ASOCIAIA ROMN DE ARHEOLOGIE

STUDII DE PREISTORIE 2 / 2003-2004

Editura Mica Valahie Bucureti 2005

ASOCIAIA ROMN DE ARHEOLOGIE

STUDII DE PREISTORIE 2 / 2003-2004

IN HONOREM
Vladimir DUMITRESCU
(19021991)

Editura Mica Valahie Bucureti 2005

ASOCIAIA ROMN DE ARHEOLOGIE

STUDII DE PREISTORIE 2 COLEGIUL DE REDACIE

Redactor ef: Silvia MarinescuBlcu Membri: Ctlin Bem, Constantin Hait, Adrian Blescu, Valentin Radu
Colegiul de redacie nu rspunde de opiniile autorilor, conform cu precizrile din prefaa primului numr. Manuscrisele, crile i revistele pentru schimb, orice coresponden se vor trimite Colegiului de redacie, pe adresa os. Pantelimon 352, sc. C, ap. 85, sect. 2, Bucureti.

Sponsorizri i donaii

G.N.V. Omega Trading SRL

ISBN: 973-7858-07-7 EDITURA MICA VALAHIE Bucureti 2005

MAGISTRULUI

(19021991) Dei ngenunchiat adesea de destin, a trit drept printre contemporanii si.

OMAGIU
Este un act temerar poate chiar condamnabil, din perspectiva unora s rosteti o opinie ntr-un domeniu n care i lipsete pregtirea de specialitate. Cum s evaluezi, s cuprinzi n vorbe o personalitate att de covritoare ca aceea a lui Vladimir Dumitrescu, atunci cnd nu eti familiarizat cu problemele, a cror stpnire perfect i-a adus faima? Dac ndrznesc, totui, s o fac este pentru c, avnd marea ans de a cunoate omul, m-am apropiat i de opera lui i, cu orientarea general n domeniul preistoriei, cptat n anii de facultate de la profesorul Ion Nestor mi-am putut da seama fie i incomplet de valoarea i grandoarea ei. Cele trei veri petrecute, n perioada studeniei, pe antierul de la DinogetiaGarvn m-au introdus n lumea att de specific a arheologilor, descoperindu-mi un fel de istorie secret a arheologiei romneti, cu diviziunile, rivalitile i ierarhiile ei (supuse contestrii). Numele domnului Vladimir Dumitrescu aprea nconjurat de un mare respect, iar arestarea lui n 1952 a provocat un adevrat oc. Cnd, n 1955, a aprut monografia Hbeti, toi tiam c sub numele D. Vlad se ascunde contributorul de baz al volumului, tatl colegei noastre de an, Carmen Dumitrescu. Cunotin direct am fcut, ntr-o var, cnd, dup eliberarea din nchisoare, Vladimir Dumitrescu conducea spturile de la Traian. Personalitatea-i puternic, a spune ceva mprtesc, impunea din prima clip. Intimidat eram proaspt absolvent de facultate, dar ncepusem s-mi percep marile goluri din pregtirea mea abia puteam purta dialogul. Doamna Hortensia Dumitrescu intervenea pentru a nclzi atmosfera. Tema discuiei? Evident, probleme de istorie. ntrebrile interlocutorului meu erau precise, comentariile succinte, dar miezoase. Cunotinele mele asupra neoliticului proveneau, n mare parte, din studiul profesorului Ion Nestor, Probleme ale neoliticului n RPR, citit ca student. Mi-am dat seama c am pit pe un teren minat, total neechipat. M-am retras ruinat. Vladimir Dumitrescu a fost un savant n cel mai nobil neles al cuvntului. Am n vedere mprejurrile anevoioase n care i-a desfurat activitatea, dup instaurarea regimului comunist. Anii de detenie, supravegherea vzut i nevzut a Securitii, nerecunoaterea, la adevrata valoare, a meritelor sale (nu a fost, cum se cuvenea, membru al Academiei Romne) nu l-au mpiedicat s se druiasc, plin de pasiune, arheologiei i s devin cel mai de seam specialist al rii n perioada neo-eneolitic. inut departe de catedr, Vladimir Dumitrescu nu a mai putut s pregteasc generaii tinere de arheologi, cu acel har didactic, dezvluit de ale sale Cursuri universitare de Arheologie Preistoric, editate postum (2002). A fcut-o ns pe antier i la Muzeul Naional de Antichiti cu cei devotai meseriei de arheolog i magistrului lor fr pereche. n spturile arheologice, de multe ori, cioburile se ntregesc i dau un vas de neasemuit frumusee. n tiin, crile i studiile ntregesc portretul autorului, ca om i nvat. Opera lui Vladimir Dumitrescu l venicete n istoria arheologiei romneti, nu numai ca pe un continuator strlucit al lui Vasile Prvan, dar i ca pe o contiin nenfricat. Pe scurt: un model. Florin CONSTANTINIU Membru corespondent al Academiei Romne

SUMAR

Douglass W. BAILEY An Interview with Ian Hodder.................................................................................................. 9 Adina BORONEAN The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem? ..................................................................... 17 Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei (jud. Mehedini) ................................................................................................................... 47 Pavel MIREA Consideraii asupra locuirii Dudeti din sud-vestul Munteniei..................................................... 75 Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpathobalkan area analysis and possible significance........................................................................................... 93 Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca Valea Argovei, dp. Clrai .................................................................................................115 Felicia MONAH, Dan MONAH Les donnes archobotaniques du tell chalcolithique de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru ........................135 Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU Piscul Corniorului. 1945-1946 ..............................................................................................143 Alexandru Mihail Florian TOMESCU Selective pollen destruction in archeological sediments at Grditea Coslogeni (Clrai county, Romania) ................................................................................................................181 Tzvetana POPOVA L'analyse anthracologique et carpologique du site de Madretz (Nova Zagora, Bulgarie) ..............187 Cristian SCHUSTER Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien .............................................................................191 Ctlin DOBRINESCU Noi puncte de vedere privind cronologia bronzului trziu i a nceputului epocii fierului n Dobrogea............................................................................................................................203 Cristian LASCU, Silvia MARINESCUBLCU Noi date privind depuneri rituale n peteri din Mehedini......................................................207

NOTE I DISCUII Adrian DOBO, Mihaela IACOB, Dorel PARASCHIV Descoperiri paleolitice n nordul Dobrogei ..............................................................................215 George TROHANI Obiecte getice din fier descoperite la Cscioarele OstroveL .....................................................221

PREZENTRI DE CARTE Linda ELLIS (editor), Archaeological Method and Theory: An Encyclopaedia, Garland Publishing Inc., New York & London, 2000, 795 pag. (Ctlin NICOLAE) ..................................227 Stefan Karol KOZLOWSKI, Nemrik. An Aceramic Village In Northern Iraq, Swiatowit Supplement Series P: Prehistory and Middle Ages, vol. VIII, Institute of Archaeology,

Warsaw University, Warsaw, 2002, 117 pag., 29 fig., 174 pl., 11 tab. (Irina NICOLAE) ..............228 Frdric GRARD and Laurens THISSEN (editors), The Neolithic of Central Anatolia. Internal Developments and External Relations during the 9th-6th Millennia CAL. BC., Proceedings of the International Central Anatolian Neolithic e-Workshop Table Ronde, Istanbul, 23-24

November 2001: Istanbul 2002, Ege Yayinlari, ISBN 975-807-052-5, Paperback, 348 pages. (Alexandru DRAGOMAN) ......................................................................................................229 Nea IERCOAN, Cultura Tiszapolgr pe teritoriul Romniei, Ed. Muzeului Stmrean, Ed. Nereamiae Napocae, Cluj-Napoca, 2002, 385 pag., 152 pl. (Ctlin NICOLAE) ....................231

N SLUJBA ARHEOLOGIEI Adrian DOBO C. S. NicolescuPlopor i arheologia paleoliticului ................................................................233

ABREVIERI..........................................................................................................................249

An Interview with Ian Hodder Douglass W. BAILEY Introduction Ian Hodder is Dunlevie Family Professor of Cultural and Social Anthropology and was recently CoDirector of the Archaeology Center at Stanford University in California. He is the author of many books and articles that have been at the core of the development of archaeology and, especially, archaeological theory, since the early 1980s. Having taken his PhD from Cambridge University in 1975, Hodder was first a lecturer at Leeds University before taking a position at Cambridge where he taught until 1999, when he moved to Stanford. Excavations include work in the UK and abroad, including his current, long-term project at atalhyk in Turkey. Professor Hodder is a Fellow of the British Academy and currently Chair of Stanfords Department of Cultural and Social Anthropology. Douglass Bailey: You spent a long time in Cambridge and during that time archaeology at Cambridge developed a tremendous global reputation. This was especially the case in the 1980s with your own writing as well as that of a group of graduate students (e.g., the books by Michael Shanks and Chris Tilley). You left Cambridge which is a dedicated Archaeology department to go to Stanford which is a department of Cultural and Social Anthropology (a very good one, it is in the top ten in the US) but which has not been known in the past as a centre for archaeological research and teaching of similar renown as Cambridge. Is there a different context for you for working in the two different places? Can you say a few things about the heavily anthropological side of things in the US, where archaeology is one of four fields of anthropology (cultural/social anthropology, linguistics, biological anthropology)? Ian Hodder: It is very different. One of the major differences is that Cambridge is much more closed and traditional and structured and hierarchical and much more constrained in many ways. This is one of the reasons why I left. But it is also the case that Cambridge has a long tradition of tolerating difference and radical thought. This was across disciplines but also within archaeology. I think of David Clarke in this sense in the late 60s and early 70s. So there is a Cambridge tradition of supporting eccentricity. What happened in the 80s must be seen in that context. It is also important to recognize links between archaeology and anthropology at that time; several of my students who came into the Cambridge Archaeology Department had early training in anthropology. One way of seeing what happened at that time is in terms of archaeology trying to catch up with intellectual debates that were taking place (or had taken place) in social anthropology and in the other disciplines such as sociology as in the work of people like Anthony Giddens. So there was a broadening out, despite the walls that existed in Cambridge. Stanford is a place where I hope we can create a similar sense of excitement. However, it is a completely different scene in terms of attracting students. Stanford is a private university; thus the number of students you attract depends on getting money to support them. Cambridge is more of a public institution where graduate students come with government funding. But the potential at Stanford is tremendous because you have interactions with Classics and other departments. I am now a chair of the Department of Social and Culture Anthropology at Stanford and, thus, it is a new context for me, a very productive one. DWB: One thing that is similar about Stanford and Cambridge is that they are both megauniversities that attract high-level staff and students. In a similar way your current work at atalhyk is a mega-site that attracts people of a similar caliber. Can we talk about the project there and your work? Many excavations of tells involve large-scale open excavations. You are

Senior Lecturer in European Prehistory at Cardiff University (baileydw@cardiff.ac.uk).

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 915.

Douglass W. BAILEY

doing something different at atalhyk. How does what you are doing work? What are the goals of your work at the site? IH: Yes, it is the type of site that attracts very able people and one of the joys for me is that it is very easy to attract a very capable team and, thus, the things that we have been doing are very high-quality and thoughtful. We are working slowly. We have been working since 1993 and have only completely excavated one house; James Mellaart excavated about one house a day and ended up with 250 houses in four excavation seasons. Excavation at atalhyk is a hugely difficult process. What I thought we should be do is work at the small scale so that we could put the larger scale excavated by Mellaart in context. Having done some really small-scale, detailed, work, we are now going to work at a larger scale too, starting in 2003. We are now planning to move on to groups of 20 or 30 houses and their inter-relationships. Doing that is an incredibly complex process; within every building there are up to 100 floors in each phase and there may be four or five phases in a single building. The walls have many minute layers of plastering. Even the middens are incredibly complicated, made up of very, very small lenses. I have never seen or dug a site that has such fine stratigraphy. The floors at other sites are 2030 cm of hard lime-plaster; at atalhyk our floors are one-or two microns thick and it is almost impossible to scrape off a floor level, to work at this detail. A lot of our work is microscopic. A lot of the work is done in the context of micro-morphology and microtechniques. Therefore, the fact that we have been working in a certain way is partly to do with the formation processes. atalhyk is a research project and it has been possible to have large groups of people working on it. In the end there is no real justification for taking a pickaxe and hacking through the levels. In fact, one swing of a mattock would go through 100 years of occupation. It is just very detailed stratigraphy and it is very difficult to justify going through it that quickly. DB: Do you see the atalhyk project with its specialists and goals as a laboratory within which are occurring a series of experiments? Is there a single goal in the end for interpretation? Or are there a series of revealed knowledges? Is it going to be a compact interpretation of a site or is it going to be some sort of organism with lots of tentacle coming out in all directions? IH: I have my own research questions and research aims but I try not to impose them on the project. The project does have lots of tentacles and it is very dispersed; I dont know where the boundaries of it are. In such a context it is very difficult to say, this is the research question and this is the research answer. What I am trying to do is encourage a whole bunch of research questions from different stake-holder groups and different perspectives. DB: You have several different teams at atalhyk; they are like little communities, each doing its own thing. There is a Polish team and one from University of California at Berkeley and in the past there has been a Greek team. Are they all given free reign to attack the problems in their own way, in whatever ways that they think are correct? IH: There are certain limitations and things that they agree on when they start. The main thing is the need to share data. They also agree to use various basic forms for recording data. But given those basic guidelines, the idea of having these different teams is to create different windows onto the site. My idea was that if you look at the site from different perspectives, using different methods and with different assumptions, you will see a different atalhyk. There are radically different ways that people see the site and I feel strongly that this is the correct way to do it. One sees this already from the current publications and it will be even clearer in the next set of publications. One aim is public participation and dissemination of information. Another aim is documenting the documentation. This means that we have to get away from the idea that we are just documenting the past. The aim of all of the diary entries on the atalhyk website is that in 100 years time

10

An Interview with Ian Hodder

people will be able to look not only at the artifacts but also at our record and thus be able to understand what we were doing. DB: At a more general level, do you feel that there is a coherent body of Hodder work, what, if you were an artist one might call the Hodder oeuvre? You have been criticized in the past as a fashion follower, as someone who picks up trendy bits of theory here and there and uses them for your career benefit. Structuralism is one example. Is there a Hodderism? IH: While some artists have oeuvres, there are others who reject that idea and try to create a dissonance between their different sorts of outputs. I feel more attune to that sort of artist. I would try and resist pigeon-holing. There is this idea that one jumps on bandwagons because they are trendy; I think that that is how science works. I dont believe that any of us really work in a vacuum. When I became engaged in Structuralism, I was really excited by it. In the end I recognized that there were problems with it but I still think that it was important for archaeology to take part in the wider debates in the social sciences about structuralism. Im not upset if people think that I am jumping on bandwagons. It is a necessary part of science to engage in contemporary debate. DB: How would you answer a child who asked you to explain what an archaeologist does? IH: The answer reveals part of the problem of archaeology today; archaeology is shifting. Even a short time ago, one would say archaeology is digging up the past and its material remains. Now you would have to say it was more about the relationship between the past and the present. This shift has meant that it is much more difficult to say exactly what an archaeologist is. Ones role depends on what sort of constituency one finds oneself in. One of the really important things is that an archaeologist recognizes the particular constituency for the sake of which he or she works. The constituency is part of an archaeologists job. Archaeologists should be trained to deal with the communities in which they work. The reality of daily life is that archaeologists spend most of their time dealing with people who are alive and in the present. Archaeologists need to recognize that their mode of enquiry is a rather aggressive insertion of techniques into peoples relationships with their pasts. This intrusion is often violent and destructive. It raises a whole series of issues that are not raised by other social disciplines that deal with communities. So if a child asks me what does an archaeologist do, I would have to say that the archaeologist deals with people in their relationships to their pasts. DB: Can you speak a bit about archaeologists going to dig on foreign countries, especially about westerners going to the East to study an Other in an exotic archaeological past? Why dont we find a Bulgarian team digging in the UK or a Polish team digging in the outskirts of Paris. Is there any guilt to be felt by western archaeologists when they go to other places? Or is it enough for an archaeologist to say, it just is what I do and local people will get something from me anyway? IH: There is a clear pattern, though there are beginning to be shifts and one begins to see attempts to get the colonial other to come and talk about monuments and the past in first world countries. I am thinking of Mike Parker Pearson who brought Ramilisonina from the Muse dArt et dArchologie at the Universit dAntananarivo in Madagascar to interpret Stonehenge (see the 1998 article by Parker Pearson and Ramilisona in Antiquity volume 72: 308325 and 855856). That is an exciting thing and I support that and I would like to see that on a larger scale: bringing a whole series of people to come and interpret the colonizers past. But the political structures of power make this very difficult. For archaeologists with very limited funding, as is the case for many archaeologists in other countries, it would be very difficult to carry out something like an excavation at Stonehenge. One of the things that I am very angry about is that most of the funding bodies that finance excavations abroad have no requirements for applicants to consider the potential impact on local communities. I think that this is appalling. You just go in, get your data out and you dont even ask a question about the impact of your work on local communities. I think that at least that

11

Douglass W. BAILEY

should change and that people should be asked to have a proper plan for involving and helping the local communities. DWB: How do you handle these problems at atalhyk? Is there a Turkish team digging at atalhyk? IH: There is not a specific Turkish team although I am negotiating now to have one soon. In the past this has not been possible because of the historical specifics of the site. In the 1960s it became a very negative site with a background of scandals associated with it. Also the Turkish government has limited resources and it prefers to use its own archaeologists for the things that they need to do. They need more excavations. They dont want to use up people on an international project. They take what I think is a good decision. At atalhyk we have a sponsor who pays for Turkish students to go abroad to get specialist training. There are very few Turks who have specialist scientific archaeological training. I see it as one of our roles to help these people get this training and then to come back and train their own students. The whole thing might appear very colonial. I often think, how has what I have done at atalhyk been different for example, has the building of the dig-house differed from building some colonial outpost in the wilderness. It only differs for me in the sense that the motivation is different. I see myself as part of a global community. I dont see the possibility of separating the local from the global. The whole distinction is incorrect. I go to atalhyk as part of a global community and I want to engage with all of the stake-holder groups. I dont, in anyway, see myself as having a dominant position. DWB: Can we speak a little about archaeological interpretation? How should an archaeologist proceed in assessing an interpretation and explanation. Are there better and worse interpretations? Even if there might no be one single correct interpretation of a situation, are there perspectives that work better than others? How do we go about assessing what is good in interpretation and what is good explanation? IH: The problem is in your question. We really need to ask what is good interpretation or explanation in whose terms? For whom? Your question makes it sound as if there is going to be an interpretation or explanation that is de-contexualised, one that just is the best interpretation. I dont except that. Some explanations are better for some groups of people. In some peoples terms some explanations are better than others and we just have to accept that. In some discussions I find that I hit a wall over this. For example, if someone comes and tells me that a particular site is a landing pad for aliens, I hit a wall that I cant get over. It is a wall that makes further discussion impossible. However, on the other side of the wall there are people who are talking rationally (at least in their own terms). They are able to have discussions and they can work through it all. The example of the aliens is an extreme example but ultimately different people see the world in very different terms. While it is possible to have a discussion with them, you recognize that you are never going to persuade them that what they see as a good explanation is anything but that. There are good examples of this at atalhyk. We may have two sets of people looking at the same stratigraphic section and someone will say, Cant you see, it is absolutely obvious that this is a fault line caused by an earthquake. And someone else will say, Thats nonsense, cant you see that the collapse of the building made the cracks in the stratigraphy. And so you get two highly able and highly intelligent people with their own backgrounds and their own perceptions looking at the same thing and they cant understand how the other person cant see it the way they see it. For each of them, their own interpretation is so clear. And so they hit a brick wall. The process that we have gone through at atalhyk is to try to have a dialogue through which we reach consensus. The results, the main published volumes, dont necessarily tell a story that I

12

An Interview with Ian Hodder

agree with. Im going to write my own book which is my own interpretation. As another example, we have had an artist and an archaeological scientist draw the same things. Thus, you get two people in a trench drawing the same thing; one from a scientific perspective in a very codified way and one from an artistic perspective. And both of these images will be in the published volume. As a whole, the team has reached a consensus on a lot of issues. However, reaching consensus is a very difficult process. It is a highly complex process. In the end it comes down to social skills as much as scientific skills. You have to create a framework in which people are willing to listen. The different atalhyk teams are writing different volumes and they look at atalhyk differently. At higher level there is a certain consensus among the different teams. At atalhyk there are different scales of community and we reach different levels of consensus. The danger is that the consensual discussion becomes hierarchical. A good example of this is the knowledge possessed by the local community. In order to include their voice at atalhyk we have had to make a lot of effort, not only in translations but in terms of re-skilling archaeologists (to listen and to understand) as well as re-skilling the community (to have the knowledge and confidence to contribute to what we are doing). We need specialist help to do this and thus we have had several social anthropologists to do this. Their role is to facilitate the process of dialogue. DWB: Usually foreign-led projects are short in duration, usually two or three years. atalhyk is a longer project, 25 years. In terms of other Neolithic sites in Turkey or other sites to the east and west, what are the potential applications of what you are doing and the way that you are doing it? IH: We all work in different sorts of contexts and you cant really transpose what we are doing at atalhyk very easily. However, I do feel that the underlying thrust towards consensual dialogue and non-hierarchical procedures and, particularly, the responsibilities one has to different stakeholders, are ideas that can be used widely. Not only in archaeology abroad but also within archaeology in the UK and US. I am involved at the moment in projects and discussions about Cultural Resource Management in an attempt to see the various ways that it could change. There are major projects in Britain where people are trying a reflexive methodology. A reflexive method is largely about positionality. Positionality means that the way that one looks at the world depends on where one is standing and it depends on what one thinks is going on in the past and the present. How you interpret the world depends on your position in the world. Reflexivity leads to attempts to understand how other peoples positions affect what they do. It involves trying to understand science within the social construction of knowledge. It is about how I, in my position, need to work with local communities and other stake-holder groups and it is about how the local community needs to be involved in what I do. It is about how different positions in the atalhyk project relate to each other. All of this is positionality. Another archaeological example of this is the new work at Heathrow Airports Terminal 5 where John Barrett and others are trying to develop some parallel ideas such as to set aside time during excavation to sit down and interpret and to try to bring all of the various specialists in to these discussions. So, I see what we are doing at atalhyk as just part of the larger process, as reacting against the extreme codification and objectification that occurred during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. This codification and routinisation of archaeology was linked to the idea that digging was something that anyone could do. There is a long history to this. In the early 20th and even the 19th centuries the digging was often done by convicts or the unemployed or, generally, the unskilled. There is a 100 or more year history in archaeology of people not really knowing what they were doing, so long as they filled in the forms or told the supervisors what they had found. At the moment there is a lot of unrest in the US among field-technicians, among the people who do the shovel work, because they feel that they are kept away from the interpretation. Archaeology is a very highly skilled process that requires not only that people know the pot types but that they know many scientific procedures. There is a lot of re-skilling that needs to be done so that the people who are digging know what micromorphology is, that they know what phytoliths are, but that they also know what the Nuer do in Africa. The idea that you do not need to be very skilled to dig creates

13

Douglass W. BAILEY

the idea that the collection of data is just a mindless, descriptive process. It isnt. Any archaeologist will tell you that digging is an extremely difficult process, even to follow a line of soil with your trowel, especially on a very complex site like atalhyk. DWB: So is the reflexive approach about explicitly recognizing the unease within oneself as one digs and accepting that it is a normal thing to say, I am not sure about this or that? IH: Yes, thats it. Its to destabilize the moment of excavation. Other people have found this difficult. Early on in our work at atalhyk there was a lot of negative reaction from some professional archaeologists but the problems have been largely resolved now. DWB: If we could talk about your career for a moment, in the Hodder bibliography, are the works that you are most proud of, that did what you wanted they to do or that surprised you? IH: The pieces that I think are interesting tend to get ignored and the stuff that I think is not particularly good gets picked up by people. I have never understood that process. The thing that I am most proud of is Reading the Past (1986). I wrote it quickly as a very personal, angry statement. There is another, new, revised version of it coming out soon (Hodder and Hutson 2003). I am pleased with it because I think that it has reached a very wide audience and because it was short and accessible. On the other hand, there are a whole series of articles that I liked but that got ignored. I wrote an article about the use of ash and hearths in Baringo in Kenya that I very much liked (Hodder 1987), but I dont think that I have ever seen a reference to it. I wrote an article in 1985 on Post-processual archaeology for American Antiquity which was just an appalling article from beginning to end and, of course, it gets referred to a lot. One thing that I am sad about is the Domestication of Europe (Blackwell 1990). I still think that the domus idea is a good one and I think that it works. However, I needed someone to edit the book for me; I wrote it and published it and didnt really smooth out some of the rough edges in it. There are a lot of claims in it that are excessive and which are not justified. I think that I spoilt the argument by going too far. I have written about my feelings over the Domestication of Europe and I am doing so again for a new collection of essays. But people dont really read these later comments; once something comes out it is very difficult to retract it. DWB: There is a popular BBC radio programme that asks its interviewees what they would take with them if they were marooned on a desert island. If you were to be marooned and you could choose some reading or a luxury, what would they be? IH: It is easier to suggest things that are non-archaeological, things that I would like to read more of and get absorbed in. I would like to take some of the great thinkers and writers of the last couple of hundred years, Marx, Weber. Or even Hobbes writers that took on the big issues. I would like to take the French Annales school, writing about Medieval Europe. I find the detail and description very interesting to explore. The way I relax is to play the piano. So taking a piano would be ideal for me, but no sheet music. When I sit down I just play. I improvise. I find its a creative process and I like that. I can do that for hours. I dont think that there is any archaeological thing that I would want to take. For me archaeology is not the central thing. There are other larger questions. Archaeology is just a tool to get at those larger questions. I cant imagine myself wanting to take a trowel. I would hate to take a corpus of pots for example. Typologising pots would be hell. Select Hodder bibliography Hodder, I. 1982. Symbols in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hodder, I. 1982. The Present Past: An Introduction to Anthropology for Archaeologists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

14

An Interview with Ian Hodder

Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the Past (updated, revised in 1991). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Third edition is published with S. Hutson in 2003. Hodder, I. (ed.) 1987. Archaeology as Long-term History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hodder, I. (ed.) 1987. The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hodder, I 1987. The meaning of discard: ash and domestic space in Baringo. In Kent, S. (ed) Method and Theory in Activity Area Research. New York: Columbia University Press. Hodder, I. 1990. The Domestication of Europe. Oxford: Blackwell. Hodder, I. 1991. (ed.) Archaeological Theory in Europe: The Last Three Decades. London: Routledge. Hodder, I. 1992 Theory and Practice in Archaeology (reprinted in 1995) London: Routledge. A collection of Hodder essays. Hodder, I. 1999. The Archaeological Process. Oxford: Blackwell. Hodder, I. (ed.) 2001 Archaeological Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity Press. For atalhyk http://catal.arch.cam.ac.uk/catal/catal.html Hodder, I. (ed.) 1996. On the Surface: atalhyk 199395. Cambridge: McDonald Institute. Hodder, I. (ed.) 2000. Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: The Example at atalhyk. Cambridge: McDonald Institute. Douglass W. Bailey is Senior Lecturer in European Prehistory at Cardiff University (baileydw@cardiff.ac.uk) and Co-Principal Investigator of the Southern Romania Archaeological Project. His recent book, Balkan Prehistory, is published by Routledge (2000).

15

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem? Adina BORONEAN*

Rezumat: Prezena tardenoasianului (de tip nordvest pontic sau centralest European) pe teritoriul Romniei a fost acceptat ca un adevr arheologic necontestat de peste 50 de ani. Prezentul articol i propune s demonstreze c lucrurile sunt mult mai complexe, pornind de la nsi definirea termenului de tardenoasian, trecnd prin caracteristicile i etapele sale de evoluie (niciodat clar definite) i sfrind cu dovezile arheologice care ar putea susine sau infirma prezena lui. Articolul este structurat n trei pri: o scurt istoriografie a tardenoasianului (ca epoc preistoric) att n context european ct i pe plan romnesc, o trecere n revist (cronologic) a cercetrii arheologice i a principalelor rezultate obinute i o a treia parte de discuii i concluzii. La baza lucrrii st catalogul siturilor tardenoasiene de pe teritoriul Romniei, ntocmit pe baza materialelor publicate. Catalogul nu se dorete o prezentare exhaustiva a siturilor ci mai degrab o sintez a problemelor aprute, att n domeniul spturilor ct i n al cel al analizrii materialului rezultat i al publicrii sale. Coordonatele principale care au stat la baza ntocmirii materialului au fost: tipul cercetrii arheologice, tipul de material arheologic rezultat (n cazul tardenoasianului acesta este predominant litic), ncadrarea cultural a sitului i criteriile care au stat la baza acestei ncadrri. Un numr de 50 de situri (cu 71 de puncte) au fost atribuite n literatura de specialitate tardenoasianului. Cele 50 de situri sunt geografic repartizate astfel: Transilvania 7, Muntenia 2, Moldova 25, Dobrogea 16. Situaia este dictat n mare msur de stadiul cercetrii: n Transilvania, de la perieghezele/sondajele efectuate de C.S. NicolescuPlopor n nord i de la spturile lui Al. Punescu la Ciumeti, nu s-a mai ntreprins nici un alt tip de cercetare legat de mezolitic (tardenoasian). n Moldova i Dobrogea, numrul mai mare de situri identificate se datoreaz antierului de la Bicaz (i perighezelor ntreprinse atunci), respectiv construciei canalului DunreMarea Neagr. Dintre cele 71 de puncte, 65 au fost atribuite strict tardenoasianului. Restul de ase, datorit stratigrafiei deranjate sau a lipsei de piese aa-zis tipice, ar putea fi neolitice sau gravetiene. Din catalog ns, observm c ntr-un numr de cazuri, mai ales n Dobrogea, descoperirile tardenoasiene sunt nsoite de fragmente ceramice atribuite neoliticului (mai ales de tip Hamangia). Numrul de situri cu atribuire controversat ar putea fi deci mai mare. Dac toate siturile ar fi ntr-adevr tardenoasiene raportul ntre tardenoasianul centralest european i cel pontic ar fi de 11 la 60. Dincolo de numrul de situri identificat, trei ali factori influeneaz major rezultatele i mai ales calitatea descoperirilor: 1. Tipul de cercetare arheologic (descoperire ntmpltoare, cercetare de teren, sondaj, sptur sistematic), 2. Suprafaa cercetat i 3. Bogia inventarului (n cazul tardenoasianului nu putem vorbi, aa cum am vzut, dect de un inventar litic). Ar mai fi de remarcat slaba publicare a materialului (cu excepia celui rezultat din spturile lui Al. Punescu care este publicat integral). De cele mai multe ori inventarul este publicat selectiv, acordndu-se preferin pieselor tipice deosebite, fr mcar a se preciza numrul total descoperit i nici mcar suprafaa cercetat. La aceasta se adaug faptul c cca. 97% din publicaii sunt n limba romn, ceea ce le face greu accesibile cercettorilor strini. Ca o nou ipotez de lucru articolul propune studiul siturilor pe regiuni de mai mic ntindere, avnd astfel avantajul studiului n detaliu a un numr mic de situri i a unei mai bune observri a eventualelor lor caracteristici comune. mprirea n cele dou mari zone de influen la un studiu atent al descoperirilor arheologice pare cel puin arbitrar. Patru mari grupe de situri par s se contureze, n stadiul actual al cercetrii: un prim grup n nordestul Moldovei (jud. Iai, Vaslui poate i Galai), un al doilea n Dobrogea de sud (jud. Constana), un al treilea n nordvestul Transilvaniei i un al patrulea n centru rii (Sita Buzului, eventual Lapo i Largu). n ncheiere nu putem dect s ne dorim ca lucrurile s nceap s se schimbe, nelegnd prin aceasta un nou tip de abordare a problemei industriilor litice microlitice (de preferat termenului de tardenoasian), trecnd de la o rapid ncadrare a unui sit n una din cele dou arii culturale postulate la grupuri regionale mai restrnse, dar acordnd o mai mare atenie caracteristicilor particulare ale acestora. Cuvinte cheie: Tardenoisian, etape de evoluie, industrii litice microlitice. Keywords: Tardenoisian, chronological background, microlithic industries.

