Rasho Rashev Introduction Рашо Рашев Увод н и дум и Christina Angelova, Mark. Stefanovich Henrieta Todorova Христина Ангелова, Марк Стефанович Хенриета Тодорова Кратка биография

Literatur

R.A.J. Avila. Bronzene Lanzen- und Pfeilspitzen der griechischen Spätbronzezeit (Prähistorische bronze-funde V.l). München 1983.

Bader, T. 1986: Neue Beiträge zu den mykeni­schen Sehweiten! vorn Typ A aus Rumänien. Zeit­schrift für Archäologie 20, 1986, 1-15.

J. Bouzek. The Aegean, Anatolia and Europa: Cultural In-terrelations in the Second Millennium B.C.. Praha 1985.

A. Evans. The Palace of Minos at Knossos. Part II. London 1928.

A. Fol. Etniceski proizhod na naselenieto na Bal-kanskija poluostrov. -In: Islorija na Balgarija I, So­fia 1979, 110-117.

A. Fol. Mvcenaean Thrace II. Starinar 40-41, 1989/90, 127-130.

J.II. Gaul. The Neolithic Period in Bulgaria. Bul­letin ofthe American School of Prehistoric Research 16,

Cambridge/Mass. 1948 (Repr. New York 1968). Hansel 1970

B. Hansel. Bronzene Griffzungenschwerter aus Bulgarien. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 45, 1970, 26-41.

hansel 1973

B. Hansel. Eine datierte Rapierklinge mykeni­schen Typs von der unteren Donau. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 48, 1973, 200-206.

B. Hansel. Zur historischen Bedeutung der The-isszone um das 16. Jh.v.Chr. Jahresbericht des Insti­tuts für Vorgeschichte der Universität Frankfurt A.M., 1977, 87-100.

S. Hiller. The Mycenaeans and Their Northern Neighbors. Temple University Aegean Symposium 9, 1984, 14-30.

schluss der Schneiden ließe sich etwa an einem Bajonett aus Athen (Anm. 38) erkennen, und die Mittelrippe vertritt die ägäische Form e.^4J Wie im vorigen Fall entspricht die Datierung in Ha AI aber nicht der Palastzeit in Knossos, sondern erst SM 11IC 1. Dasselbe gilt für ein überschlankes Blattfragment von Csabrendek" und ein frag­mentiertes Fundstück von Csäkbereny.⁴⁵

In Österreich ist eine Lanzenspitze vom Pass Luftenstein (Salzburg)"' der Lanze von Mezö-kövesd (Anm. 41) so ähnlich, dass dieselben Be­dingungen vorauszusetzen sind wie dort.

Die einzige mir bekannte original ägäische Lanzenspitze im Norden, allerdings kein Ba­jonett sondern ein Vertreter der Variante F IV'⁷, wurde wahrscheinlich auf der Insel Föhr in Nordfriesland gefunden.⁴¹* Sie kann nur als exotischer „statistischer Ausreißer" gelten, nicht

als gezieltes ägäisches Fürstengeschenk.

Fassen wir zusammen. Die Lanzenspitzen von Perustica (Nr. 1), Krasno Gradiste (Nr. 2) und Kricim (Nr. 4) sind wahrscheinlich in Kre­ta hergestellt worden, während jene von Dolno Levski (Nr. 3) und Lesura (Nr. 5) wohl in Thra­kien entstanden sind. Beide stammen aus einer Zeit, aus der kein „Import" ägäischer Originale-bekannt sind. Das archäologische Bild dieser Zeit ist durch das Erscheinen der Coslogeni -Noua - Kultur und der Griffzungenschwerter bestimmt.

Bronze Age Materials From Bagacina (North-West Bulgaria)

Stefan Alexandrov

Cm ефа и А л екса н дрои

Материала от бронзовата епоха от Еагачина (Северозападна Бълги}>ия)

И ститията са преде шанс ни матерним/ от бронзовата епоха от раз копки m e на Л. Бонев' и Г. Александров¹ на обект "Багачина", с. Сталински махала, ооласт Монтана. Матералите се отнасят КЪМ к\лш\рише Коцофени, фаза III, Глина IVи ВерСичоира IV.

