See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/223281842

Keeping an eye on your pots: the provenance of Neolithic ceramics from the
Cave of the Cyclops, Youra, Greece

Article  in  Journal of Archaeological Science · May 2010

DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2009.12.005

CITATIONS READS

11 175

6 authors, including:

Patrick Quinn Peter M Day

University College London The University of Sheffield
30 PUBLICATIONS   513 CITATIONS    84 PUBLICATIONS   1,027 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Eddy Faber Stella Katsarou

University of Bradford Greek Ministry of Culture
11 PUBLICATIONS   89 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Sarakenos Cave Excavation Project International (SCEPI) View project

TECNOLONIAL-Technological impact in the colonial New World. Cultural change in pottery archaeology and archaeometry (HAR2016-75312-P) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Patrick Quinn on 13 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas

Keeping an eye on your pots: the provenance of Neolithic ceramics

from the Cave of the Cyclops, Youra, Greece
Patrick Quinn a, *, Peter Day a, Vassilis Kilikoglou b, Edward Faber c, Stella Katsarou-Tzeveleki d,
Adamantios Sampson e
a
Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, Northgate House, West Street, Sheffield, S1 4ET, UK
b
Institute of Materials Science, NCSR ‘Demokritos’, Aghia Paraskevi 153 10, Attiki, Greece
c
Department of Archaeology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
d
Ministry of Culture, Ephorate of Palaeoanthropology-Spelaeology, 36 Ardettou Street, Athens 11636, Greece
e
Department of Mediterranean Studies, University of the Aegean, 1 Dimokratias Avenue, Rhodos 85100, Greece

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Combined petrographic and chemical analysis of MN and LN ceramics from the Cave of the Cyclops on
Received 13 August 2009 the island of Youra, Greece, has revealed a compositionally diverse assemblage with a range of different
Received in revised form local and off-island sources. Ceramics deposited in Neolithic times on this barren, rocky outpost of the
27 November 2009
Sporades chain may have originated from a surprising number of possible origins, including from the
Accepted 6 December 2009
Plain of Thessaly, Euboea and the volcanic northeast Aegean islands. This picture challenges traditional
assumptions about Neolithic pottery production and indicates that significant movement of ceramics
Keywords:
was already taking place within the northern Aegean as early as the beginning of the sixth millennium
Neolithic
Greece BC. The discovery of a persistent local pottery tradition, that is also found on the neighbouring island of
Aegean Kyra-Panagia, indicates significant continuity in ceramic technology over some 1500 years.
Ceramics ! 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Distribution
Thin section petrography
Geochemistry

1. Introduction production (Vitelli, 1993b; Perlès, 1992; Perlès and Vitelli, 1999), as
well as the role of pottery as an exchange item in this period.
Recent compositional analysis of some of the earliest ceramic Inspired by this shift in perception, we have sought to investi-
vessels from the Aegean has begun to challenge our perception of gate in more detail the movement of pottery in Neolithic Greece,
the production and distribution of pottery in Neolithic Greece. With and in particular, the scale and direction of maritime exchange of
a few notable exceptions (e.g. Schneider et al., 1991, 1994; Hitsiou, ceramic vessels. Turning our attention to the northern Aegean, we
2003), the traditional view of this period often sees most ceramics have focused on a diverse assemblage of Neolithic ceramics from
as being made locally to their find-spot and not transported over the Cave of the Cyclops on the island of Youra in the Sporades
significant distances (Vitelli, 1993a,b; Wijnen 1994; Yiouni, 1996). (Fig. 1). The Cave appears to have been frequented mainly on an
This contrasts with the circulation of other material goods such as occasional basis during the Neolithic, yet it contains a rich ceramic
obsidian, which was already being distributed as far as 200–300 km assemblage that bears close stylistic links with other islands,
from its source at least as early as the Neolithic in the Aegean notably with the settlement of Aghios Petros on the nearby island
(Carter, 2009). However, the detailed compositional examination of of Kyra-Panagia, as well as mainland Greece (Sampson, 1996a, 1998,
EN-LNII ceramics from Knossos, Crete (Tomkins and Day, 2001; 2008a). No direct evidence of ceramic production has been found
Tomkins et al., 2004; Tomkins, 2008) has revealed an unexpected on Youra and suitable clay sources are scarce on this barren, rocky,
degree of variability in raw materials and technology, reflecting uninhabited island today. Clearly much of the Neolithic pottery
a range of different production locations. This discovery has found in the Cave of the Cyclops cannot have been local in origin.
encouraged us to rethink previous models of Neolithic craft Using a combination of thin section petrography and instru-
mental neutron activation analysis (INAA) we have examined the
composition and technology of pottery from the two phases of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 114 2222949. earliest Middle Neolithic (MN) and Late Neolithic I (LNI) from the
E-mail address: patrick.quinn@sheffield.ac.uk (P. Quinn). Cave of the Cyclops. Our analysis reveals that significant

0305-4403/$ – see front matter ! 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.12.005
 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052 1043

Fig. 1. Location of Youra, the Sporades and the Cave of the Cyclops. 1, Makrygialos; 2, Agrosykia; 3, Giannitsa.

