36
Documenta Praehistorica XLVIII (2021)
Introduction
The current study presents new results of archaeo-
logical surveys in the Western Estonian Lowland (Es-
tonia, Europe) at the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea
(Fig. 1.A) conducted in 2015–2020. Although more
than 400 Stone Age sites were previously known in
Estonia (Sikk et al. 2020), different parts of the coun-
try are studied to different extents (Fig. 1.B). The
most understudied subregion is the Western Esto-
nian Lowland that takes up most of the mainland
coastline of Western Estonia between the Gulf of Fin-
land and the Gulf of Pärnu, covering about 6000km2
(about 13% of the area of Estonia). 
In spite of the proximity of the much better studied
Pärnu area to the south and the Western Estonian
Archipelago to the west (Fig. 1.B) (e.g., Kriiska 2001;
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer
seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia
from the second half of the 6th millennium
to the end of the 3rd millennium BC
Kristjan Sander 1, Aivar Kriiska2
1 Kristjan Sander (the corresponding author), School of Humanities, Tallinn University, Tallinn, EE
kristjans@hot.ee
2 Aivar Kriiska, Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu, Tartu, EE< aivar.kriiska@ut.ee
ABSTRACT – Results of archaeological surveys of paleocoastlines in the Western Estonian Lowland
are discussed with paleogeographic reconstructions. Mapped sites and stray finds can be dated to
the period between the end of the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic and the end of the Neolithic (roughly 5300–
2000 cal BC). Uniquely for Estonia and neighbouring countries in this time frame, the overwhelm-
ing majority of the sites are aceramic (and the rest feature very few pottery finds) and the find di-
versity is otherwise low, too. The findings are interpreted as traces of seasonal occupation and mo-
bility, for the first time demonstrated in the Eastern Baltics on such a large scale.
IZVLE∞EK – V ≠lanku predstavljamo rezultate arheolo∏kih pregledov paleo-obale na obmo≠ju Zahod-
noestonske ni∫ine in jih razlagamo s pomo≠jo paleogeografskih rekonstrukcij. Kartirana najdi∏≠a in
naklju≠ne najdbe lahko datiramo v ≠as med koncem predkerami≠nega mezolitika do konca neoliti-
ka (v grobem od 5300 do 2000 pr. n. ∏t.). Velika ve≠ina najdi∏≠ je akerami≠nih (ostala najdi∏≠a pa
imajo zelo malo lon≠enine), pa tudi sama raznolikost najdb je majhna, kar je edinstvena zna≠ilnost za
Estonijo in sosednje dr∫ave v tem ≠asovnem obdobju. Najdbe razlagamo kot sledove sezonske poselit-
ve in mobilnosti, kar smo prvi≠ pokazali za obmo≠je Vzhodnega Baltika v tako velikem obsegu.
KEY WORDS – hunter-gatherers; seasonal mobility; ephemeral sites; Narva Ware; Comb Ware
KLJU∞NE BESEDE – lovci-nabiralci; sezonska mobilnost; kratkotrajna najdi∏≠a; najdbe tipa Narva;
glavni≠asta keramika
Arheolo[ki sledovi sezonskih poselitev lovcev in nabiralcev na obmo;ju zahodne
priobalne Estonije od druge polovice 6. tiso;letja do konca 3. tiso;letja pr. n. [t.
DOI> 10.4312\dp.48.24
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
37
Materials and Methods
As a prerequisite for the study, paleolandscape of
the Western Estonian Lowlands was modelled bas-
ing on the LIDAR digital elevation model (DEM) and
the Estonian Soil Map (Estonian Land Board 2017.
2020). The sea levels and locations of the coastline
were reconstructed by the coast displacement curves
for South-West Estonia (Rosentau et al. 2011), Tal-
linn (Northern Estonia, Muru et al. 2017) and Lake
Veskijärv (northern study area, Grudzinska et al.
2013), taking into account the post-glacial rebound
(Saarse et al. 2003; 2006). The paleosurfaces of the
present-day raised bogs were reconstructed with the
help of the Estonian Soil Map and the database of
geological studies of Estonian peatlands (Orru 2020).
No effort was taken to reconstruct past water levels
of inland lakes as no paleolakes were included in
the survey. All other topographic data is provided
by the Estonian Land Board (2021).
2003; Kriiska, Lõugas 2009), only four Stone Age
settlement sites and one burial site (Jalukse, Tõrv
2016.123) were known before 2015 (Kriiska, Man-
del 1996; Kriiska et al. 1998; Kriiska 2001.Fig. 3;
2001b.Fig. 4; 2004.172; Jussila, Kriiska 2004.13–
15), although the apparent need for surveying the
subregion was recognized already in the 1930s (Laid
1931.357–358).
The aim of the present study is to map the Stone
Age landscape use and its dynamics along the Bal-
tic Sea paleocoastlines from the Litorina Sea Trans-
gression Maximum (LTM) in about 5300 cal BC (cor-
responding to the Late Mesolithic in the Estonian
archaeological periodization, Fig. 2) to the Limnea
Sea development stage (final part of the Neolithic)
in about 2000 BC (Hang et al. 2020; Kriiska et al.
2020.17). For that, two study areas were selected,
covering more than half of the area of the West
Estonian Lowland (Fig. 3).
Fig. 1. A The location of Estonia (black) and the Baltic Sea (blue) in Europe. B Previously known (black)
and newly discovered (red) Stone Age settlement sites projected onto the present-day Estonian grayscale
elevation model together with water streams, divided by drainage basins by different colours. Dots Pre-
Pottery Mesolithic, rectangles Narva stage, triangles Comb Ware stage. Numbers denote settlement sites
mentioned in the article and not located on other figures: 1 Ihaste, 2 Jägala-Jõesuu sites, 3 Jälevere, 4 Ka-
vastu, 5 Kivisaare, 6 Kroodi, 7 Kõnnu, 8 Kõpu sites, 9 Kudruküla, 10 Kunda Lammasmägi, 11 Lemmet-
sa sites, 12 Lepakose, 13 Naakamägi, 14 Pahapilli II, 15 Pulli, 16 Riigiküla I, 17 Ruhnu II, 18 Siimusaare,
19 Sindi-Lodja sites, 20 Umbusi, 21 Tallinn Vabaduse väljak, 22 Vihasoo III, and 23 Võhma sites.
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
38
Two main study areas (Fig. 3) were chosen to fea-
ture different landscape types (isthmuses, bays, ri-
ver mouth lagoons, rivers, islands and islets at var-
ious distances from the mainland) characteristic to
Coastal Western Estonia. The Litorina Sea paleocoast-
lines in the northern study area were fairly articu-
lated, featuring two isthmuses embracing a wide
bay, presently the Suursoo mire. Between the isth-
muses, the paleocoastline of the bay is smooth, cut
by several small streams. The biggest stream enter-
ing the bay is the River Vihterpalu, forming a la-
goon at its mouth. This study area also includes the
Elbiku paleoisland, separated from the mainland by
some 15km of sea during the LTM. The southern
study area is located south of the present-day Matsa-
lu Bay. During the LTM, Matsalu Bay stretched about
25km further eastwards, being about 35km wide.
Today, its eastern coast is well traceable as a wide
arc of coastal formations between Üdruma and Ava-
ste, cut by the River Kasari and its tributaries. In-
side the bay, the present-day hills of Lihula, Lihutsi,
Kloostri and Kasari formed an archipelago similar to
the small islands in present-day Väinameri between
the mainland and the island of
Saaremaa. Some examined paleo-
islands (Massu, Salevere Salumä-
gi) were situated outside of the
bay in the open sea. In addition
to these two main study areas,
the shores of Kasari and Vigala
rivers flowing to the southern
study area were surveyed as far
upstream as possible (about 17
and 44km from the paleocoast at
Teenuse, respectively).
As no organics enabling radiocar-
bon dating were gathered from
any of the sites, approximate dat-
ing is currently possible only by
the coastline displacement mo-
del (Jussila, Kriiska 2004) and
comparatively by archaeological
finds. The elevation of a site was
calculated as the mean elevation
of its finds in masl without out-
liers (a Z-score smaller than –3
or larger than 3). For clusters of
finds within the error margin of
a single GPS point, only one point
was used. For sites located at the
paleocoast or in the coastal zone,
the terminus post quem (TPQ)
was calculated. The minimum ele-
vation of the finds relative to the sea level was as-
sumed to be zero (the TPQ means the earliest time
when the site was above the contemporary sea le-
vel). The coordinates of the sites and TPQs are pre-
sented in the Table 1 (supplement at http://dx.doi.
org/10.4312/dp.48.24).
