Società Per La Preistoria E Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia

SOCIET PER LA PREISTORIA E PROTOSTORIA
DELLA REGIONE FRIULI-VENEZIA GIULIA

QUADERNO - 9
MICHELA SPATARO
THE FIRST FARMING COMMUNITIES OF THE ADRIATIC:
POTTERY PRODUCTION AND CIRCULATION
IN THE EARLY AND MIDDLE NEOLITHIC
Edizioni Svevo Trieste
2002
ISSN 1124-156X
S
O
C
I
E
T

P
E
R

L
A

P
R
E
I
S
T
O
R
I
A

E

P
R
O
T
O
S
T
O
R
I
A

D
E
L
L
A

R
E
G
I
O
N
E

F
R
I
U
L
I
-
V
E
N
E
Z
I
A

G
I
U
L
I
A

Q
U
A
D
E
R
N
O

9

-
2
0
0
2

1
To Paolo, my parents and Davide
2
Il presente volume stato stampato

con il contributo delle

3
QUADERNO - 9
MICHELA SPATARO
THE FIRST FARMING COMMUNITIES OF THE ADRIATIC:
POTTERY PRODUCTION AND CIRCULATION
IN THE EARLY AND MIDDLE NEOLITHIC
Edizioni Svevo Trieste
2002
ISSN 1124-156X
QUADERNO 9 - 2002
c/o Museo Civico di Storia Naturale
Piazza Hortis 4 - 34123 Trieste (Italia)
REDATTORE
Paolo Biagi
CONTENTS
List of abbreviation of sites names ........................................................................................................................ page 6
Legend for thin section and SEM-EDS tables ........................................................................................................ 6
Aknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 9
1. Preface ................................................................................................................................................................. 9
2. Scope of the research .......................................................................................................................................... 10
3. Trade and exchange in the Adriatic Neolithic .................................................................................................... 11
4. The models: current views of how the Neolithic spread in the Mediterranean ................................................. 13
5. The Mesolithic background ................................................................................................................................ 15
6. The Holocene sea-level rise ................................................................................................................................ 24
7. The Impressed Ware Culture ............................................................................................................................... 24
8. The Danilo and Hvar Cultures ............................................................................................................................ 30
9. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................... 33
CHAPTER 2 - METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 35
1. Preface ................................................................................................................................................................. 35
2. Sampling ............................................................................................................................................................. 36
3. Methodological approach ................................................................................................................................... 36
4. Fabric ................................................................................................................................................................... 37
5. Analytical approach ............................................................................................................................................ 37
6. X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) ................................................................................................................................... 41
7. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) ............................................................................................................... 41
CHAPTER 3 - THE ISTRIAN AND DALMATIAN SITES: ANALYSES AND RESULTS .................................................................... 43
1. Viùla (Pula) .......................................................................................................................................................... 43
2. Jami na Sredi (Cres Island ..................................................................................................................................... 50
3. Vela Jama (Loinj Island) ....................................................................................................................................... 60
4. Tini-Podlivade (Zadar) .......................................................................................................................................... 68
5. Smili (Zadar) ....................................................................................................................................................... 73
6. Vrbica (ibenik) ..................................................................................................................................................... 93
7. Konjevrate (ibenik) ............................................................................................................................................. 103
8. Danilo Bitinj (ibenik) ........................................................................................................................................... 113
9. Vela pilja (Korula Island) ................................................................................................................................... 125
CHAPTER 4 - THE ITALIAN SITES: ANALYSES AND RESULTS ............................................................................................. 137
1. Fornace Cappuccini (Faenza) ............................................................................................................................. 137
2. Maddalena di Muccia (Macerata) ........................................................................................................................ 142
3. Ripabianca di Monterado (Ancona) ................................................................................................................... 151
4. Scamuso (Torre a Mare, Bari) ............................................................................................................................. 163
5. Correlation between the fabrics of the soil samples analysed in thin section ................................................... 175
CHAPTER 5 - THE FIGULINA POTTERY: ITS PRODUCTION AND TRADE ................................................................................. 179
1. Preface ................................................................................................................................................................. 179
2. Analyses .............................................................................................................................................................. 180
3. The Italian sites ................................................................................................................................................... 180
4. The Dalmatian sites ............................................................................................................................................. 187
5. Typological comparisons .................................................................................................................................... 189
6. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................... 190
7. Figulina production technology ......................................................................................................................... 190
8. Trade and exchange network ................................................................................................................................ 191
6
List of abbreviations of site names

Danilo Bitinj .......................................................... DB
Fagnigola .................................................................. FG
Fiorano Modenese ............................................. FMD
Fornace Cappuccini ............................................... FC
Gravina ................................................................. GRV
Grotta delle Mura ............................................ GDM
Jami na Sredi ....................................................... JNS
Konjevrate ............................................................ KNV
Maddalena di Muccia ...................................... MDM
Malo Korenovo...................................................... MK
Ripabianca di Monterado ............................... RDM
Scamuso ................................................................. SCA
Smil~i} Impressed Ware phase ....................... SML
Smil~i} Danilo phase ........................................ SMD
Smil~i} Hvar phase ........................................... SMH
Tinj-Podlivade.......................................................... TN
Vela Jama................................................................. VJ
Vela {pilja................................................................ VS
Viùla ........................................................................ VZ
Vrbica .................................................................... VRB
Legend for thin section and SEM-EDS tables
A..................................................................... abundant
P.......................................................................... present
R.............................................................................. rare
VA......................................................... very abundant
n/d............................................................. not detected
s.d .................................................. standard deviation
CHAPTER 6 - COMPARISONS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................. 193
1. Relationships between the IW sites .................................................................................................................... 193
2. Relationships between the Danilo Culture sites ................................................................................................. 195
3. Relationships between the Hvar Culture sites .................................................................................................... 196
4. Changes in the pottery technology/production?................................................................................................. 196
5. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................... 197
6. Figulina ware in its context ................................................................................................................................ 198
7. Later changes in pottery typology due to exchanges between the two Adriatic coastlines .............................. 198
CHAPTER 7 - CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 199
1. Impressed Wares and obsidian in the Adriatic: Early Neolithic trade and exchange ........................................ 201
2. Figulina ware in the Adriatic - mid seventh millennium BP ............................................................................ 202
3. Old models and new proposals for further studies ............................................................................................. 202
APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................................................................... 205
APPENDIX 2 ............................................................................................................................................................... 209
APPENDIX 3 ............................................................................................................................................................... 213
APPENDIX 4 ............................................................................................................................................................... 213
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................... 241

7
Acknowledgements
For the writing of this volume, I have taken into account the materials stored in the collections of various
Museums, Universities and Archaeological Superintendences of both the Dalmatian and Italian Adriatic coa-
sts. For the ceramic samples kindly provided, for their help in the location of the sites and the collection of the
soil samples, I wish to thank Prof. [. Batovi} (Zadar University - HR), Prof. G. Bermond Montanari (Bologna
University - I), Dr. M. Calattini (Siena University - I), Prof. B. ê~uk (Croatian Archaeological Society,
Zagreb - HR), Dr. D. Coppola (Rome Tor Vergata University - I), Dr. M. Mendu{i} ([ibenik Museum - HR),
Dr. K. Mihovili} (Pula Museum - HR), Dr. A.N. Rigoni (Pordenone Museum - I), Dr. M. Silvestrini (Soprin-
tendenza Archeologica delle Marche, Ancona - I), and Prof. T. Teàk-Gregl (Zagreb University - HR).
Special thanks are due to those scholars who helped me in the interpretation of my analyses and for their
analytical work, for providing help and donation of off-prints, volumes and geological maps of the investiga-
ted areas: Prof. I. Freestone (British Museum, London - UK), who also revised the final draft of my analyses,
Prof. Y. Goren (Tel Aviv University - Israel), Prof. M. Maggetti (Freiburg University - CH), Dr. R. Macphail
(Institute of Archaeology, UCL - UK), Prof. T. Mannoni and Dr. A. Capelli (Genoa University - I), Dr. J.
Mller (Otto-Friedrich University, Bamberg - D), Mr. A. Beer (Department of Geology, UCL - UK), Prof. C.
Orton (Institute of Archaeology, UCL - UK), Mr. K. Reeves (Institute of Archaeology, UCL - UK), Mr. I. Turk
(Slovenian Academy of Sciences, Ljubljana - SLO), Mr. S. Hirons (Birkbeck College - UK), and Mr. S.
Laidlaw (Institute of Archaeology, UCL - UK).
A. and M. Mac Gregor and their family provided me with much help during my stay in London in the last
two years. I want to express my gratitude to all of them for their kindness and support.
Special thanks are also due to Prof. K. Thomas (Institute of Archaeology, UCL - UK), for the critical
reading of the scientific chapters, to Dr. B.A. Voytek (Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley University
- USA), who accurately checked the English of the original manuscript and for her useful criticism, as well as
to my friend and colleague Mr. S. Nishiyama, for his help and the computer work.
Finally I want to thank Prof. S. Shennan, Prof. R. Whitehouse and Prof. T. Rehren (Institute of Archaeo-
logy, UCL - UK) for discussing the many controversial points of this work. I wish to thank also Prof. M.
Cipolloni Samp (Viterbo University - I), Prof. A. Galiberti (Siena University - I), Dr. L.H. Barfield (Birmin-
gham University - UK), and Dr. I.K. Whitbread (Leicester University - UK) for their valuable advice and
useful suggestions.
This work has been possible thanks to the love, encouragement and great patience of my family. I am
most grateful to Prof. P. Biagi (Ca Foscari University, Venice - I) who introduced me to this fascinating
subject and supported this research with his wise, critical and generous advice.
8

9
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1. PREFACE
This work focuses on the study of pottery production along the coasts of the Adriatic during the Neolithic
when pottery first appeared within an archaeological context, around the end of the eighth millennium BP. It
will contribute to the debate of when and how it emerged, and to the knowledge of its manufacture systems,
production centres and circulation in the basin of the Adriatic.
To reach this goal ceramic samples from thirteen sites located along both Adriatic coastlines have been
taken into consideration. Following the order in which they are presented in Chapters 3 and 4, they are
those of Viùla near Medulin (HR), Jami na Sredi on the Island of Cres (HR), Vela Jama on Island of Lo{inj
(HR), Tinj and Smil~i} near Zadar (HR), Vrbica, Konjevrate and Danilo Bitinj near [ibenik (HR), Vela
{pilja on the Island of Kor-
~ula (HR), Fornace Cappuc-
cini near Faenza (I), Mad-
dalena di Muccia and Ripa-
bianca di Monterado in the
Marche (I), and Scamuso
near Bari (I) (fig. 1).
The three different
scientific analyses (thin sec-
tion, XRD and SEM-EDS:
see Chapter 2, 5.) undertaken
on the pottery from these si-
tes are expected 1) to provi-
de a concrete contribution to
the knowledge of the Neoli-
thic in the study region, 2)
to define whether Neolithic
pottery production was local
or non-local, 3) to identify
raw material sources em-
ployed in the manufacturing
process, and 4) to contribu-
te to the understanding of the
movement, exchange or tra-
de of materials between the
first farmers.
It is well known that
among the many different
types of artefacts in archae-
ology, two come to the fore
due to their durability: sto-
ne and ceramics which are
merely the skeletal traces of
a much more comprehensi-
ve range of both staples and
valuables (CLARKE, 1976a).
Fig. 1 - Distribution map of the Neolithic sites from which ceramics have been analised:
Grotta delle Mura (1), Scamuso (2), Gravina di Puglia (3), Maddalena di Muccia (4),
Ripabianca di Monterado (5), Fornace Cappuccini (6), Fiorano Modenese (7), Fagnigola (8),
Viùla (9), Vela Jama (10), Jami na Sredi (11), Tinj (12), Smil~i} (13), Vrbica (14),
Konjevrate (15), Danilo Bitinj (16), Vela {pilja (17).
10
2. SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH

The scope of the research is connected with a series of changes that took place in the Adriatic between the
eighth and the sixth millennia BP.
The aims to define are the following:
a) the relationships among sites located along the coastlines of the Adriatic during the Neolithic. It has been
postulated that permanent settlements permit people to accumulate possessions, to make a new range of
artifacts, and to be predictably present in one place for exchange (HIGHAM and MALONEY, 1989: 662).
The relationships among these Adriatic coastal sites are more difficult to determine. High concentrations
of settlements are known in the Tavoliere Foggiano (BRADFORD, 1949), where at least 1000 Neolithic sites
are supposed to exist (DELANO SMITH, 1978: 101), the Materano, along the eastern coast of the Salentina
Peninsula, in southeastern Italy (CIPOLLONI SAMP et al., 1999: 14), and to a lesser extent, in the interior of
[ibenik in Dalmatia (MLLER, 1994). The only area in which intensive surveys and excavations have been
carried out is that surrounding the Manfredonia Gulf, in Apulia. Here, all the Early Neolithic sites are
distributed along the edge of the river terraces, at an almost regular distance of some 2 km from each
other. For these villages, MANFREDINI (1987: 45) has hypothesized an egalitarian subdivision in the exploi-
tation of the surrounding territories by the contemporary communities. Even though most of the Tavoliere
sites consist of large settlements surrounded by ring-shaped ditches, other types of settlements are also
represented. For example the site of Coppa Nevigata, which seems to have been inhabited mainly for the
exploitation of marine resources, namely the collection of Cardium edule
1
shellfish, even though cereal
cultivation and other agricultural activities are represented by both archaeobotanical and material culture
implements.
Obsidian and figulina wares are considered to have been prestige items that had been exchanged or traded
for other goods, such as salt or tools made of perishable materials that left no trace in the archaeological
record. It is well known that obsidian was traded mainly in the shape of bladelets, that is of finished tools
(AMMERMAN et al., 1978), whilst figulina wares, mainly four-handled flasks and open bowls, as suggested
by BARFIELD (1981: 32) for northern Italy. The models of circulation of these goods are still almost unk-
nown to us (TITE, 1999: 202). This research will help clarify some aspects of the transportation and
exchange or trade networks that existed in the Adriatic during the Neolithic and address the relationships
between sites. These include, to a certain extent, the movement, not only of sophisticated types of vessels
of so-called figulina ware, but mainly of those that characterise the ordinary, everyday ceramic record of
the Impressed Ware and the other Neolithic cultures of the Adriatic Sea;
b) the provenance of the raw materials as possible indicators of local manufacture or importation of the
vessels. This information is of particular importance in the study of the transitional period between the
Mesolithic and the Neolithic in the whole region. The basic assumption is that the frequency of items
obtained from a production centre should diminish in number and percentage according to their distance
from the production centre itself (HODDER, 1978: 158);
c) the nature of the so-called figulina pottery. This concerns the location of manufacture centres of the
vessels as well as the relationships between different sites, with evidence of such products as indicators of
trade or exchange of specific goods. It is important to apply thin section analysis to the figulina pottery
because this is perhaps one of the few methods of analysis that can provide a good set of information
about the method of manufacture of a variety of wares, to which the generic term figulina has been
applied simply because of its colour (buff or cream or whitish) and the powdered aspect of its surface.
The term figulina as such has no real meaning; in Italian figulo means potter and figulina simply
means made by the potter!
This research fits into the picture of the Early and Middle Atlantic climatic periods during which the
transition from the Late Mesolithic to the Neolithic took place. The data presently available for this period are
not uniform. Their variability depends mainly on the quality of the archaeological research carried out in the
different countries. The following topics have been developed: 1) the trade/exchange network between the
two Adriatic shores, 2) the approaches and theoretical models that have been put forward in order to explain
1
This species has recently been renamed Cerastoderma edule (K. THOMAS, pers. comm. 2001).

11
the Neolithisation process, 3) the scarcity of data on the settlement patterns of the last hunter-foragers and the
first farmers of the Early and Middle Atlantic period, and 4) the importance of the early Holocene sea-level
rise in relation to the presently available distribution map of the sites.
3. TRADE AND EXCHANGE IN THE ADRIATIC NEOLITHIC
3.1. FLINT
The general problems related to trade and exchange in prehistoric Europe, including those of the last
hunter-gatherers and the first farmers, have already been pointed out by CLARKE (1969: 286), who also treated
the procurement and distribution of flint and obsidian in the Mediterranean basin. In the 1950s the exchange
patterns of lithic material in the study region were considered of particular importance since in the Mediter-
ranean too, flint was mined from deep tunnelsat the mainland sites of Apulia; these supplies were also
supplemented by limited exchange networks circulating the highly prized obsidian from Lipari, Italy and the
Aegean Islands (CLARK, 1952: 174).
The information currently available for the sources of flint and the exploitation and distribution of arte-
facts is rather good. An abundance of excellent quality flint outcrops is well documented in the Pre-Alps of
northern Italy (BARFIELD, 1987: 231). The models of exploitation of one of these regional sources, that of the
Monti Lessini in western Veneto, throughout the Mesolithic-Chalcolithic periods, are equally well known
(BARFIELD, 1994).
A complex exchange pattern of flint material, especially in the shape of nodules, has been accurately
studied along the northwestern coast of the Adriatic; it involves both Lessinian and Marche flint. An accurate
examination of the flint assemblages from the Impressed Ware sites of Miramare di Rimini and Fornace
Cappuccini in Romagna and from the Fiorano and Friuli sites of northern Italy, has shown that Lessinian flint
was employed in the manufacture of artefacts at all the Early Neolithic sites of Friuli, including Fagnigola and
Sammardenchia around, or slightly later than the mid-seventh millennium BP (FERRARI and MAZZIERI, 1998).
On the contrary, the easily distinguishable flint of the Marche Apennine chain, north of Ancona, was
traded northwards and largely utilized for making tools at the Impressed Ware coastal sites of Romagna. A
down-the-line transmission (RENFREW, 1975) of flint nodules for chipping artefacts is attested along the coast
of north-eastern Italy in the same period when obsidian was traded throughout the entire Mediterranean (TYKOT,
1996). According to BASS (1998), this is the period when sea-faring movements are undoubtedly documented
across the Adriatic.
Another important source is that of the Gargano Promontory in Apulia. Here, at least twenty-six flint mines
have been discovered to date (BASILI et al., 1995). Of these, the only excavated one is that of Defensola that is
considered to be amongst the earliest Neolithic flint mines of Europe. Its exploitation took place between the start
and the middle of the seventh millennium BP (GALIBERTI et al., 2001: 95), as indicated by both the radiocarbon dates
and the pottery assemblage recovered in situ in the underground passages of the mine (DI LERNIA, 1993).
Regarding the exportation of flint between south-eastern Italy and the Dalmatian coast, it is important to
stress that characteristic, bifacial tranchets, most probably obtained from Gargano Promontory flint, have
been found at Markova {pilja on the Island of Hvar (Ê~UK, 1970), and that a flint outcrop has recently been
discovered on the Mala Palagrua Island, midway between Apulia and Dalmatia (FORENBAHER and KAISER,
1997), and Su{ac (BASS, 1998).
At present, a few flint sources are known along the coast of Dalmatia. The raw materials from these
outcrops are easy to recognise. They do not yield any good quality flint, but a light grey-bluish, highly calca-
reous, opaque variety. They have been identified in southern Istria, near Medulin and along the Promotore
Promontory (CODACCI, 2000-2001) as well as Ravni Kotari and Bukovica (CHAPMAN et al., 1996: 192).
The Impressed Ware flint industry of Viùla (Medulin) in Istria represents a unique case. The site is most
probably related to the exploitation of a local flint source. It yielded a great number of cores, unretouched
artefacts and unworked raw material pieces, while tools are much less numerous (CODACCI, 2000-2001). These
latter are represented by retouched flakes and blades and by some perforators on thick flake, with very worn,
rounded, broken points (see Chapter 3,1.). A smaller collection of flint artefacts from the same site, analysed
by J.K. KOZOWSKI (1990), is represented by a few atypical tools, among which are side scrapers and one
probable tranchet.
12
3.2. OBSIDIAN
The occurrence of obsidian bladelets (TYKOT, 1996) and flint artefacts (STAN~I} et al., 2000; BARFIELD,
pers. comm. 1998) of south Italian provenance, at a few Neolithic Dalmatian sites, would suggest the idea of
possible trade of pottery between the two coasts of the Adriatic, as the results of the excavations carried out by
BENAC (1975) in Bosnia, and other archaeologists in southern Italy indicate (RADINA, 1981).
The research of A.J. AMMERMAN (1985: 111) has proved that Liparian obsidian from the two sources
available in Neolithic times, those of Acqua Calda and Gabellotto, was traded to the Stentinello settlements of
both the Tyrrhenian and the Ionian coastal sites of Calabria, around the beginning of the seventh millennium
BP, most probably following a down-the-line distribution model (RENFREW, 1977). Obsidian, together with
flint and greenstone, is amongst the few raw materials of long distance provenance, discovered in the Neoli-
thic settlements of the Acconia Plain. Pottery, on the contrary, is most probably of local production as the
presence of both good sources of clay and riverine sand would suggest (AMMERMAN and ANDREFSKY, 1982:
168).
At about the same time Sardinian, Mt. Arci and Palmarolan obsidians were utilised by the Impressed
Ware communities settled at the Arene Candide and other western Liguria caves (AMMERMAN and POLGLASE,
1993). A few centuries later, obsidian emporia, such as that of Pescale, from which come at least 950 pieces,
are known in the Tusco-Emilian Apennines (see Chapter 5,8.). They most probably acted as distribution cen-
tres of obsidian bladelets of Sardinian provenance, to the Neolithic villages of the Po Valley (MALAVOLTI,
1951-1952a).
Along the eastern coast of the Italian Peninsula, Liparian and Palmarolan obsidians are reported from the
Impressed Ware sites of the Marche (BARKER, 1981: 62), from Fornace Cappuccini near Ravenna (BERMOND
MONTANARI et al., 1991: 182; AMMERMAN and POLGLASE, 1998), Sammardenchia in Friuli (FERRARI and MAZZIE-
RI, 1998: 170), and two Trieste Karst caves (WILLIAMS THORPE et al., 1979; TYKOT, 1996). Obsidian bladelets of
Carpathian provenance are also recorded from the two latter regions (RANDLE et al., 1993).
The presence of obsidian artefacts in the Neolithic sites of the Dalmatian coast is documented from the
Danilo habitation layers of Smil~i}, Danilo itself, and Vela {pilja (MARTINELLI, 1990: 148; Ê~UK, pers. comm.
2002). Even though no scientific analysis has ever been made on these artefacts, their colour and transparency
would indicate that they are of Liparian origin (BIAGI, pers. comm. 2000).
Since much work has been done on the trade of obsidian across the Mediterranean, and particularly the
Adriatic Sea (TYKOT, 1996: 69), and, according to the available literature, some authors suggest that Neolithic
pottery was exchanged between the two coasts (BENAC, 1975; CHAPMAN, 1988: 12), it is now necessary to try
to define the location of the pottery production centres.
3.3. POTTERY
Pottery, like any other artefact, can be connected in space and time to different periods of its existence.
The archaeological method implicitly supposes that Early Neolithic pottery was produced and used in the
place were its waste was found, whilst the model of craft specialization and trade suggests a complex struc-
ture, with defined roles for potter, trader and customer, and a particular, limited, and formal set of interac-
tions between settlements largely maintained by professional travellers (CHAPMAN, 1988: 32).
3.3.1. The ordinary pottery
In order to study the three main research issues, as outlined above, and to achieve a more complete picture
of the trade/exchange activities concerning the Adriatic Sea in the above-mentioned time-span, an average
number of 20-30 potsherds from each of the key sites attributed to the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware and to
the Middle Neolithic Danilo and Hvar Cultures, has been sampled for thin section analysis (Chapter 1, 1.).
To my knowledge, the only Adriatic sites from which scientific analysis on pottery (TITE, 1999) has been
conducted are those of the Defensola Impressed Ware flint mine (10 samples), the Arciprete open-air site (3
samples) (DI LERNIA et al., 1993), the Tavoliere villages of Passo di Corvo (MANNONI, 1983: 22 samples),
Guadone (BERNAB BREA and TIN, 1980: 20 samples), and Amendola (MANNONI, 1983: 16 samples), the open
air, coastal site of Scamuso (CREMANTE and STORTI, 1997: 5 samples), the Scaloria Cave (TIN and ISETTI, 1980:
3 samples), and La Quercia (KNOWLES and SKEATES, 1995-1996: 20 samples). These results have demonstrated
the local manufacture of the vessels that, in the case of the Defensola mine, were most probably produced by
one single human group/single settlement (DI LERNIA et al., 1993).

13
Apart from Greece, where the pottery assemblages from the Neolithic sites of Nea Nikomedia (YOUNI,
1996) and Achilleion (BJRK, 1995) have been analysed with the thin section technique, the only north Medi-
terranean region where Early Neolithic pottery has been systematically studied in detail from a scientific point
of view, is southern France. The results obtained by BARNETT (1990: 863) indicate that, according to this
author, in this region, pottery may be used to interpret the way material goods moved between the first farmers
and the last hunter-foragers. The same author, focusing on the specific case of the Impressed Ware Culture,
suggests that Cardium decorated ceramics were more commonly transported than other Impressed Wares.
3.3.2. The figulina pottery
Another aspect to be developed is that of the figulina pottery. It has been described by MALONE (1985:
120) as the most readily defined of the finewares that is characterised by a pale buff-yellow untempered,
polished, evenly fired material. Its distribution covers various regions of the Italian Peninsula during the
Early and Middle Neolithic. It is thought to be characteristic of the Ripoli Culture in central Italy, and of the
Danilo Culture along the Dalmatian coast. One of the main production centres has always been considered the
Middle Neolithic open-air site of Ripoli in the Vibrata Valley of the Abruzzi (CREMONESI, 1965). This is a deep-
rooted assumption (MALAVOLTI, 1940) of the Italian and Dalmatian archaeologists that is still awaiting confir-
mation. This suggestion is based on observations made by RELLINI (1934) in his volume on the Ripoli village.
According to CREMONESI (1965: 88) lopinione del Rellini che pi ha avuto influenza sugli studi successivi
quella che fa della ceramica figulina il fossile guida della cultura di Ripoli, alla quale venivano in tal modo
assegnate molte stazioni, specialmente marchigiane, in cui mancavano la ceramica dipinta e tipi altrettanto
rappresentativi; Rellinis view was accepted and even reinforced by BAROCELLI (1934) in the same year.
The importance of the figulina wares in the Italian and Dalmatian prehistory has been pointed out by
various authors (MALAVOLTI, 1940; BATOVI}, 1975a; BARFIELD, 1981). Figulina painted and unpainted vessels
have been found at several Early and Middle Neolithic sites of northern Italy, such as the Ligurian caves,
including that of the Arene Candide (MANNONI, 1999: 215), and many Fiorano, Vh, Fagnigola, and Square
Mouthed Pottery Culture sites (BARFIELD, 1981: 32). The commonest shapes are those of typical Ripoli flasks
and hemispherical bowls, while Serra dAlto handles and vessels are known from many Square Mouthed
Pottery sites (MOTTES, 1997).
The problem of the figulina ware in northern Italy has been treated by BARFIELD (1981: 32) who observed
that the predominant vessel shapes represented among the trade pieces are narrow necked jars, often with
rim lugs to facilitate sealing. This might suggest that some valuable liquid was traded in themThis cera-
mic trade towards northern Italy might well be expected to be linked with the trade of obsidian.
Figulina potsherds from several sites have been analysed in thin section, by XRD and SEM-EDS in order
to define their origin and their possible socio-economic and cultural role. The question of their provenance is
particularly important because they have often been considered containers of specific goods. As suggested by
MALONE (1985: 139), its production may have been on a restricted local scale, as specialist craft production,
with exchange networks carrying the pottery to a number of secondary and tertiary destinations. Unfortuna-
tely, little research has yet been carried out on clay sources, so centres have not yet been identified.
4. THE MODELS: CURRENT VIEWS OF HOW THE NEOLITHIC SPREAD IN THE MEDITERRANEAN
One of the main problems in the study of the first food-producing cultures is whether their origin is to be
sought from a local background or they diffused from elsewhere. As reported by AMMERMAN (2002) the
spread of farming in Europe is a subject of interest to a number of disciplines ranging from archaeology and
anthropology to human genetics and linguistics. At present the debate is substantially divided between two
schools of thought, that of AMMERMAN and CAVALLI-SFORZA (1971; 1973) with their wave of advance model,
and that of M. ZVELEBIL and P. ROWLEY-CONWY (1984) who put forward their availability model, developed
from the experience of the two authors in northern Europe, especially in the Baltic countries and in Denmark.
According to the demic diffusion model proposed by AMMERMAN and CAVALLI-SFORZA (1984), the spread
of farming through Europe is to be seen as the result of two different processes: 1) the first involves cultural
diffusion that is the passage of cereals and farming techniques from one local group to the next without
geographic displacement of the respective groups; 2) the second isdemic diffusion, where the spread is due
14
to the movement of the early farmers themselves. This movement in the case of the wave of advance model
may be due to the frequent re-location of Neolithic settlements over short distances (AMMERMAN, 2002).
These authors clearly define the meaning of the term demic diffusion to be distinguished from that of
colonisation. The latter refers to groups of people who intentionally move to settle in distant lands, while
demic diffusion is to be seen as a slow and continuous dispersal of populations in a defined space. The
eventual contact of the incomers with local bands of the last hunter-foragers is also taken into consideration
implying the adoption (as possible exchange goods) of domesticated animals and cereals and (isolated) mate-
rial culture objects.
The availability model suggests that the adoption of farming passes through several forms of frontier
situations which can occur simultaneously in geographical spacethe transition to farming, when viewed in
terms of replacement of hunting-gathering adaptations by farming as a way of life, rather than as an introduc-
tion of element of farming economy, is likely to have taken much longer to complete than is usually supposed
(ZVELEBIL, 1986: 11).
One of the basic assumptions of the indigenist model is that of continuity between the Late Mesolithic
and the Early Neolithic in a defined region. This assumption presupposes an almost identical settlement distri-
bution and population density throughout the transitional period. According to the available evidence, the
number of Late Mesolithic camps or occupational layers in rock-shelters and caves in the entire study region
is very low, which makes the reliability of Zvelebils model for the central Mediterranean area, questionable.
One point worth stressing is the distribution of the Late Mesolithic sites (ZILHO, 1997; BIAGI, 2002; GUILAINE,
2002; SKEATES, 2002) and their chronology that covers some 1000-1500 radiocarbon years, according to the
different regions. The picture currently available for both the Adriatic basin and the western Italian coastline
is quite different from that provided by ZVELEBIL (1995: 118). A proposal for the application of Zvelebils
model to Italian prehistory was made by LEWTHWAITE (1987). According to this author it is inevitable that this
model passes through a number of changes in order to be applicable to a Mediterranean context. Following
CLARKE (1976: 21) he stresses la premessa di una intensificazione costiera che permetta ai raccoglitori di
raggiungere livelli di densit, complessit e sedentarismo paragonabili a quelli dei coltivatori presuppone
una scala di produttivit del mare propria del Baltico o del Mare del NordandLa premessa della pro-
grammazione stagionale in contrasto con, da una parte, la raccolta autunnale di piante selvatiche e, dallal-
tra, con lo sfruttamento delle ghiande e degli ungulatinon applicabile al Mediterraneo. The major weak-
ness of this model is represented not only by the riluttanza a dare il giusto peso ai fattori sociali invece che
a quelli ecologici o ergologici come stimolo al cambiamento economico but by the low number of Late
Mesolithic camps in northern Italy, where most sites are represented by flint scatters of typologically characte-
ristic types, or by sites attributable to the transition between the Boreal and the Early Atlantic (BIAGI, 2002).
The distribution of the Late Mesolithic sites of northern Italy does not coincide with that of the Early
Neolithic settlements. Even though the horizontal distribution of the sites of the two periods (Late Mesolithic
and Early Neolithic) is rather similar, the vertical, that is altitudinal, pattern does not coincide at all (BIAGI,
2001: 80). Little can be said of the distribution of the Mesolithic sites along the Italian Peninsula because of
the scarcity of sites of this period.
Another model has recently been proposed by J. ZILHO (1997). It is primarily based on his experience at
Portuguese Mesolithic shell-middens and Early Neolithic sites. Portugal is mainly an Atlantic-oriented coun-
try, both from a geographical and a historical point of view. All the sites mentioned by ZILHO (1992; 1993) are
strictly related to the sea-level rise of the tidal Atlantic Ocean. All the sites mapped in his paper are connected
with the Ocean and not with the Mediterranean Sea. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that his re-assess-
ment of the archaeological materials uncovered from the shell-midden and the Impressed Ware sites of the
region and the results of his excavations at the Caldeiro Cave (ZILHO, 1992) show an overwhelming sup-
port for the pioneer colonisation model (ZILHO, 1997: 38). His considerations are based on the study of the
material culture assemblages, on the re-evaluation of the radiocarbon dates and on his personal excavation
experience. His colonisation model is based on the fact that, apart from some very old absolute dates of the
Portuguese and Andorran Cardium Impressed Wares (Caldeiro Cave: 6870210 BP: ICEN-296; Balma Mar-
gineda: 6850150 BP: Ly-3289 and 6670120 BP: Ly-2839) (ZILHO, 2002), most of them are slightly more
recent than those of both Mediterranean France (MILLS, 1983: 140; GUILAINE, 2002), and Spain (BERNABEU
AUBAN, 1997). According to ZILHO the spread of farming from the southeast to northwest Mediterranean took
place quite rapidly, that is at a rate of some 5 km per year, as the radiocarbon dates from the Arene Candide

15
Cave in Liguria (MAGGI and CHELLA, 1999), would suggest. Furthermore, the oldest of these latter dates are
rather similar to those of Apulia (VARTANIAN et al., 2000) and the Dalmatian coast (MLLER, 1994). According
to ZILHO (1997: 21) at a level of resolution allowed by radiocarbon dating, this spread of Cardial farmers
and shepherds could be described as a punctuated event, not the outcome of a slow, regular, east-west spread
from one contiguous area to the next.
In a more recent article ZVELEBIL (2000: 57) proposes a new Neolithisation model assuming that neither
the introduction of farming through contact, nor by migration can alone explain the establishment of the
Neolithic. He reutilises the concept of leapfrog colonisation introduced by ZILHO (1997) that implies the
forming an enclave settlement among native inhabitants. ZVELEBIL (2000: 61) applies the hypothesis of
agriculture frontier to the Dalmatian coast that presupposes small scale movement of population within
contact zones between foragers and farmers, occurring along the established social networks, such as tra-
ding partnership, kinship lines (ZVELEBIL, 2000: 58). Nevertheless the simplest, or may be the most diffi-
cult question to answer is: where were the last Mesolithic hunter-foragers around the first half of the seventh
millennium BP (BIAGI, 2002)?
5. THE MESOLITHIC BACKGROUND
The terms Sauveterrian and Castelnovian Culture that are employed in this volume are those generally
accepted for the Mesolithic of the study region
2
. The number of Mesolithic sites so far known in the Adriatic
Fig. 2 - Distribution map of the Early, Pre-
boreal and Boreal (circles) and Late, Atlan-
tic (dots) Mesolithic sites mentioned in the
text: Tourkovouni (1), Preveza (2), Loutsa
(3), Ammoudia (4), Konispol Cave (5), Sida-
ri (6), Traba~ki Kr{(7), Medena Stijena (8),
Malisina Stijena (9), Odmut (10), Crvena
Stijena (11), Vela {pilja (12), Kopa~ina {pilja
(13), Gopodska pe}ina (14), Pupi}ina pe},
and other caves (15), Nugljanska pe} (16),
Podosojna (17), Pod ^rmukljo and Dedkov
Trebe` (18), Breg and Ljubljana marsh sites
(19), Trieste and Slovene Karst caves (20),
Grotta del Prete 21), Pievetorina (22), Ripoli
(23), Ortucchio (24), Grotta Continenza (25),
Grotta di Pozzo (26), Grotta Latronico (27),
Grotta delle Mura (28), Torre Testa (29),
Oria (30), Terragne (31), San Foca (32),
Alimini Lakes (33) and Grotta Marisa (34)
(after BIAGI and SPATARO, 2002, with modifi-
cations).
2
They follow the terminology partly introduced by KOZOWSKI and KOZOWSKI (1979) and later applied to the Adige Valley Mesolithic sequences that
are among the most complete of southern Europe (BROGLIO and KOZOWSKI, 1983; CLARK, 2000). According to this cultural sequence, the time-span
of the Sauveterrian Culture covers the entire Pre-boreal and Boreal climatic phases, and is characterised by triangular (hyper)microliths of isosceles
shape. The latter often obtained with the microburin technique, during the Preboreal and of scalene, elongate form, during the Boreal. According to
most authors, the Sauveterrian derives from the Final Epigravettian Culture (GUERRESCHI, 1983; MARTINI, 2000), while BROGLIO (1973) is more
sceptical due to the different typology of the cores yielded by Final Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic assemblages. The beginning of the Atlantic is
marked by the appearance of the Castelnovian Culture (KOZOWSKI and KOZOWSKI, 1979: 159) that derives its name from the rock-shelter site of
Chteuneuf-les-Martigues, in Provence. The flint industry is characterised by various types of (piquant tridre) trapezes (scalene, isosceles and
rectangular) obtained from bladelets with the microburin technique. Other typical tools are long end scrapers and denticulated blades and bladelets.
All the instruments are obtained from subconical blade or, more often, bladelet cores. Industries similar to this characterise the new period all over
Europe (KOZOWSKI, 1987).
16
region is very scarce (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001) (fig. 2). This might be due to different factors, which have
already been taken into consideration by various authors and that will be discussed at the end of this chapter.
It is well known that Mesolithic sites are extremely rare in the Balkan Peninsula (BAILEY, 2000: 32). This is the
case also for Turkish (ZDOGAN, 1997; 1998) and Greek Thrace (AMMERMAN, pers. comm. 1999), where inten-
sive surveys and the excavation of a series of cave sites have revealed the first traces of Mesolithic camps.
5.1. GREECE
In Greece, the distribution pattern of the Mesolithic open-air stations is limited to the coast of Epirus,
where RUNNELS (1995) discovered only four sites buried by coastal dunes. They consist of scatters of flint
artefacts, among which are trapezoidal, geometric microliths. Three of these have been mapped by VAN ANDEL
and RUNNELS (1995: 482). Another Ionian site is known along the northern coast of the Island of Corfu (SOR-
DINAS, 1969). The best-known cave site is that of the Franchthi Cave in the eastern Peloponnese (VAN ANDEL
and RUNNELS, 1995: 482). Others have been discovered in Argolis (Klisoura Cave) (KOUMOUZELIS et al., 1996),
in Thessaly (Theopetra Cave), and in the Youra Island (Cyclope Cave) (SAMPSON et al., 1998). This distribu-
tion pattern strongly contrasts with that of the Early Neolithic settlements, which are particularly numerous,
especially in the Thessalian Plain, where at least 275 Neolithic open-air sites are known to date (KYPARISSI-
APOSTOLIKA, 1998: 241).
The only Mesolithic site of this region is the Theopetra Cave, whose stratigraphy produced evidence of
Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Early Neolithic occupation layers. According to KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA (1999:
234) the appearance of an intervening sandy layer (90 cm thick) between the Palaeolithic and the Neolithic,
with distinguishing characteristics not related to any of these two periods, sets the problem of the existence of
the Mesolithic in the deposit of the cave. A radiocarbon date of 927575 BP (DEM-315) attributes this layer
to the Boreal climatic period (KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA, 1998: 249). No typical Mesolithic tools, such as geome-
tric microliths or backed microbladelets and microburins, have been recovered from this layer (ADAM, 1999).
The radiocarbon dates available from this cave show a gap of some 1000 years between the Mesolithic and the
Neolithic occupation layers (BIAGI and SPATARO, 1999-2000: 21; KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA, 2000: 136; THISSEN,
2000: 142).
A more reliable, but still problematic sequence for the understanding of the Mesolithic/Neolithic transi-
tion in Greece, is that of the Cyclope Cave in the northern Sporades. From this site the radiocarbon chronology
shows an almost continuous sequence with a gap of only some 300 years between the aceramic Mesolithic
levels, and the Neolithic ones (BIAGI and SPATARO, 1999-2000: 18), which is characterised by the appearance of
monochrome and red painted wares similar to those of Sesklo (SAMPSON et al., 1998).
Of major importance are the deposits of the Franchthi Cave in Argolis. Here the excavations brought to
light an almost continuous sequence that covers the entire Mesolithic and Early Neolithic periods. The
stratigraphy of this cave is rightly considered one of the most important of the central Mediterranean basin.
The accurate study of the flint assemblages carried out by PERLS (1987) has shown the peculiarity of the
Franchthi Mesolithic assemblages that are characterised by the scarcity of geometrical tools since the begin-
ning of the period, radiocarbon dated between the middle (P-2227: 9430160 BP) and the end (P-2228:
9060110 BP) of the tenth millennium BP (PERLS, 1999: 316). Microlithic, trapezoidal and triangular tools,
sometimes obtained from bladelets, make their appearance during the Late Mesolithic phase, dated between
8940120 BP (P-1664) and 853090 BP (P-2107). The levels above, very poor in lithic artefacts, are attribu-
ted by PERLS (2001: 26) to the Final Mesolithic (?). Various authors have supported the archaeological con-
tinuity of the Mesolithic layers into the Early Neolithic ones, up to recent times (see for instance BUDJA,
1999: 129), in order to demonstrate the local origin of the Neolithic in the Peloponnese
3
. According to THISSEN
(2000: 144) the discontinuity between the end of the Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic occupation of the
cave is also demonstrated by the radiocarbon evidence.
Another Mesolithic sequence, covering the Early and Late Mesolithic period, but missing any evidence
3
This view has been firmly rejected by PERLS (1999: 317) who, discussing the problem of the Neolithisation in the area on the basis of the finds from
the Franchthi Cave, observes that although at the beginning of the Early Neolithic the basic tool kit maintained the traditions of the Mesolithic..
a few pieces, such as pressure-flaked blades and trapezesclearly belonged to a different, Neolithic tradition. Furthermore, she also points out
that whether pottery was in use during the Initial Neolithic is still debated, even amongst Franchthi experts, and concludes that suddenly (and
probably after a break in occupation), one witnesses a fully developed Early Neolithic, with the complete range of domesticated species found in
Greece, a different lithic assemblage, pottery, bone tools, grinding implements, celts, ornaments, etc..

17
of Early Neolithic occupation, is that of Klisoura Cave, in Argolis, where excavations are currently in progress
(KOUMOUZELIS et al., 1996).
The survey carried out by C. RUNNELS (2002) in Thessaly, which is the core of Early Neolithic Greece,
even though mainly oriented towards the discovery of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites, failed to discover
sites of these periods. By contrast, a few Mesolithic flint scatters were found in Epirus and Argolis (KARDULIAS
and RUNNELS, 1995: 88).
The Impressed Ware sites in these regions are extremely poorly documented. Sidari is a mound located in
northwestern Corfu, with stratigraphy producing evidence of both Mesolithic and Early Neolithic occupation.
According to SORDINAS (1969: 26) the Mesolithic cigar-shaped, shell-mound (level D) had a maximum
thickness of 90 cm, while the overlying Neolithic layer (C, base) had a thickness of some 50-60 cm. This layer
yielded the earliest Neolithic pottery. This is followed by a sterile layer, some 70-80 cm thick (C, middle),
which separates it from the Impressed Ware pottery layer (C, top) which was radiocarbon dated to 7340180
BP (GXO-772). Other sites are those of Kastritsa Cave in the Pindus Mountains (HIGGS et al., 1967), whose
topmost, disturbed layers yielded a few Impressed Ware potsherds, some pluri-stratified mounds of the Thes-
salian Plain and its adjacent regions, such as Tsani, Prodromos, Achilleion, Sesklo, Gendiki, Nesonis, Karaga-
ts and Soufli (HAMEAU, 1987: 330; PAPATHANASSOPOULOS, 1996: 198) as well as the mound village of Nea
Nikomedia in Macedonia, along the left bank of the Haliakmon River, from which 9% of the analysed pottery
has impressed decorative patterns (RODDEN and WARDLE, 1996: 89).
The excavations carried out by SORDINAS (1969: 401) at Sidari produced evidence of Mesolithic occupa-
tion, dated to 7770340 BP (GXO-770). This layer yielded an assemblage mainly chipped from non-local flint
dominated by flakes followed, in decreasing order, by debris, chips, cores and technical pieces, tools, blade-
lets and a single blade (ADAM, 1999: 269). The picture given by this latter author, who has recently re-
examined this assemblage, is quite different from that furnished by SORDINAS (1970) who describes it as pro-
duced on local flint pebbles, including a few very atypical geometrics among which are rectangles, trapezes
and triangles as well as a few microlithic backed points. The Early Neolithic level above, containing flints and
a few fragments of pottery, has been dated to 7670120 BP (GXO-771). According to the radiocarbon dates
the Late Mesolithic shell-midden site was abandoned slightly before the advent of the first Neolithic commu-
nity that settled in the area.
5.2. ALBANIA
Moving northwards, the Konispol Cave that opens at 400 m of altitude, is located in the Sarand district,
close to the Greek border (SCHULDENREIN, 1998), some 7 km from the present Strait of Corfu. A good set of
radiocarbon dates is currently available for both the Late Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic periods of this
cave (fig. 3) (HARROLD et al., 1999: 367). The Late Mesolithic dates fall between 7630140 BP (Beta-67804)
and 741080 BP (Beta-79999), while the Early Neolithic ones occur between 7060110 BP (Beta-56415) and
647070 BP (Beta-80002). The Mesolithic horizons yielded a typical Late Mesolithic assemblage characteri-
sed by a bladelet industry, produced from subconical bladelet cores, with isosceles trapezes obtained without
the microburin technique, and notched bladelets (HARROLD et al., 2002).
5.3. MONTENEGRO
The most important Mesolithic sites of Montenegro (Crna Gora) (MARKOVI}, 1985) are the caves of Od-
mut (SREJOVI}, 1974), Crvena Stijena (BENAC and BRODAR, 1958), Malisina Stijena (MIHAILOVI} and DIMI-
TRIJEVI}, 1999), Medena Stijena (MIHAILOVI}, 1996), and Treba}ki Kr{ (DURI~I}, 1996).
The only site of this region from which are known Late Mesolithic occupation layers is that of Odmut,
whose cultural sequence has recently been re-published by KOZOWSKI et al. (1994: 61). According to these
authors the Mesolithic lithic industry from this cave is striking for its surprising stability, over the time-span
of ca 1500 radiocarbon years. The assemblages from the different layers are all characterised by a blade
technology. The most typical tools are isosceles trapezes obtained without the microburin technique, very
similar to those recovered from the Albanian Cave of Konispol, notched bladelets and short end-scrapers.
The occurrence of this peculiar industry has led KOZOWSKI et al. (1994: 67) to locate the boundary
between the Late Mesolithic Castelnovian Culture and the Odmut Culture in Montenegro, even though in a
previous paper KOZOWSKI and KOZOWSKI (1983) had attributed this latter assemblage to the Castelnovian
Culture. Following KOZOWSKI et al. (1994: 67, 68) it should be noted that the Castelnovian commonly
18
Fig. 3 - Konispol Cave (AL):

graph of the radiocarbon da-
tes calibrated using OxCal
(version 2.18 calibration pro-
gramme). Source: SCHULDEN-
REIN, 1998.
employed the microburin technique to produce trapezes, while this method - utilized at the neighbouring cave
site of Crvena Stijena, attributed to the Castelnovian, Late Mesolithic - was not used at Odmut. Differences
are also found in the end scrapers group. The Castelnovian industry contains a rich group of blade forms
(more numerous that at Odmut) with a number of specimens with angulated fronts and lateral retouch. These
types are not found in the Odmut industry. Moreover blades at Castelnovian comprise a larger proportion of
notched forms.
Eleven radiocarbon dates have been obtained from this sequence. Nine of them fall between 779070 BP
(Si-2226) and 6736130 BP (Z-142); two more, which are considered to be too old, yielded the following
results: 913580 BP (Si-2228) and 8590100 BP (Si-2224) (KOZOWSKI et al., 1994: 54) (fig. 4).
5.4. DALMATIA AND ISTRIA
No Mesolithic site is known along the Dalmatian coast as far as Vela {pilja on the Kor~ula Island (Ê~UK
and RADI}, 2000) and Kopa~ina {pilja on the Bra~ Island (Ê~UK, 1996: 18).
Even the accurate survey carried out in the Province of Zadar (BATOVI} and CHAPMAN, 1985) did not yield

19
Fig. 4 - Odmut Cave (YU):
graph of the radiocarbon
dates calibrated using OxCal
(version 2.18 calibration pro-
gramme). Source: KOZOWSKI
et al., 1994.
any Mesolithic find against a relative high number of Palaeolithic (42) and Neolithic (44) findspots in the
territory. This fact is explained by CHAPMAN et al. (1996: 61) as caused by the large-scale sea-level changes
that affected the Adriatic Sea between 10,000 and 5000 Cal. BC, flooding many coastal sites. Secondly, post-
Neolithic deposition of >1m of sediments has covered areas of bottomland in the valleys, a zone potentially
attractive to foraging groups. Thirdly, the absence of retouched artefacts diagnostic of the Mesolithic period
inhibits the identification of dated sites.
Another Croatian site, in the Istria region, is that of the Podosojna Cave, whose stratigraphy covers both
Sauveterrian and Castelnovian periods (MALEZ, 1979). A charcoal sample from this latter horizon has been
20
dated to 646090 BP (Z-198). Another Istrian cave, is that of Pupi}ina pe} (MIRACLE, 1997), which produced
evidence of Final Pleistocene and Early Holocene occupations, even though the flint assemblages from these
latter levels are so poor that they do not allow any consideration on the cultural aspect they represent. Here the
earliest Holocene occupation has been radiocarbon dated to 9590180 BP (Z-2572) and 8770310 BP (Z-
2577), levels 26-25, and to 9200170 BP (Z-2643) and 8708170 BP (Z-2635), level 24. The Late Mesolithic
is totally missing from the stratigraphy of this site.
A few more Mesolithic cave sites have recently been discovered near Pupi}ina, those of [ebrn Abri,
Nugljanska pe} and Klanj~eva pe} (MIRACLE and FORENBAHER, 1998). All this caves showed traces of Boreal
occupation. The richest finds come from [ebrn Abri. The Mesolithic layers of this cave yielded a poor assem-
blage, represented by very typical microlithic tools such as elongated, scalene triangles obtained with the
microburin technique. Three radiocarbon dates have been obtained from the Boreal levels, ranging from 928040
BP (Beta-120272) to 881080 BP (Beta-127707) (MIRACLE et al., 2000) (fig. 5).
Fig. 5 - Adriatic Mesolithic: graph of the radiocarbon dates calibrated using OxCal (version 2.18 calibration programme) (after
BIAGI and SPATARO, 2002: 169).
5.5. THE SLOVENE AND TRIESTE KARST
Apart from these sparse Croatian sites, the densest Mesolithic concentrations are those of the Trieste and
Slovene Karst. In Slovenia many sites are known around the Ljubljana marsh (Ljubljansko Barje) (MLEKU`,
2001), although only one has been published in detail. The open-air site of Breg (FRELIH, 1987), attributed to
the Castelnovian Culture on the basis of the characteristic flint assemblage, has been radiocarbon dated to
6630150 BP (Z-1421). Nevertheless, a more recent excavation revealed an older Mesolithic occupation layer
with a stone structure radiocarbon dated to the Boreal climatic period (MLEKU`, 2001: 47). Other sites are

21
known at the rock shelter of Pod ^rmukljo (BRODAR, 1992) and in the lowest layers of the cave Mala Triglavca
(LEBEN, 1988), not far from the Italian border, which both yielded typical Castelnovian assemblages. Another
Boreal rock-shelter has recently been discovered at Famlja, very close to the left bank of the Reka (Timavo)
River (TURK, pers. comm. 2000).
The situation in the Trieste Karst is rather different. There are at least fourteen caves, which have so
far produced evidence of Mesolithic occupation (MONTAGNARI KOKELJ, 1993). The last Castelnovian hun-
ter-foragers inhabited just a few of these, while most of them show the presence of Boreal, Sauveterrian
occupation.
The radiocarbon dates so far available for the Mesolithic of the Trieste Karst are those of Benussi (BRO-
GLIO, 1971), Ciclami (CICCONE, 1993), Zingari and Edera caves (BIAGI et al., 1993). The best-dated sequence is
that of Grotta Benussi from which five radiocarbon dates have been obtained. They are: 838060 BP (R-1045)
and 865060 BP (R-1045a) for the Sauveterrian occupation, 7620150 BP (R-1044), 7230140 BP (R-1042)
and 705060 BP (R-1043) for the Castelnovian levels. The Boreal Sauveterrian of Ciclami Cave has been
dated to 826070 BP (R-1041); while the Sauveterrian horizon of Zingari Cave has produced a result of
957080 BP (R-971a). Of great interest are the dates recently obtained for the Preboreal, Boreal and Early
Castelnovian Mesolithic layers of Edera Cave (BIAGI and SPATARO, 1999-2000: 36). The radiocarbon dates
from this cave are in accordance with the flint assemblages and the bioarchaeological material collected
during the excavations. Regarding the Mesolithic/Early Neolithic sequence, three main distinct anthropoge-
nic phases can be recognised, the first belonging to the Preboreal (Sauveterrian), the second to the (Middle)
Boreal (Sauveterrian) and the third to the (Early and Middle) Atlantic (Late Castelnovian and Early Neolithic
Vlaka Culture).
The systematic analysis of some of these Mesolithic assemblages (BROGLIO, 1971; CREMONESI, 1984;
BOSCHIAN and PITTI, 1984; CICCONE, 1993) have demonstrated that most of the Trieste Karst caves were inha-
bited during the Boreal, Middle Sauveterrian period. Most sequences are truncated at the beginning of the
Atlantic phase when, in the material culture flint assemblage, the first trapezoidal arrowheads make their
appearance. This fact, which has been recorded from most of the Mesolithic sequences of the Trieste Karst as
well as from the excavations in progress at Edera Cave (BIAGI, 2001) occurs at most of the Mesolithic strati-
graphical sequences so far known in northern Italy (BOSCHIAN, pers. comm. 2000), such as those of Trentino
(BROGLIO, 1992; CLARK, 2000) and of the Tuscan-Emilian Apennines (CASTELLETTI et al., 1994). The occurren-
ce of pure, Late Mesolithic Castelnovian layers is far more rare, and is restricted to Grotta Benussi (BROGLIO,
1971), Cavernetta della Trincea (ANDREOLOTTI and STRADI, 1963) and to hearth 3a of Edera Cave (BIAGI et al.,
1993).
5.6. THE NORTHERN AND CENTRAL WESTERN ADRIATIC COAST
West of the Trieste Karst no Mesolithic site has been recovered along the Marano Lagoon. All the Friuli
stations are distributed further inland, along fluvial morainic amphitheatres (CANDUSSIO et al., 1991), while a
few sites exist rather close to the present coastline of the Venetian Lagoon (BROGLIO et al., 1987).
Along the Italian Adriatic coastline, south of the Veneto, no Mesolithic site is known as far as the
Marche (PLUCIENNIK, 1994: 54). From this region, SKEATES (1999) lists six sites, none of which belongs to
the Late Mesolithic. The only dated site is that of Grotta del Prete. Here, above the Final Epigravettian
levels, traces of Preboreal occupation have been found, radiocarbon dated to 9990190 BP (R-645). A poor
flint industry recovered from the valley bottom, open-air site of Pieve Torina, along the Chienti River is
attributed to the Boreal, Sauveterrian Culture (BROGLIO and LOLLINI, 1982: 56). The finds from the open-air
sites of Ortucchio and Ripoli in the Abruzzi, are of uncertain stratigraphic position (RADMILLI, 1997), while
those of the Mesolithic sequence (spits 28-25) of Grotta Continenza (BEVILACQUA, 1994) are typically Sau-
veterrian. They are dated to 9680100 BP (R-557: spit 28), 9650100 BP (R-555: spit 27), 9330100 BP
(R-554: spit 27), 9100100 BP (R-553: spit 26) and 9490100 BP (R-552: spit 25). The poor assemblage
from Grotta di Pozzo in the Province of Potenza has yielded dates falling between 811090 BP (TO-3420)
and 937080 BP (TO-3422). It is attributable to a slightly later period in the development of the Sauveter-
rian Culture (MUSSI et al., 2000: 279).
Even the accurate survey carried out in the Biferno Valley of Molise, failed in recovering Mesolithic sites.
Despite the abundance of Epigravettian and Early Neolithic Impressed Ware settlements, no Mesolithic has
ever been discovered in this region (BARKER, 1995: 97).
22
5.7. THE SOUTH WESTERN ADRIATIC COAST

Apulia is most probably the region of southern Italy from which we have the best information regarding
the Mesolithic period. Although most of the finds are from surface collections, some cave sequences have
yielded Mesolithic habitation levels. This is the case for Grotta delle Mura near Monopoli in the province of
Bari. Layer 2 of this cave sequence gave a Boreal Mesolithic assemblage dated to 829050 BP (Utc-1417) and
to 8240120 BP (Utc-780) (CALATTINI, 1996), above a Romanellian, Final Palaeolithic layer dated to 10,850100
BP (Utc-1462). Late Castelnovian assemblages, on the contrary are known from the open-air sites of the
Salento Peninsula (MILLIKEN and SKEATES, 1990), such as those of Torre Testa (CREMONESI, 1978), S. Foca
(INGRAVALLO, 1980), Terragne (GORGOGLIONE et al., 1995), most probably in the surroundings of Oria (INGRA-
VALLO, 1977), and around the Alimini lakes (MILLIKEN and SKEATES, 1990). In south-east Italy the Sauveterrian-
Castelnovian sequence seems to be documented at only two caves, both still unpublished: Grotta Marisa in the
Salento Peninsula (GRIXONI, 1997) and Grotta Latronico in Basilicata (PLUCIENNIK, 2000). The Castelnovian
levels of this latter site have recently been dated between 780090 BP (R-449), and 740090 BP (R-447)
(GRIFONI CREMONESI, 1996; CIPOLLONI SAMP et al., 1999: 20).
5.8. DISCUSSION
The importance of the Mesolithic background in the study of the Neolithisation has been pointed out by
several scholars (see for instance KOZOWSKI and KOZOWSKI, 1983; LEWTHWAITE, 1986; ZVELEBIL and LILLIE,
2000). Nevertheless, a detailed map of the Mesolithic sites which might have been involved in the process has
never been drawn by any of the above-mentioned authors.
At this stage of the research, it is necessary to point out that only the Late Mesolithic Castelnovian
Culture might have been involved, to some extent, in the Neolithisation process, and not the preceding Sauve-
terrian one, which disappeared at the beginning of the Atlantic period (BINDER, 2000: 121; BIAGI, 2002).
According to the available data, our knowledge of the Mesolithic along the south Adriatic coastlines and
the adjacent regions is very scarce. Most of the data come from Preboreal and Boreal sites, while Early
Atlantic, Castelnovian ones are extremely rare. At some of the above-mentioned cave sites, the Boreal Sauve-
terrian occupation lies beneath the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware one. This fact has already been noticed by
several authors, such as GRIFONI CREMONESI (1996), CREMONESI and GUILAINE (1987) and GUILAINE and CREMO-
NESI (1987), who also noted the occurrence of trapezoidal microliths of Castelnovian tradition at some of the
oldest Impressed Ware sites of the Apulian coast.
The general impression is that the evidence for Mesolithic occupation is very poor also in the territories
where accurate surveys have been carried out (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2002: 174). The available evidence comes
from cave sites and scatters of surface artefacts from which a limited amount of information can be obtained
apart from the typological characteristics of the lithic assemblages. Furthermore, the occurrence of Late Me-
solithic Castelnovian sites is even less documented. This highly contrasts with the following Early Neolithic
distribution pattern, which indicates the presence of numerous settlements, distributed over large areas. These
data do not favour the view of a balanced population density during the transitional period between the Late
Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic.
Along the Italian Tyrrhenian coast, the evidence for Mesolithic occupation is even scarcer. The chronolo-
gy and the typological characteristics of the chipped stone assemblages are more difficult to interpret. The best
Mesolithic/Neolithic sequence of Sicily is that of Grotta dellUzzo in the Province of Trapani (TAGLIACOZZO,
1993). Apart from several claims to the continuity of this stratigraphy, the radiocarbon chronology shows a
gap of more than 1000 years between the so-called Mesolithic/Neolithic transition layer and the first Early
Neolithic occupation of the cave (BIAGI and SPATARO, 1999-2000: 25)
4
.
4
Another problematic site is that of Perriere Sottano in the Catania Plain. The pedology of the deposit is very homogeneous. It is composed of only one layer
produced by the dissolution of the sandstone that characterises the bedrock. The subdivision of this deposit made by the excavators (ARANGUREN and
REVEDIN, 1989-1990) is based on the presence of a supposed hardened walking floor discovered 50 cm below the surface. The upper level is richer in
flint chipped stone artifacts and faunal remains than the lower level, some 60 cm thick down to the bedrock. Spit 54 of the upper level has been dated to
8700150 BP (UtC-1424), while the lower-lying spit 60 of the same level has produced a result of 846070 BP (UtC-1355). The chipped stone assemblage
from the two horizons, composed of both flint and quartzite artifacts, is unique. Macrolithic tools and two atypical microliths, one abrupt retouched point
and one flakelet represent the assemblage from the upper level; while the lower one is rich in macrolithic and hypermacrolithic tools as well as in microliths.
The latter include types never recorded at any other Italian Mesolithic sites, such as leaf-shaped, hypermicrolithic, double points and large, bilateral, abrupt-
retouched points (ARANGUREN and REVEDIN, 1998). A fragment of Liparian obsidian comes from the spit just below the radiocarbon date UtC-1424. The
chipped stone assemblage from this site is very different both from those of the Final Epigravettian sites known in the island and from those of the other
Mesolithic sites such as the Uzzo Cave and the Cala dei Genovesi where the upper layers are dated to the beginning of the Holocene (LEIGHTON, 1999: 271).

