- Archaeology, Neolithic Archaeology, Prehistoric Settlement, The Neolithic Revolution, Prehistoric Archaeology, Anatolian Archaeology, and 66 moreAegean Archaeology, Metallurgy, Neolithic & Chalcolithic enclosures, Causewayed Enclosures, Prehistoric Metallurgy, Circular Enclosures, Neolithic of the Balkans, Prehistoric Ditched Enclosures, Recent Prehistory Enclosures, Prehistoric Western Anatolia, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), Balkan prehistory, Early Neolithic, Middle Neolithic, Late Neolithic, Neolithic & Chalcolithic Archaeology, Ditches, Linear Ditches, Pit Enclosure, Enclosure, Hillforts and Enclosures, Neolithic enclosures, RECINTOS DE FOSOS, Burial Customs, Culture, Ritual, Tradition, Megalithic Monuments, Megaliths, Stone Circles, Stonehenge, Michelsberg Culture, Erdwerke, Neolithicum, Enclosures, Prehistoric Warfare, Neolitisation, Mesolithic/Neolithic, Agricultural Economics, Hunters, Fishers and Gatherers' Archaeology, Archaeogenetics, Chalcolithic Archaeology, Paleoclimatology, Climate Change, Climate Change Adaptation, Paleoclimate, Landscape Archaeology, Funerary Archaeology, Ancient DNA, Ancient DNA Research, Dna Sequencing, Settlement Patterns, Early Neolithic Pottery, Petrographic Analysis of Ceramics, Technology of the Neolithic Pottery, Early Neolithic pottery technology, Aşağı Pınar, Mediterranean archaeology, Settlement Organization, Landscape, Anatolian Prehistory, Neolithisation, Greek Archaeology, Settlement & Landscape research, Aegean Prehistory, Neolithic Europe, Aegean Prehistory (Archaeology), and European Prehistory (Archaeology)edit
We organize a session on ditches and enclosures in Southeast Europe. The session #433 entitled as ‘Enclosed Societies: prehistoric ditches of Southeast Europe and the adjacent areas’ will deal with these specific architectural features... more
We organize a session on ditches and enclosures in Southeast Europe. The session #433 entitled as ‘Enclosed Societies: prehistoric ditches of Southeast Europe and the adjacent areas’ will deal with these specific architectural features and their social context. We are glad to invite you to present your paper on our session.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The article presents the earliest Neolithic ditch enclosures that have been registered throughout the Near East and the Balkans. The history of research indicates gaps both in the publishing state of the ditches and the analyzing... more
The article presents the earliest Neolithic ditch enclosures that have been registered throughout the Near East and the Balkans. The history of research indicates gaps both in the publishing state of the ditches and the analyzing strategies. All this restricts the in-depth study of this phenomenon and results in tentative conclusions. The time and space distribution of the known so-far ditches helps however for the distinguishing of some regional patterns and/or interregional similarities. It appears that the ditch-digging practice existed since the time of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) in the Fertile Crescent. There, single ditches were combined with stone walls. Around the mid-seventh millennium BC, ditches occurred sporadically in Western Anatolia and probably in Northern Greece. At the turn of the sixth millennium BC, ditch enclosures became a common feature for the architectural organization of settlements in the regions of Marmara, Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace, the southeast parts of the Central Balkans, as well as in the Southern Caucasus. They differ significantly from the PPN enclosures, which suggests that the idea of their construction evolved in the course of time. The Early Neolithic enclosures in Thrace, for example, display elaborate circular or oval layout of multiple ditches where rich depositional activities have taken place. If we are to assume that the ditch-digging practice originated in the PPN of the Levant and Mesopotamia, then its distribution should have been associated with the Neolithic dispersal westwards of the core area of formation. The final part of the paper is dedicated to the ambiguous concept of the Neolithic package, with a discussion on whether ditch enclosures can be considered as part of the assemblage.
