UDK 902.03:902.6(4974)"63I/634" Documenta Praehistorica XXXV (2008) Reassessing the Mesolithic/Neolithic 'gap' in Southeast European cave sequences Dimitrij Mleku/1, Mihael Budja1, Robert Payton2, Clive Bonsall3, Andreja ?ibrat Gaspari;1 1 Department of archaeology, Faculty of Arts Ljubljana University, SI 2 School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK 3 School of Arts, Culture and Environment, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK dimitrij.mlekuz@ff.uni-lj.si ABSTRACT - Radiocarbon sequences from some northern Mediterranean cave sites show a temporal gap between Mesolithic and Neolithic occupations. Some authors regard this as a regional pheno- menon and have sought to explain it in terms of a general population decline in the late Mesolithic, which facilitated the replacement of indigenous foragers by immigrant farmers. New evidence from the rockshelter site of Mala Triglavca, in Slovenia, leads us to question this view. The results of AMS radiocarbon dating of samples recovered in excavations in the 1980s and associated soil/sediment analyses reveal evidence of substantial postdepositional disturbance of the cave sediments by human agency andgeomorphologicalprocesses, which have created 'temporalgaps' and 'inversions' in the radiocarbon sequence and secondary deposits with residual finds. IZVLEČEK - Zaporedja 14C datumov iz nekaterih jamskih najdišč severnega Sredozemlja kažejo ča- sovno vrzel med mezolitsko in neolitsko poselitvijo. Nekateri avtorji to vrzel razumejo kot regional- ni pojav in ga razlagajo z zmanjšanjem mezolitskih populacij, kar naj bi olajšalo zamenjavo domo- rodnih lovcev-nabiralcev s kmetovalskimiprišleki. Novi dokazi iz spodmola Mala Triglavca to hipo- tezo spodbijajo. Rezultati neposrednega AMS 14C datiranja vzorcev izkopavanj v 80. letih in sediment- ne analize so pokazali na možne postdepozicijske spremembe depozitov, ki so ustvarile časovne vr- zeli in inverzije v sekvenci 14C datumov in sekundarne depozite z rezidualnimi najdbami. KEY WORDS - Mesolithic, Neolithic, cave sequences, radiocarbon dating, Mala Triglavca Introduction It is often assumed that Mesolithic-Neolithic continu- ity or discontinuity of settlement relates to the pro- cesses involved in the transition to farming, and can be recognized and read directly in the depositional sequences of archaeological sites and their associat- ed artefact assemblages. This view derives from the conceptual conversion of geological into cultural stra- tigraphy and the acceptance of lineal radiocarbon sequences as representing sequential accumulations of deposits through anthropogenic activities. Lineal series of radiocarbon dates from individual sites tend to be interpreted as a direct record of habita- tion, with any discontinuity being seen as a gap in occupation and, by extension, in local or even regio- nal Mesolithic-Neolithic cultural trajectories. Thus the neolithization of southeast Europe, and the Adria- tic basin in particular, has become instrumentalised by 'comparative stratigraphy' that links Anatolia (hia- tal Höyük, Suberde and Beldiba) with the Pelopon- nese and southern Balkans (Franchthi, Argissa, Se- sklo, Vlush, and Drenovac) and the Adriatic (Skarin Samograd) (Parzinger 1993.53, 65-78, 190, 254). Recently, attention has focused on cave deposits, with several authors arguing for well-defined breaks between the Mesolithic and Neolithic. In this paper, we discuss the evidence from the rockshelter site of Mala Triglavca, in Slovenia, which has a critical bearing on the issue. Continuity or gap? Mark Pluciennik (1997) noted a hiatus of several cen- turies to a millennium or more between Mesolithic and Neolithic occupations in radiocarbon sequen- ces from northern Mediterranean sites. Rather than accepting the gap as real, Pluciennik used it to high- light a number of conceptual issues relating to the transition to farming. The gap was seen as sympto- matic of the periodization of the archaeological re- cord into Mesolithic and Neolithic and the treatment of the Neolithic as radically different from the Meso- lithic. He proposed several possible explanations for the phenomenon, ranging from taphonomic and me- thodological problems connected with archaeologi- cal visibility, to changes in settlement pattern. However, the evidence of discontinuous occupations of individual sites was translated into regional cul- tural or demographic phenomena. Based on two well-studied sites with clear evidence of the gap, Theopetra (Karkanas 1999; 2001) and Franchthi (Farrand 2000; 2003), Laurens Thissen suggested there was "a stratigraphic discontinuity between the Latest (or Final) Mesolithic and the onset of the Neo- lithic both in Thessaly (at Theopetra) and in South- ern Greece at Franchthi" (Thissen 2005.35). Others maintain that the gap is a wider regional phenome- non, using it to argue for radical change between the Mesolithic and the Neolithic. Biagi and Spataro (2001) reviewed the radiocarbon dates from select- ed cave sites in the central Mediterranean, and found evidence of a hiatus between the latest Mesolithic and earliest Neolithic occupations in every case. From this, it was suggested that the late Mesolithic (Castelnovian) was a period of population decline, with the hunter-gatherers disappearing altogether soon after the arrival of farming. This in turn was seen as evidence that neolithization of the circum- Adriatic region had proceeded largely by 'demic dif- fusion' (Biagi and Starnini 1999.12; Biagi 2003. 148-150). In this paper we argue that the interpretation of the gap in terms of a widespread demographic decline of hunter-gatherers is problematic. There could be a number of different, and quite complex, processes behind the phenomenon, unconnected with demo- graphic trends. In some cases a gap may simply be a function of 'sampling bias', caused by too few dated samples and/or inconsistent stratigraphic or spatial sampling. Cave excavations in the region are typi- cally small in scale (sondages), which means that our interpretations are invariably based on only a very small sample of the deposits. A lack of proper stratigraphic control in excavations has often com- pounded the problem. In any case, Mesolithic settlement patterns should not be interpreted in a reductionist manner. A Meso- lithic settlement pattern is not just a distribution of points in space, to be studied in isolation without re- ference to the wider context. Rather, it is a remnant of wider economic, demographic and social struc- tures. The long-term reproduction - social and de- mographic - of such structures is reflected in a sta- ble settlement system. In this perspective the Meso- lithic record becomes a densely or loosely connected network spanning large areas (Wobst 1974; Chap- man 1990). Hunter-gatherer settlement patterns and associated structures are dynamic and flexible, and this is another factor that potentially can affect the occupational sequences of individual sites. Thus 'gaps' in the radiocarbon sequence of a particular site do not necessarily reflect demographic breaks and depopulations, but equally could be the result of factors such as altered mobility patterns or site use. Moreover, other evidence argues against the idea that the transition to farming in the region relates to demic diffusion of immigrant farmers and the demo- graphic extinction of the indigenous hunter-gather- ers. The European genetic landscape was reshaped recently by the identification of subclades IIa, I1b*, I1b2, and