UDK 903(234.42-11)"634" Documenta Praehistorica XXV (Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji XXV) Neolithic sequence: the upper Stryama valley in western Thrace (with an appendix: radiocarbon dating of the Balkan Neolithic) Lolita Nikolova Prehistory Foundation, Karlovo, Bulgaria lnikolova@hotmail.com ABSTRACT - The study represents the Neolithic sequence in a newly investigated micro-region in the Balkans - the Karlovo Louland in the upper Stryama valley (north-ivestern Thrace). Recent evidence confirms that during the Early Neolithic III (the period of Karanovo II) in uiestern Thrace the devel-opment of the Karanovo I culture continued. The village of Kliment-Banyata, with some similarity in the pottery to that of Karanovo II, probably represents the end of that stage in the Strjama valley. In addition the chronological definition and the sequences of tke different Neolithic periods and key sites, based on available 14C dates calibrated ivith Oxcal program, version 3-0 are presented. POVZETEK - V članku predstavljamo neolitsko zaporedje novo raziskane balkanske mikroregije - nižanja Karlovo, ki leži v zgornji dolini reke Strjame (severozahodna Trakija). Novi podatki potrjujejo, da se je v času zgodnjega neolitika III (obdobje Karano vo II) v zahodni Trakiji nadaljeval razvoj kulture Karanovo I. Vas Kliment-Banyata, ki kaže nekatere podobnosti s keramiko Karanovo II, verjetno predstavlja konec te faze v dolini Strjame. V dodatku članka so kronološka definicija in zaporedja različnih neolitskih obdobij ter ključnih najdišč. Podatki temeljijo na dostopnih datumih >4C, ki so kalibrirani s programom Oxcal, verzija J. 0. INTRODUCTION The Stryama River is a tributary of the upper Maritsa River, located in north-western Thrace (the central Balkans). Its lower basin overlaps with the Maritsa basin, but the upper course is localised in the low-lands of Hissar and Karlovo and in the Sredna Gora Mountains (Map 1). The upper Stryama valley divides into three areas: - The Hissar lowland, at the foot of the southern slopes of the central Sredna Gora Mountains; - the Karlovo lowland, between the northern slopes of the Stara Planina Mountain and southern slopes of the central Stara Planina Mountain; - the uppermost course of the river lies in the west-ern Sredna Gora Mountains, where there is a third micro-region. Through the Stryama River, the Karlovo and Hissar Lowlands are open to the south-east into the Maritsa valley micro-regions. There are no high hills between the Hissar Lowland and the upper Maritsa valley, so the southern slopes of the central Sredna Gora Mountains can be seen from the Yunatsite Teli when the weather is fine. The western parts of the Sredna Gora Mountains separate the upper Stryama basin from the Zlatitsa-Pirdop and Sofia Lowlands. To the east, through the Kaloffer Hollow, the Karlovo Low-land is connected with the upper Tundja Valley. Recently, winters have been mild there, and the summers are warm, but not very hot. Deluvial soils predominate. The region is suitable both for arable agriculture and stock breeding. The Sredna Gora Mountains and Stara Planina Mountain forests, rich both in wood and game, presented an additional favourable factor for settling this region in prehis-tory. The Karlovo and Hissar lowlands, as well as the upper Maritsa basin (to the west of the Plovdiv region) are historical and geographical micro-regions whose cultural interactions were quite intensive in prehistory. The latter resulted in a unification of the material culture. In short, one and the same cultures developed there during the different prehistoric periods. Western Thrace is connected through the Maritsa and Tundja Rivers with different micro-re-gions of eastern Thrace and opens into the Turkish Thracian Plain. The easily accessible passes of the western Sredna Gora Mountains and the western and the central Rhodopes Mountains were not a seri-ous barrier to contacts and interaction between the Thracian population with South-western Bulgaria, in the past as in the present. The Rhodopes passes con-nect western Thrace with the northern Aegean area as well. Therefore, the Karlovo Lowland, being locat-ed in the southern central region of Bulgaria, appea-red as an important contact zone during the different prehistoric periods. By the 90's, this micro-region was one of the least investigated prehistoric areas in Thrace. The only Neolithic materials originated from limited drillings of the Ploskata Mogila teli near the village of Banya (excavations of P. Detev and N. Madjev), where Karanovo I and Karanovo III layers (Early and Late Neolithic) were documented. A popular article record- Map 1. Maps of the Balkans ivith location of the upper Stryama vatle)' and the Neolithic settlements documented there: 1 Hissar, 2 Cherniche-vo 3 Banya, 4 Karlovo, 5 Dubene - Leshtaka, 6 Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila, 7 Dubene-Po-povka II, 8 Ktimenl-Banyata. ed a destroyed settlement, discovered at the foot of the Stara Planina Mountain, in the suburbs of the town of Karlovo, but there is no surviving material from this site (Krajchev 1970). In 1992 a field sur-vey and limited drillings on sites along the upper Stryama valley registered several prehistoric settlements, two of which belong to the Karanovo I culture from the Early Neolithic: the Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila teli and Kliment-Banyata open settlement CNikolova and Madjev 1993; Nikolova 1994). A few Late Neolithic sherds were discovered in the area of the Leshtaka Mogila teli near the village of Dubene in 1996, to the north of the Dubene-Sarovka teli from the Late Copper and Early Bronze Ages. In the Hissar Lowland, P. Detev performed test dig-gings of a teli near the village of Chernichevo. There is no publication of excavated material. According to the ceramics from the depot of the Hissar Archaeological Museum, levels from the Early Neolithic (Karanovo I Culture), the Late Neolithic (Karanovo III Culture), the Copper Age (Karanovo VI Culture) and the Early Bronze Age (Yunatsite Culture) were documented there. Few finds have been published from Period Western Thrace Eastern Thrace Other cultures in the Balkans Absolute Chronology BC Late Bronze Age Karlovo finds Asenovec Encrusted pottery Brenica Sabatinovka Ca. 1500-1200/1150 Middle Bronze Age No evidence ? Gulubovo ? latest Verbiciora Tei Vatin 2000 - ca. 1500 BC Early Bronze III Dubene IIC Yunatsite 8-1 Ezero 3-1 Nova Zagora 5-1 Hatvan Kirklareli Vinkovci/Maroš Bubanj III/early Vatin 2500/2450-2000 Early Bronze II Early Bronze I Final Copper Late Copper Yunatsite 14-9 Dubene IIB Yunatsite 17-15 Dubene IIA ? Karlovo axe of Jaszladani type Karanovo VI Ezero 10-4 Dolyama Detelina Ezero 13-11 ? Dolnoslav Karanovo VI Karanovo VI Kostolac/Vučedol Cotofeni II-III/Glina Ezerovo/Sozopol Cotofeni I/Orlea Cernavoda III Baden Vajska - Hunyadihalom Cernavoda I/Yagodina Bodrogkeresztur Tiszapolgar Gumelnita - Varna Ca. 3000-2500/2450 Ca. 3300/3200-3000 BC Ca. 4000-3600/3500 Ca. 4500-4000 BC Early Copper Maritsa Maritsa Vinča - Pločnik, Boyan complex, later Hamangia Ca. 5000/4900-4500 BC Late Neolithic II Kaloyanovets Kaloyanovets Karanovo III/IV (after V. Nikolov) Hotnitsa, earlier Boyan complex, earlier Hamangia Ca. 5250-5000/4900 BC Late Neolithic I Karanovo III ? Karanovo III Karanovo II/III Vinča - Tordoš, Starčevo - Cris IV Ca. 5500/5450-5250 BC Early Neolithic III Karanovo I Karanovo II Gradeshnita-Circa Starčevo = Cris III Ca. 5750-5500/5450 BC Early Neolithic II Karanovo I Karanovo I Gradeshnitsa-Circa II Starčevo - Cris I Devetaki Ca. 6000/5900-5750/5700 Early Neolithic IB Early Neolithic IA ? ? Gura Baciului Ib-Donja Branjevina II Krajnitsi, Koprivets I, Gura Baciului Ia-Donja Branjevina III Ca. 6200-6000 BC Tab. 1. Culture sequence and absolute chronology of Neolithic, Copper and Early Bronze Ages in the upper Stryama valley and northeastern Thrace. a settlement discovered in the area of the present-day town of Hissar belonging to the Karanovo III Culture (Detev 1962). The present study initiates the systematic analysis of the Neolithic sequence in the upper Stryama valley in the context of the Balkan prehistoric development, based on new evidence from my excavation in 1992. Some finds were kindly given to me to publish by Mr. N. Madzhev, from his excavations in 1980's, and to whom I am extremely grateful. There is no evidence on the Early Neolithic I in Bulgarian Thrace (see the Appendix), so the earliest records originated from the Early Neolithic II—III, Karanovo I culture. THE EARLY NEOLITHIC II-III: KARANOVO I CULTURE The prehistoric settlements of the Karlovo Lowland (Map 1) are situated at an altitude of approximately 300-450 m. The Early Neolithic settlements are locat-ed not far from the upper Stryama riversides, or at the feet of the mountains (the Stara Planina Moun-tain and Sredna Gora Mountains). Two of the Early Neolithic settlements possess thick cultural layers: the Ploskata Mogila, near the village of Banya, and the Pishtikova Mogila, near the village of Dubene. A test dig at Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila, revealed a pre-served cultural layer of around 2 metres in height belonging only to the Early Neolithic, while the Banya-Ploskata Mogila disclosed layers from the Early Neolithic (Karanovo I Culture), Late Neolithic (Karanovo III Culture) and Early Bronze Age (Yuna-tsite Culture). The third settlement, Kliment-Banyata is located on a slope at the very foot of the north-ern slopes of the central Sredna Gora Mountains. It is situated at the immediate vicinity of an intercept-ed warm mineral spring, which probably also exist-ed in Antiquity and preconditioned the rise of a settlement surrounded from the south by bare ravines. Warm mineral springs are also to be found near the Banya teli and Hissar site. The 1992 preliminary trenches demonstrated a destroyed cultural layer there reaching 1 metre in depth (excluding pits). Three categories of pottery can be distinguished: coarse, ordinary and fine. It is made of clay, with fine or bigger sand admixtures. Small stone fractions appear in the biscuit of the coarse ware. A light red or wine red slip characterise the ordinary and fine pottery. Ali pottery is hand-made, with brown, brown-red and greyish-black surface after firing. As an ex-ception, a beige surface is found on some bowls. Jar vessels with corded vertical handles are widely distributed and typify the Karanovo I culture (Fig. 1). A vase-like spheroid vessel without handles, hav-ing a small cylindrical neck and equally cut rim, was also found on the teli of Pishtikova Mogila (Fig. 2). A small bowl with equally cut rim (Fig. 3. 