The Neolithic Settlement at Makriyalos, Northern Greece: Preliminary Report on the 1993- 1995 Excavations

Maney Publishing

The Neolithic Settlement at Makriyalos, Northern Greece: Preliminary Report on the 1993-1995 ExcavationsAuthor(s): Maria Pappa and Manthos BesiosSource: Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 26, No. 2 (Summer, 1999), pp. 177-195Published by: Maney PublishingStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/530661 .

Accessed: 01/08/2013 04:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Maney Publishing is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of FieldArchaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 84.205.227.38 on Thu, 1 Aug 2013 04:15:15 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=maney

http://www.jstor.org/stable/530661?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


177

The Neolithic Settlement at Makriyalos, Northern Greece: Preliminary Report on the 1993-1995 Excavations

Maria Pappa

Manthos Besios Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki Thessaloniki, Greece

The discovery and excavation of an extensive Neolithic site near the modern village of Makriyalos, in Pieria, northern Greece, have greatly enriched our knowledge of this dis- tinctive, flat-lying, "non-tell" type of settlement. Such sites, spread over a sizeable expanse of land, and not restricted to a single, cumulative locus, have been recently recognized as dominant in Neolithic Macedonia.

The site at Makriyalos is located on the gentle slopes of a natural hill and covers some 50 ha. During two discrete phases, both securely dated to the Late Neolithic Period, the habitation area was encircled by large earthworks. The 6-ha area of excavation allowed the first detailed examination of the internal organization and evolution of this type of settlement. This preliminary report presents the first results of continuing analysis of the settlement and its organization, and places Makriyalos within the wider Balkan context.

Introduction In 1992, prior to the construction of a new railway and

the extension of the main national road, a rescue excavation project was undertaken in Pieria, northern Greece by the Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities of Thessaloniki. The project investigated archaeological remains in the area, dating from the Late Neolithic to the Late Roman period, that would be threatened by the construction work. One significant discovery, followed by excavations during 1993-1995, was the Neolithic site of

Makriyalos, near the modern village of that name. The site, covering ca. 50 ha on a gentle hillslope, is dated to the Late Neolithic.

Research on the Greek Neolithic period started early in the 20th century with the major excavations of Sesklo and Dimini in Thessaly (Tsountas 1908) (FIG. i). These pro- jects were followed by the intensive investigation of Ne- olithic sites throughout the century in that specific area. Sesklo and Dimini remain the type sites for the Greek Ne- olithic for settlement organization and chronology. Mace- donia, as a link between the Balkans and the Near East, was also a field of interest for prehistorians, though excavations there were not, until recently, as extensive as those carried out in Thessaly.

Early farming communities had been established in Macedonia in the Early Neolithic period (TABLE I), in organized permanent settlements, as the excavation at the site of Nea Nikomedia demonstrated in the early 1960s (Rodden 1965). Before today, the sites investigated throughout the Neolithic period were mostly densely inhabited villages of long duration with an economy based on farming and domesticated animals. Fine, decorated

pottery and other skillfully made artifacts characterize the

period and are the basis for the chronological system still

used, supported now by radiocarbon dates (TABLE I). Excavations at the Neolithic site of Makriyalos demon-

strate that, along with these tell-forming villages, long- lived and restricted in extent, non-tell, extensive settlements also existed in northern Greece. The latter are al-

ready well known from other areas of Europe (Chapman 1981: 43-45; Whittle 1985: 102-105). The large-scale excavation at Makriyalos is expected to address questions that arise from these differences in spatial patterning. For

example, does this differentiation reflect a different social and economic organization, different farming and stock

breeding practices, or alternatives in manufacturing strate-

gies, and what are the main variables? This report draws upon evaluations made during field-



178 Neolithic Settlement at Makriyalos, Greece/Pappa and Besios

VVIA i i

*

Yanitsa B

TH SSALKO I K

- Then • i S

"- .. alo:::

KAyps Ynnis

2, .

SoAEhA

NTERINI

SAchilleio

BULGARA LARISA

TATHRACE* SsALBANIAlk P

Figure 1. Map of Pieria and Thessaly in Northern Greece, showing sites mentioned in the text and modern cities.

work at Makriyalos and on the first results emerging from

processing of finds.

Neolithic Settlement Patterns in Northern Greece

Makriyalos is situated in the coastal area of Pieria, in the southern nome of Macedonia (FIG. I). Very few Neolithic

sites are known in this area, and the excavation of Makriya- los is actually the first prehistoric excavation that has taken place here, although numerous sites to the south of Pieria in Thessaly and to the north in the rest of Macedonia have been investigated. Most of the sites appear as mounds or tells (maghoules) rising above the flat landscape and formed



Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 26, 1999 179

Table 1. Archaeological phases and chronology for Northern Greece during the Neolithic period (after Andreou, Fotiadis, and Kotsakis 1996: 538).

Archaeological phases Years B.c., calendrical

Early Neolithic 6700/6500-5800/5600 Middle Neolithic 5800/5600-5400/5300 Late Neolithic 5400/5300-4700/4500 Final Neolithic 4700/4500-3300/3100

by the accumulation of successive prehistoric habitation

layers. The dwellings in these agrarian settlements are

densely packed, and habitation was year-round and long- lasting, with houses rebuilt on the same spot. Their size

typically ranges from 0.5 to 5.5 ha (Halstead 1984: tables

6.1, 6.6; Demoule and Perles 1993: 370). The recently recognized extensive, non-tell type of set-

tlement, which had formerly gone unnoticed due to its in-

conspicuous form, existed along with the tell sites (An- dreou and Kotsakis 1986: 83-84; Demoule and Perlks 1993: 388). The extent of these settlements ranges from 8 to 20 ha. Two such sites near Thessaloniki, Vasilika C and Thermi B, were recently investigated during rescue excavations (Grammenos 1991: 30-31; Grammenos et al. 1990: 224-243; Grammenos et al. 1992: 381-393).

Based on the excavation of these sites and by analogy to Neolithic sites in the central Balkans, these extensive, non- tell settlements were thought to represent a type of habitation different from that of the tells. Certainly the settlement area was not as densely occupied as that of the tells; instead, houses were separated by large empty spaces. This means that the area of the site was a less direct reflection of

population size (Andreou and Kotsakis 1986: 83-84). Horizontal shifting of the settlement during successive habitation phases, as recognized at the site of Selevac in Serbia (Tringham and Stevanovid 1990: 117-120), would have further contributed to the extensive occupation area.

