Salz und Gold: die Rolle des Salzes im prähistorischen Europa Salt and Gold: The Role of Salt in Prehistoric Europe 1 .

Bulgarien 30 September – 4 October 2010 Herausgegeben von Vassil Nikolov und Krum Bacvarov Provadia • Veliko Tarnovo 2012 2 .Salz und Gold: die Rolle des Salzes im prähistorischen Europa Akten der internationaler Fachtagung (Humboldt-Kolleg) in Provadia.

Bulgaria 30 September – 4 October 2010 Edited by Vassil Nikolov and Krum Bacvarov Provadia • Veliko Tarnovo 2012 3 .Salt and Gold: The Role of Salt in Prehistoric Europe Proceedings of the International Symposium (Humboldt-Kolleg) in Provadia.

) © Verlag Faber.Gedruckt mit Unterstützung der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung Bonn. Gassia Artin (Französisch) Grafikdesign: Elka Anastasova © Vassil Nikolov. Germany Sprachredaktion: Krum Bacvarov (Englisch). Tabea Malter (Deutsch). Deutschland Printed with the support of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Bonn. Krum Bacvarov (Hrsg. Veliko Tarnovo ISBN 978-954-400-695-2 4 .

....... 155 Valeriu Cavruc.....Inhalt / Contens List of Contributors ....... 11 Olivier Weller La production chalcolithique du sel à Provadia-Solnitsata : de la technologie céramique aux implications socio-économiques ........................ 109 Krum Bacvarov Saltmaking and boundaries: Within and Without at Provadia-Solnitsata .... 143 Marius Alexianu................................... Rumänien ................. 103 Petar Leshtakov The late Chalcolithic at Provadia-Solnitsata in the context of the West Black Sea Coast ........................................ 7 Vorwort der Herausgeber / Editorial .......... early complex society................................................ Robin Brigand...... 123 Dan Monah L’approvisionnement en sel des tribus chalcolithiques sédentaires et des tribus des steppes du Nord de la Mer Noire ............................... economical and social implications .............................. 89 Margarita Lyuncheva Tell Provadia-Solnitsata: The late Neolithic Karanovo III-IV period in the West Black Sea Coast context ................................................................. 93 Viktoria Petrova Tell Provadia-Solnitsata: the Middle Chalcolithic layer in the context of the cultural development of the Western Black Sea area .................................... 67 Hristo Etropolski Technology of salt extraction by means of a Late Neolithic furnace from Provadia-Solnitsata .......................................................................... Antony Harding Prehistoric production and exchange of salt in the Carpathian-Danube Region .............................................................. 173 5 ......................................................... Olivier Weller........................................ 127 Ion Sandu....................................... Roxana-Gabriela Curca Ethnoarchäologische Forschungen zu den Salzwasserquellen der moldauischen Vorkarpaten........... Olivier Weller............................................................. urbanization: Provadia-Solnitsata (5500-4200 BC) ........ 119 Desislava Takorova Long distance contacts in later prehistory: ecological.......... Marius Alexianu Analyses archéométriques sur les moules à sel chalcolithiques de l’est de la Roumanie . 9 Vassil Nikolov Salt..........................................

