Plants and People in Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Northern Greece: An archaeobotanical investigation 9781841716169, 9781407326757

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
Contents
Acknowledgements
List of figures
List of tables
List of plates
Chapter 1. Introduction
Chapter 2. The area under study: location and environment
Chapter 3. Neolithic and bronze age settlement in northern Greece
Chapter 4. The sites under study
Chapter 5. Methods
Chapter 6. The study of charred plant remains
Chapter 7. Sources of plant material: disentangling taphonomic processes
Chapter 8. Prehistoric plant exploitation in northern Greece: a synthesis
Chapter 9. The assemblages in their regional context: concluding remarks
References
Appendix

Citation preview

BAR  S1258  2004  VALAMOTI  PLANTS AND PEOPLE IN LATE NEOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE NORTHERN GREECE

B A R

Plants and People in Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Northern Greece An archaeobotanical investigation

Soultana Maria Valamoti

BAR International Series 1258 2004

Plants and People in Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Northern Greece An archaeobotanical investigation

Soultana Maria Valamoti

BAR International Series 1258 2004

ISBN 9781841716169 paperback ISBN 9781407326757 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841716169 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

To Bibis, fasolaki and boubou

"Earth feet, loam feet, lifted in country mirth Mirth of those long since under earth Nourishing the corn. Keeping time, Keeping the rhythm in their dancing As in their living in the living seasons The time of the seasons and the constellations The time of milking and the time of harvest The time of the coupling of man and woman And that of beasts. Feet rising and falling. Eating and drinking. Dung and Death. Dawn points, and another day Prepares........." extract from T.S.Elliot, East Coker, Four Quartets T.S.Elliot, 1963. Collected Poems 1909-1962. London, Faber and Faber

Contents Acknowledgements List of figures List of tables List of plates

x xi xii xiii

Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. The area under study: location and environment 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.3.1. 2.3.2.

Boundaries and physical features Climate Vegetation Modern vegetation Vegetation history

Chapter 3. Neolithic and bronze age settlement in northern Greece 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.3.1. 3.3.2. 3.3.3. 3.4. 3.4.1. 3.4.2. 3.4.3. 3.5.

Settlement type: extended sites and tells Settlement pattern Subsistence: the exploitation of plant and animal resources Arable agriculture Wild plant resources Animal husbandry The goals of plant/animal exploitation diversification, specialisation, intensification Diversification Specialisation Intensification Agricultural production and land use at extended sites and tells

Chapter 4. The sites under study 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5.

5 5 6 7 7 8 11 11 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 16 17 17 19 19 20 21

Makriyalos Mandalo Arkadikos Dikili Tash Makri

Chapter 5. Methods 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.3.1. 5.3.1.1. 5.3.1.2. 5.4. 5.5. 5.5.1. 5.5.2. 5.5.3. 5.5.4. 5.5.5. 5.6. 5.6.1. 5.6.2.

1

25 25 25 25 25 25 26 26 27 27 29 29 29 31 37 37 37

Sampling in the field Processing Sampling in the Laboratory Sub-sampling Sample choice Sample size Sorting Identification Cereals Legumes Other crops Fruit Wild species other than fruit Quantification Counting Data preparation

vii

5.6.2.1. 5.6.2.2. 5.6.2.3. 5.6.2.4. 5.6.2.5. 5.7. 5.7.1. 5.7.2.

Calculating total counts Amalgamations of taxa and samples Choice of samples to include in analyses Choice of species to include in analyses Calculations of ratios and density Analytical methods Correspondence analysis of sample composition Spatial analysis of sample composition

Chapter 6. The study of charred plant remains 6.1. 6.1.1. 6.1.2. 6.2. 6.2.1. 6.2.2. 6.2.3.