The site is locateci ncar the village of Staliiska mahala (présent clay district of Montana, North­west Bulgaria) on a full called "Bagacina" that rises approximately 40 m above the first tenace of river Loin. The top ofthe bill itself lias a 4 m declination (Northwest-Southeast) and Covers an area of approximately 500 ni-'. The excavations havetaken place during 1981-1991 under the di­rection of Dr. Alexander Bonev and Dr. Georgi Alexandrov. The results have been publishcd in two articles and a monograph. According to them the stratigraphy ofthe site is as tollows: a Late Enaeolithic scttlcment with tour layers, spo-radic materials from the "transitional period to the Bronze Age", Bronze Age (3rd - 2nd mill. BC) and Ist millennium BC materials. The ard­isi millennia materials were published as Com­ing from ritual pits which is the reason for the authors to argue about the existence at Bagacina of a Thracian cult "pit" center during those mil­lennia (БонЕв/АлЕкелндров 1986; 1993; 1996). Since the topic ofthe monograph was the Thra­cian cult center from the Ist mill. BC the pre­historic layers and materials were published in general only. That is why bere I shall présent the Bronze Age materials which, I hopc, could be a small contribution lo the better understanding ofthe nature of this important site.*

The materials

1. F.arlv Bronze Age¹ - 2 A. Bowls

1. Hemisphei ical bowls:

a) the ri m is thickened from the inside (PI. II/l).

2. Bowls with elongated body:

a) the rim is thickened from the inside (PI. 1/1-2; II/2-7).

b) the rim is everted forming a short border and obliquely cut from the inside (Pl.II/8).

Bowls oftypes 1 and 2 bave two pairs of three vertical relief hands starting front the rim and ending with a relief application at the body or just two applications on the body. The applica­tions probablv served as handles. Ali the bowls are decorateci with inciseci lines: beneath the rim the so-called "fish bone" motif is disposed; sometimes from the "fish bone" band two or four vertical scratched bands come (Pl. I; II)

B. Cups

There is a complete cup and fragments from another two, ali of them hemisphei ical body, short funnel-like neck and a tali looped-handle. Ali the cups are decorateci with inciseti lines, one of them having "linsen" décoration as well (Pl. II 1.4-6). Handies from Pl. V.2, 5, 8 come from the sanie cups as well.

There is a complete askoi and fragments from another one. The complete vessel is deco-rated with inciseci lines forming a zigzag band white the second one is decorateti with hanging triangles made of dots (Pl. ULI. 2).

D. Amphorae

There is a complete amphora and fragments from another two. The complete vessel is deco-rated with incised lines forming the so-called f ir branches motif while the two others are dec-orated with vertical lines made with imprints (Pl. III.3, 7, 8). It is not excluded handles from Pl. V.3, 6, 9-11 to corne from amphorae as weil.

The height of these vessels is around 1.0 m. The shape itself is with spherical body, tali cone-like neck and inverted to the outside ri m forming a big border. The handle connects the maximum diameter of the body to the rim ris-ing highly above it. The décoration patterns are disposed on the rim, on the body and on the handle. The technique used is incisions form­ing triangles in some cases marked with "linsen" Ornament (Pl. IV).

F. Vessels For Liquids

Some rims discovered could have come from such vessels. All the fragments are decorateci with incised lines or linsen Ornaments (PI. VI, 4).

In spite of the already described decorative techniques and motifs I would like to mention some others specific for the site. Apart from the décoration with vertical lines made with im­prints (Pl. III.3, 7, 8) this would be the verti­cal incised lines the space between them being filled with dots, Scratches of stamped triangles (Pl. V.7, 9, 11).

Model of wheel (?) or a spindle-whorl (?) at-tracted my attention as well. It is made of clay; the surface is burnished dark brown in color. The décoration is fascinatine made with im-printing a cord into the soft clay. At one of the sides of the spindle-whorl there is a rosette with seven leaves; the opposite side being decorated with curved lines making a circled band in the middle of which a représentation of'an eye is to be seen. The narrow part is also decorated (PI. XII.8). I am inclined to assign the find to the EBA-2 thanks to the considération that corded décoration was very rare in the periods follow-ing EBA-2.

2. Early Bronze Age-3 A. Bowls

l. Hemispherical bowls:

a) the rim is thickened from the inside (Pl. VILI, 2);

b) the rim is everted forming a "border" (Pl. VIII.4, 8);

c) the rim is with a "T"-profiIe (Pl. VIII. 12). Most of the bowls of types Alb-c had short,

symmetrically disposed vertical handles Con­necting rim to the body (Pl. VII.3-5).

