Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tasić Eneolitske Kulture Središnjeg I Zapadnog Balkana/Eneolithic Cultures of Central and Western Balkans
Tasić Eneolitske Kulture Središnjeg I Zapadnog Balkana/Eneolithic Cultures of Central and Western Balkans
Edito r
Academician Milutin Garašanin
BELGRADE 1995
J
~661 30\t'tl9139
SNb'>llb'8 .LS3M ONb'
lb''tI.LN3J ~O S3't1n.LlnJ JIH.L1103N3
JIS\il
, \ilO)fIN
Reviewer
Academician Milutin Garašanin
English translation
Ivana Đorđević (pp. 9-93)
Nenad Tasić (pp. 103-175)
Proof-readers
Marina Adamović
Nenad Tasić
Layout
Nenad Tasić
Drawings
Plates l-XLIII Sead Čerkez (from PJZ III. 1979)
Figs. in the chapter Register. .. Snežana Bekrić
Published by
The "DRAGANIĆ" Co.
~_......... ....... .... . .... ........ ........... ....... . ....... . ... ............................. . ........ ... ...... . .... 7
--=X....:.t:non ... ... . .... .... ..... ...... .. ........................... .... ... . ..... ........................... .... .... ..... 9
=-~_'LY E.'>EOLlTHI C........................................................................................ ... 19
· ::c ::x)Uthem Pannonian zone ......... ................ .................................... .... 20
· -:::e Central Bal kan zone ................................................ .. ........................ 28
• -;-:,e Alpine slopes zone ........... ....................... .... .... ........... ........................ 35
• -:-:le Kostolac culture ................. ............................ .... .... ... ..... .. ........ .. .... .... 59
• -:-:, e Cotofeni culture .... ........................................... ..... .... .... .... .. .............. 65
• -:-'" e Re u.Gajary horizon....................................... ........ ................ .... ..... ... 69
• -:-:'1e Pit·grave culture and the turnuli.... ........ ........... .... ......... .. ............. .... 72
:...:..~ E},"EOLITHI C .... ............................ ............ ......................... ... ..................... 75
• -:-:-:e Vuče dol culture ................................................. .... ...... ...... .. ........ ... ... 76
· -:ne terminal Eneolithic of the Alpine zone ............. .... ........ .......... .. .... .... 85
· T ne tenninal Eneolithic of the Adriatic zone ... ............. .......................... 88
.,0-:1:5 .. ................................................................................................................. 93
~C:STER OF MAJOR ENEOLl1HIC SITIS IN FORMER YUGOSLAVIA .. 103
:; ~. ! OGRAPHY ...................... ___ ...... ___ .......................... ___ .................................... l 75
:O"'\ ~Y ............................................................................................................ l 9 l
-::-JE LIST OF PLATIS (I·XLlII) ............................................. ............................. 20 l
PREFACE
The TWble wish of Alojz Benac, the originator of the five- volume Serba-
Croot version of the Prehistory of the Yugoslav Lands (Sarajevo 1979; 1983 ; 1987)
... as tO produce a book which would give a synthetic account of that subject not only
. Serbo-Croat, but also in English and Gennan. This wish, we are sorry tO say, ,=
-u. been fu lfilled. A. Bertac' s death and, later, the disimegration of famler Yugoslavia
'~-"tc p-revented the completion of that project. By that time, some autiwrs had alread)·
7--ished tileir manuscripts, and some others were still working on tileir porticn15 of the
':e:x:. According ta the editor's arrangement, tile texts for the English edition were ta
=-e u:rinen by Mitja Brodar ("The Palaeolithic") , Alojz Benac ("Tile Neolithic"),
':kola Tasić ("The Eneolitiue") ; Borivoje Čović ("The Bronze Age", apart from the
?::rJ101uan region, wlUch was to be discussed by Nikola Tasić) ; and Mi/utin
G.lrašanin ("The Iron Age"). Tile Editorial Board made certain general guide-lines
::;- che autlwrs. They were mostly based on the methodology used in tile original
S~Croat edition of the Pre/us tary of tile Yugoslav Lands. Tile illustrative material
" .:lS reduced, but it was also updated with new drawings, plans and charts. Unfor.
='.ll!ely, tlUs part of the work seems to Itave been lost in the tragic developments wlUch
~"::t€ afflicted parts of the fonner Yugoslavia, especially Sarajevo and tile Centre for
3.:zJ<Gnological Research, in which the documentation was kej)t.
The autlwr of tlUs book on the Eneolitluc of Yugoslavia submitted lus text
OJ che Editorial Board as early as 1987. He was given valuable comments and
~estions by A. Benac, B. Čović and M. Garašanin. In the 1Yleantime, the
···:':OTtUnate events mentioned above have shown that the projected English edition is
-.o: likely tO be produced in the near future, and therefore Ile has decided to update
'is zn and publish it as a separate 1Ywnograph.
What are the most Twtable changes and additions in the present text l First
. .:ill, the fomJer admirlistrative entity (tiJe Socialist Federative Republic of Yugosla-
8 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
via) exists no longer, and therefore the earlier title has been replaced by the temi "The
Central and Western Balkan", which is llOt fully adequate, but which does cover
approximately the territory of fonneY Yugoslavia. The book discusses four regional
wholes as in the original Prehistory of the Yugoslav Laru1 (Vol. Ill) : the south
Pannonian region, the central Balkan regiml, the A lpine region and the Adriatic
region. The two former regimiS belong to the central Balkans, and the two latter anes
to the western part of the Balkan region. ln view of the character and the development
of the individual Eneolithic culture (the Kostolac culture, and particularly, the
Vučedo l culture), which extended over more than one rel(ion, this approach ,eemed
appropriate. ln order to avoid long descriptive expreSSiOns,· the text uses tenns such as
"former", or "previous" Yugoslavia, and it is IlOped that the well-meaning reader will
accept them in the sense in which they are used.
Another im/Jo rtam modific ation of the original text is the addition of the
second part, which contains a Ust of the fifty most important Eneolithic sites in the
regions. lt includes those that have been used by the author for the synthetic part of
his text, those are archaeological material from which is well known to the author.
Since 1990, which nta)' be considered the upper chronological limit of the greater
portion of the text, a number of major Eneolithic sites have been explored, especially
in the western parts of the Balkan Pminsula, but they have not been discussed here
either because they have llOt been fully published of because of evidence on their
chronology and cultural traits is still not available. lt may be observed tltat the list of
sites shows cmlSiderable regional variations as regards their distribution. lt should be
added, besides, that these regions Itave not been explored equally thoroughly: for
example, the sites in Slavonia, Srem or Pelagmua are co1lSiderably better known than
those in Istria, on tite Adriatic coastline or Herzegovilta.
The illustrations used in the book are of various origin, and tltat is specified
in the appropriate place. The tables are mostly tllOse used in Vol. 1Il of the Prehistory
of the Yugoslav Lands, and they were made by Sead Čerkez after the instructimlS of
N. Tasić, S. Dinlitrijevi ć and B. Jovanović. They Itave been complemented by a few
drawings made for the English edition by EIma Bučo fro m the Centre fo r Balkanologi-
cal Research of the Academy of Science and A rts of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The
drawings in the chapter on the sites have been made by Snežana B ekrić.
INTRODUCTION
The study of Eneoli thic sites and cultures , and of the Eneolithic in
general, does not have a long tradition in fonner Yugoslavia. If we take as its
starting point the systemati c excavations of 19 (Ljubljansko Barje) carried out
by K. Deschman in 1875 1 we are left with a period of some 120 years. Extensive
material has been collected during tha t time, rela ring to Eneolithic se ttlements
and necropolises, the material and non-material culture of th e period, the
relative and absolute dating of the cultures, cultural groups, and their variants,
as well as the period as a whole, so that it is now possible to offer a fairly accurate
syntheric survey of the development of the cultures, their stylistic and typologi-
cal feat ures.
Deschman's research was followed by the investigation of other Eneo-
lithic sites, most notably by F. Fiala at Debelo Brdo (1893) , J. Brunschmidt at
Sarvaš (1 897 ) and Vučedo l (1898), Vohalski at Gomolava (1904) , M. Vasić
at Kostolac (1906) and Vinča (1908), F. MiIleker's many smaller-scale exca-
vations in southern Banat in the late nineteenth century and the first decades
of the twentieth, and many others .1 Ljubljansko Barje, Vučedol, Vinča, and
Bubanj excepted, the first large-scale and systemaric excavations were to take
place only after W orld War II: at Gomolava, Hrus tovača, Vinkovci, Zecovi,
Ravlića Pećina, Grapčeva Špilja, Gudnja, Vela Luka , Odmut, several sites in
Pelagonia, Hisar and Lipljan in Kosovo, Ajdovska jama in Slovenia, and
elsewhere. This survey of the Eneolithic in the Yugoslav Danube Basin, and
the central and western Balkans is based on material gathered at these sites.
In addition to archaeological excavations and the collecring of archae-
olOgical data, the nineteen-thirties saw the first attempts at systematizing the
material from the Eneolithic sites and drawing up a periodization of the
Eneolithic cultures. These attempts are to be found in the first volumes of what
10 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
***
The tenns Eneouthic, Copper Age and The Period of Traruition Between
the Ne olithic and tite Bro1!ze Age are all used in archaeological literature;? we
have opted for the tem) Eneolithic, not so much because it was the most
appropriate to the period under consideration but because it best suits the
general out1ine of the book and is the most frequent1y used in recent literature.
Of course, we could very well have used the term Copper Age, but not The
Period of Transition for it implies shorter duration of the epoch and a transi -
tional nature of cultures , which is by no mean s true of the Eneolithic c ultures,
especially Baden, Kostolac, V uče do l , and least of all the Culture of Tumuli
(Pit-grave culture) in the Danubian region. The main reason for singling out
the Eneolithic as a period in its own right is provided by the new categories that
emerged during that period, characterized by changes in the economy of
prehistoric society (advanced development of stock-breeding), the emergence
and development of mining and primary metallurgy (the extraction and use of
copper ores), the appearance of crafts in connection with the manufacture of
copper artefacts, the stratification of Neolithic society, the emergence of new
populations, especially in the northeastern parts of the Balkan Peninsula, etc.
However, the transition from the Neolithic Age to the Eneolithic was not in
itself abrupt, with cultures and their bearers succeeding each other in a
clear-cut way. It was a gradual and long-lasting process, which started midway
through the development of the Neolithic agrarian cultures of the Vinča ,
Lengyel, Butmir and Theiss (Tisza) types, and lasted as long as the culture s
themselves. These were superseded by the first true Copper-Age (Eneolithic)
cultures, in which the extraction and processing of copper, the manufacture of
artefacts and their exchange (initial trade) assumed the nature of economic
categories. In the Balkans the "Eneolithicization" of the Neolithic cultures was
Introduction II
Yugoslavia, with &)snia, most of Serbi a, anJ Kosovo forming its nucleus. Here
the continuity of cultural development is not as clear as in, say, southern
Pannonia, as the region had frequendy been exposed to encroachment by
already fonned cultures, most often from the north or northeast. In the Early
Eneolithic the Bubanj-Salcuta-Krivodol complex developed in the eastern
reaches of the region (sites in eastern Serbia and Kosovo), while Kostolac and,
afterwards, Vuče do l cultures predominated in the late phase. Owing to the
mountainous nature of the region, there was intensive movement of nomadic
stock-breeders, especially aloIJg the line stretching from the Ca rpathians to
Homoije, Mts. Kopaonik and Sara, and the Pindus. 9 The northern parts of thi s
zone were also, no doubt, characteri zed by uanshumance between the Sava
valley and the mountainous parts of northern &)snia, as testifieJ to by Pivnica-
type Kostolac sites or Vis-type Lasinja sites near Modran (Derventa ) . 10 The
same rela tionships are [o be obse rved in the so uthern part of the zone, between
the Adri atic coast and its hinterland (Ravlića pećina, Ha tvel jska peć ina , etc.),
especially since the recent excava tion work in Herzegovina. ll
c) The Alpine slopes zone or, to be more precise, the southeast Alpine
region, include Slo venia and most of northwest Croatia . In the Early Eneolithi c
the cultures of the region lay under a strong west-Pannonian influence,
especially that of the Lengyel and Balaton-Lasinja cultures. In the latter half
of the Eneolithic the Vuče dol culture exerted a powerful influence, most
particularly on the fonnati on of the Ljubljansko Barje (lg I) culture and, less
decisively, on the emergence of the Ljubljana cultureY The continuity of
development and the more specific nature of the different cultures are more
pronounced in the latter part of the Eneolithic rather than in its early stages,
when the Lengyel culture and the "Alpine facies of Lengyel" were merely
regional variants of their parental cultures: Lengyel , Balaton-Lasinja \. One of
the fa ctors to have influenced this was the strong development of copper
metallurgy, testified to by the many finds of both copper tools and moulds used
in their casting (Ljubljansko Barje) .
d) The Adriatic zone encompasses a long and narrow strip of land along
the Adriatic sea, from Istria in the north [o the Skadarsko Lake in the south. Recent
excavations in the hinterland (Herzegovina) have shown that some areas north of
the Dinaric range also gravitate to it. The cultures of the region display greater
.independence and point to a continuity of development from the Hvar culture to
the proto-Nakovana and the Nakovana cultures. As elsewhere, this continuity was
disrupted by the expansion of the Vučedol style, i.e. the ljubljana culture, as
evidenced by sites such as Tivat and Rubež, pottery of the kind found at Grapčeva
špilja, from the early phase of the Cetina culture, or the Istrian sites, including the
caves in the Gulf of Trieste (Grotta dei Oclami, etc.).
*
The chronological framework for the study of the emergence and
development of Eneolithic cultures in this book is something of a problem,
especially in dealing with the beginning of the period under consideration. In
o n oo :to
~ n ~
:to ~ ro
co ooo
~
~.
:o.
~ 5'
""
ii· u!'
oo -o
~
N ::; w
o oo co
~ co
co ~ o
ro iii co N
oo co o
o· ro
oo· co
ao co ro
co ~
o· iii
co ao
o·
co
I I I I I
I I I I I I I
111111
I II II
1111111111
1111111111
111111111
111111111
111111'
uOI1JnpOJlUI
14 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
recent years, especially since th e discovery of the prehis toric mine at Rudna
Glava near Majdanpek , but also on the basis of the presence of copper artefacts
at Vinča sites (Pl oč nik, Vinč a, Fafos near Kosovska Mitrovica, Gornja Tuzla)
and necropolises (grave no. 12 at Uomolava), there has been a tendency to
include the later Vinča culture in the Eneolithic period, II i.e . to shift the upper
chronological limit to the middle of the fourth millennium B.e. Vinča-type
PI. I. 4-7 pottery from the platforms of the Rudna Ula va mine dates from the period of
transition between the earlier and later Vinča cultures ; the copper bracelet
from the grave no. 12 at (,omolava and the copper beads fl)und at the same
site also support such a dating. Th ese and many other copper t1nds of a similar
kind have placed the present writer in a quandary: should the Eneolithi c period
begin with the much later Vinča culture or, as is usual, with Tiszapolgar,
Buban j-Salcuta, Lasinja, or protu-Nakovana? We have opted for the la tter
approach , even th ough quite a few "Neolithic agrarian cultures" of the Lengyel,
Vinča, Theiss, and Hvar types pa rtly belong to the Eneolithic period.
The upper chronological limit of the Eneol ithic in the central and
western Balkans is more clearly drawn, although some problems remain there,
especially as regards the post-Vuč edol cultures of thc Adriatic or Ljubljansko
Barje. In most cases the "disintegration of the Vučedol culmral complex" and
the formatio n of new post-Vučedol culmres such as Kosihy, Čaka, Mah),
Ljubljana, the early Cetina, etc. , marks the end of the Eneolithic an d the
beginning of the Early Bronze Age . This phase was not in cl uded in P. Reinecke',
periodization , but it is to be found in most of the mOte recent publications
dealing the subject (cf. Kulturen Der Friihbronzezeit des Karpatenbeckem und
N ordbalkam). In tenm of absolute chronology, the end of the t hird and
beginning of the second millennium B.e. ca n be taken as the end of the
Eneol ithic in the central and westem Balka ns. W e have thus estahlished a
ehronologieal fram ework of some 1,000 years for the Eneolithic cultures, from
the late fourth to the late third millennium B.e.
11,ere have been seve ral attempts to systematize the phases of devel-
opment of the Eneolithic in the Balkans on the basis of either the cultural-his-
torical picture of the period or the econ omic fe atures of individual cultures.
11,e Eneolithic could thus be divided into: Early and Late Eneolithic; Early,
Middle, and une Eneolithic; there is (or was) also a view of the Eneolithic as
a brief period of transi tion between the Neolithi c and the Metal Age. 14 In recen t
literature the Eneolithic is usually divided into the Early, Middle, and Late
phases , and this ternary division has also been applied in the third volume of
The Prehiswry oj Yugoslavia . 11,e Early Eneolithic saw the further evolution of
the Neolithic cultures which were familiar with copper and its processing and
produced copper jewellery, weapons , and tools, but whose material and non-
material culture preserved the chief characteristics of the preceding period.
Owing to these characteristics we tend to refer to these cultures as post-Neo-
lithic, i.e. cultures whose evoluti on from the Neoli thic to other, new styles, was
generally smooth. In the Yugoslav Danube Basin this process is evidenced on
In troduction 15
the one hand in the emergence of T iswpolg5r on thc foundations bid by the
ll,eiss, the Corzsa and the Herpaly cultures and, o n the other, in the evoluti on
of the Bubanj-Saleu(8 eompicx south (lf the Danube which in cludes, among
others, a Vinča component. In the west, the tran st()tmation of Neolithic
cultures in to Eneolithic one, can be traced in the repl ace ment of Lengyel
(Sopot-l..cngyel) by Early Lasinja- Ba!Jton, wh erea s the A lpin e region offers the
"Alpine faci es of Lengyel", i.e. the Lasinja culture. Finally, in the Adri atic
region, the Nako vana (proto-Nakovana) hori zon wa s tormed on the basis of
the Hvar -Lisič ići group, and it largely preserved the preceding culture's tea-
tures . ll,ese changes al most always took place sm(Klthly, as a graJual evoluti on
sp urred o n by th e avai lahility of new disCllV<.!ries in the ti e lei of material
production, primarily thm of early copper metallurgy.
T he end of the Early Eneolithic witnessed major changes in material
and non-materi al cul ture, and probably in ethni c structure roo, th ro ughuut
Southeast Europe. ll,e changes were more marked in the Danube Ba sin and
the eastern and northern parts uf the Ba lkon Penimula; elsewhere they were
essentially echoes <,(larger-scale population mowments, especia lly by nomads,
wave after wave of whom left thc stcppes uf southern Russia and t,x,k ,he
northern and southern Carpathian road towards the Pannonian Plain anJ
then ce to the Balkan Pcn insu\a. This cultural change marked the bec~nnll1g ",'
the Middlc Ellcolititic, which saw the definite end ot' [he a ~anan :\d,li,nlC
cultures and their descendants. It was a sharp hreak, signalled h\ [he emd~encc
offle xibic nomadi c cultures integrating vast areas from the Ca rpathi3n5 :v ::-:e
Alps and from so uthern Poland in the north w the central Baikans 111 ,he ,ou:h.
The first cul ture of the new style and the new econ 'mic, wa, B. ·1",5 :-('.c:-:13-
voda Ill , soon to he foll owed by Baden. 11leir dC\'d,'pment \11 che ~. L ,):-S!3\
Danube Ba sin must be viewed within a hr<'ader prxe,s where[,\' :n"
auroehth onous I\eoli thic population was replaceJ hl' nlCW !X'pulan, 'n,. ~ ,
Iieved to have been Indo- European. In those regk'ns whIch haj not experi -
enced direct migrational processes (Pe!a?"'l1la, the Adria[ie c,)ast, and, w a
certain extent, th e Alpine zone), the de\'e!opment or' Early Ene()lithi c cultures
went on, th ough mo difications to therr stl'lrmc reatures ;) re apparent (in
Pelagonia, for instance, the Crnobuki-Bakarnl1 Gumno group is succee ded by
Šuplevec-[ype settlements, while in the :\lpine rone pottel)' of the Re[z-Cajary
type followed Early Lasinj a POt tery) .
In the east , especially in the Danube regi()n, the Larc Ellcolirhic was
in augurated by an onrush of steppe peoples, bearers oi the Pit-grave cul ture. It
was the third and last wave ot cultural and ethnic shiits which helped lay the
foundations for [he subsequent constitution lli the palaeo-Balkan tribes in the
Bronze and Iron Ages. S[ratigraphically rdiable evidence tllr the delimita tion
of the Middl e and Late Eneo\i[hic is oiiered hl' the Jabuka tumulus near
Pančevo, where a steppe- type grave oi the late Pit-grave cul ture was dug into
a laye r containing a Kostol ac house . IS lt is to be concluded, therefore , that the
Kos tolac culture 'in th is part of [he Danube Basin belonged to the terminal
cl~6_ _____ __ _ __ __ --,-
Th,,-e::...=.:
En,-,e=o:.::
lit:.::h::.:ic:...:::
cultu res of Cen tral and West Balkans
phase of the Middle Eneolithic, as is the case with the Cotofen i culture in
western Romania . In areas left untuuched by the direct migrat ion of the bearers
of steppe cultures (Bosnia, most of Slavonia), the Kostulac c ulture wcnt on
developing, evolving [()wards the "carving" stylc of the Vuče dol culture. Con-
tacts between the Pit-grave and Vučedol cultures during rh e Late Eneolith ic
are refl ected in the adoption by t he Vučedo l culture of the custom of burials
under tumuli and the och re staining of gmve goods (Batajni ca, Vojb, Moldo va
Veche) , the appearance of "carac()mb grave;" in Vučedol, and th e like . lo The
expansion of the Vučedol culture westwards and southwards was to be the
hall mark of the La te Eneolith ic in the central and western Balkans, too. The
pressure exerted by the steppe peoples can be taken as the cause of th ese shifts.
T he Alpin e region witnessed the cmergence of the Ljubljans ko Barj e culture,
while a local variety of the Tivat-Rubd type "fbte Vuče dol appeared o n the
Adriatic Cl)ast and in its hinterl and . As stated above, the end of the Late
Eneolith ic, and of the Eneoli thi c as a whole, is marked by th e disintegrari on of
the Vučedol complex and the formation of numerous regional groups and
cultures, which inaugurated the Earl y Brome Age in the Pannonian , ca ntral
Balbn, Danubian, and Adriatic zones.
Besides th e nomadic component, one of the main features of the
Eneolithic c ultures' cconomy wa s the early, llr primary, copper metallurgy - Drc
min ing, processing, and the manufactu re ofcopper artebcts - i.e. initial mining,
metallurgy, and manufacturing technology. TIlesc new activities speeded up
the stratiflcation of Neolithic society , the emergence of specialized economic
activities , and the differentiation between settl ements within the same culture
or between various cultures. T he Enelllithic sites in thc Yugoslav Danube Basin
played a crucial part in these processes , characteri stic of a broad area of Central
and Southeast Europe . TIlese sites were both important mining and metallur-
gical ce ntres and maj or links in the transmissi on of new disco veries in material
c ulture between the A egean and the Near East on the one hand and the
Panno nian cultures on the o ther. The importance ntthe sites and findings from
the region is amply illustrated by the prehistorical mine at Rudna G lava, the
processing ce ntre in Zlocska pećina, the remains of metal-casting workshops at
Debelo Brdo, Alihodže, Sarvaš, Ljubljansko Barj e, o r th e copper hoards found
at Pl oč nik, Bečmen and Deč in Srem, Vranovi ć i and Kozarac in Bosnia, Stabanj
and Split-Gripe in Dal matia, etc. Several extensive studies of copper finds (by
B. Jo van o vić, A. Durman, M. Kuna - to mention hut thc more recent ones) 17
have emphasized the richness and diversity of artefacts of this kind. Regrettably,
most of them have been found o utside an archaeological context , which has
rather restri cted the possibility of interpretation . Only a few come from system-
atica lly excavated sites (Zlocska pećina, Vuč e dol, Sarvaš, Ljubljansko Barj e) 18
and these , together with copper-mo ulds (Sarvaš, Ljubljansko Barje, A lih odže,
Debelo brdo, Zecovi, etc .), 19 allow us to connect the forms of certain copper
arte facts with particular Eneol ithic cultures (th is issue will be payed partic ular
attention tO later in the book).
Introduction 17
·-;:; :-3i:;;--lli-.. B. jO\'3no\ić, " . T 3S:~. ,,:;::. \:' ;, ih3i ih" n1c1\,ementS of the steppe
?c\,:,p l eS. :.c. :::e "1 nl.....:'I-
~ Et.:. r\..l!k3n :T.l ~..:;~~a•,r '.."'-~ '~ h [ e' iOfl11 ot.successive l nig ra~
:: ':::;5. OVt:::- 3 '?--'"::C~.: C ~· 3tx.. . C: 3 :h (~·..:s.:::.::": \c:3:-S: 3;: :lfSr lt was merely () question
~i c ... rtW',,1 ~. n:3~i' :;~.: iru~;.:"~;:,,, ~ [\!;::J \:ureSulul, the Klado vo hoa rd of
\,
. l,nQ .,,llnt.• uaJ _ __ - -- \. :- .--- - . --. - ~- . ;.
,=~ c.~. C~.......
;·;;'--:·h Eneo l'l( h"IL, ( h c ::,teppe
....!~c ....l...~...!.~ ~.x ~11h. . . ........:e \." ... e
.
peoples ac[uallv amn:':. :::-~;: ;:..) ;:r.c lli:--.:..6t: :-C'§tiun. and rht:n tO [he regions
Sc)urh o r the Sa\'a and D3:1L::>e. Tn~ e~"r~enLe o:' ,h" C:ma\'oJ3 11I·&)lera :
cul ture, the appearance Oi' 'Sch"ltxnhen\;el" ]X)"". \,:n rhe Yu!?c"!a,, pans or
rhe Danube region, and rhe s_'urhwarJ sprćad oi rhć Buban, ·Saicura culrure
tH." Koso\'o , and [hence [ O Pelago nia) we re resulrs Q i ~(r('n g pressure e xerreJ
by the newcomers on the au[()chrhonous culrures or rhe Carparhian. Danubian,
and Balkan regions.
ln addition to these large·scale movemems of rhe bearersofrhe Eneolirhic
cultures, the endof the period al sosaw the expansion of the Vučedol culture. Air"r
a period ofconcenrrated growth during the Iasr third ofehe Eneolithic, me Vučedol
style sprea d from its native Srem·Sbvonian region in all directions: fl) the wćSt, to
ta m) the Alpine nucleus of "carveel" p<.mery (Ljubljansko Barje "i th irs If! I phase);
to the south, all the way to the mountains ofcentral Serbi a and Bosnia; to the north
and the Pannonian Plain (Zuk); and tO the east, to rhe so uthern spurs of the
Carpathians (Moldova Veche) . Somewhat later, towards rhe end nf rhis major
cultural complex, local variants of the Tivat·Rubež type appear on the Adriatic
coast, or the Ljubljana culture in Slovenia, the northern Adriatic, and Istri a, as well
as a number of other "]Xlst. Vučedol groups" of the types Kosihy, Make), and Čaka,
ina ugura ting the Early Brome Age .
18 The Eneolithic cultures of Cen tral and West Balkans
Lengyel final
Bubanj I Proto- Nakova na
-Saieula II La sinja I
Nakovana
II
Cernavoda III Kevdere
Kosto lac
(Cotofeni) Vu če do l
(lg I)
(l g II) Adriatic faeies of
Vu čedo l the Vučed o l culture
(Tivat- Rubež)
As already no ted, a clea r lin e dividin g the Neoli thic and Eneol ithic
c ultures cannot be drawn . W e have opted, therd()tc , fo r the term post-Neolithic
tO refer to cultures whi ch were familiar with copper and its techno logy, but
which preserve d Neolithic characteristics in th e main features of th eir material
and non-material culture. Continuity of developme nt is the hallmark of these
cultures, and it is refl ected in the shape of th eir vessels, their material culture,
the loca tion of their settlements, thei r economy, and their buri al practices. The
pottery of Tiszapolgjr o r Bubanj-Salc uta preserved the basic shapes and similar
fa bri c - refined clay and burni shed grey or bl ack surfaces, typical of the agrarian
cul tures of Central and So ut heast Europe. A good example are th e conical
bowls with thickened , turned-i n rilll s, known as "(;radac plates" and found both
in the Vin ča culture and in the Bubanj -Salcuta-Krivo dol and Gumelnita
complexes . T11e decora tion of the inside is burni shed in the Vin č a culture,
graphi te burnished or red-painted in Bubanj -Salcuta or Gumel nita Z5 Then Fig.8
there is the infl uence of Neoli thi c figurines on Eneolithic ones fo und at early
Eneolithi c sites in eastern Serbi a, Koso vo, and Pelagonia , whi ch also belong to
the widespread Bubanj-Salcuta- Krivodol complex and th ar of the "graphite
burni shed ware llf th e eastern Balkans". Numero us other exampl es point to
close ties between the Early Eneolithic cultures and the autoch tho nous base .
lt is enough, for instance, to compare the graves orthe Vinča culture necropolis
at Gomolava with the late r necropolises of Tiszapo lga r or another Early
Eneolith ic culture to reali ze how st rong the tradition wa s Ić The crouched
positi on of the body laid on the side, its orient<J tion, the n umber and disposal
of grave goods, are almost identical in the ea rlier and later cul tures . All this,
and the fac t that the more recent period inh erited its chief fea tures - in itial
mining and early copper metallurgy - from the I\eolithic cultures, allow us to
trea t the earliest cultures of the new epoch - thc A ge of Metal , i.e. of Copper
- as post-Neoli thic , o r Early Eneolithic. In former Yugosla via, these would
20 The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
~--------------------~~~
J
Early Eneolithic _ _~. 23
the organization of the necropolises, nor have they provided sufficient anthro-
pological evidence to establish a demographic picture of the neeropolis as a
reflection of life in the settl ement. Instead we have the grave goods, whose
typological features can be used to determine the position of the Vojvodina
necropolises within the devel o pment of T iszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur
throughout the Pannonian Plain. They belong to the same cultural circle as
the much more thoroughly investigated nec ropolises in Hungary and Slovakia,
such as Ti szapolgar-Basatanya, H(idmez(\vas6rhely-Kot3cpart, Tape, Deszk,
Tibava, Lucska, and many o thers. 4o If ou r purpose is a more accurate locatio n
of our necropolises, we might place the ea rli er graves in the Deszk group
according to the division by I. Bogn6r-Kutzi6n, while th e others (Vinča,
Subotica) would belong to a mature Bodrogkeresztur (Pusztaistvanh aza -Bo-
drogkercsztur II) culture. 41
11le material culture of the Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur sites in PI. I
our parts corresponds entirely to the finds ITom necropolise~ and settl ements
in neighbouring countries, especially the Hungarian part of th e Tisza valle y.
Tiszapo lgar pottery is generally ofa good fabric, finely burnished, but plain. 11le PI. VI. I
only excepti on is the portery from Vršac, which is of somewha t inferior
workmanship.42 A characteristic shape is that of the footed goblet, one of the
main features of the Tiszapolg6r styl e: the tall goblets have a holl ow cylindrical
or slightly profiled foot; the receptacle has the telrm ufconical or bi conical bow!.
Lugs, at tinles ve ry prOllline nt , are a constant feature of must sbapes of
Tiszapolgar pottery - bowls, globular vessels, pots, etc. 111e difference between
ho usehold porrery and grave goods is negligible and lies chiet1y in th e quality
of workmanship (grave goods are finer) and diversity of shapes (household
pottery is more varied, especiall y at Crna Bara or Vršac). The Bodrogkeresztur PI. V. 1· 9
culture saw two maj or changes in pottery-making: the appearance of decoration
and of new shapes - the characteristic "milk po t" vessel an d the calotte-shaped
bow!. The footed goblets, so frequent in Tiszapolgar, were gradually abandoned. PI. VII. 1.2.8
Bodrogkerezstur decoration takes the form of incised lines, pricks, and circular
appliques. Ir is very rich, oft en covering the entire surface of a vessel (milk PI. VII. 7
containers from Dubovac and Batajnica, Vinča bowls, etc.). flg.45/1 - 2
I
~ ------------ The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
***
conmin s eDfly Lasinja (Balmon- Lasinja I) mate ri al, whil e II b belo n~s tl> J
Boleraz sett leme nt. The impression left hy th e site's stmtigraphy and the
typ olo~i ca l a nalysis of its potte ry is of continuo us ue velopmenr un bro ken hl'
maj or populmion anu other cha nges . Anal ysis ot the mate rial cultu re of the
Lengyel and Lasinja styles trom othe r si tes has conn rmed thi s, anu so me a uth ors
O. and P. Korošec, fu r instance) refer to th e new c ul w re, tl)unued on Lengycl
in the En eoli thi c period, as "thl' Alpine facies of Le ngyel"60 The same view is
to be founu, some whm moditl eu, in F. Le hen' s and S. Di mi trijevi ć 's e xpl a nati on
of the origins of Lasinja. bl Since L~ s inja (Balaton-Lasinja I) is only a pe riphe ral
phenome non in the South Pannonian Zlme, ha v in.~ affec teu only its southwest
pam, we sh all uisc uss it in gre me r ue mil in a section dc voteu to the Earl y
Eneolithic c ultures of the Alpil1l' regio n.
Pl očni k has less often been mken into account in atte mpts to attribute the
coppe r hoards . Recent excavati ons at the site has esmbli shed the existence of
a Bubanj settlement destroyed fo r the most part by land c ultivation; in view of
13. Stalio" remark that hoard IV was dug imu the Vinča /wrizu)l, the more logical
conclusion would be that thc hoards belonged to the time when the bearers nf
rhe Bubanj culture arrived ar the sire. b ) Suc h a soluti on o bviates the illogica lity
of linki ng the latest Vinča horizon ar Pl očnik wi th Ti sza polg6r, Karannvo V I,
( ;umeinit3, and thereby Buba nj-Saicuta.
The Bubanj culture , pan of the e xte nsi ve Bu ban j-Salcu ra -Kri vodol
comple x, de ve lo ped in the central and eastern parts oi th e ce ntral Bal ka n zon e ,
whe nce it spread so uthwards to Sko psko Polje and Pelagoni a. The a rea can be
subd ivided into three zones, each with spec ific local ieatures in the styl e o f its
material culture: easte rn Serbia with the Danubian region (from (;olubac to
I\ego tin); a part of Kosovo with southeast M e tohija and the Skopje basin; and
Pclagonia. Three t)'pes o f settl ements a re c urre nt : the most freljue nt are bu il t
o n elevated ground by a river, protected by the river's cou rse and stee p slopes;
cave settle ments make up th e second gtelUp; the third type, typical of the
southern zon e, cons ists of lowland settleme nts of th e "tum be" (tell) type . The
best examples of the first type are Bubanj ne ar Niš, Kovilovo near Zaječar,
Krivdj near Bor, Uadimljc a nd Hi sar in Koso vo, and Skupsko kale b8 A
dominant pelSition, n atumlly or artificially fl)rtihed, is characteristi c of these
se ttl ements . The Krivdj settlement was protected by a wall nf srackeJ stune , fig.8/1 ·8
while Bubanj and Gadimij e we re deiended by a ditch and a palisade. T he
tendency to look for safe dwel ling-placcs is reflec ted in thc choice o f caves as
dwe llings. A number of caves inhabited at the time of Bubanj-S akuta have
bee n registered in Romania and Bulgaria (Horilor, Romanesti, Deve taška,
Magura, etc.);69 Zimska and Bogo vinska caves, as well as the caves in Fig.50/1 -5
Knja že vac area, are e xamples from easte rn Serbia. ln Pe lagonia and ne ighbo ur-
ing Albania there are twO groups of se ttl ements belonging to the sa m e cultural
co mplex : the so-ca ll ed "tum be" are the most numerous an d belong to the fai rl y
widespread type of tell-settle me nt pa rticularl y frequent in Macedonia, TI1race ,
a nd Thessaly. O f special rele vance fo r th e study of the Pelagonian fZrouP of the
Bubanj-Salcuta-Krivo dol comple x are the e xcava tions of strarified se ttle ments
at Bakarno Gumno, Crnobuki , Karam an, ctc .10 Fin ally, there are also fortified
settle ments built on elevate d ground, such as Šuplevec .7J
TI1 0ugh many se ttl ements belo nging to Bubnnj-Saicuta have been
discovered so uth of the Danube, onl y one grnve has been une nrthed, providing
minimal information about the c ulture 's burini cus to ms. A Bubanj-Saicuta
grave has been found dug inw the Ently En coli thi c strn t um of Lepenski Vir.