Recent survey work by the University of Thessaloniki in the Langhadas Basin suggests that the empty spaces between the habitation areas were used for cultivation (An- dreou and Kotsakis 1994: 17-25). A large-scale excavation was required to explore questions about this alternative oc-

cupation pattern and its adaptations, and, indeed, whether these differences could even be examined via excavation (Kotsakis 1994: 129). The rescue excavation at Makriyalos unexpectedly offered just such an opportunity.

Setting and Background The region of Pieria lies in the southern part of Mace-

donia, separated from Thessaly by Mt. Olympus, the highest mountain in Greece (FIG. i). The main route between

north and south has always passed through Pieria and, partly for this reason, the port of the ancient kingdom of Macedon was located here at classical Pydna. The neigh- boring Neolithic site, near the modern, eponymous village of Makriyalos, was known to have prehistoric sherds, but the size and form of the settlement were revealed only by the recent excavation.

The settlement extends over a low, heavily eroded hill, that like the surrounding area, consists of a succession of marls and palaeosols. Two ravines pass near the site to the NE and sw. The site lies among rolling and extensively cul- tivated hills between the sea, less than 2 km to the east, and the Pieria mountains, approximately 15 km to the west. The prehistoric settlement covers about 50 ha, based on surface finds and on a geophysical survey conducted by the University of Thessaloniki in order to help locate buried features (Tsokas et al. 1997: 130-136). About 6 ha, or 12% of the total site area, has been excavated (FIG. 2). Makriyalos is, overall, one of the largest non-tell sites in Macedonia, although the estimate combines the adjacent, and partially overlapping, depositions of two different occupation episodes (termed Makriyalos I and II).

The Excavation

Investigations at Makriyalos required a 20-month period of intensive excavation (Besios and Pappa 1998: 13-14). The site had gone unnoticed in 1970 when road building destroyed about 6 ha of the settlement. By 1992 the site was recorded by trial trenches and in the face of a renewed threat from railway and road construction, rescue excavations were organized in February 1993. Trial trenches were excavated to locate the limits of the archaeological deposits and a 700 x 300 m grid was set out over the threatened areas of the site (FIG. 3). In some places large areas of topsoil nearly 1 m thick, which covered the archaeological features, were removed by heavy equipment. Each trench measured 5 x 5 m, including 1 m balks. Habitation areas within the trenches were completely excavated, in contrast to the ditches where the huge volume of the deposits forced us to choose what amounted to the most undisturbed 50%.

About 20% of Makriyalos I was destroyed in 1970 during the initial construction of the road; our work revealed an additional 15% of the original size of that phase. Though much smaller in area, the part ofMakriyalos II settlement that was investigated required equal time for excavation as it was more densely inhabited.

Chronology Two main phases of occupation, Makriyalos I and II,

were clearly distinguished. These two phases had little hor-




..... ...

VX--\

Figure 2. Aerial view of the northern slope of the hill at Makriyalos during fiull excavation of phase II.

izontal overlap since they were established on opposite slopes of the hill. The fact that no sherds of the second

phase were found in the deposits of Makriyalos I indicates that Makriyalos I had been completely abandoned and covered with earth before Makriyalos II was established. Two subphases of Makriyalos II were distinguished strati-

graphically-an earlier one of round structures, followed

by a subphase of apsidal structures. It appears that the abandonment of Makriyalos II marked the end of use of the area until a vineyard was installed during the Classical

period. During Hellenistic and Roman times extensive cemeteries were established along the roads that led to ancient Pydna.

The Neolithic occupation is dated primarily by pottery. More than 150 radiocarbon samples were collected but have not yet been processed. The present chronological estimate places Makriyalos I and II within the limits of the

Late Neolithic period, which lasted from ca. 5400/5300

B.c. to ca. 4700/4500 B.c. in calendrical years (Andreou, Fotiadis, and Kotsakis 1996: 538). The pottery of

Makriyalos II indicates a very close relation to the so called "classical" Dimini pottery style of Thessaly. For this reason

Makriyalos II is regarded as roughly contemporary with that style, dating to the end of the Late Neolithic period (Gallis 1996: 28-29). Makriyalos I predates the later

phase, but is no earlier than 5400 B.c.

Makriyalos I

The settlement of Makriyalos I, situated on the south and sw slope of the low hill, was surrounded by a double ditch enclosing an area estimated at 28 ha (FIG. 3). The enclosure was sparsely occupied by groups of pit-dwellings (FIG. 4.). Borrow pits created by large-scale earth removal were evident at three different places within the excavated




A B F A E T

--- LIMITS OF THE AREA UNDER RESEARCH oom

S MAKRIYALOS I

S MAKRrYALOS II

SLOPES OF THE NATIONAL ROAD

m ROUTE OF DITCH ALPHA REVEALED BY EXCAVATION

S-m HYPOTHETICAL ROUTE OF DITCH ALPHA

- ROUTE OF DITCH BETA REVEALED BY EXCAVATION - - HYPOTHETICAL ROUTE OF DITCH BETA

wci "

HYPOTHETICAL ROUTE OF DITCH BETA

Figure 3. The Neolithic settlement at Makriyalos. Layout of the area under research.

area. Part of a third ditch, in the middle of the enclosure, was investigated; this ditch may have surrounded part of the settlement.

The Ditches Two curved, parallel ditches were traced in total for 470

m by excavation and trial trenches, and nearly 230 m of the identified ditches were systematically investigated. The inner ditch Alpha, which is the main deep construction, had two separate phases. Originally, a chain of large, deep pits was dug, which was continuously renewed either by clean- ing out the old pits or by digging new pits in nearly the same place and always along the same line (FIG. 5). The dimensions of the ditch were uneven, measuring up to 3.5 m in depth and up to 4.5 m in width. In places a second phase can be clearly distinguished in which the partly-filled ditch was re-dug as a continuous V-shaped trench.

Despite its depth, the ditch was surmounted in certain areas by mud-brick walls built on its outer edge. Elsewhere layers of large quantities of stones had fallen inside the ditch. These may have come from walls built of similar stones on the edge of the ditch; since stone is rather rare in the area and was not used in house building, its presence here cannot be related to dumping of architectural debris.