I1c of I Y chromosomes. Haplogroup I is the only autochthonous haplogroup that is almost entirely restricted to the European continent where it shows frequency peaks in two areas, Scandinavia and southeast Europe (Semino et al. 2000.1155- 1159; Rootsi et al. 2004.129-134; 2006). The IIb* subclade reaches maximum frequencies in southeast Europe including the Balkan peninsula, suggesting strong Mesolithic-Neolithic demographic continuity in the region (Barać et al. 2003). It should also be noted that in some sites the exis- tence of a gap is by no means certain, because the 2-sigma calibrated age ranges of the radiocarbon dates for the latest Mesolithic and earliest Neolithic occupations overlap. This is the case, for example, at Sidari on Corfu (Sordinas 1969), Konispol in Alba- nia (Russell 1998; Schuldenrein 1998), Odmut in Montenegro, (Srejović 1974; Koztowski et al. 1994), and Vela Spila in Croatia (Čečuk and Radić 2005). However, considering the circum-Adriatic region as a whole, it is noticeable that there are significantly fewer radiocarbon dates for the period 6600-6000 cal BC compared to the six centuries immediately before or after; this requires explanation, but it is beyond the scope of the present paper, except to ob- serve that this period contained two key events, one climatic (the '8.2 ka event') and the other cultural (the spread of agriculture through the Balkan and Italian peninsulas), which probably impacted signi- ficantly on demography, settlement pattern, and the use of caves and rockshelters (e.g. Bonsall et al. 2002; Weninger et al. 2006; Budja 2007). Mlekuž (2005) and Forenbaher and Miracle (2005; 2006) considered the evidence from the northern Adriatic in some detail. They acknowledged that the individual 14C sequences from cave and rockshelter sites on the Triestine karst and in Istria (e.g. Benussi/ Pejca na Sedlu, Edera/Stenasca, and Pupicina) show a temporal gap between the latest Mesolithic and earliest Neolithic occupations. However, they obser- ved that the gap varied in duration and was not synchronous among the sites, that the latest date for a Mesolithic context at Benussi is similar to the ear- liest dates for 'Neolithic' contexts at Edera (layer 3a), Podmol pri Kastelcu (layer 13), and Pupicina in Is- tria, and that there are still a number of sites with undated Late Mesolithic-Early Neolithic sequences. From this they concluded that, in spite of the exis- tence of temporal gaps in individual sites, there was no reason to assume a general hiatus in settlement across the region as a whole. Rather, it was suggest- ed that the lack of radiocarbon evidence and hence the existence of gaps at individual sites could reflect complex economic and social processes occurring in the region at the time, either pioneer colonization of farmers and subsequent interactions with indige- nous populations in the hinterland (Forenbaher and Miracle 2006) or internal transformations of Mesolithic groups (Mlekuž 2005). Current distributions of Mesolithic sites have been distorted by sea level rise during the early- to mid- Holocene, and the Mesolithic settlement pattern is biased in favour of upland caves throughout the Di- narides, while there is a selective field survey bias in favour of lowland, open-air Neolithic sites (Chap- man 1994). The dated archaeological record for the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition is thus an obviously biased sample, based mainly on cave stratigraphies (cf. Biagi and Spataro's [2001] sample, which con- sists of caves only). Caves are sediment traps in which archaeological deposits can accumulate over long periods of time. This characteristic has made them invaluable for recording long-term patterns of social and demogra- phic processes. However, as geoarchaeological and taphonomic studies have accumulated, it has be- come increasingly apparent that the interpretation of the archaeological record from these contexts is often problematic. An important topic which has to be considered in the discussion of Mesolithic-Neolithic continuity is the evidence of sedimentary hiatuses or erosional surfaces between Neolithic and Mesolithic layers. Well-documented examples have been reported from Franchthi Cave (Farrand 1993; 2000; 2003) and Theopetra Cave (Karkanas 1999; 2001) in Greece, and linked to climate change (Karkanas 2001). They have been noted also at many sites on the northern Adriatic karst, including Edera, Caterina, Azzura, Zin- gari and Lonza (Boschian and Montagnari Kokelj 2000). In Grotta Azzura intact Mesolithic layers were found in a test trench in the front of the cave; the test trench inside the cave contained only traces of Castelnovian layers (Cremonesi et al. 1984). In the Pupicina Cave the Middle Neolithic strata are depo- sited directly on an early Mesolithic surface, which was compacted through trampling (Miracle and Fo- renbaher 2006). While climate change may have been a contributory factor, these erosional surfaces and sedimentary hiatuses may largely reflect inten- sive anthropogenic modifications of the cave interi- ors, which happened at least once, at the beginning of the Neolithic, destroying evidence of late Mesoli- thic occupation. Reworking of older deposits appears to have been a primary process in the formation of the Neolithic layers in Edera (Boschian and Monta- gnari Kokelj 2000). This discontinuity also marks a completely different use of caves: from gatherings of people in the Mesolithic, to animal shelters or sheep pens in the Neolithic, which is a well-known pattern in caves and rockshelters throughout the Mediterra- nean (Brochier et al. 1992; see also Boschian and Montagnari Kokelj 2000). This could explain the presence of Late Mesolithic Castelnovian microliths in Neolithic deposits in the Triestine karst caves (Montagnari Kokelj 1993) and the presence of ano- malous radiocarbon dates and inversions in radio- carbon sequences. Mala Triglavca case study Mala Triglavca (45°40' N, 13°58' E) is a rockshelter site on the Dinaric Karst of southwestern Slovenia, 15 km from the northern Adriatic coast (Fig. 1). The rockshelter opens in the side of minor doline, its north-facing entrance lying at c. 435m above sea le- vel. It was formed in the bedded rudist limestone and is a remnant of the ancient cave system of the river Reka (Fig. 2). Mala Triglavca was first described by France Leben on the basis of excavations undertaken between 1979 and 1985 (Leben 1988). Leben excavated the deposits in the western half of the rockshelter to a depth of c. 4 m below the cave floor. Excavation and recording were based on a grid of 2m squares, and the deposits removed in horizontal units (spits) of up to 20cm thickness. No sieving or flotation was undertaken. Though never fully published, Leben's excavation showed the site to have a rich archaeolo- gical inventory (see Leben 1988; Turk and Turk 2004) and a long occupation sequence extending back to the early stages of the Mesolithic at least. Following site reconnaissance in the summer of 2001, new excavations were started in 2002 as a joint ven- ture between the universities of Ljubljana and Edin- burgh, with the parallel aims of clarifying the results of Leben's excavation and establishing a benchmark archaeological sequence for the local region. Here we provide a description of the deposits with- in the rockshelter and discuss the results of AMS ra- diocarbon dating of animal bones and bone artifacts from Leben's excavation. We also highlight problems connected