compositional variability exists within the assemblage, which other sites in the Sporades and mainland Greece. Of particular
mirrors that seen in the typology of the ceramics. Close correspon- interest are sherds of a high quality red-on-white painted fineware
dence between the petrography and chemistry of the analysed bearing weaving-inspired geometric motifs referred to as ‘canvas’
sherds has allowed us to identify numerous well-defined composi- (Katsarou-Tzeveleki, 2008, 2009), which is represented by about 100
tional groups that reflect differences in both raw materials and excavated sherds and is common in the MN phase of the site (Fig. 2).
production techniques. With the exception of a common group that The similarity between these ceramics and material excavated by
occurs throughout the Neolithic sequence and may represent a ‘local’ Efstratiou (1985) from the contemporary site of Aghios Petros on
ceramic tradition of the northern Sporades, many coarse and painted Kyra-Panagia may provide evidence for the existence of a single
sherds are incompatible with a provenance on Youra or Kyra-Pan- ‘Youra-Aghios Petros culture’ in the Northern Sporades (Sampson,
agia. By comparing our analysis with local and regional geology, as 1998; Katsarou, 2001; Katsarou-Tzeveleki 2008, 2009; Sampson,
well as the results of other analytical studies of Neolithic ceramics 2008a) and should be dated to the earliest phase of the MN on the
from the Sporades and Thessaly, we have identified several candi- basis of stylistic criteria. The rich Late Neolithic ceramic assemblage
date areas for the provenance of the non-local Neolithic ceramics of the Cave of the Cyclops, which suggests more intense human
deposited in the cave. activity in the later phase, contains examples of several well-known
types of Neolithic decoration, such as rope, incised and impressed
patterns, burnished and the white-on-dark technique.
1.1. The Cave of the Cyclops and its Neolithic ceramics
No evidence of ceramic production has been reported from
excavations at the Cave of the Cyclops or surface surveys elsewhere
The Cave of the Cyclops is situated on the island of Youra in the
on Youra. The island is composed almost entirely of hard Jurassic and
northern Aegean (Fig. 1). Youra is one of the Erimonisa or ‘Deserted
Cretaceous limestone and is devoid of extensive clay deposits. Youra
Islands’, lying at the northeastern end of the Sporades chain. A large
contains few natural springs and is covered today by poor soil, which
(c. 50 " 60 m) natural cave was discovered some 40 years ago on
supports only sparse vegetation. In the light of these shortcomings,
the southwest coast of Youra at around 150 m above present sea
the diverse Neolithic ceramic assemblage of the Cave stands out.
level. Surface finds of Neolithic and Roman ceramic sherds within
Youra is separated by distances of a few kilometers from other
the cave prompted its systematic archaeological investigation,
islands in the northern Sporades and forms part of a natural bridge
which took place between 1992 and 1996 under the direction of
between Thessaly and Asia Minor which also includes Lemnos and
Adamantios Sampson (Sampson, 1996a,b,c, 1998, 2008a).
Euboea (Fig. 1). Sea currents are strong in the northern Aegean at
Excavation in six trenches dug in the mouth and interior of the
certain times of the year and would have favoured communication
cave revealed a rich sequence of Mesolithic and Neolithic age. The
with other islands as well as with the mainland of Greece. With this
earliest levels of the site contain no pottery but an abundance of fish
in mind, the ceramic assemblage of the Cave of the Cyclops
bones, hooks and chipped stone attesting to its seasonal exploitation
represents an excellent case through which to investigate the
by Mesolithic fishermen (Moundrea-Agrafioti, 2003; Mylona, 2003;
mobility of ceramics in Neolithic Greece.
Kaczanowska and Kozlowski, 2008). The overlying Neolithic strata,
which are recorded in several trenches, are characterised by two
phases; an early MN phase dated to the beginning of the sixth 1.2. Previous analytical studies on Neolithic ceramics of the
millennium BC, separated by a gap of around 800–1000 years from Sporades and Thessaly
a later phase equivalent to LNI, which should be placed around the
end of the sixth and the beginning of the fifth millennium BC. The investigation of Liritzis et al. (1991), a comparison of the
The excavation of these two phases unearthed a diverse assem- characteristic red-on-white painted ware from Aghios Petros on
blage of coarse- and fineware ceramics with stylistic similarities to Kyra-Panagia to contemporary ceramics from Dimini and Sesklo on
1044 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

Fig. 2. Red-on-light painted pottery bearing geometric motifs reminiscent of canvas or weaving that is characteristic of the MN phase of the Cave of the Cyclops (from Sampson,
1998, p. 6, Fig 6).

the Thessalian Plain using instrumental neutron activation analysis Several published studies have brought analytical techniques to
(INAA), represents the only previously published analysis of bear on the provenance and technology of ceramics from important
Neolithic ceramics from the Sporades (Fig. 3). Based on six elements Neolithic sites in Thessaly on the Greek mainland (Fig. 3). The most
(Cs, Sc, Eu, Th, Fe and Co), the Aghios Petros sherds were found to be extensive of these is the work of Schneider et al. (1991, 1994), which
compositionally distinct from the Thessalian material. Liritzis et al. applied X-ray fluorescence (XRF) to some 200 Neolithic surface
(1991) identified three chemical subgroups within the 24 Neolithic finds from numerous sites including Sesklo, Dimini, Makrychori
sherds analysed from Aghios Petros, perhaps representing the use and Platia Magoula Zarkou, comparing the results to a large data-
of slightly different clays. bank of clay samples. At Sesklo and Dimini, Schneider et al. (1991)

Fig. 3. Location of sites covered by previous analytical studies of northern Aegean ceramics. Aghios Petros (Liritzis et al., 1991), Dimini (Liritzis et al., 1991; Schneider et al., 1991,
1994; Hitsiou, 2003), Sesklo (Maniatis et al., 1988; Liritzis et al., 1991; Schneider et al., 1991, 1994), Makrychori (Schneider et al., 1991, 1994), Achilleion (Ellis, 1989), Platia Magoula
Zarkou (Schneider et al., 1991, 1994).
 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052 1045

suggested that different local clays could have been selected for the Table 1
production of specific types of ceramics. Chemical analysis also Details of the 63 Neolithic ceramic samples from the Cave of the Cyclops analysed in
this study, with their petrographic and chemical classification.
permitted the distinction between the ceramics from different
Thessalian sites, related to differences in the geochemistry of the Sample Level Decoration/ Petrographic class Chemical
local clays or temper. ware group