................................................................... 277 Peter Attema.................... 313 Valeri Yotov Bulgarian control over the Salt Road in Transylvania during the 9th century: The archaeological evidence ..... Ángel L........... 300 Isabella Tsigarida Bereiche der zentralen Einflussnahme auf Salz im Römischen Reich am Beispiel der Provinz Dakien ........................................ 219 Thomas Saile Salt in the Neolithic of Central Europe: production and distribution ................................................................... 349 6 .. Christo Kolev Sodium Chloride: food and poison ........................................Urgeschichte und Gegenwart einer bedeutenden Substanz .... Jesús del Val-Recio.. 259 Martin Hees Die Bedeutung der vorgeschichtlichen Salzgewinnung in Südwestdeutschland ...... Luca Alessandri Salt production on the Tyrrhenian coast in South Lazio (Italy) during the Late Bronze Age: its significance for understanding contemporary society .. 333 Mariana Mitewa...............wirtschaftsarchäologische Betrachtung und neue Daten ................Distribution ..................... 341 Petia Penkova Salt as a medicine for gold ..... 201 Nenad Tasic New evidence on salt use in the Neolithic of Southeast Europe .................................... Spain) in prehistoric times ........... 213 Slavisa Peric Die neolithischen Siedlungen in der mittleren Morava-Ebene und die Slatina-Toponymie .......... F.................................. 239 Thomas Stöllner Prähistorischer Steinsalzbergbau .............. Javier Abarquero-Moras.................... 287 Elisa Guerra-Doce..................... Ionut Tutulescu Zum Salz im Nordosten Olteniens (Rumänien) in der Vorgeschichte bis ins Mittelalter....................................................... Palomino-Lázaro Salt production at the Villafáfila Lake Complex (Zamora.....................Symbolik ........................ 323 Evgeny Golovinsky Das Kochsalz ..................... 345 Anna Coleva-Dimitrova Das Salz in der bulgarischen Mikrotoponymie ....................... 225 Albrecht Jockenhövel Bronzezeitliche Sole in Mitteldeutschland: Gewinnung ............................................................................................. Germán Delibes-de Castro.......................................................................................Cristian Schuster............... Eine Einführung .............................

social relations and means for social reproduction (for a detailed consideration of the phenomenon of enclosing in prehistory. wall or various combinations between them. they emphasize their identity which finds expression. Nikolov & K. palisade. beside all other things. This division has a ritual aspect as well. see Harding 2006). On the other hand. The inhabited area in the later Neolithic – the time of and directly after the foundation of a village which would evolve in the following centuries into a complex settlement featuring layout and enclosures that have been carefully planned for and executed – was not enclosed. The space at an ancient site with so complicated life story as Provadia-Solnitsata underwent dynamic development that could be considered in the context of economic and social processes as well as of cosmological and religious changes. Moreover. at least according to the evidence of the excavation thus far1. 2012. Enclosing defines the time as well as the space characteristics of this border. enclosures have a single common role: they determine the differentiation of inner and outer space. had chosen a natural elevated ground to make their new home thus separating it from the natural and cultural environment. not only physically but also socially. one that is related to the individual’s transitions between these spaces – crossing the border. and those within the enclosure (‘we’) distinguish themselves from the other without (‘they’). 119 . The bigger the investment of efforts and time. the cosmological opposition. which is the result of this social differentiation. This crossing physically follows from the enclosure’s type.V. but the first settlers at Provadia. However. which defines the chronological categories of ‘now’ and ‘after’. But whatever their forms and functions. Saltmaking and boundaries: Within and Without at Provadia-Solnitsata Krum Bacvarov Looking for the reason for enclosing a given space. Enclosing is a way for differentiating space. The representation of reality in the form of enclosure per se is an expression of common efforts and social organization. and the complexity of the enclosing pattern determines to a certain degree how much the people ‘inside’ distinguish themselves from those ‘outside’ (see the historiographical review in Chapman. Gaydarska 2006). who came from the plains of Thrace. saltmaking at this early stage was at least partially enclosed within the real/symbolic settlement boundaries and even within the 1 This paper was completed before the 2011 season at Provadia-Solnitsata and does not include the spectacular results of the latest excavation. they allow the community to build its social identity through the very act of construction. in common history. the more important become the social practices that those within the enclosed space are involved in. even a simple consideration of the enclosed spaces in later prehistory shows that enclosures are not uniform and have different functions. one can give various answers with different degree of complexity and probability. might find a spatial expression in the complex enclosing pattern connecting it with the environment or with the cardinal points that represent part of the established social order. Salz und Gold: die Rolle des Salzes im prähistorischen Europa / Salt and Gold: The Role of Salt in Prehistoric Europe. Its crossing comes down as much to the complex physical act as it does to the social time that had been taken by the ritual itself. Provadia & Veliko Tarnovo. whether a rampart. Bacvarov (eds). Social engagement with the enclosing strengthens the significance of the ritual border crossing and makes the individual’s acts inseparable of the preceding acts of the community (Bourdieu 1991). 119-122.