I. Introduction: The emergence and development of the Tardenoisian I.1.The European background From the very beginning of the prehistoric studies (G. de Mortillet 1869, 1872) scholars noticed a huge cultural difference between the Paleolithic and the Neolithic Ages, then blamed on
*

Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan Bucureti, Str. Henri Coand 11.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 1746.

Adina BORONEAN

the different climate of the two ages. Thus, the idea of a hiatus existing in between them came into being. For some authors it was merely the result of our lack of knowledge (G. de Mortillet 1874), for others the fact that Europe was considered, climatically speaking, inhabitable prior to the Neolithic (A. Roujou 1869, F.A. Forel 1870, E. Cartailhac 1872, 1873, J.D. Clark 1936, 1958 after J.G. Rozoy 1978, p. 20). But there were also archeologists who sensed the existence of an intermediate period (A.F. Marion 1866). The dispute ended with the appearance of the Azilian, but one must note that the Azilian did not cover the entire period of the postulated hiatus. The first microliths were uncovered in Charmes, France, by Abbey Nyd, but were left unpublished. More were mentioned later by J.S. Browne (1877), E. Doigneau (1884), A. de Mortillet (1885) as they became a rather common find and were initially designated as Neolithic. The term Tardenoisian1 was only later introduced (G. de Mortillet 1883) so that together with the Azilian they would completely cover the hiatus period. Integrated to the archeological vocabulary by 1897, the Tardenoisian stayed as part of the Neolithic until the late twenties of the XX century. Meanwhile, J.A. Brown suggested for the armatures he found at Mount Vhyndia (India) the term Mesolithic. The main directions of development in the European prehistory connected of course to the evolution of the Tardenoisian will be presented below, as considered extremely important for the understanding of the Romanian Tardenoisian phenomenon2. At the beginning of the XX century (19101960) two ideas dominated the prehistoric studies: the migration idea (the most important thing was the geographical origins of a certain lithic industry) and the idea of a diagnostic tool. A second direction, initiated in 1945 and lasting until after the 1970-ies, brought the trend of inventory lists and multiple diagnostic tools. The migration idea was then replaced by a fanlike, extensive diffusion (J.G. Rozoy 1978, p. 23), leaving behind it a long propagation wave, to last until the Chalcolithic and the Bronze Age (obviously only as a tradition). This was also the moment when specialized typologies for the Mesolithic appeared, first the one of D. de Sonneville Bordes (1953), followed by J.G.Rozoys in 1969. At the end of the 1970-ies the idea of late/retarded populations came into being, exemplified in certain areas by the survival of Tardenoisian groups until after the appearance of the Neolithic communities. The idea could be accounted for if one looked at the disturbed and unclear contexts of the archeological finds, as it was the case in the Parisian area, or, for Romania, in the multilevel sites of Moldavia. At the present moment, the European Mesolithic research focuses on the identification and the detailed study of regional cultural groups. I.2The evolution of the Tardenoisian (terminology and concept) in Romania The Tardenoisian was introduced to the Romanian archeological vocabulary by C.S.NicolescuPlopor (1931, p. 403406; 1941, p. 112), following the discovery of some microliths in Oltenia, considered by the finder as Mesolithic. They had been produced by some local Mesolithic communities, named by C.S. NicolescuPlopor cleanovian and ploporean, thus
1

This is not the place for an extensive discussion on the terminology used for these lithic industries. Different schools of archeology refer to them differently. In Romania, as already seen, the term Tardenoisian is used. For Bulgaria and Turkey, recent archeological literature seems to prefer the term chipped stone assemblages (I. Gatsov 2000, I. Gatsov, M.Ozdogan 1999) but earlier literature refers to them as EpiPaleolithic or Mesolithic. The Hungarians coin them as microlithic lithic industries (R.Kertesz 1996). It is also the term the author of the present paper would prefer. For J.K.Kozlowski and St. Kozlowski, the equivalent of the Central-European Tardenoisian (in the Romanian sense of the word...) is Western Mesolithic. Strictly by Tardenoisian the two archeologists mean only the Mesolithic of Beuron-Coincy type and the Mesolithic on the Lower Rhine. The so-called north-west Pontic Tardenoisian is, in their view, made up of two regional groups: the Central-Eastern European Mesolithic and the Crimean-Caucasian Mesolithic (J.K. Kozlowski, St. Kozlowski 1979, p. 53, 61-62). Not to create further complications, throughout the present article the term Tardenoisian will be used in the classical sense of the Romanian archeology, despite the fact microlithic lithic industries would much better describe the situation. The main data was taken after J.-G. Rozoy (1978, p.22-23).

18

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

entering a dispute with N.N. Moroan who saw them as a local Tardenoisian group (N.N. Moroan 1932, p. 3) and D. Berciu who initially (1939a, p. 4) claimed them to be CapsianoTardenoisian3 and later in 1939, 1941, 1942, SwideroTardenoisian4 (D. Berciu 1939b, p. 9293; 1941, p. 14 15; 1942, p. 590591). The same author (D. Berciu) split the European Tardenoisian into the AziloTardenoisian, to be found in Western Europe, and the SwideroTardenoisian for the eastern part of the continent. According to the ideas of the time, it was during the Tardenoisian that pottery was introduced and thus, agriculture, domestication of animals leading to breeding of animals as a daily occupation, as well as pottery making appeared prior to the Neolithic Age (D. Berciu 1939, p. 15). Research was almost frozen during WWII and the 1950ies saw field surveys and excavations taking place mainly in Moldavia and northwestern Walachia5, with the Moldavian digs triggered by the opening of the large Bicaz project (started in 1952 and reaching its peaks in 19541956 and 19571958). The term Tardenoisian bearing the meaning of today was not used until the beginning of the 1960-ies. Prior to that moment, archeologists had settled for the term of SwideroTardenoisian of Gravettian tradition at CremeneaMalu Dinu Buzea (C.S. Nicolescu Plopor 1956, p. 34, C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959, p. 35) and Slaci (C.S. Nicolescu Plopor, E. Kovacs 1959, p. 41). It is worth noting that although excavations took place in sites later considered crucial for the Mesolithic Age, the lithic industry, predominantly microlithic, was initially attributed to the Upper Paleolithic (at Trguor C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959b, p. 22; Cremenea Malu Dinu Buzea, n Poieni 1959a, p. 53, 54) and in a few cases to some pre-pottery microlithic industries (Galopetreu, Valea lui Mihai C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959, p. 41). One was this can be accounted for is probably the attempt of C.S. NicolescuPlopor6 (in the 1950-ies) to deny the existence of the Mesolithic as a self-standing prehistoric age, considered by him to have lacked substance, and to see the Proto-Neolithic connected natural and organic to the Epi-Paleolithic, a direct link with no intermediate phase (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954, p. 69).The same author underlined that .. in the present stage of the research the passage from

1954, p. 70). The idea was revived in 1957 (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957, p. 56), 1959 (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, M. PetrescuDmbovia et alii 1959, p. 63) and 1960 (Fl. Mogoanu 1960, p. 128). It was this same pretended continuity between the Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic that made C.S. NicolescuPlopor react promptly and justified when rejecting D. Bercius theory on the Aceramic/Preceramic Neolithic, a dispute that was to last almost a decade (D. Berciu 1958, p. 91100, C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959, p. 221237) So, it was considered normal at that moment that with the existence of an Epi-Paleolithic (seen as an integrated part of the Upper Paleolithic), chronologically catching up with the Neolithic
3

the Upper Paleolithic is done directly into the Early Neolithic, based on the microlithic Late Magdalenian background, tightly connected to the eastern traditions7 (C.S. NicolescuPlopor

During this period the European Tardenoisian was seen as emerging from the Capsian facies of the North of Africa (D. Berciu 1932, p. 4). 4 The Swiderian was then considered part of the Tardenoisian also, as were all Mesolithic European groups. 5 C.S. Nicolescu-Plopor, Fl. Mogoanu, I. Pop, Al. Punescu conducted digs and field surveys in the Buzu area at Cremenea (Malu Dinu Buzea, n Poieni, La Delu, La Roate, between 1956 and 1957 (1959, p. 5156). So did I.T. Dragomir in north-eastern Walachia at Largu (1959, p. 475-484). In north-western Transylvania, C.S. Nicolescu-Plopor and E. Kovacs identified new sites at Valea lui Mihai, Galopetreu, Slaci (1959, p. 51-56). As for Moldavia, N. Zaharia, located the site at Ghireni, following some field surveys along the Prut Valley (1952-1956). 6 Ironically, it was Nicolescu-Plopor himself who, in 1929, had introduced the Mesolithic concept to the Romanian archeology, connecting it to his discoveries from Plopor, Cleanov and Slcua in Oltenia (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929, 1931). 7 The discussion turned to be a political issue and drifted away from archeology when Plopor, based not on scientific but political reasons, attacked Fr. Bordes typological approach and supported the methods of the Soviet archeology (C.S. Nicolescu-Plopor 1954, p. 69).

19

Adina BORONEAN

(see J.G. Rozoys observations presented in the Introduction of the article), to be no place left for the Mesolithic microlithic industries. They were part, as already shown, either of the Final Paleolithic or the Aceramic Neolithic. The Tardenoisian started to shape in the 1960-ies, when the same C.S. NicolescuPlopor made reference to some northwest Pontic lithic industries from S.S.R. Moldavia (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960, p. 179) which he considered as Early Neolithic (a chronological framing common to all Europe at the time). This Tardenoisian, considered Plopor, should have been looked for in Romania also, on the sand dunes8 in southern Moldavia. The European stereotype (the Tardenoisian seen as tightly connected to the sand dunes) influenced the thoughts in the Romanian archeology. Accordingly, the northwestern Tardenoisian seemed to have penetrated coming from Crimea (the migration theory). Strangely enough, the History of Romania (1960, vol. I, p. 179) told us differently the Azilian and the Tardenoisian seem to have come from the south. During the next period of time, archeological research was intensified and so the number of archeological sites attributed to the Tardenoisian increased: Glma (Al. Punescu, I. Pop 1961, p. 33369; 1962, p. 154158), Ocna Sibiului (I. Paul 1962, p. 193203)10, Lapo (Fl. Mogoanu, M. Bitiri 1961, p. 21221611, Fl. Mogoanu12 1962, p. 145151; 1964, p. 337350). Prior to 1965 only seven sites had been excavated: Cremenea, GlmaRoate (Merior), CostandaLdui, Lapo, Erbiceni, Ripiceni, Ciumeti (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 27) but by 1987, 27 more had been detected in Dobrogea and Moldavia (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 11) and six more in Transylvania and Walachia. The main excavated sites were Ripiceni Izvor (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 531; idem 1978, p. 317334; idem 1983, p. 187195; idem 1981, p. 187195), Erbiceni (Al. Punescu 1981, p. 187195), Mitoc (M. Bitiri Ciortescu 1973, p. 2336; idem 1987, p. 207233; M. BitiriCiortescu, M. Crciumaru 1978, p. 463479; M. BitiriCiortescu, M. Crciumaru, P. Vasilescu 1978, p. 3343), Bereti, Bneasa (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 361375; idem 1974) in Moldavia and CuzaVod, Trguor, Albeti (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 1119; idem 1990, p. 317333, idem 1999) in Dobrogea. Starting with the 1960-ies no Mesolithic excavation took place in Transylvania. A catalog with the present day state of research was drafted using all available publications. It comprises 50 sites (with 71 different excavation locations) where the authors of the respective digs identified finds assigned to the Tardenoisian. *** As the number of detected sites increased, so did the complexity of the matter. A series of problems occurred, many of them still to be faced. The first of them was the undecided cultural assignment of the Tardenoisian. Was it part of the Epi-Paleolithic or of the Mesolithic? The question might appear irrelevant or even a false problem, but taking into account the present day definitions of the two terms and comparing them to what they meant 40 years ago, the discussion gains importance. Without getting into too much detail, generally speaking, the Epi-Paleolithic is seen as the final phase of the Upper Paleolithic, tightly linked to it especially in what the lithic industries and the type of economy are concerned. As for the Mesolithic, a clear definition (although rather long) is given by Steve J. Mithen (1994, p. 133): How can we summarize the
8 9

The underlining belongs to the author. As pot sherds appeared in the respective layer, the finds were initially attributed to the Neolithic. 10 I. Paul considered the six artifacts as rather Neolithic (I. Paul 1959, p. 197-198). 11 The Tardenoisian layer was initially attributed to a neolithized Campignan (Fl. Mogoanu, M. Bitiri 1961, p. 222). The archeological context was rather unclear: The microliths lie at the base, and in the upper part (of the layer) there are microliths mixed with pot sherds and polished axes (Fl. Mogoanu, M. Bitiri 1961, p. 223). 12 The existence of the Tardenoisian was admitted and three separate sites were identified as overlapping on the same spot: one was attributed to the Campignian, the second to the Tardenoisian and the third to the Starevo-Cri Neolithic, all three seen as a continuous succession of habitations. Fl. Mogoanu supported the idea of a co-existence and mutual influence between the Epi-Paleolithic (Tardenoisian) and Neolithic communities (a theory that he applied also for the Iron Gates area, but where the issue was the cohabitation between the Mesolithic population of the Schela Cladovei group and the Starevo-Cri Neolithic one (Fl. Mogoanu 1978, p. 335-352).

20

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Mesolithic age? Was it the glorious finale to hunter-gatherer adaptations in Europe or the prelude to the social and economic systems of later prehistory? Or, was it a play within itself, requiring reference neither to what went before, nor after, for its identity? Perhaps we should try to see it as all three: a period with many complex threads which we are just beginning to unravel and understand. If we need a single image to characterize the Mesolithic we cannot choose a particular environmental type, settlement system or socioeconomic organization. These all varied markedly across Mesolithic Europe and through time. The only constant we have is at the level of the individual forager making decisions about which tools to produce, which resources to exploit, and which alliances to form. Such decisions were made on the basis of imperfect information about the options available, under the influence of the societys traditions, and with the creativity that is inherent to the human mind. It was from such decisions, from the many intended and unintended consequences that the social and economic structures of the Mesolithic emerged. It was these day-to-day, indeed minute-to minute, decisions made as Mesolithic foragers went about their daily business-that created one of the most critical periods of transformation in European prehistory.

Based on the terms employed to characterize the Tardenoasian, three historical stages can be identified in the history of the Romanian archeology. The first one (triggered by C.S. NicolescuPlopors article in 1954) denied the Mesolithic as a prehistoric age and therefore, the Tardenoisian became Epi-Paleolithic (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965, p. 717; C.S. Nicolescu Plopor, Al. Punescu, Fl. Mogoanu 1966, Al. Punescu 1966, p. 319; M. Brudiu 1971, p. 363; idem 1974, p. 7, M. Crciumaru, Al. Punescu 1975, p. 317; M. Chirica, Gh. Enache 1984, p. 317). In the 1970-ies, following C.S. NicolescuPlopor death, a part of the researchers considered that the Epi-Paleolithic and the Mesolithic were in fact the very same thing, and the Tardenoisian was then framed as either Epi-Paleolithic or Mesolithic (Al. Punescu 1978, p. 280; idem 1979a, p. 239; idem 1979b, p. 507; Vl. Dumitrescu 1971, p. 88). With the 80-ies (although some thin voices had been previously heard as well) the Tardenoisian became almost unanimously accepted as a Mesolithic facies (Vl. Dumitrescu 1972, p. 9; Al. Punescu 1980, p. 540; idem 1981, p. 479; idem 1993, p. 151 and the synthesis volumes in 1999, 2000, 2001; Vl. Dumitrescu, Al. Bolomey, Fl. Mogoanu 1982, p. 2955). Once the cultural setting was more or less agreed upon, a new question occurred: the origins of the Tardenoisian. Things appeared to be pretty simple at the beginning: two large areas were defined, the first located to the northwest and respectively the southeast of Transylvania, as part of the centralEuropean Tardenoisian area and the second, covering northeast of Moldavia, the northwest of Walachia and the Dobrogea, part of the northwest Pontic type of Tardenoisian fig.6 (Al. Punescu 1964, p. 331; idem 1980, p. 53; Vl. Dumitrescu 1971, p. 88; Vl. Dumitrescu, Al. Bolomey, Fl. Mogoanu 1982, p. 48).

The first group comprised the sites in the counties of SatuMare (Ciumeti13), Bihor (Galopetreu, Valea lui Mihai), Covasna (Cremenea, Ldui, Merior) and Sibiu (Ocna Sibiului). For the second group there were the sites in the counties of Botoani (Draxini, Ghireni, Hneti, Icueni, Ipoteti, Manoleasa, Miorcani, Mitoc, Ripiceni), Suceava (Topile), Vaslui (Brdeti, Horga, ucani), Iai (Bal, Blteni, Belceti, Corneti, Erbiceni, Mihail Koglniceanu, Probota, Storneti, Totoeti, ignai), Buzu (Largu), Prahova (Lapo), Galai (Blbneti, Bneasa, Bereti), Tulcea (Grvan, Luncavia), Constana (Albeti, Brebeni, CuzaVod, Lespezi, Lumina, Medgidia, Remus Opreanu, Sibioara, Straja, ipotele, Trguor, ibrinu). The northwest Pontic Tardenoisian seemed to have penetrated from the east (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964, p. 320) and developed on a local Epi-Gravettian background mixed with elements from adjacent areas (Al. Punescu 1964, p. 329; idem 1965, p. 27; idem 1979, p. 249; idem 1981, p. 505; idem 1987, p. 21; idem 1993, p. 52; idem 1999, p. 62; Vl. Dumitrescu 1971, p. 88). On the other hand, the Tardenoisian from Maramure represented an expansion of the CentralEuropean one (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964, p. 320) which, at his turn, developed (in

13

Fl. Mogoanu had suggested for this site the term of Tardeno-Neolithic (1964, p. 347).

21

Adina BORONEAN

Western Europe) on a Perigordian and Magdalenian background (Al. Punescu 1964, p. 329; idem 2001, p. 89). Unfortunately, the main features of the Tardenoisian were given only by its rich lithic inventory, predominantly microlithic, comprising geometric shapes (trapezes, semi-crescents, triangles), pyramidal, prismatic or spindlelike cores; typical tools were rounded or semi-circular side-scrapers (on flakes and more seldom on blades), truncated, backed or retouched blades, La Gravette points (especially in Moldavia) (Vl. Dumitrescu 1971, p. 88; M. Brudiu 1971, p. 67; Vl. Dumitrescu, Al. Bolomey, Fl. Mogoanu 1982, p. 47). Flint was used as the main raw material in Moldavia, Dobrudja and southeast Transylvania, with obsidian and flint employed in the north west of Transylvania. The northwest Pontic Tardenoisian extended across the Romanian boundaries and the Siret river, with major sites at Grebeniki, Ghirjevo, Poznanka, Orlovka, Dovjanka (P.I. Borisovski 1964, p.10), Frumuica, Kazanka, Varvarovka IX, Sreni, Mirnoe, Dobrojani (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 28; idem 1981, p. 506; idem 1999, p. 62), and across the Danube, to the northeastern Bulgaria at Pobiti kamenii (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 68). As for the CentralEuropean Tardenoisian, analogies were seen with the sites at Barca I (Oriental Slovakia), Maanske Vrke, near Seredi (southwest Slovakia), and with the ones in the Tisza Plain (Hungary) and TransCarpathian Ukraine (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 27; idem 1975, p. 336; idem 2001, p. 89). After having followed its birth and evolution, we naturally wonder about the final of the Tardenoisian. Two ideas circulated 1) a parallel evolution, for a while, of the Final Tardenoisian and the Early Neolithic (including a possible assimilation of the former by the latter) and 2) a possible Tardenoisian tradition preserved through the Neolithic, noticeable in the Neolithic lithic industries. Generally speaking, the ideas could be framed within the third stage of Rozoys scheme. In 1964, Fl. Mogoanu talked about the assimilation of some Neolithic elements by the Tardenoisian tribes (Fl. Mogoanu 1964, p. 347). Al. Punescu identified at first a Tardenoisian background for the Neolithic (at Drghiceanu, Al. Punescu 1964b, p. 28), then a development of the Early Neolithic lithic industries from the Tardenoisian (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 332, footnote 26; idem 1979, p. 525) and later on, a survival of a pure Tardenoisian or an Aceramic Neolithic until the arrival of the Hamangia groups (Al. Punescu 1978, p. 200). This hypothesis was later modified to the assimilation of the Tardenoisian groups or at least to the existence of some contacts between them and the Hamangia people (Al. Punescu 1980, p. 540). The phenomenon included (also at a later moment) Moldavia, where it was possible that some communities on the Siret, the Lower Danube, the Dnepr to continue their existence up to the Neolithic times with the one at Soroca possibly making a shift towards the Aceramic Neolithic (Al. Punescu 1981, p. 508). Contrary to the opinion of Vl. Dumitrescu (1982) that a connection between the local Neolithic and the Tardenoisian could not exist (Vl. Dumitrescu, Al. Bolomey, Fl. Mogoanu 1982, p. 48), Al. Punescu would persist, to his last publications, in the idea of a Tardenoisian tradition in the Early Neolithic and also in the persistence of the Tardenoisian communities until after the appearance of the Neolithic ones. (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 62; idem 2000, p. 50; idem 2001, p. 89). Such ideas were induced, in most cases, by the unclear stratigraphy. For an important number of sites, small pottery fragments, heavily corroded, were found in the so-called Tardenoisian layer Erbiceni, Ripiceni, Costanda (Al. Punescu 1966, p. 327), Lapo (Fl. Mogoanu, M. BitiriCiortescu 1961, p. 223; D. Mrgrit, M. Sandu 1998, p. 49; Gh. Olteanu 1996, p. 34). II. The archeological research and its outcome an assessment The catalogue presented at the end of the paper resulted out of the available archeological publications and attempted to incorporate all the sites that were considered and remained attributed to the Tardenoisian in Romania. The list comprises 50 sites with 71 excavation sectors/locations. The main criteria considered while drafting the catalogue were: 1) the type of research (extensive excavation, small area excavation, field survey, accidental discovery); 2) type of resulted finds (lithics, pottery, faunal or floral remains, human remains,

22

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

etc); 3) cultural attribution (CentralEuropean Tardenoisian, NorthWest Pontic Tardenoisian, Gravettian, EarlyNeolithic, etc); 4) criteria employed for the cultural attribution (the typology of the lithic industry, the stratigraphy, existence of pottery, etc); 5) absolute chronology (where available). Other information considered relevant was marked as Observations. The catalogue does not claim to be an exhaustive source of data for the respective sites, but to summarize and systematize the existent information, in order to asses the state of the research. As it only reviews the existing data, it does not include any remarks on the typology or the technology of the lithic inventory (it is not discussed whether the assignment of a certain tool to a certain typological group was correct or not, nor the implications of certain types of retouches, percentages etc). These could be attempted only after the lithic finds were studied attentively once again. The 50 sites are scattered as follows: Transylvania seven, Walachia two, Moldavia 25, Dobrogea 16. The distribution is heavily determined by the state of the research: since the field surveys and the small scale digs of C.S. Nicolescu Plopor to the north of Transylvania and after Al. Punescu s excavations at Ciumeti, no other Mesolithic (Tardenoisian) research took place. For Moldavia, we owe the important number of sites largely to the Bicaz project (and to the field surveys at the time). As for Dobrogea, a main role was played by the construction of the DanubeBlack Sea Canal. Tab. 1. The main data in the catalogue the archeological sites with lithic industries typologically assigned to the Tardenoisian. Number of tools 106 unknown unknown unknown 7 15 1 3 unknown 90 5 1 105 1 0 162 5 unknown 134 31 unknown Number of blanks 338 unknown unknown unknown unknown 12 0 unknown unknown 68 unknown 11 1192 1 18 4544 33 unknown 522 99 unknown Total number of lithics 444 unknown unknown unknown unknown 27 1 unknown unknown 158 unknown 12 1297 2 18 4706 38 unknown 656 130 unknown Cultural group NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW CE NW CE NW NW NW NW NW NW Type of research F,TP F F F SE SE F F F SE F F SE F TP SE F F F, TP F F 9 Surface (m2)

Site Albeti Bal Blbneti Blteni Bneasa I Bneasa II BelcetiPe Loturi BelcetiRui BelcetiScarchi Bereti layer II Brdeti Brebeni CiumetiPune Corneti Cremenean Grdini CremeneaMalu Dinu Buzea Cuza VodDealul Bulgriei Cuza VodNE border of the cemetery Cuza VodCariera Veche Cuza Vodeastern border of the quarry Draxini

132

30 2 311 700 800

23

Adina BORONEAN

Erbiceni Galopetreu Grvan Ghireni I Ghireni II Hneti Horga Icueni Ipoteti Lapo Largudune no. 1 Largudune no. 3 Ldui Lespezi Lumina Luncavia Manoleasa MedgidiaLa Potcoav Medgidia / La Plopi Medgidia / monument of the Serbian heroes MeriorDelu MeriorLiziera Otecu MeriorRoate Merior n botul Otecului MeriorPoarta Cremenii Merior Chicherului Valley Mihail Koglniceanu Miorcani MitocValea Izvorului MitocValea lui Stan Ocna Sibiului Poarta Albnext to the pump station Probota Remus Opreanu RipiceniIzvor Sibioara Storneti Straja ipotele TrguorLa Adam TrguorLa Grdin TrguorUrs

338 unknown 12 10 0 0 unknown 154 0 272 14 3 46 2 13 6 unknown 1 160 3 1 11 184 0 0 unknown 3 0 15 unknown 1 7 8 5 690 2 unknown 25 1 unknown unknown unknown

3262 unknown 88 21 unknown 2 unknown 494 3 956 128 9 34404 3 0 unknown unknown 6 752 10 11 164 57489 5 168 unknown 20 1 25 unknown 5 13 5 19 9577 29 unknown 125 6 unknown unknown unknown

3660 unknown 100 31 unknown 2 unknown 648 3 1228 142 12 34450 5 13 unknown unknown 7 912 13 12 175 57673 5 168 unknown 23 1 40 5060 6 20 13 24 10267 31 unknown 150 7 unknown unknown unknown

NW CE/N NW NW NW NW NW/G NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW CE CE/EG CE CE CE CE NW NW NW NW CE/N NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW

F, SE F F, TP F, TP F AD AD F, TP AD SE F F SE, TP F F F TP F F F TP TP SE TP TP F F F SE SE SE F F F SE F F F, TP F SE SE F

315

1200

128 1500

15

278 5 8

15

3950

24

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Topile Totoeti ibrinu I ibrinu IA ignai ucani Valea lui Mihai

0 1 9 3 unknown unknown unknown

1 unknown 19 3 unknown unknown unknown

1 unknown 28 6 unknown unknown unknown

NW NW/G NW NW NW NW CE/N

F F F F F F F

100

Where CE Central European Tardenoisian, NW NorthWest Pontic Tardenoisian, EG Epi-Gravettian, G Gravetian, N Neolithic, AD Accidental Discovery, F Field survey, TP Test Pits, SE Systematic Excavations.

Lacking almost entirely any other archeological finds but lithics, they became the main indicator for the cultural attribution. Type-lists were drafted and the directing tools were identified (putting us in the second stage in Rozoys scheme). Only four sites (Ciumeti, Erbiceni, Horga, Ocna Sibiului) provided faunal remains (poorly preserved), two provided traces of charcoal (Ciumeti and Erbiceni) and only one (Ciumeti) a small human bone (a skull fragment) destroyed following the 14C dating. It is also worth observing that Horga and Ocna Sibiului provided a very small number of lithic finds, thus making their cultural attribution at least suspicious Tardenoisian or Gravettian, respectively Neolithic. Also, both at Ciumeti and Erbiceni, the Tardenoisian layer contained some small pottery fragments making it possible that some soil disturbance to be the explanation for the appearance of the faunal remains. Calcinated lithic finds were identified on five sites Albeti, Cuza Vod (Cariera Veche, La Poarta Dealului Bulgriei), Ldui, Largu (dune no.1), Medgidia (Straja) offering the opportunity to postulate the existence of some hearths, seemingly destroyed by water and soil degradation processes. The number of sites for which lab tests/analyses were undertaken is incredible small: radiocarbon three sites (Ciumeti, Erbiceni14, Lapo15), mineralogical one site (Costanda Ldui), pollen three sites (CostandaLdui, Glma Roate, Cremenea), granullometry one site (Costanda Ldui), palinology two sites (Albeti, Erbiceni). Summarizing, 61 locations were culturally attributed based uniquely on the lithic artifacts, following technotypological studies. It must be noted though that a classification of the sites based only on the frequency of implement types can not be simply or directly linked to their cultural traditions or to the environment in which the respective communities developed (F. Djindjian, J. Kozlowski, M. Otte 1999, p. 96). Another important feature is the non-existence of sites with more than one Tardenoisian layer. There are sites where the Mesolithic is overlapped by Neolithic, Bronze or medieval layers but there is none where two different horizons could be differentiated, not even for sites with extremely rich lithic finds, such as Ciumeti and Erbiceni. And still, stages of development for the evolution of the Tardenoasian were postulated. Out of the 71 sites (fig. 1), 65 were assigned strictly to the Tardenoisian (Central European seven and NorthWest Pontic 58). The other six, because of disturbed stratigraphy and the lack of typical implements, could also be Neolithic or Gravettian (three were seen as Central European or Neolithic, one was assigned either to the Central European Tardenoisian or the Epi-Gravettian and two were considered as either NorthWest Pontic or Gravettian). It is obvious, looking in the Catalogue, that in a number of cases, especially for Dobrogea, the Tardenoisian finds were joined by pottery fragments (the Neolithic Hamangia culture). Thus, the number of disputed sites could be a lot larger. Contrary, if all the sites were really Tardenoisian there would be 11 sites assigned to the CentralEuropean group and 60 to the NorthWest Pontic one (fig. 2). It is easily seen that the

14

There are four controversial radiocarbon dates but only GX 9417; 7850 215 BP was accepted by Al. Punescu (1998, p. 303), see also the catalogue. 15 For Lapo the radiocarbon dates were also disputed, see the catalogue.

