Saturday, May 30, 2015, 4:10pm – 4:30pm
Presented by Tasos Bekiaris, Christos Stergiou, and Stella Theodoridou
In track III. INTERACTIONS AND MATERIAL PERSPECTIVES

Ground stone objects constitute indispensable and rather essential material elements of the Neolithic life. Archaeological interest on such artifacts was for many years confined to their techno-morphological description, failing to sufficiently integrate them into the Neolithic technological and social practices. Excavations at the Neolithic Settlement of Avgi (c. 5650-4500 cal BC), at the region of Kastoria, Northwestern Greece, brought to light one of the largest ground stone assemblages known from Neolithic Greece. More than 8000 ground stone tools and objects, raw materials and by-products comprise a valuable record for investigating how ground stone technology was articulated (produced, consumed and discarded) in the context of a Neolithic community.
This paper examines ground stone technology by focusing on the selection of rocks and minerals employed in the production of ground stone artifacts at Neolithic Avgi. The availability of diverse raw materials (sandstones, limestones, marls, conglomerates and ophiolites) in the sediments of the Mesohellenic Trough, where the Neolithic Settlement is situated, and the large size of the assemblage allows for a thorough exploration of the technological choices made by the Neolithic stoneworkers during various stages of ground stone manufacture. By correlating specific tool-types (grinding stones, abraders, percussion tools, edge tools, maceheads) with various raw materials, we explore how the physical properties of the rocks were perceived by the Neolithic people. Furthermore, we investigate the various criteria through which material selection and ground stone production was achieved. The paper suggests that these were complex technological procedures and that human choices were determined not only by environmental or mere ‘practical’ factors (e.g. the proximity and availability of the resources, the appropriateness and workability of the rocks), but they were formed and practiced in accordance with various social aspects (e.g. participation in social networks, interaction with other social groups, technological traditions, aesthetics and symbolic values).