Other analyses relevant to the present investigation include the 1 MN Red monochrome Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
petrographic analysis of Neolithic ceramics from Achilleion by Ellis
2 MN Red monochrome Limestone Fabric 1a
(1989) and Bjork (1995), as well as the extensive study of Late Group
Neolithic pottery production technology and circulation from 3 MN Red monochrome Limestone Fabric 1a
Makrygialos in Pieria by Hitsiou (2003) (Fig. 3). The latter demon- Group
strated that Thessalian brown-on-cream ware may have been 6 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 2
Group
transported a distance of around 200 km in Neolithic times. 7 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
At some Neolithic sites, previous compositional studies have Group
therefore supported an assumed link between ceramics and locally 9 MN Burnished Limestone Fabric 1a
available raw materials, whereas at others it remains to be rigor- Group
11 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
ously tested. More crucially, some studies have provided compo-
Group
sitional evidence for limited but unexpected movement of ceramics 12 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
between Neolithic sites on mainland Greece. Group
13 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
14 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
2. Materials and methods Group
16 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric –
Sixty-three ceramic samples were selected from the Neolithic Group
assemblage of the Cave of the Cyclops; 41 from the MN phase and 20 MN Burnished Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
22 from the LNI phase of the site. These samples, listed in Table 1,
23 LNI Burnished Limestone Fabric 1a
include both fine- and coarsewares and were selected to cover the Group
range of decorative styles present. 24 LNI Burnished Limestone Fabric 1a
Standard petrographic thin sections were prepared from each Group
ceramic sample at the Fitch Laboratory, Athens and studied with 25 LNI Burnished Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
the polarizing light microscope at the Department of Archaeology, 28 LNI Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
University of Sheffield. The individual thin sections were grouped Group
and separated into fabric classes based upon the nature of their 33 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
dominant non-plastic inclusions, their clay matrix and textural Group
34 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
characteristics (Table 1). These compositional groups were
Group
described in detail using a modified version of the methodology 35 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
proposed by Whitbread (1989, 1995, p. 379–388) (Supplementary Group
Appendix A). The main characteristic features of each fabric class 36 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
were then summarized and, wherever possible, an interpretation of Group
37 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
ceramic technology was based upon the evidence seen in thin Group
section. 38 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
Chemical analysis of the ceramic samples was performed by Group
INAA following the routine measurement procedure applied to 39 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
ceramics (Kilikoglou et al., 2007). The external surface of each
40 MN Fineware Limestone Fabric 1a
sample, weighing approximately 1 g, was cleaned with a tungsten Group
carbide drill and then ground to a fine powder. This powder was 41 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric -
dried at 110 # C and 150 mg was then carefully weighed into Group
a polyethylene vial, which was heat-sealed. The 63 separate vials 42 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
were irradiated in batches of 10 with two SOIL-7 standard reference
43 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
samples in the Demokritos swimming pool reactor at the National Group
Centre for Scientific Research, Athens. The g-spectra of the samples 44 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
were measured after 1 week with an HPGe detector to determine Group
45 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
the concentration of Sm, Lu, U, Yb, As, Sb, Ca, Na, and La, then after
Group
3 weeks for the elements Ce, Th, Cr, Hf, Cs, Tb, Sc, Rb, Fe, Ta, Co and 46 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
Eu. The full analytical data for the 21 elements analysed in each of Group
the 63 ceramic samples is presented in Supplementary Appendix B. 47 MN Coarseware Limestone Fabric 1a
Direct comparison was made between the different composi- Group
48 MN Red-on-white Limestone Fabric 1a
tional groupings of the 63 ceramic samples produced by petrog-
Group
raphy and chemistry. Consideration of the detailed thin section 49 MN Red-on-white Limestone Fabric 1a
descriptions (Supplementary Appendix A) and the concentrations Group
of individual elements (Supplementary Appendix B) provided 50 MN Red-on-white Limestone Fabric 1a
Group
a means of reconciling differences between the petrographic and
51 MN Light-on-red Limestone Fabric 1a
chemical groups, as well as providing a cross-check for the two Group
methods of classification. Finally, the provenance of the main 52 MN Light-on-red Limestone Fabric 1a
robust compositional groups of ceramics in the Cave of the Cyclops Group
material was interpreted by comparison with geological maps, (continued on next page)
1046 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

Table 1 (continued ) foliated limestone temper to non-calcareous red clay containing

Sample Level Decoration/ Petrographic class Chemical natural quartz inclusions. Both coarse and fine variants of this paste
ware group recipe occur in the cave material, as well as sherds with a range of
10 MN Burnished Phyllite Fabric – decorative styles (Table 1). The Limestone Fabric Group occurs in
Group both the MN and LNI assemblages at the site.
17 MN Coarseware Phyllite Fabric – Some seven samples contained a range of low-grade meta-
Group
morphic rock fragments and associated argillaceous and arena-
22 LNI Coarseware Phyllite Fabric –
Group ceous sedimentary rocks (Phyllite Fabric Group) (Fig. 4b). It is not
26 LNI Coarseware Phyllite Fabric – clear whether this material represents temper or occurred natu-
Group rally in the clay used for the manufacture of these ceramics.
27 LNI Coarseware Phyllite Fabric – Samples with this petrographic composition occur in both phases
Group
29 LNI Coarseware Phyllite Fabric –
and all but one of the samples analysed came from undecorated
Group coarseware vessels. A group of five matt-painted LN samples were
32 LNI Coarseware Phyllite Fabric – found to possess a homogeneous, fine non-calcareous paste with
Group small residual quartz and mica inclusions of metamorphic origin.
56 LNI Matt-painted Fine Mica and 2
These sherds form the Fine Mica and Quartz Fabric Group (Fig. 4c).
Quartz
Fabric Group Several other individual LN samples also contain inclusions derived
59 LNI Matt-painted Fine Mica and 2 from metamorphic rocks, such as biotite- and muscovite-schist
Quartz (Schist Fabric) and polycrystalline quartz (Polycrystalline Quartz
Fabric Group Fabric 1 and Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 2).
61 LNI Matt-painted Fine Mica and 2
Quartz
Two highly distinctive petrographic compositions in the
Fabric Group assemblage are characterised by the presence of fresh, and highly
62 LNI Matt-painted Fine Mica and 2 altered igneous rock fragments respectively. The Tuff Fabric Group
Quartz (Fig. 4d) contains a range of inclusions of volcanic origin, including
Fabric Group
tuff, andesite and well-formed crystals of plagioclase and horn-
63 LNI Matt-painted Fine Mica and 2
Quartz blende, in a dark, non-calcareous clay matrix. The fresh nature of
Fabric Group these volcanic inclusions suggests that they represent temper
15 MN Red monochrome Tuff Fabric Group 5 rather than the residual inclusions of clay formed from the in situ
19 MN Burnished Tuff Fabric Group 5 weathering of igneous rock. Both samples of the Tuff Fabric Group
57 LNI Matt-painted Serpentinite Fabric 4
Group
come from the MN phase, but have different surface treatments.
60 LNI Matt-painted Serpentinite Fabric 4 Within the Serpentinite Fabric Group (Fig. 4e) are two matt-painted
Group LN samples containing numerous yellow and orange, rounded
21 LNI Burnished Grog and Phyllite – serpentinite fragments. These distinctive fibrous inclusions, which
Fabric Group
can exhibit relic mineral structures, represent highly altered frag-
54 MN Pattern burnished Grog and Phyllite 3
Fabric Group ments of a basic igneous rock, such as dolerite or basalt. Their
55 MN Pattern burnished Grog and Phyllite 3 orange colour results from the firing of the ceramics.
Fabric Group Several fabric groups contained evidence of crushed ceramic
4 MN Red matt-painted Calcareous Grog 1a temper or ‘grog’. The identification of grog in thin sections of
Fabric Group
5 MN Red matt-painted Calcareous Grog 1a
archaeological ceramics can be problematic (Whitbread 1986;
Fabric Group Cuomo di Caprio and Vaughan 1993). However, possible relic
8 MN Coarseware Grog Fabric Group – vessel surfaces and slip layers can be observed in some samples.
31 LNI Coarseware Grog Fabric Group – Grog inclusions occur alongside phyllite (Grog and Phyllite Fabric
64 LNI Matt-painted Schist Fabric –
Group), limestone (Calcareous Grog Fabric Group) or as the
53 LNI White-on-dark Polycrystalline –
Quartz Fabric 1 dominant type of aplastic inclusion (Grog Fabric Group). In the
30 LNI Coarseware Polycrystalline – latter, it appears that several different types of crushed pottery
Quartz Fabric 2 were used as temper. Some samples were found to contain ‘second
18 LNI Burnished Clay and Phyllite – generation grog’ (Fig. 4f) indicating that sherds were crushed and
Fabric
recycled several times. The two Calcareous Grog Fabric Group
samples are both red-on-white pattern painted and come from
the MN phase of the cave.
reports and the results of the comparative analytical studies of In addition to the three grog groups, several of the other fabric
Greek Neolithic ceramics discussed above. classes within the Neolithic ceramics of the Cave of the Cyclops can
be linked to one another by the presence of distinctive shared
3. Results inclusions or petrographic features. For example, rare inclusions of
foliated limestone, characteristic of the Limestone Fabric Group,
3.1. Petrography occur in the Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 2 sample (Fig. 4g).
Distinctive inclusions of what appears to have been a fine, dried,
In thin section, the 63 Neolithic ceramic samples analysed from orange clay that characterise the Clay and Phyllite Fabric (Fig. 4h)
the Cave of the Cyclops could be subdivided into a total of 13 also occur in several other petrographic classes.
different petrographic classes (Table 1). Over half of the samples
taken are characterised in thin section by the presence of elongate 3.2. Chemistry
inclusions of partially metamorphosed limestone in a generally
calcareous clay matrix (Fig. 4a). The samples in this large homo- The statistical analysis of the data was performed by excluding
geneous petrographic class (Limestone Fabric Group) appear to the concentrations of particular elements due to either relatively
have been produced by the addition of a quantity of poorly sorted poor counting statistics (As, Sb) or extreme natural variability
 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052 1047

