UDK 903(392/393)"634"_
Documenta Praehistorica XXV (Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji XXV)
The Circumpontic cultural zone during the 6th millennium BC
Vassil Nikolov
Bulgarian Academy of Science, Prehistory Department, Archaeological Institute with Museum, Sofia, vnikolov@sf.icn.bg
ABSTRACT - The Circumpontic cultural zone developed during the tirne of the Balkan Neolithic and covered the territories around the southern and ivestern coast of the Black Sea. The new data pre-sented describes it as a zone ofactive two-way contacts betiveen north-ivestern Anatolia and the eastern Balkans during the 6"' millennium BC. The paper emphasises the role of Thrace as a generator offormative and ornamental ideas for the pottery production of the gradually enlarging Circumpontic zone.
POVZETEK - Obpontska kulturna cona seje razvila v času balkanskega neolitika in je obsegala območje južnih in zahodnih obal Črnega morja. Novi podatki jo kažejo kot cono aktivnih dvosmernih stikov med severozahodno Anatolijo in vzhodnim Balkanom v času 6. tisočletja BC. V članku poudarjamo pomen Trakije, kije bila "generator" oblikovnih in ornamentalnih idej pri izdelovanju keramike v postopno naraščajoči obpontski coni.
The system of chronological relations lies at the basis of every cultural and historical study. New archaeological excavations, as well as the study of old collections, create a steady accumulation of facts that, from a certain point on, lead to a more or less significant change in ideas about the pattern of past material culture in a given region or area. A change in ideas about the chronology of settlements, layers or finds usually leads to a need to up-date or funda-mentally change existing cultural and historical interpretations. Therefore, the recurrent "improve-ment" of the chronological pattern is of heuristic importance.
The most complete (according to our potential) study of the pottery related or possibly related (under the pattern valid until recently) to the Karanovo III culture, brought about the development of a new peri-odisation and chronology of post-Early Neolithic cultural phenomena in Thrace, and to an approximate definition of the territorial range of the culture known already, as well as of the newly defined cultural periods (Hukoaob 1998).
The Early Neolithic pottery assemblage of Karanovo I covered the whole territory of Thrace, from Vetren and Kovačevo to the west, to Glufiševo and Asagi
pinar to the east, from Banja and Kazanlak to the north to Muldava and Hoca (Jesme to the south and south-east, i.e., covering almost the whole Maritsa basin and the region at the Mesta's upper course. The chronologically following pottery assemblage in the western and southern parts of this region was Karanovo III-IV, belonging to the middle stage of the Late Neolithic. It also covered the north-eastern parts of Thrace, but it had been preceded by three other, consecutive pottery assemblages in the region: the Early Neolithic Karanovo II, the Middle Neolithic Protokaranovo III and Karanovo III, related to the beginning of the Late Neolithic. These three periods chronologically matched, therefore, later and the lat-est phases of the Karanovo I period in the rest of the region. The last stage of the Late Neolithic in the western parts of Thrace was represented by a variant of the pottery assemblage Karanovo III-IV, which continued to develop, while at the same time the pot-tery assemblage Karanovo IV existed in the eastern parts of Thrace, to the east from the Kazanlak-Has-kovo line, including Asagi pinar.
The introduction of a new Thracian chronological system in the chronology scheme of North-western Anatolia and South-eastern Europe is causing and will continue to cause revisions of ideas about the
chronology of the material culture of the area dur-ing the second half of the 6th millennium BC. This paper is only an attempt at an introduction to the chronological system of the Thracian Neolithic and the related pottery assemblages and the great prob-lems of the relations between Anatolia and the Balkans during the tirne of the Balkan Neolithic.
This problem has various dimensions for each pre-historic period. The most debatable aspect of the chronological period under study is the concept of the origin and distribution of the black (grey-black), very well smoothed, burnished and sometimes polished pottery. Research on this subject followed at least some main directions related to the origin of the cultural communities with dark pottery in South-eastern Europe that replaced (with a few excep-tions) the early cultures with coloured (predomi-nantly red) painted pottery in the middie and the third quarter of the 6th millennium.
