Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Middle Bronze Age Ceranic Jug From Tel
A Middle Bronze Age Ceranic Jug From Tel
VOLUME ONE
Sofia, 2022
St. Kliment Ohridski University Press
1
Volume One
2
ПЪРВИ ТОМ
под редакцията на Петър Делев, Тотко Стоянов,
Светлана Янакиева, Христо Попов, Анелия Божкова,
Майя Василева, Юлия Цветкова, Маргарит Дамянов,
Петя Илиева, Юлий Емилов
СОФИЯ 2022
Университетско издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“
3
VOLUME ONE
еdited by Peter Delev, Totko Stoyanov, Svetlana Yanakieva,
Hristo Popov, Anelia Bozkova, Maya Vassileva, Julia Tzvetkova,
Margarit Damyanov, Petya Ilieva, Juliy Emilov
SOFIA, 2022
St. Kliment Ohridski University Press
The four organizing institutions of the 13th International Congress of Thracology in 2017 have each celebrated important
anniversaries thereafter:
• 130 years since the foundation of the National Museum in Sofia (1892) [now the National Archaeological Museum
affiliated to the National Archaeological Institute];
• 120 years since the foundation of the Museum Iskra in Kazanlak (1901);
• 100 years since the establishment of the Department of Archaeology at the St. Kliment Ohridski University of Sofia
(1920);
• 100 years since the foundation of the Bulgarian Archaeological Institute (1921);
• 100 years since the establishment of the Department of Classical Philology at the St. Kliment Ohridski University of
Sofia (1922);
• 50 years since the foundation of the Institute of Thracology at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (1972) [now a Center
of Thracology affiliated to the Institute of Balkan Studies].
The editors dedicate the publication of the congress proceedings to the commemoration of these six events.
The printing of the proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Thracology has been sponsored financially by:
© the editors and the respective authors, unless where otherwise indicated
© 2022 NICE AN LTD, Sofia (prepress and graphic design)
© 2022 St. Kliment Ohridski University Press
Preface ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Congress programme ................................................................................................................... 11
Sorin-Cristian Ailincăi, Laurent Carozza and Alexandra Ţârlea
Once again on the Early Iron Age chronology at the Lower Danube. New radiocarbon
data from Babadag ...................................................................................................................... 21
Zeki Mete Aksan
Reinvestigation of Vize A tumulus in Southeastern Thrace ........................................................... 29
Amalia Avramidou and Despoina Tsiafaki
Preliminary results of the research project Attic pottery in Thrace .............................................. 35
Maguelone Bastide
Thracian sanctuaries’ myths and realities .................................................................................... 45
Dimitar Bayrakov
Clay portable hearths from the Chepino Valley (Northwestern Rhodopes)
with “Tsepina type” decoration .................................................................................................... 53
Ioan Bejinariu and Horea Pop
Recent research concerning the end of the First Iron Age – beginning of the
La Tène in the upper Tisa area ..................................................................................................... 61
Jan G. de Boer
A small world and middle grounds in ancient Thrace ................................................................. 73
Anelia Bozkova
Towards a chronology of the fourth century B.C. ........................................................................ 83
Margarit Damyanov
Hand-made pottery in the Greek colonies in the Black Sea: the case of Apollonia Pontica ......... 89
Zdravko Dimitrov
The Thracian sanctuary near the village of Angel Voyvoda, the Eastern Rhodopes ..................... 99
Diana Dimitrova
Fifth-fourth century BC Odrysian burial rites at the big Tundhza River curve ............................ 107
Dimitar Draganov
The silver coinage of Apollonia Pontica (5th – 4th century BC): iconography............................... 116
Zeynep Koçel Erdem
Cult studies in Turkish Thrace: understanding the Thracian religion – new approaches ............. 123
El-Sayed Gad
Thrace and the Thracians in the speeches of Demosthenes .......................................................... 129
William Greenwalt
Macedonian and Thracian relations through early 334 B.C. ....................................................... 137
6 Table of contents
Hristomir S. Hristov
The “Griffins” tumulus. On the structure and function of Thracian mound
facilities in the Classical and Hellenistic Age .............................................................................. 145
Rositsa Hristova Hristova
Technological changes and craft-specialization of the ceramic production
on the territory between Upper Thracian Plain and Burgas Lowland
from the Late Bronze Age to the Archaic Period .......................................................................... 153
Ekaterina Ilieva
Pottery on the move – geographical distribution of the Late Iron Age Tsepina pottery ................ 167
Hristina Ivanova-Anaplioti
Apollonia of Pontus and Thrace and the allocation of its weight standards ................................. 177
Miroslav Iliev Izdimirski
Deported Paeonians in the Achaemenid Empire as kurtaš – workers .......................................... 185
Hazar Kaba
Comparing the metal vessel acquisition patterns and trends
of the Thracian and Cypriot elite during the Classical Period .................................................... 191
Slavtcho Kirov
Le passé thraco-phrygien à la lumière de l’inscription RIMA, 2, A.0.100.5, 115B-127 ............... 207
Jeffrey D. Lerner
Skudrā and Kūšiya under Xerxes I ............................................................................................... 213
Kalin Madzharov
Trading post at Ruse? The evidence of the amphora stamps ....................................................... 221
Dragoş Măndescu
Where did they put the akinakes? On the Late Hallstatt Ferigile warriors’
panoply starting from the recent discoveries in the necropolis at Valea Stânii ............................. 231
Consuelo Manetta and Daniela Stoyanova
Architecture and decoration of the propylon at Seuthopolis ......................................................... 241
Philip Mihaylov and Borislava Galabova
The 11th – 4th century BC Dren – Delyan necropolis.
