Conference proceedings by Vasil Antonov

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE WHERE ARE THE SITES ?

Research, Protection and Management of Cultural Heritage 5-8 December 2013 Ahtopol

Programme co-funded by the EUROPEAN UNION

This page is left intentionally blank

Bulgaria â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Turkey IPA Cross-Border Programme CCI No: 2007CB16IPO008

Centre for Underwater Archaeology Център за подводна археология INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE WHERE ARE THE SITES ? Research, Protection and Management of Cultural Heritage 5-8 December 2013 Ahtopol Bulgaria – Turkey IPA Cross-Border Programme CCI No: 2007CB16IPO008 Cross-border Cooperation for Capacity Development in the Field of Archaeological Heritage CrossCoopArch EDITORS: Hristina Angelova Mehmet Özdoğan PROOFREADING: Ali Byrne LAYOUT: Selecta Publishers Ltd. Front cover: Wooden posts (vertical and horizontal) – remains from prehistoric dwellings (inundated prehistoric settlements in Sozopol) This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union through the Bulgaria – Turkey IPA Cross-Border Programme. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the Centre for Underwater Archaeology and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union or the Managing Authority of the Programme. ©Centre for Underwater Archaeology Permission to reproduce can be sought from the Centre for Underwater Archaeology Contact Information Centre for Underwater Archaeology 1 Apollonia St. 8130 Sozopol, Bulgaria Tel./Fax: +359 550 22405 E-mail: cuasozopol@mail.bg

Bulgaria â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Turkey IPA Cross-Border Programme CCI No: 2007CB16IPO008

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE WHERE ARE THE SITES ?

Research, Protection and Management of Cultural Heritage 5-8 December 2013 Ahtopol

Organised by

Background The Conference is crucial to the finalization of the joint Bulgarian-Turkish Project Cross-border cooperation for capacity development in the field of archaeological heritage (CrossCoopArch) (14/12/2012–13/12/2013) carried out by the Centre for Underwater Archaeology (Lead Partner/Project Partner 1) – Bulgaria and Kirklareli Cultural Assets Association (Project Partner 2) Turkey – Project Contract №2007CB16IPO008-2011-2-089 financed under the IPA CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION PROGRAMME.

Aims The Conference aims to bring together people from the scientific and administrative domain (scientists involved in the study of archaeological heritage and representatives of local administrations) to discuss common issues related to research, protection and management of cultural heritage and the future of joint cross-border measures that have to be undertaken jointly by Bulgaria and Turkey. A special focus will be placed on the submerged landscapes in the Black Sea and the possible future efforts of the Partners for joint marine research.

CONTENTS Forward

Mehmet Özdoğan – Istanbul University

Placing Eastern Thrace in Cultural and Environmental Context - A Survey of Archaeological Reconnaissance Vladimir Slavchev - Regional Museum Varna

A mid-Vth millennium Settlement near Suvorovo, Varna District Petar Leshtakov – National Archaeological Institute and Museum

Archaeometallurgical research in the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast: the site of Akladi Cheiri and the copper deposits of Medni Rid range Kalin Dimitrov - National Archaeological Institute and Museum

Evolution of the Gold Working Technology in the necropolis of Varna Lyubomir Dimitrov1, Eva De Boever2, Rudy Swennen2 1 - Institute of Oceanology, BAS, Bulgaria; 2- Catholic University of Leoven, Belgium

Origin and development of the geological phenomenon of Pobiti Kamani in NE Bulgaria Atanas Orachev – Black Sea Strandzha Association

99 th

Holocene sand banks of the present-day Strandzha shelf (VI -V to the middle of Ist mill. BC) Nayden Prahov – Centre for Underwater Archaeology

117

Archaeological Predictive Model for Late Chalcholithic and Early Bronze Age Settlements along the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast Kiril Velkovsky

147

Geophysical Prospecting and Underwater Archaeology Zeynep Eres - Istanbul Technical University

155

Managing the cultural heritage of the Istranca Region Eylem Özdoğan - Istanbul University

197

Aşağı Pınar Open Air Museum Ivelina Petkova-Ivanova - Museum of History – Malko Tarnovo Thracian beehive tomb Mishkova niva: research аnd excavation, state of conservation and opportunities for cultural tourism in the cross-border region.

219

Necmi Karul - Istanbul University

229

A bridge between Archeology and Public: Aktopraklık Cultural Heritage Project Alexandra Byrne – Balkan Heritage Foundation, Bulgaria

235

Managing cultural heritage: An Australian perspective Dragomir Garbov – PhD student

241

Heritage online: the new web-based information platform and online museum of the Centre for Underwater Archaeology"

FORWARD “Sozopol municipality - Bulgaria and Kirklareli District - Turkey are border regions which share the same natural environment and cultural setup. Regretfully, though there has been some sharing of academic knowledge on the outcomes of archaeological fieldwork, and although active in terms of personal communication, it still remains completely lacking regarding publicity, raising of public awareness and joint cross-border actions aimed at letting specialists and the general public learn about their shared heritage. Within the framework of the proposed project it is anticipated to activate collaboration, sharing of experience, working together in developing heritage projects and making them known to the wider public with the aim to achieve sustainability in archaeological heritage management (preservation, protection, communication) and the way heritage can be used for the benefit of the society at large. Considering that the Project activities will be carried out in regions bordering the Black Sea and acknowledging its major role in shaping their cultural development and identity since ancient times, we address the need to fill in the gap between underwater and terrestrial archaeological heritage by providing information about the invisible (underwater) Black Sea heritage and its land counterpart by linking knowledge about submerged and dry land sites and the way they form a cultural and intellectual continuum.” CrossCoopArch Project proposal

The Conference was planned as one of the activities and as an official closure of the Bulgarian – Turkish Project CrossCoopArch funded under the Bulgaria - Turkey IPA Cross - Border Programme CCI No: 2007CB16IPO008. The conference has succeeded in going further than anticipated. The opportunity that it provided for Bulgarian and Turkish archaeologists, architects, municipal officials and volunteers devoted to the preservation of cultural heritage to meet one another, disseminate their research and other activities, and share ideas and knowledge on sites they study and the efforts they make to manage, preserve and protect them, was acknowledged not as a Project closing event but rather a beginning of long-term cooperation efforts which should be continued long into the future and expanded. A summary of the year-round project activities left the feeling as if the Partners have worked together for years. To qualify project activities it does not seem appropriate to use template expressions like “implemented successfully”. All of them are anticipated as a first step made by Project partners in an attempt to achieve sustainable development of cultural heritage on both sides of the Bulgarian – Turkish border, and to teach local stakeholders how they can take advantage of and benefit from their own cultural heritage assets.

Hristina Angelova, Mehmet Özdoğan

This page is left intentionally blank

PLACING EASTERN THRACE IN CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT A SURVEY ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE Mehmet Özdoğan İstanbul University e-mail: c.mozdo@gmail.com INTRODUCTION This present paper is an overview presenting a conspectus of our work in Eastern Thrace; here, we shall restrain from going into particulars of archaeological assemblages or of cultural sequences as they have been extensively published elsewhere (Karul et.al 2003a; Özdoğan 2003a, 2007, 2010, 2011a, 2011b, 2012; Özdoğan and Parzinger 2000, 2012; Parzinger and Özdoğan 1996, 2005). On the contrary, this paper will cover some basic information on the cultural and environmental settings of the region based on our observations. As it will be mentioned in some more detail below, our work in Eastern Thrace began in 1979 as a modest field program, and in time it grew to a major research project (Özdoğan 1983a, 1983c, 1985b). In its initial stage, the main concern of the survey was to find new evidence for understanding the relations of the Fikirtepe culture with the prehistoric cultures of Southeastern Europe (Özdoğan 1983b). Already by 1981, the recording of not only the Fikirtepe, but of all prehistoric cultures, became a part of the survey coverage. While working in the field, it was observed with regret that in Eastern Thrace the modern development projects, as well as housing and industrial establishments, intensive mechanical agriculture etc. had become a real threat to the cultural remains of all kinds and of all periods. As there had been no near-to-complete cultural inventory of the region, documenting sites and monuments of all periods, including those of historic periods, became an inevitable task of our group. Up to 1984, our survey area was restricted to the European side of the Sea of Marmara, or Eastern Thrace. In that year we first included the Eastern Marmara region to the field program, covering the part of Anatolia lying between the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea, and then the Southern Marmara, up to the Aegean littoral, conducting surface survey with varying degrees of intensity (Özdoğan 1986). In addition to the surface surveys, a number of sites were also excavated in Eastern Thrace within the framework of our project. Accordingly, since the beginning of the project, a substantial amount of new data, covering the entire time span of human history has been recovered, the number of sites now recorded is over 3.000, and the material yield is in great quantities. However, the present paper will touch upon only the results of the surface surveys in Eastern Thrace, from the time of the earliest pottery to the transitional period from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age. The project has received financial help from a number of different institutions, the initial stimulus, from 1980 to 1982, being the research grants of the National Geographic Society and 1989-1992 of the Aegean Research Fund – INSTAP. In the early years of our research minor contributions have also been received from Türkiye Turing ve Otomobil

Kurumu, Çanakkale Seramik Fabrikaları and from Turkish State Hydraulic Department (DSİ). Later, from 1993 on, our Project has been subsidized with the generous contributions of Istanbul University Research Fund, General Directorate of Antiquities Ankara, German Archaeological Institute in Berlin – DAI- local government and municipalities of Kırklareli, Vehbi Koç Vakfı. We have received invaluable help from many colleagues, both in the assessment of the survey material, and, particularly in our struggle towards understanding the prehistoric sequence of the Balkans. The current stage of our project, primarily oriented to cultural heritage management and to capacity building is being carried out under EU “Cross-Border Cooperation for Capacity Development in the Field of Archaeological Heritage” CrossCoopArch Code No. 2007CB16IPO008-2011-2-089. Since 1993 our work has focused on the region around the provincial centre of Kırklareli along the southern flanks of the Istranca Mountains, establishing a base in the nearby village of Ahmetce and conducting large-scale excavations at Aşağı Pınar and Kanlıgeçit. From 1993 on, our Project has become a multifarious and multifaceted undertaking, working with research groups representing a diversity of fields ranging from vernacular and urban architecture to geology, geoarchaeology, cultural heritage management, and ethnoarchaeology. Eastern Thrace is an exceptional region, located at the meeting point of Europe with Asia and has distinct environmental features that are notably different from the surrounding areas. Moreover, being surrounded by three marine bodies, each with distinct ecological conditions and the presence of two water-channels connecting these marine bodies further complicates the eco-cultural system of Eastern Thrace. Accordingly, we consider it necessary to present a brief description of the environmental conditions of the region before going into the discussion on cultural history. THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Eastern Thrace is an inconspicuous piece of land, relatively small when compared to most of the regions in the Near East and the Balkans; it is actually a peninsula, surrounded on its three ides by three different seas. The importance of Eastern Thrace is mainly due to its geographical location at the meeting point of Asia and Europe. Moreover, two of the seas that surround this peninsula, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea, being inland seas, have some very peculiar traits that are relevant to the cultural history of this region. Accordingly, it is worthwhile to summarize some of the factors concerning the environment of Eastern Thrace; otherwise, it is not the purpose of this chapter to make an overall geographical or geomorphological description. For the sake of convenience, a selected bibliography has been appended to the end of this chapter, covering the geology and the geography of the region. The Significance of the Location Eastern Thrace, which constitutes the European part of Turkey, is located at the meeting point of Anatolia and the Balkans, two protruding peninsulas of Asia and Europe. Here, two narrow and long straits, the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, together with the Sea of Marmara, are the only natural obstacles separating these two continents. As one can even swim through the straits, the region is seemingly the obvious corridor between the continents for all kinds of cultural relations. In addition to its location on this intercontinental land bridge, the region is also at the crucial point of the important sea-route linking the Aegean to the

Black Sea, and from there linking the East and Central Europe via The Danube (French 1986). The geographical position of Eastern Thrace can be compared to the narrow tube of an hourglass, working in both North-South and East-West directions. The region is also at the meeting point of different geographical or ecological zones: Anatolia, the Aegean, Black Sea with its Pontic catchment basin, and the Balkans with the continental parts of Eastern Europe. A Brief Description of the Region The area covered by Eastern Thrace is 23484 sq km. and it has geographically well defined boundaries: surrounded on its north, east and south by the Black Sea, the Bosporus, the Sea of Marmara, the Dardanelles and by the Aegean Sea respectively. The wide flood plain of the Meriç river (Evros in Greek and Maritsa in Bulgarian), together with the highlands of the Istranca mountains, defines the western boundary of Thrace. At present, Eastern Thrace is divided into five administrative provinces: Edirne in the west, Kırklareli in the north, Tekirdağ in the south, İstanbul in the east and Çanakkale to the southwest. However, there is no general consensus among the geographers on the natural sub-divisions of the region; the sub-divisions that will be used below, should be considered as being more “eco-cultural” zones, then being geographical regions. a) Gelibolu Peninsula Gelibolu peninsula is a very narrow and long piece of land, running for about 70km. parallel to Anatolia, and it is connected to Thrace by a narrow isthmus, only 7 km. wide. In contrast to the other parts of Thrace, the peninsula has a rugged appearance, even though in no part of it are the hills of the central ridges higher than 400 m. The face of the hills towards the Aegean are steeper; here there are only a few natural harbours and almost no coastal plains; however, the side facing the strait is occasionally broken by streams, running into small harbours, and small coastal plains are present on most parts of the peninsula. Despite the fact that the peninsula is an extension of Eastern Thrace, it is much more easily accessible from Anatolia than Thrace. It should not be overlooked that this peninsula, running parallel to the Anatolian coast at a distance of less than a kilometre, is connected by a very narrow and marshy isthmus to mainland, thus while being open to Anatolia it is easily defendable against any penetration from Thrace. The Mediterranean type of climate that prevails in the peninsula is also in strong contrast to the rest of Thrace. As also verified through the results of our surface survey, from the point of cultural geography Gelibolu Peninsula is to be considered as a part of Anatolia. b) Çatalca Peninsula: The so-called Çatalca peninsula, or the easternmost parts of Thrace to the west of the Bosporus, is a particular zone, much more difficult to assess then the Gelibolu Peninsula, as it merges to the west with no topographic obstacles with the Thracian plain but, on the other hand bears the features of the Bosporus region. The general appearance of the region is rolling low hills, small plateaus, broken by deep, narrow gullies, two major lagoons- Büyük Çekmece and Küçük Çekmece along the Marmara and Terkos Lake along Black Sea are among its distinct features. The geological formation of the region is very complex; beginning with Palaeozoik there has been different cycles of erosion and deposition. Chalk hills, of

Eocene age, and gravel deposits of Neocene age cover considerable areas. The Bosphorus cuts a deep and young valley through the terrain. On the other hand some other streams, such as the Sazlıdere stream have more mature and broad floored valleys. At present most of the peninsula is covered by the metropolitan area of İstanbul, and the rest is heavily forested. Accordingly, surface surveys have been mostly unsuccessful in this area. c) Istranca Mountains The range of the Istranca Mountains, extending from the Bulgarian border almost up to the Bosporus, runs parallel to coast of the Black Sea preventing rain-bringing conditions from penetrating inland. Even though the Istranca range is of modest height in most parts, nevertheless due to its complex geological formation, it constitutes a border for the climatic and vegetational zones, preventing the moist and cold Black Sea weather from penetrating inland (Kurter 1978) . The westernmost sector of the range, north of Edirne and near the Bulgarian border is higher, the highest peak reaching 1035 m., descends considerably to the east. The central part of the Istranca ridge, around the town of Kırklareli, is more like a plateau, 400-600 m. high, and the height of the small ridges hardly exceeds the altitude of 700 m. The plateau is interrupted by gullies and/or valleys formed by streams, such as Süloğlu Deresi, Tekederesi, Şeytandere, and Anadere running southwards towards the Ergene basin; further to the south, along the piedmont, the valleys of these streams become wider with more gentle terraces. The transitional zone from the high plateau to the basin, or in other words the “piedmont”, becomes steeper to the east and is dominated by rocky ravines and outcrops. Most of the Iron Age and Medieval fortifications are located in this zone. Further to the east, Istranca range loses its height, and gradually merges with the rolling hills of the Çatalca plateau. The Istranca Mountains are exceedingly rich in minerals, including copper and iron, and various metamorphic rocks. Due to the thick green cover, the field survey of this region was not conclusive (Kantarca 1974). c) Ganos and Koru Mountains Along the southern coast of Thrace, between Gelibolu peninsula and the town of Tekirdağ there are the rises of the Koru and Ganos mountains. Even though the area covered by the Ganos and Koru Mountains are not extensive and they never reach high altitudes, they have a significant role in defining the topography of Thrace. Due to the neotectonic structuring of Thrace, with the uplift along the coast of the Sea of Marmara, Ganos range rises steeply on the side facing the sea and then continues to the north as a high plateau, at an altitude of 500m. At its highest point the Ganos Mountains reach an altitude of 920m. The Ganos massive is occasionally deeply incised valleys and ravines isolating inner parts of Thrace-the Ergene basin- from the Sea of Marmara. Both ranges, Koru and Ganos also constitute a climatic marker, preventing the rain-bringing Mediterranean type of climate from entering the Thracian plain, resulting in the arid and semi-arid conditions of the inner parts. d) Thracian Plains – the Ergene Basin Central section of Eastern Thrace is a basin defined by the Istranca Mountains on the north and Ganos in the south; the terrain gently inclines towards the Ergene River, which extends on an east-west axis through the centre of Thrace. The Ergene River has incised a deep, but very broad floodplain; at its confluence to Meriç/Maritsa River, the altitude of the

flood plain is as low as 25m. Ergene has an extensive catchment area, draining almost all of Eastern Thrace; numerous small streams originating from the Istranca Mountains, running in parallel north-south directions are features of the undulating topography of the basin. The central Thracian plain consists of extensive flat lands, almost like a peneplain, undulated by the inconspicuous parallel valleys of the small streams. These flat-lands extend almost all through the length of Thrace, from the Çatalca to the basin of the Meriç River. The base of this basin is a thick deposit of gravel, sand and lime, left over from the ancient sea of the Tertiary Period, covered by thick deposits of alluvium and collivium. Towards the headwaters of Ergene, in the region of Vize, there are small, isolated plains or depressions of tectonic origin. The central part of Eastern Thrace is an endemic steppe, only with occasional strands of trees along the streams; there is a general deficiency of springs (Dönmez 1968). e) Meriç (Maritsa) Valley The broad and well-developed valley of the Meriç River defines the western boundary of Eastern Thrace; at the confluence of Ergene to Meriç the floodplain expands considerably to form a swampy delta. From that point on the lower course of the Meriç is occasionally broken by extensive marshes and swamps and near the town of Enez, before reaching the Aegean, it forms a wide delta. The eastern side of the delta is marked by the Sultaniçe limestone hills, Eocene in age, hardly reaching 150 m. in height. Numerous backshore lakes and swamps continue eastwards, almost up to the town of Keşan (Göçmen 1976). It is evident that during the early Holocene, the present floodplain of the Meriç River was a gulf, deeply penetrating inland and extending as far east as Keşan and that Edirne must have developed in antiquity as a harbour town along this gulf. f) Black Sea Coastal Strip The Istranca Mountains run directly down to the shore, leaving no place for coastal plain; natural harbours are rather rare and are mostly along the mouths of the small streams. In the eastern section of the coast, nearer to the Bosporus there are some flatlands and/or paleocoastal terraces dominated by extensive sand dunes-fossilized or recent. With the exception of the dune areas, surface visibility was extremely low due to thick green cover, thus survey for archaeological sites had minimal field. g) Marmara Coast The coastal strip along the Sea of Marmara can be considered in two distinct sectors, in the east, from the Bosporus to Tekirdağ located at the easternmost flanks of the Ganos mountains, the coastal strip is in the form of high beach with numerous inlets and with well protected small harbours. The character of the coast changes dramatically past Tekirdağ, the coastal plain disappears, and the steep foothills of the Ganos-Koru Mountains come just up to the coast. Some Considerations on the Role of Marine Environment Thrace is surrounded on three sides by three different seas – Black Sea, the Sea of Marmara, the Aegean- separated from each other by two long and narrow straits –Bosporus and Dardanelles -presenting a very particular case on a global level, primarily due to the differences in the marine conditions of the surrounding seas. The marine environment of the

Aegean, being in direct contact with the World-wide ocean system is warm and saline; the Black Sea on the other hand is a land-locked marine body, dependent more on the water inflow from the rivers draining Europe, brackish and much colder then the Aegean. The Sea of Marmara, located in between the Aegean and the Black Sea, is where both marine bodies merge with each other, the combination being dependent on the amount of water flow from the straits. Moreover, the Sea of Marmara is the key to a chain of land-locked marine bodies: the Black Sea, the Azov Sea, the Caspian and at times the Aral Lake (Pfannensteiel 1944; Stanley and Blanpied 1980). This system is the most complex of its sort, being controlled not only by the global changes in sea levels, but on tectonics and climatic conditions. As the changes in this system are consequential on cultural formations not only on a local scale but all along the catchment areas of the Black Sea-Caspian basin, it is worth noting its particular features in some detail. The straits of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus, both of which are extremely sensitive to changes in environmental conditions, control this complex system. Firstly, it should be considered that the marine environment on one end of the Marmara is saline and warm, while on the other side is colder and less saline. Moreover, the water input from the Black Sea varies considerably according to the pertaining climatic conditions in Central and Eastern Europe, whether masses of water are blocked as ice or snow, or have all drained into the Black Sea which then over flows into the Marmara. Along with the changes in global sea-levels and local climatic conditions in Europe, the extremely active tectonic movements along the North Anatolian fault-line, upward or downward movements, are understood to have played a decisive role in the nature of the water exchange system. This is due to the close drainage systems where even a minor change in the pertaining ecological conditions can provoke exaggerated consequences, changing the boundaries between land and sea and thus exposing or drowning coastal plains. Likewise, marine conditions such as the level of salinity can vary from fresh to brackish to saline; vertical circulation of oxygen may be halted resulting in anoxic conditions and the formation of sapropels, each of these circumstances having its impact on the bio-environment. Eventually, whatever the conditions may be, they all have consequences on the human activity through the entire region (Özdoğan 2003b, 2006). Main Features of the Marmara-Black Sea System are as follows (Degens 1971; Degens and Paluska 1979; Erinç 1954): 

The Sea of Marmara, in spite of its small size, is one of the deepest seas; three depressions on its north side, reach 1200m. in depth, although there is also a shallow shelf zone covering large areas in the south. The Black Sea on the other hand is a subsiding basin, reaching depth greater than the Marmara, with a large continental shelf on its western and northern sides.



The Sea of Marmara has no major input of water from streams; accordingly the amount of water in the Marmara and the degree of its salinity depends on the water passing through the straits. The Aegean Sea, being a part of the Mediterranean, has a salinity of 35%. The Black Sea however, receives large amounts of fresh and cold water through rivers like the Danube, the Dinyeper, the Dniester and the Don. The degree of its salinity varies annually, but on the average it is 18% and is again much lower near Crimea, being around 11%. Accordingly, warm and heavy waters of the Aegean coming in from the Dardanelles meet at Marmara with the cold and light waters of the Black Sea. As the densities of these water masses are different and as the amount of water

penetrating into Marmara is not constant, marine conditions of the Sea of Marmara have always been unstable. 

Bottom elevations of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus are not even; both of them have a rather shallow ridge of hard rock, blocking the under current. The location of this ridge is at a more critical place in the Bosporus, just before the Black Sea entrance.



The big rivers draining Central and Eastern Europe control the water input of the Black Sea. In years when the European climate is more arid, or when the water is kept as snow or ice, there is less discharge to the Black Sea. Under the present conditions, the amount of water entering the Black Sea through the rivers is more than the discharging capacity of the Bosporus. This has two critical consequences: almost no or very little salty water can enter the Black Sea; the saline and therefore heavier water enters the Bosporus as a deep current but stops at the relatively shallow crest before entering the Black Sea. On the other side, the level of the Black Sea at present is about a meter higher than that of the Marmara. When the conditions change, i.e., the Black Sea receiving less fresh water through the rivers, then there will be less pressure from fresh water to the Bosphorus and accordingly the Black Sea will receive much more saline water. On the contrary, if there were more rainy periods in Europe, salt water penetration through the Bosphorus would be less.



At present the mean level of the Caspian Sea is lower than the world sea levels, its surface level being about 70m. below the mean world sea levels. The water input of the Caspian is also very flexible, depending on the river Volga and also on the climatic conditions of the Asian steppes. At times when there is an increase in water discharge, which might be either due to melted ice from northern latitudes, or due to rain, the level of the Caspian rises rather quickly, easily filling in the Manych gorge-or strait-thus connecting to the Black Sea. A similar connection is also due eastward to the Lake Aral. Accordingly, at times when there might be no changes in the conditions around the Balkans and Eastern Europe, there might be an overflow of fresh water, due to the climatic fluctuations in the steppes, from the Caspian to the Black Sea and from there to the Marmara.



The region around the Marmara is tectonically very active; recent work on the Quaternary tectonic activity of the Black Sea (and of the Marmara basin) reveals that while some areas are rising steadily, others, especially the Marmara and Black Sea basins, are subsiding. Even a minor change in the elevation of the straits is apt to have exaggerated consequences on the water exchange system between the Black Sea and the Marmara.



There is still considerable controversy on the dating and sequencing of the water exchange system between the Aegean and the Black Sea. However, it is evident that during the Late Glacial there was no water flow from either of the straits and the Marmara was a brackish lake – or lakes. It also seems possible that the early Holocene, with gradual warming of the climate, followed by the rise in world-wide sea levels, had its first impact on the Black Sea-Caspian system. The rather rapid melt of the glacial sheets and increased rain fall resulted in a quick transgression of the Black Sea-Caspian-Aral system, which is understood to have overflowed into the Marmara basin for a short period of time.



There is some controversy regarding the date of the first intrusion of saline Aegean waters into the Marmara System. It all depends on when the rise of the worldwide sea levels reached the critical height of the shallowest part of the Dardanelles. Even though there are some discrepancies among sea-level curves, this event seems to have taken place at a time between 9000 and 7000 BC. Likewise the date and the direction of the water flow from the Bosporus is also debatable, but evidently by 5500BC present conditions must have been established (Algan et al 2009, 2011). The Role of Tectonic Activities

The region around the Sea of Marmara is in a tectonically very active zone; recent survey of historical earthquakes and the tectonic activity of the region have revealed rather interesting facts on vertical movements. Even though there is considerable data from the historic periods, due to lack of research, reading the impact of tectonic movements during prehistory is rather vague, the only available information being restricted to that of Yarımburgaz Cave and to the submerged mound at Avşa Island. HISTORY OF RESEARCH Investigations in the Region Prior the Commencement of Our Project In spite of its significance, until the beginning of our project, Eastern Thrace had never been properly investigated for a variety of reasons. It is almost unbelievable that the megalithic monuments, lying just a few kilometres north of the only road connecting Europe with Istanbul, remained unnoticed until 1960. No matter how much Thrace looked like a promising area to provide the missing link between the Aegean, Anatolian and the Balkan cultures, the amount of knowledge available in the beginning was simply discouraging. All that was known from Thrace up to then consisted of only 20 prehistoric sites, randomly scattered and in most cases improperly documented, with the addition of a few megalithic chamber tombs. A few earlier surveys had not revealed the expected and almost nothing datable to the prehistoric period, not even chance finds, reached either the local museums or, apparently, the antiquity market. The honour of the first prehistoric discoveries in Eastern Thrace was taken by Calvert in the 1880s at Kilye near Eceabat on the Dardanelles, who reported Late Chalcolithic stone figurines, later to be reputed as the “kilye type of figurines” (Calvert 1901). Another recovery by Calvert, again on the Gelibolu Peninsula, is the prehistoric mound of Karaağaçtepe; this big mound was, at that time, believed to be the tumulus of Protesilaos then briefly excavated by H. Schliemann in 1892. A major excavation took place in the mound, still thinking that it was a tumulus, under R. Demangel, with the help of the French Occupation Forces at Gelibolu in years 1921-23 (Demangel 1926). Almost during at the same time, some prehistoric finds were recovered in the deep sounding at the Hippodrome in Istanbul. The first concrete project in Eastern Thrace was initiated by Prof. A. M. Mansel, then the Director of the İstanbul Archaeological Museums, with the participation of Prof. R. O. Arık, in the late 1930s. The main objective of the project was to excavate and document the tumuli of later periods. However, during this work, two prehistoric sites were also encountered, Alpullu and Yumurtatepe-Hasköy There are some uncertainties on the nature of these sites, but seemingly in both cases a tumulus was built over a prehistoric site. Only a few vessels of Alpullu have been published (Mansel 1937; Mansel 1938, p. 22-23, fig. 29-31; Mansel 1940, p. 90) and of Yumurtatepe, there is only a small note (Mansel 1938; Mansel

1940. p. 90 n.2; and especially Arık 1940, p. 243). Two stone hammer-axes, found near Kızılcaterzi, at Buruneren Çiftliği, were recovered by Kurtoğlu (Kurtoğlu 1938, p. 17). In early 1960s, Prof. Ş.A. Kansu began a small-scale research program in Eastern Thrace conducting a small sounding at Çardakaltı, near Edirne, where typical Karanovo IV material was recovered (Kansu 1963b, p. 664-665, fig. 39-46; Kansu 1964, p. 211-212, fig. 14-15). Another significant achievement of Kansu’s project was the excavation of Yarımburgaz Cave in 1964 and 1965 with the participation of K. Kökten and N. Dolunay, revealing a hitherto unknown assemblage (Kansu 1972; Kökten 1963). In 1963, Kansu also recovered a Paleolithic site at Davutpaşa, and some Late Bronze -Early Iron Age wares from Kınalı Köprü (Kansu 1963a). Within the same project, Kansu pioneered in documenting some of the megalithic monuments of Thrace, visiting 19 of them, and gathering information on 7 others (Kansu 1963c; Kansu 1969, Kansu 1971). Prior to our surface surveys, most of the surface recordings were made by D. French; among those along the southern coast of Eastern Thrace Kınalı Köprü, (French 1961, p. 103, fig. 6:1-3), Toptepe, (French 1966, p. 49, fig. 5-6), Selimpaşa Höyük, (French 1965, p. 34, fig. 13:11), Şerefli Çiftlik, (French 1966, p. 49, fig 5), Damnarca Çeşme, (French 1966, p. 49) and at the Gelibolu Peninsula Akbaş Şehitliği, (French 1964, p. 37, fig. 3-5), Asartepe, (French 1964, p. 37). There are also some sporadic finds, such as a small metal board from Safaalanı,(Dirimtekin 1960; Çernych 1978, fig. 110), another hoard from Kozmandere – Şarköy (Harmankaya 1995) and few other random finds in Istanbul Museum, including Early Iron Age sherds from a sounding (Fıratlı 1973, p. 22), a possible Cypriote import from the 2 nd. Millennium from İstanbul (Fıratlı 1958, p. 29, fig, 9-10), and a metal sickle from Umurca Çiftlik (Fıratlı 1966, p. 224). Meanwhile 5 more megalithic monuments were recorded by the museum at Edirne (one of them published by Hoddinott 1981, fig. 66).

ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF OUR PROJECT SURFACE SURVEYS 1) Surface Surveys in Eastern Thrace Our work in the region began in 1979 as a random survey within the immediate surroundings of Istanbul; by the following year it had developed into an extensive survey project. Surface surveys were the main objective of our project from 1980 to 1985, covering all of Eastern Thrace in varying degrees of intensity. During this period the most extensively surveyed areas included the Gallipoli Peninsula and the foothills along the Istranca Mountains in the provinces of Edirne and Kırklareli. Although after 1985 surface survey no longer constituted the central focus of the project, surface surveys were still conducted in areas that were not covered by our earlier work. After 1993, surface surveys in restricted areas continued annually in the Kırklareli-Edirne region in Eastern Thrace. In the course of these surface surveys, over 300 prehistoric settlement sites, 90 megalithic monuments, 300 sites of late periods and 800 tumuli were recorded.

2) Surface Survey of Eastern Marmara The eastern Marmara Region was incorporated into the survey in 1984 and 1985 covering the plains of İznik, Yenişehir and the coastal region along the Black Sea between Şile and Kefken. The survey of this region yielded sites that are datable to various phases of the Paleolithic and Mesolithic Periods (Gatsov 2001, 2009; Gatsov and Özdoğan 1994; Runnels and Özdoğan 2001). 3) Surface Survey of Southern Marmara Surface surveys on the Anatolian side of the Sea of Marmara began in 1988 and lasted up until 1990, with the aim to provide comparative material to what we had been recovering in Eastern Thrace. During these surveys, covering mainly the plains of Bandırma, Gönen, Manyas, Balıkesir, İvrindi, Çan and Yenice over 50 prehistoric sites and 120 sites or monuments of later periods were recovered. RESCUE EXCAVATIONS 1) Rescue Excavations at the Taşlıcabayır Burial Mound (Özdoğan 1987) A small burial mound in central Thrace, dated to c. 1100 BC. revealed a unique pottery assemblage related to Troy VIIb2 with the so-called buckelkeramik or to the Psenichevo culture of Bulgaria. The Taşlıcabayır burial mound has been most informative as it is the only burial mound of that period excavated in Turkey. 2) Tilkiburnu Rescue Excavation (Özdoğan 1982) Tilkiburnu is a small mound, c. 25 km south of Kırklareli on the East bank of Şeytandere stream. At the time of our visit in 1980, the site had been badly disturbed for quarrying sand and a long section cutting through the centre of the mound had been exposed, where a large pit with numerous pots in situ was visible. The assemblage thus recovered was datable to the transition from Late Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age. 3) Pendik (Özdoğan 1983b) A rescue operation was conducted in 1983 in the prehistoric site of Pendik, located in the close proximity to İstanbul. The cultural layers exposed, dated to the 6 th Millennium BC, revealed assemblages related to the early phases of the Fikirtepe culture. The excavations at Pendik have enabled the updating of our knowledge of the Early Neolithic cultures of the Marmara region. 4) Excavations at the Cave of Yarımburgaz (Özdoğan 1985a, 1990; Özdoğan Koyunlu 1986; Özdoğan et al 1991) In 1986 rescue excavations at Yarımburgaz Cave, located in İstanbul, presented a unique sequence from the Middle Pleistocene to the present, not only revealing rich remains of the Basal Paleolithic Period with pebble industries (dated to c. 300,000 – 600,000 BC), but also successive layers evincing climatic fluctuations. The later sequence of the cave revealed five distinct cultural layers of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods. The final occupation of the cave dates from the Hellenistic through to the Byzantine Periods.

5) Rescue Excavations at Toptepe (Özdoğan et al 1990, 1991, 1998) Toptepe, located along the Marmara coast of Thrace, was considered to be a Bronze Age mound; in 1989, following the destruction of the main cone of the mound, rescue work was conducted, revealing a hitherto unnoticed culture, now known as the Toptepe Culture, belonging to the Middle Chalcolithic Period, c. 5200 BC. SMALL-SCALE EXCAVATIONS 1) Excavations at Hoca Çeşme (Özdoğan 1998b, 2003d) Hoca Çeşme is a small but well stratified site by the Aegean coast, near the delta of the Meriç/Evros/Maritsa river. The site has revealed a sequence from the earliest Neolithic pottery of the region- from pre-Karanovo I- to Middle Chalcolithic Period, to early Karanovo IV Period. The basal layer, encircled by a stone wall, consists of round-plan structures carved into the bedrock seemingly established as an early colony site of Anatolian origin. 2) Excavations at Menekşe Çatağı Menekşe Çatağı, a small mound along the Marmara coast, has been excavated within the framework of our project in 1993 and 1994; the excavations were later resumed under the auspices of the Tekirdağ museum. The site includes cultural layers dated to Hellenistic, Early Iron Age, Early Bronze Age and Toptepe cultures. 3) Lalapaşa Dolmen (Akman 1998, 1999; Özdoğan 1998a) Excavations and restoration of one of the Early Iron Age megalithic monuments in Lalapaşa, Edirne province, were carried out in 1994 within the framework of our Project. LARGE-SCALE EXCAVATIONS 1) Excavations at Aşağı Pınar (Hansen 2004;Özdoğan 2011c; Schwarzberg 2006) The most extensive operation under the coverage of our project has been the excavations at Aşağı Pınar, near the town of Kırklareli, from 1993 to present. The site has yielded cultural layers from Pre-Karanovo ı to early Karanovo V period. The site has also yielded a sacrificial area dated to the Early Iron Age. During the project, an area of about 4 thousand square meters was exposed, providing dependable evidence not only on the changes in the settlement pattern, but also on various aspects of the assemblage. Extensive studies of the faunal and floral remains have also contributed to our knowledge of the paleoenvironment. 2) Excavations at Kanlıgeçit (Benecke 2002; Özdoğan 2003c; Özdoğan and Parzinger 2012) Kanlıgeçit, some 300 m. to the West of Aşağı Pınar was excavated from 1994 to 2008, yielding a unique Early Bronze Age acropolis, a citadel with megarons, duplicating plan -type of Anatolian settlements. Also in the site, remnants from the Late Chalcolithic period have also been recovered. At present, the Bronze Age citadel of Kanlıgeçit stands as the only known Anatolian Bronze Age colony settlement in Thrace, revealing a number of Anatolian imports.