Fig. 4. Thin section photomicrographs of selected Neolithic ceramics from Cave of the Cyclops analysed in this study. Limestone Fabric Group (a), Phyllite Fabric Group (b), Fine Mica
and Quartz Fabric Group (c), Tuff Fabric Group (d), Serpentinite Fabric Group (e), Grog Fabric Group, with grog (dashed line) containing probable second generation grog (1) (f),
Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 2, with foliated limestone inclusion (g), Clay and Phyllite Fabric (h). All micrographs taken with crossed polars. Field of view 2.0 mm, except (g) 1.5 mm.

(Ta, Tb) that would obscure any existing natural variability within X sij
vt ¼
different provenance groups (Weigand et al., 1977). The final 2n
ij
dataset submitted to statistical analysis comprised of 63 samples
and 17 elements. The sum ss of the variances in a particular column of the variation
The chemical variability within the compositional dataset was matrix gives the contribution to the total variation, of the element s,
estimated by determining its total variation, following the which in this case has been used as divisor. Therefore a high ratio vt/
approach of Buxeda i Garrigós and Kilikoglou (2003). Using this ss indicates small variability of the respective element (Buxeda i
method an n " n variation matrix (T) is generated, with n being the Garrigós, 1999).
number of element concentrations, and sij ¼ var{log(xi/xj)} (Aitch- Following the above approach, a vt of 4.47 was calculated for the
inson, 1986), the matrix elements, which present the variances of complete dataset of ceramics from the Cave of the Cyclops. This
the element concentrations, expressed as logarithmic ratios. In this value indicates the existence of groups with very large chemical
way all elements are used successively as a devisor in these ratios. differences among them (Buxeda i Garrigós and Kilikoglou 2003).
The total variation of the data is then given by: However, Ca values introduce by far most of this variability since its
1048 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

vt/ss ratio is 0.09, ten times higher than the next smallest. Indeed all samples from the large Limestone Fabric Group. With the exception
ceramic samples containing limestone exhibit Ca values well above of a few outliers, the samples belonging to this fabric class cluster
10%, with the others being either non-calcareous or low calcareous. well in the dendrogram. However, the chemical analysis seems to
When Ca was removed from the calculation, the vt value of the indicate that significant compositional variation exists in the form of
complete dataset dropped to 1.67, demonstrating its effect on the several smaller clusters (Chemical Groups 1a, 1b, 1c) (Fig. 5). Given
total variability. A vt of 1.67 indicates either the existence of several that the concentration of Ca is more or less uniform in all Limestone
rather indistinct chemical groups, or of one group with several Fabric Group samples, these individual chemical groups may reflect
outliers. This is compatible with the picture derived from the thin differences in the composition of their base clay, rather than varia-
section petrography, which points to a single large limestone fabric tions in the origin or abundance of the limestone temper. Chemical
group with several other small but distinct groups. Group 1c on the far right side of the dendrogram is distinguished
In all vt calculations, the elements with the least contribution to from the other two closely related clusters of Limestone Fabric Group
the variability were found to be the rare earths. According to samples due to its low rare-earth concentrations.
Buxeda i Garrigós (1999) the elements with low variability are the In comparison to the Limestone Fabric Group, the samples
least likely candidates to have been affected by alterations or belonging to the Phyllite Fabric Group did not group well in terms
contaminations during burial. In order to compensate for the effect of their chemistry. Whilst two samples of this petrographic class
of post-depositional phenomena as well as differential tempering, were associated chemically with one another, the majority were
all concentrations were expressed as logarithmic ratios over the spread across the left side of the dendrogram (Fig. 5). This indicates
element Lu, which exhibited the highest vt/sj (Aitchinson, 1986). that the samples included in the Phyllite Fabric Group may be less
Cluster analysis was then performed on the whole dataset, closely related compositionally than is suggested by their shared
producing the resulting dendrogram shown in Fig. 5. petrographic characteristics.
The main feature of the dendrogram is that most samples on the Chemical Group 2 in the middle of the dendrogram consists of
left side are from the LN phase of the Cave of the Cyclops, whereas a tight cluster of five LN samples belonging to the Fine Mica and
the majority of the samples on the right side are from MN contexts. Quartz Fabric Group, plus a single Limestone Fabric Group sample
This subdivision is likely to reflect the dominance in MN levels of (Fig. 5). This group is characterised by a high Th concentration,