Cultural and physical anthropological analyses. Preliminary data.............................................. 261
Philip Mihaylov and Nikoleta Tzankova
Glass beads from Dren – Delyan necropolis (archaeological and archaeometric study) ............ 271
Petar Minkov
A Middle Bronze Age Ceramic Jug from Tell Russe ..................................................................... 279
Kabalan Moukarzel and Miroslav Izdimirski
On Skudrians in the Akkadian versions of the Achaemenid royal
inscriptions and some Late Babylonian texts................................................................................ 287
Kate Mower
Thracians as σύμμαχοι to the Greek settlements along the West Pontic coast ............................. 297
Yana Mutafchieva
Bronze biconical oinochoai from Thrace: morphology and chronology ....................................... 301
Nerantzis Nerantzis and Stratis Papadopoulos
Mining in the Thracian world: the case of Lekani Mountains in Northern Greece ..................... 313
Table of contents 7
The Thirteenth International Congress of ogies to all participants for this impediment.
Thracology “Ancient Thrace: Myth and Real- The quantity of material imposed the publica-
ity” was held in Kazanlak, Bulgaria, from the tion of the proceedings in two volumes; the divi-
3rd to the 7th of September 2017, under the aus- sion was effected on the basis of the actual sec-
pices of the St. Kliment Ohridski University of tions of the congress – the oral communications
Sofia, the National Archaeological Institute and presented in sections 1 and 2 are published in
Museum, the Institute of Balkan Studies with the first volume, those from sections 3 and 4 – in
Center of Thracology, and the Iskra Historical the second volume. The communications from
Museum in Kazanlak. The congress comprised the two opening plenary sessions and the post-
in its three busy working days three plenary ses- ers have been split between the two volumes ac-
sions and 26 special sessions divided between cording to their thematic contents. In each of the
four concurrent sections. Some 130 oral com- two volumes, the papers are arranged in alpha-
munications and 44 posters were presented by betical order after the last name of their (first)
a total of 195 authors and co-authors. Visits to author. Alphabetical lists of the authors of the
the Iskra Historical Museum (where two special published texts with their institutional affilia-
exhibitions were opened on the occasion) and tions and e-mail addresses are appended at the
to some of the Thracian tombs in the vicinity of end of each volume.
Kazanlak were organized for the participants, as The full program of the congress is repro-
well as excursions to other archaeological sites duced at the beginning of volume 1. Due to the
on the final day of the congress. considerable number of non-submitted papers (a
A total of 101 papers were submitted for few were retracted by the authors after submis-
publication in the proceedings of the congress. sion), the editors have decided to publish their
For various reasons this publication was much summaries as presented before the congress at
delayed, and the editors offer their sincere apol- the end of the second volume.
SECTION 1
First afternoon session, moderator Chaido Koukouli-Chrysanthaki
Stefan Alexandrov, Georgi Ivanov, Tanya Hristova. Baley Necropolis and the Problems of the Ap-
pearance and Development of the “Grooved” Decoration in the Western Part of the Lower Danube
Region
Morena Stefanova. The Case of Valchitran Type Disks: Some Aspects of the Ritual, Performance and
Cultural Interconnections in the Second Millennium B.C. Thrace
Laura Burkhardt, Barbara Horejs. Selected House-Inventories of the Late Bronze Age (Mining-)
Settlement at Ada Tepe – A Preliminary functional interpretation
Delphine Frémondeau, Elena Marinova, Bea De Cupere, Plamen Georgiev, Ivanka Hristova,
Lazar Ninov, Krassimir Nikov, Hristo Popov. Bioarchaeological perspectives on subsistence
economy and land use during the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age in South-Eastern Bulgaria
Rostitsa Hristova, Lee Sungjoo. Technological Changes and Craft-specialization In the Iron Age Ce-
ramic Production of Southeastern Bulgaria
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 2
First afternoon session, moderator Totko Stoyanov
Valeriu Sîrbu, Magdalena Ștefan, Dan Ștefan. Change and continuity in the funerary practices in the
beginning of the second Iron Age in North-Eastern Thrace
Diana Gergova. The investigations of the elitarian Getic necropolises in Sboryanovo: Society, Beliefs
and Politics.
Zosia Archibald. The Power of Images and Ancient Royal Portraiture: A View from Thrace
Metodi Manov. About the author and the time of the statue of Seuthes III
Jan G. de Boer. A Small World and Middle Grounds in Ancient Thrace
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 3
First afternoon session, moderator Karl Strobel
Boaz Zissu. Figurative Paintings in the Necropolis of Hellenistic Maresha (Marissa), Israel
Dimitra Andrianou. Memories in Stone: Figured Grave Reliefs from Aegean Thrace in the Late Hel-
lenistic and Roman eras
Nade Proeva. Les représentations du soi-disant „Cavalier thrace“ en Macédoine romaine
Michaela Jordanova. Asclepius Rasuprenos (IGBulg. III/1, 1185) – Some Notes on the Possible Re-
interpretation
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 4
First afternoon session, moderator Mirena Slavova
Sorin Paliga. Thracian v. Dacian (Daco-Moesian). How many ‘Thracian languages’ were there spo-
ken in the Antiquity?