OTHER ACTIVITIES OF THE PROJECT The Research Centre An extensive research centre has been established in the village of Ahmetçe, 7 km to the north of the city centre of Kırklareli, to serve as the base for a variety of investigations to be carried out in the region. The compound, along with all necessary facilities for accommodating large research groups, has extensive storage capacity, studios, study areas and rooms to hold small-scale meetings. Some of the compounds have been designed to serve as the cultural inventory archive of the Kırklareli region, including pottery sherds, fauna, lithics and documentary archives. Documentation of Rural and Urban Architectural Heritage The project, conducted in collaboration with the Technical University of Istanbul Architectural Restoration and Conservation Department, has completed a thorough survey of villages on the Istranca Mountains along the border with Bulgaria, mainly focusing on the wooden-post wattle and daub architecture; the same team has also conducted an architectural survey of the villages in the plain and in the historic centres of Kırklareli and Kaynarca towns (Eres 2002) Ethnoarchaeology Through the various stages of the project, a program has been carried out to document some of the traditional crafts that are no longer practiced, such as thatching, potter making, weaving and basketry. This study has been conducted by searching for the old craftsmen or craftswomen in the villages. The revival of some of the traditional crafts, by providing craftspeople with the means to market their products, is anticipated. Geoarchaeology and Environmental Studies In collaboration with the Istanbul University Geology Department an extensive study was carried out on the provenience of lithic tools and for the reconstruction of the paleoenvironment. A more or less similar project is being carried out with the University of Kiel on paleo-soil formation and on the geochemistry of the soil sediments within the archaeological site. Kanlıgeçit Open-Air Site Museum Excavations at the 3rd millennium Early Bronze Age site of Kanlıgeçit, commenced by our team with collaboration with DAI Berlin in 1994, were terminated in 2007. During the excavations a modest sized fortified citadel was fully excavated, revealing a hitherto unknown Anatolian colony settlement, duplicating the plan-type of Anatolian urban centres such as Troy. The recovery of domestic horse bones, being of the earliest such in Turkey, further increased the importance of the site as it evinced the presence of an early caravan route originating from Central Anatolia. After the termination of the archaeological work, a management plan was designed so as to secure protection of the excavated architectural remains and at the same time to make the site available for visits. The first instalment of the project was completed by burying the original remains and making one to one models, consolidating the excavated area. It is anticipated to further develop the site by constructing a ‘visitors watch tower’.

Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Village Museum The excavations in the western sector of the Neolithic site of Aşağı Pınar were terminated in 1999 and this area was then designed as an open-air exhibition area in accordance with the macro-site management project. Up to present, three wooden wattle and daub cruck-like buildings had been bought from the villages in the mountains and reconstructed as a part of the village-museum. An exhibition, by models, illustrations and explanatory panels has already been put into these buildings. The reconstruction of nine more such buildings is anticipated, to create a ‘time-tunnel’, as well as the development of areas reserved for experimental archaeology and for a “school children excavation area” unit. It is also anticipated that the Kırklareli Archaeology Museum will move to the immediate neighbourhood of the site, where land has already been allocated by the local government to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism for this purpose. Site management and developing local awareness The project considers that a sustainale model of protection of archaeological sites can only be achieved through developing local awareness and working in close collaboration with the local actors. Accordingly, the project has established close contacts with the governmental and non-governmental bodies located in the town of Kırklareli, the most active partner being the “Kırklareli Kültür Varlıkları Dernaği”. The project foresees the benefits of local contacts on two distinct lines; firstly to secure the future of past remains by providing the means of sustainability, and secondly to extend the economic and geographic scope for heritage-based tourism in this neglected region (Eres 2002; Eres et al.2010; Özdoğan and Eres 2012) Through the long-term managament project devised by our group, it is anticipated to modernize site management approaches to meet increasing demand and to protect the environment, and also to clarify responsibilities in the area of cultural asset management and streamline the institutional framework. A more deliberate and focused link between local economic development and heritage assets will evidently improve the potential for success. The project will undertake investments and introduce modern site management methods within the two sites, and will provide an institutional strengthening component to address the deficiencies of the current centralized and segregated approach to cultural asset management. CONCLUDING REMARKS At the time when we began working in the region our knowledge on the prehistory of the Marmara region was restricted to a few randomly scattered finds, which allowed the creation an over-simplistic picture of the region. Since then our knowledge of early cultures of the Marmara Region has increased immensely, not only through field projects carried out within the framework of our project, but also by the works of the other teams taking up research projects in the region (Özdoğan et al 2013), the most fascinating one being the rescue excavations at Yenikapı Istanbul (Kızıltan 2007). Nevertheless, we are still far from drawing a conclusive picture of the region, in particular on matters related to both the emergence of the Neolithic way of life in Northwestern Turkey and on its dispersal from Anatolia to the Balkans. It is evident however that the process of neolithization was far more complex and multifarious than ever envisaged, thus requiring the revision of all our earlier assumptions. It is possibly correct to say that now we are in the stage of formulating correct questions that would pave the way for concrete answers to questions that were being discussed for over half a century.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Akman, M. 1998. “Die Ausgrabung der Megalithischen Dolmenanlage in Lalapaşa”, N.Tuna; Z.Aktüre; M.Lynch, (eds.) Thracians and Phrygians: Problems of Parallellism (Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Archaeology, History and Ancient Languages of Thrace and Phrygia, Ankara, 3-4 June 1995), Ankara METU, Faculty of Architecture Press, p: 65-70. Akman, M. 1999.“Megalithbauten im türkischen Thrakien”, K.W.Beinhauer ; G.Cooney (eds.), Studien zur Megalithik, Weissbach, Verlag Beier und Beran, Archäologische Fachliteratur, p. 239-250. Algan, O.; Yalçın, M.N.; Özdoğan, M.; Yılmaz, İ.; Sarı, E. Kırcı-Elmas, E., Ongan, D.; BulkanYeşiladalı, Ö.; Yılmaz, Y. and Karamut, İ., 2009.“A short note on the geo-archeological significance of the ancient Theodosius harbour (İstanbul, Turkey),” Quaternary Research 72/3: 457- 461. Algan, O.; Yalçın, N.; Özdoğan, M.; Yılmaz, Y.; Sarı, E., Kırcı-Elmas, E.; Yılmaz, İ.; Bulkan, Ö.; Ongan, D.; Gazioğlu, C.; Nazik, A.; Polat, M.A. and Meriç, E., 2011. “Holocene coastal change in the ancient harbor of Yenikapı–İstanbul and its impact on cultural history,” Quaternary Research 76: 30- 45. Arık, R.O. 1940. “1936’da Yapılan Hafriyatlar, Alpullu (Trakya) Hafriyatı”. Türk Tarih Arkeologya ve Etnografya Dergisi IV, 242-243. Benecke, N. 2002. “Die frühbronzezeitlichen Pferde von Kırklareli-Kanlıgeçit, Thrakien, Türkei”, Eurasia Antiqua 8., Berlin., p. 39-59. Calvert, F. 1901. “Eine Marmorfigur öom Thrakischen Chersones”, Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 33. Chernykh, E. 1978. Gornoe delo I Metallurgiya v. drevneyshoy Bolgarii, Sofia. Degens, E. 1971. “Sedimentary History of the Black Sea Over the Last 25.000 Years”, in A. Champbell (ed), Geology and History of Turkey, Tripoli, p. 407-429. Degens, E., and A. Paluska, 1979. “Tectonic and Climatic Pulses Recorded in quaternary Sediments of the Caspian-Black Sea Region”, Sedimentary Geology 23, p. 149-163. Demangel, R. 1926. Le Tumulus dit de Protésilas, E. de Boccard, Paris. Dirimtekin, F. 1960. “Trakya’da Safaalanı Yakınında Bulunan Eserler”, Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi X: 2, p. 56-57. Dönmez,Y. 1968. Trakya’nın Bitki Coğrafyası, İstanbul Üniversitesi Coğrafya Enstitüsü Pub. İstanbul. Erinç, S. 1954. “The Pleistocene History of the Black Sea and the adjacent Countries with Special Reference to the Climatic Changes”, Review of the Geographical Institute I, p. 84-133. Fıratlı, N. 1958. “Müzeden ve İstanbul’dan Haberler: Çarşıkapı’da Bulunan Prehistorik Keramik”, İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri Yıllığı 8, p. 29-30. Fıratlı, N. 1966. “Kısa Arkeolojik Haberler: Trakya’dan Buluntular”, İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri Yıllığı 13-14, p. 223-4. Fıratlı, N. 1973. “New Discoveries Concerning the First Settlement of Byzantion”, Türkiye Turing ve Otomobil Kurumu Belleteni 38/317: 21-25. French, D. 1961. “Late Chalcolithic Pottery in North-West Turkey and the Aegean”. Anatolian Studies XI, 1961, p. 99-141. French, D. 1964. “Surface Finds: c) Akbaş, d) Asartepe”, Anatolian Studies XIV, 1964, 36-37. French, D. 1965. “Recent Archaeological Research in Turkey: Surface Finds from Various Sites”, Anatolian Studies XV, 1965, 34-39.

French, D. 1966. “Recent Archaeological Research in Turkey, Further Discoveries in Thrace”, Anatolian Studies XVI, 1966, 49-50. French, D. 1986. “Anatolia: Bridge or Barrier?”, IX. Türk Tarih Kongresi 1: p.117−118. Gatsov, I., M.Özdoğan, 1994. “Some Epi-Paleolithic Sites From NW Turkey: Ağaçlı, Domalı and Gümüşdere”, Anatolica XX, p. 97-120. Gatsov, I. 2001. “Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic, Neolithic Period Chipped Stone Assemblages from Southern Bulgaria and North West Turkey: Similarities and Differences”, TÜBA-AR 4: 101112. Gatsov, I. 2009. Prehistoric Chipped Stone Assemblages from Eastern Thrace and the South Marmara Region 7th-5th mill. B.C. Oxford, BAR International Series 1904. Göçmen, K. 1976. Aşağı Meriç Vadisi Taşkın Ovası ve Deltasının Alüviyal Jeomorfolojisi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Coğrafya Enstitüsü Pub. No. 80, İstanbul. Hansen, S. 2004. “Neolithische Statuetten aus Aşağı Pınar in Türkich-Thrakien”. In V. Nikolov, K. Bacvarov ve P. Kalchev (eds.) Prehistoric Thrace. Proceedings of the International Symposium in Stara Zagora 30.09-04.10.2003: 188-202. Institute of Archaeology with Museum-BAS. Regional Museum of History-Stara Zagora, Sofia. Harmankaya, S. 1995. “Kozman Deresi Mevkii (Şarköy, Tekirdağ) Maden Buluntuları”. Halet Çambel İçin Prehistorya Yazıları, p.217-254. Hoddinott, R.F. 1981. The Thracians, Thames und Hudson, Ancient Peoples and Places, London. Kansu, Ş.A. 1963a. “Kanallı Köprü (Silivri) Kalkolitiğine ait Yeni Keramik Belgelerle Heraeum? Un Yeri”, Belleten XXVII, no. 106, 1963, p.289-296. Kansu, Ş.A. 1963b. “Marmara Bölgesi ve Trakya’da Prehistorik İskan Tarihi Bakımından Araştırmalar”, Belleten XXVII, no. 108, 1963, p.657-671. Kansu, Ş.A. 1963c. “Edirne’nin Lalapaşa- Büyünlü Dolmenleri Hakkında İlk Not”, Belleten XXVII, no. 107, p. 491-492. Kansu, Ş.A 1964. “Marmara Bölgesi ve Trakya’da Prehistorik İskan Tarihi Bakımından Araştırmalar”, Atatürk Konferansları I, 1964, p.205-214. Kansu, Ş.A. 1969 “Edirne’de Bulunan Dolmenler ve Dikilitaşlar Hakkında Yeni Gözlemler”, Belleten XXXIII, no.132, p. 577-579. Kansu, Ş.A 1971. “Edirne’nin Lalapaşa Çevresindeki Kalkansöğüt, Vaysal, Karagöl Dolmenleri”, Belleten XXXV, no.138, p. 124-136. Kansu, Ş.A 1972. “Yarımburgaz (Küçükçekmece-İstanbul) Mağarasında Türk Tarih Kurumu Adına Yapılan Prehistorya Araştırmaları ve Tuzla Kalkolitiğinde Yeni Gözlemler”, VII. Türk Tarih Kurumu Kongresi 1.Cilt, 1972, p. 22-32. Kantarca, D. 1974. “Trakya Orman Sahalarının Tabii Ağaç ve Çalı Türlerine Göre Bölgesel Sınıflandırılması”, Güneydoğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 2-3, p. 283-314. Karul,N.; Z.Eres.; M. Özdoğan ; H. Parzinger (eds.), 2003. Aşağı Pınar I. Einführung, Forschungsgeschicte, Stratigraphie und Architektur, Verlag Philipp Von Zabern, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Eurasien-Abteilung, Mainz. Kızıltan, Z. (ed.), 2007. Gün Işığında: İstanbul’un Sekizbin Yılı. Marmaray, Metro ve Sultanahmet Kazıları, Vehbi Koç Vakfı Yayını, İstanbul. Kökten, K. 1963. “İstanbul Batısında Eski Taş Devrine ait Yeni Buluntular”, DTFC Dergisi XX: 3-4.

Kurter, A. 1978. “Istranca (Yıldız) Dağlarının Temel Yapısal ve Jeomorfolojik Özellikleri: Yeni Görüşler Işığında I”, Güney Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 6-7, p. 1-26. Kurtoğlu, F. 1938. Gelibolu ve Yöresi Tarihi, Edirne ve Yöresi Eski Eserleri Sevenler Kurumu Yayınları No. 3, İstanbul. Mansel, A.M. 1937. “Le Foullies de 1936-37 en Thrace”, La Turquie Kemaliste, p. 36-46. Mansel, A.M. 1938. Trakyanın Kültür ve Tarihi, Edirne ve Yöresi Eski Eserleri Sevenler Kurumu Yayınları 5, Edirne. Mansel, A.M. 1940. “Trakya Hafriyatı”, Belleten 4 no.13, 1940, p.89-114. Özdoğan, M. 1982. “Tilkiburnu, a Late Chalcolithic Site in Eastern Thrace” Anatolica IX, p.1-26. Özdoğan, M. 1983a. “Surface Survey for Prehistoric and Early Historic Sites in Northwestern Turkey.”, D. Keller and D. Rupp (eds.), Archaeological Survey in the Mediterranean Area. B.A.R.International Series no.155, Oxford, p. 303-305. Özdoğan, M. 1983b. “Pendik: A Neolithic Site of Fikirtepe Culture in the Marmara Region.”, R. M. Boehmer and H. Hauptmann (eds.) Beiträge zur Altertumskunde Kleisasien, Festschrift für Kurt Bittel, Mainz, p. 401-411. Özdoğan, M. 1983c. “Trakya'da Tarihöncesi Araştırmaların Bugünkü Durumu ve Bazı Sorunlar”, Güney Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10/11: 21-58. Özdoğan, M. 1985a. “The Late Chalcolithic of Yarımburgaz Cave.” Studi di Paletnologia in Onore di Salvatore, M.Puglisi, A. Palmieri and R. Peroni (eds.), Universita di Roma, Roma, p.177-18. Özdoğan, M. 1985b. “A Surface Survey for Prehistoric and Early Historic Sites in Northwestern Turkey.”, National Geographic Research for 1979, Washington, p. 517-541. Özdoğan, M. 1986. “Prehistoric Sites in the Gelibolu Peninsula” Anadolu Araştırmaları X, p. 51-66. Özdoğan, M. 1987. “Taşlıcabayır, A Late Bronze Age Burial Mound in Eastern Thrace.” Anatolica XIV, p.7-39. Özdoğan, M. 1990. “Yarımburgaz Mağarası” X. Türk Tarih Kurumu Kongresi I, p.373-388. Özdoğan, M. 1998a. “Early Iron Age in Eastern Thrace and The Megalithic Monuments”, N.Tuna ; Z.Aktüre ; M.Lynch, (eds.)Thracians and Phrygians: Problems of Parallellism (Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Archaeology, History and Ancient Languages of Thrace and Phrygia, Ankara, METU, Faculty of Architecture Press, p. 29- 40. Özdoğan, M. 1998b. “Hoca Çeşme: An early neolithic Anatolian colony in the Balkans?”, P. Anreiter ; L.Bartosiewicz; E.Jerem ; W.Meid, (eds.), Man And The Animal World in Memoriam Sándor Bökönyi, Budapest, Archaeolingua, p. 435-451. Özdoğan, M. 2003a. “The Prehistory of Nortwestern Turkey”, D.Grammenos (ed.), Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans, Thessaloniki, Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece, Nr.3, p. 329-368. Özdoğan, M. 2003b. “The Black Sea, the Sea of Marmara and Bronze Age Archaeology- an Archaeological Predicament”, G.A.Wagner,G.; E.Pernicka; H-P. Uerpmann (eds.) Troia and the Troad. Scientific Approaches, Berlin, Springer, p. 105-120. Özdoğan, M. 2003c. “Kanlıgeçit, une colonie anatolienne de Pâge du Bronze”, Dossiers d'Archeologie: Néolithique. Découverte d'Un Berceau Anatolien 281., p. 82-86. Özdoğan, M. 2003d. “Hoca Çeşme, un site du Néolithique ancien en Thrace”, Dossiers d'Archeologie: Néolithique. Découverte d'Un Berceau Anatolien 281, p. 26-29.

Özdoğan, M. 2006. “Coastal Changes of the Black Sea and Sea of Marmara in Archaeological Perspective”, V. Yanko-Hombach et al. (eds.) The Black Sea Flood Question: 651-669. Springer, Dordrecht. Özdoğan, M. 2007. “Amidst Mesopotamia-Centric and Euro-Centric Approaches: The Changing Role of the Anatolian Peninsula Between the East and the West”, Anatolian Studies 57: 17-24. Özdoğan, M. 2010. Westward Expansion of the Neolithic Way of Life: Sorting the Neolithic Package into Distinct Packages. In Matthiae P. et al. ed., Near Eastern Archaeology in the Past, th Present and Future. Heritage and Identity, Volume 1. (Proceedings of the 6 International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, May, 5th-10th 2008, “Sapienza” Università di Roma). Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag, p. 883-897. Özdoğan, M. 2011a. Archaeological Evidence on the Westward Expansion of Farming Communities from Eastern Anatolia to the Aegean and the Balkans. Current Anthropology, 52/4, p. 54165430. Özdoğan, M. 2011b . “Eastern Thrace: The Contact Zone between Anatolia and the Balkans” Steadman S.R., and McMahon G. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia (10,000323 B.C.E.). New York, Oxford University Press, p. 657-682. Özdoğan, M. 2011c . “Neolithic Polychrome Painted Pottery at Aşağı Pınar”, Studia Praehistorica 14 (Festschrift Dedicated to Marion Lichardus): 83-90. Özdoğan, M. 2012. “An Anatolian Perspective on the Neolithization Process in the Balkans. New Questions, New Prospects”, R. Krauß (ed.) Beginnings - New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin: 23-33. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, Rahden/Westf. Özdoğan, M., N. Başgelen and P. Kuniholm (eds.) 2013. The Neolithic in Turkey. New Excavations & New Research, Vol. 5: Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul. Archaeology and Art Publication, Istanbul. Özdoğan, M., N.Özbaşaran-Dede 1990. “1989 Yılı Toptepe Kurtarma Kazısı”, Arkeoloji ve Sanat 46/49, p.2-23. Özdoğan, M. and Y. Dede 1998. “An Anthropomorphic Vessel From Toptepe- Eastern Thrace”, Stefanovich,M., Todorova,H., Hauptmann,H.(eds.), James Harvey Gaul In Memoriam 1, Sofia, The James Harvey Gaul Foundation, p. 143-152. Özdoğan, M. and A.Koyunlu 1986. "Yarımburgaz Mağarası 1986 Yılı Çalışmaları", Arkeoloji ve Sanat 32-33, p.4-17. Özdoğan, M.; Y.Miyake; N.Özbaşaran-Dede 1991. " An Interim Report on the Excavations at Yarımburgaz and Toptepe in Eastern Thrace ", Anatolica XVII, p. 59-121. Özdoğan, M., H.Parzinger 2000. “Aşağı Pınar and Kanlıgeçit Excavations-Some New Evidence on Early Metallurgy from Eastern Thrace”, Ü.Yalçın (ed.), Anatolian Metal.Der Anschnitt, Beiheft 13, p. 83. Özdoğan, M. and H. Parzinger (eds.) 2012. Die frühbronzezeitliche Siedlung von Kanlıgeçit bei Kırklareli. Ostthrakien während des 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr. im Spannungsfeld von anatolischer und balkanischer Kulturentwicklung. Studien im Thrakien-Marmara-Raum 3, Archäologie in Eurasien 27, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Eurasien-Abteilung, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Darmstadt. Parzinger, H., M. Özdoğan 1996. “Die Ausgrabungen in Kırklareli und ihre Bedeutung für die Kulturbeziehungen zwichen Anatolien und dem Balkan vom Neolithikum bis zur Frühbronzezeit”, Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 76, p. 5-29.

Parzinger, H., H.Schwarzberg, 2005. Aşağı Pınar II, Verlag Philipp Von Zabern, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Eurasien-Abteilung, Mainz. Pfannensteiel, M. 1944. “Die diluvialen Etwicklungsstudien und die Urgeschichte von Dardanellen, Marmarameer und Bosporus”, Geol. Rundsc. Stuttgart 24, p. 3441-434. Runnels, C., M.Özdoğan 2001. “The Palaeolithic of the Bosphorus Region, NW Turkey”, Journal of Field Archaeology. 28. 1-2., Boston., p. 69-92. Schwarzberg, H. 2006. “Figurale Ständer-Sozialkeramik des frühen Neolithikum aus Kırklareli-Aşağı Pınar, Türkisch-Thrakien”, TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi 9: 97-124. Stanley, D., and C. Blanpied, 1980. “Late Quaternary Water Exchange Between the Eastern Mediterrannean and the Black Sea”, Nature 285, p. 537 - 541.

A MID-5TH MILLENNIUM SETTLEMENT NEAR SUVOROVO, VARNA DISTRICT, BULGARIA Vladimir Slavchev, Varna Regional Museum of History e-mail: vladosl@yahoo.com The settlement in the Koriata locality near the town of Suvorovo, Varna district, lies about 1 km to the north of the town, on a terrace sloping to the south, ca. 225 m above the sea level. To the south and south-east the settlement is surrounded by a dry river bed, and from west and east â&#x20AC;&#x201C; by dry valleys. Its surface is about 1.4 ha (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Location of the settlement and view to it from the southeast The settlement was discovered in 1983 during road building works at which time the first investigations were undertaken (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. View to the excavated area during the 1983 season In 1989 and 1990, further research was conducted prior to the construction of a tile factory at the site. The leader of the all three campaigns was Ivan Ivanov of the Varna regional Museum of History. Over 1000 sq.m were excavated â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 20 trenches of different size, parts of eight dwellings, and a garbage pit (Fig. 3). According I. Ivanov, the settlement was

protected by a stone wall 3 m thick. This defensive structure was excavated to a length of 17 m.

Figure 3. Field pictures from the excavations in 1989 and 1990 In 2010 a geomagnethic research of the area was done. According to the established anomalies, at least ten more burnt dwellings were documented (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Results of the geomagnetic survey In 2011 excavations at the place of one of them were started (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. Location of the 2011 trench (in blue). The previously excavated trenches and dwellings are marked in red.

In this sector the ruins of the dwelling were reached and cleared out (Fig. 6).

Figure 6. Burnt dwelling at the end of 2013 campaign Its south-western corner was destroyed by an Early Mediaeval semi-dug house, dated to second half of 10th century AD (Fig. 7).

Figure 7. Early Mediaeval semi-dug house In 2011, the skeleton of a woman aged between 50 and 70 years was found to at the front of the prehistoric building, to the north. The body was lying prone. The head with its left

side on the ground was turned about 130° towards the trunk and the upper right side of the skull and cervical vertebrae 4 and 5 were missing. The trunk was still in anatomic order with the heads of the femora still fixed in the hip joints. Except for the femur the complete right leg and foot were missing. The left leg lacked the lower half of the femur and the knee cap. This femur it seems was damaged before the bone lost the rest of its flexibility. The disarticulation took place when the left lower leg was still in connection with the foot. This bone complex was turned about 180° from the original position and shifted away from the torso. The right arm was situated on the back in supination position. The left arm was shifted away from the trunk together with the head. The arm had stopped –possibly because of some stones – in pronation position. Stones could also have been responsible that the trunk was fixed on its place. No cutting marks can be seen on the bones. Thus it cannot be confirmed if the distortion has been caused by a plough. The question of how the disturbance took place remains unanswered. But it can be assumed that it has not been some kind of ritual mutilation (Fig. 8).

Figure 8. Skeleton found to the north of the dwelling The dwelling excavated in 2011, 2012 and 2013 consists of three rooms – one in the northeastern part, and two smaller in the southeastern and southwestern ones. The whole area is about 40 sq. m. For now only the second storey of the northern room is cleared, and the southern ones are partially excavated. In the northern room, two podiums made of clay were found. Their sizes are ca. 1.30 x 1.00 m. One of them was located in the northeastern corner of the building, and the second one – in the center of the western wall of the room. On the first one (northern) some fragmented pottery was found, and on the second one, in addition to the pottery, a large quantity of charcoal was found (fig. 6). Each one of the rooms contain a very large oven. The one in the northern room is very solid – with an inner diameter of 1.45 m, with two clay pillars at the front, and with a dome shaped as house model (Fig. 9).

Figure 9. Pottery kiln in the northern room of the dwelling. General view and details Because of the lack of living space, the large size of the ovens, as well as the huge number of the vessels found in this dwelling – more than 60 to date – we believe that the building was used not as an ordinary house, but as a potter’s workshop. It is possible that the large oven in the northern room was a pottery kiln. As the largest amount of the pottery (about 70%) was found in the southwestern room, we suppose it was the storage place for the backed production. The southeastern room where a large number of polishers, some spatulas and tools for stamp- and incised decoration were found, appears to have been the storage place for tools and other devices (Fig. 10).

Figure 10. Potter’s tools found in the dwelling Although I. Ivanov reported about three periods of occupation of the settlement during the 5th mill. BC, all the materials kept in Suvorovo and Varna museums belong to the last phase of Hamangia and Sava cultures (Fig. 11).

Figure 11. Pottery found in the settlement In the stratigraphy trench made in 2013 three levels were indeed documented, but all of them dated back to the Middle Copper Age (mid-5th millennium BC). A massive wall made of stone blocks was identified which dated to the earliest period (ca. 30 x 60 x 20 cm). It is preserved to height about 1 m and thickness more than 60 cm (the exact width is not clear, because the wall is not cleared in its full width) (Fig. 11).

Figure 12. Stratigraphy trench The study of this very well preserved site will shed light on many new details about the everyday life of the population in the Black Sea area during the mid-5th mill. BC. As the settlement was destroyed by fire, the entire inventory was kept in situ. It is a good opportunity for gathering more information about the prehistoric people and their activities and relationships.

EARLY COPPER METALLURGY ON THE WEST BLACK SEA COAST: ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE ON PREHISTORIC EXPLOITATION OF THE ROSEN ORE FIELD Petar Leshtakov National Archaeological Institute and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (NAIM-BAS) e-mail: junior_1_bg@yahoo.com Interest in conducting research into ancient exploitation of polymetallic deposits in the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast started as early as the first half of the twentieth century. Several ore fields are located in the Burgas ore district (Fig.1, 2), including the Rosen Ore Field comprising the Medni rid hills, which is of special interest.

Figure 1. Burgas ore district

Figure 2. Map showing the main ore fields in the Burgas ore district

Rosen Ore Field (Fig.3) About forty copper ore veins are known in the Medni rid area, some of which have large deposits. During geological research and following mining activities in the latter half of the twentieth century, ancient shafts have often been identified up to hundred meters deep. The finds from the shafts date from Antiquity up until the Middle Ages. The research of Evgenii Chernih in the early 1970s supports this information. Although no remains of Chalcolithic mining have been found, he believes it is possible that the Medni rid deposits had been exploited in that period (Fig.4). A survey project was launched in 2010, the aim of which was to search for traces of the earliest ore mining in the area. The result was a rich collection of samples of copper ore and slag from the mineral deposits at Rosen, Koruchesme, Medni rid and Propadnala voda. Of special interest is the mine in the Propadnala voda deposit area (Fig. 5); on the basis of the finds it could be dated to the late sixth or early fifth century BC. Moreover, remains of metallurgical furnaces were identified in the immediate vicinity. The large amount of slag discovered around all surveyed shafts demonstrates that a large part of the mined ore had been processed close to the deposits. Another part was transported to large ancient settlements along the Black Sea coast. This is evidenced by the metallurgical center west of Cape Atia (Fig.6) discovered by Evgenii Chernih. A second survey in this season showed that it had probably emerged as early as the Early Iron Age and continued at least through to late Antiquity.

Figure 3. Sozopol bay â&#x20AC;&#x201C; view from Medni rid

Figure 4. Location of the major copper deposits in the Rosen ore field

Figure 5. Copper deposit Propadnala voda opencast mining (VI-V century BC)

Figure 6. Metallurgical centre west of Cape Atia (Iron Age to late Roman time)

The site of Budzhaka (Fig.7) I should emphasize that in spite of the rich copper deposits in the Medni rid area, until recently only fragmentary information on Chalcolithic metallurgy was available. Pieces of copper ore and malachite ornaments were found at the late Neolithic site of Budzhaka located south of Sozopol. These finds date to the last quarter of the sixth millennium BC. Only a couple of copper tools have been identified in the immediate vicinity of the Medni rid deposits. They come from a submerged late Chalcolithic site in the Sozopol Bay. The absence of remains of metallurgical activities in the Copper Age prevented the launching of new research. However another site, which was located accidentally, yielded new evidence on the exploitation of the Medni rid copper deposits in the fifth millennium BC.

Figure 7 The site at Akladi cheiri (Fig.8)

Figure 8. The prehistoric site is located in the Akladi cheiri locality, in Chernomorets, Burgas district. In 2008, a previously unknown prehistoric site was discovered during the building of a vacation village on the northwestern beach of the Sozopol Bay in the Akladi cheiri locality (Fig.9, 10), 2350 meters southeast of the town of Chernomorets. It is located at about 250 meters west of the sea, on a terrace slightly sloping to the east/southeast, at an altitude from

1 to 4 meters. The area of the site seems to exceed 100 ares. A thick sand layer covers its eastern periphery, which prevents the precise estimation of its total area (Fig.11).

Figure 9. The Akladi cheiri site before excavation

Figure 10. The excavated area

3 Figure 11 (1-3). The prehistoric site of Akladi cheiri: a sand layer covering the eastern periphery From October 2008 to April 2009, two sectors with a total area of 18 ares have been excavated around the buildings of the vacation village. The layers and features of the stratified site date to the late Neolithic, early and late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age. Moreover, three burials (Fig.33. 34, 35) have been excavated dating to the time between the late Chalcolithic and the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. I would like to emphasize that thus far, only one preliminary AMS C14 date is available from a burial dating to the beginning of the fourth millennium BC. Therefore, the relative dating of the site has been established on the basis of the accepted chronology of the Bulgarian later prehistory. The late Neolithic level and features (5400-5000/4900 ВС) The earliest Akladi cheiri material refers to the late Neolithic and is simultaneous with the Karanovo III-IV and Karanovo IV periods in Thrace (Fig.12). The Neolithic layer is 30 to 40 centimeters thick. More than forty Neolithic pits were identified. (Fig.13, 14, 15, 16) Small ore pieces three to five centimeters long have been found in the big negative feature, some of the bigger pits and in the Neolithic layer itself (Fig.17). Some of them are malachite but the others have not yet been analyzed. The ore pieces yielded by the negative features come from stratified contexts and had probably been intentionally deposited in the pits’ fill. Their preliminary analyses don’t show traces of mechanical or thermal processing. However, their presence in Neolithic features demonstrates that the major copper deposits were known as early as the sixth millennium BC. Moreover, they were exploited and the ore was used as unprocessed pieces or as material for ornaments production. Other early- and

late Neolithic sites in Bulgaria have also yielded evidence of the presence of malachite and malachite objects: e.g. Dzhulyunitsa, Yabalkovo, Sarnevo, Budzhaka etc.

Figure 13. Pit 20 - Karanovo III-IV period

Figure 14. Pit 30 - Karanovo III-IV period

Figure 15. Pit 35 - Karanovo III-IV period

Figure 16. Pit 59 - Karanovo III-IV period

Figure 12 (1-8). Small finds from Late Neolithic pits

Figure 17. Ore pieces from Karanovo III-IV pits

The Early Chalcolithic level and features (5000/4900-4500 BC) The thirty-centimeter early Chalcolithic layer is simultaneous with the Karanovo V period in Thrace. It yielded a large number of negative features and a couple of positive contexts, which were identified as compact areas of burnt house remains. The pits have oval or circular mouths and are up to 1.50 meters deep. They contain deposited material, mostly broken pots and a small number of artifacts. Another pit that dates to the start of the early Chalcolithic could be interpreted as a well (Fig.18). It has a circular mouth with a diameter of 1.30 meters, and its bigger part is situated below the present sea level. It was excavated to a depth of 5.40 meters and the bottom was not reached. The lower part of the well yielded more than two hundred pieces of well-preserved wood which seem to be among the most ancient samples known from the Balkans (Fig.19). Only some of them bear traces of woodworking.

1 Figure 18 (1-2). Early Chalcolithic well excavated to a depth of 5.40 m

Figure 19 (1-2). Wooden finds from the well Single pieces of copper ore have been found in the early Chalcolithic layer and in the backfill of most of the pits (Fig.20). Their size varies from two or three millimeters to several centimeters. Single ceramic sherds have been identified that show traces of secondary firing; malachite particles stuck to their surface.

Figure 20. Copper ore lumps from Early Chalcolithic features A copper awl (Fig.21, 22) was found in situ in one of the pits together with the rest of the deposited material. It is 4.1 centimeters long and its cross-section is almost circular at the working end and rectangular at the back end. A similar but unstratified piece has also been discovered (Fig.23). It is 6.4 centimeters long and has an almost identical shape to the first one. The short length of both tools suggests that they were used with a bone handle. They belong to the Đ&#x;Đ&#x2DC;-2 type, according to the classification by Evgenii Chernih, who believes that this awl-type was very common throughout the Chalcolithic. The preliminary XRF analysis shows that both awls were made of almost pure copper.

A positive context was excavated in the Western area comprising compact pieces of burnt walls. The building is eight meters long but a large part of it has been destroyed by recent excavation works. Its central part yielded several pieces of a clay installation fired at a high temperature. Some of the fragments are glazed and have a porous texture. The installation was made of coarse clay. One of the walls has a thick base with flat underside. The outer surface of the installation is roughly smoothed and additionally covered with white slip. The inner surface is also roughly smoothed and shows traces of a high temperature and metal smelting. The installation had cylindrical shape and its diameter exceeded fifty centimeters. Its features give ground to interpret it as an ore smelting furnace (Fig.24, 25).

4 45

Figure 21 (1-4). Pit 54. Copper awl in situ

Figure 22 (1-2). XRF analysis of the awl: Cu - 97,35%; Cl - 1,89 %; Ca – 0,21%. P, Cl and Ca derive from the products of corrosion

Figure 23 (1-2). XRF analysis: Copper awl, stray find: Cu – 96,80%; P – 2,95%;Pb – 0,20 %; Mn – 0,03 %. P, Cl and Ca derive from the products of corrosion

Figure 24. Ruins and parts of a feature for copper smelting

Figure 25. A reconstruction of the “proto-furnace”likely used at Shiqmim and other Levantine sites in the early fourth millennium B.C.E. (Adapted from Golden et al. 2011, fig.8) (After Thornton et al. 2010) The Late Chalcolithic features (4500-4000/3900 BC) No late Chalcolithic layer has been identified at the site. Only a couple of pits were found and the backfill of some of them yielded scarce archaeological material. Only one of the pits (Fig.26) is an exception of this pattern. It is located in the northern periphery of the excavated area and has an irregular elliptical mouth and a depth of about 50 centimeters. Its backfill yielded a huge amount of pottery sherds (Fig.27), ore pieces, slag, a fragment of ceramic crucible and pieces of an installation made of tramped clay. The shapes and ornamental patterns of the fine ware suggest that the pit dates to the third phase of the late Chalcolithic Kodzhadermen-Gumelniţa-Karanovo VI complex. A group of ceramic sherds numbering about 300 altogether have traces of a secondary firing (Fig.28) and particles of copper slag stuck to their surfaces (Fig.29, 30). Fine and coarse ware are both represented; they could easily be interpreted as ‘kitchen’ ware. Similar sherds have often been found at sites from that time. The sherds from Akladi cheiri had been subjected to a high temperature environment, most probably exceeding 1000 Celsius, which caused complete or partial glazing, deformation and mass loss. The inner surfaces of most sherds had been directly subjected to fire but there are some that had been burnt from the outside. It should be mentioned that several fragments of the same vessel were found and some of them are secondarily fired but others don’t show any traces of burning. Malachite particles one or two millimeters long could be seen on the burnt surfaces. They are stuck to the surface or

partially penetrated it as a result of the melting. A porous layer covers the surface of some sherds; it could be determined as metallurgical slag.