2. Hemispherical bowls with inverted rims:

a) the rim is rounded; according to the han­dle three variants are presented:

al) with a short vertical handle rising slightly above the rim (Pl. IX.2, 5). Most of the bowls of this variant had relief applications rising from the rim. Probably there were 3 of them (dis­posed symmetrically opposite and on both sides to the handle (Pl. VIII.2, 3, 9-11). The forth ap­plication is the place where the upper part of the handle Starts (PI. VIII.7);

a2) with a horizontal tunnel lugs (Pl. IX.3, 4, 6-8);

a3) with pseudo-horizontal tunnel lugs (pl. IX.9).

b) the rim is with a "T"- profile (Pl. VIII. 1). Most of the bowls of this variant had two or four short, symmetrically disposed vertical handles Connecting rim to the body (Pl. VII.6, 7).

Most of the bowls of type lb-c and 2b have been decorated with incised lines and dots filled with white paste. The décoration is placed on the rim. The motifs are geometrie in shape - hang­ing triangles, rectangles, oblique lines etc (Pl. VILI, 4, 8, 12). The applications on the rims of bowls type 2a 1 have also been decorated in the same manner and shape (Pl. VIII.3, 9, 11).

B. Cups

2. Base pointed cups with one handle of the so-called Junacite type. None of the cups is dec­orated (Pl. X.l-3, 5, 6).

C. Jugs

There is only one jug from the site. It has a pear-like body with an everted and obliquely cut rim. The handle, decorated with a vertical relief band, connects the body to the neck (Pl. X.8).

There are no complete pots so the descrip­tion of the shapes is not possible. However, there is a distinguished shape of a pot with two short vertical handles. According to their disposai three variants are seen:

1. The handles connect the neck to the rim not rising above it (Pl. XI.l);

2. The handles connect the neck to the rim not rising slightly above it (Pl. XI.2);

3. The handles are disposed at the neck (Pl. XI.4, 5).

E. Urn-Iike Vessels

There is only one fragment, which could be assigned to that shape. It is decorated with a re­lief band below the rim, which forms a sort of manchette (pl. XI.6).

Probably the tunnel lugs from Pl. XII. 1-4 be-long to the same period as well as the fragment of a stone axe from Pl. XI 1.7.

A bronze weapon with a missing edge cornes from the site as well (Pl. XII.6 = Бонев/ Александров 1996, 26, 118, обр. 47). Unfortu-nately there is no information for the context of discovering. It could be described both as a dag-ger or spear-head. Similar daggers have been found in Anatolia and Asia Minor dated to the end of 4th—beginning of the 3rd millennium BC (MCller-Karpe 1995, 274-276, Abb. 14). From the other site the weapon is very similar to the spear-heads of Xa type according to Branigan. Similar spear-heads come, for example, from Troy Ilg (Branigan 1974, 163, pi. 10.461). In my opinion, the spear-head from Bagacina should date in EBA-3.

3. Late Bronze Age

Materials from that period are few in number but, however, very characteristic.

A. Kantharoi

This is the basic form from the site. Most of the fragments come from this shape. They are

-' Here, the typology of the Cotofeni pottery for Bulgar­ian lands will be used (ALEXANDROV 1990). In brackets the

227

made of well-purif ied clay with some mica or quartz ingrédients. The surface is burnished, often polished, gray or black in color. AU the fragments are decorated with incised lines, fine furche nstich or combinatoti of both techniques. The lines are filled with white paste (Pl. XIII.2, 3, 5-13). The same décoration techniques are to be met on the handles of the kantharoi as well (Pl. XIII.4; XIV). All the motifs have geometrie shape, one of the fragments presenting a highly stylized anthropomorphic (woman?) représen­tation (Pl. XIII.12).

B. Bowls

There is only one fragment that could be assigned to the period in discussion. It cornes from a deep hemispherical bowls with curved rim. The rim itself is inverted to the outside forming a short border. There is a décoration of a line of incised triangles on the maximum diameter of the bowl (Pl. XIII.1).