with the conversion of stratigraphic se- quences into cultural and periodic sequences. Cave soils and sediments Leben described the cave sediments in a paper writ- ten several years after his excavation (Leben 1988). The paper records 5 stratigraphic layers but these are not easy to relate to the layers shown in the published diagram (Leben 1988.Fig. 9). That diagram shows the sequence of deposits between the en- trance and the back wall of the cave. The position of the section line in re- lation to Leben's excavation grid is shown in Figure 4. In the central part of the cave, Leben's field drawing ap- pears to show 7 main layers, which we have labelled I-VII in Figure 3. It is not entirely clear how these cor- respond with the 5 layers described in his 1988 paper, but we suggest the correlation shown in Table 1. chthonous red clay with rubble". Archaeologically sterile, it was interpreted as Pleistocene in age. The overlying layers were attributed by Leben to the Ho- locene. Leben's (1988) lithological descriptions are incomplete, and the accounts in his field notes give little further information. The distinctions between layers III-VI appear to have been based mainly on small differences in colour and stoniness. Horizontal ash lenses occurred throughout this part of the se- quence. He noted lateral changes in the composition of the sediments. Thus he describes the deposits at the cave entrance as a "unified layer of compact red/ brown clayey soil with rubble and stones" and notes that the deposits at the rear of the cave are more stony with occasional pockets of dark soil. According to the field drawing, layer boundaries be- came uncertain in the rear half of cave, but occasio- nal stone lines are shown which could relate to pa- laeosurfaces. In his 1988 paper Leben simplified this part of se- quence into 2 layers (3 and 4) based mainly on ar- chaeological content. Layer 4 (VI in Fig. 3) was as- signed to the Mesolithic based on the presence of microliths and an absence of pottery. This layer also contained bone artefacts (including mattocks and piercers) and fragmentary remains of wild animals (mainly deer). Layer 3 contained Neolithic pottery as well as stone and bone tools. The faunal assemblage from this layer was dominated by the bones of wild animals, but approximately one-third were those of domesticated animals including cattle, sheep, goats, and dog. At the upper boundary of layer 3, Leben (1988) reported finding Eneolithic and EBA pottery. The lowermost layer (VII = 5) was described by Leben (1988) as "auto- Triglavca 1100 1000 900 800 700 -600 -500 -400 J300 1200 I1OO Sealevel Fig. 1. Mala Triglavca location map. Fig. 2. Mala Triglavca. Layers 1 and 2 (I-II) at the top of the sequence were described in Leben's field notes as consisting of "rub- ble and humus", with layer 2 reported as having a greater stone content. Pottery recovered from these layers was interpreted as belonging to various pe- riods from LBA to modern. In 2001, as a preliminary to the current series of ex- cavations in Mala Triglavca, the section correspon- ding to the S wall of Leben's trench - which was 2- 3m east of Leben's main axial section - was exam- ined and recorded after cleaning. However, the lo- wermost layer encountered by Leben had been ob- scured by debris fall and was not re-examined at that time. Detailed description of the cave deposits was confined to the central portion of the exposed face, between the 92 and 94m grid lines, although observations on the deposits at the rear of the cave and toward the entrance were also made. Initial observations showed that the cave deposits had been extensively modified by soil forming pro- cesses, including biotic disturbance and soil struc- ture development. Therefore, it was decided to adopt a pedological (as opposed to sedimentological) ap- proach to the description of the section, using inter- nationally accepted methods described in Hodgson (1976). This recognizes layers as soil horizons, but does differentiate lithologically distinct layers through the use of numerical prefixes (Tab. 1, Fig. 5). Soil pH was measured on soil samples collected from the main horizons recognized. This was done using a pH meter with combined electrode on soil suspensions with a soil:distilled water ratio of 2:5 (Avery and Bascomb 1982). Calcium carbonate content was estimated by the dilute hydrochloric acid field test using the criteria defined by Hodgson (1976). Starting from the cave floor, we dis- tinguished seven horizons/layers. Broadly, these correspond to layers I-VI in Figure 3 (Leben's [1988] lay- ers 1-4). Table 1 shows that the materials have similar texture (particle size distribution) and reaction through- out, being a calcareous loam with average pH in the range 8.0-8.5. All horizons other than 6Bk show strong evidence of organic matter incorporation giving dark colours and clear evidence of biotic struc- ture development, hence the granular structure ob- served throughout. These properties, together with the low porosity and packing density observed in all horizons other than 6Bk, indicate biotic distur- bance of the cave sediments and their transforma- tion into mull humus typical of soil surface horizons (Babel 1975; Duchaufour 1982). Living plant roots extend through all horizons, but are most abundant in the first three (Ah, 2AB, 3AB), including both fi- brous and woody tree roots. These originate mainly from forest trees growing outside the cave. Rooting effects, including organic matter addition from dead roots, together with mixing by soil-ingesting inver- tebrates, are the main processes that have altered the sediments forming granular structured soil ma- terial. The lithological differences between the soil hori- zons relate mainly to the frequency of stones and boulders, and the occurrence of extremely calcare- ous horizontal lenses. The latter occur throughout the 2AB, 3AB and 4AB horizons. In the main, these features correspond to the 'ash lenses' described by Leben. They are paler coloured and friable bodies up to 8cm thick and 40cm across in the section de- scribed. The strong concentration of CaCO3 in these lenses, indicated by a very strong reaction with di- lute HCl and high pH, suggests that if these are ash lenses, then some recalcification has occurred. At present it is difficult to estimate the contribution of dissolved calcium percolating through the develop- ing soil horizons, which may have an external source, for example, calcium dissolved from the cave roof rather than from the cave sediments. A. PRESENT STUDY B. Leben's study (Leben 1988, and field documentation) Layer Layer (field Layer Description (Leben 1988) drawing, cf. Fig. 2) Description Ah o-io/36cm.Very dark greyish brown (10YR 3/2), very calcareous loam; pH 8.45; many very small and small angular, (tabular to equant form) limestone stones; strongly developed medium to fine granular bioti- cally-derived soil structure; many medium and coarse woody roots; common to many fine fibrous roots proliferate in some areas; sharp irregular lower boundary; variable horizon thickness of 10 to 30cm. 1 I Up to 30cm thick layer of rubble and humus; many roots. 