Peter A. Dimitrov. The Thracian language and the epigraphical evidence
Mirena Slavova. On the Thracian Syllable
Albena Mircheva, Biliana Mihaylova. On the Etymology of some Thracian Glosses
Nicolay Sharankov. Thracarchs, archiereis, and neokoroi
Discussion
Coffee Break
14 Congress programme
SECTION 1
First morning session, moderator Hristo Popov
Borislav Borislavov. The rock sanctuaries in southern Thrace – traditions, rituals and continuity
Lynn E. Roller. The Gluhite Kamani LiDAR survey and its implications for our understanding of Thra-
cian cult monuments
Aleksey Gotsev. Sanctuaries, Megalithic Complexes and Settlement System in Ancient Thrace
Zeynep Erdem. Cult Studies in Turkish Thrace: Understanding the Thracian Religion – New Ap-
proaches
Maguelone Bastide. Thracian sanctuaries’ myths and realities
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 2
visit to Thracian Tombs and Iskra Historical Museum
Lunch Break
SECTION 3
First morning session, moderator Nade Proeva
Plamen Petkov. Das Odrysenreich in Thrakien und Διήγυλις ὁ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν βασιλεὺς / Zisemis, Dio-
gyridis filii, Thraciae regis
Ruja Popova. Antonia Tryphaena and her successors. To the Thracian history in the first half of the 1st
c. AD
Stoyanka Dimitrova. KOΣΩN – Cotisoni – Cotiso
Dilyana Boteva. Thracia huc usque regnata in prouinciam redigitur
Discussion
Coffee Break
Congress programme 15
SECTION 4
First morning session, moderator Vanya Lozanova-Stantcheva
Kostadin Rabadjiev. The Thracian Gods – the puzzle of anthropomorphism
Despoina Tsiafakis. Exploring the reality through myths and archaeological evidence
David Braund. An Odrysian “speaks” of Bendis: some observations on her significance
Dimitris Matsas. The Mysteries of the Great Gods, Samothrace: Samothracian mythology and the real-
ity of archaeological research
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 1
First afternoon session, moderator Maya Vassileva
Nerantzis Nerantzis, Stratis Papadopoulos. Mining in the Thracian world: The case of Lekani Moun-
tains in Northern Greece
Jeffrey Lerner. The Persian Conquest of Thrake and Skudra
Kabalan Moukarzel, Miroslav Izdimirski. On Skudrians in Achaemenid Royal Inscriptions and some
Late-Babylonian Texts
Miroslav Izdimirski. Deported Paeonians in Achaemenid Empire as kurtaš-Workers
Paola Schirripa, Federica Cordano. Rois thraces et rois perses dans la tradition grecque
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 2
First afternoon session, moderator François de Callataÿ
Gabriel Mircea Talmatchi. About possible stages of the significance and role of monetary signs in the
Western Pontic Area in the light of recent research (6th century BC)
16 Congress programme
Ilya Prokopov, Valentina Grigorova-Gencheva. Thassos Type Coinage in Thracia, 6–5 Century BC
Stavri Topalov. Contribution to the study to whom belong the first realistic portraits on ancient coins
(mid 5th – end of 4th centuries BC)
Hristina Ivanova. Apollonia of Pontus and Thrace and the allocation of its weight standards
Emanuel Petac. Coin finds and payments in the Thracian and Getae area at the end of the 4th century BC
Eugen Nicolae, Aurel Vilcu, Mihai Ciocanu. Un trésor de monnaies et de bijoux du IIIe siècle av. J.-
C. découvert en République de Moldavie
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 1
visit to Thracian Tombs and Iskra Historical Museum
Lunch Break
SECTION 2
First morning session, moderator Milena Tonkova
Anelia Bozkova. Pour une chronologie du IVème siècle av. J.-C.
Yuri Vinogradov. Tumulus Baksy near Kerch. Cultural contacts on the Cimmerian Bosporus in the
early 4th century BC
Katarzyna Skowron, Tomasz Bochnak. Les éléments thraces dans le bassin de la Vistule – un essai
de révision
Nikola Tonkov. Geophysical survey of Thracian burial mounds at the village of Bratya Daskalovi
(Chirpan eminences)
Lucica-Olga Savu. Discoveries of tombs and funerary inventories in southeastern Transylvania
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 3
First morning session, moderator Cristian Schuster
Aurel Rustoiu, Iosif Vasile Ferencz. Late Iron Age in south-western Transylvania (Romania): material
culture as a marker of communal identities
Ivo Topalilov. Some Notes on Thracian soldiers
Marija Ljuština, Jelena Cvijetić. Between Illyrian and Thracian World: Southwestern Serbia and
Northern Montenegro at the Turn of New Era
Rodica Ursu Naniu, Andrei Corobcean. Rituels funéraires et non-funéraires dans l’enceinte de Stol-
niceni (République de Moldavie): observations, analyses, reconstructions
Valeriu Sîrbu, Diana Dăvîncă. Mortality and Ritual Practices in the Case of Dacian Children. Case
study: Hunedoara – Grădina Castelului
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 4
First morning session, moderator Valeria Fol
Martin Gyuzelev. Crossing the Strait: A View to the Bosporian Seafarers’ Pantheon in Antiquity
Neşe Atik. Das Heiligtum der Hera/Kybele und des Asklepios als zwei bedeutende Kultplätze der Stadt
Heraion Teikhos
Marina Koleva. Greek Myths, Roman Art and Thracians
Francesca Ceci. Das Münzbild als Instrument zur Volksidentität: Liebe und Tod am Beispiel der
Darstellungen von Orpheus und Eurydike und von Hero und Leander auf kaiserzeitlichen Münzen
Thrakiens
Boryana Markova. Les Besses et le christianisme
Discussion
Coffee Break
SECTION 2