Figure 26 (1-3). Pit 28, Late Chalcolithic

Figure 27 (1-3). Pit 28, Late Chalcolithic pottery vessels

Figure 28. Pit 28, secondarily fired ceramic sherds with stuck slag piece

Figure 29 (1-4). Pit 28. Slag pieces on the surface of pottery shards

Figure 30 (1-3). Pit 28, Slags on pottery sherds. Late Chalcolithic

Several pieces have been found that could be determined as melts containing malachite or corroded copper and fired clay with a coarse paste. The ceramic material yielded three sherds of a metallurgical crucible, which can be reconstructed (Fig.31). It has an elliptical shape with an oval base, its frontal part is slightly profiled as a spout and the back part is missing. Burnt traces were identified mostly on its inner surface and on the mouth. The mouth rim had been subjected to the highest temperature and is partially melted. Malachite particles could be seen in the melted surface. Beside the ceramic material, the backfill of the pit yielded a large amount of ore with a total weight of three or four kilograms (Fig.32). Some of the smaller pieces could be determined as malachite and others, up to ten centimeters long, are iron ore. A small piece of azurite has also been found. Other important finds from the pit are several pieces of an installation made of tramped clay similar to the one discovered in the early Chalcolithic context containing burnt daubs. It was made of coarse clay with organic temper. The walls are four to five centimeters thick and the maximum preserved height is about fifteen centimeters. The wall base is thicker and is up to nine centimeters thick and its underside is flat. The preserved pieces seem to support the observations that these installations had cylindrical shape with an irregular round or elliptic cross-section. The inner surfaces of some fragments bear traces of high temperature burning that resulted in the glazing of certain sections. There are greenish residues on some areas of the lower inner surface, which suggests that this was an ore smelting installation.

3 Figure 31 (1-3). Pit 28, crucible. Late Chalcolithic

1 Figure 32 (1-2). Pit 28, copper & copper/iron ores. Late Chalcolithic

Figure 33. Burial 1 from the final stage of Late Chalcolithic 3900-3800 BC

Figure 34. Burial 4 from the final stage of Late Chalcolithic 3900-3800 BC

Figure 35. Burial 5 from the final stage of Late Chalcolithic 3900-3800 BC Discussion The Akladi cheiri material allows a partial reconstruction of the metallurgical activities in the area of the prehistoric site. The copper ore extracted by the ancient miners was transported to the processing site. There it was broken down to small pieces with stone pounders and grinders in order to extract the stone material and the iron ore, which had not been smelted in that time. This is evidenced by the large amount of iron ore and the small malachite pieces revealed at the site. After enrichment, the copper ore was deposited in smelting installations, which had a collar shape. They were more than twenty or twenty-five centimeters high but unfortunately, no evidence of their size is available, and this prevents the estimation of the amount of ore needed for one furnace loading and the amount of metal produced. This smelting tradition was preserved in later times. Pieces of similar installations have been found in the area of the Roman town of Nikopolis ad Istrum. Charcoal was probably used as the fuel needed to achieve the necessary temperature. However, the function of the burnt ceramic sherds is unclear. Their features donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t suggest that the vessels were used as crucibles. What is more plausible is that they were arranged in the smelting installation as a divider which regulated the firing process, accumulated heat or for other purposes. As a result, the sherds are glazed and ore or copper particles stuck to their surface. Thus far, no evidence is available of the metal produced or its additional processing. The crucible and the two copper tools from the site show that the metal was re-smelted and cast in molds. However, no finds related to this production phase have yet been revealed. The question posed by the context that yielded this evidence remains open. The remains within them reflect most of the metallurgical processes and exclude the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;rubbish-pit interpretationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. A more likely explanation of their function is to view them as an expression of a well-developed rituality that accompanied the life of the ancient metallurgists. The Akladi cheiri material proves the presence of a powerful ore extraction and metallurgical site in the fifth millennium BC in that area. The presence of ore in the layers from the latter half of the sixth millennium supports the theorized pre-metallurgical phase needed for the accumulation of basic knowledge about the metallurgical raw materials. In result, a well-developed ore extraction emerged in the next period and the first copper tools were produced. Although no analyses of the ore pieces from Akladi cheiri have yet been made to establish their origins, it is reasonable to believe that they came from the Medni rid polymetallic deposits situated four or five kilometers west of the site. There are many

possible reasons that the search for traces of these activities has not yet met with success. On the one hand, it could be explained with the preliminary phase of research. On the other hand, most of the traces of ore extraction in the fifth millennium BC had probably been destroyed during the exploitation of the deposits in Antiquity by the Greek colony of Apollonia Pontica, in the Middle Ages and more recently. The analyses of copper tools from the Durankulak and Varna I cemeteries clearly show that a large part of the raw material for their production came from the Rosen ore field. This is suggestive of exchange contacts between territories, which were too remote from one another for the time. These preliminary observations and conclusions demonstrate the need of continued research on the material from Akladi cheiri in order to answer many questions about ore extraction, copper production and exchange routes in the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast in the fifth millennium BC.

Figure 37. Map showing the sources of copper for the “Durankulak metallurgical centre” (after Dimitrov 2007)

Figure 37. Map showing the sources of copper for the “Varna metallurgical centre” (after Dimitrov 2007)

References Черных, Е. Н. 1978. Горное дело и метталургия в древнейшей Болгарии. София. Чолакова, А. 2006. Металургични производства в ранната история на Никополис ад Иструм. Известия на археологическия институт, 39, 163-184. Димитров, K. 2007. Медната металургия по Западния бряг на Черно море (средата наV – началото на IV хил. пр. Хр.). Автореферат на дисертация. София. Калчев, П. 1992. Очаг для плавления медной руды в доисторическом поселении в районе Первостепенной больницы в г. Стара Загора. Studia Praehistorica 11-12, 236-239. Класнаков, М., П. Лещаков. 2011. Спасителни разкопки в м. Буджака, гр. Созопол. В: Българска археология 2010, Каталог към изложба. София, p. 6-7. Лещаков, П. 2010. Археометалургични свидетелства за експлоатацията на медните находища от Медни рид през V хилядолетие пр. Хр. В: Геонауки 2010. София, стр. 175-176. Лещаков, П., М. Класнаков. 2007. Аварийни археологически разкопки на обект УПИ 8038 в м. Буджака, гр. Созопол, Бургаска област. В: Археологически открития и разкопки през 2007 г. София, стр. 54-57. Лещаков, П, М. Класнаков, Д. Недев. 2009. Спасителни археологически разкопки на праисторически обект в м. Аклади чеири, село Черноморец. В: Археологически открития и разкопки през 2008 г. София, стр. 74-77. Лещаков, П, М. Класнаков. 2010. Спасителни археологически разкопки на праисторически обект в м. Аклади чеири, Черноморец. В: Археологически открития и разкопки през 2009 г. София, стр. 58-61. Лещаков, П, М. Класнаков. 2011. Теренни археологически издирвания в Медни рид. В: Археологически открития и разкопки през 2010 г. София, стр. 581-585. Попов, П., В. Ковачев, С. Страшимиров, В. Желев, Р. Арнаудова, Б. Банушев, П. Ставрев, Р. Радичев. 1993. Геология и металогения на Бургаския руден район. Трудове на Минно-геологическия университет, 1. София. Davies, O. 1936. Prehistoric copper mines near Burgas. Man 36, p. 92-93. Gaul, J. 1942. Possibilities of Prehistoric Metallurgy in the East Balkan Peninsula. American Journal of Archaeology 46, 3, p. 400-409. Golden, J., Th. Levy, A. Hauptmann. Recent Discoveries Concerning Chalcolithic Metallurgy at Shiqmim, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 2001, 951–963. Leshtakov, P. Two prehistoric sites on the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast. In: I. Cholakov/K. Chukalev. Archaeology in Bulgaria, 2007-2009. American Journal of Archaeology, 114, 2010, 734-736. Leshtakov, P. Archaeological evidence for paleoclimatic change along the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast from the sixth to third millennium BC. In: V. Nikolov/K. Bacvarov/H. Popov (Hrg.). Interdisziplinäre Forschungen zum Kulturerbe auf der Balkanhalbinsel. Sofia: Humboldt Union in Bulgarien, 2011, 131-138. Pemicka, E., F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker, H. Todorova, l. Kuleff. Prehistoric copper in Bulgaria: Its composition and provenance. Eurasia Antiqua 3,1997,41-180. Thornton, C., J. Golden, D. Killick, V. Pigott, T. Rehren, B. Roberts. A Chalcolithic Error: Rebuttal to Amzallag 2009. American Journal of Archaeology 114, 2010, 305–315.

TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOLD WORKING TECHNIQUES IN VARNA Kalin Dimitrov National Institute of Archaeology with Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences e-mail: kalin.d@abv.bg The Varna necropolis was discovered more than forty years ago (Ivanov 1978; Ivanov 1982; Ivanov 1986). The finds were so impressive and unexpected that they continue to be the center of many theories and discussions for the general development of prehistoric society (Renfrew 1978; Renfrew 1986; Todorova 1978; Chapman et al 2006; Avramova 2000; Fol, Lichardus 1988; Nikolov 1994; Русев et al 2010). The technology employed for the production of golden objects, found in the graves and the burial complexes of Varna necropolis was discussed in the literature to some extent (Ivanov, I. 1991; Hartmann 1978; Hartmann 1982; Echt, Thiele, Ivanov 1988). The paper written by Echt, Thiele and Ivanov in 1988 is the most detailed research. This research arrived at conclusions, some of which should be accepted and could be developed to a great extent. The main weakness of all of the studies is the fact that they were all based on a selection of some the objects only. As such, a general picture of the gold working technology of Varna is missing. The present paper is based on a detailed and complete study of all 3130 golden objects, studied by their production marks and fabrication traces. The raw material for the Varna jewelers

Figure 1. Metalogenic map of Bulgaria. The main gold deposits are marked.

It has been well known since ancient times that the Balkan Peninsula, in particular the region of modern day Bulgaria, is rich in metal minerals. A general map of the gold deposits indicated that the territory to the south of the Balkan Mountain chain is rich in gold and there are many watercourses, most of which are auriferous (Fig.1). The interest of the chalcolithic peoples in the alluvial gold is attested by the observations of the gold decoration of the large dish from the grave № 4. The scanning electron microscopy study of samples from this object arrives at the conclusion that alluvial gold was used (Éluére, Ch., D. Raub 1991). It must be underlined that the gold grains on the dish from grave № 4 are actually very small. From this fact we could assume that retrieving even small sized gold grains was within the technical abilities of chalcolithic gold panning. Another argument for the extensive use of alluvial gold (Fig.2) for the fabrication of the Varna objects is the observation that on the surface of large numbers of the objects, platinum inclusions were present. Some of the platinum grains are aggregates of more than 1 mm while others are smaller. The larger ones could be seen by naked eye on the surface of some objects (Fig. 3.1, Fig. 3.2, Fig. 3.3, Fig. 4, Fig. 5). It is well known that, where it is available ina stream, platinum is a by-product of the traditional method of gold washing, so the presence of platinum inclusions in many Varna objects is a clear indication for the alluvial origin of their raw material.

Figure 2. Gold nuggets and gold sand, placer finds from West Bulgaria The available analytical data for the chemical composition shows a great variation (Kuleff 2009; Leusch, Pernicka, Krauß 2013). The copper and the silver content vary at the ranges that are characteristic for alluvial gold from different deposits. Summarizing the above, we can assume at least three important conclusions:  

the raw Varna gold was placer gold, there were multiple sources of the gold; at least three or four, characterized by their high silver content (around 40%), by the presence of platinum or by the low quantity of impurity,

ď&#x201A;ˇ

at least one of the sources for Varna gold can be placed south-west of Bourgas in the area of the Varshilo â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Mandra lake, known to present alluvial finds of platinum group aggregate (Bonev, I., J. Jordanov, V. Atanasov. 1982.; Bonev, I., J. Jordanov. 1986).

Figure 3.1. Platinum inclusions at the surface of gold objects. Grave 43

Figure 3.2. Platinum inclusions at the surface of gold objects. grave 43

Figure 3.3. Platinum inclusions at the surface of gold objects. Grave 43

Figure 4. Platinum inclusions at the surface of gold objects. Grave 43.

Figure 5. Platinum inclusions at the surface of gold objects. Grave 43 Technological steps in the gold working of Varna: Technological groups There is no doubt that the production of all gold objects from the Late Chalcolithic starts by the melting of golden dust. It is possible to assume that in some cases semifinished objects were produced directly from the raw material. It is clear that there were no technological difficulties for the chalcolithic jewelers to produce golden ingots, for example in wire form, however, to date we do not have direct evidence for golden ingots in any form. The situation is very similar to that of copper production â&#x20AC;&#x201C; we know hundreds of heavy chalcolithic tools and weapons and any semi-finished finds or ingots. The missing copper or golden ingots from the early Balkan metallurgy could be explained by the social organization of the metal production. The analysis of the forms of golden finds from the Varna necropolis allows four major technological groups to be distinguished. The definition of these four groups is based on the shape of objects and certain reserved technological traces. I. The first technological group is characterized by the usage of flat plates and wires of different cross-section as a starting point for preparation of objects: beads, finger rings, bracelets, earrings, decorative geometric plates and figural plates. The main operations for the fabrication of the objects in this group were forging, cutting, shaping, drilling and polishing. This technological group is the simplest and the most primitive, and probably the most archaic of all four groups. Typical objects classified in the first technology group: Cylindrical beads made by a rectangular wire with joined edges form the largest group of necropolis finds. Most of them are made very accurately. There are examples of strings with hundreds of items of substantially equal size and shape (Fig.6). Careful observation showed that all beads in this group have a common characteristic feature â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the inside edges

are beveled (Fig.7). Therefore la chaĂŽne opĂŠratoire, which can be proposed for them is as follows: 1. Fabrication of a flat bar (wire with rectangular section). 2. This flat bar is wound in a spiral on a cylindrical mandrel having a diameter of the opening of intended beads (Fig.8). 3. The resulting spiral is cut into " turns " from inside (where traces of oblique cutting are visible). For this purpose the very narrow specialized copper chisel was most likely used. 4. By deformation and forging, the resulting rings were transformed into cylindrical bead. 5. Operations were completed by using group polishing and milling between two flat stones. The last operation corrected the minor differences in the outer diameter of the beads and gave them a complete " machine " look (Fig.9).

Figure 7. Cut mark at the inner side of bead, Grave 43

Figure 6. 257 beads of the "machine" type, Grave 36

Figure 8. Spiral bead, Grave 4. These type of bead could be regarded as a blank for a mass production for the "machine" type bead.

Figure 9. Mass production of beads, Grave 43 Rings are the second most commonly identified items of gold finds from the necropolis. We can recognize them by function â&#x20AC;&#x201C; bracelets, finger rings, earrings, rings and decorative beads. In such kinds of classification, these functional objects are united because of the similar process of their manufacturing. The group of rings includes both large (like the arm rings from grave 4 and grave 1) and very tiny objects (Fig.10, Fig.11). Despite the differences in their size, all items are made in a similar way: 1. They were cast in the open form, straight rods with a semicircular section. 2. The blanks were formed by forging and rolling into a cylindrical (spindle shape) or rectangular rod. In some subjects, a spiral crack was observed, suggesting that the blank is twisted to achieve a better circular cross-section. 3. The cut at the right size stick (with circular, oval or rectangular / square cross-section) were bent into a ring. The thickness and massiveness of some subjects, suggests that the bending undoubtedly requires forging with intermediate heating.

Figure10. Arm ring, "Grave" 1

Figure 11. Spiral decoration, Grave Plates â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the flat plates of different shapes, figural plates and flat anthropomorphic idols are classified as part of this group (Fig. 12.1, Fig. 13, Fig. 14). The production of the plates is relatively simple and the reconstruction of the technological chain completely understood:

1. After the casting of a thin plate (probably by free pouring of molten gold on a flat stone) it was hammered with stone and horn instruments on a stone anvil in order to equalize the thickness. 2. The final contours were shaped by cutting with a chisel and working with sandstones like rectangular and circular plates, animal figures and " bukrania". Obviously craftsmen used templates and that is why the cutting of the plates was very precise. The circular plates were also very precisely outlined. It is suggested that they must have used a rotation device like a modern day compass. 3. Drilling operations and the application of " pearl " decoration on the periphery are the final steps in the preparation of the plate type objects (Fig. 12.2, Fig. 13). Drilling was done with copper and horn borers and the application of pearl buds by horn / bone punch with a rounded tip. Work on the application of pearl decoration was carried out on a semi soft support of leather or wood.

Figure 12.1. Pectoral plate from Grave 4

Figure 12.2. Traces of tolls at the pectoral plate from Grave 4

Figure 13. Convex decoration, funeral complex Section I

Figure 14. Idol, grave 36 Convex decorations of various sizes and anthropomorphic idols form the third group of finds from the necropolis. In the initial steps of craftsmanship, the ancient masters have repeated the manufacture of flat plates. Then by additional technological operation flat plates were shaped into convex form. This was done by pushing gently into negative mould (Fig.13). It is probable that both the mould and the formation instrument were made of wood. It should be noted that the plates were initially cut into a circular shape, and after that they were converted into convex shapes II. The second technological group is characterized by the application of casting technology to achieve almost the complete shape of relatively simple objects: fully enclosed cylindrical beads, bracelets with arc section, " pins ", tack and piercings. The second technological group should be divided in two subgroups: II.1. Objects that were shaped like a cylinder and cast in open moulds, which after that were essentially shaped by forging. This subgroup includes all gold finds that were produced by the use of cylindrical " tube like " blanks. It includes bracelets with an arched section, "double" bracelets, as well as cylindrical and biconical thick seamless beads (Fig. 15, Fig. 16, Fig. 17, Fig. 18). II.2. Nails, "needles", "tacks", body piercing and thick anthropomorphic idols. Although quite different in their forms technologically all these items were cast in their final form in open moulds and after that only their surface was treated.

Items classified into the second technological group: Massive cylindrical beads and closed rings (Fig. 15, Fig. 17). These finds are relatively small and were made by casting into an open annular mould. Massive anthropomorphic idol with orifice. The casting was done in an open mould with the object lying face down (Fig. 19, Fig. 20). Massive biconical beads. These striking beads were also fabricated from massive cylindrical thick " tube-like" blanks. Careful observation has shown that they were processed very cleverly: the ends of the cylinder at a length of about 1/4 were cut in 3 or 4 longitudinal elements (similar to the nose of a mechanical pencil), and then those "feathers" were shaped on a cone by hammering and filing (Fig. 21.1, Fig. 21.2.). Objects with a form close to the nail shape: pins, pins with head, body piercings. All these finds were melted into a deep funnel-shaped mould (Fig. 24.1., Fig. 24.2, Fig. 24.3, Fig. 24.4).

Figure 15. Tube like cast beads

Figure 16. Arm rings, Grave 43

Figure 17. Ring, part of the scepter from Grave 4

Figure 18. Tin arm ring, Grave

Figure 19. Massive cast idol, Grave 266

Figure 20. Massive cast idol, stray find from Varna town

Figure 21.1. Beads with biconical shaped, Grave 43 III. The third technological group is characterized by the use of a closed mould casting: solid objects and hollow spherical beads. Perhaps the bracelet with the V- shaped section from Grave 4 (Fig. 25) should also be included in this group. The third technological group presents the most advanced and sophisticated techniques for the casting of gold attested in the necropolis, the development of which can be inferred from the metalworking techniques of the second group, but which brought it to a new level. There is enough evidence to

indicate that this technological group is the latest one. It is noteworthy that in this very small group there are unique items (bracelet with V- shaped section from Grave 4 and astragalus from Grave 36). Items classified as part of the third technological group: Astragalus from Grave 36. This is virtually the only solid gold object from the necropolis – a fact that by itself should draw our attention to it. In the literature, the possibility that the astragalus was cast using a wax model is discussed. Careful observation of the reserved casting surfaces and their position on the object confirms this hypothesis (Fig. 26). Massive hollow spherical beads. Ivan Ivanov called these finds " spheroids", but there is no doubt that these objects are large hollow beads. The inspection of their internal surfaces showed that they were cast onto a clay-sand core (Fig. 27, Fig. 28, Fig. 29). On the other hand the closed form requires the use of a closed mould. A clay ball was used as a core and coated with a layer of wax (or fat),, which was then covered by another layer of clay. After melting and pouring the wax (or fat) out, a spherical shell was obtained, permitting the casting of a hollow gold bead. This technology could be regarded as the earliest example of lost wax casting in the world for the manufacture of a very complicated form. Bracelet with V- shaped section. Although it is a single example, the bracelet from Grave 4 is one of the most interesting items found in the necropolis, from a technological point of view. Nodular defects observed on the outer surface and marks on the inner surface, suggested that the bracelet may have been cast in closed form, almost finalized (Fig. 25). The sharp edge on the outside of the Grave 4 bracelet was emphasized and formed by forging after casting. The form and curvature of the inner side suggested that a chisel with a blade of copper or stone was most likely to have been used as an anvil - pad. IV. Technologically the fourth group is the most complicated and the one that differs from the general production approach to the golden objects known in classical jewelers practices. Included in this technological group are very fine decorative items, which had the character of gilding: tube-like decorations for handles of scepters or for bows (Fig. 30, Fig. 31). The most remarkable feature of these objects is that they are seamless, thin and very precisely shaped. The important details of the objects, which could help us in the reconstruction of the production technology are as follows:   

the tubes are extremely thin – less than 0.5 mm; they were cast as seamless objects; the outside face of the tubes was polished and the inside surfaces bear longitudinal imprints of a wood-like fiber structure  the tubes were precisely shaped and they follow the conical shape of the handle;  there is a technological limitation to the length of the tube-like handle decorations (50 – 60 mm). The main conclusion of these observations is that the tube-like decorations are created to fit an existing handle. Their dimensions are consistent and it is clear that they are custom-made for a particular wooden support. Therefore, the working hypothesis to date suggests at least two approaches: 

casting of golden decorations directly on the handle by spraying with molten gold

ď&#x201A;ˇ

application of a gold dust and wax compound on the handle and slow heating under a protective clay coating. It is clear that both such production schemes are nonconventional and need experimental confirmation.

Figure 21.2. Beads with biconical shaped, Grave 43

Figure 22. Armring with arched cross-section, Grave 4.

Figure 23. Armring with double arched cross-section, Grave 36.

Figure 24.1. Nail shaped piercing, Grave

24.2

24.4 Figure 24.2. Pin, Grave 15

Figure 24.4. Nail shaped piercing, Grave 154

Figure 24.3. Nail shaped pair of piercing, Grave 134

Figure 25. Armring with V shaped cross-section, Grave 4

Figure 26. Massive "astragal" with traces of casting in a closed mould, Grave 36.

Figure 27. Large spherical bead with core imprints into the internal surface

Figure 28. Large spherical bead with core imprints into the internal surface

Figure 29. Large spherical bead with core imprints into the internal surface

Figure 30. The find from Grave 4. In the foreground â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the stone scepter with gold decoration at the handle

Figure 31. Bow decorations, different graves Some conclusions The four technological groups could be regarded as the evolution of the gold working techniques presented by the objects from the Varna necropolis collection. The evidence for gold working technologies in Varna presents a picture of fully developed jeweler production. It is clear that we do not deal with the first hesitating steps of gold working, but with an established tradition and well-developed set of skills. There is a clear indication that more developed techniques are found in the richest graves and other funeral complexes. From this point of view the technological evolution is a sign for social stratification and development. Some of the most developed gold working techniques are similar to those used in copper production â&#x20AC;&#x201C; casting, casting with core etc. An the same time, on the gold material, more sophisticated production methods were applied, for example, lost wax casting.

REFERENCES Avramova, M. 2000. Myth, ritual and gold of a “civilization that did not take place”. – In: Varna Necropolis. Varna, Agató, 15-24. Bonev, I., Jordanov,J., Atanasov, V.,1982. Platinum, iridosmine and cooperite in alluvial sands from the vicinities of the village of Vurshilo, Bourgas district. София - Доклади на БАН, 35, 5, стр. 673-676. Bonev, I., J. Jordanov. 1986. New data on the platinoid minerals in placers from Bourgas region – SE Bulgaria. – Geologicky Zbornik. Geologica Carpatica, 37, 6, 709–718. Chapman, J., T. Higham, B. Gaydarska, V. Slavchev, N. Honch. 2006. The social context of the emergence, development and abandonment of the Varna Cemetery, Bulgaria. - European Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 9, No. 2-3, 159-183. Éluére, Ch., D. Raub. 1991. Investigations on the gold coating technology of the great dish from Varna. – In: J.-P. Mohen (Ed.). Découverte du métal. Picard, Paris, 13-30. Fol, A., J. Lichardus (eds.). 1988. Macht, Herrschaft und Gold: das Graberfeld von Varna (Bulgarien) und die Anfänge einer neuen europäischen Zivilisation. Saarbrücken, Moderne Galerie des Saarland-Museums. Hartmann 1978. Die Goldsorten des Äneolithikums und der Frühbronzezeit im Donauraum. Studia Praehistorica 1-2, 182-191. Hartmann 1982. Prähistorische Goldfunde aus Europa. Spektralanalytische Untersuchungen und deren Auswertung. Band 2. Berlin 1982. Higham, T., J. Chapman, V. Slavchev, B. Gaydarska, N. Honch, Y. Yordanov, B. Dimitrova. 2007. New perspectives on the Varna cemetery (Bulgaria) – AMS dates and social implications. – Antiquity, 81, 313, 640-651. Echt, Thiele, Ivanov 1988. Varna: Untersuchungen zur kupferzeitlichen Goldverarbeitung. In: J. Lichardus (Hrsg.), Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche; Symposium Saarbrücken und Otzenhausen 6.-13.11.1988. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 55 (Bonn 1991) 633691. Ivanov, I. 1978. Les fouilles archéologiques de la nécropole chalcolithique а Varna (1972–1976). – Studia Praehistorica, 1-2, 13-26. Ivanov, I. 1982. The Varna Chalcolithic necropolis. – In: The First Civilization in Europe and the Oldest Gold in the World – Varna, Bulgaria. Nippon Television Network Cultural Society, 21-24. Ivanov, I. 1986. Der kupferzeitlishe Friedhof in Varna. – In: G. Biegel (Hrsg.). Das erste Gold der Menschheit. Die älteste Zivilisation in Europa. Freiburg, 30-42. Ivanov, I. 1988. Die Ausgrabungen des Gräberfeldes von Varna. – In: Fol, A., J. Lichardus (Hrsg.). Macht, Herrschaft und Gold. Moderne-Galerie des Saarlands-Museum, Saarbrüken, Krüger, 49-66, 67-78. Ivanov, I. 1991. Les objets métalliques de la nécropole chalcolithique de Varna. – In: Découverte du metal. Paris, 9-12. Ivanov, I., M. Avramova. 2000. Varna Necropolis. The Dawn of European Civilization. Sofia, Agató, 55 p. Kuleff, I. 2009. Archeometric investigation of gold in the Chalcolithic necropolis of Varna (5th millennium BC) – Advances in Bulgarian Science, 2, 16-22. Leusch, V., Pernicka E, Krauß R. 2013. Prehistoric gold from Varna. New analytical results and insights into Copper Age gold metallurgy. Presentation at a workshop in Sozopol, May 2013.

Nikolov, V. 1994. Der soziale und religious-mythologische Kontext des Goldes in der Nekropole bei Varna. – Ann. Department of Archaeology, New Bulgarian University, I, 4-7. Renfrew, C. 1978. Varna and the social context of early metallurgy. - Antiquity, 52, 206, 197-203. Renfrew, C. 1986. Varna and the emergence of wealth in prehistoric Europe. – In: The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective (A. Appadurai, Ed.). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 141-168. Todorova, H. 1978. The Eneolithic Period in Bulgaria in the Fifth Millennium B.C. Oxford, British Archaeological Reports, BAR supplementary series 49. Русев, Славчев, Маринов, Бояджиев. 2010 Варна – праисторически център на металообработката. Данграфик (Варна), 192 рр.

ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE GEOLOGICAL PHENOMENON OF POBITI KAMANI (NE BULGARIA) Lyubomir Dimitrov1, Eva De Boever2, Rudy Swennen2 1 - Institute of Oceanology, Bulgaria; 2 – Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium e-mail1: geos@io-bas.bg Introduction Phenomena related to hydrocarbon migration and expulsion have been recognized and studied worldwide in both modern active settings and at fossil seep sites, in various sedimentological and geodynamic settings. Active (Dimitrov, 2002; Geli et al., 2008; Orphan et al., 2004) and ancient (Campbell et al., 2002; Conti et al., 2008) cold seep systems are described from distinct settings in terms of sedimentology and structural framework. These locations offer a unique opportunity for the study of the interaction between the geosphere and (micro)biosphere and to investigate the fingerprinting and preservation of biogeological processes. Moreover, they can provide a window into (ancient) fluid flow of hydrocarbonbearing fluids in different geological contexts. Research of modern cold seeps reveals valuable information on near-seabed processes (often studied with highly advanced analytical techniques), fluid sources and on deep-seated fluid pathways. On the contrary, ancient seeps are logistically easily accessible spots, allowing a detailed study of the (shallow) subsurface seep plumbing system and of the heterogeneity of complex seep processes in 4D (space and time). Common long-lasting products at these different sites are 13 C-depleted carbonate deposits of various morphologies (i.e. chimneys, slabs, mounds) formed at or below the seaﬂoor (Diazdel-Rio et al., 2003; Jensen et al., 1992; Mazzini et al., 2006; Peckmann et al., 2001). This paper discuss the results of a multidisciplinary study carried out from 2004 to 2009 on the carbonate cemented structures of the Pobiti Kamani area, located near Varna (northeast Bulgaria). The structures of the Pobiti Kamani are unique both regarding their good preservation, abundance (locally over 100 columns in a single outcrop) and immense dimensions. The fragile connection between archaeology and the topic of this paper is the Pobiti Kamani area, which, judging by the archaeological artifacts found there, is considered to have been a sacral place for the ancient peoples where they worshipped their gods. It is still believed that the area is a place of a high cosmic energy where people can ‘charge’ themselves by walking around columns. The area envelops 18 dispersed outcrops of massive, carbonate cemented vertical columns and horizontal interbeds contrasting with the loose surrounding sandy sediments. Morphological similarities with present-day forming seep-deposits in the northwestern Black Sea (Thiel et al., 2001; Michaelis et al., 2002; Peckmann et al., 2002) and so called “Bubbling reefs” in shallow water near Kattegat, Denmark (Jensen et al., 1992) as well as abundant hydrocarbon seepage along the nearby Bulgarian coast (Dimitrov and Dontcheva, 1994; Dimitrov, 2002) have led us to the hypothesis of a cold seep related origin. To contribute to a better understanding of the spatial distribution and the evolution of methane fluid migration and related carbonate diagenesis, this research addresses the following, more specific, objectives: (i) the formation and position of different seep carbonate

and vein structures within the seep environment and the controlling factors on their spatial distribution, (ii) the process of calcite precipitation along methane fluid paths and the identification of the microbial players and (iii) the evolution of methane flow paths in the shallow subsurface, framed within the geodynamic context of the platform. Therefore a multidisciplinary approach was applied, involving sedimentological and structural field observations, mapping, geostatistical data analysis and a diagenetic study, including petrography and inorganic and organic geochemical analyses. The main question answered at the end of this paper is the origin of Pobiti Kamani structures, i.e. the (micro)biological mediation of carbonate precipitation and processes controlling their formation and development in time. Geological setting The study area is located at the eastern – north-eastern side of the Bulgarian Moesian Platform tectonic unit (Fig. 1A), representing the foreland of the surrounding Carpatho-Balkan chain. The outcropping sediments are of Upper Cretaceous to Quaternary age (Fig. 1B and Fig. 2) and have consistent subhorizontal bedding. During the Late Cretaceous–Paleogene, the area was part of a broad epicontinental basin along the northern Tethys border, deepening to the south where the Balkan foredeep developed (AladzhovaHrisceva, 1991; Georgiev et al., 2001). In the region of Beloslav, shallow marine platform carbonates and clastics were deposited, often showing rapid lateral thickness variations as a result of fault-controlled differential subsidence and uplift. The carbonate-cemented structures are stratigraphically confined to the Upper Ypresian – Dikilitash Formation (Fig. 2B, Nachev and Nachev, 2001). The tubular concretions are confined to the Lower Eocene Dikilitash Formation (Fig. 2) and occur over its entire _40 m stratigraphic thickness (Nachev and Nachev, 2001). The formation in the study area consists of overall parallel-bedded unconsolidated, poorly to wellsorted coarse silts to sands. Decimetre to meter-thick beds reflect small variations in grain size, detrital composition, bioclast content or degree of bioturbation. Beds can be poorly stratified due to intense bioturbation (e.g. Ophiomorpha) or thin parallel-laminated. The unconsolidated sediments are interbedded with cemented, 0.2–1 m-thick, subhorizontally elongated sandstone concretions and continuous cemented beds representing, e.g. marine hardgrounds, cemented lag deposits or bioclast pockets. Foraminifera dominate the bioclast content, besides minor bivalves, serpulids and gastropods. The Dikilitash sediments are interpreted as mid- to outer-ramp deposits. They are overlain by the Aladan limestones, which prograded southwards, followed by the Avren marls that covered this area during a widespread transgression (Aladzhova-Hrisceva, 1991; Sinclair et al., 1997). Extensive bioturbation often obliterates the mostly subhorizontal planar parallel bedding. East- and westward dipping, NNW to NNE-oriented faults crosscut the Dikilitash Formation and displace sediments as young as the Neogene. Major faults (throws >80 m), cropping out along a road section near the village of Beloslav, show normal and oblique slip movements. Both conjugate NNW–NNE normal and ENE–NNE–NNW strike slip fault systems in the central-eastern Moesian Platform probably resulted from a single Paleogene extensional–transtensional tectonic phase (Bergerat et al., 1998). The latter has been related to the major Illyrian phase in the Balkanides, which culminated in the Middle Eocene (Doglioni et al., 1996; Georgiev et al., 2001; Sinclair et al., 1997), but could have already started after the Early Paleocene (Bergerat et al., 1998). Ongoing deformation in the Balkanides caused reactivation of the Moesian Platform fault systems during the Pliocene

(Bergerat et al., 1998; Shanov, 2005). At ďŹ rst sight, clusters of tubular concretions are not distributed in a systematic way with respect to the structural framework of the area as they can both be positioned in fault hanging walls and in footwalls and in immediate vicinity or at distances several hundreds of meters away from any known fault.

Figure. 1. Schematic structural map of NE Bulgaria (after Bokov et al., 1993; Georgiev et al., 2001; Vangelov, 2001). The red square west of Varna indicates the Pobiti Kamani study area. Locations of oil and gas occurrences are based on Georgiev (1996), area of coastal hydrocarbon seepage is based on Dimitrov (2002).