2AB io/36-68/84cm. Same colour, texture, soil structure, root frequency as the overlying Ah horizon; pH 8.45; stones increase abruptly to extremely abundant very large and large angular (tabular to equant form) limestone stones, some with subrounded elements on one side; this horizon becomes much thicker near the back wall of cave; occasional paler coloured greyish brown (10YR 5/2) to light brown (10YR 6/3) extremely calcareous, friable, horizontally-aligned lensoid bodies 2-3cm thick and 20-30cm long; clear irregular lower boundary. The increased frequency of large angular/tabular limestone with one edge smoothed and subrounded indicates solution weathering and rockfall from the cave roof, which is most likely due to frost weathering. 2 II Layer of cave humus with angular rubble, with many larger stones (collapsed cave ceiling). It varies in thickness from 20-30cm (in the central partof the cave) to up to 120cm (near the southern and western cave wall, whereat this depth loose black soil with stones start to appear). Boundary with layers 1 and 3 is not clear. 3AB 68/84-i60/i70cm. Same colour, and texture as 2AB; pH 8.20; strongly developed fine granular to fine subangular blocky biotically- derived soil structure; far fewer stones; woody roots still common as above, but the frequency of fibrous roots decreases to common; occasional faint, extremely calcareous brownish grey (10YR 5/2) to light brown (10YR 6/3) friable, horizontally-aligned lensoid bodies; an angular stoneline occurs at 106-Ii8cm. The observed lithological discontinuity in stone content indicates in washing or blowing in of soil material. 3 III—IV 'Horizon 3a' Black, humose, loose deposit with less rubble than layer 2. Contains many features: ash lenses and patches of burnt clay. Thickness 100-120cm. Pottery. 4AB i60/i70-i94-204cm. Same colour, texture, root frequency as 2AB; pH 8.34; abundant large angular (tabular to platy form) limestone stones of no particular alignment; strongly developed, biotiically- derived, medium to fine granular soil structure; abrupt, irregular boundary. This horizon thickens toward back wall of cave and the lower boundary plunges. The lithological distinctness of this more stony layer indicates a major rockfall from the cave roof. 5bAh i86-204cm. A discontinuous buried horizon (paelosurface) of black (7.5YR 2/0) humose, calcareous loam, pH 8.16. Less stony than 4AB with common to many large angular (tabular to platy form) lime- stones stones. Strongly developed medium to fine biotically-derived granular structure. Common burnt and unburnt bones. Abrupt, smooth boundary. The higher organic matter content of this horizon could be due to addition of organic material by human agency. 3b V 'Horizon 3b' Darker sandy and burnt soil with small rubble (or no rubble). No pottery. 6Bk 204-240/250cm . Light grey (10YR 7/1 to 7/2) to light brownish grey (10YR 6/2), extremely calcareous, horizontally-aligned lensoid body of loose to massive silt loam; stones decrease to common, i.e. fewer stones than in 5bAh; pH 8.45; locally common small nodules of CaCO3; black inclusion similar to 5bAh lens; few woody roots. The less stony character, lensoid form and black inclusion of this discontinuous horizon suggests a pit infill. 4 VI Black, darker layer of rubble, with features of decomposed rubble and two remains of hearths. 7bAh 240/250-280cm (base of section). Black to very dark brown (10YR 2/1 to 2/2) humose very calcareous loam; pH 8.07; abundant medium and large angular limestone stones; strongly developed medium to ine to medium granular biotically-derived soil structure; occasional fine woody roots; common animal bones often concentrated in less stony pockets suggests a midden; few snail shells; lower boundary not seen;. The high frequency of animal bones agrees with Leben's description of his Layer 4, regarded as Mesolithic in age. Large organic matter content may relate to the decay of midden material and bones transformed by biotic soil forming processes. Not seen 5 VII Autochthonous red clay ('cave earth') with rubble. Pleistocene deposit. Tab. 1. Characteristics of soils and sediments in Mala Triglavca rockshelter: a) present study; b) Leben's study. At a depth of 186cm, a much darker humose layer was encountered (5bAh). This was black (7.5YR2/0) in colour, and is interpreted as a buried surface with a larger organic carbon content, possibly with finely divided charcoal. The colour suggests the addition of organic material by human agency. This layer also contained common burned and unburned bone frag- ments. In one place in the central part of the section, this dark layer rested directly on lighter greyish, extre- mely calcareous material, which took the form of a lenticular body c. 115cm long and 40-50cm thick (6Bk). This very porous but massive material com- pressed easily and was non-sticky, indicating a high carbonate or ash content. In places, firmer and den- ser areas coincided with the presence of small nod- ules of calcium carbonate. It also contained black, humose inclusions similar in composition to the 5bAh horizon. The much less stony character of this feature suggests some kind of pit infill. The other pe- dological features indicate solution of calcium deri- ved from the ash and/or limestone fragments and re-precipitation of secondary calcium carbonate as intercalary crystals or nodules. Although the black colour of this horizon might suggest finely divided charcoal, no other evidence of burning in the form of larger charcoal fragments or burned stones was recorded. Toward the base of the section, at approximately 240cm, another black to very dark brown humose horizon was recorded (7bAh). This was also inter- preted as a buried surface. As with the overlying ho- rizons, this was a very calcareous loam, and contai- ned abundant medium and large angular limestone stones. Bones were also common, concentrated in less stony pockets, together with a few landsnail shells. The variability in stone content throughout the sec- tion can in part be attributed to rockfalls from the roof and walls of the cave, most probably due to frost shattering. In the 2AB horizon stones were very large and extremely abundant, consisting of an- gular limestone, but with subrounded elements on one side. This juxtaposition of form can be attributed to solution weathering on the cave roof, thus prov- ing the origin of this stony material. This is further proven by the thickening of this extremely stony la- yer towards the rear wall of the rockshelter where stones are tabular or platy with a distinct horizontal alignment indicating a recent fall from the roof with little disturbance of horizontal bedding. In parts of the underlying horizons, stone lines were apparent. In the 3AB horizon at 106cm an alignment of medium to large angular stones may also repre- sent a minor rockfall from the cave roof, or an arti- Fig. 3. Leben's main axial section drawing with position of samples for radiocarbon dating (Tab. 2). ficial stone pavement. However, much of the 3AB horizon was much less stony than the overlying or un- derlying horizons. Generally, the variation in frequency of stones in the different horizons could relate to variations in the in- tensity of rockfalls, inwashing or wind deposition of stoneless sedi- ment, or indeed, preferential remo- val of stones by human agency. The horizons recognized in the central part of the section became difficult to trace toward the rear of the rock- shelter. The more chaotic arrange- ment of stones and boulders and subhorizontal alignment along what appear in some cases to be shear planes, suggests that disturbance through rotational slumping of the materials has occurred. This was con- firmed in 2006, after several seasons of excavation, when pottery from different periods (Middle Neolithic/ Vlaška culture and Eneolithic/Ljubljana