23
The presence of peculiar Mesolithic assemblages, without (or with few) microlithic tools along the Tyr-
rhenian coast has led MARTINI (2000) to adopt the term undifferentiated Epipalaeolithic for these assembla-
ges. This idea derives from the discovery of a Mesolithic assemblage, dated to the beginning of the Holocene,
in the stratigraphic sequence of the Serratura Cave in Campania (MARTINI, 1993).
A few lithic industries, chronologically attributed to the beginning of the Holocene should be referred to
this aspect. They are characterised by assemblages without (or with very few) microlithic geometrics, such as
those of Riparo Blanc in Latium (TASCHINI, 1964), dated to 856580 BP (R-341), possibly the cave of La Porta
di Positano in Campania, dated to 8619200 BP (Pi-10) (FERRARA et al., 1959), and the Mesolithic levels of
Grotta del Santuario della Madonna near Praia a Mare along the north Calabrian coast (CARDINI, 1970). The
stratigraphy of this cave spans from the end of the Final Epigravettian to the Middle Bronze Age (Cardini,
1970; Bernab Brea and Cavalier, 2000). In addition the radiocarbon sequence shows a gap of some 1000
years between the Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic occupation levels (Biagi and Spataro, 1999-2000: 30).
P. BIAGI (2001; 2002) has recently rediscussed the problem of the distribution of the Late Mesolithic sites
of northern Italy in relation to the Early Neolithic ones. According to this author the two distributions do not
coincide other than in two well-defined regions, the Trieste Karst and the Adige Valley rock-shelters of the
Trento Basin. The occurrence of non-local pottery in the Late Castelnovian hearth of layer 3a of Grotta
dellEdera, in the Trieste Karst (SPATARO, 2001), is so far a unique case for this area.
The complexity of the archaeology of the upper Adriatic Basin around the middle of the seventh millen-
nium BP, or slightly earlier, has been recently reconsidered by BIAGI (2003a) who suggested that three cultural
aspects, one Late Mesolithic (the Castelnovian) and two Neolithic (the Impressed Ware and Danilo/Vla{ka)
were active in the region between the Karst and the Istrian Peninsula roughly at the same time.
Given the difficulty (or the impossibility) of establishing a very detailed seriation of the events that
took place in the area, it is also problematic to define whether the first Impressed Ware farmers were present
in the whole region when the last hunter-gatherers settled in the Trieste and in the Slovene Karst, and
whether or not the Impressed Ware and the first Danilo communities coexisted at roughly the same time
(SPATARO, 2001: 98).
The current archaeological evidence can be summarized as follows: 1) the distribution of the Impres-
sed Ware and Danilo sites seem to be complementary; 2) the Impressed Ware is poorly represented in the
Trieste Karst caves, the sequences of which never show any defined Impressed Ware horizon; 3) apart from
Edera Cave and Pupi}ina pe} (MIRACLE, 1997), most of the other sites of this period are undated; 4) apart
from the two above-mentioned ones, all the other cave and open-air sites were excavated with out-of-date
retrieval methods.
The evidence from Edera Cave, layer 3a, might represent the only indisputable example of relationships
between the last hunter-gatherers and the first farmers of the region. In ZVELEBILs (1986) terminology this
might represent the only evidence of an availability phase where contacts between the two populations are
attested by the exchange of goods, in this case of pottery as isolated items. Contrary to this author (ZVELEBIL
and LILLIE, 2001), the area where pottery is represented in hunter-gatherer contexts is known only from Edera
Cave and not all along the Dalmatian coast and the Italian Peninsula where (Late) Mesolithic traces of occu-
pation are very scarce (BIAGI, 2002; BIAGI and SPATARO, 2002).
There is no doubt that the availability and the demic diffusion models (ZVELEBIL, 2000) are reflected
in different ways in the ceramic contexts. The only evidence so far known for the first model comes from
Edera Cave, while the second seems to find better confirmation in the Adriatic basin. Thus, the supposed
balanced number of Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic which is supposed to be necessary during the availa-
bility phase is not confirmed by the archaeological data. Whether a demic diffusion or a leapfrog model
might help explain the spread of the Neolithic in the Adriatic region is still disputable. The distribution of the
Impressed Ware (and also of the Danilo) pottery would support the idea of some kind of population movement
from south-east to north-west. Their rate of advance, can be hardly defined because of the very limited number
of radiocarbon dates, although that of the Danilo Culture might have been rather rapid, as confirmed by the
strong similarities between the Gudnja pe}ina and the Trieste Karst radiocarbon dates, all falling around the
middle of the seventh millennium BP. The only evidence of a Mesolithic background in the Impressed Ware
material culture assemblages of the first farmers might be represented by trapezoidal geometrics in the chip-
ped stone industries, although this is a phenomenon that occurs almost all over Europe around the beginning
of the Neolithic.
24
6. THE HOLOCENE SEA-LEVEL RISE

Another point of this research is to define whether the scarcity of Mesolithic sites along the Adriatic
coastline is due to the post-Pleistocene sea-level rise, which undoubtedly submerged part of the plain that
might have constituted suitable land for the settlement at least of the Pre-boreal and Boreal Mesolithic
communities of the upper Adriatic (GEDDES et al., 1983; MILLS, 1983: 103; SHACKLETON and VAN ANDEL,
1986). There is little doubt that the scarcity of Mesolithic sites in this region can be linked to the sea-level
rise, as demonstrated by the marine shellfish remains, of the Trieste Karst Azzurra (CANNARELLA and CRE-
MONESI, 1967) and Edera Caves, around the middle of the seventh millennium BP. The Early Atlantic Meso-
lithic hunter-gatherers of these two caves exploited the marine resources of a rocky coastline, as demonstra-
ted by the great amount of Patella caerulea and Monodonta turbinata shellfish, while their Boreal Sauve-
terrian predecessors do not show any familiarity with the marine resources. This indicates that the Boreal
sea-shore was too far for their gathering radius. The geography of the upper Adriatic basin between the last
glacial maximum and the beginning of the Boreal has been summarized by VAN ANDEL and SHACKLETON
(1984: 310). Following these authors a high number of Late Palaeolithic to Boreal sites were undoubtedly
lost between 18,000 and 9000 BP, assuming that the sea-shoreline at this latter time was some 35 m lower
than the present one. Research in the Venetian Lagoon still in progress by A.J. AMMERMAN (pers. comm.
1999), however, has not yet revealed any trace of Mesolithic and Neolithic submerged sites.
In contrast, little is known of the location of the Early Atlantic sea-shore of most of Greece, Dalmatia and
south Adriatic region with the only exception of the fluctuation of the coastline in front of the Franchthi Cave
in the Peloponnese (SHACKLETON and VAN ANDEL, 1986).
A number of studies on the post-Glacial sea-level rise along the coasts of the Greek Peninsula have been
written in the recent past. Starting from SORDINAS (1969), who attempted to reconstruct the Early Holocene
coastlines of the Island of Corfu, to VAN ANDEL and SHACKLETON (1982), and more recently PSYCHOYOS (1988)
and LAMBECK (1996), the bibliography on the subject has steadily increased. The recent discovery of Mesoli-
thic sites with trapezoidal microliths along the Ionian littoral of northern Epirus is of great importance for the
definition of the shoreline of this region at the beginning of the Atlantic. The six sites consist of dense flint
scatters, located on fossil dunes distributed on the present shoreline between the town of Preveza and the
mouth of the Acheron River (RUNNELS, 1995: 724).
Following MLLER (1994: 279), whose view of the problem regards the Early and Middle Atlantic periods
along the Dalmatian coast, the loss of land as a product of the rising sea-level was minimal, thus it mainly happe-
ned about 1000 14C-years earlier than the appearance of first Impresso communities at the East Adriatic region.
According to the current knowledge, there is little reason to support the disappearance of Late Mesolithic
Castelnovian sites, due to sea-level rise along the south Adriatic coastline, while Early Neolithic, Impressed
Ware sites still exist close to the present coastline (see for example Scamuso: BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA, 1997,
and Torre Sabea: CREMONESI and GUILAINE, 1987).
The evidence of submerged Early Neolithic sites, along the north Mediterranean coast, is so far limited to
the Impressed Ware ones of Cap Ragnon, in the Marseille Bay (COURTIN et al., 1970-1972) and of Leucate-
Corrge, north of Perpignan (GUILAINE et al., 1984), where systematic studies on this subject were carried out
in the 1970s (DE LUMLEY, 1976).
7. THE IMPRESSED WARE CULTURE
The appearance of the early farming communities along the coasts of the Mediterranean is marked by the
occurrence of large settlements characterised by an abundance of pottery with impressed decorations obtained
by finger, fingernail, marine shell (Cardium or more rarely Pectunculus), and various instruments. Even thou-
gh these patterns vary region by region, the common characteristic is the technique adopted to decorate the
vessels, which is in most cases impressed. This technique gives the name to this widely spread aspect, which
is generically called Impressed Ware (IW).
7.1. TERMINOLOGY
A discussion on the meaning of this term at the last Round Table on the Impressed Ware of the Western

25
Mediterranean held in Nice in June 1999, failed to develop a better terminology or to define the Culture as
a whole. Nevertheless, it has been decided to adopt this term mainly because all the Early Neolithic potsherds
collected from both the Italian and Dalmatian sites have been described in the literature as belonging to the
Impressed Ware (or Ceramica Impressa or Cramique Imprime or Abdruckkeramik-Kultur or Impresso-Kul-
tur). It is well known that Impressed Wares throughout the Mediterranean basin
5
are differentiated group-by-
group and region-by-region and that their chronology covers at least 1000 years.
BERNAB BREA (1946; 1956) is one of the first scholars who described the main characteristics of this
cultural aspect in the publication of the results of his excavations at the Arene Candide Cave in Liguria.
Thanks to this scholar the chrono-typological seriation of the Neolithic cultures that characterise part of the
northwest Mediterranean coast was first established.
7.2. DISTRIBUTION
The distribution of the settlements of this Culture covers most of the coasts and some internal regions of
the Mediterranean Basin. It has been subdivided into many distinct, regional groups, mainly on the basis of
the pottery shapes and their decorative patterns. Apart from the material culture assemblage (mainly the pot-
tery and, to a certain extent, the chipped stone industry), many of the most important characteristics of this
culture, such as the subsistence economy, and the structure and the distribution of the villages, are poorly
known because of the limited number of surveys and excavations carried out in some regions where the
Impressed Ware Culture is distributed. For instance, while some of these aspects are well known to south-
eastern Italy (BARKER, 1975; 1995; BKNYI, 1991), Liguria (ROWLEY-CONWY, 1997), and southern France
(GEDDES, 1980; ROWLEY-CONWY, 1995), very little is known along the eastern Adriatic coast (MALEZ, 1975) and
Greece (BARKER, 1985: 64).
7.3. CHRONOLOGY
The problem of the chronology and of the distribution of this cultural aspect has been discussed in several
papers and is still a subject of controversial debate (PLUCIENNIK, 1997). In effect the first Impressed Ware
settlements seem to have been established in south-eastern Italy around the last two centuries of the eighth
millennium BP. Rather similar dates are known from the Cardium sites of the same culture along the coast of
Croatia. In contrast, the Impressed Ware Culture took some 1000 radiocarbon years to spread along the Italian
Adriatic littoral (SKEATES, 1994: 65) as far as Romagna where the sites of Fornace Cappuccini (ANTONIAZZI et
al., 1985) and Rimini (BAGOLINI et al., 1989) are known.
Quite a different situation is documented along the Tyrrhenian coast of the Italian Peninsula. According to
the radiocarbon chronology, the Stentinello sites of Calabria (AMMERMAN, 1985) are more or less contempora-
neous to the first Impressed Wares of the Ligurian caves (MAGGI and CHELLA, 1999). This implies quite a rapid
spread of the first Early Neolithic farmers along this coast. Furthermore, while the Cardium decorated wares
are considered to be typical of the south-eastern Italian and Dalmatian coastline, they are not represented in
central Italy, north of the Pescaro River (MLLER, 1994). Farther north they re-appear in Liguria and Provence
both in the Cardial and Ligurian facies of the Culture (GUILAINE, 2002).
7.4. THE SOUTH WESTERN ADRIATIC COAST
At least two hundred Early Neolithic sites are known to date in Apulia. This picture strongly contrasts
with the very low density of last hunter-gatherer sites of the Castelnovian Culture. These Impressed Ware sites
show thick concentrations in the Tavoliere Foggiano (ODETTI, 1975: T. 33), along both the Adriatic and Ionian
coastline of the Salentina Peninsula and in the Materano (Basilicata). The excavations carried out with inter-
disciplinary methods at some key sites, such as Trasano (GUILAINE and CREMONESI, 1987), Ripa Tetta (TOZZI,
1988), Torre Sabea (CREMONESI and GUILAINE, 1987), Scamuso (BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA, 1997), and Rendina
(CIPOLLONI SAMP, 1977-82), yielded results of great importance for the neolithisation of the Adriatic region.
From these sites all the bioarchaeological materials have been collected and the habitation structures have
been brought to light for the first time.
According to most of the recent authors (WHITEHOUSE, 1986; CIPOLLONI SAMP et al., 1999), the oldest
aspect of the Apulian Impressed Ware is the so-called Prato Don Michele, Cardial facies that takes its name
5
It must be remembered that impressed wares were in use in northern Africa up to recent times.
26
from the homonymous site on the Tremiti Islands (FUSCO, 1965). Some of the recently excavated Apulian sites
are to be attributed to this facies, from which are known the oldest radiocarbon dates of this Culture. They are
from Trasano (7030160 BP: Ly-5297; 6980130 BP: TAN-88248; 6950130 BP: TAN-88067; 6950140
BP: TAN-88056; 6950150 BP: Ly-5296; 6830190 BP: Ly-4410; and 6790120 BP: TAN-88313), Scamuso
(7290110 BP: Gif-6339), and Torre Sabea (6960130 BP (?)). The site of Masseria Giuffreda has been dated
to 7125200 BP (MC-2292) (WHITEHOUSE, 1987: 96) from a context that many authors consider unclear
(GUILAINE et al., 1981). Many authors (GRIFONI CREMONESI, 1996: 70; PLUCIENNIK, 1997: 119) agree on rejec-
ting the far too early dates from Coppa Nevigata and Casa San Paolo which yielded results between the end of
the ninth and the beginning of the eight millennia BP (MLLER, 1994: 355) (fig. 6).
Fig. 6 - Impressed Ware of south-eastern Italy: graph of the radiocarbon dates calibrated using OxCal (version 2.18 calibration programme).
Source: BIAGI and SPATARO, 2002:171, with modifications.
7.5. THE DALMATIAN COAST
Almost identical dates are reported from the Cardial sites of the Dalmatian coast. Recent investigations
carried out between the Gargano Promontory and the Islands of Mjlet, Kor~ula and Hvar, have produced early,
Cardium Impressed Ware sites at both Palagruà (FORENBAHER and KAISER, 1997) and Su{ac Islands (BASS,
1998). These discoveries reinforce the idea that trans-Adriatic connections were already established by the
beginning of the Neolithic as they already were in other areas of the Mediterranean (CHERRY, 1990; MALONE,
1997-98; MARTINI, 2000). The radiocarbon dates obtained from some of the Dalmatian Cardial Impressed
Ware sites are almost identical to those already mentioned for Apulia. This suggests that the spread of the
Early Neolithic along both sides of the Adriatic took place quite rapidly.
Other indicators of trans-Adriatic connections come from the open-air settlement of Obre I, in Bosnia
(BENAC, 1971: 106; 1973: 387; 1975: 147), which yielded both Star~evo and Guadone style Impressed Wares

27
(Chapter 6, 7.). Recent surveys carried out in the islands of the north Dalmatian archipelago by the University
of Birmingham have led to the recovery of Gargano Promontory flint artefacts (BARFIELD, pers. comm. 1999).
In fact, the Impressed Ware flint mines of Defensola started to be exploited around the beginning of the
seventh millennium BP (GALIBERTI et al., 2001: 95).
From the distribution map of the Adriatic Cardial sites developed by MLLER (1988: 121) one can note that, in
south-eastern Italy the Cardium Impressed Ware sites are restricted to a territory that covers Apulia and the Abruzzi,
with a boundary that does not extend farther then the Pescaro River. Along the east Adriatic coast, the Cardium
Impressed Ware extends from Albania and Montenegro, where are known the sequences of Crvena Stijena, Odmut
and Spila (MARKOVI}, 1985), to Istria (LEBEN, 1978-79) and, perhaps (?), the Trieste Karst, although the finds from
Vla{ka Jama (or Pejca v La{ci or Grotta del Pettirosso) (BATOVI}, 1975: 65) are of uncertain provenance
6
.
The Cardium Dalmatian sites from which have been obtained radiocarbon dates comparable to those
from the Apulian Prato Don Michele aspect, are those of Vela {pilja on the Island of Kor~ula (7300120 BP:
Z-1967 and 7000120 BP: Z-1968) (BASS, 1998: 173), Gopodska pe}ina (701090 BP: Z-579), Gudnja pe}ina
(717070 BP: GrN-10315 and 693550 BP: GrN-10314) (CHAPMAN and MLLER, 1990: 129) and Tinj-Podli-
vade (6980160 BP: GrN-15236) (CHAPMAN et al., 1990: 32) (fig. 7).
6
BARFIELD (pers. comm. 1999), who reanalysed the Moser collection (LEBEN, 1967: 66; BARFIELD, 1999) now in the stores of the Postojna Museum
(SLO), suggests that they are not from the Karst caves, but from one of the many Impressed Ware sites of the Dalmatian coast. The potsherds are
labelled with Vla{ki (Italy) and not Vla{ka Jama, which might be a consequence of the fact that Postojna (Postumia) was in Italy until the end of
World War Two (BIAGI, 2003a).
Fig. 7 - Impressed Ware of the Dalmatian coast:
graph of the radiocarbon dates calibrated using OxCal
(version 2.18 calibration programme). Source: ML-
LER, 1994.
28
The concentration of open-air settlements in the Istria, Zagora and Ravni Kotari allowed BATOVI}
(1966) to define three phases in the development of the Dalmatian Impressed Ware Culture: those of 1)
Crvena Stijena, 2) Smil~i}, and 3) Gudnja. According to his subdivision, the Crvena Stijena style (BENAC,
1957; BENAC and BRODAR, 1958) is characterised by Cardium and simple, instrumental impressed patter-
ns. Its distribution is restricted to the caves of Montenegro, Bosnia, and to the Kvarnar Islands. The
Smil~i} style (BATOVI}, 1966) is characterised by the appearance of various, impressed decorations, among
which are geometric, triangular motifs, and by the first incised patterns. The distribution of this style
covers the entire Dalmatian coast as far as Istria and, according to some authors, it reaches the Trieste
Karst. The Gudnja style is characterised by the disappearance of the Cardium decoration, while scra-
tched and incised patterns are rather common. This style is mainly distributed along the coasts of central
and southern Dalmatia.
More recently, MLLER (1988: 106) proposed a more detailed subdivision of the Dalmatian Impressed
Ware. According to this author, the Impresso A is primarily simple unconnected impressions or incisions,
covering the entire surface (Design I, II, III, IV). These are the basic decoration patterns for Impresso Pottery,
which survives throughout later Early Neolithic. Impresso B motives are the zig-zag design groups (Design
V), which are added to Impresso A motives. Impresso C is characterised by fine tremolo decoration and
geometric incisions, added to Impresso A and B motives.
Following MLLERs (1994) detailed study, the distribution of the Impressed Ware sites seems to be clo-
sely related to the soil characteristics, geomorphology, and annual temperature. Furthermore, the area for
settlement was selected because of the fertility of the territory. The subsistence economy of the sites is mixed,
based on agriculture (cereal cropping), herding, and hunting. The collection of marine shellfish (Mytilus,
Ostrea, Venus, Cardium, and Spondylus) also played an important role at the sites close to the seashore, as in
the case of Viùla, Smil~i}, Nin, etc. Agriculturally exploited nuclear zones were surrounded by areas for
herding (MLLER, 1988: 106).
In this region, the Impressed Ware Culture is known from 44 sites located along the coast and in the
western Dinaric Alps. 18 of these are open-air settlements and 26 are caves. 70% of the ceramics come from
open-air sites (MLLER, 1988: 102).
7.6. THE CENTRAL AND NORTH WESTERN ADRIATIC COAST
The Impressed Ware villages of the central and north Italian Adriatic coast are characterised by ceramic
assemblages decorated with finger, fingernail and instrumental (but not Cardium) impressions. They are gene-
rically defined as belonging to the so-called Middle Adriatic Impressed Ware Culture (CIPOLLONI SAMP et
al., 1999: 20). As already mentioned, the Cardium decorated wares did not cross the Pescaro River, although
many Impressed Ware open-air and cave sites are known from here northwards. Their ceramics are decorated
with fingernail, finger, and instrumental impressions. The earliest radiocarbon dates of these sites fall around
the middle of the seventh millennium BP (Grotta Continenza: 659075 BP: R-1411; Maddalena di Muccia:
658075 BP: R-463a; Villaggio Leopardi: 6578135 BP: Pi-101; S. Stefano di Ortucchio: 657580 BP: R-
468) (fig. 8). They are comparable with those of the Apulian Scratched (Graffite) Wares. The most recent
aspects of the Impressed Ware Culture in the Marche and Romagna regions (BAGOLINI et al., 1989) have
yielded more recent dates, which range around the last two centuries of the seventh millennium BP (IMPROTA
and PESSINA, 1998: 111). The pottery from these sites includes also linear, grooved decorations, which find
some parallels with those of the more or less contemporaneous north Italian Po Valley aspects of Fiorano and
Vh (BAGOLINI and BIAGI, 1980; 1987).
7.7. THE CHIPPED STONE ASSEMBLAGES
Regarding the flint industries, the tool inventory is characterised by a greater variety compared to that of
the Castelnovian Late Mesolithic. Among the new types are different burins and end-scrapers, straight perfo-
rators obtained with abrupt, alternate retouch, which are a typical characteristic of the north Italian borers,
sickle blades and, at some of the Apulian sites, bifacial tranchets. The chipped stone assemblage from Torre
Sabea includes some types, such as isosceles trapezes, obtained with the microburin technique (CREMONESI
and GUILAINE, 1987: 381). Trapezoidal piquant tridre armatures obtained with the microburin technique are
also known from Fornace Cappuccini near Ravenna, as well as from many other central Italian, Impressed
Ware sites of the Abruzzi and Marche regions (RADI, 1995).

29
Fig. 8 - Impressed Ware of central and north-eastern Italy: graph of the radiocarbon dates calibrated using OxCal (version 2.18 calibration
programme). Source: SKEATES, 1994a; RADI, 1995.
7.8. THE STRUCTURAL REMAINS
One of the main problems to face in the study of the Impressed Ware Culture is the rarity of habitation
structures. One of the few exceptions is the Stentinello open-air settlement of the Piana di Curinga in Calabria.
Here, in the interior of the SantEufemia Gulf, AMMERMAN (1985) excavated a probable trapezoidal house, the
only indicators of which consisted of thousands of daub pieces.
The only hut-foundation structure so far excavated from an Apulian site is that of Ripa Tetta (CIPOLLONI
SAMP et al., 1999: 23). This consists of a rectangular structure with narrow foundation ditches and postholes.
At Rendina, in Basilicata, CIPOLLONI SAMP (1977-1982) excavated the remains of a rectangular house delimi-
ted by postholes, while MANFREDINI (1972) reports the existence of rectangular habitation structures at Monte
Aquilone, which consist in remains of dry walls.
A long, semi-circular stonewall is known at Trasano (GUILAINE and CREMONESI, 1987), and at the
entrance of the Uzzo Cave in the Province of Trapani (Sicily) (COSTANTINI et al., 1987). Here earliest
Impressed Ware occupation is represented by a few potsherds of Cardium decorated. This is later fol-
lowed by a local aspect of the Stentinello Culture (TUSA, 1976-1977), defined as Kronio style by TIN
(1971).
Other houses are supposed to exist at Bribir (BRUSI}, 1994-1995) and Smil~i} (BATOVI}, 1966), in the
district of [ibenik (HR), and Crno vrilo near Zadar (HR) (MARIJANOVI}, 2002). The dry-stone foundation of a
house was discovered at Pokrovnik (MLLER, 1988: 114), while masses of daub fragments might indicate the
remains of hut-foundations at Viùla (Medulin), in south Istria (BA}I}, 1969).
30
7.9. SUBSISTENCE ECONOMY

The best data come from the Apulian and central Italian Adriatic sites. In examining the faunal remains from
seven Impressed Ware sites of Apulia, BKNYI (1991: 32) points out the predominance of domestic species -
mainly sheep and goats, followed by cattle and pig. A rather different situation is known from the Marche in east-
central Italy. The bone remains come from the two settlements of Maddalena di Muccia and Ripabianca di
Monterado, which show quite a different location and chronology. The fauna from Maddalena di Muccia an
open-air site located in the hilly countryside of the interior, is composed of pig (50%), red deer (25%), caprines
(15%) and cattle (8%) (BARKER, 1975: 133) (see Chapter 4,2.). At Ripabianca di Monterado, a village rather close
to the Adriatic coast, 40 m above the sea level, pig was much less important (19%), while caprines rise to 64%,
cattle maintained a stable frequency and deer and other game species are almost irrelevant (see Chapter 4,3.).
8. THE DANILO AND HVAR CULTURES
8.1. PREFACE
The reason why the Danilo and Hvar Cultures have been included in this research is that the first develo-
ped during the second half of the seventh millennium BP, which means that it is contemporaneous to the north
Italian Early Neolithic sites and to the Impressed Ware sites of the northwestern Adriatic coast. In Dalmatia,
the Danilo Culture (KORO{EC, 1958; 1959; 1964), is referred to the Middle Neolithic, because its radiocarbon
chronology follows that of the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware Culture. The Hvar Culture (NOVAK, 1955) is
most probably derived from that of Danilo. This assumption is based on three factors: 1) the similarities
between some ceramic forms, 2) the almost identical distribution of the sites, and 3) the subsequent absolute
chronology of the two cultures (FORENBAHER and KAISER, 2000).
In northern Italy, where the first Neolithic communities make their appearance around (or slightly later
than) the middle of the seventh millennium BP, the Vla{ka Group (BARFIELD, 1972) and the other Friuli Plain
sites that yielded typical Danilo material, are attributed to the Early Neolithic (FERRARI and PESSINA, 2000).
Some of the most important Neolithic settlements of the Dalmatian coast are multistratified, as, for in-
stance those of Smil~i} and Danilo Bitinj. I have decided to analyse the ceramics from the three Neolithic
habitation layers (Impressed Ware, Danilo and Hvar) to check the eventual continuity in the pottery produc-
tion systems. These analyses have been particularly successful in the case of the site of Smil~i}, where this
continuity has been demonstrated for the first time (Chapter 3, 5.5.).
8.2. THE DANILO CULTURE
The distribution of the Danilo and Hvar Culture covers the coastal area and the islands of Dalmatia. As
mentioned above, a local, impoverished aspect of Danilo, called Vla{ka by L.H. BARFIELD (1972) is known from
the caves of the Trieste and Slovene Karst. Characteristic Danilo ceramics, such as fragments of rhyta, and other
cult objects, e.g. a clay phallus (BATOVI}, 1968) and female figurines, have recently been brought to light from
the open-air settlement of Sammardenchia di Pozzuolo near Udine in the Friuli Plain (FERRARI and PESSINA,
1996). According to the Dalmatian authors, the origins of the Danilo Culture are to be sought in the Impressed
Ware, as the results obtained from the study of the materials from Smil~i} would suggest (BATOVI}, 1975a). A
radiocarbon date from a charcoal sample collected at a depth of 4.6 m in a transitional Impressed-Danilo layer
of Gudnja Cave sequence, near Dubrovnik yielded the result of 656040 BP (GrN-10311) (CHAPMAN, 1988: 7).
8.2.1. The radiocarbon chronology
Two radiocarbon dates have been obtained for the Danilo Culture from the cave site of Gudnja pe}ina, near
Dubrovnik. They are 641540 BP (GrN-10312) and 652040 BP (GrN-10313) (CHAPMAN, 1988: 7), while another
two were already available from the open site of Pokrovnik: 6300150 BP (Z-859) (CHAPMAN and MLLER, 1990:
130) and 629065 BP (HD-13262/12842) (MLLER, 1988: 350) (fig. 9). These dates are similar to those obtained
from the Vla{ka hearths of Edera Cave in the Trieste Karst, where Danilo type, black burnished wares and
fragments of one typical Kakanj rhyton (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001), identical to those known along the Dalmatian
coast and Bosnia (MONTAGNARI KOKELJ and CRISMANI, 1993), have been brought to light. These vessels, that
CHAPMAN (1988: 13) has interpreted as salt-pots, are characterised by an open round or oval mouth, a large ring
handle and two or four legs resembling animal or human figures (PERI}, 1996).

31
The radiocarbon chronology of the Danilo Culture is partly contemporaneous with that of the Impressed
Ware Culture of both sides of the Adriatic. This fact has posed some problems in the terminology employed by
the Croatian and Italian prehistorians. According to the first, the term Early Neolithic is always referred to the
Impressed Ware Culture, while the Danilo Culture represents the Middle Neolithic of the Dalmatian Coast
(and that of Hvar the end of the Middle Neolithic). The Italian archaeologists, on the contrary, have always
considered the Impressed Ware as representative of the Early Neolithic as well as that Vla{ka Group simply
because they both flourished during the seventh millennium BP. The start of the Middle Neolithic, in northern
Italy is marked by the appearance of the Square-mouthed Pottery Culture, around the beginning of the sixth
millennium BP (BAGOLINI and BIAGI, 1990).
8.2.2. The pottery
The Danilo Culture sites from which we have the highest amount of data, are those of Danilo Bitinj
(KORO{EC, 1956; 1958; 1964), Smil~i} (BATOVI}, 1966), Jami na Sredi (Ê~UK, 1982) and Vela {pilja on the
Lo{inj (Ê~UK, 1982) and Kor~ula Islands (Ê~UK, 1978), [karin Samograd (MLLER, 1988a), Bribir (KORO{EC
and KORO{EC, 1974; 1980), Zelena pe}ina (BENAC, 1957a), Crvena Stijena (BENAC and BRODAR, 1958), and
Gudnja pe}ina (BATOVI}, 1970).
According to CHAPMAN (1988: 11) the Danilo ceramic assemblage comprises four main fabric groups;
bichrome painted wares, dark burnished wares with or without incised decoration, a red or buff monochrome
ware, and coarse wares in varying colours. The pottery assemblage has been subdivided by KORO{EC (1956)
into two main classes: the ordinary, decorated or undecorated, and the painted, figulina pottery. The commo-
nest ceramic shapes of the first class consist of different varieties of carinated and hemispherical bowls,
pedestalled vessels and vases with restricted mouth. Cylindrical pedestals are also typical as are the rhyta and
the phallus cult objects. The decorative patterns are mainly dynamic with incised and grooved recurrent
spirals, meanders and linear geometric motifs (BENAC and MARIJANOVI}, 1993; BREGANT, 1968). Following
KORO{EC (1956: 299) the ordinary pottery had been manufactured with local clay. The second class is repre-
sented by red, or brown and red, painted figulina wares, whose. internal surface is sometimes painted. This
class of pottery includes shapes that are not represented among the ordinary forms. They are jars, deep cylin-
drical cups, large carinated, hemispherical bowls decorated with linear geometric patterns of recurrent trian-
gles, zigzags, squares and net motifs. KORO{EC (1956: 304) suggested a non-local provenance of the clay
employed in the production of these ceramics (Chapter 5,5.).
8.2.3. The chipped stone assemblages
The flint industry from the Danilo Culture sites is poorly known. Only one paper has been devoted to the
typological analysis of the chipped stone assemblages of Danilo, Smil~i} and [karin Samograd (MARTINELLI,
1990). They are represented by a few characteristic types such as flat retouched instruments, a few geometrics
and a relatively high number of sickle blades. The presence of obsidian bladelets is of great importance,
although their source of provenance is still undefined.
8.3. THE HVAR CULTURE
At some of the multistratified Dalmatian sites, the Danilo and Hvar Culture layers lie above those of the
Impressed Ware (BATOVI}, pers. comm. 1999). This is clearly documented at Smil~i} (BATOVI}, 1966), Danilo
Bitinj (KORO{EC, 1958), Bribir (KORO{EC and KORO{EC, 1974), and Vrbica (BATOVI}, pers. comm. 1998), as
observed by Ê~UK and DRECHSLER-BI~I} (1984). Here, the Danilo and Hvar Cultures present a distribution
and a pottery assemblage which are very similar to each other. As reported by many authors authors (BATOVI},
1975a: 156; 1984: 27; BAGOLINI, 1984: 135; BENAC and MARIJANOVI}, 1993), the general impression is that the
second is the natural continuation of the first (BATOVI}, 1975a: 155), as some of the pottery shapes and deco-
rations would indicate (BREGANT, 1968). This is also the case for the Gudnja Cave in the Pelje{ac Peninsula,
near Dubrovnik (BATOVI}, 1970), where the three periods of Neolithic occupation are attested. Even though
the distribution of these two cultures is restricted to the Dalmatian coast and its related regions, typical potsherds
have been collected from a few Apulian (Tavoliere) sites (CIPOLLONI, pers. comm. 1999).
The absolute chronology of the Hvar Culture attributes this aspect to the first half of the sixth millennium
BP thanks to a new set of radiocarbon dates obtained from the cave of Grap~eva spilja (FORENBACHER and
KAISER, 2000) (fig. 9).
32
8.3.1. The pottery

The pottery shapes and decorations of the Hvar Culture are sometimes similar to those of the Danilo
Culture (figs. 35-37, 39, 40, 57-59, and 65-68) (BATOVI}, 1978; BENAC and MARIJANOVI}, 1993: 138). The
shapes include hemispheric and carinated bowls, dishes, pedestal bowls and flasks, while also rhyta are rather
common. The most distinctive decorative patterns are the spiral motifs, very often obtained with the comb-
grooving technique. The painted wares are also common, characterised by bands of reddish paint on a black
burnished slip as well as on light buff figulina pottery. Apart from Grap~eva Spilja, other important cave sites
are those of Vela {pilja and Jakova pilja on the Kor~ula Island (Ê~UK, 1978). Typical fragments of Hvar
hemispheric bowls are commonly found in the assemblages from the old excavations carried out in Trieste
Karst caves such as Jama na Dolech and Teresiana (BARFIELD, 1999).
The relationships between the Danilo and Hvar Cultures and the contemporary traditions of the
Italian coast of the Adriatic have been discussed by BATOVI} (1975a: 156). This author considers Danilo
contemporary with Ripoli and Scaloria Bassa, and Hvar to Serra dAlto and Diana. These parallels are
based not only on the pottery characteristics, but also on the presence of imported vessels from southern
Italy, and of scratched ware fragments and typical Serra dAlto figulina vessels at Obre, in Bosnia (BE-
NAC, 1975: 212).
The figulina vessels are also very common to the Danilo and Hvar Cultures. Even though their production
centres have never been identified, BATOVI} (1975a: 155) suggests that they were not located in central Italy
because their decorative patterns (mainly dynamic and spiral-meander) are typically Dalmatian and do not
belong to the Ripoli and the south Italian painted ware traditions.
Fig. 9 - Danilo and Hvar
Cultures: graph of the ra-
diocarbon dates calibrated
using OxCal (version 2.18
calibration programme)
(after BIAGI and SPATARO,
2002: 172).

33
9. DISCUSSION
Several models have been developed to explain the way the Neolithisation of the area took place around
the beginning of the seventh millennium BP.
At those sites where excavations have been carried out in a scientific way by recovering bioarchaeologi-
cal materials, a Neolithic complete package is attested with appearance of the Impressed Ware Culture
settlements. Following the models proposed by different researchers, this culture spread north-westwards
following either a demic diffusion (AMMERMAN and CAVALLI-SFORZA, 1971), or a colonisation, mainly
applicable to the west Mediterranean (ZILHO, 1997), or through an availability model subdivided into three
distict phases: availability, substitution and consolidation (LEWTHWAITE, 1986: 96).
Even though it is widely accepted that navigation
7
, ceramics and cereal cultivation do not (necessarily)
coincide (LEWTHWAITE, 1981: 293) and that there is no proof of the existence of an Impressed Ware Culture in
a polythetic sense, as proposed by CLARKE (1978), it is to be stressed that most of the premises of the availa-
bility model are still to be proved.
The first point deals with the limited number (or the absence) of Late Mesolithic sites even in those areas
where research has been carried out for many years, such as western Liguria (BIAGI, 1987) or central eastern
Italy (BARKER, 1995) or the province of Zadar (CHAPMAN et al., 1996).
The second relates to the importance given to the Mesolithic domestication of the mouton at a number
of French Early Neolithic, sites (LEWTHWAITE, 1987a), an idea that has later been deprived of any archaeozoo-
logical, scientific basis (ROWLEY-CONWY, 1995).
In the Adriatic basin, which is characterised by highly differentiated environmental, microclimatic and
geographic regions, the situation is very problematic. An example of the difficulties that have been encounte-
red is that of Edera Cave, in the Trieste Karst, a region characterised by a continental climate, 3 km from the
Adriatic Sea. At present we known that three different cultures were present in the area around the middle of
the seventh millennium BP.
They are: the Castelnovian Late Mesolithic, and the Impressed Ware and Danilo Neolithic Cultures. The
scientific analysis of the ceramics from the Early Holocene sequence of this cave (SPATARO, 2001) has helped
understand the interaction between these three cultural aspects.
In 1981 J. LEWTHWAITE suggested that 1) long-distance exchange of highly uniform wares, such as the
Cardium Impressed Wares, if proved on a scientific basis, might suggest an inter-group prestige network, and
that 2) strong similarities between the Cardium Impressed Wares along the two coasts of the Adriatic would
support hypotheses for a connected trade network, which would provide a mechanism for the acculturation of
local Mesolithic populations.
As we have seen, there is little evidence of Late Mesolithic populations in the Adriatic region and the
results obtained from the scientific analyses of the Cardium Impressed Wares do not seem to support the
theoretical premises put forward some twenty years ago.
7
Seashore navigation was, undoubtedly, the most important way of long-distance communication in the Adriatic and in the entire Mediterranean. It
allows to constater la supriorit de la navigation sur dautres modes de dsplacement, mme avec des techniques peu volues. Pour aller de l
Epire dans les Pouilles, ou Golfe de Genes en Camargue, il est facile de mettre en balance le tour de lAdriatique pied ou la traverse du sud des
Alpes avec un trajet maritime que pouvrat rendre trs facile un vent favorable (ROUDIL, 1990: 389). Navigation must have been very important in
the Adriatic during the Neolithic. In effect, the crossing of this basin must have been facilitated by the presence of small islands located midway
between Apulia and the Dalmatian coast (BASS, 1998).
34

35
CHAPTER 2
METHODOLOGY
1. PREFACE
The question of local ceramic production versus transport on a regional scale is central in this research.
Thus, it is worth mentioning that according to the studies of ARNOLD (1985: 50), based on ethnological data,
the clay and the temper utilised in ceramics are to be sought within a radius of some 5 km from the production
point, while a vessel found farther than 10 km means that it has been transported for some reasons that do not
depend strictly on its manufacture.
In their efforts to interpret the economic and social foundations of past societies, scientists and archaeo-
logists, since the late 1950s, have increasingly recognized the need to understand the production process
itself. Production forms a central and universal focus for the study of world traditions. It not only incorpora-
tes technology- that is how the object was made, including each step in the building or fabrication process, the
raw-materials- but includes supply and demand, the organisation of the workforce and the relationships
between the producers and other groups in society. It is affected by natural factors such as climate and
topography as well as artificial ones such as the proximity of roads and cities (FREESTONE and GAIMSTER,
1997: 11).
The state of fragmentation of prehistoric pottery (CHAPMAN, 2000), especially from Neolithic contexts, is
high and potsherds of the same vessels are often distributed all over the site (BARTHS, 1994). In a few cases
potsherds have been re-conjoined, lying at dozens of metres of distance from each other, indicating trampling
or post-depositional movements that took place after the site had been abandoned (GRYGIEL, 1986). In the case
of the Impressed Ware sites of the Adriatic coast, the fragmentary condition of the vessels is generally very
high. This fact follows the available ethno-archaeological data, which indicate that broken pottery is discar-
ded in different ways, and that potsherds are never dispersed equally on a site (LONGACRE, 1981). Thus, and
due to the lack of large-scale excavations, the available body of sherd fragments is neither complete, nor
necessarily representative of the whole surviving material. This has to be kept in mind when sampling for
analyses, and interpreting the data.
Further problems that are connected with the methodology of this research regard the following:
a) the excavations of Early Neolithic sites of the study area that have yielded very little evidence of kilns
(Chapter 5, 1.). Given the scarcity of kiln refuse, in most cases, it is extremely difficult to define the
production area for any type of pottery;
b) the very homogeneous geology of the eastern coast of the Adriatic (from Istria, in the north, to Albania, in
the south). It consists almost exclusively of limestone and karstic formations. Thus, the chance to define
the exact provenance of specific ceramics is often problematic;
c) the fact that many prehistoric archaeologists, in most of the north-eastern Mediterranean countries, have
not yet shown much interest in broad-scale scientific analyses. The only exception is that of Tuscany
where such analyses have mainly been centred on vessels attributed to the Bronze and Iron Ages (MARTINI
et al., 1995). Thus, little comparative data are available.
According to BLAKELY and BENNETT (1989: 8) direct observations about ceramics within the archaeologi-
cal record can be subdivided into several categories: findspot (stratigraphy), morphology - among which are
represented decorative styles (HAALAND, 1978) and typology - and fabric (including firing condition and for-
mation process). Regarding the first, one single archaeological layer characterises most of the Impressed Ware
sites; the second, the morphology of the vessels, is often difficult to reconstruct because of their fragmentary
status.
For these reasons, the research concentrates on the analysis of the ceramic fabric. The study of the pro-
duction of pottery from different sites should shed some light on the variability of the raw material sources, the
affirmation of local traditions, according to specific areas of diffusion, and the similarities/dissimilarities
36
among the various pottery production techniques. Furthermore, it might help understand the relationships
between different communities inhabiting the same territory.
2. SAMPLING
Thanks to the kind co-operation of many Croatian and Italian colleagues, I had direct access to many
Neolithic collections stored in various Institutions.
The potsherds have been collected from sites of known relevance. In one case, that of Danilo Bitinj, the
site is eponymous of the Middle Neolithic Danilo Culture. In another, I have selected a site whose strati-
graphy covers different Neolithic occupation phases. This is the case of Smil~i}, that is one of the few open-air
sites of the Dalmatian coasts where Early, Middle and Late Middle Neolithic horizons are in stratigraphic
sequence. I have preferentially chosen sites whose contexts are undisturbed or where excavations have been
carried out recently, or whose excavation reports have been published in detail.
When possible, typical potsherds were chosen according to stratigraphic parameters (also in the case
of the Impressed Ware Culture sites that, as mentioned above, are characterised by one single occupation
layer)
7
. Twenty to thirty potsherds from each site were selected for thin section analysis. This is the
average amount of material generally considered necessary to obtain reliable results (LAZZARINI, pers.
comm. 1998).
One or two soil samples suitable for pot making were taken for thin section and XRD analyses at a
distance of some 0.5 - 1 km from the Neolithic site. Most of the sampled clay deposits consist of Pleistocene
terra rossa soils (calcic luvisol, R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). They are typical of limestone, karstic envi-
ronments. In thin section, terra rossa shows a dark red colour, very pure red clay, iron-rich and does not
contain inclusions, with an exception of, sometimes, very rare quartz grains (fig. 69f).
Regarding the pottery, care was taken in sampling, to ensure that the full range of stylistic features was
represented following macroscopic examination (surface treatments, finishing, fracture and compaction of
the fabric, and nature of inclusions) (BARNETT, 1991: 177).
The ceramic groups were defined on the basis of potsherd typology and style and of recurrent fabric
characters, such as thickness, colour, surface treatment (including impressed, incised or painted patterns,
plastic decoration, burnishing, slip and/or mineral pigments) (PLOG, 1980). Shapes have only occasionally
been included in the sampling parameters because of the high fragmentation of the potsherds. Thus, all the
classes macroscopically defined were sampled
8
.
3. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
SHEPARD (1956) and MATSON (1969) were the first to develop new types of scientific approaches and
techniques, while chemical analyses, including X-Ray fluorescence (XRF) and neutron activation (NAA)
were introduced around the middle of the eighteenth century (RICE, 1987; MAGGETTI, 1990). These methods
were first applied to the study of pottery from Near Eastern sites. Their scope was to define the ceramic
manufacture centres in order to understand the trade/exchange activities, the economy of the individual sites
and their social network. Thanks to their results important aspects of the social relationships were revealed for
the first time (RILEY, 1975; 1976; 1981).
From an analytical point of view, the minero-petrographic characterisation of fabrics will allow 1) the
definition of different pottery groups to be compared with the vessels typology (which is the method of clas-
sification more commonly employed by the archaeologists) and, 2) the interpretation of the probable raw
material sources. In this connection petrology can often provide a quick means of defining origin, compara-
bility with similar material of known provenance and the technology involved (WILLIAMS, 1983: 301). In the
case of the Impressed Wares, however, the strong macroscopic similarities and the state of fragmentation of
the vessels do not help subdivide different pottery groups and define the provenance of the fabric.
7
For the tables of provenance, see Appendix 1.
8
It is impossible to know if the sample selected from the collection is proportional to any existing reality in prehistoric times (RICE, 1987: 315).

37
4. FABRIC
A sherd is characterised by the fabric. It concerns the arrangement, size, shape, frequency and compo-
sition of components of the ceramic material (WHITBREAD, 1995: 368). The fabric of a sherd can be composed
of matrix and temper. Matrix is the material that constitutes a more or less continuous phase and encloses
coarse material, concretions, etc....and generally it refers to material <2 mm, though fractions can be much
larger (FITZPATRICK, 1984: 135)
9
. Temper refers to inclusions that have been artificially added to the clay
(RICE, 1987: 406-413).
The parameters of RICE (1987: 410) and MAGGETTI (1982)
10
have been followed in the identification of
purposely-added temper. They are principally based on the careful observation of size, shape and quantity.
The latter author points out four features, which I used for identification of artificially added temper: 1)
bimodal distribution of the temper grains (hiatal structure), 2) angular outlines of the temper grains (modi-
fied temper is usually much more angular than naturally occurring alluvial sand temper), 3) organic material
and 4) grog
11
.
In this work, the inclusion have been identified as temper of 1) organic materials, on the basis of the
abundance of voids in the fabric (RICE, 1987: 350-354), 2) rock (and flint) fragments, thanks mainly to their
bimodal distribution, 3) limestone, mainly on the angularity of the fragments, 4) calcite, because of the bimo-
dal distribution and the rhombohedric shape of the inclusions, and 5) quartz sand, according to the parameters
used by RICE (1987: 410). This author stresses the importance of the typical pronounced angularity of the
grains, though difficulties might occur due to the presence of angular particles in the primary clay; therefore a
determination of the size distribution can help identify the addition of temper (BARNETT, 1991).
5. ANALYTICAL APPROACH
The methods, which have been employed for the analyses, are those of optical microscopy of thin-section
analysis, SEM-EDS and XRD. While thin section has demonstrated to be the more efficient in the study of the
coarse pottery, SEM-EDS and XRD have been used to test the microscopic groupings. In this work, thin section
analysis is used as the primary means of investigation, because chemical analyses cannot answer some important
questions that can be explained by simple microscopic analysis. Chemical analyses have not been made because
the coarse pottery I have analysed is low-fired and porous: these two pottery characteristics advise against the
use of chemical analyses. Low-fired pottery is very susceptible to post-depositional alteration. Soil solutions
(calcium and phosphorous oxides) may deposit new minerals internally in the pores...calcite and material
precipitated on a very fine scale in the matrix of the ceramic, or possibly absorbed on the mineral phases in the
matrix (FREESTONE, 2001: 621). Another reason why chemical analyses were not undertaken is that they are
commonly employed to compare large compositional groups and are considered to be useful in the case of
production centres (FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). The scale of manufacture of the prehistoric pottery, which has
been examined, is small, as demonstrated by the large number of different groups and subgroups. Furthermore,
the thin section method is the most suitable tool for the identification of added inclusions on the basis of their
size, shape and distribution (Chapter 2, 5.2.), whereas chemical analyses can only indicate the amount of their
presence. Besides this, petrological methods show the great advantage, for instance over the chemical ones, that
any compositional change that might have occurred after burial in an archaeological layer is immediately evi-
dent. For example, thin sections show whether the primary calcite found in the matrix is fixed entirely in the
temper or both in the temper and in the matrix. They can also reveal whether the firing phases contain CaO and
consequently inform us about the firing temperature, whether it is secondary calcite which has formed through
retrograde processes from CaO (MAGGETTI, 1982: 129) (fig. 38f).
9
The size limit between the coarse and the fine fractions is not fixed. It varies (commonly between 2 and 10 mm) according to the type of material
studied (BARNETT, 1991).
10
Following MAGGETTI (1982: 123), temper is composed of all the solid phases with a diameter wider than 0.015 mm. This author makes a distinction
between natural temper (if naturally present in the fabric) and artificial temper (if artificially added). In this work, temper is used only with the
meaning of artificially added inclusions.
11
The identification of this particular kind of recycling is, not always unambiguous, as WHITBREAD (1986) has stressed. The raw clay often contains
clay pellets which, strongly resemble grog, after firing.
38
5.1. MINERO-PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

Although the thin section method is always subjective, it allows the classification of pottery fabrics.
Classification is based on the variety of minerals that normally occur in pottery (Chapter 2, 5.2., m). Thin
sectioning is limited, since it does not fully allow the identification of the mineralogical composition of the
clay, due to the microscopic size of the particles. According to WILLIAMS (1983), in most studies this handicap
is minimised by the identification of the various temper constituents; each category of inclusions defines a
particular fabric type.
Following PIERRET (1994), petrography is just one of the many scientific techniques that archaeometrists
employ in pottery characterisation which help establish the location of provenance source. There is no one
single method of analysis which is suitable for every kind of pottery fabric (WILLIAMS, 1983: 323). In the study
of early ceramics that have been produced with non-standardised raw materials and heterogeneous clay sour-
ces (including insufficient homogenisation of clays during preparation), quantitative results reflect only the
limited volume of the area analysed, not the entire vessel, or the vessel category as a whole. In order to avoid
pitfalls caused by insubstantial quantifications produced by the method employed, it has been decided to
concentrate on qualitative microscopy, or qualitative analysis (DURRENMATH, 1996) that is to identify the
clay/matrix types and the inclusion/temper characteristics, including significant trace species such as, for
instance, microfossils, as well as to furnish an only broad estimation of quantities of inclusions. This metho-
dological approach has been established in the course of the research because of the heterogeneity of inclusion
densities shown by a number of sherds even within one thin section obtained from one single potsherd.
Another method of quantifying the mineralogical composition, is the so-called point counting. It con-
sists of scanning a thin section at regular intervals and counting the number of mineral inclusions. It is,
however, only feasible if the material analysed is homogeneous enough within each sample and within each
group of samples to be meaningful. In other words, in order to be significant the results have to be from
standardised material with clear differences in inclusion quantities and mineral varieties, which are not pre-
sent in this assemblage.
5.2. PARAMETERS ADOPTED FOR THIN SECTION DESCRIPTION
One of the main problems in the description of the thin sections is trying to use objective parameters. This
is important for a better evaluation of the analysis within the same assemblage and for the study of comparable
ceramic assemblages from elsewhere (COURTY et al., 1989; ORTON et al., 1993).
The methodology used in this volume partly follows the recording system proposed by ORTON et al.
(1993) and COURTY et al. (1989: 64-68); it concentrates primarily on the detrital fraction of the fabric. The
following attributes are recorded:
a) Colour: colours are estimated by looking at the slide in Crossed Polarised Light (XPL). The colour of a
fabric might be due to various factors as the iron compounds and the organic matter (humus, rootlets,
fibres) present in the clay, and to the firing atmosphere (RICE, 1987: 334-335). The colour is influenced by
the thickness and density or porosity of the section;
b) Identity/Composition of the mineral fraction (COURTY et al., 1989: 64-68):
1) single mineral grains (e.g. quartz, calcite, micas and opaque iron minerals);
2) compound mineral grains (e.g. soil, rock, clayey soil fragments);
3) inorganic residues of biological origin (e.g. bones, phytoliths, fossils). The microfossils included in
the thin sections of the samples I have analysed have not been identified because they all belong to the
same species of the order Foraminifera that are extremely common to the limestone formations of Dal-
matia and of the south Italian coast (K. THOMAS, pers. comm. 2001);
4) fragments of human materials (e.g. grog-recycled pottery, and organic materials);
c) Grain-size: the subdivision of the fabric into very fine, coarse, etc. depends on the grain-size of the
inclusions. In this work, I have always specified the grain-size of the inclusions contained in the fabrics of
the potsherds I have analysed. Some basic concepts have been adopted in the description of the fabrics.
For example typical size that indicates the median size of most of the grain minerals (length by width)
included in the fabric, or size range between...and that indicates the size of the larger and smaller
grains (length by width) identified in the fabric;
d) Frequency/Abundance: estimation of the abundance of a particular component contained in the fabric
was carried out by comparing the objects in the microscopic field with patterns in abundance charts

39
(COURTY et al., 1989: 68). It was decided to use the comparison charts for the estimation of mineral
content by MATTHEW et al. (1991). The terms rare, present, abundant and very abundant, employed in the
description of the percentage of the inclusions in the fabrics, have been utilised in relation to the different
varieties of minerals. For instance, minerals such as mica, pyroxene, feldspar, opaques and iron oxides are
rare when their presence in the fabric is of about 1%, whereas other inclusions such as limestone and
calcite are rare when their presence is of 5%. Mica, pyroxene, feldspar, opaques and iron oxides are
abundant when their percentage is of 5% or more; in contrast, limestone is abundant when it is of some
10% (if naturally present) and calcite (that has almost always been artificially added) of about 20%;
e) Roundness: this attribute concerns the sharpness of the edges and corners of the grain (COURTY et al.,
1989: 69). Any of four classes are usually represented: angular, sub-angular, subrounded and rounded.
The shape of inclusions reflects their erosion history. In general, the longer the history, the more roun-
ded the grains will become (ORTON et al., 1993: 139). Angularity measurements indicate whether the
temper consists of naturally occurring coarse grains or crushed or ground material. Such an addition can
only be demonstrated, however, through comparison among samples;
f) Sorting: this concept expresses the degree of size uniformity (or variability) of the inclusions. According
to COURTY et al. (1989: 68), a well-sorted sediment contains an overwhelming abundance (c. 90%) of
material of a given size, whereas a poorly-sorted one consists of a mixture of different sizes. Poorly-
sorted deposits contain roughly equal proportions of all grain sizes;
g) Clay pellets: this term concerns argillaceous inclusions, which present the following properties (WHIT-
BREAD, 1986): roundness shape, optical density, (red) colour, inclusions. Following WHITBREADs descrip-
tion (1986: 22, table 2), the clay pellets contained in the thin section that I have analysed show sharp
boundaries, rounded to well-rounded roundness, equal to ovoid shape, high optical density and dark red
colour. The consituents are similar to the inclusions of the matrix; they are mainly composed of quartz;
h) Bohnerz: this term (or Argillaceous Rock Fragments, ARF) indicates some colloidal substances (aggrega-
tion of aluminium, iron or magnesium) that are present in the sherd. They are due to the absence of
seasoning, when clay is left in the open-air for one season to eliminate the clots from colloidal substances
(L. LAZZARINI, pers. comm. 1997). In thin section they are red and show sharp to clear boundaries and a
high degree of angularity (WHITBREAD, 1986: 22, table 2). Their constituents are mainly quartz and mica;
i) Firing conditions: much work has been done on the two basic kiln and non-kiln firing procedures of
prehistoric ceramics (HEIMANN and FRANKLIN, 1979; TITE, 1995). Regarding kiln firing, a reducing condi-
tion can be achieved if a vessel is smudged during additional firing (RICE, 1987: 158; 343). Various
expedients can be used to proceed from an oxidising to a reducing atmosphere and vice-versa. To produce
a reducing atmosphere the draught is to be diminished, while smoke-producing substances must be ad-
ded. In contrast, to obtain an oxidising atmosphere, it is necessary to increase the percentage of incoming
air as well as to utilise a very dry fuel. On the other hand, non-kiln firing can be done either in a pile of
fuel or in a pit. Temperature is difficult to control and is, in most cases, lower than 900 C. Also the firing
atmosphere can be poorly controlled in terms of oxidising or reducing conditions.
In thin section the firing temperature can be hypothesised on the basis of the presence or absence of some
minerals or of organic matter. For example, the latter burns off at a temperature of 300-500 C. Calcite,
which is a mineral very common to the thin sections analysed for this research, disappears at temperatures
in excess of 700-750 C under oxidizing atmosphere; if the conditions are reducing, calcite would decom-
pose at temperatures higher than 750 C. As reported by LETSCH and NOLL (1983: 266), the systems CO2
partial pressure delays the decomposition of calcium carbonate, which first sets in at about 800 C
At that temperature, the formation of calcium silicates is able to accelerate quite rapidly. Calcite is
represented in most of the potsherds analysed. Given that their firing took place in an oxidizing atmo-
sphere I have assumed that the temperature was lower than 750 C
12
;
l) Vitrification: in thin section, the high-firing temperature can also be defined on the basis of the vitrifica-
tion of the fabric. Vitrification (e.g. figulina, Chapter 5, 7.) can be identified by XPL polarizer, because of
the milky appearance of the isotropic and non-birefringent characters of the paste (I. FREESTONE, pers.
comm. 2001). The vitrification region is around 850 C (RICE, 1987: 431). When vitrification has not
12
The term banded calcite has been used in this volume to indicate calcite that shows variegations due to iron depositions, possibly caused by
stratifications in particular environments such as caves (A. BEER, pers. comm. 2000).
40
been specified in the description of the fabrics, they look anisotropic (non-vitrified) and birefringent;
m) Grouping: each assemblage has been subdivided into groups on the basis of the characteristics of the
different fabrics, which very often show strong similarities, even though they are never identical (e.g.
differences in quartz size, percentage, different variety of limestone, etc.). Therefore, it is very difficult to
establish fixed parameters for the definition of groups. Most probably this is also due to the fact that we
are dealing with pottery that represents the first ceramic production of southeast Mediterranean Europe.
The fabrics are always more or less coarse depending on different choices made by (probably more than
one) potter. The subdivisions have been made principally on the matrices differentiations (more or less
calcareous, iron-rich, etc.), and on the percentages of the type and grain size of the inclusions contained in
the fabrics. When the matrix and the naturally present and artificially added inclusions are similar for
identity, grain size, sorting, roundness, etc., in different samples, they have been attributed to the same
group. The subgroups have been defined according to the strong similarities between their matrix and that
of their related groups, besides little variations in the percentage and size of some minerals (e.g. quartz);
or, in case the subgroup has the same matrix of the group it belongs, it is characterised by the adding of
temper. It is obvious that this method of subdivision is subjective and other possibilities of grouping do
exist (MIDDLETON et al., 1991). It is for this reason that the SEM-EDS method has been employed, in order
to test the groups already defined with the minero-petrographic analysis;
n) Correlation between microscopic and macroscopic groups: each group, microscopically defined on the
basis of its fabric, has been compared with the other microscopic groups identified at that site also from
macroscopic, typological and stylistic points of view, to try to define any possible relationship between
fabric and typology, in order to understand whether each group had been manufactured with clay from a
particular source or a specific filler had been added. It is obvious that the number of specimens taken into
consideration from each group represents an undoubted limiting factor. Nevertheless, it can be considered
as a useful data-base for future research.
5.3. INTERPRETATION OF PETROGRAPHIC DATA
The scope of the minero-petrographic analysis is the identification of the provenance of the clay and
temper of the samples (RICE, 1987: 413-421; 424-425). The first stage of the process consists in the identifica-
tion of the inclusions of the fabric. Once the minerals have been identified, they have been compared with the
geological deposits of the region where the site is located. This stage is particularly delicate since it must
proceed through a program of enquiries that concern the natural inclusions of local clays, the presence or
absence of the inclusions in the sediment, the reliable indicators, etc. The second stage consists of the compa-
rison of the fabrics with the thin section (and XRD pattern) of the soil sample(s) collected in the proximity of
the site (Chapter 2, 2.). The soil thin sections sometimes show fabrics almost identical to those of the potsher-
ds (see for instance the case of Viula). Another essential help comes from the cross analyses of the fabrics
from neighbouring, contemporary sites (see the cases for Smili and Tinj Podlivade, Vrbica and Konjevrate,
Jami na Sredi and Vela Jama). Sites located close to each other often show similar, or in a few cases, almost
identical, fabrics (e.g. Jami na Sredi and Vela Jama). In case the fabrics match with the geology of the area and
with the analyses of the soil sample, it is agreeable to suggest a local provenance. The term local source
means that the clay deposit lies some 15-20 km from the site, at a half days walk from the site itself.
In case the fabric does match with the local geology, and with the thin section of contemporary and
neighbouring sites, it is possible to talk about regional manufacture. It means that the materials employed in
its manufacture come from a radius wider than 20 km (see, for instance, the cases of Smili and Tinj Podliva-
de). If the fabric does not match with the area, with the local geology or with the surrounding clay deposits, it
is reasonable to suggest a non-local manufacture, that is an allochtonous provenance (see the samples of group
3 of Maddalena di Muccia). In this case it would be necessary to compare its fabric with that of already
known sources. This is the only way it can be attributed to a probable production area. Unfortunately this
latter case is very problematic because 1) no data base of the areas under study are presently available, and 2)
the research progress would request further analyses such as, perhaps, chemical analyses.
Given the limitations of the study methods and of sampling strategy employed, and given the geological
uniformity of the Dalmatian coast, the characteristics, which have been considered in the identification of the
ceramics are: 1) the specificity/uniqueness of the distribution of the inclusions in the various fabrics, 2) the
strong similarities/dissimilarities observable, in most cases, between the fabrics of neighbouring sites (see for

41
instance Vrbica and Konjevrate, Vela Jama and Jami na Sredi, Tinj and Smili, IW phase, Maddalena di
Muccia and Ripabianca di Monterado), and 3) the comparison between the fabrics of potsherds that come
from different Neolithic horizons (i.e. Smili).
Since great similarities often occur among fabrics of the same site, the terms homogeneity and simila-
rity have sometimes been used. In this volume these terms are employed to hypothesise the raw material
provenance from similar, probably neighbouring sources or from different layers of the same deposit. Never-
theless, these terms might be employed also over a wider, for instance regional, scale.
6. X-RAY DIFFRACTION (XRD)
The XRD analysis
13
has been applied to the soil samples (one or two) collected in the vicinity of the
archaeological sites and to the various (between two and four) ceramic groups identified with the thin section.
It has been mainly employed to support the thin section method and to test the groups classified according to
the thin sections. Furthermore, it has been used to compare the soil with the different ceramic groups classified
according to the thin section.
In a few cases the XRD has allowed the identification of minerals too small to be detected in the thin
section. In other cases it has been of great help to define the type of clay characterising both soil and potsherds
(e.g. the presence of kaolinite in sherds from Viùla, Konjevrate, Vrbica, Danilo Bitinj and Scamuso; Chapter 2,
6.1.).
6.1. KAOLINITE
Kaolinite has been detected by XRD in some sherds. Normally kaolinite disappears at about 500-600 C.
In most cases kaolinite occurs with chlorite (see Viula, Konjevrate, Vrbica, and Scamuso). Even though they
have different structures, chlorite has a basal series of diffraction peaks superimpose or nearly superimpose
on the members of the kaolinite 00l series (MOORE and REYNOLDS, 1997: 233-234).
If it is really present, its presence might be due to post-depositional factors (retroformation of metakaoli-
nite in the soil), though in the case of my samples it is most probably due to short firing because it can survive
in the centre of the thick ceramic body. Usually, Neolithic firing took place as open firing and the whole
firing cycle was finished in 20-30 minutes, reaching even only 300 C for some pots parts (M. MAGGETTI, in
litteris 2001; MAGGETTI and ROSSMANITH, 1981). In a further research, the occurrence of kaolinite might be
checked by IR-Spectrometry analysis.
7. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY (SEM)
Almost all the potsherds (some were omitted because the samples were too small and consequently utili-
sed only for the thin sections) analysed in thin section were also studied with the SEM-EDS (Energy Disper-
sive Spectrometry; SEM is used in combination with LINK ISIS - Oxford instruments)
14
. The SEM-EDS was
used as an accessory technique to test the microscopic groups.
Stoichiometry combined elements have been used: Oxygen and Valency: - 2. The results are normalised
semi-quantitative, because the ceramics samples show many voids (high porosity). The accuracy of this ma-
chine depends on the topography of the samples (porosity, holes, etc.) with a detection limit of some 0.5%.
The limit of the topography of the specimens analysed for this research is almost irrelevant since I have tried
to obtain a comparative model of the samples.
Five bulk analyses were made on each sample at a magnification of 86X. The average of the bulk analyses
is used to define the ceramic groups on the basis of the percentage of elemental composition (SCHNEIDER,
13
The XRD machine utilised for this research is a Philips Pc APD version 3.6. The diffractometer type is a P/W1710 based. The generator tension is
40kV, and the generator current is 30 mA. Characteristics of the model: start angle (20) 2.010; end angle (20) 69.970; step size (20) 0.020;
maximum intensity 4186.090; time per step 2.000 s; continuous type of scan. The machine is accurate enough to detect compounds present at more
than about 1%. It can identify peaks. They have been checked by Mr. S. Hirons of the Birberck College, Geology Department.
14
The machine employed is a JEOL JSM-35 CF with a standard peak resolution of 138 eV, and Window ATW2.
42
1989). The chemical composition of the fabric was tested with the SEM-EDS, though it was impossible to avoid
calcite (or flint, in the case of Maddalena di Muccia and Ripabianca di Monterado) inclusions. For this reason
it was very difficult to make a clear separation between the matrix and the inclusions. In most cases, the groups
identified microscopically have been confirmed by the chemical composition of the matrix (e.g. Ripabianca di
Monterado, Viùla, Smili, Vela pilja, etc.). The differentiations on the basis of which the subgroups have
been identified (for example which are mainly based on the number of inclusions and not on the matrix), are not
clearly visible. However, no opposite evidence of groups was found, which would question the accuracy of the
microscopic groupings. Nevertheless, this method was very useful for the definition of the different clay sour-
ces exploited for the manufacture of the fine figulina ware, in comparison with those used for the ordinary
pottery (see for instance Smili, Danilo and Hvar phases).

43
CHAPTER 3
THE ISTRIAN AND DALMATIAN SITES: ANALYSES AND RESULTS
1. VIÙLA (Pula)
The open-air site of Medulin (Medolino) at Viùla (Isola del Vescovo) (fig. 10), a few kilometres south of
Pula (Istria), is located in the northernmost region reached by the spread of Impressed Ware in the east Adria-
tic. A few more sites of the same culture are known in the same territory, namely those of Vela Gromaa
(BA}I}, 1973), Verudella and Punta Rossa, while single potsherds are known from other sites that were reloca-
ted during the Iron Age hillfort (Castellieri) period (MIHOVILI}, 1994: 103).
The site of Medulin was discovered in 1969 in an area that is now densely forested, very close to the
shoreline of Viula. The archaeologists of the Pula Museum opened a first trial-trench in the spring of the same
year. It was later enlarged to an extension of 80 square m, in order to excavate the site systematically (BA}I},
1969: 23). The largest trench is so-called point 1, covering 6x2 m. The stratigraphy showed that the Impressed
Ware layer lay at a depth of 40 cm from the present surface, and that it was some 20 cm thick, just above the
limestone bedrock. Even though the only archaeological structures brought to light are a few pits and one
hearth, the presence of daub fragments (more than 1500 pieces) with cane impressions might suggest that
habitation structures might have existed close to the area where the trail trench was opened. The hearth was
filled with valves of marine shellfish, mainly Cardium edule, Lamarcki, and oysters. According to the obser-
vations made by the excavator (BA}I}, 1969) the Impressed Ware horizon was perfectly in situ. Two radiocar-
bon dates have been obtained from bone fragments. They are: 6850180 BP (HD-12093) and 614065 BP
(HD-11733) (CHAPMAN and MLLER, 1990: 130).
Fig. 10 - Viùla (Medulin): location of the Neolithic site (dot) and of the soil samples (squares). Scale in kilometres.
44
The material culture remains

The excavation yielded 474 potsherds, 171 of which have impressed decorations, 60 linear and incised
patterns (CODACCI, 2000-2001). They are from characteristic Impressed Ware ceramic vessels, such as shallow
and deep open bowls and deep large vessels decorated with rocker Cardium Impressed lines, instrumental
impressions and groups of parallel, incised lines (PETRI}, 1978-1979). The characteristics of the ceramic as-
semblage and the comparisons that can be extended to the site of Smil~i} (BATOVI}, 1966), relate the site to an
advanced stage in the development of the IW Culture, phases B and C of MLLERs (1994: 313) subdivision.
The flint assemblage has recently been re-examined by J.K. KOZOWSKI (1990: 69) who studied only a
very small part of the total assemblage, without analysing the collection of the Pula Museum. In his article, he
pointed out the richness of this industry compared with other sites of the IW Culture in Dalmatia. It shows
many peculiarities, such as a very high flake index characterised by the presence of many discoid cores.
Instruments are represented by end scrapers, transversal and lateral side scrapers, and denticulated pieces.
Other tools include bifacial picks and tranchets.
The flint industry collected by Ba}i} has been recently rediscovered in the stores of the Pula Museum
(CODACCI, 2000-2001). It is very rich in unretouched artefacts, mainly waste flakes and unretouched blocks
obtained from a local source of opaque, light grey material.
According to the results of the measurements of the complete, unretouched artefacts, they are mainly represented
by normoliths; the laminarity index is fairly high (36.45%). The numerous cores are represented by many polyhedrical,
flakelet and a rare subconical, bladelet specimens. Among the instruments, one can note the presence of several
peculiar tools, namely of straight, abrupt retouched perforators on thick flakelet, with very worn broken point. Other
tools are two short end scrapers with very worn working edge, and several retouched bladelets and flakelets.
The abundance of nodule fragments, waste dbitage flakes, and cores might indicate that the site was
strongly linked with flint extractive activities.
The archaeozoological remains
Almost nothing is known of the subsistence strategy of this IW Culture site. The only identified bone
remains belong to domestic caprovines (BON, pers. comm. 2001), while masses of Cardium edule shellfish
come from a hearth. At Smili, Nin and Medulin, masses of shells have been excavated. Over all, a mixed
subsistence economy, including foraging and agriculture is suggested by large-scale site catchment, animal
bones, and the lone botanical analysis. (MLLER, 1988: 103-106).
1.1. GEOLOGY OF THE AREA
The area surrounding the site is characterised by an interstratification of layers of limestone, clay, dolomitic
limestone and some strata with fossils of Nerinae and Diceratides (Dignano, Brioni Islands, Pula, Cape Promotore).
The site is characterised by lower Turonian formations (white, compact limestones with Radiolites, horizons with
Chondrodonta Joannae, Neitaea Zitteli, Diceras Pironai, Radiolites macrodon, etc.) and by Upper Cenomanian
deposits with Rudistae (coarse limestone and white, compact limestone, with Radiolites, layers of Ichthyosarculites
triangularis - Srici, Monticchio and Medulin) (Foglio XXXVII Pisino della Reale Carta Geologica dItalia,
1:100000). MLLER (1994: Plate 77) shows that the site is surrounded by terra rossa and retzina soils.
1.2. ANALYSES
Nineteen of the 474 Impressed Ware sherds examined were sampled for thin section analysis. Two Roman
potsherds were also analysed in order to compare their results with those obtained from the Neolithic samples
(table 1, Appendix 3 and table 1, Appendix 1). The Impressed Ware specimens have been subdivided into
three different groups (G1-G3), while the fourth (G4) belongs to the historical period.
G1 - (4 samples: VZ 28, 29, 32, 35) (fig. 11a)
Reddish very silty, iron-rich matrix characterised by sub-parallel orientation of the clay, with poorly-sorted, fine angular and suban-
gular quartz (<30%; size range between 0.04 by 0.02 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some hornblende, opaques and iron oxides (<10%),
muscovite (2%) and biotite (<3%) micas, rare feldspar, heavy minerals (tourmaline and epidote), rare zircon (1%), and some red clay
fragments (pedological fragments). VZ 32 includes one fragment of glauconite.
G2 - (5 samples: VZ 1, 2, 27, 33, 34) (fig. 11b)
Brown-reddish matrix characterised by poorly-sorted, angular and subangular quartz (<25%; size range between 0.12 by 0.08 and 0.05

45
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 11 - Viùla (Medulin): photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) VZ 28, b) VZ 34, c) VZ 11, d) VZ 24, e) VZ 20, f) VZ 37, g) VZ
4, h) soil sample Medulin 2 (XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
46
by 0.04 mm), some flint (<3%), abundant iron oxides (7%), muscovite (3%) and biotite (5%) micas, some clay pellets, rare pyroxene
(1%), and very rare amphibole (<1%). The high percentage (6%) of voids and the black, burnt organic material would suggest the use
of organic temper;
sub. a (4 samples: VZ 11, 22, 26, 38) (fig. 11c)
Brown-reddish matrix very similar to that of G2, with a lower content of quartz (<20%; same size range as group 2), more organic
material (>7%), and iron oxides (>10%);
sub. b (2 samples: VZ 18, 24) (fig. 11d)
The matrix is very similar to that of G2 sub. a, although it shows a lower number of voids, caused by the inclusion of organic
material, and some added crushed calcite (10%; size range between 1.0 by 0.8 and 0.4 by 0.2 mm). Sample VZ 18 has one
Gastropod microfossil.
G3 - (2 samples: VZ 10, 20) (fig. 11e)
Reddish fine matrix more calcareous than those of groups 1 and 2, with fine and well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%;
typical size range between 0.04 by 0.03 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (about 5%; size range between 0.5 by
0.3 and 0.2 by 0.2 mm), biotite mica (<5%), opaques and iron oxides (10%), and rare muscovite mica (1%);
sub. a (2 samples: VZ 15, 37) (fig. 11f)
Matrix more micritic and richer in rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone than that of G3 (10%; typical size range 0.6 by 0.4
mm), well-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (25%; typical size 0.1 by 0.08 mm), iron oxides (<10%), muscovite and
biotite micas (3%).
G4 - (2 samples: VZ 4, 25) (fig. 11g)
Dark red, very iron-rich, vitrified matrix, poorly-sorted abundant angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range between 0.4 by 0.2
and 0.04 by 0.03 mm), muscovite mica (<3%), some biotite larger than that of the preceding groups, rare pyroxene (1%), microcline
(1%), abundant opaques and iron oxides (<15%), and some microfossils.
One soil sample collected from the proximity of the site has been analysed in thin section (figs. 10 and 11h). Its red matrix is
characterised by abundant angular and subangular quartz (35%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), iron oxides (5%), some biotite and
muscovite (>3%), rare pyroxene (1%), and red clay fragments (pedological fragments which infilled voids in the soil). It is an alfisol
(argillic diagnostic horizon), alternatively referred to as a luvisol (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001).
1.2.1. Summary of group characteristics
Group 1 has a silty, iron-rich matrix with sub-parallel orientation of the clay, abundant small-sized quartz,
hornblende, muscovite and biotite micas, rare feldspar, heavy minerals (tourmaline and epidote), zircon, and
red clay fragments. Group 2 shows a fabric without orientation, coarser quartz and less heavy minerals than
that of G1. It is characterised by flint, iron oxides, muscovite and biotite micas, pyroxene, amphibole, clay
pellets, and voids. G2 sub. a shows less quartz and more voids than G2, whereas the fabric of G2 sub. b is
similar to the preceding subgroup, with sparse fragments of crushed calcite. Group 3 has a micritic fabric,
different from those of G1 and G2, with a lower percentage of quartz and some limestone fragments. It has
some biotite, opaques, abundant iron oxides, and rare muscovite. Its subgroup (G3 sub. a) has a very calcare-
ous fabric. It shows a higher percentage of coarser quartz and fragments of polycrystalline limestone. The
limestone is natural to the clay as indicated by its rounded and subrounded shape.
Group 4 shows a very iron-rich matrix with abundant quartz, and muscovite and biotite micas. The biotite
is larger in diameter than that of the preceding groups. The quartz is more angular and there is no evidence of
clay fragments. It also shows pyroxene, microcline, and a few microfossils.
1.2.2. SEM-EDS analyses
Seven samples from this site have been analysed by SEM-EDS (table 1, Appendix 4). Groups 1, 2 and 3
have yielded similar results, with rather high aluminia, silica, and iron oxide. G2 sub. a has less abundant silica
than G2 (less quartz, see above) and a higher content of aluminia and iron oxide (as shown by the thin section
analysis). G3 sub. a is characterised by a higher quantity of calcium oxide (micritic matrix and presence of
limestone fragments), while the amount of potash is lower than that of groups 1 and 2. G4 has the lowest percen-
tage of aluminia and the highest of magnesia and potash, and abundant calcium oxide (this result is curious
because no limestone or calcite has been noted in thin section). The similarities between groups 1 and 2 are
evident also in thin section (see above), whereas G3 shows a more calcareous fabric. G4 is characterised by very
low aluminia and high potash and magnesia. It comes from a source different from those of the other groups, as
confirmed by the thin section analysis. It is interesting to note the presence of calcium oxide, whereas in thin
section no limestone or calcite were identified (see also the XRD pattern of this sample). These analyses reinfor-
ce the idea of a similar provenance for the first three groups (see Chapter 3, 1.3.), and a different one for G4.

47
1.2.3. XRD analyses
Two soil samples (Medulin 1, Medulin 2) collected from the proximity of the Neolithic site have been
analysed by XRD. The two patterns show the presence of the same minerals (figs. 12, top and 12, bottom):
kaolinite, muscovite mica, chlorite, quartz, and hematite.
Three potsherds (VZ 4, G4; VZ 15 and VZ 37, G3 sub. a) already studied in thin section were also
Fig. 12 - Viùla (Medulin): XRD patterns of soil samples 1 (top) and 2 (bottom).
48
Fig. 13 - Viùla (Medulin): XRD patterns of potsherds VZ 15 (top), VZ 37 (centre) and VZ 4 (bottom).