Chronological and cultural frame

1. Early Bronze Age - 2

There is no doubt about the cultural défi­nition of the materials from EBA-2. From the very beginning of the excavations they have been assigned to the Cotofeni culture. Accord­ing to the typology of the Cotofeni pottery in Bulgaria and Romania the bowls with elongat-ed bodv and everted rim forming a short bor­der thickened from the inside as well (Pl. 1.1-2; II.12-7) are included in type IId2 (Ild).² Bowls with similar shape and obliquely cut from the inside rim (PI.II.8) are included in type IIb4 (IIb). Hemispherical bowls with thickened from the inside rim (Pl. ILI) belong to type Ilf (Alex-androv 1990; Roman 1976, 20, Pl. 15). Cups (Pl. II 1.4-6) enter type IIIc2b while askoi are includ­ed in type XIal and XIa2 (Alexandrov 1995, Fig. 4.72; Roman 1976, 21, 23, Pl. 17.9; 29.1-4). Amphorae (Pl. II 1.3) enter type V, the big jars (Pl. IV) - type X and the vessels for liquids (Pl. V.l-3) - type IX (Alexandrov 1990; Roman 1976, 21, 23, Pl. 23.4; 27; 28). It is clear from the parallels listed above that ail the pottery pré­sentée in chapter EBA-2 is characteristic for the Cotofeni culture. The présence of this culture

general typology of the pottery proposed by P. Roman is shown.

in Staliiska mahala has been noticed from the very beginning of the excavations. The excava-tors looked for parallels in Cotofeni Settlements such as Gradée and Magura, Vidin district (Йоцова 1988; Джамбазов/Катинчаров 1974) and Rassovo, Montana district³ dating the ma­terials in ЕВА (Бонев/Алексапдров 1993, 25; 1996, 22-24). However, a more precise chrono-logical attribution for the pottery is possible.

On both sides of the Danube a southern variant of the Cotofeni culture develops for which the name Danubian has been proposed. According to the chronology and periodisation of the Bronze Age accepted in Bulgaria this variant covers phases ЕВА le - ЕВА 2 (Alex­androv 1995, 256-260). Where is the place of Staliiska mahala materials in this chronologi-cal order? Bowls of types IIb4, IId2, and Hfl are characteristic for Gradée and Magura sites most of ail for horizons II-I in both sites (Al­exandrov 1990). Those horizons are dated to the phase Cotofeni III (Alexandrov 1995, 262). North of the Danube such forms corne from Ba-sarabi and Ostrovul Corbului both sites dating from Cotofeni III (Roman 1976, Pl. 91, 92, 99). The same parallels could be found for cups of type IIIc2b, jugs of type X, amphorae of type V, askoi of type XI as well as vessels for liquids of type IX (Alexandrov 1990; Roman 1976, P1.95; 99; 100). Considering the parallels listed, a date of the finds in Cotofeni III seems quite logie. Based on the parallels with Gradée II-I and its chronological position I am inclined to believe that Staliiska mahala dates to the end of Cotofeni III that would correspond to EBA 2b-c in Bulgarian chronology and periodisation of the Bronze Age (Alexandrov 1995, 256).

2. Early Bronze Age - 3

2.1. Chronological frame

Hemispherical bowls with thickened from the inside rim (Pl. VII.1,2) have good paral­lels in Glina settlement from Ostrovul Corbului - "Cliuci" (Roman 1985, fig. 1.6, 7). The same is to be said for the bowls (Pl. VII.3-5) with everted rim forming a "border" and a short, symmetri­

cally disposed vertical handles Connecting rim to the body (Roman 1985, fig. 1.9, 11). The set­tlement was dated to the 4th phase of the Glina culture being synchronized to Monteoru Ic4 as well (Roman 1986). Same bowls have been at-tested in the Central Balkans' EBA site Juzac (Jevtic 1997, Pl. XI.2) as well as in the EBA-3 level from Pernik (Alexandrov 1998, fig. 7.1, 2).

