sign in sign up
<<
Home , Mesolithic

Upper Palaeolithic and human fossils hm Moravia and Bohemia (Czech Republic): some new 14C dates

JIfi A. SVOBODA, JOHANNES VAN DER PLICHT & ViTEZSLAV KUZELKA"

New radiocarbon dates from four Moravian and Bohemian sites are presented and linked to previous work on the depositional contexts of human fossils at similar sites in the region. Whilst dates from Mladec' confirm its early Upper Palaeolithic age, the chronologies of the other three sites require revision.

Key-words: radiocarbon dating, Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Moravia, Bohemia Introduction In addition to a previous paper on the Traditionally, the territories of Moravia and Bo- depositional context of the human fossils from hemia (Czech Republic) are considered rich in Mladec' and Kon6prusy-Zlatq ktifi (Svoboda human fossils from Upper and Early ZOOO), we focus in this paper on new 14Cdates, contexts. However, the fossil lists, as obtained recently from four Moravian and Bo- included in the available Catalogues and other hemian sites: MladeC, KonGprusy-Zlaty kiifi, reviews (VlEek 1971; Valoch 1996; Svoboda et Svitavka and Obfistvi, and discuss them in the al. 1996;Jelinek & Orvanova 1999;Wolpoff 1999) chronological framework of the human fossils are constantly being supplemented and modified from Moravia and Bohemia. It appears that the by new discoveries both in the field (MatouSek Mladei: dates confirm the expectations very , 2000; Svoboda et al. 2000a) and in the collec- whereas dates from the other three sites make tions (Trinkaus et al. 1999; ZOOO), by rediscover- a revision and reclassification of the contexts ing old fossils believed to be lost (Svoboda zoolb; of these human fossils necessary. Drozdova 2001), and by new dates improving both the chronologies and the archaeological contexts New dates from the four Czech sites (Pettitt & Trinkaus 2000). Mladec'I (Central Moravia) We review here 14Cdates for the region, ob- Sites 1-11 from MladeC are characterized by a tained from materials such as bone, charcoal multi-floor karstic system in the Tfesin Hill. It and calcite. The bone samples provide direct is penetrated by vertical fissures and chimneys, dates, whereas charcoal and calcite yield asso- where more than 100 specimens of anatomi- ciated dates. The dates are all shown in TA- cally modern human fossils were found at vari- BLES1 & 2. The samples received the standard ous locations between 1881 and 1922 14Cpretreatment to remove contaminants. Large (Szombathy 1925; Bayer 1925; SmyCka 1922; samples were measured by the conventional Skutill938;Jelinek 1983; Oliva 1993; Wolpoff method (GrN, Groningen; ISGS, Illinois), and 1999).The aim of our present project was the small samples (mg size) by AMS (GrA, reconstruction of the depositional context, as Groningen; OxA, Oxford). For ages beyond it was before removal of sedimentary fill- 20,000, there are inconsistencies in published ings, by combining the early reports with evi- 'calibration' records and thus in absolute chro- dence from sediment relicts still present in the nology, so that we use the I4C chronology in cave, using a Surfer programme graphic pres- this text. The measurements are all corrected entation (Svoboda 2000). It appeared that all for isotopic factionation, and are reported in human fossils were related to debris cones ac- BP (Mook & Streurman 1983). cumulated under the chimneys, the largest being * SvobodaJnstitute of Archaeology, ASCR, Department of and Paleoethnology, Bmo-Dolni VGstonice, Czech Republic. [email protected] van der Plicht, Groningen University, Center for Isotope Research, Nijenborgh 4,9747 AG Groningen, . Kuielka, National Museum, Department of Anthropology, Vaclavsk6 nbm. 68, 120 00 Prague, Czech Republic. Received 15 October 2001, accepted 31 January 2002, revised 14 April 2002 ANTlQUlTY 76 (2002): 957-62 958 NEWS & NOTES the so-called Chimney of the Dead at site I. The According to Szombathy’s (1925) descrip- majority of the cone deposits are of Middle tion of the locus ‘a’ at MladeC I (Dome of the Pleistocene age; the dating of the anatomically Dead),the human fossils were located directly modern human fossils found in their upper- below the surface calcite layer, and a similar most parts was based primarily on the pres- position was reported by SmyCka (1922) from ence of the MladeC points, i.e. bone projectiles another location of the same debris cone. In considered culturally diagnostic for the Early fact, portions of the calcite are still visible on Upper Palaeolithic in general and the some of the fossils preserved in the Vienna in particular (Albrechtet al. 1972; Svoboda 2001a). Natural Museum. Since the interval Dating the human bones directly was unsuccessful between our two samples documents a rapid thus far. Through the courtesy of Drs Szilvassy, formation of the series of calcite layers, we may Wolpoff and Frayer, a human rib fragment from conclude that the deposition of human bodies the main cave, chamber D, locus d, associated was either more or less contemporaneous or with MladeC crania 1,2 and 4, was submitted to slightly earlier. We conclude that our two 14C the Oxford Accelerator for dating in 1987 by C. dates of 34,000-35,000 BP provide the mini- Stringer (pers.comm.). Unfortunately it contained mal ages of the fossils; a direct date from the insufficient collagen to produce a radiocarbon human bone is still needed for confirmation. date (R. Housley pers. comm.). Our dating efforts concentrated on site I, Kodprusy-Zlat$ kuYi (Bohemian Karst} Szombathy’s find-spot ‘a’in the so-called Dome The karstic system of the Zlaty kiifi Hill resem- of the Dead. The graphic reconstruction shows bles that at MladeC, being another multi-floor that before removal of the sediments this spot cave site, with skeletal remains of a female in- lay at the foot of the large debris cone under dividual found in one of the deep cavities (the the Chimney of the Dead (Svoboda 2000: fig- Pros’ek Hall) on the surface of a debris cone ure 5). According to Szombathy (1925; Tafel2, under a vertical chimney (Pros’ek 1952; VlCek Abb. 2), his trench, 3 m deep, was sealed at 1957; Kuielka 1997; Svoboda 2000: figures 2- the top by a solid calcite cover (layer 1);just 3). Whereas at MladeC the deposition of hu- below it followed the deposits with Upper man bodies seems to be a repeatedly practiced Pleistocene human and faunal remains (layer act, KonBprusy shows a single event. At both 2), whereas the majority of underlying depos- sites, human bodies were deposited during ter- its (layers 3-7) were sterile. Today, several