Sources of charred plant material The taphonomic sequence Preservation by charring Approaches to the study of charred plant material Crop husbandry practices Crop Processing The study of dung

Chapter 7. Sources of plant material: disentangling taphonomic processes 7.1. 7.2. 7.2.1. 7.2.1.1. 7.2.1.2. 7.2.2. 7.2.3. 7.3. 7.3.1. 7.3.1.1. 7.3.1.2. 7.3.2. 7.3.3. 7.4. 7.4.1. 7.4.1.1. 7.4.1.2. 7.4.2. 7.4.3. 7.5. 7.5.1. 7.5.1.1. 7.5.1.2. 7.5.2. 7.5.3. 7.6. 7.7.

Introduction Makri sample composition Crops, fruits, nuts Correspondence analysis Spatial analysis Wild/weed species Conclusions The Arkadikos samples Crops, fruits, nuts Correspondence analysis Spatial analysis Wild/weed species Conclusion The Makriyalos samples Crops, fruits, nuts Correspondence analysis Spatial analysis Wild/weed species Conclusion The Dikili Tash samples Crops, fruits, nuts Correspondence analysis Spatial analysis Wild/weed species Conclusions Sources of archaeobotanical material at Mandalo General conclusions

Chapter 8. Prehistoric plant exploitation in northern Greece: a synthesis 8.1. 8.1.1. 8.1.2. 8.1.2.1. 8.1.2.2.

Crops, fruits, nuts and other useful plants Causes of variation: the depositional and post-depositional biases The choice of crops and other utilised plants Glume versus free-threshing wheat The predominance of einkorn over emmer viii

37 37 37 42 42 49 49 49 51 51 51 52 52 52 54 56 59 59 60 60 60 61 62 67 73 73 73 73 87 88 88 88 88 88 101 102 102 102 102 104 104 108 108 108 111 111 113 113 113 114

8.1.2.3. 8.1.2.4. 8.1.2.5. 8.1.2.6. 8.1.2.7. 8.2. 8.2.1. 8.2.1.1. 8.2.1.2. 8.2.1.3. 8.2.1.4. 8.2.2. 8.2.3. 8.2.4. 8.2.5. 8.3. 8.3.1. 8.3.1.1. 8.3.1.2. 8.3.1.3. 8.3.1.4.

The status of barley The absence of spelt and millet The importance of pulses Flax cultivation in neolithic northern Greece The diversity of crops and other utilised plants Plant use Food versus fodder The evidence from species The evidence from processing Evidence from depositional context The significance of feeding grain and fruits to livestock Use of fruits/nuts and especially grape The uses of flax in neolithic northern Greece Medicinal/aromatic plants Sources of fuel Agricultural practice Crop husbandry Sowing time Rotation Manuring Weeding, harvesting or processing? Investigating the paucity of weed seeds in the assemblages 8.3.2. Fruits and nuts: harvests from the wild or cultivation? 8.3.3. Animal grazing 8.3.3.1. Animal feeding patterns at Mandalo and Arkadikos 8.3.3.2. Animal feeding patterns at Makri 8.3.3.3. Animal feeding patterns at Makriyalos

Chapter 9. The assemblages in their regional context: concluding remarks 9.1. 9.2. 9.3. 9.4. 9.5. 9.6. 9.7.

Animal feeding in late neolithic and early bronze age northern Greece Seasonal or year round occupation? Diversification versus specialisation in prehistoric northern Greece Scale of land use Tell and extended sites compared Beyond subsistence Concluding remarks

115 115 115 115 115 116 116 116 116 116 117 117 117 117 118 121 121 121 121 122 122 123 123 124 124 125 127 127 128 128 130 131 132 133

References

135

Appendix.

147 147 155 163 181

Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4.

Charred seeds from Makri Charred seeds from Arkadikos Charred seeds from Makriyalos Charred seeds from Dikili Tash

ix

Acknowledgements This book is based on my Ph.D. Thesis, submitted at Sheffield University in 2001. Although in retrospect several things could have been enriched and expanded, I resisted the temptation in fear that this would render the publication of a substantial archaeobotanical data set a story with no ending.