1,2) and a cone-shaped plate on which lines and signs were secondarily cut over the outer wall (Fig. 4) are also characteristic of this culture. Fig. 1. Dubene-Pishtikova teli. Karanovo / Culture. Broken jar-like vessel ivitli an S-shaped profile and four vertical, bud-like handles. Clay ivith sand ad-mixtures. Well slipped surface, ivith a fine finish. Broivn. Diameter of the mouth -11 cm. Height -21.5 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. Fallow land. l 4- s f f ---— Fig. 2. Dubene-Pishtikova teli. Karanovo I Culture. Fragmented vase-like vessel uith a short cylindrical neck, rotmded body and a ringfoot. Clay u ith sand admixtures. Well smoothed and finished surface. Broivn. Height - 19 cm. N. Subev's collection. Accor-ding to the oivner ofthe collection, the vessel origi-nated from Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. Fig. 3■ Kliment-Banyata settlement. Karanovo I Cul ture. A fragment of a spheroid botvl; preserved profile. Clay, abundant in sand admixtures. Height -6.6 cm, Kliment - Banyata. A destroyed cultural layer from. Fig. 4. Dubene-Pishtikova teli. Karanovo I Culture. A fragment of a cone plate ivith a rounded mouth rim. Clay, abundant in large and fine sand. Traces ofbroivn-red slip on the surface. Parallel lines and small crosses are incised on the tvall face. 16 parallel lines, on one side of which three small crosses and one "M" turned to the left are incised. On the other side, three vertical parallel lines are preserved. Wall thickness: 0.7 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. Surface find. Pottery painted in white was typical of the Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila and Ploskata Mogila tells near the village of Banya (Fig. 5. 1,2). Earthenware painted in dark-brown was found as an exception at Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila (Nikolova and Madjev 1993■ Fig. 6) (Fig. 5. 3). The investigated area, however, was quite restricted. An exceptional find of two frag-ments of a lid with a greyish-black surface and a deeply incised spiral decoration with white encrus-tation was discovered at Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila (Fig. 5. 4a-b). The white painted pottery was manufactured of well-refined clay, which sometimes contained fine sand or small stones. Cone-shaped broad plates and spheroid bowls, some of which have a foot, are most pop-ular. Sometimes, the feet are detached. There are sherds of tulip-shaped vessels, but for the time being the evidence is scanty about this popular shape in Early Neolithic Thrace. The prevailing number of painted earthenware has a wine-red slip, but pottery painted in white on an ochre ground was also found. Rare examples are known both from Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila (Nikolova and Madjev 1993■ Fig. 6) and from Banya-Plos-kata Mogila (unpubl.). The painted pottery is characterised by a lozenge decoration pattern under the mouth. Geometric pat- Fig. 5. Dubene-Pishtikova teli. Karanovo I Culture. 1. A fragment of a vase-like spherical ves-sel ivith a cylindrical neck and evenly cut, rounded rim. Clay uith sand and plant admix-tures. Fine, dense cover of red-broum slip. Painted pattern in uhite. On the outer side of the neck: large lozenge pattern under the mouth; on the body: curved line decoration. Wall thick-ness: 0.5 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. 1.90-2.10 m depth from the surface. 2. A mouth fragment of a plate ivith a rounded rim. Clay uith small sand and plant admixtures. Broum-red slip. Painted pattern in ivhite. On the inner side: a strip of uide lozenge pattern under the mouth. On the outer side: groups of parallel lines cross-ing at an angle. Wall thickness: 0.5-0.6 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. 1.25-1.30 m depth from the surface. 3■ A fragment of ajar-like vessel ivith spheroid body. Clay ivith sand and plant admixtures. On the outer tvall: a painted pattern in dark broivn. Clearly defined profile change, under ivhich a painted band of con-centric lines and upriglit trianglesfolloiv. Wall thickness: 0.6-0.9 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. Surface find. 4a-b. Tivo fragments of a Ud uiith an incised spiral pattern encrusted ivith ivhite. Finely refined clay. Black polished surface. Wall thickness: 0.5 cm. Width of the encrustation channel: 0.3-0.5 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. teras are typical of the body (Fig. 5. 1-3)- Some of the feet bear concentric white painted strips. The pottery fragments discovered in Kliment-Banya-ta were without preserved surface slip. The acid soil destroyed the ceramic surface, creating an impres-sion that painted pottery is absent. But from the mor-phological point of view, however, the earthenware does not differ significantly from that found in Du-bene-Pishtikova Mogila. Some jar-like vessels with rope handles have more elongated bodies. Impresso ceramics are typical. Therefore, the settlement prob-ably followed chronologically the Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. One herring-bone channelled fragment was discovered at Kliment-Banyata (Fig. 6) which has no parallels at Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. It is probable that Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila and Kliment-Banyata represent the long duration of the Karanovo I culture in the Karlovo Lowland. The cult objects so far discovered consist of fragments of small tables-altars. One of the pieces from the Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila bears a stamped pattern (Fig. 7. 1), and another has an attached zoomor-phic foot (Fig. 7. 2). The small table from the Kli-ment-Banyata was completely restored (Fig. 8). The female idol from the Banyata-Ploskata Mogila is typ-ical of the Karanovo I culture (Fig. 9). Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila and Kliment-Banyata are the most northwestern Karanovo I settlements in Thrace (about Karanovo I see Georgiev 1974 and Fig. 6. Kliment-Banyata settlement. Karanovo / Culture. A tvallfragment of a channelled herringbone vessel. The finish is missing. Clay, abundant in fine and coarse sand. Broun surface. Destroyed cultural layer. Parzinger 1993-110, and the a bibliography quoted there). They effectuated one of the communication lines between the upper Thracian Plain and the Zla-titsa-Pirdop and Sofia Lovvlands. The pottery finds the closest numerous parallels at Chernichevo in the Hissar Lowland (unpublished), as well as in the upper Maritsa basin (Kapitan Dimitrievo: Detev 1950. Fig. 5). The upper Stryama valley is directly connected \vith the upper Tundzha region through the eastern Sredna Gora Mountain passes, where the closest parallels are to be found on the Kazanluk teli (unpublished). Stryama River also connects north-western Thrace with the Maritsa valley, where the ceramic parallels reach as far as the region of Edirne (materials from the Archaeological Museum, Edirne). Although the ceramics from ali the investigated Karanovo I settlements have not been completely published, it could so far be assumed that this culture comprised the whole upper Thracian Plain, the northern Rhodopi Mountains slopes included. Ac-cording to recent evidence, during its early stages Fig. 7. Dubene-Pishtikova teli. Karanovo I Culture. 1. A fragment of a cult table. Part ofthe tvall is preserved uith a stamp decoration. Clay tvith fine sand and stone ad-mixtures. Dark broun surface uith a finish. Wall thickness: 0.4-1.1 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. 2. A fragment of a zoomorphic leg uith a round-like basin. Clay tvith fine sand admixtures. Redslip. Wall thickness: 0.3-0.5 cm. Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila. the Karanovo I Culture occupied not only Bulgarian Thrace, but also south western Bulgaria: Kovachevo, Eleshnitsa (the Middle Strouma basin), Slatina, lower horizons (Sofia Plain), etc. (cp. Pavuk 1993)• Earth-enware painted in white from the upper Stryama valley finds parallels in settlements like Kovachevo (Permčeva 1990. Fig. 7. 2; Fig. 9. 4). But at the same tinte, there are some very close parallels to the site of Nevestino I in the middle Strouma basin (Čoha-džiev and Genadieva 1998.85; Fig. 1. 7, 16) with earlier dot painted pottery at Donja Branjevina (Brukner 1997. Fig. 3■ 2; Karmanski 1968. Fig. 1. 6-7). The later stages of the culture, however, de-monstrate a strong influence of the Starčevo culture in the north western areas (Slatina, Gulubnik), which was reflected in the pottery style of the "mixed" Kre-mikovtsi group, including the Zlatitsa-Pirdop Plain (Chavdar) (Garašanin 1966.19) or recently named Starčevo. The pottery painted in brown and red from Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila and Chernichevo could be considered as influenced by the production of the Zlatitsa-Pirdop region. The cult tables have numerous parallels in the synchronous settlements in Southwestern Bulgaria: Priboj (Chokhadžiev 1986. Fig. 10), as well as in the Late Neolithic settlements (Vandova 1997 uith ref). Triangular tables were also typical of Gradeshnitsa A-C (Northwestern Bulgaria) \vhere, however, a meander pattern pre-vails (Nikolov 1975. Fig. 14) which is not found in Thrace. The northern boundary of the Karanovo I culture was the Stara Planina Mountain. Pottery painted in white is known from Vrtiste, Byala and the Deveta-ki cave (.Nikolov 1992.12 uith ref), but recently it was discovered in the Danube areas of north west-ern Bulgaria: Maluk Preslavets (Panayotov et al. 1992. Fig. 4) and Koprivets (unpublished), as well. According to V. Popov and I. Vajsov (1992.10), the Fig. 8. Kliment-Banyata settlement. Karanovo I Culture. A fragmented cult table. Clay uith fine sand and Ume admixtures. Light broivn surface. The basin is relatively deep, triangular in plan. The legs have triangular cross sections. Pierced metop-like pattern on the ivalls and on the lower part of the legs. Wall length: 15 cm. Basin depth -1.6 cm. Height - 9-8. Wall thickness - 0.5 cm. WaU height - 3 cm. Legs foundation thickness - 3-8 x 1.9 cm. Kliment-Banyata. A destroyed cultural layer. white painted pottery from last site parallels the Proto-Starčevo horizon. These data, however, are in-sufficient for a search of the Karanovo 1 cultural gen-esis in northern Bulgaria, bearing in mind the new data from Strouma valley (Nevestino), as well as of the monochromic stage in European Turkey (see below). At the same tirne, the material from the De-vetaki cave poses the problem of the possibility of direct contacts between the Karlovo Lowland popu-lation and that of the Osum basin in northern Bulgaria as early as the Early Neolithic. At present, the Kurnare-Troyan pass is a major communication route between southern and northern Bulgaria. The earliest archaeological data from the high parts of the Troyan pass in the Stara Planina Mountain originate from the First Millennium BC. High prehistoric set- Fig. 9. Banyata-Ploskata Mogila. Karanovo I Culture. A female idol, Clay uith coarse and fine sand and gold mica admixtures. Well finished surface. Dark brouith ivhite paste, and bud-like projections