of the Balkans
Mirjana Roksandic Editors
Human Evolution and its Context
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology Series
Paleoanthropology of the Balkans
and Paleoanthropology Series
Vertebrate Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History
New York, NY, USA
Eric J. Sargis
Anthropology, Yale University
New Haven, CT 06520, USA
Focal topics for volumes in the series will include systematic paleontology of all vertebrates (from agnathans to humans), phylogeny
reconstruction, functional morphology, Paleolithic archaeology, taphonomy, geochronology, historical biogeography, and bio-
stratigraphy. Other ﬁelds (e.g., paleoclimatology, paleoecology, ancient DNA, total organismal community structure) may be con-
sidered if the volume theme emphasizes paleobiology (or archaeology). Fields such as modeling of physical processes, genetic
methodology, nonvertebrates or neontology are out of our scope.
Volumes in the series may either be monographic treatments (including unpublished but fully revised dissertations) or edited col-
lections, especially those focusing on problem-oriented issues, with multidisciplinary coverage where possible.
Editorial Advisory Board
Ross D. E. MacPhee (American Museum of Natural History), Peter Makovicky (The Field Museum), Sally McBrearty
(University of Connecticut), Jin Meng (American Museum of Natural History), Tom Plummer (Queens College/CUNY).
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/6978
of the Balkans and Anatolia
Human Evolution and its Context
Paleoanthropology, Department of Geosciences, Eberhard Karls
Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and Paleoenvironment,
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
PhD Program in Anthropology, City University of New York,
Graduate Center and New York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology,
New York, NY, USA
Department of Anthropology, University of Winnipeg,
Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Paleoanthropology, Department of Geosciences
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
PhD Program in Anthropology
City University of New York
Graduate Center and New York Consortium
in Evolutionary Primatology
New York, NY, USA
Department of Anthropology
University of Winnipeg
Winnipeg, MB, Canada
ISSN 1877-9077 ISSN 1877-9085 (electronic)
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology
ISBN 978-94-024-0873-7 ISBN 978-94-024-0874-4 (eBook)
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016955953
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is
concerned, speciﬁcally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microﬁlms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation,
computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not
imply, even in the absence of a speciﬁc statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and
regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to
be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express
or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
Cover illustration: The cover shows the Petralona cranium on the left (Photo K. Harvati, Copyright E. Delson) and the
Kokkinopilos handaxe, shown in three views (Photos and Copyright V. Tourloukis). In the background is a view of the
Megalopolis basin, central Peloponnese (Photo and Copyright A. Vlachopoulos).
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
The registered company address is: Van Godewijckstraat 30, 3311 GX Dordrecht, The Netherlands
119© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016
Katerina Harvati and Mirjana Roksandic (eds.), Paleoanthropology of the Balkans and Anatolia,
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, DOI 10.1007/978-94-024-0874-4_8
The Acheulian Site at Rodafnidia, Lisvori, on Lesbos,
Nena Galanidou, Constantin Athanassas , James Cole, Giorgos Iliopoulos, Athanasios Katerinopoulos,
Andreas Magganas, and John McNabb
N. Galanidou (*)
Department of History and Archaeology, University of Crete,
74100 Rethymno, Greece
Centre de Recherche and d’Enseignement de Géosciences de
l’Environnement (C.E.R.E.G.E.), Europôle Méditerranéen de
l’Arbois, Avenue Louis PHILIBERT BP 80-13545, Aix-en-
Provence cedex 04, France
School of Environment and Technology, University of Brighton,
Brighton BN2 4GJ, UK
Department of Geology, University
of Patras, 26504 Rio Patras, Greece
A. Katerinopoulos • A. Magganas
Faculty of Geology and GeoEnvironment,
University of Athens, 15784 Athens, Greece
Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton,
Southampton SO17 1BF, UK
Abstract Rodafnidia is an Acheulian site on Lesbos Island,
in the north-east Aegean Sea. This chapter presents the model
that guided Paleolithic investigations on the island, the his-
tory of research, and the results of the 2012 expedition of
systematic work in the ﬁeld, which consisted of surface sur-
vey and excavation. The typology and technology of lithic
artifacts from the surface and the uppermost Unit 1, as well as
the ﬁrst cluster of luminescence dates, ﬁrmly place the early
component of the site in the Middle Pleistocene. The
Acheulian industry derives from ﬂuvio-lacustrine deposits at
a locale with abundant fresh-water and lithic resources.
Situated in the north-east Mediterranean Basin, an area where
research on early hominin prehistory is intensifying,
Rodafnidia holds the potential to contribute to Eurasian
Lower Paleolithic archaeology and ﬁll the gap in our under-
standing of early hominin presence and activity where Asia
Keywords Lower Paleolithic • Large cutting tools • Middle
Pleistocene • West Asia • pIRIR dating
Rodafnidia, at Lisvori on Lesbos Island in the north-east
Aegean Sea (Fig. 8.1), is a new open-air site with a distinc-
tive Lower Paleolithic component. It lies at 26°11′54.58″ E
and 39°6′15.42″ N, in a volcanic setting, near the local thermal
springs, and 2 km from the south-west shore of the Kalloni
Gulf (Fig. 8.2). The site has produced compelling evidence
for the presence of groups who used Acheulian tools on
Lesbos (Galanidou 2013; Galanidou et al. 2013). By virtue
of its content and position at the junction between west
Anatolia, the Aegean Archipelago and the Balkan Peninsula,
Rodafnidia links the early archaeology of south- east Europe
with that of west Asia. In this chapter, we report the key geo-
graphic features of Lesbos that guided research on early hom-
inin archaeology of the island, the history of site discovery,
the background work, the objectives of our project, and the
results of the 2012 campaign, including the ﬁrst cluster of
pIRIR dating results obtained for the excavated sediments.
The Key Geographic Features of Lesbos
Guiding the Project
Lesbos is the third largest of the Greek islands, measuring
some 1600 km2. Its topography and landscape have been sig-
niﬁcantly affected by volcanism, sedimentation, tectonism,
eustasy, and isostasy. Around Lisvori, the island’s Cenozoic
volcanic and sedimentary history is mainly manifested by vol-
canic rocks, volcaniclastic deposits including large ignimbrite
bodies and tuffs, siliceous and marly limestones, and geother-
mal springs (Hecht 1974; Pe-Piper 1978; Pe-Piper and Piper
1993, 2002; Lamera 2004; Kouli and Seymour 2006;
Lambrakis and Stamatis 2008; Thomaidou 2009). Within the
same area, various hard, mostly siliceous rocks of volcanic
and/or diagenetic origin, are commonly outcropped as layers,
nodules, or fracture ﬁllings, which can be easily used as raw
materials for knapping. These rocks are also found as clastic
constituents of the Quaternary strata of the area.
Quaternary deposits are not widespread on Lesbos.
However, they are fairly abundant in the south and east part
of the island, consisting mainly of clastic ﬂuvial and allu-
vial deposits (Soulakellis et al. 2006). Lesbos is separated
from the Asian coast by two sea straits. The north strait,
Lamna, is a faulted trough more than 150m-deep, lying
along a major splay of the south branch of the North
Anatolian Fault. The east strait, Mytilene, is mostly shal-
low, less than 50 m deep, with a ﬂat, smooth seaﬂoor
(Fig. 8.1). Thus, a glacial sea-level drop of only 50 m would
have been enough to expose the latter, connect the island
with the Anatolian mainland, and allow the migration of
hominins and terrestrial animals. Such a Pleistocene move-
ment can be attested to by the presence of several fossilifer-
ous sites at Vatera that have yielded a rich Early Pleistocene
paleontological record with over 15 mammal taxa, including
the giant macaque Paradolichopithecus arvernensis. This
evidence represents a fauna that can be characterised as con-
tinental (De Vos et al. 2002; Lyras and van der Geer 2007),
Fig. 8.1 Location map for the island of Lesbos (left), the Kalloni Gulf (upper right) and the Rodafnidia archaeological site (bottom right)
N. Galanidou et al.
Fig. 8.2 Panoramic view of the Kalloni Gulf area where Rodafnidia is situated, looking north
reﬂecting the long-term, close association of Lesbos with
Asia (Fig. 8.1).
Glacial periods with accompanying low sea levels were
the times for terrestrial animals to disperse onto what are
today the islands of the east Aegean Sea. These faunal dis-
persals likely also encompassed hominin population move-
ments, and Rodafnidia at Lisvori offers archaeological
evidence to support this hypothesis, adding a human compo-
nent to the rich paleontology of Lesbos. Interglacial periods
with accompanying high sea levels were key periods that cut
Lesbos off from the Asian mainland, producing the insular
picture that one sees today (Sakellariou and Galanidou
2016). Such events of land fragmentation occurred several
times during the Pleistocene, isolating animal and hominin
populations from the large expanses of Anatolia and limiting
them to the islands mentioned earlier.
A further important feature of Lesbos is the presence of
two shallow and enclosed gulfs, the Kalloni Gulf and the
Gera Gulf (Fig. 8.1). Both embayments are connected to the
open sea through shallow straits. During Pleistocene glacial
periods, both gulfs would have lain well above sea level.
