Yabalkovo - Chipped Stone Industry

1

YABALKOVOvolume 1.

The Early Neolithic site of Yabalkovo originated from the end of the 7th, or the very beginning of the 6th mill. BC. Its life thrives for a few hundred years till the end of the 6th mill. BC. In the same place, attracted by the favourable natural environment, people settled in the mid. 5th, 3rd and 1st mill. BC. Life here ends in the beginning of the 13th cen. AD, when the Crusaders de-stroyed the fl ourishing mediaeval village with a church, stone architecture and well developed trade.Yabalkovo is the largest in area EN site, explored till now, not only on the Balkans, but in Southeastern Europe and Northwestern Anatolia. The whole inhabited area is ca. 1.2 km by 0.75 km. The central settlement was surrounded by a triple ditch system – three concentric ditches, with a depth of max. 5 m and a width of up to 4 m at the opening, surround an area with a diameter of 220 m. In the encircled space, the places for stone and fl int tools manufac-ture, for storage of supplies, ritual places and the ‘district’ with the luxurious dwellings, etc., were plotted. During the rescue excavations, a huge amount of information was gathered, which we plan to publish in several volumes.You hold Yabalkovo, Volume 1 which has the character of introductory or panoramic publica-tion and includes data not only from the early Neolithic, but also from all later periods pre-sented at the site. We plan to follow it with monographic studies of the ceramics, small fi nds, stone and fl int tools, stock-breeding, agriculture, etc. The editors hope these investigations would be a step forward in our understanding of the Neolithisation of Europe and realising of the process of European enclaves formation which started more than 8000 years ago.

YABALKOVO volume 1.

MARITSA PROJECT volume 2.

Edited by:

J. Roodenberg, K. Leshtakov, V. Petrova

ATE – Ars et Technica Explicatus, SOFIA UNIVERSITY “ST. KLIMENT OHRIDSKI”Sofi a, 2014

4

Yabalkovo, volume 1.

© Jacob Roodenberg, Krassimir Leshtakov, Vanya Petrova, editors, 2014© M. Songül Alpaslan Roodenberg, Chelsea Budd, Aleta Guadelli, Maria Gurova, Ivaylo Dedov, Iliya Hadzhipetkov, Alexander Harizanov, Nikolaj Iliev, Georgi Katsarov, Laszlo Klein, Krassimir Leshtakov, Malcolm Lillie, Philip Machev, Georgi Mavrov, Encho Myanushev, Nikolina Nikolova, Vanya Petrova, Tsvetana Popova, Jacob Roodenberg, Mariana Slavova, Nikolaj Spassov, Asen Stanchev, Nadezhda Todorova, Nikola Tonkov, Milena Tonkova, Dian Vangelov, Zheni Vasileva, Radka Zlateva, authors, 2014© Viktor Paunov, design, 2014© ATE – Ars et Technica Explicatus, publishing, 2014

ISBN 978-619-90348-1-1

All rights preserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,without the prior permission of the publisher.

5

Transliteration / 7

List of Abbreviations / 8

List of Tables and Figures / 9

Preface / 21J. Roodenberg

Chapter I. Introduction. Structure of the fi eldwork. Documentation and archive / 25K. Leshtakov

Chapter II. Quaternary paleogeographic interpretation and geomorphological environment of Early Neolithic Yabalkovo / 51D. Vangelov, F. Machev, L. Klein

Chapter III. Soil analysis in archaeological research. Yabalkovo case study / 65E. Myanushev, A. Stanchev

Chapter IV. Geophysical survey at the Early Neolithic settlement of Yabalkovo / 73N. Tonkov

Chapter V. Cultural environment of Early Neolithic Yabalkovo / 79K. Leshtakov

Chapter VI. Chronicles of the excavations / 119K. Leshtakov

Chapter VII. Settlement topography / 217 Chapter VII. 1. Early Neolithic subterranean structures (pits and ditches). An introduction / 217V. Petrova, N. NikolovaChapter VII. 2. Early Neolithic ditches / 223 Chapter VII. 2. 1. Early Neolithic ditches in Sector North. Stratigraphy / 223 V. Petrova Chapter VII. 2. 2. Early Neolithic ditches in northern part of Sector Southwest. Stratigraphy / 231 V. Petrova Chapter VII. 2. 3. Early Neolithic ditches in southern part of Sector Southwest. Stratigraphy / 253 G. KatsarovChapter VII. 3. Early Neolithic pits / 275 N. Todorova, I. Hadzhipetkov Chapter VIII. The Early Neolithic burials: an overview / 297S. Alpaslan Roodenberg, N. Todorova, V. Petrova