are attached to its ends. Preserved length: 13-9 cm. Wall thickness: 1.3 cm. Wall height - 4.3 cm. Basin depth - 2.6 cm. plished. According to the present data, some Neolithic tells (Banya, Chernichevo) were re-occupied in the Early Bronze Age. The Late Neolithic II: Karanovo IV Culture During the second half of the Late Neolithic the Karanovo IV (Kaloyanovets) culture developed in Bul-garian Thrace and in European Turkey (Kirklareli). A change in the settlement pattern characterises this phase: the pattern of the teli decreased (Karanovo IV, Kazanluk, etc.) and open settlements characterise that culture - Kaloyanovets, Nova Zagora - Khobeza-voda, etc. The Karanovo IV culture has been best studied in the region of Nova Zagora (Kancev and Kančeva 1988 ivith ref), although its expansion was significantly greater, reaching Turkish Thrace -Kirklareli (excavations under the direction of H. Par-zinger and M. Ozdogan). The absence of convincing evidence of the Karanovo IV Culture in western Thrace has recently pro-voked the launching of the hypothesis that Karanovo III culture continued its development in western Thrace during the period of the Kaloyanovets culture in eastern Thrace {Nikolov 1998). According to V. Nikolov, the encrusted ceramics from Kalugerovo (unpublished) in the upper Maritsa valley do not con-tradict this assumption. But in 1992 a vessel with the encrusted ornamenta-tion typical of Karanovo IV Culture was found for the first tirne in north-western Thrace (Fig. 16), which demonstrates that Kalugerovo was not an ex-ception in western Thrace. It is a conical bowl found on the surface to the south of Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila, in the immediate vicinity of the left bank of the Stryama (Dubene-Popovka II). The bowl has a massive, broken foot. It is of clay, with fine and coarser sand admixtures. Its surface is smoothed, but not polished. The inner side of the plate is decorat-ed with successive bands of horizontal incised lines and parallel zigzag lines. The rim bears oblique cuts. Bands of parallel, incised lines and an S-attached pattern decorate its outer side. The ornamentation was encrusted. Fig. 15- Banyata-Ploskata Mogila. Karanovo III Culture. Tite loiver part of a clay idol. Clay ivith sandy ad-mixtures. Black smoothed surface. The legs are preserved, ivhich represent an undifferentiated volume, marked by a vertically incised line ivhich reaches the point of an inverted triangle at the upper end. The seat is moulded rendered. This vessel is evidence of the fate of most of the thin-layered settlements in the region, which were completely destroyed by farming. The close parallels in the ceramics from eastern Thrace also support this conclusion. A plate with an S-shaped pattern from Nova Zagora-Hlebozavoda has been discovered (Kančeva 1992. pl. VI). Three building horizons of the Kaloyanovets culture were filed at this site, as well as another bowl with a zig-zag, incised pattern (Kancev; Kančeva 1988. pl. II: 7). The different decorative patterns on the inner and outer surfaces of the vessels could be followed in the published cone-shaped bowls from Nova Za-gora-Hlebozavoda as well, although they have no feet (Kancev, Kančeva 1988. plates /-//; Kančeva Fig. 16. Dubene-Popovka II. Kaloyanovets Culture. 1992. pl. 6). According to the published stratigraph-ic data, the bowl from Dubene-Popovka originated from a settlement that was synchronous with building horizons 1-2 at Nova Zagora-Hlebozavoda. The cone-shaped, solid foot, the zigzag and S-shaped patterns relate the vessel from Dubene-Popovka II to the bowls from Brenitsa (Northwestern Bulgaria), which, however, have smoother profiles (Nikolov 1986. Fig. 5, 6). According B. Nikolov, the lower two horizons at Brenitsa belonged to the end of the Late Neolithic. In light of the evidence from Dubene-Popovka II (and Kalugerovo), the Karanovo IV Culture encom-passes the whole of Thrace (Turkish Thrace includ- ed). North-western Thrace was not isolated from common trends in the development of pottery styles (Nikolov 1998). It could be theoretically assumed that the Dubene-Popovka II find did not originate from the Karanovo IV Culture settlement in this locality, because the context is missing. But in my opinion, the presence of a Late Neolithic II settlement is more probable, given that the villagers have reported numerous pottery finds in the locality. At the same time, the find, originating probably from a thin level, open settlement, also confirms my thesis that changes in the settlement pattern charac-terise the later Late Neolithic in Thrace, because there are no cultural levels of the Karanovo IV culture at the Banyata and Chernichevo tells. The situa-tion is similar to that at the Kapitan Dimitrievo, Plov-div - Yasa tepe, Kazanluk and other tells in Thrace. The vessel from Dubene-Popovka II is so far the lat-est Neolithic find from north-western Thrace. No settlement of the Early Copper Age Maritsa culture has been discovered there, but a female anthropomor-phic figurine from Dubene (an accidental find) sug-gests that the Karlovo Lowland was also occupied during this period (Nikolova and Madjev 1993■ Fig. 8). A settlement of the late stage of Karanovo VI was discovered at the base of the teli near Dubene-Sarov-ka, located to the south-east of the village of Dubene (Nikolova 1994). A period followed which has not been documented: the final stage of the Copper Age when the Chernavoda I culture developed along the eastern lower Danube; while the end of the Kri-vodol-Salcuta-Bubanj and Salcuta-Telish cultures were characteristic of the western lower Danube. A big multi-layer settlement of Early Bronze Yunatsite culture has been investigated on the upper levels of Du-bene-Sarovka. This is the latest prehistoric site so far registered in the upper Stryama valley. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS In the context of the čase study of this contribution, the recent evidence of the Balkan Early Neolithic raises several points for discussion and/or conclu-sions: O The archaeological data on prehistoric sites in the Karlovo Lowland provide an opportunity to create a cultural-chronological system of the micro-region (Tab. 1). The last includes the following cultures: Karanovo 1 (Early Neolithic), Karanovo I/III, Karanovo II/III Karanovo III and Karanovo III/IV after V. Niko- lov (Late Neolithic I), Karanovo IV (Late Neolithic II), Maritsa (Early Copper Age), Karanovo VI (Late Copper Age), Yunatsite (Early Bronze Age). For the time being, the Late Bronze Age is documented only by an accidental find of an axe mould (unpublished). The data are so far insufficient for the periodisation of the Neolithic cultures of the micro-region. Apart from the Early Bronze Yunatsite Culture, the rest have scarcely been excavated. The new data on the Neolithic, the Karanovo I, Karanovo III and Karanovo IV cultures, however few, allow a more precise de-finition of the cultural attributes of the micro-region, to make a preliminary sketch of its settlement struc-ture and to reconsider some previous scholarly views. © At the various sites one, two or more prehistoric periods were represented (Tab. 2). Sites Periods of occupations Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila EN II-III Banya - Ploskata Mogila EN II-III, LN I, EB II Chernichevo EN II-III, LN I, LC, EB III Kliment - Banyata EN III Dubene- Leshtaka LN I Dubene-Popovka II LN II Tab. 2. The prehistoric periods of occupations on the documented prehistoric sites in the Karlovo Lotvland. © The prehistoric settlement structure in the Karlovo lowland was established during Early Neolithic II. In the earlier stage it included multi-level settlements at distances of 10-15 km apart along the Stryama Ri-ver: Chernichevo, Banya-Ploskata mogila and Dube-ne-Pishtikova mogila. The increase in population pro-bably resulted in an extension of the settlement structure and settlement at the foot of the Sredna Gora, near the village of Kliment-Banyata. But no conditi-ons for successful agriculture existed there. Probably this is a main reason for the short-term occupation of the village. In terms of archaeological typology, there are two types of settlements: tells (multi-level settlements) and open villages (short-term occupations). There are no investigated houses of the Karanovo I culture in the Karlovo lowland. According to the plasters recovered, wattle-and-daub buildings typify the Early Neolithic architecture there, as in other re-gions of the Balkans. 0 Typological variety characterised the hand-made pottery of households in the Karlovo lowland dur- Models Description 1 Adoption of the ceramic style of the white painted pottery by undiscovered culture of the monochrome stage (Early Neolithic I) 2 Migration / demic diffusion from the Strouma valley 3 Migration / demic diffusion from European Turkey 4 Migrations / demic diffusions from the Strouma val lev and European Turkey 5 Migration from Anatolia through the Strouma valley and/or European Turkey Tab. 3- Models of a genesis of the Karano vo I Culture in Bulgarian Thrace. ing the Early Neolithic, but pithoi, jars, pots, bowls and conical plates predominated. The evolution from the white towards white and red/brown painted ware can be assumed based mainly on the data from Dubene - Pishtikova Mogila. In the Karanovo III culture, plain pottery predominated, but channel and plastic ornamented vessels specify this ceramic style. Encrusted pottery, represented in the Karlovo valley by the conical bowl with a foot, is emblemat-ic of the Late Neolithic II. Kaloyanovets culture. © The arable/stock breeding economy characterises the Neolithic Stryama valley. Stone tool assemblages were comprised of mainly flat axes. Bone imple-ments were also widely used in household activities. Special evidence of fishing was found at Banya-Plos-kata teli, where a fish hook was discovered in a Karanovo III level. © Idols and small tables were used in fertility cult rituals, and of special interest is a female idol of the goddess of fertility, which has no parallel in the Karanovo I culture, although there is a close one from north-western Bulgaria. This record documents ac-tive cultural interaction through the Sredna Gora Mountains and the Iskur River or through the Stara Planina Mountains, probably connected with com-mon rituals of the fertility. 