25

Adina BORONEAN

former group is heavily underrepresented, largely because of the rather poor research in the Transylvanian area. Leaving aside the state of the research, three other factors strongly influenced the results and especially the quality of the discoveries: 1. The type of the research; 2. The size of the surveyed area; 3. The complexity of finds (artifacts and ecofacts, but as mentioned above, for the Tardenoisian we are largely dealing only with lithic artifacts). Considering the type of the research, the situation is presented in Table 2 and fig.3: Tab. 2. The type of archeological research. Type CE NW AD 0 3 F 3 38 TP 5 1 F, TP 0 4 F, SE 0 1 SE 3 10 SE, TP 0 1

Where AD Accidental Discovery, F Field Survey, TP Test Pits, SE Systematic Excavation, CE Central European Tardenoasian, NW NorthWest Pontic Tardenoasian.

Given the small number of sites assigned to the CentralEuropean group, figures concerning them are statistically irrelevant. For the second group, the number of sites identified following field surveys (38 out of 60) is extremely large when compared to the sites actually excavated (10 out of 60). And even for these 10 cases, only for three sites the size of the excavated surfaces is known (Ripiceni, Erbiceni, Bereti) and only in one instant (Ripiceni) it is large enough to be considered relevant 3950 m2. Figure 5 shows the comparative situation between field surveys and excavations (test pits were also included) between 1950 and 2000. Digs are generally predominant and we can even interpret the significance of the spikes on the graphic: 19551961 was the period of the Bicaz project, 10601965, 19701975 were the years of Al. Punescus intense excavations at Ripiceni and 19811985 represented the research years of V. Chirica while drafting regional archeological repertoires. As it can be easily observed, after 1985 almost any Mesolithic archeological activity ceased, with the exception of the site of Lapo, reopened between 1993 and 1999 by M. Crciumaru. As for the field surveys, the two peaks are represented by Al. Punescus activity during the Ripiceni excavations, while the second illustrates the efforts of M. Brudiu in Dobrogea during the Canal project and those of V. Chirica in Moldavia, while elaborating the Archeological Repertoires and digging at Mitoc. All field surveys stopped in 1997. In what the lithic inventory is concerned (predominantly microlithic, but this is hardly a Tardenoisian feature) the situation presents itself as follows (fig. 4): for 23 sites the size of the inventory is unknown (not published), four sites provided over 10 000 lithic artifacts, 3 sites range between 1000 and 10 000 artifacts, there are 12 for the category between 100 and 1000 lithic finds, 16 between 10 and 100 (in fact none provided more than 50 finds) and there are also 13 sites with less than 10 artifacts uncovered. It is easily observed that the third part of the information concerning the size of the inventories is unknown. There are only seven sites with an important number of artifacts, but in exchange 20 sites are extremely poorly represented. As for the 13 sites with less than 10 artifacts, they can hardly be taken into consideration, and their attribution to the Tardenoisian (when typical implements are absent as it was the case at Brebeni, CuzaVod, Luncavia, Sibioara, Merior (Sub Delu) or we are talking only about one or two artifacts Topile, Miorcani, Hneti) is more than debatable. Another curious fact is the incredible small number of tools for the CentralEuropean group sites (when compared to the total number). The lack of tools was connected by Al. Punescu to an inter-community exchange of goods (Al. Punescu 1961, p. 34; idem 1962, p. 155; idem 1966,

26

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

p..32716). Even if one accepts that perishable goods were taken in exchange, given the scarcity of tools in all cases, one might wonder who and where were located the communities receiving them and why are they still unknown to us. III. Conclusions As stated before, the aim of the present paper was not only a mere review of the sites and the artifacts but an attempt to evaluate the present day situation of the Tardenoisian question. Without minimalizing the importance of previous research it is clear that the problem is more complex than it might seem at a first glance. Reconsidering the problem of the Mesolithic and especially of the Tardenoisian for the whole past century, one might notice a parallel between the Romanian archeological ideology and the European trends of the time. However, at the very beginning of the sixth decade differences started to appear: while Europe moves forward leaving behind a number of ideas such as those of migrations, late populations, generalization of the Tardenoisian, in Romania things froze. Unfortunately, not only in pure theory. If the Mesolithic (and this time we are not talking only Tardenoisian) had received little attention prior to the sixties, from that moment on it almost completely disappeared from the archeological landscape. Very little was excavated (one, at most two sites every year) and in locations where the Tardenoisian was considered as a byproduct, with the Paleolithic as the Primadonna. A second problem is that the features of the Tardenoisian have never been properly defined, nor the differences with other cultural groups; it has never been shown how the Central European group differentiated from the NorthWest Pontic one. What received the utmost attention were the categories of implements, sometimes the raw material, the areas presumed of origin, the links with the neighboring sites (but without a real comparison between the archeological finds of two different sites). A techno-typological study, establishing a reduction sequence, refittings etc. was never attempted as the Romanian approach to the study of lithic industries was always a static, not a dynamic one17 (F. Djindjian et alii 2000, p. 86). Even the division of the lithic industries into the two groups (Central European and North West Pontic) was rather vague. Geographically, the sites of the two groups are at large distances and more, right in between the two main groups there are two sub-groups which do not share the features of any of the larger defined areas: the first sub-group includes the sites at Sita Buzului and forms apparently a regional facies of the Transylvanian Tardenoisian (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 89) while the second, located in northwestern Walachia is represented by the sites at Lapo and Largu, seen by the same author as the very northwestern limit of the Pontic Tardenoisian (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 62). However the last two mentioned sites display huge differences compared to the rest of the northwest Pontic Tardenoisian, as we shall discuss further on. Maintaining the idea of J.G. Rozoy on the identification and study of regional groups, the author of the present paper suggests that a narrower grouping of sites would be more beneficial, as defining types (and categories) is essentially regional (J.G. Rozoy 1978, p. 32). Even more, it

Transylvania should not necessarily be compared looking merely for different or similar features. J. Kozlowski, M. Otte 1999, p. 96).

is necessary that the criteria changes during the research, especially when we move from one region to another (J.G. Rozoy 1978, p. 31). The microlithic industries of Moldavia and

The quantitative structures of the lithic tools vary with the territory and chronology, as expressions of regional differences of the cultural traditions and of the way of living (F. Djindjian,

16

The scarcity of entire typical tools [...] such objects were traded and the same happened with similar goods in the large workshop-sites at Glma-Roate and Cremenea (Al. Punescu 1966, p. 327) 17 Their examination (of the finds)- could be a static one, taking into account their morpho-technical attributes (butt, dorsal side, ventral side, shape) and dimensions (morpho-metrical analysis). A different approach, also called dynamic approach, deals with the reconstruction of a debitage product or support, based on various technical stages of the debitage within the operational chain. The reconstruction of the operational chain/reduction sequence is based on refitting and experiment (F. Djindjian, J. Kozlowski, M.
Otte, 1999, p. 86).

27

Adina BORONEAN

In my approach, one first regional group might include the sites in northeastern Moldavia (Botoani, Suceava and Iai counties fig. 6), also tied to the sites in Ukraine and the Republic of Moldavia. As for the earlier hypothesis of Crimean origins, one might wonder whether we were talking about diffusion or migration. As there is no answer for the moment, the question stays open. A second group could be represented by the sites in Dobrogea (departments of Constana, Tulcea and possibly Galai). At the present moment the scattering pattern of the sites and the type of implements resemble the ones in northwest Bulgaria and Turkey, also on the Black Sea Coast. (I. Gatsov, M. zdogan 1997, I. Gatsov 2000). The sites in Dobrogea, with hardly any systematic research, pose many questions in what the cultural attribution is concerned. Some might rather belong to the Hamangia Neolithic than to the Tardenoisian. A third area gets shaped around Sita Buzului with possible connections to Lapo and Largu. The two locations at Largu provided insufficient finds, they were collected from the surface of the sand dunes and the site was destroyed. At Lapo the stratigraphy is unclear and raises questions as to the association of pottery with the microliths. The interpretation of the Lapo site changed greatly in time. In the first publication, the existence of the Tardenoisian was not noticed (Fl. Mogoanu, M. Bitiri 1962). Fl. Mogoanu remarked the lack of connection between the finds at Lapo and those from Cremenea (Fl. Mogoanu 1962, p. 149), but a certain resemblance of the side-scraper types to the ones at Ripiceni. Al. Punescu initially considered it part of the Sita Buzului regional group (Al. Punescu 1965, p. 27). He maintained his opinion during the 80-ies but in his impressive volume on the Paleolithic and Mesolithic south of the Carpathians he framed Lapo as one of the Tardenoisian sites at the western limit of the Pontic area. This opinion was equally shared by M. Brudiu (1974, p. 69), who classified CostandaLdui within the same cultural area. Excavations at Lapo were resumed in 1993 by a team led by M. Crciumaru18. If in 1994 a number of four implements resulted from the dig were assigned to the Tardenoisian on a morpho-typological basis (M. Crciumaru, C. Beldiman, C. Cpi 1994, p. 49), in 1999 the excavators changed their view suggesting that there was no evidence supporting the existence of a Tardenoisian layer on the respective site (M. Crciumaru, M. Anghelinu, O. Crstina 2000, p. 54)19. The matter would remain open until the archeological material is published or new excavations take place. We also consider that a re-evaluation of the archeological finds uncovered by Fl. Mogoanu is a must. A fourth regional area of the microlithic industries could be located in northwestern Romania (departments of Bihor and Satu Mare), keeping the earlier considerations concerning its ties with the sites in Hungary and Slovakia. Recent research (after 1989) indicated a high density of Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic sites on the Tisza Valley (thus including the Romanian ones too), suggesting the existence of a regional Mesolithic facies (M. Otte, P. Noiret 2001, p. 411; R. Kertesz 1996, p. 565). According to R. Kertesz (1996), the Mesolithic in the Tisza Valley could be considered as a variation of the local Epi-Gravettian and of the Western Mesolithic technocomplex20. As for the site at Ocna Sibiului, until new excavations take place, it can be crossed out from the list of Mesolithic sites, given the scarcity of finds which I. Paul assigned rather to the Neolithic. One can not miss the extremely poor state of publication of the archeological finds (with the exception of those of Al. Punescu, published completely). Even for the happy cases when something did get printed, the information refers mainly to the lithic artifacts, presented in a
The excavations took place between 1993 and 1999 when Lapo was turned into a training site for the students of the Valahia University in Trgovite. The largest part of the archeological material is still unpublished. The little information one can find comes from the annual excavation reports (referring mainly to the stratigraphical context) and from a series of papers presented at Trgovite in 1996. 19 The stratigraphical interpretation of Lapo appears difficult, as it has already been mentioned, considering the disturbed stratigraphy. But it is impossible not to note that, according to Fl. Mogoanu the area of the Tardenoisian settlement was rather extensive, making the question on the existence of the Tardenoisian site one disputable problem... 20 We are talking about what the traditional Romanian archeology coined as the area of influence of the Central-East European Tardenoisian.
18

28

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

selected manner, with priority given to typical tools, sometimes without mentioning the total number of uncovered artifacts or the total surface of the excavated area. More than 97% of the publications are in the Romanian language, making them almost inaccessible to foreign researchers. *** The present article only suggested a starting point and a few working hypotheses. But it must be obvious that the study of smaller regions gives the advantage of a more thorough research and a better observance of common or different features between sites. In the end, one can only wish that things should start changing, meaning by this a shift towards a new approach in the matter of lithic industries (much to be preferred to the term of Tardenoisian industries, non-existing, in fact), a change from the rapid cultural framing of a certain site into one of the two postulated cultural areas to small size cultural groups and more attention given to the regional characteristics.
Catalogue of archeological sites considered as Tardenoisian 1. Albeti, Constana county (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 511512; idem 1987, p. 1622; idem 1990, p. 3 4;1993, p. 151153, idem 1999, p 7076). Location: La Cetate Type of research: field survey, test pits. Type of remains: microliths 444 (106 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, artifact typology and size, the presumed climate of archeological horizon. Observations: the site covered approx. 45000 m2; 13 calcinated lithic artifacts; pot sherds (IVI centuries BC) also occurred. 2. Bal (Tg. Frumos), Iai county (V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 1983, p. 1719). Location: the Harapu Farm, 8 km west of Tg. Frumos Type of remains: lithics of a Tardenoisian aspect sidescrapers, geometric shapes (trapezes). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: archeological finds only partly published (8 artifacts, V. Chirica, Gh. Enache, 19831984, fig. 4/26). 3. Blbneti, Galai county (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 372; idem 1974, p. 150; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 315). Location: Chilieni hill Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics (flint artifacts-flakes, microlithic endscraper). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian ? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: unclear, probably typology (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 372; idem 1974, p. 150). 4. Blteni (Probota), Iai county (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 285; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 332 (I); N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 269). Location: Unchetea hill, Moanca hill at the eastern border of the village Type of research: field survey? Type of remains: lithics-flint artifacts. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology? Observations: unknown number of finds. 5. Bneasa, Galai county (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 370; idem 1974, p. 131132; Al. Punescu 1979, p. 520; idem 1981, p. 505; idem 1998, p. 351352). 5.1. Location: The well of Toader Buil (Bneasa I) Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: few lithic artifacts (flint), predominantly microlithic. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology ? Observations: unknown number of finds; small number of tools (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 351352).

29

Adina BORONEAN

5.2. Location: The Gemenii well (Bneasa II) (M. Brudiu 1974, p. 131132; Al. Punescu 1979, p. 520; idem 1981, p. 505; idem 1989, p. 151; idem 1998, p. 351352). Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: lithics predominantly microlithic 27 flint artifacts. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, artifact size. Observations: similarities to BeretiDealul Taberei, Bneasa I. 6. Belceti, . Iai county 6.1. Location: centre of Rui village (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52; V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 16; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 288). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 3 microlithic sidescrapers and other finds (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW) (Epi-Paleolithic). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: also traces of Cri and Cucuteni habitations (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52(I); V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 16); Al. Punescu considered it identical to the location Pe Loturi (see next). 6.2. Location: Pe Loturi, next to the sand quarry (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 288). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: one flint microlithic trapeze. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW) (Epi-Paleolithic). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: Cri, Cucuteni, Latene, IV century archeological traces (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52(I); V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 16); Al. Punescu considered it identical to 6.1 Centre of Rui village. 6.3. Location: Scarchi (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 52; V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 16; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 288). Type of research: field survey Type of remains: microliths, some finds show patina Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW) Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, artifact size. Observations: artifacts occurred in several locations; some could typologically be assigned to the Gravettian; the location, defined by Chirica et alii. as a Tardenoisian site providing trapezes, microlithic sidescrapers and spindle-like cores, was overlapped by a Cucuteni B layer. 7. Bereti, Galai county (M. Brudiu 1971, p. 61375; idem 1974, p. 132134; idem 1979, p. 293298; Al. Punescu 1979, p. 520; idem 1981, p. 505; idem 1984, p. 250, 252; idem 1986, p. 74; idem 1990, p. 226, idem 1998, p. 352358; V. Chirica 1989, p. 120121). Location: Dealul Taberei, layer II Type of research: systematic excavations, 132 m2. Type of remains: lithics, predominantly microliths 158 artifacts within two features (130, respectively 28). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (M. Brudiu) (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, typology, tool size. Chronology: Holocene? Observations: the site was destroyed by natural factors and agricultural works; poor finds; chronologically could be placed prior to IcueniRipiceniErbiceni, possibly synchronous to Bneasa III (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 358). 8. Brdeti (Vinderei), Vaslui county (M. Brudiu 1971, p.70; idem 1974, p. 150; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 333). Location: UrsoaiaMnstirea hill Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics (flint, gritstone, gravel boulders). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: artifact size? Observations: the site has been destroyed by agricultural works. 9. Brebeni (Corvin), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 6; idem 1999, p. 78). Location: La Vcrie Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: microliths (flint) 12 artifacts. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW).

30

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Criteria for cultural attribution: tool size. Observations: directing artifacts are missing (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 78). 10. Ciumeti (Sanislu), Satu Mare county (Al. Punescu 1964, p. 321336; idem 1970, p. 3133,148; idem 1989, p. 151152; idem 2001, p. 503511; Proek 1959, p. 145148). Location: Pune Type of research: systematic excavations in a sand dune, 30 m2. Type of remains: lithics, predominantly microlithic (97%, flint, obsidian, quartz, gritstone); faunal remains, charcoal, ochre, fragment of parietal human bone. Cultural attribution: Central European Tardenoisian (CE). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Chronology: GrA21701: 732060 BP. Observations: other cultural remains were uncovered assigned to the Neolithic, Bronze, Dacian, Early Medieval ages; technotypological similarities to Barca I, Maanske Vke, Doln Sreda (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 511). 11. Corneti (Miroslava), Iai county (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 236(I); V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 17; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 292). Location: Tarlaua FermPodul la Danca Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 2 microlithic flint flakes. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: unclear, probably typology. Observations: archeological remains belonging to the Noua culture. 12. Cremenea (incorporated to ntorsura Buzului), Covasna county (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Pop 1959a, p. 2934; idem 1959b, p. 5156; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1938, p. 6667; Al. Punescu 1966, p. 319324; M. Crciumaru, Al. Punescu 1975, p. 315318, 328329; M. Roska 1924, p. 305306; idem 1925, p. 188; idem 1926, p. 306, 332 (I); idem 1930, p. 9596; idem 1942, p. 275276; idem 1956, p. 166174; E. Patte 1934, p. 383384). 12.1. Location: Malu Dinu Buzea Type of research: systematic excavations, 311 m2. Type of remains: lithics. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (CE). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size, raw material. Observations: contemporary to Merior. Aurignacian and Schneckenberg remains were also uncovered. 12.2. Location: n Grdini (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 371). Type of research: test pits, 2 m2. Type of remains: lithics 18 flint blanks. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (CE). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy. Observations: layer succession identical to the one at Malu Dinu Buzea (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 371). 13. CuzaVod (Castelu), Constana county 13.1. Location: Cariera Veche, at the eastern limit of the Caolinul Medgidia quarry (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 67; idem 1999, p. 104107). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 130 flint microlithic artifacts (31 typical). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size and to a certain extent, the stratigraphy (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 104, 107). Observations: the site was completely destroyed by the quarrying (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 107). 13.2 Location: Cariera Veche (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 611; idem 1990, p. 228231; idem 1989, p. 151; idem 1999, p. 111112). Type of research: field survey (finds came out of the quarry), test pits 9m2 (4+5). Type of remains: flint microliths 656 finds (134 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, typology and tool size. Observations: 30 calcinated finds; Neolithic, Bronze and Roman pot sherds were also identified; (Al. Punescu, 1999, p. 109); 2 lithic artifacts were seen as Aurignacian. 13.3. Location: La Poarta Dealului Bulgriei, ENE of the village cemetery (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 120 121).

31

Adina BORONEAN

Type of research: field survey (700800 m2). Type of remains: 38 flint microlithic finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: 4 heavy calcinated artifacts. 13.4. Location: to the NE limit of the village cemetery (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 120121). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: microliths (flint). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: Observations: 300 m SW of Dealul Bulgriei; the archeological finds are poor lacking the typical tools; the two locations could be contemporary (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 120121). 14. Draxini (Blueni), Botoani county (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 47(I); Al. Punescu, P. adurschi 1988, p. 347; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 113). Location: La Silite Type of research: field survey ? Type of remains: a few flint artifacts among which a microlithic sidescraper (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 47(I); Al. Punescu 1998, p. 113). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian ? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. 15. Erbiceni, Iai county (N. Zaharia 1965, p. 289; idem 1961, p. 28, 30; N. Zaharia, M. Petrescu Dmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 219; Al. Punescu 1964, p. 321333; idem 1979, p. 520522; idem 1970, p. 3133, 145147; idem 1980, p. 540541; idem 1981, p. 479493; idem 1984, p. 241, 253; idem 1998, p. 295303; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 139140 (I). Location: Sub budi n fnaul de pe es Type of research: field survey, systematic excavations 315 m2. Type of remains: 3 features containing lithics (3660 artifacts 338 tools, 77,6% microlithic), few faunal remains (bones, teeth, shells), charcoal and burnt soil (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 296297). Cultural attribution: evolved Tardenoisian of northwest Pontic type (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy (?). Observations: pallinological analysis; disputed radiocarbon dates GX9417: 7850215 BP (bones), GrN 16993: 340040BP (snail shells), GrN16993: 484050BP (snail shells, mussel shells). Only the first date was accepted by Al. Punescu (1998, p. 303); technotypological similarities to Icueni, RipiceniIzvor. 16. Galopetreu (Tarcea), Bihor county (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 433; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959, p. 4041; N. Janos 1999, p. 33; B. Jungbert 1979, p. 396397). Location: unknown II, within village limits Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics-obsidian (cores, blades, sidescrapers on fragmented blades). Cultural attribution: pre-ceramic microlithic industry (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959, p. 4041); possibly Tardenoisian (Ciumeti) or Neolithic (Berea) (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 433) (CE). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. 17. Garvn (Jijila), Tulcea county (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 507508; idem 1987, p. 3; idem 1999, p. 69; E.Coma 1953, p. 750751). Location: In Bugeac, at the foothill of Crcanele hill Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: microlithic (flint), 100 artifacts (12 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology and tool size. Observations: poor typology (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 69); three calcinated finds; Roman, Migration, Medieval Age pot sherds (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 508). 18. Ghireni (Couca), Botoani county 18.1Location: La Hrtop la Balta Srat (Al. Punescu 1973, p. 9; idem 1998, p. 113114; Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 8788 (I); N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 242). Type of research: field survey, test pits. Type of remains: lithics (31 flint implements). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, raw material?

32

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Observations: a few finds, made of blue flint with patina were assigned to the Lower Paleolithic. 18.2 Location: La Livad/ La Livad n Balta Lat (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 11, nota 1; idem 1999, p. 115, Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 88). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics a few flint finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. 19. Hneti, Botoani county (Al. Punescu 1973, p. 9; idem 1998, p. 115; Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 139 (I). Location: La Movili Type of research: accidental discovery. Type of remains: lithics 2 flint pieces. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: The remains attributed to the Tardenoisian was recovered from the soil excavated in the migration necropolis (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 139 from the IIIIV centuries; Cucuteni pot fragments were also noted (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 139. 20. Horga (Epureni), Vaslui county (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 335; Gh. Coman 1980, p. 132, information Gh. Coman 1981). Location: To the northern limit of the village Type of research: accidental discovery (landslide). Type of remains: lithics (sidescrapers, endscraper, flakes), sometimes microlithic; many faunal remains. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW)?, Gravettian? (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 335). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology (microlithic sidescrapers). 21. Icueni (Vorona), Botoani county (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 301, 303; Al. Punescu 1979, p. 239251; idem 1981, p. 503504; idem 1989, p. 151; idem 1998, p. 117120). Location: Poiana Eroilor Type of research: field survey, test pits. Type of remains: lithics (648 microlithic finds, flint and other rocks). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian of northwest Pontic type (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy (?)21, typology (tools and armatures). Observations: technotypological similarities to Erbiceni and Ripiceni Izvor (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 117120). 22. Ipoteti (Mihai Eminescu), Botoani county (O. ovan, I. Ioni, P. adurschi, 1983 information, Al. Punescu 1998, p. 121). Location: In the courtyard of Mihai Eminescus memmorial house Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: 3 finds of greyblack flint. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology of a spindlelike core. Observations: the excavations took place in the IIIII AD Dacian settlement. 23. Ldui (incorporated to ntorsura Buzului), Covasna county (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959, p. 54; Al. Punescu 1964, p. 35; idem 1965, p. 27; idem 1966, p. 324327; idem 1970, p. 145; idem 2001, p. 373377; M. Crciumaru, Al. Punescu 1975, p. 316325). Location: Costanda Type of research: systematic excavations 120 m2. Type of remains: lithics 93% microlithic 34 450 finds (46? tools) made of flint, gritstone, quartzite. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian. Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy and techno-typology. Observations: one single cultural layer; calcinated finds were noted; the large quantity of debris was seen as the consequence of a small flint processing workshop; there are Bronze pottery fragments. 24. Lapo, Prahova county (Fl. Mogoanu, M. BitiriCiortescu 1961, p. 215226; Fl. Mogoanu 1960, p. 127128; idem 1962, p. 145151; idem 1964, p. 337350; idem 1969, p. 512; idem 1978, p. 118121; Al. Punescu 1970, p. 2526, 136137, 220; idem 1979, p. 512517; M. Crciumaru, C. Beldiman, R. Dobrescu,
21

The artifacts were found in three layers not deeper than 0.40 m (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 117). Soil formation procesess are unknown.

33

Adina BORONEAN

other types (e.g. the Aurignacian ones or pot fragments), they belong, both techno-typologically but also dimensionally to the Tardenoisian, probably a middle stage (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 127); the radiocarbon
dates were not accepted and where considered as too recent both for the Tardenoisian and for the Aurignacian; a Cris Neolithic layer was also noted.

A. Cozma 1994, p. 3536; M. Crciumaru, C. Beldiman 1994, p. 380; M. Crciumaru, C. Beldiman, C. Cpi 1995, p. 4950; M. Crciumaru 1996, p. 425; M. Crciumaru, R. Dobrescu 1996, p. 71; M. Crciumaru, R. Dobrescu, 1997, p. 377; M. Crciumaru, R. Dobrescu, C. Cpi 1997, p. 3334; M. Crciumaru et alii 1999, p. 6263; M. Crciumaru et alii 1996, p. 3233; Gh. Olteanu 1996, p. 3435; O. Crstina 1996, p. 638; D. Mrgrit, M. Sandu 1998, p. 4955; M. Crciumaru, M. Anghelinu, O. Crstina 2000, p. 5354). Location: Poiana Roman Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: lithics, predominantly microlithic (flint) 1228 finds (272 typical) and approximately other 9500 finds from M. Crciumaru excavations, unpublished. Cultural attribution: Evolved Tardenoisian (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 127) (CE). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. Observations: small size settlement; although, stratigraphically the lithic finds were uncovered mixed with

25. Largu, Buzu county 25.1. Location: Cornul Malului, dune no. 1 (I.T. Dragomir 1957, p. 300301; idem 1959, p. 475476; Al. Punescu 1979, p. 517518; idem 2000, p. 114115). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 142 microlithic flint finds (14 typical). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. Observations: no archeological context, the finds came from three sandy layers of the dune; 8 calcinated artifacts (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 518). 25.2. Location: La Calentir, dune no. 3 (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 518) Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 12 microlithic flint finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. Observations: 1 km away from dune no. 11. 26. Lespezi (Dobromir), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 6; idem 1999, p. 132). Location: North of the village Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 5 microlithic flint finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. 27. Lumina (incorporated to Constana), Constana county (M. Brudiu 1985, p. 1316, 2023; Al. Punescu 1990, p. 224226; idem 1999, p. 136). Location: Peninsula Type of research: field survey 1500 m2. Type of remains: lithics 20 implements (M. Brudiu 1985, p. 14). Cultural attribution: rather Final Gravettian than Tardenoisian? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology and retouch manner (M. Brudiu 1985, p. 1316, 2023). Observations: the number of finds appears different as reported Al. Punescu and M. Brudiu (13 vs. 20); 60% are sidescrapers, no geometric shapes; until now, the discoveries made in Dobrogea are different from the one in the south of Moldova where the microlithism is excessive (M. Brudiu 1985, p. 2122). 28. Luncavia, Tulcea county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 6970). Location: La Ceair Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: microlithic and middle size lithic finds (flint), 6 tools and an unknown number of flakes, bladelets and cores. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian ? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: not specified. Observations: few lithic artifacts, no diagnostic tools (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 70).

34

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

29. Manoleasa, Botoani county (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 121122). Location: HrtopCoasta SaivanelorLa Agra Type of research: test pits. Type of remains: lithics (flint). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian ? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, typology. Observations: one Gravettian and one Dacian layer were also noticed: the small scale excavations were undertook to expose the Dacian IIIII AD settlement (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 121). 30. Medgidia, Constana county 30.1 Location: West to the stadium La plopi (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 1116; idem 1989, p. 151; idem 1990, p. 228232; idem 1999, p. 166169). Type of research: field survey on a limited area. Type of remains: flint microliths 912 items (160 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian of northwest Pontic type (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. Observations: 100 calcinated finds (or showing traces of burning); the site was destroyed: no other traces of habitation were noted; marked similarities to Icueni, CuzaVod, Ripiceni Izvor, Erbiceni (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 168)22. 30.2 Location: La Potcoav (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 11, nota 1; idem 1987, p. 4, 6; idem 1999, p. 174). Type of research: field survey on a limited area. Type of remains: 7 flint microliths (one encoche flake). Cultural attribution: possibly Tardenoisian of northwest Pontic type (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. 30.3. Location: To the western limit of the Serbian heroes monument (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 4, 6; idem 1999, p. 170). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 13 lithic finds (flint). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: unknown. Chronology: typology, size. Observations: no Neolithic remains were noticed. 31. Merior (incorporated to ntorsura Buzului), Covasna county; other names: Crciuneti, Glma, Valea Brdetului 31.1. Location: Sub Delu (Delu) (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 387). Type of research: test pits, 15 m2 (7+8). Type of remains: lithics (flint). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy. Observations: poor typology. 31.2. Location: Poarta Cremenii (Al. Punescu 1962, p. 156; idem 2001, p. 387). Type of research: test pits (8 m2). Type of remains: flint finds 168 flakes. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, raw material, technology (Al. Punescu 1962, p. 156). Observations: workshop (?) (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 387; idem 1962, p. 156). 31.3. Location: Roate (n Roate) (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Pop 1959, p. 51; Al. Punescu, I. Pop 1961, p. 3335; Al. Punescu 1962, p. 153156; idem 2001, p. 378387; M. Crciumaru, Al. Punescu 1975, p. 315318, 333334). Type of research: systematic excavations 278 m2. Type of remains: flint lithic finds coming from workshops 57 673 items. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, size. Observations: small number of tools 184, there are no armatures, microburins or spindlelike cores; atypical Neolithic and Bronze Age pot fragments (Al. Punescu 1961, p. 35; idem 2001, p. 378379). 31.4. Location: n Botul Otecului (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 387). Type of research: test pits, 5 m2. Type of remains: 5 flint finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW).
22

Not even the main groups of implements are identical.