The body was lying pronc (!), in a crouch ed position . ( ;rave goods w nsisted of
four vessels; of gre at typol ogic al importa nce is a In rge , t hick-rimmed bowl-dish
30 The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
EASTERN SERBIA
KOSOVO
Kosovo and Metohija was the second region affected by the south -
wards movemen t ofBubanj-Salcuta from th e Danube Basin . Seve ral sites have
been registered in the mountain-encircled area, but major eXGl vati ons have
only be~n ca rri ed o ut at Hisar and Cadimlj e near Li pljan.l b lInfonuna te ly,
although it ha s been q ui te a while since the compl etion of excava tion work
( l963 in the case of H isar), no results have been published, except for a
preliminary report on Hi sa r. TI,e present text will therefore have to be based
on the author's own in sight into the material, which is of grea t importance both
because it presents a clear pictu re of the style of a local variety of Bubanj -Salcuta
and because of the cul ture's relationship with Vinča, whi ch was very strong
and long-lived in this regi on (Predionica, Valač, Fafos, Žitko vac, etc.).
TI,e position of Bubanj-Salcum sites in Kosovo is simila r to that of the
sites in eastern Serbia . TI,e se ttlements at Hi sar and Gad imij e have bee n built PI. IX. 1-4
on hills overlooking river valleys, and bear traces of fortification . TI,e footi ngs PI. X. I. 7
of the houses are well -preserve d, and th ere is a considera ble amount of ceramic
material. The fact th at bo th sites, especially Hi sa r, are stratifi ed has made it Fig 18/ 1-9
possible to study the relationship between Bubanj-Salcuca .a nd the later Eneo-
lithic cultures of the regio n. The classification of Hi sar' s En eoli thi c layer has
not been sufficiently backed by arch aeological material, and sho uld be taken
with some rese rve. lt is certai n, however, that the lowest layers contain the
remains of a Bubanj-Salcura settle ment , and that another settlement was
formed above them, belonging to a variety of the Baden -Kostolac style where
Kostolac elements predominated. The problem of the chronological conti nuity
of the two settlements rema ins unresolved. Analog ues from other regions (the
Yugoslav parc of the Danube Basi n , Oltenia, north Bulgaria) suggest the
possible existence between these twO cultural phenomena of another phase in
Eneolithic development, the phase contemporaneous with Bolen'iz-Cernavoda
III and Ba den .
PELAGONIA
The strati graph y of the sites (Babrno Gumno, Crnobuki, Šuple vec )
PI. X. 5-6 an d the typologica l analysis of the porre ry have allowed us to single o ut at least
PI. XI I. 2. 3. 6 two stages in the development of th e PeiJgonia n vari ety llI' Bu banj-SalcutQ or
Crn obuki and Bakarn ll Gumno-Šupl evec, as the culture is also referred roN
Tl1e situation is very much th e same as in eastern Serbi a: some sites have yielded
thick-rimmed bowls, and graph ite burni sheJ anJ painteJ (with thick red or
white paint) ware, which is entirely miSSing from o ther sites. This is why it is
believe d thDt the lowest layers ot Crno buki (strata I anJ Il) and the lower ones
at Bakar~1(l C;umno bdong tu the ve ry beginning of the En eoli thic, while sites
such as Suplevec (the later Inye rs - Suplevec Il) belollg to a later Enelliithi c
period, whe n "steppe clements" appeareJ, e .g. corded wa re, the "corde [Otdue"
PI. XIII. 1. 3.5 technique, and the well -known sceptre whose steppe llrigi n is undeniable 80
***
Throughout the eastern pan of the central Balkan zone, Kosovo, and
Pelagon ia, the materi al cul ture of the Bubanj-Salcu ta- Kri vodol compl ex dis-
plays both a unity of style and some spec ific traits due to the intluence of
autoch thonous culture s and their mingling with more recent ph eno mena
(Kosovo, Pelagoni a) . ThLlugh not all the si tes in this extensive area belLlng to
the sa me chronological horizon , it is possible, especially in pottery, to single llut
certain ubiq uirous shapes ur types of decora tion. Shallow , thic k-rimm ed plates,
often decorated on the insiJe by painting, burnishing, or gra phite burnishi ng
(Bubanj, Zlo ts ka pećina, C rn Ll buki), arc one of thc main featu res of th e style,
even of its earliest phase, as wirn essed by th c sa me l,m11 of pl ate f'J und at later
V in Č8 sites (Gradac, Predi on ica) . A nothe r very widespread shape is that of the
two-ha ndled goblet uf the "kantaros" type encou ntered wi th the same fre-
quency in eastern Serbi", the Nišava valley , Kuso vo, anJ Pelagoni a. Severni
varieties h ave bee n founJ . Tl1C presence of such goblets and uf the sa me type
of sh allow plate as the une described above at sites in Romania , Bulgaria, and
even northern Greece (Dikili T ash, Sitagroi ) indica tes that they all belong to
the same complex of the east Balbn gmphite burnished ware , located in t he
areas between the Carpathians to thc north and the A egea n CLlast in thc suuth,
as the Gumelnita (Karanovll V I) culrure 81 O ther pottery sh apes include
bowls with turned-in rims, biconi cal bowls, pots of vmi ous profiles, anJ ampho-
rae decorated with pinch ings, cuts ur incised lines (Krivdj, Bubanj, Hi sa r).
Fin ally, mention shLluld be made of the fairly freljuent trun cated lids (Bubanj,
Fig. 41 Hisar, Crno buki) an d do uble weigh ts of th e kind fo und in abundance 111
PI. X. 6 Sateuta, Romania s2 (Skopsko kale', Šuplevec) .
PI. XII. 1·8 Figurines are anoth er importa n t tra it of the materi al culture of
Bubanj-Salcuta. Tl,ey are not as numerous as in, say, the Vinča culture, but
PI. 2. -- Pottery shapes of
the Bu banJ--Sal cuta--Krivodol cl uture
from si tes ln Serbia and Macedonia
lU fl{ JI
::.34-'--_ _ _ __ _ _ __ ___--'Tcch."-
e En eolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
they are an impo rtant typologic<ll fe<lture of a broad area of this cultural
complex. There are some typologic<ll differences between the terra-co((a figu-
rines of thc Danube Basin an d those of the southern sites, of Kosovo and
Pelago nia. The group of anthropomorphic figurines in eastern Serbia consists
of finds fro m Kovilovo, Krivelj , Zl otsb pećin<l, and Bub<lnj. The style is closer
to Vin č a models, with the exception of a Kri vdj find - a swnding woman's
PI. XII. I figure - whose prototypes <lre to be found to the east , within the Cumelni ta
compl ex and re b ted cultu res (decoration of the steato pygic part of the figurin e
with either flmed or paimed spir<l ls)81 1l1C southern gro up of figurin es , bes t
illustrated by finds from Gadimije <l nd Crnobuki, is represe m ed by semi-sea ted
fi gures wit h shorrened legs and a stylized con ical head. No dcwils of the face
are indicated. Such m<lnner of mode lling has its <lnalogues at lace (JumeInita
sites (Karanovo V I) .84 Zoomorphic oncsare less frequent. T hey include rather
stylized figurcs of bovines o r othcr four-l egged animal s, and <lnimal- headed
vessels.
The presence of copper finds h<ls <ll ready been disc ussed. However,
we sh o uld further stress the importancc of certain elemems flor understanding
the level of de velo pmem of emly mining and meta llurgy within the Bubanj-
Saicuta c ulture. Copper artefacts have been found , in varying quantities, at
PI. XI. 7·8 nearly all the exca v<Jtcd sites . 1l1CY usu<llly include awl s, pins, 8nd chi sels,
produced by hammering (Zimska peć in 8, Bubanj, Hisar) ; flnt or cruciform 8xes
made by casting are muc h r<l rer (Zimska peć i na , Smedovac). Copper finds are
more numerous in eastern Serbia; underscandably so, since the area is rich in
copper ore and mining was develo ped there as early as the later Vin ča c ulture
PI. I. 1-7 (Rudna GInva). However, we muSt mention here the copper axe and axe mould
Fig.38/2 found in a tell nea r the village of Kravari (Pel8gonia). 1l1C axe is single-bladed,
with a tubulnr sh ah _hole. s5 They are very pro bably related to the Eneo lithi c
c ultures of the Bubanj -Saicuta complex, especially since the sam e site has
produced Eneoli thic po ttery too.
1l1e periodizatio n of Bubanj-S alc um, particul a rly the rel ative chro-
nology ofi ts vario us regions 8nd the relations within each of them, is a complex
problem. Recent exc8va tio ns (M.GarnŠa nin, P. Roman, N. Ta sić)86 have
refuted D. Berciu's division of S8 ic u(3 into fo ur sca ges o n the basis of suaci-
graphic and typological e vidence from the e ponymous site. His divi sion is of a
regional nature and valid only for the se ttiemem in questio n. A frequent
questi on in recent years has been that of the IVb stage (pottery with flattened
handie ends) whi ch, according to some authors, goes beyond the Saicm a
c ulture (Pecica-Satu Mare, the Scheibenhenkel horizon). Sites in Banat, and
even Srem, where this type of ware has been fo und (Baranda, Opo vo, Zemun-
Prigrevica, ctc.) 87 date from the time when Saloma IV b was spreading west-
ward. It is indicative that m8ny elements typical of the Bubanj-Salcma style
(thick-rimmed bowls, graphite-burnished decora tio n, two-handled goblets,
etc.) are missing at sites in Vojvodina; the inevitable conclusion is that Salcuta
IVb pottery is closer to Hunyadi-Vajska than to the cla ssical Bubanj-Salc m a
~arly Eneolithic 35
stressed (S. Dimitrij evi ć ),94 nnd with the cultures of the Adriatic coast (T.
Bregant, Š. Ba tović) 9.5
Excavations in Slovenia in the past twenty-odd years have enabled a
PI. XXXV. 4.9 elearer view of the Early Eneolit hic in the area. The stratigraphy of some sites
Fig. I (Resnikov preko p, Ajdovsb jama pri Nemški Vnsi, Drul ovka, etc.) and a
typological nnalysis of the mnterial have shown that two phases can be dem-
onstrated in the development of the "Alpine facies of Lengyel", a view supported
by J. Korošec. 96 The first, ch aracterized by the finds from Resnikov prekop,
the lowest levels at Ptuj ski grad, Drulovb, and even Ajdovska jama, is closer
to Lengyel models. It consists of fragments of coloured and painted vessels, .
tall-footedgoblets, bowls of vari ous shapes. 97 Th e later phnse is that of ceramic
vessels viewed as belonging to the Lasinja culture: bowls whose upper part is
decorated with sloping incised lines Oermnnovn jama, Drulovb), vesse ls with
ribba"n handl es starti ng from the rim (Ptuj ski grad), goblets on a broad foot with
linear decorati on (Križevci) , etc. 98 By this phase the painted wnre, a key
element of the style of most varieties of bte Lengyel, has disappeared. The
suggested division of the Earl y Eneolithic of the Alpine zone refl ects the logica l
development of cultures in the area as the effect of the westward and southward
shift of the nucleus of the Lengyel culture. At fi rst, the ea rl y phase of the "Alpine
facies" has all the features of the Lengyel style (e .g. Blatna Brezo vica ). It ha s
not yet had time to emancipate itself from the cultural development of its
original area. On ly se veral generations bter, under the influence of changed
economic condi tions and wenkened ties with the lands of ori gin, does the
creation of a new styl e and cultural group take place. This would seem to justify
the opinions relating both to the name of the culture and to its origin. The
earliest phenomena registe red at Eneolithic sites in Slovenia, Styria, and
Carinthia belong to tite Lengyel culture; they are somewhat modifi ed and bear
loca l traits, but not to su~ h an extent as to represent another culture altogether.
On the other hand, as a result of further development, the Adriatic influence
in Slovenia, and the central Balkan influences (Butmir, Vinča) in Croa tia and
north Bosnia, a new c ulture emerged. The fonner is best referred to as "the
Alpine facies of Lengyel" , which , stylisti cally, it is, while the latter might be
tenned the Lasinja culture, as S. Dimitrijević would have it, or Balaton-Lasinj a;
this, however, would encoinpass only the material attributed to Lasinja I and
II (i.e. Balaton I and II) , while pottery with Furchenstich decoration is not
related to this cultural and stylistic phenomenon. 99
culture, most of them concentrated between the Drava and Sava rivers lOO
Most settlements are temporary ones, with pits and pit-dwellings. The re are no
remains of permanent architecture, which has led to th e conclusion that they
were, in fact, seasonal nomadic stations, built also at greater altitudes (Kevderc
is at 810 m) . Cave settlements, especially frequent in Slovenia (Ajdovska jama,
Ljubniška jama, Krška jama, etc .) and northwest Croati a (Vindija cave), arc
of the same nature. Howe ve r, settlements built in the Lt' ngye\ (Zengc)varkony)
tradition appear simultnneously; they are to be t'Jund in the lowbn ds and
consist of exceptionally large houses partly dug into the soil (Draguše vac nea r
Cerje Novo). As a rule the cultural layer is thin (up to 0.80 m) , as elsewhere
at Lasinja sites, with one habitation horizon. This makes it diffi cult to pe ri odize
the culture with accuracy; judging by the typo logical features of the pottery, it
went through several stages in its development. More evidence might, perhaps,
be provided by the stratigraphy of Ajdo vska jama, both th e settl e m ćnt and th e
necropolis; there a stra tum containing Lengyel pottery is followed by two strata
with Lasinja pottery, more precise\y Lasinja I, lA, and IIB, accurdin g co S.
Dimitrijević. I OI Working with these dara, stratigraphic conclusions fi-om Vis PI. XXXV. 1-3 . 7. 8
near De rventa and Gornja Tuzla, anU typological analyses, S. Dimitr ijević PI. XXXVI. 7
divided the Lasinja culture into three phases (f,)Ur levels: I, ilA, IIB, III). This
is close tO N. Kaliez's division of Bala con, tho ugh the two differ in the contents
of the individual phases. 102 As already noted, Lasinja III and Bala ton III, which
have not been stratigraphically confirmed, consist of pottery with Furche nstich
decoration. Stylis(ically it differs eonsiderably fro m Lasinja I and II pottery, and PI 3
it seems that S. Dimitrij ević ' s ea rlier opini on, as modifi ed by Z. Mark ović , might
be more correct, i.e. that Lasinja we nl through two srages ,,( development ,
Lasinja A and Lasinja B. IOJ The ca rlier phase is charneterized by plain ware
of Lengyel affiliations, while the later comprises pottery with linear mocifs,
dotted pricks, and new shapes (bowls with a ribbon handie starting from the
rim, cups with a handie above the rim, etc.). Compared with the most recent
division of Lasinja in Vol. III of Tite Preitistory of Yugoslavia, Lasin ja A wo uld
he rhe equivalent of stage I, while Lasinja B would correspond to stages II and
III. L04
The chronological framework of the L1sinja culture has been estab -
lished on the basis of two elements: a) its genesis and b) stratigrnphic data in
Ajdovska jama, Vis, and Gornja Tuzla. If we accept the conclusion that Lasinja
is the result of the evolution of a Lengyei substratum, influenced also by later
Vinča (Vinča D- l and D-Z) and Sopot (Sopot-Le ngyel) in th e south and cast,
then the end of these cultures would provide a tenniHus post quem for the
emergence of early Lasinja se ttleme nts. In Ajdovska jama, thc eontin uity of
development has been confirmed by vertical stratigraphy . On the other hand,
setting an upper chronologicallimit CO the duration of Lasin ja is a much more
complex matter. According to some authors, it lasted until Vučedol, and even
",38,,---~~~~~~~~~~~~T'.Ch,,:e,-,Ec"n.'::
eo~l,,:
it~ h lć:c cultures of Central and West Balkans
ran parallel with it (S. Dimitri jevi ć).I O) If, however, we el imin ate rurchenstich
po ttery as a constitucnt part of Lasinja- Bala ton, th en its enu wo ulu be some-
what earlier. In the Alpine zone, th at wo uld mean before or at the beginni ng
of Retz-Gajary. ll1C srratigraphies of Gradina on the Bosut an d partly of Vis
near Derventa have establisheu an approximate upper lim it for thc duration uf
Lasinja in these parts. At Grauina on the Bosut, a layer belonging to a Roleraz
se ttlement was o verlying a layer containing early Lasinja pottery. IOb W e could
conclude, thcrei()re, th at La sinja survived in Slavonia anu wes tern Srem until
the appearance of the bea rers of Cerna voda III-Boleraz, i.c. that it co vered the
period of the Early Eneolithi c in these regions. In th e eastern Alpine zon e it
might have la steu slightly longer, but not much later than thc appearance of
Retz-Gajary potte ry (Ke vdcrc, Postojna) whi ch some authors unjustifiably
assign to Lasinja or Balaton (N. Kalicz, F. Leben)., o7 If Retz- Ua ja ry po ttery is
placed within the same Furchenst ich horizon as Kostolac, it wo uld mean that
in Sloveni a La sinja was conrempo raneo us with Boleraz, anu even Baden . On
the basis of a fragm ent of a Kostolac vcssel fo unu in stra tum III of Ajdovska
ja ma , S. Dimi t rij e v i ć drew hi s conclusion abo ut the longevity of Lasinja. lOS
However, even if this can be accepteu in the case of thc relatively isolateu
Alpine zone, the conclusion coulu nor be appli ed to the regions of Srem and
Slavonia, where La sinja was succeeded first by Boleraz, and thcn by Bauen.
d) The Adriatic zo ne
ll1e long and narrow strip of the cast coast of the Adriatic , from Istria
in the north to th e Skauarsko Lake in the south, foll owed a specific CDurse of
developm ent. Thi s was conditioned by the vari ous cultural influences that were
fel t in the region : that of the "Alpine facies of Lengye l" on thc Encoli thic
cultures ofI stria and the karst regi l)n; that nf Lasinja, fe lt in the same areas but
also, to a lesser extent , in centra l Dalmatia; and finally, the presence of a strong
Vinča tradition and elements of Bubanj-Salcuta at sites in so uth Dalmatia and
the Montenegrin li ttoral. ll1e heterogeneous develo pm ent of the cultures,
insufficient research, especia lly in the hinterland, and the non -publication of
results from some strati fied sites (Gudnja, Vela Luka) make it very difficult to
Fig. 17 present.? complete picture of the development of Eneolith ic cul tures in the
Fig. 44 regi on. S. Ba rovi ć ha s described two phases in th e "Adriatic Eneolithic" of
northern and central Dal ma tia : the fi rst is illustrateu by finds fro m Brijuni (the
Brijuni group) in the north anu the central Dalmatian sites of Biskupija near
Knin, Crapče v a špilja, K aš i ći, Cct ina , and others; the other comprises pottery
from the later strata ofGudnj a, Grapčeva špilja, the Tradanj ca ve near Šibenik,
Gradina Sveti Spas near Knin, ctC . I09 This division has been harshly criticized,
PI. 3. -- Pottery shapes
of the Lasinja cu lture
from the si tes in Croatia and Bosnia
~
.' l'::
,. "
O
...... <I . . . . . . . . <I ~ ....
'" {{»})m~)tm»{)
40 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
primarily because ofits earl y dating of the Cetin a gro up (placed in the first stage
of the Eneoli thi c) but al so bec au se of a lack of clea r strarigraphic evidence
which would support it, A mo re realistic approach tO the problem of the
Adriatic En colithic is ro be found in the works of N, Pe trić, S, Dimitrij e vić and,
more recently, B, Marijanović and Č, Marko vi ć, wh o dealt with th e En eolithic
of Herzegovin a and the Montenegrin litwral. llo S, Dimitrij e vić suggested the
existe nce of three cultural and chro nological hori Zllns, noting, however, tha t
the scarcity of material was bo und to make this d ivisio n hypothetica l. Thc first
hori Zlln wo uld be marked by the appearance of prom-Na ko vana and Nakovana
PI XLII, 1-9 pottery, th e second by the penetratio n of th e continental Eneo lithi c (Lasinj a
and steppe elemcnts), and thc third by the second impact of a post - Vuče dol
type of th e continental Eneolithic , i,e. the Ljubljmw culture, On thc basis of
these divisions and of issues raised in the works of A. Benac , N, Pe triĆ , B, Čović,
Č. Markovi ć, Š. Barović, 13. Ma rijanović , B, (;ovednrica, and othersi ii it is
possible tO describe th ree stages in the development of the Eneolithi c on the
Adriatic coast and in the hinterland (Montenegro, H erzegovina): a) the
hori zon of fl uted ware (Odmu t IV, C;udnja IV, Spila Ila, Grap če va špilja,
Markova špilj a, etc.); b) the hori mn of the Nako van a culture (Odmut V, Vela
Špil ja near Vela Luka, (;udnj a V, Spila in Nakovana), and c) a post-Vučedol
culture of the Ti vat-Rubež type, chronologically fo llowed by a ho ri zon of the
Ljubljana culture (Grapče vn špilja , Trndanj, Gudnja VI and V II , Ra vli ć a peĆina
IIIA, Gradina Sv, Spas near Knin), The hori zon of the Cetina cultu re is set
aside ; althLl ugh Š, Barović pl aced it in the first phase of the Adriatic En eol ithic,
it actually belongs to the peri od of transition rowards the Early Bronze A ge , III
Th e first two stages of th e above division form an evo luti onary unity, with the
earlier based directly on Neolithi c tradition and preserving many of its stylistic
features , while the later gradually moves away frLlm autochthonLlus models and
introd uce s new stylistic elements characreri sti c of the Pelješac and Nakovana
cultures. Viewed in this perspective , the development of the Eneo li thi c cul tures
of th e central and southern Adri atic best illustrates the theory of their post-
Neolithic nature. In this context f1uted ware is of particular importance,
especially in explaining the genesis of the Early Eneolithic on the Adriati c coast ,
PI XLII , 1-3 The frequent presence of this kind of pottcry at coastal and island sites has
been linked with its appearance in the Hvar c ulture o n the one h and and with
a strong continental Vin ča influence on the o ther. At Hvar, in Marko va špilja
Fig, 16/ 1-3 and Grapče va špilja, this kin d of ware is fo und in the Neolithic stratum, whe nce
it was taken o ver by the bearers of the Nakovana culture, along with some o ther
eleme nts ("crusted" painting), says N , Petrić, l lJ S. Dimitrijević, o n th e o ther
hand, gives priority to the Vinč<l culture as th e so urce of fluted ware found
eventually on the coa st, 114 Recent excavations at Mo ntenegrin sites, both on
the coast (Spil a cave near Perast) and inl and (Beran krš), have helped tra ce
the road taken by Vinča pottery on its way to central and so uth Dalmatia ,l iS
At Beran krš, fo r instance, stratum Ile contai ns plentifu l po ttery decorated o n
the sh o ulder with shallow verti cal flutings , lt is easily linked both to the almost
Ea rly Eneolithic 41
ide ntica l shapes of th e Nakovana culture and with the Vinča c ulture in Kosovo
and furth er north. Simllar ware has bee n found in the Spi ln cave near Per3st;
it was loca ted in strata ll a-c which, according tO Č. M a rković, bel ong to th e
Early and Middle Eneolithic. 116 At Monren egrin sites, it has to be noted, fluted
ware is also found in earlier, Neo lithic strata (Spila lc , Bera n krš I, Odmut III), Fig.30/1-4
when ce it was obvio usly adopted by the Early Eneolith ic. l 11;s could also apply Flg.40
to sites in Herzegovina (Ravli ća peć in a IIc , individual finds from Badanj),
wh ere fluted ware is also found in the lowes t En eolith ic strata. 111is is why B.
M a rijan ović considers the mconremporaneous wi th the final phase of the Hvar
cul ture,'17 there by pos tulating a "H var o rigin of flute d ware" in the Adriatic
hinterland (Badanj), in spite of the fl)regoing arguments, ver y c on\~ncing,
abo ut Vinča mode ls fo r the flut ed ware of ce ntral and south Dal mati a.
The sca rcity of data o n th e c ultural devel opment of the Adriatic
region, the restri c ted n umber of systematically excavated sites and th e lack of
published mate rial make it impossible [o present mo re than a summary picture
of tbe post-Neo lithic (Early Encolithic) cultures of th e region. It consists, as
we have already noted, of three sub-regions: a) Istria and Kvarner, b) central
and south Dalmatia, and c ) the Montenegrin littoral with the hinterland. The
Eneoli thic cultures in th ese regions deve loped by a gradual e volution of a
Neolithic basis. The Brijuni group (or c ulture) emerged in Istria anci Kvarner, PL 4/a -d
its develo pment based on both the "Alpine facies ofLengyel" and the traditions
of the Hvar culture. On the basis of these lin ks and th e appearance nf fluted
decoration , Š. Baro vić dated the gro up as tra nsitional be twee n the Neolith ic
and Eneolithic. " s In its furth e r de velo pment , the region was submitted tel
strong Lasinja influence from Sl ove nia. Central and south Dalmatin and their
hinterland (the Ne re tva valley, Herzegovi na) are characterized by the emer-
gence of the Nakovana c ulture, a product, according to S. Dimitrij evi ć , of a
symbiosis of thc Hvar and Vin ča cultures. 119 A number of sites belonging to
th is culture have been registered (Spila in Nakovana , and Gudnja in Pelješac,
Vela Špilja near Vela Luka on Korčul a, Ravlića pećina, Badanj, etc.); most
have been excavated but, unfortunate ly, there has been no e xtensive data,
e xcept in the case of Ra vlića peć ina. Better insight into the excava ted material
and appropriate documentation will no doubt allow us to distinguish between
a t least two stages in the early Eneolithic development of the regions. S.
Dimitrij e vić's suggestion abo lIt the e xi stence of th e proro-Nakovana and
Nakovana cultures is n ot sufficiently backed by material and stratigraphic
e viden ce. Viewed in a broadercontext, this division fits in with the theory that
there was an earlier, post-Neol ithic horizon containing flu ted ware, which
wo uld comprise the prolO -Nako vana style, and a later one, whe re new styl istic
elements appea red (under the influe nce of Lasi nja, Bubanj-Salcuta, Maliq Il a,
etc .) re lated with the Nakovan a c ulture.
On the Montenegrin coas t and furth er inland (the Piva and Lim
valleys), the Early Eneolithic was largely charac terize d by the development of
the Nakovana c ulture, but also by strong influences of the Vin ča culture . The
42 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
stratigraphy of Spib near Perast allows the possibility of as many as three phases
Llf Eneolithic development (Spila Ila-c), with Ila and IIb belonging to the
Fig.30 region's Early Eneolithic. The stratigraphy of Odmut and Seran krš has added
tD o ur knowledge about the Eneolithic in these parts. lt should be nL)ted,
however, that the habitarion of Beran krš ceased as early as the beginning of
the Eneolithic (Beran krš Ile), while at Odmut it ran parallel with the devel-
opment of the Spila near F'erast (Odmut IV, V, VI).m Th e end of the Early
and Middle Eneolithic in these parts was marked by a powerful thrust uf a
post-Vuče dol culture uf the Tivat-Rubež type putting an end tD the lengtllY
development of th e post-Neolithic cultures, which endured much lunger in this
region than in the more turbulent areas uf eastem and northern Yugosla via.
/'" /'
/ '"
,, " '"
,,/
I
-----~
---- --- - _/
The term "lndo-European migrati on" is here used conditi Llna lly. lt is
used to deno te a le ngthy period of mi>:r8ti ons, of cu ltu ral shi ft s fmm east tO
west, from the steppes of southern Russia tO the Pannonian Plain and the
Balkans. 12l 1l1ese movements were the cause of numero us changes in material
and non-materi al culture , and especially in prehiswri c economy, where no-
madic paswralism superseded the already worn o ut agrarian civilizati on of the
Neoli thic. The bearers of these changes were the tribes nf steppe pastoralists,
mobile , witho ut Hxed abode, and quickly spreading over the vast e xpanses of
East , Central , and Sout heast Europe . lt is IIp to palaeolin guist s and furhter
st udies to establish whether they are tO be identified with the bearers of the
grea t lndo-European migrat ion . ln any case, archaeological materi al shows that
the Middle Eneolithic in the Danube Basin and further afielJ , in the Carpath ian
Basin and the Balkans , witnesseJ the demise of post-l\eolithic cultu res of the
Tripo lye, later Vin č a, Theiss, Lengyel, Bubanj -Salcura, and GUll1el nira types
and their varieties, and th e emergence of the widesprea d cultural complex of
Cerna voda lll -Bo leraz and the Baden c ulture, whose economy, way of life , anJ
organiza ti on of se ttlements was entirely J ifferent. 1l1e cause of these changes,
so important for the furth er deve lopment of prehisrori c society in the Yugoslav
Danube Basin and th e Balkans, is w be sought in a wave of migrati ons, th e shift
of the steppe tri bes from the Euro-Asian zone (the Orenburg steppes and the
area north of the Caspian Sc a) in the east towards Central and Southeast
Europe in the west. 1l1is movement was spearheaded by the bearers of thc
Pit-grave culture with their specific material culture , economy, and burial
customs . ln dealing with the development of Eneolithi c cultures in the central
44 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkan s
Kostolac cultures, i.e. that it was contemporaneous with early Vučedol in the
west and Ezero in the south.
The last echoes of the steppe cultures' thrus t across the Danube and
into the eastern and central Balkans, which were earlier marked by the
'\"
~
t -·
)
~
'\' '- \...,.~
"-
__ _• Migrations of the s:eppe population
.. during the EneoW;c
ii \ ."" "
~ '\y-....,~\ '\,,-, ."\ ../
j ----~
- ~
The Cernavoda IIlintrusion
:,
'
~).//~
...~
... i . . .. .~
~~"", '
. ..... .. ,-.~~ . '':'~ . .
~... . ."... ~ W"
'
I
i -'-,"
.:
, .'.;:.. ,.' -:-... .
•
---...-.~ /;. "
y. ."' ::~,...~.!..
:
'4, ' ) ",.\\\\\ , ,.-I~.:
i
I-..! ______
.. •. . . . •• .•• •
"' . ~. ~
• '~"'"
. " '.
. .•..
I
' .~... .
-."~ ':' .
.
":'" -.-~~"
~. ----.......... ,.~.-----
~ ~,. .
-~....' ' ,' -.5 "·t · .
~-------'. -
"
CK- -:-~._!
...... .- . . .. .
. ..
___ _ _ _ 1.
,. ~, . . ~ ..; - .'.
" (
I
-o- ' i-- ----BLA..
· · · · ·· ··,··" .. · · ·
\ / .l::::=:- oo: :.='
.
:>=='---=-~
:::- 3> "-~1\ . '
.i -~" ~ .. .
~:.. .
t =
~_~~::.::: __.,..-
SEA.:: - ____
.'--3'
,oo
- --
~\, \-
'.,-, - ~
•...
. r.... .~
\~-:f
.
t:'
. ..,'!>' '. '"
..
. ..../-; . - ;
. . .
- - - ; 7' . '
.... •
( " '.'
. ___
.~. .. ~
., ~~
~- :,'.-
~.
- . ~'- ,
.. ::<,~..
.,'.
north, Slo vakia and areas towards sourhern Poland, where Poli sh archaeolo-
gists used to rrear it as part of the f1uted, i.e. Prominisra culrure . 1JS Some local
differences were inevirab le over such a huge rerri tory, regardless of the unity
in the m ain fea rures of rhe material culrure . Fo r example , in rhe zone covered
by Cern a voda III and rhe relared E:ero culrure (hl'n :ons XI\' and XIIl of rhe
eponymous sire) coarse wme decorared wirh plasric bands or rough cu rs is more
frequent th an in, say, Pannonia (Bolera : ), where porre1')' is iiner, ofren wirh
f1ut cd decorari on. 1J9 Th e diffe re nc es a re uu" LO rhe im1uence o f
autochth ona us cul t ures on rhe newly -fanned one.
To the so uth and sourhwesr, Cerna voda III- &'Icra: wa, \\l.}"spread
in the Danube Basin, with a high concentrari on of si res in s..'urhem &na: and
western Bačka, between rhe Sava and rhe Dan ube, anu, as reCent "XC8\·aG.:11S
have revealed, south of the Danube - in Šumadija , wesrern Serbia. and &-"',118.
This last group is less prominent; with the exception of a single SIt" n,,3~
Smederevska Palanka, others are of the type where coarse Cerna voua III ware
predominates . They are also characrerizeu by a lack of t1ured decoration anJ a
profusion of plastic bands, impressions, anJ slanting cuts. T he Gračanic a sire,
erroneously dated into the Early Bromc Age, woulJ partly belong to rhis
cultural circle. 140
There are some thirty registered Cerna vo da III-Boleraz sires in thc
Yugoslav Danube Basin, but the only ones to have been excavateu tD any exrent
are Brza Vrba near Kovin , Vaju ga near Korbo vo, Mostonga nea r O džaci, PI. XI
Gradina on the Bosur and Gradina in T olisavci in western Serbia. 1l1e partia l PI. 'iN
publication of. results from thcse sites has made it possible to sketch a rough
picture of this culture in the Yugoslav Danube Basin and south of it, and define
the characteristics of irs marerial cultute, type of dwellings and of settlements.
ln this respect, the most helpful sites have been Brza Vrba, Mos tonga, and
Gradina on the Bosut. 141 T opographical features make it possible to di srin-
guish betwee n two types of settlem ents: the first are built on river banks in rhe
lowlands , and the second on higher grounJ, or even in hilly areas n o t typical
of Cernavoda III-Boleraz sertlements. Brza Vrba, Beljarica near Zem un,
Mostonga, and a few settlements in Banat are , or used to be, located on th e
banks of the Danube anu its arms. Gradina on the Bosut, though its present- da y
name wo uld suggest a hillfort settlement ( gradina = hillfort ), is in fa ct a
lowland settlement buil t on the river bank (Bosut). 1l1e Smederevska Palan ka
site was built by the Morava, and Cladnice n ear Gračani ca on a bank of the
eponymo us river. On the othe r hand, (Jradina Likodra in T olisavci wo uld
belong to the other, hilltop type of settlement, rypical of the culture's thrust
towards the ce ntral Balkans.
There is very little data about the types of dwellings and habitation
J?factices in Cemavoda III-Boleraz. Excavati ons at Gradina on the Bosut near
Sid and Brza Vrba have revealed the footings of several houses, budt using
practically rhe same techniqLLe: potsherds or pebbles (Bosut) were used to
solidify the fl oor; this was coateJ with a layer of cl ay, which was then packe d
The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
~---
anu bun1t. The upper part uf thc houses was executeu in a widespread
prehistoric technique uf builuing: wattle-and-daub and rounu posts. Also
frequent were pits and pit-dwellings (Mustunga, Brza Vrba), as we ll as open
hearth s amJ stuves built using the technique applieu in the con str ucti un uf
above-grounu uweilings (Brza Vrha).
PI. 5 Pottery finds are quite frequent in Cerna voda III-Boleraz settlements,
but not as vari eu as in the sumewhar late r Bauen culture. We shall here uescribe
only a few distinctive pottery types, which can help us explain the genesis of
the culture and are equally important as evidence of the cultural and stylistic
unity of the vast arca that the culture covered. There are, first of all, deep pots
with a plastic banJ atOunJ (or below) the rim, uecorate d all over wi th a coarse
herringbone ornament. The shape is tl)UnJ at many sites from Dobruja to the
Alps and from southern Polanu to the centroi Balkans (Cernavuda , Brza Vrba,
Gradina un the Bosut, Schwechat, lža, Nitriansky Hradok, etc. ) .142 This and
th e other shapes to be uiscusseu are placed by V. Ne mejcuva-Pavukov:1 within
the Baden l b hotizon of her chronu logy uf the Baden culture . : 4J Anuthe r
characteristic shape is thar dbrge pithoi, often with a roughene d surface and
PI. XV. 4 decorated with plastic banus (Locllsteni, Brza Vrba, Donne rskirche n, Nitl·ian-
sky Hradok). Finer ware includes cups with a single handie above the rim anu
PLXV. 3 broad fluting on the hdly and slmuluer. Typi cal are th eir "subcutane()us",
PI. XIV. 2. 4 vertically perfo rateJ tunncl handles (Gradina un the Bosut, Mostunga, Dun-
PI. XV. 2 nerskirchen, Pilismarot-Basarhac).144 hnally, there is a fairly widespread type
of bowls with a tlIrned-down rim whose inside (ufte n the entire surface) is
decorated with shallow paralld fluting. Sometimes they are exceptionally large,
Fig29/1 over 50 c m in diameter (Gradina un the Bosut, Mostonga, Dunn erski rch en,
PI. XV. I etc. ) .145 The greater frequency of these buwls at Boleraz sites and the absence
of the fluted cups described ahove have leu V. Nemejcov6-Pavuk ov:1 to treat
Cernavllda III and Bo kraz as tWl) distinct cultllral groups. However, "transi-
tional" sites such as Lxusteni in Oltenia, Vajuga near Kor hovo, or Brza Vrba
in Banat, where both fluting and bowls with turned-down rims are present,
show that these were merely local traits of a broader c ultural complex. T o this
group of rare but characteristic vessel shapes shoulJ be added a spl,cific kind
of plate (or lid), richly decornred on burh sides, with spiral or crosshatc hed
mutifs. It was f()unu in Brza Vrba, Uladnica near C;račanica, Ezero, but abu at
sites in Slovakia Oevišovice, Bratislava). 146
1l,e analysis of pottery f()und at Cerna voda III-Boler"z si tes, including
those in the Yugoslav Danube Basin, has provided a basis for resulving the
problem of the genesi, of this culture as a whole . Assul11ing that the primary
nucle us of the Cerna voda III style was situated in the lower Danube Basin,
along thc border between the steppe cultures and the "pl)st-Neulithic" cultures
of the Balkans, its origins sho uld be sought in that arco. In the introductory
part of this chapter we drew atte ntion to the "successive" movements of the
steppe tribes towards the lower Danube Basin, Central ond South east Eumpe.