The first assumptions about the significance of the black, burnished pottery as a reliable mark for migra-tions within the Balkan territory (from Greece to the Danube region) were those of H. Frankfort and W. Heurtley, but the globalisation of the problem of the origin of this pottery in the Balkans as a result of migrations from the Near East was stated by V. G. Childe (1936-1937) and supported later by V. Miloj-čič (1949). Three decades later, M. Garašanin presen-ted his concept of the Balkan-Anatolian complex of the Late Neolithic, a concept which, though modified, is maintained up to now (TapamaHm 1966; 1973; Garašanin 1979). The concept included as a specific element a slow, continuous migration from Anatolia to the Middie Danube area. Close to this comprehen-sive idea were the views of other archaeologists studying particular details of the problem (Thmob 1974; Lichardus, Lichardus-Itten 1989-1990). The idea that the origin of the Vinča culture was the result of migrations from the east (via Thrace) is shared by D. Srejovič (1963), B. Jovanovič (Jomm-bulj 1962-1963), V. Dumitrescu (1980), G. Lazarovi-ci (1973), T. Efe (1990), etc. The origin of the black, burnished pottery that appeared in Middie and Northern Greece during the transition from the Middie to the Late Neolithic was related traditionally to migrations from the east (Holmberg 1964; Gallis 1987). The appearance of the Late Neolithic, dark, burnished pottery (and the origin of the Dudesti culture) to the north of the Danube was ascribed also to migrations via the valleys of the Vardar and Morava, or to a movement of groups of population over the large area from the Black Sea to the Central Balkans
(Comsa 1987). The origin of the black, burnished pottery of the Paradimi group was sought also in Anatolia (Bakalakis; Sakellariou 1981). Some pre-hi-storians also accepted that the Karanovo III culture was not of local origin in Thrace (Radunceva 1978).
The concept of the autochthonous origin of the black, burnished pottery in the Balkans and the cultures reproducing it has had far fewer supporters. G. I. Georgiev always insisted on the local origin of the Karanovo III culture in Thrace (Georgiev 1971; Teop-rnes 1974). H. Todorova suggested that at the end of the Early Neolithic (i.e. at the tirne of the Karanovo II culture) there was a break in the contacts between Thrace and Anatolia, and the culture of the former area continued to develop without eastern influence (TojopoBa, Bsmcob 1993)• J- Chapman stated his belief in an autochthonous development that led to the emergence of the Vinča culture and its black, burnished pottery (Chapman 1981). Similar conclusions were presented by V. Lekovič (1990). Other experts also shared "autochthonous" views regarding the origin of this culture (and its pottery) (e. g. Boroneant 1990; Seferiades 1990).
The concept proposed in recent years by M. Ozdogan for the existence of a prehistoric Anatolian-Bal-kan cultural zone also had its supporters. This was his personal opinion on the problem: "... from the beginning of the Neolithic period in the Balkans, up to the beginning of the Bronze age, we tend to con-sider most of the Balkan peninsula, Western and Central Anatolia as a single cultural formative zone, distinct from the areas of the Levanto-Mesopotamian tradition. In considering vast geographical areas, ex-tending from Central Anatolia to the Danube, we imply neither that identical cultural assemblages existed throughout this region or that a cultural homogeneity was due to the impetus of diffusion. The model we are suggesting manifests a large cultural formation zone, developing together with the same trend, but also displaying a considerable diver-sity in the composition of cultural and artificial assemblages." (Ozdogan 1993-177). The evidence presented by M. Ozdogan was completed and par-tially developed by L. Thissen (1993) in his analysis of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic pottery from North-western and Central Anatolia, and by S. Steadman (1995) on the basis of publications on the prehistoric development of the same region.