49
analysed by XRD. Both patterns of the samples of group 3 sub. a (VZ 15 and VZ 37) show quartz, chlorite, and
hematite (figs. 13, top and 13, centre) that are common to the soil samples, plus some calcite. As already shown
by the thin section analyses, both sherds have micritic fabrics rich in polycrystalline limestone. The pattern of
sample VZ 37 (fig. 13, centre) also includes some kaolinite (Chapter 2, 6.1.) and albite. Albite is a common
mineral sometimes disseminated in granular limestone (FORD, 1949: 546) while the kaolinite matches the soil
sample.
The Roman sample of group 4 (VZ 4; fig. 13, bottom) shows microcline, quartz, muscovite, hematite,
calcite, and gypsum. Gypsum is the most common sulphate and often forms extensive beds in connection
with various sedimentary rocks, especially limestone, shales, marls and clay (FORD, 1949: 759). Most of
these minerals, as microcline, quartz and muscovite, had already been identified in the thin section of the
sherd. Hematite is a very common mineral. It was difficult to identify in thin section because of the very
homogeneous dark red colour (most probably due to hematite) of the matrix, caused by the high content of the
source. It is interesting to observe that the XRD analysis shows a slightly micritic clay. This contradicts the
results of the thin section analysis because calcite was not observed in the thin section, although according to
the SEM-EDS analyses the percentage of calcium is higher than in other groups: see above. This may be
caused by post-depositional factors due to circulation of water after the sherds were buried. The formation and
deposition of secondary calcite is very common in an area characterised by a calcareous environment. Also
the presence of gypsum is due to post-depositional factors (FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). Gypsum is a mine-
ral that disappears at very low temperatures, approximately 200 C, while the vessels have been fired at more
than 850 C. The presence of microcline recognised by XRD in VZ 4 (its percentage is to be higher than 2%)
confirms the results of the thin section analysis, that it is from a different source, and that its formation cannot
be due to firing (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001).
To conclude, the XRD analysis reinforces the opinion that group 3 comes from a local source (on the basis
of the similarities with the soil sample patterns), while group 4 does not.
1.3. DISCUSSION
The fabrics of groups 1 and 2 most probably come from sources located close to each other. Their mineral
inclusions are identical, even though the percentage is variable. They show a fine fraction of inclusions rich in
quartz, mica, and heavy minerals. The sources of the subgroups most probably derive from different layers of
the same clay deposit. They are relatively rich in clay minerals and poorer in quartz; therefore they needed the
addition of some temper (organic and/or calcite) in varying proportion. The fabric of group 3 looks similar to
those of groups 1 and 2, although its fabric is richer in calcium carbonate (see SEM-EDS results) and poorer
in muscovite mica.
Group 4 is very different from the previous three. Its fabric is more homogeneous, more ferric, better
oxidized, with microcline, and microfossils. The source is very different from the preceding ones, characteri-
sed by more angular quartz, without any clay fragment.
The thin section of the soil sample collected from the proximity of the site (sample Medulin 2) is almost
identical to the fabric of group 1. It shows the same reddish, fine silty clay with abundant fine quartz and the
same size of muscovite lamellae (even though the soil sample shows a higher percentage of white mica).
1.4. CONCLUSIONS
The study of the fabrics of the thin sections of groups 1, 2 and 3 indicates that they derive from local clay
sources. The thin section of the local soil is almost identical to the fabrics of the potsherds of group 1 (the soil
is very silty, argillic with clay fragments). The fabrics of the sherds of group 1 show minerals (mainly quartz,
muscovite, and biotite micas) characterised by similar grain size of the soil and by identical clay fragments.
The XRD analyses of the sherds and soil samples show many similarities. It is reasonable to think that the
vessels of these three groups were produced locally.
Group 4 is very different. The XRD analysis shows the presence of microcline and muscovite mica that
are absent in the other samples. The XRD pattern also shows the presence of some microscopically invisible
calcite and gypsum. As mentioned above, these minerals are due to post-depositional factors.
More suggestions can be put forward about the origin of the second group. Sample VZ 18 of G2 sub. b,
shows the presence of one microfossil of Gastropod, typical of muddy environments. It is possible that muddy
clay was utilised by the inhabitants of the Neolithic village of Viula for their pottery production. Another
50
sample belonging to group 1, VZ 32, contains glauconite, a mineral related to fossils and to low water, marine
environments. Since only one small fragment has been identified, we can suppose that it might have been
transported by the tide. No shell fragment, which might indicate the presence of marine or lacustrine sedimen-
ts, has been found. Therefore, the minerals and the matrices may point to a clay deposit located further inland.
Some differences have been noted in the technology employed in the pottery production of Viula. Group
2 sub. b shows some burnt organic material and some added crushed calcite (the calcareous inclusions are
very large and they are mineralogically distinct from the clay). On the other hand, there is no convincing
evidence for the use of temper for the other ceramic groups. The quartz grains of the other groups are poorly-
sorted. This suggests that the clay deposit is located near the source of the parental rock, because the quartz
inclusions have neither been rounded, nor sorted in size by an extended process of water transport.
All the Neolithic ceramic samples show quite a low firing temperature, never higher than 750 C, proba-
bly about 600-650 C, on the basis of the very crumbling and soft nature of the pottery and the presence of
intact crystals of calcite. On the other hand, the Roman samples have been highly fired, above 850 C (becau-
se of the vitrification of the fabrics: Chapter 2, 5.2., l).
In conclusion, the clay sources exploited in prehistoric and Roman periods are very different as testified
by thin section, XRD and SEM-EDS analyses.
2. JAMI NA SREDI (Cres Island)
The cave site of Jami na Sredi lies on the Island of Cres, at an altitude of 34 m on the western slope of
Mount St. Bartolomej (US-RUKONI, 1982), just north-east of Punta Kriza (MIROSAVLJEVI, 1959), facing the
Loinj Canal (figs. 14 and 15). The cave has a wide entrance, 13.3 m high; its main chamber continues for
some 69 m inside the mountain.
Jami na Sredi is one of the most important Neolithic sites so far discovered in the Kvarnar Islands. V.
MIROSAVLJEVI (1959; 1960) excavated it by test-trenches in three campaigns, in 1955, 1957 and 1958. The
excavations revealed a complex and arti-
culated sequence that extended to a dep-
th of 4.35 m. It produced evidence of dif-
ferent phases of Late and Final Palaeoli-
thic (so-called Solutrean, Gravettian
and Mesolithic) as well as of Early and
Middle Neolithic occupations.
The material culture assemblage
The Early Neolithic layer yielded an
assemblage typical of the Cardium Im-
pressed Ware Culture. Following J. ML-
LERs (1994: 313) classification, it is to
be attributed to the Impresso B phase.
According to the descriptions given by
both the excavator and other authors (BA-
TOVI, 1966; EUK, 1982a; MLLER,
1994), the ceramic industry is characte-
rised by fine and coarse pottery with im-
pressed or stamped decorations. The de-
corative patterns cover the entire surface
of the vessel including the handles. In
most cases they were obtained by pres-
sing the perystome of Cardium edule
marine shell on the vessel surface. Sand-
glass, linear instrumental, paired finger,
and fingernail decorative patterns are also
Fig. 14 - Location of the Neolithic cave sites of Vela Jama (1) and Jami na Sredi (2) and of
the soil samples (squares). Scale in kilometres.

51
relatively frequent. The large dimension, coarse pottery vessels are mainly of spherical or oval shape. Only one
fragment with impressed motifs filled with white inlay has been found. Evidence from other Neolithic sites in the
area show that this decorative technique is more recent than the typical Jami na Sredi Impressed Ware assembla-
ge. As reported by BATOVI (1975a) the Jami na Sredi aspect of the Impressed Ware Culture has very close
parallels with that of the Prato Don Michele (FUSCO, 1965) in the Tremiti Islands (south-eastern Italy).
Flint and bone tools are very rare (but this might be due to the technique employed by the excavator),
while polished stone tools are absent.
According to preliminary observations (EUK, 1982a), the subsistence economy of the Jami na Sredi
Early Neolithic community seems to have been based on fishing, the collection of marine molluscs and hun-
ting. The excavations produced no evidence of agricultural implements or bones of domesticated animals.
The geology of the territory surrounding the site of Jami na Sredi is characterised by terra rossa soils
(MLLER, 1994: Plate 77, 3), and by a large outcrop of limestone and some dolomite (Turonian formation)
(Loinj, L 33-125, Osnovna Geoloka Karta, 1: 100000).
2.2. ANALYSES
Thirty-two potsherds from the Impressed Ware cave site of Jami na Sredi have been subdivided into five
different groups (figs. 16-20; tables 2a, b, Appendix 3).
G1 - (6 samples: JNS 2, 5, 24, 26, 27, 30) (fig. 21a)
Red dark-reddish, very slightly micritic and very iron-rich matrix characterised by well-sorted, abundant angular and subangular
quartz (<25%; size range between 0.06 by 0.03 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), abundant muscovite mica (<4%), clay pellets, opaques and
iron oxides (>7%), and rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<7%; size range between 0.8 by 0.5 and
0.15 by 0.1 mm);
sub. a (2 samples: JNS 6, 25) (fig. 21b)
Red micritic iron-rich matrix very similar to that of G1, with more abundant subrounded, subangular and rare, angular fragments of
polycrystalline limestone (15%; size range between 2.5 by 1.5 and 0.07 by 0.05 mm), well-sorted angular and subangular quartz
(20%; same size range G1), and occasional sparry calcite (3%);
Fig. 15 - Environmental location of Jami na Sredi (arrow) from the top of Mt. Telegraph (photograph by M. Spataro).
52
Fig. 16 - Jami na Sredi: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

53
54

55
56

57
sub. b (5 samples: JNS 4, 21, 100, 101, 102)
Red dark red matrix very similar to that of G1, with coarser and poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range
between 0.2 by 0.15 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (7%; same size range G1), flint (<2%),
and muscovite mica (3%);
sub. c (1 sample: JNS 7)
Dark red, iron-rich matrix. The fabric is coarser and has more detrital fraction than that of G1. It is characterised by abundant rounded
and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (15%; size range between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.06 by 0.04 mm), rich in poorly-
sorted, angular and subangular quartz (35%; size range between 1.7 by 1.0 and 0.04 by 0.03 mm);
sub. d (1 sample: JNS 28)
The fabric is identical to that of G1 sub. c. In addition it contains some added crushed sparry calcite (5%; size range between 3.0 by
1.5 and 1.0 by 0.8 mm);
sub. e (3 samples: JNS 8, 18, 19)
Brown slightly micritic matrix with poorly-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (up to 30%; size range between 0.1 by
0.05 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), and abundant added
crushed calcite (up to 30%; size range between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.05 by 0.02 mm).
G2 - (1 sample: JNS 12) (fig. 21c)
Brown micritic matrix with very well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (20%; typical size 0.04 by 0.03 mm), some iron
oxides (5%), rare polycrystalline limestone, one angular fragment of fossiliferous limestone (size: 1.5 by 0.75 mm), and muscovite
mica (3%);
sub. a (1 sample: JNS 23)
Brown matrix similar to that of G2, more calcareous, characterised by subrounded and subangular fragments of polycrystalline
limestone (5%; size range between 3.0 by 2.0 and 0.1 by 0.08), well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; typical size 0.1 by
0.08), muscovite mica (2%), opaques and iron oxides (4%), and few clay pellets;
sub. b (1 sample: JNS 29)
Brown-reddish matrix with poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (20%; size range between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.04 by 0.03 mm),
rare subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%), rare muscovite mica (1%), opaques and iron oxides (7%), and added
crushed calcite (<20%; size range between 1.0 by 0.7 and 0.2 by 0.1 mm);
sub. c (1 sample: JNS 103)
Brown-reddish matrix similar to that of G2, with some coarser quartz (20%; size range between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm),
and rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (4%; typical size 0.2 by 0.15 mm);
sub. d (2 samples: JNS 3, 22)
Dark brown micritic matrix with poorly-sorted abundant angular and subangular quartz (<25%; size range between 0.1 by 0.08 and
0.04 by 0.02 mm), abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (7%; typical size 1.2 by 0.8 mm),
opaques and iron oxides (4%), few muscovite mica (2%), and some subrounded calcareous sandstone rock fragments (JNS 3).
G3 - (1 sample: JNS 16) (fig. 21d)
Brown iron-rich matrix characterised by poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<3%; size range between 0.2 by 0.15 and 0.03
by 0.02 mm), abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (20%; size range between 3.0 by 2.5 and 0.2
by 0.18 mm), muscovite mica (2%), rare fragments of calcite (1%), and opaques and iron oxides (5%).
G4 - (4 samples: JNS 11, 13, 17, 20) (fig. 21e)
Very reddish matrix indicative of the use of terra rossa soil with very abundant added crushed sparry calcite (up to 40%; size range
between 2.0 by 1.5 and 0.08 by 0.03 mm).
G5 - (2 samples: JNS 1, 14) (fig. 21f)
Brown very clayish matrix characterised by few, fine angular and subangular quartz (2%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), and very
abundant added crushed sparry calcite as well as banded (40%; size range between 1.0 by 0.5 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: JNS 15) (fig. 21g)
Brown-reddish matrix, very similar to that of G5 with some terra rossa soil, rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%;
size range 1.0 by 0.08 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), and very abundant added crushed sparry calcite (40%; size range between 1.3 by 1.0 and
0.07 by 0.03 mm).
One soil sample collected in the proximity of the site (some 0.5 km) has been analysed in thin section (figs. 14 and 21h). It is a
reddish luvisol (terra fusca), part of a palaeosoil, deep subsoil Bt/Ct (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). It shows a very reddish, non-
calcareous fabric with well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), fine muscovite mica (3%),
rare pyroxene (<1%), opaques and iron oxides (3%), and rare clay pellets.
Group 1 has a very iron-rich and very slightly micritic fabric with fine quartz, muscovite, iron oxides, and
abundant polycrystalline limestone. Its subgroup a shows the same iron-rich fabric with a higher percentage
of limestone. The fragments of limestone are subrounded, subangular and angular. They have been probably
added as temper because of their angular shape. G1 sub. b is less iron-rich and has coarser quartz; it also shows
58
Fig. 21 - Jami na Sredi: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) JNS 2, b), JNS 25, c) JNS 12, d) JNS 16, e) JNS 20, f) JNS 1), g) JNS 15, h),
soil sample (XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)

59
some flint. G1 sub. c shows a much more abundant detrital fraction with poorly-sorted and coarser (than G1
sub. a) quartz, limestone, and iron oxides; G1 sub. d is almost identical to G1 sub. c, although the latter shows
added calcite. G1 sub. e shows a slightly micritic fabric with abundant quartz, polycrystalline limestone and
added calcite. Group 2 shows a very fine fabric, very well-sorted fine quartz, muscovite, rare polycrystalline
limestone, one fragment of which is fossiliferous. It is much less rich in iron and in polycrystalline limestone
than that of group 1. G2 sub. a is very similar to G2, with a fabric much richer in limestone fragments, with
coarser and less abundant quartz. G2 sub. b shows the same matrix of G2 sub. a plus added crushed calcite.
The fabric of G2 sub. c is similar to that of G2 with added calcite and quartz more poorly-sorted. Group 2
sub. d has a dark brown, calcareous fabric with coarse quartz, occasional muscovite mica, abundant polycry-
stalline limestone, and some calcareous sandstone fragments. Group 3 has an iron-rich fabric with very rare,
fine quartz, iron oxides and opaques, and abundant rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone. Group 4
shows a very iron-rich terra rossa fabric with very abundant added crushed calcite. Group 5 has a brown very
clayey, non-calcareous fabric, with very low percentage of quartz and very abundant added calcite. Its sub-
group (G5 sub. a) shows in addition some terra rossa soil.
The soil sample is very similar to the fabric of G1, although the latter is slightly micritic with limestone
fragments. They both show the same iron-rich fabric with abundant quartz, muscovite mica and iron oxides.
The results of G1 (table 2, Appendix 4) are of particular interest because they show the highest amount of
phosphorus oxide of the whole assemblage, with an average around 5% and a maximum percentage of 12.44%.
This is probably due to post-depositional factors (FREESTONE, 2001). Nevertheless, this is the only group of the
Jami na Sredi assemblage that produced these results. G1 and its subgroups a, b, and c have much more silica
and aluminia than the other groups.
The quantity of phosphorus oxide is much lower (0.48-4.02%) in the subgroups than in G1. The percen-
tage of calcium oxide is generally lower than 22.88% in all the G1 samples, with the exception of JNS 8 and
18 (sub. e; CaO 29.30-31.78%), whereas it is much higher in the other groups (because of the very abundant
crushed calcite). The percentages of iron oxide are quite high with the exception of G1 sub. e; the highest peak
of 12.50% is reached by JNS 2 (G1).
The quantity of potash is rather homogeneous in G1 and in its subgroups, while it is lower than those of
groups 2 and 3 (only JNS 21 has a higher percentage of 3.26%). Group 2 shows less aluminia and more potash
than G1.
Group 3 has a percentage of potash and magnesia much higher than that of the other groups. G4 is very
homogeneous with a percentage of aluminia and silica lower than that of the other groups, and a very high
quantity of calcium oxide. G5 shows the lowest percentages of silica and iron oxide and the highest of calcium
oxide. Its subgroup (JNS 15) contains more abundant silica and aluminia and less calcium oxide.
To sum up, clear differences can be observed among the groups. G1 shows a high quantity of aluminia,
silica, and phosphorus oxide, while groups 3, 4 and 5 have low percentages of these latter. In particular they
are very low in G5 (mainly because of the scarce presence of quartz). Another note regards the presence of
calcium oxide, which is very high in groups 4 and 5, due to the occurrence of abundant calcite.
2.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 2 most probably come from similar or neighbouring sources, as indicated by the same size
of quartz and the similar polycrystalline limestone. There are some differences in the percentage of quartz,
limestone, and muscovite mica (see differences in Chapter 3, 2.2.1.).
The subgroups (G1 sub. a, b, c, d, e) might come from different layers of the same sediment because they
show differences only in the percentage of the same type of minerals (quartz, muscovite mica and limestone).
The two groups most probably derive from the same geological area. Group 3 comes from a source much more
silty and less micritic than the preceding ones.
The fabric of group 4 is different from that of the other groups. It shows no evidence of micritic matrix
and is very rich in terra rossa soil.
The fabric alone was too plastic for pottery manufacture, and required the addition of abundant calcite.
Group 5 comes from another different source. It is less micritic than those of groups 1, 2, and 3 and not as rich
in iron oxides and terra rossa as that of group 4.
60
2.4. CONCLUSION
Most of the fabrics did not need the addition of any temper because the micritic matrix is not very plastic.
Some groups, G4 and G5, have been heavily tempered because of their too argillaceous matrices. Also group
1 subgroups a, d, e, and G2 sub. b show added temper (always calcite). In G1 sub. a, the fragments of limesto-
ne are also subangular and angular. It is possible that the limestone has been added. The firing temperature
was quite low, never higher than 750 C, as shown by the perfectly preserved sparry calcite.
At least five sources were utilised for the manufacture of the vessels analysed from Jami na Sredi. Those
exploited for groups 1 and 2 were most likely located very close to each other because of the very similar
fabric, size ranged quartz and polycrystalline limestone. The main differences are in the variability of the
percentage of limestone and iron oxide, and the latter is particularly high in G1. The source for G3 was finer
and siltier and less iron-rich than groups 1 and 2 (as confirmed by the SEM-EDS analyses). A more different
source has been exploited for the production of group 4. It is composed of terra rossa. Group 5 is different
from G4, because it has a very argillaceous matrix, although the matrix also shows some quartz. Its subgroup
has some terra rossa, therefore this source might be located close to a terra rossa outcrop. Otherwise it might
indicate that two different soils have been mixed.
The characteristics of the geology of the area and the soil sample analysis might indicate a local pro-
duction for the Early Neolithic pottery of this site. Rocks and minerals such as limestone, calcite, mica,
quartz and calcareous sandstone are typical of the surrounding geological areas. Terra rossa outcrops are
also located in the vicinity of the cave. A local production is also strongly supported by the similarities
between the fabrics of the pottery from this site and those from the neighbouring, contemporaneous site of
Vela Jama (Chapter 3, 3.4.).
2.4.1. Correlation between typology and fabric
Group 1 is composed only of Impressed Ware pottery. Group 1 sub. e (JNS 8 and 18) is represented by two
vessels with identical shapes and very different decorations. From a typological point of view, they could fit
into the category of large deep, oval-shaped vessels of groups 4 and 5. The sherds of group 2 do not share a
common decoration, JNS 23 has an instrumental, impressed motif; JNS 29 has rocker designs and JNS 12 is
undecorated. Group 3 (JNS 16) is decorated with one single incised line. It has no parallels from a typological
point of view (fig. 16). Group 4 is characterised by large, deep vessels with two horizontal lines of small
rectangular and oval impressions. The two vessels of group 5 (JNS 1, 14) are typologically identical. They are
oval-shaped, large vases with elongated impressions distributed on horizontal lines. They are very similar to
those of group 4 (the shapes and the distribution of the decorative patterns are identical).
It is possible to suggest that, in many cases, there is a good correlation between the macroscopic and the
microscopic groups 1, 3, 4 and 5. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that from a stylistic and typological
point of view, the microscopic groups 1 sub. e, 4, and 5 can be referred to only one group, that of the large,
deep, oval-shaped vessels.
To conclude, the pots of each fabric are in most cases (with the exception of G2) stylistically and typolo-
gically very homogeneous. It is possible to suggest that the Early Neolithic inhabitants of the cave of Jami na
Sredi exploited five sources for the manufacture of vessels of similar shape and decoration. It is also important
to consider that 1) more than one potter was probably involved in the vessels manufacture, and that 2) clay/
raw material deposits for pottery production are quite abundant in the area surrounding the cave.
It must be suggested that different Impressed Ware people might have settled in the cave seasonally, at
different times. If pottery was made locally it is probable that they exploited well-known, local raw material
sources. Therefore, if different human groups inhabited it, various potters might have manufactured the ves-
sels found inside the cave. This might help explain why several, different outcrops were exploited apparently
at the same time.
3. VELA JAMA (Loinj Island)
The cave site of Vela Jama is located at an altitude of 338 m along the western slope of Mt. Telegraph on
the Island of Loinj (US-RUKONI, 1982: 9) (fig. 14), some 7.5 km from the site of Jami na Sredi. In 1968,
MIROSAVLJEVI opened three trenches at 9, 18 and 22 m from the cave entrance. The last of these covered an

61
area of 16 square metres. The excavation of this trench revealed a complex stratigraphy, down to 4.12 m from
the cave floor (the bedrock was never reached).
According to EUK (1982a), the stratigraphy shows different layers of prehistoric occupation. The lower-
most one belongs to an advanced period in the development of the Middle Palaeolithic Mousterian Culture.
This is most probably followed by the early Late Palaeolithic Aurignacian and by two different stages, evol-
ved and final, of the Gravettian Culture. The Impressed Ware Culture assemblages represent the most impor-
tant Neolithic assemblages, although few typical sherds of the Danilo and Hvar Cultures have also been
recovered (MIROSAVLJEVI, 1968: tables XXIII and XXIV). The excavator reports the presence of microlithic
tools that he refers to the Mesolithic. Unfortunately, none of these microliths has been illustrated in his report.
The backed bladelets and points photographed in his table VIII might be better ascribed to the Final Epigra-
vettian Culture, mainly on the basis of their size.
Vela Jama is one of the Dalmatian caves which, even though it is often mentioned in the literature (BENAC,
1971; MIROSAVLJEVI, 1971; MLLER, 1994), is almost unknown. The only detailed study so far available is that
written by MIROSAVLJEVI (1968) just after the conclusion of his first season of excavations.
The Impressed Ware Assemblage
A preliminary report of the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware assemblages of this cave was written by
EUK (1982). He subdivided the pottery into three different periods, or phases, of development. The first
phase is characterised by coarse wares mainly decorated with motifs including paired, pinched, finger and
sand-glass, instrumental and Cardium impressions. Deep, open, spherical and ovoid pots, sometimes with
restricted mouth, almost exclusively represent the vessel shapes. During the second phase that, according to
EUK (1982a: 31), is almost exclusive of this cave, the impressed decorations are obtained by the imprinting
of Cardium shells and a sharp instrument producing very elongated triangular impressions. The zigzag and
Cardium rocker motifs make their appearance during this second phase. The vessels are different from those
of the first phase, with more common smaller pots, including plates and bowls. According to MLLER (1994:
316), this assemblage is attributable to phases A and B of his classification.
No agricultural instruments were found in these first two Impressed Ware phases. The bone assemblage
seems to indicate that the subsistence strategy of the Vela Jama inhabitants was still based on hunting and the
exploitation of marine resources.
The third phase is characterised by the appearance of plastic cordons decorated with fingernail impres-
sions, and of deep oval vessels with two horizontal lines of elongated and oval impressions below the plain
rim. The Cardium decorations disappear during this phase. They are substituted by patterns obtained by bone,
and wooden stick impressions.
EUK (1982) stresses the importance of the impressed horizontal plastic cordons. On this basis he consi-
ders this phase contemporaneous to the earliest phase of Obre I (BENAC, 1973), to layers 26-24 of the Arene
Candide Cave in Liguria (BERNAB BREA, 1946), and to some of the Apulian Impressed Ware sites.
The geology of the area surrounding the site of Vela Jama is almost identical to that of Jami na Sredi, 7.5
km to the east. Vela Jama is located on limestone and chalk (Turonian and Senonian formation). Close to the
site there are some narrow limestone beds which contain Foraminifera fossils (Cres, L 33-113, Osnovna
Geoloka Karta, 1: 100000).
3.2. ANALYSES
Fourteen ceramic samples of the Impressed Ware site of Vela Jama have been attributed to four different
fabrics (figs. 22-24; table 3, Appendix 3).
G1 - (2 samples: VJ 5, 6) (fig. 25a)
Reddish, iron-rich, micritic matrix with abundant, well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between 0.07 by
0.05 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<7%; typical size 0.85 by 0.6 mm), few muscovite
mica (<2%), occasional flint, some clay pellets and iron oxides (5%);
sub. a (2 samples: VJ 12, 13) (fig. 25b)
Reddish matrix identical to that of G1 with more fragments of limestone (most of them are subangular shaped) (10%; size range
between 0.7 by 0.5 and 0.07 by 0.04 mm), and some added sparry calcite (5%; size range between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.15 by 0.08 mm);
62
Fig. 22 - Vela Jama: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

63
64

65
sub. b (2 samples: VJ 4, 7) (fig. 25c)
Reddish, iron-rich, slightly micritic matrix characterised by a high percentage of poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (30%;
size range between 0.2 by 0.15 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<10%;
typical size 1.1 by 0.7 mm), some flint (3%), muscovite mica (<3%), few polycrystalline quartz (<2%), some clay pellets and
abundant iron oxides (7%).
G2 - (2 samples: VJ 1, 9) (fig. 25d)
Red-brownish, fine, iron-rich matrix with poorly-sorted, abundant, angular and subangular quartz (15%; size range between 0.08 by
0.06 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), iron oxides (<10%), rare rounded and subrounded fragments of fine polycrystalline limestone (typical
size 0.04 by 0.02 mm), rare muscovite mica (<1%), and some added crushed calcite (<10%; size range between 2.0 by 1.5 and 0.4 by
0.2 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: VJ 2)
The matrix is the same of that of G2 with more quartz (20%; same size range as G2) and iron.
G3 - (1 sample: VJ 8) (fig. 25e)
Brown matrix characterised by a high percentage of poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between 0.1 by
0.08 and 0.04 by 0.03 mm), some flint (3%), rare pyroxene (<1%), some opaques and iron oxides (5%), fine polycrystalline limestone
(3%; same size range as G2), occasional polycrystalline quartz, and some added crushed sparry calcite (5%; size range between 2.0
by 1.5 and 0.6 by 0.3 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: VJ 11)
Same brown matrix of group 3 with less abundant quartz (20%; same size range of G3), more abundant rounded, subangular and
angular shape fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<10%; size range between 2.0 by 1.5 and 0.7 by 0.5 mm), some polycrystalline
quartz (2%), flint and muscovite mica (3%), clay pellets and iron oxides (3%). There are no artificially added inclusions.
G4 - (1 sample: VJ 3) (fig. 25f)
Brown slightly micritic matrix, very rich in fine angular and subangular quartz (<30%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), subrounded
and subangular fragments of polycrystalline limestone (10%; typical size 2.0 by 1.5 mm), some muscovite mica (3%), rare pyroxene
(<1%), and some iron oxides;
sub. a (1 sample: VJ 10) (fig. 25g)
Brown matrix coarser than that of G4, with less and coarser quartz (25%; size range between 0.07 by 0.05 and 0.04 by 0.03 mm),
some muscovite mica (3%), occasional flint, subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (5%; typical size 0.25 by 0.2 mm),
iron oxides (3%), and added crushed sparry calcite (10%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm);
sub. b (1 sample: VJ 14)
Brown matrix with less quartz than that of G4 (15%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limesto-
ne (5%; size as G4 sub. a), rare muscovite mica (1%), iron oxides (5%), and added crushed calcite (10%; size range between 1.2 by
1.0 and 0.2 by 0.1 mm).
One soil sample collected in the proximity of the site has been analysed in thin section (figs. 14 and 25h). It is a mull humus, Ah
horizon (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). Its fabric is brown, iron-rich and non-calcareous with abundant fine and well-sorted quartz
(>30%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some fragments of calcite (<5%), and some terra rossa (3%).
Group 1 shows an iron-rich, micritic fabric with fine, well-sorted quartz, some muscovite, limestone
fragments, occasional flint and iron oxides. The fabric of G1 sub. a is similar to that of G1 with calcite and
more coarse and abundant fragments of limestone mainly of subangular shape, without any flint inclusion. It
is possible to suggest that the limestone fragments have been added as temper besides the calcite. G1 sub. b
has an iron-rich, slightly micritic fabric characterised by quartz more abundant and coarser than that of G1,
polycrystalline quartz, muscovite mica, flint, clay pellets, and more abundant limestone than in G1. Group 2
shows a silty fabric with small-sized quartz, iron oxides, rare muscovite, polycrystalline quartz, and some
artificially added calcite. G2 sub. a is richer in quartz and iron than G2. Group 3 has a brown fabric characte-
rised by quartz, flint, occasional polycrystalline quartz, muscovite, limestone, iron oxides, and added calcite.
G3 sub. a shows a lower percentage of quartz and more abundant polycrystalline quartz and limestone. Group
4 is characterised by a fabric slightly more calcareous than that of the preceding groups, with abundant and
very fine quartz, limestone, muscovite mica, and some iron oxides. The fabric of G4 sub. a is coarser than that
of G4 with a lower percentage of quartz and polycrystalline limestone. It is characterised by flint, rare musco-
vite, and added crushed calcite. G4 sub. b is very similar to G4 sub. a with a smaller quantity of quartz and less
polycrystalline limestone.
The soil sample is very similar to G4 as indicated by the abundant fine and well sorted quartz, although
G4 is micritic with some limestone fragments, whereas the soil sample is non-calcareous and has some terra
rossa. None of the ceramic groups analysed from Vela Jama shows evidence of terra rossa.
66
Fig. 25 - Vela Jama: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) VJ 5, b) VJ 12, c) VJ 4, d) VJ 1, e) VJ 8, f) VJ 3, g) VJ 10, h) soil sample (XPL,
X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)

67
The variability in the calcium oxide percentages is very evident (table 3, Appendix 4). It is mainly due to
the presence/absence of calcite in the analysed areas. G1 and its subgroups (a and b) yielded very similar
results with relatively high amounts of aluminia, silica and iron oxide. Group 2 has a percentage of silica and
potash higher than that of G1 with lower aluminia, iron and calcium oxides, whereas the other results are
similar to those of G1. G2 sub. a shows higher quantities of aluminia, iron oxide, and lower calcium oxide
than G2. The differences in iron oxide are to be attributed to the iron-rich fabric (see thin section analysis). G3
shows very high percentage of silica, and rather low calcium oxide. This is due to the high percentage of
quartz, to the presence of flint, and to the small quantities of limestone. Its subgroup has less silica (less
abundant quartz), and more calcium oxide (as in the thin section the limestone is more abundant than in G3).
G4 is slightly different from its subgroups with more silica (abundant quartz), iron oxide and lower calcium
(due to the lack of crushed calcite). The SEM-EDS analysis indicates that these samples yielded very similar
results, supporting the idea of their provenance from a very similar geological area (see Chapter 3, 3.4.).
3.3. DISCUSSION
Group 1 comes from a micritic source rich in iron oxides and polycrystalline limestone. Group 2 shows
less iron-rich, slightly different fabric, with very few polycrystalline limestone inclusions. Group 3 has a
fabric similar to that of G2, even though it is less rich in iron and has more abundant quartz. The sources
exploited for the manufacture of the pottery of groups 2 and 3 were probably located close to each other.
Group 4 has a much darker fabric with very abundant, fine quartz compared to that of the other groups.
The inhabitants of Vela Jama exploited four sources, which were most probably located close to each
other. They contain the same varieties of minerals in different percentages. The mineral inclusions are angular
and subangular quartz, polycrystalline quartz, muscovite, iron oxides and opaques, flint and polycrystalline
limestone.
3.4. CONCLUSIONS
From a technological point of view the vessels are to be subdivided into two groups: 1) those characteri-
sed only by a natural fabric without any artificial addition of aplastic inclusions and 2) those with temper. The
temper of most of the samples (11 out of 14) consists of crushed calcite and probably crushed limestone (G1
sub. a and G4). Calcite is the most common mineral that potters might have obtained in an area characterised
by caves and by micritic soils (Chapter 3, 3.1). The occurrence of intact calcite crystals indicates that the firing
temperature for making pottery was below 750 C.
The data from the geological map of the area surrounding the site, which is characterised by limestone
and chalk, and the soil thin section sample, suggest a local provenance for the vessels analysed. To discuss
their origin it is necessary to compare the petrographic groups of this site with those of the neighbouring
Impressed Ware cave site of Jami na Sredi, located just 7.5 km from Vela Jama. Clear similarities can be
observed between the pottery fabrics of both these sites. The Vela Jama group 1 is very similar to the Jamina
Sredi group 1. They both show the same fine fabric characterised by quartz, fine polycrystalline limestone,
some muscovite and occasional flint (e.g. VJ 5 and JNS 2 and 30). The Vela Jama group 1 sub. a shows strong
similarities with group 1 sub. a of Jami na Sredi (e.g. VJ 13 and JNS 25). They both have a very iron-rich
fabric with some added crushed calcite and large fragments of polycrystalline limestone (probably added).
On the basis of these considerations it is reasonable to suggest a local provenance of the pottery of these
two contemporaneous cave sites.
From a typological/stylistic point of view, group 1 and its subgroups are characterised only by Cardium
Impressed Wares. One sherd of group 2 is decorated with a rocker motif. Its subgroup shows Cardium
impressed patterns identical to those of group 1. One flask with Cardium impressed motifs represents group 4
(VJ 3). The shape of this vessel is less common than those of the other pots. It is impossible to make any
comment on the typology of the sherds of G4 sub. a and sub. b (VJ 10 and 14) because they are just wall
fragments.
It is not easy to establish a correlation between fabric and typology, because the only considerations can
be made on the pottery stylistic features. Nevertheless, it is clear that, in some cases, this correlation exists.
68
Therefore the inhabitants of Vela Jama undoubtedly exploited more than one source for the manufacture of
their Cardium Impressed Wares (see an analogy with site Jami na Sredi in Chapter 3, 2.4.1.).
3.4.2. Macroscopic correlation between the similar fabrics from Vela Jama and Jami na Sredi
Some fabrics from the two sites show microscopic similarities, although the typological concurrences are
few. The microscopic groups Jami na Sredi G1 and Vela Jama G1 are both characterised by Cardium Impres-
sed Wares. Group 1 sub. a from Vela Jama and G1 sub. a from Jami na Sredi are extremely similar, decorated
with Cardium impressions all over the body.
It seems that the inhabitants of these two islands exploited similar sources for the production of their
pottery, used almost identical technologies and decorated the similar vessels with almost identical patterns.
This interpretation, however, raises some questions. The first regards possible exchange/trade activities between
different sites of the same age. Did the potters of these two sites exploit the same raw material sources? Were
the Jami na Sredi inhabitants the same who settled in the cave of Vela Jama? Was the raw material all imported
from the same external area/source? This is very improbable because all the material analysed from the two
sites is very similar to the geology of the area and to the soil sample. Furthermore, it is very difficult to
imagine that the same people, who inhabited two neighbouring caves, imported raw material necessary for
pottery manufacture exactly from the same outcrops located out of the region. According to the available data
it is impossible to say whether the two caves where inhabited by the same population for similar or different
purposes. The geographic location of the two sites would suggest the opposite. Both caves are oriented in the
same direction, facing west, but, while Jami na Sredi opens rather close to the seashore, just in front of the
Island of Loinj, the location of Vela Jama is very impressive. It opens at an altitude of 338 m, along the
western, upper slope of Mt. Telegraph (588 m), facing the open Adriatic Sea. Nevertheless, given the paucity
of data collected during the excavations, besides the fact that no radiocarbon date is available from these cave
deposits, little is known of the activities exploited by their inhabitants. Unfortunately the majority of the data
that might have helped us understand whether the two sites were complementary to each other are almost
totally absent.
4. TINJ-PODLIVADE (Zadar)
The Impressed Ware site of Tinj-Podlivade was discovered by K. Tomi} in the late 1970s and accurately
surveyed in 1982, during a programme of archaeological reconnaissance carried out by the Neothermal Dalma-
tia Project. It is located some 7 km from the present coastline, some 20 km east south east of Zadar (fig. 26). It
lies in a secondary basin formed on the slopes of the hill between the Vrana depression, to the SW and the Tinj
ridge, to the north-east (CHAPMAN et al., 1996: 176). The site is 1 km from the top of the ridge, at an altitude of
45-50 m. It is located at the centre of an oval area characterised by high-quality arable and terrace soils surroun-
ded by a typical Karst landscape. The site slopes gently from northeast to southwest and from southeast to
northwest. Palaeopedological analyses have shown the existence of a former marsh or lake at the break of the
slopes, along the southwest margins of the site, overlying soft chalk and marls (CHAPMAN et al., 1996).
The site extends over an area of 2.8 ha (280x100 m). It was sounded for the first time in 1984 (BATOVI,
1989). Two trenches were opened covering an extension of 50 square metres. The Impressed Ware layer was
found in situ between 60 and 110 cm of depth. Four small rubbish pits were discovered, cut into the archaeo-
logical layer. Charcoal pieces were collected for radiocarbon dating from pits 1 and 2 in trench 5. The fol-
lowing dates were obtained for trench A: 6980160 BP (GrN-15236); 6670260 BP (GrN-15237) and 6280210
BP (GrN-15238) (CHAPMAN et al., 1990: 32; CHAPMAN and MLLER, 1990: 130). Even though these results
show a high standard deviation, they are the first absolute dates so far obtained for the north Dalmatian
Impressed Ware. However GrN-15238 fits into the range of dates presently known for the Danilo rather than
the Impressed Ware Culture of the region. Following the excavator the gap of several centuries between the
dates suggests the repeated use of a desirable site, and perhaps the long-term permanent occupation of a
preferred location. In the same report it is pointed out that the settlement had two phases of occupation.
According to the illustrations (CHAPMAN et al., 1996: 191), the undecorated pottery of phase 2, strongly resem-
bles some of the common Danilo forms, such as the open and the carinated bowls.
38 kg of daub were recovered from trench A. They might perhaps indicate the presence of a hut structure.

69
Fig. 26 - Tinj: location of the Neolithic site (dot), and of the soil sample (square). Scale in kilometres.
The pottery assemblage
The site was partly excavated in 1984 when two main trenches (A and B) were opened. They showed that
the site had been settled in two main periods separated by pavements of cobbles. The stratigraphic sequence of
both trenches revealed natural topsoil down to a depth of 0.75 m covering the Neolithic layer. Four small
refuse pits were discovered in trench A, and one in trench B.
The ceramic assemblage of Phase 1 consists of typical Impressed Ware pottery, representing up to 25% of
the total assemblage. The decorative patterns indicate that the Impressed Ware occupation at Tinj belongs to
the Smili style in the subdivision proposed by BATOVI (1966), and to the Impresso B, following MLLERs
(1994: 321) classification. Apart from Cardium decorated vessels, representing 12% of the total collection,
other types of impressed decoration are present including bone instrumental, finger, fingernail, and incised
lines. The range of decorative styles has close parallels in the pottery assemblage from Smili, some 20 km
from Tinj.
The vessel shapes of Phase 2, however, are all undecorated, more closely resembling Danilo shapes than
typical Impressed Ware ones (CHAPMAN et al., 1996: 191). Together with the more recent radiocarbon date
GrN-15238, this might indicate that, Phase 2 might belong to a later Neolithic occupation phase.
CHAPMAN et al. (1996) subdivided the Tinj pottery assemblage into three main classes (fine/coarse, coar-
se/fine and very coarse). The shapes are dishes, open bowls, miniature vessels, and necked forms. It is unclear
if this generic description is to be related to the forms of Phase 1 or to the forms of both phases. The authors
also observed that oxidizing atmospheres were used for the firing of the most of the Tinj shards (CHAPMAN et
al., 1996: 189).
Other material
A small lithic assemblage of 255 chipped stone tools comes from the excavations. None of these pieces is
illustrated in CHAPMAN et al.s (1996) report. The authors attribute the finds to twenty raw material classes,
70
among which are flint, chert and quartzite. The only tools seem to be abrupt retouch truncations and sickle
blades. Two geometrics, among which one rectangular trapeze with piquant tridre point, were collected
during the preliminary surveys carried out in 1982 (BATOVI and CHAPMAN, 1985: plate V, f and g). The same
collection includes denticulated blades, one crested blade and two small, trapezoidal greenstone adzes.
The economic subsistence strategy
The most important finds from Tinj are the plant remains that were recovered by intensive flotation of the anthro-
pogenic soil. Domestic cereals are represented by barley, emmer and einkorn, and possibly Triticum boeoticum.
The faunal assemblage comprises mainly domestic animals. The identified species include sheep and
goat, cattle, pig and dog. Hunting, fowling and the gathering of marine molluscs were practised on a smaller
scale, as indicated by a few bones of red deer, roe deer, badger, birds and by marine shellfish.
The geology of the area surrounding the site of Tinj-Podlivade is characterised by lenses of limestone and
Foraminifera located a few kilometres from sediments of alluvial origin. The Foraminifera belong to the
genera Nummulites Aturicus, N. Perforatus, N. Puschi, N. Incrassatus, Discocyclina pratti and Globigerina
officinalis (Zadar, L 33-139 Osnova Geoloka Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
4.2. ANALYSES
Six potsherds have been analysed from the Impressed Ware site of Tinj: two different fabrics have been
recognised (fig. 27; table 4, Appendix 3).
G1 - (2 samples: TN 1, 2) (fig. 28/a)
Reddish, iron-rich, micritic matrix characterised by poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between 0.1 by
0.08 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<20%; size range between 1.7
by 1.5 and 0.7 by 0.6 mm; some of the fragments are fossiliferous), opaques and iron oxides (<10%), very rare pyroxene, occasional
flint, feldspar, and muscovite mica. Sample TN 2 contains one calcareous sandstone fragment and shows the inclusion of some terra
rossa soil;
sub. a (1 sample: TN 6)
Red brownish, iron-rich, micritic matrix, less calcareous than that of G1. It shows well-sorted angular and subangular quartz, finer
than that of group 1 (<20%; typical size is 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rare flint, iron oxides and smaller, mainly rounded fragments of
polycrystalline limestone (5%; size range between 0.6 by 0.5 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm);
sub. b (1 sample: TN 3) (fig. 28b)
Light brown very micritic matrix with poorly-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range between 0.18 by 0.1
and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (15%; size range between 1.0 by 0.9 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm; one
fragment is fossiliferous), rare calcareous sandstone rock fragments, very rare zircon, flint (2%), iron oxides (2%), and muscovite
mica (2%).
G2 - (1 sample: TN 4) (figs. 28c and 28d)
Brown-reddish, very iron-rich, slightly micritic matrix with abundant poorly-sorted quartz (20%; size range between 1.1 by 0.07 and
0.05 by 0.03 mm) with large fragments of subrounded and subangular polycrystalline limestone (10%; size range 2.0 by 1.5 and 0.6
by 0.3 mm; some of which fossiliferous), flint (2%), and rare pyroxene (<1%);
sub. a (1 sample: TN 5)
The fabric is very similar to that of G2, with poorly-sorted quartz (same size range as G3). It does not show presence of limestone
fragments. It has occasional flint, bohnerz, and some added crushed calcite (3%).
A soil sample, collected in the proximity of the site (0.5 km), has been analysed in thin section (figs 26, 28e and 28f). Its fabric
is red-brownish, micritic, rich in poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range between 0.9 by 0.7 and 0.04 by 0.02
mm), abundant limestone, some of which is fossiliferous (20%; size range between 3.0 by 2.5 and 0.06 by 0.04 mm), one fragment of
calcareous sandstone, opaques and iron oxides (5%), rare clay pellets, flint, and muscovite mica (1%).
Group 1 is characterised by a red, micritic, iron-rich fabric with abundant, poorly-sorted quartz, limesto-
ne, iron oxides and muscovite mica. Its subgroup a is less calcareous, with finer quartz. The fabric of G1 sub.
b is less rich in iron. The percentage of quartz is higher than that of group 1. It includes some muscovite mica,
flint and rare calcareous sandstone fragments. Group 2 has an iron-rich fabric, less micritic than G1, with
quartz coarser than that of the preceding groups, fragments of limestone, and flint. G2 sub. a does not show
any fragment of limestone, while it has some added crushed calcite.

71
Fig. 27 - Tinj: Impressed Ware pottery.
The soil sample is very similar to the fabric of G1 (red-brownish, iron-rich, very micritic fabric with abun-
dant quartz, poorly-sorted flint and fossiliferous limestone). It also shows one calcareous sandstone fragment as
in G1 sub. b.
Group 1 is characterised by high percentages of potash and iron oxide, whereas its subgroup a (TN 6)
contains less potash and iron oxide (table 4, Appendix 4). G1 sub. b shows a higher percentage of calcium
oxide (due to the very micritic fabric and the calcareous sandstone fragments) and much lower iron oxide and
potash than that of G1. G2 and its subgroup are similar to each other, with the exception of calcium oxide that
is less represented in TN 5 because it does not show any polycrystalline limestone, but only few calcite. The
72
Fig. 28 - Tinj: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) TN 1, b) TN 3, c) and d) TN 4, e) and f) soil sample (XPL, X40) (photographs by M.
Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
b)
d)
f)
SEM-EDS data show that groups 1 and 2 are very similar (high percentages of iron oxide and potash) as
already noted in thin section.
4.3. DISCUSSION
Two sources were exploited for the different fabrics of the Tinj pottery. Groups 1 and 2 are very similar,
very rich in iron, micritic, and with abundant quartz (as also tested from the SEM-EDS data). They also show
the same variety of rock fragments (calcareous sandstone) and a strong similarity (in particular G1 sub. b)
with the soil sample analysed in thin section.
4.4. CONCLUSIONS
The geological characteristics of the area, the soil thin section and the fabrics of the samples suggest that
the pottery was most probably a local product. The geology of the area is characterised by limestone and
calcareous soils. All the samples from this site show micritic, iron-rich, slightly micaceous fabrics with some

73
calcareous rock fragments, and some fossiliferous limestone (as for the case of the soil sample analysed). They
most probably come from this pedological environment. It is reasonable to conclude that the sources exploited
for the production of pottery are located close to each other.
This interpretation is also supported by the comparison of the Tinj ceramics with those of the neighbou-
ring, contemporary site of Smili (Impressed Ware phase). Most of the Tinj samples (TN 1, 2, 3 and 5) show
fabrics and styles very similar to groups 1 and 2 of the Smili Impressed Ware phase (Chapter 3, 5.6.).
5. SMILI (Zadar)
The open-air Neolithic settlement is located some 2.5 km west of the small village of Smili in a locality
called Barice, some 21 km in the interior of Zadar (figs. 29 and 30). The site lies in a shallow depression,
currently exploited for agricultural purposes, around a small, perennial stream. The site has an extension of
some 5 square km.
The excavations were carried out by . BATOVI} (1960-1961; 1966; 1971) in 1957, 1959 and 1962 over an
area of 1,148 square metres. They brought to light an archaeological sequence 3.30 m thick. The Neolithic
village had been inhabited during three main different periods. The first phase of occupation has been attribu-
ted to the Impressed Ware (BATOVI}, 1962; 1966), the second to the Danilo (BATOVI}, 1962; 1971; 1990) and
the third to the Hvar Culture (BATOVI}, 1962; 1990).
5.1. THE IMPRESSED WARE SETTLEMENT
The first, Impressed Ware village was distributed over an area more restricted than those occupied by the
Danilo and Hvar settlements, more close to the river course. It was surrounded by two circular (defensive)
ditches, the external of which was 5.50 m wide and 3.10 m deep. The Impressed Ware archaeological layer
was not homogeneous, but characterised by almost circular spots of dark greyish organogenic soil rich in
artefacts. A few pits were also discovered and excavated. They were of circular shape and 20-60 cm deep.
These structures were particularly rich in potsherds and faunal remains.
Burial remains
The Impressed Ware horizon yielded three human skulls, that BATOVI} (1967) relates to a Neolithic skull
cult, as well as the skeletons of two individuals buried in a crouched position, namely a child, ca. 8 years old,
and a young male of about 15 years.
The material culture assemblages
The flint industry of this phase is extremely poor. It has been studied by MARTINELLI (1990). It is represen-
ted by only 7 retouched tool types, among which are 1 transverse burin on retouch, 1 rectangular trapeze on
bladelet, 6 retouched bladelet with simple, inframarginal (2) marginal (3) or deep (1) retouch, and 1 side
scraper on flake. Of particular importance is 1 (broken) bladelet with simple, deep retouch, which has a
transversal gloss indicating that it had been inserted obliquely in a sickle for harvesting cereals.
The pottery assemblage is characterised by several forms of coarse ware with surfaces of buff colour, such
as hemispherical and conical bowls, more rarely biconical vessels and flasks (BATOVI}, 1966). Some 30% of
the vessels are decorated. The more common decorations were obtained with valves of marine shells (Car-
dium and Mytilus), and with impressed finger and fingernail patterns. The incised motifs are very rare as are
the ochre, red inlays. The decorations of the Impressed Ware vessels are often very regular, grouped into lines
and horizontal bands. There are also Cardium zigzag motifs.
According to the characteristics of the pottery shapes and decoration, the first phase of occupation can be
attributed to the B and C Impressed Ware horizons (MLLER, 1994: 321).
As reported by the excavator a great number of cattle bones was found. Red deer and wild goat bones
document hunting activities. A certain role was also played by fishing and the collection of marine molluscs.
5.2. THE DANILO AND HVAR SETTLEMENTS
The Danilo and Hvar villages are only partly located above the Impressed Ware one, while their largest
portion lies directly on the sterile soil. The stratigraphy can be subdivided into four main phases of occupa-
74
Fig. 29 - Smili: location of the Ne-

olithic site (dot) and of the soil sam-
ple (square). Scale in kilometres.
tion, from 0.55 to 3.30 m of depth. The first three phases are characteristic of the Danilo Culture. On the basis
of the results of the excavations this latter culture seems to develop from the late the Impressed Ware. The
fourth is to be attributed to a transitional period between Danilo and Hvar.
The uppermost phase documents the presence of a richer and more expanded village. The excavation did
not yield any hut or habitation structure, although a few pieces of daub were discovered. However, a few
circular areas, particularly rich in material culture artefacts were noticed. They were similar to those of the
Impressed Ware horizon and might represent the remains of the same type of structures.
Burial remains
Seven human skulls come from this site. They were discovered in the Danilo Culture layer without traces
of any burial practice. Also two skeletons were brought to light, crouched on their left side, among which one
adult male between 18 and 30 years of age (BATOVI, 1967).
The chipped stone assemblage of the Danilo phase has been studied as a unitary complex. It is characte-
rised by a high laminar index. It has been obtained mainly from flint, even though 10 pieces of obsidian of
unidentified source are also present (MARTINELLI, 1990). It includes 94 retouched tools among which are 11
burins, 4 end scrapers, 24 abrupt retouch instruments, 12 flat-retouched instruments, 35 retouched blades, 3

75
Fig. 30 - Smili: the area where the Neolithic site is located, as it appeared in 1999 (photograph by M. Spataro).
denticulates, and 5 pices cailles. Straight perforators and backed blades employed as sickles, and 3 rectan-
gular geometrics, are of particular interest amongst the abrupt retouch instruments. The flat retouched tools
include 10 tanged arrowheads. According to BATOVI (1971) these pieces make their first appearance in the
third occupation phase.
The pottery of the first phase is represented by biconical and hemispherical vessels, plates and typi-
cal rhyta with wide strap handles. They are decorated with incised patterns sometimes filled with red
inlay. The incised motifs mainly consist of triangles and recurrent spirals. The same forms and decora-
tions are typical for the second phase of occupation, in addition to which meander motifs make their first
appearance.
The pottery of the third phase includes types similar to those of the first two as well as flat plates, strai-
ners, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines, relief motifs and sherds filled with white inlay. The fourth
phase pottery is represented by the same types as the preceding ones, with new types appearing and the fine
ware disappearing. Monochrome, coarse painted ware is rather common as are new decorative patterns inclu-
ding circles and garlands.
The geology of the area where the site of Smili is located, is characterised by large strips of limestone,
chalk and clastics. The soil contains abundant marine macrofauna and microfauna, including Macroforamini-
fera and corals. The area surrounding the site shows deposits of stratified calcite and conglomerates. Some
organic lake sediments are located a few kilometres north of the site (Obrovac, L 33-140 Osnova Geoloka
Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
5.4. ANALYSES
5.4.1. Smili. The Impressed Ware Phase
Three different groups have been identified among the twenty-one potsherds analysed in thin section from
the Impressed Ware phase at Smili (figs. 31 and 32; table 5, Appendix 3 and table 2, Appendix 1).
76
G1 - (11 samples: SML 2, 4, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20) (fig. 33a)
Very homogeneous group with brown, micritic matrix, rich in poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range betwe-
en 0.15 by 0.1 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), mainly subrounded and rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<20%; size range
between 1.0 by 0.8 and 0.05 by 0.04 mm), opaques and iron oxides (5%), some flint (<2%), muscovite mica (2%), and occasional
calcareous sandstone fragments (e.g. SML 15). No artificially added inclusions;
sub. a (5 samples: SML 3, 8, 12, 13, 16) (fig. 33b)
Brown-dark brown, calcareous matrix, coarser than that of G1, characterised by poorly-sorted, abundant quartz (<20%; size range
between 0.12 by 0.11 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<15%; same size range of G1),
abundant opaques and iron oxides (<7%), and flint (<3%). There are no artificially added inclusions; one shell fragment is present in
SML 13.
G2 - (3 samples: SML 1, 5, 21) (figs. 33c and 33d)
Dark red, very iron-rich, micritic fabric, characterised by abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone
(<15%; typical size 0.4 by 0.2 mm), rich in angular and subangular quartz (15%; size range between 0.15 by 0.03 and 0.08 by 0.02
mm), rich in opaques and iron oxides (<10%), and rare flint (1%). A microfossil is present in one sample (SML 5);
sub. a (1 sample: SML 9)
Dark brown, iron-rich, slightly calcareous fabric characterised by poorly-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (<25%;
size range between 0.3 by 0.2 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some fragments of rounded polycrystalline limestone (5%; typical size as G2),
flint (<3%), rare muscovite mica (1%), pyroxene (1%), and one fragment of calcareous sandstone (the size is 5.0 by 3.0 mm).
G3 - (1 sample: SML 10) (fig. 33e)
Brown-reddish, iron-rich, micritic matrix. It has poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<10%; size range between 0.15 by
0.04 and 0.06 by 0.02 mm), added crushed calcite (10%; size range between 1.6 by 0.7 and 0.5 by 0.2 mm), rare muscovite mica, and
pyroxene (1%).
One soil sample collected 0.5 km from the site has been analysed in thin section. It is an Ap horizon (colluvium) (R. MACPHAIL,
pers. comm. 2001) (figs. 29 and 33f). It has a red iron-rich, micritic fabric characterised by abundant, poorly-sorted quartz (20%; size
range between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), abundant subrounded limestone (15%; size range between 2.5 by 2.0 and 0.05 by
0.04 mm), some chalk, abundant iron oxides (7%), some opaques, narrow strips of terra rossa, rare muscovite mica (1%), flint (3%),
and fossiliferous limestone.
Most samples (20 out of 21: groups 1 and 2) do not show any artificially added inclusion.
Group 1 has a very micritic fabric, with quartz, fragments of polycrystalline limestone, some muscovite
mica, flint and iron oxides. G1 sub. a shows the same size range with more abundant quartz, flint and iron
oxides. Sample SML 13 contains one shell fragment. The fabric of group 2 is much richer in iron than that of
G1. It has similar quantities of polycrystalline limestone, quartz, and some flint. Group 2 sub. a has flint,
muscovite mica and a micritic matrix identical to that of the preceding group. It shows a lower number of
limestone fragments and more abundant and coarser quartz than that of G2. The limestone fragments present
in these groups are naturally part of the fabric, as indicated by their rounded and subrounded shape. The fabric
of group 3 (SML 10) is very iron-rich. It has a lower percentage of quartz compared to groups 1 and 2. It is the
only sample containing crushed calcite.
The soil sample is very similar to that of G2: they both show a calcareous iron-rich fabric with abundant
quartz, iron oxides, flint, and fossils. The only difference is that the soil sample contains some narrow strips of
terra rossa soil, which are absent in the fabric of the potsherds.
Group 1 shows a very high percentage of calcium and moderate iron oxide. Its results are very similar to
those of G1 sub. a (table 5, Appendix 4). The only difference is that the latter shows less calcium oxide
(because of the lower percentage of limestone fragments) and more iron oxide and silica (more abundant
quartz than that of G1). G2 is similar to G1. It shows a slightly higher quantity of aluminia and rather low CaO
(because of the lower number of limestone fragments). G2 sub. a shows less calcium oxide (much lower
content of limestone) and more silica (more abundant quartz). G3 is again very similar to the previous groups.
The main difference between G1 and 2 and G3 (SML 10) is visible only in thin section. It is the only sample
from the IW layer of Smili characterised by added calcite, though, in the SEM-EDS analysis, its calcium
oxide percentage is similar to those of the other specimens, because SML 10 does not contain any limestone
fragment. The homogeneous results confirm that similar sources have been exploited for the manufacture of
these vessels.

77
Fig. 31 - Smili: pottery from the Impressed Ware Culture settlement.
78
Fig. 32 - Smili: pottery from the Impressed Ware Culture settlement.

79
Fig. 33 - Smili: photomicrographs of Impressed Ware Culture thin section samples: a) SML 2, b) SML 8, c) SML 21, d) SML 5, e) SML 10, f) soil
sample (XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
b)
d)
f)
5.4.4. XRD analysis
Only one soil sample collected in the proximity of the site (about 0.5 km) has been analysed by XRD. Its
pattern (fig. 34) shows kaolinite, muscovite, chlorite, and quartz. All these minerals are characteristic of
sedimentary deposits typical of the area surrounding the site. It is also characteristic of the sherds from this
site analysed in thin section.
5.4.5. Discussion
Two hypotheses can be put forward: 1) that the pottery of groups 1 and 2 was manufactured with material obtained
from the same source, or 2) from two sources very similar to each other. They are characterised by the same minerals
(quartz, muscovite mica, iron oxides and limestone) in comparable percentages (see above Chapter 3, 5.4.2.). G2
shows one microfossil Foraminifera. Group 2 sub. a comes from a similar source It shows the same variety of
polycrystalline limestone, containing a great quantity of sandy quartz. The fabric of G3 can be compared to that of
group 2 but it is richer in iron; furthermore, it contains added crushed calcite instead of natural limestone fragments.
80
To conclude: groups 1 and 2 were manufactured with clay from the same source or with material exploited
from two almost identical, possibly neighbouring sources (as confirmed also by the SEM-EDS results). We
cannot exclude a similar source of provenance also for group 3. All the sources are micritic and rich in iron
(apart G1, which is less iron-rich but as micritic as the other groups). The soil sample is very similar to G2
(iron-rich and micritic fabric with flint, limestone and muscovite mica), it also shows the same fossiliferous
limestone of sample SML 5 (G2).
Fig. 34 - Smili: XRD pattern of the soil sample.
5.4.6. Smili. The Danilo phase
Twenty-one potsherds from the Danilo Culture phase of Smili have been analysed in thin sections (figs.
35-37; table 6, Appendix 3). Five different fabrics have been recognized. In addition, two daub fragments
have also been analysed.
G1 - (4 samples: SMD 2, 3, 13, 14) (fig. 38a)
Dark red, iron-rich, very slightly micritic matrix, characterised by well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range
between 0.06 by 0.04 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), some clay pellets (<3%), iron oxides (<7%), fragments of rounded polycrystalline limesto-
ne (3%; typical size 0.1 by 0.1 mm), and abundant added crushed calcite (<30%; size range between 1.0 by 0.3 and 0.5 by 0.3 mm);
sub. a (6 samples: SMD 1, 6, 7, 9, 15, 19)
Reddish, iron-rich matrix slightly micritic as G1, characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; typical size
between 0.08 by 0.02 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<3%; same size as G1), some iron
oxides (5%), rare pyroxene, and abundant added crushed calcite (20%; typical size 0.4 by 0.2 mm);
sub. b (1 sample: SMD 4)
Dark red, very iron-rich slightly micritic matrix characterised by few, well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<5%, typical size
0.03 by 0.02 mm), a great quantity of added crushed sparry calcite (<35%; size range between 1.0 by 0.3 and 0.5 by 0.3 mm), and very
occasional rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%; typical size 0.1 by 0.07 mm).
G2 - (4 samples: SMD 8, 16, 17, 18) (fig. 38b)
Brown-reddish calcareous matrix, characterised by angular and subangular quartz (<20%; size range between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.06 by
0.04), fragments of mainly subrounded and rounded polycrystalline limestone (<7%; typical size 0.2 by 0.16 mm), some opaques and
iron oxides (<3%), and added crushed sparry calcite (<20%; size range between 1.0 by 0.3 and 0.5 by 0.3 mm) (banded calcite is also
present).

81
Fig. 35 - Smili: pottery from the Danilo Culture settlement.
82

83
G3 - (1 sample: SMD 11) (fig. 38c)
Dark brown-reddish matrix characterised by poorly-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (<40%; size range between 0.2
by 0.1 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), rounded polycrystalline limestone (3%; typical size 0.5 by 0.3 mm), rare zircon (1%), opaques and iron
oxides (5%), and rare muscovite mica (1%).
G4 - (1 sample: SMD 10) (fig. 38d)
Brown-reddish iron-rich, micritic matrix, with abundant mainly rounded and subrounded polycrystalline limestone (20%; size range
between 2.0 by 1.25 and 1.7 by 1.5 mm), well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (7%; size range between 0.07 by 0.05 and 0.06
by 0.03 mm), muscovite mica (2%), iron oxides and opaques (3%).
84
G5 - figulina pottery (total 4 samples):

G5a - (3 samples: SMD 20, 22, 23) fine figulina (fig. 38e and 38f)
Reddish, very fine, slightly micritic, vitrified, iron-rich matrix. It shows very fine and well-sorted, angular and subangular quartz
(<5%; typical size 0.02 by 0.01 mm), very fine muscovite mica (5%), iron oxides (3%), and rare pyroxene. SMD 22 shows rare
polycrystalline quartz.
G5b - (1 sample: SMD 21) coarse figulina (fig. 38g)
Brown micritic iron-rich matrix coarser than that of G5a, richer in coarser muscovite mica (10%), rare biotite, abundant and much
coarser quartz than that of G5a (20%; typical size 0.8 by 0.5 mm), rare polycrystalline quartz, pyroxene, feldspar, opaques and iron
oxides (>5%).
Two daub fragments (SMD 5, 12) (fig. 38h) have been analysed. They show a light brown, micritic matrix, extremely rich in
rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<40%; typical size 0.8 by 0.6 mm), poorly-sorted angular and
subangular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.15 by 0.08 and 0.1 by 0.04 mm), clay pellets, opaques and iron oxides (<5%), and
some flint (3%). One of the samples (SMD 12) contains one shell fragment. Artificially added inclusions are absent.
The first two groups are characterised by the same added crushed calcite. There are some slight differen-
ces in their fabrics.
Group 1 has an iron-rich, very slightly micritic fabric, with angular and subangular quartz, clay pellets,
and some polycrystalline limestone. Its sub. a shows a higher percentage of quartz and rare pyroxene; G1 sub.
b shows a very iron-rich fabric with some polycrystalline limestone and a lower percentage of very fine quartz
compared to the preceding groups. The fabric of group 2 is much less rich in iron, and more micritic than G1.
It includes abundant pellets of limestone. Groups 3 and 4 have no added calcite. Group 3 (SMD 11) shows an
iron-rich, non-calcareous matrix with a very high percentage of poorly-sorted quartz, naturally present roun-
ded limestone, opaques, iron oxides, rare muscovite, and zircon. Group 4 has an iron-rich micritic matrix, very
rich in rounded and subrounded limestone. It also shows some muscovite and iron oxides. Group 5 is figulina
ware. It has been subdivided into two subgroups: 1) the fine figulina (G5a), with an iron-rich slightly micritic,
vitrified matrix, very fine, with few and well-sorted quartz, fine muscovite mica, iron oxides, and rare pyroxe-
ne; and 2) the coarse figulina (G5b), that has abundant and coarser quartz muscovite mica, and a more calca-
reous matrix than G5a.
The daub fragments are characterised by a very calcareous fabric, with abundant naturally present, roun-
ded fragments of polycrystalline limestone with abundant quartz, some iron oxides and flint. They show some
similarities with group 4 because of the presence of limestone, although the percentage of quartz is higher than
that of group 4. One sample contains one shell fragment (SMD 12).
Group 1 yielded homogeneous results with some fluctuations in the percentages of silica (28.60-49.00%)
and calcium oxide (12.40-27.80%) (table 6, Appendix 4). The latter is due to the bulk analyses, whether it
included calcite or not. Its subgroup a shows very similar results. Its subgroup b shows a lower percentage of
silica and aluminia, and more abundant calcium oxide (crushed calcite). Group 2 is slightly different from G1
because of the slightly higher quantity of calcium oxide (more micritic and rich in limestone) and the lower
amount of aluminia. Group 3 is clearly different from the previous two groups, because of the higher quantity
of silica (very abundant quartz) and potash, and the very low presence of calcium oxide (CaO: 4.06%; it does
not contain calcite). Group 5a is absolutely different from the other groups, because it contains much higher
percentages of MgO (4.34-5.40%), K2O (3.26-4.88%), and Fe2O3 (10.00-14.00%). Also the average of pho-
sphorous oxide is quite high (2.10-2.50%), although this can be due to post-depositional factors. G5b is
different from G5a: calcium oxide is more abundant, whereas magnesia, and iron oxides are less represented,
though still at significantly higher concentrations than in the four other groups. The material utilised for the
daub manufacture seems to derive from a source different from those of the potsherds. It shows much less
aluminia, titania and iron oxide than those of the sherds analysed, and is much richer in calcium oxide.
The SEM-EDS analysis confirms the groupings of the thin sections. In particular, the differences between
G1-2 and G3 are very clear. Very important data come from the analyses of the fine figulina ware (G5a), from
which it is clear that a very different source, much richer in magnesia, potash, and possibly iron oxide, has

85
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 38 - Smili: photomicrographs of Danilo Culture thin section samples: a) SMD 2, b) SMD 17, c) SMD 11, d) SMD 10, e) and f) SMD 20 (post-
depositional factors), g) SMD 21, h) SMD 5 (XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
86
been utilised for the manufacture of this pottery. An interesting result is that of the calcium oxide. Its percentage
is quite high, considering that it can be identified only a slightly micritic matrix at the polarised microscope (in
PPL, Plane-Polarised Light). This presence might be due to post-depositional factors since some secondary
calcite has been observed in some of the samples (fig. 38f). The results obtained from the coarse figulina
wares (G5b) are also interesting. The percentages of magnesia and iron oxides that are lower than that of G5a,
indicate the exploitation of a different source.
5.4.9. Discussion
Groups 1 and 2 have very similar fabrics with slightly variable percentages of iron oxides, quartz and
limestone. This might indicate that they come from different but similar sources, while group 3 clearly comes
from another source. This is evident from the higher percentage and the larger size of the quartz inclusions.
Given that its fabric is rich in quartz, no addition of other temper (e.g. crushed calcite) was required (the quartz
has been probably added because of its high percentage and bimodal distribution). The source exploited for
the vessel of group 3 is very iron-rich, non-micritic with rare rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone.
Group 4 seems to come from a different, very calcareous, clay deposit. The limestone is less rounded than that
of the daub fragments that show a fabric similar to that of sample SMD 10 (G4). Both fabrics (SMD 10 and
those of the daub fragments) are made from micritic clay with a high percentage of very rounded polycrystal-
line limestone. Moreover, the daub samples show a quantity of rounded, polycrystalline limestone higher than
that of G4, and one shell fragment.
It is very difficult to identify the source exploited for the manufacture of the fine figulina ware (G5a). Its
fabric is very fine, and poor in inclusions. The clay must have been washed and decanted in order to loose all
the heavier inclusions. This is why it did not keep all the characteristic of the original source. In any case,
results obtained from the SEM-EDS (see above) show that the clay was very different from those utilised for
the ordinary ware. It also shows a vitrified fabric. Therefore we can assume that it was fired at a relatively high
temperature, of about 850 C (Y. GOREN, pers. comm. 2000 and I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). The coarse
figulina (G5b) shows a very micritic fabric richer in inclusions, mainly quartz, carbonates, muscovite, and
iron oxides. According to the SEM-EDS results, the clay employed for the manufacture of the coarse figulina
is different, but probably related to that of the fine figulina. From a technological point of view, it seems to
have been washed and decanted for a shorter period. The firing temperature of this variety of figulina must
have been rather high, although lower than that of the fine type, since it shows regions of vitrification.
For the manufacture of the daub fragments, the Neolithic inhabitants of Smili exploited a source diffe-
rent from those utilised for making pottery. It is characterised by a higher quantity of very rounded limestone,
rare shell fragments, and quartz grains of a size larger than those of groups 1 and 2 (see also SEM-EDS data).
It is reasonable to think that the inhabitants of Smili utilised local material for daub manufacture. The
roundness of the limestone grains suggests that it was collected from a riverbed, possibly that flowing close to
the site. Shell fragments are common to the soil of the area surrounding the site, characterised by marine
macrofauna (see Chapter 3, 5.3.).
To conclude: the sources of groups 1 and 2 should be located close to each other because of their similar
iron-rich fabrics with polycrystalline limestone. Group 3 is much richer in quartz than groups 1 and 2 and it
does not show added calcite but few polycrystalline limestone, naturally present as indicated by its rounded
and subrounded shape. The source for the daub fragments must have been located in a more micritic area,
poorer in iron if compared to those of the preceding groups. Only group 4 is as micritic as the daub fragments.
Nevertheless, it is slightly different because of the higher percentage of oxide particles, less rounded limesto-
ne, lower percentage and finer quartz than the daub fragments.
5.4.10. Smili. The Hvar phase
Twenty-one potsherds from the Hvar phase settlement have been analysed in thin section (figs. 39 and 40;
tables 7, Appendix 3). The ceramic from this layer has been subdivided into four different groups.
G1 - (9 samples: SMH 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 16, 19, 20) (fig. 41a)
Brown micritic matrix, characterised by fine, well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.08 by 0.05 and
0.04 by 0.02 mm), subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (>15%; typical size 0.2 by 0.1 mm), opaques and iron oxides
(5%), and added crushed calcite (>20%; size range between 0.6 by 0.4 and 0.4 by 0.3 mm);

87
sub. a (3 samples: SMH 7, 11, 17) (fig. 41b)
Brown calcareous matrix, similar to that of G1, more micritic, less iron-rich and with more abundant inclusions, mainly angular and
subangular, poorly-sorted quartz (>20%; size range between 0.05 by 0.03 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some subrounded fragments of
polycrystalline limestone, and added crushed calcite (<20%; size range between 0.3 by 0.2 and 0.2 by 0.15 mm);
sub. b (2 samples: SMH 12, 15)
Brown, iron-rich, very slightly micritic matrix, with well-sorted and very fine angular and subangular quartz (<15%; typical size 0.03
by 0.02 mm), rich in iron oxides (<7%), rare fine subrounded limestone fragments (2%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), opaques (1%),
and added crushed calcite (20%; size range between 1.0 by 0.6 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm).
G2 - (1 sample: SMH 4) (fig. 41c)
Dark red iron-rich matrix, very rich in inclusions, characterised by poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (coarser than G1)
(<20%; size range between 0.2 by 0.1 and 0.1 by 0.08 mm), flint (>3%), added crushed calcite (<15%; size range between 1.0 by 0.5
and 0.4 by 0.3 mm), abundant iron oxides (7%), and abundant rounded limestone fragments (15%; size range between 4.5 by 2.2 and
1.0 by 0.8 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: SMH 6)
Red iron-rich matrix, very slightly micritic, characterised by poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between
0.1 by 0.09 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), flint (2%), occasional rounded limestone (<2%), rare muscovite mica (1%), rare clay pellets, and
added crushed calcite (<10%; size range between 0.5 by 0.3 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm);
sub. b (2 samples: SMH 1, 9)
Red, iron-rich matrix, characterised by fine and well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (20%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm),
occasional flint, some rounded polycrystalline limestone (2%), and added crushed calcite (up to 20%; size range as G2 sub. a).
G3 - (1 sample: SMH 14) (fig. 41d)
Brown, very micritic matrix, rich in rounded and subrounded polycrystalline limestone (20%; typical size 1.0 by 0.8 mm), well-
sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (10%; size range between 0.06 by 0.04 and 0.02 by 0.01 mm), and iron oxides (5%).
G4 - (2 samples: SMH 18, 21) fine figulina ware (figs. 41e and 41f)
Reddish, very fine, slightly micritic, vitrified, iron-rich matrix. It shows very fine and well-sorted quartz (5%; typical size 0.02 by
0.01 mm), very fine muscovite mica (<5%), very rare pyroxene (in sample SMH 21), rare polycrystalline quartz, and iron oxides
(5%). Sample SMH 18 is also more vitrified than SMH 21, all the carbonates have been burnt out. SMH 21 shows a fragment of
quartzite, a low-grade metamorphic rock.
Groups 1 and 2 are characterised by artificially added inclusions of crushed calcite. Group 1 has a micritic
fabric with fine quartz and abundant limestone. G1 sub. a has a more micritic and less iron-rich similar fabric,
but richer in quartz than that of the previous group. G1 sub. b shows iron-rich, slightly micritic fabric with fine
quartz and some rounded fragments of limestone. Group 2 has an iron-rich, non-micritic fabric with more
abundant and coarser quartz than that of group 1. It also shows a high percentage of fragments of limestone
and some flint; G2 sub. a has a slightly micritic fabric with a lower presence of flint and more abundant quartz
than G2; G2 sub. b shows the same fabric of G2 sub. a but with a lower percentage of quartz. Group 3 shows
a very micritic fabric, very rich in polycrystalline limestone, a percentage of quartz lower than that of the
preceding groups, and no artificially added inclusions. Group 4 is composed of fine figulina ware characteri-
sed by very fine quartz, muscovite mica, and some iron oxides. It is identical to the fine figulina of the Danilo
phase (G5a) with the same vitrified (indicator of high-firing), slightly calcareous matrix, with few inclusions
of quartz, mica and iron oxides.
The results obtained from the samples of groups 1, 2 and 3 are rather homogeneous (table 7, Appendix 4).
G1 shows fluctuations of calcium oxide due to the presence of calcite in the areas analysed. The data of
subgroup a are very similar to those of G1, whereas G1 sub. b has lower silica and slightly higher iron oxide.
G2 has not been analysed. G2 sub. a is richer than G1 in silica (very abundant quartz) and iron oxide, with less
calcium oxide (lower presence of calcite and non-micritic matrix); G2 sub. b is similar to G2 sub. a with a
lower quantity of silica (less abundant quartz), iron oxide and more calcium oxide (presence of calcite and
limestone). G3 has produced results similar to those of the previous groups (rich in iron and calcium oxides)
with similar averages of sulphur oxide, soda, and magnesia with lower aluminia and titania. The data of the
fine figulina (group 4) are totally different from those of the previous ones. They show percentages of magne-
sia, potash, iron oxide, and aluminia higher than those of the other groups. The two samples of this group
(SMH 18, 21) show a certain variability in the presence of calcium oxide (4.92-13.58%). This might depend
88
Fig. 39 - Smili: pottery from the Hvar Culture settlement.