culture) was found on either side of a distinct shear plane. More- over, the horizontal alignment of the recent rockfall described earlier is nowhere seen in these lower la- yers to the rear of the rockshelter. Possible explana- tions include slumping of super-saturated cave sedi- ments after overloading by rainwater running into the cave, and movements triggered by seismic acti- vity. There is a significant slope leading into the rock- shelter and the amount of surface water which runs in during storms can be high. Solution weathering at the rear of the cave may periodically have destabili- zed the adjacent deposits, facilitating movement. Radiocarbon Dating Samples of terrestrial mammal bone from Leben's excavation were selected for AMS 14C dating, togeth- er with an additional pottery sample. The objectives were to establish the ages of the different layers, and to test the stratigraphic integrity of the sequence. All the dated materials show evidence of anthropo- genic modification, either in the form of manufactu- ring traces (bone tools) or fragmentation (animal bones). Eight samples from bones of large mammals were submitted to the Poznan lab. A further 12 samples Fig. 4. Leben's excavation grid with density of pottery sherds per grid square. were taken from individual antler and bone artefacts using high-speed steel drills, and submitted to the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit. The samples submitted to Oxford weighed between 200mg and 620mg, while those submitted to Poznan were frag- ments weighing between 300mg and 1200mg. Col- lagen extractions were performed using each labo- ratory's standard procedure. The Oxford procedure included an ultrafiltration step. This usually produ- ces collagen of improved quality (for details, see Bronk Ramsay et al. 2004; Higham et al. 2006. 556). Collagen quality and chemical integrity are assessed using the atomic ratio of carbon to nitro- gen (C:N atomic ratio), the percentage of collagen extracted compared with the starting weight of bone (wt% collagen), and the carbon yield of the colla- gen on combustion. Problem bones may be screened on the basis of these parameters. Bone is conside- red acceptable if measured C:N ratios of collagen fall between 2.9 and 3.5. In addition, bone that is composed of less than 1wt% collagen is not dated. Collagen yield in five of the samples submitted to Oxford fell below this threshold value, and so only 7 of the 12 samples submitted were actually dated. One pottery sherd was submitted to the Poznan la- boratory, where organic residues on the pottery were extracted and dated. The 16 radiocarbon dates obtained from the Oxford and Poznan labs are pre- sented in Table 2. Reassessing the Mesolithic/Neolithic 'gap' in Southeast European cave sequences The radiocarbon sequence documents frequent use of the cave from 8400 BP to at least 3700 BP. The dates fall into three distinct clusters (8400-7900, 7600-7200 and 6600-6000 BP) with some outliers. However, the clusters as well as the gaps in the se- quence (7900-7600 BP, 7200-6600 BP) could be the result of the sampling. A consideration of the relation between depth/stra- tigraphic context and age reveals some obvious in- versions in the sequence. However, the inversions can be observed only in the sequence from grid squares 4 and 5 in the rear of the cave, close to the cave wall, where horizon boundaries became uncer- tain, evidence for rockfalls increases (Tab. 1) and the presence of shear planes was noted. The dates from the central part of the cave (grid squares 2, 3, 6, 7), where horizons could be clearly defined, show no obvious inversions. Here, a long gap of 1770 14C years can be observed between OxA-15139: 6451 ± 36 BP) and OxA-15138: 8225 ± 40 BP. The dates come from successive spits. The boundary between these spits at 3.05m depth cor- responds to the boundary between Leben's horizons 3a and 3b (4AB and 5bAh, Tab. 1). According to the excavator, the main difference between the two la- yers was the presence of pottery and bones of do- mesticated animals in layer 3a and their absence from layer 3b (Leben 1983). Therefore, the gap of 1770 radiocarbon years prob- ably corresponds to a sedimentary hiatus or erosio- nal surface, separating Mesolithic and Neolithic de- posits in the central part of the cave. The recorded morphology of the 5bAh horizon supports this fea- ture as a paleosurface (Tab. 1). The 'missing' dates corresponding to this temporal gap (OxA-15136: 7255 ± 40 BP, Poz-14232: 7630 ± 50 BP, Poz- 16341: 7950 ± 50 BP) occur in the deposits at the rear of the cave, in grid squares 4 and 5. Occasional stone lines inclined upward toward the back of the cave suggest that the deposits in this part of the cave were formed in a different way from those in the central area of the cave. These deposits could be the result of movement of material from the central part of the cave due to human agency, combined with na- tural processes operating at the back of the cave, re- depositing rockfall as scree, which was subsequently buried by finer sediment to produce inclined stone- lines. Therefore, it may be suggested that at some time before 6400 BP, sediments originally deposited Sample Grid Level Lab ID 14C age yr B.P. Error 813C Cal yr BC age range (2a) Median probability of cal yr BC age range red deer mandible 4 2.70 Poz-14232 7630 50 6591-6420 6477 large ungulate humerus 5-6 3.50-3.70 Poz-14241 8210 50 7446-7070 7226 large ungulate scapula 7 2.90-3.05 Poz-14243 5980 40 4988-4750 4869 Bos seu Bison skull 5-6 3.50-3.70 Poz-14244 8020 50 7075-6710 6932 Sus scrofa maxilla 3A "directly above Pleistocene layer" Poz-14245 8070 50 7180-6820 7046 red deer antler 4 2.50-2.70 Poz-16341 795° 50 7041-6691 6867 human skull 4 2.50 "above breccia deposit" Poz-16342 5120 40 4031-3798 3893 Capra horn core 3 1.90 Poz-15343 3690 40 2198-1959 2081 pottery fragment 4 2.70-3.00 Poz-21395 6320 40 5460-5214 5301 antler, red deer ("beam chisel") 5 4.10 OxA-15134 6602 37 -20.4 5617-5485 5546 antler, red deer ("beam chisel") 4 4.05 OxA-15135 8430 45 -20.8 7582-7367 7514 antler, red deer ("beam chisel") 5-6 3.60-3.75 OxA-15136 7255 40 -21.9 6221-6034 6133 bone, large ungulate ("splinter") 4 3.70-3.90 OxA-15137 7229 38 -18.7 6211-6020 6090 bone, roe deer ("fine 1/2 point") 6 3.05-3.25 OxA-15138 8225 40 -21.1 7446-7081 7242 bone, roe deer ("tip of medium point") 7 2.90-3.05 OxA-15139 6451 36 -19.2 5481-5343 5418 bone, red deer ("fine point") 4 3.70-3.90 OxA-15223 6647 37 -19.3 5635-5511 5579 Tab. 2. AMS14C ages and associated contextual data for mammalian bone pottery samples from Leben's excavation in Mala Triglavca rockshelter. Calibration performed with CALIB 5.0.2 (Stuiver & Reimer 1993; Stuiver et al. 2005) using the IntCal04 curve (Reimer et al. 2004). between 8200 and 6400 BP in the central part of the cave were moved toward the rear of the cave and redeposited against the cave wall. One date (OxA-15136: 7255 ± 40 BP) is on a bone tool (red deer antler beam "chisel"), while others (Poz-14232: 7630 ± 50 BP, Poz-16341: 7950 ± 50 BP) are on fragmented animal bones and antlers (Tab. 2). Thus, in our opinion all three dates, which correspond to the hiatus in the central part of the cave, indicate human use of the cave during this period. The depo- sits at the rear of the cave contain large quantities of cultural material, including lithics, bone tools, pot- tery, and fragmented animal bones. The spatial dis- tribution of pottery, with concentrations of pottery sherds near the cave