Bowls with "T" or closed to it profile of the rim (Pl. VII.5-7; VIII.1, 4-6, 8, 12) find their best parallels, including the incised décoration on the rim, in Bubanj-Hum group from the Central Balkans (Буба1ь 1983, cat. Nos. 135, 142; Праисториске 1973, cat. No. 186). The chronological position of these bowls in Bubanj-Hum III has already been discussed (Alexan­drov 1998, 225-226). Further south and south­east such bowls corne from EBA-3 sites of Okol Glava and Ciukovec - Sofia and Pernik districts (Alexandrov 1998, 225, fig.7.3,4) as well as from Sitagroi Vb (Rf.nfrew et al. 1986, fig. 13:27. 9, 10, 12). Bowls with a "T" profile appear in Mun-tenia-Odaia Turcului-'Obere Schicht" (Tudor 1982, Abb. 7.1-5, 7, 16; Bäjenaru 2003, Fig. 5). Similar shapes have been attested in Näeni - Zänoaga in levels I-II. It has been noted that their number increases from level I to level II. Both levels have been synchronized with Monte­oru IC4-1 (levels Ila-b) and ante-Monteoru IC4 (1) - levels Ia-b respectively (Motzoi-Chicideanu/ §andor-Chicideanu 2001, 79, fig. 15.4, 9).

Hemispherical bowls with inverted rims, re­lief applications and a short vertical handle ris-ing slightly above it (Pl. VIII.2, 3, 7, 9-11; IX.2, 5) are also typical for the EBA-3 in the région. The nearest parallel is a complete bowl from Al-timir, Vratza district (Николов 1965, 175, обр. 16.г).⁴ Further east such shapes come from EBA-3 site Hotnitsa - V. Tarnovo district (Ilcheva 2000, fig. 2.9). Another complete vessel comes from Southwest Bulgaria - Djakovo, associated with cups of Junacite type (Alexandrov 1998, fig. 5.2-4, 7).⁵ Bowls with short vertical handles are also known from Ostrovul Corbului-Glina IV settlement (Roman 1998, Abb. 3.5) as well as from the EBA in Central Balkans - Gradina

and Juzac sites near Pazariste (jevtic 1997, Pl. V.4; XII.2). Relief application possibly from the same bowls corne from Bubanj-Hum III (Буьан, 1983, cat. Nos. 137-138).⁶

Hemispherical bowls with inverted rim and tunnel or pseudo tunnel lugs on the rim (Pl. IX.3, 4, 6-9). The nearest parallel comes from Lovech - complete vessel associated with a Ju-nacite type base pointed cup (alexandrov 1998, fig. 1.5-7). Close parallels of the bowls with pseu­do- tunnel lugs corne from Ostrovul Corbului - Glina IV site (Roman 1998, Abb. 3.2). The shape is typical for the EBA in Thrace appear-ing there from EBA-2 and continuing during EBA-3. It appears in the EBA-2 in Southwest Bulgaria continuing its présence there during EBA-3 as well (alexandrov 1994). Generally speaking, north of the Danube bowls (différent in shape) but with tunnel, or pseudo-tunnel lugs on the rim appear as early as Odaia Turcului -level 4, Näeni-Zänoaga I-II and Monteoru IC4 (Tldor 1982, Abb. 7/4,16; Bâjenaru 2003, Fig.5; Motzoi-Chigideanu/§andor-Chicideanu 2001, 79, fig. 15.4,6; Zaharia 1987, fig. 15).

One of the most characteristic pottery forms from Staliiska mahala is the base-pointed cup of "Junacite" type (pl. X.l-3, 5, 6). The form it­self is not a stränge one for Northwest or Cen­tral North Bulgaria. The nearest parallel comes from Jakimovo, some 10 km east of Staliiska ma­hala. Such cups are known from Lovech, Zga-levo, Sadovec and Muselievo (Alexandrov 1999, 223, fig.l, 2). However, the shape is most char­acteristic for the Northwest Thrace. Majority of the cups known cornes from Junacite-tell where they appear from 8th to Ist horizon (Миков 1933, обр. 38; КатинчаровМацлпова 1933, 157). 8th to 3rd horizons from tell were dated by "C in the period 2570/2530-2360/2330 cal. BC (Boyadziev 1995, 155-157). Such cups appear in Southwest Bulgaria, unfortunately without any stratigraphie data (Alexandrov 1998, Fig. 5) as weil as in Velika Humska Cuka, phase Bubanj-Hum III and Pelince near Kumanovo associated with cups of Bubanj-Hum III type (Буб.мь 1983, cat. Nos.187-188; Саржоски 1992, 34; Garasanin 1996, 103). A Junacite type cup cornes from Sitagroi Vb, feature Q06. The last one is later than the "Long House" and the "Bin Complex" representing the end of the EBA-3 in tell. The EBA-3 there was dated by ^l4C between 2100 - 1800 BC, or 2700 - 2200 cal. BC (Ren-erewetal. 1986, 173, 185, fig. 13:27.3).