In the further discussion, the sites will be divided in-
to three zones by their proximity to the paleocoast:
● inland sites discovered while surveying the banks
of the Kasari and Vigala rivers;
● coastal zone sites on the banks of rivers and bro-
oks up to 10km from the paleocoast;
● coastal sites in the immediate vicinity of Littorina
Sea coastal formations originating from the LTM
or younger; 
● island sites on paleoislands or islets.
The primary method of fieldwork was fieldwalking
and gathering finds from the surface. Occasionally
30×30×60 cm test pits were made. At least three
spatially close finds were grouped as a settlement
site. Groups of finds were recorded as different sites
Fig. 2. Estonian Stone Age periodization together with Baltic Sea de-
velopmental stages (Kriiska et al. 2020.17; Hang et al. 2020).
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
39
if separated by a visual barrier (most often, afforest-
ation), located at different elevations or spatially
associated with coastal formations at different ele-
vations. The division of closely located GPS find-
spots into sites thus often reflects the present land
use and surface conditions. The locations of all find-
spots were recorded by handheld GPS with mini-
mum precision ±8m.
Finds could have been collected only from areas
with open ground: agricultural land, gardens, for-
est clearings and haulways. Therefore, the quantity
of finds for each site does not indicate the intensity
or nature of human activity during the time of depo-
sition but the present-day finding conditions. The
spatial orientation of the sites does not necessarily
reflect the landscape use during the time of deposi-
tion either, as two adjacent sites might be separated
by a strip of land with more difficult finding condi-
tions. Similarly, the lack of finds from any particular
area might be attributed to the lack of open ground.
The routes for fieldwalking traced Litorina Sea coa-
stal formations, identifiable from the LIDAR eleva-
tion model and often visible on the ground. If pos-
sible, adjacent areas at different elevations were
also checked for comparison. However, the goal of
the fieldwork was to find as many sites as possible,
not to survey a statistically
representative sample of the
surface. The overwhelming
majority of finds are spatially
associated with coastal forma-
tions, water streams or both.
This might reflect a research
bias towards areas with visi-
ble landforms, but the trend
is in line with the current re-
search on Stone Age settle-
ment site location choice in
Estonia (Sikk et al. 2020).
Results
Finds
In total, 2185 Stone Age finds
were gathered. In addition to
2131 finds from 99 sites, 54
stray finds were collected from
38 locations. The newly dis-
covered sites amount to one
fourth of all Estonian Stone
Age sites published before the
current study (Fig. 1; Sikk et
al. 2020). None of them have
been published before except
the locations of Kõmmaste V,
Kesu II and Ojapere II-III sites
(O.c.). As the number of finds
gathered by fieldwalking de-
pends heavily on surface con-
ditions, it is not indicative of
the intensity of the site use.
The vast majority of finds are
lithic artefacts. There are only
27 sherds of Stone Age cera-
mics among the finds (2 of
Fig. 3. Location of the study areas in the Western Estonia with paleo-
coastlines for 5300 cal BC (blue) and 4000 cal BC (red) projected on the
present-day Estonian map with previously known settlement sites (red
dots), burial ground (green dot) and stray finds (black dots: 1 Kloostri,
2 Lihula, 3 Oese, 4 Avaste, 5 Tiduvere, 6 Kesu I, 7 Harju-Risti, 8 Vilivalla).
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
40
Narva Ware, 15 of Comb Ware and 10 of Corded
Ware vessels). 18 lithic finds exhibit signs of sec-
ondary processing. Among these are 8 flint and 2
quartz scrapers, 3 flint and 2 quartz retouched flakes
and 3 flint arrowheads. 2 flint and 4 quartz flakes
and 2 flint blades bear clear signs of use wear. The
evidence of stone grinding is scarce: there are two
adzes (from Ojaküla I and Teenuse II) and a frag-
ment of grinding stone (from Küünimäe II).
The most common lithic material is quartz followed
by Carboniferous, Silurian and Cretaceous flint and
other lithic materials. As the number of finds is quite
small for most of the sites, spatially close sites at
close elevations with similar archaeological materi-
al were grouped for statistical overview of lithic ma-
terial use (Tab. 1, supplement at http://dx.doi.org/10.
4312/dp.48.24). Sites with a small number of finds
and no adjacent sites were left out of the analysis.
Utilized landscape types
The number of inland sites (2) is surprisingly small,
indicating low Stone Age human activity on the in-
land shores of water streams. The majority of the
sites in the coastal zone (17) can be dated to the Neo-
lithic Comb Ware stage by the finds, most of the rest
having only a few finds registered. A notable ex-
ception is the Kesu II site, probably used during the
Pre-Pottery Mesolithic, as indicated by a large share
of blades. The group of coastal sites is the most nu-
merous one (47), with TPQs ranging from the Pre-
Pottery to Comb Ware stage. Thirty-three sites are
located on the islands, islets or peninsulas formed
after the LTM, indicating continuous use of islands
starting at latest in the Narva stage.
Pre-Pottery Mesolithic and Narva stages
In the northern study area, numerous sites were lo-
cated on the barrier separating the Vihterpalu Ri-
ver mouth lagoon from the Nõva Bay (the Valgeristi
sites; Fig. 4) and along the western (inland) coast of
the lagoon (the Küünimäe sites). The southern study
area (Fig. 5) also features a river mouth lagoon at
the lower reach of the River Velise (Tõnumaa and
Ojapere sites).
A radically different landscape is represented by the
cape sites. In the northern study area, a number of
them are clustered in the Kõmmaste village, situat-
ed at the end of the peninsula, forming the eastern
coast of the Nõva paleobay (Fig. 4). The strip of land
at the cape was about 600m long and up to 150m
wide between 5300 and 5000 cal BC, completely
open to the sea. The Nurme I and the Üdruma sites
in the southern study area are similarly situated
near the tip of the peninsulas at the mouth of a bay
(or in the case of Üdruma, possibly on a coastal islet
soon to become such a peninsula).
Small paleoislands became utilized during the Narva
stage at latest. This is best observable in the case of
the eastern Massu paleoislet in the second study
area, where the cluster of finds at the Massu I site
covers the central part of the eastern islet in about
4000 cal BC or somewhat earlier (Fig. 6.A). The over-
whelming majority of the Massu I finds consists of
quartz with some Silurian flint present. The same is
probably true about the Massu III site and the high-
er part of the Massu IV site on the western islet while
at least some finds from the lower part of the Mas-
su IV site were deposited during the Comb Ware
stage at earliest. The Lihula I site might be even ear-
lier, with TPQ around 5000 cal BC (Fig. 5). 
While the Massu, Lihula and Kirbla islands were
parts of a coastal archipelago a few kilometres away
from the coast, the Elbiku paleoisland in the north-
ern study area was situated about 15km from the
coast during the Pre-Pottery and Narva stages (Fig.
4). If the Elbiku island finds of higher elevations (El-
biku VIII, IX, XI) were deposited at the coast, then
human presence began in the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic.
Most of the Elbiku sites can be associated with Nar-
va stage coastlines.
The Comb Ware stage
Both Vihterpalu and Velise river mouth lagoons
ceased to exist before the beginning of the Comb
Ware stage (Figs. 7, 8), and newly formed lagoons in
the northern study area have been investigated on
minimal scale due to heavy afforestation. The use of
the banks of the Velise river mouth at Ojapere conti-
nued after the end of the lagoon, where adjacent
sites together take up about 13 hectares. A small
number of Comb Ware sherds are present among
the finds. In addition to Ojapere II–III sites, some
Comb Ware sherds were also found from the Teen-
use IX riverside inland site.
In the eastern part of the northern study area, the
pattern of utilizing capes continued (Risti I, Risti III
and Vihterpalu I sites and Hatu I and Vihterpalu II
stray finds) during the first half of the Comb Ware
stage.