Cernavoda III sites in Roman io and nortwest Bulgaria (Do bruja) appear at the
time when the Sredni Stog (II) culture was penetroting the area of T ripolye
(B), whi ch soon resulted in th e disappea rance of the latter. Elements of the
Sredni Srog c ulture are foun d in Cerna voda III pottery: coarse ware decorated
with obliq ue cuts on the upper half, the appearance of a rudimen tary form of
the herring bone motif, of a festoon below the ri m, consisting of pricks or cuts,
etc. 111is kind of pottery is most frequently found in the Dereivka II hori zon,
where terra-corta figurin es with flatten ed upper parts are a lso present
(Dereivka); 147 the same were fo und at Cernavod3 III sites and, somewh3t
later, in the C3 ri y ph3se of the Baden culture (Vin ča, Bela dice , Šarovce, e tc.) 148
Also to be nored are the close ti es between Ce rn avoda III po ttery and Ezero
finds in Bulg3ria , most particul3r1y the comse ware and decora tion by means
of plastic bands and obl ique cutS (Dipsiska mogila -Ezem , horizons XIII -VII) .149
By co rrec ting the synchronization of Ezero potte ry with Baden, i.e. Cern avoda
III and Boleraz, we are able to connect these finds with phenomena in the
Yugosla v Danube Basin and th e Carpathian Basin at large.
111e Sredni Stog compo nent and li nks with the Ezero cult ure are only
one aspect of the genesis of Cernavoda IlI -Boleraz. Also of importance fo r
Bolen'iz sites is the influence of autochthonous curtures on the emergence of
the new style : that of the late Lengyel and of Balaton- Lasinja. The latter is
especially prominent at Gradina on th e Bosut , whose vertica l st ratigraphy
Fig. 14/1 shows a sequence of the Lengyel (Sopot- Lengyel), Balaton -Lasinja IIII , and
Cern avodo III -Boleraz culturall ayers. 15o The influence of Balaton-Lasinj a on
the Bolen:iz group is reflected in pottery of the same fabric and simil ar shapes,
and in the direct stratigraphic continui ty be tween thc two cultures . 111is, of
course, is a regiona l pheno menon, characteristic of the area between the Sava,
Drava, and Danube rivers, although , in the words of E. Neustupnl', 151 the
theory of the "polygenetic o rigin" of the Baden culture (to whose carly phase
he attribu tes Boleraz) migh t be accepted.
lt is not hard to establish the relative chronology of Cerna voda
Ill -Boleniz. Mos t archaeologists agree that in the east it succeeded Cernavoda
I (type Renie ll ), Salcuta IV, and Gumelnita (K aranovo Vl) ; in the central
parts, the Yugosla v Danube Ba sin, and most of the Pannonian Plain, it was
later than Bodrogkeresztur, Hunya di-Vajska, and Balaton-Lasinja I-II ; in the
north, it followed the final stages of the Lengyel (Ludanice) culture . Through-
out most of this atea it was succee ded by the Baden culture, except in the east,
where an early stage of Cotofeni (Cotofeni I) emerged. In absolute terms, and
on the basis of uncalibrated C-1 4 dating, Cernavoda Ill -Boleraz would cove r
the period be tween 2850 and 2700 B.e. (data provided by the Berlin and
Groningen la boratories). 151
Middle Eneolithic SI
Baden sites: settle ments, individual graves, and chance finds, are
located in the southern section of the vast Baden complex - practically on its
periphery. In the south, the border runs along the lower course of the Sava and
the Danube, spreading to the ROl11anian and Serbian BJi1at to the east, mainly
in rhe lowlands. T o the south, Baden settle ments dil not reach furth er than
the narrow Danubian zone (Vinča) . Certain sites in Se rbia, for instance
C ladnice near Cračanica (Kosovo), Bubanj, Hisar, and others, are typologically
o utside the framework of the Baden style, though some resea rchers hold
contrary views. Thc finds from CJladniea, for instance, are closer to Cerna voda
[ll , while "Baden" or "Baden-Kostolac" pottery from Hisar and Bubanj be!ong
to the Kostolac culture . Djurdj e vo, in Šumadija (Djurdjevačka glavica), how-
ever, belongs to Vučedo l, not Baden, etc. IS6 llw apparent conclusion would
be that Baden settlements belong chielly to the Pannonian Plain, including
Slavonia and Srem. [n th e mo untainous regions south of the Sava and the
Danube , in Bosnia, Serbia, Transyl vania to the east, there are no Baden sites,
as P. Roman has shown . ISl ll1cir predilec tion f~) r low ground proceeds from
(he I!n Olnadic, steppe cOlnponent" of the culture'::; economy_
Ove r 100 Baden sites ha ve been registered in the region between th e
",
52~_ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ T,-,-h"e--,E"-,n-"eo:"l,,ith'.':i:c;. cultu res of Central an d West Balkans
Slavonski Brod-Va lpovo line to the west and the Romanian-Yugoslav border
to the east, but only a few have been in vestigated. The basis fo r a discussion of
the mate ri al culture, type of settlements, stylistic tra its, burial customs, and
other fea tures of the Baden culture in the southern zone of its expanse is
provided by the sites of Beli Man astir, O džaci, Bogojevo , Vučedol, Sarvaš,
Dobanovci, Gomolava, Vinča, Erdevik, and a fe w others where small- scale
sondage o r systematic excavations have been carri ed out. I 18 All th ese sites
have one thing in common : they are single-layer, short-tenn settlements, even
where the Baden habitation horizon is part of averticall y srratifi ed site
(Vuč e dol, Gomolava, Sa rvaš, Bapska, Vinča). No site has yielded two or mo re
habitati on horizons in the vertical strat igraphy. lllis also has to do with the
economic feat ures of the culture as a whole.
By their tOpographic features, the Baden set tlements in the middle
Yugoslav Basin belong to the widespread type of lowlan d settlement known
thro ughout the Panno nian Plain, in Slo vakia, and as far as southern Poland in
the north. These are the so-called pit-dwelling set tlements, whi ch deve loped
horizontally and left no significa nt cultural layers. Mos t of the material is to be
found in pits, less often in a cultura l layer. Another characteristic of t hese
se ttlements (e .g. Beli Manastir, Dllba novci) is the lack of surface dwellings , of
house s whi ch had been present in the area in the days of th e Vinča, Lengyel,
or llleiss c ultures. The foo tings of (apsidal and rectangular) houses in Vu čedol
and Sarvaš are not of the Baden cult ure. The fact that R. R. Schmidt did not
differentiate between Baden and Kostolac pottery might also account fo r t he
erroneous cu ltural attribution of the surface buildings ~at these sites . 159 Exca -
vations at Gomolava have clearly shown that the Bade n horizon contains only
pits and semi-subte rranean dwellings Llverlied by a settlemen t with earl y
Kostolac ho uses. '6o lllis is wh y it is believed th" t the bearers of th e Baden
culture in the Yugoslav Danube Basin were using only temporary set tlements
with pits o r semi-subterranean dwell ings; longer-lasting dwellin gs were to be
Fig. 9/ 1 ~ 4 built only in the Kostolac culture. This is an effect of the nomad ic way of life
Fig. IO/I-3 which characterized the Baden culture . Dobanovci and Beli Manastir arc
typical exampl es of this ki nd of settlement: numerous pits and semi-subterra-
nean dwellin gs with quite a few remain s of materi al culture, open hearth s and
hearths in pits, are the only mark of settled life at these sites . 161 They often
cover an extensive area (several hec tares) and are usua lly located on permea ble
loe ss ridges above rivers, streal11S, o r marshes. In addition to Do banovci and
Beli Manastir, this group also includes the sites in Bačka near Odžaci and
Moston ga , Bogojevo, Perlez, and a number of Baden sites li sted in Tite Eneolithic
of Southern Banat.162
A variant of the above, most widespread, type of Baden se ttlement is
represe nted by the sites on the right ban k of the Danube, built on elevated
terraces , such as Sarvaš, Vučedol, or Ilok. Severa l sites on the to p or slopes of
Fig. 26/1 ~3 Fruška Gora (Lice kod Erdevika) could also be included in thi s gro up. Due to
the topogra phic features of the terra in they "re more compact , but tbey are still
Late Eneol ithic 53
Material culture
Muc h hns been written nbout the typologicnl tea tures llf the Baden
culture, especin lly its po[[e!)', nnd we shnll nor dwelIon them. W e wo uld onl y
like [o poim [o some specific chnracre ristics relevnm for thc southern si tes, and
especinlly for the d nti ng of the sites in the Yugosbv Danube Bnsin wi thin the
PI. 6/b overall de velo pmem of the Bnden c ultuml CClIilplex. In the nbse nce of stmti-
graphic dara, it wn s from po[[ery thnt many authors (] . Bnn ne r, V. Nemejcova-
PaVllk ov6, E. Ne ustupny , S. Dimi t rijević , M. (~n m šn nin , N. Tns i ć ) 16) have
ded uced intcrnnl periodiwtion, fol lowing its stylistic develupment through
severa l phn ses ( 3 to 5) . It seems that an analysis of mnte rial fro m sites in the
Yugosbv Danube Basin Cl1uld sign ificantly contribute to the so luti on of this
problem, especinlly sin ce the h"rizun in questi on is limited in time nnd likely
to represent n separate phase in the developmen t of th e Baden culture.
A general conclusion to bc dmwn from the nnnlysis of potte ry would
be the stylisti c unity of the nmterial found almost througho ut the sou thern zone
of the Baden culture. Simil ar or identical sh npcs, th e sn me ornnme n wtion, nnd
even the nbsencc of cerwi n c harncteristic fentures of the cemmics, present at
some other sites in thc Panno nian Plain, would be the first factor pointing to
PI. XVII. 1-7 the synchronism of the Bnde n sites in the Danube Bnsin, Sre m, and Slav()nia .
PI. XVI II . 1-9 TI,e most frequent shape, characteristic oi the entire Bn den c ultural comple x,
is that of a c up wi th a bulbous recepracle nnd n ribbun h nndle nbove the rim .
Ir was modelle d, no doubt , nfte r Boleraz-Cern nvod n III prowtypes, cups which
still did not hnvc n bulbous recipient, but in all the o th er detn il s (ribhon ha ndle,
PI. XVI fluting) nnticipnted the new sha pe, which wo uld reach its npex in the Baden
culture . T his develo pme nt could bc t,)lIowed through an a na lysis of the po ttc ry
found in Rnde n settle ment nt Vučedol. Assuming that this po tte ry, publ ish ed
by R.R. Sc hmidt, is unique and tha t the re is no Role ra z hori zon nt the site , we
could interpret some purely Boleraz forms of cups and goblets ns their cont inu-
ation into the Baden c ulture . 168 T he c up with n ribbon handie nppears
nbundantl y, in vnrious forms, at nil Baden sites, from those in Ban ne to Vinča,
PI. XV. 3- S Dobanovci, Gomo lava, Vučedol, a nd Beli Mannstir. In terms of the usual
divisio ns of the Baden c ulture, most of these fon m would belo ng to p hases B
PI. 6/a an d C of its de velopment, i.e . the classical phase of the Bade n c ulture .
Anothe r very widesptead fmm nt Baden sites in the so ut he rn reaches
of this c ultural compl ex is a bowl assuming different vn rinnt shapes _On e of thlO
variants, a sOl11ewh at biconi cnl bowl with n tum ed-down ri m , also e volved
from Boleraz models. Bowls were "ftlOn decorated with dotted prick> or zigzag
lines . TI,e twO ornnl11ents nre oft en combined tu form a complex multi-pointed
srar (Do bnnovci, Vuč e do l, etc.) . 169 Next among the widespread Baden shapes
in the Danube Basin nre th e deep pots. TI,eir shape vari es from a simpl e deep
por, unprotlied a nJ wi th (l r without a thickened rim to sOl11 ewhat more
PI. 6 -- Potte ry shapes of the Early (A) and 'classical' (B)
phases of the Baden cu lture from sites in Croatia and Serbia
00000001
8
l *,
8
~~ ~-~-
---"-
O'Yl'loa Uj aIPp' V1
S6
~~-~~~~~~~~~~~=
The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Bosača Kostolac
---~
IV Uny-6zd i- D Bosača
Early Kosto lac
--,
Gomolava Ill. 2a I
I
I
I
Middle Eneoli thic 59
Though the Kostolac culture was at fi rst tho ught of as limited to the
Serbian Danube Basin, recent research has shown thar ir covered a much more
extensi ve area, which partly coincided with th at of the Baden culture, especially
in the central and so uthern parts of the Pann oni an Pla in. Kostolac ware has
been found as far south as central Serbia (Jelenac near Aleksinac, Makršane
near Kruše vac, and sites near Svetozarevo and Kraguj evac) and northern
Bosnia (Pivnica, Donj a Mahala, Dvorovi near Bijeljina) . Its elements are also
to be found furth er south, at sites aro und Niš, in Koso vo, Metohija, and rosnia
(near Alihodže). The sourh ernmost sites in Se rbi a belong to a somewhat
modified form of the Kostol ac c ulture, which M. Ga raša nin, J. Todoro vić, and
j. Gli š i ć h ave ca ll e d Ba de n·Kos to lac (Bu ba nj, Hi sar, Gl adnice n ear
Gra Ča nica).1 8 3 T o the east, sites with Kos tolac wa re are fo und in the Roma·
nian part of Banat, Ol tenia, and Transylvania, but very often within Cotofeni
culture . A ccording to recent research, the bo undary line between the two
cultures lies in eastern Serbia, some where between the Timok and Porečka
reka. Ir should be noted, however, that the two cu lt ures have mixed a lot in
rhi s area, so th at some sites (Cmajka, Kl ok očevac ) have yielded rhe two types
60 The Eneolithi c cul tu res of Central and West Balkans
is uncertain. 111e same might be said of the Vučedol graves. The double grave
attributed to the Baden culture by R. Schmidt conrained no unquestionable
grave goods (a bone awl and shards of a vessel which need nut have belonged
tu the grave) 1 91 More reliable, though incumple(e, are dara give n by T.
Težak-Gregl about the recenrly excavated tombs in Vučedol. She mentions,
without describing them in detail, five skele m n graves (crouched or extended
burials), of which two belong to (he Baden culrure, (WO fl) Vučedol, and one
91
(o Kostolac.1 As ar Gomolava, burials wok place within (he se(riement , ofte n
below (he floors of houses, which might well be linked fl) (he cusrom of
"preserving the Jeceased\ presencelI in the senielnenr after his death, an
exclusive privilege of (h e ranking membe rs of (he community.
The other group consists of graves cuncail1lI1,g cren1areu burin ls, a
non-traditional and quite alien custom in l\:eol i(hic and Eneoli(hic c ul(ures in
Yugoslav these regions. One ofrhe finds, so far isob (cd, is (ha( ofa grave from
(he Silaje( sire , in the village of DVlll'llvi near Bijeljina (nllr(h eas( Bosnia),
where a Bronze Age nec ropolis yi el ded a (ypical Kostolac bowl covering (he
calc ined bones l,fan incinerated body.19J The other site was discovered farther
east, in the area of Djerdap region, more precisciy ar Padina, in the Danube
gorge (Sector III). Systematic excava(ion at the site, known for much earlier
finds (Mesolithic, Neolithic), has yielded the remains ob necropolis containing
cremated burials: five bowls (f()ur aligned Kosmiac graves dug in tu approxi-
mately the same depth). B. Jovanović believes thar this was a smaller Kostolac
cemete ry with cremated burials, which would be bmh the earliest necropolis
with cremated burials in the Yugoslav Danube Basin and thc easternmost site
of the pure Kostolac culture. 194 Cremation was not unknown in the Pan-
nonian Plain in the Early and Middl e Eneolithic (Ohrozim, Tibava, Lučky,
Pilismarot, etc.), but it was much less frequent than inhumation. This phe-
nomenon, especially within the Kostolac culture, deserves more attention and
we shall return to it in the concluding chapter.
PI. XXII exceeds the size of the recepwcle several by times. Both this vessel and most
of the o thers arc made of well purified clay, burnisheo, and well baked. Other
shapes worthy of mention incluoe pots, some wi th a strengtheneo rim (Pi vnica,
Como lava, Sremski Kar1ovci, etc.), amphorae (Pivnica , Gomolava), and an-
other shape deri ving from Baden models, th e ell ipsoid vessel (Fischbutte) often
PI. XXIII found at Kostolac sites (Comoia va, Lepenska potkapina, Vučeool, !ža, etc.).
However, tho ugh the shapes ore many, varied, and often typical, ornamenta-
tion remains th e most characteristic oetenninant of the Kostolac style, easily
recognized rega rdless of whether the site is in Sbvakia, H ungary, Romania, or
Yugoslavia . TI,e ornamenration of vessels from, say, Iža, Varhegy, Comolava,
Pivnica, or the sites in the Djerdap area (including Romanian ones, such as
Cuina Turcului m Hercu lana) 19 \ is very similar, often even identical. lt
includes: va rious motifs made up uf dotted pricks (bands, stars, chequers),
crescenr-shapeJ cuts, the hen-ingbone 1110tif, triangu\af pricks , etc.; sorneriInes
PI. XX. 7 several motifs are combined on a single vessel (chequ ers with bands , or
PI. XXI. 4 herringbone with a band made of pricks, etc .). Also characteristic, especially
PI. XXV. 15.8 in the later phase lOf Kostolac, is Furchenstich decuration. Most of these
techniques have been adapted (by roughening) fm the application uf white
encrusted paint. T his favourite technique ofpottery decoration in thc Kostolac
culture originated in Baden and was to reach its zenith in the Vučedol culture.
On the basis of an analysis of the pottery style, the stratigraphy of
certain sites (Comolava, Vučedo l) , the culture's norrhward and eastward
spread and its contacts with other cultures, we can distinguish between two
Fig. 13a phases of development within the Kostolac culture. Of special importance in
this connection are stratigraphic dara, notably from layer III b at Comolava. At
this site, where we find rhree building horizons, rwo of rh em in superposition
(houses VI a and b), wc can dlstinguish (on the basis of porrery too) two
chronological entities . T he earlier horizon is characterized by an ornament of
pricks and cuts, a modest range of motifs, and the complete absence of the
Furchenstich technique. Even white encrusted paint is rather scarce in this
horizon . In the later phase, on the other hand, Furchenstich decoration
predominates, and the application of white paint to the ornament in negative
is m uch more frequent too . If the formation and development of the Kostolac
culture and its style are vicwcd comprehensively, the first phase would be that
of the culture's emergence and its stabilization in Srem, Slavcmia (Comolava
house VI a), and northem Bosnia (Pivnice), while the second phase would he
that of the culture's mo vements toward the late Baden settlements of the
Pannonian Plain and Slovakia on the one hand, and the Serbian and Romanian
Dan ube Basin, where it came into contact with the already fonned Cotofeni
PI. XXV culture, on the other. In the north it entirely displaced the bearers of the late
Baden culture, while in the east it entered into a symbiosis with Cotofeni; that
is why it is often referred to as Kostolac-Cotofe ni, when sites in the Djerdap
Fig.23/1·3 gorge, eastern Serbia and the Romanian Danube Basin are discussed. 196 Irs
Fig. 24/2. 4. 8 relationship with sites in the west has not been sufficiently investigated. There
Middle Eneoli thic 65
were no direct contacts with the Eneoli thi c cultures of the Alpine zone, but an
analysis of the material shows that the Kostolac culture might ha ve been related
to the development of th e Re tz-Gajary cu ltu re . We should here quote the
opinion of Z. Mark ovi ć , who believes thur the ea rly Retz-Gajary culture
prece ded Kostolac in Slavo nia, whil e the later phase was contemporary with
It . 197 The situa tion is particularly signifi ca nt in northwest Croatia, where there
are no Baden or Kostola c sites at all, but Retz-C;ajary settle ments of thc Višnjica
and Hrn jevac types are e ncountered instead . It is norew()rth y that they all
belo ng to the so-called Furche nstich complex of the Alpine zone, and Furchen-
stich decoration is, as we ha ve shown, onc of the basic trai ts of the later phase
of the Kostolac culture . S. Dimitrij e vić is righ t in saying that Retz-Cajary and
rel ate d gro ups (Baj č, W alrrahiihle-Jevišovice C- I, Mondsee , the Erdely type)
trace an arc which extends from the Alps vi a the north of th e Ca rpurhian Basin
to Transylvan ia , avoiding the area ofSlavo nia, Srem, north ern Bosn ia , Serbia,
and the Romani an and Serbian Danube BaSin, which belonged, in fact, to the
Kostolac culture. 198 lt is in this context that the relatio nship between the twO
cul tures , wh ich we beli eve to have been contemporaneo us, should be viewed.
Of course , the questi on is where the Furche nstich technique originated: within
Retz-Gajary or Kostol ac! S. Dimitrijevi ć and Z. Marković fav Ll ur Rerz-Gajaf)',
which is acceptable since the technique only appears in the later stage of
Kostolac. 199 The technique was obviously widespread in Ccntral and parrly
Southeast Europe . S. Di mitrij ević may be ri ght in suggesting that ir ca me into
being somewhere in the eastern Alpine region , on the basis of the pricked band
(Sti chband) ornament 2OO lt the n spread rowards the east and so utheast, ro
the Kostolac culrural area . Thi s could be an expl ana tion of why Furchenstich
decoration does not appear in the ea rliest phase llI' the Kostolac culrurc and
why its frequency steadily decreases south of the Sava and Danube rivers
(Pivnice , Bubanj, Hi sar).
in southwest Romania, concen trated densell' ;)Iong the upper Mures, Olta and,
especially, the Danubion part of 0lte nia 202 T o his dota we shl)uld add the
considerable numbe r of sites in the Serbian Danube Basin and the T imok
valley. When the results of excavations in northwest Bulgaria m e publi shed wc
shall have a relatively accur;)tc picture of the territory encompassed by the
c ulture at the time uf its greotest expansion .
ln the Se rbi an Danube Basin and eastern Serbia, the Cotofeni culture
extended along the Danube almost w Golubac, and along th e Timok valley to
the confluenee of th e Crna IZcb with the Timok .2O; Ind ividual finds west of
C30lubac (e.g. Jabuka near Panč e vo) can be interpreted as no more than the
presence of some ele ments or influence of the Cotofeni culture on its western
neighbours. Of the thirty Eneolithic sites at Dj erdap I and II citeu by M. J evtić,
twenty-two belong !-la rtl l' or e ntirely to the Curofeni culture 204 At some, only
Cowfeni pottery was found (Donje Buturke, Zbradila-Fund); elsewhere it was
mixed with Kosto lac ware (Vajuga-Pesak, Lepensb !-lorkapina) . A mixture of
these two cultures is typical of many sites in eastern Serbia and southwest
Romania. Important information f(.1f th e srudy of the Cotofeni culture is also
provided by two groups o(sites in eastern Serbia: in the Timok valley (Grabar-
Svračar near Smedovac, Cetaće near Kovilovo, and Kapu Djaluluj near Veljk-
ovo), and in the area between Bor and Majdanpek, wh e re sites with Cotofeni
ware have been registered nea r Kri veij, Zlotska !-lećina, Štubik, Crnajka, and
Klokoč evac. 2 os Must uf thc sircs have been more or less excavated; in addition
to ponery rhey have yidued infnrmariun on settlements ami buildings, Jnd on
the stratigraphic !-losition l,fCorofe ni in its rela tion to the Eneolirhic culrures
of rhe region.
The Corofeni c ulture shuws no preference.s in the choice ofsettle ment
sires. The settlements arc II various kinds: a) <lpen luwland sertlements
characterisric of isles in the Danube (Ostrovul Curbului), rhe Olte nian Plain
and the area along the Danube (Zbradila, Vajuga) ; b) settlements on cievared
ground by rivers or srreams (Krivelj, Kovilovo, Smeuovac); c) settlements at
almost inaccessible s!-l0ts or steep hi!lsides, where ho uses were builr on an
artificial escarpment or close to the rocks (K lokočevac, C rnajka); ca ve sites,
such as Zlotska peć in a in our pmtsor Horilor, Pestera cu apa, Romanesti, Cheile
T urzii, and orhers in Romania . Most of the sites in easrem Se rbia and the
Serbian Danube Basin were herdsmen's temporary dwelling-places; habiwrioI1S
are, for the mosr part, badly preserved, and the Corofeni cultural layer is thin
and shows no signs of prolonged habirarion in the same !-llace.
Though only temporary, the settlements are usually rich in ceramic
material. Vessel shapes fit in with a broader complex of Eneoli thic c ultures of
PI. 8 rhe Carpathian-Danubi an- Balbn zone. 111ey are related tO Bole raz-Ce rna-
voda III and Baden backgrounds, and similar (o Kosrolac. Th e mosr frequent
shapes are those of various bowls (conical, biconica l), cups with ribbon
PL XXIV handles, deep pots, sauceboat shapes, etc. The ornament a tion, however is qui te
specific, and it is the most characteristic trait of the Cotofeni style . Incision is
the most frequent technique, as well as prick s, cuts, and plastic bands. Pcculiar
PL XXV. 8 to the culture are the \jentiform (Linsen) appliques, usua lly combined with
Fig. 24/2. 4 incised motifs. Other techniques and motifs were also used (Furche nstich ,
Fig. 50/4 crescent- shaped c uts or stamped motifs combined intO a chequered pattern),
bU( we are inclined to treat them as a phcnomeno n alien to Cotofeni: mos t of
them have been taken ITom Kostolac, while some decora tive elements (plastiC
bands, channeIling) originated with Cernavoda IJJ or Baden. Corded ware is
usually taken to be of steppe origin WO On the whole, the Corufeni style of
decoration developed under the influence of other styles: ITom th e inh elited
tradition s of Boleraz-Cernavoda III , through Baden and KostOlac stylcs, to
influences fro m the steppes of south Russia.
111e question of the strcltigraphic position of the Cotofeni culture, it.1 origin
and developmem seems tO have been more or less satisfactorily resolved, thanks
to the fact that its place at stratified sites has been identified and to analyses
of its potte ry and its rela ti ons with other contemporary cultures. Cocofeni ware
is found at sites in eastern Se rbia above the Bubanj-Salcura-Krivodol layer
(Zimska peć in a, Krivelj, Kovilovo, etc ). P. Roman belie ves there wa s a hia tus
between the two cultures in Romania, presumably co be filled by the incursions
of Cernavoda III ,z07 It foll ows that the Cotofeni culture spread towards the
south and southwest after it had been stabilized, i.e. in phase II according to
its ternary division. This seems an acceptable vi ew, all the more so as nu
material belonging to phase l uf Cmofeni has been found at sites in th e Serbian
Danube Basin and eastern Serbia. 111e earliest settlements in the region could
be those at Donje Bmorke or Zbradila, where there is a comp le tc abscnce of
Furchenstich decoration. Serbian sites would bel ong to phases II and III of the
Cotofeni culture ; sites where Furchenstich decoration is prominent, or even
predominant (Klokočevac, Cmajka) would thus belong to the final phase.lOS
In view of the symbiosis of the two techniques of ornament3tion and styics at
a single site we are inclined to describe this phase as the Kostol ac-Cotofeni
culture.
111e question of the ori gin of the Cocofeni cu lture should be viewed
within the ITamework of the emergence and expan sion of Boleraz-Cernavoda
III and, for a somewhat later peri od, of Baden, as well. NumerolIS elements of
Cotofeni pottery, especially as fou nd at Romani an sites, derive from the styl e
of Cernavoda III: the use of plastic bands, a rather coa rse version of the
herringbone motif, and broad channel ling. 111is kind of poctery ITom Romanian
sites (Petresti, Brateiu-Nišiparie , the ea rlier layers of Locusterri) 209 is dated by
P. Roman to phase I of the Corofe ni culture. This pha se is also characteri zed
by the compl ete absence of Furchenstich decorati on and of the motif of cuts
organized into chequer patterns in Kostolac manner (Herculana-Pestcra-
Hotilor, Girbova de Sus) 210 The presence of Boleraz-Cernavl)Ja lli elements
Middle Eneoli thic 69
in the early ph ase of Cotofeni does not indicate, however, a direct e voluti on,
The Cotofeni culture probably ca me in to being as a res ult of the very same
process which gave ri se to Baden in the Pann onian Plain , Only their
autochthon ous bases were different: in the case of Baden, the line followed was
Balaton-Boleraz-Baden, while the basis of Corofeni was a combination of
Cemavoda III and Salcuta,
In the conte xt of the other contemporaneous phenomena in the
Ca rpathian-Danubian-Balkan region, the relative chronology of the Corofeni
culture would bc as follows: phase I of P, Roman's coincides with the emergence
of th e Baden culture in the Panno ni an Pl ain (in the Serbian Danube Basin at
the time, Boleraz-Cernavoda III settlements were still in existence here and
there: Vajuga nea r Korbovo, Brza Vrba near Kovin); Corofeni II would be
parall el with the further development of Baden (classical phase) and the
appearance of Kosrolac elements; Corofeni III was co ntemporaneous with the
mature Kostolac culture and the first Vuče dol serrlements in Srem and Sla-
voniaJ ll lt is hard to say what exactly happened in the Serbian Danube Basin
and eastern Serbia after the Cotofeni culture, The next settle ments there
belong to the Verbicioara and Varin cultures, bur this does no t exclude the
possi bility of a temporal hia tus between the twO cultures,
Hmjevac ,md Višnjica types in Sl ovenia and Cruatia; Retz and Waltrah0hle-
]evišovice Cl in Austria and Moravia; Mondsee in lIpper Austria; Gaj ary- Baj č
in Slovakia; Retz-Cajary in the upper T isw valley, and the Erdely or Tran syl-
vanian type in Rom ania Zi4 Po ttery is the most characwrist ic tearure of the
material t,)und owr thi s extensive area (cups with rib blln handles, bowls, and
deep pots), The decoratio n was by Furchenstich, rustica ting, ca rving, rough -
en ing, and impression before tiring in o rder tD prepare the surface f,x the
application l1f white encrusted paine.
Comparativeil' tew Rerz-Cajary sites have been discovered in north-
west Croatia and Slovenia , S, Dimitrijević listed seven, to whi ch Z, M arkov ić
has added another f(lur, Sl) that we can COUnt with eleven sites at present 2l 5
Charac terist ica lly, they are all cave settlements located at higher altitudes:
Kevderc and Ljubiška jama at 810 m, [,redjama nea r Posteljna at 41 0 m, Velika
pećina at 428, and M ačkuva pećina near Vindija at no more th an 275 m, The
other sites are situated either in the hilly area llf Hrvatskll zagorje or they bdong
to the hillfo rt type (Hmjevac, at 405 m), l1)e ropogra phy of Retz-Gajary sites
in Croatia and Slo venia has conn nncd the presumption tha t their inhabitants
were srock-breeders, shmvi ng also thc importance of hunting in their economy,
111e analysis of ostenlogi c material from Velika peć ina nea r Višnj ica has
de monstrated the presence in the cultural layer " fbo th do mcsticated animals
and big game, such as deer, wild buar, wild buvi nes, or small, such as fl)X2l6
11,e positi on of the caves at Kevderc, Ljubiška jama, and even Predjama, alsn
suggests that they could have been high-altitude hunting stations too , Cave
settlements werc found beYlll1d this area as well (Waltrahtihlc, Austria) al-
though, according tl> data trom other regions, including Austria itself, pit-
dwelling settleme nts on loess de va tions (Ret' in Austria, Bajč- Vlaka novo in
Slovakia, Pecsbagota-Cseralya in west Hungary, etc.) and pile-settlements (in
the Mundsee and Altersee regions of Austria) were more frequent.
On the basis of typological features, of pottery in the fi rst place, S,
Dimitrijević has distingui shed between twO different types of this culture in
fa mler Yugoslavia; in our view, they mayaiso be ofch runological imporrance 21 7
11,e first is the Viš1ljica t)'pe, found near the epon ymous settlement, at Vindija
PI. XXXVII. 2~ 10 and Predjama , and at localities in Hrvatsko zagorje listed by Z, Marković, ! lS
This type is cha ra cte ri zed by cuarse ware (rounded vessels , often with a very
narrow neck, big-belli ed pots, globular receptacl es, ete.), sometimes with a
Iightly barbotin ed surface or with a plastic band bearing finger impressions,
Finer ware includes small bowls, c ups with han dles above the neck , decper
PI. XXXVII. I, 10 conical vessels, small er terrines, ete. Fine ware is decorated with gmoved
incisions (a kind of Furchenstich) or th e ground is prepared for the laying on
of white encrusted paint , The motifs are arranged in zones, as in other
Eneolithic cultures (Kostolac, Vučedol, Bell Beaker, etc ,), Globular vessels,
closed receptacles, and carved decoration are typical of stock- tearing cult ures
whose bea rers dwelt in hill I' and mo untaino us regions (pmper woodcarving) ,
Middle Eneolithic 71
Map 2 In th e Middle and bte Eneuli thic a considerable numbe r of tum uli
appear in th e Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian Danube Basin. T hey have been
mechanically linked with th e "steppe culrures", "steppe influenc es", "Pit-grave
culture", "oehre graves \ 'T I ndo~Europeans" , Obviously, the ir cultura l and
l
Ifwe leave o ut the above-menti oned tum uli near Mo krin (Arndjanska
humka), Batajnica, Voj ka anJ Srpski Krstur, as well as some unreliabl e data
about Perlez anJ Skorenovac, it is lm the basis of bu rial custllms that the others
may be classifieJ in to the same cul tural anJ, it sccms, ch ronologica l horizon,
whi ch cou ld be linked to the ph enomena of the Pit-grave culture . TI,e ba rrows
in question are those near PDnčevo (Voj lovica and Jabu ka) , Vršac (Uljma, Fig_ 34
Vl aj kovac, Vatin) , Perlez (Batka), and KikinJa (Padej) . They are charac terizeJ Fig_42
by the presence of cro uched burials within a rectangular grave covered by a
barrow. A wooden structure, especially prominenr at Vojlovica, the use of ochre
staining, and rare bu t ch aracteristic grave goods (the sil ver hai r orna menr from
Voj lo vica o r the gold locks-ring from Vršac and Vlajkovac) are other features
linkin g these tum uli with thc steppt:s of southern Russia. TI,e best-Joc um enteJ
is the Vojlo vica grave , where the burial chamber wa s su nno unted by a wooden
structure, a lid set on pillars. The body was laid on a mat and spri nkled wi th
ochrc. On the basi s of the burial ri te and the silver lock-rings, B. J o vanović
decided th at the grave belonged tu the steppe Pit -grave culture.m TI, e grave
no. 6 from Pašića humka (barrow) near Perlez is important in this context; its Fl g 3~
The tumul was erected over a stratified prehismric settl ement with Baden and
Kostolac pottcry. Lj. Buk vi ć's doc umentation from this site is perfectly clea r: a
Pit-gra ve cu lture grave was dug into earlier layers and and thus di sturbed the
footings of a Kostolac house 2 l2 This ca n be taken as a more accurate tenni)lus
post quem for the Pit-grave culturc in thc Yugoslav Danube Basin.
Finally, C-1 4 dating ha s also been instrumental in providing an
acc urate date for these graves. An analysis of the remains of the wooden lid
from Padej by the Berlin La boratory has yielded the following result: Bln -2219
- 4320±50 B.P. (2370±50 B.C). 2JJ The laboratory's clata for some Pit-grave
culture burials from Ketegyh:'iza arc almos t identical: gra ve no. 4 from tumulus
3: 2315±80 2l4 When we know that the mature phase of the Pit -grave culture
between th e Dnieper and Dnies ter is dated to between 2500 and 1900 B.c.,m
it is clear that the Berlin data are in absolute accordance with the situation as
it was when the bearers of the Pit -grave culture or, shall we say, the Indo- Euro-
pean wave, arrived. The tumuli subsequently appearing in the Yugoslav and
Romanian Danube Basin as part of the Vučedol c ulture (Batajnica, Vojka,
Moldova Veche) belong to a somewhat later peri od, that of the te rmin al
Pit-gra ve culture, and may have been somehow (ochre-painted vessels) related
to ir.
