Qf Univerza v Ljubljani Documenta Praehistorica XLI Editor Mihael Budja ISSN 1408-967X (Print) ISSN 1854-2492 (Online) Ljubljana 2014 documenta praehistorica xli Uredniki/Editors: Dr. Mihael Budja, urednik/editor, miha.budja@ff.uni-lj.si Bojan Kambič, tehnični urednik/technical editor, bojan.kambic@amis.net Dr. Dimitrij Mlekuž, urednik spletne strani/web editor, dimitrij.mlekuz@guest.arnes.si Uredniški odbor/Editorial board: Dr. Maja Andrič (ZRC SAZU), Dr. Mihael Budja (Univerza v Ljubljani), Dr. Dimitrij Mlekuž (Univerza v Ljubljani), Dr. Simona Petru (Univerza v Ljubljani), Dr. Ivana Radovanovic (University of Kansas), Dr. Katherine Willis (University of Oxford), Dr. Žiga Šmit (Univerza v Ljubljani), Dr. Andreja Žibrat Gašparič (Univerza v Ljubljani) © Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, 2014. Vse pravice pridržane / All rights reserved Brez pisnega dovoljenja Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani je prepovedano reproduciranje, distribuiranje, dajanje v najem, javna objava, dajanje na voljo javnosti (internet), predelava ali vsaka druga uporaba tega avtorskega dela ali njegovih delov v kakršnemkoli obsegu ali postopku, vključno s fotokopiranjem, tiskanjem ali shranitvijo v elektronski obliki. Odstranitev tega podatka je kazniva. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission in writing of the publisher, the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana. Založila in izdala/Published by: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete, Univerza v Ljubljani/ The Academic Publishing Division of the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Za založbo/For the publisher: Branka Kalenic Ramšak, dekanja Filozofske fakultete Naslov uredništva/Address of Editorial Board: Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani, Aškerčeva 2, 1001 Ljubljana, p.p. 580, tel.: 386 12411570, fax.: 386 14231220 Spletni naslov/Website: http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica Prelom/DTP: Cambio d.o.o., Ljubljana Tisk/Printed by: Birografika BORI d.o.o., Ljubljana Naklada/Circulation: 500 izvodov/copies Cena/Price: 34,20 EUR Natisnjeno s podporo Javne agencije za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije. Funded by the Slovenian Research Agency. Documenta Prehistorica je vključena v Evropski referenčni seznam za humanisticne vede (SCOPUS in ERIH PLUS) in sodeluje v omrežju CrossRef (http://www.crossref.org/), ki omogoča povezovanje referenc med založniki. The Documenta Praehistorica is indexed in the European Reference Index for Humanities (SCOPUS and ERIH PLUS). The journal participates in CrossRef (http://www.crossref.org/), the collaborative, cross-publisher reference linking service. Revija je tiskana v črno-beli tehniki; elektronska izdaja je barvna in dostopna na spletni strani http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica The printed publication is in black and white while the online publication is in colour and available at http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica Contents Bernhard Weninger, Lee Clare, Fokke Gerritsen, Barbara Horejs, Raiko Krauß, Jörg Linstädter, Rana Özbal and Eelco J. Rohling 1 Neolithisation of the Aegean and Southeast Europe during the 6600-6000 calBC period of Rapid Climate Change Mehmet Ozdogan 33 A new look at the introduction of the Neolithic way of life in Southeastern Europe. Changing paradigms of the expansion of the Neolithic way of life Raiko Kraufi, Nedko Elenski, Bernhard Weninger, Lee Clare, Canan Qakirlar and Petar Zidarov 51 Beginnings of the Neolithic in Southeast Europe: the Early Neolithic sequence and absolute dates from Dzuljunica-Smardes (Bulgaria) Adem Bunguri 79 Different models for the Neolithisation of Albania Maria Gurova, Clive Bonsall 95 'Pre-Neolithic' in Southeast Europe: a Bulgarian perspective Turan Takaoglu, Taner Korkut, Burpin Erdogu and Gul I§in 111 Archaeological evidence for 9th and 8th millennia BC at Girmeler Cave near Tlos in SW Turkey Clemens Lichter 119 'Temples' in the Neolithic and Copper Age in Southeast Europe? 137 Marko Porčic, Miloš Nešic Simulating cultural transmission: preliminary results and their implications for the study of the formal variability of material culture in the Central Balkan Neolithic Lucija Šobert, Milena Horvat, Andreja Žibrat Gašparič, Marko Sraka, Richard Evershed and Mihael Budja 149 Neolithic and Eneolithic activities inferred from organic residue analysis of pottery from Mala Triglavca, Moverna vas and Ajdovska jama, Slovenia 181 Nives Ogrinc, Mihael Budja, Doris Potočnik, Andreja Žibrat Gašparič and Dimitrij Mtekuž Lipids, pots and food processing at Hočevarica, Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia Mihael Budja 195 Neolithic pottery and the biomolecular archaeology of lipids Andreja Zibrat Gasparic, Milena Horvat and Breda Mirtic 225 Ceramic petrography, mineralogy and typology of Eneolithic pottery from Krasnja, Slovenia Bine Kramberger 237 The Neolithic-Eneolithic sequence and pottery assemblages in the fifth millennium BC in north-eastern Slovenia Raluca Kogalniceanu, Ana Ilie, Monica Margarit, Angela Simalcsik and Valentin Dumitrascu 283 A hoard of astragals discovered in the Copper Age settlement at lepuresti, Giurgiu County, Romania 305 Book Reviews Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Neolithisation of the Aegean and Southeast Europe during the 6600-6000 calBC period of Rapid Climate Change Bernhard Weninger1, Lee Clare2, Fokke Gerritsen3, Barbara Horejs4, Raiko Krauß5, Jörg Linstädter1, Rana Özbal6 and Eelco J. Rohling7,8 b.weninger@uni-koeln.de 1 Institute of Prehistory, University Cologne, Köln, DE 2 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Orient-Abteilung, Berlin, DE 3 Netherlands Institute in Turkey, Beyoglu, TR 4 Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Austrian Academy of Science, Vienna, AU 5 Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte und Archäologie des Mittelalters, Eberhard Karls Universität, Tübingen, DE 6 Kog Üniversitesi, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Tarihi Bölümü, Rumeli Feneri Yolu, Istanbul, TR 7 Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, AUT 8 Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, UK ABSTRACT - In extension of the recently established 'Rapid Climate Change (RCC) Neolithisation Model' (Clare 2013), in the present paper we demonstrate the existence of a remarkable coincidence between the exact (decadel-scale) entry and departure dates of the Neolithic into/from the Aegean (~6600/6050 calBC) with begin/end of RCC-conditions. IZVLEČEK - Članek predstavlja razširitev nedavno vzpostavljenega modela neolitizacije v povezavi s hitrimi klimatskimi spremembami -1. i. 'Rapid Climate Change (RCC) Neolithisation model' (Clare 2013). V članku opozorimo na izjemno sovpadanje med natančnimi (v merilu desetletij) vstopnimi in izstopnimi datumi za širjenje neolitika v/iz Egejskegaprostora (~6600/6050 calBC) in začetkom/ koncem razmer hitre klimatske spremembe (RCC). KEY WORDS - Neolithisation; radiocarbon chronology; Rapid Climate Change Introduction The paper is organised as follows. In Section 1 (Neolithic Dispersal), we provide an overview of archaeological research of the Neolithisation process undertaken in the past decade. As is well known, there is a strong temporal gradient between the earliest appearance of Neolithic lifestyles in the Near East and their spread to other regions (e.g., Europe). Although contemporary archaeological research is now focussing on the accompanying economic, socio-cultural and cognitive transformations, an urgent need remains for continued chronological research. As we discuss in the first section, we observe an increasingly critical attitude of contemporary research towards the so-called 'wave-of-advance' description of Neolithic dispersal. We address here the three main 'core-elements' of this widely applied model: (1) the basic notion that the expansion of farming from the Near East to Europe can actually be described as a continuously advancing cultural-demographic wave; (2) the specific result that Neolithic lifestyles expanded from the Near East into Europe with an average speed of ~1 km/yr; (3) the assumption that both (1) and (2) are supported by radiocarbon dating. In Section 2 (Rapid Climate Change - RCC), we address some results of ongoing palaeoclimatological research. We provide an overview both of regional, mainly lower resolution RCC-records for the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as global high-resolution records, with a focus on the time of the Hudson-Bay outflow. In this section, we also examine some pro- DOI>10.4312\dp.41.1 1 blems relating to our previous timing of RCC-periods (Weninger et al. 2009a). These periods were based on the temporal distribution and clustering of major peaks in the Greenland GISP2 [K+]-record (Mayew-ski et al. 1997). It still now appears possible to define these periods on a wider scale according to the (smoothed) Greenland GISP2 [K+]-record (Mayew-ski et al. 2004). However, a set of historical records for drought and precipitation anomalies in the Eastern Mediterranean during the Little Ice Age (LIA) does not correlate well with the sequence of individual peaks in the GISP2 [K+]-record, at least not for the period 1500-1900 AD. Instead, the two strongest [K+]-peaks (-1523 AD and ~ 1640 AD) are coincident (within error limits of ~2yrs) with the two strongest historically documented dust storms in the north Chinese plains (Hui et al. 2013). In combination, the Eastern Mediterranean and Chinese historical data agree well with recent meteorological evidence (Tubi, Dayan 2012) for the existence of two distinct geographic corridors for the outflow of cold air masses from the polar regions at times of pronounced Siberian High (SH). The first cold air corridor has an easterly direction (over China, directly connected with Greenland via the Westerlies). The second corridor follows a westerly direction (into the Eastern Mediterranean, related to Greenland via changes in major atmospheric circulation modes; e.g., Josey et al. 2011). Section 3 (Cultural History 6600-6000 calBC) provides a condensed overview of cultural developments in the Eastern Mediterranean (Aegean, Anatolia, Levant) during the RCC study interval. To allow for quantitative errors of present 14C-based site chronologies, which are typically in the order of 50-100yrs, this interval is artificially subdivided into an early RCC-phase A (6600-6300 calBC) and a late RCC-phase B (6300-6000 calBC). The results summarised in this section are based on a recently completed study (Clare 2013). In Section 4 (Chronological Case Studies) we provide a compilation of high-resolution 14C-chronologies for the Aegean and Southeast Europe in the Early Neolithic (Southeast European terminology). Altogether, four new chronologies are presented, three of which are for sites in West and Northwest Anatolia (Ulucak, ^ukurigi, and Barcin), and one for a site in north-central Bulgaria (Dzuljunica). In addition, at Dikili Tash (North Greece) and at Sidari (Corfu) we have unique on-site evidence for the hydro-environmental impact of RCC-conditions both in the Northern Aegean (Lespez et al. 2013) and in the southern Ad- riatic (Berger et al. 2014). In addition to the respective site descriptions, this section contains a compilation of archaeological arguments (mainly pottery style comparisons), which further substantiate our conclusion that the spread of farming from the Near East into Southeast Europe proceeded in a step-wise and often delayed manner, with one of the most significant delays of around 500 years visible in the Aegean. Section 5 (Conclusions) brings the new chronological results into context with ongoing interdisciplinary research. Previously, the majority of 14C-based statistical/mathematical models for Neolithic dispersal (e.g., dates-as-data, wave-of-advance) either concluded, or were already based on this assumption, that early farming spread fastest along the maritime routes. Our conclusion is that at certain times the terrestrial routes were equally rapid. This results from the 'super-fast' dispersal (>1000km in <200yrs) as documented for the spread of the Early Neolithic from the Aegean to Northeast Hungary. This speed is recognisable, already at low dating resolution, but becomes all the more evident from the archaeological case-studies that were performed at a higher dating resolution using the method of Gaussian Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching (Section 4). A similarly rapid Neolithic dispersal (>5km/yr: minimum average; obtained for <200yrs time-span and for >1000km distance) was previously known only for maritime expansion along the Western and Eastern Mediterranean (Fig. 10) coasts. Indeed, this dispersion is so fast, and is accompanied with such large spatial discontinuities, that it may inhibit (or at least complicate) further applications of the linear (continuous) differential equations typically used in contemporary modelling studies. In a nutshell, we demonstrate a precise temporal coincidence (within given error limits) and strong social impact of RCC on Neolithic dispersal processes. Our conclusions are based on 14C-data combined with insights gained from recent palaeoclimatologi-cal research, but above all on archaeological data that are analysed from the viewpoint of modern vulnerability theory. Neolithic dispersal Following the introduction of radiocarbon dating some 50 years ago, the chronology of Neolithic dispersal from its area of genesis in the Near East and Anatolia into Europe is today largely based on 14C-dates. Advances in chronology have been achieved in: (1) dating precision, which increased from typical values of a = 100 BP (around 1970) to a = 40 BP today; (2) sample size, which decreased from grams to milligrams; and (3) in the quality of archaeological excavation techniques. Today, the majority of 14C-AMS measurements are performed on shortlived ('single event') samples (Ashmore 1999). The scientific progress achieved in 14C-dating is also apparent in the size and geographic scope of the archaeological 14C-database, which ranges from the few dozen dates that were available to Clarke (1965), through hundreds of dates (Quitta 1967); and now into the thousands (e.g., Breunig 1987; Reingruber, Thissen, 2004; Pinhasi et al. 2005; Biagi et al. 2005; Bóhner, Schyle, 2006; Luca, Su-ciu, 2006; Bocquet-Appel et al. 2012; Furholt et al. 2009; Weninger et al. 2009b; Hinz et al. 2012). The CalPal-database used in the present paper contains 21519 dates for 3239 Epipalaeolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age archaeological sites from Europe and the Near-East, of which 82% are geo-referenced (We-ninger 2014). In a recent publication, Stephen Shennan et al. (2013) also studied the introduction of agriculture into Central and Northwest Europe based on insights gleaned from a large archaeological database (N = 13 658 14C-dates). Their main conclusion, based on the application of the 'dates-as-data method', is that the long-term growth of the European Neolithic population followed an approximately exponential trend, but this was interrupted at certain times by major declines in population size of the order of 3060%. Based on this observation it is argued that the summed calibrated Neolithic radiocarbon data distributions, which show a number of conspicuous peaks and minima, can be used to deduce corresponding demographic booms and busts. Similar methods were applied to advance the idea that, following an initial boom, the Early Neolithic Linear Pottery culture (LBK) ended with a major population collapse (Shennan, Edinborough 2007). The applied methodology is not convincing. In this specific case study, the CalPal-database used by Stephen Shennan and Kevan Edinborough (2007) indeed had a major focus on the LBK-chronology, but its focus was on the LBK in the Rhineland. It contained minimal amounts of 14C-data for other LBK settlement regions, mainly from the Kóln-laboratory, and was also incomplete for the subsequent Middle Neolithic period. The application of the 'dates-as-data' method in pa-leodemographic studies has been found inadequate for many reasons (Weninger at al. 2009b; Crombé, Robinson 2014; Contreras, Meadows 2014, with further references). In general terms, the problem is the extreme bias of the archaeological 14C-data-base towards natural research variability such that: (a) large numbers of dates are available for few sites, (b) very few dates are available for other sites, and (c) the majority of sites remains undated. Certain geographic regions have been favoured by researchers to the exclusion of others. Finally, (d) there is a strongly unequal geographic distribution of major radiocarbon laboratories (e.g., GrN in the Netherlands; OxA in Great Britain; many countries have no operating laboratories), and these tended to focus on regional projects. As an example, and certainly not in order to compare the relative importance of any given geographic area (or lab, site, or period) simply by 14C-counting, in the CalPal-database there are more 14C-dated Mesolithic sites (N = 69) from the Netherlands (mainly: GrN-lab) than there are 14C-dated Neolithic sites (N = 37) from the whole of Turkey. When the aim is to achieve higher temporal and modelling sensitivity, in our view, it is advisable to base demographic studies not on 14C-counting (of any variable) but directly on archaeological evidence (artefacts, sites, visibility, taphonomic questions) (see fylingiroglu 2005; Reingruber 2011). Nevertheless, an important question at stake is why -having made considerable efforts to correct their large 14C-database for taphonomic bias - Shennan et al. (2013) found no evidence of the impact of climate variability on Neolithic dispersal. We argue that this is not due to any inherent (size/scope/source) limitations of the database, but rather to the inability of the dates-as-data method to differentiate between statistical-archaeological 14C-noise and the climatic-demographic signal with the required temporal resolution. We illustrate this with an order-of-magni-tude estimate. Given that the 8.2ka calBP event extended over a time-span of ~ 100-150 years (Thomas et al. 2007), that the majority of 14C-ages in the database were processed on charcoal (i.e. results have a systematic but uncontrolled age-offset of 0100 years), and that the majority of archaeological 14C-ages has a precision well beyond 50 14C-BP (with additional errors following 14C-age calibration), it will be virtually impossible to detect the demographic impact of the 8.2ka calBP (Hudson Bay) event by using only the dates-as-data method. Under controlled conditions (theoretical simulation, random sampling) this a priori expectation has been verified by Daniel A. Contreras and John Meadows (2014) for the period of the Black Death in Europe, for which a major population decline is historically documented, as well as for the disastrous crash in the Basin of Mexico following the arrival of the Spanish conquerors. An example from the Neolithic period with relevance for the present study is provided by the recently published 14C-series from Tell Sabi Abyad (Syria). Using N = 69 dates on human bone from six cemeteries, Neeltje Plug et al. (2014) discuss whether the 8.2ka calBP event is visible in the temporal distribution of these data. All dates from Sabi Abyad were measured by the Groningen-laboratory (GrN) to a precision of 30-50 BP, so one might assume that the precision and accuracy of the 14C-AMS measurements is sufficient to answer the question at hand. Using the method of Bayesian Sequencing, based on the known sequence of cemeteries, the authors attempt to further enhance the dating precision. They conclude that Sabi Abyad was continuously occupied during the 8.2ka calBP interval. As illustrated in Figure 1, analysis of these data using the method of 'cross-bar' dispersion calibration appears to suggest the existence of two possible gaps in the sequence; one coincides exactly with the 8.2ka calBP (Hudson Bay outflow) event, and the second occurs slightly later, at 6100-6000 calBC. Yet it would be wrong to simply use this to attribute the first gap (for whatever social or climatic reason) to the 8.2ka calBP event, given that the separation of calibrated age clusters before and after the Hudson Bay event can be explained by the strong lateral pull of the median values of the calibrated probability distributions (along the calendric time-scale) by small plateaus in the calibration curve. Hence, the 'gap' is at least partly an artificial construct of the applied analytical method: when 14C-dates are calibrated one-by-one (i.e. assumption-free in terms of sequence or grouping) it is typical for their calendric readings to lock into one or the other of the many pre-defined geometric inversions ('quantum states') of the 14C-age calibration curve. Such data clustering as becomes evident from Figure 1 is often seen to occur when analysing 14C-data both with the histogram method (on the 14C-scale) as well as for summed calibrated 14C-ages (on the calendric time-scale). In mathematical terms such effects are due to the (geometric) folding properties of the calibration curve. From a more fundamental (axiomatic) perspective, the data clustering is due to the non-commutative properties of 14C dates (Weninger et al. 2011). Note that similar quantisation effects occur when using the interval method of 14C-age calibration, or Baye- sian Sequencing, to some extent even in wiggle matching, although in these approaches the problem is not explicitly visible. We also note in Figure 1 that a pro-gap argument could be formulated on the basis of the fact that the cross-bar method seems to successfully reproduce both the known grouping of data according to individual cemeteries, and the known sequence of cemeteries, without any such assumptions having been entered. Having evaluated the gap-hypothesis, let us now address an alternative: the continuity-hypothesis. A closer look at Figure1 reveals that only one (if any) of the 69 human burials is reliably dated to the timewindow of the 8.2ka calBP event. It appears that the continuity hypothesis is an even more artificial construct of the applied analytical method than the gap-hypothesis. The procedure of Plug et al. (2014) was to apply Bayesian Sequencing using OxCal 4.2 (Bronk Ramsey 2009) with boundaries set between the 14C-data pre-grouped according to cemetery. However, in this case study, the Bayesian Sequencing method is not used to further evaluate the continuity model, which is simply applied, but not tested. Of greater interest from a methodological viewpoint is that the incorporation of archaeological information into the calibration procedure apparently does not lead to an enhancement in dating precision in all cases. At Tell Sabi Abyad, the opposite occurs: due to the above-mentioned quantum-effects, and lacking the possibility of applying external numeric (quantitative) dating information, in a real sense 'the simultaneously most precise and accurate results' are achieved when no assumptions are made at all. This effectively negates the main reason for applying the Bayesian Sequencing method, according to which, in general terms, archaeologists may even incorporate ordinal-scaled ('younger-older') archaeological information into the calibration process in order to optimise dating precision. By applying the crossbar-method, despite its acknowledged insensitivity, we at least become aware of the interpretational difficulties that arise from the strong attraction of the calen-dric-scale readings of all 14C-ages towards pre-established states of quantum chronology. Before continuing, we note that the second gap in the Tell Sabi Abyad data is curiously coincident with a major sub-structure of the 8.2ka calBP for the period 8030-7960 calBP in the stable oxygen record from Qunf Cave (Oman). In contrast to the first gap, which may or may not be real, this second gap is better described as an interval with non-artificially low data density. At least, it cannot be explained by Fig. 1. Tell Sabi Abyad (North Syria). Upper: 14C-scale histogram and calibrated summed probability distribution of N = 69 14C-dates on human bone from cemeteries 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 and 1 (Plug et al. 2014) shown (Lower) in context with Greenland GISP2 8t8O-record (GICC05-age model) as proxy for the Hudson outflow (Grootes et al. 1993), and with Oman Q5 Qunf Cave S18O-record (Fleit-mann et al. 2007) as proxy for shifts in the position of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (cf. Fig. 9). Upper: 14C-and calendric scale crossbars (68%-confi-dence) of the 14C-dates indicate separation of the cemeteries into 4 groups (Cemeteries 7, 6/5, 4/3 and 1). The conclusion of Plug et al. (2014) that the burial sequence is continuous throughout the 8.2 ka calBP period is not validated (cf. text). Either there is a real gap, or the apparent gap is artificially caused by the folding properties of the calibration curve). Note the complex internal structure of the '8.2ka calBP event' with sub-events at 8220-8140 calBP and 80307960 calBP (indicated by shading) defined according to record comparisons shown in Figure 9. the shape of the calibration curve, which is reasonably linear in this interval. Interestingly, it appears to separate the data from cemeteries 6/5 and 4/3 (with the one exception of human bone from cemetery 4, as indicated in Figure 1). The second gap may simply be due to chance effects in l4C-radiometric dating. Nevertheless, given the high quality of the l4C-data, and also since the second gap is equally as long as the first, let us keep its existence in mind for future research. Later, we return to the discussion of the internal structure of the 8.2ka calBP event at a higher temporal resolution (Fig. 9). In summary, despite the large number of l4C-dates and high sampling quality (single entity bones), we cannot distinguish between the two competing hypotheses. In effect, the burial sequence at Sabi Abyad could be continuous in terms of the sequence of individual burials as well as cemetery level, but there could equally well have been a temporary abandonment of the site during the 8.2ka calBP event. We infer from this example that the search for climatic impacts on societies is unlikely to be succes- sful when based on single-site analysis. Therefore, and returning to the issue of Neolithic dispersal, we now turn our attention to the study of the signal enhancement that may be expected from a major expansion of the database. Unfortunately, what we see happening in this case is that - in addition to the anticipated problem of limited temporal resolution - a second analytical complication arises. It is related to the spatial distribution of the archaeological 14C-data. We illustrate this spatial, geographic problem in Figure 2 (top left), by comparing a diagram from Ron Pinhasi et al. (2005.Fig. 2) with a re-interpretation of the same data (Fig. 2, top right). Both diagrams show the earliest arrival dates of the Neolithic at 735 Near Eastern and European sites, relative to the great-circle distance [km] from Abu Madi (Pinhasi et al. 2005; Supplementary Information). Strongly contrasting with the straight lines used as interpolation method in the original diagram, our reinterpretation (shading) suggests several discrete data clusters. These clusters occur both in the 'horizontal' (along the age-scale) and in the 'vertical' direction (along the distance scale). Closer inspection of the corresponding map (Fig. 2) shows that essentially no data are available for Spain or Western France. The database contains few dates for the Alpine regions, very few dates for Southeast Europe, and is also lacking in Northern Europe. Yet these aspects are not the really critical issues, and it is obvious that the clusters and void regions are largely due to the incomplete character of the database. The critical aspect concerns the absences of dates for Southeast Europe at distances beyond 2000km from Abu Madi, and notably of Early Neolithic 14C-ages prior to c. 6600-6000 calBC. Already in general terms, the stepwise character of the age-diagram gives reason to doubt the validity of the 'wave-of-ad-vance' model, regardless of whether a straight line (Pinhasi et al. 2005) or smooth polynom (Silva, Steele 2014) is used to trace the dispersal process. What we observe, formulated in more detail, is (1) an almost complete lack of (14C-dated) Early Neolithic (EN) sites everywhere in Southeast Europe prior to the 8.6-8.0ka calBP RCC-interval; (2) for the same RCC-interval a large number of 14C-dated EN sites on the Greek mainland and in Northern Macedonia; (3) a large number of EN sites in Central Anatolia prior to RCC, but which seem to end at some time within the RCC-interval, and (4), a complete lack of 14C-dated sites (all Neolithic periods) for the West Coast of Turkey. Although we presently remain suspicious as to the validity of observations (1)-(3), which could be out of date, they appear worthy of further consideration (as undertaken below). The last observation (4) is simply wrong, or formulated better, an outdated function of the age of the 14C-database, which was published in 2005 i.e. prior to the availability of first Early Neolithic 14C-data from the West Coast of Turkey (cf. bibliography in CalPal-database; Weninger (2014)). Use of the incomplete Pinhasi et al. (2005) 14C-database may explain why Carsten Lemmen and Kai Wirtz (2012) found no significant impact of climate variability on Neolithic dispersal, despite a dedicated search for such an impact and the application of state-of-the-art geographic modelling procedures (cf. Lemmen et al. 2011). A less fragmentary compilation of 14C-dates (Clare, Weninger 2014) provides further information, (A) concerning the reality (or its chance existence) of the 'EN-RCC-gap' in Southeast Europe, and (B) concerning a potential (regional) refinement of the standard-value of ~ 1km/yr initially derived by Albert L. Ammermann and Luigi L. Cavalli-Sforza (1971) for Neolithic dispersal in all regions of Europe and the Near East. The moment the Neolithic left the Aegean basin, which appears to have occurred not earlier than 6100 calBC, it apparently took little more than 100 years to become established at sites in Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania, and little more than around 200 years even to have reached the Pannonian Basin. We conclude that it is impossible to further refine the standard speed of 1km/yr for wave dispersal in quantitative terms because, simply, the concept of dispersal at a steady mean speed is flawed. Figure 4 provides support for the recently proposed idea that, following its arrival in Central Anatolia, there was a long (~1000yrs) halt in the Neolithic prior to its further westward spread through the Lakes district into the Aegean (Düring 2013; Brami 2014). Research history of Neolithic dispersal The rapidity of Neolithic dispersal from the Aegean all the way to regions in the northeast of the Panno-nian Basin, if only indicated at low temporal resolution in Figure 4, is not unexpected. Similar ideas were frequently advanced in the past. A first significant step away from slow 'wave-modelling' was provided by Jean Guilaine, who proposed in his so-called 'arrhythmic' model that the expansion of agriculture was neither regular nor uniform across; Europe as a whole, but proceeded in leaps (Guilaine 2001; 2003; 2013). Further deviations from 'slow' transmission were demonstrated by Joao Zilhao for the spread of farming along the Northern Mediterranean coast on the maritime route to the Iberian Peninsula (Zilhao 2001). Similar conclusions were arrived at for Neolithic expansion along the Adriatic (Bia-gi et al. 2005; Forenbaher, Miracle 2005; Forenba-her et al. 2013). Taking a route that has recently been termed the 'Marine Epipalaeolithic network' (Linstädter in press), the further distribution process along the Mediterranean coasts also appears to have been quite rapid. This is indicated by the arrival of domesticated species in Andalusia and Portugal as early as at 7.5ka calBP (Aura Tortosa et al. 2009; Carvalho 2010; Cortés Sánchez et al. 2012). Between the Southern Iberian Peninsula and Northwest Africa, within the so-called the Alboran territory (Linstädter et al. 2012), these innovations were further distributed through pre-existing Epipalaeo-lithic coastal networks representing forager groups focussed on the use of marine resources. Through what has recently been termed 'Continental epipa-laeolithic networks' (Linstädter in press), the local foragers from the west-Mediterranean hinterlands adopted Neolithic inventions and integrated them step-by-step into their way of life. The rapidity of Fig. 2. Map of earliest Neolithic sites according to Pinhasi et al. (2005.Fig. 2), redrawn with Globalmap-per™ using Lambert Conformal Conic (LCC) projection, based on coordinates from 14C-database (Pinhasi et al. 2005.Tab. 1). Top Left: Age-Distance graph redrawn (unchanged) from Pinhasi et al. (2005. Fig. 2). B. Top Right: Age-Distance graph redrawn (with additional shading to show artificial data clusters A-H) from Pinhasi et al. (2005.Fig. 2). When drawn on LCC projection, a straight line approximates a great-circle route between selected start- and end-points. Note: Pilots use LCC-projection for convenient visualization of flight distances. these adoptions is indicated by their equally early date of arrival in Morocco, at around 7.6ka calBP (eastern Rif) (Linstadter, Kehl 2012; Morales et al. 2013; Zapata et al. 2013). However, in comparison to the Eastern Mediterranean, plant cultivation and animal husbandry on the Iberian Peninsula and in North Africa appear to have been only one aspect of subsistence in the sense of a broad-spectrum economy or low-level food production. What is implied by these recent results, and what is important for the present paper, is that there is no evidence in the Western Mediterranean to support an assumption that maritime routes were faster than terrestrial routes of Neolithic dispersal. Although further research is needed, there is wide consensus that the source region for the Neolithic in the Western Mediterranean was somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and -most probably - in the Aegean. This again emphasises the importance of precisely dating both the earliest arrival of the Neolithic in the Aegean, and its further pattern of dispersal. As yet, it remains unknown whether such datings fall close together (decadal scale), or far apart (centennial scale). Fig. 3. Distribution of archaeological study sites in Anatolia, Southeast Europe and eastern Central Europe during and after the RCC-in-terval (6600-5700 calBC). Numbers correspond to site-chronology shown in Figure 4. References for 14C-data: sites 1-20 (Clare, Weninger 2014); site 21 (Lespez et al. 2013); site 22 (Weninger et al. 2006; Linick 1977); site 24 (Tasic 1988); site 25 (Bogdanovic 2008); site 26 (Biagi, Spataro 2005; Luca et al. 2008); site 27 (Lichardus-Itten et al. 2002); site 28 (Kraufc et al. 2014); sites 29-34 (Gorsdorf, Bojadziev 1966); sites 35-39 (Biagi, Spataro 2005; Luca et al. 2008); sites 40-42 (Oross, Siklosi 2012); sites 43- 44 (Boric 2011). Rapid Climate Change It is now well established that a sharp 8.2ka calBP climate event developed in response to the abrupt influx of a large volume of meltwater from the Hudson Bay into the North Atlantic. This meltwater outburst resulted in a brief (<200yrs) disturbance of deep-water formation in the North Atlantic and attendant widespread cooling (Fig. 5). However, the impact of the 8.2ka calBP Hudson Bay outflow was not only the climate perturbation in this period; it is clearly embedded within one of several Holocene 'Rapid Climate Change' (RCC) intervals (Mayewski et al. 2004; Rohling, Palike 2005; Marino et al. 2009). As shown in Figure 5, the GISP2 non-sea salt (nss) [K+] record best illustrates this sequence of distinct cooling episodes through the Holocene, as an extension of similar (more intense) events during the last glacial cycle (Mayewski et al. 1997; 2004; Rohling et al. 2002; 2003). Each of these episodes is associated with a more pronounced Siberian High over Asia, which in turn would have led to the increased occurrence and severity of winter outbreaks over Europe and in the Eastern Mediterranean (Mayewski et al. 1997; Cohen et al. 2001; Rohling et al. 2002; 2003; Casford et al. 2003). The existence of recurring cold anomalies during the Holocene is confirmed by a variety of terrestrial and marine records from our study region, the Eastern Mediterranean (Rohling et al. 2002; 2009; Mercone et al. 2001; Meeker, Mayewski 2002; Casford et al. 2003; Marino et al. 2009). Based on the GISP2 nss [K+] record, the strongest RCC-conditions are inferred for the time-intervals ~10.2ka calBP, ~9.2ka calBP, 8.6-8.0ka calBP, 6.0-5.2ka calBP, and ~3.0ka calBP (with varying decadel/cen-tennial-scale age-limits). The most recent RCC-event coincides with an episode that is commonly referred to as the Little Ice Age (LIA; c. 1450-1929 AD). Against this RCC background, it appears that the (atmospheric) cold conditions between 8.6 and 8.0ka calBP were amplified between 8.2 and 8.0ka calBP by the impacts of the Hudson Bay event SITE Schela Cladovei Vlasac Ecsegfalva 2 Szolnok-Szanda Nagykoru-Tsz Dudejtii Vechi Foeni-Gaz Foeni-Salas Gura Baciului Miercurea Sibiului Stara Zagora-Okr.Boln Elesnica Kara novo Slatina Čavdar Galabnik Džuljunica Kovačevo Donja Branjevina Blagotin Divostin Anzabegovo Nea Nikimedeia Dikili Tash Asagi Pinar Hoca ^ejme llipinar Mente§e Ege Gubre Ulucak Hoyuk ^ukurigi Hoyuk Kuru<;ay Hoyuk Hacilar Hoyucek Erbaba Bademagaci CatalhoyukWest £atalhoyuk East Can Hasan I Tepecik Can Hassan III Suberde Musular A§i ki 1 Hoyuk PERIOD [calBC] 8000 7500 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 RCC RCC+Hudson Late Mesolithic Early Neolithic 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i Iron Gorges II II 1 IIIIIIIII 1 Hill III III i i m m N=46 [Meso/Neo] i | 1 IUI III II III 1 II III 1 i i i i II i 1 N=46 Iiiiiiiii m N=38 North East Hungary III Mill 1 N=11 ii mu i N=9 M i N=4 i N=1 Roumania 1 i N=2 1 N=2 ii i 1 1 N=7 ii m m N=13 i m 111 N=9 ii Iiiiiiiii llllllllll 1 1 N=43 III IUI N=12 Bulgaria 1 im im im i 1 1 N=28 1 III INI N=12 III IUI 1 1 N=31 1 1 II N=5 II 1 1 III N=7 Serbia 1 N=3 1 II 1 Hill N=10 FYROM 1 Hill Hill II 1 1 1 1 1 I N=29 1 1 1 1 IUI II 1 N=15 1 III 1 III II II 1 1 II N=19 1 1 1 IIIIII II 1 I N=23 North West Anatolia 1 1 III 1 IUI 1 N=14 1 III llllllllll IIIIII Hill N=66 1 11 Hill 1 1 1 N=11 INI 1 II N=10 West Coast III 1 IIIIII III 1 1 1 N=36 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 N=15 1 1 1 1 N=4 Lakes District 1 II 1 II 1 1 N=11 II 1 II N=7 1 III 1 1 1 N=7 1 II III 1 N=7 1 III IIIIII Hill N=25 1 1 i nulluni mi ■IIIIII um 1 1 N=117 i i i ii II II 1 1 1 N=13 Central Anatolia i ii i i N=6 II II 1 1 m i ii i N=16 1 III II i II i N=11 1 1 M M N=9 h m mi mil N=46 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i | ii [calBC]8500 8000 7500 PERIOD Epi PPN i i i i i i i | i i i i i i i i i | i i i i | i i i i 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 EPN LN ECh MCh MAP NR 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Fig. 4. Overview of 14C-ages (total N = 857) for 44 archaeological sites (site numbers refer to the map (Fig. 3), using the Barcode Method of 14C-age calibration (cf. Time-scales and terminology). Each vertical line represents the calibrated median value of one 14C-age, using CalPal-software (Weninger, Jöris 2008) and INTCAL09 calibration data (Reimer et al. 2009). Shaded areas show Rapid Climate Change (RCC) interval 8.6-8.9 ka calBP according to Rohling et al (2002) andMayewski et al. (2004), Hudson-Bay outflow interval set schematically to ~6200-6000 calBC. The position of the 9.3 ka calBP RCC-interval according to Fleitmann et al. (2009) is included for explorative purposes. Abbreviations: Epi = Epipalaeolithic, PPN = Pre-Pottery-Neolithic, EPN = Early-Pottery-Neolithic, LN = Late Neolithic, ECh = Early Chalcolithic, MCh = Middle Chalcolithic, FYROM=Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. From Clare and Weninger (2014). (Rohling, Palike 2005; Marino et al. 2009). The combined impacts of the RCC and the Hudson Bay event produced one of the most extreme climate anomalies of the entire Holocene. In the following, we consider the nature of the 8.6-8.0ka RCC impacts on our study region. Seasonality of RCC Strong and cold north-easterly winds in the Aegean are a regular winter/early spring phenomenon. They are of typically short duration of just a few days at a time. In the Eastern Mediterranean, such outbreaks of polar air masses occur most frequently in December, with fewer occurrences in November and January, still lower frequencies in February and March, with the fewest occurrences in October. No polar outbreaks occur in the summer months (Saaroni et al. 1996). The decrease in the number of outbreaks in January is linked to the end of maximum cooling over Eurasia and the associated drop in anticyclone genesis. Concerning their duration, polar outbreaks tend to fall into two categories. The first and most common category is an outbreak lasting between one and two days. Outbreaks in the second category can persist for more than twice as long (Saaroni et al. 1996). We note that the occurrence of such anomalous winter conditions is well known - and feared - in Mongolia (where cold air outbreaks are referred to as dzuds) due to their effects on agriculture and livestock mortality (Lau, Lau 1984; Begzsu-ren et al. 2004; referenced in Tubi, Dayan 2013). Palaeoclimate records suggest that there were periods during the Holocene when cold air outbreaks over the Eastern Mediterranean were more frequent and/or intense than today. A key record for understanding Holocene RCC-conditions in the Eastern Mediterranean is provided by 14C-dated marine microfossil assemblage variations in marine sediment core LC21 from south-eastern Aegean Sea (Rohling et al. 2002; 2009; Casford et al. 2003). This record reveals a series of distinct drops in sea surface temperature (SST) that correlate well (Fig. 5) with periods of enhanced atmospheric dust flux as documented in the Greenland GISP2 glaciochemical record (Mayewski et al. 1997). These SST drops are attributed to the occurrence of north-easterly winds (Rohling et al. 2002; Casford et al. 2003) that, before reaching the LC21 site, would have blown across the surface of the Aegean Sea for several hundred kilometres. The associated cooling (~ 1-3°C) of the Mediterranean sea surface (to a depth of ~300m) was sufficiently strong that it contributed to enhanc- ed Mediterranean deep-water formation (Mercone et al. 2001; Casford et al. 2003; Abu-Zied et al. 2008; Rohling et al. 2009). Rapid Climate Change corridors There are two main geographic corridors for the outflow of cold masses from the polar regions at times of pronounced 'Siberian High' (SH) (Tubi, Dayan 2013; with further references). While the first corridor extends westwards from Central Asia, running north of the Himalayas and crossing the North Pontic steppe, eventually entering Southeast Europe, the second corridor takes an easterly path across China and into the Pacific (Tubi Dayan 2013). The westward extension of the SH, on which we focus in the present paper, can lead to continental polar outbreaks over the Aegean, the Adriatic, and the Gulf of Lion (Rohling et al. 2002). These outbreaks are linked to the orographic channelling of polar air masses at the northern Mediterranean margin, more commonly known as the Vardar, Bora and Mistral winds (Casford et al. 2003). Mean annual wind fields over the Mediterranean show a dominance of these northerly outflows (Pinardi et al. 2013/14.Fig. 8), and variations in these systems dominate the spatial pattern of heat loss from the Mediterranean (Josey et al. 2011). Historical data for RCC in the Eastern Mediterranean and China As demonstrated by historical data from the recent LIA (Clare 2013), severe winter outbreaks are not the only form of perturbation that would have impacted farming communities in RCC-intervals. Based on historical records from the LIA, it is evident that RCC-conditions in the Eastern Mediterranean are also associated with drought and extreme precipitation anomalies. Although apparently paradoxical, this is simply a reflection of inter-annual variability within a context of significantly increased winter extremes (Clare et al. 2008; Weninger, Clare 2011). What is in itself quite remarkable is that the historically documented LIA-events (Fig. 6) show a clear clustering of drought years, severe winters, famine and plague, especially in the six decades of the interval 1550-1610 AD. However, what we also observe is that this clustering does not correlate well with the strongest events in the GISP2 K+-record. Notably, the years with highest GISP2 K+-values (1523 and 1640/1644 AD) actually coincide with the two strongest historical Chinese dust events (Hui et al. 2013). The in-phase character of the Chinese dust storms with the two strongest GISP2 nss K+ peaks, along with the (seemingly) ~20yrs out-of-phase character of Eastern Mediterranean LIA-conditions corresponds well with the existence of the two different RCC-corridors (see above). Notwithstanding these observations, which are at least promising for GISP2 nss K+-based forecasting (at high-resolution) of cold events in China, for the time being we must remain cautious in using the GISP2 nss K+ peaks to forecast individual years with strongest RCC-conditions in the Eastern Mediterranean. The 8.2ka calBP event: global data (high-resolution records) Taking a wider geographic perspective, three results of ongoing palaeoclimatological research are of particular relevance to the archaeological 8.2ka discussion: 14 13 12 11 10 1 0 [ka calBP] ill sVVy-^'V 90 [%1 Tree Po 80 mbsl 1—360 -380 ■400 -420 -440 5 30 Q-Q. "k20 C (N 6 10 IK 1 W W Wm twÜtUlL i«» » J 00 A) GRIP Greenland B) MD952043 W-Med SST C)LC21 Aegean SST D) Steregiou Romania Peat Pollen E) Sufular Cave N-Turkey Stalagmite F)Tenaghi Philippon N-Greece Tree-Pollen G)SL21 E-Aegean SST H) Dead Sea Levels Levante I) GISP2 nss [K ] Greenland 200 yr smoothed J) GISP2 nss [K ] Greenland 14 13 12 11 10 ■i.......... 2 1 0 [ka calBP] Fig. 5. Northern Hemisphere Palaeoclimate Records showing Holocene Rapid Climate Change (RCC); (A) Greenland GRIP ice-core Sl8O (Grootes et al. 1993); (B) Western Mediterranean (Iberian Margin) core MD95-2043; C37 alkenones as proxy for sea surface temperature (SST) (Cacho et al. 2001; Fletcher, Sanchez Goni 2008); (C) Eastern Mediterranean core LC21 (Sea Surface Temperature, SST) fauna (Rohling et al. 2002); (D) Steregiou (Feurdean et al. 2008); (E) Sufular Cave &3C (Fleitmann et al. 2009); (F) Tena-ghi Philippon tree pollen (Pross et al. 2009); (G) Eastern Aegean SL21 (Sea Surface Temperature, SST) fauna (Marino et al. 2009); (H) Dead Sea Levels (Migowski et al. 2006); (I) Gaussian smoothed (200yrs) GISP2 nss [K+] as proxy for the Siberian High (Mayewski et al. 1997; Meeker, Mayewski 2002); (J) HighResolution GISP2 nss [K+] as proxy for the Siberian High (Mayewski et al. 1997; Meeker, Mayewski 2002). Fig. 6. Compilation of historical records (1500-1900 AD) from different regions of the eastern Mediterranean (Anatolia, Levante, Aegean) with reference of severe winters, drought, plague and famine (data: Clare 2013, with further references and discussion), in comparison to GISP2 nss K+ record (Mayewski et al. 1997). Each historical event is represented by one vertical line. Interpretation: (a) there is clear supraregional evidence of the strongest impact of LIA-conditions in the time-interval 1550-1610 AD; (b), there is no clear (annual-scale) correlation between historical events in the eastern Mediterranean and strongest Greenland GISP2 nss K+ peaks; (c) the two strongest GISP2 nss K+ peaks (~1523 AD and ~1640 AD) most likely derive from dust storms documented in the N-China plain (Hui et al. 2013), (cf. Fig. 7). Fig. 7. Dust events in China compared to GISP2 nss K+ climate record. (A) Upper: High-Resolution GISP2 nss [K+] as proxy for the Siberian High (Mayewski et al. 1997; Meeker, Mayewski 2002); (B) Lower: Summed annual frequency of dust storms North China Plain, AD 1464 to 1913, derived from a total of 1180 historical archives (Hui et al. 2013). The 1640/1644 AD double-peak represents the highest number of documented dust storms. The 1644 AD dust storm covered the vast region from 32°N to 40°N. The AD1523 peak relates to a dust storm that was documented in six provinces (Shouzhang, Jize, Yifeng, Dingtao, Fanxian, Weixian). Of all identified dust storms, 72.85% occurred in the spring, 16.39% in winter, 8.71% in summer, and 2.05% in the auntumn. Hui et al. (2013) relate the spatial pattern of dust storms to the movement of cold air systems in North China in winter or spring. 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900[GISP2AD]2000 GISP2 nss [K+](ppb) - 10- i i I ' i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i ' i i I i ' i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i (A) 20- 10- 1523.0 Two consecutive samples 1641.3 1639.1 Typical sample width: 2.3 yrs GISP2 nss [K+](ppb) 10 -5 Two major events 1640 1644 N-China Plains Dust Storms Historical Records 0 - 40 " [N] - 30 20 10 i i i i i i i i i | i i I i | i i i | i i i i i i i I i | i i I i i i i i i | i i i i i i i i i | i i i i i i i i r 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 [histAD] 2000 O changes in the strength of North Atlantic ocean circulation are in many details (near) synchronous with climatic variations throughout most of the Northern Hemisphere, including the lower-latitude monsoon regimes of Eastern Asia (e.g., China) (e.g., Rohling et al. 2003); © such long-distance synchronicities are understandable only if they are related via the Earth's atmosphere, and not through oceanic circulation with its comparatively slow (millennial and centennial) transfer times; © there are strong indications for a distinctly (almost) anti-phased inter-hemispheric relationship between East Asian and Near Eastern climate regimes on the one hand (i.e. north of the Intertropical Convergence Zone [ITCZ]), and South American climate on the other hand (i.e. south of the ITCZ). As such, it is not only the North Atlantic climate regime that requires attentive study, but also the interplay between the different components of the global climate system. This is illustrated in Figure 9 for the time-interval 6700-5900 calBC by a compilation of selected high-resolution records that, on the one hand, have their proximity close to the North Atlantic (Greenland and Germany) and, on the other hand, a geographically much wider dispersal from regions as far apart as China, Oman, and Brazil. We note that some records suggest a more complex internal structure within the '8.2ka calBP event', with two major sub-events e.g., 8220-8140 calBP and 8030-7960 calBP (indicated in Fig. 9 by shading). If the existence of such (very short: decadal-scale) subevents is confirmed, and they impact the Levant, then this would both complicate future climate-archaeological research in the eastern Mediterranean and provide stimulus for further high-resolution studies. Already above, using the 14C-data from Tell Sabi Abyad (Fig. 1), we have studied the methodological challenge that the identification of complex substructures of the 8.2ka calBP event will impose on highresolution 14C-dating. Gianluca Marino et al. (2009) offer a first tentative indication that a double peak may exist in the Aegean cool event that appears to be related to the 8.2ka calBP Hudson Bay event. The relevant climate record (core SL21: E-Aegean SST) is included in Figure 5 (record G). Cultural history 6600-6000 calBC On the basis of the aforementioned insights from recent palaeoclimatological research, we posit that archaeological climate-culture analysis for the age-range 6600-6000 calBC should consider that the 8.2ka calBP Hudson Bay event occurred embedded within a wider (RCC) cool interval, so that we may recognise an earlier phase (RCC only: 6600-6200 calBC) and a later phase (RCC amplified by Hudson Bay impact; 6200-6000 calBC). The two climate mechanisms would have resulted in similar environmental impacts with a temporal overlap (Rohling, Palike 2005; Marino et al. 2009). As an alternative to these climate-based phases, but which have unequal length (400 and 200yrs), we can greatly simplify the archaeological discussion (if only for overview purposes with an acceptable loss of chronological precision) by defining two phases of equal length, Phase A (6600-6300 calBC) and Phase B (63006000 calBC). Phase A: Eastern Mediterranean 6600-6300 calBC Major developments in the first phase (RCC: 66006300 calBC) are summarised in Figure 10 (top). In this phase, there is manifold evidence for population movements not only within Anatolia, but also in coastal and lower-lying locations in the Northern and Southern Levant. In the Southern Levant, the onset of RCC (~8.6ka calBP) coincides with the first appearance of pottery-bearing communities, commonly referred to as the Yarmoukian culture, and increasing intensities of settlement activities in the coastal plain. These trends coincide with the gradu- Fig. 8. Modern Position of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) in July and January, redrawn from Cheng et al. (2012.Fig. 1), with location of key sites for records addressed in the present paper. Abbreviations: GISP2 (Greenland Ice Sheet Project Two); SASM (South American Sum-mer Monsoon); NASM (North African Summer Monsoon); ISM (Indian Summer Monsoon); EASM (East Asian Summer Monsoon). al decline of LPPN 'megasites' in the Jordanian Highlands (Gebel 2004). As coastal and lower-lying areas would have been less affected by typical RCC-impacts (e.g., summer drought in combination with severe winters), we posit that the widely observed habitat tracking to milder regions, and in particular (1), from the Jordanian highlands to the Levantine coast, and (2), from the Central Anatolian Plateau to the Turkish West Coast, may be attributed to the same climate mechanism (Clare 2013; with data and references). Phase B: Eastern Mediterranean 6300-6000 calBC Major developments in the second phase (i.e. combined RCC and Hudson Bay event: 6300-6000 calBC) are summarised in Figure 10 (bottom). These were centuries of unprecedented social disturbances in the Southern and Northern Levant, Eastern and Central Anatolia. In the Southern Levant, this phase is referred to as the Late Yarmoukian Crisis (Clare 2013). It sees the widespread abandonment of settlements in the Transjordanian Highlands and the Lower Jordan Valley (south of Lake Galilee), including the major Yarmoukian site of Sha'ar Hagolan. Notably, subsequent Jericho IX culture sites (7900-7600 calBP/ 5900-5600 calBC) are limited to the southern coastal plain, the Jezreel Valley and the Hula Basin. Once again, this trend appears linked to strategies aimed at the mitigation of RCC-impacts. Eastern Anatolian and Syrian data testify to a similar period of instability, with numerous sites providing either substantial, or at least possible, evidence of settlement abandonment. We have discussed this issue above for Tell Sabi Abyad (Akkermanns et al. 2006; van der Plicht et al. 2011; Plug et al. 2014). Other examples are 'Ain Ghazal, Basta, and 'Ain Ra-hub (and other sites in Jordan and Israel covered by rubble layers following RCC-related site desertion, see Rollefson 2009; Gebel 2009; Zielhofer et al. 2012); Shir (Bartl 2010), gayo-nu (Ozdogan 1999), Akargay Tepe (Ozba§aran, Duru 2011), A§ikli Hoyuk (Ozba§aran 2011) and Mersin-Yumuktepe (Caneva, Koroglu 2010). In the Amuq plain, there is at least a potential hiatus in the ceramic sequence between phases Amuq Fig. 9. Timing and structure of the 8.2 ka calBP event on a global scale. Compilation of high-resolution U/Th-dated stalagmite records from China and Brazil (D, E, F) according to Cheng et al. (2009), with additional records (A, B, C, G) added. (A) German oak tree-ring growth record (Klitgaard-Kristensen et al. 1998); (B) Greenland GISP Sl8O on Hulu time-scale (Grootes et al. 1993; Weninger, Jöris 2008); (C) Q5 Qunf Cave (Fleitmann et al. 2007); (D) Dongge Cave Sl8O (Wang et al. 2001; 2005); (E) Heshang Cave HS4 S18O (Liu et al. 2013); (F) Padre Cave Brazil S18O (Cheng et al. 2009); (G) Greenland GISP nss K+ on Hulu time-scale (Mayewski et al. 1997; Vinther et al. 2006; Weninger, Jöris 2008). Note the geographic variability and complex internal structure of the '8.2 ka calBP event' with major sub-events e.g., 8220-8140 calBP and 8120-8090 calBP (indicated by shading). A and Amuq B (Balossi 2004), while in the Rouj Basin (Tell el-Kerkh) there is a shift in burial practices, with the first appearance of a demarcated burial ground (cemetery) and central areas in the settlement used for public purposes (Tsuneki 2010). Combined, these data suggest geographically widespread and socially significant changes in prevailing social systems at this time. The westward expansion of farming indicated in Figure 10 (bottom) relies on increasing evidence that the introduction of impresso pottery elements in the Aegean could be related to the arrival of groups from the Northern Levant via Fig. 10. Top: Summary of events identified in the first phase of RCC (86008300 calBP/6600-6300 calBC) in the Southern Levant and Anatolia (after Clare 2013). There is evidence of a push/pull to coastal and lower-lying locations in both study areas. In Anatolia, this trend is synonymous with the dispersal of Neolithic communities from their core area as far as the Aegean coast. As coastal and lower-lying areas would have been less affected by typical RCC-im-pacts (drought and severe winters), it is posited that the colonization of these areas would have reduced the biophysical vulnerability of communities to RCC. The disruption in the flow of Cappa-docian obsidian to the Southern Levant is quite remarkable. In Western Anatolia, this same commodity was mainly procured from the Aegean island of Melos. This latter development may even testify to breaks with Central Anatolian traditions, and can be interpreted as an attempt to reduce social vulnerability in the face of climate-induced resource shortfalls. Bottom: Summary of events identified in the second phase of RCC (8300-8000 calBP/6300- 6000 calBC) in the Southern Levant and Anatolia (after Clare 2013). In the Southern Levant there is a further retreat of Neolithic sites to moister (less arid) parts. The related abandonment of sites in the Transjordanian Highlands and the lower Jordan Valley is referred to as 'Late Yarmoukian Crisis'. Remarkably, there are similar developments in the Northern Levant and Eastern Anatolia, where many sites bear witness to an interruption in settlement continuity or are deserted (site names on black background). In the Turkish Lakes District there are first indications for internecine warfare. Curiously, all these developments coincide with a further wave of Neolithic expansion into Southeast Europe. Generally speaking, one of the most astounding aspects of the archaeological evidence reviewed in Figure10 is the increase in cultural (and presumably also demic) mobility in many regions of the Near East and Anatolia. a marine route (Cilingiroglu 2010; Brami, Heyd 2011). In this latter region, this development appears to accompany the widespread appearance of Proto-Halaf culture sites (e.g., Cruells 2008). Before continuing, we note that the traditional assignment of Archaic Fikirtepe (Northwestern Anatolia, Marmara region) to RCC Phase B (Fig. 10, lower) should be treated with caution. This assignment is based on 14C-dates from different levels of Yarim-burgaz Cave (near Istanbul), which, however, have an unsatisfactory spread, probably due to stratigra-phic disturbance (cf. Ozdogan et al. 1991; Clare, Weninger 2014.Tab. 24). As discussed below, new 14C-dates as well as stratigraphic and ceramic analyses from Barcin indicate an earlier start of the Fikir-tepe culture (in RCC Phase A) and even a pre-Fikir-tepe farming presence in the region. Chronological case studies Above, we commented on the abrupt appearance of Neolithic communities in the Aegean at the beginning of RCC-Phase A. It is, therefore, essential that an exact date be established for the very first arrival of farming communities in this region in order to validate (or falsify) the Rapid Climate Change (RCC) -Neolithisation relationship proposed in this paper. Specifically, if farming had already been introduced to coastal regions of the Aegean prior to the onset of RCC-conditions, then this relationship would be difficult to support. In this respect, recent excavation results from the sites of Ulucak, ^ukurigi Hoyuk, and Barcin Hoyuk, in each case with a new series of stratified 14C-dates (cf. below), provide a welcome test of the Aegean-refugium concept as proposed by Clare (2013). Figure 11 shows the geographic location of the archaeological sites under study in the following section. Ulucak Hoyuk (Turkish West Coast) Ulucak Hoyuk is located in a plain, bordered to the north and south by mountain ranges, 3km east of the Belkahve mountain pass that gives access to the Aegean littoral, some 25km further east at Izmir. Ulucak lies on the path of a natural thoroughfare linking the central Aegean coast with more eastern (inland) areas of western Anatolia. The mound currently rises 6m above the plain with a diameter of some 100m, although drilling in the vicinity of the site has shown that settlement probably extended over a much larger area (4.5ha). Sediment accumulations from slope-wash erosion and alluvial depo- sition from the Nif ^ayi, a small stream adjacent to the site, has detracted substantially from the height of the hoyuk, which is known to extend more than 3 metres below the present surface of the plain. Six architectural levels with numerous sub-phases have been identified at Ulucak (Qilingiroglu et al. 2012). These are, from top to bottom, Late Roman/Early Byzantine (level I), Early Bronze Age (level II), Late Chalcolithic (level III), Early Chalcolithic/Latest Neolithic (level IV), Late Neolithic (level V), and a possible Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) occupation (level VI) (Cilingiroglu 2011. 68-69). The stratigraphically derived (age-depth based) results of 14C-wiggle-matching) for Neolithic levels VI-IV (Fig. 12) provide a chronology with ~400yrs later foundation of Ulucak (Level VI: 6630+32 calBC) than estimated by other authors (e.g., Qakirlar 2012a; b. -7000/7040 calBC), but age differences in similar range are not uncommon for Anatolian and Aegean 14C-chronology (e.g., Rohling et al. 2003). While the excavators describe preliminary discoveries in these lowermost Neolithic deposits (level VI) as reminiscent of PPN features in central parts of Anatolia, a recent evaluation of available radiocarbon ages from associated contexts (cf. Clare, Weninger 2014) would rather suggest an incipient occupation of Level VI no earlier than the late EPN or early LN. LN occupations at Ulucak (level V) are further differentiated into six different sub-phases, labelled (Va-f). While the oldest subphases (Vb-f) are associated with free-standing wattle-and-daub houses, with three substantial representative buildings in Vb, one of which features a large number of storage facilities (clay bins), the youngest LN sub-phase (Va) is characterised by a change in settlement plan. Houses are no longer free-standing, which is perhaps indicative of an increase in population (Qilingiroglu 2011.71). It is of note that this phase (Va) also marks the introduction of impressed pottery at the site. Impressed wares appear almost contemporaneously around the Aegean at the end of the 7th millennium calBC, a development that may be linked with the arrival of new groups from the Levant and Northern Syria in the region at this time (Qilingiroglu 2010). (ukurifi Hoyuk (Turkish West Coast) ^ukurigi Hoyuk (Fig. 11) on the centre of the Western Anatolian coast is located on the Kuguk Mende-res river delta opposite the island of Samos and is embedded in a sheltered basin that in prehistoric times had direct access to the Aegean. The mound is now visible to a height of 4.50m above the plain and extends over an area of 80 x 100m, originally measuring 160 x 200m and 8m high. In the years following the first small-scale rescue excavations in 1995, which recovered evidence for Chalcoli-thic and Early Bronze Age occupations, the settlement mound was subjected to severe disturbances by modern agricultural activities. Renewed excavations at the site which commenced in 2006 are now leading to a much clearer picture of the prehistoric settlement sequence at this location (Horejs 2010; 2012). The tell was settled during different periods, with six distinct settlement phases excavated so far, including Pottery Neolithic, Early Chalcolithic, Late Chalcoli-thic and Early Bronze Age periods (Horejs, Wenin-ger in prep.; Galik, Horejs 2011). The earliest excavated settlement phase thus far, ^ukurigi Hoyuk (^uHo) X, revealed rectangular houses with stone foundations and a characteristic Pottery Neolithic assemblage that can be dated to ~6630 calBC (Fig. 13). The following occupation level, ^uHo IX, contains at least one almost complete rectangular building with adjacent open activity zones or courtyards and several other domestic deposits dating between 6400-6200 calBC (Horejs 2012). The following settlement ^uHo VIII also revealed the remains of a rectangular building and various domestic settlement structures dated between 6200-6000 calBC (Horejs 2012). The excavated and archaeologically analysed settlement levels are additionally supported by radiocarbon dated drilling cores conducted before the excavation of the Neolithic occupation (Fig. 12). There are good chances that ^ukurigi Hoyuk was first settled immediately following the onset of RCC-conditions (Fig. 13), similar to Ulucak (Fig. 12), but this hypothesis remains to be tested by ongoing excavations. Barcin Hoyuk (Northwest Anatolia) Given its potential to elucidate the spread of farming from Anatolia to Southeast Europe and the Balkans, Neolithic research in Northwestern Anatolia has gained tremendous momentum recently, with new projects beginning in the provinces of Bursa, ^anakkale and Istanbul such as Aktopraklik (Karul, Fig. 11. Geographic distribution of archaeological sites under study in the present paper. Avci 2013), Ugurlu (Erdogu 2013), and Yenikapi (Kiziltan, Polat 2013) respectively, adding to the existing projects of Fikirtepe, Pendik, Hocage§me, Toptepe and A§agipinar (Ozdogan 2013). Barcin Hoyuk, in the Yeni§ehir Plain south of the Iznik Lake and east of Bursa, has contributed to this emerging picture with the earliest evidence of the presence of sedentary farming communities in the region, and new insights into the evolution of regional ceramic technologies (Gerritsen, Ozbal and Thissen 2013b). Barcin Hoyuk (Fig. 11) is a small mounded site with Neolithic occupation levels. Excavations at the site began in 2005 (Gerritsen, Ozbal and Thissen 2013a). The Yeni§ehir Plain is a basin filled with Quaternary deposits with a minor stream (the Kocasu), which drains the valley to the east. Coring with a hand auger around the site indicates a complex history of sedimentary and hydrological changes, dominated by lacustrine and marsh conditions (Groenhuijzen et al. in prep). In addition to the Neolithic Phase, the site has yielded Byzantine, Hellenistic/Roman, Iron Age, Bronze Age, and Chalcolithic phases. Most of these are ephemeral traces and represent intermittent and interrupted occupation throughout these periods. The short habitation sequences in these periods are sandwiched by centennial-scale intervals that lack evidence of human activity of any kind. Excavations have identified five sub-phases (indicated with the letters a-e) with VIe being the earliest and VIa representing the latest Early Neolithic phase (Gerritsen, Ozbal and Thissen 2013a). Soundings have established that the Phase VIe occupation sits Fig. 12. (Upper) Ulucak (Turkish West Coast, Levels VI-V): Optimised linear strati-graphic 14C-age model based on stratified charcoal 14C-ages according to sample depth. Ulucak (Level Vl): Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching of short-lived samples based on random Gaussian shuffling of 14C-ages (N = 10 000 iterations) within an interval 0±20 yrs. The combined Ulucak age-model is shown in comparison to (Lower): Greenland G1SP2 ice-core Sl8O record (Grootes et al. 1993) as proxy for North Atlantic air temperature and LC21 foraminifera data [percent warm species] as proxy for Sea Surface Temperature in the Aegean (Rohling et al. 2002). Allowing for an (error-prone) 20yrs age difference between initial settlement and dated samples, the settlement was founded at 6650±35 calBC (95%), i.e. synchronous with the onset of RCC-conditions (shaded). Note: LC21 age-model has a dating precision of 100yrs (68%) in this interval. Ulucak 14C-data assembled from (ilingiroglu 2010; 2011; 2012). (2009; directly on top of a low natural elevation. During phases VIe and VId, the production and use of ceramics increases from 'practically non-existent' to 'rare' and then to 'common' in phase VId (Gerritsen, Oz-bal and Thissen 2013b). Sharing some very generalised common features with central Anatolian ceramics, the VIe and VId pottery types are best seen as the genesis of a regional northwest Anatolian ceramic tradition that culminates in phases VIc and VIb in the Fikirtepe tradition also known from other sites in the eastern Marmara region. The best preserved architectural deposits come from Phases VIc and VId, which yielded a sequence of row houses surrounded by courtyards. Walls of rectangular houses were constructed from wooden posts set closely together in foundation ditches, providing a skeleton for the mud-covered walls. Adult burials were usually placed within the courtyards, while infant burials, relatively more frequent, have been found in houses, within walls and around oven complexes. Zoo-archaeological analyses show that the subsistence economy was based from the first occupation level onwards on herding and cultivation. Current evidence provided by the stratigraphy, pottery development and l4C-dates for the Neolithic Period (Level VI) suggests a period of about 600 years of habitation between 6600 calBC and around 6000 calBC (Gerritsen, Ozbal and Thissen 2013b). This is confirmed in Figure 14 by application of Gaussian Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching based on an explorative equi-length phase model, which was applied independently to the data of the different sub-phases. The validity of this model remains to be established. The existence of a gap (or hiatus) between sub-phases VIc and IVb at the time of the 8.2ka calBP event cannot yet be excluded, but is not evident in the ceramic sequence or stratigraphy. An intriguing idea - although impossible to substantiate - is that the abandonment of Barcin Hoyuk and the foundation of Ilipinar, some 40km distant at Lake Iznik, may have been related events. What can be stated with confidence is that the settlement was founded in sub-phase IVe around 6600 calBC, or a few decades later if due allowance is made for the dating of potentially long-lived charcoal samples. Dikili Tash (North Greece) At the Dikili Tash (Fig. 11) site in North Greece, the first detailed on-site geomorphological evidence has been reported for an environmental impact at the time of the 8.2ka calBP event at high dating resolution (Lespez et al. 2013), as outlined in the following. Dikili Tash is one of the largest tells in northern Greece, covering an area of ~4.5ha (250 x 180m2 at its base) and with a total height of ~22m, of which 17m are above and 5m are below the modern surface. Ongoing excavations, which commenced in 1961, have provided a good insight into the long stratigraphic sequence of this settlement, which spans from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age (Treuil R. 1992; Koukoulli-Chryssanthaki et al. 2008; Dar-cque et al. 2009). In the immediate vicinity of the tell there is a freshwater spring; this fills a pond, which then drains via a streamlet running adjacent to the eastern side of the tell (Lespez et al. 2013. Fig. 1). Of interest for the present paper is the observation that the 8.2ka calBP event is marked at Dikili Tash by an abrupt rise in ground-water level in this hydrological system, which ultimately led to the relocation of the early Neolithic settlement (Les-pez et al. 2013). Given their importance for our RCC-related studies, we briefly review these inferences. The rise in water level is documented in two cores (core C2 and core C3), but we focus here only on C3 from the northern part of the tell, for which a series of stratified 14C-ages is also available (Lespez et al. 2013. Tab. 2). Core C3 shows an approximately 10m long sedimentary sequence that extends from the Pleistocene, through the Early and Middle Neolithic, up to the Late Neolithic I and II periods (Lespez et al. 2013.Fig. 3). We concentrate on the earliest Neolithic layers. Starting with Pleistocene clay at its lower end, the core shows a sequence of archaeological layers with Early Neolithic artefacts (e.g. bone fragments, small flakes, one red-brown burnished sherd, and a semi-circular end-scraper). Some of the layers appear to be disturbed, whereas others seem to be in situ. The EN-sequence is interrupted at ~53-54m asl by a series of palustrine silts and oncolithic sands (schematically illustrated in Fig. 15, top). Having established by Gaussian Monte Carlo Age-Depth Wiggle-Matching (Fig. 15, top) that the sediment accumulation in C3 is linear (with average growth rate of 2.55yrs/cm) for the study-interval 6400-5600 calBC, it is possible to analyse the corresponding sedimentary sequence (Fig. 15, top) in relation to the GISP2 18O record (Fig. 15, bottom). The timing of the Hudson Bay outflow relative to the sedimentary sequence of core C3 (Fig. 14) supports the concept of Laurent Lespez et al. (2013) concerning an abrupt rise of the ground-water level at the time of the 8.2ka calBP event. With the age-depth model shown in Figure 14, we note two important details, namely (1) that the rise of ground water level coincides very closely (within error limits < 7000 6800 6600 6400 6200 6000 [calBC] 5800 —i i i i i i i i i I i i i i I i i i i i i i i i I i i i i I i i i i i i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i— i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i 6800 6600 6400 6200 6000 [calBC] Fig. 13. (Upper): fukurigi Höyük (Turkish W-coast). Stratigraphic age-depth model based on geomorphological coring by Helmut Brückner (University Cologne, Department of Geography) at the west edge of the tell. The deepest 14C-age (charcoal: UGAMS-6043; Horejs, Weninger in prep.) is from lowermost cored archaeological deposits. Period X 14C-Data: Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching of shortlived samples based on random Gaussian shuffling of 14C-ages (N = 10 000 iterations) within an interval 0±20yrs. (Lower): Greenland GISP2 ice-core Sl8O record (Grootes et al. 1993) as proxy for North Atlantic air temperature and and LC21 forami-nifera data [percent warm species] as proxy for Sea Surface Temperature in the Aegean (Rohling et al. 2002). 14C-Data: Ho-rejs, Weninger in prep.; CalPal-database (Weninger 2014). Fig. 14. Barcin Hoyuk (Northwest Anatolia). (Upper): Explorative equi-length phase-model, established by independent analysis of the 14C-dates from sub-phases IVa-VIe, shown in context (Lower) with GISP2 S18O-record (GICC05-age model) as proxy for the Hudson outflow and with marine core LC21 (% cold species) as proxy for RCC-conditions in the Aegean. The existence of a gap (or hiatus) between subphases VIc and IVb in parallel to the 8.2ka calBP event cannot yet be excluded, but is not evident in the ceramic sequence or stratigraphy. Hence the temporal overlap of 14C-dates from sub-phases VId and VIc is likely to be the artificial outcome of applied modelling procedures. 14C-Data: Gerritsen, Ozbal and This-sen 2013b; CalPal-database (Weninger 2014); with (outlier) Beta-340889 removed. 100yrs) with the onset of the 8.2ka calBP event, and (2) that the site was already occupied (if perhaps only by a few decades) prior to the onset of the 8.2ka calBP event. The necessity for settlement relocation due to the rising ground water level is also confirmed by 14C-ages from Core 2 from a location closer to the site's pond and water courses (Les-pez et al. 2013.Tab. 2). Lespez et al. (2013) further address the question as to why RCC-conditions at Dikili Tash are accompanied with a rise in ground-water level. Based on temperature and precipitation values from pollen transfer functions at the nearby (former) swamp at Tenaghi Philippon (Peyron et al. 2011), Lespez et al. (2013) argue that a reduction in evapotranspiration during the 8.2ka calBP interval due to a large estimated decrease in winter (~4°C) and summer (~ 2°C) temperatures coincided with a rise of 75mm in summer rainfall. This combination would have sufficed to generate high ground-water levels. The interpretation that the 8.2ka calBP interval experienced colder than normal winters and wetter than normal summers (Peyron et al. 2011) seems to be supported by an increase in Gramineae (grasses) and Cype-raceae (sedges) at the Tenaghi Philippon swamp (Pross et al. 2009). Sidari (Corfu) Another hydro-climatic phenomenon for the 8.2ka calBP interval was recently observed at Sidari on the island of Corfu (Fig. 11), where flooding and deep Fig. 15. Dikili Tash (North Greece). Linear Age-Depth Model for 14C-dates from Core 3 (Lespez et al. 2013. Tab. 2; Fig. 3) shown in context with GISP2 S18O-record (GICC05-age model) as proxy for the Hudson outflow. Due to the occurrence of oncolithic sands in Core 3 at depths 53-54m asl the authors identify a rise in groundwater level of a site-adjacent pond. This appears to be a local response to the 8.2ka calBP event, causing a settlement relocation to dryer parts of the tell (Lespez et al. 2013). Note that the uppermost 14C-age SacA-22588: 6210+35 BP from core 3 at depth 56.33-56.15m (Lespez et al. 2013.Tab. 2) is removed from analysis as outlier (in respect to the assumed linearity). fluvial flows are documented on-site during the transition from an Initial to an Early Neolithic settlement phase (Berger, Guilaine 2009; Berger et al. 2014). At this site, a lower Mesolithic level (layer D) is covered by deposits attributed to an 'Initial Neolithic' (layer C, basis: badly fired pottery, little decorated, indications of the breeding of small ruminants), which is followed by a sterile deposit (hiatus) that, in turn, is overlain by 'Early Neolithic' deposits (layer C, upper part) with characteristic Impressed Ware of Adriatic type. As indicated by the 14C-dates (Berger et al. 2014.Fig. 6), all these layers are chronologically so close together that they cannot yet be clearly separated using the available 14C-ages (values range between 8000-7670 BP for the Mesoli-thic-Neolithic transition, and 7500-7170 BP for the transition between the two Neolithic layers). Importantly, but in need of further validation, Sidari is similar to Dikili Tash in that it records a switch to moister conditions with distinct hydro-sedimentary impacts for the 8.2ka calBP interval. Combined, the studies of Laurent Lespez et al. (2013), Jean-François Berger et al. (2014), Jorg Pross et al. (2009) and Odile Peyron et al. (2011) define an important milestone for understanding the interplay between (global) climatic change and local hydrological conditions during the 8.2ka calBP interval. Franchthi Cave (Argolid, Greece) We conclude the Aegean section of this paper by noting that essentially identical results (i.e. ~6600 calBC) for the arrival of early farming on the Turkish West Coast have recently been obtained by Catherine Perles et al. (2013), using direct 14C-AMS dating of domestic seeds at Franchthi Cave (Argolid, Greece) (Fig. 11). The relevant 14C-dates are GifA-1106: 7805+40 BP and GifA-11455: 7740±50 BP for sample FAN163, and GifA-11017: 7780+40 BP and GifA-11456: 7645+50 BP for sample FAN162 (Perles 2013.Tab. 1). Since all four measurements are statistically identical (Chi-square test: 7.6%) on the 14C-scale, it is not possible to define an age difference for the two samples on the calendric time-scale. Although it is strictly speaking pointless to base any kind of inference on the weighted average for the given (non-commutative) 14C-ages, for convenience (in talking about these dates), we nevertheless calculate an average age of 6580+40 calBC (i.e. ~6600 calBC) for these samples. What is important is that there is no measurable age-difference between the earliest (known) date of arrival of the Neolithic at Franchthi and for the Turkish West Coast. Dzuljunica (North-Central Bulgaria) Regarding the further dispersal of Neolithic lifestyles into Southeast Europe, key information may be obtained from north-central Bulgaria and the Early Neolithic settlement of Dzuljunica (Fig. 11). The location contains natural springs that flow from the base of the prominence upon which the site is located. Even today, there are four active springs at the foot of the site. The prominence itself is a slightly elevated ri- Fig. 16. (Upper): Dzuljunica (NE-Bulgaria). Optimized Linear Stratigraphie Age modelfor Phases Dz I-II for average Growth-rate of 1.70yrs/cm, in comparison to INTCAL09 curve (Reimer et al. 2009), INTCAL09 high-precision calibration raw-data (Seattle/Heidelberg); (Lower): GISP2 S18O-record (Grootes et al. 1993) as proxy for North Atlantic ocean/atmosphere temperature with GISP2-ages shifted 40yrs younger according to Weninger and Joris (2008) in agreement with GICC05-age model (Vinther et al. 2006). 14C-Data: see Kraufi et al. (2014). ver terrace above the Dzuljunica River, which - together with other tributaries - flows into the Yantra River today at about 6.5km north of the settlement. Finds from the oldest settlement layer at Dzuljunica (Dz-I) attest to clear similarities with material of the West Anatolian Late Neolithic. As such, pottery from this level is coeval with the very beginning of its usage in the Southeast European Neolithic cultural sequence. Furthermore, this earliest pottery (Dz-I) is comparable with assemblages from the near vicinity, including the oldest material from Koprivec and Pomostica, as well as with vessels from Orlovec and Poljanica-Platoto. Similar vessel forms have also been recovered from Hotnica-Pesterata, but this material most probably represents a transition from Dz-I to Dz-II. Convincing parallels are attested in assemblages from West Anatolia, especially in the Izmir region, specifically Ulucak Va and early IV, ^u-kurigi Hoyuk, and Yegilova. Further details and references, in particular for the construction and interpretation of the l4C-age-depth model for Dzuljunica phases I and II (Fig. 16), are presented by Raiko Kraufi et al. (2014). What is important is that, (1) the 14C-dates based on stratigraphic 14C-age modelling for the different sites are consistent with the respective pottery synchro- nisms in each case at phase level, and (2) the date of 6050 calBC achieved for the incipient occupation at Dzuljunica (Dz-I) represents, to the present state-of-knowledge, the very earliest Neolithic known from anywhere in Southeast Europe outside the Aegean. New radiocarbon dates from the old excavations in Koprivec measured on cattle bones confirm that Neolithic settlement in that particular region does not begin before Dzuljunica (Scheu et al. forthcoming). Conclusions Beginning with the Pre-Pottery-Neolithic (~7500 calBC: Anatolian nomenclature. Fig. 4), the long-distance dispersal of Neolithic lifestyles from the Near East to Southeast Europe appears to have been established in a stepwise manner. Here we have focus-sed on achieving high-resolution dates for the introduction of farming in the circum-Aegean regions and its further dispersal into Southeast Europe. For arrival and dispersal, we distinguish two major chronological steps. The first comprises a land-based dispersal of the Neolithic from Central Anatolia to the Aegean and southern Marmara region, and -probably - also by the sea-based coastal route from the Near East. This first step, which dates (abbreviated) to ~6600 calBC (i.e. the onset of RCC-condi-tions) appears to have been consolidated within a few decades, although this remains to be validated. The second step took Neolithic lifestyles away from the Aegean littoral all the way to north-eastern Hungary, Starting at ~6050 calBC (i.e. towards the end of RCC-conditions); this step was completed within 200 years. We infer that these processes can partly be explained by a mitigation of climate-induced biophysical and social hazards. Time-scales and terminology The age-models and chronologies discussed in this paper are based on tree-ring calibrated 14C-ages. Numeric ages are given on the calendric time scale using [calBP or calBC/AD] units, with AD1950 = 0 calBP as a reference year, using CalPal software (Weninger et al. 2008) and the INTCAL09 data set (Reimer et al. 2009). All GISP2-ages are shifted 40yrs younger than published (Grootes et al. 1993), according to Bernhard Weninger and Olaf Joris (2008). By this procedure, annual agreement with the recounted Greenland ice-core GICC05 age model (Vin-ther et al. 2006) is achieved. Calibrated numeric 14C-age values are based on optimised (shortest) 95% cal-scale intervals [a,b], as calculated from the calibrated age-distributions, then re-scaled to provide a calibrated median [defined as (a+b)/2] and a calibrated '+' value (approx. 68%) [defined as (a-b)/ 2]. This notation (applied in Figs. 1 and 4) is convenient for the purposes of numeric abbreviation (for tabulated calibrated 14C-ages), as well as providing room for further graphic contextualisation (e.g., representation of large amounts of site data and/or reference to climate records). The method is derived from probabilistic Dispersion-Calibration (Wenin-ger 1986), simply, by showing only the calibrated median values and leaving out the envelope curve. To minimise age-distortion due to the non-commutative properties of the calibration operator, this so-called 'bar-code' method is based on quantum-theoretical Bayesian procedures that utilise non-normalised probabilities (Weninger et al. 2011). The modelling results shown in Figure 12 (Ulucak), Figure 13 (^ukurigi Hoyuk), Figure 14 (Barcin Hoyuk), Figure 15 (Dikili Tash), and Figure 16 (Dzuljunica) were achieved by applying an automated version of the method called 'Optimizing Gaussian Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching' (oGMCWM) described in Benz et al. (2012). CalPal-internally all numeric calculations have annual precision. With the exception of oGMCWM, this reduces to decadal precision for program-external comparisons (e.g., with OxCal or CALIB). All 14C-dates used in this paper are available from: https://uni-koeln.academia.edu/BernhardWeninger/ CalPal -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- We are grateful to Deng Hui (University of Peking, Beijing, China) for providing numeric data (Fig. 7). Special thanks are also due to Amit Tubi and Uri Da-yan (University of Jerusalem, Israel) for information relating to the meteorology of Rapid Climate Change. We thank Zoi Tsirtsoni (Labex DynamiTe Research Group, Paris, France) for important geo-archaeologi-cal information pertaining to the sites at Dikili Tash and Sidari. Research at Qukuri^i Hoyuk is funded by the European Research Council (ERC project Prehistoric Anatolia 263339) and supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF project Y528). Research at Barcin Hoyuk is funded by NWO, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research. References Abu-Zied R. H., Rohling E. J., Jorissen F. J., Fontanier C., Casford J. S. L. and Cooke S. 2008. Benthic foraminiferal response to changes in bottom water oxygenation and organic carbon flux in the eastern Mediterranean during LGM to Recent times. Marine Micropaleontology 67: 46-68. Akkermans P. M. M. G., Cappers R., Cavallo C. and Nieu-wenhuyse O. 2006. Investigating Early Pottery Neolithic of Northern Syria: New Evidence from Tell Sabi Abyad. American Journal of Archaeology 110:123-156. Ammerman A. J., Cavalli-Sforza L. L. 1971. Measuring the rate and spread of early farming in Europe. Man 6: 784688. Aura Tortosa J. E., Jordá Pardo J. F., Pérez Ripoll M., Morales Pérez J. V., García Puchol O., González-Tablas Sastre J. and Avezuela Aristu B. 2009. Epipaleolítico y Mesolítico en Andalucía oriental. Primeras notas a partir de los datos de la Cueva de Nerja (Málaga, España). In M. P. Utrilla Miranda, L. Montes Ramírez (eds.), El mesolítico geométrico en la Península Ibérica. Monografías Arqueológicas 44. Universidad de Zaragoza. Zaragoza: 343-360. Ashmore P. 1999. Single entity dating. Mémoires de la Société préhistorique française 26: 65-71. Balossi F. 2004. New Data for the Definition of the DFBW Horizon and Its Internal Developments. Anatolica 30: 109-149. Bartl K. 2010. Shir, West Syria. Neo-Lithics 1(10): 92-93. Begzsuren S., Ellis J. E., Ojima D. S., Coughenour M. B. and Chuluun T. 2004. Livestock Responses to Droughts and Severe Winter Weather in the Gobi Three Beauty National Park, Mongolia. Journal of Arid Environments 59(4): 785-796. Benz M., Co§kun A., Hajdas I., Deckers K., Riehl S., Alt K. A., Weninger B. and Ozkaya V., 2012. Methodological Implications of New Radiocarbon Dates from the Early Holo-cene Site of Kortik Tepe, Southeast Anatolia. Radiocarbon 54(3-4): 291-304. Berger J-F., Garyfalia G., and Guilaine J. 2014. Vers une révision de la transition méso-néolithique sure le site de Sidari (Corfou, Grèce). Nouvelles données géoarcheologi-ques et radiocarbon, évaluation des processus post-dépo-sitioneles. In C. Manen, T. Perrin and J. Guilaine (eds.), La Transition Néolithique en Méditerranée. Actes du colloque Transitions en Méditerranée, ou comment des chasseurs devinrent agriculteurs, Muséum de Toulouse, 14-15 avril 2011. Diffusion Erran. Errance. Arles at Toulouse: 209-228. Biagi P., Shennan S. and Spataro M. 2005. Rapid Rivers and Slow Seas? New data for the radiocarbon chronology of the Balkan Peninsula. In L. Nikolova, J. Higgins (eds.), Prehistoric Archaeology and Anthropological Theory and Education. Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects 6-7: 43-51. Biagi P. and Spataro M., 2005. New Observations on the Radiocarbon Chronology of the Starcevo-Cri§ and Körös Cultures. In L. Nikolova, J. Higgins (eds.), Prehistoric Archaeology and Archaeological Theory and Education. Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects 6-7. International Institute of Anthropology. Argosy University. Salt Lake City: 35-52. Bocquet-Appel J. P., Naji S., Vander Linden M. and Kozlow-ski J. 2012. Understanding the rates of expansion of the farming system in Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 39(2):5 31-546. Bogdanovic M. 2008. Grivac: Settlements of Proto-Star-cevo and Vinca Culture. Center for Scientific Research of Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts and University of Kragujevac and Natinal Museum of Kragujevac. Kragujevac. Böhner U., Schyle D. 2009. Radiocarbon Context Database 2002-2006. D0I:10.1594/GFZ.C0NTEXT.Ed1. Online http://context-database.uni-koeln.de/download.php Boric D. 2011. Adaptations and Transformations of the Danube Gorges Foragers (c. 13.000-5500 BC): An Overview. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by D. Ciobotaru, B. Horejs and R. Krauß. Menschen-KulturenTraditionen. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Band 1. Deutsches Archäologischen Institut. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rah-den/Westf.: 157-203. Breunig P. 1987. 14C-Chronologie des vorderasiatischen, südosteuropäiscehen und mitteleuropäischen Neolithikums. Monographien zur Urgeschichte. Reihe Fundamenta A13. Böhlau Verlag. Köln. Brami M. N. 2014. A graphical simulation of the 2,000-year lag in Neolithic occupation between Central Anatolia and the Aegean basin. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 6. doi: 10.1007/s12520-014-0193-4. Brami M., Heyd V. 2011. The Origins of Europe's First Farmers: The Role of Hacilar and Western Anatolia, Fifty Years On. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 86:165-206. Bronk Ramsey C. 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51(1): 337-60. Cacho I., Grimalt J. O., Canals M., Sbaffi L., Shackleton N. J., Schoenfeld J. and Zahn R. 2001. Variability of the western Mediterranean Sea surface temperature during the last 25,000 years and its connection with the Northern Hemisphere climatic changes. Paleoceanography 16(1): 40-52. Carvalho A. F. 2010. La passage vers l'Atlantique: le processus de neolithisation en Algarve (sud du Portugal). L.Anthropologie 114:141-178. gakirlar C. 2012a. Neolithic Dairy Technology at the European-Anatolian Frontier: Implications of Archaeozoolo-gical Evidence from Ulucak Höyük, Izmir, Turkey, ca. 7000-5700 cal. BC. Anthropozoologica 47(2): 79-100. 2012b. The evolution of animal husbandry in Neolithic central-west Anatolia: the zooarchaeological record from Ulucak Höyük (c. 7040-5660 cal:BC, Izmir, Turkey. Anatolian Studies 62:1-33. Caneva I., Köroglu G. 2010. Yumuktepe. A Journey Through Nine Thousand Years. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul. Casford J. S. L., Rohling E. J., Abu-Zied R., Fontanier C., Jo-rissen F. J., Leng M. J., Schmiedl G. and Thomson J. 2003. A Dynamic Concept for Eastern Mediterranean Circulation and Oxygenation During Sapropel Formation. Palaeogeo-graphy, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 190:103-119. Cheng H., Fleitmann D., Edwards R. L., Wang X., Cruz F. W., Auler A. S., Mangini A., Wang Y., Kong X., Burns S. J. and Matter A. 2009. Timing and structure of the 8.2 kyr B.P. event inferred from 518O records of stalagmites from China, Oman, and Brazil. Geology 37:1007-1010. Cheng H., Sinha A., Wang X., Cruz F. W. and Edwards R. L. 2012. The Global Paleomonsoon as seen through spe-leothem records from Asia and the Americas. Climate Dynamics 39:1045-1062. gilingiroglu g. 2005. The concept of the "Neolithic Package": considering its meaning and applicability. Documenta Praehistorica 32: 1-13. 2009. Central-West Anatolia at the End of the 7th and Beginning of 6th Millennium BCE in the Light of Pottery from Ulucak (Izmir). PhD thesis. University of Tübingen. Online http://tobias-lib.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/vol ltexte/2009/4278/ 2010. The Appearance of Impressed Pottery in the Neolithic Aegean and its Implications for Maritime Networks in the Eastern Mediterranean. Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi-AR (TÜBA-AR) 13:9-22. 2011. The Current State of Neolithic Research at Ulucak, Izmir. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauß. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Band 1. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf.: 67-76. 2012. The Neolithic Pottery of Ulucak in Aegean Turkey. Organization of production, interregional comparisons and relative chronology. British Archaeological Reports IS 2426. Archaeopress. Oxford. ^ilingiroglu A., Cevik O. and ^ilingiroglu 2012. Towards Understanding the Early Farming Communities of Middle West Anatolia. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen, and P. Kuni-holm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Western Turkey. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 139-175. Clare L. 2013. Culture Change and Continuity in the Eastern Mediterranean and During Rapid Climate Change. Assessing the Vulnerability of Neolithic Communities to a Little Ice Age in the Seventh Millennium calBC. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Cologne. Cologne. Clare L., Rohling E. J., Weninger B. and Hilpert J. 2008. Warfare in Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic Pisidia, southwestern Turkey. Climate induced social unrest in the late 7th millennium calBC. Documenta Praehistorica 35: 65-92. Clare L., Weninger B. 2014 (in press). The dispersal of Neolithic lifeways: absolute chronology and rapid climate change. In M. Özdogan, P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey, new excavations and new research. Vol 6. Archaeology & Arts Publications. Istanbul. Clark J. G. D. 1965. Radiocarbon dating and the expansion of farming culture from the Near East over Europe. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 1:58-73. Cohen J., Saito K. and Entekhabi D. 2001. The Role of the Siberian High in Northern Hemisphere Climate Variability. Geophysical Research Letters 28(2): 299-302. Contreras D. A., Meadows J. 2014. Summed radiocarbon calibrations as a population proxy: a critical evaluation using a realistic simulation approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 52:591-608. Cortés Sánchez M. and 22 co-authors 2012. The Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in southern Iberia. Quaternary Research 77: 221-234. Crombé P., Robinson E. 2014. 14C dates as demographic proxies in Neolithisation models of Northwestern Europe: a critical assessment using Belgium and northeast France as a case-study. Journal Archaeological Science Volume 52:558-56. Cruells W. 2008. The Proto-Halaf: Origins, definition, regional framework and chronology. In J. Ma Córdoba, M. Molist, Ma C. Pérez, I. Rubio and S. Martínez (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Arqueología del Oriente Próximo Antiguo. Vol. III. Madrid: 671-689. Darcque P., Koukouli-Chryssanthaki H., Malamidou D. and Zsirtoni Z. 2009. Rapport sur les traveaux de l'École francaise d'Athènes en 2008: Dikili Tash. Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique 133:529-541. Düring B. S. 2013. Breaking the Bond: Investigating the Neolithic Expansion in Asia Minor in the Seventh Millennium BC. Journal of World Prehistory 26: 75-100. Erdogu B. 2013. Ugurlu: A Neolithic settlement on the Ae-genan Island of Gokçeada. In M. Ozdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 5 Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publications. Istanbul: 1-33. Feurdean A., Klotz S., Mosbrugger V. and Wohlfarth B. 2008. Pollen-based Quantitative Reconstructions of Ho-locene Climate Variability in NW Romania. Palaeogeogra-phy, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 260(3-4): 494504. Fleitmann D., Burns S. J, Mangini A., Mudelsee M., Kramers J., Villa I., Neff U., Al-Subbary A. A., Buettner A., Hippler D. and Matter A. 2007. Holocene ITCZ and Indian monsoon dynamics recorded in stalagmites from Oman and Yemen (Socotra). Quaternary Science Reviews 26: 170-188. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2006.04.012. Fleitmann D., Cheng H., Badertscher S., Edwards R. L., Mu-delsee M., Goktürk O. M., Fankhauser A., Pickering R., Raible C. C., Matter A., Kramers J. and Tüysüz O. 2009. Timing and Climatic Impact of Greenland Interstadials Recorded in Stalagmites from Northern Turkey. Geophysical Research Letters 36(19): L19707. doi:10.1029/2009GL040 050. Fletcher W. J., Sanchez Goñi M. F. 2008. Orbital- and sub-orbital-scale climate impacts on vegetation of the western Mediterranean basin over the last 48,000 yr. Quaternary Research 70(3): 451-464. Forenbaher S., Miracle P. T. 2005. The spread of farming in the Eastern Adriatic. Antiquity 79(305): 514-528. Forenbaher S., Kaiser T. and Miracle P. T. 2013. Dating the East Adriatic Neolithic. European Journal of Archaeology 16(4): 589-609. Furholt M., Müller J., Raetzel-Fabian D., Rinne C. and Wo-tzka H-P. 2009. RADON. Datenbank mitteleuropäischer 14C-Daten für das Neolithikum und die frühe Bronzezeit. Online http://www.jungsteinsite.uni-kiel.de/radon/radon_ neu.htm. Galik A., Horejs B. 2011. ^ukurigi Höyük - Various Aspects of Its Earliest Settlement Phase. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by D. Ciobotaru, B. Horejs and R. Krauß. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Band 1. Deutsches Archäologischen Institut. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf.: 83-94. Gebel H. G. K. 2004. Central to What? The Centrality Issue of the LPPNB Mega-Site Phenomenon in Jordan. In H. D. Bienert, H. G. K. Gebel and R. Neef (eds.), Central Settlements in Neolithic Jordan. Proceedings of a Symposium Held in Wadi Musa, Jordan, 21st-25th of July 1997. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 5. Ex Oriente. Berlin: 1-19. Gebel H. G. K. 2009. The Intricacy of Neolithic Rubble Layers. The Ba'ja, Basta, and 'Ain Rahub Evidence. Neo-Li-thics 1(09): 33-48. Gerritsen F. A., Özbal R. and Thissen L. 2013a. Barcin Hö-yük. The Beginnings of Farming in the Marmara Region. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 5. Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publications. Istanbul: 93-112. 2013b. The Earliest Neolithic Levels at Barcin Höyük, Northwestern Turkey. Anatolica 39:53-92. Görsdorf J., Bojadziev J. 1996. Zur absoluten Chronologie der bulgarischen Urgeschichte. Eurasia Antiqua 2:105173. Groenhuijzen M., Kluiving S., Gerritsen F. and Künzel M. in prep. Geoarchaeological research at Barcin Höyük: implications for the initial Neolithic occupation of northwest Anatolia. Quarternary International. Grootes P. M., Stuiver M., White J. W. C., Johnson S. and Jou-zel J. 1993. Comparison of Oxygen Isotope Records from the GISP2 and GRIP Greenland Ice Cores. Nature 366: 552-554. Guilaine J. 2001. La diffusion de l'agriculture en Europe: une hypothèse arythmique. Zephyrus 53(4): 261-212. 2003. De la vague à la tombe. La conquête néolithique de la Méditerranée (8000-2000 avant J.-C.). Le Seuil. Paris 2013. The Neolithic Transition in Europe: some Comments on Gaps, Contacts, Arrhythmic Model, Genetics. In E. Starnini (ed.), UnconformistArchaeology. Papers in honour of Paolo Biagi. British Archaeological reports IS 2528. Archaeopress. Oxford: 55-64. Hinz M., Feeser I., Sjögren K-G. and Müller J. 2012. Demography and the intensity of cultural intensities: an evaluation of Funnel Beaker Societies (4200-2800 calBC). Journal of Archaeological Science 39(10): 3331-3340. Horejs B. 2010. Çukuriçi Höyük. Neue Ausgrabungen bei einem Tell bei Ephesus. In S. Aybek, A. Kazim Öz (eds.), The Land of the Crossroads. Essays in Honour of Recep Meriç. Metropolis Ionia II. Istanbul: 167-175. 2012. Çukuriçi Höyük. A Neolithic and Bronze Age Settlement in the Region of Ephesos. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 4. Western Turkey. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 117-131. Horejs B., Weninger B. in prep. Zur Radiocarbondatierung des frühen und späten Chalkolithikums am Çukurici Höyük. In B. Horejs (ed.), Çukuriçi Höyük 1. Erste Ergebnisse zum frühen und späten Chalkolithikum. Vienna. Josey S. A., Somot S. and Tsimplis M. 2011. Impacts of atmospheric modes of variability on Mediterranean Sea surface heat exchange. Journal of Geophysical Research 116. C02032. doi:10.1029/2010JC006685. Karul. N., Avci M. B. 2013. Aktopraklik. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 5 Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publications. Istanbul: 45-68. Kiziltan Z., Polat M. A. 2013. The Neolithic at Yenikapi Marmaray-Matro Project Rescue Excavations. In M. Özdo-gan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 5 Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publications. Istanbul: 113-165. Klitgaard-Kristensen D., Sejrup H. P., Haflidason H., Johnsen S. and Spurk M. 1998. A regional 8200 cal. yr BP cooling event in northwest Europe, induced by final stages of the Laurentide ice-sheet deglaciation? Journal Quaternary Science 13(2): 165-169. Koukouli-Chryssanthaki H., Treuil R., Lespez L. and Ma-lamidou D. (eds.) 2008. Dikili Tash, village préhistorique de Macédoine orientale. Recherches franco-helléniques dirigées par la Société Archéologique d'Athènes et l'école française d'Athènes (1986-2001). Bibliothèque de la Société Archéologique d'Athènes n° 254. Athènes. Krauß R., Elenski N., Weninger B., Clare L., Çakirlar C. and Zidarov P. 2014. Beginnings of the Neolithic in Southeast Europe. The Early Neolithic sequence and absolute dates from Dzuljunica-Smardes (Bulgaria). Documenta Praehi-storica 41. Lau N. C., Lau K.-M. 1984. Structure and Energetics of Mid-latitude Disturbances Accompanying Cold Air Outbreaks over East Asia. Monthly Weather Review 112(1): 13091321. Lemmen C., Gronenborn D. and Wirtz K. W. 2011. A simulation of the Neolithic transition in Western Eurasia. Journal of Archaeological Science 38:3459-3410. Lemmen C., Wirtz K. W. 2012. On the sensitivity of the simulated European Neolithic transition to climate extremes. Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 65-12. Lespez L., Tsirtsoni Z., Darcque P., Koukouli-Chryssanthra-ki H., Malamidou D., Treuil R. and Oberlin C. 2013. The lowest levels at Dikili Tash, northern Greece: a missing link in the Early Neolithic of Europe. Antiquity 81: 30-45. Lichardus-Itten M., Demoule J.-P., Perniceva L., Grebska-Kulova M. and Kulov I. 2002. The site of Kovacevo and the beginnings of the Neolithic period in southwestern Bulgaria. The French-Bulgarian excavations 1986-2000. In M. Lichardus-Itten, J. Lichardus and V. Nikolov (eds.), Beiträge zu jungsteinzeitlichen Forschungen in Bulgarien. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 74. Dr. Rudolf Habelt Gmbh. Bonn: 99-158. Linick T. 1977. La Jolla Natural Radiocarbon Measurements VII. Radiocarbon 19(1): 19-48. Linstädter J., Medved I., Solich M. and Weniger G.-C. 2012. Neolithisation process within the Alboran territory: Models and possible African impact. Quaternary International 214: 219-232. Linstädter J., Kehl M. 2012. The Holocene archaeological sequence and site formation processes at Ifri Oudadane, NE Morocco. Journal of Archaeological Science 39:33063323. Linstädter J. in press. Climate induced mobility and the missing Middle Neolithic of Morocco. In M. Reindel (ed.), Palaeoenvironment and the Development of Early Societies. Proceedings of International workshop. Sanliur-fa 5th-7th October 2012. Liu Y-H., Henderson G. M., Hu C-Y., Mason A. J., Charnley N., Johnson K. R. and Xie S-C. 2013. Links between the East Asian Monsoon and North Atlantic Climate during the 8,200 year event. Nature Geoscience 6:117-120. Luca S. A, Diaconescu D. and Suciu C. I. 2008. Archaeological research in Miercurea Sibiului-Petri§ (Sibiu Country Romania): the Starcevo-Cri§ level during 1997-2005 (a preliminary report). Documenta Praehistorica 35:325343. Luca S. A., Suciu C. 2006. Bazâde date deschisâ(C14) pen-tru neoliticul §i eneoliticul din zona Carpato-Danubia. In N. Ursulescu (ed.), Dimensiunea Europeana a Civiliza-tiei Eneolithifice Est-Carpatice. Universitatea "Alexandra loan Cuza". Centrul Interdisciplinar de Studii Arheoisto-rice. Editura Universitâfii "Al. I. Cuza". Ia§i: 219-228. Marino G., Rohling E. J., Sangiorgi F., Hayes A., Casford J. L., Lotter A. F., Kucera M. and Brinkhuis H. 2009. Early and Middle Holocene in the Aegean Sea: Interplay Between High and Low Latitude Climate Variability. Quaternary Science Reviews 28(27-28): 3246-3262. Mayewski P., Meeker L. D., Twickler M. S., Whitlow S., Yang Q., Lyons W. B. and Prentice M. 1997. Major Features and Forcing of High Latitude Northern Hemisphere Circulation Using a 110,000-year-long Glaciochemical Series. Journal of Geophysical Research 102(C12): 2634526366. Mayewski P. A. and 15 authors. 2004. Holocene Climate Variability. Quaternary Research 62: 243-255. Meeker L. D., Mayewski P. A. 2002. A 1400-year High-resolution Record of Atmospheric Circulation over the North Atlantic and Asia. The Holocene 12(3): 257-266. Mercone D., Thomson J., Abu-Zied R. H., Croudace I. W. and Rohling E. J. 2001. High-resolution geochemical and micropalaeontological profiling of the most recent eastern Mediterranean sapropel. Marine Geology 177:25-44. Migowski C., Stein M., Prasad S., Negendank J. F. W. and Agnon A. 2006. Holocene climate variability and cultural evolution in the Near East from the Dead Sea sedimentary record. Quaternary Research 66: 421-431. Morales J., Pérez-Jordà G., Pena-Chocarro L., Zapata L., Ruiz-Alonso M., Lopez-Saez J. A. and Linstàdter J. 2013. The origins of agriculture in North-West Africa: macro-botanical remains from Epipalaeolithic and Early Neolithic levels of Ifri Oudadane (Morocco). Journal of Archaeological Science 40(6): 2659-2669. Oross K., Siklosi Z. 2012. Relative and absolute chronology of the Early Neolithic in the Great Hungarian Plain. In A. Anders, Zs. Siklosi, (eds), The First Neolithic Sites in Central/South-East European Transect, Vol. III, The Körös Culture in Eastern Hungary. British Archaeological Reports IS 2334. Archaeopress. Oxford: 129-159. Özba§aran M. 2011. Re-Starting at Asikli. Anatolia Antiqua XIX: 27-37. Özba§aran M., Duru G. 2011. Akarçay Tepe. A PPNB and PN Settlement in Middle Euphrates - Urfa. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. Vol. 2. The Euphrates Basin. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 165-202. Özdogan A. 1999. Çayonu. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey - The Cradle of Civilization. New Discoveries. Arkeoloji ve sanat yayinlari. Istanbul: 35-63. Özdogan M. 2013. Neolithic Sites in the Marmara Region: Fikirtepe, Pendik, Yarimburgaz, Toptepe, Hoca Çe§me and A§agipinar. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations and New Research. Vol. 5. Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publications. Istanbul: 167-269. Özdogan M., Miyak Y. and Özba§aran Dede N. 1991. An Interim Report on Excavations at Yarimburgaz and Top-tepe in Eastern Thrace. Anatolica 17:59-121. Perlès C. 2005. From the Near East to Greece: let's reverse the focus. Cultural elements that didn't transfer. In C. Lichter (ed.), How Did Farming Reach Europe. Anatolian-European Relations from the Second Half of the 7th through the First Half of the 6th Millennium cal BC. Proceedings of the International Workshop Istanbul, 20-22 May 2004. BYZAS 2. Veröffentlichungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, 59-74. Yayinlari. Istanbul: 275290. Perlés C., Quiles A and Valladas H. 2013. Early seventh-millennium AMS dates from domestic seeds in the Initial Neolithic at Franchthi Cave (Argolid, Greece). Antiquity 87 (338): 1001-1015. Pinardi N., Zavatarelli M., Adani M., Coppini G., Fratianni C., Oddo P., Simoncelli S., Tonani M., Lyubartsev V., Dob-ricic S. and Bonaduce A. 2013-14 (in press). Mediterranean Sea large-scale low-frequency ocean variability and water mass formation rates from 1987 to 2007: A retrospective analysis. Progress in Oceanography. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2013.11.003. Pinhasi R., Fort J. and Ammerman A. J. 2005. Tracing the Origin and Spread of Agriculture in Europe. PLoS Biol 3 (12): e410. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030410. Peyron O., Goring S., Dormoy I., Kotthoff U., Pross J., de Beaulieu J.-L., Drescher-Schneider R., Vanniere B. and Ma-gny M. 2011. Holocene seasonality changes in the central Mediterranean region reconstructed from the pollen sequences of Lake Accesa (Italy) and Tenaghi Philippon (Greece). The Holocene 2:131-146. Plug J., van der Plicht J. and Akkermans P. M. M. G. 2014. Tell Sabi Abyad: Dating of Neolithic Cemeteries. Radiocarbon 56(2): 543-554. van der Plicht J., Akkermans P., Nieuwenhuyse O., Kaneda A. and Russell A. 2011. Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria: Radiocarbon Chronology, Cultural Change, and the 8.2 Ka Event. Radiocarbon 53(2): 229. Pross J., Kotthoff U., Müller U. C., Peyron O., Dormoy I., Schmiedl G., Kalaitzidis S. and Smith A. M. 2009. Massive Perturbation in Terrestrial Ecosystems of the Eastern Mediterranean Region Associated with the 8.2 Kyr BP Climatic Event. Geology 37(10): 887-890. Quitta H. 1967. The C14 Chronology of the Central and SE European Neolithic. Antiquity 41(164): 263-270. Reimer P. J. and 27 co-authors 2009. IntCal09 and Ma-rine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0-50,000 Years Cal BP. Radiocarbon 51:1111-1150. Reingruber A. 2011. Early Neolithic settlement patterns and exchange networks in the Aegean. Documenta Prae-historica 38:291-305. Reingruber A., Thissen L. 2004. CANeW 14C databases and 14C charts. Aegean Catchment (E Greece, S Balkans and W Turkey), 10,000-5500 calBC. Previously: www.canew. org. Rohling E. J, Mayewski P., Abu-Zied R., Casford J. and Hayes A. 2002. Holocene Atmosphere-ocean Interactions: Records from Greenland and the Aegean Sea. Climate Dynamics 18(7): 587-593. Rohling E. J., Mayewski P. A. and Challenor P. 2003. On the timing and mechanism of millennial-scale climate variability during the last glacial cycle. Climate Dynamics 20: 257-267. Rohling E. J, Pälike H. 2005. Centennial-scale Climate Cooling with a Sudden Cold Event around 8,200 Years Ago. Nature 434(7036): 975-979. Rohling E. J., Abu-Zied R., Casford J. L., Hayes A. and Ho-ogakker B. A. A. 2009. The Marine Environment: Present and Past. In J. Woodward (ed.), The Physical Geography of the Mediterranean. Oxford University Press. Oxford: 33-68. Rollefson G. O. 2009. Slippery Slope: The Late Neolithic Rubble Layer in the Southern Levant. Neo-Lithics 1(09): 12-18. Saaroni H., Bitan A., Alpert P. and Ziv B. 1996 Continental polar outbreaks into the Levant and eastern Mediterranean. International Journal of Climatology 16:11751191. Scheu A. et al. (forthcoming). The multifaceted origin of the Southeastern European Neolithic A synthesis of archaeology, archaeozoology and palaeogenetics. Shennan S., Edinborough K. 2007. Prehistoric population history: from the Late Glacial to the Late Neolithic in Central and Northern Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 34:1339-1345. Shennan S., Downey S. S., Timpson A., Edinborough K., Colledge S., Kerig T., Manning K. and Thomas M. G. 2013. Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe. Nature Communications 4: 1-8. Silva F., Steele J. 2014. New Methods for Reconstructing Geographical Effects on Dispersal Rates and Routes from Large-Scale Radiocarbon Databases. Journal of Archaeological Science. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2014.04.021. Thomas E. R., Wolff E. W., Mulvaney R., Steffensen J. P., Johnsen S. J., Arrowsmith C., Whited J. W. C., Vaughn B. and Popp T. 2007. The 8.2 ka event from Green-land ice cores. Quaternary Science Reviews 26: 70-81. Tasic N. 1988. Comparative C-14 dates for the Neolithic Settlements in Serbia. In D. Srejovic (ed.), The Neolithic of Serbia, Archaeological Research 1948-1988. University of Beograd. Beograd. Treuil R. (ed.) 1992. Dikili Tash: village préhistorique de Macédoine Orientale I, Fouilles de Jean Deshayes (1961-1975). Bulletin de correspondance hellénique: Supplément. Ecole Française d'Athènes. Athènes. Tsuneki A. 2010. A Newly Discovered Neolithic Cemetery at Tell el-Kerkh, Northwest Syria. In P. Matthiae, F. Pinnock, L. Nigro and N. Marchetti (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. 5 May - 10 May 2009, "Sapienza", Uni-versità Di Roma. Volume 2, Excavations, Surveys and Restorations. Reports on Recent Field Archaeology in the Near East. Harrassowitz Verlag. Wiesbaden: 697-713. Tubi A., Dayan U. 2013. The Siberian High: Teleconne-ctions, Extremes and Association with the Icelandic Low. International Journal of Climatology 33(6): 13571366. Vinther B. M., Clausen H. B., Johnsen S. J., Rasmussen S. O., Andersen K. K., Buchardt S. L., Dahl-Jensen D., Seier-stad I. K., Siggaard-Andersen M.-L., Steffensen J. P., Svens-son A. M., Olsen, J. and Heinemeier J. 2006. A synchronized dating of three Greenland ice cores throughout the Holocene. Journal Geophysical Research 111: D13102. doi:10.1029/2005JD006921. Wang Y. J., Cheng H., Edwards R. L., An Z. S., Wu J. Y., Shen C. C. and Dorale J. A. 2001. A High-Resolution Absolute-Dated Late Pleistocene Monsoon Record from Hulu Cave, China. Science 294(5550): 2345-2348. Wang Y., Cheng H., Edwards R.L., He Y., Kong X., An Z., Wu J., Kelly M. J., Dykoski C. A. and Li X. 2005. The Holocene Asian Monsoon: Links to Solar Changes and North Atlantic Climate. Science 308: 854-85. Weninger B. 1986. High-precision calibration of archaeological radiocarbon dates. Acta Interdisciplinaria Ar-chaeologica 4:11-53. 2014. https://www.academia.edu/71380l6/Europe. xls_-_CalPal-Format_l4C-Database. Weninger B., Alram-Stern E., Bauer E., Clare L., Danze-glocke U., Jöris O., Kubatzki C., Rollefson G. O., Todorova H. and van Andel T. 2006. Climate Forcing Due to the 8200 calBP Event Observed at Early Neolithic Sites in the Eastern Mediterranean. Quaternary Research 66: 401-420. Weninger B., Jöris O. 2008. A 14C Age Calibration Curve for the Last 60 Ka: The Greenland-Hulu U/Th Timescale and Its Impact on Understanding the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition in Western Eurasia. Journal of Human Evolution 55(5): 772-781. Weninger B. and 18 co-authors. 2009a. The Impact of Rapid Climate Change on Prehistoric Societies during the Holocene in the Eastern Mediterranean. Documenta Pra-ehistorica 36: 7-59. Weninger B., Edinborough K., Bradtmöller M., Collard M., Crombe P., Danzeglocke U., Holst D., Jöris O., Niekus M. and Shennan S. 2009b. A Radiocarbon Database for the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in Northwest Europe. In P. Crombé, M. van Strydonck, J. Sergant, M. Boudin and M. Bats (eds.), Chronology and Evolution within the Mesolithic of North-West Europe. Proceedings of an International Meeting, Brussels, May 30th-June 1st 2007. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Newcastle upon Tyne: 143176. Weninger B., Clare L. 2011. Holocene Rapid Climate Change in the Eastern Mediterranean: An Emerging Archaeological Climate Research Project. In K. Raiko (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by D. Ciobotaru, B. Horejs and R. Krauß. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Band 1. Deutsches Archäologischen Institut. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf.: 11-22. Weninger B., Edinborough K., Clare L. and Jöris O. 2011. Concepts of Probability in Radiocarbon Analysis. Documenta Praehistorica 38:1-20. Zapata L., López-Sáez J. A., Ruiz-Alonso M., Linstädter J., Pérez Jorda G., Morales J., Kehl M. and Peña-Chocarro L. 2013. Holocene environmental change in NE Morocco: Archaeological and Palaeobotanical evidences from Ifri Oudadane. The Holocene 23 (9): 1286-1296. Zielhofer C., Clare L., Rollefson G. O., Wächter S., Hoffmeister D., Bareth G., Roettig C., Bullmann H., Schneider B., Berke H. and Weninger B. 2012. The Decline of the Early Neolithic Population Centre of 'Ain Ghazal and Corresponding Earth Surface Processes, Jordan Rift Valley. Quaternary Research 78: 427-441. Zilhäo J. 2001, Radiocarbon evidence for maritime pioneer colonization at the origins of farming in west Mediterranean Europe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 98(24): 14180-14185. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) A new look at the introduction of the Neolithic way of life in Southeastern Europe. Changing paradigms of the expansion of the Neolithic way of life Mehmet Ozdogan Istanbul University, Istanbul, TR c.mozdo@gmail.com ABSTRACT - Questioning when, how and even why the Neolithic way of life appeared in Europe has been one of the most debated problems of European prehistory, leading to the formulation of various explanatory models, each providing evidence to support its point of view, but without convincing others. Conventional standpoints, one-tract thinking and considering the emergence of the Neolithic way of life as a short-term event have hampered consensus, bringing discussions almost to a deadlock. Recent evidence has made it clear that the Neolithisation process in Europe was a multifarious event that went on for more than a millennium; thus, all previous hypotheses were correct with regard to their specific cases. Analytic or synthetic explicative models such as migration, colonisation, segregated infiltration, the transfer of commodities and of know-how, acculturation, assimilation, and maritime expansion that are seemingly mutually contradictory actually took place simultaneously as distinct modalities. IZVLEČEK - Vprašanja kot so kdaj, kako in celo zakaj se je neolitski način življenja pojavil v Evropi predstavljajo temelje razprav o Evropski prazgodovini, ki so vodila k oblikovanju različnih razlagalnih modelov, ki so vsak zase podprti z dokazi, ki jih prinašajo, a so hkrati nezdružljivi z drugimi modeli. Tradicionalna stališča, enoumno razmišljanje) in razumevanja pojava neolitskega načina življenja kot kratkočasnega dogodka ovirajo konsenz ter so pripeljali razpravo skoraj na mrtvo točko. Nedavni dokazi kažejo, da je bil proces neolitizacije v Evropi raznolik, več kot tisočletje trajajoč pojav, tako da so prejšnje hipoteze, vsaka zase, pravilne. Analitski ali sintetski razlagalni modeli kot so migracija, kolonizacija, segregirana infiltracija, izmenjava izdelkov in znanja, akulturacija, asimilacija in pomorska ekspanzija, ki so si navidezno medsebojno nasprotujoči, so se dejansko lahko odvijali sočasno kot različne modalitete. KEY WORDS - Neolithic dispersal; Neolithic package; segregated migration; Marmara region; Anatolia Prelude to the problem Discussions on when and how the Neolithic way of life was introduced to Europe have a century-long history, a trajectory of thinking and arguments swaying from one extreme to the other (Budja 1993; 2004; Ozdogan 1995; Sherratt 1997; Tringham 2000). Initially, almost up to the late 1970s, there was not much to discuss; endemic diffusion - almost in colonisation mode - was considered the indubitable explanation for the emergence of the Neolithic way of life in regions outside the Near East; thus, debates mostly targeted its subsequent stages. Here, it should be noted that in the decades following World War II, there was a growing tendency in social sciences to unscramble conventional approaches; as is often the case, it took some time for the quest to break away from the traditional frameworks to influence European prehistoric archaeologists (Barford 2002; Bentley 2006). It mainly took the form of a total denial of cultural diffusion; thus, expansionist models propagating the Near East or Anatolia as the origin of European Neolithic were met with considerable reaction, at the same time triggering a fierce debate between defenders of conventional models and defenders of the autonomy of the Eu- DOI>10.4312\dp.41.2 33 ropean Neolithic. Inevitably, through the final quarter of the last century, the question 'How?' became the central focus of discussions; a number of controversial models were formulated and debated. For some years there has been a shift back to what might be termed 'neo-diffusionism'; nevertheless, it is far removed from the over-simplistic narratives of previous decades. At the time when we presented a paper to Documenta Prehistórica almost 20 years ago (Ozdogan 1995), very little was known from the Northwestern parts of Turkey on the early stages of Neolithi-sation, so most of what we had noted was based on intuitions rather than on concrete data. In that paper, we stressed the fact that biases in the quest for the beginning of Neolithic life in Europe had their roots in the unbalanced distribution of evidence between Southeastern Europe and Anatolia: while the former was known through hundreds of excavations, the work on Anatolia was minimal. Nevertheless, in spite of the paucity of evidence, certain indicators hinted at connections between the Neolithic assemblages of the Balkans and Central Anatolia, making it possible to surmise an endemic movement out of the Anatolian Plateau in the direction of Southeastern Europe. However, at that time, no data were available from the interim zone, i.e. the region around the Sea of Marmara, so we left our view as a suggestion. Rather paradoxically, over-documentation or the excessive number of studies in the Balkans had paved the way for other biases, the overall picture being blurred by being lost in details. Throughout Southeastern Europe there has been an apparent over-emphasis of the stylistic features of pottery assemblages, overriding other components of the material evidence, with cultures occasionally being defined by scrupulous categorisations of decorative elements - in a way, 'Balkanising' cultures that are more or less similar to the level of the smallest geographic unit. Nevertheless, with the inflow of new evidence from the Western and Northwestern parts of Turkey, it became possible to elaborate the picture we had drawn 20 years ago. Although there are still considerable gaps in our knowledge and various pitfalls in assessing the evidence, it is now at least plausible to develop a comprehensible view with a supra-regional perspective based on subtle evidence. In this respect, one more point needs to be defined: the archaeologies in Southeastern Europe and in Anatolia-Near East developed as distinct fields of specialisation, with little or no contact between them for decades, thus hampering the flow of knowledge, modalities and terminologies as well; the significant dif- ference between the Anatolian and Balkan archaeologies in, for example, what is meant by terms such as 'culture' or 'material assemblage' had considerable implications for developing a mutual understanding between the two sides (Ozdogan 2004). In the tradition of Anatolian archaeology, as in most Near Eastern archaeology, proxies other then stylistic variants are taken into consideration to define cultures in time and in space. What is denominated as the 'Halaf culture best exemplifies the conceptual approach of Near Eastern archaeology. Halaf culture extends from western Iran to Cilicia, in an area comparable in size to the Balkan Peninsula, with numerous stylistic variants that are much more apparent then those between Sesklo - Starcevo - Kremikovci -Gradesnitsa - Karanovo I - Koros and Çris, although it is still called Halaf Culture. One significant novelty of the last two decades has been the shift in research priorities, both in Anatolia and in the Balkans, which regretfully has not helped to answer the ultimate questions as much as it could have. While Neolithic sites began to be excavated in previously unexplored regions of Western Anatolia, the number of Neolithic excavations in the Balkans, where the focus of interest was diverted to the later periods of the Neolithic, declined sharply. Having large-scale exposures is one of the principle excavation strategies in Turkey, whereas most of the recent work in Southeastern Europe, with the exception of rescue operations, are carried out as restricted soundings and even as core-drillings. Evidently, this also makes it more difficult to make secure comparisons between the two regions. Archaeology in Anatolia developed from 'Mesopotamia-centric' roots, almost totally overlooking what had taken place in the west, or more specifically, in the prehistory of the Balkans. Although this has been somewhat ameliorated in the last decade or so, the aftermath of Mesopotamia-centric thinking still prevails (Ozdogan 1997). Thus, collating the archaeological evidence of Anatolia with the Balkans has its particular problems, which are apparent even in border regions that are separated only by present-day political borders. In spite of all the drawbacks, some progress has been made to improve the development of mutual understanding between the archaeologies of Anatolia and the Balkans by at least being aware of what is happening on the other side. Within the framework of this paper, it is not possible to present even a conspectus on the newly emerging picture; instead, we shall be concerned with new ways of looking at this century-old problem from the standpoint of changing paradigms. The term 'Neolithic package' seems to have taken a central place in current debates on the origin and dispersal of the Neolithic way of life; however, it is also clear that what is implied by the term 'Neolithic package' is not always the same. Accordingly, for the sake of clarity, we first have considered looking into the coverage and implications of this term. The 'Neolithic package' The concept of Neolithic grew with what had been defined as the 'primaries', consisting of constructed spaces indicating permanent habitation, domestic animals, cultivated cereals and legumes indicating food production, pottery vessels indicating storage and cooking, ground stone objects indicating food processing, celts indicating a new technology of finishing stone tools by polishing. Until recently, the presence of 'primaries' sufficed to denominate a site as Neolithic, as the Neolithic period was viewed as a period of simple farming communities striving to survive and gain dominance over their habitats. Thus, detecting the absence or presence of the primaries was, more or less, the prime objective of research for a long time. While most components of the package such as architecture, pottery and ground stone are easy to detect, determining agricultural practices and domestication of animals necessitated work by special experts; thus working on floral and faunal remains soon became the main objective of Neolithic excavations. Through the meticulous work of natural scientists, the much needed data leading to summarizing the stages towards food production became available; however, at the same time, the Neolithic came to be conceptualised in terms of subsistence, overlooking the structure of cultural and social entities. Moreover, the prominence given to subsistence patterns has hampered the search for answers to other questions, including 'origins' or 'identity', that are essential to understanding the modalities of Neolithic dispersal. The recent picture of the Neolithic of the Near East is far more sophisticated and multifarious than what could have been imagined in the previous decades, necessitating other sets of questions that would enable us to follow origins, sequences of developments, trajectories of dispersal, spheres of interaction etc. It also became evident that in the early, pristine stages of Neolithisation, what was being consumed as food was not as important for Neolithic communities as we have hypothesised. It is apparent that Neoli- thic communities did not identify themselves with how they procured food, while some remained hunters for long periods, others were utilising various cereals or legumes, or managing sheep, goat or cattle. Regardless of their subsistence pattern, they interacted, sharing knowledge, which clearly indicates that their socio-cultural identity was the prime marker that differentiated them from other groups. Thus, the course of our thinking on Neolithic communities fixed on the efficiency of food production has to be revised to enable new paradigms to be developed for holistic approaches (Ozdogan 2002). With the increase in our knowledge of the Neolithic Period defining what is implied by the term, the Neolithic became far more difficult than before; now, the definition varies according to the types of question being asked. However, any hypothesis based on conventional 'primary' elements would fail to answer even the simplest questions. Although the term 'Neolithic package' has emerged to mark the multifarious outlines of Neolithic cultures, considering it as a single, homogenous package is as misleading as the earlier assumptions. The Neolithic package has to be defined and specified both in time and space as distinct packages. Following this idea, we have devised a tentative list of proxies to specify and diagnose Neolithic packages and tested them to construe various clusters, spheres of interaction, and trajectories of dispersal. As our approach and methodology have been described elsewhere in detail (Ozdogan 2010b; 2011a), this paper is limited to presenting some of the basic issues that are relevant to the discussions here. As the first step, we began by defining 52 components of the Neolithic assemblages that we considered as indicative of tracing cultural clusters (Ozdogan 2010b.Tables). These ranged from settlement layout to architectural designs to symbolic or prestige objects to utilitarian tools that reflected either certain technologies or traditions. During the later stages of our work, we extended the list to 94 by adding new components. The results are by no means conclusive, and are apt to be expanded and elaborated by time; however, at least they provide a subtle basis for investigating certain problems. The list should be considered as a database intended to cover various Early Neolithic assemblages in an extensive geography, as a guide to what to look for. Methodologically, our approach is basically the same as what was devised to trace the distribution patterns of the 'crop package' of founder crops (Colledge, Co-nolly 2007). The next stage of our work has been to define spatial and chronological zones that would be the final basis for sorting the list, enabling us to trace the distribution patterns of the components of the Neolithic package. With a supra-regional view, trying to avoid local variations, we defined seven geographic zones, each of which has more or less similar traits during the initial stage of Neolithisation (Ozdogan 2012.Fig. 1); the annotated geographic units used to plot entities of the Neolithic package will be described briefly. Designating geographic zones Seven geographic zones that could potentially contribute to tracing the spatial distribution patterns of the Neolithic package have been defined (Fig. 1); these are: Zone A: The main core area of Neolithisation, covering the Central Anatolian plateau, the Levant, northern Syro-Mesopotamia, Southeastern Turkey and Western Iran. The Neolithic way of life emerged within this zone as early as the 11th millennium calBC and continued to develop for some 3000 years without expanding its boundaries or having a detectable impact on other regions. The vast territory that has been denominated as the core or the formative zone of primary Neolithisation is not a uniform entity, but consists of at least three sub-divisions: the Central Anatolian plateau, Southern Levant, and the region conveniently named Greater Mesopotamia; each featured its own particular settlement pattern, architectural design, material assemblage, burial customs, symbolic indicators and technologies. However, in spite of the apparent differences, there was still an intensive interaction and, more significantly, sharing of knowledge throughout the entire area of Zone A, regardless of the diversity of their cultural systems. Zone B: The immediate periphery of Zone A, where the components of the Neolithic package began to appear by the turn of the 8th to the 7th millennium BC, although rather sporadically. The boundaries of this zone are not well defined, seemingly changing through time. The Western parts of the Anatolian peninsula and, possibly, the littoral areas of the Aegean comprise Zone B. Most of the terrain covered by Zone B comprises small intermountain plains, some - like those in the Lakes district - occupied by lakes and alluvial valleys extending along tectonic fault-lines. The picture along the littoral areas of the Mediterranean coast is not that clear. The maritime route following the coastline of the Neolithic era seems to have been as effective as that of the land route (Ozdogan 2011b). The appearance of Neolithic elements in the region at the initial stage seems to have been rather sporadic and random. The initial stage seems to continue until about 6500-6400 BC, being followed by more intensive and organised waves of intrusion, each following different trajectories and bringing together distinct Neolithic packages, with the final and more intensive wave dating to a time around 5600 BC. Maritime routes, whether following the coast or not, must have been as important as those of the land-routes through Anatolia in the expansion of Neolithic communities (Perles 2005; Ozdogan 2011b). It is also of interest to note that the communities established in the new areas mentally and physically were not totally detached from their land of origin. Through the initial stages of Neolithisation up to the end of the Early Chalcolithic Period, communities living in these areas were evidently aware of the changes taking place in the core area. David Anthony (1997) calls sustained relations with the old homeland by constant back-and-forth movements between the core and periphery as "chain migration" (Anthony 1997.24); the same generalisation holds for Zones C and D. Zone C: This covers the north-south oriented corridor in inner-west Anatolia and the eastern parts of the Sea of Marmara. At its southern end, Zone C touches the Lakes District of Zone B. It seems highly probable that the initial wave out of Central Anatolia, after reaching the Lakes District, diverged into two branches, one going westward into Zone B along the valley of the Menderes River and the other northwards along the Sakarya River, reaching eastern Marmara by 6500-6400 BC, taking with them the Neolithic package characterised by the so-called 'monochrome' assemblage, which in time will emerge as the Fikirtepe group. In an overview, this process of Neolithisation differs from the others. Firstly, the coastal regions of eastern Marmara were densely occupied by the Mesolithic communities known as the Agagli group. There, as evidenced at sites such as Ye-nikapi, Fikirtepe and Pendik, both groups peacefully merge, developing a coastal variant of the Fikir-tepe culture that differs from those of inland sites such as Demirci Hoyuk, Bargin and Kanlitas Hoyuk. The migration of Neolithic farmers after integrating with the local communities ends in the region around the Istanbul area, with no attempt to move further into Thrace. Secondly, this zone was totally avoided by the second and more massive movement Fig. 1. Geographic Zones designed to follow Neolithic packages. which brought with it the Neolithic package characterised by the red-slipped pottery assemblage. We were rather startled by the different compositions of the Neolithic packages of Yenikapi-Fikirtepe-Yarim-burgaz group and that of A§agi Pinar in Eastern Thrace, only 100km away; this will be further detailed below Zone D: This covers most of the Aegean and the Balkans, with the exception of the Adriatic littoral. Evidently, this vast territory could also have been broken into several smaller units, the most apparent being the southern parts of the Greek peninsula that feature rather distinct from most of the Balkans. As noted for Zone B, the maritime routes seem to have been more effective in bringing in Neolithic elements. Perles (2005) has explicitly noted that there must have been some direct connections between the northern Levant and mainland Greece that bypassed the Anatolian peninsula. The initial wave of Neolithic expansion reached some parts of Zone D by 6500- 64o0 BC, though extremely sparsely and even indistinctly in most areas. As in Zones B and C, this initial stage is characterised by the Neolithic package of monochrome pottery. Although infiltration into the region seems to have been sustained for some centuries, at around 61005900 BC there is a considerably massive and organised migration, as evidenced by the rapid foundation of hundreds of new settlement sites in almost every alluvial plain and valley throughout Greece and the Balkans, bringing with them the package of the red-slipped horizon. Throughout the region, the material assemblages present an apparent uniformity, and almost every component of the Neolithic package appears in a fully developed stage. The sudden appearance of similar or even identical elements throughout the vast geographical area extending from the Aegean to the Danube indicates that the occupation by Neolithic migrants was very rapid. In parts of Southeastern Europe where there was a strong presence of Meso-lithic communities, the process of Neo-lithisation took place in different modalities that varied from region to region, either as gradual acculturation or adaptation, as in the Iron Gates and Western Balkans (Bonsall 2007; Boric 1999; 2011) or as in the case of Eastern Marmara, the peaceful merging of two communities. It is of interest to note that Zone D, after following the trends in Zones A and B in the initial stages, later became detached to develop as a new core for the Neolithi-sation of areas further in Central Europe. Zone E: This covers those parts of Central and Western Europe where the Linear Band Ceramic assemblages appear as a uniform entity. In spite of the discrepancy regarding its origins, during its later stages it developed as an independent identity, being totally detached from events that took place at the core area of primary Neolithisation (Banffy, Sume-gi 2011; Oross, Banffy 2009). Zone F: This is the Central and Western Mediterranean, the region of so-called Impresso and of Car-dium-Impresso groups. This zone can also be broken into numerous regional variants, partly due to distinct environmental features, partly because of the strong presence of Mesolithic groups preceding the arrival of Neolithic elements. Although the appearance of Neolithic package happened as early as the mid-6th millennium BC, indicating the effective implementation of maritime connections through out the Mediterranean basin, it is also clear that the dispersal of Neolithic elements was not due to endemic movements, but resulted from the transfer of commodities and/or know-how. Zone G: This covers the northeastern parts of Turkey and most of Caucasia, where the appearance of Neolithic elements appear as late as the 6th millennium BC, seemingly not due to an endemic movement, but to the transfer of commodities and know-how. The geographic zones noted above, with the exception of Zone A, should not be considered as definite entities, but more as starting points for testing working hypotheses. Firstly, none of them has clear boundaries; moreover, their areas and position in the process of Neolithisation changes through time. Likewise, any of them could be further segregated into different units or merged with each other. Nevertheless, the template suggested here enables us to trace the distribution patterns of various Neolithic packages and demonstrate regions of origin. Even a preliminary assessment has revealed that the spread of Neolithic culture in Zones B, C and D was due to multiple waves of very rapid endemic movements covering large territories relatively quickly. We are aware that what has been noted above covers a wide and diversified geographical area, inevitably leading to questions about the pace at which communities and or commodities could move. Pace of Neolithic dispersal It has often been argued that the movement of communities that lack pack animals must be very slow, so seeking analogies to present-day nomadic tribes would be erroneous. Accordingly, various models have been suggested for the spread of Neolithic communities, such as leap-frog and wave of advance; almost all of them consider a very slow pace of expansion, almost in the range of one kilometre per year. In calculating the pace of migration, demographic built-up, the time needed for demographic pressure to built up to a level that would trigger people to move in search of new areas to settle has been one of the main concerns. Most of these models have been explicitly described and discussed in a number of works, so we refrain even from presenting a review of these (Bellwood, Renfrew 2002; Bocquet-Appel et al. 2009; Harris 2003; Pinhasi 2003; Price 2000; Richards 2003; Zvelebil 2002; 2005). Before going into problems related to demography, which we deal with below, some facts concerning the pace of the movements need to be discussed. In estimating the pace of Neolithic expansion, the available radiometric dates are not of much help in specifying the time of the initial stages of the movement because, firstly, the margins of absolute dates are wide, and secondly, those from the basal layers of occupation are very few in number and rather random. Nevertheless, they help to place cultural assemblages in the main stages of Neolithic dispersal, such as the 7200-6400, 64005900, 5900-5600 BC general slots. Accordingly, until more precise absolute dates are available, other agents have to be looked at to view the pace of dispersal. In this respect, the level of uniformity and similarities in the stylistic details of material assemblages within Zones B, C and D is remarkable. For example, what we have been recovering in Layer 7 of A§agi Pinar in Eastern Thrace is identical to contemporary material not only from Bulgaria, but also Macedonia and the Danubian basin, as if the same craftsmen had made them (Fig. 2). In our view, this could only have occurred if the expansion was very rapid, giving no time for stylistic changes or the introduction of new components to the assemblage. So the problem is: how rapid can the movement of Neolithic communities that are in search of new areas of habitation have been? Although - as mentioned above - estimates deduced from the pace of migration of present-day nomadic groups is considered to be misleading; it should also be considered that, even if they possess pack animals, the speed of their movement depends on the distance a flock of sheep or goats can walk in a day. In their annual migration from wintering grounds to summer pastures, modern sheep-herding Turcoman tribes move an average of 8 to 15km per day, and within two to three weeks they travel 150 to 250km to cross over the Taurus Mountains. In alluvial plains or steppes, the distance covered in a day can be even greater (Bates 1973; Dani§maz 2012; Hutteroth 1959). Even if this is considered an exaggerated estimate for movement through hostile environments, from A§agi Pinar in Eastern Thrace to the basin of the Danube, which is only 250km as the crow flies, can easily be covered during a season. Accordingly, once people have a motive to migrate, the distances that we conceptualise as unfeasible are actually achievable within reasonable periods. We Fig. 2. Clay figurines of A§agi Pinar 7; finds identical to these are extensively distributed throughout almost the entire Balkan Peninsula. thus surmise that the regions of the Karanovo I and related groups, for example, could be occupied by immigrating farmers within a year or two, providing their numbers were sufficient to fill this area. This leads to the question of how to differentiate between settlements founded by immigrant groups and local communities that were Neolithicised either by acculturation or adaptation. Identifying endemic movements: 'village life' as an indicator To what extent migrant farmers were the actual founders of the Early Neolithic sites of Southeastern Europe and how these can be differentiated from those due to cultural interaction is a critical question in understanding the process of Neolithisa-tion; no matter how simple it looks, the answer is not easy. The presence or absence of certain components of the Neolithic package and, in particular, types of artefacts, are not dependable criteria for answering this question, as commodities and technologies can easily be transferred and adopted. Likewise, certain utilitarian or prestige items that require skill and experienced know-how to manufacture could have been distributed by wandering craftsmen; thus, by following this line of thought, a consensus is difficult to reach. On the other hand, 'village life' is a more dependable criterion if what is implied by the term can be properly defined. Settlements in the core area of primary Neolithisa-tion, Zone A, had become 'villages' as early as the beginning of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic stage, developing life-styles markedly different from those of 'other' communities. Alhough discerning criteria for village life is not easy, regardless of the artefactual assemblages, even by looking to the plan of a settlement anywhere in Zone A, be it in the Southern Levant or in Central Anatolia, they clearly reveal a picture of a village in the true sense of the term, where the presence of complex social order is apparent (Fig. 3). Thus, Neolithic farmers on the move had behind them the social memory of a tradition established several millennia previously, which can be clearly viewed in the newly founded settlements in Zones B, C and D. It seems evident that the immigrant groups could not give up the modalities of life to which they were accustomed when settling down. The social modalities of village life are not easy to adapt for an outsider. It requires long experience and a tradition to be comfortable with; thus, it cannot be imitated in a short period. It is for this reason that we included way of village life as one of the major components on our list. Even the earliest settlements in Zones B, C and in nuclear sectors of D are villages in the sense of Anatolian and/or Near Eastern ones, regardless of their size, layout or construction techniques. However, none of those on the fringes of Zone D, and almost none that are in Zone F are habitation sites in the tradition of the eastern Neolithic. Accordingly, as a working hypothesis, the type of habitation is apt to be an indicator in defining the area covered by endemic movements. Social meaning attached to the living space is consequential to the development of village life; it is bound tightly to the concept of a 'new way of life' and is another criteria with which to identify settlements established by immigrant farmers. In the Zone A tradition, buildings are not mere shelters, but homes, structures ascribed to new values; likewise, compared with conventional dwellings, Neolithic houses are multifunctional, closely reflecting modalities of the new way of life (Ozdogan 2010a; Wat-kins 1990; 1996; 2012). The transition from simple huts to houses, the consolidation of the living space to comply with the expectations of the Neolithic way of life, took place in Zone A at a very early stage. Even during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period, when Fig. 3. Aerial Southeastern view of Kortiktepe, a Pre-Pottery Neolithic A site in Turkey (from Ozkaya et al. 2013^. the building plans were circular, they were already houses, not simple huts (Figs. 3-4). The development of building techniques that required structural innovations was a long process; through trial and error; stable rectangular-plan buildings had already appeared in Zone A by the transition from Pre-Pot-tery Neolithic A to B (Ôzdogan 2010a). Accordingly, by the last quarter of the 9th millennium BC, buildings throughout Zone A were rectangular in plan and multifunctional, representing well-developed structural practices designed to leave open spaces in between for other activities. On the other hand, the dwellings of contemporary Mesolithic communities were exclusively light, hut-like structures, round or oval in plan. Immigrant farmers coming from Central Anatolia were accustomed to solid houses. After entering the temperate forest zone, possibly in Zone B, they began practicing with wood as a building material and rather quickly became acquainted with using wooden posts and timber to build rectangular, solid and multifunctional houses. Although some round plan buildings occur at newly established coastal sites such as Hoca Çe§me or Ege Gübre, they are also solid structures with stone foundations incomparable to the hut-like dwellings as in the peripheral areas of Zone D. Accordingly, we also consider the presence of huts or homes as an indicator to set settlements founded by immigrants apart from others. In this respect, the difference between the settlements of coastal and inland sites of the Fi-kirtepe culture presents a fine example (Ôzdogan 2013a). Sites located distant from the coastal areas without a Mesoli-thic substratum are villages in the true sense of Neolithic settlements of the core area. However, at coastal sites where local Mesolithic groups merged to live together with the newcomers, the picture is notably different. Recent excavations at Pendik revealed a rectangular mud-slab building (Fig. 5) in the same layer, with numerous round or ovoid wattle-and-daub hut-like dwellings (Kiziltan 2013). Likewise, Starcevo, Ko-ros and Cris settlements in the marginal areas of Zone D also differ from those in the central sections as they consist of huts, and the settlement habitation areas lack the indicators of 'village life'. Accordingly, it is possible to surmise that the endemic movement covered only parts of the Balkan Peninsula, mainly northern Greece, Eastern Thrace, Bulgaria, Macedonia and only parts of Serbia. Demography In seeking modalities that might have triggered communities to leave their homeland, increases in population that exceeded the carrying capacity of the terrain have always been on the agenda as being among the most probable options. It has been generally argued that deterritorialisation of habitat either by intensive consumption or climatic fluctuations, or by the overpopulation due to the optimal living conditions brought by the Neolithic way of life, were the main agents leading to the momentum to migrate (Bocquet-Appel, Bar-Yosef 2008; Bar-Yosef 2009; Clare et al. 2008; Goring-Morris, Belfer-Cohen 2008; Rollefson, Kohler-Rollefson 1989; Weninger et al. 2009; Sherratt 2004). Some sort of social unrest or turbulence has also been considered as a reason for massive movements from the core area to other regions (Clare 2010; Ozdogan 2013a). Although what may have led populations to migrate is beyond the Fig. 4. Burial gifts of a sub-floor burial from a round building of the Pre Pottery Neolithic A at Kortiktepe (from Ozkaya et al. 2013). concern of this paper, there is clear evidence of population displacements both in the southern Levant and in Southeastern Anatolia, some sites being abandoned, others diminishing in size, eventually leading to what has been termed the 'Neolithic Collapse' by the last quarter of the 8th millennium BC; this is also a period when previously unattested elements of the Levantine and Southeastern Anatolian Neolithic cultures begin appearing on the Central Plateau (Ozdogan 2013a; 2014). It is thus possible to surmise that some groups, mainly farmers and herders with the now fully domesticated animals, had left the eastern parts of Zone A, moved into Central Anatolia and merged with the local communities, with which they had long-standing connections. It is of interest that no component of the dominant clerical system of the east was transferred to the west; seemingly the movement was by ordinary people, while the ruling elite or the clergy remained, which is highly suggestive of some sort of social turmoil (Ozdogan 2008. 141). It also seems plausible that after entering Central Anatolia, some people kept moving west, firstly as stray bands and then in a massive and more organized fashion. However, whether prior to the mass movement of around 6000 BC, the level of population growth had reached a level that would cover Zone D is a question that still needs to be answered. Related to the demography question, it should also be taken into account that the westward expansion of Neolithic farmers was not a singular event, but took place in multiple installments extending through a millennium, each wave bringing together certain components of the Neolithic package and having its distinct trajectory. The evidence from Neolithic excavations in Western Turkey indicates that in deciding locations to settle, migrating groups omitted places that had been occupied by the previous newcomers. Accordingly, the content of the Neolithic package differs not only in time, but also locality. For example, in a relatively small area around Izmir, five Neolithic sites have recently been excavated, ^ukurigi, Latmos Besparmak, Ege Gubre, Ulucak and Ye§ilova, and there are apparent differences among the material assemblages of layers that are even contemporaneous. A case study: comparing the Neolithic packages of two neighboring regions With the onset of numerous Neolithic excavations now mounting to 13 altogether, the region around the Sea of Marmara provides the means to exemplify some of the issues mentioned in this paper. As the details of the sites with extensive bibliography have been published elsewhere, they will not be repeated here (Ozdogan et al. 2013). Among them, Gurpinar, ^o§kuntepe, Ugurlu and Hoca ^e§me, are located in the western sector of the region, almost along the coastal strip of the Aegean; Yarimburgaz, Yenikapi, Fikirtepe, Pendik, Ilipinar, Mente§e, Bargin in the eastern sector; and Aktopraklik and A§agi Pinar in the interim zones by geographic location (Fig. 6). Among these sites, Fikirtepe was the first to be excavated (1952-54) followed by Pendik, Yarimbur-gaz, all located in the eastern part of the region. When we began working on the Neolithic assemblages of these sites in the 1980s, even at the initial stage of our assessment, it was possible to detect numerous finds that are similar to the Neolithic assemblages of both the Lakes District in Turkey and the so-called Karanovo horizon in the Balkans. Similarities in tool types such as the bone spoons, belt-hooks etc. were too specific to be explained by parallel developments. This led us to conclude that the Fikirtepe culture of Eastern Marmara derived from the Neolithic sub-stratum of the Lakes District, at that time known mainly from Hacilar, Kurugay, Er-baba and Suberde, and that it was ancestral to the Fig. 5. The rectangular mud-slab building at Pendik excavated in 2013 (courtesy of the Istanbul Archaeological Museums). Neolithic cultures of Bulgaria (Ozdogan 1995; 1997). With that view in mind, through our early work in Thrace, we tried to detect elements specific to the Fi-kirtepe culture in Thrace and were somewhat misled by the presence of certain dark-coloured wares. The absence of certain elements of the Karanovo assemblage at Fikirtepe, such as red-slipped painted wares, tubular lugs, pedestalled bases was rather startling, but we considered that the second wave that brought red-slipped painted pottery to the Balkans had bypassed Eastern Marmara. Excavations at Hoca ^e§me were in a way an indicator of the difference in the Neolithic assemblages between the eastern and western parts of the Marmara region, but not conclusive, as the excavations were on a rather limited scale. Excavations at A§agi Pinar provided ample evidence to draw a clear picture; firstly, because there was a clear uninterrupted cultural deposition covering the entire sequence of the Early Neolithic period and the large extent of the exposures; it is now evident that the basal layers of A§agi Pinar, layer 8, pre-dates Karanovo I and is contemporary with early Fikirtepe, while A§agi Pinar 7 is contemporary with Karanovo I and Yarimburgaz 4 (Ozdogan 2013b). In an overview, neither A§agi Pinar 7 or 8 have elements typical of Fikirtepe-Yarimburgaz group with the exception of elements that are common to all of Zone A and B; on the other hand, the basal layers of A§agi Pinar have the characteristic features of pre-Karano-vo and Karanovo I cultures, also sharing the same assemblages as sites such as Hoca ^e§me, Ugurlu etc. in western Marmara. Some of the most characteristic features will be discussed in some detail below. One of the most striking differences between the east and west Marmara assemblages is apparent in the lithic industries (Gatsov 2001; 2003); the sites of the Fikirtepe culture, both the coastal sites such as Yenikapi, Fikirtepe, Pendik and the inland sites such as Ilipinar, Bargin, Mente§e, Aktoprakli have a very distinctive micro-blade industry, notably featured by pressure flaking and bullet cores (Fig. 7). Round curricular scrapers, keeled scrapers, end scrapers and backed blades are among the most common tool types. There is also some obsidian in the assemblages, mostly in the form of blade-lets. However, as in the case of the Karanovo I sites, at all sites of the western group, including A§agi Pinar, there is a general deficiency of lithic tools. The featured Karanovo I blade is the only clear-cut made tool (Fig. 8), others being mostly ad hoc pieces. There is some obsidian at coastal sites, but it is completely absent from A§agi Pinar. The absence of developed lithic tools in the Thracian sites is rather astounding, as pressure-flaked bullet core technology with micro-blades occurs throughout Zone B. Another striking difference is in the burial customs. As evidenced at ^atal Hoyuk in Central Anatolia, primary, secondary or collective intramural burials was a common practice in Zone A, but seldom in Zone B and almost absent from Zone D. On the other hand every site in Zone C has revealed large numbers of burials comparable to those of Zone A, the most abundant being at Ilipinar, Pendik, Yenikapi and Ak-topraklik (Figs. 9-10). With the exception of a few rather random scatters of bones, no burials have been recovered at any of the Thracian sites. Clay figurines found in hundreds at almost every site in Zone B and D, including west Thracian ones, hardly exist at sites in Zone C. The recovery of a wooden figurine at Yenikapi (Fig. 11) suggests that wood might have been preferred to clay in eastern Marmara, but this does not exclude that wooden figurines might have been present in other regions and have not been recovered, as none had the conditions of preservation found at Yenikapi. The scarcity of polished stone tools in eastern Marmara sites is interesting; well-finished celts or adzes occur, but in minimal numbers. Considering the wooded environment in which they lived, this also is strange. West Thracian sites, and particularly A§agi Fig. 6. Excavated Neolithic sites in the Marmara region. Pinar, have yielded vast amounts of polished stone tools of all sizes and shapes. Other particulars in comparing the two assemblages and, especially those related to pottery, can easily be seen in Figure 12; we will not go into details. Considering both the similarities, as well as the differences among the assemblages, simple explanations such as necessity or environmental concerns would not suffice to answer the question why. Nevertheless, knowing that at this stage a clear answer is not possible, we still find it worth contemplating. Fig. 7. Aktopraklik; bullet cores typical of the eastern Marmara Neolithic. As we have already noted, the presence or absence of certain commodities, whether utilitarian or prestige, can be the result of a number of reasons. On the other hand, ritual and symbolic practices, as in the lifestyle, are more resistant to change. In the case of Zone C, the presence of burials and the absence of clay figurines are suggestive of identities distinct from those that occupied Zone B and D, necessitating an examination of the assemblages of Zone A for similar traits. During the Pre-Pottery Neolithic stage, particularly in Southeastern Anatolia and the Levant, clay female figurines do not stand out among the most significant symbolic indicators. They are incomparably crude compared to those in stone, and in many cases are indistinct in form, occurring together with male and animal figurines in domestic areas; the prominent appearance of clay female figurines in the Neolithic assemblages happens in the transition to the Pottery Neolithic period. On the other hand, intramural burial, primary, secondary or collective, was a widespread practice through the Pre-Pot-tery Neolithic period, but by the transitional period to the Pottery Neolithic intramural burials disappeared from the eastern parts of Zone A. Seemingly, burials occur in cemeteries that are not in the immediate vicinities of the settlements. In this respect, Central Anatolia stands out as an exceptional area, as evidenced at ^atal Hoyuk, where the tradition of intramural burials was sustained. What is of interest is that while communities moving westward to Zone B did not bring with them the tradition of burying the dead within or nearby the settlement, those in Zone C do maintain the tradition. While the number of human burials that have been recovered at over 300 sites excavated in Zones B and D is less than a few dozen, the number of excavated skeletons is over 300 only at Pendik, Ilipinar and Aktopraklik (Figs. 9-10). It thus seems plausible to surmise that groups of diverse origin, each having their particular social habits, were on the move. As we have already noted, we use this case to exemplify our trajectory in looking at Neolithic dispersal, being fully aware that much more data has still to be procured to draw a conclusive picture. Concluding remarks There has been an almost sudden inflow of new data coming from all over the Near East, Anatolia and Southeastern Europe, shaking the foundations of what we had taken to be the Neolithic. The picture emerging now is so different from the conventional one that some more time is still needed for it to settle in and de-contextualise in order to become part Fig. 8. So-called Karanovo I type blades from Hoca ^e§me. of new conceptual approaches. Only then will it be possible to adjust our perception of Neolithic identity. It is evidently not easy to avoid cliched definitions that are so deeply rooted, and as already noted, more time is needed to develop a new way of looking at old problems. What we have presented in this paper is by no means conclusive and should be considered as a quest to develop new trajectories for approaching the problem. We tried to stress the primal difference between the core and periphery. Any discussion of problems related to the dispersal of the Neolithic way of life inevitably involves looking at a vast territory through a supra-regional perspective. In this respect, narrowed over-specialisations are an obstruction, since to most of the archaeologists working in the core area, events that took place on the exterior at later dates are simply uninteresting. On the other hand, most colleagues working on regions of secondary or late Neolithisation, such as Europe or Central Asia, lack even a basic knowledge of the core area, as they are so much involved with the problems of their own regions. The contact zones on the borders of major cultural entities are generally overlooked, as their material evidence is atypical of neighboring regions, making it difficult to establish 'mental' bridges between the two areas. What is important is to maintain a delicate balance between over-simplistic generalisations and becoming lost in Fig. 9. Neolithic burials from the 2013 excavations at Pendik (courtesy of the Istanbul Archaeological Museums). the details of the narrow confines of selective artefact typology; the latter obscures the overall picture by distracting the focus from the primary evidence to subsidiary issues. With these in mind, we conclude by noting certain traits that may help to develop supra-regional perspectives when examining the dispersal of the Neolithic way of life. All of the components of the Neolithic package that are present in Zones B to E have antecedents in Zone A, but in different ratios. An item that might be very rare in Zone A may turn out to be a common item or continue as a prestige object in any of the other zones. For example, 'bone spoons', 'festooned bone objects' and 'pintaderas' (Figs. 13-15) occur at random in some of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic assembla- Fig. 10. A Neolithic burials from Yenikapi (courtesy of the istanbul Archaeological Museums). Fig. 11. Wooden Neolithic figurine from Yenikapi (courtesy of the Istanbul Archaeological Museums). ges of Zone A, with no indication of being ranked as status objects. Bone spoons become a common commodity in Zones B, C and D, at the same time attaining a symbolic value as, at least in Zone C, most are found among grave goods. On the other hand, 'pintaderas', which were so rare and insignificant during the Pre-Pottery stage, become exceedingly common with the onset of the Pottery Neolithic even in western parts of Zone A, then moved into Zones B and D, but not Zone C. 'Festooned bone objects', which are of insignificant occurrence in Zone B, are more common and varied in Zone D. Items from Zone A that require an extremely high level of craftsmanship to manufacture occasionally occur in the earliest horizons of Zones B, C or D, but as poorly made imitations, possibly reflections of social memory. The so-called 'terrazzo' floor of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic, for example, occurs at some sites in Zone B as red-coated lime floorings. Terrazzo floors at Pre-Pottery Neolithic A and B sites such as ^ayonu, Neva-li ^ori or Gobeklitepe located in the eastern wing of the core area were made by burning lime, which requires high technology, know-how and organised labor (Hauptmann, Yal-gin 2000). Moving west, red-colored lime floorings become simpler, although in some cases such as A§ikli, lime was being processed; the westernmost examples, those from Haci-lar, Ulucak, Hoca ^e§me III and A§a-gi Pinar 8, were made simply by setting pebbles in lime mortar and finishing with a red ochre coating. A similar case are stone bracelets: those of the Pre-Pottery period are highly sophisticated, decorated by grooves, ridges etc., while those in Zones B and C are still made of stone, but shaped as simple rings. In Zone D, however, they are even simpler, being mostly made of clay (Fig. 16). Likewise, so-called altars or cult tables that are insignificant components of the Zone A and B pottery assemblages are the most common objects in Zones C and D, being rectangular in the former and triangular in the latter (Fig. 17). As noted above, the ancestral forms of all of the types that are present in Zones B to E are to be found in Zone A. However, the composition of the assemblages varies considerably from region to re- Fig. 12. Comparative table of east and west Marmara Neolithic assemblages. Fig. 13. Bone spoons from Fikirtepe and Pendik. Fig. 14. Festooned bone objects. gion or even from site to site. In sorting out our list, we were able to find analogies to every item of Zones B to D somewhere in Zone A, but unevenly distributed. Thus, for example, analysing the material assemblage of a site in Thrace in search of similarities with Zone A, one item points to the Levant, another to Southeast Anatolia and still others to east Central Anatolia. The apparent mixed pattern of origins leads us to deduce the following. It seems evident that the initial dispersal of the Neolithic way of life was due to a considerable demic movement beginning in the core area. The assessment of the Neolithic package in the new areas of Neolithisation clearly indicates that the antecedents of most objects that were transferred are in the eastern parts of the core area, in Northern Syria, the Levant and Southeastern Turkey, but not in Central Anatolia. Accordingly, the initial 'push' for migration must have originated from the eastern parts. What happened when this passed through Central Anatolia, where there was already a Pre-Pottery Neolithic sub-stratum, is not yet clear, but again, the Neolithic package that is found in the immediate contact Fig. 15. Pintaderas. zone in the western parts of Turkey suggests that they somehow merged. The various amalgamations of the Neolithic package imply that the movement to the west, at least in its earlier stages, was not an organised migration. On the contrary, the mixed or merged composition of the assemblages is highly suggestive of what we described elsewhere as the "segregated migration model" (Ozdogan 2008). As we have noted before, the dispersal of the Neolithic way of life from the core to other regions was a multifarious event that lasted for more than a thousand years. In any time segment during this process, different modes of dispersal were taking place simultaneously. That is to say, while the most apparent Fig. 16. Marble bracelets from Cafer Hoyuk in Southeast Anatolia, Qatalhoyuk in Central Anatolia, Aktoprakhk in southern Marmara, and a clay bra-celet from A§agt Pinar-Eastern Thrace. model was the segregated migration type, at the same time, direct migration, acculturation and/or transfer of know-how and technologies were also Fig. 17. A rectangular cult table from Fikirtepe. taking place both by land and sea. It is also evident that further away from the core area, Neolithisation due to interaction or cultural contacts was more pronounced than any of the migratory models. The fact that all of the previous hypotheses on Neolithic dispersal - from migratory to autochthonous models were correct for each individual case, offers no way to finish the discussion at the present stage of our knowledge. References Anthony D. 1997. Prehistoric migration as social process. In J. Chapman, H. Hamerow (eds.), Migrations and Invasions in Archaeological Explanation. British Archaeological Reports IS 664. Archaeopress. Oxford: 21-32. Banffy E., Sumegi P. 2011. The environmental contexts of earliest Neolithic settlement and architecture in western Hungary. In A. Hadjikoumis, E. Robinson and S. Viner (eds.), The Dynamics of Neolithisation in Europe. Studies in honour of Andrew Sherratt. Oxbow Books. Oxford: 231-265. Barford P. M. 2002. East is East and West is West? Power and paradigm in European archaeology. In P. F. Biehl, A. Gramsch and A. Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories. Waxmann Munster. New York: 77-97. Bar-Yosef O. 2009. The collapse of the Levantine PPNB and its aftermath. In J. M. Burdukiewicz, K. Cyrek, P. Dy-czek and K. Szymczak (eds.), Understanding the Past. Papers offered to Stefan K. Kozlowski. University of Warsaw. Warsaw: 29-35. Bates D. G. 1973. Nomads and Farmers: A Study of the Yoruk of Southeastern Turkey. The University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. Bellwood P., Renfrew C. (eds.) 2002. Examining the Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Cambridge. Bentley R. A. 2006. Academic copying, archaeology and the English language. Antiquity 80(307): 196-201. Bocquet-Appel J. P., Bar-Yosef O. (eds.) 2008. The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its Consequences. Springer Science, Business Media. New York. Bocquet-Appel J.-P., Naji S., Vander Linden M. and Kozlowski J. 2009. Detection of diffusion and contact zones of early farming in Europe from the space-time distribution of 14C dates. Journal of Archaeological Science 36:807820. Bonsall C. 2007. When was the Neolithic transition in the Iron Gates? Societa Per La Preistoria e Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Venezia Guilia 12:53-66. Boric D. 1999. Places that created time in the Danube Gorges and beyond, c. 9000-5500 BC. Documenta Prae-historica 26: 41-70. 2011. Adaptations and transformations of the Danube Gorges foragers (c. 13,000-5500 BC): An overview. In R. Krauss (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin (International Workshop, 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul). Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf: 157-203. Budja M. 1993. The neolithisation of Europe. Slovenian aspect. Documenta Praehistorica 21:163-193. 2004. The Neolithisation of the Balkans: Where in the puzzle?. In A. Lukes, M. Zvelebil (eds.), LBK Dialogues. Studies in the Formation of the Linear Pottery Culture. British Archaeological Reports IS 1304. Archaeo-press. Oxford: 37-48. Clare L. 2010. Pastoral Clashes: Conflict risk and mitigation at the Pottery Neolithic transition in the Southern Levant. Neo-Lithics 1(10): 13-31. Clare L., Rohling E. J., Weninger B. and Hilpert J. 2008. Warfare in Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic Pisidia, Southwestern Turkey. Climate induced social unrest in the late 7th millennium cal BC. Documenta Praehistorica 35: 65-92. Colledge S., Conolly J. 2007. The Neolithisation of the Balkans: A Review of the archaeobotanical evidence. Societa Per La Preistoria e Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Ve-nezia Guilia 12:25-38. Dani§maz H. 2012. Urartu Kralligi ile Assur Arasindaki Siyasi ili$kiler. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Marmara. Istanbul. Gatsov I. 2001. Epipaleolithic/ Mesolithic, Neolithic period chipped stone assemblages from Southern Bulgaria and North West Turkey: Similarities and differences. Tur-kiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi (TUBA-AR) 4: 101-112. 2003. The latest results from the technological and typological analysis of chipped stone assemblages from Ilipinar, Pendik, Fikirtepe and Mente§e, NW Turkey. Documenta Praehistorica 30:153-158. Goring-Morris N., Belfer-Cohen A. 2010. "Great expectations", or the inevitable collapse of the Early Neolithic in the Near East. In M. S. Bandy, J. R. Fox (eds.), Becoming Villagers: Comparing Early Village Societies. The University of Arizona Press. Arizona: 62-77. Harris R. D. 2003. Paradigms and transitions: reflections on the study of the origins and spread of agriculture. In A. Ammerman, P. Biagi (eds.), The Widening Harvest. The Neolithic Transition in Europe: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Archaeological Institute of America. Massachusetts: 43-58. Hauptmann A., Yalgin Ü. 2000. Lime plaster, cement and the first puzzolanic reaction. Paleorient 26 (2): 61-68. Hütteroth W. D. 1959. Bergnomaden und Yaylabauern im mittleren Kurdischen Taurus. Im Selbstverlag des Geographischen Institutes der Universität Marburg. Marburg. Kiziltan Z. 2013. Pendik Höyük Kazilari. Aktüel Arkeoloji 34:32-36. Oross K., Banffy E. 2009. Three successive waves of Neolithisation: LBK development in Transdanubia. Documenta Praehistorica 36:175-189. Özdogan M. 1995. Neolithization of Europe: A view from Anatolia. Part 1: The problem and the evidence of East Anatolia. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 22:25-61. 1997. The Beginning of Neolithic economies in Southeastern Europe: An Anatolian perspective. Journal of Eropean Archaeology 5/2:1-33. 2002. Redefining the Neolithic of Anatolia. In R. Cappers, S. Bottema (eds.), The Dawn of Farming in the Near East. Ex Oriente. Berlin: 153-159. 2004. Heritage and Nationalism in the Balkans and Anatolia or changing patterns, what has happened since Hasluck? In D. Shankland (ed.), Archaeology, Antropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: The Life and Times of F. W. Hasluck, 18781920. ISIS Press. Istanbul: 389-405. 2008. An alternative approach in tracing changes in demographic composition: the westward expansion of the Neolithic way of life. In J. Bocquet-Appel, O. Bar-Yosef (eds.), The Neolithic Demographic Transition and its Consequences. Springer. Heidelberg: 139-178. 2010a. The transition from round-plan to rectangular. In D. Gheorghiu (ed.), Neolithic and Chalcolithic Architecture in Eurasia. Techniques and Spatial Organisation. British Archaeological Reports IS 2097. Ar-chaeopress. Oxford: 29-34. 2010b. Westward expansion of the Neolithic way of life: Sorting the Neolithic package into distinct packages. In P. Matthiae, F. Pinnock, L. Nigro and N. Mar- chetti (eds.), Near Eastern Archaeology in the Past, Present and Future. Heritage and Identity. Proceedings of the ICAANE 6. Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden Vol 1: 883-897. 2011a. Archaeological evidence on the westward expansion of farming communities from Eastern Anatolia to the Aegean and the Balkans. Current Anthropology 52: 415-430. 2011b. Submerged sites and drowned topographies along the Anatolian coasts: an overview. In J. Benjamin, C. Bonsall, C. Pickard and A. Fischer (eds.), Submerged Prehistory. Oxbow Books, Oxford: 219-229. 2012. An Anatolian perspective on the Neolithization process in the Balkans. New questions, new prospects. In R. Kraufi (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf: 23-33. 2013a. Anatolia and the Balkans: archaeology. In I. Ness, P. Bellwood (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration. Volume I. Wiley-Blackwell. Hobo-ken, New Jersy: 139-145. 2013b. Neolithic sites in the Marmara Region. Fikirte-pe, Pendik, Yarimburgaz, Toptepe, Hoca ^e§me and Asagi Pinar. In M. Ozdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuni-holm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, Vol. 5: Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publication. Istanbul: 167-269. 2014. The Neolithic Collapse or the Transition from PPN to PN. In B. Finlayson, C. Makarewicz (eds.), Settlement, Survey and Stone. Essays on Near Eastern Prehistory in Honour of Garry Rollefson. Ex oriente, Berlin in collaboration with the CounBritish Research in the Levant, London (2014): 169-175. Ozdogan M., Basgelen N. and Kuniholm P. (eds.) 2013. The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, Vol. 5: Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publication. Istanbul. Ozkaya V., Co§kun A. and Soyukaya N. 2013. Kortik Tepe. Diyarbakir Valiligi. Istanbul. Perles C. 2005. From the Near East to Greece: let's reverse the focus - cultural elements that didn't transfer. In C. Lichter (ed.), How Did Farming Reach Europe? Anatolian-European Relations from the Second Half of the 7th Through the First Half of the 6th Millennium cal BC. Byzas 2. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul: 275-290. Pinhasi R. A. 2003. New model for the spread of the first farmers in Europe. Documenta Praehistorica 30:1-47. Price D. 2000. Europe's first farmers: an Introduction. In D. Price (ed.), Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 1-18. Richards M. 2003. The Neolithic transition in Europe: archaeological models and genetic evidence. Documenta Praehistorica 30:159-167. Rollefson G. O., Kohler-Rollefson I. 1989. The collapse of Early Neolithic settlements in the Southern Levant. In I. Hershkovitz (ed.), Change, People and Culture. British Archaeological Reports IS 508. Archaeopress. Oxford: 73-89. Sherratt A. 1997. Changing perspectives on European prehistory. In A. Sherrat (ed.), Economy and Society in Prehistoric Europe. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh: 1-34. 2004. Fractal farmers: patterns of Neolithic origin and dispersal. In J. Cherry, C. Scarre and S. Shennan (eds.), Explaining Social Change: Studies in Honor of Colin Renfrew. Cambridge University Press. McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge: 53-63. Tringham R. 2000. Southeastern Europe in the transition to agriculture in Europe: bridge, buffer, of mosaic. In T. D. Price (ed.), Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 19-56. Watkins T. 1990. The origins of house and home? World Archaeology 21(3): 336-347. 1996. The Origins of the Household in North Mesopotamia. Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Insti-tuut te Istanbul. Leiden. 2012. Household, Community and Social Landscape: Maintaining Social Memory in the Early Neolithic of Southwest Asia. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn. Weninger B. and 18 authors. 2009. The impact of rapid climate change on prehistoric societies during the Holo-cene in the Eastern Mediterranean. Documenta Praehisto-rica 36: 7-59. Zvelebil M. 2002. Demography and dispersal of early farming populations at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition: lingustic and genetic implications. In P. Bellwood, C. Renfrew (eds.), Examining the Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Cambridge: 379-394. 2005. Looking back at the Neolithic transition in Europe. European Journal of Archaeology 8(2): 183-190. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Beginnings of the Neolithic in Southeast Europe: the Early Neolithic sequence and absolute dates from Dzuljunica-Smardes (Bulgaria) Raiko Krauß1, Nedko Elenski2, Bernhard Weninger3, Lee Clare4, Canan £akirlar5 and Petar Zidarov6 1 Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte und Archäologie des Mittelalters, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, DE raiko.krauss@uni-tuebingen.de 2 Regional Museum of History, Veliko Tärnovo, BG 3 Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Universität zu Köln, DE 4 German Archaeological Institute, Orient Department, Berlin, DE 5 Groningen Institute of Archaeology, Groningen, NL 6 New Bulgarian University, Sofia, BG ABSTRACT - Investigations of a balk in the centre of the prehistoric settlement of Dzuljunica-Smardes comprised a sequence of archaeological deposits from the very onset of Neolithisation in Southeastern Europe throughout the end of the Early Neolithic. The arrival of Neolithic lifeways in the region coincides with the end of a period for which palaeoclimate proxies attest to considerable climate fluctuation. In connection with these investigations, the zoological finds were examined, which provide insight into the economy of this key settlement for the entire Balkan region. IZVLEČEK - Raziskave ozkega pasu sedimenta med dvema izkopnima jarkoma v središču prazgodovinske naselbine Džuljunica-Smardeš predstavljajo zaporedje arheoloških depozitov od samega začetka neolitizacije v Jugovzhodni Evropi do konca zgodnjega neolitika. Prihod neolitskega načina življenja v regiji sovpada s koncem obdobja, za katerega paleoklimatski kazalci pričajo o znatnih klimatskih nihanjih. V povezavi s temi raziskavami smo preučili zoološke najdbe, ki omogočajo vpogled v gospodarstvo te za celoten Balkan ključne naselbine. KEY WORDS - Neolithisation; Bulgaria; painted pottery; 'Rapid Climate Change' Introduction The dispersal of the Neolithic from the Near East to Europe is a long-standing focus of scientific research. In this context, Southeast Europe is of particular relevance to these investigations due to its status as a transit connecting Anatolia with Central Europe. Accordingly, this land mass is situated between the source area of Neolithisation and the European heartlands. The vast river valleys that transect this mountainous terrain provided natural thoroughfares along which agriculture, animal husbandry and ceramic-producing technologies disseminated. Significantly, new discoveries made since the 1980s have demonstrated that the onset of Neolithisation actu- ally predates the better known tell occupations otherwise considered characteristic of the Neolithic in this region. In this context, the earliest settlements in Greece are now dated to the second half of the 7th millennium calBC, and although the Neolithic reached areas north of the Aegean only slightly later, it soon became evident that these occupations predated the formation of tell settlements in this region as well. Meanwhile, several sites recorded in North Bulgaria and Thrace are also known to predate the lowest occupation level at the prominent Neolithic site of Karanovo, most notably at Koprivec, Poljanica-Platoto (Todorova 2003), Pomostica (Elen- DOI>10.4312\dp.41.3 51 ski 2008b), Orlovec (Stanev 2008) and Tabaska Cave (Survey Elenski, unpublished) (Fig. 1). However, intensive studies have shown that these assemblages should not be considered 'monochrome', in the Anatolian sense of the term (Stefanova 1996; Kraufi 2006.161-162; 2008.119-121). For example, several of the earliest (Pre-Karanovo I) Neolithic sites known in the Balkans produced both monochrome and painted pottery. This fact alone refutes the hypothesis that there existed a 'Monochrome Neolithic' as an earliest phase of the Balkan Early Neolithic sequence (Lichardus-Itten et al. 2002). Discussions of the character of the earliest Neolithic pottery in Southeast Europe have so far lacked any reliable absolute-chronological basis. In fact, the absence of a 'Monochrome Neolithic' is still indicated only by typological comparisons of material from the few relevant sites from which a small number or uncertain l4C-ages have been published (cf. Gors-dorf Bojadziev 1996). Similarly to the Southwest Anatolian Lakes District, e.g., at Hacilar (Mellaart 1970), 'Monochrome' pottery is the predominant ceramic ware in the developed Southeast European Early Neolithic, while painted pottery occurs in only small amounts (Kraufi 2011). The Early Neolithic settlement of Dzuljunica-Smardes is currently proving a key site for determining the characteristics of the earliest Neolithic on the Balkans. Meanwhile, numerous survey trenches excavated in the substantial settlement area have produced an extensive array of finds, and there are now good reasons to assume that the occupation of this site commenced at the very onset of Neolithisation in the East Balkans. In Fig. 1. Location of the Early Neolithic sites in NE-Bulgaria mentioned in the text. addition, this site remained occupied throughout the entire Early Neolithic sequence, thus providing us with a unique insight into cultural-historical developments at the dawn of agriculture and animal husbandry in this region. Geographical location and settlement topography The catchment of the Yantra, one of the largest tributaries of the lower Danube, drains the central Balkan massif to the north. Geographically, the point where the Yantra enters the Danube corresponds almost exactly with the southernmost extremity in the course of the Danube between its sources in the southern Black Forest to its mouth at the Black Sea. The excellent geographical location of the Yan-tra is self-evident and has proved particularly important for the region throughout its history. The country between the main ridge of the Balkan Mountains and the Danube can be divided into three larger regions that include a still densely wooded mountainous area in the south, the northerly adjacent mountain foothills, and the Danube lowlands, with their characteristic undulating loess deposits. This is reflected in the highly contoured shoreline on the Bulgarian side of the Danube compared to the very level banks on the northern (Romanian) side. The Early Neolithic settlement of Dzuljunica is situated 3km north of the eponymous village, approx. 500m west of the local railway station, in a field known as Smardes (Fig. 2). The location was probably chosen due to the occurrence of natural springs which flow from the base of a natural prominence upon which the site is located. Even today, four springs at the foot of the site are active. The prominence itself is a slightly elevated river terrace above the Dzuljunica River, which, together with other tributaries, flows into the Yantra some 6.5km north of the settlement. The geographical situation of the site in the prehistoric period has not yet been determined, including its relation to the Yantra and its tributaries, which today flow just 2km from the settlement. The previously meandering water courses of these rivers have Fig. 2. Dzuljunica-Smardes from the hilltop south of the site with approximate location of Neolithic (red), Chalcolithic (blue) and Bronze Age (green) sites. since been artificially regulated and corrected. However, old water courses, some of which reach up to one kilometre from the site, have been identified in satellite images and antique maps. The water discharged from the modern springs flows in a westerly direction, directly towards the Yantra. Pronounced erosion channels in the northeast and southwest have significantly altered the shape of the prominence, with slope gradients of 16° in the northeast and 22° in the southwest. The site lies at between 70 and 77m above sea level. The highest elevations are at the west of the terrace, decreasing slightly to the southeast. To the north, the site gives way to the old floodplain, conferring a plateau-like appearance upon the settlement area. On the basis of results from surface surveys, it is estimated that Neolithic occupations extended over some 4ha, and that there were noticeable shifts in settlement activity within this area in the course of its long occupation, ultimately leading to the development of a pronounced horizontal stratigraphy. The spatial extent of the settlement towards the close of the Early Neolithic (Phase Dz-IV) has been determined more precisely. In this period, the settlement area covered approx. 0.2-0.3ha. In the eastern most part of the site there is a small spur on which a Copper Age settlement mound developed. Sporadic finds found on the tell and attributed to the Early and Middle Bronze Age suggest that the accumulation of deposits did not come to a complete end at the close of the Copper Age, but continued into these later phases. A substantial concentration of Bronze Age finds has been detected in an area southeast of the mound, where the centre of the Bronze Age settlement is expected. History of research The first mention of a settlement mound at Dzulju-nica dates to the late 19th century. In a report by the Skorpil brothers (Skorpil, Skorpil 1898.99), Czech antiquarians, reference was made to the clearly visible Copper Age tell, which was later included in the register of archaeological sites compiled by Vasil Mikov (1933.58). The first archaeological investigations were undertaken in 1983-84, when salvage excavations became necessary in the course of road construction. The focus of this small-scale examination was a section through the Copper Age tell in the northeast caused by these intrusions and now braced by a concrete wall. The succession of deposits revealed in this section span the entire duration of the Bulgarian Copper Age (5th millennium cal-BC) with sporadic finds from the Early Bronze Age on the surface of the mound (Stanev 1984.28-29; 1985.35). A later analysis of the excavated ma- Core area of the Early Neolithic settlement Fig. 3. Dzuljunica-Smardes. Extension of the Early Neolithic site and Chalcolithic tell (grey shading) with location of trenches excavated since 2001 by N. Elenski (T). Trenches 12,13,18 and 21, and the location of the balk investigated in 2010 (red) are shown in detail. terials showed that among finds from the Copper Age recovered from a depth of 4.10 to 6.10m below the modern surface there was also material attributed to the Early Neolithic which was interpreted by the excavator as indicating an Early Neolithic settlement lying beneath the tell (Stanev 1995.93). Several test trenches to the southwest, south, and east of the Copper Age tell that were excavated between 2001 and 2005 by Nedko Elenski, and renewed work commencing in 2008 (Elenski 2006; 2008a), have been dedicated primarily to the investigation of the Early Neolithic settlement (Fig. 3). The general development of this earliest occupation can now be presented. The oldest two phases at Dzuljunica (Dz-I and Dz-II) extend from the northern edge of the terrace, covering its entire width from the southwest to the northeast; in fact, the various test trenches confirm the presence of these oldest two levels over the entire terrace. The third occupation level (Dz-III) was detected only in the centre and on the eastern side of the terrace, where it takes the form of a thin sediment accumulation almost entirely lacking in architectural features and with only few fragmented finds. By the end of the Early Neolithic, the settled area had decreased in size and was restricted to a small area in the centre of the terrace (Dz-IV), leading to what might be described as initial tell-development. The earliest investigations in 2005 revealed a high concentration of earliest Neolithic pottery along the eastern edge of the terrace, while finds from the end of this period were found concentrated on its western side. So far, a total of 22 test trenches have been excavated. Initially, the positioning of trenches was oriented to finds of Early Neolithic pottery discovered below the Copper Age tell. For this reason, the first test trenches (1-8 and 16-17) were excavated in the east of the settlement. Only in the course of excavations was a further series of connected trenches (10-13) opened up in the west. Remarkably, these excavations revealed accumulations from the entire Early Neolithic sequence of the Eastern Balkans. As no continuous cultural deposits from later occupation phases were encountered in this area, the focus of attention could be placed firmly on the Early Neolithic. Post-Neolithic disturbances in this area were seldom, and barely affected the structure of the earlier settlement levels. Two additional trenches (14 and 15) opened to the south of the Copper Age tell revealed no further Early Neolithic accumulations. The end of Early Neolithic settlement was also documented in excavations on the eastern side of the terrace. This evidence took the form of disturbed and redeposited material that was later cut by an Early Bronze Age ditch; no coherent features and structures were discovered (Elenski 2002.27-28; 2003. 17-18). Test trenches 4 and 17 represent approx. the southern limit of the Early Neolithic settlement layer in the east. Significant settlement accumulations in this area are assigned to the Copper Age and Early Bronze Age. In contrast, the underlying 20cm thick Early Neolithic layer produced only sporadic fragments of pottery (Elenski 2002.27-28; Elenski, Lestakov 2006.36-39). The only trench on the east of the terrace to reveal any significant deposits from the Early Neolithic was test trench 8, which was excavated 60m east of the Fig. 4. Dzuljuniea-Smardes, Section 21, West-Profile, with stratigraphie position of 14C-samples (cf. Tab. 1). Fig. 5. Schematic representation of stratigraphie units and associated finds and radiocarbon samples excavated at Dzuljunica-Smardes, 20th-28th September 2010. tell. These remains were covered by a 1.3 to 2.0m thick layer of Early and Late Copper Age strata. Early Neolithic accumulations were shown to comprise three superimposed layers with a total thickness of 1.0 to 2.2m. Insights into changes in the size of the settlement are therefore based primarily on observations made in trenches 12, 13, 18 and 21, which were opened in close proximity to one another on the central part of the terrace Description of settlement layers The oldest layer (Dz-I) lies directly on loess and is on average 0.2 to 0.3m thick, although in some pits it reaches depths of up to 1.0m. In the central part of the terrace (in test trenches 12, 13, 18 and 21), a house sunk into the native loess was excavated. In all probability, structures from this early period were without exception pit houses, between which further features were discovered that were probably not directly associated with the houses. Signs of further structures which might belong to the houses from this layer were located in trenches 8 and 22. It is possible that we are dealing here with a line of houses which follows the course of the northern edge of the terrace. The extension of the excavation should clarify the layout of the settlement in its earliest phase, providing far better insights than are presently possible based on observations from the very central part of the settlement, which allows for only very general conclusions. The second settlement layer (Dz-II) is 0.45 to 0.90m thick in the central trenches 12, 13, 18 and 21. Clearly defined buildings or prehistoric surfaces have so far not been discovered for this phase, although three extensive concentrations comprising the remnants of clay ovens and three large ashy deposits with numerous finds, primarily painted pottery fragments, were recorded. In the course of extensive horizontal excavation, it was observed that some pits from this second layer cut into deposits of the underlying first settlement layer. In trench 22, in the far west of the settlement, a pit from the second settlement layer was recorded which contained human and faunal skeletal remains. In comparison to the earliest settlement level (Dz-I) this second layer is characterised by considerably thicker deposits and especially by the occurrence of a greater number of finds. Once again, in spite of the limited extent of observations that can be made in this layer due to the use of test trenches, clear characteristics of this settlement phase can be discerned. However, any interpretation is rendered especially difficult owing to the nature of the excavated structures, i.e. houses which were not destroyed by fire and therefore are poorly preserved. Therefore, a more extensive horizontal excavation is essential if we are to better understand the delimitations of these structures. The third level (Dz-III) has been documented only sporadically over the entire area, being at most just 0.10m thick. In comparison to all the other layers, this particular layer is not only significantly thinner but also of a much firmer texture, and not ubiquitously present even in the centre of the settlement. While this third layer can be observed throughout trenches 13 and 18, in trenches 12 and 21 it is only visible in two thirds of the excavated area. This layer contains a large number of stone artefacts and highly fragmented pottery and bone finds. It is extremely likely that we are dealing here with a levelling layer. There are absolutely no signs of house floors in this level and no remains of loam daub. This suggests that it may have been a structure-free area within the settlement and with any associated structures so far poorly known due to the small extent of excavation work. Nevertheless, the platform of an oven has been attributed to this settlement phase. The fourth settlement level (Dz-IV), which has so far only been detected in the central part of the settlement, is 0.90m thick and is divided into three different sub-phases: • The lowermost sub-phase of the uppermost Early Neolithic settlement (Dz-IVa) is a 0.40m thick deposit of loose, dark grey sediment. In the southern central part of the settlement (trench 13) a row of six postholes was observed. Additionally, three subterranean structures were recorded in trench 21; these were originally accessed via platforms, beams or Fig. 6. Dzuljunica I. 1-3 dark painted pottery; 8-9, 11-13 pottery from excavations by N. Elenski; 10 corner of a four-legged vessel; 6-7 Early Neolithic figurines from the planum adjacent to the section documented in 2010 (cf. Figs. 23-24). steps. It is probable that these structures served as workshops, for flint knapping, for example. • In the second sub-phase (Dz-IVb) a ground-level house structure, and two thirds of a second such structure (both untouched by fire) were investigated. These buildings were built directly adjacent to one another, i.e. sharing a common wall. The first structure displays a rectangular plan; floors comprised a 0.10m thick layer of trodden earth. The wall foundations rested on a single or double row of stones; there were no signs of postholes; the house walls were constructed using loam. An oval-plan oven was excavated in the north-western corner of the room. The second building also featured a rectangular plan, with a 0.05m thick trodden earth floor. Stone foundations in this structure were lacking, except beneath the common wall separating it from the adjacent building. In the north-eastern corner of the house, a massive rectangular-plan oven was discovered. The remains of this structure suggest that it measured approx. 2.20 x 2.00m, with a 0.30m thick wall. • In the third (uppermost) sub-phase of the fourth settlement level (Dz-IVc) a small part of an unburn-ed structure was investigated. This house partially superimposed one of the buildings from the underlying sub-phase. The higher-lying northern part of this house had already been damaged by modern ploughing, as had a part of a hearth construction, fragments of which were collected from the surface of the field in the immediate vicinity. The plan of the house appears to have been rectangular, and its trodden earth floor was some 0.10-0.05m thick. An oval oven-platform was located in the western part of the house. In the eastern part of the settlement, younger occupation levels assigned to the Early and Late Chalcolithic are observed overlying the Early Neolithic deposits. Two Late Copper Age burials were discovered in this area (Elenski 2002.27-28; 2003.17-18; 2006). Additionally, in the east the remains of a Bronze Age ring ditch were excavated. This ditch enclosed an area with concentrations of pits and circular loam platforms (Elenski 2002.27-28; 2003.17-18; 2006). In the slightly raised central part of the settlement, where all four Early Neolithic levels were documented, several pits from the Early and Late Iron Age and Late Antiquity were uncovered (Elenski 2006; 2009; 2010; 2011). Finally, this part of the site also yielded remains of a domestic structure from the Early Middle Ages (9th-10th century AD) with accompanying pits (Elenski 2005; 2006; 2010; 2011). Fig. 7. (n. 21 Location of the balk and methodology of the 2010 investigations In summer 2010, supplementary investigations were undertaken in the course of continuing work at Dzuljunica-Smärdes by a joint team from the University of Cologne (Collaborative Research Centre 806 -Our way to Europe, Project F1), financed by the German Research Foundation (DFG), and the University of Tübingen. The focus of these activities was the excavation and documentation of a stratigraphically significant section in an unexcavated balk separating test trenches 18 and 21 (Fig. 4). The stratigraphic excavation of this balk promised to provide important information relating to the occupation sequence for the Early Neolithic; all documented Early Neolithic phases at the site were attested in this section, and no significant disturbances from younger occupation phases were expected. The Early Neolithic occupation deposits in this area had been disturbed only by the aforementioned shallow pits from the Iron Age and by a house feature from the Early Middle Ages in trench 21. Dzuljunica I. Ceramic finds from the balk: 1-9 spit 3 -88); 10-11 spit 4 (n. 21-94). The balk was excavated according to stratigraphic layers and all sediment was sieved. On the reverse side of the balk, i.e. in trench 18, a narrow trench was excavated to assess the maximum depth of earliest Neolithic (Dz-I) deposits. These revealed that they extended some 30-40cm below the current planum of trench 21. Subsequently, these deposits were the focus of particularly meticulous documentation. Accumulations assigned to this initial phase were excavated in artificial spits of 10-15cm. In trench 21, the planum directly adjacent to the section was also extended downwards, i.e. parallel to the excavation of the balk. All finds were documented and samples for radiocarbon dating (bone and charcoal) extracted from all stratigraphic relevant units. All steps of our excavation were documented numerically, and each is referred to by a two-part number separated by a hyphen. While the first (prefix) number refers to the location of the balk in trench 21, the second number identifies the particular step (or position). For example, 21-10 is the tenth recorded step of our excavation of the balk. In this way, finds and samples were assigned a unique position-number at the exact moment of their recovery. In this paper, we again refer to these numbers in illustra- tion captions and in the radiocarbon table. Figure 5 provides an overview of the allocated position-numbers of finds and radiocarbon samples, and their stratigraphic provenance. Finds from individual settlement layers and their cultural-historical position in the Balkan Neolithic Finds from the oldest settlement layer at Dzuljunica (Dz-I) (Figs. 6-9) show clear similarities with material of the West Anatolian Late Neolithic. As such, pottery from this level is coeval with the very beginning of its usage in the Southeast European cultural sequence. Bulbous vessel forms with flattened bases or slightly pronounced foot are particularly characteristic. The vessel form repertoire also includes spherical pots with a narrowing or slightly conical inclining neck, bowls with an S-shaped profile, and open bowls with straight walls. The elaborate surface treatment of vessels while in their unfired and leather-hard state is quite remarkable and has resulted in a consolidated and shiny, in some cases enamel-like, appearance. This is all the more exceptional considering the coarse matrix of the pottery, with its numerous coarse organic inclusions. The only exceptions are the smaller, thin-walled vessels; no organic inclusions are visible with the naked eye in the fractures of these pots. These vessels appear in no way inferior to modern porcelain in their strength, hardness and gloss. Handles are limited to vertical cord lugs at the widest part of the vessel. Even among the oldest pottery, impressed decoration and plastic applications are attested, e.g., warts or wide, well-smoothed incisions. In their fractures, coarse wares are mostly deep black, and the fine ceramics varying from grey to brown. Surface colours range from dark hues of ochre to brown, orange and red. Some fragments feature smoke marks and are discoloured dark brown to black. A few sherds also carry a simple painted decoration in a dark colour (Figs. 6.1-4; 8.1). This painted decoration takes the form of plain wavy and wide comb motifs which extend over large areas of the vessel surface. However, painted pottery constitutes less than 1% of the excavated material. ing the oldest material from Koprivec (Kraufi 2006. Taf. 1.3.5) and Pomostica (Elenski 2008b.Abb. 19), as well as with vessels from Orlovec (Stanev 2008. Abb. 98-101) and Poljanica-Platoto (Todorova 2003. Abb. 1). Similar vessel forms were recovered from Hotnica-Pesterata (Ilceva 2002.Taf. 1-4), but this material most probably already represents a transition from Dz-I to Dz-II. Convincing parallels are attested in assemblages from West Anatolia, especially from the Izmir region, specifically Ulucak Va and early IV (Qilingiroglu et al. 2004; fylingiroglu 2009.Abb. 4.1, 4.2; 2011.Abb. 3, 5), Cukurigi Hoyuk (Galik, Horejs 2011.Abb. 5) and Ye§ilova (Derin 2011.Abb. 5-7). In the geographically nearer Marmara region, Dz-1 material can be parallelised with Classical Fikirtepe, although vessel forms from Ilipi-nar IX-VIII (Thissen 2001.Abb. 21-29) or the eponymous site at Fikirtepe (Ozdogan 1999.Abb. 33) only allow the identification of more general consistencies with our typological spectrum. Generally speaking, vessel forms from the second settlement phase Dz-II (Figs. 10-15) do not differ substantially from those of the first phase. However, The pottery from Dz-I is comparable with assemblages from the near vicinity, includ- Fig. 8. Dzuljunica I. Ceramic and stone finds from the planum (trench 21) adjacent to the balk: 1-4, 8-9 n. 21-88; 5,7 n. 21-113; 6 n. 21-120; 10 grooved mallet? -n. 21-109; 1 fragment of a dark-on-light painted vessel. Fig. 9. Džuljunica I. Ceramic and stone finds from the balk: 1-5 spit 5 (n. 21-141); 6 spit 6 (n. 21-145); 7-8, 10 spit 8 (n. 21-155); 11-12 spit 10 (n. 21-167); 9,13-15 spit 11 (n. 21-171); 9 stone support for a mortar. as finds from this phase are more numerous, a few of the forms appear in slightly greater variation; nevertheless, there are no new vessel forms associated with this settlement phase. Most vessels feature a surface treatment which is of an equally high standard as noted for the previous settlement layer. A new development is the occurrence of white painted decorations on a red slip (Figs. 12.1-10; 14.3,7; 15.8); the dark painted decoration from Dz-I continues to be documented (Figs. 10.4; 11; 14.1). In addition, two fragments feature a creamy or ivory painted decoration (Fig. 12.14-15) and three sherds were painted entirely white (Fig. 12.11-13). White-painted motifs include dabbed spots arranged into triangle shapes, latticed and stepped bands, parallel W-motifs arranged one above the other, and patterns reminiscent of textiles. The ratio of painted pottery in this layer reaches just 1-2% of the entire assemblage. One tenth of painted sherds are of the dark-painted variety. Significantly, in the upper part of Dz-II deposits, dark-painted wares vanish and only white-painted decoration occurs. The white-on-red decoration connects Dz-II with the Karanovo I horizon in Thrace. Finds of pottery with white-painted decoration in combination with dark-painted vessels have recently been reported from Turkish Thrace, from the site A§agi Pinar 7 (M. Ozdogan 2011.Abb. 10-11). On the other hand, extensive decorations using beige paint are documented from the Izmir region; these may indicate parallels between Dz-II material and Ulucak IV h-l (Qilingi-roglu 2009.Abb. 4.19, 4.21). For the central part of the site, the third settlement layer Dz-III has already been described as a very thin deposit with relatively few finds. Due to the high state of fragmentation, pottery from this layer does not allow for a reliable reconstruction of vessel forms (Figs. 16-17). Especially notable, however, is the lack of highly burnished sherds with a dense surface. Only a few fragments carry a white-painted decoration on a red slip (Fig. 16), while dark-painted pottery is now absent for the first time. The stratigraphic position of this layer suggests that it may run parallel to developed Kara-novo I, which would certainly not be contradicted by the material recovered from this deposit. Particularly crucial for this conclusion is the presence of white-painted, and the absence of dark-painted, decoration. A more precise chronological delimitation is not possible due to the small number of finds. Pottery recovered from the fourth settlement layer Dz-IV includes vessel shapes characteristic for the developed Early Neolithic in the region (Figs. 1820), especially as known from the settlement of Ov-carovo-Gorata (Kraufi2011.Abb. 6-7; 2014.Taf. 159). Vessels are characterised by bases with a solid foot or a pronounced foot rim. Common vessel shapes are tall beakers, also with lateral strap handles, and diverse bowl and pot forms. There also occur occasional cylindrical lids which belong to bulbous vessels with elongated cylindrical necks. Generally, pottery from this phase is coarser than in the earlier phases, albeit that the occurrence of fragments of fine ware still attests to efforts to produce highly burnished and lustrous surfaces. Vessel decoration is now dominated by plastic types of surface treatment. In contrast, painted decoration is no longer discerned. Particularly characteristic is an extensive canellated/fluted relief decoration found especially on beakers (Figs. 18.1-3; 19.3; 20.2, 6-7, 12-13), and various plastic applications, such as spirals, small blossom patterns, as well as knobs or warts. The entire surface of coarse vessels is frequently covered, with the exception of the rim and foot zones, either with prick marks or with parallel or diamond-shaped incised motifs. From a larger scale perspective, we are dealing here with a horizon that correlates with Karanovo II in Thrace, which on the European side of Turkey is attested at A§agi Pinar, layer 6 (Parzinger 2005.Taf. 116-117; E. Oz-dogan 2011.Abb. 10). Coeval with this phase, but typologically different, is material from known sites in Anatolia. On the basis of radiocarbon ages, it is assumed that Dz-IV is roughly contemporaneous with Ilipinar V and the uppermost Chalcolithic layer of Ulucak IV. Turning now to the ceramic small finds, for the lowermost levels Dz-I and Dz-II so-called labrets, small idols in the shape of highly stylised cattle heads, are particularly characteristic (Fig. 21). Two fundamental types are differentiated: more compact specimens with a wide body rounded at the bottom (Fig. 21.1-7), and elongated rod-shaped pieces (Fig. 21.8-9). A broken idol carries a decoration comprising deeply incised lines (Fig. 21. 4). A massive baton made of grey stone with a wide and perforated end might also be attributed to this group Fig. 10. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic vessels and a four legged vessel (4) with zoomorphic head and traces of dark colour from excavations by N. Elenski. of objects (Fig. 22.1). The pointed end of this piece in particular is strongly reminiscent of ceramic rod-shaped labret types. This sceptre-like artefact was discovered in test trench 12 in 2004 and is attributed to level Dz-II. Fragments of a similar stone with a fine crystalline structure and a highly smoothed inner surface may be the remains of flat bowls or palettes. Only one specimen was recovered from trench 21 and can be attributed to level Dz-I (Fig. 22.3). Two further pieces, including one with a cantilevered edge, were discovered in trench 22 (Fig. 22.2, 4). While large numbers of these palettes are already known from Anatolia, the fragments from D-D are, as far as we are aware, the first ever discovered in Southeast Europe. A special ceramic form identified at the site is the four-footed vessel (Figs. 6.5, 10; 10.4) which is attested only in the oldest settlement layers Dz-I and Dz-II. These vessels are either void of all decoration or they are trays with a relief-type adornment of their sides; normally this decoration takes the form of hanging triangles or protuberances pinched out of the vessel surface. Fig. 11. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic vessels with traces of dark painting from excavations by N. Elenski. Among the most remarkable finds from Dzuljunica are two anthropomorphic figurines discovered in 2010 during our excavation of the balk se- Fig. 12. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic vessels with white and cream painting from excavations by N. Elenski: 1-10 white-on-red painted sherds; 11-13 sherds with white slipped surface; 14-15 sherds with crème slipped surface. parating trenches 18 and 21. The first figurine, the gender of which cannot be determined, comprises a human torso and head, with what appears to be a masked face and coffee-bean eyes (Fig. 23; see also Fig. 6.6). The edge of the head is scuffed. The forearms and the lower part of the body are missing. A small breakage point on the front of the figurine suggests that the arms of the figure were originally folded across the belly. Exceptional from a typological perspective is the masked appearance of the face, a considerably younger feature that is more commonly associated with figurines of the Vinca culture. Typologically, the piece can be lined up alongside previously discovered Early Neolithic figurines from Southeast Europe, first and foremost due to the characteristic coffee-bean eyes. The assignment of this figurine from Dzuljunica to the Early Neolithic is further substantiated by its securely documented embedding in lowermost Dz-1 settlement layer deposits, just 0.50m in front of the investigated section. Radiocarbon ages were determined on a charcoal (OxA-25044: 7095±40 14C-BP) and on a bone sample (OxA-24979: 7145±38 14C-BP) in the direct proximity of the find. Accordingly, the figurine was deposited at this location around 6000 calBC. The surface and breakage points are heavily rubbed, indicating that this piece was in circulation for an extended period. A second smaller figurine was found at the same level, approximately 1.5m south of the first figurine (Fig. 24; see also Fig. 5.7). This second figurine is of an extremely compact type. It is seated and features a greatly enlarged rump, and shortened legs. The arms, which are only suggested, also appear to be crossed across the breasts. Large parts of the head have been chipped away. In spite of its small size, this piece can be attributed to a known format: the representation of a seated, presumably female individual that is comparable, for example, with a figure vessel from Ulucak IV b2 (Cilingiroglu et al. 2004.Fig. 25. 