However, it is not certain that they were dry. Our null
hypothesis, which is still only supported by a small body of
marine geological data, is that, during past low sea-level
periods, these gulfs may have been shallow, initially semi-
salted but eventually fresh-water lakes. If this were the case,
then, in addition to abundant lithic raw materials of chert
composition, hominins on Lesbos would have had a variety
of survival possibilities associated with fresh-water
resources. Envisioning the Kalloni Basin as a large,
resource-rich, Pleistocene lake suggests that it might have
been a point of attraction and persistent occupation for
hominins in west Anatolia and the larger Aegean landmass
during glacial periods (Lykousis 2009; Sakellariou and
The Site, Its Discovery, and Objectives
Rodafnidia is situated on a spur of a low hill, bordered to the
north by a small stream and to the west by the Glyﬁas stream
(Figs. 8.1 and 8.2). The Glyﬁas receives its brackish water
from the local geothermal spring that lies less than 400 m to
the south-east of the hill. It joins the little stream at the north-
west of the hill to debouch into the Kalloni Gulf east of the
Polichnitos salt pans. The south and west sides of the hill,
being made up of ignimbrites, are rather steep and rocky,
forming a small gorge, whereas the north side presents a
smooth relief with a gentle slope, covered now with olive
groves. The toponym ‘Rodafnidia’ refers to the oleanders,
which once used to grow in the area where a large olive grove,
segmented into numerous properties, stretches today (Fig. 8.3).
The hill is divided into a south and a north part by a narrow
farm track; its west end slopes down smoothly and meets the
Glyﬁas. Some 100 m north of this point, on the lowermost ter-
race, a nineteenth- century watermill represents the only stand-
ing historical monument on the hill, apart from the stone
installation with a now-dried-up fresh-water spring. The task of
recording the watermill’s plan brought to the area two medical
doctors with an interest in the cultural heritage of Lesbos. They
identiﬁed an extensive scatter of knapped stone artifacts, the
greater portion of which had Levallois, proto- Levallois, and
Acheulian afﬁnities, and belonged to the Middle Paleolithic
and the end of the Lower Paleolithic (Harisis et al. 2000).
Against the sparse background of early hominin sites within
mainland Greece, the Aegean Archipelago and west Turkey
(Jöris 2014; Otte et al. 1999; Galanidou 2004; Harvati et al.
2009), this earlier brief report, coupled with an evaluation of
the island’s key geographic features, led to an initial visit to the
site by NG in 2009. A subsequent surface survey in 2010 with
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
a small team1 established the boundaries, character, and afﬁni-
ties of the lithic scatter (Fig. 8.1).
From the results of the initial investigation it was determined
that the distribution of knapped stone artifacts was extensive,
ceramic ﬁnds were almost completely absent, and a component
of the lithic assemblage was Lower Paleolithic in character,
including several Large Cutting Tools (LCTs) (as described by
Kleindienst 1962; McNabb et al. 2004). Although the highest
concentration of lithic ﬁnds was indeed near the watermill, the
Lower Paleolithic component was not located in its immediate
vicinity. A good number of the surface ﬁnds belonged to later
Prehistory, namely the Late Neolithic and the Bronze Age.
Having ascertained that Rodafnidia had signiﬁcant potential
for systematically exploring Middle Pleistocene hominin pres-
ence at the junction between Anatolia and the Aegean
Archipelago, the University of Crete obtained a permit in 2011
to undertake a 5-year (2012–2016) program of on-site and off-
site research in order to:
a) conduct archaeological excavation, surface survey, and
1 The members of the 2010 campaign team were Christina Papoulia, Elli
Karkazi, Aggeliki Garidi, and Mihalis Spyridakis.
b) establish a chronological framework for the archaeological
record based on relative and absolute dating; and
c) evaluate and correlate existing and new regional paleon-
tological, paleoclimatic, geomorphological, and oceano-
Put together, this work sheds new light on the history of
hominin movements and dispersals between Africa and
Eurasia, and on the early occupation of Europe, covering the
current lacuna of early sites in south-east Europe and the west
Anatolian coast (Dennell et al. 2011; Jöris 2014). Through an
extensive program of reconstructing the site catchment and
landscape evolution of the Aegean Archipelago, it further
explores the attractions that the Kalloni basin, Lesbos, and the
north-east Aegean basin offered to early humans during the
Middle Pleistocene (Sakellariou and Galanidou 2015).
The investigation strategy of the ﬁrst season in the ﬁeld con-
ducted in August and September 2012, comprised archaeo-
logical surface, sub-surface, geological, and paleogeographic
Fig. 8.3 View of Rodafnidia, looking east. In the foreground, the site prior to excavations. In the background, the village of Lisvori
N. Galanidou et al.
work.2 A detailed topographic GPS survey was conducted
over the extent of the hill, with test pit, trench, and ﬁnd locations
also being recorded (Fig. 8.4).
The excavation was guided by the initial 2010 surface
survey work that had identiﬁed areas containing concentrations
The members of the 2012 campaign scientiﬁc team were as follows:
James Cole, Giorgos Iliopoulos, Athanasios Katerinopoulos, Geoff King
(Institut de Physique du Globe, Paris), Andreas Magganas, John McNabb,
Ageliki Theodoropoulou (Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, Paris),
Chronis Tzedakis (University College London), Katerina Vasileiadou;
graduate students were as follows: Elli Karkazi, Thanos Rousis, Lena
Kouklamani, Eleni Zervaki, Stefanos Fotinis (Univ. of Crete); and the
undergraduate students were as follows: Ageliki Garidi, Elina Latsou,
Eirini Saloustrou, Vaso Kourkouli (Univ. of Crete), Jeanine Curvers
(Katholik Univ. of Leuven), and Roy Waterston (Univ. of York).
of ﬁnds from different periods. Given this assessment of
spatial variation present on the site, the 2012 ﬁeld season
focussed on areas associated with LCTs in order to gain
insight into the stratigraphy, and to understand the geological
background to the Paleolithic remains. A major question,
therefore, was the origin of the surface scatters.
Intrusive investigation took place in two adjoining plots
on a north–south axis across the top of the Rodafnidia knoll
(Fig. 8.4), which form a continuous strip of land, a transect
across the top of the spur. The plots are named after their
owners, Hatzoglou to the south of the dirt track and Alvanos
to the north. Their surface survey during 2010 yielded numer-
ous LCTs. The location of these two plots was crucial in that
they allowed a geological assessment of the knoll at its widest
point. Along this transect we laid out a series of fourteen
Fig. 8.4 DEM showing the location of Rodafnidia, the 2010 and 2012
survey areas marked in gray, and the two successive properties where
excavations were conducted during the 2012 expedition (bottom). Plans
of the trench and test pit locations in the two successive properties,
namely Alvanos and Hatzoglou (upper middle and right)
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
1 × 1 m test pits at regular 20 m intervals and gave them the
Greek alphabet letters A to Ξ; of these we opened ten. Based
on the results of the smaller test pit sampling strategy, we also
opened three longer L-shaped trenches: Trench A Extension
(11 × 1–3 × 1 m), Trench B Extension (7.5 × 1–3 × 1 m), and
Trench H Extension (7 × 1–3 × 1 m) (Fig. 8.4). These were
dug in order to expose large geological sections at key loca-
tions (Fig. 8.5), to allow sedimentological and geological
sampling and to reﬁne the preliminary geological interpreta-
tion of the site established via the test pits.
In September 2012, before leaving the site the majority of
trenches and test pits were backﬁlled so that the plots could
be returned to their owners as they were prior to excavations.
Test pits Γ, Θ and M, the most signiﬁcant in terms of stratig-
raphy, to which we wanted to have immediate access in the
future for the purpose of stratigraphic referencing, paleo-
magnetic sampling and dating, were backﬁlled using geo-
textile and polystyrene blocks, topped by cobbles and loose
earth from the excavation debris (Fig. 8.6).
We conducted additional surface surveys in both the exca-
vated plots and in the surrounding areas (Fig. 8.7). Artifacts
lying on the topsoil (the top of Unit 0, see below) were col-
lected and their positions plotted using an RTK GPS (Fig. 8.8).
Stratigraphy and Date
The sedimentary series were exposed to a maximum depth of
approximately 2.5–2.7 m. These stratigraphic sequences
from different trenches excavated in the north and south
Fig. 8.5 Rodafnidia: view of the Hatzoglou property, test pits BI and B2 in the foreground and Trench A Extension, looking south-west
Fig. 8.6 Picture showing test pit backﬁlling in the Alvanos plot. In the
foreground, test pit M backﬁlling using geo-textile and polystyrene
blocks, topped by cobbles and loose earth from the excavation debris
Fig. 8.7 Surface surveying at the Alvanos plot (August 2012)
N. Galanidou et al.
parts of the site have been correlated and are described as
follows. Four sedimentary units (Units 0–3) were identiﬁed
above both the weathered bedrock and the unaffected bedrock
proper (Fig. 8.9).
• Unit 0 is the topsoil. It consists of brown silts with
scattered rounded pebbles of relatively small sizes, and
its upper part is loose due to farming activity.
• Unit 1 is a matrix-supported conglomerate, with red/brown
silt as the matrix. In some places the matrix contains more
sand, as well as rounded to sub-rounded pebbles and cob-
bles of various sizes. The larger cobbles have a diameter
of about 20 cm.
• Unit 2 is a red-brown mud with calcitic nodules and
numerous mud-cracks ﬁlled with calcium carbonate, par-
ticularly to the north of the site where the unit gets thicker.