LATE ENEOLITHIC
(The Vučedol cultural complex)
Thanks to its anractive po n ery, the Vučedo l culture was among the
fi rst pre historic cultures registered by archaeological scie nce. Incidentally , it is
with the excavation, towards the end "f th e 19-th century, of Vu čedo l sites,
mostly on the territory of the ex-Austro-Hungarian Monarch y, that the work
on pre historic archaeology has begun. T hc firsr sire to be inves tigated were the
pile-dwellings in Ljubljansko Barje, which K. Deschmann started excavat ing
in l875 2 J6 ll, ough interr upted fi-om time to ti me, thi s w" rk has continued to
the present day. In anoth er area, at Debelo Brdu near Sarajevo, F. h ala began
his own work in 1896.1l7 ll, eir findings were soon described in the first
publications devoted to prehistory. Besides Oeschm an n's reports on hi s Barje
work, these findings , in the first place incrusted pottery, were also the subj ect
of writings by M. Hoem es (1898) and, in a now classical work The [,,[aid Pot tery
of the Stom and Bronze Ages (1904), by M. W osin sky2J8 In th e first phase of
resea rch, Vuče do l sites were also excava ted by J. Brunschmidt, wh ose excep-
tionally ramified activity covered sites in Srem and Slavonia too, most notably
Vučedol , where he started exca vating in 1897 2J9 ll,e second phase of research
comprises the inrerwar years, when research was largely concentrated on
already excavated sites (Ljubljansko Barj e, Vuče do l, Sa rvaš). ll,e mate ri al
ITom these , and from Z6k in the Hungarian part of Baranja (Dj. Kara pandži ć
in 1919 and 1920), was publis hed by Yugoslav and foreign archaell logists (N.
Vu li ć , M. Cr bi ć , V. Hoff1l1 er, R. Ložar, R.R. Schmidt, etc .) .24° T hc third phase
started as soon as W orl d W ar II was over: at Hr usrovača (1947) and Zeco vi
(195 4) , at Ptujski grad (1946) and (~ o mo lava (1 953 ); o ur picture of the culture
was further added to by the in vestigation of si tes near Vinkovci, Belegiš, Rudina
I, or the ones in central Serbia Oasik and Djurdjevo) 241 Excavation was
accompanied by publication of excavation reports, articles and studies (A.
76 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
11,e term "Vuče uol culture" refers to the regional phenomenon within
the Vučedol complex which has all the characteristic traits of the Vučeuol style
in pottery and the main features of Vučedol settlements, in oth er words the
phase which archaeological literature calls classical or true Vučedol culture. It
c.omprises the central area of the Vučedol compl ex, th;: terri t.ory of Baranja
(south of Lake Balaton), Srem, and Slavonia, including northwest Croatia,
central Serbia, and Bosnia south of the Sava. A number of sites have been
registered and panly investigareu in the area. Their concentratio n is especia lly
high between the Sava, Drava, and Danube rivers: fi-om the Hungarian part of
Baranja (Za k, Dunaszekcsii-V arhegyrbl, Szava, etc.) and the stratified sites on
the left bank of the Danube (Sarvaš, Vučedol, Belegiš) tO those in the Sava
valley and the lowlands of Slavonia (Gomolava, severalloca li ti es near Vink-
Late Eneolithic 77
ovci, Mari ć gradina in Mikl euška near Kutina, and sites in the Bj elovar and
Koprivni ca areas),
The position of tl", scttlC11lCnL\ indicates that their inh abitants preferred
commanding sites, They built their dwellings on elevated gro und by the banks
of rivers or in their hinterland, The settlements were additionall y fortified by
ditches or palisades , Characteristic are the man y settlements on the high loess
bank of the Danube be tween Zemun and the contluence of the Drava and
Danube rivers, whi ch always have a deep ditch or mher fonns of artificial
fortificati on , Simil ar settlements were built em the slopes ot Mt. Fruška Gma,
especially the north side, which slopes down to the Danube (t'eštin, Sot, Vizić)
and the sO llth, where the hilly terrain mee ts the lowlands otSrem (Pećine near
Vrdnik , Gradac in Bapska , in a way even (lomolava near Hnkovci) , 1l1e best
examples of Vllčedol fortifi ed se ttlements are (;radac in Vučedol, Šančine in
Belegiš, or Prisonj ača in Vodjinci near Vinkovci, 1l1e present-da y toponyms
I1Gmdac", !lCrad't, trŠančine", or, in Hunga ry, HVaraJU, "Varhegy!l, best iJlusrrare
thc hil1fo n nature of th e Vučedo l settlements, Thanks to the fact that it has
been investigated in its entirety, the Vuče dol Gradac is tO be taken as the
paradigm of V uče dol fo rtifi ed settlements, 1l1e deep di tch that ran ro und the
high loe ss plateau separated Uradac ITom other se trlem e nt~ in the immedia te
vicinity and made it a fairly safe place for th ose ti mes, A t Sa nčin e in Belegiš,
elements offonifica ti on we re strengthened: the pla tea u was surrounded by twO
ditches with a wooden pali sade between them,
In Bosnia and central Serbia another type of settl ement is widespread,
but it also features the elements so important fo r Vučedo l settlements - safety
and security, The position of the hillfon vi llages in Šumadija (Djurdjevo, Jasik
near Kragujevac)24l is simi lar to that of the Fruška Gora sett lements (Pe ćin e
near Vrdnik) and the Vuče dol settlements in Bosnia (Zecovi, Debelo Brdo) ,244
An exception to the rule is the only cave settlement, H rusrovača in western
Bosnia; nevertheless, it toO belongs to the type of safe set tl ement favo ured by
the Vučedol culture,245
Excavati on has shown th at there was a busy buil ding activity at
Vuče dol sites, On e of its aspects was the erection of fortifIcation s, another
concerned the construc tion of dwellings, and even sacred structures, Gelud
so urces of information on this aspect of the culture are Gradac in Vučedo l ,
Tržn ica in Vinkovci and, to a lesser extent, Šančine in Belegiš and Rudine nea r
Koprivni ca , On the levelled surface of Gradac there was a "megaron"-shaped
ho use of some size (15.40 x 9,50 m) which belonged to the early phase of the
Vuče dol se ttlement, Because of the five "smel ting" furnaces (three in th e ho use
and two just outside), R. Schmidt desc ribed the building as the "copper-smelt-
ers' megaron" ("Megaron des Kupfergiessers") 2 46 A later Vučedol building at
the same spot , and of roughly the same size, conta ined a potter's kiln , Gradac,
however, is not a typical V uče dol settlement, It was built for a special purpose,
possibly as a seat for dignitari es or, in Schmidt's upinion, a place where copper
was smelted and processed, Much more infonn ation is provided by a site nea r
78 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-'T.he Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Ba lkans
Vi nkovci (Tržnica-Hotel) where severnI medium- and large-sized rec tangu lar
ho uses (between 14 and 16 m in length) have been discovered in an men of
2,000 squnre metres. As a rule they contain n horseshoe- or oval-shaped hearth;
in one of thc houses there was also a sacrificial structure in the shape ofhorns
of consecration, a symbol often encountered in the Vučedul culture 241 The
settlement was not o rgnnized; buildings were erected without a defini te plan
or orientation. Characteristic are the renovation of buildings, the levelling of
the ground in preparation il,r furt her construction work, all ofwhich indicates
n lengthy stay by a consi derable pupulation in a single place, unduubtedly
conditioned by its economy tou . Most Vuč edol settlemcnts in Srem and
Slavuni a are characterized by thc existence of several building phases. Ths is
especially truc of sites on the high loess bank (Sarvaš , Lovas, Erdut, etc.).
Necro/Jolises in the classical sense are not known to the Vuče dol
culture. Individual buri al; have been discovered within settlements, besidc
PL 9 houses or under their fuut ings .Burial was by inhumation, in a crouched position
and in pits of various shapes. Characteristic is the do uble grave in front of a
later "mega ron" house in Vučedol, with the L- shaped buria l chamber resem-
bling the catacomb graves of steppe origin. The large number of grave goods
fuund there (2 I whole vessels, 30 fragmented ones, and 800 pmsherds) mea ns
that the grave was a special one ; R. Schmidt called it "the Cllupl e's romb"; while
S. Dimitrij ević interpreted it as a "pmto-princely grave" 24S Individual burials
with Llf with Llut grave gOLlds have been found elsewhere roo, for instance 011
the plateau ofStreim's Vinograd (Vineyard), where a Vuče d o l pit has yielded
8 skeletons. S. Dlmi t rij ev i ć alSl) mentions a small group romb in Vinko vci,
contalning three skeleron graves H9
ln the easte rn parts of the Vučedol cultural area, burial under barrows
was also practiced, probably under the influence Llf the steppe peLlples' inc ur-
sion s into th e Carpathian Basin and the Yugoslav Danube Basin. Two barrows
conclusion can be drawn rega rding its end: Vuče d o l elements appear in the
Vinkovci culture (e.g., Rudin e I). In some isoloted regions, especially south of
the Sava, in Bosnia and Serbia, the Vučedol culture may have been partly
contemporan eo us with the emergence of the new Early Brome Age c ultures.
TI,is, however, is another problem, that of the genesis, duration , and pe riodi -
zation .of the Vučedol culture and Early Brome Age cultures , a problem we
shall tum to later.
Th" material culture of Vučedol sites is rich and vari ed. As has often
been noted, the style is best exemplified in pottery, richly decorated usin g
PI. 10 various techniques . T ec hnologically and artistically it is among tne most
advanced prehistoric cultures of the region, as evidenced by the 4uality of
modelling, fabric, and omamentation. TI, e tables of pottery types and the
illustrations provide an insight into the richness and variety nf shapes. How-
ever, since R. Sch mi dt and his Die Burg Vučedol there has been no extensive
survey of Vučedol pottery which would include recent finds from the region
affected by the classical Vučedol culture. Nor would such an analysis be possi blc
here, our space being limited. Instead we shall point to some basic fomls, sna pes,
and decoration, of importance for the evolution of the Vuč e dol culture . In the
early phase, bowls are the most frequent shape . An inheritance frum the
Kos tolac culture, they are sometimes very shallow and with a small ba se. Their
variants range from mildly biconical to fully articulated bowl s (neck, shoulder,
upper and lower cone) . Nearly all are decorated with a ca rved o r Furchenstich
horizontal band. Footed goblets are rather scarce in the earl y ph ase . In the latcr
stages, especially near the end of th e Vučedol period, they become in crea singly
frequent bearing importance for the internal pe ri odization of the Vuče dol
PI. XXVI. 1-5 culture . A shape inherited from the Kostolac c ulture is that of th e "terrine", a
deep bowl with a ribbon handie between the shoulder and lower cone or on
the long neck. TI,e "terrine" was widespread throughout the durati on of the
Vučedol culture. Often, but without much ground, it is though t of as exclusive
to Vučedol, though it had been known to the KDstolac culture too. One of the
most sumptuous, in both workmanship and decoration , was fo un d in a Vuče do l
grave . Amphorae of various sizes , hanging vesse ls, pots and pithui of different
shapes complete to the list of the pottery forms Df the Vučedo l culture. Most
vessels, of medium and smaller size, are richly decorated, chiefly by ca rving. It
is the technique by which the Vuče do l culture is defined in literature as the
one where decorati on by applying white paste OntO the rusticated su rface of a
vessel reached its apex. The effect is that of a contrast between the burnished
black surface of the vessel and the white paste. In addition to vessels used fo r
practical purposes, cult and ritual objects were also often found at Vučedol
sites. Frequent are the "altars" - rectangular or sa ddle-shaped (the shape of
PI. XXVI. 7 horn s of consecration) pedes tals, present in all the stages of the Vučed o l
culture. Some altar sh apes deri ve from the Kostolac culture, e.g. the ope found
at Pl andište in Cerić; 250 similar form s have been fo und in Belegiš (San čine)
together with material belonging to the earli est phase of the Vučedol culture .
Late Eneolithic 81
These data are of importance fl)r the periodization of the culture and point to
the existence of a transitional horizon between the Kostolac and Vučedol
cultures. To this group of special-purpose artefact s also be long small tripodal
vessels from Vučedo l and Hrustovača and ring- based vessels, whose surface,
even the parts not normally visible, is richly decorated all over (Vinkovci,
Vuč e dol). Finally, there are anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines, not
very fTequent at Vučedol sites, but with characteristic, unusual shapes and
ornamentation. l1le anthropomorphic terra-cOlta figurines from Vuče dol
(Gradac) and Vinkovci (Tržnica) are roughly modelled, but richl y decorated
with incised lines. Femal e figures have th e genital area covered with a kind of
apron. Althuugh different in shape from the well -known Ljubljansko Barje
figurine, they display similar ornamental motifs.
Metal artefacts are comparatively rare at Vuče dol sites, though there
are indications, both direct and indirect , that th e bearers of the culture were
familiar with copper metallurgy (smelting, casting and the manufacturing of
artefacts) . In addition to the "copper -smel ters' mega ron" , as R. Schmidt named
the house with several smelt ing (?) furnaces at Cr adac in Vučedol, the same
site has yielded a few artefacts which could confirm that this, indeed, had been
the inhabitants' occupatiun. I S1 A flat-axe mould was found near one of the
furnaces, and a copper axe of the same shape near another. Also, a number of
ingots, whole or in fragments, have been found in a layer belonging to the
Vučedol culture. A preci ous fi nd of exceprional importance for the study of
copper metallurgy in the Vuč e do l culture was the content of a pit in Vinkovci PI. XXXII. 1· 3
(Tržnica-Hotel, excavated in 1978) referred to as ".Jama-livača" (foundry pit) Fig. 46/4
by S. Dimitrijević. 15S Close to the bemom of the pit (of an up turne d funnel
shape) were three sets of moulds for casting "battie-axes" (single-bladed shaft-
hole axes), a miniature set of the same kind and a mould for casting chisels.
The same pit contained two smaller Vučedol vessels which made it possible to
be veryaccurate in chronological and cultural attributior, of the moulds .
According to S. Dimitrij e vić , they belong to the B-2 ph ase of the Vuče dol
culture. More information for the study of the earl y copper metallurgy in the
Vučedol culture was provided by finds from Debelo Brdo near Sarajevo and a
well-known find from Sarvaš consi sting of moulds for leaf-shaped daggers an d
a copper chise!. Th ough the Debelo Brdo fin ds are mentioned as earl y as the Fig. 12/1 -3
end of the 19th century , in the works of F. Fiala, they have been treated in
greater detail only by B. Čović 2 59 Three fragmented mo ul ds for si ngle -blade
shaft-hole axes are al so among the finds from this site, as well as three smail
fragments of a dagger mould, an awl mould and twO fragments of a funneI-
shaped vessel which was also used in cas ting. The fin ds from Debelo Brdo,
Zecovi, and Alihodže testi fy to the high level of develo pment tha t copper
metallurgy had reached in Bosnia at the time of the Vučedo l culture 2 6()
The problem of the origin and chronology of the V učedo l culture seems
to have been satisfactorily resol ved by now, thanks Iargely to the extensi ve work
carried out at sites in Srem and Sl avoriia and to more recent information
82 Th e Eneolith ic cul tures
-
of Central
.-
and West Balkans
sentatives of this phase in the development "fthe Vučedol culture are the sites
at Belegiš (Šančine) , Lovas, and Mitrovac ; it seems that a detailed analysis of
material ITom Vučedol (Gradac) and Sarvaš might point to the existence of a
transitional or ea rly phase still exhibiting some features of the Kostolac style.
In H ungary, this phase is represented by the site Dunaszekc sb-Varhegyrol 265
PI. XXVIII. 1-4 The classical tj/tase, or the ea rly classical and classical phases (stages B-l and
PI. XXIX. 1·4 B-2 according to Dimitrijević), is marked hy the stabilization of the culture and
PI. XXX. 1-4 its apex in building, metallurgy and ponery. Most of the finds fi-om Vučedo l,
PI. XXXI. 1-7 Vinkovci, C30molava, Aparovac, Sarvaš, Hrusruvača, Z6k, and oth er sites
belong to this phase of Vučedol. Pottery shapes are varied (an entire series of
new ones appear), there is an abundance of ornamental motifs, especially
carved ones combined wi th th e application of white paste. Th e prosperity of
the culture is best illustrated hy the construction of permanent settlement
structures (houses and hearths), which were combin ed with fortification sys-
tems to give th e inhabitants of Vuč e dol settlements increased safety. At the
tail-end of this phase cremation burials under barrows appea r alongside inllu-
mation; this can be interpreted as the beginning of the crisis provoked by the
arrival of new populations into the C:arpathian Basin and the Balkans, a crisis
that would eventllally bring abou t the disintegration of the culture. These
phenomena ushered in the third, late phase (the phase of regional di versification
PI. XXXII. 1· 6 - stage C according to S. Dimitrij evi ć) of the Vuče dol culture, marked by th e
PI. XXXIII. I· g emergence of regional types . ln their further development they kept drawing
away from the original area of Vučedol and, somewhat later, formed new
cultures that already belong to the Early Bronze Age. These regional phenom-
ena, according to S. Dimitrijević, include the south and west Bosnian types
(Debelo Brdo), the Šumadija type with sites around Kraguj evac Oasik, Djurd-
jevo), and sites ou tside o ur country, such as Molduva Veche or Mak6 and
Nyi rseg in Hungary and Slovakia.
. 1l1e chronological position of the Vučedol c ulture and its relationship
with other phenomena in neighbouring areas (Alpine, Adriatic, Carpathian,
etc.) have been established on the basis of the stratigraphy of stratified sites
(Vuče dol, Vis near Derventa, Comolava), the presence of similar shapes and
decoration, the typology of metal finds, and the prese nce of imported material.
Kosrolac and its neighbour, Cowfeni to the east and Retz-Cajary to the west,
chronol ogi cally preceded the Vuč e dol culture; in absolute terms, that would
be ca. 2200/2100 B.e. T he end of the C srage of Vučedol is seen as connected
with the disintegration uf this cultural complex and the emergence of the first
cultures of the Early Bronze Age. It is the time of local groups such as Ma k6,
Nyirseg, and Kosihy-Čaka in the north, Ljubljana in · the west, Ul ina III -
Schneckenberg in the north, and T ivat-Rubcž in the south. In Srem, Slavonia,
and the Hungarian part of Baranja, the end of Vučedol was marked by the
appearance of Vink ovci-Somogyvar wa re, approximately around 1900/1800
B.e., when the Early Bronze Age began in Central and Southeast Europe (the
Aegean excepted) .
Late Eneolithic 85
I
Lj ubljan sko Barj e I Srem. Slavonia. NW Croatia
(H. ParZlnger) I (S. Dimi trijević . N. Ta sić)
(Resnikov prekop - a.
LB I Ajdovska jama) - Sopot-Lengyellll
terminal Lengyel
I
I LB II (Resnikov prekop - b) Early Lasinja culture
use, however, is often limited, due to o lock of accumte strotigraphic dow ond
the fact thot most finds have been produced by excavations corrie d out ot the
close of the nineteenth century, or by otht' r eoreh works (the digging and
expansion of the ne twork uf cJna ls, etc.) .
111e material culrure of the Alpine vari ety of Vuč e dol, most particu-
larly thot of the pil e-dwelli ng settlements at Lj ubljansko Borje, is well known
th oriks to reg Ldar publication. Seve ral catal ugues, numerous repurt; in " Po ručila PL. XXXIX. I 7
o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sl uveniW' anu <) llUlnber of other v.'flrings Fig 27/ 1-7
make up a very good survey uf this type of mmerial, especially potte!)', lithic
and bone 1113reria i, and, tO;) lesse r e xte nt, copper finJ5.~j' -, TIle 11)OSr frequent
ve ssel shape at Ljubljonsko Borje ond othe r si tes in Slovenia and nonhw.:;tem
Croatia is that of a jug, o single-handled, high -nccked \'eSse! with rich decl)ra -
tion on the globular or biconical rece placl e, or on the bwad rihb.m handle.
Oth.:r shapes include a two-handled amph ura, oiso richly o mamented on the
belly, bowls or conical vessels on a crucif()(J11 or cylindrical tl)() t. 111ere are also
heavie r vessels of crude workl1lanship, usua lly plain. In spite of ubvio us si mi-
lari ties in shapes andornamentation between the Vučedol cul ture of Sre m and
Slavonia and its Slovene (Alpine) type, some teatures are fJ<'culia r to sites in
[he Ljubljansko Barj e region: first ofall, the uSe ofcarved decoration dec reascs,
the same motifs being e xecuted by incisi on. Furr hennur.:, thde appea r vessels
with one proper handie and o smaller tunne l Ont' un the ,)pptlSlte side, fi xed in
a position [h3t corresponds (O chc sumewhat later Vinh)\'ci wnfe . Finc:dly ,
globular and big-bel li ed vessels appear, uf a kind which wl)uld be freqUent in
the Ljubljana culture and wh osć analogues are to be found in "ther Central PI. XL. 1-8
European cultures of the Early Brunze Age (!:lell!:leaker , CsefJ<'l, ('Alrded ware,
etc.).
Jn addition to portery , Ljublj ansko Barj e (lg J) si tes have alsn \ielJeJ PI. XXXIX. 1-5
copper finds and ceramic artebcts used in thei r casting. Th e finds inci uJe a F,g_27JI -3
mould for casting single-blade shaft-hole axes, several sma ller vessels ",hleh PI. I. 7
migh t have been Llsed in casting, and o number uf copper ancfacts, most nurably
a coppe r dagger of characteristic shape and o fr agmented flat axe. 111eir PI XL l e
analogues have been fl)und in Srem and Slavonia at Sarvaš (daggers), Vinkuvci,
and Vučedol (single-blade and flat axes) . Besides the wel l-kn own memllurgical
centres such as Debelo Brdo near Sarajevo, Sarvaš, Tržnica-Vinkovci, or
Gradac in Vučedol, the site of Ljubljansko Barj e also oppears as an important
regional metallurgical centre of the Vučedol cultural complex.
&111e and stone rools , with sume all tou rare wood artcfncts, 11elp to
complete o ur picture of th e material culture (lf the Ljubljansko !:larje sites.
Besides well-made bone artefacts used for practical purposes there is also a
sizeable collection of fine bifacial stL1ne tools struck in a broad retouch . Most
of them are some sort of wedges and "daggers" that used to be fIxed in 3 wooden
or bone haft. T hey are exclusive [ O this area and have nu analogues in Srem
and Slavonia, where the culture origin3ted.
88 The Eneol- ithi c cultures
-
of Central and West Balka ns
)uclging by available Jara (the typology of the mate rial anJ matigraphy
of th e sites), the Alpine vari ety of Vuče dol was shorter-lived than the culture
itself. lt emerged simultaneously with the B2-CI stage and ran parallel to it,
surviving until the appearance of th e Ljubljana culture in the area. Since the
Ljubljana culture is rightly taken to be the first Early Bronze Age cu lture and
dated to the sa me period as the Bell l:leaker, Corded Ware, Somogyvar- Vink -
ovci, Csepel , Polada, and other cultures , the end of the Alpine type of Vučedol
should he dated to abo ut 1700 B.C. In view of its short duration, however, it
may have first appea red aroun d 1900/ 1800 B.C.
continental zone, Rubež near Nikšić). Some of the finds from th is group already
belong to the Early Bronze Age (the early tumuli at the hea d of the Cetina).
There are few reliable data for the interpretat ion of "Vuče d ol finds on
the Adriatic cnast". One of the theori es proposed is that it had been an
aftermath of th e incursion of the bearers of the cult ure, or rather style, from
southern Bosnia (Debelo Brdo) towards the Adriatic coast. This would make
it possible to' explain certain finds of Vuč edol-like pottery in Montenegro
(Rubež near Nikšić, some finds from the Odmut cave - part of stmtum VI ) <md, r'g 30
in some ways, th e well-known grave fi-om the Mala Gruda rumulus near PI :- g 2E
Tivar.278 On the other hand, thc many sites of "the Adriati c type oi [he
Ljubljana culture" all along the Adriatic coast and in its hinterl and (Ravlića
pećin a, Badanj near Stola c, Slime near Posušje) offer much more informatio
about the origins and develo pmem of the culture. Howeve r, disa~eement
arises as soon as it comes to dating. Is the culture Eneol ithic or does it belon2
to the Earl y Bronze Age? P. Korošec and Š. Barović dated it to the tail-end o:'
the Eneolithic. With some variation, F. Leben, B. Čović, B. Marijano\'ic, .-\.
Miloše vić and B. C;ovedarica did the same. IN S. Dimitrijević, on the l)th~ e
hand, believes that this culture marks the beginning of the Early Bron :e ,-\ ~"
on the Adriatic coast 2 80 Another source of confusi on is the fa c[ that all
phenomena preceding the Al stage of th e Bronze Age uf Reinecke's pencu -
zation should be classified as Eneolithic. If we post ulote an e ven earlier ~nc":
than A 1 within the Eorly Bronze Age of Central Europe, whi ch has been IarEd,
accepted in orchaeological Iiterature,2S I the period encomp a$$m~ 2~I :::~
"post- Vučedo l cultures" and variants of the Bell Beaker complex, th~:: :::~
"Adriatic type of the Ljubljana cul ture", by onalogy with the Ljubljana c~~=t
of the Alpine region or with Mak6-Nyirseg in the Pannonia n Pb;r., WC"'.!!c
belong to the Early Bronze Age or the transitional period between ::'" ::.:-."'~
lithic and the Bronze Age. We shall therefo re deal with it oni\' 1115<.':3::;> 1: :-.t::»
to clarify the rather obscure peri Od uf heterogeneou s phenc'mc:'.o .:h. :'-.<
Adriatic coast in the Late Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age.
nl e specific features of the ropography and climate v:- ~':t ."= 3~~
eoast have detemlined the appearance of diffe rent [ypes l'l s"'::~:::c:-.'-' ;:-:.:;~
ited by the bearers of "the Adriatic type of the Ljubljana cdtur~·. T-." :-:-,c ; :
frequent type is the c ave settlement, both in [he nonh (ca\'e; ::1 ::-.e G~' a;,'
Tri es te and Istria), in central Dalmatia and on [he island, ,T",±in;. 50.:C::3
draga, (]rapče va špilja, Gudnja, etc.), in Herzegovina (RadIća ",,':...-.2. Exd:;::;,
etc.), and in the south, in M ontene~o (Odmut, Vranjan). r.il::.:." >erde:-:-..,:-.::;
are slightly less frequent (Gradina Sv. Spas nea r Kmn and G:3J:m "e:'le K:;,;-;.:i,.
More recently, sett lements in karst holes have been Jisco'~re'::, ".2. '-" :; nE::
plateau near the village of Otišić (some 100 ka[$[ holes are m~;1Ll G::~.:! · ::,,2:
Sinj, one of which has been excavated 282 Mos[ s.:tt!ements Wdc: shNt -teiTIl.
intermittent!y inh abited stations of nomadic stock - breed~rs. :"1any or their
features indicate that these noma ds were engaged in a kind oi prehisroric
transhumance and, indeed, condi tions in the re!!ion favou red [his [ype of
90 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
,.:a"'!GI'OWI'I '~:II"
.
. ,,:., , ; : ,
, ' ~ '( '~ " . \./~'':
'o" .:
~
3
~ 5
O tJ 6 7
(J
4
,,'
ac tivity. Thi s ca n pa rtly e xplnin th e prese nce of sites of "th e Adriatic type
of the Ljublj a na e ulrure" in He rzegov ina and th e co ntin e n tal parts of
Mo nte negro .
The ceramic mate ri al of "the Adria ric type of thc Ljubljana e ulrure" PI. XLI II. 1-8
is for the most part fragm ente d as it com es from caves , hillfo rts, ,md brst h oles
(where th ere is greater de nudarion uf th e Sl)i1). Specimens prese rved inta C[ are
rare . The most frequent shapes arc those of gl obldar or he misphe riea l vessels
(Gra pčeva špi lja, Otiši ć), tall-fl)()ted gu blets (Grapčeva špilja, Ori š ić), conical
a nd calotre-sha ped vessels with a thi ekened rim (Rube ž, C ra pčeva špilja ,
Otišić), gobl ets on a cruc if'Jn11 t'Jot (Mala Gruda near T ivat), e tc.'S) Mosr
ve ssels are ri ehly decora ted wirh incise d lin es or by ca rving.ll1e omamenrarion
is often o rgani zed in zon es, simil arly to that oi the Reli Rea ke r, RenedelIL" and
Po lada c ultu res . In carryin g OUt a typologieal anal ysis o ( rh e potter), it is p<')ssihlc
to si ngle out Mala (,ruda and Rubež as specifi c phen,)me na difle rent Tn)m ,)ther
sites of thi s circle. They proba bil' represent a regional type wi thin rh" (ulwral
complex as a whole, o r dse an insufficientiy diflc renti ated pha se in rhe
development of the c ulwrt' .
ln addition to settleme nts, four tu muli have bee n disco vered th a r
mi ght well be long to the "Adriatic type of the Ljubljana culrure" : a tumulus at
the hea d of th e Cetina (barruw n o . 2) , ha rrows near Rubež and at PazhLlk
(Albania), and the chronologicall y very important tumulus ar Mala (~r uda near PI. II
T ivar. l 84 T his last, the o n ly systematically ć xca vated tlllnulus , ha s yidded a
grave with grave goods. lS I 111e body oi th e deceased was I()und in a cist of
stone slabs dug into the suhsoil. A ca lLltte-sha ped st ruc(ure made of boulders,
se veral pyres, exceptiona l grave goods, and the si ze of the tumulus (o ver 20 m
in dia me ter, with a h eigh t d2.S - 4.0 m) indic ate th a t the deccased had been
an important figure and tha t burial rires had bee n vćry elaborate . In a ddition
to two vesse ls, the gra ve goods included a tri angular electrum dagger, a
s ing lć-blade d sh afl-hole axe of the samc mate ri a l a nd (WO go ld hai r rings
(Noppe nring) . While th e cera mic finds arc clearly rdated tD rh" VUČćd,,1
c ul tu ra l comple x, th e elecrrum tlnds are co nsidć red to be an Aegean impC'rt
(rom the time of the "Middle Minoan phase of the Aegean c ulr ure", atOund
1800 H.C.ll,i s is an impo rtant piece ll in (o rmation as rć gards ch ronology, and
it ca n easily he confwnted with Other post- Vučedol ph ć n Ll111 e n a (the Ljubljana
culture , Mak6 , Nyi rseg, etc .) .
***
111e e nd nf th e Vu če do l complex a nd of t h ć c ultures rh a r di rec riy
originated from it, both through a local evol ution and under fore ign inlluences,
marks the en d 01 the Enel)lithic in the central and western Balkans. A series
of new cul tures , groups, and variants ap peared all ,,,,cr the vast te rritory it had
covered : Csepel-Bell Be ake r and SOl11ogyvar- Vinkovci in the north, with th e
Be l orić-l3eiD Crkva variant in th e central a rea ; Glina IIl -Sch n eckcnhe rg in th e
east ; in the west the influence of the I3e lll'leaker and related cultu res grew in
92 The En eolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
intensity, while the Cetin a culture emerged in the south, no doubt as part of a
more comprehen sive process. ll1ey ushered in the "true Earl y Bron ze Age",
where the influence of the Vuče dol substratum was still felt for a while,
especially in the areas of irs origin - Srem, Slavonia , Baranja, an d in the
Vinkovci-Somogyvar culture. Th at would be the period around 1800 B. e., as
testified to bot h by the "Aegean connexion", and the chronological framework
of the Early Bronze Age of Central Europe.
NOTES
l. K. Deschman, 1875.
2. F. Fiala, 1894, pp. 107 ff.; F. Milleker, 1889, pp. 1·6;]. Brunšmid, 1902; M.
Vasić, 1906.
3. N. Vulić· M. Grbić, 1937.
4. V. Hofmer, 1933; Idem, 1938. T. I, V, VII, VIII
5. V. Milojčić, 1949, pp. 88 ff.; M. Garašanin, 1959, pp. 29 ff.; Idem, 19 73, pp.
161·288; A. l:lenac, 1962, pp. 131 ff.; S. Dimitrij e vić, 1961, pp. 24 ff.; N. Tasi ć,
1967, pp. 9·90; PraLwnija VojIlOdine, 1974, pp. 113·183.
6. N. Tasić. S. Dimitrij ević. B. Jovanović in; PJZ III, passim.
7. N. Tasić, 1968, p. 266.
8. J. Cvijić, Balka1lSko IJOluo.mvo , Beograd 1987.
9. N. Tasić, 19753, pp. 51 ff.
10. A. Benac, 1948, pp. 3 ff. (Hrustovač3); Idem, 19623, pp. 21 ff. (Pivnica): B.
Belić, 1964, pp. 22 f. (Vis nea r Modrana).
ll. B. Marijanović, 1981, pp. 53 ff.
12. S. Dimitrijević, 1967, pp. 8·10; Idem, in: PJZ III, RP. 307, 317·320.
13. For rbe opinions concerning this issue, cf.; B. Cović, 1973 , pp. II cO.: B.
Jovanović, 1971, passim; Idem, in; PJZ III, pp. 33 ff.; B. Bruk ner, 19". :o;::.;:
ff.
14. N. Tasić, 1968,265; M.GaraŠanin, 1973, p. 161; Praistorija Vojt·od;;cc. : ~ - ~
pp . II Hf.
15. Lj. Bukvić, 1978 (1979), pp. 14ff.
16. P. Roman, 1980, pp. 220 ff.; M. Garašanin, 1967 , p. 31; 1'. T a5l::. ::;5';. ;:-;:.
23-27.
17. B. Jovanović, 1971, passim; M. Kuna , 1981, pp. 13 ff.; A. Durman. ,05.3. ';:;·5:.
18. N . Tasić, 1973, 14 ff. (Zlotska pećina) ; R.R. Schmid r, 1945. pp. =: .=:> , ::2:-'~ '
and Vučedol) ; PJZ III , T. XLIV /1 1·13 (Ljubljansko barje) ; :\. k--:n2:'_ ! :;2~
pp. 39 ff.
19. B. Čović, 1976, pp. IlOff., T. 1·111; PJZ III, T. XLIII ; A. Durma:1. !:;o.3. ;o;:.
37 ff., T. 1·6.
20. B. Jovanović in: PJZ III, p. 36, and quot. bibliog.
21. Ibid., pp. 35·36.
22. E. Černyh, 1975, pp. 132 ff.
23. M. Garašanin, 1971; Idem, 1973, p. 281; B. Jovanović in: PJZ II!. pp. 35: ;'i'.:
N. Tasić, 1983, pp. 15 ff.; A. Benac, 1986, pp. 78 ff., and qUOL bib~iog.
24. M. Garašanin, 1954, pp. 225 ff.; Idem, 1973, p. 222 ; B. J ovana-ić;", rIZ m.
p. 382, and quot. bibliog.
25. B. Stalio, Zlokućani-Gradac, Caralogue of the ceramics I, :-\arodni :TI
Beograd, 1955, pp. 9 ff.; A r!teološki lokaliteti Bubanj i HW1lSka čuka. ea
of the exposition, Niš 1983, sl. 20, 25, 79.
26. B. Brukner, 1977, pp. 9 ff.
27. N. Tasić in: PJZ III, pp. 80-82.
28. For more information on Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkerezstur culrures and their
94 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
lO J. P. Korošee, 1975a, T. I·X IV; S. D imitr ij ević ill: PJZ Ill , 1'.1 44, n. 14.
102. N. Kalicz, 1973, W 131 ff.
103 . S. Dimit rijević, 1971, 1'.151 (plates); Z. Marković, 1977, pp . 51 tf.
104. S. Dimitrij e vić in: PJZ III, p. 146.
105. Ibid ., p. 176.
106. N. Tasi ć, 1986, pp. SI ff.
107. N. Kaliez, 1973,pp. 15S.159; F.Lebe n, 1973 ,pp.I S7tl.;I de m, 1975,1'1'.1 51
tf.
10R. P. Korošee, 1975a: S. D imitrij e v i ć ill: PjZ III , ~p . 144·145.
109. Š. B arov i ć . 1975, pp. lOS ff. .
llO. N . Pet rić, 1976, pp. 305 tf.; S. D imitr ij ev i ć in: PJZ Ill , pp. 367 ff.; Č. Markuvić,
1985, pp. 79 ·81; B',Mar ijano vić, 1982,1'.219., ,
111. A . !:le nac, 1962; S. lla tCJvić, 1975, pp. 62 ff.; ll. Cović, 1980, p. 35; C.
Mark ović, 1974, passim; IJem, 1985; B. MarijaIl ov ić, 1981, pp. 50 tf.; Idem,
1982, p. 219; B. C,,, veclarica, 1987, pp. 57.70.
112. Š. Barović, 1975, 1'.108, T. 22·24; R. Čović in: PjZ IV, 1'.162; B. CJuveclarica,
1987, p. 65 .