0 The upper Stryama valley belongs to the third Euro-Asian geographical region distinguished by M. Zvelebil (the so-called southern Balkans and the Pontic Steppe) with an environment, which would suggest "a reliance on cereals, roots, and tubers" during the Mesolithic. He considers this area "as an extension of grassland habitats of the Near East (Ira-no-Turenian steppe), which share in common the abundance of wild seed grasses, including wild bar-ley and eincorn" {Zvelebil 1994.64). G. Georgiev also stressed the presence of wild forerunners of some cultivated plans in the Bulgarian region. Never-theless, there are no secure arguments for the autochthonous genesis of the Neolithic in Bulgarian Thrace, including the Karlovo lowland. Several migration hypotheses can be defined (Tab. 3), but ali they are based mainly on a lack of archaeological evidence of the earliest Neolithic in Bulgarian Thrace. In the first model, the stage of the painted pottery in the second level of the graduate Neolithization of the Balkans and the bearers of the Karanovo I culture appear to be the inheritors of the first agricul-tural comnuinities in the Balkans. The second to fourth models require a demographic crisis in the neighbour regions, the outcome of which was the colonisation of Bulgarian Thrace. In this čase the presence of strong micro-regional and long-distance contacts are one of the main factors of Neolithisa-tion in terms of demic interactions. The fifth model assumes a new population in the southern Balkans which immigrated from Anatolia and was integrated with the local agricultural and stock breeding struc-tures. In ali cases, Neolithisation can be defined as a long-term process of gradual culture integration. The absence of Mesolithic evidence from the southern Balkans contrasts with the increased data on the Vlasac-Lepenski Vir culture in the western lower Da-nube basin, but recently in the south-eastern parts, important so-called Epi-Paleolithic sites have been documented (Gatsov and Ozdogan 1994). The Vlasac-Lepenski Vir culture is an advanced Mesolithic model, including temporary housing, a complex flint industry, possible storage facilities and a developed ideological system, the centre of which was an ances-tor cult. It cannot be ruled out that the Mesolithic population participated in the Neolithisation of the Balkans (Seferiades 1993)• The anthropologica! charac-teristics of the Maluk Preslavets settlement cemetery in the eastern lower Danube basin are an example of a proto-European anthropological type (Panayo-tov et al, 1992.52-53), which is comparable to the Vlasac-Lepenski Vir Culture. A similar conclusion ari-ses from the Devetaki Cave anthropological material, while Mediterranian characteristics are reported from Late Neolithic Plovdiv-Yasa Tepe (Boev 1959). At the same tirne, M. Hopf (1988), following the model of J. Renfrew, assumes an influence from the south among the earliest (EN I) agriculturalists in North-eastern Bulgaria. Therefore, culture integration also characterises the Neolithisation of the Balkans in the light of the evidence from north-eastern Bulgaria. © The process of Neolithisation originates from the Karanovo I settlement pattern, which characterises that process as a stabilisation and structuring of so-cial relationships towards interrelated complex communities, in which households were the main social basis (see Hodder's (1990) concept of Domus). The pottery, stone and bone industries of the Karanovo I culture also represent the Neolithisation of the Balkans as a standardisation of the cultural com-ponents connected probably not only with domestic activities, but to some extent with the specialisation of production. The idols of the monochromic stage and from Karanovo I culture also define the Neolithisation of the Balkans as a process of reutilising social life, devel-oping an innovative fertility cult. The existence of settlement burials suggests that in that process an ancestor cult was of great importance. But the ab-sence of separate burial backgrounds characterises the Balkan Early Neolithic. This fact can be explained by the absence of a cult of the dead or of burial tra-ditions. But in my opinion, it is more probable that a tradition of isolated burials existed. In this čase the cult of the dead was not communal, but connected with the different households. At the same tinte, the Maluk Preslavets settlement cemetery as an excep-tion in the Balkans is connected not only anthropo-logically and also ritually with the Mesolithic Vlasac-Lepenski Vir culture, where burials in settlements were popular, but its mode of inhumation-crouched position - is a element of Neolithisation. © A cultural change can be recognised in the devel-opment of the Karlovo Lowland at the beginning of the Late Neolithic. Banya teli, and Chernichevo teli in the Hissar valley, represents continuity in settlement life, while in the Dubene region a new settlement probably was based at Leshtaka, approximate-ly 5 km from the Early Neolithic Pishtikova Mogila. It can be assumed that a change in ceramics was the result of eastern influence in a period when the Balkan style of painted pottery began to be replaced by encrusted ornamentation. The last, as an exception, appeared during the early Neolithic, but began to predominate in the period of the Kaloyanovets culture. The absence of settlement(s) of this culture in the Karlovo lowland can be explained by a crisis in the arable/stock breeding economy, and a change towards a semi-nomadic economy in the later late Neolithic in western Bulgarian Thrace. Some changes in the landscape cannot be completely excluded (for the western Balkans see Budja 1995). Despite the possibility that one or more settlements existed from the Early Copper Age in the upper Stryama val-ley, a new flourishing of the prehistoric culture can be argued for the Late Copper Age, as well as during the Early Bronze Age. © The Neolithisation of the Balkans was also a stage in the initial development of the earliest proto-Indo-Europeans as a stage towards the development of the initial technological terntinology of the agriculture. In this čase of special importance there is evidence of culture integration in the Balkans in terms of the sintilarity betvveen the Karanovo I and Starčevo cultures, as well as the examples when one culture with painted pottery adopted other style (later Gulubnik and Sofia-Slatina). This example defines the culture system as dynamic. In the course of inter-actions, terntinology was probably unified and re-unifited, like the technologicallv unified system: stone and bone implements. For this problem it is important to define continuity in my čase study in western Thrace: after the Neolithic, the Maritsa culture is well-docuntented in the Plovdiv region, as well as the Late Copper Karanovo VI culture, in ali micro-regions. The latest Karanovo VI site in the light of recent evidence dates to the earlier Final Copper Age. At the same tirne, the Central Rhodopi Mountains cave were oc-cupied by the successors of the Karanovo VI culture during the Final Copper I—II, the pottery of which parallels that of the Cernavoda I culture. Because the cultural continuity between the Cernavoda I and Cernavoda III cultures is \vell argued, of special importance is evidence of parallels in the material culture (mainly diachronic) between the Early Bronze I Ezero and Yunatsite cultures, on the one hand, and the Cernavoda III, on the other hand. At the same time, there is no evidence for steppe migration in western Thrace at ali, which is a very strong counter-argument against any theory connected with Indo-Europeanisation through steppe migration. From this point - the Early Bronze Age - a long, well-documented continuity characterises the southern Balkans, including western Thrace, with its critical point, the Middle Bronze Age. But knowledge on the earlier Balkan prehistory suggests that in Bulgarian Thrace there were cyclic economic changes, fol-lowed by the decreasing or temporary disappear-ance of settlement structures. This feature of the southern Balkan prehistoric development fits well with the social model of periodic crises in agricul-tural structures, and social and economic change towards nomadic structures. This fact explains the evidence for some similarity in the ornamentation of Late Bronze Age pottery to that of the Early Bronze Age, following at the same tirne the style of the former period. This pottery appears in the Rho-dopi Mountains in a period when part of the popu-lation was already settled on the plain. But the Early Bronze Age was the last period of long-term settle-ments (tells); the Middle Bronze Age can be defined as a period of gradual development of nomadic structures in the southern Balkans, like those structures which are known for the earliest Indo-Europeans, the Thracians. In this evolution and integrated model of Indo-Euro-peanisation as a gradual process of change, an in-crease and decrease in arable/stock breeding and nomadic structures, the advances over the migration theory is that there is no homeland identified by material culture, because in my opinion, one and the same culture cannot be equated to one and the same language, just as different cultures are not the same if they have different languages. A language can be unified through active contacts between distant cultures, and at the same tirne peculiarities can increase in micro-regional interactions. In this čase a question appears: to what extent does an archaeological culture equate with a tribe? From an ethnic point of view, the ethnographic peculiarities appear as re-gional characteristics. At this point, the material culture of the distinct archaeological structures has the same feature - the archaeological culture is a region-al definition of a peculiar material culture. This the-oretical similarity makes possible the different archaeological cultures to be defined as different tribes (or clans). Therefore, the Early Neolithic is also a process of initial ethnic structuring and development of the Balkan population and the earliest stage of the proto-Indo-European tribes. SUMMARY The study represents the Neolithic sequence in a newly investigated micro-region in the Balkans - the Karlovo Lowland in the upper Stryama valley (north-western Thrace). The excavations of the author in 1992 uncovered Early Neolithic sites (Dubene-Pishti- kova Mogila teli and the Kliment-Banyata open settlement), as well as a find from the Late Neolithic II period (Dubene - Popovka II). Based on ceramic parallels, they are attributed to the Karanovo I culture and to the Karanovo IV culture. Recent evidence confirms that during the Early Neolithic III (the period of Karanovo II) in western Thrace the development of the Karanovo I culture continued. The village of Kliment-Banyata, with some similarity in the pottery to that of Karanovo II, probably represents the end of that stage in the Stryama valley. At the same tirne, it is clear that the advanced culture developed there was in active contact with neighbour-ing regions, lying on one of the communicated lines connecting Thrace and the Strouma valley and, con-ceivably, northern Bulgaria. The unpublished exca-vations of P. Detev at the Chernichevo teli argue that the Early Neolithic II—III period was represent-ed in the Hissar valley (to the south of the Karlovo Lowland), as well. As far as the Late Neolithic I period is concerned, materials from the Karanovo III culture originate from