gen- minal stages of the accumulation of the debris erations of calcite layers are still visible on the cones. This analogy, together with the associ- cave wall adjacent to the find-spot, sealing the ated fauna, led researchers to date the time of top of this sequence. In 1994, an attempt was made deposition at both sites to the Early Upper to date two calcite layers by means of U-series Palaeolithic. Supporting evidence for Kongprusy isotopes, but the samples appeared to be con- was scarce: stratigraphically, the human remains taminated by clay (A. Latham pers. comm.). were deposited on or just below the surface, Two other samples, both from the top cal- the associated artefacts were culturally cite layers and 5 cm apart, were collected re- undiagnostic and the presumed bone projec- cently and dated by I4C. The results obtained tile fragment (MladeC-type) later appeared to from the carbonate are 34,160 (+520-490) BP be just a fragmented bone. In addition, the gla- for the upper sample (GrN-26333) and 34,930 cial fauna from the upper layers of the debris (+520490)BP for the lower sample (GrN-26334). cone might be older than the human fossils. Based on 813 values, the ages are c. For dating, VK selected a fragment of 4x2 800 years (sample 1) and c. 1200 years (sam- mm size, most probably from the cranial base ple 2). There is one basic assumption here: the of the buried individual. travertine should have been formed in more or Methodically, it is crucial how the date of less streaming, recent (at the time of formation) 12,870+70 BP (GrA-13696), obtained from this water, and not in e.g. fossil age water. human bone, changes our perspective in the In addition, a fragment of animal bone from search for analogies. In fact, the parallels now the Olomouc museum collection was submit- turn from the distant Moravian cave to the lo- ted for 14C dating. Unfortunately, no collagen cal regional archaeological background. The could be extracted from this bone. region of the Bohemian karst has a predomi- NEWS & NOTES 959 nantly occupation. No significant thropologists pointed to the surface fossiliza- Early Upper Palaeolithic site has been proved tion, including its whitish colouration, which before in the vicinity. The nearby site of Hostim, is different from the more fossilized Upper which seems to be a kind of central living-site Palaeolithic specimens. All this information for the Bohemian Magdalenian, is dated to raised considerable doubts as to the age of the 12,420+470 BP (Ly 1108). Another important find. Magdalenian living site, the De'ravB Cave (un- For dating, VK selected a fragment of the dated),opens in marginal rock walls of the same cranial vault, 10x5 mm in size. The result, Zlaty kLiii Hill (Fridrich & SklenBi: 1976; Vencl 1180+50 BP (GrA-13711), confirms the earlier 1995). In this perspective, the Kongprusy hu- doubts about the Pleistocene age of the fossil. man fossil provides the first evidence of mor- Most probably, it is an early medieval pit , tuary behaviour that may well be related to the hollowed as deep as the level of the palaeosol Magdalenian settlement system of the Bohe- and later filled with loess. More such cases are mian karst. However, we still propose to con- known and documented from other geological firm this single date by additional dating. In sections where the outlines of such pits in the particular, as at MladeC, we propose to date loess are invisible. the calcite layers which have originally sealed the sediments and which, nowadays, are still ObFi'stvi (Central Bohemia) attached at the walls of the ProSek Hall. On a sandy dune at the Labe river plain, Progek The analogy with the Early discovered four child in 1949, with no site of MladeC would suggest that deposition archaeological context. They were dated as of human bodies into deep karstic cavities was probably Mesolithic for several reasons: firstly, a type of mortuary behaviour with a longer the burial pits were covered by a well-devel- duration and transcultural significance. This oped Holocene soil attributed to the is further confirmed by the recent discovery of period; secondly, there was a suspicious lack Mesolithic human skeletal remains in a smaller of associated artefacts; and thirdly, Mesolithic karstic fissure on top of the Bacin Hill (Bohe- occupation was documented at other sites in mian karst), dated to 9500 BP (MatouSek 2000). the region (VlCek 1956; 1971). However, occupation is also present. The date Svitcivka (Central Moravia) obtained from burial 4, a fragment of mesial Skeletal fragments of a female individual were part of a rib, 20 mm long (4650f50 BP, GrA- discovered at Svitavka during geological sur- 13710),points nevertheless to the later, Neolithic veying in 1962 (Smolikova & Loiek 1963).The or Eneolithic age, which is still consistent with find was dated to the Upper Palaeolithic (Klima the geological situation. The lack of associated 1963; VlCek 1971) because of its location in a artefacts, as a negative argument, seems weak palaeosol stratified in the loess section, and its to support any dating. Naturally, since the new association with several lithic artefacts, char- date only refers to one of the four burials, and coal and fauna, and because of morphological Mesolithic sites are found in the area, additional similarities of the facial bones with the find dating may be useful to confirm this first re- Brno 3. The latter, however, is lost today and sult. quite doubtful as an Upper Palaeolithic speci- men as well. Discussion: radiocarbon chronology for With the more detailed geological evidence Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic human known today, it appears that the type of fossils from the Czech Republic chernozem palaeosols in which the find was The Mladec' I (locus 'a') fossils belong to the presumably located developed earlier during earliest anatomically modern humans in Eu- the last glaciation (between late 01s stage 5 and , being at least 34,000 years old. The dates stage 3). Their last formation, at StrBnskfi skBla, compare well with the published dates from is dated to c. 30,000 BP (Svoboda & Bar-Yosef Vogelherd (Stetten,Germany), another Central in press). This stratigraphic position would European human fossil site with at least three exclude the Svitavka female from the individuals, dated by 14Cbetween 30,700 and group, where it has usually been placed, and 31,900 BP (H-series; Churchill & Smith 2000; make it older. At the same time, several an- Conard 2001). Whereas at MladeC the Aurig- 960 NEWS & NOTES site/fossil no. lab no. material context I4C age (BP)