Research Interests:
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic... more
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses
Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological
characteristic are the samples, which are divided into the following groups: denudated rocks, and used for inorganic
temper; clays – tectonic and alluvial; ceramics- pottery fragments and burnt remains of stationary equipment;
organic fillers, pigments and substances for painting and incrustation, organic residues and impressions of mats
and baskets on the pottery bases. . Different methods and analyzes have been applied to solve the problems posed:
cartographic analysis and description of the landscape, morphological and typological analysis, dating, instrumental
methods, chemical analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM ), petrographic analysis etc.
Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological
characteristic are the samples, which are divided into the following groups: denudated rocks, and used for inorganic
temper; clays – tectonic and alluvial; ceramics- pottery fragments and burnt remains of stationary equipment;
organic fillers, pigments and substances for painting and incrustation, organic residues and impressions of mats
and baskets on the pottery bases. . Different methods and analyzes have been applied to solve the problems posed:
cartographic analysis and description of the landscape, morphological and typological analysis, dating, instrumental
methods, chemical analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM ), petrographic analysis etc.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
40 potsherds and five other fired clay fragments from the prehistoric site of Nova Nadezhda in Bulgarian Thrace were analysed by archaeometric techniques. Twenty sherds and a daub fragment were analysed in thin section by optical... more
40 potsherds and five other fired clay fragments from the prehistoric site of Nova Nadezhda in Bulgarian Thrace were analysed by archaeometric techniques. Twenty sherds and a daub fragment were analysed in thin section by optical microscopy; these thin sections, and thick sections of a further 24 sherds were also analysed by SEM-EDX. Results were used to describe the Early Neolithic chaîne opératoire at Nova Nadezhda, which was then compared to pottery production in roughly contemporaneous Starčevo-Criş communities in the central Balkans, to shed light on the Neolithisation process that took place in the 6th millennium BC. A variety of ceramic recipes was used to make different vessel shapes. Analyses of surface coatings were particularly enlightening in terms of provenance and the organisation of pottery production.
Research Interests:
This article presents the current state of research on the Early Neolithic settlement enclosures in the Eastern Balkans (ca. 6200/6000–5500 cal. BC), with a focus set on the ditch-digging practices. A large database was accumulated in the... more
This article presents the current state of research on the Early Neolithic settlement enclosures in the Eastern Balkans (ca. 6200/6000–5500 cal. BC), with a focus set on the ditch-digging practices. A large database was accumulated in the last decade during surface surveys, large-scale excavations, and geomagnetic prospection, demonstrating conclusively that ditch enclosures were indeed a tradition rather than an exception. In the Eastern Balkans, enclosures consist mostly of single or multiple ditches and rarely a combination of ditch and wooden, emplectum, or a stone wall. Moreover, some sites existed long enough that the development of the settlement pattern demanded also changes in the enclosures’ layout and/or design. Most of the settlements were enclosed as early as their initial stages. However, no enclosure features have been identified at the earliest Neolithic sites in the area even though this might reflect biased research strategies.
Research Interests:
Ring ditches are a peculiar phenomenon for the Thracian Bronze Age. The earliest ones are known from the beginning of the period but the high tide of their distribution can be seen at the end of the EBA II and especially during EBA III... more
Ring ditches are a peculiar
phenomenon for the Thracian Bronze
Age. The earliest ones are known from
the beginning of the period but the high
tide of their distribution can be seen
at the end of the EBA II and especially
during EBA III (the so-called Sv. Kirilovo
phase). Referred to as sanctuaries, they
mostly constitute of a ditch enclosing
a circle area (temenos) and an entrance
towards the usually empty inner space.
Sometimes, a single building, a central
pit or group of pits are surrounded
by the enclosure. Such features are
widely spread throughout Central and
Western Europe in the Late Prehistory.
