@FrankN,
I read the papers in question with great interest. Thank you for the links. Here is the map from the Carsten Lemmen paper:
View attachment 6496
From what I see, this reinforces the map I provided above, and the findings of this Paschou paper, that the Neolithic moved from the Levant to Cyprus, Crete, then presumably the Aegean and even the Adriatic and Sicily
before it moved to even central Anatolia, much less northwestern Anatolia. So, I think it unlikely that the spread north onto the continent (i.e. broadly the Balkans and then via the Danube into central and eastern Europe) came by way of northwestern Anatolia over the Bosphorous.
Do you have other archaeological data to indicate that there was a definite, direct connection between the Neolithic of the Northwest and that of Thessaly? I believe that Maju, on his blogs has questioned such a connection.
Well, your map leaves out the lower Danube and Western Anatolia, which makes it difficult to trace the continental route.
On the lower Danube, I only have
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precriş#Neolithic
The Early Neolithic (c. 6600 – 5500 BC) consists of two cultural layers: genetically linked and with similar physiognomies. The first (layer Gura Baciului - Cârcea/Precriş) is the exclusive result of the migration of a Neolithic population from the South Balkan area, while the second (the Starčevo-Criş culture) reflects the process of adjusting to local conditions by a South Balkan community, possibly a synthesis with the local Tardenoisian groups.
Layer Gura Baciului – Cârcea, also called the Precriş culture, is a spin-off of a Protosesklo culture group that advanced north and reached the North Danubian region where it founded the first culture of painted pottery in Romania. The small number of sites attributable to this early cultural time has not allowed the route followed by the group, to penetrate the Inter-Carpathian area, to be firmly established, yet in all likelihood, it was the Oltului Valley.
There is a long list of Romanian sources enclosed - maybe one of the Romanian forum members can provide a few more details.
As to a possible Bosporus route, this paper etensively discusses the Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures in Turkish Trace:
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3994/1/3994_1511.pdf?UkUDh:CyT.
According to the paper, the site of Hoka Cesme, near the Maritsa/Meric delta, has been dated as contemporary to Sesklo (Thessaly) and Nea Nikomedia (Macedonia), most of early Neolithic material is also similar to Nea Nikomedia. Some early Neolithic sites in Western Anatolia show pottery similar to Hoka Cesme (p 223f). Moreover, a marked change in flint processing in some Western Anatolian sites near Eskisehir (from microliths to long blades) is believed to show Central Anatolian influence during the pre-pottery Neolithic, and possibly indicate a transition to farming (p. 220). The early Fikirtepe culture (named after a south-eastern Istanbul suburb), a mixed hunting-fishing-stockbreeding economy with some farming, OTOH, is dated somewhat later than Sesklo/ Hoka Cesme at 6.400 BC (p. 181). For subsequent periods, the late Neolithic and especially the Chalcolithic, the study documents several cultural linkages between the Black Sea coast east of Samsun, the Aegean, Turkish Thrace, the Eastern Balkans, and pre-Cucuteni in Romania /Moldova, and- to a lesser extent -also with Central Anatolia (p. 215ff). With respect to an eventual overland spread of farming, however, it concludes that late Mesolithic sites in West Anatolia require further investigation before substantiated statements become possible.
My personal takeaway from that study is that, rather than an overland route, a Black Sea route might deserve further consideration - not that much for the Aegean and the Danube, but especially for the Bug-Dniester culture, which in turn might have complemented LBK in introducing agriculture north of the Carpathians.
Here is another, very interesting take on the matter:
http://www.academia.edu/656645/The_Late_Escape_of_the_Neolithic_from_the_Central_Anatolian_Plain
The author postulates that the Central Anatolian Plain, rich in wild animals, did not require a full-fledged switch to agriculture, and for millenniums allowed for a hybrid "hunter cum farmer" sedentary economy. Further to the west, ecological conditions were different, but local populations needed time to "re-assemble" the Central Anatolian model to be workable (smaller, household-based units, etc.) in their environment. Once that had been achieved, in a way that included most of the "Mediterranean package", it from 6.400 BC on spread quickly around Western Anatolia and beyond. The spread itself is not described, just referenced in footnotes.
Obviously, the fastest dissemination path would be from the "Lake District" north of Antalya via the Mediterranean. Such a connection is also favoured by a paper on the early-to late 7th millennium BC site of Ulucak (Izmir), west of Antalya, that identifies similarities between local pottery and the one found in Syria and in the Aegean:
http://tobias-lib.uni-tuebingen.de/volltexte/2009/4278/pdf/Diss_Cilingiroglu_1.pdf
A similar conclusion, based on comparing five different sites in South Anatolia ("Lake District") with Ulucak (Izmir) is reached here:
http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/documenta/pdf37/37_23.pdf
However, for the specific distribution of "stamp seals", originating in Anatolia but also found on the Eastern Balkans, the following paper argues for a land connection, while constating that archaeological research of West Anatolia has been sparse so far:
http://www.academia.edu/947635/West...rly_Chalcolithic_the_actual_state_of_research
Domesticized animals appear to have appeared in Western Anatolia (Uluzak) by the beginning of the 7th millennium BC - by boat or over land from Central Anatolia?
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8743970 (abstract only).
All in all, this very much looks like work in progress. A site to watch in this respect will be
http://beanproject.eu/