Fig. 5. INAA dendrogram of the Neolithic ceramics from Cave of the Cyclops analysed in this study. MN samples in grey, LNI samples in black. Dashed line indicates broad split in
dendrogram between MN and LNI samples. Well-defined chemical groups are indicated by ellipses.
 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052 1049

which is indicative of a distinctive base clay. The close chemical

composition of the Fine Mica and Quartz Fabric Group samples in
Chemical Group 2, correlates well with their petrographic homo-
geneity observed in thin section. Limestone-tempered sample 6,
which also appears in this cluster has a base clay that is compatible
to the members of Chemical Group 2 and different to the other 36
Limestone Fabric Group samples.
Three additional small chemical groups, each consisting of two
samples, were formed by the cluster analysis of the ceramic samples
analysed from the Cave of the Cyclops. Chemical Group 3 contains
two of the three samples from the Grog and Phyllite Fabric Group
(Fig. 5). The main characteristic of this cluster is its high rare-earth
element concentrations. The other Grog and Phyllite Fabric Group
sample has a very different chemical signature and therefore appears
as an outlier elsewhere in the dendrogram. Chemical Group 4,
characterised by high Cr, Fe and Sc, relates well to the distinctive LN
Serpentinite Fabric Group (Fig. 5) and Chemical Group 5, charac-
terised by the highest and lowest Th and Cr concentrations respec-
tively contains both samples of the MN Tuff Fabric Group.
Of the four petrographic fabric classes composed of single
samples or ‘loners’, both the Schist Fabric and the Clay and Phyllite
Fabric were found to be chemically unique in the cluster analysis of
the 63 ceramic samples. Finally the two samples belonging to the
Grog Fabric Group appear as outliers and have no chemical affinities
between them or with the rest of the chemical groups identified.

3.3. Provenance of Neolithic ceramics from the Cave of the Cyclops

The 63 Neolithic ceramic samples analysed from the Cave of the

Cyclops are compositionally diverse. Several distinctive ceramic
paste recipes have been identified by our complementary petro-
graphic and chemical analyses. The high degree of correlation
between the results of the two methods suggests that the
compositional groups are real and archaeologically meaningful.
This compositional variability correlates also with differences in
typology. The occurrence at the Cave of the Cyclops of a range of
ceramic styles, produced from several different types of raw Fig. 6. Geological map of Youra (after Psarianos and Charalambakis, 1951; IGME, 1984).

materials, suggests that pottery from a variety of sources was

deposited here during Neolithic times. volcanic origin, such as those, which characterise the distinctive
The dominant limestone-tempered Neolithic ceramics (Lime- MN Tuff Fabric Group/Chemical Group 5, do not occur on Youra, or
stone Fabric Group) are compatible with an origin on Youra or Kyra- on the geologically identical, neighbouring island of Kyra-Panagia
Panagia, which are geologically more or less identical. The bulk of (IGME, 1984; Psarianos and Charalambakis, 1951) (Fig. 6). The
both islands consist of limestone of Jurassic and Cretaceous age ceramics of this composition are therefore non-local in origin. The
(Psarianos and Charalambakis, 1951). The Jurassic limestone on the nearest source of volcanic tuff to Youra is an isolated occurrence on
inaccessible east coast of Youra is described as being intensely northern Skyros (IGME, 1989) (Fig. 7). However, extensive acid and
tectonised and microfolded (IGME 1984) (Fig. 6), which corre- intermediate volcanic tuffs that are closer in composition to the
sponds well with the foliated limestone inclusions found in the ceramics of the Tuff Fabric Group occur extensively on the northern
ceramics. However, extensive deformation also occurs in the Aegean island of Agios Efstratios, as well as on Lemnos, Lesbos and
heavily faulted Cretaceous limestone that covers the majority of Gökçeada (Imbros) further to the east (IGME, 1983) (Fig. 7).
Youra and Kyra-Panagia. The rocky, barren nature of both islands Contemporaneous pottery, related stylistically to the LNI red
suggests that extensive clay sources are likely to be rare. Never- monochrome and burnished Tuff Fabric Group samples from Youra
theless, the dominance of the Limestone Fabric Group in both MN has been recovered from a low mound near the village of Uğurlu on
and LNI levels at the Cave of the Cyclops and its occurrence in the western part of Gökçeada (Erdoğu, 2003). Typological links also
a range of coarse- and fineware styles indicates that it could have exist between Youra and Poliochni on Lemnos in the form of white-
been produced locally. Indeed the Limestone Fabric Group contains on-dark LNI sherds that occur on both islands (Sampson, 1996a,
several examples of the canvas-painted red-on-white decoration 1998; Mavridis, 2008).
that is thought to be a local phenomenon to the northeastern Another distinctive petrographic composition that could not
Sporades (Katsarou-Tzeveleki, 2008). In their analysis of red-on- have originated on Youra is the Serpentinite Fabric Group/Chemical
white ceramics from Aghios Petros, Liritzis et al. (1991) identified Group 4. The two LN matt-painted samples belonging to this fabric
a number of chemical subgroups. Their finding seems to be class are unrelated petrographically to any other of the ceramics
mirrored by the chemical diversity of the Limestone Fabric Group in analysed. Their composition suggests an origin in an area con-
this study, within which three separate clusters (Chemical Groups taining serpentinite and metamorphic rocks. The nearest occur-
1a, 1b, 1c) have been identified. rences of serpentinite appear to be on the islands of Skopelos and
Several of the identified compositional groups are geologically Skyros in the Sporades (Fig. 7). Only small bodies of this rock type
incompatible with a source in the local area. For example, rocks of have been found on Skopelos (IGME, 1995). On Skyros, however,
1050 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

Fig. 7. Probable origins of Neolithic ceramics analysed from the Cave of the Cyclops in this study. Geology (after IGME, 1975, 1983, 1984, 1986, 1989, 1995).