Figure. 2. (A) Simplified geological map of part of the Pobiti Kamani area (modified after Chechistev et al., 1992) with indication of the three groups of tubular concretions sampled. (B) Stratigraphic column (vertical axis not to scale) of Late Cretaceous to Middle Eocene formations near the village of Beloslav (modified after Aladzhova-Hrisceva, 1984, 1991; Sinclair et al., 1997). Material and methods To reconstruct the evolution of the pore fluid composition and the cementation conditions during the formation of the tubular concretions in relation to the ascent of methane-bearing fluids, a combined approach was used, including petrography, stable isotopes, elemental carbonate geochemistry and lipid biomarker analyses. The macroscopic characteristics of tubular concretions were described in terms of their size, shape and anatomy, integrating observations from the whole study area, which allowed defining four morphological types. A detailed study of the morphology and 2D mapping of the spatial distribution of tubes were done at two representative locations, i.e. the Strashimirovo group and Central group. Their selection was based upon (1) their accessibility and subhorizontal topography, (2) well-defined tube cluster margins, characterized as little as possible by human activity or rapid lithological changes and (3) their different location with respect to known faults. The Strashimirovo group is positioned hundreds of meters distant from any known fault contact. In contrast, an NS-oriented fault exposed to the NW of the

Central group passes closely along the group’s western border when traced southward. In addition, the former Beloslav sand extraction quarry was included for descriptive purposes because of the exceptional lateral and vertical exposure of the Dikilitash Formation, hosting numerous tubular concretions within the hanging wall block of a major NS-oriented fault contact. Subsequent data handling was undertaken within a Geographical Information System (GIS), i.e. MapInfo (MapInfo Corporation) and Idrisi (Clark Laboratories) to investigate whether the distribution of tubular concretions is random or shows a spatial pattern. Tube position data were first used to reconstruct the tube density and furthermore to calculate the orientations of the connection lines between tube positions for all pairs of tubular concretions. Epoxy-impregnated thin sections, half-stained for carbonates with alizarin red-S and potassium ferricyanide (Dickson, 1966) were studied by conventional microscopy, UV fluorescence and cold cathodoluminescence microscopy (Technosyn model 8200, Mark II; operating conditions: 8–11 kV gun potential; 300–550 µA beam current; 0.05 Torr vacuum and 5 mm beam width). Point counting (650 points/thin section) was carried out to quantify the modal composition. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with an energy dispersive detector (EDX) was used for detailed observations and qualitative chemical analyses (Jeol JSM 6400 SEM and XL30FEG SEM, connected to an EDAX EDX: 60 s counting time, between 1000 and 2000 cps). Individual carbonate cement phases from 11 carbon-coated, polished thin sections were analyzed for their Ca, Mg, Sr, Fe and Mn content by electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) on a Cameca France ‘SX 50’ device (15 kV beam voltage, 20 nA beam current, 12 s counting time on peak and 3 s on background). 236 carbonate samples were drilled with a hand-held microdrill and analyzed for their stable carbon and oxygen isotopic signature at the University of Erlangen–Nürnberg. Carbonate powders were reacted with 100% phosphoric acid (density N1.9 g/cm3 , Wachter and Hayes, 1985) at 75 °C using a Kiel III online carbonate preparation line, connected to a ThermoFinningan 252 mass spectrometer. All values are reported relative to V–PDB by assigning a δ13C value of +1.95‰ and a δ18O value of +2.20‰ to the NBS19 laboratory standard. Reproducibility, checked by replicate analysis was better than 0.06‰(1σ) for δ13C and δ18O. Analysis of lipid biomarkers was done on pooled samples, containing several handdrilled plugs (n). The total amount of sample used was ~200 g from (a) the Beloslav quarry group (n=6, tube 2. 3. 4. 9), and (b) the Central group (n=9, tube 10, 11). To extract only pristine signatures from the carbonates, a cleaning, decalcification and extraction procedure was applied (for a detailed description see Birgel et al., 2006b). Briefly, after the carbonates were dissolved, the residual sediment was saponified with 6% KOHin methanol at 80 °C for two hours to cleave ester-bound lipids. Thereafter, the sediment was extracted with CH2Cl:MeOH (3:1) using a microwave extraction system (CEM, MARS X) at 80 °C and 600 W. The combined extracts were separated by column chromatography into four fractions of increasing polarity: (I) hydrocarbons; (II) ketones/esters; (III) alcohols; (IV) carboxylic acids. Identification of individual compounds was based on GC retention times and published mass spectral data. Results Fig. 3 illustrates schematically the different morphological types distinguished of which type 1 is the most common. Straight, often cylindrical-shaped type 1 tubular concretions (Fig. 5A–C) can be completely cemented or are characterized by a peripheral, well-cemented wall and one or more near-central uncemented or partly cemented ‘‘conduits’’

(Fig. 4D,E), which can be traced over mdistances along the tube length axis. Tube circumferences are rather constant throughout the tube length (Fig. 4B) and may vary between 0.5 and 12 m. The statistical distribution of Strashimirovo circumference data shows two modes at 2–2.5 m and at 4.5–5 m and reaches values up to 9.5 m. In the Central group, tubes have an average circumference of 3.2 m, showing a smaller variation. Furthermore, the tube peripheral wall ranges in thickness between 0.1 and 0.5 m, being independent of the tube size (R 2¼ 0.015). The majority of the tubes are in subvertical position with their length-axis perpendicular to the bedding plane demonstrating their cemented ‘‘conduits’’ (Fig. 4D,E), which can be traced over mdistances along the tube length axis. Tube circumferences are rather constant throughout the tube length (Fig. 4B) and may vary between 0.5 and 12 m. The statistical distribution of Strashimirovo circumference data shows two modes at 2–2.5 m and at 4.5–5 m and reaches values up to 9.5 m. In the Central group, tubes have an average circumference of 3.2 m, showing a smaller variation. Type 2 concretions are large, more irregular-shaped with many bulbous protrusions (Fig. 4G), but remain vertically elongated. The recognition of a central conduit is often less evident. Observations in the Beloslav quarry indicate that type 1 tubes sometimes evolve into type 2 concretions where tubes intersect cemented sandstone beds, but both types may as well occur within the same stratigraphic horizon. Type 3 tubular concretions are signiﬁcantly smaller (±1 m diameter), commonly have an irregular conduit in cross section and occur strongly clustered, hampering the measurement of tube circumferences (Fig. 4H). They are not widespread, but were observed within the same stratigraphic horizon as type 1 tubes. The cm-diameter, entirely cemented type 4 tubes are densely grouped, which made it difﬁcult to distinguish individual tubes (Fig. 4I,J). Multiple clustered type 4 tubes locally underlie a single type 1 or type 2 concretion (Fig. 4J).

Figure. 3. Summary of the main characteristics of the four morphological types of tubular concretions distinguished in the ﬁeld. Scale bars correspond to 1 m.

Figure 4. Morphology of tubular concretions. (A) Two characteristic cylindrical, tubular concretions of type 1. Measuring staff ¼ 1 m (Central group). (B) A 25 m vertical section of the outcrop wall in the Beloslav quarry showing cylindrical-shaped tubes of type 1 with signiﬁcant vertical continuity, which widen (black dotted lines) near their point of cross section with cemented sandstone beds (arrows). (C) Type 1 cylindrical tubular concretions, which show bulbous protrusions (black arrow) along their outer wall where they crosscut a concretionary sandstone horizon (Beloslav quarry). Tubes are about 2.5–3 m in length. (D) Cross transect of type 1 tube with a distinct peripheral wall (black arrow) contrasting with the uncemented axial zone (conduit) (Central group). (E) Irregularly textured conduit surface of a type 1 tube characterized by small, dm-long pipes, which resemble preferentially cemented bioturbations. Height of tube ¼ 1.5 m (Beloslav quarry). (F) Contact between unconsolidated host sands and a type 1 tube. Sedimentary layering (S0, dashed white lines) can be traced without disturbance across the sharp contact (Beloslav quarry). (G) Type 2 tubular concretion characterized by a highly irregular morphology. Measuring staff ¼ 1 m (Central group). (H) Cluster of type 3 tubular concretions (Teterlik group). (I) Detail of type 4 tubes (Banovo

group). (J) Slightly broader type 4-like tubes underlie the base of a type 1 tubular concretion. Measuring staff ¼ 0.6 m (isolated outcrop along road to the village of Banovo). The microscopic fabric of tubular concretions consists of a grainsupported subarkosic sandstone, cemented by non-ferrous calcite cements. Both the fabric and sequence of diagenetic phases are similar within and between tubes (Fig. 5). The characteristic events and diagenetic phases are addressed in the following (Fig. 6). Framework grains are dominated by quartz and feldspar with minor lithic fragments (Q). The latter consist predominantly of polycrystalline quartz with minor chert and fragments consisting of micas and quartz crystals or ﬁne silt-sized quartz grains. K-feldspar (orthoclase and minor microcline), plagioclase and albitized K-feldspar characterize the feldspar population. Accessory detrital components consist of glauconite pellets, straight muscovite ﬂakes and different heavy (e.g., rutile, zircon) and opaque (e.g., hematite, ilmenite) minerals. Biogenic components (0 to 7±2%) consist predominantly of randomly oriented, large and small hyaline foraminifera with small miliolid forams, alveolina, echinoderm, bivalve and coral fragments in minor quantities.

Figure 5. Macroscopy of the tubular concretions. (A) Field image of tubular concretions in the Slanchevo N group. Hammer and backpack for scale. (B) Top view of a small tubular concretion showing a near-central open conduit and surrounding dm-thick tube wall (Central group). (C) Close-up of cemented tube surface consisting of greyish cemented sandstone, enclosing large foraminifera and mollusks (Beloslav quarry group). Mostly plagioclase, but also K-feldspar grains are strongly altered. Authigenic Kfeldspar overgrowths develop as transparent, µm-thick rims consisting of a single, euhedral crystal, enveloping part of the altered detrital grain. Kaolinite appears to be a common alteration product of detrital feldspars, typically concentrating along cleavage planes, twins and cracks. In case of pervasive intragranular porosity, the K-feldspar authigenic overgrowths are often also affected by dissolution. A ﬁrst granular to dogtooth-shaped rimcement (RCa cement) grows normal to bioclast surfaces. It is either (1) homogeneous brownish dull or non luminescent or (2) displays a succession of a non or dull luminescent zone, followed by a bright luminescent zone (Fig.6). Interparticular and intrabioclast porosity is subsequently cemented by an anhedral granular calcite cement (GCa), yielding a mosaic fabric of interlocking crystals. Granular calcite crystals may replace bioclasts, detrital fragments and their authigenic overgrowths. The GCa cement phase displays a light to dark brown dull luminescence, often showing various shades within a single sample. Especially within samples from the Beloslav quarry and Slanchevo N group, the GCa cement can also show bright luminescent spots and zones (‘blotchy luminescence’). Opaque to brown-reddish coloured, circular to structureless phases almost exclusively occur in intrabioclast pores, along bioclast tests and enclosed within the GCa cement in close vicinity to bioclasts. Occasionally, cubic crystals grouped into a sphere, typical of framboidal pyrite were

observed with SEM. The interparticular porosity of the reference concretion sample is uniformly cemented by a similar GCa cement phase with a characteristic brown dull, yellowbright, brown dull concentric zoned luminescence. At last, almost all samples possess dissolution vugs, but only few show interconnected, brownish altered zones, which often seem to surround (former) bioclast accumulations. The latter samples are often positioned along the incompletely cemented axial tube portions or the outermost tube margin. Secondary porosity can be partly or completely cemented by a sub- to euhedral, transparent, equant calcite cement (ECa).

Figure 6. Relative timing of the different events and diagenetic phases recorded in the tubular concretions. Lengths of bars are not indicative of the duration. Broken lines refer to probable maximum extent of the event. As the calcite cements are characterized by small crystals with different phases often intergrown at a µm-scale, stable isotope data of δ13C and δ18O measurements relate to bulk compositions. These are roughly representative of the GCa cement phase, although the regular presence of a blotchy luminescence suggests recrystallization, with the variable admixture of ECa and PCa cements. Intra-sample variability is up to 3‰ for δ13C and up to 1‰ for δ18O values. The signatures of tubular concretions from the Beloslav quarry group conﬁrm the broad trend of decreasing δ18O with increasing δ13C values as reported by De Boever et al. (2006) (Fig. 7). Samples, plotting at the ﬁrst end of the trend (group 1) have negative d signatures of around -35‰ with a tail towards values as low as -44.5‰ and δ18O signatures that mostly plot within the range of Early Eocene marine low-Mg–calcite (Fig. 7). With some exceptions, samples from the Central group cluster within this group, but δ18O signatures reach more positive values as high as +1‰. The other end of the trend is characterized by less negative d 13 C values, up to -8‰ and more 18O -depleted signatures (δ18O: down to 9‰) (group 2 values). Along an isotopic transect of a single tube, the δ13C and δ18O values can cover the entire range between the two isotopic end groups. This is prominent for most tubular concretions from the Beloslav quarry and Slanchevo N group (De Boever et al., 2006). Only

limited variability is present along isotopic transects of tubes from the Central group. Patterns in the changing isotopic signatures along transects are not consistent among tubes from the same study location. However, samples which are positioned along the peripheral tube wall or within and in close vicinity to axial, less cemented tube parts commonly possess δ18O values lower than -2.5‰ and mostly below -4‰. The carbon isotopic signature of these samples may vary strongly, but is generally above -25‰. These samples thus often possess group 2 isotope values or plot along the isotopic trend between group 1 and 2 isotope values.

Figure 7. Carbon–oxygen stable isotope cross-plot of bulk carbonate samples from all tubes investigated. Grey reference square for marine calcites based on Zachos et al. (2001), white reference square for meteoric calcites based on O'Neill et al. (1969) and Rozanski et al. (1993). Elemental composition of carbonate phases show that all cements consist of low-Mg– calcite. Only little variation in elemental composition could be detected, but some general trends exist. RCa cements are characterized by MgO contents between below detection limit (<0.05 wt.%) and 1.56 wt.%, similar to the GCa cement phase in the marine calcitecemented reference sample (0.25 and 1.49 wt.%). MnO and SrO contents are often below detection limit (<0.10 and <0.05 wt.% respectively), but the latter can reach 0.15 wt.%. Similar values are recorded for the GCa cements, but MgO contents tend to be slightly lower (below detection limit to 1.09 wt.%). The blotchy luminescence of GCa crystals in sample 6 from tube 9 and sample 1 from tube 12 suggest recrystallization. Here, MgO and SrO contents are lower than in any other sample of this phase. The elemental composition of GCa cements from samples with a bulk isotopic composition varying between group 1 and 2 values does not show a clear covariance with their isotopic signature. ECa and PCa cements

are marked by variable, but often low MgO and especially SrO contents, mostly below detection limit. MnO contents can be up to 0.75 wt.%. Samples for a lipid biomarker study were obtained from different tube structures at two sites, i.e., (a) the Beloslav quarry group (isotopic signatures between group 1 and 2 values) and (b) the Central group (group 1 isotope values). The most abundant archaeal biomarker identified in both settings is the isoprenoidal diether archaeol in fraction (III). In the Central group, sn-3-hydroxyarchaeol, another isoprenoidal diether with an additional hydroxyl group in the sn-3 phytanyl-chain was found in lower abundance (Fig. 8). Sn-2hydroxyarchaeol, which is often the predominant or only hydroxyarchaeol in modern and ancient seep deposits, was not detected. The identification of sn-3-hydroxyarchaeol was based on mass spectra and retention time comparison with samples from Hydrate Ridge (see Elvert et al., 2005). In fraction (I), 3,7,11,15,19-pentamethylicosane (PMI), known to be produced by many archaea, was identified only in the Central group samples.

Figure 8. Partial gas chromatogram (total ion current: TIC) of alcohol fraction (as trimethylsilylethers) from the Central group. DAGE: dialklyglycerolether. DAGE a–c: see Table 2. MDGD: macrocyclic diphytanyl glycerol diether with numbers indicating the number of pentacyclic rings. istd: internal standard. x-axis: Retention time is given in minutes. Additional archaeal markers are the rare macrocyclic diphytanyl glycerol diethers (MDGD) containing 0, 1, or 2 cyclopentane rings (Fig. 8). The major MDGD in both deposits is MDGD-1, representing 58% and 63% of all MDGDs respectively in the Central and Beloslav quarry group. Minor compounds, although still the most abundant archaeal biomarkers in fraction (IV), are biphytanic diacids (bp) (see Schouten et al., 2003; Birgel et al., 2008a), containing 0, 1, or 2 pentacyclic rings, like MDGDs. The major bp is bp-2 in both deposits, representing 59% and 58% of all bps found in the Central and Beloslav quarry group, respectively. Bp-0 and bp-1 are almost equally distributed with ~20% each. The δ13C values of archaeal biomarkers are as low as -123‰ (MDGD-0 in the Central group), and mostly range from -120 to -110‰.

Disscussion Circumgranular rim cements (RCa) are often interpreted to be typical of early cementation in the marine phreatic zone (Flügel, 2004). The MgO and SrO contents are highly variable, but low compared to reported values of inorganic marine precipitates (Veizer, 1983). The latter can be attributed to diagenetic recrystallization by e.g., meteoric waters, which subsequently circulated through the sediments (cf., Brand and Veizer, 1980). Indeed it is most pronounced in RCa cements displaying a blotchy luminescence indicative of recrystallization. The late equant and poikilotopic cement phases (Fig. 4) follow a major dissolution phase. Their complex luminescence patterns can be interpreted as cementation under rapidly changing precipitation conditions, most typical for cementation in near-surface environments. With Mn2+ and Fe2+ being the most important luminescence controlling trace elements (Machel et al., 1991; Machel, 2000), rapid variations in luminescence within a shallow burial setting likely reflect changes between oxic to suboxic conditions (Meyers, 1978). The overall pattern of low MgO and SrO and occasionally higher MnO contents is characteristic of meteoric phreatic carbonates (Lohmann, 1978; Brand and Veizer, 1980). Granular calcite cements (GCa) generally are the predominant pore-occluding cement phase. Locally, granular calcite crystals are replacive with respect to framework components, prohibiting straightforward estimations of subseafloor cementation depths from the intergranular volume. However, as unaltered detrital minerals only show point or line contacts and muscovite flakes have preserved a straight shape, the onset of cementation occurred during the Early Eocene, prior to burial. The combination of calcite δ18O values, indicating precipitation in equilibrium with Early Eocene marine pore waters and negative δ13C values (group 1 isotope values) (Fig. 6), typifies Cenozoic seep carbonates (Campbell et al., 2002) and is consistent with the contribution of a methane-bearing fluid source (De Boever et al., 2006). Applying a fractionation factor of 1.004 to 1.018 for bacterially mediated anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM) determined by culture experiments and models (Whiticar, 1999), the lowest δ13 value of -44.5‰ V-PDB yields a δ13 signature in between -40‰ and -27‰ V-PDB. However, the measured δ13Cmethane most likely reflects a mixture of methane-derived carbon and less depleted marine, dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC; cf., Zachos et al., 2001) and thereby does not provide a reliable measure for the original dcalcite value. Based on a number of studies of modern methane seeps, a δ13Cmethane value 20‰ to 40‰ lower than the lowest δ13 value can be expected (cf., Peckmann and Thiel, 2004, their Table 1). This would yield a δ13 signature of -84‰to -64‰, suggesting an important contribution of microbial methane. Samples with isotopic signatures close to group 2 values (Fig. 6), i.e., least 13C depleted and strongly 18O-depleted values, are frequently positioned along tube margins and along partial cemented axial zones. They are often, but not always, characterized by prominent macroscopic dissolution vugs, blotchy luminescent GCa cement and locally by the predominance of late ECa and PCa cements. These observations suggest that at least part of these isotopic signatures reflect a variable degree of GCa recrystallization and ECa–PCa cementation, related to meteoric water circulation during the Cenozoic. The negative δ18O values fall indeed within the range of δ18O signatures for calcite precipitated in equilibrium with present-day, and likely palaeo-meteoric water in the study area (-7.4 to -9.1‰ V-SMOW, T=15°–20 °C; O'Neill et al., 1969; Rozanski et al., 1993) (Fig. 6). The less negative δ13C

signatures can be caused by the dissolution of carbonate bioclasts providing a (marine) carbon and calcium source, which is supported by the presence of biomolds. The δ13C-depleted early diagenetic calcite cements confirm that methane-derived carbon was involved in carbonate precipitation. The lack of lipid compounds diagnostic of aerobic methanotrophs (e.g., Birgel and Peckmann, 2008) suggests that methane was mainly oxidized anaerobically. Archaeal signatures of the AOM-performing consortium can be traced by the presence of archaeol with δ13C values as low as -111‰ in both outcrops studied. Archaeol with a strong C-depletion was identified in modern seep deposits as reliable biomarker of various methane-oxidizing archaea (ANMEs) of different orders, as for example Methanosarcinales spp. (e.g., Hinrichs et al., 1999) and was used as molecular fossil of methane-oxidizing archaea in ancient seep deposits as old as Oligocene (Peckmann and Thiel, 2004). Even more remarkable is the presence of sn-3-hydroxyarchaeol (δ13C = 112‰) in the Central group samples and the concomitant absence of the more common sn2-hydroxyarchaeol. Other unusual archaeal biomarkers, besides sn-3-hydroxyarchaeol, are MDGDs with 0 to 2 pentacyclic rings. Acyclic MDGD has so far only been identified in thermophilic methanogens (Methanococcus jannaschii; Comita and Gagosian, 1983). However, δ13C values between -123‰ to -112‰ found for these compounds in the Central and Beloslav quarry group clearly point to methanotrophic archaea as source organisms. The acquired biomarker results indicate that methane was consumed anaerobically by methane-oxidizing archaea. This sets new light on the formation of the Pobiti Kamani tubular concretions (De Boever et al., 2006). AOM generally proceeds with sulphate as the terminal electron acceptor (1), starting at the base of the sulphate reduction zone. Sulphate can penetrate as deep as 10 m below the seafloor in organicpoor sediments (Wallmann et al., 2006), but mostly becomes exhausted at shallower depths especially where hydrocarbons ascend. This constrains the cementation of the tubular concretions likely to a maximum depth of a few meters below the paleo-seafloor. Conclusions The combined petrographical, inorganic geochemical and lipid biomarker approach yielded new insights on the lithification process of spectacular tubular concretions approximately one meter in diameter and several meters high, representing parts of the subsurface plumbing system of Early Eocene methane seepage in the eastern Moesian Platform (Pobiti Kamani area, NE Bulgaria). Host sediment lithification started during the Early Eocene in the marine eogenetic realm with a volumetrically minor circumgranular rim cement. The subsequent influx and oxidation of microbial methane provided a δ13C -depleted carbon source for subsurface, pervasive and homogeneous low-Mg–calcite cementation (δ13C values as low as -44.5‰ VPDB), surrounding the ascending methane-bearing fluid plume. The presence of particular Cdepleted archaeal biomarkers (δ13C: -123‰ to -81‰ V-PDB), enclosed within the calcitecemented sandstone tubes, indicates the importance of microbially mediated anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM). An uncommon suite of lipid compounds including macrocyclic diphytanyl glycerol diethers (MDGD) and sn-3-hydroxyarchaeol is interpreted to reflect yet unknown methane-oxidizing archaea. The 13C pore fluid alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon concentration increase resulting from AOM, is considered as prime factor driving

early calcite precipitation. Moreover detrital feldspar weathering might have additionally triggered precipitation of calcite, at least on a very local scale. Highly variable d δ13C and δ18O bulk signatures along isotopic transects of single tubular concretions, at least partly, result from recrystallization and calcite cementation in relation to late meteoric water circulation. Concluding, with great certainty, we can state that the Pobitite Kamani structures have been formed as “bubbling reefs” around ascending methane-bearing ﬂuid plumes on and close beneath the paleo-seafloor during the Early Eocene.

References Aiello, I.W., Garrison, R.E., Moore, J.C., Kastner, M., Stakes, D.S., 2001. Anatomy and origin of carbonate structures in a Miocene cold-seep ﬁeld. Geology 29 (12), 1111–1114. Aladzhova-Hrisceva, K., 1984. Stratigraphie des dépôts éocènes aux environs du village Beloslav, département de Varna. Review of the Bulgarian Geological Society 45 (1), 33–44 (in Bulgarian, abstract in French). Aladzhova-Hrisceva, K., 1991. Stratigraphic subdivision and correlation of Paleogenic deposits in Northeast Bulgaria. Geologica Balcanica 21 (2), 12–38 (in Bulgarian, abstract in English). Birgel, D., Peckmann, J., 2008. Aerobic methanotrophy at ancient marine methane seeps: a synthesis. Organic Geochemistry 39, 1659–1667. Birgel, D., Peckmann, J., Klautzsch, S., Thiel, V., Reitner, J., 2006a. Anaerobic and aerobic oxidation of methane at Late Cretaceous seeps in the Western Interior Seaway, USA. Geomicrobiology Journal 23 (7), 565–577. Birgel, D., Thiel, V., Hinrichs, K.U., Elvert, M., Campbell, K.A., Reitner, J., Farmer, J.D., Peckmann, J., 2006b. Lipid biomarker patterns of methane-seep microbialites fromthe Mesozoic convergent margin of California. Organic Geochemistry 37 (10), 1289–1302. Birgel, D., Himmler, T., Freiwald, A., Peckmann, J., 2008b. A new constraint on the antiquity of anaerobic oxidation of methane: Late Pennsylvanian seep limestones from southern Namibia. Geology 36 (7), 543–546. Blumenberg, M., Seifert, R., Reitner, J., Pape, T., Michaelis, W., 2004. Membrane lipid patterns typify distinct anaerobic methanotrophic consortia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101 (30), 11111–11116. Boetius, A., Ravenschlag, K., Schubert, C.J., Rickert, D., Widdel, F., Gieseke, A., Amann, R., Jørgensen, B.B., Witte, U., Pfannkuche, O., 2000. A marine microbial consortium apparently mediating anaerobic oxidation of methane. Nature 407, 623–626. Bojanowski, M.J., 2007. Oligocene cold-seep carbonates from the Carpathians and their inferred relation to gas hydrates. Facies 53 (3), 347–360. Bokov, P., Gocev, P., Ognyanov, R., 1993. Tectonic position, hydrocarbon exploration and future potential of Bulgaria. Geologica Balcanica 23 (3), 3–24. Campbell, K.A., 2006. Hydrocarbon seep and hydrothermal vent paleoenvironments and

paleontology: past developments and future research Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 232 (2–4), 362–407.

directions.

Palaeogeo-graphy,

Campbell, K.A., Farmer, J.D., Des Marais, D., 2002. Ancient hydrocarbon seeps from the Mesozoic convergent margin of California: carbonate geochemistry, ﬂuids and palaeoenvironments. Geoﬂuids 2 (2), 63–94.

Chechistev, G., Milanova, V., Popov, N., Kojumdgieva, E., 1992. Geological map of Bulgaria. Sheet Varna and Resort Zlatni Pjasaci. Committee mineral and energy resources. Deparment of geological prospecting and geological mapping, Sofia. De Boever, E., Swennen, R., Dimitrov, L., 2006. Lower Eocene carbonate cemented chimneys (Varna, NE Bulgaria): formation mechanisms and the (a)biological mediation of chimney growth? Sedimentary Geology 185 (3–4), 159–173. De Boever, E., Huysmans, M., Swennen, R., Muchez, P., Dimitrov, L., 2009. Controlling factors on the morphology and spatial distribution of hydrocarbon-related tubular concretions —study of a Lower Eocene seep system. Marine and Petroleum Geology. doi:10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2008.11.004. Diaz-del-Rio, V., Somoza, L., Martinez-Frias, J., Mata, M.P., Delgado, A., HernandezMolina, F.J., Lunar, R., Martin-Rubi, J.A., Maestro, A., Fernandez-Puga, M.C., Leon, R., Llave, E., Medialdea, T., Vazquez, J.T., 2003. Vast fields of hydrocarbon-derived carbonate chimneys related to the accretionary wedge/olistostrome of the Gulf of Cadiz. Marine Geology 195 (1–4), 177–200. Dickson, J.A.D., 1966. Carbonate identification and genesis as revealed by staining. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 36, 491–505. Dimitrov, L., 2002. Contribution to atmospheric methane by natural seepages on the Bulgarian continental shelf. Continental Shelf Research 22, 2429–2442. Elvert, M., Suess, E., Whiticar, M.J., 1999. Anaerobic methane oxidation associated with marine gas 20 25 hydrates: superlight C-isotopes from saturated and unsaturated C and C irregular isoprenoids. Naturwissenschaften 86, 295–300. Elvert, M., Suess, E., Greinert, J., Whiticar, M.J., 2000. Archaea mediating anaerobic methane oxidation in deep-sea sediments at cold seeps of the eastern Aleutian subduction zone. Organic Geochemistry 31 (11), 1175–1187. Elvert, M., Hopmans, E., Treude, T., Boetius, A., Suess, E., 2005. Spatial variations of methanotrophic consortia at cold methane seeps: implications from a highresolution molecular and isotopic approach. Geobiology 3, 195–209. Ferrante, G., Ekiel, I., Patel, G.B., Sprott, G.D., 1988. A novel core lipid isolated from the aceticlastic methanogen Methanothrix concilii GP6. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 963, 173–182. Flügel, E., 2004. Microfacies of carbonate rocks. Analysis, Interpretation and Application. SpringerVerlag, Berlin Heidelberg. Georgiev, G., 1996. Overview of the oil and gas exploration and production of Bulgaria. In: Wessely, G., Lieble, W. (Eds.), Oil and gas in Alpidic thrustbelts and basins of Central and Eastern Europe European Association of Petroleum Geologists, pp. 29–33. Georgiev, G., Dabovski, C., Stanisheva-Vassileva, G., 2001. East Srednogorie–Balkan Rift Zone. In: Ziegler, P.A., Cavazza, W., Robertson, A.H.F., Crasquin-Soleau, S. (Eds.), Peri-Tethys Memoir 6: Peri-Tethyan Rift/Wrench Basins and Passive Margins: Mémoires du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, pp. 259–293. Goedert, J.L., Thiel, V., Schmale, O., Rau, W.W., Michaelis, W., Peckmann, J., 2003. The Late Eocene ‘Whiskey Creek’ methane–seep deposit (Western Washington State) - Part I: Geology, palaeontology, and molecular geobiology. Facies 48, 223–239. Gontharet, S., Pierre, C., Blanc-Valleron, M.M., Rouchy, J.M., Fouquet, Y., Bayon, G., Foucher, J.P., Woodside, J., Mascle, J., 2007. Nature and origin of diagenetic carbonate crusts and concretions from mud volcanoes and pockmarks of the Nile deep-sea fan (eastern Mediterranean Sea). Deep-Sea Research. Part 2. Topical Studies in Oceanography 54 (11– 13), 1292–1311.

Greinert, J., Bohrmann, G., Suess, E., 2001. Gas hydrate-associated carbonates and methane-venting at hydrate ridge: classiﬁcation, distribution and origin of authigenic lithologies. In: Paull, C.K., Dillon, W.P. (Eds.), Natural Gas Hydrates Occurrence, Distribution and Detection. InAmerican Geophysical Union, Washington DC, pp. 99–113. Hinrichs, K.U., Hayes, J.M., Sylva, S.P., Brewer, P.G., DeLong, E.F., 1999. Methane- consuming archaebacteria in marine sediments. Nature 398 (6730), 802–805. Hinrichs, K.U., Summons, R.E., Orphan, V., Sylva, S.P., Hayes, J.M., 2000. Molecular and isotopic analysis of anaerobic methane-oxidizing communities in marine sediments. Organic Geochemistry 31 (12), 1685–1701. Hoehler, T.M., Alperin, M.J., Albert, D.B., Martens, C.S., 1994. Field and laboratory studies of methane oxidation in an anoxic marine sediment: evidence for a methanogensulphate reducer consortium. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 8, 451–463. Judd, A., Hovland, M., 2007. Seabed Fluid Flow: The Impact on Geology, Biology and the Marine Environment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ketzer, J.M., Morad, S., Nystuen, J.P., De Ros, L.F., 2003. The role of the Cimmerian unconformity (Early Cretaceous) in the kaolinitisation and related reservoir-quality evolution in Triassic sandstones of the Snorre Field, North Sea. In: Worden, R., Morad, S. (Eds.), Clay Mineral cements in Sandstones. In: International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication, vol. 34. Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 361–382. Knittel, K., Losekann, T., Boetius, A., Kort, R., Amann, R., 2005. Diversity and distribution of methanotrophic archaea at cold seeps. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71 (1), 467– 479. Machel, H.G., 2000. Application of cathodoluminescence to carbonate diagenesis. In: Pagel, M. (Ed.), Cathodoluminescence in geosciences. Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 271– 301. Machel, H.G., Mason, R.A., Mariano, A.N., Mucci, A., 1991. Causes and emission of luminescence in calcite and dolomite. In: Barker, C.E., Kopp, O.C. (Eds.), Luminescence Microscopy: Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects. SEPM, pp. 9–27. Mazzini, A., Svensen, H., Hovland, M., Planke, S., 2006. Comparison and implications from strikingly different authigenic carbonates in a Nyegga complex pockmark. Marine Geology 231 (1–4), 89–102. Meyers, W.J., 1978. Carbonate cements: their regional distribution and interpretation in Mississippian limestons of southwestern New Mexico. Sedimentology 25, 371–400. Michaelis, W., Seifert, R., Nauhaus, K., Treude, T., Thiel, V., Blumenberg, M., Knittel, K., Gieseke, A., Peterknecht, K., Pape, T., Boetius, A., Amann, R., Jørgensen, B.B., Widdel, F., Peckmann, J., Pimenov, N.V., Gulin, M.B., 2002. Microbial reefs in the Black Sea fueled by anaerobic oxidation of methane. Science 297 (5583), 1013–1015. Nachev, I.K., Nachev, C., 2001. “Pobitite kamani”—bacterial–algal columns. Soﬁa, Artik. (in Bulgarian, symmary in English). Nauhaus, K., Treude, T., Boetius, A., Krüger, M., 2005. Environmental regulation of the anaerobic oxidation of methane: a comparison of ANME-I and ANME-II communities. Environmental Microbiology 7 (1), 98–106. Niemann, H., Elvert, M., 2008. Diagnostic lipid biomarker and stable carbon isotope signatures of microbial communities mediating the anaerobic oxidation of methane with sulphate. Organic Geochemistry 39 (12), 1668–1677.

Nyman, S.L., Nelson, C.S., Campbell, K.A., 2009. Miocene tubular concretions in East Coast Basin, New Zealand: analogue for the subsurface plumbing of cold seeps. Marine Geology. doi:10.1016/m.margeo.2009.03.021. O'Neill, J.A., Clayton, R.N., Mayeda, T.K., 1969. Oxygen isotope fractionation in divalent metal carbonates. Journal of Chemical Physics 51, 5547–5558. Orphan, V.J., House, C.H., Hinrichs, K.U., McKeegan, K.D., DeLong, E.F., 2001. Methaneconsuming archaea revealed by directly coupled isotopic and phylogenetic analysis. Science 293 (5529), 484–487. Orphan, V.J., House, C.H., Hinrichs, K.U., McKeegan, K.D., DeLong, E.F., 2002. Multiple archaeal groups mediate methane oxidation in anoxic cold seep sediments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99 (11), 7663–7668. Pancost, R.D., Hopmans, E.C., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2001a. Archaeal lipids in Mediterranean cold seeps: molecular proxies for anaerobic methane oxidation. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 65 (10), 1611–1627. Paull, C.K., Chanton, J.P., Neumann, A.C., Coston, J.A., Martens, C.S., 1992. Indicators of methanederived carbonates and chemosynthetic organic carbon deposits examples from the Florida escarpment. Palaios 7, 361–375. Peckmann, J., Thiel, V., 2004. Carbon cycling at ancient methane-seeps. Chemical Geology 205 (3–4), 443–467. Peckmann, J., Thiel, V., Michaelis, W., Clari, P., Gaillard, C., Martire, L., Reitner, J., 1999. Cold seep deposits of Beauvoisin (Oxfordian; southeastern France) and Marmorito (Miocene; northern Italy): microbially induced authigenic carbonates. International Journal of Earth Sciences 88 (1), 60–75. Peckmann, J., Reimer, A., Luth, U., Hansen, B.T., Heinicke, C., Hoefs, J., Reitner, J., 2001. Methanederived carbonates and authigenic pyrite from the northwestern Black Sea. Marine Geology 177, 129–150. Peckmann, J., Thiel, V., Michaelis, W., Clari, P., Gaillard, C., Martire, L., Reitner, J., 1999. Cold seep deposits of Beauvoisin (Oxfordian; southeastern France) and Marmorito (Miocene; northern Italy): microbially induced authigenic carbonates. International Journal of Earth Sciences 88 (1), 60–75. Peckmann, J., Reimer, A., Luth, U., Hansen, B.T., Heinicke, C., Hoefs, J., Reitner, J., 2001. Methanederived carbonates and authigenic pyrite from the northwestern Black Sea. Marine Geology 177, 129–150. Ritger, S., Carson, R., Suess, E., 1987. Methane-derived authigenic carbonates formed by subduction-induced pore-water expulsion along the Oregon/Washington margin. Geological Society of America Bulletin 98, 147–156. Sachsenhofer, R.F., Stummer, B., Geogiev, G., Dellmour, R., Bechtel, A., Gratzer, R., Coric, S., 2009. Depositional environment and hydrocarbon source potential of the Oligocene Ruslar Formation (Kamchia Depression; Western Black Sea). Marine and Petroleum Geology 26 (1), 57–84. Schouten, S., Wakeham, S.G., Hopmans, E.C., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2003. Biogeo-chemical evidence that thermophilic archaea mediate the anaerobic oxidation of methane. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 69 (3), 1680–1686. Sinclair, H.D., Juranov, S.G., Georgiev, G., Byrne, P., Mountney, N.P., 1997. The Balkan thrust wedge and foreland basin of Eastern Bulgaria: Structural and stratigraphic development. In: Robinson, A.G. (Ed.), Regional and petroleum geology of the Black Sea and surrounding region, pp. 91–114.