The paleoislands in the southern study area gradu-
ally merged with the mainland, becoming peninsu-
las (Fig. 8). Stone Age sites are common along their
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
41
coastlines at relevant elevations. In the Massu IV
site, the Comb Ware stage landscape use is attested
by a relatively large number of Carboniferous flint
finds and a rhombic bifacial arrowhead (Fig. 6.B).
However, only quartz bits were found from the Sa-
levere I site, although the TPQ does not allow an
earlier dating than the middle of the Comb Ware
stage (the same is true about the coastal Änglema I
site in the northern study area). The latest TPQ for
the Elbiku paleoisland is 3850 cal BC (Elbiku XIII).
The lowest site of the Massu cluster is Massu V, the
elevations of which (9.5–11m) correspond to the
coastline of the peninsula in about 2600 cal BC,
roughly contemporary with the previously known
Kaseküla site (Fig. 3). East of the Massu V site, about
200m2 of an Early Iron Age stone enclosure was ex-
cavated in 1973 (Lang 2007.78–79.246; Tõnisson
2008.255) but no Stone Age finds were recovered.
The large majority of coastal zone sites by the tribu-
taries to the River Kasari in the southern study area
(Fig. 8) have a high percentage of Carboniferous flint
combined with a very low percentage of flint blades.
These two traits combined support dating to the Comb
Ware stage even in the absence of pottery sherds.
Discussion
No excavations have been carried out at the newly
discovered sites, and no finds datable by radiocarbon
methods have been obtained from the surface. Be-
sides coastal chronology TPQs, well-researched back-
ground information on lithic material use makes ace-
ramic sites roughly datable by the proportions of dif-
ferent lithic materials and stylistic features of the
artefacts.
First, during the 7th and 6th millennia BC, a change
in stone usage occurred throughout coastal Estonia
as Silurian flint was mainly replaced by quartz (Kri-
Fig. 4. Sites (red dots) and stray finds (black dots) discovered in the northern study area together with
coastlines in 5300 cal BC (land denoted by green) and in 4000 cal BC (white). 
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
42
iska, Sikk 2014.51–52), the reasons for which are
unclear. Second, the share of flint blades (including
fragments and tools made from blades) is generally
higher in the Estonian Pre-Pottery Mesolithic (e.g.,
Pulli, Umbusi, Lepakose, Siimusaare, Ihaste, Sindi-Lo-
dja II, Kavastu, Kivisaare and Jälevere sites, where it
ranges from 10% to 40%; Jaanits, Ilomets 1988.54;
Kriiska et al. 2003.36; Tvauri, Johanson 2006.42–
43; Kriiska, Lõugas 2009.Fig. 26.5), than in the Late
Mesolithic Narva stage sites (e.g., in the north-Es-
tonian Vihasoo III and Kroodi sites in a range of 1–
6%; Kriiska 1997.9). Third, while Carboniferous
flint is present in several Mesolithic settlement sites
(e.g., Sander, Kriiska 2018.77–78; Kriiska, Khru-
staleva 2020.41–42), the inflow of that material ap-
pears to have decreased significantly before the
LTM. It reappeared as a typical material used by peo-
ple also using the Comb Ware pottery (Moora et al.
1935.45–46; Yanits 1959.334; Jaanits et al. 1982.
77; Kriiska 2015). However, the share of quartz
finds could exceed 90% of all lithic finds at some
Comb Ware stage sites.
The indicators listed above work in combination (an
early dating is justified if the share of blades among
the flint finds and the share of flint among lithics
are both high). In regard to the present study, the
dynamics of the lithic material use and artefact typo-
logy described above (1) rule out the dating of the
newly discovered coastal sites with a high share of
quartz to a significantly earlier period than the LTM;
(2) allow dating the coastal zone or inland riverside
sites with a high share of Carboniferous flint and a
low number of flint blades to the Comb Ware stage.
The most striking feature of the material found at
the newly discovered sites regardless of dating is the
low assemblage diversity, including almost total lack
of pottery sherds and very few finds associable with
stone grinding or wood chopping. Out of 99 Stone-
Age sites, sherds of Narva or Comb Ware were pre-
sent in only six (Narva Ware: Kõmmaste V (2), Comb
Ware: Teenuse IX (2), Ojapere II (4), III (7), IV (1),
V (1)) while the TPQ is later than the introduction
of pottery for 64 sites. In addition to pottery sherds,
one fragment of a grinding stone (Küünimäe II) and
two adzes (Ojapere I, Teenuse II) were found. A pre-
viously known stray find of a stone axe could be as-
sociated with the Kesu I site.
The observation of relatively large Estonian main-
land areas featuring only small sites with low assem-
blage diversity is novel to the present work. A num-
ber of aceramic sites of the Narva stage or sites with
Fig. 5. Sites (red dots) and stray finds (black dots) discovered in the southern study area together with
coastlines in 5300 cal BC (land denoted by green) and in 4000 cal BC (white). 
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
43
only a few Narva Ware sherds were previously
known on the Western Estonian islands. Most of
them are situated on the small Kõpu paleoisland
(the highest part of the Kõpu peninsula of the pre-
sent-day Hiiumaa island): Kõpu VII/VIII (Lõugas et
al. 1996.205; Kriiska 1996a; 1996b; Jussila, Kriiska
2004.8), Kõpu XIII, Kõpu XVI, Kõpu X (dating to the
Comb Ware stage also possible – all Jussila, Kriiska
2004) and Kõpu XIV (Rosentau et al. 2020). Of
these, the Kõpu VII/VIII and Kõpu X sites have been
excavated on a small scale. Pottery sherds are pre-
sent among the finds gathered during the excava-
tion of the late Narva stage Kõpu I site in a modest
quantity (about 500 pottery sherds from more than
20 vessels). Lithic finds are about nine times more
numerous, including a number of grinding stone
fragments but only one wood chopping tool (Lõugas
et al. 1996.204–206). The younger radiocarbon dat-
ings of the Pre-Pottery Võhma I settlement site on
the Saaremaa island (Kriiska 2003.21) do not rule
out dating to the Narva stage. Very few pottery
sherds have been recovered from the Narva stage
layer of the Ruhnu II site on the Ruhnu island in the
Gulf of Riga (Kriiska 2000). The aceramic Rõuste
settlement site with Narva stage TPQ (Kriiska 2001a.
8, 16; 2001b.Fig. 4; 2004.172; Jussila, Kriiska 2004.
13–15) is located near the western coast of the pre-
sent-day mainland (Fig. 3), at the highest part of the
same coastal paleoisland where the Comb Ware Ka-
seküla settlement site is situated. Presently, no ace-
ramic sites with Comb Ware stage TPQs are known
on the Western Estonian islands, but that reflects
the current research situation rather than trends in
Neolithic landscape use.
Low assemblage diversity in general is often asso-
ciated with the (seasonal) mobility of the site (e.g.,
Kelly 2001; case studies: Cole 2012; Eschenbrenner
et al. 2017). For instance, the presence of numerous
wood-chopping tools (axes, adzes, chisels) and evi-
dence of stone grinding or polishing could be con-
sidered as indicators of diverse activities at the site,
as opposed to activities associated with resource ga-
thering and minimal tool making (Kriiska 2002a.
46–47). However, a low number of any particular
find type alone cannot be interpreted as an indica-
Fig. 6. The findspots of the Massu I-V sites together with paleocoastlines for 4500 cal BC (yellow), 4000
cal BC (end of the Narva stage, land denoted by green), 3000 cal BC (middle of the Comb Ware stage,
white continuous line) and 2000 cal BC (final Neolithic, white dashed line) on the map of both Massu
paleoislets (B) and the surroundings of the settlement sites (A). White dots: quartz, blue dots: Silurian
flint, red dots: Carboniferous flint, yellow star: the rhombic bifacial arrowhead. 
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
44
tor of the mobility of the site. For instance, among
the numerous and diverse finds (including a large
quantity of pottery sherds) of the exceptionally well-
preserved Sārnate settlement site (Latvia) with per-
manent dwellings, only 15 wood chopping tools and
36 grinding or polishing stones are listed (Vankina
1970.150–151, Tab. 3).
