Interdisciplinary Studies / Интердисциплинарни изследвания <p>The journal has been established at the beginning of the 1980-es as part of the editing policy of the then Archaeological Institute and Museum – BAS. It has to occur once in a year. The journal publishes scientific papers related to archaeology: archaeozoology, archaeobotany, anthropology, ethnology, geophysics, geodesy, mineralogical and chemical analyses, GIS and the application of Information technologies in archaeological studies, and other topics, when dealing with some aspects of archaeology studies. The journal is published also as e-journal that will assure an open access and broaden its public.</p> <p>Списание "Интердисципплинарни изследвания" е създадено в началото на 80-те години, като част от изданията на Националния археологически институт с музей при БАН. Издава се един път годишно. Публикува научни статии, свързани с археологията: археозоология, археоботаника, антропология, етнология, геофизика, геодезия, минераложки и химически анализи, географско-информационните системи и използването на информационните технологии в археологическите проучвания, както и други изследвания свързани с археологическите проучвания биха могли да бъдат публикувани. Списанието се публикува в електронен вариант, като по този начин се осигурява открит достъп до съдържанието му и по този начин ще спомага за по–широк кръг на читатели.</p> en-US (Tsvetana Popova, (Georgi Ivanov) Sun, 29 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0200 OJS 60 A bioarchaeological approach for personal identification based on human handprint from the village of Ploski, Southwest Bulgaria <p>The discovery of imprints of human hands and feet in various archaeological sites and on materials is extremely rare. Even rarer are the studies of these traces for personal identification. The current article concerns the analysis of a human handprint on a brick, unearthed in a tile kiln, excavated during 2017. The main goal is not only to establish the age and sex of the person left his mark but to pay particular attention to the possibilities of these type of anthropological investigations in the research of the ancient man. The handprint belongs to the right hand. It is preserved partly from second to fifth fingers. The values of the imprint gives us reason to assume that the hand on the brick from the village of Ploski belongs to a child aged between 6 and 7 (Infans I/Infans II), most probably a boy (?).</p> Borislava Galabova ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sun, 29 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Interpreting the Archaeological Record: Archaeological Space <p>The present study is based on Session AR16 entitled: ‘Interpreting the Archaeological Record: GIS’ held at the EAA conference in Glasgow, 2015. The particularity of the session was that each presentation asked particular questions, such as: (i) how a built space of a single settlement talks to its visitors; (ii) how the monumentality of megaliths is perceived in the field by observers both past and present in relation to their visual reproductions; (iii) how large archaeological spatial data can be managed with GIS so that they become visualized and made available for on-going and future studies; (iv) how partial and incomplete archaeological spatial data can be analyzed properly and provide coherent interpretations. <br>The answers to these and related questions are not straightforward. Insights are borrowed from various disciplines related to the theory of mind, psychological reactions to built environment, cognition, and art. These involve technically informed studies such as GIS and multi-dimensional statistics. This wider problematic requires from participants in the session capabilities of proper way of representation of archaeological spatial data, analytical inquiry, and theoretically informed interpretation. From this point of view the disparity of the examples in this joint paper provide a vantage point that shows the necessity of developing these different topics together for any archaeological research scheme and interpretation of already acquired data.</p> Markus Spring, Thomas van den Brink, Sven Straumann, Tsoni Tsonev ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sun, 29 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Social Dimensions of Technology of Ceramic Production in Southeast Bulgaria in 6th–2nd mill. BC <p>The article presents activities and data obtained during the first year of the project. The research area encompasses Southeastern Bulgaria with nine main sites included. Object of instrumental research and archeological characteristic are the samples, which are divided into the following groups: denudated rocks, and used for inorganic temper; clays – tectonic and alluvial; ceramics- pottery fragments and burnt remains of stationary equipment; organic fillers, pigments and substances for painting and incrustation, organic residues and impressions of mats and baskets on the pottery bases. . Different methods and analyzes have been applied to solve the problems posed: cartographic analysis and description of the landscape, morphological and typological analysis, dating, instrumental methods, chemical analysis, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), petrographic analysis etc.