35

Adina BORONEAN

Criteria for cultural attribution: not specified, probably typology. 31.5. Location: Liziera Otecu (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 387388). Type of research: test pits. Type of remains: lithics (flint, gritstone). Cultural attribution: Epi-Gravettian Early Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: not specified, probably typology. Observations: the almost total absence of the main tool types (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 388). 31.6. Location: Valley of Chicheru creek and adjacent valleys (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 388389). Type of research: field survey (collections). Type of remains: mixed lithic finds. Cultural attribution: Aurignacian, Gravettian, Tardenoisian ? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. 32. Mihail Koglniceanu (ignai), Iai county (N. Zaharia 1955, p. 900; idem 1961, p. 27; N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 252; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1985, p. 435 (II); Al. Punescu 1993, p. 205, Al. Punescu 1998, p. 311). Location: La Hatie, la Hotar Type of research: field survey? Type of remains: lithics 23 flint microliths. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Type of remains: Paleolithic, Precucuteni and Cucuteni A. 33. Miorcani (RduiPrut), Botoani county (Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 211212; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 125). Location: Pustoaia Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: a flint pyramidal core. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian? (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: core typology. 34. Mitoc, Botoani county 34.1. Location: Valea Izvorului, Dealul Srturii (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, N. Zaharia 1959, p. 3536; N. Zaharia 1961, p. 1819; M. BitiriCiortescu 1965a, p. 810; eadem 1965b, p. 436440; eadem 1973, p. 2735; eadem 1987, p. 207233; N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 276; M. Bitiri Ciortescu, M. Crciumaru 1978, p. 463479; idem 1981, p. 319; idem 1980, p. 6575; M. BitiriCiortescu, M. Crciumaru, V. Vasilescu 1979, p. 3341; M. Crciumaru 1980, p. 126131; N.N. Moroan 1938, p. 60; Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 191; Al. Punescu 1989, p. 135; idem 1993, p. 193; V. Chirica 1990, p. 163171; idem 1988, p. 1122; D Monah, t. Cuco 1995, p. 105109). Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: lithics (40 items). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: depth of finds, techno-typology, flint patina, size. Observations: four habitation layers: Musterian, Aurignacian, Tardenoisian, Cucuteni B. 34.2. Location: Valea lui Stan (P. Istrati 1979, p 8389; idem 1981, p. 713; D. Monah, t. Cuco 1985, p. 120; V. Chirica 1989, p. 4648). Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: lithics 5060 flint items. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: the Mesolithic and Paleolithic finds were mixed together (?); uncertain stratigraphy. 35. Ocna Sibiului, Sibiu county (I. Paul 1962, p. 197198, Al. Punescu 2001, p. 310311). Location: La Roghin Type of research: test pits, 15 m2. Type of remains: 6 flint finds (3 microlithic, 2 tools), bone fragments impossible to determine. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian? (Al. Punescu), Neolithic (I. Paul). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, typology, tool size (rounded sidescraper, pyramidal core). Observations: a temporary settlement (Al. Punescu 2001, p. 310); also remains from the Petreti culture and medieval times.

36

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

36. Poarta Alb, Constana county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 184; idem 1987, p. 6; idem 1990, p. 228). Location: Next to the pump station Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: flint microliths 20 items. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: no Hamangia Neolithic remains; the site was destroyed during the works at the canal. 37. Probota, Iai county (N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 271; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1985, p. 329 (II), Al. Punescu 1998, p. 315). Location: Dealul Porcului Type of research: field survey? Type of remains: flint microliths (with patina) 13 items. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: Cucuteni B Neolithic traces in proximity; the site provided a few lithic finds considered as Aurignacian (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 315). 38. Remus Opreanu (incorporated in Medgidia), Constana county (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959, p. 1; Al. Punescu 1987, p. 6; idem 1999, p. 186187). Location: NNE to the village Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics (flint) 49 items out of which 24 microlithic. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: techno-typology, tool size. Observations: no Hamangia Neolithic traces; 25 finds showing patina were assigned to the Musterian. 39. Ripiceni, Botoani county (N.N. Moroan 1938, p. 3352; Al. Punescu 1965, p. 532; idem 1970, p. 3133, 108111, 113119, 146147, 217; idem 1964, p. 321336; idem 1976, p. 58; idem 1978, p. 317 333; idem 1983, p. 187195; idem 1984, p. 235264; idem 1987, p. 87100; idem 1993, p. 11178; Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976, p. 225228, V. Chirica 1995, p. 105109). Location: Izvor Type of research: systematic excavations 3950 m2. Type of remains: lithics (flint) from workshops 10267 items (690 tools). Cultural attribution: Evolved Tardenoisian of northwest Pontic type (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology (traditional Epi-Gravettian pieces but also abundant habitation traces from post-Paleolithic ages (Cri, Horoditea, Noua, Hallstatt, Dacian) overlapping directly the Tardenoisian, lying at its turn directly on Gravettian IIb. The Tardenoisian had been badly disturbed by rodent tunnels and no faunal remains were assigned to it (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 168); the percentage of microliths is of only 62%; close similarities to Icueni and Erbiceni (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 265); the site is nowadays under water. 40. Sibioara (Mihail Koglniceanu), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 194; Matei 1985, p. 137). Location: Livada Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: predominantly microlithic (flint) finds 31 items (2 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: scarcity of tool types (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 194). 41. Straja (Cumpna), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 194195; idem 1978, p. 277282; idem 1987, p. 46; idem 1990, p. 228; idem 1979, p. 510511). Location: La Stnior/ La lac la Stnior Type of research: field survey, test pits. Type of remains: flint microliths 150 finds (25 typical). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: stratigraphy, typology, tool size. Observations: the site covers approximately 4000 m2; 2 calcinated finds (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 511); Metal and Byzantine Age pottery. 42. Storneti (Sineti), Iai county (V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi, 1985, p. 369 (II), Al. Punescu 1998, p. 317).

37

Adina BORONEAN

Location: La Livad Type of research: field survey? Type of remains: lithics (flint), unknown number of finds, three large and middle size. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. 43. ipotele (Deleni), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 195196; idem 1987, p. 6). Location: Canaraua Pustnicului Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: 7 flint microliths. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology (the type of one core!!!), tool size, the lack of Neolithic remains. Observations: abundance of postNeolithic remains (pottery, stone walls) (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 120121). 44. Trguor, Constana county (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 201; idem 1979, p. 508; idem 1987, p. 34; idem 1990, p. 228). 44.1. Location: La Grdin Type of research: systematic excavations, test pits. Type of remains: lithics (flint) large number of microlithic finds. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: the Mesolithic layer is at times directly overlapped by the Hamangia Neolithic one; the site covers approximately 1000 m2; unknown number of finds; the remains are scattered in small concentrations situated at some distance one from the other (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 201); the excavation were made by paleontologists and the results are only partially published. 44.2. Location: La Adam (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 202210; idem 1979, p. 4; idem 1980, p. 531,536; idem 1987, p. 4; idem 1990, p. 215232; idem 1989, p. 134, 145; P. Samson, C. Rdulescu 1959, p. 199204; idem 1962, p. 282320; idem 1971, p. 629636). Site type: cave. Type of research: systematic excavations. Type of remains: lithics (flint?). Cultural attribution: Mesolithic (P. Samson 1959, p. 199204), Tardenoisian (Al. Punescu 1979, p. 510; idem 1999, p. 208) (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: not specified. Observations: excavation undertook by paleontologists: the Mesolithic finds are not published (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 205) with the number of finds unknown; two layers had been assigned as Aceramic Neolithic (P. Samson C. Rdulescu 1959, p. 199204); the lithic remains seem to show similarities to the ones from Trguor La Grdin; two other cultural layers were present: Hamangia and Gumelnia Neolithic. 44.3 Location: Urs Al. Punescu (1979, p. 508) suggested the existence of a Tardenoisian horizon in certain areas, based on the presence of some flint microliths. 45. Topile (Valea Seac), Suceava county (V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 18). Location: Catargi Hill, on the area of the Gravettian site Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: one flint spindlelike core. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: core typology. 46. Totoeti (Erbiceni), Iai county (N. Zaharia 1961, p. 30; Al. Punescu 1998, p. 326; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 146 (I). Location: Dealul Totoetilor Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics (flint, sometimes with patina), black schist backed bladelet. Cultural attribution: EpiPaleolithic? (N. Zaharia 1961, p. 30)/Tardenoisian?/Evolved Gravettian (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 326; V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, p. 146). Criteria for cultural attribution: unknown. Observations: unknown number of finds. 47. ibrinu (Mircea Vod), Constana county (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 38; idem 1999, p. 213). 47.1. Location: I On the right bank of the lake Type of research: field survey (100 m2).

38

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Type of remains: flint microliths 28 items (9 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size . Observations: no other habitation traces; inventory poor in tools (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 213). 47.2. Location: IA On the right bank of the lake (Al. Punescu 1987, p. 4; idem 1999, p. 214). Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: flint microliths 6 finds (3 tools). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology, tool size. Observations: no other habitation traces. 48. ignai, Iai county (V. Chirica 1987, p. 11, footnote 1; V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 17). Location: Pe Deal la Raiu Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: flint microliths; sidescrapers are predominant but no geometric shapes (V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 19831984, p. 17). Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology. Observations: a rich site. 49. ucani (Mluteni), Vaslui county (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 348; N. Zaharia, M. PetrescuDmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970, p. 356; information N. Zaharia 1980). Location: unknown, probably SE of the village in Igeti Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics (flint): pyramidal and spindle-like cores. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW). Criteria for cultural attribution: typology (pyramidal cores). Observations: the cores were considered identical to those at Erbiceni and Ripiceni (Al. Punescu 1998, p. 348). 50. Valea lui Mihai, Bihor county (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959, p. 4041; C.S. Nicolescu Plopor 1938, p. 80; Al. Punescu 2001, p. 447). Location: unknown, within village area Type of research: field survey. Type of remains: lithics microlithic sidescrapers, fragmented blades. Cultural attribution: Tardenoisian (NW) or Early Neolithic. Criteria for cultural attribution: not specified.

Bibliography: C. Ambrojevici 1932 D. Berciu 1939a D. Berciu 1939b D. Berciu 1941 D. Berciu 1942 M. BitiriCiortescu 1965a M. BitiriCiortescu 1965b M. BitiriCiortescu 1973 M. BitiriCiortescu 1987

Cteva cuvinte despre prezena paleoliticului n regiunea Nistrului din Basarabia de Nord, n Buletinul Facultii de tiine din Cernui, 6, p. ndrumri n preistorie (O serie de prelegeri inute la seminarul de istorie universal supt conducerea domnului profesor N. Iorga), p. Repertoriu arheologic de staiuni i descoperiri preistorice n Romnia, n Revista Arhivelor, 3, p. 416. Le Paleolithique et le Mesolithique en Roumanie, n Bulletin dInstitut Roumain de Sofia 1, 2, p. 567592. Cu privire la nceputurile paleoliticului n Romnia, n SCIV 16, 1, p. 5 Consideraii asupra prezenei unor forme de unelte bifaciale n aezrile paleolitice din Romnia, n SCIV, 16, 3, p. 431450. Cteva date cu privire la paleoliticul de la MitocValea Izvorului, n Studii i Materiale, Suceava 3, p. 2736. Paleoliticul de la MitocValea Izvorului, n SCIVA 38, 3, 207233.
16. 88102. 170173. Arheologia preistoric a Olteniei.

39

Adina BORONEAN

M. BitiriCiortescu, V. Cpitanu, M. Crciumaru 1989 M. Bitiri, M. Crciumaru 1978 M. Bitiri, M. Crciumaru 1981 M. Crciumaru, P. Vasilescu 1978 P.I. Borisovski 1965 J.A. Brown 1893 J.A. Brown 1877 M. Brudiu 1971 M. Brudiu 1974 M. Brudiu 1985 M. Crciumaru 1980 M. Crciumaru 1985 M. Crciumaru, Al. Punescu 1975 M. Crciumaru, C. Beldiman, C. Cpi 1995 M. Crciumaru et alii 1996 M. Crciumaru, M. Anghelinu, O. Crstina 2000 V. Cpitanu 1968 V. Cpitanu 1969 V. Cpitanu 1988 V. Chirica 1970 V. Chirica 1989a V. Chirica 1989b V. Chirica 1995 V. Chirica, Gh. Enache 1984 V. Chirica, M. Tanasachi 1984, 1985 Gh. Coman 1980 E. Coma 1953

Paleoliticul in sectorul subcarpatic al Bistriei n lumina cercetrilor de la Lespezi, n Carpica 20, p. 752. Atelierul de la MitocValea Izvorului i locul lui n cronologia paleoliticului din Romnia, n SCIVA 29, 4, p. 463479. Consideraii asupra unor probleme privind dezvoltarea paleoliticului superior i mediului su natural pe teritoriul Romniei, n SCIVA 32, 1,

Paleoliticul de la MitocValea Izvorului, specificul culturii i mediul natural, n Hierasus 1, p. 3343. Problemele paleoliticului superior i mezoliticului de pe coasta de nordest a Mrii Negre, n SCIV 15, 1, p. 517. On the continuity of the Paleolithic and the Neolithic periods, n Journal A.I.G.B. 22 (1, 2), 1892, p. 6698. On some flint implements from Egypt, n Journal A.I.G.B. 7, p. 396 Primele descoperiri tardenoasiene din sudestul Moldovei, n SCIV 22, Paleoliticul superior i epipaleoliticul din Moldova, Biblioteca de ArheologieSeria complementar 2. Descoperiri paleolitice i epipaleolitice pe teritoriul comunei Lumina, n Pontica 18, p. 1329. Mediul geografic n pleistocenul superior i culturile paleolitice din Romnia, Bucureti. La relation hommeenvironment, element important de la dinamique de la societe humaine au cours du paleolithique et epipaleolithique sur le territoire de la Roumanie, n Dacia N.S. 29, p. 734. Cronostratigrafia i paleoclimatul tardenoasianului din depresiunea ntorsura Buzului, n SCIVA 26, 3, p. 315342. LapoPoiana Roman, jud.Prahova, n Cronica cercetrilor arheologice. Campania 1994, p. 4950. Spturile de la Lapo, n Lucrrile simpozionului de arheologie,
Trgovite, 2325 nov. 1995, p. 3334. 3, p. 361375. 412.

p. 319.

LapoPoiana Roman, jud. Prahova, arheologice. Campania 1999, p. 5354.

Cronica

cercetrilor

Unele observaii cu privire la nceputurile paleoliticului superior n zona Prutului mijlociu, n ArhMold 12, p. 1122. Ateliere paleolitice i epipaleolitice de prelucrare a uneltelor, n MemAnt 2, p. 718. The Gravettian in the East of the Romanian Carpathians, BAI 3, Iai. Les industries a pointes folliacees du Paleolithique superieur europeen, n Eraul 42, p. 163171. Les industrie a pointes foliacees d'Europe Centrale. Paleosupplement Actes du Colloque de Miskolc, 1015 sept. 1991 , nr. 1, Juin 1995, Noi descoperiri paleolitice i epipaleolitice n Podiul Moldovei, n AMM, 19831984, 56, p. 1529. Repertoriul arheologic al judeului Iai, vol. III, Bucureti. Statornicie i continuitate (Repertoriul arheologic al judeului Vaslui). Contribuie la harta arheologic a Dobrogei de nordvest, n SCIV 4,
p. 105109.

16.

Descoperiri paleolitice n bazinul Bistriei, n Carpica 1, p. 916. Descoperiri paleolitice n judeele Neam i Vaslui, n Carpica 2, p. 7

34, p. 747758.

40

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

E. Coma 1965 E. Coma 1973 E. Condurachi, Vl. Dumitrescu, M.D. Matei 1972 B. Cunliffe (ed) 1994 Fr. Djindjian, J. Kozlowski, M.Otte 1999 I.T. Dragomir 1957 I.T. Dragomir 1959 Vl. Dumitrescu 1964 Vl. Dumitrescu 1971 Vl. Dumitrescu 1972 Vl. Dumitrescu, Al. Bolomey, Fl. Mogoanu 1983 I. Gatsov 2000

Consideraii cu privire la complexele neolitice din preajma Dunrii n sudvestul Romniei, n SCIV 16, 3, p. 545554. Bibliografia paleoliticului i epipaleoliticului din Romnia, Bucureti. Harta arheologic a Romniei, Bucureti. The Oxford illustrated prehistory of Europe. Le paleolithique superieur en Europe.
312.

Cercetri arheologice pe valea Clmuiului, n Materiale 3, p. 293 Raport asupra spturilor ntreprinse la Largu, n Materiale 5, p. 475

Faze tipologice i realiti stratigrafice, n SCIV 15, 1, p. 4552. Le debut du neolithique au nord du danube en Roumanie, n Actes du VIIIe Congres International de Sciences Prehistoriques et protohistoriques, Beograd, I, p. 8596. Comuna primitiv, n Harta arheologic a Romniei, Bucureti, p. 7
27.

476.

Esquisse d'une prehistoire de la Roumanie, Bucureti. Chipped stone assemblages from South Bulgaria and NW Turkey, n Technology, Style and Society. Contributions to the Innovations between the Alps and the Black Sea in Prehistory (ed. Lolita Some epipaleolithic sites from NW Turkey. Agacli, Domali, Gumudere, n Anatolica 20, p. 97120. Repertoriul arheologic al zonei Careiului, Bibliotheca Thracologica 28. Repertoriul localitilor cu descoperiri paleolitice din Transilvania, n AMN 16, p. 389410. Repertoriul localitilor cu descoperiri paleolitice din Transilvania, n AMN 19, p. 541555. Repertoriul localitilor cu descoperiri paleolitice din Transilvania, n AMN 2223, p. 385400. The Mesolithic n the Great Hungarian Plain: A Survey of the Evidence, n At the Fringes of three worlds: Hunters, gatherers and farmers in the middle of Tisza Valley, p. 565. L'epoque mesolithique en Pologne, n L'Anthropologie, p. 5256. Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic in Europe. Taxonomy and Paleohistory LapoPoiana Roman. Campaniile 19931997, n Lucrrile sesiunii naionale de comunicri tiinifice studeneti. ArheologieIstorie 2,
Trgovite 1011 aprilie 1998, p. 4955. The Mesolithic Age, n The Oxford Illustrated Prehistory of Europe, p. 77135. Unele aspecte ale paleoliticului de sfrit din ara noastr, n SCIV 11, 1, p. 125129. antierul de la Lapo, n Materiale 8, p. 145151. Probleme noi n aezarea de la Lapo, n SCIV 15, 3. Paleoliticul i epipaleoliticul de la Lapo, n Studii i materiale privitoare la trecutul istoric al judeului Prahova, p. 512. Mezoliticul de la Ostrovul Corbului, n SCIVA 29, 3, p. 335352. Aezrile Cucuteni din Romnia, Bucureti. Asupra mezoliticului din Oltenia, Institutul de Arheologie Oltean, Craiova, Memoriul VI, Muzeul regional al Olteniei, Craiova, 1932. Nikolova), p. 128

I. Gatsov,M.Ozdogan 1999 N. Janos 1999 B. Jungbert 1979 B. Jungbert 1982 B. Jungbert 1986 R. Kertesz 1996 L. Kozlowsky 1926 J.K. Kozlowski,St. Kozlowski 1987 D. Mrgrit, M. Sandu 1998 S.J. Mithen 1994 Fl. Mogoanu 1960 Fl. Mogoanu 1962 Fl. Mogoanu 1964 Fl. Mogoanu 1969 Fl. Mogoanu 1978 D. Monah, t. Cuco 1985 N.N. Moroan 1932

41

Adina BORONEAN

G. de Mortillet 1869 G. de Mortillet 1872 G. de Mortillet 1874 M. Otte, P. Noiret 2001 I. Nestor 1932 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Pop 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965b C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Al. Punescu 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, M. PetrescuDmbovia 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, N. Zaharia, V. Cpitanu 1959 Gh. Olteanu 1995 E. Patte 1934 I. Paul 1962 Al. Punescu 1962 Al. Punescu 1964a Al. Punescu 1964b Al. Punescu 1965 Al. Punescu 1966 Al. Punescu 1970

Essai dune classification des cavernes et des stations sous abri, fondee sur le produit de lindustrie humaine, n Bull. Soc. Geol. De France 3, 26 (18681869), p. 583587. Classification des diverses periodes de lAge de la pierre, n C.I.A.A.P. Intervention a la Societe dAnthropologie de Paris le 16.4.1874 (sur le Hiatus), n B.S.A.P., p. 317. Le Mesolithique du basin Pannonien et la Formation du Rubanne, n LAnthropologie 105 (2001), p. 409419. Der Stand der Vorgeschicht Forschung in Rumanien, n BRGK 22, p. Cercetrile paleolitice din regiunea BaiaMare, n Materiale 6, p. 33 Cercetrile i spturile paleolitice de la Cremenea i mprejurimi, n Materiale 6, p. 5156. Introducere n problemele paleoliticului n R.P.R., n Probleme de Antropologie 1, p. 5971. Le paleolithique en Roumanie a la lumiere de dernieres recherches, n Dacia N.S. 1, p. 4160. Discuii pe marginea paleoliticului de sfrit i nceputurilor neoliticului nostru, n SCIV 10, 2, p. 221237. Descoperiri tardenoasiene n RSS Moldoveneasc (recenzie), n SCIV Date noi cu privire la cunoaterea nceputului i sfritului paleoliticului n Romnia, n SCIV 15, 3, p. 307320. Epipaleolitic i mezolitic. O problem de terminologie, n SCIV 16, 4, Oamenii din vrsta veche a pietrei, Bucureti. antierul arheologic Bicaz, n Materiale 6, p. 5783. Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956, I, Dobrogea, n Materiale 6, p. 1642. Principalele rezultate ale cercetrilor arheologice de la Bicaz, n Materiale 5, p. 4560. Cercetrile de la Mitoc, n Materiale 6, p. 1128. Privire general asupra atelierelor de la Lapo, n Lucrrile simpozionului de arheologie, Trgovite, 2325 nov. 1996, p. 3536. Souvenirs de voyage en Roumanie. Notes de prehistoire, n Bull. Soc. Preh. Francaise 31, 9, p. 371374. Sondajul arheologic de la Ocna Sibiului, n Materiale 8, p. 193204. Spturile de la Glma, n Materiale 8, p. 153158. Cu privire la perioada de sfrit a epipaleoliticului n nordvestul i nordestul Romniei i unele persistene ale lui n neoliticul vechi, n SCIV 15, 3, p. 321336. A propos du neolithique ancien de Drghiceanu et quelques survivances tardennoisiennes, n Dacia N.S. 8, p. 297306. Sur la succesion des habitats paleolithiques et postpaleolithiques de Ripiceni Izvor, n Dacia N.S. 9, p. 531. Cercetri paleolitice. A. ara Brsei. Spturilor de la Costanda Ldui (r. Tg. Secuiesc, reg. Braov), n SCIV 17, 2, p. 319335. Evoluia uneltelor i armelor de piatr cioplit descoperite pe teritoriul Romniei, Bucureti.
p. 765773. 9, 1, p. 179. 42. 2631. Bruxelles, p. 432444.

42

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

Al. Punescu 1978a Al. Punescu 1978b Al. Punescu 1979a Al. Punescu 1979b Al. Punescu 1980 Al. Punescu 1981 Al. Punescu 1983 Al. Punescu 1984 Al. Punescu 1987a Al. Punescu 1987b

Complexele de locuire musteriene descoperite n aezarea de la RipiceniIzvor i unele consideraii privind tipul de locuire paleolitic, n SCIVA 29, 3, p. 317334. Aezarea tardenoasian de la Icueni (com. Vorona, jud. Botoani), n SCIVA 30, 2, p. 187195. Tardenoasianul din sud estul Romniei i unele consideraii asupra perioadei cuprinse ntre sfritul paleoliticului i nceputurile neoliticului n aceast regiune, n SCIVA 30, 4, p. 507526. Evoluia istoric pe teritoriul Romniei din paleolitic pn la nceputul neoliticului, n SCIVA 31, 4, p. 519545. Mezoliticul de la Erbiceni i Ripiceni Izvor, expresie a tardenoasianului nordvest pontic, n SCIVA 32, 4, p. 479509. Cele mai vechi dovezi de locuire de la Ripiceni Izvor, n SCIVA 34, 3, Cronologia paleoliticului i mezoliticului din Romnia n contextul paleoliticului central i sud european, n SCIVA 35, 3, p. 235265. Tardenoasianul din Dobrogea, n SCIVA 38, 1, p. 332. Expose sur les recherches paleolithiques en Roumanie, La genese et l'evolution des cultures sur le territoire de la Roumanie, Sesssion
scientifique dediee au centenaire de la premiere decouverte de Mitoc (department de Botoani), IaiBotoani 2225 oct. 1985, p. 123. Le tardenoasien de l'est du sudest de la Roumanie, n Dacia N.S. 31, 12, p. 1119. p. 187195.

n SCIVA 29, 2, p. 329.

Aezarea tardenoasian de la Straja (com. Cumpna, jud. Constana),

Al. Punescu 1987c Al. Punescu 1988 Al. Punescu 1989 Al. Punescu 1990 Al. Punescu 1993 Al. Punescu 1998a Al. Punescu 1998b Al. Punescu 1999 Al. Punescu 2000 Al. Punescu 2001 Al. Punescu et alii 1976 Al. Punescu et alii 1977

Les industrie lithiques du neolithique ancien de la Roumanie et quelques considerations sur l'inventaire lithique des cultures du neolithique moyen de cette epoque, n Dacia N.S. 32, p. 520. Le Paleolithique et le Mesolithique de Roumanie (Un bref apercu), n L'Anthropologie 93, 1, p. 123158. Scurt privire asupra mezoliticului din Dobrogea, n SCIVA 41, 34, p. RipiceniIzvor. Paleolitic i mezolitic. Studiu monografic, Bucureti. Paleoliticul i epipaleoliticul de pe teritoriul Moldovei dintre Siret i Prut, vol. I/2, Bucureti. Paleoliticul i mezoliticul de pe teritoriul Moldovei , vol. II/2, Paleoliticul i mezoliticul de pe teritoriul Dobrogei, Bucureti. Paleoliticul i mezoliticul din spaiul cuprins ntre Carpai i Dunre,
317333.

Bucureti. Bucureti.

Al. Punescu, P. adurschi, V. Chirica 1976 Al. Punescu, I. Pop 1960 Al. Punescu, P. adurschi 1988 D. Popescu 1960 M. Roska 1924 M. Roska 1926

Paleoliticul i mezoliticul din spaiul transilvan, Bucureti. Consideraii arheologice, geocronologice i paleoclimatice privind aezarea Ripiceni Izvor, n SCIVA 27, 1, p. 58. Semnificaia cronostratigrafic i paleoclimatic a unor analize chimice granulometrice i palinologice n unele aezri paleolitice din bazinul Ceahlului. Consideraii asupra tipului i caracterului aezrilor, n SCIVA, 28, 2, p.157185 Repertoriul arheologic al judeului Botoani, vol. I, Bucureti. Spturile de la Glma, n Materiale 7, p. 153158. Repertoriul arheologic al Romniei. Judeul Botoani. III. Comuna Blueni, n Hierasus 78, p. 337370. Spturile arheologice din R.P.R. n 1959, n SCIV 9, 1, p. 182188. Recherches prehistoriques pendant l'annee 1924, n Dacia 2, p. 297 Az osregeszet keziknyve I.A.
316.

43

Adina BORONEAN

M. Roska 1942 J.G. Rozoy 1978 N. Zaharia 1955 N. Zaharia, M. Petrescu Dmbovia, E. Zaharia 1970:

Erdly rgszeti repertorium, vol. I. Les derniers chasseurs, vol. I, II, III. Cercetrile de suprafa executate n Moldova n cursul anului 1954, n SCIV 3/4, p. 214232. Aezri din Moldova de la paleolitic pn n secolul al XVIII-lea,
Bucureti.

70

60

50

No. of locations

40

30

20

10

EC

EC/N

EC/EG

NW

NW/G

Cultural attribution

Fig. 1. The main site groups according to the cultural atribution.

70

No. of identified locations

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

EC

NW

Tardenoisian type

Fig. 2. The NorthWest 'Pontic' Tardenoisian locations versus the CentralEast European ones.

44

The Tardenoisian in Romania a false problem?

40

EC

NW

35

No. of identified locations

30

25

20

15

10

0 AD F TP F,TP F,SE SE SE,TP

Type of archeological research

Fig. 3. NW Tardenoisian versus CE Tardenoisian a comparison of the research types.

25

Number of locations

20

15

10

0 unknown >10 000 1000-10000 100-1000 10-100 <10

Number of finds

Fig. 4. The Tardenoisian sites grouped according to the number of finds.

45

Adina BORONEAN

12

10

Number of researched locations

F S E ,TP

53

51

55

57

59

61

63

65

67

69

71

75

73

77

79

81

83

87

91

93

95

97

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

Year

Fig. 5. Archeological excavations versus field surveys evolution in time.

Fig. 6. Romania map of Tardenoisian sites.