excavations by P. Detev at Banya-Ploskata Mogila teli, Chernichevo (II) teli and the Hissar open settlement, as well as from the excavations of N. Madzhev at Banya-Ploskata Mogila. Some finds from the most recent investigations are included in this study to represent the Late Neolithic in the Karlovo Lowland, which parallel that from Hissar. The latest Neolithic sequence is represented by an accidental find from Dubene-Popovka II: a plate with Karanovo IV culture encrusted ornamentation. According to the author, the find confirms that the latter culture was distributed in north-western Thrace, and also economic changes are assumed for LN II in Thrace. The absence of 14C dates from the upper Stryama valley has required an indirect dating, so the Neolithic chronology and calibrated individual |4C dates, as well as R-combine and Sum-probability for levels and phases from the Neolithic Balkans are given as an appendix. The chronological definition of the different Neolithic periods and of some key sites are based on available 14C dates calibrated with Oxcal program, version 3.0. It is concluded that the Neolithic cultures developed from the later 7th Millennium BC until the end of the 6th Millennium/be-ginning of the 5th Millennium BC (c. 6200-5000/ 4900 BC). EN I is dated to c. 6200 BC- 6000 BC/5900 BC (monochromic and earliest painted phases), which is not documented in Bulgarian Thrace. The EN II span was between 6000 BC/5900 BC and c. 5750 BC (Karanovo I, earlier Starčevo and synchro- nous cultures). The beginning of EN III (c. 5750) is well dated by the end of the Karanovo I and the beginning of the Karanovo II in eastern Thrace, con-tinuing until 5000-5450 BC (the beginning of the Karanovo III culture). The span of the Karanovo III culture defines LN I (5500/5450 BC - 5250/5000/ 4900 BC) and that of Karanovo IV culture - LN II (c. 5250 BC-5000 BC/4900 BC). This periodisation is based on the culture sequence in Thrace. APPENDIX Neolithic Radiocarbon Dating in the Balkans The absence of Neolithic radiocarbon dates from the upper Stryama valley requires indirect absolute dating. Recentlv armed with calibrated curves, the rela-tive chronology based on cross-cultural contact data (Lazarovici 1979. figs. 17-18; Ozdogan 1993; Laza-rovici and Kalmar 1995; Ozdogan 1997; Brukner 1997; Garašanin 1998; Nikolov 1998;) is easily com-parable with the absolute chronology (Breuning 1987; Vajsov 1998. Tab. 1; Gorsdorf and Bojadžiev 1996. Fig. 1; Glaser 1996; Schier 1996, and above (Tab. 1). Therefore, at the end of this approach to-wards the Neolithic in the Central Balkans I will briefly construct a model of the Neolithic Balkan radiocarbon dating, for the purposes of the indirect absolute dating of the Neolithic cultures of the upper Stryama valley. The fundamental monograph of Breuning (1987) and the recent comprehensive sum-maries of Bulgarian (Gorsdorf and Bojadžiev 1996) and that of Rumanian dates (Mantu 1995) include the basic individual 14C dates, and termolumines-cence dates (Bogdanovič 1996). The Oxcal program (3.0 version by B. C. Ramsay) provides for different interpretations of the available radiocarbon (and termoluminescence) dates. In this study, of primary importance is the possibility of a Sum probability definition of different l4C date series. In the cases of more than one date from one and the same horizon the Oxcal program requires R-combine dating, which is used here to date severa! key sites (Tab. 4). The Sum probabilities of dates from key phases (Tab. 5) give an approximate span of du-ration. There is are special technique for reduction of the values from wood charcoal, but bearing in mind that the l4C dates give the end of the phase, for the purposes of this study this calculation was elimina-ted below. I should stress that most of the Neolithic samples are from wood, in contrast to the later prehistoric Balkans, but the method of using blocks of dates for conclusions give dates close to the histori-cal chronology. It should be especiallv stressed that none of my conclusions is based on uncalibrated date comparisons because of the nature of the 14C dates the validity of which depends on the calibrated values. Recently, only in exceptional research are uncalibrated dates stili used, but this archaism of Balkan historiography is almost past. In light of recent evidence, two periods can be dis-tinguished in the Balkan Neolithic: Early and Late. Until the 80's, the thesis of the Middle Neolithic was popular, to which period recently V. Nikolov attrib-utes so-called Karanovo II/III culture. In my periodisation system this phase, well-argued for by Nikolov, is attributed to the earliest stage of the Late Neolithic, based on the jugs with vertical handles and plastic application in the upper part as one of the remarkable innovations in the Balkans, characteris-ing ali later Neolithic periods in the southern Balkans. I. Vajsov (1998) stili uses Middle Neolithic terminologa attributing the Karanovo III Culture even to the Early Neolithic; the former term is also popular for the stage of classical Starčevo in Yugoslavian historiography. V. Nikolov gave cogent arguments for the evolution from the Karanovo III towards the Karanovo IV cultures, which is my reason for attributing the Karanovo III culture to the earlier Late Neolithic (Nikolova and Madjev 1993)- The Early Neolithic is divided into three stages. The earlier phase of the first stage (EN IA) is charac-terised by the emergence of monochrome pottery (Donja Branjevina III-Gura Bacuilui Ia, Krajnitsi I, Koprivets I, etc.). It is partially investigated, e. g. there are areas in the Balkans, such as Thrace, in which this stage is missing, but there are no serious reasons to ignore the phase of monochrome pottery in the development of the Neolithic in the Balkans. To this phase belongs the Hoca Cesme IV type from the south-eastern Balkans (Ozdogan 1993■ 185-86). But according to M. Ozdogan (1993-185), at the same type of villages in north-western Turkey a few painted sherds were discovered. The radiocarbon dates plače the EN IA at the latest in the 7th Millennium BC (Chart 1, Tab. 1). The radiocarbon chronology of the Vlasac (Lepenski Vir) culture - from the point of view of recent interpretations - belongs to the pre-ceding Mesolithic period and there is no overlap between the Earliest Neolithic and the Mesolithic of the Central Balkans (Tasič 1992). This dating is im-portant for excluding 6400 BC as possibly the earliest chronological border of the monochromic horizon in the Balkans if it was not a graduate stage from Site /Horizon R_combine BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Relative ChronoIIogy Hoca ^e§me I 7468±27 6360-6220 6380-6210 EN IA Polyanitsa-Platoto 7271±34 6160-6010 6170-6000 EN IA Gulubnik 8 6787±33 5665-5600 5690-5590 EN III Gulubnik 7 6965+53 5860-5720 5950-5690 EN II Slatina 4 6875±17 5714-5687 5730-5670 EN II Eleshnitsa 2 6879±21 5720-5688 5745-5670 EN II Chavdar 5 6922+42 5790-5695 5860-5670 ENIII Dobrinishtel 6626±38 5580-5450 5580-5440 EN III Tab. 4. R-combine dating of key levels of the Neolithic Balkans. Sum 68.2% confidence 95.4% confidence Period Hoca Ge§me IV-II 6500-5600 6600-5200 EN I - EN II Hoca Qe§me III 5950-5660 6350-5500 EN IB Hoca Cesme II 5820-5330 6150-5200 EN II Stara Zagora -Okruzhna Bolnitsa IV-V 5800-5520 6050-5400 EN II-EN III Stara Zagora - Azmak I 5770-5320 6300- 5000 EN II, EN III Stara Zagora - Azmak 12-3 5720-5440 5950-5200 EN II Stara Zagora - Azmak 14-6 5490-5140BC 5600-4950BC EN III Stara Zagora -Okruzhna Bolnitsa IV 5780-5520 5940-5440 EN III Karanovo III 5440-5290 5530-5220 LNI Sitargoi I—II 5450-4600 5700-4400 LNI-II Tab. 5. Sum probability distribution for site sites and phases from the Neolithic Balkans. the south towards the north with possible example in southeastern Thrace before 6200 BC (Hoca Cesme IV) (Vajsov 1998). There are l4C series for the EN IA from Polyanitsa -Platoto I and Hoca (Jesme IV (Charts 1, 2). According to the excavator (Ozdogan 1993; 1997), the third layer seems to precede Karanovo I culture. Despite that most of the dates from the third phase are dated after the beginning of the sixth Millennium BC (Chart 2), the computing programme of the possibil-ity of calculates of any given year that preceded Hoca Cesme III, gives a dating before the end of the sixth Millennium BC (Chart 3). To the later phase of EN I belongs the earliest white painted pottery horizon of Donja Branjevina II type (Proto-Starčevo II). According to V. Nikolov (1998), pottery with parallels in this horizon was document-ed at a multilevel site in north-eastern Bulgaria, where it followed a monochromic level. Therefore, in light of that evidence EN IB also includes that micro-region. The fact that at Krajnitsi the white level succeeded the monochromic level also suggests a diachronic relation between the earliest white painted pottery and that of the earliest Karanovo I complex. There are some parallels in Donja Branjevina II and Nevestino I (see above), probably docu-ment this Pre-Karanovo I phase in the central Strou-ma valley. It is difficult to conclude if this phase belongs to EN I (B-C?) or to EN IIA. There are limited UC dates from the key sites in the northern Balkans from EN IB with published corre-lation between the radiocarbon samples and the ceramic evidence. Tasič (1993; Table A) published dates and some stratigraphic correlation from Donja Branjevina and Magareči mlin. Assuming for the tirne being that EN IB is dated ca. 6100-6000/5900 BC. The second stage of the EN is characterised by the wide distribution of white painted pottery in the Karanovo I complex, the earlier Gradeshnitsa-Cir^a and earlier Starčevo-Cris cultures, as well as in the Maluk Preslavets type from the eastern lower Danu-be basin with the numerous regional peculiarities (for the middle and upper Strouma see Pavuk 1993, Brukner 1997). The 14C dates from earlier Karanovo I and Starčevo cultural contexts date the stage to earlier Sixth Millennium. The earlier Charvar, Slati- na and Gulubnik belong to this stage too. For the čase study of the upper Stryama valley, the beginning of the Karanovo II culture in turn gives the bor-der between the EN IIA and EN IIB or between the earlier and later Karanovo I culture in western Thrace. There is a possibility of dating the latest white painted horizon in the upper Stryama valley, as well, and for the results to be compared. The radiocarbon dating of the Karanovo II culture based on the dates from the eponymous site correspond well to the EN III in the Balkans, giving dates between 5750 BC and 5520 BC, with 68.2% confi-dence (Chart 5). The fact that the charcoal samples date that group is not a big problem because those samples date the end of occupation of the levels and we are interested in the beginning of the Karanovo II group. Those dates coincide with the dating of the end of the Slatina 4 (Chart 6) to c. 5750 BC based on the earlier