111 . N . Petr i ć, 1976, p. 305; B. Marijanović, 1982, p. 219.
114. S. Dimitrij ev i ć in : I'JZ Ill. p. 373.
115 . Č. Mark ov ić, 1985 , p. 82 .
116. Ibid, 1'1'. 78 ·82, T. VIl I/I·2, X/S , LXV/ I·2, LXVI/I·6.
117. B. M ar i januvić, 1981, p. 50.
llR. Š. B arović, 1975, pp. 106 ff.
ll9. S. Dimitirj e vić in : PJZ III , p. 376.
120. Č . Mark ović, 1985, p. 80, allJ the plates.
121. For this matter, cf. : P. Bosch.(Jimpe ra 1960, pp . 3 tf.; V. Dumitrescu, 1963;
M. ( ,imilutas, 1970; 11.. Crossland, 1971; Idem, 1971a, pp. 232 ff.; N. Ham·
mond, 1972; A. H3usle r, 1976. As t(lr the Yugoslav bihl iography, cf.: M.
(Jarašanin, 1961, pp . Sifi'.: A. Be nac, 1964, pp. 164 ff.; B. J ovanović in: PJZ
III , pp. 397 tf. ; N . Tasić , 1983, 1'.16 , anci quot. bibliog.
122. N . Tasić, 1975a, pp . 51 ff.; B. Brukne r, 1970, pp. 1·14; Idem, 1976, pp. 27·3 1;
H. T odoruva in: Oobn,dja l, pp. 58·59; F. Frendi, 1966, pp. 270 ff.; M.
Carašanin, 1973 , pp. 165·168.
123. V. Zirra, 1960, pp. 90 tf.; E. COlma , 1976, pp. 43 ff.
124. Lj. Bukvi ć, 1978 (1979), 1'1'.14·18, figs. 1·3.
125. N . Tasić, 1978 (1979), pp . 2· 4; D. Srej ović , 1976, pp . II ? ff.
126. I. Panajorov . V. ne rgač ov , 1984, p. 107, A bb. 4; H . T odorova in: [)obn«ija
l, pp . 62·63 .
127. A. Be nae, 1986, pp. 53 ff., sl. 5· 11.
J 28. D. Srejović, 1976, pp. 11 7 ff. (Bare): M. Pa to vić· V . T rhuhović, 197 I, p.
!.l8, T III ·V.
129. V. Nem ejCLlv3.Pavukuv;i, 1981. pp. 261 ff.; Idem, 1973 . pp . 297 ff.; S.
Dimitrij e vić in: FJZ III , p. 194, T. XXII/I·6 ; E. Ne ustllpny, 1973, p. 320, Abb .
I.
130. S. Morintz· P. Roman, 1973, p. 268, A bb. 5.
131. N . T asie, 1975, pp. 12 ·20; IJ em in: PJZ III, pp. 41 8 ff.
132. D. [lereiu, 1964, pp. 269 ff.
133. V. Nemejcuv5 .Pavllk()V3, 1964. pp. 163 tf., Idem, 1968, pp. 353 ff.; Idem,
Notes 97
164. M. Gir ić, 1982, pp. 99-100; S. Dimitrijev i ć in: PJZ Ill, p. 204; P. Medo vić ,
1987, pp. 77 ff.
165. I. Torma, 1973, pp. 483 ff
166. St. Ko vacs, 1987, pp. 99 tT.
167. J. Banner , 1956, pp. 226 ff.; V. Nemejcova -Pav(lk ova, 198 1, pp. 261 ff; E.
Neustupny, 1959, pp. 260 ff.; Idem , 1973, pp. 320 ff.; M. Garašanin, 1973, p.
232; S. Dim itrijević in: PJZ III, pp. 191-195, ami quot. bibliog.; N. Tasi ć, 1967,
pp. 3-3 4; Praistorija Vojvodine, pp. 158-160.
168, Cf. the vessels in: R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Taf. 24/9 -1 I, and 25/ 1·2 .
169. N. Tasi ć, 1959, p. 231, sl. 5,7 (Dobanovci); R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Textbd.
36/6, T af. 22 / 1.
170, R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Tal. 20/1-2; N. Ta sić, 1959, sl. 10; K. Vinski-Gasparini,
1956, T. XIII/52.
171. N. Tasić, 1959, sl. 8.
172, N. Kalicz, 1976, p. 126, T. 54, 55; P. Roman - I. Nemeti, 1978, Pl. 44/3-4; B.
Novotny, 1981, p. 132, Abb . 1-4; N. Tasić, 1980-81, pp. 27 ff.; Idem, 1984,
pp. 70-71, sl. 39-42.
173. N. Kalicz, 1976, p. 127; B. Novotny , 1981, p. 132 .
174. V. Dumitrescu, 1960, p. 448, tig. 2/7, and quot. bibliog.
175 . V. Nemejcova-Pavukov:i, 1981, pp. 261 tl
176. E. Neustupny, 1959, pp. 265 ff.; Idem, 1973, p. 320.
177. V. Nemejcova-Pavukova, 1981, p. 261.
178. S. Dimitrije vić in: PJZ III , pp . 194-195.
179. N. Tasić, 1967, pp. 33-34.
180. E. Neustupny, 1973 , p. 32 4, Abb. 3.
181. V. Milojčić, 1943, pp. 42 ff. ; Idem , 1949, pp. 157 ff.; Idem, 1953.
182. A. />enac, 1962a, pp. 21 ff.; R. Rašajski, 1954, pp . 187 ff.; M. G irić, 1960, p.
130; N. Tasić, 1965. pp. 39 ff., Id em, 1967, pp. 45-48, B. Jovanović in:
Praistorija Vojvodine, pp. 160 ff. , R. Galović, 1959, pp. 37 ff., S. Dimi trij evi ć ,
1971, pp. 147 fT., ll. 98: B. Brukner, 1978-79, pp. 8·13 .
183. M. Garašanin, 1973, pp. 226 ff., J. Todoro vi ć, 1963 p. 26 (Hisar by Suva
Reka) ; J. Glišić, 1961, pp. 133 ff. (Gladnice by Priština).
184. N. Tasić, 1982, pp. 26-28; P. Roman, 1976, pp. 143 ff.
185. S. Dimi trij e vić in: PJZ Ill, p. 346 .
186. I. Escedy , 1985, pp. 97 ff., Pl s. I· 7, V. Nemejcova. Pavukova, 1968 , pp. 380
tT. , Abb. 23·38, Kart. Abb. 42.
187. M. Novoma, 1961 , pp. 21 fT., T. IX-XVII.
188. V. Milojčić, 1953, p. 160, S. Dimitrij e vić, 1971, p. 147, n. 98 , N. Tasić, 1970,
pp . 26·28.
189. T. T ežak-Gregl, 1985, pp. 57 ·59.
190. B. Bruk ner, 197 8- 79, pp. 8 fT. , Abb.
191. R.R. Schmidr, 1945 , p. 41, T af. 10/2.
192. T. Težak.Gregl, 1985, p. 58.
193 . M. K osorić, 1965, pp. 83 ff., sl. I.
194. B. J ova novi ć, 1976 , pp. 131 ff., sl. 1·2.
195. V. Nemejcova. Pavuk ov:l, 1982, p. 380, Abb. 23.38; I. Escedy, 1985, PIs. l -lO,
P. Roma n, I 976a, p. 143, T. Ill ; V. Boroneant, 1960, p. 350, A. Benac, 1962a,
pp. 21 ff., N. Tasić, 1965, p. 180, sl. 6, T. II ·IV.
~ .o~es 99
196. B. J ovanović, 1976, pp. 135·136; N. Ta sić in: PJZ Ill , pp. 12 ?ff.; Idem, 198 1,
p. 20 ff.; Idem, 1982, pp. 27 ff.
197. Z. Ma rk o vić , 1985, p. 20, sl. 8.
98. S. Dimitrije vi ć in: PJZ III, p. 364.
199. Ibid., p. 359; Z. Marković, 1985, p. 20.
200. S. Dimitrij e vić in: PJZ Ill , p. 362 .
201. N. Ta sić in: PJZ III, pp. 11 5 ff.; Idem, 198 1, pp. 9 ff., T. lII·I V: M. Je vri ć,
1987, pp. 2 l ff.
202 . P. Roman , 1976, pp. 79·86, Pl. 2.
203. K Tasi ć , 1982, p. 19.
204. M. J evt ić, 198 7, pp. 2 1·24.
205. V. Trb uho vić . Lj. Vuković, 1967, pp. 97 ff.; N. Ta,ić, 1981, pp o li
206. P. Roman, 1976a, T. 11/ 1-4 (Cerna voda III), T. IlI · 1V (Kostolac): Idem. !?7c.
Pls. 55, 56/8 (Cerna voda Ill).
207. S. Morinrz · P. Roman, 1973, p. 280.
208. I'. Tasi ć, 198 2, T. Vl.
209. P. Roman, 1976, Pls. 53·60.
no. Ibid ., Pls. 78· 79, and 8 1: Idem, 1976a, T. Ill.
21 1. P. Roman, 1976, pp. 53 ff., fig o8.
2 12. S. Dimitrij e vi ć in: pJZ Ill, p. 346.
213. Ibid ., pp. 358 ff.; Z. Marković 1981, p. 243.
21 4. S. Dimitrij e vi ć in: pJZ III, pp . 348·351.
215. Ibid., p. 352; Z. Mark ović, 1985, p.20.
216. M. Malez, 1967, pp. 14·15 (Stratunl b).
217 . S. Dimitrij e vi ć , 1967, pp. 6·8: Z. Matko vi Ć, 1981, pp. 243 ii.
218. Z. Ma rko vić . 1985 , pp. 20 ff.
2 19. S. Dimitrije vi ć , 1967, pp. 6 ff.: Idem in: pJZ III , p. 355: F. Ld",,,. :';' l ~. T,O.
188 ff.
no. K Kalicz, 1973, pp. 158 ff.; Z. Marko vi ć, 1985, p. 20: F. Ld",n. :~'i3. ;:-;:-.
187 ff.
22 1. S. Di mitrije vi ć , 1975; Idem in: PJZ III, pp . 363 ff.
222. F. Milleker, 1906, p. 183: M. Gatašanin, 1973, p. 280, and quot. OU-::v2.
223 . N. Ta s ić , 1959, pp. 30·32 (Batajnica); B. J ovanovi ć, 1976, pp. l~ [:... >.. :
(Voj iDvica) ; D. Srej o vić , 1976, p. 117 (bare and Rogojevac in ~umaillla I: 1.;.
Bukvić , 1978, pp. 14 ff. (Jabuka by Panče vo ) ; M. Girić, 1987, pp. ,;·75
(rumuli in northern Banat) ; P. Medović, 1987, pp. 77 ·82 (tumuli near Per'e-:l.
n 4. F. Milleker, 1906, pp. 193 ff.: M. Girić, 1982, pp. 102 ff.. and qUOL bibliog.
225. V. Dumitrescu, 1960: Idem, 1963: V. Zitra, 1960, pp. 90 ff.; E. Comsa. ' 976,
pp. 43 ff; I. Ecsedy, 1979: I. Panajotov . V. De rgačov 1984, pp. 100 r..
226. B. Jo vano vić, 1976, pp. 12 ff., sl. 5·6.
22 7. P. M edo vi ć , 1987, pp. 79·81, Abb. 4.
228. D. Srej ović, 1976, pp. 11 8 ff., sl. l , T. I· V.
229. Ibid. , pp . 125· 126.
230. N. Vlassa · M. Takaes · Gh. Lazaroviciu, 1987 , pp. 114 ff., T. VI· VII: P.
Roman, 1976, p. 98.
23 1. P. Medovi ć , 1987, p. 79: M. Gitić , 1987, pp. 72, 76; D. S rejović, 1976, p. 122,
sl. 3·5 .
232. Lj. Bukvić , 1978· 79, pp . 14 ff.
100 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Aj DOVSKA JA MA pri Nemeški Vasi by Krško 27 LJUBLjANSKO BA RjE near Ljubljana (Slovenia)
(S loven ia) 28 MA LA GRUDA near Tivat (Mon tenegro)
2 BABA SIVAČKA near Vaj ska (Bačka) 29 MOSTONGA I near Deranje (Bačka)
3 BAKARN O GU MNO near Prilep (Pelaganla)
30 ODMUT (NW Mon tenegro)
4 BATKA near Senta (Vojvodina) 31 PADINA ln the Upper Gorge of Djerdap (Serb ia)
5 BEKETINEC by Kri ževci (NW Croatia)
32 PEClNE lO Vrdnik near Ruma (Srem)
6 BELEGIŠ near Stara Pazova (Srem)
33 PEPELANE near VI[ovitica (NW Croatia)
7 BRZA VRBA by Kovin (South Banat)
34 PERLEZ near Zren)an in (Banat)
8 BUBANJ near Niš (Serbia)
35 PIVNICA near Odžaci in Bosnia
9 CIGLA NA in Beli Manaslir (Baranja)
36 PLOČ NIK near Prokuplje (South Serbia)
10 CI GLANA ln Dobanovci near Zemun (Srem)
37 RUDI NA I near Kopnvnica (NW Croalla )
II CRNOBUKI near Bitala (Pelagonia)
12 DEBELO BRDO near Saralevo (Bosnia) 38 RUDNA GLAVA near Ma)danpek (NE Serbi a)
13 GO MOLAVA near Hrtkovci (Srem) 39 SEČ E near Kopri vn ica (NW Croalia)
14 GRADINA on the river Bosut near Šid (Srem) 40 SP ILA near Perast (Boka Kotorska - Montenegro)
15 GRADINA ZECOVI nea r Prij edor (North Bosnia) 41 ŠUPLEVEC near Bi tala (Pel agoni a)
16 G RAPČ EVA AND MARKOVA ŠPILJA on the island 42 TRI HUMKE by village jabuka near Pa nčevo (Banat)
Hvar (Adn atic Coast - Croatia) 43 VAJUGA - KORBOVO (S erbia - D)erdap II)
17 GUDNjA on Pelj ešac (Adriatic Coast - Croa tia) 44 VELA ŠPI LJA near Vela Luka on the island Korčula
18 HISAR near Suva Reka ln Metochia (Serbia ) (Croa tia)
19 HRNj EVAC by Ku tj evo (West Slavan la - Croatia) 45 VINČA - BELO BRDO near Belgrad e (Serbia)
20 HRUSTOVAČA near Sanski Most (North Bosn ia) 46 VINKOVCI STA RA PIJACA - Market and Hotel
2 1 JELEN AC near Aleksan drovac (Central Serbia) (Croa tia)
22 KEVDERC on Lubnik (NW Slovenia) 47 VIS near Derventa (North Bosn ia)
23 KLOKOČ EVA C near Don)1 Mi lanovac (East Serbia) 48 VLASTELI NSKI BREG (G rada c) in Sarvaš nea r Osijek
24 KRIVElj near Bor (East Serbia) (Croatia)
25 LASTVINE by Bukovi ći near Benkovac (Dalmatia) 49 VUČEDOL near Vu kovar (West Srem )
26 LICE near Erd evi k (Srem) 50 ZLOTS KA PEĆI N A near Bor (East Serbia)
The following chapter represents the list of si tes which were taken as a
basis for this book. In our o ppinion this list will proove itself usefull for unde r-
standing of tl,e phenomenon and the development of Eneolithic cultures, theit
geographical distribution, the model of settlements , as well as the material culture
and spiritual life. It has been done by choosing the most important eneolithic sites
exca vated, wi th material that was, at least partly published (repurts in Arheološki
pregled , Starinar, Atheološki vesenik, Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, Godišnjak
Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANl' BiH , Clasnik Zemaljskog muzeja in
Sara jevo or in some other publications). Of course, more detailed studies and fe w
monographs on these sites werc far more hclpfu!. The author is aware that some
sites were neglected, especi ally those investigated after 1989 when this book was
actually written. TI1e autho r was either no t in the position to (]cquire the data o n
the material from few sites (Guelnj a, n ew results from Vela Luka, excavarion s by
Š. Barović near Zaelat etc.), ot could find only vague or inadeq uatly published data
on ce rtain sites, whic h could not be of any help to the reade r of this book (sties
in the Timok Valley n ear Negotin, Kovilovo, Hisa r in Kosovo etc.). In spite of
that, we believe that all of those interested in the matter will be able to find basic
information on the site, particularly on its eneoli thic horizan, and to look t(:Jr further
information in the relevant bibliography. In order to simplify the manipulation, in
the bibliography we quo ted only the author, journal, year anel page, and in the
bibliography listed in a separate chapter at the enel of this book , only the authors
name, the year of publishing and the page.
Meticulaus reader will notice the difference in the number of Eneolithic
sites from different regions. The reason for this lies in the fact that the former
Yugoslav region was unevenly investigated. This was also due ro unequal de velop-
ment of cultures, and sometimes due to archaeologists lust to excavate sites with
more atractive material (e.g. the Vučedol culture cera mic ware , or the abundance
of finds on Bubanj-Salc uta complex), and sometimes due to other reasons. 111e
fact is that as we go from the East towards the West, the number of excavated
eneoli thic sites diminishes (unlike some other periods, HaUstatt for example). We
,1"'0"'
8_ _ __ __ _ _ __ ___ Th e Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
hope that the author of this book will not be judged as subjective for choosing 50
Eneolithic sites discussed further in the text .
ln the end we owe an e xplanation regarding illustrations. The selection
was made according to the data available from published material. The part of
ceramica l and other characteristic material was represented on the plates in this
book. The reason for different quality of ill ustra tions was the serious financial
difficulties. The list of sites was made in alphabetical order, and their numera tion
was made according to the numera tion on the map of sites which could be found
at the end of this chapter.
The cave Ajdovska or Kartuševa Jama, as some call it, is situated on the
right bank of the river Sava, west of Krško. lt has two hallways and a central
chamber. The entrance is located beneath the cliff call ed Nemeško Vasjo, on the
altitude of227 m.
The excavations in this cave were started in the end oflast century by K.
Oeschmann, and were latter continued by local amateur archaeologists. The
material has been collected for years, when in 1938 S. Brodar decided to commence
first wide-range excavations. Tllese were inspired with authors desire to find the
remnants of the Pleistocene period. Prehistoric material was brought in light by J.
Korošec (Rasprave SAlU 3,1953) . ln the year 1967 excava tions ofprehistoric
deposit started and gained wider range in 1982.
According to the published results, in this cave exist five cultural
horizons. The first belonging to the Pleistocene, the second was the horizon of the
Late Neolithic graves, the third -- Eneolithic, the fourth -- Roman and the fifth
was of the Medieval period. Here we are interested in horizons II and Ill.
According to P. Korošec, they could be dated from the end of the Neo1ithic and
to the beginning of the second phase of the Eneolithic. These horizons contain the
material of the Alpine facies of the Lengyel culture, which could correspond to the
Lasinjska culture (1l1 h01izon). The data acquired by M. Horvat, the author of
latter investigations on this site , show the existance of 14 skeletons which belong
to the II horizon (the final Neolithic or, in our opinion the Early Eneo1ithic). This
could confirm J. Korošec's hypothesis tha t this ca ve was once used as a ri tual place ,
Register o r major En eoli thic sites in rormer Yugos lavia _ _ __ _ ----'109
where deceased were simply laid on th e ground , nnd somecimes put in a sitting
position by the cave wall , and sometimes merely covered wich stones.
TI1e analysis of 14C give the dates from 534 ' \30 BP for horizon Il (the
final Neolithic), and 5175-4800 ·130 for the Enea lithic ha rizon Ill.
Lit.: J. Korošec, Rasprave SAZU 3, 1953 ; P. Komšec, 1975, 167 · 169: M. Horvat, Af'
1988,40·42 .: PJZ III, 144.
n
~
,;
,...::::-
2~
....
---, ----
~
I .,~ ~=:=c.:.:::=c::?~~~"
~
-------~-.- ----- -----
-- : --.-- . - -
~ ~
"',
' ,
---- ~
- - - - - - - ; .-.- - - -
, ~'~
--
~ ------::::----
- .
- ~.---'---------=-~
- -
------------
- ---
-- --, ~~ -------'-~
~ -' -..-----------::....
---- ---------\i
\.
I
I ,....
~- - --"~~~O,
" " .,
/ /"
,
,
--- ~/
--:>/-- ..... "1::-=- --
------ -- _______
,/
\, Fig. 1 -- Ajdovska jama . t he
• 4
- ----- ------------= ----- ------- ------
_______________
groundplan or th e cave (arter
M . Horvat. 1988. 40)
110 ---~
The Eneoli thic cultures of Central and West Balkans
2 3
which was the richest one, nea r the head on the both sides two golden pendants
we re found.
The typological analysis of the ceramic material, espec ially the appere-
ance ofSclteibenltmkel handles, show that the necropolis belongs to the Hunyadi halolll
5 culture of thc Eneolithic period. This is the single necropolis of this culture in
Vojvodina. On the account of the specific material ((lund here, B. Brukner n amed this
Fig 2 -- Baba Sivačka. pot- pheno111el1ol1 Vajska-l-ILl11yadi culture . lt could be placed into the el1d of the Early
tery from the grave I. 2. S [l1eo!ithic of this region.
and golden pendant (ace. to
B. Brukner 1970) Lit.: B. Brukner, AILlg. Xl, 1970, 1-14, PL l-V]]] and Pr. 1-2 .
Register of major Eneolith ic sites in former Yugoslavi_
a ~__~_ III
The site Bakarno (;unmo near village Čepi govo is of the tell-type
(tumbe), as they call them locally. lt is situated 17 km south ofPrilep, on the hank
~
of the river Blato which empties in the Crna Reb . The excavations were com-
menced in 1959 by tlle expert team from the Museum in Prilep (B. Kitanoski,
1971). The depth of the cultural layer is 3.10 meters. Three difTerent hori-
zons/phases (with two sub-phases) of occupation could be dis tingui shed here.
Bakarno Gumno b (3.10- 2.60 m) - with characteristic black ware which
some times has chann clcd decoration . lt belongs to the end o f tht.· Neolithic period
of Pelagonia .
Bakarno Gumno lb (2.60-1.70 m) - with houses of rL'ctangular basis and
the wate decotated with channels and burnishing (shallow bowls with swolkn
rims). The f(lrIns from the pre vious phase still appear.
Bakarno Gumno II (1.70-0.50 m) - horizon ofburnt houses. Although
the con tinuity of ce ramic f()rms and decoration e xists, red painting appears
(rv),..
(crusted), as well as te rra-cotta. TIle re are also burials in se mi-seated position.
Bakarno Gumno III (0.50-0.00 m) - the youngest phase with significant
'đJt ·
transformation of the material culture. According to its manifestati()[1S (decoration ~
with incisedlines, wol f teeth, net ornaments) it belongs to the beginning of the
Early Bronze Age, phase Kritzana.
The first two phases on Bakarno Gumno belong to the period of the Eorly
.J,
and the Middle Eneolithic of Pelagonia, with the fl1ll owing distinction : the first 2
l?hase could be marked as Crnobuki- Bakarno Gumno, and the second as Crnobuki-
Suplevec.
4
Lit.: B. Kitanoski, 1971, 139- 140, fig, 1-12.
4
Regis ter of major Eneolithi c si tes in former Yu goslavia I 13
6 7
gaps until 1944. Some of these graves, es pecially those excavateu in 1882 by Gy.
Dud as, belong to Sa rmates, and some of them to the Medieval pe riod, and only a
sma ll fraction belo ngs to the Eneolithic period (the T iszapolgar and the Bodrogk-
e rezstur c ultures). .
Except for the typology of ceramic mate rial, findings from Batka are not
very significa nt (the lack of complete grave asse mblages), with t he exception of
the material collected by J. Korek in 1944, and published fourte en years latter.
According to his infor mation there were seven burials and th ree pits from the
Eneoli thic period. The deceased were buried in tle xed position a nd we re regularly
o riented North-West - South-East. Grave offerings were smaller bowls, pots
which resemble Milchwpf or coa rse pots. The only exception is the grave I in which,
apart from one bowl, the top of the copper knife and the stone polisher were found.
Being partly devastated, this grave could not bc ta ken as a reliable one, as it could be
placed in the T iszapolgar culture only according to the shape of the pot. ll,e uther
graves a re somewha t yOW1gc r and belong to the Bodrogkerezstur culture.
According to th e pottery sh apes, t h ree pits, excavated by j. Korek, can
be attrib uted to the 'Tiszapolgar c ulture. T his could lead us tO the conclusion that
o ne d ugou t- type settlement of the T iszapo lgar cultu re existed here, and was used
latter as a n ecropoli s. 111is is frequent phe nome no n on sites uf this two c ultures in Fi g. 4/1 -7 -- Batka . offerings
H unga ry. Other gra ves in flatka, belung to the Sa rmatian pe riod (8- 10 graves), fr om graves : 9 (I. 7. 8): 8
a nd th e Medieval pe riod (1 8 graves).
(2.5): 2 (4): I (6) and Pi t
(3). (ace. toj. Korek 1958.
Lit.:)' Korek, RVM 7, 1958, 21-30 .
21 ff.)
11 4 The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Bal kans
s. BEKETINEC BY KRiŽEVC I
The settl ement of the La sinj a culture
A mong the num ber of sites of the LasinjG culture ofNonh- West Croatia,
Beketinec could be of notabil' importance, due to the fact that it reptesents single
layered settlement with chronoiogicG lly unique material. It means that it gi ves clear
info rmatio n un cl single phase in the development nf thl' Lasinja culture . An
am ate ur archaeologist was 'responsible' fo r thl...' JisC<.lVery uf this site . It was
Vjekoslav Duk i ć who gathered the material, perform ed test-trcnch exca vations
and aroused the interest for thi s site, among the professionals. S. Dimitrij evi ć has
quoted his investigations in the PJZ III , along with the data gathered by Z. Homen
in later works.
The topog taphy show that Beketinec , accord-
ing to its location, represents the prototy pe of the
2
Lnsinja culture sites he twee n the ri ve rs Sa va and Drava.
lt is situGted on an elongated Illound with t1arrened
plateau and relatively steep sisles which descend to-
wards marshy tE'rr<lin and the C rnec c reck whic h runs
nearhy . From the preiiminGry report by Z. Homen
(1 980) we see that the first rescue excava tions werc
unde rtaken in 1978 on the locality Imbra lovec left of
thc road that leads fr om Dobovac to Beke tinec. T h e
locality on the right side of thc same road, on which
sounding excava ti ons wok place in 1979 is called
T opolje . I t is e vi dently the same archaeological site wi th
different nGmes. As S. Dimitrijevi ć already did, we shall
also use only the name Beketinec.
The investiga tions of 1978 and 1979 show
that the cultural layer is either poor, or has been de-
stroyed by t1eld works, and was preserved merely in pits, dugllUtS and natural
de pressions. During the campaign of 1978 one dugout was found. T he other one,
di scovered in 1979 was very la rge (l5 x 15 m), which makes it undoubtedly one
of the biggest objects of the Lasinja c ulture in th is region . The dugo ut had twO
rooms, and in its vicinity there was an unusual triangular hearth sunk 15 en1 into
the ground. ll.i s area was very ri ch wit h ceramic material , bone and flint tools.
This abundance of ceramic material was not comple tely published, but the pub-
lished material clearly shows t he classical ph ase of the Lasinja culture (phase IIb,
according to S. Di mitrijević) . Those are well known shapes like cups with the
handle, bea kers on decorated foot, bowls with in verted rim s, dee p am phora e and
Fig.5 -- Beketi nec. sha rds of
similar ware. They were decorated with incised lines combined wi th pierced dots,
pottery (acc. to Z. Homen.
which is characteristic fo r the classical phase of the Lasinja culture.
1980.30)
On the high loess bank, in the district of village Belegiš, few archaeologi-
sal sites were recognized. Excavations were und ertaken on only three of them:
Sančine, Grada c and Stojića Gumno. First two are important for the study of the
Eneolithic cultures, while the third one was the necropolis with cremated individu-
als with urns that gave name to whole Bronze Age cultu re: Belegiš culture.
Excavations were performed from 1954 to 1965.
TI)e site Sa n čine is model fo r fortified, multy-laycred settlements similar
to those along the left bank of thc Danube from the contluence of rivers Dra va
and Sava. The platea u with the settlement was fo rtified with two deep rrenches
divided with the pa lisade. The stratigraphy shows the following horizons:
L the hori zon with T iszapolgar culture pits.
2. the horizon which should correspond with the Eneolithic humus.
3. the horizon of houses of the Early Vučedol culture.
4 . the horizon with remains of the Vatin culture houses.
5. the horizon with the Bosut culture pottery {phase Kalakača }.
6. humus layer with La Tćne ceramic materi aL
TIle fir>t and the third horizon belong to the Eneolithic period. The
settlement of the Tiszapolga r culture would represent the southernmost point of
Šančine Gradac
(Surduk)
Double ditch
its penetration, while the Vučedol culture settlement would belung to the time of Fig.6 .- The cross-section of
the erection of thc fortiftcations (the trenches and the palisade) . According to the the site Šančin e and Gradac
cetamic material it could be dated to the Early phase uf this culture. in Belegi š
TI)e site Gradac is sepa rated trom the site Ša n čine with one deep trench,
as it wa s the case on Vučedol. During the excavations on this site, rem ains of the
V učedol culture settl~ ments were detected, together wi t h graves which belong to
the Vinkovci culture and dugout-type settlement of the La te Belegiš culture (Ha
A2) . The Vučedol culture ware is slightly younger than that found on Šančine and
probably preceded the Vinkovci culture ware.
Lit.: V. Trbuhović , RVM 5,19 56, 147-1 88; N. Tasi ć, [p.)ques ... , 164-166: S. Dimitri-
jevi ć,PJZ IlL
~I-,-I"-6_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ____T
-'-'h-"e:.:E
: :n::e"'ocolit""hic c_ul_tu_res _o_f e_e_ntral and West Balkans
On the left bank of the Danube, only twelve kilometers upstream fro m
Kovin, there are re mains of larger prehistoric and antique settlement. In the
opened profile one can follow the loess layer some 200 m in length, and 3 m decI',
thus forming smooth terrace ahove marshy terrai n. The site was spotted for the
first time by F. Milleker in his notes , and rescue archa eological excavations were
conducted from 1969 to 1970, before Oerdap power plant was built. and the terrain
submerged. The occupation horizon varies in depth from 1.2 tO 1.6m. Three main
horizons could be traced, among whi ch the youngest belongs to the Roman period,
the middle to the Bronze Age, and the oldest, and major ho rizon to the Eneolithic
period .
Few dwelling objects we re notified in this horizon: pirs dug in the virgin
soil , zones with house rubble, few bigger (2.70 x 1.8 m) and few smaller (1.5 x I A
m) calotte kilm. The ceramic material is pooriy preserved due to fl oods that
occasionally afflict this area. The reconstruction was made possible because
ceramic moreri al wa s predominantl y discovered near kilns. Generally, those were
large massive potS made of pooriy refined clay, deco rated with plastic ribbons, nail
incisions, and often with haring bone ornam ent. The pottery from the Eneolithic
layer belongs to one unique, charac teristic style, that could be marked as Cerna-
voda III. With the exception of few fragments decorated with shallow c hannels
e
.....
, 78809
-
fig. 7 .. Brza Vrba. the pro- (on the rim ofla rger bowls), other pot tery bares attributes of robust, rough manner
fd e of the trench (ace. to P. of decora tion.
Med ović. 1969. T. XLIV) The site near Brza Vrba be longs to the beginning of the Middle Eneolithic
in this part of the Danube basin and is the first exca vated site of this type in fo rmer
Yugoslavia. In the vicinity of Vršac, superficial fin ds of similar settlements were
also registered .
TI1e hill with the pla teau which dominates the whole surrounding region
is loca ted in the the very center of the Niš va lley. O nce, in t he period of prehistoric
cultures, the ri ve r Niša va used to merge here with t he Južna Morava. TI1is si te is
exrremly well situated on important crossrodads of South-East Europe. Roads th at
lead rowards the South and the Aegean , to t he East and the Sofi a valley, TI1tace
and futher tO Asia Mino r, towards the So uth West and Kosovo and Metoch ia and
further to the Adria tic coast, and finally toward s t he North, along Morava valley
to the Pan nonian plain all clustered in this pla ce. Its' geographic position played
importa nt role in the dispersion of cultural groups that belong to the Buba nj-Sal -
cuta- Kri vodol complex.
TI1e fi rst investiga tion on this si te wa s pub lished by A. Oršić- S lave rić in
193 5. T he fi rst scien tific e valuation of Bub anj was made by M. Ga rašanin in 1950.
and his division. with somc la tter revisi ons is still va lid. T he existance of the Bubanj
or the Bubanj -H um gro up was certified primarily through the ana lysis of thc
material from Bubanj. Latte r exca vations of thi s site remained associated wi th M.
Garašanin, and partl y D. Garaša nin's o pus.
An ample site of the Baden culture and the culture of the Tram -Da" ,,-
bian enerusted ware was found near the brick plant in Beli Manastir. The >lre or"
some la hectares is located on a plateau, in the triangle formed of rhe =
rail road, local road Beli Manastir Baranjsko Petrovo Selo and the local railro2c.
that goes in the crescent from the main railroad to Baranjsko Petrovo Selo. T ne
plateau is 6.6 meters higher than the adjacent southern marshy terra in, which
was ideal position for the settlement.
Small rescue investigations of this area were conducted in 1954. ln che
meantime the site was largely deva stated by the exploitation of the clay. Than..<s
to the excavations of K. Vinski-Gasparini, the fellow of the Archaeologica
Museum in Zagreb and the Museum of Slavonia in Osijek, some 23 5 square
meters were excavated, the archaeological material was gathered and a clear
stratigraphic position of the cul tural horizons obtained. There were 5 geological stra
and only the second one (from the bottom) tumed up to be cultural horiwn. The
layer was 0.4 meters thick, while in the pits it reached almost 2 meters. ln this layer
there were two cultural and chronological periods: one, older, which would belong
2
3 4
to the Baden culture, rather pOOf, except in pits, and the other, yaunger which
belongs to the Encrusted Pottery culture of the South Trans-Danubian, i.e. the
transition from the Early into the Middle Bronze Age (Br Bl/2). This unstratified
Baden culture settlement had simple pits and dugouts, similar to that near the brick
plant in Dobanovci. Pits 8 and 9 wi th annexes are characteristic for this site. They Fig. 9 - Po::.er, iro;n 8eli
had ceramic material which determines them clearly. For example, the pit 9 Ma nasur 20: <- .'i1ski-
contained cups with ribbon handles and bulb-like containers, bowls with net and Gaspo nm 95
do tted decoration, as well as other findings that date it into the classical phase of the
Baden culture.
In the easte rn part of S r~ m , in the sub urbs of village Dobanovci, not far
from Zemun, on the terrace above the river (lalovica (now canal), one larger
prehi storic site wi th ho rizon ta l stratigraphy was (o und . The Galovica rive r runs
from thc so uthern slopes of Frušb Gora, and then via Srem region, flows into the
rive r Sava . In the prehi story this was vcry impo rta nt communication.
show that there are remnants of thc settlement dated probably in the end of the
Encoli thic on the part of the Lll lexcavated site.
Lit. : N. Tasi ć, 1959 , 227 ff: IbiJ ., 1969 , AI-' 11,39-42, T XVI.
ll1is tell-type settlement is situated norh-east of Fli tola on the right side /
of the road Bi rola - Prilep, on the bank of the river Šemnica , no t fa r from the ~,
vill age C rnobuki. It is circul ar in shape, somc 150 meters in diameter, and 4 meters
in height. [ts dime nsions confo rm with average prehi sroric tell s frequen t in
Pela gon ia fro m Prilcp ro rIorina in Greece. T h is site entered the archaeological
li terat ure rather early, tha nks to t he work of V.J. Fewkes in Macedonia. During
his surveying in Pela goni a in 193 4 he disco vered this site and made sm aller test
soundings . His disco very wa s brought fo rward by V. Mil ojči ć in 1949 when hc
,
l,
attempted tO settle it in hi s system of thc Macedonian Neolithic. La ter, in 1953,
M. Gara šanin dealt with this material for the sa me o bj ective. 111e excava tions
were renewed in 1974 (B. Kitanoski. D. Simosb, J. Todoro vić). The precise
sequencc was esta blisllcd: the c ultural layer was divided in fo ur hori zons (I . IV) .