• Unit 3, of which at least the top 20–30 cm were exposed,
is a matrix-supported conglomerate with red silt as the
matrix, accompanied by pebble-sized clasts.
Units 0 and 1 contained archaeological ﬁnds, whilst Unit
2 was barren. Unit 3 yielded no artifacts in 2012. The recov-
ery of any archaeological ﬁnds in it will have to await fuller
and deeper excavation. The lithology suggests a relatively
small alluvial plain, which represents the depositional envi-
ronment for the artifacts. Two types of deposit can be distin-
guished: ﬂoodplain and ﬂuvial. The ﬂoodplain sediments,
Unit 2, are red to red-brown muds with mud-cracks ﬁlled
with carbonates (cracks were formed when the muds were
exposed and dried, and during soil formation they were ﬁlled
with carbonates). The ﬂuvial deposits are the conglomerate
accumulations of Unit 1 that characterise a ﬂuvial network,
be it river or stream, that shifted its course over time, eroding
and forming new river beds that cut through the ﬂoodplain
sediments deposited during older ﬂood events.
This picture can be made out in most trenches. The excep-
tion is the northernmost excavated test pit M, the one closest
to the present-day Kalloni Gulf shore. Here, green clay below
Unit 0 indicates the presence of a still fresh-water deposit: a
pond, a marsh, or a small lake (possibly an oxbow). The green
color of the clay is a result of its reducing conditions. The
presence of such still fresh-water bodies is a common feature
found alongside ﬂuvial systems developing across alluvial
plains (Marriott 2006).
Sediment samples were collected for luminescence and
TCN dating (conducted by Constantin Athanassas), for micro-
Fig. 8.8 Map showing the Rodafnidia knoll; in beige the 2012 surface survey area and location of surface ﬁnds collected
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
fossil preparation (conducted by Katerina Vasileiadou), and
from test pit M for palynological preparation (conducted by
Chronis Tzedakis). The sediments from M were highly oxi-
dised and did not preserve any fossil content apart from a few
algae. More promising is the study of micro-fossil remains.
Amongst the ﬁnds from the ﬁrst sample (H extension), the
presence of charophyte gyrogonite was noted; this stonewort
calcareous spore, if contemporary with the sampled sediments,
indicates a freshwater depositional environment.
For the luminescence dating method, the samples were
collected from depths well below the ground surface and
from soil proﬁles exposed in the trenches (Fig. 8.9). Cohesive
layers were sampled in the daytime by inserting aluminium
tubes into the sections, while loose sediments were sampled
at night under dimmed-red portable lighting, by delving into
the soil proﬁle with a spade and sealing the extricated sedi-
ment into light-tight wrapping. Four of the samples were sub-
mitted to the Luminescence Dating suite of the Laboratory of
Archaeometry at N.C.S.R. ‘Demokritos’, Athens.
The speculated Mid-Pleistocene age of the artifacts neces-
sitated the employment of extended-range luminescence dat-
ing methods instead of conventional optically stimulated
luminescence from quartz (OSL), as the latter was expected
to be saturated on the time scales considered here.
Examination of the material revealed a predominance of tec-
tosilicate mineralogy, abundantly supplied by the extensive
volcanic contexts of the wider area.
Quartz from volcanic environments has been proven
unsuitable with respect to its luminescence properties
(e.g. Bonde et al. 2001). For that reason thermally trans-
ferred OSL from quartz (e.g. Wang et al. 2007) was avoided;
the abundance of feldspars instead dictated an infrared
stimulated luminescence (IRSL) approach. For preliminary
chronological evidence, fast track runs of the elevated-
temperature IRSL protocol of Thiel et al. (2011) were carried
out on the feldspars. This method, established as ‘post infra-
red infrared stimulated luminescence’ (pIRIR) dating, allows
estimation of the paleodose by measuring the IRSL at
290°C. Furthermore, it has the purported advantage that it
circumvents underestimations potentially induced by loss of
signal from feldspars in ambient conditions, a phenomenon
known as ‘anomalous fading’ (Wintle 1973; Spooner 1994).
Fig. 8.9 Showing the stratigraphy of the Rodafnidia site exempliﬁed through Trench B Extension (middle) and Trench H Extension (bottom). The
origin of luminescence dating samples is denoted by red dots
N. Galanidou et al.
In the absence of in situ γ-dose rate measurements, dosime-
try was limited to radio-elemental analyses by inductively
coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS).
Even though pIRIR290 signal response was found not to be
close to saturation, two of the delivered ages (Lesbos-4:
164 ± 33 kBP and Lesbos-9: 258 ± 48 kBP) appeared broadly
spread (Table 8.1). Additionally, the age distribution of
Lesbos-1 brought forth two clusters: one centred at
272 ± 25 kBP and a second at 475 ± 48 kBP. The latter shows,
at least, consistency with the age of the sample Lesbos-7
(476 ± 62 kBP) (Table 8.1).
The bimodality seen in the distribution of these preliminary
results raises the obvious question as to the origin of this
behavior. It remains uncertain whether it is caused by environ-
mental, anthropological, microdosimetric, or laboratory mea-
surement conditions. In situations where adequate signal
resetting can be evidenced by the environmental conditions, a
series of post-depositional processes may be responsible for
altering the paleodose of some grains, leading to skewed and
multimodal age dispersal (Lomax et al. 2007). Employment of
age modelling is therefore necessary here to explore different
approaches to establishing the luminescence age.
The possibility that the observed scatter is a laboratory
artifact due to the acceleration of measurement procedure
cannot be ruled out in this case. Current ages were calculated
using default settings proposed by Thiel et al. (2011), but it is
recommended that the paleodose be measured over a range of
temperatures to establish optimum measurement conditions
of IRSL, and the maximum reproducibility of the paleodose.
Additionally, the ages should be further tested for the
presence of any anomalous fading in the pIRIR290 signal.
Despite the spread and the methodological challenges,
all pIRIR290 results suggest a Middle Pleistocene age for
Rodafnidia. The delivered ages for the samples from Unit 2
(Table 8.1) indicate that this unit might have been deposited
during MIS stage 13 and thus during an interglacial period
(interstadial). Conversely, the delivered ages for the samples
from Unit 1, Lesbos-4 and Lesbos-9 (Table 8.1), suggest that
Unit 1 in Trench H Extension was possibly deposited during
MIS 6 (164 ± 33 kBP) and Unit 1 in Trench B Extension dur-
ing MIS 8 (258 ± 48 kBP). Hence, despite the age difference,
the sediments in both cases appear to have been deposited
during glacial periods (stadials).
It is important to note that these observations are in agree-
ment with the lithological character of the sampled units
(Fig. 8.9). The ﬁne grained Unit 2 must have been deposited
during an interglacial period when sea level was signiﬁcantly
higher and the climate was wet enough with increased pre-
cipitation. On the other hand, the coarse grained deposits of
Unit 1, as well as of Unit 3, which is located below Unit 2 in
Trench H Extension, represent sediments deposited during
glacial periods when sea level was lower and the climate
drier. It should be noted that the deposits of Unit 1 appear
mostly as lenses undercutting the sediments of Unit 2, for
reasons explained later. We assume that during the stadial
MIS 13 Rodafnidia was located closer to the sea shore (the
paleo-Kalloni Gulf), thus representing a ﬂoodplain environ-
ment where marshes and temporary ponds would develop,
allowing the presence of fresh water dwellers (charophytes,
gastropods). Conversely, during glacial periods Rodafnidia
became an elevated inland area where erosional processes
would dominate. Hence ﬂuvial systems would ﬁrst develop,
eroding the substrate, which in this case would be the sedi-
ments of Unit 2; these ﬂuvial channels would be subse-
quently ﬁlled by ﬂuvial coarse-grained deposits of Unit 1.
Unit 1 might also represent coarse-grained ﬂuvial deposits
that were deposited in different ﬂuvial networks formed dur-
ing two different glacial periods, MIS 6 and 8, respectively.
These are the ﬁnd-bearing sediments. The artifacts must
have accumulated originally in older sediments (units), pos-
sibly older than MIS 13, that were eroded upstream and were
carried downstream through the ﬂuvial channels to where
they were ﬁnally deposited. Similarly, the coarse grained
Unit 3 represents ﬂuvial deposits formed during a glacial
period before MIS 13.
In summary, based upon the surface survey collections and
excavations, a working hypothesis has emerged: that the pres-
ent surface material may have originated from the sub-
surface geological features. The presence of a buried channel,
or possibly network of channels, across the knoll is suggested
by the nature of the geological deposits with a spatial varia-
tion in the stratigraphy towards the Kalloni Gulf shore.
The Lithic Finds
The vast majority of Rodafnidia lithic artifacts recovered in
2012 were produced on chert of a wide range of colors. The
most common hues are light brown and beige, while dark red-
brown is occasionally present. Rarely, black, white, or trans-
lucent samples occur. The majority of these cherts are
fossiliferous; macro and microfossils are included. Many of
them present wood tissue and could be characterised as fos-
silised remains of plants. Others present faunal (mainly gas-
tropod) macrofossils; these are endocasts of the original
Table 8.1 pIRIR dates obtained for the excavated sediments at
Rodafniﬁa Unit 1 and Unit 2
Trench Unit Depth below
Lesbos-4 H Extension 1 0.8–0.9 164 ± 33 ka 6
Lesbos-9 B Extension 1 1.2–1.4 258 ± 48 ka 8
Lesbos-1 H Extension 2 1.3 272 ± 25 ka 9
(475 ± 48 ka) (13)
Lesbos-7 B Extension 2 1.6–1.7 476 ± 62 ka 13
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
gastropod shells and provide determinations only to the genus
level. In order to use fossils for accurate biostratigraphic dat-
ings, determinations to the species level are needed. In the
future, thin sections need to be produced in order to identify
and determine possible microfossils that will provide us with
relative dating of the age of the rocks. This in turn would
guide research into lithic raw material provenance.