Other characteristic forms are the two han­dle cups with an elongated "S"-profile of the so-called "Bubanj-Hum III" or "Vecina Mala" types (Pl. X.4, 7). Best analogies are to be found in Southwest Bulgaria - Pernik (Alexandrov 1998, 224, fig. 4), Bubanj-Hum III group and Vecina Mala from Nisava and Morava Valleys (БУБАН> 1983, cat. Nos.154-164; Стоиъ, 1986, Сл. 3-12) and, further south in the Armenochori group (Heurtley 1939). From Thrace, similar cups come from the upper horizons in Ezero-tell as well as from Djadovo-tell, horizons I-II dating to the end of the ЕВА (Лещлков 1997, обр. 4.м, 17.e). Considering the internal division of the EBA-3 in Northwest Bulgaria and Morava val­ley (Alexandrov 1995, 256; Garasanin 1996, 102-104). I am inclined to assign the Bagacina cups to EBA-3a.

Pots with handles Connecting the neck to the rim not rising above it (Pl. XI.l) as well as those with handles disposed at the neck (Pl. XI.4, 5) have been attested in early Vinkovci pits from Golokut (Vojvodina), in Novacka Duprija (Morava valley) and in the Central Balkan EBA sites (Петровпъ 1996, 9, Табл. 3; Крстиъ et al. 1986, IX. 1, 2; XV.4, 5; Jevtic 1997, IV.2, 4; VIII.l, 3). Pots with two handles Connecting the neck to the rim rising slightly above it (Pl. XI.2) have their parallels in Kozlodui (Alexandrov 1998, fig. 2.6), Odaia Turcului (Tudor 1982, Abb. 8.1-3, 6) and Monteoru IC4 (Zaharia 1987, fig. 10). The shape was presented in the EBA Central Balkans as well (Jevtic 1997, VII.1,3).

Considering the above-mentioned parallels I am inclined to date the EBA-3 materials from Bagacina to the phase EBA-3a. This presump-tion is based mainly on the parallels with the Näeni - Zänoaga and Monteoru IC41 as well as on the lack of the so-called besenstrich déco­ration that marks the end of the EBA in some parts of the Lower Danube.

⁶ For the discussion on aciual date of these applications see Ai.kxanukov 1998.

2.2. Cultural Interpretation

EBA-3 materials from Bagacina have already been subject to cultural interprétation. The au-thors of the investigations assigned some ofthe materials described above to the ".. .cultural com­plex Late Glina-Schneckenberg-Bubanj-Hum III" (Boheb/Aaekcah4I'ob 1996, 25). The existence of Late Glina culture materials in Bagacina has been noted in some other articles as well (Alex­androv 1995, 266; Alexandrov 1998, 230; Al­exandrov et al. 1998, 26). However, there is an interprétation of the EBA-3 materials from the site as belonging to "...EB III Zgalevo-Lovech group" (Nikolova 1999, 33). In my opinion, resolving the problem with the cultural inter­prétation ofthe Bagacina EBA-3 is not possible outside the whole picture of the cultural devel-opment during the EBA-3 in North Bulgaria and Lower Danube as well.

The earliest Glina site south of the Danube (Russe) dates to phase II⁷ (3mehkoba 2003). The only excavated EBA-3 "closed" complex comes from Tutrakan. It has been assigned to Late Glina culture (Alexandrov et al. 1998, 26). However, there are some other opinions considering the cultural and chronological at­tribution of the site. In some recent studies the materials from Tutrakan have been associated with those from Militari-Câmpul Boja "aspect" (Nf.gru et al. 2000) both sites being connected with a final Glina phase with strong southern influences as well (Bàjenaru 2003, 115). Accord­ing to L. Nikolova the stratigraphy of the EBA layer has been interpreted as "... Glina II cul­ture, EBA IIB-C; II-III?" (Nikolova 1999, 50). Another opinion given by the same author says that "...the seulement can be attributed not to the end ofEB but to the end of EB III A dated to the third quarter of the Third Millennium BC. The absence of stratigraphie information published and especially the depth of the sherds discovered give no possibil-ily of more detailed analysis of the ceramic material. However, some classic Glina sherds may indicate also an EB II occupation at the site" (Nikolova 1999, 231). For the needs of this article it is neces-sary to remind once again the real stratigraphie situation in Tutrakan. The complex (part of a dwelling) has been discovered in Trench No.2