First afternoon session, moderator Zosia Archibald
Hazar Kaba. Comparing the Luxurious Metal Vessel Acquisition Patterns of Thracian and Cypriot
Elites during the Classical Period
Angela Pencheva. Wreaths in Funeral Context: Chronology and Meaning in Ancient Thrace and Mac-
edonia
Milena Tonkova. L’orfèvrerie des Odryses à la fin du IVe siècle av. J.-C. à travers les parures du tumu-
lus Malkata près de Chipka
Petar Balabanov, Daniel Pantov. A treasure of gold appliques of horse harness from Primorsko
Discussion
SECTION 3
First afternoon session, moderator Valeriu Sirbu
Andrei Măgureanu. A discussion about understanding what pottery can tell
Viorica Crişan, Paul Pupeză. The Dacian walls of Covasna – Fairies Fortress (Covasna County, Ro-
mania)
Gergana Kabakchieva, Krasimira Stefanova-Georgieva. Die Antike Siedlung bei Kran, Gemeinde
Kazanlak
Andrei Magureanu, Bogdan Ciuperca. Cultural exchanges in the Lower Danube area in Late Antiq-
uity
Discussion
SECTION 4
First afternoon session, moderator Dimitris Matsas
Julia Tzvetkova. Ancient Thrace: GIS and reality
Adela Sobotkova. Centralisation and autonomy in settlement patterns in Thrace
Karl Strobel. Getae, Moesi, Daci: The Northern Thracian World?
Aliénor Solas. Thracian studies and global history
Discussion
Hristomir Hristov. Der Hügel Grifonite. Zum Aufbau und Funktion thrakischer Tempelanlagen der
klassischen und hellenistischen Periode
Ekaterina Ilieva. Pottery on the move – geographical distribution of the Tsepina pottery
Sasha Lozanova, Stela Tasheva. Architectural Images in Antique Coins from Bulgarian Lands
Despina Măgureanu, Sebastian Matei. Craft and creativity. A discussion on several Geto-Dacian belt
buckles
Antoniu Tudor Marc, Cristina Bodó, Ioana Lucia Barbu. “Around the hearth” – considerations on
certain combustion structures in the Wietenberg Culture
Vassil Markov. Mythological Symbols from the Thracian Megalithic Sanctuaries
Sergiu Matveev, Vlad Vornic. Processing of horn and bones in the early Iron Age in the space between
Prut and Dniestr in light of discoveries from Lipoveni (R. Cimislia, Republic of Moldova)
Philip Mihaylov, Nikoleta Tzankova. Glass beads from Dren-Delyan necropolis (archaeological and
chemical study)
Petar Minkov. A Middle Bronze age ceramic jug from tell Rousse
Alexandru Morintz. Balbus, A Roman Surveyor in Dacia
Yana Mutafchieva. Bronze biconical pitchers from Thrace. Morphology and chronology
Ulrike Peter. <www.corpus-nummorum.eu> – A web portal for ancient coins of Thrace
Vyara Petrova. Attic red-figure kraters with the scenes of symposium from the site “Adzhiyska
Vodenitsa”
Horea Pop. Măgura Moigraduluiritual sacred area and Dacian settlement
Alexandar Portalsky. Thracians in Palaeobalkan-Westanatolian community
Hristo Preshlenov. The (Re)used Pagan temenoses in Thracia Pontica (4th-6th century AD)
Milena Raycheva. Imperial cult in private context? Some observations from Roman Thrace
Nicolae Cătălin Rișcuța, Antoniu Tudor Marc, Ioan Alexandru Bărbat. Cultic Discoveries from the
Late Bronze Age Settlement from Şoimuş – Teleghi (Romania, Hunedoara County)
Valeriu Sîrbu, Alexandru Berzovan, Alin Frânculeasa. The Dacian standard (draco) on a clay vessel
north of the Danube
Nikolay Sivkov. The starry sky of the Thracians on an anthropomorphic stela
Adela Sobotkova. Places of Memory or Places of Power? Regional Approaches to Burial Mounds in
Thrace
Irina Sodoleanu. Roman Artifacts from Albești (Constața county, Romania)
Julij Emilov Stoyanov. The Upper Tonzos Valley with or without Celts
Eugenia Tarassova, Mihail Tarassov, Diana Gergova, Rositsa Titorenkova. Pigments used for dec-
oration of escharae from tumuli №№ 21 and 31, Sboryanovo National Reserve, Bulgaria
Eva Tonkova. Black glazed pottery from the pit fields in Bulgaria
Stavri Topalov, Alexander Toromanov, Svetozar Stoyanov. New types and denominations of Thra-
cian tribal and royal coins published in studies of Bulgarian collectors in the period of 1994–2014
Nartsis Torbov. Die Verzierung der Messer mit den geschwungenen Schneiden
Lyubomir Tsonev. Megalithic construction techniques in classical Thracian buildings
Ivan Valchev. The Cult of Apollo in Cabyle
Todor Valchev, Petya Kirilova. The dolmens near the villages of Hlyabovo and Sakartsi – 40 years
later
Varbin Varbanov. Late Hellenistic Mounds from Northern Bulgaria – the Case Study of Tumulus №8
from the Village of Brestovitsa, Rousse Region
Kalina Yordanova. Foureés and barbarian imitations of the coins of Apollonia Pontica
Vladislav Zhivkov. Thracian Pottery from Nicopol and Present day North Central Bulgaria on the Eve
of the Roman Conquest (2nd c. BC – early 1st c. AD)
The following article will discuss a Mid- the catalogue about Tell Russe.6
dle Bronze Age jug, found in the last century
The vase from Tell Russe
during rescue excavations at tell Russe. Several
The jug was found heavily damaged and
suggestions regarding the chronology of the jug
was restored later (Fig. 1). After the restoration,
have been proposed over the last few decades,
its dimensions are: height – 29 cm (24.7 cm to
with dates varying from the Middle to the Late
the handle); mouth diameters – 8.1 x 8.2 cm;
Bronze Age. The aim of the present paper is to
maximal diameter – 19.6 cm; base diameter –
refine the dating of the jug and to determine its
5.5 cm; thickness of the walls – 1 cm. The pot
cultural context.