Petrological analyses on siliceous raw materials recovered
from Rodafnidia and the wider Lisvori—Polichnitos area sug-
gest that cherts may have been formed either through chemical
precipitation of SiO2 from silica-rich ﬂuids within a hydrother-
mal, possibly geyser-type environment, connected to the vol-
canism of the past; or by thermally induced diagenesis of the
lacustrine siliceous limestones of Pliocene date and the sili-
ceous marly limestones of the fresh-water swamp that occur
close to Rodafnidia. Within both environments, biogenic
(opal-A) and/or non-biogenic (opal-Aʹ) silica was transformed
to chert with microcrystalline quartz and chalcedony, through
an intermediate stage of opal-CT (Stamatakis and Magganas
1988). This change is mostly due to the existing high heat ﬂow
in the area, while compaction and probably alkaline pore
waters played a subordinate role (Kelepertsis 1993).
The presence of handaxes and cleavers indicates a Lower
Paleolithic component to the Rodafnidia assemblage. Initial
observations on the lithic ﬁnds collected during the 2010 sur-
face survey suggested a broad similarity between artifacts
from Rodafnidia and those from Kaletepe Deresi 3 in
Cappadocia, central Anatolia (Slimak et al. 2008), Gesher
Benot Ya’aqov in north Israel (Goren-Inbar and Saragusti
1996) and even from certain African assemblages, for example
at Olduvai Gorge and elsewhere (Leakey and Roe 1994;
Sharon 2007). In light of this, a variation of the methodology
applied at the South African Acheulian sites of the Cave of
Hearths and Canteen Koppie (McNabb et al. 2004; McNabb
and Sinclair 2009; McNabb and Beaumont 2012) was used
to conduct a preliminary study of the artifacts. The major tech-
nogroups identiﬁed in Rodafnidia lithics are (Table 8.2) as fol-
lows: (1) Large Cutting Tools, (2) Prepared Core Technology
(PCT), (3) Non-PCT Flake Cores, (4) Flakes and Detached
Pieces, and (5) Retouched Flakes.
The Large Cutting Tools Technogroup
The 2012 database (for the preliminary investigations and
the ﬁrst systematic survey and excavation season) records a
total of 30 Large Cutting Tools (LCT) (Table 8.3).
Handaxes are tools with a converging tip that have been
wholly or partially made by bifacial thinning and shaping.
They lack the ﬂat/guillotine-shaped cutting edge (cleaver
bit), which is characteristic of cleavers. The database records
16 whole handaxes, two broken tip fragments, and two further
examples whose identiﬁcation is less certain (a selection is
shown in Fig. 8.10).
Unifaces represent handaxes with converging tips where
all, or virtually all, of the thinning and shaping is conﬁned to
one face of the tool. There are three unifaces and a possible
fourth in the database (Table 8.3). Trihedrals are tools that
have a triangular shape in cross-section. This is either a result
of the original cobble/nodule form, or of ﬂaking on an unusu-
ally thick nodule/cobble. In some instances trihedrals may
result from ﬂaking on an unusually thick natural or struck
ﬂake. One clear example of a trihedral was found at
Rodafnidia (Table 8.3; Fig. 8.11c). Rough-outs are large ﬂat
artifacts with a small number of ﬂake removals on each face.
They tend to be ﬂat in cross-section. It is often difﬁcult to
distinguish these from ordinary cores, which happen to be
Table 8.2 Main artifact types found at Rodafnidia in the 2010 and the
Artifact type Artifact provenance
Blade 2 – – 2
Core 74 20 111 205
Core (tool) – 1 2 3
Discoidal core – – 1 1
Flake 240 30 164 434
Flaked ﬂake – 1 11 12
LCT 5 5 20 30
PCT (core) 2 – 2 4
PCT (ﬂake) – – 2 2
Retouched Flake – 1 7 8
Scraper – – 2 2
– – 2 2
Total 323 58 324 705
Table 8.3 Counts of LCT types recovered from Rodafnidia in 2010
LCT type Artifact provenance
Cleaver – – 1 1
Cleaver ﬂake 1 – – 1
Cleaver? – 1 1 2
Handaxe 2 3 12 17
Handaxe tip – – 1 1
Handaxe? – – 2 2
Rough-out – 1 – 1
Trihedral 1 – – 1
Uniface 1 – 2 3
Uniface? – – 1 1
Total 5 5 20 30
N. Galanidou et al.
made on a ﬂat nodule. Their status as an unﬁnished LCT is
therefore a subjective call. Two examples were identiﬁed at
Rodafnidia (Table 8.3; Fig. 8.11d).
Cleavers are deﬁned on a number of criteria (Mourre
2003). (1) The presence of a clear ﬂat cleaver edge or bit. (2)
They are made on ﬂake blanks. (3) The ﬂake blanks show
evidence of preparation of the core prior to the detachment
of the ﬂake. This evidence takes the form of large primary
ﬂake scars whose point of origin, where discernable, origi-
nates well beyond the current margins of the cleaver. (4)
Adjacent to the cleaver bit, on the dorsal face, is a large ﬂat
ﬂake scar, which represents one of the original blank scars
just noted. With regard to criteria two to four, these cleavers
conform to Sharon’s Large Flake Acheulian (2007). (5)
Where it is possible to observe, the ﬂake blanks are side-
struck and the lateral margins of the cleaver (i.e. the proxi-
mal and distal of the original ﬂake-blank) have been removed.
Criteria two to ﬁve represent a common pattern in the African
Acheulian and one of us (JM) has seen numerous identical
examples from the Middle Pleistocene of South Africa.
So much so, that the cleavers at Rodafnidia could be said to
conform precisely to the ‘Acheulian package’ noted else-
where (Sharon 2008, 2009; McNabb and Sinclair 2009).
The ﬂaking away of the proximal area, accompanied by
some thinning and shaping of the former distal end of the
blank, to form the cleaver sides, is particularly diagnostic.
The deﬁnition of cleavers adopted here is, primarily, a tech-
nological one. The database at the end of the 2012 season3
recorded one certain (Fig. 8.12a) and one possible example
of these cleavers (Fig. 8.12c), though the latter may be a
broken handaxe. A number of large ﬂakes from Rodafnidia
would be suitable for LCT blanks. One in particular is highly
suggestive of a ﬂake blank from the prepared surface of a
core or boulder (Fig. 8.12b). It was recovered from the exca-
vated Unit 1 of Trench B Extension.
Cleavers represent one of the most interesting aspects of
the Rodafnidia Acheulian lithic assemblage. In that a number
3 As the paper goes to print in 2016, four additional seasons in the ﬁeld
have brought to light a larger sample of LCTs and cleavers.
Fig. 8.10 (a–e) Five examples of the handaxe component for the Rodafnidia LCTs
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
Fig. 8.11 Four examples of Lower Paleolithic artifacts from Rodafnidia. (a) Scraper; (b) Single platform core or massive scraper; (c) Trihedral;
N. Galanidou et al.
Fig. 8.12 Three examples of the cleaver component for the Rodafnidia LCTs. (a) Cleaver on a side struck ﬂake; (b) Cleaver ﬂake; (c) Cleaver
broken at tip or handaxe broken medially
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
of cleavers are made on pre-prepared ﬂake blanks, they are
closer in concept to the technologically deﬁned Gesher Benot
Ya’aqov (GBY) cleavers (Goren-Inbar and Saragusti 1996),
than to other non-technologically deﬁned assemblages else-
where in the Near East. Cleavers may be deﬁned on morpho-
metric (Leakey and Roe 1994), or on typological grounds
(Kleindienst 1962; Wymer 1961). Even a brief perusal of
some of the Acheulian literature from Near Eastern sites sug-
gests, from the illustrations, that many of the LCTs described
as cleavers are in fact ovate handaxes with transverse tranchet
blows resulting in square-ended handaxes (the tips are plainly
convergent and are made by bifacial thinning and shaping
prior to the tranchet blow). We would restrict the deﬁnition of
cleavers to the purely technological deﬁnition set forth here,
and so see all convergent tips with square ends, whether made
by thinning and shaping detachments, or by tranchet ﬁnish, as
handaxes (narrow square-ended). Irrespective of this, the tech-
nologically deﬁned cleavers from Rodafnidia present an inter-
esting problem. The large ﬂake-blank cleaver, or Acheulian
package as described here (Sharon 2007; McNabb 2009), is
normally associated with intractable lithologies such as andes-
ite in South Africa or the volcanics of East Africa and GBY.
On more tractable rock types, particularly those that knap like
siliceous rocks, the preforming of ﬂake blanks is usually
unnecessary. A future research question for our project will be
to examine why Acheulian knappers at Rodafnidia resorted to
this package, when the chert, which is a common lithology at
the site, knaps so well and did not require it?