46

19

99

85

89

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei (jud. Mehedini) Nicolae MIRIOIU* Nicuor SULTANA* Andrei SOFICARU*
Abstract: About a prehistoric skull from a random discovery of Schela Cladovei (Mehedinti County). The skull was found by Gabriel and Marius Chiliban, two amateur speleologists from Speo Alpin Club Mehedini and it was gave us to study by Cristian Lascu, chief editor of National Geographic Romania. During the last 35 years have made archaeological excavations at Schela Cladovei and it was discovered artifacts of a hunter gathers population who lived on the both banks of Danube, in Iron Gates, between IX VIII B.P. (Map. 1). State of preservation and available skeletal elements. The skull was restored but incompletely because of old missing parts. The bones skull is very good preserved and covered by a calcareous crust. Method. For dimension and morphoscopic observation was used Martin technique with Brauer addition. The angles were measured through personal method and the cranial capacity calculated after Lee and Pearson formulas. Classification of absolute dimensions was made after Alexeev and Debetz scale and the index after Bruer. Epigenetic traits were recognize and pooled after Beery and Berry and Hauser and De Stefano. Due to the missing parts were used artificial technique to measure some dimensions of neurocranium and facial skeleton. Age estimation, sex determination and degree of sexualization. Age estimation have known using the closed of cranial sutures and teeth attrition. So, endocranian all the sutures are closed and exocranian just coronal suture can be seen. Teeth attrition is very advanced: on the maxilla it touches the roots level, but on the mandible it touches 1/3 of teeth crown. Estimated age of death is 50 years old. After Harsany and Nemeskeri method was calculated the degree of sexualization and the result of +1.62 show his masculinity and robustness. Anthropological traits (for metric and indices see tab.1). Measurements and indices define the subject as dolichocranic, ortocran and akrocran, eurimetop, mesen and euri-mesoprosop with mesokonc orbits, very high nose (probably leptorhin) and orthognat face. The neurocranium, the splanchnocranium and mandible show typical forms and characters for this subject (fig. I/2-3; II/1-3). Epigenetic traits. It was pooled 14 non metric traits and recorded their left or right presence or their missing. Dentition. Joint of anterior teeth is edge to edge type and the joint of posterior teeth is bilateral; both indicated an intermediary occlusion type between archaic and modern. Analyzing attrition and other dental affection and it can observe that the subject suffered of inflammatory paradontopathy (fig. II/4). On the left half arches of maxillary among 3 2 1 molars and on the mandibles teeth it can be observe artificial grooves (fig. III/1-2). These were caused by insertion of a tooth-pick among the teeth for cleaning. Cure trauma and death causing violence traces. In the posterior region of left parietal at the half distance between sagittal and squamos suture and from 35 mm of lambdoid suture it have observed a little circular depression (diameter = 8 mm) who represent the traces of a fracture. It is a minor injury and was cured without problems. On the right parietal laterally of sagittal suture is another fatal trauma. It has a sagittal diameter of 30 mm having angular and lateral medial edge some semicircular. Endocranian it has funnel form and radial and circular fissures. This was caused by a strong hit with a bludgeon (fig. III/4). Discussion and conclusion. Physical type, comparison and taxonomic category. Biologic origin, taxonomic category and archaeological culture were established through comparison of his anthropological configuration with Mesolithic craniological series from Vlasac, Lepenski Vir, Vasievka I, Vasievka II and Vasievka III, and four Neolithic series from Nikoskoe, Dereivka I, Voneno and Vovnigi (see map 2). Used statistical method is carts rduits (table 1, 2, 3). The skull is Eastern Cro Magnon based on the morphological and metrical traits. Our results indicate that this skull reassemble with Neolithic series from Volneno and Mesolithic series from Vasilievka II, but has same similitude with Mesolithic population from Iron Gates.

Centrul de Cercetri Antropologice Francisc I. Rainer, Bd. Eroilor Sanitari 8, C.P. 3513, Bucureti 050474.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 4773.

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Some aspects regarding the life style and behavior. Teeth attrition, paradontopathy and masticator muscularly indicated a diet based on hard food like other hunter gather population. It seems that used the anterior teeth as tools. The missing of caries is a sign of aquatic or terrestrial food without carbon hydrate. The presence of torus auditivus indicate swimming and sinking in cold water (fig. III/3). Relationship with the area of archaeological excavations is not clear (fig. IV). Keywords: Schela Cladovei, cranial capacity, age estimation, sex determination, degree of sexualization, anthropological traits, cure trauma, torus auditivus, Eastern Cro Magnon. Cuvinte cheie: Schela Cladovei, capacitate cranian, estimarea vrstei, determinarea sexului, grad de sexualizare, torus auditivus, Cro Magnon.

n data de 14 septembrie 2003 din iniiativa i prin strdaniile domnului Cristian Lascu, redactorul ef al revistei National Geographic Romnia, ne-au fost naintate spre expertiz resturile unui craniu (30 de fragmente de diferite dimensiuni i mandibula n perfect stare) precum i dou fragmente de omoplat (unul din unghiul inferior al omoplatului stng i cellalt din peretele fosei infraspinoase), descoperite prin explorri de suprafa la Schela Cladovei, jud. Mehedini, de ctre domnii Gabriel i Marius Chiliban, membrii ai Clubului SpeoAlpin Mehedini1. Dup restaurarea acestor resturi a rezultat un craniu incomplet cu multe lipsuri, dar ale crui sprturi erau n majoritate din vechime, fapt ce dovedete c a fost atent i minuios recuperat din teren de ctre descoperitori. Pe lng caracterele sale deosebite, interesul nostru pentru aceast "fosil" este justificat i de locul de descoperire, toponimul Schela Cladovei fiind bine cunoscut n arheologia preistoric romneasc i strin prin spturile din situl de epoc mezolitic de pe malul Dunrii. Astfel, din 1965 pn astzi (cu unele ntreruperi) aici au fost ntreprinse cercetri arheologice sistematice de ctre Vasile Boronean, n colaborare cu Dardu NicolescuPlopor i apoi, din 1991, n colaborare cu echipa englez condus de Clive Bonsall acesta din urm oferind i posibilitatea unor sofisticate explorri interdisciplinare (V. Boronean 1970, p. 125; idem 1973, p. 539; idem 1990, p. 121125; idem 1993, p. 511514; idem 2000, p. 100102, 110, 112119, 143144, 155, 178180, 194, 235; V. Boronean, D. NicolescuPlopor 1990, p. 5565; V. Boronean et alii 1995, 7 pagini fr numerotare n extrasul primit de noi; C. Bonsall et alii 1997, p. 5092; Al. Punescu 2000, p. 439453). Fr s intrm n amnunte trebuie s precizm c descoperirile sunt deosebit de importante i constau n resturi de locuire, cu tot ce implic acestea, precum i mai multe zeci de schelete umane ce aparineau unei sau unor populaii de vntori pescariculegtori care a vieuit ntre mileniile IX VIII B.P. pe ambele maluri ale Dunrii n Defileul Porilor de Fier (harta 1-2). Din pcate ns, n coleciile Institutului nostru nu sunt locate dect o parte din osemintele umane descoperite la Schela Cladovei n campaniile 19671968, aflate n acest moment n curs de studiu antropologic. Comparaia craniului n discuie cu acestea, arat asemnri izbitoare, ceea ce ne ndeamn s credem c el a aparinut populaiei mezolitice i se poate nscrie n consecin n seria de datri 14C AMS dintre 81056695 B.P. obinut n laboratoarele de la Oxford pe scheletele de la Schela Cladovei (C. Bonsall et alii 1997, p. 66, tab. 6; C. Bonsall et alii 20022003, p. 1 i fig. 2). Aceast atribuire cronologic este de asemenea susinut i de comparaia cu rezultatele studiilor antropologice asupra scheletelor mezolitice din siturile de pe malul srbesc al Dunrii i n special cu cele consistent publicate de la Vlasac (J. Nemeskri, L. Szatmry 1978, p. 69426). Preciznd i c ipoteza noastr va fi verificat prin datarea 14C AMS a unei probe recoltate din unghiul mandibular stnga vom prezenta n continuare consideraiile noastre antropologice asupra acestui craniu. Starea de conservare i reprezentare Dup cum am precizat, craniul restaurat este incomplet, dar important de observat este i faptul c el nu a suferit distorsiuni postume n mediul de zacere. Osul este foarte bine conservat i prezint acea stare de semifosilizare caracteristic osemintelor de la Schela Cladovei, fiind acoperit i de o fin crust calcaroas.
1

Tuturor le suntem recunosctori i le mulumim clduros i pe aceast cale.

48

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

n interiorul craniului i n special n partea sa posterioar depunerea de crust este mai accentuat i nglobeaz mici fragmente din bolta cranian neputnd fi nlturat prin curire mecanic. Frontalul este reprezentat de regiunea orbitar i supraorbitar precum i de partea lateral stnga a squamei frontale cu segmentele temporal i complicat ale suturii coronare. Din partea dreapt a squamei este prezent doar un fragment cu pars verticis a coronarei, conexat cu o poriune din parietalul respectiv. Parietalele. Stngul este mulumitor reprezentat prezentnd doar unele lipsuri din squam posterior suturii coronare i deasupra suturii squamoase. De asemenea, este absent unghiul anterosuperior cu punctul bregma. Dreptul are ns lipsuri mai mari lateral de regiunea obelic, bosa parietal, unghiurile anterosuperior i inferior, marginea anterioar i inferioar. Temporalele. Stngul este pstrat n ntregime, iar din dreptul lipsesc jumtatea superioar a squamei i o mic poriune din cavitatea glenoid. Occipitalul prezint distrugeri doar n partea sa bazal, lipsindu-i o poriune din planul nucal pe stnga, condilii occipitali i bazioccipitalul; din foramenul magnum se pstreaz doar marginea sa posterioar. Sfenoidele sunt reprezentate doar de mici poriuni din regiunea superioar a aripilor mari cu sutura frontotemporal. Masivul facial prezint cteva lipsuri ce mpiedic restaurarea sa mulumitoare i unele conexiuni cu neurocraniul. Astfel, apofizele ascendente ale maxilarelor i nasalele (cu vrfurile distruse) precum i zigomaticul stng sunt conexate la frontal i temporal, arcada zigomatic stng fiind complet iar din orbit lipsind doar o poriune de trei mm din marginea sa inferioar (medial de foramenul infraorbitar). Zigomaticul dreapt are ns distrugeri la vrfurile proceselor frontal, temporal i maxilar care fac imposibil conexarea sa cu oasele respective. De asemenea, din maxilare lipsesc o poriune din hemiarcada dreapt dintre alveola caninului i cea a premolarului secund mpreun cu dinii respectivi, o mic poriune din palat i partea bazal a ambelor apofize ascendente reprezentnd marginile laterale ale aperturii piriforme precum i poriuni din pereii sinusurilor maxilare. Toate aceste lipsuri fac ca segmentul molar dreapta s nu poat fi conexat cu restul hemiarcadei, iar pereii anteriori ai ambelor sinusuri maxilare s prezinte doar mici puncte de contact ntre partea bazal (cu arcadele alveolare) i cea superioar conexat la zigomatice, puncte ce nu permit solidarizarea cu adeziv. Metodologie Dimensiunile i observaiile morfoscopice au fost prelevate dup tehnica i definiiile clasice ale lui R. Martin (1914) cu adaosurile i precizrile lui G. Bruer (1988, p. 225264). Unghiurile au fost msurate cu raportorul divizat n jumti de grad pe craniograma orientat n planul Frankfurt dup o metod personal (inedit), iar capacitatea cranian calculat dup formulele lui A. Lee i K. Pearson (1901, p. 225264). Clasificarea dimensiunilor absolute s-a fcut dup scrile dimorfice ale lui V.P. Alexeev i G.F. Debec (1964, p. 114122) iar cea a indicilor i dup G. Bruer (1988, p. 225264). Caracterele epigenetice au fost determinate i scorizate dup definiiile i metodologia din A.C. Berry i R.J. Berry (1967, p. 361379) i G. Hauser i G.F. de Stefano (1989). Starea de conservare i integritate a craniului au impus ns, pentru prelevarea unor dimensiuni, i unele artificii tehnice care obligatoriu trebuie prezentate i discutate. Astfel, pentru neurocraniu limea maxim a acestuia (eueu) a fost msurat prin simetrie, estimarea noastr de 142 mm putnd fi n realitate eventual mai mare cu 23 mm. innd ns cont de faptul c pentru lungimea maxim (gop) de 197 mm modificarea indicelui cranian orizontal cu o unitate nseamn mrirea sau micorarea limii maxime cu 1.97 mm, considerm aproximaia rezonabil, indicele cranian neputnd prsi categoria dolicocran. De asemenea punctul bregma lipsete, poziia lui fiind reconstituit prin prelungirea traiectului suturilor sagital i coronar (cu 24 i respectiv 6 mm) pe suport de cear i pe craniogram, eventuala mic abatere de la realitate a estimrii noastre neputnd influena ncadrarea n categorii a nlimii poriobregmatice (pob) i a indicelui cranian verticolongitudinal. Nu putem ns controla veridicitatea valorii indicelui verticotransversal ale crui componente ar fi putut avea eventual abateri de la realitate n sensuri opuse.

49

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Pentru reconstituirea dimensiunilor masivului facial, ntr-o prim faz, cele dou fragmente ale arcadelor maxilare au fost potrivite n ocluzie i fixate cu adeziv la mandibul, prelevndu-se astfel, destul de corect, limea maxiloalveolar (ekmekm) precum i nlimea i limea palatului (enmenm). n a doua faz mandibula a fost fixat n articulaia temporomandibular, iar arcadele maxilare potrivite prin punctele lor de contact cu procesul zigomatic al maxilarului stnga. S-au putut astfel preleva nlimea feei superioare (npr), nlimea nasului (nns) precum i nlimea morfologic a feei (ngn). n ceea ce privete corectitudinea lor putem aprecia c dac primele dimensiuni nu pot fi mai mici dect au fost estimate, cea din urm poate fi subevaluat datorit extraordinarei uzuri dentare. Din fericire zygioanele sunt situate posterior de sutura zigomaticotemporal limea maxim a feei (zyzy) putnd fi corect msurat chiar i n absena poriunii anterioare a arcadei zigomatice din dreapta. innd cont de faptul c n acest caz o unitate de indice facial se traduce prin variaia cu 1,53 mm a nlimilor feei, credem c indicele facial superior este totui corect ncadrat n categoria mesen, dar c cel facial total a fost n realitate mesoprosop sau poate chiar leptoprosop. n sfrit mai trebuie s precizm i c uzura accentuat face imposibil dimensionarea corect a diametrelor coroanelor dinilor, n acest caz chiar i lungimea seriei jugale (Pm1M3) fiind subevaluat. Estimarea vrstei, determinarea sexului i a gradului de sexualizare Pentru estimarea vrstei la deces nu putem lua n considerare, fiind vorba doar de craniu, dect dou fenomene i anume obliterarea suturilor craniene i uzura dentar, ambele supuse din pcate unui mare grad de variabilitate inter- i intrapopulaional. Din suturile craniene sunt reprezentate n ntregime doar ambele lambdoide, sagitalei lipsindu-i o parte din sectorul bregmatic, iar coronarelor poriuni din sectorul bregmatic de ambele pri i sectoarele complicat i temporal din dreapta. Endocranian toate poriunile prezente sunt complet obliterate i nu avem nici un fel de motive s credem c cele care lipsesc ar fi avut alt stare. Exocranian coronarele (combinnd informaiile din stnga i dreapta) sunt vizibile, dar prezint mici ntreruperi i au sectorul temporal complet nchis. Sagitala este foarte greu vizibil, cu multe ntreruperi, iar din lambdoide se mai pot observa doar sectoarele asterice. Uzura dentar, dup cum am precizat deja, este foarte avansat. Pentru grupa frontal este mai accentuat pe maxilar unde a atins deja nivelul rdcinilor, dect pe mandibul unde se pstreaz circa o treime din nlimea coroanelor dinilor. Molarii 1 i 2 au un grad de uzur 5++, iar molarii 3 grade variabile 3+ i 4 dup schema lui Miles (dup D. Brothwell 1981, p. 72, fig 3/9). Estimarea vrstei cronologice numai pe baza acestor indicatori biologici, dar i cu o puternic component cultural n cazul uzurii dentare, este discutabil i dificil. Astfel, vrstele modale dar i cele medii pentru stadiile de nchidere a suturilor craniene sunt foarte diferite (i chiar mult prea optimistice) de la un autor la altul, i dup cum s-a artat ele depind de componena pe grupe de vrst a populaiilor de referin (C. Masset 1971, p. 85105) dar i de fenomenul de secular trend, populaiile recente fiind mai precoce dect cele vechi (C. Masset 1982, p. 2442; J.P. BocquetAppel, C. Masset 1995, p. 3952). Totodat cranii cu suturile complet obliterate, ca i n cazul de fa, se ntlnesc n anumite procente la toate categoriile de vrst (K. Hajni, J.T. Novak 1976, p. 8992). Gradul de uzur dentar depinde de calitatea esuturilor dentare a cror duritate prezint un caracter rasial sau ecologic, de tipul de articulaie precum i de natura hranei i modul ei de preparare, populaiile foarte vechi avnd o uzur mai precoce i mai rapid dect cele moderne (A. Mayti 1976, p. 148149, 157, 159). Aprecierea ritmului uzurii pentru o anumit perioad istoric este ns posibil prin luarea n calcul a gradelor de uzur a molarilor n funcie de diferenele cronologice n apariia lor (D. Brothwell 1981, p. 72). innd cont de toate aceste consideraii, credem c vrsta la deces a acestui individ, pe baza stadiului de evoluie al celor doi indicatori, ar putea fi totui ncadrat rezonabil n categoria de vrst matur, mai probabil n jur de 50 de ani. n ceea ce privete diagnoza sexului, judecnd dup caracterele sexuale secundare ale craniului, acesta a fost fr ndoial masculin.

50

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

Astfel urmnd instruciunile din L. Harsnyi i J. Nemeskri (1964, p. 5156; Gy. Acsadi, J. Nemeskeri 1970, p. 8791), modificate de D. Ferembach et alii (1979, p. 1517), vom lista aceste caractere morfologice i gradul lor de dezvoltare: 1. glabella = 0; 2. procesele mastoide = +3; 3. relieful planului nucal = +2; 4. procesele zigomatice = +2; 5. arcurile supraciliare = +1; 6. tuberozitile frontale i parietale = +2; 7. protuberana occipital extern = +1; 8. nclinarea frunii = +2; 9. osul zigomatic = 0; 10. marginea supraorbitar i forma orbitei = +2; 11. aspectul mandibulei = +3; 12. simfiza mandibular = +1; 13. unghiul goniac = +3; 14. marginea inferioar a corpului mandibulei = 0 Ponderndu-le dup recomandrile lui D. Ferembach et alii (1979, p. 16, tab. II) rezult un grad de sexualizare de +1.62, valoare ce subliniaz masculinitatea i robusticitatea acestui craniu, fcnd inutile alte comentarii. Pentru meninerea comparabilitii cu seria craniologic de la Vlasac (J. Nemeskri, L. Szatmry 1978, p. 7796) am calculat gradul de sexualizare i dup setul de caractere i ponderile din metoda original (Gy. Acsadi, J. Nemeskeri 1970, p. 90, tab. 14) acesta fiind de + 1.52. Aceste constatri sunt ntrite i de examinarea univariat sau multivariat a caracterelor dimensionale. Astfel, de exemplu, modulul mastoidian (produsul dintre lungimea sagital i nlimea mastoidei) este de 21.84 dreapta i 22.04 stnga realiznd un scor al abaterilor reduse de 4.07 i respectiv 4.57 sigma fa de o serie de cranii de francezi cu identitate cunoscut (F. Demoulin 1972, p. 259264). De asemenea, folosind funcia discriminant nr. 14 a lui E. Gilles i O. Elliot (1963, p. 5368, tab. 2) (dimensiunile Martin nr. 1, 8, 45 i 19a) rezult un scor de 663.84 (!) punctul de discriminare fiind de 536.93 (media masculin 558.22 i feminin 515.63). La fel, pentru mandibul, funcia discriminant a lui E. Gilles (1964, p. 129135) (dimensiunile Martin nr. 66, 69 i 70) d un scor de 352.20 (!) fa de valoarea discriminant 287.43 (media masculin 302.25 i feminin 272.60). Caractere antropologice (dimensiunile i indicii n tabelul nr. 1) Neurocraniul n norma superioar este ovoid i phaenozyg. Lungimea maxim este foarte mare, limea mijlocie, iar nlimea auricular foarte mare. Indicii cranieni sunt astfel dolicocran, ortocran spre hipsicran i akrocran (pl. I/2). n norma lateral glabella este mascat de proeminarea arcurilor supraciliare, coarda frontal este lung la limita cu categoria mijlocie i foarte nclinat. Parietalele sunt foarte lungi, foarte curbate i lipsite de aplatizare lambdatic. Occipitalul are o lungime mare i curbur mijlocie spre slab. Inionul este foarte jos situat, iar nlimea calotei perpendicular pe axa gi se ncadreaz astfel n categoria foarte mare. Protuberana occipital extern este precedat de o mic depresiune i nu este deosebit de proieminent n profil. Partea superioar a squamei occipitale are o curbur slab, iar cea inferioar aproape nul, angularea intervenind la nivelul protuberanei. Liniile temporale sunt foarte puternice i rugoase pn la sutura coronar. Ele se extind ns posterior pn aproape de asterion unde se termin printr-un mic torus angularis mai puternic n partea dreapt. Pe squama parietal sunt situate la jumtatea distanei dintre sutura squamoas i cea sagital. Pterionul are form de H, la stnga unde s-a pstrat mai bine ncadrndu-se n varianta i (G. Hauser, G.F. de Stefano 1989, p. 217, fig. 33b). Arcurile zigomatice sunt robuste i se prelungesc oblic n sus pn la sutura squamoas cu o creast supramastoidian foarte puternic i robust. Procesele mastoide sunt deosebit de nalte, robuste i modelate (pl. I/3). n norma anterioar fruntea are o lime foarte mare i arcurile supraciliare foarte dezvoltate. n raport cu limea parietalelor este eurimetop, iar cu cea a occipitalului este foarte ngust (pl. I/1). n norma posterioar neurocraniul are form de cas. Occipitalul este de lime mijlocie, iar n raport cu parietalele este mijlociu de lat dar ngust fa de lungimea corzii sale. Liniile nucale superioare sunt foarte proeminente, iar cele inferioare sunt arcuite i bifurcate, ramura lor superioar convergnd cu liniile nucale superioare printr-un proces retromastoid. De asemenea, protuberana occipital extern este rugoas i foarte modelat. anurile digastrice i sulcusul occipital sunt foarte accentuate (pl. II/1).

51

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Masivul facial este foarte nalt, nlimea morfologic i cea a feei superioare ncadrndu-se n categoria foarte mare. De asemenea, limea superioar i cea bizigomatic sunt din categoriile foarte mare i respectiv extraordinar de mare (153 mm). Indicele facial superior este astfel mesen, iar cel facial total euriprosop la limita cu mesoprosop. innd cont ns de extraordinara uzur a dentiiei frontale care a micorat nlimea morfologic a feei putem considera c acesta fcea parte din categoria mesoprosop. Orbitele au form rectangular, limea foarte mare i nlimea mare. Indicele orbitar (stnga) este mesokonch. Nasul are nlimea foarte mare, dar din pcate limea lui nu a putut fi msurat. Nasalele prezint sutur internasal parial sudat, au forma nr. 1 la R. Martin (1914, p. 839, fig. 345 dreapta sus) i coarda simotic din categoria mare. Profilul nasului este concav, forma nr. 1 de tip europoid (R. Martin 1914, p. 842, fig. 348). Spina nasal are o dezvoltare de grad 2 Broca (R. Martin 1914, p. 844, fig. 349) iar marginea inferioar a aperturii piriforme este antropin (R. Martin 1914, p. 845, fig. 350) (pl. I/1). Zigomaticele sunt reliefate, dar au nlime mic i tuberculul marginal slab dezvoltat. De asemenea tuberculul zigomaxilar este slab dezvoltat i n poziie medial. Fosa canin este foarte slab. Maxilarele au o lime foarte mare i prezint juga alveolaria reliefate. Palatul este lat, brahistafilin i hipistafilin cu reliefuri accentuate (pl. II/2). Mandibula este deosebit de expresiv i are dimensiuni mari. Astfel lungimea i limea sa bicondilian se ncadreaz n categoria foarte mare iar indicele mandibular n categoria dolicostenomandibular. Gonioanele au tuberozitile maseterice foarte dezvoltate i reliefate i sunt puternic rsfrnte n afar. Limea lor este extraordinar de mare. De asemenea nlimile ramului vertical, corpului i simfizei sunt foarte mari. Limea ramului este ns mijlocie, iar grosimea corpului, n mod surprinztor, este mic, indicele ramului precum i cel de seciune al corpului, ambii traducnd n fond robusticitatea, ncadrndu-se astfel n categoria foarte mic. Unghiul mandibular este foarte mic. Simfiza este proeminent i de form triunghiular, fosele digastrice sunt foarte adncite i expresive, foramenele mentale se afl situate sub apexurile premolarilor secunzi, iar spina mental este median i comun ca form i mrime (pl. II/3). Caractere epigenetice Pentru completarea descrierii morfologice i n scopul unor viitoare demersuri comparative2 vom lista n continuare caracterele epigenetice ce au putut fi observate i scorizate dei la discuii i concluzii nu-i vor gsi ns deocamdat locul dect unele comentarii asupra prezenei exostozelor auriculare ce comport o dubl interpretare. Aceste caractere sunt: sutura supranasal prezent; sulcusuri frontale stnga prezent, dreapta lips observaia; foramen supraorbital medial prezent drepta; incizur supraorbital medial prezent stnga; foramene parietale absente bilateral; osicule wormiene coronare prezent stnga (unu, mic, ptrunznd n parietal), dreapta lips observaia; osicule wormiene lambdoide stnga prezente (3, mici), dreapta absente; foramenele palatine minore (accesorii) prezente bilateral; sutura palatin transvers asimetric (tip c) (G. Hauser, G.F. Stefano 1989, p. 173, fig. 30); exostoze auriculare prezente bilateral, puternice; sutura mendoza prezent bilateral (originea n asterion, bine exprimat); sutura squamomastoid, parial persistent, bilateral; osicul n incizura parietal, prezent bilateral; punte milohioidian prezent dreapta (complet, poziie superioar), stnga absent. Aparatul dento maxilar Forma arcadelor dentare este paraboloid iar valorile absolute ale lungimii dinilor jugali (Pm1M3) dup S. de Felice (dup G. Olivier 1960, p. 181182) se nscriu n aria de variabilitate a populaiilor albe din Europa i Africa care sunt microdonte. Trebuie totui amintit i faptul c uzura proximal se asociaz cu nclinarea dinilor n sensul mesial provocnd astfel importante scurtri ale seriilor dentare (A. Peluso 1980, p. 60, fig. 2). Nu putem ns estima, n cazul de fa, amploarea acestui fenomen. Articulaia dinilor anteriori este de tip cap la cap (edge to edge) sau labiodont, muctura fiind astfel n clete, ceea ce constituie o caracteristic arhaic. Premolarii i molarii se articuleaz ns bilateral, alternant sau ncruciat, un dinte inferior lund contact cu doi dini
2

Pentru caracterele epigenetice ale craniilor din siturile mesolitice de la Vlasac, Lepenski Vir, Padina i Haidua Vodenica, vezi M. Roksandi 2000, p. 1100.