serpentinite forms part of an ophiolitic complex in the centre of the Chemical analysis indicates that the seven samples of the
island that also contains mica schists (IGME, 1989). Ophiolite bodies Phyllite Fabric Group may not be as closely related as is suggested
also occur in many places on the mainland, such as Thessaly (IGME, by their petrography. It is therefore possible that they came from
1983) (Fig. 7). Indeed, Schneider et al. (1991) found that coarse more than one source. Furthermore, the rare occurrence in thin
Neolithic ceramics from Soufli contained rounded inclusions of section of altered basic igneous inclusions suggests that at least
serpentinite, alongside metamorphic rocks such as gneisses and some of these samples could not have originated on Youra or Kyra-
mica schists, and Hitsiou (2003) recorded rare serpentiniferous Panagia. Phyllites and other low-grade metamorphic rocks occur on
ceramics at Dimini. Serpentinite commonly derives from the several other islands in the Sporades, including Skopelos, Skyros,
alteration of ultrabasic igneous rocks, such as peridotite. Rocks of Skiathos and Alonnissos, as well as on Euboea and in Thessaly
this composition occur in many areas of northern Euboea (IGME, (IGME, 1975, 1983, 1989, 1995). The co-occurrence in some Phyllite
1983). Therefore this group of ceramics has a number of possible Fabric Group samples of phyllite, altered basic igneous inclusions
sources in neighbouring islands and on the mainland. and rocks of argillaceous and arenaceous sedimentary origin is
Several petrographic groups and individual samples within the compatible with the geology of north-western Skopelos, which
Cave of the Cyclops ceramics are characterised by material of contains metabasalts, metaclastics and low-grade metamorphic
metamorphic origin. Most common among these are several MN rocks (IGME, 1995).
and LN coarseware ceramics of the Phyllite Fabric Group. The fine- Late Neolithic samples 30 (Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 2), 53
grained biotite, chlorite and muscovite-rich metamorphic rock (Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 1) and 64 (Schist Fabric) are charac-
fragments that characterise these ceramics are geologically terised in thin section by inclusions deriving from schistose
compatible with in the ‘Kalamaki-Mortero System’, which has metamorphic rocks. Schists do not appear to be present on Youra or
outcrops on both Youra and Kyra-Panagia (Fig. 6). This group of Kyra-Panagia, but occur on several other islands in the Sporades
low-grade metamorphic rocks contains phyllites of various including Skyros and Skopelos (IGME, 1989, 1995) (Fig. 7). Neolithic
compositions (IGME, 1984). However, on both islands, this meta- ceramics containing schist and quartzite inclusions have been
morphic unit outcrops in steep rocky sea cliffs on the east coast, reported from several Thessalian sites including Sesklo (Maniatis
where Jurassic strata are exposed. As such it may not have been et al., 1988), Achilleion (Ellis, 1989; Bjork, 1995), Soufli (Schneider
easily accessible from the known Neolithic sites on the western side et al., 1991) and Dimini (Hitsiou, 2003). Unfortunately, the quartz-
of both islands. mica schist inclusions in samples 30 and 64 contain little additional
 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052 1051

evidence that could be suggestive of a more precise origin. groups are diagnostic petrographically in terms of provenance,
However, the occurrence of schistose inclusions with feldspar their strong correlation with previously analysed ceramics from
porphyroblasts in the Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 1 (sample 53) Dimini suggests that they originate in Thessaly, some 100 km from
may link this sample to the schists of the ‘Glossa Unit’ on Skopelos, Youra. It is important to note that all these fragments belong to
which also contains feldspar (IGME, 1995). The heavily deformed, pattern-painted vessels.
quartz-rich cataclastic inclusions in Polycrystalline Quartz Fabrics 1 Other exotic ceramic compositions recorded in the assemblage
and 2 (samples 53 and 30) could originate from one of several at the Cave of the Cyclops include a distinctive group dominated by
metamorphic units in the Sporades, although breccias have been serpentine and another characterised by volcanic tuff, neither of
reported specifically from an extensive schistose formation on which could have been produced on Youra or Kyra-Panagia. The
Skyros (IGME, 1989). location of the nearest sizeable sources of serpentinite to Youra
The five matt-painted LN ceramic samples belonging to Fine suggest that matt-painted ceramics of this tight LNI petrographic/
Mica and Quartz Fabric Group/Chemical Group 2 may also have chemical group could have been transported at least 50-75 km,
been made of raw materials with a metamorphic origin. Late from either Skyros, Euboea or Thessaly. Similarly, the distinctive
Neolithic brown-on-cream pottery with an almost identical tuffaceous MN red monochrome ceramics that occur at the Cave of
petrographic composition have been analysed by Hitsiou (2003) the Cyclops must also have been imported from a distant source,
from Dimini, Makrygialos, Agrosykia and Giannitsa (Fig. 1). These with the volcanic islands of the northeastern Aegean (100-150 km)
ceramics are thought to have been produced close to Dimini and as likely candidates.
exchanged over long distances. It seems that there are several sources of fabrics characterised
Ceramics characterised by the presence of grog in thin section by metamorphic inclusions. While the LNI Phyllite Fabric Group is
are difficult to provenance because of the non-diagnostic nature of geologically compatible with a production centre within the
their dominant inclusions. An exception is the Calcareous Grog northern Sporades, significant variation in their chemistry could
Fabric Group, which bears strong petrographic similarities to Late indicate that these typologically similar coarse and burnished
Neolithic ceramics analysed by Hitsiou (2003) from Dimini. The ceramics arrived at Youra from more than one source. Previous
presence of rare inclusions such as phyllite (Grog and Phyllite Fabric compositional studies of material from Neolithic sites on the The-
Group) and limestone (Calcareous Grog Fabric Group) in some ssalian plain suggest that this could be the origin of some of the
grog-tempered ceramics might link them to other samples with metamorphic ceramic compositions recorded in the Cave of the
more certain origin. Similarly, LN burnished sample 18 (Clay and Cyclops assemblage.
Phyllite Fabric) may be related to the ceramics of the Phyllite Fabric This picture of diverse sources for the Youra ceramics would
Group, and sample 30 (Polycrystalline Quartz Fabric 2), which seem to indicate an active exchange of both coarse and painted
contains a single distinctive foliated limestone inclusion was pottery along the Northern Sporades, from Thessaly and possibly
probably produced in the same general area as the dominant Euboea at the western end, through the islands to volcanic sources,
Limestone Fabric ceramics. which are likely to be either Gökçeada or Lemnos in the east (Fig. 7).
Based upon the possible source areas for the Cyclops Cave It appears that such movement of pottery is well underway as early
samples, there appears to be a higher proportion of exotic ceramics as the beginning of the sixth millennium BC and is not a product
in LNI than MN, with a corresponding reduction in the ‘local’ Lime- only of the later phase of the Neolithic. Instead it should be
stone Fabric Group within the samples analysed. Short- and long- conceived as a basic component of the island identity, ultimately
range imports occur in both phases of the site, although some depending on assimilation, connectivity and culture blending for its
distinct differences in the exact sources of the ceramics may be existence.
present. Our analysis of the Neolithic ceramics from the Cave of the
Cyclops, along with recent typological discussion (Sampson, 2008b;
4. Discussion and conclusions Katsarou-Tzeveleki, 2008, 2009) would seem to suggest the exis-
tence of a diverse pottery assemblage. This has important impli-
The combined petrographic and chemical analysis of the MN cations for current theories on the function of the cave (Sampson,
and LNI ceramic samples from the Cave of the Cyclops has revealed 2008c) and its role in possible ritual activities (Katsarou-Tzeveleki,
a compositionally diverse assemblage with a range of different 2008; Tomkins, 2009). Perhaps the diversity of the assemblage
broadly local and off-island sources. This evidence adds to the shows not only the regular movement of ceramic material culture
emerging picture of widespread pottery exchange and consump- at that time, but specifically the nature of deposition by ships
tion during the Neolithic of Greece. passing Youra, before leaving the Sporades and heading to the
In terms of local production, the strongest candidate for a source eastern Aegean and Asia Minor. Whatever mechanism is respon-
on Youra or Kyra-Panagia is the dominant Limestone Fabric Group, sible for the appearance of exotic non-local ceramics in the rich
which includes the characteristic red-on-white vessels that are also assemblage of the Cave of the Cyclops, the detailed compositional
found at Aghios Petros. It is this distinctive pottery, which is taken investigation presented here has demonstrated unequivocally that
to join the settlement of Aghios Petros with the Cave site on Youra. significant movement of pottery is already taking place in the
They are likely to represent a local pottery tradition of this part of Aegean during the Neolithic.
the northern Sporades, whose clay recipes and choices of raw
materials remain more or less unchanged between the MN and LNI
Acknowledgements
phases at the Cave, reflecting significant continuity in ceramic
technology over some 1500 years.
The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for
In addition, the project has found evidence of pottery imported
their helpful comments and suggestions.
from a variety of geological sources, some of which can be corre-
lated with probable production areas. Petrographic analysis has
indicated close compositional matches between the well-defined Appendix. Supplementary data
LNI Fine Mica and Quartz Fabric Group/Chemical Group 2, the MN
Calcareous Grog Fabric Group and contemporary material from Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in
Thessaly identified by Hitsiou (2003). Whilst neither of these the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.12.005
1052 P. Quinn et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 1042–1052