Stadnitskaia, A., Baas, M., Ivanov, M., Van Weering, T.C.E., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2003. Novel archaeal macrocyclic diether core membrane lipids in a methane-derived carbonate crust from a mud volcano in the Sorokin Trough, NE Black Sea. Archaea 1, 165–173. Stadnitskaia, A., Muyzer, G., Abbas, B., Coolen, M.J.L., Hopmans, E.C., Baas, M., van Weering, T.C.E., Ivanov, M.K., Poludetkina, E., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2005. Biomarker and 16S rDNA evidence for anaerobic oxidation of methane and related carbonate precipitation in deep-sea mud volcanoes of the Sorokin Trough, Black Sea. Marine Geology 217 (1–2), 67– 96. Tari, G., Dicea, O., Faulkerson, J., Georgiev, G., Popov, S., Stefanescu, M., Weir, G., 1997. Cimmerian and Alpine stratigraphy and structural evolution of the Moesian Platform (Romania/Bulgaria). In: Robinson, A.G. (Ed.), Regional and petroleum geology of the Black Sea and surrounding region, pp. 63–90. Teichert, B.M.A., Bohrmann, G., Suess, E., 2005. Chemoherms on hydrate ridge — unique microbially-mediated carbonate build-ups growing into the water column. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 227 (1–3), 67–85. Teske, A., Hinrichs, K.U., Edgcomb, V., Gomez, A.D., Kysela, D., Sylva, S.P., Sogin, M.L., Jannasch, H.W., 2002. Microbial diversity of hydrothermal sediments in the Guaymas Basin: evidence for anaerobic methanotrophic communities. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 68 (4), 1994–2007. Thiel, V., Peckmann, J., Seifert, R., Wehrung, P., Reitner, J., Michaelis, W., 1999. Highly isotopically depleted isoprenoids: molecular markers for ancient methane venting. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 63 (23–24), 3959–3966. Thiel, V., Peckmann, J., Richnow, H.H., Luth, U., Reitner, J., Michaelis, W., 2001. Molecular signals for anaerobic methane oxidation in Black Sea seep carbonates and a microbial mat. Marine Chemistry 73 (2), 97–112. Veizer, J., 1983. Trace elements and isotopes in sedimentary carbonates. In: Reeder, R.J. (Ed.), Carbonates: mineralogy and geochemistry. In: Reviews in Mineralogy, vol. 11. Mineralogical Society of America, pp. 265–299. Wallmann, K., Aloisi, G., Haeckel, M., Obzhirov, A., Pavlova, G., Tishchenko, P., 2006. Kinetics of organic matter degradation, microbial methane generation, and gas hydrate formation in anoxic marine sediments. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 70 (15), 3905–3927. Wallmann, K., Aloisi, G., Haeckel, M., Tishchenko, P., pavlova, G., Greinert, J., Kutterolf, S., Eisenhauer, A., 2008. Silicate weathering in anoxic marine sediments. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 72, 3067–3090. Whiticar, M.J., 1999. Carbon and hydrogen isotope systematics of bacterial formation and oxidation of methane. Chemical Geology 161 (1–3), 291–314. Worden, R.H., Barclay, S.A., 2000. Internally-sourced quartz cement due to externallyderived CO in sub-arkosic sandstones, North Sea. Journal of Geochemical Exploration 69–70, 645–649. Worden, R.H., Morad, S., 2000. Quartz cementation in oil ﬁeld sandstones: a review of the key controversies. In: Worden, R., Morad, S. (Eds.), Quartz cementation in Sandstones. In: Spec. Publs. Int. Ass. Sediment., vol. 29. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 1–20. Zachos, J.C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E., Billups, K., 2001. Trends, rhythms, and aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science 292, 686–693.

HOLOCENE SANDSPITS ALONG THE PRESENT STRANDZHA SHELF (6TH-5TH – MID-1ST MILLENNIUM BC) Athanas Orachev “Black Sea Strandja” Association e-mail: aso_1953@abv.bg Over the last few years, numerous publications have appeared that discussed the Holocene paleography of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast (see last Hristova 2006, 2007; Христова 2011; cf. Юрковец on the Black Sea region, 2010, 2011 and loc. there ref.). Generally, these works are based on the data from „Геологическая эволюция западной части Черноморской котловины в неоген-четвертичное время” (The Geological Evolution of the Western Part of the Black Sea Basin during the Neogene-Quaternary Period), symposium-proceedings, published in Sofia in 1990. In turn, this data summarizes the information acquired through many years of research and published in corpora such as „Геологическая история Черного моря по результатам глубоководного бурения” (1980), „Геолого-геофизические исследования болгарского сектора Черного моря” (1980), „Геология и гидрология западной части Черного моря” (1979), and the US “Drilling Project” (Initial reports of DSDP 42.1-2). The review of research on the topic to date shows that the Holocene deposits and the upper cretaceous sub-aquatic rock slopes along the Strandzha shelf have not been studied properly and the conclusion that “The depression in front of the Medni Rid-Strandzha coast is characterized by low amounts of Holocene deposits from 3 to 9 m” is only hypothetical, as evident from the “Scheme of Distribution of Holocene Depths” (Krastev et al. 1990: 407, pic. No 6). Even an undisputed contribution such as the fixation of the paleo-valleys of the Ropotamo, Dyavolska and Karaagach rivers (Черкезова 1994; Cherkezova 1994 – see Fig. 1) needs refinement. The general orographic scheme (Krastev, 1990:401, pic. No 4) is not quite reliable. The basic statements about the old sea terraces and the deposits over them are questionable as well (Христова 2011; Hristova 2007 and ref.). The geomorphological map of the Strandzha coast also needs a revision (Fig. 2). The present state of paleographic research on the coast of Strandzha is the result of traditionalist views (Popov, Mishev 1974) combined with a rudimentary knowledge on the terrace sequence of the Strandzha shelf (Parlichev, Nikolov1977, with errors in the map attached). This influences attempts to summarize the information as in V. Peichev’s “Morphodynamic and Lithodynamic Processes in the Coastal Zone” (Varna, 2004), and V. Peichev’s, and P. Peev’s “Evolution of the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast After the Early Holocene” (Varna, 2004). The recently obtained data about the additional sedimentation and clusterization in the Ahtopol bay of Lardigo, the mouth of the Veleka river, Butamyata and Silistar Bays (Orachev 2012, 2013 and ref.), in turn marked out the necessity to revise some basic ideas about the local paleography. As a matter of fact, the necessity for such a revision became clear as early as the 1970s, when the first data for the existence of prehistoric settlements in the aquatory of Atiya and Sozopol were published (Лазаров 1975; Lazarov 1974; Dimitrov 1975), followed by similar discoveries in the bays in front of the Ropotamo and Karaagach rivers (Angelova, Draganov 2006 – see most recently the review by Gyuzelev 2008 and ref.).

The fundamental question here is how and why these Eneolithic and Bronze Age settlements survived until the present instead of being dispersed by the actions of the surf. Therefore, one of the primary tasks currently should be to check the theory about the existence of ancient sandspits that blocked the present-day bays (Orachev, 2002, 2012, 2013 and ref., cf. Lazarov 2009 and ref., Stoev 1997 and ref.).

Figure 1. Isobaths on the Topographic Map, scale 1:25 000

100

Figure 2. The Paleo-valleys Between the Maslen Nos Cape and Rezovo *** Publications that discuss certain aspects of the paleography of coastal Strandzha (Cherkezova 1994, Petzold 1995, Orachev 2002 and ref.) have been used in recent scientific research according to the attitude, goals and knowledge of their authors (see last Gyuzelev 2008). Also, several new paleographic maps of the settlement aquatories were published recently (Preisinger, Aslanian, and Heinitz 2000-2001), whilst the precise measurements by a team of Bulgarian geophysicists (Georgiev, Stoev, Velkovsky 2006) confirmed the criticism (Орачев 2013). The Centre for Underwater Archaeology in Sozopol made a new beginning with the application of novel technologies and the involvement of specialists for digital predictive modeling in the research of the Primorsko and Kiten bays (Prahov et al. 2011). Digital predictive modeling is very promising both from paleographic and from historicalarchaeological aspects, since the evolution of a given coastal strip is determined by multiple factors. The precise measuring of the cliffs of the shelf- and coastal terraces is fundamental and the geological history of a given area should always be taken into consideration. Decisive here appears to be the subaquatic higher-level paleovolcanic activity, which is responsible for the specifics of the local littoral area. If the Borouna peninsula (together with Cape Maslen Nos) was not formed by upper-cretaceous syenites, monzosyenites, and middle-base vulcanites and tuffs, then the present coastal strip and bays would have had a different appearance – they would have been poorly articulated and leveled by the abrasions of the middle-miocene limestones and gravelites, as is the case with the Tsarevo coast. The old marine- (now land) terraces of particular importance are those which the Russian geomorphology calls “staro-“ and “mladokaragantska” (old and new Caragant) (Попов, Мишев 1974; cf. Димитров et al. 1998; Пейчев 1998; Пейчев, Пеев 2006). The terrace with correlative parameters of 20 to 25 m above sea-level to the south of Cape Maslen Nos shapes a considerable number of the capes in the region and the towns of Primorsko, Kiten, and Lozenets, and parts of Tsarevo, Varvara, Achtopol and Sinemorets are situated on it. The second terrace (10 to 14 m above sea-level) to the north of Tsarevo is relatively unstable, since it cuts into slanting limestones and calcareous sandstones (Fig. 2).

101

To the south of Tsarevo however, it is more stable, since its base is formed by uppercretaceous rocks. Nevertheless, marks of quite active neotectonic processes are easily traced there. To the south of Lozenets (down to Varvara), a considerable displacement is visible, due to landslide processes. The landslides here are the result of waterlogging of delluvial or delluvial-proluvial covers that slide over the clays and bedrocks. On the other side, the present Varvara coast down to Rezovo is formed by upper-cretaceous, intermediate basic vulcanites and tuffs, and only on the Ahtopol peninsula of St. George there are layers of intermediate littoral shell, oolitic and sandy limestones, and gravelites. Therefore, abrasion has prevailed in the area during the last 10 000 years and no considerable accumulation formations are to be found, compared to features such as the sand beaches and dunes near Primorsko that can generally be regarded as the result of such processes (Orachev 2013). The coastal specifics, the nature of the currents and the wind factor are the reason why a relatively big sandy beach is to be found only at the Lardigo bay. These observations explain why there are such fundamental differences in the present coastal strip of the Primorsko Municipality, compared to the one of Tsarevo and why big sandy strips (with the exception of the Lardigo bay and the relatively small sandy beaches in the mouths of the Veleka and the Boutamja/Potamja Rivers) reappear only to the south of the Rezovska River. Amongst the reasons for this specific coastal situation are the results of the activities of underwater paleo-volcanoes during the Upper Cretaceous period (Orachev 2012 and ref.). Due to the regression of the Black Sea, by the end of the Pleistocene the link with the Mediterranean was broken, to be renewed again during the Holocene. Then, under the influence of eustatics (see last Юрковец 2010; 2011; Yurkovets 2013 and ref., and Fig. 3), and the epeirogenic movements of the land and shelf during the Pleistocene, a series of sea terraces was formed and then reshaped along the Strandzha coast at relative heights of 95100, 55-60, 35-40, 22-25, 10-12 and at 4-5 m above sea-level. Having in mind that the Black Sea level was at the present 90-100-110 isobath during the Ice Age, we should conclude that the respective shelf terrace system is now underwater. Its precise localization and study is a forthcoming scientific task. A considerable number of old river terraces are also underwater and the currently known and discussed submerged prehistoric settlements are situated on them. Bulgarian geomorphologists still accept the fixationist thesis, that “During the Quaternary, the formation of the terrace complex in the Black Sea area was determined mainly by climatic factors (icing and warming), and the break and renewal of the link to the World Ocean” (see Димитров, Михова, Пейчев 1998: 136 and ref.). This thesis is valid also for the notions about the evolution of the so-called firths and lagoons (see Мишев, Попов 1974; cf. Пейчев, Пеев 2006 and ref.). There are no geomorphological or archaeological analyses so far on the possibility of sandspits being accumulated and later destroyed that could block coastal basins along the present shelf in the past. Their formation would be specific for the different parts of the Southern Black Sea coast, due to the dynamics of the present vertical fluctuation of land and shelf. The seismic-tectonic- and landslide processes resulting from them would have also had an influence, especially for the Strandzha coast, where the formation of the present coastal basins is still to be traced and dated. The available information points us not to a Prehistoric or Ancient, but rather to a Medieval date (Орачев 2002 and ref.).

102

Figure 3. Geomorphological Map of the Strandzha Coast The movement of the coastal strip is determined by the eustatics, the present differential vertical (epeirogene) fluctuations of the land and shelf, the microtectonics, the accumulation, the abrasion, the landslide processes, as well as by other factors. Ten millennia BP, it began its movement from the present depths of about -90 (down to -100, 110 m) and since the 6th millennium BC, settlements from the Neolithic, Eneolithic, Bronze, Early Iron Age, even to Classical Antiquity occupied the respective terraces – mostly (now submerged) river terraces. At this point, the paleo-geographic situation is the following: During the late Neolithic period, the Strandzha coastal strip fluctuated around the present-day -40 m isobath. According to geomorphologists, by that time lower Holocene deposits were being accumulated, characterized by a complex of mollusks and diatomic algae of mixed character – from estuarine to marine forms (Шимкус et al. 1979; Сорокин, Куприн 2007 and ref.). The absolute dating of these sediments along the Bulgarian Black

103

Sea coast (Димитров 1982 and ref.) is between 5480 and 4480 BC (non-calibrated С14 data). In order to trace the coastal strip at that period, it is necessary to find out what remained from old accumulative forms. In most cases, those are sandspits formed between the 6th and the first half of the 5th millennium BC that have blocked the river mouths. These sandspits may have outlined the coast during the early Eneolithic as well, using the upper cretaceous rock slopes for a fundament. Some researchers assume that the formation of coastal firths had started as early as towards the end of the early Holocene transgression i.e. during the late Eneolithic (Shopov et al. 1992). Materials from the Durankulak lake were published, carbon-dated to 4170 BC (non-calibrated C14 data), and the peat layers together with the changes registered in the gastropod fauna, show a break and subsequent renewal of the link between the lakes and the sea. Carbon dates however, should be calibrated and observations should be considered carefully, and only regarding that part of the Dobroudzha coast which has specific tectonics (Orachev 1990 and ref.). The situation along the coast of Strandzha is quite different, as both land and shelf sink during the entire Holocene (Орачев 1984/1990, 2002). The submerged settlements discovered here were not coastal, as some archaeologists and geomorphologists think (see Димитров, Михова, Пейчев 1998 and ref.; Лазаров 2007 and ref.), but occupied nonfloodable river terraces. They were located at a considerable distance from the coastal strip, the location of which is yet to be determined in the respective areas. During the Bronze Age, settlements emerged both at the mouth of the Ropotamo River and at the South bay of Kiten, the layers of which have not been dispersed by the activities of the surf (Draganov 1995; Орачев 2013 and ref.). The same applies to the settlement in the bay of Sozopol (Angelova, Draganov 2003 and ref.) which indicates the presence of relatively more substantial sandspits at that location. These sandspits blocked the present-day inlets even during the 3rd millennium BC, when they were situated around the present -20 m isobath. Geomorphologists have studied sediments from deep-sea sondages in the area, that show the presence of stenohaline mollusk colonies, and estuarine mollusks within lake sediments, bearing non-calibrated C14 dates between 2200 and 1400 BC. Currently we can accept that the Early Bronze Age sandspits along the Strandzha coast were dispersed by the sea currents after the 17th c. BC (Orachev 2013). During the Bronze Age, the sandspits along the Strandzha coast had already descended to the -8 / -12 isobath. They were observed by the first ancient Greek settlers, who arrived in the region around the last decades of the 7th c BC. At that time, the presentday sheltered bays did not yet exist and this was one of the main reasons for the Greek settlers not to colonize the area until the 5th B.C. General conclusions: 1.

Upper cretaceous sub-aquatic rock slopes are abundant in the inlets to the south of Cape Maslen Nos. They develop across those inlets and could have served as foundation for relict sandspits. It is possible that those sandspits were destroyed as a result of earthquakes, under the influence of the activity of the substantial rift, noted on the newest neo-tectonic map of Bulgaria made by the team of Prof. Zhivko Ivanov.

The rock slopes, known and detected by geomorphologists during underwater observations in the 1970s and visible on old aerial photographs from 1963 and 1971 (Fig. 4-7) are found at different depths, because of the character of the local epeirogene movements and seismic processes. Those around the -20 m isobath must have served as a base for sandspits, that existed between the 3rd and 2nd

104

millennium BC, and the ones around the -10 m isobath – between the mid-2nd and the mid-1st millennium BC. 3.

The processing of the information on these rock slopes in the respective inlets, acquired recently by the Centre for Underwater Archaeology in Sozopol, is a promising task, which would allow us to refine our knowledge about the basic stages in the evolution of the coastal basins and the sunken river terraces, where the local settlements from the Bronze and Early Iron Ages were situated.

Figure 4. Caspian-Black Sea-Mediterranean Climatic, Archaeological, and Paleogeographic Correlations (based on Юрковец 2010, 2011)

105

Figure 4.1

Figure 5. Absolute C14 Dating of Bottom Black Sea Sediments (non-calibrated) (based on Sorokin, Couprin, 2007)

106

Figure 6. Aerial Photograph of the South Bay of Primorsko

Figure 7. Aerial Photographs of the Achtopol Inlets

107

Figure 7.1

108

Figure 8. Aerial Photograph of the bay in front of the Mouth of the Veleka River

Figure 9. Aerial Photograph of the Bay of Silistar

109

Figure 9.1

Figure 10. A segment of the Neotectonic Map of Bulgaria (based on Ivanov et al. 2008)

110

References Aksu, А., T. Calon , D. Piper et al. 1992 Architecture of late orogenic Quaternary basins in northeastern Mediterranean Sea. – Tectonophysics 210, 191-213 Aksu, А., T. Calon , D. Piper et al. 1992a Quaternary sedimentary history of Adana, Cilicia and Iskenderun Basins: northeast Mediterranean Sea. - Marine Geology 104, 55-71. Angelova, Hr. V. Draganov 2006 Underwater Archaeological Excavations of Submerged Late Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlements in Kiten and Sozopol (South Bulgarian Black Sea Coast) – Thracia Pontika 6.2. Degens, E., A. Paluska 1979 Tectonic and climatic pulses recorded in Quaternary sediment of the Caspian, Black Sea region. - Sediment geol. 23, 149-163. Degens, E., D. Ross (eds.) 1974 The Black sea Geology, Chemistry and Biology. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Mem. Vol. 20. Tulsa, Oklahoma (USA). Demirbag, E., E. Gokacan E., F. Oktay et al. 1999 The last sea level changes in the Black sea: evidence from the seismic data. - Marine Geology 157, 249-265. Dimitrov, B. 1975 Beobachtungen über die Antike Topographie der Südlichen Schwarzmeerküste. Studia Balcanica 10, 11-18. Ergin, M., M. Okyar, K. Timur 1992 Seismic stratigraphy and late Quaternary sediments in inner and mid-shelf areas of eastern Mersin Bay, Northeastern Maditerranean Sea. - Marine Geology 104, 73-91. Filipova M., R. Hristova, E. Bozilova 2004 Palaeoecological conditions in the Bulgarian Black sea zone during the Quaternary. - Journal of Environmental Micropalaeontology, Microbiology and Meiobentology 1, 136-154. Filipova M., R. Hristova 2001 Sea level fluctuations in the western part of the Black Sea during the Holocene. - Compt. rend. bulg. Acad. Sci. 54 (5), 59-64. Georgiev,M., D. Stoev, K. Velkovsky 2006 Geomorphologic development of the Bay of Sozopol. - – Thracia Pontica 6.2, Georgiev, M., A. Petkov, D. Stoev, K. Velkovski 1994 Geophysical prospecting of the aquatoria of the Southern Black Sea coast aimed at reconstructing of the paleorelief. - Thracia Pontica 5, 317328. Gyuzelev, M. 2008 The West Pontic Coast between Emine Cap and Byzantion during the First millennium BC. Burgas. Harvey, Ch., J. Press 1996 Databases in Historical Research: Theory, Methods, and Applications. London. Hristova, R. 2006. Palaeogeographical reconstruction of the Bulgarian Black Sea shelf and coastal zone during the Quaternary. - Compt. rend. bulg. Acad. Sci. 59(12), 1277-1284. Hristova, R. 2007 Marine Holocene sediments from the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. - Compt. rend. bulg. Acad. Sci. 60 (4), 429-434. Hristova, R. 2007 New data on the Karangatian (Pleistocen ) sediments from the Bulgarian Black Sea shelf. - Compt. rend. bulg. Acad. Sci. 60 (3), 299- 302. Hsu, K., L. Montadert et al. 1978 Initial reports of DSDP. 42.1. Hsu, K. 1978 Stratigraphy of the lacustrine sedimentation in the Black sea. – In: Initial reports of the DSDP. 42.2, 509-524.

111

Jones, G., A. Garnon 1994 Radiocarbon chronology of Black sea sediments. - Deep-Sea Res. 41.3, 531-557. Keller, J., W. Ryan, D.Ninkouich, R. Altherr 1978 Explosive volcanic activity in the Mediterranean over the past 200000 years as recorded in deep-sea sediments. - Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull., 89.4, 591-604. Lazarov, M. 1974 Localités prégrecques sur le littoral de la Mer Noirе au sud du Balkan. - Thracia 3, Primus congressus studiorum Thracicorum. Sofia, 107-113. Mardin, Y. 1995 Bosphorus through the Ages. Ankara. Okyar M., V.. Ediger, M. Ergin 1994 Seismic stratigraphy of the southeastern Black sea shelf from high resolution seismic records. - Marine Geology121, 213-230. Petzold, C. 1995 Neue Erkentnise zur jung quärteren Entwicklungsgeschichtre der südlichen Schwarzmeerküste. – Kölner Geographische Arbeiten 66, 35-46. Porotov, А., T. Yanina, Y. Gorlov 2005 Climate and sea-level changes along the north-eastern black sea coast. – In: Black Sea – Mediterranean corridor during the last 30 ky: sea level change and human adaptation. Istanbul, 77–79. Preisinger, Ant., S. Aslanian, W.-D. Heinitz 2000-2001 Geomorphological Develop of Develoment of the Bay of Sozopol, Bulgaria (Black Sea). – ИНМ-Варна 36-37, 9-18. Rangin C., A. Bader et al. 2002 Deep structure of the Mid Black Sea High (offshore Turkey) imaged by multi-channel seismic survey (BLACKSIS cruise). - Marine Geology 182, 265-278. Ross, D. 1978 Summary of results of Black sea drilling. - In: Initial reports of the DSDP 42.2., 11491175. Ross D.A., Neprochnov Y.P. et al. 1978 Initial reports of DSDP. Washington, 1978, v.42. Shimkus, K., E. Trimonis E. 1974 Modern sedimentation in Black sea.- In: The Black Sea -geology, chemistry and biology. Tulsa, Oklahoma (USA), 249-279. Shopov, V., E. Bozilova, D. Yankova 1992 Biosratigraphy and radiocarbon dataof the Upper Quaternary sediments of the Black Sea. – Geologica Balcanica 22.2, 59-69. Stoffers, P., E. Degens, E. Trimonis 1978 Stratigraphy and suggested ages of Black sea sediments cored during Leg 42B. – In: Initial reports of the DSDP 42.2., 483-488. Velkov, V. 1986 Archäologische Unterwasserforschungen in Bulgarien. - Klio 27, 283-296. Winguth C., H. Wong, N. Panin et al. 2000 Upper Quaternary water level history and sedimentation in the northwestern Black sea. - Marine geology 167, 127-146. Woodside, J., M. Ivanov, A. Limonov 1997 Neotectonics and fluid flow through seaflow sediments in the Eastern Meditettanean and Black sea. Parts 1.2. IOC technical series 48. UNESCO. Айбулатов, H.A., Ф. Щербаков 2001 Черное море. – В: Геоэкология берегов и шельфов морей России. Москва, 166-213. Ангелова, Хр. 2000 40 години подводна археология в България. - ИНМ-Бургас 3, 42-49. Антонова, В., А. Хоменко 2006 К вопросу о новочерноморской трансгресии АзовоЧерноморского бассейна. – In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the “Late Cenozoic Geological History of the North of the Arid Zone”. Moscow State University, AzovRostov-on-Don, 18–20. Банушев, Б. 2002 Нови данни за горнокредните субаквални вулканити от южното черноморско крайбрежие. - Минно дело и геология, 7-8, 34-40. ГИЧРГБ 1980 Геологическая история Черного моря по результатам глубоководного бурения

112

(под ред. Ю. П. Непрочнова). Москва. ГГЗЧЧМ 1979 Геология и гидрология западной части Черного моря. София. ГГИБСЧМ 1980 Геолого-геофизические исследования болгарского сектора Черного моря. София, 1980. Горлов, Ю., А. Поротов, Е. Столярова 2004 К оценке изменении уровня Черного моря в античний период по археолого-палеогеографическим данным. – В: Древности Боспора 7, 117-128. Гроздев, Д. 2007 Средномногогодишни и екстремални вълнови условия в българската прибрежна зона на Черно море. – В: Втора национална научно-практическа конференция по управление в извънредни ситуации и защита на населението. София, 283-289. Гюзелев, М. 2009 Западният Понт между Емине и Босфора през първото хилядолеие пр.Хр. Бургас. Димитров, П. 1982 Радиовъглеродни датировки на дънни утайки от българския черноморски шелф. – Океанология, 9, 45-53. Димитров П., Д. Димитров, Д. Солаков, В. Пейчев 2005 Новейшая геологическая история Черного моря и проблема потопа. – В: Геология и полезные ископаемые Мирового океана 1 (Киев), 102-111. Димитров, П., Ел. Михова, В. Пейчев 1998 Палеоокеаножки реконструкции на западната част на Черно море през кватернера. – Трудове на Института по екеанология 2, 127-139. Желев, В., Б. Вълчев, Кр. Кършева, Д. Съчков 2012 Геотопите „Устието на река Велека” и „Силистар – основа на един естествен геопарк по палеовулканолоия. - ГМГУ 55, Св. 1 (Геология и геофизика), 21-29. Желев, В. 2006 Геоложки феномени – Силистар. - Геология и минерални ресурси, 5, 2-9. Желев, В. 2006а Геоложки феномени - Устието на река Велека. - Геология и минерални ресурси, 6, 4-11. Каплин, П., A. Поротов, T. Янина 2005 Колебания уровня Черного моря в позднем голоцене. - В: КВАРТЕР-2005. Материалы IV Всероссийского совещания по изучению четвертичного периода. Сыктывкар, 172–173. Карайотов, Ив. 1988 Подводни проучвания в залива пред устието на река Ропотамо. - В: Странджанско–Сакарски сборник 4, 357-360. Карайотов, Ив. 1990: Подводни археологически проучвания в залива пред устието на Ропотамо през 1989. - АОР през 1989, 35, 178–179. Конюхов А., М. Иванов, Л. Кульницкий 1988 Глубоководный конус выноса Дуная и фации слагающих его осадков. - Вестник МГУ. Сер. Геология. 4, 28-39. Крыстев, Т., А. Свиточ и др. 1990 (ред.) Геологическая еволюция западной части Черного моря в неоген-четвертичное время. София. Куприн, П., В. Георгиев, С. Чочов и др. 1985 Литофациальная характеристика и расчленение разрезов верхнечетвертичных осадков континентального склона западной и восточной части Черного моря. – Океанология (БАН), 13; 37-51. Куприн, П., В. Сорокин 1982 Отражение в разрезе четвертичных осадков изменений уровня Черного моря. – В: Изменение уровня моря. Москва, 221-226. Куприн, П., В. Сорокин, П. Димитров 1980 Основы расчленения и типы разрезов позднечетвертичных осадков континентальной террасы. - В: Геолого-геофизические

113

исследования Болгарского сектора Черного моря. София, 1980, 188-202. Куприн, П., В. Сорокин, Л. Потапова Л.И. и др. 1982 Голоценовое осадконакопление во внутриконтинентальных морях. – В: Проблемы четвертичной истории шельфов. Москва, 33-50. Куприн, П., Ф. Щербаков, А. Поляков 1980 Влияние литологического состава на физикомеханические свойства плиоцен-четвертичных отложений. – В: Геологическая история Черного моря по результатам глубоководного бурения. Москва, 166-173. Лазаров, М. 2009 Древното корабоплаване по Западното Черноморие. Варна. Лазаров, М. 2000 Българското Черноморие проучванията. – ИНМ- Бургас 3, 23-41.

през

архаичния

период.

Състояние

на

Лазаров, М. 1975 Потъналата флотилия. Варна. Лещаков, П. 2002 Теренни обхождания в землищата на с. Резово и с. Синеморец през 2001 г. АОР през 2001, 41, 36-38. Маляков, Й., Х. Белмустакова 1999 Петроложки и петроструктурни особености на Силистарския плутон, Югоизточна Странджа. – Геохимия, минералогия и петрология 36, 29-44. Марков, Хр., Д. Костичкова 1980 О динамике водных масс в зоне шельфа. – В: Геологогеографическое исследование болгарского сектора Черного моря. София, 179-187. Невесская, Л. 1965 Позднечетвертичные двустворчатые моллюски Черного моря, их систематика и экология. – Тр. Палеонт. института, 105. Невесский, E. 1967 Процессы осадкообразования в прибрежной зоне моря. Москва. Никишин, А. М. Коротаев, С. Болотов, А. Ершов 2001 Тектоническая история Черноморского бассейна. - Бюлл. МОИП. Отд. Геол. 2001, 76.3, 3-17. Николаев, С. и др. 1980 Об абсолютном возрасте позднечетвертичных осадков шелфа. – В: Геолого-географическое исследование болгарского сектора Черного моря. София, 223228. Орачев, Ат. 2013 Историческа информатика на община Приморско (предварителни материали). - www.morskivestnik.com/mor_kolekcii/izsledwaniq/ Орачев, Ат. 2012 Историческа информатика Ахтопол www.morskivestnik.com/mor_kolekcii/izsledwaniq/

неговото

землище.

–

Орачев, Ат. 2011 Приноси към историята, археологията и географията на Анхиало. - В: Поморие – древност и съвремие 1, 132-169. Орачев, Ат. 2002 Приноси към палеогеографията и историята на Бургас. - ИНМ-Бургас 4 (Studia in honorem Ivani Karayotov), 236-259. Орачев, Ат. 1993 Аполония Понтика. - В: Кратка енциклопедия тракийска древност. София. Орачев, Ат. 1990 Приноси към палеогеографията на Добруджанското крайбрежие”. - Добруджа 7, 32-52. Орачев 1894/1990 Странджанското крайбрежие и Евксинския Понт до V в.пр.н.е. – В: П. Колев, Д. Попов, Ат. Орачев (съст и ред.) Странджа – древност и съвремие. София 1990, 344365. Пейчев, В. 2004 Морфодинамични и литодинамични процеси в бреговата зона. Варна. Пейчев, В., Пр. Пеев 2006 Еволюция на Българското черноморско крайбрежие след ранния холоцен. Варна. Пейчев, В., 1998 Абразионният процес на Българския черноморски бряг. - В: Брегоукрепване и

114

дълготрайно стабилизиране на склоновете на Черноморското крайбрежие. София. Петрова, А., Х. Дабовски, Л. Михайлова, С. Савов, Г. Чаталов 1995 Обяснителна записка към геоложката карта на България в М 1:100000 (картен лист Царево, н. Силистар, Малко Търново, Резово). - КГМР, „Геология и геофизика” АД. Петрова, А., Х. Дабовски, С. Савов, Г. Чаталов 1992 Геоложка карта на България е М 1:100000 (картен лист Царево, н. Силистар, Малко Търново, Резово). - КГМР, ПГПГК. Петрунова, Л., Димитрова, Т., Димитров, Й., Маляков, Й. 2010 Нови палиноложки находки от Югоизточна Странджа планина. - В: Сб. Разширени резюмета „Геонауки 2010”. БГД, 8283. Поротов, А., О. Парунин, Т. Янина 2006. Палеогеография Таманского залива в эпоху греческой колонизации. – В: Позднекайнозойская геологическая история севера аридной зоны. Ростов-на-Дону, 130–133. Попов, Вл., К. Мишев 1974 Геоморфология на Бъл-гарското черноморско крайбрежие и шелф. София. Поротов, А., О. Парунин, Т. Янина 2002 Палеогеография северо-восточного сектора Черного моря в голоцене. - В: Всероссийское совещание по изучению четвертичного периода, материалы. Смоленск, 19-20. Прахов, Н., Хр. Ангелова, А. Коцев, А. Попов, С. Димитров 2011 Прогнозно моделиране в археологията: световна практика и български перспективи. – Bulgarian e – Journal of Archaeology, 1, 71-121 (http://be-ja.org/). Пърличев, Д., Х. Николов 1977 Подводни тераси пред Странджанския бряг. - Океанология, 2, 95-99. Пърличев, Д., Х. Марков 1971 Депресия на дъното край българския бряг на Черно море. Природа, 2, 31 - 34. Родев, Ц. 1985 Отвъд синия праг – експедиция Космос. София. Свиточ А., А. Селиванов, Т. Янина 1998 Палеогеографические собития плейстоцена ПонтоКаспия и Средиземноморья. Москва. Соловьева, H., В. Сорокин 1993 Генетическая типизация позднечетвертичных осадков восточной окраины Черного моря. - Стратиграфия. Геологическая корреляция, 2, 45-54. Сорокин, В., П. Димитров, В. Лукша 1980 Типы позднечетвертичных осадков на континентальной террасе. – В: Геолого-геофизические исследования болгарского сектора Черного моря. София, 230-237. Сорокин, В., В. Соколов 1992 О цикличности осадконакопления в Черном море в позднечетвертичное время. - Литол. и полезн. Ископаемые, 3, 115-120. Сорокин, В., В. Лукша, Л. Пирумова, В. Соколов 1992 О позднечетвертичных диатомовых осадках Черного моря. - Литол. и полезн. ископаемые, 5, 113-118. Сорокин, В. 2003 Четвертичное осадконакопление во внутриконтинентальных морях. - Вест. Моск. Ун-та. Сер. 4. Геология, 3, 50-64. Сорокин, В., П. Куприн 2007 О характере подема уровня Черного моря. – Вестник Москоского университета, сер. 4 Геология, 5, 40-46. Федоров, П. 2000 Отражение киматических событии плейстоцена в геологической истории Черного моря. – Стратиграфия. Геологическая коррелация 8.5, 74-81. Федоров, П. 1978 Плейстоцен Понто-Каспия. Москва. Хаин, В. 2001 Тектоника континентов и океанов. Москва.

115

Христов, Р. 1966 Морски тераси по крайбрежието на Черно море в района Бургас–Несебър. – ГВМГИ 12, 1965/1966, 75-77. Христова, Р. 2011 Промени на климата и морското ниво през кватернерната еволюция на Черно море. - www.su-varna.org/izdanij/MNauki-2011/pages_61_66.pdf Хрисчев, X., В. Шопов 1979 Морской плейстоцен Бургасского залива и проблема соотношния узунларских и карангатских слоев. - Geologica Balcanica 9.2, 69-84. Чаталов, Г. 1990 Геология на Странджанската зона в България. София. Черкезова, Ем. 1994 Палеохидроложка еволюция на долинните системи на реките Китенска, Дяволска и Ропотамо през късноледниково време и холоцена. – ГСУ-ГГФ 85.2, 101-120. Шимкус, К., Е. Емельянов, Э. Тримонис 1975 Донные отложения и черты позднечетвертичной истории Черного моря. – В: Земная кора и история развития Черноморской впадины. Москва, 138-163. Шимкус, К., Н. Комаров, И. Гракова 1979 К стратиграфии губоководных верхнечетвертичных осадков Черного моря. – Океанология (Москва) 18.4, 675-678. Шопов, В. 1993- Стратиграфия на кватернерните седименти в българския черноморски шелф. – СпБГД 54.1, 83-97. Юрковец, В. 2011 Климатические корелации. – Вестник Росийской Академии ДНК-генеалогии. – 4(1), 66-80. Юрковец, В. 2010 Климатические корелации. – Вестник Росийской Академии ДНК-генеалогии. – 3(2), 301-325. Янина, Т., Р. Макшаев, Д. Хомченко 2013 Развитие бассейнов Понто-Каспия в условиях последнего климатического макроцикла. – В: Природная среда Черноморского региона за последние 30 тысяч лет: от прошлого к прогнозирвоанию будущего. Одеса, 162-167. Яранов, Д. 1939 Средиземноморските земи. 3. София (отд. отп. – ГСУ–ИГФ).