According to the analysis of pottery, the authors proved tha t horizons I-Ill belong
to the Eneolithic, and horizon IV to the Early Bro nze Age . ll, is yo ungest hori zun
develops continually above t he yo ungest (III) hori zon of thc Eneolithic settle -
men t.
ll,e stylc types of cera mic ware and plastic art of Eneolithic horizons
attributed this site to the Bubanj-Salcuta- KrivodoI complex. Even more, this site
could be dated in to a region al va ria nt of the sa me comple x, some times mentioned
as C rnobuki , Bakarno Gumno-Crnob uki, C rnobuki-Šuplevac group, or merely as
the variant of the Pelagonian Eneolithic. Ha ving in mind thc frequent appeara nce
2
of burnished ware, o the r pottery shapes as well as terra-co tta , Encoli thi c horizons
at Crnobuki could bc se ttled in the horizon of East Balkan graffito ware, roge ther
with sites fro m Saleuta and G umelni ta in the l\orth, over Bubanj and Karanovo
VI, ro the si tes of Dikili-Tash - Sitagroi type in t he South. Fi g. 1 I -- Crno buki . terra-cotta
and pottery (a cco rding to
Simoska - Kitan oski -
Lit. : D. Simoska, B. Kitanoski , j. Todorovi ć, 1976,43 -72, T . I-Xl. Todorović. 19 76.43)
122 ___T
'C.he Eneolithic_c_u_ltu_res of Central and West Balkans
d\
JJ
2 3
of the Vuče d o l culture and the development of the ca rly meta Ilurgy in Bosnia. The
credit for tha t goes tu B. Čo vić , who investigated in the Archaeo logical Collection
of the Zemalj ski Muzej in Sa raj e vo and worked on F. Fi ala's already I("gotten
materia l. He divided t hree cultural and chronological hori zons on Debelo · Brdo:
one, that belongs to the Late Neolithic, the second - thl· Eneoli thic or t he V učedo l
culture horizon and the thi rd one, that belongs to the La tL' Bronze A ge, i.e. the
South-Bosnian group, as he n amed it.
According tD its ty po logical att ributes , the Eneol ithic pottery belongs to
one mature phase of t he V učedo l culture , the So uth- Bosnian facies of the Vučedo l
cul ture , or the Debelo Brdo ty pe , as S. Dimitrijević calls it. W e are dealing with
rathe r coarse modded , ca rved o r Ftlrchenstich' ware . Alo ng this material onE' simple,
I
fragmen ted re rra'co[[a was discoven: J. However, what is morL' impo rtant is thc fact
,hat Debelo Brdo in the Eneoli thic period was big metall urgical center. Seven pieces
Fig. 12 -- Debelo Brdo. of casts, larger and small er, came ffllm this site (3 1(" axes with tubular extension fur
shards of pottery of the the handie and 2 for daggers). TI,ere are two ceramic objec ts used during casting of
Vučed ol cu lture (ace B. metal. T ogether wi th Ljubljansko Barje anci Vinkovci, Debelo Brdo could be the
ČOVIĆ 197 6. 10 7 riches t site with this type of objects.
Lit.; F. Fial", 1894. (UZ M VI , 107, T V III) ; B. C\>v ić, 1976 , 107-1 10, PL II -III: A.
Durman, ~A. 8, 1983, I ff.
Regi ster of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavi!' _ 123
ln the SUhLlfbs of village Hrtkovci, Dn the bank of the rive r Sava on the
place where it makes the turn towards the South, there is amound fl)rmed by
stra tifk a tion of cultural ho ri zons from the I\:eolithi c m the Medieval period. It is
assumed that the re maining surface is merely rhe third of irs original size . Even
toda y we can see the trench tha t surrounded the 11lound and made the life o n it
more sec ute. 11lis fo rt ificatio n wete made probalhy as ea rl y as Eneolithi c, and the
trencl, was latter widened and deepened .
11lis settlement was spotted early in the protile of the river bank and
instanrly entered the archaeological li teratu re. It was me ntio ned firsrly in the end
of the las t century in the reports of M. Wnhalsk i (18 98), then in
1904 in the works of M. Br unschmidt who started with mino r
rre nc hing on Go mo la va . Systematic e xcava..,tio ns (the second
phase) star ted in 1953 . and lasted until 1957 (S . Nad , R. Rašajski ,
M. Giri ć , L. Sekerd et a l!.); fin ally, the th ird phasL' wete extensive
archaeological excavatio ns performed in accord wi th the btt's t
methodological stadnards (larger surface , palaco-zoologica l and
pala ca- bo tanical resea rch , 14C dating and so o n). These investi -
gatio ns mok place fro m 1965 to 1985 (Il. Bruk ner, N. Tasi ć, B.
Jovanovi ć, J. Petrovi ć and n ume ro us assistants) .
ll,e stratigraphy of the clllmral horizon , of some 6.5
meters th ick, showed that the lowest horizons (Gomolava la-b)
bclong to the N eolithic, while above it there are di tle rent layers of
Eneolithic humus (Il), Eneolithic, (lll a-c), Bronze Age (IVa-c).
Ea rl y Iron Age (Va-b), La T ene (Vla-c). Roman period (V II ) anci
at last t he Medieval hori zon (V Ill) . 111e Eneoli thic horizon s II and III Were !(JrIned Fig. l} -- Gomol ava. bowl of
above the youngest Vin ča c ulture settlement and a smaller necropolis ofehe same the Vučedol cul ture
culture (Gomalava lc). A ccording to indi vid ual pottery shards the Eneolithic
humus (Gomolava ll), belong to the time of pen etra tion of the Tis:apolgar and
Bod rogkerezstur cultures. 11lis was evidenced in the entire area of the plateau,
which co uld be seen in the profile tOwards the ri ver. Phases C omolava lIIa-c
co ver: a) a smallet settl ement of the Baden culture with pits (Ill a); b) one
lo ng-teremed and abundant settlement of the Kostola c culture with three clwell -
ing hori zons (lllb 1-3) , and finally c) one modest settlement of the Vučedol cultre
that belongs to the end of the Eneolithic (l Ilc) . A bove these Eneoli thic ho rizons ,
there was a horizon fo rmed d uring the Early Bro nze Age (I Va), with the ma terial
of the Vati n c ulture and individ ual findings of the incrus ted T ransdanubia n ware ,
as well as fragments of the Vinkovci cul t ure ware .
Individual graves wi th or without grave goods were also found during
these excavations. ll,ose were skeletal graves with dece seci in fle xed position. In
one of these gta ves there was on e Kostolac type vessel.
,-,,-,--- --=._-====---
~-
'.
J '-o
__ J / /
. - - .::
, ,
--
COMOl AVA- Il~~~':~~'~~~~
'9B- il.
19('5.- 69.
-
I9fH - 7/.
l' ,==';O=";';;'=~J;;
; '=,,;"';:,,,...;c.o rn 19 77 - 1\5
Tl1" plmeau Gradina , (di m. 265 x 60 m), i, situated on the bank uf tht·
Bosut river (partiy devasta ted byerosion) and the ri vet Struga which fl ows near
its western foothills. Thc pla tea u is about 10 me ters higher then surrounding
terrain) thus having dominant position. This site helo ngs to the tortified type or
prehistoric settlements. The other twu sides that were not protected by the Bosut
and Struga river were CI1co111passcci w ith <J Jeep trenc h. In the eastern part therl'
is one smaller and even bener to rtitled plateau (Gradac). This elaborate system
was prohably built in thc time of the Bosut culture, although one ca n suppose
that natural con veniences h"d heen important t(lC the building of the settlement
in boch Eneolithic and Bronze Age.
Although this sitc wus already we ll known, e xcavatio ns startcu as late
as 1964. They were continued during next 1965 (N. Tasi ć, P. Milušev i ć) , and
since 1975. they became e xtensive systematic in vt:stigarions which lasted until
1985 (P. Medovi ć, D. Popovi ć, i'i. Ta si ć ). Thanks to results uf this reseatch ,
precise sttatigrophy of cultutallayers up to 6.5 m thick was established . Abundanr
archaeological material was gathered, thus covering periods from the Late Neo-
li thic (Bosut l), Eneolithic (Bosut ll), Bronze Age (Bosut llI) and Early and Late
Iron Age (Bosut IV and V).
Two Eneolithic horizons (Ila and b) were t() rmeci, one should say, in
continuu above the oldest horizon with ma te rial tha t belongs to the Sopot- Lengyel
culture. Tl,e earlier Eneolithic settlement (Ila) according to its ware belongs to
a variant of the ea rly phase of the Bala to n-Lasinj e culture, and the yo unger (lIb)
belongs to the Boleraz-Cemavoda III culture. Tl,e transition between these twu
phases was gra dual, which was asc('rtain t:!d by stratignl phic evide nce::; and rypulogical
c haracteristics of ceralnic ware . From 1981 to 1985 twn larger features were eXC<l~
vatcd. Opulent cera mic matericd was found which he lo ngs tn the Boleraz . . Cenlavoda
III culture. Tlns could be the first evidence on the architecture of this culture in the
Yugoslav Danube Basin. Tl,is was tbe main reason why another relative chronology
of tlns site was made. Instead of previous, corrected division on tlve horizons was
introduced. T he Ene,)lithic is lll"rked " S ll, above th is ldlnws III - the Rronze Age
(divided into t\Vt) suh . . phases a nn J b) l then thc richest nne tha t belungs tD the E<-1rly
126 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Iron Age (wirh three sub-phases a-e), and the youngest prehistoric honzon (V) which
belongs to the La Tene.
Lit,: D. Popović, 1981, Mate rij ali XI X, 57 -62: P. MeJ<)vić, 1978, 13-14: N. Tasić, 1985,
1-11: N. Tasić , 1987,85-92.
, ,~,.-rrn1'TrrI11TTITmlTITmlTITmTTITmlTITmn1TrnTr___ _-,F="'-Fhorizons
I,suU,]lnll l Dwelling
'"
"
III
:zn
C\ ;'>,;,g fC~,.
" ',
~.
" "'~ .: ~.,.",",
>'•.
1:
11,e Vuč edol culture settlement is rich in ceramic material and dwelling
obj ects (pi ts, hearths and houses) which were rather de va stated with following Fig. I S -- The ground plan of
horizons . Vučedol culture ware was fo und mainly in pits . lt was decoratec! with Gradina _ Zecovi
deep incised lines, ,vith carving and white incrustation. Certain shapes (botele
shaped vessel) and the manner of the decoration uetermine this Vučedol culture
settlement on Gradina Zecovi into the final Eneo1ithic, Le. imo the end of the
period which it belongs to. 11,e parts of casts and casting vessels also belong to
the Vučedol culture horizon.
Lit.: A. Bcnac, 1956, GZM XI, 147-166 , TI -X; Ibid, EpoqLles ... , 78-81.
128 The En eolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Lit.: cl. Novak, Prai.itorij ski Hvar, 1955; Ibid ., 1959, ARR I, 5·60; Ibid., 1962, ARR
I, 19· 102, T. I· XXXVI; Ibid., A RI<. VI, 61 . 179 , "1'. I· XXII ; Ibid., Epollues... , 110·113;
B. Čečllk , 1968 , A RR VI, 18 1·212, T . I· XII ; U. N'lVak ·B. ČCč llk, 1982, ARIZ VIII.IX,
11 ·3 3, T. I·XVIII ; S. Dimi trij ević , 1970, 105 ff, T. 11·11 1.
I
130 The Eneolith ic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Thc stratigraphic di vision was not illustrated with suffkie n t info rmation
(o nl y preliminary re po rt was publish ed). Howe ve r one ca n concl ude that olde r
; tcatum I wi th its sub-phases A and B belon gs to t11L' Buhanj - Saicuta c ulture
wit h elements of the Vi n ča c ulture and infl uences of th e Adti atic Neolithic. The
proh le m of the su a rum II a a nd B is still not clear e no ugh. One part of publishecl
ce ramic mate rial ce rtJ inly belongs to the Kostolac c ulture (its southernmost
penetration ), while thc mate riallc:beled as "the Early Bro nze A ge of Maced onia"
(Ktitza n a type) is con side rably youn ger and helongs to thc Iron A ge ,,(Meto h ia,
with earl y Dard anian in fluen ces. lt is, howe vet, certain that th e majori ty of the
cultut al de pOSit belongs to long-termed Eneolithic de velopment of one Kosovo
and Metoh ia va riant of the Bubanj - Salcuta c ult ure. It is iII ust ratecl with the
cera mic ware from Hisa r I A and B, wh ich was decora ted wi th thic k red and white
painting, blac k burnished pottety, nume rous sha pes of shallow plates with thick -
e ned rims, beakers on the foot , and as we ll wit h Scileihcllilellkel h andles pots. T he
132 _--,-T:..::
he_En_eo_1i_thi"-cul t_u_res_o_f C_e_ntr_al_an_d_W_es_t _B_alkans
horizon II A certai nly belongs to t he Kostolac culture , which was confirmed with
the pottery (c ups with high banci handle, chess-field mOtifs). One large house, quire
fa miliar to the Kosto lac culture, seems to belong to this horizon.
6
7
ll,e site Brdo (Hrnje vac) by Ku tjevo belongs to the hill ·,i:H ,,-pe. I: is
situated on a dominant hill. As well as other sites of the Ke\·d",c ·h..--;Ji",<K Q,-pe.
this one is also located on rather high altitude (405 m . "bove""" I",·d). :\"".:rdinl1
to this one, and other settlements of the same type w e can ""CL",,,
:ha: me\'
bclonged to the population of hunters or farm ers (Kevderc and u-.DCl:,:'a jama
are located on SlO m. abo ve see level).
ll,e first finds from Hrnj e vac were g"therecl by Milan T ur:'c,,~. :"l!o\\'
of the Muse um in Zagre b in 1898 . This J;)t;) ente red tht> litera(UIe i~ : c:!' ~ a:;d
we re e rroneously attributed to the Lasinja cul ture . Late r on, (l0;5. !':SC. an2
especially in PJZ Ill, 343.) S. Dimitrij e vić has placed this tl nd in an m.:=>",xe:l'
culture . the Rctz.Gajary culture . as its variant with proposed m= . ,ho-
K e vd e rc~Hrnje vac
culture.
Among scarce Hrnj e v()c c ulture findings from the collec~vn Cl :::he
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, which were published in the third '\Jl:...."'" c;
'Praistorija Jugoslavenskih Zemalja', three characte ristic cups wi th ban..: ha."::l,,,
which raise above the rim were also mentioned. The base on some Oi' me;,] ""'2.,
shaped as calotte . On thc site Hrnjcva c , be side the se fo rms, we come acr""'5S ~a :-?tr
spherical vesse ls. 'pointed vessels', as wel! ;) s coarse ware . 111ese were Jee....,:acc::C
with inci sed orname nts, some kind of Furche1l5tich and ro ugh c ar ving . ~. [).:t:.:.:::.
je vić also rne ntions one damaged ro ughly modeled fe male idol, and one .JCit:C~
that resembles the labry'. The manner of decoration is similar to that :n :.'>c
Mondsee culture, on one hand, and to the Kostolac and V učedol Cu lture5L~ ,h.:
2
other.
According to the criteria mentioned previously, the site Brdo '"""
Hrnjevac, perhaps should not be listed herc (the lack of the
scratigraphy, scarcity o f finds). Howe ve r, its characteristic
ceramic ware enabled S. Dimitrij e vić to ide ntify one new
Eneolithic variant of the Retz.C;aj"ry culture. Finds from
Drljanovo near Bielovar (A. Durman, ()A 7,1982,3 7 ff.),
Kevderc near Škofja Loka and from some other sites in
Hungary, especially those separated in the Balaton III group
by N. Kalicz, also belong to this variant.
Lit.: S. Dimitrij e vić, in: PJZ, 343-365, '1'. XLVII, 1·6; Ibid., 6 I
BROK, Mainz 1980, 15·89, T. 1·20.
1l1e cave Hrustovača nea r S,H1Ski Most is one of thc most impo rtant site s
in the river Sana valley. Ir is located in the vicinity of Vrhpolje, not far ti-om the
village Hrustovo . Near the Hrusrovača cave there art' some other caves) among
which th e Dabarska GIVe , located 3 krn northwes t is certainly thc most prominenr.
Archaeological site in this cave was discovered by M.
Mandić in 1938, who also performed first excavations in 1939 (M.
Mandić, GZM, 1939,65 ff.). Hi s excavations covered the right side
of the vestibul e and came across abundam archaeologica l materiaL
First stratigraphic information was also obtained: the first stratum
was humus (to 0.40 m), then very thin (some 0.10 m) Roman
stratum, the third was Hallstadr stra tum (about 1.00 m thick), then
stratum with 'Pannonian ware' tOJO m thick), and at last - clay
laye r with occasio nal osteological mmerial.
The material discovered by M. Mandić, togethe r with that
collected latter, was processed by j. Korošec in 1946 (GZM, 1946,
7-38). New excavations in the cave were undertaken a year bter by
A. Benac. He gave a relevant stratigraphic sequence and meticulous
analysis of the material. According tO A. Benac three strata existed:
upper, middle and lower. For the purpose of this book, we are
interested only in the middle, Eneol ithic stratum which varies from
0.40 - Ll O m, depending on the inclination of the terrain. The
abundance of the Vučedol culture ware (Slavonian, as he called it
at the time), bones of wild and domesticated animals (deer, doe,
bovine) is atypical, and what is also important are large quantitie ~
of cereals, parts of grindstones and few hearths. Two typological
groups could be distinguished in the Vučedol culture ware: one,
according to the shape and decoration closer to the Kostolac culture
ware (incised decoration, hanging triangles, and ribbons), ane! the
othcr which belongs to the developed Vučedol carving technique,
where certain forms resemble the Vinkovci culture ware. The deco~
ration of the Vučedol culture ware is regularl y combined with white
incrustation. This pheno111enon re presents the regional manifesta~
tion of the Vučedol culture that could be called 'Bosnian type' or
Debelo Brdo-Hrustovača type.
Fig. 20 -- Hrustovača. two
pots of the Vučedol culture
(after A. Benac 1948.) Lit.: J. Korošec, GZM, 1946, 7-38: A, Benac, GZM, 1948,5-40, T l-XV and op. cit.
Register of major EneElithic sites in former Yu goslavi~ 135
ln thc outskirts "fAleksinac raise's a pl ateau (dim. 200 x 100), some ten
me te rs highe r from the valle y of the rive r Moravica. T o pographic cha racte r of
th is site , particularl y its st(:(: p sides whic h desce nd toward s t11l' rive r, SUggL'st that
this se ttleme nt belongs to the Eneolithic type, al ready known in the Hubanj ,
Kostolac and Cotofen i cultures.
1l,anks to M. Vasić's excavatio ns in 1910, thi s setticml'nt ente red
archaeologica l li terature rather ea rl y. Preliminary results fro m these investiga,
tio ns wcre published in C;odišnjak SKA XXIV (1910,273-3 14) and in Starina r
(1910,23). After 45 years the works were rene wed in 1950. Excava tio ns by R.
Galović of 1955, were not ve ry extensive, but thanks to them it is now possible
[O make use o f the results o f the previous excavatio ns. in spite of the f~ct that
Vasić's mme ri al was irret rieva bly lost during the World W a r One . (;alovi ćo pened
about 70 square mete rs in three rre nches o n difft.:'r12nt parts of thl' plate;Ju .
Inspite the fact thar thc mate rial does not suggests this ci ivi ::;io l1 , two horizons
we re distingui shed . The d e pth of t he laye r was 1.20 m and three ilo()[' kvels we re
identified, probably helo nging to the same huuse which was re newed (0.7S, 0.90
and 1.01 m).
Ri ch cera mi c mate rial t()uml in these two ho ri zons he lo ngs mainly to
the Kostolac c ulture, although there are so n1l' othe r e lt:'111L'11tS connected to the
2 3
Hubanj-Hum as well as the C"roteni cultures. Thc' sha pes, an u the manner of Flg.2 I -- Jelenac. the pottery
decoration of the potte ry, arc typica l fc". the Kostolac c ul ture . 1l,e re are cone- of th e Kostolac culture (ace.
shaped c ups with band Ilondi es that go abo ve the rim , anci howls ofdiffere nt shape . to R. Ga l ović 1959. 329)
They were Jecorated mainly with carved lines, net o rname nt, short incisions,
dotted incisions, while f(l r the Furc"c1lStich technique it could not bl' told that it
was freq ue nt in both horizons. Among the publi shed material we co me ac ross
ce rtain exa mples ofbowls with thickened rim which could be connected with the
Bubanj - Salcuta gro up, then frag me nts with lens-shaped a ppliquć or vertical
plastic bands that bdong to the Corot;, ni cul turt· complex .
As wel! as Lubni ška jama, located nearby, th~ site Kevderc belongs to
Eneolithic highland-rype settlements. Both of these sites are on the altitude of81 O
meters, and one could say that the y have similar stratigmphic sequence , as we ll as
similar a rc haeological mate rial. Thc material from systematic excavarions was
published by F. L:ben ir 1963 in Acta carsologica 3,1963. The material is kept in
the museum ofLoka in Skofja Loka. Results ofexca vations are e xtremely important
for the study of the Eneolithic of Sloven ia, parti cularly of the Gorenjska d istrict.
Beside the author of the excavations, F. Leben, the material was also discussed hy
P. Korošce. Certain evident terminologica l differences in t he articles upon this
problem are the consequence of different ap proaches of the two authors. W e used
F. Leben's information for the interpretation of the srratigraphy.
Gathering all the info rmation and e vi-
dence on Kevderc and Lubniška jama, F. Leben
distinguishes three, cultural!y and chtonological!y
independent horizons:
A. T he horizon of tik' Earl y Lasinja cul-
[Ufe with cups, bowls and semi . . sphe rical jug::; with
one handle. The decoration is modest and was
made with incised lines.
B. The horizon with unique ceramic ma-
terial, determined by F. Lehen as the Lubnik type
of the Lasinja culture. However, according to th e
channele d o rnament, ca rvin g , rough carving ,
white incrustation and the sh apes of the pottery
(jugs without the base), th is horizon could be as
weil placed into therime of the Kevde rc - Hrnjevac
type of the Retz - Gaj ary cultute , as it was deter-
mined by S. Dimitrij e vi ć .
Fig 22 - Kevderc-cave. the C. Th e youngest horizon in Kevderc belongs tu the Late Vučedol culture
chalICe of the Kevderc- (the Ljubljansko Barje II or rather to the Alpine facies of the Ljubljanska c ulture,
Hrnje'"l( type (ace. to s.
depending on which terminology we use).
DlmltflJeYlc 980. PI. 13/ 1) P. Korošec dates the habitation of caves Kevde rc and Lubniška jama in
the period between the fitst phase of the Eneolithic, o ver II and III to the Brome
Age ( Br A period).
Lit.: F. Leben, 1975, 151-156, anJ lit. cit., P. Korošec, 1973, AV XXIV , 171-176, T.
I-Il, and quoted literawre.
~egiste r of major Eneolithics ltes in fo rmer Yugoslavia 137
Near the road that lead, to Negotin, in the outskirts of the village
Klokoče va c ,there is one hill cal led Culmi a Sciopul ui and cl iff Stnllac. There was
a number of natural terraces on rhe stecp amphirheater-sha ped slopc, on which
bases of Eneolithic houses were found. During the excavation of 197 0 very
in teresting and unique architecture was discovered. Houses were situated on
terraces (there were 4 or 6 of them). The back side of the house was dug into the
hill. 111e dimensions did not exceed 6 x 3 meters. Due co the inclination of the
:;\ope , pottery was ofte n found in the secondary positi on. Howe ver, as this was
single layered , and apparently short term ed farm er' s settlement, the stratigraphic
sequence is no t of a great importance.
The style ana lysis of thc archaeological material , especially of the
po tte ry, shows that two groups we re re presented he re : Co tofe ni, wi th carved
dccoration, plastic bands and lens-shaped ap pliquć, and the Kostolac culture
pottery, decorated with crescen t-shaped incisions, chess field motifs and f'urc!Ic71-
stich technique. The blcnd of these twO st yi es of different cultures is obvious and
onc can find omaments of one group, on the ceramic form of the other culture
and vice versa. The mutual relationship between these two cultural manifesta-
tions is so strong he re , that it leads to the conclusion that it made quite new
c ultur;:'d phc no menon, whi ch also occurs on some o ther sites in East Serbia
.::,
"
" '
~ ~
(Kovilovo, Krivelj and also on sites in Đerdap I and II). 111ese regions wirnessed Fig. 23 .. K lokoč evac. the
the intensive mixture of twO contemporary styles, two cultures : western Kosto lac pottery of the Cotofeni and
culture (Srem-Slavonia and Central Bal ka ns) and the Cocofeni (south Carpa- Kostola c cultures
thian and Danubian) culture.
111e site Kl o kočevac is located in the mountain region of Homoije, in
its periphera i region , and was home for the population of farm ers. However, few
smaller copper objects (copper pin) show the interest tlll the exploitation of the
copper ore, abundant in this region, among the inha bitants of this settlement.
T he prehistoric Eneolithic mine near Rudna Glava is located only about 10 km
south from Klokoče va c .
,-_o-
Fig. 25 .. Lastvine. channeled Zoologica l remains (bones of sheep and goat), as well as the type of the
bowls (ace to Batović . Cha p· settlement with short-lasting architec ture imply th at this was proba bl\, a settlement
man . 1985.52) occupied only occasionally or seasonally.
The remains of prehisto ric settlement of the Eneolithic and the 8'0".:_ .,.,..,. ........
~,.- .. .... . ........
".
""-~-
~
~
~
Age period are located on south slopes of the mountain Fruška Gora, c.'\'c""2 oo .. ,. ~ __ p ~~ ~~, ~ -""
the area of 500x200 meters. ll.e loca lity "Li ce" is one mo und \\i[h rlartcnc-::
plateau. On its west is one wide plain which is the part of the Srem lowland. 1lk
stream Moh a ra č flows thro ugh it (recently it became artinciallake). Steep slope,
_
i\t..
~J-_
Ar
~
_
. ~
----
> -;- ,..,,",,-"'i:~
.;'l _ .. _....:-_~:~~7ir_~.~~-:.
~' -"'''
. ~ '""'"'--- ~---'\" -~~
.
......
~
. ..
"\ _~'":>.t:!
~- ..... ..... ~.I'U""~.,..., ~... ~. ""
.,.~~~
......... + "";-A~__ ._~_!""'
'. '
....... .. _.'"
~-::i
~
...
_
of the mound give the impression of thc hill ,fort site. ' ......
~~=--a
-.:... . -:; '"'.....
~~
During the arch aeo logica l excavations of 198 1 (Dragan Po po vić), re- ~
mains of the seulement of the middle and late Eneoli thic and the middle Bron:e
Age were detected. ll.e depth of the cultural byer, without the pi ts, varies
between 0.2 and 0.6 meters. T he earli est settlement belongs tOcla ssical phase of
the Baden culture. It is single layered settlement witl\pits and earth-cabins, the
type 'luite frequent in this region (Dobanovci, Rim ski Sančevi, the Baden c ulture
horizon at Gomolava). One larger ea rth-cabin with a kiln is typi cal for this site .
\\-
'\:,"": ~::;: ,-,~":
. -,'- -
,
~ ,r:"
r-
" "
- '. <,'
,. ,
)J(]
- -- --
:: , .:'~-4i;~X' ~
'r '
,
'/';1
-- '
~" ~-)~"':(f '~
C""C''''~'''~~
-=,!
~~~~~~-tr. .§
-~="
2 3
11.0 po[[ery shapes are often carina ted (biconic) bowl s, decora ted with carving Fig. 26 -, Erdevik. the potu ec.
and incisions, then cups with hulb-shaped container with handles that surpass of the Baden and Kos tol ac
the rim , coarse pots and diffetent shapes of amphorae. The Kostolac c ulture cultures
se[[lement with remains of dwellings and more durable houses , re presents the
younger period of life on this site, According to the pottery it belongs to one
younger phase of the Kostolac c ulture in which Fltrchenstich decoration appears,
Bowls of diffe rent shapes with rich decoration prevail among the pottery of this phase .
In the vicinity of the plateau there are rel11::tins of yo unger periods, ceramic ware
which has no stratigraphic links, but could bc , according tn its tYIXl!ogical ch arac ~
te ris[ics, chronologicall y placed : a) the potte ry which belongs [o incrus[ed T rans-
Danubian group of find s in Srem (Br Bl ) and b) the pot[ery which belongs to the
Belegiš culture (Br e - Ha A).
< ll.e materi al from these excavations is being kept in the Muse um in
Sid , and will be published by D. Po po vić.
142 The Eneoli t hic cultu res of Central and West Balkans
- --
6
------------~----- -- --
144 _ _ _ _ _ __ The Eneolithic cultures of Central and W es t Balkan s
---'J-
. _ '. -
...
- -- -
-
- - .---- -
-
- ---, -
-
,
I
:ll5:'
-'1---
-'- - - --
" -1;-:~ :.---:=.
[I --. ~--:
_ ._--~~
._.',:
_. -
----- - -
, -- --- ._"-- --.-
. .- -)-- -
.
•
--
• • 0
. ..
_
"l
'o"
"
~
I
>--
"oz
Register of major Eneolithic sltes in former Yugoslavia ___ . 145
'Gruda', 'Glavi ca ', '(,omila' are Serbian words for tumuli sca ttered over
Tivatsko Polje, Krtole, GrbIj e and neighboring loca ti uns. T hey were all e videnced
and detailedly surveyed by the Archaeological Institute from Belgrade and the
Nautica l Museum trom Kotor . A rchaeologica l e xcavations wt're perfonned on
some of them (Milovića Lokva and Milovića (;umno). Beto r" the exca vations at
Mala Gruda, three of them wer" already exca vated (dim.: lS·20 m. in dia m ćte r
and 1.5- 2.5 m in height). They contained skeletal graves (graves [Omled ni ston"
slabs) with deceased in f1 exed posirion withour grave otfe ring,. T he rir>[ resul"
from Tivatsku Pulje came from Mala Gruda, excavated during 1970 and 1971. lt
is the tumulus located in the va lley Polje and was, unlike [he other>, previously
investigated. lt is situated o n the crossroads Budva-T i,·ar- Kotor. l[ was 3.5-4
me ters high and 20 me te rs in diame ter.
The re sults of e xc avations by M. Parovi ć-Pešikan and \'. T rbuho \"i ć sho w
that there was only one, central, grave in this tumulu>. n,is gran" had iew t,replaces
which are thought to be places of cult. The grave constructIon was sunk, and is
now 4.5 meters lower from the present highest point of the tumulu>. T he grave pit
(dim.: 1.27 x 0.7010.76 m) was formed of rectangular scone slabs. lt was oriented
V·
North -South, with slight decl ination to the West. T he gra"e contained poorly J..,....':" ;/ / -:.Y':.
preserved skeleton (parts of the legs, pelvis, scull and mandible ... ), probably in
f1exed position. n,e grave contained: one golden dagger and one silver ax in
abdominal region; two pots (a beaker and a bowl on low foot) positioned near the
~
legs, and five golden pendants and a fragment of copper tail by the head (Pl. II ). r"'
."
"
r . - . --- ~/-~ ,
-------~ ,
.~ ..-'
D uring the construction works un the hank of the ancient river beJ of
the rive r D anube, few archat'()iogic:.d sites Wef t' disco ve red . One of [hern was
named 'Must[)nga I' m Kruškov Kuren . It is located un a high loess bank of the
ri ve r Mostonga, that was later joined with th l' 'Danube ~Tis8 ~Danube ' channel.
11112 knoll , from which the a rchaeological materi31 came, is luca ted 300 m south
of Ka ra vuko vo, on the left side of the road that leads from th e brick plant towa rds
the 'OTO Channel'.
llw site 'Mostonga I' was discovered in 1964 by S. Ka rmanski, who
surveyed this area fm years, anJ metic ul llusly published thc mate rial h e gathered .
He made soundings on ChZlf(lCteris ric spots in o rder to establish rele vant facts
(srratigra phy, fear ~rcs etc. ). 5rnall~sized archaeological excavati ons were per-
formed h ere anJ it showeJ the e xistence of pits, dugo uts, h ea rths and probably
h o uses ofdifferent cultures in the horizontal stratigraphy(the Starče vo -late Donja
Branjevina phase, the Ea rl \' Vinč:J culture, the lxngyel anJ Bole niz c ultu res).
Important discovery for the srudy o f rhe Eneolithic of southeastern Bačka region
was the Jiscove ry of one dwelling (large r fi re place or burnt house) with abun dance
of cera mic ware (even wholc pots), charcoal, ashes anci burn t bones. T his assem-
blage belongs to the Boleraz (Ce rna voda III - Boleroz) culture. The rough ware
predominates: deep pots with plastic bands and finge r prints be low the rim (typical
for the Cernavoda III culture)' deep amphorae, and what is import:Jnt ICJf the
chrono \ogica\ detennination of these objects, t'ew fragmen ts of fine potte ry : bowls
witl1 bent our rim with shallow chan nels, bulhlikc c u ps wi th handles that raise
abo ve the rim, and tInally sim ilar , Jecp c ups with c hanne ls organized in triangles
Fig. 29 -- Mostonga . one in the upper pa rt. According to the typologica l analysis, this mate rial cOLdd bc
bowl of the Boleraz-Cerna· da ted in the Bo lera z (or l'roto-Baden) c ulture period.
voda III culture (acc to S.
Karmanski 1970) Lir. : S. Karlllanskl, B;-lb1rnodllbni lokaliteti jugl)zapadnc Bačk e I , 1970.
Regi~t_e r of major Eneolith ic ~)tes~n_ f~r~_er Yu_goslavia 14 7
11.e cave Odmut is situated in nmthwcstern part of Monten,,~, e:' :h" ~ r - ---.,
canyon of the tiver Piva, in the loathills of Kulin, on rhe alritude OI' 555 In 3"-.'\"(':
sec level. Wide entra nce looking towards the South-Ea st and spaciolli h2~1 '" ,,;.,.,
cave offered excellent conditions fm longer inhabita tion of prehi>tcnc p.;p:.!:;-
I
\. \
'
tions. T his was also suggestcd by thc depth of the cultural hon :"" ..dlli:h i>
som e times 4 meters thick .
T he main impetus for test~t rench i ng and the n systematic t'xcn"2::;)~
the interior of the cave was the construction of the power plant Piva. Th: ;::.)Iee
lasted from 1972 ro 1974, when in 1975 the cave disappeared under }he '.'"'''''' -
the lake. The excavations performed hy B. Gavela, D. S rejović , C. !\~3r" l"-~
covered the largest part of the cave (80 square me ters).
T he sediment analysis of the the cave sh()wed eleven geolo2ic3, ;:::-.:.: _,
archaeological straw:
Odmut I AlB - the Mesolithic period
Odmut II A/B the Early Neolithic
Odmut III - the Late Neolithic
Odmut IV - the transitory period from the Nea lithi c ro the EnQ..-'::'
Odmut V - the Early Eneolithic
Odmut VI - thc Final Eneolithic
Odmut VII - the Early Brome Age
4
The horizons III. IV, V and VI ate important for the srudy of rhe
Eneolithic of the continental Montenegro. First three horizons show th::- cnlltinui ry
of the life in this cave . They contain elements of the Adriatic Enenli' . 'c (th e
Nakovanska culture), on one hand, and the Vinča culture, on the , < ,. These
elements are, primarily, black burnished ware decorated with cl13nneis. T he
findings from the horizon VI are different in style and, among other things, contain Fig. 30 - 00"1,, : :.ce
elements of the Tivat-Rubež group, which is dated in the Final Eneolithic of this pot tery of tne \2'-0-,'2'l2
region. (fig I) and Tova:- '.LDeZ ~,pe.
(acc. to C. Mar·:o'. 'C 9ES.
Lit.: Č. Marković, Arch. Iugosla V1Gl XV, 1974, 7-12: Idem, 1985, 3 1-44. 3 1)
148 ._---
The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
!"-. _ __ _ __ . ______ . _ A o
11 b
Fig. 30a -- The cave Odmut. south -western profile of blocks II and III
(acc. to Č. Marković 1985)
Register of major Eneoli thic sites in forme r Yugoslavia 149
Padina is a loca l toponym for oline ofinlet, k>eateu unuer the stcep cliffs
which uescenu [Owards t he Danube near the localit\ calku (;,,,pouin Vir. Thcse
inlets (or bays) haYe been hiding the remain, of prehbtonc ,ertlem"m" \\·hich
c!evelopeu in the narrow and tlat area hetween the cliii, anu th" warer. Pauina
compri ses of t()ur such inlets (I-I V), with the rc'mains 01 setr\"m"m, o ,· the
Mesolithic, t he ea rliest Neolithic period anu inuiviuual nnull1~' OI the Erk:"lirhic
pottery and graves with incineratt'd indi\ldual;:,.
ll,t' excav;)rion;:, of rhis impo rtant si tC' ;:,carn.:J rather la[t:.'.lu~r betore the
artificial lake for the power plant 'Đerdap I' W[lS made. Between 1968 and 1970
o nl y a fraction of this site was e xca vated. Four sectors we re investigated, and the
SL'c[()r III ga ve the rn ajori ty of the info rmation on the Eneo lirhi c peri od . Ont.'
smaller necropo lis U), with incinerated inuiviLiu[lls was t()und nea r thc Danuhe
bank. hve graves were excavated (an d te w devast<l ted), and only graves 2 and 3
con tained crematcd hone s. Graves we re dug in locss soil, 0 .9 ~ lA me te rs deep,
and were orga nized in a row. Gra ves contained vessels (pots or bowls) with calcified
bones in the recipi ent or in its immedime vic ini ty. Few pots (urns) we rc dislocated,
which e xplains thc abse nce of bones. According to thl' typological c haracteristics,
shape and decoration, the necropolis belo ngs to the Kostola c c ulture. Thc um from
the grave 2 was particularly interesting. Its shape and decoration is ty pical fo r (hL'
Kostolac culture.