32, 58). Parallels from Ulucak also show quite clearly how the position of the arms of the Dzuljunica figure should be reconstructed. The figure is holding her hands below the breasts, presenting them in this way to the viewer. This gesture is a commonly encountered characteristic of Neolithic figurines in the Near East and Anatolia, but only observed in very few examples from Southeast Europe (cf. Hansen 2007.350, Tab. 9). It is of further note that this gesture is typical, and observed primarily among the earliest Neolithic figurines which are already disappearing in the developed Early Neolithic period (cf. Hansen 2007.363, Abb. 202). Dzuljunica radiocarbon dates The radiocarbon dates from Dzuljunica are listed in Table 1. A total of 21 samples were processed by the 14C-AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) technique at Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory (Lab Code: OxA). As indicated by the Sample Code (column 3), all ages relate to material recovered from Trench 21, either directly from the balk itself or from its immediate proximity (adjacent planum). Figure 4 shows the provenance of 14C-dated samples from the balk, projected onto the section (A-B) and adhering to the applied documentation system and site-phasing (Dz-I to IV; cf. Tab. 1). Although short-lived animal bones (N = 14) constituted the emphasis of our sampling strategy, seven (potentially) long-lived wood-charcoals were also dated in order to verify the 14C-ra-diometric chemical integrity of bone samples. The series of radiocarbon measurements from Dzuljuni-ca comprises a total of 12 ages for Dz-I, and 7 ages for Dz-II. The two youngest Phases Dz-III and Dz-IV are represented by one date each. In all cases, the stable isotope 813C-values fall within the range of expected values (column 6). Figure 25 provides an overview of the 14C-data dispersal on the calendric time-scale for Dzuljunica compared with 14C-data from Ovcarovo-Gorata (Tab. 2). From the age distribution of samples from Dz-I and Dz-II we conclude that these phases are probably relatively short in duration, each in the range of a maximum of 100 calendric years. A charcoal sample (0xA-25047) from Dz-III has a 14C-age that appears too old (cf. Fig. 25). Since this age resembles data from directly underlying phases Dz-I and Dz-II, we conclude that this sample was reworked from earlier deposits. The youngest sample 0xA-25045 from phase Dz-IV has a 14C-age (6686±39 14C-BP) that is in good typological agreement with an extended series (N = 13) of highly consistent 14C-ages of bone-samples from Ovcarovo-Gorata (Tab. 2). Notably, the majority of previously measured charcoal samples from Horizon III of Ovcarovo-Gorata have yielded 14C-ages that are clearly too young, for which an explanation may be sought in the high ash content of these samples (Bln-2030; Bln-2031; Bln-2032; cf. Gorsdorf Bojad-ziev 1996). Although the duplicate measurements (Bln-1544: 6688+60 14C-BP; Bln-1620: 6463+50 i4C-BP ) on the charcoal sample from Ovcarovo-Gorata (Horizon I) are not statistically perfect (p = 0.1%), their weighted average 6576+35 14C-BP (calculated for explorative purposes) still lies well within the overall range of 14C-ages obtained for bone samples (Tab. 1). The oldest sample (OxA-24937) in the Dzuljunica series has a i4C-age of 7588 + 37 14C-BP. Since this specific bone (assigned to Dz-I) was sampled at an intermediate depth of the section (depth 116.05m), we interpret this measurement as a radiometric outlier. In particular, since this measurement is significantly older than all the other i4C-ages attested for Dz-I and II, we can rule out that this sample was reworked from older deposits. Such deposits are not identified at the site. For this reason, we exclude OxA-24937 from our stratigraphic age-model (see below). In addition to the first (radiometric) outlier (OxA-24937), the series contains a second (stratigraphic) outlier (OxA-24936), albeit with an otherwise acceptable i4C-age (7083 + 36 i4C-BP). This sample has unique properties: it was taken at a stratigraphic depth of 115.40m, and - as such - was the lowest Fig. 13. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic and clay finds from the balk: 1-9 n. 21-54; 18 n. 21-60; 10-14 n. 21-61; 15-17n. 21-63; 10-11 ceramic tokens from pottery sherds; 12-13 fragments of ceramic rings; 14 fragment of a loam weight; 18 horn from a zoomorphic figurine? sample recovered from Trench 21. The status of this age as a (stratigraphic) outlier only became clear in the course of stratigraphic age modelling. Gaussian Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching Using the metric depth-values of the 14C-data from Dzuljunica, as provided in Table 1 (column 8), we constructed a linear stratigraphic age-depth model for phases Dz I-II. Subsequently, this model was implemented in order to achieve a high-resolution chronology for these specific phases using Gaussian Monte Carlo Wiggle Matching (GMCWM). The age-model is founded on three assumptions: © (average) sediment growth from the onset of Dz- I to the end of Dz-II is constant; © sediment accumulation was uninterrupted; and consequently © there exists a linear age-depth relation between the recorded stratigraphic depth of the 14C-dated bone samples and their calendric ages. These assumptions are - to all intents and purposes - confirmed by our study results (Fig. 28). In the fol- lowing, we provide details of the statistical analysis that are also illustrated in Figures 26 and 27. Weighted averages The method of GMCWM is an extension of the earlier developed wiggle matching method (e.g., Neustupny 1973; Pearson 1986; Weninger 1986; 1992). Wiggle matching underlies the basic idea to make use of additional independent information in order to refine the often limited precision and accuracy of dating achievable for single 14C-ages. When single dates are age-calibrated in an unrelated (individual) manner, all we achieve is a list of (again unrelated) statistical intervals on the calendric time-scale. Further, the method of calculating weighted averages fails to provide access to the requested higher dating resolution. For example, Table 1 contains three 14C-measurements (OxA-24931, OxA-24932, OxA-25040) that were obtained on different bone samples, all of which are from the same stratigraphic depth (16.16m). Assuming these samples have the same calendar age, which we judge is reasonable, it is possible to combine the values, and in particular, calculate a weighted average with a smaller standard devia- Nr. Lab-Code Sample-Code Material (species) 14C-Age [BP] 813C [%oPDB] Phase Depth [m] 1 OxA-25045 DZH 21 -35 charcoal 6686±39 -25 35 D/ IV 117.31 2 OxA-25047 DZH 21 -51 charcoal 7140±40 -24.38 D/ III 117.01 3 OxA-25046 DZH 21 -13 charcoal 6950±40 _25-59 D/ II 116.20 4 OxA-24981 DZH 21 -80 bone (large adult bovide) 7185±40 -20.76 D/ II 116.41 5 OxA-25043 DZH 21 -78 charcoal 7°55±4° -25.76 D/ II 116.41 6 OxA-24977 DZH 21 -79 bone (large adult bovide) 7136±40 -20.11 D/ II 116.41 7 OxA-24978 DZH 21 -85 bone (adult sheep) 7054±39 -20.44 D/ II 116.26 8 OxA-24939 DZH 21 -83 bone (sheep) 7171±36 -19.59 D/ II 116.26 9 OxA-24935 DZH 21 -62 bone (large adult bovide) 7026±35 -20.46 D/ II 116.56 10 OxA-24931 DZH 21 -90 bone (subadult sheep) 7066±38 -20.00 D/ I 116.16 11 OxA-24932 DZH 21 -90 bone (subadult sheep) 7053±35 -19.93 D/ I 116.16 12 OxA-25040 DZH 21 -92 charcoal 7049±39 -24.83 D/ I 116.16 13 OxA-24938 DZH 21 -99 bone (large adult bovide) 7134±35 -19.20 D/ I 116.06 14 OxA-25044 DZH 21 -105 charcoal 7095±40 -25.87 D/ I 116.05 15 OxA-24979 DZH 21 -110 bone( large adult bovide) 7145±38 -20.26 D/ I 115.96 16 OxA-25033 DZH 21 -116 animal bone 7084±36 -20.28 D/ I 115.92 17 OxA-24980 DZH 21 -159 bone (large adult bovide) 7011±38 -19.97 D/ I 116.05 18 OxA-24937 DZH 21 -153 bone (wild adult pig) 7588±37 -20.24 D/ I 116.11 19 OxA-25042 DZH 21 -117 charcoal 7095±40 -24.29 D/ I 115.76 20 OxA-24934 DZH 21 -125 bone (large juvenile bovide) 7195±37 -19.73 D/ I 115.70 21 OxA-24936 DZH 21 -180 animal bone 7083±36 -19.09 D/ I 115.40 Tab. 1. Radiocarbon dates from Džuljunica (Trench 21). Fig. 14. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic finds from the balk and the adjacent planum (trench 21): 1-6 spit 1 (n. 21-73); 7 from the planum; 1 fragment of a dark painted vessel; 3,7 white-on-red painted fragments. tion. As shown by x2-test, there is a high probability (94.7%) that the numeric spread of the three 14C-ages (7066+38; 7049+39; 7049+39 14C-BP) is an expression of chance fluctuations in the strength of the respective 14C/12C AMS ion-beams. As such, we can replace the three ages by their combined value (7056+21 14C-BP, p = 94,7 %). However, although the combined value is characterised by a significantly lower standard deviation (STD = +21 14C-BP) than the separate data (+38, +39, +39 14C-BP), both the position and length of the calendric-scale interval (6020-5860 calBC, 95% confidence) is almost identical to the intervals previously obtained for the individual components. The component intervals are: 6050-5850 calBC (OxA-24931), 60405840 calBC (OxA-24932), and 6050-5810 calBC (0xA-25040). This result can be summarised as follows: no methods, including stacking or weighting single 14C-ages, both on the 14C-scale or alternatively on the ca-lendric time-scale, provide access to the enhanced dating precision required. Perhaps unexpectedly, although well-illustrated by this example, the limitations of single 14C-age/sample analysis increase with increasing dating precision. Fig. 15. Dzuljunica II. Ceramic finds from the balk; 1-3 spit 1 (n. 21-73); 4-10 spit2 (n. 21-82); 8 fragment with white-on-red painting. General considerations on 14C-age calibration As explained in Weninger et al. (2011), the theoretical reasons for these limitations are to be sought in the underlying algebra of probabilistic 14C-age calibration. Briefly, in mathematical language, the calibration operation is not only non-linear (due to the wiggles of the 14C-age calibration curve), but in particular, also non-commutative (ordered). In consequence, there is a (one-sided) uncertainty relation between the 14C-scale and the calendar time-scale, which means that all 14C-based chronological results depend strongly on which of the two scales the analysis is initially (or secondarily) performed (e.g., first on the 14C-scale and second on the calendric time-scale, or vice-versa). Better known from quantum mechanics, but where the uncertainty relation between the different paired variables (e.g., between energy and time) is two-sided, all such non-commutative systems have a strong tendency towards an irreversible lock-in of variables (when measured), onto certain pre-defined states of the study system (e.g., energy levels in atoms). Interestingly, this quantisation effect can also be observed in the results of archaeological radiocarbon analysis, by whatever method, but most clearly in single 14C-age analysis. In view of the high dating precision achieved at the Oxford 14C-AMS-laboratory for Dzuljunica samples, and knowing that the observable effects of age-quantisation become stronger with increased dating precision, we therefore confidently forecast that such lock-in effects will also appear as a result of Dzuljunica 14C-analysis. Fig.16. Dzuljunica III. Foot from a white-on-red painted beaker. Excavated by N. Elenski. Nr. Lab-Code Material Species/ Function Locus Square/ Quadr. Feature/ Sample Nr. i4C-Age [BP] Depth [m] Comments/ Sample Quality 1 Bln-1544 charcoal Hor. I 6688±60 same sample Bln-1620 2 Bln-1620 charcoal Hor. I 6463±50 same sample Bln-1544 3 Bln-2030 charcoal Hor. III 61 Pit 6125±45 0.60 too young high ash content 4 Bln-2031 charcoal Hor. III 61 Pit 544°±5° 0.30 too young high ash content 5 Bln-2032 charcoal Hor. III 33 6555±7° 0.26 high ash content 6 Poz-16984 bone Bos bone point Hor. I ?7 6890±40 0.10 4.1% collagen 7 Poz-16985 bone Ovis/Capra bone point Hor. I M6 6890±40 0.20 2.5% collagen 8 Poz-16986 bone Ovis/Capra bone point Hor. III 115/125 6500±40 1.30 2.2% collagen 9 Poz-18480 bone Bos bone point Hor. IV - MTg 2510A Feldnr. 222 6900±40 - 0.8% collagen 10 Poz-18483 bone bone point Hor. II Mi MTg 2480A Feldnr.142 6750±40 0.10 0.4% collagen 11 Poz-18484 bone Bos bone disc Hor. III 104 MTg 2554A Feldnr. 149 6640±40 0.10 0.5% collagen 12 Poz-18486 bone bone point Hor. I 63 MTg 1955A Feldinv. 10 6800±40 2.40 0.5% collagen 13 Poz-18487 bone Ovis/Capra worked bone Hor. IV 24 MTg 1962A Feldnr. A18 6660±40 0.20 0.6% collagen 14 Poz-18489 bone Bos worked bone nd 62/2 MTg 2609A Feldnr. 169 6750±40 1.90 6.2% collagen 15 Poz-18490 bone bone spoon Hor. III 115 MTg 2609A Feldnr. 169 6780±40 1.30 9.5% collagen 16 Poz-18491 bone bone spoon Hor. II - MTg 2603A Feldnr. 139 6810±40 0.15 11.2% collagen 17 Poz-18493 bone Bos worked bone Hor. I 61/3 MTg 1632A Feldnr. 8 6670±40 0.30 5.3% collagen 18 Poz-18494 bone Bos/Cervus bone disc Hor. IV 30 MTg 2555A Feldnr. 80 6690±40 0.20 6.6% collagen Tab. 2. Radiocarbon dates from Ovčarovo-Gorata (43°11' N, 26°39' E). Source: Nr. 1-4 (Gôrsdorf, Boja-džiev 1996.128-129); Nr. 5-18 (Kraufi 2014.282-283). As mentioned above, in the present paper we based the stratigraphie analysis of Dzuljunica 14C-data on GMCWM. while the alternative method of Bayesian Sequencing (most recently in Bronk Ramsey 2011) makes use of the available stratigraphie information in terms of age-relations that are given on an ordinal scale (younger-older), the application of GMWCM requires this information to be interval-scaled (e.g., tree-ring counts, pottery seriation, metric depth). Both methods share the disadvantage that it is practically impossible to simultaneously optimise both the precision and accuracy of the archaeological age model under study. In theoretical terms, this is yet another consequence of the above-mentioned non-commutative relation between the 14C and the ca-lendric time-scale. Accepting this fundamental limitation, the major advantage of GMWCM is that we at- tempt not only to optimise the dating precision, which is a relatively straightforward matter, but in addition use an algorithm whereby the dating probability is implemented as a proxy for the otherwise unknown dating accuracy. In the following, we use GMCWM based on the measured metric depth of the short-lived bone samples (Tab. 1). For taphonomic reasons, we exclude the two outliers (identified above) and all charcoal samples from these studies. The GMWCM algorithm As described in Marion Benz et al. (2012), the GMC-WM algorithm fits the depth-scaled archaeological data repeatedly to the calibration curve for an optional number of runs (read: age-models) between 1 and 100, each of which is assigned a max. 10 000 statistical iterations (read: input of age-model vari- ables). Prior to each run, the metric depth values [cm] are linearly scaled to calendric ages [yrs] according to the specific age model [yrs/cm] under study. In the course of the analysis, by run-wise lengthening of the calendric-scale distance between samples, the algorithm uniformly expands the age model in annual steps between 0 and 4 [yrs/cm]. These are specific values that are relevant in the present study. The overall aim of this approach is to identify all age-depth models for which there is acceptable statistical agreement between the archaeological 14C-data and corresponding points of the 14C-age calibration curve. The final analytical step is to identify which of the different models is 'best'. As numeric measure for this qualification, in the course of each of the 100 runs, the GMCWM algorithm calculates the summed probability for the archaeological 14C-data set in comparison to the corresponding points of the 14C-age calibration curve. This calculation covers both the standard deviation (STD) of the archaeological 14C-ages and the STD assigned to the calibration curve. Steered by three independently running random number generators, each of the 100 runs provides 10 000 different results, whereby the algorithm simulates the following age-model errors: (1) Monte Carlo (Gaussian) re-measurement of the archaeological data steered by given standard deviations (STD); (2) Monte Carlo (Gaussian) re-measurement of the calibration curve data steered by STD typically set to values of ±10 14C-BP, with corresponding Monte Carlo recalculation of the calibration curve; as well as (3) Monte Carlo (Gaussian) calendric-scale variation of the initial age model steered by the input age-depth values. In the present study, for this third error component, we applied constant errors of ±5 years on the calendric-scale, to allow for corresponding errors in age-depth simulation in the order of ±5-10 [cm]. For each of the 100 runs the obtained distribution of best-fit values contains 10 000 individual ca-lendric age values, each of which represents the best-fitting calendric age (maximum probability) for the specific run. Following each run the results are shown on-screen, first as Fig. 18. Dzuljunica IV. Pottery finds from excavations by N. a histogram for which the calendric-scale Elenski: 1-3 canellated/fluted relief; 4, 6 plastic applications. Fig. 17. Dzuljunica III. Ceramic finds from the balk (n. 2147). width is calculated (Fig. 27 left) and second as a graph that shows the actual position of the archaeological data in comparison to the calibration curve (Fig. 27 right). Following graphic output the algorithm then begins calculations for the next run (age-model). Consequently, in the course of the analysis, the observer is presented with a graphically animated (incrementally expanding) sequence of age models on-screen. Typical run-times are 2 minutes to 6 hours, depending on the numeric precision requested. Fig. 19. Džuljunica IV. Ceramic finds from the balk: 1-4 n. 21-26; 5-6 n. 21-30; 7-9 n. 21-34; 1-2, 6 with incised lines; 3 canellated/fluted surface; 4-5, 7 fingernail impressions; 8 sieve vessel; 9 lid with in-presso decoration. When the GMWC-analysis is completed the software finally produces what we call a statistics graph (Fig. 26). Results As shown in the statistics graph (Fig. 26) the dating probability function (red line) has a maximum value of p ~80% for tell growth of 0.35yrs/cm. Smaller, but still highly significant probabilities (p~35%), are achieved for an extended plateau in the range 1.2-2.2yrs/cm. The probability then deteriorates to values lower than p = 5% at the end of the scale. In comparison, the dating precision (blue line) is highest (i.e. the smallest bestfit histogram width ±5 to ±7calyrs) for tell growth in the range of 0-1yrs/cm. A local peak shows less precision for models ~1.3 yrs/cm, followed by higher precision again (±10yrs histogram width) for growth values larger than ~1.5yrs/cm. Finally, the dating precision function also deteriorates towards the end of the scale. As mentioned above, in developing GMCWM we made efforts to optimise both precision and accuracy simultaneously. This was achieved by introduction of an optimising factor, F. Initially we defined F as the linear product of probability and precision. However, as shown by experimental studies with data of known age, sensitivity can be increased by defining F by using the squared probability function. An explanation can be sought in the fact that radiocarbon dates have algebraic properties similar to those in quantum physics, where defining probabilities for measured observables based on the squared values of wave-particle functions is standard practise (e.g., Omnes 1994. 83). Interestingly, the analogy works correctly. As can be taken from Figure 26, the F function (green) has its strongest peak for tell growth at ~0.35yrs/cm (similar to the probability function), but a peak in the F-function is now also attained for tell growth of ~ 1.70yrs/cm. Put together, the statistics graph informs us of the existence of two distinctly different (alternative) age models (we call Model 1 and Model 2), between which we must choose. These two models represent the quantum states into which the chronological system jumps when we try to mea- Fig. 20. Džuljunica IV. Ceramic, clay and bone finds from the balk and the adjacent planum: 1-4 n. 21-37; 5-10 n. 21-40; 11 n. 21-43; 12 from the planum; 2, 6-7,12 with canellated/fluted surface; 4-5, 9 fingernail impresso; 11 bone pendant. Fig. 21. Zoomorphic idols, so called labrets, from Dzuljunica II. Excavations: N. Elenski. sure (enforce) a continuous sequence of stratigraphic age models. Accepting Model 1 would imply that the two Dzuljunica Phases Dz-I and Dz-II would together cover a time-span of only ~30 calendar years (~0.35yrs/cm x 86cm). Although it has the highest probability, by archaeological reasoning, Model 1 appears too short. In comparison, with an implied time-span of 1.75 yrs/cm x 86cm = 150yrs, Model 2 agrees much better with archaeological expectations based on considerations for realistic tell growth and on pottery style comparisons between Dzuljunica and other 14C-dated sites (Ulucak, ^ukurigi, Ovcarovo-Gorata). Finally, when shown in context with the INTCAL09 high-precision calibration of raw data at the laboratories at Seattle and Heidelberg (Fig. 28) it becomes clear that the existence of two alternative best-fitting models is due to a reversed calibration curve wiggle between 5960 and 5900 calBC. In Model 1, all Dzuljunica 14C-data (phases Dz-I and Dz-II) lock into the steep slope of the calibration curve between 5950 and 6050 calBC. In Model 2, the Dz I-data still lock into this steep region but the Dz II-data are now attracted to the next following strong wiggle, which has a maximum of around 5930 calBC. Since this wiggle can be identified in the laboratory raw data, but is over-smoothed in the construction of the INTCAL09 calibration curve, we are confident that Model 2 is acceptable, despite its slightly lower overall probability. It appears that some of the Dzuljunica Dz-II 14C-data are picking up the corresponding slightly higher atmospheric 14C-ages. This is only possible due to their relatively high dating precision (STD ~35 14C-BP). Finally, Figure 28 shows the GISP2 admeasurements of Minze Stuiver et al. (1998) as a proxy for North Atlantic ocean/atmosphere temperature, and GISP2 non-sea salt K+ as a proxy for the strength of Siberian High pressure (Mayewski et al. 1997; Rohling et al. 2002). It can be deduced from this comparison that the earliest Neolithic was established at Dzulju-nica some 100 years (perhaps 4 generations) after the end of RCC-con-ditions (Rapid Climate Change) (We- ninger et al. 2009). Figure 29 shows the chronological results achieved for Dzuljunica in comparison to other Neolithic settlements in Northeast Bulgaria. Early Neolithic animal remains from Dzuljunica The dispersal of animal husbandry technologies from western Anatolia into Southeastern Europe is a poorly understood process. Recent studies in western and central Anatolia indicate that animal husbandry evolved in diverse forms in this intervening area between the Fertile Crescent and Southeast Europe (Qakirlar 2012). In other words, no single animal husbandry package was introduced to Southeast Europe from Southwest Asia. Instead various kinds of Fig. 22. Items of fine sandstone from Dzuljunica I and II. Excava tions N. Elenski: 1 sceptre-like object from Dzuljunica II, remini scent of the smaller labrets with perforated head; 2-4 fragments of stone palettes, 3 from Dzuljunica I, 2 and 4 from Dzuljunica II. Fig. 23. Torso of an Early Neolithic clay figurine from Dzuljunica I. Planum adjacent to the balk (n. 21-111). Fig. 24. Headless female Early Neolithic clay figurine from Dzuljunica I. Planum adjacent to the balk. Excavations: N. Elenski. evolving animal husbandries would have been moving across a wide frontier until they eventually reached this region. How were animal husbandry technologies transmitted further west, across the Aegean and into the temperate regions of the Balkan Peninsula? And how were they further transformed there? Zooarchaeological assemblages from well-stratified, radiocarbon-dated deposits representing early Neolithic settlements like Dzuljunica are crucial to understanding the integration of herding during the transition to sedentary life in Europe. Material and methods We studied 900 specimens from the stratigraphie balk excavated in 2010, which covers the entire Neolithic sequence, and 1264 specimens from the horizontal exposures representing the earliest (Dz -I) Neolithic phases. The assemblages from the balk were recovered through 2mm mesh and for the most part (approx. 89%) include unidentifiable mammal remains. The Dz-I assemblage from horizontal excavations yielded a larger proportion of identifiable specimens (c. 45%). The sample size is thus small, 6800 6600 6400 6200 6000 5800 5600 5400 5200 5000 4800 4600 4400 [calBC] P(rel) 1 P(rel) "= .......... 1 N=5 ■ 1111111111111111111111111111 ii ii1111111111111 ■ 11111111111111111 Ovcarovo-Gorata charcoal / / 1 1 ■ i a 1111 ■ | ....................... ,/A ■ i il 11ill1111111111111111111111111111111111 A. 1 _.........1 : N=13 Ovcarovo-Gorata bone ......................1"" ,T,,f,l.........I""T' _.......... : N=1 ................................... Dzuljunica 4 ....... ,.r.... ..m., p... ...A ......1.........1...... ..........................................i 1 N=1 "T,,,. /A. ! N=7 .............................!■■■■' Dzuljunica 2 —,.... r....,.........,.... 11 II 1 >1 : N=12 Dzuljunica 1 . . . 1 , . . 1 . . . 1 M rfiTïl 1, rTT.TTTTW.T( ¿AfpWiWfrr.............. 6800 6600 6400 6200 6000 5800 5600 5400 5200 5000 4800 4600 4400 [calBC] Fig. 25. Probabilistic calibration of 14C-data from Dzuljunica (Tab. 1) and Ovcarovo-Gorata (Tab. 2). The data from Dzuljunica are grouped according to phase Dz I-IV, with phase-groups arranged in stratigraphie order from Dz 1 (oldest) to Dz 4 (youngest). The data from Ovcarovo-Gorata are grouped according to sample material (bone and charcoal). Radiocarbon calibration based on INTCAL09-data (Reimer et al. 2009). Calibration method: (Weninger 1986). Graph produced by CalPal-software (Weninger, Joris 2008). and the study of archaeofaunal assemblages from the younger Neolithic layers of Dzuljunica continues. For these reasons, here we refrain from speculating about how animal exploitation developed during the course of Early Neolithic occupation in Dzuljunica and focus on the character of animal husbandry as it emerged in Dz-I. The assemblage was studied in the archaeological laboratory of the New Bulgarian University in Sofia and at the Regional Historical Museum of Veliko Tar-novo. Domesticated pig and cattle (i.e. domesticated animals whose wild ancestors are known to have occurred in Bulgaria in prehistory) were identified based on their morphology, specifically by comparing them with standard wild specimens of known sex and provenance (Degerb0l, Fredskild 1970; Hongo, Meadow 2000; Payne, Bull 1988). Osteometric measurements followed Angela von den Driesch (1976). NISP (= Number of Identified Specimens) is the basic quantification unit used to calculate the proportions of the represented taxa. A more detailed presentation of the material will follow in future publications. Results and discussion Sheep, goat, and domestic cattle are present in Dz-I. The domestic status of the sheep and goats in Dz-I is clear, because Dzuljunica falls well out of the natural distribution area of their wild progenitors (Uerp-mann 1987). Sheep and goat comprise approx. 50% of the vertebrate material from the horizontal exposures and approx. 65% of the material from the balk (Tab. 3). The most likely cause of this dissimilarity is the difference in the recovery techniques used in the two excavations. It is well known that sieving mitigates bias causing a low turnout of smaller animals (Payne 1972; Clason, Prum-mel 1977). Regardless of artificial differences in proportions, both assemblages demonstrate the important place of imported ovicaprid herds in domestic herd composition in Dz-I. Fig. 26. GMCWM statistics graph for Dzuljunica 14C-data (Phases Dz I-II) with simulated tell growth in the overall range 0-4.0yrs/cm, based on 100 runs with increments 0.04yrs/cm. Red - dating probability left scale: Probability [%]); Blue - dating precision (right scale: histogram width, Precision [yrs]); Green - Optimising Best-Fit Factor F (Probability-squared/ Precision [yrs-1]). Optimal results, based on maximal values for F, are achieved for age-models 0.35yrs/cm and 1.70yrs/cm. malian specimens in Dz-I. The presence of domestic cattle in Dz-I is attested by the relatively small sizes of the Bos specimens (Fig. 30). Measurements indicate that aurochs (Bos primigenius) are also present in small amounts. This indication fits expectations based on earlier studies from Koprivec near Cattle comprise approx. 3035% of the identified mam- Fig. 27. Comparison of Age-Model 1 and Age-Model 2. Left - 14C-sequence for Dzuljunica (Phases Dz I-II) according to Model 1 (0.35yrs/cm); Right -14C-sequence for Dzuljunica (Phases Dz I-II) according to Model 2 (1.75yrs/cm); in comparison to INTCAL09 curve (Reimer et al. 2009). Both models provide high-precision fits of Dzuljunica 14C-ages to INT-CAL09. By archaeological reasoning, Model 1 is too short (cf. text). Model 2 agrees well with archaeological expectations based on considerations for realistic tell growth and on pottery style comparisons between Dzulju-nica and other 14C-dated sites (Ulucak, fukurigi, Ovcarovo-Gorata). Taxa represented Frequency Bos taurus (cattle) VA Ovis aries\Capra hircus (sheep or goat) VA Canis domesticus (dog) R Bos primigenius (aurochs) C Cervidae (deer) C Sus scrofa (wild boar) R Castor fiber (Eurasian beaver) R Lepus capensis (European hare) R Unionidae (Freshwater clams) C Tab. 3. List of faunal taxa represented in Dzulju-nica and their relative abundance (R = rare; C = common; A = abundant; VA = very abundant). Dzuljunica (Manhart 1998) and Fikirtepe further to the southeast (Boessneck, Von den Driesch 1979). Morphologically domestic pigs are absent from the assemblages studied thus far. Morphologically wild boar (Sus scrofa) is represented by very few specimens in both sieved and hand-collected assemblages. The measurements of both cranial and post-cranial elements fall well within published ranges from modern populations (Tab. 4). For the time being, it is difficult to argue for the presence of domestic pig in early Dzuljunica. The special role played by pigs and boars in the dissemination of early animal husbandry technologies is only beginning to be understood. While osteometric analysis indicates that morphologically domestic pigs were absent in the 7th millennium BC cultures of Central Anatolia (Ar-buckle et al. 2014; Russel, Martin 2005), the same type of analysis shows that domestic pigs were rapidly adopted after the initial phase of Neolithic settlement in northwestern Anatolia around 6100 calBC (gakirlar 2013). They were also present in southern, southwestern, and central-western parts of Anatolia from the earliest Neolithic (£akirlar 2012). Furthermore, ancient DNA analysis demonstrates that wild boar and domestic pig interbred in western Anatolia (Ottoni et al. 2013). In view of these recent studies and observations on the Sus sp. specimens from Dzuljunica, it is possible to surmise that domestic pigs were added to the herds of Dzuljunica at a later period, either through local domestication, the introduction of domestic breeds, or both. capreolus) are common, at percentages similar to what has been observed for Fikirtepe (Boessneck, Von den Driesch 1979). These remains show that hunting was practiced fairly regularly by these early Neolithic communities, whose mode of animal exploitation was geared primarily towards herding. Our results substantiate previous faunal studies that attest to the important role of cattle herding at numerous Neolithic sites in Southeastern Europe and for the dispersal of early farming into temperate Europe (Benecke 2006; Conolly et al. 2012). At Dz-I, cattle, sheep and goat herding played a significant role from the very earliest phase of occupation. Although Dzuljunica is located in northern Bulgaria, this situation is in agreement with trends observed at Early Neolithic sites in southern Bulgaria (Benecke, Ninov 2002). The proposed link between dairy production and an emphasis on cattle breeding (Evershed et al. 2008) is yet to be explored by appropriate zooarchaeological tools applied to sufficiently large samples. While the abundance and size of cattle, sheep and goat for Dz-I supports the demic diffusion model of Neolithisation for Bulgaria, the paucity and large size of Sus sp., together with the possibility of late adoptation of domestic pigs, demonstrate one of the ways in which local innovation shaped the Neolithisation of Southeast Europe. Conclusions The investigations undertaken at Dzuljunica-Smar-des in 2010 focused on the excavation of the balk separating trenches 18 and 21. The systematic excavation and documentation of this balk, which comprised a sequence of archaeological deposits beginning in the Early Neolithic, provided us with the unique opportunity to study developments for the eastern Balkan region from the Pre-Karanovo I phase through Karanovo II. The lowermost settlement deposits (Dz-I) can be assigned to a phase which coincided with the Neolithi- In contrast to the paucity of boar remains, specimens of deer (Cervus elaphus, and Capreolus Speci men. Element no. Measurement Remarks 162 Ulna BPC = 26.4mm Difference from Hongo, Meadow 2000 standard individual: 1.1mm 617 Radius BFp = 36.5mm Difference from Hongo, Meadow 2000 standard individual: 2.3mm 343 Maxilla with teeth Breadth of Ml = Breadth of P4 = 15.7mm; 15.8mm Compare with Payne, Bull 1988.appen. Tab.4. Measurements of three Sus sp. specimens from Dzuljunica I and their relationship to modern wild individuals of known sex and provenance. Fig. 28. Linear stratigraphic age model for Dzuljunica 14C-data (Phases Dz I-II) according to Model 2 (1.70yrs/cm), in comparison to INTCAL09 curve (Reimer et al. 2009), INTCAL09 high-precision calibration raw-data (Seattle/Heidelberg), and climate records (GISP2 Sl8O /Stuiver et al. 1998] as proxy for North Atlantic ocean/atmosphere temperature, and GISP2 non-sea salt K+ as proxy for the strength of Siberian High pressure /Mayewski et al. 1997; Rohling et al. 2002]; GISP2-age model shifted 40yrs younger according to refined GICC05-ages /Vin-ther et al. 2006]). sation of the region, for which there are currently no older Neolithic finds. From a typological perspective, material from this level corresponds to finds made at Koprivec and from Poljanica-Platoto. Additionally, finds from Dz-I attest to clear affinities with material from West Anatolia. This context is also confirmed by radiocarbon data. While the larger figurine discovered at Dzuljunica (Fig. 23) already indicates independent Balkan traditions from the outset of Neolithisation, the smaller figurine (Fig. 24) still displays typical Anatolian features. This trend is also reflected in the results of our investigations into the faunal assemblage from the site. While the ear- liest Neolithic communities arrived in the region with herds of sheep and goat, and domesticated cattle, pig was either domesticated locally or imported into the region later. Certainly, it cannot be ruled out that the Neolithisa-tion of the Central Balkans did not occur a few generations prior to the earliest occupation deposits from Dzuljunica. Data from Thessaly indicate that Neoli-thisation occurred slightly earlier in Greece, and the river valleys of the Vardar/Axios, Struma/Strymon and Morava would have provided natural routes for Age calBC, 4700 1 4800 ■ 4900 ■ 5000 - 5100 ' 5200 ' 5300 ' 5400 ' 5500 - 5600 ■ 5700 ' 5800 ■ 5900 ■ 6000 -6100 ■ 6200 • Comparative Stratigraphy of Neolithic Settlements in Northeast Bulgaria Džuljunica t ? Pomostica B2 Samovo-dene A2-B1 A Kocica Tell Hotnica 1 RUSENSKI LOM SILISTRA 12-7 18-13 3 Tell Ovčarovo 1-2 4-7 Tell Poljanica 1-3 Tell Goljamo Delčevo 3-4 Malak Preslavec Dri novo Rezervata Ovca rovo platoto Goljamo Delčevo 1 Ovčarovo-Gorata ? Hotnica Cave Koprivec Poljanlca Platoto Age calBC 4700 4800 4900 ■ 5000 5100 5200 5300 5400 ■ 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000 6100 6200 Fig. 29. Schematic comparative stratigraphy of Neolithic settlements in northeast Bulgaria. Grey-shaded boxes indicate radiocarbon-dated sequences. • Standard aurochs ▲ Koprivec A Monochrome • X Koprivec A Bichrome q □ Ulucak V ^ ♦ Fikirtepe 4 • ♦ ♦ ♦ Bd Fig. 30. As a proxy for domestic vs. wild cattle populations at the Neolithisation frontier between Anatolia and the Balkans, comparison of length (GLl) and breadth (Bd) measurements of Bos sp. astragali (knuckle bone) from Dz-I, roughly contemporary settlements in the greater Early Neolithic European frontier (Koprivec data from Man-hart 1998; Ulucak V data from gakirlar 2012; Fikirtepe data from Boessneck and von den Driesch 1979), and a standard prehistoric aurochs from northern Europe (Degerbel, Fredskild 1970). the dispersal of the new form of subsistence. Furthermore, it is not insignificant that the arrival of Neolithic lifeways in the region coincided with the end of a period for which palaeoclimate proxies attest to considerable climate fluctuation. From the middle of the 7th millennium calBC until its final century, a Rapid Climate Change (RCC) interval - with the same mechanism as the recent Little Ice Age - prevailed. RCC conditions are synonymous, for example, with harsh winters, but also with severe droughts. Additionally, in the century directly preceding the Neoli-thisation of the Central Balkans, these climate perturbations would have been intensified by the effects of the 8.2ka calBP Hudson Bay event. Causal relation- ships between climate change and the Neolithisation of Southeast Europe in the late 7th millennium calBC are an area of considerable interest which should be pursued in the future. By the Dz-II and Dz-III phases, Neolithic communities had dispersed over the entire region, from the Aegean coast to the Carpathian Basin. The widely occurring white-on-red painted pottery (especially with white dots) testifies to a large communication sphere stretching from central West Anatolia (Ulucak and ^ukurigi) to Gura Baciului, at the centre of the Carpathian Basin. From Dz-IV/Ovcarovo-Gorata (Karanovo II) there is a distinctive trend to regionalisation. In the Eastern Balkans, this trend is expressed in the near disappearance of painted decoration and the introduction of vessels with canellated/fluted surfaces. The smooth transition from this period to the subsequent Middle Neolithic, not identified at Dzuljunica, heralds the period of tell development in Southeast Europe. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- Our investigations in Bulgaria were supported by the Collaborative Research Centre 806 - Our way to Europe, Project F1 by the German Research Foundation (DFG) at the University of Cologne. We would like to thank Marion Etzel and Jonas Abele (Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen) for support at Dzuljunica during the excavations and Moni-Möck Aksoy (Tübingen) for the drawings of the finds. The follow-up investigations in Bulgaria in 2012 and 2013 were supported by Ivan Georgiev Suvandziev, Dragomir Valentinov Markov and Todor Simeonov Djakov (St. Cyrill and Methodius University Veliko Tarnovo). References Arbuckle B. S. and 22 authors 2014. Data sharing reveals complexity in the Westward Spread of Domestic Animals across Neolithic Turkey. PloS one 9(6): e99845. Benecke N. 2006. Animal Husbandry and Hunting in the Early Neolithic of South-East Europe - a Review. In I. Gat-sov, H. Schwarzberg (eds.), Aegean-Marmara-Black Sea: The Present State of Research on the Early Neolithic. Proceedings of the Session held at the EAA 8th Annual Meetingat Thessaloniki, 28th September 2002. Schriften des Zentrums für Archeologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes 5. Beier & Beran. Langenweissbach: 175-186. Benecke N., Ninov L. 2002. Zur Nahrungswirtschaft der neolithischen Bevölkerungen im Gebiet des heutigen Bulgariens nach archäozoologischen Befunden. In M. Li-chardus-Itten, J. Lichardus and V. Nikolov (eds.), Beiträge zu jungsteinzeitlichen Forschungen in Bulgarien. Saar-brücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 74. Bonn: 555-573. Benz M., Co§kun A., Hajdas I., Deckers K., Riehl S., Alt K. W., Ozkaya V. and Weninger B. 2012. Methodological Implications of New Radiocarbon Dates from the Early Holo-cene Site of Körtik Tepe, Southeast Anatolia. Radiocarbon 54(3-4): 291-304. Boessneck J., Von den Driesch A. 1979. Die Tierknochenfunde aus der Neolithischen Siedlung auf dem Fikirtepe bei Kadiköy am Marmarameer. Institut für Palaeoanato-mie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universität München. Bronk Ramsey C. 2011. Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates. Radiocarbon 51(1): 337-360. Çakirlar C. 2012. Evolution of Animal Husbandry in Neolithic Central-West Anatolia: The Archaeozoological Record from Ulucak Höyük (ca. 7040-5660 cal. BC, Izmir, Turkey). Anatolian Studies 62:1-33. 2013. Rethinking Neolithic Subsistence at the Gateway to Europe with New Archaeozoological Evidence from Istanbul. In M. Groot, D. Lentjes and J. Zeiler (eds.), Subsistence and Surplus. The Environmental Archaeology of Subsistence, Specialization and Surplus Production. Sidestone Press. Amsterdam: 59-79. Çilingiroglu Ç. 2009. Central-West Anatolia at the End of 7th and Beginning of 6th Millennium BCE in the Light of Pottery from Ulucak (Izmir). Tübingen (February 9th, 2012). 2011. The Current State of Neolithic Research at Ulucak, Izmir. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th - 9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westfalen: 67-76. Çilingiroglu A., Derin Z., Abay E., Saglamtimur H. and Ka-yan I. (eds.) 2004. Ulucak Höyük. Excavations Conducted between 1995 and 2002. Ancient Near Eastern Studies, Supplement 15. Louvain. Clason A. T., Prummel W. 1977. Collecting, Sieving and Archaeozoological Research. Journal of Archaeological Science 4:171-175. Conolly J., Manning K., Colledge S., Dobney K. and Shen-nan S. 2012. Species distribution modelling of ancient cattle from early Neolithic sites in SW Asia and Europe. The Holocene 22: 997-1010. Degerb0l M., Fredskild B. 1970. The Urus (Bos primigenius Bojanus) and Neolithic Domesticated Cattle (Bos taurus domesticus Linné) in Denmark, with a Revision of Bos Remains from the Kitchen Middens. Zoological and Palynological Investigations. Det Kongelige Danske Vi-denskabernes Selskab Biologiske Skrifter 17.1. Kopenhagen. Derin Z. 2011. Ye§ilova Höyük. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Ho-rejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/ Westfalen: 95-106. Elenski N. 2002. Sondažni proučvanija na praistoričesko-to seliste Dzuljunica - "Smardes" Velikotarnovsko, prez 2001 g. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2001 g. XLINacionalna arheologičeska konferencija. Sofija: 2728. (in Bulgarian) 2003. Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto seliste Dzuljunica - "Smardes" Velikotarnovsko prez 2002 g. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2002 g. XLII Nacionalna arheologičeska konferencija. Sofija: 1718. (in Bulgarian) 2004. Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto seliste Dzuljunica - "Smardes" Velikotarnovsko prez 2003 g. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2003 g. XLIII Nacionalna arheologičeska konferentcija. Sofija: 1415. (in Bulgarian) 2005. Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto seliste Dzuljunica - "Smardes" Velikotarnovsko prez 2004 g. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2004 g. XLIV Nacionalna arheologičeska konferencija. Sofija: 2123. (in Bulgarian) 2006. Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto seliste Dzuljunica - Smardes, Velikotarnovsko (predvaritel-no saobstenie). Arkheologija 47:96-117. (in Bulgarian) 2008a. Nai-rannite fazi na neolita v baseinite na rekite Yantra i Rusenski Lom. Problemi na kulturnata inden-tičnost. In M. Gyurova (ed.), Praistoričeski proučvanija v Balgarija: Novite predizvikatelstva. Balgarska akademija na naukite, Nacionalen arheologičeski institut i muzei. Sofija: 96-105. (in Bulgarian) 2008b. Keramičnija kompleks ot paarvija plast na ranno-neolitnoto seliste do Pomostica, Popovsko. Popovo v minaloto 5: 41-50. (in Bulgarian) 2009 Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto selis-te Džuljunica - "Smardeš" Velikotarnovsko. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2008 g. XLVIII Nacionalna arheologiceska konferencija. Sofija: 41-44. (in Bulgarian) 2010 Sondažni arheologičeski proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto selište Džuljunica - "Smardeš" Velikotarnovsko. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2009 g. XLIX Nacionalna arheologiceska konferencija. Sofija: 33-35. (in Bulgarian) 2011 Sondažni proučvanija na rannoneolitnoto selište Džuljunica - "Smardeš". Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2010 g. Sofija: 34-37. (in Bulgarian) Elenski N., Leštakov P. 2006 Sondažni proučvaniya na rannoneolitnoto selište Džuljunica - "Smardeš" Velikotarnovsko Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 2005 g. XLV Nacionalna arheologiceska konferenciya. Sofija: 36-39. (in Bulgarian) Evershed R. P and 21 authors. 2008. Earliest Date for Milk Use in the Near East and Southeastern Europe linked to Cattle Herding. Nature 455:528-531. Galik A., Horejs B. 2011. ^ukurigi Höyük - Various Aspects of its Earliest Settlement Phase. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/ Westfalen: 83-94. Görsdorf J., Bojadžiev J. 1996. Zur absoluten Chronologie der bulgarischen Urgeschichte. Eurasia Antiqua 2: 105-173. Hansen S. 2007. Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit. Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa. Archäologie in Eurasien 20. Philipp von Zabern. Mainz. Hongo H., Meadow R. H. 2000. Faunal remains from pre-pottery Neolithic levels at ^ayönü, southeastern Turkey: a preliminary report focusing on pigs (Sus sp.). In M. Mash-kour, A. M. Choyke, H. Buitenhuis and F. Poplin (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East IV: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Archaeozoology of Southwestern Asia and Adjacent Areas. ARC-Publicatie. Groningen: 121-140. Ilcheva V. 2002. Hotnica, čast I praistorija. Veliko Tar-novo. (in Bulgarian) Krauß R. 2006. Die prähistorische Besiedlung am Unterlauf der Jantra vor dem Hintergrund der Kulturgeschichte Nordbulgariens. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa 20. Vlg Marie Leidorf. Rahden. 2008. Karanovo und das südosteuropäische Chronologiesystem aus heutiger Sicht. Eurasia Antiqua 14: 115-147. 2011. On the "Monochrome" Neolithic in Southeast Europe. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/ Westfalen: 109-125. 2014. Ovcarovo-Gorata. Eine frühneolithische Siedlung in Nordostbulgarien. Archäologie in Eurasien 29. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn. Lichardus-Itten M., Demoule J.-P., Perniceva L., Grebska-Kulova M. and Kulov I. 2002. The Site of Kovacevo and the Beginning of the Neolithic Period in Southwestern Bulgaria. In M. Lichardus-Itten, J. Lichardus and V. Niko-lov (eds.), Beiträge zu jungsteinzeitlichen Forschungen in Bulgarien. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 74. Bonn: 99-158. Manhart H. 1998. Die vorgeschichtliche Tierwelt von Ko-privec und Durankulak und anderen prähistorischen Fundplätzen in Bulgarien aufgrund von Knochenfunden aus archäologischen Ausgrabungen. Documenta naturae 116:1-353. Mayewski P., Meeker D., Twickler M., Whitlow S., Yang Q., Lyons W. B. and Prentice M. 1997. Major Features and Forcing of High-Latitude Northern Hemisphere Atmospheric Circulation Using a 110,000 Year Long Glaciochemical Series. Journal of Geophysical Research 102: 2634526366. Mellaart J. 1970. Excavations at Hacilar. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh. Mikov V. 1933. Predistoriceski selista i nahodki v Balga-rija. Sofija. (in Bulgarian) Omnes R. 1994. The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press. Princeton. Özdogan E. 2011. Settlement Organization and Architecture in A§agi Pinar. Early Neolithic Layer 6. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westfalen: 213-223. Özdogan M. 1999. Northwestern Turkey: Neolithic Cultures in Between the Balkans and Anatolia. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayinlari. Istanbul: 203-224. 2011. An Anatolian Perspective on the Neolithisation Process in the Balkans. New Questions, New Prospects. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. VML, Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westfalen: 23-33. Ottoni C. and 34 authors. 2013. Pig Domestication and Human-Mediated Dispersal in Western Eurasia Revealed through Ancient DNA and Geometric Morphometrics. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30(4): 823-832. Parzinger H. 2005. Die mittel- und spätneolithische Keramik aus A§agi Pinar, Grabungen 1993-1998. In H. Parzinger, H. Schwarzberg (eds.), A$agi Pinar II. Die mittel- und spätneolithische Keramik. Archäologie in Eurasien 18. Mainz: 1-245. Payne S. 1972. Partial Recovery and Sample Bias. The Results of Some Sieving Experiments. In E. S. Higgs (ed.), Papers in Economic Prehistory. Cambridge: 49-64. Payne S., Bull G. 1988. Components of Variation in Measurements of Pig Bones and Teeth, and the Use of Measurements to Distinguish Wild from Domestic Pig Remains. Archaeozoologica 2:27-66. Pearson G. W. 1986. Precise Calendrical Dating of Known Growth-Period Samples Using a 'Curve Fitting' Technique. Radiocarbon 28(2A): 292-299. Reimer P. J. and 27 authors. 2009. IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0-50,000 Years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51:1111-1150. Rohling E. J., Mayewski P. A., Abu-Zied R. H., Casford J. S. L. and Hayes A. 2002. Holocene Atmosphere-Ocean Interactions: Records from Greenland and the Aegean Sea. Climate Dynamics 18:587-593. Stanev P. 1984. Razkopki na selisnata mogila v zemliste-to na selo Džuljunica, Velikotarnovski okrag Arheologiče-ski otkritija i razkopkiprez 1983 g. Smoljan: 28-29. (in Bulgarian) 1985. Proučvanija na selisnata mogila do selo Džuljunica. Arheologičeski otkritija i razkopki prez 1984 g. Sliven: 35. (in Bulgarian) 1991. Rezultati i perspektivi na praistoričeskite izsled-vanija vav Velikotarnovskija region. Izvestija na isto-ričeski muzei Veliko Tarnovo 6:99-107. (in Bulgarian) 1995. Topografija i stratigrafija na neoliten kompleks Orlovec. Žilistna arhitektura na rannoneolitnoto seli-šte. Izvestija na istoričeski muzei Veliko Tarnovo 10: 57-66. (in Bulgarian) 2008. Orlovec. Neoliten kompleks. Izdatelstvo Faber. Veliko Taarnovo. (in Bulgarian) Štefanova T. 1996. A Comparative Analysis of Pottery from the "Monochrome Early Neolithic Horizon" and "Ka-ranovo I Horizon" and the Problems of the Neolithisation of Bulgaria. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neoli-tika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 23:15-38. Stuiver M., Reimer P. J., Bard E., Beck J. W., Burr G. S, Hughen K. A., Kromer B., McCormac G., van der Plicht J. and Spurk M. 1998. INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 24000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40(3): 1041-1083. Skorpil C., Skorpil K. V. 1898. Pametnici iz bälgarsko. Mogili. Plovdiv. (in Bulgarian) Thissen L. C. 2001. The Pottery of Illipinar, Phases X to VA. In J. Roodenberg, L. C. Thissen (eds.), The Illipinar Excavations II. Leiden: 3-154. Todorova H. 2003. Neue Angaben zur Neolithisierung der Balkanhalbinsel. In E. Jerem, P. Raczky (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Festschrift N. Kalicz. Budapest: 83-88. Uerpmann H.-P. 1987. The Ancient Distribution of Ungulate Mammals in the Middle East. L. Reichert Verlag. Wiesbaden. Vinther B. M., Clausen H. B., Johnsen S. J., Rasmussen S. O., Andersen K. K., Buchardt S. L., Dahl-Jensen D., Seier-stad I. K., Siggaard-Andersen M.-L., Steffensen J. P., Svens-son A. M., Olsen J. and Heinemeier J. 2006. A synchronized Dating of Three Greenland Ice Cores Throughout the Holocene. Journal of Geophysical Research 111D13102, doi:10.1029/2005JD006921 Von den Driesch A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. Cambridge. Weninger B. 1986. High-Precision Calibration of Archaeological Radiocarbon dates. Acta Interdisciplinaria Archa-eolica 4:11-53. 1992. Fallstudien zur l4C-Chronologie des Neolithikums in Bulgarien. Studia Praehistorica 11(12): 407-422. Weninger B., Jöris O. 2008. A 14C Age Calibration Curve for the Last 60 ka: The Greenland-Hulu U/Th Timescale and its Impact on Understanding the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition in Western Eurasia. Journal of Human Evolution 55: 772-781. Weninger B. and 18 authors. 2009. The impact of Rapid Climate Change on Prehistoric Socities during the Holo-cene in the Eastern Mediterranean. Documenta Praehistorica 36: 7-59. Weninger B., Edinborough K., Clare L. and Joris O. 2011. Concepts of Probability in Radiocarbon Dating. Documenta Praehistorica 38:1-20. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Different models for the Neolithisation of Albania Adem Bunguri Institute of Archaeology, Tirana, AL bunguria1@gmail.com ABSTRACT - According to the archaeological evidence, the Neolithisation process in Albania seems to have passed through three different phases, with chronological gaps between them. The earliest phase is represented at the Vlusha site, where coarse monochrome pottery was found in the same layer as microlithic tools. The second phase can be traced back to the Konispol site, where Impresso pottery appeared immediately above the Mesolithic layer. The third phase is represented by the Pod-gorie I site, which is characterised by red monochrome slipped ware, white-painted pottery, polychrome pottery, as well as pottery with impresso and barbotine decoration. IZVLEČEK - Arheološki podatki kažejo, da je proces neolitizacije v Albaniji potekal v treh različnih fazah z vmesnimi kronološkimi prekinitvami. Najzgodnejšo fazo predstavlja najdišče Vlusha, kjer je bila odkrita groba enobarvna (monokromna) lončenina v isti plasti kot mikrolitska orodja. Drugo fazo smo prepoznali na najdišču Konispol, kjer se lončenina, okrašena v stilu Impresso, pojavlja tik nad mezolitsko plastjo. Tretjo fazo predstavlja najdišče Podgorie I, za katerega je značilna rdeče premazana enobarvna (monokromna) lončenina, belo slikana lončenina, večbarvna (polikromna) lončenina, kakor tudi lončenina, okrašena z vbodi in barbotinom. KEY WORDS - Albania; Neolithisation; pottery; interpretative model Introduction Positioned at an intersection of the network of land routes that connect Anatolia, the Balkans and the Western Mediterranean, Albania is a highly favourable location, which determined the cultural features of its Neolithic civilisation (Fig. 1). The Neolithisation process is complex, involving successive social-historical events and interactions which happened in a definite space and time, conditioned by numerous circumstances and geographical and bio-economical conditions in particular (Budja 1999.121). The debate about the Neolithisation process has been a long one, and includes various hypotheses, from the indigenous to the migratory models (Budja 1993. 179-193; Zvelebil 1995.107; Ozdogan 1995.25; Banffy 2005.75). Earlier models of Neolithisation based on a single wave of colonisation and a single scenario have recently been supplanted by more complex models involving interaction and reciprocal cultural impacts (Oross, Banffy 2009.175). The Early Neolithic culture in Albania combines elements of the Anatolian-Balkan and Adriatic-Mediterranean cultural complexes of this period. As such, the territory of Albania is an important case study area for defining the spatial extent of the Mediterranean and Continental cultural groups that were present in this region during the Neolithic period. We find various regional cultures in Albania that have attracted the attention of prehistoric archaeologists in recent decades who suggested different models, ranging from the indigenous to diffusionist theory. Our knowledge about the very beginnings of the Early Neolithic is very limited; one or two sites can be ascribed to this period: Vlusha in the south-central part of Albania, and Konispol on the southwest coast. A vertical sequential stratigraphy has been found only in the Konispol Cave, while at the open site at Vlu-sha there is only horizontal stratigraphy present. DOI>10.4312\dp.41.4 79 On the other hand, the Podgorie site has yielded quite good stratigraphical and archaeological evidence to confirm a late stage of the Early Neolithic which resulted from migration. However, according to the archaeological evidence, Albania can be divided longitudinally between two main cultural Early Neolithic complexes, as shown in the following map (Fig. 2). The archaeology of the Early Neolithic in Albania shows that the culture of this period developed in three chronological phases, even with hiatuses between them, each corresponding to the three different models of the Neolithisation process (Fig. 3). Model no. 1: Vlusha I-II Vlusha is a site where Mesolithic and Early Neolithic deposits were found in two different areas of the site, Vidhez (point A) and Armenina (point B), ap-prox. 300m apart. The site lies on a mountain slope 800m above sea level, on the right bank of the Ka-pinova River, near the eponymous village in the district of Skrapar (Fig. 4). The site has been known since 1972, when Luftin Ylli collected several objects discovered by chance at this location which are reminiscent of the Mesolithic tradition of tool production (Prendi 1982.190; 1990.300, Pl. I, 1-8). A year later, a small trial excavation was carried out by Muzafer Korkuti, who concluded that the finds dated to a transitional period between the Mesolithic and Neolithic. The last trial excavation at Vlu-sha, carried out by Ylli in 1990, revealed different stratigraphic sequences and cultures, each indicating two successive periods of development, termed Vlusha I and Vlusha II, and related to the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic, respectively. Vlusha I The first trench of 3x3m was excavated at Vlusha I (Vidhez), which revealed a cultural deposit reaching a depth of 0.85m that comprised two separate cultural horizons, as can be seen in its eastern profile (Fig. 5): © The upper horizon, 0.30-0.35m thick, consisted of light brown soil that contained flint silex and no pottery. The cultural layer dates to the late Me-solithic period, perhaps the Tardenoisien phase (Prendi 1990.300). The flint tools are of the same type as those found on the surface; the same flint tools, mainly in grey and whitish colours, with very small dimensions (1.5-2cm) and irregular trapezoidal shapes, which are typical examples of Mesolithic microlithic tools, are apparently in the Tardenoisien tradition. Based on the microlithic character of the silex (Pl. 1.1-8) and the absence of ceramics, the possibility that a Mesolithic settlement existed at Vidhes was considered. However, the suggestion remains open to debate, as the finds were insufficient and not all typo-logically definable. The excavations at Vlusha revealed that there were two distinct cultural horizons, of which the layer at point A (Vidhez-Vlusha I) had no pottery, but is securely dated to an earlier period, i.e. the Mesolithic, while the layer at point B (Armenina-Vlusha II) dates to an early phase of the Neolithic. However, this aspect requires further investigation, as Vlusha is indeed a site with great potential for studying the process of Neolithisation of this area, given that the earliest Neolithic layer here, Vlusha II, follows directly after the Mesolithic layer, Vlusha I. Vlusha II The second trench of 3x3m was excavated in 1990 at point B (Armenina). Vlusha II is of particular in- © The lower horizon, 0.50m thick, 150 km consisted of dark brown soil, with late Mesolithic flint silex and no - pottery. Fig. 1. Map of the Balkans and Albania. Fig. 2. Map of Early Neolithic cultural complexes in Albania. terest because of its monochrome pottery and strong Mesolithic tradition. The Early Neolithic deposit discovered at point B (Armenina), which includes monochrome dark grey pottery sherds, has been associated with Mesolithic microlithic flints. The cultural layer was 0.80m thick and clearly divided by two building levels with traces of burned earth and hearths, as can be seen in its eastern profile (Fig. 6): O The first and the earliest horizon is a layer 0.20m thick, light grey layer lying directly over the natural bedrock and consisting of clay and sand, and culturally sterile. © Traces of a fireplace and the remains of a hearth, measuring 0.15-0.30m. © The second occupation horizon consists of two layers. The first layer is 2.20m thick and begins with traces of a hearth. It was made of compact dark brown clay which contains microliths and a few pottery. 0 The second layer, measuring 0.40m in thickness, consists of light brown clay and a few pottery sherds and flint tools. The layer appears homogenous, containing only pottery, small flint chips, nuclei and a few objects that show traces of use. The material culture of both occupation horizons at Armenina (Vlusha II) is represented by some flint tools of micro-dimensional silexes (Pl. 2.1-20) and monochrome ware produced with modest technology, highly fragile and poorly fired. It has a dark grey sandy clay fabric, and in a few cases reddish or ochre colouring. Coarse ware of fabric with medium-sized grains predominates, while pottery with a coarser grained fabric is less frequent. The pottery is highly fragmented and contains few diagnostic elements. Spherical and semi-spherical cups predominate, along with conical bowls, generally with a flat base, which in a few cases appear to have small tubular handles, particularly in the case of the coarser fabric ware. Decoration is rarely present and consists of impressed lines placed around the neck or just below it, mainly observed on the coarser fabric ware (Pl. 3.1114). Impresso and barbotine style decorations are entirely absent. The excavated area in this sector, except for a few flint tools, produced no tools of polished stone or bone. Bones are generally absent, except for a single jaw fragment with three pre-molar teeth of a large unidentified wild animal, which were Pl. 1. Flint tools. 1-8: Vlusha I; 9-16: Konispol II. found at 0.70m depth, in the upper section of the first occupation level. The material culture is particularly striking because of the presence of micro-dimensional silexes, some of which are similar in shape and retouch style to Mesolithic micro-liths found during the excavations at Vidhëz (Vlusha I; Prendi 1990.300). Of particular chronological and cultural relevance among these finds are the microliths, especially one example of elongated shape with fine retouch on the back, identical in form and production style to microliths that have been previously found here. The general characteristics of the pottery at Vlusha do not correspond to any of the Neolithic cultures known so far in Albania, which makes the cultural and chronological evaluation of this material complex, especially as the material is limited in quantity and has no clear stratigra-phic provenance. However, the monochrome pottery, its poor firing quality, the simplicity of the shapes, and the limited and uniform decoration indicate that this material represents a new cultural phenomenon that cannot be chronologically associated with a classic phase of the Early Neolithic period. In this sense, it is interesting that in the layer that contained pottery finds, some mi-croliths are similar to those found at site B (Vidhëz). Thus, we believe that the locality of Vlusha was occupied during both the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic. Fig. 3. Map of three phases of Neolithisation in Albania. It is worth pointing out that Vlusha differs from the above-mentioned settlements in that the elements of the Mesolithic tradition appear in its early phase in association with monochrome ware and not with Adriatic Impresso ware. This phenomenon has been stratigraphically documented at the Sidar settlement on Corfu, where the layer with monochrome Early Neolithic pottery and many (non-microlithic) flint tools, at a depth of 0.50-0.60m (Sidar C, Base), was located over a Mesolithic layer (Sidar D) and covered by an alluvial hiatus of 0.70-0.80m in depth (Sidar C, Middle), followed by a layer of Adriatic Im-presso ware accompanied by many flint tools at 0.15m depth (Sidar C, Top; Sordinas 1969.402-407, Pl. III; 2003.89). The same stratigraphic sequence was observed at Skarin Samograd in Central Dalma-tia, where a horizon of monochrome ware (Samograd I) is followed by a layer of Adriatic Impresso ware (Muller 1991.311-358; 1988.232-234). Accord- ing to the radiocarbon dates, the monochrome pottery from Sidari C Base dates to about 6610-6420 calBC (Müller 1991.355) and about 6825-6241 calBC {Briam, Heyed 2001.200-202). The impresso pottery of Sidar C Top layer is dated to 6410-5990 calBC (Sordinas 1968.26; Müller 1991.356) or 6569-5850 calBC {Briam, Heyed 2001.200-202), with a gap of almost 300 years. At Skarin Samograd, the horizon with monochrome pottery (Samograd I), is dated to 5660-5560 calBC, and followed by a layer with Adriatic type B Impresso pottery (Samograd II), which is dated to 5630-5470 calBC (Müller 1988.219-224; 1991.354-355), with a gap of 150 years. The coarse dark grey monochrome pottery at Vlusha IIa, both in forms and decoration, is similar to the monochrome pottery from the Krainici settlement in the Struma valley in Southwest Bulgaria. The decoration on the pottery from both settlements consists only of plastic ornamentation (Stefanova 1996. 16-17). In the later one, the earliest building level Pl. 2. Flint tools from Vlusha IIa. with monochrome pottery was covered after a hiatus by two other Early Neolithic building levels, in which white-on-red painted pottery appeared. (Štefanova 1996.16-17, Pl. I.1-4). A similar situation was observed at the Koprivec settlement in Northeast Bulgaria, where the Early Neolithic layer was formed by two building levels which followed each other without interruption. The earliest building level contained similar monochrome pottery, and its second building level, besides the monochrome, contained some fragments of white-on-red painted pottery (Štefanova 1996. 17). Similar cases were reported at the oldest Early Neolithic building level at Pomoshtica and Poljanica plato in Northeast Bulgaria, which were covered by a second building level where some white-on-red painted pottery was found (Stefanova 1996.17-19). The monochrome pottery at Koprivec was 14C dated to c. 6300-6200 calBC (Schubert 2005.242, Fig. 2) and at Poljanica plato to about 6200 calBC (Schubert 2005.242) or c. 61806120 calBC (Nikolova 1998.128; Budja 2001.36). The monochrome pottery and the simple shapes found at Vlusha indicate a possible affinity with the early monochrome ware of Sidar and Škarin Samo-grad, despite a few local differences, as well as with the early monochrome pottery from Thessaly (ger. Fruhkeramikum) (Milojcic 1959.5, Pl. 5), with pottery from Krainici in the Struma valley or even with the monochrome pottery from the first building level at Koprivec, Poljanica Plateau, and Pomoshtica in Southwest and Northeast Bulgaria (Stefa-nova 1996.16-18, Pl. I-IX). The monochrome pottery at Kuprivec has been dated 14C to c. 6300-6200 calBC (Schubert 2005.242, Fig. 2) and at Poljanica plato to c. 6200 calBC (Schubert 2005.242, Fig. 2) or between 6180-6120 calBC (Nikolova 1998.128; Budja 2001.36). However, the closest analogies to the dark grey coloured monochrome pottery of Vlusha IIa were found at the settlement of Krainici in the Struma valley in Southwest Bulgaria (Ste-fanova 1996.16-17, Pl. I.1-4; Todo-rova 2003.264). Similar dark brown monochrome pottery with quite simple forms was found in the oldest Hagilar IX layer as well as at ^ukurugi Hoyuk in Aegean Anatolia, and most recently at the oldest building levels at Bargin Hoyuk VIe and VId in Northwestern Anatolia, 14C dated to between 6620-6570 calBC and 6500-6400 calBC, which precedes the oldest building level at Fikir Tepe (Gerritsen et al. 2013.60-62). These data show that simple monochrome pottery is the earliset in the Anatolian-Balkan complex of the Early Neolithic, followed in the Eastern Balkans by a white-on-red painted pottery layer (Todorova 2003.264; Kraufi 2011.110). This chronological priority of monochrome pottery has also been confirmed in the Adriatic-Mediterranean Fig. 4. View of Vlusha. complex of the Early Neolithic, where the monochrome pottery layer was followed after a hiatus by an Impresso layer {Müller 1988.219-220; 1991.354). These similarities provide indications of the cultural and chronological affiliation of Vlusha with the wider Aegean-Balkan region, as well as connecting the Neo-lithisation process of this area to that of the Aegean regions. The simple monochrome pottery at Vlusha IIa, weakly fired and dark grey in colour, as well as the lack of Impresso pottery, suggest that Vlusha IIa preceded the Konispol Ilia layer which yielded Im-presso pottery. In this context, Vlusha IIa seems to be parallel with Sidar C Base (Corfu) and Skarin Sa-mograd I {Central Dalmatia). Based on this chronological priority of Vlusha IIa preceding the other Early Neolithic cultures in Albania, as well as its analogies with contemporaneous Balkan cultures {Todo-rova 2003.264), we believe that this culture, originating in Anatolia, may be considered a representative of the earliest Neolithic that arrived in Albania. However, since excavations at this site remain limited, future investigations are required to fully clarify the picture. The strong Mesolithic tradition supports the idea that pre-Neolithic groups were involved in the Neolithisation of the region. On the other hand, the presence of coarse monochrome pottery, known from some other Early Neolithic sites in the Southern Balkans, seems to indicate that the first farmers arrived in this part of Albania through the first wave of Neolithisation, known as 'Monochrome' Neolithic. It appears that two different populations lived together at this settlement, the indigenous groups and the newcomers, undergoing processes of assimilation and integration. According to the archaeological evidence, we believe that small migratory groups were involved, having arrived from one or various directions and for seasonal habitation. The newcomers seem to have arrived at Vlusha along the Anatolian-Balkan route, mainly through the settlement of Krainici in the Struma valley, where the monochrome pottery is more similar. In conclusion, I believe that Vlusha IIa represents the 'leap-frog colonisation' model, following Marek Zvelebil's classification {Zvelebil 2001.2). Model no. 2: Konsipol Ilia The second model can be traced back to the site at Konispol {Saranda district), in Southwest Albania, where Early Neolithic Impresso pottery appears immediately above the Mesolithic layer. The Konispol cave is located in the southern extreme of Albania in Fig. 5. Vlusha I profile. 0 50m - <4 '1 > ® ; ^ ~ \ «-it »»swsfc^f^ Fig. 6. Vlusha II profile. the lime formation of the Saragin Mountains, 400m above sea level, near the Ionian Sea (Fig. 7). It was uncovered thanks to systematic excavations carried out by a joint Albanian-American team (199294). According to the relative chronology established by the excavators, the cave provides the best example of a clear stratigraphic sequence from the Upper Paleolithic (Konspol I), Mesolithic (Konispol II), Early Neolithic (Konispol IIIa), Middle Neolithic (Konispol IIIb), Late Neolithic (Konispol IIIc), Eneolithic (Konispol IV), Early Bronze Age (Konispol V), Iron Age (Konispol VI), and Archaic and Hellenistic periods (Konspol VII) (Korkuti et al. 1996.183-202) (Fig. 8). Konispol II The Konispol cave is the settlement where the first compact layer of Mesolithic culture in Albania was discovered, lying immediately above an Upper Palaeolithic layer. That the layer was Mesolithic was demonstrated by the date of each of the two levels within it to the period between 7630+140, calibrated as 7000-6100 calBC (Forenbaher, Miracle 2006. 93, Pl2) and 7510+90 (Korkuti et al. 1996.197), calibrated as 6510-6100 calBC (Forenbaher, Miracle 2006.93, Tab. 2). The Mesolithic tools are of high-quality flint, predominantly red and brown, and with fine, high-quality retouch (Korkuti et al. 1996.185, 197, 200). They comprise of small geometric micro-lithic tools, mainly triangular or trapezoidal scrapers with a fine single blade or terminal retouch, or dogtooth blades with a fine single or bifacial retouch (Pl. 1.9-16). The lithic industry was accompanied by fau-nal finds, including wild goat (Capra ibex) (Korkuti et al. 1996.185, 200). With regard to the technical and morphological aspects, the microlithic finds at Konispol II are similar to those at Vlusha (Korkuti Pl. 3. Monochrome pottery from Vlusha IIa. et al. 1996.186). There are also parallels with finds from several Mesolithic sites in the Balkans, such as the cave at Odmut in Montenegro (Srejovic 1974. 3) and the Francthi cave (phase VIII), despite the small differences in the dimensions of the compared microliths (Perles 1990.Fig. 16). Further analogies Fig. 7. View of Konispol Cave. can be found between Konsipol II and Mesolithic Sidar on Corfu, despite the fact that the small lithic tools at the latter were produced in a slightly less elaborate manner (Sordinas 1969.Fig. 6). Konispol Ilia Most of the stratigraphic data were obtained from trench VIII, where the cultural deposit reached 4.20m. The Neolithic layer, Konispol III, consists of three successive occupation levels, namely Konispol IIIa-c, which correspond to the Early, Middle and Late Neolithic phases, respectively. The Early Neolithic layer, Konispol IIIa, 14C dated to 6170-5800 calBC (Korkuti et al. 1996. 197), and follows immediately after the Mesolithic layer, Konispol II (65106100 calBC). This stratigraphic sequence is of particular interest for the interdisciplinary study of the Neolithi-sation process in the south-western region of Albania. According to the excavators, the Early Neolithic phase at Ko-nispol is represented by pottery that, although of limited quantity, is significant in determining the chronological and cultural character of the deposit in which it was found. It is mostly of coarser fabric, made of a mixture of clay and fine sand and very well fired (Korkuti et al. 1996.198, Pl. I). Light slip appears to have been applied to some of the dishes, while others have a smoothed surface. Red and reddish brown are the predominant colours, while dark grey is also observed in a few cases. Depending on the intensity of firing, the background colour of some fragments appears to have double nuances. Typo-logically, the Early Neolithic pottery at Konispol was not very varied. The most common types of vessels are cups with a straight or slightly inward curved rim, a rare type of cup with a conical trunk, and dishes with a body which gradually narrows towards the neck (Korkuti et al. 1996.198, Pl. I). The Konispol IIIa vessels mostly do not have handles (Pl. 4.1-12). The Impresso pottery connects layer Konispol IIIa with the much wider area of the Early Neolithic Adriatic complex. The ceramic assemblage at Konispol Ilia has parallels with that of Level C Top at Sidar (Corfu), 14C dated to 6410-5990 calBC {Müller 1991.356) or 6390-6020 calBC and 6550-5800 calBC (Forenba-her, Miracle 2006.95, Pl. 3) and with the Impresso ware from Koirospilios (Leu-kas) (Dörpfeld 1927.Tab. 836), as well as with other sites on the Italian side of the Adriatic coast. The discovery of a large number of domesticated animal bones in the Early Neolithic layer at Konispol, mainly of goat and sheep, and a small quantity of carbonised grain seeds (Kor-kuti et al. 1996.201) attest to the emergence of an early form of agricultural and pastoral economy in this area at the time. A complete study of the floral and faunal data recovered from the site, however, is a prerequisite for any closer examination of the question of the Neolithisation of south-western Albania. Konispol fits the model of an autochthonous culture, and has yielded data on the transformation of its Mesolithic hunter-gatherers into Neolithic herders, mainly of sheep and goat. We think that the Ko-nispol cave site has to be included among types of site where food production preceded pottery production, a known scenario in Greece (e.g., Francthi cave, Argis-sa Magula, Nea Nikomedia) and the Eastern Adriatic (e.g., Crvena Stijena, Icoana; Budja 1993.179, 181). We believe that the Impresso pottery came to Konis-pol by way of contacts and exchange between local herders and farmers. We believe this because of the huge prior chronological data from Sidar C Top at 6410-5990 calBC (Korkuti et al. 1996.197; Korkuti 2003.221), or later as 6390-6020 calBC and 65505800 calBC (Forenbaher, Miracle 2006.95, Pl. 3), compared with the Konispol layer with impresso pottery dated to 6170-5800 calBC (Korkuti et al. 1996. 197; Korkuti 2003.221) or 6000-5550 calBC (Forenbaher, Miracle 2006.95, Pl. 3). The Konsipol cave fits the so-called 'regional contact model' involving trade and the exchange of ideas (Zvelebil 2001.2), as well as individual frontier mobility, according to Zvelebil's classification. Model no. 3: Podgorie I-Vashtemi This cultural group is found mainly in South-eastern Albania, with its centre in the Korp basin, where Pl. 4. Impresso pottery from Konispol III. the main sites at Podgorie, Vashtemia and Barp were discovered. Frano Prendi named the group, based on the two most important sites, after his excavation at Podgorie in 1982. At the three settlements, the Early Neolithic cultural deposits lay directly above the sterile levels of the plain, and were not preceded by any other older cultural layer to which the Podgorie I-Vashtemi cultural group could be related. Podgorie has yielded the richest data and shows the clearest development of this Early Neolithic group. On the basis of trial excavations, it has been suggested that the occupied part of the site extended over approx. 2500m2. Aside from Early Neolithic deposits, late material of the Middle Neolithic, Eneolithic, Early and Late Bronze Age was also found. The cultural layer consists of seven building levels (3.10-3.20m in depth), developed over three phases, Ia-c (Fig. 9). The two earliest phases, Podgorie Ia-b, represent the classic stages in the development of this culture, while phase Ic is a stage of decline. The main difference between Podgorie Ia and Pod-gorie Ib is that barbotine decoration appears only in Fig. 8. Konispol profile. phase Ib, a phenomenon that has also been observed in the neighbouring site's respective layers at Vashtemi in the Korga basin. Podgorie Ia phase The earliest phase, Podgorie Ia, corresponds stratigra-phically to horizons I-IV of the cultural deposit. The ceramic groups of this phase are fine monochrome red slipped ware, monochrome dark grey or brownish slipped ware and painted ware (Pls. 5-7). Painted pottery is the main characteristic of this phase, which appears in the following styles and motifs: • white-on-red slipped ware, and in fewer cases, grey-to-black, in a style similar to A3a of the pre-Seklo phase (Wace, Thompson 1912.59); • white-on-red or cream slipped ware, in a style similar to A3P of Neolithic Thessaly (pre-Sesklo phase) (Wace, Thompson 1912.59) (Tabs. 5.1-10; 6.1-13); • polychrome pottery in three colours, mainly white and cream on red slipped ware, in a style similar to B3P of phase Ib of Neolithic Thessaly or the proto-Sesklo phase (Wace, Thompson 1912.59, Pl. VII, 1-16); • brown on red slipped ware, with straight or sinuous linear motifs, and sometimes combined with white motifs on a red ground; • pottery with the entire surface painted white, and dark grey pottery. The Podgorie Ib phase includes the same pottery categories as Podgorie Ia, as follows: white on red painted ware is also present, but in not in the same quantities as in the earlier phase; Impresso pottery increases in frequency compared to the preceding phase; incised ornaments appear very rarely; nail pinching and nail printing techniques can be identified; shallow grooved lines are rare. Red slipped monochrome ware gradually begins to decrease until it almost disappears completely in the following phase Ic. A new phenomenon that is exclusively related to this phase and distinguishes it as a separate stage in the classic development of this culture is the appearance of barbotine decoration. The Podgorie Ic phase refers to the last occupation horizon. The main pottery categories in this phase are: autochrome reddish pottery with brownish and dark grey surfaces; matte red monochrome pottery; Impresso and barbotine pottery; red slipped ware is very rare, while matte white-on-red painted pottery disappears, as well as painted ware and red slipped monochrome ware. The Podgorie Ic phase represents the final stage of development of the Early Neolithic culture of Podgorie I. Podgorie Ia-b has analogies with Anzabegovo-Vrs-nik Ic based on the white-on-red painted pottery with advanced ornamental features, as well as Impresso style pottery and several typical pottery shapes, especially vessels with three legs. It has analogies with Nea Nikomedia in Greece in the white-on-red painted motifs such as triangles, sinuous and zigzag lines, some shapes of the pottery, as well as Impresso decoration, and with Thessaly (Presesklo and the beginning of Sesklo) in the white-on-red painted ware, similar to that of the proto-Sesklo phase, the typology of several dishes, and also with Hoga ^esme III in the white-on-red painted pottery with advanced ornamental features, Impresso pottery and incision motifs. On the other hand, white-on-red painted pottery also links Podgorie Ia-b with Kovagevo, Asagi Pinar, Hagilar etc. The polychrome pottery distinguishes Podgorie I-Vashtemi from other similar cultures, placing this group chronologically at a later developmental stage of the Early Neolithic. Actually, the earliest stages of this cultural group are not known in Albania. On the other hand, its analogies and similarities, mentioned above, suggest that this culture could be considered as deriving from other Early Neolithic cultural groups of the Anatolian-Balkan regions. It seems that the Pod-gorie I culture represents the third wave of Neolithisation in Albania, which arrived here by the Anatolian-Balkan route according to its cultural similarities to other neighbouring Early Neolithic cultures in Thessaly, Aegean Macedonia, Thrace and North Western Anatolia. This model of the spread of the 'Neolithic package' is included in so-called 'folk migration' as described by Zve-lebil (2001.2), which stands for the movement of a population from region A to region B, and the replacement of the old local populations, which also produces genetic/cultural changes at the same time. It appears that only during this phase were farming communities fully established in Albania. During this phase (II1) we can see the extension of Neolithic groups into the deep hinterlands of Central and Eastern Albania. A strong Adriatic impulse moves from the southwest (e.g., from Konispol) to the east, establishing new sites of later chronological phases, such as the settlement caves at Blaz and Nezir (Mat), as well as the settlement cave at Katundas (Berat). The Blaz cave settlement was excavated by Frano Prendi and Zhaneta Andrea from 1978 to 1979 (Prendi, Andrea 1981.19-21). Its second layer is characterised by coarse pottery, with grey, black or brown burnished exterior and especially Impresso pottery, which predominates. Impressions are the most common technique of pottery decoration. At Blaz II, three types of Adriatic pottery were represented, according to a classification carried out by Johannes Müller (1991.325-326). Type A Impresso predominates and covers the entire surface of vessels. In Dalmatia, this type of decoration has been dated to between 6100-5800 BC (Müller 1991.327). Cardium impresso is quite rare; only four sherds have been collected. Cardium impresso, including type B Adriatic Impresso, is dated to 5800-5600 BC (Müller 1991.327). Only one example of type C Impresso, known as tremolo, with a wave motif, was Pl. 5. White-on-red painted pottery from Podgorie Ia. found at Blaz II. In the Eastern Adriatic, this is dated to 5650-5600 BC (Müller 1991.327). Barbotine pottery (5-6%) has an ochre or reddish colour. Barbotine was applied in organised lines. This pottery does change the Adriatic character of the site, but shows the influence of the Starčevo IIb culture in the southwest. In this layer, a small cul-tic altar, painted dark brown, belonging to the Starčevo IIb culture, was found next to a rhyton fragment belonging to the Adriatic complex. A similar culture has been discovered at the Nezir cave settlement near Blaz. The Blaz II phase is almost contemporaneous with Zelena Pečina III-Obre I (2nd phase) -Starčevo IIb, as well as Adriatic I (Impresso-cardi-um II). Katundas (Berat) was excavated by Muzafer Korkuti in 1986 (Korkuti 1995a; 1995b.84). The Early Neolithic culture is characterised by Impresso pottery quite similar to Blaz II, barbotine ware, and semi-coarse pottery in reddish colour. Only one fragment of a white-on-red painted vessel of Podgorie Ia style was found. This is important in chronological terms. Impresso pottery is the main characteristic of Katun-das I, which marks the eastern border of the continental areas in which Adriatic elements had arrived. On the other hand, during the phase (III1) in the north-eastern part of Albania, we can follow an Anatolian-Balkan wave from Starčvo IIb culture which reached all the way to Burim I (Diber) during its earliest southerly extension (III1) and to Kolsh I (Kukes) during its greatest extension towards the southern and south-eastern Balkans (III2). The earlier Burim I phase is near the end of Starčevo I and the beginning of Starčevo IIa, the same as Anzabego-vo-Vrsnik Ib and Presesklo, while the older Kolsh I phase is equal to Starčevo IIb-Rudnik III-Anzabego-vo-Vrsnik III-Galabnik III and Sesklo (Fig. 3). The Early Neolithic cultures developed in close relation with neighbouring cultures, which was reflected by the interaction of a number of cultural elements of one group with another. This can be explained by the direct influence or movement of groups of people from one region to another. According to the absolute chronology of Early Neolithic culture in Albania, only two Early Neolithic sites have produced radiocarbon dates so far, as follows: • the beginnings of Konispol IIIa; a layer with Im-presso pottery finds that yielded domestic animal bones (sheep and goat horns) (trench IX/20), dated to 6030-5710 and 6170-5800 calBC (Foren-baher, Miracle 2006.95, Pl. 3); • the end of Konsipol IIIa, a layer which contained Impresso ware (trench IX/18), dated to 58405450 and 6000-5550 calBC (Forenbaher, Miracle 2006.95, Pl. 3). Fig. 9. Podgorie I profile. According to the relative chronology, the three phases of Neolithisation in Albania produce the following picture: I. Vlusha IIa = Škarin Samograd I - Sidar C base -proto-Sesklo (partly Fruh-Keramikum phase); II. Konispol IIIa = Sidar C Top - Škarin Samograd II; III. Podgorie I = Anzabegovo-Vrsnik I (mainly phase Ic) - Veluska-Porodin I-II - Starčevo II - Nea Ni-komedia - Presesklo (Magulica phase) and the beginning of the Early Sesklo-Cavdar phase. Conclusions It is necessary to summarise briefly the archaeological evidence about the three essential points of the Neolithisation of Albania discussed above. The present state of knowledge of this period allows for several conclusions to be drawn about the chronological, cultural and genetic aspects, despite the hypothetical nature of some of them, which could change with further investigation. Thus far, no evidence has been found of the presence of a PPN horizon in Albania. The Blaz I phase, which lacks pottery, and is stratigraphically positioned after a hiatus below the Early Neolithic layer Blaz II, which contained Impresso pottery, cannot be securely associated with a proto-Neolithic phase with forms of productive economy; on the contrary, it pertains to the Epipalaeolithic period. Also, the attempt to consider the proto-Neolithic layer 13 in sector A12 at Sovjan (Korga basin) as the Epipaleoli-thic is based on the absence of pottery (Lera et al. 2007-2008.45). However, a Neolithic period without pottery has not been observed on the Eastern Adriatic coast of Dalmatia, where all the Early Neolithic settlements have produced pottery (Batovic 1972.18; Benac 1971.336). According to the archaeological research in Albania, we can refer to three different models of the Neoli-thisation process: O The earliest appearance of Early Neolithic culture in Albania is related to the settlement at Vlusha (phase IIa). This culture is characterised by dark grey monochrome pottery, and by flint microliths of a Mesolithic tradition. In this early phase of its development, Impresso pottery does not appear at Vlusha IIa, which ap- peared in the second phase of the development of the Early Neolithic period, Vlusha II b. This stratigraphy is similar to that at Sidar on Corfu and Skarin Samograd in Dalmatia, where similar monochrome pottery layers were covered by an Impresso pottery layer in the Adriatic style (Müller 1988.259; Sordinas 1969. 401). This suggests that, on the territory of Albania, as in continental Greece, Impresso ware must not be considered the earliest type of Neolithic pottery. This is also supported by other sites with Impresso pottery finds discovered in Albania, which without exception date to a later stage of the Early Neolithic than that of Vlusha's monochrome ware. The particularities of the latter attest to its local evolution, but there is no evidence to support an autochthonous origin of the technology required to produce this pottery. On the other hand, if we were to refer to a possible affinity between the pottery of Vlusha IIa and the earliest monochrome pottery of Anatolia (Hagilar IX, Bargin Höyük; Gerritsen et al. 2013. 57, 70, Fig. 17-18), Thessaly (Frühkeramikum; Milojcic 1959.5, Pl. 5) and Greece in general (Achilleon I and Sesklo I; Todorova 2003.264; and the earliest phase of Ela-tea; Sordinas 1969.406), Southwest Bulgaria (Krai-nici; Stefanova 1996.16- 17, Tab. I,1-4; Todorova 2003.264) and Northeast Bulgaria (Kuprivec, Pomi-shtica, Poljanica plato; Stefanova 1996.17), or the Central Balkans (Divostin; Krauß 2011.10), the possibility of the south-eastern origin of its technology tradition being in Anatolia and the Southeast Balkans moving north-west towards the Adriatic through de-mic diffusion and chaining transmission must not be excluded. Therefore, we believe that Vlusha IIa could be considered as representative of the first and earliest Anatolian influences in Albania, where indigenous populations with Mesolithic traditions have been present. With regard to the dynamics of the Neolithisation process of this settlement, this phenomenon would attest to the arrival in Vlusha of small groups of migratory farmers who brought the technology of pottery production and were influential in the acculturation of the indigenous Mesolithic population. Given the importance of the Mesolithic lithic tool industry at Vlusha IIa, it is possible to con- Pl. 6. Photos of white-on-red painted pottery from Podgorie Ia. clude that a hybrid process of the Neolithisation of Mesolithic peoples occurred at this site, which formed its culture through the co-existence of the indigenous and migratory populations which were associated with the assimilation and integration processes. In this context, Vlusha Ila would be included in the so-called 'leap-frog' model of colonisation (Zvelebil 2001.2). However, the transition process from the Mesolithic to the Early Neolithic, for example, from Mesolithic hunters to Early Neolithic herders and farmers at Vlusha IIa, is far from completely understood. There is a lack of evidence of whether the bearers of the Early Neolithic culture at Vlusha IIa learned the Neolithic way of life, which is why we believe that this settlement would have been used only seasonally. However, whatever the case may be, this remains an aspect which requires further investigation. © The second phase of Neolithisation in Albania refers to the Konispol III phase, where we find the model of an indigenous settlement that developed directly from the Mesolithic, supporting the indigenous Pl. 7. Polycrome pottery from Podgorie Ia. scenario. This is supported by the stratigraphic sequence at Konispoil, where the Early Neolithic layer with Impresso pottery of Konispol IIIa was deposited immediately, with no hiatus, above the Mesolithic layer of Konispol II. Konispol IIIa is contemporaneous with the Eastern Adriatic cultures of Sidar C Top, Skarin Samograd II, Crvena Stijena III, Zelena Pecina III, and Smilcic I. It was the Impresso ware which helped us to classify Konispol IIIa as the earliest representative of Adriatic influences in Albania, originating from the Eastern Mediterranean. We believe that the Impresso pottery at Konispol was acquired by cultural diffusion and acculturation processes from its closest neighbour, Sidar C Top on Corfu Island, only 35km away, where this kind of pottery was 14C dated to 6410-5990 calBC (Müller 1991. 356). This date is earlier than the date for the Impresso pottery from Konispol IIIa phase, which is dated to 6170-5800 and 6000-5550 calBC (Korkuti et al. 1996.197; Korkuti 2003.221; Forenbaher, Miracle 2006.95, Tab. 3). In conclusion, we can say that Konispol IIIa would be included in the so-called 'regional contact' category (Zvelebil 2001.2), which entails trade and exchange relations with neighbouring communities, including the exchange of ideas and innovations. The second wave of Neolithisation seems to have taken an alternative route via the Aegean and Ionian Seas to the coast of the Ionian Sea, with first farmers arriving from the Eastern Mediterranean region. © The third phase of Neolithisation in Albania refers to the second Anatolian wave, characterised by monochrome red slipped ware, and red-on-white painted pottery, represented by the cultural group of Podgorie I-Vashtemi, while polychrome pottery was found only at the Podgorie I site. This quite advanced Early Neolithic ware was not preceeded in the Kor-ga basin by an earlier development phase. Meanwhile, earlier phases of monochrome red slipped ware and red-on-white painted monochrome have been discovered in Western Anatolia (Erdogu 2005.97), Eastern Thrace (Hoga ^e§me and A§agi Pinar; Ozdogan 2003.351; Perles 2003; 2005.286), Aegean Macedonia (Nea Nikomedia), Eastern Macedonia (An-zabegovo-Vrsnik I), Pelagonia (Velus-ka-tumba I) etc. These analogies lead us to the conclusion that the bearers of this cultural wave seem to have travelled along the Anatolian-Balkan route. This migration towards Southeast Albania included a third model of Neolithisation, so-called "folk migration,v as described by Zvelebil (2001.2). During this advanced Early Neolithic phase in the Korga basin, ritual secondary burials were carried out, as well as the differentiation of grave goods contained in them, which means there were socioeconomic inequalities. Similar cases have been reported in Nea Nikomedia in Aegean Macedonia (Rodden 1962.286, Tab. XLII; Theocharis 1981.Fig. 20; Perles 2001.265, Fig. 12, 3; Seferiedes 1995.89), in Mavropigi-Filosari in Western Macedonia (Karamit-rou-Mentessidi et al. 2013.5, Fig. 7; Papathanasiou, Richards 2011.257, Fig. 7), dated to 6300-6000 calBC (Papathanasiou, Richards 2011.257), in Western Thessaly (Prodrom; Stratouli et al. 2010.96), Turkish Thrace (Hoca ^e§me; Seferiedes 1995.89), and in Aegean Anatolia (Burgin Hoyuk; Roodenberg et al. 2013.1-10, Fig. 2-4) etc. On the other hand, based on some clay biconoids (Renfrew 2003.413), known as sling-stones or sling shots, discovered at Podgori-Vashtemi group, as well as on the other Early Neolithic cultural groups in Pe-lagonia (Simoska, Sanev 1975.47, Pl. II, 7; Naumov et al. 2009.Pl. 72, 7; Kitanovski et al. 1987.14, Pl. III, 2), Thessaly (Sesklo; Wace, Thomson 1912.Fig. 62), North-East Greece (Sitagroi I-II; Renfrew 2003. 413-414, Pl. 10), Aegean Macedonia (Nea Nikome-dia), Anatolia (^ukurigi Hoyuk; Bargin Hoyuk - Ger-ritsen et al. 2013.88, Fig. 22, 2; Ulugak Vb - 0in-giroglu 2013.71, Fig. 4, c) etc., we believe that war and conflicts appeared in this phase of the Early Neolithic. According to the dominant opinion, such biconoids are Early Neolithic weapons (Rodden 1962. 285; Korkuti 1982.113; Seferiades 1995.90). The appearance of conflicts and war at the end of the Early Neolithic would also be supported by the earliest prehistoric fortification, documented at Hoga gesme IV (Ozdogan 1998.439, Fig. 3.a-b; 2003. 340), as well as the ramparts reinforced with palisade that emerged at A§agi Pinar in Southeast Thrace (Ozdogan 2003.342). This new cultural change leads us to the conclusion that during this period, the real Neolithic way of life had become established in the Korga basin and other regions of Albania; it was only during this phase that farmers really become completely Neolithicised in Albania. The above picture, and especially the cultural similarities of Podgorie I to other neighbouring Early Neolithic cultures in Thessaly, Aegean Macedonia, Thrace and North Western Anatolia, lead us to the conclusion that the first and the third wave of Neo-lithisation may have been connected with the Anatolian-Balkan route. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- The author thanks Prof. Mihael Budja (Ljubljana) for his invitation to take part in the 20th Neolithic Seminar in Ljubljana to present a paper about the Neo-lithisation process in Albania. I would also like to thank Prof. Eszter Banffy (Frankfurt am Main) for her useful discussion about the subject of this paper, as well as Dr. Christoph Rummel (Frankfurt am Main) for the correction of the translation of this paper. References Banffy E. 2005. Mesolithic-Neolithic contacts as reflected in ritual finds. Documenta Praehistorica 32: 73-86. Batovic S. 1972. Problemi neolitika na istočnoj Jadranskoj obali. IX. Kongres Arheologa Jugoslavije. Materijali XII: 17-24. Benac A. 1971. Quelques aspects de la néolithisation dans les Balkans du nord-ouest. Premieres communautés paysannes en medierranée occidentale: 335-341. Brami M., Heyd V. 2011. The origins of Europe's first farmers: The role of Hacilar and Western Anatolia, fifty years on. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 86(2): 165-206. Budja M. 1993. Neolithisation of Europe. The Slovene Aspect. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 21:179-193. 1999. The transition to farming in Mediterranean European indigenous response. Documenta Praehistorica 26: 119-141. 2001. The transition to farming in Southeast Europe: perspectives from pottery. Documenta Praehistorica 28: 27-47. ^ilingiroglu 2005. The concept of "Neolithic package": considering its meaning and applicability. Documenta Praehistorica 32:1-14. Dörpfeld W. 1927. Alt Ithaka. Ein Beitrag zur HomerFrage. Gräfelfing. München. Erdogu B. 2005. Visualizing Neolithic landscape: Archaeological Theory in the Aegean Islands. In C. Lichter (ed.), How Did Farming Reach Europe. Anatolian-European Relations from the Second Half of the 7th through the First Half of the 6th Millennium calBC. Proceedings of the International Workshop Istanbul, 20-22May 2004. BYZAS 2. Veroffentlichungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, 59-74. Yayinlari. Istanbul: 95-105. Forenbaher S., Miracle P. S. 2006. The spread of farming in the Eastern Adriatic. Documenta Praehistorica 33:89100. Gerritsen F. A., Özbal R. and Thissen L. C. 2013. The earliest Neolithic Levels at Barcin Höyük, Northwestern Turkey. Anatolica XXXIX: 53-92. Karamitrou-Mentessidi G., Efstratiou N., Kozlowski J. K., Kaczanowska M., Maniatis Y., Curci A., Michalopoulou S., Papathanasiou A. and Valamoti S. M. 2013. New evidence on the beginning of farming in Greece: the Early Neolithic settlement of Mavropigi in western Macedonia (Greece). Antiquity 87(336): 3-18. Kitanovski B., Simoska D. and Todorovic J. 1987. Radin Dol - Neolitska Naselba kaj Prilep. Macedoniae Acta Ar-chaeologica 7-8: 7-29. Korkuti M. 1982. Vashtemia-nje vendbanim i neolitit te hershem. Iliria XII: 91-118. 1995a. Paleoliti ne Shqiperi. Iliria XXV: 5-15. 1995b. Neolithikum und Chalkolithikum in Albanien. Internationale Interakademische Kommission für die Erforschung der Vorgeschichte des Balkans: Monographien. IV, Seite(n) 281; Tafeln I-LXXXII; Tafeln 1-121. Philipp von Zabern. Mainz. 2003. Researches and Studies of Prehistory in Albania. In D. V. Grammenos (ed.), Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. N. 3. Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. Thessaloniki: 205-255. Korkuti M., Petrusso K., Bejko L., Harrold F., Ellwood B., Hansen J., Russell N. and Bottema S. 1996. Shpella e Ko-nispolit (Konsipol Cave, Albania), 1992-1994. Iliria XXVI: 183-224. Krauß R. 2011. On the "Monochrome" Neolithic in Southeast Europe. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Menschen - Kulturen - Traditionen. Forschungsclu-ster 1. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Rahden/Westf.: 109121. Lera P., Touchais G. and Oberweiler C. 2007-2008. Ndih-mesa e germimeve te Sovjanit per kronologjine absolute te prehistorise shqiptare. Iliria XXXIII: 39-50. Milojcic V. 1959. Ergebnisse der deutschen Ausgraben in Thessalien (1953-1958). Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums in Mains 6:1-56. Müller J. 1988. Skarin Samograd - eine Früheneolithische Station mit monochromer Ware und Impresso Keramik an der Ostadria. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 18:219-235. 1991. Die ostadriatische Impresso-Kultur: Zeitliche Gliederung und kulturelle Einbindung. Germania 69(2): 311-358. Naumov G., Fidanovski L., Tolevski I. and Ivkovska A. 2009. Neolitskite Zaednici vo Republika Makedonija. Dante. Skopje. Nikolova L. 1998. Neolithic sequence: the upper Stryma valley in western Thrace (with an appendix: radiocarbon dating of the Balkan Neolithic). Documenta Praehistori-ca 25:99-131. Oross K., Banffy. E. 2009. Three successive waves of Neolithisation: LBK development in Transdanubia. Documenta Praehistorica 36:175-189. Ozdogan M. 1995. Neolithization of Europe: A view from Anatolia. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 22:25-61. 1998. Hoca Çe§me: An Early Neolithic anatolian colony in Balkans? In. P. Anreiter, L. Bartosiewicz, E. Jerem and W. Meid (eds.), Man and the Animal World. In memoriam §ândor Bôkônyi. Archaeolingua 8. Budapest: 435-451. 2003. The Prehistory of Northwestern Turkey. In D. V. Grammenos (ed.), Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece, no. 3. Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. Thessaloniki: 329-370. Papathanasiou A., Richards M. P. 2011. Anthropological remains from the early sites at Mavropigi, Xirolimni and Pontokomi of the Early Neolithic in Western Macedonia. The Archaeological Work in Upper Macedonia 1:257275. Perlès C. (ed.) 1990. Les industries lithiques taillées de Franchthi (Argolide, Grèce). Tome II: Les industries du Mésolithique et Néolithique initial. Excavations at Franchthi Cave, Greece. Indiana University Press. Blooming-ton/Indianapolis. 2001. The Early Neolithic in Greece. The first farming communities in Europe. Cambridge World Archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 2003. An alternate (and old-fashioned) view of Neolithisation in Greece. Documenta Praehistorica 30:99113. 2005. From the Near East to Greece: Let's reverse the focus cultural elements that didn't transfer. In C. Lichter (ed.), How did farming reach Europe. Anatolian-European Relations from the Second Half of the 7th through the First Half of the 6th Millennium calBC. Proceedings of the International Workshop Istanbul, 20-22May 2004. BYZAS 2. Veroffentlichungen des Deu- tschen Archaologischen Instituts, 59-74. Yayinlari. Istanbul: 275-290. Prendi F. 1982. The Prehistory of Albania. The Cambridge Ancient History III(I): 187-192. 1990. Le Neolithique ancien en Albanie. Germania 68 (2): 399-426. Prendi F., Andrea A. 1981. Te dhena te reja mbi neolitin ne Shqiperi. Iliria XI: 15-40. Renfrew C. 2003. Special Clay Objects: Cylinders, Stamp Seals, Counters, Biconoids and Spheres. In E. S. Elster, C. Renfrew (eds.), Prehistoric Sitagroi, Excavations in Northeast Greece, 1968-1970. Vol. 2. The Final Report. Monumenta Archaeologica 20. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. Los Angeles: 403-414. Rodden R. J. 1962. Excavations at the Early Neolithic Site at Nea Nikomedia, Greek Macedonia (1961 season). Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society XXVIII: 267-288. Roodenberg M. S. A., Gerritsen A. F. and Ozbal R. 2013. Neolithic burials from Barcin Hoyuk: The 2007-2012 excavations seasons. Anatolica XXXIX: 1-19. Schubert H. 2005. Everyone's Black Box-Where does the European ornamention come from. In C. Lichter (ed.), How did farming reach Europe. Anatolian-European Relations from the Second Half of the 7th through the First Half of the 6th Millennium calBC. Proceedings of the International Workshop Istanbul, 20-22May 2004. BYZAS 2. Veroffentlichungen des Deutschen Archaologi-schen Instituts, 59-74. Yayinlari. Istanbul: 239-253. Seferiedes M. L. 1995. The Neolithic of Greek Macedonia: from Nea Nikomedia to Dikili Tash. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 22: 83-105. Simoska D., Sanev V. 1975. Neolitka Naselba Veluska Tumba kai Bitola. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 1:25-88. Sordinas A. 1969. Investigations of the prehistory of Corfu during 1964-1966. Balkan Studies 10(2): 402-427. 2003. The "Sidarian": maritime Mesolithic non-geometric microlithics in western Greece. In N. Galanidou, C. Perles (eds.), The Greek Mesolithic. Problems and Perspectives. Monograph of the British School at Athens 10. London: 89-97. Srejovic D. 1974. The Odmut cave. A new face of the Me-soneolithique Culture of the Balkan peninsula. Archeolo-gica Jugoslavica 15:3-6. Stefanova T. 1996. A comparative analysis of pottery from the "Monochrome Early Neolithic Horizon" and "Karano-vo I Horizon" and the problems of the neolithization of Bulgaria. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 23: 15-38. Stratouli G., Triantaphyllou S., Bekiaris T. and Kastikari-dis N. 2010. The manipulation of death: a burial area at the Neolithic Settlement of Avgi, NW Greece. Documenta Praehistorica 37:95-104. Theocharis D. R. 1981. Neolithikos Politismos. National Bank of Greece. Athens. Todorova H. 2003. Prehistory of Bulgaria. In D. V. Gram-menos (ed.), Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. N. 3. Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. Thessaloniki: 257-289. Wace A. J., Thompson M. S. 1912. Prehistoric Thessaly. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Zvelebil M. 1995. Neolithization in Eastern Europe: A view from the frontier. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleoli-tika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 22: 107-151. 2001. The Agricultural Transition on the origins of Neolithic Society in Europe. Documenta Praehistorica 28: 1-26. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) 'Pre-Neolithic' in Southeast Europe: a Bulgarian perspective Maria Gurova1, Clive Bonsall2 1 National Institute of Archaeology with Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, BG gurovam@yahoo.fr 2 School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh, UK C.Bonsall@ed.ac.uk ABSTRACT - This paper discusses why large areas of the central and northern Balkans lack evidence of Mesolithic settlement and what implications this holds for future research into the Neolithization of the region. A marked shift in site distribution patterns between Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic is interpreted as a response to changing environmental conditions and resource availability. It is suggested that some important questions of the pattern, processes and timing of the transition to farming across the Balkan Peninsula may only be answered through new archaeological surveys of the Lower Danube valley and exploration of submerged landscapes along the Black Sea, Aegean and Adriatic coasts. IZVLEČEK - V članku razpravljamo o vzrokih za pomanjkanje dokazov o mezolitski poselitvi velikega dela srednjega in severnega Balkana ter o posledicah, ki jih lahko imajo te ugotovitve za prihodnje raziskave neolitizacije v regiji. V poselitvenih vzorcih med poznim paleolitikom in mezolitikom smo prepoznali premik, ki ga razlagamo kot odziv na spremembe v okoljskih pogojih in razpoložljivosti naravnih virov. Predlagamo, da je mogoče na nekatera pomembna vprašanja, povezana z vzorci, procesi in ritmom prehoda h kmetovanju na Balkanskem polotoku, odgovoriti le z novimi arheološkimi pregledi Spodnjega Podonavja in z raziskovanjem potopljenih pokrajin ob obalah Črnega, Egejskega ter Jadranskega morja. KEY WORDS - Balkans; Mesolithic; demographic change; Neolithization; exchange networks Introduction While there is general agreement that the Neolithic farming system was introduced to Southeast Europe from the Near East, just how farming reached and spread through the Balkans remains an important topic of discussion. Was agriculture brought in primarily by Anatolian farmers who replaced the resident hunter-gatherers, or did farming advance largely through the spread of ideas and technology rather than people? How many waves of expansion were there and what routes were followed? In those areas where a Mesolithic presence has been documented - in parts of Greece, Dalmatia and the Iron Gates, for example - indigenous hunter-gather- ers are sometimes seen as active participants in the Neolithization process. Conversely, where the Mesolithic has proved difficult to identify (as in Bulgaria) the Neolithic is assumed to have begun with the arrival of immigrant farmers who entered a landscape that was 'almost completely uninhabited in the early Holocene' (Todorova 1995.82). In this paper we consider why large areas of the central and northern Balkans, especially Bulgaria, lack evidence of Mesolithic settlement and what implications this holds for future research into the Neolithi-zation of the region. DOI>10.4312\dp.41.5 95 Where were the foragers? In the context of a discussion of forager-farmer interactions, Marek Zve-lebil and Malcolm Lillie (2000) published a map of Southeast Europe on which they proposed several 'areas of concentrated hunter-gatherer settlement' north of the Aegean (Fig. 1). In the central and northern Balkans areas of high Mesolithic population density were identified in the Iron Gates of the Danube, the northeast Adriatic and upper Sava River catchment, the southern Dinaric Mountains, and the Danube Delta and neighbouring Black Sea littoral. The only one of these 'population clusters' for which there is strong supporting evidence is the Iron Gates, where some twenty Mesolithic sites have been identified along the banks of the Danube in Romania and Serbia, the majority of which also have Early Neolithic occupations (Boroneanf, Bonsall 2012.Fig. 1; Boric, Price 2013). Of the other Mesolithic 'population clusters', the northeast Adriatic and Dinaric Mountains are represented mainly by cave and rockshelter sites; there are no large open-air sites equivalent to those in Iron Gates. Zvelebil and Lillie's 'Danube Delta-Black Sea cluster' appears to rest on the evidence of occasional finds of supposedly Mesolithic artefacts from Romanian Dobrogea (Bolomey 1978; Paunescu 1987) and the Pobitite Kamani (Dikilitash) area some 20km to the west of Varna in northeast Bulgaria (Dzhambazov, Margos 1960; Gatsov 1989). The Pobitite Kamani area is an extensive heathland developed on Lower Eocene sands. Lithic artefacts were collected from surface blow-outs and erosion scars over an area of more than 50km2, and the assemblage of over 12 000 artefacts is generally regarded as a 'palimpsest' resulting from human activity at different time periods. Several authors have identified a 'Mesolithic' component within the assemblage, including micro-liths. Published illustrations indicate the presence of curved backed and geometric forms (including trapezes). The curved backed pieces and some geometric elements find their closest Balkan parallels in the Epigravettian, notably at sites in the Iron Gates reach of the lower Danube valley (Gatsov 1989). The trapezes from Pobitite Kamani often have straight truncations and appear to have been made Fig. 1. 'Areas of concentrated hunter-gatherer settlement' in South-east Europe (after Zvelebil, Lillie 2000.Fig. 3.4). on blades. In the Balkans trapezes of this type are characteristic of the Final Mesolithic ('Castelnovian') of the circum-Adriatic region, which has been interpreted as a region-specific tradition that originated in North Africa (Perrin 2012). To the east of the Di-naric Mountains, however, blade and trapeze industries appear to be absent from Late Mesolithic contexts, for example from sites along the Lower Danube in the Iron Gates (C. Bonsall, pers. obs.). In contrast trapezes with straight truncations and made on blades are a frequent component of Early and Middle Neolithic sites throughout the Balkans (e.g., Lichardus et al. 2000; Zlateva-Uzunova 2009; Gurova 2014). The trapezes that occur sporadically in the Mesolithic of Franchthi Cave in the Peloponnese differ in that they are often made on flakes (vs blades) and have sinuous truncations (Perles 2001). The balance of probability, therefore, is that the trapezes from Pobitite Kamani are of Neolithic and not Late Mesolithic date. The bigger picture Figure 2 compares the locations of radiocarbon dated Upper Palaeolithic (c. 40-11.7 ka calBP) and Late Mesolithic (c. 9.2-8.0 ka calBP) sites in the Balkans. The map is based on published sources that were available to us at the time of the Ljubljana Seminar in 2013. The list of sites may not be exhaustive, but we suggest the overall picture is broadly representative. The respective distributions are strikingly different. Upper Palaeolithic sites (the majority of them in Fig. 2.14C dated Upper Palaeolithic and Late Mesolithic sites in the Balkans. caves or rockshelters) are found in most areas of the Balkans, including deep into the interior. In contrast, Late Mesolithic sites have a distinctly peripheral distribution within the Balkans, most sites being located within 50km of the sea or the Danube (by far the largest river in the region). The absence of Mesolithic sites from large areas of the Balkans has sometimes been attributed to a lack of research - including an emphasis on cave investigation at the expense of extensive, open-air survey - or the effects of geomorphological processes on site survival or visibility. To some extent, these factors must have affected Mesolithic site distributions. For example, the surveys and salvage excavations that led to the discovery of the Iron Gates sites between 1964 and 1983 did not extend downriver of the Iron Gates II dam, and this may account for the lack of Mesolithic (and indeed Early Neolithic) sites along the Bulgarian section of the lower Danube Valley. Where targeted surveys have been undertaken, as in parts of Greece (Runnels 2009), Albania (Runnells et al. 2004), Istria (Komso 2006) and Slovenia (Frelih 1986; Mlekuz 2001), open-air Mesolithic sites have been discovered where previously only cave sites were known. However, this research has had little or no impact on the predominantly peripheral distribution of Late Mesolithic sites within the Balkans. On the other hand, there are aspects of the Mesoli-thic distribution in the Balkans that are difficult to explain in terms of variable research intensity or taphonomic processes. One is the absence of Mesolithic remains from the many cave sites in Bulgaria that have produced evidence of Upper Palaeolithic occupation (Fig. 2) - sites that because of lower sea levels during the Last Glaciation were even further inland than they are today. Another is the 'Late Mesolithic gap' that is a common feature of radiocarbon sequences in caves located in peripheral areas of the Balkan Peninsula. Caves that were used in the Early Mesoli-thic often lack evidence of occupation during part or all of the Late Mesolithic. At Edera Cave in the Trieste Karst at the head of the Adriatic no activity is recorded between the end of the Early Mesolithic c. 9.0 ka calBP and the earliest Neolithic c. 7.6 ka calBP (Biagi et al. 2008). Similarly, at Pupicina in Istria there is a gap of over 2000 years between the latest Mesolithic and earliest Neolithic occupations (Forenbaher, Miracle 2005; 2006; Forenbaher et al. 2013). Paolo Biagi and Mi-chela Spataro (2001) attributed the 'radiocarbon gap' in sites like Edera and Pupicina to a general Mesolithic population decline and the disappearance of hunter-gatherers from whole areas of the Balkans. There is a clear demographic trend from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Late Mesolithic in the Balkans. The various lines of evidence suggest that the interior of the Balkan Peninsula, which was extensively exploited in the Upper Palaeolithic, was not heavily populated by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers especially in the period after c. 9.0 ka calBP. However, this does not necessarily signify an overall population decline. Why the demographic shift? Palaeovegetation records for the Balkans (e.g., Hut-tunen et al. 1992; Connor et al. 2013; Magyari et al. 2013; Tonkov et al. 2014) show fluctuations between semi-desert, steppe and forest-steppe ecosystems between c. 37.5 and 10.5 ka calBP, corresponding to the Upper Palaeolithic and initial Mesolithic, followed by a major expansion of temperate forest during the early Holocene (Fig. 3). Forest composition and canopy cover were strongly influenced by climate, altitude and soils, but crucially much of the Fig. 3. Pollen diagram from Kupena II, western Rhodopes Mountains (redrawn from Huttunen et al. 1992). central and northern Balkans below 700m a.s.l. was covered by closed canopy deciduous woodlands by 9.0 ka calBP, if not earlier (Willis 1994). Compared to steppe (grassland) environments, temperate forests have much lower ungulate biomass (Discamps 2014). Dense canopy cover also provides concealment for animals hence protection from predators, which further impacts on the productivity of hunting (Fig. 4). Closed canopy forest is also likely to have posed significant challenges for inter-group communication and participation in viable mating networks. Moreover, closed canopy forest is relatively poor in edible plants (Diamond 1997; contra Clarke 1976; Zvelebil 1994). In temperate forest ecosystems the highest ungulate and edible plant biomasses are found at forest margins, for example at the upland treeline, in areas recently burned by wildfires, or along sea, lake and river coasts and associated wetlands. Overall, early Holocene forest expansion across the Balkans would have resulted in a substantial reduction in carrying capacity for human populations reliant on hunting and gathering. In some areas of Europe the reduction in animal biomass was com- pensated for by the availability of aquatic resources in inland rivers, lakes and wetlands. The Balkans, however, have few large rivers or navigable waterways; while lakes are comparatively few, often small and shallow, or at high elevations. The region lacks the numerous glacial lakes and connecting waterways of some other inland regions of Europe, which provided both aquatic food resources and communication routes for Mesolithic populations. Across Mesolithic Europe as a whole there was a trend of increasing exploitation of aquatic resources against the background of early Holocene forest expansion. This trend is seen in site distribution patterns and archaeofaunal inventories, as well as in C- and N-isotope values of human remains, to the extent that later Mesolithic populations in many parts of Europe are perhaps more accurately characterized as 'fishers' rather than hunter-gatherers. Given the poverty of inland aquatic resources in the Balkans, the main demographic consequence of early Holocene forest expansion was most likely a redistribution of population from the interior toward sea and river coasts, with hunting activities concentrated at forest margins. Tasmania, a large island to the south of Australia, provides a striking ethno-archaeological example of human abandonment of a heavily forested interior in favour of the coast. Like the central and northern Balkans, Tasmania has a predominantly mountainous landscape and temperate climatic regime. In the southwest of the island the largely open scrub and heathland landscape of the Late Pleistocene was replaced by dense rainforest during the early Holo-cene (Colhoun et al. 1999). Although Late Pleistocene occupation of the interior is well documented (Lourandos 1997), ethnographic records indicate that at the time of European settlement in the early 19th century the densely forested areas were not occupied by aboriginal peoples, who were concentrated in settlements along the coast (Plomley 1966). In Southeast Europe evidence of Late Mesolithic coastal settlement is sparse and likely to be difficult to find owing to a general regional rise of sea level during the Holocene. The post-glacial sea level history of the Balkan coastline has been complicated by tectonic and isostatic factors (cf. Lambeck et al. 2004), but for the most part early Holocene shorelines lie below present sea level with the result that many shore-related Mesolithic and Early Neolithic sites on the Black Sea, Aegean and eastern Adriatic coasts will have been submerged or in many cases, perhaps, destroyed by marine erosion (Bailey 2007; Benjamin et al. 2011; Ozdogan 2011a). The few sites along the Aegean and Adriatic coasts that show direct evidence of marine exploitation in the form of fish or shellfish remains, such as Franchthi, Maroulas and Si-dari, occupied elevated positions above rocky shorelines, and some of these sites may have been 'field camps' (cf Binford 1980) or processing camps rather than residential base locations. 1996; Boroneanf 2012). Moreover, they were not just a Late Mesolithic phenomenon; paired AMS 14C dating and stable isotope analyses of human remains indicate that fishing was practised in the Iron Gates (and probably along the entire length of the lower Danube) at least as early as the Late Palaeolithic, became increasingly important during the Mesolithic, and was still significant economically during the Early Neolithic (Bonsall 2008; Boric 2011; Bonsall et al. 2012; 2015). The Iron Gates sites have tended to be regarded as exceptional, yet paradoxically they may have been typical of Mesolithic and Early Neolithic coastal adaptations in Southeast Europe. Fishing villages or hamlets like those in the Iron Gates likely existed along the Bulgarian section of the Lower Danube, as well as in protected embayments, lagoons and river estuaries along the Black Sea, Aegean and Adriatic coasts. As Douglass Bailey observed: "If the rise in the Black Sea removed from the region's landscapes a large coastal plain ... then that flooded plain must contain much of the missing pre-Neolithic record, perhaps in localized concentrations similar to what was found in the [Iron Gates] Gorges'' (Bailey 2007.521). Many sites may not have survived the Holocene marine transgression; others may lie at depths (or be covered in a thick layer of sediment) that make underwater archaeology difficult or impossible with Fig. 4. Caves in the limestone cliff of Belyakovo Plateau, near Veliko Turnovo, Bulgaria. In the Upper Palaeolithic such sites provided convenient short-term shelters and good vantage points for watching game movements. In the heavily forested landscapes of the early Holocene this strategic advantage would have been lost (photo: Clive Bonsall). Currently, well-documented examples from the Balkans of Mesolithic shore-related settlements occur mainly in the Iron Gates section of the Danube valley. Sites such as Padina, Vlasac and Schela Cladovei were hundreds or thousands of square metres in extent with architectural, burial and other evidence of permanent or semi-permanent occupation over centuries or millennia (Radovanovic current technology. However, recent discoveries of submerged Neolithic settlements along the Mediterranean coast of Israel (Galili, Rosen 2011a; 2011b) and the northern shore of the Marmara Sea in Turkey (Ozdogan 2011a) at up to 12m below sea level, suggest it is only a matter of time before submerged Late Mesolithic settlements are discovered around the Balkan coastline. The pattern of coastal settlement and resource procurement likely varied regionally, influenced by the character of the coastline and resource availability. In contrast to the 'soft shore' environment of the Lower Danube, the Adriatic and Aegean coasts in particular provide extensive rocky shorelines, with more dispersed shellfish and fish resources. Meso-lithic exploitation of such shorelines may have been similar to that in western Scotland where residential sites were located in protected embayments, and more remote areas of the coast were exploited using a logistical collecting strategy that involved the establishment of outlying fishing-and-processing camps, often taking advantage of the shelter (from sun, heat and rain) offered by coastal caves (Bonsall 1996; Bonsall et al. 2009). The model of Pre-Neolithic settlement of the Balkans presented above, which envisages an increasing emphasis on aquatic resources and concentration of population in coastal fishing communities, does not preclude Late Mesolithic use of inland areas, especially where there were local concentrations of wetland and aquatic resources. But large areas of the interior with dense canopy cover and few aquatic resources may have been visited rarely or not at all. Fishers and farmers: implications for Neolithi-zation What role did coastlines and fishing communities play in the expansion of farming within the Balkans? Most researchers accept that the spread of the Neolithic through the Aegean and the Mediterranean basin generally involved communities with a significant seafaring capability, and who probably combined farming with fishing and shellfish gathering. This model has been applied to the spread of the Impressed Ware Neolithic along the western shore of the Balkan Peninsula (e.g., Forenbaher, Miracle 2005). Yet the Neolithization of the Balkans east of the Di-naric Mountains is still seen by most researchers largely in terms of an overland spread initially following river valleys that led inland from the Aegean coast (e.g., Nikolov 1987; 1990; Lichardus-Itten 1993; Todorova, Vaysov 1993; Lichardus-Itten et al. 2002, 2006). Only a few researchers (e.g., Bailey 2007; Özdogan 2011b) seem to have considered the possibility of an early maritime spread along the (now submerged) Black Sea coastal plain. However, several lines of evidence, concrete and circumstantial, favour this possibility: © The lack of Early Neolithic sites along the Black Sea coast probably has more to do with geological processes and our inability to locate sites, than a lack of interest in coasts and coastal resources by early farmers. © Some of the earliest known Neolithic communities in the southern Balkans and neighbouring parts of western Anatolia combined farming with the exploitation of coastal resources, for example at Fikir-tepe (Düring 2011), Ye§ilova (Derin 2008) and Fran-chthi (Perles et al. 2013). © The earliest known Neolithic sites in the Balkans interior (Fig. 5) are several centuries younger than the earliest known sites in mainland Greece and the Aegean. Moreover, the similarity of the earliest Neolithic 14C dates (6100-6000 calBC) across the Balkans from southern Bulgaria to Transylvania (a straight-line distance of c. 600km), is difficult to explain purely in terms of a south-north overland spread. A simultaneous expansion along the Black Sea littoral and river valleys leading inland from the Black Sea - including those of the Danube and its southern and northern tributaries - would fit better with the radiocarbon record. © For reasons discussed above, the densely forested interior may have proved as difficult for pioneer farmers as for hunter-gatherers. Therefore, an initial maritime/coastal spread aided by the availability of watercraft was arguably the easier option. Pioneer colonization of the interior would have been difficult, if not impossible, without participation in 'interaction spheres' - loosely defined as information and exchange networks (cf. Caldwell 1964) -through which pioneer farmers were able to maintain social and economic ties with established farming-fishing communities living in peripheral (coastal) areas. Fig. 5. Earliest radiocarbon dated evidence of farming in different parts of the Balkans-Aegean region. Exchange networks operated among both Mesolithic and Early Neolithic groups in many parts of Europe, including the Balkans. In some cases there is evidence of the continuation of Mesolithic networks into the Neolithic. Marine shells used as body ornaments circulated widely among Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic groups in Southeast Europe (Cristi-ani et al. 2014) judging by evidence from Greece, the Adriatic coast and the Iron Gates. Shell ornaments were also exchanged during the Early Neolithic although the forms and perforation techniques changed, reflected for example in the introduction of Spondylus ornaments and flat discoid beads made from marine bivalve shells (,Seferia-des 1995; Perles 2001). The existence of an important interaction sphere in the southern Balkans at the Meso-Neolithic transition is reflected in the distribution of obsidian originating from the Aegean island of Melos. Exploitation of this source necessitated the use of boats. Melian obsidian circulated among Late Upper Palaeolithic and Mesoli-thic groups on the Aegean islands and the Greek Mainland. Its use increased in the Early Neolithic - at Early Neolithic Argissa-Magoula (Greece) obsidian accounted for over one-third of the chipped stone tools - when it also appears in the eastern Aegean and western Anatolia. In a thought-provoking paper, Agathe Reingruber (2011) has argued that the archaeological distribution of Melian obsidian is indicative of a network of seafaring groups that was already in existence in the Mesoli-thic and continued into the Neolithic, and which was crucial in the spread of farming across the Aegean into mainland Southeast Europe. In the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Balkans north of Greece obsidian is scarce, and its provenance uncertain. The very limited amount of material found on Early Neolithic sites in the central and northern Balkans east of the Dinaric Mountains may all come from sources in the Carpathians rather than Melos (Williams-Thorpe et al. 1984; see also Tripkovic 2004). In Early Neolithic Bulgaria, Serbia and southern Romania the 'demand' for high quality lithic materials was largely satisfied by yellowish-brown flint with white or pale-brown 'spots', often referred to in the archaeological literature as 'Balkan flint'. This high quality material often dominates chipped stone assemblages of the Karanovo I-II and Starcevo-Ko-ros-Cri§ cultures. Early Neolithic use of Balkan flint has been most intensively studied in Bulgaria (Fig. 6; Gurova 2008; Fig. 6. Bulgarian Early Neolithic sites with Balkan flint artefacts (all sites) and 'formal toolkits' (red triangles): 1 - Slatina; 2 - Kovačevo; 3 - Rakitovo; 4 - Kapitan Dimitrievo; 5 - Yabalkovo; 6 -Sedlare; 7 - Azmak; 8 - Karanovo; 9 - Dzhuljunitsa; 10 - Ohoden (revised after Gurova 2008.Fig. 1). Fig. 7. Balkan flint formal toolkit from the Early Neolithic sites of Yabalkovo (1) and Slatina (2) (Photo and drawings: M. Gurova). 2011; 2012a; 2012b; Gurova, Nachev 2008). The Balkan flint component of Karanovo I-II culture li-thic assemblages is characterized by what Maria Gurova has termed a 'formal toolkit' with a distinctive suite of retouched tools made on large regular blades produced by punch technique. The formal tools comprise blades with continuous (sometimes partial) semi-abrupt to abrupt retouch along one or both lateral edges, sometimes with pointed or rounded retouched ends, as well as sickle inserts (Figs. 7 and 8) (Gurova 2008). The sudden appearance of this highly developed lamellar (sometimes misleadingly termed 'macroblade') industry remains one of the most intractable problems of the Balkan Neolithic (Koz-lowski 2007.49). The repetition of the Balkan flint 'formal toolkit' over such a large territory and its co-occurrence with other distinctive socio-cultural traits between c. 5900-5600 calBC, implies the existence of a sophisticated exchange network with a high degree of interaction. Fig. 8. Early Neolithic sickles with Balkan flint inserts: 1 microphotographs of typical cereal polish (x 100); 2 sickle inserts from Kovačevo; 3 sickle inserts from Yabalkovo; 4 sickles from Tell Karanovo (Figure: M. Gurova). Considerable uncertainty surrounds the origin of the Balkan flint that was exploited by Early Neolithic groups in Bulgaria. Macroscopic, thin section and trace element analyses of archaeological and geological samples suggest that the most likely source or sources of the Balkan flint found at Kara-novo I-II culture sites is in Cretaceous chalk-limestone formations of the Moesian platform in northern Bulgaria, most notably the Pleven-Nikopol region (Gurova, Nachev 2008; Bonsall et al. 2010; Gurova et al. in preparationJ). 'Pre-Karanovo I' use of Balkan flint is attested at the Early Neolithic site of Dzhuljunitsa c. 6050 calBC (Fig. 9) {Gurova 2008; 2009; 2012a; 2012b). However, Balkan flint it seems did not occur in the earliest Neolithic occupation phase at Kovacevo in southwest Bulgaria (Gurova 2011), also dated to c. 6050 BC (Reingrüber, Thissen 2005; Higham et al. 2011). This very limited evidence may indicate that Neolithic use of Balkan flint began earlier in the north of Bulgaria than in the southwest. But what were the origins of the Balkan flint interaction sphere? Did it originate with or after the arrival of farming in northern Bulgaria, or did Neolithic farmers take advantage of a pre-existing exchange network? Much less is known of the exploitation of Balkan flint in Southeast Europe before the Neolithic. In Bulgaria the earliest documented archaeological occurrence was in the Gravettian and Epigravettian of Tem-nata Cave (Pawlikowski 1992). According to Dinan (1996a; 1996b) Balkan flint was also used in the Epigravettian of the Iron Gates. Whether it continued in use during the Iron Gates Mesolithic is problematic. Most sites in the Iron Gates also had Early Neolithic occupations; so the stratigraphic integrity of many 'Mesolithic' assemblages cannot be guaranteed and the characteristic features of Late Mesolithic assemblages in particular are hard to define. The lack of Mesolithic sites in Bulgaria means that the extent of Balkan flint use during the early Holocene is unknown. But 1 A project entitled 'Prehistoric Flint Sourcing in NW Bulgaria and NE Serbia: field survey and laboratory analyses' was awarded in 2011 by the America for Bulgaria Foundation (ABF) and co-ordinated by the American Research Centre in Sofia (ARCS). The results are in preparation for publication by team members. if there were Mesolithic fishing villages along the Bulgarian section of the Danube (as argued above), it seems inconceivable that they would not have exploited the rich Balkan flint outcrops in the region - if only the alluvial placer deposits along the Danube at Nikopol on the Bulgarian shore (Fig. 10) and at Ciuper-ceni in Romania. Transport of this material by boat to settlements further down the Danube and along the Black Sea coast would have been relatively easy, but much more difficult upriver to the Iron Gates because of river speeds that in places exceeded 18kph. Conclusions The lack of evidence for Late Mesolithic settlement over large areas of the Balkan Peninsula has simultaneously dictated the direction of research into the Neolithic transition in Southeast Europe and acted as a serious impediment to it. In this paper we have presented a model of Pre-Neolithic settlement of the central and northern Balkans that envisages extensive exploitation of the Peninsula by Late Pleistocene hunter-gatherers, followed by increasing reliance on aquatic resources as post-glacial forest expansion led to a progressive reduction in ungulate biomass, with Mesolithic populations becoming concentrated in fishing villages along sea coasts and the lower courses of major rivers. This model does not preclude lo-gistically-organized use of the near hinterland by Mesolithic groups operating from residential bases on the coast, but remote areas of dense, closed canopy forest were likely avoided. Many Mesolithic coastal sites would have been inundated by the Holocene marine transgression. But sites like Schela Cladovei and Vlasac in the Iron Gates were perhaps typical of the Late Mesolithic fishing villages that once existed along the length of the Lower Danube and the Black Sea coast. The earliest Neolithic settlements in the Balkans may also have been located along sea and river coasts and combined farming with fishing, as in the Iron Gates. Many of these sites, too, would have been inundated by marine transgression. Rapid recolonization of the hinterland by farmers began before 6100 calBC, would have been initiated from population centres on sea and river coasts, and Fig. 9. 'Pre-Karanovo I' culture Balkan Flint artefacts (mainly debitage) from Dzhuljunitsa (Photo: M. Gurova). was made possible by participation in established interaction spheres. One such exchange network had been operating in the Aegean since the Late Upper Palaeolithic, reflected in the distribution of Melian obsidian. We suggest there was also an exchange network involving Balkan flint (which may have originated in the Upper Palaeolithic) operating among Late Mesolithic groups in the Bulgarian section of the Danube valley and adjacent parts of Black Sea littoral, which expanded to encompass large areas of the central and northern Balkans during the Early Neolithic after 6000 calBC? The current lack of information on the coastal aspect of early Holocene settlement of the Balkan Peninsula limits our ability to understand the processes involved in the transition to farming in the region. It follows that the future of Mesolithic and Early Neolithic studies in the Balkans, and Bulgaria in particular, may lie in targeted archaeological surveys of the Lower Danube valley downriver from the Iron Gates II dam and in systematic exploration of submerged landscapes along the Black Sea, Aegean and Adriatic coasts. Fig. 10. Outcrops of Balkan flint near Nikopol: 1 Ali Koch Baba (Nikopol), flint nodules in a primary context in chalky limestone; 2 on the road SW from Nikopol, flint nodules in a primary context in chalky limestone; 3 Danube bank near Nikopol, secondary placer of flint concretions/nodules (after Gurova 2012.Fig. 13). References Bailey D. W. 2007. Holocene changes in the level of the Black Sea: consequences at a human scale. In V. Yanko-Hombach, A. S. Gilbert, N. Panin and P. M. Dolukhanov (eds.), The Black Sea Flood Question: Changes in Coastline, Climate and Human Settlement. Springer. Berlin: 515-536. Benjamin J., Bekic L., Komso D., Koncani Uhač I. and Bonsall C. 2011. Investigating the submerged prehistory of the eastern Adriatic: progress and prospects. In J. Benjamin, C. Bonsall, C. Pickard and A. Fischer (eds.), Submerged Prehistory. Oxbow. Oxford: 193-206. Biagi P., Spataro M. 2001. Plotting the evidence: some aspects of radiocarbon chronology of the Mesolithic-Neo-lithic transition in the Mediterranean basin. Atti della So-cietà per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia 12:15-54. Biagi P., Starnini E. and Voytek B. 2008. The Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the Trieste Karst (north-eastern Italy) as seen from the excavations at the Edera Cave. In C. Bonsall, V. Boroneant and I. Radovanovic (eds.), The Iron Gates in Prehistory. British Archaeological Reports IS 1893. Archaeopress. Oxford: 250-260. Binford L. R. 1980. Willow smoke and dogs' tails: hunter-gatherer settlement systems and archaeological site formation. American Antiquity 45(1): 4-20. Bolomey A. 1978. Why no Early Neolithic in Dobrogea? Dacia n.s. 22:5-8. Bonsall C. 1996. The 'Obanian' problem: coastal adaptation in the Mesolithic of western Scotland. In T. Pollard, A. Morrison (eds.), The Early Prehistory of Scotland. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh: 183-197. 2008. The Mesolithic of the Iron Gates. In G. Bailey, P. Spikins (eds.), Mesolithic Europe. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 238-279. Bonsall C., Payton R., Macklin M. G. and Ritchie G. A. 2009. A Mesolithic site at Kilmore, near Oban, western Scotland. In N. Finlay, S. McCartan, N. Milner and C. Wickham Jones (eds.), From Bann Flakes to Bushmills: Papers in Honour of Professor Peter Woodman. Prehistoric Society Research Paper. Oxbow. Oxford: 70-77. Bonsall C., Gurova M., Hayward C., Nachev C. and Pearce N. J. G. 2010. Characterization of 'Balkan flint' artefacts from Bulgaria and the Iron Gates using LA-ICP-MS and EPMA. Interdisciplinarni izsledvanija (Interdisciplinary Studies) 22-23:9-18. Bonsall C., Boroneant A., Soficaru A., Mcsweeney K., Hig-ham T., Miritoiu N., Pickard C. and Cook G. T. 2012. Interrelationship of age and diet in Romania's oldest human burial. Naturwissenschaften 99:321-325. Bonsall C., Vasic R., Boroneant A., Roksandic M., Soficaru A., Mcsweeney K., Evatt A., Aguraiuja Ü., Pickard C., Di-mitrijevic V., Higham T., Hamilton D. and Cook G. 2015. New AMS 14C dates for human remains from Stone Age sites in the Iron Gates reach of the Danube, Southeast Europe. Radiocarbon 57(1): in press. Boric D. 2011. Adaptations and transformations of the Danube Gorges foragers (c. 13.000-5500 BC): an overview. In R. Krauß (ed.), Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Papers of the International Workshop 8th-9th April 2009, Istanbul. Organized by Dan Ciobotaru, Barbara Horejs and Raiko Krauss. Menschen-Kulturen-Traditionen 1. Studien aus den Forschungs-clustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westfalen: 157-203. Boric D., Price T. D. 2013. Strontium isotopes document greater human mobility at the start of the Balkan Neolithic. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110(9): 3298-3303. Boroneant A. 2012. Aspecte ale tranzifiei de la mezoli-tic la neoliticul timpuriu in zona Porfile de Fier. Mage. Cluj-Napoca. Boroneant A., Bonsall C. 2012. Burial practices in the Iron Gates Mesolithic. In R. Kogalniceanu, R. Curca, M. Gligor and S. Stratton (eds.), HOMINES, FUNERA, ASTRA. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Funerary Anthropology 5-8 June 2011 '1 Decembrie 1918' University (Alba Iulia, Romania). Archaeopress. Oxford: 45-56. Caldwell J. (ed.) 1964. Interaction Spheres in Prehistory. Illinois State Museum. Springfield. Cristiani E., Farbstein R. and Miracle P. 2014. Ornamental traditions in the Eastern Adriatic: The Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic personal adornments from Vela Spila (Croatia). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 36: 21-31. Clarke D. L. 1976. Mesolithic Europe: the economic basis. In G. de G. Sieveking, I. H. Longworth and K. Wilson (eds.), Problems in Social and Economic Archaeology. Duckworth. London: 449-481. Colhoun E. A., Pola J. S., Barton C. E. and Heijnis H. 1999. Late Pleistocene vegetation and climate history of Lake Selina, western Tasmania. Quaternary International 5758:5-23. Connor S. E., Ross S. A., Sobotkova A., Herries A. I. R., Mo-oney S. D., Longford C. and Iliev I. 2013. Environmental conditions in the SE Balkans since the Last Glacial Maximum and their influence on the spread of agriculture into Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews 68:200-215. Diamond J. 1997. Guns, Germs and Steel: A Short History of Everybody for the Last 13,000 years. Chatto & Win-dus. London. Discamps E. 2014. Ungulate biomass fluctuations endured by Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic societies (SW France, MIS 5-3): the contributions of modern analogs and cave hyena paleodemography. Quaternary International 337: 64-79. Derin Z. 2007. Neolithic shellfish gathering at Ye§ilova: an ethnoarchaeological view. In T. Takaoglu (ed.), Ethno-archaeological Investigations in Rural Anatolia. Vol. 4. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul: 1-6. Dinan E. 1996a. A preliminary report on the lithic assemblage from the early Holocene level at the Iron Gates site of Baile Herculane. Mesolithic Miscellany 17(2): 15-24. 1996b. Preliminary lithic analysis of the Epigravettian levels from the Iron Gates site of Cuina Turcului. Meso-lithic Miscellany 17(2): 25-40. During B. S. 2011. The Prehistory of Asia Minor: From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Dzhambazov N., Margos A. 1960. Kam Vaprosa za Prou-chvaneto na Paleolitnata Kultura v Raiona na Pobitite Ka-mani Dikilitash. Izvestia Bulgarskija Arheologičeski Institut 23: 269-295. (in Bulgarian) Forenbaher S., Miracle P. T. 2005. The spread of farming in the Eastern Adriatic. Antiquity 79(305): 514-528. Forenbaher S., Miracle P. T. 2006. Pupicina Cave and the spread of farming in the Eastern Adriatic. In P. T. Miracle, S. Forenbaher (eds.), Prehistoric Herders of Northern Istria: The Archaeology of Pupicina Cave. Vol. 1. Arheološki muzej Istre. Pula: 483-519. Forenbaher S., Kaiser T. and Miracle P. T. 2013. Dating the East Adriatic Mesolithic. European Journal of Archaeology 16:589-609. Frelih M. 1986. Breg pri Skofljci - Mezolitsko najdišče na Ljubljanskem Barju (Breg near Škofljica. Mesolithic settle- ment at Ljubljana Marsh). Poročilo o raziskovanju paleo-litika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 14:21-41. Galili E., Rosen B. 2011a. Ancient underwater and coastal settlements of Israel: an endangered cultural resource. In H. Oniz, E. Aslan (eds.), SOMA 2009. Proceedings of the XIII Symposium on Mediterranean Archaeology, Selcuk University of Konya, Turkey 23-24 April 2009. British Archaeological Reports IS 2200. Archaeopress. Oxford: 57-66. 2011b. Submerged Neolithic settlements off the Carmel Coast, Israel: cultural and environmental insights. In J. Benjamin, C. Bonsall, C. Pickard and A. Fischer (eds.), Submerged Prehistory. Oxbow. Oxford: 272286. Gatsov I. 1989. Early Holocene flint assemblages from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. In C. Bonsall (ed.), The Mesolithic in Europe. John Donald. Edinburgh: 471-474. Gurova M. 2008. Towards an understanding of Early Neolithic populations: a flint perspective from Bulgaria. Documenta Praehistorica 35:111-129. 2009. The flint factor in the Neolithization debate. In B. Petrunova, A. Aladzhov and E. Vasileva (eds.), Laurea. In honorem Margaritae Vaklinova. Vol. 2. National Archaeological Institute with Museum. Sofia: 1-14. (in Bulgarian). 2011. Early Neolithic site of Kovačevo: a case study of 'Balkan flint' formal toolkit. Studia Praehistorica 14: 71-81. 2012a. 'Balkan Flint' - fiction and/or trajectory to Neo-lithization: evidence from Bulgaria. Bulgarian e-Jour-nal of Archaeology 1:15-49. Available at http://www. be-ja.org 2012b. Establishing the identity of Bulgaria's first farmers - a new perspective. Archaeologia Bulgarica 16 (2): 1-26. 2014. Neolithic flint assemblages from Bulgaria: an overview. Samarskij naučnij vestnik 3(8): 94-108. Gurova M., Nachev C. 2008. Formal Early Neolithic flint toolkits: archaeological and sedimentological aspects. In R. I. Kostov, B. Gaydarska and M. Gurova (eds.), Geoar-chaeology and Archaeomineralogy. St Ivan Rilski. Sofia: 29-35. Higham T. F. G., Bronk Ramsey C., Brock F., Baker D. and Ditchfield P. 2011. Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS system: Archaeometry datelist 34. Archaeometry 53 (5): 1067-1084. Huttunen A., Huttunen R-L., Vasari Y., Panovska H. and Bozilova E. 1992. Late-glacial and Holocene history of flora and vegetation in the western Rhodopes Mountains, Bulgaria. Acta Botanica Fennica 144: 63-80. Kozlowski J. K. 2007. Western Anatolia, the Aegean Basin and the Balkans in the Neolithization of Europe. In M. Spataro, P. Biagi (eds.), A Short Walk through the Balkans: the first farmers of the Carpathian basin and adjacent regions. Quaderno 12. Trieste Società per la Preis-toria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia. Trieste: 39-52. Komso D. 2006. The Mesolithic in Croatia. Opuscula Ar-chaeologica 30:55-92. Lambeck K., Antonioli F., Purcello A. and Silenzi S. 2004. Sea-level change along the Italian coast for the past 10,000 yr. Quaternary Science Reviews 23:1567-1598. Lichardus-Itten M. 1993. La vallée du Strimon - une route au Néolithique ancien? In V. Nikolov (ed.), Praehistori-sche Funde und Forschungen: Festschrift zum Gedenken an Prof. Georgi I. Georgiev. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Sofia: 69-72. Lichardus J., Gatsov I., Gurova M. and Iliev I. K. 2000. Geometric microliths from the Middle Neolithic site of Drama-Gerena (southeast Bulgaria) and the problem of Mesolithic tradition in south-eastern Europe. Eurasia Antiqua 6:1-12. Lichardus-Itten M., Demoule J.-P., Pernicheva L., Grçbska-Kulova M. and Kulov I. 2002. The site of Kovačevo and the beginnings of the Neolithic period in southwestern Bulgaria. The French-Bulgarian excavations 1986-2000. In M. Lichardus-Itten, J. Lichardus and V. Nikolov (eds.), Beiträge zu jungsteinzeitlichen Forschungenin Bulgarien. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 74. Dr. Rudolf Hebelt Verlag Gmbh. Bonn: 99-158. 2006. Kovačevo, an Early Neolithic site in south-west Bulgaria and its importance for European Neolithiza-tion. In I. Gatsov, H. Schwarzberg (eds.), Aegean - Marmara - Black Sea: The Present State of Research on the Early Neolithic. Proceedings of the Session held at the EAA 8th Annual Meetingat Thessaloniki, 28th September 2002. Schriften des Zentrums für Archäologie und Kulturgeschichte des Schwarzmeerraumes 5. Beier & Beran. Langenweissbach: 83-94. Lourandos H. 1997. Continent of Hunter-Gatherers: New Perspectives in Australian Prehistory. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Magyari E., Gaydarska B., Pettitt P. and Chapman J. 2013. Palaeo-environments of the Balkan Lateglacial and their potential - were humans absent from the Garden of Eden? Bulgarian e-Journal of Archaeology 3:1-30. Available at: http://www.be-ja.org Mlekuž D. 2001. Floods and fires: landscape dynamics at Ljubljana Moor, Slovenia. In J. Fewster, M. Zvelebil (eds.), Ethnoarchaeology and Hunter-Gatherers: Pictures at an Exhibition. British Archaeological Reports IS 955. Archaeo-press. Oxford: 43-52. Nikolov V. 1987. The Strimon route in the Early Neolithic. Vekove 2:39-47. (in Bulgarian) 1990. The problem of Central Balkan migration routes in the Early Neolithic: an interdisciplinary approach. Interdisciplinarni izsledvanija (Interdisciplinary Studies) 17:9-24. (in Bulgarian) Ozdogan M. 2011a. Submerged sites and drowned topographies along the Anatolian coasts: an overview. In J. Benjamin, C. Bonsall, C. Pickard and A. Fischer (eds.), Submerged Prehistory. Oxbow. Oxford: 219-229. 2011b. Archaeological Evidence on the westward expansion of farming communities from eastern Anatolia to the Aegean and the Balkans. Current Anthropology 52(S4): S415-S430. Pâunescu A. 1987. Tardenoisianul din Dobrogea. Studii Si Cercetari Istorie Veche si Archeologice 38:25-41. Pawlikowski M. 1992. The origin of lithic raw materials. In J. K. Kozlowski, H. Laville and B. Ginter (eds.), Temna-ta Cave: Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area Bulgaria. Jagiellonian University Press. Krakow: 241-288. Perlès C. 2001. The Early Neolithic in Greece: The First Farming Communities in Europe. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Perlès C., Quiles A. and Valladas H. 2013. Early seventh-millennium AMS dates from domestic seeds in the Initial Neolithic at Franchthi Cave (Argolid, Greece). Antiquity 87(338): 1001-1015. Perrin T. 2012. Les derniers chasseurs-cueilleurs européens. Les Dossiers d'Archéologie 353:26-31. Plomley N. J. B. (ed.) 1966. Friendly Mission: The Tasma-nian Journals and Papers of George Augustus Robinson, 1829-1834. Tasmanian Historical Research Association. Hobart. Radovanovic I. 1996. The Iron Gates Mesolithic. International Monographs in Prehistory. Ann Arbor. Michigan. Reingruber A. 2011. Early Neolithic settlement patterns and exchange networks in the Aegean. Documenta Prae-historica 38:291-305. Reingruber A., Thissen L. 2005. 14C database for the Aegean catchment (eastern Greece, southern Balkans and western Turkey) 10.000-5500 cal BC. In C. Lichter (ed.), How Did Farming Reach Europe? Anatolian-European relations from the second half of the 7th through the first half of the 6th millennium cal BC. BYZAS 2. Verof-fentlichung des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts Istanbul. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul: 295-327. Runnels C. 2009. Mesolithic sites and surveys in Greece: a case study from the southern Argolid. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 22(1): 57-73. Runnels C., Korkuti M., Galaty M., Timpson M. E., Whitta-ker J. C., Stocker S. R., Davis, J. L., Bejko L. and Mugaj S. 2004. The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Albania: survey and excavation at the site of Kryegjata B (Fier District). Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 17(1): 3-29. Seferiades M. L. 1995. Spondylus gaederopus: the earliest European long distance exchange system - a symbolic and structural archaeological approach to Neolithic societies. Porocilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneoli-tika v Sloveniji 22:238-245. Todorova H. 1995. The Neolithic, Eneolithic and Transitional Period in Bulgarian prehistory. In D. W. Bailey, I. Panayatov (eds.), Prehistoric Bulgaria. Prehistory Press. Madison: 79-98. Todorova H., Vajsov I. 1993. The Neolithic in Bulgaria. Nauka i Izkustvo. Sofia. (in Bulgarian). Tonkov S., Lazarova M., Bozilova E., Ivanov D. and Snowball I. 2014. A 30,000-year pollen record from Mire Ku-pena, western Rhodopes Mountains (south Bulgaria). Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 209: 41-51. Tripkovic B. 2004. Obsidian deposits in the central Balkans? Tested against archaeological evidence. Starinar 53-54:163-179. Williams-Thorpe O., Warren S. E. and Nandris J. G. 1984. The distribution and provenance of archaeological obsidian in Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 11:183-212. Willis K. J. 1994. The vegetational history of the Balkans. Quaternary Science Reviews 13: 769-788. Zlateva-Uzunova R. 2009. Early Neolithic Stone Assemblage From Ohoden - Valoga Site, Building No.1. In G. Ga-netsovski (ed.), Ohoden: a site from the Early Neolithic, excavations 2002-2006. Craft House Bulgaria. Sofia: 6375. Zvelebil M. 1994. Plant use in the Mesolithic and its role in the transition to farming. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 60:35-74. Zvelebil M., Lillie M. 2000. Transition to agriculture in Eastern Europe. In T. D. Price (ed.), Europe's First Farmers. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 57-92. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Archaeological evidence for 9th and 8th millennia BC at Girmeler Cave near Tlos in SW Turkey Turan Takaoglu1, Taner Korkut2, Burqn Erdogu3 and Gül I;sin2 1 Department of Archaeology, £anakkale (18th March) University, TR turantakaoglu@gmail.com 2 Department of Archaeology, Akdeniz University, Antalya, TR tanerkorkut@akdeniz.edu.tr< gulisin@akdeniz.edu.tr 3 Department of Archaeology, University of Thrace, Edirne, TR berdogu@gmail.com ABSTRACT - A mound settlement in front of the Girmeler Cave near the major Lycian city of Tlos in SW Turkey revealed evidence for occupation during the late 9th and 8th millennia BC. The ccupation is characterized by a structure with at least two layers of lime-plastered floor, hearths and bins and a wattle-and-daub superstructure, all pointing to a sedentary community engaged in intensive hunting and gathering. The trial trenches at Girmeler Cave also yielded evidence of an Early Pottery Neolithic period at the end of the 8th millennium BC. The remains of several buildings with terrazzo floors and wattle-and-daub superstructures were found. It is likely that the cave served as a sacred site in the Early Pottery Neolithic period. There was a hiatus between the late 9th/early 8th millennium BC and the Early Pottery Neolithic occupations at the site. IZVLEČEK - Naselbina na gomili pred vhodom v jamo Girmeler v bližini pomembnega likijskega mesta Tlos v jugozahodni Turčiji razkriva dokaze o poselitvi v času poznega 9. in 8. tisočletja pr. n. št. Značilnost poselitve je struktura z vsaj dvema plastema z apnom prekritih tal, ognjišč, odpadnih jam in butane nadgradnje, kar kaže na sedentarno skupnost, ki se je ukvarjala z intenzivnim lovom in nabiralništvom. Testne sonde v jami Girmeler so prinesle dokaze o poselitvi v obdobju zgodnjega keramičnega neolitika ob koncu 8. tisočletja pr. n. št. Odkriti so bili ostanki več zgradb s teraco tlemi in butano nadgradnjo. Verjetno je, da je jama v zgodnjem keramičnem neolitiku služila kot svet kraj. Med poznim 9./zgodnjim 8. tisočletjem pr. n. št. in poselitvijo v zgodnjem keramičnem neolitiku je prepoznana prekinitev. KEY WORDS - Anatolia; Pottery Neolithic; cave site; burials; rituals Introduction Girmeler Cave, situated in the valley below the major ancient Lycian city of Tlos to the east of the modern town of Fethiye in Southwestern Turkey, presents archaeological evidence of one of the most poorly understood periods of the region, the 9th and 8th millennia BC (Fig. 1). The cave, located at the end of a promontory of limestone hill, is formed from two long galleries that are almost parallel (Fig. 2). Gallery I, about 100m long, is a narrow cave. Gallery II, 150m in length and larger than Gallery I, has two entrances opposite one another and contains stalactites and stalagmites. There is a natural hot thermal spring close to the site, which might have been one of the reasons that led to the selection of this locality for occupation from as early as the late 9th millennium BC to the Byzantine period. Girmeler Cave was first recognised as an archaeological site by Fethiye Archaeology Museum in the 1980s, when a mound type settlement at the cave mouth was bulldozed away illegally to establish thermal installations (Kokturk 2000). This mound DOI>10.4312\dp.41.6 111 once stood in front of the cave that was continuously occupied from almost as early as the late 9th millennium BC to the Byzantine period. Because nearly 6m of the top layers of the mound were destroyed, only the lowest layers containing evidence of occupation for the late 9th/ early 8th millennium calBC remained. Small portions from the edges of the mound were also preserved in the mouths of Gallery I and II which provides a limited picture of the stratigraphy of the site. This paper introduces data derived from four trial trenches opened in the lowest layers of the mound in front of the cave and in the preserved parts of the mound in the mouth of Gallery I. David French (2008) introduced some of the finds that remained after the destruction of the mound. The archaeological investigations represented by four trial trenches and surveys were conducted between 2011 and 2013 by a team representing the Tlos Excavation Project under the auspices of the Turkish General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums. Because Tlos is among the major sites mentioned in the 2nd millennium BC Hittite texts such as Tlawa, the pre-Classical past of the city and its territory attracted a great attention among Lycian specialists (Korkut 2013). It was during the exploration of the pre-Classical sequences at Tlos and its territory that the site came to our attention and was included in the research programme. The late 9th/early 8th millennium BC occupation: a sedentary community? Two trial trenches (A and C) in the lowest layers of the mound revealed archaeological evidence of late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC structures and related features. In Trench A, this occupation is about 7.6m below the original surface level of the mound, suggesting the intensity and longevity of the settlement. Part of a structure with a lime-plastered floor was discovered in Trench A in 2013 (Fig. 4). The plastered floor with small stones has evidently been renewed at least twice. Two postholes gouged into the plaster floor were also noted. The structure appears to have had superstructures of wattle and daub. This structure also has a number of features, including two circular sunken mud plastered basins and a rectangular pit. These features show the long-term and regular use/reuse of the structure. The finds include Fig. 1. Map locating Girmeler Cave and other major sites mention-ed in the text. an oval basin filled with ash, and burnt and fire-cracked stones. The basin might have been used for cooking facilities. Two circular hearths of the earlier phase were found beneath this oval plastered basin. Close to the hearths of the early phase are two shallow rectangular features with roughly oval corners, both filled with ash. At least two more hearths were also found in the early phase, but their exact connection with the structure is obscure. When the structure was abandoned, further pits for burned lime and various sizes of hearth were placed over its remains. Three AMS radiocarbon dates (Wk-37966: 8906±37 BP; Wk-37967: 8876±33 BP; Wk-35608: 8868±25 BP) obtained from samples taken from these deposits in Trench A fall between c. 82007900 calBC. In order to reach virgin soil, the southeast corner of Trench A was deepened, but the sounding yielded a line of stones and clay lumps with a dense concentration of animal bones and chipped stone implements in red palaeosols. Red paleosols were also discovered just below the surface in Trench C in front of Gallery II. Less than half a metre of the deposit was excavated in Trench C because a rock fall sealed the trench. A burial leaning against the cave wall was found in Trench C (Fig. 5). The burial revealed a flexed articulated adult on his/her left side in a contracted position. Three flint artefacts were found in situ around the skull. In Trenches A and C, flint was the raw material for the manufacture of chipped stone tools (Fig. 6). No obsidian was found. Because it was collected from a variety of mixed sources, flint is often very variable in character; in this case, red-brown is the most common. A flake-based technology can be observed in the chipped stone industry of the Girmeler Fig. 2. Aerial view of Girmeler Cave from the south mouths of Gallery I (left) and Gallery II (right). A stood in the front of the cave. Cave. Tools are rare, but flakes are numerous; they were made from small flint blocks by direct percussion technique with the help of a hard expedient tool. Cores often have multiple platforms with a limited amount of flakes taken from each. Blade cores are rare. All were bidirectional blade cores, and only a few traces of core preparation are present. Most of the blanks were used directly, without retouch. Tools include end and circular scrapers on flakes, perforators, blade, and bladelets. A sickle blade with parallel lateral edges is unique. It must be mentioned that no microliths were found in the four trial trenches at the site. The preliminary analysis of animal bones from Trenches A and C indicates that Sus scrofa (wild boar), Cervus elaphus (red deer), Dama dama (European fallow deer), Caracal caracal (caracal), and Lepus europaeus (European hare) were the most common species represented, indicating that hunting was part of the subsistence strategy of settlers at the site. Fish and birds were also consumed. Caprines and aurochs were not detected at all among the available animal bone assemblage. In addition, two perforated and burned Nassarius shell beads were found in the habitation debris of the structure in Trench A. One small stone with a polished groove which could be identified as a shaft straightener was also found in the habitation debris. A total of 19 worked bones have also been identified among the habitation debris in Trenches A and C (Fig. 7); three are pendants made from the bones of Lepus euro-paeus, each with a hole for suspension, while 13 are awls pointed either at one end or both ends. The remaining three worked bones are tips of bevel-ended tools. The habitation debris in Trench A also revealed grind stones, mainly large querns bearing extensive abrasive use wear on their ventral surfaces. The late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC occupation at Girmeler Cave was characterised by a total absence of pottery. The structure with at least two layers of lime-plastered floor, wattle and daub superstructures, and floor furnishing in Trench A points to a sedentary community. However, it is unclear whether sedentism could be viewed as an extension of radiating mobility or as a generically distinct way of life. The site is contemporary with well-known 9th millennium calBC Central Anatolian sites such as A§ikli, Pi-narba§i and Boncuklu. This period in Central Anatolia is characterised by sedentary communities engaging in intensive hunting and gathering. Oval structures with mud-brick walls and a central hearth existed at both A§ikli and Boncuklu (Ozba§aran 2012; Baird et al. 2012). The architectural tradition at Pinarba§i is different, as the site is characterised showing the mound once Fig. 3. Map of Girmeler Cave showing trial trenches. by sunken curvilinear buildings with wattle and daub superstructures (Baird 2012). Human remains have been discovered beneath the floors of A§ikli and Boncuklu, but not at Pinarba§i. The structure in Trench A at Girmeler Cave may be associated with the curvilinear, wattle and daub architectural tradition of Pinarba§i, with the difference being the lime-plastered floor. Subsistence in Central Anatolia in the 9th millennium calBC depended on hunting mainly cattle, boar, deer, sheep and goat, and gathering plants for food. Cattle, sheep, and goat are totally absent from Girmeler Cave. Differences in archaeological assemblages of faunal remains might be explained by differences in the strategies of 9th millennium calBC communities. The chipped stone assemblages of Central Anatolian sites were dominated by obsidian and characterised by microliths. The chipped stone assemblage at Girme-ler Cave is different from that of the Central Anatolian assemblages. Microliths are totally absent; flake-based technology is dominant. All these differences may show a different form of sedentism in Southwestern Anatolia. Some dates from layer Ib1 at the Okuzini Cave fall into the end of 9th millennium calBC, i.e. contemporary with Girmeler Cave. Layer Ib1 of the Okuzini Cave is described as a mixture of microlithic industries with Neolithic elements, and may be assigned to the Aceramic Neolithic Period (Albrecht et al. 1992). Despite the more or less contemporary dates, there are no identical similarities between the assemblages of the two caves. The end of the early phase of the Aegean Mesolithic also dates around the end of the 9th millennium calBC. The available evidence from the semi-permanent settlements at Maroulas on Kythnos in the Cy-clades and Kerame I on Ikaria in the Dodecanese both show that the lithic industry of this period consisted of flake-based technology. Denticulated-notched forms, end-scrapers, perforators and arched backed pieces were the most frequent chipped stone tools at these two sites (Sampson et al. 2012). A small scale excavation at Kerame I yielded no architectural structures except hearths and several stone rings, while the remains of more than 30 stone circular dwellings were found at Maroulas (Sampson Fig. 4. Trench A with the remains of a late 9th/early 8th millennium BC structure with a lime-plastered floor and related features such as hearths, bins, basins, and postholes. et al. 2010). The structures consist of small stones placed in an upright position on the periphery and flat slabs on the floor. Burials were recovered beneath the floors of the circular dwellings or between them. In the Aegean, the west trench in the Cyclopes Cave on Youra was dated to the middle of the 9th millennium calBC. The lithic industry here is also characterised by a flake technology in which flaked tools, end-scrapers, retouched flakes and notched tools dominate (Sampson et al. 2008; Kaczanow-ska, Kozlowski 2008). Surface finds from Chalki in the Dodecanese also suggest a similar chipped stone industry within the Aegean Mesolithic tradition, but the presence of microblade technology and a more numerous group of geometric and parageometric inserts makes this industry different. The chipped stone industry at Girmeler Cave bears general similarities with the Aegean Mesolithic, although tools such as blades with parallel lateral edges also find parallels in Neolithic contexts. The late 8th millennium BC occupation: an Early Pottery Neolithic sacred site? Archaeological evidence for Early Pottery Neolithic at Girmeler Cave was mainly recovered from part of the mound that remained after destruction at the mouth of Gallery I. The profile of the mound at the mouth of Gallery I measures 20m in length and about 1-1.5m in height. In the 2012 and 2013 seasons, two small trial trenches (B and D) were opened in this area to obtain a picture of the stratigraphy over the late 9th/early 8th millennium BC occupational debris. In front of Gallery I, a number of superimposed terrazzo floors were exposed in the section, along with parts of a building with a terrazzo floor directly on top. The building was probably burned ritually and regularly in order to mark the end of the 'life' of the structure. Almost all burned debris contained scattered seeds, probably wheat, some of which stuck to the lime floors, apparently as part of a closing ritual. The last terrazzo building was destroyed by a natural disaster. Very large rocks fell onto the building from the ceiling of the cave. Other terrazzo floors and burned debris in the profile of the mound indicate that at least three additional terrazzo buildings once lay at the mouth of Gallery I. Fig.5. Trench C with a late 9th/early 8th millennium BC burial in contracted position. overlying them (Fig. 8). The examination of the surviving parts of the standing walls suggests that this building was made of wattle-and-daub. The wall was plastered on the inside and outside with fine layers of lime. The terrazzo floor of this building was made with lime and small stones with thickness varying from 9cm to 12cm. A number of lumps of clay with impressions of split planks and twigs were found among the structural debris over the terrazzo floors (Fig. 9). The other terrazzo floors of underlying buildings were cleaned in the 1x3m sized Trench D, which was opened to reach the bedrock. A total of nine superimposed layers of terrazzo floors and eight layers of burned debris were revealed. The first terrazzo building was formed directly on the stony virgin soil. It seems that when the building fell into disuse, it was deliberately burned and another built Fig. 6. Late 9th/early 8th millennium BC flint artefacts from Trenches A and C. Pottery is the most common artefact found in this period. The bottom layer yielded pottery typical of Bademagaci Early Neolithic I /9-8. The very oldest pottery at Girmeler Cave is rare, consisting mainly of coarse, grit-tempered grey to black clay, with a reddish-brown surface colour. In the upper layers, red and black-slipped, fine-burnished pottery begin to appear. No decoration is seen on the pottery. Medium to large deep bowls with rounded sides predominate the assemblage. The eastern-most surface of Gallery I and the entrance to Gallery II (French 2008) yielded Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic white-on-red and red-on-buff painted pottery, similar to those of the Lake District region. The chipped stone tools recovered from the Early Neolithic occupation were made from flint, although two obsidian tools of probably Melian origin were also identified. The chipped stone technology differs from that of the late 9th/early 8th millennium BC occupation. Typical artefact assemblages include large blades. Grind stone tools, especially large saddle querns and pestles, also existed. A full-grooved stone fishnet sinker was also discovered. As mentioned above, the remains of the mound at the mouth of Gallery I are formed of buildings with terrazzo floors. Terrazzo floors were constructed of burnt lime and crushed limestone and were polished. The embedded crushed limestone gives these terrazzo floors a slightly mottled appearance. The earliest known lime plaster pyrotechnology dates to c. 12 000 calBC in the Levant, although floors made of lime plaster are not recorded in the Middle East until c. 9000 calBC (Kin-gery et al. 1988). Buildings with terrazzo floors are generally associated with special buildings in the Ace-ramic period of Southeastern Turkey (e.g., Gobeklitepe, ^ayonu, and Nevali ^ori), and also from Acera-mic Central Anatolia (c. 8500-6600 calBC). Both Terrazzo Building T at A§ikli Hoyuk and Terrazzo Building A at Musular have been interpreted as special buildings where ritual activities might have taken place (Duru, Ozbasaran 2005.26). Buildings with terrazzo floors also existed around 7000 calBC at Early Neolithic settlements in the Lake District, including Hacilar and Bademagaci (Duru 2012). Special buildings marked by their red-coloured lime plastered floors were also found in Ulucak, Western Anatolia, c. 7000 calBC (Qilingiroglu et al. 2012). It is possible that the buildings with terrazzo floors at Girmeler Cave might have been more or less contemporary with those of the Lake District. A single radiocarbon date (KIA-44211) recovered from this area in the trial trenches of 2011 provided a date around 7460-7070 calBC (Becks, Polat-Becks 2013. 166). The terrazzo buildings identified at the mouth of Gallery I at Girmeler Cave might have also been used for ritual and ceremonial purposes. Caves are not only physical geographic landmarks, but also part of the very structure of the spirit world. They are the dwellings of deities, a place where one can pass from Fig. 8. Trench D and the remains of buildings with terrazzo floors representing early pottery Neolithic at the preserved edge of the mound at the mouth of Gallery I. Fig. 7. Late 9th/early 8th millennium BC bone objects from Trenches A and C: (a-e) awls, (f) part of a bevel-ended tool, (g) tip of a round-ended tool, (h-j) fragments of pendants with holes for suspension. one cosmic zone to another (Duerr 1985). Caves may also symbolise the dead and the underworld, the womb, childbearing and new life. Although usually portrayed as terrifying, dangerous or unpredictable places, caves appear in many myths as sources of growth, life and rebirth. They were probably sacred meeting centres in the Neolithic Period. Concluding remarks Girmeler Cave is one of the first extant early sedentary sites with a subsistence based mainly on intensive hunting and gathering in SW Turkey. The differences between the archaeological assemblages of faunal remains and the chipped stone tool production at Girmeler Cave and other sites of this period, such as in the Lake District, Central Anatolia, and the Aegean islands, show that sedentism developed along quite different paths in SW Turkey. The Early Pottery Neolithic period at Girmeler Cave, on the other hand, is characterised by buildings with terrazzo floors at the entrance to Gallery I, indicating that these buildings might have had sacred functions. The Early Pottery Neolithic culture identified at Girme-ler Cave more or less shared the same cultural tradition to which the cultures of the Lakes District also belonged in this period. Whether a hiatus occurred between the late 9th/ early 8th millennium BC occupation dating between 8200 and 7900 calBC and Early Pottery Neolithic occupation dating around late 8th millenni- Fig. 9. Lumps of clay with impressions of split planks and twigs found in occupational debris just above the terrazzo floors. um BC is difficult to estimate with certainty due to the extensive destruction at the site and the nature of the topography, which slopes down from east to west. However, the horizontal association of sections of four trial trenches indicates that the late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC occupation unearthed at Trench A constitutes the lowest layer. Although remains representing Early Pottery Neolithic occupation are absent above Trench A because they were moved away during the destruction of the mound, a deposit of some 0.80m thick grey-brown silt overlying the late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC occupation is observable here. It is also clear from Trench D that the Early Pottery Neolithic occupation rested on bedrock, as the ground level in this part is higher than in the western part. This indicates that not all parts at the front of the cave were used in the late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC. The differences in the material assemblages of the late 9th/early 8th millennium calBC and Early Pottery Neolithic occupations also confirm that a hiatus existed between these two periods. Therefore, the new data from Girmeler Cave sheds some light on aspects of culture and subsistence at two different, crucial cultural stages of SW Turkey, which has long been considered void of human occupation during the Neolithic and pre-Neolithic periods. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- This project was conducted with the financial support of the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBITAK Project no: 11K227). We are grateful to Levent Atici, who undertook the preliminary analysis of animal bones from the site. Our thanks are also due to Denis Guilbeau, Nurcan Kayacan, and 0er Algül for sharing their thoughts on the chipped stone assemblage from Girmeler Cave. Thanks are also due to Gülnaz Acar and Abdülkadir Özdemir for their contributions during the fieldwork and A. Onur Bamyaci and 0em Yav§an for their help in preparing the illustrations. • • References Albrecht G., Albrecht B., Berke H., Burger D., Moser J., Rahle W., Schoch W., Storch G., Uerpmann H.-P. and Urban B. 1992. Late Pleistocene And Early Holocene Finds from Okuzini: A Contribution of the Settlement History of the Bay of Antalya, Turkey. Paleorient 18(2): 23-141. Baird D. 2012. Pinarba§i: From Epi-Paleolithic camp site to Sedentarising Village in central Anatolia. In M. Ozdo-gan, N. Ba§gelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Central Turkey. Vol. 3. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 181-218. Baird D., Fairbrain A., Martin L. and Middleton C. 2012. The Boncuklu Project: The origins of Sedentism, Cultivation and Herding in Central Anatolia. In M. Ozdogan, N. Ba§gelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Central Turkey. Vol. 3. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 219-244. Becks R., Polat-Becks A. 2013. Girmeler Magarasi: Lykia' da bir Kalkolitik dönem yerle§imi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8:166-183. Çilingiroglu A., Çevik Ö. and Çilingiroglu Ç. 2012. Ulucak Höyük: Towards Understanding the Early Farming Communities of Middle West Anatolia; Contribution of Ulucak. In M. Özdogan, N. Ba§gelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Central Turkey. Vol. 3. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 139-175. Duerr H. P. 1985. Dreamtime: Concerning the Boundary between Wilderness and Civilization. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford. Duru R. 2012. The Neolithic of the Lakes Region. In M. Özdogan, N. Ba§gelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Central Turkey. Vol. 3. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 1-65. Duru G., Ozba§aran M. 2005. A non-domestic site in Central Anatolia. Anatolia Antiqua 13:15-28. French D. 2008. Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age pottery of southwest Anatolia. In H. Erkanal, H. Hauptmann, V. Sahoglu and R. Tuncel (eds.), The Aegean in the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age. Ankara University Press. Ankara: 197-202. Kaczanowska M., Kozlowski J. K. 2008. Chipped stone artefacts. In A. Sampson (ed.), The Cave of Cyclops. Vol., In-tra-Site Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional Site Distribution. INSTAP Academic Press. Philadelphia: 169178. Kingery W. D., Vandiver P. B. and Prickett M. 1988. The beginnings of pyrotechnology, Part II: production and use of lime and gypsum plaster in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Near East. Journal of Field Archaeology 15:219-240. Korkut T. 2013. Die Ausgrabungen in Tlos. In P. Brun, L. Cavalier, K. Konuk and F. Prost (eds.), Euploia: La Lycie et la Carie antiques. Dynamiques des territoires, échanges et identités. Ausionius. Bordeaux: 333-344. Kokturk H. 2000. New lights on prehistoric Lycia: Finds from Girmeler Cave near Tlos. Lykia 3:39-45. Ozba§aran M. 2012. A§ikh. In M. Ozdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey. Central Turkey. Vol. 3. Archaeology & Art Publications. Istanbul: 135158. Sampson A., Kozlowski J. and Kaczanowska K. M. 2008. Mesolithic chipped stone industries from the Cave of Cy-clope on the island of Youra (Northen Sporades). In N. Galanidou and C. Perles (eds.), The Greek Mesolithic Problems and Perspectives. British School at Athens Studies 10. British School at Athens. Athens: 123-130. Sampson A., Kaczanowska M. and Kozlowski J. K. 2010. The Prehistory of the Island of Kythnos (Cyclades, Greece) and the Mesolithic Settlement at Maroulas. Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences. University of the Aegean. Krakow. 2012. Mesolithic Occupations and Environments on the Island of Ikaria, Aegean, Greece. Folia Quaternaria 80 (1): 5-86. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) 'Temples' in the Neolithic and Copper Age in Southeast Europe?* Clemens Lichter Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, DE clemens.lichter@landesmuseum.de ABSTRACT - Several buildings dated to the Neolithic period and Copper Age in Southeast Europe have been designated as 'temple', 'sanctuary', 'cultic structure' or 'place of cult' in scholarly works. The present contribution discusses the problems of identifying religious architecture; it elucidates some of these archaeological records and evaluates arguments with which the designation 'temple' or 'cultic structure' is justified. Thereby, the author concludes that no structure has been found among the houses excavated in Southeast Europe that can be classified as a 'sanctuary'. Instead, there are many indications that ritual activities took place in every dwelling and that these were specially decorated for such occasions. The author also considers so-called 'special buildings' of the Neolithic period in the Near East and discusses their absence in Southeast Europe. IZVLEČEK - Številne neolitske in bakrenodobne zgradbe v Jugovzhodni Evropi so v strokovnih delih opredeljene kot 'templji', 'svetišča', 'kultne zgradbe' ali 'kultniprostori'. V prispevku razpravljamo o problemih prepoznavanja verske arhitekture; pojasnjujemo nekatere od tovrstnih arheoloških zapisov in ovrednotimo utemeljitve, ki upravičujejo opredelitve, kot so 'tempelj' ali 'kultna zgradba'. Ugotovili smo, da med izkopanimi zgradbami iz Jugovzhodne Evrope ni nobenega objekta, v katerem bi lahko prepoznali 'svetišče'. Nasprotno, obstajajo številni znaki, da so ritualne aktivnosti potekale v vsakdanjih bivališčih, in da so bila le-ta posebej okrašena za ta namen. Obravnavamo tudi t. i. 'posebne zgradbe' iz obdobja neolitika na Bližnjem Vzhodu in razpravljamo o njihovi odsotnosti v Jugovzhodni Evropi. KEY WORDS - Neolithic; Chalcolithic; religion; cult buildings; sanctuary; Anatolia; Southeastern Europe Introduction In the beginnings of scientific studies on prehistory, first material (stone) and later technology (production of stone artefacts, pottery production) were propounded as defining criteria for the Neolithic period. Vere Gordon Childe's works drew socioeconomic criteria into the centre of interest, describing the Neolithic as an epoch of food production and a sedentary way of life, criteria that are still definitive today. Alongside material and economic criteria, sociological aspects have also been regarded as useful in dividing prehistory and thereby defining the Neolithic period (Morgan 1878). In the past decades, ideological criteria have appeared increasingly, that is, more consideration has been given to spiritual culture and deliberations made about religion and cultic practices in prehistoric archaeology (e.g., Biehl et al. 2001; Bradley 2005; Hansen 2003; Insoll 2004; Renfrew, Zubrow 1994; Rowan 2012). * This article is a revised and augmented version of the paper: 'Tempel' in der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit Sudosteuropas?', presented in the German language in 2010, in J. Sutekova, P. Pavuk, P. Kalabkova and B. Kovar (eds.), Panta Rhei - Studies in the chronology and cultural development of South-eastern and Central Europe in earlier Prehistory presented to Juraj Pavuk on the occasion of his 75th Birthday. Studia Archaeologica et Mediaevalia XI (2010): 581-591. This renewed contemplation of the topic was inspired by M. Budja, whom I thank for accepting the text for publication in Documenta Praehistorica. My thanks also go to E. Schalk (Berlin), who undertook the translation of the German text. DOI>10.4312\dp.41.7 119 One example of this change in paradigm is illustrated by the interpretation of Bronze Age hoards: well into the 1970s and 1980s, they were conventionally viewed as depositions buried by bronze smiths or traders, or as intentionally hidden goods, implying uncertain, economically difficult or contentious times. In recent years, however, this category of finds has been predominantly interpreted as votive offerings or dedications: the formerly 'mundane' interpretation has given way to a religious one. Another example is the significance of cult and religion in the emergence of the Neolithic in the Near East (Cauvin 1994; Gebel et al. 2002) and the role of ideology in the dissemination of the Neolithic way of life (Lüning 2007). Initially, nothing can be said against the assumption that traces of religious activities in the archaeological record are just as frequent as their place in the daily life of people at that time. The difficulty, however, lies in recognising these traces. Archaeological finds and contexts are not self-explanatory; their meaning and interpretation are based on conclusive analogies. Thus, finding evidence for religious practices in non-literate civilisations is a difficult task. Are Neolithic clay figurines cultic figures, representations of ancestors, or children's toys? Were Neolithic ditched enclosures fortified complexes or cult sites? These inquiries go beyond our cultural comprehension and background. We distinguish between the religious and the mundane, which is a concept that cannot be applied to prehistory. In prehistoric times, religious practices were probably not phenomena that can be viewed as detached from other practices; rather, they were components of all practices (Brück 1999). Therefore, according to our understanding, mundane activities could also have been motivated by religion. Prehistoric stone and copper axes could have served as weapons or tools; but as symbols of power they also fulfilled a social or even religious function. Groups of supposed 'ritual' Neolithic objects have always been of interest, as can be seen in the multitude of publications (e.g., Hansen 2007; Becker 2011; Nikolov 2007; Schwarzberg 2005; 2011). The designations customarily used for some of these find categories - 'idol', 'cult vessel', 'cult table' - emerged without knowledge of their functions, and are a sign of the common practice of assigning unusual or rationally inexplicable objects to the religious sphere. Due to the aforementioned problem of substantiation, it is also difficult to designate buildings as 'religious architecture'. Ultimately, remains can be approached only through thorough analysis. This applies to objects utilised in supposed ritual activities just as much as structures, whether they are pits or dwellings. Here, the archaeological record is of special significance. A precise analysis of the finds and find contexts with regard to their surroundings as well as their relation to one another is the basic prerequisite for approaching this issue. The development of a category of criteria for a 'cult building', with the aim of establishing the physical characteristics of corresponding cult practices has, in Mycenaean Greece for example, a longstanding tradition. Robin Hagg (1968) followed this aim by viewing material remains in order to identify cult practices and thereby also cult sites. For him, the essential classificatory criteria seemed to be specific devices, such as altars, 'offertory stones' or benches upon which liquids or other forms of offerings without fire were placed and which could also be used for incense offerings. Further criteria included, for example, the interior furnishing of structures with wall paintings, as well as the presence of objects of cultic character, such as figurines or anthropomorphic vessels. Since then, Hagg's catalogue of criteria has had further additions and nuances (summarised in Albers 1994), but its basic features are still valid. Needless to say, the criteria that pertain to Mycenaean Greece cannot be transferred to the Neolithic or Copper Age in Southeast Europe, several thousands of years earlier. General formulations about signs of the existence of religious activities as found in archaeological remains are still vague (Renfrew, Bahn 1991.359-360; Renfrew 1994.51-52). A further possible approach to religious architecture in prehistory is the (presupposed) handing down of religious practices, which allows conclusions to be drawn from existing knowledge about the distant past. Examples for this are provided, for instance, by the stratigraphies of temples in Mesopotamia: starting with temple architecture known from the Uruk period, the function of the underlying sequence of buildings can be determined, so that the cult architecture in many sites can be traced back well into the 6th millennium BC (e.g., the building sequence beneath the Ur-Nammu ziggurat in Eridu: Safar et al. 1981.86-114). This argument is based on an almost continuous sequence of occupation and an assumed constancy in location of the corresponding structures. With the argument of continuity, Iron Age san- ctuaries sited on those of the Late Bronze Age in Greece could be identified (van Leuven 1978). By contrast, examples of discontinuity in the development of cult architecture are especially notable in the post-Mycenaean, Protogeo-metric and Geometric periods between the 11th and 8th centuries BC. There is little evidence of cult architecture, which in addition would differ markedly from that of Mycenaean times (Mazarakis Ainian 1997). During these periods, religious activities were probably performed once again inside individual households. There is hardly any distinction between cult buildings and the houses of the social elite. The attempt in the Aegean sphere to discern structures that overlap in time and in this way to link them firmly with the Neolithic cult buildings did not produce any reliable results. Thus, the derivation of Neolithic cult architecture in view of later forms is unsuccessful due to the enormous time span. For the same reason, the use of the catalogue of criteria pertaining to the Bronze and Iron Age is limited when discussing Neolithic cult objects and architecture (Rutkowski 1986). Fig. 1. Gobekli Tepe: Schematic plan of enclosures A-D (after Schmidt 2011.Fig. 2). Finally, it cannot be assumed a priori that the superimposed, religious structure of the Bronze or Iron Age resembled that of the Stone Age. The terms and their use The term 'temple' derives from the Latin word tem-plum, a ritually specified area. In colloquial speech, it is understood as a non-Christian cult building. Ritual acts in temples were carried out by cult personnel (priests, priestesses), who in addition made use of sacred objects, such as artefacts for offering. In Mesopotamia, a temple was a building sheltering a deity represented by a depiction. The temple was considered the 'house' or 'residence' of the deity (Sallaberger 2013.519). Therefore, ancient oriental temples display a similarity with coeval domestic architecture. An important point here is the concept of the existence of anthropomorphic gods. Oriental temples are characterised by, for example, altars, cult pedestals and also foundation gifts, building inscriptions, and votive inscriptions, as well as objects normally not present in domestic dwellings (summarised in Miglus 2013.530-531). The basic features of Mesopotamian sacred architecture were compiled and described by Ernst Heinrich (1982). With the indistinct designation 'cult house' (ger. Kulthaus) Heinrich documents buildings (Heinrich 1983.319) that possess certain peculiarities of temples, as well as dwellings whose arrangement served sacred purposes to a great extent. Heinrich himself writes that the term for cult house remains dubious and is not limited to any types. Compared to the terminology applied in classifications such as 'vessel', 'building' or 'axe', the use of terms such as 'cult vessel', 'cult building' and 'ceremonial' or 'ritual axe' necessitates an interpretation on the basis of further evidence. However, because the religious superstructure of corresponding activities and the artefacts utilised or residual contexts are unknown, most of the results of these interpretations are ambiguous. The basic prerequisite for using terms such as 'cult building' or 'cult axe' should be that the 'cult object' should have been repeatedly used for this purpose and that the 'cult building' should have mainly (if, indeed, not exclusively) served religious purposes. Buildings of the Neolithic period in the Near East which, in view of their size, ground plan, construction and interior furnishing, clearly differ from dwellings, are designated 'special buildings'. This term allows an impartial approach to the corresponding architecture, regardless of its actual function. Special buildings of the Neolithic Near East Excavations in recent decades have revealed a very heterogeneous picture for the end of the 10th to 8th millennia BC in the area where the Neolithic emerged: the 'hilly flanks' of the Fertile Crescent, particularly in the so-called 'Golden Triangle' (Aurenche 2007). As early as the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA, c. 9600-8500 BC), several 'special buildings' with round or oval ground plans were already present, for example, in Gobekli Tepe near Sanliurfa (Schmidt 2006; 2007; 2011) and Jerf el Ahmar in Northern Syria (Stordeur et al. 2000) (Figs 1-2). Comparable complexes with somewhat smaller dimensions were also present at the site of Gusir (Karul 2011). Departing from this nomenclature, Klaus Schmidt (2006) uses the term 'temple' for the complexes in Gobekli Tepe (cf. critical commentaries by Banning 2011; Bernbeck 2013). The circular structures in Gobekli Tepe (Schmidt 2011) measure as much as 15m in diameter. Characteristic installations include benches located at the walls, and T-shaped pillars reaching up to 5m in Fig. 2. Jerf el Ahmar: special building EA 30 and EA 53, plan and reconstruction (after Stordeur et al. 2000.Figs. 5 and 9). height and grouped in concentric rows around a central pair of pillars. The surface of the pillars is decorated in flat relief displaying animals or abstract symbols. Stylised arms and hands render some pillars as anthropomorphic beings. Totem-like, round stone images complete the imagery. Dwellings at sites like Nemrik (Koztowski 2002) and Quermez Dere (Watkins 1990) display similar features, with two rectangular pillars, erected in pisé technique and plastered, standing in the centre of the building. In the course of development, at the latest as of the mid Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB, c. 8500-7300 BC), the ground plans of buildings became rectangular, a change that is also seen in domestic buildings. Corresponding to this development are later buildings in Gobekli Tepe (e.g., the 'lion pillar building'; Schmidt2007.84), the so-called 'cult building' in Nevali ^ori (Hauptmann 1993) and several special buildings in ^ayónü (Schirmer 1983; Ózdogan 1999; Erim-Ózdogan 2011). In the PPNB, three special buildings are known in ^ayónü alone: the 'terrazzo building', the 'skull building' and the 'flagstone building'. They differ distinctly from the domestic storage buildings (Sicker-Akman 2007; Bigakci 2001) with regard to their size, ground plans, monu-mentality, construction and technology (i.e. terrazzo floor) as well as inventory. They were evidently not utilised for storage, or as dwellings or working places. Wulf Schirmer (1983) already presumed a ritualistic or representative function of these buildings. The walls of the oldest phase of the 'skull building' in ^ayónü have an oval to circular course and, thus relate to older building forms of the PPNA. Consider- Fig. 3. £ayonu: isometric reconstruction of the 'flagstone building' (left) and the 'terrazzo building' (right) (after Schirmer 1990.Figs. 11 and 13). ing the skulls and bones of more than 450 individuals that were brought there over a longer time span, the 'skull building' was presumably a site for the preparation and repository of the dead. The function of the 'terrazzo' and the 'flagstone building' has still not been clarified. Two stone stelae stand in the centre of the 'flagstone building' in ^ayónü. In Nevali ^ori, also in the PPNB, is a corresponding building that differs from the other buildings in the settlement in having an almost square ground plan (Hauptmann 1993; 1999). Two monumental T-shaped pillars stand in its centre, while smaller T-shaped pillars are aligned along the interior wall (Figs. 3-4). A tradition of such 'special buildings' can be traced back to the 10th millennium BC. Hence, in the area of the origins of the Neolithic in Upper Mesopotamia, special buildings had been in existence since the beginning of the PPN, buildings that differed in almost all respects from domestic architecture and which in no case were constructed as dwellings or places of work. Namely, until now, no domestic objects or hearths have been found in these peculiar structures. Instead, their special furnishings include sculpture, reliefs or painting. in the tradition of the complexes in Gobekli Tepe (Figs. 5-6). Many of the 'special buildings' were rebuilt several times, a feature that points to their long-term use. Various clues, such as the superimposition of one building upon another, the undamaged ground plan, the blocked doors and the addition of mud bricks, as well as the remains of certain, indicative objects in the buildings, allow the assumption of an 'interment' of the building itself (Oz-dogan, Ozdogan 1998). In the end, the complexes at Gobekli Tepe were filled up (Schmidt 2006). Furthermore, no later structures were erected on these sites quite deliberately, which is probably the main reason for their good state of preservation. Viewed all together, building these complexes involved an enormous expenditure of labour. Estimates of this vary greatly: Banning (2011. 633) considers that pillars were created and erected by a few tens of individuals, whereas Schmidt (2006) believes larger groups were involved, who were needed to produce and transport the T-pillars. Whether or not the building activities were controlled by an 'elite', this supposition has not yet been verified by the building process itself (Kurapkat 2009). Through the collaborative erection of 'special buildings' - without doubt a basic characteristic of the process - their dimensions and interior equipment could have been achieved. After the end of the PPN, no continued construction of special buildings is recognisable. Evidently, the rituals of foragers and hunters lost significance with the establishment of Neolithic life, and thus their symbols and practices gradually disappeared. Central Anatolia Recently Edward B. Banning (2011) concluded that complexes A-F in Gobekli Tepe were not special buildings, arguing that the site consists almost exclusively of such structures. However, Banning did not take into consideration that 'special buildings', whose appearance resemble those in Gobekli Tepe, have been found alongside domestic architecture at several other sites. The 'skull building' in Çayonu surely was not used for domestic purposes, and the 'flagstone building' in Çayonu and the so-called 'cult building' in Nevali Çori display features that differ distinctly from those of domestic architecture and, thus, as far as architecture is concerned, they stand The Neolithic in central Anatolian ^atal Höyük presents a completely different image as far as settlement type, architectural traditions, artefact assemblages etc. are concerned (Mellaart 1967; Hodder 2006; 2012). Compared to Upper Mesopotamia, the differences are found in both the material culture as well as in cult practices (Hauptmann 2002). Contrary to the many buildings designated 'shrine' or 'sanctuary' by the first excavator, James Mellaart (1967), no special buildings like those found in Upper Mesopotamia can be distinguished in ^atal Höyük (Hodder 2005; 2006). This negative context could of course be due to the choice of the excavation area, Fig. 4. (ayonu: isometric reconstruction of the 'skull building' with earlier (a) and later (b, c) phases (after Schirmer 1990.Fig. 12). in which no special buildings were located, or for chronological reasons, since the ^atal Hoyuk site dates mainly to the 7th millennium BC (Fig. 7). Evidence that such special structures were built in Central Anatolia was supplied by building 'T' in A§i-kli Hoyuk, a quadrangular structure (Esin, Harman-kaya 1999; Ozba§aran 2012). In view of the building's furnishings, the floor - a mixture of the local native tuff with water and an overlying layer of red clay - is reminiscent of the 'terrazzo building' in ^a-yonu and the 'cult building' in Nevali ^ori. But this is the only thing that can be considered to be of a symbolic nature (Ozba§aran 2012.140), whereas a canal within building 'T' resembles features known from the site at Musular, some 350m west of Agikli (Ozbasaran et al. 2012.160). Building 'A' at Musular and building 'T' from Agikli seem to be related to economic activities, i.e. the butchering of game animals. The buildings in ^atal Hoyuk which Mellaart designated as 'shrines', contain wall paintings, bucrania and other decorative plastic figures, and also functioned as dwellings or work areas (Hodder 2006; 2012; Hodder, Cessford 2004). The individual structures appear as independent economic units, with spaces for preparing food, for storage and for producing artefacts such as stone tools, and even for storing raw materials. Furthermore, the dimensions of mud bricks used for the buildings differ from house to house, which leads to the conclusion that every house had its own moulds for making mud bricks and that bricks were produced individually for each building project; so self-reliance as compared to other households is also illustrated by the use of mud bricks. Based on various factors, Ian Hodder interprets the wall paintings, relief decoration and figurines in the rooms as short-term ornamentation of the rooms undertaken on the occasion of specific rituals that were of importance to the household. Namely, numerous superimposed layers of painting and plaster were detected in some buildings, which show that the interior walls were frequently plastered anew, and that the wall paintings were visible for only a relatively short time of a few weeks or months before being painted over (Hodder 2006). These activities could have related to initiation rites for young men, in which a hunt was undertaken and then portrayed in images. 'Dangerous parts' of the animals, for example, the bull's skull, were attached for a short time to the wall in commemoration. One important indication that these hunts were primarily of ritual or social significance is the fact that the wild animals depicted were not essential to the community's subsistence, or played only a secondary role as a source of food. Thus far, there is no evidence in ^atal Hoyuk for the ritual cremation of buildings, a topic often debated in research (Twiss et al. 2008). Possible differences or even features for categorising construction forms as in the Upper Mesopotamian PPN cannot be determined in Central Anatolia. An institutionalised cult that was practised in a distinctive building, as evidenced by special buildings in Upper Mesopotamia, is not present in Anatolia. 'Cult buildings' and 'temples' in Southeast Europe Considering criteria and arguments presented to justify the designations 'temple', 'cult building' or 'sanctuary' for the sites of Cascioarele (Dumitre§cu 1970), Kormadin (Jovanovic 1991), Madžari (Sanev 1988), Mramor (Jovcevska 1993), Nea Nikomedea (Rutkowski 1986), Parta (Lazarovici et al. 2001), Veszto-Magor (Hegedus, Makkay 1990), Vrbjanska Čuka (Kitanovski et al. 1990), Zelenikovo (Garaša-nin, Bilbija 1988), Zorlenttu Mare (Lazarovici, Laza-rovici 2006) and Zuniver (Jovčevska 2006), several common aspects become evident. The arguments proffered are: the dimensions of the feature, its central position within the settlement, wall decorations, interior furnishings and the inventory, in association with burials or the use of fire during the 'burial' of the building. At the Dolnoslav site near Plovdiv (Ra-dunčeva 1991; 2003) almost every dwelling has been described and classified as a sanctuary. The type and manner of argumentation occasionally eludes scientific discourse entirely: Ljubinka Babo-vic (2006.3), for example, writes that all the buildings at Lepenski Vir should be designated as sanctuaries, solely because stone was utilised as building material, a durable material that would also be a symbol for eternity. In a critical valuation of buildings from the Southeast European Neolithic and Chalcolithic designated as sanctuaries, the human component - the striving towards discovering and presenting something extraordinary - must not be neglected. Finally, it is noteworthy that in some areas, 'sanctuaries' appear with particular frequency (e.g., in Macedonia: Madžari, Mramor, Vrbjanska Čuka, Zelenikovo, Zuniver), or they are always discovered by certain scholars or their students; whereas in other areas, by contrast, 'sanctuaries' seem to be absent. Such a bias stands in the way of a neutral analysis of find contexts. In addition, it has to be pointed out that almost every author dealing with the assumed 'sanctuaries' or 'cult buildings' at the southeast European sites mentioned above quote Mellaart's publication on hiatal Hoyuk (Mellaart 1967). Mellaart's ideas about 'shrines' in latal Hoyuk exerted a wide influence. Meanwhile, the aforementioned re-evaluation of Mel-laart's 'shrines' puts all these considerations into question. Position in settlements Borislav Jovanovic (1991) argues that sanctuaries were consistently erected in the centre of settlements. This would then explain why no sanctuaries have been found hitherto in settlements like Vinca or Gomolava, despite large-scale excavation areas there: namely, the excavated surfaces lay outside the settlement's centre. According to the excavators, the sanctuaries at Parjta were located in the centre of the settlement (Lazarovici et al. 2001.204). Nicolae Ur-sulescu (2001) also positions sanctuaries in the centre of the settlement. Similar statements have been made about the site of Gaiajtui Movila Berzei (Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2006.533) and Cucuteni settlements (Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2007.228; 2008). Thus, not all the authors define what and where the centre of a settlement actually was. Is it the centre of the built area of the settlement, the most densely constructed area, or the highest point of the built area, as in tell settlements? Fig. 5. Nevali fori: 'cult building', phase III (after Hauptmann 1993.49, Fig. 9). Concluding the centre of a settlement at the place of the supposed sanctuary's location is circular reasoning that should be avoided. As has already been demonstrated, many special buildings of the PPNB stood on the periphery of settlements, that is, at a distance from dwellings and work areas. Dimensions of buildings That a dwelling has a larger ground plan does not necessarily mean it has a different function; its greater dimensions could have had other reasons, such as more occupants. The ascription of two buildings in Partta as sanctuaries is supposedly proven by their dimensions ('Sanctuary 1': 12.6 x 7m; 'Sanctuary 2': 11.6 x 6m) and architecture (Lazarovici 1989.149; Lazarovici et al. 2001.204). However, other buildings in Parta are identical in construction (Lazarovici et al. 2001; Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2006.217). A similar argument was made for the 'shrine' in Nea Nikome-dia (Rutkowski 1986.155-157). With dimensions of 11.8 x 13.6m, this structure was relatively larger than the surrounding buildings ('structure 1+2'; Pyke 1996.45, Tab. 3.1); it stood out among the other houses mainly because of its fully revealed ground plan. However, the context of the ground plans of 'structure 1+2' (Pyke 1996.22) was rather unclear. The construction and layout of the 12 x 12m dwelling at Vrbjanska Čuka (Kitanovski et al. 1990) still awaits publication. Hence, if another, different purpose is assumed for the building, religious use would become merely one possibility among others. For instance, a building with a bigger surface area could also have served as an assembly hall or chief's house. The classification of a building as a cult structure on the basis of its dimensions is hardly acceptable as a criterion. The supposed 'temple' in Madžari (Sanev 1988.29) does not differ in size from other structures; the same applies to house 4 designated as sanctuary in Zorlentu Mare (Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2006.155). In Kormadin, Jovanovic (1991.120) confirms that there is no evidence for any special construction or a larger size of the 'sanctuary'. Interior furnishings and inventory In most cases, these buildings could not be distinguished from other houses in the settlement on the basis of their architecture. Their identification as a 'sanctuary' is based exclusively upon the finds (Fig. 8). Various aspects of the interior furnishings or the inventory were interpreted by the excavators as indicative of cult practices inside the building: • clay boxes with incised decoration have been interpreted as 'cult' or 'libation' tables (House 1 in Kormadin; 'Sanctuary 2' in Parta); • the finds of several figurines (the 'shrine' in Nea Nikomedia). The Precucuteni 'sanctuaries' from Isaiia, Poduri and Sabatinovka (Lazarovici, La-zarovici 2006.561-566). This kind of argument has been produced equally for the 'shrine' of Ho-yucek/SW-Turkey (Duru, Umurtak 2005); • models of a house found within the building (e.g., in Cascioarele; Madžari; Veszto-Magor); • the existence of bull-skulls and -horns (e.g., in Kormadin; Parta). In Parta, raised applications of a stylised human face and a bull skull as well as a sickle-shaped clay application around a hole in the wall led the excavator to assume that this building served as a temple (Lazarovici 1998; Laza-rovici et al. 2001.204-241). The head of a large figurine is mentioned from Zorlentu Mare house 4 (Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2006.153). The examples listed above elucidate the problems of identifying cult buildings through the inventory. In this regard, the terminology employed is worth noting: pedestals are termed 'altars' or 'offering tables' (Parta), and hearths are reinterpreted as 'offering tables' (Madžari). The 'offering table' found in Zelenikovo was later changed into a 'hearth', when the 'sanctuary' was rebuilt into a dwelling. A quadrangular basin (2 x 2m) in 'cult building' in Vrbjan-ska Čuka (Kitanovski et al. 1990) has been declared an 'altar'. 'Cult objects' found upon a table or bench in a corner of the (cult)room in Nea Nikomedia are submitted as evidence of a sanctuary (Rutkowski 1986). The decoration of the walls through painting or plastic applications, likewise a frequent criterion indicative of a 'cult building', is a general element of buildings in the Southeast European Neolithic and Chal-colithic periods (Lichter 1993.48-49). Catal Hoyuk has clearly demonstrated that wall paintings or plastic applications are quite common features. One should keep in mind that the archaeological record rests mainly on the conditions of preservation and that wall paintings are documented at many sites in Europe (Fries-Knoblach 2009). Burials, single human bones in buildings or graves which are associated with the erection or use of a building have also been proposed as evidence of a particular structure's cultic purpose. Yet, burials in settlements or within houses are a phenomenon attested in many prehistoric cultures and are not evidence of the special function of a building (cf. in general Veit 1992; for Southeast Europe cf. Lichter 2001; for Macedonia Naumov 2007; 2013.81- 86). The burnt building H2b-11 in the late Neolithic layers (c. 4900-4800 BC) at Uivar display several peculiarities which, compared to other buildings at the site, suggest that this structure had a special function (Schier 2006; Dra§ovean, Schier 2010.176). Aside from compartments separated by approx. 0.5m high Fig. 6. Nevali Çori: isometric reconstruction of the 'cult building' fBadisches Landesmuseum 2007.32). mud walls on the eastern wall, there are several hearths/oven complexes that left little space for household activities. Peculiarities in the interior furnishings (a non-functional footed vessel, a tortoise shell, a bucranium made of clay) also distinguish this building from the others. The structure is further distinguished by a large empty space on the south side. A better evaluation of the find contexts must await the final publication on this building, which has been published hitherto only in one preliminary report. The excavator intentionally avoids addressing the building as a 'sanctuary'. As it is a two-storey structure, the confined space caused by the compartments and hearths (which might belong to different phases of use) need not be surprising, for other activities could have taken place in the upper storey. These few examples suffice to demonstrate the difficulties at hand when argumentation is based on interior furnishings and inventory. In view of the 'cult objects' found inside them, structures have been interpreted as a 'temple' or 'cult building'. In reverse, some objects have been declared 'sacred' because they were discovered in 'cult buildings': a classic example of circular reasoning. Finally, the use of the these objects in cult practices should first be investigated and attested for every culture before the question is pursued as to whether or not a building was actually a place for cult practises (Fig. 9). Referring to some examples from the Carpathian Basin, Eszter Banffy (2001) could show that so-called cult objects displayed traces of use. These were not (passive) ornaments, but objects whose use lay outside food production or other aspects of daily life. It can be discerned from the countless fragments that these objects were produced in great numbers, used and then discarded. Although knowledge about Neolithic cult practices remains nonetheless relatively limited, one observation should be underscored: many of the 'cult objects' are attested in settlements, in houses, partition walls inside houses, but mostly in waste pits. This would indicate - according to Banffy - that Neolithic cults were enacted in domestic surroundings and were not communal activities in a sanctuary (Banffy 2001. 209-217). This context accords largely with the finds of clay figurines in Nevali gori (Hauptmann 1993; Morsch 2002), where almost all of the figurine fragments were found near storage structures in the spaces between houses or in the houses themselves, but always in the context of discarded material. By contrast, clay figurines are absent in the area of the cult building in Nevali gori, with its large-sized stone sculpture and anthropomorphic T-pillars (Hauptmann, Schmidt 2007). From this observation, a different function and meaning can be inferred for figurines, on one hand, and for large sculpture on the other, at least in Nevali gori (Hansen 2001; 2007). Whereas the latter was limited to so-called special buildings, obviously erected for cultic purposes, clay figurines are found in domestic settings. Similarly, numerous figurines and fragments of figurines were found in buildings in gatal Hoyuk, further confirming that rituals and cult were practised solely in the domestic sphere. Special buildings meant for religious practices have not been attested there thus far. Hence, the presence of figurines is not evidence of a special building; in fact, quite the opposite. This also applies to figural vessels which appear in a domestic context (Schwarzberg 2011). The situation is similar with regard to house models. Janos Makkay (1971) denoted some examples as models of sanctuaries, which he considered in turn were proof of the existence of these sacred structures. Makkay's line of reasoning is still followed (Lazaro-vici, Lazarovici 2008; 2010). But according to the archaeological record, this opinion can no longer be upheld (Trenner 2010). Goce Naumov (2013.86) has suggested, that anthropomorphic house models should be seen as representative of individuals buried inside or near a house. Grind stones, storage vessels, loom weights, sling stones and ovens found in supposed 'sanctuaries' in Southeast Europe document the fact that these can hardly be differentiated from other structures. Commentaries about cultic grinding or symbolic looms cannot be followed (Lazarovici 1989.150151; Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2006.540541). 'Cult tables', figurines and bucrania found in house 2 in Kormadin imply that not only practical and economic dealings (residing, food preparation, grain storage, production of implements and textiles etc.), but also religious acts were performed in the domestic sphere. Some other houses of the Vinca culture sustain this interpretation (Chapman 1981.66; Stevanovic, Tringham 1997.198) and the site at Crkvine (Crnobrnja, Simic and Jankovic 2009; Crnobrnja 2010) demonstrates once more quite clearly, that figurines and bucrania form part of the standard inventory of Vinca culture houses. Naumov stated recently (2013. 