No construction resembling an entrance was encountered

along the excavated part of the ditch. The fill of ditch Alpha consisted of layers representing

successive periods of construction and use (FIG. 6), all of which belong to the beginning of the Late Neolithic period since no later finds were encountered. Much of the ditch fill came from the collapse of the sides of the pits and contained few artifacts. By contrast, when the fill derived from the settlement area, either by erosion or refuse, it contained a great number and variety of artifacts and detritus. Thin layers of mud were often encountered between the levels indicating the presence of water.

Ditch Beta, outside ditch Alpha, is much simpler in construction and consists of a narrow and shallow continuous

V-shaped channel. Ditch Beta seems to have been filled by the collapse of its sides since very few objects were found in the deposit. A third ditch, Gamma (FIG. 3), very similar in construction to ditch Alpha, is poorly understood, but

may have served as a partition within the enclosure. The ditch system was covered by a dark brown layer up

to 1.5 m thick derived from hilltop erosion. The lack of finds dating to Makriyalos II in the ditch suggests that the ditch was abandoned and filled up before the establishment of the phase II settlement. The absence of Makriyalos I re-




SECTOR KAPPA

Ditch Alpha

Group of pit dwellings

,

Group of pit dwellings 0 Q

& :0 SECTOR LAMDA

SEXCAVATED AREAS OF DITCH ALPHA

5.0m

"Oak..

Figure 4. Makriyalos I, sector Kappa and Lamda. Part of intrasite area and ditch Alpha consisted of a chain of pits.

mains on the outside the ditch system indicates that it bounded the occupation of that phase.

The understanding and interpretation of the ditch system has been the most complicated part of our investigation. It was apparently the boundary of the habitation area, and its size and the considerable effort required for its digging and maintenance reflects its importance for the prehistoric settlement. The ditch may also have been used as a refuse area, as a burial place, or as a cistern for the storage of water, all of which are partially supported by the finds.

Intrasite Organization Inside the enclosed area loose groups of pits (FIGS. 4, 7)

form the remains of semi-subterranean buildings used

mainly as houses. Any upper structure of the houses has to-

tally eroded away, but post holes around some of the pits

belonged to outer walls. Similar but better preserved structures found in Makriyalos II allow a hypothetical recon- struction of these buildings. Small hearths and ovens were found outside the houses in separate small, shallow pits. The empty areas between groups of structures suggest gar- den plots inside the settlement limits, as mentioned earlier.

Borrow pits, more or less round areas of earth removal

measuring up to 30 m in diameter, are present during both Neolithic phases. These depressions were afterwards

pressed into service for habitation (FIG. 7). Earth dug from these areas was, presumably, used for activities such as

building.

Makriyalos II

Makriyalos II seems to be smaller in overall extent than

Makriyalos I, but the layout of the structures is much more




, " ,, , , I I ? ?, I .

X4. WWI;

lk.

41

Figure 5. Makriyalos I, ditch Alpha, chain of pits.

dense. Despite a high degree of erosion, two habitation

subphases can be distinguished on stratigraphic evidence (FIG. 8). Ditches were also present during Makriyalos II, but their courses are difficult to determine, as they mostly lie outside the excavated area. A ditch on the southern

edge of the excavated area seems to constitute an inner

partition, and another one on the northern edge might be a settlement boundary. A large watercourse at the western

edge was channelized to form a third ditch. As noted above, large borrow pits were present in this period.

Intrasite Organization Because of erosion, thick archaeological deposits are

not preserved in Makriyalos II habitation areas, and only the lower parts of buildings remain (FIG. 9). What is left is effectively the underground part of the settlement, i.e., the pits of the semi-subterranean houses, the basements, associated pits of specialized functions, and the deep foun-

dations of walls. No vacant areas now intervene between the structures, in contrast to Makriyalos I, suggesting a different pattern of habitation.

SUBPHASE OF PIT DWELLINGS

The earlier habitation subphase consists of large pit dwellings, up to 5 m in diameter, encircled by postholes that indicate the position of walls (FIG. io). A few pieces of wattle and daub attest to wall construction; stone was not used. The dwellings had vertical walls and subterranean or semi-subterranean floors. One of the deepest dwelling pits excavated preserved its entrance. On the floor, 2 m below the present surface of the ground, there were three holes marking the position of storage pots whose sherds were found in the floor deposit, suggesting that this space might have been used as a cellar. In that case, a wooden floor could be used on the ground level.

Fragments of plastered clay, decorated on one surface and




w -pw

"EmilE2m 77, ... . AM:~

Figure 6. Makriyalos I, section through ditch Alpha showing two separate construction phases.

SECTOR OMIKRON SECTOR PE

5O0m L . . .

T - - - ----

Avg

Figure 7. Makriyalos I, sectors Omikron and Pi. Group of habitation pits to the left and borrow pit to the right. This area yielded the highest concentration of finds.



Journal of FieldArchaeology/Vol. 26, 1999 185

p oBasement

6C' 00

sjidal buildi

01 C)

o ae ors e 00

SECTORit dwellETA PS O T

o 0

o~j ate co rse . ... Trial trench ... SECTOR ETTA es0SECTOR TH?ETA

........ .A

Figure 8. Makriyalos II, sectors Eta and Theta. The two separate subphases can be distinguished in places. The large watercourse mentioned in the text lies on the lowest part of the plan.

found in the fill of the basement, might derive from the su-

perstructure of the basement, which has otherwise com-

pletely vanished (FIG. II). Around the dwellings various subsidiary pits were

found that, depending on size, shape, and contents, were identified as storage pits, refuse pits, and possible working areas. A few remains preserved above floor level suggest stone-paved yards while hearths and ovens were situated outside the houses in specially formed shallow pits. Though such structures were also found singly, small clus- ters of three or four hearths or ovens suggest a communal

cooking area shared by groups of houses.

SUBPHASE OF APSIDAL STRUCTURES

The pit dwellings described above were cut in places by traces of rectilinear walls, all in the same alignment (FIG. 8). We believe these walls belong to a separate habitation

episode, as they were found all around the excavated area of Makriyalos II. In some cases the straight walls form the sides of rooms with a curved, apsidal end. The general plan

of these buildings became evident after the complete ground plan of an apsidal building was exposed near the northern edge of the excavation. It was set on a N-s axis with its apsidal end towards the south; its length was 15

m, and it was divided into two rooms by an inner wall (FIG. 12). The northern room had four postholes in the center, possibly for the support of the roof. In the apse there was a deep storage pit containing flax seeds. The

building was preserved only below floor level and merely the foundation of the walls and the postholes could be traced.