For a community that has adopted pottery, the lack
or low quantity of pottery sherds in a site assem-
blage could be somewhat intuitively associated with
mobility, especially anticipated mobility (the amount
of time members of a group expect to spend at the
site, Kent 1991). However, as pottery vessels of the
earliest (Narva) type were mainly used for proces-
sing aquatic food (Oras et al. 2017), treating the pre-
sence of a large number of pottery sherds as a defi-
nitive indicator of sedentism would create a research
bias towards considering settlement sites where
aquatic resources were exploited as more sedentary,
contradicting the seasonal nature of seal hunting or
spawning runs of anadromous fish. The same point
could either strengthen the case for the non-perma-
nent nature of an aceramic site located near aquatic
resources (especially on islands) or a suggestion that
a site was used for some other reason if multiple
types of resources were available (e.g., the Narva and
Comb Ware phases of Kunda Lammasmäe settlement
site in the North Estonian coastal zone; Sander, Kri-
iska 2018). As seen above, evidence of stone grind-
ing, wood-chopping and pottery use are all very
scarce among the finds of the newly discovered sites.
Besides assemblage diversity, funerals (Kriiska 2007)
and pit-houses (Khrustaleva et al. 2020 and refe-
rences therein) have been interpreted as markers
of sedentariness. Further insights could be gained
by spatial analysis and research into site structure
(Kent 1991). Currently, only one presumably seaso-
nal settlement site has been excavated on a suffi-
cient scale and quality in Estonia (Tallinn Vabaduse
väljak, Muru et al. 2017).
Fig. 7. Sites (red dots) and stray finds (black dots) discovered in the northern study area together with
coastlines in 3500 cal BC (land denoted by green) and 2000 cal BC (white). 
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
45
Other applicable criteria for determining the site
seasonality or sedentariness of mainland sites are
presently lacking. Intuitively, the low faunal taxono-
mic diversity of zooarchaeological material recover-
ed from a site could also be considered a marker of
seasonal occupation, even if the surrounding envi-
ronment supported year-round occupation. Lewis R.
Binford (1980) formulated a forager-collector conti-
nuum of settlement systems, distinguishing between
two modes of mobility, where the foragers moved
their settlements to the resources (residential mobi-
lity) and collectors moved the resources to their set-
tlements (logistical mobility). The diversity of ex-
ploited resources at a site thus supports logistical
mobility and vice versa (see also Kelly 2013.77–
104). However, stable isotope analysis has demon-
strated the prominent role of marine fish and mam-
mals in the diet of Stone Age people buried on Sa-
aremaa (Kõnnu, Kõljala, Naakamäe), consistent with
the high share of marine mammal and fish bones in
the zooarchaeological material (Tõrv 2016.165–175,
197–204; Kriiska et al. 2020.68). In other words,
the diet of the buried people seems to have been
in line with low taxonomic diversity of the bone ma-
terial gathered from the island sites.
Methods to assess the mobility of a site based on li-
thic reduction strategies (e.g., Kelly 1991; Dibble et
al. 2005) are not applicable for the study areas and
time frame for two reasons: (1) quartz is abundant-
ly available at least throughout coastal Estonia, and
was already widely used before the LTM; (2) during
the Comb Ware stage, Carboniferous flint imported
over hundreds of kilometres was preferred to local
Silurian flint. In addition to that, quartz was extensi-
vely used during the Comb Ware stage (apart from
the early sites at least until 3700 cal BC, where Car-
boniferous flint is overwhelmingly dominant (Kri-
iska et al. 2020.126)). The presence of a poorly
workable but abundantly available raw material like
quartz might lead to a shift towards its use instead
of more efficient utilization of high quality but ra-
rer raw materials by production of a larger number
of formal tools (Manninen, Knutsson 2013). The
large share of quartz among the lithic finds of the
newly discovered settlement sites regardless of ele-
vation (Tab. 1, supplement at http://dx.doi.org/10.
4312/dp.48.24) might indicate mobility for earlier
Comb Ware sites.
The seasonality of the Post-LTM landscape use in
Estonia has been discussed mostly in the context of
the Western Estonian islands (e.g., Pre-Pottery Me-
solithic Võhma I settlement site on the Saaremaa is-
land (Kriiska 1998) and later Kõpu sites together
with zooarchaeological studies (Moora, Lõugas 1995;
Fig. 8. Sites (red dots) and stray finds (black dots) discovered in the southern study area together with
coastlines in 3500 cal BC (land denoted by green) and 2000 cal BC (white).
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
46
Lõugas et al. 1996; Kriiska et al. 2017)). In general,
the existence of seasonally exploited island sites
with comparably low assemblage diversity on the
Western Estonian islands supports the idea of the
seasonality of the newly discovered mainland sites.
Until the present work, no presumably seasonal Nar-
va or Comb Ware stage mainland sites besides the
Tallinn Vabaduse väljak and Kunda Lammasmägi
were known, and the small number of known sea-
sonal sites has prevented further exploration of the
topic. Timo Jussila and Aivar Kriiska (2006) briefly
discuss the phenomenon of ‘hunting camps’ but do
not suggest seasonal mobility, and seasonality has
been only briefly mentioned in general treatises (Ja-
anits et al. 1982.48–49, 93; Kriiska et al. 2020.61–
64; 112–113, but see Moora et al. 1935.52–53 dis-
cussing ethnographic parallels with the residential
seasonal mobility of the indigenous Siberian peo-
ples).
The anthropological and archaeological literature on
seasonal mobility is abundant, covering most parts
of the world, and much has been written about adap-
tations of pottery to hunter-gatherer lifestyle and
mobility (e.g., Arnold 1985; Simms, Bright 1997;
Gibbs 2012; Hommel 2012; Santacreu 2014; Em-
mitt 2017; Heitz, Stapfer 2017). Aceramic sites or
sites with very few ceramic finds of people with es-
tablished pottery traditions are a much less discuss-
ed phenomenon (but see Pippin 1998; Eerkens
2003; 2008; Cole 2012 about the United States Great
Basin area). This owes partly to the difficulties of
distinguishing the aceramic and pre-ceramic sites,
and partly to the general research bias towards
large sites with diverse finds (for a discussion about
the American Northeast featuring climate and land-
scapes quite similar to the Eastern Baltics but with
an adverse effect of coastline change, see Rieth
2008). From this perspective, the study areas of the
current work are noteworthy for their geological
properties (that make even the small ‘lithic scatter’
sites datable by coastal chronology), well-researched
background of lithic material use and artefact ty-
pology and their size (that makes the research into
aceramic modes of landscape use finally inescapa-
ble). The first two points have been discussed above.
In the following passages the third point will be ad-
dressed in some detail.
While a number of settlement sites contemporary
with Narva or Comb Ware stages have been inter-
preted as permanent in neighbouring countries (e.g.,
Vankina 1970; Núñez, Okkonen 2005; Berzins
2008), archaeological traces of seasonal activities
are less known by far. The dwellers of the Sārnate
settlement site (Latvia) have been described as an
extreme case of logistical mobility during Early and
Late Sārnate Ware phases (c. 4365–3780 cal BC and
c. 3630–2850 cal BC, respectively, Berzins 2008.
383). However, these logistic forays might have
taken more than a day, necessitating field camps or
ephemeral sites. Berzins (ibid. 391–392) discusses
possible seasonal expeditions, noting that no field
camp sites have been discovered so far. In Finland,
Comb Ware period pit-houses are often considered
a more sedentary settlement type than winter-only
ones, with logistic forays similar to those postulated
by Berzins (Mökkönen 2011.35–38). Small sites are
known but seldom studied (but see Carpelan et al.
2008 for two examples of aceramic sites in Karelian
Isthmus, Russia). The current study presents evidence
not only about mostly aceramic single sites interpret-
able as ‘field camps’, but also about larger coastal
areas featuring only such sites. The study areas are
neighboured by three regions where more perma-
nent settlement sites are known from the Comb
Ware stage at latest: (1) the drainage basin of the
Pärnu Bay south to the study areas, (2) the North-
ern Coastal Estonia and (3) the Western Estonia Ar-
chipelago.