is handmade of very fine clay with almost no
Previous research impurities (single quartz grains of 0.2 – 0.3 cm).
The jug was found during annual excava- The surface is very well polished. The color
tions of Tell Russe in 1948 – 1949. In 1952, it is grey-brown. The jug’s shape is very elegant
was recorded in the inventory book as find No (Fig. 2). The mouth rim is oblique, with a spout
2487. Its actual archaeological context is sec- at the higher end. The neck has a conical shape.
tor “West”, are 13, square “Г” (G), layer “Б” The transition between the neck and the lower
(B), depth – 1.80 m, at the eastern periphery part of the body is emphasized by a fine incised
of a section covering 525 sq. m. This area had line. The handle has a convoluted polygonal
been confined by a 1 m high stone wall. Nowa- cross-section. The base is flat and has a round
days, the southern part of the wall is still pre- shape.
served, while its eastern and northern parts are The decoration is simple. Based on the
destroyed, most probably by seasonal floods scratches around the main decorative lines it
of the Danube River or by modern human ac- was most likely done after the firing of the jug
tivities. The jug was found alongside pottery (Fig. 3). There are three incised horizontal lines
sherds which can be dated from the Eneolithic with V-shaped cross-section, grouped as a panel
to the second half of the first millennium BC.1 on the front side of the pot. The top and bottom
Seventy years ago, the jug was presented as a lines curve outside at both their ends (weight
local Thracian pottery shape, mainly because 0.6 – 1 cm), while the middle one ends straight.
of its grey colour and the rare/unknown charac- Each of the lines is decorated with three equally
teristics.2 Bernhard Hänsel commented on the spaced elliptical dimples (0.2 x 0.1 cm). Similar
jug and placed it in a table with pottery from dents, somewhat larger in size, are also present
the Late Bronze Age.3 Goranka Tonceva used at the curved ends of both the top and bottom
the jug for the inner periodization of the Early lines.
Iron Age but recognized it as a Late Bronze
Parallels
Age object.4 Later on, Raiko Krauss suggested
No parallels of the pot from Tell Russe are
the Middle Bronze Age as a possible period of
known in the Upper Thracian Plain, although a
origin for the jug.5 His opinion was preferred in
great number of imported vessels from the sec-
ond and third phases of the Early Bronze Age
1 Георгиев, Ангелов 1957, 45-49.
2 Цончев 1951, 107, 109, 110, обр. 42.
3 Hänsel 1976, taf. 62-3. 6 Чернаков 2009, 90-91, кат. № 153. I would like to express
4 Toncheva 1980, 66-67, Pl. XXV-3. my gratitude to Dr D. Chernakov for the opportunity to exam-
5 Krauss 2006, 3-26, Abb. 7-2. ine and publish this interesting artifact.
280 Petar Minkov
and from the beginning of the Middle Bronze ing that period. For example, beak-spouted jugs
Age have been published in the recent decades.7 were not typical for the city of Troy itself, but
A small cup found at Dabene could be pointed were common in its periphery.15 This conclusion
as an exception.8 The cup/jug from Dabene is is confirmed by later investigations of pottery
decorated with an incised ornamentation with found at Troy.16 Shapes, typical for Troy V,17 are
white inlay.9 The author points out that it com- sporadically shown in Beycesultan IV.18 It might
bines traits of the local ceramic productions and be that some elements from the common shape
influences from “the South”, i.e. the so-called of the beak-spouted jugs were borrowed, while
Aegean-Anatolian region.10 The published radi- some local features were preserved alongside.
