Archaeology and Heinrich Schliemann 2012

Addendum: Troy VII and the north-eastern Balkans in light of new research 57replacement of the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeni cultureby the new cultures of the “Early Hallstatt” (HaA-B) period, which makes it likely that a (partial) synchronismexisted between the late Noua-Coslogeniculture and the emerging Babadag culture, whichwere in contact in neighboring areas. The occurrencein Troy first of the Barbarian Ware (in the VII b 1phase), and then also of the Knobbed Ware (in the VIIb 2 phase) would therefore not be the result of severalstrictly successive “waves” (of migration), as previouslythought (see above), but the consequence of aquasi continuous influx to the Aegean of certain populationgroups belonging to the above-mentioned culturalareas. 58This pattern could also account for the apparentchronological incongruity noticed in Korakou (NorthernPeloponnesos), where, in an archaeological contextdated with early LH III C pottery, there werefound both pottery similar to that of the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeniculture and Coarse Ware belongingto Troy VII b 1 (pottery group I), and ceramics resemblingthat of the Babadag I culture and KnobbedWare belonging to Troy VII b 2 phase (potterygroups II and IV). 59 As we showed on other occasions,the shapes of the Korakou pottery group II (especiallythe high swinging handle cups) are similar to thosespecific to the Babadag culture; however, as far as theornamentation is concerned, there are no concentriccircles with tangent lines, which are specific to theBabadag culture (and present on the Knobbed Wareof Troy). Actually, the pottery group II from Korakoubest resembles the “Pre-Babadag” and Tamaoanitype pottery. 60 We believe that the foreign potteryfrom Korakou, as a whole, may be connected to thelate Coslogeni culture and/or to the emergingBabadag culture, which integrated some features ofthe Coslogeni culture.Returning to Troy, lately there have been opinionsnoticing possible North-Western Pontic influences inthe domain of architecture, which may be even moresignificant than the changes remarked in the productionor import of portable artifacts. 61 We are talking ofa new building technique: use of flat stones placed((vertically at the foundation of walls (the so-calledorthostates). This technique is employed exceptionallyin the Troy VII b1 phase, is specific to the VII b 2phase and disappears in the VII b 3 phase, whichproves its intrusive nature. 62 Prototypes of this buildingtechnique may be found in the Northern Ponticsteppe areas, in the stone architecture of the Catacomb,Mnogovalikovaya, Sabatinovka and Belozerkacultures. As for the Coslogeni culture, the stone architectureis at present proven only by way of exceptionin Durankulak (Southern Dobrogea, Bulgaria), andthis is the North-Western Pontic site nearest to Troy,where orthostates were used. 63 Starting with theinformation mentioned above, connections have beenmade between the spreading of the orthostate buildingtechnique in Troy VII b2 and the occurrence ofthe Knobbed Ware in this phase. 64The weakness of this reasoning is the fact that theCoslogeni cultural environment, which is the presupposedorigin of the orthostate technique, is the sourceof the Barbarian Ware, characteristic of Troy VII b 1phase, while the Babadag culture, connected to theKnobbed Ware in Troy VII b 2, is not familiar withstone architecture (except of covering with flat stonesthe earth walls of some defense works). This lack ofconcordance (that reminds us of J.B. Rutter’s dilemma,related to the Korakou foreign pottery), may besettled only if we admit, as suggested above, the existenceof certain complex interconnections (and atleast a partial synchronism) between the late Coslogeniculture and the emerging Babadag culture. Thesimultaneous occurrence of Barbarian Ware andfibulae in Troy during the VII b 1 phase, may be anothersign of these contacts, as no certain fibulae discoverieshave been acknowledged in the Noua-Sabatinovka-Coslogeniculture. This new type of dress ornamentspread in that area during the following “EarlyHallstatt” period, with the first Western (Central-European) and Southern (Mediterranean) influences,conventionally dated in the Ha A phase. 65Since we have no other direct and unequivocalproof, we could rely on conventional radiocarbondates, in order to be able to set relative chronology58. See La′ szlό 1990/1997, 92-93; 1999, 28-29; 2003, 108-109.59. Rutter 1975.60. La′ szlό 1999, 30; see also La′ szlό 1986.61. Pieniazek-Sikora 2003.62. Pieniazek-Sikora 2003, 32, 36; Becks 2003, 47-49.63. Pieniazek-Sikora 2003, 31-33.64. Pieniazek-Sikora 2003, 35-36.65. About the “early Hallstattian”, “western” influences,eventually originating from the Banat in the genesis ofBabadag culture, see La′ szlό 1997a.