Enco lirhic po tte ry was also to unJ outside thl' necro po1is , in othe r sectors
(I and II). The impo rtant fact is that the C'_otole ni culture fragments are found next
Fig. 31 -- Padina. th e pot-
to the Kostolac potte ry, whic h comes 8S no surprise for this region.
tery (urns ') from gra ves o'
the Kostola c cultu re ao:
Li t. : R. Jovanović, Strinar XXII /l 97 I , 1974, II li., fig . 7, PL VII: IJem, 1976, \33- \36,
to B. JovanovIc 19 "0 "
fig. 1-2.
150 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
Remains of the Eneolithic and Early Brome Age settl em ents were de-
tected on the platea u rather un usually named Peć in e (Cm'es). Nearby was found
an isolated skeleton, from the Bronze Age period (early phase of the Bosut group).
The site is located on the hill that dominates the valley opened towards the South
and to the lower Srem valley . TI1e dimensions of the plateau are 350 x 250 m, and
it seems that it was once fortit1ed with a rampart whose remains are still visible .
The site near Vrdnik was disco vered in 1967 during ground surveying of
the region by the team of'Zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture Srema' (D. Popović) .
Two years later one small-scale exc"vation was peril)fmed on the upper plateau.
According to the prel iminary reports and the in~
2
sight to the ma te rial we can establish: the strati-
graphic situation of the site ; its topog raphy, as well
<lS the typology of the material.
-Thc cultura l horizon in trenehes vari es between
0.5 and 2.5 meters. lt is thickest in the trencl1 II,
in its southe rn part.
-The lowest part of the horizon belongs to the
Kostolac culture horizon which was forrned ahave
the prehistoric humus. Following horizon, 0.3 m
thick, contained the Vućedol c ulture ware, while
in the youngest horizons, as well as in recent
humus, Vinkovci culture ware was found. This
part of the horizon is almost entirely devastated,
3 4 but in the above mentioned trene h Il one pit was
discovered with a number of whole pots of the
Vinkovci culture. TI1e occurrence of these pits
Flg. 32 -- Peći ne - Vrdnik. with whole pots is known fi-om other sites of this culture in Srem (Gradina on Bosut
the pottery of the Kostolac or Tvrđava in Ilok). Such stratigraphic situation (with the exception of the grave
culture (ace. to D. Popović of the Early Iron Age) shows that this site was inhabited constantly from the Middle
1969.35) Eneolithic (the Kostolac culture settlement), then during the Late Eneolithic (the
Vučedol culture horizon) until the Early Bronze Age (the Vinkovci culture
findings) .
Bowls decorated with dots, incisions, and sddom FurchelLStich technique
are predominant in the Kostolac culture horizon. The Vučedol culture ware
belongs to the early phase of this culture (Šančine in Belegiš) . lt was decorated
with concentric circles, rhomboids, triangles and wavy lines with white incrusta-
tion.
ll,e importance of this site for the study of [he Eneolithic of [his region
is in gi\1ng further in formation aboU[ the life on [his sire from rhe end of the
Neolithic (,Seče' culture), and during two phases of rhe Rerz- Gaja ry culture to the
Middle Eneolithic period. ln thc Fina l Eneolithic one mus t coum on the presence
of the Vučedol culture population.
o
1
2
10
.. '
2.5
3m
2
Fig. 34/1 · 3 -- Perlez · Vu na.
Tumulus 9. grave 1 (ace to P
Me dovi ć . 1987)
Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia 153
Two kilometers East of Pe rle: near Batka, thuc is a group nf 15 tum uli
which re present an inde pe ndent group in the system of prehisroric (Eneoli thic)
rumuli that follows the rive r Ti sa from its origin tO its contluence with the Danuhe .
The rnajoriry of them are located on the loe:;:::, terraCe of former river bed of the
BegeL nea r its conf1ut'!I1ce with the Ti sa. Only three' our ot- 15 mounds were
e xcavated: Vuna #9, Vuna # l Oand Pašića Humka. T he diankt<'r orthese mo und s
is from 30 to 40 mete rs, while the height "aries from O.SO - 3 meter, (due tO the
inte nsity of ag riculture).
The in vestigation of mounci s nea r Perl cz WZlS commenceJ in 1972 and
wa s finished with systematic e xcavations (lf 1976 (P. Med o vi ć, 1987,77). The
resul ts could he following:
l. T hc mo unds were formed when t he earth was deposited over abamloned Baden
c ulture se ttle ment. T he pottery, fl)und h ere is prohably dislocated. It IlIarks onl y
the termiTII L.':> IJost quem for thc chrono\ogy of the graves.
2. T umulus Vuna #9 conrained only one grave with the deceased in f1exed
position, sunk into the basis of the rumulus. T umulus # 10 had also only one grave ,
similar to pre vious. In the tumulus Paši ća Hurnka there were six skeletal graves ..
one senili.~ female and tl vc inf(l1lts about 2 years of age .
3. Graves were without offerings. 1llE' on ly element for rhe chronoiogic<l i uetermi ,
nation of these graves, apart from thc o riCl1w tio n of the deceased, is the ()cher as
well as wooden con struction, well-k nown in graves of the Steppe, Jamna culrure,
found in grave #6 in Pa ši ća Humka.
/
-) I
/
4.TI1e stratigraphic superposition over thc Baden culture settlement, shows that
these mounds near Pe rle z probably bclong to thc time of the pe netrarion of the Fig. 34/4 -- Centra l grave n
Steppe population, or to the horizon of the Final Eneolithic (rumuli near Pančevo, the tumulus 10 (ace . to p
Vojlovica anci Tri Jabuke , Padej etc.). Medović 1987. 77
Pločnik is well-known, eponimous, site for one ph"seof the Vinb culture .
The discovery of four ho mds of cupper "nd other objects was" phenomenon . As
far as we know, similar d iscoveri es we re no r made on an\' o ther Eneoli thic si te in
the wider region of midd le "nd So uthe"sr Europe. \'( 'e shall lea\'e aside rhe
Neohthic settle me nt , whic h co uld be, in SOI11l' ways. ah,o uerenllineu as [neoli rhic,
and concentrate o ur aUcllri o n to these
hoards.
Hoard l was di scovered during ar~
ehaeologieal investigatio ns by M. Grbić in
j 92 7. Ir was located in the outs kirts of r11L'
Vinča cult ure settleme nt, ne ar the railway.
Ir comprises of 12 copper chisels, one mas-
sive axe/hamme r and five (ongue ,sh8ped
axe s made of light white lime stone . The
hoard was dug into thc Vinča c ulture ho ri,
tt
zon 0.80 meters deep.
Hoard II came into the possession of 2 J
the 'Muzej knez<J Pavla' in the same year as thc
pre vio us as a random find. According to the information of tl1l' tinder, it was
discovered not far from the hoard I, also in the o utskirts of the Vi nča culture
settlement. It contained t\vo 3xe/lnmmers, one of \'o,hich was decorated with
incisions on the cutting edge ; two chisels and threl' copper bracelets.
Hoard III was discovered during the construction works t() r wool facto ry, across
the railway sta tion, again in the ou tskirts of the Vinča culture settlement. It was dug 0.7
m deep in the ground . It had 9 cupper objects (6 chiseb, axe/hammer, J ecorated with
groups of incisions, one massive copper bracelet similar to that (ronl o ne grave o f the
Vinča culture necropJlis at Gomolava, and one needle with f()fked top with helical
ending, important for chronological detemlinatio n) .
Hoard N was fO Wld between hoarcIs I "nd II and h03rd III, in thc outskirts of
thc Vin ča culture settlement, on the righ t side ofthl' railr<)~ld Pr()k llpljL>~ K lIrŠumlij 8. TI K' Fl g.\6 · Plo čni k .
the hoard II
culrural layer, accordi ng to rhc proti lc, "shallow, and thl' lloa rd wa, dug into thc gruund (acc. t o B Jovanovll 1971 .
on 0.30 m. It contains 5 copper ehisels, 8 tongue-shaped axes made of light white PI. IV. 14-17)
limestone and o ne cylindrical casting vessel.
Although Bubanj-Salcum culture p.mery was f()und in the eariieS[ horizons of
Pločnik, it is still nor certain wherher the hoards he long [() rh is yo wlger period Of ,
3ccm·ding to sto ne 3xes to thc \linča culture.
Lit.: M. Grbić, 1929,9 ; B. Stali" , 1964, 35 <md further, (ig. 1-2; n. Ibid, 1973, IS7, {igo
1-14; B .J o vano v ić, 1971 , 28-29, PI. IV.
I S6 The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
--==--
37. RUDI NE I NEA R KOPRIVN ICA (NW CROATIA)
Th e Vuče d o l culture settlement
Near the village Ko privni čka Rijeko, on the platea u of the hill Rudine,
southwesr of Koprivnica, there is one larger Vuče " ol cul tu re settlement. It domi -
nates the surrnunuing and overlnoks the river Koprivnica whi ch runs in thc
footh ills. Tl,e position of thi s settlement is similar to the position of Other hill -fort
settl ements of rhe Late Vučedo l culture.
The excavarions were commenced in 1978, anci co ntinued during 1979.
Tl,c area of some 8 12 square meters was LlI1cove red. Ir was undo ubtedly estab-
lished rhar rhis wa s singl e horizon settlement. The exca va ted area revea led one
house, nineteen pits (few of them were used as dwell ing objects) anel ten hearths.
Few dwelling obj ects suggest S that certain number of ho uses must have been
devasmted. Reside dugouts, pits with the remains of animal ske letons are also very
important. Tl,e pir 19 offered the skeletun of a wild hoar. Z. Marković labelled the
pit 4 as an an im al grave , but did not specify the species.
of the archaeological material was fo unu. A mong other materi al, five hoards that
conta ined stone [,arons (sligh rly adjusted pebbl es), antler rools, por tery, and altars,
which were probably used also to illuminatc the shaft. T ypological analysis of the
archaeological material clearl y shows that this mine was in func tion during the
tra nsition of the Early Vinča c ulture into the Late V inča . A ut hors of these
excavations dated this site in the Eneolithic period, and it was therefore incorpo-
rated in this register. Fig.3 8 -. Rudna Gla,;a The
Vinča cul ture po: ana 5.~or.;:
Lit.: B. J ova n o vi ć, 1982, passim; Z. S tan ojević, Arhc olllct<llurški \nkaliteti II Srbiji, Bor implement ,ace i.o 8
1990, 5-8. Jov an o'1c 9E2
158 ------
The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and W est Balkans
One scat tered lowland -type settlement is situated near the village Ko-
privnički Breg (o r Bregi), 6.5 km so utheast o(Kopri vnica . It is located on a plateau
near the K oprivni čk a rive r. fir st CXGlv;]ti o ns we re pe rfo rrn cd after gro und surveing
of the region in 1979 (Museum in Koprivnica, where the ma terial is kept). After
a short recess in 1984, th e work s were continued in 1987. The prelimina ry results
were published by Z. M a rk o vi ć (VAMZ IS, 19S5, A P 28, 1987, 50-51; Podravski
zbornik 81, 198 1, etc.). If we neglected scarce find s ot the Roman and Medieval
period (9th-14 th century) , thesl' info rm "tion suggest th at this wa s single layered
dugo ut-type settlcml' nt which developed hori zont"lIy ove r " lorger "re" . During
these excavations an arca of some l 000 square mete rs was investigated. Most of
the settlement was covered with test rrenches which g <1VL' eno ugh information
about its disposirion. The site is interesting and was pic ked up t"()r thi s occasio n , in
the tlrst place, due to the f"ct that it belongs to one still insutlkiently "cknow-
ledged, early Eneolithic c ulture n"med Seče or Pe pe\a ni -Seče c ulture.
One dWe\ ling obj ec t with d abor"te interna l struc ture is very important
for understanding the ty pe of the settl ement and its architec ture. lt is a dugour (or
rather semi-dugo ut) with more rooms, with a hearth. lt w"s sunk from the level of
humus and goes down to thl' virgin soil. The depth of certnin parts of this house
varies and goes from 0.78 to 1.84 m. ll,e rem"ins of wa II supportS show thot it was
covered with some kind of " orgnnic material.
Potte ry ga the red from the pirs and dugo uts is unique in style and sho ws
ch"racteri stics of the Early Eneolithic of this region. Z. Mark o vić points OLl( one
strong Lasinja culture component, which could be expl"ined with the h ypothesis
that the Seče -Pe pe l an i culture could belong to the same c ul turni complex - as its
early ph ase (the Proto- Lasinj,,), .or rem"ins just region al phenome non. Among the
pottery sh"rds, one can tlnd rem"ins of bowls with tongue-sh" ped handles , smaller
POts wi th thc hand lc tha t goes from the rim, as well as of ampho", e and pithoi.
The decoration is ra re and was made with channeled lines, incisio ns o r sma ll and
shallow impressions.
ll,e resuirs of ca librated 14C analysis perti.ltmed in the laboratory Ruder
Bošković in Zagreb, show th" t this settlement developed between 3 160 "nel 2S60
BC which should correspond to the end oithe Early Eneoli thic, i.e. to the beginning
of the Lasinj" c ulture.
On t he e ast fringe of Pdagonian plain, in the vic ini ty ofehe village Dolno
Oreovo, there is one steep slope whic h goes fro m southern and western side towards
Pelagonian depression. Remaips (l f()rtitled, rwo ~l;)yc rl.'J Ent'(}\i rhi c se ttl e ment was
found on small plateau ca ll ed S uplevec . According to its rupography this site diffe rs
from other Eneolithic t e ll~type se rdem.e nts in Pelagonia. Howeve r it contl)fJllS to
one well known type of the Bubanj-Salcuta sites in northe rn regions.
First rescue eXG.lvatio!1s on this place were comm enced in
1959 by P. M ač ki ć and D. Simoska . Ne ve rtheless, the inte rest fo r this
site wa s rai sed onl y after one stone baton of the 'steppc proveni ence'
was f()unu , and insranrly entered ;)rchaeo\ogica llirerarurc. Tht' works
we re continued in 1971 . T he result was good srratigrap hic sequence
alld o the r importa nt data 0 11 the developme nt of thi s site during the
Eneoli thic pe riod.
According to M. Garašanin and D. S imoska, the stratigraphI'
sho ws that thL' c ultural horizon was divided into two separate aSSe m~
blages. These we rc' marked with I an d II with ano ther five sub -horizons
(1- 5). The stud y of the contents of these h orizo ns does no t show maj or
diffe ren ces in Style' o t potte ry and other tinds. The a utho rs bel ie ve thar
this was one culture of the Bubanj-Salcut3 CDmplex and proposed the
2
name - Šuple vec- Bab rno Gumno culture . The fa ct that n o c rusted
colour painting or graffIto decoration was found in the cultucal hori zon on this site,
is characte ris tic for c hronologica l determination of this culture in the Eneolithic
of Pelagonia. Instead, togethe r with obvious Bubanj -Salcurn fo rms, Sch1lur ware
appears (Wi1lckdsc!mur o rname nt), which was anrihuted to the 'ste ppe influe nce ',
Fig 41 ·· The pottery from Le . (he same curnplex to which the stone baton belongs to .
Šupl evec (acc. to Gara šanm -
Sim aska 19 76) Lit.: M. G","š""in - D. SinH)Sb 1976.
Register of major Eneoli thic sites in former Yugoslavia 161
In the plain s (Jf southwest [Ianat , 8 km nurth of Pančevo, near r11L' village
Jabuka, few mounds - tum ul i, call ed Three mounds' we re ascertained. On one of
them systematic ćxcavation was performed. That mound, 48 m in diam eter, 2.30
m in heigh t belongs to middle sized tum uli. It is located on smaller terrace risen
abo ve marshy te rrain. T he e xc avations, at tirse rescue tYpl:, became syste matic, anu
this rum ulus was derailedly investigated in 1981. Its imm euiate vicinity was also
surveyed , which showed that thi s mmmu was ereeteu upo n the srratitk'd Eneolithic
site .
,
,'" -, , \
)
" I I
1.',
,
,,, ( " ' " l. --j
, '-- - - - - - - -
/
I
,
".
~
". /
2 3
Stratigraphic inf() rrnario n from the [um ul us. its surroundings <1nd layers ,,
under it showed: ,----.
l) the lowest horizon with pits helong tu the Baden culture se ttlement :
2) in the widet area above the previous. onc Kosto lac c ul ture settlement
was confirm ed (during the e xca vatiom fo ur houses were discovered):
3) humus layer (Eneolithic ') 9 .5 cm thick:
4) the tumulus with one gra ve uf the Jamna culture.
ll1is complex situation shows that the tumulus was f("medafter a short
gap in the li fe oi the Kosroloc culture settlement, which ce rtainly has chronological
implicatiom. According to all obtainable dara, the tumulus belongs to the 'steppe 4
graves' horizon of the late janlna culture , suc h as Vojlovica and odler sites in
southern Banat , Potisje, Romania and north [lulgaria. The rumulus had only one,
central gtave dug into the base of the Kostolac culture house. ll1c grave irselfwas
1.50 m long and 0.90 m wide. ll1e deceased was laid on his back in flexed position,
over a mat covered with ocher. T he deceased was also covered with ocher. T here
were no grave offerings. T he deceased was male, about 40 years of age, 165 cm
high.
Two more graves were found on the periphery of the mound. ll1ey were
also without grave offe ri ngs, with individuals in conrrac ted position. lt is suppused
that they belonged to the Baden culture horizon of this site. FigA2 .. Jabuka near
Pa n čevo. The pottery of the
Lit.: Lj. B llkvić, 1978 (1979) , 14-18. Baden and Kostolac cultures
162 The En eolithic cul tures of Central and West Balkan s
On a high te rrace of the [)an ube, in thC' viciniry of the vill agE' Vajuga, a
nUl11ber of prehisro ri c , n,0I11<J11 anu Medie vdl sites we rl' asce rtained. Fo r the stud y
of the Eneo lithic o n Oerdap II sites Vajuga-Zbradila, Vajuga-Pesak and Vajuga-
Korhovo are particularl y important. The last one is situmed on the bank of the
Danube c hannel whi ch forms the isle Korbovo, \Ve il -known for its prehisroric sites
(the Eneolithic, The [orly and MidcIk BroIlZL' Age ).
The site near Vajuga was registered in 1980, during the trenc h surveying
of the area . [)uring next yea r, 1981, D. Krsti ć pe rformed rescue archaeological
e xcavatio ns whic h covereu some 360 square meters. The cultural horizon wa s
rather thin and wa s f()[med of the layer bE'tween the humus and sandy soil. The
depth varies between 0.4 and 0.9 m. It is partly destroyed with the necropolis dug
into the ho rimn during the Middle Hronze Age (II graves - investigated), and also
with later intrusi ons during the La Tene <J nd the Ro man period .
TI1e Eneolithic hori zo n un this sitE' is interest ing fo r both its finds and
stratigrap hy. Two dwelling ho rizons, belonging to ditle rent c ultures, frequent in
the Đerdap region, could be distingui shed herc. One belongs to the Buba nj-Sak uta
culture, and the orher to the Cerna voda III (i. e. Bole r6z-Cernavoda Ill). The
Bubanj -Salcuta settlement was very rich in matcrial, especially from one well
preserved ho use t hat o /fered a number of whole and frag mentcd pots felunu iH sil!<o
The typology of the pottery and some orhcr chara cteristics show that it was the
product of a single phase of this culture , but with gratllro pottery lack ing . Most
frequent fo rms were beakers with two handles with inverted rims as wdl as coarse
po ts. TI)i s materi al has closest analogies with the materi al trom Kovilovo near
Negorin and Krivdj near Bor. TI)e tlnds of the Cerna voda III c ulture are rare, but
figo 43 _. Vajuga - Korbava , typologically very clear. ll)ose were bowls with cha nnels in the interior of the rim,
The Bubanj -Sal cuta and Cer· pots with double plastic bands beneath the rim , rugged zig-zag motifs and cups with
navoda III pottery (acc. to wide vertical channels. TI)e material is simila r to that from Rrza Vrba near Kovin.
D. Krsti ć 1986, 148)
Lit, ; D. Krstić, Đe rJ"p ske sveske 111,1986, 148-152, Fig. 1-16.
Regi ster of major Eneolith ic sites in former Yugoslavia 163
The stratigraphic data shnw that the depth of the hori zon varil·s, depend-
ing o n the incl inat ion of the te rrain, bu t therc we re also ce rta in pan s in the cavt'
whete the virgin soil have not been reached. Thl· dept h of 4. 5 meters of c ultural
la yer is men tioned in the documentation of ch i::! sieL: . However, it seem:'; that
stratigraphi c sequence is now clearl y establi shed: t here are th ree Nco lith ic horizons
(older, middle and younger) with Adriatic impresso ware, material of the Danil o-
Kakanj-Ripoli culture, and tlnally the hori zon of the H va r - Li sičić i c ulture . Eneo-
lith ic, Bronze A ge and Iron Age sed iments \Vere superposed.
The Eneolithic hnri zon \vas distinguished in reCent years, LlIld <:lcco rciing
to B. Čečuk 's inforrna tion o ne can aniculatt:' t\\'o c hro no iogica i and c ultural
ho rizons: the older o ne, which was intluenced \\·ith rhe Hvar cul ture (!\ ak",·an-
ska) , and the younger (lne with elements of Adria(ic facie> of [he V učedol
(Ljublj anska) culture . One infant grave comes from the Eneolithic horimn , as well
8S one hoard (!) of long stone kn ives (steppe provenience ' ), and one copper ax
of the Pl očnik culrure style . Thi s interesting material belongs to the Eneolithic
period , probably to its final phase, when the V učL'dol c ulture ciements appear
(Tivat-Rubcž) .
Unfo rtunately, the rn ateriai from these exca v8t ion:::; were not comple tel y
published, so this in teresting site, will have to wa it another occasion for co mpre ~
hensive scie ntific valorization .
Lit.: B. Čeč Llk, Arheološki pregled 26, 1985, 46 -47 : Ibid, Arl1C'<l I"ški pregleJ 28 , 1987,
44-46 and li t. cit.
164 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
lombe 4
+- +
f s
I
3
".~8'eJ
, .
_
O
(J.() e"
sOl du tOUf
Register of major Eneolithic si!es in former Yugoslavia 165
Lit.: N. Tasić, 1984,69-75, Fig. 39-44; Cat. 264-266; M. Jevtić, 1986, 135-144, Fig. Fig. 45/1 .. The base plan
1-14. with graves (4) and the ves,
sei of the Bodrogkerezstur
culture (1-2 ) and Baden eul·
ture terra ·cotta (3)
166 The Eneolithic cu ltu res of Cen tral and Wes t Balkans
1038C, ----r-- - - - - . - 7 } ~~b(.:; bl ----~·...!!- --- :. )"'~J, - 1 --- ---- r.j-~ e"" 1i >I
59,50 \% 2
, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - ~ - ~~ ,
- -~ -~
! -
W l~ 1
-- 1--
I i
, I
., milON
., . l!
~1
\', I N~OVll BI
--+--
"OQI10IIC
tvIN'(QV ( \ ~ \
' _1_
milON ,
!'1 UllOOll
I
- 1-
UO<llG llH
l\i ~ Q(lVU \
-1-
--~
- --- -
- -- - -
- - -- - -
-
-
- - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - -- -- - -
-- -- - - - -
---- - - - - - - -- - ------- - - - - - .- -- - .- - --
--- - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -
those with the Lasinje III-Salcuta IV and the Vuč edol culture tIndings, particularly
latter with a number ofhous es, heartl", altars and pits. Apart from the abundance
of the Vučedol culture ponery (younger phase), one 'melting pit' with the hoa rd
(1) with three casts for battle axes, one miniature of the same shape and a cast for
chi»el, are of great importance.
4
Lit.: S. Dimitrijević, 0 pLlscula Archaeologica 7,1982,7 tf: Ibid , in:PIZ III, 140 ((, A.
Dunnan, OPLlSCllIa ArchaeologlC<1 8, 1983 .
168
-----~
----~
The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
If the results of the excava tions wc re publi shed, Sarvaš would probahly
become the most prominent of all sites of the Eneolithi c period, particula rl y of the
Vučedol culture, in the region fro m the ri ver Drava to the conf1uence of rivers
Sava and Danube. Unfortunately, results of R. Schmidt's work of 1942 and 1943
were never published and the documentation was irre rrievably lost, and the
stra tigraphy of the 8 m thick layer can not be used. Nevertheless, Sarvaš has made
its way to the literature as the site of rema rkable im porta nce for the study of the
Eneolithic in Slavonia and Srem.
TIle topographic position of the pla tea u Vlastelinski Breg is similar to
other V učedol culture sites along the Danube. lt is a mound (dim. 185 x 175 m),
raised 15 meters above the river Drava, bordered with ancient ri ver beds and
fortified with the pa lisade, as Grad ac in Vučedo l which is merely 37 km away.
Sarvaš was mentioned for the fi rst time in the a rchaeological litera ture in the
publication eVA Fasc. 2 by V. Hofflller in 1938, and more stratigraphic data were
given by R.R. Schmid t in Die Burg Vučedo l in 1945. ln the latter were for the first
time mentioned results of the 1942/43 ca mpaigns.
ln the cul tural deposit, 8,20 m thick, the fi rst two hori zons belong to the
Neolithic period ( la, lb and ll) , then follow a massive eneolithic horizon (3.60·2 ,00
m) with twO sub·horizons (Ill and IV) and finally horizons of the Bronze Age, La
T ene, Roman and Slavic period (V, Vl VII). The horizon III was the Baden c ulture 3
fortification with apsidal houses and melting casts. The horizon IV was the Vučedol
culture settlemen t wi th two building horizons, megaron houses and graves. These
information could be corrected by inte rposing of one Kostolac culture horizon
(probably the one with apsidal houses), to which melting casts could be a ttributed. Fig. 48 Sarvaš. the pottery
oo
One of the most important Danubian and Middle Euro pea n Enćo li t hi c
settlements is located on ly six kilome ters upstream fro m Vukovar, on a high loess
terrace of the ri ver Dan ube. lt is called Vučed ol, the eponymous site of the c ulture.
In a wider region, fcw mo re prehistoric settlements and individual graves we re also
found: Štrojmo v vinograd i kukuruzište ('Streim 's vineyard and corn-field'), Vi-
nograd K a rasović(,Vi ne- yard K a rasov i ć') ond G",doc (,(Jradac'). Vučed ol was
mentioned in archaeological literature os ca rl y as 189 7, thanks to small-scale test
exca va tions by ). Brunschmid t. Since that time V učedol remained una voidable in
archaeology (eVA I, Yu, 1933), portic ula rl y after systematic excava tions of 1938
,md the monog"'ph 'Die Burg Vučedo l' by R.R. Schmidt (1945). After the W orld
War 2, smaller excavations were underta ken by S. Dimitrij evi ć in 1966 and 1967,
and after that came extensive excavations by A. Durman (1 981, 1984-1988).
ll1ese were all a imed in order to complete the sequence of the development of the
Neolithic and Eneolithic c ultures o n these sites.
from previously mentioned locations, Gradac is undoubtedly the most
importa nt. This was fortit1ed settlement with elaborate fortifi ca tion system, sur-
rounded fro m rhree sides with the trench and the pa li sade, while on the fourth side
it was guarded with steep bank of the river Danube. Cultural h orizon on this site
was 4.00 meters thick, while on other neighboring sites it was consid erably thinner
(about 2.20 m). The ea rliest settlement, erected on the Neolithic humus, belonged
to the S ta rče vo culture. T he development of thc Eneolithic cultures starts with
the Baden c ulture, and continues with thc Kostoloc and Vučedo l cultures and lasts
continually until the Earl y Brome Age and the c ultures of the Eorl y Iron Age. The
youngest prehistoric settlement belongs to the Celtic period . Following disposition
of the Eneolithic hori zons was obtained by combining of the stratigraphic se-
quences from (Jradac and both S. Dimitrij ević's and A. Durman's stratigraphic
data from 'Streim's vineyard and corn -fi eld':
I. the horizon of the Baden culture phase I A (with the Bolen\z cul ture
elements):
2. the horizon with mixed classical Baden and Kostolac pottery;
3. the horizon of the Kostolac c ul ture; 4. the horizon of the Early Vučedo l
culture with Kostolac c ulture elements;
5. the horizon of the classical Vučedol culture (B-I) ;
6. the horizon of the Vučedol culture with elements of the Vinkovci
culture.
The econ omy of the Eneolithic population was based on agriculture,
animal husband ry and fishing. Mctal implements, weapons and melting casts, as
well as numerous melting kilns, suggest th e existence of metall urgy. R. Schmidt
Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia 171
has also written about specialized workshops for casting of copper objects (Mq:aro71
des Kupfergissers).
New excavations gave numerous sampl es that were ana lyzed in the
laboratory Ruđer Bošković in Zagreb. 111e average age for the Baden culture is
4400 BP (uncalibrated) or 3365-3010 BC (calibrated). For the V učedol cultute fig o49 -- Vučedol · the
they are 4215 (uncalibtated) or 2935-2785 (calibrated). ground-plan with m,cro
locations.
Lit.: R.R. Schmidt, 1945, passim; S. Dimitrij ev ić , 1977: A. Dllnmll1, 1983, 1-75; T.
Težak, Arheološki pregled 26 , 1985,5 7-59.
. .t/"
w- -
<J
,
"o
I.'EIN8!:R6 STREIM
/;1 i:
il.f'':
/ ,1 1'- Ul/I I<UtlURUZffLO STRElM
/"
!(II I~.
; ./
,; i i
:' ./ (/"-\
/ 11. (,~11r-<~~~~=-==-~~
~)I ! ~~-~--- -=-=-~///~
\ "V ----------..c_-- -- -------...----'
172 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
it became hunting station. La ter, in the 7th century AD, it becam e, once again, figo 50·· Zlotska Pećina. the
important metallurgica l center. ground· plan of the cave (5)
and the pottery of the
Lit. : N. Tasić, 1978, passim; Ibid., 1973, 11 -28; IhiJ., 198 1,7 -26: Ibid., 1980,43-59. Bubanj · Sal cuta (I · 2. 3) and
Cotofeni cultures (4).
liJ
/>' ••, . . . . . . . . .
~~~/
f
t '----_
o
5
".., ..,....
BIBLlOGRAPHY
ABBREVIATIONS
AAHung Acta archeologica Academiae Scientia rum Hungaricae,
Budapest.
Actes l, Il, Beograd Actes du VIII e Congres des Sciences prehistoriques et
pratohistoriques I, Beograd 1971 ; II , Beograd 1973.
AE Archaeologia Ertesitii, Budapest.
AH Archaeologia Hungarica, Budapest.
AIug Archaeologia lugoslavica , Beograd.
Akten Szekesfehervar Akten der Panonnia Konferenzen I, Szekesfehervar
1972.
AF Arheološki pregled, Beograd.
ARR Arheološki radovi i rasprave JAZU, Zagreb.
AV Arheološki vestnik, Ljubljana.
BaIcanica BaIcanica, Godišnjak Balkanološkog instituta SANU,
Beograd.
BAR BAR International Series, Oxford, England.
BRGK Bericht der Riimisch-Gerrnanischen Kommission des
Deutschen Archeologischen Institutes, Frankfurt arn
Main - Berlin.
ČGT Članci i gradja za kulturnu istoriju Muzeja istočne Bosne,
Tuzla.
Dobrudža Istorija na Dobrudža, Tom I, Sofija 1984.
Eneolit južnog Banata Eneolit južnog Banata (katalog izložbe) , Pančevo-Vršac
1987.
Ezero Ezera, ranobranzanodobno selište, Sofija 1979.
FBK Kulturen der Fruhbranzezeit des Karpatenbeckens und
Nordbalkans, Beograd 1984.
GeBI Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka istraživanja ANUBiH,
Sarajevo.
GMGB Godišnjak Muzeja grada Beograda, Beograd.
GMKM(GMK} Godišnjak Muzeja Kosova (i Metohije), Priština.
Gomolava I Gomolava - Chranologie und Stratigraphie der vor-
geschichtlichen und antiken Kultur der Donauniederung
und Sudosteurapas, Novi Sad 1988.
Hiigelbestattung ... Hugelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone
warend der aneolithischen Periode, Internationales Sym-
posium, Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd 1987.
176 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
BOSCH-
GIMPERA P., 1960 Les Indo-europeens, Paris 1960.
BRUKNER B., 1970 Die Nekropole in Vajska. Ein neuer Beitrag zur
kulturellen und chronologischen Determinierung
des Aneolithikums Sudostpannoniens, AI ug. XI,
1970, Beograd (1973).
BRUKNER B., 1977 Beitrag zur Feststellung des Beginns der Metallur-
gie und der Aeneolithisierung, Alug. XVIII, Beo-
grad 1977 .
DIMIlRIJEVIĆ S., 1970 Zur Frage der kannelierren Keramik in der Hvar-
Kultur, Adriatica - Praehistorica et Antiqua, Za-
greb 1970.
DIMI1RlJEVIĆ S., 1977, Zur Frage der Genese und der Gliederung der
Vučedoler Kultur in dem Zwischenstromlande
180 The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans
DUMITRESCU V., 1963 The Date of the Earliest Western Expansion of the
Kurgan Tribes, Dacia VII , 1963.
GIRIĆ M., 1982 Ober die Erforschung der Grabhugel in der Wo-
jwodina, Simposio Lazise-Verona 1982.
KALITZ N., 1976 Tokal, Dunapart (Kom. Pest) , Mitt. des Arch.
Institutes des Ung. Academie den Wissenschaften,
1976.
KOROŠEC P., 1962 Neka pitanja oko eneolita Dalmacij e, ARR II,
1962.
KOSOR1Ć M., 1965 Praistorij ska nekropola u selu Dvorovi kod Bi·
jeljine, CGT VI, Tuzla 1965.
LETICA Z., 1972 Grob Salkuta kulture sa Lepenskog Vira, Sta rinar
XXI, 1970, Beograd (1972).
MARIJANOVIĆ B., 1981 Ravli ća pećina (Peć. Mlini), GZM 35/36, 1981 .
MEDOVIĆ P., 1976a Eneolitsko naselje "Brza vrba" kod Ko vina, Grada
Pokrajinskog zavoda za zaštitu spomenika kulture,
VI.V II , Novi Sad 1976.
Bib[io~ 185
MILOJČIČ V., 1953 Funde der Kosto lacer Kultur in der Samml ung des
Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars in MarburglLahn ,
W PZ XXXN, 1949/ 1950, Berlin 1953.
NOVOTNY B., 1981 Zur idololatrie der Badener Kultur in der Slowakei,
SLA XXIX/l, A981.
PAROVIĆ.
PEŠIKANM.• Iskopavanja tumula ranog bronzanog doba u Ti·
TRBUHOVIĆ V., 1971 vatskom polju, Starinar XXII, 1971 (1974).
ROMAN P., 1976 Kontakte der Cotofeni- Kultur mit den Baden-Kos-
rolac und Vučedol Kultur im Westen Rumaniens,
Istraživanja 5, 1976.
ŠULMAN M., 1952 Grobovi iz bakrenog doba iz Subo tice, NZMS III,
Novi Sad 1952 .
TAsrć N., 1980-1981 Die Idole der Baden-Kultur in Vinča, AIug. XX-
XXI, 1980- 1981.
TASIĆ N., 1986 Sopot- Lengyel, Lasinja und Boleraz Funde am Bo-
sut in der Nahe von Šid, A Beti Balogh Adam
museum Evk6nyve XIII, Szekszard 1986.
TEŽAK-
GREGL T., 1985 Vučedol kod Vukovara, AP 26, 1985.
TODOROVIĆ J., 1963 Die Grabung Hissar und ihre Verhalmisse zum
Anaeolithikum und der fruhen Bronzezeit, Alug.
IV, Beograd 1964.