It is not possible to mention ali the components of the above-mentioned aspect of the problem of cultural and demographic relations between Anatolia
and the Balkans during the second lialf of the 6th millennium, but what has already been stated reflects the three main trends in the scientific efforts at using black, burnished pottery as an argument or reason for solving the problem. The possibility, how-ever, of expressing different and even self-contra-dictory theses concerning one and the same subject indicates insufficiently strict methodology or a crisis in the research approach. This concerns mainly pure "migrationists" and "autochthonists", which is why the idea of the existence of an Anatolian-Balkan cultural zone, although it could not be a cure-all in it-self, is certainly an example of a fruitful, non-tradi-tional idea.
The problem of the reasons, the nature, and the mechanism of the serious changes that caused the emergence of cultures with black, burnished pottery in South-eastern Europe could be the subject of a comprehensive studv. I would like just to present briefly some of my observations concerning the problem that resulted both from my recently com-pleted study of post-Early Neolithic pottery and my long research work on Early Neolithic development in the area.
There is no doubt that the origin of the Early Neolithic cultures with painted pottery in the central parts of the Balkan Peninsula was related to South and especially South-western Anatolia. Important indica-tions for this include not only the indisputable typo-logical similarities between the material cultures, but also the geographic link between the two regions that, together with the Aegean Islands, form a clear-ly detectable are from the Taurus Mountains to the Carpathian basin. Two other regions, Northern, and especially North-western Anatolia, and the eastern parts of the Balkan peninsula (up to Moldavia), re-mained between this "exterior" are and the Black Sea; the Early Neolithic in the "interior" are was char-aeterised by dark, unpainted (with certain excep-tions) pottery. Theoretically, there could be three possible Balkan contact areas of the two zones (from south to north): Western Thrace/Eastern Macedonia, Thrace, and the Lower Danube basin. In fact, only Thrace developed in this way.
The European part of the so called "exterior" are or the South Anatolian-Central Balkan zone developed a little bit later than the Anatolian part, but within a comparatively short period. The interactions within the range of the "exterior" are are demonstrable for the whole period of its existence, i.e., for the period of the produetion of the early painted pottery, which
lasted for at least a millennium in almost the whole area of the zone. After that tirne, a material culture with black, burnished pottery (Vinča and Vinča groups) originated and dominated for a rather long period in the most northerly parts of the zone; in the other parts of the zone (to the south and south-east), painted pottery continued its development (though with some innovations).
The formation processes of the "interior" are (Northern Anatolian/Eastern Balkan or the Circumpontic zone) started a little bit later, and their development was considerably slower. The formation area of the Circumpontic zone was probably some-where around the Sea of Marmara and in Northern Anatolia to the east.
According to the present stage of research, I can relate the sites Fikirtepe I, Pendik I, Ilipinar X, (Janak-kale (the early materials), Demircihuyuk (at least the so-called Fikirtepe ware), Orman Fidanhgi I—III, etc. to the earliest period (Karanovo I) of that zone (see Fig. 1 for ali sites mentioned in this paper). Some contemporaneous sites will probably be discovered in the future further to the east. During the Karanovo I period, a culture with painted pottery (Karanovo I) spread gradually from western to eastern Thrace, up to the lower Tundza and Maritza rivers (Nikolov 1989). Meanwhile, though on a small scale, the reproduetion of dark grey and grey-black, very well smoothed to burnished pottery also started to ap-pear in the settlements of the eastern reaches of this cultural phenomenon (Nikolov 1997).
During the following period already (Karanovo II) the zone of the "interior" are covered Eastern Thrace (a region where the process had probably started a little bit earlier, e. g. Yanmburgaz 5-4), the north-eastern parts of Thrace (Karanovo II) and reached the Fore-Balkan fields of North-eastern Bulgaria (Ov-čarovo-platoto and Ovčarovo-gorata). Painted pottery vanished completely in the north-eastern parts of Thrace (i.e. the Karanovo I period ended) and the Karanovo II cultural phenomenon, with dark pot-tery, developed; the painted pottery tradition (Karanovo I) continued in the remaining parts of the same area {Nikolov 1993-185-186; Nikolov 1993a.l68-169).