Burials

Both phases provide information on burial practices. In

Makriyalos I skeletons were found in the lower layers of the fill of ditch Alpha. In some cases the corpse was thrown

carelessly into the ditch without any special treatment. Such casual discard of the corpse is not unknown during the Neolithic (Pappa 1997: 304). In other cases, signs of

secondary burials were found in the ditch in which bones




..... . . . . .

Ar low,

~ Il~sssPB ----~-- 'IPI ~ - a~p~s~ ~al~414

. ..

.. .. .. .. .. ...... 146., t ...... -4

Figure 9. Makriyalos II. General view of sectors Eta and Theta.

were gathered and covered with stones. Scattered human bones were found throughout the deposits of the ditch, possibly washed in. Fragmentary human bones were also found in habitation areas, but are not sufficient enough to

support the presence of burials. Since meters of deposit are known to have been removed by erosion, however, it is

possible other burial places, apart from the ditch, have vanished completely.

A different burial practice is attested at Makriyalos II. An infant cremation was found in a small pot in one of the round houses. No other signs of cremation were found in either phase. The practices of the earlier period were not

completely forgotten, however, as one complete human skeleton was found in the deep pit in the area of the large earthworks. Further analysis of human skeletal remains is

ongoing.

Subsistence

The abundant paleoeconomic data is at the preliminary

stage of sorting and identification. Taking advantage of the

large scale of the excavation, Paul Halstead and Patricia Collins have three principal aims for the faunal study: 1) to

clarify whether the marked divergence of spatial organization between "tell villages" and extended, non-tell settlements is related to different patterns of animal exploitation; 2) to investigate animal exploitation by individual social units within the Late Neolithic settlement; and 3) to determine whether early finds of metal tools at Makriyalos extended to the use of metal in animal butchery (Halstead and Collins 1997: 268-270). The faunal "package" from one of the borrow pits is standard for the period (Halstead 1992: 22). Fish bones are present and marine shells are abundant (Paul Halstead, personal communication 1997). The most common of the various edible marine molluscs encountered is Cerastoderma glaucum, as at other Greek Neolithic settlements (Tsuneki 1989: 4-21). Apart from food processing the presence of large numbers of shells

might also be related to pottery and other crafts. For ex-




2?jowiw ?--,

- 3-P, -?

~ ~g~$~ WK

i ????-7 0 VTI::

4?1Y-:;~~

4--~I~,~ :~:--.

Figure 10. Makriyalos II. Remains of pit dwellings.

ample, Spondylusgaederopous, present as large amounts of

manufacturing waste, was mainly used in jewelry and was

presumably collected on the nearby shore.

Despite the high degree of erosion and non-preserva- tion of floor levels, about 1300 useful samples of charred

plant remains have been found (Valamoti 1998: 270). The

species encountered are presented in Table 2. Most of the

plant remains were found around cooking areas, in occu-

pation layers, and in specific parts of the ditch deposit.

Artifacts

The large number of artifacts collected during the excavation does not permit full publication of the material at this time. Therefore the results presented for the most part do not refer to the entire excavation, but to those sectors that have already been studied by the various collaborators.

Pottery The habitation levels of the two main chronological

phases scarcely overlap in space but the deposits of each

phase are very easily distinguished by their different pottery styles. Undisturbed pottery groups are the richest available

for the Greek Late Neolithic. As a result of the quantity, pottery analysis is still at an initial stage.

Initial examination indicates that the most common ceramic shapes during Makriyalos I are biconical open bowls and large storage vessels that frequently exhibit well worked surfaces. Black burnished pottery was dominant

during this period, along with brown burnished and coarse

pottery. The presence of black-topped pottery was also evident in smaller quantities, while there are only few exam-

ples of red burnished pottery. The percentage of decorated

pottery is very low. Plastic decoration is more common and

appears rippled, incised, channeled, and pattern burnished. Painted decoration only displays a few examples of white- on-black and white-on-red (Lachanidou 1997: 261).

The characteristic pottery of Makriyalos I is closely related to ceramic styles found in western Macedonia, in the Late Neolithic phases of the site of Servia in Pieria (Riddley and Wardle 1979: 213, 225). A close stylistic link is also traced to the fine Thessalian black pottery (Demoule, Gal-

lis, and Manolakakis 1988: 33-38). Actually, Makriyalos I is part of the common black burnished pottery tradition that is widespread throughout the whole of the Balkans.



188 Neolithic Settlement at Mlakriyalos, Greece/Pappa and Besios

R P m F-

IM "

*Ott:

'k, 4. V IAV AL:~ :::;:~:iI: :

Figure 11. Makriyalos II. Basement structure preserving an entrance.

The link with the northern Balkan Vinia A tradition is stressed in vases decorated with plastic depictions of the human face and figure on the rim or the neck (Besios and

Pappa 1995: 29; Gimbutas 1972: 24). The dominant painted pottery of Makriyalos II is close-

ly related to the "classical" Dimini pottery style of Thessaly, though signs of contact from elsewhere in the Balkans are also present. The excavated area of Makriyalos II is much more restricted than that of Makriyalos I and subsequent- ly the quantity of pottery collected is smaller. Painted pottery of the Dimini brown-on-cream (FIG. 13) and Otzaki black-on-red wares are the dominant decorated styles. Bowls of all sizes, "fruitstands," and jars are common

shapes. The pots are burnished and covered with thick slips that ensure the uniform color of the finished surface. The incised pottery of the same period is also very close to Thessalian wares (Alarm-Stern 1996: 137-140, 151; Weisshaar 1989: pl. 1-5). Black-topped open bowls with

cylindrical bases and S-shaped profiles were found in the

same layers. Petrographic analysis of the various categories is underway in order to identify the various fabrics and their provenance (Hitsiou 1997: 263).

The percentage of painted pottery from Makriyalos II is low compared to the coarse pottery. An uneven spatial distribution is suggested by initial analysis, as painted pottery derives in large quantities mainly from the borrow pit in the northern edge of the settlement and from other large pits, while the rest of the pits contained hardly any decorated pottery.