Karanikas, Emily Latrobe-Bateman, Cathy Hembury, Sarah Lindsay, Vicky Seddon, Maggy Cemble, Nicky Gilding, Janette and Ian. For patient help with field-notebooks I wish to thank Dr Gianna Anagnostou (Arkadikos), Dr Nikos Efstratiou (Makri), Mrs Dimitra Malamidou (Dikili Tash), Mrs Evi Papadopoulou (Mandalo), Mrs Maria Pappa (Makriyalos), Dr Kosmas Touloumis (Arkadikos). The material studied in the thesis was partly examined at the Toumba Excavations Laboratoty (University of Thessaloniki) and at the Chemistry Laboratory of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki. I thank Prof. Kostas Kotsakis, Prof. Stelios Andreou and Dr Efi Mirtsiou for allowing access to these facilities.

This research was undertaken with financial help provided mainly by the University of Sheffield and the A.G.Leventis Foundation. Funding was also provided by the British School at Athens for identification work, by the Institute for Aegean Prehistory for residue sorting and by the British Federation for Women Graduates for travelling expenses. The main financial body throughout my study, however, has been my family, in particular my grandfather and my husband, whom I deeply thank.

I wish to thank the following people for stimulating discussions and for sending useful references: Dr S. Andreou, Prof. D. Babalonas Dr C. Bakels, Prof. P. Buckland, Mrs A. Bogaard, Mr Chouliaras, Dr Eleftherochorinos, Dr M. Fotiadis, Mrs L. Gourgioti, Dr P. Halstead, Dr Y. Hamilakis, Dr R. Karousou, Mr K. Kasvikis, Dr H. Kroll, Dr I. Mainland, Dr P. Monk, Dr M. Nesbitt, Dr C. Palmer, Dr S. Samaras, Dr D. Samuel, Dr A. Sarpaki, Dr A. Sherratt, Mr G. Toufexis, Dr M. van der Veen, Dr V. Kyriatzi, Dr M. Ntinou, Mrs M. Pappa, Dr L. Dr N. Samaras, Prof. V. Papanastasis, L. Peña-Chocarro, Dr S. Riehl, Mrs K. Skourtopoulou, Mrs D. Urem-Kotsos, Mr D. Valamotis, Dr A. Zamanis, Dr L. Zapata. My friend Dr Arturo Vargas-Escobar I thank for his help with using the image analysis facilities at the Dept. of Archaeology in Thessaloniki. Nikos Valasiadis was responsible for digital editing of the book.

First of all I wish to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr Glynis Jones for introducing me to the principles of archaeobotany sixteen years ago and for patiently providing her help and advice during the course of my Ph.D. on which this book is based. This book owes a great deal to her. I am also grateful to Dr Mike Charles for help in every aspect of work involved in my thesis and for his support when confidence levels became low. I deeply thank Prof. Kostas Kotsakis for introducing me to archaeology nineteen years ago and generating my interest in archaeobotany; Had it not been for him, I might not have taken this long and winding path… Many thanks go to all the Greek archaeologists who provided the means to retrieve the archaeobotanical material considered in this book and entrusted me with its study: Mr Manthos Besios, Prof. G. Chourmouziadis, Prof. Nikos Efstratiou, Ms Dina Kalintzi, Prof. Kostas Kotsakis, Dr Chaido Koukouli, Prof. Katerina Papanthimou-Papaefthymiou, Ms Maria Pappa, Ms. Katerina Peristeri, Prof. Angeliki Pilali; I hope I have lived up to their expectations. I am grateful to all the people who helped with flotation and residue sorting. Had it not been for them I would still be sorting my samples. Neil Ruttledge, Andy Schofield, Eliza Anagnostopoulou, Vicky Ioannidou, Maria Giannelou, Maria Psarou, Charis