78) that the existence of sanctuaries cannot be confirmed for the settlements in Macedonia, since unequivocal traces of ritual activity are absent. Burnt house remains The severely burnt house remains often observed in tell settlements have been viewed by various authors as resulting from deliberate destruction (Chapman 1999; Stevanovic 1997; Stevanovic, Tringham 1997; Tringham 2005). According to their view, the construction, habitation and destruction of a house should be part of a constantly repeated process. Houses can catch fire for many reasons: aside from unfortunate accidents, the cause could be violent conflict or measures taken to destroy pests or fungi, among others. An interpretation that sees a deliberate symbolic act behind the burnt buildings of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic is not necessarily correct. As evidence for this, experiments were evaluated (e.g., Gheorghiu 2007; 2010) in which a conflagration accidentally started in a Neolithic or Copper Age building and continued without any intensifying measures (e.g., adding more combustible or flammable material, making holes in the walls or roof). The fire did not reach high temperatures nor have the disastrous effects that have often been observed in find contexts. There is some doubt about the con- Fig. 7. Çatal Hoyuk: reconstruction of 'shrine' VIB 10 (after Mellaart 1967.150, Abb. 38). elusions reached through these experiments. Namely, the flammable properties of experimentally erected buildings with a relatively short duration doubtlessly differed from buildings which fell to flames only after several years or even decades. A counter-example was the documented conflagration of an Iron Age building in Lejre, Denmark (Rasmussen 2007), where, after approximately one hour, temperatures were measured that exceeded 1200°C. As shown by the documentation, the conflagration progressed with no additional propellants and no fuel. Furthermore, the chaff present in the building material of many Chalcolithic houses in the Balkans has not been taken into account as fuel for the fire (Hansen, Toderas 2010.101). For Okoliste, it has to be considered that, in some cases after houses have been burnt a different spatial arrangement of dwellings has been recognised, but in other cases, house areas were abandoned. However, not every new spatial arrangement or abandonment can be linked to a preceding burning horizon, which strengthens the case against ritualistic razing at the end of their lifecycle (Hofmann 2013.375). Furthermore, it has to be considered that identifying dwellings that are not burnt is much more difficult than identifying burnt dwellings. Therefore, dwellings that were not burnt are underrepresented in the archaeological record. Only 5% of the buildings in Uivar were destroyed by fire, indicating that the supposed ritual of house burning was a very selective practice at most (Schier 2006.330). Numerous burnt houses were found in all of the layers at the tell settlement of Polgar-Csoszhalom on the remains of which new houses had been constructed. In contrast, among the 79 buildings in the flat settlement, which did not differ in size or ground plan from those on the tell site, not a single burnt house was discovered (Raczky, Anders 2010.149). The examples mentioned clearly demonstrate that the concept of the 'burned house horizon' (Stevanovic 1997; Tringham 2005) does not concur with the archaeological record. With regard to the finds, the furnishings of buildings on the tell site at Polgar-Csoszhalom were only slightly better (grind stone with hematite, miniature vessel, figurine, fragment of Spondylus), a situation that could also have been due to conflagration. Burnt mud and wood architecture can remain in an excellent state of preservation and, thus, can provide special contextual conditions, such as conserved wall decorations or a preserved house inventory. A particular feature of the 'sanctuaries' in Par|a, Madžari and Kormadin is their extraordinary preservation due to fire. Yet the attribution of a special function to these buildings does not seem justified. Special buildings which stand out in appearance among the dwellings in Southeast Europe through their dimensions, furnishings or inventory alone and, therefore, would warrant the designation 'sanctuary', 'cult building' or 'temple', have not been observed. Instead, it has a lot to prove that within the dwellings, aside from their use as habitation and for economic purposes, cult activities were practised there as well. Fig. 8. Kormadin: reconstruction drawing of the 'cult building' (after Jovanovic 1991121, Fig. 1). Some records from Central Europe can be explained in a similar way, such as the house wall decorated with painting and reliefs in Ludwigshafen-Seehalde (Southern Germany), dated to the 39th century BC (Schlichtherle 2006). With no preliminary sketching, the painting was executed in white lime in one course of the interior walls of a house dated to the 39th century BC; integrated into this were four to five pairs of breasts modelled in relief. The decorative repertoire consists of lines, dots and spaces filled with circles or semi-circular motifs, M-mo-tifs, triangles and cross-hatching. A similar wall decoration is known, for instance, from the settlement site of Sipplingen-Osthafen. Corresponding reliefs of clay breasts are known at other sites dating from the second half of the 5th and first half of the 4th millennium BC in south-western Germany and Switzerland (Schlichtherle 2010.273). The brief application of the painting in Ludwigshafen-Seehalde contradicts any permanence and, therefore, should be seen instead as a sign of a temporally limited action. Preserved by a disastrous conflagration, the wall covering does not supply any arguments in favour of the building's exclusive use for religious practices. A house of the Cortaillod culture (c. 3500 BC) discovered in Marin-Les-Piecettes (Lac de Neuchatel, Switzerland) stood in the centre of the settlement on an earth platform approx. 1m high. The structure cannot be linked to any religious function, as suggested by the excavator (Honegger 2007). Based on a few indications, Jens Luning (2009) interprets the north-western part of the Linear Pottery Culture (LPC) houses of Central Europe (5500-4950 BC) as a space in which domestic ancestors were worshipped. The archaeological record of a house found in Nieder-Morlen (Hessen) seems to reveal that the north-west part of the building opens onto a palisade circle (diameter 30m), which according to Luning supposedly enclosed an earth mound in the LPC period; several thousand years later, this mound was allegedly still visible, a circumstance that led to the installation of a burial in the centre of the LPC mound during the Iron Age. This hitherto singular find context, as well as other contexts of LPC houses connected with concentric or rectangular rows of posts, were interpreted by Luning as LPC cult structures. He further assumes - based on the rarity of such contexts - that the structure serv- ed the entire settlement and even beyond. Finally, the cultic use of the complex in Nieder-Morlen, whose contemporaneity with the long house is hard to confirm reliably, remains conjectural, like the structure's 'responsibility' for the entire settlement. Conclusion and outlook Buildings that were dedicated exclusively to religious practices and which differ from the other buildings through their ground plan, construction and furnishings have not been evidenced for the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods in Southeast Europe. Instead, there are many indications that religious ceremonies, among others, were performed in normal dwellings, which might have been decorated and arranged on certain occasions. With the dissemination of the Neolithic in the 7th millennium BC, institutionalised cultic activities practiced in the Neolithic core area - and with them, special buildings constructed for this purpose - lost their significance. Therefore, no 'special buildings' are known yet outside the Neolithic core area; with the end of the PPN at the close of the 8th millennium BC and at the start of the 7th millennium BC, their traces even disappeared in the heartland. Evidently, the significance of clan structure for social unity had declined, and with it, the communal construction of special buildings and rituals practiced in them. In their place appeared small family units or families, for whom, as independent and separate economic units, other forms of solidarity were important. Thenceforward, not only economic, but also religious activities were practiced at the level of individual households. Considered further, consequently, the existence or absence of special buildings reflect the different social orders and social structures of the societies in- Fig. 9. Parta: reconstruction of 'sanctuary 2' (after Lazarovici et al. 2001.220, Fig. 180). side and outside the Neolithic core area: within the core area large units existed, presumably organised in clans, whereas in areas neolithisised later (i.e. during the 7th millennium BC), there existed small families who were economically independent of one another. In view of questions pertaining to the process of Neolithisation, the differences that were noted in cult practices between the origins of the Neolithic and further areas of its dissemination are of unquestionable importance. Namely, they contradict the notion of a massive immigration of Neolithic settlers from the original heartland, and can instead indicate the passing down of Neolithic traditions through exchange networks and cultural spheres. The 'arhy-thmic distribution model' (Guilaine 2007) is much more suited to these observations and can better explain the common features discernible over vast distribution areas, rather than the 'wave-of-advance' model (Ammermann, Cavalli-Sforza 1984). With regard to special buildings, the somewhat evolutionist idea according to which sanctuaries are a sign of a culture of higher standing at the end of a development, and basically of a later date, should be discarded. In early times in the Near East, the core area of the Neolithic, the 'land of plenty' (Gebauer, Price 1992.8), it was possible for a larger community to sustain itself over a longer period of time at one location, a situation that favoured and fostered the emergence of large settlements. The cohesive-ness of these large settlements was secured through, among other things, the erection and use of special buildings. Outside the Neolithic heartland, environmental conditions favouring such large settlements were not present, which consequently required other social solutions for the success of the Neolithic mode of production. Therefore, institutionalised cults in the form of communally constructed, special buildings in settlements are not attested outside the Neolithic core area. With regard to some Copper Age contexts in Southeast Europe, it appears that a few houses stood in an elevated position, but there is no evidence that these were cult buildings; perhaps these houses can be attributed to the rise of elites. Considering developments, for instance, in the Near East as of the 5th millennium BC, then at first glance astonishing associations become perceptible. The institution of the 'temple' - institutionalised cult - forms the core of civilisation, and with that the starting point of urban cultures in Mesopotamia or also the formation of states (Roaf 2013). Comparable developments took place in other areas much later. In view of these observations, one is tempted to seek the causes for this development in the differences in cultic practices that were already present in the Early Neolithic, and to view cult buildings of the Near Eastern aceramic Neolithic as forerunners of later monumental temple complexes in the Syro-Mesopotamian sphere (Ozdogan, Ozdogan 1998). Special buildings of the PPN might be the archaeological record for a mentality comparable with the conceptual mindscape which separates the religious from the profane (cf. critical remarks in Bernbeck 2013). This division, however, did not exist beyond the Neolithic core area at that time. In order to confirm this assumption, the gap in the contexts of special buildings that still persists between the 7th and 5th millennium BC must be filled. Also to be considered is the fact that the social structures in the background differed greatly, but that is another story. References Albers G. 1994. Spätmykenische Stadtheiligtümer. Systematische Analyse und vergleichende Auswertung der archäologischen Befunde. British Archaeological Reports IS 596. Archaeopress. Oxford. Ammerman A., Cavalli-Sforza L. 1984. The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe. Princeton University Press. Princeton. Aurenche O. 2007. Das "Goldene Dreieck" und die Anfänge des Neolithikums im Vorderen Orient. In Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000 Jahren in Anatolien: Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Ausstellungskatalog Karlsruhe. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart: 50-65. Babovic L. 2006. Svetilista Lepenskog Vira: mesto, po-lozaj i funkcija. Arheoloske monografije Narodni Muzej Beograd 17. Narodni Muzej. Beograd. Banffy E. 2001. Notes on the connection between human and zoomorphic representations in the Neolithic. In P. Biehl, F. Bertemes and H. Meller (eds.), The Archaeology of Cult and Religion. Archaeolingua 13. Budapest. Alapit-vany: 53-71. Banning E. B. 2011. So Fair a House: Göbekli Tepe and the Identification of Temples in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic of the Near East. Current Anthropology 52(5): 619-660. Becker V. 2011. Anthropomorphe Plastik der westlichen Linearbandkeramik. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 83. Dr. Rudolf Habelt Verlag GmbH. Bonn. Bernbeck R. 2013. Religious Revolutions in the Neolithic? „Temples" in present discourse and past practice. In K. Ka-niuth et al. (eds.), Tempel im Alten Orient. 7. Internationales Colloquium der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft, Mün- chen 11.-13. Oktober 2009. Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 7. Harrassowitz Verlag. Wiesbaden: 33-47. Biçakçi E. 2001. Çayônû Tepesi: Untersuchungen zu den Bauten und Siedlungsmustern der akeramisch-neolithi-schen Subphasen 5 und 6. Materialien zu Bauforschung und Baugeschichte 21. Institut für Baugeschichte der Universität Karlsruhe. Karlsruhe. Biehl P., Bertemes F. and Meller H. (eds.) 2001. The Archaeology of Cult and Religion. Archaeolingua 13. Budapest. Alapitvany. Bradley R. 2005. Ritual and Domestic life in Prehistoric Europe. Routledge. London. Cauvin J. 1994. Naissance des divinités - Naissance de l'agriculture. La révolution des symbols au Néolithique. CNRS Éditions. Paris. Chapman J. 1981. The Vinca culture of South-East Europe. Studies in chronology, economy and society. British Archaeological Reports IS 117. Archaeopress. Oxford. 1999. Deliberate house-burning in the prehistory of Central and Eastern Europe. In A. Gustafsson, H. Karls-son (eds.), Glyfer och arkeologiska rum - en vänbok till Jarl Nordbladh. University of Göteborg. Department of archaeology. Göteborg: 113-126. Crnobrnja A. N. 2010. Investigations of Late Vinca House 1/2010 at Crkvine in Stubline. Starinar LXII: 45-64. Crnobrnja A., Simijc, Z. and Jankovic M. 2009. Late Vinca culture settlement at Crkvine in Stubline (household organization and urbanization in the Late Vinca culture period). Starinar LIX: 9-25. Dra§ovean F., Schier W. 2010. The neolithic tell sites of Parta and Uivar (Romanian Banat). A comparison of their architectural sequence and organization of social space. In S. Hansen (ed.), Leben auf dem Tell als soziale Praxis. Internationales Symposium Berlin 2007 Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 14. Eurasien-Abteilung des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn: 165-188. Dumitre§cu Vl.1970. Édifice destiné au culte découvert dans la couche Boian-Spantov de la station Tell de Casci-oarele. Dacia XIV: 5-24. Duru R., Umurtak G. 2005. Höyücek - 1989-1992yillari arasinda yapilan kazilarin sonuclari. Türk Tarih Kuru-mu. Ankara. Erim-Özdogan A. 2011. Çayonû. In M. Özdogan, N. Ba§ge-len and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 1: The Tigris Basin. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 185- 269. Esin U., Harmankaya S. 1999. Agikli Höyük. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey - The Cradle of Civilization - New discoveries. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. istanbul: 115-132. Fries-Knoblach J. 2009. Vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Hüttenlehm mit Konstruktions- und Dekorationsspuren. In J. M. Bagley, Chr. Eggl, D. Neumann and M. Schefzik (eds.), Alpen, Kult und Eisenzeit. Festschrift für Amei Lang zum 65. Geburtstag. Internationale Archäologie - Studia honoraria 30. Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/ Westf.: 427-455. Garasanin M., Bilbija M. 1988. Das Haus 1 von Zeleniko-vo. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 9:31-42. Gebauer A. B., Price T. D. 1992. Foragers to Farmers: An introduction. In A. B. Gebauer, T. D. Price (eds.), Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory. Kongress Madison 1991. Monographs in World Archaeology 4. Prehistory Press. Madison, Wisconsin: 1-10. Gebel H. G., Hermansen B. D. and Hoffmann-Jensen Ch. (eds.) 2002. Magic practices and ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Proceedings of a Workshop held at the 2nd International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (ICAANE) Kopenhagen 2000. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 8. Ex oriente. Berlin. Gheorgiu D. 2007. A fire cult in southeasteuropean chal-colithic traditions? On the relationship between ritual contexts and the instrumentality of fire. In D. A. Barrow-clough, C. Malone (eds.), Cult in context - Reconsidering ritual Archaeology. Oxbow. Oxford: 269-284. Gheorgiu D. (ed.) 2010. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Archaeology in Eurasia: Building Techniques and Spatial Organisation. Proceedings of the UISSP XV World Congress Session C 35, Lisbon 2006. British Archaeological Reports IS 2097. Archaeopress. Oxford. Guilaine J. 2007. Die Ausbreitung der neolithischen Lebensweise im Mittelmeerraum. In Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000 Jahren in Anatolien: Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Ausstellungskatalog Karlsruhe. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart: 166-176. Hägg R. 1968. Mykenische Kultstätten im archäologischen Material. Opuscula athenensia 8:39-60. Hansen S. 2001. Neolithic Sculpture. Some remarks on an Old Problem. In P. Biehl, F. Bertemes and H. Meller (eds.), The Archaeology of Cult and Religion. Archaeolingua 13. Alapitvany. Budapest: 37-52. 2003. Archäologie zwischen Himmel und Hölle: Bausteine für eine theoretisch reflektierte Religionsarchäologie. In M. Heinz, H. K. M. Eggert and U. Veit (ed.), Zwischen Erklären und Verstehen? Beiträge zu den erkenntnistheoretischen Grundlagen archäologischer Interpretation. Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher 2. Waxmann. Münster, München, Berlin: 113-148. 2007. Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit - Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupferzeit in Südosteuropa. Archäologie in Eurasien 20. Eurasien-Abteilung des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Philipp von Zabern. Mainz. Hansen S., Toderas M. 2010. Pietrele und die neuen Dimensionen kupferzeitlicher Siedlungenan der Unteren Donau. In S. Hansen (ed.), Leben auf dem Tell als soziale Praxis. Internationales Symposium Berlin 2007 Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 14. Eurasien-Abtei-lung des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn: 85-105. Hauptmann H. 1993. Ein Kultgebäude in Nevali Çori. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae and M. Mellink (eds.), Between the rivers and over the mountains. Festschrift für Alba Palmieri. Rome: 37-69. 1999. The Urfa Region. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey - The Cradle of Civilization - New discoveries. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 65-86. 2002. Upper Mesopotamia and its regional context during the Early Neolithic. In F. Gérard, L. Thissen (eds.), The Neolithic of Central Anatolia. Proceedings of the International CANeW Table Ronde Istanbul, 23-24 November 2001. Ege yayinlari. Istanbul: 263- 274. Hauptmann H., Schmidt K. 2007. Anatolien vor 12000 Jahren: Die Skulpturen des Frühneolithikums. In Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000Jahren in Anatolien: Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Ausstellungskatalog Karlsruhe. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart: 67-82. Hegedus K., Makkay J. 1990. Vészto-Magor - Eine Siedlung der Theiß-Kultur. In Alltag und Religion: Jungsteinzeit in Ost-Ungarn. Exhibition catalogue. Frankfurt: 97116. Heinrich E. 1982. Die Tempel und Heiligtümer im alten Mesopotamien: Typologie, Morphologie und Geschichte. Denkmäler antiker Architektur 14. De Gruyter. Berlin. 1983. Kulthaus. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie 6 Klagegesang - Libanon. De Gruyter. Berlin: 319-323. Hodder I. 2005. Peopling Çatalhoyûk and its landscape. In I. Hodder (ed.), Inhabiting Çatalhoyûk reports from the 1995-99 seasons. Çatalhoyûk Research Project 4. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Cambridge: 1-33. 2006. Çatalhoyûk, the Leopard's tale - Revealing the mysteries of Turkey's ancient town. Thames&Hudson. London. 2012. Çatalhoyûk. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 3: Central Anatolia. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 245-277. Hodder I., Cessford C. 2004. Daily practice and social memory at Çatalhoyûk. American Antiquity 69(1): 17-40. Hofmann R. 2013. Okoliste 2 - Spätneolithische Keramik und Siedlungsentwicklung in Zentralbosnien. Neolithikum und Chalkolithikum in Zentralbosnien 2. Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie, Band 234. Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichteder Christi-an-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn. Honegger M. 2007. Le site de Marin-Les Piécettes (Neuchâ-tel, Suisse) et la question des sanctuaires néolithiques: potentiel et limite de l'approche archéologique. In M. Besse (ed.), Sociétés Néolithiques. Des faits archéologiques aux fonctionnements socio-économiques. Actes du 27e colloque interrégional sur le Néolithique Neuchâtel 2005. Lausanne: 175-183. Insoll T. 2004. Archaeology, ritual, religion. Routledge. London. Jovanovic B. 1991. Kultplätze und Architektur in der Vin-ca-Kultur. Banatica 11:119-124. Jovčevska T. 1993. House from horizon I of the neolithic settlement Mramor. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 13: 17-41. 2006. Shrine to the cult of fertility: The site of Zuniver, v. Izvor. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 17:39-53. Karul N. 2011. Gusir Höyük. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 1: The Tigris Basin. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 1-17. Kitanovski B., Simoska D. and Jovanovic B. 1990. Der Kultplatz auf der Fundstätte Vrbjanska Čuka bei Prilep. In Vinca and its World. The Danubian Region from 6000 to 3000 B.C. Belgrade, Smederevska Palanka 1988. Serbian Academy of Sciences and Art. Belgrade: 107112. Kozlowski S. K. 2002. Nemrik. An aceramic village in Northern Iraq. Swiatowit Supplement Series P: Prehistory and Middle Ages 8. Agade. Warszaw. Kurapkat D. 2009. Das Wissen der neolithischen Bauleute. Zu den epistemischen Fundamenten der kleinasiatischen Bautechnik. In M. Bachmann (ed.), Bautechnik im antiken und vorantiken Kleinasien. Internationale Konferenz 13.-16. Juni 2007 Istanbul. Byzas 9. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul: 65-80. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006. Arhitectura Neoli-ticului si Epocii Cuprului din Romania - Neoliticul. Trinitas. Ia§i. 2007. Arhitectura Neoliticului si Epocii Cuprului din Romania - Epoca Cuprului. Ia§i. Trinitas. Lazarovici Gh. 1989. Das neolithische Heiligtum von Parta. In S. Bökönyi (ed.), The Neolithic of southeastern Europe and its Near Eastern connections. Kongress Szol-nok/Szeged 1987. Varia Archaeologia Hungarica II. Budapest: 149-174. 1998. Monumentale Plastik in Parta. Acta Musei Napo-censis 35(I): 9-15. Lazarovici Gh., Drasovean F. and Maxim Z. 2001. Parta. Ed. Waldpress. Timisoara. Lazarovici Gh., Lazarovici C.-M. 2008. Sanctuarele cul-turii Precucuteni - Cucuteni. Angvstia 12: 9-40. 2010. "Casa sacra" §i importanta ei pentru reconstitui-rea arhitecturii, amenajarea interiorului §i vietii spiri-tuale. The "Sacred House" and its importance for the reconstruction of the architecture, inner arrangements and the spiritual life. Memoria Antiquitas XXV/XXVI: 89-114. Lichter C. 1993. Untersuchungen zu den Bauten des südosteuropäischen Neolithikums und Chalkolithikums. Internationale Archäologie 18. Verlag Marie Leidorf. Buch am Erlbach. 2001. Untersuchungen zu den Bestattungssitten des südosteuropäischen Neolithikums und Chalkolithi-kums. Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften: Internationale Interakademische Kommission für die Erforschung der Vorgeschichte des Balkans. Verlag Phillip von Zabern. Mainz. Lüning J. 2007. Bandkeramiker und Vor-Bandkeramiker. Die Entstehung des Neolithikums in Mitteleuropa. In Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000 Jahren in Anatolien: Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Ausstellungskatalog Karlsruhe. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart: 177-189. 2009. Bandkeramische Kultanlagen. In A. Zeeb-Lanz (ed.), Krisen - Kulturwandel - Kontinuitäten. Zum Ende der Bandkeramik in Mitteleuropa. Beiträge zur internationalen Tagung in Herxheim bei Landau (Pfalz), 14. - 17.06.2007. Internationale Archäologie. Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress; Bd. 10. Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westf: 129-190. Makkay J. 1971. Altorientalische Parallelen zu den ältesten Heiligtumstypen Südosteuropas. Alba Regia XI: 137-144. Mazarakis Ainian A 1997. From Rulers' Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100-700 B. C.). Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology CXXI. P. Astroms forlag. Jonsered. Mellaart J. 1967. fatal Höyük - A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. Thames&Hudson. London. Miglus P. 2013. Tempel. B. I. Archäologisch. In Mesopotamien, Levante, Anatolien und Iran. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie 13 Telepinu. B - Tiergarten. De Gruyter. Berlin: 530-576. Morgan L. H. 1878. Ancient society: or researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization. Holt. New York. Morsch M. 2002. Magic figurines? Some remarks about the clay objects of Nevali ^ori. In H. G. Gebel, B. D. Herman-sen and Ch. Hoffmann-Jensen (eds.), Magic practices and ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Proceedings of a Workshop held at the 2 nd International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (ICAANE) Kopenhagen 2000. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 8. Ex oriente. Berlin: 145-163. Naumov G. 2007. Housing the dead: burials inside houses and vessels from Neolithic Balkans. In D. Barrowclough, C. Malone (eds.), Cult and Context. Reconsidering Ritual in Archaeology. Oxbow. Oxford: 255-265. 2013. Embodied Houses: the social and symbolic agency of neolithic architecture in the Republic of Macedonia. In D. Hofmann, J. Smyth (eds.), Tracking the Neolithic House in Europe. Springer. New York, Heidelberg: 65-94. Nikolov V. 2007. Neolitni kultovi masicki. Balgarska Aka-demia na Naukite i Nacionalen Archeologiceski Institut i Muzej. Sofia. Özba§aran M. 2012. A§ikli. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 3: Cen-tralAnatolia. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 135-158. Özba§aran M., Güru G., Kayacan N., Erdogu B. and Bui-tenhuis H. 2012. Musular - The 8th Millennium cal. BC satellite site of A§ikli. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Ku-niholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 3: Central Anatolia. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 159-180. Özdogan A. 1999. ^ayönü. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey - The Cradle of Civilization -New discoveries. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 35-63. Özdogan A., Özdogan M. 1998. Buildings of Cult and Cult of Buildings. In G. Arsekük, M. Mellink and W. Schirmer (eds.), Light on Top of the Black Hill - Studies presented to Halet Cambel. Ege Yayinlari. Istanbul: 581- 602. Özdogan M., Basgelen N. (eds.) 1999. Neolithic in Turkey - The Cradle of Civilization - New discoveries. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul. Pyke G. 1996. Stratigraphy (Chapter 2); Structures and Architecture (Chapter 3). In K. A. Wardle (ed.), Nea Niko-medeia I: The excavations of an early Neolithic village in Northern Greece 1961-1964. British School at Athens. Suppl. Vol. 25. London: 9-53. Raczky P., Anders A. 2010. Activity loci and data for spatial division at a Late Neolithic site-complex (Polgar-Csosz-halom: a case study). In S. Hansen (ed.), Leben auf dem Tell als soziale Praxis. Internationales Symposium Berlin 2007 Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 14. Eu-rasien-Abteilung des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn: 143-163. Radunceva A. 1991. Kurzer vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Dolnoslav. In J. Lichardus (ed.), Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche. Symposium Saarbrücken und Otzenhausen 1988. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 55. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH. Bonn: 107-110. 2003. Kasnoeneolitnoto obstestvo v Balgarskite zemi. Razkopki i proucvanija XXXII. Sofia. Rasmussen M. 2007. Iron Age houses in flames. Testing house reconstructions at Lejre. Studies in Technology and Culture 3. Lejre Historical-Archaeological and Experimental Centre. Lejre. Renfrew C. 1994. The archaeology of religion. In C. Renfrew, E. B. Zubrow (eds.), The ancient mind. Elements of cognitive archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 47-54. Renfrew C., Bahn P. 1991. Archaeology, theories, methods and practice. Thames&Hudson. London. Renfrew C., Zubrow E. B. 1994. The ancient mind. Elements of cognitive archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Roaf M. 2013. Temples and the origin of civilization. In K. Kaniuth et al. (eds.), Tempel im Alten Orient. 7. Internationales Colloquium der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft, München 11.-13. Oktober 2009. Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 7. Colloquien der Deutschen OrientGesellschaft. Harrassowitz Verlag. Wiesbaden: 427-443. Rowan Y. M. 2012. Beyond Belief: The Archaeology of religion and ritual. Wiley. Hoboken. Rutkowski B. 1986. The cult places in the Aegean world. Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of the History of Material Culture. Wroclaw. Safar F., Mustafa M. A. and Lloyd S. 1981. Eridu. Republic of Iraq. Ministry of Culture and Information. State Organization of Antiquites and Heritage. Bagdad. Sallaberger W. 2013. Tempel. A. I. a. Philologisch. In Mesopotamien. 3. Jt bis 612 v. Chr. In Reallexikon der Assy-riologie 13 Telepinu. B - Tiergarten. De Gruyter. Berlin: 519-524. Sanev V. 1988. Neolithic temple at Tumba Madžari, Skopje Region, Preliminary report of the excavations in 1981. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 9:9-30. Schier W. 2006. Neolithic house building and ritual in the late Vinca Tell site of Uivar, Romania. In N. Tasic, C. Groz-danov (eds.), Homage to Milutin Garašanin. Serbian Academy of Science and Arts. Belgrade: 325-339. Schirmer W. 1983. Drei Bauten des Cayönü Tepesi. In R. M. Boehmer, H. Hauptmann (eds.), Beiträge zur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens. Festschrift für Kurt Bittel. Verlag Phillip von Zabern. Mainz: 463-476. 1990. Some aspects of building at the 'aceramic-neoli-thic' settlement of Cayönü Tepesi. World Archaeology 21(3): 363-387. Schlichtherle H. 2006. Kulthäuser in neolithischen Pfahlbausiedlungen des Bodensees. In A. Hafner, U. Niffeler and U. Ruoff (eds.), Die neue Sicht. Unterwasserarchäologie und Geschichtsbild. 2. Internationaler Kongress für Unterwasserarchäologie Rüschlikon, Zürich 2004. Antiqua 40. Basel: 122-145. 2010. Kultbilder in den Pfahlbauten des Bodensees. In Badisches Landesmuseum (ed.), Jungsteinzeit im Umbruch - Die "Michelsberger Kultur" und Mitteleuropa vor 6.000 Jahren. Badischen Landesmuseum Karlsruhe. Primus Auflage. Stuttgart: 266-277. Schmidt K. 2006. Sie bauten die ersten Tempel. Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Verlag C. H. Beck. München. 2007. Die Steinkreise und Reliefs des Göbekli Tepe. In Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe (ed.), Vor 12000 Jahren in Anatolien: Die ältesten Monumente der Menschheit. Ausstellungskatalog Karlsruhe. Konrad Theiss Verlag GmbH. Stuttgart: 83-96. 2011. Göbekli Tepe. In M. Özdogan, N. Basgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.), The Neolithic in Turkey 1: The Euphrates Basin. Arkeoloji ve Sanat. Istanbul: 41-83. Schwarzberg, H. 2005. Kultgefäße von A§agi Pinar. „Kulttischchen" und ihre Stellung im Neolithikum und Chalko-lithikum Südosteuropas und Anatoliens. In H. Parzinger, H. Schwarzberg (eds.), A$agi Pinar II - Die mittel- und spätneolithische Keramik. Studien im Thrakien-Marmara-Raum 2. Archäologie in Eurasien 18. Philipp von Zabern. Mainz: 247-416. 2011. Durch menschliche Kunst und Gedanken gemacht. Studien zur anthropomorphen Gefäßkeramik des 7. bis 5. vorchristlichen Jahrtausends. Münchner Archäologische Forschungen 1. Verlag Marie Leidorf. Rahden/Westfalen. Sicker-Akman M. 2007. Qayönü Tepesi: Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten Grillplanbauten der akeramisch-neolithischen Subphase 2. Materialien zu Bauforschung und Baugeschichte 22. Institut für Baugeschichte der Universität Karlsruhe. Karlsruhe. Stevanovic M. 1997. The age of clay. The social dynamics of house construction. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16:334-395. Stevanovic M., Tringham R. 1997. The significance of Neolithic houses in the archaeological record of Southeast Europe. In M. Lasic (ed.), Uzdarje Dragoslavu Srejovicu. Centar za arheološka istraživanja, knjiga 17. Filozofski fakultet. Univerzitet u Beogradu. Beograd: 194-207. Stordeur D., Brenet M., Der Aprahamian G. and Roux J.-C. 2000. Les bâtiments communautaires de Jerf el Ahmar et Mureybet horizon PPNA (Syrie). Paléorient 26(1): 29-43. Trenner J. 2010. Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten Hausmodellen des Neolithikums und Chalkolithikums in Südosteuropa. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archaologie. Bd. 180. Dr. Rudolf Habelt Verlag GmbH. Bonn. Tringham R. 2005. Weaving house life and death into places: a blueprint for a hypermedia narrative. In D. Bailey, A. Whittle and V. Cummings (eds.), (Un)settling the Neolithic. Oxbow Books. Oxford: 98-111. Twiss K. C., Bogaard A., Bogdan D., Carter T., Charles M., Farid Sh., Russell N., Stevanovic M., Yalman E. N. and Yeo-mans L. 2008. Arson or accident? The burning of a neoli- thic house at Çatalhoyuk, Turkey. Journal of Field Archaeology 33(1): 41-57. Ursulescu N. 2001. Positions des constructions-sanctuaires dans les habitats de l'eneolithique ancien de la Roumanie. Cultura si civilizafie la Dunarea de Jos XVI-XVII: 42-47. van Leuven J. C. 1978. The Mainland tradition of sanctuaries in prehistoric Greece. World Archaeology 10(2): 139-148. Veit U. 1992. Studien zum Problem der Siedlungsbestattung im europäischen Neolithikum. Tübinger Schriften zur Ur- und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie 1. Waxmann. Tübingen. Watkins T. 1990. The origins of house and home? World Archaeology 21(3): 336-347. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Simulating cultural transmission: preliminary results and their implications for the study of the formal variability of material culture in the Central Balkan Neolithic Marko Porčic, Miloš Nešic Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade, RS mporcic@f.bg.ac.rs ABSTRACT - In this paper, we adopt the theoretical framework of evolutionary archaeology in order to model and simulate cultural transmission between hypothetical Neolithic sites in Balkans. We simulate neutral cultural transmission in order to compare the simulation results with empirically observed patterns of material culture variability such as traditional archaeological cultures. Our preliminary results show that a series of random local interactions can result in spatial groupings of typologically similar assemblages that correspond to the spatial distributions of traditional archaeological cultures, even in the absence of any other 'external' factor such as an overarching regional political structure or shared collective identity. IZVLEČEK - V članku prevzemamo teoretski okvir evolucionistične arheologije, da bi modelirali in simulirali kulturni prenos med hipotetičnimi neolitskimi najdišči na Balkanu. Simuliramo nevtralen kulturni prenos, da bi primerjali rezultate simulacije z empirično ugotovljenimi vzorci spremenljivosti materialne kulture, ki jih tradicionalno imenujemo arheološke kulture. Preliminarni rezultati kažejo, da ima niz naključnih lokalnih interakcij lahko za posledico prostorsko grozdenje tipolo-ško podobnih zbirov, ki ustrezajo prostorski razporeditvi tradicionalnih arheoloških kultur, celo v odsotnosti kakršnihkoli 'zunanjih' dejavnikov, kot so krovni okvirji regionalnih političnih struktur ali skupne kolektivne identitete. KEY WORDS - evolutionary archaeology; cultural transmission: archaeological culture; Neolithic; Balkans; simulation Introduction In Neolithic research, as in any other research, great effort is invested in looking for patterns. However, the search for patterns is only the first step. The final aim is to account for these patterns in terms of the historical and anthropological dynamics that produced them. The standard procedure in science is to propose an explanation (hypothesis), derive the empirical implications (expectations) from this hypothesis, and then compare these expectations to the actual empirical situation. Our hypotheses about the past are often about complex processes, and archaeological data are equally complex, so it is difficult to explore the implications of our hypotheses without the aid of some formal method. One possible approach to this problem involves attempts to 'recreate' the past by constructing a model related to some aspects of the past and then exploring the behaviour of the model and its output by computer simulation (Lake 2014). For example, geneticists have simulated genetic effects related to different scenarios of Neolithisation (e.g., François et al. 2010) in order to see which scenario would produce contemporary genetic patterns in space as revealed by Ca-valli-Sforza's seminal research (Cavalli-Sforza 2001). Archaeologists have simulated the demographic dynamics of the spread of the Neolithic in order to account for patterns related to radiocarbon and settlement evidence (e.g., Fort et al. 2012; Lemmen et al. 2011). From an epistemological perspective, the simulation approach enables archaeologists to do what is gene- DOI>10.4312\dp.41.8 137 rally very difficult in social sciences and utterly impossible for historical disciplines: to approximate the experimental method by 'repeating' different versions of history and observing the outcomes (Grune-Yanoff, Weirich 2010; Lake 2014). However, what makes simulation studies possible is the theoretical framework. For example, genetic simulation models are constructed using concepts and principles of population genetics theory, and demographic simulations are based on demographic theory, which provides the conceptual framework and mathematical models of population dynamics. But what about the formal variability of material culture, which is the traditional domain of archaeology? The issue of style has been the central issue of the traditional culture-historical approach, which is still the dominant school of thought in many academic communities, especially in Southeastern Europe. In the traditional approach, variability in form was divided into entities called archaeological cultures; these entities were both patterns and explanations at the same time, because they were based on an essentia-list view of archaeological cultures as direct reflections of collective identities: ethnic, linguistic, political (or even racial) (Hodder 1982.2-12; Shennan 1994). But regardless of the fact that such traditional culture-historical explanations are outdated, the problem remains: how can we account for the formal variability of material culture in time and space (for the most recent and thoughtful discussion of this problem, see papers in Roberts and Vander Linden (2011))? Just as there are genetic and demographic patterns, there are also patterns of formal variability of material culture. So, is there a theory, other than traditional culture-historical theory, that can provide a suitable framework for translating hypotheses about the workings of past societies into formal models whose properties and implications can be investigated by means of computer simulations and then compared to patterns of material culture variability observed in the archaeological record? Evolutionary theory of culture - a new framework for an old problem The evolutionary theory of culture or cultural transmission theory, a relatively recent development in the history of archaeological thought, is a paradigm that provides the intellectual and analytical tools to translate the patterns of formal variation of material culture in time and space into meaningful and anthropologically relevant statements about the past (Lipo 2001; O'Brien, Lyman 2000; 2003; Shennan 2002; 2011). It is based on an evolutionary theory of culture that views culture as an evolutionary process (Boyd, Richerson 1985; Cavalli-Sforza, Feld-man 1981; Mesoudi 2011; Mesoudi et al. 2006; Richerson, Boyd 2005; Shennan 2002; 2011). The evolutionary view of culture allows different classes of material culture to be treated as different hereditary systems, thus enabling the analyst to infer the nature and trajectory of cultural transmission and its underlying behavioural and social basis. This kind of analysis has the potential to tackle the most intriguing questions about the anthropological and historical reality that lies behind the archaeological record (e.g., Bentley, Shennan 2003; Bettinger, Eer-kens 1999; Gray, Atkinson 2003; Gray, Jordan 2000; Jordan, Shennan 2003; Lipo 2001; Lipo et al. 1997; Lycett 2007; Neiman 1995; Tehrani, Collard 2002; Tehrani et al. 2010). In this theory, culture is conceptualised as a population phenomenon: each domain of culture can be characterised by a frequency distribution of traits. These traits are culturally transmitted in a process that is analogous in some degree to the transfer of genes (Henrich et al. 2008). Changes in frequencies of cultural traits are governed by the forces of cultural evolution, such as drift or various forms of selection (Boyd, Richerson 1985; Richerson, Boyd 2005). This means that attributes, types and assemblages can be thought of as the results of various cultural transmission processes operating at different scales (cf. Clarke 1968). A growing number of simulation studies investigate the properties and implications of different transmission models in time and space (e.g., Crema et al. 2014; Lipo et al. 1997; Premo, Scholnick 2011; White 2013). These studies are of great theoretical and methodological importance. In this paper, we aim to make a link between abstract models from cultural transmission theory and the specific context of the Central Balkan Neolithic. Models of cultural transmission There are several basic transmission models in evolutionary theory of culture (Boyd, Richerson 1985; Richerson, Boyd 2005; Shennan 2002). These models tell us how a frequency of a trait will behave in time if it is transmitted in a certain way. One of the most important models in evolutionary archaeology is the neutral model of cultural transmission (Bentley, Shennan 2003; Eerkens, Lipo 2005; Kohler et al. 2004; Neiman 1995; Premo, Scholnick 2011; Shennan, Wilkinson 2001; Steele et al. 2010). The neutral model assumes a random copying of cultural traits in a population. This can be illustrated, for example, by a group of potters randomly copying patterns of vessel ornamentation from one another (Fig. 1). Initially, each potter decorates a bowl with a distinctive motif. After some time, equal to the average use-life of bowls, each vessel from the set is broken and deposited, and each potter creates a new vessel by randomly deciding how to decorate each new bowl. Potters can choose a pattern of ornamentation for each new bowl from the previous generation of bowls or they can introduce a completely new motif (i.e. new to this community of potters) either by intention or by error of perception with an associated probability (^), which is analogous to the mutation concept in biology. Following Neiman, the probability of mutation can be broken down into two components ^ = v + m (Nei-man 1995.17), where m is the probability that the new variant will be introduced from another community and v is the probability that a completely new variant will be introduced. It should be emphasised that in cultural contexts the neutral model does not have to be necessarily interpreted in such a way that individuals copy traits (e.g., pottery decoration motifs) completely at random. Individual choices can be and often are idiosyncratic and have a meaning for the individual making the choice, but as long as the aggregate result of these individual choices is such that the probability of copying for each trait depends only on its current frequency in the population (e.g., corresponding to the simple interpretation of the model pre- Fig. 1. Illustration of the neutral model of cultural transmission (after Porcic in press.Fig. 1). sented above), the transmission process is effectively random (Shennan 2011.1073). In general, if the transmission is not neutral, it is biased in some manner. There are various forms of biased transmission. For example, the conformist bias is one such model; it can be illustrated by many examples where people show a tendency to conform by choosing the most common cultural trait in the population, ranging from religious beliefs to choosing a hair style or clothing style. In conformist transmission, there is an additional probability (degree of conformism) that an entity will copy the most frequent variant in the population. However, this preliminary report is limited to the simulation of the neutral model. Research aims, questions and hypotheses The general idea of this paper is to illustrate how cultural transmission models for the Neolithic of the Central Balkans can be translated into computer simulations. The aim is to make a simulation of cultural transmission that enables the analyst to answer theoretical, methodological and empirical questions related to the patterns of formal variability of material culture in the Central Balkans. This project is ongoing, and in this paper we present only preliminary solutions and preliminary results. Due to its incompleteness and lack of suitable empirical data for rigorous testing, this paper should be viewed only as an illustration of the potential of the simulation approach grounded in the evolutionary theory of culture. Specifically, we address two questions in this study: © Can simulations produce patterns that resemble the empirical patterns of formal variability of material culture in the Central Balkan Neolithic? Our hypothesis is that the neutral model of transmission coupled with the specifics of Balkan topography is sufficient to produce patterns of typological similarity observed in the archaeological record. If correct, this hypothesis would imply that there is no need to invoke collective identity explanations (such as ethnic, linguistic or political) to explain the observed empirical patterns in the distribution of pottery styles. © Should we expect the geographical distance to be strongly correlated with typological distance if the probability of interactions between sites is determined by their spatial distance? A recent empirical study of Iroquian pottery demonstrated that geographical distance had little effect on pottery similarity (Hart 2012). John P. Hart (2012) found that the geographical distance explained a relatively small amount of inter-assemblage typological variance. We use the simulation to see whether the neutral transmission, which is often used as underlying model for the evolution of style (Cochrane 2001; Dunnell 1978; Lipo et al. 1997; Neman 1995), can produce such a result. The simulation Geographical set-up The starting point for all simulations is a set of virtual sites generated on a topographical map of Central and Western Balkans (Fig. 2). We chose computer-generated site locations instead of real site locations because of the unequal and biased research history in Balkans, which makes current data about the spatial distribution of Neolithic sites unreliable. Site locations are chosen according to the most general Neolithic settlement criteria (e.g., low altitude, flat terrain, proximity to water). In total, 100 sites were generated in this simulation. When site locations are chosen, the computer calculates the least cost path (LCP) distance between each pair of sites and stores these distances in the LCP distance matrix. Sites properties and virtual material culture assemblage The material culture assemblage for each site is modelled as a vector of integers, each element of the vector representing a certain variant of that particular material culture class. These vector elements will be referred to as entities. Entities may carry different variants (i.e. have different integer values); this can be interpreted as, for example, different ceramic bowl shapes or different decorative motifs. The size of the material culture assemblage (N) is 100 entities for each site. The variants which entities carry are culturally transmitted. Modeling cultural transmission For the purpose of this preliminary report, we simulate only the neutral model of cultural transmission. The simulation of the neutral model is based on the standard algo- rithm presented in the literature (Bentley et al. 2004; 2007; Bentley, Shennan 2003; Crema et al. 2014; Neman 1995). For each site, in each iteration, and for each entity, the computer generates a random number between 0 and 1, and based on the generated value, the entity chooses between three options: © If a random number falls between m and 1, the entity will randomly copy a variant from another entity from its own site, including itself, with the probability of a particular variant being copied equal to its current relative frequency in the assemblage. © If the random number falls between 0 to v, the entity will generate a completely new (to the entire simulation universe) variant. © If the random number falls between v and m (being equal to m = m - v, see below) an entity will copy a variant from another site. The probability of each site being chosen as the source of the new variant is proportional to its LCP distance from the focal site. When the site to be copied from is chosen, a variant to be copied is chosen randomly from the cultural assemblage of that site. Simulation procedure and output The computer records the assemblage structure (i.e. the relative frequency of variants) for each site for each iteration. Each iteration corresponds to one cultural generation, because if entities are interpreted as ceramic bowls, then one simulation time step is Fig. 2. Spatial distribution of virtual sites in the Central Balkans. equal to the bowl's use-life, assuming that a broken bowl needs to be replaced with a new bowl and that the making of the new bowl involves the choice of the variant of the bowl shape or bowl decoration. For this reason, simulation iteration can be interpreted as corresponding to roughly one year, because this is close to the median use-life of serving pottery vessels, as the survey of the ethnoarchaeo-logical literature shows (Mills 1989; Varien, Mills 1997). A simulation runs for 1000 iterations. Given the fact that archaeological site assemblages are not snapshots in time, but time-averaged, accumulated assemblages (Bailey 2007), the output of the simulation consists of matrices where sites are in rows and columns give the frequencies of variants accumulated in the last 200 iterations. Cultural scenarios In this paper, we present only two simple scenarios: © The Low Interaction scenario. All sites start with identical assemblages with maximum diversity (each entity has a different variant). Cultural transmission is based on the neutral model with the following parameters: m = 0.1, v = 0.01. © The High Interaction scenario. All sites start with identical assemblages with maximum diversity (each entity has a different variant). Cultural transmission is based on the neutral model with the following parameters: m = 0.4, v = 0.01 Methods of analysis Comparing simulation results to the archaeological record Ideally, we would make a direct comparison of simulation results with the archaeological record by examining a correlation between the typological distance matrix produced by the simulation and the observed typological distance matrix based on archaeological data. However, the appropriate quantitative archaeological data is not available. This would also require simulated site positions to correspond to real site positions, which is not the case here. For this reason, we attempt to make only an indirect and very rough comparison of simulated and real-world patterns using the traditional concept of archaeological culture as defined by Gordon Childe (1929) and formalised by David Clarke (1968). Childe defined cultures in this way: "Wefind certain types of remains - pots, implements, ornaments, burial rites and house forms - constantly recurring together. Such a complex of associated traits we shall call a 'cultural group' or just a 'culture'. We assume that such a complex is the material expression of what today we would call 'a people'" (Childe 1929.v-vi). Clarke gave a formal version of this definition1: "A polythetic set of specific and comprehensive artefact-type categories which consistently recur together in assemblages within a limited geographical area" (Clarke 1968.188). The implication of Clarke's formalisation is that archaeological cultures are equivalent to statistical groups (e.g., clusters resulting from cluster analysis). Culture historians have defined archaeological cultures as groups of sites sharing many types of material culture, with pottery usually being the most important class of material culture considered. The difference between cluster analysis and the traditional culture-historical approach is that definitions of traditional archaeological cultures are based on researchers' subjective evaluations of similarities between assemblages. However, it is not unreasonable to assume that traditional cultures, despite the informal and subjective methodology used to define them, capture some of the main trends of spatial and temporal variability of material culture. It should be emphasised that our use of archaeological cultures as proxies for the patterns of material culture variability in space does not mean that we consider archaeological cultures as real anthropological and historical phenomena; we use them only as a proxy in the absence of quantitative data on the distribution of material culture. So, in order to make our simulation results comparable to the distribution of archaeological cultures, we performed a cluster analysis on the assemblages using variant frequencies as variables. For frequency data, Euclidean distance matrix was calculated based on variant percentages in assemblages. Ward's method was used as a clustering algorithm on variant percentage data (assemblages in rows, individual variant percentages in columns). The number of clusters is equated with the number of major archaeological cultures (4) in the study area: Vinca, Butmir, So- 1 Childe was aware of the polythetic nature of archaeological cultures but his aim was to disregard types that were associated with more than one culture (Shennan 1994.13). pot-Lengyel, Tisza (Fig. 3). We have no simulated sites in the Adriatic area, so we did not anticipate the existence of clusters corresponding to the Danilo and Hvar-Lisicici cultures. Given that both scenarios start with identical assemblages, the initial conditions are broadly comparable to the Early Neolithic in the Central Balkans, where only two major cultural groups are distinguished: Starcevo-Koros-Cri§ and Impresso group (Benac 1979). Since there are no sites in an area corresponding to the Impresso culture, the fact that all virtual sites have the same assemblage crudely mimics the relative uniformity of material culture in the Early Neolithic in the Central Balkans in the first half of the 6th millenium BC. The end of the simulation occurs 1000 iterations later, accumulating the variant frequencies from the last 200 iterations. The end of the simulation would roughly correspond to the first half of the 5th millennium BC, which is the period of the Late Neolithic in Central Balkans. The results of cluster analyses were presented visually by plotting the sites coded for the cluster membership on the study area map. In this way, we can visually explore whether clusters based on typological similarity are spatially grouped in a similar way to traditionally defined archaeological cultures. Given that the cluster analysis may yield different solutions for different distance measures, clustering algorithms and the number of clusters, we also perform a correspondence analysis (CA) on the simulation output data matrix. CA reduces the dimensionality of the complete data matrix and the first CA axis accounts for the greatest amount of variance in the multi-dimensional data. Each site is then colour coded for its value on the first CA axis, with the colours of the spectrum corresponding to CA axis 1 score values, and the sites coded in such a way are plotted on the geographical Fig. 3. Distribution of traditional archaeological cultures in the Late Neolithic of the Central Balkans (based on maps of archaeological cultures in Benac 1979). space. In this way, we can visually explore the main trends in similarity and dissimilarity of assemblages without the intervening step of grouping them into clusters. Is there a correlation between geographical and typological distances? We answered this question by performing Mantel's matrix correlation test (Mantel 1967) on the matrix of LCP distances and the matrix of typological distances based on type frequencies. We also tested for the correlation between typological distances based on the Jaccard distance measure and LCP geographical distances. The Jaccard distance measure Fig. 4. Simulation results for the Low Interaction scenario. is based on the Jaccard similarity coefficient (see below). The intensity and statistical significance of this correlation is also tested by Mantel's matrix correlation test implemented in R. Results Patterns of typological similarity between simulated assemblages Figure 4 shows the results for the Low Interaction scenario cluster analysis. There is a broad correspondence between the spatial patterning of simulated assemblages and the distribution of traditional archaeological cultures. Cluster 2 roughly corresponds to Vinca, cluster 4 to Butmir, Cluster 3 to Zelenikovo (although Zelenikovo is very similar to Vinca), and cluster 1 to Sopot-Lengyel, although it seems to have a discontinuous distribution - it is interrupted by cluster 2 sites in Vojvodina and its distribution then continues in Romania. Figure 5 shows the plot of site locations with their scores on the first CA axis, which explains 1.9% of total variance (inertia) in the data2. There is a gradient of CA axis 1 scores along the southeast-northwest axis. The similarity/dissimilarity pattern in space resembles the distribution of archaeological Fig. 5. Plot of simulated assemblages for the Low Interaction scenario in geographical space coded for their score on the first CA axis. cultures. The group in Romania is clearly different from the group in Eastern Croatia. Bulgarian sites also form a clear group (shown in blue). The differences between Croatian and Bosnian sites are not as pronounced as the cluster analysis would suggest. Figure 6 shows the results of the High Interaction scenario. In this plot, we recognise only a cluster of sites (Cluster 1) vaguely resembling Vinca culture, but the spatial distribution of other clusters is not that similar to the distribution of archaeological cultures. Figure 7 shows the plot of site locations with their scores on the first CA axis, which explains 2.05% of total variance (inertia) in the data. Again, there is a gradient of CA axis 1 scores along the southeast-northwest axis. Correlation of typological and geographical distances Figure 8 shows the plot of LCP geographical distances and Euclidean typological distances, while Figure 9 shows the plot of LCP and Jaccard typological distances for the Low Interaction scenario; there is a curvilinear relationship between geographical and typological distances. Therefore, we transformed the data by calculating the logarithms of both variables. The correlation is higher for Jaccard distances (Pearson's r = 0.767, Mantel test p < 0.001 ) than for Euclidean distances (Pearson's r = 0.265, Mantel's test p < 0.001). Figure 10 shows the plot of LCP geographical distances and Euclidean typological distances, while Figure 11 shows the plot of LCP and Jaccard typological distances for the High Interaction scenario. Again, the correlation for log-transformed data is higher for Jaccard distances (Pearson's r = 0.839, Mantel test p < 0.001) than for Euclidean distances (Pearson's r = 0.522, Mantel test p < 0.001). Discussion and conclusions We have shown that a very simple model of interactions conditioned by distance can produce patterns similar to the spatial distribution of traditionally defined archaeological cultures. This does not mean that the neutral model is the correct model. It only 2 Even though this seems extremely small, it actually does summarize the patterns of covariation of main variants. There are around 20 000 variants in the accumulated assemblage, most of which are mutations with very low frequencies. Since they appear in very low frequency for a short time (usually being lost after the iterations in which they are introduced) they are mostly independent of the high frequency variants. Therefore, many of these variants are accounted by different CA axes thus reducing the percent of inertia explained by the first axis which accounts for a relatively small number of highly frequent variants. means that this simple model is sufficient as it is to produce patterns that are visually similar to the observed ones, so we do not necessarily need to invoke ethnic identity or some other form of collective identity to account for the observed patterns. It is interesting that the gradient in typological similarity appears to be running in the NW-SE direction, although there is no directional movement or transmission. -, o • . • v. at* . ""«J Legenda Pripadnost kiasteru: o • ' •• if/ i Vf i v The correlation between geographical and typological distances predictably differs between the High and the Low Fig. 6. Simulation results for the High Interaction scenario. Interaction scenarios. The High Interaction scenario shows a stronger correlation than the Low Interaction scenario. However, in both scenarios a great amount of typological variance is not accounted for by distance, although the interaction is affected by distance. This means that we should not expect to find a perfect correlation between typological and geographical distances, even if the transmission is affected by distance (f Hart 2012), because the transmission process also occurs within sites. It is interesting that the choice of the typological distance measure influences the strength of the correlation between geographical and typological distances. At present, we can only speculate about the reasons for this effect. Our first hypothesis was that this result could be explained by the fact that the Jac-card coefficient is predominantly influenced by joint presences of types. Given that joint presences are dependent primarily on the degree of interaction, which is conditioned by geographical distance, a typological distance measure based only on joint presences will capture mostly variation correlated with geographical distance. This is not the case for Euclidean distance measure which is based on all types: e.g., frequencies of types which are present only in one assemblage and not in the other, such as random innovations, will also enter into the calculation and act as random noise in relation to the signal created by interaction by geographical distance. However, we are not certain that this is the correct explanation, because when the 'city-block' distance metric is used, which is a distance analogue of the Brainerd-Robinson similarity coefficient (Brainerd 1951; Robinson 1951), the correlation between typological distances based on the city-block metric and geographical LCP distances for log transformed data are higher than for Euclidean typological distances, but not as high as for the Jaccard coefficient (e.g., for the Low Interactions scenario with city-block distance used: Pearson's r = 0.556, p < 0.001). As Euclidean distance, the city-block distance also takes into account the frequencies of all types, regardless of whether they are jointly present or absent. Fig. 7. Plot of simulated assemblages for the High Interaction scenario in geographical space coded for their score on the first CA axis. Fig. 8. LCP and typological distances based on Euclidean distance for the Low Interaction scenario. Fig. 9. LCP and typological distances based on the Jaccard distance for the Low Interaction scenario. Fig. 10. LCP and typological distances based on Euclidean distance for the High Interaction scenario. Fig. 11. LCP and typological distances based on the Jaccard distance for the High Interaction scenario. While the results seem interesting, this project is still 'under construction', so there are many issues that need to be addressed and corrected before the simulation results can be considered relevant. One of the greatest weaknesses of the simulations described above is the lack of demographic dynamics. Demography is a key factor in the process of cultural evolution, as both theoretical work and empirical studies show (Collard et al. 2013; Henrich 2004; Shennan 2001; 2013). So, demographic dynamics needs to be built into the simulation framework -work that is currently in progress. We simulated only a very simple and general (semi-abstract) model, so our results are interesting only as a methodological exercise at this point. The simulation approach is potentially useful because it allows for more complex and realistic models to be simulat- ed. For example, the model can be made more complex by letting the current similarity between sites affect transmission choices in addition to distance (cf. Axelrod 1997), or we could run simulations with several classes of 'material culture' coevolving and interacting. Additionally, spatial interaction can be modeled more flexibly (see Crema et al. 2014.292). Needless to say, the full potential of simulations will not be fulfilled until empirical work has been done. Typological data from existing archaeological assemblages need to be collected in a systematic way in a form which is compatible with the simulation results. Only then will we be able to test different models and scenarios rigorously. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- This research was undertaken as a part of project No. 177008, funded by the Ministry of Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia. This paper is based on the paper presented at the 20th Neolithic seminar in Ljubljana. We are grateful to Professor Mihael Budja for providing us with the opportunity to participate in the seminar. References Axelrod R. 1997. The Dissemination of Culture: A Model with Local Convergence and Global Polarization. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(2): 203-226. Bailey G. 2007. Time perspectives, palimpsests and the archaeology of time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26(2): 198-223. Benac A. (ed.) 1979. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja II: Neolitsko doba. Svetlost. Sarajevo. Bentley R. A., Hahn M. W. and Shennan S. J. 2004. Random Drift and Culture Change. Proceedings: Biological Sciences 271(1547): 1443-1450. Bentley R. A., Lipo C. P., Herzog H. A. and Hahn M. W. 2007. Regular rates of popular culture change reflect random copying. Evolution and Human Behavior 28(3): 151-158. Bentley R. A., Shennan S. J. 2003. Cultural Transmission and Stochastic Network Growth. American Antiquity 68: 459-485. Bettinger R. L., Eerkens J. 1999. Point Typologies, Cultural Transmission, and the Spread of Bow-and-Arrow Technology in the Prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity 64(2): 231-242. Boyd R., Richerson P. J. 1985. Culture and the Evolutionary Process. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Brainerd G. W. 1951. The Place of Chronological Ordering in Archaeological Analysis. American Antiquity 16(4): 301-313. Cavalli-Sforza L. L. 2001. Genes, Peoples and Languages. Penguin Books. London. Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Feldman M. W. 1981. Cultural Transmission and Evolution: A Quantiative Approach. Princeton University Press. Princeton. Childe V. G. 1929. The Danube in Prehistory. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Clarke D. L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. Methuen & Co. London. Cochrane E. E. 2001. Style, Function, and Systematic Empiricism: The Conflation of Process and Pattern. In T. D. Hurt, G. F. M. Raluta (eds.), Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Archaeology. Bergin & Garvey. London: 183-202. Collard M., Ruttle A., Buchanan B. and O'Brien M. J. 2013. Population Size and Cultural Evolution in Nonindustrial Food-Producing Societes. PLoS ONE 8(9): e72628. Crema E. R., Kerig T. and Shennan S. 2014. Culture, space, and metapopulation: a simulation-based study for evaluating signals of blending and branching. Journal of Archaeological Science 43:289-298. Dunnell R. C. 1978. Style and Function: A Fundamental Dichotomy. American Antiquity 43(2): 192-202. Eerkens J. W., Lipo C. P. 2005. Cultural transmission, copying errors, and the generation of variation in material culture and the archaeological record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24(4): 316-334. Fort J., Pujol T. and Linden M. V. 2012. Modelling the Neolithic Transition in the Near East and Europe. American Antiquity 77(2): 203-219. François O., Currat M., Ray N., Han E., Excoffier L. and Novembre J. 2010. Principal Component Analysis under Population Genetic Models of Range Expansion and Admixture. Molecular Biology and Evolution 27(6): 1257-1268. Gray R. D., Atkinson Q. D. 2003. Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature 426(6965): 435-439. Gray R. D., Jordan F. M. 2000. Language trees support the express-train sequence of Austronesian expansion. Nature 405(6790): 1052-1055. Grune-Yanoff T., Weirich P. 2010. The Philosophy and Epi-stemology of Simulation: A Review. Simulation & Gaming 41(1): 20-50. Hart J. P. 2012. The effects of geographical distances on pottery assemblage similarities: a case study from Northern Iroquoia. Journal of Archaeological Science 39(1): 128-134. Henrich J. 2004. Demography and Cultural Evolution: How Adaptive Cultural Processes can Produce Maladaptive Losses: The Tasmanian Case. American Antiquity 69 (2): 197-214. Henrich J., Boyd R. and Richerson P. J. 2008. Five Misunderstandings About Cultural Evolution. Human Nature 19:119-137. Hodder I. 1982. Symbols in action: Ethnoarchaeological studies of material culture. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Jordan P., Shennan S. 2003. Cultural transmission, language, and basketry traditions amongst the California Indians. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22(1): 42-74. Kohler T. A., VanBuskirk S. and Ruscavage-Barz S. 2004. Vessels and villages: evidence for conformist transmission in early village aggregations on the Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23(1): 100-118. Lake M. W. 2014. Trends in Archaeological Simulation. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 21(2): 258-287. Lemmen C., Gronenborn D. and Wirtz K. W. 2011. A simulation of the Neolithic transition in Western Eurasia. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(12): 3459-3470. Lipo C. P. 2001. Science, Style and the Study of Community Structure. British Archaeological Reports S 918. Ar-chaeopress. Oxford. Lipo C. P., Madsen M. E., Dunnell R. C. and Hunt T. 1997. Population Structure, Cultural Transmission, and Frequency Seriation. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16(4): 301-333. Lycett S. J. 2007. Why is there a lack of Mode 3 Levallois technologies in East Asia? A phylogenetic test of the Mo-vius-Schick hypothesis. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26(4): 541-575. Mantel N. 1967. The Detection of Disease Clustering and a Generalized Regression Approach. Cancer Research 27: 209-220. Mesoudi A. 2011. Cultural Evolution: How Darwinian Theory Can Explain Human Culture and Synthesize the Social Sciences. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Mesoudi A., Whiten A. and Laland K. N. 2006. Towards a unified science of cultural evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29:329-383. Mills B. J. 1989. Integrating Functional Analyses of Vessels and Sherds through Models of Ceramic Assemblage Formation. World Archaeology 21(1): 133-147. Neiman F. D. 1995. Stylistic Variation in Evolutionary Perspective: Inferences from Decorative Diversity and Interassemblage Distance in Illinois Woodland Ceramic Assemblages. American Antiquity 60: 7-36. O'Brien M. J., Lyman R. L. 2000. Applying Evolutionary Archaeology. Plenum Press. New York. 2003. Cladistics and Archaeology. The University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City. Porcic M. in press. Exploring the Effects if Assemblage Accumulation on Diversity and Innovation Rate Estimates in Neutral, Conformist, and Anti-Conformist Models of Cultural Transmission. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. DOI: 10.1007/s10816-014-9217-8. Premo L. S., Scholnick J. B. 2011. The Spatial Scale of Social Learning Affects Cultural Diversity. American Anti-qiuty 76:163-176. Richerson P. J., Boyd R. 2005. Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Roberts B. W., Vander Linden M. (ed.) 2011. Investigating Archaeological Cultures: Material Culture, Variability, and Transmission. Springer. New York. Robinson W. S. 1951. A Method for Chronologically Ordering Archaeological Deposits. American Antiquity 16 (4): 293-301. Shennan S. 1994. Introduction: archaeological approaches to cultural identity. In S. Shennan, Archaeological approaches to cultural indentity. Routledge. London: 1-32. 2001. Demography and Cultural Innovation: a Model and its Implications for the Emergence of Modern Human Culture. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 11 (01): 5-16. 2002. Genes, memes and human history: Darwinian archaeology and cultural evolution. Thames & Hudson. London. 2011. Descent with modification and the archaeological record. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 366:1070-1079. Demographic Continuities and Discontinuities in Neolithic Europe: Evidence, Methods and Implications. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 20(2): 300-311. Shennan S., Wilkinson J. R. 2001. Ceramic Style Change and Neutral Evolution: A Case Study from Neolithic Europe. American Antiquity 66(4): 577-593. Steele J., Glatz C. and Kandler A. 2010. Ceramic diversity, random copying, and tests for selectivity in ceramic production. Journal of Archaeological Science 37:1348-1358. Tehrani J., Collard M. 2002. Investigating cultural evolution through biological phylogenetic analyses of Turkmen textiles. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21(4): 443-463. Tehrani J., Collard M. and Shennan S. 2010. The cophylo-geny of populations and cultures: reconstructing the evolution of Iranian tribal craft traditions using trees and jungles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences 365:3865-3874. Varien M. D., Mills B. 1997. Accumulations research: Problems and prospects for estimating site occupation span. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 4(2): 141-191. White A. 2013. An Abstract Model Showing That the Spatial Structure of Social Networks Affects the Outcomes of Cultural Transmission Processes. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 16(3): 9. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Neolithic and Eneolithic activities inferred from organic residue analysis of pottery from Mala Triglavca, Moverna vas and Ajdovska jama, Slovenia Lucija {oberl1*, Milena Horvat2, Andreja ?ibrat Ga[pari;2, Marko Sraka2, Richard Evershed1 and Mihael Budja2 1 Organic Geochemistry Unit, School of Chemistry, University of Bristol, UK lucija.soberl@gmail.com 2 Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, SI ABSTRACT - The research discussed in this paper focused on the analysis and identification of organic residues either preserved as visible or absorbed organic remains on Neolithic and Eneolithic pottery from various archaeological and geographical contexts. These are connected with various food preparation strategies and past human activities, i.e. cave burials in Ajdovska jama (food as a grave good/offering), the rock shelter at Mala Triglavca (meat and dairy animal husbandry practices) and Moverna vas, which had a long occupation sequence (complex farming and animal management). The preservation of biomarkers mirrored past human activities and different pottery uses at various types of sites. The carbon stable isotope ratios ofprimary fatty acids in lipid pottery extracts confirmed the presence of adipose and dairy fats as well as biomarkers ofplant fats, beeswax and birch bark tar. IZVLEČEK - Predstavljeno raziskovalno delo se je osredotočalo na analizo in identifikacijo organskih ostankov na površini neolitske in eneolitske keramike ter ostankov lipidov absorbiranih v keramično matrico vzorcev iz različnih arheoloških in geografskih kontekstov. Ti so povezani z različnimi strategijami priprave hrane in preteklimi človeškimi aktivnostmi - pokopi v Ajdovski jami (hrana kot grobni pridatek), skalniprevis Mala Triglavca (mesna in mlekarska živinoreja) ter naselbina Moverna vas z dolgo stratigrafsko sekvenco (kompleksno poljedelstvo in živinoreja). Različne tipe najdišč je bilo mogoče povezati z raznolikimi dejavnostmi in raznoliko uporabo keramičnih posod prek ohranjenih biomarkerjev. Analiza razmerja stabilnih izotopov glavnih maščobnih kislin v keramičnih ekstraktih je potrdila prisotnost mesnih in mlečnih maščob glavnih domestikatov kakor tudi navzočnost lipidnih biomarkerjev rastlinskega izvora, ostanke čebeljega voska in smole. KEY WORDS - Neolithic; Eneolithic; lipid residue analysis; pottery; stable isotopes; birch bark tar; beeswax Introduction Archaeological research has benefited greatly in the past twenty years from an exponential increase in interdisciplinary studies incorporating analytical sciences. Two major fields of archaeological investigation, predominantly in prehistoric periods, have been trying to understand past diets and the mobility of populations by analysing osteological material and ceramics. The porous surface of these two commonly found archaeological artefacts enables * author for correspondence organic molecules such as lipids, proteins and nucleic acids to become entrapped and preserved through millennia. Unglazed pottery has proved to be an ideal analytical medium: on the one hand, it readily absorbs organic compounds during cooking, food storage and consumption, while it also serves as an indicator of past lifestyles, kinship, animal husbandry practices, DOI>10.4312\dp.41.9 149 Lucija Soberl, Milena Horvat, Andreja Zibrat Gašparič, Marko Sraka, Richard Evershed and Mihael Budja agriculture, trade or ritual practices (Boast 2002; Gibson 2002). Although organic molecules are prone to degradation processes during pottery use or during the post-depositional period, it has been found that adequate concentrations of lipids can be preserved either as absorbed residues or visible food crusts and retrieved through organic solvent extraction (Heron, Evershed 1993; Ever-shed 2008; Craig 2004; Saul et al. 2013). Sites selection Among the various Slovenian Neolithic and Eneolithic sites available, three were chosen for lipids analyses (Fig. 1). The two with the longest settlement sequence, i.e. Mala Triglavca and Moverna vas, are embedded in different environmental and cultural contexts. The third, Ajdovska jama, is a burial site with strong evidence of burial ceremonies and rituals. The Mala Triglavca rock shelter is located on the Dinaric Karst in south-western Slovenia, 15km from the Northern Adriatic coast. The AMS 14C dates show a long sequence of human activities from the 8th to the 3rd millennium calBC, combined with natural and geomorphological post-depositional disturbances. The Moverna vas open-air site is situated in the karstified Bela Krajina region in the south-eastern part of Slovenia. The settlement sequence spans approximately two millennia from the 5th to the 3rd millennium calBC. The Ajdovska jama cave site lies within the catchment of the Sava River in south-eastern Slovenia. The site is well known for its burials. The human remains at the site occurred as distinct Fig. 1. A map of Slovenia showing the locations of archaeological sites investigated (adapted from National Museum of Slovenia). clusters of mainly disarticulated bones belonging to at least 31 individuals. The cave was used for burial and related ritual practices in the late 5th and early 4th millennium calBC. Moverna vas The Neolithic and Eneolithic settlement sequence at Moverna vas consists of nine settlement phases. Phases 2 to 6 were recognised as Neolithic, and phases 7 to 9 as Eneolithic (Budja 1989; 1994). Bayesian modelling (Fig. 2) shows that the sequence spans approximately two millennia, with continuous occupation from 4945-4810 calBC to 4270-4135 calBC and discontinuous occupation until 2905-2800 calBC (at 68.2% probability) with possibly centuries-long breaks in occupation (Budja 1994; Sraka 2013). The chronology is largely based on AMS 14C dates from carbonised organic residues adhering to interior pottery surfaces. Chemical analyses of these residues show that they are either charred remains of food Sample Name Material Context Phase Lab code 14C Conventional age (BP) Calibrated age acc. to 68.2% prob. (calBC) Calibrated age acc. to 95.4% prob. (calBC) A13C (meas. on AMS) Reference 23MV food crust 053.1 3 Poz-21396 5750+40 4450-4350 4460-4335 -24.9+0.5 Sraka 20i3.App. 24MV birch bark tar 050.2 4 Poz-21398 5550+40 4540-4455 4615-4370 -20.6+0.3 Sraka 20i3.App. 25MV birch bark tar 050.1 4 Poz-21399 5630+40 4715-4605 4770-4540 -24.2+0.2 Sraka 20i3.App. 26MV birch bark tar 022.1 5 Poz-21400 5610+40 4940-4805 4995-4785 -24.2+0.6 Sraka 20i3.App. 27MV birch bark tar 050.1 4 Poz-21401 5620+40 4495-4370 4530-4360 -20+0.4 Sraka 20i3.App. 28MV birch bark tar 050.2/056 2 Poz-21402 5990+40 4490-4365 4520-4355 -22.3+0.7 Sraka 20i3.App. 29MV food crust planum 7 2 Poz-21403 5800+40 4505-4370 4540-4365 -21.6+1.8 Sraka 20i3.App. 151MV birch bark tar 031.4 6 Poz-21404 5670+40 4450-4350 4460-4335 -19.1+0.5 Sraka 20i3.App. 152MV birch bark tar 050.2 4 Poz-21420 5550+40 4680-4545 4705-4500 -22.9+0.5 Sraka 20i3.App. Tab. 1. 14C dates obtained from organic remains on pottery for Moverna vas (see also Fig. 10). Fig. 2. Moverna vas stratigraphical sequence with Bayesian statistical modelling of radiocarbon dates. (23MV, 29MV; App. 1; Tab. 1) or birch bark tar (24MV-28MV, 151MV, 152MV; App. 2; Tab. 1; Fig. 10). According to the results of chemical analyses, no freshwater reservoir effect is to be expected for these dates. Both the food crust and birch bark tar samples are considered as reliable samples with minimal inbuilt age (Hedges et al. 1992; Oinonen et al. 2010). During the continuous occupation in the 5th millennium, two related changes in 4325-4265 calBC (at 68.2% probability) have been observed. While the transition from Neolithic to Eneolithic vessel types and pottery fabrics was observed in the pottery assemblages (Tomaz 1997), the changes in settlement pattern relate to settlement fragmentation and settlement extension within the site-catchment areas, as well as in previously uninhabited areas (Budja 1995). The pottery samples selected for lipid analysis were embedded in Neolithic settlement phases 2 to 6 (c. 4945-4265 calBC) (Figs. 2, 4). The ceramic vessels of these settlement phases include various types of pot (Fig. 3.type 4, 5, 6, 8, 9), dishes with spouts (Fig. 3.type 1), pedestal dishes (Fig. 3.type 7), small pots (Fig. 3.type 3), bowls (Fig. 3.type 2), and ladles (Fig. 3.type 10). Most of the pottery was fired in an oxidising atmosphere and well made, with burnished surfaces and red or brown slips applied to the sur- face. The vessels were made with homogenous clay fabrics and abundant quartz grain inclusions, which in some samples can even be interpreted as added temper {Tomaz 1997; 1999; Zibrat Gasparic 2008). Mala Triglavca The Neolithic and Eneolithic sequence at the Mala Triglavca rock shelter consists of 23 occupational levels, ranging from c. 5600 to 3500 calBC. The lipid analyses of the pottery assemblage, which is comprised mainly of various types of bowls, beakers, dishes and pots have been published (Soberl et al. 2008; Budja et al. 2013) and will be used here mainly in relation to other sites in the discussion. The pottery samples were taken from Neolithic occupational levels and can be linked according to their morphology and technology to the Vlaska pottery group (Barfield 1972; Zibrat Gasparic 2004). The oldest pottery fragments appear as early as 56165525 calBC. For the lipid analysis, we sampled 65 vessels from contexts that range from 5480 to 4261 calBC (68.2% probability). The results indicate an extensive mixing of ruminant and non-ruminant, and ruminant adipose and ruminant dairy fats in individual vessels. In some vessels, the presence of molluscs, crustaceans and freshwater fish was detected. Thirty per cent of the sampled pottery contained lipids characteristic of dairy fats, indicating Fig. 3. Moverna vas pottery types represented within the different settlement phases. Types 1-10 were-analysed for organic residues. See Appendix 1. that the processing of dairy products in pottery vessels was quite extensive. The use of dairy products at Mala Triglavca is embedded in the time span between 5467-5227 calBC (for details see Budja et al. 2013). Ajdovska jama Excavations in Ajdovska jama proved that the cave was an eminent site at the end of the Neolithic period, with traces of temporary human activity until the High Middle Ages. Ajdovska jama is the funerary site with the oldest excavated burials in Slovenia, and a place where the remains of the dead were worshipped. The cave is also a natural karstic phenomenon, which might have had a symbolic meaning for prehistoric people. The most typical grave goods of individual groups of burials that were excavated in the central hall and the left corridor included pottery (i.e. pot, dish, jug and ladle), jewellery (i.e. necklace or bracelet), and tools or weapons (i.e. axe, awl). The grave goods were found alongside the bodies of the deceased and prove that rituals were performed at the time of subsequent burials and visits to the cave. Food and meat were also placed beside the bodies as offerings. Analyses of plant and animal remains from the burials showed that cereals (e.g., wheat, barley and a type of bean) and the meat of domestic animals (i.e. ovicaprids, cattle) as well as wild animals (i.e. rabbit, wild boar, red deer, fox) were cooked (Horvat 1989). Additional information on diet came from the analyses of carbon (13C) and nitrogen (15N) isotopes in collagen obtained from human and animal bones. The results show that the people of this community consumed mostly meat and plant protein coming from C3 dietary source (Ogrinc, Budja 2005; Bonsall et al. 2007). Bayesian chronological modelling of 14C dates provided by Clive Bonsall et al. (2007) shows that the burials belong to a relatively Fig. 4. Vessels from Moverna vas that were analysed for organic residues. short time interval of a few human generations from 4340-4290 to 4295-4235 calBC (at 68.2% probability). A collection of 52 pottery samples was selected for lipid residue analysis, including various types of pots, dishes, dishes with spouts, pedestalled vessels, bowls and jugs (Fig. 5). Most of the vessels were fired in an oxidising atmosphere and were made with various fine-grained quartz fabrics (Horvat 1989; Os-terc 1986). Organic residue analysis Cooking and processing organic commodities enables insoluble lipid residues to be absorbed into porous ceramic matrix and preserved for several thousand of years in the form of surface or/and absorbed residues. Cooking vessels have proved to be the most convenient for analysing organic residues due to their constant everyday use and exposure to high temperatures during cooking. However, non-culinary related vessel use can also absorb lipids when fatty commodities are stored: from the use of various sealants to reduce the permeability of the unglazed ceramic surface (resin, tar, pitch, milk and beeswax) and from the use of adhesives to repair broken ves- sels (Charters et al. 1993a; Regert, Rolando 2002; Regert 2004). When determining the functionality of pottery, numerous archaeological methods can be employed, including written and pictorial evidence, the use of archaeological contexts, information obtained via ethnographical comparisons, pollen analysis of visible organic remains, use wear analysis and the analysis of preserved contents (Orton et al. 1993; Rice 1987; Tite 2008; Skibo, Feinman 1999). Prudence Rice (1987) divided the principle functions of pottery into three categories: (i) storing dry substances; (ii) carrying liquids; and (iii) heating the contents over fire. Direct evidence for storage vessels apart from their larger size is not readily available, cooking pots offer some additional indices, i.e. carbonised visible remains adhering to outer or inner pot surfaces and signs of sooting. Chemistry offers interpretative tools for use in cases with a complete absence or selective preservation of organic and biological remains, such as osteological assemblages or plant remains; or for activities that are archaeologically difficult to trace, such as beekeeping. The primary focus of lipid research in the past 20 years has been to identify various biomar- Fig. 5. Vessels from Ajdovska jama that were analysed for organic residues. kers connected to specific domestic activities and ancient diets, and above all, identifying landmark transitions in ancient economies. These transitions include examples such as horse domestication (Outram et al. 2009), the earliest dairying practices in Europe, the Near East and Africa (Copley et al. 2005c; Craig et al. 2005; Evershed et al. 2008b; Dunne et al. 2012; Salque et al. 2013; Cramp et al. 2014); the chronologically and typologically diverse importance of pig exploitation (Mukherjee et al. 2007) and the evidence of geographical dependence on marine food sources (Copley et al. 2004b; Hansel et al. 2004; Evershed et al. 2008d; Craig et al. 2011; Cramp et al. 2014; Cramp, Evershed 2014). The components of the lipid extracts of such residues can be identified and quantified by solvent extraction and a combination of analytical techniques that can achieve molecular level resolution, i.e. high temperature-gas chromatography (HTGC), GC/mass spectrometry (GC/MS; Evershed et al. 1990) and GC-combustion-isotope ratio MS (GC-C-IRMS; Evershed et al. 1994; 1999). Furthermore, modern cooking experiments have helped to understand the accumulation of lipids caused by different cooking practices, vessel use and preservation. If we take into consideration that an average concentration of preserved lipids in archaeological pottery is around 100|ug g-1, it is quite clear that only 1% or less of the original concentration survives post-depositional degradation (Evershed 2008). The initial lipid absorption also depends on the lipid content of processed food (animal vs. plant products) and modes of food preparation or storage. Variations in long-term lipid preservation can also occur due to differences in fabric types. Animal fats are by far the most common class of residue identi- fied from archaeological pottery with compound-specific stable carbon isotope analysis, allowing the identification of different animal fats, e.g., ruminant and non-ruminant adipose fats and dairy fats (Dudd, Evershed 1998), as well as the identification of the mixing of commodities (Charters et al. 1995; Ever-shed et al. 1999). Materials and methods Lipid analyses were performed with established protocols that are described in detail in earlier publications (Evershed et al. 1990; Charters et al. 1993b). The identification of individual compounds was based upon eluting order, a comparison of retention times to standards and by comparing the mass spectra with known fragmentation patters and NIST spectra library. In summary, after cleaning the potsherd surface, a 2g fragment was ground to a fine powder and extracted using a mixture of chloroform and methanol (2:1 v/v). An aliquot of the obtained total lipid extract (TLE) was trimethylsilylated and analysed directly by HTGC. Structure elucidation and molecular identification was achieved by GC-MS and HTGC-MS analyses. Fatty acid methyl esters were prepared by saponification of a TLE aliquot with BF3/methanol to enable compound-specific stable isotopic determination by GC-C-IRMS. The addition of an internal standard of known concentration (n-tetratriacontane, 1mg mL-1) enabled the calculation of extracted lipid concentration. The discussion of recovery rates refers to the proportional number of pottery extracts with an appreciable preserved li-pid concentration (>5|g g-1), which was determined as the lowest acceptable lipid concentration that can be reliably attributed to and interpreted as remnants of ancient food processing rather than modern contamination (Evershed et al. 1999; Evershed 2008a). Visible surface residues were scraped from the ceramic surface with a clean scalpel, ground to a fine powder and extracted as described above; again an internal standard was added for lipid quantification. A total of 179 potsherds and visible residues were selected for organic residue analysis: 52 samples from Ajdovska jama, 36 samples from Mala Triglavca and 91 samples from Moverna vas site. Potsherds were selected to represent different occupational phases and human activities at each site. Visible residues were sampled and analysed separately. To avoid duplication, where visible residues were present they were labelled with the number 1, while the originating potsherd extract was labelled with the number 2. Results Neolithic and Eneolithic pottery from Ajdovska jama, Mala Triglavca and Moverna vas showed a very good lipid preservation, with an overall 53.6% of potsherds analysed yielding an appreciable lipid concentration. The preservation of lipids in pottery is heavily influenced by the alterations that may occur during vessel use or due to post-burial conditions in the soil, as well as the use of ceramic vessels during their lifetime (Evershed et al. 1999; Ever-shed 2008a). These factors could explain the variations observed in average lipid concentrations and recovery rates between sites: the pottery assemblage from Mala Triglavca yielded the least TLE extracts, with appreciable lipid concentrations (30.6%), followed by 48% of pottery from Ajdovska jama yielding lipids, while 65.9% of the analysed pottery from the Moverna vas site showed preserved organic residues. This trend is also repeated in observed median lipid concentrations from potsherd extracts as well as lipid concentration ranges. For a better demonstration of different concentration ranges, these are plotted as box-and-whiskers plots in Figure 5. Since, generally, only lipid concentrations higher than 5|g g-1 are considered as appreciable and can therefore be interpreted as archaeological, lipid concentrations below this threshold were ignored in the following comparisons (see Fig. 6 and Tab. 2). The observed lipid concentration ranges are considerably narrower in the ceramic assemblages of Mala Triglavca and Ajdovska jama than those from Moverna vas. Since the latter site was a fully developed, permanent settlement, in contrast to the occasionally used rock shelter and burial cave, higher li-pid concentrations could indicate frequent daily use of ceramic vessels resulting in an accumulation of residues. The organic residues in the investigated pottery showed compound distributions typical of animal fats and plant material degraded to various degrees. The parent triacylgycerols (TAGs) present in fresh adipose fats and plant oils quickly degrade into their constituent fatty acids, with the palmitic (C16:0) and stearic (C18:0) fatty acids persisting in highest abundance, and with minor contributions from shorter chain saturated fatty acid components. Many vessels yielded only free fatty acids, indicating that complete hydrolysis of the precursor TAG components had taken place. Two gas chromatograms representing differing degrees of degradation and compounds most commonly identified in the Neoli- thic and Eneolithic residues analysed can be seen in Figure 7. Fatty acids are usually present in the greatest abundance in archaeological lipid extracts with even rather than odd carbon number preference, dominated by palmitic (Ci6:o) and stearic (Ci8:o) fatty acids. While animal fats generally display a greater abundance of stearic acid, the plant derived lipids show a predominance of palmitic acid (Dudd 1999; Copley et al. 2005a; Romanus et al. 2007). The presence of odd carbon number free fatty acids (e.g., Ci5:o, Ci7:o, Ci9:o) together with their iso- and anteiso-bran-ched variations may indicate ruminant animal sources, as these compounds are biosynthesised by the bacteria living in the rumen (Mottram et al. 1999; Evershed et al. 2002). Despite their predominance, the Ci6:o and Ci8:o fatty acids possess only limited biomarker potential. Broad groups of commodities can be alluded to only by investigating the Ci6:o vs. Ci8:o fatty acid ratio (P/S ratio). Previous investigations of P/S ratios in modern reference materials have provided some additional proxies; however, interpretations of these have to be applied with great caution and only in combination with other data, i.e. TAG distributions and 813C values. Calculated P/S ratios for pottery extracts from investigated sites are shown in Figure 8. Previous studies have reported a P/S ratio <1.3 as indicative of ruminant adipose fats; a P/S ratio of approx. 2.2-2.9 and 4.9 indicative of dairy fats or non-ruminant adipose fats, while a P/S ratio between 4.o and 9.4 has been reported for commercial olive oils (Dudd 1999; Copley et al. 2005a; Romanus et al. 2007). P/S ratios calculated for TLEs of Slovenian pottery (Fig. 8) show a large proportion of 53 lipid extracts (68%) falling below the 1.3 mark, indicative of ruminant adipose fat; 24 extracts (31%) displaying the range 1.3-4.o, attributed to either rumi- Labels Ajdovska Mala Moverna jama Triglavca vas Min 5.02 5.53 5.25 Qi 8.26 10.81 18.03 Median 32.45 21.93 118.18 Q3 79.25 65 95 503.45 Max 557.13 173 35 3308.10 IQR 70.99 55J4 485.42 Upper 3 Outliers 1 7 Tab. 2. Details of absorbed lipid concentration ranges in analysed pottery. Fig. 6. Box-and-whiskerplots showing the range of preserved appreciable lipid concentrations in pottery from Ajdovska jama, Mala Triglavca and Mo-verna vas. Only concentrations higher than >5pgg-1 were used. nant dairy or non-ruminant adipose fats; only 1 extract (1%) displays a P/S ratio higher than 4.o, indicative of olive/plant oils. The presence of ruminant-derived lipids has also been confirmed by observed distributions of odd carbon number saturated fatty acids with their branched iso- and anteiso- homologues (C^o, C^obr, C17:o, C17:obr), biosynthesised by the bacteria living in the rumen (Dudd et al. 1998; Mottram et al. 1999; Vlaemnick et al. 2006). These branched fatty acid biomarkers were found in ten potsherd extracts: o8MT, 18MT, 75MT, 87MT, 23MV-2, 98MV, 134MV, 149MV, 153MV and 154MV. Apart from C16:o and C18:o fatty acids, a series of saturated long-chain fatty acids (LCFA) with a carbon number range between C2o and C3o has also been identified in fifteen potsherd extracts, representing 8% of the total assemblage: o3AJ, 37AJ, 69AJ, 7oAJ, 18MT, 29MV-2, 91MV, 99MV, 1o2MV, 111MV, 114MV, 121MV, 147MV, 149MV AND 154MV. Such a series of LCFA has previously been associated with two potential sources, depending on the accompanying compounds. If found in combination with isopre-noid fatty acids such as phytanic or pristanic acid, 4,8,12-trimethyltridecanoic acid or w-(o-alkylphenyl)-alkanoic acids, preserved lipids are most likely derived from marine organisms (Copley et al. 2004b; Fig. 7. Partial HTGC profile of the trimethylsilylated total lipid extract from potsherds 18MT (Mala Triglavca) and 110MV (Moverna vas) illustrating the contrasting distribution of compounds characteristic of partially and fully degraded animal fat. Key: FAX:Y are saturated free fatty acids of carbon length x and degree of unsaturation y. IS is the added internal standard; MAGs are monoacylglycerols; DAGs are diacyl-glycerols; TAGs are triacylglycerols. Hansel et al. 2004; Evershed et al. 2008c). LCFA extracted from Slovenian Neolithic and Eneolithic pottery, however, occur in high frequency together with long-chain n-alcohols of C22 to C32 even-carbon number series and analogous odd-carbon number n-alkane series of C23 to C33 chain length, which are more characteristic of degraded plant waxes (Tulloch 1976; Bianchi 1995). Mid-chain ketones have been identified in six residues derived from five body sherds and one rim sherd (02AJ, 04AJ, 72AJ, 29MV-2, 91MV, and 133MV), most frequently displaying a narrow distribution with C29, C31, C33 and C35 homologues. These bio-marker compounds are known to form by the condensation of fatty acids, involving decarboxylation and dehydration reactions occurring at high temperatures, typically in excess of 300°C (Evershed et al. 1995; Raven et al. 1997). The carbon chain length of ketones previously found in pottery extracts usu- ally ranges between C27 and C35, which reflects the length of the precursor fatty acids. These compounds have also been reported as components of the epicuticu-lar leaf waxes of higher plants (Tulloch 1976; Kolattukudy et al. 1976). However, the presence of unsaturated keto-nes was identified in two lipid extracts (02AJ and 72AJ), suggesting the unsatu-rated fatty acid precursors common in plant oils. A similar series of ketones was also reported to be formed during vigorous pyrolysis at temperatures reaching 800°C (Raven et al. 1997). Waxes Beeswax recovered from archaeological contexts can undergo various degrees of alteration; however, four major groups of compounds provide biomarkers for its presence: (i) long-chain alcohols (C24 to C32); (ii) odd-carbon number n-alka-nes (C25 to C33); (iii) a series of palmitic wax esters (C40 to C54); and (iv) hydroxy palmitic wax esters (C42 to C54). Similarly, plant waxes contain a mixture of compounds, including odd-carbon number n-alkanes (C21 to C37), monoesters ranging in chain length from C32 to C64 and long-chain alcohols with a chain length range between C22 to C34 (Tulloch 1976; Heron et al. 1994; Mills, White 1994; Charters et al. 1995; Regert et al. 2001). A relatively large proportion of preserved lipid residues (27%) showed traces of wax esters with chain lengths of C40 to C48, together with even-carbon number long chain alcohols (C22-C32) and odd-carbon number straight chain alkanes (C23-A33), which could either derive from diagenetically altered beeswax or degraded epicuticular plant waxes (Fig. 9). Wax esters in these potsherd extracts were predominantly found together with free fatty acids and their acylglycerol moities, suggesting that the vessels were used to process both leafy plants and animal products; whether they were processed simultaneously or separately cannot be elucidated from this data. Interestingly, a beeswax residue was identified in cup extract 125MV without any contributions from animal fats or plant waxes. A further seven potsherd extracts from three vessels (25MV, 26MV and 28MV) contained birch-bark tar biomarkers in conjunction with wax esters, indicating mixing of commodities. Recent experimental work reported by Dana Millson (2011) and Merryn Dineley (2000; 2011) has addressed the question of applying beeswax as a sealant, concluding that, although it is an effective waterproofing agent, it is not appropriate for use on cooking pots, causing the pot fabric to spall and flake off. Based on this, as honey would have been the earliest available natural sweetener, the beeswax residues identified in archaeological pottery could be interpreted as the remains of food processing that involved the addition of honey. Birch bark tar An unusual set of triterpenoid compounds was identified in 16 potsherd extracts from Moverna vas, representing seven vessels (24MV, 25MV, 26MV, 27MV, 28MV, 151MV and 152 MV) which had visible residues present on either the interior or exterior surface (Fig. 10). Visible residues are a common find on archaeological pottery, and routinely used for radiocarbon dating. It has been previously assumed/assessed that the exposed nature and structure of visible residues are usually not a good medium for preserving organic molecules (Evershed et al. 1992; Evershed 2008). It was possible to assess this variation, because visible residues were sampled and extracted separately. Lipid concentration values differ quite significantly, with values for visible residues averaging at 1537.04|g g-1, while absorbed residues displayed an average lipid concentration of 25.5|g g-1. The two sets of residues were also diffe- rentiated by the biomarkers extracted: visible residues showed the presence of lupa-2,20(29)-dien-28-ol, allobetul-2-ene, lupenone, lupeol, betulone and betu-lin, which are characteristic of birch-bark tar. While betulin and lupeol are the predominant biomarkers present in birch-bark tar, other compounds are formed by degradation reactions, particularly the heating processes needed to produce the pitch. In particular, betulin is partly transformed into lupa-2,20(29)-dien-28-ol by dehydration, whereas lupeol leads to the formation of a triterpenoid hydrocarbon identified as lupa-2,2-(29)-diene (Charters et al. 1993; Pollard, Heron 1996; Regert, Rolando 2002; Regert et al. 2003a: 2003b). Triacylglycerols Triacylglycerols, as the most abundant components of fresh animal fats and plant oils, can be useful indicators of lipid preservation and the extent of degradation. A comparison of TAG distributions with those of modern reference fats has shown that specific distributions can be linked to different lipid sources and enable the preliminary differentiation of their origins from the two major classes of domestic animals (ruminant and non-ruminant/porcine) and between ruminant dairy and adipose fats. Ruminant animals show a characteristic distribution of TAGs, with carbon numbers ranging from C44 to C54 with a maximum concentration at C52, whereas non-ruminant animals display a slightly shorter distribution with carbon numbers between C46 and C54 with a low concentration at C46 and C54 and a maximum again at C52. Dairy fats show the widest TAG distribution, with carbon numbers ranging from C42 to C54, usually with two maxima at C50 and C52 (Evershed et al. 1997; Dudd, Evershed 1998; Mottram et al. 1999). Triacylglycerol remains (including samples with only trace amounts preserved) were identified in thirty pottery lipid extracts, representing 17% of the total assemblage investigated. Quantifiable TAG distributions as detected in lipid extracts from Slovenian potsherds are represented in Figure 11. Fig. 8. Histograms representing the relative abundance ratios of palmitic (Ci6:o) vs. stearic (Cmo) fatty acid as detected in analysed potsherds. The dotted lines (set at 1.3 and 4) represent criteria as reported in the literature and used to separate ruminant adipose fats from non-ruminant, ruminant dairy fats and plant oils (Dudd 1999; Copley et al. 2005a; Romanus et al. 2007). TAG distributions detected in potsherd extracts seem to be predominantly derived from ruminant adipose fats, with only 5 extracts (18MT, 79MT, 159MT, 96MV, 143MV) possibly deriving from ruminant dairy Fig. 9. Partial gas chromatograms of the trimethylsilylated TLEs from pottery showing the various biomarkers detected: 116MV epicuticular waxes residue; 69AJ a mixture of beeswax and plant residue; 26-2MV mixture of birch bark tar and plant residue. Key: FAx:y are fatty acids where x is the carbon chain length and y is the degree of unsaturation; OHx are long-chain alcohols of carbon chain length x; Ax are aliphatic alkanes of carbon chain length x; Wx are wax esters with carbon chain length x; IS is internal standard; * are plasticisers. tion of compounds with lower carbon numbers, and thus come to resemble the narrower distribution seen in ruminant adipose fat TAGs distribution (Dudd, Evershed 1998; Aillaud 2001). Conclusions from TAG distributions have to be drawn with caution and serve only as preliminary results, complemented with compound-specific carbon isotope ratio measurements. Compound-specific stable carbon isotope analysis Compound-specific stable carbon isotope values (813C) were obtained for the palmitic (Ci6:o) and stearic (Ci8:o) fatty acid methyl ester derivatives (FAMEs) from 52 Neolithic and Eneo-lithic potsherd residues with sufficient lipid concentrations. In order to elucidate the origin of preserved lipids accurately, archaeological 813C values were compared with modern reference fats from animals reared on isotopically similar diets to those of animals in prehistory. To eliminate any isotopic variations occurring in animals through differences in dietary intake or environmental factors, the difference between 813Ci8:o -S13Ci6:0 values (D13C) is plotted in Figure 12. D13C values ranging from -3.3 to -6.3%o indicate ruminant dairy fats; values from 1.0 to 2.8% represent ruminant adipose fats, while values from -0.7 to + 1.9% indicate porcine adipose fats (Dudd, Evershed 1998; Evershed et al. 2008; Craig et al. 2011; Dunne et al. 2012; Salque et al. 2013). residues and with no TAG distribution indicating the presence of porcine fats. However, laboratory experiments have shown that TAG distributions can be skewed by degradation occurring during use or postdeposition, causing the wide TAG distribution characteristic of fresh ruminant dairy fat to become considerably narrowed due to the preferential degrada- Distributions of stable carbon isoto-pic values of lipids preserved in Neolithic and Eneolithic pottery show differences between individual archaeological sites: the residues recovered from Ajdovska jama pottery were predominantly of ruminant adipose (5 extracts) and ruminant dairy origin (4 extracts), while those from the Moverna vas pottery assemblage were mainly of ruminant adipose origin (17 extracts). The ubiquitous presence of dairy lipid residues in vessels from Mala Triglavca has already been reported, with 63% and 17% of vessels being used to process or store dairy products, respectively (Soberl et al. 2008; Budja et al. 2013). The lowest occurrences were of porcine derived lipids, being found on only one potsherd from Ajdovska jama and three potsherds from Moverna vas. The mixing of various commodities throughout the life of vessels can also be seen by 813C values plotting close to, or between, the ranges of modern reference fats. It has been assumed that the pottery extracts with minor concentrations of leaf waxes or beeswax components present still reflect the isoto-pic signature of predominant fatty acids present in the residues. Discussion Pottery use in different contexts Pottery has been traditionally regarded as a passive bearer of culture; however, with the rise of contextual archaeology, pottery has come to be seen more as an active factor, brought about by human agency and used in the construction of social identity (Boast 2002; Gibson 2002). Ceramic vessels could be used for many primary functions, such as the preparation, storage and cooking of food, brewing, tanning, dairying, dyeing, fulling, textile washing, transporting and salt preparation. Whatever pottery was used for, it was an important artefact, as demonstrated by its appearance at domestic sites, as well as within ritually structured deposits. Pottery deposited in funerary settings could consist of previously used vessels or one made deliberately for that purpose. Fig. 10. Potsherds from Moverna vas with visible residues, remnants of birch bark tar application or production. Although pottery is very robust and able to survive, it is also very sensitive and responsive to cultural, social, economic and ideological changes. These can be mirrored in a variety of ways: decoration, design, typology, modes of use and deposition. Ajdovska jama The ceramic vessels recovered from the Ajdovska jama site formed part of Neolithic burial rituals, acting as grave goods or simply containers for food offerings. Lipid preservation in ceramic vessels was good, with almost half of the potsherds (48%) yielding an appreciable amount of organic residue. The variety of animal remains deposited with the burials is well reflected in preserved fatty acid composition and isotopic signatures, indicating that ceramic vessels predominantly contained ruminant animal products (meat and dairy), while only one vessel showed the presence of porcine fat. The presence of mid-chain ketones in three pots (02AJ, 04AJ, 72AJ), formed by the condensation of precursor fatty acids at high temperatures in the presence of clay, suggests these vessels were used as cooking pots (Fig. 5). The extraction of uncommon unsaturated mid-chain homologues in 02AJ pot could be the result of processing plant material which contains high concentrations of unsaturated fatty acids. This was also suggested by the extracted organic residues, which in combination with the excavated plant remains (burnt, scattered cereal grains and pulses), show a high contribution of a plant-based diet, with approx. 