52

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

antagoniti ca la tipurile moderne. De asemenea, caninul inferior se plaseaz n ocluzie ntre incisivii laterali i caninul opus. Acest tip de ocluzie este considerat ca fiind intermediar sau tranziional ntre tipurile arhaice i cele moderne (A. Mayti 1976, p. 150152, 158). Uzura dinilor anteriori este plan i orizontal n sens vestibulolingual datorit articulaiei cap la cap. Ea este mai accentuat pe arcada superioar unde a atins deja nivelul rdcinilor astfel c n plan frontal aliniamentul proximal este uor concav superior i convex pe arcada inferioar. Molarii au o uzur helicoidal, suprafaa ocluzal fiind nclinat vestibular la primul, intermediar la al doilea i lingual la cel de-al treilea (A. Mayti 1976, p. 155156). Cu excepia celor din urm, uzura a atins camera pulpar, aceasta fiind ns obturat prin depunerea dentinei secundare. Resorbia osului alveolar de 8 mm poate fi apreciat drept considerabil (D. Brothwell 1981, p. 154155, fig. 6, 14). Ea se asociaz cu denudarea rdcinilor vestibulare ale primului molar maxilar dreapta (care are ns i o poziie vicioas fiind implantat oblic spre interior) precum i cu dou abcese periradiculare la molarul secund maxilar stnga i la primul molar mandibular stnga (pl. II/4). La acesta din urm abcesul este fistulat vestibular printr-un orificiu cu diametrele de 3x5 mm. Depunerea de tartru este prezent dar are o amploare modest. Toate acestea dovedesc o intens suferin a parodoniului cu o permanent iritare i infectare a gingiilor (parodontit inflamatoare). Specificm de asemenea c i abcesele semnalate se datoresc tot parodontopatiei care a infectat demodoniul i nu penetrrii bacteriale prin canalele radiculare care la acest subiect au fost complet obturate cu dentin secundar. Spre deosebire de populaiile medievale i moderne la care parodontopatia este consecina lipsei impulsurilor stimulatoare asupra parodoniului datorat preparrii rafinate a alimentelor (P. Firu et alii 1965, p. 197, 200201) n cazul de fa, dimpotriv, suferina se datoreaz consumrii unor alimente dure, iritante asupra gingiilor i care necesitau o masticaie viguroas i ndelungat. Cu totul excepional este observarea prezenei unor nuiri interproximale artificiale (artificial grooves) foarte evidente pe hemiarcada maxilar stnga ntre molarii 321 i pe mandibul la feele interproximale ale dinilor de la molarul 2 la canin dreapta precum i ntre canini i premolarii din stnga. Mai puin accentuate asemenea nuiri exist i ntre incisivii mandibulari. Examinate din poziie bucal nuirile dintre feele a doi dini au poziie cervical, form cilindric i diametrele de 2 mm. ntre molari direcia lor este disto lingual, iar ntre premolari, canini i incisivi perpendicular pe axa mesiodistal (pl. III/12). Aceste alterri artificiale sunt produse prin inseria repetat ntre dini din motive terapeutice sau cel puin paleative a unui instrument inflexibil i abraziv. Explicaiile morfologic cauzale, constau n faptul c uzura ocluzal avansat expune spaiile interproximale la impactul cu hrana provocnd boala periodontal cu resorbie alveolar datorit iritrii gingiilor. Obiceiul curirii spaiilor dintre dini cu ajutorul unui instrument ascuit dup fiecare mas reduce sau anihileaz astfel starea de disconfort provocat de presiunea hranei asupra gingiilor sensibilizate (D.H. Ubelaker et alii 1969, p. 145149; D.H. Ubelaker 1978, p. 72; W.M. Bass 198, p. 288). Traume vindecate i urme de violen cauzatoare de moarte n regiunea posterioar a parietalului stng la jumtatea distanei dintre sutura sagital i cea squamoas i la 35 mm de sutura lambdoid, pe linia temporal, se observ o mic depresiune circular cu diametrul de circa 8 mm ce reprezint urmele unei fracturi cu nfundare a tablei externe. Minor, leziunea s-a vindecat fr nici un fel de urmri. De importan major i cu urmri fatale este ns o traum localizat pe parietalul drept lateral de sutura sagital (pl. III/4). Aceasta const ntr-o deschidere cu diametrul sagital de circa 30 mm avnd marginea medial angular i cea lateral, oarecum semicircular. Endocranian are form de plnie i este complicat de un sistem de fisuri radiare dar i circulare (nspre lateral) realiznd aspectul tipic de fractur n terase, cauzat de o lovitur foarte putenic cu un obiect contondent (mciuc?)3 (C.B. Courville 1962a, p. 128; idem 1962b, p. 303322) (pl. III/4).
3

Pentru nomenclatur i schema de analiz traumatologic J. Wahl, H.G. Knig 1987, p. 115128, pentru pertinenta analiz i modalitile de prezentare schematic a observaiilor J. Wahl, H.G. Knig 1987, p. 129165. De asemenea, vezi M. Kunter 1981, p. 221246, pentru discuiile asupra fracturilor i vulnerrilor

53

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Probabil instrumentul nu a ptruns n interiorul craniului dar numeroasele eschile pe care le-a produs fora de impact au vulnerat creierul i nveliurile sale provocnd sngerri abundente, embolie i n final decesul subiectului4. Discuii i concluzii Tipul fizic, comparaii i ncadrare taxonomic Rezumnd observaiile fcute la caracterizarea antropologic completate cu cele de la capitolul de metodologie constatm c avem de-a face cu un subiect dolicocran, ortocran i akrocran, eurimetop, mesen i eurimesoprosop cu orbite mesokonce, nasul foarte nalt (posibil leptorin) i fa (estimat) ortognat. n ceea ce privete dimensiunile absolute se remarc limile mari ale frunii, auricularelor, mastoidalelor, feei i orbitelor, precum i nlimile feei, nasului i orbitelor. De asemenea, sunt deosebit de mari i dimensiunile mandibulei. Pentru elucidarea problemelor originii biologice, ncadrrii taxonomice, culturale (i cronologice) a acestui craniu descoperit ntmpltor i vom compara configuraia sa antropologic cu seriile craniologice mesolitice din Clisura Dunrii de la Vlasac (J. Nemeskri, L. Szathmry 1978, p. 157175) i Lepenski Vir (Z. Zoffmann 1983, p. 141, tab. 2) precum i de pe Niprul Inferior de la Vasievka I (T.S. Konduktorova 1957, p. 200206, tab. I; eadem 1973, p. 1316, tab. I), Vasievka II (I.I. Gohman 1958, p. 2438; idem 1966, p. 112117, tab. 19)5 i Vasievka III (I.I. Gohman 1966, p. 3247, tab.). De asemenea, vom face comparaii i cu patru serii neolitice situate tot pe Niprul Inferior la Nikoskoe (G.P. Zinevi 1967, p. 186189, tab 31), Dereivka I (G.P. Zinevi 1967, p. 170177, tab. 30), Voneno (T.S. Konduktorova 1973, p. 2831, tab. 5) i Vovnigi6 (harta 2). Ca metod statistic de comparaie am ales testul abaterilor reduse (carts rduits), care dei pare empiric fa de alte teste mai elaborate, este rapid, eficace i foarte elocvent n ceea ce privete punerea n eviden a asemnrilor i deosebirilor unei piese izolate fa de o serie de referin7. Deoarece noi vom compara craniul n discuie cu mai multe serii craniologice, fiecare dintre ele prezentnd sigme (abateri medii ptratice) diferite precum i sigma ratio mai mici sau mai mari dect valorile normale, pentru comparabilitatea rezultatelor vom folosi mediile sigmelor calculate de V.P. Alexeev, G.F. Debec8 (1964, p. 123127, tab. 1214). Astfel vom obine i imaginea asemnrilor sau deosebirilor dintre seriile de referin n funcie de valoarea abaterilor lor fa de piesa izolat. Precizm de asemenea c vom considera semnificative statistic abaterile de 2.5 dar vom ine cont i de cele cuprinse ntre 2 i 2.5 i, de asemenea, c nu am folosit dect mediile caracterelor din seriile de referin calculate pe minimum ase indivizi9. Pentru completarea i adncirea observaiilor asupra rezultatelor acestui test (tab. 2a) am calculat i mediile caracterelor tuturor craniilor mezolitice din Clisura Dunrii10 (care mpreun cu
sistemului osteologic (intenionate sau accidentale) la populaiile vechi, precum i D.W. Frayer 1997, p. 181216 pentru descoperirile mezolitice de la Ofnet. 4 O analiz amnunit a cazului v-a fi prezentat cu un alt prilej mpreun i cu alte cazuri de moarte violent din spturile sistematice de la Schela Cladovei ce se gsesc n coleciile noastre. 5 Considerate mult vreme ca aparinnd neoliticului (complexul cultural Nipru Done), scheletele din acest sit s-au dovedit n urma analizelor 14C AMS mai vechi: trei date ntre 76208020 B.P. cu o medie de 7850 B.P. (K. Jacobs 1993, p. 314). Pentru interpretarea corect a datrilor i atribuirea epocii mezolitice vezi ns D.W. Anthony 1994, p. 4952 i, de asemenea, M.C. Lillie 1996, p. 135142. 6 Din necropoloa de pe malul drept s-au publicat dou eantioane: T.S. Konduktorova 1960 (inaccesibil nou) i I.I. Gohman 1966, p. 132163. Pentru parametrii statistici ai eantionului total s-au folosit datele din I.I. Gohman 1966, p. 134139, tab. 25 iar pentru valorile individuale ale eantionului secund I.I. Gohman 1966, p. 152163, tab. 21). 7 Testul abaterilor reduse const n divizarea prin sigma a seriei de referin a diferenei dintre valorile caracterelor piesei izolate i mediile acestor caractere din seria de referin. 8 Calculele au la baz 88 de serii craniologice i pot fi considerate reprezentative. 9 Dup E. Schreider 1960, folosit prin intermediul lui D. Fermbach 1974, p. 202, dac valoarea abaterilor este egal cu 2 exist 5% anse ca diferena s se datoreze hazardului, dac este egal cu 2.5 numai 1%, iar dac atinge 3 doar 10/00 anse ca acesta s fie ntmpltoare. 10 n afar de Vlasac i Lepenski Vir ale cror surse au fost citate, este vorba de Padina (S. ivanovi 1975, p. 167, tab. 3) i Ostrovu Corbului (O. Necrasov, D Botezatu 1981, p. 13, tab. 1), ambele cu cte un craniu.

54

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

limitele de variaie se gsesc n tab. 1) i, de asemenea, am clasificat n categorii valorile individuale ale unor caractere (cu probleme) din seriile mezolitice i neolitice pentru care valorile respective au fost publicate (tab. 3)11. Dup aceste precizri care n economia articolului i-ar fi gsit mai degrab locul la capitolul de metodologie, dar pe care noi am preferat s nu le ndeprtm de textul comentariului, vom trece la analiza datelor din tabelele respective. Astfel din tabelul 1 care cuprinde un set substanial de dimensiuni absolute i relative (indici) se observ c valorile acestora la craniul de la Schela Cladovei se nscriu n cea mai mare parte n limitele de variaie ale craniilor mezolitice din Clisura Dunrii, sau le depesc doar puin. Peste limita superioar se situeaz limea auricular, arcul parietal, nlimea total a feei, nlimea nasului i orbitei. Acestea antreneaz un indice de curbur parietal (30:27) sub limita inferioar i un indice auriculoparietal (11:8) ce depete doar cu dou zecimale limita superioar. Indicii facial total (47:45) precum i cel orbitar (52:51) rmn ns n interiorul limitelor de variaie. Pentru indicii jugomandibular (66:45), jugofrontal (66:9) i craniofacial transvers (45:8) ce depesc limitele superioare explicaia poate consta ns n lipsa datelor pentru craniile de la Lepenski Vir. Asupra rezultatelor testului abaterilor reduse din tab. 2a, trebuie s observm mai nti c n ceea ce privete dimensiunile i indicii neurocraniului Schela Cladovei este foarte asemntoare cu mediile tuturor seriilor mezolitice i neolitice analizate, abaterile fiind mici i nesemnificative. Excepie face limea minim a frunii care este semnificativ mai mare fa de Vasievka I (2.59) i doar depete pragul de doi (2.22) fa de Vasievka III. De asemenea pentru limea auricular abaterea este 2 fa de Vasievka II, iar pentru indicele auriculo parietal (11:8) de 2.20 fa de seria de la Vlasac. n ceea ce privete masivul facial, limea maxim a feei este ns semnificativ mai mare fa de seriile mezolitice de la Vlasac (2.94) i Vasievka III (2.68), aproape atinge pragul de semnificaie fa de Vasievka I (2.41) i este aproape identic cu media seriei de la Vasievka II. Pentru Lepenski Vir nu au fost dimensionate dect patru cazuri (i deci nu am putut folosi media) dar ntre ele unul are valoarea de 156 mm (!). Contra seriilor neolitice ukrainiene abaterile sunt nesemnificative dar depesc valoarea de 1. nlimea morfologic a feei prezint abateri nesemnificative fa de toate seriile i chiar neglijabile pentru seriile neolitice de la Nikoskoe i Voleno, iar nlimea feei superioare depete pragul de 2 doar n cazul seriei de la Vasievka III (2.07). Astfel, indicele facial total prezint abateri neglijabile i doar pentru Vasievka II de 1.06 (lipsesc ns datele pentru Vlasac i Lepenski Vir), iar cel facial superior de asemenea abateri neglijabile (cea mai mare fiind 0.80 pentru Vasievka II) sau chiar nule pentru neoliticii de la Nikoskoe. Exceptnd limea maxim a feei, care este semnificativ mai mare la Schela Cladovei n comparaie cu seriile mezolitice subliniate, masivul facial poate fi considerat suficient de asemntor cu toate seriile i mai ales cu cele neolitice ucrainiene. Nu trebuie ns s omitem c din aceast comparaie ne lipsesc dou din laturile triunghiului facial nprba i anume lungimea bazei i adncimea feei. Pentru dimensiunile orbitei, limea maxim prezint o abatere de peste 2 doar la Lepenski Vir (2.05), pentru restul seriilor abaterile fiind nesemnificative sau aproape nule fa de seriile neolitice de la Nikoskoe i Voleno. nlimea orbitei este ns mai mare contra tuturor seriilor, abaterile avnd valori sub 2 doar pentru Valasac, Vasievka I i Voleno, dar n nici un caz nu ating pragul de semnificaie de 2.5. Astfel indicele orbitar este foarte asemntor i doar pentru Vasievka II abaterea este de 2.40. Pentru nas nu a fost din pcate posibil dect reconstituirea (!) nlimii, care se dovedete a fi mai mare dect mediile tuturor seriilor. Abaterile sunt sub 2 doar pentru Vasievka II (1.87), dar pentru Vasievka I, Vasievka III i neoliticii de la Dereivka ating i depesc pragul
11

n ceea ce privete dimensiunile i indicele orbitelor deoarece noi am msurat doar stnga pentru eantioanele la care stnga i dreapta au fost publicate separat (Vlasac, Vasievka II, Vasievka III i Vovnigi 1966) n calculele din tab. 1 i 2a s-au folosit msurtorile din stnga iar pentru clasificrile n categorii din tab. 3 au fost folosite mpreun att stnga ct i dreapta maximiznd astfel numrul de cazuri.

55

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

de semnificaie statistic. De asemenea, fa de media seriei de la Vlasac estimarea noastr prezint o abatere de 3.06 care elimin orice asemnare, depind chiar cu 3 mm cea mai mare valoare individual nregistrat la mezoliticii din Clisura Dunrii (v. Ostrovu Corbului). Nu cunoatem ns valoarea indicelui nasal i este posibil (ca i n cazul indicelui orbitar n componea cruia nlimea mare a orbitei este compensat de limea ei) acesta s se ncadreze n valorile seriilor de comparaie. n ceea ce privete mandibula se nregistreaz cteva abateri semnificative care-i subliniaz deosebita robusticitate. Astfel limea bicondilian prezint o abatere de 2.71 fa de Vasievka III iar cea goniac (datorit puternicelor rsfrngeri ale gonioanelor) abateri de 2.61 pentru Vlasac, mult peste 3 fa de Vasievka I i III, precum i de 2.88 fa de neoliticii de la Dereivka. De asemenea, nlimea simfizar are o abatere de 3.26 fa de Vasievka III. Trebuiesc menionate i abaterile negative (dar nesemnificative) ale lungimii proiectate fa de toate seriile care se datoresc unghiului goniac foarte mic i traduc n fond robusticitatea piesei analizate. Prin toate caracterele dimensionale mandibula de la Schela Cladovei se aseamn ns foarte mult cu cele din seria mezolitic de la Vasievka II i neoliticii de la Vovnigi. Aceste consideraii bazate pe comparaia valorilor individuale ale craniului i mandibulei de la Schela Cladovei cu mediile seriilor de referin, trebuiesc ns obligatoriu completate i cu analiza frecvenelor pe categorii a indivizilor din cadrul seriilor respective care traduce componena mediilor acestora. Astfel la o simpl lecturare a tab. 3 se observ c valorile individuale ale cazului n discuie se ncadreaz n categorii ce ntrunesc procente deloc neglijabile att pentru totalul seriilor mezolitice ct i al celor neolitice ukrainiene fapt care ne scutete de alte comentarii. n urma acestei analize pe orizontal a tabelului 2a care a subliniat asemnrile dar i deosebirile dintre caracterele craniului de la Schela Cladovei fa de cele ale seriilor de comparaie, trebuie s ne punem i ntrebarea cu care dintre acestea se aseamn el cel mai mult prin ansamblul caracterelor sale, cu alte cuvinte s evalum coninutul tabelului pe vertical. De data aceasta ns vom lua n considerare numai acele caractere care au fost socotite a fi cele mai discriminante, care nu depind de dimorfismul sexual i a cror determinare este n cea mai mare parte genetic (T.S. ConstandseWestermann 1974, p. 180). Din cele apte dimensiuni care traduc mrimea i cei opt indici care traduc forma suntem lipsii ns din pcate de lungimea bazei (nba), adncimea feei (prba) precum i de indicii nasal (52:51) i gnatic (40:5). Din tabelul 2b se observ astfel c Schela Cladovei se aseamn cel mai mult cu seria neolitic de la Voneno i mezolitic de la Vasievka II i apoi n ordine descresctoare cu Vasievka I i Vovnigi, Vlasac, Dereivka i Nikoskoe i n ultimul rnd cu Vasievka III. Aceste rezultate trebuiesc luate ns n considerare cu unele precauii att datorit metodei ct i strii de integritate a fosilei. Asumndu-ne riscurile, putem totui afirma c acest craniu ar fi putut face parte din oricare dintre aceste serii mezolitice i neolitice, deosebirile fa de acestea datorndu-se variaiilor individuale (n special n ceea ce privete caracterele de mrime) i care l situeaz oarecum n aria superioar a variabilitii. Dup caracterele morfologice i metrice prezentate n caracterizarea antropologic el poate fi considerat din punct de vedere taxonomic ca o variant evoluat din tipul CroMagnon estic (E. Vlek 1970, p. 5972; D. Ferembach 1962, p. 6275) pus n eviden n seriile mezolitice de la Vlasac i Lepenski Vir (J. Nemeskri, L. Szathmry 1978, p. 177184). Analize sofisticate prin metoda Penrose (Size and shape distances) arat c aceste serii (deci populaia mezolitic din Clisura Dunrii) prezint similariti cu seriile mezolitice i neolitice ucrainiene i distane destul de mari i nesemnificative statistic cu seriile i craniile mezolitice din vestul Europei i nordul Africii (Z. Zoffman 1983, p. 136138, fig. 25; I. Schwidetzky, F.W. Rsing 1989, p. 445)12 ceea ce justific orientarea comparaiilor fcute de noi i le explic astfel rezultatele (Z. Zoffman 1983, p. 138144).

12

Din pcate, n ambele lucrri Vasievka II este considerat ca aparinnd neoliticului conform cronologiei relative puse n circulaie de ctre arheologii ucrainieni. De asemenea, coninutul articolului lui I. Schwidetzky i F.W. Rsing ne-a rmas inaccesibil datorit faptului c n extrasul pe care l deinem (i de altfel n tot numrul revistei) au fost tiprite numai paginile cu numr impar (e. g. 1, 3, 5, 7 etc.).

56

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

n ceea ce privete relaiile populaiei mezolitice din Clisura Dunrii cu neoliticii din cultura StarevoCri lucrurile nu sunt foarte clare datorit srciei materialelor antropologice ale celei din urm (Z. Zoffman 1983, p. 144). Totui dintre craniile neolitice de la Lepenski Vir lipsesc tipurile CroMagnon sau cromanoide robuste, comparaiile artnd clar gracilitatea lor i a scheletului postcranian (. Miki 1981, p. 29, 36, tab. 23). Cele cteva (?) cazuri din Cmpia ungar ce prezint componente cromanoide (L. Szathmry 1983, p. 336) nu pot constitui dovada unor conexiuni genetice cu populaia mezolitic i n consecin dup prerea noastr craniul n discuie are puine anse s fie datat n neolitic13. Cteva aspecte privind modul de via i comportamentul Gradul extrem de uzur a dinilor acestui individ precum i aspectele patologice adiacente (parodontopatia) corelate i cu deosebita dezvoltare a musculaturii masticatoare arat fr ndoial consumarea unor alimente dure care nu au suferit o preparare rafinat (e. g. fierbere), situaie de altfel specific tuturor populaiilor de vntori pescari culegtori. Unele observaii ne permit ns s credem c aceast uzur nu se datoreaz exclusiv dietei. Astfel uzura plan i orizontal n sens vestibulo lingual a dinilor anteriori mai accentuat pe maxilar poate fi explicat i prin folosirea abuziv a dinilor ca unelte, e. g. pentru muierea pieilor sau ca a treia mn (C.G. Turner, J.D. Cadien 1969, p. 303310). Paraleliznd cu comportamentul tradiional al eschimoilor care apuc ntre dinii anteriori o mare bucat de carne pe care apoi o reteaz cu cuitul la nivelul buzelor, G.G. yEdinak face o interesant corelaie ntre uzura dinilor anteriori i schimbrile n material i form a uneltelor tietoare de la Vlasac. Astfel ea arat c uneltele de cuarit nu au o margine tietoare la fel de ascuit i eficace precum cele de silex i datorit acestui lucru pentru operaia de tiere i zdrobire a alimentelor sunt folosii preponderent dinii anteriori, ceea ce duce la atriia lor accentuat i prematur (G.G. yEdinak 1978, p. 616618). Pentru mezoliticii de la Schela Cladovei acest tip de uzur nu este singular, cazuri similare aflndu-se i n coleciile noastre dar i n materialele studiate de McSweeney (V. Boronean et alii, p. 3)14. O alt caracteristic a acestui individ care merit subliniat este lipsa cariilor, fenomen comun i pentru mezoliticii de pe malul srbesc al Dunrii (pentru Vlasac G.G. yEdinak 1978, p. 616; G Djurica 1996, p. 177183, care pe 1989 dini de la Vlasac, Lepenski Vir, Padina i Haidua Vodenica gsete doar 25 exemplare cariate toate aparinnd neoliticului de la Lepenski Vir) dar i pentru mezoliticii i neoliticii din Ukraina (M.C. Lillie 1996, p. 138) i care arat o alimentaie preponderent bazat pe proteine acvatice sau terestre i srac n hidrai de carbon. n ceea ce privete prezena nuirilor artificiale interproximal (artificial grooves) provocate prin curirea spaiului dintre dini cu ajutorul unui instrument inflexiv i abraziv trebuie s spunem c pn acum fenomenul nu a fost pus n eviden dect la indienii nordamericani15. Cazul de fa dei singular printre materialele mezolitice pe care le-am putut examina (de altfel puine!), ne ndeamn s credem c obiceiul a fost practicat i de mezoliticii din Clisur, lipsa evidenelor fiind cauzat doar de faptul c examinatorii nu erau familiarizai cu acest tip de alterri artificiale. nc o observaie morfologic ne dezvluie i alte amnunte asupra modului de via i ocupaiilor populaiei din care provenea acest individ. Este vorba de prezena bilateral n meatul auditiv extern pe peretele posterior al poriunii timpanice a acestui craniu a unor proeminee osoase (noduli) (pl. III/3). Cunoscut i sub numele de exostoze auriculare, torus auditivus, torus timpanicus, acetia au fost considerai de unii autori ca avnd o baz genetic (G. Hauser, G.F. de Stefano 1989, p. 187) fiind luai n considerare i n bateria de caractere epigenetice a lui A.C. Berry, R.J. Berry (1967, p. 361379).
13

Materialele osteologice aparinnd culturii StarevoCri din Romnia, publicate sau cunoscute de noi, sunt deosebit de gracile att n ceea ce privete craniul ct i scheletul postcranian. 14 Aceeai explicaie completat cu observaia c fenomenul este comun att brbailor ct i femeilor. 15 J.A. Wallace 1974, p. 385390 arat c aceste nuiri nu se datoreaz folosirii unui instrument pentru curirea spaiului dintre dini ci particulelor fine de nisip i sol supte printre dini (mpreun cu saliva) dinspre cavitatea vestibular spre cea oral n timpul fazei deglutiiei orale. Direcia oblic disto-lingual a acestor nuiri (evideniat i n cazul nostru) i care de fapt este impus de limita extensibilitii comisurii buzelor, face ca aceast prere s fie inacceptabil i de nereinut.

57

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Studiile mai noi stabilesc ns o relaie cauzal ntre prezena exostozelor auriculare i notul sau scufundrile n ape reci. Astfel prin expunerea la ap rece sau srat, n osul meatului extern apare un prelungit reflex vasodilatat care produce o cretere a tensiunii periostului i stimuleaz astfel activitatea osteogenetic ce se traduce prin aceast hiperplusie osoas (E. Fowler jr., P. Osmum 1942, p. 455466; D.F.N. Harrison 1962, p. 187201; A. Ascenzi, P. Balistreri 1975, p. 579584). Aceast ipotez este puternic susinut de un studiu asupra prezenei exostozelor auriculare n funcie de latitudine (G.E. Kennedy 1986, p. 401416). Astfel, pe 21 de eantioane din ntreaga lume nsemnnd 1879 de cazuri s-a constat c cea mai mare frecven a exostozelor auriculare se nregistreaz la populaiile care triesc ntre 30o i 45o latitudine nordic i sudic unde temperaturile apelor sunt sub 19oC. n plus, fenomenul prezint i un dimorfism sexual doar la trei serii frecvenele fiind mai mari la femei dect la brbai. Aceste constatri validate statistic au fost puse n legtur cu exploatarea resurselor acvatice i diviziunea sexual a muncii. Pentru mezoliticii din Clisura Dunrii exostozele auriculare au fost identificate iniial la Padina (fr a se specifica numrul i proporia pe sexe) (S. ivanovi 1975, p. 170, tab. 5), precum i la Vlasac unde apar la 27.2 % din brbai (nr.=22) i 43.8% din femei (nr.=16) (D.W. Frayer 1988, p. 346349), prezena lor fiind negat la Lepenski Vir (Z. Zoffmann 1983, p. 133 134). ntr-un complex studiu ulterior M. Roksandi gsete ns pentru Lepenski Vir 3 cazuri din 28 (10.7%), pentru Vlasac 17 din 46 (36.9%), 10 din 19 (52.6%) la Padina i 3 din 13 (23%) la Haidua Vodenica (M. Roksandi 2000, p. 47, 57, tab. 11). Aceste fapte au fost diferit interpretate n funcie de explicaia naturii exostozelor: ereditar sau datorat mediului. Astfel, Z. Zoffmman (1983, p. 133134), adoptnd ipoteza ereditar, crede c cele dou comuniti de la Lepenski Vir i Vlasac dei erau parial contemporane i triau doar la 5 km distan, erau independente (izolate) biologic una de alta (!). Dimpotriv, D.W. Frayer (1988) leag prezena acestor exostoze de expunerea timp ndelungat a canalului auditiv la contactul cu apa rece a Dunrii, datorit metodelor specifice folosite pentru capturarea unor specii de peti mari cum sunt somnul (Siluris glanis) ale cror resturi osoase sunt frecvente n ansamblurile paleofaunistice ale siturilor mezolitice din zon (S. Bkny 1978, p. 3565; L. Bartosiewicz et alii 1995, p. 219). n ceea ce ne privete, pe lng cazul de fa, noi am identificat prezena exostozelor n meatul auditiv i la ali indivizi de la Schela Cladovei i Icoana (observaii inedite) i suntem de acord cu ipoteza lui D.W. Frayer c acestea se datoresc notului i scufundrilor repetate n ape reci pentru prinderea petilor prin rstocire cu mna sau cu plasa (?). Nu credem ns c este vorba numai de peti de foarte mari dimensiuni (a cror capturare trebuie sa fi fost totui un eveniment i nu un fapt obinuit) ci de toate speciile i dimensiunile existente (T.T. Nalbant 1970, p. 43). n sfrit asupra morii violente a acestui individ trebuie precizat c la mezoliticii de la Schela Cladovei situaia nu este singular. Pe lng cazurile deja publicate (sau mcar semnalate) n care s-au gsit vrfuri de sgei de os sau de silex nfipte n diverse pri ale scheletului (D. NicolescuPlopor 1987, p. 35; V. Boronean, D. NicolescuPlopor 1990, p. 5565; V. Boronean et alii 1995, p. 3) n coleciile noastre exist mai multe cazuri (ca i cel de fa) n care moartea a survenit n urma unor lovituri traumatizante majore asupra craniului i scheletului postcranian i pe care le vom publica i comenta n viitor. Mai trebuie de asemenea precizat c relaia topografic dintre aceast descoperire i aria spturilor arheologice sistematice de la Schela Cladovei ne este necunoscut, n ultima vreme ruptura malului Dunrii unde ar fi putut aprea la suprafa aceste oseminte fiind consolidat cu pavaje de piatr (pl. IV)16. n urma prezentrii analitice precum i a discuiilor amnunite asupra acestui craniu descoperit ntmpltor n care i-am subliniat asemnrile din punct de vedere biologic dar i al modului de via i comportamentului cu populaia mezolitic din zon nu putem s ncheiem

16

Mulumim i pe aceast cale prietenului Alexandru Dinu de la Universitatea Madison Wisconsin pentru amabilitatea de a ne fi furnizat fotografii i informaii de la faa locului.

58

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

dect cu sperana c rezultatele datrii absolute prin metoda C14 AMS vor confirma aceast atribuire, produs exclusiv prin analiza osteologic. Bibliografie: Gy. Acsdi, J. Nemeskri 1970 V.P. Alekseev, G.F. Debec 1964 D.W. Anthony 1994 A. Ascenzi, P. Balistrer, 1975 L. Bartosiewicz et alii 1995 W.M. Bass 1987 A.C. Berry, R.J. Berry 1967 J.P. Bocquet Appe, C. Masset 1995 C. Bonsall et alii 1997 C. Bonsall et alii 20022003 V. Boronean 1970 V. Boronean 1973 V. Boronean 1990 V. Boronean 1993 V. Boronean 2000 V. Boronean, D. NicolescuPlopor 1990 V. Boronean et alii 1995 S. Bkny 1978 G. Bruer 1988

History of humann life Span and mortality, Akadmiai Kiad, Budapest, Kraniometrija. Metodika antropologieskih issledovanij, Moskva, 1964. On Subsistance Change at the Mesolithic Neolithic Transition, n Current Anthropology 35, 1, p. 4952. Aural exostoses in a roman skull excavated at the bath of the swimmer in the ancient town of Ostia, n JHE 4, p. 579584. Schela Cladovei: a preliminary review of the prehistoric fauna, n Mesolithic miscellany 16, 2, p. 219. Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual, Columbia, Missouri: Epigenetic variation in the human cranium, n J. Anat. 101, p. 361379. ge au dcs dans les populations inhumes: comparaison des mthodes et de resultats, n Antropologia Portuguesa 13, p. 3952. Mesolithic and early Neolithic in the Iron Gates: A Paleodietary perspective, n JEA 5, 1, p. 5092. Climate, floods and river gods: environmental change and the Meso Neolithic transition in southeast Europe, n Before Farming 4 (2), p. 112. La priode pipaleolithique sur la rive roumaine des Portes de Fer du Danube, PZ 45, 1, p. 125. Recherches archologiques sur la culture Schela Cladovei de la zone de Portes de Fer, n Dacia N. S. 17, p. 539. Les enterements de Schela Cladovei: nouvelles donnes, n: Vandermesch P.M., Philip Van Peer (eds.), Contributions to the Mesolithique in Europe,
Leuven University Press, p. 121125. 514. Missouri Archaeological Society, 1987. 1970.

Nouvelles donns sur les dcouvertes anthropologiques de Schela Cladovei Drobeta Turnu Severin (Roumanie), n Anthropologie 97, 2/3, p. 511 Paleolithique superieur et epipaleolithique dans la zone des Portes de Fer, Lsions traumatiques violents datant de Epipaleolithique tardif du Sud Ouest de Roumanie, n Anthropologie 28, 1, p. 5565. A Mesholithic burial area at Schela Cladovei, Romania, n Epipaleolithique et Msolithique en Europe. Paloenvironnement, peuplements et sistmes culturles, n Actes du 5-e Coloque international UISPP, (commision XII), The vertebrate fauna of Vlasac, n Sreovi D., Letica Z.: Vlasac: A Mesolithic Settlement in the Iron Gates, vol.2, Beograd, p. 3565. Osteometrie, n: Knussman R., Schwidetzky I., Jrgens H. W., Ziegelmayer G. (eds.): Anthropologie. Handbuch der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen, zugleich 4. Auflage des Lehrbuch der Anthropologie begrndet von Rudolf Martin. G. Fischer, Stuttgart, New York, p. 160192. Digging up Bones. 3rd edition, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York. homme msolithique du nordouest de Europe, distance biologique, considrations gntiques, BMSAP 6, sr. XII, 1, p. 173199. Forensic Neuropathology II: Mechanisms of Craniocerebral Injury and Their Medicolegal Signifiance, n JFS 7, p. 128.
Grenoble 1823 sept. Bucureti.