up to the beginning of the fifth millennium BC but no evidence has been provided so far on an early Chalcolithic production. see Николов 2008 and Nikolov. a wall was erected consisting of a stone wall made of huge rocks and a palisade of densely spaced and high oak trunks.boundaries of village buildings. These ovens were located in buildings within the settlement (for all excavation details. to the prehistoric saltmakers and their community. this complex assemblage consisting of an open (although naturally delimited) settlement and a closed (at least to a certain degree) production type suggests the existence of clearly defined and structured ideas of within and without. beside everything else. which most probably was accessible through two opposite gates. bastions and palisades. which had further emphasized the formative identity characteristics of the settlement community. no such layer has been identified in the excavated area of Tell Provadia-Solnitsata.50 m. The early development of the colonial-type settlement obviously predetermined complex space and identity negotiations as much within Provadia-Solnitsata itself as with the native northeast Bulgarian Neolithic communities. During the middle Chalcolithic. should be considered in relation to the drastic change in the saltmaking technology. this volume). walls. It is located immediately north-northeast of the tell settlement.70 by 1. at least the southeastern of which was flanked by two quadrilateral bastions connected to the palisade by short stone walls. and dimensions along the two axes 1. wide mouth. These are thin-walled bowls with roughly smoothed surface. Now its area seems to be at least 50 ares but in fact it could turn out to be larger. 120 .e. which had bestowed huge social prestige. The ditch and the wall completely enclosed the village and outlined an irregular circle covering an area of about 70 ares. had been enclosed by a complicated system of impressive ditches. social and ritual practices. The brine evaporation was performed on an open fire burning on the pit’s bottom in the spaces between the touching mouth rims of the tubs. A brine evaporation installation was found on the ground floor of a two-level building. and deep biconical body. The technological and economic mechanisms of the Neolithic saltmaking at Provadia-Solnitsata have not yet been satisfactorily explained. and controlled – and therefore dominated over – the surrounding space through various economic. The Chalcolithic enclosure consisted of two major parts. and behind the ditch. It seems that in the next occupation period the main elements of this open-settlement / closedproduction pattern swapped their positions and therefore drastically changed their functions and meaning: saltmaking in the middle Chalcolithic was completely or at least mostly moved out of the settlement’s area which. nor are the social consequences of that specific activity. but without the thinner or thicker base raised above the room floor which was typical of the domestic ovens. however. but it is obvious that beside multiple other factors. Only a small part of the Chalcolithic production site has been uncovered. These were very deep and thick-walled tubs of much larger volume than that of the later Neolithic bowls. It is reasonable to believe that the techno-economic distinction was even more accentuated by a material culture and traditions that differed very much from the northeast Bulgarian Neolithic milieu. the dome ovens were replaced with larger open installations: wide pits in which ceramic vessels of a new type were arranged close to each other. The installation is four-sided. thickly clay-plastered on both sides. The appearance of such a complicated and carefully planned enclosure. 1). A strong earthquake destroyed the bastions but high and thick walls of smaller stones were built behind their remains (fig. i. Brine evaporation in ovens was practiced throughout the later Neolithic. A ditch was dug between the low natural elevation – which the earlier settlement had been founded on and which naturally delimited it – and the surrounding flat landscape. with bulging walls and rounded corners. if not earlier. which had strictly defined space division and access. Salt production during the later Neolithic was carried out by evaporating brine from the Provadia salt springs in thin-walled ceramic bowls specially made for the purpose which were placed into specially built massive dome ovens. The brine evaporation vessels represent a specific ware that was identified for the first time in the later prehistory of the Eastern Balkans. It consists of a solid dome and a thick inner floor.