There is no data indicating a territorial expansion of the Circumpontic zone during the following two peri-ods (Karanovo II—III and Karanovo III), especially as far as its European part is concerned. The relation of the Anatolian material culture to these periods is at
present unreliable. The Karanovo II—III and Karano-vo III cultural phenomena, with dark (black) pot-tery, developed consecutively in the north-eastern parts of Thrace, and in the rest of Thrace the culture with painted pottery (Karanovo I) was reproduced (Nikolov 1993(1.186).
The Karanovo III-IV period was a time of territorial expansion of the zone. It is difficult to estimate the dimensions of the expansion to the east because of
unreliable data on previous periods; however, at the end of the period, the culture with black burnished pottery was already present in the central, inner and Black Sea part of Anatolia, as seen, for example at the beginning of Alaga Hiiyuk IVa, the beginning of Biiyiik Giiliicek, and Ikiztepe II, at least layer 6. The European part of the zone expanded in the west and spread over the whole of Thrace, to Yasatepe and Kapitan Dimitrievo, for example (the Karanovo III-IV period), and also to the north, reaching the Da-
Fig. 1. Neolithic sites in the Circumpontic zone and neighbour regions: 1. Ikiztepe; 2. Buyuk Giiliicek; 3■ Alaga Hiiyuk; 4. Yazir Huyiik; 5. Orman Fidanligi; 6. Demircihuyiik; 7. Ihpinar; 8. Pendik; 9■ Fikirtepe; 10. Kumtepe; 11. Gulptnar; 12. Agio Gata; 13- Emporio; 14. Tigani; 15. Yarimburgaz; 16. Toptepe; 17. Asagij) mar; 18. Paradimi; 19. Drama; 20. Karanovo; 21. Yasatepe; 22. Kapitan Dimitrievo; 23. Kačica; 24. Samovodene; 25. Hotnica; 26. Koprivec; 21. Ovčarovo; 28. Ussoe; 29. Goljamo Deleevo; 30. MatdkPre-slavec; 31- Dude$ti; 32. Circea; 33- Gradešnica; 34. Stipska; 35. Predionica; 36. Anzabegovo; 37. Vršnik; 38. Kretnenik-Sapareva banja; 39. Balgarčevo; 40. Sitagroi; 41. Dikili tash; 42. Arapi (made by S. Goshev).
nube via the Yantra and Russenski Lom valleys (e. g. Koprivec Al).
The last of the studied periods, Karanovo IV, marked a time of great territorial expansion of the Circumpontic zone in South-eastern Europe. The black, bur-nished pottery displaced the painted type from almost the whole of the Central Balkan region (to the north from Thessaly, with a few exceptions), covered the whole of the Lower Danube region, Mol-davia and Western Thrace/Eastern Macedonia. Its production in Northern Anatolia is also well docu-mented, and to the south the zone covered almost the whole of the eastern Anatolian coast as well as Crete. Thrace was entirely within the range of the zone, as it had been during the previous period (the Karanovo IV cultural phenomena to the east and the final stage of the Karanovo III-IV to the west).
At the end of the Balkan Neolithic, the territory of the "exterior" are no longer existed as a contact cultural zone. As well as in the Konya plain (Southern Anatolia), painted pottery continued its development in Southern and Central Greece, Thessaly, and the Lower Struma valley; in the European parts of the zone it is always found together with black-bur-nished ware.
Interregional interaetion within the Circumpontic zone was only supposed, albeit very cautiously, in the third trend of ideas deseribed above about the nature of Balkan-Anatolian contacts, but their direc-tions and nature remain completely unexplored. The possibility of investigating this essential aspect of the character of the Circumpontic zone could be found in certain common, formative elements of the pottery assemblages in the area; two are especially significant and could be detected almost during its whole chronological range. These are vessels with one vertical pronged handle, and dishes with a thick-ened, inner part of the rim. Their significance had been noted many times in the literature (cf. Efe 1990.110). These or other vessels sometimes have cylindrical feet. The two main, significant formative elements appeared in the north-eastern parts of Thrace, which is why their distribution within the zone is an indisputable indication for direetions of cultural interaetion.
