Page 18 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 9(1) (2021)
P. 18
dia universitatis her editati, letnik 9 (2021), številk a 1 / volume 9 (2021), number 1 18
hereditati
Figure 3. EN cultures in Bulgaria (1. Western Bulgarian Painted Pottery culture, 2. Slatina-Sofia culture in earliest
phase and in later phases treated as Kremikovci culture, 3. Gălăbnik culture in earliest phase, 4, 5. Protostarčevo and
Starčevo culture, 6. Krajnici culture in earliest phase and in later phases treated as Gălăbnik culture, 7. Karanovo I cul-
ture, 8. Kovačevo).
Gradsko, Selečka Planina (Mountain), Prilep re- 3 although geographically distant show greater
gion, communicates with group 2. Group 1 can similarities, and in the MN this is the case with
communicate directly with group 3 of the Vard- group 1 and 3.
ar Valley, north to the Pčinja riverflow, or south
along Bregalnica riverflow. The communication Time
of group 2 and group 3 geographically does not al- Unlike the dominant approach in older studies
low a direct approach, that is, it may have taken – that material culture is the basic chronological
place southwards through Thessaly, then along and periodization indicator, today absolute dates
the Struma riverflow to north, or north again are the primary means of (precisely) defining Ne-
through Vardar riverflow, and then further to olithic contexts. Absolute dates, which are con-
north to Pčinja riverflow or south along the Bre- tinuously made in large numbers for sites around
galnica riverflow. From what has been said so far, the world for decades, are rare for North Macedo-
it can be confirmed that Vardar and Struma and nian Neolithic sites. Unfortunately, until today
their tributaries are essential for Neolithic mi- only for a total of 11 (Neolithic) sites are available
grations. However, on the basis of the material absolute dates. There is a large number of dates
culture the dynamics of communications vary for Barutnica-Amzabegovo, and a smaller num-
in a different phase/s (see the chapter Neolith- ber of dates for Cerje-Govrlevo, Vršnik-Tarin-
ic heritage), that is, in the EN group 2 and group ci, Grnčarica-Krupište, Čuka-Topolčani, Tum-
hereditati
Figure 3. EN cultures in Bulgaria (1. Western Bulgarian Painted Pottery culture, 2. Slatina-Sofia culture in earliest
phase and in later phases treated as Kremikovci culture, 3. Gălăbnik culture in earliest phase, 4, 5. Protostarčevo and
Starčevo culture, 6. Krajnici culture in earliest phase and in later phases treated as Gălăbnik culture, 7. Karanovo I cul-
ture, 8. Kovačevo).
Gradsko, Selečka Planina (Mountain), Prilep re- 3 although geographically distant show greater
gion, communicates with group 2. Group 1 can similarities, and in the MN this is the case with
communicate directly with group 3 of the Vard- group 1 and 3.
ar Valley, north to the Pčinja riverflow, or south
along Bregalnica riverflow. The communication Time
of group 2 and group 3 geographically does not al- Unlike the dominant approach in older studies
low a direct approach, that is, it may have taken – that material culture is the basic chronological
place southwards through Thessaly, then along and periodization indicator, today absolute dates
the Struma riverflow to north, or north again are the primary means of (precisely) defining Ne-
through Vardar riverflow, and then further to olithic contexts. Absolute dates, which are con-
north to Pčinja riverflow or south along the Bre- tinuously made in large numbers for sites around
galnica riverflow. From what has been said so far, the world for decades, are rare for North Macedo-
it can be confirmed that Vardar and Struma and nian Neolithic sites. Unfortunately, until today
their tributaries are essential for Neolithic mi- only for a total of 11 (Neolithic) sites are available
grations. However, on the basis of the material absolute dates. There is a large number of dates
culture the dynamics of communications vary for Barutnica-Amzabegovo, and a smaller num-
in a different phase/s (see the chapter Neolith- ber of dates for Cerje-Govrlevo, Vršnik-Tarin-
ic heritage), that is, in the EN group 2 and group ci, Grnčarica-Krupište, Čuka-Topolčani, Tum-