Chapter IX. The Early Neolithic pottery from Yabalkovo. An interim report / 305K. Leshtakov

Chapter X. Early Neolithic small fi nds from Yabalkovo / 341Chapter X. 1. Small fi nds. Introduction / 341 V. Petrova, K. Leshtakov

Contents

6


Chapter X. 2. Stone tools / 353I. HadzhipetkovChapter X. 3. Chipped-stone industry / 371 R. ZlatevaChapter X. 4. Flint assemblage: formal toolkit and functional connotation / 381M. GurovaChapter X. 5. Bone and antler artefacts. Preliminary analysis / 391A. GuadeliChapter X. 6. Loom weights / 403 V. PetrovaChapter X. 7. Ornaments / 409 Zh. Vasileva, I. Hadzhipetkov

Chapter XI. Plant Husbandry of Early Neolithic Yabalkovo / 415Ts. Popova

Chapter XII. Faunal remains from Early Neolithic Yabalkovo / 425 Chapter XII. 1 Bone remains from domestic and wild animals / 425 N. Spassov, N. IlievChapter XII. 2. Molluscs / 433I. Dedov

Chapter XIII. Red ochre / 437I. Hadzhipetkov, F. Machev

Chapter XIV. Stable isotope analyses and AMS dating of human and faunal remains / 441Ch. Budd, M. Lillie

Chapter XV. Yabalkovo’s radiocarbon dates and the spread of agriculture / 447J. Roodenberg

Chapter XVI. Post-Neolithic periods at Yabalkovo / 453Chapter XVI. 1. Ditch from the Early Bronze Age 3, Sector North / 453V. Petrova, K. LeshtakovChapter XVI. 2. Bronze lion fi gurine from a LIA pit, Sector North / 463K. Leshtakov, M. Tonkova, G. MavrovChapter XVI. 3. Late Roman ceramic kiln, Sector North / 469A. HarizanovChapter XVI. 4. Byzantine gold coins from Yabalkovo / 475M. Slavova

List of Contributors / 478

Index / 480

7

Bulgarian letters/Latin transliteration

A B V G D E Zh Z I Y K L M N O P R S T U F H Ts Ch Sh Sht A Y Yu Ya

The main source http://www.translitteration.com/translitera-tion/en/bulgarian/streamlined/. There are some exceptions broadly adopted in the literature due to longstanding tradition, for instance – Bulgaria or Maria.

Cyrillic (Bulgarian) – Latin transliterationused in the volume

А, аБ, бВ, вГ, гД, дЕ, еЖ, жЗ, зИ, иЙ, йК, кЛ, лМ, мН, нО, оП, пР, рС, сТ, тУ, уФ, фХ, хЦ, цЧ, чШ, шЩ, щЪ, ъЬ, ьЮ, юЯ, я

Bulgarian digraphs/Latin transliteration

дж dzhдз dzьо yoйо yoия (end of word) ia

8

EN – Early Neolithic

MN – Middle Neolithic

LN – Late Neolithic

ECh – Early Chalcolithic

Ch – Chalcolithic

LCh – Late Chalcolithic

EBA – Early Bronze Age

MBA – Middle Bronze Age

LBA – Late Bronze Age

EIA – Early Iron Age

LIA – Late Iron Age

MA – Middle Ages

NE – Northeast

NW – Northwest

SE – Southeast

SW – Southwest

NS – North-South

EW – East-West

Abbreviations used in the text


371

Since 2000, the excavations of the settle-ment of Yabalkovo have yielded a large fl int collection, which casts new light on some aspects of the technology, typology and raw material (base) of the chipped-stone industry. Judging from the accom-panying pottery repertoire this industry can be dated to the Karanovo I period of the Early Neolithic. In this preliminary study 1898 artefacts were examined, while the complete assemblage will be analysed at a later stage. In the assemblage, fl akes, including fl akes under 1.5 cm, and chips predominate. Next in line come retouched tools, followed by blades, bladelets and their fragments, and natural forms with-out any attempt at exploitation. Cores and unidentifi able fragments are rather less represented. A few fl int hammerstones also belong to the collection.Natural forms such as pieces and frag-ments, some of which bear traces of initial reduction-like attempts to shape striking platforms, fl aking surfaces, etc., occur in the ensemble, however, the subsequent stages of processing were not carried out. The main method of core preparation was the use of bilateral and more rarely, uni-lateral crests. Three pre-cores have been recognised.One of the specifi c features of the collec-tion is the prevalence of single platform cores. Double platform cores are also nu-merous, while cores with an altered orien-tation are least represented. Small natural pieces and fragments were preferred as initial forms as well as cores made from fl akes. On some fl ake cores we fi nd traces