A million thanks to my mother Vasso, for providing childcare during our stay in England and general help throughout the duration of the PhD. I wish to deeply thank my children, Dimitris and Vassiliki, who patiently, from day one of their existence, put up with a mother who was under stress most of the time and abroad some of the time (unfortunately they had no other choice!). Lastly, but mostly and above all, I wish to thank Giorgos Kapetanakis, my dearest companion throughout this decade, who despite my dedication to archaeobotany, decided to join his life with mine and suffer the consequences!

x

List of figures 1.1. Map of Greece showing the regions of Macedonia and Thrace 1.2. Makriyalos (4), Mandalo (8), Arkadikos (19), Dikili Tash (20), Makri (22) and other prehistoric sites of northern Greece mentioned in the text

1

2.1. Geomorphological map of Macedonia and Thrace 2.2. Climatic regions of northern Greece: A. The cental European climatic region, B. The north Aegean and its islands, C. The Black Sea coast and Thrace (after Polunin 1987) 2.3. Location of sites represented by pollen records from Greece (after Athanasiadis and Gerasimidis 1995)

5

4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4.

4.5. 4.6. 4.7. 4.8.

General plan and estimated extent of the site of Makriyalos (after Pappa and Besios 1999) Excavated areas of Makriyalos I and general plans of these areas (after Pappa and Besios 1999) Excavated areas of Makriyalos II and general plans of these areas (after Pappa and Besios 1999) Areas of Makriyalos represented by archaeobotanical samples studied in this book: (a) and (b) ditch A, (c) pit Π, (d) the “megaron” area, (e) area of hearths and ovens, (f) the area south of hearths and ovens (plan after Besios and Pappa 1998). The excavated trenches at the site of Arkadikos during the 1991/1992 excavation seasons Topographic plan of Dikili Tash showing the excavated trenches (after Koukouli Chrysanthaki 1992). General plan of phases A (bottom) and B (top) of Dikili Tash Topographic plan of the site of Makri showing the excavated trenches in 1989 (after Efstratiou 1992) and plan of the trenches considered in this book

7.1. Correspondence analysis of the Makri samples using crop species only: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.2. Correspondence analysis of the Makri samples, using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.3. Plan of Makri I, phase 4, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.4. Plan of Makri I, phase 3, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.5. Plan of Makri I, phase 2, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.6. Plan of Makri I, phase 1 (last disturbed layers) showing location and composition of samples: crop/ fruit/nut species 7.7. Correspondence analysis of the Makri samples, using wild/weed species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.8. Plan of Makri I, phase 4, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.9. Plan of Makri I, phase 3, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.10. Plan of Makri I, phase 1 (the last disturbed layers) showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.11. Correspondence analysis of the Makri samples, using wild/weed species: plot of samples showing relative proportions of species classified according to major habitat preferences. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.12. Correspondence analysis of the Arkadikos samples, using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.13. Correspondence analysis of the Arkadikos samples (excluding sample 352), using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.14. Plan of Arkadikos post-framed house, trenches A1γ and A1δ, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.15. Plan of Arkadikos floor 1, trench A1δ, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species