While there is a strong African ﬂavor to the Acheulian
assemblage at Rodafnidia originating from Units O and 1, it
is important to remember that any Acheulian settlement of
Lesbos will have originated from mainland Anatolia.
Kaletepe Deresi 3 is the only excavated Acheulian site in
Turkey (Slimak et al. 2008; Dinçer 2016). Located on a bank
of a seasonal drainage in the Göllüdağ region of central
Anatolia (well known for its obsidian sources), it has revealed
assemblages manufactured on obsidian and andesite with a
strong afﬁnity to the Large Flake Acheulian described by
Sharon (2007). Since Rodafnidia also falls within this group
of assemblages, a key future research goal will be to compare
these two assemblages.
The Prepared Core Technology Technogroup
From Unit 1 we also recovered artifacts, smaller than LCT
ﬂake-blanks, which demonstrate clear preparation of a sur-
face prior to ﬂaking. The Prepared Core Technology (PCT)
technogroup can encompass Levallois, as well as other forms
of PCT such as Victoria West (McNabb and Beaumont 2011,
2012), Kombewa and simple prepared cores (McNabb and
Sinclair 2009), as well as the Tabelbala Tachengit technique
noted at Kaletepe Deresi 3 (Slimak et al. 2008; Dinçer 2016).
What unites them as a group is that one surface on the core
or ﬂake will be considered more important than the other,
and from this preferential surface ﬂakes or a single ﬂake will
be removed. This is irrespective of whether preparation or
ﬂaking of that surface has been conducted or not. Thus, the
common thread here is that all these artifacts are conceived
of as possessing a hierarchical relationship between their
upper and lower halves.
The two forms of classic Levallois present at Rodafnidia
are as follows:
• Radial/centripetal. In practice the cores need not always
be circular in their plan form. One example of a radial
core in a worn state was found on the surface during ﬁeld
walking (Fig. 8.13a).
• Convergent/point. Two examples of Levallois convergent
cores were found (Table 8.3), both worn, the latter a surface
ﬁnd possibly made on a ﬂake. A single example of an
atypical Levallois convergent point was recovered from
one of the test pits, and a second atypical point was found
on the surface during ﬁeld walking (Fig. 8.13b, c).
Additionally, there exists the artifact category known as
‘Simple Prepared Cores’ that represent a form of ‘Stripped
Down Levallois’ (White and Ashton 2003). They conform to
a number of the rules for Levallois as identiﬁed by Boëda
(Boëda 1995). However, a carefully prepared surface and
careful maintenance of lateral and distal convexities is not
practised (White and Ashton 2003). Two such simple pre-
pared cores were discovered during surface survey collection
For many archaeologists the presence of PCT, and
Levallois in particular, signals the Middle Paleolithic (Clark
1994, 1999). However, the temporal boundary between these
periods based on tool typology is becoming blurred
(McBrearty 2001, 2003; Shea 2006; Beaumont 2011). There
are a number of sites from Africa where Acheulian artifacts
are clearly contemporary with Levallois and other forms of
PCT, e.g. the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya (Tryon et al.
2005), and Canteen Koppie, South Africa (McNabb and
Beaumont 2012). This has been noted elsewhere. Currently,
the presence of Levallois may signal an Acheulian with PCT
or the presence of a Middle Paleolithic assemblage. A major
question for future research will be determining the relation-
ship between the LCTs and the PCTs.
The Non-PCT Flake Cores Technogroup
A number of ﬂake core morphologies persist throughout the
African Early Stone Age (Leakey 1971; Kuman 2007) and
N. Galanidou et al.
Fig. 8.13 Examples of PCT artifacts from Rodafnidia. (a) Radial Levallois core; (b) Convergent Levallois point (atypical); (c) Convergent
can be found in other parts of the Old World where similar
ranges of raw materials occur. These forms are choppers/
chopping tools, discoids/discoidal cores, single platform
cores (including the typological category of core scraper), and
polyhedrons and irregular polyhedrons (McNabb and Sinclair
2009; McNabb and Beaumont 2011). How culturally diag-
nostic, or indicative of a speciﬁc period (say Lower Paleolithic
but not Middle Paleolithic) they are, is open to debate. Raw
material considerations may weigh heavily in the choice of
knapping procedures. Furthermore, enigmatic types such as
spheroids/sub-spheroids are also reported from Early Stone
Age sites (Kleindienst 1962; Leakey 1971, 1979).
A single example of a chopping tool (Table 8.2) is present
in the Rodafnidia database, made of a coarse-grained lava and
found on the surface during ﬁeld walking. A number of other
cores resemble chopping tools, but their morphology is not
sufﬁciently diagnostic for a conﬁdent interpretation. There
were two typological discoids (Table 8.2), both made by
alternate ﬂaking. There is one example of a single platform
core, which would class typologically as a core scraper
(Table 8.2; Fig. 8.11b); as well as a spheroid made on lava
The Flakes and Detached Pieces
A large number of ﬂakes were recovered during ﬁeld walking
and during the excavation of the test pits and the extension
trenches. The majority are un-diagnostic waste ﬂakes. Some
possess dihedral butts, but this need not be an indicator of the
Middle Paleolithic alone. Some of the larger ones may have
been used as cores.
The Retouched Flake Technogroup
The Retouched and Modiﬁed Flake technogroup is divided
into two broad sub-groups. The ﬁrst are the ﬂaked ﬂakes.
These are a common Lower Paleolithic tool type in which a
ﬂake of any size is ﬂaked again by one or more removals.
They are not cores, since the intent appears to be the modiﬁ-
cation of the edge (Ashton et al. 1991). Our database records
12 examples (Table 8.2), all having the razor-sharp edges pro-
duced by this technique. Technologically they are similar to
those found at other Lower Paleolithic/ESA sites, with remov-
als being single or multiple, direct or inverse, proximal, distal
or from the laterals. The Retouched Flake group encompasses
scrapers, made on ﬂakes (Fig. 8.11a) as well as on unworked
pieces, three denticulates, an un-diagnostic retouched point, a
possible wedge, and a potential awl.
Summary of Lithic Artifact Analysis
The artifacts recovered from controlled excavations (Unit 1)
and from systematic ﬁeld walking around the excavated ﬁelds
(Unit 0) clearly demonstrate the presence of the Acheulian at
Rodafnidia. The Trench B Extension conﬁrmed that diagnostic
Lower Paleolithic artifacts were present within the channel
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
ﬁlls of Unit 1. It is possible that Middle Paleolithic groups
associated with Levallois technology were also present there.
Given the very small numbers of diagnostic artifacts, the pres-
ence of the latter remains to be established by further research.
Lower Paleolithic sites in the north-east Mediterranean Basin
are sparse and discontinuous due to archaeological research
traditions and priorities in the countries involved (but see
Tourloukis 2016 for a geoarchaeological perspective). They
are found in a variety of settings, in caves or in the open air,
and associated with good quality lithic raw materials and
larger or smaller bodies of fresh water. Together they produce
a fragmentary picture of a number of hominin dispersal epi-
sodes at different times of the Early and the Middle
Pleistocene. In Turkey and in Greece, bifacial technology is
better known from material recovered on the surface rather
than through excavation (Galanidou et al. 2016, appendix 1;
Dinçer 2016). Working with material deriving from open
contexts presents us with a number of problems in discussing
the character and presence of Acheulian groups.
Recently, Kuhn (2010a) set out the research questions and
current status of Lower Paleolithic research in Anatolia, and
in this volume Dinçer offers an updated comprehensive
account of the evidence available. The issues here concern
the quality and the affordances of the record, which stem
from recovery conditions and procedures, rather than the
absolute numbers of the sites and the ﬁnds reported in the
large expanses of Anatolia. Out of a total of 170 Lower
Paleolithic sites documented in the Archaeological
Settlements of Turkey Project database (www.tayproject.
org), only a handful can be included in detailed paleoanthro-
pological discussion. In central Anatolia, the two major refer-
ence sites are situated at altitudes higher than 1000 m (Dinçer
2016). Kaletepe Deresi 3 near Cappadocia is the only exca-
vated site with what is described as a ‘geologically in situ
Acheulian component’ and a Middle Paleolithic component
overlying it (Slimak et al. 2008; Dinçer 2016). Its Acheulian
component provides the nearest published comparanda to the
Rodafnidia Acheulian assemblage. Further west, Dursunlu,
located in a lignite quarry, has yielded less than 30 quartz
artifacts, mostly ﬂakes and ﬂake tools, and associated faunal
remains. These, coupled with paleomagnetic dating, document
a hominin presence here in the Early Pleistocene, probably
sometime around or post 1 Ma (Güleç et al. 2009).
In Aegean Turkey, the Lower Paleolithic inventory
includes part of a Homo erectus skull found embedded in a
travertine block in a quarry near Kocabaş in the province of
Denizli, recently dated to around 1.1 Ma (Kappelman et al.
2008; Lebatard et al. 2014; Aytek and Harvati 2016), and
the odd site containing bifaces, big ﬂakes, or chopping tools
(Dinçer 2016). The picture of Lower Paleolithic in Turkey
is completed with two reference cave sites in the far south
and the far north of the country. The earliest component of
the 11-m-long and impressive Karain Cave sequence (Otte
et al. 1998, 1999) on the Mediterranean coast south of the
Taurus Mountain consists of Clactonian ﬂakes, denticu-
lates, and three bifaces manufactured on a variety of radio-
larite, ﬂint, and calcareous stones. In European Turkey,
Yarimburgaz Cave contains Middle Pleistocene deposits
and a lithic assemblage with Middle Paleolithic afﬁnities
(Arsebük 1993; Arsebük and Özbaşaran 1999; Kuhn 2003,
2010b). Yarimburgaz Cave may be combined with open-air
sites of low chronological resolution that contain choppers,
chopping tools, and other lithics (Dinçer 2016) to make up
the patchy and enigmatic record of Turkish Thrace.
