Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-mnklg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T17:23:03.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Neolithic in Anatolia and the Balkans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

M. V. Garašanin
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since 1907 when Professor M. M. Vasić first posed the question of the south-eastem connexions of the Neolithic culture of Serbia, the investigation of this problem over a wider field and on a broader chronological footing has made material advances in the whole area from the Near East to the Lower Danube. It even proved possible to provide this problem with a more or less exact historical outline. These results have been produced by exceptionally fruitful but unco-ordinated, local research: uncertainties and apparent contradictions have still to be resolved.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Antiquity , Volume 35 , Issue 140 , December 1961, pp. 276 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 Vasić, M. M., Annual of the British School at Athens, 14, 1907, 318 ff.Google Scholar

2 So for example Schachermeyr, F., Die ältesten Kulturen Griechenlands, 1955.Google Scholar

3 Mellaart, J., ANTIQUITY, 1960, 270 ff.Google Scholar

4 Ibid., 272, and chronological table, p. 277.

5 Ibid., 270 ff.

6 Ibid.

7 Garašanin, M., Hronologija vinfanske grupe, 1951, 146 Google Scholar, 190. The same, Archaeologia lugoslavica, I, 1954, I ff.

8 Mellaart, , op. cit., 270 Google Scholar.

9 Thus I saw in the Archaeological Museum at Athens stone idols from Naxos and Amorgos, with stumpy arms and a conical cap, which should be equated with types from Vinča; cf. Vasič, M. M., Prestoriska Vinča, III, 1936, fig. 562.Google Scholar

10 For the Hamangia idols see most recently, Berciu, D., ANTIQUITY, 1960, 283 Google Scholar f., pl. XXXVIII. For Karanovo IB see, Georgijev, G., Światowit, XXIII, 1960, 309, fig. 7.Google Scholar

11 Most recently Garašanin, M., 39 B.R.G.K., 1958, 18, pl. 3, 6–7.Google Scholar

12 Summarized ibid., 23 f., and amplified in M. Garašanin, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, IX, 1954, 5 ff., especially 25 f. Moreover this fact corresponds with the most recent views of Milojčić, V., Germania, 37, 1959. 70.Google Scholar

13 ANTIQUITY, 1960, 272 f. and chronological table p. 277.

14 Garašanin, M., Germania, 39, 1–2, 1961 Google Scholar, forthcoming. For the Balkan-Anatolian complex, cf. 39 B.R.G.K., 12 ff., and in greater detail, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, IX, 5 ff.

15 Garašanin, M., Germania, 39, 1–2.Google Scholar

16 So in part with the sack of the Late Bronze Age settlements of Macedonia during the Aegean migration.

17 Dealt with at length in Germania, 39—in the press.

18 Cf. for this Passek, T., Sovjetskaya archeologija, 1958, 28 ff.Google Scholar, especially 39 ff., figs. 5-6. These questions were discussed by T. Passek at the Neolithic Symposium in Prague in 1959.

19 Summarized in Garasanin, M., 39 B.R.G.K., 24 Google Scholar, fig. 5, 4, note 122.

20 Cf. ibid., 53 ff., pl. 6, 2-3.

21 ANTIQUITY, 1960, 273 ff. and chronological table.

22 Garašanin, M., op. cit., 60 Google Scholar. Garašanin, D., Archaeologia Iugoslavica, 1, 19 ff.Google Scholar

23 Mylonas, G., Hagios Kosmas, 1959, type C13 (cf. catalogue, p. 189 Google Scholar), fig. 141, no. 176; 142, no. 170, 171, 178; 143, no. 180; 147, no. 203; 149, no. 213; 151, no. 220-224; 152-153; 154, no. 245-246; 155, no. 251-255 ; table of types, fig. 57. Cf. also Garašanin, M., 39 B.R.G.K., 44 Google Scholar, note 240.

24 Mylonas, op. cit., 159 ff.

25 M. Garašanin, op. cit., 63, pl. 11, 4; 12, 1.

26 Ibid., 64 ff., pl. 13, 2-4; cf. also Garašanin, M., Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, XV-XVI, 1961, 19 f.Google Scholar In view of this the relationship of the two-handled vessels with Armenochori need not be disturbed, since, as is well known, this Macedonian group exhibits a retarded version of the Early Bronze Age. Heurtley, W. W. A., Prehistoric Macedonia, 1939, 85.Google Scholar

27 Garašanin, M., op. cit., 66 f.Google Scholar

28 Ibid., 75 ff. For the decorative discs see most recently, Tihelka, K., Kommission für Aneolithikum und die ültere Bronzezeit, Nitra, 1958, 77 ff., pl. viii, 2.Google Scholar

29 Attention was also called to this by Piggott, S., ANTIQUITY, 1960, 293, note 43.Google Scholar

30 Cf. Garašanin, M. , op. cit., 105 f.; Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, XV-XVI, 5 ff.Google Scholar

31 Cf. most recently, Waterbolk, H. T., ANTIQUITY, 1960, 14 ff.Google Scholar, especially 16 ff., and the examination by Neustupny, J., Pravek Československa, 1960, 26 ff.Google Scholar

32 Mellaart, , op. cit., chronological table, p. 277.Google Scholar