xi

2

6 8 17 18 18

19 19 20 20 21

60 61 63 64 65 66 68 69 70 71

72 74 75 76 77

7.16. Plan of Arkadikos, floor 7 in trench A2β, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.17. Plan of Arkadikos complex of constructions and pits, trenches A2α and A2β, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.18. Correspondence analysis of the Arkadikos samples, using wild/weed species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.19. Plan of Arkadikos post-framed house, trenches A1γ and A1δ, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.20. Plan of Arkadikos floor 1, trench A1δ, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.21. Plan of Arkadikos, floor 7 in trench A2β, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.22. Plan of Arkadikos complex of constructions and pits, trenches A2α and A2β, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.23. Correspondence analysis of the Makriyalos samples, using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.24. Plan of Makriyalos, Ditch A, north area showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.25. Plan of Makriyalos, Ditch A, south area showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.26. Plan of Makriyalos, big pit in area Π, north of ditch Γ, showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.27. Plan of Makriyalos, area of the ‘megaron’ showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.28. Plan of Makriyalos, area of the hearths/ovens complex showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.29. Plan of Makriyalos, area south of the hearths/ovens complex showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.30. Plan of Makriyalos, Ditch A, north area, showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.31. Plan of Makriyalos, Ditch A, south area showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.32. Plan of Makriyalos, area of the ‘megaron’ showing location and composition of samples: wild/weed species 7.33. Correspondence analysis of the Dikili Tash samples, using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.34. Correspondence analysis of all Dikili Tash samples (excluding sample 801), using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 7.35. Plan of Dikili Tash House 1 area showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.36. Plan of Dikili Tash House 3 area showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 7.37. Plan of Dikili Tash west of House 2 area showing location and composition of samples: crop/fruit/nut species 8.1. Correspondende analysis of all samples from all sites, using crop/fruit/nut species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 8.2. Correspondence analysis of the Mandalo, Arkadikos and Makri ‘dung’ samples, using wild/weed species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of species coded according to life cycle. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically 8.3. Correspondence analysis of the Mandalo, Arkadikos and Makri ‘dung’ samples, using wild/weed species: (a) plot of samples (b) plot of samples showing relative proportions of species classified according to major habitat preferences. Axis 1 is plotted horizontally, axis 2 vertically xii

78 79 81 82 83 84 85 90 91 92 93 94 95 97 98 99 100 102 103 105 106 107

112

119

120

List of tables 1.1. Neolithic and bronze age crops from Macedonia and Thrace, northern Greece (after Halstead 1994)

3

5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.4. 5.5. 5.6. 5.7. 5.8. 5.9. 5.10. 5.11. 5.12. 5.13. 5.14. 5.15. 5.16. 5.17. 5.18. 5.19. 5.20. 5.21.

Amalgamated identification categories List of species’ latin names and respective codes used in correspondence and spatial analyses List of amalgamated samples at each site Taxa present at 100->500) were found and Mangafa and Kotsakis (1996) were able to reliably identify them as wild. The Mangafa and Kotsakis method was not applied to pips from the other sites as it was not available early enough in the course of identification for measurements to be carried out. Due to the overlap between domesticated and wild grape, which is particularly high with Stummer’s indices, large numbers of seeds (>100) are needed for a safe distinction between the two species (Hansen 1988, and cf. Smith and Jones 1990, p. 326). Thus, the use of Stummer’s indices for distinction between wild and domesticated grape was not a feasible task in the majority of the sites under study. The breadth to length indices for some of the grape pips from the other sites were nevertheless measured, in order to see whether any of the pips would fall in the zone that characterises the domesticated vine (Stummer 1911, 44-53). As the measurements showed, no pips provided measurements characteristic of the domesticated vine (Valamoti 1998a). Most of the pips fell in the overlap zone between the domesticated and wild grape. Certain pips fell in the zone that characterises the wild vine (above 76) while some of the Makri grape pips were very close to the domesticated vine, especially when one considers the changes in the dimensions caused by charring. It would be interesting, in future, to carry out the measurements and use the formulae suggested by Mangafa and Kotsakis (1996) on the grape-pips from the sites under study, investigate further the possibility of the presence of domesticated vine in Neolithic deposits.

of acorns, were also encountered (Makri, sample 250). Fig (Ficus carica L.). Fig seeds were recognised by their characteristic pointed hilum (Renfrew J. 1973a) and the biconvex shape. In a few samples not included in the current study, whole fruits were found, easily recognisable by their strong resemblance to modern dried figs. Fragments of whole figs were also found charred and had a pitted texture with fig seeds still attached or contained within the pits. These fragments also resembled the internal structure of whole archaeological figs that were partly fragmented in a way that revealed their internal structure. It is not clear whether these whole fruits were charred as fresh fruit or as dried figs as no systematic charring experiments have been carried out to compare charred fresh and dried figs. Fresh figs (of the variety used for drying) charred in the embers of an open fire looked very much like the archaeological ones, suggesting that, depending on fig variety and ripeness at harvest, the archaeological figs need not necessarily represent dried fruits. Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus L. agg.). Seeds of blackberry were recognised by their more angular shape and sharper edges compared to R. idaeus L. and R. caesius L. (Jones 1983a). No certain identifications of Rubus idaeus or caesius were made. Elder and danewort (Sambucus nigra L., S. ebulus L.). Both species were identified. Elderberry seeds are parallel-sided, abruptly contracting to a point at the embryo end whereas Danewort seeds are gradually tapering to a point. In some cases only the insides of Sambucus seeds were found; in these cases it was not possible to determine the species.