It is irregular. 1. The inner surface is smoothed.75 m. Only several thin-wall sherds have been uncovered in the pit permitting to date the installation back to the beginning of the late Chalcolithic Varna culture. The liminal space between within and without: the southeastern gate of Tell Provadia-Solnitsata (photo Petar Leshtakov) The central and eastern parts of one of the production pits have been excavated which was subsequently transformed into a dumping area for production remains from the salt production in other similar installations.80 m wide and 5. The ceramic sherds show secondary firing. The mouth diameter of the tubs varies from 30 to 70 cm. The outer surface is rusticated and under the mouth pairs of large conical buttons have been attached. The pit was completely filled with mainly large sherds of very deep and wide thick-walled tubs and a great amount of white wood ash. During the whole evaporation process the fire heated laterally mainly the upper part of the brine in the tubs. This was probably the access way to the production pit. Hard conical salt cakes remained in the tubs which were convenient to transport at long distances. the bottom diameter is about 18-20 cm and their depth is probably 50-80 cm.5 cm. often with considerable advantage of the mouth diameter to that of the bottom. Bearing in mind their height and inverted conical shape. With the fire dying away the temperature dropped down thus creating conditions for salt crystallization. the ovens of the later Neolithic were replaced with much more productive installations.50 m and the maximum width of the excavated part is 5 m. In the southeastern part of the installation. The change in the saltmaking technology by brine evaporation is obvious. These spaces were probably filled with firewood. The maximum pit depth is 1.5 and 2. almost oval in shape. large spaces widening downwards were left between the parts of the vessels under the mouths. 121 .Fig. during the evaporation its level dropped down and so did the level of the fire burning outside.20 m long. The wall thickness varies between 1. a chute of nearly southeast-northwest orientation has been found. Its uncovered part is 3. The deep pottery tubs were probably arranged on the pit’s bottom in such a way that their mouths touched and the periphery vessels touched the pit walls. Its length is about 10. narrowing in its northern part.

Sievers. the reasons for this obvious incongruity could be many: for example. Sheffield. almost no metal items have been uncovered at the site. Venclová (eds). Chapman. as well as the recent occupations of the area. which have to be looked for. S. Whether this was so or not. Праисторически солодобивен център Провадия-Солницата. Moreover. – In: A. 2006. References Николов 2008: В. Разкопки 2005 – 2007 г. Cambridge. The fact that such an impressive enclosure which included construction elements built of stone blocks weighting several tons each. 1991. Does enclosure makes a difference? A view from the Balkans. it is certain that the inhabitants of the inner space also controlled the extensive trade contacts as well as undoubtedly huge for the time sphere of culture and economic influence of the Provadia saltmakers related to their trade expansion. 2008. B. but there are also other factors for this seeming ‘destitution’ hidden behind ‘Cyclopean’ walls. drastically contradicts the true value of the raw material which the Provadia community dominated over. Chapman. Gaydarska. and which had efficiently restricted the access to – and respectively the exit of – the inner space at Provadia-Solnitsata actually enclosed a Chalcolithic settlement that has thus far failed to yield massive architectural remains. N. 122 . Николов (ред. Enclosing and excluding in Bronze Age Europe. – In: A. S. the later disturbances related to the erection of the Thracian tumulus upon the tell. 20-43. And I see this research strategy as an especially important aspect of the future investigation of the life and death of the prehistoric saltmakers of Provadia.). Gaydarska 2006: J. Language and symbolic power. Harding. Harding. Enclosing the past: Inside and Outside in Prehistory (Sheffield Archaeological Monographs. 97-115. 2006. N. during which a considerable part of the prehistoric cultural layer had been completely destroyed. The small areas of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic settlements excavated thus far as well as of the Chalcolithic production area do not give enough evidence to draw detailed conclusions but it is obvious that all these complex and clearly defined spatial oppositions determine strict organization and probably stratification of the social landscape. Of course. Harding 2006: A. 15). Bourdieu 1991: P. София. Bourdieu. 15). Venclová (eds).C. neither copper nor golden ones. nor do we have any finds that can be considered as direct evidence of extensive exchange networks. Sievers. Enclosing the past: Inside and Outside in Prehistory (Sheffield Archaeological Monographs.It is still not known whether the outer production area had also been enclosed or only delimited because the control exercised from within the walled tell settlement could have been sufficient to isolate the production area from any undesired outside forces. Harding. Sheffield.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful