Theory of Balkan Prehistory
Comments, critics, suggestions
Please submit comments, critics or suggestions on Theory of Balkan Prehistory at

Criteria: 1. Sufficient archaeological methods of excavations. 2. Sufficient documentation. 3.
Sufficient published data

Golyamo Delchevo, Durankulak and Vinitsa: crime against humanity

The Balkans traditionally have been providing important information about
prehistory of Eurasia and evolutionary anthropology. One of the most important
periods is Late Copper Age because of the discovered rich Varna cemeteries
with the earliest gold finds in the world. Despite of the opportunities of
excavations over big areas of both settlements and cemeteries, the traditionally
non-satisfying methods of excavations and documentation results in just brief
information from most important excavated sites in the Balkans.
     Vinitsa and Golyamo Delchevo are interesting for science since both were
excavated over big areas and include settlement and cemetery information.
Vinitsa is a little bit more informative than Golyamo Delchevo since the
inventory of houses was published by houses.  The publication of Golyamo
Delechevo include in fact studentish information without professional
archaeological report and very brief paleozoological report.
     Despite the fact that both tell settlements were not far from each other and
belong to one and the same period, there is a striking difference – the age of
the buried population is different. However, the information is just narrative
without paleoanthropological characteristics following iniquitous practice of
excavating skeletons without specialists-anthropologists in the field. This
practice obvious culminated at Durankulak, the most recent almost completely
prehistoric excavated cemetery, where in the final report numerous skeletons
are reported just “adults” – “a hair raising” characteristics of burials. This crime
against humanity makes the serious scholars engaged in trying to learn more
about distant ancestors – victims of non-professional archaeologists with
obvious non-humanistic view on archaeology and on society, by using
comparative data from better scholarly traditions although the lost information
never can be replaced.
     If you have problems with learning more about who was buried at Vinitsa,
Golyama Delchevo and Durankulak, you are not along. Responsibility is to
archaeologists Henrieta Todorova and Ana Raduncheva who obviously did not
have the professional skills to make scientific excavations and to offer scientific
publication making readers feel like in the cave period of human civilization.
Most importantly, Durankulak cemetery was excavated without any reason, just
for personal glory of Todorova, famous with in fact brutal social behavior and
as a brutal non-professional archaeologist.