25% of vessels containing some plant biomarkers. A mixed diet of plants and animals was also attested in bulk stable isotopic determinations (813C and 815N) of collagen extracted from osteo-logical remains recovered from the burials (Ogrinc, Budja 2005; Bonsall et al. 2007). However, enriched 813C values of palmitic acid extracted from lipid residues in ceramics (Fig. 12) could indicate a C4 or marine component in the animal-based diet, as they are strongly diet-dependent (Copley et al. 2003). Since a marine dietary contribution seems unlikely in the case of Ajdovska jama, enriched 813C16:0 values could have been introduced via animals eating plants from a waterlogged environment (Salque et al. 2012). This observed difference between Ajdovska jama, Mala Triglavca and Moverna vas isotopic values Fig. 11. Histograms showing triacylglycerol (TAG) distributions detected in pottery lipid extracts from Ajdovska jama, Mala Triglavca and Moverna vas. TX denotes the number of acyl carbon atoms in individual TAGs, grey bars represent TAGs identified in modern adipose and dairyfats while those in white are usually found only in dairy fats. was also confirmed statistically with a two-tailed student's T-test which returned probability values of 0.003 and 0.016. Mala Triglavca Rock-shelters such as Mala Triglavca were used as gathering places for Mesolithic populations, and some could have been subsequently transformed into shelters and pens for domestic animals during the Neolithic. An analysis of herd structure and mortality on faunal remains (sex and age of animals) can be used to produce 'kill-off curves' in order to distinguish between meat or dairy animal exploitation (Payne 1973). Kill-off curves from Neolithic sites in the Northern Adriatic region have been interpreted in two ways: while Preston Miracle, Staso Forenbaher and Laura Pugsley believe herds of domestic animals were kept predominantly for dairying, Dimitrij Mlekuz suggests simple, non-optimised animal husbandry (Miracle, Forenbaher 2005; Miracle, Pugsley, 2006; Mlekuz 2005; 2006; Bonsall et al. 2013; Rowley-Conwy et al. 2013). AJDOVSKA JAMA Predominantly £8 O- o Increasing C4 diet and/or marine component AJ49 0 AJ68-& C 0) = m E o u o. CC S i5 - £ C ■Û-AJ64 AJ72^ ^AJ03 ®AJ44 AJ61 • - « E o a. 1, K35>1 198.63 1.19 -25.26 -27.88 mixed animal fat, plant residue, cooking 03AJ body FA14, FA16, FA17, FA18, FA20-FA28< OH24-OH34< A27-A31, traces of WE 83.19 0.46 -26.44 -29.27 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue, waxes 04AJ body FA14, FA15, FA16, FA17, FA18, K27-K35 161.18 1.15 -25.45 -31.25 ruminant dairy fat, cooking 05AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 06AJ body \ 11.86 1.35 \ \ n\a 07AJ body FA14, FA16, FA18, OH24-OH32 7.9 1.10 \ \ plant residue 31AJ body \ 4.43 \ \ n\a 32AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 33AJ body \ 2.16 \ \ n\a 34AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 35AJ base FA16, A25-A3K OH24-OH32, traces of WE 12.94 \ \ plant residue 36AJ body \ 2.66 \ \ n\a 37AJ body FA16, FA22-34< A25-A33< OH22-OH34, WE 99.93 3.30 \ \ plant residue, waxes 38AJ rim \ 0 \ \ n\a 39AJ rim \ 2.73 \ \ n\a 40AJ body \ 3.97 \ \ n\a 41AJ rim \ 2.79 \ \ n\a 42AJ rim \ 3.89 \ \ n\a 43AJ rim \ 0 \ \ n\a 44AJ body FA14, FA16, FA17,FA 18, DAGs, TAGs 80.45 0.59 -25.71 -28.99 mixed ruminant fat 45AJ rim \ 1.08 \ \ n\a 46AJ rim \ 0 \ \ n\a 47AJ body \ 4.°3 \ \ n\a 48AJ body FA14, FA16, FA18>1, FA18, FA20 7.°5 3.40 -22.41 -27.40 ruminant dairy fat, plant residue 49AJ rim FA16, FA18, FA20 48 2.32 -25.91 -24.88 porcine fat 50AJ body \ 5.15 \ \ n\a 51AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 52AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 53AJ body \ 4.16 \ \ n\a 54AJ rim \ 1.76 \ \ n\a 55AJ body \ 7.34 \ \ n\a 56AJ body \ 6.72 \ \ n\a 57AJ base A25-A33, OH24-OH34, FA22-FA30 267.04 \ \ plant residue, waxes 58AJ-1 body \ 0 \ \ n\a 58AJ-2 body \ 0 \ \ n\a 59AJ body \ 4.66 \ \ n\a 60AJ rim FA14, FA16, FA18 21.96 2.27 -23.25 -28.47 ruminant dairy fat, plant residue 61AJ rim FA16, FA17, FA18, FA20, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 47.46 0.65 -25.15 -29.05 ruminant dairy fat FA14, FA16, FA17, FA18, 62AJ body MAGs, A27-A33, OH24-OH32, DAGs, WE, TAGs 73.65 1.09 \ \ animal fat, waxes 63AJ body \ 0 \ \ n\a 64AJ rim FA16, FA18 9.36 1.85 -23.29 -24.24 ruminant adipose fat 65AJ body FA16, FA18, DAGs, traces TAGs 1337 2.64 \ \ mixed animal fat 66AJ rim \ 0 \ \ n\a 67AJ base \ 5.02 \ \ n\a Sample Vessel Biomarkers detected Lipid P/S 515Ci6:C 515Ci8:o Interpretation # CHEM part concentration ratio [%o] [%o] mg g-1) 68AJ body FA16, FAi8:i, FA18, traces WE 11.39 2.96 -25.91 -26.47 porcine fat, plant residue 69AJ body FA14, FA15, FA16, FA17, FA18, A25-A33, OH24-OH32, FA22-FA32, WE, DWE 557.13 2.20 / / plant residue, waxes 7OAJ body FA14, FA16, FA18, A25-A33, OH24-OH34, FA22-FA30, WE, traces DWE 75.66 1.85 / / plant residue, waxes 71AJ body FA16, FAi8:i, FA18, OH, DAGs, TAGs 42.94 0.82 -29.11 -31.78 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue 72AJ body FA16, FA18, K29-K35, K33>1, K35>I 47.37 0.80 -27.59 -30.08 mixed ruminant fat, plant residue, cooking 73AJ body / 1.46 / / n/a 74AJ body / 0 / / n/a 08MT body FA14, FAi5br, FA15, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs, traces of WE 173.35 °.99 -26.51 -29.91 ruminant dairy fat, plant residue 09MT body traces of FA16 & FA18, K31-K35 1.9 / / n/a 11MT body traces of FA16 & FA18, K31-K35 0.81 / / n/a 12MT body / 0.42 / / n/a 13MT rim FA16, FA18, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs, traces of WE, A and OH 11.56 0.63 -26.68 -28.85 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue 14MT body / 0.24 / / n/a 15MT body / 0 / / n/a 16MT body / 0 / / n/a 17MT body / 1.01 / / n/a 18MT body FA14, FAi5br, FA15, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20-FA24, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 88.09 °.75 -27.68 -33.26 ruminant dairy fat 75MT rim FA14, FA15, FAi6:i, FA16, FA17, FAi7br, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 9°.54 0.64 -28.96 -31.52 ruminant adipose fat 76MT base / 2.92 / / n/a 77MT body / 0 / / n/a 78MT body / 2.58 / / n/a 79MT body FA14, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20, traces of A & OH, DAGs, TAGs 27.23 1.24 -27.80 -32.91 ruminant dairy fat, plant residue 80MT rim / 3.45 / / n/a 81MT body / 1.34 / / n/a 82MT base / 0 / / n/a 83MT body / 3.12 / / n/a 84MT base / 1.1 / / n/a 85MT rim / 1.34 / / n/a 86MT rim / 1.38 / / n/a FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20, ruminant dairy fat, plant 87MT body MAGs, traces of A & OH, traces of DAGs & TAGs 21.93 1.°5 -27.35 -32.18 residue 88MT rim FA14, FA16, FA18, FA20 9.93 2.56 -26.97 -31.91 ruminant dairy fat 89MT rim / 0 / / n/a 156MT rim FA16, FAi8:i, FA18, traces of MAGs & DAGs 10.06 2.27 / / n/a 157MT rim / 4.06 / / n/a 158MT rim / 0.98 / / n/a 159MT rim FA16, FA18, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 12.65 1.32 / / mixed animal fat 160MT complete FA16, FA18, traces of MAGs, DAGs & TAGs 5.53 3.46 / / n/a 161MT rim FA16, FAi8:i, FA18, MAGs, traces of DAGs 43.81 1.11 -29.38 -33.95 ruminant dairy fat 162MT n/a / 2.77 / / n/a 163MT body FA16, FA18 4.02 / / n/a 164MT rim FA16, FA18 2.47 / / n/a 165MT rim / 1.53 / / n/a 166MT rim / 4.67 / / n/a 23MV-1 rim FA16, FA18, traces OH 361.4 0.30 / / animal fat 23MV-2 rim FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FA18, FA20, OH24-OH34, A29-A35, WE 434.99 0.25 -26.99 -3°.46 mixed fat, waxes 24MV-1 base pitch markers 1789.97 / / birch bark tar Sample Vessel Biomarkers detected Lipid P/S 513Ci6:c S13CiS:o Interpretation # CHEM part concentration ratio [%o] [%o] fee g-1] 24MV-2 base traces of pitch markers 0.77 / / n/a 25MV-1A base pitch markers, traces of WE 720.94 / / birch bark tar, waxes 25MV-1B base pitch markers, traces of WE 911.02 / / birch bark tar, waxes 25MV-2 base pitch markers, traces of WE 31.06 / / birch bark tar, waxes 26MV-1 base pitch markers 1539 77 / / birch bark tar 26MV-2 base FA10, FA12, FA14, FA16, FA18, pitch markers, WE 24.3 1.48 / / birch bark tar, waxes 27MV-1A base FA16, FA18, pitch markers 3308.1 1.33 / / birch bark tar 27MV-1B base FA16, FA18, pitch markers 118.18 1.34 / / birch bark tar 27MV-1C base FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, pitch markers 740.32 1.71 / / birch bark tar, plant residue 27MV-2 base / 0 / / n/a 28MV-1A base FA16, FA18, pitch markers, WE 3056.3 1.32 / / birch bark tar, plant residue, waxes 28MV-1B base FA16, FA18, pitch markers, WE 542.58 1.30 / / birch bark tar, plant residue, waxes 28MV-1C base FA16, FA18, pitch markers, WE 1261.79 1.68 / / birch bark tar, plant residue, waxes 28MV-2 base FA16, A, OH, traces of WE 5.25 / / plant residue 29MV-1A rim / 18.03 / / n/a 29MV-1B rim FAi6:i, FA16, FAi8:i, FA18 8.06 1.89 / / plant residue 29MV-2 rim FA14, FAi6:i, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20-FA24, K31-K35 27.57 1.02 / / mixed animal and plant residue, cooking 30MV-1 base / 0 / / n/a 30MV-2 base FA16, MAG16, DAG32, TAG54 17.69 / / plant residue 90MV body / 0 / / n/a 91MV body FA16, FA17, FA18-FA24, K29-K35 156.62 0.31 -27.53 -31.65 ruminant dairy fat, cooking 92MV rim FA14, FA16, FA18, FA20, MAGs, traces of DAGs and TAGs 29.41 1.02 -27.75 -30.35 mixed ruminant fat 93MV body FA14, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 119.17 0.77 -27.92 -31.36 mixed ruminant fat 94MV body FA16, FA18, FA20 15.2 0.57 -28.41 -30.89 ruminant adipose fat 95MV body FA16, FA18, MAGs, traces of DAGs and TAGs 5.5 1.19 -26.65 -28.90 mixed animal fat 96MV body FA14, FA16, FA18, FA20, MAGs, DAGs, TAGs 9.51 0.81 -27.18 -31.09 dairy fat 97MV body FAi6,FAi8 10.52 0.92 / / mixed animal fat 98MV rim FA12, FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FA18, MAGs, traces of A & OH, DAGs, traces of WE, TAGs 57.85 0.69 -28.62 -30.75 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue, waxes 99MV body FA16, FA18, A25-A33, OH24-OH34, FA24-FA32, WE, DWE 429.65 6.20 -26.09 -29.62 dairy fat, plant residue, waxes 100MV rim FA16, FA18, A25-A31, MAGs, OH24-OH34, DAGs, WE, DWE 449.81 0.57 -27.47 -29.44 ruminant adipose fat, waxes 101MV body / 0 / / n/a 102MV rim traces of FA16 & FA18, A25-A33, OH24-OH34, FA24-FA34, WE, DWE 399.78 2.86 -26.20 -33.48 plant residue, waxes 103MV body FA16, FA18, MAGs, traces of A&OH, DAGs, traces of WE 4.27 / / plant residue 104MV body FA14, FA16, FA17, FA18 214.36 0.65 -27.66 -30.22 ruminant adipose fat 105MV body / 0 / / n/a 106MV body FA16, FA18, traces of A&OH 4.51 2.15 / / plant residue 107MV body FA16, FA18 29.38 0.67 -26.68 -28.39 mixed animal fat 108MV base / 0 / / n/a 109MV body FA16, FA17, FA18 126.6 0.90 -26.14 -26.19 porcine fat 110MV rim FA16, DA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20 1219.85 1.17 -24.90 -24.96 porcine fat 111MV base FA12, FA14, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, MAG16, A27-A33, OH24-OH34, FA24-FA28, WE 177.63 2.47 -25.40 -25.73 porcine fat, plant residue, waxes 112MV rim traces of A&OH, traces of DAGs, WE 5.22 / / plant residue 113MV rim traces of FA16 & FA18, A23-A33, OH24-OH34, WE 47.2 -26.36 -27.85 plant residue, waxes 114MV base FA16, FA18, A23-A33, OH22-OH34, FA24-FA30, WE 94.85 2.89 / / plant residue, waxes Sample Vessel Biomarkers detected Lipid P/S 615Ci6:C 013CiS:o Interpretation # CHEM part concentration ratio [%o] [%o] [Mg g"1] 115MV body / 0 / / n/a 116MV body FA16, FA18, A23-A33, OH22-OH34, FA26, WE 145.68 3.24 -26.68 -28.75 plant residue, waxes 117MV body / 0 / / n/a 118MV body / 0 / / n/a 119MV body / 0 / / n/a 120MV body FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20 197.58 0.81 -25.18 -25.15 porcine fat 121MV body A25-A33, OH24-OH34, FA24-FA32, WE 970.81 -26.89 -26.03 porcine fat, plant residue, waxes 122MV body traces of FA16 & FA18 2.18 / / n/a 123MV body / 0 / / n/a 124MV body FA14, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20 503.45 1.65 -24.24 -23.99 porcine fat 125MV body A23-A31, OH24-OH32, traces of WE 12.57 / / waxes 126MV rim traces of A&OH 1.4 / / n/a 127MV body traces of A&OH 1.74 / / n/a 128MV body / 0 / / n/a 129MV body / 1.07 / / n/a 130MV body / 0 / / n/a 131MV-1 body / 0 / / n/a 131MV-2 body / 0 / / n/a 132MV body FA16, FA17, FA18 13.45 0.60 -26.57 -29.84 mixed ruminant fat 133MV rim FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FA18, K 17.61 0.88 / / mixed animal fat, cooking 134MV rim FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FA18, MAGs, OH22-OH32, A29-A31, DAGs, WE, TAGs 289.58 0.54 -28.35 -29.94 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue, waxes 135MV body FA16, FA17, FA18, MAGs, traces of DAGs & TAGs 47.71 1.41 -27.47 -26.99 porcine fat 136MV body / 1.06 / / n/a 137MV body FA14, FA16, FA18 14.27 0.46 -28.64 -31.15 ruminant adipose fat 138MV body / 0 / / n/a 139MV body / 0 / / n/a 140MV body FA16, FA18, traces of A&OH; traces of DAGs&WE 4.14 1.12 / / mixed residue 141MV rim / 0 / / n/a 142MV base / 0 / / n/a 143MV rim FA16, FA18, MAGs, OH22-OH32, A27-A33, DAGs, TAGs 6.17 0.91 -27.66 -30.71 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue 144MV base FA16, FA18, FA20 9.76 1.45 -26.38 -29.28 ruminant adipose fat 145MV body traces of FA16 & FA18, A27-A31, OH22-OH32, traces of DAGs, WE & TAGs 6.82 / / mixed residue 146MV base / 0 / / n/a 147MV base FA12, FA14, FA15, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20-FA30, MAGs, A25-A33, OH22-OH32, 37.61 0.53 / / mixed animal and plant residue, waxes DAGs, WE 148MV rim / 0 / / n/a 149MV rim FA14, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FA18, FA20-FA26, MAGs, A23-A33, OH22-OH32, DAGs, traces of TAGs 20.49 0.76 -26.71 -29.22 ruminant adipose fat, plant residue 150MV rim FA16, FA17, FA18, MAGs, A27-A33, OH24-OH32, DAGs, traces of TAGs 9.63 0.73 -27.42 -30.82 ruminant fat, plant residue 151MV-1 body traces of FA16 & FA18, pitch markers 2918.51 / / birch bark tar 151MV-2 body FA16, FA18, pitch markers 91.85 0.44 / / animal fat, birch bark tar 152MV-1 body traces of FA16 & FA18, pitch markers, traces of TAGs 2818.76 0.91 / / mixed animal fat, birch bark tar 152MV-2 body / 0 / / n/a 153MV body FA14, FA15, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, FA20, MAGs, DAGs, traces of TAGs 55.01 0.76 -27.70 -29.97 ruminant adipose fat FA14, FAi5br, FA15, FA16, FAi7br, FA17, ruminant fat, plant residue, waxes 154MV body FA18, FA20-FA28, MAGs, A23-A33, 607.11 0.29 -27.96 -31.10 OH22-OH32, traces of DAGs & TAGs, WE 155MV rim FA14, FA16, FA17, FAi8:i, FA18, traces of DAGs & TAGs 7.15 0.56 -29.17 -31.37 ruminant adipose fat Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Lipids, pots and food processing at Hočevarica, Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia Nives Ogrinc1, Mihael Budja2, Doris Potočnik1, Andreja Žibrat Gaspari;2 and Dimitrij Mleku/2 1Department of Environmental Sciences, Jo/ef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, SI nives.ogrinc@ijs.si< doris.potocnik@ijs.si 2Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, SI ABSTRACT - The paper presents the results of lipid analyses ofpottery samples from Hočevarica (Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia). Total lipid extracts were subjected to high temperature gas chromatography (HT-GC), gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and gas chromatography-combustion-iso-tope ratio mass spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS). The results show that some vessels were used for preparing ruminant meat and vegetable, but also the remains of aquatic food were identified. The processing of non-ruminant meat was detected in a few samples. A high number of pottery samples yielded the presence of beeswax lipids. The charred residual on pottery was AMS 14C dated. IZVLEČEK - V članku predstavljamo rezultate analiz lipidov ohranjenih v keramičnem zbiru s Hoče-varice. Lipide, ekstrahirane iz ostankov keramičnih posod, smo analizirali s pomočjo plinske kroma-tografije pri visokih temperaturah (HT-GC), plinske kromatografije sklopljene z masno spektrome-trijo (GC-MS) in plinske kromatografije sklopljene z masnim pektrometrom za analizo stabilnih izotopov lahkih elementov preko sežigne enote (GC-C-IRMS). Rezultati kažejo, da so v posodah pripravljali hrano iz mesa prežvekovalcev in zelenjave; redko iz mesa neprežvekovalcev. V drugih so pripravljali hrano iz sladkovodnih rib. V številnih posodah je bil odkrit čebelji vosek. Karbonizirani ostanki na posodah so bili AMS 14C datirani. KEY WORDS - lipid analysis; 14C dates; pottery; Eneolithic; Ljubljansko barje Introduction Hočevarica is located at the outfall of Hočevarica drainage channel into the Ljubljanica River between Blatna Brezovica and Verd on the western part of the Ljubljansko barje area (Fig. 1). A small trench (8m2) was excavated in 1998 {Velušček 2004a). The site was recognised as a pile-dwelling settlement embedded in the time span 3650-3520 calBC (for wood samples) (Cufar, Kromer 2004.283) and 3640-3530 calBC (for short-lived seed and carbonised grain samples) (Jeraj 2004.59). The site stratigraphy consists of ten layers (Fig. 2). While some are of geological provenance, layers 4-8 relate to settling and can be associated with two settlement phases (Velušček 2004b.37-40; 2004c.213- 217). Patches of burnt clay and daub (e.g., house remains) are deposited in well-defined stratigraphie superposition; they correlate with the distribution of vertical wooden piles, and depositions of pottery, stone and wooden tools within the stratified settlements' layers (ibid. 40-47). Palaeobotany and archaeozoology More than 30000 remains of seeds and fruits of cultivated and gathered wild plants have been found in both settlement contexts. While cereal grains were carbonised, most of the remaining plant remains were unburned. The grains of cultivated Hordeum vulgare (six-rowed barley), Triticum monococcum DOI>10.4312\dp.41.10 (einkorn wheat) and Triticum di-coccum (T. turgidum ssp. Dicoc-cum, emmer wheat) were identified; the most abundant cereal at Hocevarica is barley. However, the remains of wild nuts, fruits and seeds predominated in the archaeobotanical assemblage, comprising Quercus sp. Cu-pulae (acorn), Corylus avellana (hazelnut), Malus sylvestris (crab apple), Prunus avium (wild cherry), Cornus mas (Cornelian cherry), Cornus sanguinea (common dogwood), Prunus spinosa (blackthorn), Rubus fruticosus (blackberry), Fragaria vesca (wild strawberry), Physalis alkekengi (winter cherry), and Trapa natans (water chestnut). Along with Pa-paver somniferum (opium poppy) seeds, the only remains of an oily plant, Chenopodium album (go-osefoot), which has seeds rich in oil and starch, were also gathered. Pulses such as Lathyrus sativus (grass pea) and Vicia sp. (Vitis vinifera ssp. Sylves-tris, wild grapevine) were found in small numbers in the 1st settlement phase (Jeraj 2004.58-59; 2009. 79-82). Fig. 1. Map of Ljubljansko barje region with the position of the site at Hocevarica. It was suggested that while cereals were cultivated in fields situated on moist to damp soils close to the settlement, wild nuts, fruits and seeds were collected along the forest edges and in clearings around the settlement. The water plants were collected in small and shallow meso- to eutrophic lakes which warm up in summer. All the wild plants have been processed in settlement contexts (Tolar et al. 2011.216). Lab code Material Phase 14C Conventional age BP Calibrated date Reference calBC (20) Hd-18976 wood 4822+39 Čufer, Kromer2004.Tab. 3695-3521 6.3.2 Hd-22139 wood 4867+26 3702-3636 :ufar et al. 2010.Tab. 4* Hd-20765 wood 4748+26 3636-3382 :ufar et al. 2010.Tab. 4* Hd-22305 wood 4825+25 3656-3530 :ufar et al. 2010.Tab. 4* organic sediment 4780+40 3648-3383 Jeraj 2004.62** II seed 2 4780+40 3648-3383 Jeraj 2004.59 ??? grain 1 4810+40 3691-3518 Jeraj 2004.59 Beta-391181 food residue 2 4910+30 3763-3642 Beta-391176 food residue 1 4860+30 3704-3539 Beta-391182 food residue 2 4770+30 3641-3519 Beta-391178 bos taurus 1 4760+30 3641-3384 Beta-391183 ovis/capra 2 4740+30 3639-3379 Beta-391185 Cornus stone 2 4720+30 3635-3376 Beta-391180 Cornus stone 1 4680+30 3623-3370 Beta-391177 food residue 1 4780+30 3635-3531 Tab. 1. Radiocarbon dates from Hocevarica. Dates marked with an asterisk (*) are inconsistently published (Hd-22139 as 4972±25 and Hd-20765 as 4746±26 in Cufar, Kromer 2004). Date for organic sediment (marked by **) by Jeraj (2004) is the same age as date for seed in phase 2. Since Jeraj does not cite lab codes for dates, it is possible that both are the same sample. The animal bone assemblage consists of 4352 animal remains. About a third of them are fishes and birds, the remainder (63.4%) are mammals. The mammal bones (2757 total) are from at least 14 species (Toskan, Dirjec 2004.76-132). Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) remains predominate, comprising a good third of the mammalian assemblage; the second most frequent was pig/wild boar (Sus sp.), accounting for one third. Other species were less frequent. Only red deer (Cervus ela-phus), beaver (Castor fiber), dog (Canis familiaris), and the remains of sheep and goat (Ovis s. Capra) exceeded 5% of all finds. While Sus scrofa/domesticus bones predominate (38.2%) in the 1st settlement phase, Ovis s. Capra remains are the most frequent (19.7%) in the 2nd phase (ibid. 80). The evidence of animal slaughter and further meat processing at the site are weak. The proportion of bones with cut and chop marks and/or traces of boiling or roasting was below 10%. However, the analysis of tooth wear showed that most of the pigs were slaughtered in the autumn at an assessed age of 17 to 22 months, and during winter or in early spring, at a probable age of 22 to 27 months (Tos-kan, Dirjec 2004.121). The fish remains consist of five species: common carp, rudd, pike, perch and roach. The carp and rudd remains predominate (Go-vedic 2004.133-151). Chronology The Hocevarica radiocarbon sequence is comprised of 13 AMS radiocarbon dates. In addition to the series of four dates on wooden piles used to anchor the dendrochronological sequence and two dates obtained on shortlived botanical samples, an additional two AMS radiocarbon dates from animal bones, two AMS dates on short-lived botanical samples and four dates of carbonised food residues on pottery were obtained recently (Tab. 1). Complementary samples allow a better understanding of the chronology of activities at the site. The radiocarbon dates of bones and carbonised food/organic residues on pottery date events relating to the preparation and disposal of food, and thus complement the dates of the wooden structures relating to building and construction events. The floating oak chronology of 139 years from Hocevarica (HOC-QUSP1) is dated between 3685 and 3547 (±10) BC, which suggests an end to building activities after around 3550 BC (Cufar et al. 2010). On the other hand, the majority of AMS dates on short-lived samples concentrate between 3630-3350 calBC (Fig. 3). The wide spread of values can be attributed to a wiggles in the calibration curve between 3620-3520 and 3480-3380 cal-BC. However, it seems that activities at the site reflected in the short-lived sam- ples began well before the end of the building activities, before 3600 calBC, and continued for a few decades after building activities had ended. This long span of activities corresponds well with the two settlement phases. Two dates on charred food residues on pottery are older than the oldest dates on the wooden piles. Lipid analysis on one sample (Beta-391176) from the first phase yielded a lipid concentration high enough (01H0; Tab. 2) to suggest that the pot was used to cook a ruminant/plant mixture. The concentration of lipids in the other sample (Beta-391181, 18H0; Tab. 2) was too low to allow a determination of foodstuffs. However, as this sample is associated with the second phase, it appears too old. At the moment, we have no dates on fish bones or food residues associated with aquatic foodstuffs that would demonstrate the presence of a reservoir effect. Therefore, both early dates could suggest earlier activities at the site or a reservoir effect. Fig. 2. Northern cross-section of the trench at Hocevarica (after Velušček 2004.Fig. 3.1.5). Calibrated date (calBC) Fig• 3. Calibrated radiocarbon dates from Hocevarica in relation to the HOC-QUSP1 chronology. These new dates suggest a long and complex chronological sequence for the Hocevarica site. It appears that the site was settled for almost 200 years, had two distinct phases of occupation, and shows possible evidence of activities before the wooden structures were built. The pottery For the present study, we analysed 35 pottery samples from Hocevarica by hand lens to identify inclusions, their size and frequency, and the presence of voids. The samples were chosen on the basis of typology (see Velušček 2004d. 169-212) and on the basis of the presence of charred food remains on the interior surface of the vessels. Most of the samples came from fragments of vessel rims and walls; only 9 samples were attributed to types according to their morphology: 3 pots, 4 dishes, and 2 bowls (Fig. 4; Tab. 2). The vessel types are similar to the pottery assemblage from the contemporary site at Maharski pre- kop in the south-eastern part of Ljubljansko barje (Bregant 1974a; 1974b; 1975; Velušček 2004d. 184-212). The majority of the vessels can be attributed to various types of pots (Velušček 2004d.186-194) and dishes (ibid. 196-203), but other forms are also present (cups, miniature vessels, hanging vessels and other special forms; ibid. 195, 203). Similarly, the technological characteristics of the Hocevarica pottery assemblage are comparable to vessels from Maharski prekop (Žibrat Gašparič 2013. 153-155). The vessels area primarily dark grey, brown and black, and most were fired in a reducing atmosphere. Most of the pottery is poorly made and prone to mechanical decomposition; only the decorated vessels are of better quality and have polished surfaces or slips applied to the surface (Velušček 2004d.184-185). We could divide the pottery samples into two technological groups according to their inclusions (descriptions after Horvat 1999): most of the samples have calcite/limestone inclusions (82.8%), while the Fig. 4. Pottery samples bearing traces of ruminant fat (14HO, 33HO), mixed animal fats (05HO), mixed animal and plant fats (31HO), mixed animal fats and beeswax (21Ho, 26HO, 36HO), freshwater animal oils (11HO) and a mixture of dairy fat and beeswax (20HO) (drawings after Velušček 2004a.l69-183). remainder are made of non-calcareous clay and have only quartz inclusions (17.2%). In the group with quartz, most of the inclusions comprise very fine (less than 0.25mm) or medium-size sand (0.25 to 0.50mm). Most of the samples with calcite/limestone have medium-size sand inclusions (0.25 to 0.50mm), but coarse sand is present (0.50 to 2.00mm) in a third of the samples. The pottery samples from Hocevarica have voids, usually on both surfaces, in the size of medium to coarse sand fraction, and many have an angular shape similar to calcite crystals. This could be the result of calcite dissolved from the vessels. Such chemical changes in pottery are common post-deposi-tional processes (Rice 1987.421). A similar situation could be observed at the contemporary site at Kras-nja near Lukovica (Zibrat Gasparic et al. 2014). All the pottery samples were handmade and their surfaces burnished; smoothing and polishing were also present. One of the vessels (10H0) was decorated with a grey-black slip on both the interior and exterior surfaces. They were fired in an incomplete oxidising (51.4%) and a reducing atmosphere (34.3%), while the other samples were fired in a reducing at- mosphere with an oxidising atmosphere at the end of firing. The pottery from the calcite/limestone group at Ho-cevarica has characteristics very similar to fabric MP-1 from Maharski prekop, which is a non-calcareous clay with frequent calcite grains added as temper and is the most common fabric found at that site (Zibrat Gasparic 2013.154). On the other hand, the group with quartz inclusions from Hocevarica differs from the fabrics described at Maharski prekop and could display a new technology in the later phase of the settlement, since the samples of the quartz group all come from the 2nd settlement phase at Hocevarica. This hypothesis would have to be tested with additional pottery samples, as well as with a petrographical analysis of thin sections. Materials and methods A total of 36 selected pottery samples were first cleaned to remove exogenous lipids, and then ground to a fine powder. For lipid extraction, about 2g of sample were transferred to a 50ml vial and 20|l of internal standard (n-tetratriacontane, 1mg/mL in n-hexane) were added. Lipids were ultrasonically ex- tracted with a mixture of methanol and chloroform (1:2 v/v, 24mL, 2 x 30min). The solvent extract was removed into a glass flask and reduced to a small volume by rotary evaporation. The residue of solvent extract was transferred to a 2ml glass vial and evaporated to dryness under a gentle stream of nitrogen to obtain the total lipid extract (TLE). The aliquot (500|ul) of the TLE was treated with BSTFA (N, O-bis(trimethylsilyl)-trifluoroacetamide, 40|l; 70°C, 60min), evaporated to dryness and re-dissolved in n-hexane. The resulting trimethylsilyl derivatives were analysed using high-temperature gas chroma-tography (HT-GC) and, where necessary, combined GC-MS analyses were performed to identify the structure of the components (Evershed et al. 1990). All HT-GC analyses were performed on Agilent Technology 6890N GC system equipment with DB-5HT capillary column (15m x 0.32m x 0.10|m). Temperature program: initial temperature 50°C (1min), increasing to 350°C (10 min) at a rate of 10°C/min. Helium was used as a carrier gas and a flame ionisation detector to monitor the column effluent. Another aliquot (500|L) of solvent extract was used to prepare free fatty acids methyl esters (FAMEs) by adding 100|L of BF3-methanol (14% w/v, Sigma Al-drich, 70°C, 60min). The methyl derivatives were extracted with n-hexane and analysed by GC-MS and GC-C-IRMS using standard protocols (Evershed et al. 1994; Mottram et al. 1999; Greg, Slater 2010; Ogrinc et al. 2012). For GC-C-IRMS (Isoprime GV system, Micromass, Manchester, UK) the accuracy of repeated measurements was ±0.3%o. In addition, powder samples (~ 1mg) were analysed by elemental analysis isotope ratio mass spectrome-try (IRMS) as previously reported (Ogrinc et al. 2012; Budja et al. 2013). Stable isotope results are expressed as 813C or 815N values in per mil (%) relative to the VPDB and AIR international standard, respectively. The accuracy of measurements was ±0.2% for 513C and ±0.3% for 515N. Results and discussion The average and standard deviations from bulk potsherd samples are -28.3±1.6% and +4.5±2.0% for 813C and 815N, respectively (Fig. 5; Tab. 2). These data fall in the range expected for C3 plant and degraded animal tissues whose subsistence was based mainly on C3 plants. The 815N values of terrestrial plant proteins are around +3%, while proteins derived from terrestrial herbivores from temperate Europe should not exceed 815N values of +7.0% (Ri- Fig. 5. Bulk stable isotope values of pottery samples from Hocevarica. The vertical bars show 95% confidence intervals and the median stable nitrogen isotope value from literature data. chards et al. 2003), although protein derived from domestic animals (such as pigs) may be higher (Privat et al. 2002; Polet, Katzenberg 2003; Richards et al. 2003; Ogrinc, Budja 2005). At Hocevarica, only three samples (01H0, 03H0 and 06H0) have 815N values higher than +7.0%. Thus the variations in the carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios in our sample show that a wide diversity of animal and plant food was processed in the vessels. No sample has an 815N value greater than 9% consistent with processing aquatic products with a high trophic level (Fig. 5). However, data on fish species from modern and archaeological samples from lacustrine environments demonstrates a wide range of nitrogen values due to the diverse mixture of aquatic food sources. For example, the 815N values of freshwater fish in Lake Baikal range from +7.3 to +13.7% (Katzenberg, Weber 1999). And Melanie J. Miller et al. (2010) reported that the modern fish 815N values of Lake Titicaca range from +4.1 to +9.5%, while the majority of the 815N values in archaeological fish samples ranged from +5.1 to +7.7%. In order to obtain more reliable information on the processing of different commodities in pottery vessels from Hocevarica, more specific chemical and molecular analysis, including lipid analysis, were performed. Lipid preservation in our samples was very good, with more than 75% of potsherds containing appreciable quantities of lipid (Tab. 2). Lipid biomarkers Even-carbon number n-alkanoic acids that range from C12:0 to C22:0 were observed in analysed sherds (Fig. 6). In addition, monounsaturated fatty acids Fig. 6. The representative GC-MS total ion chromatograms of the fatty acids methylesters (FAMEs) with different C16.0 and Cis.o abundance extracted from the Hocevarica pottery samples 11HO and 14HO. Ci8:i were present in the lipid extracts of all samples (Tab. 1). The presence of odd number (Ci5:0 and Ci7:o) and/or a low amount of branched chain of Ci7:0 was determined in 50% of the pottery samples (02HO, 05HO, i4HO, 20HO, 2iHO, 22HO, 25HO, 26HO, 27HO, 3iHO, 33HO, 34HO, 36HO). The presence of these acids together with two double bonds positional isomers of Cm indicates ruminant animal fats that have been biosynthesised in the gut and rumen (Dudd et al. 1999; Regert 2011). The parallel biomarkers, i.e. triacylglycerols (TAGs) and their degradation products (diacylglicerols (DAGs) and mo-noacylglicerols (MAGs) were detected in 9 sherds (02HO, 05HO, i4HO, 20HO, 2iHO, 26HO, 27HO, 34HO, 36HO), confirming the presence of degraded animal fats (Tab. 2; Fig. 7). However, the TAG distribution could be identified in three sherds (20HO, 2iHO and 26HO), while in the remaining samples only traces of TAGs were observed. The narrow distribution of TAGs in these three sherds, ranging from C42 to C52, indicates the presence of ruminant adipose or diary fats. The presence of saturated and mono-saturated fatty acids in a range from C20 to C24, together with a high proportion of Ci6:0 and minor amounts of Ci2:0 and Ci8:0 acids are indicative of aquatic oils and thus provide evidence that freshwater foods were processed in these vessels (Hansel et al. 2004; Craig et al. 2011; 2013; Cramp et al. 2014). Such a lipid profile was observed in 35% of the samples (04HO, 06-HO, 09HO, i0HO, iiHO, i2HO, i3HO, i7HO and i8HO). In addition, in these samples 4,8,12-trimethyltridecanoic acid (4,8,i2-TMDT) at low concentrations was also identified. This component is a characteristic lipid biomarker of aquatic resources (Hansel et al. 2004) (Fig. 6). Alongside the identification of animal or aquatic fats, a high percentage of samples (8i%) yielded the presence of beeswax lipids (Tab. 2). In five samples (20HO, 2iHO, 25HO, 26HO, 36HO) the lipid distribution indicate the high content of degraded beeswax lipids, while in other samples only traces of wax lipids are present. Beeswax lipids may indicate the addition of honey to other foodstuffs or the application of beeswax to pottery vessels to improve impermeability (Regert et al. 2001; Kimpe et al. 2002; Copley et al. 2005). Although in most of the samples only trace levels of this particular commodity were detected, its presence indicates that beeswax was utilised at Hocevarica in pottery vessels associated with cooking/processing foodstuffs or applied as a coating. Long-chain ketones (C3i, C33 and C35) were observed in most samples with preserved lipids, except in 05HO. Long-chain ketones have been widely reported as components of the epicuticular waxes of higher plants (Walton 1990), but can be also formed from the condensation of fatty acids (Ci6:0 and Ci8:0) during the heating of vessels to temperatures in excess of 400°C (Evershed et al. 1999). The presence of long-chain ketones together with thermally pro- Lab. ID. No. Context MC Lab. no. 14c conv. Fabric Desciption TLE 813C 815N 813Ci6:o 813Ci8:o sample age BP group (mg g-1) bulk bulk (%o) (%o) no. (%o) (%o) 01HO 126 phase 1 Beta-391176 4860+30 calcite vessel wall 36.5 -26.8 7.2 -29.0 -29.1 02HO 165 phase 1 Beta-391177 4780+30 calcite vessel wall 25-3 -29.1 4.9 -28.0 -29.2 03HO 073 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 48.3 -27.0 7.5 n/d n/d 04HO 075 phase 1 calcite vessel rim with wall 32.9 -27.7 6.6 -31.0 -25.7 05HO 080 phase 1 calcite dish 39.° -27.3 5.5 -27.8 -27.4 06HO 135 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 96.5 -27.9 7.4 -31.1 -27.3 07HO 138 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 42.7 -32.0 -0.1 -34.3 -29.0 08HO 174 phase 1 calcite vessel rim with wall 40.8 -27.4 0.4 -29.8 -28.2 09HO 087 phase 1 calcite vessel rim with wall 13.1 -31.5 1.8 -30.7 -27.1 10HO 076 phase 1 calcite vessel rim with wall 10.9 -27.8 4.7 -32.2 -28.5 11HO PN0081 phase 1 calcite pot 71.3 -29.1 3.5 -29.8 -27.7 12HO 068 phase 1/2 calcite vessel rim with wall 78.6 -26.5 6.9 -30.7 -28.5 13HO 067 phase 1/2 calcite vessel wall 37.8 -27.0 3.7 -32.4 -27.6 14HO PN0135 phase 1/2 calcite pot 51.5 -27.5 1.8 -25.5 -27.9 i6HO 049 phase 1/2 calcite vessel wall 108 -27.3 1.5 -36.0 -29.9 17HO 082 phase 2 calcite vessel base with wall 27.8 -26.6 4.3 -31.5 -28.8 i8HO 088 phase 2 Beta-391181 4910+30 calcite vessel wall 5.9 -28.4 4.9 n/d n/d 19HO 029 phase 2 calcite vessel wall 3.1 -27.8 4.4 n/d n/d 20HO 032 phase 2 quartz pot? 211 -30.7 4.8 -27.3 -33.9 21HO PN0049 phase 2 quartz dish 63.3 -30.5 4.8 -26.7 -28.5 22HO 035 phase 2 Beta-391182 4770+30 calcite vessel wall 29.2 -27.3 6.3 -29.8 -29.1 23HO 020 phase 2 calcite vessel wall 23.6 -27.0 5.8 -30.6 -26.8 24HO 017 phase 2 quartz vessel rim with wall 2.1 -27.6 5.5 n/d n/d 25HO 169 phase 2 quartz vessel wall 73.9 -27.2 5.1 -26.5 -28.4 26HO 025 phase 2 quartz dish 53.3 -27.3 5.2 -28.4 -29.2 27HO 019 phase 2 calcite vessel wall 15.9 -27.2 4.4 -30.3 -31.4 28HO 120 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 1.6 -28.2 4.6 n/d n/d 29HO 121 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 6.0 -29.3 5.6 n/d n/d 30HO 089 phase 1 calcite bowl 4.7 -26.5 6.7 n/d n/d 3iHO 085 phase 1 calcite pot 26.4 -28.8 4.6 -28.6 -28.2 32HO 078 phase 1 calcite vessel wall 18.3 -29.1 6.1 n/d n/d 33HO 061 planum 4/4 calcite dish 12.4 -27.4 4.6 -28.1 -29.5 34HO 008 SU 4/7 quartz vessel wall 7.0 -28.9 3.3 -26.3 -27.2 35HO 003 SU 1/2 calcite vessel wall 6.9 -33.1 1.0 n/d n/d 36HO PN0138 E cross-section calcite bowl? 6.2 -28.1 2.4 -28.2 -29.1 Tab. 2. A summary of the organic residues detected in pottery samples from Hocevarica, Ljubljansko barje region. Key: MAG - moniacylglycerols; DAG - diacylglycerols; TAG - triacylglycerols; A - n-alka-nes; OH - n-alcohols; K - ketones; WE - wax esters; (tr) - trace; n/d - not detected. A'SC Ci6:o/CiS:c Fatty Acids (FA) Other lipids Predominant Reference (%o) commodity type 0.0 1.48 C ^-12:0, C14:0, C16:0, C17:1, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE mixture ruminant, plant Not published -1.2 1.45 C12:o, C22:o C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0-br, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, K, WE, DAG(tr), TAG(tr) ruminant Not published n/d n/d n/d K n/d Not published 5.3 1.50 C^:o, C 22:0 CM:0, TMDT, C16:0, C17:1, C17:0, Csn, C8:o, C20:0, K freshwater Not published o.4 0.74 C, 12:0 C , C , 14:0 15:0 C16:0, C17:1, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 WE, DAG, TAG mixture ruminant, non-ruminant Velušček 2004.Pl. 4157 3.8 1.44 C12:0, C22:0 C14:0, TMDT, C6:0, C17:1, C17:0, C18:1, C8:o, C20:0, K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published 5.3 2.80 C12:0, C14:0, C16:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) non-ruminant Not published 1.6 0.76 C, 12:0 C16:0, C17:1, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) non-ruminant Not published 3.6 3.79 C, 12:0 C14:0, TMDT, C16:0, C17:1, C^n, Q8:o, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published 3.7 1.97 C12:0, C14:0, TMDT, C6:0, C17:1, C18:1, C8:o, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published 2.1 0.94 C12:0, C14:0, TMDT, C16:0, C^n, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.3:2 2.2 1.15 C12:0, CM:0, TMDT, C16:0, C17:1, C18:1, C8:o, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published 4.8 0.74 C12:0, C14:0, TMDT, C16:0, C17:1, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published -2.4 0.74 C, 12:0 C 22:0 C , C , 14:0 15:0 C16:o, C17:o-br, C170 C18:1, C18:o, C2o:o, K, WE, TAG(tr) ruminant Velušček 2004.Pl. 41.6:5 6.1 2.22 C12:0, C22:0 C14:0, TMDT, C15:0, C16:0, C^n, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published 2.7 1.35 C12:0, C18:0, C14:0, TMDT, C150 C151, C16:0, C16:1, C17:1, C18:1, C20:0, C22:0 K, WE(tr) freshwater Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published -6.6 1.19 C12:0, C21:0, C14:0, C15:0, C20:0, C22:0 C160 C16:1, C17:o-br, C17:o, C18:1, C18:o, C24:0 A, OH, K, WE, MAG, DAG, TAG mixture ruminant dairy fats and degraded beeswax Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.9:10 -1.8 1.26 C12:0, C ^-24:0 C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0, A, OH, K, WE, DAG, TAG mixture ruminant fats and degraded beeswax Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.8:1 0.7 1.22 C, 12:0 C14:1, C15:0, C16:0, C17:1, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K mixture ruminant, plant Not published 3.8 2.02 C12:0, C14:0, C16:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 K non-ruminant Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published -i.9 1.93 C12:0, C24:0 C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0, A, OH, K, WE mixture ruminant fats and degraded beeswax Not published -0.8 2.28 C, 12:0 C 24:0 C , C , 14:0 15:0 C16:0, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0, A, OH, K, WE, MAG, DAG, TAG mixture ruminant fats and degraded beeswax Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.10:2 -1.1 0.85 C12:0, C20:0, C14:0, C15:0, C22:0 C15:1, C16:o, C17:o-br, C17:o, C18:1, C18:o, K, DAG(tr), TAG(tr) ruminant Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published 0.4 1.11 C, 12:0 C20:0, C , C , 14:0 15:0 C22:0 C15:1, C16:0, C17:0, C17:1, C18:1, C18:0, K, WE(tr) mixture ruminant, plant Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.3:3 n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published -1.4 1.67 C12:0, C14:0, C16:0, C17:o-br, C17:o, C18:1, C18:o, C2o:o, C22:o K ruminant Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.7:1 -1.0 0.24 C12:0, C18:0, C14:0, C15:0, C , C , 21:0 20:0 C15:1, C16:o, C16:1, C17:o-br, C17:o, C18:1, C , C 22:0 24:0 K, TAG, WE(tr) ruminant Not published n/d n/d n/d n/d n/d Not published -0.9 0.81 C12:0, C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0, C18:1, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0 A, OH, K, WE, DAG(tr), TAG(tr) mixture ruminant fats and degraded beeswax Velušček 2004.Pl. 4.1.7:3 duced &>-(o-alkylphenyl)alkanoic acids implies that their formation is mainly related to heating to high temperatures. Stable carbon isotope composition of fatty acids Further information regarding the source of the organic residues was obtained by measuring the stable carbon isotope ratio of saturated fatty acids Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 preserved in sufficient quantities in the pottery samples. The results were compared with modern reference animal data obtained from the literature presented in Figure 8 (Evershed et al. 2002; Copley et al. 2005; Craig et al. 2007; 2012). to meat mixtures exclusively. In vegetable oils, for example, the Ci8:i fatty acid is enriched in i3C compared to Ci8:0 (Spangenberg, Ogrinc 2001). A i3C-enrichment of Ci8:i (up to 2.3%o) compared to Ci8:0 acid was also observed in three pottery vessels (OiHO, 22HO and 3iHO) suggesting an admixture of plant-animal fats. Conclusions The results of stable isotope data and the more specific product identification based on available lipids indicate varied vessel use: pots were used to cook both aquatic and terrestrial products. Twelve samples (04HO, O6HO, 07HO, O8HO, 09HO, iOHO, iiHO, i2HO, i3HO, i6HO, i7HO and 23HO) yielded 8i3C values closer to those of lipid extracts from modern pottery vessels used to prepare freshwater and non-ruminant animals (Copley et al. 2005) (Fig. 8). Although nine of them (04HO, 06HO, 09HO, i0HO, iiHO, i2HO, i3HO, i6HO, i7HO) have aquatic biomarkers present, their use cannot be resolved more specifically. Non-ruminant, terrestrial animal contribution/origin could not be excluded, since the animal bone assemblage contains a high percentage of boar/pig (>30%) (Toskan, Dirjec 2004). 35% of samples (02HO, i4HO, 2iHO, 25HO, 26HO, 27HO, 33HO, 34HO, 36HO) plot in the range for ruminant adipose fats (Fig. 8). The Ci6:0/Ci8:0 ratios of fatty acids for these samples range between 0.74 and 2.28 values (Tab. 2) typical of ruminant adipose fat (Copley et al. 2005). The distribution of the data (Fig. 8) and 8i5N values of samples (average value 4.4+1.2%o) suggested that the population at Hocevarica used diverse domesticated (goat, cattle) or wild (deer) animal products in their diet. The sample 20HO plots in the region typical of ruminant dairy fats. The processing of dairy products in this pottery vessel is further supported by the distribution of lipids (Fig. 7). A further i5% of the samples (0iHO, 05HO, 22HO, 3iHO) fall close to the limit value between non-ruminant and ruminant fat (Di3C = 6i3Ci8:0 -8i3Ci6:0 = 0%). However, not all samples could be assigned The ruminant animal fats of either domestic (cattle, goat) or wild (deer) origin were the most frequently processed products preserved in the Hocevarica pottery samples (Tab. 2; 02HO, 05HO, i4HO, 2iHO, 22HO, 25HO, 26HO, 27HO, 3iHO, 33HO, 34HO, 36-HO). These samples come from all the analysed settlement phases at Hocevarica and display a variety of different types and technologies (both the calcite/ limestone group and the quartz group). This confirms that ruminant animal fat was processed in a variety of vessels, such as pots (14hO, 3iHO), dishes (2iHO, 26HO, 33HO) and bowls (05HO, 36HO) (Fig. 4). The processing of non-ruminant animal fats was detected in only three samples from Hocevarica that come from both main settlement phases, all made from the most common technological group with added calcite/limestone inclusions (Tab. 2; 07HO, 08-HO, 23HO). Fig. 7. Partial high-temperature gas chromatogram showing total lipid extracts from pottery sample 20HO from Hocevarica that is characteristic of a mixture of ruminant dairy fat and degraded beeswax. Fig. 8. Plot showing: A) the Sl3Cis.o versus Sl3Ci6.o values of some modern reference animal fats and archaeological samples; B) the difference in the St3C values of Cmo and C16.0 fatty acids (Al3C) versus Sl3Ci6:0 recovered from pottery extracts from Hocevarica. Also shown are the data from modern reference fat: ^ data from Craig et al. (2007) and the median and ranges of Sl3C from animals fed exclusively on C3 diets. The pig adipose fats and ruminant adipose and dairy fats are from Copley et al. (2005), while the wild ruminants are from the UK (Evershed et al. 2002) and red deer from Poland (Craig et al. 2012). All isotope data have been adjusted for the effects of post-industrial carbon (Friedl et al. 1986) in order to compare them with archaeological data. Only one decorated pot with an appliqué (20HO) indicates the processing of dairy fat. This pot dates to the 2nd settlement phase at Hocevarica and was made with the less common fine-grained fabric with quartz inclusions (Fig. 4; Tab. 2). The appearance of aquatic biomarkers is associated with nine samples (04HO, O6HO, 09HO, IOHO, 11-HO, 12HO, 13HO, 16HO and 17HO), indicating that these vessels were used in the preparation of aquatic resources such as fish and molluscs (Tab. 1). One of the samples with aquatic biomarkers is a pot with an appliqué (11HO; Fig. 4). Most of the samples come from the oldest settlement phase at Hocevarica and have similar technological characteristics in terms of their inclusions (calcite/limestone group), surface and firing treatment. This group of vessels also includes the only samples with a grey-black slip on the surface (10HO). Moreover, we found that three of the pottery samples (01HO, 22HO and 31HO) were used to process both plant and animal fats. These samples also come from all the settlement phases and are made with calcite/limestone inclusions. Sample 31HO is also a pot with an appliqué and comes from the same con- text as pot 11H0, which showed the presence of aquatic biomarkers (Fig. 4; Tab.2). The presence of beeswax in the vessels suggests either the storage of honey or the use of beeswax as a waterproofing agent. Beeswax was detected in five samples (Tab. 2; 20H0, 21H0, 25H0, 26H0, 36H0), of which four come from the 2nd settlement occupation phase and fall into the group with quartz inclusions. As to their morphology, the samples with preserved beeswax include two dishes (21H0, 26-H0), one pot that was also used to process dairy fat (20H0), and one bowl (36H0) (Fig. 4). These results suggest that the use of beeswax as a waterproofing agent or the use of honey in the preparation of food was more common in the younger settlement phase at Hocevarica and/or connected to special types of vessels made with a different ceramic fabric. -ACKN0WLEDGEMENTS- The research was undertaken as part of research projects J6-4085funded by the Slovenian Research Agency. We thank the Ljubljana City Museum and our colleague Irena Sinkovec for providing access to the Hocevarica pottery and fish bone assemblages. References Bregant T. 1974a. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja leta 1970. Poročilo o raziskovanju neoli-ta in eneolita Slovenije 3: 7-34. 1974b. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja leta 1972. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita Slovenije 3:39-66. 1975. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja 1973. in 1974. leta. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita Slovenije 4: 7-106. Budja M., Ogrinc N., Žibrat Gašparič A., Potočnik D., Žigon D. and Mlekuž D. 2013. Transition to farming - transition to milk culture: a case study from Mala Triglavca, Slovenia. Documenta Praehistorica 40:97-117. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Dudd S. N., Straker V., Payne S. and Evershed R. P. 2005. Dairy in antiquity, I: evidence from absorbed lipid residues dating to British Iron Age. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 485-503. Craig O. E., Forster M., Andersen S. H., Koch E., Crombé P., Milner N. J., Stern B., Bailey G. N. and Heron C. P. 2007. Molecular and isotopic demonstration of the processing of aquatic products in Northern European prehistoric pottery. Archaeometry 49:135-152. Craig O. E., Allen R. B., Thompson A., Stevens R. E., Steele V. J. and Heron C. 2012. Distinguishing wild ruminant lipids by gas chromatography/combustion/isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Rapid Communication in Mass Spectrometry 26: 2359-2364. Craig O. E. and 13 authors 2013. Earliest evidence for the use of pottery. Nature 496:351-354. Cramp L. J., Jones J., Sherdin A., Smyth J., Whelton H., Mulville J., Sharples N. and Evershed R. P. 2014. Immediate replacement of fishing with dairying by the earliest farmers of the northeast Atlantic archipelagos. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 281:20132372. Čufar K., Kromer B., Korenčič T. and Velušček A. 2010. Dating of 4th millennium BC piledwellings on Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia. Journal of Archaeological Science 37(8): 2031-2039. Čufar K., Kromer B. 2004. Radiocarbon dating of tree-ring chronologies from Hočevarica. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hoče-varica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 281-285. Dudd S. N., Evershed R. P. and Gibson A. M. 1999. Evidence for varying patterns of exploitation of animal pro- ducts in different prehistoric pottery traditions based on lipids preserved in surface and absorbed residues. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:1473-1482. Evershed R. P., Heron C. and Goad L. J. 1990. Analysis of Organic Residues of Archaeological Origin by High-Temperature Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. Analyst 115:1339-1342. Evershed R. P., Arnot K. I., Eglinton G. and Charters S. 1994. Application of isotope ratio monitoring gas chroma-tography-mass spectrometry to the analysis of organic residues of archaeological origin. Analyst 119:909-914. Evershed R. P., Dudd S. N., Charters S., Mottram H., Stott A. W., Raven A., van Bergen P. F. and Bland H. A. 1999. Lipids as a carriers of anthropogenic signals from prehistory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 354:19-31. Evershed R. P., Dudd S. N., Copley M. S. and Mukherjee A. 2002. Identification of animal fats via compound specific S13C values of individual fatty acids: Assessment of results for reference fats and lipid extracts of archaeological pottery vessels. Documenta Praehistorica 21: 73-96. Friedl H., Lotscher H., Oescher H., Siegenthaler U. and Stauffer B. 1986. Ice core record of the 13C/12C ratio of atmospheric CO2 in the past two centuries. Nature 324: 237-238. Govedič M. 2004. Fishes from the archaeological site at Hočevarica. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hočevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 133-151. Gregg M. W., Slater G. F. 2010. A new method for extraction, isolation and transesterification of free fatty acids from archaeological pottery. Archaeometry 52: 833-854. Hansel F. A., Copley M. S., Madureira L. A. and Evershed R. P. 2004. Thermally produced «-(o-alkylphenyl) alcanoic acids provide evidence for the processing of marine products in archaeological pottery vessels. Tetrahedron Letters 45: 2999-3002. Horvat M. 1999. Keramika: tehnologija keramike, tipologija lončenine, keramični arhiv. Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete. Ljubljana. Jeraj M. 2004. Palaeobotanical analyses of the Hočevarica pile dwelling. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hočevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 56-64. 2009. The diet of Eneolithic (Copper Age, Fourth millennium cal B.C.) pile dwellers and the early formation of the cultural landscape south of the Alps: a case study from Slovenia. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 18: 75-89. Katzenberg A. M., Weber A., i999. Stable isotope ecology and paleodiet in the Lake Baikal region of Siberia. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 651-659. Kimpe K., Jacobs P. A. and Waelkens M. 2002. Mass spec-trometric methods prove the use of beeswax and ruminant fats in late Roman cooking pots. Journal of Chromatography A 968:151-160. Miller J. M., Capriles J. M. and Hastorf A. 20i0. The fish of Lake Titicaca: implications for archaeology and changing ecology through stable isotope analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 37:317-327. Mottram H. R., Dudd S. N., Lawrence G. J., Stott A. W. and Evershed R. P. i999. New chromatographic, mass spectro-metric and stable isotope approaches to the classification of degraded animal fats preserved in archaeological pottery. Journal of Chromatography A 833:209-21. Mukherjee A. J., Berstan R., Copley M. S., Gibson A. M. and Evershed R. P. 2007. Compound-specific stable carbon isotopic detection of pig product processing in British late Neolithic pottery. Antiquity 81(313): 743-54. Ogrinc N., Budja M. 2005. Paleodietary reconstruction of a Neolithic population in Slovenia: A stable isotope approach. Chemical Geology 218:103-116. Ogrinc N., Gams Petrisic M., Zigon D., Zibrat Gasparic A. and Budja M. 20i2. Pots and lipids: molecular and isotope evidence of food processing at Maharski prekop. Documenta Praehistorica 39:339-347. Polet C., Katzenberg M. A. 2003. Reconstruction of the diet in the mediaeval monastic community from the coast of Belgium. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:525533. Privat K. L., O'Connell T. and Richards M. P. 2002. Stable isotope analysis of human and faunal remains from the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Berinsfield, Oxfordshire: Dietary and social implication. Journal of Archaeological Science 29: 779-790. Regert M., Colinart S., Degrand L. and Decavallas O. 200i. Chemical alteration and use of beeswax through time: accelerated ageing test and analysis of archaeological samples from various environmental contexts. Archaeometry 43(4): 549-569. Regert M. 2011. Analytical strategies for discriminating archeological fatty substances from animal origin. Mass Spectrometry Reviews 30:177-220. Rice P. M. 1987. Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London. Richards M. P., Pearson J. A., Molleson T. I., Russell N. and Martin L. 2003. Stable isotope evidence of diet at Neolithic ^atalhoyuk, Turkey. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 67-76. Spangenberg J. E., Ogrinc N. 2001. Authentication of vegetable oils by bulk and molecular carbon isotope analyses - with emphasis on olive oil and pumpkin seed oil. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 49:15341540. Spangenberg J. E., Jacomet S. and Schibler J. 2006. Chemical analyses of organic residues in archaeological pottery from Arbon Bleiche 3, Switzerland - evidence for dairying in the late Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 1-13. Tolar T., Jacomet S., Velušček A and Čufar K. 2011.Plant economy at a late Neolithic lake dwelling site in Slovenia at the time of the Alpine Iceman. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 20: 207-222. Toskan B., Dirjec J. 2004. Hočevarica - an analysis of ma-crofauna remains. In Velušček A. (ed.), Hocevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 76-132. Velušček A. (ed.) 2004a. Hocevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeo-logici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana. 2004b. Field research, stratigraphy and the material finds. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hocevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 33-40. 2004c. Analysis of the stratigraphic distribution of finds. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hocevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 213-217. 2004d. Hočevarica: pottery. In A. Velušček (ed.), Hocevarica. An Eneolithic pile dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8. ZRC SAZU Publishing. Ljubljana: 169-212. Walton T. J. 1990 Waxes, cutin and suberin. In J. L. Har-wood, J. R. Bowyer (eds.), Methods in plant biochemistry. Vol. 4. Academic Press, London: 105-158. ZZibrat Gasparic A. 2013. A new look at old material: ceramic petrography and Neo/Eneolithic pottery traditions in the eastern Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia. Documenta Prae-historica 40:147-164. Žibrat Gašparič A., Horvat M. and Mirtič B. 2014. Ceramic petrography, mineralogy and typology of Eneolithic pottery from Krašnja, Slovenia. Documenta Praehistorica 41: 225-236. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Neolithic pottery and the biomolecular archaeology of lipids Mihael Budja University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Archaeology, SI miha.budja@ff.uni-lj.si ABSTRACT - In this paper, we present archaeological and biochemical approaches to organic food residues, the lipids that are well preserved in ceramic matrices on prehistoric vessels. The 'archaeological biomarker revolution' concept is discussed in relation to pottery use, animal exploitation and the evolution of dietary practices in prehistory. IZVLEČEK - V prispevku predstavljamo arheološke in biokemijske raziskave organskih ostankov hrane, lipidov ohranjenih v stenah keramičnih prazgodovinskih posod. Koncept 'revolucije arheoloških biomerkerjev' analiziramo v povezavi z uporabo keramičnih posod, izrabo živalskih virov in razvojem mlečnega gospodarstva v prazgodovini. KEY WORDS - Neolithic; pottery; organic residues; lipids; biomarker revolution; fatty acids; stable isotopes Introduction Organic residues on pottery have become broadly recognised as remnants of the original vessel contents or the accumulated remnants of its multiple uses since David Braun (1983) introduced the perception of 'pots as tools', in which vessels are seen as containers designed to play a set of utilitarian roles. Elizabeth F. Henrickson (1990) distinguishes between the terms 'use' and 'function'. While use refers to the specific utilitarian tasks of vessels, the function is defined as a broad term for the agency encompassing the way in which a vessel and pottery assemblage fit into the social, economic, and ritual contexts of a cultural system, and the roles pottery is called on to play within them. In parallel, the determination of intended use was correlated to the performance characteristics of pottery manufacture, i.e. fabric, shape, and firing (Rice 1987), accessibility, stability and transportability (Skibo 2013), and with shifts in diet and food in different archaeological and ethno-archaeological contexts (Henrickson, McDonald 1983; Schiffer, Skibo 1987; Kimple et al. 2004; Skibo 2013). The term organic residue covers a variety of amorphous organic remains, lipids that lack the clearly discernible morphological features that characterise other biological materials. Their identification relies on chemical and biochemical analyses. Visible and absorbed organic residues are usually regarded as remnants of the original vessel contents, the accumulated remnants of multiple uses, and one or more cooking episodes of burning of food due to overheating of vessels. These residues are "typically chemically complex (commonly comprising hundreds of compounds of different classes, such as fatty acids and their derivatives, terpenes or polymers) and degraded (due to anthropic and natural degradation) mixtures of unknown organic compounds at low concentration" (Salque 2012.130). Visible residues can be observed as charred deposits encrusted (food-crust) on the interior and exterior of vessels (Fig. 1). Those on the outer walls may derive from soot deposited during the heating of the vessel over a fire. Resinous substances could have DOI>10.4312\dp.41.11 195 been applied during the manufacturing processes to reduce the permeability of porous fabrics. Residues on interior surfaces are highly charred and amorphous, but may provide direct and indirect evidence of their use. They are of animal or plant origin and may derive from animal fats, dairy products, beeswax, fermented beverages, resins, and tars (Regert 2011.178; see also Colombini, Modugno 2009) (Fig. 2). It has been suggested that surface residues 'are probably the result of the last, or one of the last, phases of vessel use', which increases the likelihood of identification of the original vessel content (Ou-demans, Boon 1993.222), and that they contain 'a more intact' lipids profile because those extracted from the ceramic matrix have been thermally degraded by repetitive heating of the vessel wall (Ou-demans, Boon 2007). Kenneth Peters, Clifford Walters and Michael Moldovan (2005.342) suggested on the contrary that charred food remains on the surfaces of cooking pots 'can be identified by visual inspection but provide less chemical information on their origins'. It has also been suggested that surface residues have been thermally altered, degraded and contaminated before and after deposition (Regert et al. 1998; Craig et al. 2007.137). However, the combined archaeometrical pottery analysis, and botanical and chemical analyses of charred residues performed on Early Neolithic Swifter-bant pottery show a correlation between pottery technology and function on the one hand, and between micro-fragments of partially charred foods prepared in the vessel and lipids, both identified in surface residue on the other. Thus micro-fragments of leaf tissue, roots and tubers and emmer chaff epidermis (Triticum dicoccum), correlate with the remains of fish scales and terrestrial animal bones, and with free fatty acids, acylglycerides, sterols and acyl-lipids (Raemaekers et al. 2013; Oude-mans, Kubiak-Martens 2012). Lipids were successfully recovered from charred surface deposits on Incipient Jo-mon pottery (c. 15 000 to 11 800 calBP) on Hokkaido, Honshu and Kyushu Islands. The lipids profiles in charred surface deposits show organic compounds consisting of saturated fatty acids derived from processing freshwater and marine organisms (Craig et al. 2013). In North America, the regional histories of maize utilisation have been intensi- Fig. 1. A surface residue on the Neolithic pottery at Maharski prekop site (photo: M. Budja). vely studied using bulk values of stable carbon isotopes 813C, maize phytoliths and starches derived from charred cooking residues. The basic assumptions were that maize was the only C4 resource cooked in a pot along with C3 legumes and other plants, and that there was a linear relationship between the proportion of maize cooked in a pot relative to legumes and bulk 813C values on residues. The presence of C4 maize in a mixture with C3 legumes would result in higher bulk S13C values on residues. The -24%o S13C bulk value was recognised as a proxy signature of maize presence (Hastrof, DeNiro 1985; Morton, Schwarcz 2004). The analytical work focused on isotope ratio mass spectrometry and was first limited to 'bulk' carbon (S13C) and nitrogen (S15N) isotope compositions of carbonised food remains (DeNiro 1987). It was recognised recently as a 'very blunt analytical tool' unsuitable for Fig. 2. Natural substances that may have been preserved as amorphous organic residues on prehistoric vessels (reprinted from Regert 2011.Fig. 1, copyright 2010 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.). distinguishing complex mixtures of biomo-lecules derived from a number of poorly defined origins of food constituents (Craig 2007.137). The experiments suggest that maize cannot be identified from bulk 513C values even when it contributed substantially to the food mix, and that different carbon mobilisation from C3 and C4 resources over time is an important variable in residue formation and in determining bulk values (Hart et al. 2007; 2009; 2012). They even show that the decomposition of lipids was rapid, thus making maize lipids in bulk values unidentifiable. Their identification can be performed with compound-specific Fig. 3. "Diagram of a replica late Saxon/Early Medieval jar showing the lipid concentrations (^g lipid g-1 sherd) as an average of three samples taken from cleaned ceramic at five points on the experimental vessel. On the right is a histogram showing the lipid concentrations at three points on the ancient vessel" (from Evershed 2008a. Fig. 2). stable isotope analysis only (Reber, Evershed 2004). Invisible residues are absorbed by porous ceramic fabric and usually better preserved than surface deposits, because the ceramic microstructure protects them from microbial degradation. They are very common, 'probably being present in 80% or more' of all archaeological pottery assemblages (Brown, Brown 2011.194). It is believed that absorbed residues include compounds from the entire use of vessels, as the lipids absorbed in archaeological pottery represent an integrated signature, reflecting a number of occasions of use rather than simply the last or even later uses of a vessel (Evershed 2008a.35). During boiling or roasting of food, organic compounds like lipids, proteins, carbohydrates, and other biopolymers are liberated or mobilised from foodstuffs. Different processes preserve these compounds in absorbed residues, but it seems they are hydrophilic enough to dissolve in cooking liquid and thus be absorbed into pot walls, but also hy-drophobic enough not to wash out during deposition. Lipids represent the largest and most enduring portion of these residues because of their hydrophobicity and greater resistance to structural modification compared to proteins and carbohydrates. However, even the lipid components deposited in ceramic vessels are preserved in low concentrations and highly degraded. Degradation and loss of residue begin over the course of cooking and continue after discard and deposition through py-rolysis, bacterial action and autoxi- dation. The duration of burial is probably less important for residue survival than the prevailing conditions within the burial environment. Experimental studies have shown the variability of lipid preservation with burial environments and that anoxic conditions favour organic residue preservation. They indicate that only a small fraction of lipid originally absorbed survives burial. It was suggested that 99% of the extractable lipid missing from food residues is lost principally through microbial action. The surviving lipids - the fraction of molecules that survives is presumed to be due to their protection in molecular-sized pores within the clay fabric microstructure or strong absorption into the clay surface (Evershed 2008a.28-29). The latter was also suggested to be significant in the survival of protein residues as well (Craig, Collins 2002). Fig. 4. Partial high temperature gas chromatogram of trimethyl-silylated total lipid extracts that is characteristic of ruminant dairy fats and degraded beeswax from the Maharski prekop pottery sample MP59 (Ogrinc et al. 2015 in prep.). Analyses show that many cooking vessels displayed greater lipid concentrations in the upper parts of vessels and much lower or negligible accumulation in their bases (Fig. 3). A notable difference appears in the absolute concentration of lipid deposited in the vessel wall in mixed residues like meat and vegetables. Meat dominates over vegetables, showing higher concentrations of triacylglycerols than of leaf wax. This difference is most strongly influenced by the lipid richness of the source foodstuff and the degradation resistance of components from different sources (Evershed 2008a.31-35). Since the 1990s the determination of nature and origin of lipids, which mostly derived from degraded animal fats based on the distribution of fatty acids, sterols, mo-noacylglycerols, diacylglycerols, and triacylglycerols, was a great challenge because they reflect a range of complex transformations and mixtures and have undergone a series of alteration processes. The introduction of biomarker concept and HTGC-MS combined with carbon isotopic analysis of individual fatty acid by GC-C-IRMS analytical tools and soft ionization techniques have offered the possibility to differentiate ruminant and nonruminant fats, and to detect dairy products (e.g., goat and cow milk) in Neolithic ceramic vessels. Lipids Lipids are a broad group of organic macromolecules produced by living organisms, which include fats, oils, waxes, steroids, and various resins. The main biological functions of lipids include storing energy and acting as structural components of cell membranes. Plants, animals, and other living organisms use fats and oils as stored forms of energy. Fats and oils are stored in the adipose cells of animals, forming adipose tissue, and in the seeds of plants. Within a wide variety of organic compounds which are categorised as lipids, the fatty (carboxylic) acids (FAs), triacylglycerols (TAGs), steroids, waxes and terpenes are recognised as useful in the analysis of prehistoric food residues. FAs rarely occur as free, isolated molecules in nature, but they most often occur as parts of TAGs, in which three fatty acids are bonded to a single glycerol molecule through ester linkages. Lipids are relatively resistant to degradation by chemical and microbial processes and can survive with little structural change for long periods. They are recognised as 'simple' and 'complex'. The first consist of TAGs, and their derivatives derived from hydrolysis, such as diacylglycerols (DAGs) and monoacylgly- Fig. 5. The representative GC-MS total ion chroma-tograms of the FAs methylesters (FAMEs) with different C16.0 and C1S.0 abundance extracted from the Maharski prekop pottery samples (from Ogrinc et al. 2012.Fig. 3). cerols (MAGs), free fatty acids (FAs), as well as other sterol-containing metabolites such as sterols (cholesterol), esters (waxes) and lipoproteins. The latter consist of phospholipids and glycolipids. TAGs are the main storage form of fats within the body, where their main function is to store energy. Nearly all fats and oils of animal and plant origin consist almost exclusively of TAGs. FAs rarely occur as free molecules in nature, but are usually found as components of lipid molecules like fats and oil, and phospholipids. While FAs derive from dietary sources or produced by the metabolic breakdown of stored fats, phospholipids serve as major components of cell membranes and have an essential role in photosynthesis (Pollard et al. 2007; Colombini, Modugno 2009). Fatty acid structure is one of the most fundamental categories of lipids, and is commonly used as a build- Fig. 6. Partial gas chromatogram of the total lipid extract (trimethyl-silylated) of an Early Bronze Age cooking vessel, showing the presence of long-chain ketones formed by thermal free radical condensation of the FAs present in the same extract. Peak identities are Cum and C18.0, which indicate saturated fatty acids (palmitic and stearic), and C18:1 (oleic) that indicates a monounsaturatedfatty acid. K, the long mid-chain ketones with the preceding number corresponds to the number of carbon atoms in each component. IS is internal standard (5a-cholestane). Values in parentheses refer to the 13C values of the individual compounds determined by GC/C-IRMS (reprinted from Evershed et al. 1999.Fig. 2). ing-block of more structurally complex lipids. FA is a carboxylic acid with a long aliphatic chain. The main FAs found in plant and animal foods have a chain of an even number of carbon atoms ranging from 4 to 36, which is either saturated or unsaturated. Unsaturated FAs have one or more double bonds between carbon atoms. Saturated FAs usually have between 12 and 24 carbon atoms and have no double bonds. When they are not attached to other molecules, they are known as 'free' fatty acids produced from the breakdown of TAGs. The more abundant saturated (unbonded) FAs are the palmitic (Ci6:o), and stearic (Ci8:o) acids, followed by lauric (Ci2:o), myristic (Ci4:o); the unsaturated (bonded) acids are palmitoleic (C16:1), oleic (C18:1), linoleic (Ci8:2), and linolenic (Ci8:3). These FA distributions are typical of degraded fats, and have a strong biological signature. While unsaturated FAs are more abundant in food of vegetable origin, small quantities of branched-chain fatty acids are present in many plants and animals (especially ruminants and fish), and in much larger concentrations in many bacteria (Spangenber et al. 2006; Eerkens 2007). 'The archaeological biomarker revolution'1 Since all the organic materials processed in vessels are of biological origin, they will be complex mixtures. The complexity increases through human activities (e.g., mixing biological materials in food pre- paration), followed then by the compositional alteration of residual matrices due to continuous vessel heating (pyrolysis), and decay during burial (diagenesis). Richard Evershed (1993) proposed using bio-markers as identifiers of the origin of food components in complex molecular mixtures in prehistoric vessels. The conceptualisation was embedded in the 'biomolecular archaeology of lipids', which concerns the recognition and origin of "the properties of the individual compounds or mixtures of compounds" in organic residues in pottery. He suggested that it is possible to identify the origin of lipids in a ceramic matrix by "matching the structures of individual compounds, or the relative proportions of the components of a mixture of compounds, to those found in contemporary plant and animal natural products likely to have been exploited in antiquity' (Evershed 1993.79). His identification of 'lipid biomarkers' in organic residues in pottery is related to recognitions of: (i) 'sterols and sterol derivatives' in which cholesterol is the most abundant animal sterol, while campes-terol and sitosterol are the two major plant sterols; (ii) 'fatty acids and acyl lipids' in which FAs, DAGs, MAGs and TAGs are detected as being associated with animal fats, dairy products, vegetable oils and fish/marine oils; and (iii) 'long chain alkyl (acyclic)' compounds that relate to beeswax and plant waxes. The main chemical characteristics that constitute i Evershed (2008b.898) introduced a syntagm recently, relating it to 'archaeological biomarker concept' that relies upon matching the structures or distributions, 'chemical fingerprints', to the compounds and mixtures known to exist in extant organisms likely to have been exploited in the past. Sometimes the structure of a single component is sufficient to define the origin of a constituent of an organic residue. Betulin is thus marking the Birck bark, Boswellic acid the Frankincense, and Moronic acid the Pistacia spp. Beeswax is further example. It can be readily recognized because of the characteristic mixture of aliphatic components that it contains. However, the fundamental aspects of the biomarker approach is ability to recognize an original constituent or source, of an organic residue based upon altered structures surviving in the residues. It requires knowledge of the chemical and biochemical mechanisms and pathways that have been involved in the processes (see below). biomolecular markers are 'carbon skeletons, and the position, number, and stereochemistry of the double bonds' of carbon (Ibid. 79-84; see also Evershed 2008b). The biomarkers approach focuses on the correlation of lipid molecular components preserved within organic residues in pottery with biomolecules present in modern-day plant and animal tissues. While the composition of animal and plant lipids in contemporary materials is well established, the effect of degradation, e.g., chemical, microbiological or physical, on these individual lipids and their distributions during vessel use and burial (diagenesis) needs to be studied continuously (see Spangenberg et al. 2006; Eerkens 2007; Gregg et al. 2009; Gregg, Slater 2010). The complex mixtures which originate from the degradation of lipids (specifically those with unsaturated components) are difficult to interpret and can often lead to an incorrect characterisation of the origin of the residues (Stacey 2009). Although the conceptualisation of 'archaeological biomolecular markers' remains unchanged, their terminology and typology have become more precisely elaborated recently (Evershed 2008b.898; Regert 2011). The markers are recognised as: 'biomarkers' that correspond to native molecules relating to natural sources (animal and plant fatty acids, sterols); 'anthropogenic transformation markers' that relate to chemical transformations induced by different human activities (e.g., heating vessels and pyrolysis); 'natural degradation markers' formed by the natural decay of initial 'biomarkers', or 'transformation' markers during deposition by chemical or biochemical processes; and 'migration markers', known as contaminants, that relate to components migrating from sediment to archaeological organic residues (Regert 2011.185; see also Erkens 2007). By combining the complementary data of all molecular markers, and their chemical characteristics and isotopic values, it is possible to detect animal fats in pottery and to identify their main types (body fats of ruminants and non-ruminants, dairy products, and marine and freshwater resources), their biosyn-thetic origins, their diagenesis through natural burial and aging, and alteration under cooking conditions. The application of the 'archaeological biomar-ker concept' has required analytical techniques that can achieve molecular-level resolution. While gas chromatography combined with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is recognised as the most useful technique for lipids individual identification and distribution Fig. 7. High-temperature gas chromatograms of the total lipid extracts from "Medieval pottery samples (Leicester): lamp (a), 'dripping' dish (b) and cauldron (c). Peak identities 14:0 (myristic), 16:0 (palmitic), 18:0 (stearic) are saturated fatty acids. The 18:1 is octadecenoic (oleic) acid. The IS is internal standard of n-tetratricontane. The 48, 50, 52, 54 are triacylglycerols (TAGs)" (reprinted from Mottram et al. 1999.Fig. 1, copyright 1999, with permission from Elsevier). within a mixture in lipids matrices, gas chromatog-raphy-combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometry (GC-C-IRMS) has been used to detect biomarkers iso-topic structures and 813C values, and to record the biochemical history of each diagnostic components. From 'bulk stable isotope' to 'compound-specific stable isotope' analysis As presented above the identification of food components in organic residue in a ceramic matrix is complicated due to degradation processes that occurred during vessel use and burial. Lipids are preserved in 'low concentrations in highly degraded and complex matrices' because of chemical and micro-biological processes of degradation and alteration that include hydrolysis, oxidation, polymerization, condensation, cyclization or microbial degradation (Evershed 2008a; Regert 2011.178). Degrad- Fig. 8. Gas chromatograms of fatty acid methyl esters recovered from Medieval (Leicester) 'dripping dish' (a) and a lamp (b) (reprinted from Mottram et al. 1999. Fig. 2, copyright 1999, with permission from Elsevier). ed animal fats, which are the most commonly identified 'biomolecular constituent', are characterised by a recognisable distribution of FAs, MAGs, DAGs and intact TAGs. Because of degradation and alteration they might exhibit great similarities in the chromatographic pattern of total lipids extract. The analytical work thus focused on the carbon isotope (S13C) compositions of individual biomarkers, e.g., FAs, TAGs and wax esters (Evershed et al. 1994; 1997a). Evershed (2009.397) suggested a number of 'compelling' reasons for an analytical and interpretative shift from bulk carbon (S13C) and nitrogen (S15N) isotope compositions to the carbon isotope (S13C) values of individual biomolecular markers, i.e. 'compound-specific S13C values on individual lipids'. The reasons mainly relate to the facts that structurally similar biochemical components can derive from sources exhibiting different stable isotopic signatures, and that 'complementary use of structurally diagnostic biomarkers' together with their compound-specific stable isotope values can provide informa- tion on a metabolic process (i.e. to distinguish adipose and milk fats). The compound-specific stable isotope analysis is thus to provide accurate stable isotope value(s) for a specific component(s) of what is likely to be a biochemically complex matrix preserved in pottery to be compared to modern reference samples. Advances in high temperature gas chromatography (GC) analysis of total lipid extract, and the development of appropriate methodologies of lipid extraction and purification at the beginning of the 1990s made it possible to analyse the main biomar-ker components of animal fats, including TAGs, FAs, and sterols. Work on the assessment of transformation and degradation markers ran parallel to experimental work on animal fats from replica ceramic vessels and degradation experiments (for an overview, see Evershed 2008a). Evershed's team introduced an internal standard in the procedure for quantifying different components of extracts (i.e. molecular markers); they later became used in various laboratories, sometimes with minor modifications. However, many important components in total lipid extract (TLE) from ceramic matrices cannot be analysed directly by GC. They have to be chemically modified, or derivatised first to generate molecular markers and their isotopic signatures. The trimethylsilylation sampling protocol (resulting in TMS derivatives) is associated with high-tem- Fig. 9. Plot showing the &3C values of C16.0 and C1&0 FAs "form Medieval lamps (o) and dripping dishes (□) and from modern reference animal fats [cattle (♦), sheep (•), and pig (■)]" (reprinted with permission from Evershed et al. 2002.Fig. 10, copyright 2002 American Chemical Society). perature gas chromatography (HT GC) and gas chro-matography-mass spectrometry (HT GC-MS) techniques. They are basic investigative techniques focused on the initial detection of molecular markers, 'intact acyl lipids' or fatty acids like FAs, TAGs, DAGs, MAGs and wax esters that provide the partial gas chromatogram profile of the total lipid extract preserved in the ceramic matrix (Evershed et al. 1990; Charters et al. 1993; 1995) (Fig. 4). The parallel gas chromatograph-combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometer (GC-C-IRMS) technique enables the compound-specific isotope (513C) analysis of individual molecular markers extracted from bulk organic materials. It is necessary to transform the FAs via the chemical process of esterification to FAMEs (fatty acid methyl esters), which play a substantial role in identification of isotopic signature of individual biomarkers and to differentiate their sources (Fig. 5). GC-C-IRMS has proven especially powerful in determining and studying the 513C values of FAs as biomarkers for animal fats in pottery matrices, and in distinguishing ruminant (e.g., sheep/goat and cattle) and non-ruminant (pig) body fats for the major old world domesticates (for an overview, see Evershed 2009; Regert 2011). The initial application of this approach, which combines the biomarker and the compound-specific 513C values of individual markers, was related to dietary plant lipids analysis. It was carried out by linking a gas chromatograph (GC) to the isotope ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) used for stable isotope measurement (Evershed et al. 1991; 1994; 1999.22). The molecular structures present in organic residues in the ceramic matrix were correlated with those known to be present in modern-day vegetables, and 'likely to have been exploited in antiquity'. The gas chromatographic profiles for the total lipid extracts of a medieval cooking pot show the biomarker distribution, which consists of FAs and their derivatives, and the wax esters hydrolysed into C29 and C31 alkanes, C29 ketones and C29 alcohol. The distribution of alkanes and ketones corresponds well with those in cabbage leaves (Brassica oleracea) boiled in an experimental replica vessel (Charters et al. 1997). The 513C values for the C29 alkanes and ke-tone are consistent with those of higher plant leaf waxes, as shown by the similarity to the values obtained for the contemporary wild Brassica (-35.8% ±0.1) within the accepted limits of precision (±0.3%). However, further studies of cooking of leafy vegetables of an Early Bronze Age cooking vessel show that 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 Number of acyl carbon atoms Fig. 10. TAGs distributions in (A) fresh milk, (B) milk absorbed in ceramic vessel and degraded in the laboratory under oxic conditions for 90 days, and (C) fresh ruminant (ovine) adipose fat. The distributions were determined by high-temperature GC of total lipid extracts (from Dudd, Evershed 1998.Fig. 1, reprinted with permission from AAAS). the three major saturated long-chain ketones (the C31, C33 and C35) in the total lipids extract have 513C values of -26.8, -26.5 and -25.9% respectively (Raven et al. 1997). These compounds are too enriched (c. 10%) in 13C to be derived from epicuti-cular leaf waxes of Brassica oleracea (-35.4%). Two major FAs (C16:0 and C18:o) in the same extract have 513C values of -25.5% and -26.6% similar to those of ketones. This similarity suggests that since cooking vessels were continuously heated, ketones have formed by condensation of fatty acid moieties derived from fats absorbed into the ceramic matrix during vessel use. (Fig. 6). Laboratory experiments involving heating (<300°C) of either TAGs or FAs acids embedded in a ceramic matrix showed that during the heating of fats at high temperatures such mixtures of long-chain ke-tones can form readily. These findings indicate 'anthropogenic transformation markers' and the close similarity of the ketones produced by the pyrolysis of acyl lipids and those biosynthesised by higher plants (Evershed et al. 1999.23). The next approach combining the biomarker and the compound-specific 513C values of individual markers was related to the question of the origin of animal fats. Animal fats present greater challenges, because the major components, polyunsaturated fatty acids, TAGs that compose approx. 95% of fresh animal fats, rarely survive in pottery residuals, leaving mainly undiagnostic fatty acids. Fig. 11. Plot of the &3C values of the C160 and C180 FAs of the lipid extracts "from potsherds from (A) West Cotton (late Saxon to early medieval) and (B) Stanwick (Iron Age-Romano-British). The archaeological fats (solid circles) cluster near the reference adipose and milk fats (bovine and ovine). In the case of West Cotton, nonruminant (porcine) adipose fats have also been identified. The mixing curves (dashed lines) have been calculated to illustrate the S13C values that would result from the mixing of ovine/bovine and porcine fats in the vessels. The encircled fields encompass the ranges for reference animal fats, with the ranges crossing at the arithmetic mean. The numbers of different reference fats analyzed were as follows: pig adipose fat, 4; ruminant adipose fat, 9 (3 cow and 6 sheep); chicken adipose fat, 8; milk fat, 7 (6 cow and 1 sheep). All the animals were raised on C3 diets. The more depleted 813C values for the C18 fatty acid in the milk fats arises through routing of a large proportion of fatty acids directly from the diet (after biohydrogenation) to milk production. The 813C values for the fatty acids in the reference fats have been corrected for the post- Industrial Revolution effects of fossil fuel burning, which has decreased the 813C value of atmospheric CO2 by 1.2%0 since the middle of the 19th century. The letters adjacent to the points in (B) correlate with the triacylgly-cerol distributions ... and correspond to the following types of domestic archaeological vessels: a, b, e, f, h through m, p, r, and s are jar-form vessels of various sizes; c is a mortaria; d is a ceramic lid; g and n are flanged and wide bowls, respectively; and i, o, and q are small dishes. There was no obvious correlation between vessel form and the type of fat they contained. Analytical precision is ±0.3%o" (from Dudd, Evershed 1998.1479, Fig. 2, reprinted with permission from AAAS). It was shown, however, that it is possible to identify animal fats if the stable isotopic compositions of the FAs generated via the hydrolysis of TAGs are determined. For example, the 513C values of saturated Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs that survive in degraded animal fats can be used to differentiate their sources. Ruminant and non-ruminant fats can be separated, and ruminant adipose fats distinguished from dairy fats, due to metabolic differences between the different animals and carbon sources utilised in the biosynthesis of different fat types (Evershed 2008b. 899-900). The first attempt to distinguish animal fats focussed on medieval ceramic vessels of two different shapes, with various functions as lamps and 'dripping dishes'. The HT GC chromatographic profiles for the total lipid extracts (using derivatisation sampling protocol) showed biomarker distributions, which consist of a great quantity of saturated Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 and unsaturated Ci8:i FAs. MAGs and DAGs were present only in very low quantities, and it seemed that the hydrolysis was almost completed. The small amount of TAGs remained intact in ceramic matrices, as if they had been protected from degradation (Fig. 7). Although the extracts of all the vessels contained the same major saturated and unsaturated FAs (Ci6:0, Ci8:0 and Ci8:i) there were clear differences in the relative proportions. In the lamps, the Ci8:0 FA was more abundant than the Ci6:0 component. In contrast, the dripping dishes had more Ci6:0 (Evershed et al. 1997b; Mottram 1999). Clear differences were also apparent in the distributions of FAs identified by their FAME mass spectra for the two vessel types. The gas chromatograms show a series of branched iso- and anteiso FAs, with i5 and i7 carbon atoms (Ci5br and Ci7br), known to be formed in the gut by thermophilic bacteria synthesis. While they have a strong biological signature in lamps, they were not found in the 'dripping dishes' (Evershed et al. 1997b; 1999; Dudd, Evershed and Gibson 1999; Mottram 1999) (Fig. 8). A parallel electron ionisation mass spectrometry (EI) associated with dimethyl disulphide (DMDS) and io- Fig. 12. (a) "Histogram of the 813C values of Ci8:3 fatty acids and glucose extracted from plants. The histogram of the 813C values of the major fatty acids and carbohydrates of 166 modern plants demonstrates that there is an 8.1%o mean difference in the 813C values of Ci8:3 fatty acid (mean = -36.3%o) and glucose (mean = -28.2%o) which is the basis of the difference in the 813C value of the Ci8:0 fatty acid in dairy and milk fat. This difference in 813C value between lipids and carbohydrates is seen in both C3 and C4 plants." (b) "Diagram showing the routing of dietary fatty acids and carbohydrates in the rumen, adipose tissue and mammary gland of the ruminant animal. 60% of the Ci8:0 in ruminant milk is directly incorporated from the diet following biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids in the rumen (marked by asterisk), and reflects the inability of the mammary gland to biosynthesise C18:0, and the remaining 40% is rerouted from adipose tissue and is comprised of carbon originating from dietary glucose and fatty acids. The 2.3%o mean difference in the 813C values of Ci8:0 in ruminant adipose tissues and dairy fats can be seen graphically in Fig. 12a" (from Copley et al. 2003.Fig. 1, copyright 2003, The National Academy of Science). dine in diethyl ether treatment of FAMEs has revealed the existence of two kinds of monounsaturat-ed fatty acid Ci8:i (oleic acid) distributions. While the single monounsaturated octadecenoic acid CmA9 was identified in 'dripping dishes', a more complex composition characterised by a mixture of positional isomers of octadecenoic acid with a double bond located at different positions Ci8:iA9,ii,i3,i4,i5,i6 was identified in lamps (Evershed et al. 1997b; Mottram et al. 1999). It was suggested that this difference in fatty acid distribution reflects different origins of -22 -24 " (a) O m MO -26 -28 -30 -32 -34 -1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-r Porcine adipose fats (aa ' Ruminant adipose fats y Dairy fats -36 -34 animal fats related to different diets and variations in animal metabolisms. While in ruminant animals (sheep and cattle), biohydrogenation of dietary fats occurs in the rumen, resulting in the formation of several positional Ci8:i isomers, in non-ruminant mo-nogastric animals (pigs) a single isomer is present (Evershed et al. 1997b; 2002.664). The origins of animal fats were further studied by GC-C-IRMS analysis of 8i3C values of individual free FAs, palmitic (Ci6:o) and stearic (Ci8:o), and by corre- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (b) 1 ,3.8 %o Porcine f \ adipose fats a j J 6.9 %o •'75%"«a,„et,,mnbm)i)ii - _ Ruminant / adipose fats mWk// - Jm / _ /\J • / / * Ruminant ( dairy fats .....1 1 1 1 1 -22 -24 -26 O -28 OO O -30 O -32 -34 -36 -32 -30 -28 -26 Ô13C16:0(%O) -24 -22 -34 -32 -30 -28 -26 Ô13C16:0(%O) -24 -22 Fig. 13. Scatter plot showing the 2.3%o mean difference in the S13C values of Cmo in ruminant adipose tissues and dairy fats, and the 6.9%o mean difference in porcine body fat and ruminant adipose fat (reprinted and modified from Evershed 2009.Fig. 14.18a and Mukherjee et al. 2007.Fig. 3, with permission from Antiquity Publications Ltd). lation with modern reference fats considered to be the major domesticated species in the medieval period in the United Kingdom such as pigs, sheep and cattle. The analysis was supplemented with laboratory degradation experiments of those fats deposited in modern potsherds (Evershed et al. 1997b). The 613C values of Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs clearly indicated that these two types of vessel contained two kinds of animal fat (Fig. 9). The FAs in the lamps were depleted in 13C, having higher 613C values compared to the 'dripping dishes'. Individually, in the lamps the 613C value of palmitic Ci6:0 was higher compared to the 613C value in stearic C1&0, whereas in the 'dripping dishes' the situation was reversed. The FAs in the latter cluster near the reference body porcine fats, while the former plot close to the values obtained for modern non-ruminant fats (Evershed et al. 1997b; 2002; Mottram et al. 1999). The 613C values were consistent with the biomarker compositions determined by GC-MS, as the set of FAs identified in lamps was consistent with ruminant fats, while those determined in 'dripping dishes' were characteristic of monogastric animals. From biomolecular to stable isotope markers: from meat to milk Subsequent studies focused on ruminant and non-ruminant fats and possible changes in patterns of animal exploitation and dietary practices in prehistory. Among the existing extraction protocols and instrumental analytical methods mentioned above, a number of precise chemical criteria were suggested for use in distinguishing between the residues of animal fats preserved in ceramic matrices. These criteria relate to both biomolecular and isotopic markers and were listed in order: "(i) the positional isomers of monounsaturated fatty acids; (ii) the abundances of odd-carbon number (C150 and C170) iso- and anteiso- branched-chain fatty acids; (iii) fatty acid and triacylgly-cerol distributions; and (iv) the 513C values of the major saturated fatty acids Cm and Ci8:0, determined by GC-combustion-isotope ratio MS (GC-C-IRMS) (Dudd, Evershed 1998a.1479). Stephanie Dudd and Richard Evershed postulated that while bulk stable isotope studies allow the detection of remnant fats in either carbonised food re- sidues or residues absorbed in pottery, the compound-specific 513C measurements allows the differentiation of nonruminant (omnivores) and ruminant (herbivores) animals' fats, and a distinction between adipose and dairy fats in ruminants. They hypothesised that one major category of fat that has to be detected in pottery is that derived from milk, and that just as with body fats, the processing of milk would result in the absorption of fat by the ceramic matrices. They presumed it would be easy to detect dairy fat, because of the presence of short-chain (C4 to C14) saturated FAs biomolecular markers, the main components of fresh milk. However, they failed to detect them in any lipid extracts from Fig. 14. "Plot of the difference in the S13C values of the Cis:o and Ci6:0 fatty acids (= A13C value) obtained from the modern reference fats (a). Plot of the 813C values of Ci6:o and Ci8:o fatty acids of modern reference fats (b). The three fields correspond to P = 0.684 confidence ellipses calculated for the 513C values of the domesticates known to comprise the major component of prehistoric economies in Britain. All of the animals were raised on C3 diets. The 813C values obtained from the modern reference materials have been adjusted for post-Industrial Revolution effects of fossil fuel burning by the addition of 1.2%o. Analytical precision is ±0.3%o" (reprinted from Copley et al. 2003.1526, Fig. 2, copyright 2003, The National Academy of Sciences). Fig. 15. Plots of the &3C values of C16.0 and C18.0 FAs and &3C values of lipid extracts from Neolithic pottery from of Windmill Hill (a), Hambledon Hill (b), and Eton Rowing Lake (c) sites in the United Kingdom. The fields and ranges corresponding to the modern reference fats have served "to classify the lipid extracts". Extracts that plot between the reference ellipses have been recognized to be "indicative of the mixing of commodities in antiquity" (reprinted from Copley et al. 2003.Fig. 3, copyright 2003, The National Academy of Sciences). pottery. They ran a laboratory experiment to prove that their inability to detect dairy fats must have been related to milk processing and to compositional alteration through decay during burial. Meanwhile, they examined the existing biomolecular markers, e.g., TAGs distributions of both, milk fat from fresh milk and of ruminant body fat after decay in the laboratory when absorbed into unglazed replica pottery (Dudd et al. 1998). The results showed that when released from TAGs by hydrolysis, the short-chain FAs are more water soluble than their long-chain counterparts. Over a period of 90 days, the distribution of FAs in milk was transformed into a distribution similar to that of the adipose fat. They observed the same pattern in lipid extracts from ceramic matrices (Fig. i0). They realised that molecular analyses alone do not allow dairy fats to be distinguished from body fats, or ruminant from non-ruminant fats. As most of the lipids extracted from pottery matrices are reduced to Ci6:o and Ci8:o FAs, the components of hydrolysed TAGs are often the only surviving lipids of degraded degradation and/or biological hydrolysis during deposition. Dudd and Evershed thus focused on the isotopic markers, the 8i3C values of Ci6:o and Ci8:o FAs in lipids extracted from different pottery assemblages. The residuals from Late Saxon - Early Medieval and Iron Age - Romano-British pottery matrices were analysed first. The results showed that ruminant fats in pottery could be divided into two groups, one with low Si3C values for Ci8:o (Dudd, Evershed 1998) (Fig. ii). They noticed that the isotope values of this group are similar to those they obtained on modern ruminant milk fats. They suggested, therefore, that the "data show that milk and adipose fats from animals raised on similar diets are separable on the basis of the comparison of the S13C values of C160 and C180 fatty acids and that this provides the basis for determining the presence of milk fat in archaeological pottery' (Dudd, Evershed 1998.1480). As the biochemical evidences of processing of animal products in various archaeological vessels correspond well with the composition of the bone assemblage from the site, Richard Evershed et al. (2002.665) suggested further that the application of compound-specific stable isotope analyses "to pottery from prehistoric periods is beginning to reveal important cultural biases in the exploitation of animal products". Dudd and Evershed (1998) proposed that the isoto-pic higher values for FAs in ruminant body relate to a subtle difference in the way in which the Ci6:o and Ci8:o acids are synthesised in two types of fat. Body tissues are able to make both Ci6:o and Ci8:o FAs, Fig. 16. "(A) Plot of the 813C values of the FAMEs of 813Ci6:0 and 813Cis:0, prepared from lipid extracts from the six pottery assemblages. The ellipses indicate the 813C values of the reference animal fats, based on which the archaeological extracts are classified. Sherds plotting in between the ellipses represent the mixing of animal products in the vessel. A13C (=813C1S:0 - 813C16:o) values of lower than -3.3%o indicate dairy fats. The black filled circles represent extracts containing TAG distributions indicative of degraded adipose fats. The open circles represent those with typical degraded dairy fat TAG distributions, whilst the circles with crosses within them represent sherds that yielded no TAGs. A 'P' adjacent to the circle denotes that plant lipids were also detected, whilst a 'B' represents the presence of beeswax. (B) A13C values of the extracts plotted against their 813C16:0 values. The further the sherds plot to the right, then the greater the marine component of the animals' diet. The reference materials are represented by their ranges and mean A13C values" (reprinted from Copley et al. 2005c.527, Fig. 3, copyright 2005, with permission from Elsevier). using acetate and other substrates derived from carbohydrates contained in the diet. This process involves an isotopic shift that results in the S13C value of the synthesised biomolecule being 1-2%o higher than that of the dietary carbon. On the other hand, the mammary gland can synthesise C16:0, but not C18:0. It obtains them from FAs contained in the ingested plants, most of which are unsaturated, like C18:1, C18:2 and C18:3. The biohydrogenation process in the rumen converts about 40% of them to saturated C18:0 FAs. This conversion does not result in an isotopic shift. Therefore, the S13C value of the C18:0 in milk, or in any dairy product, is slightly lower than that in body tissue. A few years later Mark Copley et al. (2003) confirmed that a range of chemical criteria, like saturated fatty acid compositions, double-bond positions, TAGs distributions, and S13C values, can be used to assign the origins of fats to domesticated animals (sheep goats, cattle, and pigs) in prehistory. As the critical distinction between meat and milk fats is possible by determining 513C values in the Ci8:0, the analytic focus turned to the study of the 513C values of individual FAs and to the differences in values for ruminant adipose and diary fats, and for non-ruminant fats in prehistoric and modern animals. The 513C values of the Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs from 16 ruminant adipose and 10 dairy fats, and 8 non-ruminant (porcine) body fats from modern animals that were raised on strict C3 diets were calculated. The results show that stearic C18:0 acid in milk fat has a 513C value ~2.3%o lower compared to the same FA in adipose fat due to the biohydrogenation process in the rumen. The differences in 513C values of the C16:0 and C18:0 between porcine body fat and ruminant adipose and milk fats are -4.6% and ~6.9% respectively (Copley et al. 2003.1525-1526; Mukher-jee 2007.745) (Figs. 12 and 13). Neolithic Bronze Age Iron Age -22 -24 0 -26 & -28 u -30 1-0 -32 -34 -36 Porcine - * fats ........ -34 -32 -30 -28 -26 -24 -22 SI3C160(%O) P 75% porcine • • • J*:-.- - — Ruminant / adipose fats / « vw ••• T • Ruminant / - dairy fats •( , 1 , 1,1,1,1, £ Predominantly C3 diet Increasing marine diet a • • OQ Q- • • C/3 — II Ruminant ajiipose fat 1 , 1 .................................. 1 Ruminant dairy fats 1 - 1 • 5' •V- M , / -40 -30 1 1 1 1 b 1 1 1 Porcine f 1 1 1 1 • adipose fatsV_ > 75% porcine V • • • — Ruminant / • • . adipose fats / '/ Ruminant / dairy fats (,___ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1,1, -22 -24 -26 -28 -30 -32 -34 -36 Oo _p se o 9 -20 -40 Ô13C16:0 (%c) - 1 > it) o 9 --5 Fig. 19. Scatter plots of S13C values of C160 and C180 FAs "from (a) domestic Grooved Ware, (b) ceremonial/non-domestic Grooved Ware, and plots of A13C values for all (c) domestic Grooved Ware and (d) ceremonial/non-domestic Grooved Ware" in Neolithic in United Kingdom (reprinted from Mukherjee et al. 2008.Fig. 9, copyright 2008, with permission from Elsevier). reference animal fats from which the extracts are classified. The D13C proxy distributions are graphed separately (Fig. 15). The dairying trajectory has been systematically charted from the Neolithic to the Iron Age across the British Isles (Copley et al. 2005a; 2005b; 2005c; Cramp 2014a). The results show site-to-site variation, although at some sites the intensity of dairying was high, and no mixing of ruminant and non-ruminant fats was evident in any of the vessels (Fig. 16). However, the processing of ruminant animal products (both adipose and dairy fats) strongly prevailed through the prehistoric periods. Very few of the 813C values plot within, or in the vicinity of, the reference pig body fat ellipses, suggesting that vessels used only to process porcine products were rare. At a few sites, mixing of porcine and ruminant adipose fats in the vessels was evident (Copley et al. 2005) (Fig. 17). Copley et al. (2005a.528) suggested that about 50% of the extracts that contained significant quantities of lipids can be classified as predominantly dairy fats. On the other hand, they point out that very few of the extracts plot within the reference isotopic values of pig body fats. There was even no evidence of the processing of porcine products in vessels from sites where bones were preserved, suggesting that porcine products were processed by other methods (e.g., spit roasting) that did not involve the pottery they analysed (Copley 2005.898; 2005a.528). The identification of the origin of dairy fats residue has been related to the question of whether fats arise through the processing of milk or milk products, such as yoghurt, or represent residues of the use of butter. The laboratory experiments performed on replica vessels indicate that milk degrades much faster than butter, probably because of the presence of Fig. 20. (A) The theoretical mixing of animal fats. "The labelled ellipses are generated from the reference animal fats, and the minor ellipses correspond to the theoretical fields that would result from the mixing of the respective fats (each ellipse represents a 10%increase/decrease in the specific commodities). The lines are the actual mixing curves joining the centroids of the respective fields. (B) The theoretical effect on the A13C (=813C1S:0 - 513C18:o) values of mixing the specific fats as in (A). The reference materials are represented by their ranges and mean A13C values." Curves from the porcine adipose ellipse to the ruminant dairy and adipose ellipses and between the ruminant dairy and adipose ellipses represent theoretical 8*3C values for mixtures of these fats. Extracts plotting above the dotted line contain a 75% or greater contribution of porcine fat (a,d) (reprinted from Copley et al. 2005b.508, Fig. 2, copyright 2004, with permission from Elsevier; and Mukherjee et al. 2008.2068, Fig. 6, copyright 2008, with permission from Elsevier). proteins and carbohydrates that are excellent nutrients for soil micro-organisms. In contrast, butter is composed of pure lipids and is not a suitable substrate for microbial growth. It was concluded, therefore, that the accumulation of dairy fats in several prehistoric vessels may have derived from 'the processing of large amounts of butter fat, probably over extended periods of time' (Copley et al. 2005.905). While there were no differences in vessel form or actual use in the Neolithic, it was demonstrated that dairy products were generally processed in vessels with smaller rim diameters than those used for cooking meat products in the Bronze Age. There were differences in vessel use, type and form, and rim diameter in the Iron Age (Copley et al. 2005). The subsequent analyses based on lipids extracts from 385 vessels from 16 sites from the UK showed that 16% of late Neolithic Grooved Ware vessels contained 'significant proportions of porcine fat, and half of these were used to process solely porcine products'. The pottery from preceding Peterborough and Impressed Wares sites, while predominantly used to process dairy products, also showed evidence of the processing of porcine products, but only 7% of the extracts were composed of predominantly porcine fats (Mukherjee et al. 2007). To put these results in a wider prehistoric context in Britain, they were incorporated into an accumulated dataset of d13C values for pottery lipid residues from prehistoric sites analysed by Copley et al. (2005) (Fig. 18). Fig. 21. Histograms "of typical saturated acyl carbon number distributions in modern reference animal fats: (a) cow adipose fats, (b) sheep adipose fat, (c) pig adipose fats, (d) fresh milk, (e) milk degraded for 90 days; and animal fats extracted from prehistoric pottery: (f ) ruminant adipose fat, (g) porcine adipose fat, (h) ruminant dairy fat" (reprinted from Mukherjee et al. 2007.Fig. 2, with permission from Antiquity Publications Ltd). Site-to-site analysis of Grooved Ware sites showed that the processing and consumption of pig or pig products was more important at non-domestic, ceremonial sites than at domestic settlement sites. This may be due to 'the suitability of the pig to be raised and slaughtered for large-scale feasting events' at ceremonial sites or it could relate to a special significance of pigs to the Grooved Ware people', allowing them to be consumed only at certain places or by specific people (Mukherjee, Gibson and Evershed 2008) (Fig. 19). A broad discrepancy between the 513C distributions of lipid extracts and principal ellipses of reference animal fats representing domesticates known to have been raised in prehistory in the UK can be seen from the plots. Very few of the extracts plot within, or in the vicinity of, the reference ruminant and non-ruminant body fat fields. It was suggested that those embedded between the ellipses indicate the mixing of these fats in the vessels (Copley 2005.897) (Fig. 17). Theoretical mixing curves have been calculated to illustrate the effect of vessel re-use and the processing of mixtures of foods. Each ellipse in Figure 20A "represents the effect of mixing a specific percentage of each of the respective commoditiesl3J. The resultant mixing lines display curved trends due to differences in the relative abundances of the fatty acids in the animal fats, and hence their influence on the overall S13C values.... [W]henever a lipid extract is classified, it is necessary to refer to the extract as being of predominantly dairy/ruminant adipose/porcine adipose origin rather than simply being of ruminant adipose origin, for instance. Furthermore, it is likely that classifications based on both of these plots depend upon the ex- 3 The term commodity is broadly accepted "to designate all kind of raw or transformed natural substance that has been exploited by ancient communities" (Regert 2011.184). Fig. 22. Partial high temperature gas chromatograms of total lipid extract, and histogram of TAGs carbon number distributions indicative of ruminant dairy from the same extract. They both correlate to scatter plot showing the Sl3C of C16.0 and Cis:o FAs, and A13C proxy measured for domestic Neolithic Grooved Ware pottery in UK (reprinted from Mukherjee et al. 2008.Figs. 4, 5, 9, copyright 2008, with permission from Elsevier). tent of vessel re-use in antiquity... The three principal ellipses from the S13C values of the reference animal fats representing the domesticates known to have been raised in British prehistory ... The corresponding A13C values... are shown as ranges and means., and further aid in the classification to predominant commodity group" (Copley et al. 2005.507). It was suggested that the environmental variations in Si3C values (calculated in Ai3C proxy) would potentially have the effect of shifting the di3C values of the extracts along the axis of the ellipses. The mixing model postulates that within the percentage abundance of each fatty acid in reference porcine and ruminant fats and their di3C values, "a contribution of porcine fat equal to or greater than 75 per cent of the total mixture were classed as 'predominantly porcine" (Mukherjee et al. 2007.749). In looking for milk and pig 'signatures' in prehistory the analysis of TAGs distributions in extracted li-pids have recently been reactualized. TAGs are ma- jor constituents of animal fats, and their carbon number distributions in pottery lipids have been recognised as a biomarker of lipid origin to species level. The biomarker studies of modern animal fats have shown that bovine adipose fats contain saturated TAGs of total acyl carbon numbers that range between C42 and C54. Ovine adipose fats contain TAGs ranging from C44 to C54. In milk fat, the TAGs distribution is very broad, ranging from C28 to C54 due to presence. In body fat of non-ruminant species (porcine) the TAGs range from C44 to C54, with very low amounts of C44, C46 and C48 (Regert 2011.186) (Fig. 21). The analyses of prehistoric pottery showed that about 19% of extracted lipid residues display preserved TAGs. The carbon number distributions of half of them, either indicative of degraded dairy or adipose fat, correlate well with ô13C values of Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs, and A13C proxy values of the same samples (Mukherje et al. 2008; Copley et al. 2005a; 20005b; 2005c) (Fig. 22). Biomolecular and isoto- Fig. 23. Statistical'reference confidence ellipses' model was calculated for TAGs distributions in modern reference and late Neolithic pottery extracts using average carbon number and dispersion factor (reprinted with permission from Mirabaud, Rolando and Regert 2007.Fig. 2, copyright 2007, American Chemical Society). pic data have thus been equally used in detecting and interpreting the exploitation of domesticated animals for their 'secondary products', and their roles in non-domestic ceremonial contexts. A parallel statistical 'reference confidence ellipses' model was calculated for TAGs distributions in modern reference and late Neolithic pottery extracts (Mirabaud, Rolando and Regert 2007). TAGs distributions of cow, sheep and goat milk were analysed after decay in the laboratory when absorbed into unglazed replica pottery. By calculating the 'average carbon numbers in the TAGs distribution' the three different 'classes' of TAGs distribution were determined; they are reminiscent of earlier calculated 'reference confidence ellipses' of three fat types. The 'first class' relates to a 'large distribution of TAGs, from T40 to T54', which can be associated with degraded dairy products. The second relates to the 'medium distribution of TAGs, from T44 to T54', and to body degraded fat. The third relates to a 'narrow distribution of TAGs, from T46 or T48 to T54', which can be associated with body fats (Ibid. 6186) (Fig. 23). However, it is "necessary to consider TAGs distributions as preliminary information" in detecting the origins of FAs (Regert 2011.188). Laboratory experiments showed that TAGs distributions are unstable when absorbed in a pottery matrix. They are degraded by hydrolysis and microbial activity during deposition. Degradation pathways are not fully understood yet, and might differ, depending on the burial micro environments. We already mentioned that when released from TAGs by hydrolysis, the short-and medium chain FAs are more water soluble than their long-chain counterparts. Over 90 days, the distribution of FAs in milk was transformed into a distribution similar that of the adipose fats. Research in food sciences has demonstrated that FAs decomposition is an extremely complex process that can produce a diverse range of organic compounds, depending on environment (Eerkens 2007). The A13C correction factor was recognised, on the other hand, as a 'very powerful' tool to decouple the proxy from the C3/C4 and other environmental influences, which makes reference fat data sets (collected in the UK) with relating confidence ellipses and their A13C values 'globally applicable' (Ever-shed 2009.417; Salque 2012). The A^C proxy approach has recently been used to provide the earliest evidence for prehistoric milk use in Southeast Europe, Anatolia and the Levant (Evershed et al. 2008a). It was shown that milk was in use by the 7th millennium BC and that milking was particularly important in north-west Anatolia, pointing to regional differences linked with conditions more favourable to cattle compared with other regions, where sheep and goat were relatively common and milk use less important (Fig. 24). This work involved the greatest number of analysed pottery samples so far, 2225 in all, from 23 archaeological sites in the Levant, Anatolia, and Southeast Europe, dating from 6500-3500 BC. Surprisingly, only 255 pottery sam- -1 -3 -5 Predominantly Increasing C4 diet C3 diet -► ro • CD D- C CO" ta * , •p to1 E 0 a. ^J — ro L 5 • r...........X-........................ • • v« *: .. ' (a) 1 1 1 Ruminant milk fats Predominantly Increasing C4 diet C3 diet--► is m Q. • • — ...y). e cc " ro : ■ -..........* v ..................... •= to 1 E 0 • U ä #J ro 1 r • * c to -'E ¿Ê UL Ë • _ (b) 1 1 -1 -5 Predominantly Increasing C4 diet C, diet -> E o 3 9- - E ^ 5 E •t . r *VV (c) Predominantly Increasing C4 diet C, diet -► ■ \ • * £ ^ (d) -30 -20 513C16:0(%O) -30 -20 Ô13C16:0(%o) Fig. 24. Plots of the A13C values for Early Neolithic animal fat residues in pottery show the milk use in Southeastern Europe and Anatolia dating back to the 7th millennium BC. Pottery was from: (a) northwestern Anatolia; (b) central Anatolia; (c) northern Greece; and (d) eastern Anatolia and the Levant (reprinted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: Nature, Evershed et al. 2008a.Fig. 3, copyright 2008). ples contained absorbed residues, a substantially smaller number than anticipated from past experience with pottery assemblages from UK. The relatively low success rate might have been due to increased diagenesis in warmer climates and variations in the calcareous soil conditions in Southeast Europe, Anatolia, and the Levant, or could possibly reflect differences in the absorptive powers of the types of clay used in different parts of the world. The results showed that milk was being used in all the regions from which potsherds were obtained, including the earliest sites, and that dairying was particularly widespread in northern Anatolia. In this area, 70% of the potsherds that contained residues yielded strong signs of the presence of milk. In contrast, at sites from eastern Turkey and the Levant, closer to the areas where farming began, the proportion of pottery showing signs of milk usage were much smaller. This distribution may relate to differences in the vegetation patterns of the various regions, with parts of northern Anatolia providing much better grazing conditions than eastern Turkey and the Levant, thus being more suitable for breeding cattle. Recently, Michael Gregg and Greg Slater were able to extract C16:0 and C1&0 FAs from 34 of 65 archaeological pottery fragments (52%) from nine Neolithic settlements in the Middle East dated between 7300 and 4700 calBC by using a microwave-assisted liquid chromatography solvent extraction protocol in combination with purification and analytical protocols. The isotopic values are consistent with those obtained from the modern body fats of wild boar and goat pastured on lands adjacent to the Jordan Valley, and residues from a modern pottery vessel used in the manufacture of yoghurt in Central Turkey (Gregg, Slater 2010.835). The long sequence of dairying and milk usage was recently embedded within the archaeogenetic scenario of demic diffusion of Near Eastern farmers and Fig. 25. Partial gas chromatograms of total lipid extracts from ceramic sieve associated with cheese production in Linear Pottery culture (reprinted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: Nature, Salque et al. 2012.Figs. 1-2, copyright 2012). the evolution of lactase persistence in the Neolithic population in Eurasia. It was hypothesised on the one hand that strong selection for lactase persistence runs within the 'niche construction' at the forefront of the demic diffusion, where local environmental conditions and subsistence strategies led to a population increase and concentration on milk resources (Gerbault et al. 2011). On the other hand, it was suggested that lactase persistence appears in a relatively short period among dairy farmers in the northern Balkans in the Starcevo and Koros cultures, and is subsequently dispersed by demic diffusion to Central and Western Europe in the area of Linear Pottery (Itan et al. 2009). However, archaeogenetic analyses revealed an absence of the lactase gene in Neolithic populations in Europe, suggesting that lactase persistence was very low or even zero (Leonar-di et al. 2012.93; for a discussion, see Budja et al. 2013). The first farmers were probably lactose intolerant and could not have used unprocessed milk without Triacylglvcerols Fattv acids Other constituents 51JC and A1JC signature f— Ž S3 5 -ûj! 2 2 < C 2 Porcine - Narrow distribution C44 to C54 with adipose fats low abundance of C44, C4<-> and C54 - Rich in Iripalmitin - Palmitic acid preferentially located in the 2-position (P:S ratio in sn-2 position is of~ 95:5) - C 16:0 more abundant than Cim - Absence of minor odd carbon number fatly acids - Monounsaturatcd fatty acid: only a single isomer Z-9-octadecenoic acid - Odd-numbered ketones ranging from C2-1 %u (Fig. 21, D) Cattle adipose fats - Distribution from C42 to C54 - P:S ratio in sn-2 position is of- 60:40 0 2 < m 3 2 Ç * - Goat adipose fats Sheep adipose fats - Distribution from C44 (tracc) 1o C54 - P:S ratio in sn-2 position is of = 60:40 - Distribution from C44 (trace) to CM - P:S ratio in sn-2 position is of- 60:40 - C[60 less abundant than CiS:[) - Low amount of straight carbon chain with odd carbon number, specifically C15:0 and C-17:0 - Low amount of branched-chain alkanoic acid (Ci?:o and C|7:o) - Mixture of isomers of octadcccnoic acid (double bond at 9, 11, 13, 14, 1 5 and Repositions) - Same ketones as for porcine adipose fats - A C from -3 to -1 %o (Fig. 21, D) < O - Large distribution from C40 to C54 - in all triacylglycerols, Cut;« present at lower abundance than in goat milk ¿¡3 _ c 5 < - ûi S Sheep milk - Large distribution Irom C4() to C - Same fatty acids as for adipose fats of - Same ketones as for porcine ruminant animals adipose fats Goat milk - Large distribution from C40 to C54 - in all triacyl glycerols, CK):0 present at higher abundance than in cow milk - C [¡¡:o depleted in "C in comparison with adipose animal fats - AnC < 3.3 %o Not preserved - Palmitic acid more abundant than stearic acid - Long chain fatty acids with more than 18 carbon atoms - Triunsaturated fatty acids (usually not preserved in archaeological contexts) - Presence of isoprenoid acids (phytanic acid 3,7,11,15-tetramethylhexacosanoic acid and 4,8,12-trimetbyltridecanoic acid = 4,8,12-TMDT) al low abundance - Series of isomers containing 16, 18 and 20 carbon atoms of co-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids (cyclic compounds) with a wide range of positional isomers formed by degradation of triunsaturated fatty acids - Palmitic and stearic acids are isotopically enriched in 13C compared to those of terrestrial animals, eventhough they plot not far from adipose fats of domestic pigs (Fig. 18) Freshwater fish Not preserved - Same acids as for marine fish - Same constituents as for marine fish - freshwater fishes are depleted in 13C for both C1():0 and Cik:o fatty as compared to marine resources Fig. 26. Summary of molecular and isotopic criteria to distinguish animal fats in archeological ceramic vessels (reprinted from Regert 2011.Tab. 2, copyright 2010 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.). Fig. 27. Comparison of the carbon isotope composition of stearic acid (S13Ci8.o) versus palmitic (S13Ci6.o) and oleic (S13Ci8.i) acid of organic residues from Arbon Bleiche 3 Neolithic site with those of modern (A and B) and pre-industrial animal andplant fats (C and D) (reprinted from Spangenberg et al. 2006.Fig. 5, copyright 2005, with permission from Elsevier). having digestive problems. It should be noted that lactose is progressively reduced by milk processing. The lactose content of fresh milk ranges between 4.42-5.15g/g% in cattle, 4.66-4.82g/g% in goats and 4.57-5.40g/g% in sheep. It can be reduced to 5060% by bacterial fermentation. Some processed milk products (such as cheese and butter) have very low lactose content, ranging from 0-3.7g/g% (Nagy 2011. 267). Lactose intolerant farmers were thus able to digest processed milk products better than fresh milk. It would therefore be possible that the earliest dairy farmers not only recognised the nutritive value of milk, but also understood how to convert milk into what would have been, for them, more palatable dairy products. Milk is extremely perishable and many methods have been developed to preserve it; fermentation was the earliest method. Inoculating fresh milk with the appropriate bacteria can ferment milk at temperatures that favour bacterial growth. As the bacteria grow, they convert milk sugar or lactose into lactic acid. The lowered pH caused by lactic acid preserves the milk by preventing the growth of pathogenic bacteria, which do not grow well in acidic conditions. The lactic acid bacteria (e.g., Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, Lactobacillus caucasius and Lactococ-cus lactis) thus turn milk into yoghurt, kefir, buttermilk and cheese. They make milk available as a nutritional source throughout the entire life of individuals, and also have advantages for storing and transporting dairy products and making them available in periods of low milk production on the other. The presence of abundant milk fat in specialised vessels comparable in form to modern cheese strainers was identified in Northern Europe in the Early Neolithic LBK complex at c. 5200 and 4900-4800 calBC. It provides compelling evidence that vessels were used to separate fat-rich milk curds from the lactose-containing whey, which is characteristic of the production of cheese (Salque et al. 2012) (Fig. 25). In Scandinavia, further to the north, dairy fat residue Fig. 28. Scatter plots of &3C and SD values of the Cis.-o and Ci6.-o fatty acid animal fats of modern reference fats (A and B) and of organic residues from archaeological pottery (C and D) from Kazakhstan. C shows the Si3C values of Cis-o and Ci6-o FAs extracted from 89pottery fragments of Eneolithic Botai culture; and (D) shows the SD values of the Cis.o and Ci6.-o FAs of the residues from pottery assigned as equine fats. All confidence ellipses correspond to the values exhibited by modern reference fats. The residues highlighted in red correspond to archaeological equine milk fats (from Outram et al. 2009.Fig. 3, reprinted with permission from AAAS). was found in Corded Ware culture at c. 25oo calBC (Cramp et al. 2014b). Oliver Craig et al. (2005) provided much earlier data for milk processing in the Early Neolithic in Southeast Europe. Degraded ruminant fatty acid in pottery in the Starcevo-Cri§ (595o-55oo calBC) and Koros cultures (58oo-57oo calBC) suggest milk products and milk processing, i.e. the heating of milk. In the Northern Adriatic, initial milk processing is well embedded in Vlaska culture in the time span 5467-5227 calBC (Budja et al. 2013). Towards a new perception of reference isotopic values of modern animal fats and A13C proxies While all the molecular and isotopic criteria useful for discriminating different animal fats have been summarised (Regert 2011.Tab. 2) (Fig. 26), many recent studies of organic residues in archaeological pottery from Neolithic sites in Central Europe, Near East and Central Asia have raised questions about the use of stable carbon isotope values obtained from modern reference fats from animals pastured in the UK to characterise ancient organic residues from other regions of the world. Gregg and Slater (2010.847-849; see also Gregg et al. 2009) noted that the isotopic ratios of adipose fats of wild boar from Palestine, domesticated sheep from Israel and dairy food residues from Turkey do not correlate with ranges of Si3C values for pig fats, and ruminant adipose and dairy fats from the UK. While Si3C values of Ci6:o and Ci8:o from sheep adipose fats from the Near East are significantly more positive, plotting near the observed range of domesticated pigs from the UK, those from wild boar adipose are both significantly more negative. None of the Si3C values of pottery lipids extracts plot below the Ai3C = -3.3 line, and thus would not be catego- 813Ci6:0 (%O) -34 -32 -30 -28 -26 -24 -22 1 1 1 Pike * Wild boar 1 1 V Perch ^Carp y jkfa/ V /Or / Deer" Fig. 29. Plot of the S13C values obtained on reference wild and domestic animals. "Data in blue = porcine fats (Copley et al. 2003); in red = ruminant adipose fats (Copley et al. 2003); in green = ruminant milk fats (Copley et al. 2003). Data in orange = wild species (Craig et al. 2007b); brown crosses = marine fish (Craig et al. 2007b)" (reprinted from Regert 2011.200, Fig. 18, copyright 2010 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.). rised as dairy foods on the basis of the criteria postulated by Evershed et al., Copley et al., and Muk-herjee et al. (see above). In Central Europe, Si3C values for ruminant adipose fats plot above the Ai3C = 0 line, and within the range previously observed for pig fats. Jorge E. Spangenberg et aVs (2006) study of lipids extracts from Neolithic pottery and modern reference adipose and dairy fats from Central Europe has demonstrated that there is greater diversity in the fractionation of carbon isotopes associated with the synthesis of Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs in ruminant and non-ruminant animals than previously postulated. Stable carbon isotope values of modern pig fat, cow's milk, and goat cheese in this study all overlap the range of ruminant adipose values from the UK used to categorise potsherd extracts (Fig. 27). It was shown that the overlap in stable carbon isotope values of dairy foods and adipose fats of ruminant and non-ruminant species can result from a wide range of other factors that affect fractionation, not only in the synthesis of FAs in the animals themselves, but also during the subsequent preparation and storage of fermented milk byproducts. The boiling effect on modern milk samples showed different changes in the Si3C values for the main FAs Ci8:0 and Ci8:i in cow, goat and sheep milk during heating. The differences in Si3C values were up to 8%o. On the other hand, these FAs in sheep and goat cheese samples are enriched in i3C by ~4% compared to raw milk samples. This isotopic shift probably reflects the bacterial degradation of long-chain FAs during cheese making and storage (Spangenberg et al. 2006.9-11; 2008.197-198). Interestingly, the ôi3C values of Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs from adipose fats from suckling calf and lamb cluster in the range of adult pig adipose. It was suggested that the use of glucose from mother's milk as carbon source for fatty acid biosynthesis by young animals probably explains why their adipose fat plots near porcine fats that derive from acetate and glucose carbon source, but not in the range of adult ruminant animals that mainly use acetate as a carbon source for fatty acid biosynthesis (Spangenberg et al. 2006.8-9). On the Kazakh steppe in Central Asia, isotopic values for modern ruminant dairy fats have also been reported as plotting above the Ai3C = -3.3 line. The Si3C values of horse milk and adipose fats fall within the range of previously published values for the adipose fats of ruminants in Northern Europe (Outram et al. 2009) (Fig. 28). However, Si3C values are not appropriate to discriminate mare's milk from horse carcass fats. Alan Outram et al. (2009.13341335) have introduced another proxy, the compound-specific deuterium isotope (SD) analysis, to discriminate milk and subcutaneous horse fats, and it was shown that the SD values obtained for these two types of horse products were distributed in two distinct clusters. The difference in values between milk and carcass fat is related to the variation kn SD values of summer and winter precipitation that differ importantly (>i00%) on the Kazakh steppe. Adipose fats integrate water and dietary signal of all year, while mares produce milk only in summer to feed their foals, which explains the difference in 8D signals between equine milk and adipose fats. In the context of the hypothesised Mesolithic - Neolithic dietary shift in Northern Europe, Si3C values for Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs of a range of marine and freshwater (pike, perch, and carp) fish were determined. Marine fats have shown to be isotopically enriched in i3C compared to those of terrestrial animals, even though they plot not far from adipose fats of domestic pigs (Craig et al. 2007) (Fig. 29). The available data show that freshwater fishes are depleted in i3C for both Ci6:0 and Ci8:0 FAs as compared to marine fishes. It was suggested that the formation of œ-(o-alkylphenyl) alkanoic acids 'could be undeniably considered as biodegradation markers of marine products' and evidence of fish consumption (Regert 2011.192; see also Evershed et al. 2008b; Cramp et al. 2014a; Cramp, Evershed 2014). Lucija Soberl et al. (this volume) show they can occur in high frequencies together with long-chain n-alcohols of C22 to C32 even-carbon number series and analogous odd-carbon number n-alkane series of C23 to C33 chain length, which are more characteristic of degraded plant waxes. There is no doubt, however, that since the 1990s the determination of the nature and origin of lipids, which mostly derived from degraded animal fats based on the distribution of FAs, sterols, MAGs, DAGs, and TAGs, was a great challenge because they reflect a range of complex transformations and mixtures and have undergone a series of alteration processes. References Brown T., Brown K. 2011. Biomolecular Archaeology An Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. Chichester. Braun D. 1983. Pots as Tools. In J. A. Moore, A. S. Keene (eds.), Archaeological Hammers and Theories. Academic Press. New York: 107-34. Budja M., Ogrinc N., Zibrat Gasparic A., Potocnik D., Zigon D. and Mlekuz D. 2013. Transition to farming - transition to milk culture: Mala Triglavca case study. Documenta Praehistorica 40:97-118. Charters S., Evershed R. P., Goad L. J., Leyden A., Blinkhorn P. W. and Denham V. 1993. Quantification and distribution of lipid in archaeological ceramics: implications for sampling potsherds for organic residue analysis and the classification of vessel use. Archaeometry 35(2): 211223. Charters S., Evershed R. P., Blinkhorn P. W. and Denham V. 1995. Evidence for the mixing of fats and waxes in archaeological ceramics. Archaeometry 37:113-127. Charters S., Evershed R. P., Quye A., Blinkhorn P. W. and Reeves V. 1997. Simulation experiments for determining the use of ancient pottery vessels: the behaviour of epicu-ticular leaf wax during boiling of a leafy vegetable. Journal of Archaeological Science 24:1-7. Colombini M. P., Modugno F. 2009. Organic Mass Spectrometry in Art and Archaeology. Wiley. Chichester. Copley M. S., Rose P. J., Clapham A., Edwards D. N., Hor-ton M. C. and Evershed R. P. 2001. Detection of palm fruit lipids in archaeological pottery from Qasr Ibrim, Egyptian Nubia. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 268:593-597. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Dudd S. N., Docherty G., Mukher-jee A , Straker V., Payne S. and Evershed R. P. 2003. Direct chemical evidence for widespread dairying in prehistoric Britain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 100:1524-1529. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Dudd S. N., Aillaud S., Mukher-jee A. J., Straker V. and Evershed R. P. 2005. Processing of milk products in pottery vessels through British prehistory. Antiquity 79(306): 895-908. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Dudd S. N., Straker V., Payne S. and Evershed R. P. 2005a. Dairying in antiquity. I. Evidence from absorbed lipid residues dating to the British Iron Age. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:485-503. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Straker V., Payne S. and Ever-shed R. P.2005b. Dairying in antiquity. II. Evidence from absorbed lipid residues dating to the British Bronze Age. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:505-521. Copley M. S., Berstan R., Mukherjee A. J., Dudd S. N., Straker V., Payne S. and Evershed R. P. 2005c. Dairying in antiquity. III. Evidence from absorbed lipid residues dating to the British Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:523-546. Craig O. E., Collins M. J. 2002. The Removal of Protein from Mineral Surfaces: Implications for Residue Analysis of Archaeological Materials. Journal of Archaeological Science 29(10): 1077-1082. Craig O. E., Chapman J., Heron C., Willis L. H., Bartosiewicz L., Taylor G., Whittle A. and Collins M. 2005. Did the first farmers of central and eastern Europe produce dairy foods? Antiquity 79(306): 882-894. Craig O. E., Forster M., Andersen H., Koch E., Crombé P., Milner N. J., Stern B., Bailey G. N. and Heron C. P. 2007. Molecular and isotopic demonstration of the processing of aquatic products in northern European prehistoric pottery. Archaeometry 49:135-152. Craig O. E., Saul H., Lucquin A., Nishida Y., Taché K., Clarke L., Thompson A., Altoft D. T., Uchiyama J., Ajimoto M., Gibbs K., Isaksson S., Heron C. P. and Jordan P. 2013. Earliest evidence for the use of pottery. Nature 496:351354. Cramp L. J. E., Jones J., Sheridan A., Smyth J., Whelton H., Mulville J., Sharples N. and Evershed R. P. 20i4a. Immediate replacement of fishing with dairying by the earliest farmers of the northeast Atlantic archipelagos. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 281: 20132372 281. Cramp L. J. E., Evershed R. P., Lavento M., Halinen P., Mannermaa K., Oinonen M., Kettunen J., Perola M., Onka-mo P. and Heyd V. 20i4b. Neolithic dairy farming at the extreme of agriculture in northern Europe. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 281:20140819. Cramp L. J. E., Evershed R. P. 20i4. Reconstructing Aquatic Resource Exploitation in Human Prehistory using Li-pid Biomarkers and Stable Isotopes. In H. D. Holland, K. K. Turekian (eds.), Treatise on Geochemistry: Archaeology and Anthropology. Vol. 14. Elsevier. Oxford: 3i9-339. DeNiro M. J. i987. Stable isotopy and archaeology. American Scientist 75(2): 182-191. DeNiro M. J., Epstein S. i978. Influence of diet on the distribution of carbon isotopes in animals. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 42: 495-506. Dudd S. N., Evershed R. P. i998. Direct demonstration of milk as an element of archaeological economies. Science 282:1478-1481. Dudd S. N., Regert M. and Evershed R. P. i998. Assessing microbial contributions to absorbed acyl lipids during laboratory degradations of fats and oils and pure TAGs absorbed into ceramic potsherds. Organic Geochemistry 29 (5-7): 1345-1354. Dudd S. N., Evershed R. P. i999. Evidence for varying patterns of exploitation of animal products in different prehistoric pottery traditions based on lipids preserved in surface and absorbed residues. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:1473-82. Eerkens J. W. 2007. Organic residue analysis and the decomposition of fatty acids in ancient potsherds. In H. Barnard, J. W. Eerkens (eds.), Theory and Practice in Archaeological Residue Analysis. British Archaeological Reports IS i650. Archaeopress. Oxford: 90-98. Evershed R. P. i993. Biomolecular archaeology and li-pids. World Archaeology 25(1): 74-93. 2008a. Experimental approaches to the interpretation of absorbed organic residues in archaeological ceramics. World Archaeology 40(1): 26-47. 2008b. Organic residue analysis in archaeology: the archaeological biomarker revolution. Archaeometry 50 (6): 895-924. 2009. Compound-specific Stable Isotopes in Organic Residue Analysis in Archaeology. In M. P. Colombini, F. Modugno (eds.), Organic Mass Spectrometry in Art and Archaeology. Wiley. Chichester: 391-430. Evershed R. P., Heron C. and Goad L. J. 1990. Analysis of organic residues of archaeological origin by high-temperature gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Analyst 115(10): 1339-1342. 1991. Epicutilar wax components in potsherds as chemical indicators of leafy vegetables in ancient diets. Antiquity 65(248): 540-544. Evershed R. P., Heron C., Charters S. and Goad L. J. 1992. Chemical analysis of organic residues in ancient pottery: methodological guidelines and applications. In R. White, H. Page (eds.), Organic Residues in Archaeology: Their Identification and Analysis. United Kingdom Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works. Archaeology Section. London: 11-25. Evershed R. P., Arnot K. L., Collister J., Eglinton G. and Chartes S. 1994. Application of isotope ratio monitoring gas chromatographymass spectrometry to the analysis of organic residues of archeological origin. Analyst 119: 909-914. Evershed R. P, Charters S. and Quye A. 1995. Interpreting lipid residues in archaeological ceramics: Preliminary results from laboratory simulations of vessel use and burial. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 352: 85-95. Evershed R. P., Vaughan S. J., Dudd S. N. and Soles J. S. 1997a. Fuel for thought? Beeswax in lamps and conical cups from late Minoan Crete. Antiquity 71(274):979-985. Evershed R. P., Mottram H. R., Dudd S. N., Charters S., Stott A. W., Lawrence G. J., Gibson A. M., Conner A., Blinkhorn P. W. and Reeves V. 1997b. New Criteria for the identification of animal fats in archaeological pottery. Naturwissenschaften 84: 402-406. Evershed R. P., Dudd S. N., Charters S., Mottram H., Stott A. W., Raven A., van Bergen P. F. and Bland H. A. 1999. Lipids as carriers of anthropogenic signals from prehistory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B 354:19-31. Evershed R. P., Dudd S. N., Copley M. S., Berstan R., Stott A. W., Mottram H., Buckley S. A. and Crossman Z. 2002. Chemistry of Archaeological Animal Fats. Accounts of Chemical Research 35: 660-668. Evershed R. P. and 21 authors. 2008a. Earliest date for milk use in the Near East and southeastern Europe linked to cattle herding. Nature 455(7212): 528-531. Evershed R. P, Copley M. S., Dickson L. and Hansel F. A. 2008b. Experimental evidence for the processing of marine animal products and other commodities containing polyunsaturated fatty acids in pottery vessels. Archaeometry 50(1): 101-113. Gerbault P., Liebert A., Itan Y., Powell A., Currat M., Burger J., Swallow D. M. and Thomas M. G. 2011. Evolution of lactase persistence: an example of human niche construction. Philosophical Transactions of Royal Society. Series B 366: 863-877. Gregg M. W., Banning E. B., Gibbs K. and Slater G. F. 2009. Subsistence practices and pottery use in Neolithic Jordan: molecular and isotopic evidence. Journal of Archaeological Science 36:937-946. Gregg A., Slater G. F. 2010. New method for extraction, isolation and transesterification of free fatty acids from archaeological pottery. Archaeometry 52(5): 833-854. Hart J. P., Lovis W. A., Schulenberg J. K. and Urquhart G. R. 2007. Paleodietary implications from stable carbon isotope analysis of experimental cooking residues. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 804-813. Hart J. P., Urquhart G. R., Feranec R. S. and Lovis W. A. 2009. Non-linear relationship between bulk 513C and percent maize in carbonized cooking residues and the potential of false-negatives in detecting maize. Journal of Archaeological Science 36(10): 2206-2212. Hart J. P., Lovis W. A., Jeske R. J. and Richards J. D. 2012. The potential of bulk 513C on encrusted cooking residues as independent evidence for regional maize histories. American Antiquity 77(2): 315-325. Hastorf C. A., DeNiro M. J. 1985. Reconstruction of Prehistoric Plant Production and Cooking Practices by a New Isotope Method. Nature 315: 489-491. Henrickson E. F. 1990. Investigating Ancient Ceramic Form and Use: Progress Report and Case Study. In W. D. Kin-gery (ed.), The Changing Roles of Ceramics in Society: 26,000 B. P to the Present. Ceramics and Civilization. Vol. 5. American Ceramic Society. Westerville, Ohio: 83-117. Henrickson E. F., McDonald M. M. A. 1983. Ceramic Form and Function: An Ethnographic Search and an Archaeological Application. American Anthropologist 85(3): 30-43. Heron C., Evershed R. P. i993. The Analysis of Organic Residues and the Study of Pottery Use. Archaeological Method and Theory 5:247-284. Itan Y., Powell A., Beaumont M. A., Burger J., Thomas M. G. 2oo9. The Origins of Lactase Persistence in Europe. PLoS Computational Biology 5(8): e1000491. Kimpe K., Drybooms C., Schrevens E., Jacobs P. A., Degeest R. and Waelkens M. 2oo4. Assessing the relationship between form and use of different kinds of pottery from the archaeological site Sagalassos (southwest Turkey) with lipid analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 31(11): 1503-1510. Leonardi M., Gerbault P., Thomas M. G. and Burger J. 2oi2. The evolution of lactase persistence in Europe. A synthesis of archaeological and genetic evidence. International Dairy Journal 22: 88-97. Mirabaud S., Rolando C. and Regert M. 2oo7. Molecular criteria for discriminating adipose fat and milk from different species by nanoESIMS and MS/MS of their TAGs: Application to archaeological remains. Analytical Chemistry 79: 6182-6192. Mottram H. R., Dudd S. N., Lawrence G. J., Stott A. W. and Evershed R. P. i999. New chromatographic, mass spectro-metric and stable isotope approaches to the classification of degraded animal fats preserved in archaeological pottery. Journal of Chromatography A 833:209-221. Morton J. D., Schwarcz H. P. 2oo4. Paleodietary Implications from Stable Isotopic Analysis of Residues on Prehistoric Ontario Ceramics. Journal of Archaeological Science 31:503-517. Mukherjee A. J., Berstan R., Copley M. S., Gibson A. M. and Evershed R. P. 2oo7. Compound-specific stable carbon isotopic detection of pig product processing in British Late Neolithic pottery. Antiquity 81(313): 743-754. Mukherjee A. J., Gibson A. M. and Evershed R. P. 2oo8. Trends in pig product processing at British Neolithic Grooved Ware sites traced through organic residues in potsherds. Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 20592073. Nagy D., Tomory G., Csanyi B., Bogacsi-Szabo E., Czibula A., Priskin K., Bede O., Bartosiewicz L., Stephen Downes C. and Rasko I. 2oii. Comparison of Lactase Persistence Polymorphism in Ancient and Present-Day Hungarian Populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 145: 262-269. Ogrinc N., Gams Petricic M., Zigon D., Zibrat Gasparic A. and Budja M. 2oi2. Pots and lipids: molecular and iso- tope evidence of food processing at Maharski prekop. Documenta Praehistorica 39:339-347. Ogrinc et al. 2015 in prep. Oudemans T. F. M., Boon J. J. 1993. Traces of Ancient Vessel Use: Investigating Prehistorie Usage of four Pot Types by Organic Residue Analysis using Pyrolysis Mass Spectrometry. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 26:221-234. Oudemans T. F. M., Boon J. J. 2007. A comparative study of extractable lipids in the shards and surface residual crusts of ceramic vessels from Neolithic and Roman Iron Age settlements in the Netherlands. In H. Barnard, J. Eer-kens (eds.), Theory and Practice of Archaeological Residue Analysis. British Archaeological Reports IS 1650. Archaeopress. Oxford: 99-124. Oudemans T. F. M., Kubiak-Martens L. 2012. Botanical and chemical characterisation of charred organic residues in ceramics. In B. I. Smit, O. Brinkkemper, J. P. Kleijne, R. C. G. M. Lauwerier and E. M. Theunissen (eds.), Late Neolithic Behavioural Variability in a Dynamic Landscape: a Kaleidoscope of Gathering at Keinsmerbrug (the Netherlands). Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands. Ne-derlandse Archeologische Rapporten 043. Amersfoort: 107-235. Outram A. K., Stear N. A., Bendrey R., Olsen S., Kasparov A., Zaibert V., Thorpe N. and Evershed R. P. 2009. The Earliest Horse Harnessing and Milking. Science 323:13321335. Peters K. E., Walters C. C. and Moldowan J. M. 2005. The Biomarker Guide I. Biomarkers and Isotopes in the Environment and Human History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Pollard A. M., Batt C. M., Stern B. and Young S. M. M. 2007. Analytical Chemistry in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Raemaekers D. C. M., Kubiak-Martens L. and Oudemans T. F. M. 2013. New food in old pots - charred organic residues in Early Neolithic ceramic vessels from Swifterbant, the Netherlands (4300-4000 calBC). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 43(3): 315-334. Raven A. M., van Bergen P. F., Stott A. W., Dudd S. N. and Evershed R. P. 1997. Formation of long-chain ketones in archaeological pottery vessels by pyrolysis of acyl lipids. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 40-41:267285. Reber E. A., Evershed R. 2004. Identification of maize in absorbed organic residues: a cautionary tale. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 399-140. Regert M., Bland H. A., Dudd S. N., Van Bergen P. F. and Evershed R. P. 1998. Free and bound fatty acid oxidation products in archaeological ceramic vessels. Proceedings of the Royal Society ofLondon. Series B 265:2027-2032. Regert M. 2011. Analytical strategies for discriminating ar-cheological fatty substances from animal origin. Mass Spectrometry Reviews 30:177-220. Rice P. 1987. Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Salque M. 2012. Was Milk Processed in these Ceramic Pots? In F. Feulner, P. Gerbault, R. Gillis, H. Hollund, R. Howcroft, M. Leonardi, A. Liebert, M. Raghavan, M. Salque, O. Sverrisdottir, M. Teasdale, N. van Doorn and C. Wright (eds.), May Contain Traces of Milk. Investigating the role of dairy farming and milk consumption in the European Neolithic. Lactose Persistence and Early Cultural History of Europe. LeCHE. The Univesity of York. Heslington: 127-142. Salque M., Bogucki P. I., Pyzel J., Sobkowiak-Tabaka I., Grygiel R., Szmyt M. and Evershed R. P. 2013. Earliest evidence for cheese making in the sixth millennium BC in northern Europe. Nature 493(7433): 522-525. Schiffer M., Skibo J. 1987. Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 28 (5): 595-622. Skibo J. M. 2013. Understanding Pottery Function. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique. Springer. New York. Spangenberg J. E., Jacomet J. and Schibler J. 2006. Chemical analyses of organic residues in archaeological pottery from Arbon Bleiche 3, Switzerland - evidence for dairying in the late Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 33(1): 1-13. Spangenberg J. E., Matuschik I., Jacomet S. and Schibler J. 2008. Direct evidence for the existence of dairying farms in prehistoric Central Europe (4th millennium BC). Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies 44(2): 189200. Stacey R. J. 2009. Organic residues: origins, analysis and scope - an overview for the archaeological ceramicist. The old potter's almanack 14(1): 1-8. Stott A. W., Davies E., Evershed R. P. and Tuross N. 1997. Monitoring the routing of dietary and biosynthesized li-pids through compound specific stable isotope (813C) measurements at natural abundance. Naturwissenschaften 84: 82-86. Soberl L., Sraka M., Horvat M., Žibrat Gašparič A., Evershed R. and Budja M. 2014. Neolithic and Eneolithic activities as inferred from organic residue analysis of pottery from Mala Triglavca, Moverna vas and Ajdovska jama, Slovenia. Documenta Praehistorica 41:149-180. Vogel J. C. 1993. Variability of carbon isotope fractionation during Photosynthesis. In J. R. Ehleringer, A. E. Hall, and G. D. Farquhar (eds.), Stable Isotopes and Plant Water-Relations. Academic Press San Diego: 29-46. Warinner C., Tuross N. 2009. Alkaline cooking and stable isotope diet-tissue discrimination in swine: archaeological implications. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 1690-1697. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) Ceramic petrography, mineralogy and typology of Eneolithic pottery from Krasnja, Slovenia Andreja Žibrat Gašparič1, Milena Horvat1 and Breda Mirtič2 1 University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Archaeology, SI andreja.zibrat.gasparic@gmail.com 2 University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering, Department of Geology, SI ABSTRACT - In this article, we present newly excavated Eneolithic pottery from the site at Krasnja near Lukovica in central Slovenia. The material was AMS14C dated and is contemporaneous with archaeological sites from the Ljubljansko barje region in Slovenia. The vessels were reconstructed and then various types of pots, dishes, cups, and beakers were analysed using petrography and the X-ray diffraction method. Additionally, the clay remains of walls and the floor of an Eneolithic kiln excavated at the site were also analysed. The results show that Eneolithic potters used different fabrics to make vessels, and mostly one recipe with added calcite. The raw source material probably came from a nearby valley to the south of the site at Krasnja. IZVLEČEK - V članku predstavljamo eneolitsko lončenino z novoodkritega najdišča Krašnja pri Lu-kovici v osrednji Sloveniji. Najdišče je bilo AMS 14C datirano in je sočasno z najdišči iz območja Ljubljanskega barja. Lončenino smo lahko rekonstruirali v različne tipe posod, med drugim lonce, sklede, skodelice in čase, ki smo jih nato preiskali še s petrografsko metodo in metodo rentgenske difrakcije. Dodatno smo preiskali tudi sledove glinenih oblog stene in tal ene od dveh eneolitskih peči, ki smo jih odkrili na najdišču. Rezultati kažejo, da so lončarji v obdobju eneolitika uporabljali različne glinene mase za pripravo posod, vendar predvsem en lončarski recept z dodanim zdrobljenim kalcitom. Naravno surovino, glino, so morda nabirali v sosednji dolini, ki se nahaja južno od najdišča Krašnja. KEY WORDS - Eneolithic; pottery; typology; petrography; microfossils Introduction The mineralogical properties of pottery and clay play an important part in pottery analysis and are helpful in understanding past technologies. Nevertheless, the mineralogical composition of ceramic objects can be significantly altered by production techniques, from the cleaning of clays, addition of temper, forming of objects, firing conditions and atmosphere. The life cycle of pottery and its use as well as post-depositional changes are also important and can contribute to altering the mineralogical composition. Through this whole operational sequence of pottery, we try to reconstruct past technologies and production techniques (Sillar, Tite 2000; Whit-bread 1995). In this article, we present recent analyses of pottery from the new site at Krasnja in central Slovenia, which was excavated in 2013 during the reconstruction of the gas pipeline M2/1 Trojane-Vodice. The excavated material dates from the Eneolithic and the Bronze Age period to the Medieval Ages and the Industrial period. We focus here on the Eneolithic material excavated, as well as on the remains of two kilns preserved in situ. The pottery assemblage is not large, but is nevertheless comprised of various types of pots, dishes, bowls, cups and beakers. The various types of vessels as well as the remains of a ceramic kiln were chosen for mineralogical analyses using petrography and X-ray diffraction techniques. DOI>10.4312\dp.41.12 225 Krašnja near Lukovica Krasnja is a village near Lukovica in central Slovenia located in the lower part of the Črni graben valley, north of the Radomlja River. To the south, it is bordered by the steep slopes of the Limbarska gora and Golčaj hills, and to the north by the mountain ridges of Jagodnik, Kotle and Cicelj. Many small streams flow from this direction, commonly flooding this area. The valley and surrounding hills are composed mostly of dark grey to black Palaeozoic siltstones and fine-grained sandstones. The archaeological site is located south of the local road and north of the A1 motorway between Kompolje and Blagovica (Fig. 1; Horvat et al. 2014a; 2014b). The Črni graben valley is the easiest passage between central and eastern Slovenia and was used as such for centuries. In the 1st century AD, Romans built a via publica through the valley, which became the main road between Italy and the Danube Regions until the 12th century, when the main road was moved north to the Tuhinjska dolina valley. The Črni graben road again became the most important road between the Adriatic and the Danube from the end of the 16th century and is still being used today (Stražar 1985.626). The excavation site covers an area of 237 x 15m and is located directly on the alluvial beds of two torrents that flowed from the hills in the north to the Radom-lja River in the south. The old torrent bed in the western part was filled with Eneolithic pottery, and two partly preserved kilns were dug into the youngest Eneolithic layer on the bank. Only the floor of Fig. 1. The geographical position of Krasnja near Lukovica in the Črni graben valley in central Slovenia. the kiln remained intact. Charcoal and some pieces of pottery were documented on the floor of the kiln. The eastern torrent bed was also filled with Eneoli-thic pottery, some charcoal, parts of grind stones, and a stone mallet and an axe (Horvat et al. 2014a. 67; 2014b). The charcoal from the infill of the stream, from the Eneolithic layer, and from the kiln was AMS radiocarbon dated at the Poznan Radiocarbon Laboratory. According to the 14C dates the calendar age of the Eneolithic material can be placed within the 37th-35th century calBC range, while the two kilns date to the late 37th and/or 36th century calBC; both the kiln samples show the same 14C age of 4750+35 BP (Tab. 1; Horvat et al. 2014a.69; 2014b). This makes Krasnja contemporaneous with sites in the Ljubljansko barje region, especially with Maharski prekop (Bregant 1974a; 1974b; 1975; Mlekuž et al. 2012) and Hočevarica (Velušček 2004). Pottery technology and typology We described the pottery assemblage at the macroscopic level with the use of a hand lens to identify Lab. N0. Material Context 14C Conventional age BP Calibrated age calBC (68.2%) Calibrated age calBC (95.4%) Poz-58839 charcoal layer SU 21 4655±35 3510-3365 3620-3360 Poz-58840 charcoal layer SU 137 4820135 3650-3535 3695-3520 Poz-58841 charcoal kiln SU 136 4750±35 3635-35]5 3640-3380 Poz-58842 charcoal kiln SU 117 4750±35 3635-3515 3640-3380 Poz-58843 charcoal layer SU 214 49io±35 3710-3650 3770-3640 Poz-58845 charcoal layer SU 198 4930±40 3765-3650 3790-3645 Poz-58846 charcoal layer SU 172 4870140 3695-3635 3765-3530 Tab. 1. 14C dates for the Eneolithic period at Krasnja. Fig. 2. Pottery typology of Eneolithic vessels from Krašnja. inclusions, their size and frequency, the presence of voids, as well as hardness, colour after firing, and the firing atmosphere of the vessels (following descriptions after Horvat 1999). Because the vessels were fragmented to a great extent, the technological description was made only of typologically defined vessels and fragments of vessel rims, bases, and ornamented fragments. All the analysed pottery could be attributed to a single technological group, i.e. fine- grained fabric with quartz inclusions. The other inclusions are mica, ferrous oxides, organic matter and very rare crushed pottery or grog. All the vessel surfaces are burnished and well formed, but also have many voids visible on the surface. The voids have angular and semi-angular shapes, and measure from 0.5 to 2mm. The majority of vessels (77%) were fired in an incomplete oxidising atmosphere, while the rest were fired in an oxidising atmosphere. The vessels have mostly grey and light brown surface colours, with rare fragments in red, grey and dark brown shades. A total of 329 fragments of pottery were excavated at Krašnja in the Eneolithic assemblage, from which only 25 whole vessels could be reconstructed and assigned to five basic types: pots (11), dishes (5), bowls (3), cups (4) and beakers (2). Among the unclassified pottery fragments are mostly parts of vessel bases and parts of walls with hand-made appliqués. This classification was made using criteria such as shape and proportions (Horvat 1999). The Eneolithic pottery from Krašnja has many similarities with assemblages from contemporary sites in the Ljubljansko barje region, mostly with Maharski prekop (Bregant 1974a; 1974b; 1975), Hocevarica (Velušček 2004) and Stare gmajne (Velušček 2009). Pots (Fig. 2) are classified into two groups according to their outline and the shape of the contact between the upper and lower parts of the vessels. The first group is comprised of pots without necks, with biconical (L01, L02) or ellipsoid shape (L03a, L03b, L04). The second group of pots is comprised of vessels with necks. At Krasnja, only the upper parts of these vessels were preserved, so a reconstruction of the shapes was not possible. The biconical shapes present a special form of pot with a high bottom part and short shoulders. These pots were common in the Eneolithic period in central Slovenia. Pot variant L01 can be found at Hoce-varica (Velušček 2004.t. 4.1.5:7) and pot variant L02 at Hocevarica {Velušček 2004.186, Fig. 4.2.1:L2) and Maharski prekop (Bregant 1974a.t. 3.8). For variant L03a and L03b, there are comparisons at Maharski prekop (Bregant 1974a.t. 5.4; 1975.t. 30.11) and Hocevarica (Velušček 2004.186, Fig. 4.2.1L3). We used functional criteria (e.g., open/closed, deep/ shallow) and the criteria of the vessels outlines to classify dishes and bowl (Fig. 2). Dishes are classified into open shallow dishes with a biconical outline with a semi-ellipsoid shape and a redesigned rim and a sharp contact with the wall of the vessel (S01a, S01b). Dishes S01a and S01b have parallels from Hocevarica (Velušček 2004.t. 4.1:6, t. 4.1.8:5) and from Maharski prekop (unpublished material). Only one type is a deep closed dish with a complex biconical outline with a semi-ellipsoid shape and a simple rim (S02). Variant S02 has parallels with a dish from Maharski prekop (Bregant 1975.t. 22.10). Only three bowls could be classified in the assemblage (Fig. 2). The most significant is an open bowl with an oblique rim that has a fluid contact with the lower part of the body with a spherical shape (Sk01). Bowls similar to Sk01 can be found at Hocevarica (Velušček 2004.Fig. 4.2.9S8), Maharski prekop (Bregant 1975.t. 19.4) and Stare gmajne (Velušček 2009. t. 318:9). Among the closed shapes of bowls, we could identify a bowl with a simple spherical shape (Sk02) and a biconical bowl with a conical spherical shape (Sk03), both with a simple rim and fluid contact with the body. Similarities to bowls of variant Sk02 are also found at Hocevarica (Velušček 2004. t. 4.1.2:9) and Maharski prekop (Bregant 1975.t. 28.9). Cups and beakers are classified between shallow and deep vessel types (Fig. 2). The variants Skd01 and Skd02 are open bowls with a simple spherical out- line, and variant Skd03 is an open bowl with a conical shape, an oblique rim and gradual contact with the lower part of the body. The cups Skd01 are similar to cups from Hocevarica (Velušček 2004. t. 4.1.2:9). The beakers have a simple ellipsoid shape (K01) or a biconical outline with a semi-ellipsoid shape (K02). Beakers K01 have similarities with vessels from Hocevarica (Velušček 2004.196, Fig. 4.2.7: K4) and K02 can also be found at Maharski prekop (unpublished material) and Stare gmajne (Velušček 2009.t. 3.15: 11, Fig. 3.15: K1). The vessels are only modestly decorated, with only two basic types of decoration: impressions and appliqués. The most common techniques are awl impressing, pinching with two fingers, and simple hand-made appliqués; the latter two were also identified in combination. Analytical methods The Krasnja pottery was first analysed with the use of a hand lens and described at the macroscopic level, detailing the broader technological traits of the whole assemblage (Horvat 1999) such as the inclusions, their size and abundance, the presence of voids, the hardness, surface treatment, colour, and firing atmosphere. The pottery was then sampled according to its stratigraphic position, vessel type and ornamentation technique, and basic technological traits. We sampled 12 vessels from the Eneoli-thic period and three additional contemporary clay samples from the excavated kiln SU 117 at the site (Tab. 2). For the mineralogical analyses, we used thin-section petrography and X-ray powder diffraction techniques. Ceramic petrography enhances the identification of non-plastic inclusions and allows for direct comparisons with regional geology (Rice 1987.415; Whitbread 1995). The pottery samples were prepared as standard thin sections of 30|m thickness (Reedy 2008.1-3) and then described under a polarising light microscope (Whitbread 1995.App. 3; Terry, Chillingar 1955). One of the clay samples from kiln SU 117 was fired in a controlled atmosphere to 800°C and prepared as a thin section. We sorted the samples into fabric groups based on the composition of inclusions, the clay matrix and voids. On the basis of compositional, microstructural and textural criteria, we identified the presence of specific techniques, such as the addition of temper, raw material processing, vessel forming, and the at- Sample No. Catalogue No. SU Grid Square Vessel Type Description OBD 16 13 21 F38 So1b dish OBD 180 2 21 G38 L02 pot OBD 181 20 242 E36 K02 beaker OBD 183 1 21 E39 Lo3b pot OBD 184 35 21 E38 / vessel (base) OBD 245 17 21 G38 SKD03 cup OBD 247 18 21 E38 SKD01 cup OBD 248 19 21 e39 K02 beaker OBD 249 15 21 e39 SKD02 cup OBD 251 14 21 e33 S02 dish OBD 252 10 21 E38 S01a dish OBD 258 6 21 G38 L04 pot Sample 17 / 117 E27 / fired clay - part of kiln roof Sample 18 / 117 E27 / fired clay - kiln floor Sample 28 / 117 E27 / clay - part below the kiln the clay paste as temper. The dissolution of calcium carbonate may occur in post-deposition of pottery due to the low pH environment of the soil (Reedy 2008.208). Afterwards, the voids were secondarily coated with amorphous hydrated iron oxide-hydroxides, i.e. limonite (Fig. 3). Such chemical alterations and deterioration in the composition of pottery are common post-depositional processes when vessels are buried in sediment (Rice 1987.421; Reedy 2008. 208-210). Tab. 2. List of pottery and kiln samples from Krasnja. mosphere and firing temperatures (Reedy 2008.146148, 173-189; Whitbread 1986; 1995.393). The pottery and clay samples were also analysed using the X-ray powder diffraction method. For the analysis, approx. 3g of pottery were ground into fine powder and then recorded on a Philips PW3710 X-ray diffractometer (Cu X-ray tube; secondary graphite monochromator; 10kV; 10mA; 2 to 70° 20). The results of ceramic petrography and X-ray diffraction The petrographic analysis revealed many similarities with the pottery samples from Krasnja. The pottery was made from non-calcareous clay, with many inclusions, such as quartz, mica (muscovite, sericite, biotite), plagioclase feldspars and composed mineral grains such as chert, opaque aggregates, argillaceous rock fragments and, very rarely, organic matter. The main difference between the samples is in their microfossil content and the presence of opaque minerals. We could divide the samples into 5 fabrics according to their composition (Tab. 3). The samples have very few (1-5%) angular voids, mostly in the medium to coarse sand size fraction, with many of them having a rhombohedral shape characteristic of calcite crystals. Based on their shape, we conclude that these voids were created as a result of dissolving calcite from pottery (e.g., Fig. 4.D). Since voids are mostly sand grained with almost no voids in the silt size fraction common to non-plastic inclusions, this confirms that calcite was added to Fabric 1 (Fig. 4.A) is a non-calcareous clay with frequent (30%) non-plastic inclusions that are well sorted and mostly in the silt size fraction. They include frequent monocrystalline quartz, common muscovite mica grains and opaque ferrous minerals, and rare bio-tite mica, plagioclase feldspars and chert. Microfossil sponge spicules are also common in the paste (10%). The fabric has rare (1%) angular and rhom-bohedral voids, showing that the crushed calcite was added to the fabric as temper. The fabric was recognised in only one beaker from the Eneolithic layer (OBD 248). Fabric 2 (Fig. 4.B) is a non-calcareous clay with common (20%) non-plastic inclusions that are well sorted and mostly in the silt size fraction. They include common monocrystalline quartz, common muscovite Fig. 3. Photomicrograph of a thin-section from cup OBD 245 from Krasnja. The voids in the sample are secondarily coated with amorphous limonite. Image taken in plane polarised light. Voids (in %) Grog (in %) Quartz (in %) Mica (in %) Spicules (in %) Diatoms (in %) Opaques (in %) Sample No. Fabric 1 1 / 40 20 10 0 10 OBD 248 Fabric 2 5 0-1 20-30 20 10-15 0-2 10 OBD 16, OBD 247, OBD 251 Fabric 3 1 / 20 5 10 2 30 OBD 184 Fabric 4 1-5 0-1 30-40 5-15 10-15 5-10 5-15 OBD 181, OBD 183, OBD 245, OBD 252, OBD 258 Fabric 5 1 / 20-30 10-20 10 15 10 OBD 180, OBD 249 Tab. 3. The basic compositions of pottery fabrics from Krasnja. mica grains and opaque ferrous minerals, and rare biotite mica, chert and organic matter. Common (1015%) sponge spicules and rare (0-2%) diatoms microfossils are also present in the paste. The fabric has few (5%) angular and rhombohedral voids, showing that the crushed calcite was added to the fabric as temper. The fabric was recognised in two dishes (OBD 16, OBD 251) and one cup (OBD 247). Dish OBD 251 also had rare (1%) angular grains in the coarse sand size (approx. 1mm) composed of non-calcareous clay with quartz and mica inclusions and sponge spicules. These grains could be attributed to crushed old pottery (i.e. grog) added to the fabric as temper. Fabric 3 (Fig. 4.C) is a non-calcareous clay with common (20%) non-plastic inclusions that are well sorted and mostly in the silt size fraction. They include common monocrystal-line quartz, a few muscovite mica grains, frequent opaque ferrous minerals, and rarely, biotite mica grains. Common (10%) sponge spicules and few diatoms (2%) are also present in the paste. The fabric has rare (1%) angular and rhombohedral voids, showing that the crushed calcite was added to the fabric as temper. The fabric was recognised only in one sample, i.e. a fragment of a base (OBD 184). dish (OBD 252), a beaker (OBD 181) and a cup (OBD 245). They are made of non-calcareous clay, with common to frequent (20-30%) non-plastic inclusions that are well sorted and in the silt size fraction. They include frequent monocrystalline quartz, few to common muscovite mica grains and opaque ferrous minerals, and rare biotite mica, plagioclase feldspars and chert. Common sponge spicules (1015%) and diatoms (5-10%) are also present in the paste. The fabric has rare to few (1-5%) angular and Fabric 4 (Fig. 4.D) is the most common fabric, since five samples could be attributed to it. The samples include two pots (OBD 183, OBD 258), a Fig. 4. Photomicrographs of pottery thin-sections from Krasnja: A - fabric 1 (beaker OBD 248); B - fabric 2 (dish OBD 251); C - fabric 3 (vessel OBD 184); D - fabric 4 (pot OBD 258); E - fabric 5 (pot OBD 180); F -fired sample 28 from kiln SU117. Images taken in plane polarised light. rhombohedral voids, showing that the crushed cal-cite was added to the fabric as temper. Beaker OBD 181 also had rare (1%) angular grains in the coarse grain size (approx. 1 mm) that are composed of non-calcareous clay with quartz and mica inclusions, as well as sponge spicules and diatoms. These could be attributed to crushed grains of ceramic vessels (i.e. grog) added to the fabric as temper. Fabric 5 (Fig. 4.E) is a non-calcareous clay with frequent (30%) non-plastic inclusions that are well sorted and mostly in the silt size fraction. They include common monocrystalline quartz, mica (muscovite) grains and opaque ferrous minerals, as well as very rare biotite mica, plagioclase feldspars and chert. Diatoms comprise 15% of all inclusions and are slightly more common than sponge spicules (10%). The fabric has rare (1%) angular and rhombohedral voids, showing that the crushed calcite was added to the fabric as temper. The fabric could be recognised in two samples, i.e. pot OBD 180 and cup OBD 249. The various fabrics were all made to a similar recipe, since they all contain added calcite temper that was later dissolved from the vessels. Pottery recipes with added calcite temper also comprise the most common type of pottery from the contemporary site at Maharski prekop near Ig in the Ljubljansko barje region (Osterc 1975; Zibrat Gasparic 2013.153155). Only two samples had crushed old pottery or grog added as temper in addition to crushed calcite grains, i.e. beaker OBD 181 and dish OBD 251. A similar recipe with calcite and grog was also discovered at Maharski prekop, which has a rare type of fabric (Osterc 1975; Zibrat Gasparic 2013.153-155). The presence of added calcite is a common temper in cooking pots, since the shape and properties of these grains give a vessel greater thermal and shock resistance than quartz temper (Tite et al. 2001). The microfossils present in the samples are isotrop-ic, have oval to spherical cross-sections and range from 20 to 100|m in size (Fig. 5). These are mostly fragmented remains of siliceous sponge spicules and diatoms (Quinn 2008). Their shapes suggest that the sponges and diatoms were saltwater organisms originating from sedimentary rocks, perhaps from local Middle Miocene marlstone (Aleksander Horvat, pers. comm.). Diatomaceous sediments are rare in Slovenia and could be confirmed only for some Middle Miocene sedimentary rocks from central Slovenia (Horvat, Misic 2004). Nevertheless, Miocene sedimentary rocks can be found closest to Krasnja in the two valleys parallel to Crni graben and the valley of the Radomlja River: i.e. in the northern Tuhinjska dolina valley and in the south near Mo-ravce and Izlake (Premru 1983). The X-ray powder diffraction analysis shows even greater similarities between the pottery samples than the results of petrography (Tab. 4). All the samples have similar peaks of minerals such as quartz, muscovite mica and plagioclase feldspars (albite and/or anorthite). As we have demonstrated, the most common recipe at Krasnja has crushed calcite grains added to the fabric. At temperatures around 850°C, calcite (CaCO3) starts to decompose into lime (CaO), although the reaction can start as low as 700°C according to tests (Cultrone et al. 2001.628). This reaction can damage vessels in the cooling process. Since the vessels at Krasnja were not damaged during firing and were being used, they were clearly fired below 700 to 800°C. The absence of clay minerals and clinochlore as well as the presence of cracked quartz grains, attributed to the quartz inversion reaction at 573°C (Graimshaw 1971.221- 227), show the lower firing temperatures of the Krasnja samples were around 600°C. Analysis of kiln SU 117 The remains of two kilns were excavated at Krasnja (SU 136 and SU 117; Horvat et al. 2014). Only the fired floors of the chamber and part of the firebox facing west were preserved, since the kilns were partly destroyed by water erosion. Nevertheless, the remains show that the kilns had spherical shape (Fig. 6) and could be the remains of a simple updraft kiln (Rye 1981.100; Rice 1987.159-160). The surface of Fig. 5. Photomicrograph of a thin-section from pot OBD 180 from Krasnja. The image shows the presence of sponge spicules and diatoms inside the clay matrix. Image taken in plane polarised light. the chamber was later filled with dark grey-brown silt with pieces of charcoal and Eneolithic pottery. The radiocarbon dates of charcoal from both kilns date the material to the second half of the 37th and/ or the 36th century calBC (Tab. 1). We analysed three samples from kiln SU 117, including one fired clay sample from the floor of the kiln, one from the roof and one sample of partly fired clay from beneath the kiln (Tab. 2). Sample 28 is a light yellowish brown fired clay from below the floor of the kiln; sample 18 is a reddish brown fired clay from the central floor of the kiln, and sample 17 is a brown fired clay from the roof part of the kiln. The samples were dried and prepared for X-ray powder diffraction analysis. The mineralogical composition of all three samples is very similar (Tab. 4), as according to the analysis they all contain minerals such as quartz, muscovite mica, plagioclase feldspars and clinochlore. The clay samples are similar to pottery; only the presence of clinochlore in the samples points to a lower firing temperature than the temperature achieved in pottery from Krasnja. Clinochlore starts to decompose at 500 to 600°C (Grimshaw 1971.221- 227). Therefore, we conclude that the temperatures inside the kiln wall did not exceed 500°C for most of the firing process. Since the Eneolithic pottery from Krasnja was fired above this temperature and showed no presence of clinochlore, we could presume that the kiln was not used to fire pottery. Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that temperatures inside a kiln can be a few hundred degrees higher than temperatures during kiln construction (Rye 1981.102-103; Harrison 2008; Urankar 2012; Kramar 2013). Sample 28 was additionally fired in a controlled oxidising atmosphere at 800°C and prepared as a standard thin section for petrographic analysis. The aim of this analysis was to establish a comparison between the Eneolithic pottery samples and this in situ clay sample from a contemporaneous kiln. The fired test sample had a reddish yellow colour and Mohs hardness 4. The sample is a non-calcareous clay, with frequent (40%) non-plastic inclusions, mostly in the silt size fraction (Fig. 4.f). These include frequent monocrystal-line quartz, common muscovite mica and frequent opaque ferrous mine- Fig. 6. Partly preserved Eneolithic kiln SU 117 from Krasnja. rals. There are also a few (5%) polycrystalline quartz grains present, such as sandstone grains and chert, and rarely, other minerals such as biotite mica, plagioclase feldspars, microcline alkali feldspars, argillaceous rock fragments and organic matter. Clay sample 28 had no traces of microfossils such as sponge spicules or diatoms. Samples 17, 18 and 28 from kiln SU 117 have a similar mineralogical composition to the Eneolithic pottery; however, as demonstrated by the test-fired sample 28, the clay samples were more coarse grained, contained more polycrystalline quartz and muscovite mica than the pottery, and had no traces of sponge spicules or diatoms characteristic of the Krasnja pottery. We conclude that the potters at Krasnja obtained clay for their vessels from a different source, and did not use the clay that was available at the site. As already mentioned, the microfossils found in the pottery had to come from material outside the Črni graben valley, since such rocks are not part of the local geology. For additional provenance analysis, we sampled two more clays, one obtained near Krasnja (sample KR) and one near Moravče (sample MO). The first clay sample came from sediments excavated during the construction of the renewed pipeline, some 100m east of the archaeological excavation site. The second sample was obtained from a Miocene quartz-sand quarry near Moravče, some 5km south of Krasnja in the neighbouring valley, where layers of plastic clay can be found between the sand (Rokavec 2014.79). The samples were fired in a controlled oxidising atmosphere at 700°C, 800°C and 900°C, and then prepared as standard thin sections for pe-trographic analysis. Sample No. Quartz Muscovite Clinochlore Plagioclase OBD 16 x x x OBD 180 x x x OBD 181 x x x OBD 183 x x x OBD 184 x x x OBD 245 x x x OBD 247 x x x OBD 248 x x x OBD 249 x x x OBD 251 x x x OBD 252 x x x OBD 258 x x x Sample 17 x x x x Sample 18 x x x x Sample 28 x x x x Tab. 4. The mineralogical composition of pottery and clay samples from Krasnja after X-ray diffraction analysis. The preliminary petrographic results show that clay KR near Krasnja contained more frequent mica grains and no microfossils in the matrix and differs considerably from the Eneolithic pottery found at the site, thus confirming that Krasnja potters obtained their raw material outside the Crni graben valley. Sample MO has more similarities with the Eneo-lithic pottery, which the petrographic results predicted, but contained only very rare remains of sponge spicules. The question of whether clay from the Mo-ravce valley or some other material was used to produce the pottery at Krasnja will have to be answered in the future with additional samples. Discussion The technological choices of potters are always linked to natural resources, the cultural traditions of their community and its natural backdrop. Therefore, the choices of natural materials, ceramic fabrics and recipes, firing conditions and ways of forming vessels are linked to the local environment as much as to the abilities and experience of the potters (Sillar, Tite 2000.7-9). But they are also linked to culturally defined pottery traditions that reveal symbolic gestures or individuality of the potters, which can be postulated, for example, in the use of old vessels as an integral part of a new pot (Quinn, Burton 2009.288). Similarly, the use of crushed calcite can be seen as a purely technological choice, since low-fired vessels with a high calcite temper perform better as cooking vessels due to the higher resistibility to changes in temperature needed in cooking ves- sels (Tite et al. 2001), but could be also linked to a special role of this mineral in a community, e.g., calcite was used for making ornaments in the Eneo-lithic period (Žibrat Gasparič 2013). Both these techniques were documented at Krasnja. Most of the pottery was made of fine-grained material with added crushed calcite as temper, with only few pots with both added crushed calcite and old pottery as temper. A similar technology was documented at the Maharski prekop site in the Ljubljansko barje region, where the addition of crushed calcite is the most common pottery recipe in the Eneolithic period, while pottery with added calcite and grog is also present (Osterc 1975; Žibrat Gasparič 2013). The main difference between Krasnja and Maharski prekop pottery is the mineral composition of the clay matrix, the presence of microfossils at Krasnja, and the different firing atmospheres documented for each site, i.e. oxidizing conditions at Krasnja and reducing atmosphere at Maharski prekop (Žibrat Gasparič 2013). The non-calcareous clays used for making vessels at Krasnja had a similar composition of quartz, mica, feldspars, chert, opaque ferrous minerals and several remains of microfossils, i.e. sponge spicules and diatoms. According to changes in the composition, we could define 5 different fabrics, although the main mineralogical composition in the fabrics is quite similar, as shown by the petrography and X-ray diffraction. The observed variations between the fabrics could be the result of fluctuations in composition between the different locations of clay pits, but also within a single clay pit (Fig. 4; Tabs. 3-4). The shape of diatoms and sponge spicules inside the clay suggest that they belonged to saltwater species of these organisms (Fig. 5). These organisms therefore did not live in a freshwater environment of the Eneolithic period, as is the case of sponge spicules documented at the Neolithic site at Resnikov prekop in the Ljubljansko barje, but represent the remains of weathered sedimentary rocks, most probably from marlstones of the Miocene age (Aleksander Horvat, pers. comm.). The surrounding geology of Krasnja has no Miocene rock formations, but they are present in two valleys less than 10km from Krasnja: in the Moravce valley to the south and the Tuhinjska dolina valley to the north (Premru 1983). This distance is still within the area of the site-catchment proposed for traditional potters (Arnold 1985). The clay material used in the construction of the Eneolithic kiln SU 117 found in situ at Krasnja (Fig. 6) had a different composition than the Krasnja pottery, especially lacking any remains of microfossils (Fig. 4.F), which is additional proof that natural materials available around Krasnja were not used for pottery production. This is also supported by two additional clay samples, one obtained near Krasnja and one from a Miocene quarry near Moravče in the south. The clay was then shaped into various types of vessels. At Krasnja we could document types such as pots, dishes, bowls, cups and beakers that were only rarely decorated (Fig. 2). For the shaping of different vessels, the Krasnja potters used various fabrics, but mostly only one recipe, i.e. with added calcite as mentioned above. Pots were made with fabrics 3, 4 and 5, dishes with fabrics 2 and 4; cups were made with fabrics 2, 4 and 5, and beakers with fabrics 1 and 4. This proves that the same fabrics and recipes were used for a variety of vessels, e.g., fabric 4 was the main component of pots, dishes, cups and beakers alike (Tabs. 2-3). The vessels were then dried and fired usually in an incomplete oxidising atmosphere, probably inside kilns such as were excavated at the site. These vessels share many similarities in pottery typology and technology with material from contemporaneous sites such as Hočevarica, Maharski prekop and Stare gmajne in the Ljubljansko barje region (Bregant 1974a; 1974b; 1975; Velušček 2004; 2009; Mlekuž et al. 2012; Žibrat Gašparič 2013). The story of pottery from Krasnja did not end with the discarding of pots and deposition. The depositio-nal conditions of the sediments where the vessels lay for thousands of years have changed its composition significantly. Chemical alterations are common in vessels in a buried environment (Rice 1987. 421). The crushed calcite grains that were added as temper were not preserved inside the pots, but dissolved; all that is left behind is the typical rhombo- hedral shape and size of the voids (Fig. 4.D). A similar event was documented with a petrographic analysis of Eneolithic pottery from Moverna vas in the Bela Krajina region in southern Slovenia, where the dissolution of calcite could be connected to very acid soils (Žibrat Gašparič 2008.127-174). In addition, the remaining voids inside the vessels from Krasnja were then secondarily coated with amorphous hydrated iron oxide-hydroxides, i.e. limonite (Fig. 3). Conclusions The mineralogical and petrographic analyses of Eneo-lithic Krasnja pottery showed that the vessels were made with at least 5 different fabrics that nevertheless have a similar mineralogical composition and vary mostly in their microfossils and opaque ferrous mineral content. The composition of the clay points to an origin from weathered marlstone, probably Miocene, that is present in an area less than 10km north and south from Krasnja, but is not present in the Črni graben valley. The local clays have a different mineralogical composition, without microfossil remains, as we proved with the analysis of the remains of a contemporaneous kiln excavated in situ. Krasnja also had two of the very rare pottery kilns dating to this period in Slovenia. They are oval in shape and probably used for firing pottery. The maximum temperature inside the kiln was only around 800°C, as proved by the analysis of pottery from Krasnja; the kiln walls were fired at even lower temperatures (see above). All the fabrics contained added crushed calcite grains that could also have been gathered in the valley north and south of Krasnja. The potters rarely added crushed old pottery or grog along with calcite to the fabrics. The vessels were then shaped, dried, and fired in an open fire in a mostly incomplete oxidising atmosphere. References Arnold D. E. 1985. Ceramic theory and cultural process. Cabridge University Press. Cambridge. Bregant T. 1974a. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja leta 1970. Poročilo o raziskovanju neoli-ta in eneolita Slovenije 3: 7-34. 1974b. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja leta 1972. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita Slovenije 3:39-66. 1975. Kolišče ob Maharskem prekopu pri Igu - raziskovanja 1973. in 1974. leta. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita Slovenije 4: 7-106. Cultrone G., Rodriguez-Navarro C., Sebastian E., Cazalla O. and De La Torre M. J. 2001. Carbonate and silicate phase reactions during ceramic firing. European Journal of Mineralogy 13(3): 621-634. Grimshaw R. W. 1971. The Chemistry and Physics of Clays and Allied Ceramic Materials. Ernest Benn Ltd. London. Harrison S. 2008. An experimental prehistoric pottery firing at Harray, Orkney. Antiquity 82(317): Project gallery. http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/harrison/ Horvat A., Misič M. 2004. Mineralogy and sedimentology of diatomaceous sediments from Slovenia. RMZ - Materials and Geoenvironment 51(4): 2145-2161. Horvat M. 1999. Keramika: tehnologija keramike, tipologija lončenine, keramični arhiv. Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete. Ljubljana. Horvat M., Masaryk R., Klasinc R., Soklič J., Verbič T. and Stuhec S. 2014a. Arheološke raziskave v Krašnji v letu 2013. Zbornik Občine Lukovica II: 66-71. Horvat M., Masaryk R., Klasinc R., Verbič T., Soklič J., Stuhec S., Žibrat Gašparič A., Mirtič B., Sraka M. and Culiberg M. 2014b. Končno poročilo o arheoloških raziskavah na lokaciji Krašnja. Unpublished excavation report by the Archaeologic consortium (Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana; Institute of Archaeology, Slovene Academy of Sciences and Arts; Arhej d.o.o.). Ljubljana. Kramar S. 2013. Mineraloško-petrografska in kemična sestava lončenine in gline iz lončarskih peči. In M. Horvat et al., Cogetincipri Lenartu. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 37. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana: 225-231. Mlekuž D., Žibrat Gašparič A., Horvat M. and Budja M. 2012. Houses, pots and food: the pottery from Maharski prekop in context. Documenta Praehistorica 39: 325338. Osterc V. 1975. Mineralna sestava in mikrostruktura keramike s kolišča ob Maharskem prekopu I. Poročila o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 4: 123-134. Premru U. 1983. Tolmač za list Ljubljana: L 33-66: Socialistična federativna republika Jugoslavija, osnovna geološka karta, 1:100 000. Zvezni geološki zavod. Beograd. Quinn P. S. 2008. The Occurrence and Research Potential of Microfossils in Inorganic Archaeological Materials. Geo-archaeology: An International Journal 23(2): 275-291. Quinn P., Burton M. 2009. Ceramic petrography and the reconstruction of hunter-gatherer craft technology in Late Prehistoric southern California. In P. S. Quinn (ed.), Interpreting silent artefacts. Petrographic Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics. Archaeopress. Oxford: 267-295. Reedy C. L. 2008. Thin-Section Petrography of Stone and Ceramic Cultural Material. Archetype Publications. London. Rice P. M. 1987. Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London. Rokavec D. 2014. Gline v Sloveniji / Clays in Slovenia. Geološki zavod Slovenije. Ljubljana. Rye O. S. 1981. Pottery Technology. Principles and Reconstruction. Manuals on Archaeology 4. Taraxacum. Washington. Sillar B., Tite M. S. 2000. The challenge of 'technological choices' for materials science approaches in archaeology. Archaeometry 42(1): 2-20. Stražar S. 1985. Črni graben, od Prevoj do Trojan. Kul-turno-umetniško društvo Janko Kersnik Lukovica. Luko-vica. Terry R., Chilingar G. 1955. Summary of 'Concerning some additional aids in studying sedimentary formations' by M. S. Shvetsov. Journal of Sedimentary Research 25:229234. Tite M. S., Kilikoglou V. and Vekinis G. 2001. Strength, toughness and thermal shock resistance of ancient ceramics, and their influence on technological choice. Archaeometry 43(3): 301-324. Urankar R. 2012. Arheometrične raziskave kovinskih izdelkov in polizdelkov iz bronaste dobe ter rude na Slovenskem. Unpulished PhD thesis. Faculty of Arts. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. Velušček A. (ed.) 2004. Hočevarica: eneolitsko kolišče na Ljubljanskem barju / Hočevarica: an Eneolithic pile-dwelling in the Ljubljansko barje. Opera Instituti Archaeo-logici Sloveniae 9. Institute of Archaeology ZRC SAZU. Založba ZRC. Ljubljana. (ed.) 2009. Koliščarska naselbina Stare gmajne in njen čas / Stare gmajne pile-dwelling and its era. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 16. Institute of Archaeology ZRC SAZU. Založba ZRC. Ljubljana. Whitbread I. K. 1986. The characterisation of argillaceous inclusions in ceramic thin sections. Archaeometry 28(1): 79-88. 1995. Greek Transport Amphorae. A Petrological and Archaeological Study. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 4. The British School at Athens. Exeter. Žibrat Gašparič A. 2008. Strukturna analiza neolitske keramike in lončarske tehnologije. Unpublished PhD thesis. Faculty of Arts. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. 2013. A new look at old material: ceramic petrography and Neo/Eneolithic pottery traditions in the eastern Ljubljansko barje, Slovenia. Documenta Praehistorica 40:147-164. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) The Neolithic-Eneolithic sequence and pottery assemblages in the fifth millennium BC in north-eastern Slovenia Bine Kramberger Ljubljana, SI bine.kramberger@siol.net ABSTRACT - This paper discusses the settlements at Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center, Zgornje Radvanje and Hoče-Orglarska delavnica, all located in north-eastern Slovenia. The settlements are dated on the basis of the results of radiocarbon analyses. The characteristics of the material and cultural-chronological site structures were studied through analyses of pottery (pottery production, form, decoration) and comparative analyses. IZVLEČEK - V prispevku obravnavamo naselbine Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Šolski center, Zgornje Radvanje in Hoče-Orglarska delavnica, ki se nahajajo v severovzhodni Sloveniji. Na podlagi rezultatov radiokarbonskih analiz ugotavljamo starost naselbin. Z analizami keramičnih najdb (način izdelave keramike, oblike, okras) in s primerjalnimi analizami pa smo raziskali značilnosti materialne kulture in kulturno-kronološko strukturiranost najdišč. KEY WORDS - Neolithic; Eneolithic; settlement; NE Slovenia; 5th millennium BC; pottery analysis; 14C analysis; chronology Introduction The study of the Neolithic and Eneolithic periods in north-eastern Slovenia (for an overview of the earlier part of the history of research, see Budja 1983) does not have a long tradition, in comparison with neighbouring countries, and this area consequently lacks knowledge and archaeological research of this era. Mainly due to archaeological research on the motorway network, only archaeological periods after the second half of the 5th millennium onwards in north-eastern Slovenia are relatively well-studied (i.e. the Lasinja Culture), while only individual pits, structures and finds from the end of the first half of the 5th millennium are known, and older settlement have not even been identified to date.1 The present research has therefore been focused on analyses of pottery and an assessment of selected north-eastern Slovenian settlements dating to the first and the second half of the 5th millennium BC. The settlements are located relatively close to one another, in an area which is also important in the interpretation of archaeological records elsewhere (primarily in Austria, Hungary and Croatia) due to its transitional location between the Alps and the Pan-nonian Plain. The settlement of Andrenci is located on a hill 335m high, called Andrenski vrh, in western Slovenske gorice. Stoperce is located in Haloze, along the Majsperk-Rogatec road, while Ptuj-Solski center, Zgornje Radvanje and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica are 1 Bukovnica {Savel 1992.59-60; 1994.47-48; 2006.90), Andrenci (for both see also Budja 1983.81; Gustin 2005.9-16; Tomaž2010. 164; Kavur 2010.71; Velušček 2006.32-35; 2011.211-216), Ptuj-Šolski center, and partly, to a small extent, Ptujski grad (for both see Guštin 2005.Fig. 1; Tomaž 2010.164; Kavur 2010.Fig. 1), are sites that have been most often mentioned in literature as the only late Neolithic sites in north-eastern Slovenia. Most of the pottery from Ptuj-Šolski center has, until recently, not even been drawn or mended and, with the exception of Ptuj-Šolski center, no 14C dates were available for these sites. DOI>10.4312\dp.41.13 237 situated on the edge of the Drava plain (Fig. 1). Settlement contexts Andrenci Small-scale trenches dug in the 1950s at the settlement on Andrenski vrh partially explored two structures (Pahic, Lorber 1954; Pahic 1973; 1976). Structure A was represented by a large pit containing two cultural layers, the bottom (A1) and top (A2). They both contained residue of charcoal, burnt clay, fragments of pottery vessels (A1: Pl. 1.1-9; see also Pahic 1976.Pl. 2; A2: Pl. 1.13-20; see also Pahic 1976.Pl. 3 - Pl. 4.24) and stone tools (A1: Pahic 1976.Pl. 1.2, 8, 16-18; A2: Pahic 1976.Pl. 1.3, 11-12),2 but they were delimited by a thinner layer, A2a, which in addition to individual pottery fragments (Pahic 1976.Pl. 4.25-27) and stone tools (Pahic 1976.Pl. 1.9) also contained charcoal, ash, Fig. 2. Andrenci. Strucure A. Plan and section. Fig. 1. Map of north-eastern Slovenian sites with settlement remains dating to the 5th millennium BC. Larger dots and inscriptions mark settlements, which are analysed in this paper. rare bones and two spindle whorls (Pahic 1976.Pl. 24.28-29) (Fig. 2)3 Structure B also comprised a large pit with two cultural layers, bottom (B1) and top (B2). Both layers contained fragments of ceramic vessels (B1: Pl. 2.2534, B2: Pl. 2.35-51; see also Pahic 1976.Pl. 5.1-Pl. 22.6) and stone tools (Pahic 1976.Pl. 1.6-7, 13-15), and were delimited by charcoal. In the bottom layer, and partly under it (Pahic 1976.41), two straight lines of pebbles with their intersection forming a right angle were discovered, which may be interpreted as part of a wall or building foundation (Fig. 3). The 14C analysis of charred food residues obtained from the inner surface of a vessel base from the top layer (B2) in structure B showed a conventional age of 5730±40 BP, which means that it dates between 4689 and 4466 calBC (95.4% probability) or (between) 4652 and 4505 calBC (68.2% probability). Pottery assemblages from Andrenci are typologically homogeneous (Pls. 1-2), so it is possible to assume that both structures presented above were contem-poraneous.4 Stoperce Based on the results of 14C analyses, analyses of stratigraphic sequences and analyses of pottery, it is 2 Layer A1 also yielded two large concentrations of charcoal and burnt clay (Fig. 2), which might represent the remains of a structure or a hearth (see also Pahic 1976.35). 3 Parts of individual vessels were found in both layers (Pl. 1.13-20), while Structure A also yielded individual finds (Pahic, Lorber 1954.335-338) with unknown location details (Pl. 1.21-24). 4 The conventional value of all the dates presented in this paper was calibrated using the program OxCal version v4.2.3 (Bronk Ramsey, Lee 2013), with a current calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013). Fig. 3. Andrenci. Structure B. Plan and Section. possible to conclude that the area researched in 2009 was settled twice (Fig. 6). The first (earlier) phase is represented by Structure I, and the second by Structure III - area 2. At least three (II, IV and V) other structures were discovered. They did not contain pits with pottery, and absolute dates were not obtained. However, it seems that they belong to the second settlement phase, because smaller pits (Pl. 4.75-77), ditches and post-holes were discovered in the vicinity which contained pottery comparable to pottery found in the pit from Structure III (compare with Pl. 4.70-74); fragments of such vessels were also found in a thin cultural layer, stratigraphic unit (SE) 003, which was examined in isolated areas on top of the structure remains. Structure I was single-spaced, partially deepened (pit SE 128) and, based on the distribution of post-holes, probably had a trapezoidal floor plan. The hollow/ pit was filled with a single layer which contained charcoal, burnt clay, fragments of Late Neolithic pottery vessels (Pl. 3) and individual stone tools (Fig. 7). The 14C measurements of charcoal sample Beta-339594, gained from this layer showed a conventional age of 5690+30 BP, which means that it dates to the end of the first half or the turn of the first to the second half of the 5th millennium BC, and that Structure I was contemporary with Structure B from Andrenci (Figs. 9-10). Structure III, which represents the second settlement phase, was perhaps two-spaced.5 Area 1 was not deepened, and rare pottery fragments were discovered only in a thin cultural layer above the post-holes. The central part of Area 2 was some 30cm deepened, with two cultural layers and a hearth detected in the pit itself (SE 150). The upper layer (layer 2) contained charcoal, burnt clay, a number of Early Eneolithic vessel fragments (Pl. 4.70-74) and stone tools. The bottom layer (layer 1) did not yield any finds.6 The hearth was discovered in the specially formed north-eastern part of the pit SE 150 which appeared as a layer of charcoal 2cm thick containing some burnt clay fragments (Fig. 8). Two 14C dates are available from pit SE 150 (Structure III - Area 2), which significantly differ: the first date was calibrated to the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 4th millennium BC (Beta-362539) and the second to the end of the first half of the 4th millennium BC (Beta-339595). It is important to emphasise that the pottery from the pit is homogeneous, that comparable pottery occurs at sites within the region and beyond at the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 4th millennium BC, and that pottery, or any other proof of dating to the end of the first half of the 4th millennium BC, was absent Site Context Lab Code Material Age (BP) SD (±a) CalBC (68.2%) Cal BC (95.4%) Reference Andrenci Structure B (B2) Beta-339593 food crust 5730 40 4652-4505 4689-4466 first published here Figs. 4 and 5. Andrenci. Structure B, layer B2. 14C AMS date. Andrenci, Stru ;ture B (B2) . .. 5000 4800 4600 4400 Calibrated date (calBC) 4200 4000 5 There is a possibility that areas 1 and 2 were actually two separate structures, where one was older than the other, or perhaps they co-existed, but no stratigraphic data exist. 6 Cultural layers were separated based on the differences in the colour and fragments of pottery, stone objects and charcoal which concentrated on the boundary between them. Fig. 6. Stoperce. General plan of the site. from Stoperce.7 Therefore, it is possible to assume that the date of Beta-339595 is too late for the presented context (Figs. 9-10). Ptuj-Solski center During 1980/1981 (Structure I), 2000 (Structures II and III) and finally 2010 (Structure IV), this multi-period site yielded four structures from the 5th millennium BC (Strmcnik Gulic 1983; Lubsina Tusek 2004.74). Structures II and IV have been radiocarbon dated and are presented in detail below. Structure IV was deepened in the central part, where two cultural layers and a number of small pits were found (Fig. 11). Most of the pottery was found in layer SE 410, which was the top layer of a pit (Pl. 5.78-85), layer SE 430, which was located beneath (Pl. 5.89-91) and in a smaller pit SE 435, which was found at the deepest point of the structure. Parts of individual vessels were detected in all of the mentioned stratigraphic units (Pl. 5.86-88), so we can assume that all layers were deposited within a short time span. This can be partially confirmed by 14C analyses of charcoal samples, which place Structure IV between the second half of the 45th and 43rd centuries BC (Figs. 13-14). Structure II was probably rectangular. It was deepened along its entire length. The shallow deepening contained two cultural layers, a hearth and a greater concentration of burnt clay, probably the remains of a wall destroyed by fire. Two construction phases were documented, but they were more or less contemporary, as the northern and western sides of the building were only slightly modified during the second construction phase (Fig. 12).8 The bottom layer, which yielded a few stone artefacts and a large number of pottery fragments (Pl. 6), was deposited between the two construction phases. The upper, yellowish brown layer was deposited after the second construction phase and contained less pottery. Two 14C dates are available to determine the age of Structure II; however, one of these is unreliable and Fig. 7. Stoperce. Structure I. Plan and section. 7 In north-eastern Slovenia, pottery from the end of the first half of the 4th millennium was discovered at 14C dated settlements at Kalinovnjek near Turnisce (Kerman 2013a.242-245), Turnisce (Tomaz 2012.277-280), Gornje njive near Dolga vas (Kerman 2013b.407) and a 14C dated graveyard Pod Kotom - jug near Krog (Savel 2009.64, 94). The absolute date from pit SE 11 at Ivan-kovci in Lendava is more or less simultaneous to dates, mentiones above. The pit yielded very fragmented (!) vessels from the Early Eneolithic period (Kavur 2011.125-127) together with fragments that are believed to be later, from the end of the first half of the 4th millennium BC (Kavur 2011.find nos. 31 and 101). 8 Construction phases were determined based on the heights of the post-holes. Individual post-holes were discovered at the base of the pit, while others were above the bottom layer. therefore was not included in further analyses.9 The second available date places, with 68.2% probability, Structure II to the period between 4527-4366 calBC, which means that it may be slightly earlier than Structure IV. However, it has to be stressed that Structure II yielded one reliable 14C date, while Structure IV offers three (Figs. 13-14). Zgornje Radvanje The area of the site was intermittently inhabited from the Eneolithic to the Early Modern Period (Kram-berger 2010b.311; 2010a. 7; Murko 2012.141-142; Arh 2012). This paper presents 23 Eneolithic settlement structures, which were investigated in 2007 and 2008.10 The settlement was probably circular in form. Structure 22 was located in the central part in the first visible circumference, together with structures 31-36, which had not been deepened and yielded no finds.11 The second circumference contained structures 5-21 and 26, with associated smaller pits; the third circumference was represented by structures 2-4, with associated smaller pits, while the partly researched fourth circumference might be represented by Structure 1 in the far north-eastern part of the excavation area and smaller pits SE 212, SE 245, SE 247 in the far western part (Fig. 15). In addition to the structure studied already in complex 10 (Kramberger 2010b), labelled as Structure 5, 14C dates were also obtained from structures 22, 1, 4, 6, 7 and 10. The size and form of Structure 22 is comparable to Structure 5. Furthermore, it contained two phases; both were 14C dated (Fig. 16). Phase 1 was identified by several small pits containing Fig. 8. Stoperce. Structure III with areas 1 and 2. Plan and section. stone finds, pottery fragments (Pl. 7.109-118), fragments of burnt clay and wood, while Phase 2 was interpreted as the remains of a trapezoid house,12 which was located above the Phase 1 pits. The daily activities of Phase 2 were documented by the remains of a hearth, with pottery (Pl. 7.119-122) and stone finds. Based on the position of the post-holes, structure 6 was rectangular (Fig. 17). In contrast to structures 5 and 22, a uniform cultural layer (SE 250 = 252 = 226) has been detected in a shallow deepening, which was 14C dated. It contained fragments of charcoal and burnt clay, individual stone tools and pottery fragments (Pl. 8.123-133). Site Context Lab Code Material Age (BP) SD (±a) CalBC (68.2%) Cal BC (95.4%) Reference Stoperce Structure I (SE 128) Beta-339594 charcoal 5690 30 4548-4466 4604-4456 first published here Stoperce Structure III (SE 150) Beta-362539 charcoal 5200 30 4039-3971 4047-3961 first published here Stoperce Structure III (SE 150) Beta-339595 charcoal 4820 30 3650-3536 3656-3526 first published here OxCal V4.2.3 Bronk Ramsey (2013); r:5 lntCa!13 atmospheric curve (Reimer et al 2013)___ Stoperce, Structure I (SE 128) RDate Beta-c 39594---^ --- Stoperce, Structure III (SE 150) R Date Beta-i 62539 --- 5000 4800 4600 4400 4200 4000 Calibrated date (calBC) 9 This is the date of sample Z-3015, which was created by combining five different samples of charcoal, which, as is generally known, strongly influences the results of 14C analysis. 10 The rest of the settlement was studied by Monika Arh (2012). 11 Structures 31-36 have not yet been 14C dated, but based on their position in the first circumference, they seem to be from the Early Eneolithic period. 12 A greater quantity of burnt plaster and charcoal has been documented just above small pits, but direct evidence of the existence of a wooden structure similar to Structure 5 (burnt wooden post) has not been found here (Kramberger 2010b.Fig. 4). Figs. 9 and 10. Stoperce. First and second settlement phase. 