values of 68.2% confidence in the con-text of cross-cultural comparisons. Therefore, the lowest chronological border of the EN II is c. 6000/5900 BC, and the upper chronological border is c. 5750 BC. This is the period to which can be attributed the earliest levels from the Dubene-Pishtikova Mogila, and probably from Banya-Ploska-ta Mogila and Chernichevo. It is possible the earliest Gradeshnitsa-Circa culture followed the beginning of the Karanovo I culture because of the indirect evidence for the white painted horizon from Devetaki cave (Nikolov 1992). For the tirne being, the relative chronology is well defined for the Dobrinishte 1 (middle Stryama basin), at the end of the EN II (Chart 7). The calibra-ted values of R-combine 6626+38 BP date the end of the village between 5580 BC and 5450 BC (68.2% confidence) which in short corresponds to later Starčevo and the end of the Karanovo II complex in the eastern Balkans, including the Karanovo II and Ov-charovo groups. There are 212 14C dates reliable for Sum probability dating of the Early Neolithic Balkans, from pre- and Karanovo I culture and Starčevo complexes to Karanovo II culture. They infer that the span between 6010 BC and 5520 BC (with 68.2% confidence) gives the probable dating of the that period (Chart 4), which fact in my opinion corresponds well to the re-gional chronology of the different culture formations. In the earlier Late Neolithic (LN I) two tendencies characterise Balkan Neolithic development: on the one hand, the innovatory, bi-conical ceramic style was distributed in the Karanovo III (including Karanovo II/ III and III/IV after V. Nikolov) and the earliest Vinča, as well as that of the Hamangia cultures (for the chronological sequence of the latter see Vaj-sov 1998. Fig. 1). On the other hand, the decreased evolution of the EN ceramic style of painted pottery was stili distributed in the north-western Balkans. This stage is dated by the Karanovo III Culture l4C dates to the third quarter of sixth Millennium BC (Chart 8); 5440BC-5290 BC is the radiocarbon dating based on the sum probability of 12 dates from Karanovo teli, which coincides with the sum proba-bility based on the dates from the tells of Karanovo III, Kazanluk 6 and 3 and Ezero 24 (Chart 9) to 5440 BC-5280 BC. To this stage belong the LN levels from Banya-Ploskata Mogila and Chernichevo tells. The late Neolithic II horizon includes Karanovo IV culture in Thrace, an earlier Vinča culture, the earliest Boian, Hotnitsa, Gradeshnitsa and Hamangia cultures in the Balkans between the Drina and the Black Sea, as well as between the Carpathians and the Aegean. The absolute dating of Karanovo IV culture, based on a comparison with the EN II dating of sites from neighbouring regions (Chart 10), is to the fourth quarter of the sixth Millennium BC. This is the stage to which belongs the Dubene-Popovka II encrusted plate. In light of the recent evidence, the end of the Neolithic in the Balkans occurred between c. 5000 and 4900 BC. The Sum probability of the 283 dates of the Balkan Neolithic confirms mainly the dating of the earlier stages (Chart 11), which can be explained by the fact that more dates belong to the earlier Neolithic. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Dr. M. Budja who invited me in 1995 to participate in the Neolithic Seminar at the Univer-sity of Ljubljana. I extend my thanks to Prof. R. Tring-ham, who was my host at Berkeley during my research there in 1997-1998.1 am also grateful to the Conference of the German Academy of Sciences, which supported my research and teaching at the University of Heidelberg in Winter 1998 - Spring 1999, and to my host professor there, Prof. J. Maran, who gave me the best conditions of work there and consulted with me on many primary research points. B. C. Ramsay was my initial indirect consultant at the beginning of my research on the radiocarbon chronology, whom I thank for his kind replies to my cjuestions. REFERENCES BOEV P. 1959- Neoliticni antropologichni materiali ot Yasa Tepe (Plovdiv). Godishnik na Narodniya Arkheologicheski Muzej Plovdiv 3: 89-91. BOGDANOVIČ M. 1996. Prilog proucavanju apsolut-ne kronologije protostarčevacke i starčevačke kulture. Starinar 47: 187-92. BRUKNER B. 1997. Proto-Starčevo White Painted and Early Painted Pottery of Southeastern Europe. Similarities and Differences. Anatolica 23: 243-68. BUDJA M. 1995. Lanscape Changes in the Neolithic and and Eneolithic in Slovenia. Čase Study: Ljubljansko Barje I. Poročilo o raziskovanjupaleolitika, ne-olitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 22: 175-81. COKHADZHIEV M. 1986. Prouchvane na rannoneo-litnoto selishte kraj Proboj -Pernishki okrug. Arkheo-logiya 27: 3, 41-48. ČOHADZIEV S. and GENADIEVA V. 1998. Contribu-tion to the Study of the Early neolithic Age in the Struma River Basin. In Stefanovich M. et al. (eds.), In the Steps of James Harvev Gaul: 63-89. DETE V P. 1950. Selishtnata mogila Banyata pri Kapi-tandimitrievo. Godishnik na Narodniya Arkheologicheski Muzej Plovdiv 2: 1-23. 1960. Razkopki na selishtnata mogila Yasatepe v Plovdiv prez 1959 g- Godishnik na Narodniya Arkheologicheski Muzej Plovdiv 4: 5-74. 1962. Praistorichesko selishte v s. Hissar, Plov-divsko. Arkheologiya 4: 2, 53-55- 1963- Stratigraphiya na selishtnite mogili v Yuzh-na Bulgariya. Godishnik na Narodniya Arkheologicheski Muzej Plo vdiv 5: 5-25. DRASOVEN F. (ed.) 1996. The Vinča Culture, Its Role and Cultural Connections. Museum Baticum Teme-siense. GARAŠANIN M. 1966. Khronologiya i genezis na neo-lita v yugoistochnata chast na Balkanskiya poluos-trov. Arkheologiva 8: 1, 16-29- 1998. Kulturstromungen im Neolithimum des sud-lichen Balkanraums. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 73: 25-51. GATSOVI. AND OZDOGAN M. 1994. Some Epi-Paleo-lithic Sites from NW Turkey. Agačli, Domali and Gti-miisdere. Anatolica 20: 97-120. GEORGIEV G. 1974. Stratigraphiya i periodizatsiya na neolita i khalkolita v dneshnite bulgarski zemi. Arkheologiya 16: 4, 1-19. GEORGIEV G., NIKOLOV V., NIKOLOVA V. AND ČOHADZIEV S. 1986. Die neolithische Siedlung Kremenik bei Separeva Banja, Bezirk Kjusdendil. Studia Praehistorica 8: 108-51- GLASER R. 1996. Zur absoluten Datierung der Vinča-Kultur anhand von l4C-Daten. In Drasoven F. (ed.), The Vinča Culture: 175-212. GORSDORF J. AND BOJADŽIEVJ. 1996. Zur absoluten Chronologie der bulgarischen Urgeschichte Eu-rasia Antiqua 2: 105-73- HODDERJ. 1990. The Domestication of Europe. HOPF M. 1988. Fruhneolithische Kulturplanzen aus Poljanica-Plateau bei Turgovishte (Bulgarien). Studia Praehistorica 9: 34-36. KALUDOVA Y. 1966. Selishtnata mogila pri s. Ruen, Plovdivsko. Arkheologiya 8: 1, 52-59- KANCHEV M. AND KANCHEVA T. 1988. Pozdneneo-liticheskpoe poselenie "Khlebozavoda" u goroda Nova Zagora. Studia Praehistorica 9: 68-83- KANCHEVA T. 1988. Spatneolithische Kunstwerke im Museum von Nova Zagora Studia Praehistorica 13: 74-86. KARMANSKI S. 1968. Slikana keramika sa lokalite-ta Donja Branjevina kod Deronja. KRAJCHEV I. 1970. Predi 7000 godini. Novootkrito praistorichesko selishte v Karlovo. Karlovska Tribuna 148, fune 12: 4. LAZAROVICI G. 1979. Neoliticul Banatului. Muzeul National de Istorie a Transilvaniei. LAZAROVICI G. AND KALMAR Z. 1995. Gura Bacu-lui. Muzeul National de Istorie a Transilvaniei. NIKOLOV B. 1975. Selishte ot stariya neolit pri s. Gradeshnotsa, Vrachanski okrug. Arkheologoya 27: 4, 3-17. 1986. Selishte ot kusniya neolit pri s. Brenitsa, Vrachanski okrug. Arkheologiya 38: 4, 5-17. 1992. Periodizatsiya na neolitnite kulturi v Severna Bulgariya. Izvestiya na Muzeite v Severoza-padna Bulgariya 18: 11-23, figs. 1-17. NIKOLOV V. 1992. Mittelneolithische Keramik aus Karanovo: typologische Charakteristik. Balcanica 23: 123-31. 1994. Risuvanata ornamentatsiya vurkhu ranno-neolitni keramichni sudove ot Chavdar. Godi-shnik na Department Arklieologiya NBU 1: 185-208. 1998. Prouchvaniya vurkhu neolitnata keramika v Trakiya. Keramichnite kompleksi Karanovo //-///, III and III-IV v konteksta na Severo-zapadna Anatoliya i Yugoiztochna Evropa, NIKOLOVA L. 1994 Novootkriti praistoricheski seli-shta v gornoto techenie na r. Stryama (Severozapad-na Trakiya). Anali 2-3: 5-11. NIKOLOVA L. AND MADJEV N. 1994. Prahistorische Funde aus Bulgarien (das Strjama - Tal). MKM. OZDOGAN M. 1993 Vinča and Anatolia: A New Look at a Very Old Problem. Anatolica 19: 173-93- 1997 The Beginning of the Neolithic Economy in Southeastern Europe: An Anatolian Perspective. Journal of European Archaeology 5: 2, 1-33■ OZDOGAN M. and DEDE Y. 1998. An Anthropomor-phic Vessel from Toptepe - Eastern Thrace. In Stefa-novich M. et al. In the Steps of James Harvey Gaul: 143-52. PANAYOTOV I, GATSOV I. AND POPOVA Ts. 1992. "Pompena stantsiya" bliz s. Maluk Preslavets - ranno-neoliticheskoe peselenie s intramuralnymi porgebe-niyami. Studia Praehistorica 11-12: 51-61. PARZINGER H. 1993. Studien zur Chronologie und Kulturgeschichte der Jungstein-, Kupfer- und Fridi-bronzezeit zivischen Karpaten und Mittleren Tau-rus. Vols. 1-2. Romisch-germanischen Forshungen 52. PERNICHEVA L. 1990. Le site de Kovachevo. Neoli-thique ancien, dans de department de Blagoevgrad. Studia Praehistorica 10: 142-96. PETKOV N. 1948. Ginova Mogila do s. Chelopech, Pirdopsko. Razkopki i prouchvaniya 1: 75-81. PYKE G. and YIOUNI P. 1996. Nea Nikomedea. Vol, 1. The British School at Athens. Suppl. Vol. 25. POPOV V. AND VAJSOV I. 1992. Spasitelni razkopki na praistoricheskoto selishte kraj s. Koprivets, obshti-na Balya. Arkheologicheski otkritiya i razkopki prez 1991:9-11. SCHNIER W. 1996. The Relative and Absolute Chro-nology of Vinča: New Evidence from the Tvpe Site. In Drasoven F. (ed.), The Vinča Culture: 141-62. SEFERIADES M. 1993. The European Neolithization Process. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neoli-tika in eneolitika v Sloveniji 21: 137-62. STEFANOVICH M, TODOROVA H. AND HAUPTMANN H. (eds.) 1998. In the Steps of James Harvey Gaul, Vol. 1 James Harvey Gaul in Memoriuam. TASIČ N. N. 1988 Comparative C-14 dates for the Neolithic Settlements in Serbia. In Srejovič D. (ed.), The Neolithic in Serbia. Archaeological Research 1948-1988: 45-47. 1992. A Review of the C14 Series of Dates from Derdap. Balcanica 23: 89-98. 1993 Nekoliko novih radio-karbon datuma sa lo-kaliteta Derone i Magarechi Mlin. Glasnik SAD 9: 99-102. TSONEV Ts. 1995. Collection of Flint Artefacts from the Upper Valley of the Stryama River, Karlovo Region. In Nikolova L. (ed.), Early Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in the Balkans (ca. 3500-2000 BC, Calibrated Dates). Part 1. Agatho and Foundation Prehistory. Sofia. Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects vol, 1:57-63- VAJSOV 1.1984. Anthropomorphnyya plastika iz pra-istoricheskogo poseleniya Kurilo-Kremenitsa, Sofij-skogo okruga. Studia Praehistorica 7: 33-63- 1998. Studies in Memoriam of James Harvey Gaul on the Typology of Anthropomorphic Figurines from Northeastern Bulgaria. In Stefanovich M. et al. (eds.), In the Steps of fames Harvey Gaul: 107-41. VANDOVA V. 1997. Typology of the Neolithic Small Altars from Southern Bulgaria. Archaeology in Bul-garia 1: 1, 23-29. ZVELEBIL M. 1994. Plant Use in the Mesolithic and its Role in the Transition to Farming. Proceedings of Prehistoric Society 60: 35-74. CHARTS M, Stuiver. A. Long and R. S. Kra eds 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 probfchronl Sum Early Neolithic IA 68.2% confidence 6500BC (13.9%) 6350BC 6200BC (54.3%) 5850BC 95.4% confidence J 6550BC (95.4%) 5800BC Lii i i.........i..... f- i i i i .i 7000BC 6500BC 6000BC 5500BC Calendar date Chart 1. Sum-probability for >4C dating of EN IA in the Eastern Balkans (Hoca (e$me IV and Polyanitsa-Platoto) n = 7. M. Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron] Calibrated date Chart 2. 14C dated sequence of the Hoca Cesme IV, III and IIphases. M. Stuiver. A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron] M. Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron) 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Before Hoca Cesme III 68.2% confidence ... (68.2%) 6091 BC 95.4% confidence ... (95.4%) 6396BC 7000BC 6500BC 6000BC Calendar date 5500BC Chart 3■ The computing of the possibility of the calculates the probability of any given year preceding Hoca (testne III. 0.8 06 0 4 0.2 0.0 Sum Early Neolithic 68.2% confidence 6010BC (68.2%) 5520BC 95.4% confidence 6500BC (95.4%) 5200BC 7500BC 7000BC 6500BC 6000BC 5500BC 5000BC 4500BC Calendar date Chart 4. Sum probability for dating of the EN in the Balkans based on 212 dates. M. Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r.4 sd:12 prob[chronJ M. Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob(chron) 5 .o 0.8 o o. 0.6 > 00 0.4 O) ct 0.2 0.0 6000BC 5500BC Calendar date 5000BC Sum Karanovo II 68.2% confidence 5750BC (64.1%) 5570BC 5550BC ( 4.1%) 5520BC 95.4% confidence i 5850BC (95.4%) 5250BC L. Chart 5. Sum probability of radiocarbon dating of the Karanovo II culture. 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Sum Slatina 4 68.2% confidence 5770BC (68.2%) 5600BC 95 4% confidence 5940BC ( 2.8%) 5910BC 5880BC (92 6%) 5580BC 6200BC 6000BC 5800BC 5600BC 5400BC 5200BC Calendar date Chart 6. Sum probability of dating of the end of the Burnt House from Slatina 4 (end of EN II A). M. Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron) 6900BP J 6800BP 3 | 6700BP 6600BP | 6500BP ^ 6400BP 6300BP R Comblne Dobrlnishtel 6626±38BP 68.2% confidence 5580BC (24.9%) 5540BC 5530BC (38.9%) 5480BC 5460BC (4.5%) 5450BC 95.4% confidence 5580BC (95.4%) 5440BC X2-Test: df=1 T=0.3(5% 3.8) I_I I_I u 5800CalBC 5700CaiBC 5600CalBC 5500CalBC 5400CalBC 5300CalBC 5200CalBC Calibrated date Chart 7. R-combine probability of dating of the Dobrinitshte (the end of EN HB in the Balkans). M Slu iver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1): OxCal v3 0d cub r:4 sd:12 probichron] Sum LN 1 Karanovo III 68.2% confidence 5440BC (67.0%) 5310BC 5300BC (1.2%) 5290BC 95.4% confidence 5530BC (95.4%) 5220BC i J L i ■ i A. m ! i I. i 1 , 1 M Sluiver. A. Long and R. S Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1|; OxCai v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron] 5800BC 5600BC 5400BC 5200BC 5000BC 4800BC Calendar date Chart 8. Karanovo III levels absolute dating based on the sum probability of 12 dates. 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Sum LN 1 Kar III culture 68.2% confidence 5440BC (68.2%) 5280BC 95.4% confidence 5530BC (90.6%) 5200BC 5180BC ( 2.7%) 5130BC J 5120BC (2.1%) 5070BC L ..... ...... i 6000BC 5500BC 5000BC Calendar date 4500BC Chart 9. Karanovo III culture absolute dating based on the dates from Karanovo, Ka-zanluk and Ezero tells. B ro -O 0.8 o CL 0) 0.6 > ro 0.4 0) cr 0.2 0.0 . Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds. 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1); OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[chron] Sum LN IIB The S Balkans 68.2% confidence 5270BC (62.7%) 4930BC 4840BC ( 5.5%) 4780BC 95.4% confidence 5350BC (95.4%) 4500BC 5500BC 5000BC 4500BC Calendar date 4000BC Chart 10. Late Neolithic II in the Bulgaria and the northern Aegean dated by the ,4C dates from Kachica 3, Topolnitsa and Sitga-roi II. M Stuiver, A. Long and R. S. Kra eds 1993 Radiocarbon 35(1}; OxCal v3.0d cub r:4 sd:12 prob[ctiron] 0.8 0.6 0 4 0.2 0.0 Sum Balkan Neolithic 68.2% confidence 6050BC (68.2%) 5300BC 95.4% confidence 6500BC (95.4%) 4700BC 7500BC7000BC6500BC6000BC5500BC5000BC4500BC4000BC Calendar date Chart 11. Sum probability of the Neolithic absolute dating the Balkans based on 283 >4C dates. Table A. Individual calibrated dates from Neolithic sites in the Balkans (later Seventh- earlier Fifth Mil-lennia BC), R-combine for individual levels and Sum-probability for phases. References for the dates: Breuning 1987; Tasič 1988; Mantu 1995 and Gorsdorf and Bojadžiev 1996 (uith ref); Tasic 1993; Ozdogan 1993.186; Pyke G. and Yiouni P. 1996.195; Schier 1996; Gldser 1996; Ozdogan 1997.28; Ozdogan and Dede 1998.150. Calibrated by Oxcal 3.0. EN - Early Neolithic LN - Late Neolithic EC - Early Copper Comment: The kind of the most of the samples and their stratigraphic conte.vt are given in the original publications. Site Labaratorv and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95-4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Anzabegovo LJ-2519 7560±70 6460-6250 6470-6190 Anzabegovo-Vršnik Anzabegovo Ia LJ-2181 7340±250 6450-5850 6700-5600 LJ-3032 7210±50 6120-5970 6170-5950 LJ-2330/2331 7180±60 6110-5950 6170-5870 LJ-3187 7150±70 6050-5880 6170-5820 LJ-3183 7150+50 6030-5890 6120-5860 LJ-3185 6830±70 5720-5600 5810-5520 LJ-2347 6700+150 5690-5440 5950-5250 Sum-probability Anzabegovo Ia 6150-5550 6050 (56.2%) 5940 6400-5400 EN I Anzabegovo Ib LJ-2341 7230+170 6220-5860 6400-5700 Anzabegovo-Vršnik LJ-2342 7120+200 6170-5730 6400-5550 LJ-2332 7110+120 6050-5800 6170-5710 LJ-2339 7110±70 6010-5850 6120-5770 Sum-probability Anzabegovo Ib 6120-5790 6060 (63.8%) 5790 6400-5650 Sum-probability Anzabegovo Ia-b 6200-5600 6200 (62.0%) 5800 6400-5400 EN I-beginning EN II? Anzabegovo Ib/II LJ-2337 7080±60 5980-5850 6020-5760 Anzabegovo-Vršnik Anzabegovo II LJ-2157 7030±330 6200-5550 6500-5200 LJ-2405 6940±80 5930-5690 5960-5630 LJ-2333 6840+120 5810-5580 5950-5480 LJ-2409 6850+50 5720-5630 5770-5590 LJ-2338 6800±140 5790-5520 5950-5400 LJ-2156 6630+300 5850-5200 6200-4800 Sum-probability Anzabegovo II 5940-5530 5870 (65.4%) 5570 6300-5000 EN II Anzabegovo II/III LJ-2343 7000±280 6150-5550 6400-5300 Anzabegovo-Vršnik LJ-2351 7050±80 5970-5800 6020-5700 Anzabegovo III LJ-2344 7000±270 6150-5550 6400-5300 Anzabegovo-Vršnik LJ-2345 6540±120 5580-5330 5630-5250 LJ-2185 6510+110 5560-5320 5600-5250 Sum-probabillty Anzabegovo III 5630-5260 6200-5200 ENIII-LN 1 Anzabegovo IV LJ-2329 6230+60 5250-5070 5280-4990 Anzabegovo-Vršnik IV LJ-2411 6070±190 5220-4780 5450-4500 Sum-probability Anzabegovo IV 5270-4980 5350-4600 LN Sum Anzabegovo 6150-5550 6500-4900 EN-LN Banja Bln-873 7048+100 5970-5770 6050-5680 Proto-Starčevo EN I Beran Krš 7 Z-491 6030±l60 5210-4720 5300-4500 Vinča / LN-EC Beran Krš 13 Z-492 5870±150 4910-4540 5200-4350 Site Labaratorv and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Bulgarchevo 4 Bln-2614 6100+50 5070-4930 5210-4850 Topolnitsa Chavdar 6 Bln-1583 7208±52 6120-5970 6170-5950 Karanovo I Bln-1580 7202+55 6120-5970 6170-5890 Bln-2108 7195±65 6120-5960 6170-5880 Bln-1663 7070±50 5970-5850 5990-5780 Bln-1582 7020+45 5950-5800 5960-5750 Bln-1581 7000+60 5940-5760 5960-5710 Bln-1579 7003±45 5940-5770 5960- 5730 Bln-1578 6994+55 5940-5760 5960-5710 Bln-2662 6820+50 5695-5615 5740-5580 R-combine Chavdar 6 7049±17 5950-5855 5960-5840 EN 11 Chavdar 5 Bln-4261 7120±80 6040- 5850 6130-5760 Karanovo I / EN II Bln-4106 6840+50 5710-5625 5760- 5590 R-combine Chavdar 5 5790-5695 5860- 5670 EN II Chavdar 4 Bln-ll60A 7040+100 5970-5770 6050-5670 Karanovo 1 Bln-1251 6997±100 5950-5730 6000-5630 Bln-ll62A 6985+100 5950-5720 5990-5630 Bln-1241A 6930+100 5940-5670 5960-5600 Bln-1241 6852±100 5780-5590 5950-5520 Bln-1160 6680+100 5620-5440 5720-5380 R_Combine Chavdar 4 6917+41 5780-5695 5850-5670 EN II Chavdar 3 Bln-998 7045+120 5980-5750 6120-5630 Kremikovtsi Bln-908 6990+150 5970-5690 6150-5500 Bln-911 6870+120 5820-5590 5960-5520 Bln-909 6815+100 5750-5580 5940-5480 Bln-1030 6760±100 5710-5520 5790B-5440 Bln-910 6665±100 5600-5440 5710-5340 R_Combine Chavdar 3 6833±45 5705-5625 5740-5590 EN III Chavdar 2 Bln-906 6720±100 5680-5490 5750-5430 Kremikovtsi / EN III Circea-Viaduct III Bln-1981 6540+60 5570-5380 5580-5330 Later Gradeshnitsa - Circea Bln-1982 6430+60 5440-5310 5440-5260 Bln-1983 6395+60 5430-5270 5440-5240 Sum-probability Circea-Viaduct III 5550-4700 5550(65.2%) 5250 5600-4550 LN I Circea-Viaduct Bln-1978 6585165 5570-5440 5600-5340 Dudesti - Vinča B Bln-2292 6325+60 5330-5140 5430-5070 Bln-2008 6250140 5260-5080 5270-5070 Bln-1980 6IOO16O 5200-4930 5220-4840 Sum-probability Circea-Viaduct 5600-4950 5350(49.7%) 4950 5600 (95.4%) 4900 LN II Čuka Z-495 7010H90 6010-5660 6250-5500 Starčevo Dikili Tash I Gif-1740 6450+160 5570-5240 5650-5000 Gif-1737 6400+160 5480- 5080 5600-4950 Gif-1735 6170+160 5270- 4920 5450-4700 Sum Dikili Tash 1 5480-5060 5600- 4800 LN I Dikili Tash II Gif-1736 5990H60 5200-4700 5300-4500 Sitagroi - Dikili Tash Gif-1424 5750H50 4780-4450 4950-4250 Gif-1425 5750H40 4770-4460 4950-4300 Dikili Tash II 4910-4450 5250-4300 LN II Divostin Bln-899 72001100 6170-5890 6220-5810 Proto-Starčevo Bln-826 71201100 6050-5830 6170-5730 Site Labaratory and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Bln-823 7080±180 6110-5720 6350-5550 Bln-866/899 7050±100 5970-5770 6050-5680 Bln-824 6970±100 5940-5710 5980-5620 Bln-896 6950±100 5940-5690 5970-5610 BM-573 6935+98 5940-5680 5960-5600 Bln-827 6910±100 5850-5630 5960-5590 Sum-probability Divostin 5960-5690 6200-5500 EN I Dobrinishte 1 Bln-3785 6650±60 5590-5480 5610-5430 Kremenik Bln-3786 6610+50 5570-5440 5580-5430 R-combine Dobrinishte 1 6626±38 5580-5450 5530BC (38.9%) 5480BC 5580- 5440 EN III Donja Branevinja Gm-15974 7155+50 6040- 5890 6120-5860 6040 (64.6%) 6060 (77.4%) 5950 5930 GrN-15976 7140±90 6110-5850 6170-5770 6050 (46.5%) 5930 GrN-15975 6955+50 5850-5720 5950-5690 Sum Donja Branevinja 6050- 5740 6120- 5700 Proto-Starčevo and earlv Starčevo EN I—II Eleshnitsa 2 Bln-3238 7010+60 5950-5770 5960-5720 Karanovo I Bln-3241 6960+60 5930-5710 5950-5680 Bln-3242 6940±50 5830-5700 5940-5670 Bln-3239 6920+60 5820-5680 5940-5630 Bln-3240 6850±50 5720-5630 5770-5590 Bln-3237 6790±50 5675-5595 5720-5530 Bln-3245 6730+90 5690-5520 5730-5440 Bln-3244 6720±70 5670-5520 5690-5440 R-combine Eleshnitsa 2 6879+21 5720- 5688 5745-5670 EN 11 Ezero 24 Bln-1833 6415+70 5430-5280 5450-5230 Karanovo III Bln-530 6270+80 5280-5070 5430-4990 R-combine Ezero 24 6353+53 5380-5240 5340(64.8%) 5240 5430-5210 LN I Gornja Tuzla GrN-2059 6640+75 5580-5440 5640-5430 