Both study areas are situated north of the water-
shed separating the drainage basin of the Pärnu Bay
from the drainage basin of the Väinameri (Fig. 1). It
has been suggested (Jaanits et al. 1982.50–51; Ja-
anits 1992.43) that already during the Pre-Pottery
Mesolithic, the drainage basin of the Gulf of Pärnu
together with the area around the Lake Võrtsjärv
and possibly beyond formed a social territory linked
together by a communication network based on wa-
terways. As the surveys of the inland banks of the
streams flowing to the southern study area revealed
very few sites and finds, we suggest that (1) the
newly discovered sites were mainly accessed from
the sea; (2) the rivers of the drainage basin of Väi-
nameri did not act as a comparable communication
network and ‘led to nowhere’ in a social or cultural
geographical sense, and (3) the population of areas
where more permanent settlements are known was
not dense enough to necessitate colonization of the
drainage basin of Väinameri. The validity of the se-
cond point depends heavily on the results of future
studies of the shores of Central Estonian (paleo)la-
kes.
The closest known sites to the study areas interpret-
ed as (semi)sedentary settlements in the literature
are Sindi-Lodja I and II (Kriiska et al. 2002; Rosen-
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
47
tau et al. 2011.178–179), Sindi-Lodja III (Kriiska
et al. 2002; Kriiska, Lõugas 2009) and Lemmetsa
I–II (Kriiska, Saluäär 2000b), situated 35–45km
from the southern study area by the Audru and Pär-
nu rivers. The current research supports the idea
of (semi)sedentary settlements by the Pärnu River
and its tributaries during the Comb Ware period at
latest, but possibly even during the Pre-Pottery pe-
riod while the information about the Narva stage is
almost totally lacking.
The Sindi-Lodja I-II Pre-Pottery Mesolithic (about
7000–6700 cal BC) sites, situated by the Pärnu Ri-
ver some kilometres from the paleocoastline, have
been interpreted as more sedentary settlements by
the thickness of cultural layer and higher find den-
sity (Kriiska, Tvauri 2002.32; Kriiska 2004.67–69;
Kriiska et al. 2020.57, 62, 65) compared to the Early
Mesolithic Pulli settlement site situated about 10km
from the Ancylus Lake coastline by the same river
(Jaanits et al. 1982.27–33; Veski et al. 2005; Kri-
iska, Lõugas 2009; Kriiska et al. 2020.51–54). As
the relevant population sizes are not known, the
validity of this suggestion is unclear. The Sindi-Lodja
III site by the Pärnu River (Kriiska, Lõugas 2009;
Rosentau et al. 2011.180; Kriiska et al. 2020.107)
has been radiocarbon dated to the beginning of the
Comb Ware stage, but pottery sherds of earlier Nar-
va type are also present. The site features intensive
cultural layers with high find densities comparable
to settlement sites with dwelling remains (the Narva
and Comb Ware settlement site Riigiküla I, situated
by the River Narva in the North-Eastern Estonia and
Jägala Jõesuu V, Khrustaleva et al. 2020 and refe-
rences therein). The material found at the Lemme-
tsa I site by the River Audru from the later half of
the Comb Ware stage is numerous and diverse, in-
cluding more than 800 Comb Ware sherds and seve-
ral wood chopping tools and grinding stones gath-
ered by fieldwalking. The find density of the near-
by Lemmetsa II site is lower, but the same find types
are present (Kriiska, Saluäär 2000).
Leaving apart the sites clustered near the River Nar-
va, Northern Coastal Estonia has become the least
surveyed coastal region after the present work (Fig.
1), with only six Comb Ware stage sites known along
more than 200km of northern coast, four of which
have been excavated. While the Comb Ware settle-
ments of Tallinn Vabaduse väljak and Kunda Lam-
masmägi clearly bear a seasonal character, the ar-
chaeological record of the settlement site of Jägala
Jõesuu V between them features remnants of a Comb
Ware period pit-house together with numerous and
diverse finds (Khrustaleva et al. 2020). Settlement
patterns and pottery use along the Northern coast
definitely deserve further research.
Finally, the largest paleoisland of the Western Esto-
nian Archipelago in the central part of present-day
Saaremaa (Saarse et al. 2009a; 2009b) was at least
seasonally used during the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic,
and most probably permanently settled during the
Narva stage by the example of the Kõnnu settlement
site featuring an extensive cultural layer, funerals,
diverse material finds and possibly pit-houses (Ja-
anits 1979, Kriiska 1998.19; Kriiska 2001b and re-
ferences therein; Kriiska 2002a; Kriiska et al. 2020.
59–61).
As for utilized landscape types, the newly discovered
settlement sites on the coastal islands seem to post-
date the first human activity in Saaremaa and Kõpu,
suggesting a dual mode of maritime activities: earli-
er longer sealing trips (and consequent settlement)
of faraway islands, and later continuous utilization
of the coastal islands, starting during the Narva
stage and continuing at least until the later part of
the Comb Ware stage, as attested by the Kaseküla
and Massu V sites (TPQ 2600–2500 cal BC). Although
the notion of mainland cape sites utilized by the
Stone Age people is novel to the present work, seve-
ral late Pre-Pottery Mesolithic and Narva stage sites
on Saaremaa island are situated at the open coast or
on small peninsulas, surrounded by the sea from
three sides (Pahapilli II, Võhma VII, Võhma I).
River mouth paleolagoons have been studied in the
Narva-Luga area (Rosentau et al. 2013; Kriiska et al.
2016; 2017; Ryabchuk et al. 2019) and in the Pär-
nu area (Veski et al. 2005; Rosentau et al. 2011;
Nirgi et al. 2020). The thin barrier peninsula and
islands of the Narva River mouth lagoon were used
by the Stone-Age people during the Narva and Comb
Ware stages (Rosentau et al. 2013.Tab. 2, Fig. 7),
but no settlement sites have been discovered at the
inland coast of the Narva lagoon. The Pärnu River
mouth lagoon was contemporary with the Vihterpa-
lu lagoon, having ceased to exist after the LTM and
definitely before the Comb Ware, but no settlement
sites are presently known from its coast.
Sites situated by the rivers or smaller streams both
in the 10km coastal zone and farther inland form
the most numerous subgroup of Estonian Stone Age
sites in the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic, Narva and Comb
Ware stages (Jaanits et al. 1982, Tahvel I & III; Sikk
et al. 2020). The predominant location of the south-
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
48
ern study area riverside sites in the coastal zone
suggests that they were accessed from the sea. As
the (semi)sedentary sites in the Pärnu area are all
located by big rivers, it is logical to assume that the
seasonal utilization of the river mouth lagoons and
riversides originated from an area where the possi-
bilities to catch anadromous fish or hunt beaver
were more limited: the Western Estonian Archipela-
go. If that was the case, then the phenomenon of the
river mouth lagoon and coastal zone riverside sea-
sonal settlement of the Western Estonia Lowland
could be explained by two factors: (1) relatively
sparse population of the Pärnu area (there was no
need to colonize the Western Coast beyond the drai-
nage basin of the Gulf of Pärnu), and (2) the colo-
nization of Saaremaa at the end of the Mesolithic,
resulting in an environmentally circumscribed popu-
lation interested in exploiting additional mainland
resources.
Unfortunately, this suggestion is very hard to prove
by archaeological material. The only lithic indicator
would be artefacts made of Baltic red quartz porphy-
ry, a raw material local to Saaremaa and Hiiumaa
(and a small part of the south-western coast of the
mainland (the Kaseküla site), Kriiska 2008.105).
These are rare even there, amounting to only a few
per cent of all lithic finds (Kriiska 2001b.Fig. 2).
Furthermore, the validity of the hypothesis depends
heavily on future research into Stone Age landscape
use in the Northern Coastal Estonia. If the landscape
use in comparable study areas in North Estonia pro-
ves similar to the areas of the current study, the
Stone Age seasonal mobility of most of Estonia could
be considerably higher than previously thought.
Conclusion
Most of the newly discovered sites in the study areas
can be dated to the end of the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic,
Narva, Comb Ware and Corded Ware stages by coa-
stal chronology, used lithic raw materials used and
artefact typology. The diversity of the material found
is fairly low, as pottery sherds and wood chopping or
stone grinding tools are present only on rare occa-
sions and as single specimens. This suggests seaso-
nal use of the sites similar to the Narva stage sites on
the Western Estonian islands, especially the Kõpu
paleoisland. The notion of large areas featuring only
seasonal sites during the Estonian Narva and Comb
Ware stages is novel to the present work.