Metal Objects Very little is known about metallurgical techniques and

sources of raw materials during the Late Neolithic, mainly because of the small number of artifacts found and ana-

lyzed from stratified deposits (McGeehan-Liritzis and Gale 1988: 199-225; Demoule and Perlks 1993: 394). The

copper artifacts from Makriyalos are among the earliest in Greece. Sixty-five objects were found in the deposits of




Aili

pow,!i t

• i~ii,• : ! i!ii!

........... ...: • ..

I0I

"i i~i~ ~!? •'??•?. ..... ......

. .

............

Figure 12. Makriyalos II. The apsidal structure from the north. The apse is indicated by the arrow at the southern end.

Makriyalos II of which nearly half are small cylindrical beads made of curved sheet metal. There are also pins, awls, pieces of thin wire, a small chisel, a sheet in the shape of a "ring idol," and other unidentified objects. Twenty-one of these copper objects, selected on the criteria of stratig- raphy and typology, have been analyzed at the Getty Con- servation Institute using an advanced method of mass

spectrometry. The results indicate that Makriyalos marks a transitional phase in the development of copper metallur-

gy, from the early exploitation of native copper sources, to the smelting of copper from its ores (David Scott, personal communication 1997).

Figurines The view that we are "still a long way from understand-

ing prehistoric figurines" (Talalay 1993: 81) has not been

radically changed by the Makriyalos excavation, though the number of figurines found during the excavation ex-

ceeds any published group from the Greek mainland (Ta- lalay 1993: 60, table 6; Marangou 1992: 337, 340, 343). The figurines in both phases were found all over the excavated area. No special concentrations or specific associa- tions with particular buildings were observed, although further analysis of the spatial distribution of finds might al- ter this perception.

The Makriyalos figurines are mainly representations of the human figure; very few zoomorphic figurines were found. The figurines were stylistically diverse, emphasizing different elements such as gender, a specific part of the

body, a facial characteristic, the decoration of clothes and

body, or even pregnancy and birth. Most of the figurines are small, less than 10 cm high.

The total number of figurines is 280, distributed more or less equally between Makriyalos I and II. This figure does not include zoomorphic or anthropomorphic handles of vases. The forms of the clay figurines vary from very sim-




Table 2. Listing of scientific and common names of

plant remains found at Makriyalos.

Cereals Triticum monococcum Einkorn Triticum dicoccum Emmer Triticum aestivum/durum Bread/durum wheat Hordeum distichon Two-row barley Avena spp. Oat

Pulses Vicia ervilia Bitter vetch Lens spp. Lentil Lathyrus sativus/cicera Grass pea Pisum sativum Pea

Fiber / oil plants Linum usitatissimum Flax

Fruit / nuts Quercus sp. Acorns Ficus carica Fig Rubus fruticosus Blackberry Pistacia cf terebinthus Terebinth Vitis vinifera Grape Comrnus mas Cornelian cherry Sambucus cf nzjna Elderberry

ple to relatively complicated ones. Certain styles, such as bird shaped figurines, are more common during the earlier phase, but there are no dramatic shifts analogous to the

changes in pottery style between the two phases. They generally have parallel examples from the Vinea and Karanovo cultures of the central and eastern Balkans (Gimbutas 1986).

One notable change between the two phases was the ap- pearance of stone figurines, mainly of white marble, in

Makriaylos II. The human body is depicted in a very schematic and abstract form (FIG. 14) in a type well known from Thessalian sites of the Late and Final Neolithic

(Tsountas 1908: pl. 37-38).

Tool Industry More than 10,000 fragments of chipped stone debitage

were recovered. A considerable variety of raw materials was

used, including various qualities of quartz, chert, and obsidian. Petrographic analysis of the raw materials, along with the chemical analysis of obsidian, will be conducted.

Quartz, low quality chert, and jasper show evidence of on- site tool production, while there are no such indications for the remaining materials (Skourtopoulou 1997: 266).

Two major groups of ground stone tools were distin-

guished. The first includes elaborate polished axes, adzes, and chisels of serpentine or jadeite. Other kinds of stone were also used and were all probably found in the form of

pebbles in the ravines near the site. The tools are found in various states, ranging from broken during manufacturing to worn out by use. The second group contains querns, hand-grinders, polishers, pounders, and whetstones made of various local rocks of medium quality. This group is the most numerous among 8000 specimens of ground stone

(Gerousi 1997: 267). Implements of animal bone and antler comprise a third,

much smaller, group. Projectile points, awls, needles, spat- ulae, and polishers are the most common categories, while there are other tools of unknown function. Among the most interesting objects are antler or bone hafts for stone tools.

Stamps Stamps of this period usually date to the earlier stages of

the Neolithic and there are only few examples from stratified deposits of the Late Neolithic (Onasoglou 1996:

163-164). All the stamps from Makriyalos were made of

clay and belong to two different types, each corresponding to a different phase of the settlement. All stamps from the site were found in habitation areas. In Makriyalos I, three identical stamps were found, all in nearly the same area.

They have a conical shape and a circular stamping surface

bearing an incised motif of concentric circles. The type is common during the Neolithic, though there are earlier ex-

amples (Pilali-Papasteriou 1992: pl. 11, nos. 9-11). All the

specimens from Makriyalos II have a large oval-shaped stamping surface bearing wide plastic linear shapes in

zigzag and round motifs; a handle is provided on the back. The two types were obviously not used to mark the same

type of surface.

Other Finds

Clay objects related to spinning and weaving-mainly spindle whorls, loom weights, and spools - occur in much lower frequencies than other categories, such as stone and bone tools, even though most of the excavated area com-

prises habitation areas where these objects are normally found.

Small "luxury" vases, usually made from marble pebbles, were common. These, stone loom weights, stone figurines, and jewelry show remarkable skill in stone working.

Makriyalos in European Prehistory

Macedonia and Thessaly were already densely populat- ed by Neolithic communities at the time that Makriyalos was established. These agrarian settlements had been mostly identified as nucleated, long-lasting sites that formed low tells. The identification of a non-tell type of settlement in northern Greece demonstrates the similarity to sites in-




-' : - :Aw" 4:::~_. ,

NT.- Ao~-

IF - ;~,::,-: j Al Oil : ? :

Aki-- W.-~:

Figure 13. Makriyalos II. Pottery decorated in the "classical" Dimini style.

vestigated elsewhere in the Balkans (Chapman 1981: 45). The Makriyalos excavation has revealed the intrasite organization of one such settlement and, because of the large scale of work, analysis of the site has the potential to an- swer major problems in Greek prehistoric research.