walls (Fig. 4), suggests that mo- vement and redeposition of material at the cave walls (possibly associated with living floor mainte- nance) continued after 6400 BP. A pottery fragment from grid square 4, dated to 6320 ± 40 BP (Poz- 2139) further supports this hypothesis. However, there appears to have been another pro- cess that altered the positions of deposits within the cave. Three dates, Poz-2139: 6320 ± 40 BP., OxA- 15223: 6647 ± 37 BP and OxA-15137: 7229 ± 38 BP from the rear of the cave (grid squares 4 and 5) create a depth/age inversion with the dates above them (Poz-14232: 7630 ± 50 BP, Poz-16341: 7950 ± 50 BP, OxA-15136: 7255 ± 40 BP). They relate to a level corresponding to Leben's Mesolithic layer 4 (equivalent to 7bAh in Table 1). This suggests that there were postdepositional processes, which led to vertical displacement of material. It seems likely that this movement is connected with the curved shear/ erosional planes discovered in 2006 (see above), most likely caused by periodic slumping of cave se- diments after overloading by rainwater running into the cave. These rotational slumps (Selby 1993) were probably localized and connected with the presence of cavities or conduits penetrating the bedrock at the back of the cave, which provided a further de- stabilizing factor. Unfortunately, the low resolution of Leben's contextual information for the dated ma- terial does not allow us to localize those processes. The evidence presented for disturbance of the cave sediments by soil formation, in particular bioturba- tion (Tab. 1), is not regarded by the present authors to have significantly affected the stratigraphic se- quence of the sediments in the central parts of the cave. The finer fractions of the sediments have cer- tainly been substantially transformed into soil ma- terials with the form of mull humus, however, larger clasts (stones and boulders) and larger archaeologi- Fig. 5. Section corresponding to W wall of Leben's trench, recorded in 2001. cal objects, including those used for dating, have probably remained more or less in situ, providing li- thologically distinct layers. However, smaller, undat- ed animal bones and bone tools could indeed have been translocated by soil forming processes. Pottery Leben's layer 3 contains Neolithic and Eneolithic pottery. The assemblage is modest in size; 690 pot- tery fragments could be attributed to this layer. The ceramic material is very fragmented and only 29 whole vessels could be reconstructed. The assem- blage was investigated for its technological and typo- logical properties on a macroscopic level, and sub- sequently archaeometrical analyses of pottery sam- ples from the site were also conducted (Žibrat Gas- parič 2004. 206-209; 2008.44-64). The material in- cludes some ceramic vessels that are typical of the Neolithic period in this region, including bowls orna- mented with triangles, tulip shaped cups, and a rhy- ton fragment (Fig. 6: MT22/00, MT 24/03; Žibrat Gasparič 2004. Fig. 2, 1-3). Three main groups of ceramic matrixes were identi- fied at the macroscopic level. The group with calcium carbonate is by far the most abundant; 78.3% of all the samples from Leben's layer 3 belong to this group. The group with calcium carbonate and quartz constituted 18.9%, and the group with quartz made up only 2.7% of the total assemblage. Calcium carbo- nate in the form of the mineral calcite was added as temper to the clay, as shown by the mineralogical analysis of the material (Žibrat Gasparič 2004.215- 216). The distribution of the pottery sherds in the cave shows distinctive patterning, with pottery concen- trations in the grid squares adjacent to the cave walls, where average potsherd weight is also higher than in the grid squares in the central part of the cave (Fig 4). This evidence supports the hypothesis that material in the cave was moved and deposited, or redeposited, near the cave wall. Grid square 4, located at the back of the cave, contains most of the pottery from Leben's layer 3 (232 fragments or 33 % of the ceramic material from the layer). This mate- rial is mixed; it includes artefacts that can be secure- ly attributed to the Neolithic and Eneolithic periods on the basis of typological characteristics. One pot- sherd from grid square 4 was dated by the AMS 14C method. The result (Poz-21395: 6320 ± 40 BP) pla- ces the potsherd firmly in the Neolithic (Žibrat Gas- parič 2008.48, Fig. 4.2). In an effort to determine the provenance of the pot- tery from Mala Triglavca, clay samples were taken mostly in a 5km radius around cave, as proposed by Arnold (1985.32-34) for prehistoric sites. Samples were taken from the Mala Triglavca rockshelter, from the nearby archaeological site of Trhlovca, from local caves or denuded caves in the vicinity (e.g. from Di- vaška jama, dolina Radvanj, Lipove doline), as well as from some more distant locations on the Karst plateau (Tomaj), from Vremsko polje, and from the Slovene coastal area near the open-air Neolithic site of Sermin near Koper (Žibrat Gasparič 2008.89- 96). The analyses revealed the clay samples from cave sites and the samples from Vremsko polje to have a mineralogical composition similar to the natural clay matrix of the Neolithic pottery from Mala Triglavca, from which it is inferred that the pottery was pro- duced locally. Only the clay samples from the Slo- vene coastal region (e.g. from Sermin and Rižana near Koper) could not be linked to the Neolithic pot- tery production of Mala Triglavca, mainly because they contained calcareous molluscs (not present at Mala Triglavca) but also a lower concentration of the mineral haematite (Žibrat Gasparič 2008.97-100). Trace element analysis revealed similarities between the Mala Triglavca ceramic assemblage and the clays from the Divača Karst region (i.e. from the locations of Divaška jama, Trhlovca, dolina Radvanj and Lipo- ve doline) and from the nearby Vremsko polje (Žib- rat Gasparič2004.Tab. 5; 2008.100-107.Fig. 4.32). As part of a functional study of the pottery, 36 sam- ples from layer 3 were analyzed for the presence of organic residues or lipids using the GC-C-IRMS me- Fig. 6. Typical middle Neolithic bowl ornamented with triangles, from Leben's layer 3 with evidence of milk lipids (MT 22/00) and a rhyton fragment (MT 24/03). thod. Lipids were present within the pottery fabric in 28% of the samples. Milk residues could be iden- tified in 6 (16.7%) of the pottery samples analyzed from Mala Triglavca (Šoberl et al. this volume); these were detected in 3 bowls and 1 cup, one of which is a typical middle Neolithic bowl ornamented with triangles, from Leben's layer 3. (Fig. 6: MT 22/00). These results provide direct evidence of Neolithic dairying practices, and this line of research could lead to a new understanding of the function and social meaning of Neolithic pottery in the Caput Adriae region. Conclusions The evidence from the current excavations and as- sociated soil/sediment analyses at Mala Triglavca show that in the central part of the cave a well-de- fined stratigraphic sequence can be established, de- spite postdepositional modification by soil forming processes. There is, however, also evidence for post- depositional disturbance of the cave sediments by human agency and geological/geomorphological pro- cesses. Leben's description of the cave sediments as- sumed a straightforward stratigraphic sequence, fai- ling to recognize the significance of postdepositional modifications. Where controls can be established, some