MladeC 1-1 GrN-263 3 3 calcite Aurignacian 34,160+520/-490 MladeC 1-2 GrN-26334 calcite Aurignacian 34,930+520/-490 Kongprusy GrA-13696 human bone Magdalenian 12,870+70 Svitgvka GrA-13 711 human bone to be cancelled 1180f50 Pavlov-Northwest GrN-2039 1 charcoal, exc. 1957 Pavlovian 26,170+450 DV I1 triple burial GrN-1483 1 associated charcoal Pavlovian 26,640f110 DV 11 triple burial ISGS-1616 associated charcoal Pavlovian 24,000+900 DV II triple burial ISGS-1617 associated charcoal Pavlovian 24,970f920 DV I1 male burial GrN-15276 associated charcoal Pavlovian 25,5 70k280 DV 11 male burial GrN-15277 associated Pavlovian 25,740f210 DV II male burial ISGS-1744 associated charcoal Pavlovian 26,390+2 70 DV I1 fossil 33 GrN-15324 associated hearth Pavlovian 27.070f170 DV II fossils 36,39,49 GrN-21122 associated hearth Pavlovian 26,970+ 200 DV 11 fossil 47 GrN-15279 associated hearth Pavlovian 26,920f250 DV II fossils 51-52 GrN-21123 associated hearth Pavlovian 26,390+190 DV I fossil 35 OXA-8292 human femur Gravettian 22,840+200 Brno 2 OXA-8293 human rib Willendorf-Kostenkian 23,680f200