D. Brothwell 1981 T.S. Constandse Westermann 1974 C.B. Courville 1962a

59

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

C.B. Courville 1962b F. Demoulin 1972 G. Djurica 1996 G.G. y Edinak 1978 Gy. Farkas 1975 D. Ferembach 1962 D. Ferembach 1974 D. Ferembach et alii 1979 P. Firu et alii 1965 E. Fowler jr., P. Osmum 1942 D.W. Frayer 1988 D.W. Frayer 1997 E. Giles 1964 E. Giles, O. Elliot 1963 I.I. Gohmann 1958 I.I. Gohmann 1966 K. Hajni, J.T. Novk 1976 D.F.N. Harrison 1962 L. Harsnyi, J. Nemeskri 1964 G. Hauser, G.F. De Stefano 1989 K. Jacobs 1993 K. Jacobs 1993 G.E. Kennedy 1986 T.S. Konduktorova 1957 T.S. Konduktorova 1960 T.S. Konduktorova 1973 M. Kunter 1981

Forensic Neuropathology IV: Signifiance of Traumatic Extracranial and Cranial Lesion, n JFS 7, 3, p. 303322. Importance de certaines mesures crniennes (en particulier de la longeur sagittale de la mastode) dans dtermination sexuelle des crnes, n BMSAP 9, Sr. XII, p. 259264. Karijes u humanoj populaciji kulture Lepenskog Vira, n Starinar 47, p. Culture, Diet and Dental Reduction in Mesolithic ForagerFishers of Yugoslavia, n Current Anthropology 19, 3, p. 616618. A Dl Alfld skornak paleoantropolgija, Kand. Diss. Szeged, 1975. Les hommes du Palolitique suprieur de Europe, n Soc. dtude recherches Prhist., Inst. Pratique Prhist., Les Elysies, 2, p. 6275. Les hommes de epipaleolithique et du mesolithique de la France et du nordouest du bassin mditerranen, n BMSAP 2, sr. XIII, p. 201236. Recomandations pour dterminer ge et le sexe sur le squelette, n BMSAP 6, sr. XIII, p. 745. Cteva corelaii ntre aspectele morfopatologice ale regiunii dentomaxilare i condiiile de via social economice la populaiile vechi de pe teritoriul Romniei, n SCA 2, p. 191203. New bone growth due to cold water in the ear, n Arch. Otolaryngol 36, p. Auditory Exostoses and Evidence for Fishing at Vlasac, n Current Anthropology 29, 2, p. 346349. Ofnet: Evidence for a Mesolithic Massacre, n: Martin D. L. & Frayer D. W., 1987: Troubled Times. Violence and Warfare in the Past, vol. 3, p. 181
216. 455466. 177183.

Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of the mandible, n AJPA 22, p. 129135. Sex determination by discriminant function analysis of crania, n AJPA 21,
p. 5368.

Paleoantropologieskie materialy iz ranneneolitieskogo moginika Vasievka II v Dneprovskom Nadporo,e, n SE 1, p. 2438. Naselenie Ukrainy v epohu mezolita i neolita (antropologieski oerk),
Moskva, 1966. 92.

Die Verwachsung der Nhte Schdeldach, n Anthropologie 14, 12, p. 89 The relationship of osteomata of the external auditory meatus to swimming, n ARCS 3, p. 187201. ber Geschlechtdiagnose an Skeletlfunden, n AMLS 17, p. 5155. Epigenetic Variants of the Human Skull, ed. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart. Criteria for selection of osteometric dimensions, n AJPA 30, p. 451458. Human Postcranial Variation in the Ukrainian MesolithicNeolithic, n Current Anthropology 34, 3, p. 311323. The relationship betwen auditory exostoses and cold water, n AJPA 71, p. Paleoantropologieskie materialy iz mezolitiekogo moginika Vasievka I, n SAnt 2, p. 189210. Paleoantropologini materiali vovniz,kih pizn,oneolitinih moginikiv, MAU 1. Antropologija naselenija Ukrainy mezolita, neolita i epohi bronzy, Moskva. Frakturen un Verletzungen des vorund frhgeschichtlichen Menschen, Archeologie und Naturwissenschaft 2, p. 221246.

401415.

60

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

A. Lee, K. Pearson 1901 M.C. Lillie 1996 R. Martin 1914 C. Masset 1971 C. Masset 1982 A. Mayti 1976 . Miki 1981 T.T. Nalbant 1970 O. Necrasov, D. Botezatu 1981 J. Nemeskri, L. Szathmry 1978 D. Nicolescu Plopor 1987 G. Olivier 1960 Al. Punescu 2000 A. Peluso 1980 M. Roksandi 2000 E. Schreiner 1960 I. Schwidetzky, F.W. Rsing 1989 T.C. Surnina 1961 C.G. Turner, J.D. Cadien 1969 D.H. Ubelaker 1978 D.H. Ubelaker et alii 1969 E. Vlek 1970 G.P. Zinevi 1967 S. ivanovi 1975 Z. Zoffman 1983 J. Wahl, H.G. Knig 1987 J.A. Wallace 1974

Erreures systmatiques dans la dtermination de ge par les sutures crniennes, n BMSAP 7, sr. XII, p. 85105. Estimations de ge par les sutures crniennes, n TSN 7. Usure et articuls dentaires en Anthropologie, n Actualits Odonto Stomatologiques 113, p. 147165. Die neolitische Bevlkerung von Eisernen Tor (Djerdap). Ein Beitrag zur frage der Neolitisation, n Homo 32, 1, p. 2643. Cteva observaii asupra resturilor de peti descoperite n locuirile romanello aziliene (I II) de la Cuina Turcului Dubova, n SCIV 21, 1, Les caractristiques anthropologiques un squelette dcouvert Ostrovu Corbului, appartenant aspect culturel Schela Cladovei, n Ann. Roum. Anthropol. 18, p. 1114. Anthropology, n: Sreovi D., Letica Z,: Vlasac: A Mesolithic Settlement in the Iron Gates, vol.2, Beograd, p. 69426. Deux cas de mort violente dans l Epipaleolithique final de Schela Cladoveii, n Ann. Roum. d Anthrop. 13, p.35. Pratique anthropologique, Paris. Paleoliticul i mezoliticul din spaiul cuprins ntre Carpai i Dunre, Patologia orale in una antica popolazione egiziana, n Antropologia contemporanea 3, 1, p. 5782. Between Forargers and Farmers in the Iron Gates Gorge: Physical Anthropology Perspective. Djerdap Population in Transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic, n Documenta Praehistorica, Ljubljana, 27, p. 1100. La biomtrie. Que Saisje, Paris, nr. 871. Vergleichend statistiche Unterschungen zur Anthropologie von Neolithicum und Bronzezeit, n Homo 40, 12 (Sonderheft Neolithicum). Paleoantropologieskie materialy iz Vonenskogo neolitieskogo moginika, Antropolo / sb. III, Trudy Inst. etnograf im N. N. MikluhoMaklaja 71. Dental Chipping in Aleuts, Eskimos and Indians, n AJPA 31, 1969, 3, p. Human skeletal remains: Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation. Washington,
30, 1, p. 145149. 303310. Taraxacum. Bucureti. p. 4143.

Jena.

A first study of correlations of human skull, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. of London, series A 196, p. 225264. Mesolithic and Neolithic Populations of Ukraine: Indications of diet from Dental Pathology, n Current Anthropology 37, 1, p.135142. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie in Systematischer Darstellung, G. Fischer,

Artificial Interproximal grooving of the teeth in American indians, n AJPA

Relation morphologiques des types humains fossiles de Brno et Cro Magnon au Pleistocene Suprieur Europe, n: Camps G., Olivier G. (eds.): homme de CroMagnon 18681968, Paris, p. 5972. Oerki paleoantropologii Ukrainy, Kiev. A note on the anthropological characteristics of the Padina population, n Z. Morph. Anthrop. 66, 2, p. 161175. Prehistorical skeletal remains from Lepenski Vir (Iron Gate, Yugoslavia), n Homo, 34, 34, p. 129148. Anthropologische Traumatologische Untersuchung der menschlichen Skelettreste aus dem Bandkeramischen Massengrab bei Talheim, Kreis Heilbronn, Fundberichte aus BadenWrtenberg 12, p. 65193. Approximal Grooving of Teeth, n AJPA 40, 3, p. 385390.

61

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Tab. 1. Schela Cladovei, dimensiuni i indici, comparativ cu mediile i limitele de variaie ale craniilor mezolitice din Clisura Dunrii: Vlasac (J. Nemeskri, L. Szathmry 1978), Lepenski Vir (Z. Zoffmann 1983), Padina (S. ivanovi 1975) i Ostrovu Corbului (O. Necrasov, D. Botezatu 1981). ncadrarea n categorii dup: V.P. Alexeev, G.F. Debec 1964 [1] i R. Martin 1914 [2].
Nr. Martin / Dimensiuni i indici 1. gop 2. gi 2a. ni 3. gl 3a. nl 4c. Lung. max. mastoid 5(1). no 8. eueu 9. ftft 11. auau 12. astast 13. msms 19a. nlimea mastoid lungimea mastoid poast 20. pob 22. nlimea pe ni 22a. nlime pe gi 27. arc bl 28. arc lo 28(1). arc li 28(2). Arc io 29. coard nl 29d. Coard gb 30. coard bl 30a. Sgeat pe bl 30b. bsgeat 31. coard lo 31a. Sgeat pe lo 31b. lsgeat 31(1). Coard li Valoare Categoria Nr. 197 179 172 195 193 50/51 145 (142) 108 134 110 117 39/38 56/58 (123) 114 116 (153) 120 84 36 (115) (110) (128) (28,5) (70) 103 23 60 79 f. mare [1] mare [1] f. nalt [1] f. nalt [1] f. f. lung [1] lung
mare  [1] [1] mijlocie [1] f. lat [1] f. lat
mijlociu [1] [1] f. lung [1] lung [1] 30 12 12 31 32 12 24 12 32 25 17 23 17 26 17 23 Clisura Dunrii Media 192,06 184,50 189,66 141,51 100,93 124,66 112,95 105,16 122,49 134,32 123,52 73,69 114,88 121,50 104,58 69,21 Lim. var. 177207 174202 180198 122157 90115 120130 100125 97119 113133 120148 111137 5895 100125 111133 90120 5690

62

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

31(2). Coard o 32(1a). Unghi nb / OAE 33. unghi lo / OAE 33(1). unghi li / OAE 33(2). unghi io / OAE 33(4). unghi lio 37. unghi ni / OAE 37a. unghi gi / OAE 37(1). unghi gl / OAE unghi nl / OAE 38. Cap. cr. (Lee Pearson) 43. fmtfmt 43(1). fmofmo 45. zyzy 47. ngn 48. npr 50. mfmf 51. mfek (stg) 52. nlime orbit (stg) 55. nns 57. coard simotic 57(1). Lime max. nasale 57(2) Lime sup. nasale 61. ekmekm 62. olsta 63. enmenm 64. nlime palat 65. kdlkdl 65(1). krkr 66. gogo 67. lime la f.m. 68. lungime mandibul 68(1). Lungime proiectat 69. idgn 69(1). nlime la f.m.

34 (47,5 ) 125o 109,5o 17

o o

6 mare
[1]
3

52,00 1573,10 112,63 138,40 119,44 69,23 23,82 41,82 32,90 52,12 9,07 66,18 48,00 39,85 15,71 107,16 84,20 108,27 33,91
o

4858 14621638 101126 120156 101129 6280 2030 3846 2935 4658 712 6279 4066 3249 920 125140 85131 6994 95120 2440

126,5 16
o

18,5o 5,5 8o 1615,23 cm 117 108 153! (130) (79) 23,5 46 36,5 (61) 10,5 17 17 (68) 46 (44) (20) 135 112 124,5 43 85 108 39,5 35 f. nalt [1] f. nalt [1] f. lung
[1] f. f. lat [1] f. lat [1] lat [1] f. lat  [1] f. lat [1] nalt [1] f. nalt mare [1]  [1] f.mare [1] aristenkephal [2] f. lat  [1] f. lat [1] f. f. lat [1] f. nalt  f. nalt
[1] [1]
o

17 22 15 9 17 17 15 16 16 14 16 9 14 14 2 12 19 18 24

63

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

69(2). nlime la M2 69(3). Grosime la f.m. 69b. grosime la M2 grosime simfiz 70. nlime ram 70a. nlime proiectat 70(1). nlime coronoid 70(3). adncime inciz. 71. lime ram 71a. lime min. ram 71b. lung. max. condil 79. unghi goniac 79(4). unghi bazal 80(2).Lung. Pm1M3 (max.) 80(2). Lung. Pm1M3 (mand.) I.1. 8:1 I.4. 20:1 I.5. 20:8 I.5(1). 22a:2 I.5(2). 22:2a I.13. 9:8 I.14. 12:8 12:9 12:31

34 11 12 15 75 74 75 17 36 35 24 107 77 41 44 (72,08) (62,43) (86,61) 64,80 66,27 (76,05) (94,36) (77,46) 101,85 106,79 (78,43) (83,66) 85,83 94,04 35,05 (84,96) (51,63) 81,37 115,27 mic [1] euriprosop  [2] mijlociu
[1] mesen [2] f.mare
[1] f.mare [1] f. mare [1] eurimetop [2] f. mare [1] mijlociu [1] f.mic [1] mic [1] mic [1] f. mic
[1] [1] f. mic [1]dolicocran [2] mijlociu [1] ortocran [2] f. mare [1] akrocran [2] f. mare [1] f. mic [1] mijlocie [1] f. nalt [1] mic [1]

19 22 23 18 20 22 17 11 19 19 17 17 26 19 21 6 8 6 12

66,57 37,50 121,64 72,40 63,19 86,39 72,03 88,08 79,77 111,49 108,35

5577 3244 101129 58,979,8 59,570,3 74,6104,9 65,077,0 83,694,1 74,387,4 100,9 121,7 87,5118,2

I.18. 28:27 I.24. 30:27 I.25. 31:28 I.26. 31(1):28(1) I.28. 31(2):31(1) I.38. 47:45 I.39. 48:45 I.40. 66:45 66:9

93,16 76,5109,6 90,18 84,62 93,73 87,90 53,05 77,71 104,22 85,592,5 78,193,7 89,398,5 74,892,6 46,759,0 74,281,1 85,0103,1

mijlociu 

64

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

I 42. 52:51 (stg.) I.58. 63:62 I.59. 64:63 I.62. 68(1):65 66:68 71a:70

79,34 (95,65) (45,45) 80,00 146,47 46,66 48,00 92,22 31,42 35,29 (107,74) 70,58

mijlociu [1] mesokonc [2] mare [1] brahistafilin [2] hipistafilin [2] dolicostenomandibular [2] mare f.mic [1] [1]

7 7 9 2 12 19 2

79,87 85,05 43,83 127,15 56,63 96,85 74,36

65,989,5 59,1104,3 33,352,7 78,585,5 102,4 147,8 49,365,0 88,193,5 88,8104,4 69,487,0

I.63. 71:70 I. 64. 66:65 I.66. 69(3):69(1) 69b:69(2)

f. mic [1]

11

I.71. 45:8 I. 73a. 9:45

mijlociu

[1]

12

65

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Tab. 2a. Scorurile abaterilor reduse ale craniului de la Schela Cladovei fa de seriile mezolitice din Clisura Dunrii i Niprul inferior i neolitice de pe Niprul inferior 1. Vlasac (J. Nemeskri, L. Szathmry 1978); 2. Lepenski Vir (Z. Zoffmann 1983); 3. Vasievka I (T.S. Konduktorova 1957; eadem 1973); 4. Vasievka II (I.I. Gohman 1958); 5. Vasievka III (I.I. Gohman 1966; T.S. Konduktorova 1973); 6. Nikoskoe (G.P. Zinevi 1967; T.S. Konduktorova 1973); 7. Dereivka I (G.P. Zinevi 1967; T.S. Konduktorova 1973); 8. Voneno (T.C. Surnina 1961; T.S. Konduktorova 1973); 9. Vovnigi, malul drept (I.I. Gohman 1966; T.S. Konduktorova 1960; eadem 1973). Note: a) S-au folosit mediile abaterilor standard din V.P. Alexeev, G.F. Debec 1964. b) Datele din T.S. Konduktorova 1957.
Nr. Martin Dimensiuni i Indici 1. g op 8. eu eu 9. ft ft 11. au au 20. po b 45. zy zy 47. n gn 48. n pr 51. mf ek 52. nl. orb. 55. n ns 61. ekm ekm 65. kdl kdl 66. go go 68 (1) lung. proiec. 69. id gn 70. nl. ram 8:1 20 : 1 20 : 8 9:8 11 : 8 47 : 45 48 : 45 66 : 45 66 : 9 52 : 51 66 : 65 45 : 8 9 : 45 Abaterile reduse 1 0,47 0,39 1,74 1,94 0,18 2,94 1,18 1,87 1,84 3,06 0,56 2,61 0,05 1,96 1,70 0,05 0,28 0,04 1,18 2,20 0,07 1,72 0,11 2,45 1,08 2 1,24 0,62 1,13 0,15 2,05 2,05 3 0,19 1,40 2,59 [1,72] 0,55 2,41 1,28 1,26 1,63 1,69 2,50 2,15 3,71 [0,07] [1,50] [1,16] 0,61 0,33 1,08 1,28 [0,07] 0,40 0,14 [2,96] [1,50] 0,38 [2,29] 0,38 [0,68] 4 1,22 0,72 0,27 0,20 0,15 0,09 1,22 0,90 0,88 2,36 1,87 0,93 0,24 1,55 1,03 1,19 1,36 1,44 1,06 0,76 0,92 0,12 1,06 0,80 2,52 1,16 2,40 1,70 0,51 0,48 5 0,70 1,00 2,22 2,00 0,77 2,68 1,92 2,07 1,49 2,12 2,78 1,40 2,71 3,52 0,53 3,26 2,34 0,27 0,17 0,08 1,31 1,41 0,27 0,35 1,96 1,69 0,80 1,42 1,56 0,02 6 0,16 0,18 1,38 0,35 0,2 1,50 0,24 0,97 0,13 2,27 2,06 0,31 0,30 0,76 1,83 1,34 0,64 0,00 1,76 2,85 7 0,37 0,52 1,47 0,85 0,42 1,66 0,95 1,26 1,07 2,14 2,59 1,77 2,88 0,93 2,07 2,61 0,75 0,90 0,00 1,59 1,60 0,17 0,02 1,76 1,46 1,20 1,91 2,40 8 0,36 0,80 1,38 0,10 1,07 0,48 0,78 0,01 1,53 2,32 0,89 1,76 0,94 0,18 0,79 1,89 0,17 0,07 1,24 1,77 9 0,62 0,56 1,54 0,43 0,20 1,31 1,27 1,65 0,66 2,10 2,62 0,46 0,38 1,53 0,42 1,01 1,83 0,88 0,46 0,51 1,37 1,03 0,57 0,70 1,30 1,27 1,80 0,30

66

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

Tab. 2b. Semnificaia statistic a scorurilor testului abaterilor reduse. Pentru surse vezi explicaiile de la tabelul nr. 2a.: ns = abateri sub 2 nesemnificative statistic; s = abateri sub 2,5 semnificative statistic 95% i ss abateri de 2,5 i peste semnificative statistic 1%.
Nr. Martin. Dimensiuni i indici 8. eu eu 45. zy zy 48. npr 52. nl. orb. 55. n ns 8:1 20 : 1 47 : 45 52 : 51 45 : 8 9 : 45 Siturile 1 n.s. ss. n.s. n.s. ss. n.s. n.s. n.s. s. n.s. 2 n.s. s. 3 n.s. s. n.s. n.s. ss. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 4 n.s. n.s. n.s. s n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. s. n.s. n.s. 5 n.s. ss. s. s ss. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 6 n.s. n.s. n.s. s s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. ss. 7 n.s. n.s. n.s. s ss. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. s. 8 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. s n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 9 n.s. n.s. n.s. s ss n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.

Tab. 3. ncadrarea n categorii a unor dimensiuni i indici dup clasificrile lui Alexeev & Debetz (1964). Pentru surse vezi explicaiile de la tabelul nr. 2, cu excepia sitului Vovnigi pentru care s-a folosit numai eantionul publicat de Gohman (1966). Pentru dimensiunile i indicele orbitei vezi precizrile de la nota 52. Categoriile subliniate cu aldine sunt cele n care se ncadreaz craniul de la Schela Cladovei.
Dimensiuni i indici. Categoria 45. laime max. fa f. ngust 117125 ngust 126130 mijlocie 131136 lat 137141 f. lat 142150 f. f. lat 151X 47. nl. morfol. f. joas 96107 joas 108114 mijlocie 115122 nalt 123129 f. nalt 130141 f. f. nalt 142X 48. nl. superioar f. joas 5864 joas 6568 mijlocie 6973 nalt 7477 f. nalt 7884 f. f. nalt 85X i. facial total (47:45) f. mic 71,380,5 mic 80,685,8 mijlociu 85,991,6 mare 91,796,9 f. mare 97,0106,2 i. facial sup. (48:45) f. f. mic X42,7 f. mic 42,848,3 mic 48,451,4 1 5 2 2 1 2 6 1 2 3 2 2 3 1 3 1 1 3 Siturile cu numrul de cazuri 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 5 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 3 6 5 1 1 3 2 2 4 3 1 1 3 1 7 7 1 5 6 1 1 1 3 7 3 3 6 4 4 5 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 2 4 6 1 1 4 2 1 9 3 2 1 3 4 5 3 11 6 3 4 6 1 1 2 8 4 2 6 6 1 1 8 6 Total (%) meziolitic (1+3+4+5) 1 (2,27) 14 (31,78) 5 (11,35) 17 (38,59) 7 (15,89) 1 (2,77) 6 (16,62) 16 (44,32) 10 (27,70) 2 (5,54) 1 (2,77) 3 (7,14) 8 (19,04) 14 (33,32) 10 (23.80) 7 (16,66) 9 (30,00) 10 (33,30) 9 (30,00) 2 (6,66) 1 (2,94) 9 (26,47) 11 (32,34) Total (%) neolitic (6+7+9) 8 (21,6) 21 (56,7) 8 (21,6) 4 (11,08) 9 (37,50) 9 (37,50) 1 (4,16) 1 (4,16) 1 (2,56) 3 (7,68) 19 (48,64) 10 (25,60) 5 (12,82) 1 (2,56) 6 (26,08) 10 (43,40) 7 (30,38) 1 (3,12) 8 (25,00) 13 (40,56)

67

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

mijlociu 51,554,9 mare 55,058,0 f. mare 58,163,6 51. l. orbit f. mic 36,039,1 mic 39,240,9 mijlocie 41,042,9 mare 43,044,7 f. mare 44,847,9 f. f. mare 48,0X 52. nl. orbit f. f. joas X27,8 f. joas 27,931,2 joas 31,333,1 mijlocie 33,235,2 nalt 35,337,1 f. nalt 37,240,5 i. orbitar (52:51) f. f. mic X65 f. mic 65,173,8 mic 73,978,7 mijlociu 78,884,3 mare 84,489,2 f. mare 89,398,0 54. l. nas f. ngust 19,522,6 ngust 22,724,4 mijlociu 24,526,4 larg 26,528,2 f. larg 28,331,4 f. f. larg 31,5X nl nas f. mic 4347 mic 4850 mijlocie 5153 mare 5456 f. mare 5761 f. f. mare 62X i. nasal (54:55) f. mic 35,442,5 mic 42,646,6 mijlociu 46.751,1 mare 51,255,2 f. mare 55,362,4 65. lat. condilian f. ngust 101110 ngust 111116 mijlocie 117122 larg 123128 f. larg 129138 f. f. larg 139X 66. lat. goniac f. ngust 7990 ngust 9196 mijlocie 97103 larg 104109 f. larg 110121 f. f. larg 122X

1 1 3 1 4 4 1 4 3 9 1 1 2 6 1 1 3 7 3 3 2 4 1 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 4 1

2 2 5 4 1 4 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 5 2 2 2 5 2

2 1 6 8 3 3 1 5 9 1 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 1 1 4 1 1 4 2 1 1 4 2

4 1 4 3 1 2 1 9 10 7 1 1 13 10 4 2 2 6 1 2 1 1 1 8 4 1 2 5 3 1 2 1 4 6 2 2 1 7 6 1

3 1 2 4 1 4 1 6 1 1 2 3 2 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

5 6 6 5 1 7 7 5 1 1 7 9 1 2 6 5 2 1 2 8 4 2 1 4 3 5 2 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 6 2 1

2 4 7 14 9 1 11 7 14 1 1 3 19 12 1 3 7 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 1 2 6 6 2 2 9 2 1 5 5 3

9 (26,47) 4 (11,76) 7 (14,89) 4 (8,48) 11 (23,32) 8 (16,96) 7 (14,89) 10 (21,20) 1 17 20 19 3 2 5 26 24 12 5 1 2 10 11 10 3 1 (1,61) (27,37) (32,20) (30,59) (4,83) (3,22) (6,75) (35,10) (32,40) (16,20) (6,75) (1,35) (5,40) (27,00) (29,70) (27,00) (8,10) (2,70)

9 (28,08) 1 (3,12) (17,20) (25,86) (39,56) (17,20)

10 15 23 10

1 (1,66) 18 (29,88) 18 (29,88) 20 (33,2) 2 (3,32) 1 (1,66) 4 32 22 1 1 (6,66) (53,12) (36,52) (1,66) (1.66)

6 (15,38) 15 (38,4) 11 (28,16) 6 (15,38) 1 (2,56) 3 (7,50) 4 (10,00) 14 (35,00) 9 (22,50) 9 (22,50) 1 (2,50) 1 (2,70) 9 (24,32) 12 (32,43) 11 (29,72) 4 (10,81) 1 (3,57) 3 (10,71) 2 (7,14) 6 (21.42) 12 (42,84) 4 (14,28) 2 (6,66) 3 (10,00) 11 (36,63) 9 (29,97) 5 (16,65)

1 (2,63) 5 (13,15) 14 (36,82) 14 (36,82) 4 (10,52) 3 (10,71) 8 (28,56) 11 (39,27) 2 (7,14) 4 (14,28) 2 (5,71) 4 (11,40) 13 (37,05) 5 (14,25) 8 (22,80) 3 (8,55) 3 3 14 11 11 3 (6,66) (6,66) (31,08) (24,42) (24,42) (6,66)

68

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

1.

2.

3. Plana I. Craniul de la Schela Cladovei: 1. Norma anterioar; 2. Norma superioar; 3. Norma lateral stnga.

Plate I. The skull from Schela Cladovei: 1. Anterior view; 2. Superior view; 3. Left lateral view.

69

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

1.

3.

2. Plana II. Craniul de la Schela Cladovei: 1) Norma posterioar; 2) Norma bazal; 3) Mandibula, norma lateral dreapta; 4) Mandibul i maxilar, norma lateral stnga (sgeata neagr indic un abces apical fistulat, iar cea alb un abces periradicular).

4.

Plate II. The skull from Schela Cladovei: 1) Posterior view; 2) Inferior view; 3) Mandible, right lateral view; 4) Mandible and maxilla, left lateral view (black arrow shows an apical fistulate abscess and the white arrow a periradicular abscess).

70

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

1.

2.

3.

4. Plana III. Craniul de la Schela Cladovei: 1. Mandibula, norma superioar cu enuirile interproximale artificiale indicate de inseria unei scobitori; 2. Maxilarul, norma bazal cu aceleai modificri artificiale ale dinilor; 3. Exostoze auriculare n meatul auditiv extern; 4. Detaliu, calot cranian cu urme de violen perimortem.

Plate III. The skull from Schela Cladovei: 1. Mandible, superior view with artificial interproximal grooving indicated by a pointer; 2. Maxilla, inferior view with the same artificial modifications of teeth; 3. Auricular exostosis in external acoustic meatus; 4. Detail, cranial vault with perimortem violence traces.

71

Nicolae MIRIOIU, Nicuor SULTANA, Andrei SOFICARU

Pl. IV. Schela Cladovei vedere actual a sitului. Sus vedere din amonte; jos vedere din aval (foto Alexandru Dinu).

Plate IV. Schela Cladovei actual photo of the site. Above upstream view; below downstream view (by courtesy of Alexandru Dinu).

72

Asupra unui craniu preistoric dintr-o descoperire ntmpltoare de la Schela Cladovei

7 8 6 1 5 4 2 3 9

Harta 1. Descoperirile mezolitice cu oseminte umane din Clisura Dunrii. Legend: 1. Padina; 2. Lepenski Vir; 3. Vlasac; 4. Cuina Turcului; 5. Climente II 6. Hajduca Vodenica; 7. Icoana; 8. Schela Cladovei; 9. Ostrovu Corbului. Map 1. Mesolithic discoveries with human bones from Iron Gates.

4 1,2,3 5 6 7

Nipru

Marea Neagra

Harta 2. Descoperirile mezolitice si neolitice de pe Niprul Inferior (Map 2. Mesolithic and Neolithic discoveries from inferior Dnieper) Legend: 1, 2, 3. Vasilevka I, II, III; 4. Dereivka; 5. Nikolskoe; 6. Vovnigi; 7. Volnevo. Descoperiri mezolitice (Mesolithic discoveries) Descoperiri neolitice (Neolithic discoveries)

73

Consideraii asupra locuirii Dudeti din sud-vestul Munteniei Pavel MIREA*

Abstract: This article presents the preliminary stage of the Dudeti finds in the southwest Muntenia and the implication concerning the area covered by this culture in relation with the neightbours areas (the central and the south Muntenia and Oltenia). In the southwest Muntenia we have 23 locations with tipical Dudeti finds. We present them one by one. Keywords: Neolithic, Dudeti finds, southwest Muntenia. Cuvinte cheie: neolitic, Dudeti, sud-vestul Munteniei.

Definit de Eugen Coma i caracterizat ca fiind o cultur neolitic sudcarpatic dezvoltat pe temeiuri epipaleolitice (E. Coma 1956, p. 4749), cultura Dudeti era cunoscut n Muntenia mai ales prin descoperirile arheologice din sudul i centrul provinciei, cercetrile concentrndu-se n special n jurul Bucuretiului (E. Coma 1956, p. 4149; idem 1959, p. 9197; S. Morintz 1963, p. 3041; S. DolinescuFerche 1964, p. 113119). Sudvestul Munteniei aprea ca o zon srac n astfel de descoperiri n raport cu zonele nvecinate, fapt ce putea avea anumite consecine negative cu privire la stabilirea ariei de rspndire a acestei culturi. ntrun studiu dedicat culturii Dudeti, aprut n 1971 (E. Coma 1971, p. 199200), n sudvestul Munteniei erau semnalate doar cinci puncte n care se fcuser descoperiri specifice Singureni, Drghiceanu, Fundu Drghiceanu, Roiori de VedeUrlui i Ipoteti II (fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Harta descoperirilor Dudeti (apud E. Coma). Map of the Dudeti Finds (after E. Coma). Peste aproape trei decenii situaia nu se modificase prea mult. Un nou articol referitor la aceast cultur meniona alte dou noi puncte cu descoperiri tipice Dudeti, la Mgura i Plopii Slviteti (M. Neagu 2000, p. 5455). Se aduga un alt punct aflat la limita de vest a teritoriului

Muzeul Judeean Teleorman, Alexandria, str. 1848, nr. 1, jud. Teleorman, pavelcmirea@yahoo.com.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 7592.