89
Fig. 40 - Smili: pottery from the Hvar Culture settlement.
90
Fig. 41 - Smili: photomicrographs of Hvar Culture thin section samples: a) SMH 2, b) SMH 11, c) SMH 4, d) SMH 14, e) SMH 21, f) SMH 18
(XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
b)
d)
f)
on post-depositional factors, which affect more the less vitrified sample (SMH 21) than the more highly vitrified
one (SMH 18).
5.4.13. Discussion
During the late phase of the Middle Neolithic, the inhabitants of Smili primarily exploited a number of
similar clay sources, rich in polycrystalline limestone and fine quartz. The limestone shows mainly rounded
and subrounded shapes; therefore we can suppose that it was naturally present in the clay. Groups 1 and 3 have
a similar fabric with fine angular and subangular quartz, but different percentages of fragments of polycrystal-
line limestone and a slightly variable percentage of iron oxides.
A different source was employed in the manufacture of the pottery of group 2. The fabric of sample SMH
4 (G2) is rich in flint (>3%), coarse quartz and abundant iron oxides. This clay source was relatively different
from those used for the manufacture of the other vessels, non-micritic and iron-rich. Group 4, the fine figulina
ware, is characterised by very rare and common inclusions. Therefore it is very difficult to identify a source of

91
provenance. It seems, however, that the fabric of these samples (SMH 18 and 21) is identical to that of the fine
figulina from the earlier Danilo phase layer (G5a). This is also confirmed by the SEM-EDS results, from
which it is obvious that the clays exploited for the manufacture of this pottery are very similar (high percenta-
ges of magnesia, potash, iron oxide, and rather low quantity of calcium oxide).
5.5. GENERAL DISCUSSION
On the basis of the analyses of the potsherds from the Smili Neolithic sequence, a number of interesting
observations can be made. The first is that the pottery of the Impressed Ware Culture at Smili was produced
almost without the addition of inclusions. The only exception is sherd SML 10. On the contrary, the pottery of
the Middle Neolithic, i.e. Danilo and Hvar phases of occupation, is mainly tempered with crushed calcite.
Furthermore, the fabric of just a few specimens from the Impressed Ware and the Danilo layers, shows very
few fragments of marine shells (the potsherd SML 13 and the daub fragment - SMD 12). It is important to
point out that also the geology of the area shows the presence of fossil marine macrofauna.
The firing temperature never exceeded 750 C, with the exception of the figulina pottery. According to
the microscopic analysis, no improvement in the technology of pottery production can be noticed from the
Early (Impressed Ware) Neolithic up to the end of the Middle Neolithic (Hvar Culture). The only difference is
the commoner use of temper (always crushed calcite) during the Middle Neolithic (Danilo) and the late phase
of the Middle Neolithic (Hvar), probably to obtain better quality vessels with more homogeneous and less
porous surfaces.
The vessels are characterised by addition of the same temper. This does not confirm what is known for the
pottery style and typology of the three different horizons, which are extremely different and very distinctive,
phase-by-phase. There are, for example, noticeable changes in the surface treatment as well as in the decora-
tive patterns, and in the vessel forms. These differences are particularly striking between the Impressed Ware
and the two later phases.
However, it is possible to say that some very similar fabrics recur in all the three phases. The Smili
Impressed Ware fabrics have some close parallels with those of the more recent phases (i.e. Danilo and Hvar).
They are always characterised by the occurrence of very calcareous matrices and polycrystalline limestone.
For instance, group 1 of the Impressed Ware horizon is very similar to the Hvar period sample SMH 14 (G3),
even though the percentage of quartz of the two specimens is not identical (the IW group shows some occasio-
nal flint). The IW sample SML 9 (G2 sub. a) is almost identical to the Danilo phase sample SMD 11 (G3).
They show a very high percentage of all range-sized quartz, some fragments of polycrystalline limestone and
rare muscovite mica. They are close enough to make them one group, had they been from the same period.
Furthermore, some of the characteristics of the Danilo phase pottery recall those of the Hvar horizon. Two
samples, SMD 10 and SMH 14 (G4, Danilo and G3, Hvar), do not show any evidence of added inclusions.
Their fabric is very similar, micritic and fine-grained. These sherds have a similar high percentage of polycry-
stalline limestone and a similar size range and quantity of angular and subangular quartz. Another interesting
parallel can be traced between the fabrics of SMD 19 and SMH 4 (G1, sub. a, Danilo phase and G2, Hvar
phase, respectively). They show the same iron-rich fabric with a high percentage of quartz, some limestone,
iron oxides, and added crushed calcite. The only difference is the presence of flint in the sample from the Hvar
phase. Also the samples of group 1 (Danilo phase) and those of group 2 sub. b (Hvar phase) have a very similar
fabric, they are both iron-rich with similar percentage of quartz and with the same sparry calcite (occasional
flint is present in SMD although absent in SMH), while the Danilo phase samples of group 2 and the Hvar
phase G1 sub. b contains a very similar micritic fabric, with abundant quartz and added crushed calcite.
The fine figulina wares from the two later occupation phases show almost identical fabrics with a high
quantity of magnesia, potash, iron oxide and aluminia. They are very similar also from a typological point of
view. The fine figulina from both layers shows the same fine, slightly micritic, high-fired, iron-rich, vitrified
matrix with very few mineral inclusions (as confirmed by the SEM-EDS results). The firing of this type of
pottery implies the use of a kiln because it has been highly fired (about 850C; Y. GOREN, pers. comm. 2000;
I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). A rigorous control of the firing temperature is also necessary. It must have
been difficult to fire this type of pottery without any additional use of temper at the high temperature em-
ployed without cracking.
On the basis of these considerations, two very different technologies were utilised in the pottery produc-
tion at Smili during the Middle Neolithic. The ordinary pottery was manufactured with local clay, either
92
with or without temper, adding only crushed calcite and firing it at low-temperature, most probably in an open
fire. The figulina pottery was manufactured by skilled potter(s) following a longer and different phases of clay
preparation and firing. The clay must have been washed and left to decant for a much longer period than for
the ordinary pottery and later fired in a kiln. The coarse figulina ware from this site has been analysed only
from the Danilo layer. It shows a very micritic fabric with higher percentages of quartz and muscovite than the
fine figulina. It seems to have been fired at a similar high temperature, although the matrix is less vitrified than
those of the fine samples (Chapter 5, 7.). Both quartz and muscovite are very refractory, and thus, the fabrics
may appear less vitrified even if fired at the same temperature.
5.6. CONCLUSIONS
Since the pottery of the three different habitation phases is characterised by very homogeneous fabrics
throughout a period of at least 1000 radiocarbon years, and given that the geology of the territory is highly
compatible with the fabrics of the potsherds analysed, it is reasonable to conclude that the clay was most
probably obtained from local sources (see also the similarities between the soil sample and the fabrics of the
Smili, IW phase). This observation is reinforced by the results of the analyses of the Impressed Ware potsherds
from the neighbouring site of Tinj, some 20 km southwest of Smili. As mentioned above, the Impressed
Ware site of Smili has been attributed to the B and C phases of development of MLLERs (1994: 321)
subdivision. Thus, it is contemporary to that of Tinj. In fact it yielded a pottery assemblage very similar to that
of this latter site, from both typological and stylistic points of view (CHAPMAN et al., 1996). According to our
analytical study, the Tinj group 1 shows many similarities with the Smili group 2 (e.g. SML 1). They have
the same iron-rich fabric with abundant quartz, rare flint, and fragments of limestone. The Tinj group 1 sub. b
shows a fabric very similar to that of the Smili group 1, that is highly micritic, light brownish, with abundant
quartz and some calcareous rock fragments. The only difference is in the lower percentage of quartz of the
sherds from Smili. On the basis of the similarities between the two sites, it is possible to suggest a local/
regional production for the pottery of both sites.
5.6.1. Correlation between fabric and typology
The Impressed Ware pottery of group 1 is composed of sherds whose original vessel shape cannot be recon-
structed because of their very fragmentary state. They are mainly undecorated with the exception of SML 11,
which has impressed motifs. Their surfaces are of variable colour because of the different firing atmospheres.
Samples SML 4, 5, 7 and 15 are black, while SML 2, SML 18, SML 13, and SML 19 are buff. Group 1 sub. a is
composed of impressed decorated sherds. Group 2 is represented by impressed sherds (SML 1, 5) and by one
undecorated specimen that is too small to be attributed to any defined shape (SML 21). Only one undecorated
sample has been attributed to group 3 (SML 9). Group 4 includes only one undecorated, grey sherd.
The Danilo phase. Group 1 is stylistically very inhomogeneous. SMD 2 belongs to a typical black, bur-
nished, bowl with incised decorative patterns. SMD 14 is probably part of a similar bowl. Sample SMD 3 is a
buff coloured base. SMD 3 is too small and atypical. Group 1 sub. a includes many sherds (SMD 6, 9, 19)
decorated with incised, linear motifs. Sample SMD 1 belongs to an undecorated, carinated bowl of buff co-
lour. G1 sub. b (SMD 4) includes only one undecorated, buff coloured sherd. Group 2 (SMD 17, 18) is
composed of two black, burnished potsherds similar to sample SMD 2. They are decorated with incised linear
motifs. Two other sherds can be attributed to this group: one decorated with incised lines (SMD 8, 16), the
other undecorated (SMD 16). Only one single fragment of necked jar has been attributed to group 3 (SMD 11).
Apart from the case of sherd SMD 11, fabric and typology never correspond. For instance, sample SMD
2 and SMD 17 and 18 are typologically comparable, although they belong to distinct microscopic groups.
Some relations have been noticed among the figulina potsherds. In fact, the fine group comprises only thin
walled potsherds; while the coarse group includes only pottery with thicker walls.
The Hvar phase. Group 1 is composed of one hemispherical bowl and a few potsherds with horizontal
grooves. Nothing can be said of group 1 sub. a that is represented by two specimens with horizontal grooves.
Group 1 sub. b (SMH 12, 15) consists of two probable hemispheric bowls. Group 2 (SMH 4) is a peculiar
vessel, typologically different from all the others. Group 3 (SMH 14) consists of only one vessel of buff
colour. Group 4 is that of the fine figulina pottery. This group shows clear correlation between fabric and

93
typology. Some stylistic parallels have been noted, for instance between groups 1 and 1 sub. a and between
groups 1 sub. b and 2. Nevertheless, the only unquestionable correspondence is that of the figulina ware that
always shows the same fabric. This fact has been noticed at Smili as well as at Danilo itself.
6. VRBICA ([ibenik)
The small open-air Impressed Ware site of Vrbica lies in the interior of [ibenik, in a locality called
Bribirske Mostine (MENDUI, 1998) (fig. 42). It was accidentally discovered in 1973, during the excavation of
a Medieval site located on the neighbouring hill of Bribirska glavica (BRUSI, 1974). Several test trenches
were opened during the 1973 excavation campaign. One of these, measuring 6x4.5 m, showed traces of Early
Neolithic occupation indicated by typical Impressed Ware material culture remains.
The same trench yielded also a few, typical, Danilo Culture potsherds. The excavation revealed the pre-
sence of an archaeological layer some 10 to 30 cm thick, and of 4 shallow depressions, or pits. The archaeolo-
gical horizon lay beneath an agricultural, disturbed layer some 20 cm thick. The 4 pits, 1.60-1.80 m long and
0.60-0.80 m deep, were discovered in this layer. Pit 2, that yielded most of the material, had a grey to grey-
brown fill, and several pebbles. The black, organogenic fill of the other three pits contained some pieces of red
and yellow burnt soil that were interpreted by BRUSI} (1974) as remains of a house structure.
The Impressed Ware site of Vrbica, attributed to phase A in the development of this culture (MLLER,
1994: 322), yielded 571 potsherds, 514 of which were studied (439 from the archaeological layers, 69 from pit
2 and 6 from pit 1). Of the 43 vessel forms recognised by BRUSI (1979), 27 are oval with convex base, 10 are
large, open bowls, 2 are necked jars, 2 are deep open jars, and 2 are beakers. Two of the large, open bowls had
convex bases.
The decorative patterns include finger and fingernail impressions and finger-pinched (pizzicato) motifs
as well as triangular, instrumental decorations, while Cardium and Mytilus marine shell impressions are more
rare. Only one sherd is decorated with parallel, incised lines. The decorations cover the entire vessel form and
are often organized in horizontal lines.
Among the other peculiar artefacts is one fragment of polished greenstone adze. The flint assemblage,
which is very rich, includes several complete, unretouched blades and few flakes. No retouched tool is men-
tioned in the main excavation report (BRUSI, 1994-1995).
Relative chronology
According to BRUSI (1994-1995), the Impressed Ware ceramics from this site show many affinities with
those of the Italian Adriatic coastline, in particular those from the Prato Don Michele facies. Thus the site of
Vrbica has been attributed to the oldest Impressed Ware A phase of the Dalmatian coast.
The special finds include one mushroom-shaped polished stone earplug (MLLER, 1994: 173), whose
importance is due to the parallels with specimens from the Early Neolithic sites of Thessaly. Even though no
radiocarbon date is available for Vrbica, the site is supposed to belong to a period around 7000 BP or slightly
earlier on the basis of these finds (MLLER, 2000: 153).
The geology of the area is very similar to that of the site of Konjevrate (Chapter 3, 7.1). The geological
substratum of the region is mainly composed of large limestone deposits and narrow veins of limestone and
Foraminifera (Nummulites perforatus, Halkyardia minima, Discociklina discus and Assilina spira). A very
small area with alluvial sands and small pebbles in stratified gravels is also present (ibenik, K 33-138 Osno-
vna Geoloka Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
6.2. ANALYSES
Twenty-three potsherds have been analysed: twenty-two of the Impressed Ware phase and one of the
Danilo Culture phase (figs. 43-45; table 8, Appendix 3, and table 3, Appendix 1). Five different fabrics have
been identified among the twenty-two Impressed Ware Culture samples.
94
Fig. 42 - Vrbica: location of the Neolithic site (dot) and of the soil sample (square). Scale in kilometres.
G1 - (4 samples: VRB 1, 5, 8, 10) (fig. 46a)
Reddish, iron-rich, calcareous matrix characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.05 by
0.03 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), iron oxides (7%), muscovite mica (<3%), rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<3%; typical
size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), some bohnerz (ARF, Argillaceous Rock Fragments), few clay pellets, and abundant added crushed calcite
(<20%; size range between 1.0 by 0.2 and 0.4 by 0.3 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: VRB 6)
Brown calcareous matrix less iron-rich than that of G1, rich in well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (15%; typical size 0.03 by
0.02 mm), iron oxides (5%), some subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (3%; typical size 0.4 by 0.3 mm), occasional
muscovite, and abundant added crushed and some banded calcite (<30%; size range between 1.0 by 0.7 and 0.4 by 0.2 mm).
G2 - (4 samples: VRB 7, 14, 18, 20) (fig. 46b)
Dark brown, fine matrix characterised by few, fine and well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (5%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm),
abundant rounded limestone (<10%; size range between 1.25 by 1.0 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm), iron oxides (<5%), some muscovite mica
(<3%), rare pyroxene (1%), and added crushed calcite (7%; size range between 0.8 by 0.4 and 0.6 by 0.5 mm);
sub. a (1 sample: VRB 16)
Matrix very similar to that of G2, richer in iron oxides (10%). It shows presence of coarser, poorly-sorted angular and subangular
quartz (10%; typical size 0.06 by 0.04 mm), rare clay pellets, and some added crushed calcite (5%; size range between 0.5 by 0.4 and
0.1 by 0.07 mm);
sub. b (5 samples: VRB 4, 9, 11, 21, 22)
Brown micritic matrix coarser than that of G2. It is characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<20%; typical size
0.05 by 0.03 mm), abundant fragments of limestone, some of which are rounded like those of G2 (<10%; size range between 1.0 by
0.9 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm), abundant iron oxides (7%), muscovite mica (3%), and added crushed sparry calcite (<20%; size range
between 0.6 by 0.3 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm);
sub. c (1 sample: VRB 3) (fig. 46c)
Brown-reddish iron-rich matrix, characterised by rounded fragments of limestone, similar to that of G2 (about 15%; same shape and
size of G2), with iron oxides (5%) and very rare, fine, well-sorted quartz. It does not show any added inclusion.
G3 - (4 samples: VRB 2, 12, 13, 15) (fig. 46d)
Very iron-rich slightly micritic matrix. It shows fragments of polycrystalline and banded limestone (10%; same size G2), abundant

95
Fig. 43 - Vrbica: pottery from the Neolithic site.
96

97
98
angular and subangular quartz (20%; size range between 0.05 by 0.03 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), muscovite mica (<3%), abundant iron
oxides (10%), and added crushed calcite (<15%; size range between 0.8 by 0.6 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm).
G4 - (1 sample: VRB 17) (fig. 46e)
Brown-reddish, coarse, very micritic matrix characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<20%; typical size 0.06 by
0.04 mm), rare pyroxene (<1%), some clay pellets, and rich in iron oxides (7%). There are two types of limestone: rounded shape
polycrystalline (>10%; size range between 1.0 by 0.5 and 0.3 by 0.3 mm) and fossiliferous. The fragments of fossiliferous limestone
(<5%) show angular and subangular shape. Some microfossils of Foraminifera have also been observed.
G5 - (1 sample: VRB 23) (fig. 46f)
Brown highly calcareous matrix rich in poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (20%; size range between 0.2 by 0.1 and 0.1 by
0.07 mm), rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (>10%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), iron oxides (5%), few clay pellets,
and rare muscovite mica (1%).
In addition one potsherd of the Danilo settlement phase has been analysed (VRB 19; fig. 46g). Its brown calcareous fabric has
poorly-sorted, angular and subangular quartz (10%; size range between 0.08 by 0.05 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), some muscovite mica,
rare opaques and iron oxides (1%), and abundant added crushed calcite (35%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm).
One soil sample collected in close proximity to the site has been analysed in thin section (figs. 42 and 46h). Its fabric is very rich
in iron oxides with well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (15%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), subangular and subrounded
fragments of limestone (>7%), and muscovite mica (<3%).
Three groups (1 and 1 sub. a and b, 2 and 3) have artificially added calcite. The other groups (1 sub. c, 4,
5 and 6) do not show any added temper.
Group 1 has a reddish, slightly calcareous fabric with some well-sorted angular and subangular quartz,
some muscovite mica, rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone, some bohnerz, clay
pellets, iron oxides, and abundant added crushed calcite. The quartz of G1 sub. a is finer than that of G1. It has
also some banded calcite. The fabric of group 2 is very different. It is dark brown, much more silty and fine
than G1. It contains very occasional, well-sorted quartz and abundant, rounded, fine-grained limestone, rare
pyroxene, some muscovite mica, and little added calcite. Group 2 sub. a has the same fabric of group 2 with a
higher percentage of quartz. G2 sub. b has the same rounded fragments of limestone of group 2. It has added
crushed calcite, although its fabric is coarser and slightly micritic and contains a higher percentage of quartz.
G2 sub. c is characterised by a silty, fine, iron-rich fabric with rounded limestone, and very rare quartz (as
group 2), although it does not show any added calcite. Group 3 has a very iron-rich fabric with more abundant
detrital fraction compared to the preceding groups, with banded limestone, different from that found in the
other groups, some polycrystalline limestone, muscovite, quartz, and added calcite. Group 4 has a reddish,
very coarse matrix, more calcareous and coarse than the matrices of the above-mentioned groups. It is rich in
quartz and in two different types of limestone: polycrystalline and fossiliferous. The fossiliferous limestone,
which is not very abundant, has probably been added because of its subangular and angular shape (probably
indicating deliberate crushing). The fabric of group 5 is more micritic than those of the previous groups. It
shows a high percentage of poorly-sorted quartz and no added inclusions. The analyses of the Danilo phase
potsherd have shown a fabric very similar to that of group 1 sub. a (sample VRB 6). They both show a very
calcareous, brown fabric. The main difference consists in the less iron-rich fabric with poorly-sorted and
coarser quartz of the Danilo sample compared to that of the Impressed Ware.
The soil sample analysed in thin section shows some similarities with the fabric of group 4. They both are
micritic and iron-rich, although the soil is more micaceous and shows quartz grains finer than those of VRB 17.
This is one of the few cases where this method was of no help to test the microscopic groups, mainly
because of the very homogeneous minerals that characterise the different fabrics (table 8, Appendix 4). In
particular, the variability in the percentage of calcium oxide of groups 1 and 2 is mainly due to the limestone
fragments (G2) and to the crushed calcite (G1). This can be noticed only through thin section analysis, since
it focuses on size, shape, and arrangement of the inclusions.
G1 shows rather low silica, very high calcium oxide (crushed calcite) and a large variability in iron oxide
(1.52-8.30%). According to the SEM-EDS results its subgroup could perfectly fit into it. Also G2 has rather
little silica, whilst aluminia is slightly better represented, and calcium and iron oxides show great variations

99
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 46 - Vrbica: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) VRB 5, b) VRB 18, c) VRB 3, d) VRB 12, e) VRB 17, f) VRB 23, g) VRB 19, h) soil
100
(CaO: 27.42-35.60%; Fe2O3: 1.66-5.02%). The subgroups show very few differences. G2 sub. a has less
calcium oxide and more iron oxide and silica (in thin section the main difference with G2 is the higher percen-
tage of quartz). G2 sub. b has yielded results similar to those of G2. G2 sub. c might perfectly fit into G2. G3
has a quantity of iron oxide slightly higher than that of the other groups, though it does not show other
differences. G4 shows results similar to those of G3 (in thin section its fabric is fossiliferous). An interesting
datum comes from the analysis of the Danilo phase sample VRB 19. It matches very well with the results of
the other IW specimens (only the percentage of iron oxide is much lower). All these data seem to reinforce the
impression of a common origin of these sherds. They have been usefully correlated with the SEM-EDS results
obtained from the site of Konjevrate (Chapter 3, 7.2.2.).
6.2.3. XRD analyses
One soil sample collected in close proximity to the site was analysed by XRD. The pattern of the soil (fig.
47, top) shows the presence of quartz, calcite, muscovite, chlorite, and hematite. Four potsherds (VRB 3, 5, 7,
9) studied in thin section were also analysed by XRD. The pattern of sample VRB 5 (G1; fig. 47, centre) is
almost identical to that of the soil. It shows the presence of quartz, calcite, muscovite, chlorite, and hematite.
It also has some anatase that is not present in the soil sample. Anatase derives from the alteration of titanium-
bearing minerals, and is associated with quartz, chlorite, hematite, etc. (FORD, 1949: 500). The pattern of VRB
7 (G2; fig. 47, bottom) includes calcite, kaolinite (Chapter 2, 6.1.), anatase, and chlorite. In XRD terms, this
kaolinitic clay is very similar to that of group 1 (VRB 5). This contrasts with the thin section results, because
the fabrics are very different, even though they show the same varieties of minerals (calcite, limestone, quartz,
iron oxides). G2 is much finer and siltier than G1 and has very rounded limestone inclusions. It is obvious that
the XRD analyses do not show the topography, size, or shape of the minerals, but only their identity. Sample
VRB 3 (G2 sub. c; fig. 48, top) has the same kaolinitic clay of group 2 (VRB 7), and some quartz. Quartz is
very occasional in the thin section of sample VRB 3 as well as in those of group 2. The pattern of sample VRB
9 (G2 sub. c; fig. 48, bottom) shows the same minerals of VRB 3 (G2 sub. c), with brookite instead of anatase.
To conclude, it is possible 1) to suggest a strong correlation between groups 1, 2 and the soil sample, and
2) to confirm the close relationship between group 2 (VRB7) and its subgroups b and c (VRB 9 and 3). The
thin section results show a correlation between the soil and groups 1, 3 and 4; the XRD patterns show parallels
between the soil and groups 1 and 2. From a different perspective these data indicate that the ceramics assem-
blage derive from a very similar environment closely related to the soil of the area surrounding the site.
6.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 2 come from different sources. The fabric of G1 is more calcareous, coarse and rich in iron
oxides than that of G2, which has fine, silty fabric with peculiar, rounded limestone inclusions. Group 3
derives from a source richer in fragments of polycrystalline limestone and iron oxides. Group 4 (sample VRB
17) undoubtedly comes from a different source because of its very micritic matrix and the fossiliferous lime-
stone that has been not observed in other samples. Also group 5 (VRB 23) has a highly micritic matrix, richer
in quartz and poorer in iron oxides than that of G4.
It seems probable that the Impressed Ware inhabitants of Vrbica exploited five different sources. Group 2
is characterised by a peculiar variety of rounded limestone probably collected from the proximity of a river
course (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). The clays exploited for the manufacture of the other groups were
collected from different areas, although they all contain the same varieties of minerals that are characteristic of
sedimentary deposits. An important difference is the fossiliferous limestone of sample VRB 17 that contrasts
with the more common polycrystalline limestone of the other samples. The soil sample shows a fabric similar,
but not identical, to the fabric of some ceramic groups (1, 3 and 4). This indicates a similar geological context
of provenance.
6.4. CONCLUSIONS
According to the soil (thin section and XRD) analyses and the geology of the area, the potsherds are
compatible with the pedology of the local soil.
The fabric of group 1 is rich in iron oxides (as the XRD analysis also revealed), with fine quartz. The clay of
the vessels of group 2, silty and with very well-sorted fine quartz has been probably collected close to a water-
course. This observation is based on the very rounded aspect of the limestone. The fabric of G4 shows some

101
Fig. 47 - Vrbica: XRD pattern of soil sample (top), and potsherds VRB 5 (centre) and VRB 7 (bottom).
102
Fig. 48 - Vrbica XRD pattern of potsherds VRB 3 (top) and VRB 9 (bottom).
similarities with that of the soil sample. Furthermore, the presence of Foraminifera microfossils, (sample VRB
17, G4), reinforce the idea of a local provenance, because they are perfectly compatible with the local geology.
Also the fabric of the Danilo potsherd stresses this hypothesis (VRB 19). It is very similar to that of sample VRB
6 (G1 sub. a). It is difficult to suggest that the material employed in the production of both IW and Danilo
ceramics was imported from the same source throughout such a long time-span.

103
The knowledge of the relationships between the fabrics of the ceramics of the two contemporaneous,
neighbouring sites of Vrbica and Konjevrate is another important provenance indicator. A few similarities can
be observed in the fabrics of the samples from these two sites. The Vrbica group 4 (sample VRB 17) is very
similar to the Konjevrate group 5 (samples KNV 6, 23). They show the same coarse, iron-rich fabric with
polycrystalline limestone and quartz. The only difference consists in the fossiliferous limestone of sample
VRB 17. Both KNV 16 (G7) and VRB 23 (G5) have the same micritic fabric with abundant limestone frag-
ments. The only difference is that sample VRB 23 has coarser and more abundant quartz. The sources exploi-
ted for the manufacture of the sherds from both these sites come from a similar pedological background, even
though not from the same source.
Given the similarities in the geology of the territory around Konjevrate and Vrbica, a common provenan-
ce for some of the ceramic fabrics can be suggested. Nevertheless, there are some important differences between
the petrographic groups of Konjevrate and Vrbica group 2. The sherds from Vrbica G2 show a peculiar fine-
grained, rounded limestone that does not occur in the Konjevrate potsherds (nor in many other Vrbica sherds).
According to these considerations, it is possible to conclude that the production of this pottery is based on the
exploitation of similar pedological areas and, consequently, that it is of local manufacture.
The typology of the four vessels of group 1 strongly resembles that of the Danilo Culture pots. Open
bowls with brown, burnished surfaces represents them. Also G1 sub. a (VRB 6) recalls the Danilo fine pottery
because of its identical form. The vessels of group 2 (VRB 7, 14, 18 and 20) show internal differences. Only
two sherds (VRB 18 and 20) have common decorations with elongated impressions. Also VRB 16 (G 2 sub. a)
has an impressed decorative pattern. G2 sub. b (VRB 4, 9, 11, 21 and 22) is stylistically characterised by two
groups: the first (VRB 11, 21 and 22) with impressed Cardium motifs, while the second (VRB 4 and 9) has a
similar shape, even though it is decorated with impressed small dots. Sample VRB 3 (G2 sub. c) is a base
fragment. The microscopic group 3 is composed of four sherds that typologically and stylistically have nothing
in common between each other. Sample VRB 13 is typologically and stylistically very similar to VRB 11, 21
and 22 (G2 sub. b) with impressed Cardium decorations. Sample VRB 12 is unique: it shows some incised
patterns. The other two specimens (VRB 2 and 15) are undecorated. Therefore, they cannot be classified
stylistically. Both sherds VRB 17 (G4) and VRB 23 (G5) have impressed motifs.
According to this criss-cross correlation it is possible to say that, at Vrbica, temper or fabric do not
correspond to specific typological and decorated classes of pottery. The only exception is the Cardium Im-
pressed Ware that mainly fits into a particular group (G2 sub. b), with sherds characterised by similar shapes.
Most of them (3 out 5) are decorated with Cardium impressed motifs. Nevertheless, it is impossible to attribu-
te any specific temper or matrix to any defined typological form.
To test the hypothesis of a local production system instead of a regional one, we can extend the parallels
to the potsherds of the neighbouring site of Konjevrate that show a similar matrix. The fabric of Vrbica group
4 is very similar to that of Konjevrate group 5 (samples KNV 5, 6, 12, 23), although they do not show any
common typological or stylistic feature. Two sherds from these sites, VRB 23 and KNV 16, are both characte-
rised by very similar fabrics (see above) even though they are decorated with different Impressed Ware patter-
ns (figs. 45 and 51). At present only these conclusions can be drawn. They suggest a local production at both
sites, with the utilisation of similar clay sources, but different stylistic patterns.
7. KONJEVRATE (ibenik)
Almost nothing is known of the Early Neolithic site of Konjevrate, which lies in the interior of ibenik
(fig. 49), 15 km from the present coastline, in an area that is extremely rich in Neolithic settlements (Bribir,
Vrbica, karin Samogrand and Krivace) (MENDUI, 1998a; MLLER, 1998).
The site, the extension of which is still unknown, is located at an altitude of 210 m, close to the course
of the Krka River, near a perennial spring. It was discovered by chance in 1993, inside the modern village
of Konjevrate, during the opening of a new grave inside the cemetery of the church of St. Ivan (KRNCEVI,
1995).
The archaeological excavations were carried out by MENDUI (1998) immediately after the discovery of
104
the site. A trench 2.5x2.5 m was opened, which yielded a great quantity of Impressed Ware potsherds and a
few flint artefacts. They all belong to the Early Neolithic without any inclusion of more recent materials. They
were found inside the Neolithic archaeological layer that did not produce any evidence of man-made features
such as pits and hearths.
The Impressed Ware layer was some 20 cm below a disturbed surface level. It was some 50 cm thick and
was excavated in artificial spits of 15 cm each. More than 1000 potsherds were recovered from this small trial
trench. They are now in the collections of the ibenik City Museum.
As mentioned above, the excavation produced more than 1000 potsherds belonging to the Impressed Ware
tradition, decorated with Cardium, other marine shell, fingernail, finger and instrumental impressions. The deco-
rative patterns were organised in rows of horizontal lines. Other finds include several flint artefacts, mainly on
blade and bladelet, faunal remains, many of which were charred, and some pieces of daub. On the basis of these
latter finds, MENDUI (1998a) suggested the presence of hut foundations close to the area where the trial trench
had been opened. The settlement was attributed to the earliest phase A of the Impressed Ware Culture.
The geology of the territory around Konjevrate is homogeneous. Therefore it is very difficult to define a
precise source of provenance for these sherds. The geology of the ibenik area is very similar to those of
Vrbica and Danilo Bitinj. Konjevrate is located on a limestone deposit that alternates with conglomerates and
fossiliferous limestone that originated during the first phases of the Eocene. This fossiliferous limestone con-
tains Foraminifera, especially Nummulites szaboi and Halkyardia minima. It must be remembered that also
the limestone deposit located along the Adriatic coastline is fossiliferous, especially rich in Foraminifera
(Drni, K 33-139 Osnovna Geoloka Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
7.2. ANALYSES
Twenty-five potsherds from the Impressed Ware site of Konjevrate have been subdivided into seven
different fabrics, based on thin section analysis (figs. 50 and 51; table 9, Appendix 3).
G1 - (5 samples: KNV 1, 9, 13, 17, 20) (fig. 52a)
Reddish, iron-rich, slightly micritic, poly-sorted matrix characterised by well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size
range between 0.05 by 0.04 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rich in iron oxides (<10%) and some opaques, rounded and subrounded fragments
of limestone (<15%; size range between 2.7 by 2.5 and 0.4 by 0.3 mm), rare flint, and no added inclusions;
sub. a (1 sample: KNV 14) (fig. 52b)
Reddish matrix, rich in iron, similar to that of G1, but with large clay pellets (>5%), well-sorted fine angular and subangular quartz
(20%; size range between 0.05 by 0.03 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (15%; size range 2.5
by 2.0 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm), and some muscovite mica;
sub. b (4 samples: KNV 3, 11, 22, 24)
Brown-reddish iron-rich matrix, similar to that of G1, more calcareous, with coarse angular and subangular quartz (<20%; size range
between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.07 by 0.04 mm), abundant fragments (mainly rounded and very rarely subangular shape) of coarse-grained
limestone (15%; size range as G1), opaques and iron oxides (<10%), muscovite mica (<3%), and some clay pellets;
sub. c (4 samples: KNV 7, 8, 21, 25) (fig. 52c)
Matrix very similar to that of G1 sub. b, with added crushed sparry and banded calcite (>15%; size range between 1.2 by 0.75 and 0.5
by 0.4 mm), and rounded fragments of fossiliferous limestone (7%; typical size 0.7 by 0.5 mm). One microfossil has been identified
as belonging to the Foraminifera;
sub. d (1 sample: KNV 19)
Matrix very similar to that of G1 sub. a, with coarser angular and subangular quartz (<20%; size range between 0.12 by 0.08 and 0.1
by 0.06 mm), rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (10%; size range as G1), iron oxides (10%), and rare feldspar (<1%).
G2 - (1 sample: KNV 4) (fig. 52d)
Brown fine matrix characterised by elongated, subrounded and rounded fragments of limestone (<20%; size range between 3.0 by 1.2
and 0.2 by 0.15 mm), poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.15 by 0.08 and 0.05 by 0.04 mm),
iron oxides (3%), and some clay pellets.
G3 - (1 sample: KNV 18) (fig. 52e)
Very dark red iron-rich matrix characterised by poorly-sorted, abundant angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between
0.13 by 0.1 and 0.09 by 0.05 mm), rare feldspar (1%), some subrounded fragments of polycrystalline and banded limestone (7%;
typical size 0.4 by 0.3 mm), and added crushed calcite (10%; size range between 0.8 by 0.5 and 0.7 by 0.35 mm).

105
Fig. 49 - Location of the Neolithic sites of Konjevrate and Danilo Bitinj (dots) and of the soil samples (squares). Scale in kilometres.
G4 - (2 samples: KNV 10, 15) (fig. 52f)
Red iron-rich matrix with well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (<10%; typical size range between 0.04 by 0.02 mm), some
rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<5%; size range between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.2 by 0.15 mm), a great quantity of iron
oxides (<15%), and abundant added crushed calcite (<30%; size range between 0.9 by 0.6 and 0.4 by 0.2 mm).
G5 - (4 samples: KNV 5, 6, 12, 23) (fig. 52g)
Red, iron-rich, micritic matrix with abundant well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.05 to 0.03 and
0.03 to 0.02 mm), very occasional pyroxene (<1%), rich in rounded, subrounded and some angular fragments of polycrystalline and
some fossiliferous limestone (<20%; typical size 1.5 by 1.32 mm). Samples KNV 5, 6 and 12 show the presence of a few microfos-
sils. One, in particular, has been identified as a Nummulite. The subangular limestone has been probably added as temper.
G6 - (1 sample: KNV 2) (fig. 52h)
Red, calcareous, iron-rich matrix, similar to that of G5, characterised by well-sorted, few, angular and subangular quartz (7%; typical
size range is 0.04 by 0.03 mm), and very rare polycrystalline quartz (<1%). It is richer in inclusions than G5 with a greater quantity
of very rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (40%; size range between 4.5 by 2.0 and 0.05 by 0.04 mm), and very rare,
fine muscovite mica. The limestone might have been added as temper because of its bimodal distribution.
G7 - (1 sample: KNV 16) (fig. 53a)
Brown very micritic matrix with well-sorted, fine quartz (<20%; size range between 0.05 by 0.03 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), some muscovite (2%),
abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (15%; typical size 0.6 by 0.3 mm), clay pellets, opaques and iron oxides (>5%).
106
Fig. 50 - Konjevrate: pottery from the Neolithic site.

107
Fig. 51 - Konjevrate: pottery from the Neolithic site.
108
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 52 - Konjevrate: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) KNV 1, b) KNV 14, c) KNV 7, d) KNV 4, e) KNV 18, f) KNV 15, g) KNV 5, h)
KNV 2 (XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).

109
One soil sample has been analysed in thin section (figs. 49 and 53b). Its fabric is very iron-rich and slightly calcareous, with a high
percentage of well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (20%; size range between 0.07 by 0.04 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), subangular and
subrounded fragments of limestone (<7%; typical size 1.3 by 1.2 mm), rare muscovite mica (1%), very rare zircon and pyroxene
(<1%).
Group 1 shows a fine, iron-rich, slightly micritic fabric with some quartz, abundant iron oxides, rare flint,
abundant polycrystalline limestone, and no artificially added inclusions. It comes from a source rich in iron
and polycrystalline limestone. Most probably its subgroups come from different parts of the same clay depo-
sit. They show differences in the quartz size range and in the percentage of the rounded and subrounded
fragments of limestone. G1 sub. a shows the same fabric as G1, with some large clay pellets (fig. 52b),
muscovite mica, and is rich in fine and well-sorted quartz. G1 sub. b has a more calcareous matrix with more
abundant and coarser quartz than G1; G1 sub. c has the same matrix as G1 sub. b with some added calcite; the
fabric of G1 sub. d is similar to that of G1 sub. a, with coarser quartz and without clay pellets. The fabric of
a) b)
Fig. 53 - Konjevrate: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) KNV 16 (XPL, X40), b) soil sample (XPL, X100) (photographs by M. Spataro).
group 2 is silty, less rich in iron than that of G1. It has some banded limestone naturally present in the fabric (it
does not show any sharp edge). The fabric of group 3 is very different from the preceding ones. It is very iron-
rich and poorly-sorted. It shows fragments of limestone and abundant quartz, with some added crushed calci-
te. The fabric of group 4 is fine, iron-rich and siltier than that of G1. It shows the same variety of polycrystal-
line limestone, less quartz than G3 and abundant artificially added inclusions (calcite). The fabric of group 5
is very different from the above-mentioned groups because it shows abundant rounded and some fossiliferous
limestone. Some of the limestone has subangular shape; thus we cannot exclude that it has probably been
added. Group 6 shows a micritic fabric very similar to that of group 5, with less quartz and very abundant
rounded limestone. It is possible that the limestone has been added because of its bimodal distribution. Final-
ly, the fabric of group 7 is more micritic than those of the other six groups, with fine quartz and rounded
fragments of polycrystalline limestone.
As for Vrbica, the data of the SEM-EDS analyses of Konjevrate are very homogeneous mainly because of
the results of soda, magnesia, aluminia, sulphur oxide, and titania (table 9, Appendix 4). Silica, iron and calcium
oxides are subject to fluctuation/variations. G1 shows very homogeneous results apart from that of the iron oxide
(3.72-9.94%). Its subgroups a, b and d might fit well into it, whereas sub. c shows higher percentages of calcium
oxide (because of the presence of calcite, which is absent in G1 and the other subgroups), and a lower quantity of
silica. G2 has yielded results similar to those of G1, although the percentage of iron oxide is much lower (2.94%).
G3 shows a high percentage of titania (2.02%) and a very high percentage of iron oxide (17.18%) (in thin section
it is very iron-rich indeed), less silica and calcium oxide than those of groups 1 and 2 (for the thin sections, see
above). G4 does not show any difference from G1 and G2, apart from the higher percentage of aluminia (25.50%).
G5 is similar to the preceding groups, whereas G6 shows the lowest percentages of silica (few quartz), and one of
the highest quantities of calcium oxide (very abundant limestone). G7 shows similar results to G6 with a very
110
high percentage of calcium oxide (very micritic fabric with abundant limestone), higher silica (more abundant
quartz), and much lower iron oxide (less iron-rich fabric).
In this case, it is not possible to test the microscopic groups with the SEM-EDS results, because of the
very homogeneous composition of the ceramic fabrics. Nevertheless, it is important to note that soda, magne-
sia, titania, and sulphur oxide always show similar percentages.
These data support the hypothesis of material collected from different sources located in the same geolo-
gical area. To test the microscopic groups is of little help because of the homogeneity of these data. Neverthe-
less, they can be used to compare the results of the two assemblages of Konjevrate and Vrbica. According to
the results presented in tables 8 and 9 (Appendix 4) it is important to note that while soda, magnesia, sulphur
oxide and potash are generally very similar, at Konjevrate the averages of silica and iron oxide are higher than
those of Vrbica, whereas Vrbica has a higher average of calcium oxide.
7.2.3. XRD analyses
The soil sample analysed in thin section, collected close to a terra rossa deposit that outcrops a few
hundred metres from the Neolithic settlement, has been studied by XRD. The pattern shows the presence of
kaolinite, muscovite mica, quartz, calcite, and hematite (fig. 54, top). Also four potsherds (KNV 17, G1; KNV
18, G3; KNV 19, G1 sub. d; KNV 23, G5; figs. 54, centre and 54, bottom, and 55, top and 55, bottom)
analysed in thin section have been studied by XRD. All the patterns of the potsherds show quartz, calcite, and
chlorite. Samples KNV 18 (G3; fig. 54, bottom) and KNV 19 (G1 sub. d; fig. 55, top) show also some kaolinite
(Chapter 2, 6.1.) and hematite. Both these minerals are represented in the soil pattern. Even though the results
obtained from the thin section analysis demonstrate that two distinct clay deposits were exploited for the
manufacture of the two vessel groups (1 and 3), a common origin might be suggested mainly because of the
occurrence of the same clay mineral (kaolinite), that is almost impossible to identify through this type of
analysis. It is interesting to note that groups G1 sub. d (KNV 19) and G3 (KNV 18) have strong similarities.
The thin section shows the presence of the same minerals. Nevertheless, they can be attributed to two distinct
groups because of some differences (the matrix of G3 is very rich in iron, less very well-sorted and less
micritic than that of G1). It is also important to note their strong similarities through the XRD analysis.
This method has demonstrated that the composition of the clay sources exploited by the Impressed Ware
potters are very similar to each other. This had already been supposed on the basis of the results obtained from
the thin section analysis. It is important to note that both XRD patterns of the samples of groups 3 and 1 show
kaolinitic matrix with hematite, very similar to that of the soil sample.
7.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 2 come from different, though similar sources. The clay source of group 2 has quartz
inclusions coarser than those of G1 and some banded limestone. Also groups 3 and 4 do not derive from a
common source. G3 does not show a micritic matrix; it is very iron-rich. Group 5 shows the same fabric as G6,
though the latter has more abundant, rounded limestone and does not contain any fossiliferous limestone. The
source exploited for the manufacture of group 7 is much more calcareous than those of the other groups. It
must be different from the others. The sources exploited were at least seven. Those employed in the produc-
tion of the pottery of groups 1, 2, 5 and 6 might be located very close to each other (or belong to different
layers of the same formation). This is indicated by 1) the similar iron-rich fabric with quartz and small frag-
ments of mainly rounded limestone, 2) the different percentage of limestone, and 3) the occurrence of similar
fossils in two groups (1 sub. c and 5). In particular, G6 shows a matrix similar to that of G5, with very rounded
limestone inclusions. It was undoubtedly collected in the close proximity of a river or a beach; it is also
possible that the limestone has been added (see Chapter 3, 7.2.1.). The source of group 4 is richer in iron
oxides than that of G1. Group 3 comes from a different source. Compared to the others its fabric is much more
iron-rich. It is richer in quartz and contains some added crushed calcite. The source for the manufacture of
group 7 is more micritic than the preceding ones.
The thin section of the soil sample does not show any clay identical to that of the fabrics of the potsherds,
although it is similar to the fabrics of the vessels of group 5 (e.g. KNV 5 and 12). They both have an iron-rich,
micritic fabric with quartz, large fragments of limestone, and pyroxene. It might come from a similar source
because of the presence of the same minerals. There are no minerals that might suggest a different provenance.
Furthermore, the specificity of each single site of the Croatian coastline indicates a local production.

111
Fig. 54 - Konjevrate: XRD pattern of soil sample (top), and potsherds KNV 17 (centre) and KNV 18 (bottom).
112
Fig. 55 - Konjevrate: XRD pattern of potsherds KNV 19 (top) and KNV 23 (bottom).
7.4. CONCLUSIONS
The inhabitants of the Early Neolithic, Impressed Ware, settlement of Konjevrate probably exploited diffe-
rent, although similar (see SEM-EDS results) sources for the manufacture of the pottery of groups 1, 2, 5, and 6.
The clay source utilised for the production of group 3 is much more iron-rich and non-micritic. Nevertheless, as
the XRD pattern of sample KNV 18 (fig. 54, bottom) has demonstrated, it contains the same minerals of group 1.
Therefore it is likely that all these groups are from a similar source. The source exploited for the manufacture of

113
group 6 must have been close to a river or to a beach. From a technological point of view, only groups 1 sub. c, 3
and 4 clearly show addition of temper (crushed calcite, bimodal distribution of size and rhombohedric shape with
sharp edges). It is also possible that G5 and G6 have been tempered with (some fossiliferous) limestone, because
of its bimodal distribution and sometimes subangular shape. However, also the soil sample shows the presence of
subangular limestone fragments that are naturally present in the fabric.
According to the minerals contained in the ceramic fragments and in the soil, and to the geology of the
area, it is possible to suggest that the source exploited for the production of the Early Neolithic pottery was
probably local, or situated close to the site. It is reasonable to think of a local or regional pottery production.
Also relevant to the definition of the local or regional provenance of the Konjevrate pottery is the comparison
with the minero-petrographic groups of the contemporary, neighbouring site of Vrbica (Chapter 3, 6.4.) and of
the SEM-EDS results of both sites (see above).
The considerations that follow are mainly based on the stylistic more than on the typological aspects,
because, in most cases, it is impossible to reconstruct the vessel shapes due to the high fragmentary condition
of the potsherds. From a stylistic point of view, group 1 is characterised by pottery with impressed motifs
(KNV 1, 9, 13, 20). Only one sherd (KNV 17) shows light incised motifs. The sample KNV 14 (G1 sub. a) has
some impressed decorations with motifs that are slightly different from those of the preceding ones. Group 1
sub. b includes vessels (KNV 3, 11, 22) with very similar decoration patterns with linear instrumental impres-
sions. One specimen of the same subgroup has a slightly different motif (KNV 24), with parallel grooves. G1
sub. c (KNV 7, 15) has two different typologies. Sample KNV 19, which constitutes G1 sub. d, is very diffe-
rent from the other samples because it has an unusual decoration with small dots that has nothing in common
with the other impressed decorations. The fragments KNV 8 and 21 (G1 sub. e) do not show any common
feature. Sample KNV 4 (G2) and KNV 18 (G3) belong to different microscopic groups. Compared to the
samples of group 1, they are stylistically very similar to each other, decorated with impressed motifs. The
microscopic group 4 is composed of sherds (KNV 10, 15) that have nothing in common either stylistically or
typologically. Group 5 is composed of vessels with very similar decorations composed of lines of recurrent,
elongated impressions. Sample KNV 12, while showing the same common fabric, is decorated with a roc-
ker pattern (fig. 50). Group 6 (KNV 2), which is very peculiar from a microscopic point of view, characteri-
sed by very rounded limestone, has the same common impressed motifs of groups 1, 2 and 3. Sample KNV 16
(G7) is from a large, deep flask with impressed decorations. It has nothing in common with the other potsherds
analysed from this assemblage.
No real correspondence seems to exist between the fabric and the typology of the vessels from Konjevra-
te, although the samples are of small dimension. The inhabitants of the Early Neolithic village utilised diffe-
rent sources for the manufacture of similar vessels (groups 1, 2, 3 and 6).
All the sherds from this site are very typical of the Impressed Ware Culture. From a stylistic point of view,
only two of them, KNV 16 and 19, differ from the rest of the assemblage. Nevertheless, the matrix of KNV 19
is rather similar to that of G1, used for the production of Impressed Ware vessels. Only sample KNV 16, has
been manufactured with clay different from that of the preceding groups. This clay is more micritic, with very
fine quartz and polycrystalline limestone, but there is not diagnostic mineral, in contrast to all the other
fabrics. The typological analysis, whenever it has been possible to apply it to the definition of the vessels
shapes, does not show any comparison with the microscopic groups (see the already-mentioned samples KNV
4 (G2) and 18 (G3)).
8. DANILO BITINJ (ibenik)
The open-air Neolithic site of Danilo Bitinj is located in the fertile Valley of Danilo, an elongated depres-
sion of karstic origin that lies some 18 km east of ibenik (figs. 49 and 56). It was discovered by chance by
Randic-Miocevi in 1952 during an archaeological survey whose aim was the discovery of Roman objects.
The Neolithic site lies in a very fertile agricultural region and is distributed over an area of some 70x20 m,
covering 1400 square m. The excavations by KOROEc (1958) revealed a Neolithic occupation some 1.50 m
thick, whose lower part, 70-80 cm deep, was still intact, while the upper had been disturbed by deep plou-
114
ghing. The excavations revealed a number of features such as pits, even though remains of habitations or of so-
called hut-foundations were never found. Nevertheless, the presence of large quantities of characteristic
pieces of daub should indicated that houses might have existed in the excavated area or close to it. High
concentrations of daub have been found in the eastern and northern side of the excavation. The pits are most
probably to be interpreted either as rubbish pits, filled with archaeological soil mixed with potsherds, flint
tools, charcoal and bones, or as clay-pits. According to KOROEC (1958), they are to be subdivided into two
groups, the first of which includes small and regular pits of symmetrical shape most probably employed as
storage pits; the second includes pits of larger dimension and irregular shape, poorer in material culture re-
mains whose function was, most probably that of clay pits.
The excavation at the site also yielded three graves of young individuals buried in a crouched position,
without grave goods. The skeletons were oriented in north-south and northwest-southeast directions. The great
quantity of daub pieces discovered in the same area of the graves seems to indicate that the individuals had been
buried inside, or very close to, the houses. An isolated skull was found in another area of the excavation.
Material culture remains
All the above-mentioned pits are particularly rich in ceramic fragments, followed by chipped and po-
lished stones, bone and antler tools. Regarding the chipped stone tools, the site yielded a great variety of flint
tools, among them a few long tanged arrowheads (obtained from blades with bifacial flat retouch) that are
typical of the Middle Neolithic of the Dalmatian coast. Knives obtained by the same technique are represented
as well. Obsidian artefacts include only seven tools. Its provenance is still unknown since no analysis for its
identification has so far been conducted. Among the polished stone tools are axes and adzes of different
typology, a few hammerstones and pestles. Red-deer antler and bone tools are rare, comprising a few awls and
some smoothers. Furthermore, there are some peculiarly shaped stone and bone objects, possibly pendants,
and a few ornaments made from marine shells.
The pottery can be subdivided into four different groups, including monochrome, plain and decorated
pottery with incised, geometric and curvilinear patterns (zigzags, rhombic, spirals, chess-boards, etc.), pain-
ted pottery and unpainted figulina ware. The shapes of the plain and the incised pottery are very similar. Each
type includes hemispherical bowls, jugs, flasks, and deep vessels with restricted mouth, high-pedestalled
vases and shallow plates. The fabrics of both these categories seem to be identical (KOROEC, 1958: 108-109:
tab. 1-4). The incisions are often filled with red (ochre) inlay, only one fragment has white inlay. According to
KOROEC (1958) the technology employed in the manufacture of incised pottery is the same of that of the plain
one, even though it was burnished after firing. The shallow plates and the deep vessels with restricted mouth
are of a shape that is very similar to that of some characteristic Butmir Culture (BENAC, 1952) types (KOROEC,
1959: T. LXXXIV).
Following KOROEC (1958: 97), from a technological point of view, the painted pottery is absolutely
different from the other types. It is fired at lower temperature and its surfaces are always polished and reddish
in colour. The clay utilised for its manufacture was most probably imported (KOROEC, 1958: 57). The decora-
tive patterns are represented by linear and geometric (rectangular, triangular, rhombic and chess-board) motifs
on the body vessel and, more rarely, in its internal surface, while spiral decorations are absent (BENAC and
MARIJANOVI, 1993: 135). The commonest shapes include flasks similar to the plain ware ones as well as
shallow plates. The colours utilised to decorate the surfaces of the vessels are various ranging from white, red,
and black to brown. White colour, more rarely light grey, was mainly used as a slip; while red was often
employed to decorate wide surfaces.
The Danilo pottery from Danilo Bitinj comprises several so-called cult vessels, or rhyta, and some
other peculiar ceramic objects. The rhyta are distributed all along the Dalmatian coast (MONTAGNARI KOKELJ
and CRISMANI, 1993) as well as in Greece and in Central Bosnia (BIAGI, 2003). Their shape is very distinctive,
with four (or two) legs, a circular open mouth and a wide stripe handle. They are often decorated with incised
patterns, sometimes filled with red ochre. According to KOROEC (1958: 59), the two-legged types are proba-
bly to be referred to female, human figures. Other plastic objects are represented by stylised animal heads,
most probably bulls (KOROEC, 1958: 60).
Other interesting finds are four ceramic, cylindrical objects, probably phalli that are quite common to
both the Danilo and Hvar Cultures. BATOVI (1968: 51) suggests that they represent male human figures that
prove the bisexual elements of the fertility cult in the Danilo Culture.

115
Fig. 56 - Danilo Bitinj: location of the Neolithic settlement in the centre of the picture (photograph by P. Biagi).
Subsistence Economy
The subsistence economy of Danilo was based on animal husbandry and agriculture (BENAC and MARIJA-
NOVI}, 1993: 135), as is indicated by some specific implements such as stone tools related to agricultural
activities, among which are axes and whetstones. Straw impressions related to house roofing have also been
discovered. The analyses of the daub fragments have shown the presence of seeds of Triticum monococcum
and dicoccum, Hordeum vulgare and Secale dalmaticum (KOROEC, 1958: 124-128; HOPF, 1964). The faunal
remains include bones of both domesticated (cattle, sheep, goat, pig and dog), and wild animals (red and roe
deer, chamois, fox, and various bird species). The diet of the Danilo inhabitants included also sea-shells
(Mytilus, Cardium, Spondylus, Ostrea, Patella, Murex, Cypreae), and land snails.
Relationships with other Cultures
The relationships with other coeval cultures of both sides of the Adriatic are to be sought in several
varieties of pottery. The Danilo figulina pottery is very similar to that of the Neolithic village of Ripoli in
central Italy in both shapes and decorations (see Chapter 5, 5.). The use of bands of linear geometric motifs of
red and brown colour is common at both sites. Also at Ripoli the vessels very often show a whitish slip, with
coloured, painted geometric patterns. Among the differences one can note that lugs are present at Ripoli and
absent at Danilo.
The more evident relationships between the Danilo and Butmir Cultures lie in the occurrence of high
pedestal and restricted mouth vessels at both sites, as well as in some decorative, linear geometric and spiral
patterns. The presence of clay animal heads is attested in both cultures, even though the Danilo specimens are
always incised, while those of Butmir are plastic or produce a plastic effect.
In the Trieste and Slovene Karst, many cave sites have yielded Danilo type wares. They have been descri-
bed as belonging to the Vlaka horizon, a local, impoverished aspect of the Danilo Culture (BARFIELD, 1972).
A recent re-examination of most of these finds (BARFIELD, 1999), and the preliminary results of the excava-
tions at Edera Cave in the Trieste Karst (BIAGI et al., 1993), and at the open-air village of Sammardenchia,
seem to demonstrate that the northernmost limit reached by the expansion of the Danilo Culture was the
eastern Friuli Plain. This is indicated by the recovery of Danilo pottery and fragments of typical rhyta and of
one clay phallus at Sammardenchia (PESSINA et al., 1998: 139).
Even though no radiocarbon date is currently available for Danilo Bitinj, we know that this culture was
116
active since the middle of the seventh millennium BP. This is demonstrated by a series of radiocarbon dates
from Gudnja pe}ina (CHAPMAN, 1988: 7), along the southern Dalmatian coast, and from Edera Cave in the
Trieste Karst (NISBET, 2000; Biagi and Spataro, 1999-2000). The radiocarbon dates recently obtained for the
Hvar Culture site of Grapeva spilja (FORENBAHER and KAISER, 2000) show that this latter culture is to be
ascribed to the first half of the sixth millennium BP.
The geology of the site is very similar to that of the Ravni Kotari region, in the Province of Zadar, located
75 km to the south. It is characterised by limestone, dolomitic limestone, and some narrow lenses of fossilife-
rous (Foraminifera) limestone (Drni, K 33-139 Osnovna Geoloka Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
8.2. ANALYSES
Three different fabrics have been identified for the twenty-five potsherds analysed from the Danilo phase
of the site of Danilo Bitinj (figs. 57-59; table 10, Appendix 3).
G1 - (11 samples: DB 1, 3, 6, 8, 13, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24) (fig. 60a)
Dark brown, iron-rich, slightly calcareous matrix characterised by poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (up to 15%; size
range between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some muscovite mica (about 2%), opaques and iron oxides (3%), rounded fragmen-
ts of polycrystalline limestone (3%; typical size 0.5 by 0.2 mm). The temper is composed of crushed sparry calcite (<30%; size range
sub. a (3 samples: DB 2, 9, 18)
Light brown calcareous matrix richer in well-sorted angular and subangular quartz than that of G1 (20%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02
mm), opaques and iron oxides (<5%), clay pellets, rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (5%; typical size 0.5 by 0.4 mm),
and abundant added crushed calcite (>25%; size range between 1.0 by 0.5 and 0.5 by 0.3 mm);
sub. b (1 sample: DB 22) (fig. 60b)
Dark brown, iron-rich, micritic matrix similar to that of G1, containing fine, well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (20%; typical
size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), added crushed calcite (30%; same size range as G1), and one fragment of fossiliferous limestone (size: 4.0 by
1.2 mm).
G2 - (4 samples: DB 4, 5, 7, 12) (fig. 60c)
Brown-reddish, very iron-rich matrix characterised by iron oxides, well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (15%; typical size 0.04
by 0.02 mm), muscovite mica (about 1%), rare pyroxene, rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2
mm), and abundant added crushed calcite (<30%; typical size 0.5 by 0.25 mm).
G3 - figulina pottery (total 6 samples)
3a) fine figulina (3 samples: DB 10, 15, 16) (fig. 60d)
Reddish, very fine, very slightly micritic and vitrified matrix, very well-sorted and fine angular and subangular quartz (<5%; typical
size 0.02 by 0.01 mm), fine muscovite mica (up to 3%), iron oxides (<7%), very rare pyroxene, and one crystal of feldspar in DB 10;
3b) medium figulina (2 samples: DB 14, 25) (fig. 60e)
Red-brownish, calcareous matrix characterised by fine rounded fragments of limestone (<15%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), poor-
ly-sorted abundant angular and subangular quartz (15%; range size between 0.06 by 0.03 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rich in muscovite
mica (>5%), iron oxides (7%), rare polycrystalline quartz, and pyroxene. Sample DB 14 shows one microfossil (fig. 60f);
3c) coarse figulina (1 sample: DB 11) (fig. 60g)
Brown calcareous matrix characterised by very abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (20%; typical size 0.05 by
0.04 mm), well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<25%; typical size 0.05 by 0.04 mm), muscovite mica (5%), iron oxides, rare
feldspar, pyroxene, and one single fragment of calcite.
One soil sample collected in the proximity of the site (0.5 km) has been studied in thin section (figs. 49 and 60h). It is a Beta B
clay (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). It shows a dark red, very iron-rich, non-calcareous fabric characterised by angular and
subangular quartz (20%; size range between 0.08 by 0.05 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), abundant weathered limestone (20%; size range
between 3.0 by 2.0 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), abundant iron oxides (>5%), very pure red clay, and rare muscovite.
Group 1 has a dark brown, iron-rich, micritic fabric with quartz, fragments of polycrystalline limestone,
some muscovite, opaques, iron oxides, and added crushed calcite. The fabric of G1 sub. a is more micritic,
richer in quartz, iron oxides and polycrystalline limestone than that of G1. The fabric of G1 sub. b is similar to
that of G1. It contains finer and more abundant angular and subangular quartz and some fossiliferous limesto-
ne. Group 2 shows a brown reddish, non-micritic, iron-rich fabric with quartz, muscovite, pyroxene, and a
high percentage of added calcite. The third group (G3) is that of the figulina pottery. Three different fabrics

117
Fig. 57 - Danilo Bitinj: potsherds from the Danilo Culture settlement.
118

119
120
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 60 - Danilo Bitinj: Photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) DB 1, b) DB 22, c) DB 4, d) DB 15, e) DB 25, f) DB 14, g) DB 11, h) soil sample
(XPL, X40) with the exception of DB 14 (XPL, X100) (photographs by M. Spataro).

121
have been identified within this ceramic group: a) fine, b) medium, and c) coarse. The fine figulina (G3a)
shows a reddish, slightly micritic, very silty, vitrified and iron-rich matrix with very sparse detrital fraction,
composed of very fine quartz and muscovite mica, iron oxides, and one small piece of feldspar. The medium
figulina (G3b) has a brown, very calcareous matrix with abundant and coarser quartz, muscovite, and iron
oxides. One of the samples shows one microfossil (DB14). The coarse variety G3c (DB 11) has a very calca-
reous matrix very similar to that of G3b, although it is richer in inclusions. It has a higher percentage of quartz
and small fragments of polycrystalline limestone.
The soil sample analysed in thin section shows some similarities with the fabric of G2 (iron-rich and non-
calcareous), although it is richer in iron and limestone fragments.
The results of the SEM-EDS analysis of the ordinary Danilo Bitinj pottery, groups 1 and 2, are very
homogeneous (table 10, Appendix 4). G1 shows some fluctuations in the percentages of silica (26.40-46.20%;
most probably due to the presence of quartz) and aluminia (19.20-24.60%), and a high quantity of calcium
oxide. G1 sub. a and b yielded almost identical results. The main difference between G1 sub. b and G1
consists in the presence of fossiliferous limestone. The results obtained from G2 are similar to those of G1.
This is interesting because the main difference observed in thin section is that of the matrix (micritic in G1 and
non-micritic in G2; the calcium oxide in both groups is due to calcite). In contrast, G3 yielded very different
data.
The fine figulina (G3a) contains a very high amount of magnesia (4.70%), silica (47.25%), potash (3.60%),
and iron oxide (10.28%), whereas the calcium oxide is rather low (13.73%). The percentage of magnesia of
the medium figulina pottery (G3b) is higher (2.54-2.72%) than that of the ordinary pottery, although lower
than that of G3a. The percentage of silica (45.80-47.20%), potash (3.36-3.66%) and iron oxide (8.30-9.00%)
is high, whereas the content of calcium oxide is rather low (11.30-12.18%). The coarse figulina (G3c) has the
highest content of silica (51.75%), a high percentage of potash (3.33%), and iron oxide (8.93%), a quantity of
magnesia (1.55%) and calcium oxide (7.20%) lower than that of the fine and medium figulina. The high
percentage of CaO in G3a might be due to secondary calcite, due to post-depositional factors, noted in thin
section.
To conclude, the SEM-EDS analyses clearly show that two very different sources were exploited for the
manufacture of the Danilo Bitinj ceramic assemblage. The clay exploited for the production of the figulina ware
is richer in magnesia, silica, potash, and iron oxide. Its content of calcium oxide is lower than that employed in
the ordinary pottery. The clays used for G3a, b and c show some differences, mainly in the contents of magnesia
and iron oxide whose percentages are higher than those of the fine figulina. It is very interesting to note that the
percentages of both potash and silica are rather similar (mainly between G3 a and b).
The fine figulina from Danilo Bitinj shows results very similar to those of the fine figulina from Smili
(Danilo and Hvar phases) (tables 6, 7, and 10, Appendix 4). This might indicate that they come from common
sources (Chapter 5, 4.1.; 7.).
8.2.3. XRD analyses
Two soil samples have been collected and analysed by XRD. The pattern of the first sample (Danilo.1:
fig. 61, top) is characterised by kaolinite, muscovite mica, quartz, chlorite, and calcite. The second sample
(Danilo.2: fig. 61, centre) shows kaolinite, muscovite mica, chlorite, calcite, quartz, hematite and chlorapatite.
Four potsherds analysed in thin section have also been studied by XRD. Two of these belong to the
ordinary pottery (DB 1, 13), the other two to the figulina ware (DB 10, 14). The patterns of the soil samples
and of the ordinary pottery (DB 1: fig. 62, top; DB 13: fig. 61, bottom) have kaolinitic matrices (Chapter 2,
6.1.: in this case kaolinite does not occur with chlorite; therefore this pattern cannot be misunderstood). The
pottery (DB 1 and DB 13) shows almost the same minerals -i.e.- calcite, quartz, and hematite. Hematite is a
widely distributed mineral in many formations: all rocks are iron-bearing (FORD, 1949: 485). The patterns of
the soil also show some muscovite, which does not appear in the patterns of the sherds. Nevertheless, it is
represented in their fabric, as demonstrated by the thin section analyses. The chlorite present in the soil (Da-
nilo.1) is a common mineral closely related to the micas. Samples DB 1 (G1: fig. 62, top) and DB 13 (G1: fig.
61, bottom) also show the presence of anatase. The patterns of the fine and medium figulina wares (DB 10,
G3a and DB 14, G3b: figs. 62, centre and 62, bottom) are similar. Both show orthoclase, quartz, and musco-
122
vite. Orthoclase is a common silicate found in plutonic and igneous rocks, gneiss, and syenite. It also recurs in
coarser sedimentary rocks, such as conglomerates and sandstones (FORD, 1949: 485). The medium figulina
has some calcite (this is also very clear from the thin section analysis), whereas the fine one, whose carbonates
have been completely burnt out, shows some albite. Albite does occur in many igneous rocks, even though it
can be also found disseminated in granular limestone in very low concentrations.
To conclude, the XRD analyses indicate two distinct groups of pottery characterised by similar minerals
(DB 1 and DB 13 on one side, and DB 10 and DB 14 on the other). The patterns of the soil samples and those
of the ordinary pottery of the microscopic group 1 show strong similarities. This is also confirmed by the
results of the thin section analysis.
An interesting point arises from the figulina wares patterns. They are very similar to each other, sugge-
sting a possible common source or that they derive from a similar pedological area. The only difference is the
presence of albite, a mineral that occurs in limestone formations in very low concentrations. In this case, the
SEM-EDS analyses have been more helpful in defining the differences in the clay of these two groups.
8.3. DISCUSSION
Group 1 comes from a calcareous clay source with abundant quartz and some mica muscovite. The matrix
of group 2 is non-micritic; it is more silty and iron-rich than G1. It comes from a different source, richer in iron
oxides. It is probably located in a very similar pedological area as attested by the presence of the same mine-
rals. G3b and c most probably come from different (or from the same?) depositional layers of the same source.
Their fabrics show strong similarities, they are characterised by the same calcareous matrix with variable
percentages of identical inclusions. The differences observed in their fabrics might derive from a longer pe-
riod of decantation. It is very difficult to define a source of provenance for the potsherds of group 3a because
they contain very few but common minerals (quartz, iron oxides, and mica). Their fabrics are absolutely
different from those of all the others samples so far analysed from this site: they are finer, more silty, vitrified,
slightly micritic and the inclusions are very rare and fine.
8.4. CONCLUSIONS
The production technology of the ordinary pottery of both groups 1 and 2 is similar. They show a temper
including added crushed sparry calcite. The firing temperature is always lower than 750 C. This is demon-
strated by the presence of intact single minerals of calcite. On the other hand, the presence of kaolinite sugge-
sts a short firing. Therefore some areas of the pots did not fire at a temperature higher than 500-600 C
(Chapter 2, 6.1.). From a technological point of view, interesting similarities can be extended to the Danilo
phase pottery of Smili. The temper and the firing temperatures are the same in both cases (Chapter 6, 2.;
4.2.).
The minerals that characterise the inclusions of the Danilo Bitinj vessels are identical to those included in
the soil samples. In particular, the fossils of sample DB 22 (G1 sub. b) belong to Foraminifera that are com-
mon to the limestone deposits of the territory surrounding the site and the Dalmatian coast. On the basis of
these data it is possible to suggest that these vessels were produced locally.
Another point is that of the figulina pottery. It is very difficult to define the provenance of the raw material
of the fine figulina ware. The minerals represented in its matrix are very few and common. The matrix itself is
very fine, silty and vitrified, rich in iron oxides, and muscovite mica. It also shows a low percentage of quartz.
The figulina pottery of groups 3b and 3c, is much richer in detrital fraction (presence of a very high percentage
of minerals), than group 3a. The minerals are those observed in the potsherds of group 3a, although their size
range is larger. Another characteristic is the very calcareous matrix that is totally different from that of the
finest variety. Even though the XRD patterns show strong similarities between the two figulina groups (G3a
and b), the thin sections of these vessels show a noticeable difference. The fine figulina, in contrast with the
medium one, is much richer in iron oxides, poorer in carbonates, and with very rare inclusions. According to
the results of the XRD, G3a and b can be grouped together because the minerals of both samples are identical
(they show the same kind of silicate, orthoclase). According to the SEM-EDS results, the clay of G3a, is
different from G3b because it contains higher percentages of magnesia and iron oxide and lower aluminia.
The manufacturing phases of the figulina ceramics are different from those of the ordinary pottery. A
longer process must have been used to decant the clay, and leaving the clay for at least 1-2 weeks (levigation).
This process is necessary to obtain finer clay from which the coarse fraction has been eliminated. The fine

123
Fig. 61 - Danilo Bitinj: XRD pattern of soil sample 1 (top) and 2 (centre), and potsherd DB 1 (bottom)
124
Fig. 62 - Danilo Bitinj: XRD pattern of potsherds DB 13 ((top), DB 10 (centre) and DB 14 (bottom).