TABLE1. I4C dates for human fossils of the Upper Palaeolithic. DV: Dolni Vgstonice. site lab no. material context I4C age (BP)

Obfistvi 4 GrA-13 7 10 human bone to be cancelled 4650f50 Nizkd LeSnice GrN-24210 underlying charcoal Mesolithic 10,160f190 Vysokti LeSnice GrN-24217 associated charcoal Mesolithic 79301160 Sidelnik GrA-11456 associated hearth Mesolithic 7 120+80 Pod zubem GrN-2 3 3 3 3 associated charcoal Mesolithic 6580k50 Pod zubem GrN-2 3 3 3 2 associated charcoal Mesolithic 6790f70 Bacin OXA-9271 human femur Mesolithic 9490f65

TABLE2. The Obfistvi 14C date in context with other dates for Mesolithic human fossils and fragments. nacian classification is based on the bone pro- lowed by Zlatfkiiiiat Kongprusy, dated to 12,900 jectiles only (which may appear in other Early BP and reclassified as Magdalenian, and SvitAvka, Upper Palaeolithic contexts as well), the site dated to 1200 BP and classified most probably as of Vogelherd provided a rich and complex an early medieval burial. Aurignacian evidence, including typical lithic The majority of the Upper Palaeolithic hu- and art. However, the dating of MladeC man fossils from the Czech Republic are from I human fossils make them contemporary not the Gravettian context. Based on a large series only with the series of I4C dates from other of new I4C dates and a few stratigraphic Aurignacian settlements along the upper and superpositions, this complex is now being sepa- middle Danube (South Germany, Lower Austria), rated into earlier (Pavlovian, 30-25,000) and but also with the latest occupations later (Willendorf-Kostenkian,25-20,000) stages. at Strhska skAla, Moravia (Svoboda & Bar-Yosef In general, most of the Gravettian dates from in press). It should be recalled that this time-pe- the four major settlements (Pavlov I, Dolni riod saw a mosaic-like pattern of persisting ‘tran- Vgstonice 1-11 and Pfedmosti I) correspond with sitional’ cultural entities at the same time as the the Evolved Pavlovian interval, i.e., between expanding Aurignacian. 27,000 and 25,000 BP (van der Plicht 1997; On the other hand, certain Central European Svoboda et al. 2000b). The site of Dolni Vgstonice sites, presumably Early Upper Palaeolithic, should I1 in particular, well-structured spatially and now be excluded hom this chronological con- chronologically and also relatively rich in hu- text. The first was Velika Peeina in Croatia, dated man fossils, yields insight into this chronol- to around 5000 BP (Smith et al. 1999), now fol- ogy (Trinkaus et al. 2000; Svoboda 2001~). NEWS & NOTES 961