116

ARCHAEOLOGICAL PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR LATE CHALCOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE COASTAL SETTLEMENTS ALONG THE SOUTHERN BULGARIAN BLACK SEA COAST Nayden Prahov Centre for Underwater Archaeology, 1 Apollonia St., Sozopol 8130, e-mail: cuasozopol@mail.bg; naydenprahov@yahoo.com Along the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast have been registered numerous partly or completely submerged archaeological sites from Late Chalcolithic Age1 (LCA) and Early Bronze Age (EBA): settlements, necropolises and artifacts. Almost all of them have been found during building or dredging activities from the 1960s to the 1980s, in a period of serious state control of these activities. Although the investment projects along the coast (building of new- and maintenance of old harbours extraction of raw materials, dredging of the seafloor and the coastal lakes, etc.) increased in the beginning of 21st century, no such sites have been declared and registered. One of the concerns of archaeologists is that the reason for this is that private entrepreneurs may be hiding information about such discoveries, deliberately destroying archaeological sites or ignoring the cultural heritage. The Center for Underwater Archaeology (CUA) under the Ministry of Culture is the Bulgarian cultural institute responsible for the protection, preservation, research and communication of the underwater cultural heritage in Bulgaria. In 2008 CUA launched a research project entitled “Development of Predictive Models for the Identification of Underwater Archaeological Sites along the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast in GIS Environment”. Its ultimate goal was, by means of Predictive modeling, to enhance and support the protection, preservation and study of the Bulgarian underwater cultural heritage, especially its most vulnerable part – the numerous still undiscovered sites, which stay unknown and invisible on the seabed, and are under permanent threat due to the numerous investment projects and different destructive activities along the coast: building and dredging, extraction of row materials, anchoring, looting, polluting, etc. The project was financed by the Bulgarian Science Fund under the Ministry of Education and Science. Project partners were the Department of Cartography and GIS and the Department of Archaeology at Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”. The project is pioneering with the application of Airborne Lidar Bathymetry in Underwater Archaeology, with the first Bathymetric Lidar scanning in the Black sea and also with the introduction of Predictive modeling to Bulgarian Archaeology. Below will be presented some of the project results concerning the development of a predictive model for LCA and EBA coastal settlements2. Predictive Modeling Archaeological Predictive Modeling is a scientific field that encompasses different methods, methodologies and approaches the goal of which is to predict the location of archaeological sites or to divide a study area into zones with different probability for presence of archaeological sites. Predictions are based either on observed patterns, on assumptions 1 2

Late Copper Age The person behind the Project idea and organization was Mrs. Hristina Angelova, Director of CUA.

117

about past human behavior or the interactions between human activities and nature (Kohler and Parker 1986; Sebastian and Judge 1988), or on knowledge about the distribution of artifacts by natural processes. Predictive modeling is a complex spatial analysis which combines various geographic and other data. It is conducted by the means of specialized GIS (Geographic Information System) software and appropriate hardware. The Model presented below was executed with ESRIS’s ArcMap software with Spatial Analyst application. Predictive Modeling Underwater Predictive Modeling already has a 40 year history. Although it has a background of hundreds of case studies for terrestrial sites (mostly in USA, Canada and Western Europe) (Dalla Bona, 1994), its application underwater has been limited to several projects. Some of them proved quite successful. Topographical models were used for the location of Mesolithic occupation areas and fishermen’s places along the prehistoric coast of Denmark, submerged due to sea level rise in Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene. The models were developed in the 1980s and later by A. Fisher on the base of archaeological data and ethnographical information about the fishing habits of the coastal population in the near past. The underwater verification field survey showed that sites existed in at least 80% of the places which were considered to have a high probability in the predictive model. At the remaining 20% of the ‘high probability’ locations, the intensive sedimentation process had covered the prehistoric landscapes and the verification of predictions by means of non destructive diving surveys was rendered impossible (Fischer, 1995, 371-384). Another successful model was developed by M. Faught from 1986 onward, for the location of habitation and activity areas of the Prehistoric population in the submerged Aquila river valley, Florida, USA. Since this area was first inhabited in eleventh millennium BPE by Clovis tribes the sea level has risen about 40 meters and inundated a strip more than 10 km wide in some areas. The predictive models based on the established settlement pattern identified areas with overlapping archaeological potential. Using these models the archaeologists found numerous archaeological sites and artifacts within a large surveyed area (Faught, 2003, 116- 118; Faught, 2004, 275-278, 281-283; Faught, 2006; Faught, Gusick, 2011, 146-150). The main reasons for the limited number of underwater predictive models are: 1) the lack of reliable archaeological data for underwater sites along with information about their topographical context and past environment, 2) that the site location prediction is very much dependent on the availability of a precise DTM (Digital Terrain Model) of the sea bed, which is usually absent and 3) the considerably changed and permanently changing coastal landscapes. Airborne Lidar Bathymetry based DTM The absence of DTM or large scale bathymetric maps of the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast was one of the main challenges before the CUA’s project implementation. The application of conventional survey techniques used for the development of bathymetric DTM, e.g. multibeam/singlebeam echosounding, was inappropriate because a major part of the underwater cultural heritage along the Black Sea Coast is usually discovered in very shallow waters of up to 10 m depth or in the intertidal zone, constituting the main obstacle for scanning from a boat. The solution was the application of Airborne Lidar Bathymetry.

118

Lidar is a remote sensing technology that measures distance by illuminating a target with light. The transmitted laser beams are reflected by the target surface and are received back by the scanner’s receiver. The location of each reflection point is determined after analysis of the time of return (knowing the speed of the light in air and in water), the angle of the transmitted and received beams, the position of the scanner (longitude, latitude, altitude) at the time of sending and receiving of the beams. The records of all georeferenced reflection points create a point cloud, which is used for developing a DTM (Crutchley, Crow, 2009). When the Lidar scanner is used in a mobile mode i.e. transported by vehicle or aircraft, it is connected with differential GPS. The Airborne Lidar scanner is transported by an aircraft (airplane, helicopter, etc.) and scans the ground surface. The Airborne Bathymetric Lidar transmits two different laser beams: infrared and green. The infrared are reflected by the land and the sea surfaces, while the green penetrate the water and are reflected from the seabed. The depth is calculated knowing the time elapsed between the returns of the two pulses and the speed of light in water. The final result of its application is a complete homogeneous representation of the ground and seabed surface passing through the inter-tidal margin and into deep water (Fig.1). The first Lidar scanning in the Black Sea was conducted as part of the CUA’s project. Blom Aerofilms Ltd scanned an area of 100km2, including both land and water, along the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast (Fig.2, 3). The maximum measured depth was about 22m. The collected data were used for creating of a precise DTM with pixels of 1m2 for the ground and 5m2 for the seabed (Fig.4, 5, 6). It was the base of the spatial analyses for the predictive modeling of Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age settlements. Coastal Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age settlements The PM (Predictive Model) was limited by the area of the DTM but its prediction logic was based on information of all known Prehistoric coastal sites along the Western Black Sea Coast. Along the Bulgarian strip of the coast more than 20 LCA (Vth millennium BCE) and EBA (IIIrd millennium BCE) settlement sites have been discovered (Fig.7). They were partly or completely submerged due to the sea level rise and the subsidence of the tectonic plates. Most of them have been discovered during dredging activities and have been partially or completely destroyed. Only few settlements have been partially excavated. The settlements are: 1) Durankulak settlement now situated on The Big Island in Durankulak coastal lake. Part of the necropolis lies under the lake’s floor (Todorova, 2002-A; Todorova, 2002-B); 2) Submerged necropolis in Shabla bay (Peev, 2008). Palinological and microbotanical analyses of cores from Shabla coastal lakes proved intensive human activities and occupation in Prehistory (Филипова-Маринова, Божилова, 1990). Archaeological underwater surveys found reefs in the aquatory of Shabla cape which in the past protected the coast from the sea winds Лазаров, 2009, 115 – 117; Peev, 2008); 3) About 14 settlement sites in Varna lakes. In Prehistory they were situated along the ancient Varna river or once existent firths. In several cases the sites consist of two cultural layers belonging to LCA and EBA period divided by naturally generated marine deposits (Лазаров, 2009, 16-17; Ivanov, 1993); 4) LCA and EBA settlement in the aquatory of Atia military harbour (Лазаров, 2009, 18);

119

5) LCA and EBA settlement in the aquatory of Sozopol harbour. They were situated in paleovalley of Patovska river and were well protected from the winds by the neighboring hills (Angelova, Draganov, Dimitrov, 1995; Angelova, Draganov, 2003; Draganov, 1998; Draganov, 1995; Ангелова, Драганов, Димитров, 1994); 6) LCA settlement in the bay of Ropotamo river outflow. It was situated on the right bank of the river and was sheltered by St. Demetrius cape, which in the past was more jutted in the sea (Karayotov, 1992; Karayotov, 2002; Лазаров, 2009, 19); 7) EBA settlement in Southern bay of Kiten. It was situated on the left riverbank at the foot of deep protruding in the sea Urdoviza promontory, which protected it from the Eastern and Northern winds (Angelova, Draganov, 2003; Draganov, 1998; Draganov, 1995; Georgiev, Petkov, Stoev, Velkovski, 1994, 322-326). Although belonging to two historical periods and different cultures these sites were considered as one group from topological point of view. They have been situated along the Prehistoric coastline, in vicinity to the sea, on the banks of rivers or once existent firths. The LCA settlements have been inundated due to the sea level rise. They remained underwater for several centuries and were covered by sea sediments. Probably at the end of the Transitional Period (between the LCA and EBA) the sea level dropped a few meters. New EBA settlements appeared in the same or in similar places, in several cases over or in proximity to the LCA ones. At the end of EBA period the settlements were inundated again and remained underwater till present. They were covered by sea sediments in the sea or by alluvial deposits in the river valleys (Angelova, Draganov, Dimitrov, 1995, 54-55). The comparison between the LCA/EBA and the Neolithic settlements, discovered along the present day coast, shows significant difference in the topographical context of both groups. The Neolithic ones are situated above sea level, including some in very close proximity to the present day coastline. Some of them are located in areas exposed to the sea and unprotected from the sea winds (Klasnakov, 2010; Leshtakov, 2010-A; Leshtakov, 2010B). These locations suggest that the relative sea level in the Neolithic period was much lower than the present one and these settlements were distanced from the sea. One could expect future discoveries of Neolithic sites in the submerged Prehistoric coastline, also at depths greater than those of the discovered LCA and EBA sites. Topographic Characteristics of the Settlements Although the topographical analysis of the submerged LCA and EBA sites shows many differences between them, most of them are located on topographically similar places. These topographical similarities were used for the predictive modeling. They are: 1) similar level (depth) at present; 2) proximity to a river/firth; 3) location in sheltered areas, protected from the Northern and Eastern winds; 4) preference for Southwestern aspect; 5) slope of up to 5%.

120

The Model Design Each of the identified landscape characteristics was modeled and represented by a separate GIS layer to enable the following Overlay Analyses, which combines these characteristics into a single layers. 1) Elevation All discovered submerged LCA and EBA sites are situated at a similar level (depth): two (probably LCA) graves in Shabla cape aquatory were discovered at -3.5 and -6.5 m; the settlements in Varna lakes are located at depth between -2 and -8.5 m; the settlements along the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast (Stradzha Mountain Coast) are between -4 and -9/10 m. These levels constitute the vertical zone with higher probability for existence of sites: 2m – -10m or -3m – -9m. For creating of GIS layers of the elevation zones the DTM was divided with Reclassify tool into areas with different elevation ranges, representing different probability zones, e.g.- High: -3 / -9 m; Medium: -3 / 6 m and -9 / -12 m; Low: over -6 m and less than 12 (Fig.8). 2) Sheltered areas All discovered coastal settlements were situated in places protected from the Northern and Eastern winds. At present these are the predominant winds in the coastal area (Попов, Мишев, 1974, 110 – 113, 127 - 128) and the topographical logic of the settlements indicates that this was the case during their existence. They were protected by hills and promontories. Big parts of these promontories have been eroded by the abrasion and inundated by the relative sea level rise, but their submerged continuations are still visible on the sea floor (Fig.19, 20, 24). The Visibility tool (Spatial Analyst) was used for the creation of layers for the sheltered areas. The visibility simulated the winds. The viewpoints (in the sea) defined the wind origin (from North and East). Its direction was modeled by the visibility limitations. The lower sea level in the past and the wind barriers that once existed (hills, promontories) were modeled through defining the viewpoints elevation below the present day sea level (e.g. -7 m). The invisible areas were the sheltered ones (Fig.9, 10). 3) Proximity to rivers or firths All the settlements were situated on the banks of rivers or once existing firths. These locations were related to the subsidence of the prehistoric population. The river valleys provided more fertile soils for agriculture and suitable areas for husbandry and hunting. They offered good connection between the hinterland and the sea and were probably used as water roads. Concerning the settlements along the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast, it is likely that the rivers were used for the transportation and the trade of copper, mined in Strandzha Mountain and Bakarlaka ridge. A major problem in the creation of this layer was the tracing of the ancient riverbeds, at present buried under alluvial deposits and marine sediments. The results of archaeological and geophysical surveys (Georgiev, Petkov, Stoev, Velkovski, 1994, 322-326; Angelova, Draganov, 2003, 14) in the study area were used as well as the Hydrology toolset (Flow accumulation tool) with which some probable ancient riverbeds were identified on the DTM

121

(Fig.11). Along the theoretically reconstructed ancient riverbeds were created buffers (zones) representing different probability according the proximity/distance (Fig.12, 13). 4) Aspect South and Southwest aspect were preferred because of the prevailing Northern and Eastern winds. Areas with different aspect, representing different probability zones, were exported from the DTM by the means of Aspect tool and Reclassify tool (Fig.14). 5) Slope The settlements were situated in the low river valleys with a slope of up to 5%. They were covered by alluvial and marine sediments and thus their present-day slope is between 0 and 3 to 5 %. Areas with different slopes, representing different probability zones, were exported form the DTM by the means of Slope tool and Reclassify tool (Fig.15). The Overlay Analysis The Overlay analysis combines layers representing different topographical factors (variables) in to a single layer. The analysis was executed with the Raster Calculator tool which calculates (adds) the values of the overlaying pixels (spatially overlaping), representing different probability of every layer. Several overlay analyses have been made with different combinations of the layers and with different variations of the layers themselves. In several cases some of the layers (topographical characteristics) were considered as more significant and their values were augmented (weighted). The results were more or less the same. All overlays determined the lower river valleys, including their submerged continuations, as zones of medium archaeological probability (Fig.16, 17, 18). Three small areas within the studied region were identified as high probability zones. Two of them coincide with already registered sites â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the settlement in the South bay of Kiten town (Fig. 19) and the settlement in the gulf of the Ropotamo river outflow (Fig.20). The third area is in the gulf of the Dyavolska river outflow (Fig. 21). These are the zones where most of the topographic characteristics of the settlement locations overlap. Another predictive model was developed which aimed to identify areas similar to the places of the submerged sites within the present-day river valleys. The prevailing idea was that if the Prehistoric coastal population was forced to abandon the villages due to sea level rise it probably settled in the vicinity, in suitable places up the river valleys. The overlay analysis identified such areas within the valleys, protected from the Northern and Eastern winds by neighboring hills (Fig.22, 23). The predictive modeling results demonstrated good predictive capacity of the model identifying small number of high probability zones, all with limited areas, two of which coincide exactly with the areas of already registered sites. The other high probability spots on the predictive maps are future targets for archaeological surveys of the CUA. The predictions verification will be a base for the model development and improvement. After the relative sea level rise (caused by the sea level rise and the subsidence of the tectonic plates) some of the settlement environments turned to bays, well protected from the winds by promontories and hills that in Prehistory sheltered the settlements. Since then

122

they have been used as natural harbours. Such submerged settlements situated in the aquatory of present-day harbours are Sozopol, Kiten, Atia. The Ropotamo settlement was found during the dredging activities preceding the construction works for a new harbour that did not take place. The area with higher probability in the gulf of the Dyavolska River is also in the area of the small harbour of the town of Primorsko. This fact is the main threat for the archaeological sites. At present most of the settlements are partly or completely destroyed by dredging and building activities. The well preserved organic matter have been contaminated and badly affected by the pollution in harbour areas. The numerous ongoing and coming projects for reconstruction of old and building of new harbours along the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast constitute a major and permanent threat for the still unknown sites. On the other hand the coastal river valleys and lakes are considered as a profitable source for raw materials (sand, gravel, rubble), creating another risk for the buried sites. All these construction, dredging and extraction activities could be severely influenced by discovery of an archaeological site. The produced archaeological predictive maps could be used for protection of the areas with high and medium probability as well as for the planning of any investment activities that will affect the landscapes. The maps are a good base for archaeological field surveys. Although the predictive models are primarily designed for the protection of archaeological sites, their use carries a risk for the cultural heritage. The user should be aware that the predictions could be false and could miss sites that follow different topographical logic. The significantly changed landscape in the coastal area also raises the probability of models imprecision and false predictions. Although the predictive model for LCA and EBA coastal settlements is in an early stage of application and iteration, its initial results demonstrated good predictive capacity in what was a rewarding beginning of predictive modeling in the Bulgarian archaeology. The intentions of the project team are, after the necessary modifications, to apply the model for other areas of the Western Black Sea Coast and to continue with its development and improvement. The presented project as well as the numerous archaeological, geophysical and remote sensing surveys along the coast organized by the CUA are a solid base for capacity building and team building of interdisciplinary specialists in the fields of Underwater Archaeology, Predictive modeling, Remote sensing technologies, Geophysics, Geomorphology, Spatial analyses, Reconstruction of ancient landscapes and environment and their evolution. Thus the CUA strengthens its positions as a research institute following the modern approaches in Underwater Archaeology and applying advanced interdisciplinary research technologies, methods and practices. As a project team member the articleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s author had the chance to work on a PhD dissertation with the same topic â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Archaeological predictive modeling for underwater sites at Sofia University and for one semester at the University of Arkansas. The author expresses his gratitude to Mrs. Hristina Angelova, director of CUA, for the opportunity to take part in the project and to work on a related dissertation, to Prof. Keneth Kvamme from University of Arkansas for his attitude and help in the field of GIS and Predictive modeling, to his PhD advisor Prof. Totko Stoyanov from Sofia University for his assistance and support, to the professors from the Dept. of GIS and Cartography at Sofia University for their aid and to all the colleagues who contributed to the research with ideas, advice and help.

123

Figure 1. Aiborn Bathymetric Lidar System Hawk Eye 2 (Courtesy by Blom Aerofilms Ltd.)

Figure 7. LCA and EBA settlements along the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast

124

Figure 2. Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast with the area scanned with Lidar (in color)

125

Figure 3. 100 km2 of the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast scanned with the Airborne Bathymetric Lidar

126

Figure 4. Lidar based Digital Terrain Model

127

Figure 5. Lidar based Digital Terrain Model

128

Figure 6. Lidar based Digital Terrain Model

129

Figure 8. Elevation range between -3 and -9m (in red)with high archaeological probability

130

Figure 9. Sheltered areas (in red), represented with Visibility effect

131

Figure 10. Sheltered areas (in red), represented with Visibility effect

132

Figure 11. Model of the streams in three ranges calculated from the DTM with Flow Accumulation tool

133

Figure 12. Distance buffers with three levels of probability along Ropotamo, Dyavolska and Karaagach rivers

134

Figure 13. Buffers with three levels of probability along Dyavolska river

Figure 18. Predictive model with three levels of probability for Ropotamo river coastal valle

135

Figure 14. Areas with Southwest aspect (in red) on the DTM

136

Figure 15. Areas with slope between 0 and 5% (in red) on the DTM

137

Figure 16. Predictive model with three levels of probability

138

Figure 17. Predictive model with three levels of probability for the region of Kiten and Primorsko towns

139

Figure 19. High probability zones and the EBA settlement in the Southern bay of Kiten

Figure 20. High probability zones and the settlement in the gulf of the Ropotamo river outflow

140

Figure 21. High probability zone in the gulf of Dyavolska river outflow

141

Figure 23. High probability zones within Dyavolska river valley

142

Figure 24. Visualisation of lower sea level (-12 m) on the DTM

143

Figure 22. High probability zones within Karaagach river valley References Angelova, H., V. Draganov 2003. Underwater Archaeological Excavations of Submerged Late Eneolithic and Early Bronze Settlements in Kiten and Sozopol (Southern Bulgarian Coast). – In: Thracia Pontica, 6.2, 2003, pp. 9-22. Angelova, Hr., V. Draganov, K. Dimitrov 1995. Prehistoric Setlements in the Harbour of Sozopol (Preliminary communication). – In: L. Nikolova (ed). Early Bronze Age Settlement Pattrrns in the Balkans (Cal. 3500 – 2000 BC). Sofia 1995, pp. 54-55. Crutchley, S., Crow, P. 2009. The Light Fantastic: Using airborne laser scanning in archaeological survey. Swindow: English Heritage. Accessible at: http://www.englishheritage.org.uk/publications Dalla Bona, Luke 1994. Predictive Modelling Methodology - Methodological Considerations (A Report Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources).- In: Cultural Resource Research Predictive Modeling Project. Archaeological Predictive Modeling in Ontario’s Forests: "Volume 3. Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario. Available online: http://modelling.pictographics.com/pdfs/carpvol3.pdf Draganov, V 1998. The Present State of Eneolithic Research in Northeastern Bulgaria and Thrace. (The Area of the Krivodol-Gumelnitsa_Karanovo VI and Varna Cultures). – In the steps of James Harvey Gaul,. Vol. 1. James Harvey Gaul in Memoriam., Sofia, pp. 203-221. 1995

Draganov, V. Submerged Coastal Settlements from the Final Eneolithic and the Early Bronze Age in the Sea around Sozopl and the Urdoviza Bay near Kiten. – Monographs in World Archaeology, N 22, 1995, pp. 225-242.

144

Faught, M., A.Gusick. 2011. Submerged Prehistory in the Americas. In Benjamin, J., C. Bonsal, C. Pickard, A. Fisher (eds.). – In: Submerged Prehistory, Oxford and Oakville, Oxbow Books, pp.145-157. Fаught, M. 2006. Finding Submerged Paleoindian and Archaic Archaeological Sites: Experiences from Karstic NW Florida (Poster). Fаught, M. 2004. The Underwater Archaeology of Paleolandscapes, Apalachee Bay, Florida. American Antiquity, 69, 2, pp. 275-289 Fаught, M. 2003. Geophysical Remote Sensing and Underwater Cultural Resource Management of Submerged Prehistoric Sites in Apalachee Bay: A Deepwater Example, Site Predictive Models, and Site Discoveries. In: McKay, M. (Ed.). Proceedings: Twenty First Annual Gulf of Mexico Information Transfer Meetings, 2002. Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, pp. 115 – 129. Fischer, A. 1995. Entrance to the Mesolithic World Below the Ocean. Status of Ten Years’ Work on the Danish Sea Floor. – In: Man and Sea in the Mesolithic: Coastal Settlement Above and Below Present Sea Level. Proceedings of the International Symposium, Kalundborg, Denmark (Oxbow Monographs), Oxbow Books Limited, pp. 371-384. Georgiev, M., A. Petkov, D. Stoev, K. Velkovski 1994. Geophysical Prospecting of the Aquatoria of the Southern Bulgarian Black Sea Coast aimed at reconstruction of the Palaeorelief. – In: Thracia Pontica, 5, 1994, pp. 317-322. Ivanov, I. 1993. À la question de la localisation et des ètudes des sites submergés dans les lacs de Varna, Pontica XVI, pp. 19-26. Karayotov, I. 2002. Nouveaux monuments des villes antiques du littoral Ouest de la Mer Noire. – In: Πιτύη (Pitye). Studia in honoren Prof. Ivani Marazov, Sofia, pp. 558-567. Karayotov, I. 1992. Explorations archeologiques sous-marines dans la baie devan l’embouchure de Ropotamo. – In: Bulgaria Pontica Medii Aevi, III, Sofia, pp. 277-280. Klasnakov , M. 2010. . Klasnakov. Neolithic Sites along the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast and its Hinterland. – Archaeologia Bulgarica, 2010, 3, 1-27. Kohler, T., S. Parker. 1986. Predictive Models for Archaeological Resource Location. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 9, New York, Academic Press, Inc., 397-452. Lazarov, M. 1993. Les sites submergés le long du Pont Eest dans le contexte le l'histoire pontique et mediterranéene. Pontica, 1991, XXVI, pp. 7-18. Leshtakov, P. 2010-A. The Prehistoric Site at Akladi Cheiri, Chernomorets. – In: Cholakov, I., K. Choleev (Eds). Archaeology in Bulgaria, 2007-2009 (Newsletter)., AJA, 114, 4, 715-741, 735. Leshtakov, P. 2010-B. The Neolithic Settlement Site at Budzhaka, Sozopol. – In: Cholakov, I., K. Choleev (Eds). Archaeology in Bulgaria, 2007-2009 (Newsletter)., AJA, 114, 4, 715-741, 735. Peev, P. 2008. Underwater Sites in the Area of Cape Shabla (North-East Bulgaria). – In: Kostov, R., B. Gaydarska, M. Gurova (Eds). Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy. Proceedings of the International Conference, 29-30 October 2008, Sofia, Sofia, pp. 303-304. Available online: http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/62Peev.pdf Porozhanov, K. 1994. Le site submerge d’Ourdoviza. – In: Thracia Pontica, 4, Sofia, pp. 109-112. Sebastian, L., W. Judge. 1988. Predicting the Past, Correlation, Explanation, and the Use of Archaeological Models. In Judge, W., L. Sebastian (eds). Quantifying the Present and Predicting the Past, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Оffice,1-18. Todorova, H. 2002-A. Durankulak, Band II, die prähistorischen gräberfelder von Durankulak, Teil 1. Berlin-Sofia: Publ. House Anubis.

145

Todorova, H. 2002-B. Durankulak, Band II, die prähistorischen gräberfelder von Durankulak, Teil 2. Berlin-Sofia: Publ. House Anubis Ангелова, Х., В. Драганов, К. Димитров 1994. Потънали селища от финала на халколита и ранната бронзова епоха в созополското пристанище. – АОР през 1993-1994 г., Велико Търново, с. 17-20. Лазаров, М. 2009. Древното корабоплаване по Западното Черноморие, Варна. Попов, В., К. Мешев 1974. Геоморфология на Българското Черноморско крайбрежие и шелф. С., Изд. БАН. Филипова-Маринова, М., Е. Божилова.1990. Палеоэкологические исследования ШабленскоЕзерецкого озера на Болгарском побережье Черного моря. – В: Геологическая эволюция западной части Черноморской котловины в неоген-четвертичное время, С, 1990, с. 41-87.

146

GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING AND UNDERWATER ARCHAEOLOGY BATHYMETRIC AND SIDE SCAN SONAR SURVEYS IN THE AQUATORIA OF SOZOPOL – SINEMORETS, 2013 Kiril Velkovsky1, Hristina Angelova2, Vesselin Draganov2, Nayden Prahov2, Dragomir Garbov2, Atanas Orachev3, Peter Petrov2 1

M.Sc Geophysicist, Information Technologies for Engineering; 2Centre for Underwater Archaeology; 3Black Sea Strandzha Association e-mail: 1kvelkovsky@gmail.com; 2cuasozopol@mail.bg; 3aso_1953@abv.bg

In the autumn of 2013 the Centre for Underwater Archaeology Sozopol launched a remote sensing survey in the southern Bulgarian Black Sea coast. The survey incorporated bathymetrical measurements and side scanning monitoring. The subject of the survey was to complete the following tasks:  To set up the new equipment of the Centre for Underwater Archaeology to be operational and to create and test a methodology of surveying especially for archeology;  To cover some areas where we do not have data from previous conducted surveys;  To use the side scan sonar together with bathymetry and to receive detailed information about the sea bottom in the territory of the studied areas;  To search for and identify new potential objects/locations potentially interesting from an archaeological point of view;  To record detailed information about the underwater geological structures in order to complete and clarify the picture for the development of the coast line in the future;  The survey was launched with the support of the Ministry of the Culture Bulgaria. Bathymetric measurements and side scans were undertaken simultaneously by boat, along preplanned tracks in the studied areas.

Figure 1. Covered areas

147

The areas covered during the survey are (Fig.1):  Sozopol North Bay and the area between st. Kirik and st. Ivan islands  Kiten area starting from the cape of Primorsko in the North, to bay of Oasis in the south.  Ahtopol North Bay  Sinemorets south bay to “Silistar” bay  The tracks between Ahtopol - Sinemorets – Silistar To date the surveys have covered an area greater than 27 sq. km. The tracks received from the side scan sonar are over 260 km long, in more than 150 lines. Area

Number of profiles

Kiten

182,7

17.50

Ahtopol

13,0

2,60

Ahtopol - Sinemorets

22.5

3.50

Sinemorec South

40.0

3.05

Silistar

11.0

0.51

268.20 km

27.16 km2

Total:

Length of the profiles

Area measured

Used equipment (Fig.2, 3):   

The equipment used for the survey was: Bathymetric measurements were made with a BBT-Flamingo echo sounder with integrated DGPS system. Side scanning sonar StarFish 450H hull-mounted seabed imaging system for seabed scanning. Trimble DGPS system for coordinate tracking. The signal from the DGPS was split for precise online navigation of the boat and to coordinate the side scan records.

Figure 2. Block diagram of the equipment - connections.

148

Figure 3. Block diagram of the data flow. Methodology employed for the measurements: After several test runs and considering the tasks and the specific requirements of the areas, the surveys were conducted along pre-planned tracks, usually perpendicular to the shore. In the majority of cases the tracks have been made along an east-west plane or opposite. (Fig.4)

Figure 4. Side scan lines â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Kiten â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Primorsko area

149

The distance between the tracks was 80 meters in order to guarantee coverage of the side scans from two tracks in the range of 50% to 70%. This methodology allows objects in the middle zone between the tracks to be seen in the sonograms from two sides. Along the shore, in shallow waters, the surveys were conducted in free tracks depending on the situation, but kept close to the shore. The scans were generally conducted up to a depth of approximately 25-30 m depth, however in several cases scans were undertaken at a depth of 40 to 45 m as a control. Between planned survey destinations, tracks were also recorded for use as additional information and as control measurements. Received results bathymetry: The processing of the data is still ongoing but preliminary results are available. Based on the data received from the echo sounder, Flaming BBT, preliminary bathymetrical maps have been created. The maps are available in WGS84 coordinate system or coordinate system 1970. The results are available as grid and data files, JPG or GeoTIFF files and KMZ files for Google Earth.

Figure 5. Bathymetrical map Kiten area: bay Primorsko south to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Oasisâ&#x20AC;? bay.

150

Figure 5A. Bathymetrical data for Kiten area printed in 3D shape

Figure 6. Bathymetrical map of Ahtopol - North bay

151

Figure 7. Bathymetrical map of the areas: Sinemorets south and “Silistar” bay

Results from side scans Preliminary mosaics of images on the tracks are created for all areas. The results are available in form of GeoTIFF or KMZ to be used with Google Earth program. From the first overview of the sonograms over 700 potential sides or individual objects on the sea bottom have been selected for further underwater assessment. The main criteria used for the selection are:  Objects which do not fit in the context of the surrounds or which present some logic to their positioning such as showing alignment or similar.  Objects which have a specific shape or which returned an extremely powerful echo signal. The next task will be to evaluate the information and create a short list of the most potentially interesting objects or areas from an archaeological point of view. Even now, however, it is clear that there are several potentially very interesting locations which can be assessed during subsequent underwater surveys.

152

Figure 8. Arch object on the sea bottom â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the structure looks like it is constructed from separate stones and does not fit the structure of surrounding rocks.

Figure 9. Object with rectangular shape in the sand lying 6 m deep on the sea bottom.

153

Figure 10. Arch object, pin 07, 4-5 m deep. The shape is similar to board of ship. The size of the object is around 14 m length. The post processing is currently ongoing and new results will be available.

154

MANAGING THE CULTURAL HERITAGE OF THE ISTRANCA REGION

Zeynep ERES Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture e-mail: zeyneperes@yahoo.com INTRODUCTION Eastern Thrace, bridging between Europe and Asia, is at the contact zone of Southeast European cultures with those of Anatolia and the Near East. Any contact between Anatolia and the Balkans, such as migration, invasion, trade, conveying new technologies or ideas had to go through Eastern Thrace, leaving its fingerprints in the archaeological deposits (Fig.1). Accordingly, the archaeological evidence of this area is of importance not only for this region but also more significantly for the regions beyond. Knowledge on what had been happening in this region, whether it had been a bridge or a barrier, becomes much more crucial particularly for understanding the turning points in the history of civilization.

Figure 1. Location of Eastern Thrace in between distinct cultural geographies In spite of its significance, archaeological research in Eastern Thrace was almost at a standstill until 1980, up to the commencement of our project. To that date almost nothing was known about the prehistory of the K.rklareli region where neither any surface surveys nor excavations had taken place (Fig.2). Deficiency of archaeological research had a number of negative consequences, firstly in interpreting cultural process on a supra-regional level, but also on the local community outlook on their heritage, taking no account of the issues related

155

to the heritage of their region. Due to the absence of archaeological research they came to believe that that there was nothing of importance in their region that deserved to be considered a cultural asset, providing no possibility for the development of cultural tourism. The research excavation project had been initiated by the Prehistory Department of the University of Istanbul in 1980 primarily to test various hypotheses on how and when farming began in the European part of Turkey. During the early instalments of the Project, preliminary reconnaissance of the region was carried out through intensive surface surveys and with short term archaeological excavations, providing the initial data on the cultural sequence of this previously unexplored region, and at the same time making it possible to formulate correct questions to address.

Figure 2. Location map of the previous activity areas of the project. In 1993 a decision was taken to concentre on the prehistoric sites near the town of K.rklareli in the central part of Eastern Thrace along the southern foothills of the Istranca Mountains (Fig.3-4). Excavations have been carried out in two distinct locations, some 300 meters apart, Asag. P.nar and Kanl.gecit; the former - a Neolithic site representing the beginnings of earliest farming village life in Europe, going back to 6200 BC, and the latter an Early Bronze Age site of the 3rd millennium BC, the only town yet recovered in Southeastern Europe comparable to the Anatolian urban centres of its time (Fig.5-10).

156

Figure 3. Location map of the cultural management area, with the prehistoric sites of Kanlıgeçit and Aşağı Pınar in relation to the town of Kırklareli

157

Figure 4. View of Aşağı Pınar from the town centre

Figure 5. A general view of the Aşağı Pınar excavations

158

Figure 6. A general view of the Aşağı Pınar excavations

Figure 7. Aşağı Pınar, excavation of a Neolithic structure of Phase 4

159

Figure 8. Aşağı Pınar, excavation of a Neolithic structure

Figure 9. Kanlıgeçit Excavations, general view

160

Figure 10. One of the Early Bronze Age megaron-type of buildings of Kanlıgeçit Our research project has always been operating on a multi-national and multidisciplinary basis, incorporating a wide range of experts from diverse fields such as archaeology, ethnoarchaeology, architectural history, conservation, cultural management, archaeometry, archaeobotany, archaeozoology, geoarchaeology and geology. In this respect, surface surveys, archaeological excavations, cultural inventorying, documentation of rural and urban heritage, and geoarchaeology projects have been conducted, and a considerable amount of data has been gathered and assessed. Within the framework of the Project several books and hundreds of papers have been published addressing both - the academicians and the laymen as well. Our team has also undertaken a large-scale program to activate cultural assets of K.rklareli according to internationally acceptable criteria. The eventual aim of the cultural sector initiative is while gaining cultural assets for the national and the local economy, at the same time to incite a consciousness in local communities for the cultural heritage. The objectives of our project are;    

To manifest the significance of K.rklareli region in the history of civilization by procuring archaeological evidence. To disseminate the data revealed by our archaeological undertakings to academicians. To develop awareness of archaeological heritage among local community living at K.rklareli. To develop cultural sector through ameliorating cultural assets so as to contribute to the social and economic wealth of the local community.