125
figulina was highly fired at a temperature of some 850 C, as shown by the vitrified fabric. It is reasonable to
think that it has been fired in a kiln (therefore the potter could control the temperature) for 1-2 hours, because
almost all the carbonates have been burnt off (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001) (Chapter 5, 7.).
The inhabitants of the Middle Neolithic site of Danilo Bitinj exploited very similar clay sources for the
manufacture of stylistically and typologically different vessels. There is no firm evidence that indicates the
exploitation of one particular source for the production of a specific typological class of ceramic. No correla-
tion can be made between fabric and typology in this Danilo phase. The clay sources exploited are only two.
Groups 1 and 2 include very different Danilo Culture shapes and decorations among which are dishes, large
open bowls, sometimes carinated, cylindrical pedestals and oval-shaped deep, vessels. Some of the fine ware
potsherds are decorated with scratched geometric motifs, while the coarse shapes bear linear incised patterns
descending from the rim.
Clear relationships between fabric and typology do exist in the figulina pottery. It is interesting to note
that the finer figulina ware of group 3a is characterised by a more refined and sophisticated typology and
morphology. The more typical shapes are hemispherical bowls and flasks with very thin walls (0.3-0.4 mm
thick). Jugs with 1 cm thick walls, mainly represent the microscopic fabrics of G3b and c that group the coarse
figulina together. They are thicker than those of the fine figulina pottery. Another important point is that, from
typological/stylistic, microscopic and SEM-EDS points of view, the figulina potsherds analysed from the
Danilo and Hvar phases of the Neolithic site of Smili are extremely similar to the fine figulina ware of
Danilo Bitinj (Chapter 3, 5.5.). They also show the same types of correlations between fine and coarse ware
groups (Chapter 5, 4.1.).
9. VELA [PILJA (Korula Island)
The cave of Vela pilja (The Great Cave) opens at an altitude of some 130 m above the Bay of Kala, on the
Island of Korula. The area where the cave is located is called Pinski Point (figs. 63 and 64). Its entrance is 10
m wide and faces south-west (EUK, 1985). N. Ostoji was the first to mention the cave in 1853, and M.
Sgjivoje initiated unsystematic excavations in 1950. One year later, G. Novak opened several trial trenches
from which Neolithic monochrome and painted wares were recovered. This pottery showed clear parallels
with the ceramics from Grapeva spilja on the Island of Hvar, which had been attributed to the Hvar Culture.
Systematic excavations were initiated in 1974 under the direction of G. Novak and, after his death in 1978, of
B. EUK.
The first occupation layers
From an archaeological point of view, the cave is extremely important. It was inhabited, at least since the
end of the Late Palaeolithic (EUK and RADI, 2000a). The discovery of an Epigravettian assemblage in the
lowermost levels of the sequence is of great interest. According to the excavators the chipped stone assemblage
from this layer is characterised by short and circular end scrapers, backed blades and microlithic geometrics.
The cave was occupied also during the Mesolithic period, most probably during the Pre-boreal or Boreal
climatic phases, as well as by the beginning of the Neolithic. This latter phase is documented by Cardium
Impressed Ware potsherds also with recurrent rocker decoration (EUK, 1987; EUK and RADI, 2000;
2000a; 2001).
The Neolithic sequence, some 3 m thick, has yielded occupation layers belonging to the three main
Neolithic cultural phases known along the Dalmatian coast, that is to the Impressed Ware, Danilo, and Hvar
Cultures. The uppermost deposits have been attributed to the Chalcolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages. Later, Hi-
storical occupations are attested by the recovery of Greek, Roman and Byzantine ceramics.
The Impressed Ware horizon was first recognised during the 1986 and 1987 excavations (EUK, 1987),
which carried out in the north-eastern and central part of the cave, after removing the Bronze Age and Chalco-
lithic (Ljubljana Culture) layers. The material culture assemblage is composed of Cardium, instrumental and
fingernail decorated potsherds, bone and flint artefacts and two small polished greenstone, pierced axes, most
probably employed as pendants or amulets.
126
Fig. 63 - Vela pilja: location of the cave (dot) and soil sample (square).
Fig. 64 - Vela pilja: cave entrance (photograph by M. Spataro).

127
In the same area, below the Impressed Ware occupation, was found one layer, some 80 cm thick, rich in
animal bones, land snails and marine shells, containing just a few flint artefacts. At the base of this layer, 20
cm above the bedrock, 2 skeletons were discovered. They lay in a crouched position and belonged to very
young individuals some 2-4 years old. They were surrounded by stones and cobbles, which indicate the pre-
sence of an intentional grave. This layer is most probably to be attributed to the Mesolithic.
The Hvar Culture
The Hvar Culture layer is the richest Neolithic horizon so far discovered in the cave. The importance of this
ceramic assemblage is mainly due to the peculiarity of some of the painted potsherds which were recovered.
According to EUK (1977) a small number of potsherds, decorated with red painted lines, which have never
been found before at any Hvar site of the Dalmatian archipelago, show strong similarities with some ceramics
from southern Italy, Albania and Ionian Greece. Following EUK (1987), the Hvar Culture painted pottery from
this site shows a quantity of new decorative elements that might indicate a local new variant of this culture.
Two skeletons were discovered during the 1985 excavations. They were lying on their left side, in a
crouched position. Their arms and legs were contracted and the heads bent and placed on a stone base. One of
the individuals had a typical Hvar Culture vessel positioned as a grave good. Fragments of Hvar Culture black
polished pottery were found close to the bones of the other skeleton and several marine shells were collected
close to its skull. The discovery of intact Neolithic Hvar Culture graves is unique for the Dalmatian islands.
Human remains of this period had already been recorded from Grapeva spilja (NOVAK, 1955), Smili (BATO-
VI, 1966), and Lisiii (BENAC, 1954; 1955), although the human remains from these sites have always been
found isolated and scattered throughout the archaeological layers.
Apart from the ceramic assemblage, the Hvar Culture sequence yielded numerous flints, polished stone
and bone artefacts (awls, points, pins) and several lower and upper querns of various shape and size. Two
reports have recently been published on the fauna from this cave.
The first regards the mammal and shellfish remains (BAKI, 2001), the second the bird bones (MALEZ,
2001). This latter stresses the importance of the avifauna for the understanding of the environmental varia-
tions that took place in the area during the periods when the cave was inhabited. Regarding the mammal
bones, the assemblage is represented by both domestic (sheep/goat, cattle, ass) and wild animals (red deer,
wild horse, boar). Of particular importance are also the large fish and marine mammal bones (dolphin, tuna,
sea bream), and the marine shellfish (oyster and Mytilus), some of which show circular or squared perfora-
tions. Even though no radiocarbon date is yet available from this cave a new series of dates from the neighbou-
ring cave of Grapeva would suggest that the Hvar horizon is to be attributed to the (entire) sixth millennium
BP. The dates obtained from this latter cave fall between 600080 BP (Beta-103487) and 546060 BP (Beta-
103482) (FORENBAHER and KAISER, 2000).
The geology of the area surrounding the cave of Vela pilja is characterised by Lithothamnius limestone
and dolomite. A terra rossa outcrop is located some 2 km south of the site (Lastovo i Palagrua, K 33-146 I 57
Osnovna Geoloka Karta SFRJ, 1:100000).
9.2 ANALYSES
Forty potsherds have been analysed from the Hvar Culture layer of the cave site of Vela pilja (figs.
65-68; tables 11a, b, Appendix 3 and table 4, Appendix 1), from which five different groups have been
identified.
G1 - (17 samples: VS 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 24, 26, 27, 35, 36, 39, 40) (fig. 69a)
Brown, dark-brown, iron-rich calcareous matrix characterised by angular and subangular quartz (>15%; size range between 0.06 by
0.04 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), some rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (3%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), abundant iron
oxides and opaques, rare muscovite mica (<1%), and very abundant added crushed sparry calcite (<30%; size range between 1.5 by
0.5 and 0.1 by 0.07 mm);
sub. a (6 samples: VS 3, 6, 7, 8, 19, 22) (fig. 69b)
Brown, light brown, calcareous matrix less rich in iron than that of G1, characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular quartz
(10%; same size range of G1), some opaques and iron oxides (<5%), very rare rounded fragments of limestone (<1%; typical size as
G1), and abundant added crushed calcite (up to 20%; size range between 0.8 by 0.2 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm).
128
G2 - (1 sample: VS 34) (fig. 69c)

Fine brown, slightly micritic, iron-rich matrix with well-sorted abundant angular and subangular quartz (25%; typical size 0.03 by
0.02 mm), rare muscovite mica (1%), occasional rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (typical size 0.04 by 0.03 mm), no
added inclusion and abundant iron oxides (<10%);
sub. a (1 sample: VS 18) (fig. 69d)
This matrix is very similar to that of sample VS 34 (G2) but less micritic. It shows some added sparry calcite (15%; size range
sub. b (1 sample: VS 31)
Brown iron-rich matrix similar to that of G2, more micritic, characterised by small rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone
(up to 10%; size range 0.35 by 0.3 and 0.07 by 0.05 mm), abundant poorly-sorted, angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range
between 0.08 by 0.04 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), rare muscovite mica (1%), and iron oxides (7%).
G3 - (6 samples: VS 12, 13, 23, 29, 33, 38) (fig. 69e)
Dark red very iron-rich matrix, mainly terra rossa, characterised by some fragments of rounded limestone (about 2%; typical size 0.1
by 0.08 mm), few well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (5%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm). The temper is composed of abun-
dant crushed sparry calcite (up to 30%; size range between 0.9 by 0.6 and 0.6 by 0.5 mm).
G4 - (7 samples: VS 1, 2, 25, 28, 30, 32, 37) (fig. 69f)
Reddish iron-rich matrix, slightly micritic, with well-sorted and fine quartz (10%; typical size 0.04 by 0.02 mm), some opaques, iron
oxides (5%), rare fragments of rounded polycrystalline limestone (1%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), added crushed calcite (up to 30%;
size range between 1.0 by 0.8 and 0.5 by 0.3 mm), and some elongated and rounded chunks of terra rossa soil.
G5 - (1 sample: VS 21) (fig. 69g)
Dark red very iron-rich, silty and non-micritic matrix characterised by iron oxides (>10%), poorly-sorted angular and subangular
quartz (<10%; size range between 0.08 by 0.03 and 0.12 by 0.06 mm), some rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<2%;
typical size 0.2 by 0.1 mm), clay pellets containing quartz (3%), and some fragments of grog.
One soil sample (figs. 63 and 69h) collected at the entrance of the cave has been studied in thin section. It shows a brown-
reddish, iron-rich, non-calcareous fabric with abundant, well-sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (30%; typical size 0.03 by
0.02 mm), opaques and iron oxides (3%), some limestone fragments (2%; typical size 0.06 by 0.04 mm), and rare flint and pyroxene
(1%). It is a Bt/Ct, gleyic deep Ap (colluvium) probably from a luvisol area (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001).
Group 1 is characterised by a dark brown iron-rich micritic fabric, some quartz, few fragments of rounded
limestone, rare muscovite mica, iron oxides, and abundant added crushed calcite. The fabric of group 1 sub. a
is slightly different because it has very rare fragments of polycrystalline limestone and is poorer in quartz and
iron than G1. Group 2 has a brown, slightly micritic and iron-rich fabric with well-sorted fine angular and
subangular quartz smaller and more abundant than G1, rare muscovite, high percentage of iron oxides, occa-
sional fragments of polycrystalline limestone, and no artificially added inclusions. G2 sub. a is almost identi-
cal to G2, with some added crushed calcite. The matrix of G2 sub. b is very similar to that of G2, but more
micritic. Group 3 shows a very iron-rich fabric mainly of terra rossa, fine quartz, some rounded polycrystal-
line limestone, and abundant added crushed calcite. Group 4 has a fine slightly calcareous fabric rich in iron
oxides, some quartz, added crushed calcite and elongated, rounded chunks of terra rossa soil. Group 5 is
characterised by a very silty, fine, iron-rich fabric with quartz, some clay pellets, and rounded polycrystalline
limestone pellets. It has been tempered with grog.
The soil sample shows some similarities with the fabric of G2 (VS 34), although the latter has less quartz
and iron than the soil sample, and does not contain any pyroxene or flint.
Group 1 shows a low percentage of aluminia (10.00-13.80%) and a very high percentage of calcium oxide
(with large fluctuations between 25.18 and 39.84%) (table 11, Appendix 4). The high percentage of calcium
oxide is due to the micritic matrix and the added calcite; the variations to the presence or absence (in bulk
analysis) of calcite. G1 sub. a shows percentages very similar to those of G1. Small differences can be obser-
ved in thin section but not in the SEM-EDS analyses (see thin section analysis). The data obtained from G2 are
very different from those of G1 and its subgroup. It has higher quantities of aluminia (17.80%), silica (60.20%),
potash and iron oxide, while the percentage of calcium oxide is much lower (absence of calcite). Its subgroup
(G2 sub. a) is almost identical. The only exception is the slightly higher percentage of calcium oxide, which is
most probably due to the small amount of added crushed calcite that is absent in G2. The percentage of silica

129
Fig. 65 - Vela pilja: pottery from the Hvar Culture layers.
130

131
132
Fig 68 - Vela pilja: pottery from the Havr Culture layers.

133
Fig. 69 - Vela pilja: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) VS 14, b) VS 7, c) VS 34, d) VS 18, e) VS 29, f) VS 32, g) VS 21, h) soil sample
(XPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
134
in G3 is lower than that of G1 and G2, mainly because of the smaller quantity of quartz in the fabrics. The
quantity of calcium oxide is similar to that of G1, while iron oxide is slightly more abundant. According to
both the SEM-EDS and the thin section results, G4 is rather similar to G3. The difference consists in the
elongated, rounded chunks of terra rossa (see Chapter 3, 9.2.1.) and in a slightly higher concentration of
magnesia and lower percentages of aluminia and titania in G4. Group 5 shows results very different from
those of the preceding ones, because of the highest percentages of aluminia (25.60%) and iron oxide (11.38%)
and the very low quantity of calcium oxide (5.06%). According to the above-mentioned results, compositional
differences can be noted among the microscopic groups; in particular, those of G2 and G5 are very different
from those of the other groups as also observed through thin section analysis.
9.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 1 sub. a come from very similar sources. The fabric of G1 is more iron-rich and contains
more quartz than that of G1 sub. a. These sources might be located close to each other because of the simila-
rities observed in the fabrics. Group 2 derives from a more different source (as also testified by the SEM-EDS
results). Its fabric is much less micritic than G1. It is more silty and richer in well-sorted quartz than the
preceding group. The clay source exploited for the manufacture of group 3 is absolutely different from those
of groups 1 and 2. It is non-micritic, mainly composed of terra rossa, and very rich in iron. This clay must
have been very plastic, needing a high quantity of temper, represented by the high percentage of added cru-
shed calcite. The source exploited for the production of the ceramics of group 4 is silty, slightly micritic, with
some terra rossa soil. Finally, group 5 is characterised by a different clay source, much more silty, finer and
better-sorted than those of the preceding groups (it also shows the highest percentages of aluminia and iron
oxide: see SEM-EDS results). It contains some polycrystalline limestone and also grog.
All the above-mentioned sources clearly derive from sedimentary deposits, as shown by the abundance of
rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone and calcite.
9.4. CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the potsherds analyses, the inhabitants of Vela pilja, exploited at least five relatively
different sources for the production of their vessels during the Hvar habitation phase. The first source, for the
manufacture of most of the ceramics of groups 1 and 1 sub. a, is very micritic. The sources utilised for groups
2 and 5 are different from each other. G2 is slightly micritic with more abundant quartz, whereas G5 is non-
calcareous, more silty and richer in iron than G2. Nevertheless, they are both very silty and less micritic than
those employed for the ceramics of the preceding two groups (with the exception of sample VS 31, G2 sub. b).
The source of group 3 is very rich in iron and composed of terra rossa, while that exploited for G4 must have
been located close to a terra rossa outcrop (there are few chunks of terra rossa). Group 5 is characterised by
a matrix siltier than the preceding ones. As mentioned above, a terra rossa outcrop is located close to the site.
The iron-rich matrices such as those of groups 3 and 5 are very common to the karstic areas.
The data obtained from the geological map of the Korula Island are in accordance with a local provenan-
ce of the pottery of the Hvar phase of Vela pilja. The area is characterised by limestone, micritic soil, and
terra rossa. Most of the pottery (groups 1, 2, 3 and 4) has been manufactured with these materials. Furthermo-
re, there is a strong similarity between the fabrics of G2 and the soil sample.
It is important to point out a few technological observations made on the pottery from Vela pilja. The
firing temperature was never higher than 750 C. This is demonstrated by the presence of well-preserved
sparry calcite. This temperature is rather low; it is the same firing temperature employed in pottery manufac-
ture by the Early Neolithic inhabitants of the Dalmatian coast already some 1000 years before.
Another technological aspect is the addition of temper. Most vessels (thirty-eight out of forty) show
artificially added inclusions (in groups 1, 1 sub. a, 2 sub. a, 3, 4 and 5). Only two samples do not show any
added inclusion (in groups 2 and 2 sub. b). The temper employed consists of sparry and banded calcite with
the exception of sample VS 21 which contains grog. The banded calcite was probably collected from cave
stalactites or stalagmites (e.g. samples VS 3 and VS 7 show different types of calcite).
Most of the Middle (Danilo Bitinj and Smili, Danilo phase) and Late Middle Neolithic (Smili, Hvar
phase) pottery of the Dalmatian coast shows artificially added inclusions. This contrasts with that of the Early
Neolithic sites where it was not that common (e.g. Viula, Smili Impressed Ware phase, Tinj and Jami na
Sredi) (Chapter 6, 4.1.). The production of the Hvar phase Vela pilja ceramic is characterised by the same

135
technology already observed for the production of the Hvar phase pottery at Smili. A calcareous matrix is
common to both sites. Furthermore, crushed calcite has been added as temper in most cases (Chapter 6, 4.3.).
The microscopic group 1 is not associated with any particular typological form. Group 1 sub. a includes
some restrict-mouthed (VS 3, 6, 14, 19) and other vessels decorated with horizontal incised lines. Unfortuna-
tely, nothing can be said of the small fragment of group 2. Group 2 sub. a is a sherd of restrict-mouthed vessel,
very similar to samples VS 3, 6 and 19 (G1). Sample VS 31 (G2 sub. b) is a sherd with buff surfaces. No
typological or stylistic similarities can be pointed out for group 3. VS 38 belongs to the same typological class
of the restrict-mouthed vessels VS 3, 6, and 19 of G1 and VS18 of G2 sub. a. Group 4 includes two different
typological classes, both belonging to the typical Hvar Culture fine ware. The first is characterised by grooved
decorations (VS 1, 2, 25), the second by black, burnished, fine wares (VS 28, 30, 32, 37).
Although its fabric is different, group 5 (VS 21) can be distinguished from the rest of the ceramic assem-
blage also from a typological point of view. It is a unique piece, most probably a flask fragment, with concave
instead of convex walls. Its interior surface shows traces of red paint. It does not show the presence of mine-
rals of allochtonous origin (see Chapter 3, 9.2.).
No parallels can be traced between the groups defined according to the typological/stylistic characters of
the vessels and those subdivided on the basis of the microscopic analysis. Shapes belonging to the same
typological category (see for example the restrict-mouthed vessels VS 3, 6, 14, 18, 19) have been attributed to
different microscopic groups.
In general, the same fabric is found in different typologies/styles, while identical styles occur in different
fabrics. For instance, the small bowl VS 24, that does not find any typological parallel within the rest of the
assemblage, is microscopically identical to other typologically diverse vessels. Also those ceramics that can
be attributed to the same typological class of production, as, for instance, the fine, black burnished wares (see
VS 14, 17, 25, 26, 27, 30, 33, 37 and 40), show dissimilar matrix and temper.
136

137
CHAPTER 4
THE ITALIAN SITES: ANALYSES AND RESULTS
1. FORNACE CAPPUCCINI (Faenza)
The prehistoric site of Fornace Cappuccini is known since 1941. It is located inside the modern town of
Faenza, on the left terrace of the Lamone River along the northern fringe of the Romagna Apennines (fig. 70).
The site was first rescue excavated in 1978 because of the urban expansion of the town. During this first
season several features were brought to light (ANTONIAZZI et al., 1985), among which an oval-shaped deep
ditch that might have delimited a Copper Age village. This ditch had been filled with deposits containing
material culture remains of different ages, from the Early Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age (GIUSBERTI, 1990;
MORICO, 1998).
The excavations were resumed in 1990 (BERMOND MONTANARI et al., 1991). During this season a few other
features were discovered, one of which belonging to the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware settlement. One pit
was found some 70 cm below a layer disturbed by deep ploughing. It consisted of two adjacent oval-shaped
structures with almost vertical edges, one of which was 95 cm deep. It contained potsherds, a rich flint assem-
blage and a few charcoal pieces. The faunal remains, in a very bad state of preservation, were extremely rare.
The charcoals from three of the structures so far excavated have been radiocarbon dated to 632060 BP
(Bln-3372), 628080 BP (R-2314) and 6100170 BP (R-2313) (BERMOND MONTANARI, 2000). These results
indicate that the Impressed Ware site flourished during the last three centuries of the seventh millennium BP.
The Early Neolithic Impressed Ware pottery
Three ceramic classes characterise the Impressed Ware Culture pottery: coarse, semi-fine, and fine. This
subdivision is based on the thickness of the vessel walls and on empirical observations of the surfaces and
inclusions (BERMOND MONTANARI et al., 1991; 1998).
The most typical forms include deep conical pots with opposite oval-shaped lugs, decorated with instru-
mental, stab and drag, and fingernail impressions all-over the body. Other decorations on the same vessels are
represented by incised, linear horizontal, and oblique motifs.
Other ceramic shapes include hemispherical bowls, which are sometimes undecorated. Some of these
vessels have two small handles. Horizontal, wide strap handles are also known, while necked flasks and
carinated bowls are more rare (ANTONIAZZI et al., 1985; BERMOND MONTANARI et al., 1991).
The Early Neolithic flint assemblage
A very rich flint assemblage comes from the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware structures. It was mainly
obtained from local, very good quality Marche flint. Obsidian is also well represented. One of the structures
produced a very high number of Liparian obsidian (AMMERMAN and POLGLASE, 1998), which represents 10% of
the total chipped stone assemblage.
The flint industry, with a high blade index, is characterised by the abundance of bladelet burins (both
simple and on truncation). Burin spalls are also present. Typical are also end scrapers with abrupt front. Other
tools, always on bladelet, are represented by straight perforators, geometrical trapezes obtained with the mi-
croburin technique, bladelets with abrupt, sinuous retouch and sickle blades with oblique sickle gloss. Most
cores are of bladelet subconical type. Many of these have been highly exploited.
Among the other finds are a few adzes polished from metamorphic rock and jadeite. The site gave almost
no faunal remains because of the characteristics of the clayey soil that has destroyed most of the bones.
Considerations
Fornace Cappuccini is a typical late Impressed Ware site of the Romagna coastline. Other sites of this age
are known around Rimini, at Misano Adriatico, and Imola. They belong to the more recent stream of the
Italian, Adriatic Impressed Ware that extends from the Pescaro River to the south, to Bazzarola, in Emilia to
138
Fig. 70 - Fornace Cappuccini: location of the Neolithic site. Scale in kilometres.

the north. All the above-mentioned sites are datable to the last three centuries of the seventh millennium BP
(BERMOND MONTANARI et al., 1991). They are more or less contemporary to the open-air settlement of Ripa-
bianca di Monterado in central eastern Italy.
The differences in the ceramic and chipped stone assemblages between these sites and that of Ripabianca
consist in the absence of figulina wares, the more monotonous variety of pottery forms and decoration and, as
regards the flint industry, in the absence of Ripabianca Burins.
The site is located on an alluvial terrace composed of Holocene sandy-clayey and gravely-sandy deposits.
10-12 km south-west of the site, in the vicinity of the modern village of Brisighella, the Lamone River passes
through a flysh Eocene deposit. This latter includes lenses of conglomerate with granites, radiolarite limesto-
ne, flints as well as Miocene sandstones, quartz and feldspar siltstones (Foglio 99 della Carta Geologica
dItalia, Faenza, 1:100000).
1.2. ANALYSES
Three fabrics have been identified for ten potsherds analysed from Fornace Cappuccini (fig. 71; table 12,
Appendix 3).

139
Fig. 71 - Fornace Cappuccini: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.
140
a)
c)
b)
d)
Fig. 72 - Fornace Cappuccini: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) FC 3, b) FC 9, c) FC 4, d) FC 10 (XPL, X40) (photographs by M.
Spataro).
G1 - (2 samples: FC 1, 3) (fig. 72a)
Brown-reddish, very iron-rich matrix characterised by a high percentage of coarse angular and subangular (mainly angular) quartz
(30%; size range between 1.25 by 0.87 and 0.1 by 0.07 mm), abundant polycrystalline quartz (5%), subangular and angular flint (5%;
typical size 0.4 by 0.3 mm), muscovite mica (3%), opaques and iron oxides (5%), rare feldspar (1%), very rare radiolarian chert, some
subangular fragments of granite (2%; typical size 1.5 by 1.0 mm), and subrounded/rounded fragments of siltstone (1%; size range
between 3.0 by 2.0 and 0.6 by 0.4);
sub. a (1 sample: FC 2)
Dark brown-reddish, iron-rich matrix very similar to that of G1, with a higher percentage of quartz (35%);
sub. b (3 samples: FC 6, 7, 9) (fig. 72b)
Dark brown-reddish, very iron-rich matrix with very well-sorted coarse, mainly angular quartz (<50%; size range between 0.5 by 0.3
and 0.15 by 0.08 mm), occasional fragments of angular flint (3%), polycrystalline quartz (<3%), pyroxene (>3%), some feldspar
(2%), some muscovite mica (2%), very rare radiolarian chert, opaques and iron oxides (3%), and one fragment of granite rock.
G2 - (2 samples: FC 4, 5) (fig. 72c)
Dark reddish, very iron-rich matrix with poorly-sorted, abundant, mainly subangular quartz (<30%; size range between 0.42 by 0.3
and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), some polycrystalline quartz (3%), feldspar (2%), pyroxene (2%), muscovite mica (3%), rare biotite, some
subangular and angular fragments of flint (2%; typical size 2.3 by 2.0 mm), iron oxides (7%), few subrounded and rounded fragments
of granitic rock and subrounded fragments of siltstone (typical size 2.1 by 1.7 mm) (as in G1);
sub. a (1 sample: FC 8)
Dark yellow-brownish matrix, with a high percentage of very well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (35%; size range between
0.1 by 0.05 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), muscovite mica (<5%), and rare pyroxene (<1%). It does not contain any flint inclusion.
G3 - (1 sample: FC 10) (fig. 72d)
Dark brown-reddish matrix with poorly-sorted and very abundant poorly-sorted quartz (>40%; size range between 0.7 by 0.5 and
0.04 by 0.02 mm), some polycrystalline limestone (2%), flint (2%), muscovite mica (3%), feldspar (2%), and rare pyroxene (1%).
Group 1 shows an iron-rich fabric with abundant and coarse quartz, polycrystalline quartz, flint, musco-

141
vite mica, opaques, and some granite rock fragments. Sand rich in quartz and granitic fragments have most
probably been added (the distribution is bimodal and the inclusions show very sharp and angular edges).
Sample FC 1 (G1) shows very old, slightly metamorphous rock fragments that derive from low-grade meta-
morphic sediments. This group includes some siltstones, granitic rocks and some metamorphic rocks (I. FRE-
ESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). G1 sub. a has the same iron-rich fabric, with a percentage of quartz higher than
that of G1. The fabric of G1 sub. b is similar to that of G1, with a lower percentage of flint and more abundant
added sand. The sandy quartz is characterised by a very well-sorted distribution. It contains polycrystalline
quartz, pyroxene, feldspar, and rare muscovite. There is only one granite rock fragment. The fabric of group 2
is similar to that of G1, although it is slightly more iron-rich and the percentage of flint is lower. It has been
tempered with granitic sand. Compared to that of G1, this sand shows higher percentages of pyroxene, feld-
spar, and rock fragments. The fabric of G2 sub. a is finer than that of G2. It is dark yellow-brownish with very
abundant, probably added, small-sized and very well-sorted quartz, a great quantity of muscovite and no flint
inclusion. The fabric of group 3 is characterised by very abundant, poorly-sorted quartz, some flint, mica,
pyroxene, and feldspar. It is more iron-rich than those of groups 1 and 2. Its inclusions are finer and more
rounded.
The most evident results of the SEM-EDS analysis consist in the very high quantity of silica (up to
73.60%) and the low percentage of calcium oxide (1.04-2.12%) (table 12, Appendix 4).
Among the groups, subdivided on a microscopic basis, G1 and its subgroups show a percentage of silica
higher than that of groups 2 and 3. G1 sub. a is more iron-rich and contains less magnesia and silica and more
aluminia and calcium oxide than G1. G1 sub. b has slightly more silica (due to the abundance of quartz) and
soda, lower quantities of iron and titania (than G1). G2 shows less silica (probably due to the lower percentage
of flint) and more magnesia and slightly higher iron oxide than G1 and its subgroups. G2 sub. a has produced
results similar to those of G2 with a very high percentage of phosphorus oxide that might be due to post-
depositional factors. G3 (FC 10) shows the lowest percentage of silica of the whole assemblage and the
highest of aluminia, titania, and iron oxide. To conclude, these data confirm the microscopic groups and the
strong similarities between groups and subgroups and stress the differences between G3 and the other groups,
despite a certain similarity between G3 and sample FC 4 (G2).
1.3. DISCUSSION
The fabrics of G1 and of its subgroups are very rich in iron, and contain some flint. They most probably
come from the same source. The presence of pyroxene, biotite, muscovite, feldspar, and quartz in the sand
should indicate that granitic sources were exploited for temper. Given the presence of some siltstone, granitic,
and metamorphic rocks (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001) the source might be located along the northern
fringes of the Emilian Apennine chain that are rich in metamorphic rocks. The presence of polycrystalline
quartz is to be noted among the other inclusions. The quartz is strained and the grains are irregular. All these
data suggest metamorphism. The source of group 1 might be located in a very iron-rich deposit with siltstone
and flint, while the sand employed as temper is to be sought close to a granitic deposit because of the coarse
inclusions. It is very probable that the inclusions of G1 and G2 were added. This interpretation is due to the
sharp edges and to the high percentage of very homogeneous range-sized quartz that can be noticed especially
in group 1 sub. b. The sands of groups 1 and 2 are characterised by granitic rocks with different percentages of
pyroxene, feldspar, and rock fragments. They might have been collected from two different zones of the same
basin. The fabric of G2 is more iron-rich than that of G1 although it shows the same variety of subrounded
siltstone and flint. The quartz sand is most probably added, as indicated by its bimodal distribution. It is as rich
in polycrystalline quartz, pyroxene and feldspar as that of G1: however the sand is finer. It might derive from
a similar source. Group 3 has a much darker fabric, more iron-rich than those of G1 and G2 with probably
added sand characterised by quartz, feldspar, flint, polycrystalline quartz, and rare pyroxene. The origin of the
inclusions of G3 must be located in another area. The minerals that are much smaller and rounded than those
of the other two groups show this. This probably indicates a longer transport.
1.4. CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the results of the analyses and of the characteristics of the geology of the area surroun-
142
ding the site, it is possible to conclude that the fabrics of groups 1 and 2 derive from similar sources because
they show the same mineral inclusions (polycrystalline quartz, flint except G2 sub. a, pyroxene, feldspar,
mica, granite and siltstone fragments). It is possible to suggest a local source for these groups. The material
might have been collected from the proximity of the site or from the Lamone River bed (on the basis of the
presence of subrounded rock fragments). Group 3 is slightly different. It shows flint, mica, feldspar, and
pyroxene that are also represented in groups 1 and 2, though it contains also limestone. Limestone occurs in
the conglomerates of the flysch formation some 12 km south-west of the site, along the course of the same
river (Chapter 4, 1.1.).
Group 1 is represented by only two Impressed Ware fragments. Group 1 sub. a includes one fragment
with impressed motifs. Nothing can be said of the typology and style of the samples of group 1 sub. b that are
too small and undecorated. Group 2 is characterised by Impressed Ware potsherds. Group 2 sub. a is typolo-
gically different from the sherds of the other groups. It is the rim of a flask or of a necked jar. Nothing can be
said of the plain potsherd of group 3 (FC 10).
To conclude: the Early Neolithic inhabitants of Fornace Cappuccini exploited two different sources for
the production of the IW ceramic of groups 1 and 2. On the contrary the source employed in the manufacture
of one vessel, typologically distinct from the rest of the assemblage (FC 8), is the same of the more characte-
ristics IW vessels.
Sample FC 10 (G3) shows a fabric very similar to that of the Ripabianca di Monterado sample RDM 17
(G2 sub. a). They both are rich in iron, with the same poorly-sorted inclusions of quartz, polycrystalline
quartz, flint and muscovite mica, a great quantity of feldspatic and granitic fragments. Their production style
is very similar. They both show the presence of iron minerals (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). The differen-
ces are that RDM 17 is less iron-rich (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001) and shows some radiolarian chert. They
come from a similar, but not from the same source. In fact, according to the SEM-EDS results, FC 10 shows
less silica, potash, and calcium oxide, but a higher quantity of aluminia, iron oxide and titania (table 12,
Appendix 4). From a typological point of view RDM 17 is an undecorated base fragment, while FC 10 is a
wall fragment of plain pottery.
According to the available radiocarbon dates, the Impressed Ware site of Fornace Cappuccini is more or
less contemporaneous to that of Ripabianca di Monterado in the Marche, some 150 km to the south-southeast.
Nevertheless, the pottery assemblage from this latter site is more various, since it is represented by Impressed
Wares as well as incised and plain, well burnished ceramics that strongly recall types from the late seventh
millennium BP site of Catignano near Chieti, in the Abruzzi (TOZZI, 1982).
2. MADDALENA DI MUCCIA (Macerata)
The Impressed Ware open-air site of Maddalena di Muccia (figs. 73 and 74) is located on a fluvial terrace
at the confluence of the Chienti di Pievetorina and the Chienti di Gelagna, some 400 m above sea level. It lies
at the edge of the Apennines, in the interior of the Marche region (East-Central Italy), some 50 km from the
present-day Adriatic coastline. Rolling hills are to the north and east, while to the south and the west the
country rises up to some 1000 m.
The excavations, carried out between 1962 and 1965 by D.G. LOLLINI (1965; 1991a), extended over a
surface of 6x10 m. They brought to light an Impressed Ware settlement characterised by several adjacent pits
of different size and shape and no other structures to interprete as hut foundations. All the archaeological finds
come from the pit fillings. One radiocarbon date obtained from charcoals from pit 4-6 gave the result of
658075 BP (R-643a) (ALESSIO et al., 1970: 603). This indicates that the site flourished around the middle of
the seventh millennium BP.
The coarse ware is the most characteristic and frequent pottery. It is often decorated with both digital
(finger, finger-nail, and pizzicato) and instrumental (points, dots, small circles) impressed motifs. Rare
incised patterns are also known. They consist of bands of lines unsystematically distributed all over the surfa-

143
Fig. 73 - Maddalena di Muccia: location of the Neolithic settlement (dot) and soil sample (square). Scale in kilometres.
Fig. 74 - Maddalena di Muccia: location of the Impressed Ware settlement (arrow) (photograph by P. Biagi).
144
ce of the vessel. The vessels are open or, sometimes, with restricted mouth. The only reconstructed shape
belongs to a deep, oval-shaped pot with bands of incised lines descending from the rim with an internal plain
cordon, to lean a lid (BENAC, 1971). Another, much more rare type of pottery has well-treated, burnished
surfaces. This group comprises open and carinated bowls and a few wide, strap handles (SILVESTRINI and
PIGNOCCHI, 1998).
The chipped stone assemblage is mainly composed of Marche flint, even though obsidian bladelets of
Liparian origin have been identified. The flint assemblage, with a very high laminar index, is represented by
burins on retouch, long and short end scrapers, truncations on bladelet, straight perforators and several types of
geometric tools among which are bipolar crescents, triangles and isosceles trapezes obtained with the microburin
technique that, to a certain extent, recall Castelnovian, Late Mesolithic types (BROGLIO and LOLLINI, 1963).
The polished stone industry includes one lower quern and a few axes/adzes only one of which is from
greenstone, while all the others are from limestone.
The bone assemblage is abundant. It comprises long, conical points, perforators, pins, plaquettes and a
few fish-hooks.
The subsistence economy
The faunal assemblage has been summarily synthesized by BARKER (1975). The most represented species
are pig (50%), red deer (almost 25%), caprines (15%) and cattle (8%). According to this author, the faunal
sample should imply that much of the lower ground was wooded, and that caprines made a much smaller
contribution to the diet than either pig or deer. In his opinion the Early Neolithic site, located on a middle
altitude fluvial terrace at the confluence of minor valleys descending from the surrounding hills, may have
been selected at least in part to exploit the spring and the autumn movement of the deer.
The site of Maddalena di Muccia is located on red micritic limestone with seams or nodules of red flint,
with intercalation of white subcrystalline limestone and of small nummulithic breccias of Early-Middle Eoce-
ne period. There are also some thinly stratified white or greyish micritic limestone, alternated with strata of
marl containing flint of different colour, and microfauna (Globotuncana helvetica, Plaeglobutruncana ste-
phanii turbinata, Rotalipora appenninica, Planomalina buxtorfi) of Turonian p.p.-Cenomianian age. This
geology belongs to the so-called Scaglia Rossa e Bianca formation.
A few kilometres south of the site, the geology of the region is characterised by white, compact, well-
stratified limestone with thin layers and nodules of brown to light grey flint containing rare ammonites. A
microfauna with radiolarians and Nannoconus sp. is characteristic of the micritic limestone of the lowermost
formation called Calcare Rupestre (rocky limestone) (Foglio 124 della Carta Geologica dItalia, Macerata,
1:100000).
2.2. ANALYSES
Twenty-seven potsherds have been analysed from the Neolithic Impressed Ware site of Maddalena di
Muccia (figs. 75-77; table 13, Appendix 3). Four different fabrics have been recognised.
G1 - (12 samples: MDM 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 19, 20, 21, 25, 27) (fig. 78a)
This is an homogeneous group with a very iron-rich, red dark matrix characterised by a high percentage of probably added, sharp
edged and very poorly-sorted flint (<30%; size range between 5.0 by 2.5 and 0.6 by 0.3 mm), some radiolarian chert (3%), very well-
sorted, fine angular and subangular quartz (between 10% and 15%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), very rich in iron oxides (>10%),
some feldspar (2%), pyroxene (less than 2%), some organic material, opaques and muscovite mica (3%);
sub. a (1 sample: MDM 2)
Dark red, iron-rich matrix, very similar to that of G1 with poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (15%; size range
between 0.2 by 0.1 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), poorly-sorted, sharp-edged flint (20%; size range like G1), pyroxene (3%), rare
muscovite, and some subrounded fragments of limestone (size range between 1.2 by 1.0 and 0.2 by 0.18 mm). It contains one
shell fragment.
G2 - (5 samples: MDM 4, 7, 23, 24, 26) (fig. 78b)
Very homogeneous group with well-sorted, iron-rich, very humic, dark red-brownish matrix, with very well-sorted and fine angular
and subangular quartz (<20%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), abundant muscovite mica (<5%), some organic material (vegetable and
dung), many clay pellets, rare radiolarian chert, some flint (<3%), rare feldspar (<1%), and polycrystalline quartz (<1%). The fabric
has been heavily tempered with grog filler (recycled pottery) (fig. 78c).

145
Fig. 75 - Maddalena di Muccia: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.
146

147
G3 - (3 samples: MDM 1, 13, 18) (fig. 78d)
Red and brown, iron-rich matrix, very rich in poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (>30%; size range between 0.5 by 0.3 and
0.07 by 0.05 mm), pyroxene (3%), muscovite (>3%) and biotite (2%) micas, polycrystalline quartz (2%), some flint (3%), rare
radiolarian chert, iron oxides and opaques (5%), feldspar (2%), some organic material, rounded granitic rock fragments (MDM 1)
composed of mica, quartz and feldspar;
sub. a (1 sample: MDM 17) (fig. 78e)
Dark brown matrix very similar to that of G3, with abundant smaller-sized angular and subangular quartz (40%; size range between
0.3 by 0.2 and 0.05 by 0.03 mm), some rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (5%; size range between 1.0
by 0.8 and 0.15 by 0.1 mm), muscovite (5%) and biotite (2%) micas, one small fragment of calcite, feldspar (2%), rare organic
material traces, some flint (2%), few radiolarian chert, opaques and iron oxides (3%), some subangular and subrounded fragments of
micaceous sandstone (fig. 78e) and granitic rock (2%; size range between 0.8 by 0.5 and 0.4 by 0.3 mm), and one shell fragment;
148
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)
Fig. 78 - Maddalena di Muccia: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) MDM 9, b) MDM 7, c) MDM 24, d) MDM 18, e) MDM 17, f) MDM
22, g) MDM 16, h) soil sample (XPL, X40, except c), PPL, X40) (photographs by M. Spataro).

149
sub. b (3 samples: MDM 6, 12, 22) (fig. 78f)
Matrix very similar to that of group 3, coarser, with some organic material (<5%), subangular and rounded fragments of granitic
rocks (7%; size range between 2.7 by 2.5 and 1.5 by 1.0 mm), poorly-sorted quartz (<40%; size range between 0.4 by 0.2 and 0.04 by
0.02 mm), pyroxene (<3%), flint (5%), occasional radiolarian chert, feldspar (3%), opaques and iron oxides (5%). There are some
micaceous sandstones and granitic rock fragments. The granitic rock fragments (fig. 78f) are composed of quartz, feldspar, and
muscovite and biotite micas. The biotite is very long and thick (up to 0.5 by 0.1 mm).
G4 - (2 samples: MDM 3, 16) (fig. 78g)
Brown, iron-rich, very poorly-sorted and micritic matrix, characterised by a very high percentage of poorly-sorted, mainly angular
fragments of limestone (up to 40%; size range between 2.8 by 0.7 and 0.15 by 0.1 mm), rare angular and subangular quartz (3%;
typical size 0.02 by 0.01 mm), some opaques and iron oxides (5%). Both samples include fossiliferous limestone with the same
species of fossils.
One soil sample collected some 1 km from the site has been studied in thin section (figs. 73 and 78h). It shows a very micritic
fabric, abundant limestone (>20%), angular flint (7%), radiolarian chert (<2%), some opaques and iron oxides (3%) and one shell
fragment. The soil formed out of a breccia (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). The limestone is fossiliferous.
Group 1 is characterised by a reddish, iron-rich, poorly-sorted fabric with abundant flint, fine quartz, few
radiolarian chert, feldspar, some iron oxides and opaques, rare pyroxene, and muscovite mica. The flint was
probably added to the clay because of its bimodal distribution and its very sharp edges. It must be pointed out
that the thin section of a soil sample collected next to the site shows the same type of angular (fig. 78h),
coarser flint grains in much lower percentage than those of G1 (see also Chapter 4, 3.4.). Group 1 sub. a has a
fabric very similar to that of G1. It also contains some naturally present limestone inclusions of rounded and
subrounded shape. Group 2 shows an iron-rich matrix similar to that of G1, although it contains very fine,
well-sorted angular and subangular quartz, more abundant than in group 1, and more humic soil. Its fabric is
composed of abundant muscovite, some flint, rare feldspar, clay pellets, radiolarian chert, some organic mate-
rial and dung indicated by visible voids with black burnt organic material. Contrary to that of group 1, it
contains a very small percentage of flint; it has been heavily tempered with grog. Grog fragments, with very
angular edges, are very common. They do not represent a natural soil inclusion (I. FREESTONE and R. MACPHAIL,
pers. comm. 2001). Some natural, very rounded clay pellets are also present. It is also possible to see a coil
boundary in a sample (MDM 23) (WOODS, 1989: 197). Group 3 is very different from the preceding ones. It
has an iron-rich fabric characterised by very abundant and poorly-sorted quartz, some flint (of much smaller
size than that of groups 1 and 2), rare radiolarian chert, some feldspar, pyroxene, muscovite and biotite micas,
characterised by the same rock inclusions. It has been subdivided into two subgroups: G3 sub. a with finer
quartz and one shell fragment, and G3 sub. b with a coarser fabric, rich in granitic rock fragments, with rare
fragments of micaceous sandstone. The rock inclusions are granitic, because of the presence of quartz, feld-
spar, biotite and muscovite micas. Because of their bimodal distribution it is possible that they have been
added as temper. In contrast with the preceding groups, G4 has a very micritic matrix with a very high percen-
tage of limestone, some of which is fossiliferous. Probably the limestone has been added because of the
bimodal distribution and its mainly angular shape.
G1 shows homogeneous data characterised by high percentages of silica (59.60-71.20%) and iron oxide
(due to the iron-rich fabric with abundant flint), and quite low calcium oxide (1.46-2.84%) (table 13, Appen-
dix 4). G1 sub. a is similar to G1, with a lower percentage of silica (56.00%), but more potash and calcium
oxide (7.98%). The latter is due to the natural rounded fragments of limestone present in the fabric. G2 shows
a slightly higher average of aluminia, calcium oxide, titania and iron oxide, whereas the silica is much lower
than in G1 (mainly because it has not been tempered with flint as G1). G3 shows results similar to those of the
previous groups, with silica percentages lower than those of G1, and more iron oxide. Its subgroup a has
yielded almost the same results. G3 sub. b has similar data to G3, although it shows slightly higher aluminia,
potash, titania and calcium oxide, but lower silica. The SEM-EDS data of G4 are very different from those of
the preceding three groups. They are characterised by very low aluminia (12.40-12.80%) and silica (32.60-
33.40%); calcium oxide is well represented (41.98-42.60%), and the percentage of iron oxide is much lower
than in the other groups.
150
These results confirm the microscopic grouping especially for the strong similarities among the groups
and their subgroups. The difference between G1, G2 and G3 is more easily identifiable in thin section (mainly
because of the very different fabric of G3). The results of G4 match perfectly well with those of the optical
microscope. The percentage of limestone fragments is very high, while quartz is rare (low silica). The fabric is
much less iron-rich than those of groups 1, 2, and 3.
2.2.3. XRD analysis
The soil sample collected close to the Impressed Ware site has been analysed both in thin section (see
Chapter 4, 2.2.) and by XRD. The XRD pattern shows presence of kaolinite, muscovite, chlorite, and quartz
(fig. 79).
Fig. 79 - Maddalena di Muccia: XRD pattern of the soil sample.
2.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 2 are different, although they seem to derive from a very similar pedological area. They
both are very iron-rich with fine quartz, radiolarian chert, and abundant iron oxides, although the fabric of G1
contains large grains of flint that have probably been added. The clay sources are to be found close to each
other because of the presence of the same iron-rich fabric characterised by fine quartz and radiolarian chert.
The source exploited for the production of group 2 has only occasional flint, some radiolarian chert, and
abundant fine quartz as G1 but it is more humic than G1, whereas the one exploited for group 1 is very rich in
flint. As mentioned above, group 2 has been heavily tempered with grog. It did not show many natural aplastic
inclusions. As suggested by R. MACPHAIL (pers. comm. 2001), the source exploited for the manufacture of the
vessels of this group might have been located close to a stable. Its soil is very humic, characterised by abun-
dant vegetable matter and dung both naturally present in the soil, not added as temper. Group 3 is of a very
different clay source, more iron-rich and with less flint than those of groups 1 and 2. From a technological
point of view, this group shows temper composed of sand with granitic rock fragments, occasional sandstone
fragments, and very abundant quartz. The organic material has been most probably added. Finally, a different
clay source has been exploited for the production of group 4. The fabric is very micritic, poor in quartz, and
rich in limestone inclusions as shown by the SEM-EDS analysis. Probably the limestone has been added as
temper (bimodal distribution and sharp edges).

151
Three very different sources have been exploited for the pottery manufacture of the Impressed Ware site
of Maddalena di Muccia. There are some relationships between the soil sample and the fabrics of some of the
groups (1, 2, and 4). The soil has the same flint (in smaller percentage compared to that of G1), which is
present in all groups (mainly in group 1). It is characterised by a micritic and fossiliferous fabric similar to that
of group 4.
2.4. CONCLUSIONS
The geology of the area surrounding the site (see Chapter 4, 2.1.) is characterised by abundant flint and
radiolarian chert. Both these minerals are present in the fabrics of groups 1 and 2, in particular the flint grains
that are also present in the soil sample of the site. These data might indicate the local provenance of these two
groups.
On the basis of the similarities between the soil and the thin section of the sherds, it is reasonable to
suggest that also the vessels of group 4 are of local provenance. They show a very similar calcareous fabric
with fossils, and a high percentage of limestone, similar to that of the soil sample. Group 3 and its subgroups
come from very different sources. Their fabrics are more iron-rich than those of G1 and G2 and show different,
most probably added inclusions (fragments of granitic and sandstone rocks). The sandstone and the granitic
rock fragments are not features represented in the geology of the area surrounding the site. The rock fragments
might belong to metamorphic rocks (a great quantity of quartz and muscovite). This reflects a more mature
environment (old rocks). The presence of micaceous sandstone suggests that the clay derives from a different
geological context (Jurassic rocks) (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). The roundness of the inclusions might
indicate that this material derives from a river bed (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001), i.e. the temper was not
obtained from crushed sandstone rocks. According to these observations two hypotheses can be suggested: 1)
that the ceramic group has been imported from elsewhere, or 2) that the sand was collected from the bed of a
watercourse rich in pebbles of allochtonous rocks. Since the geological maps of the Province of Macerata
does not show any granite outcrop in this territory, we cannot exclude that the pottery of group 3 was imported
from elsewhere and that the filler employed for its manufacture was collected from the bed of a river course.
Group 1 is characterised by a very homogeneous pottery assemblage with impressed decorative patterns.
Only one fragment is decorated with incised motifs (MDM 5). G1 sub. a is a piece of vessel bottom. Three of
the five specimens attributed to group 2 are of characteristic fine pottery (e.g. MDM 23, 24 and 26). It is
impossible to reconstruct most of the shapes with the exception for a hemispherical, open bowl. Group 3 does
not show any parallel between fabric and typology. Samples MDM 1 and MDM 13 are different from each
other. On typological ground MDM 1 can be classified as a fine, polished ware and MDM 13 is of dark,
burnished ware. Sample MDM 18 (G3 sub. a) is again a piece of fine ware, G3 sub. b is represented by three
typologically different sherds. Group 4 consists of two potsherds (MDM 3 and 16). They are identical also
from a typological point of view. They both are of coarse, light buff (paglierino) ware.
To conclude, the same parallels can be extended to the fabric and to the typological characteristics of the
Maddalena di Muccia ceramics. Group 1, composed of coarse Impressed Wares, is very homogeneous from
both microscopic and typological points of view. It is represented by coarse wares always characterised by
impressed decorations.
3. RIPABIANCA DI MONTERADO (Ancona)
The open-air Neolithic site of Ripabianca di Monterado (fig. 80) lies at 40 m of altitude, on the left bank
of the Cesano River, in the Marche Region, some 10 km from the present coastline. The archaeological site is
on heavy soils that characterise the alluvial deposit of the area.
D.G. LOLLINI (1965) excavated the site in 1962 and 1964. The excavations revealed an irregular pit-
structure measuring 8 by 10 m containing several smaller depressions. The deepest of these depressions, filled
with charcoal, with walls reddened and burnt by the heat, has been interpreted as an oven. Two skeletons of
individuals buried on their back were found close to this structure. The remains of two other burials had
already been disturbed by deep ploughing (LOLLINI, 1991).
152
Fig. 80 - Ripabianca di
Monterado: location of
the Neolithic settlement
(dot) and of the soil sam-
ple (square). Scale in ki-
lometres.
The ceramic assemblage of this site is composed of very different classes of pottery. The Impressed
Ware vessels are characterised by deep tronco-conical forms decorated with fingernail and linear, instru-
mental impressions organized around the body, while the rim and the vessel foot are accurately polished.
This category of vases is without handles. Oblique, oval-shaped lugs are often located in the central part
of the body (SILVESTRINI and PIGNOCCHI, 2000). The incised wares are very common. Bands of deep irre-
gular, parallel incisions run from the neck to the body of four-handled flasks. These bands are sometimes
filled with red or white colour. Incised and impressed patterns have been employed to decorate the same
vessel. The fine, grey or blackish, burnished pottery is also very common. They often have four strap
handles. The commonest shapes are flasks, beakers, tulip-shaped vases, deep, four-handled pots, pede-
stal cups, carinated and hemispherical bowls. One only typical figulina fragment with one red-painted
stripe is also recorded. The pits produced a great quantity of pieces of daub, as well as three fragments of
ceramic, female figurines.
The flint industry is particularly rich. Even though the chipped-stone assemblage from this site has
never been studied in detail, some instruments are typical such as the Ripabianca Burin (BROGLIO and

153
LOLLINI, 1963), which is a blade or bladelet Burin on a side notch. Among the other tools, all chipped from
local flint, are abrupt retouch truncations, straight awls, retouched blades and a few geometrics among
which are some trapezes obtained with the microburin technique. Sickle blades with oblique sickle gloss
are also recorded. Among the other stone materials are obsidian bladelets, greenstone axes and adzes, lower
and upper querns.
Particularly abundant is the bone industry that includes long points, perforators, spatulae (sometimes
obtained from red deer antler), one handle and one knife obtained from cattle/deer rib.
Three radiocarbon dates have been obtained from charcoal. They are: 626585 BP (R-599), 621075 BP
(R-598A), and 614070 BP (R-598) (ALESSIO et al., 1970: 602). This indicates that the site flourished during
the last two-three centuries of the seventh millennium BP.
Subsistence economy
In BARKERs (1975: 134) opinion, the location of Ripabianca di Monterado was not suitable for cereal
cultivation without a plough. This observation in mainly due to the location of the site on heavy alluvial
soils.
The meat diet of the inhabitants was basically supplied by caprines that represent the 64% of the bones.
Pig was far less important and cattle represented only 6% of the total assemblage. Hunting activities seem to
be quite irrelevant, indicated by a very small amount of deer bones. Of interest is the recovery of a few
charred, wild apples.
Considerations
The discovery of the Neolithic site of Ripabianca di Monterado is of extreme importance not only for the
Neolithization of the Marche region, but also for the Neolithic of the entire central Italy. The material culture
assemblage recovered from this site is extremely important for the parallels that can be extended across the
Apennines towards the Tuscanian coast (Sarteano Culture) (GRIFONI, 1967) as well as towards the Po valley to
the north where the Vh and Fiorano Culture sites of the same age are all characterised by the occurrence of
Ripabianca Burins (BIAGI, 1995).
The suggestion of G. BARKER (1975) concerning the import of painted figulina potsherds from the sou-
thern, Apulia Neolithic coastal sites remains to be proved.
The geology of the area is characterised by Upper Pliocene bluish, marl-silty clays with lenses of sand
containing polygenetic pebbles (quartziferous porphyry, gneiss and granite of the Middle Pliocene age). A
good source of flint exploited during the Neolithic period is known in the alluvial deposit of the Apennine
piedmont just in the area where the site lies (FERRARI and MAZZIERI, 1998). Some 9 km from the site, in the
locality called S. Angelo, in an area characterised by calcareous marls with microfauna and Foraminifera
belonging to the species Bolivina arta Mac Fayden, Cassidulina cruysi Marks, Globorotalia menardii (dOr-
bigny), Globoquadrina altispira (Cushman and Jarvis) (Schlier formation of Turtonian-Elvezian age) (Foglio
110 della Carta Geologica dItalia, Senigallia, 1:100000).
3.2. ANALYSES
Three different fabrics have been recognised among thirty potsherds analysed in thin section (figs. 81-85;
table 14, Appendix 3).
G1 - (8 samples: RDM 1, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14) (fig. 86a)
Very reddish, iron-rich and poly-sorted matrix with angular shaped flint (20%; size range between 2.0 by 1.5 and 0.3 by 0.2 mm),
abundant and poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<20%; size range between 0.3 by 0.2 and 0.05 by 0.04 mm), polycrystal-
line quartz (2%), some radiolarian chert (>2%), some limestone from breccia (<3%) (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001), rare muscovi-
te mica (>1%), feldspar (2%), very rare microcline (<1%), iron oxides and opaques (5%), rare pyroxene (<1%), and some organic
material;
sub. a (4 samples: RDM 3, 5, 15, 16)
Red, brown-reddish, iron-rich, poly-sorted matrix with abundant angular flint (15%; same size range of G1), very abundant, poorly-
sorted angular and subangular quartz (<30%; size range between 0.1 by 0.08 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), rounded fragments of polycry-
stalline limestone (<5%; size range between 2.7 by 2.5 and 0.5 by 0.4 mm), iron oxides (5%), radiolarian chert (<3%), polycrystalline
quartz (2%), rare plagioclase (<1%), feldspar (2%), muscovite mica (2%), and rare pyroxene (<1%);
sub. b (1 sample: RDM 18)
154
Fig. 81 - Ripabianca di Monterado: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.

155
156

157
Fig. 84 - Ripabianca di Monterado: pottery from the Impresssed Ware settlement.
158

RDM 9
RDM 22

159
Very reddish, iron-rich matrix, with abundant angular flint (20%; same size range as G1), well-sorted and fine angular and subangular
quartz (<10%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), radiolarian chert (>2%), muscovite mica (3%), feldspar (2%), pyroxene (1%), and no
limestone fragment.
G2 - (3 samples: RDM 2, 4, 19) (fig. 86b)
Brown, micritic, iron-rich matrix with abundant inclusions among which are flint (<7%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), radiolarian chert
(>3%), very abundant and poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (>30%; size range between 0.3 by 0.2 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm),
rare rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (2%), some polycrystalline quartz (2%), muscovite mica (3%), some clay pellets,
feldspar (1%), rare pyroxene, and rare angular fragments of granite rock;
sub. a (1 sample: RDM 17)
Dark brown, iron-rich matrix characterised by very abundant, well-sorted and fine quartz (>30%; typical size range 0.05 by 0.03
mm), flint (<10%), radiolarian chert (>2%), muscovite mica (2%), feldspar (2%), iron oxides (5%), and very rare granite rock
fragments. It does not show any limestone fragment;
sub. b (1 sample: RDM 10) (fig. 86c)
Reddish, iron-rich matrix with poorly-sorted, very abundant angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range between 0.2 by 0.17 and
0.04 by 0.02 mm), some subangular fragments of granite rock, feldspar (2%), long muscovite (3%; up to 0.4 by 0.02 mm) and rare
biotite mica, some pyroxene (2%), radiolarian chert (2%), and few clay pellets. One can note the presence of some granite rock
fragments (composed of biotite and quartz) and the absence of flint;
sub. c (1 sample: RDM 7)
Reddish, iron-rich, very silty matrix with abundant, well-sorted, fine quartz (20%; typical size 0.03 by 0.02 mm), abundant muscovite
mica (<5%), some subangular fragments of flint (<5%), radiolarian chert (2%), opaques and iron oxides (5%). Some grog filler is
present.
G3 - (9 samples of figulina ware: RDM 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30) (fig. 86d)
Brown, micritic, fossiliferous, vitrified, very well-sorted matrix characterised by angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range
between 0.08 by 0.05 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), fine rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (<10%; typical size 0.06 by 0.04
mm), radiolarian chert and flint (<2%), some muscovite mica (<3%), one shell fragment (RDM 30), one calcareous sandstone frag-
ment (RDM 23), opaques and iron oxides (3%), feldspar and pyroxene (1%). The matrix of all samples is rich in microfossils;
sub. a (2 samples of figulina ware: RDM 26, 28) (figs. 86e)
Dark brown, very micritic, fossiliferous, vitrified matrix with poorly-sorted abundant angular and subangular quartz (30%; size range
between 1.5 by 1.0 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), flint (<5%), some radiolarian chert, feldspar (2%), muscovite mica (2%), fine rounded
fragments of limestone (7%), and microfossils.
One soil sample collected 0.5 km from the site has been analysed in thin section (figs. 80 and 86f). Its fabric is characterised by
a brown, micritic, fossiliferous mud, with poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<30%; size range between 0.3 by 0.2 and
0.03 by 0.02 mm), fine rounded fragments of limestone (<10%; typical size as that of G3), opaques and iron oxides (5%), feldspar
(1%), angular fragments of flint (<2%; size range between 2.0 by 1.0 and 0.2 by 0.1 mm), muscovite mica (2%), and occasional
radiolarian chert.
Group 1 contains a very iron-rich, non-calcareous fabric characterised by abundant quartz and flint, some
radiolarian chert, few limestone breccia, some polycrystalline quartz, muscovite mica, feldspar, iron oxides
and opaques, rare pyroxene and microcline, and some organic material. Group 1 sub. a shows a fabric with
more abundant polycrystalline limestone and quartz finer than that of G1. River sand has been probably added
as temper because of the poly-sorted minerals (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001). G1 sub. b shows the same
fabric of G1 with flint and without addition of sandy quartz. The flint has most probably been added because
of the sharp edges and the bimodal distribution. The fabric of group 2 is more micaceous, with more abundant
detrital fraction and limestone, and a higher percentage of mainly finer quartz than that of G1. It includes flint,
some polycrystalline limestone, muscovite, feldspar, radiolarian chert, some polycrystalline quartz, occasio-
nal pyroxene, rare angular fragments of granite rock and few clay pellets. The fabric of RDM 17 (G2 sub. a)
is similar to that of group 2, with a higher quantity and finer quartz than that of G2. Limestone is completely
absent. G2 sub. b shows a fabric very similar to that of G2, with a higher percentage of quartz, granite rock
fragments, muscovite, radiolarian chert, clay pellets, pyroxene, and rare biotite. It does not show any flint that,
on the contrary, is present in the preceding groups. Its texture is very similar to that of the river sand. G2 sub.
c shows the same fabric of G2 without addition of river sand. Some grog has been added. It can be classified
as grog because of the presence of very angular fragments that do not seem to pertain to the natural soil or to
be related to the method of clay manufacturing. Group 3 is that of the figulina ware. It is very homogeneous,
characterised by a brown micritic, well-sorted, fossiliferous fabric with abundant quartz, fine rounded lime-
stone fragments, flint, radiolarian chert, one shell fragment, feldspar, muscovite, iron oxides, and pyroxene.
160
a)
c)
e)
b)
d)
f)
Fig. 86 - Ripabianca di Monterado: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) RDM 14, b) RDM 4, c) RDM 10, d) RDM 23, e) RDM 28, f) soil
Its subgroup (G3 sub. a) has a fabric much coarser than that of G3, although it shows more fragments of
polycrystalline limestone and larger-sized quartz and flint.
The samples of G1 (table 14, Appendix 4) are characterised by homogeneous results that show a low percen-
tage of aluminia and a relatively high percentage of silica (64.40-71.40%); the latter is due to the abundant flint
contained in the fabrics. There is quite a low presence of calcium oxide (2.04-5.16%), whereas that of the iron
oxide is relatively high. G1 sub. a shows a slightly higher percentage of iron oxide. G2 shows similar results with
slightly higher soda and slightly lower percentage of silica (64.20-67.60%). The latter is related to the smaller
abundance of flint. G2 sub. a is very similar to G2, with less silica, soda, magnesia, and potash and more manga-
nese oxide and phosphorus oxide (the latter might be due to post-depositional factors). In thin section, this
subgroup shows a percentage of fine quartz higher than that of G2. Also G2 sub. b has yielded results similar to

161
that of G2 with lower aluminia, potash, titania and higher soda, whereas, in thin section, the main difference is
that it does not contain any flint. G2 sub. c and G2 produced similar results, although the latter shows higher
percentages of silica and soda and lower aluminia. G3 is very different from the rest of the assemblage. It has less
silica and slightly lower aluminia, increased magnesia and potash, and much more abundant calcium oxide
(15.98-24.30%). Its subgroup shows very similar results, with a higher percentage of soda and manganese oxide.
To conclude: according to these results, only the differences between the first two groups and G3 can be
defined. The results obtained from groups 1 and 2 do not show noticeable differences, mainly because of the
high presence of silica which is due to the presence of flint (in G1) and quartz (in G2). It is significant that the
data of the subgroups are very similar to those of the group they belong (they might belong to the same group).
Regarding the figulina (G3), a different source has been clearly exploited, much more micritic (high calcium
oxide) and poorer in aluminia and silica.
3.2.3. XRD analysis
The soil sample collected from the proximity of the site already analysed in thin section (see Chapter 4,
3.2.) has also been studied with the XRD. The XRD pattern shows presence of kaolinite, quartz, muscovite,
and chlorite (fig. 87).
3.3. DISCUSSION
Groups 1 and 2 come from non-calcareous, iron-rich sources characterised by flint and radiolarian chert.
Probably the flint has been added. Group 2 shows a sandier, micaceous fabric, with more abundant quartz than
that of G1. This group has the same type of minerals among which are quartz, flint, radiolarian chert, musco-
vite mica, feldspar, and iron oxides; it also shows some granite rock fragments. The sand is a natural compo-
nent of the soil, while the flint might have been added (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). The figulina ware
derives from a very micritic source, which is characterised by a fossiliferous soil (absolutely absent in the
previous groups, as confirmed by the SEM-EDS analyses). The thin section of the soil sample shows the same
fossiliferous and micritic limestone of the figulina ware, with radiolarian chert, flint, some muscovite mica
and abundant quartz, more poorly-sorted than that of the figulina pottery.
Fig. 87 - Ripabianca di Monterado: XRD pattern of the soil sample.
162
3.4. CONCLUSIONS
Two sources were exploited for the manufacture of the ordinary vessels of groups 1 and 2. The inhabitants
of the Early Neolithic site of Ripabianca di Monterado utilised very rich and non-calcareous clay to produce
the vessels of group 1, most probably adding some quartz sand (because of the bimodal distribution and sharp
edges of the grains) (except for G1 sub. b) and flint. The flint might be either naturally present in the clay or
crushed and added by the potter, because of its very angular, triangular shape. Nevertheless, it must be stressed
that a few angular shaped flint grains are also present in the soil. The fabric of group 2 is more micaceous than
that of G1. It seems to have been tempered with some flint. The sand is characterised by quartz, rare granite
rock fragments and feldspar, possibly transported by a river. The figulina ware (G3 and G3a) comes from a
micritic and fossiliferous deposit.
Therefore it is reasonable to think that, for the confection of the vessels of group 1, the Neolithic commu-
nity exploited local sources, available in the proximity of the flint outcrop (see Chapter 4, 3.1.). Regarding the
production of group 2, the fabric is characterised by granitic rock fragments. In the Provinces of Macerata,
Senigallia and Ancona there is only one source characterised by polygenetic pebbles (granite, gneiss, etc.)
crossed by the tributaries of the Cesano River, more precisely the territory between Mt. S. Giovanni and S.
Costanzo. Since it is located some 7 km north of the site, we can think of a local source.
The source exploited for the production of the coarse figulina ware is characterised by the same highly
micritic and fossiliferous clay with quartz, some radiolarian chert, feldspar, pyroxene, polycrystalline quartz,
small fragments of flint, and microfossils. The similarity between this group and the soil thin section is noti-
ceable (figs. 86d and 86f). Therefore one might suggest a local provenance also for the Ripabianca figulina
ware. According to the geological map, there is only one very micritic and fossiliferous soil deposit in the
surroundings. It is located in the area of S. Angelo, less than 9 km from the site.
From a technological point of view the so-called ordinary pottery of Ripabianca di Monterado, is not
very fine. It shows some organic material that might have been artificially added (G1), some quartz sand
(groups 1 and 2), and flint. Only sample RDM 7 (G2 sub. c) contains some grog temper. The firing temperatu-
re was not very high, since the matrix is non-vitrified and the micas are well preserved. It is possible that the
technology employed in the production of the figulina pottery consisted in washing and decanting the clay for
few days before being utilised by the potters. This consideration is based on the observation of the soil sample
collected next to the site, which has a fabric, slightly coarser, although similar to those of the sherds analysed
(e.g. the soil has some large flint grains that are not present in the figulina fabric). Nevertheless, the technolo-
gical process must have not required many efforts, since the similarities with the natural clay are very close. It
is interesting to note that the ordinary pottery has been manufactured with iron-rich and non-micritic clay,
whilst the figulina ware has been produced with a calcareous and fossiliferous soil. Therefore, two different
materials have been utilised for two typologically different classes of ceramic.
3.4.1. Correlation between Ripabianca di Monterado and Maddalena di Muccia
From a minero-petrographic point of view, the pottery assemblages from Maddalena di Muccia and from
Ripabianca di Monterado, show few similarities. Both group 1 from Maddalena di Muccia, and group 1 from
Ripabianca di Monterado have very iron-rich fabrics with flint and radiolarian chert. Nevertheless, the clay
exploited for the Ripabianca di Monterado group 1 is richer in quartz and contains some limestone, which is
absent in MDM, G1. Both groups show the presence of organic material. Sample MDM 2 (G1 sub. a) shows
some limestone. It is characterised by monocrystalline, non-polycrystalline limestone as that known for the
RDM group 1. Two distinct sources must have been exploited. The Maddalena di Muccia groups 2 and 4 have
nothing in common with the petrographic groups of Ripabianca di Monterado. In fact G2-MDM has only very
abundant and fine quartz in a very iron-rich fabric with very rare flint inclusions. G4 shows a very micritic
fabric rich only in limestone part of which is fossiliferous.
Sample RDM 18 (G1 sub. b) is very similar to that of group 1, MDM. They have a red iron-rich fabric
with abundant fine quartz, flint, some radiolarian chert, feldspar, rare pyroxene, and muscovite. RDM 18 is
richer in iron and muscovite and does not show any organic temper. These two groups must come from a
similar source.
3.4.2. Correlation between Ripabianca di Monterado and Fornace Cappuccini
Some similarities can be observed between Fornace Cappuccini group 1 and Ripabianca di Monterado