The boundary ditches place Makriyalos among a large group of sites with clearly defined limits. The manipula- tion of space through earthmoving is a practice widely used in Neolithic Europe. In Britain, for example, large en- closures surrounded by complicated ditch systems were

mostly not habitation sites but reflect instead ritual aspects of, for instance, the trade of axes at the sites of Cam Brea in Cornwall and Hembury in Devon (Bewley 1994: 49-56; Edmonds 1995: 68-73). A group of Neolithic settlements in Apulia, Italy, employed a complicated system of ditches with monumental entranceways (Tine 1983: 23-25; Jones 1987: 191-195); individual areas were dis-

tinguished there by smaller circular ditches organizing the area of habitation. The eastern Balkans and the Cucuteni-

Tripolye area in Romania also contain settlements that em-

phasize boundaries defined by earthworks, often resulting in complicated systems consisting of palisades, banks, and

ditches. Boundaries produced by earthmoving occur in both nucleated and non-nucleated sites (Whittle 1985:

146-148). In the Greek mainland evidence for boundary ditches is

sparse, although they were in wide use during the Late Ne- olithic elsewhere in Europe. Only a few, and fragmentary, examples are known from Macedonia, at the site of Yian- nitsa B (Chrysostomou 1997: 138) and Nea Nikomedia

(Pyke 1996: 51-52). In Thessaly, a region that has been more intensively investigated, ditches have been found in numerous settlements, such as Achilleion, Soufli Magoula, Argissa, Otzaki, and Ayia Sophia (Demoule and Perlks 1993: 370, 390; Andreou, Fotiadis, and Kotsakis 1996: 552).

Built walls were used in other Thessalian sites to define, organize, or differentiate intrasite space. A symbolic function for these limits has recently been adduced for Middle Neolithic Sesklo (Kotsakis in press). Late Neolithic Dimi- ni contains an impressive system of concentric walls that

precisely organize the nucleated settlement (Chour- mouziadis 1979: 62; Whittle 1985: 148). Both Dimini and Makriyalos II are roughly contemporary, have clear




n", . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... % . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------- .......... ;k, R?

zz,, k4.

AI

Figure 14. Makriyalos II. Marble figurine.

boundaries, and possess very close similarities in pottery. While Dimini is nucleated, Makriyalos II is extended along the slope of a hill, bounded by large earthworks, ditches, and a watercourse. In both cases, the settlement space is defined through communal works, while the distinction between areas internal and external to the settlement is em-

phasized. Chourmouziadis (1979: 65-66) has argued that the Dimini walls were not defensive, but in fact served to

organize the structure of the settlement. Likewise, the large dimensions of the habitation area of Makriyalos renders

unlikely a defensive role for the ditches. The round pit-dwellings used in both phases at

Makriyalos are in contrast to the single-roomed, four- walled building common to other Balkan sites (Whittle 1985: 50). Pit dwellings are normally found in early stages of Neolithic settlements and are not widely used in the Greek mainland. The few examples encountered before now all predate Makriyalos. The best preserved examples were found at the Aceramic site of Dendra, in the Pelo-

ponnese (Protonotariou-Deilaki 1992: 106), at Early Ne- olithic Achilleion in Thessaly (Winn and Shimabuku 1989: 33-34), and at Nea Makri in Attica (Pantelidou-Gofa 1991: 12-36). Additionally, a non-tell settlement of the

Early Neolithic was recently discovered at Kato Hagios Yiannis, 20 km to the south of Makriyalos and consists of

pit dwellings (Pappa in press). That site is not excavated, but modern earthmoving work has exposed the pits in the ground. This new find might suggest the origins of a local architectural tradition.

The shape of the round house has traditionally been related to discussions of primitive forms of architecture and social complexity (Saidel 1993: 94-96), and not without reason, as it is associated with earliest stages of many settlements. Ethnographic evidence relates round houses to seasonal habitation (Gilman 1997: 83), a circumstance that may be the case at Makriyalos, given the lack of successive habitation deposits. Paleoeconomic data for cultivation and stock-breeding practices, both involving sea-

sonality, remain to be evaluated. The artifacts from the excavation, in contrast to the ar-

chitecture, are generally comparable with those from con-

temporary settlements in Northern Greece. A close resem- blance to Makriyalos I pottery wares and figurines can eas-

ily be traced with the central Balkans, while Makriyalos II is surprisingly close to the Thessalian ceramic tradition.

Conclusions The excavations at Makriyalos revealed two main occu-

pation phases of this non-tell settlement dated to the Late Neolithic period. The ditch system that bounded Makriya- los I was traced along nearly half its circuit. For the first time on the Greek mainland, it is possible to more fully record the phases and the construction of such a site. The loose layout of Makriyalos I was revealed and a fairly com-

plete view of the whole settlement was achieved. The layout of Makriyalos II is not so clear, as the area excavated was more restricted and it was not possible to delineate the

complete plan of the settlement. A considerable amount of the site had been eroded

away, destroying the upper part of the structures, leaving only remains below floor level. But enough is left to re- construct basic aspects of the settlement. There are problems in the definition of households, mainly during Makriyalos II, which is densely inhabited, but further analysis of the finds will define the main units.

Cataloguing of finds is ongoing; most artifacts and other samples are being studied by specialists for final publication. The end result should be most significant for re- constructing social and economic life in the Neolithic non- tell settlements.




Acknowledgments

The excavation was strongly supported and made possible by the late ephor of the Museum of Thessaloniki, Jou- lia Vokotopoulou, to whose memory this report is dedi- cated. The following archaeologists participated in the excavation: F. Adaktylou, A. Almatji, K. Almatji, E. Alvanou, Z. Billi, P. Elefanti, S. Gerousi, A. Hatjoudi, E. Hitsiou, J. Imamidis, K. Ioannidis, G. Karaiskou, J. Karliambas, A.

Karnava, K. Koutroumbakis, D.-A. Lahanidou, Ch.

Michelaki, K. Peleidou, A. Tjoni, A. Touliopoulou, S.