References Mylona, D., 2003. The exploitation of fish resources in the Mesolithic Sporades: Fish
remains from the Cave of Cyclope, Youra. In: Galanidou, N., Perlès, C. (Eds.), The
Greek Mesolithic: Problems and Perspectives. British School at Athens Studies
Aitchinson, J., 1986. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data. Chapman and
10. British School at Athens, London, pp. 181–188.
Hall, London.
Perlès, C., 1992. Systems of exchange and organization of production in Neolithic
Bjork, C., 1995. Early Pottery in Greece: A Technological and Functional Analysis of
Greece. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 5, 115–164.
the Evidence from Neolithic Achilleion, Thessaly. Paul Astroms Forlag, Jonsered,
Perlès, C., Vitelli, K.D., 1999. Craft specialization in the Neolithic of Greece. In:
Sweden.
Halstead, P. (Ed.), Neolithic Society in Greece. Sheffield Studies in Aegean
Buxeda i Garrigós, J., 1999. Alteration and contamination of archaeological ceramics:
Archaeology 2. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, pp. 96–107.
the perturbation problem. Journal of Archaeological Science 26, 295–313.
Psarianos, P., Charalambakis, S., 1951. Geological investigation of the island of
Buxeda i Garrigós, J., Kilikoglou, V., 2003. Total variation as a measure of variability
Yioura. Praktika Akademia Athinon 26, 237–258.
in chemical datasets. In: van Zelst, L. (Ed.), Patterns and Process: a Festschrift in
Sampson, A., 1996a. The Cyclope’s cave at Youra Alonnessos. In:
Honor of Edward V. Sayre. Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and
Papathanassopoulos, G. (Ed.), Neolithic Culture in Greece. Museum of Cycladic
Education, Suitland, MD, pp. 185–198.
Art, Athens, pp. 58–59.
Carter, T., 2009. L’obsidienne égéenne: caractérisation, utilisation et culture. In:
Sampson, A., 1996b. Excavation at the cave of Cyclope on Youra, Alonnessos. In:
Moncel, M.-H., Fröhlich, F. (Eds.), L’Homme et le précieux. Matières minérales
Alram-Stern, E. (Ed.), Das Neolithikum in Griechenland, mit Ausnahme von
précieuses de la préhistoire à aujourd’hui. BAR International Series 1934.
Kreta und Zypern, Die Ägäische Frühzeit, 2. Serie. Forschungsbericht
Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 199–212.
1975–1993, 1. Austrian Academy of Science, Vienna, pp. 507–520.
Cuomo di Caprio, N., Vaughan, S.J., 1993. Differentiating grog (chamotte) from natural
Sampson, A., 1996c. La grotte du Cyclope; un abri de pêcheurs préhistoriques?
argillaceous inclusions in ceramic thin sections. Archeomaterials 7, 21–40.
Archeologia 328, 54–59.
Efstratiou, N., 1985. Aghios Petros: A Neolithic Site in the Northern Sporades. Aegean
Sampson, A., 1998. The Neolithic and Mesolithic occupation of the Cave of Cyclope,
Relationships during the Neolithic of the 5th Millennium. British Archaeological
Youra, Alonnessos, Greece. Annual of the British School at Athens 93, 1–22.
Reports, International Series, 241. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.
Sampson, A. (Ed.), 2008a. The Cave of the Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic
Ellis, L., 1989. Petrographic analysis of the ceramics. In: Gimbutas, M., Winn, D.,
Networks in the Northern Aegean, Greece: I. Intra-site Analysis, Local Indus-
Shimabuku, D. (Eds.), Achilleion: A Neolithic Settlement in Central Greece,
tries, and Regional Site Distribution. INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA.
6400–5600 B.C. Monumenta Archaeologica 14. Institute of Archaeology.
Sampson, A., 2008b. Pottery analysis of the Neolithic period. In: Sampson, A. (Ed.),
University of California, Los Angeles, CA, pp. 165–169.
The Cave of the Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic Networks in the Northern
Erdoğu, B., 2003. Visualizing Neolithic landscape: the early settled communities in
Aegean, Greece: I. Intra-site Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional Site
Western Anatolia and Eastern Aegean Islands. European Journal of Archaeology
Distribution. INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 17–67.
6, 7–23.
Sampson, A., 2008c. Conclusions. In: Sampson, A. (Ed.), The Cave of the Cyclops:
Hitsiou, E., 2003. Production and circulation of the Late Neolithic pottery from
Mesolithic and Neolithic Networks in the Northern Aegean, Greece: I. Intra-site
Makrygialos (phase II), Macedonia, N. Greece. Doctoral thesis, University of
Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional Site Distribution. INSTAP Academic
Sheffield.
Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 199–226.
IGME, 1975. Geological Map of Greece 1:50 000 – Alonnissos-Scantzoura Islands.
Schneider, G., Knoll, H., Gallis, C.J., Demoule, J.-P., 1991. Production and distribution
Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration, Athens.
of coarse and fine pottery in Neolithic Thessaly, Greece. In: Pernicka, E.,
IGME, 1983. Geological Map of Greece 1:500 000. Institute of Geology and Mineral
Wagner, G.A. (Eds.), Archaeometry ’90. Proceedings of the 27th Symposium on
Exploration, Athens.
Archaeometry, Heidelberg, April 2–6. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, pp. 513–522.
IGME, 1984. Geological Map of Greece 1:50 000 – Kira Panayia Island. Institute of
Schneider, G., Knoll, H., Gallis, K., Demoule, J.-P., 1994. Production and Circulation of
Geology and Mineral Exploration, Athens.
Neolithic Thessalian Pottery: Chemical and Mineralogical Analyses. Thessalia.
IGME, 1986. Geological Map of Greece 1:50 000 – Volos Sheet. Institute of Geology
Dekapende hronia arheoloyikis erevnas, 1975–1990. Apotelezmata ke proop-
and Mineral Exploration, Athens.