pointing to the use of a hammerstone. Prob-ably, chance fl akes, obtained in the process of working with hammerstones, were used for the shaping of cores. Cores with concre-tions are an exception. This circumstance and some technological practices refl ect the exploitation of a variety of raw materials with specifi c properties. The shape of the cores can also be regarded in this connec-tion, the prevailing shape being irregular. Single platform cores are most often conical or prismatic, while double platform cores are more or less cylindrical. The cores are usually in the fi nal phase of exploitation. While cores were generally used for the production of fl akes, there were also used for bladelets, or for fl akes and bladelets. Typical blade cores are missing. A consider-able percentage of the artefacts can be iden-tifi ed as microcores (Fig. 1.6). Most fl aking surfaces were situated on the wide part of the initial shapes (Fig. 1.2). On the major-ity of single platform cores fl aking surfaces were short and wide. In some instances the exploitation continued from adjacent and semi-adjacent fl aking surfaces. This was preceded by the shaping and removal of crests from the sides of the cores. Flaking surfaces also appear on the narrow part of the cores. Narrow longitudinal fl aking surfaces occur on double platform cores (Fig. 1.3) and in some cases their exploita-tion was realised simultaneously on both platforms. The variants of fl aking platforms among cores with an altered orientation are numerous and after all other possibilities were exhausted, it must be that detachment occurred from the striking platforms. Single

CHAPTER X. 3. CHIPPED-STONE INDUSTRY

R. Zlateva


cores bear traces of the use of a hard pad/anvil (Fig. 2.6). In most cases, the latter did not go through preliminary preparation. Striking platforms were most often faceted or prepared by more than two strikes. Back parts, as a rule, were not prepared and were left with cortical or natural sur-faces. Only rarely was there preparation from the striking platforms or the sides. In

other cases detachment was realised from the side edges towards the center com-bined with short, broad fl aking surfaces (Fig. 1.1).Flakes predominate in the debitage group. Numerous artefacts under 1.5 cm and chips are an indication that a fl ake produc-tion chain existed within the settlement. Another indication is the high percentage

Fig. 1. Flint artefacts from Yabalkovo: 1-3, 6 –

cores; 4, 5 – trapezes.

373

Chapter X. 3. Chipped-stone industry. R. Zlateva

of fl akes with entirely or partially corti-cal and natural surfaces. There are also characteristic fl akes, core-rejuvenation fl akes, crests, etc. Most often, fl akes were produced from single platform cores, less frequently they were made from cores with an altered orientation, while those from double platform cores were almost entirely absent. Among cross-sections triangular and multifaceted cores were well represented, followed by semi-ellip-tical. Longitudinal profi les are generally straight. Prepared, dihedral, and facetted bases are the most common. Some of the artefacts were used without additional modifi cations. Blades, bladelets and their fragments are about three times less likely to occur than fl akes. Intact artefacts are sporadic. Among the broken pieces we fi nd a high degree of intentional fragmentation. Prod-ucts, the outcome of core preparation and rejuvenation, are almost absent as well as pieces with cortical surfaces. Blades usu-ally have straight edges and a trapezoidal cross-section, those with triangular cross-sections and convex to straight longitudi-nal profi les are less frequent. Most come from single platform cores. Considering these characteristics, there is reason to suppose that elements of the group were detached from cores in an advanced phase of exploitation with convex fl aking sur-faces. The bases were most often prepared. As in the case of fl akes, we fi nd artefacts which utilised retouching and polishing.A considerable number of natural forms have been found – pieces and fragments, without attempts at exploitation.The assemblage typology is dominated by retouched blades (Fig. 4.1-4, 6-7, 11, 15) and end-scrapers (Figs. 2.2-5; 3.1, 3-4). Perforators are less often repre-sented (Fig. 5.3, 6): drills (Fig. 5.7, 14), splintered pieces (Fig. 5.12), truncations (Fig. 5.2, 4-5), backed tools (Fig. 4.8, 12), notched tools (Fig. 4.5, 9) and denticu-lated, retouched fl akes (Figs. 3.6; 6.8, 11), combined implements (Figs. 4.13-14; 5.1). Burins are sporadic (Fig. 4.16) as well as side-scrapers (Figs. 3.5; 5.13). Artefacts of various types are made from bladelets