In the southern part of the Balkan peninsula, the Lower
Paleolithic inventory numbers less than a handful of sites or
ﬁnd spots, presenting fewer than a dozen Large Cutting
Tools (Harvati et al. 2009; Galanidou 2004, 2014a, b;
Panagopoulou et al. 2015). Three are key sites. First is
Petralona cave in Macedonia, yielding a precious Homo hei-
delbergensis cranium (Henning et al. 1982; Grün 1996;
Harvati 2009) and early artifacts, though neither can be
directly associated with the other (Darlas 2014).
The second key site is Kokkinopilos, an ancient wetland
site in the karstic landscape of Epirus with eroding terra rossa
deposits out of which three impressive ﬂint LCTs originate:
an elongated ‘Micoquian handaxe’ (Runnels and Van Andel
1993a) and two more bifaces (Tourloukis 2009, 2016). Of
these latter pair, one may be considered to have Acheulian
afﬁnities, but the other, originating from a stratiﬁed context,
has afﬁnities with the Keilmesser group, and so perhaps may
be part of the Kokkinopilos Middle Paleolithic component
(Galanidou et al. 2016). At Kokkinopilos an overlap, in chro-
nostratigraphic terms, between the Acheulian and an early
Mousterian may be envisaged. This is concordant with
Tourloukis and Karkanas’ (2012) description of the site as ‘a
low energy depositional environment of a shallow lake formed
in a tectonic basin, at times drying out’ (2012: 4). Serious
attempts to come to grips with its stratigraphy and dating have
taken place, especially in the undisturbed localities.
Luminescence dating of the biface- bearing sediments sug-
gests minimum ages between 207 and 220 kBP (ibid.). These
match the Runnels and van Andel (1993a, 198) date calcu-
lated from the rate of sedimentation, namely 250 kBP, pro-
posed for the context of the ﬁrst handaxe. The two lines of
evidence combined give us conﬁdence that hominin presence
at Kokkinopilos began during the late Middle Pleistocene.
The question that remains open is who these hominins were
The third Lower Paleolithic site is Marathousa 1 in the
Megalopolis basin, an area long-known for its rich paleonto-
N. Galanidou et al.
logical yield. Archaeological excavation on this Middle
Pleistocene site has produced the remains of Elephas
(Palaeoloxodon) antiquus and lithics (mainly ﬂakes and
various kinds of fragments though no bifacially worked
specimens) in a ﬁne-grained geological matrix (Panagopoulou
et al. 2015). Ongoing research is expected to clarify the dep-
ositional history of these remains.
Beyond these three instances, if one adds in Lenormant’s
(1867) nineteenth-century reference to a biface claimed to
originate from the Megalopolis basin in the Peloponnese, the
handaxe discovered by Eric Higgs (1964) in west Macedonia
during his ﬁrst expedition to Greece in the 1960s, as well as
two more sites in the Peneios River, Thessaly (Runnels and
van Andel (1993b) and Nea Artaki, Euboea (Sarantea 1986)
whose assignment to the Lower Paleolithic sites is possible
yet lacks secure chronostratigraphic conﬁrmation, one has
enumerated the whole of the scanty Lower Paleolithic record
of mainland Greece.
Claims for Lower Paleolithic ﬁnds from a handful of
island sites that include Milos, Aegean Sea (Chelidonio
2001), Kefallonia, Ionian Sea (Foss 2002), Loutro and
Plakias in south Crete, Libyan Sea (Mortensen 2008; Strasser
et al. 2010), and Gavdos, Libyan Sea (Kopaka and Matzanas
2009, 2011), are based on artifact typology, as most ﬁnds
derive from low-resolution surface collections. At Plakias
they are also based on dating the associated geological con-
texts (Strasser et al. 2011); unequivocal evidence, however,
is absent, since association of the claimed early ﬁnds with
the better dated geological contexts has not been adequately
shown (Galanidou 2014a, b).
Rodafnidia is unique for the richness of an Acheulian
lithic assemblage, which has to date no counterpart within
the Lower Paleolithic of the Aegean Turkey or Greece
(Galanidou 2013; Galanidou et al. 2013). The site therefore
stands out as an exciting target for enriching the Lower
Paleolithic record of the north-east Mediterranean and for
obtaining dates for Acheulian activity. The importance of
this site and thence of our project lies in (i) the time and
duration of the hominin and human presence, with pIRSL
results suggesting that the upper part of the excavated
sequence dates to the Middle Pleistocene. (ii) The size of the
entire site—the Acheulian site may be extensive: explaining
the archaeological assemblage distribution forms a central
focus for future research. And (iii) the geography of the
site which has a critical element to it: both on a local scale,
in a ﬂuvio-lacustrine environment of the Kalloni basin right
by geothermal springs, and on a regional scale, with its cen-
tral geographical position on the border of two continents
and the heart of Eurasia. The proximity of Lesbos to Anatolia
makes Rodafnidia a key site in the attempt to comprehend
both hominin migration into Europe (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-
Cohen 2001; Moncel 2010), as well as Acheulian occupation
northwards of the Jordanian Rift Valley (Dennell et al. 2011;
Goren-Inbar et al. 2000; Otte et al. 1999; Lordkipanidze
et al. 2000). Further systematic exploration of the site will
furnish research into human origins with archaeological data
to address the role of these two key Eurasian regions, either
as areas of occupation and stasis, or as mere passageways in
hominin dispersals during the Middle Pleistocene.
Acknowledgments The ﬁrst year of systematic research at Rodafnidia,
Lisvori was supported by the University of Crete, the Secretariat General
for the Aegean and Island Policy and the authority of the North East
Aegean Region. We are grateful to the Municipality of Lesbos for its sup-
port and lab space granted. Doukas and Toula Alvanou and Theodoros
Hatzoglou granted us permission to excavate their properties in 2012, and
for this they deserve our special thanks. We thank the Editors and anony-
mous reviewers for the helpful comments and suggestions.
Arsebük, G. (1993). Yarımburgaz, a Lower Paleolithic cave site near
Istanbul. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptman, M. Liverani, P. Matthiac,
& M. Mellink (Eds.), Between the rivers and over the mountains,
archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica (pp. 23–36). Roma:
Gruppo Editoriale Internazionale.
Arsebük, G., & Özbaşaran, M. (1999). Pleistocene archaeology at the
cave of Yarımburgaz in Eastern Thrace/Turkey: Preliminary results.
In G. N. Bailey, E. Adam, E. Panagopoulou, C. Perlès, & K. Zachos
(Eds.), The Palaeolithic archaeology of Greece and adjacent areas
(pp. 59–72). Nottingham: The British School at Athens.
Ashton, N., Dean, P., & McNabb, J. (1991). Flaked ﬂakes: What,
Where, When and Why? Lithics, 12, 1–11.
Aytek, I. A., & Harvati, K. (2016). The human fossil record from
Turkey. In K. Harvati, & M. Roksandic (Eds.), Paleoanthropology
in the Balkans and Anatolia: Human evolution and its context.
Bar-Yosef, O., & Belfer-Cohen, A. (2001). From Africa to Eurasia—
Early dispersals. Quaternary International, 75, 19–28.
Beaumont, P. (2011). The edge: More on ﬁre making by about 1.7 million
years ago at Wonderwerk Cave in South Africa. Current
Anthropology, 52, 585–594.
Boëda, E. (1995). Levallois: A volumetric construction, methods, a
technique. In H. L. Dibble & O. Bar-Yosef (Eds.), The deﬁnition
and interpretation of Levallois technology (pp. 41–68). Madison,
Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
Bonde, A., Murray, A. S., & Friedrich, W. L. (2001). Santorini:
Luminescence dating of a volcanic province using quartz.
Quaternary Science Reviews, 20, 789–793.
Chelidonio, G. (2001). Manufatti litici su ciottolo da Milos (isole
cicladi): Nota preliminare. Pegaso: Rivista annuale di cultura medi-
terranea, 1, 117–144.
Clark, J. D. (1994). The Acheulean industrial complex in Africa and
elsewhere. In R. S. Corruccini & R. L. Ciochon (Eds.), Integrative
paths to the past. Paleoanthropological advances in honour of
F. Clark Howell (pp. 451–469). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Clark, J. D. (1999). Cultural continuity and change in hominid behavior
in Africa during the Middle to Upper Pleistocene transition. In
H. Ullrich (Ed.), Hominid evolution. Lifestyles and survival strate-
gies (pp. 277–292). Archaea: Gelsenkirchen.
Darlas, A. (2014). Researching the identity and importance of the
Petralona cave in Greek and European prehistory. In A century of
Research in prehistoric Macedonia 1912–2012, Proceedings of
International Conference Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki
November 2012 (pp. 195–204) (Original in Greek).