ocarbon dates from the structure where the cup All objects have similar chronological frames:
was found give some indication about the abso- Troy – 2000/1900 to 1750/1700 BC; Beycesul-
lute chronology of the vessel.11 According to the tan and Demircihöyük – 1900 to 1700 BC (ac-
available information the 14C date is 3963+/- cording to the latest chronological references).19
23 BP.12 The author however accepts that the
Conclusion
provided dates could be earlier with some 100
The precise chronology of the jug from
or 200 years, because the tested sample is from
Russe depends on the dates of the mentioned
charred wood.13
parallels: between 1950 and 1700 BC. While
The jug from Russe belongs to a very popu-
these parallels are all wheel-made, our jug is
lar shape – the beak-spouted jug, known also
hand-made. This may indirectly suggests a later
as “Schnabelkanne” or “gaga ağızlı testi” and
date for it. Based on the information from the
vastly distributed across the territory of Anato-
aforementioned analogies from Anatolia, the
lia. Its development continued throughout the
most probable chronology which sounds plau-
Early and Middle Bronze Age. Well-known
sible is the period between 1750 and 1600 BC,
parallels of our jug come from Central and
a period when jugs of this type would have
Western Anatolia. The following sites could
been in production and could conceivably have
be mentioned: Demircihöyük, Beycesultan,
been reproduced in Thracian lands. Since this is
Tarsus, Kültepe, Küçük Höyük and Lerna in
the only such jug discovered in Thrace for the
Greece (Fig. 4).14 The referred examples have
present moment, the suggested chronological
conical or biconical profiles, high vertical han-
frames have a preliminary character and cover
dles, and decoration applied on the lower part
a long-time span.
of the neck and the widest part of the body. As
There is only one category of pottery ves-
already mentioned above, their distribution is
sels from the beginning of the Middle Bronze
attested in Western and Northwestern Asia Mi-
Age known in Thrace that can be defined as
nor during the Middle Bronze Age. Despite the
imported items – “depas amphikypellon”, and
aforementioned analogies, the jugs show also
at the same time the shape had local imitations.
differences which might be explained with the
Such examples have been discovered at Galabo-
regional production specifics. The intensity of
vo, Constantia (Simeonovgrad), Mihalich, and
their distribution was probably influenced by
Ezero. This was one of the widespread vessel
the role of the sites and their hinterlands dur-
shapes in Anatolia between the third phase of
the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the
7 Leshtakov 1995, 39-44; 1996, 239-287; 1997, 5-17; 2002, Middle Bronze Age, the so-called “Trojan cups”
171-211; 2004, 23-76; 2015, 5-115; 2016, 321-337.
8 Hristov 2016, 235, 234: fig. 4a. well known in the pottery repertories of Troy
9 Hristov 2016, 235. itself, Demircihöyük and Beycesultan.20 In the
10 Hristov 2016, 235.
11 Hristov 2015, 490; 2016, 235. Upper Thracian Plain, this was the most popu-
12 Hristov 2015, 490. lar shape among the imported pottery. The idea
Hristov 2015, 490.
13
14 Blum 2004, 22 Abb. 4 with cit. lit.; Kull 1988, 147, Abb. 161,
for the Russe jug might have been influenced
taf. 22, 2; Mellaart, Lloyd 1965, 85-87, 94 Fig. P.6:12-17,
Fig. P.7:1; 109-110 Fig. P.17-18; 124 Fig. P.27; Caskey 1954, 15 Lloyd, Mellaart 1965, 87.
45, Pl. 21-d; Güneysu 2015, 184: Leh. 19/6; 192: Leh. 27/2, 16 Blum 2004, 209.
3; 198: Leh. 33/7, 8 – http://docplayer.biz.tr/27043556-T-c- 17 Blum 2004, 22 Abb. 4, Nos 1234, 1236, 1238.
bilecik-seyh-edebali-universitesi-sosyal-bilimler-enstitusu- 18 Lloyd, Mellaart 1965, 113, Fig. P.20:5.
arkeoloji-anabilim-dali-protohistorya-ve-onasya-arkeolojisi- 19 Shahoglu 2005, fig. 2; Kouka 2009, 140, tab. 6 with cit. lit.
programi.html – visited on 9.07.2017, 18:18 h. 20 Shahoglu 2014, 299.
A Middle Bronze Age Ceramic Jug from Tell Russe 281
by the import of depas amphikypella during the Anatolia than during the previous period.24
process of trade contacts and importing goods. Here I should point out that the slowing
The later date of some of the accompanying ob- down of the contacts doesn’t necessary mean
jects from Tell Russe means probably either that that they were interrupted forever. As K. Leshta-
it was an archaized shape, or that it was found kov notes, their revival was marked at the mid-
in a chronologically later context. The second- dle of the second millennium BC.25
ary decoration offers indirect evidence for this In conclusion, some preliminary and com-
latter assumption, posing the questions why and pletely hypothetical points of view about the
how this specific jug was introduced in a later reviewed jug from Tell Russe could be pointed
context. In fact, there are neither Middle Bronze out:
Age vessels in the region, nor any other kind of It is acceptable that some local groups of
finds linked to the jug, that could confirm the people continued their relations with people
mentioned hypothesis. The same can be said from and around big cities like Troy and oth-
about the sites from this period as the single one ers, which were not affected by the changes
in the vicinity of Tell Russe is the Early Bronze mentioned above. Migrating people (not strong-
Age cemetery near Batin, which however be- ly connected with the city structures) like the
longs to an earlier period. nomads or transhumant shepherds, could have
The identification of the jug from Russe is performed these contacts.26 In the case of the
connected with two general problems. The first jug from Russe, it is very likely that a small
one is why this jug was found in such a distant group of people may have accomplished such
area from the attested parallels and the concur- relations. A confirmation to this statement can
rent imports in the Upper Thracian Plain dur- be drawn from Blegen’s jug type B 20, which
ing the Early Bronze Age? The second question was the most popular type in the periphery of
is “what happened” with the contacts between Troy and its hinterland, where the people were
Anatolia and Thrace at the end of the Early having different structure and organization and
Bronze Age (third phase) and the beginning of were probably more open to incomers.