14C AMS date. The 'problematic' date, excluded from further analyses, is shown with inclined letters. Early Eneolithic Structure 4 was discovered under alluvial layer SE 983, which contained finds from the same period. Two layers were discovered in pit SE 1129. The pit base was filled with layer SE 1128. The 14C dated layer SE 1102 was placed on top. Fragments of charcoal, burnt clay, stone tools and pottery (Pl. 9.142-146) were detected in both layers and were especially concentrated between the two layers (Fig. 18). The construction of Structure 7 was documented only with a few post-holes that were discovered in the central part of the deepening. The deepening of the structure yielded one cultural layer (SE 16 = 18 = 25), which was 14C dated, with some smaller pits (SE 37, SE 26 and SE 21) beneath. The cultural layer contained fragments of burnt clay, charcoal, Early Eneolithic stone tools and pottery (Pl. 8.134141), as well as two concentrations of burnt clay (Fig. 19). The deepening of 14C dated Structure 1 (SE 600) showed two major concentrations of charcoal with fragments of burnt clay (SE 623, SE 625), probably part of the structures' burnt construction, and a cultural layer SE 599. Stone tools and pottery fragments were found in SE 599 (Pl. 9.149-152) and in the concentrations of charcoal (Pl. 9.147-148, 153), where two 14C samples were collected (Fig. 20). The last 14C dated structure, Structure 10, was identified as a pit (SE 1028) filled with layer SE 1027, which contained a large quantity of burnt clay, charcoal and fragments of pottery (Pl. 10.160-164). A hearth (SE 1029) was discovered next to the pit (both Phase 1). On top of layer SE 1027 and the hearth, another layer, SE 1004, was discovered which contained fragments of charcoal, burnt clay and various fragments of Early Eneolithic pottery (Pl. 10.154-157) (Phase 2). Post-hole SE 1040, also containing fragments of Early Eneolithic pottery (Pl. 10.158-159), was discovered under layer SE 1027. It was therefore assumed that it represented part of Structure 10 (Fig. 21). Ten out of eleven dates from one part of the settlement at Zgornje Radvanje, which was investigated in 2007 and 2008, more or less overlap and date the settlement to the last third of the 5th millennium BC. Sample Beta-305862 from post-hole SE 1040 was dated somewhat later, to the end of the 5th and beginning of the 4th millennium BC (Figs. 22-23). The o „ bedrock \ O 0 0 5 1_2 3 m - ceramic fragments ' ■ I ;HZUD charcoal boundary of a layer section: A SE 410 B y^f -' SE430 SE435 SE437 ^^ Fig. 11. Ptuj-Solski center. Structure IV. Plan and section. post-hole was, as already mentioned, discovered beneath layer SE 1027, so it was assumed that it was related to Structure 10 (Phase 1). However, charcoal sample Beta-305861 from SE 1027 yielded an earlier date, which is consistent with the rest of the settlement. So post-hole SE 1040 was perhaps dug into Structure 10 from the later layer SE 1004 (Phase 2), which is located above the layer SE 1027 and its cut into later layers was not detected (Fig. 21). This seems credible, but no 14C dates are yet available from SE 1004, so we can not completely exclude the possibility that the 14C dating of sample Beta-305862 from pit SE 1040 is incorrect in its context (Bronk Ramsey 2009b.1023-1024)>3> — boundary of a layer sections: C14 location of the 14C sample A • post hole (phase 1a) _ _ ° post hole (phase 1b) r C D Fig. 12. Ptuj-Solski center. Structure II. Plan and section. 13 Dates from the other part of the settlement at Zgornje Radvanje were presented by Monika Arh (2012. Figs. 10, 40, 61, 65). Site Context Lab Code Material Age (BP) SD (±a) CalBC (68.2%) Cal BC (95.4%) Reference Ptuj-{.c. Structure II (!) Z-3015 charcoal 5873 132 4901-4556 5202-4449 Obelic et al. 2002.626 Ptuj-S.c. Structure II (SE 10) Z-3114 charcoal 5626 80 4527-4366 4680-4337 Lubsina-Tusek 2004.75 (only mentioned) Ptuj-S.c. Structure IV (SE 410) LTL5611A charcoal 5504 50 4445-4272 4455-4260 first published here Ptuj-S.c. Structure IV (SE 430) LTL5612A charcoal 5387 45 4330-4176 4339-4059 first published here Ptuj-S.c. Structure IV (SE 435) LTL5613A charcoal 5384 40 4328-4177 4336-4065 first published here Figs. 13 and 14. Ptuj-Solski center. 14C AMS dates. Date, not included in further analyses, is shown with inclined letters. Ptuj-Solski cen B nato 7 "31 1/ ter, Structure II 1 ■- Ptuj-Solski cen R Combine L" ter, Structure IV L5611A, LTL56 19 in I TI ^ 5000 4800 Hoce-Orglarska delavnica The latest site studied in this paper and the only one without 14C dates is Hoce-Orglarska delavnica.14 In 1988 and 1989 Roman and Bronze Age settlements were discovered and partially studied, together with five hollows from the period studied in this paper (Strmcnik Gulic 1989.224-226; 1990.173-175). Most of the pottery was found in three pits which were investigated in 1989 and interpreted as pit-houses (Strmcnik Gulic 1990.174-175).15 Pit-houses I and II contained a single cultural layer, which yielded burnt clay, charcoal, fragments of stone tools and pottery (Pl. 11 and Pl. 12.180-188), while pit-house III contained two cultural layers with pottery (Pl. 12.189-192) and a higher concentration of burnt clay mixed with charcoal. Layer 9 filled the deepening of the pit (Phase 1); a concentration of burnt clay and charcoal - probably the remains of a hearth - was situated on top of it, while layer 5 (Phase 2) represents the top layer (Fig. 24). Neolithic-Eneolithic settlement in NE Slovenia The settlements at Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center and Zgornje Radvanje yielded a total of 20 dated samples, while part of the site at Radvanje-Ha- 4600 4400 Calibrated date (calBC) 4200 4000 bakuk 2 (Arh 2012) offers another five dated samples. These provide a relatively good basis for explaining past events (Figs. 9-10, 13-14, 22-23 and their comments). Andrenci, two settlement phases at Stoperce and Ptuj-Solski center offer only individual 14C-dated structures,16 while the studied part of Zgornje Radvanje yielded a number of dates, so it is possible to analyse the life span of the settlement. The dates of the samples derived from the same structure were combined before calibration (function R. Combine), so that they were evenly represented during the activity period.17 In contrast, dates that refer to a variety of contexts were studied separately. The 'Span' function, which determines only the duration of directly dated events, was used, together with the 'Interval' function, which determines the whole range of activities between the beginning and the end of one phase (Fig. 25).18 Based on the presented 14C dates, it is possible to conclude that the studied part of the settlement at Zgornje Radvanje, as well as the settlements at Andrenci, Stoperce and Ptuj-Solski center document a time span of settlement activities in the period between the second half of the 47th and the first half of the 40th century BC, while the studied part of the Radvanje-Habakuk 2 settlement, partly dates back to 14 Early Eneolithic pits from Hoce-Orglarska delavnica were not radiocarbon dated because there were no suitable samples. The settlement is dated only indirectly by typological comparisons. 15 Post-holes were detected only at pit-house III, while the remaining pits were interpreted as pit-houses solely on the basis of the fragments of burnt clay and charcoal discovered in them. 16 As mentioned above, two structures were dated at Ptuj-Solski center, but one reliable 14C date comes from Structure II, with a large standard deviation. 17 The R_Combine function can, by definition, merge only 14C dates relating to the same event, yielding a more precise date for this event, but it is also used to merge samples from the same pit (Stadler, Ruttkay 2007). The difference in the result is minimal in this case, as the merged dates relate to events which were more or less simultaneous. 18 Analyses were done with the OxCal program version v4.2.3 (Bronk Ramsey, Lee 2013) and the current calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013). the first and the second half of the 4th millennium BC (Arh 2012.Fig. 10; 2012. Fig. 40). According to the current chronology of the 'central and southern Slovenian Neolithic and Earlier Eneolithic' and 14C dates that are known so far, the settlements at An-drenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center and Zgornje Rad-vanje can be placed in the period between the Younger or Late Neolithic and Early Eneolithic, while the settlement in the studied part of Radvanje-Habakuk 2 dates partly to the Middle Eneolithic period (Velušček 2011. 225-233). The earliest settlement, dating to the end of the first half and the middle of the 5th millennium BC, was documented at Andrenci and Stoperce (Structure I -SE 128). Ptuj-Solski center - Structure II, is younger and dates to the 4527-4366 calBC (68.2% probability), followed by a whole range of contexts with dates which more or less overlap: Structure IV at Ptuj-Solski center, and Structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) at Zgornje Radvanje.19 With the Span function, the life span of the part of settlement at Zgornje Radvanje, determined by structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) has been estimated to not more than 95 years (95.4% probability), or not more than 43 years (68.2% probability), between 43554186 calBC and 4337-4226 calBC respectively; more- Fig. 15. Zgornje Radvanje 2007-2008. General plan of the site. over, the 'Interval' function yielded a maximum life span of 146 years in the period between 4355 and 4186 BC (95.4% probability) or a maximum of 60 years in the period between 4337 and 4226 calBC (68.2% probability).20 Structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) at Zgornje Radvanje are earlier than Structure III (SE 150) at Stoperce, from post-hole SE 1040 at Zgornje Radvanje and individual contexts from part of the settlement at Radvanje-Habakuk 2, researched in 2010 (Arh 2012.Fig. 61). These latest contexts are dated to the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 4th millennium BC. Pottery assemblages The Neo-Eneolithic settlements at Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center, Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and the studied part of the settlement at Zgornje Radvanje yielded 38 398 pottery fragments (over 409.479kg). The pottery assemblages differ in quantity: the largest was discovered at Zgornje Radvanje (26 408 sherds (291.7kg)), followed by Ptuj-Solski center (5908 sherds (65kg)), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (1584 sherds (33.9kg)) and the second settlement phase at Stoperce (2522 sherds (14.6kg)). The pottery assemblages from Andrenci and the first settlement phase at Stoper-ce are the smallest and comparable in quantity (Andrenci, according to £ Pahic 1976.45 - 1050 fragments; Stoperce - 1186 fragments (4.3kg)) (Fig. 26). Pottery production 2723 ceramic objects, which were mended from 16848 pottery fragments, were analysed according to the established method of macroscopic standards (Horvat 1999); 62 different fabrics were identified. Quartz (A), mica (C) and iron oxide (E) are present in all fabrics, only the size of grains and their frequency differ. In addition, some fabrics were characterised by whitish, somewhat softer grains, undefined in more detail. LM20, LM23 and LM59 were charac- 19 Structure 1 at Radvanje-Habakuk (Arh 20I2.Fig. 10) is dated to the same period. 20 Later 14C dates from Zgornje Radvanje are therefore largely a result of the characteristics of the calibration curve in the second half of the 5th millennium BC. This is quite curved and therefore more intersections of the value of the conventional dates with calibration curve occur, while dates have subsequently extended ranges (Wiener 2012.428-429). Fig. 16. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 22. Plan and section. terised by partially burnt organic material.21 The fabrics are macroscopically comparable, apart from the Andrenci pottery, which differs slightly in having a smaller amount of mica, which is probably due to different clays being used, as mica is naturally present in clay and its decomposition takes a place around 900-950°C (Guirao et al. 2014.757-758; App. 1). Most of the pottery was made of fabrics without quartz temper, and fabrics with a small amount of quartz temper. Andrenci (83%), Zgornje Radvanje (61%), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (74%) and pits from the second phase of the settlement at Stoperce (66%) are dominated by pottery fragments made of very fine-grained fabrics. Fine-grained pottery was less frequent (most of it was found in pits from the second settlement phase at Stoperce - 21%); coarsegrained fabric was even less common. Only Structure I at Stoperce and Ptuj-Solski center yielded slightly more pottery made of fine-grained fabrics (58% and 52%) (Fig. 27). The pottery was hand-thrown and finished with treatment of the exterior and interior to remove irregularities from the surface of the objects. At An- drenci, most of the pottery surface is uneven or rough, which means that their surface was smo-othened before firing (98%). Structure I at Stoperce (91%), Ptuj-Solski center (74%), Zgornje Radvanje (92%), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (83%) and pits from the second phase of the settlement at Stoperce (88%) were dominated by pottery with smooth surfaces which were sponged before firing (Fig. 28).22 In some cases, the surface was coated with a coloured clay slip, most frequently red. This type of pottery was discovered at Andrenci (3%), Structure I at Stoperce (32%), Ptuj-Solski center (9%), Zgornje Radvanje (3%) and at Hoce-Oglarska delavnica (7%); it was coated with either a thicker layer of resistant slip (probably applied before firing, it now crumbles off the pottery surface), or thinner slips that can be removed from the pottery surface if touched with a wet finger (Fig. 29). The decoration was made with fingers or various tools prior to firing. Three techniques of decoration can be seen - impressions, incisions and applied decoration - wherein the motif was made with a single technique or a combination of two or three techniques. Impressions of the tips of various tools, and Fig. 17. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure ó. Plan and section. 21 Fabric LM18 is the only fabric containing grains of calcium carbonate. It was documented on the fracture of the base of a vessel from pit SE 52 at Stoperce. Its form resembles late prehistoric vessels, so it is assumed that it was not primary deposited in the pit. 22 Polished pottery is rare. It was found at Zgornje Radvanje (4%), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (5%) and the Early Eneolithic pits at Stoperce (2%) (Fig. 27). a o plan view: boundary of the excevation area fingernail and fingertip impressions can be seen on the pottery surface. Incised decoration is a technique that includes dragging a tool tip/s across the surface, while applied decoration involves making an appliqué which is later applied to the surface.23 The largest ratio of decorated pottery to undecorated vessels was discovered in Structure I at Stoperce (47%), Ptuj-Solski center (39%) and in Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (37%). Less decorated pottery was found at Andrenci (28%), Zgornje Radvanje (25%) and in the pits of the second settlement phase at Stoperce (15%) (Fig. 30).24 Individual sites are dominated by different decorating techniques. At Andrenci, most of the pottery was decorated with simple protrusions made with applied decoration (80%) and rarely with impressions (15%) or incisions (5%). Structure I at Stoperce is dominated by applied decoration and impressions (both 30%), with incisions (13%), combinations of incisions and impressions (13%), a combination of applied decoration and impressions (9%) and a combination of incisions and applied decoration (5%). The pottery at Ptuj-Solski center more often has impressions (46%), while the quantities of applied decoration (28%), incisions (14%) and combinations of incisions and impressions (9%) are comparable to pit SE 128 at Stoperce. Most of the pottery from Zgornje Radvanje (49%) and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (52%) was decorated with incisions, while a smaller proportion has applied decoration (Radvanje 25%, Hoce 14%), impressions (Radvanje 14%, Hoce 15%) or combinations of incisions and impressions (Radva-nje 10%, Hoce 15%). Most of the ware from the second settlement phase at Stoperce is decorated with impressions (40%) or a combination of incisions and impressions (30%) (Fig. 31). The firing atmosphere differs from vessel to vessel, wherein two firing conditions are most common. Vessels from all the sites were most often fired under oxidising conditions, wherein the firing temperature was too low and the oxygen was insufficient for the complete combustion of organic material. a se 903 b 0 0,5 1 2 3 m 1 I I Fig. 18. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 4. Plan and section. Typically, the surfaces and fractures of pottery fired under these conditions have several bright hues (5 or more), with several grey areas that indicate partially burnt organic material.25 Another common firing technique was with incomplete oxidation with a reducing phase at the end of the process. As the name suggests, vessels were constantly fired in oxidising conditions and the oxygen supply intentionally reduced during cooling. The pottery fractures are in bright colours, with darker grey tones on the surface. Such pottery was found in pit SE 128 at Stoperce. It is rare in comparison with pottery fired under incomplete oxidising conditions (13%), but occurs more often at Ptuj-Solski center (29%), Zgornje Radvanje (30%), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (24%) and the Early Eneolithic pits at Stoperce (40%). Some pottery fragments from Zgornje Radvanje (0.20%), Ptuj-Solski center (1%) and from pits from the second phase of the settlement at Stoperce (3%) had fractures and surfaces with a uniform dark grey colour. These vessels were fired under reducing conditions, with constant temperature and reduced oxygen supply while firing as well as cooling (Fig. 32).26 23 Appliqués are discussed as parts of decoration, as some are very decorative (Kramberger 20I4a.Fig. 149), although they probably also served as an aid in holding the object (like handles and lugs). 24 The results need to be observed with caution. Namely, analyses included all rim fragments of vessels of closed forms, all fragments of vessel girths, all handle fragments, all fragments of the feet of footed vessels. Some of these were, within the studied pottery assemblage, never decorated or decorated rarely. 25 All pottery from Andrenci was fired under these conditions, while SE 128 in Stoperce had 87%, Solski center 70%, Zgornje Radvanje 63%, Orglarska delavnica 76% and the second phase of the settlement at Stoperce a total of 57% of pottery fired under these conditions. 26 According to the pottery fractures, complete oxidation, oxidation with reduced atmosphere in the final stage and reduced firing with the oxidising atmosphere in the final stage were determined. Fragments were mostly very small, so it is possible that the evaluation would be different if sherds were larger. Fig. 19. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 7. Plan and section. The hardness of the pottery was determined by macroscopic analysis. A statistical comparison of the results of a Mohs test showed that the pottery from Structure I at Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center, Zgornje Radvanje, Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and the Early Eneolithic pits at Stoperce was on average harder (dominated by a value of 3-6 on the Mohs' scale of hardness) than the pottery from Andrenci (values 1-4 on the Mohs' scale of hardness) (Fig. 33). The hardness of pottery depends on many factors, the most important of which are the composition and microstructural properties of clay, the surface treatment of vessels prior to firing, firing temperature and atmosphere (Rice 1987. 354)2 Forms of pottery, decoration and typological comparisons The pottery found at the settlements from the 5th millennium BC differs in form and decoration, with some notable differences from site to site which can be seen between contexts, which according to the results of 14C analyses, date to different periods, as well as between contexts that were contemporaneous. Good comparisons are available in different geographic areas and the studied sites can be connected to different cultural groups. As mentioned above, according to the current chronology of the 'central and southern Slovenian Neolithic and Earlier Eneolithic and 14C dates known so far, the settlements at Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center and the studied part of the settlement at Zgornje Radvanje date to the Younger or Late Neolithic and Early Eneolithic (Velušček 2011.225-233). According to the above chronology, the earliest settlement in central and south-eastern Slovenia is culturally defined as pertaining to the Sava group of the Lengyel Culture, followed by the Lasinja Culture, dated to the Early Eneolithic period, and later by the horizon of pottery with furrowed incisions, which is dated to the Middle Eneolithic (Velušček 2011.209). The chronological scheme of the 'central and south Slovenian Neolithic and Earlier Eneolithic' is comparable to the Austrian chronological scheme, with the only difference being the terminology used.28 However, a very different chronological scheme exists in neighbouring Croatia (Markovic 1994.27- 29) and Hungary. The transition from the Neolithic to the Copper Age is better defined in Hungary, where the Se horizon, early and middle phases of the Lengyel Culture (West Hungary) and the Tisza Culture (East Hungary) define the Late Neolithic period. Phase Lengyel III (West Hungary), which according to Anton Velušček is correlated with the Sava group of the Lengyel Culture (Velušček 2011.210-222), and the Proto-Tiszapolgar and Tiszapolgar horizons (East Hungary) date to the Early Eneolithic period, while the Balaton-Lasinja Culture and the horizon of pottery with furrowed incisions ('Furhenstich') date to the Middle Eneolithic period (Raczky 1974; Mak-kay 1976; Zalai-Gaal 1982; Kalicz 1973; also Banffy 1995c.192; 1997.61). The transition from the Neolithic to Eneolithic has been explained by changes in society and lifestyle, supposedly related to the spread of new technologies from the area of the central Balkans to Central Europe (Banffy 1995c.183-187). Contacts with the central Balkans are also supposed to be seen in a number of new forms of pottery that first appear during the Late Lengyel Culture and which are a specific feature of the subsequent Balaton-Lasinja Culture (Banffy 2002). 27 The results of the analysis need to be treated with caution, since the analysis was carried out with a magnifying glass, not a microscope. Moreover, the Mohs hardness test is not entirely relevant for gritty pottery (Rice 1987.357). 28 In Austria, the Lengyel Culture and related cultural groups (e.g., Moravia - East-Austrian group of painted ceramics, Stichbandkeramik, the Münschöfen Culture) define the Middle Neolithic, while the Kanzianiberg-Lasinja and related cultures define the earlier phase of the late Neolithic period, which equates to the Copper Age in Austria (Krenn-Leeb 2006.Fig. 2). The second half of the 47th to the beginning of the 45th century BC Differences in pottery forms and pottery decoration can be seen at Andrenci (Pls. 1-2) and Structure I at Stoperce (Pl. 3), although they were absolutely dated to approximately the same era, i.e. between the 47th and mid 45th century BC (95.4% probability) or between the second half of the 47th and the beginning of the 45th century BC (68.2% probability). Differences can be noticed mainly in the forms of pots and decorative motifs, while, for example, footed dishes, dishes and jugs are almost identical. To begin with, we focus on finds with no significant differences, because such finds have been found over a wide geographical area. The pottery assemblages from Structure I at Stoperce (Pl. 3.52, 54, 56) as well as from both structures at Andrenci (Pl. 1.1.2, 16, 23; Pl. 2. 26, 38) often include dishes with a convex body and an everted rim (cf. Kramberger 2014. 285-287), which stood either on a base or low cylindrical foot (cf. Kramberger 2014.288-289).29 Furthermore, all contexts contain dishes with a convex body and a straight rim (Pl. 1.3, 18; Pl. 2.37, 40; Pl. 5.3, 58; see also Kramberger 2014.290)30 and jugs with a low-convex body, shoulders and a long or medium sloping neck (Pl. 1.10; Pl. 2.44; Pl. 3.59; see also App. 2.V11-V13).31 The so-called beak-spouted rims (Pl. 1.21-22),32 the 'buta' type of vessel with horizontal handles of a triangular form (Pl. 24.1; Pl. 2.49; see also Kramberger 2014.159-161, 299), ladles with a punctured handle attachment and a semi-spherical receptacle (Pl. 2.47-48) and a ladle with a punctured handle attachment and a semi-ellipsoidal receptacle (Pl. 19.1; cf. Kramberger 2014.298) only appear at Andrenci; these are generally known types of pottery from the 5th millennium BC in Central and South-eastern Europe. Differences in pot forms are more significant. Apart from differences, defined as versions, it was discovered that structures A and B at Andrenci yielded only pots with rounded body (Pl. 1.11-12, 20) and an everted neck (Pl. 1.6, 11-12; Pl. 2.28, 31, 33- bedrock boundary of the excevation area section: a b —-ciririp---se 600 se 623 se 599 se 625 0 0,5 1 2 3 m 1 ■ i Fig. 20. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 1. Plan and section. 34) 33 while better preserved pots from Structure I at Stoperce have concave bodies (Pl. 3.66-69) and strongly everted (Pl. 3.63, 69), slightly everted (Pl. 3.60) as well as ellipsoidal necks (Pl. 3.62, 64) (see also App. 3. L24.1-L15.1-2). The upper parts of pots have vertical strap handles, a characteristic of pots from the end of the first half of the 5 th millennium BC onwards in Austria (MOG IIa and IIb; Stadler, Ruttkay 2007.142-143) and Hungary (end of the Phase II and Phase III of the Lengyel Culture; Bânffy 1995b.87; Zalai-Gaâl 2003.294-295). A common feature of pottery decoration at Andrenci and SE 128 from Stoperce are plastic motifs on girths (Pl. 1.1-2, 7, 9, 10, 12, 17, 20; Pl. 2.29-30, 32, 37, 42-44, 46; Pl. 3.58-60, 63, 65, 68), while there is a great difference in the frequency of occurrence of such motifs in comparison with other types of decoration. Applied motifs are the most common tech- 29 Simple dishes with feet tapering at the end appear individually at Andrenci (Pl. 13.1). 30 SE 128 at Stoperce yielded a similarly formed dish with a concave body (Pl. 3.57). 31 Good comparisons are available at, for example, the Late Lengyel sites of Nagykanizsa-Inkey-Kapolna, Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo and Catež-Sredno polje (cf. Horvath, Kalicz 2006.58; Velušček 2011c.214-242; Kramberger 2014.Fig. 186). 32 Comparisons can be found at, for example, the sites of Lengyel Culture, the Sopot Culture and at Catež-Sredno polje (Kramberger 2014.291). 33 Although only three such pots are typologically identified, based on fragments of the lower parts of the vessels, it is possible to assume that the majority were of this form. All fragments of closed vessels from structures A and B have rounded bodies, while the necks of all closed vessels from structures A and B were everted. We can assume that most of these fragments are fragments of pots, while some could be from jugs or the 'buta' type of vessels. nique of decoration at Andrenci,34 while the decoration of pottery from Structure I at Stoperce is diverse. Apart from applied decoration, one can notice impressions (Pl. 3.64, 66-67), a combination of impressions and applied decoration (Pl. 3.63, 68), a combination of impressions and incisions (Pl. 3.62, 69), incisions and a combination of incisions and applied decoration (Pl. 3.65). A feature of the ware from Andrenci has to be stressed, i.e. decoration with a large bulge on the rim of a vessel (Pl. 2.45) and horizontally perforated appliqué (Pl. 1.5), while only pottery from SE 128 at Stoperce has two small plastic bulges (Pl. 3.58) and horizontal elongated appliqués (Pl. 3.52, 54). Pottery which disparates Andrenci from Structure I at Stoperce can be found in different geographic areas. The Andrenci pottery mainly resembles pottery assemblages dating to the end of Phase II and from Phase III of the Lengyel Culture in West Hungary, in Styria (for a review, see Obereder 1989; Tie-fengraber 2006) and Bukovnica (Savel 1992.59-60), and is thus the extreme southwest site where such pottery occurs. The West Hungarian sites are the most researched among the sites mentioned. Firstly, the site at Zalaszentbalazs-Szôlôhegyi mezô has to be mentioned (lor an analysis of decoration, see Banffy 1995b. 78-80), followed by, for example, sites at Nagykanizsa-Inkey-Kapolna (Kalicz 2003; Horvath, Kalicz 2006), Tekenye (Katalin 1987), Veszprém (Regenye 2007), Szentgal-Fuzi-Kut (Regenye 1994) and Kaposvar-Gyertyanos (Rege-nye 2006). These sites yielded pots with rounded bodies, everted necks and vertical strap handles (cf. Pl. 12.1 with Banffy 1995b.Pl. 71.179, with Regenye 2007.Fig. 2.1), which are almost identical to the pots described above. Moreover, the pottery is decorated with similarly formed appliqués (cf. Pl. 1.5: Banffy 1995b.Pl. 53.16; Pl. 63.109; Pl. 71.199; Pl. 92.126-127, Kalicz 2003.Pl. 4.12-14, Pl. 5.4, Regenye 1994.Fig. 8.19, Fig. 11.7, Regenye 2006, with Savel 1992.Pl. 5.16; cf. Pl. 2.45: Banffy 1995b. Pl. 71.179, Katalin 1987.Fig. 26.12). Similar forms and decoration also appear at sites dated to the late phase of the Moravia - East Austrian group of painted pottery (MOG) in Austria (Stadler, Ruttkay 2007. 140, 142-143; cf. Pl. 1.11 with Ruttkay 1976.Pl. 3.3), while similar forms, but decorated with painted ornament, occur at sites dated to the middle phase of the MOG (e.g., Stadler, Ruttkay 2007.138139, 142; cf. Pl. 1.12 with Neugebauer, Neugebauer-Maresch 2006.Fig. 3.8; Pl. 2.45 with Carneiro 2006. Fig. 5. 1-2). Good comparisons can, moreover, be found in late phases of the Brodzany-Nitra Group in Slovakia (cf. Pl. 2.45 with Rakovsky 1986.Fig. 1.1, Fig. 2.1, 4, with Kuča et al. 2011.Fig. 5.10 and Ko-sturik 1979.Pl. 1.8, Pl. 4.4, Pl. 7.5, 7). The form and decoration of pottery from Structure 1 (SE 128) at Stoperce, on the other hand, mainly resembles sites in central and south-eastern Slovenia. Good comparisons can be found at settlement phase 2 at Moverna vas (Budja 1995.Fig. 4; Tomaž 1999), at Resnikov prekop (Harej 1975; Korošec 1964) and at Gradišče pri Stiski vasi (Velušček 2005). Individual comparisons also occur at, for example, Catez-Sredno polje (Tomaž 2010; Tomaž, Kavur 2006) and Dragomelj (Turk, Svetličič 2005), where it seems Fig. 21. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 10. Photo and segment of partially researched structure. 34 Structure A yielded 19 vessels decorated with plastic motifs, while Structure B yielded 9 vessels with this type of decoration. According to the statistics, as already stated, this means that 80% of pottery was decorated with plastic motifs, 15% of motifs were impressed (Pl. 28.2, 34, 50) and only 5% were incised (Pl. 1.8). Site Context Lab Code Material Age (BP) SD (±a) CalBC (68.2%) Cal BC (95.4%) Reference Zg. Radvanje Structure 7 (SE 20) Beta-305853 charcoal 5450 40 4346-4262 4361-4236 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 4 (SE 1102) Beta-305863 charcoal 5430 40 4336-4260 4354-4177 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 5 (SE 324) Beta-305855 charcoal 5370 40 4325-4079 4331-4057 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 5 (SE 330) Beta-305856 charcoal 5420 40 4332-4259 4352-4082 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 1 (SE 623) Beta-305857 charcoal 5430 40 4336-4260 4354-4177 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 1 (SE 625) Beta-305858 charcoal 5320 40 4233-4061 4316-4042 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 22 (SE 853) Beta-305860 charcoal 5350 40 4312-4071 4323-4052 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 22 (SE 820) Beta-305859 charcoal 5410 40 4329-4246 4348-4076 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 6 (SE 250) Beta-305854 charcoal 5360 40 4321-4074 4328-4054 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 10 (SE 1027) Beta-305861 charcoal 5370 40 4325-4079 4331-4057 first published here Zg. Radvanje Structure 10 (SE 1040) Beta-305862 charcoal 5190 40 4040-3964 4223-3824 first published here Figs. 22 and 23. Zgornje Radvanje. 14C AMS dates from part of the settlement, which was investigated during 2007 and 2008. that more pottery is decorated with impressions.35 These sites yielded identical or similar decorated pots, with concave bodies, strongly everted (cf. Pl. 3.63 with Tomaž 1999. Pl. 14.1, with Harej 1975.Pl. 1.6; cf. Pl. 3.69 with Tomaž 1999.Pl. 12.1-2),36 slightly everted (cf. Pl. 3.60 with Tomaž 2010.find no. 668) and ellipsoidal necks (cf. Pl. 3.62 with Velušček 2005.find no. 8; see also the pot from settlement phase 2 in Budja 1995.Fig. 4). Dragomelj, Res-nikov prekop, Catež-Sredno polje and Gradišče pri Stiski vasi, all of these with artefacts that are comparable to the studied pottery, have been dated to the so-called Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture. According to Mitja Gustin, Moverna vas in Bela Krajina is not attributed to this group (Guštin 2005.Fig. 1). However, Velušček considers that the distribution of this cultural group is wider and includes sites in Bela Krajina, around Karlovac, Kočevsko and Slovenian Sty-ria (Velušček 2011.206), which is confirmed by the pottery from the deepening of Structure I at Stoperce. 35 According to the analysis, which was presented by Alenka Tomaž, this is reliable, especially for Čatež-Sredno polje (Tomaž 2010), while a study of the whole Dragomelj site has to be published first in order to confirm or disprove this. 36 The second settlement phase of Moverna vas offers the best comparisons with footed dishes decorated with a horizontally elongated appliqué (cf. Pl. 3.52, 54 with Tomaž 1999.Pl. 5.2). End of the 46th to 43rd century BC Based on individual 14C date from Structure II and dates from Structure III, the site at Ptuj-Solski center can be dated to between the end of the 46th and 43rd century BC (Fig. 25). The date partly overlaps with dates from both, i.e. Structure I at Andrenci and Zgornje Radvanje. This indicates that Ptuj-Sol-ski center may have been contemporary with Structure I at Stoperce and with Andrenci, as well as with the structures at Zgornje Radvanje. However, the pottery assemblages found in the structures differ from site to site. plete oxidising conditions, with reducing conditions used at the end of the firing process. The same firing process was used for high hollowed sloping feet (Pl. 6.99), high hollowed sloping feet, convex in the middle (Pl. 5.83), high hollowed sloping feet, convex on top, and differently formed low feet (Pl. 6.97-98). Some footless dishes and bowls were similar in form (Pl. 6.101, 103) occur together with dishes with a simple semi-circular form (Pl. 5.91). Handles or spouts, semi-circular spouts with a partition (Pl. 5.91), or thrown spouts (Pl. 5.84) could be attached to all types of dishes and bowls as well as footed dishes. Based on pottery assemblages, Ptuj-Solski center is culturally dated to the Late Lengyel Culture (Kavur 2010.71) or the 'wider Lengyel Culture' (Gustin 2005.9, Fig. 1; Tomaz 2010.164). The comparisons presented in this paper are only partly consistent with this definition. In addition to finds that are comparable to material from Andrenci and Structure I at Stoperce, Structures I-IV also yielded finds comparable to the Lasinja Culture in the region. The most important feature of the Late Lengyel Culture (Carneiro 2004.267-271) and the 'wider area of the Lengyel Culture' (Gustin 2005.12-13) are vessels with a coloured clay slip.37 It can be seen on dishes of identical or similar forms as those from Andrenci and SE 128 at Stoperce: on dishes with a convex body and an everted rim (Pl. 5.82; Pl. 6.100), simple hemispherical dishes (Pl. 5.78 ; Pl. 6.92), dishes with a convex body, of simple form with a tapered upper part, where the base is not preserved (Pl. 5.90; Pl. 6.94, 102), on high hollow cylindrical feet (Pl. 6.96) and on numerous foot fragments.38 In addition to the presented dishes with clay slip, which were probably footed, Ptuj-Solski center yielded many footed dishes with a convex body and straight rim decorated with four tongued appliqués (Pl. 5.79, 81, 89; Pl. 6.93, 95) which have been identified as a typical find of the Slovenian Lasinja Culture (Gustin et al. 2005.47; Velušček 2011.222). These were usually fired under incom- Even more differences can be seen between jugs and pots from Ptuj-Solski center and those from Andren-ci and Structure I at Stoperce. In contrast with the jugs from SE 128 at Stoperce and Andrenci, the typo-logically determined jugs from Ptuj-Solski center have a low concave body (Pl. 6.104-106), shoulders and either short and slightly sloping (Pl. 6.106) or long cylindrical necks (see also App. 2). Pots usually have a high concave body, shoulders and a medium (Pl. 5.86; Pl. 6.107) or short cylindrical neck or a long sloping neck (Pl. 6.108). Pots of different forms are rare (Pl. 6.88; see also App. 3). The ceramic finds are most often decorated with impressed, applied, incised and impressed-incised motifs; some are comparable to those from Structure I at Stoperce (cf. Pl. 3.52, 54 with Pl. 6.92; cf. Pl. 3. 63, 68 with Pl. 6.106). Different motifs also occur (Pl. 6.103); they are more comparable to those at Zgor- Fig. 24. Hoce-Orglarska delavnica. Plan of the part of the settlement that was excavated in 1989 and sections of Early Eneolithic 'pit-houses' (drawn according to Strmcnik-Gulic 1990.App. 2). 37 Ptuj-Solski center, as already stated, yielded more slip-coated pottery than Andrenci, but less than SE 128 at Stoperce (Fig. 28). 38 No base fragments covered with slip were found at the site, so we can assume that most of the presented variations were footed. nje Radvanje and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (cf. with Pl. 8.128 and Pl. 12.182, 186, 188). Typological comparisons reveal great similarities in the pottery from the nearby site of Rabenstein near Lawamünd, which, according to the chronology of E. Ruttkay, dates to the Early Lasinja Culture (Tiefen-graber 2004; Carneiro 2004; see also Krenn-Leeb 2006.195, Fig. 2). The pottery from this site is relatively fragmented; however, several forms can be identified: dishes with a convex body and everted rim (cf. Pl. 5.82 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 5.45) and dishes with a simple semi-circular form with a conical top (cf. Pl. 6.102 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 2.15-16, Pl. 4.33, Pl. 14.152-153) coated with red slip and probably footed; simple spherical dishes with spouts, with partition of semi-circular form (cf. Pl. 5.91 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 5.49, Pl. 9.95); jugs with a low concave body (cf. Pl. 6.105 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 2.20-21, Pl. 8.79, Pl. 11.114115) and almost identical decoration (cf. Pl. 5.87 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 10.101; Pl. 6.103 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 3.29; Pl. 6.101 with Tiefengraber 2004.Pl. 14.150). Comparisons of some forms of pottery which from Ptuj-Solski center which differs from that found at Andrenci and Structure I at Stoperce are known from some sites in central and south-eastern Slovenia, the most important being: the 14C dated settlement phases Moverna vas 4, 5 and partly 6 (cf dish with a thrown spout - Pl. 5.84 4800 4600 4400 Modelled date (BC) Fig. 25. Settlement chronology at Andrenci, Stoperce, Ptuj-Solski center and part of Zgornje Radvanje. Fig. 26. Size of studied pottery assemblages. The only data available from Andrenci is the quantity of pottery fragments that were found in the settlement. Settlement Amount of fragments before mending Amount of fragments after mending Total weight of pottery fragments (kg) Andrenci 1050 / / Stoperce - settlement phase 1 1186 850 4,28 kg Stoperce - settlement phase 2 2522 1714 14,58kg Ptuj-Solski center 59o8 4465 64,995kg Zgornje Radvanje 26408 18086 291,677kg Hoce-Orglarska delavnica 1584 895 33,947kg All settlements together 38398 26010 + Andrenci 409,479 kg + Andrenci with Tomaž 1999.Pl. 17.4; a pot with a concave body and cylindrical neck - Pl. 5.86 with Tomaž 1999.Pl. 24.1, Pl. 25.1, Pl. 32.6; a jug with a concave body decorated with incisions - Pl. 6.105 with Tomaž 1999.Pl. 31.2-3) and a 14C-dated site at Ponikve pri Trebnjem which is dated to the same era as Structure II at Ptuj-Šolski center (Ravnik, Tica in press)39 and settlement phases Moverna vas 4 and 5. In addition to the similarity between pottery from Ptuj-Šolski center and pottery from the sites mentioned above, noticeable differences also exist. The former has frequent imprinted decoration more frequently, while the pot with a low convex body and a sharp transition between a medium cylindrical neck and shoulders, as well as footed dishes with a straight rim and hanging appliqués, which were identified in the region as typical of the Lasinja Culture, are not known at the above-mentioned sites. Is this merely a result of archaeological research, or do we have to look for an answer elsewhere? Ptuj-Šolski center is located near the so-called 'western route' defined by Eszter Banffy and based on many elements of southern origin seen on pottery. Sites further away from this route have fewer of these elements (Banffy 1994.294; 2002.42). As already noted, these links are important, as they help to determine the transition from the Hungarian Late Neolithic to the Copper Age, as they link with changes that should have resulted from spread of new technologies (primarily copper) from the area of the central Balkans to Central Europe. Further research is needed to answer the above question, but, at this point, it is necessary to stress that there are noticeable similarities to pottery from several Copper Age cultural groups in the central Balkans, primarily with the early phases of the Salcuta Culture. Several correlations can be found (Kramberger 2014.292, 308- 309, 310-311)• However, the comparison with a uniquely formed pot with a low convex body and sharp transition between medium cylindrical neck and shoulders (Pl. 5.88; Fig. 34.1) has to be stressed here. No similar form has been found at other Slovenian sites (cf. Fig. 34.2). The end of the 44th and 43M century BC As mentioned above, 14C dates and settlement model date structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) at Zgornje Radvanje to the late 44th and 43rd century BC (68.2% probability) or, more specifically, between the second half of the 44th and the early 42nd century BC (95.4% probability) (Fig. 25). Pottery from these structures is typologically well comparable with pottery from Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (cf. Pl. 7-10 with Pl. 11-12), but slightly different from that found at Ptuj-Solski center, mainly in elements where similarities with Ptuj-Solski center, Structure I at Stoperce and Andrenci were found. Namely, Zgornje Radvanje and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica yielded only footed dishes with a straight rim decorated with hanging tongue-like appliqués (Pl. 7.109, 112; Pl. 8.124; Pl. 9.142, 147, Pl. 10.159; Pl. 11.165). Different forms of feet are present (Pl. 8.137; Pl. 11.172; Pl. 12.180, 184; see also Kramberger 2010.Pl. 1.1; Pl. 6.33), the most common being high hollow feet, convex on top (Pl. 7.110; Pl. 8.123; Pl. 10.155; Pl. 12.183). Dishes and bowls were formed similarly to footed dishes.40 They have applied handles (Pl. 8.126; Pl. 11.166; Pl. 12.186), lugs (Pl. 12.192), appliqués (Pl. 7.113; Pl. 11.168) or spouts. Semi-circular spouts with a partition (Pl. 9145) and thrown spouts (Pl. 9143; Pl. 10.154) appear with a protrusion/protrusions on the inside, and circular spouts with partition (Pl. 7.111; Pl. 11.170) and extracted spouts (Pl. 7.115; Pl. 12.181) are also present. 39 I am grateful to Mateja Ravnik that enabled me to get an insight to the dating and pottery and allowed me to mention the yet unpublished data at this stage. 40 Only bowls with a concave body, shoulders and rim differ (Pl. 11.168, see also Kramberger 2010b.Pl. 1.6-7). 3 0.66 0,58 ,6 1 ( 0.46 ,5 2 0/ 2 O, 1 23 0 22 C ,2 0,12 • 0.04 ■8,'94 1° 0 0 0 ),01 I" an stl sc rad h st2 □ very fine grained □ fine grained □ medium grained ■ coarsegrained Fig. 27. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce -settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of different granularity groups of fabrics. 0,98 j,» i CM A >,8 ',8 '.21 0,0 0,02 r 0 0,04 0 T 0,04 p "I 0,1 0,05 ■ r 0,02 AN STl ŠC RAD H ST2 □ smoothing □ burnishing □ polishing Fig. 28. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce -settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of finishing (surface treatment) techniques. Jugs with a low concave body, low shoulders and a long, cylindrical (Pl. 7.116; Pl. 11.174; Pl. 12.182) or slightly sloping neck (Pl. 10.162) are similar in form to jugs found at Ptuj-Solski center, but the shoulders are often extremely thickened (see also Pl. 8.128, Kramberger 2010.Pl. 7.41, 45). Jugs with identically formed upper parts, but a high concave body (Pl. 7.121; Pl. 8.136; Pl. 11.171; Pl. 12.185, probably also Pl. 9.144), and jugs with a high concave body and long strongly sloping necks (Pl. 8.127, 135; Pl. 9.149) (see also App. 2) are also present. The most common pot forms are, similarly to Ptuj-Solski center, pots with a high concave body, shoulders and a sharp transition to a short cylindrical neck (Pl. 8.131; Pl. 11.177-178; 12.187-188; see also Kramberger 2010.Pl. 2.12; Pl. 3.13-15, 18; Pl. 7.48-49; Pl. 9.52; Pl. 10.58), and pots with a high concave body, low shoulders and a long, sloping neck (Pl. 9.152; Pl. 11.176, 179; see also Kramberger 2010.Pl. 7.46-47). Pots with a high concave body, with no shoulders and a long, strongly sloping neck (Pl. 7.122; Pl. 9.146, 153; see also Kramberger 2010. Pl. 8.50) are also frequent, together with individual finds of pots with a low concave body (Kramberger 2010.Pl. 2.11; Pl. 20.4), a pot with a high concave body, shoulders and medium strongly sloping neck (Pl. 10.164), a pot with a concave body and an indi- stinct transition to a short slightly sloping neck (Pl. 7.114) and pots with a convex body and a long, slightly sloping neck (Pl. 12.189-190; see also App. 3). Apart from pots, 14C-dated structures at Zgornje Radvanje also yielded bottle-like vessels (Pl. 7.118, Kramberger 2010b.Pl. 3.17, 9.55). They are similar to the so-called Lasinja bottles - a characteristic of this period, which are also present at Zgornje Radvanje (Pl. 7.119) and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (Pl. 12.191) -but incomparably larger (Kramberger 2014.343344, 346-348). They were categorised as pots in the first publication (Kramberger 2010.313, 314), but compared to pots they are more closed and have appliqués instead of handles. The pottery ladles were made in one piece, with a full (Pl. 8.132) or punctured attachment (Pl. 9.151; Pl. 10.160; Pl. 11. 175) for a handle. The latter is more common, often with one (Pl. 7.117; Pl. 8.141; see also Kramberger 2010b.Pl. 9.53) and sometimes more protrusions, which is characteristic of a period after the Lengyel Culture (Ruttkay 1994. 223). Pottery similar to that found at Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Zgornje Radvanje can primarily be found41 at sites dated later as pertaining to the Lengyel Cul- 41 Some forms and ornaments have comparisons on sites that are dated to the 45th and 44th century BC (Phase 4 and 5 of Mover-na vas - see Kramberger 2010b.317-322) and even sites that are dated to the middle of the 5th millennium BC (cf. Pl. 9.150 with Pl. 3.66). The datings of some sites which are based on comparisons of a few small pottery fragments do not seem completely convincing (see Tomanic-Jevremov et al. 2006.find no. 2-15 and compare find no. 3 with Pl. 8.133). However, we also have to mention that there are indeed some fragments at Ptujski grad which are characteristic of the pottery of the middle of 5th and first half of 5th millennium BC (Tomanic-Jevremov et al. 2006.find no. 2; Korosec 1951.Fig. 55; 1965.Pl. 11.4) Fig. 29. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce -settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of different coloured clay slips. ture. Most comparisons are from Lasinja sites in the region, in south-eastern Slovenia and in the Gorenjska region in Northern Slovenia; Zbelovo (cf. Pl. 19. 189-190 with Pahič V. 1983.Pl. 5.1; cf. Pl. 7.119 and Pl. 12.119 with Pahič V. 1983. Pl. 15.10-11) and Brezje pri Zrečah (cf Pl. 7.119 with Pahič 1956. Pl. 1.2), located at Dravinjske gorice. The Drava plain offers good comparisons at, for example, Hardek (cf. Pl. 12.189-19 with Žižek 2006a.find no. 31; Pl. 7.115 with Žižek 2006a.find no. 20; Pl. 7.114 with Žižek 2006a.find no. 23), part of the pottery from Ptujski grad (Tomanič Jevremov et al. 2006b.178-182) and some of the finds from Ormož-Škoršičev Fig. 30. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase l (STl), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce -settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of decorated/ undecorated pottery. vrt (cf. Pl. 12.189 with Tomanič Jevremov et al. 2006a.find no. 21). South-eastern and northern Slovenia offer well comparable pottery finds primarily from burials in Ajdovska jama (cf Pl. 7.121 with Horvat Mi. 1989.Pl. 6.435; Pl. 11.179 with Korošec Pa. 1975.Pl. 8.1; Pl. 11.176 with Horvat Ma. 1986. Pl. 3.2; cf. Kramberger 2010b.Pl. 3.17 with Horvat Mi. 2009.Fig. 5.10; cf. Pl. 7.119 with Horvat Mi., Horvat Ma. 1987. Fig. 3), finds from the 6th and 7th settlement phase of Moverna vas (Budja 1995. Fig. 4), pit PO 004 at Catež-Sredno polje (cf. Pl. 7.121 with Tiefengraber 2006b. find no. 5), and partly finds from Spaha (Velušček 2011.222-223) and Dru- Fig. 31. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce - settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of pottery decoration techniques. Fig. 32. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoče-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce - settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of types of firing of pottery (firing conditions). lovka near Kranj (Güstin et al. 2005.47-50; cf. also Pl. 7.119 with Gustin et al. 2005.find no. 32).42 The best Austrian comparisons are from Raababerg near Graz (cf. Pl. 7.115 with Obereder 1989.Pl. 15. 155-156;; cf. Pl. 9.143 with Obereder 1989.Pl. 18. 183-184, Pl. 20.201-204; cf. Pl. 9.145 with Obereder 1989.Pl. 18.188, Pl. 20.205; cf. Pl. 12.192 with Obereder 1989.Pl. 9.97 and 149), and also from Stillfried (cf. Pl. 7.113 with Hahnel 1991.Pl. 1.2) and Kanzel bei Graz (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Artner et al. 2012.Pl. 1.R30-R42, R69). The other side of Slovenske gorice yielded comparable sites at Sodolek (cf Pl. 7.114 with Kavur et al. 2006.find no. 5; Pl. 9.143 with Kavur et al. 2006. find no. 2) and Safarsko (cf Pl. 7.116 with Savel 2006.find no. 27; cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Savel 1984.Pl. 4.1), which are located on the right bank of the Mura River. Slightly fewer comparisons can be found at sites from the Prekmurje region in eastern Slovenia and Hungary. In Prekmurje, for example, pottery comparisons can be found at Popava 1 near Lipovci (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Savel, Karo 2012. find no. 481; Pl. 7.119 and Pl. 12.119 with Savel, Karo 2012. find no. 819; Pl. 12.192 with Savel, Karo 2012. finds nos. 49, 239-240, 507, 717, 729), Turnišče (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Tomaž 2012.finds nos. 7-8,10,14, 15, 22,139; Pl. 12.192 with Tomaž 2012.find nos. 435, 485, 487-488), Bukovnica (cf. Pl. 11.176 with Savel 1994.Pl. 21.2; cf. Pl. 12.189 with Savel 1994.Pl. 21.13), Kalinovnjek near Turni-sce (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Kerman 2013a.find no. 408; Pl. 12.192 with Kerman 2013a.find no. 267) and Gorice near Turnisce (cf. Pl. 9.152 with Plestenjak 2010.find no. 15). It is also necessary to mention some of the Hungarian sites, particularly Szombathely metro (cf. Pl. 7.121 with Gabor 2004. Pl. 86), Dobri-Also-meso (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Horvath, Katalin 2004.Fig. 25.3; Pl. 12.192 with Fig. 33. Andrenci (AN), Stoperce - settlement phase 1 (ST1), Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoče-Orglarska delavnica and Stoperce -settlement phase 2 (ST2). Percentage of hardness groups of pottery. 42 The miniature bottle from Drulovka has been explained as a representative find of the Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture, but it is not clear on what basis. Resnikov prekop, Catez-Sredno polje, Dragomelj and other comparable Slovenian sites have not yielded miniature bottles; they are present only at sites of the Lasinja Culture. Horvath, Katalin 2004.Fig. 6.5), Sormas (cf. Pl. 12. 189-190 with Straub 2006.Fig. 4.6; Pl. 12.192 with Straub 2006.Figs. 5.3, 8.2, 8.1, 3), Nagykanizsa (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Kalicz 1975. Pl. 9.4), Zalaszent-balazs-Pustateto (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Banffy 1995a.Pl. 32.129), Gellénhaza-Varosrét (cf. Pl. 12. 191 with Horvath, Katalin 2003. Figs. 22.7, 23.8; Pl. 9.143 with Horvath, Katalin 2003.Fig. 24.7; Pl. 12.192 with Horvath, Katalin 2003.Fig. 24.2), Uype-rint-Kavicsbanya (cf. Pl. 7.116 with Karolyi 1992. Pl. 34.4), Mosonszentmiklos-Palmajor (cf. Pl. 7.113 with Virag, Figler 2007.Fig. 8.1), Kaposvar (cf. Pl. 7.113 with Samogyi 2000.Fig. 13.3), Zalavar-Basa-sziget (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Virag 2003b.Fig. 3.5, Fig. 6.4; Pl. 12.192 with Virag 2003a.Fig. 4.1), Letenye-Szentkerszdomb (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Kalicz 1973. Fig. 19.6), Tornyiszentmiklos (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Barna 2003.Fig. 6.10) and Nagy-kanizsa-Sanc (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Kalicz 1991. Fig. 8.1). In Croatia, the best correlations come from Bukovje (cf. Pl. 7.119 with Homen 1985.Fig. 1), Beketinec (cf. Kramberger 2010.Pl. 3.17 with Homen 1990. Fig. 5.8; Pl. 7.118 with Homen 1990.Fig. 2.1; Pl. 7.119 with Homen 1985.Figs. 2-3), Cerje Tuzno-Krc (cf. Pl. 7.119 with Markovic 1994.Pl. 24.9) and Jak-sic (cf. Pl. 12.189-190 with Markovic 1985.Fig. 3). The second half of the 41st and the first half of the 40th century BC Pottery from the Early Eneolithic pits at Stoperce, which, based on an absolute date from the hearth in Structure III, can be dated to the period between the second half of the 41st and the first half of the 40th century BC, are typologically homogeneous. The finds that connect Early Neolithic pits at Stoperce, structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6, 10 (Phase 1) from Zgornje Radvanje, Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and Ptuj-Sol-ski center are dishes with a straight rim (Pl. 4.70) on high hollow feet that are convex on top (Pl. 4.71), and decorated with tongue-like appliqués, together with dishes and bowls similar to them. On the other hand, differences can be seen in jug and pot forms and decorative motifs. The pots and jugs most frequently have an S-shap-ed profile. These jugs (Pl. 4.74, 77) and pots (Pl. 4.72) differ from one another only in dimensions and the number of handles. Another form of pot has a high concave body, an indistinct transition to the upper part and a long, slightly sloping neck (Pl. 4.75). A jug from the same site is similar in form, but Fig. 34. Comparison to a pot with a low convex body. 1 Ptuj-Solski center, Structure IV; 2 Salcuta (after Radu 2002.357 - CANA 2B). has a distinct transition to the upper part (Pl. 4.76) (see also App. 2-3). As mentioned above, the decoration is noticeably different. The most common form consist of individual bunches of incisions that end with awl impressions (Pl. 4.73, 77). Another decoration that has to be mentioned consists of two lines of impressions on the shoulders of a closed vessel (Pl. 4.76) and the upper parts of the feet of footed dishes (Pl. 4.71). A foot of this type was also found in layer SE 1004 in Zgornje Radvanje (cf. Pl. 10.155), which may be linked to post-hole SE 1040 and its absolute date (see Fig. 25 and comments on dates from Zgornje Radvanje). Again, comparable finds in terms of form and decoration can be found mainly at Lasinja Culture sites and related cultures in neighbouring countries. The best correlations are from Keutschacher See in Austria (cf. Pl. 4.71 and Pl. 10.155 with Samonig 2003. Pl. 40.435; Pl. 4.75 with Samonig 2003.Pl. 13.133; Pl. 4.74, 77 with Samonig 2003. Pl. 13.138 and Fig. 25: Type B2), Pri Muri near Lendava (cf. Pl. 4.72 with Savel, Sankovič 2011. find nos. 92, 131-132) and Brezje near Turnisče (cf. Pl. 4.71 and Pl. 10.155 with Novsak et al. 2013.find no. 97), and finally in some of the finds from Hardek (cf Pl. 4.75 with Tu-sek 1999.Pl. 2.8; Pl. 4.74, 77 with Žižek, 2006.find no. 22). Chronologically concurrent sites and cultural groups To summarise, the best comparisons with the pottery from Andrenci can be found in pottery from the later Lengyel Culture (phases Lengyel lib and III) in western Hungary, Austrian Styria and Bukovnica and from later phases of the MOG Culture in Austria (phases IIa and IIb), while pottery from chronologically contemporary Structure I at Stoperce correlates with sites in central and south-eastern Slovenia. Pottery from slightly later structures at Ptuj-Solski center is comparable to pottery from Rabenstein near Lawa-mund and some sites in central and south-eastern Slovenia, while pottery from Zgornje Radvanje, Ho-ce-Orglarska delavnica and settlement Phase 2 at Stoperce correlates with Lasinja Culture sites. 14C dates from Structure B in Andrenci and Structure I at Stoperce are comparable with dates from the Late Lengyel site at Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi mezo in western Hungary, from Dragomelj, settlement Phase 3 of Moverna vas and some of the dates from Resnikov Prekop (see also Mlekuz et al. 2013. Pl. 1) and Catez-Sredno polje. This indicates that these sites were partly contemporary. The unpaint- ed phase of the Lengyel Culture (Lengyel Phase III) was, by definition, concurrent with the 'Phase of un-painted pottery' MOG IIb in Austria, while Phase MOG IIa, which is characterised by multiple colour painting, was probably earlier (Bánffy 1997.61). However, scholars note that this does not correlate with the AMS 14C dating (Veluscek 2011.236). This was furthermore confirmed with dates from Andren-ci and Structure I at Stoperce, which are earlier than dates from MOG IIb and comparable to MOG IIa (Michelstetten, Oberbergern, Antonshöhe in Reichersdorf) (Fig. 35). Fig. 35. Sum probability of dates from the sites of Lengyel Phase III (according to Hertelendi 1995.105 and Gábor 2004.Fig. 26), phases MOG IIa and IIb (according to Stadler, Ruttkay 2007.Pl. 1-4), the Sava Group and comparable sites in central and south-eastern Slovenia (according to Gustin 2005.Fig. 2; Turk 2010.43; Turk, Svetlicic 2005.69; Budja 1994.Fig. 5; Cufar, Korencic 2006.Pl. 2; Sraka 2012.375), earlier phases of the Salcuta Culture (after Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2013.Fig. 5 and Radoescu 2009.42) and dates from Ptuj-Solski center. Fig. 36. Sum probability of dates from the Lasinja Culture sites in north-eastern Slovenia (according to Gustin 2005.Fig. 3; Tomaž 2012.Fig. 59; Žižek 2006.Figs. 2 and 3; Kerman 2013.Fig. 46; Savel, Karo 2012.Figs. 48 and 49; Plestenjak 2010.Figs. 86, 93-94; Savel, Sankovic 2011.Fig. 52; Meiert Grootes, Josée Nadeau 2013.126), in central and south-eastern Slovenia (Bonsall et al. 2007.Tab. 1; Mason, Andrič 2009.Tab. 1; Sraka 2013.375) and in Croatia (Bekic 2006.95; 2006a.27; Balen 2008.Fig. 3); a single date of the Balaton-Lasinja Group in Hungary (Oross et al. 2010.Fig. 12); dates of the Kanzianiberg-Lasinja Group (Fuchs 2002.117; Cichocki 2003.Tab. 1), Bisamberg-Oberpullendorf Group in Austria (Stadler, Ruttkay 2007.Tab. 4); date of the Jordanovska Culture in the Czech Republic (Sankrot, Zapotocky 2011.114); dates of the Ludanice Group in Slovakia (Görsdorf 1995.205-206) and sum probability of dates from Salcuta Phase IV (according to Lazarovici, Lazarovici 2013.Fig. 5). Structure II at Ptuj-Šolski center yielded a date that overlaps with the later MOG Ila, with earlier MOG lib, with dates of the Late Lengyel Culture site at Szombathely metro in Hungary and dates of settlement phases 4 and 5 at Moverna vas (south-eastern Slovenia), which can probably be attributed to the Sava Group (Velušček 2011.226-227). Dates from phases II and III of the Salcuta Culture, where, for example, a comparison of a pot with a rounded lower part was found, are also comparable (Fig. 35). According to the results of the 14C AMS analyses, structure II at Ptuj-Solski center is earlier than structures 7, 4, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) at Zgornje Radvanje, and perhaps also Structure IV at Ptuj-Sol-ski center, although typologically well comparable pottery has been discovered in both structures. These structures are earlier than Structure III at Sto-perce, part of the site at Radvanje-Habakuk 2 (Arh 2012) and the date from the post-hole SE 1040 at Zgornje Radvanje. Dates from the mentioned structures at Zgornje Radvanje, as well as from Structure IV at Ptuj-Šolski center, are consistent with the earlier dates of the Lasinja Culture and its related cultures in neighbouring countries, while the dates from Structure III at Stoperce (SE 150), part of the site at Radvanje-Habakuk 2 and from post-hole SE 1040 in Zgornje Radvanje, correlate with later dates of the Lasinja Culture and its related cultures. It is important to note that sites with comparable pottery material have been shown to be chronologically concurrent (Keutschacher See, Pri Muri near Lendava and Brezje near Turnišče) (Fig. 36). Conclusion Comparative analyses of pottery found at the studied settlements and beyond, as well as comparisons of radiocarbon dates show that, based on the presented settlements of the 5th millennium BC in northeastern Slovenia, it is possible to identify three cultural groups, i.e. the Sava, the (Late) Lengyel and the Lasinja Culture. According to the current chronology of the 'the central and southern Slovenian Neolithic and Early Eneolithic' and 14C dates known so far, these settlements date to between the Younger/ Late Neolithic and the Early Eneolithic (Velušček 2011.225-23). Andrenci in western Slovenske gorice represents the extreme south-western site of the Lengyel Culture, while the more or less concurrent Structure I from Stoperce at Haloze belongs to the Sava Group. They are dated to between the end of the 47th century and the first half of the 45th century BC, which is consistent with the earlier dates of the Late Lengyel Culture in western Hungary (Zalaszentbalazs-Szolo-hegyi mezo) and dates of MOG IIa in Austria. The settlement at Ptuj-Šolski center dates to between the end of the 46th and 43rd century BC.43 The comparative analyses of the pottery are not completely consistent with the relative chronological incorporation of Ptuj-Šolski center into the wider Lengyel Culture (Gustin 2005.13, Fig. 1) or Late Lengyel Culture (Kavur2010.71). The pottery found in structures (I, II and IV) shows elements of the Sava Group in central and south-eastern Slovenia, as well as elements already attributed to the Early Eneolithic Lasinja Culture. Comparable pottery assemblages are deemed to have been produced in the early phase (Phase I) of the Lasinja Culture in Austria (Tiefengraber 2004. 219). These phases were followed by the 'Classical' Lasinja Culture. The studied sites passed through two phases: structures 7, 5, 1, 22, 6 and 10 (Phase 1) at Zgornje Radvanje, part of the settlement at Radvanje-Ha-bakuk 2 (Arh 2012.Fig. 10) and the settlement at Hoce-Orglarska delavnica represent the older phase, namely the end of the 44th and 43rd century BC (68.2% probability), with dates corresponding to earlier (!) dates of the Lasinjska Culture and related cultures in neighbouring areas. Structure IV at Ptuj-Solski center was more or less contemporaneous, although pottery from this structure is well comparable with material from Structure II on the same site, while its decoration and forms differ slightly from the material found at Zgornje Radvanje and Hoce-Orglarska delavnica. Differences in decorative techniques, motifs and forms could therefore be regional or chronological, but the latter can be confirmed or disproved only with new 14C dates and new pottery assemblages. The Late Lasinja Culture is presented by pits from the second settlement phase at Stoperce, individual pits in part of the site Radvanje-Habakuk 2 and, according to the 14C date, post-hole SE 1040 at Zgornje Radvanje. This settlement dates to the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 4th millennium BC, where the dates correlate with the later (!) dates of the Lasinja Culture and related cultures in neighbouring countries. Translation: dr. Nives Kokeza 43 One of the two dates from Structure II was, as already stated, not included in further analyses, as five different samples were mixed in one sample prior to dating. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- The paper presents a summary of some of the results of the PhD thesis 'Settlement Structures and Pottery Assemblages in the Fifth Millennium BC in Northeastern Slovenia', which was written under the supervision of prof. dr. Mihael Budja at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana (Kramberger 2014). I am grateful to archaeologist Marija Lubsina Tusek (ZVKDS, CPA Ptuj), head of archaeological excavations at Stoperce, and in 2000 and 2010 at Ptuj-Solski center, to retired archaeologist Mira Strmcnik Gulic, head of the archaeological excavations at Zgornje Radvanje, Hoce-Orglarska delavnica and in 1980-1981 at Ptuj-Solski center, which enabled me to publish this paper. AMS14C dating of the settlement of Zgornje Radvanje was supported by the Group of Archaeology on the Motorways of the Republic of Slovenia (SAAS) at the Institute for Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia (ZVKDS) and the Motorway Company in the Republic of Slovenia (DARS d.d.). References Arh M. 2012. Neo/Eneolitska naselbina Zgornje Radvanje - Habakuk 2. Unpublished undergraduate thesis. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. Artner W., Brandl M., Christandl G., Gutjahr C., Obereder J., Postl W. and Trausner M. 2012. Die kupferzeitliche Höchensiedlung auf der "Kanzel" bei Graz, Steiermark. Fundberichte aus Österreich 50: 43-66. Balen J. 2008. Apsolutni datumi sa zastitnih istraživanja na prostoru Slavonije kao prilog poznavanju kronologije srednjeg eneolitika. Vjesnik Arheoloskog muzeja u Zagrebu 41(3. ser.): 17-35. Banffy E. 1994. Transdanubia and Eastrern Hungary in the Early Copper Age. A Nyiregyhäzi Jösa Andräs Müzeum Evkönyve 36:291-295. 1995a. Neolithic and Copper Age settlements at Hahot and Zalaszentbalazs (Zalaszentbalazs-Pusztateto, Hahot-Szartori I-II). Antaeus 22:35-50. 1995b. Early Chalcolithic settlement at Zalaszentbalazs-Szolohegyi Mezo. Antaeus 22: 71-102. 1995c. South West Transdanubia as a mediating area. On the cultural history of the Early and Middle Chalco-lithic. Antaeus 22:157-196. 1997. Cult objects of the Lengyel culture. Connections and interpretation. Archaeolingua Series Minor 7. Ar-chaeolingua Alapitvany. Budapest. 2002. A unique southeastern vessel type from early Chalcolithic Transdanubia: data on the "Western route". Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hunga-ricae 53: 41-60. Barna J. P. 2003. Közepso rezkori es keso bronzkori tele-pülesreszletek Tornyiszentmiklosrol. J. Kisfaludi (ed.), Re- gészeti kutatasok Magyarorszagon 2001/Archaeological investigations in Hungary 2001. Magyar Nemzeti Mu-zeum. Budapest: 47-62. Bekic L. 2006. Zaštitna arheologija u okolici Varaždina, Arheološka istraživanja na autocesti Zagreb - Goričan i njezinim prilaznim cestama (Sprilozima Darka Kom-še i Zorka Markovicaj/Rescue Archaeology in the Va-raždin Environs, Archaeological Research on the Zagreb Goričan Highway and its Access Roads (With Contributions by Darko Komšo and Zorko Markovic). Ministry of Culture RH. Zagreb. Bonsall C., Horvat Mi., McSweeney K., Masson M., Higham T. F. G., Pickard C. and Cook G. T. 2007. Chronological and Dietary Aspects of the Human Burials from Ajdovska cave, Slovenia. Radiocarbon 49(2): 727-740. Budja M. 1983. Tri desetletja razvoja teorij o poznem neo-litu in eneolitu severozahodne Jugoslavije. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 11: 73-83. 1994. Neolithic Studies in Slovenia: An Overview. Atti della Società per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Re-gione Friuli - Venezia Giulia 8: 7-28. 1995. Neolithic and Eneolithic settlement patterns in the Bela krajina Region of Slovenia. In A. Aspes (ed.), Symposium Settlement patterns between the Alps and the Black Sea 5th to 2nd millenium B.C. Atti del Sipo-sio Internazionale Modelli Insediativi tra Alpi e Mar Nero dal 5° al 2° Millenio A. C., Verona - Lazise 1992. Memore del museo civico di storia naturale di Verona (IIa serie) sezione scienze dell'uomo 4 (1995). Museo civico di storia naturale di Verona. Verona: 119-127. Bronk Ramsey C. 2009. Dealing with Outliers and offsets in Radiocarbon Dating. Radiocarbon 51(3): 1023-1045. Bronk Ramsey C., Lee S. 2013. Recent and planned developments of the program OxCal. Radiocarbon 55(3-4): 720-730. Carneiro A. 2004. Die Interpretation der Keramikfunde von Rabenstein im Lavanttal - Überlegungen zur Lengyelbe-siedlung im Südostalpenraum. Carinthia I (194): 185-254. 2006. Die eingetiefte Siedlungskonstruktion von Mannersdorf an der March in Niederösterreich und die eingetieften Bauten der Lengyelkultur. In A. Krenn-Leeb, K. Grömer and P. Stadler (eds.), Archäologie Österreichs 17/02. Festschrift für Elisabeth Ruttkay. Krems/Donau: 71-81. Cichocki O. 2003. Der Pfahlbau im Keutschacher See. In Samonig B., Studien zur Pfahlbauforschung in Österreich Materialen II. Die Pfahlbaustation des Keutschacher Sees. Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission 51. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Wien: 30-34. Čufar K., Korenčič T. 2006. Raziskave lesa z Resnikovega prekopa in radiokarbonsko datiranje. In A. Velušček (ed.), Resnikovprekop, najstarejša koliščarska naselbina na Ljubljanskem barju = the oldest Pile-Dwelling Settlement in the Ljubljansko Barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 10. Ljubljana: 123-127. Fuchs G. 2002. Kupferzeitliche Funde vom Kalvarienberg, MG St. Peter am Ottersbach, Steiermark. Fundberichte aus Österreich 40:115-127. Gabor I. 2004. Szombathely Öskori települestörtenetenek väzlata Avagy, a romai kor elött is volt elet/Outline of the Pre-historic settlement of Szombathely or life before the Roman Age. Öskurunk 2/Our Prehistory, part 2. Headquarter of the Museums in Vas County. Szombathely. Görsdorf J. 1995. Datierung von Menschenknochen aus dem Gräberfeld Jelšovce. In J. Pavuk and J. Batora (eds.), Siedlung und gräber der Ludanice-Gruppe in Jelšovce (Mit Beiträgen von J. Jakab, M. Fabiš, L. IlMova, E. Per-nicka und J. Görsdorf). Archaeologica Slovaca Monogra-phiae. Studia Instituti Archaeologici Nitriensis Academiae Scientiarum Slovacae 5. Archäologischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Nitra: 205-209. Guirao D., Pla F. and Acosta A. 2014. The archaeometric characterization of Majolica ceramics from Talavera de la Reina and El puente del Arzobispo (Toledo, Spain). Archaeometry 56: 746-763. Guštin M. 2005. Savska skupina lengyelske kulture. In M. Guštin (ed.), Prvi poljedelci, Savska skupina lengyelske kulture/First Farmers, The Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 7-22. Guštin M., Tomaž A. and Kavur B. 2005. Drulovka pri Kra-nju/Drulovka near Kranj. In M. Guštin (ed.), Prvi poljedelci, Savska skupina lengyelske kulture/First Farmers, The Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 37-62. Hahnel B. 1991. Ein Epilengyel-Brandgrab aus Stillfried in Niederösterreich. Fundberichte aus Österreich 29:9-12. Harej Z. 1975. Kolišče ob Resnikovem prekopu - II. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 4:145169. Hertelendi E. 1995. l4Carbon dating of Zalaszentbalzs-Szölöhegyi Mezö (1992-1993). Antaeus 22:157-196. Homen Z. 1985. Prilog proučevanju lasinjskih keramičkih bočica. Muzejski vjesnik 8: 44-46. 1990. Lokaliteti Lasinjske Kulture na Križevačkom po-dručju/Fundorte der Lasinja-Kultur im gebiet von Kri-ževci. Izdanja Hrvatskog arheološkog društva 14 (1989): 51-68. Horvat Ma. 1986. Ajdovska jama pri Nemški vasi - desni hodnik. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 14: 77-88. Horvat Mi., Horvat Ma. 1987. Ajdovska jama pri Nemški vasi. Varstvo spomenikov 29:234-236. Horvat Mi. 1989. Ajdovska jama pri Nemški vasi. Razprave filozofske fakultete. Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete Ljubljana. Ljubljana. 1999. Keramika. Tehnologija keramike, tipologija lončenine, keramični arhiv. Razprave filozofske fakultete. Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete Ljubljana. Ljubljana. 2009. Prvi prebivalci v Posavju. In J. Peternel (ed.), Ukročena lepotica. Sava in njene zgodbe. Javni zavod za kulturo, šport, turizem in mladinske dejavnosti. Sevnica: 25-35. Horvath L., Kalicz N. 2006. Siedlungsfunde der Spätesten phase der Lengyel-Kultur bei Nagykanizsa (südwestungarn) (die Letzten zwei drittel des 5. jahrtausends v. chr., kalibriert). In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube). Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 53-66. Horvath L. A., Katalin H. S. 2003. Das Neolithikum und die Kupferzeit in Südwesttransdanubien. Siedlungsge- schichte und Forshungsstand. Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae 8. Magyar Nemzeti Muzeum. Budapest. 2004. Kupferzeitliche Siedlungen auf dem Fundort Do-bri-Alsö-mezö. Zalai Muzeum 13:55-118. Kalicz N. 1973. Uber die chronologische Stellung der Balaton-Gruppe in Ungarn. In B. Chropovsky (ed.), Symposium über die Entstehung und Chronologie der Badener Kultur. Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bratislava: 131-165. 1975. Siedlungsfunde der Balaton-Gruppe in Nagyka-nizsa. Mitteilungen des Archäologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 4:19-24. 1991. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Kupferzeit im ungarischen Transdanubien. In J. Lichardus (ed.), Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 55(1). Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH. Bonn: 347-387. 2003. Az ujkôkorvégi és rézkori megtelepedés marad-vanyai a Nagykanizsai Inkey-Kapolna mellett (Kr.e. 5. évezred elsö harmadatöl a 3. évezred alsö feléig). Zalai Muzeum 12: 7-49. Karolyi M. 1992. A Korai Rézkor Emlékei vasMegyében/ The Early Copper Age in County vas. Öskorunk 1. Vas Me-gyei Muzeumok Igazgatösaga Szombathely. Szombathely. Simon Katalin H. 1987. Neolit és rézkori telepûlések Te-kenye hataran. Zalai Muzeum 1: 7-46. Kavur B., Tomaž A. and Mileusnic Z. 2006. Sodolek - naselje Bakrene dobe. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 121-128. Kavur B. 2010. Polomljena kolesa in pozabljene živali. Odsevi predmetov na razpotjih kultur/Broken wheels and forgotten animals. Reflection of artifacts on the crossroads of cultures. Zbornik soboškega muzeja 15: 63-75. Kavur B., Tusek I. 2011. Ivankovci (Ivânkôc)pri Lendavi. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 15, Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Kerman B. 2013a. Kalinovnjekpri Turnisču. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 33. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. 2013b. Gornje njive pri dolgi vasi. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 36. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Korošec J. 1951. Prazgodovinska naselbina na Ptujskem gradu. Dela/Opera 6. Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti, razred zgodovinske in družbene vede. Ljubljana. 1964. Kulturne ostaline na kolišču ob Resnikovem prekopu odkrite v letu 1962. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 1:25-46. 1965. Neo- in eneolitski elementi na Ptujskem gradu. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 2: 5-51. Korošec Pa. 1975. Poročilo o raziskavah v Ajdovski jami 1967. leta. Poročilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 4:170-187. Košturik P. 1979. Neoliticke sidlište s malovanu kerami-kou u Jaromerice n. R. Studie Archaeologickeho Üstavu Československe Akademie ved v Brne. Academia Praha. Prague. Kramberger B. 2010a. Neolitska in zgodnjeeneolitska naselbina Zgornje Radvanje, kompleks 10. Unpublished undergraduate thesis. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. 2010b. Zgornje Radvanje, Cluster 10 - a Late Neolithic pit with a structure and smaller pits. Documenta Praehistorica 37:311-338. 2014a. Naselbinske strukture in keramični zbiri v petem tisočletju pred našim štetjem v severovzhodni Sloveniji. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. Krenn-Leeb A. 2006. Chronologietabelle des Neolithikums in Ostösterreich. In A Krenn-Leeb, K. Grömer and P. Stadler (eds.), Archäologie Österreichs 17(02). Festschrift für Elisabeth Ruttkay. Krems/Donau: 195, Fig. 2. Kuča M., Schenk Z. and Nyvltova Fišakova M. 2011. Leng-yelske sidlište v Dluhonicich (okr. Prerov) a Jeho postave-ni v ramci počatku mladšiho stupne Lengyelske Kultury v prostoru Jjižniho vstupu Moravske brany (A Lengyel settlement in Dluhonice (Prerov district) and its position with reference to the outset of the later phase of the Lengyel culture in the Southern section of Moravska brana). Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae sociales: 33-57. Lazarovici G., Lazarovici C. - M. 2013. Etapa veche din ate-lierul de bijuterii de la Cheile Turzii - "Pe§tera Ungurea-sca". Arheovest I (In Memoriam Liviu Maruia. Interdi-sciplinaritate in Archaeologie si Istorie, Timi$oar - 7 decembrie 2013): 55-90. Lubšina Tušek M. 2004. Izročilo preteklosti med Potrčevo in Volkmerjevo cesto na Ptuju. In L. Šuligoj (ed.), Zbornik splošne bolnišnice dr. Jožeta Potrča Ptuj 1874-2004. Ptuj: 73-80. Makkay J. 1976. Problems concerning Copper Age chronology in the Carpathian Basin. Acta Archaeologica Aca-demiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 28:251-300. Markovic Z. 1985. Pogrebni običaji i društveno raslojeva-nje u neolitu, eneolitu i početku brončanog doba sjever-ne Hrvatske. Podravski zbornik 11:157-167. 1994. Sjeverna Hrvatska od neolita do brončanog doba. Problem stanovništva in kultura sjeverne Hrvatske od ranog neolita dopočetka brončanog doba. Muzej Grada Koprivnica. Koprivnica. Mason P., Andrič M. 2009. Neolithic/eneolithic settlement patterns and Holocene environmental changes in Bela krajina (South-Eastern Slovenia). Documenta Praehistorica 36: 327-335. Meiert Grootes P., Josée Nadeau M. 2013. Radiocarbon 14C analysis. In Novsak M., Tomaž A. and Plestenjak A. (eds.), Brezje pri Turnišču. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije 40. Ljubljana: 126-127. Mlekuž D., Ogrinc N., Horvat Mi., Žibrat Gašparič A., Gams Petrisič M. and Budja M. 2013. Pots and food: uses of pottery from Resnikov prekop. Documenta Praehistorica 40:131-146. Murko M. 2012. Maribor - arheološko najdišče Zgornje Radvanje. Varstvo spomenikov 47:139-142. Neugebauer J. W., Neugebauer-Maresch C. 2003. Die Doppel-Sonderbestattung der Bemaltkeramik von Reichersdorf, Marktgemeinde Nussdorf ob der Traisen, Niederösterreich. In E. Jerem, P. Raczky (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nändor Kalicz zum 75. Geburtstag, Archaeolingua 15. Archaeolingua Alapitvany. Budapest: 327-334. Novšak M., Tomaž A. and Plestenjak A. 2013. Brezje pri Turnišču. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije 40. Ljubljana. Obelic B., Bronic I. K. and Horvatinčic N. 2002. Rudjer Boškovic Institue radiocarbon measurements XV. Radiocarbon 44(2): 601-630. Obereder J. 1989. Die jungneolitische Siedlung Raaba-berg bei Graz. Unpublished undergraduate thesis. University of Vienna. Vienna. Oross K., Marton T., Whittle A., Hedges R. E. M. and Cramp L. J. E. 2010. Die Siedlung der Balaton-Lasinja-Kul-tur in Balatonszarzo-Kis-erdei-dölö. In J. Sutekova, P. Pa-vuk, P. Kalabkova and B. Kovar (eds.), Panta Rhei: Studies in Chronology and Cultural Development of South- Eastern and Central Europe in Earlier Prehistory Presented to Juraj Pavúk on the Occasion of his 75th Birthday. Studia Archaeologica et Mediaevalia 11. Comenius University in Bratislava. Bratislava: 381-407. Pahič S., Lorber V. 1954. Andrenški vrh. Arheološki vest-nik 5/2:335-360. Pahič S. 1956. Neolitske jame v Brezju pri Zrečah. Arheološki vestnik 7/2: 227-241. 1973. Najstarejše seliščne najdbe v severovzhodni Sloveniji. Arheološki vestnik 24:12-30. 1976. Seliščne najdbe v zahodnih Slovenskih goricah -Andrenci, Spodnji Duplek, Spodnji Porčič, Vumpah. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 5:29-83. Pahič V. 1983. Zbelovo. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 11: 85-137. Plestenjak A. 2010. Gorice pri Turnišču. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 12. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Raczky P. 1974. A Lengyeli kultúra legkésobbi szakaszá-nak leletei a dunántúlon/Funde der spätesten phase der Lengyel-kultur in Westungarn. Archaeologiai Értestito 101: 185-210. Radu A. 2002. Cultura Säcufa in Banat. Editura Banati-ca. Timi§oara. Radoescu L. 2009. Cateva consideratii cu privire la evo-lutia §i chronologia culturii Salcuta. Analele Universita tii "Constantin Brancu$i" din Tärgu Jiu, Seria Litere si §tiinfe Sociale 2(2009): 33-44. Rakovsky I. 1986. Die Neige der Ältern Stüfe der Kultur mit mährischer bemalter Keramik im Lichte der funde aus Jezerany-Maršovice und Brno-Bystrc. In B. Chropowsky, H. Friesinger (eds.), Internationales symposium über der Lengyel-Kultur (Nové Vozokany). Archäologisches Institut der Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenshaften. Nitra-Wien: 243-250. Regenye J. 1994. Elozetes jelentés a Lengyeli kultúra Szent-gáli Telepének Kutatásáról. A Veszprém Megyei Múzeu-mok Kózleményei 19-20: 69-88. 2006. Kaposvár-Gyertyános, die Siedlung der Lengyel-Kultur. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 67-74. 2007. The Late Lengyel culture in Hungary as reflected by the excevation at Veszprem. In J. K. Kozlovski, P. Raczky (eds.), The Lengyel, Polgär and related cultures in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe. The Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences Krakow, Eöt-vös Lorand University Institute of Archaeological Sciences Budapest. Krakow: 381-396. Reimer P. J. and 29 authors 2013. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves, 0-50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55(4): 1869-1887. Rice P. M. 1987. Pottery Analysis, A Sourcebook. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago, London. Ruttkay E. 1976. Die Keramikformen der Lengyel-Kultur in Österreich. Fundberichte aus Österreich 15:141-148. 1994. Neues Tonstempel der Kanzianiberg-Lasinja-Grup-pe. Mitteilungen der Antropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 123/124: 221-238. Samogyi K. 2000. A Balaton-Lasinja-Kultüra Leletanyaga Somogy Megyeben. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 2000:5-48. Samonig B. 2003. Studien zur Pfahlbauforschung in Österreich Materialen II. Die Pfahlbaustation des Keut-schacher Sees. Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission 51. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Wien. Sankrot P. and Zapotocky M. 2011. Eneoliticky sidlistni areal (jordanovska a rivnacska kultura) s kruhovym ob-jektem - rondelem v Tuchomericih, okr. Praha-zapad (Das äneolithische Siedlungsareal der Jordanov- und Rivnac-Kultur mit Rondell in Tuchomerice, Landkr. Prag-West). Pamätky Archeologicke 52:59-116. Sraka M. 2012. 14C calendar chronologies and cultural sequences in 5th millennium cal BC in Slovenia and neighbouring regions. Documenta Praehistorica 39:349-376. 2013. 14C dates and stratigraphy: reconsidering the sequences at Moverna vas (Bela Krajina, southeastern Slovenia). Documenta Praehistorica 40:313-321. Stadler P., Ruttkay E. 2007. Absolute chronology of the Moravian-Eastern-Austrian Group (MOG) of the painted pottery (Lengyel-culture) based on new radiocarbon dates from Austria. In J. K. Kozlovski, P. Raczky (eds.), The Leng-yel, Polgär and related cultures in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe. The Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences Krakow, Eötvös Lorand University Institute of Archaeological Sciences Budapest. Krakow: 117-146. Straub P. 2006. Közepso rezkori települes Sormas hatara-ban/Middle Copper Age settlement at Sormas. J. Kisfaludi (ed.), Régészeti kutatâsok Magyarorszâgon 2005/Ar-chaeological investigations in Hungary 2005. Magyar Nemzeti Muzeum. Budapest: 33-60. Strmčnik Gulič M. 1983. Ptuj. Varstvo spomenikov 25: 193. 1989. Hoče. Varstvo spomenikov 31: 224-226. 1990. Hoče. Varstvo spomenikov 32:173-175. Savel I. 1984. Poročilo o raziskovanju od leta 1981 do 1983 v Safarskem. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 12:39-72. 1992. Bukovnica - rezultati terenskih raziskav v letih 1987-1988. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 20:57-85. 1994. Prazgodovinske naselbine v Pomurju. Pomurska založba. Murska Sobota. 2006. Prekmurje v mlajši kameni dobi. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Dona-vo/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 89-94. 2009. Pod Kotom - jug pri Krogu I/II. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 7. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Savel I., Karo S. 2012. Popavapri Lipovcih 1. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 30. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Savel I., Sankovič S. 2011. Pri Muri pri Lendavi. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije 23. Ljubljana. Tiefengraber G. 2004. Jungneolithische Funde vom Rabenstein bei St. Paul im Lavanttal. Carinthia I (194): 185-254. 2006a. Zum Forschungsstand des Neolithikums in der Steiermark. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Leng-yel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 81-88. 2006b. Jungneolitische funde aus Čatež-Sredno polje. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 229-234. Tomanič-Jevremov M., Tomaž A. and Kavur B. 2006a. Or-mož-Škoršičev vrt. In A. Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Len-gyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 155-174. 2006b. Neolitske in bakrenodobne najdbe s Ptujskega gradu. In A. Tomaž (ur.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 175-194. Tomaž A. 1999. Časovna in prostorska strukturiranost neolitskega lončarstva: Bela krajina, Ljubljansko barje, Dinarski kras. Unpublished undergraduate thesis. University of Ljubljana. Ljubljana. 2010. Neolitska keramika iz najdišča Čatež-Sredno polje: prispevek k poznavanju neolitskega obdobja v osrednji Sloveniji. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Primorska. Koper. 2012. Turnišče. Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 28. Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije. Ljubljana. Tomaž A., Kavur B. 2006. Zemlja in ogenj. Univerza na Primorskem. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper. Turk P. 2010. Priložnosti in pasti radiokarbonske dataci-je iz neolitske naselbine v Dragomlju. Argo 53/1:41-44. Turk P., Svetličič V. 2005. Neolitska naselbina v Dragomlju. In M. Guštin (ed.), Prvi poljedelci, Savska skupina lengyelske kulture/First Farmers, The Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 65-79. Tušek I. 1999. Hardek. Varstvo spomenikov 38:35-46. Velušček A. 2005. Kratna nad Kamnikom, Gradišče pri Stiski vasi. In M. Guštin (ed.), Prvi poljedelci, Savska skupina lengyelske kulture/First Farmers, The Sava Group of the Lengyel Culture. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 23-28. 2006. Resnikov prekop - sondiranje, arheološke najdbe, kulturna opredelitev in časovna uvrstitev. In A. Velušček (ed.), Resnikov prekop, najstarejša koliščarska naselbina na Ljubljanskem barju = the oldest Pile- Dwelling Settlement in the Ljubljansko Barje. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 10. Ljubljana: 19-86. 2011. Spaha in kronologija osrednje- in južnosloven-skega neolitika ter zgodnejšega eneolitika/Spaha and chronology of central and south Slovenian Neolithic and Early Eneolithic. In A. Velušček (ed.), Spaha. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 22. Ljubljana: 201244. Virag S. 2003a. Settlement historical research in Trans-danubia in the first half of the Middle Copper Age. In E. Jerem, P. Raczky (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nändor Kalicz zum 75. Geburtstag, Archaeolingua 15. Archaeolingua Alapitvany. Budapest: 375-400. Virag S. M. 2003b. Közepso rezkori keramialeletek Zala-var-Basaszigetrol. A Balaton-Lasinja kultura tipologiajanak es belso kronologiajanak kerdeseirol. Zalai Müzeum: 3752. Virag Z. M., Figler A 2007. Data on the settlement history of the Late Lengyel period of Transdanubia on the basis of two sites from the Kisalföld (small Hungarian plain). A preliminary evaluation of the sites Gyor-Szabadretdomb and Mosonszentmiklos-Palmajor. In J. K. Kozlovski, P. Raczky (eds.), The Lengyel, Polgär and related cultures in the Middle/Late Neolithic in Central Europe. The Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences Krakow, Eötvös Lorand University Institute of Archaeological Sciences Budapest. Krakow: 345-364. Wiener M. H. 2012. Problems in the measurement, calibration, analysis, and communication of radicarbon dates (with special reference to the prehistory of the aegean world. Radiocarbon 54(3-4): 423-434. Zalai-Gaal I. 1982. A lengyeli kultura kronologiai kerdesei a Del-Dunantulon. A Szekszärdi Beri Balogh Ädäm Müzeum Evkönyve 10-11:3-58. 2003. Das Henkelgefäß aus Györe: Ein Beitrag zu den chronologischen und kulturellen Beziehungen der Len-gyel-Kultur. In E. Jerem, P. Raczky (eds.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nändor Kalicz zum 75. Geburtstag, Archaeolingua 15. Ar-chaeolingua Alapitvany. Budapest: 285-310. Žižek I. 2006a. Eneolitska naselbina Hardek. In A Tomaž (ed.), Od Sopota do Lengyela, prispevki o kamenodobnih in bakrenodobnih kulturah med Savo in Donavo)/ Between Sopot and Lengyel, contributions to stone age and copper age cultures between the Sava and the Danube. Založba Annales (Annales Mediterranea). Koper: 129-140. 14 I finds from the years 1954-1955 Pl. 1. Andrenci. Structure A - layer A1, layer A2 and finds from 1954-1955. Pottery. Pl. 3. Stoperce. Structure I - layer SE128. Pottery. SCALE 1:4 SE 52 Pl. 4. Stoperce. Structure III - layer SE 150. Pit SE 52. Pottery. Pl. 5. Ptuj-Solski center. Structure IV - layers SE 410, 430 and 435. Pottery. 107 108 Pl. 6. Ptuj-Solski center. Structure II - gray-yellowish brown layer. Pottery. Structure 22 - SE 853 Pl. 7. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 22 - SE 820 and SE 853. Pottery. Pl. S. Zgornje Radvanje. Structures 6 (SE 250 = 252 = 226) and 7 (SE 16 = IS = 20 = 25). Pottery. Structure 1 Pl. 9. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 4 - SE 1128 (142-143,145-146), SE 1102 (144). Structure 1 - SE 623 (147, 153), SE 625 (148), SE 599 (149-152). Pottery. Pl. 10. Zgornje Radvanje. Structure 10 - SE 1004 (154-157), SE 1040 (158-159) and SE 1027 (160-164). Pottery. Pl. 11. Hoce-Orglarska delavnica. Pit-house I. Pottery. Pl. 12. Hoce-Orglarska delavnica. Pit-houses II and III. Pottery. Appendix Fabric Macroscopic description Granularity Quantities of different fabrics AN STl SC RAD H ST2 LM01 Ai3;C2i;E3i;E2i 1 1 // / / LM02 Ai3;C23;E3i;E2i 1 1 3 133 628 54 23 LM03 Ai3;C23;E3i;E23 1 / /5 29 4 2 LM04 A2i;Ai3;C2i;E3i;E2i 1 31 // / / / LM05 A2i;Ai3;C23;E3i;E2i 1 / 2 / 39 5 6 LM06 A2i;Ai3;C3i;C23;E3i;E22 1 / / / 13 3 / LM07 A2i;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i 1 / 1/ 24 54 LM08 A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E4i;E3i;E22 1 / / / 1 / / LM09 A3i;A2i;Ai3;C2i;E3i;E2i 1 88 / / / / / LM10 A3i;A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E2i 1 / 12 112 177 20 22 LM11 A31;A21;A13;C31;C22;E31;J31 1 / / / 23 1 / LM12 A31;A21;A13;C31;C22;E32;E22;J31 1 / / / 40 / / LM13 A3i;A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E4i;E32;E23 1 / / / 5 / / LM14 A3i;A2i;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i 1 / // 6 16 / LM15 A4i;A3i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E2i 1 /1/627 LM16 A4i;A3i;Ai3;C2i;E3i;E2i 1 1 / / / / / LM17 A5i;A3i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i 2 / / / 1 / / LM18 A3i;A2i;Bi3;Ai3;C2i;E3i 2 / / / / / 1 LM19 A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E2i 2 / 7 132 55 / LM20 A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;D3i;E3i;E2i 2 / / / 1 / / LM21 A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E22 2 / / 58 / / / LM22 A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E22 2 / / / 4 / / LM23 A3i;A22;Ai3;C2i;D33;E3i 2 7 / / / / / LM24 A3i;A22;Ai3;C2i;E32;E22 2 1 / / / / / LM25 A3i;A22;Ai3;C22;E3i 2 10 // / / / LM26 A3i;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i 2 / / 43 50 7 5 LM27 A31;A22;A13;C31;C22;E31;E21;J31 2 / / / 36 / / LM28 A31;A22;A13;C31;C22;E31;E22;J31;J23 2 / / / 6 / / LM29 A3i;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E22 2 / 11 / / / 1 LM30 A3i;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E22;J3i 2 / 5 / 29 / / LM31 A3i;A22;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i 2 / 1/ 71 19 LM32 A3i;A22;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i;J3i 2 / / / 6 / / LM33 A23;Ai3;C22;E4i;E3i;E22 2 / / / 2 / / LM34 A23;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E2i 2 / 1 / 17 8 / LM35 A23;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i;E2i 2 / 1 / 4 5 / LM36 A23;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E2i 2 / / 48 / / / LM37 A23;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E23;J2i 2 / / / 3 / / LM38 A23;Ai3;C32;C23;E3i;E2i 2 / / / 12 1 / LM39 A3i;A23;Ai3;C22;E3i;E22;J2i 2 / / / 19 / 1 LM40 A3i;A23;Ai3;C22;E4i;E3i;E2i;J3i;J2i 2 / / / 15 / / LM41 A3i;A23;Ai3;C3i;C22;E2i 2 / / 1 40 / / LM42 A3i;A23;Ai3;C32;C22;E3i;E22;J2i 2 / / / / / 1 LM43 A3i;A23;C3i;C22,D3i;E4i;E3i;E23 2 / / / 1 / / LM44 A32;A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E2i 3 / / / 26 / / LM45 A32;A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;J3i;J2i 3 / / / 15 / / LM46 A32;A2i;Ai3;C32;C22;E2i 3 / / / 11 / / LM47 A32;A22;Ai3;C2i;E3i 3 7 / / / / / LM48 A32;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i 3 / /1 61 3 12 LM49 A32;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;J3i 3 / / / 6 / / LM50 A32;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E32;E2i;J3i 3 / / / 44 / LM51 A32;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;E33 3 / // / / 4 Fabric Macroscopic description Granularity Quantities of different fabrics AN STl SC RAD H ST2 LM52 A32;A22;A13;C32;C23;E31 3 / / / 27 4 \ LM53 A32;A23;C22;E32;E21 3 / / 10 17 1 / LM54 A32;A23;C41;C31;C22;E32;E21 3 / / / 2 / / LM55 A32;A23;C22;E32;E21;J31;J22 3 / / / 2 / 3 LM56 A33;A22;C31;C22;E31 3 / / / 6 / / LM57 A33;A23;C22;E31 3 / / / 3 / / LM58 A33;A23;C22;E31;E21;J31 3 / / / 12 / / LM59 A4i;A32;A22;Ai3;C3i;C22;D3i;E32 3 / / / 5 / / LM60 A42;A3i;A2i;Ai3;C3i;C22;E3i;E2i;j3i 4 / / / 15 / / LM61 A42;A3i;A2i;Ai3;C22;E3i 4 / / / / / 2 LM62 A42;A3i;A2i;Ai3;C32;C22;E3i 4 / / / / / 2 App. 1. Pottery fabrics and their representation in the Late Neolithic pottery assemblages at Andrenci (AN) and Stoperce 1 (ST1) and Early Eneolithic pottery assemblages at Ptuj-Solski center (SC), Zgornje Radvanje (RAD), Hoce-Orglarska delavnica (H) and Stoperce (ST2). Fabric codes, firstly define type of a particular grain (A - quartz, B - calcium carbonate, C - mica, D - charred organic substance, E - iron oxides, J - undefined white grains), followed by its size (1 - <0.25mm, 2 - 0.26 to 0.50mm, 3 - 0.51 to 2.0mm, 4 - 2.01 to 3mm and 5 - >3mm), and finally their frequency (1 - <5 grains per mm2, 2 - 5 to 10 grains per mm2 and 3 - >10 particles per mm2). ts 3 n co 1 dat S C •«h h ligh ghl rs tter let o fiq 3 n o c t n e e s c i ithi li o e I * d n a o Neo te a d e die u e h gs o le a n o ti at n a 2. App. Documenta Praehistorica XLI (2014) A hoard of astragals discovered in the Copper Age settlement at lepuresti, Giurgiu County, Romania Raluca Kogalniceanu1, Ana llie2, Monica Margarit3, Angela Simalcsik4 and Valentin Dumitrascu5 -5 1 "Teohari Antonescu" County Museum, Giurgiu, RO raluca.kogalniceanu@gmail.com 2 "Princiary Court" Museum Complex, Targoviste, RO; ana_arheo@yahoo.com 3 Valahia University, Targoviste, RO; monicamargarit@yahoo.com 4 Centre of Anthropology, Romanian Academy - lasi branch, RO; angellisimal@yahoo.com 5 "Vasile Parvan" Institute of Archaeology, Bucharest, RO; validumitrascu@yahoo.com ABSTRACT - This article presents the discovery of 25 abraded and perforated ovicaprid astragals in a burned house at the Gumelnifa Copper Age settlement at Iepure$ti in Southern Romania. They were analysed in terms of their processing, of the taphonomic processes that affected them (burning), and of their spatial distribution. These astragals were also analysed in the wider context of more or less similar discoveries made mainly south and east of the Carpathian Mountains, in Romania, but also south of the Danube, in Bulgaria. IZVLEČEK - V članku predstavljamo odkritje 25 odrgnjenih in preluknjanih gležnjic/astragalov ovce/ koze v požgani hiši na bakrenodobni naselbini kulture Gumelnita pri kraju Lepuresti v južni Romuniji. Preučili smo obdelavo, tafonomske procese (žganje) in prostorsko razporeditev teh najdb. Glež-njice/astragale smo preučevali tudi v širšem kontekstu bolj ali manj podobnih najdb, ki so jih izdelovali v glavnem južno in vzhodno od Karpatov v Romuniji, a tudi južno od Donave v Bolgariji. KEY WORDS - abraded and perforated astragals; Copper Age; Gumelnifa settlement; spatial analysis; contextual analysis Introduction The Iepure§ti site is located in Southern Romania, approx. 30km southwest of Bucharest, between the villages of Stalpu and Iepuresti, Giurgiu County, at an altitude of approx. 65m (altimetric reference system - Baltic Sea) (Fig. 1). It is located on the middle course of the Neajlov River, on its flood plain. Today, the river flows approx. 500m north of the site, but is very active, changing its course every three or four years (Ilie 2011.38). It is quite possible that the site was located on its banks in the past (Morintz 2011). The archaeological investigations at this site began in 2007 and continued each year, expanding outside the site, in its immediate surroundings (Schuster et al. 2009; 2010; 2011; 2012; Markussen, Vornicu 2011; Kogalniceanu et al. 2012). Four sections (4 x 4m) were opened on the northern margin of the site in order to establish the stratigraphy. The research was extended into the meadow with a trench of 11 x 1.5m in order to identify a possible defense system. The 2 x 1m test pits around the site following magnetic surveys were aimed at understanding the use of space outside the settlement. Although the investigations in the four sections mentioned above have not been completed, we can assert that the site is the result of prehistoric human activities. The first layer (the most important in terms of the archaeological features investigated: houses, debris areas, etc.) is attributed to the Gumel-nita - Kodjadermen - Karanovo VI cultural complex DOI:io.43i2/dp.4i.i4 283 (hereafter: G-K-KVI). The second layer was represented by a series of pits, attributed to the Early Bronze Age Glina culture. The G-K-KVI cultural complex is known for tell settlements with several layers of habitation and was important for the production and circulation of large copper and gold artefacts. Chronologically, it evolved between 4600 and 3900 calBC (Bem 2001b; Rein-gruber, Thissen 2009; Brehard, Bald§escu 2012. 3169). Although, based on pottery styles, the existence of regional expects and internal modifications is accepted (three evolution phases have been distinguished), much is still unknown about the social and territorial organisation of these communities due to the state of field research and published results. The site is located on a levee and has the appearance of a small mound (Fig. 2), a characteristic common to a large number of G-K-KVI sites on the Gava-nu-Burdea Plain considered to be tell settlements (Andreescu, Mirea 2008; Bem et al. 2001; Ilie 2011). In spite of this, the stratigraphy of this site is different from that of the tells located along the Danube (Oltenita, Cascioarele, Pietrele, Ruse, Harso-va, Bordusani) which are characterised by important depositions that vary between 3-12m of the habitation layers, and also from that of the tells on the Gaavanu-Burdea Plain. The ongoing research at the G-K-KVI sites in the Bucsani and Vitane sti-Laceni micro areas (Haita 2001a; 2001b) suggests a different type of behaviour, the sites being formed by multiple settlements in the same place interposed by alluvial levels which mark periods of abandonment. In this context, the excavations at Iepuresti diversify the image of this period concerning the habitation types of Gumelnita communities on this plain north of the Danube. The discovery in the last four years of excavation (2010-2013) of 25 astragals (see Tab. 1 and Figs. 3-4) in the G-K-KVI layer must be regarded as diversifying our understanding of social organisation, both through the type of site and through the types of artefacts specific to certain types of site. The finds come from at least 13 individuals of Ovis aries or Capra hircus and underwent modifications consisting of drilling, abrading and burning. Morphology and modifications of the finds The astragal is a short, compact bone located in the ankle joint. The family Bovidae (including sheep and goat) has a distinctive astragal with a double-pulley at the extremities and four distinct facets. It Fig. 1. Location of the site. has a characteristic shape (cube-like) with four sides and a depression on the dorsal surface (Fig. 5). The astragal ossifies relatively early in the maturation process, making it difficult to distinguish between sub-adult and adult animals. The only indicator of age is the porosity of the bone surface observable in very young individuals (Reitz, Wing 2008). The 25 sheep/goat astragals, complete (17) or fragmentary (8), are extremely burned (Fig. 6a, e, i), and vary in colour, from black to white, except for two examples (Tab. 2). In order to modify the anatomical morphology, the astragals were abraded on the four sides, which helped to reduce the protuberances specific to this type of bone, which finally gave the pieces an approximately rectangular form (Fig. 6b, d, g, h, j, l). A perforation was made in the centre by boring alternately from each side. The dimensions are uniform, being determined both by the selection of a single species, and by the similar processing technique (see Tab. 2). At the beginning of our analysis, we started, a priori, from several assumptions concerning the technique used to make these pieces. These suppositions were later confirmed or disproved by microscopic study. The plantar side of all the examples was abraded, acquiring a perfectly flat aspect, unlike the dorsal, lateral and medial sides, whose morphology was modified to varying degrees. The abrasion scratches are oblique to the axis of the piece and parallel with each other, but are hard to detect even at a magnification of 200x due to the deterioration of the surface caused by burning. We supposed that the rectilinear edges might have been created through previous processing (e.g., cutting by sawing) but we have not been able to identify any marks of this nature. Our conclusion is that they were transformed exclusively through an abrasive action of linear friction. Other observations were formulated regarding the central perforations made, with just one exception, at the level of the depression on the dorsal side. It is not by chance that this area was used, as it is the thinnest surface and therefore the surface easiest to perforate. We could have supposed that these pieces were elements destined to be attached to something, and that the abrasion was made at the same time as the perforation to eventually create an ornament. Yet, as a second hypothesis, we also considered a function in two stages, i.e. the piece might have been used as a polisher in an abrading action on a highly abrasive surface (ceramics, perhaps), using a new side as the different faces were worn out, until their final exhaustion (until the piece could not be held for abrading). During a second stage, the piece might have been perforated and converted into a bead, part of a necklace. Yet again, an examination by microscope showed that the abrasion followed the perforation, as it had destroyed its edges, and also that the pieces were suspended for a long time on a thread, as the scratches from the perforation process have been preserved in only a few cases (Fig. 6c, f, k). The conclusion is that, regardless of the function they had, the items were perforated at the beginning of the process of technological transformation. Concerning the burning of the astragals, the criteria used for analysis were as follows: • the colour of the exterior surface of the bone; • the pattern of cracking of the external bone; • the presence/absence of warping. Fig. 2. Aerial image of the site (image from ANCPI). A general observation is that the astragals were burned in a dry state, and that the burning was uneven. The analysed pieces are not deformed or contracted; there are no fissures deep in the bone; they are not white-coated, and the colour inside the bone is yellow-brownish. The bone wall displays a variety of colours (according to the RGB scale), varying from dark brown No. Piece no. Year of discovery Section Square Depth (m) (in relation to a '0' point) Side 1 373 2010 S2 C3 -1-13 R 2 396 2010 S2 C3 -1.01 L 3 404 2010 S2 B4 -1.18 R 4 408 2010 S2 A-D/3-4 -0.90 -1.10 R 5 422 2011 S2 B4 -0.96 L 6 423 2011 S2 B4 -0.96 L 7 424 2011 S2 B4 -0.96 L 8 425 2011 S2 B4 -0.96 R 9 428 2011 S2 C4 -0.98 L 10 430 2011 S2 B3 -1.08 L 11 431 2011 S2 B4 -1.07 R 12 432 2011 S2 B4 -1.18 R 13 433 2011 S2 C4 -1.18 R 14 437 2011 S2 B3 -1.03 L 15 439 2011 S2 B4 -1.09 R 16 441 2011 S2 B4 -1.09 L 17 486 2011 S2 B4 -1.19 R 18 489 2011 S2 B4 -1.19 L 19 490 2011 S2 C4 -1.17 L 20 560 2011 S2 A-D/3-4 - R 21 562 2012 S2 A-D/3-4 - L 22 638 2012 S2 C3 -1.26 L 23 690 2012 S2 C4 -1.29 R 24 751 2013 S2 A4 -1.47 L 25 753 2013 S2 A4 -1.48 R Tab. 1. List of discovered astragals, indicating the year of discovery, the location within the excavation, the depth and whether they were left or right side. (200°C) through black (300°C) and grey-brown (400°C) to light brown (500°C), dark grey (600°C) and light grey (700°C). In two cases a temperature of 800°C (dark beige) and even 900°C (light beige) were reached (these values are on the threshold of calcination). In conclusion, the burning temperature can be ascribed to an interval between 200°C and 700°C (Walker et al. 2008). In ten cases, the temperature did not exceed 400-500°C (nos. 373, 396, 404, 431, 433, 437, 489, 490, 562, and 690) (Fig. 7a). In another eleven cases (nos. 422, 423, 424, 425, 428, 430, 432, 439, 441, 486, and 560), the temperature reached 600-700°C (Fig. 7b). The bone wall indicates higher temperatures, of 800-900°C, in two cases (nos. 638 and 408), where the presence of whitish areas indicates temperatures close to those required for calcination (Fig. 7c). There is one additional observation concerning astragal no. 408. This fragment, unlike the others, seems to have undergone uniform burning. It appears white-coated, meaning that there is a whitewash layer of Fig. 3. Image of astragals in situ. approx. 1mm that 'coats' the rest of the dark-coloured bone tissue. In addition, the external surface is dotted with quite deep fissures that form a network. All these traits are characteristic of burning of fleshed or recently de-fleshed remains ('green' bones). Nonetheless, we remain reserved concerning the Fig. 4. All 25 astragals found in Section 2. state of bone at the time of burning because there is only half of it present in the sample. Cracks were recorded in nine out of 25 astragals (nos. 373, 408, 422, 424, 437, 490, 560, 638, and 690). The pattern of cracks is not uniform (as it usually is on long bones), but appears as a network (similar to the patterns that would appear on cranial vault bones). With the exception of astragal no. 408, which has both surface and profound cracks (Fig. 8a), in all the other cases the cracks are superficial (Fig. 8b), i.e. they extend for a maximum of 1mm into the bone tissue (although they are visible to the naked eye). Only two astragals (nos. 751 and 753) of the 25 appear to be unburned. In these two cases, the colour of the external bone wall is not typical of unburned (animal or human) bone: while bone that is not touched by flames would generally be reddish or reddish-beige, the astragals nos. 751 and 753 are greyish-beige (Fig. 9). It is possible that these astragals were close to a heat source, but were not been touched directly by the flames. Context of discovery Due to the location of the site in the flood plain of the Neajlov River, the archaeological layers underwent significant pedogenetic degradation, which makes the reading of traces of Chalcolithic human activity difficult. The 23 burned astragals, as well as the two unburned ones, were not found in a vessel or assembled in a more restricted area, but dispersed over an area of 2.5m2, and at different depths. We tried to analyse the characteristics of their dispersal and to answer several other questions to determine if they were part of a hoard. Abrasion Perforation Morphometry IU si "5 s r or T3 n E £ E £ s s e E £ r ter e E 0 IU T3 'w IU si IU si IU si n o n io si io ti a u _o r £ £ -C t -0 3 £ n IE t E ia T5 n io ti Observations a) u