Vrahionidou, and S. Zambetas. The operation of the wa- tersieve was undertaken by S.-M. Valamoti, who is also re-

sponsible for the study and publication of the archaeo- botanical remains. Sampling of geophysical layers was undertaken by A. Krachtopoulou who is studying the geophysical formation of the site. The drawings of the excavation and artifacts were made by G. Goulas, M. Kargoglou, and H. Sionidis. The surveyor E. Papadimitriou was re-

sponsible for mapping the site. The geophysical survey was conducted by the University of Thessaloniki under the di- rection of G. Tsokas and was funded by the Ministry of Macedonia and Thrace. Conservation of the objects is done

by D. Karolidis and on site conservation by A. Moditsis. A.

Vargas and F. Adaktylou worked with the excavation data- base. Computerized drawings and maps were made by D.

Papoudas. Of invaluable help in all fields was the continuous presence and support of the guard of the Archaeolog- ical Service, P. Miaouras, assisted by N. Kalitsios. Help in all fields from Ch. Karanikas, T. Avramidis, Ch. Avramidis, and K. Athanasiades makes the study of the material possible.

We are grateful to all our colleagues who encouraged us

during the difficult, extended excavation project. Among them, Kostas Kotsakis and Paul Halstead contributed with

frequent visits and long discussions. We would also like to thank the archaeologists who commented on the manu-

script for their helpful suggestions. The study of the material is sponsored by the Greek Ar-

chaeological Service, the Institute for Aegean Prehistory, the University of Sheffield, the British Academy, and the Greek Railways Company.

Maria Pappa, a curator at the Thessaloniki Museum since 1987, has done work mainly in Chalkidiki, Pieria, and Thes- saloniki. Her research interests focus on the spatial organization of Neolithic and Early Bronze age sites in mainland Greece. Mailing address: Archaeological Museum of Thessa- loniki, 6, M. Andronikos Street, 54621, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Manthos Besios, a curator at the Thessaloniki Museum

since 1981, is directing the archaeological team working at the excavation ofAncient Pydna in Pieria. His research interests

focus on the funerary practices of the Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic periods ofMacedonia. Mailing address: Archaeo-

logical Museum of Thessaloniki, 6, M. Andronikos Street, 54621, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Alarm-Stern, Eva 1996 Die Agiiische Friihzeit. Das Neolithikum in Greichenland 1.

Band. Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Andreou, S., and K. Kotsakis 1986 "Diastaseis tou chorou stin Kentriki Makedonia: Apoty-

posi tis endokoinotikis kai diakoinotikis choroorganosis," inAmitos. Thessaloniki: University of Thessaloniki, 56-88.

1994 "Prehistoric Rural Communities in Perspective: The Lan- gadas Survey Project," in P. N. Doukelis and L. G. Men- doni, eds., Structures rurales et societes antiques, Actes du colloque de Corfu, 14-16 Mai 1992, Centre de Recherches d'His- toire Ancienne Vol. 126, Bensangon: Annales Littiraires de

l'Universiti de Bensangon, 17-25.

Andreou, S., M. Fotiadis, and K. Kotsakis 1996 "Review of Aegean Prehistory V: The Neolithic and

Bronze Age of Northern Greece," American Journal ofAr- chaeology 100: 537-597.

Besios, Manthos, and Maria Pappa 1995 Pydna. Thessaloniki: Pieriki Anaptixiaki. 1998 "O neolithikos oikismos sto Makriyalo Pierias" Archae-

ologika Analekta ex Athinon 23-28 (1990-1995): 13-30.

Bewley, Robert 1994 Prehistoric Settlements. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd/English

Heritage. Chapman, John

1981 The Vinia Culture of South-East Europe. BAR International Series 117. Oxford: B.A.R.

Chourmouziadis, G. Ch. 1979 To Neolithiko Dimini. Volos: Etaireia Thessalikon Erevnon.

Chrysostomou, P. 1997 "O neolithicos oikismos Giannitson B '. Nea anaskafika de-

domena," To archaeologico ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 7 (1993): 135-146.

Demoule, J. P., K. Gallis, and L. Manolakakis 1988 "Transition entre les cultures Niolithiques, de Sesklo et de

Dimini: Les Categories Ciramiques" Bulletin de Correspon- dance Helldnique 112: 1-58.

Demoule, J. P., and C. Perls 1993 "The Greek Neolithic: A New Review," Journal of World

Prehistory 7 (4): 355-416.

Edmonds, Mark 1995 Stone Tools and Society. Working Stone in Neolithic and Bronze

Age Britain. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd.

Gallis, Kostantinos 1996 "0 Neolithikos kosmos" in Papathanasopoulos George,

ed., O neolithikos politismos stin Ellada. Athens: N. P. Goulandri Foundation, Mouseio Kykladikis Technis.

Gerousi, Soultana 1997 "Liasmena kai tripta ergaleia apo to neolithico oikismo sti




thesi Agiasma Mariyalou," in M. Pappa, "Neolithikos oikismos Makriyalou Pierias. Prota apotelesmata tis meletis4"' To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 10 (1996): 267-268.

Gilman, Patricia A. 1997 Wandering Villagers: Pit structures, Mobility and Agriculture

in Southeastern Arizona. Anthropological Research Papers No. 49. Tempe: Arizona State University.

Gimbutas, Marija 1972 "The Neolithic Cultures of the Balkan Peninsula," in H.

Birmbaum and S. Vryonis, eds., Aspects of the Balkans, In- ternational Balkan Conference 1969. Los Angeles: Universi- ty of California, 8-49.

1986 "Mythical Imagery of Sitagroi Society," in C. Renfrew, M. Gimbutas, and E. S. Elster, eds., Excavations at Sitagroi. A Prehistoric Village in Northeast Greece. Vol. 1. Monumenta Archaeologica 13. Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology, University of California, 225-301.

Grammenos, Demetrios 1991 Neolithikes erevnes stin Kentriki kai Anatoliki Makedonia.

Athens: Tameio Archaeologikon Poron.

Grammenos, D., M. Pappa, D. Urem-Kotsos, K. Skourtopoulou, E. Giannouli, and B. Tsigarida

1990 "Anaskafi neolithikou oikismou Thermis. Anaskafiki periodos 1987," Makedonika 27: 223-288.