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
De Vos, J., Van der Made, J., Athanassiou, A., Lyras, G., Sondaar, P., &
Dermitzakis, M. D. (2002). Preliminary note on the Late Pliocene
fauna from Vatera (Lesvos, Greece). Annales Géologiques des Pays
Hélléniques, 1e Série, 39(A), 37–70.
Dennell, R. W., Marinón-Torres, M., & Bermúdez de Castro, J. M.
(2011). Hominin variability, climatic instability and population
demography in Middle Pleistocene Europe. Quaternary Science
Reviews, 30, 1511–1524.
Dinçer, B. (2016). The Lower Paleolithic in Turkey: Anatolia and hom-
inin dispersals. In K. Harvati, & M. Roksandic (Eds.),
Paleoanthropology of the Balkans and Anatollia: Human evolution
and its context (pp. 213–228). Dordrecht: Springer.
Foss, P. (2002). Kephallenia: Archaeology and history: The ancient
Greek cities. In K. Randsbourg (Ed.), Acta Archaelogica (Vol. 73).
Copenhagen: Blackwell Munksgaard.
Galanidou, N. (2004). Human presence in the Balkans during the
Palaeolithic. In H. J. Grifﬁths, J. Reed, & B. Kristufek (Eds.),
Balkan biodiversity: Pattern and process in the European hotspot
(pp. 157–175). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Galanidou, N. (2013). Looking for the earliest occupants of the
Aegean—Palaeolithic excavations at Rodaﬁnidia, Lisvori, Lesvos.
In M. Alvanou (Ed.), Island identities (pp. 15–17). Mytilene:
Secretariat General for the Aegean and Island Policy.
Galanidou, N. (2014a). Advances in the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic
archaeology of Greece for the new millenium. Pharos, 20(1), 1–40.
Galanidou, N. (2014b). Archaic hominins on Crete: Fact or ﬁction.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 27(2), 260–267.
Galanidou, N. (2016). Before ancient Nericos, What? Palaeolithic ﬁnds
from Karyotes Lefkas. In C. Papadatou-Yannopoulou (Ed.),
Nericos, Lefkas, Castro. The longest-living capital of Lefkas.
Proceedings of a Conference held at Lefkas in August 2010. Lefkas:
Cultural Centre of the Lefkas Municipality 83–111.
Galanidou, N., Cole, J., Iliopoulos, G., & McNabb, J. (2013). East
meets West: The Middle Pleistocene site of Rodafnidia on Lesvos,
Greece. Antiquity Project Gallery, 87(336). http://antiquity.ac.uk/
Galanidou, N, Papoulia, C., & Ligovanlis, S. (2016). The Middle
Palaeolithic bifacial tools from Megalo Karvounari. In B. Forsén,
N. Galanidou, & E. Tikkala (Eds.), The Thesprotia Expedition vol.
III. Helsinki: Papers and Monographs of the Finnish Institute at
Goren-Inbar, N., Feibel, C. S., Versoub, K. L., Melamed, Y., Kislev,
M. E., Tchernov, E., & Saragusti, I. (2000). Pleistocene milestones
on the Out-of-Africa corridor at Gesher Ya’aqov, Israel. Science,
Goren-Inbar, N., & Saragusti, I. (1996). An Acheulian biface assem-
blage from the site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel: Indications of
African afﬁnities. Journal of Field Archaeology, 23, 15–30.
Grün, R. (1996). A re-analysis of electron spin resonance dating results
associated with the Petralona hominid. Journal of Human Evolution,
Güleç, E., White, T., Kuhn, S., Özer, I., Sağır, M., Yılmaz, H., & Howell,
F. C. (2009). The Lower Pleistocene lithic assemblage from Dursunlu
(Konya), central Anatolia, Turkey. Antiquity, 83(319), 11–22.
Harisis, H. B., Durand, P., Axiotis, M., & Harisis, T. B. (2000). Traits of
Palaeolithic settlement on Lesbos. Archaeology and Arts, 76, 83–87.
Original in Greek.
Harvati, K. (2009). Petralona: Link between Africa and Europe? In L. A.
Schepartz, S. C. Fox, & C. Bourbou (Eds.), New directions in the
skeletal biology of Greece (Hesperia Supplement, Vol. 43, pp. 31–47).
Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
Harvati, K., Panagopoulou, E., & Runnels, C. (2009). The paleoanthro-
pology of Greece. Evolutionary Anthropology, 18(4), 131–143.
Hecht, J. (1974). Geological map of Greece, 1/50Π000, ‘Polichnitos’
sheet. Athens: Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration. Original
Henning, G. J., Herr, W., Weber, E., & Xirotiris, N. I. (1982). Petralona
cave dating controversy. Nature, 299, 281–282.
Higgs, E. S. (1964). A hand axe from Greece. Antiquity, 38, 54–55.
Jöris, O. (2014). Early Palaeolithic Europe. In C. Renfrew & P. Bahn
(Eds.), The Cambridge world prehistory (Vol. III, pp. 1703–1746).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kappelman, J., Alçiçek, M. C., Kazanci, N., Schultz, M., Özkul, M., &
Sen, S. (2008). First Homo erectus from Turkey and implications
for migrations into temperate Eurasia. American Journal of Physical
Anthropology, 135(1), 110–116.
Kelepertsis, A. (1993). The mineralogy—Geochemistry of pliocene
lacustrine sediments of the polichnitos area, Lesvos Island, Greece
and the formation of silica polymorphs. Mineral Wealth, 83, 25–34.
Kleindienst, M. R. (1962). Components of the East African Acheulean
assemblage: An analytic approach. In G. Mortelmans (Ed.), Actes
du IVème Congrès Panafricain de Préhistoire et de l’Étude du
Quaternaire (Vol. 40, pp. 81–105). Tervuren: Musée royal de
Kopaka, K., & Matzanas, C. (2009). Palaeolithic industries from the
island of Gavdos, near neighbour to Crete in Greece. Antiquity
Project Gallery, 83(321). http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/antiquitynew/
Kopaka, K., & Matzanas, C. (2011). Early marine travels in the Aegean
and Crete. Reﬂections departing from the knapped-stone industries
from Gavdos island. In M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki (ed.) Proceedings of
the 10th International Cretological Conference, Chania, 1-8 October
2006, A1, 43-82. (in Greek). Chania, Chrysostomos Scholar Society.
Kouli, M., & Seymour, S. K. (2006). Contribution of remote sensing
techniques to the identiﬁcation and characterization of Miocene
calderas, Lesvos Island, Aegean Sea, Hellas. Geomorphology,
Kuhn, S. L. (2003). Flexibility and variation in the Lower Paleolithic:
A view from Yarımburgaz Cave. In M. Özbaşaran, O. Tanındı, &
A. Boratav (Eds.), Archaeological essays in honour of Homo amatus:
Güven Arsebük (pp. 149–157). İstanbul: Ege Yayınları.
Kuhn, S. L. (2010a). Was Anatolia a bridge or barrier to early hominin
dispersals? Quaternary International, 223–224, 434–435.
Kuhn, S. L. (2010b). The Yarımburgaz lithic assemblage. In F. C.
Howell, G. Arsebük, S. L. Kuhn, M. Özbaşaran, & M. C. Stiner
(Eds.), Culture and biology at the crossroads: The Middle
Pleistocene record of Yarımburgaz Cave (Thrace, Turkey)
(pp. 93–129). İstanbul: Ege Yayınları.
Kuman, K. (2007). The earlier Stone Age in southern Africa: Site con-
text and the inﬂuence of cave studies. In T. Pickering, K. Schick, &
N. Toth (Eds.), Breathing life into fossils. Taphonomic studies in
honour of C.K. (Bob) Brain (pp. 181–198). Bloomington, Indiana:
Stone Age Institute Press.
Lambrakis, N. J., & Stamatis, G. N. (2008). Contribution to the study of
thermal waters in Greece: Chemical patterns and origin of thermal
water in the thermal springs of Lesvos. Hydrological Processes, 22,
Lamera, S. (2004). The Polichnitos ignimbrite of Lesvos island.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Patras. (Original in Greek).
Leakey, M. D. (1971). Olduvai Gorge: Excavations in Beds I and II
1960–1963. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leakey, M. D. (1979). Olduvai Gorge. My search for early man.
Glasgow: Book Club Associates for William Collins Sons and Co.
Leakey, M. D., & Roe, D. A. (1994). Olduvai Gorge Volume V;
Excavations in Beds II, IV and the Msek Beds 1968–1971.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lebatard, A. E., Alçiçek, M. C., Rochette, P., Khatib, S., Vialet, A.,
Boulbes, N., et al. (2014). Dating the Homo erectus bearing traver-
tine from Kocabaş¸ (Denizli, Turkey) at least 1.1 Ma. Earth and
Planetary Science Letters, 390, 8–18.
Lenormant, F. (1867). L’ âge de la pierre en Grèce. Revue Archéologique, I,
N. Galanidou et al.
Lomax, J., Hilgers, A., Twidale, C. R., Bourne, J. A., & Radtke, U.
(2007). Treatment of broad palaeodose distributions in OSL dating
of dune sands from the western Murray Basin, South Australia.
Quaternary Geochronology, 2, 51–56.