In addition to the previously known sites on the
Western Estonian islands, the utilization of capes
open to the sea can be observed on the mainland
(novel to the present work). Besides capes, the pa-
leolagoons at the past river mouths feature clusters
of settlement sites similar to the Narva-Luga area in
North-Eastern Estonia. At latest during the Narva
stage, small coastal islands located up to 15km from
the coast became extensively used. While the earli-
er utilization of the 10km coastal zone riversides is
probable, the majority of the newly discovered ri-
verside sites feature Carboniferous flint with very
few blades, making it possible to date them to the
Comb Ware stages even in the absence of pottery
finds. The finds from banks of the tributaries of the
River Kasari further away from the coast are very
rare, suggesting that the coastal zone sites were ac-
cessed from the sea. This is radically different from
the neighbouring drainage basin of the Pärnu Bay,
where the Rivers Pärnu and Navesti formed a part
of a communication network leading to the Lake
Võrtsjärv region, featuring a large number of Stone
Age settlement sites. This finding is in line with the
very low number of known sites in Central Estonia
north to the Lake Võrtsjärv region. As the River Ka-
sari and its tributaries might have ‘led to nowhere’
in the social or cultural geographic senses.
The findings of the present work suggest the persis-
tence of established landscape use patterns and the
additive nature of spatial extension of subsistence
strategies. This can be divided into three phases:
● at least seasonal utilization of Saaremaa and Kõ-
pu already during the Pre-Pottery Mesolithic, con-
current with the mainland coastal sites of the study
areas situated at capes or river mouths; 
● the utilization of the coastal islands, probably start-
ing during the Narva stage;
● the utilization of the mainland streams in the
10km coastal zone during the Comb Ware stage.
The utilization of capes and coastal islands started
earliest and continued during the Comb Ware stages,
as attested by the newly discovered Vihterpalu I
(TPQ 3300 cal BC), the previously known Kaseküla
and newly discovered Massu V sites (TPQ 2600–
2500 cal BC), while the overwhelming majority of
the sites by the rivers and brooks of the southern
study area probably originate from the Comb Ware
stage. This additive model of spatial expansion of
human activities is novel to the present work.
The study areas are neighboured by regions where
settlement sites with intensive cultural layers, larger
find diversities, funerals or remains of pit-houses
can be dated at latest to the Narva (Saaremaa island)
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
49
or the Comb Ware stages (the drainage basin of the
Pärnu Gulf and Northern Coastal Estonia). One pos-
sibility to explain the findings of the present work
is the hypothesis that the seasonal human activity
originated from the Western Estonian Archipelago
with an environmentally circumscribed population
interested in exploiting additional mainland resour-
ces. The validity of this suggestion depends heavily
on future studies of the landscape use of Northern
Coastal Estonia: if study areas of similar size along
the northern coast exhibit patterns similar to the
study areas of the present work, then the seasonal
mobility of most of Estonia rather than some parti-
cular region should be considered higher than pre-
viously thought.
This work was supported by the Estonian Research
Council research project PRG243, the base financed
project PHVAJ20919 of the Institute of History and
Archaeology of the University of Tartu and Arheogra-
ator Ltd. The work is based on datasets: Estonian
Land Board 2021. Digital Terrain Model. Estonian
maps and topographic data, and Estonian Land
Board 2017. Digital Soil Map. The work uses com-
puter programmes: CloudCompare 2.10.2 Zephyrus.
2020. www.cloudcompare.org, and Quantum GIS
3.0.3 Girona. 2018. www.qgis.org. The authors are
grateful to all participants of the fieldwork and to Ms.
Ly Kriiska for supporting the expeditions. Our special
thanks belong to the reviewers of the paper.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
∴
Arnold D. E. 1985. Ceramic theory and cultural process.
Cambridge University Press. London.
Bērziņ∏, V. 2008. Sārnate: living by a coastal lake dur-
ing the East Baltic Neolithic. Unpublished PhD thesis.
Faculty of Humanities. University of Oulu.
http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789514289415.pdf
Binford L. R. 1980. Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hun-
ter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site
Formation. American Antiquity 45(1): 4–20.
https://doi.org/10.2307/279653
Carpelan C., Uino P., and Gerasimov D. 2008. Archaeo-
logy in the former municipality of Johannes. In M. Laven-
to, K. Nordqvist (eds.), Karelian Isthmus: Stone Age Stu-
dies in 1998–2003. Iskos 16. The Finnish Antiquarian
Society. Helsinki: 185–211.
Cole C. R. 2012. Prehistoric Archaeology and the Fre-
mont Frontier at North Meadow Valley Wash, Eastern
Nevada. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Califor-
nia. Davis. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1027415
395?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
Dibble H. L., Schurmans U., Iovita R. P., and McLaughlin
M. V. 2005. The Measurement and Interpretation of Cor-
tex in Lithic Assemblages. American Antiquity 70(3):
545–560. https://doi.org/10.2307/40035313 
Eerkens J. W. 2003. Residential Mobility and Pottery Use
in the Western Great Basin. Current Anthropology 44(5):
728–738. DOI:10.1086/379262
2008. Nomadic Potters. Relationships between ceram-
ic technologies and mobility strategies. In H. Barnard,
W. Wendrich (eds.), The Archaeology of Mobility: Old
World and New World Nomadism. Cotsen Institute of
Archaeology. Los Angeles: 307–326.
Emmitt J. J. 2017. The Neolithic Pottery of Egypt: Inves-
tigating settlement pattern in middle Holocene north-
east Africa with ceramics. Unpublished PhD thesis. The
University of Auckland. Auckland.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12527.33445
Eschenbrenner J. H., Edwards A. R., Hall-Holton J., Jaege
E., Johnson R., and Walton C. 2017. The Archaeology of
High Prairie, Idaho. Idaho Archaeologist 40(1): 21–66.
Gibbs K. 2012. Not meant to last: mobility and disposable
pottery. Documenta Praehistorica 39: 83–93.
https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.6
Grudzinska I., Saarse L., Vassiljev J., and Heinsalu A. 2013.
Mid- and late-Holocene shoreline changes along the south-
ern coast of the Gulf of Finland. Bulletin of the Geologi-
cal Society of Finland 85(1): 19–34.
https://doi.org/10.17741/bgsf/85.1.002
Hang T., Veski S., Vassiljev J., Poska A., Kriiska A., and
Heinsalu A. 2020. A new formal subdivision of the Holo-
cene Series/Epoch in Estonia. Estonian Journal of Earth
Sciences 69: 269–280.
https://doi.org/10.3176/earth.2020.15
References
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
50
Heitz C., Stapfer R. 2017. Mobility and pottery produc-
tion. Archaeological & anthropological perspectives.
Sidestone Press. Leiden.
Hommel P. N. 2012. The Emergence of Ceramics among
Hunter-gatherers in Northern Eurasia: The Neolithic Ce-
ramics of the Upper Vitim Basin, Northern Transbaikal,
Siberia. Unpublished PhD thesis. Faculty of Arts and Hu-
manities. University of Sheffield. Sheffield. https://etheses.
whiterose.ac.uk/24574/1/Thesis%E2%80%94Hommel.pdf
Yanits L. Yu. 1959. Poseleniya epokhi neolita i rannego
metalla v priust’ye r. Emayygi (Estonskaya SSR). Akade-
miya Nauk Estonskoi SSR. Tallinn. (in Russian)
Jaanits L. 1979. Die neolithische Siedlung Kõnnu auf der
Insel Saaremaa. Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia Toimeti-
sed. Ühiskonnateadused 4(4): 363–367.
1992. Põllumajanduse eelduste kujunemine. In J. Kahk,
E. Tarvel (eds.), Eesti talurahva ajalugu 1. Olion. Tal-
linn: 42–56.
Jaanits L., Laul S., Lõugas V., and Tõnisson E. 1982. Eesti
esiajalugu. Eesti Raamat. Tallinn.
Jaanits K., Ilomets M. 1988. Umbusi mesoliitilise asula
vanusest ja kohast Eesti keskmise kiviaja kronoloogias.
In A.-M. Rõuk, J. Selirand (eds.), Loodusteaduslikke me-
etodeid Eesti arheoloogias. Academy of Sciences of the
Estonian SSR. Tallinn: 54–64.