postdepositional disturbances - for example, those resulting from soil forming processes such as bioturbation - do not significantly alter the super- positioning of larger components within sequential layers/horizons, as in the sequence described in Tab- le 1. However, the current study has found substan- tial evidence for other postdepositional processes of greater magnitude including: rotational slumps and possible anthropogenic removal and transport of soil material. In places, such processes have trans- formed the stratigraphic sequence in Mala Triglavca rockshelter, altering original stratigraphic relation- ships, thus effectively creating a series of secondary deposits with residual finds. The relatively large set of radiocarbon dates ob- tained on bone samples from Leben's excavation now enables some of the processes to be identified. Vertical displacement of material has created 'tem- poral gaps' and 'inversions' in the radiocarbon se- quence. Two separate processes are indicated. One accounts for the radiocarbon gap detected in the sequence from the middle of the cave, which can be explained by late Mesolithic deposits having been removed from this area and redeposited against the rear wall of the cave - a process that was probably linked to human activity - and subsequently modi- fied by natural processes resulting in inclined stone- lines. Another postdepositional process resulted in the movement of material deeper into the cave, pos- sibly due to rotational slumps, as evidenced by the presence of distinct shear planes. The precise nature of these anthropogenic and natural processes, and the relationship between them, is uncertain, but may be resolved through ongoing excavation of the site. The work at Mala Triglavca underlines the fact that any stratigraphic or radiocarbon sequence may be a complex palimpsest, created and recreated through a series of interlinked processes. On the one hand, 'gaps' in the radiocarbon sequence do not necessar- ily represent periods of abandonment of a cave, but may reflect episodes of postdepositional disturbance and intensive modification and transformation of the cave sediments. They may also be created by hav- ing too few radiocarbon samples and by the selec- tivity of the sampling. Small scale excavation (typi- cal for cave sites), failure to appreciate the effects of postdepositional processes, direct translation of se- ries of radiocarbon dates into cultural sequences, and interpretative models that see the Neolithic as radi- cally different from the Mesolithic, have all contribu- ted to the creation of such gaps. The gaps detected by some researchers in the radiocarbon sequences of caves in southeast Europe around the time of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition are perhaps symptoms of our approach toward the transition, rather than a reflection of radical cultural or demographic change associated with the displacement of Mesolithic for- agers by immigrant farmers. -ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS- This research was partly supported by the Slovenian Research Agency, Research Programme Arheologija P6-247 and ALPIne NETwork for Archaeological Sci- ences - EU "Culture 2000" Programme (Mihael Bu- dja). Dimitrij Mlekuž's and Andreja Žibrat Gasparic's contributions was carried out within the Junior Re- searcher Program, funded by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology of Slovenia. Clive Bonsall wishes to thank the British Academy, the Car- negie Trust for the Universities of Scotland, and the Munro Fund, Hayter Fund, and Development Trust Research Fund of the University of Edinburgh for the award of research grants to support the work at Mala Triglavca. REFERENCES ARNOLD D. E. 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Pro- cess. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. AVERY B. W. and BASCOMB C. L. 1982. Soil Survey labo- ratory methods. Soil Survey technical monograph no.6. Soil Survey of England and Wales, Harpenden. BABEL U. 1975. Micromorphology of soil organic matter. In J. E. Geiseking (ed.), Soil Components. Volume 1, orga- nic components. Springer Verlag, New York: 369-473. BARAĆ L., PERIČIĆ M., MARTINOVIČ KLARIĆ I., ROOTSI S., JANIČIJEVIĆ B., KIVISILD T, PARIK J., RUDAN I., VILLEMS R. and RUDAN P. 2003. Y chromosomal heritage of Croa- tian population and its island isolates. European Journal of Human Genetics 11:535-542. BIAGI P. 2003. A review of the late Mesolithic in Italy and its implications for the Neolithic transition. In A. J. Am- merman and P. Biagi (eds.), The widening harvest: the Neolithic transition in Europe: looking back, looking forward. Archaeological Institute of America, Boston: 133-155. BIAGI P. and SPATARO M. 2001. Plotting the evidence: some aspects of radiocarbon chronology of the Mesoli- thic-Neolithic transition in the Mediterranean basin. Atti della Societa per la Praistoria e Protoistoria della Re- gione Friuli-Venezia Giulia 12:15-54. BIAGI P. and STARNINI E. 1999. Some aspects of the neo- lithization of the Adriatic region. Atti della Societa per la Praistoria e Protoistoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia 11: 7-17. BONSALL C., MACKLIN M. G., PAYTON R. W. and BORO- NEANT A. 2002. Climate, floods and river gods: environ- mental change and the Meso-Neolithic transition in south- east Europe. Before Farming: the archaeology of Old World hunter-gatherers 3-4(2): 1-15. BOSCHIAN G. and MONTAGNARI KOKELJ E. 2000. Prehi- storic shepherds and caves in the Trieste Karst (northeast- ern Italy). Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 15: 331-371. BROCHIER J., VILLA P., GIACOMARRA M. and TAGLIACOZ- ZO A. 1992. Shepherds and sediments: geo-ethnoarchaeo- logy of pastoral sites. Journal of Anthropological Archa- eology 11: 47-102. BRONK RAMSEY C., HIGHAM T. F. G., BOWLES A. and HEDGES R. E. M. 2004. Improvements to the pre-treat- ment of bone at Oxford. In N. Beavan Athfield and R. J. Sparks (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Radio- carbon Conference, Wellington. Radiocarbon 46(1): 155- 163. BUDJA M. 2007. The 8200 cal BP 'climate event' and the process of neolithisation in south-eastern Europe. In M. Budja (ed.) 14th Neolihic Studies. Documenta Praehisto- rica 34:191-201. CHAPMAN J. 1990. Demographic trends in Neothermal south-east Europe. In C. Bonsall (ed.), The Mesolithic in Europe. Papers presented at the Third International Sym- posium, Edinburgh 1985. John Donald, Edinburgh: 500- 515. 1994. The origins of farming in South East Europe. Prehistoire Europeenne 6:133-156. CREMONESI G., MELUZZI C., PITTI C. and WILKENS B. 1984. Grotta Azzura: Scavi 1982 (nota preliminare). Il Me- solitico sul carso Triestino. Societa per la Preistoria e Protoistoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Qua- derno 5: 65-108. ČEČUK B. and RADIĆ D. 2005. Vela Spila. A stratified prehistoric site Vela Luka - island of Korčula (Croatia). Centar za kulturu "Vela Luka", Vela Luka. DUCHAUFOUR P. 1982. Pedology, 2nd edition. Allen & Unwin, London. FARRAND W. R. 1993. Discontinuity in the stratigraphic record: snapshots from Franchthi Cave. In P. Goldberg, D. T. Nash and M. D. Petraglia (eds.), Formation Processes in Archaeological Context. Monographs in World Archa- eology No. 17. Prehistory Press, Madison: 85-96. 2000. Depositional History of Franchthi Cave - Sedi- ments, Stratigraphy, and Chronology. Indiana Univer- sity Press, Bloomington. 