Vessels with vertical pronged handles (probably mugs only), dishes with thickened inner part of the rim and vessels on cylindrical feet appeared for the first time during the Karanovo II—III period in north-eastern parts of Thrace. At this time they developed
only there, as a local phenomenon in the formation region. During the Karanovo III period these formative elements became indicative of the character of its pottery assemblage. They were stili a local phenomenon of parts of north eastern Thrace, but their earliest sporadic distribution could be detected to the north, in the Yantra Valley (Samovodene).
The significant elements pointed out covered the whole of Thrace during the Karanovo III-IV period. Moreover, they reached the Struma Valley to the south-west (Kremenik - building levels IV) and pro-bably the Vardar Valley (Vršnik IV); they spread to the Fore-Balkan fields in the north (Samovodene -building levels VI-V, Goljamo Delčevo I) and via the Yantra and Russenski Lom valleys reached the Danube (Koprivec Al); except for Eastern Thrace (Yarim-burgaz 0), at the end of the period they penetrated the Anatolian part of the Marmara region to the south-east (the beginning of Ilipinar VI, the begin-ning of Fikirtepe II, the beginning of Pendik II, De-mircihuyuk) and even further inland in Northern Anatolia (layers 6-5 of Ikiztepe II, the beginning of Buyuk Guliicek, the beginning of Ala?a Hiiyiik IVa).
During the Karanovo IV period (in the eastern parts of Thrace) the significant elements deseribed re-mained typical of its pottery assemblage. They continued to be produced in the western parts of Thrace also (the final stage of the Karanovo III-IV period). They were typical of the pottery of Western (Paradi-mi I-III) and Eastern (Yanmburgaz 3-2) Thrace, though in smaller cjuantities. They could be found as single pieces in ali areas around Thrace (as a whole): in the Anatolian part of the Marmara region (the end of Ilipinar VI, the end of Fikirtepe II, the end of Pendik II, Demircihuyiik) and in Northern Anatolia (Yazir Huyiik, Ikiztepe II, layer 4-2, the end of Bti-yiik Gtilucek, the end of Ala^a Hiiyiik IVa) to the south-east; almost along the whole eastern coast of Anatolia and on the islands (Kumtepe IA, Koskunte-pe, Giilpinar, Agio Gala-the Upper Cave, Emporio X-IX, Tigani Ib—II, Kalimnos) to the south; in Thessaly and Macedonia (Arapi layer in Arapi, Vassilika I, Di-mitra I, Sitagroi I—II, Dikili Tash I, Anza IV, Balgarce-vo II-IIIA, Kremenik, building levels III-I) to the south-west; in the northern central Balkan zone (Sup-ska 9-8, Predionica, Circea-Viadukt, Gradešnica-Lu-kanovo darvo) to the north-west; in Northeastern Bulgaria (Samovodene - building levels IV-I, Ussoe I—II, Malak Preslavec) to the north.
The conclusions following the observations present-ed on the time and the range of distribution of the
vessels with vertical pronged handles, dishes with a thickened, inner part of the rim, and vessels on cylin-drical feet which appeared first in Thrace are unam-biguous. It is obvious that after the aesthetic-techno-logical idea of an eastern origin for the production of dark, unpainted pottery had established itself in the eastern parts of Thrace, the same area turned gradually into a generator of formative and proba-bly ornamental ideas for pottery production that influenced for a long period the pottery "fashion" of the enlarging Circumpontic zone. An independent pottery design was developed in the north-eastern parts of Thrace during the tirne of the Karanovo II-III and III periods, and during the Karanovo III-IV and IV periods, Thrace participated actively in the exchange of ideas concerning material culture with neighbouring regions and in a way influenced the formative abundance of the pottery assemblages developing there. The conclusion for the deep pen-etration of significant Thracian pottery elements into Northern Anatolia not as imports, but as influenced by Thracian local pottery production is espe-cially important in view of the concepts presented above about Anatolian-Balkan relations in the middle and the second half of the 6th millennium BC. It is obvious that the idea of a one-way Anatolian influ-ence should be revised, at least for the period in question. The most probable model should include multi-directional contacts within the Circumpontic zone, and Thrace was the motive power for these contacts, at least as far as the European part is con-cerned.