Grape skins. Grape seeds covered by skin as well as empty grape skins were also found. A series of charring experiments on whole grapes, raisins and wine-pressings, carried out by Mangafa (1990, Mangafa et al. 1998), indicated that the finds of grape skins correspond to wine pressings.

Apple, Pear, Sorbus (Malus sp., Pyrus sp., Sorbus sp.). Finds of whole fruit that could either be apple, pear or Sorbus were found. Those of the 1989 excavation season were identified by M. Mangafa as pear (Pyrus cf. amygdaliformis, Mangafa 1990). The more recent finds were not examined in detail due to time limitations. Again, as in the case of fig, lack of experimental work does not allow us to state whether this fruit became charred fresh or dried.

Whole fruit. One whole charred fruit of grape (from Makriyalos) was recognised from pips visible inside the fruit. Its internal structure resembles modern charred grapes (Mangafa 1990, Mangafa et al. 1998, p. 166) but it is possible that it is the remains of a raisin, as the internal structure of charred raisins is not visible in the photos provided in these papers. A direct comparison of the archaeological specimen with modern charred examples would be necessary to decide. Even if this find, perhaps unique for neolithic Greece, represents a charred ‘raisin’, it is not easy to determine whether it is a charred raisin (i.e. fruit collected and dried on purpose) or a fruit that had dried by chance. A single find makes it difficult to talk about neolithic raisins.

Terebinth (Pistacia cf. terebinthus L.). Nuts of terebinth were either whole or fragmented and, in the cases where they were found fragmented, no kernels were observed. These nutshells are laterally flattened and elliptic in outline; they are identified as P. cf. terebinthus as the possibility of P. atlantica Desf., although unlikely, cannot be entirely excluded on morphological grounds. Pistacia atlantica does not grow in northern Greece today (Koukos, pers. comm.) and some reference material provided by Dr M. Charles showed that the nuts of P. atlantica were more elliptical and the P. terebinthus more ovoid, a characteristic observed in the archaeological specimens. The comparative material was, however, rather poor (i.e. few specimens and only a single population in each case), allowing only a tentative identification of the nuts.

Stalks. Stalks resembling modern grape stalks are always present in samples with grape finds. Acorns (Quercus sp.). Acorn cotyledons were easily identified by their large size, oval shape, semicircular cross-section and positioning of the embryo at the narrow end of one of the cotyledons. In one case, shell fragments, possible acorn cup fragments and several embryos, resembling those 30

Methods

Cornelian Cherry (Cornus mas L.). Stones of this species were ovoid in ouline with a blunt apex and base (Renfrew J. 1973b) and two longitudinal canals inside (cf. McLaren and Hubbard 1990, p. 251).

surface pattern as P. aviculare but was of smaller size.

5.5.5. Wild species other than fruit

Bilderdykia convolvulus (L.) Dumort. seeds had a “symmetrically trigonal shape being widest in the middle of the fruit and the surface pattern characteristic of B. convolvulus with rounded tubercles arranged in rows” (Jones 1983a).

Polygonum persicaria L. These were “lenticular, acute with a smooth surface” (Hanf 1983, p. 400).