ZIRRA V., 1960 Kultura pogrebenija s' ohroj v Zakarpatskih obla st-
jah RNR, Materij ali i isledovanija po arheologii j-z
SSSR i RNR, Kišinev 1960.
crezstru) ko mple ksa koji je poniloo n a llC'o li tskom su pstratu potiske i He rpal j
(H erpnly) kulture, Jok su ismč ni i juzni delovi hili whvaćt: ni sl1nznim ra zvojem
lokalnih grupa Buhanj-Salkuca (Saleuta) - Krivodlll kumpleksa. Ti sapolgarska i
bodrogkerestrus kn kultura na vujvodjallskolll prostoru č ini integrn lni deo r,]Zvoj <l
ovih kultura i stočn og dela Karpatskog basena . Nj ihovo m atičn o p odručj e sc nalazi
u Illadjarskoll\ Potisju. Karak teriše ih vrlo kval ite tn a ke ra milo , bogatstvo u
baknrnirn nalazima i relativno česta pojava zlatnih predm eta . Mmerijn\nn kultur;)
poznatJ jc: pretežno ll;) osnov u velikog broja istraživanih t1l:kropo\a II koj ima se
pokojn ik sa hranjivao po kannIlima važećim za neoli tske kulture i n;) osnovu bruj nih
priloga II njim a (k erarnik a, o rudjl', nakit). l ' Vojvodini SlI iS[faži vanl' dve nek ropole
ovih ku ltura Ueu na kod Sente i u ruga kod Suhllticc) i jed no nase lje otkriveno u PI. V. 1· 9
C rnoj Bari kod Zrenjanina. Na osnovu poj edina č nih na laza zabeležen jL· i jeda n
kratkotrajan prodo r ovih kultu," prema jugu, u SrL'm, srpsko Poduno vlje i zapadnu
Stbiju. Jedna manja n e kro po la sa hod rogke restutskim grobovima otkrivena je u Pl. VII . 7·8: Fig. 45
V in č i kroj Beograda . Ona je dalo zanimljiv m ate rijal i potvrdila fi zi čk o prisustvo
nosilac;] hodrogkercsturske kulture i Ll o bb stirna zna tIlo južnije od on ih koje su
smatrane nje no m južnon1 grani cum. Ovoj grupi nal:Jz:] treba uoumi i dobro poznati
zlotan na laz iz Progara kod Ze muna koji predstavl ja stilizova nu antru po morlnu
figuru.
l · vre me razvoja tisapolgarsk e i bodrogke rcstursk e kulture , prostor od
srpskog Pod unavlja do PdagonijL' biu je ",hva ć<, n dugim kontinuiranim razvojem
Bubanj-Sa lkuca kulture. Ono je deo jednug šireg, istočno balbnskog kulturnog
komple ksa slikane, grafiti rane keramike (Bubanj-Salkuca- Krivodol-l;umelnica
kompl eks) ko me pri pada či tov ni z kultura i kulturnih grupo od is toč ne Bugarske
do Po mo ra vlja i od južnih Karpata du Pel agonije i dalj e do trakijskog uela Grčke
na jugu (nala zišta Dikili T ash, Pa rad imi, Sitagroja i dr.). Na laziš ta u našoj zemlji
kojo se svrsta va ju u regio nalnu varijantu ozn ačen u kao buha njska kultura (ili
Bubanj-Salkuca) pripadaju za padnim oblastima ovog kulturnog kompleksa . Rela-
tivno je dobro istraže n a, naroč ito zahvaljujuć i radovim a u i stočnoj Srbij i (Zimska
I)eć ina, Kri veij, Rubanj, Kovilovo, Veljko vo i dr.), na Kosov u (Hisar kou S uve
Re ke i Uadimlje kod Lipljana) i u Pelagoniji gde je iskopavan veći broj nalazišta
tipa "tumbi" (tella) u oko lini Bi tolja i Prile pa (Crno buki , Kara m ani, Balorno Pl. XIII. 3. 5
gumno ) i graclinskih naselja bo što je Šuplje va c kod Suvodo la. Na ova ko velikom
prostoru, koji je zahvatila Bubanj-Sa lkuea i njoj srodna C rnobuki kultu ra pojavljuju figo I I
se, zavisno od geografsklh uslova i oU e konom skih ocl lika kultu re , različiti tipovi
naselj a. LI istočn oj Srbi ji, južnobrpatskoj zoni u Rumuniji i use verozapadnoj
Bugarskoj koriste se peči ne za boravak i već ih ljud skih zajednica (Zimska pećina
koci Bora, Horilor kod Baie Herculo ne ili De vetaška pećin a kod Vidim ). L: nji ma
se podižu k uće, kolibe, obje kti za stanovanje . Priliko m arheoloških iskop3vanja
naiš lo se na više nasenbinskih horizonam što ukazuje da sc ne radi u pri vremenim
sraništima, zakl o nim a stočara, već o dugo trajnim naseljima II kojima su se o bavljale Fig.5 0
i druge aktivnosti . LJ Zimskoj pećini na prime r na lazio se zna čajan pre radjivački
me talurški centar (m kopano je više bakarnih alatki, ko nndi zgure, tučkovi za
mr vlje nje ruue i sL). No prostoru od Ka tpa ta, pa preko Kosova, Skopsk e kotline
The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
i još na nekim drugim nalazišti nw nalaze se kerami čki obli ci koji pripadaju ranim
eneo litskim kulturama. Medju tim, izvesnu jc, kako to pokazuje strnrigrat1ja
pornenu[o.l: nalazišta kuJ Stona, da na srednjem J ~\(..Iral1u prvu L'J1l'o[itsku kulturu Pl. XLII
prL,dstavl ja pelješb (N.Pe tri ć) ili nakovansb kul tura (po nalazišcu Spila kod
Nakovan" na Pelješcu) bko je još naziva S .Dimitrij ev ić . Nju čini crna kvalitetna
keramika ukraš<lvana kanelurama koja sc sa ranirn cneolitom pojavljuje na većem
broj u nalazišta na jadranskoj ohali (Grapč~va i Markova pećina, Jamina Sredi na
Cresu i dr.).
SREDNJI ENEOLIT gotovo na celom balkanskom prostoru obeležavaju
snažne ku lturne i socijalne pro!llene: napuštanj \.:' neolitskih tradicijn .~ot(lVO II svim
viuovima materija lne 1 uuhovne kulture . Im a se utisn k. da II ovom Vfl'!1ll'nu J olaZ]
Jo prodora novih pupulacija, vd ik ()~ etno kulrurnog porencijnia, kojI;:' na ši rem
prostoru srednj e i jugoistočn e Evrope dovode Ju prurnc-na, ne SJmo kuituw,
kulturnih grupa i stilova u kL'w mičkoj proizvodnji, VeĆ znatnu šire, oni men.jaju
strukturu privrede i n3čin života eneolitskog stnnovništvJ na ovom prostoru.
Migracioni pokreti koji su zahvJt ili veliku teri torij u, ud stepskih ohlasti južnt· Rusije
pa do Poduna vlja , a zatim i daljL" du jadranske o ba l~, ostavili su duhok trag u
razvoj u eneolitskih kul t ura. Istoč n e oblasti Podunavlja i Balkanskog poluostrva bile
su jače izložene ovim promenama pa je razumlji vu da je do smenjivanja kulturu
došlo uz veće potrese. Prcnw. zapO()U intenzitet P()puia c!unug talasa, kuji se puv('zuj e
sa prvom indoevropsko m seohom flstepskih pastir;)" slahi , Što s(: ogledn i u
poste penom smenjivanju kultura, prerastanje lendjelske u \asi njsku ili razvoj
protonakovanskt' II nnkovnnsku kulturu II j3drJn sk()j zoni .
Kao prva kultura "novog talasali u usnuvi južnu panonskJ, ali kuja prelazi
i južno od Sa ve i Dunava, javlj a se Če rn avod a III • Boleras kultura, koja se pod
pritiskom novih popula cija širi od istoka prema za padu. Zahvaljujući svojoj nomad·
skoj komponenti u ekonomi i, pokretljivosti nj enih nosilaca, vrio brzo prekriva
prostor od don jeg Podunavlja do istočnih Alpo i od južne Poljske du ce ntralnog
Balkana. Nalazišta Černavod" III i Bo le ra s kultu re (ove dve kulture či ne jedan
kulturni kompleks) skoncenrrisana su u jugoslovensko Podunnvlje, mach:! kako
pokazuju no va istr<Jživanja p ojedinačno su otkrivena i II centrolnobalkatlskoj zoni
(nalazišta kod Kraguj evca, Svetozareva, Smederevske Palanke, Valjeva i u Bosni).
Po tipu, o na u Podunavlju pripadaju ravniča rskim naseIj iIlla podizanim kraj reka
(Brzo Vrba kud Kuvina, Mostonga koJ Odžaka, gradina na Bosutu kod ŠiJa i dr.).
Izuzetak č in e naselja južno od Save i [lun a vo ud koj ih se neka podižu u brdovitoIll
ambijentu, često na uzvišenim d ominantnim poloZajima (Uradina Likodra u Rad·
jevini) . Nekropole ili pojedinačni grobovi nisu poznati u jugoslovenskom Podu~
navlju, ali na osno vu nekib podataka iz susednih oblasti (Madj arska), u ovoj kulturi
sc napušta tradicionalan način sahranjivanja pokojnika (ravni grobovi, skeletno
sahranjivanje u zgrčeno m puložaju) i pojavljuje sc spaljivanje pokojnika i sa hran.
jivanje u urnama koj e se pola žu u manj e tum ul e . humke {nekrupola Pilismarot u
Madjarskoj }.
Materijalna kultura, posebno keramički nalazi, znatnu se razlikuju od Pl. XIV-XV
o blika koji su karak terisa li kulture ranog eneolita. Sad a Sl' pojavljuju šolje luk·
196 The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans
ovičastog oh lika ukrašene plitkim kal1l'lurama, velike ,dele, plitki ranjiri - poklopci,
PL XIV, 4 lonci ukraša va ni p!n sr ičnim trakama, vdike dubok e posude ir. I I ornalllcllrici s reću
St' novi rllotivi i nove rel1nikc ukr;]šav<Jnja Što stilu ove kulture dajL' specifičan
k'Haktl::'r. Duboki br;)zdasri urezi, motiv rihlje kosti izveden II tck prosLLšcnu glinu
i plitke kan el ure čine, uz nahrojZlIll' ohlikc! osn ovne odlike novog stilskog izraza
nepoznatog II kulturama ran()g eneoi ira lt sfcJnj()j i jug() i stočm)j Evro pi. T(J jl' rDZi(lg
što se II ge nt'zi ove kulturc! st rani e le menti uzimaju kao osnovna ()drL'cinic;) pri
formirnnju njenug stila.
Sa · ČA:mavoda III i Bo icras kulturom za počinje nov c iklus u razvoju
eneolitskih kultur;) na pros toru jugoslove nskog Podunavlja i II oblastima koj e mu
gravi rirnju. lhd ~nsk:.l kultura koja postupnom l' volucijOIll nastaje jz B()iera s os~
novc, zahvata gotovo Isto područjL' kao I njena prethodnica. Čak je i nt1 n itt:'t p rema
s li čnim položajima za podizanje naselja ostao isti. l ' južn{)p('l llonskoj zoni brojna su
ravničarska nasel,ia, slobodno t()[Jllirana, p retežno zet1luničkog ripa u k()jlm ;) St:
boravi nekoliko ::;eZO!la a zatim se iut.: daije. Nomatbki način živom, pojava kola i
ko n ja, učinili su ovu kulturu izuzetno m o hilnolll tako Ja je postignuto jedin stvo
stila nQ velikom pros t ranstvu od Karpata na istoku do AlpQ (do !:lodemkog jezera)
na zapadu i od Mniopoljske 11::1 SeVL'ru J() Save i [)un<Jva na jugu. L' jugoslovenskom
Podunavlju (iako brojna), istražen JI:' reiarivno mali broj naselia ([)o hanovci koJ
Zt:'lllUnZl I Lice kod [ruevika na S rel11 u, Peril'z i Rimski ;Zlnčt.:vi u Bačko.i, Vučedo!,
Sarva; i !:lei i Manastir kod Osij eka), ali nam un;] pružaju dosta podataka za
rekonstrukciju n ačinn života imate rijnin e kulturl'.
Posle promena h)jc Sll Sl' u na čin u sa hranjivanja odigrak kao poslcLi icn
prodo ra ranih stepskih populacija, II hadcnsk()j kulturi, ponovo srećemo klasičan
ritllal, nasiceljen iz neolitskih i ranih e neolitskih kultura - sahranjivanje pokojnika
u zgrčeno m po ložaju ([)obanovci, Vučedol, Bogojevo, Gomolnva). Medjutim,
upo redo sa njim jn vlja Sl' i nov način, sahranjivanJl' poJ h umka ma Ll kojima Sl'
nalaze urnl' sa spaljl:'l1lm kostlmn pukojnika, što St' bar jL'dnim ddorn pOVeZUll.' sa
stepskim načinom sahranjivanp (Aradianska humka kod Kikinde). Biritllaln()st u
sahranj ivanju kamktersitika je i badenske kultu re u Madjarskoj , gde St' često i na
istim nek ropolama pojavljuje spaljivanje pokOjnika iskeletnu sahranjivan,ic.
PI. XVI. 1· 6 I I mate rijalnoj kulturi badensk ih nalazišta nastavlja se dalji razvoj Boleros
stila: šolje sa lukovičastim recipi ent{)rn posmju vodeća forma, zdele se ukr;]šavaju
motivom urezane zvezde, nn uubljirn pos udam a nalazi se ornamen t riblje kosti itd .
Uporedo sa ovim ohl icima inasledj e nom o rn nmentikolll Černav()(.in III ~ Bolems
stila na keramici počinj e da Se upotrebljava bda inkrustacija a koJ o blika Se
PI. XVI I. 5 pojavljuju e1ipsoidne posude (Fischbutte), am/l lfe i čitav n iz novih varipnara kod
pehara i šolja čija drška nQdvisuje ohod suda. l ; proizvodnji bakarnih predmeta
takodje se pojavljuju novi oblici m edju kojima su karakterist i čne ve like masivne
krstaste sekirL' i sekirc sn jednim sečivo ln i Cl'v<lstim uoua[kom. OVt· stilskl'
karakter istike pokazuju da se razvoj oblika pos uda iz prethodn e ku lt ure nastav lja
i kroz hĐdcnski stH; onc sc usavršnvaju, pOJavljUJU Ilovi nli St' mkoJj e napuštaju
PI. III neki e le m enti karakteristični za stariji period. T ako se na primer antropomorfna
Fig.45
?ummary 197
bo staništa (Vindjij", Velika pećina u Višnjici) ukazujl' na polun omad sku kom-
ponentu II njenoj ekonomici.
POZNI ENEO LIT centralnog i istoč n og dela Balkanskog Po luostrva,
posebno Pod una vl.ia , uhcležen jl' pre svega !lovim, snažnim prodorom stepskih
populacija, nosilac:J kulrure jamnih grobova (oker grobovi), a odmah zatim i
ekspanzijom vučedolske kulture no jug, zapad i istok, OV:Jj vremen ski period u
eneolitu je , za razliku relativno mirne evolucije na relaciji lIoleraz- Bad e n -Kostolac
kul tuf<]) izuzetno (urhuil-nmtl, praćen čl'st im migracionim pokretima, integr:J~
cionim i ciezintcgracionim procesima. Nesumnjivo J3 jl' II istočnin) ohlastima na šc
zenllje prodor nosilaca jmnl1t: kulture imao posehan značaj ZJ cl'iukup<ln kasniji
kulturni r:Jzvoj šireg područja Karparokog basena i oblasti kojl' mu grovitiraju,
Nedosrawk I1nseija ove kulture ()bjašnjava SL' izrazito nornn dskorn komp<lIlen()lll
u njenoj ekonomici , Medjutim, veliki broj registrovonih tumula (humki) na po-
d ručju rnacijJfSkog i srpskog Put isja , Ll ju.~osl()vens k()m Po<..iun;)vlju i na ccntrJln (l~
balkansko m tlu (njihov broj iznosi više hiljad;)) ukazuje nn brojno prisustvo nosilaca
kulture u ovim ohlasrirll;J . L' Vojvodini je is tr;J živano desetak tU l1lu!n ovog tipa i
svi su dali sigurne podatke o njihovorn srepskom k;)rakteru, počev od nClčina
sahranjivanja (polaganje pokojnika nCl ;)suru, posipanjL: c rvenom hojom - okerom,
fig.42 drven;) konstrukcija Iznad rak~, nasipanje tumu!n), do priloga koji Se nalaze uz
pokojnika (zlatni i srebrni uvojci Z;] kosu) . Posebno su važni tumu!i ~ humke
iskopavani kod Pančeva (Vojlovica, Ja buka), Vršea (Vlajkovoe, Vatin, l'ljma) i
fig.34 Pe rieza (Batka), koji sU dali mačajne pod:Jtkc' o ovom fenomenu II ~ nl'()litll
jugoslovenskog Podunavlja, Veliko humka Jahuko kod Pančeva (I, o ko 40 m,) bila
je n asuta izn:JJ naselja kostn!ačkL' kulture tako Ja je raka stepskog groha prohila
osnovu jedne kuće sa koswlačkol1l keramikom, l\a ovaj način dubijen je značajan
poci;)tak () vn..:mcnu prodora stepskih naroda u ove oblasti, odnosno da Sl' hUlukl'
o vog tipa javljaju krajem kustolačke kulture (oko 2300 god,), Sličnu situaciju
srećemo i na humkama kod Perlcza sa mu što iL' ovciL: humk;) (Pašica hurn ka)
Map.2 Z;:Jsip;)n;) sa zemljom li kojoj su bili fragmenti badenske keramike.
Prodor stcpskih kultura nije u svim oblastima naše zemlje prekinuo ra zvoj
autohtnonih kultura. LJ srernsk()~::;lavonskoj zoni, na osnllvama kos[oiačkog stila
formira se vri" znaČJjna vučed"lska kultura, O na Će ostat i dominantna pojava kroz
ceo po zni eneolit na prostoru oJ Slovačke ll;) severu, UO jadranske obale na jugu,
i oe! Karpata na istOku e!o Alpa n:J zapadu, Zahvatajući ova ko veliko prostranstvo
formirale su se brojne loka lne grupe i kulture kOjl', zahvaljujući lI1icijalnom stilskom
jedinstvu čin e vučedolski kulturni kompleks. Medjutim, kaJa se govori o čistoj
vučedol skoj kulturi, obično Se pod tlm podrazumev;J njena pojava u srcmsk(l~sla
vonskoj oblasti, a zatim i na području severne Bosne i Central n e S rbije , Zastupljena
su dva osnovna tipa naselja: jedna pouizar1d na visokim IL-snim obaiama Dunava,
Save, Drave (Svaraš, Vučedol, llelegiš, Gomolava) i druga koja se nalaze južno u
brdovitim predelima Bosne i Srbij e a koja imaju grad inski karakter (Debelo brdo i
delovi u Rosni, Jasik i Djurdjevo kod Kraguj evca) , Izuzetak ud pravila čine n"scij a
podizana u pećinama (HrustovaČJ u Bosn i na pL), Ono što karoktcrište vel iki broj
vučedolski h naselja tO je njihov u izvesnoj llle ri i odbrom beni karakter. (jradac u
?_IJmmar; 199
Vučedolu, Šnnčine u Belegišu ili Sarvaš kod Osij eb imaju razvijen j<Jrtiilbcioni
sistem: jednostruki ili uvustruki rovovi, pzll is8d e i sl. l itvrdjeni knfnktL'r ima ju i
vučedolska naselja na pod r učju l10Sl1L' i Srbije što sve ukazuj e na prisustvo str;)nih
po pulacija u neposredno m susedstvu i no potrebu podizanja hezhcdnih nnse lja _
Kod sahranjivanja pokojnika, u vučedolskoj kulturi istovrem e no se po-
jnvljuje incine racija i inhumnc ijn pokojnika _ Skdetn() sahrnnjivnnj e wdržava u
osnovi odlike rnn ijih kultura ovog područja ali se pojnvlj uju i novi oh li ci: dvojno
sahranjivanje ili sahranjivzlIlje cele porodice. LJ Vučedolu SLI na pr. zastupljenl' Sv e
tri vrste skclL'tll og sahrnnjivnnjJ ~ pojt'dinJčnog, dvo jnog i grupnog S()ilr8lljiva njJ .
l iz tO, ka o jedna spec i fičnost Ilasiedjena iz hZldcl1ske kultu re sreće se i sahranjivanje
životinja, Tirgrjber,i . Sn drugL' strane l1<.1roči[o II i stočnim o blastima vučedols ke
kulture pojavljuje Se spaljivanje pokojnikn i sahra njivanj e pod humka m a _ Kod
Batajn ice i Vojke iskopavana su dva vučedolska tum ula u č ij e m su sc središru
n alaz ile urne sa spalj e nim kostima pokojn ikn a na područjujužnog dda rumunsk og
Banata, nedaleko od Dunava, o tkopavano je kod Moldova Vechc ne ko liko
vučedolskih rumul8 sa urnal1lJ l k8ll1 ell()m kalonnn. Ove odlikl' s<Jhranjiva nj3 II
vučedo I sknj kulturi pok8zuju da SLl promene II naj()st:rlj ivijoj i naj konzcrvarivnijoj
man ifestaciji praisto rij skog J r u~ tva - način u snhranj ivanja - bil e spo re . Postepe no
se napuštao tradicionalni na či n sahranj ivanja na račun n ovih o blib_ PI. XXVI-XXV II. 1-3
Ke ramička proizvodnja u vučeclolskoj ku lturi predsrnv lj a najviši dom e t
kako li razn ovrsnosti oblika rako i II načinu ukrašavanja . Poste br;:lZdastog urezi . .
va n ja koje je prih vatila iz kosrolačh' kulture, svc se češće pojavljuje uubore z,
dubljene (rovašene) po vršine >uda J" b i Sl' U uduhljenja stnvlja li veći n anosi bell'
mase. Kontrast izm edju crne uglačane po vršine suda i bele inkrustaci je dosti," o je PI. XXVIII -XXXII
visok es tetski e fekat. Raznov rsnost mo ti\';) mk udj l: Josti žc svoj I1Jjviši stepen:
ko ncen tr i čni krugovi, llfe Z;)ni rrougiuvi, rombo vi i k\,adr;:I[], : ve:de i elipse. S\'j ti
geometrijski mo tivi izvode Sl' II brOj nim varijant8ma i \'ari jete tima. t -kraša vaju Sl'
ča k i površine suda koje nisu vidlji veot\:Z1 :delam Zl, pch,:ml11J, ZlmforamZl, n eOblČI1l111
predlne6 ma verovatno kuinlt' namellC, na teraknta ma i zoornotfm1l1 tlgur<1ll18
ukrašava se maksi111n lno mog uća površina. Kod p!irkih pch:Jra na no zi , ukraš<Jvi.1
se i unutrašnjost suda. Sve ovo čini lb se vučc do lska keramika srrwtro jeclin~
stvenom pojavom po bogatsrvu llkrašnvanja nL'dostignuta u pra is torijskim kul -
turama srednje i jugoistočne Evrope .
Iz svog;) matičnog p()dručja, Srema i Slavonije vučedol s ka kultura Sl~
proširiln vrlo hrzo II suseJne oblasti: najpre II Barnnju (Zok u Macijarskoj), zatim
na područje Ljubljanskog barja (lg I, II) .~cie je na išla na vrlo pogodno rl o za da lji
razvoj, zatim II Bosnu i Srhiju i najzad u rumunski Banat i na jZlcimnsku ubalu.
ZZlhv;) t ajući ovako veliku područje sa heterogenim '-iupstratolll, udaljujuć i st' od
matičnog jezgra i primarnug stil skog izra!;), II iZ1l1enjcni m uslovima vrlo hrzo je došle )
do ras pada velikog vučedolskog ko mple ksa i d u t<>fIniranjn n o vih kultura koje Će
poslužiti kao osnov za razvoj grup" i stil o va ranog hronza n og doba . I I sre msko -sla-
vons kom pod r učju i u delu južne Macljarske nastaje vinkovačko (Vinkovci-So-
mogyvar) kulrura ; na zapadu u Sloveniji , a delom i na jadranskoj obali fo rmira se
ljubljanska kultura; na srednjem i južnom Jadranu grupa T ivm-Rubcž; na severu LI
200 The Eneol ithi c cultures of Central and We st Balkan s
srednjoj i severnoj Madjarskoj, zatim u Slovačk oj grupe tipa Mako, Kos i hy-(~aka i
još ne ke va rijal1tt2 . One II hrono \()škot11 pogledu već pripadaju [JI1<H11 hr()l1 zanom
dobu, ali po svojoj genezi, stilski m odlikam a i opštim karnkte ristikama ma terij alne
i d uhovne kulture o ne su poslednji refleb hiljadugodišnjeg eneolitskog razvoj a na
području cent ra lnog i zapadnog Balkana koji po č inj e kraj em č e tvrtog i traj e sve do
početka drugog milenija oko 1900/ 1800 godine pre n.e.
THE LIST OF PLATES
PLATE II Fig. l-R -- Casts fl)r copper ruols and caster'> pot (8 ).
Sarvaš (1,2,4); Vučedol· Gradac (3); V inkovci . Tržni ca
(5); De belo Brdo Ik'a r Sarajevo (6, 8); Ljublj ansko Barje
(7). R · 1: 2 (5·8); 1:4 (1-4) .
PLATE III Fig. 1-7 -- Coppe r axes. Bečm en l1<'a r Zem un (1,2,5)
anJ Pl oč nik nea r Prokuplj e (3,4,6,7). IZ - 1:2 (2·7);
1:4 (l).
PLATE IV Fig. l a-e -- Copper axe from Osij e k. R • 1:2 (b, c) and
1:4 (a).
PLATE VII Fig. l-R -- The pottery and go lden find from the gra ves
of the BoJrogke rczstur c ulture . Nosa nea r S ubotica (1.6)
and Vinča (7·8). l\ . 1:2 (3.6) ; 1:4 (l, 2).
PLATE VIII Fig. l-R -- C;rav.: finds from Vajska, Hunyodi . Vojska
c ulture. Gra ve 1(3,6, 7); grave 2 (5); grave 5 (1,2,4,8).
Different ratios.
PLATE Xl Fig. ]·9·· Bubanj , Salcuta ' Krivodol complex, Loo mor,
phic \vare, the lid ~lIlJ tilt' f1int, bOllt' and copper impk-,
ments fro m Kov il ovo (l), Kriv elj (2,4), H isar (3),
Kladovu (5,9), Gadimije (6, 7) and Zlotska Pećina (8) .
R, 1:2 (1,3,5,7,9); 1:4 (2,6).
PLATE XlII Fig. ]·6 -- Stcppe tlnds' within the site s of the Bubanj,
Salcuta • Kri voJol culture trom Šuple vec (l), th e hoard
fro m Klad ovo (2), Crnobuki (3, 5), Zimska Peć ina (4)
and individual tlnding from Srps ki Krstur (6). R, l: l (I):
1:2(2,6) .
PLATE XIV Fig. ]·7 -- The potre ry of the Cerna voda III c ulture from
Brza Vrba near Kovi n. R, 1:2 (5); 1:4 (l-4, 6); l: 10 (7) .
PLATE XVI Fig. ]·6 -- T he potrery Df the carly phase of the Baden
culture (the trzmsition between the Bole-raz, Cernav()cb
III anci the !laden cu lture) from Mostonga I , De ronj e (l,
4,6). Beli Manastir (2) and Vučedo l, Cradac (3, 5).
Different ra tios.
PLATE XVIII Fig, 1·9 " The pot te ry of the classical phase of th c Baden
culture from Sarvaš (2, 4), Ar"danska Humka (gr. 1,6),
V"
Gomola ne ar Hrt kovci (3), Beli Manastir, Ciglana (5,
8) and Vučedol (7,9). R, 1:2 (2,4,7 ,9 ); 1:4 (1,3,5,
6).
The list of pla~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 203
PLATE XIX Fig. 1-7 -- The pottery (l-3) ami the allthropomorphic
sculpture (4-7) trom Vinča - Belo Brdo. The ca rl y phase
ofthc Baden culture. R- 1:1 (4,7); 1:2 (6); 1:4 (1·3).
PLATE XXI Fig. 1-7 -- The pottery of the Kostolac culture from
(;omoinv" (1,4·7). Vučedol·C;radac (2) and O strikovac
near Jagodina (3). Diffe rent ratios.
PLATE XXII Fig. 1#10 " Potrl:ry <l the K()st(J lac culture (rorn Sremski
Karlovci (the hoard or the pit) . R - 1:4 (1-8); 1:6 (9-10).
PLATE XXIII Fig. 1-7 -- I'otte ry of the Kustolac culture from Pivni ca
near Odžaci . Bosnia. rz · 1:4.
PLATE XXIV Fig. 1-'; -- Pottery of thc' Cototeni culture fmm Zlots ka
Peć i na (I, 3), (;Iadni ce near Grabnica (2) and
Kl okočevac near Oonji Milanova c (4, 5). R· 1:2; 1:4 (l ,
4,5).
PLATE XXV Fig. 1-8 -- The mixture of the Kostolac and Cocofeni style
on sites in East Se rbia: K lokočevac (1.3,5,6) and Krivelj
near Bor (4, 7, 8). rz· 1:1 (6); 1:2 (1,2, 3, 4,5,7,8) .
PLATE XXVII Fig. 1-6 -- TI,e '[nina' sha pes of the ea rly and classical
phase of the Vučedol culrur,' {rom llclegiš. Ša n č i11l' (I),
Gomolava (2. 4). Sarvaš· Vlastelinski Breg (3) and
Vinkovci· Tržnica (5,6). Oifre rent ratios.
PLATE XXVIII Fig. 1·4 oo The punery of the classical phase of the
Vučedol c ulture (phase B according to S. Oimitrij ević)
frorn site CjmJac in Vučedol. Differl'nr ratios.
PLATE XXIX Fig. 1-4 Ponery uf the classical phase of the Vučedo l
oo
PLATE XXX Fig. 1-4 -- Deco roted por tery of the cbssical ph ose (B· I ,
2) according to 5. Dimi t rij ev i ć) of the Vučed o l cultu re
from Sarvaš (I, 3, 4) and Vinkovci (2).
PLATE XXXI Fig. 1·7 -- Pottery and rhe altar of the 'haroq ue ' phase of
t he Vučedol culture (B.2) fro m 5arva š (1·5 ), Batajn ica
(um fro m th e tumulus; figo 6) ami Vu čedo l · Vinogrodi
Streim (7) . Different rotios.
PLATE XXXII Fig. )·6 -- ['ottery of the late phose of thc Vučedo l cu lture
(B·2/c according to 5. lJ i mi t rij ,'v i ć) fro m V inkovci .
Zvijezda (I), Vinkovci · T rž n ico (2,3 ) , O patovac (4) ,
IJraganlug . Cigleni k (5) and Sotin (6). Di ffe ren t ratios.
PLATE XXXIll Fig. 1·9 -- Pottery of thc Wes t· Bosnian phose of the
Vučedo l culture from Hr usrov ača (1 .3,6, 8) and Zecovi
near Prij edor (4, 5, 7,9). rz · 1:2 (1.3,6,8,9); 1:4 (4, 5,
7)
PLATE XXXIV Fig, 1·2 -- The objeccso( cult from Vuč edol· Gradac ('the
pigeon' and tb e pedestal or altar) . The classica l pbase of
the Vučedo l culture. Different rat ins.
PLATE XXXV Fig. 1·11 -- Pottery and anthropomotp bic sc ulp t ure of
tbc earl y phase of the Lasinja culture from: Vis· Motiran
neor IJoboj ( 1.3,7,8 ), Ljubljansko Bot je • Resnikuv
Preko p (4,9), Nuvosei ci . Paš njak (5, 6 ) and Ajdovska
Ja mo (10) . rz· 1:2 (2, 3, 5· 7, II); 1: 4 ( I, 4. 8, 9, 10).
PLATE XXXVI Fig, 1.8 -- Po tte ry of t he late ph ase of the Losinj a cu lture
fro m sites: Pav lo vac near Križevac ( I), Gradac· Pašnjak
(2-4) ond j akš ić (5,6,8) near Slavon ska Požega and Vis
. Modran (7). rz · 1:2 (1-4) ; 1:4 (5.8 ).
PLATE XXXVII Fig. 1·10 .. Pot tery of the Retz.Gaj ary culture . Višnjica
ty pe acco rding tu S. Di m it r ijevi ć . fro m sites Do nja V oća
neat Vindija (I ) and Velika Pećina near Višnjica (2. 10) .
R · 1: 2 (I.IO) .
PLATE XXXVIII Fig. 1·6 .. ['ot te ry of tht' !\etz .('ajary culwre, Ke vdc rc·
Htnjevoc type accordi ng to S. Di m itrij e v i ć . Site I-I rnj cvoc
. Brdo neo r Kutjevo (1·6). R · I: I.
PLATE XXXIX Fig. 1·7 .. Pottery and sculpture (4) of west (East A lpine)
variant of the Vučed o l culrure from Ljuhljansko Ba rje ·
19 (I ·7). R . 1:2 (1,3.6 ) ; 1:4 (2, 7).
rhelist or plates_ 20 5
PLATE XL Fig. 1-1' ·· llm,," (1.3), t1int (6·3), corpe r (5) onel c10y (4)
impleme nts fr(Jm 19 ill Liuhijansko Borjl' . West· (Ea st
Alpine) va riarn ofthL' Vuče·d,, 1 c lIILurL'.lZ· I: I (6-8), 1:2
( I ·5).
PLATE XLI Fi~. 1-1' .. 1\)ttL' ry of t hL' fina l rho sc (JI' the V učeclL) 1
c ult u re ct )mple x . Ljubljanska culrure fro m 19 (lg II
according to p, Ko rošec) . R· 1:2 (1,3-8); 1:4 (2).
PLATE XLIII Fig. 1-8 •. POlIe rI' of rhe 1'1118 1 Eneolithic of th e Adriatic
zunL:. Adriatic type of thL' Ljubljansko c ulture occording
to S , Oillli t rij e vi ć. Sitl'S: Grapčcva Špilja (l· 5, 8) allli
T relanj Špiljanea r Šibeni k (6, 7), Oifte re nt ratios ,
,"
..
.~
. ir·
; .;.;J
,
>,~
> u
>',":i' f
, ~,
CD
2
4 5 6
1 2
-,
-'----J
L-,-------J
('---~( _.:J
Plate IV -- Copper ax from Osijek
-- f,!~ ___-
fl
II
- o.
~5 6
Plate VIII -- Grave goods from the graves of the Huniady-Vajska culture (Vajska)
l
\ ,
I ~,
! 1\
I !!
,J
i _/
~
.,
.~
/
__ l
1
(\
\
\
\
\
~"..
'1 -
Plate X -- Pottery and the 'Ioom weigh' of the Bubanj - Salcuta - Krivodol culture
Jm11nJ 10POAIJ){ - e1nJles - fueq ns J41 JO
SWJWJldwl 1U 1U pue JJddOJ 'Juoq 'A.JJ11Od J41 -- IX J1eld
B J,
.- -
o
•
1
2
Pla te XIV oo Pottery of the Cernavoda III culture from Brza Vrba
~
!
rf\
,
\\
"~-'----
"-' - .
II
"" I
i"ffit'~.
(~~~j;,,,,,.
f.<'::-~-\":" .•.•. ~ -- ~";;;'i&%
. . ...c.,',.'- ._ . •
,
,, , , ,
~-
3
/,....,,-~ - ~
6 7
'\
I
I
I
\
\
\'
Plate XVIII -- Ceramic ware of the classical phase of the Baden cultu re
I
,\ 9
f
I I
U
2
If-.~.
, ~,
f
_,- f)
""
fl
/
Plate XXII -- Pottery of the Kostolac culture from the deposit in Sremski Karlovci
fc:~
~\\
\,
"-
1 2
,-
I.
(j
5
\\ \:
\\
} j
I :
3
1
~ "
--.~
I __________--~~~~~~~~~~~================~==~==~
.'
Oo::..;
Plate XXVII -- Shapes of the 'teri na' pottery of the early (I -3 ) and classical pha se
of the Vučedol culture
4
~" -
"' :00'
Plate XXXIV -- The objects of cul t of t he Vučedo l cult ure from V u čedo l
6
B
L
17
3
Pl ate XXXVI -- Pottery of the late phase of the Lasi nja culture
2
, "
'-- - -- - - - - --_ /
Plate XLII -- Pottery of the early and the middle Eneolithic on the Adrla Uc coasr
9
CIP - Katalogizacija u publikaciji
Narodna biblioteka Srbije
903(497. 1)"636"
TASIĆ, Nikola
Eneolithic Cultures of Central and West Balkans I Nikola Tasić , [English translation
Ivana Đorđević. Nenad Task]. - Belgrade : » Draganić« : InstinIte for Balkan Studies
Serbian Academy of Sciences an d ,\rts, 1995 (Belgrade , Kultura). - 248 pp. III. 24
cm. - (Special Edition I Institute fo r Balkan Studies Serbian Academy of Sciences and
Arts: No 61) (Series Heritage » Draganić«)
r-