The same concerns the Karanovo IV period, too. I will add some more details about the interrelations within the Circumpontic zone. During the period under discussion, the Karanovo IV cultural pheno-menon developed in the eastern parts of Thrace and in some parts of Eastern Thrace, based on the pre-vious development common to the whole Thrace (the Karanovo III-IV periods); in the western parts of Thrace there continued the reproduction of the earlier Karanovo III-IV type culture, although with some innovations to be discussed later. The reason for the changes in the pottery assemblage that dif-ferentiated Karanovo IV complex to the east of the Kazanlak-Haskovo line should probably be sought in an intensified two-way cultural exchange at this tirne from north to south and from south to north (between the Carpathian Mountains and the Aegean Sea). This exchange definitely included the Anatolian part of the zone, but the limited research there does not permit essential conclusions about the trans-fer of ideas along the east-west axis (between the
Marmara area and the central northern parts of Anatolia).
Bearers of the Linear Band pottery and, precisely, of so-called Notenkopf pottery appeared in the north-eastern parts of Muntenia during the Karanovo IV period (Drasovean 1996.184-186). The Bojan-Bo-lintineanu cultural phenomenon resulted probably from contact with the local bearers of the earlier phases of the Dudesti culture. Certain elements typ-ical of this pottery assemblage (for example, negative field framed by pricked dots in channelled com-position) penetrated the south and could be seen on pottery in the eastern parts of Thrace (for exantple, at Teli Karanovo). The distribution of some very spe-cific ornamental elements of Notenkopf pottery as far as the central parts of Anatolia is of special sig-nificance for the study of cultural contacts within the zone. These are the "note" elements in the pottery decoration from Karanovo, Kalojanovec (the north-eastern parts of Thrace), Yarimburgaz (Eastern Thrace), Alaca Hiiyiik, Biiyiik Giiliicek (Central Anatolia). The direction of penetration is indisputable in this čase and coincides with the direction and the depth of penetration of the other, aforementioned formative elements, typical of Thrace (pronged handles, thickened rims and feet). Other ornamental elements, typical of the Linear Band pottery culture were discovered again in Eastern Thrace (Asagi pi-nar, Yartmburgaz and Toptepe) and probably at Ilt-ptnar also (to the south of the Sea of Marmara). By this I mean specific motifs consisting of connected spirals and meanders or wave motifs made by shal-low incisions on the bodies of dark, thin-walled clay vessels.
E. Comsa suggested that the ornamentation, charac-teristic of the earlier phases of the Dudesti culture -specific zig-zag bands hatched or filled with pricked dots - originated from similar decoration at Demirci-hiiyiik (Comsa 1987.79-80). This hypothesis is quite convincing, since such ornamentation was found at Teli Karanovo, though as an exception. The diffusion in this čase was oriented undoubtedly from the south-east to the north-west.
A typical feature of some low, vertical, pronged handles (a "thumb-like", eccentric prong) appeared in Eastern Thrace (Asagi pinar). This peculiarity was also observed in the Yantra valley (Kacica, Hotnica). Here we must also mention some clay "altars" on three or four feet, having similar prongs at their cor-ners. They appeared during the later phases of the Dudesti culture in Muntenia, in North-eastern Bulga-
ria (Hotnica, Kacica, Malak Preslavec), along the Lo-wer Tundza valley (Drama) and Eastern Thrace (Asa-gi pinar). It is difficult to find supporting evidence of where these specific elements emerged in the region and the direction of their later distribution. The presented group of typical elements is, houever. a very good addition to the abundant evidence for inten-sive cultural contacts within the Circumpontic zone and in this very čase, its European part.
Predominantly in the Anatolian part of the zone, probably the region where the idea emerged, there are clay vessels with decoration, dry incised or in-cised after firing (Alaca Hiiyiik, Biiyiik Guliicek, Ikiz-tepe II, Demircihtiyuk, Fikirtepe, Pendik). The same decoration technique is also registered in the neigh-bour south-eastern region of the European part of the zone (Paradimi, Asagi pinar, Drama). Obviously, this ornamental-technological element travelled from the east to the west and north-west.