Later Starčevo/EN III Grivac Bln-869 7250+100 6170-5980 6360-5860 Proto-Starčevo/EN I Gulubnik 1 Bln-3579H 7220+80 6160-5960 6070 (47.2%) 5960 6190-5870 6190 (91.4%) 5930 Gulubnik Bln-3580 7120+70 6020-5850 6020 (41.7%) 5930 6120-5770 6060 (92.8%) 5770 Bln-3579 7030+70 5960- 5790 5980-5710 Bln-3582 6950+70 5930-5700 5960-5660 R-combine Gulubnik 1 7073+36 5965-5865 5980-5820 EN II Gulubnik 7 Bln-4096 7140+80 6050-5860 6170-5780 Later Starčevo Bln-4095 7020+150 5980-5700 6200-5550 Bln-4094 6760+80 5690-5520 5750-5440 R-combine Gulubnik 7 6965+53 5860- 5720 5950-5690 5890 (84.7%) 5690 EN II Gulubnik 8 Bln-4091 6760+60 5675-5580 5720-5520 Later Starčevo Bln-4092 6710+60 5640-5520 5680-5440 Bln-3576 6670+70 5600-5480 5640-5430 Site Labaratory and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Coniplex (Culture, Group, Type) Period R-combine Gulubnik 8 6718±36 5605-5525 5605 (45.8%) 5570 5670-5520 EN III Hoca (teme IV Bln-4609 7637±43 6470-6410 6550-6370 Hoca Ces me GrN-19779 7360±35 6220-6060 6240-6040 GrN-19355 7200±180 6190-5820 6400-5650 R-combine Hoca Ce§me IV 7468±27 6360-6220 6380-6210 EN IA Hoca (Jedrne III GrN-19357 7135+270 6250-5650 6500-5450 Hoca Qe§me GrN-19311 6960+65 5930-5710 5960-5670 GrN-19780 6920±90 5930-5670 5950-5600 GrN-19781 6900+110 5850-5620 5960-5580 Sum Hoca Ces me III 5950-5660 6350-5500 EN IB-II Hoca ^e§me II GrN-19782 6890+60 5780-5630 5860-5600 GrN-19310 (or GrN-19356) 6890±280 6000-5450 6400-5200 GrN-19356 (or GrN-19310) 6520+110 5570-5330 5600-5250 Sum Hoca (Je§me II 5820-5330 6150-5200 EN II Sum Hoca (Je§me 6500-5600 6600-5200 EN I-II Karanovo I Bln-4179 7130+70 6040-5860 6120-5780 Karanovo 1 Bln-4336 7110+50 5990-5870 6050-5830 Bln-4177 7110+50 5990-5870 6050-5830 Bln-4339 7090+90 6000-5810 6120-5720 Bln-4338 6955+45 5840- 5720 5940-5690 Bln-3942 6820±50 5695-5615 5740- 5580 Bln-4337 6810+65 5695-5595 5770-5520 Bln-4335 6710±55 5630-5520 5680-5450 Sum-probability Karanovo I 6000-5530 6000BC (39.5%) 5840BC 6050-5500 EN II Karanovo II Bln-3716 6910±60 5810-5670 5940-5620 Karanovo II Bln-3716H 6850±60 5730-5620 5810-5590 Bin-152 6807±100 5740-5530 5860-5480 Bln-3944 6785+60 5680-5590 5730-5520 Bln-3586 6780±60 5680-5590 5730-5520 Bln-3943 6760+50 5665-5585 5700-5520 Bln-3941 6750+50 5670-5530 5700-5520 Bln-201 6540+100 5570-5330 5600-5270 Bln-234 6490+150 5570-5270 5700-5050 Sum probability Karanovo II 5750- 5520 5850- 5250 EN III Kazanluk 6 Bln-730 6335+160 5440-5070 5600-4900 Karanovo III/LN I Kazanluk 3 Bln-729 6330±100 5430-5080 5450-5040 Karanovo III/LN I Kremenik 2 Bln-2554 6620±100 5590-5440 5670-5330 Kremenik Bln-2552 6460±60 5440-5330 5480-5260 Kremenik 3 Bln-2555 6840+60 5720-5615 5790-5580 Kremenik Bln-2553 6660+60 5600-5480 5620-5440 Bln-2105 6530±50 5530-5340 5570-5330 Bln-2556 6480±60 5450-5330 5530-5270 Bln-2106 6475±40 5440-5335 5450-5310 Kremenik 4 Bln-2550 6550+60 5570-5380 5580-5330 Kremenik Bln-2551 6450±100 5450-5280 5580-5210 Bln-2549 6350±60 5380-5220 5440-5140 Sum-probability Kremenik 2-4 5570-5310 5530 (64..5%) 5310 5720-5240 EN II Site Labaratory and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Magareci Mlin Grn-15973 7130+60 6020-5870 6020 (48.3%) 5930 6120-5820 6060 (92.8%) 5820 GrN-15972 7015+90 5960-5760 6000-5670 GrN-15971 6910±45 5780-5685 5860-5630 Sum Magareci Mlin 6000-5690 6000 (17.3%) 5930 6050-5670 Proto-Starčevo and early Starčevo EN I-II Nea Nekomedea P-1202 7557+91 6460-6230 6550-6170 Nea Nekomedea OxA-l6o6 7400±100 6370-6060 6410-6010 OxA-4282 7400±90 6370-6060 6400-6010 OxA-l605 7400+90 6370-6060 6400-6010 OxA-3876 7370±90 6360-6050 6380-6000 0xA-3874 7370±80 6350-6050 6370-6010 OxA-l604 7340+90 6230-6030 6370-5990 OxA-3873 7300+80 6180-6020 6360-5960 OxA-3875 7280±90 6180-6010 6360-5950 P-1203A 7281+74 6170-6020 6230-5960 OxA-4283 7260+90 6170-5990 6240-5880 OxA-4281 7100±90 6010-5820 6120-5720 OxA-l603 7050±80 5970-5800 6020-5700 OxA-4280 6920+120 5940-5630 5980-5570 Sum Nea Nekomedea 6360-5990 6450-5700 EN I-II Ogradena-Icoana Bln-1056 7445±80 6370-6180 6420-6050 Starčevo-Cris / EN I Ovcharovo-Gorata 1 Bln-1544 6688±60 5610-5480 5670-5440 Karanovo II -Ovcharovo aspect A Bln-1620 6463±50 5435-5335 5450-5280 R-combine Ovcharovo-Gorata 1 6558+38 5525-5435 5505 (61.0%) 5435 5570-5380 5530 (82.3%) 5420 Ovcharovo-Gorata 3 Bln-2032 6555+70 5450-5330 5530-5270 Ovcharovo Sum-probability Ovcharovo-Gorata 1/3 5590-5330 5630-5290 EN III Ovcharovo-Platoto 1 Bln-1356 6480±60 5450-5330 5530-5270 Ovcharovo EN III Padina BI 7100+80 6010-5840 6120-5740 Proto-Starčevo EN I Polyanitsa-Platoto I Bln-1571 7535+80 6430-6230 6470-6180 Koprivets I Bln-1613 7380±60 6110-5950 6170-5870 Bln-l6l3A 7275±60 6170-6010 6190-5980 Bln-1512 7140+80 6050-5860 6170-5780 R-combine PoIyanitsa-Platoto 7334+34 6180-6060 6180-6120 6220-6040 EN IA Porodin KN-I.596 7240+55 6130-5990 6180-5970 Starčevo H-1486/987 7120+140 6120-5780 6250-5650 R-combine Porodin 7224±51 6120- 5980 6170-5960 EN II Priština-Predionica Bln-435 6280±80 5290-5070 5430-4990 Vinča A Selevac Z-233 6366+100 5430-5220 5450-5060 Vinča B/C Z-233B 6152+90 5220-4960 5270-4840 B/C Z-233A 6ll3±80 5210-4930 5230-4830 B/C LJ-2523 6100+100 5210-4860 5250-4790 LJ-2521 6080±70 5070-4850 5220-4810 B/C Sum-probability Selevac 5220-4900 5450- 4800 LN II Servia BM-1103 6880+49 5760-5665 5820-5610 BM-1104 6747+51 5670-5530 5700-5520 BM-1106 6690+83 5630=5480 5690-5430 BM-1107 6606+55 5570=5440 5590-5430 Sum Servia 5670- 5450 5770-5430 EN-LN Site Labaratory and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Sitagroi I Bln-779 6625+170 5670-5330 5850-5200 Bln-778 6425+100 5440-5270 5570-5140 BM-648 6265+75 5280-5070 5340-4990 Sum-probability Sitagroi I 5490-5080 5490 (57.3%) 5200 5750-5000 Sitagroi LN I Sitagroi II Bln-884 6240+100 5280-5050 5430-4930 Sitagroi 11 Bln-777 5920±120 4950-4610 5100-4450 Bln-649 5904+66 4900-4710 4940-4600 Bln-776 5720+100 4700-4460 4780-4350 Sum-probability Sitagroi II 5250-4500 4950 (62.1%) 4500 5300(95.4%) 4350 LN II Slatina 4 Bln-3504 6970+60 5930-5730 5960-5690 Karanovo I BIn-3441 6960±60 5930-5710 5950-5680 Bln-3438 6960+60 5930-5710 5950-5680 Bln-3439 6940±60 5840-5700 5950-5660 Bln-3434 6890+60 5780-5630 5860-5600 Bln-3435 6860+50 5730-5635 5790-5590 Bln-3440 6840±60 5720-5615 5790-5580 Bln-3443 6840+60 5720-5615 5790-5580 Bln-3436 6840±60 5720-5615 5790-5580 Bln-3555 6830±60 5710-5610 5780-5580 Bln-3437 6810±50 5685-5605 5730-5580 Bln-3442 6780±60 5680-5590 5730-5520 R-combine Slatina 4 6875+17 5714- 5687 5730-5670 EN II Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-1 Bln-293 Bln-291 7303±150 7158+150 6350-5970 6170-5830 6450-5800 6400-5650 Karanovo I Bln-292 6878+100 5810-5610 5950-5570 Bln-294 6768+100 5710-5520 5800-5440 R-combine Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-1 6956+59 5850-5710 5950-5680 EN II Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-2 Bln-296 6779±100 5720-5520 5820-5440 Karanovo I Bln-295 6720±100 5680-5490 5750-5430 R-combine Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-2 6750+71 5680- 5520 5720- 5480 ENIII Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-3 Bln-203 6870+100 5800-5600 5950-5520 Karanovo I Bln-299 6812+100 5750-5580 5860-5480 Bln-267 6758+100 5710-5520 5790-5440 Bln-297 6675±100 5610-5440 5720-5380 Bln-224 6650±150 5670-5380 5800-5250 Bln-298 6540+100 5570-5330 5600-5270 R-combine Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-3 6727+43 5625-5525 5680- 5520 ENIII Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-4 Bln-301 6483±100 5480-5280 5580-5240 Karanovo I Bln-300 6426±150 5530-5220 5600-5000 Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-5 Bln-430 6279±120 5330-5060 5440-4940 Karanovo I Sum probability Stara Zagora-Azmak 1-4-5 5490-5140 5600- 4950 EN III Stara Zagora-Azmak II Bln-140A 6476±100 5480-5280 5450 (66.5%) 5280 5580-5230 5530 (90.6%) 5230 LN I Stara Zagora-Okruzhna Bolnitsa V Bln-1586 6814+65 5700-5600 5770-5520 Karanovo I Site Labaratory and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Coinplex (Culture, Group, Type) Period Bln-1587 7139±65 6040-5880 6120-5810 Sum-probability Stara Zagora-Okruzhna Bolnitsa V 6020- 5590 6150- 5500 EN II Stara Zagora-Okruzhna Bolnitsa IV Bln-1590 6939±60 5840-5700 5950-5660 Karanovo II Bln-1589 6918+45 5790-5690 5930-5660 BIn-1250 6820+100 5750-5580 5940-5480 Bln-1164A 6744±100 5700-5520 5770-5430 Bln-1164 6723±100 5680-5500 5760-5430 Bln-1163 6688+150 5690-5440 5850-5250 Stara Zagora-Okruzhna Bolnitsa IVI Bln-1588 6750+60 5670-5530 5710-5500 Sum-probability Stara Zagora-Okruzhna Bolnitsa IV 5780- 5520 5940- 5440 EN III Starčevo GrN-9036 6920±45 5790-5695 5940-5660 Later Starčevo GrN-7155 6835+70 5720-5600 5820-5570 GrN-9035 6835±45 5705-5625 5740-5590 GrN-8231 6700±70 5630-5480 5680-5440 GrN-9037 6700+55 5625-5520 5670-5440 GrN-9034 6640±45 5580-5450 5590-5440 GrN-6629 6615+65 5580-5440 5600-5430 GrN-6626 6610+65 5570-5440 5600-5380 GrN-7154 66l0±100 5590-5430 5670-5320 GrN-6627 6545+105 5580-5330 5600-5270 Sum-probability Starčevo 5630-5440 5810-5330 EN III TTrpe§ti Bln-801 6245±100 5280-5050 5430-4930 Linear Band Pottery Bln-800 6170+100 5220-4970 5290-4840 Sum-probability Tirpe§ti 5270-5000 5270 (64.5%) 5040 5400-4850 LN II Topolnitsa 2c Bln-3349 6240±90 5270-5060 5340-4940 Topolnitsa Bln-3382 6l00±60 5200-4930 5220-4840 Topolnitsa 2b Bln-3381 6270+60 5270-5080 5330-5060 Bln-3348 6000±80 4970-4780 5080-4710 Topolnitsa Sum-probability 5270-4940 5350-4750 LN II Toptepe 5 GrN-16476 6290+25 5260-5227 5280-5140 Toptepe GrN-18741 6200+50 5220 (68.2%) 5060 5260 (95.4%) 4990 GrN 18740 6160+70 5220-4990 5260-4930 HD 13589-13321 6155+40 5210-4990 5220-4950 HD 13590-13235 6095±40 5050-4945 5210-4900 Toptepe 4 HD 13591- 13339 6410+180 5530-5090 5650-4900 Toptepe 3 GrN-18743 6220±70 5240-5060 5280-4960 GrN-18742 6060+110 5200-4830 5080(63.8%) 4830 5250-4700 Sum Toptepe 5270 (68.2%) 4990 5450BC (95.4%) 4800BC LN II Tresti ana GrN-1 7003 6665±45 5595-5500 5600-5440 Starčevo-Cri§ Valea Rau KN-1 102 6480±75 5450-5310 5570-5270 LN I Starčevo-Cris Site Labaratorv and Sample No. BP 68.2% confidence BC 95.4% confidence BC Complex (Culture, Group, Tvpe) Period Veluška Tumba Tx-1785 6950+120 5950-5680 6000-5590 Starčevo Tx-1786 6890+140 5930-5600 5990-5480 Tx-1809 6900±90 5830-5630 5950-5590 Suni-probability Veluška Tumba 5930-5630 5980-5570 EN 11 Vršnik-Tarinci Bln-339 6950+100 5940-5690 5970-5610 Starčevo Bln-339a 6855+80 5760-5600 5860-5570 H-559/485 6865+150 5930-5580 6000-5400 Sum-probability Vršnik-Tarinci 5840-5610 5980-5520 EN II Vinča-Belo Brdo GrN-1535 6l70±85 5220-4990 5270-4900 GrN-1546 6190+60 5220-5060 5260-4960 Vinča Hd-14184 6249+31 5260-5090 5270-5070 Vinča A Hd-14235 6264+22 5260-5140 5270-5090 Hd-l4l10 6149+63 5210-4960 5230-4920 Vinča B Hd-16661 6353±66 5420-5230 5440-5140 Hd-17665 6273±49 5270-5090 5290-5060 Hd-16636 6180±40 5220-5060 5230- 4990 Hd-17674 6198+51 5220-5060 5260- 4990 Hd-16864 6145±34 5210- 4990 5220-4950 Hd-16733 6293+79 5320-5080 5430-5050 Sum Vinča 5260-5060 5340-4940 LN II