⁷ Here, the periodisation of Glina culture proposed by P. Roman will be used.

at a depth of 0.68-0.75 m. It consisted of two rows of post-holes and a floor of rammed gray-brown clay. On the floor level fragments of 10 vessels, flints and a fragment of stone axe have been discovered. (Alexandrov etal. 1998, 7-8, Figs. 2, 3, Pl.l; 2.8, 11). Considering its nature

- floor of a dwelling, the feature can be inter­preted as a "closed" one. Thus, all the materials discovered in it are synchronous. In spite of that this is the only EBA complex at the site. Then, it is not understandable how a part of it (prob-ably fragments decorated with "buttons" from PI. 1.1-3) is to be assigned to one period - Glina II (EBA-2) and the other part to another one

- EBA-3? If, according to L. Nikolova there are "...some classic Glina sherds" in the complex (Nikolova 1999, 131), which is my opinion as well (Alexandrov etal. 1998, 10) than the cul­tural attribution of the complex to Glina culture seems to me quite logie. The présence of frag­ments decorated with buttons is not so stränge considering that they have been attested in the EBA-3a Late Glina layer from Ostrovul Corbu­lui (Roman 1985, fig. 1.8). The Tutrakan com­plex has been dated to "...the end of the EBA" or "...EBA-3 according to Bulgarian periodisation" (Alexandrov et al. 1998, 15). In terms of rela­tive chronology Tutrakan feature has been syn­chronized with "...Monteoru IC4-Odaia Turcului "Obere Schickt"-Ostrovul Corbului (Alexandrov etal. 1998, 15).

Thus, during the chronological horizon Monteoru IC4-Odaia Turcului there are two Late Glina sites placed at the eastern and the western parts ofthe Lower Danube - Tutrakan and Ostrovul Corbului (Roman 1985, 1998). South of the Danube, between these two Settle­ments there are more than 15 sites which have also been assigned to Glina culture (Alexan­drov et al. 1998, 26, fig. 5; Alexandrov 1998). Recently L. Nikolova has argued cultural attri­bution of most of them. Some of these sites have been assigned to a new cultural group called "Zgalevo-Lovech" (Nikolova 1999, 9-10, 234-235). What is the archaeological situation?

1. From the already published arguments the site from Jakimovo (Northwest Bulgaria) belongs to Glina culture (Alexandrov 1998;

The internal division of Cotofeni III for its' Southern (Danubian) variant has been made based on stratigraphie data from Basarabi, Os­trovul Corbului and Moldova Yeche. In fact, principle site was that at Ostrovul Corbului where, in spite of the stratigraphie data, Kostol-ac and Vucedol imports have been used for ad-ditional strengthening ofthe periodisation (Ro­man 1976). Such éléments are rare in Oltenia and Northwest Bulgaria. However, according to the material published there is no différence between the pottery from the end of Cotofeni culture in Bulgaria (Gradée, Jakimovo, Bagaci­na etc.) and that from Ostrovul Corbului. That is a good reason for me to believe in their syn-chronism.

Second, sites of Glina II type enter Oltenia only in its' eastern part - Branet (Shuster 1997, fig.6). The 3rd phase of Glina culture (Govo-ra—Runcuri) is attested in North Oltenia only. There is no clear évidence for Glina III sites in South Oltenia and Northwest Bulgaria. In spite of that there are sites which date to Glina IV-Verbita for example. Then, any materials later than Cotofeni ones in the région should have been dated to EBA-3a or later.

Third, according to C. Shuster at least a part of Glina III sites in Muntenia should have been contemporaneous to those of Glina IV (Shus­ter 1997, 87), a presumption which seems to me quite logie. From that point of view all the par­allels between Jakimovo and classic Glina sited in Table 10.5 (Nikolova 1999, 233) have only an informative value. Considering the fact that in the original publication parallels of the same shapes with sites and cultures later then clas­sic Glina have been shown (Monteoru IC4-3. Odaia Turcului, Vinkovci etc.) I think the date of the Jakimovo materials in EBA-3 much more accurate. Then, if the existence of Glina culture there is aeeepted (Nikolova 1999, 232) it should be only the Late Glina one.