Named as Rondels, Kreisgrabenanlagen
or Ringgrabeanlagen and causewayed or
ditched enclosures, they bring in a similar,
if not the same, idea for certain ritual
activities. The following article does not
aim to present new field data that will fill
in the blanks about the Early and Middle
Bronze Age ditched enclosures. It rather
intents to draw a general outline and
review on the Rondels-problem as well as
to focuses on specific characteristics of
the sanctuaries. I will discuss the already
published information for this type of
sites and will give more detailed insight
into the different theoretical approaches
regarding their interpretational models.
phenomenon for the Thracian Bronze
Age. The earliest ones are known from
the beginning of the period but the high
tide of their distribution can be seen
at the end of the EBA II and especially
during EBA III (the so-called Sv. Kirilovo
phase). Referred to as sanctuaries, they
mostly constitute of a ditch enclosing
a circle area (temenos) and an entrance
towards the usually empty inner space.
Sometimes, a single building, a central
pit or group of pits are surrounded
by the enclosure. Such features are
widely spread throughout Central and
Western Europe in the Late Prehistory.
Named as Rondels, Kreisgrabenanlagen
or Ringgrabeanlagen and causewayed or
ditched enclosures, they bring in a similar,
if not the same, idea for certain ritual
activities. The following article does not
aim to present new field data that will fill
in the blanks about the Early and Middle
Bronze Age ditched enclosures. It rather
intents to draw a general outline and
review on the Rondels-problem as well as
to focuses on specific characteristics of
the sanctuaries. I will discuss the already
published information for this type of
sites and will give more detailed insight
into the different theoretical approaches
regarding their interpretational models.
Research Interests:
This article presents the current state of research on the Early Neolithic settlement enclosures in the Eastern Balkans (ca. 6200/6000-5500 cal. BC), with a focus set on the ditch-digging practices. A large database was accumulated in the... more
This article presents the current state of research on the Early Neolithic settlement enclosures in the Eastern Balkans (ca. 6200/6000-5500 cal. BC), with a focus set on the ditch-digging practices. A large database was accumulated in the last decade during surface surveys, large-scale excavations, and geomagnetic prospection, demonstrating conclusively that ditch enclosures were indeed a tradition rather than an exception. In the Eastern Balkans, enclosures consist mostly of single or multiple ditches and rarely a combination of ditch and wooden, emplectum, or a stone wall. Moreover, some sites existed long enough that the development of the settlement pattern demanded also changes in the enclosures' layout and/or design. Most of the settlements were enclosed as early as their initial stages. However, no enclosure features have been identified at the earliest Neolithic sites in the area even though this might reflect biased research strategies.
Research Interests:
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic... more
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic are the samples, which are divided into the following groups: denudated rocks, and used for inorganic temper; clays-tectonic and alluvial; ceramics-pottery fragments and burnt remains of stationary equipment; organic fillers, pigments and substances for painting and incrustation, organic residues and impressions of mats and baskets on the pottery bases.. Different methods and analyzes have been applied to solve the problems posed: cartographic analysis and description of the landscape, morphological and typological analysis, dating, instrumental methods, chemical analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), petrographic analysis etc.
СОЦИАЛНИ ИЗМЕРЕНИЯ НА ТЕХНОЛОГИЯТА НА КЕРАМИЧНОТО ПРОИЗВОДСТВО В ЮГОИЗТОЧНА БЪЛГАРИЯ ПРЕЗ VI-II ХИЛ. ПР.ХР. РЕЗЮМЕ В тази статия са представени дейности и данни, получени през първата година от проекта. Цел на проекта е изследването на технологията на керамичното производство през праисторията чрез прилагане на различни инструментални методи и опит за характеристика на социалните аспекти на това производство. Изследователският район обхваща Югоизточна България с включени девет основни обекта. Предмет на това инструментално изследване са образци от глини, керамика, отпечатъци от органични останки върху керамика, пигменти за рисуване, оцветяване и инкрустация, отпечатъци от рогозки и кошници. За разрешаването на поставените проблеми са приложени различни методи и анализи: картографски анализ и описание на ландшафта, морфологичен и типологичен анализ, датиране; инструментални методи; химичният състав на пробите, сканираща електронна микроскопия (SEM), петрографският анализ и др.