the Middle Bronze Age. Recently prof. Kras- According to the chronology of the Russe
simir Leshtakov observed this topic in his study Tell, it is acceptable to say that these contacts
“Troy and Upper Thrace: What Happened in should be attributed to a later period – the second
the EBA 3? (Interrelations Based on Pottery half of the Middle Bronze Age and the transition
Evidence)”.21 period to the Late Bronze Age. This assumption
According to this author, regardless of the is sustained by the lack of other contemporary
intense contacts during the transitional period imported finds which could have served as a
between the Early Bronze Age III and the be- prototype for the Russe jug. Based on all that,
ginning of the Middle Bronze Age, the relations the most acceptable explanation is that people
weakened and become difficult to trace. In his practicing transhumance or other migratory
opinion, the reason for this were the significant travels had observed and imitated, once or re-
changes in Asia Minor at the end of the third peatedly, the typical features of the jug types 3.1
millennium BC, including the transformation(s) and 3.2 from Troy, in a later period.
of the social structure, the collapses of the cen- In a few words – the jug from Russe Tell
tralized political and economic systems, as is similar to the so-called “beak-spouted jugs”,
well as the climate changes in some regions.22 well known from Troy’s periphery, Demir-
He also stated that in this period the situation cihöyük, Beycesultan, etc. The hypothetical
in Thrace was different. Most of the sites show routes of distribution may have been the same
traces of burning during the final phase of the as those of the so-called “depa amphikypella”27
Early Bronze Age.23 Sites like Galabovo and and other imports, like the one from Central
Constantia are exceptions as the life there con- Anatolia – Sakaria valley – Western Anatolia –
tinued, although with less intense contacts to Bosporus – Karaevlialtı – Sakar Mountain to
24 Leshtakov 2016, 333.
21 Leshtakov 2016, 321-337. 25 Leshtakov 2016, 333.
22 Leshtakov 2016, 332-333. 26 Leshtakov 2016, 332.
23 Leshtakov 2016, 333. 27 Leshtakov 2016, 331, fig. 8 and cited lit.
282 Petar Minkov
the Sokolitsa River valley.28 Other conceivable reminiscent of examples from the third phase of
transport routes could have used the valleys of the Tei culture as far as Troy.31
the rivers Maritsa and Tundzha and the passes of Summarizing the foregoing, it could be as-
the Balkan Mountain, or the Western Black Sea sumed that the settlements in Southern Thrace
coast. The latter options have been suggested by which were centers of communication and ex-
Tanya Hristova.29 Analyzing the known grave change during the Early Bronze Age, were re-
complexes from the Middle Bronze Age, she placed at the end of this period by new emerg-
proposed conceivable trade roads going via the ing alternatives for continuing interrelationships.
Rish Pass where the Madara and Karnobat fu- These were located to the North – in the lowland
nerary complexes are located, and via the Aytos areas along the Lower Danube. The assumption
Pass; to the south both joined the valley of the gains more weight in the light of the recently pub-
Tundzha as attested by several grave complexes lished find from Lipnik – a Syrian bottle mould,
near the villages of Irechekovo, Malka Detelina and the interpretation of its appearance as a re-
(Manchova tumulus), Drama and Boyanovo sult of the already commented active contacts and
(Lozyanska tumulus).30 She noted furthermore transfer of goods and ideas along the route of the
the presence of materials typical for the Tei cul- so-called “Great Caravan Road” 32 during the tran-
ture along these routes, and of a ceramic vessel sition from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age.
Bibliography
Blum, S. 2004: Die ausgehende frühe und die be- In: S. W. Manning, M. J. Bruce (еds.). Tree-
ginnende mittlere Bronzezeit in Troia. Archäolo- Rings, Kings, and Old World Archaeology and
gische Untersuchungen zu ausgewählten Fund- Environment: Papers Presented in Honor of
komplexen der Perioden Troia IV und Troia V. Peter Ian Kuniholm. Oxford and Oakville, Ox-
Darmstadt, Verlag Philipp von Zabern (Studia bow Books, 133-149.
Troica. Monographien 4). Krauss, R. 2006: Indizien für eine Mittelbronzezeit
Caskey, J. 1954: Excavations at Lerna, 1954. – He- in Nordbulgarien. – Archaeologia Bulgariсa
speria 24.1, 25-49. 10.3, 3-26.
Güneysu, A. 2015: Iç Kuzeybati Anadolu’da Ilk Tunç Kull, B. 1988: Demircihöyük. Die Mittelbronzezeit-
Çaği’nda Gaga Ağizli testi Formu’nun gelişimi. liche Siedlung, V. Darmstadt – Mainz am Rhein,
Yüksek Lisans tezi, bilecik. Available at http:// Verlag Philipp von Zabern.
docplayer.biz.tr/27043556-T-c-bilecik-seyh- Leshtakov, K. 1995: Bronze Age graves at Debelt,
edebali-universitesi-sosyal-bilimler-enstitusu- Bourgas region. – In: B. Schmid-Sikimić, Ph.
arkeoloji-anabilim-dali-protohistorya-ve-onasya- Della Casa. TRANS EUROPAM. Beträge zur
arkeolojisi-programi.html, visited on 9.07.2017. Bronze- und Eisenzeit zwischen Atlantik und
Hochstetter, A. 1984: Kastanas. Ausgrabungen in Altai. Festschrift für Margarita Primas. Bonn,
einem Siedlungshügel der Bronze- und Eisenzeit Habelt, 39-44.