161

KIRKLARELI CULTURAL SECTOR PROGRAM As the flow of information increased, a decision was taken to initiate a “Cultural Sector Program” based on the cultural properties that have been exposed or noted in the course of our work. It was thus anticipated to include cultural properties in the social and economic wealth of the region, to ameliorate and to exploit the cultural resources, and to raise local awareness. In this respect, a long-term cultural sector project, including site management projects of our excavations, has been designed. Some of them have already been materialized, the most significant undertakings among them being the open-air site displays of Kanl.gecit and Asag. P.nar, and the development of a multi-purpose research centre. The main objective of these undertakings is to raise public awareness among the local community and to secure the future sustainability of the site-museums. In this respect, an intensive collaboration has been established with a local NGO (Kırklareli Kultur Varlıkları Dernegi), the only one existing in the province of K.rklareli that is concerned with cultural heritage. Among short-term objectives, besides developing the open-air site museums, local training for capacity-building, programs oriented to school children, seminars and preparation of booklets are to be accounted. It is also anticipated to work together and to share experience with groups on the other side of the Bulgarian-Turkish border, an issue that previously could not be possible. Site Management and Developing Local Awareness: The Approach The Project considers that a sustainable model of protection of archaeological sites can only be achieved through raising local awareness and working in close collaboration with the local actors. Accordingly, the Project has established close contacts with the governmental and non-governmental bodies located in the town of Kırklareli, the most active partner being the “K.rklareli Kultur Varlıkları Dernegi”. The Project foresees the benefits of local contacts on two distinct lines: firstly, to secure the future of past remains by providing the means for sustainability, and secondly, to extend the economic and geographic scope for heritage-based tourism in this neglected region. Through the long-term management policies devised by our group, it is anticipated to develop site management approaches to meet increasing demand and to protect the environment, and also to clarify responsibilities in the area of cultural asset management and streamline the institutional framework. A more deliberate and focused link between local economic development and heritage assets will improve the potential for success. The Project will undertake investments and introduce innovative site management policies within the two sites - Asag. P.nar and Kanlıgecit, and will provide an institutional strengthening component to address the deficiencies of the current centralized and segregated approach to cultural asset management. Kırklareli Kultur Varlıkları Dernegi (Kirklareli Cultural Assets Association) “Kırklareli Kultur Varlıkları Dernegi” was founded in 2008 as a local NGO with the aim of providing local support to academicians that are specifically working on the cultural heritage of K.rklareli, and also to help in the development of local awareness towards the cultural assets of the region. The founders of the association present a diverse profile, ranging from local businessmen to teachers, and shopkeepers to bureaucrats. On the foundation document of the association it has been specified that the NGO is a not-for-profit

162

organization that can act as a main contributor for fund-raising and a medium between cultural heritage projects operating in the province of K覺rklareli. Since the time of its foundation, the Association has been regularly organizing public lectures by inviting speakers, organizing tours to the archaeological site museum of Asag. P.nar, mainly by stimulating primary and high school students in the district (Fig. 56-57). A number of volunteering members of the Association are regularly cleaning the exhibition units of the site museum and have taken the responsibility to maintain it through the winter season. In this respect, the Association has always been the most active supporter of the Istanbul University K.rklareli Research Project team, the only scientific undertaking oriented to the cultural assets in the region.

Figure 56. Visit of the school children

Figure 57. Visit of the students

163

Ahmetce Research Centre A research centre has been established in the village of Ahmetce, 7 km to the north of the city centre of K.rklareli to serve as the base for all sorts of investigations to be carried out in the region (Fig.11-12). The research centre, along with all necessary facilities for accommodating research groups, has extensive storage capacity, studios, study areas and rooms to hold small-scale meetings. Some of the facilities have been designed to serve as a cultural inventory archive of the K.rklareli region, including pottery sherds, fauna, lithics and documentary archives as well.

Figure 11. The research centre at Ahmetรงe village, general view from the courtyard

Figure 12. Ahmetรงe Research Centre, archive-storage

164

Documentation of Rural Architectural Heritage The Project, in collaboration with the Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, Restoration Department, has conducted a thorough survey of villages in the Istranca Mountains along the border with Bulgaria mainly focusing on the traditional wooden post - wattle and daub architecture. The project began in 1997 and 71 villages were surveyed. Each different type of traditional building was documented and a classification for plan types and structural system was prepared (Fig. 13-24). We have also conducted an architectural survey of the villages in the flatlands of Thrace mainly focusing on Early Republican immigrant villages (Fig. 25-29).

Figure 13. A traditional house in the Istranca region, Kuzulu village

Figure 14. A traditional house in the Istranca region, Tastepe village

165

Figure 15. A traditional house in the Istranca region, Ağaçlı village

Figure 16. A shepherds hut, Ömeroba village

166

Figure 17. A traditional sheepfold in the Istranca region, Karaabalar village

Figure 18. A sheepfold in the Istranca region

Figure 19. Plan of a sheepfold, Kad覺k繹y village

167

Figure 20. A traditional hayloft in the Istranca region, Ă&#x2013;meroba village

Figure 21. A traditional hayloft, Ahmetler village

168

Figure 22. A traditional hayloft in the Istranca region, Sislioba village

Figure 23. Different types of haylofts, Sislioba village (left), Avc覺lar village (right)

169

Figure 24. Plan and cross-section typology of the cruck-buildings

170

Figure 25. A village school dated to Early Republican era, Koyunbaba village

Figure 26. Immigrant houses dated to Early Republican era, Muratlı village in Tekirdağ

Figure 27. Plans of the immigrant houses, Muratlı village in Tekirdağ

171

Figure 28. Plan of an immigrant village, Arizbaba village

Figure 29. Immigrant houses dated to the Early Republican era, Arizbaba village

172

Documentation of Urban Architectural Heritage The Project, in collaboration with the Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, Restoration Department, has conducted an architectural survey in the historic centres of K.rklareli and Kaynarca towns (Fig. 30-40). These two towns still maintain the historic character even though they have serious preservation problems. The aim of this project is to document the historic buildings as valuable cultural properties and to develop awareness to this heritage.

Figure 30. Historic buildings in the K覺rklareli town, Yayla district

Figure 31. Historic buildings in the K覺rklareli town, Yayla district

173

Figure 32. Historic buildings in the K覺rklareli town, Yayla district

Figure 33. Historic buildings in the K覺rklareli town, Yayla district

174

Figure 34. Architectural survey of Yayla district in K覺rklareli

175

Figure 35. Historic buildings in Kaynarca Town

Figure 36. Historic buildings in Kaynarca Town

176

Figure 37. Historic buildings in Kaynarca Town

Figure 38. Historic buildings in Kaynarca Town

177

Figure 39. Architectural survey of Kaynarca town

Figure 40. Historic buildings in Kaynarca town

178

Ethnoarchaeology Through the various stages of the project, a program has been carried out to document some of the traditional crafts that are no longer practiced, such as thatching, pottery making, weaving, and basketry (Fig. 41-45). In particular, the building construction process was documented while the traditional haylofts were constructed at the excavation site (Fig. 46). The ethnoarchaeological study has been conducted by searching for old craftsmen or craftswomen in the villages. It is anticipated to revive some of the traditional crafts by providing the means to market their products.

Figure 41. Basket maker in K覺rklareli province

Figure 42. Local Potter at K覺rklareli

179

Figure 43. Weaving with loom in the K覺rklareli villages

Figure 44. Food Preparation local to the mountainous villages of K覺rklareli

180

Figure 45. Thatching in the Istranca region

Figure 46. Construction process of a traditional cruck-building Geoarchaeology and Environmental Studies In collaboration with the Istanbul University Geology Department an extensive study has been carried out on the provenance of the material used for the production of various stone artefacts of the Neolithic Period, as well as on the reconstruction of the palaeoenvironment and the discovery of fingerprints of climatic fluctuations. A more or less similar project on palaeo-soil formation and on the geochemistry of the soil sediments within the archaeological site is being carried out in collaboration with the University of Kiel. Asag覺 P覺nar Open-Air Site Museum Asag覺 P覺nar is a large site with multiple mound formations. In earlier years, our work was mostly in the western sector of the site exposing mainly remains of the Chalcolithic Period. Later on, the working area shifted to the northern sector of the site focusing on the remains of the Neolithic habitation. In 1999 a macro-scale site management plan, including

181

an open-air site museum, was devised to be implemented in instalments as defined by the progress our excavation program (Fig. 47). The first instalment of the open-air museum was in the western sector of the site where our work had already been terminated. Three wooden wattle-and-daub cruck-like buildings had been bought from the villages in the mountains, dismantled, transported to Asag. P.nar and reconstructed as a part of the village-museum (Fig. 48). An exhibition of models, illustrations and explanatory panels has already been displayed in these buildings (Fig. 49-53). The southern part of the archaeological site is used as Paleo-environment Park. The models of wild animals were placed in this park (Fig. 54-55). It is anticipated that five more buildings will be transferred from the villages and reconstructed within the open-air museum.

Figure 47. Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Museum project

182

Figure 48. Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Museum, 2011 view of the first three exhibition halls

Figure 49. The interior of the first exhibition hall after modifying the explanatory panels through the EU Bulgaria-Turkey IPA Cross-Coop-Arch Project, 2013

183

Figure 50. Interior of the second exhibition hall, display of a Neolithic house, 2009

Figure 51. Interior of the third exhibition hall, display of a Neolithic house, 2011

184

Figure 52. Display in the third exhibition hall with the models of the pottery, 2011

Figure 53. Display in the third exhibition hall, the craftsmen (bead maker and carpenters), 2012

185

Figure 54. Aşağı Pınar, plan of the paleo-environment park

Figure 55. Aşağı Pınar paleo-environment park, the models of wild animals through the EU Bulgaria-Turkey IPA Cross-Coop-Arch Project, 2013

186

The northern sector of the site has been reserved for experimental archaeology, training and for model excavation area for children. Two pottery kilns and model excavation area have already been built. Construction of a time-tunnel and a reconstruction of Layer 6 as well as of a building from Layer 4 on their original locations at the archaeological site are among the prospects of the coming years. It is also anticipated that the K.rklareli Archaeology Museum will move to the immediate neighbourhood of the site where land has already been allocated by the local government to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism for this purpose (Fig. 47). KanlÄągecit Open-Air Site Museum The excavations of the 3rd millennium BCE Early Bronze Age site of Kanl.gecit began in 1994 and were finalized in 2008. During the excavations a modest sized fortified citadel had been fully excavated, revealing a hitherto unknown Anatolian colony settlement duplicating the plan-type of Anatolian urban centres such a Troy (Fig. 9-10). The recovery of domestic horse bones, being one of the earliest in Turkey, further increased the importance of the site as it evidenced the presence of an early caravan route originating from Central Anatolia. After the termination of the archaeological work, a management plan was designed to secure the protection of the excavated architectural remains and at the same time to make the site available for visits. The main part of the project has been completed by burying the original remains and making one to one models of the architectural remains at the site; these include four megarons, the enclosure wall and one of the gate towers. The sides of the exposure have also been consolidated (Fig. 58-61). It is anticipated to further develop the site by constructing a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;visitors watch towerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

Figure 58. Preparing mud-bricks, 2009

187

Figure 59. The construction of Kanl覺ge癟it Open-Air Museum, 2009

Figure 60. Kanl覺ge癟it Open-Air Museum, 2013

188

Figure 61. Kanlıgeçit Open-Air Museum, 2013 Excavations at Asagı Pınar Asagı Pınar is located in the centre of Eastern Thrace, almost within the boundaries of the town of K.rklareli, on the southern foothills of the Istranca Mountains, near a spring of the same name; a small brook Haydardere runs on the north of the site (Fig.3-4). The excavation began in 1993 in collaboration with the German Archaeological Institute in Berlin and is still ongoing. During 21 field campaigns an area of over 4500 m2 has been excavated down to the virgin soil revealing an uninterrupted sequence from 6200 to 4800 BCE (Fig.5-8). The earliest settlement was found on the northernmost part of the terrain, on a small rise overlooking a fresh water spring that seemingly also formed a small pond or a marshy area. Through time, the area of the settlement expanded to cover an area of at least 200 x 200 meters. Asag. P.nar has a very particular mound formation as the location of the habitations changed over time?, and the nature of the archaeological deposition also varied. During the life span of the settlement lasting for about 1500 years eight cultural horizons have been defined, each of them presenting multiple rebuilding or renovation phases. Excavations at Kanlıgecit The prehistoric site at Kanlıgecit is about 300 meters further to the west of Asagı Pınar, still within the catchment area of the Haydardere Stream, excavated within the framework of our project between 1994 and 2008, though with intervals, revealing the remains of one of the most significant Early Bronze Age mounds in South-eastern Europe. The site has revealed an uninterrupted sequence of stratified remains extending almost through the entire span of the Early Bronze Age, covering a time period of several centuries. Among the outstanding features of the site, unique to this region, are the well preserved

189

remains of typical megaron type of buildings, the employment of stone-laid foundations combined with mud-brick constructions, a significant amount of pottery of Anatolian origin and the extensive presence of horse bones are to be accounted (Fig. 9-10). Kanl.gecit is a far more important site than evidenced by its architectural remains: the site has revealed an unprecedented dynamic model between the Anatolian and the Balkan cultural formations. In the initial stages of its foundation Kanl.gecit represents a typical Thracian Bronze Age settlement with wattle-and-daub architecture and a local cultural assemblage, transforming in time to a fortified ‘citadel’ designed in Anatolian fashion, and at the same time revealing a rich variety of Anatolian imports. In spite of its evident importance, the implications of this sequence are yet to be clarified. Whether Kanlıgecit represents a colonial expansion of the state formation process of West Anatolian cultures into South-eastern Europe, or it was a trading outpost, or represents the emergence of a local elite group in Thrace by adapting the cultural markers of Anatolia, are questions yet to be answered. Nevertheless, by the very end of the 3rd millennium BC, the settlement came to an eventual end rather abruptly. Kanlıgecit site signifies the transmission of the “Anatolian urban model” into Europe, activating the interaction between the cultural spheres of the Anatolian Plateau, the Aegean and the Eastern Balkans. There is still very little evidence to conclude how firmly the Anatolian type of an urban setting was established in Thrace; at present Kanlıgecit stands as a unique case. Nevertheless, recent surveys have revealed the presence of a number of other Early Bronze Age sites in the area but without excavation it is not possible to say whether or not they share the same type of transmission like Kanl.gecit, The end of the site the final destruction of Kanlıgecit, marks also the terminal stage of sedentary life in Thrace. For about a thousand years following the destruction of Kanlıgecit, there are no discernible settlements all over Thrace: a possible explanation is that perhaps nomadic groups that might have migrated from the north had occupied it. It seems possible that numerous burial mounds scattered around the northern parts of Eastern Thrace, like those in Bulgaria, are the only definable remains of the 2nd millennium groups living in this area. Thus, Kanl.gecit represents the pristine urbanisation process in South-eastern Europe that came to an abrupt end by the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. LONG TERM PROJECTS and MACRO SCALE PLANNING The project is designed to take place in three consecutive stages: short, middle and long range. In the short run, the project will focus on developing archaeological sites located along the southern parts of Kırklareli town centre by organizing open-air site museums, exhibitions and a new archaeology museum (Fig. 62). The next instalment of the project is to cover historic centre of Kırklareli and heritage sites in its surroundings (Fig. 63). The ultimate target of the project covers K.rklareli province as a whole, working in collaboration with other projects to develop touristic and cultural itineraries and to activate recreational centres for tracking, sports and heritage sites (Fig. 64-66).

190

Figure 62. Archaeological Areas in the Southern Sector of K覺rklareli

191

Site Management Planning 1- Kanlıgeçit Open-Air Museum (implemented) 2- New Archaeology Museum (in planning stage) 3- Protective shelter of Aşağı Pınar and Time tunnel (in planning stage) 4- Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Museum (implemented) 5- Tumuli Museum (in planning stage)

Figure 63. Kırklareli city centre, historic buildings and archaeological sites

Figure 64. Kırklareli province, historic buildings and archaeological sites

192

Figure 65. Eastern Thrace, main road system and natural settings of the region

Figure 66. Papuรงdere River and the Black Sea

193

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Akdag, A., 2002. Tarihoncesi Donem Ac.k Hava Muze Teshirleri ve K.rklareli Asag. P.nar Projesi’nde Uygulama Modeli. Y.ld.z Teknik Universitesi (unpublished master thesis). Akın, N., 2006. “Kırklareli’nde Kentsel Belgeleme ve Koruma”, Yıldız Dagları ve Yakın Cevresi Tarih Arastırmaları: 51-63., Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları. Arı, I., Z. Eres and A. Demirtas, 2010. “Kanlıgecit Acık Hava Muzesi: Trakya’da Bir Ilk Tunc Cag Ic Kalesi”, TUBA-KED 8: 229-240. Arı, I. and Z. Eres, 2009.

“From a Granary to an Exhibition Hall, Making Use of the Traditional

Architectural Structures of Thrace to Display Archaeological Sites”,H.T. Yıldız ve Y.I. Guney (eds.) Revitalising Built Environments: Requalifying Old Places for New Uses. IAPS-CSBE Culture & Space in the Built Environment Network and the IAPS – HOUSING Network, 12–16 October 2009, Istanbul. Arı, I., 2009. Tarihoncesi Sit Alanlarında Kulturel Miras Yonetimi. K.rklareli Hoyugu Sit Alan. ve Kultur Miras. Yonetimi. Istanbul Universitesi (unpublished PhD thesis). Arı, I., 2006. “K.rklareli Kultur Sektoru Uygulamalar.: Kanlıgecit Ac.khava Muzesi Ornegi”, Mimar.ist 21: 103-106. Efe, T., 2007. “The Theories of the ‘Great Caravan Route between Cilicia and Troy: The EB III Period in Inland Western Anatolia”, Anatolian Studies 57: 47–64. Eres, Z., E. Ozdogan and A. Demirtas, 2010. “Asagı Pınar Acık Hava Muzesi: Yaklas.m, Uygulama Sureci ve Karsılasılan Sorunlar”, TUBA-KED 8: 183-200. Eres, Z., 2010a. “Turkiye’de Tarihoncesi Kazı Alanlarında Koruma ve Sergileme Calısmalar. – Sunu”, TUBA-KED 8: 101-102. Eres, Z., 2010b. “Tarihoncesi Kaz. Alanlarında Koruma ve Sergileme Kavram.n.n Gelisimine Kısa Bir Bakıs”, TUBA-KED 8: 119-130. Eres, Z., 2009. “Erkenntnisse aus der Landlichen Architektur in Thrakien fur das Verstandnis der vorgeschichtlichen Flechtwerkbauweise. Rekonstruktionsversuche zu den Bauten der Schicht 2 des Siedlungshugels Asagı Pınar”, Bautechnik im antiken und vorantiken Kleinasien: 39–63. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut Istanbul, Ege Yay.nlar.. Eres, Z., 2008. Turkiye’de Planlı Kırsal Yerlesmelerin Tarihsel Gelisimi ve Erken Cumhuriyet Donemi Planlı Kırsal Mimarisinin Korunmas. Sorunu. ITU Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu (unpublished PhD thesis). Eres, Z., 2006. “Kırklareli Bolgesi’nin Kırsal Mimari Gelenegi”, Y.ld.z Daglar. ve Yak.n Cevresi Tarihi Arastırmalar Sempozyumu – Historical Researchment at Strandza Mountains & in their Vicinity: 147–160. 22–25May.s 2006, Kırklareli. Eres, Z., 2003a. “Traditionelle Dorfarchitektur im Istranca-Gebirge”,N. Karul, Z. Eres, M. Ozdogan, H. Parzinger (eds.) Asagı Pınar I Einfuhrung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und

194

Architektur: 155–173. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Eres,Z., 2003b. “Die Huttenlehmreste von Asagı Pınar”, N. Karul, Z. Eres, M.Ozdogan, H. Parzinger (eds.) Asag. P.nar I Einfuhrung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und Architektur: 126– 154. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Eres, Z., 2002. “Traditional Village Architecture of Thrace: Documentation, Problems and Future Prospects”,H. Turgut ve P. Kellet (eds.) Traditional Environments in a New Millennium: 447– 452. 2nd International Symposium, IAPS-CSBE Network, 20–23 June 2001 - Amasya, IAPSCSBE Network Book Series:4. Eres, Z., 2001. “Kırklareli –Asagı Pınar Acık Hava Muzesi”, Arkeoloji ve Sanat 101–102: 19-36. Eres, Z., 1999. Tarihoncesi Kazı Yerlerinin Koruma, Restorasyon, Sergileme Sorunu ve Cozume Yonelik Bir Uygulama: Kırklareli - Asagı Pınar Ornegi. Istanbul Teknik Universitesi (unpublished master thesis). Karul, N. and Z. Eres, 2003. “Rekonstruktionsversuche zu den Bauten von Asag. P.nar”, N. Karul, Z. Eres, M. Ozdogan, H. Parzinger (eds.) Asag. P.nar I Einfuhrung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und Architektur: 174–180. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (EurasianAbteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Karul, N., Z. Eres, M. Ozdogan and H. Parzinger (eds.), 2003. Asagı Pınar I Einfuhrung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und Architektur. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Karul, N., Z. Eres and A. Boratav, 1998. “Kırklareli’nde Deneysel Arkeoloji: Bir Neolitik Cag Evinin Yeniden Yapılıs.”, Arkeoloji ve Sanat 82: 19–25. Ozdogan, M. and H. Parzinger, 2012. “Die fruhbronzezeitliche Siedlung von Kanl.gecit bei K.rklareli Osttthrakien wahrend des 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr.”, Spannungsfeld von anatolischer und balkanischer Kulturentwicklung. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung). Ozdogan, M., 2010. “Cayonu: Canak Comleksiz Neolitik Donem’e Tarihlenen Bir Yerlesim Yerinde Koruma ve Alan Duzenleme Uygulamas.”, TUBA-KED 8: 141- 154. Ozdogan, M., 2006. “Organizing prehistoric sites as open air museums. Two experimental cases: Cayonu and K.rklareli”, Z. Ahunbay and U. Izmirligil (eds.) Management and Preservation of Archaeological Sites: 50-57. ICOMOS Turkiye, YEM Yayınları. Ozdogan, M., 2003. “The Prehistory of Northwestern Turkey. A Synoptic Overview of the Latest Evidence”, D.V. Grammenos (eds.) Recent Research in the Prehistory of the Balkans: 329– 368. Publications of the Archaeological Institute of Northern Greece. Ozdogan, M., 2000. “Kırklareli Kazılar.: Asagı Pınar ve Kanlıgecit”, O. Belli (eds.) Turkiye Arkeolojisi ve Istanbul Universitesi (1932-1999): 69-76. Istanbul Universitesi Rektorlugu Yayınları. Ozdogan, M., 1999a. “Anadolu’dan Avrupa’ya Acılan Kapı Trakya”, Arkeoloji ve Sanat 90: 2-28. Ozdogan, M., 1999b. “Preservation and Conservation of Prehistoric Sites. Two Experimental Cases: Cayonu and K.rklareli-Asag.p.nar”, M. Korzay, N.K. Burcoglu, S. Yarcan, D. Unalan (eds.)

195

International Conference on Multicultural Attractions and Tourism I: 179–195. Bogazici Universitesi Yayınları. Ozdogan,M., 1986. “Trakya Bolgesinde Yapılan Tarihoncesi Arastırmalar.”, IX. Turk Tarih Kongresi 1: 29–39. Turk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi. I. Polat Pekmezci, Z. Eres ve M. Topcubas., 2013. “Trakya’da Tarihi Bir Kasaba: Kaynarca-Geleneksel Yerlesme Dokusu Uzerine On Degerlendirmeler”, K.K. Eyupgiller and Z. Eres (eds.), Prof.Dr. Nur Ak.n’a Armagan – Mimari ve Kentsel Koruma: 493-509. YEM Yayınları.

196

AŞAĞI PINAR OPEN AIR MUSEUM PROJECT Eylem Özdoğan3 Department. of Archaeology, Istanbul University e-mail: eyozdogan@yahoo.com Introduction The prehistoric site at Aşağı Pınar is located in the region known as Eastern Thrace, which is geographically part of Balkan Peninsula. The area is situated in a basin created by the Istranca Mountains in the North and by Ganos Mountain in the South, and is isolated from the environmental influences of the sea, with the Ergene River being the primary source of water. Aşağı Pınar is in the North of this region, in a location that exhibits features of both the endemic steppe environment of Ergene basin with the forested mountainous habitat of the Istranca Mountains. Therefore the site is within range of two diverse habitats, an ideal situation for both subsistence and also for obtaining raw materials. The prehistoric cultures existing in Eastern Thrace are similar to those in the Balkans, especially those in Bulgaria, and Aşağı Pınar reflects well the Phases I-IV of the ‘Karanovo’ period in Bulgaria. Excavations at Aşağı Pınar revealed that the mound contained cultural layers that covered a time range between ca. 6200 - 5000 BC; or from the Early Neolithic to the Late Neolithic periods, as per the Balkan chronological denomination (Karul et al. 2003; Parzinger and Schwarzberg 2005, Özdoğan 2013). The excavations have been carried out since 1993 by a joint team of the İstanbul University and the German Archaeological Institute, directed by Mehmet Özdoğan. To date, the excavations have exceeded an area of 4000 m2, making possible the documentation of this period in full detail. However, as the remains exposed lack visual attraction or aesthetic appeal, there is interest in developing a modality to attract public attention (Eres et al. 2010) The design of an open-air museum at the site, a public display with new modalities addressing the general public has been the main concern (Özdoğan and Eres 2012). Along with developing public awareness, the development of a research centre that would also provide the means for experimental work was also considered. This paper will present a conspectus of the Pınar open-air museum project in Aşağı Pınar. Aşağı Pınar Mound Aşağı Pınar, a mound which dates back as far as the Early Neolithic up until the Late Neolithic periods, consists of nine layers (Karul et al. 2003; Parzinger and Schwarzberg 2005; Özdoğan 2013) The Middle and Late Neolithic layers, from 1-5 in ascending order, reflect a period in connection with the Balkan cultures, and of Phases III and IV of the Karanovo, a culture of Bulgaria. In this period, detached houses of rectangular shape constructed of wattle-and-daub architecture are aligned in a regular pattern. Pottery remains found in the above mentioned layers represent a tradition of dark faced burnished ware and carinated vessels. In the last decade, studies have focused mainly on the Early Neolithic deposits, which are situated on the north of the settlement and where three layers dated to this period were identified. Layers 6 and 7, which reflect this period, were found to be parallel 3

İstanbul University, Prehistory Section.

197

to Phases II and I of the Karanovo culture. In Aşağı Pınar, there is also a transition phase called the 5-6 Transition Phases, which represent the evolution from the Early Neolithic to the Middle-Late period. The recent excavations in Aşağı Pınar have produced pottery assemblages in Layer 8 that indicate connections with its contemporaries in Anatolia, a period known as the Pre-Karanovo in the Balkans. Aşağı Pınar Open Air Museum Project

Figure 1. Plan of Aşağı Pınar Open Air Museum Project Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Museum (Fig.1) is a part of the Kırklareli Cultural Heritage Management project, which is a result of archaeological research in the district (see also Arı 2006; Arı et al. 2010; Arı and Eres 2009; Eres 2001; Eres at al. 2010; Özdoğan 2006; Özdoğan and Eres 2012). The aims of the project include the preservation of archaeological sites, mainly Aşağı Pınar and Kanlıgeçit, where studies have been conducted; and also the sharing of the information obtained at the end of these studies, chiefly with the inhabitants of the region, but also with a more general public audience. Within this framework, the goals of the project can be summarized in two parts. Firstly, to set up a sustainable project that will create its own resources for the preservation of the archaeological sites. Second, to enable this by sharing it with all the components of society, thus creating a sensitivity and awareness in the public by transforming the scientific data into a more comprehensible form (Eres 2001; Eres et al. 2010).

198

The Aşağı Pınar Open Air Museum, still under construction, comprises distinct sections: 

Exhibiting the archaeological remains

 

A reconstruction of a prehistoric village Natural environment planning

 

Experimental workshops Artificial excavation area Due to the visually weak architectural remains and the existence of a different architectural design at each stratum, much consideration has been given to how the arrangement of the Aşağı Pınar Open-Air Museum should be. As the remains of the architectural features lack visual stimulus, the plan is to use reconstructions a nd models to stimulate an understanding of original structures. Moreover, interactive activity units such as experimental workshops or children’s excavation fields, as well as training and workshops that will encourage visitors to spend more time in the museum have been added to the project. Another point of consideration in the arrangement of the open-air museum is to introduce the visitors to a totally different atmosphere the moment they enter the museum area. In order to achieve this, special care has been given to the natural landscaping of the museum; models of prehistoric humans and animals have been designed which will be placed in this layout. The open air museum project is designed for the preservation of the architectural remains and for sharing the information gathered during the Aşağı Pınar excavation. It is structured and initiated based on a specific approach, which defines the architecture and the regime of the period. One of the objectives for the future is to exhibit the structure remains and thus to allow the visitors to relate to the real archaeological data as well as to relate to the mound itself. Therefore a project plan has been created for exhibiting two areas under a protective roof when the excavations are complete. The most prominent facet of the Aşağı Pınar Open Air Museum Project is its architecture. During the restoration of the various structural remains encountered in the settlement, it has not been stated that the animations represent absolutely accurate recreations of the structures. End-results of restitutions are rather called “suggestions” although they rely on broad research and analysis. Furthermore, different architectural traditions exist in each of the layers at Aşağı Pınar. Therefore, it is evident that during Prehistoric period more than one architectural tradition existed in site. In this context, selecting which structures would best represent a village settlement from the site became a difficult topic. In the end the decision was to create a village presentation based on Aşağı Pınar Layer 2, since some similar living samples in Istranca Villages still exist (Eres 2002; Karul and Erse 2003). Therefore the prehistoric village reconstruction is not designed as a copy of Aşağı Pınar, but as a settlement, which represents the site during this period. Instead of building completely new structures, ethnographic cruck buildings were purchased from the Istranca villagers, and were taken apart and rebuilt on the museum grounds. This approach not only provided, the village museum with correct construction samples, but also prevented the slow destruction of these few remaining buildings, which were being ruined at their original location. (Fig. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12) Once the basic approach was decided for the Aşağı Pınar prehistoric village reconstruction, a spontaneous-looking village environment was created as much as possible

199

by using the excavation data as well as observations on the architectural order of constructions and settlements obtained in Istranca village researches. As the first step of the project implementation, two barns were purchased in 1998 from Ahmetler Village, a mountain village in the region, for the price of wood (because the villagers were selling the cruck constructions they are not using for the price of wood). Then the purchased constructions were transported to the excavation area. The massive oak boards which constitute the main bodies of the barns, estimated to be hundred and fifty years old by their owners (although exact ages are unknown), were found to be very sturdy. The main frames of these buildings were installed via mutual work of the excavation team as well as the handy men. In 2006 a third barn was bought from Ahmetler Village and erected. The skeletons of two of the structures were covered up in 2007, while the third was covered up in 2010, thereby being transformed into indoor exhibition areas. Since the structures are going to be used as exhibition areas, after the wood skeleton was erected, they were covered with modern isolation material on top of which was placed rye stems to give the roof the appearance of the original. As a result, wall surfaces that are resistant to weather conditions were obtained and covered with original material on the inside and outside. A fourth building was purchased in 2012, disassembled and transported to the excavation area to be re-combined in 2013.

Figure 2. Reassembling the cruck building

200

Figure 3. Reassembling the cruck building

Figure 4. Reassembling the cruck building

201

Figure 5. Reassembling the cruck building

Figure 6. Reassembling the cruck building

202

Figure 7. Reassembling the cruck building

Figure 8. Reassembling the cruck building

203

Figure 9. Reassembling the cruck building

Figure 10. Reassembling the cruck building

204

Figure 11. Reassembling the cruck building

Figure 12. Final stage of the cruck buildings The exhibiting method and the setup of the museum are also designed in parallel with the above approach. Upon completion, it is intended that these buildings will each contain an exhibit based on differing themes, in addition to containing general information. The four themes are planned to be: - Daily life, - Technology,

205

- Nutrition, and - Architecture in prehistoric age. Three buildings are intended for the purpose of exhibition and general information will be provided in the first building including archaeology, prehistoric ages, cultural history of Kırklareli, the research history, and our study. The second wattle and daub building will house an exhibition including an introduction that covers the prehistoric architecture and architectural layers in Aşağı Pınar Mound. This exhibition will contain a one-to-one reproduction of a part of one of the buildings, as well as models of architectural remains, and some structural elements. The prehistoric technologies exhibited in the third wattle and daub house will include models and representations of the production of pottery, copies of pots found on the excavations, production of bead, production of bone tools, and wood workmanship etc. The proposed prehistoric village reconstruction (Fig.13) to be displayed in the mound is not limited to the contents of ethnographical wattle and daub houses. A setting is being created in the open air to animate the natural environment as well as the building elements that help handling the daily activities such as the outdoor installations and courtyards etc. Models of wild animals and fauna (those identified through the remains encountered in the mound), which reflect the prehistoric period are also being created. These animal models, which are currently being exhibited together, will be placed at a different setting once the project is complete. (Fig. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ,22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28)

Figure 13. General view of the prehistoric village reconstructions

206

Figure 14. View from first building

Figure 15. View from first building

207

Figure 16. Exhibition in second building

208

Figure 17. Exhibition in second building

Figure 18. Exhibition in third building

209

Figure 19. Weaving

210

Figure 20. Exhibition in third building

Figure 21. Exhibition in third building.

211

Figure 22. Bead making

Figure 23. Exhibition in third building

212

Figure 24. Bead and bone tool making

Figure 25. Prehistoric tools.

213

Figure 26. Model of architectural remains of Layer 6

Figure 27. Model of architectural remains of Layer 4

214

Figure 28. Animal models for outdoor exhibition There is also a unit where educational and research based activities will be held and prehistoric technologies will be recreated with experimental methods. This unit will serve for the experimental activities of teenagers (high school or university students) or where experts from archaeology related branches would be able to conduct experimental studies and organize workshops. For this purpose two kilns (Fig. 29) are built in the area as a result of the joint Bulgarian – Turkish Project CrossCoopArch implemented under the IPA CrossBorder Programme CCI Number 2007CB16IPO008 in order to experiment with pottery making and firing. In addition to this area and as an important output of the CrossCoopArch project an experimental excavation pool (Fig.30, 31) was also built, consisting of twosegments; the first one to explain the mound formation and to teach the documentation of archaeological remains, and second will be used as an experimental excavation area. The other part of this unit is under construction. Epilogue Excavations at the prehistoric site of Aşağı Pınar have revealed significant evidence on the prehistoric cultures of Eastern Thrace, revealing the time span from 6200 BC to 5000 BC. As the areal coverage of excavations has been extensive, it has become possible to document this cultural stage in full detail. However as the remains exposed lack visual attraction, there has been investment in developing a modality to attract public attention. Thus in designing an open-air museum at the site, public display with new modalities addressing the general public has been the main concern. Currently the project is at a phase where we are focused on resolving the construction and exhibition problems, and the later plan is to complete the other components of the project, which we have summarized above.

215

Figure 29. Kilns for experimental studies

Figure 30. Artificial excavation area for experimental purposes.

216

Figure 31. Artificial excavation area for experimental studies

References Arı İ. 2006.Kırklareli Kültür Sektörü Uygulamaları: Kanlıgeçit Açıkhava Müze Örneği” Mimar.ist 21:103106. Arı İ., Z. Eres and A. Demirtaş 2010. “Kanlıgeçit Açık Hava Müzesi: Trakya’da Bir İlk Tunç Çağı İç Kalesi” TÜBA-KED 8: 229-240. Arı İ. and Z. Eres 2009. “From a Granary to an Exhibition Hall, Making Use of the Traditional Architectural Structures of Thrace to Display Archaeological Sites” In: Revitalising Built Environments: Requalifying Old Places for New Uses, edited by H. T. Yıldız and Y. İ. Güney, IAPS-CSBE Culture & Space in the Built Environment Network and the IAPS - HOUSING Network, 12–16 October 2009, İstanbul. Eres, Z. 2002. “Traditional Village Architecture of Thrace: Documentation, Problems and Future Prospects” In: Traditional Environments in a New Millennium, edited by H. Turgut and P. Kellet, pp. 447–452, 2nd International Symposium, IAPS-CSBE Network, 20–23 June 2001, IAPS-CSBE Network Book Series:4, Amasya. Eres, Z. 2001. “Kırklareli – Aşağı Pınar Açık Hava Müzesi” Arkeoloji ve Sanat 101–102: 19-36. Eres, Z., E. Özdoğan and A. Demirtaş 2010 “Aşağı Pınar Açık Hava Müzesi: Yaklaşım, Uygulama Süreci ve Karşılaşılan Sorunlar” TÜBA-KED 8: 183-200. Karul, N. and Z. Eres 2003. “Rekonstruktionsversuche zu den Bauten von Aşağı Pınar” In: Aşağı Pınar I Einführung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und Architektur, edited by N. Karul, Z. Eres, M. Özdoğan, and H. Parzinger, pp. 174–180. Archaeologie in Eurasien 18, Studien im

217

Thrakien‐Marmara Raum Band 2, Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Berlin. Karul, N., Z. Eres, M. Özdoğan and H. Parzinger (Eds.) 2003. Aşağı Pınar I, Einführung, Forschungsgeschichte, Stratigraphie und Architektur, Archaeologie in Eurasien 15, Studien im Thrakien‐Marmara, Raum Band I, Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein. Özdoğan 2013. Neolithic Sites in the Marmara Region Fikirtepe, Pendik, Yarımburgaz, Toptepe, Hoca Çeşme, and Aşağı Pınar. In: The Neolithic in Turkey New Excavations and New Research, Northwestern Turkey and Istanbul, edited by M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen and P. Kuniholm, pp. 167-269 Archaeology and Art Publications, İstanbul. Özdoğan, M. 2006. “Organizing prehistoric sites as open air museums. Two experimental cases: Çayönü and Kırklareli” In: Management and Preservation of Archaeological Sites, edited by Z. Ahunbay and Ü. İzmirligil, pp. 50-57. ICOMOS Türkiye, YEM Yayınları, İstanbul. Özdoğan M. and Z. Eres 2012. “Protection and Presantation of Prehistoric Sites. A Historic Survey from Turkey” Origini XXXIV: 467-484 Parzinger, H. and H. Schwarzberg (Eds.) 2005. Aşağı Pınar II, Die mittel und spätneolithische Keramik, Archaeologie in Eurasien 18, Studien im Thrakien‐Marmara Raum Band 2, Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut (Eurasian-Abteilung) & Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein.