163
group 1. They are characterised by very iron-rich fabrics with flint and muscovite, tempered with quartz sand
with granitic rock fragments (e.g. FC 3 and RDM 14). The difference is the presence of occasional limestone
in a non-calcareous matrix, and the slightly higher percentage of radiolarian chert in the Ripabianca di Mon-
terado group, whilst the radiolarian chert is rare and the limestone is absent at Fornace Cappuccini. Both
groups have been tempered with sand characterised by polycrystalline quartz, feldspar, and granitic rock
fragments. Group 2 sub. a (RDM 17) of Ripabianca di Monterado shows strong similarity with sample FC 10
of Fornace Cappuccini (G3) (Chapter 4, 1.4.1.).
Group 1 is characterised by vessels with both finger and instrumental impressions. Apart from one sample
(RDM 16), decorated with incised lines, all the potsherds of group 1 sub. a have impressed motifs. The samples
of group 2 are characterised by different typological shapes including hemispherical bowls, one fragment of
deep, large vessel and one flask (RDM 4) with horizontal, linear incised decorations. The potsherd RDM 17 (G2
sub. a) is a plain base. It is impossible to attribute sample RDM 10 (G2 sub. b) to any typological form. Group 2
sub. c (sample RDM 7) is a vessel with incised motifs. One vase with instrumental impressions constitutes its
subgroup. Group 3 fits into the same coarse figulina group. This site is very rich in figulina pottery. It is characte-
rised by hemispherical bowls (RDM 25, 27 and 29) very similar to each other, deep vessels (RDM 21 and 30),
and one carinated pot (RDM 28), most probably to be attributed to a tulip-shaped form. This sherd is typical for
the Ripabianca di Monterado phase. It represents a precise cultural and chronological indicator.
On the basis of the above-mentioned data, it is clear that the parallels that can be traced between vessel
shapes, decorations and their fabric are not perfect. The only correspondence between typology and fabric is
that of the first group that is very homogeneous from every point of view (fabric, style, and typology).
Regarding the relationships between the similar fabrics of Ripabianca di Monterado and Maddalena di
Muccia, the only common typological forms are those of RDM 18 and of Maddalena di Muccia group 1 (even
though it must be stressed that there is a chronological gap of some two-three hundred radiocarbon years
between the two Impressed Ware sites). They are stylistically identical because of the type of impressed motifs
that decorate their walls.
4. SCAMUSO (Torre a Mare, Bari)
The Neolithic site of Scamuso is located on a small calcarenitic promontory projecting towards the sea,
some 3 km east of Torre a Mare, 18 km southeast of Bari, in Apulia (fig. 88). Its precise geographic location is
400450 lat. N. and 43500 long. E. of Monte Mario (Rome) (BIANCOFIORE, 1957; COPPOLA, 1986). The
archaeological site is partly eroded by the sea.
The first excavations were carried out in 1983 when two trenches, called AI and AIII, were opened. They
were resumed between 1985 and 1988 when two more trenches were excavated (AIV and AV).
Trench AI was opened in the central part of the site. It revealed a sequence of some 70 cm. The uppermost,
disturbed layer contained glazed wares of Historical age, while the lower one, subdivided into artificial spits,
yielded Neolithic material attributed to different cultural aspects, to the Impressed Ware, Scratched Ware,
Serra dAlto and Diana Cultures.
Trench AIII was excavated in the western part of the settlement. It covered an area of 8 square m. The
sequence, 1.50 m deep, was subdivided into 20 artificial spits, the lowermost of which produced traces of
Early Neolithic occupation. More precisely Impressed Ware sherds start to appear from spit 12, together with
scratched and painted wares.
A hut floor was discovered in spits 14-20, down to the bedrock. It was partly excavated during the 1983
campaign when a hearth, rich in charcoals, was found in the central part of the trench. The hearth was radio-
carbon dated to 7290110 BP (Gif-6339), which is one of the oldest dates so far obtained for the Impressed
Ware Culture of Apulia (COPPOLA, 1986).
More extensive excavations were carried out in 1985-1988, when a surface of 77 square m was opened.
The lowermost levels of this excavation are attributable to the Impressed Ware Culture, even though the
stratigraphy of this trench is not very clear. Here the Impressed Wares make their appearance from the upper-
most spits, where they are associated with Diana and red painted pottery. Also this deposit was excavated in
164
Fig. 88 - Scamuso: location of the Neolithic sttlement (dot) and of the soil sample (square). Scale in kilometres.
(18) artificial spits. Charcoals from spits 14 and 16 of layer III were radiocarbon dated to 6600120 BP (Gif-
7345: spit 14) and 681080 BP (Gif-7055: spit 16). Some authors consider these dates more reliable than that
obtained from the same levels (Gif-6339) during the preceding campaigns (BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA, 1997).
The thickness of this deposit varies from 0.80 to 1.50 m.
Spits 13 and 14 of layer III yielded a great concentration of daub fragments, which probably suggest the
presence of a hut floor foundation, even though the excavation did not yield any trace of walls or postholes. A
pavement of cobble, with hearths was uncovered in the same spits. Traces of walled hut-foundations come from
the overlying spits 7 and 8 (layer II), which are characterised by the occurrence of scratched and painted wares.
The Impressed Ware ceramic assemblage
Most of the Impressed Ware potsherds were found in spits 17 and 18 of layer IIIc (31.58%) of the 1985-
88 excavations, although also monochrome brown pottery (15.86%) and undecorated wares (47.60%) come
from these spits. These data seem to indicate that the first Neolithic occupation of the site does not belong to
a pure Impressed Ware horizon, but that elements of other traditions also occur (BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA,
1997: 154). Spit 12 of layer IIIb has been related to Rendina Phase I (CIPOLLONI SAMP, 1977-1982) because of
the abundance of Guadone style Impressed Ware ceramics. This indicates that at least two distinct phases in
the development of the Impressed Ware Culture are attested at Scamuso.
The few Impressed Ware sherds illustrated in the above-mentioned reports, suggest that the first Impres-
sed Ware Culture of this site is characterised by coarse, open bowls and necked jars decorated with finger,
fingernail, instrumental, small dots, and Cardium rocker motifs. This is the pottery that BIANCOFIORE and
COPPOLA (1997) attribute to their Group R. Group I of the same authors refers to a class of finer Impressed
Wares, including a small number of sherds decorated with instrumental, small dots, zigzag, and geometric
patterns. A third class, which is very poorly represented, is that of the Guadone style open bowls, whose
internal surface is often painted with brown motifs.
BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA (1997: 65) also published the percentages of the different Impressed Ware
varieties. The R type pottery represents 8.47% of the total assemblage, while type I only 1.51%.
The chipped and polished stone assemblages
According to the excavators, the Neolithic chipped stone assemblage of the 1985-1988 excavations
includes 2500 flint artefacts and 265 obsidian pieces. The instruments have been described and illustrated

165
according to their spit of provenance. Their cultural attribution is sometimes difficult to argue. Nevertheless,
there are some tools that are characteristic of the Impressed Ware horizon, such as the trapezoidal geometric
instruments. Some of these were probably obtained with the microburin technique, even though these residues
are not represented in the archaeological record. Other Early Neolithic tools are straight borers and narrow
bladelets with abrupt, marginal retouch. All the other implements are of uncertain cultural attribution.
The above-mentioned tools show similarities with those from the Impressed Ware site of Torre Sabea
(CREMONESI and GUILAINE, 1987). It is difficult to attribute all the sickle gloss blades to the Early Neolithic
because of the size variability of the blanks. BIANCOFIORE and COPPOLA (1997: 151) mention the presence of
upper and lower querns obtained from limestone and sandstone pebbles as well as of limestone polishers and
hammerstones.
The bone assemblage
The bone instruments are represented from layer IIIa upwards. They include long perforators, sometimes
finely polished, fishhooks, spatulae, polished flat fragments, and ornamental objects.
Some of the perforators can be compared to similar specimens from Rendina III (CIPOLLONI SAMP, 1977-
1982), while others find parallels in other instruments from the Middle Neolithic caves of SantAngelo near
Cassano Ionio and San Biagio near Ostuni (COPPOLA, 1983).
The marine shells assemblage
The great number of worked marine shells led the excavators think that part of the site was devoted to the
workmanship of marine molluscs. The commonest shells are Monodonta turbinata employed for making
rings, a few broken specimens of which have been discovered, Cerastoderma edule (layer IIIb), and Denta-
lium, sp. (layer IIIb). Other worked shells, used for making necklaces or beads, are Columbella rustica (layer
III), Conus mediterraneus (layer Ic), and Cyclops neritea (layer III).
The subsistence economy
The archaeobotanical analysis of the Early Neolithic levels was conducted on a good sample of charred
seeds recovered by flotation and water-sieving of the sediments, and on the study of the imprints of 239 pieces
of daub (COSTANTINI et al., 1997: 200). The general picture obtained from their identifications is that of a
developed and varied agricultural economic subsistence based on the cultivation of several species of cereals
and legumes among which are Triticum monococcum, T. dicoccum, T. aestivum, T. compactum, Hordeum,
vulgare, Lens culinaris and Pisum sp., and a vine of Vitis sylvestris/vinifera.
In Apulia, a situation similar to that of Scamuso was already known from the identification of the charred
archaeobotanical remains from Coppa Nevigata (SARGENT, 1987), Passo di Corvo, Torre Sabea (COSTANTINI
and LENTINI, 1991), and Ripa Tetta (COSTANTINI and TOZZI, 1987).
Regarding the faunal remains, the predominance of domesticated animals is well documented at Scamuso
since the beginning of the Neolithic. This situation is identical to that of other Apulian sites, among which are
Rendina (BKNYI, 1977-1982), Masseria Candelaro and Masseria Valente (BKNYI, 1983), Torre Sabea and
Ripa Tetta (CASTELLETTI et al., 1987). Caprovines, pig and cattle represent the majority of the bones from the
Early Neolithic spits, while the incidence of wild animals is irrelevant (CASSOLI e TAGLIACOZZO, 1997: 228).
The meat diet of the Impressed Ware inhabitants was based on young sheep/goat individuals. A certain role
was also played by the gathering of marine resources, as indicated by the presence of crabs and sea urchins,
while marine shells were mainly collected for making ornaments (WILKENS, 1997: 246).
The geology of the area surrounding the village of Scamuso is characterised by white or yellowish arena-
ceous limestones and by Pleistocene arenaceous-argillic limestone deposits, which often include fossiliferous
levels with Ostrea sp., Pecten sp., etc., and horizons of argillic marls. In the territory around the archaeologi-
cal site, outcrop layers of the Cretaceous, carbonaceous platform, and of Pleistocene calcarenite, sandy and
clayey deposits of Tufi delle Murge. They belong to two distinct sedimentary periods (SPECCHIO, 1985-
1986). The upper part of the first cycle includes a yellowish and greyish marl-clayey deposit, known as
Argille di Rutigliano, which lies above a sand layer. It contains some thin ashy levels, composed almost
exclusively of pumice. The mineralogy of the clay is represented by illite, smectite, caolinite, quartz, feldspar,
166
pyroxene, granite, carbonates, amphibole, mica, rutile, zircon, iron oxides and hydroxides (DELLANNA, 1969).
The second cycle is composed of sands, whose lower part is rich in Oysters and Pectinides, while its
upper part is rich in small Gastropods. They are followed by thin layers of terra rossa. The sands include
quartz, calcite and feldspar. The stratigraphic position, the granulometry of the deposit and the abundance of
calcarenitic pebbles indicate that these sediments are of alluvial origin (Foglio 177 della Carta Geologica
dItalia, Bari, 1:100000; Foglio 178 della Carta Geologica dItalia, Mola di Bari, 1:100000).
4.2. ANALYSES
Four different fabrics have been recognised among the twenty-one potsherds analysed in thin section
from the Impressed Ware site of Scamuso (figs. 89-91; table 15, Appendix 3).
G1 - (9 samples: SCA 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 20) (figs. 92a and 92b)
Yellowish-brown-reddish, slightly micritic, fossiliferous matrix, characterised by abundant, poorly-sorted, subangular and angular
quartz with some rounded grains (25%; size range between 0.4 by 0.3 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), abundant fine rounded fragments of
polycrystalline limestone (up to 5%; typical size 0.08 by 0.06 mm), polycrystalline quartz (2%), flint (<3%), some very fresh feldspar
(<3%), green pyroxene (>2%), occasional muscovite mica, some clay pellets, opaques and iron oxides (3%). SCA 12 contains a lava
grain. The fabric of most samples, with the exception of SCA 12, 16 and 17, contain microfossils;
sub. a (4 samples: SCA 4, 7, 10, 21) (fig. 92c)
Fossiliferous matrix of light brown colour along the edges, and dark brown colour in the centre (due to reduced firing atmosphere).
It is characterised by poorly-sorted, less abundant and finer quartz than that of G1 (20%; size range between 0.2 by 0.1 and 0.03 by
0.02 mm). Some of the quartz grains are rounded. The fabric has a very high percentage of most probably added organic material
(some 15%), most probably grass, rounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (7%; typical size 0.1 by 0.08 mm), some very fresh
feldspar (>3%), green pyroxene (3%), few muscovite mica, rare lava grains (fig. 92d), some polycrystalline quartz, rare flint, very
few amphibole, opaques and iron oxides (<3%). The fabrics of all samples, with the exception of SCA 21, contain many microfossils;
sub. b (1 sample: SCA 19)
Brown micritic, fossiliferous fabric very similar, although more calcareous than that of G1. It shows poorly-sorted subangular and
angular quartz (<15%; size range between 0.2 by 0.15 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), abundant rounded fragments of polycrystalline limesto-
ne (>15%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), flint (2%), feldspar (2%), some plagioclase, rare pyroxene (1%), muscovite mica (>1%), one
calcite fragment, and many microfossils. It contains one shell fragment.
G2 - (3 samples: SCA 1, 5, 8) (fig. 92e)
Red, iron-rich matrix with poorly-sorted, abundant, mainly subangular quartz (>25%; size range between 0.4 by 0.3 and 0.05 by 0.04
mm), very probably collected from a watercourse, abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (>10%;
size range between 2.5 by 1.6 and 0.8 by 0.6 mm) some of which are fossiliferous. It contains rare flint (>1%), polycrystalline quartz
(<2%), feldspar (<2%), some pyroxene, rare muscovite mica, iron oxides (>5%), and rare bohnerz. Two samples (SCA 1 and 5) show
some subrounded calcareous sandstone fragments (quartz arenite given that almost all grains are made of quartz: I. FREESTONE, pers.
comm. 2001);
sub. a (1 sample: SCA 14)
Red iron-rich matrix with abundant, poorly-sorted, mainly subangular and rounded quartz (30%; size range between 0.48 by 0.3 and
0.06 by 0.04 mm), flint (>3%), occasional pyroxene, feldspar (2%), rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone
(7%; same range size G2), and one shell fragment.
G3 - (2 samples: SCA 9, 18) (fig. 92f)
Dark red, very iron-rich matrix with many small rounded and subrounded fragments of polycrystalline limestone (15%; size range between
1.2 by 0.9 and 0.2 by 0.1 mm), poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (15%; size range between 0.1 by 0.8 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm), high
percentage of iron oxides (>15%), muscovite mica (2%), rare feldspar, and pyroxene. They do not show any added inclusion.
G4 - (1 sample: SCA 15) (fig. 92g)
Brown calcareous matrix with few angular and subangular quartz (7%; size range between 0.2 by 0.17 and 0.03 by 0.02 mm),
abundant rounded-shape fragments of polycrystalline limestone (20%; typical size 0.3 by 0.2 mm), rare polycrystalline quartz, very
rare feldspar, flint, calcite, and pyroxene. It does not show any added inclusion.
One soil sample (figs. 88 and 92h), collected from the lower sequence of the site, has been analysed in thin section. It shows a
brown micritic fabric rich in poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (25%; size range between 2.5 by 2 and 0.04 by 0.03 mm),
rare polycrystalline quartz and flint (1%), some muscovite mica (2%), abundant pyroxene (3%), opaques and iron oxides (>7%),
some feldspar and plagioclase (2%), rare fine grained limestone, amphibole, and radiolarian chert (1%).
Group 1 shows a yellowish, brown-reddish, slightly micritic, and fossiliferous fabric with abundant quar-
tz (mainly subangular grains), limestone and fragments of mud, polycrystalline quartz, some flint, fresh feld-
spar and plagioclase, rare muscovite, some green pyroxene, clay pellets, opaques, and iron oxides. The fabric

167
Fig. 89 - Scamuso: pottery from the Impressed Ware layers.
168

169
170
Fig. 92 - Scamuso: photomicrographs of thin section samples: a) SCA 20, b) SCA 11, c) and d) SCA 4, e) SCA 5, f) SCA 18, g) SCA 15, h) soil
sample (XPL, X40, with the exception of d) SCA 4, XPL, X100) (photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
e)
g)
b)
d)
f)
h)

171
of most samples contains microfossils. Group 1 sub. a is very similar to that of G1, although it shows abun-
dant, probably artificially added, organic material (probably grass), and rare lava grains. The matrix of G1
sub. b is almost identical, but more micritic, than that of G1. The quartz sand of G1 and its subgroups has been,
most probably, added (bimodal distribution) (I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001). Group 2 is characterised by a
red iron-rich fabric, with quartz sand (most grains are subangular and rounded), and abundant fragments of
rounded polycrystalline limestone. Also the sandy quartz of this group has most probably been added. Some
limestone fragments contain fossils. Contrary to G1, this matrix is much more iron-rich and non-fossiliferous.
The fabric contains some flint, polycrystalline quartz, feldspar, occasional pyroxene, muscovite mica, and
iron oxides. Two samples (SCA 1 and 5) have small calcareous sandstone fragments. Group 2 sub. a is very
similar to G2, although it contains more quartz sand and fewer fragments of limestone. The fabric of group 3
is as rich in iron as that of G2, and it is richer in polycrystalline limestone. It shows little quartz, occasional
feldspar, pyroxene and muscovite. It does not show any artificially added inclusion. Group 4 (SCA 15) shows
a micritic fabric with abundant rounded-shape limestone, a low percentage of quartz, very occasional feldspar,
flint, calcite, and pyroxene. It has not been tempered. The limestone is very fine-grained and rounded. It might
have been collected in the proximity of a watercourse.
The fabric of the soil sample is not identical to that of the ceramic fabrics, although it shows strong
similarities in the quartz sand of G1 and G1 sub. a. They both are characterised by abundant quartz, pyroxene,
amphibole, feldspar, flint, and polycrystalline quartz. The fabric of the soil sample does not show any micro-
fossil or lava grain.
The samples of G1 have yielded quite homogeneous results with the exception of potash, which spans
from 2.76 to 5.16% and calcium oxide (2.40-13.90%) (table 15, Appendix 4). The latter is probably due to the
visible presence of limestone in the bulk analysis. Its subgroup a has produced almost the same data with
slightly more abundant calcium oxide, due to the higher percentage of limestone. G1 sub. b (SCA 19) has
yielded different data: lower silica and iron oxide, very high soda (3.72%), magnesia (3.22%), and calcium
oxide (22.22%). In thin section it is clear that SCA 19 contains less quartz and more limestone than G1 and G1
sub. a. It is interesting to note that, on the basis of the SEM-EDS results, G1 and G1 sub. a are very homoge-
neous. Also in thin section they are very similar, with the exception of the presence of organic temper in G1
sub. a. G2 and G2 sub. a have yielded SEM-EDS results similar to those of G1, apart from a higher percentage
of iron oxide. This is very interesting, because in thin section they look very different (see Chapter 4, 4.2.1.).
G2 sub. a shows the same results of G2; the only difference is the (slightly increased) abundance of magnesia
and calcium oxide.
Groups 3 and 4 are definitely different from the others. G3 is different from the previous two groups: it
contains high iron oxide, less silica and potash (less quartz and feldspar), and much more calcium (abundant
limestone) and titania than groups 1 and 2. G4 is characterised by the lowest percentages of aluminia (7.60%),
silica (22.60%; few quartz), and iron oxide (2.28%; non iron-rich), while calcium oxide is the highest (61.94%;
micritic fabric and very abundant rounded fragments of limestone).
The SEM-EDS analyses confirm the differences between G3 and 4 and G1 and 2, although no difference
has been noticed between G1 and G2 (e.g. SCA 1, G2 and SCA 20, G1 have produced almost identical results).
This method confirms the strong similarities within groups and their subgroups. In contrast, G3 and G4 can be
undoubtedly defined as two distinct groups.
4.2.3. XRD analyses
Four potsherds (SCA 1, 6, 10, 15) analysed in thin section have also been studied by XRD.
The XRD pattern of sample SCA 6 (G1: fig. 93, top) shows muscovite, quartz, rutile, and chlorite. It is
very similar to that of SCA 1 (G2: fig. 93, bottom). Both show muscovite, quartz and rutile. Rutile is an
accessory mineral of granites. It occurs as an alteration of the mica, and, as in this case, with an abundant
presence of feldspar and quartz. SCA 6 shows chlorite that is not present in SCA 1, whereas SCA 1 has calcite.
Chlorite is a micaceous mineral widely distributed. It can also derive from the alteration of pyroxene that is
naturally present in the clay of group 2 and is often accompanied by other minerals such as limonite, calcite,
etc. (FORD, 1949: 669).
The pattern of SCA 10 (G1 sub. a: fig. 94, top) shows calcite, kaolinite (Chapter 2, 6.1.), muscovite, quartz,
172
chlorite, and anatase. Most of the minerals are present also in the previous two samples (G1 and G2). They are:
calcite, muscovite, quartz and chlorite. This sample shows a kaolinitic clay with anatase. It is impossible to
identify kaolinite through an optical microscope because the clay mineral is too small (<4). Anatase occurs in
granite, mica schists, etc. It is often associated with quartz, hematite, rutile, etc. (FORD, 1949: 500). It is very
interesting to point out that the soils surrounding the site are characterised by kaolinitic clay (see Chapter 4, 4.1),
rutile and mica. The pattern of SCA 15 (G4: fig. 94, bottom) shows only calcite, muscovite, and quartz. Unfortu-
nately, these minerals are extremely common. They are usually very typical of sedimentary environments. This
is the reason why they are of no help in the identification the provenance of this sherd. The thin section analysis
of this sherd shows also feldspar, flint and pyroxene in a silty, calcareous matrix.
To conclude: there is a strong correlation between the minerals of groups 1, 1 sub. a and 2. This evidence
supports the idea of similar sources that are compatible with the pedological context of the site, indicating a
local origin.
4.3. DISCUSSION
The micritic and fossiliferous matrix of group 1 has been most probably tempered with quartz sand with
subangular and round-shaped grains. The sand might be of volcanic origin, because of the presence of fresh
feldspars and green pyroxene. Its subgroup a has been heavily tempered with organic material (probably
grass, because of the very elongated shape of the holes) and the same quartz sand of G1. The sand is of
volcanic origin because of the very fresh aspect of the feldspar, plagioclase, green pyroxene, and rare lava
grains (fig. 92d). The fabric of group 2 is different from that of G1. It is iron-rich and neither fossiliferous nor
micritic. It contains some limestone and some calcareous sandstone fragments. It has been tempered with
quartz sand (because of the rounded grains and the bimodal distribution). It also shows some pyroxene, feld-
spar, and polycrystalline quartz like that of group 1, even though its percentage is lower. Group 3 has an iron-
rich fabric, not as fossiliferous as that of group 2, with more fragments of polycrystalline limestone and non-
artificially added quartz. Group 4 is very micritic, non-fossiliferous and without any addition of temper. In all
the groups the limestone is of rounded and subrounded shape, therefore it was naturally present in the clay
exploited for the pottery manufacture.
4.4. CONCLUSIONS
Four different sources have been exploited for the production of the vessels of the Impressed Ware site of
Scamuso. The source utilised for group 1 is most probably local. It shows a micritic, kaolinitic and fossilife-
rous fabric with two types of added temper: organic material and sand.
The quartz sand is of volcanic origin because of the very fresh aspect of the feldspar plagioclase, green
pyroxene, and rare lava grains. The source is non-volcanic because there are no volcanic rock fragments,
and the lava grains are very rounded. A watercourse has probably transported them. It is reasonable to think
that the potters mixed the local yellowish fossiliferous, micritic clay with some sand collected from the La
Lama River that flows some 2 km apart; furthermore, the soil sample shows a similar detrital fraction (see
Chapter 4, 4.2.1.).
The clay might have been collected from the vicinity of the site, not necessarily from a watercourse,
because the local clays contain ashy levels characterised by pumice (see Chapter 4, 4.1.) with carbonates,
granate, feldspars, pyroxene, amphibole, micas, zircon and rutile.
The source exploited for the manufacture of the vessels of group 2 is very different from the preceding
one. Despite a similar chemistry and mineralogy, as indicated by SEM-EDS and XRD, there are clear differen-
ces in the fabric, such as the occurrence of microfossils in G1 and rare fossiliferous limestone inclusions in
G2, and a higher percentage of iron oxide in the latter. It does not show any fossiliferous and micritic matrix.
On the contrary it is very rich in iron, with some calcareous rock fragments.
The added temper must have been similar to the sand utilised for the preceding group. It is characterised
by a lower percentage of the same minerals: feldspar, pyroxene, polycrystalline quartz, and flint. It does not
show any lava grain. A similarity between these two groups is confirmed also by the results of the XRD
analyses (see Chapter 4, 4.2.3.).
The source was probably located in an area belonging to the second cycle of sedimentation where the
sands are composed of quartz, feldspar, and calcite. The clay exploited for the production of group 3 is
similar to that exploited for the manufacture of group 2 (non-fossiliferous, iron-rich, and micritic) characte-

173
Fig. 93 - Scamuso: XRD pattern of samples SCA 6 (top) and SCA 1 (bottom).
rised by some muscovite, feldspar and pyroxene, and richer in polycrystalline quartz. It does not show any
added temper.
To conclude, the source utilised for group 4 is very micritic but non-fossiliferous. Also the XRD pattern of
this sample is not of great help because it does not reveal the presence of minerals that indicate an allochto-
nous provenance. The micritic clay is typical of the area surrounding the site; nevertheless, its source is
different from that of group 1 because it is not fossiliferous like those of groups 2 and 3. In effect, these latter
do not show any fossiliferous fabric.
174
Fig. 94 - Scamuso: XRD pattern of samples SCA 10 (top) and SCA 15 (bottom).
The inhabitants of the Early Neolithic village of Scamuso exploited, 1) for the manufacture of the vessels of
group 1, a micritic, yellowish-brownish, fossiliferous source adding sand that had been probably collected from
a river, characterised by volcanic minerals; 2) for the production of group 2, an iron-rich clay with limestone, and
quartz, and sand similar to that exploited for the temper of group 1; 3) for group 3 a basin more calcareous but
similar to the above-mentioned one; 4) for group 4, a very micritic, non-fossiliferous, and yellowish clay.

175
According to the results of the XRD, the thin section analyses of the ceramics and of the soil, and of the
study of the geology/pedology of the area, it is most probable that the sources exploited for the production of
the four groups of pottery are located in the surroundings of the site (see Chapter 4, 4.1. and 4.2.3). It is also
very probable that the temper employed for groups 1 and 2 was collected in a river flowing close to the site.
These data are of extreme importance since they indicate the local manufacture of Impressed Ware potte-
ry at one of the earliest, Early Neolithic sites of the Italian Peninsula so far known.
In many cases it has been possible to define the style and, sometimes, the shape of the potsherds in order
to suggest some correlations between the microscopic groups identified in thin section, and the macroscopic
groups, defined on their typological-stylistic characteristics. Only one sherd is too small and undecorated to
be attributed to any macroscopic group. Since it is very difficult to reconstruct the shapes from these small
fragments, the correlations have mainly been based on the decorative motifs.
Group 1 is composed of sherds belonging to similarly decorated vessels. SCA 2, 6, 12, and 16 have
Cardium impressions. Samples SCA 3 and 13 are identical: they have recurrent triangular, geometric motifs
obtained with a sharp, pointed instrument. Group 1 sub. a includes, among others, two sherds with fingernail
impressions all over the body (SCA 10 and 21).
Two other samples are decorated with incised lines (SCA 4 and 7). The sherds of group 2 (SCA 1, 5, 8)
show similar decorative patterns. Most of them have incised, linear motifs, with the exception of SCA 14 (G2
sub. a) that is absolutely different. It is a bottom fragment with Cardium impressions. Sample SCA 1 is a flask
fragment. Group 3 (SCA 18 and SCA 9) is represented by very large vessels with very thick walls and incised
motifs. Group 4 (SCA 15) is a fragment of brown, painted vessel. From a microscopic point of view, it is a
unique piece.
There are some correlations also between macroscopic and microscopic groups. From a stylistic, more
than from a typological point of view, groups 1 and 2 are similar (therefore they would fit into only one
group). Group 3 is characterised by very thick-walled, large, open vessels. This is also the case for SCA 12
(G1 sub. c). It is interesting to note that also the single case of group 4 (SCA 15) is typologically very
different.
To sum up: these data suggest some correlations between the typology and the fabric of Scamuso cerami-
cs. In many cases, as for groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, the correlation is clear, even though not perfect (see G2 sub. a).
From a typological point of view the sherds of groups 1 sub. a and 2 might be grouped together. Stylistically
G2 sub. a has nothing in common with the potsherds of group 2. It should fit into group 1 because of the same
decorative, Cardium impressed, patterns.
5. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FABRICS OF THE SOIL SAMPLES ANALYSED IN THIN SECTION
Since the soil samples collected from the vicinity of the sites have been considered as evidences of
relationships with the ceramic assemblages, it is useful to compare the different fabrics in order to stress their
similarities and differences.
5.1. THE ITALIAN SOIL SAMPLES
Most of the soil samples from the Italian sites have been analysed in thin section (table 16, Appendix 3).
They are characterised by strong differences. Starting from the north, the soil of Fagnigola is brown, iron-rich
and slightly micritic. It has some quartz, flint, rare limestone, occasional radiolarian chert, polycrystalline
quartz, rare muscovite mica, iron oxides and opaques (Chapter 5, 3.). The Maddalena di Muccia (MDM) soil
is totally different: its light brown fabric is very micritic with abundant limestone and angular flint (absent in
Fagnigola soil sample) and no quartz.
The soil formed out of a breccia (R. MACPHAIL, pers. comm. 2001) (Chapter 4, 2.2.). The fabric of the soil
sample of Ripabianca di Monterado is light brown, very micritic with abundant quartz, feldspar, muscovite
mica, which are absent in the MDM soil (Chapter 4, 3.2.). Moving further to the south, the Scamuso soil
sample has nothing in common with the preceding ones (Chapter 4, 4.2.).
It shows a brown, slightly micritic fabric with very abundant quartz, flint, some muscovite, rare polycry-
176
stalline quartz, limestone fragments, feldspar, plagioclase, amphibole, radiolarian chert, and abundant pyro-
xene. It differs from the other samples for the high quantity of pyroxene, the presence of feldspar, plagioclase,
amphibole that are almost absent in the other soils.
5.2. THE ISTRIAN AND DALMATIAN SOIL SAMPLES
All the soil samples of the eastern Adriatic coast have been analysed in thin section (table 16,
Appendix 3). The soil from Viùla (VZ) (Chapter 3, 1.2.) has a red fabric characterised by abundant,
fine angular and subangular quartz, iron oxides, biotite and muscovite, rare pyroxene, and red clay
fragments. The Jami na Sredi (JNS) sample (Chapter 3, 2.2.) has a reddish, non-calcareous fabric with
abundant and fine angular and subangular quartz, fine muscovite, rare pyroxene, clay pellets, and some
iron oxides. These two soils are similar, although Viula shows some peculiar red clay fragments (which
characterise also the ceramic group 1, VZ), which are absent in JNS soil, and a finer and higher content
of quartz.
The soil sample collected in the proximity of the cave of Vela Jama (VJ) some 8 km from the place
where the JNS soil was collected, is similar to the latter one (iron-rich and non-calcareous fabric with a
high percentage of fine quartz), although VJ has a darker fabric with some terra rossa soil and fragments
of calcite (absent in the preceding soils) (Chapter 3, 3.2.).
The Tinj (TN) soil sample is very different from the above-mentioned ones. It has a very micritic
fabric with fossiliferous limestone, quartz much coarser than that of the preceding soils, limestone, and
flint (Chapter 3, 4.2.). The Smili (SML) soil has been collected about 20 km from TN. It is similar to
that of TN because they both show a micritic fabric with abundant fragments of limestone, part of which
is fossiliferous, muscovite mica and flint.
Nevertheless, some differences have been noted, since Smili has a higher quantity of flint, is more
iron-rich and has some terra rossa soil (Chapter 3, 5.4.1.). The soil of Vrbica (VRB) is again different
from those already described. It has a very iron-rich and slightly calcareous fabric with very fine quartz
and monocrystalline fragments of limestone (Chapter 3, 6.2.). It does not show the micritic fabrics of
SML and TN, and the very iron-rich non-calcareous fabrics of VZ, VJ and JNS. Furthermore, it shows
less variety of inclusions.
The Konjevrate (KNV) soil is very similar to that of VRB: its fabric is very iron-rich and slightly
calcareous with abundant limestone (Chapter 3, 7.2.). The only difference is that at KNV, quartz is more
abundant and coarser than at VRB, and that rare zircon and pyroxene are present, which are absent at
VRB. The Danilo Bitinj (DB) soil has a dark red, iron-rich and non-calcareous fabric with quartz, abun-
dant limestone, and iron oxides (Chapter 3, 8.2.).
It is more iron-rich than the VRB and KNV soils, with more abundant and coarser limestone frag-
ments. The limestone is also iron-rich, similar to that of G1-DB. The Vela pilja (VS) soil is brown-
reddish, iron-rich and non-calcareous with very abundant, fine and well-sorted quartz, some limestone
fragments, rare flint and pyroxene (Chapter 3, 9.2.). It is much finer than the VRB, KNV and DB soils
and shows less abundant limestone. It is very similar to the VJ soil (brown, iron-rich fabric with abun-
dant fine quartz), although VJ shows no flint and pyroxene, whereas in VJ there is calcite that is absent
in VS.
5.3. DISCUSSION
To conclude, whereas the soil samples of the Italian Neolithic sites show very strong differences, some
soils of the eastern Adriatic coastline show some similarities. This is the case of the sites of JNS/VJ and VS/
VJ. JNS and VJ lie very close to each other in a similar geological environment.
The definition of the provenance of the ceramics is made easier by the similarity between the soils. Given
that the sites are located some 7.5 km apart, it is possible to think of their local provenance because of the
similarities observed between the two pottery assemblages (Chapter 3, 3.4.). VS and VJ are two islands, some
270 km apart, characterised by a similar geology.
The pottery assemblage examined from these two sites are of different age and culture (Hvar and IW,
respectively). Also the soils from VRB/KNV and DB are similar. Nevertheless, the pottery analysed from DB
belongs to the Danilo Culture, whereas that from VRB and KNV belong to the IW Culture. VRB and KNV are
located close to each other. A local provenance of their assemblages has been suggested because of the diffe-

177
rences and peculiarities of the fabrics analysed. When similarities have been noticed, they have not been
confirmed by the typological characteristics of the vessels (Chapter 3, 6.4.1.).
Differences among the soils often allowed one to allocate a local origin for the ceramic from nearby
sites (e.g. MDM and RDM). This highlights the necessity to not only compare different fabrics and styles/
typologies with each other, but also to relate them to the local soil composition.
178

179
CHAPTER 5
THE FIGULINA POTTERY: ITS PRODUCTION AND TRADE
1. PREFACE
This chapter deals with a specific class of pottery that often occurs, though in varying percentages, in the
Impressed Ware sites of the region under study (Chapter 1, 2. c). The term ceramica figulina is commonly
used in Italy to indicate a particular class of ceramic of yellowish, light buff, straw, greyish, or pinkish colour
that was found in great quantity at the Middle Neolithic site of Ripoli in the Vibrata Valley (Abruzzi, central
Italy). According to U. RELLINI (1934) and G. CREMONESI (1965), unpainted and painted figulina wares have
been collected in really enormous quantities from the Neolithic pits of Ripoli. RELLINI (1934: 33) also
noticed that both the unpainted and the painted figulina vessels show identical characteristics: la figulina
chiara, gialliccia, pi di rado tendente al rossiccio, dimpasto ben depurato e fine, di cottura omogenea in
tutto il suo spessore, con le superfici farinose al tatto e allappantiquella dipinta, anchessa in grandissi-
ma quantit, la stessa cosa di quella acroma.
The Neolithic open-air site of Ripoli mainly flourished during the second half of the sixth millennium BP,
according to the four available radiocarbon dates that cover a time-span between 563080 BP (R-664) and
5100120 BP (Pi-unpubl.) (ALESSIO et al., 1971; SKEATES, 1994). Nevertheless, given the recovery of typical
Fiorano style carinated bowls and rhombic, geometric arrowheads, it is most probable that the site began to be
inhabited around the end of the seventh millennium BP. Even though no kiln has ever been excavated at
Ripoli, this settlement has often been considered a production centre for this class of ceramic. The only kiln so
far known in southern Italy is that of Serra dAlto, a Middle Neolithic village located near Matera in Basilica-
ta, from which RIDOLA (1924-1926) reports the excavation of two interconnected pits, the wider of which, with
a maximum diameter of 1.10 m, was 1.80 m deep. From this pit, rich in charcoal and ash, he collected some
fragments of figulina painted ware. According to the detailed authors description, la cavit maggiore mo-
strava le tracce di fuochi intensi che avevano cotto le pareti e lasciato ceneri e carboni. La cavit minore,
nella quale si mettevano i vasi, non mostrava tracce di fuoco. Another kiln is known from the north Italian
Middle Neolithic site of Rivaltella, Ca Romensini, attributed to the earliest phase of the Square-Mouthed
Pottery Culture, dated between the end of the seventh and the beginning of the sixth millennium BP (6070110
BP: I-12519) (TIRABASSI, 1987). This site also yielded a few figulina painted sherds.
Along the Adriatic coastline, the figulina ware was in use from the first half of the seventh millennium BP,
during the flourishing of the Impressed Ware Culture, up to the end of the sixth millennium BP. This means
that its chronology covers a time-span of more than 1500 radiocarbon years. All the sites taken into conside-
ration for this study on the figulina pottery, belong to different periods of the seventh millennium BP. This
means that they all are undoubtedly older than the above-mentioned two from which we have evidence of
kilns where figulina pottery might have been produced.
In one of her papers on the Neolithic of southern Italy, MALONE (1985: 122) estimates that 142 Italian
sites have yielded figulina pottery. 50% of them are located between Apulia and the Abruzzi. She also
provides us with typological schemes of the types of figulina vessels that characterise the different cultural
aspects of the Early and Middle Neolithic of central and southern Italy. In addition, also some north Italian
sites have yielded fragments of imported figulina unpainted or painted sherds. Some of these belong to the
Early Neolithic Fiorano Culture, while the great majority are attributed to the Middle Neolithic Square-
Mouthed Pottery Culture (BARFIELD, 1981). In both cases figulina vessels are often in the form of flasks or
open bowls or occur in the shape of unique handles and lugs. According to BARFIELD (1981: 32) the vessels
are just as likely to have been prized as exchange objects in their own right. He also suggests that flasks
were used to transport specific goods such as wine. Even though the present evidence for seeds of Vitis sp.
is quite scarce in Neolithic northern Italy (BAGOLINI et al., 1973: 205), the employment of specific prestige
pots for the preparation of alcoholic beverages has been demonstrated from other Neolithic areas of nor-
thern Europe (HAYDEN, 1998: 30).
180
The discovery of one typical, complete Apulian, Serra dAlto figulina small flask at Gaione, a Square-
Mouthed Pottery settlement near Parma, in the Central Po Valley (BERNAB BREA et al., 1988), together with
99 Sardinian and Liparian obsidian artefacts including not only bladelets and flakes, but also locally chipped
cores (POLGLASE, 1988), reinforces the impression that a long-distance trade or exchange network of well-
defined pottery shapes, as prestige items, was already active towards northern Italy at least by the Middle
Neolithic, if not before (TYKOT, 1996: 41; AMMERMAN and POLGLASE, 1997).
Painted, imported figulina potsherds are also recorded from the Ligurian caves of Arene Candide, Pollera,
and dellAcqua o del Morto (BERNAB BREA, 1946: 297). From this latter comes a neck fragment of flask,
painted with typical Ripoli geometric patterns. It is similar to one of the two painted figulina flask body
fragments discovered by Tin in layer 13 of his excavations at the Arene Candide Cave (TIN, 1999: 395). This
layer has been dated to the last three centuries of the seventh millennium BP (TIN, 1974).
There is no doubt that the generic term of ceramica figulina hides a variety of pottery of different colour,
fabric, surface treatment, and painted decoration. However, up-to-now only five figulina samples have been
analysed in thin section by T. MANNONI (1999). They all come from the Arene Candide Cave, although from
chronologically and culturally different archaeological contexts, ranging from the Impressed Ware to the
Square-Mouthed Pottery Culture. Their external, surface appearance is also different. They have been descri-
bed as grey, red, and red-grey wares. Unfortunately the results of the analyses are somewhat disappointing
since they reached the only conclusion that I campioni di ceramica figulina presentano unargilla tanto
depurata da non essere dissimile da quella delle migliori terre sigillate romane...Le informazioni sulla
possibile provenienza vengono cos a scemare (MANNONI, 1999: 217).
Also the figulina pottery from the central Po Valley sites is not very homogeneous. For instance, the
potsherds recovered from the Vh and Fiorano (BAGOLINI and BIAGI, 1975) sites are whitish or straw coloured.
The texture is also different since their surfaces are sometimes powdery, sometimes more compact. A simi-
lar observation can be made for the central and south Italian figulina that is represented by more powdery
and more compact wares as well as by finer and coarser vessels.
2. ANALYSES
Thirty-five fragments of figulina ware have been analysed in thin section from seven sites. Most of these
settlements are distributed along both the Adriatic coastlines, while two are located in the Friuli Plain of north-
eastern Italy (Fagnigola: 1 sherd only comes from this site; P. BIAGI, pers. comm. 2001), and in the central Po
Valley (Fiorano Modenese: 1 sherd). The sites of the Italian Adriatic coastline and interior sampled for analy-
sis are those of Ripabianca di Monterado (11 sherds), Gravina (3 sherds), and Grotta delle Mura (7 sherds);
while those of the Dalmatian one are: Smili (Danilo phase: 4 sherds; Hvar phase: 2 sherds) and Danilo Bitinj
(Danilo phase: 6 sherds). The figulina ware is not present in the other sites already mentioned in Chapters 3
and 4. The sites have been grouped according to their distribution comparing 1) those located in northern
Italy, even though their geographic position is not identical (for instance, Fiorano is in the Po Plain, while
Fagnigola is in the Friuli Plain), 2) the Apulian sites and that of Ripabianca, along the Italian coast of the
Adriatic, 3) the Dalmatian sites in the interior of ibenik. Subsequently, the similar fabrics have been compa-
red, and 4) the coarse figulina from the Apulian and the Dalmatian sites and the latter with the coarse figulina
from Ripabianca di Monterado.
3. THE ITALIAN SITES
Fagnigola (Pordenone) (BIAGI, 1975)
The only recovered figulina sherd has been analysed in thin section (FG 34; fig. 95a). It is characterised
by a reddish, very fine, slightly calcareous, vitrified, silty matrix with very rare inclusions, among which are
fine, very well-sorted quartz (<5%; typical size 0.02 by 0.02 mm), some iron oxides (5%), very fine muscovite
mica (1%), and one microfossil.
Twenty-six sherds belonging to the ordinary pottery have been analysed from the site of Fagnigola
(SPATARO, 2000). They have been subdivided into two groups (G1 and G2), which are very different from the

181
figulina one. The fabric of the latter, is much more silty and finer than those of groups 1 and 2. The matrix is
not only different: it must have passed through a much longer preparation process.
One soil sample collected some 2 km from the site has also been analysed in thin section. Its fabric is
brown, iron-rich and slightly micritic. It shows poorly-sorted angular and subangular quartz (<20%; size
range between 0.1 by 0.06 and 0.04 by 0.02 mm), some clay pellets, rare subrounded fragments of polycrystal-
line limestone (size range 0.9 by 0.4 and 0.14 by 0.1 mm), very occasional radiolarian chert, some opaques,
iron oxides, and rare muscovite mica.
The site is located close to old river courses on a very low hill surrounded by springs. The area is characte-
rised by heavy, clayey soils of the lower Friuli Plain. They are located close to lighter clayey-sandy soils, more
suitable for Neolithic agriculture (Foglio 39 della Carta Geologica dItalia, Pordenone, 1:100000).
On the basis of the thin section analysis, the ordinary pottery seems to have been produced locally (SPA-
TARO, 2000: 204). On the contrary, the clay for the production of the figulina ware is to be sought elsewhere. It
is more micritic, much more silty and finer than those utilised for the ordinary pottery.
Fiorano Modenese (Modena) (MALAVOLTI, 1951-1952a)
The Fiorano Culture is distributed over a large region of northern Italy including Emilia and the Veneto as
far as the Friuli Plain. Sites attributable to the Fiorano Culture have recently been discovered in north-western
Tuscany (TOZZI and ZAMAGNI, 2000).
The site of Fiorano Modenese is located on the right alluvial loamy terrace of the Secchia River just to the
north of the northernmost fringes of the Emilian Apennines in the Province of Modena (northern Italy). A local
amateur, F. MALAVOLTI (1944), discovered the site in 1938. The same author carried out several rescue excava-
tions at the site that is located inside a clay pit, at the depth of 2.50 m (MALAVOLTI, 1951-1952: 9). The
stratigraphy of the clay pit has shown Iron Age, Bronze Age, Early and Middle Neolithic occupation layers
and a Late Pleistocene buried soil (CREMASCHI, 1987: 174). The Early Neolithic Fiorano horizon, some 30 cm
thick, yielded many pit structures of different shape and size. Many of these were excavated by MALAVOLTI in
the 1940s as soon as they were brought to light by quarrying. Three radiocarbon dates have been obtained
from charcoal (Bln-3137: 557050 BP) and bone samples (pit 2, GrN-19838: 6690180 and pit 5,
GrN-19839: 654060 BP) (IMPROTA and PESSINA, 1998: 109). These dates are more recent or older than ex-
pected and do not fit into the average dates already available for the other Fiorano sites of the Emilian region
(BAGOLINI and BIAGI, 1990: 12).
The material culture assemblage of the Fiorano Culture layer produced typical Fiorano ceramics. They
are represented by carinated bowls with wide, knobbed strap handles, hemispheric, four handled cups, spheri-
cal, four handled flasks with four pierced small knobs on the rim and large, four handled, coarse ware jars with
plain, vertical cordons descending from the rim. The figulina ware is at most 1% of the pottery assemblage.
The flint industry is based on flint of pre-Alpine (Lessini Hills) provenance (BARFIELD, 1994). It is characteri-
sed by a high blade index. The commoner instruments are burins on a side notch, straight perforators, rhom-
boids obtained with the microburin technique and bladelets with sinuous edges. The cores are of the bladelet
type of subconical shape. The greenstone assemblage, obtained from non-local material is represented by a
few axes/adzes and rings with triangular section. The bone and shell assemblage consists of spearheads,
double and single perforators, rings and plaquettes (BAGOLINI and BIAGI, 1975).
The faunal assemblage is mainly represented by bones of domesticated animals. The list provided by
MALAVOLTI (1951-1952: 10) includes pig, ovicaprids and cattle followed by hare, mouse, badger, squirrel,
boar, red and roe deer and few birds.
The only available sherd of figulina ware has been analysed from this site. The sample (FMD 1: fig. 95b)
has a reddish, slightly micritic, vitrified, iron-rich matrix characterised by very well-sorted, fine quartz (<5%;
typical size 0.02 by 0.01 mm), occasional muscovite, iron oxides (5%), and one fragment of pyroxene (the
size is 0.3 by 0.16 mm).
3.1. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FIGULINA OF FIORANO MODENESE (FMD) AND FAGNIGOLA (FG)
The samples FMD 1 and FG 34 are almost identical. They show the same vitrified, iron-rich, reddish, slightly micritic
fabric with very few, well-sorted and very fine quartz, fine muscovite and iron oxides. The only difference is that FG 34
shows one microfossil that is absent in the Fiorano Modenese sample that, on the contrary, contains one pyroxene crystal.
182
a) b)
Fig. 95 - Photomicrographs of thin section figulina samples: a) FG 34 (Fagnigola: XPL, X100) and b) FMD 1 (Fiorano Modenese: XPL, X40)
(photographs by M. Spataro).
a)
c)
b)
d)
Fig. 96 - Gravina di Puglia: photomicrographs of thin section figulina samples: a) GRV 1, b) and c) GRV 2, d) GRV 3. (XPL, X40, with the exception
of c) GRV 2, XPL, X100) (photographs by M. Spataro).
Gravina di Puglia (Bari) (RADINA, 1981a; 1986)
The Neolithic settlement at Gravina (Bari) is located on the slopes of the hill of Botromagno, outside the
area of the Iron Age settlement. The site was first identified by VINSON (1972: 65, site no. 2) and later excava-
ted by Radina in the 1980s. So far only preliminary results have been published (RADINA, 1981a; 1986). Traces
of a ditch and possible hut remains were found. The pottery includes both Impressed and painted (figulina)
wares, presumably dating to the Middle Neolithic, although no radiocarbon dates are available (R. WHITEHOU-
SE, pers. comm. 2001).

183
Three figulina sherds have been analysed in thin section (table 17, Appendix 3). Only one group has been
identified.
G1 - (1 sample: GRV 1) (fig. 96a)
Reddish, micritic, fossiliferous, slightly vitrified matrix with very well-sorted angular and subangular quartz (10%; typical size 0.04
by 0.02 mm), fine subrounded and subangular fragments of limestone (10%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), muscovite mica (3%),
iron oxides (3%), some opaques, rare pyroxene, and many microfossils (Foraminifera);
sub. a (1 sample: GRV 2) (fig. 96b)
Red-brownish, micritic, fossiliferous matrix similar to that of G1 with more inclusions. It shows well-sorted angular and subangular
quartz (15%; typical size 0.05 by 0.03 mm), fine limestone (10%; size as G1), muscovite (3%), iron oxides (3%), some opaques, rare
pyroxene, and many microfossils (Foraminifera; a possible sea-urchin) (fig. 96c);
sub. b (1 sample: GRV 3) (fig. 96d)
Red-brownish, micritic, fossiliferous matrix very similar to that of G1 sub. a with coarser well-sorted angular and subangular quartz
(15%; typical size 0.08 by 0.06 mm), more abundant rounded and subrounded fragments of limestone (15%; same size as G1), some
opaques, muscovite mica, very rare feldspar, iron oxides (5%), and many microfossils (Foraminifera).
The three samples from Gravina are very similar. They are characterised by a reddish, red-brownish, micritic, fossiliferous matrix
with very well-sorted quartz, fine limestone fragments, some muscovite, rare pyroxene, iron oxides, and Foraminifera microfossils.
G1 sub. a (GRV 2) shows the same fabric as G1, with quartz more abundant and coarser than that of G1. The quartz of G1 sub. b
(GRV 3) is even coarser than that of G1 sub. a. In addition, it has more abundant fine fragments of limestone. They come probably
from the same source because of the identical micritic and fossiliferous fabric, which shows the same range of inclusions.
Grotta delle Mura (Bari) (CALATTINI and GRECO, 2000)
The cave of Grotta delle Mura is located along the coast of Apulia, in the municipality of Monopoli
(Bari). It opens in the locality called Lido Rosso, some 500 m southeast of Monopoli, at the bottom of a small
bay. It is part of a wider karstic system of the Pleistocene limestone formation. The site was discovered by the
spelaeologist Professor F. Anelli in 1952. The first excavations were carried out by O. Cornaggia Castiglioni
in 1960 (CORNAGGIA CASTIGLIONI and PALMA DI CESNOLA, 1964). The deposits of the cave, more than 3 m thick,
are composed of Middle Palaeolithic, Early and Late Epigravettian (Late Palaeolithic), Mesolithic, and Neo-
lithic Impressed Ware layers. No radiocarbon date is currently available for the Mousterian, for the Early
Epigravettian and for the Neolithic layers. The Final Epigravettian deposit, some 1 m thick, has produced four
radiocarbon dates, between 14,51050 BP (Beta-91798) and 10,540140 BP (Beta-91796) (CALATTINI, 1996a).
The layers above have yielded a rich flint assemblage attributable to a local facies of the Sauveterrian Mesoli-
thic. The lithic industry, composed of more than 5000 artefacts, includes long and circular end scrapers,
double, bilateral, hypermicrolithic backed points, isosceles and scalene hypermicrolithic triangles, backed
blades and points and truncation. The Mesolithic occupation of the cave has been dated to 829050 BP (Utc-
1417) and to 8240120 BP (Utc-780) (CALATTINI, 1996).
The uppermost occupation layer of Grotta delle Mura is attributed to the Impressed Ware Culture. According to
the excavator, this layer can be interpreted as a temporary stable for caprovids (CALATTINI and GRECO, 2000: 98). The
Early Neolithic ceramic assemblage is represented by materials typical of the Guadone-Lagnano facies characteri-
sed by evolved Impressed Wares and by figulina pottery with brown painted bands (CIPOLLONI SAMP, 1998).
The pottery includes cylindrical, spherical and tronco-conical large vessels, flasks, hemispherical and
carinated bowls and cups. The Impressed Ware pottery is decorated with Cardium, rocker, finger and instru-
mental motifs. Scratched, linear patterns are also represented. The figulina pottery is decorated with brown
and red painted bands.
Seven figulina sherds have been analysed from Grotta delle Mura (fig. 97; table 17, Appendix 3). Three
groups have been identified.
G1 - (1 sample: GDM 20) (figs. 98a and 98b)
Reddish, slightly micritic, vitrified, fossiliferous matrix characterised by well-sorted, angular and subangular quartz (7%; typical size
0.05 by 0.03 mm), iron oxides (7%), rare opaques, muscovite mica (2%), rare feldspar, rare flint, rare pyroxene, one clay pellet, and
many microfossils (Foraminifera);
sub. a (2 samples: GDM 17, 25) (fig. 98c)
Reddish, micritic, fossiliferous, vitrified matrix with well-sorted quartz (<20%; typical size 0.06 by 0.03 mm), many microfossils
(also a possible sea-urchin: fig. 98d), rare feldspar, muscovite (2%), rare opaques, iron oxides (5%), subrounded fragments of lime-
stone (10%; typical size 0.08 by 0.05 mm), very rare pyroxene, and flint in sample GDM 17.
184
Fig. 97 - Grotta delle Mura: figulina pottery from the Impressed Ware layers.

185
a)
c)
e)
b)
d)
f)
Fig. 98 - Grotta delle Mura: photomicrographs of thin section figulina samples: a) and b) GDM 20, c) GDM 25, d) GDM 17, e) GDM 9, f) GDM 10
(XPL, X40, with the exception of a) GDM 20, XPL, X100) (photographs by M. Spataro).
G2 - (GDM 7)
Brown-reddish, micritic, fossiliferous, slightly vitrified matrix characterised by angular and subangular quartz (10%; typical size
0.05 by 0.03 mm), fine subrounded fragments of limestone (10%; typical size 0.05 by 0.02 mm), iron oxides (5%), opaques, musco-
vite (3%), rare flint, and many microfossils (Foraminifera);
sub. a (2 samples: GDM 1, 9) (fig. 98e)
Same brown-reddish, micritic, fossiliferous, slightly vitrified matrix of G2, characterised by well-sorted angular and subangular
quartz (<20%; typical size 0.07 by 0.05 mm), rare flint, muscovite mica (3%), opaques, subrounded fragments of limestone (<15%;
typical size 0.09 by 0.07 mm). Two coarser rounded fragments of limestone (0.7 by 0.5 mm) are also present.
G3 - (1 sample: GDM 10) (fig. 98f)
Brown-reddish, fossiliferous matrix with poorly-sorted, very abundant, mainly rounded limestone (50%; size range between 2.5 by
1.5 and 0.1 by 0.1 mm), iron oxides (1%), occasional opaques, rare muscovite, many microfossils and rare and well-sorted quartz
(5%; typical size 0.07 by 0.05 mm).
186
Group 1 has a very fine reddish, vitrified, slightly micritic, fossiliferous fabric with some very well-sorted
quartz, muscovite, some iron oxides, rare pyroxene and feldspar, and many microfossils. This is the only
Grotta delle Mura sample that might be microscopically defined as fine figulina because of the size and
quantity of the inclusions. G1 sub. a shows a reddish, vitrified, slightly micritic and fossiliferous fabric similar
to that of G1, although richer in coarser quartz and with fine mainly subrounded fragments of limestone. The
fabric contains rare pyroxene, flint, feldspar, muscovite, and many microfossils. Group 2 has a brown-reddish,
micritic, fossiliferous and vitrified fabric with well-sorted quartz, abundant fine fragments of limestone, some
muscovite, rare feldspar, flint, pyroxene, and iron oxides. The matrix of G2 is slightly more micritic than that
of G1. Group 2 sub. a shows the same fabric of G2 with more abundant and coarser quartz and limestone
fragments. Group 3 shows a very different fabric, fossiliferous but very rich in coarse fragments of limestone
with very rare quartz and muscovite. It does not show any feldspar, pyroxene or flint.
The sources of groups 1 and 2 are very similar. They are both calcareous and fossiliferous and contain the
same inclusions. Group 2 is characterised by a fabric more micaceous and micritic than that of group 1; this latter
contains feldspar and pyroxene that are not represented in group 2. The source of G3 is different. It is much richer
in coarse limestone fragments, less fossiliferous and with less quartz than those of groups 1 and 2.
15
Some of the microfossils of groups 1 and 2 are Nummulites of the Eocene period. There is also a possible
sea-urchin (GDM 17: fig. 98d) (Y. GOREN, pers. comm. 2001).
3.2. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FIGULINA OF GROTTA DELLE MURA AND GRAVINA
The figulina samples from Gravina (GRV) and Grotta delle Mura (GDM) show some similarities. GRV 1
(GRV, G1) and GDM 7 (GDM, G2) have a similar brown-reddish, fossiliferous, slightly vitrified fabric with
well-sorted quartz, rich in microfossils, fine muscovite, iron oxides, rare feldspar, and pyroxene. The differen-
ce is that GDM 7 shows rare flint that is absent in GRV 1, and is richer than GRV 1 in microfossils. They might
come from very similar sources.
Also GRV 2 (GRV, G1 sub. a) is similar to GDM 9 (GDM, G2 sub. a). They have a very similar fabric
(micritic, fossiliferous, slightly vitrified) with muscovite and rare feldspar, pyroxene, although GDM 9 shows
rare flint (absent in GRV 2) and quartz more abundant and coarser than that of GRV 2. Another parallel can be
extended to the microfossils: e.g. GDM 20 (G1, GDM) and GDM 17 (G1 sub. a) has the same microfossils of
GRV 2 and GRV 3 (G1 sub. a, GRV; G1 sub. c, GRV) (e.g. possible sea-urchin and Nummulites) (figs. 96c and
96d, and 98a and 98d).
It is possible to suggest that the figulina wares of these two Apulian sites come from very similar sources.
The difference is that the samples from Grotta delle Mura show some occasional flint inclusions that are
absent in the Gravina samples. The sample GDM 10 has little similarity with the figulina from Gravina,
because it is characterised by a fabric coarser than those of groups 1 and 2. It is less fossiliferous, poorer in
quartz and richer in coarse fragments of limestone than the other analysed specimens.
Ripabianca di Monterado (Ancona) (for the site description see Chapter 4, 3.) (SILVESTRINI and PIGNOCCHI,
2000)
(11 figulina sherds: one group identified) (figs. 82-85)
G3 - (9 samples: RDM 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30) (fig. 86d)
Brown, micritic, fossiliferous matrix with well-sorted quartz, limestone, radiolarian chert and flint, opaques and iron oxides, feld-
spar, pyroxene, and many microfossils;
sub. a (2 samples: RDM 26, 28) (fig. 86e)
Dark brown, very micritic, fossiliferous matrix with poorly-sorted quartz, radiolarian chert, muscovite, limestone, flint, and many
microfossils (Chapter 4, 3.2.).
The fabric of G3 is very micritic and fossiliferous with quartz, flint, radiolarian chert, feldspar, pyroxene,
muscovite and iron oxides. G3 sub. a is coarser than that of G3 with larger-size quartz and limestone fragmen-
ts (Chapter 4, 3.2.1.).
15
Some other samples belonging to the ordinary pottery of GDM were analysed in thin section. They also show some Foraminifera characterised by
the same species of those of the figulina sherds.

187
The clay source utilised for this figulina is very micritic and fossiliferous, very similar to the soil sample
collected in the proximity of the site (Chapter 4, 3.4.).
3.3. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FIGULINA SAMPLES OF RIPABIANCA DI MONTERADO, GRAVINA AND GROTTA DELLE MURA
The figulina ware from Ripabianca di Monterado (RDM) shows some similarities with the figulina from
Grotta delle Mura (GDM). The fabric of both these samples shows muscovite mica, rare feldspar, pyroxene,
and Foraminifera. Their fabrics are micritic and fossiliferous, although the clay exploited for the manufacture
of the GDM ceramics is much richer in microfossils and in iron than the clay employed in the production of
the RDM figulina. On the other hand, the Ripabianca di Monterado samples show some radiolarian chert that
is absent from the GDM samples. Furthermore, the former is richer in flint than the GDM samples.
It is possible to suggest that the sources exploited for the figulina ware of these two sites are different. As
mentioned above, the sources for the production of the GRV and GDM figulinas are very similar and might be
located in the same region. On the contrary, the RDM source must be sought in a different area. From a
technological point of view, the same technique has been employed in the production of this pottery for all
three sites. The well-sorted fabric has been manufactured in the same way (decantation) in order to obtain a
specific fabric that was later fired at a relatively high temperature.
4. THE DALMATIAN SITES
Smili (Zadar) (for the site description see Chapter 3, 5.) (BATOVI, 1960-1961; 1962)
(total 6 samples) (figs. 36, 37 and 40)
(Danilo phase: 4 figulina sherds: 1 group identified)
G5a - (SMD 20, 22, 23; fine figulina) (fig. 38e)
Reddish, iron-rich, vitrified, very fine, slightly micritic matrix characterised by few and very fine, well-sorted, angular and subangu-
lar quartz, very rare pyroxene, iron oxides, and very fine muscovite mica. One sample (SMD 22) contains rare polycrystalline quartz;
G5b - (1 sample: SMD 21; medium figulina) (fig. 38g)
Brown, slightly micritic, iron-rich, slightly vitrified matrix characterised by well-sorted, abundant, angular and subangular quartz,
muscovite mica, rare polycrystalline quartz, pyroxene, feldspar, rare biotite, iron oxides and opaques (Chapter 3, 5.4.6.).
(Hvar phase; 2 figulina sherds: 1 group identified)
G4 - (2 samples: SMH 18, 21; fine figulina) (figs. 41e and 41f)
Reddish, vitrified, very fine, slightly micritic matrix characterised by few, very fine, and well-sorted angular and subangular quartz,
iron oxides, muscovite, rare polycrystalline quartz and very rare pyroxene in sample SMH 21. The matrix of sample SMH 18 is more
vitrified than that of SMH 21 whose carbonates have completely burnt out. Sample SMH 21 shows one fragment of quartzite (Chap-
ter 3, 5.4.10.).
The fine figulina potsherds of the Danilo and Hvar phases are extremely similar. In particular, samples SMD
22 (Danilo phase) and SMH 21 (Hvar phase) are practically identical. They show the same reddish, vitrified,
slightly micritic fabric with rare pyroxene, muscovite and iron oxides, and rare polycrystalline quartz.
Danilo Bitinj (ibenik) (for the site description see Chapter 3, 8.) (KOROEC, 1964)
(total 6 samples: 1 group identified) (figs. 57 and 59)
G3a - (3 samples: DB 10, 15, 16; fine figulina) (fig. 60d)
Reddish, iron-rich, vitrified, slightly micritic matrix with few, very fine, well-sorted quartz, fine muscovite, iron oxides and rare
pyroxene;
sub. b (2 samples: DB 14, 25; medium figulina) (fig. 60e)
Brown, micritic matrix with abundant quartz, muscovite, polycrystalline quartz, iron oxides, and one microfossil in DB 14 (fig. 60f);
sub. c (1 sample: DB 11; coarse figulina) (fig. 60g)
Brown, micritic matrix with abundant quartz, iron oxides, abundant limestone, muscovite, feldspar and pyroxene (Chapter 3, 8.2.).
The fine figulina group 3a is characterised by a very fine, vitrified, slightly micritic, iron-rich fabric with
very few inclusions, among which are quartz, muscovite, and iron oxides. The fabric of the medium and
coarse figulina (G3b and 3c) is much more calcareous and richer in inclusions than G3a (Chapter 3, 8.2.1.).
188
4.1. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FIGULINA WARES OF SMILI AND DANILO BITINJ
The fine figulina fromSmili (Danilo-SMD and Hvar-SMH, phases) and Danilo Bitinj (DB) are almost
identical (see also SEM-EDS results, Chapter 3, 5.4.8.; 5.4.12.; 8.2.2.). They show a very fine, reddish, vitri-
fied, slightly micritic, iron-rich fabric characterised by well-sorted and little quartz (same typical size), rare
pyroxene, fine muscovite, and iron oxides. The difference is that the fine figulina from Smili shows, in two
cases (SMD 22 and SMH 21), rare polycrystalline quartz that is absent from the fine figulina from DB. It is
also absent from the other samples from Smili, e.g. SMD 20, 23, and SMH 18. From a microscopic point of
view, the DB samples are slightly richer in iron oxides than those from Smili. All other parameters being
identical, it is still reasonable to suggest that they come from the same, or from an almost identical source.
This is also confirmed by the SEM-EDS results, which show very high percentages of magnesia, potash,
silica, and iron oxide (tables 6, 7, 10, Appendix 4).
Regarding the medium and coarse figulinas, only one coarse fragment has been analysed from SMD
(SMD 21). One group of medium (G3b) and one of coarse figulina (G3c) are represented at DB. Few simila-
rities have been observed between SMD 21 and the medium figulina of DB. They both show the same inclu-
sions (quartz, muscovite, feldspar, pyroxene, iron oxides, and opaques), although the fabric of G3b from DB
is more micritic, with fewer inclusions, than sample SMD 21. The coarse figulina (DB, G3c) is again much
more micritic and coarse than SMD 21. The source of the medium and coarse DB figulina specimens is more
micritic and slightly less iron-rich than that exploited for the production of SMD group.
4.2. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FINE FIGULINA OF DANILO BITINJ AND SMILI AND THAT OF FIORANO MODENESE
AND FAGNIGOLA
Strong similarities can be observed between the fabrics of the fine figulina of the Dalmatian sites I have
analysed and those of Fagnigola (FG) and Fiorano Modenese (FMD) in northern Italy. They are characterised
by the same reddish, vitrified, slightly micritic, very fine and well-sorted fabric with fine quartz and muscovi-
te, rare pyroxene, and iron oxides. FMD 1 and FG 34 show the same typical size of SMD, SMH and DB
samples. SMD 22 shows also the same tonality of colour of FMD 1, whilst the other samples from DB and
SMH are slightly more reddish. Therefore it is possible to suggest the exploitation of very similar, or identical,
sources for the production of this type of pottery. We can definitely speak of the same production technique for
the fine figulina wares from both Adriatic coastlines. The manufacture of this pottery implies the use of kilns
in order to control the high firing temperature (about 850 C) (Chapter 2, 5.2.l). This contrasts with KOROECs
(1964; Chapter 3, 8.) opinion of low-firing temperature for the production of figulina wares.
4.3. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE COARSE FIGULINA OF DANILO BITINJ, SMILI AND THAT OF GROTTA DELLE MURA
AND GRAVINA
No significant similarity can be observed between the fabrics of the Dalmatian sites of DB, SMD, and the
Italian site of GDM because the latter is more iron-rich than the coarse figulina from DB and SMD. Further-
more, the GDM samples show a very fossiliferous fabric, whereas the fabric of DB and SMD is non-fossilife-
rous (with the exception of DB 14 that shows one microfossil).
Some analogies can be noticed in the inclusions of the above-mentioned fabrics. All samples show well-sorted
quartz, rare pyroxene, feldspar, muscovite, iron oxides, and opaques in a calcareous fabric. The GDM samples show
flint and, only in one case, polycrystalline quartz (GDM 17), whereas the DB and SMD potsherds do not show any
flint but, in most cases minor amounts of polycrystalline quartz and very rare biotite mica (SMD 21).
The fabrics of DB 14 and GRV 1 are very similar. They show the same vitrified, micritic fabric: DB 14 is
slightly richer in iron and with only one microfossil, whereas GRV 1 is very fossiliferous. DB 14 has rare
polycrystalline quartz that is absent in GRV 1; the latter has quartz finer than that of DB 14. From a microsco-
pic point of view, only one sample from GDM can be classified as fine figulina (GDM 20). It has nothing in
common with the fine figulina of the other sites (FG, FMD, SMD, SMH, and DB). It is more micritic, very
fossiliferous, less vitrified and contains more abundant and coarser quartz than the others.
4.4. CORRELATION BETWEEN THE COARSE FIGULINA OF RIPABIANCA DI MONTERADO AND THAT OF SMILI AND
DANILO BITINJ
Because of the quantity and size of the inclusions, the figulina from RDM can be classified as coarse
figulina. It shows few similarities with the coarse specimens from SMD and DB that show a micritic matrix

189
and very similar inclusions, although they do not come from the same or from similar sources. This has been
established because: 1) the fabric of the RDM figulina is very fossiliferous; this contrasts with those from the
Croatian sites, 2) the samples from RDM always contain flint, which is missing from the Dalmatian samples,
and 3) the size range of the quartz is very different. Furthermore, the coarse figulina potsherds from SMD, DB
and RDM have different chemistry, although they show some similarities in the high percentage of potash and
magnesia. Nevertheless, the quantity of iron is much lower in the figulina of the Italian site than in those of the
Dalmatian coast (tables 6, 10, 14, Appendix 4).
5. TYPOLOGICAL COMPARISONS
Apart from the limited number of north Italian sites from which figulina potsherds have been sampled,
almost exclusively in the form of flasks and hemispherical bowls, the central and south Italian figulina vessels
are extremely varied. From Ripoli, the site most often associated with the term figulina, considered by some
authors strictly connected with the Danilo Culture because of the great quantity of painted wares, RELLINI (1934:
28) reports the presence, among the figulina pottery (of yellowish, clear, rarely pearl-coloured, often painted), of
medium and large-sized bowls, cups, tulip-shaped vessels, large dishes, jars, and necked flasks with globular
body. These latter shapes are typified by the presence of four handles on the body and four small, horizontally
pierced knobs just below the rim. The painted decorative patterns include thin bands of brownish zigzag lines,
triangles filled with single or net motifs, various triangle panels often delimited by rows of pointed bands, brown
and wide, red painted bands. Linear geometric patterns prevail (RELLINI, 1934: 37).
The painted Danilo pottery, that KOROEC (1958: 163) supposed was not made of the clay found in that
locality or in its immediate vicinity on the basis of the results of the chemical analysis of an excellently
purified clay containing various substances in the following order of sequence: silicium dioxide, aluminium
trioxide, ferrum trioxide, calcium monoxide and manganic monoxide is mainly represented by several types
of open bowls, ring-bottomed dishes, necked flasks, and rare tureens. The decorative, painted patterns are
represented by criss-cross brownish bands of lines, various net, triangle and sandglass motifs, and by wider
reddish bands. Squared and rhombic brownish motifs are also known as are a few recurring, dynamic, spiral
designs. A few sherds are decorated with panels of whitish rhombic motifs and wide brownish zigzag bands
filled with white dots. Given the dissimilarities in the ceramic forms and in the decorative patterns, it is
difficult to understand why KOROEC (1958: 167) suggested that the Danilo painted ware derived from that of
Ripoli. Furthermore, it is to be remembered that, according to the radiocarbon chronology we now know that
the Danilo Bitinj, Danilo Culture, village began to flourish at least 300-500 radiocarbon years before that of
Ripoli. Even though KOROEC (1958) was not aware of the noticeable differences between the Ripoli and
Danilo vessel forms and decorative patterns, he concluded despite its diversities, the ornamentation shows
certain similarities, both Danilo and Ripoli displaying the same distribution. At Ripoli, the ornamental patter-
ns are likewise executed in brown and red, the latter colour being used in both cultures only in the form of
broad bands...There exist similarities also in individual ornamental patterns. True, these are never identi-
cal, but connections are obvious. Most likely similarities will also be found in certain other details as well as
in the stone and flint artefacts (KOROEC, 1958: 167). In the light of the results of the new analyses, it is
difficult to sustain that the Danilo painted wares come from the Ripoli environment. Koroecs suggestion that
either our pottery comes from Italy or that other details suggest that this pottery (Danilo) used to be
exported from the Dalmatian mainland to Italy seems to be unfounded. Furthermore, his second suggestion
that either our pottery comes from Italy or that other details suggest that this pottery (Danilo) used to be
exported from the Dalmation mainland to Italy seems to be unfounded. The same can be said for the Hvar
Culture painted ware that is rather different from that of Danilo both in vessel shapes and decorations. The
best collection so far known is that of Grapeva spilja in the Hvar Island, published by NOVAK (1955), even
though a pottery sample has been published also from Vela pilja on the Korula Island (EUK, 1978; EUK
and RADI, 1995; 2001). The pottery shapes and decorations from these two assemblages and from the Hvar
Culture in general, find little comparison with those of both Ripoli (IHDE, 1995: 76) and Danilo. The only
radiocarbon dates so far available for the Hvar Culture come from the stratigraphic sequence of Grapeva
spilja. They all fall between the end of the seventh (Beta-103485: 613080 BP) and the middle of the fol-
lowing millennium (Beta-103482: 546060 BP) (FORENBACHER and KAISER, 2000: 33).
190
6. DISCUSSION
According to the above-mentioned results, it is clear that the fine figulina from Danilo and Smili (both
Danilo and Hvar phases) is almost identical. It is possible to suggest 1) the existence of regional production
centre(s) along the eastern Adriatic coastline serving both sites, or 2) that Smili itself was a manufacturing
centre because of the striking similarities between the figulina sherds of the Danilo and the Hvar phases
represented at the site that cover a time-span of some 500 years. Furthermore, it is to be stressed that the
distance between the sites of Smili and Danilo Bitinj is only some 75 km. It is important to point out the
macroscopic similarities between the figulina from the Croatian sites and that from the south Italian ones
(GRV and GDM), and their microscopic differences (see Chapter 5, 4.3.). Even though the bulk of the inclu-
sions is almost the same for the figulinas of both areas, the clear difference consists in the presence of flint in
the Italian wares, which is absent in the Dalmatian ones.
The coarse figulina from the south Italian, Apulian sites shows strong similarities between each other.
This might suggest a regional production of this pottery. On the other hand, the fabrics of the figulina of the
central Italian site of Ripabianca di Monterado seem to indicate a different source of provenance. This
source might even be local because of its strong similarity with the thin section of a soil sample collected
from the site itself. The figulina pottery from Ripabianca has never been described in detail. SILVESTRINI and
PIGNOCCHI (1998: 76) report the presence of fragments of pseudofigulina and of one single piece of red
painted figulina pottery. The term pseudofigulina is employed by these authors to indicate the roughness of
the outer surfaces and the occurrence of visible filler grains in the fabric. In another paper LOLLINI (1991:
60) wrote that documentata anche una ceramica giallastra di impasto depurato di tipo figulina, mentre
della figulina vera e propria con decorazione dipinta a fasce rosse non marginate, se ne rinvenuto un solo
frammento.
The figulina samples of the north Italian sites of Fiorano Modenese and Fagnigola have an extremely
similar matrix that probably indicates a common origin. Unfortunately it is very difficult to draw any conclu-
sion because of the very limited number of samples from these two sites.
Given the similarities between the fabrics of the fine figulina wares from the sites of Smili, Danilo
Bitinj, Fiorano Modenese and Fagnigola, we cannot exclude the possibility that this pottery was exchanged or
traded between the two coasts of the Adriatic, as already pointed out by BATOVI (1975) and KOROEC (1964).
In this context it must be stressed that samples from some of the most important central Italian sites, such
as Ripoli (RELLINI, 1934; CREMONESI, 1965) and Catignano (TOZZI, 1982) that are very rich in figulina pottery,
have not been available for analysis. Thus we cannot exclude the existence of a production centre different
from those taken into consideration for this work. Catignano, in particular, is an extremely important site
especially because of its close connections with that of Ripabianca di Monterado from which typical, ordinary
Catignano decorated vessels have been recovered.
7. FIGULINA PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY
A specific technique has been employed in the production of both fine and coarse figulina wares. The
potter knew very well the variety of clay to employ, the manufacturing process to follow through a long and
careful preparation, and the firing temperature to utilise. A clay source different from that utilised for the
ordinary pottery must have been used for the production of the fine figulina wares. This is clear from the
SEM-EDS analyses of the figulina wares from Smili and Danilo Bitinj. The clay employed at these sites is
richer in magnesia, potash, and iron oxide and poorer in calcium oxide (Chapter 3, 5.4.8.; 5.4.12.; 8.2.2.).
Most probably this would imply a technological process longer than that of the ordinary vessels (Chapter 6,
4.). Regarding the Italian sites, a well defined variety of micritic and fossiliferous clay has always been em-
ployed.
A skilful person and a kiln were needed. One of the most important pieces of evidence for the use of a
kiln is the fairly high firing temperature of about 800-850 C testified by the vitrification of the matrix and
the burning of the carbonates (Chapter 2, 5.2., l), in contrast with that of the every day, ordinary pottery that
is always lower than 750 C. This is testified by the presence of calcite filler in the Early (e.g. Jami na Sredi)
and in the Late Middle Neolithic ceramics (e.g. Vela pilja). These observations suggest that 1) a speciali-

