-0.1 C
Sofia
Wednesday, February 4, 2026

Discrepancies in Archaeological Names

Why the Same Prehistoric Culture Can Have Several Names (and how to read Balkan archaeology without getting lost)

If you have ever wondered why one book says “Yamnaya” while another insists on “Pit Grave”, you are not looking at bad history. You are examining how archaeology operates across borders.

Prehistoric “cultures” are modern labels. Archaeologists group sites together when they share consistent patterns in pottery, settlement life, burials, tools, and symbols. The people themselves did not refer to their world as “Vinča” or “Karanovo”. Those names come from the first places where the pattern was recognised, and from the research traditions that grew around them.

This article explains why naming discrepancies happen in the Balkans and around modern Bulgaria, and gives you a practical list of common synonyms. For how these cultures are structured and compared, see the related article How to Classify Bulgaria’s Prehistoric Cultures.

How archaeological names are created

Most culture names come from one of three sources:

1) Type-sites and first discoveries

A culture is often named after a key excavation. “Karanovo” is named after the tell in Bulgaria. “Starčevo” comes from a Serbian site. “Cucuteni” from Romania, “Trypillia” from Ukraine.

2) National research traditions

Because archaeology developed inside modern states, neighbouring countries sometimes name the same horizon differently. Later, scholars realised they were describing a single large phenomenon and either adopted a single label or merged them.

3) Stratigraphic phases that become names

At long-lived sites, layers are numbered (Karanovo I–VII, for example). Sometimes a layer name becomes shorthand for a broader cultural horizon, creating parallel terminology: one author writes a phase name, another uses a regional culture name for the same concept.

Why does the same culture get different names

Naming differences usually come from:

  • Parallel discovery: teams in different countries excavate similar materials and assign them local names.
  • Language and transliteration: the same word may be spelled differently in Latin script or translated into English.
  • Different scales of classification: some scholars prefer broad “horizons”, others split into smaller regional groups.
  • Hyphenation as a solution: combined names are used to show unity across borders while acknowledging regional variants.

The result is not just academic pedantry. Names affect how readers interpret maps, dates, and “influences”. If you do not know the synonyms, you may think two cultures are separate when they are really the same network viewed from different angles.

Key examples connected to Bulgaria

Starčevo, Körös, Criș

These are essentially regional labels for the same Early Neolithic farming horizon. “Starčevo” is common in the central Balkans, “Körös” in Hungary, and “Criș” in Romania. You will often see the combined phrase Starčevo–Körös–Criș to make the equivalence explicit.

Vinča and Vinča–Karanovo

“Vinča” is the major Neolithic tradition centred in today’s Serbia, with wide influence. In northwestern Bulgaria, material can show strong Vinča traits alongside local Karanovo developments. Some authors use the Vinča–Karanovo to signal this overlap and blending, rather than forcing the evidence into a single label.

Cucuteni, Cucuteni–Trypillia, Trypillia, Tripolye

This is one culture with several names, reflecting the place of origin and the transliteration method used. Romanian scholarship often uses “Cucuteni”; Ukrainian uses “Trypillia”; older Russian-influenced literature uses “Tripolye”. Modern writing often prefers Cucuteni–Trypillia to acknowledge both traditions.

Gumelnița, Kodžadermen, Karanovo VI

In the Late Chalcolithic, the same cultural horizon has long been known by different national labels. Romanian literature used “Gumelnița”, Bulgarian used “Kodžadermen” in some regions, and “Karanovo VI” as a phase label in the tell sequence. Many works now use the combined form Gumelnița–Kodžadermen–Karanovo VI to avoid false separations.

Salcuţa, Krivodol, Bubanj

A similar case exists for the late Eneolithic to early Bronze transition: Romanian “Salcuţa”, Bulgarian “Krivodol”, Serbian “Bubanj”. The combined name Salcuţa–Krivodol–Bubanj denotes an interconnected complex spanning borders.

Ezero and phase-based labels

“Ezero” is the name of a Bulgarian archaeological culture, rooted in the Ezero tell sequence. Outside Bulgaria, the same period may be described as Early Bronze phases rather than “Ezero”. That can appear as a naming disagreement when it is actually a difference in periodisation style.

Yamna, Yamnaya, Pit Grave, Ochre Grave

This is the classic translation case. “Yamnaya” is a transliteration from the Slavic term meaning “pit”, and “Pit Grave” is its English translation. “Yamna” is a spelling variant. “Ochre Grave” appears in some older literature because of red ochre in burials. These names all point to the same steppe horizon that is significant for Bulgarian prehistory due to its burials and contacts in the wider region.

Coțofeni and Kostolac

Northwestern Bulgaria lies near a region where Romanian and Serbian terminologies converge. Coțofeni in Romania and Kostolac in Serbia are often treated as closely aligned or overlapping cultural expressions in cross-border syntheses, so you may see them paired.

Quick list of synonyms and common alternative names

Culture labelAlso appears asWhy name varies
StarčevoKörös, Criș, Starčevo–Körös–CrișDifferent national type-sites
VinčaVinča–KaranovoOverlap zone in NW Bulgaria
CucuteniTrypillia, Tripolye, Cucuteni–TrypilliaRomanian vs Ukrainian vs Russian transliteration
GumelnițaKodžadermen, Karanovo VI, KGK VINational labels plus tell-phase label
SalcuţaKrivodol, Bubanj, Salcuţa–Krivodol–BubanjCross-border complex name
EzeroEzero phases, Early Bronze phase labelsCulture name vs periodisation wording
YamnayaYamna, Pit Grave, Ochre GraveTransliteration vs translation and descriptive nickname
CoțofeniKostolac, Coțofeni–KostolacRomanian vs Serbian naming tradition

How to read archaeology pages without confusion

  1. Look for the type-site clue. If a name matches a village or tell, it is probably a type-site label.
  2. Watch for hyphens. Hyphenated names usually mean “same horizon across countries”.
  3. Check whether a term is a phase label. Roman numerals often point to stratigraphy, not a separate people.
  4. Expect overlap. Cultures spread unevenly. Names often reflect where a style was first recognised, not where it “belongs”.

If you keep those four rules in mind, archaeology becomes much easier to follow, and the naming differences start to look less like contradictions and more like a map of research history.

References

  • Tsirtsoni, Z. (ed.). The Human Face of Radiocarbon: Reassessing Chronology in Prehistoric Greece and Bulgaria, 6th–3rd Millennium BC. MOM Éditions, Lyon.
  • Anthony, D. W. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton University Press.
  • Kim, J. “The Domestication of the Horse in Central Eurasia and the Spread of the Chariot.” Journal of Humanities 80(1).
  • Romanian Cultural Institute. “Cucuteni Painted Vessel: The History of Romania in One Object.” RCI USA History Series.
- Advertisement -

Timeline & Chronology Notes

- Advertisement -

Read More