2. Part of the Sadovec materials (Central North Bulgaria) belongs to Glina culture as well (Alexandrov 1998). As a specific decora-tion one could mention the holes under the rim (Todorova 1992, Abb. 14.14, 20-23) with paral­lels in Glina culture (Shuster 1997, 73, esp. fig. 70.2; 108.1). Unfortunately, Central North Bul­garia is not very well investigated considering the EBA. Therefore, the attribution of Sadovec materials to certain Glina culture phase is not possible. However, the existence of base-pointed cups (Todorova 1968, Abb. 12.47 = Alexandrov 1998, 7, 9) suggests at least an EBA-3 level. H. Todorova (1992, 365) was the first one to pro-pose the attribution of the materials discussed to a southern variant ofthe Glina Culture.

3. From the above-mentioned one can draw some conclusions considering the Glina Culture presence south ofthe Danube. At present it is as earlier as Glina II in Central North Bulgaria. There are no straight evidences for Glina III sites in that region but they are to be expected. Glina IV sites (including vessels with typical Glina decoration with "buttons") are presented in Tutrakan (to the east) and Jakimovo (to the west). Then, attribution of the Bagacina EBA-3 materials to Glina Culture (with very strong south influences) is not so stränge and looks logic at the present stage ofthe investigations.

3. Late Bronze Age

Kantharoi form is a charactcristic one for the LBA in Balkan Peninsula. Richly decorated kantharoi from Bagacina find their parallels in a number of sites - Gradeshnitsa, Hayredin, Lesura in North-West and Muselievo, Devetaki etc. in Central North Bulgaria (Hansel 1976. Taf.20; 36). Similar or identical decorative com-positions are to be met in Verbicioara IV-V and Tei IV-V cultures north ofthe Danube (Berch 1961a, Abb.8, 9, 18; MoRiNTZ 1976, 63. 69. 73;

Some of the Bulgarian sites mentioned above have already been attributed to Verbicio­ara culture (Bf.rciu 1961b; 1961c, 390) or Gov-ora group (Hansel, 1976, 59). Considering the présent stage of the investigations in Bulgaria as well as the situation north of the Danube we are inclined to assign the discussed materials to Verbicioara IV culture. Its eastern border was Iskar river valley, the southern one being the Balkan mountains' range, Devetaki and Muse-lievo caves entering the Tei culture région. Un-til now in North-West Bulgaria 4 sites dated to Verbicioara III phase (MBA) - Biala Slatina, Al-timir (Vratsa district), Jakimovo (Montana dis­trict) and Antimovo (Vidin district) as well as 3 sites dated to Verbicioara IV-V phases (LBA) - Gradeshnitsa, Hayredin, Lesura (Vratsa dis­trict) were known. Thus, Bagacina becomes the eight Verbicioara site south of the Danube.

The analysis of the materials presented above shows that 3 Bronze Age archaeologi-

References

Бонев/Александров 1986 А. Бонев, Г. Александров. Разкопки в м. Ба-гачина край с. Сталийска махала, Михайлов-градски окръг (предварително съобщение). Археология XXVIII.3, 1986, 49-56.

Бонев/Александров 1993 А. Бонев, Г. Александров. Багачина - тракийс-ки култов център (предварително съобщение). Археология XXXV.1, 1993, 24-30.

⁸ The materials show exact parallels with Baile Herculane, Salcuta IV and Galatin. For more information see Г. Ганецовски. Керамика от късноенеолитното селище

cal phenomena were presented in Bagacina - Cotofeni, Glina and Verbicioara IV. Chrono-logically, they belong to EBA-2b-c, EBA-3a and LBA-1 according to the Bulgarian periodiza­tion of the Bronze Age. As presented above, the authors of the excavations connected all the Bronze Age materials to a "pit" sanctuary that existed on the hill from EBA-2 onwards. How­ever, in the annual reports of the excavations the "Junacite" type cups were reported as Com­ing from a floor level. In some articles existence of apsis houses is mentioned (Г. Александров, 1994, 11). Inside one of them „...hand made thra-cian pottery was found" (Бонев/Александров 1986, 51, обр. 2, 3). From the other site the surface of the hill has been ploughed for more than 40 years at a depth of 0.50 m that "...dis-turbed the cultural layer in its upper