Focussing on dates obtained from the Groningen The new date of 12,900 for the human skel- Laboratory, from charcoal associated with buried etal remains from the deep cavity of Koniprusy- human skeletons (DV 13-15, DV 16), from the Zlat? kiiiifits well into the series of Magdalenian central of the same settlement units as dates which range between 13,000 and 12,500, the human fossils, and on the dates obtained both in Bohemia (Hostim) and Moravia (Pekfirna, directly from human bones (TABLEI), it ap- Kolibky; cf. Valoch 1996; Svoboda et al. 1996). pears that a few smaller human fragments such The Mesolithic, a period traditionally ne- as DV 33, 36,39,47, and 49 fall to the 27,000- glected by Czech archaeological research, is only year horizon (specific at the site of Dolni now receiving a chronological framework. Vistonice II), whereas the majority of finds, such However, it is not yet established nor published as the triple burial, the male burial and others, in full. Whereas the old Obr'istvi find appears follow with the subsequent Evolved Pavlovian to be Post-Mesolithic based on our new 14Cdate, stage (27-25,000). The same is generally true new human fossil sites are being discovered for Dolni Vistonice I, Pavlov I and Pfedmosti and 14C-datedrecently (TABLE2). This affects, I. The only later burial, corresponding with the among others, the directly dated Mesolithic Willendorf-Kostenkian stage of the Gravettian, human bones from a karstic fissure at Bacin is Brno 2 (23,700years, Pettitt &Trinkaus 2000). Hill in the Bohemian karst (MatouSek ZOOO), This later burial is specific because of its loca- and a series of small human fragments from tion outside the typically Pavlovian regions and the Mesolithic excavation project in sandstone settlements, and because of the unusual rich- rock-shelters of North Bohemia, dated by means ness of the . Another later date of charcoal obtained from the same levels and (22,800) obtained directly from the femur DV from the related hearths (Svoboda et al. 2000a). 35 from the site of Dolni Vistonice I is prob- ably contaminated, since most of the other dates Acknowledgement. We thank Professor Emanuel VlCek, DSc, from the DV I settlement correspond with the for consultation on the palaeoanthropological aspects of Evolved Pavlovian stage (Trinkaus et al. 1999). this paper.