(Fig. 4.8, 10, 12). Among the retouched fl akes we should mention implements where a steep retouch was carried out on the base (Fig. 5.9), which, compared to the use-wear traces, was defi ned as accomo-dational. Among retouched blades we fi nd specimens with unilateral and bilateral retouching, with a tendency towards the processing of the ventral surfaces, the bases (Fig. 4.1, 7, 15) and the shaping of the tip (Fig. 4.2). Typical and atypical perfora-tors and drills on blades and fl akes also occur. There is a tendency towards the preparation of retouched tools on blades, some of which had a considerable length and width (Fig. 5.1). At the same time, in comparison to other Early Neolithic en-sembles from the region, we should note a comparatively large number of fl ake implements. Various retouched implements show clearly identifi able use-wear traces typical for sickle elements (Figs. 3.4, 6; 4.4, 11). The use of high, steep retouching on various types of implements was observed (Figs. 2.2-3; 3.1-3; 4.7, 13, 15; 5.1, 2, 7). This may, on the one hand, be due to concrete functional needs and an established tech-nological tradition (Gatsov, Gurova 2001) and on the other hand may be related to the use of semi-fabricates with consider-able metric parameters, hence the necessity of their intense modifi cation. The same tendency was observed in the collections from tell Azmak (Златева 1995), Karanovo (Gatsov, Kurchatov 1997) and other sites. In the assemblage we found artefacts with semi-steep and semi-steep/denticulated retouching. Implements with a small bit of retouching are the least represented. Special attention should be given to discs with bi-facial processing and geometric microliths – trapezes (Fig. 1.4-5) and segments (Fig. 3.7). The discs were made through large semi-fl at and half-cover retouching in the central parts, passing towards a splintered retouch towards the edges, which were applied concentrically from the edges to the centre, over natural pieces or fl akes (Figs. 2.7; 3.2). A similar, but not identical method of secondary modifi cation was applied to some retouched fl akes (Fig. 2.1). It should be mentioned that these artefacts have no

374


Fig. 2. Flint artefacts from Yabalkovo: 1, 7 – discs, 2-5 – end-scrapers; 6 – core.

375


Fig. 3. Flint artefacts from Yabalkovo: 1, 3, 4 – end-scrapers; 2 –

disc; 5 – side-scraper; 6 – retouched fl ake; 7 –

segment.

376


Fig. 4. Flint artefacts from Yabalkovo: 1-4, 6,

7, 11, 15 – retouched blades; 5, 9 – notched pieces; 8, 12 – backed

tools; 10 – retouched bl-adelet; 13, 14 – combined

tools; 16 – burin.

377


Fig. 5. Flint artefacts from Yabalkovo: 1 – combined tool; 2, 4, 5 – truncated tools; 3, 6 – perforators; 7, 14 – drills; 8-11 – retouched flakes, 12 – splintered piece; 13 – side-scraper.

378


direct analogues in published Early Neo-lithic chipped-stone ensembles within the present day territory of Bulgaria. How-ever, similar artefacts are known from Anatolia and the Near East (Rosen 1997, 158-64). The artefacts from Yabalkovo could be interpreted as an attempt to imi-tate the production of a certain type, based on local raw materials and techniques. Geometric microliths in an Early Neo-lithic context are known from the Eastern Rhodope Mountains (Zlateva-Uzunova 2004) and Ohoden, Vratsa region (Zlateva-

Uzunova 2009). Comparative data also exist from the Upper Thracian plain, how-ever, they are dated much later. They are mentioned in the literature from the site of Drama-Gerena, along the Tundzha valley and from the tell settlement of Karanovo, the fi nds from the latter site were attrib-uted to the Karanovo II/III, III, III/IV and IV periods (Gatsov 2004). High quality raw materials originating in Northern Bulgaria were identifi ed in the collection. As a rule they were used for the production of retouched implements on blades; they also occur with blades amongst the debitage. Generally, it can

Fig. 6. Raw materials with aesthetic value from Yabalkovo.

379


be claimed that local varieties dominate the assemblage, most likely coming from deposits around the towns of Chirpan and Merichleri, on the opposite bank of the Maritsa River. These sources are predomi-nantly used for the production of fl akes, cores and natural forms. Fewer come from the Eastern and Western Rhodope Moun-tains.The preliminary results of the analysis of the chipped-stone collection from Yabalko-vo point to the presence of two production chains. The fi rst was for the production of blades from high quality raw materi-als. Probably this took place beyond the borders of the site because no cores or waste from their production have yet been found within the studied area. According to the number of artefacts associated with the fi rst chain, we suppose that there was regular supply, probably in the form of fi nished semi-fabricates. Later they were used without additional modifi cation or were turned into tools – chiefl y retouched blades, typical perforators and truncated tools. This presupposes the functioning of specialised ateliers/workshops, associated with the chain.

The second chain was obviously directed towards the production of fl akes and tools from them, based on local raw materials and materials from the Rhodope Moun-tains (Fig. 7). This chain functioned within the area of the settlement and its periph-ery, satisfying a large part of the daily needs of the inhabitants. It can be said that the gathering of small natural pieces took place, in most cases, without any practical use, but in other cases with aesthetic value (Fig. 6). Rarely were there attempts to modify cores and make implements. These conclusions are largely confi rmed by other studies of Early Neolithic assem-blages from Upper Thrace (Gatsov 2004; Gatsov, Gurova 2001; Zlateva 1995). At the same time the specifi cs of the material from Yabalkovo defi ne the site as falling into a contact zone between the tell-type settlements and the open-air settlements found in the Eastern Rhodope Mountains (Zlateva-Uzunova 2004). This probably is a direct refl ection of the geographical position of the settlement in the southern periphery of Upper Thrace, through which one fi nds the shortest route from the East-ern Rhodopes to Anatolia.

Fig. 7. Map of sources of raw material used in

chipping-stone industry at EN Yabalkovo. Pre-

liminary results.

380


REFERENCES

Gatsov, I. 2004. Über manche Characteriristiken der neolithischen Steinensembles in Thrakien. In V. Nikolov, K. Bačvarov (eds.), Von Domica bis Drama. Gedenkschrift für Jan Lichardus. AIM-BAW, Sofi a, 69-72.Gatsov, I., M. Gurova 2001. Some Remarks on the Chipped-Stone Industries of the Earliest Neolithic Cultures in Bulgaria. In Problems of the Stone Age in the Old World. Jubilee Book dedicated to Prof. J. K. Kozlowski, Krakow, 249-263.Gatsov, I., V. Kurcatov 1997. Neolithiche Feursteinartefakte. In S. Hiller, V. Nikolov (eds.), Karanovo, Die Ausgrabungen im Südsektor 1984-1992. Salzburg, 213-233.Rosen, S. 1997. Lithics after the Stone Age. London: Altamira Press.Zlateva-Uzunova, R. 2004. Early Neolithic Chipped Stone Assemblages from the Eastern Rhodope Mountains, South Bulgaria. Preliminary Report. Известия на ИМ Хасково 2, 19-24.Zlateva-Uzunova, R. 2009. Early Neolithic Stone Assemblage from Ohoden – Valoga Site, Building N1. In Г. Ганецовски (ред), Оходен. Селище от ранния неолит. Разкопки 2002-2006г., София, 63-75.Златева, Р. 1995. Кремъчни артефакти от раннонеолитния пласт на селищна могила Азмак. Технико-типологически анализ и статистическа обработка. Дипломна работа за Бакалавърска степен. София: НБУ, (непубл.).

MARITSA PROJECTvolume 2.

YABALKOVOvolume 1.

Language editor Shannon Martinolanguage checkers Nikolina Nikolova, Denitsa Ilieva, Vanya PetrovaDesign and prepress Viktor Paunov

size 21 x 28 cm, number of pages 488

Printing HELIXPRESS Ltd

ATE – Ars et Technica Explicatus, SOFIA UNIVERSITY “ST. KLIMENT OHRIDSKI”Sofi a, 2014

Yabalkovo - Chipped Stone Industry

Documents

Transcript of Yabalkovo - Chipped Stone Industry