Lordkipanidze, D., Bar-Yosef, O., & Otte, M. (2000). Early humans at
the gates of Europe. Proceedings of the First International
Symposium, Dmanisi, Tbilisi (Georgia) September 1998. Liège:
Etudes et Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Liège
Lykousis, V. (2009). Sea-level changes and shelf break prograding
sequences during the last 400 ka in the Aegean margins: Subsidence
rates and palaeogeographic implications. Continental Shelf Research,
Lyras, G. A., & van der Geer, A. A. E. (2007). The Late Pliocene verte-
brate fauna of Vatera (Lesvos Island, Greece). Cranium, 24(2), 11–24.
Marriott, S. B. (2006). Floodplain. In A. S. Goodie (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of geomorphology (Vol. 1, pp. 381–384). New York:
McBrearty, S. (2001). The Middle Pleistocene of East Africa. In L. S.
Barham & K. Robson-Brown (Eds.), Human roots. Africa and Asia
in the Middle Pleistocene (pp. 81–98). Bristol: Western Academic
and Specialist Press.
McBrearty, S. (2003). Patterns of technological change at the origin of
Homo sapiens. Before Farming, 3(9), 1–5.
McNabb, J. (2009). The ESA stone tool assemblage from the Cave of
Hearths, Beds 1–3. In J. McNabb & A. Sinclair (Eds.), The cave of
hearths: Makapan middle pleistocene research project: Field
research by Anthony Sinclair and Patrick Quinney (University of
Southampton Series in Archaeology, Vol. 1, pp. 75–94). Oxford:
McNabb, J., & Beaumont, P. (2011). A report on the archaeological
assemblages from excavations by Peter Beaumont at Canteen
Koppie, Northern Cape, South Africa (University of Southampton
Series in Archaeology, Vol. 4). Oxford: Archaeopress.
McNabb, J., & Beaumont, P. (2012). Excavations in the Acheulean levels
at the earlier Stone Age site of Canteen Koppie, Northern Province,
South Africa. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 78, 51–71.
McNabb, J., Binyon, F., & Hazelwood, L. (2004). The large cutting
tools from the South African Acheulean and the questions of social
traditions. Current Anthropology, 45(5), 653–677.
McNabb, J., & Sinclair, A. (2009). The cave of hearths: Makapan mid-
dle pleistocene research project: Field research by Anthony Sinclair
and Patrick Quinney, 1996–2001 (University of Southampton Series
in Archaeology, Vol. 1). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Moncel, M.-H. (2010). Oldest human expansions in Eurasia: Favouring
and limiting factors. Quaternary International, 223–224, 1–9.
Mortensen, P. (2008). Lower to Middle Palaeolithic artifacts from
Loutró on the south coast of Crete. Antiquity Project Gallery,
Mourre, V. (2003). Implications culturelles de la technologie des
hachereaux. Ph.D. Dissertation, Université de Paris X – Nanterre.
(Original in French).
Otte, M., Yalçınkaya, I., Bar-Yosef, O., Kozlowski, J. K., Léotard,
J.-M., Taşkıran, H., Noiret, P., & Kartal, M. (1999). The Anatolian
Palaeolithic: Data and reﬂections. In G. N. Bailey, E. Adam,
E. Panagopoulou, C. Perlès, & K. Zachos (Eds.), The Palaeolithic
archaeology of Greece and adjacent areas (pp. 73–85). Nottingham:
The British School at Athens.
Otte, M., Yalçınkaya, I., Kozlowski, J., Bar-Yosef, O., Bayón, I. L., &
Taşkıran, H. (1998). Long-term technical evolution and human
remains in the Anatolian Palaeolithic. Journal of Human Evolution,
Panagopoulou, E., Tourloukis, V., Thompson, N., Athanassiou, A.,
Tsartsidou, G., Konidaris, G. E., et al. (2015). Marathousa 1: A new
Middle Pleistocene archaeological site from Greece. Antiquity
Project Gallery, 89, 343.
Pe-Piper G. (1978). The Cenozoic volcanic rocks of Lesbos.
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Patras. (Original in Greek).
Pe-Piper, G., & Piper, D. J. W. (1993). Revised stratigraphy of the
Miocene volcanic rocks of Lesbos, Greece. Neues Jahrbuch für
Geologie und Paläontologie Monatshefte, 2, 97–110.
Pe-Piper, G., & Piper, D. J. W. (2002). The igneous rocks of Greece.
Beiträge zur Regionalen Geologie der Erde, 30, 1–573.
Runnels, C., & Van Andel, T. H. (1993a). A Handaxe from Kokkinopilos,
Epirus, and its implications for the Paleolithic of Greece. Journal of
Field Archaeology, 20, 191–203.
Runnels, C., & Van Andel, T. H. (1993b). The lower and middle paleolithic
of thessaly (Greece). Journal of Field Archaeology, 20, 299–318.
Sakellariou, D., & Galanidou, N. (2016). Pleistocene submerged
landscapes and Palaeolithic archaeology in the tectonically active
Aegean region. In J. Harff, G. N. Bailey, & F. Lüth (Eds.), Geology
and archaeology: Submerged landscapes of the continental shelf
(Special Publications, Vol. 411). London: Geological Society
Sarantea, E. (1986). Prehistoric ﬁnds from Nea Artaki Euboea. Athens:
Arsenides Editions. Original in Greek.
Sharon, G. (2007). Acheulian large ﬂake industries: Technology, chro-
nology and signiﬁcance (British Archaeological Reports
International Series, Vol. 1701). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Sharon, G. (2008). The impact of raw material on Acheulian large ﬂake
production. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 1329–1344.
Sharon, G. (2009). Acheulian giant core technology: A worldwide
perspective. Current Anthropology, 50, 335–367.
Shea, J. J. (2006). The origins of lithic projectile point technology:
Evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. Journal of
Archaeological Science, 33, 823–846.
Slimak, L., Kuhn, S. L., Roche, H., Mouralis, D., Buitenhuis, H.,
Balkan-Atli, N., et al. (2008). Kaletepe Deresi 3 (Turkey):
Archaeological evidence for early human settlement in Central
Anatolia. Journal of Human Evolution, 54(1), 99–111.
Soulakellis, N., Novak, I., Zouros, N., Lowman, P., & Yates, J. (2006).
Fusing Landsat 5/TM imagery and shaded relief maps in tectonic
and geomorphic mapping: Lesvos Island Greece. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing, 72(6), 693–700.
Spooner, N. A. (1994). The anomalous fading of infrared-stimulated lumi-
nescence from feldspars. Radiation Measurements, 23, 625–632.
Stamatakis, M., & Magganas, A. (1988). Thermally induced silica
transformation of Pliocene diatomaceous layers from Aegina Island,
Greece. In J. R. Hein & J. Obradovic (Eds.), Siliceous deposits of
the Tethys and Paciﬁc regions (pp. 141–150). New York: Springer
Strasser, T. F., Panagopoulou, E., Runnels, C., Murray, P., Thompson,
N., Karkanas, P., McCoy, F., & Wegmann, K. (2010). Stone age
seafaring in the Mediterranean: Evidence from the Plakias region
for Lower Palaeolithic and Mesolithic habitation of Crete. Hesperia,
Strasser, T. F., Runnels, C., Wegmann, K., Panagopoulou, E., McCoy,
F., Digregorio, C., Karkanas, P., & Thompson, N. (2011). Dating
Palaeolithic sites in southwestern Crete, Greece. Journal of
Quaternary Science, 26(5), 553–560.
Thiel, C., Buylaert, J.-P., Murray, A., Terhorst, B., Hofer, I., Tsukamoto,
S., & Frechen, M. (2011). Luminescence dating of the Stratzing
loess proﬁle (Austria). Testing the potential of an elevated tempera-
ture post-IR IRSL protocol. Quaternary International, 234, 23–31.
Thomaidou, E.L. (2009). Geological structure of Lesbos Island.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Aristotelian University of Thesaloniki. (Original
Tourloukis, V. (2009). New bifaces from the Palaeolithic site of
Kokkinopilos, Greece and their stratigraphic signiﬁcance. Antiquity
Project Gallery, 83(320). http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/tourloukis/.
Tourloukis, V. (2016). On the spatio-temporal distribution of
Mediterranean Lower Paleolithic sites: A geoarchaeological
8 Aegean Acheulian at Rodafnidia, Lesbos
perspective. In K. Harvati, & M. Roksandic (Eds.),
Paleoanthropology of the Balkans and Anatolia: Human evolution
and its context (pp. 303–323). Dordrecht: Springer.
Tourloukis, V., & Karkanas, P. (2012). The Middle Pleistocene archaeo-
logical record of Greece and the role of the Aegean in hominin dis-
persals: New data and interpretations. Quaternary Science Reviews,
Tryon, C. A., McBrearty, S., & Texier, P.-J. (2005). Levallois lithic
technology from the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya: Acheulian origin
and Middle Stone Age diversity. African Archaeological Review,
Wang, X. L., Wintle, A. G., & Lu, Y. C. (2007). Testing a single-aliquot
protocol for recuperated OSL dating. Radiation Measurements, 42,
White, M. J., & Ashton, N. (2003). Lower palaeolithic core technology
and the origins of the Levallois method in North-Western Europe.
Current Anthropology, 44, 598–609.
Wintle, A. G. (1973). Anomalous fading of thermoluminescence in
mineral samples. Nature, 245, 143–144.
Wymer, J. (1961). The Lower Palaeolithic succession in the Thames
Valley and the date of the ancient channel between Caversham and
Henley, Oxon. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 27, 1–27.
N. Galanidou et al.