It is probable that there are more examples of cultural influences with moving in opposing directions within the Circumpontic zone during the Karanovo IV period. Undoubtedly, the progress of the study would provide an increase in, and higher precision of, such evidence. I think it is a very important fact that such contacts existed during the period, and that the movement of culture-formation ideas went in the two directions. What is more, Thrace as a whole was not only a transmitter, but also a generator of innovations for the material culture of the zone.
The pottery assemblage of the final stage of the Karanovo III-IV cultural phenomenon that developed in the western parts of Thrace contemporary with the Karanovo IV period indicates intensive contacts with the Central Balkan region. However, the strati-fied materials available are insufficient to provide a more precise analysis of these contacts to the north-west and south, or of relations with the related Karanovo IV cultural phenomenon to the east.
The observations presented above argue against both the pure migration and the pure autochtho-nous theories on the origin of the black, burnished pottery in South-eastern Europe in the middle and during the second half of the 6th millennium BC. The theory on the Balkan-Anatolian cultural zone is a good basis for speculation, but it is more than obvi-ous that during the earlier stages of the Neolithic period two cultural (contact) zones existed, covering large territories of the two regions; the Circumpon-
tic zone enlarged considerably in its European part as late as the last stage of the Balkan Neolithic, and this was the period of the Anatolian-Balkan cultural zone. Nevertheless, the classical range of the Circumpontic zone remained (as already described) autono-mous to a great extent from the processes occurring in the western parts, and this perceptible cultural and territorial differentiation remained at least for the whole of the 5th millennium BC.
The aesthetics and technology of dark pottery pro-duction have their roots in Northern Anatolia. How-ever, the implementation of this idea - the reproduc-tion and development of dark and black-burnished pottery - was a very long process, that covered con-stantly expanding territory of South-Eastern Europe, and manifested itself as different cultural phenome-na, ali having two-way cultural contacts among them-selves as well as with Northern Anatolia.
REFERENCES
BAKALAKIS G., SAKELLARIOU A. 1981. Paradimi (Monographien der Heidelberger Akademie der Wis-senschaften 2).
BORONEANT V. 1990. Le site de Schela Cladovei: problemes poses par la transition de la culture Cris-Starčevo a la culture Vinča. In Srejovič D., Tasič N. (eds.) Vinča and its ivorld: 143-147.
CHAPMAN J. 1981. The Vinča culture of South-East Europe. Studies in chronology, economy and society. BAR International series 117.
CHILDE V. G. 1936-1937. Neolithic black ware in Greece and on the Danube. The annual of the British school at Athens 37: 26-35-
COMSA E. 1987. Betrachtungen iiber die Entwick-lung der neolithischen Kulturen auf rumanischem Gebiet. Slovenska archeologia 35, 1: 65-103-
DRASOVEAN F. 1996. Cultura Vinča tarzie (faza C) in Banat.
DUMITRESCU V. 1980. The Neolithic settlement at Rast. BAR International series 72.
EFE T. 1990. An inland Anatolian site with pre-Vinča elements: Orman Fidanhgi, Eskisehir. Germa-nia 68/1: 67-113-
GALLIS K. 1987. Die stratigraphische Einordnung der Larisa-Kultur: eine Richtigstellung. Praehistori-sche Zeitschrift 2: 147-163-
rAPAllIAHMH M. 1966. xp0h0a0rhfl h rehe3hc ha heoahta b ijehtpaahata h k>r0h3t0hhata nact ha BaA-KaHCKHH noAyocTpoB. ApxeoAorm 1:16-30.
1973- npaHCTopHja Ha TAy CP Cp6Hje. I.
GARAŠANIN M. 1979- Centralnobalkanska zona. In Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja II. Neolitsko doba: 79-212.
rEOPFMEB T. M. 1974. ctpaturpac^mi h nepH04H3a-
ijHfl Ha HeoAHTa h xaAKOAHTa b 4HeuiHHTe 6i>ArapcKH
3eMH. ApxeoAorm 4:1-18.