Jussila T., Kriiska A. 2004. Shore displacement chronolo-
gy of the Estonian Stone Age. Estonian Journal of Archa-
eology 8(1): 3–32.
2006. Pyyntikultuurin asuinpaikkojen rantasidonnaisu-
us. Uusia näkökulmia Suomen ja Viron kivi- ja varhai-
smetallikautisten asuinpaikkojen sijoittumiseen. In P.
Pesonen, T. Mökkönen (eds.), Arkeologia ja kulttuuri.
Uutta kivikauden tutkimuksessa, Arkeologipäivät
2005. Suomen arkeologinen seura. Hamina: 36–49.
Kelly R. 2001. Prehistory of the Carson Desert and Still-
water Mountains: Environment, Mobility, and Subsi-
stence in a Great Basin Wetland. University of Utah
Press. Salt Lake City.
2013. The lifeways of hunter-gatherers. The foraging
spectrum. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. New
York.
Kent 1991. The relationship between mobility strategies
and site structure. In E. N. Kroll, T. D. Price (eds.), The in-
terpretation of archaeological spatial patterning. Sprin-
ger. New York.
Khrustaleva I., Roog R., Kholkina M., and Kriiska A. 2020.
Hunter-gatherer pit-houses in Stone Age Estonia. Archaeo-
logical and Anthropological Sciences 12(2): UNSP 56.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01018-0
Kriiska A. 1996a. Archaeological studies on the Kõpu Pen-
insula. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Scien-
ces. Humanities and Social Sciences 4: 398–409.
1996b. Viron rannikkoalueen asutus ja pyyntikulttu-
urin erikoistuminen kivikaudella. Muinastutkija 4: 1–6.
1997. Kroodi ja Vihasoo III asula Eesti varaneoliitiliste
kultuurirühmade kontekstis. Estonian Journal of Ar-
chaeology 1: 7–25.
1998. Mesoliitilised asustusjäljed Loode-Saaremaal. Aja-
looline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal 100
(1): 13–22.
2001a. Lääne-Eesti mandriosa kiviaja äärejooni. Lääne-
maa muuseumi toimetised V: 7–40.
2001b. Stone Age settlement and economic processes
in the Estonian coastal area and islands. Unpublished
PhD thesis. Faculty of Arts. University of Helsinki. Hel-
sinki.
2002a. Lääne-Eesti saarte asustamine ja püsielanikkon-
na kujunemine. In V. Lang (ed.), Keskus – tagamaa –
ääreala. Uurimusi asustushierarhia ja võimukesku-
ste kujunemisest Eestis. Centre – Hinterland – Mar-
gin. Studies in the Formation of Settlement Hierar-
chy and Power Centres in Estonia. University of Tal-
linn and University of Tartu. Tallinn, Tartu.
2002b. Maa ja mere piiril. Inimasustuse algus Paikuse
piirkonnas. Kahe jõe vahel. Meie elu läbi aegade 1: 5–12.
2003. Colonisation of the west Estonian archipelago. In
H. Kindgren, K. Knutsson, L. Larsson, and D. Leoffler
(eds.), Mesolithic on the Move: Papers Presented at
the Sixth International Conference on the Mesolithic
in Europe. Oxbow Books. Oxford: 20–28.
2004. Aegade alguses: 15 kirjutist kaugemast minevi-
kust. A. Kriiska. Tallinn.
2007. Saaremaa kiviaeg. In K. Jänes-Kapp, E. Randma,
and M. Soosaar (eds.), Saaremaa. Ajalugu, majandus,
kultuur. Koolibri. Tallinn: 9–36.
2008. Primorskaya adaptatsiya i zaseleniye Zapadno-Es-
tonskikh ostrovov Baltiyskogo morya v kamennom ve-
ke. In G. A. Khlopachev (ed.), Problemy biologicheskoy
i kul’turnoy adaptatsii chelovecheskikh populyatsiy.
Nauka. Sankt-Peterburg: 98–118. (in Russian)
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
51
2015. Foreign Materials and Artefacts in the 4th and 3rd
Millennia BCE Estonian Comb Ware Complex. In P. Es-
pak, M. Läänemets, and V. Sazonov (eds.), When Gods
Spoke. Researches and Reflections on Religious Phe-
nomena and Artefacts. Studia in honorem Tarmo
Kulmar. Tartu University Press. Tartu: 107–124.
Kriiska A., Gerasimov D. V., Nordqvist K., Lisitsyn S. N.,
Sandel S., and Kholkina M. A. 2016. Stone Age research in
Narva-Luga Klint Bay area (2005–2014). New sites, new
methods. Iskos 21. The Finnish Antiquarian Society. Hel-
sinki: 101–115.
Kriiska A., Johanson K., Saluäär U., and Lõugas, L. 2003.
The results of research of Estonian Stone Age in 2002.
Archeological fieldwork in Estonia 2002: 30–43.
Kriiska A., Khrustaleva I. 2020. Inside the Dwelling: Clay
Figurines of the Jägala Jõesuu V Stone Age Settlement
Site (Estonia). Baltic Journal of Art History 20: 11–57.
https://doi.org/10.12697/BJAH.2020.20.01
Kriiska A., Lang V., Mäesalu A., Tvauri A., and Valk H.
2020. Eesti ajalugu I. Eesti esiaeg. Tartu Ülikooli Ajaloo-
ja Arheoloogia Instituut. Tartu.
Kriiska A., Lõugas L. 2005. Formation of Ruhnu Island
and its early settlement history. In Talvi T. (ed.), Nature
of Ruhnu Island. Lääne-Eesti Saarestiku Biosfääri Kait-
seala. Viidumäe: 123–152.
2009. Stone Age settlement sites on an environmental-
ly sensitive coastal area along the lower reaches of the
River Pärnu (southwestern Estonia), as indicators of
changing settlement patterns, technologies and econo-
mies. In S. McCartan, R. Schulting, C. Warren, and P.
Woodman (eds.), Mesolithic Horizons. Papers Present-
ed at the Seventh International Conference on the Me-
solithic in Europe, Belfast 2005, I. Oxbow Books. Ox-
ford: 167–175.
Kriiska A., Lõugas L., and Saluäär U. 1998. Archaeologi-
cal excavations of the Stone Age settlement site and ruin
of the stone cist grave of the Early Metal Age in Kasekü-
la. Archeological fieldwork in Estonia 1997: 30–43.
Kriiska A., Mandel M. 1996. Aruanne arheoloogilisest in-
spektsioonist Läänemaale 25.–26.04 ja 4.–5.09. 1996.
Report archived at National Heritage Board. Tallinn.
Kriiska A., Oras E., Lõugas L., Meadows J., Lucquin A., and
Craig O. E. 2017. Late mesolithic Narva stage in Estonia:
pottery, settlement types and chronology. Estonian Jour-
nal of Archaeology 21(1): 52–86.
https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2017.1.03
Kriiska A., Rappu M., Tasuja K., Plado J., and πafranovski
J. 2009. Archaeological research in Jägala. Archaeological
Fieldwork in Estonia 2008: 36–52.
Kriiska A., Saluäär U. 2000a. Archaeological fieldwork on
the island Ruhnu. Archeological fieldwork in Estonia
1999: 18–43.
2000b. Lemmetsa ja Malda neoliitilised asulakohad Au-
dru jõe alamjooksul. In A. Vunk (ed.), Pärnumaa aja-
lugu 3. Pärnu Maavalitsus. Pärnu: 8–38.
Kriiska A., Saluäär U., Lõugas L., Johanson K., and Hanni
H. 2002. Archaeological excavations in Sindi-Lodja. Archa-
eological fieldwork in Estonia 2001: 27–40.
Kriiska A., Sikk K. 2014. Archaeological test excavations
at the Mesolithic and Iron Age settlement site Jägala-Joa
IV. Archeological fieldwork in Estonia 2013: 45–54. 
Kriiska A., Tvauri A. 2002. Eesti muinasaeg. Avita. Tallinn.
Laid E. 1931. Kodumaa asustus muinasajal. Eesti kirjan-
dus 7: 353–367.
Laneman M. 2012. Stone-cist grave at Kaseküla, western
Estonia, in the light of AMS dates of the human bones.