All of the wild species other than fruit, occurring in the samples considered in this book, were identified on the basis of comparisons with modern reference material, available at the Department of Archaeology and Prehistory, Sheffield University, and at the Institute of Archaeology in London (for grasses). Reference material was considered for species occurring today in Greece, but excluding species occurring in habitats unlikely to be represented archaeobotanically (e.g. the alpine zone), as well as species endemic to regions outside the study area. Identification was aided by descriptions of seeds, provided by various archaeobotanical studies (mainly Jones 1983a, Berggren 1969, 1981, Flood 1986, Hanf 1983, Lange 1979, Renfrew J. 1973b, van Zeist 1974, van Zeist et al. 1987).

Rumex acetosella L. agg. Seeds attributed to this species had “small size and rounded symmetrically trigonal shape” (Jones 1983a). Other species in this aggregate are R. angiocarpus and R. tenuifolius. Rumex spp. Seeds larger than Rumex acetosella L., of a “trigonal shape with squared ridges” along the edges of the three faces, were identified as Rumex spp. and could belong to species such as “R. crispus L., R. pulcher L. and a number of other Rumex species” (Jones 1983a). Chenopodiaceae

All seeds of wild species other than fruit, that occurred more than once in the assemblages in a recognisable form, were either identified to family, genus or species or, when they were unknown, were described, drawn and numbered as indeterminate (i.e. indeterminate 1, 2, and so on). Due to time constraints, it was not considered wise to spend time on the precise identification of seeds that occurred in low numbers and few samples. Every effort was made however, within the available time, to identify accurately species that occurred regularly. Although some information is lost in this way, the overall patterns are unlikely to be obscured. Rare species tend to be left out of the analysis anyway (see below, 5.6.2.4) and so their contribution to the interpretation of the assemblages is minimal. In the descriptions that follow, detailed information is provided for seeds that were common and difficult to identify. These are presented in the order, and with the nomenclature, used in Flora Europaea (Tutin et. al. 1964-1980). For species not listed in Flora Europaea, the relevant reference is provided for the source of information. Seeds that occurred once were grouped into a broad indeterminate wild category.

Polycnemum cf. majus A. Braun/arvense L. These seeds were discoid and biconvex with a sharp edge defining the circumference of the seed. They had a very characteristic surface pattern of low, closely packed tubercles. They resembled modern reference material of P. majus and a drawing of P. arvense (Palmer in press) and were therefore identified as Polycnemum cf. majus/arvense. No reference material was available for examination of P. heuffelii. Chenopodium album s.l. Seeds identified as Chenopodium album L. were of “biconvex discoid shape”, “had a slightly protruding radicle” and their surface was “smooth with lines radiating out from the centre of the seed” (Jones 1983a). Insides of Chenopodiaceae were also present in the samples and had the same shape as whole Chenopodium album seeds, with the surface missing. These were probably the insides of Chenopodium album seeds as is indicated by the finds of Chenopodium album seeds from which the outer surface was partly missing allowing the underlying surface to appear.

Urticaceae

Atriplex sp. Seeds of this species were identified only in two samples. These were flat, more or less circular in outline with a distinct radicle tip (cf. van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1988, p 214). Parallel lines were visible on the surface, running horizontally along the area of the radical tip and some faint parallel lines running vertically.

Urtica L. sp. A few ovate, flattened seeds were identified to this genus. Polygonaceae Polygonum aviculare agg. Seeds were identified as such by their shape and surface pattern: “asymmetrically trigonal and widest towards the base of the fruit”, “ covered in rounded tubercles arranged in parallel bands” (Jones 1983a). Other species included in this aggregate are P. arenastrum Boreau, P. boreale (Lange) Small and P. rurivagum Jordan ex Boreau (the last two not occurring in Greece). Reference material of P. patulum Bieb. showed the same shape and

Caryophylaceae Stellaria sp./Cerastium sp. Few seeds were encountered which in outline resembled either a Stellaria or a Cerastium species. Some among them had a papillose surface pattern preserved. Their low number and frequency did not justify the effort to attribute these seeds to any of the 21 Cerastium species or the 6 Stellaria species which occur in Greece. 31

Chapter 5

van Zeist et al. 1987). Scleranthus sp. Very few seeds were identified to this genus and so no effort was made to attribute the archaeological specimens to any of the Greek species of this genus (S. perennis L., S. annuus L., S. uncinatus Schur).