References ALBRECHT,G., J. HAHN& W. TORKE.1972. Merkmalanalyse von posium on I4C and Archaeology, Groningen, 1989 = PACT Gesch opspitzen des mittleren Jungpleis tozans in Mi ttel- publications 8: 31-55. und Osteuropa. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer. Archaeologia OLIVA,M. 1993. Le contexte archbologique des restes humains Venatoria 2. dans la grotte de MladeE, in UISPE XIIe Congres, Vol- BAYER,J. 1925. Die altere Steinzeit in den Sudetenlandern, ume 2: 207-16. Bratislava: Institut d'Archeologie. Sudeta 1: 21-120. PETTITT,P.B. & E. TRINKAUS.2000. Direct radiocarbon dating CONARD,N. 2001. Chronostratigraphy of the Aurignacian in of the Brno 2 Gravettian human remains, Anthropologiel the Swabian Jura as a test of the Danube corridor and Brno 38: 149-50. Kulturpumpe models, in UISPE XIVe Congres, Pre-Actes: PROSEK,F. 1952. Vqzkum jeskynd Zlatbho kond u KonBprus, 139-40. LiBge: Universit6 de Liege. ceskoslovenskykras 5: 161-79. DROZDOVA,E. 2001: The human mandible from Pfedmosti, SKUTIL, J. 1938. PravSkB ndlezy v MladA u Litovle no MoravS. Archeologicke rozhledy 53: 450-56. Litovel: Krajinskh musejni spoleEnost. CHURCHILL,S.E. & F.H. SMITH.2000: Makers of the Early SMITH,EH., E. "KAus, P.B. Em,I. KARAvANId & M. PAUNOVI~. Aurignacian of , Yearbook of Physical Anthropol- 1999. Direct radiocarbon dates for Vindija GI and Velika ogy 43: 61-115. PeEina hominid remains, Proceedings of FRIDRICH,J. & K. SKLENAI?.1976: Die palaolithische und the National Academy of Sciences 96: 12,281-6. rnesolithische Hohlenbesiedlung des Bohmischen Karstes. SMOLfKOVA, L. & V. LOBEK.1963. Interglacial a nalez pleisto- Prague: NBrodni muzeum. cenniho Elovgka u Svitavky, Casopis pro mineralogji a JELfNEK, J. 1983: The Mladec' finds and their evolutionary im- geologii 8: 189-97. portance, Anthropologie/Brno 21: 57-64. SMY~KA,J. 1922. Nalezy diluviilniho ClovBkav MladEi u Litovle JEL~NEK,J, & E. ORVANOVA.1999. Czech and Slovak Republics, na MoravB, Obzor prehistoricw 1: 111-20. in R. Orban (ed.), Hominid remains: an up-date = SVOBODA,J. 2000. The depositional context of the Early Upper Anthropologie et pribistoire, supplement 9: 1-118. Paleolithic human fossils from the Konsprusy (Zlat); kdfi] KLIMA, B. 1963. Die Entdeckung eines pleistozanen Menschen and MladeC , Czech Republic, Journal of Human bei Svitivka, Pfehled cjzkumd 1962: 2-3. Evolution 38: 523-36. KU~ELKA,V. 1997. The postcranial skeletal remains of Pleistocene 2001a. MladeE and other caves in the Middle Danube re- man from Zlat); kdli near KonEprusy [Bohemia), gion: early modern humans, late Neandertals, and pro- Anthropologie/Brno 35: 247-9. jectiles, in Les premiers hommes modernes de la Pdninsule MATOUSEK,V. 2000. Bacin: 9490565 BP a 428k37 BP. Nova lberique. Actes du colloque de la Commission VllI de data z Ceskbho krasu, Archeologie ve stkdnich Cechdch I'UISPP: 45-60. Lisbon: IPA. 4: 15-30. 2001b. Analysis of the large hunter's settlements: excava- MOOK,W.G. & H.J. STREURMAN.1983. Physical and chemical tion at Pfedmosti in 1992, Archeologicke rozhledy 53: aspects ofradiocarbon dating, in First International Sym- 431-43. 962 NEWS & NOTES