218

THRACIAN BEEHIVE TOMB MISHKOVA NIVA RESEARCH Đ?ND EXCAVATION, STATE OF CONSERVATION AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR CULTURAL TOURISM Ivelina Ivanova Museum of History "Prof. Aleksander Fol", Malko Tarnovo e-mail: iva_diver@mail.bg

The Thracian Beehive Tomb at Mishkova niva (Fig.1) was discovered in 1981. It is located on the South-Eastern slope of Goliamo gradiste peak, about 3 km South-West of the town of Malko Tarnovo, and close to the border with Turkey. The sanctuary is a part of a large complex consisting of a fortress on top of the big Gradishte, ancient mines at its foot, a mound necropolis, a fortified Roman villa rustica and an ancient water-supply system connecting Goliamo Gradishte Peak with the buildings at the Mishkova niva locality.

Figure 1. Miskova niva - General view - present condition The excavations of the mound concluded in the summer of 1983 (Fig. 2, 3, 4). The building that was discovered belongs typologically to the Thracian cult architecture with a central circular chamber. Similar buildings discovered in Bulgaria date back to the 5th-3rd century B.C.

219

Figure 2. The mound during the excavations

Figure 3. Archive photo during the excavations. General view from the south

220

Figure 4. Archive photo during the excavations. General view from the north

Figure 5. The Round chamber during the excavations

221

The dome complex had been active from about the middle of the second millennium B.C. up to the Late Antiquity. The tomb is constructed of large marble blocks connected with metal brackets to form original architectural solutions. The round chamber (Fig.5, 6, 7) has a diameter of 2.70 m and is arched at the top of the dome with high triangular blocks. The entrance is crowned by a triangular pediment (Fig. 8, 9), the central field of which is occupied by a profiled shield, a spear and hands raised up with the palms turned to the viewer. West of the dromos (Fig. 10, 11, 12) is a rectangular camera built with medium-sized stones mortared with mud and covered with two horizontal plates. The most impressive architectural element is the so-called krepis (Fig. 13) with an outer diameter of 25 m encompassing the base of the mound. It is constructed of large marble blocks in three rows, the highest row curving into a vault and reaching a height of 1.8 meters above the ground.. There is a second internal krepis (Fig.14) with a diameter of 17 m, which lies concentric to the external marble wall, and is built of crushed granite. A great number of blocks and slabs scattered around the centre of the mound were excavated in its interior. Most probably these granite remains had formed a part of the first and earliest cult building in the tumulus at Mishkova niva. The sanctuary is one of the most famous monuments of ancient spirituality in SouthEastern Europe. It is of a great cultural, historical and architectural value and over 2,000 tourists visit it annually. Cultural tourism is rapidly developing as the most successful tourist industry in the border region, as interest in archaeological and museum complexes as cultural heritage touristic sites is growing. The sanctuary has the potential to become one of the most attractive sites for tourists visiting Bulgaria. The unique location of the site - on the border with Turkey, only 5 km from the checkpoint - creates an ideal opportunity for enticing tourists to enter Bulgaria. The location of Malko Turnovo municipality determines its use for touristic purposes â&#x20AC;&#x201C; within Burgas district, it hosts the highest number of tourist overnights in a year. It is also located in the largest nature park in the country and is only 50 kms from the most beautiful places on the Black Sea coast.

Figure 6. The round chamber today

222

Figure 7. In the round chamber - The place with very powerful energy The Thracian cult complex Mishkova niva has been a site of great importance since antiquity. This outstanding architectural and spiritual monument has survived throughout the ages and has reached us in an enviable condition. The existing architectural documentation made during the excavation of the preserved walls, blocks, tiles and architectural details found in the mound or outside it, allow for the preparation of a complete and accurate graphic reconstruction of the last architectural phase of the cult building covered by the mound. The main threat to the monument is the lack of funding for its restoration and development of the building maintenance plan. The only way to combat the destruction of the monument is its restoration and conservation. This activity requires very serious financial resources to solve all problems cardinally, but not one by one. Previous attempts at providing partial funding for the restoration of some portions of the site show that this is not an effective approach; the poor physical condition of the monument soon affects the restoration and undermines further attempts to claim financial support. In the very near future it will become clear that the lack of funding for the development and execution of a complete design of an architectural and reconstruction plan would be most probably fatal to the monument. Until present we have applied for funding at the World Monuments Fund and Europa Nostra Fund. We hope that the monument will be soon restored.

223

Figure 8. The triangular pediment â&#x20AC;&#x153;in situâ&#x20AC;?

Figure 9. The triangular pediment, today located in front of the Museum of history Malko Tarnovo

224

Figure 10. The dromos and the round chamber before last restoration in 2005

Figure 11. The dromos and the round chamber after last restoration in 2005

225

Figure 12. The dromos and the round chamber today

Figure 13. Part of the marble krepis

226

Figure 14. Archive photo during the excavations â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the krepis build of crushed granite

For the past 10 years it was visited by many students involved in programs to explore the cultural heritage of Strandzha mountain. Our partners in this activity were many schools in Burgas district, as well as leading Bulgarian universities. A Bulgarian-Turkish Summer University (Fig. 15) is organized for 12 years already in the Bulgarian and Turkish part of the Strandzha mountain - an area of common Thracian heritage. A key issue addressed by the Bulgarian scientists in ancient history and archeology is the Thracian cult complex Mishkova niva. In this sense, the monument is a subject of ongoing research. The Municipality of Malko Turnovo is also the organizer of an International Workshop in painting. The location of the Thracian complex is one of the places where artists create some of their best paintings. The monument is reproduced in more than 70 paintings displayed in many exhibitions. The place is said to have a very powerful energy and from this concept emerged the idea to host small concerts and performances there during the summer cultural festivals in Malko Tarnovo. In October 2012 a mini fire performance was organized there in support of the Burgas district candidacy for a European Capital of Culture. This is the monument on which Malko Tarnovo municipality wants to focus the attention of the government and the cultural institutions.

227

Figure 15. In this picture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; prof. Valeria Fol with students during the Bulgarian-Turkish Summer University in Bulgarian and Turkish part of the Strandzha

228

A BRIDGE BETWEEN ARCHEOLOGY AND PUBLIC: AKTOPRAKLIK CULTURAL HERITAGE PROJECT Necmi Karul Istanbul University, Faculty of Letters, Department of Prehistory. 34434 Laleli-İstanbul e-mail: nkarul@istanbul.edu.tr Introduction

Figure 1. The settlements dated to 5700-5600 BC, reflect a circular settlement lay-out surrounded by a ditch. The ditch is 120 m in diameter (depth: 4 m- width: 10 m). The buildings made by mud-brick walls in quadrilateral plan. The walls are supported by buttresses, which separate the interior into rooms at the same time. There is always an oven in one of these rooms. There are sheds, workshops, and stone platforms in front of the buildings and close to the center of the site, big ovens are observed. In the center there’s another group of building which surround the courtyard. Aktopraklık Cultural Heritage Project is a part of archeological research in Aktopraklık Mound. The excavations at the mound have been carried out since 2004 and revealed several levels dated back to mid 7th millennium BC to the mid 6th millennium BC. These dates comprise long sequences with no apparent interruption and stretching from the Middle Neolithic to the end of the Early Chalcolithic in the Anatolian chronology. The results obtained from Aktopraklık provide a remarkable amount of data on the Neolithization process

229

on the Northwest Turkey (Karul-Avcı 2013:45)4 The principal concerns of the archeological project at the mound are to answer questions concerning how the Neolithic way of life developed in the region. However one of the other major objectives of the project was to set up a sustainable culture sector project at the site, with the ultimate aim to bring together both the archaeological evidence and the wider environmental and traditional context in which prehistory was embedded. Hence, the Cultural Heritage Project in Aktopraklık is interactive, with features such as exhibitions of conserved archeological remains as well as reconstructions of prehistoric and traditional villages created with experimental applications. Aktopraklık Cultural Heritage Project

Figure 2. Aktopraklık, the walls that are exposed each year are coated with a waterproof material called geotextile, after which the wooden plate is supported from all sides like a mould. Aktopraklık is located to the west of Bursa, one of the largest industrial cities of Turkey. Bursa is the first capital of the Ottoman Empire; it always remained an important city of the Ottomans, and is therefore an attractive city today with its well-preserved buildings reflecting this period. There are other archeological sites and remains close to Aktopraklık such Miletepolis (Karacabey), Apollonia and Ryndacum (Gölyazı) and Lapadion (Uluabat Village). The region has a high potential in culture with one of the largest wetlands of Turkey, Uluabat Lake, and with other attractive natural places such as Ayvaini Cave, Gölyazı, islands 4

After the long break, the site was occupied again during the Late Roman-Early Byzantine Period covering an area of about 10,000 square meters on the ridge and extending towards the western flanks of the hill.

230

as well as the Uludağ Mountain. Aktopraklık Mound supports the potential of creating an archeology-centered culture project, which is discussed here under categories of protection, reconstruction and sustainability. The target audience of the project is primarily made up of three different groups. These are: -

Daily visitors from Bursa and surrounding cities that have an interest in the history and would like to visit an archeological site,

Students from all grades and teachers that attend to the trips and seminars organized to promote archeology as a science, and to help understand the historic continuum, and

Specialists and students being trained in or who have graduated from archeology and related areas. There’s no doubt that seeing the original archeological remains on their original

locations is something that will improve and enrich the visitors’ perception. On the other hand on-site-presentation has its own problems such as lack of visual qualities, and lack of endurance of materials such as mudbrick, and limestone against open air conditions. The buildings under protection in Aktopraklık are made of mudbrick. In the case of Aktopraklık, the building walls exposed every year are coated with a water-proof material and then the timber is supported from both sides like a mold. This method

of protection is

improved by the use of more permanent materials after selecting an area, which represents the building and settlement layout. Reconstruction of past and present Reconstruction is one method for increasing the perception of prehistoric sites and to share the information with different layers of society. The selected location doesn’t contain archeological layers underneath, is close to the remains of the mentioned period, and does not dominate the archeological context. Another point of attention was safety. Support for ground studies, statics and endurance of building materials were requested from authorities for this purpose. Chalcolithic Village Reconstruction: Construction of the Chalcolithic Period reconstruction -dated back to 5600 – 5700 BC- is mostly finished and represents the settlement surrounded by ditches. Four buildings were built directly on soil after conditioning the ground for construction. The walls are made of 40x40x8 cm imitation mud-bricks. The mud-bricks were produced in a serial manner with the press and vibration technique. Production of bricks and construction of the walls was carried out simultaneously - 10.000 imitation mud-bricks were used. Timber poles were

231

placed on the walls to support the roof, this latter being built by arranging canes on top, and covering them with soil. The walls were plastered with green clay that is also observed on the traditional village buildings and then painted with lime wash.

Figure 3. In front of the Chalcolithic buildings reconstruction are stone platforms known in the region as “kurutmalık” (drying place), which were possibly used to dry vegetables, as well as sheds distinctive for their poles supported by stones, and large domed ovens in the centre Traditional Village Reconstruction: The reconstruction of a traditional village is also part of the project scope. One of the aims is to help visitors to establish links with the past, helping them to have a sense of historical continuity, and encouraging them to preserve traditional values. For this part of the project six buildings were fully documented on their original locations in Eskikızılılema Village and taken apart, then rebuilt in the park area.During the village survey and documentation of the traditional buildings, all architectural elements were numbered before being deconstructed, and then assembled piece by piece during the reconstruction. Green clay used for plastering was brought from the village. Cattle barns, ovens, and work places were also built around the buildings, which are built on both sides of an old river bed. Local craftsmen were deployed at all stages of production, and the disassembly and reconstruction phases are documented in detail. Inside each of these buildings, boards will be placed telling the story of the specific past of a building, and their interior decorations will be arranged according to their specific functions. One of the objectives of this decoration approach is to increase participation by the visitors. A village coffee house where the visitors can rest, and ateliers for pottery, weaving, and forging are among those buildings planned for visitor participation (Karul et.al. 2010: 246).

232

Figure 4. Six buildings were fully documented at their original location in the village of Eskikızılelma, where they had been deserted in favour of concrete buildings. Following documentation the buildings were dismantled then rebuilt in the park area. Sustainability and General Remarks Nowadays the cultural heritage management is seen as a source of social enrichment for the surrounding area and society as well as creating places where information is produced. Every application contributes to the progress of this issue and the depth of requirement in this matter points out that archeology is not interfacing with the society in a sufficient manner. Project sustainability is important for solving this issue. Therefore the fact that Aktopraklık is in a large and industrial city such as Bursa, brings additional benefits such as other natural and cultural values in close proximity (Karul, N. in pres). The biggest local organization, Bursa Metropolitan Municipality, supports this project as an asset, which ensures its permanence. On the other hand the inhabitants of Eskikızılelma Village will be increasing the value of their labor with this project, which is devalued in the global labor market; this can be seen as insurance for the project. Having this objective in mind, places where the villagers can sell their products are planned, and this operation will be managed through the village cooperative. Sustainability will also be supported by the planned activities such as cycling, paramotoring, and trekking that will use this area as a logistic base. It is also an important matter of sustainability to make these types of areas a part of the formal training programs. Acknowledgments We are indebted to the following institutions for their support: Istanbul University Department of Scientific Research Projects (Project no: BYP 30001), Bursa Metropolitan Municipality and Master Maritime Agencies.

233

References Karul, N., M. B. Avcı.,2013. “Aktopraklık”, Neolithic in Turkey, M. Özdoğan, N. Başgelen, P. Kuniholm (Eds.), Archaeology and Art Publication, İstanbul 2013, pp. 45-68. Karul, N., M. B. Avcı, A. Deveci and N. Karkıner, 2010. “Bursa Aktopraklık Höyük’te Kültür Sektörünün Oluşturulması: Çok Yönlü Bir Proje. TÜBA-KED 8: 241-262. Karul, N., (in pres). Cultural Heritage Management of a Prehistoric Site in Northwest Turkey: In Aktopraklık” Heritage & Society, The Future of Heritage: Laws, Ethics and Sustainability Guest Editors Peter F. Biehl, R Nils Olsen & Mateo Taussig-Rubbo (all University at Buffalo) (in pres).

234

MANAGING CULTURAL HERITAGE: AN AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE Alı Byrne Balkan Heritage Foundation, Bulgaria e-mail: ali.byrne9@gmail.com On the first of January 1901, Australia officially became a federated nation governed by a single constitution. In the following 112 years, the country has quietly thrived, capitalising on both the industrial and tourism related benefits of the island’s vast mineral and natural resources. In the 1970s and 80s, Australia also became a world leader in cultural heritage management and conservation, with the introduction of legislative protection of both non-Indigenous historic heritage, including historic shipwrecks, and Indigenous cultural heritage objects and places. Following the establishment of such legislation, protection of cultural heritage in Australia has continually seen the introduction of new and updated legislative protections at both a national and state level. Unfortunately, while one would assume that such continuous legislative development would increase the protection, conservation and preservation of cultural heritage objects and places, the emerging pattern appears to be somewhat different. While greater numbers of archaeologists are working to record more sites than ever before, this work is more often than not done in the context of pre-development environmental approvals for mines, infrastructure, industrial and residential developments. Steps are not being taken to assess properly the significance of sites against financial objectives and no further studies of site patterning, landscape archaeology or cumulative impacts occur subsequent to the completion of reporting and registration of newly identified sites (Vines 2013). While this is not a singularly Australian problem, it is a very different case to the issues faced by Turkey or Bulgaria. This paper outlines the legislation in place in New South Wales, Australia for non-Indigenous and Indigenous heritage, both terrestrial and submerged, and discusses the potential for such legislation to become destructive in it’s own manner. New South Wales is situated on the east coast of Australia and contains more than 30% of Australia’s entire population. Coal and related products are the state’s biggest exports, and coal mining and associated activities have supported some of the greatest growth in the cultural heritage management industry in New South Wales. All Australian states manage and maintain their own cultural heritage legislation however Commonwealth legislation is also in place to protect archaeological and cultural heritage. Cultural heritage in New South Wales is managed under both Commonwealth (or federal) legislation and State legislation. For the most part, Commonwealth legislation applies only where State legislation has failed to offer protection to cultural heritage objects, places or values or where objects or places are considered to be of National or International significance (Australian Government Department of the Environment 2013a). At all levels, statutory controls are divided by Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage, where Indigenous heritage is protected by very specific sets of legislation which aim to protect not only the physical cultural heritage of Aboriginal people, but also spiritual and ceremonial places and places of significance relating to contact between Aboriginal and non-

235

Aboriginal people, such as missions and massacre sites. For New South Wales, such regulations are required due to the very complicated and largely negative history of Aboriginal contact with Europeans since the arrival of Captain Cook at Botany Bay in Sydney in 1788. The cultural heritage implications of the concept of ‘intangible’ cultural heritage will be discussed further following a summary of the most pertinent statutory controls in place to protect Australian cultural heritage. In the past, there were a number of acts under which cultural heritage was addressed in Commonwealth law and each of these was established in order to prevent purposeful or inadvertent damage, destruction or desecration of cultural heritage sites by an individual or organisation. Recently, however, the federal government repealed a number of old laws and systems in favour of what they refer to as the ‘one stop shop’ approach, whereby the government aims to ‘simplify the approvals process for businesses, achieve faster decisions and improve Australia’s investment climate, while maintaining high environmental standards’ (Australian Government Department of Environment 2013a). Such statements are an emphatic indicator of the direction in which cultural heritage management is heading in Australia – that protection of non-Indigenous and Indigenous heritage sites is about toeing the legislative line and not about putting real thought into the analysis and assessment of archaeological places and objects. This system operates under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, under which natural, Indigenous and historic places considered to be of high significance to the nation are protected. For Indigenous or Aboriginal heritage, “The Commonwealth is responsible for protecting Indigenous heritage places that are nationally or internationally significant, or that are situated on land that is owned or managed by the Commonwealth. This protection operates under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999“ (Australian Government Department of Environment 2013a). Three other Commonwealth laws also apply to Indigenous heritage in New South Wales, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984; the Native Title Act 1993; and the Protection of Moveable Cultural Heritage Act 1986. These acts pertain to the regulation and protection of Aboriginal objects and sacred sites, the export of Aboriginal goods and the rights of Aboriginal people to control their own cultural heritage (Australian Government Department of Environment 2013b). Submerged cultural heritage in Australia is separated into two discrete categories; shipwreck or maritime archaeology and the archaeology of submerged Aboriginal cultural heritage sites. In Australia, shipwrecks date back to the seventeenth century on the western coastline, when European, predominantly Dutch, vessels began exploring to the south of the East Indies (Australian Government Department of Environment 2013c). Statutory controls for the protection of shipwrecks have been present at both Commonwealth and State levels for about 30 years (Staniforth 2007). The Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976 was introduced and is administered by the Commonwealth government, and protects historic wrecks and associated artefacts older than 75 years and situated in Commonwealth waters. The appropriate Minister can also declare any wrecks not older than 75 years to be protected under this law where necessitated by the historic significance of the wreck or associated items. This law does not protect submerged items other than shipwrecks - sites such as submerged aircraft or Indigenous objects or places are not protected under these controls. Submerged items located within State governed waters such as bays, harbours or rivers are protected only under State legislation.

236

Sites of Aboriginal cultural heritage that are submerged off the coast date back to the early Holocene or before, when the sea levels started to rise, forcing Aboriginal people to move inland. Submerged Indigenous sites also include sites which were intended for submersion such as fish traps, as well as the archaeology of inland water bodies such as rivers, which occasionally contain intact artefacts of organic material (for example, tree bark canoes) which have sunk and remained undamaged in the sediment at the bottom (Staniforth 2007). Australia has not yet ratified the Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001, although in 2010, the Commonwealth, State and Territory governments signed an Intergovernmental Agreement in which the roles and responsibilities of all parties relating to the identification, protection, management, conservation and interpretation of submerged cultural heritage in Australia were established. Included in the agreement is a statement that Australia supports the principles of international best practice for underwater cultural heritage management as per the Annex to the 2001 Convention. However, further action has not yet been taken (Shearing 2012). At the State level in New South Wales, there are two main laws that protect cultural heritage, the Heritage Act 1977 and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW Office of Environment and Heritage 2013). The Heritage Act protects the natural and cultural heritage of New South Wales, particularly non-Indigenous heritage, by way of a Heritage Council and protection provisions for historic heritage sites. As New South Wales was the original landing place for the first convicts and settlers from England, it contains some of the oldest evidence of non-Indigenous people in the country. Submerged heritage is also protected under this law however, as with the Commonwealth Historic Shipwrecks Act, the law largely focuses on shipwrecks, and statutory protection of other submerged heritage objects or places remains minimal. Indigenous sites of high significance are also protected under the Heritage Act, however, the National Parks and Wildlife Act provides statutory protection for all Indigenous heritage, places and objects. This law includes not only the protection of known and unknown Indigenous sites, but also outlines the rights of Aboriginal people to participate in the assessment of Indigenous sites and the responsibilities of archaeologists to ensure that Aboriginal people are consulted about their own objects and places (NSW Office of Environment and Heritage 2011). The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 also plays a role in the protection of Indigenous objects and places, and Historic heritage sites, by ensuring that cultural heritage is properly assessed in land use planning and development. This is a brief outline of some of the more important aspects of heritage legislation in just one state of Australia. Such a saturation of legislation at multiple levels of government would appear to be a positive thing, however, Australian archaeology is slowly becoming nothing more than a nation wide machine. The sole purpose of most commercial archaeologists is to record sites within proposed development areas so that permits to destroy may be obtained by the developer, while at the same time, the government can claim that it is doing the right thing by our cultural heritage. Even among archaeologists, there is a lack of interest in actually examining assessment and management options for archaeological sites that are not considered to be ‘scientifically significant’ when recorded in the commercial context. The main driver of this problem is the relationship between the archaeologists or ‘heritage consultants’ and the client or developer - the situation becomes focussed on the monetary interests of both sides. Where a client has the desire to obtain

237

their permits and approvals with as little cost and trouble as possible, and the archaeologist wishes to please the client in order to secure further work in the future, an analytical or long term view of the importance of cultural heritage for the future is overlooked in favour of successful business in the present. In order to meet the needs of the client, a heritage consultant must toe the legislative line in order to get the job done, leaving no room for the analysis or assessment of the sites within the study area. For Aboriginal cultural heritage, this is especially damaging, because the nomadic lifestyle of the Indigenous peoples of Australia means that a real understanding of behavioural patterns and Indigenous culture cannot be developed without the analysis on a regional basis of site patterns and landscape use, including resource procurement, utilisation and management. The legislation requires the recording and registration of sites and necessitates the procurement of permits prior to the destruction of any Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal site, but there is no requirement for a comprehensive study of the archaeological context in the region beyond the study area. Cultural heritage management in Australia has taken the form of factory archaeology, with large quantities of poor quality recording work produced in order to accommodate the needs of business. The cultural heritage of Australia’s Indigenous peoples remains largely unknown to the public, partly due to the social complications, for example where sites can become endangered by racial aggression and are therefore not disclosed by the Aboriginal community, and partly due to the somewhat intangible nature of much of the Aboriginal cultural heritage. Australia signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2009, however, the government has yet to indicate that it will ratify the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. This convention provides a legal framework in which the intrinsic relationship between human rights and intangible cultural heritage protection are fundamental to the human rights framework (Shearing 2012, pp76). Such inconsistencies at a governmental level add another aspect to the management of cultural heritage by creating mistrust between archaeologists and Aboriginal people. Most archaeologists genuinely wish to record, assess and protect Indigenous archaeological sites, but the creation of commercial archaeology has encouraged corruption amongst consultants who are purely interested in making a dollar. While archaeologists are obligated to consult with local Aboriginal people (or ‘Traditional Owners’ as they are also known) during the completion of Aboriginal cultural heritage assessments, it is the archaeologist who makes the final assessment of the ‘scientific’ significance of a site and therefore its standing in the law. Large numbers of new archaeological sites are being recorded each day, particularly on mine owned land in regions such as the Hunter Valley of New South Wales where open cut mining is common, but after they are registered on the State database, there is no further requirement for strategic planning of landscape or site patterning assessment (Vines 2013). As most sites consist solely of stone artefacts, it is nearly impossible to excite public interest in the fate of Indigenous cultural heritage. Aboriginal people used organic materials for most of their shelters, tools, weapons and personal items, meaning that very little physical evidence now remains. The main site types found during archaeological surveys, depending on the landscape, are stone artefact sites (mostly made up of waste flakes), shell middens, rockshelter sites, sometimes with painted or engraved art, grinding groove sites, which are places where sandstone sheets near water sources have been used for the maintenance of stone tools and scarred or sometimes carved trees. The same issues face submerged Indigenous cultural heritage objects and places throughout New South Wales. While shipwrecks have been introduced into the Australian

238

consciousness as heritage items which offer both cultural value and academic interest, being symbols for all (non-Indigenous) Australians of our beginnings as a nation, other submerged heritage remains barely acknowledged by the governments and unknown by the public (Staniforth 2007). Public interest in historic heritage places and objects extends mostly only to the continued need for many Australians to establish an identity for themselves. As a nation built by migrants from all parts of the world, the question of identity is one which still resonates strongly with most Australian people, whether they are an Aboriginal Australian who has lost much of their culture, a recent immigrant or a tenth generation Australian whose ancestors arrived amongst the original transported convicts. Australia has a very short ‘built’ record and many people are unable to understand the significance of a building that is less than 100 years old, particularly when they have familial backgrounds from Europe and Asia where civilisations have been building impressive and beautiful structures for thousands of years. In New South Wales, the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development and Inter-generational Equity have been emerging for the past ten years as part of the framework of cultural heritage management. In the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, Guide to investigating, assessing and reporting on Aboriginal cultural heritage in NSW, Part 6 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 published in 2011, the concepts are defined as follows: “The precautionary principle states that full scientific certainty about the threat of harm should never be used as a reason for not taking measures to prevent harm from occurring. The principle of inter-generational equity holds that the present generation should make every effort to ensure the health, diversity and productivity of the environment – which includes cultural heritage – is available for the benefit of future generations. “ Unfortunately there is little information available to guide archaeologists in their assessment of cumulative impacts (for example, the nature and extent of a site which will be harmed by proposed developments in relation to other sites in the region) and no laws or regulations that enforce an assessment framework for cultural heritage which would promote inter-generational equity. While employment for archaeologists and cultural heritage specialists is at an all time high in New South Wales and indeed, in all states of Australia, and heritage legislation has been drafted and redrafted at all levels of government, the nation has lost its focus on maintaining the integrity of its cultural heritage and instead just continues to follow the process of taking a photo of a site and giving it a name before the bulldozers take it out. In summary, Australian cultural heritage management is faced by a number of challenges that stem from both political and social stances held by the Commonwealth and State governments as well as a lack of public interest, or at least a lack of understanding. Some of the problems stem from their desire to create jobs and satisfy big business, which forces them to overlook the cultural and social implications of losing our tangible and intangible cultural heritage at the hands of the minerals industry and developers. When cultural heritage legislation was first introduced in Australia in the 1970s and 1980s, Australia was heading in the right direction by attempting to regulate the recording of Indigenous and non-Indigenous cultural heritage. Unfortunately between that time and the present, no genuine steps have been taken to really safeguard the cultural heritage.

239

References NSW Environment & Heritage. 2013. Act Summaries | NSW Environment and Heritage. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/legislation/DECCActsummaries.htm#heritage [Accessed 29 November 2013]. Australian Government. 2013a. Early Australian shipwrecks | Australia.gov.au. 2013. Early Australian shipwrecks |Australia.gov.au. [ONLINE] Available at: http://australia.gov.au/aboutaustralia/australian-story/early-austn-shipwrecks. [Accessed 29 November 2013]. Australian Government. 2013b. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (the EPBC Act) home page: matters of national environmental significance, environment assessments, permits and approvals, compliance and enforcement, policy statements and significant impact guidelines. 2013. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/aboutus/legislation/environment-protection-and-biodiversity-conservation-act-1999. [Accessed 29 November 2013]. Indigenous heritage – Laws and Notices. 2013. Indigenous heritage – Laws and Notices. [ONLINE] Available at http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/heritage/laws-and-notices/indigenousheritage-laws. [Accessed 29 November 2013]. National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Act 2010 | NSW Environment & Heritage. 2013. National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Act 2010 | NSW Environment & Heritage. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/legislation/NPWAmendmentAct2010.htm [Accessed 29 November 2013]. NSW Office of Environment & Heritage 2011, ‘Guide to investigating, assessing and reporting on Aboriginal cultural heritage in NSW, Part 6 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974’. Office of Environment and Heritage, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Sydney. Shearing, S 2012, ‘Reforming Australia’s National Heritage Law Framework’, Macquarie Journal of International and Comparative Environmental Law, vol. 8, no. 1, pp.74-75 Staniforth, M 2007 ‘Australian approaches to defining and quantifying underwater cultural heritage – learning from our mistakes’ in J Satchell & P Palma (eds), Managing the Marine Cultural Heritage: Defining, accessing and managing the resource. Vines, G 2013, Where is CRM archaeology going? Australian Archaeology: Where is CRM archaeology going? [ONLINE] Available at http://australianarchaeology.blogspot.com/2011/09/where-is-crm-archaeology-going.html [Accessed 29 November 2013].

Legislation Commonwealth     

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act (1984) Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) Historic Shipwrecks Act (1976) Native Title Act (1993) Protection of Moveable Cultural Heritage Act (1986)

NSW   

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) Heritage Act (1977) National Parks and Wildlife Act (1974)

240

HERITAGE ONLINE: The concept for a new website and virtual museum of the Centre for Underwater Archaeology Dragomir Garbov5 Centre for Underwater Archaeology, 1 Apollonia St., Sozopol 8130, Bulgaria E-mail: d.garbov@gmail.com, cuasozopol@mail.bg

This is a short report on one of the features of the “CrossCoopArch” project6. In its role as a leading partner, the CUA has committed itself to designing a virtual museum for the purpose of promoting the cultural heritage of Bulgarian-Turkish border areas. By raising the awareness of Bulgarian travelers about the archaeology of Turkish Strandja it is our aim to increase the already significant flow of tourists to the area, directing them to the archaeological open-air museums of Asagi Pinar and Kanligecit. On the other hand, by creating an online version of the Kiten underwater archaeological exhibition and providing public access to adapted site- and artifact databases, we hope to further educate Bulgarian communities, thus contributing to our mission to research, protect and promote the Country’s submerged heritage. As early as the very beginnings of our work, we became aware that the now existing website of the CUA could hardly perform the functions of a gateway to the prospective online museum. This is why we decided to go beyond the frames of the project commissioning a new website where the museum would form a semi-independent section. Since work is still in progress, the following report will be confined to briefly presenting the concept for both webprojects, outlining their architecture and basic layout. Here it is necessary to remark that some details on this framework are still a subject of discussion and the upcoming release might bear differences from the structural scheme presented here. The Website (www.cua-sozopol.com): Besides the complexity of the online museum concept, another reason for considering the commission of a new website of the CUA is provided by the need to create possibilities for distance working. While the Centre employs a few affiliates, it is relying on a vast network of associate scholars and specialists whose work is largely dependent on the information acquired by and stored within the CUA. With recent developments such as upcoming remote sensing and mapping campaigns, the volume of raw data keeps increasing, as do the amounts of human and temporal resources needed to process it. Potentially this could result in serious financial and management complications. 1

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Mrs. Hristina Angelova and Dr. Nayden Prahov (CUA – Sozopol), Prof. Mehmet Özdoğan, Dr. Zeynep Eres and Dr. Eylem Özdogan (Istanbul University) as well as all the members of the Kirklareli Cultural Assets Association for providing information, help and support during my work on this project. 6 Cross-Border Cooperation for Capacity Development in the Field of Archaeological Heritage (Транс-гранично сътрудничество за изграждане на капацитет в областта на археологическото наследство), Project No 2007CBI6IPO008-2011-2-089

241

Intranet communications can provide an easy solution, being probably the most efficient way to gain remote access to common data by multiple users. Cloud computing services, on the other hand, provide large enough storage and online processing capabilities, eliminating the need to purchase, install and maintain a dedicated computer (server). Access to- and management of data is possible from virtually anywhere where there is internet coverage, including from small mobile devices (smartphones and PDAs). Thereby, the establishment of an intranet communication hosted by the CUA would enable both the affiliates and associates of the Centre to access and manage information databases from any location at any time, eliminating lots of collateral expenses. In addition to its function as a carrier of the virtual museum and a portal to online storages, the new website of the CUA is designed be an online representation of the Centre providing extensive information on its functions and activities. Information will be accessed via two headers (Fig. 1 & 2) along a logical and easy to understand navigation tree. Userfriendliness is a major Leitmotiv in the design, as the target group for the website includes visitors of all ages and backgrounds ranging from high state officials and subcontractors through to diving enthusiasts and general web-surfers. With the upcoming release of the website, we are striving to achieve a modern, attractive and informative web-platform that would increase the publicity of the CUA and provide easy access to information for its members, controllers, contractors and the general public. The Online Museum (www.cua-sozopol.com/museums/virtual_museum): Online- or virtual museums are a phenomenon associated with the expansion of internet technology in the early to mid-1990s. Together with interactive museums they form one of the innovative directions of museum development and embody the drive to adapt museums to the fast developing technologies of the Age of Communication. During their two decades of active existence, virtual museums have already become an object of theoretical research, as exemplified by the “Museums on the Web” Annual Conference. Even though there is a slight tendency towards decline to be observed, there is still a wide array of possibilities for successful implementation of the online museum concept – especially in the field of Archaeology. In Bulgaria, most physical museums already have some form of an online presence with varying degrees (and quality) of information. On one side of the spectrum we find the so called “brochure museums” –online platforms that provide basic contact information and, in some cases, a list of exhibitions. This type of online presence is common to most local and regional museums in the country. On the other side, there are expected to be museums that possess physical buildings and online collections, or even museum platforms that exist entirely online and manage extensive virtual exhibits. Attempts have been undertaken several times in that direction, but regretfully none of them have yet resulted in a functioning online exhibition platform. Even in their best conceptual form, prospective “virtual-museums” eventually devolve to tourist-oriented webpages of physical museums or historic towns, or simply to online advertisements of heritage-related projects that do bear some information on physical exhibitions, but never so far have provided any actual online ones. It is my opinion that in these cases, the term “virtual museum” is becoming depleted of its meaning and thus should not be applied. The virtual museum of the CUA is designed to stray from the status quo by introducing a platform designed specifically for displaying of both permanent and temporary

242

online exhibitions. In accordance to the temporal and financial frames of the “CrossCoopArch” Project, we decided on a scheme that would provide the highest effect at a most competitive cost (Fig. 2). The concept revolves around three leading notions, each of which describes an aspect of the desired result – communication, accessibility and focused information. There are different types of exhibitions ranging from the “basic permanent type” (Fig. 3) and the “advanced permanent type” (Fig. 4) through to the “temporary type”7. Data is organized in a logical structure that is easy to understand and orient in for individuals of all backgrounds. The information itself is not generic, but addresses topics specific to the work and research of the CUA and its partner organizations – depth and not breadth is the Leitmotiv. Aesthetic appeal is a major topic in the design of all exhibitions and innovation is being emphasized by the introduction, for the first time in Bulgaria, of public online access to 3D scans of archaeological artifacts. Another aspect of our striving to provide visitors with better understanding of Bulgaria’s coastal and marine archaeology is added by the publishing of three databases, referring to the different types of submerged archaeological sites along the country’s Black Sea Coast, as well as the materials that originate from them. The purpose of the “CrossCoopArch” Project is developing capacities and stimulating cross-border cooperation in the field of managing archaeological heritage in BulgarianTurkish border areas. The essence of this grant lies in the overcoming of differences and advancing together by means of communication on all possible levels. We are confident that by conceptualizing and creating the website and virtual museum of the Centre for Underwater Archaeology we have purposefully contributed to the goals of the Project, laid the foundations for further cooperation and development in the heritage-related IT, and made a successful effort for the dissemination of knowledge on the archaeology of BulgarianTurkish border areas.

List of Figures: Fig. 1: Architecture of the official website. Header 1 Fig. 2: Architecture of the official website. Header 2 Fig. 3: Architecture of the online museum Fig. 4: Architecture of basic exhibit Fig. 5: Architecture of advanced exhibit

The web architecture of temporary exhibits replicates the basic type.

243

Fifure 1. Official website. Header 1

Fifure 2. Official website. Header 2

244

Figure 3. Architecture of the virtual museum

Figure 4. Architecture of basic exhibit

245

Figure 5. Architecture of advanced exhibit

246