2003. Depositional environments and site formation during the Mesolithic occupations of Franchthi Cave, Peloponnesos, Greece. In N. Galanidou and C. Perles (eds.), The Greek Mesolithic: problems and perspecti- ves. British School at Athens, London: 69-78. FORENBAHER S. and MIRACLE, P. 2005. The spread of far- ming in the Eastern Adriatic. Antiquity 79:514-528. 2006. Pupićina Cave and the spread of farming in the eastern Adriatic. In P. Miracle and S. Forenbaher (eds.), Prehistoric Herders of Northern Istria: the archaeo- logy of Pupičina Cave. Volume 1. Arheološki muzej Istre, Pula: 483-523. HIGHAM T., BRONK RAMSEY C., I., SMITH F. H. and TRIN- KAUS E. 2006. Revised direct radiocarbon dating of the Vindija G1 Upper Paleolithic Neandertals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 103(3): 553-557. HODGSON J. M. 1976. Soil Survey Field Handbook. Soil Survey technical monograph no. 5. Soil Survey of England and Wales, Harpenden. KARKANAS P. 1999. Lithostratigraphy and micromorpho- logy of Theopetra cave deposits, Greece: some prelimi- nary results. In G. N. Bailey, E. Adam, E. Panagopoulou, C. Perles and K. Zachos (eds.), The Palaeolithic Archaeo- logy of Greece and Adjacent Areas. Proceedings of the ICOPAG Conference, Studies 3. British School at Athens, Athens: 240- 251. 2001. Site formation processes in Theopetra Cave: a record of climatic change during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene in Thessaly, Greece. Geoarchaeo- logy: An International Journal 16:373-399. KOZLOWSKI J. K., KOZLOWSKI S. and RADOVANOVIĆ I. 1994. Meso- and Neolithic Sequence from the Odmut Cave (Montenegro). Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu War- szawskiego, Warszawa. LEBEN F. 1983. Mala Triglavca. Elaborat: izkop 1983. Ma- nuscript at the Archive of the Institute of Archaeology at ZRC-SAZU (No. 175). ZRC-SAZU, Institute of Archaeology, Ljubljana. 1988. Novoodkrite prazgodovinske plasti v jamah na Krasu. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 16: 65-76. MIRACLE P. and FORENBAHER S. 2006. Changing activi- ties and environments at Pupicina cave. In P. Miracle and S. Forenbaher (eds.), Prehistoric Herders of Northern Istria: the archaeology of Pupičina Cave. Vol. 1. Mono- grafije i katalozi, 14. Arheološki muzej Istre, Pula: 455- 481. MLEKUŽ D. 2005. The ethnography of the Cyclops: Neoli- thic pastoralists in the eastern Adriatic. In M. Budja (ed.), 12th Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica 32: 15-51. MONTAGNARI KOKELJ E. 1993. The transition from Meso- lithic to Neolithic in the Trieste Karst. Poročilo o razisko- vanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 21:69-84. PARZINGER H. 1993. Studien zur Chronologie und Kul- turgeschichte der Jungstein-, Kupfer- und Frühbronze- zeit zwischen Karpaten und Mittlerem Taurus. Römisch- Germanische Forschungen, 52. Philipp von Zabern, Frank- furt am Main. PLUCIENNIK M. 1997. Radiocarbon determinations and the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in southern Italy. Jour- nal of Mediterranean Archaeology 10(2): 115-150. REIMER P. J., BAILLIE M. G. L., BARD E., BAYLISS A., BECK J. W., BERTRAND C. J. H., BLACKWELL P. G., BUCK C. E., BURR G., CUTLER K. B., DAMON P. E., EDWARDS R. L., FAIRBANKS R. G., FRIEDRICH M., GUILDERSON T. P., HOGG A. G., HUGHEN K. A., KROMER B., MCCORMAC F. G., MANNING S., BRONK RAMSEY C., REIMER R. W., REM- MELE S., SOUTHON J. R., STUIVER M., TALAMO S., TAYLOR F. W., VAN DER PLICHT J. and WEYHENMEYER C. E. 2004. INTCAL04 terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 0-26 kyr BP. Radiocarbon 46(3): 1029-1058. ROOTSI S. 2006. Y-Chromosome haplogroup I prehistoric gene flow in Europe. In M. Budja (ed.), 13th Neolithic Stu- dies. Documenta Praehistorica 33:17-20. ROOTSI S., MAGRI C., KIVISILD T., BENUZZI G., HELP H., BERMISHEVA M., KUTUEV I., BARAĆ L., PERIČIĆ M., BALA- NOVSKY O., PSHENICHNOV A., DION D., GROBEI M., ZHI- VOTOVSKY L. A., BATTAGLIA V., ACHILLI A., AL-ZAHERY N., PARIK J., KING R., CINNIOGLU C., KHUSNUTDINOVA E., RUDAN P., BALANOVSKA E., SCHEFFRAHN W., SIMO- NESCU M., BREHM A., GONCALVES R., ROSA A., MOISAN J., CHAVENTRE A., FERAK V., FUREDI S., OEFNER P. J., SHEN P., BECKMAN L., MIKEREZI I., TERZIC R., PRIMORAC D., CAMBON- THOMSEN A., KRUMINA A., TORRONI A., UN- DERHILL P. A., SANTACHIARA-BENERECETTI A. S., VIL- LEMS R. and SEMINO O. 2004. Phylogeography of Y-chro- mosome haplogroup I reveals distinct domains of prehi- storic gene flow in Europe. American Journal of Human Genetics 75(1): 128-137. RUSSELL N. 1998. The Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in the faunal assemblage from Konispol Cave, Albania. In H. Buitenhuis, L. Bartosiewicz and A. Choyke (eds.), Archaeo- zoology of the Near East III. University of Groningen, In- stitute of Archaeology, Groningen: 145-199. SCHULDENREIN J. 1998. Konispol Cave, southern Albania, and correlations with other Aegean caves occupied in the Late Quaternary. Geoarchaeology: An International Jour- nal 13:501-526. SELBY M.J. 1993. Hillslope Materials and Processes. 2nd edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford. SEMINO O., PASSARINO G., OEFNER P. J., LIN A. A., ARBU- ZOVA S., BECKMAN L. E., DE BENEDICTIS G., FRANCALAC- CI P., KOUVATSI A., LIMBORSKA M., MIKA A., MIKA B., PRIMORAC D., SANTACHIARA-BENERECETTI A. S., CAVAL- LI-SFORZA L. L. and UNDERHILL P. A. 2000. The genetic legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in extant Euro- peans: a Y chromosome perspective. Science 290:1155- 1159. SORDINAS A. 1969. Investigation of the prehistory of Cor- fu during 1964-1966. Balkan Studies 10(2): 392-424. STUIVER M. and REIMER P. J. 1993. Extended 14C data base and revised CALIB 3.0 14C age calibration program. Radiocarbon 35(1): 215-230. STUIVER M., REIMER P. J. and REIMER R. 2005. CALIB Ra- diocarbon Calibration (rev. 5.0.2): On-line Manual. http:// radiocarbon.pa.qub.ac.uk/calib/manual/ SOBERL L., ŽIBRAT GASPARIČ A., BUDJA M. and EVER- SHED R. P. 2008. Early herding practices revealed through organic residue analysis of pottery from the early Neoli- thic rock shelter of Mala Triglavca, Slovenia. In M. Budja (ed.), 15th Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica 35: this volume. THISSEN L. 2005. Coming to grips with the Aegean in prehistory: an outline of the temporal framework, 10.000-5500 cal BC. In C. Lichter (ed.), How Did Far- ming Reach Europe? Anatolian-European relations from the second half of the 7th through the first half of the 6th millennium cal BC. Byzas 2. Yayinlari, Istanbul: 29-40. TURK M. and TURK I. 2004. Archaeological finds. In I. Turk (ed.), Viktorjev spodmol and Mala Triglavca: Con- tributions to understanding the Mesolithic period in Slo- venia. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 9. ZRC- SAZU, Ljubljana: 176-196. WENINGER B., ALRAM-STERN E., BAUER E., CLARE L., DANZEGLOCKE U., JÖRIS O., KUBATZKI C., ROLLEFSON G., TODOROVA H. and VAN ANDEL T. 2006. Climate forc- ing due to the 8200 cal yr BP event observed at Early Neolithic sites in the eastern Mediterranean. Quaternary Research 66: 401-420. WOBST H. M. 1974. Boundary conditions for Paleolithic social systems: a simulation approach. American Anti- quity 39(2): 174-178. ŽIBRAT GASPARIČ A. 2004. Archaeometrical analysis of Neolithic pottery from the Divača region, Slovenia. In M. Budja (ed.), 11th Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehi- storica 31: 205-220. 2008. Strukturna analiza neolitske keramike in lon- čarske tehnologije. Unpublished PhD dissertation. De- partment of Archaeology, University of Ljubljana. back to contents