tikes. Praktika diethnus sinedriu Lion, 17–22 April 1990, 1. Athina, pp. 61–70.
IGME, 1989. Geological Map of Greece 1:50 000 – Skyros Island. Institute of Geology
Tomkins, P.D., 2008. Time, space and the reinvention of the Cretan Neolithic. In:
and Mineral Exploration, Athens.
Tomkins, P.D., Isaakidou, V. (Eds.), Escaping the Labyrinth: The Cretan Neolithic
IGME, 1995. Geological Map of Greece 1:50 000 – Skopelos Island. Institute of
in Context. Sheffield Studies in Aegean Archaeology 2. Oxbow Books, Oxford,
Geology and Mineral Exploration, Athens.
pp. 21–48.
Kaczanowska, M., Kozlowski, J.K., 2008. Chipped stone artefact. In: Sampson, A.
Tomkins, P.D., 2009. Domesticity by default. Ritualization and cave-use in the
(Ed.), The Cave of the Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic Networks in the
Neolithic Aegean. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 28, 125–153.
Northern Aegean, Greece: I. Intra-site Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional
Tomkins, P.D., Day, P.M., 2001. Production and exchange of the earliest ceramic
Site Distribution. INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 169–178.
vessels in the Aegean: a view from Early Neolithic Knossos, Crete. Antiquity 75,
Katsarou, S., 2001. I Keramiki me Erythra Kosmimata apo ta Stromata this Mesis
259–260.
Neolithikis tou Spilaiou tou Kyklopa, in: Sampson, A. (Ed.), Archaiologiki Erevna
Tomkins, P.D., Day, P.M., Kilikoglou, V., 2004. Knossos and the earlier Neolithic
stis Voreies. Sporades, Alonnessos, pp. 11–31.
landscape of the Herakleion Basin. In: Cadogan, G., Hatzaki, E., Vasilakis, A.
Katsarou-Tzeveleki, S., 2008. Middle Neolithic weavers paint: red patterns as
(Eds.), Knossos: Palace, City, State. British School at Athens Studies 12. British
markers of the local group’s identity. In: Sampson, A. (Ed.), The Cave of the
School at Athens, London, pp. 51–59.
Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic Networks in the Northern Aegean, Greece: I.
Vitelli, K.D., 1993a. Franchthi Neolithic Pottery. 1: Classification and Ceramic Phases
Intra-site Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional Site Distribution. INSTAP
1 and 2. Excavations at Franchthi Cave, Greece, Fascicle 8. Indiana University
Academic Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 69–110.
Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN.
Katsarou-Tzeveleki, S., 2009. Cave of Cyclops: contribution of the painted pottery to
Vitelli, K.D., 1993b. Power to the potters: comment on Perlès’ ’Systems of exchange
the discussion on Middle Neolithic Symbolisms. In: Mazarakis-Ainian, A. (Ed.),
and organization of production in Neolithic Greece’. Journal of Mediterranean
Archaeologiko Ergo Thessalias kai Stereas Elladas 2, Praktika Epistimonikis
Archaeology 6, 243–253.
Synantisis, Volos 16.3-19.3.2006, Vol. I. Volos. Ministry of Culture, University of
Weigand, P.C., Harbottle, G., Sayre, E.V., 1977. Turquoise sources and source analysis:
Thessaly, pp. 53–59.
Mesoamerica and the southwestern USA. In: Earle, T.K., Ericson, J.E. (Eds.),
Kilikoglou, V., Grimanis, A., Tsolakidou, A., Hein, A., Malamidou, D., Tsirtsoni, Z.,
Exchange Systems in Prehistory. Academic Press, New York, pp. 15–34.
2007. Neutron activation patterning of archaeological materials at the National
Whitbread, I.K., 1986. The characterization of argillaceous inclusions in ceramic thin
Center for Scientific Research ‘Demokritos’: the case of black-on-red Neolithic
sections. Archaeometry 28, 79–88.
pottery from Macedonia, Greece. Archaeometry 49, 301–319.
Whitbread, I.K., 1989. A proposal for the systematic description of thin sections
Liritzis, Y., Orphanidis-Georgiadis, L., Efstratiou, N., 1991. Neolithic Thessaly and the
towards the study of ancient ceramic technology. In: Maniatis, Y. (Ed.),
Sporades. Remarks on cultural contacts between Sesklo, Dimini and Aghios
Archaeometry: Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium. Elsevier,
Petros based on trace element analysis and archaeological evidence. Oxford
Amsterdam, pp. 127–138.
Journal of Archaeology 10, 307–313.
Whitbread, I.K., 1995. Greek Transport Amphorae: a Petrological and Archaeological
Maniatis, Y., Perdikatsis, V., Kotsakis, K., 1988. Assessment of in-site variability of
Study. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper, 4. British School at Athens.
pottery from Sesklo, Thessaly. Archaeometry 30, 264–274.
Wijnen, M., 1994.Neolithic pottery from Sesklo – technological aspects, in: The-
Mavridis, F., 2008. Late Neolithic painted and burnished decorated wares identity.
ssalia. Dekapende Hronia Arheoloyikis Erevnas, 1975–1990. Apotelezmata ke
In: Sampson, A. (Ed.), The Cave of the Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic
Prooptikes. Praktika Diethnus Sinedriu Lion, 17–22 April 1990, 1. Athina,
Networks in the Northern Aegean, Greece. Intra-site Analysis, Local Industries,
pp. 149–155.
and Regional Site Distribution, Volume I. INSTAP Academic Press, Philadelphia,
Yiouni, P., 1996. I Simboli ton Arheometrikon erevnon sti meleti tis neolithikis
PA, pp. 111–121.
keramikis, in: Stratis, I., Vavelidis, M., Kotsakis, K., Tsokas, G., Tsoukala, E. (Eds.),
Moundrea-Agrafioti, A., 2003. Mesolithic fish hooks from the Cave of Cyclope,
Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium of the Hellenic Archaeometrical Society,
Youra. In: Galanidou, N., Perlès, C. (Eds.), The Greek Mesolithic: Problems and
26–28 March 1993. Archaeometrical and Archaeological Research in Macedonia
Perspectives. British School at Athens Studies 10. British School at Athens,
and Thrace. Hellenic Archaeometrical Society, Thessaloniki, pp. 135–148.
London, pp. 131–141.

View publication stats