Fumaria sp. Seeds of Fumaria were identified on the basis of their “globular shape and the dumbell-shaped hole” (Jones 1983a) interrupting the circumference of the seed. These were not further identified to species because they were present in low numbers.

Silene sp. A few reniform seeds with concentric rows of elongated verrucae on the side faces and the dorsal surface (cf. van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1988, p. 214) were found. On the dorsal surface these verrucae are arranged in five rows. These seeds were rather large. They were not identified to species as, of the 68 Silene species that grow in Greece, only 24 were available for examination.

Capparidaceae Capparis sp. Seeds of this genus were found and occasionally they were mineralised. They resembled modern reference material and matched the description by van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1988 (p. 213): obovate in outline with a curved radicle.

Petrorhagia sp./Dianthus sp. One seed that very closely resembled seeds of these two genera was found. It is shield shaped, with a more or less extended tip or radicle, a slightly convex dorsal face and a hollow concave ventral face (Berggren 1981).

Cruciferae cf. Camelina sp. The very few seeds found, of oval to ovate outline and a groove running from the base to the apex, were tentatively identified to this genus due to their close resemblance to modern reference material. No attempt was made to attribute these seeds to any of the four species that occur in Greece (i.e. Camelina sativa (L.) Grantz, C. microcarpa Andrz. ex D.C., C. rumelica Velen. and C. alyssum (Miller) Thell.).

Ranunculaceae Nigella sp. The one seed found, closely resembled reference material and pictures of seeds identified to this genus. Ranunculus sp. Very few seeds, that were flat and obovate in shape, were identified to this genus.

Neslia paniculata (L.) Desv. One silicula of this species was found. It is globular and coarsely reticulate.

Papaveraceae

Brassica cf. rapa L./nigra (L.) Koch. Spherical seeds with a distinct reticulate surface pattern were identified to the genus Brassica. Of the 7 Brassica species that are listed for Greece only B. napus L., B. rapa and B. nigra were available for examination. Of these B. rapa L. and B. nigra (L.) Koch resembled the archaeological specimens more closely. In terms of surface pattern the cells were smaller than those of B. nigra and the sculpturing was stronger in the archaeological than in the modern reference material of B. rapa. The surface pattern in each cell of the reticulate pattern, which can be used to distinguish the two species, could not be clearly discerned due to preservation conditions. They were therefore tentatively identified as Brassica cf. rapa/nigra.

Papaver somniferum L. Seeds were identified to Papaver by their “reniform shape and surface patterning of cells demarcated by raised ridges” (Jones 1983a). Seeds of this species were characterised by their large size and the large hexagonal cells irregularly arranged on the surface. Papaver dubium L./P. pinnatifidum Moris. Papaver seeds were identified to this species because of their medium size and cells with 4 to 5 sides arranged in more or less regular rows. Some of the Papaver seeds which, in most other characteristics, were similar to P. dubium, had cells with very strong sculpturing, a characteristic of P. somniferum seeds. They clearly differed from P. somniferum, however, due to their smaller size. These seeds resembled very closely modern seeds of P. pinnatifidum, a species that, according to Hanf (1983) and Polunin (1987), occurs in Greece and is closely related to P. dubium (Hanf 1983), though Flora Europaea lists it as a species of the western mediterannean region (Tutin et al. 1964-1980). Because most of the characteristics of the seeds resemble those of P. dubium, these seeds were identified as P. dubium/pinnatifidum. P. nigrotinctum Fedde is the only species unavailable for examination, it may therefore be an equally possible candidate for the archaeological specimens.

Resedaceae Reseda cf. luteola L. These seeds are small (