191
sed class of artisans was already established, and 2) the presence of structures for pottery production. These
two factors would suggest that the figulina pottery production was already well organised at least by the
middle of the seventh millennium BP, involving some sort of central, regional production (I. FREESTONE,
pers. comm. 2001).
8. TRADE AND EXCHANGE NETWORK
It must be stressed that the figulina is a wider regional, less a local product than the ordinary
pottery; it marks the probable existence of long-distance trade activities already established by the se-
venth millennium BP, as documented also by the circulation of other materials such as obsidian and
Spondylus (SFRIADS, 2000).
Ethnographic parallels indicate that pottery is usually of local production and that most potters usually
sell their pots at a market rather close (some 5 km) to their home, and that purchased vessels are not transpor-
ted very far from the point of sale. The commoner picture for pots is that at least 90% of the sold items remain
within a radius of 15 km from the market (DIETLER AND HERBICH, 1994: 466). If this model might be applicable
to the ordinary Adriatic pottery, it is clear that this is not the case for the figulina ware whose distribution
certainly implies some kind of down-the-line exchange pattern (Chapter 1, 3.3.2.) or perhaps (?) the existence
of central places for the redistribution of these special goods (RENFREW, 1975).
Despite dissimilarities among the various regions, there is no doubt that exchange or trade activities had
already been established between the two coasts of the south Adriatic Basin at least by the middle of the
seventh millennium BP (Chapter 1, 3.1.; 3.2., and Chapter 6, 7.).
Even though no specialised site of this kind has ever been discovered for the figulina ware, a Middle
Neolithic redistribution centre for the Sardinian obsidian has been suggested at Pescale di Prignano, in the
central Emilian Apennines (MALAVOLTI, 1951-1952a) where 950 obsidian artefacts, mainly bladelets (813),
but also some retouched instruments (18) and cores (6) have been found. The fact that some varieties of
figulina wares were considered as prestige items (Chapter 6, 6.) is also indicated by the recovery of a locally
made Serra dAlto vessel in one of the Square-Mouthed Pottery burials of La Vela di Trento (BAGOLINI, 1990;
MOTTES, 1997: 67).
This discovery is of extreme importance in the study of the relationships between south and northern
Italy, even though, in this case, only the idea and not the material culture artefact seems to have travelled.
Trento lies on the left bank of the Adige River. The Adige Valley represents the main route across the
Alpine chain that links the Mediterranean world to central Europe. The same cemetery produced eviden-
ce of long, Spondylus beads, other prestige ornaments whose distribution might have followed a similar
route. The existence of prestige items is well documented during the flourishing of the Square-Mouthed
Pottery Culture. Hyaline quartz bladelets have been collected at Casatico di Marcaria, in the central Po
Valley (BIAGI et al., 1983).
The rock crystal raw material outcrops are known in north-western Lombardy and in South Tyrol where it
was mainly exploited during the Mesolithic (BROGLIO and LUNZ, 1983). Other materials are represented by
jadeite axes and rings whose outcrops are known in the western Ligurian and southern Piedmont (DAMICO et
al., 2002). In the Adige Valley cemetery of La Vela, the presence of one complete, typical Hinkelstein shoe-
last-chisel indicates that contacts were already active between the southern and the northern side of the Alpine
watershed around 5500 BP.
The results of these analyses, which indicate the existence of both local and regional production centres
(see Chapter 5, 6.) reinforce the idea of networks among sites. According to the data that have been developed,
the models of circulation of the figulina wares do not seem to follow the same routes we presently know for
other materials that were traded throughout the Adriatic during the same period, namely obsidian, flint (Chap-
ter 1, 3.1.; 3.2.) and possibly greenstones (PETRI, 1995)
16
.
16
Almost nothing is known of the provenance of the greenstone axes so far found along the coast of Dalmatia. The only tools analysed are those
reported by the above-mentioned author, who attributes his oldest specimens to the middle of the sixth millennium BP. The raw material sources
he suggests for the Dalmatian objects are those already known in south western Piedmont and in western Liguria (DAMICO, 2000: 69).
192

193
CHAPTER 6
COMPARISONS AND DISCUSSION
1. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE IW SITES
This chapter takes into reconsideration the results of the scientific analyses developed in Chapters 3 and
4, which would indicate that the Impressed Ware ceramics of both the Dalmatian and the Italian coastlines
were produced locally (tables 1-3, Appendix 2). The description of the sites is provided from the north to the
south starting from those of Istria, continuing with those of Dalmatia and then with those of the Italian Adria-
tic coast (fig. 1). It also discusses the relationships between the cultural aspects that have been examined, the
possible exchange of ceramics between the two coasts and the pottery typological characteristics as indicators
of spread of similar ideas and manufacture technology out of the original production centre.
1.1. THE ISTRIAN AND DALMATIAN SITES
Descending from Istria, minero-petrographic analyses show close similarities between the soil sample
collected from an outcrop located very close to the Neolithic settlement of Viula, and one of the Impressed
Ware ceramic groups from the same site (Chapter 3, 1.3.).
The cave sites of Jami na Sredi and Vela Jama, on the Islands of Cres and Loinj, in the north Kvarnar
Archipelago, have yielded Impressed Ware pottery assemblages very similar, from both typological (MLLER,
1994: 137) and technological points of view. The clay sources employed are also very similar, in some cases
almost identical, suggesting a local production (Chapter 3, 3.4.).
Moving farther to the south, the Impressed Wares from Tinj-Podlivade and Smili, some 20 km apart,
show very similar fabrics (Chapter 3, 5.6.). The pottery from these two sites are comparable also from a
typological point of view. CHAPMAN et al. (1996: 192) attributed it to the same phase of the IW Culture.
The ceramic assemblages from the open-air settlements of Konjevrate and Vrbica, in the interior of ibe-
nik, show few similarities. Nevertheless, they have unique and specific traits that do not occur elsewhere
along the eastern Adriatic coast. The comparison suggests that similar (but not identical) sources were exploi-
ted for their production (Chapter 3, 6.4.). The strong affinities observed between the IW pottery fabrics, the
geology of the surrounding areas, the soil sample thin section (and in most cases XRD) analyses and the
comparison with the pottery assemblages of the neighbouring, contemporary settlements, should indicate
that the Impressed Ware ceramics of this region were produced locally.
1.2. THE ITALIAN ADRIATIC SITES
From the north to the south, the Italian Impressed Ware sites considered for this research are those of
Fornace Cappuccini, Maddalena di Muccia, Ripabianca di Monterado, and Scamuso.
The results of the analyses of the ceramic assemblage from Fornace Cappuccini indicate that the IW
pottery of this site is of local production. The presence of flint, granite and siltstone rock fragments in the
fabric, finds close parallels in the geology of the area (Chapter 4, 1.4.).
The minero-petrographic analyses of the Maddalena di Muccia potsherds have revealed three fabrics of
probable local and one (G3-MDM) of non-local provenance (Chapter 4, 2.4.). This latter is characterised by
sandstone inclusions and granitic rock fragments. They do not occur in the geology of the area surrounding the
site, and, more generically, of the Province of Macerata.
The pottery from Ripabianca di Monterado has been subdivided into two groups of ordinary and one of
figulina wares. The results indicate the local manufacture of the entire pottery assemblage because of the
similarities between the ceramic groups and the geology of the area surrounding the site. The thin section
analysis of a soil sample collected in the proximity of the site confirms this view (Chapter 4, 3.4.).
The analyses of the assemblage of the IW Apulian site of Scamuso, point to a local manufacture for these
ceramics because of the fossiliferous and micritic matrix, with temper of volcanic origin (e.g. G1-SCA) which
matches with the geology of the area where the site is located (Chapter 4, 4.4.).
194
It is very difficult to suggest the existence of a trade/exchange ceramic network between the Impressed
Ware sites of the Dalmatian coast on the basis of the results of the analyses of the pottery assemblages. This is
mainly due to the great homogeneity of the geology of this territory, and of its related islands (Chapter 2, 1.).
Nevertheless, given the relatively high number of sites analysed, and the selection of contemporary,
close sites, it is reasonable to suggest that all the ceramic assemblages examined are of local origin. This is
confirmed by 1) the regional uniqueness of this production, 2) the results obtained from the study of the
materials from three superimposed Neolithic layers at Smili, and 3) the technological characteristic of its
manufacture based on open fires without the employment of specialists in pottery firing (Chapter 6,5.), which
contrasts with that of the figulina ware production.
Stylistic analysis is not very helpful for the definition of regional variants because the pottery typology
and decoration from all the other assemblages is very uniform, with the exception of that of the Istrian site of
Viula. They are all to be attributed to phases A and B of MLLERs (1988: 110) seriation.
Regarding the pottery production of the Italian IW sites, it is reasonable to suggest a local production for
all the examined cases. The only exception is a group of potsherds from Maddalena di Muccia whose prove-
nance seems to be non-local (G3; Chapter 4, 2.4.). This does not necessarily imply trade or exchange of
pottery. Their presence might be simply due to the occasional transit of people in the area. The limited number
of potsherds analysed cannot allow further hypotheses.
The idea of exchange or trade does not find support in the pottery of the almost contemporaneous sites of
Fornace Cappuccini and Ripabianca di Monterado, located 150 km apart. The only exception is represented
by one potsherd from Fornace Cappuccini (sample FC 10, G3), which is compatible with the geology of the
area surrounding the site. This specimen is very similar to the Ripabianca di Monterado sample RDM 17 (G2,
sub. a). According to this evidence (R. MACPHAIL and I. FREESTONE, pers. comm. 2001) we cannot exclude the
possibility of a pottery trade/exchange from Fornace Cappuccini to Ripabianca, but not vice-versa. In this
case, the typological/stylistic analysis might help shed more light on this problem. As stressed in Chapter 4, 2.
the typology of the RDM pottery assemblage is very rich. Some vessels, such as the burnished wares, are
identical to those of Catignano. Given the archaeological evidence, the trade route one would expect is from
Ripabianca to Fornace, not the opposite, because of the wider stylistic-typological variety which characterises
the Ripabianca assemblage (Chapter 4, 1.4.1.).
1.3. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE TWO COASTS
The results so far obtained would indicate that, at least as regards the sites taken into consideration, no
pottery trade activity took place between the two coasts during the Early Neolithic Impressed Ware Culture.
Although the distribution of the Cardium decorated pottery covers a large region of the Adriatic, there is no
scientific proof that the vessels were exchanged between the two coasts. At this stage of the research it would
be of great importance to analyse the potsherds from the early Impressed Ware site of Prato Don Michele in
the San Domino Island of the Tremiti Archipelago (FUSCO, 1965), that of Mala Palagrua, (FORENBAHER and
KAISER, 1997), and Suac Islands (BASS, 1998) midway between the Apulian Tavoliere and the Dalmatian
coast.
From a microscopic point of view, only two types of temper occur in the east Adriatic assemblages (with
the exception of one sherd from Vela pilja, VS 21, that contains grog): sparry calcite and very rarely organic
material (at Viula). The use of calcite is more probably linked with the raw material resources available in
Dalmatia
17
. Contrary to the Dalmatian situation, more varieties of temper were employed by the Impressed
Ware potters of the western coast. None of the potsherds so far examined has produced evidence of calcite.
This material is naturally present in the vessel fabrics (Chapter 4, 4.2.1.) of Scamuso, a site located in an area
of limestone. The potsherds analysed from this settlement show the occurrence of quartz sand with rare inclu-
sions of volcanic origin, and organic material.
The ceramics from the Middle Adriatic IW sites of Ripabianca di Monterado, Maddalena di Muccia and
Fornace Cappuccini, contain different varieties of temper, such as organic matter, flint, grog, siltstone, and
granitic rock fragments. The potsherds from one of the oldest South Italian sites, Scamuso, roughly contempo-
rary to the earlier Impressed Ware sites of the Dalmatian coast, does not show either sparry calcite or a fabric
17
In a recent article concerning the Early Neolithic ceramics of the Franchthi Cave in Argolis, K. VITELLI (1993: 193) suggests that calcite or shell
can produce what other additives to a clay body do not, a watertight body for low-fired ceramics (BUDAK, 1991).

195
similar to those of the potsherds of the contemporaneous Dalmatian sites. According to the available data,
the hypothesis of ordinary pottery trade/exchange between the two coasts during the first half of the seventh
millennium BP should be rejected.
From typological and stylistic points of view, the Impressed Wares of the two areas are very different. The
Dalmatian aspect has been subdivided into different groups first by BATOVI} (1966) and later by MLLER
(1988; 1994). Both these authors recognized different phases of development of the ceramic assemblages.
While the Cardium Impressed Ware is distributed, along the eastern Adriatic coastline, from Montenegro to
Istria (MLLER, 1988: 121), along the Italian side, the same type of pottery is not attested north of the Pescaro
River, in the Abruzzi. North of this river, the Impressed Ware Culture consists of regional variants that make
their appearance around the middle of the seventh millennium BP, at the sites of Maddalena di Muccia and
Portonovo di Ancona (SILVESTRINI and PIGNOCCHI, 2000).
Only two centuries later the Impressed Ware site of Ripabianca di Monterado is strongly influenced by
other cultural aspects such as that of Catignano, in the Abruzzi, whose radiocarbon dates fall between 633070
BP (R-996a) and 591065 BP (R-1777) (BAGNONE and TOZZI, 1988-1991). The pottery assemblage from this
latter site is absolutely different from that of the Impressed Ware tradition. It is composed of fine, burnished
and figulina wares painted in red and brown (RADI, 1995). The characteristic shapes of the four handled flasks
are almost identical to those of the same class of vessels of the Ripoli Culture as well as to those of the Fiorano
and the Vh Cultures that flourished in the Po Plain around the last two centuries of the same millennium BP.
Bands of incised lines with red inlay, characteristic of the Catignano settlement, are also known at Ripabianca
di Monterado.
2. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE DANILO CULTURE SITES
The pottery from two Danilo Culture sites has been examined. They are Danilo Bitinj (DB) and Smili,
Danilo phase (SMD).
From a typological/stylistic point of view, the ordinary pottery from both these sites shows many simi-
larities. The decorative patterns include incised herringbone and spiral motives (SMD 2, 14, 17: figs. 35
and 37; DB 9, 12, 17, 24: fig. 57) and linear grooves (SMD 7: fig. 35; DB 3, 8: figs. 58 and 59), while
similar large bases (SMD 3; DB 19), and necked jars (SMD 9, 11, 23; DB 8) characterise the vessel shapes.
No correlation could be extended to the figulina potsherds of both sites because of their very fragmentary
state of preservation.
From a microscopic point of view, the ordinary pottery is mainly represented by coarse wares with dark
brown, iron-rich fabrics including quartz and crushed calcite. Only two potsherds from Smili (G3 and G4-
SMD) do not show artificially added inclusions. The fabrics of G1 (SMD) and G2 (DB) are very similar. They
are iron-rich with fine quartz, rounded fragments of limestone, and abundant added crushed calcite. Given the
homogeneity and the identity of the geology of the two sites (Chapter 3, 5.3. and 8.1.), it is very difficult to
define whether they were traded/exchanged.
Furthermore, the SEM-EDS results (tables 6 and 10, Appendix 4) seem to support the idea of a local
provenance. In fact, the results obtained from these two groups are rather different: G1, SMD shows a higher
percentage of magnesia and much more abundant silica, potash, and iron oxide. On the other hand, G2, DB is
characterised by a percentage of calcium oxide higher than that of G1-SMD.
Regarding SMD, we can suggest a local pottery production because of the similarity of the fabrics with 1)
the fabrics of the potsherds analysed from the earlier (IW) and mainly the later phase of occupation (Hvar
phase), and 2) the daub fragments (SMD 5 and 12) (Chapter 3, 5.4.9.; 5.5.). Nevertheless, given the restricted
number of sites analysed, it is very difficult to establish whether or not the ordinary pottery was traded. The
indubitable data regard 1) the almost identical typological characteristics, and 2) the employment of the same
manufacturing technique. Only the fine figulina ware, which has almost identical fabrics at both sites, might
have been reasonably manufactured in a regional production centre (Chapter 5, 4.1.; 6.).
On the basis of these observations, the general picture currently available is that of two sites belonging to
the same culture, where the ordinary pottery, characterised by the same typology and style, was most probably
of local manufacture, following the same techniques and knowledge. Contrary to this, the analyses of the
figulina ware would suggest regional production centres for trade/exchange activities. Therefore, the present
196
evidence is that of an organised local production for the daily-used pottery and a more complex figulina
production system finalised to a wider exchange system. Unfortunately, the data currently available for a
better understanding of the routes/network trades followed by the figulina pottery are very limited.
3. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE HVAR CULTURE SITES
The pottery from two Hvar Culture sites has been examined. They are Smili, Hvar phase (SMH) and
Vela pilja (VS). From a typological/stylistic point of view, the two assemblages show some similarities.
Some sherds are decorated with linear, incised patterns (VS 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 16, 20, 22, 23: figs. 65-68; SMH
1, 3, 4, 7, 16, 18: figs. 39 and 40). The shapes include open bowls (VS 24, 39: figs. 54, 56; SMH 7, 19: fig. 39),
vessels with restricted mouth (VS 1, 6, 18, 19; SMH 13, 14: fig. 40), and deep jars with slightly out-turned rim
(VS 3: fig. 66; SMH 3, 4, 5: figs. 39 and 40).
From a microscopic point of view, the two assemblages show some common characteristics: G1-SMH is
similar, but not identical to G1-VS, because the former is richer in rounded fragments of limestone and the
quartz is slightly coarser than that of G1-VS. Similar sources were exploited for the production of these
groups. As mentioned above and in the conclusions of Chapter 3, 5.5. the assemblage from Smili, Hvar
phase, seems to be of local production because of the strong similarities with the pottery fabrics of the lower-
lying Neolithic layers (IW and Danilo occupation phases). Also in this case it is difficult to suggest any
pottery movement due to trade or exchange, because of the similar geology that characterises the region where
both these sites are located. Furthermore, the SEM-EDS data (tables 7 and 11, Appendix 4) seem to confirm a
different origin for the two groups. In effect, G1-SMH is characterised by higher percentages of iron oxide and
titania, and much higher quantities of aluminia and phosphorus oxide (although the latter might be due to
post-depositional factors) than G1-VS. In contrast, G1-VS shows percentages of magnesia and manganese
oxide higher than that of G1-SMH.
No trade/exchange activity can be suggested for these ceramics because the other VS fabrics do not show
any relationship with those of SMH. The matrix of G2-VS is much finer than those of SMH, while the potsher-
ds of G3 and 4-VS show the presence of terra rossa soil, which is never present in the fabrics of SMD. The
typological and mineralogical characteristics of G1-VS are not different from those of the other ceramic
groups of the same site (G2-4). Thus it is difficult to suggest that only those vessels, whose typology is similar
to those produced with terra rossa soil, were imported.
4. CHANGES IN THE POTTERY TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCTION?
4.1. EARLY NEOLITHIC POTTERY PRODUCTION
The ceramics analysed from the IW sites are characterised by very similar technologies and techniques.
Their fabrics are coarse, often with added temper (Jami na Sredi, Vrbica, Konjevrate, Vela Jama, Maddalena di
Muccia, Fornace Cappuccini, Ripabianca di Monterado, and Scamuso). In a few cases they do not contain
artificially added inclusions (e.g. most of the sherds from Viula, Tinj, and Smili). The firing temperature is
always rather low, of some 650-700 C, as testified in most cases by a non-vitrified fabric and the presence of
sparry calcite. The temper more frequently utilised at the sites of the Dalmatian coast, is crushed calcite most
probably because this is the commonest mineral available in the region. In very few cases it has been possible
to observe that, during the pottery manufacture also some limestone was crushed and added as temper. This is
suggested by the angular and subangular shape of some limestone observed in a few thin sections of Jami na
Sredi (G1), Vrbica (G4), and Konjevrate (groups 5 and 6).
Organic temper was contained in some of the assemblages, such as those of Viula (G2, G2 sub. a and b),
Maddalena di Muccia (G1 and G3), Ripabianca di Monterado (G1), and Scamuso (G1 sub. a). Another temper
is quartz sand of volcanic origin utilised for the manufacture of the Scamuso ceramics. Only in two cases grog
was utilised as temper: they are the Middle Adriatic IW sites of Maddalena di Muccia and Ripabianca di
Monterado (G2-MDM and G2 sub. c-RDM).
Temper was also obtained by adding granite, calcareous sandstone and siltstone rock fragments. This fact
has been noticed at the Italian IW sites of Maddalena di Muccia (groups 3, 3 sub. a and b), Ripabianca di

197
Monterado (groups 2 and 2 sub. b), and Fornace Cappuccini (groups 1, 1 sub. a and b, and group 2).
On the basis of the results obtained from the sherds analysed, there is no proof that temper might indicate
a functional variability of the different classes of pottery.
18
4.2. MIDDLE NEOLITHIC POTTERY PRODUCTION
The ceramic assemblages analysed from the Middle Neolithic sites are those from Smili and Danilo
Bitinj (Danilo Culture). The technology employed is very similar at both sites. The coarse fabrics are low-
fired with crushed calcite used as temper. Smili also shows two fabrics without crushed calcite. The first is
characterised by abundant, most probably added, quartz (G3, SMD), the second (G4, SMD) by naturally
present limestone. Therefore 14 sherds out of 16 show added calcite, while all the ordinary pottery of Danilo
Bitinj contains crushed calcite
19
.
To conclude, the technology of the pottery manufacture of the Middle Neolithic does not show any diffe-
rence among these two sites. A unique case is that of the figulina pottery, that shows a more advanced techno-
logy at both Smili and Danilo Bitinj (Chapter 5, 7.).
4.3. THE LATER MIDDLE NEOLITHIC PHASE
The ceramics from two sites of the later phase of the Middle Neolithic (Hvar Culture) were analysed:
Smili and Vela pilja.
The first assemblage shows that 18 out of 19 sherds are of coarse fabric with added calcite. Only one
sherd (SMH 14, G3) does not show any artificially added inclusion. Most of the potsherds from Vela pilja are
characterised by added calcite; only one contains grog temper (VS 21, G5). The firing temperature is always
below 750 C. The pottery from these sites does not show any difference in both the manufacturing and firing
techniques.
5. DISCUSSION
The ordinary pottery production of the Adriatic coastlines does not show any technological change between
the Early and the Middle Neolithic. In most cases the fabrics are coarse and rich in temper. No clear correla-
tion is attested between the fabric and the typology of these ceramics.
Most of the Early Neolithic potsherds show the inclusion of temper. It becomes even more clear during
the Middle Neolithic and the later phase of the same period, while the firing temperature remains always
lower than 750 C (Chapter 2, 5.2., i).
On the other hand, this very homogeneous picture contrasts with that of the treatment of the vessel surfa-
ces that varies considerably from the Early to the later phases of the Middle Neolithic. The surfaces of the
Impressed Ware pottery are very porous and often rough, whereas those of the Danilo and Hvar Cultures are
well treated, burnished, polished, sometimes of black or dark brown translucent colour. This fact has already
been observed by MUNTONI (1999: 239) who, suggested that often, while similar composition and fabrication
are characteristic traits common to prehistoric wares, forms and surface finishing techniques seemed to be
the major source of variation. According to the same author, most archaeologists who interpret stylistic
modes as a result of cultural change might utilise incorrect parameters, while more significant modifica-
tions should be noticed if the culture had really changed. In this authors opinion, at synchronic level,
these modifications would derive from selections operated by different groups to answer to some kind of local
or social pressure. At diachronic level it might indicate that the pottery tradition was too strong to develop
into new ceramic forms; in this case only new types of decorative patterns represent the innovations.
Clear technological changes took place with the appearance of the figulina wares since a specialised
potter and a kiln were introduced in a new production system. Unfortunately, given the limited size of the
excavated area, little is known of the site dimensions through the different habitation periods. BATOVI (1964;
18
At the site of Malo Korenovo, which belongs to the Linear Pottery Culture (LBK), granitic rocks seem to have been utilised as temper specifically
for the cooking vessels, undoubtedly for pots coarser than those whose fabric is characterised by a finer material, such as alluvial silt (SPATARO,
2003).
19
Also most of the pottery from layers 2a and 2 of Edera Cave, radiocarbon dated from the beginning of the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic, shows
added crushed calcite (18 sherds out of 19 - layex 2a, 9 sherds out of 10 - layer 2) (SPATARO, 2001).
198
pers. comm. 1999) reported that the Impressed Ware sites of the interior of Zadar and [ibenik are much
smaller than those of the Middle Neolithic (Danilo) and Late Middle Neolithic (Hvar) periods of the same
provinces. This is the case, for instance, of the sites of Smili (Zadar) and of Bribir ([ibenik). This would
indicate that the population had increased from the middle of the seventh millennium BP onwards, exactly
when, figulina ceramics start to make their appearance along the coast of Dalmatia.
During the Early and the Middle Neolithic periods, the manufacture of the every day, ordinary pottery
contrasts with that of the fine wares some of which might perhaps have acted as prestige items. This phenome-
non that occurred almost simultaneously along both the Adriatic coasts, indicates that, around the end of the
Early Neolithic, the pottery production system changed. It became more complex and most probably implied
exchanges on a regional scale.
6. FIGULINA WARE IN ITS CONTEXT
The occurrence of figulina wares seems to increase in a later period in the development of the Impressed
Ware Culture, roughly around the middle of the seventh millennium BP, when the Guadone style takes over, at
least in some regions. This latter style has been dated at Monte Maulo, in the Biferno Valley, between 654080
BP (OxA-651) and 621070 BP (OxA-653) (BARKER, 1995: 105).
Ceramics decorated in the Guadone style are known also in central Bosnia at Obre I (BENAC, 1973) and in
eastern Herzegovina, where the cave site of Hateljska peina produced evidence of some characteristic Gua-
done decorated potsherds (MARIJANOVI, 2000: T. XIII/3). According to BENAC (1973: 405), at Obre I, this
pottery belongs to the very end of the early Neolithic period and the origin of this kind of pottery
should be looked for in Dalmatia or in settlements belonging to the same group as the early settlement at
Smili. This indicates that, following the above-mentioned author, no trade or exchange of pottery took
place between the Italian shore of the Adriatic, the Dalmatian and the Bosnian sites, but that (perhaps) the
technology employed in the manufacture of new pottery styles with monochrome, well-burnished surfaces,
tremolo and other decorations was transmitted throughout the entire region.
The figulina wares represent another aspect of the mid seventh millennium BP pottery technology that
greatly evolved during that period. Its manufacture involves the use of kilns and firing temperatures higher
than those utilised for the production of the Impressed Ware vessels. According to MLLER (1988: 122) rela-
tionships might have existed between the painted figulina wares of Apulia and those of Greece, around the
middle of the seventh millennium BP. If this is correct it would indicate that the complexity of the picture that
was emerging during that period is to be understood even on a wider geographic scale.
If we restrict this view to the Adriatic, we can observe, around this period (mid seventh millennium BP),
that 1) noticeable changes are taking place in the Impressed Ware tradition along the Italian coastline north of
the Abruzzi region, 2) according to the radiocarbon dates obtained from the cave site of Gudnja pe}ina (CHAP-
MAN, 1988), along the Dalmatian coast the Danilo Culture makes its appearance in the southern part of this
region, 3) cultural transformations occurred in central Bosnia, where the Kakanj Culture developed out of a
Starevo Culture complex at Obre I, 4) that the rhyton cult (PERI, 1996) of the Kakanj and Danilo Cultures
(Chapter 6, 7.), starts to spread, rapidly towards the north, 5) figulina painted wares become a common feature
of distinct cultural aspects along both the Adriatic coastlines, 6) the trade of obsidian increases, sometimes
following long-distance routes (TYKOT, 1996) (Chapter 1, 3.2.; 7, 1.).
7. LATER CHANGES IN POTTERY TYPOLOGY DUE TO EXCHANGES BETWEEN THE TWO
ADRIATIC COASTLINES
The site of Obre I in central Bosnia is of key importance for the understanding of some of the events that
took place in the Adriatic during the seventh millennium BP. Basically, the Obre I stratigraphy is represented
by two evolving cultural aspects: those of Starevo and Kakanj. The Starevo Culture is commonly conside-
red to represent the earliest Neolithic of this region of the Balkan Peninsula (TRINGHAM, 1971). The Obre I
oldest dates for this culture fall between 724060 BP (UCLA-1605I) and 671060 BP (UCLA-1605G) (GIM-
BUTAS, 1984: 250), which means that they are roughly contemporary to the early spread of the Cardium Im-

199
pressed Ware in the Adriatic. Here the Impressed Ware, Guadone style pottery makes its appearance in the
second, over-lying occupation layer. According to BENAC (1973: 405) the Impresso component of the IInd
stratum of Obre I belongs to the very end of the early Neolithic period.
At Obre I the Impresso pottery ware of the Adriatic type are much richer including simple shapes
sometimes with very well-burnished surface covered with a brilliant black slip, decorated with tremolo
rows, hatched triangles and nail impressed motifs that are also very common to the site of Zelena peina along
a tributary of the Neretva River, near Mostar (BENAC, 1957a). Following BENAC (1973: 388), the hypothesis
that the Starevo/Impresso Culture represents the immigration of the bearers of these cultures to the area of
Obre andthe establishment of a new settlement on the periphery of both culture complexes must be taken
into consideration.
Also the excavations carried out at Obre II (BENAC, 1973a) have produced evidence of relationships
between the two coasts of the Adriatic during the middle of the sixth millennium BP, demonstrated by the
presence of one imported Serra dAlto typical vessel at Obre II itself (BENAC, 1987).
Furthermore, the excavations at the Apulian Tavoliere site of Passo di Corvo have yielded a unique class
of pottery with geometrical, rhombic patterns of pointille decorations (TIN, 1983: Tav. 118). This ceramic
assemblage had been compared by the excavator with similarly decorated potsherds from the Neolithic levels
of Knossos in Crete (TIN, 1983: 181), while both the decorative technique and the rhombic pattern is typical
of the Butmir Culture, as demonstrated by BENAC (1987: 18).
This discovery reinforces the evidence of relationships between the two coasts of the Adriatic during the
Middle Neolithic period.
The over-lying upper layers of the Obre I sequence are represented by the Kakanj Culture that is strictly
related to that of Danilo. The Kakanj Culture is characterised by the appearance of a new cult object that
substitutes the typical Starevo Culture altars: the rhyton. Following the typological subdivision suggested
by BENAC (1973: 384), the Obre I rhyta include, among others, typical Kakanj types.
These latter are characterised by thickened, conical legs, sometimes decorated with geometrical, scra-
tched, linear motifs. A new re-interpretation of these vessels recently proposed by PERI} (1996), suggests that
the classical Kakanj rhyta are to be interpreted as representations of female cattle and that the Thessalian
specimens, with shorter and wider, pointed legs, as sows.
This author hypothesises that the rhyton cult spread very rapidly from Greece and the Peloponnese to
the Balkan Peninsula, following transhumant herdsmen who moved from the permanent valley bottom settle-
ments, to the seasonal upper mountain pastures bearing these unique vessels with them.
At this point it is of great importance to note the presence of typical Kakanj rhyta in the northernmost
region reached by the spread of the Danilo Culture, in its local Vlaka variant, that is the Trieste Karst of north
eastern Italy, where rhyta are known from many cave sites (MONTAGNARI KOKELJ and CRISMANI, 1993). The
Edera Cave, Kakanj type rhyton (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001) comes from an Early Neolithic ash level radiocar-
bon dated to the middle of the seventh millennium BP.
The present radiocarbon evidence seems to indicate a rapid spread of this new cultural Danilo aspect
towards the northwest as well as the diffusion of this cult in other areas such as the Trieste Karst by the very
beginning of the Neolithic in that region.
The scientific analysis of the Edera rhyton has demonstrated its local production. This indicates that, in
this case, the idea of the rhyton cult was diffused, and not the specific item itself (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001;
SPATARO, 2001: 98; BIAGI, 2003). Relationships between the eastern Adriatic and Apulia are also demonstrated
by the discovery of two foot fragments of typical, eastern Adriatic cultual vessels or rhyta (PERI, 1996) from
the site of Le Macchie near Bari (RADINA, 1981).
Regarding the possible typological variations deriving from the import of ceramics from elsewhere, even
though the Danilo Culture layer at Smili yielded eight typical Korenovo Culture potsherds (TEAK-GREGL,
1993: 14), no typological change can be noted in the pottery assemblage from this site, denoting the influence
of this Linear Pottery aspect in the local wares.
200

201
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSIONS
1. IMPRESSED WARES AND OBSIDIAN IN THE ADRIATIC: EARLY NEOLITHIC TRADE AND
EXCHANGE
All the results obtained from the analysis of the Impressed Ware potsherds from the examined sites indi-
cate that the production of this class of Early Neolithic ceramic was local. These data contrast with the sugge-
stions put forward by some authors concerning the transport of pottery across the southern Adriatic because of
the easy navigation across the sea in Neolithic times, thanks to the great number of islands forming a natural
bridge between the Apulian Tavoliere and the Dalmatian coast (BASS, 1998: 167). Experiments have recen-
tly demonstrated that Early Neolithic navigation was effectively possible across this sound (TICH, 2000).
Given the limited number of sites and of potsherds analysed from each site, it is not possible to be undoubtedly
sure that Impressed Ware vessels were not transported across the Adriatic by the beginning of the seventh
millennium BP. A further step in the research would be the examination of a greater number of potsherds
including those from the Impressed Ware sites discovered on the Islands of Palagrua and Suac (BASS, 1998:
168), just midway between the two opposite shores, to check their local manufacture or their potential import
from the south-west.
This evidence contrasts with that already known for obsidian that was traded, mainly in the form of
finished products, namely bladelets, throughout the Adriatic from the beginning of the seventh millennium
BP. The detailed study undertaken by TYKOT (1996: 69) on the Mediterranean obsidians shows the distribution
of the Neolithic and post-Neolithic finds. His analyses demonstrate that Liparian obsidian was traded across
the Adriatic as far as the Trieste Karst and the eastern Friuli Plain, as well as all along the western Adriatic
coastline. Unfortunately, all the obsidian specimens from the Dalmatian Neolithic sites have not been exami-
ned and their source of provenance is uncertain. Nevertheless, these data indicate that obsidian was traded
over long distances towards the east and northeast, while this cannot be ascertained for the ceramics of the
period under discussion. As pointed out by TYKOT (1996: 64) Cardial ceramics, for example, were also being
exchanged in the Early Neolithic, although the distances involved were on the order of 50-70 km rather than
the hundreds travelled by obsidian as also remarked by BARNETT (1990) for the Impressed Wares.
Another point that needs clarification is that of the methodology employed in the scientific identification
of pottery and obsidian. While pottery is the commonest assemblage from an archaeological (Neolithic) site,
obsidian is simply the opposite. While ceramic vessels are utilised every day, obsidian artefacts (bladelets) are
usually unretouched or unused (un-functional or new), and are often interpreted as prestige items. Furthermo-
re, the scientific analysis of obsidian can be carried out on all the (few) available specimens from each archa-
eological site (AMMERMAN and POLGLASE, 1997: 583); its raw material, volcanic sources are very few and well
known, and their identification rather easy (CANN and RENFREW, 1964). Pottery, on the contrary is, as mentio-
ned above, extremely common to any archaeological site. The samples that can be scientifically analysed are
few (according to the presently adopted methodology 20 to 30 samples). Furthermore, their study is undoubte-
dly difficult, costly and takes much longer than that needed for other materials such as obsidian, greenstones,
and flint. These contrasting data have to be taken into consideration. They mean that, while the results obtai-
ned from the obsidian source of provenance determination are very reliable, because many or all the available
samples have been analysed, those obtained from the ceramics are not, because the specimens examined
represent an extremely limited sample of the total assemblage available. The scientific analysis of the entire
pottery assemblage from an excavated Neolithic site is simply impossible and will never be conducted with
the currently available scientific methods and funds.
The results that have been so far obtained from the Impressed Ware pottery of both the Adriatic coastal
sites do not indicate any wide distribution or long-distance diffusion of these vessels; on the contrary, they
demonstrate their local or regional production. Their dispersal is always restricted to a rather limited radius,
similar to that observed by BARNETT (1990: 863; 2000: 108) for the Impressed Wares of Languedoc in southe-
202
astern France. With the exception of the Trieste Karst Edera Cave, layer 3a (SPATARO, 2001) my results do not
even reinforce the hypothesis of exchange or interaction of pottery vessels between the last hunter-gatherers
and the first farmers of the study region. This is contra ZVELEBIL and LILLIE (2000: 71) who showed a distribu-
tion map of the Adriatic region where pottery was introduced first into foragers communities in the Availa-
bility phase. It is also difficult to define whether the results of this study contribute to reinforce the wave of
advance model proposed by AMMERMAN and CAVALLI-SFORZA (1971), although this appears to be the more
acceptable solution, since the local (or regional) production of Early Neolithic pottery might have been manu-
factured by local potters belonging to communities that moved from an old to a newly established site. Even
though this model is purely theoretical and further scientific evidence is highly needed, in my opinion it might
be achieved by mean of the multiplication of the scientific analysis of pottery. The results obtained through the
methodologies employed in this work (Chapter 2, 5.), might constitute a fundamental database for the conti-
nuation of these analyses and the further development of these studies.
2. FIGULINA WARE IN THE ADRIATIC - MID SEVENTH MILLENNIUM BP
Given that the circulation of pottery during the Early Neolithic was minimal, as we have seen, it undou-
btedly changed later, at a certain stage of the production of the figulina wares. It is well known that, in
southern Italy, this type of pottery began to be manufactured quite early. Since before the middle of the
seventh millennium BP (WHITEHOUSE, 1969: 280), figulina wares have been common to various south and
central Italian Neolithic cultural aspects; their production continued until at least the middle of the sixth
millennium BP, or even later, with the Serra dAlto and the Ripoli Cultures (FRANGIPANE, 1975: 135; MALONE,
1985: 142). The distribution of figulina wares along both sides of the Adriatic is a phenomenon that, according
to the analyses so far conducted, seems to have taken place mainly around the last centuries of the seventh
millennium BP, and to have continued at least until the middle of the sixth, as documented by the import of
potsherds at some north Italian sites (BARFIELD, 1981: 33).
A few interesting data suggest that, during the above-mentioned period, not only some specific types of
figulina vessels were traded (Chapter 5, 6.), but also that the transmission of ideas was taking place. This is
indicated, for example, by recent information obtained from a locally made, typical central Bosnian Kakanj
cult rhyton discovered in the Trieste Karst Edera Cave (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001; SPATARO, 2001). This
discovery reinforces the importance of the role that transhumance might have played from the Balkans towar-
ds northern Italy, following routes that herders travelled until World War Two. This implies important mecha-
nisms which undoubtedly led to: 1) the transmission of ideas, 2) the redistribution of rare raw materials, 3)
the distribution of finished products and 4) the archaeological distributions of material traits (NANDRIS,
1999: 125).
3. OLD MODELS AND NEW PROPOSALS FOR FURTHER STUDIES
In some of the study regions, such as the western Adriatic coast, the temporal dimension of the wave of
advance model of demic diffusion proposed by AMMERMAN and CAVALLI-SFORZA (1971) can be suggested, as it
has been for other areas of Europe, for example the south Balkan Peninsula (THISSEN, 2000a: 193), for which
a time-scale less rigid than that proposed by the above authors has been proposed. At this stage of the research
it is not easy to suggest the role that pottery can play in the scientific proof of such model. As far as we know,
it is presently clear that 1) the Impressed Ware Culture took some 1000 radiocarbon years to spread from the
Tavoliere up to the coasts of Romagna, that is to cover some 1000 kilometres (SKEATES, 1994: 65), 2) the first
Neolithic, made its appearance, in Apulia, at the end of the eighth-beginning of the seventh millennium BP,
while the earliest Neolithisation of the Romagna coast took place not earlier than during the last three centu-
ries of the seventh millennium BP, and that 3) the Impressed Ware ceramic assemblages of the two above-
mentioned regions (Apulia and Romagna) show very different typological and decorative characteristic traits.
Much less is known of the chronology of the spread of this culture along the Dalmatian coast, mainly because
of the scarcity of radiocarbon dates from most of the key sites. Although the situation here seems to be
different from that of the opposite coast, it is important to observe that only the more recent aspects of this

203
culture are represented in Istria. At these sites, namely those around Medulin (Pula) and Vela Gromaa (BAi,
1969; 1973), the Impressed Ware ceramics have always been found associated with linear incised decorated
pottery which led MLLER (1994) to introduce the term Medulin for this specific ceramic group.
Apart from the case of Edera Cave (SPATARO, 2001), after the original diffusion of people, the exchan-
ge/diffusion of ideas, more than of ceramic vessels and other material culture remains, seems to have been of
great importance in the case of the Impressed Ware Culture. It is interesting to note that, at least as regards the
Dalmatian coast, the vessel forms and decorations do not vary over well-defined regional or super-regional
boundaries, even though their production was always at local or regional scale. Further results might possibly
be obtained taking into consideration a higher number of specimens from other Impressed Ware Apulian sites
from which very early radiocarbon dates have been obtained.
The changes took place only around the middle of the seventh millennium BP, when the Danilo Cultu-
re substituted the Impressed Ware one along the Dalmatian coast, and the Catignano and later the Ripoli
Cultures took over along the central Italian coast. Changes in the structural development of the archaeological
sites can also be noticed from this period onwards. In central Italy, settlement sites with long, apsed habitation
structures have been excavated at Catignano, where the site was re-inhabited several times as documented by
several super-imposed house remains (TOZZI, 1982: 320). In Dalmatia, where Neolithic open-air settlements
of different age and culture are known, the Impressed Ware villages are always spread over areas smaller than
those covered by those of the Danilo and Hvar Cultures (Chapter 6, 5.). Although the available data on the
Neolithic structural remains of the area are scarce, they seem to indicate that social changes occurred around
the middle of the seventh millennium BP. These changes might be indicated, along the western Adriatic coast,
by the construction of habitation structures more complicated than those of the preceding centuries, and, in
Dalmatia, by the establishment of villages of greater extension than those of the Impressed Ware Culture
(BATOVI, 1972).
To conclude: by the middle of the seventh millennium BP many changes were taking place in the Adriatic
basin and more generally in the Mediterranean region. They can be described as follows:
1) along the western coast of the Adriatic, while in southern Italy the Guadone style and the figulina wares
were taking over and substituted the Cardium and instrumental Impressed Wares (CIPOLLONI SAMP et al.,
1999), in Central Italy, north of the Abruzzi, new aspects of this culture started to flourish (RADI, 1995);
2) the Danilo and Kakanj Cultures made their appearance along the Dalmatian coast and its interior (KORO-
EC, 1964; BENAC, 1973);
3) the cult rhyton vessels spread along the same territories covered by the Kakanj and Danilo Cultures,
possibly from Greece (PERI), 1996);
4) the expansion of the distribution of this cult is indicated by the occurrence of fragments of rhyta at
some sites of the south Italian coast of the Adriatic, and moving towards the north, as far as the Friuli
Plain (BIAGI and SPATARO, 2001);
5) the figulina wares became more and more common reflecting more complex pottery production systems
in an evolving society, whose structure was subject to a rapid change (MALONE, 1985);
6) the distribution map of the obsidian finds shows that the trade of (finished) objects was already active at
the beginning of the Neolithic throughout most of the Mediterranean. Nevertheless, little is known of the
obsidian trade along the Dalmatian coast, because of the limited number of artefacts of identified source
of provenance, most of which are still unpublished (BATOVI, pers. comm. 2000);
7) while at the beginning of the Neolithic the (Cardium IW) pottery production system was local and the
relationships between villages were not based on the exchange of vessels, this pattern seems to change
around the mid seventh millennium BP;
8) the relationships between the coast and the settlements of the interior, along the course of the Sava River
and its surrounding region, seem to be well established around the middle of the same millennium. The
discovery of typical potsherds of the LBK Korenovo Culture (DIMITRIJEVI), 1961) in the Danilo Culture
layers of the coastal site of Smili (TEAK-GREGL, 1993: 14), are very indicative in this respect.
Thus, according to the evidence to date available, based on the scientific analyses of potsherds from a
reasonable number (11) of Impressed Ware sites of both the Adriatic coastlines, it can be stressed that there are
no elements indicating that pottery exchange/trade activities were already established by the first half of the
seventh millennium BP, nor that they took place during the second half of the same millennium. Nevertheless,
204
regional or possibly wider exchange networks did take place from the middle of the seventh millennium BP. It
is for this reason that the number of figulina pottery samples and sites to analyse should be increased including
material from other representative sites such as, for instance, Ripoli and Catignano in the Abruzzi. The analy-
sis of ceramic specimens from these two Central Italian key sites might shed more light on the relationships
between the Abruzzi and the Dalmatian coast, since this first region has been supposed by KOROEC (1956) to
be a possible centre for the production and distribution of this special pottery throughout the Adriatic during
this period.
Further analyses that might help improve our knowledge of the figulina ware diffusion, would consider
the employment of other techniques such as the XRF and chemical analyses to detect trace elements; methods
that have not been adopted in the present work.

205
APPENDIX 1
Table 1 - Viùla (Pula): provenance of the potsherds analysed according to their location (layer and depth from surface).
206
Table 2 - Smili} (IW) (Zadar): provenance of the potsherds analysed according to their location (layer and depth from surface).

207
Table 3 - Vrbica (ibenik): provenance of the potsherds analysed according to their location (layer and depth from surface).
208
Table 4 - Vela pilja (Korula Island): provenance of the potsherds analysed according to their location (layer and depth from surface).

209
APPENDIX 2
Table 1 - Characteristics and number of potsherds analysed from the Dalmatian sites.
210
Table 2 - Characteristics and number of potsherds analysed from the Dalmatian sites.

211
Table 3 - Characteristics and number of potsherds analysed from the Italian sites.
212

213
APPENDIX 3
Tables 1 - Thin section analysis of Viula potsherds.
clay
214
Table 2a - Thin section analysis of Jami na Sredi potsherds.

215
Table 2b - Thin section analysis of Jami na Sredi potsherds.
216
Table 3 - Thin section analysis of Vela Jama potsherds.

Table 4 - Thin section analysis of Tinj-Podlivade potsherds.

217
Tables 5 - Thin section analysis of Smili (IW) potsherds.
218
Table 6 - Thin section analysis of Smili (Danilo phase) potsherds.

219
Tables 7 - Thin section analysis of Smili (Hvar phase) potsherds.
220
Table 8 - Thin section analysis of Vrbica potsherds.

221
Table 9 - Thin section analysis of Konjevrate potsherds.
222
Table 10 - Thin section analysis of Danilo Bitinj potsherds.

223
Table 11a - Thin section analysis of Vela pjlia potsherds.
224
Table 11b - Thin section analysis of Vela pjlia potsherds.

225
Table 12 - Thin section analysis of Fornace Cappuccini potsherds.
,
226
Table 13 - Thin section analysis of Maddalena di Muccia potsherds.

227
Table 14 - Thin section analysis of Ripabianca di Monterado potsherds.
228
Table 15 - Thin section analysis of Scamuso potsherds.

229
Tables 16 - Thin section analysis of Istrian, Dalmatian and Italian soil samples.
,
,
230
Table 17 - Thin section analysis of Gravina (GRV) and Grotta delle Mura (GDM) figulina potsherds.

231
APPENDIX 4
Table 1 - SEM-EDS analysis of Viula potsherds.
Table 2 - SEM-EDS analysis of Jami na Sredi potsherds.
232
Table 3 - SEM-EDS analysis of Vela Jama potsherds.

Table 4 - SEM-EDS analysis of Tinj-Podlivade potsherds.
Table 5 - SEM-EDS analysis of Smili (IW phase) potsherds.

233
Table 6 - SEM-EDS analysis of Smili (Danilo phase) potsherds.
Table 7 - SEM-EDS analysis of Smili (Hvar phase) potsherds.
234
Table 8 - SEM-EDS analysis of Vrbica potsherds.

235
Table 9 - SEM-EDS analysis of Konjevrate potsherds.
236
Table 10 - SEM-EDS analysis of Danilo Bitinj potsherds.

237
Table 11 - SEM-EDS analysis of Vela pilja potsherds.
238
Table 12 - SEM-EDS analysis of Fornace Cappuccini potsherds.

Table 13 - SEM-EDS analysis of Maddalena di Muccia potsherds.

239
Table 14 - SEM-EDS analysis of Ripabianca di Monterado potsherds.
240
Table 15 - SEM-EDS analysis of Scamuso potsherds.

241
R E F E R E N C E S
ADAM, E. 1999 - Preliminary presentation of the Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic stone industries of Theopetra Cave, Western
Thessaly. In BAILEY, G.N., ADAM, E., PANAGOPOULOU, E., PERLS, C and ZACHOS, K. (eds.) The Palaeolithic of Greece and adjacent
areas. British School at Athens. Studies, 3: 266-270. London.
ALESSIO, M., BELLA, F., IMPROTA, S., BELLUOMINI, G., CORTESI, C. and TURI, B. 1970 - University of Rome Carbon 14 Dates VII.
Radiocarbon, 12: 599-616.
ALESSIO, M., BELLA, F., IMPROTA, S., BELLUOMINI, G., CORTESI, C. and TURI, B. 1971 - University of Rome Carbon-14 Dates IX.
Radiocarbon, 13 (2): 395-411.
AMMERMAN, A.J. 1985 - The Acconia Survey: Neolithic Settlement and the Obsidian Trade. Institute of Archaeology. Occasional
Publication, 10. London.
AMMERMAN, A.J. 2002 - Looking back. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening Harvest. Archaeological Institute of
America, Monographs, 1. Boston (in press).
AMMERMAN, A.J. and ANDREFSKY, W. 1982 - Reduction Sequences and Exchange of Obsidian in Neolithic Calabria. In ERICSON, J.E.
and EARLE, T.K. (eds.) Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange: 149-172. Academic Press, London.
AMMERMAN, A.J. and CAVALLI-SFORZA, L.L. 1971 - Measuring the rate of spread of early farming in Europe. Man, 6: 674-688.
AMMERMAN, A.J. and CAVALLI-SFORZA, L.L. 1984 - The Neolithic Transition and Genetics of Populations in Europe. Princeton University
Press, Princeton.
AMMERMAN, A.J., MATESSI, C. and CAVALLI-SFORZA, L.L. 1978 - Some new approaches to the study of the obsidian trade in the
Mediterranean and adjacent areas. In HODDER, I. (ed.) The spatial organisation of culture: 179-196. Duckworth, London.
AMMERMAN, A.J. and POLGLASE, C. 1993 - The exchange of obsidian at Neolithic sites in Italy. In SCARRE, C. and HEALY, F. (eds.) Trade
and exchange in prehistoric Europe. Oxbow Monographs, 33: 101-107. Oxbow Books, Oxford.
AMMERMAN, A.J. and POLGLASE, C.R. 1997 - Analyses and descriptions of the obsidian collections from Arene Candide. In MAGGI, R.,
STARNINI, E. and VOYTEK, B. (eds.) Arene Candide: a functional and environmental assessment of the Holocene sequence
(excavations Bernab Brea - Cardini 1940-50). Memorie dellIstituto Italiano di Paleontologia Umana, n.s. 5: 574-585. Rome.
AMMERMAN, A.J. and POLGLASE, C. 1998 - Obsidian at Neolithic sites in Northern Italy. Preistoria Alpina, 34: 291-296.
ANDREOLOTTI, S. and STRADI, F. 1963 - Lindustria mesolitica della Cavernetta della Trincea in Val Rosandra. Atti e Memorie della
Commissione Grotte E. Boegan, III: 71-85. Trieste.
ANTONIAZZI, A., BAGOLINI, B., BERMOND MONTANARI, G., MASSI PASI, M. and PRATI, L. 1985 - Die Jungsteinzeit in Fornace Cappuccini
in Faenza und die Impressokeramik in der Romagna. A Bri Balogh dm Mzeum vknyve, XIII: 337-363. Szekszrd.
ARANGUREN, B. and REVEDIN, A. 1989-1990 - Primi dati sugli scavi a Perriere Sottano (Ramacca, Catania). Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche,
XLII: 305-310.
ARANGUREN, B. and REVEDIN, A. 1998 - Il giacimento mesolitico di Perriere Sottano (Ramacca, CT). Bullettino di Paletnologia
Italiana, 89: 31-79.
ARNOLD, D.E. 1985 - Ceramic theory and cultural process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
BAI, B. 1969 - Medulin, Iula, Istra - neolitsko naselje. Arheoloki Pregled, 11: 23-24. Beograd.
BAI, B. 1973 - Vela Gromaa kod Kavrana. Histria Archeologica, IV (1): 7-29. Pula.
BAGNONE, D. and TOZZI, C. 1988-1991 - Catignano. Archivio di Tipologia Analitica, 16: 77-97. Siena.
BAGOLINI, B. 1984 - Influssi Adiratico-Balcanici nella formazione e sviluppo del Neolitico dellItalia settentrionale. In Rapporti tra i
Balcani e lItalia meridionale nellet neolitica. Atti dellAccademia Nazionale dei Lincei, CCCLXXXI: 111-144. Roma.
BAGOLINI, B. 1990 - Nuovi aspetti sepolcrali della Cultura dei Vasi a Bocca Quadrata a La Vela di Trento. In BIAGI, P. (ed.) The
Neolithisation of the Alpine Region. Monografie di Natura Bresciana, 13: 227-235. Brescia.
BAGOLINI, B., BARFIELD, L.H. and BROGLIO, A. 1973 - Notizie preliminari delle ricerche sullinsediamento neolitico di Fimon-Molino
Casarotto (Vicenza) (1969-1972). Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche, XXVIII (1): 161-215.
BAGOLINI, B. and BIAGI, P. 1975 - Introduzione al Neolitico dellEmilia e Romagna. In Atti della XIX Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP:
79-136. Firenze.
BAGOLINI, B. and BIAGI, P. 1980 - The Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Settlement of Northern Italy. In KOZOWSKI, J.K. and MACHNIK,
J. (eds.) Problmes de la Nolithisation dans certains Rgions de lEurope: 9-26. Ossolineum, Krakw.
BAGOLINI, B. and BIAGI, P. 1987 - The first Neolithic chipped stone assemblages of Northern Italy. In KOZOWSKI, J.K. and KOZOWSKI,
S.K. (eds.) Chipped Stone Industries of the Early Farming Cultures in Europe. Archaeologia Interregionalis: 423-448. Warszaw-
Krakw.
242
BAGOLINI, B. and BIAGI, P. 1990 - The Radiocarbon Chronology of the Neolithic and Copper Age of Northern Italy. Oxford Journal of
Archaeology, 9 (1): 1-24.
BAGOLINI, B., DELUCCA, O., FERRARI, A., PESSINA, A. and WILKENS, B. 1989 - Insediamenti neolitici ed eneolitici di Miramare (Rimini).
Preistoria Alpina, 25: 53-120.
BAILEY, D.W. 2000 - Balkan Prehistory. Routledge, London and New York.
BAKI, J. 2001 - Prehana korisnika Vele pilje u svjetlu prehrane stanovnika u Neolitiku. In Arheoloka istraivanja na podroju
otoka Korule i Lastova. Hrvatska Arheoloko Drutvo, 20: 125-131. Zagreb.
BARFIELD, L.H. 1972 - The First Neolithic Cultures of north eastern Italy. In SCHWABEDISSEN, H. (ed.) Die Anfnge des Neolithikums
vom Orient bis Nordeuropa. Fundamenta A (3): 182-216. Bhlau, Kln.
BARFIELD, L.H. 1981 - Patterns of north Italian trade 5000-2000 b.c. In BARKER, G. and HODGES, R. (eds.) Archaeology and Italian
Society. Prehistoric, Roman and Medieval Studies. BAR International Series, 102: 27-51. Oxford.
BARFIELD, L.H. 1987 - Recent work on sources of Italian flint. In SIEVEKING, G. DE G. and NEWCOMER, M. (eds.) The human uses of flint
and chert: 231-239. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
BARFIELD, L.H. 1994 - The exploitation of flint in the Monti Lessini, northern Italy. In ASHTON, N. and DAVID, A. (eds.) Stories in
Stone. Lithic Studies Society Occasional Paper, 4: 71-86. Lithographic Service, London.
BARFIELD, L.H. 1999 - The Moser collection in the Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna. Atti della Societ per la Preistoria e Protostoria
della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, XI: 19-62. Trieste.
BARKER, G.W.W. 1975 - Prehistoric territories and economies in central Italy. In HIGGS, E.S. (ed.) Palaeoeconomy: 111-176. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
BARKER, G. 1981 - Landscape and Society. Prehistoric Central Italy. Academic Press, London.
BARKER, G. 1985 - Prehistoric farming in Europe. New Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
BARKER, G. 1995 - A Mediterranean Valley. Landscape Archaeology and Annales History in the Biferno Valley. Leicester University
Press, London.
BARNETT, W.K. 1990 - Small-scale transport of early Neolithic pottery in the west Mediterranean. Antiquity, 64 (245): 859-865.
BARNETT, W.K. 1991 - The identification of clay collection in prehistoric pottery at the Early Neolithic site of Balma Margineda,
Andorra. In MIDDLETON, A. and FREESTONE, I. (eds.) Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology. British Museum Occasional
Paper, 81: 17-37. London.
BARNETT, W.K. 2000 - Cardial pottery and the agricultural transition in Mediterranean Europe. In DOUGLAS PRICE, T. (ed.) Europes
First Farmers: 93-116. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
BAROCELLI, P. 1934 - La pi antica ceramica dipinta in Italia. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, LIV: 115-136.
BARTHS, P. 1994 - Lapport du remontage des vases dans lanalyse et linterprtation dune stratigraphie dhabitat nolithique.
Lexemple de labri de Font-Juvnal Conques-sur-Orbiel (Aude). In Terre cuite et socit. La cramique, document technique,
conomique, culturel: 199-215. APDCA, Juan-les-Pins.
BASILI, R., DI LERNIA, S., FIORENTINO, G. and GALIBERTI, A. 1995 - Review of prehistoric flint mines in the Gargano Promontory
(Apulia, Southern Italy). Archeologia Polona, 33: 414-436.
BASS, B. 1998 - Early Neolithic Offshore Accounts: Remote Islands, Maritime Exploitations, and the Trans-Adriatic Cultural Network.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 11 (2): 165-190.
BATOVI, [. 1960-1961 - Neolitsko naselje u Smiliu. Diadora, 1: 5-26. Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1962 - Neolitsko nazalite u Smiliu. Diadora, 2: 31-115. Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1966 - Stariji Neolit u Dalmaciji. Arheoloki Muzej, Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1967 - Pokapanje pokajnika v Smiliu i Kult mrtvih u Neolitu Dalmacije. Atheoloki Radovi i Rasprave, IV-V: 263-298. Zagreb.
BATOVI, [. 1968 - Problem kulta phallosa u Danilskoj kulturi. Diadora, 4: 5-51. Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1970 - Odnos Danilske i Hvarske kulturne skupine. Diadora, 5: 5-32. Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1971 - Barice, Smili prs de Zadar - site nolitique. In BENAC, A., GARAANIN, M. and TASI, N. (eds.) Epoque prhistorique
et protohistorique en Yougoslavia - Recherches et rsultats. UISPP, Beograd.
BATOVI, [. 1972 - Problemi neolitica na istonoj Jadranskoj obali. Materijali, XII: 17-24. IX Kongres Arheologa Jugoslavije, Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1975 - Odnos Jadranskog primorja prema podroju Jugoistonih Alpa u neolitu i eneolitu. Arheoloki vestnik, XXIV: 62-
127. Ljubljana.
BATOVI, [. 1975a - Le relazioni tra la Daunia e la sponda orientale dellAdriatico. Civilt Preistoriche e Protostoriche della Daunia.
In Civilt Preistoriche e Protostoriche della Daunia: 149-157. Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, Firenze.
BATOVI, [. 1978 - Origines du Nolithique a lAdriatique et les rapports avec la Mditerrane Occidentale. Godinjak, XVI: 45-60.
Sarajevo.

243
BATOVI, [. 1984 - Le relazioni tra i Balcani e lItalia meridionale in et Neolitica. In Rapporti tra i Balcani e lItalia meridionale
nellet Neolitica. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, CCCLXXXI: 5-27. Roma.
BATOVI, [. 1989 - Istrazivanje prapovijesti sjeverne Dalmacije od 1984 do 1988. Diadora, 11: 5-57. Zadar.
BATOVI, [. 1990 - Benkovacki karj u Prapovijesti. Radovi Razdio Povijesnih Znanosti, 29 (16): 5-142.
BATOVI, [. and CHAPMAN, J. 1985 - The Neothermal Dalmatia Project. In MACREADY S. and THOMPSON F.H. (eds.) Archaeological
Survey in Britain and Abroad: 158-195. The Society of Antiquaries, London.
BENAC, A. 1952 - Prehistorijsko naselje nebo i problem Butmirske Kulture. Univerza v Ljubljani, Ljubljana.
BENAC, A. 1954 - Prethodna istraivanja na Neolitskom naselju u Lisiiima. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzej u Sarajevu, 1954: 137-150. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1955 - Neolitsko naselje u Lisiiima kod Konjica. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzej u Sarajevu, 1955: 49-77. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1957 - Crvena Stijena-1955 (I-IV stratum). Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzej u Sarajevu, 1957: 19-50. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1957a - Zelena peina. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzej u Sarajevu, 1957: 61-92. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1971 - Le Nolithique ancien dans les Balkans du Nord-Ouest et ses relations avec les rgions voisines. In Actes du VIII
Congrs International des Sciences Prhistoriques et Protohistoriques de lUISPP, 1: 97-108. Beograd.
BENAC, A. 1973 - Obre I - A Neolithic settlement of the Starevo-Impresso and Kakanj Cultures at Raskre. Wissenschaftliche
Mitteilungen des Bosnisch-Herzegowinischen Landesmuseums, III (A): 327-430. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1973a - Obre II - A Neolithic settlement of the Butmir group at Gornje polje. Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen des Bosnisch-
Herzegowinischen Landesmuseums, III (A): 5-325. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. 1975 - Qualche parallelo tra la Daunia e la Bosnia durante il Neolitico. In Civilt Preistoriche e Protostoriche della
Daunia: 145-148. Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, Firenze.
BENAC, A. 1987 - Kulturni odnosi sjeverozapadnog Balkana i Italjanske oblasti Tavoliere u Neolitsko doba. Arheoloki Radovi i
Rasprave, 10: 11-23. Zagreb.
BENAC, A. and BRODAR, M. 1958 - Crvena Stijena -1956. Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzej u Sarajevu, 1958: 21-64. Sarajevo.
BENAC, A. and MARIJANOVI, B. 1993 - Les Balkans du Nord-Ouest. In KOZOWSKI J.K. (ed.) Atlas du Nolithique Europen. Vol. 1.
LEurope Orientale. ERAUL, 45: 127-150.
BERMOND MONTANARI, G. 2000 - Datazioni radiometriche di Fornace Cappuccini - Faenza (Ravenna). In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul
Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino dellAdriatico in ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria e
Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 8: 21-26. Trieste.
BERMOND MONTANARI, G., MASSI PASI, M. and MENGOLI, D. 1991 - Linsediamento neolitico di Fornace Cappuccini di Faenza (Ravenna).
Preistoria Alpina, 27: 173-195.
BERNABEU AUBAN, J. 1997 - Indigenism and Migrationism. The Neolithisation of the Iberian Peninsula. Poroilo o raziskovanju
paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji, XXIV: 1-18. Ljubljana.
BERNAB BREA, L. 1946 - Gli scavi nella Caverna delle Arene Candide. Parte I. Gli strati con ceramiche. Collezioni di Monografie
Preistoriche ed Archeologiche, I. Istituto Internazionale di Studi Liguri, Bordighera.
BERNAB BREA, L. 1956 - Gli scavi nella Caverna delle Arene Candide (Finale Ligure). Parte prima: gli strati con ceramiche, vol. 2:
Campagne di scavo 1948-50. Collezioni di Monografie Preistoriche ed Archeologiche, I. Istituto Internazionale di Studi Liguri,
Bordighera.
BERNAB BREA, L. and CAVALIER, M. 2000 - La Grotta del Santuario della Madonna di Praia a Mare (Praia a Mare - Cosenza). Livelli
olocenici. Memorie dellIstituto Italiano di Paleontologia Umana, n.s. 6: 15-99. Roma.
BERNAB BREA, M., GHIRETTI, A., POLGLASE, C.R. and VISCONTI, V. 1988 - I siti neolitici lungo il Torrente Cinghio (Parma). Preistoria
Alpina, 24: 103-164.
BERNAB BREA, M. and TIN, S. 1980 - Il villaggio neolitico del Guadone di S. Severo (Foggia). Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche,
XXXV: 45-74.
BEVILACQUA, R. 1994 - La Grotta Continenza di Trasacco. I livelli Mesolitici ed Epigravettiani. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche, XLVI
(1): 3-40.
BIAGI, P. 1975 - Stazione neolitica a Fagnigola (Azzano Decimo, Pordenone). Relazione preliminare dello scavo 1974. Annali
dellUniversit di Ferrara, n.s., sezione XV, II (6): 247-269. Ferrara.
BIAGI, P. 1987 - Il Neolitico della Liguria e del Piemonte. In Atti della XXVI Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 203-216. Firenze.
BIAGI, P. (ed.) 1995 - Linsediamento neolitico di Ostiano-Dugali Alti (Cremona) nel suo contesto ambientale ed economico. Monografie
di Natura Bresciana, 22: 9-143. Brescia.
BIAGI, P. 2001 - Some Aspects of the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Periods in Northern Italy. In KERTSZ, R. and MAKKAY, J.
(eds.) From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic. Archaeolingua, 11: 71-88. Budapest.
BIAGI, P. 2002 - A Review of the Late Mesolithic in Italy and its Implication for the Neolithic Transition. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and
BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening Harvest. Archaeological Institute of America, Monographs, 1. Boston (in press).
244
BIAGI, P. 2003 - The Rhyton of the Balkan Peninsula: Chronology, Origin, Dispersion and Function of a Neolithic Cult Vessel.
Journal of Prehistoric Religion, XVII. Jonsered (in press).
BIAGI, P. 2003a - New data on the Early Neolithic of the Upper Adriatic. Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects, 6. Sofia-
Karlovo (in press).
BIAGI, P., BARKER, G.W.W. and CREMASCHI, M. 1983 - La stazione di Casatico di Marcaria (Mantova) nel quadro paleoambientale ed
archeologico dellOlocene antico della Val Padana Centrale. Studi Archeologici, 2. Istituto Universitario, Bergamo.
BIAGI, P. and SPATARO, M. 1999-2000 - Plotting the Evidence: some aspects of the radiocarbon chronology of the Mesolithic-Neolithic
Transition in the Mediterranean Basin. Atti della Societ per la Preistoria e Protostoria della regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia,
XII: 15-54. Trieste.
BIAGI, P. and SPATARO, M. 2001 - Il rhyton della Caverna dellEdera di Aurisina (Trieste) e il problema della produzione e distribuzione
dei rhyta neolitici nella regione adriatica. Rivista di Archeologia, XXV: 5-11. Venice.
BIAGI, P. and SPATARO, M. 2002 - The Mesolithic/Neolithic Transition in North Eastern Italy and in the Adriatic Basin. In BADAL, E.,
BERNABEU, J. and MART, B. (eds.) Neolithic Landscapes of the Mediterranean. Saguntum, EXTRA-5: 167-178. Valencia.
BIAGI, P., STARNINI, E. and VOYTEK, B.A. 1993 - The Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic Settlement of Northern Italy: Recent
Considerations. Poroilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji, XXI: 45-68. Ljubljana.
BIANCOFIORE, F. 1957 - Villaggio capannicolo a Scamuso, Bari. Archivio Storico Pugliese, X: 224-227. Bari.
BIANCOFIORE, F. and COPPOLA, D. 1997 - Scamuso. Per la storia delle comunit umane tra il VI ed il III millennio nel Basso Adriatico.
Dipartimento di Storia dellUniversit di Roma Tor Vergata. Paletnologia. Roma.
BINDER, D. 2000 - Mesolithic and Neolithic interaction in southern France and northern Italy: new data and current hypotheses. In
DOUGLAS PRICE, T. (ed.) Europes First Farmers: 117-143. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
BJRK, C. 1995 - Early Pottery in Greece. A technological and functional analysis of the evidence from Neolithic Achilleion Thessaly.
Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, CXV. Paul strms Frlag, Jonsered.
BLAKELY, A. and BENNETT, W.J. Jr. 1989 - Analysis and Publication of Ceramics. The Computer Data-Base in Archaeology. BAR
International Series, 551. Oxford.
BKNYI, S. 1977-1982 - The early neolithic fauna of Rendina: a preliminary report. Origini, XI: 345-350.
BKNYI, S. 1983 - Animal bones from test excavations of early neolithic ditched villages on the Tavoliere, South Italy. In CASSANO,
S.M. and MANFREDINI, A. (eds.) Studi sul Neolitico del Tavoliere della Puglia. BAR International Series, 160: 237-249. Oxford.
BKNYI, S. 1991 - The Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in South Italy: the switchover from hunting to animal husbandry. In Msolithique
et Nolithisation en France et dans les Rgions Limitrophes. Actes du 113
e
Congrs National des Socit Savantes: 29-36.
CTHS, Paris.
BOSCHIAN, G. and PITTI, C. 1984 - I livelli mesolitici della Grotta dellEdera. In Il Mesolitico sul Carso Triestino. Societ per la
Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 5: 143-210. Trieste.
BRADFORD, J.S.P. 1949 - Buried Landscapes in Southern Italy. Antiquity, XXIII (89): 58-72.
BREGANT, T. 1968 - Ornamentika na Neolitiski Keramiki v Jugoslaviji. Mladinska Knjiga, Ljubljana.
BRODAR, M. 1992 - Mezolitsko najdice Pod rmukljo pri embijah. Arheoloki vestnik, 43: 23-34. Ljubljana.
BROGLIO, A. 1971 - Risultati preliminari delle ricerche sui complessi epipaleolitici della Valle dellAdige. Preistoria Alpina, 7: 135-241.
BROGLIO, A. 1973 - La preistoria della Valle Padana dalla fine del Paleolitico allinizio del Neolitico: cronologia, aspetti culturali e
trasformazioni economiche. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche, XXVII: 133-160.
BROGLIO, A. 1992 - Mountain sites in the context of the north-east Italian Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic. Preistoria Alpina, 28
(1): 293-310.
BROGLIO, A., FAVERO, V. and MARSALE, S. 1987 - Ritrovamenti mesolitici attorno alla Laguna di Venezia. Istituto Veneto di Scienze,
Lettere e Arti. Rapporti e Studi, X: 195-231. Venice.
BROGLIO, A. and KOZOWSKI, S.K. 1983 - Tipologia ed evoluzione delle industrie mesolitiche di Romagnano III. Preistoria Alpina, 19:
93-148.
BROGLIO, A. and LOLLINI, D.G. 1963 - Nuova variet di bulino su ritocco a stacco laterale nella industria del Neolitico medio di
Ripabianca di Monterado (Ancona). Annali dellUniversit di Ferrara, n.s. XV, 7: 143-155. Ferrara.
BROGLIO, A. and LOLLINI, D.G. 1982 - I ritrovamenti marchigiani del Paleolitico Superiore e del Mesolitico. In 1 Convegno sui beni
culturali e ambientali delle Marche: 27-61. Paleani, Roma.
BROGLIO, A. and LUNZ, R. 1983 - Osservazioni preliminari sullutilizzazione del cristallo di rocca nelle industrie mesolitiche del
bacino dellAdige. Preistoria Alpina, 19: 201-208.
BRUSI, Z. 1974 - Vrbica, Krkovic kod Bribira - stariji neolit. Arheoloki Pregled, 16: 12-13. Beograd.
BRUSI, Z. 1979 - Prethistorijski i ranoantiki nalazi u ibenskoj okolici. Novija i Neobjavljena Istraivanja u Dalmaciji: 25-34.
Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, Zagreb.