Estonian Journal of Archaeology 16(2): 91–117.
https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2012.2.01
Lang V. 2007. Baltimaade pronksi- ja rauaaeg. Tartu Üli-
kooli Kirjastus. Tartu.
Lõugas L., Kriiska A., and Moora H. 1996. Coastal Adapta-
tion and Marine Exploitation of the Island Hiiumaa, Esto-
nia, During the Stone Age with Special Emphasis on the
Kõpu I Site. In A.-M. Robertsson, A. Åkerlund, and S. Hicks
(eds.), Landscapes and life: studies in honour of Urve
Miller. PACT Belgium. Rixensart: 197–211.
Mandel M. 1975. Ausgrabungen der Steingräber von Ka-
seküla. Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia Toimetised. Ühis-
konnateadused 1: 74–76.
1991. Lihula 1987. a. arheoloogiliste kaevamiste aru-
anne. Report archived at National Heritage Board, Tal-
linn, Estonia.
Manninen M. A., Knutsson K. 2013. Lithic raw material
diversification as an adaptive strategy – Technology, mo-
bility, and site structure in Late Mesolithic northernmost
Europe. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 33: 84–
98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2013.12.001
Moora H., Laid E., Mägiste J., and Kruus H. 1935. Eesti aja-
lugu I. Esiajalugu ja muistne vabadusvõitlus. Eesti Kir-
janduse Selts. Tartu.
Kristjan Sander, Aivar Kriiska
52
Moora H., Lõugas L. 1995. Natural conditions at the time
of primary habitation of the Hiiumaa Island. Proceedings
of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and
Social Sciences 44(4): 472–481.
Muru M., Rosentau A., Kriiska A., + 7 authors, and Kihno
K. 2017. Sea level changes and Neolithic hunter-fisher-
gatherers in the centre of Tallinn, southern coast of the
Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea. The Holocene 27(7): 917–928.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616678462
Muru M., Rosentau A., Preusser F., + 5 authors, and Kri-
iska A. 2018. Reconstructing Holocene shore displace-
ment and Stone Age palaeogeography from a foredune se-
quence on Ruhnu Island, Gulf of Riga, Baltic Sea. Geomor-
phology 303: 434–445.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2017.12.016.
Mökkönen T. 2011. Studies on Stone Age Housepits in
Fennoscandia (4000-2000 cal BC): Changes in ground
plan, site location and degree of sedentism. Unpublish-
ed PhD thesis. Faculty of Arts. University of Helsinki. Hel-
sinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/26492
Nirgi T., Rosentau A., Habicht H.-L., + 9 authors, and Tõ-
nisson H. 2020. Holocene relative shore-level changes
and Stone Age palaeogeography of the Pärnu Bay area,
eastern Baltic Sea. The Holocene 30(1): 37–52.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683619865603
Núñez M., Okkonen, J. 2005. Humanizing of north Ostro-
botnian landscapes during the 4th and 3rd millennia. Jour-
nal of Nordic Archaeological Science 15: 25–38.
Oras E., Lucquin A., Lõugas L., Tõrv M., Kriiska A,. and
Craig O. E. 2017. The adoption of pottery by north-east
European hunter-gatherers: Evidence from lipid residue
analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 78: 112–119.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2016.11.010
Orru M. 2020. Estonian Peat Database.
turba.geoloogia.info
Pippin L. C. 1998. Hunter-gatherer adaptations and en-
vironmental change in the southern great basin: the
evidence from Pahute and Rainier Mesas. Technical Re-
port no. 92. Quaternary Sciences Center. Desert Research
Institute. University and Community College System of
Nevada. Reno.
Rieth C. B. (ed.) 2008. Current approaches to the ana-
lysis and interpretation of small lithic sites in the north-
east. New York State Education Department. Albany.
Rosentau A., Muru M., Kriiska A., + 10 authors, and Lety-
ka N. 2013. Stone Age settlement and Holocene shore dis-
placement in the Narva-Luga Klint Bay area, eastern Gulf
of Finland. Boreas 42(4): 912–931.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12004.
Rosentau A., Nirgi T., Muru M., + 6 authors, and Kriiska A.
2020. Holocene relative shore level changes and Stone
Age hunter-gatherers in Hiiumaa Island, eastern Baltic
Sea. Boreas 49(4): 799–812.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bor.12452
Rosentau A., Veski S., Kriiska A., + 5 authors, and Oja T.
2011. Palaeogeographic model for the SW Estonian coa-
stal zone of the Baltic Sea. In J. Harff, S. Björck, and P.
Hoth (eds.), The Baltic Sea Basin. Springer. Berlin: 165–
188.
Ryabchuk D. V., Sergeev A. Y., Gerasimov D. V., + 6 au-
thors, and Terekhov A. V. 2019. New data on the postgla-
cial development of Narva-Luga Klint Bay (Eastern Gulf of
Finland): results of geoarchaeological research. Journal
of Coastal Conservation 23: 727–746.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-018-0670-5
Saarse L., Vassiljev J., and Miidel A. 2003. Simulation of
the Baltic Sea shorelines in Estonia and neighbouring
areas. Journal of Coastal Research 19(2): 261–268.
Saarse L., Vassiljev J., Miidel A., and Niinemets E. 2006.
Holocene buried organic sediments in Estonia. Proce-
edings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Geology
55(4): 296–320.
Saarse L., Vassiljev J., and Rosentau A. 2009a. Ancylus
Lake and Litorina Sea transition on the Island of Saare-
maa, Estonia: a pilot study. Baltica 22(1): 51–62.
2009b. Litorina Sea shore displacement on the Island
of Saaremaa, Estonia. Polish Geological Institute Spe-
cial Papers 25: 59–66.
Sander K., Kriiska A. 2018. New archaeological data and
paleolandscape reconstructions of the basin of an Early
and Middle Holocene lake near Kunda, North-Eastern Es-
tonia. Fennoscandia Archaeologica XXXV: 65–85.
Santacreu D. A. 2014. Materiality, Techniques and So-
ciety in Pottery Production. The Technological Study of
Archaeological Ceramics through Paste Analysis. De
Gruyter Open. Warsaw.
Sikk K., Kriiska A., Johanson K., Sander K., and Vindi A.
2020. Environment and settlement location choice in
Stone Age Estonia. Estonian Journal of Archaeology 24
(2): 89–140. https://doi.org/10.3176/arch.2020.2.01
Simms S. R., Bright J. R. 1997. Plain-ware ceramics and
residential mobility: a case study from the great basin.
Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 779–792.
Archaeological traces of hunter-gatherer seasonal occupation in Western Coastal Estonia from the second half of the 6th millennium...
53
T∏ugai A., Plado J., Jõeleht A., + 4 authors, and Rosentau
A. 2014. Ground-penetrating radar and geological study
of the Kudruküla stone age archaeological site, Northeast
Estonia. Archaeological Prospection 21(3): 225–234.
https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.1484
Tvauri A., Johanson K. 2006. Archaeological Research on
Kavastu Mesolithic and Early Modern Settlement Site in
2005. Archeological fieldwork in Estonia 2002: 41–46.
Tõnisson E. 2008. Eesti muinaslinnad. Prehistoric strong-
holds of Estonia. Muinasaja teadus 20. Tartu Ülikool. Tal-
linna Ülikooli ajaloo instituut.Tartu, Tallinn. 
Tõrv M. 2016. Persistent practices. A multi-disciplinary
study of hunter-gatherer mortuary remains from c.
6500–2600 cal BC, Estonia. PhD thesis. Institute of Hi-
story and Archaeology, Faculty of Arts and Humanities,
University of Tartu, Estonia Dissertationes Archaeologiae
Universitatis Tartuensis 5. University of Tartu Press.
https://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/51352/tor
v_mari.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Vankina L. V. 1970. Torfyanikovaya stoyanka Sarnate.
Zinatne. Riga. (in Russian)
Veski S., Heinsalu A., Klassen V., Kriiska A., Lõugas L., Pos-
ka A., and Saluäär U. 2005. Early Holocene coastal settle-
ments and palaeoenvironment on the shore of the Baltic
Sea at Parnu, southwestern Estonia. Quaternary Interna-
tional 130: 75–85.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2004.04.033