Grammenos, D., M. Pappa, D. Urem-Kotsou, K. Skourtopoulou, E. Giannouli, Ch. Marangou, S. M. Valamoti, G. Syridis, E. Marki, and R. Christidou

1992 "Anaskafi neolithikou oikismou Thermis B kai Vyzantinis engatastasis para ton proistoriko oikismo Thermi A. Anaskafiki periodos 1989," Makedonika 28: 381-501.

Halstead, Paul 1984 "Strategies of Survival: An Ecological Approach to Social

and Economic Change in the Early Farming Communities of Thessaly, N. Greece," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

1992 "From Reciprocity to Redistribution: Modelling the ex- change of Livestock in Neolithic Greece," Anthropozoologi- ca 16: 19-30.

Halstead, Paul, and Patricia Collins 1997 "LN Makriyalos: Preliminary results of the study of animal

bones," To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 10 (1996): 268-270.

Hitsiou, Elli 1997 "I keramiki tis phasis II tou Makriyalou," To Archaeologiko

ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 10 (1996): 263-264.

Jones, G. D. B. 1987 Apulia. Vol. 1: Neolithic Settlement in the Tavoliere. London:

Society of Antiquaries of London.

Kotsakis, Kostas 1994 "The Use of Habitational Space in Neolithic Sesklo," in La

Thessalie, Quinze anne'es de recherche archeologiques, 1975-1990, Bilans et perspectives, Actes du colloque international, Lyon, 17-22 Avril 1990. Vol. A. Athens, 125-130.

in press Sesklo. Oi anaskafes tou D. R. Theochari. I stromatografia kai i architechtoniki tis mesis neolithikis periodou. Athens.

Lachanidou, Anna-Despoina 1997 "Keramiki/Phasi I," To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai

Thraki 10 (1996): 261-262.

Marangou, C. 1992 Idolia, Figurines et miniatures du Ndolithique Re'cent et du

Bronze Ancien en Grace. BAR International Series 576. Ox- ford: B.A.R.

McGeehan-Liritzis, V, and N. H. Gale 1988 "Chemical and Lead Isotope Analyses of Greek Late Ne-

olithic and Early Bronze Age Metals," Archaeometry 30: 199-225.

Onasoglou, Artemis 1996 "Sfragides," in G. Papathanasopoulos, ed., Neolithikos

politismos stin Ellada. Athens: N. P. Goulandri Foundation, Mouseio Kykladikis Technis, 163-164.

Pantelidou-Gofa, Maria 1991 I neolithiki NeaMakri. Ta oikodomika. Athens: Archaeologi-

ki Etaireia.

Pappa, Maria 1997 "Neolithiki engatastasi sto choro tis Diethnous Ekthesis

Thessalonikis," To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai Thra- ki 7 (1993): 303-310.

in press "I organosi tou chorou stous proistorikous oikismous tis Voreias Pierias," Ancient Macedonia. 5th International Sym- posium, Thessaloniki 1996. Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies.

Pilali-Papasteriou, A. 1992 "Oi sfragides apo to Sesklo kai ta provlimata tis Thessalikis

neolithikis sfragidoglyfias," in International Symposium on Ancient Thessaly, in Memory of D. R. Theocharis. Athens: Tameio Archaeologikon Poron, 83-89.

Protonotariou-Deilaki, E. 1992 "Paratiriseis stin Prokeramiki," in International Symposium

on Ancient Thessaly, in Memory of D. R. Theocharis. Athens: Tameio Archaeologikon Poron, 97-119.

Pyke, Gillian 1996 "Structures and Architecture," in R. J. Rodden and K. A.

Wardle, eds., Nea Nikomedeia I. London: The British School at Athens, 39-53.

Riddley, Cressida, and K. A. Wardle 1979 "Rescue Excavations at Servia 1971-1973: A Preliminary

Report,"Annual of the British School atAthens 74: 187-230.

Rodden, R. J. 1965 "An Early Neolithic Village in Greece," Scientific American

212 (4): 83-91.

Saidel, Benjamin Adam 1993 "Round House or Square? Architectural Form and Socio-

Economic Organization in the PPNB,"Journal of Mediter- ranean Archaeology 6: 65-108.

Skourtopoulou, Katerina 1997 "Oi lithotechnies apolepismenou lithou sto neolithico

Makriyalo. Ta prota stoicheia4" To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 10 (1996): 259-277.

Talalay, L. 1993 Deities, Dolls and Devices. Neolithic Figurines from Franchthi

Cave, Greece. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana Uni- versity Press.

Tine, Santo 1983 Passo di Corvo e la civiltt

neolitica del Tavoliere. Genova: Sagep Editrice.

Tringham, Ruth, and Mirjiana Stevanovid 1990 "Field research," in R. Tringham and D. Krsti6 Selevac. A

Neolithic Village in Yugoslavia. MonumentaArchaeologica 15.




Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology, University of Cali- fornia, 57-156.

Tsokas, G., A. Sarris, M. Pappa, M. Bessios, C. Papazachos, P. Tsour- los, and A. Giannopoulos

1997 "A Large Scale Magnetic Survey in Makriyalos (Pieria), Greece," Archaeological Prospection 4: 123-137.

Tsountas, Christos 1908 Ai proistorikai akropoleis Diminiou kai Sesklou. Athens: Ar-

chaeologiki Etaireia.

Tsuneki, Akira 1989 "The Manufacture of Spondylus Shell Objects at Neolithic

Dimini, Greece," Orient 25: 4-21.

Valamoti, Soultana 1998 "Archaeovotanikes erevnes ston proistoriko oikismo

Makriyalou," To Archaeologiko ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 10 (1996): 270-272.

Weisshaar, H.-J. 1989 Die Deutchen Ausgrabung auf der Pevkakia-Magula in Thes-

salien I. Das Spate Neolithikum und das Chalkolithikum. BAM 28. Bonn: Dr. Rudolph Habelt GMBH.

Whittle, Alasdair 1985 Neolithic Europe: A Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-

sity Press.

Winn, Shan, and Daniel Shimabuku 1989 "Architecture and Sequence of Building Remains," in Winn

Gimbutas and D. Shimabuku, eds., Achilleion. A Neolithic Settlement in Thessaly, Greece, 6.400-5.600 B.C. Monumenta Archaeologica 14. Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology, University of California, 32-68.



Documents

The Neolithic Settlement at Makriyalos, Northern Greece: Preliminary Report on the 1993- 1995 Excavations