СОЦИАЛНИ ИЗМЕРЕНИЯ НА ТЕХНОЛОГИЯТА НА КЕРАМИЧНОТО ПРОИЗВОДСТВО В ЮГОИЗТОЧНА БЪЛГАРИЯ ПРЕЗ VI-II ХИЛ. ПР.ХР. РЕЗЮМЕ В тази статия са представени дейности и данни, получени през първата година от проекта. Цел на проекта е изследването на технологията на керамичното производство през праисторията чрез прилагане на различни инструментални методи и опит за характеристика на социалните аспекти на това производство. Изследователският район обхваща Югоизточна България с включени девет основни обекта. Предмет на това инструментално изследване са образци от глини, керамика, отпечатъци от органични останки върху керамика, пигменти за рисуване, оцветяване и инкрустация, отпечатъци от рогозки и кошници. За разрешаването на поставените проблеми са приложени различни методи и анализи: картографски анализ и описание на ландшафта, морфологичен и типологичен анализ, датиране; инструментални методи; химичният състав на пробите, сканираща електронна микроскопия (SEM), петрографският анализ и др.
Research Interests:
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic... more
The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic are the samples, which are divided into the following groups: denudated rocks, and used for inorganic temper; clays-tectonic and alluvial; ceramics-pottery fragments and burnt remains of stationary equipment; organic fillers, pigments and substances for painting and incrustation, organic residues and impressions of mats and baskets on the pottery bases.. Different methods and analyzes have been applied to solve the problems posed: cartographic analysis and description of the landscape, morphological and typological analysis, dating, instrumental methods, chemical analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), petrographic analysis etc.
СОЦИАЛНИ ИЗМЕРЕНИЯ НА ТЕХНОЛОГИЯТА НА КЕРАМИЧНОТО ПРОИЗВОДСТВО В ЮГОИЗТОЧНА БЪЛГАРИЯ ПРЕЗ VI-II ХИЛ. ПР.ХР. РЕЗЮМЕ В тази статия са представени дейности и данни, получени през първата година от проекта. Цел на проекта е изследването на технологията на керамичното производство през праисторията чрез прилагане на различни инструментални методи и опит за характеристика на социалните аспекти на това производство. Изследователският район обхваща Югоизточна България с включени девет основни обекта. Предмет на това инструментално изследване са образци от глини, керамика, отпечатъци от органични останки върху керамика, пигменти за рисуване, оцветяване и инкрустация, отпечатъци от рогозки и кошници. За разрешаването на поставените проблеми са приложени различни методи и анализи: картографски анализ и описание на ландшафта, морфологичен и типологичен анализ, датиране; инструментални методи; химичният състав на пробите, сканираща електронна микроскопия (SEM), петрографският анализ и др.
СОЦИАЛНИ ИЗМЕРЕНИЯ НА ТЕХНОЛОГИЯТА НА КЕРАМИЧНОТО ПРОИЗВОДСТВО В ЮГОИЗТОЧНА БЪЛГАРИЯ ПРЕЗ VI-II ХИЛ. ПР.ХР. РЕЗЮМЕ В тази статия са представени дейности и данни, получени през първата година от проекта. Цел на проекта е изследването на технологията на керамичното производство през праисторията чрез прилагане на различни инструментални методи и опит за характеристика на социалните аспекти на това производство. Изследователският район обхваща Югоизточна България с включени девет основни обекта. Предмет на това инструментално изследване са образци от глини, керамика, отпечатъци от органични останки върху керамика, пигменти за рисуване, оцветяване и инкрустация, отпечатъци от рогозки и кошници. За разрешаването на поставените проблеми са приложени различни методи и анализи: картографски анализ и описание на ландшафта, морфологичен и типологичен анализ, датиране; инструментални методи; химичният състав на пробите, сканираща електронна микроскопия (SEM), петрографският анализ и др.
Research Interests:
Galabovo in Southeast Europe and beyond: Cultural Interactions during the 3rd-2nd millennium BC