Makedoniens 1975-1979. Die handgemachte Ke- Leshtakov, K. 1996: Trade centers from early
ramik, Schichten 19 bis 1. Berlin, Spiess. bronze age III and middle bronze age in upper
Hänsel, B. 1976: Beiträge zur regionalen und chro- Thrace (notes on the interpretation of Baa dere-
nologischen Gliederung der Älteren Hallstattzeit Konstancia-Gulubovo). – In: L. Nikolova (ed.).
an der Unteren Donau. Bonn, Habelt. Early bronze age settlement patterns in the
Hristov, M. 2016: Dubene and its Probable Contacts Balkans (CA. 3500-2000 BC, cablirated dates).
with the Aegaeo-Anatolian Region. – In: E. Sofia, Prehistory Foundation/Agatho Publishers
Pernicka, S. Ünlüsöy, S. W. E. Blum (eds.). (Reports of Prehistoric Research Projects 1.2),
Early Bronze Age Troy: Chronology, Cultural 239-287.
Development, and Interregional Contacts. An Leshtakov, K. 2002: Galabovo pottery and a new
international conference held at the University of synchronization for the Bronze Age in Upper
Tubingen May 8-10, 2009. Bonn, Habelt (Studia Thrace with Anatolia. – Anatolica 28, 171-211.
Troica. Monographien 8), 229-239. Leshtakov, K. 2004: The Thracian Settlement at
Kouka, O. 2009: Third Millennium BC Aegean Assara (Constantia) near Simeonovgrad. – Из-
Chronology: Old and New Data from the вестия на Историческия музей в Хасково 2,
Perspective of the Third Millennium AD. – 23-76.
Leshtakov, K. 2015: Klassifikation und Chronologie American Journal of Archaeology 24, 339-360.
der mittelbronzezeitlichen Keramik aus Gălăbovo Shahoglu, V. 2014: Depas and Tankard vessels.
(Südostbulgarien) im Vergleich zu anatolischen – In: M. Lebeau (ed.) Associated regional
Siedlungsfunden. Teil 1. – Studia Archaeologica chronologies for the Ancient Near East and the
Universitatis Serdicensis 5, 5-115. Eastern Mediterranean. Interregional Vol. 1:
Leshtakov, K. 2016: Troy and Upper Thrace: What Ceramics. Turnhout, Brepols, 289-311.
Happened in the EBA 3? (Interrelations Based Toncheva, G. 1980: Chronologie du Hallstatt ancien
on Pottery Evidence). – In: E. Pernicka, S. dans la Bulgarie de Nord-Est. – Studia Thracica
Ünlüsöy, S. W. E. Blum (eds.). Early Bronze 5, 66-67.
Age Troy: Chronology, Cultural Development, Георгиев, Г., Н. Ангелов 1957: Разкопки на се-
and Interregional Contacts. An international лищната могила до Русе през 1950-1953 го-
conference held at the University of Tubingen дина. – Известия на археологическия инсти-
May 8-10, 2009. Bonn, Habelt (Studia Troica. тут, 21, 41-50.
Monographien 8), 239-259. Лещаков, К. 1997: Може ли да се разчупи „лини-
Leshtakov, L., T. Zimmermann 2021: The first ята на хронологическата грешка”. – Минало 2,
casting mould for a ‘Syrian Bottle’ from Lipnik, 5-17.
Bulgaria. – Praehistorische Zeitschrift 96.1, 89- Христова, Т. 2010: Гробни комплекси от Средна-
100. та бронзова епоха от Югоизточна България в
Lloyd, S., J. Mellaart 1965: Beycesultan, II. Middle контекста на културното развитие в Долноду-
Bronze Age Architecture and pottery. London навския басейн. – Югоизточна България през
(British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, ІІ-І хилядолетие пр. Хр. Варна, Зограф, 16-19.
Occasional Publications 8). Цончев, Д. 1959: Сивата тракийска керамика в
Meffre, J.-F., Y. Rigoir 2005: Archeo 4. Calcul de la България. – Годишник на Народния Археоло-
contenance d’un vase. http://sfecag.free.fr/conte- гически музей Пловдив 3, 93-135.
nance.htm Чернаков, Д. 2009: Русенската селищна могила.
Shahoglu, V. 2005: The Anatolian trade network and Пътеводител-каталог. Русе, Импресарско-из-
the Izmir region during the Early Bronze Age. – дателска къща „РОД“.
Fig. 3. Tell Russe. Details of the decoration (a, b, c). Bellow: earlier representations of the jug (A) Hänsel
1976, taf. 62/3; (B) Toncheva 1980, 66, Pl. XXV/3; (C) Krauss 2006, Abb. 7/2.
A Middle Bronze Age Ceramic Jug from Tell Russe 285
Fig. 4. Parallels of the jug from Tell Russe. 1. Troy (Blum 2004); 2. Demircihöyük (Kull 1988); 3.
Beycesultan (Lloyd, Mellaart 1965); I. Küçük Höyük; II. Küllüoba; III. Küçük Höyük (Güneysu 2015,
184, Leh. 19/6; 192, Leh. 27/2, 3; 198, Leh. 33/7, 8).
Fig. 5. Tell Rousse. Middle Bronze Age jug – estimating volume (Meffre, Rigoir 2005).
286
Ancient Thrace: Myth and Reality
Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Congress of Thracology, Volume 1