GEORGIEV G. I. 1971. Die Entwicklung der alteren prahistorischen Kulturen in Siidbulgarien. In I 'eth-
nogenese des peuples balkaniques (Studia balcani-ca 5): 21-35.
HOLMBERG E. 1964. The appearance of Neolithic black burnished ware in mainland Greece. American jo urna/ of archaeology 68:343-348.
JOBAHOBMH B. 1962-1963. riocraHaK KepaMHHKnx
TnnoBa 6aAKaHCKo-no4VHaBCKor HeoAHTa H eHeoAHTa.
Crapamp 13-14:9-21.
LAZAROVICI G. 1973. Uber das Neolithikum im Banat. In Actes du VII le Congres International des sci-encesprehistoriques etprotohistoriques 2:461-466.
LEKOVIČ, V. 1990. The Vinčanization of Starčevo culture. In Srejovič D., Tasič N. (eds.), Vinča and its ivorld: 67-74.
LICHARDUS, J., LICHARDUS-ITTEN, M. 1989-1990. Der Komplex mit schwarz-, braun- und graupolierter Keramik und der Beginn des Mittelneolithikums in Siidosteuropa. - Crapiimp 40-41: 43-49.
MILOJČIČ V. 1949. Chronologie der jungeren Stein-zeit Mittel- und Sudost-Europas.
HMKOAOB B. 1998. UpovmtaimR bt,pxy hsoamthuts KepaMHKa b TpaKiin. KepaMrnimre komiiagkch Kapa-hobo II-III, III n III- IV b KOHTSKCTa Ha CeBepo3ana4-Ha AmTOAHH h IOroH3TcmHa EBpona.
NIKOLOV V. 1989- Zu einigen Aspekten der Kultur Karanovo I. In Teli Karanovo und das Balkan-Neo-lithikum: 27-41.
1993. Die neolithische Kulturen Karanovo I, II und III im Kontext ihrer Beziehungen zu Anato-lien. Anatolica 19: 167-171.
1993a. Spatneolithische Siedlungen in Thrakien: das Problem Karanovo IV. Saarbriicker Studien und Materialien zur Altertumskunde 2: 157-190.
1997. Die neolithische Keramik. In Hiller S., Nikolov V. (eds.), Karanovo. Die Ausgrabungen im Sudsektor 1984-1992: 105-146.
OZDOGAN M. 1993. Vinča and Anatolia: a new look at a very old problem (or redefining Vinča culture
from the perspective of Near Eastern tradition). Anatolica 19: 173-193■
RADUNCEVA A 1978. On some problems of the Late Neolithic culture in Bulgaria. In Studia in honorem Veselim Beševliev: 273-277.
SEFERIADES M. 1990. Vinča et 1'archeologie grecque. In Srejovič D., Tasič N. (eds.), Vinča and its tvor Id: 175-181.
SREJOVIČ D. 1963. Versuch einer historischen Wer-tung der Vinča-Gruppe. Archaeologia Iugoslavica 4: 5-17.
STEADMAN S. 1995. Prehistoric interregional inter-action in Anatolia and the Balkans: an overview. Bul-letin of the American schools of oriental research 299-300:13-32.
THISSEN, L. 1993. New insights in Balkan-Anatolian connections in the Late Chalcolithic: old evidence from the Turkish Black Sea littoral. Anatolian Studies 43: 207-237.
1993a. Pottery tradition and innovation at Ilipi-nar. Anatolica 19: 295-305.
THMOB B. C. 1974. IIpo6AeMa xp0H0A0rroi HeoAHTa h eheoahta K)r0-B0CT0HH0fl EBponbi. ConeTCKan ap-xeoAorm 4: 23-48.
TO/JOPOBA X., BAKCOB M. 1993- HoBOKaMeHHaTa
enoxa b BiArapHfl (KpaaT Ha ce^MO - iuecTO xhaa40-AeTne npe^H HOBaTa epa).