</p> Krassimir Leshtakov, Philip Machev, Tsvetana Popova, Dian Vangelov, Viktoria Vangelova, Tanya Stoilkova, Vanya Petrova, Denitsa Ilieva, Nikolina Nikolova, Silvia Chavdarova, Mila Andonova, Hristina Vasileva, Hanna Hristova, Zhelyazko Zhelyazkov, Daniel Dimitrov, Nikol Blagoeva ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sun, 29 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Advantages and disadvantages of bricks as a material for archaeomagnetic study <p>Three collections of bricks were archaeomagnetically studied – Roman bricks (taken from the Diocletianopolis city wall, present Hissarya), Turkish bricks (coming from a mosque excavated on the territory of „40 Saint Martyrs” church, Veliko Tarnovo) and bricks with inscription (found also on the territory of „40 Saint Martyrs” church). The bricks differ significantly according to their shape and size. The main aims of the study were: 1) to determine the geomagnetic field elements (inclination and intensity); 2) to evaluate the magnetic anisotropy effect; 3) to verity the reliability of previously obtained archaeomagnetic determinations for Hissarya bricks (involved in the Bulgarian archaeomagnetic database); 4) to demonstrate the reliability and capabilities of archaeomagnetic dating method using bricks with well-known manufacturing date.<br>The rock-magnetic experiments performed indicate that the magnetic properties of all bricks are suitable for archaeomagnetic study. This is a consequence of the fact that bricks are usually baked at high temperatures (above 700oC) so they always carry a stable full TRM.<br>The inclinational data obtained show unacceptable scatter for the Turkish bricks and mean inclinational value was calculated only for the Roman bricks and the bricks with inscription. The magnetic anisotropy corrections applied do not improve the dispersion observed for none of the collection studied. Therefore, it can be concluded that these bricks were not strictly arranged along their long narrow sides during their production and obviously, this dominates the magnetic anisotropy influence. It is suggested that the Turkish bricks were situated in the furnace much more randomly compared to the other ones. There is a good internal consistency among the archaeointensity results obtained for the different collections and the magnetic anisotropy does not affect significantly the final mean results. The repeated archaeomagnetic study of the referent site Hissarya confirms its old inclinational determination but changes the old intensity result. Based on all the archaeointensity data received for the Roman bricks it can be suggested that some of the bricks in the construction of Hissarya fortress were reused (they were baked at least in two different periods). <br>Archaeomagnetic dating was performed only by one geomagnetic field element (intensity) for the studied Turkish bricks and by two geomagnetic field elements (inclination and intensity) – for the bricks with inscription. The dating intervals obtained on 95 percent probability level (2σ) are: 1817 – 1894 AD (Turkish bricks) and 1833 – 1894 AD (bricks with inscription) as they ended with the last year of the Bulgarian archaeomagnetic dataset. The archaeomagnetic dating interval obtained for the Turkish bricks indicate that they were produced rather in the end of the Ottoman ruling than in the end of XVII – beginning of XVIII century. This does not contradict the archaeological data. The maximum of probability density distribution for the bricks with inscription is around 1880 AD and agree quite well with the year of their production – 1888 AD. It should be considered that dating by all geomagnetic field elements (impossible for bricks materials) in the most cases produces narrower and more precise archaeomagnetic dating intervals compared to dating by one or two geomagnetic field elements.<br>The Turkish bricks and the bricks with inscription are included as new referent points with their archaeological dates in the Bulgarian archaeomagnetic database. With the new study of the Roman bricks an important correction for the referent site Hissarya was done. This demonstrates the importance and requirement of regular revision of the available archaeomagnetic dataset especially with regard to the old results.</p> Maria Kostadinova-Avramova ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sun, 29 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0200