2001~.Analysis of the large hunter's settlements: spatial femoral diaphysis, Anthropologie/Brno 37: 167-75. structure and chronology of the site Dolni Vestonice II- TRINKAUS,E., J. SVOBODA,D.L. WEST,V. SLADEK,S.W. HILLSON, Ira, Pamdtky archeologicke 92: 74-97. E. DROZDOVA& M. FISAKOVA.2000. Human remains from SVOBODA,J., V. L&EK & E. VLCEK. 1996. Hunters between East the Moravian Gravettian: Morphology and taphonomy of and West. The Paleolithic of Moravia. New York (NY): isolated elements from the Dolni VGstonice I1 site, Jour- Plenum. nal of Archaeological Science 27: 1115-32. SVOBODA,J., L. JAROSOVA & E. DROZDOVA.2000a. The North VALOCH,K. 1996. Le paleolithique en Tchequie et en Slovaquie. Bohemian Mesolithic revisited: the excavation seasons Grenoble: J. Millen. 1998-1999, Anthropologie/Brno 38: 291-305. VAN DER PLICHT, H. 1997. The radiocarbon dating, in Pavlovl- SVOBODA,J., B. KL~MA,L. JAROSOVA& P. SKRDLA.2000b. The Northwest = TheDolniVtstonice Studies4:427-36. Brno: Gravettian in Moravia: climate, hehaviour and techno- Institute of Archaeology. logical complexity, in W. Roebroeks, M. Mussi, J. Svoboda VENCL,S. 1995. Hostim. The Magdalenian in Bohemia. Prague: & K. Fennema (ed.),Hunters of the . The mid Institute of Archaeology. Upper Palaeolithic of , 30,000-20,000 BP: 197- VLCEK, E. 1956. Staroholocenni kostrove pohfby z Obfistvi u 217. Leiden: Leiden University Press. MBlnika (Early Holocene skeleton burials from Obfistvi SVOBODA,J. & 0. BAR-YOSEF(ed.). In press. Strdnskd skdla. near MBlnik), Anthropozoikum 5: 233-85. Early Upper Paleolithic occupations in the Brno Basin, 1957. Pleistocenni Elovek z jeskyne na Zlat6m koni u Moravia. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. Koneprus, Anthropozoikum 6: 283-311. SZOMBATHY,J. 1925. Die diluvialen Menschenreste aus der Fiirst- 1971. Czechoslovakia, in K.P. Oakley, B.G. Campbell & T.I. Johanns-Hohle bei Lautsch in Mahren, Eiszeit 2/1: 1-34, Molleson (ed.), Catalogue of fossil hominids:47-64. Lon- 73-95. don: (National History). TRINKAUS,E., J. JELfNEK & P.B. PETTITT. 1999. Human remains WOLPOFF,M.H. 1999. Paleoanthropology. 2nd edition. Boston from the Moravian Gravettian: The Dolni VEstonice 35 (MA):McGraw-Hill.

Birch-bark tar at Neolithic Makriyalos,

DUSHKAUREM-KOTSOU, BEN STERN, CARLHERON & KOSTASKOTSAKIS"

The authors discuss the first evidence for the use of birch-bark tar on Late Neolithic from Greece. This appears to have been used for two different purposes, to seal a fracture and to line the interior walls. The authors also discuss other possible uses.

Key-words: Makriyalos, Greece, Late Neolithic, birch-bark tar, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Introduction area of Pieria, Northern Greece (FIGUREl), less The potential for organic analysis of Neolithic pot- than 2 km from the sea. Fifteen km to the west tery from Greece is largely unexplored. The results lie the Pieria Mountains with Mt Olympus, the of a pilot study conducted on vessels from the Late highest mountain in Greece, on the southern side. Neolithic settlement at Makriyalos, northern Greece The settlement is located on the gentle slopes of are reported in part here. Gas chromatography-mass a natural low hill. Two ravines pass near the site spectrometry (GC-MS) is used to study the lipid to the northeast and southwest. The prehistoric composition of 19vessels representing the range of settlement covers about 50 ha and is one of the main vessel types. The lipids from visible residue largest non-tell sites in prehistoric Macedonia. and ceramic exh.acts of three of these vessels show Two main phases of occupation, Makriyalos I and the presence of molecular markers consistent with 11, both dated to the Late Neolithic period, are birch-bark tar. These results are the first evidence clearly distinguished (Pappa & Besios 1999). in Greece both for its use and for the use of natural products to affect the perfonnance characteristics Samples of pottery vessels. All 19 vessels analysed for organic residues come from Makriyalos I which is dated to the begin- The site ning of the Late Neolithic period (c. 54004900 The site at Makriyalos is situated in the coastal BC; Pappa & Besios 1999). Samples of three of

* Urem-Kotsou & Kotsakis, Department of Archaeology, Aristotle University, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece. Stern & Heron, Department of Archaeological Sciences, University of Bradford, Richmond Road, Bradford BD7 ZDP,England.

Received 11 October 2001, accepted 26 February 2002, revised 15 August 2002 ANTIQUITY76 (2002) 962-7