245
BRUSI, Z. 1994-1995 - Naselje iz starijeg neolitika na Vrbici kod Bribira. Diadora, 16-17: 1-49. Zadar.
BUDAK, M. 1991 - The Function of Shell Temper in Pottery. The Minnesota Archaeologist, 50 (2): 53-59.
BUDJA, M. 1999 - The transition to farming in Mediterranean Europe - an indigenous response. Documenta Praehistorica, XXVI:
119-141. Ljubljana.
CALATTINI, M. 1996 - Le niveau Msolithique de Grotta delle Mura (Bari). In Proceedings of the XIII Congress UISPP, 2: 29-34.
ABACO, Forl.
CALATTINI, M. 1996a - Le niveau de lEpigravettien final de Grotta delle Mura (Bari, Italie). In Proceedings of the XIII Congress
UISPP, 3: 517-524. ABACO, Forl.
CALATTINI, M and GRECO, M. 2000 - Alcune considerazioni sul livello neolitico di Grotta delle Mura. In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul
Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del bacino dellAdriatico in ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria e
CANDUSSIO, A., FERRARI, A., FERRARI, U., MESSORI, A., PESSINA, A., PEZ, O., QUAGLIARO, F., TOSONE, R. and TULLIO, B. 1991 - Nuovi siti
mesolitici in Provincia di Udine. Natura Bresciana, 26: 251-287. Brescia.
CANN, J.R. and RENFREW, C. 1964 - The characterization of obsidian and its application to the Mediterranean region. Proceedings of
the Prehistoric Society, 30: 111-133.
CANNARELLA, D. and CREMONESI, G. 1967 - Gli scavi nella Grotta Azzurra di Samatorza nel Carso Triestino. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche,
XXII (2): 281-330.
CARDINI, L. 1970 - Praia a Mare. Relazione degli scavi 1957-1970 dellIstituto Italiano di Paleontologia Umana. Bullettino di
Paletnologia Italiana, 79: 31-59.
CASSOLI, P.F. and TAGLIACOZZO, A. 1997 - Nuovi dati faunistici del sito neolitico di Scamuso (Bari). Scavi 1986-1988. In BIANCOFIORE,
F. and COPPOLA, D. (eds.) Scamuso. Per la storia delle comunit umane tra il VI ed il III millennio nel Basso Adriatico: 215-234.
Dipartimento di Storia dellUniversit di Roma Tor Vergata. Paletnologia. Roma.
CASTELLETTI, L., COSTANTINI, L. and TOZZI, C. 1987 - Considerazioni sulleconomia e lambiente durante il Neolitico in Italia. In Atti
della XXVI Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 37-55. Firenze.
CASTELLETTI, L., MASPERO, A. and TOZZI, C. 1994 - Il popolamento della Valle del Serchio (Toscana Settentrionale) durante il Tardiglaciale
wrmiano e lOlocene antico. In BIAGI, P. and NANDRIS, J. (eds.) Highland Zone Exploitation in Southern Europe. Monografie di
Natura Bresciana, 20: 189-204. Brescia.
EUK, B. 1970 - Kampinijen na istonoj oboli Jadrana. In Adriatica Praehistorica et Antiqua: 87-104. Zagreb.
EUK, B. 1977 - Vela i Jakasova pilja na otoku Koruli. In Dolina rijeke Neretve od prethistorije do ranog srednjeg vijeka. Hrvatsko
Arheoloko Drutvo: 25-34. Split.
EUK, B. 1978 - Notizie preliminari degli scavi dellIsola di Korula (Curzola). In Atti della XX Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 261-
268. Firenze
EUK, B. 1982 - Prilog Prouavanju Keramike Impresso-Cardium na otocima Loinju i Cresu. In Arheoloka Istraivanja na otocima
Cresu i Loinju. Hvratsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 7: 12-32. Zagreb.
EUK, B. 1982a - Prilog prouavanju keramike impresso-cardium na otocima Loinju I Cresu. In Arheoloka Istraivanja na otocima
Cresu i Loinju. Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 7: 19-32. Zagreb.
EUK, B. 1985 - Vela pilja na Koruli. Neolitisko i eneolitisko nalazite. Arheoloki Pregled: 46-47. Beograd.
EUK, B. 1987 - Vela pilja na Koruli. Vieslojno nalazite. Arheoloki Pregled: 44-46. Beograd.
EUK, B. 1996 - pilja Kopaina kod Donjeg Humca na otoku Brau. Arheoloki Radovi i Rasprave, 12: 13-30. Zagreb.
EUK, B. and DRECHSLER-BII, R. 1984 - Pregles arheolokih istrazivanja u spiljama podroju sr Hrvatske. The ninth Yugoslavian
Congress of Spelaeology: 185-198. Zagreb.
EUK, B. and RADI, D. 1995 - Vela pilja. Pretpovijest Otoka Korule. Centar za kulturu, Vela Luka.
EUK, B. and RADI, D. 2000 - Vela pilja 99. Obavijesti, XXXII (1): 21-24. Zagreb.
EUK, B. and RADI, D. 2000a - Arheoloka istraivanja u Veloj pili: sezona 2000. Obavijesti, XXXII (3): 54-58. Zagreb.
EUK, B. and RADI, D. 2001 - Vela pilja - preliminarni rezultati dosadanjih istraivanja. In Arheoloka istraivanja na podroju
otoka Korule i Lastova. Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 20: 75-118. Zagreb.
CHAPMAN, J. 1988 - Ceramic Production and Social Differentiation: the Dalmatian Neolithic and the Western Mediterranean. Journal
of Mediterranean Archaeology, 1 (2): 3-25.
CHAPMAN, J. 2000 - Fragmentation in Archaeology. People, places and broken objects in the prehistory of south-eastern Europe.
Routledge, London and New York.
CHAPMAN, J. and MLLER, J. 1990 - Early farmers in the Mediterranean Basin: the Dalmatian Evidence. Antiquity, 64 (242): 127-134.
CHAPMAN, J., SCHWARTZ C., TURNER, J. and SHIEL, R.S. 1990 - New absolute dates for prehistoric and Roman Dalmatia. Vjesnik za
Arheologiju i Historiju Dalmatinsku, 83: 29-46. Split.
246
CHAPMAN, J., SHIEL, R. and BATOVI, . 1996 - The Changing Face of Dalmatia. Archaeological and Ecological Studies in a
Mediterranean Landscape. The Society of Antiquaries, London.
CHERRY, J.F. 1990 - The first colonization of the Mediterranean islands: a review of recent research. Journal of Mediterranean
Archaeology, 3: 145-221.
CICCONE, A. 1993 - Lindustria mesolitica della Grotta Azzurra di Samatorza: scavi 1982. Atti della Societ per la Preistoria e
Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, VII: 13-45. Trieste.
CIPOLLONI SAMP, M. 1977-1982 - Scavi nel villaggio neolitico di Rendina (1970-1976). Relazione preliminare. Origini, XI: 183-323.
CIPOLLONI SAMP, M. 1998 - LItalie du Sud. In GUILAINE, J. (ed.) Atlas du Nolithique Europen. 2A, LEurope Occidentale. ERAUL,
46: 9-112.
CIPOLLONI SAMP, M., TOZZI, C. and VEROLA, M-L. 1999 - Le Nolithique ancien dans le sud-est de la Pninsule Italienne: caractrisation
culturelle, conomie, structures dhabitat. In VAQUER, J. (ed.) Le Nolithique du nord-ouest Mditerranen: 13-24. Socit
Prhistorique Franaise, Paris.
CLARK, J.G.D. 1952 - Prehistoric Europe: the Economic Basis. Methuen, London.
CLARK, R. 2000 - The Mesolithic Hunters of Trentino. A Case Study in Hunter-Gatherer Settlement and Subsistence from Northern
Italy. BAR International Series, 832. Oxford.
CLARKE, D. 1969 - The Economic Context of Trade and Industry in Barbarian Europe till Roman Times. In POSTAN, M. (ed.) The
Cambridge Economic History of Europe, II (1). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
CLARKE, D. 1976 - Mesolithic Europe: the Economic Basis. Duckworth, London.
CLARKE, D. 1976a - The Beaker Network: social and economic models. In LANTING, J.N. and VAN DER WAALS, J.D. (eds.)
Glockenbechersymposion Oberried: 459-477. Haarlem.
CLARKE, D. 1978 - Analytical Archaeology. Methuen, London.
CODACCI, G. 2000-2001 - Il sito neolitico di Viula - Isola del Vescovo presso Medulin. Thesis submitted for Dott. Examination.
University Ca Foscari, Venice. Faculty of Arts and Philosophy (unpublished).
COPPOLA, D. 1983 - Le Origini di Ostuni. Testimonianze archeologiche degli avvicendamenti culturali. Arti Grafiche Pugliesi, Martina
Franca.
COPPOLA, D. 1986 - La comunit neolitica di Scamuso. Torre a Mare, Bari. Rivista di Antropologia, LXIV: 17-48. Firenze.
CORNAGGIA CASTIGLIONI, O and PALMA DI CESNOLA, A. 1964 - Grotta delle Mura - Monopoli. III: Paletnologia dei livelli pleistocenici.
In Atti della VIII e IX Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 249-264. Firenze.
COSTANTINI, L, COSTANTINI BIASINI, L. and LENTINI, A. 1997 - Agricoltura e note sullambiente dellabitato neolitico di Scamuso. In
BIANCOFIORE, F. and COPPOLA, D. (eds.) Scamuso. Per la storia delle comunit umane tra il VI ed il III millennio nel Basso
Adriatico: 199-210. Dipartimento di Storia dellUniversit di Roma Tor Vergata. Paletnologia. Roma.
COSTANTINI, L. and LENTINI, A. nd - Agricoltura e ambiente del sito neolitico di Torre Sabea (Gallipoli), Puglia (in press).
COSTANTINI, L. and TOZZI, C. 1987 - Un gisement cramique imprime dans le subappennin de la daunia (Lucera, Foggia): le village
de Ripa Tetta. Economie et culture matrielle. In GUILAINE, J., COURTIN, J., ROUDIL, J-L. and VERNET, J-L. (eds.) Premires
Communauts Paysannes en Mditerrane Occidentale: 387-394. CNRS, Paris.
COURTIN, J., GAGNIRE, S., GRANIER, J. LEDOUX, J-C. and ONORATINI, G. 1970-1972 - La Grotte du Cap Ragnon, commune du Rove
(Bouches-du-Rhne). Bulletin de la Socit dtudes des Sciences Naturelles de Vaucluse: 113-170.
COURTY, M.A., GOLDBERG, P. and MACPHAIL, R. 1989 - Soils and Micromorphology in Archaeology. Manuals in Archaeology Series.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
CREMANTE, G. and STORTI, C. 1997 - Indagini strumentali e osservazioni tecnologiche su campionature qualificate di ceramiche neolitiche
di provenienza italiana a confronto di ceramiche di Tessaglia, Macedonia e Creta. In BIANCOFIORE, F. and COPPOLA, D. (eds.)
Scamuso. Per la storia delle comunit umane tra il VI e il III millennio nel Basso Adriatico: 255-324. Dipartimento di Storia
dellUniversit di Roma Tor Vergata. Paletnologia. Roma.
CREMASCHI, M. 1987 - Paleosols and vetusols in the Central Po Plain (Northern Italy). UNICOPLI, Milano.
CREMONESI, G. 1965 - Il villaggio di Ripoli alla luce dei recenti scavi. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche, XX (1): 85-155.
CREMONESI, G. 1978 - Nuovi ritrovamenti del Paleolitico superiore e Mesolitico a Torre Testa (Brindisi). Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche,
XXXIII: 109-159
CREMONESI, G. 1984 - I livelli mesolitici della Grotta della Tartaruga. In Il Mesolitico sul Carso Triestino. Societ per la Preistoria e
Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 5: 65-108. Trieste
CREMONESI, G. and GUILAINE, G. 1987 - Lhabitat de Torre Sabea (Gallipoli, Puglia) dans la cadre du Nolithique ancien de lItalie du
sud-est. In GUILAINE, J., COURTIN, J., ROUDIL, J-L. and VERNET, J-L. (eds.) Prmires Communauts Paysannes en Mditerrane
Occidentale: 377-385. CNRS, Paris.
US-RUKONI, J. 1982 - Arheoloka topografija otoca Cresa i Loinja. In Arheoloka Istraivanja na otocima Cresu i Loinju. Hrvatsko
Arheoloko Drutvo, 7: 9-17. Zagreb.

247
DAMICO, C. 2000 - La pietra levigata neolitica in Italia settentrionale e in Europa: litologia, produzione e circolazione. In PESSINA, A.
and MUSCIO, G. (eds.) La Neolitizzazione tra Oriente e Occidente: 67-80. Museo Friulano di Storia Naturale, Udine.
DAMICO, C., BERNAB BREA, M., BIAGI, P., PEDROTTI, A., PESSINA, A. and STARNINI, E. 2002 - Archaeometrical analysis of polished
stone tools from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age in Northern Italy. In Archaeometry Symposium 1998. BAR, International
Series 1043, Oxford (in press).
DELANO SMITH, C. 1978 - Daunia Vetus. Terra, vita e mutamenti sulle coste del Tavoliere. Amministrazione Provinciale di Capitanata,
Foggia.
DELLANNA, L. 1969 - Ricerche mineralogiche e chimiche sulle Argille di Rutigliano. Periodico di Mineralogia, 38: 515-577.
DELLANNA, A. and RADINA, F. 1994 - Analisi mineralogiche di alcuni manufatti ceramici neolitici provenienti dal territorio di Rutigliano
(Bari, Puglia). In BURROGATO, F., GRUBESSI, O. and LAZZARINI, L. (eds.) First European Ceramic Workshop: 441-459. Rome.
DE LUMLEY, H. 1976 - Les lignes de rivage quaternaire de Provence et de la rgion de Nice. In La Prhistoire Franaise. Tome I: 311-
325. CNRS, Paris.
DIETLER, M. and HERBICH, I. 1994 - Ceramics and Ethnic Identity: Ethnoarchaeological observations on the distribution of pottery
styles and the relationships between the social contexts of production and consumption. In Terre cuite et socit. La cramique,
document technique, conomique, culturel: 459-472. APDCA, Juan-les-Pins.
DI LERNIA, S. 1993 - Lindicatore ceramico nellarcheologia mineraria: il caso-studio della Defensola. Vieste (FG). Rassegna di
Archeologia, 11: 45-65. Firenze.
DI LERNIA, S., FRANCHI, R. and PALLECCHI, P. 1993 - Manufacture characteristics, provenance problems and content residues: an
archaeometrical approach to the Neolithic pottery of the Defensola mine (Vieste, FG - Italy). Quaternaria Nova, III: 151-175.
DIMITRIJEVI, S. 1961 - Problem Neolita i Eneolita u sjeverozapadnoj Jugoslaviji. Opuscola Archeologica, V: 5-87. Zagreb.
DURII, L. 1996 - The chipped stone industry from the rock-shelter of Trebaki Kr. In SREJOVI, D. (ed.) Prehistoric settlements in
caves and rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro. The University of Belgrade. Centre for Archaeological Research, 16: 75-
102. Beograd.
DURRENMATH, G. 1996 - Contraintes, typologies, cultures. Abord quantitatif du dgraissant de cramiques du Nolithique final en
Provence. In Production et identit culturelle. Actualit de la recherche: 187-202. APDCA, Antibes.
FERRARA, A., REINHARZ, M. and TONGIORGI, E. 1959 - Carbon-14 Dating in Pisa. Radiocarbon, 1: 103-110.
FERRARI, A. and MAZZIERI, P. 1998 - Fonti e processi di scambio delle rocce silicee scheggiabili. In PESSINA, A. and MUSCIO, G.
(eds.) Settemila anni fa il primo pane: 165-170. Museo Friulano di Storia Naturale, Udine.
FERRARI, A. and PESSINA, A. 1996 - Sammardenchia e i primi agricoltori del Friuli. Banca di Credito Cooperativo di Basiliano.
FERRARI, A. and PESSINA, A. 2000 - Il sito neolitico di Sammardenchia fra Oriente e Occidente. In PESSINA, A. and MUSCIO, G. (eds.) La
Neolitizzazione fra Oriente e Occidente: 185-198. Museo Friulano di Storia Naturale, Udine.
FITZPATRICK, E.A. 1984 - Micromorphology of Soils. Clapham & Hall, London.
FORD, W.E. 1949 - A textbook of mineralogy with an extended treatise on crystallography and physical mineralogy. John Wiley &
Sons, New York.
FORENBAHER, S. and KAISER, T. 1997 - Palagrua, jadranski moreplovci i nijhova kamena industrija na prijelazu iz bakrenog u bron~ano
doba. Opuscola Archaeologica, 21: 15-28. Zagreb.
FORENBAHER, S. and KAISER, T. 2000 - Grapeva spilja i apsolutno datiranje istonojadranskog neolitica. Vjesnik za Arheologiju i
Historiju Dalmatinsku, 92: 9-34. Split.
FRANGIPANE, M. 1975 - Considerazioni sugli aspetti culturali neolitici a ceramica tricromia dellItalia meridionale. Origini, IX: 63-
152.
FREESTONE, I.C. 2001 - Post-depositional Changes in Archaeological Ceramics and Glasses. In BROTHWELL, D.R. and POLLARD, A.M.
(eds.) Handbook of Archaeological Sciences: 615-625. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
FREESTONE, I. and GAIMSTER, D. (eds.) 1997 - Pottery in the making. World ceramic traditions. British Museum Press, London.
FRELIH, M. 1987 - Novo Odkrita prazgodovinska plana najdia na Ljubljanskem Barju. Poroilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in
eneolita v Sloveniji, XV: 109-125. Ljubljana.
FUSCO, V. 1965 - Resti di un insediamento neolitico nellIsola di San Domino alle Tremiti. In Atti della X Riunione Scientifica
dellIIPP: 71-90. Firenze.
GALIBERTI, A., SIGILLI, S. and TARANTINI, M. 2001 - La miniera Neolitica della Defensola (Vieste-Foggia): lo stato delle ricerche.
Origini, XXIII: 85-110.
GEDDES, D.S. 1980 - De la chasse au troupeau en Mditerrane Occidentale. Les dbuts de llevage dans le bassin de lAude. Archives
dEcologie Prhistorique, 5: 1-145. Toulouse.
GIMBUTAS, M. 1984 - The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe 6500-3500 BC. Myths and Cult Images. Thames and Hudson,
London.
248
GIUSBERTI, G. 1990 - Sepolture, resti faunistici, manufatti in osso e in pietra dal fossato di Fornace Cappuccini: unindagine interpretativa.
In Archeologia a Faenza: 36-45. Bologna.
GORGOGLIONE, M.A., DI LERNIA, S. and FIORENTINO, G. 1995 - Linsediamento preistorico di Terragna (Manduria - Taranto). Regione
Puglia, Manduria.
GRIFONI, R. 1967 - La Grotta dellOrso di Sartiano. Il Neolitico. Origini, I: 53-115.
GRIFONI CREMONESI, R. 1996 - La Neolitizzazione dellItalia: II - Il Neolitico dellItalia settentrionale. In The Neolithic in the Near
East and Europe. Colloquium XVII UISPP: 69-80. ABACO, Forl.
GRIXONI, E. 1997 - Grotta Marisa (Laghi Alimini - Otranto). In INGRAVALLO, E. (ed.) La passione dellorigine. Giuliano Cremonesi e
la ricerca preistorica nel Salento: 87-103. Conte Editore, Lecce.
GRYGIEL, R. 1986 - The household cluster as a fundamental social unit of the Brzesc Kujawski group of the Lengyel Culture in the
Polish lowlands. Prace I Materiay. Muzeum Archeologicznego I Etnograficznego w odzi. Seria Archeologiczna, 31: 43-270.
GUERRESCHI, A. 1983 - Tendenze evolutive in senso mesolitico dellEpigravetiano italico finale dellItalia nord-orientale. Preistoria
Alpina, 19: 209-212.
GUILAINE, J. 2002 - Aspects de la Nolithisation en Mditerrane et en France. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening
Harvest. Archaeological Institute of America, Monograph, 1. Boston (in press).
GUILAINE, J. and CREMONESI, G. 1987 - Lhabitat nolithique de Trasano (Matera, Basilicate). Prmiers resultats. In Atti della XXVI
Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 707-719. Firenze.
GUILAINE, J., FREISES, A. and MONTJARDIN, R. 1984 - Leucate-Corrge. Habitat noy du Nolithique Cardial. Centre dAnthropologie
des Socits Rurales, Toulouse.
GUILAINE, J., SIMONE, L. and THOMMERET, J. 1981 - Datations C14 pour le Nolitique du Tavoliere (Italie). Bulletin de la Socit
Prhistorique Franaise, 78 (5): 154-160.
HAALAND, R. 1978 - Ethnographic Observations of Pottery-Making in Darfur, Western Sudan, with some Reflenctions on Archaeological
Interpretation. In KRISTIANSEN, K. and PALUDAN-MLLER, C. (eds.) New Directions in Scandinavian Archaeology. Studies in
Scandinavian Prehistory and Early History, 1: 47-61. The National Museum of Denmark, Copenaghen.
HAMEAU, P. 1987 - Le Niveau a Cramique Imprime dans le Nolithique Grec. In GUILAINE, J., COURTIN, J., ROUDIL, J-L. and VERNET,
J-L. (eds.) Prmires Communauts Paysannes en Mditerrane Occidentale: 329-334. CNRS, Paris.
HARROLD, F.B., KORKUTI, M.M., ELLWOOD, B.B., PETRUSO, K.M. and SCHULDENREIN, J. 1999 - The Palaeolithic of Southern Albania. In
BAILEY, G., ADAM, E., PANAGOPOULOU, E., PERLS, C. and ZACHOS, K. (eds.) The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and Adjacent
Areas. British School at Athens, Studies, 3: 361-372. London.
HARROLD, F.B., RUSSELL, N. and WICKENS, J. 2002 - The Mesolithic of Konispol Cave. In KANER, S. (ed.) From the Jomon to Star Carr.
BAR International Series. Oxford (in press).
HAYDEN, B. 1998 - Practical and Prestige Technologies: The Evolution of Material Systems. Journal of Archaeological Method and
Theory, 5 (1): 1-56.
HEIMANN, R. and FRANKLIN, U.M. 1979 - Archaeo-thermometry: the assessment of firing temperature of ancient ceramics. Journal of
the International Institute of Conservation-Canadian Group, 4: 23-45.
HIGGS, E.S., VITA-FINZI, C., HARRIS, D.R. and FAGG, A.E. 1967 - The Climate, Environment and Industries of Stone Age Greece: Part
III. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, XXXIII: 1-29.
HIGHAM, C. and MALONEY, B. 1989 - Coastal adaptation, sedentism, and domestication: a model for socio-economic intensification in
prehistoric South-East Asia. In HARRIS, D.R. and HILLMAN, G.C. (eds.) Foraging and Farming. The Evolution of Plant Exploitation.
One World Archaeology, 13: 650-666. Unwyn Hyman, London.
HODDER, I. 1978 - Some effects of distance patterns of human interaction. In HODDER, I. (ed.) The spatial organization of culture: 155-
158. Duckworth, London.
HOPF, M. 1964 - Untersuchung der Getreidereste im Httenlehm aus Danilo. In KOROEC, J. (ed.) Danilo in Danilska Kultura: 107-
110. Arheoloki Oddelek Filozofske Fakultete. Univerza v Ljubljani, Ljubljana.
IHDE, C. 1995 - Die Elefantendarstellungen der Hvar-Lisiii-Kultur und das Problem ihrer Herleitung. Arheoloki vestnik, 46: 53-88.
Ljubljana.
IMPROTA, S. and PESSINA, A. 1998 - La neolitizzazione dellItalia Settentrionale. Il nuovo quadro cronologico. In PESSINA, A. and
MUSCIO, G. (eds.) Settemila anni fa il primo pane. Ambienti e culture delle societ neolitiche: 107-115. Museo Friulano di Storia
Naturale, Udine.
INGRAVALLO, E. 1977 - Stazione con industria litica del territorio di Oria. Ricerche e Studi, X: 3-22. Taranto.
INGRAVALLO, E. 1980 - La stazione Mesolitica di S. Foca. Studi di Antichit: 59-77. Galatina.
KARDULIAS, P.N. and RUNNELS, C.N. 1995 - The Lithic Artifacts: Flaked Stone and Other Nonflaked Lithics. In RUNNELS, C.N., PULLEN,
D.J. and LANGDON, S. (eds.) Artifact and Assemblage. The Finds from a Regional Survey of the Southern Argolid, Greece: 74-
139. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

249
KNOWLES, K. and SKEATES, R. 1995-1996 - Thin section analysis of neolithic pottery fabrics from La Quercia, Southeast Italy:
identification and interpretation. Accordia Research Papers, 6: 119-132.
KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA, N. 1998 - The significance of Theopetra Cave for Greek prehistory. In OTTE, M. (ed.) Prhistoire dAnatolie.
Gnese des deux mondes. ERAUL, 85: 241-252.
KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA, N. 1999 - The Palaeolithic deposits of the Theopetra Cave in Thessaly, Greece. In The Palaeolithic of Greece
and adjacent areas. British School at Athens, Studies, 3: 232-239. London.
KYPARISSI-APOSTOLIKA, N. 2000 - The Mesolithic/Neolithic Transition in Greece as Evidenced by the Data at Theopetra Cave in
Thessaly. Documenta Praehistorica, XXVII: 133-140. Ljubljana.
KOROEC, J. 1956 - Ceramica dipinta della costa Dalmata. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, X (65): 297-320.
KOROEC, J. 1958 - Neolitska naseobina u Danilu Bitinju (text). Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti, Zagreb.
KOROEC, J. 1959 - Neolitska naseobina u Danilu Bitinju (plates). Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti. Zagreb.
KOROEC, J. 1964 - Danilo in Danilska Kultura. Arheoloki Oddelek Filozofske Fakultete. Univerza v Ljubljani, Ljubljana.
KOROEC, J. and KOROEC, P. 1974 - Bribir i njegova okolica u prapovijesno doba. Diadora, 7: 5-34. Zadar.
KOROEC, J. and KOROEC, P. 1980 - Istraivanje na Bribirskoj glavici u Bribiru. Diadora, 9: 95-164. Zadar.
KOUMOUZELIS, M., KOZOWSKI, J.K., NOWAK, M., SOBCZYK, K., KACZANOWSKA, M., PALIKOWSKI, M. and PAAZDUR, A. 1996 - Prehistoric
settlement in the Klisoura Gorge, Argolid, Greece (excavations 1993-1994). Prhistoire Europenne, 8: 143-173.
KOZOWSKI, J.K. 1990 - Le complexe Impresso-Cardial et les Civilisations Balkano-Danubiennes au sud des Alpes. In CAHEN, D. and
OTTE, M. (eds.) Ruban et Cardial. ERAUL, 39: 65-72.
KOZOWSKI, J.K. and KOZOWSKI, S.K. 1979 - Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic in Europe. Taxonomy and Palaeohistory. Prace
Komisji Archeologicznej, 18. Polska Akademia NAUK, Krakw.
KOZOWSKI, J.K. and KOZOWSKI, S.K. 1983 - Le Msolithique a lest des Alpes. Preistoria Alpina, 19: 37-56.
KOZOWSKI, J.K., KOZOWSKI, S.K. and RADOVANOVI, I. 1994 - Meso- and Neolithic Sequence from the Odmut Cave (Montenegro).
Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Waszawa.
KOZOWSKI, S.K. 1987 - The Pre-Neolithic Base of the Early Neolithic Stone Industries in Europe. In KOZOWSKI, J.K. and KOZOWSKI,
S.K. (eds.) Chipped Stone Industries of the Early Farming Cultures in Europe. Archaeologia Interregionalis: 9-18. Warszawa-
Krakw.
KRNCEVI, Z. 1995 - Historijat Arheolokih istrazsvanja na ibenskom podrucju. Muzej Grada ibenik: 9-56. ibenik.
LAMBECK, K. 1996 - Sea-level change and shore-line evolution in Aegean Greece since Upper Palaeolithic times. Antiquity, 70 (269):
588-611.
LEBEN, F. 1967 - Stratigrafija in asovna uvrstitev jamskih najdb na Trakem Krasu. Arheoloki vestnik, XVIII: 43-86. Ljubljana.
LEBEN, F. 1978-1979 - Introduzione alla Preistoria dellIstria. Atti del Centro di Ricerche Storiche di Rovigno, IX: 185-248. Rovigno.
LEBEN, F. 1988 - Novoodkrite prazgodovinske plasti v Jama na Krasu. Poroilo o raziskovanju paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji,
XVI: 65-76. Ljubljana.
LEIGHTON, R. 1999 - Sicily before history. An archaeological survey from the Palaeolithic to the Iron Age. Duckworth, London.
LETSCH, J. and NOLL, W. 1983 - Phase formation in several ceramic subsystems at 600 C - 1000 C as a function of oxygen fugacity.
Berichte des Deutschen Keramischen Gesellschaft, 60: 259-267.
LEWTHWAITE, J. 1981 - Ambiguous first impressions: a survey of recent work on the Early Neolithic of the west Mediterranean.
Journal of Mediterranean Anthropology and Archaeology, 1 (2): 292-307.
LEWTHWAITE, J.C. 1986 - The Transition to Food Production: a Mediterranean Perspective. In ZVELEBIL, M. (ed.) Hunters in Transition.
Mesolithic Societes of Temperate Eurasia and their Transition to Farming: 53-66. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
LEWTHWAITE, J. 1987 - Three steps to leaven: applicazione del modello di disponibilit al Neolitico Italiano. In Atti della XXVI
Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 89-102. Firenze.
LEWTHWAITE, J, 1987a - Essai dans le cadre du Nolithique ancien Mditerranen pour extraire de sa coquille le facteur social. In
GUILAINE, J., COURTIN, J., ROUDIL, J-L. and VERNET, J-L. (eds.) Premires Communauts Paysannes en Mditerrane Occidentale:
737-743. CNRS, Paris.
LOLLINI, D.G. 1965 - Il Neolitico delle Marche alla luce delle recenti scoperte. In Atti del VI Congresso dellUISPP: 309-315. Firenze.
LOLLINI, D.G. 1991 - Monterado (AN) - Loc. Ripabianca. Scavi 1962 e 1964. In LOLLINI, D.G. (ed.) Museo Archeologico Nazionale
delle Marche. Sezione preistorica. Paleolitico-Neolitico: 58-63. ERREBI, Falconara.
LOLLINI, D.G. 1991a - Muccia (MC) - Loc. Maddalena. Scavi 1962 e 1965. In LOLLINI, D.G. (ed.) Museo Archeologico Nazionale delle
Marche: 52-57. ERREBI, Falconara.
LONGACRE, W. 1981 - Kalinga pottery: an ethnoarchaeological study. In HODDER, I., ISAAC, G. and HAMMOND, N. (eds.) Pattern of the
past. Studies in honour of David Clarke: 49-66. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
250
MAGGETTI, M. 1982 - Phase Analysis and its Significance for Technology and Origin. In Archaeological Ceramics: 121-133. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington.
MAGGETTI, M. 1990 - Il contributo delle analisi chimiche alla conoscenza delle ceramiche antiche. In MANNONI, T. and MOLINARI, A.
(eds.) Scienze in Archeologia: 65-88. Quaderni del Dipartimento di Archeologia e Storia delle Arti. Sezione Archeologica.
Universit di Siena, 20. AllInsegna del Giglio, Firenze.
MAGGETTI, M. and ROSSMANITH, M. 1981 - Archaeometry of kaolinitic clay. Review dArchometrie, supplement: 185-191.
MAGGI, R. and CHELLA, P. 1999 - Cronologie par le radiocarbon du Nolithique des Arene Candide (Fouilles Bernab Brea). In
VAQUER, J. (ed.) Le Nolithique du nord-ouest Mditerranen: 99-110. Carcassonne.
MALAVOLTI, F. 1940 - Ceramica acroma e dipinta tipo Ripoli nellEmilia. Atti della Societ dei Naturalisti e Matematici di Modena,
LXXI: 243-248. Modena.
MALAVOLTI, F. 1944 - Una stazione ed un sepolcreto eneolitici alle Fornaci Carani di Fiorano Modenese. Atti della Societ dei Naturalisti
e Matematici di Modena, LXXV: 142-163. Modena.
MALAVOLTI, F. 1951-1952 - Appunti per una cronologia relativa del neo-eneolitico emiliano. Emilia Preromana, 3: 2-28. Modena.
MALAVOLTI, F. 1951-1952a - Lossidiana del Pescale (Modena). Emilia Preromana, 3: 127-132. Modena.
MALEZ, M. 1975 - Kvatarna fauna Crvene Stijene. In BASLER, D. (ed.) Crvena Stijena. Zbornik radeva. Nikic.
MALEZ, M. 1979 - Gospodska Peina - novi lokalitet paleolitika u Dalmaciji. Vjesnik Split, LXXII-LXXIII: 5-9. Split.
MALEZ, V. 2001 - Fosilna avifauna Vele pilje na otoku Koruli (Hrvatska). In Arheoloka istraivanja na podroju otoka Korule i
Lastova. Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 20: 119-124. Zagreb.
MALONE, C. 1985 - Pots, Prestige and Ritual in Neolithic Southern Italy. In MALONE, C. and STODDARD, S. (eds.) Papers in Italian
Archaeology IV. Part ii Prehistory. BAR International Series, 244: 118-151. Oxford.
MALONE, C. 1997-1998 - Processes of colonization in the central Mediterranean. Accordia Research Papers, 7: 38-57.
MANFREDINI, A. 1972 - Il villaggio Trincerato di Monte Aquilone nel quadro del neolitico dellItalia Meridionale. Origini, VI: 29-154.
MANFREDINI, A. 1987 - Il Tavoliere: indagine in unarea campione. In Coppa Nevigata e il suo territorio. Testimonianze archeologiche
dal VII al II millennio a.C.: 42-47. Quasar, Rome.
MANNONI, T. 1983 - Caratterizzazioni mineralogico-petrografiche e tecniche di alcune ceramiche del Tavoliere. In TIN, S. (ed.) Passo
di Corvo e la civilt neolitica del Tavoliere: 94-97. SAGEP, Genova.
MANNONI, T. 1999 - Caratterizzazioni petrografiche delle ceramiche neolitiche. In TIN, S. (ed.) Il Neolitico nella Caverna delle Arene
Candide (Scavi 1972-1977): 214-218. Collezione di Monografie Preistoriche e Archaeologiche, X: 214-218. Istituto Internazionale
di Studi Liguri, Bordighera.
MARIJANOVI, B. 2000 - Prilozi za prapovijest u zaledu jadranske obale. Filozofski Fakultet, Zagreb. Monograph, 2. Zagreb.
MARIJANOVI, B. 2002 - Prilog daljem poznavanju starijeg Neolitika u Dalmaciji. Radovi. Razdio Povijesnih Znanosti, 26: 27-36.
Zadar.
MARKOVI, E. 1985 - Neolit Crne Gore. The University of Belgrade. Centre for Archaeological Research, 5. Belgrade.
MARTINELLI, M.C. 1990 - Industrie litiche di alcuni siti neolitici della Dalmazia e loro raffronti con contemporanee industrie dellItalia
sud-adriatica e delle Isole Eolie. Rassegna di Archeologia, 9: 125-151. Firenze.
MARTINI, F. 1993 - Grotta della Serratura a Marina di Camerata. Culture e ambienti dei complessi olocenici. Garlatti e Razzai,
Firenze.
MARTINI, F. 2000 - Note sulla facies mesolitica dellEpipaleolitico indifferenziato: riflessioni e aggiornamenti. In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi
sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino dellAdriatico in Ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria e
MARTINI, F., PALLECCHI, P. and SARTI, L. 1995 - La ceramica preistorica in Toscana. Artigianati e materie prime dal Neolitico allEt
del Bronzo. Garlatti e Razzai, Firenze.
MATSON, F.R. 1969 - Some aspects of ceramic technology. In BROTHWELL, D. and HIGGS, E. (eds.) Science in Archaeology: 592-602.
Thames and Hudson, London.
MATTHEW, A.J., WOODS, A.J. and OLIVER, C. 1991 - New Comparisons Charts for Visual Percentage Estimation in Archaeological
Material. In MIDDLETON, A. and FREESTONE, I. (eds.) Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology. British Museum Occasional
Paper, 81: 211-263. London.
MENDUI, M. 1998 - Neolitica naselja na ibensko-Drniskom podrucju. Podruje ibenske upanije od pretpovijesti do srednjega
vijeka. Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 19: 47-62. Zagreb.
MENDUI, M. 1998a - Konjevrate. Ranoneolticko naselje. Arheoloki Pregled 1988: 46. Beograd.
MIDDLETON, A., LEESE, M.N. and COWELL, M.R. 1991 - Computer-assisted approaches to the grouping of ceramic fabrics. In
MIDDLETON, A. and FREESTONE, I. (eds.) Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, British Museum Occasional Paper, 81:
265-276. London.

251
MIHAILOVI, D. 1996 - Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic chipped stone industries from the rock-shelter of Medena Stijena. In SREJOVI,
D. (ed.) Prehistoric settlements in caves and rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro. The University of Belgrade. Centre for
Archaeological Research, 16: 9-60.
MIHAILOVI, D. and DIMITRIJEVI, V. 1999 - La fin du Palolithique superieur et le Msolithique dans le Montngro - volution des
techniques et du mode de subsistance. In THVENIN, A. (ed.) LEurope des derniers chasseurs. pipalolithique et Msolithique.
Actes du 5
e
Colloque International UISPP commission XII: 391-398. CTHS, Paris.
MIHOVILI, K. 1994 - Preistoria dellIstria dal Paleolitico allet del Ferro. In Atti della XXIX Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 101-118.
Firenze.
MILLIKEN, S. and SKEATES, R. 1990 - The Alimini Survey: The Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in the Salento Peninsula (S.E. Italy).
Institute of Archaeology Bulletin, 26: 77-95.
MILLS, N. 1983 - The Neolithic of Southern France. In SCARRE, C. (ed.) Ancient France 6000-2000 BC: 91-145. Edinburgh University
Press, Edinburgh.
MIRACLE, P. 1997 - Early Holocene foragers in the Karst of northern Istra. Poroilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitika in eneolitika
v Sloveniji, XXIV: 43-62. Ljubljana.
MIRACLE, P. and FORENBAHER, S. 1998 - Pupiina Cave project: Brief summary of the 1998 season. Histria Archaeologica, 29: 27-48. Pula.
MIRACLE, P., GALANIDOU, N. and FORENBAHER, S. 2000 - Pioneers in the Hills: Early Mesolithic Foragers at ebrn Abri (Istria, Croatia).
European Journal of Archaeology, 3 (3): 293-329.
MIROSAVLJEVI, V. 1959 - Jamina Sredi, prilog prethistorijskoj kulturi na otoku Cresu. Arheoloki Radovi i Rasprave, 1: 131-174.
Zagreb.
MIROSAVLJEVI, V. 1960 - Prethistorijski Objekti na Otoku Cresu. Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti u Zagrebu, 64:
204-218. Zagreb.
MIROSAVLJEVI, V. 1968 - Vela pilja prethistorijsko nalazite na otoku Loinju. Arheoloki Radovi i Rasprave, VI: 27-60. Zagreb.
MIROSAVLJEVI, V. 1971 - Jamina Sredi dans lle de Cres. In Epoque prhistorique et protohistorique en Yougoslavie - Recherches et
rsultats: 102-105. Radia Timoti, Beograd.
MLEKU, D. 2001 - Floods and fires: Landscape dynamics at Ljubljana Moor, Slovenia. In FEWSTER, K.J. and ZVELEBIL, M. (eds.)
Ethnoarchaeology and Hunther-Gatherers: Pictures at an Exhibition. BAR International Series, 955: 43-52. Oxford.
MONTAGNARI KOKELJ, E. 1993 - The transition from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic in the Trieste Karst. Poroilo o raziskovanju
paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji, XXI: 69-83. Ljubljana.
MONTAGNARI KOKELJ, E. and CRISMANI, A. 1993 - La presenza di vasi a quattro gambe nel neolitico del Carso Triestino. Aquileia
Nostra, LXIV: 10-66. Aquileia.
MOORE, M. D. and REYNOLDS, R.C. Jr. 1997 - X-Ray Diffraction and the Identification and Analysis of Clay Minerals. Oxford University
Press, Oxford (2
nd
edition).
MORICO, G. 1998 - Il sito di Faenza, Fornace Cappuccini: il fossato. In Atti del XIII Congresso UISPP: 17-23. ABACO, Forl.
MOTTES, E. 1997 - Peninsular cultural influences in the Square Mouthed Pottery Culture of Trentino. Preistoria Alpina, 33: 63-67.
MLLER, J. 1988 - Cultural Definition of the Early Neolithic and its Interaction in the Eastern Adriatic. Berytus, XXXVI: 101-125.
Beirut.
MLLER, J. 1988a - karin Samograd - eine frhneolithische Station mit monochromer Ware und Impresso-Keramik in der Ostadria.
Archologische Korrespondenzblatt, 18: 219-235.
MLLER, J. 1994 - Das ostadriatische Frhneolithikum. Die Impresso-Kultur und die Neolithisierung des Adriaraumes. Prhistorische
Archologie in Sdosteuropa. Band 9. Volker Spiess, Berlin.
MLLER, J. 1998 - Neue Frhneolithische Fundstellen an der Osteradria. In Podruje ibenske upanije od Pretpovijesti do Srednjega
vijeka. Hrvatsko Arheoloko Drutvo, 19: 63-74. Zagreb.
MLLER, J. 2000 - Earplugs, ceramics and sheep: examples of communication and boundaries in the Adriatic early Neolithic. In
BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del bacino dellAdriatico in ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ
per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-venezia Giulia, Quaderno 8: 151-159. Trieste.
MUNTONI, I.M. 1999 - From Ceramic Production to Vessel Use: A Multi-Level Approach to the Neolithic Communities of the Tavoliere
(Southern Italy). In OWEN, L.R. and PORR, M. (eds.) Ethno-Analogy and the Reconstruction of the Prehistoric Artefact Use and
Production. Urgeschichtliche Materialhefte, 14: 237-254. Tbingen.
MUSSI, M., COUBRAY, S., GIRAUDI, C., CAZZELLA G., TONIUTTI, P., WILKENS, B. and ZAMPETTI, D. 2000 - Lexploitation des territoires de
montagne dans les Abruzzes (Italie centrale) entre le Tardiglaciaire et lHolocne ancien. In CROTTI, P. (ed.) Meso 97. Cahiers
darchologie Romande, 81: 277-284. Lausanne.
NANDRIS, J. 1999 - Ethnoarchaeology and Latinity in the mountains of southern Velebit. In BARTOSIEWICZ, L. and GREENFIELD, H.J.
(eds.) Transhumant Pastoralism in Southern Europe. Recent Perspectives from Archaeology, History and Ethnology.
Archaeolingua, series minor, 11: 111-131. Budapest.
252
NISBET, R. 2000 - Nota preliminare sullantracologia dei depositi olocenici della Grotta dellEdera, Carso Triestino (Scavi 1990-
1999). In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino dellAdriatico in Ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli.
Societ per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 8: 161-170. Trieste.
NOVAK, G. 1955 - Prethistorijski Hvar, Grapeva spilja. Jugoslavenska Akademija Znanosti i Umjetnosti, Zagreb.
ODETTI, G. 1975 - Foto aerea e villaggi neolitici nel Tavoliere. In Civilt Preistoriche e Protostoriche della Daunia: 134-136. Istituto
Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria, Firenze.
ORTON, C., TYERS, P. and VINCE, A. 1993 - Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
ZDOAN, M. 1997 - The beginning of Neolithic economies in Southeastern Europe: an Anatolian perspective. Journal of European
ZDOAN, M. 1998 - Anatolia from the Last Glacial maximum to the Holocene climatic optimum: cultural formations and the impact
of the environmental setting. Palorient, 32 (2): 25-38
PAPATHANASSOPOULOS, G.A. (ed.) 1996 - Neolithic Culture in Greece. N.P. Goulandris Foundation, Athens.
PERI, S. 1996 - Kult-Rhytone der Neolithischen Viehzchter der Balkanhalbinsel. Starinar, XLVII: 21-66. Beograd.
PERLS, C. 1987 - Les industries du Nolithique prceramique de Grce: nouvelles tudes, nouvelles interprtations. In KOZOWSKI,
J.K. (ed.) Chipped stone industries of the early farming cultures in Europe. Archeologia Interregionalis: 19-39. Krakw.
PERLS, C. 1999 - Long-term perspectives on the occupation of the Franchthi Cave: continuity and discontinuity. In BAILEY, G.N.,
ADAM, E., PANAGOPOULOU, E., PERLS, C. and ZACHOS, K. (eds.) The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and Adjacent Areas.
British School at Athens, Studies, 3: 311-318. London.
PERLS, C. 2001 - The Early Neolithic in Greece. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
PESSINA, A., FERRARI, A. and FONTANA, A. 1998 - Le prime popolazioni agricole del Friuli. In PESSINA, A. and MUSCIO, G. (eds.) Settemila
anni fa il primo pane. Ambienti e culture delle societ neolitiche: 133-146. Museo Friulano di Scienze Naturali, Udine.
PETRI, N. 1978-1979 - Introduzione alla Preistoria dellIstria. Atti del Centro di Ricerche Storiche di Rovigno, IX: 185-248. Rovigno.
PETRI, N. 1995 - Sjerike od adeita i nefrita u pretpovijesti Hrvatske. Histria Archaeologica, 26: 5-27. Pula.
PIERRET, A. 1994 - Identification des techniques de faonnage: intrt des donnes exprimentales pour lanalyse des microstructures.
In Terre cuite et socit. La Cramique, document technique, conomique, culturel: 75-91. APDCA, Juan-les-Pins.
PLOG, S. 1980 - Stylistic variation in prehistoric ceramics. Design analysis in the American Southwest. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
PLUCIENNIK, M. 1994 - Holocene hunter-gatherers in Italy. In SKEATES, R. and WHITEHOUSE, R. (eds.) Radiocarbon Dating and Italian
Prehistory. Accordia Specialist Studies on Italy, 3: 45-59. London.
PLUCIENNIK, M. 1997 - Radiocarbon Determinations and the Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in Southern Italy. Journal of Mediterranean
Archaeology, 10 (2): 115-150.
PLUCIENNIK, M. 2000 - Riconsidering Radmillis Mesolithic. In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino
dellAdriatico in Ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia,
Quaderno 8: 171-184. Trieste.
POLGLASE, C.R. 1988 - Analyses of the Obsidian Collection from the Gaione Site, Parma. Preistoria Alpina, 24: 140-155.
PSYCHOYOS, O. 1988 - Dplacements de la Ligne de Rivage et Sites Archologiques dans les Rgions Ctires de la Mer Ege, au
Nolithique et a lAge du Bronze. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature, pocket-book, 62. Paul strms Frlag,
Jonsered.
RADI, G. 1995 - Osservazioni sulla Ceramica Impressa Abruzzese Marchigiana. In Miscellanea in Memoria di Giuliano Cremonesi:
129-156. ETS, Pisa.
RADINA, F. 1981 - Le Macchie: lo scavo e i materiali. Atti del 3 Convegno sulla Preistoria-Protostoria della Daunia: 113-126. San
Severo.
RADINA, F. 1981a - Resti di una capanna neolitica a Botromagno (Gravina di Puglia - Bari). Taras, 1: 290-292. Taranto.
RADINA, F. 1986 - Primi dati sullinsediamento neolitico di Ricotto a Botromagno (Gravina di Puglia, Bari). Gravina, 2: 111-116.
RADMILLI, A.M. 1997 - La vita in Abruzzo ventimila anni fa. Il Paleolitico superiore. ETS, Pisa.
RANDLE, K., BARFIELD, L.H. and BAGOLINI, B. 1993 - Recent Italian obsidian analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science, 20: 503-
509.
RELLINI, U. 1934 - La pi antica ceramica dipinta in Italia. Collezione Meridionale Editrice, Roma.
RENFREW, C. 1975 - Trade as action at a distance. In SABLOFF, J.A. and LAMBERG-KARLOWSKY, C.C. (eds.) Ancient Civilisation and
Trade: 3-59. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
RENFREW, C. 1977 - Alternative models for exchange and spatial distribution. In EARLE, T.K. and ERICSON, J.E. (eds.) Exchange
Systems in Prehistory: 71-90. Academic Press, New York.

253
RICE, P.M. 1987 - Pottery analysis. A Sourcebook. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
RIDOLA, D. 1924-1926 - Le grandi trincee preistoriche di Matera. La ceramica e la civilt di quel tempo. Bullettino di Paletnologia
Italiana, XLIV-XLVI: 3-83.
RILEY, J.A. 1975 - The Pottery from the First Session of Excavation in the Caesarea Hippodrome. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research, 218: 25-63.
RILEY, J.A. 1976 - Amphorae. In Humphrey, J.H. (ed.) Excavations at Chartage 1975: Conducted by the University of Michigan, 1:
108-20. Crs Productions, Tunis.
RILEY, J.A. 1981 - The Coarse Pottery from Berenice. In LLOYD, J.A. (ed.) Excavations at Sidi Khrebesh, Benghazi (Berenice), 2: 91-
467. Supplements to Libya Antiqua, V (II). Department of Antiquities, Tripoli.
RODDEN, R.J. and WARDLE, K.A. 1996 - Nea Nikomedeia I. The Excavation of an Early Neolithic Village in Northern Greece 1961-
1964. The British School at Athens. Supplementary Volume, 25. London.
ROUDIL, J-L. 1990 - Cardial et Nolithique ancien Ligure dans le sud-est de la France. In CAHEN, D. and OTTE, M. (eds.) Ruban et
Cardial. ERAUL, 39: 383-392.
ROWLEY-CONWY, P. 1995 - Making First Farmers Younger: the West European Evidence. Current Anthropology: 36: 345-353.
ROWLEY-CONWY, P. 1997 - The animal bones from Arene Candide (Holocene sequence): the animal bones. In MAGGI, R., STARNINI, E.
and VOYTEK, B.A. (eds.) Arene Candide: a functional and Environmental Assessment of the Holocene Sequence (Excavations
Bernab Brea - Cardini 1940-50). Memorie dellIstituto Italiano di Paleontologia Umana, n.s. 5: 153-278. Rome.
RUNNELS, C.N. 1995 - Review of Aegean Prehistory IV: The Stone Age of Greece from the Palaeolithic to the Advent of the Neolithic.
American Journal of Archaeology, 99: 699-728.
RUNNELS, C.N. 2002 - The Origins of the Greek Neolithic. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening Harvest. Archaeological
Institute of America, Monograph, 1. Boston (in press).
SAMPSON, A., KOZOWSKI, J.K. and KACZANOWSKA, M. 1998 - Entre lAnatolie et les Balkans: une sequence Msolithique-Nolithique
de lIle de Gioura (Sporades du Nord). In OTTE, M. (ed.) Prhistoire dAnatolie, Gense de deux mondes. ERAUL, 85: 125-141.
SARGENT, A. 1987 - Relazione sui resti paleobotanici di Coppa Nevigata. In Atti della XXVI Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 761-764.
Firenze.
SCHNEIDER, G. 1989 - A technological study of North-Mesopotamian Stone Wares. World Archaeology, 21 (1): 30-50.
SCHULDENREIN, J. 1998 - Konispol Cave, Southern Albania, and Correlationships with Other Aegean Caves Occupied in the Late
Quaternary. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, 13 (5): 501-526.
SFRIADS, M. 2000 - Spondylus Gaederopus: Some Observations on the Earliest European Long Distance Exchange System. In
HILLER, S. and NIKOLOV, V. (eds.) Karanovo III. Beitrge zum Neolithikum in Sdosteuropa: 423-437. Phoibos Verlag, Wien.
SHACKLETON, J.C. and VAN ANDEL, TJ.H. 1986 - Prehistoric Shore Environments, Shellfish Availability, and Shellfish Gathering at
Franchthi, Greece. Geoarchaeology: an International Journal, 1 (2): 127-143.
SHEPARD, A.O. 1956 - Ceramic for the archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington DC. Publication 609.
SILVESTRINI, M. and PIGNOCCHI, G. 1998 - La neolitizzazione lungo lAdriatico: le Marche. In PESSINA, A. and MUSCIO, G. (eds.)
Settemila anni fa il primo pane. Ambienti e culture delle societ neolitiche: 70-77. Museo Friulano di Storia Naturale, Udine.
SILVESTRINI, M. and PIGNOCCHI, G. 2000 - Il primo neolitico delle Marche: considerazioni e riflessioni alla luce delle recenti acquisizioni.
In PESSINA, A. and MUSCIO, G. (eds.) La neolitizzazione tra oriente e occidente: 341-354. Museo Friulano di Storia Naturale,
Udine.
SKEATES, R. 1994 - Towards an absolute chronology for the Neolithic in central Italy. In SKEATES, R. and WHITEHOUSE, R. (eds.)
Radiocarbon Dating and Italian Prehistory. Accordia Specialist Studies on Italy, 3: 61-72.
SKEATES, R. 1994a - A radiocarbon date-list for prehistoric Italy (c.46,400 BP 2450 BP/400 cal. BC). In SKEATES, R. and WHITEHOUSE,
R. (eds.) Radiocarbon dating and Italian Prehistory. Accordia Specialist Studies on Italy, 3: 147-288.
SKEATES, R. 1999 - Unveiling Inequality. Social Life and Social Change in the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of East-Central Italy. In
TYKOT, R.H., MORTER, J. and ROBB, J.E. (eds.) Social dynamics of the prehistoric Central Mediterranean. Specialist Studies on
the Mediterranean, 3: 15-45. Accordia Research Institute, London.
SKEATES, R. 2002 - Radiocarbon Dating and the Interpretation of the Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in Italy. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and
BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening Harvest. Archaeological Institute of America. Monograph, 1. Boston (in press).
SORDINAS, A. 1969 - Investigations of the Prehistory of Corfu during 1964-1966. Balkan Studies, 10 (2): 393-424. Thessaloniki.
SORDINAS, A. 1970 - Stone Implements from Northwestern Corfu, Greece. Memphis State University Anthropological Research Center.
Occasional Papers, 4: 1-41. Memphis, Tennessee.
SPATARO, M. 2000 - Analisi archeometrica delle ceramiche della stazione neolitica di Fagnigola, Boschetto Mantova (Azzano
Decimo-Pordenone). In BIAGI, P. (ed.) Studi sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino dellAdriatico in Ricordo
di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 8: 195-
206. Trieste.
254
SPATARO, M. 2001 - An Interpretative Approach to the Prehistory of the Edera Cave in the Trieste Karst (North-Eastern Italy): the
Archaeometry of the Ceramic Assemblage. Accordia Research Papers, 8: 83-99.
SPATARO, M. 2003 - Pottery technology and manufacture at the Korenovo culture (LBK) site of Malo Korenovo (Bjelovar, Croatia).
Opuscola Archaeologica, 26. Zagreb (in press).
SPECCHIO, V. 1985-1986 - Rilevamento geologico della della parte centro-occidentale dellarea della Tav. 178 III S.O.- N.O.
Rutigliano. Tesina di rilevamento geologico, Dipartimento di Geologia e Geofisica dellUniversit di Bari (inedita).
SREJOVI, D. 1974 - The Odmut Cave - a new facet of Mesolithic culture in the Balkan Peninsula. Archaeologia Jugoslavica, XV: 3-6. Beograd.
STANI, Z., BARFIELD, L., VUJNOVI, N. and BURMAZ, J. 2000 - Report on the flint assemblages field survey on the Island of Bra.
Obavijesti: XXXII (1): 25-34. Zagreb.
STUIVER, M., LONG, A. and KRA, R.S. 1993 - Calibration 1993. Radiocarbon, 35 (1).
TAGLIACOZZO, A. 1993 - Archeozoologia della Grotta dellUzzo, Sicilia. Supplemento al Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, 84:1-278.
TASCHINI, M. 1964 - Il livello mesolitico del Riparo Blanc al Monte Circeo. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, 73: 65-88.
TEAK-GREGL, T. 1993 - Kultura Linearnotrakaste Keramike u Sredinjoj Hrvatskoj. Dissertationes et Monographiae, 2. Department
of Archaeology, University of Zagreb.
THISSEN, L. 2000 - Thessaly, Franchthi and Western Turkey: Clues to the Neolithisation of Greece? Documenta Praehistorica, XXVII:
141-154. Ljubljana.
THISSEN, L. 2000a - A Chronological Framework for the Neolithisation of the Southern Balkans. In HILLER, S. and NIKOLOV, V. (eds.)
Karanovo III. Beitrge zum Neolithikum in Sdosteuropa: 193-212. Phoibos Verlag, Wien.
TICH, R. 2000 - Namon plavba v Ranm Neolitu. Pspvek Experimentln Archeologie k Poatkm Neolitizace Stedomoi.
Archeologick rozhledy, LII (2): 234-260. Prague.
TIN, S. 1971 - Lo stile del Kronio in Sicilia, lo stile di Ghar Dalam a Malta e la successione del Neolitico nelle due isole. In Atti della
XIII Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 75-88. Firenze.
TIN, S. 1974 - Il Neolitico e let del Bronzo della Liguria alla luce delle recenti scoperte. In Atti della XVI Riunione Scientifica
dellIIPP: 37-52. Firenze.
TIN, S. (ed.) 1983 - Passo di Corvo e la civilt neolitica del Tavoliere. SAGEP, Genova.
TIN, S. (ed.) 1999 - Il Neolitico nella Caverna delle Arene Candide (scavi 1972-1977). Collezione di Monografie Preistoriche ed
Archeologiche, X. Istituto Internazionale di Studi Liguri, Bordighera.
TIN, S. and ISETTI, E. 1980 - Culto neolitico delle acque e recenti scavi nella Grotta Scaloria. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, 82: 31-70.
TIRABASSI, J. 1987 - Relazione preliminare della prima campagna di scavi a Rivoltella - Ca Romensini (RE) - 1981-83. In Atti della
XVI Riunione Scientifica dellIIPP: 581-594. Firenze.
TITE, M.S. 1995 - Firing temperature determinations - How and why?. In LINDHAL, A. and STILBORG, O. (eds.) The Aim of Laboratory
Analyses of Ceramics in Archaeology. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien Konferenser, 34: 37-42. Stockholm.
TITE, M.S. 1999 - Pottery Production, Distribution, and Consumption. The Contribution of the Physical Sciences. Journal of
Archaeological Method and Theory, 6 (3): 181-232.
TOZZI, C. 1982 - La transition du Nolithique Ancien au Nolithique Moyen dans la cote Adriatique (Abruzzo-Marche). In Le Nolithique
Ancien Mditerranen. Archologie en Languedoc n spcial 1982: 319-326. Montpellier.
TOZZI, C. 1988 - Contributo alla conoscenza del villaggio neolitico di Ripa Tetta (Lucera). In Atti del VI Convegno Nazionale sulla
Preistoria, Protostoria e Storia della Daunia: 11-26. S. Severo.
TOZZI, C. and ZAMAGNI, B. 2000 - Il Neolitico Antico nella Toscana Settentrionale (Valle del Serchio). In TOZZI, C. and WEISS, M-C.
(eds.) Les Premier Peuplements Holocnes de lAire Corso-Toscane: 57-69. ETS, Pisa.
TRINGHAM, R. 1971 - Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe 6000-3000 BC. Hutchinson, London.
TUSA, S. 1976-1977 - La ceramica preistorica della Grotta dellUzzo. Kokalos, XXII-XXIII: 798-816. Palermo.
TYKOT, R.H. 1996 - Obsidian Procurement and Distribution in the Central and Western Mediterranean. Journal of Mediterranean
VAN ANDEL, TJ.H. and RUNNELS, C.N. 1995 - The earliest farmers in Europe. Antiquity, 69 (264): 481-500.
VAN ANDEL, TJ.H. and SHACKLETON, J.C. 1982 - Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Coastlines of Greece and the Aegean. Journal of
Field Archaeology, 9: 445-454.
VAN ANDEL, TJ.H. and SHACKLETON, J.C. 1984 - Coastal Palaeogeography of the Central and Western Mediterranean during the Last
125,000 Years and Its Archaeological Implications. Journal of Field Archaeology, 11: 307-314.
VARTANIAN, E., GUIBERT, P., NEY, C., BECHTEL, F., SCHVOERER, M., GUILAINE, J. and CREMONESI, G. 2000 - Chronologie de la Nolithisation
en Italie du sud-est. Nouvelles datations grce a la Thermoluminescence (TL) sur le Site de Matera-Trasano. In BIAGI, P. (ed.)
Studi sul Paleolitico, Mesolitico e Neolitico del Bacino dellAdriatico in Ricordo di Antonio M. Radmilli. Societ per la Preistoria
e Protostoria della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Quaderno 8: 245-268. Trieste.

255
VINSON, S.P. 1972 - Ancient roads between Venosa and Gravina. Papers of the British School at Rome, 40: 58-90.
VITELLI, K.D. 1993 - Looking up at Early Ceramics in Greece. In SKIBO, J.M. and FEINMAN, G.M. (eds.) Pottery and People. A
Dynamic Interaction: 184-198. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
WHITBREAD, I.K. 1986 - Argillaceous Rock Fragments. Archaeometry, 28 (1): 79-88.
WHITEHOUSE R. 1969 - The Neolithic Pottery of Southern Italy. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, XXXV: 267-310.
WHITEHOUSE, R. 1986 - Siticulosa Apulia Revisited. Antiquity, LX: 36-44.
WHITEHOUSE, R. 1987 - Il Neolitico Antico: Cronologia Assoluta. In CASSANO, S.M., CAZZELLA, A., MANFREDINI, A and MOSCOLONI, M.
(eds.) Coppa Nevigata e il suo territorio. Testimonianze archeologiche dal VII al II millennio a.C.: 95-97. Quasar, Roma.
WILKENS, B. 1997 - I molluschi di Scamuso. In BIANCOFIORE, F. e COPPOLA, D. (eds.) Scamuso. Per la storia delle comunit umane tra
il VI ed il III millennio nel Basso Adriatico: 245-247. Dipartimento di Storia dellUniversit di Roma Tor Vergata. Paletnologia.
Roma.
WILLIAMS, D.F. 1983 - Petrology of ceramics. In KEMPE, D.R.C. and HARVEY, A.P. (eds.) The Petrology of Archaeological Artefacts:
301-350. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
WILLIAMS THORPE, O., WARREN, S.E. and BARFIELD, L.H. 1979 - The sources and distribution of archaeological obsidian in northern
Italy. Preistoria Alpina, 15: 73-92.
WOODS, A.J. 1989 - Fired with enthusiasm: experimental open firings at Leicester Univerity. In GIBSON, A. (ed.) Midlands Prehistory.
Some recent and current researches into the prehistory of central England. BAR British Series, 204: 196-226. Oxford.
YOUNI, P. 1996 - The Early Neolithic Pottery: Technology. In RODDEN, R.J. and WARDLE, K.A. (eds.) Nea Nikomedeia I. The Excavation
of an Early Neolithic Village in Northern Greece 1961-1964. The British School at Athens. Supplementary Volume, 25: 55-79.
London.
ZILHO, J. 1992 - Gruta do Caldeiro. O Neolitco Antigo. Trabalhos de Arqueologia, 6. Lisboa.
ZILHO, J. 1993 - The spread of agro-pastoral economies across Mediterranean Europe: a view from the Far West. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology, 6 (1): 5-63.
ZILHO, J. 1997 - Maritime pioneer colonisation in the Early Neolithic of the west Mediterranean. Testing the model against the
evidence. Poroilo o raziskovanju paleolitika, neolitica in eneolitika v Sloveniji, XXIV: 19-42. Ljubljana.
ZILHO, J. 2002 - The Neolithic transition in Portugal and its implications for the understanding of the spread of agriculture in Europe
as a process of demic diffusion. In AMMERMAN, A.J. and BIAGI, P. (eds.) The Widening Harvest. Archaeological Institute of
America. Monograph, 1. Boston (in press).
ZVELEBIL, M. 1986 - Mesolithic Prelude and Neolithic Revolution. In ZVELEBIL, M. (ed.) Hunters in Transition. Mesolithic Societies of
Temperate Eurasia and their Transition to Farming: 5-16. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
ZVELEBIL, M. 1995 - Neolithization in Eastern Europe: a view from the frontier. Poroilo o raziskovanju neolitica in eneolitika v
Sloveniji, XXII: 107-151. Ljubljana.
ZVELEBIL, M. 2000 - The Social Context of the Agricultural Transition in Europe. In RENFREW, C. and BOYLE, K. (eds.) Archaeogenetics:
DNA and the population prehistory of Europe. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge: 57-79.
ZVELEBIL, M. and LILLIE, M. 2000 - Transition to agriculture in eastern Europe. In DOUGLAS PRICE, T. (ed.) Europes First Farmers: 57-
92. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
ZVELEBIL, M. and ROWLEY-CONWY, P. 1984 - Transition to Farming in Northern Europe: a Hunter-gatherer Perspective. Norwegian
Archaeological Review, 17: 104-128.
Authors address:
MICHELA SPATARO, Via Giorgione 9 I-30020 MARCON (VE)
E-mail: smichela@hotmail.com
256
CENTRALGRAFICA S.N.C. - VIA ISOLA DISTRIA, 2 - 34145 TRIESTE - TEL. 040.829800 - FAX 040.822439 - E-MAIL: CENTRALGRAFICA@TIN.IT

Società Per La Preistoria E Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Società Per La Preistoria E Protostoria Della Regione Friuli-Venezia Giulia

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SOCIET PER LA PREISTORIA E PROTOSTORIA

DELLA REGIONE FRIULI-VENEZIA GIULIA

Il presente volume stato stampato

List of abbreviations of site names

2. SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH

Fig. 3 - Konispol Cave (AL):

5.7. THE SOUTH WESTERN ADRIATIC COAST

6. THE HOLOCENE SEA-LEVEL RISE

7.9. SUBSISTENCE ECONOMY

8.3.1. The pottery

5.1. MINERO-PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

The material culture remains

Fig. 16 - Jami na Sredi: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

Fig. 18 - Jami na Sredi: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

Fig. 20 - Jami na Sredi: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

Fig. 22 - Vela Jama: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

Fig. 24 - Vela Jama: pottery from the Impressed Ware layer.

Fig. 29 - Smili: location of the Ne-

Fig. 32 - Smili: pottery from the Impressed Ware Culture settlement.

Fig. 36 - Smili: pottery from the Danilo Culture settlement.

G5 - figulina pottery (total 4 samples):

Fig. 39 - Smili: pottery from the Hvar Culture settlement.

Fig. 44 - Vrbica: pottery from the Neolithic site.

Fig. 50 - Konjevrate: pottery from the Neolithic site.

Fig. 58 - Danilo Bitinj: potsherds from the Danilo Culture settlement.

G2 - (1 sample: VS 34) (fig. 69c)

Fig. 66 - Vela pilja: pottery from the Hvar Culture layers.

Fig 68 - Vela pilja: pottery from the Havr Culture layers.

Fig. 70 - Fornace Cappuccini: location of the Neolithic site. Scale in kilometres.

Fig. 76 - Maddalena di Muccia: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.

Fig. 81 - Ripabianca di Monterado: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.

Fig. 83 - Ripabianca di Monterado: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.

Fig. 85 - Ripabianca di Monterado: pottery from the Impressed Ware settlement.

Fig. 90 - Scamuso: pottery from the Impressed Ware layers.

Table 2a - Thin section analysis of Jami na Sredi potsherds.

Table 3 - Thin section analysis of Vela Jama potsherds.

Table 6 - Thin section analysis of Smili (Danilo phase) potsherds.

Table 8 - Thin section analysis of Vrbica potsherds.

Table 10 - Thin section analysis of Danilo Bitinj potsherds.

Table 11b - Thin section analysis of Vela pjlia potsherds.

Table 13 - Thin section analysis of Maddalena di Muccia potsherds.

Table 15 - Thin section analysis of Scamuso potsherds.

Table 3 - SEM-EDS analysis of Vela Jama potsherds.

Table 8 - SEM-EDS analysis of Vrbica potsherds.

Table 10 - SEM-EDS analysis of Danilo Bitinj potsherds.

Table 12 - SEM-EDS analysis of Fornace Cappuccini potsherds.

Table 15 - SEM-EDS analysis of Scamuso potsherds.

Вам также может понравиться