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpathobalkan areaanalysis and possible significance Valeriu SRBU* Stnic PANDREA*
Rezumat: Obiecte neolitice cu semne incizate pe fund descoperite n aria carpatobalcanic. Analiz i posibil semnificaie.

Importana acestor vase const n semnificaia lor, dar i n faptul c sunt caracteristice unui interval cronologic bine definit. ntruct n marea majoritate a cazurilor, liniile, benzile de linii, figurile geometrice sau compoziii de linii i figuri geometrice realizate pe fundul vaselor n-au putut avea un rol decorativ i pentru c nici nu putem ti, cu certitudine, rostul lor, am preferat s le denumim "semne". Vase cu semne pe fund au fost descoperite n nordestul Cmpiei Brilei n aezrile BoianGiuleti de la Silitea Conac, Licoteanca Mo Filon i Movila din Balt, Brilia, dar i n aezarea de tip BoianGiuleti de la Isaccea, n nordul Dobrogei. Astfel de vase, cu semne incizate pe fund, au fost descoperite n numr mare i n aria culturii Vina, n aezrile de la Para Tell I, Zorlen, Vrac At, Rast i Bucov, fiind datate de ctre descoperitorii lor la nivel cronologic Vina B i Vina B2/C, ori au fost atribuite Grupului Bucov (etapa Bucov II). Un numr apreciabil de vase cu semne pe fund s-au gsit n aria culturii/grupului cultural Turda, ele provenind din aezrile de la Turda Lunc, Deva Tuala, Ortie Dealul Pemilor, Alba Iulia Lumea Nou i Daia Romn Pru. La sud de Dunre, vase cu semne pe fund au fost descoperite la Gradenica n nivelul de locuire atribuit culturii Gradenica, precum i n aezrile culturii KalojanovecKaranovo IV de la Kalojanovec, Obruite i Nova Zagora Hlobopzavod. Vase cu semne pe fund, similare cu cele descoperite n ariile culturale Boian, Vina i KalojanovecKaranovo IV, au mai fost descoperite n aezarea Hamangia de la Ceamurlia, n aezrile culturii ceramicii liniare de la Traian Dealul Fntnilor, Glvnetii Vechi, Nezviko i n aezrile culturii Precucuteni de la Traian Dealul Viei i Larga Jijia. Din datele de care dispunem, rezult c fundurile care poart semne provin, n cea mai mare parte, de la pahare, cupe i strchini tronconice, lucrate din past fin, bine arse, cu suprafaa intens lustruit i decorate cu pliseuri ori motive incizate (uneori incizate i ncrustate). Vasele cu semne pe fund descoperite n aezrile Boian din nordestul Cmpiei Romne seamn, pn la identitate, cu cele descoperite n ariile culturale Turda, Vina, Karanovo IV i Gradenica. n schimb, piesele similare descoperite n mediile culturale liniarceramic, precucutenian i Hamangia au un aspect uor diferit fa de acela al vaselor descoperite n aezrile Boian din Brgan fiind redate conform canoanelor stilistice proprii acestor medii culturale. Rezult c vasele cu semne pe fund caracterizeaz, n primul rnd, ariile culturale Vina, Turda, KalojanovecKaranovo IV i Boian, nefiind ntmpltor faptul c n aezrile acestor culturi a fost descoperit majoritatea covritoare a acestor piese. n actualul stadiu al cercetrilor, prezena vaselor cu semne pe fund, cu precdere n mediile culturale Vina, Gradenica, Karanovo IVKalojanovec i Boian o putem explica astfel: a) datorit unui fond cultural comun; b) ca rezultat al unui impuls cultural al crui centru l reprezint teritoriille din jurul Propontidei, ipotez care ni se pare ca fiind cea mai probabil. ncheiem problematica ncadrrii culturalcronologice a acestor piese evideniind faptul c intervalul cronologic pe parcursul cruia se dateaz vasele cu semne pe fund este Vina B2 Vina C1 = Turda = Gradenica = Karanovo IVKalojanovec = Boianfaza Giuleti = Precucuteni III = Hamangia III. ncercrile de a nelege de ce s-au fcut aceste semne pe fundul vaselor trebuie s aib n vedere toate realitile arheologice: contextele, asociaiile cu alte tipuri de piese, tipul de piese pe care apar i locul unde au fost executate, tehnicile i momentul executrii, valene/nonvalene decorative, tipurile de semne i asocierile dintre ele, repetabilitatea/nonrepetabilitatea lor n aceleai contexte, situri ori arii culturale, originea i dinamica rspndirii lor, categorii de piese pe care mai apar astfel de semne etc. Este evident c exagerarea importanei unor aspecte i eludarea altora duc la concluzii i ipoteze eronate. ntruct aceste semne nu erau vizibile n mod normal i nici nu reprezint realizri artistice notabile, apreciem c rostul lor nu era decorativ. Descoperirile arheologice ne demonstreaz c, de regul, prile vaselor care nu erau expuse vederii nu erau ornamentate. Mai mult, este sigur c unele semne s-au executat pe vase dup o perioad de utilizare a lor iar pe unele funduri poate chiar dup spargerea vaselor. Nu credem c semnele
*

Vase cu semne pe fund apar n aproape toate aezrile BoianGiuleti din Cmpia Brilei, dar piese similare sunt rspndite pe spaii mult mai largi, fiind descoperite n medii culturale diferite.

Muzeul Brilei, Piaa Traian 3, 6100, Brila.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 93114.

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

de pe fundul vaselor au putut fi mrci de olar, att datorit marii diversiti de semne i numrului mic de vase marcate, ct i faptului c o parte din ele au fost incizate dup arderea vaselor. O alt utilitate pur practic a acestor semneeventual de marcare a unor cantiti sau a unor momente n folosirea lornu poate fi decelat din aceleai considerente. Pe de alt parte, marcarea semnelor doar pe un numr restrns de vase, relativa repetabilitate a motivelor de baz, existena lor pe anumite tipuri de vase i doar pe fundul acestora, prezena lor numai n anumite medii culturale i ntr-o anumit perioad, le confer un rost anume. Dincolo de repetabilitatea unor semne de baz, impus i de fondul relativ redus al acestora, se observ diferene notabile ntre combinaiile de semne specifice diferitelor culturi arheologice, dar nu putem spune dac aceste diferene grafice exprim i "mesaje" diferite. Desigur, se pot face diferite sugestii privind natura mesajelor acestor semne dar, n lipsa unor date complete despre toate descoperirile, ar nsemna s intrm prea mult n sfera speculaiilor. Reinem ipoteza distrugerii lor intenionate: a) din motive religioase; b) din motive legate de anumite practici sociale denumite prin sintagma "the enchainement of social relations. Faptul c aceste "semne" au fost puse pe fundul unor vase (= ascunse), c ele n-au valene artistice i c s-au gsit n locuine obinuite ori depuse n gropi ar putea sugera ipoteza c semnificaia lor ar aparine mai degrab sferei magiei, deci unor nevoi practice ale familiilor. De aceea ne limitm la a spune c ele n-au fost elemente decorative i, foarte probabil, nici n-au avut o utilitate practic propriu-zis, ci au reprezentat nite semne al cror mesaj poate nu-l vom afla niciodat. Cuvinte cheie: vase cu semne pe fund, Boian-Giuleti, Vina, Turda, Gradenica, Kalojanovec Karanovo IV, liniarceramic, Precucuteni, Hamangia, cronologie, funcionalitate. Keywords: vessels bearing incised signs on the bottom, Boian-Giuleti, Vina, Turda, Gradenica, KalojanovecKaranovo IV, linearceramic, Precucuteni, Hamangia, chronology, functionality.

Vessels bearing incised signs on the bottom were found in almost all the settlements Boian Giuleti of the Brila Plain, as some objects are spread over larger and culturally different areas. This kind of objects is important for their significance as well as for their being characteristic for a period of time well defined; thats why we are going to study this category of objects. As in most cases, the lines, the stripes, the geometric figures and the compositions of lines and geometric figures made on the bottom of vessels had no decorative role and as we dont know exactly what they stand for, we decided to name these by a neutral term, "signs". I. CATALOGUE OF DICOVERIES 1. BoianGiuleti culture: Brila Plain and Dobroudja Such vessels have been uncovered in the BoianGiuleti settlements of Silitea Conac (V. Srbu, St. Pandrea 1994, p. 2762), Licoteanca Mo Filon and Movila din Balt (N. Haruche, Fl. Anastasiu 1968; idem 1976). a) Silitea Conac (fig. 1/19). Bottoms of vases together with other pottery fragments and tools, have been unveiled in the layer but also in pits. All the bottoms are from truncated beakers made of fine paste; they are completely fired, and the surface is well polished; most of them are decorated on the body by pleats. There are umbo type bottoms and the signs are made exclusively on the outside, incised (fig.1/15) as well as excised (fig. 1/8). As far as the incised bottoms are concerned for three of them, the signs have been made after the firing and even, after a use (fig. 1/1, 2, 5) b) Licoteanca Mo Filon (fig. 1/1011). The items were discovered in pits and are from stemmed beakers broken in ancient times, made of demi-fine paste. Completely burnt and the surface very well polished. The decoration is exclusively incised, made inside the vase, before the burning, in the soft paste. c) Licoteanca Movila din Balt (fig. 2; 3/113). In this settlement have been uncovered most of the objects, in pits as well as in the archaeological layer.

94

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

The Pit nr. XIII (fig. 2/14) is very interesting as in it were 10 bottoms with incised signs, together with other pottery fragments (some vessels can be completed, that is they have been either broken in situ, or deposited already broken). These bottoms belong to truncated beakers (fig. 2/12, 47), as well as to bitruncated vases (fig. 2/3, 810). All of them are made of fine paste, completely fired and the surface well polished; the body is decorated by pleats but also motifs incised in white paste (fig. 2/23). The large majority of these signs are incised on the bottom of the vases, on the outside, excepting one bitruncated vase where they are made inside (fig. 2/3); one can remark six vase bottoms with an incised decoration in the white paste. Thirteen other objects have been found in pits and the archaeological layer, all of them in fragments and associated to other pottery sherds and tools (fig. 2/510). These bottoms belonged to truncated beakers (fig. 2/510). These vases are made of fine paste, completely fired and the surface is very well polished, while the body bears an incised decoration. The signs have been made by incision, sometimes in white paste (fig. 3/4, 710). d) Brilia Vadul Catagaei (fig. 3/14) In a pit house of Brilia settlement was uncovered a bottom of a truncated beaker, made of fine paste completely fired, well polished and decorated by thin canalling (N. Haruche, Fl. Anastasiu 1968, p. 9). e) Isaccea Suhat (fig. 4/1) In this settlement have been found a number of cups and beakers, made of fine paste, well polished, and bearing on the bottom incised nets of lines and cruciforme signs (C. Micu et alii 2000, p. 9, fig. 10/8). 2) The Cultural Area of Vina a) Para Tell I (fig. 4/26; 10/48) The vessels found at Para Tell I (Gh. Lazarovici 1979, p. 204, pl. XVIII H/5, 2527; XXIV F/1627; Gh. Lazarovici et alii 2001, fig. 10/2; 19/11; 25/3; 46/16; 70/6; 104/6) either were placed in Vina B1B2 phase, or attributed to the Bucov Group, IInd phase). b) Zorlen (fig. 10/13). The vessels bearing incised signs on the bottoms (Gh. Lazarovici 1979, p. 209210, pl. XVIII F/53; XIX H/45) have been placed in the Vina B2 and Vina B2/C phases. The Vina settlements of this zone were closely linked to those of Serbia and their evolution is synchronous with the Vina area, without being influenced or belated by other cultural surroundings (Gh. Lazarovici 1979, p. 136137). We may conclude that the objects found at Zorlen belong to Vina settlements and are dated in the chronological period Vina B2Vina B2/C. c) Bucov (fig. 10/910). The vases found here have been considered to belong to Bucov IInd phase, synchronous with Vina B2 (Lazarovici 1979, p. 202204). d) Rast (fig. 10/1120) A lot of vessels with incised signs on the bottom have been uncovered in the Ist and IInd levels of the Rast settlement, belonging to Vina culture, reprezentative for the last stage of Vina B2 and beginning of Vina C (Vl. Dumitrescu 1980, p. 110, pl.XXXIV/6, pl. XLV/317). e) Vrac At A lot of vases have been discovered in this settlement, usually cups and beakers, well polished, bearing on the bottom incised lines nets and crosses (www.arheologija.narod.ru/d1 ustanove/vrsac/Prehistoric.html). Taking into consideration the opinion expressed by Gh. Lazarovici (1979, p. 137, fig. 1213) and Fl. Draovean (1996, p. 73) we could say that this settlement belonged to Vina C phase. 3. Cultural Area Turda. a) Turda Lunc (fig. 5/23; 9)

95

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

M. Roska (1941, fig. XXXIXXXIV) presented a lot of vase bottoms with incised signs collected in the 19th century by Zsofia Torma. The latest archaeological excavations revealed some vessels with signs incised on the bottom (S.A. Luca 2001, p. 68, fig. 33/9; 34/8). b) Ortie Dealul Pemilor (X2) (fig. 5/49) The kind of vases we are dealing with were uncovered at Ortie Dealul Pemilor (X2) in the two levels of inhabitation. According to the author of the excavations, this settlement is a reprezentative one for the final stage of Turda culture/cultural group, being contemporary with the middle level of Turda, the superior level of Tula and is dated during the chronological horizon Vina C1 (S.A. Luca 1997, p. 77). c) Daia Romn Pru (fig. 5/10) In the settlement of Daia Romn Pru was uncovered, by chance, a vase with incised signs on the bottom and it was published by I. Paul (1992, p. 110114, pl. LII/11) who considered it to belong to the Turda Culture, because of the decoration very similar to the one of vases of Turda and the plaques of Trtria (I. Paul 1992, p. 111). Thus, this vase could be placed in the final stage of Turda Culture (I. Paul 1992, p. 111112). d) Deva Tula (fig. 10/3132). H. Dumitrescu (1984, p. 7, 17) discovered a few vases with incised signs on the bottom, very similar to those found at Turda and Ortie. The author of the excavations considered that at Tula we are dealing with a facies of VinaTurda culture, linked to Vina B1B2 phases (H. Dumitrescu 1984, p. 7, 17). In 1986, Gh. Lazarovici has varied the opinion expressed by Hortensia Dumitrescu and stated that Tula aspect is effectively linked to Turda group and this one begins to exist at the chronological level Vina B1/B2, continuing its evolution all along the stages of Vina C phase (Gh. Lazarovici, H. Dumitrescu 19851986, p. 15, 21, 26). Recently, referring to the latest discoveries made in the Mure Valley, Fl. Draovean (1997, p. 78) and S.A. Luca (1997, p. 74; 2001, p. 133) consider that there are no cultural and chronological differences between the objects found at Turda, Ortie and Tula, thus, we could assume they belonged to Turda cultural area. Beyond any controversy, which is important for our approach, is the fact that the vases found at Tula belong to Turda culture and are dated in the chronological period Vina B2C1. e) Alba Iulia Lumea Nou (fig. 5/1) During the excavations made between 19441947, in the lower cultural level [Turdaour note] has been uncovered also a fragment of vase whose body was decorated with stripes full of dots, while the bottom bore a number of incised signs (D. Berciu, I. Berciu 1949, p. 56, fig. 3/5). *** The Transylvanian archaeologists are still deliberating upon the cultural origin and the chronology of the Turda type objects found in the settlements of the Mure Valley (Gh. Lazarovici 1977; I. Paul 1992, p. 117132; Fl. Draovean 1996, p. 93100; S.A. Luca 1997, p. 7475; idem 2001, p. 125139; Z. Maxim 1999, p. 69, 8087). Beyond these arguments concerning the genesis and the area of cultural manifestations of Turda type, a fact remains clear, that is the existence, either of a cultural group or a culture named Turda. The Turda culture/cultural group was developed in Transylvania, having the Mure river as an axis (S.A. Luca 1997, p. 7677) by its separation from the great Vina areal, at the chronological level Vina B1B2 (I. Paul 1992, p. 129; S.A. Luca 1997, p. 7475). Gh. Lazarovici (1977, p. 223) considers that this process of separation took place during the Vina B2/C stage, while Fl. Draovean (1997, p. 7) states that this phenomenon was later and that we couldnt speak about a Turda Group earlier than Vina C1. It is not necessary, for the time being, to continue, now and here, this discussion about the Turda culture/cultural group, it is important for our approach to mention that the vases bearing incised signs on the bottom discovered in the Turda type settlements of Deva Tula, Turda Lunc, Ortie Dealul Pemilor, Alba Iulia Lumea Nou, Daia Romn Pru belong to chronological horizon Vina B2Vina C1.

96

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

4. Gradenica and KalojanovecKaranovo IV Cultures: Bulgaria a) Gradenica (fig. 10/2130) This kind of vessel has uncovered in the Chalcolitic layerthe B level, that B. Nikolov considers to be synchronous with VinaTurda, Karanovo V and BoianVidra cultures (B. Nikolov 1974, p. 28 30; fig. 48, 67, 70, 89, 110). The cultural elements of Gradenica have been afterwards considered to be itself a culture, named Gradenica, developped in the Northern and NorthWestern Bulgaria, a culture born at the outskirts of the great Vina area, but being strongly influenced by it (Y. Bojadiev et alii 1993, p. 62, 74, 75). Vl. Dumitrescu (1980, p. 102103) considers that the materials found in the three chalcolitic levels of Gradenica are very similar to the ones of Rast and Vina area, but also influenced by the MaricaKaranovo V culture. As for the chronology of the chalcolitic B level of Gradenica, J. Makkay (1990, p. 78), agreeing with B. Nikolov (1974, p. 2830), thinks also that the vases with incised signs on the bottom (as well as the plates) are very similar to the objects found at Turda and Trtria. He also considers that it can be dated during the chronological horizon Vina C1. As for us, we consider ourselves that the Gradenica settlement is closely linked to the neighbouring cultural area Vina and Turda. b) Kalojanovec Goljamata Mogila (fig. 6/1, 47, 911) The excavations made in this settlement revealed a lot of beakers and cups, made of fine paste, with delicate grooves, and many incised or polished signs on the bottom (M. Dimitrov 1969, p. 2933; fig. 7/1, 47, 911). c) Obruite (fig. 6/23, 8) In this settlements have been unveiled polished beakers and cups with incised signs on the bottom, similar to those discovered in the Kalojanovec and Nova Zagora settlements (M. Dimitrov 1969, p. 2933, fig. 7/23, 8). d) Nova Zagora Hlebozavod (fig. 6/1213) In this settlement were found vases bearing signs on the bottom (*** 1983, p. 60, fig. 51/a b); this settlement is considered to belong to the KalojanovecKaranovo IV culture (M. Dimitrov 1976, p. 1314; G. Georgiev 1983, p.17; Y. Bojadiev et alii 1993, p. 6869). *** The KalojanovecKaranovo IV culture is born in the eastern Thracia, along the middle and lower Tunda and is characterized by the appearance and spreading of the vessels decorated by excision or canalling (M. Dimitrov 1976, p. 1012; G. Georgiev 1983, p.17; Y. Bojadiev et alii 1993, p. 6869; J. Lichardus et alii 2000, p. 9596, 111113). As far as the genesis and spreading of the Karanovo IVKalojanovec culture are concerned, V. Nikolov (1995, p. 6970; 1996, p. 141142) considers that it has developped, mainly, in the western Thracia, it was very dynamic, its main feature is the existence of the decorated vases by excision or canalling, being synchronous with BoianGiuleti culture (Greaca stage). The excavations made lately in the tell of Kirklareli Asagi Pinar pointed out a living level where have been found objects of Karanovo type, together with objects of classic Vina type (http://tayproject.eies.iti.edu.tr/KalkIng...KalkdetailEng.html). It is important, for our approach, to emphasize the fact that, in the eastern and southern Thracia, the vases bearing incised signs on the bottom appear in the KalojanovecKaranovo IV cultural level, they are associated with the vases that bear excised or canalled motifs and are contemporary with the Vina B and Vina C phases. 5. The Area of the Linear Pottery Culture a) Traian Dealul Fntnilor (fig. 7/5a) Hortensia Dumitrescu (1955, p. 466; fig. 9/22) published a vase which bottom was incised with a cruciform motive, reprezented according to the rules of the linearceramic decoration. b) Glvnetii Vechi (fig. 7/5b) E. Coma (1994, fig. 17/13; 33/12) published two vases with cruciform signs, similar to the one found at Traian Dealul Fntnilor.

97

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

c) NezvikoUkraine (fig. 7/5cd) In this settlement have been uncovered vessels with cruciform signs on the bottom, made similarly to those of Traian and Glvnetii Vechi (T.S. Passek, E. erny 1963, fig. II/78) 6. Precucuteni Cultural Area a) Traian Dealul Viei (fig. 7/5ei) Silvia MarinescuBlcu (1974, fig. 35/15, 912) published vessel bottoms bearing signs, that belong to Precucuteni I culture, made alike, as far as style is concerned, to the discovered in the BoianGiuleti settlements of Brila Plain. b) Larga Jijia (fig. 7/5j) In this Precucuteni II settlement was found a fragment of a vase bottom bearing signs, similar to those dated in the Precucuteni I phase discovered at Traian Dealul Viei (S. MarinescuBlcu 1974, fig. 45/1). 7. The Hamangia Culture Area a) Ceamurlia de Jos (fig. 7/12) There have been unveiled two tureens made of fine paste, well polished and decorated with impressed and canalled motifs (D. Berciu 1966, p. 202203, fig. 104/1; 105/1). The shape and the signs incised on the vessel bottom allow us to place them in the Hamangiaphase III, as P. Haotti proposed (1991; 1997, p. 2728). b) Isaccea Suhat (fig. 7/34) In this BoianGiuleti type settlement were found pottery of BoianGiuleti type together with a few fragments of vases Hamangia typephase III (C. Micu, S. Micu 1998). We must say that among these vases there are also two tureens with incised signs on the bottom (C. Micu, S. Micu 1998, fig. IV/1; VII/4). We must also remind that in the Isaccea settlement were discovered also vases of BoianGiuleti type with incised signs on the bottom (C. Micu et alli 1999, p. 9, fig. 10/8). II. ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS The data presented so far show that the decorated vessel bottoms come, most of them, from truncated beakers, cups and tureens, made of fine paste, well fired, with a very well polished surface and decorated of pleats and incised motifs (sometimes incised and encrusted). But these signs remain a mistery because their presence on the vessels couldn't be explained neither by a utilitarian necessity, nor by the desire of the prehistorical people to decorate the whole vase. In order to realize a rigorous analysis we have to take into consideration the following aspects: a) the bottoms come from fragmentary vases, which means this objects have been broken in the ancient times (another proof are the materials found in Pit nr. XIII at Licoteanca Movila din Balt, vases broken on purpose and deposited in the pit); b) on the bottom of certain vases the signs have been made ab initio, but there are also vessels used for a while before having been incised on the bottom (for example, some signs scratched, after the firing, on certain vases uncovered at Silitea Conac); c) the main technique, with a few exceptions, is the incision; on some vessels, the signs are incised and grooved, on others, the signs are excised and canalled; d) the motif themes are quite unitarian and one can even remark a certain variety, as the main categories of signs are reconstituted and synthetically presented (fig. 7/5; 810). It happens very seldom for a single sign to appear, because they are used in combinations of motifs like: the cross, the angle, arc of circle, circle, rhomb, spiral, linked spirals etc. One can also find the trident motif and even the net of incised lines; Due to the fact that we are going to do the analysis of these motifs further on, well confine ourselves to point out some features of these signs: a) the most frequent signs are the perpendicular lines, the "cross" (fig. 5/2, 45; 6/23, 10, 12; 7/3, 5ae; 8/115, 27, 3132; 9/13, 5, 817, 32; 10/1, 49, 1617, 20, 2628), the arc of circle

98

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

d) there is also a situation when four arcs of circle, symetrically disposed mark the bounds of a cross (fig. 8/1620; 9/2930); e) the concentric circles (fig. 8/23, 33; 9/28) and the spiral (fig. 8/2830) form a special motif; one can also observe the representation of two concentric circles and excised triangles (fig. 8/33); f) the trident is present only twice (fig. 8/2627); g) the presence of the nets of lines, incised as well as excised (fig. 5/69; 6/4, 7, 1011; 7/5hi; 8/2425; 9/18, 2426, 10/1315, 2325).

(fig. 6/9; 7/5h, j; 8/822; 9/2930; 10/22) and the rhomb (fig. 7/5fg, i; 8/67, 12, 26; 9/2021; 10/2, 19, 25, 30); b) in most cases, they appear in combinations, as the cross and the arc of circle (fig. 8/5, 8 15; 9/1213), the cross and the rhomb (fig. 7/5c, fg; 8/67, 26; 9/14, 21) or all the three together; c) the cross is also associated with the right angle (fig. 8/25; 10/5, 2627);

III. CULTURAL AND CHRONOLOGICAL SITUATION The vases bearing incised signs on the bottom discovered in the Boiantype settlements of the northeastern Romanian Plain are very similar, almost identical with those discovered in the cultural areas of Turda, Vina, Karanovo IV and Gradenica. On the other hand, similar objects found in the linear pottery culture, Precucuteni and Hamangia areas are a bit different from the vases discovered in the Boian settlements of the Brgan Plain. We are pointing out the fact that the signs made on the objects belonging to linearpottery, Precucuteni or Hamangia cultures are rendered according to their own stylistic rules, which make them have a different aspect. These types of objects are caracteristic for the Vina, Turda, Kalojanovec Karanovo IV and Boian cultures, because they have been found, most of them, in these cultural areas. The geographical area of such discoveries is concentrated in certain places (fig. 12): 1) on the middle Mure river, 2) on the Timi and Bega rivers, 3) on the Danube Valley, 4) on the Clmui river, 5) on Tunda river, 6) to all these, we must add the single discoveries made at Traian, Glvneti, Nezviko and Ceamurlia. The stage of the research can be an explanation for the big distances between these zones, but one shouldnt give up the hypothesis of population movements. J. Chapman (2001, p. 223233) has recently explained the spreading of the objects with signs on the bottom by certain social economic practices specific to late Neolithic and Chalcolithic in the Balkans, named by the syntagm fragment enchainment. Another problem to deal with concerning these objects is about their appearance and their disappearance. In the early Neolithic and developped Eneolithic cultures, these objects with signs on the bottom are very scarce. Thats why we consider that there is no gradual evolution of this category of archaeological items. The miniature vases with incised crosses on the bottom uncovered in some Gumelnia A2 settlements (nsurei Popina I, Taaul La Ostrov) dont change essentially the situation, as the period of highest development and spreading of the objects with signs on the bottom is during the Vinaphases B and C, Turda, Boian and KalojanovecKaranovo IV cultures. The previous data point out the fact that this kind of objects is caracteristic to the southern cultures and caracterizes a well defined chronological periodend of the developped Neolithic and beginning of the Eneolithic. As far as the present stage of research is concerned, we could explain, as it follows, the presence of the vases with signs on the bottom, particularly in Vina, Gradenica, Karanovo IVKalojanovec and Boian cultural areas: a) a common cultural background; b) the outcome of a cultural impulse, whose core was situated in the territories around Propontida, received by the

99

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Vina B2Vina C1 = Turda = Gradenica = Karanovo IVKalojanovec = BoianGiuleti phase = Precucuteni III = Hamangia III.

cultures of the late developped Neolithic between the Danube and the Aegean Sea, hypothesis that seems more likely to us. The objects bearing signs on the bottom are dated in the following chronological period:

V.POSSIBLE MEANINGS If we want to find out why these signs have been made on the vessels bottoms, we have to take into consideration all the archaeological realities: the contexts, the associations with other types of objects, the kind of vases they are made on, the place of their making, the techniques and the moment of their making, decorative/non-decorative virtue, types of signs and their associations, their repetability/non-repetability in the same contexts, sites or cultural areas, origin and dynamic of their spreading, categories of other objects on which such signs appear. It is obvious that exaggerating some aspects or even neglecting others may lead to false conclusions. We cannot state, but very cautiously, some general or detailed remarks because there are few information regarding the archaeological contexts of the vases discovery, as well as the associations with other categories of objects. Anyhow, there is no obvious evidence of their presence in sanctuaries or cult complexes still in function. They have been mostly found in pits, huts, surface dwellings or in the archaeological layer. For some cases, one can assume that is was a ritual deposing, like in Pit nr. XIII of Licoteanca Movila din Balt where 10 vessel bottoms with signs have been uncovered. Most of the signs were incised on the bottom of the truncated vases (beakers) before or after their firing. Its worth mentionning that an overwhelming majority of such signs are incised on beakers and cups bottoms that have been broken in ancient times, or even bottoms already broken, so, as J. Chapman (2001) demonstrates, there is not an incidental situation. Because the large majority of these signs are on the bottom, usually hidden to the sight and because they are deprived of artistic qualities and difficult to be seen, their purely decorating role can't be ruled out. The archaeological discoveries show us that the ancient people didn't usually decorate the parts of vases hidden to the sight. Moreover, it is certain that some signs have been incised on the objects after a period of use, and on other bottoms, even after their breaking. There is a great variety of such marks as there is different combinations of lines, dots, angles and geometrical forms. Thus, although the basic elements arent numerous, their association and combination led to a great variety of decorative motifs and combinations, plus the unique particular signs. The great variety of signs, the small number of marked vases and the fact that some of them have been incised on vessel after the firing or the breaking, make for arguments against interpreting them as potter trademarks. As there is a great diversity of signs and combinations of signs we couldn't assign them a purely utilitarian role (at least, for the time being)or even, marking some quantity, or some moment of their use. The presence of such signs on a relatively small number of vases, and only on the bottom of certain types of objects, the relative repetability of the basic motifs, their presence only in certain cultures and periods of time etc. stand for a certain purpose in making them. These signs have been incised, mostly, on bottoms of fine objects that had previously been broken and polished. What were the reasons of all this? Their incision especially on fine, black, polished objects bottoms is explained, on the one hand, by the clear contour of the signs on them and, on the other, by their easy storing and distribution. In some museums of the southern Balkans, we saw dozens of such stocks of bottoms bearing incised signs, separated, obviously, from the entire object. Certainly, when the signs have been impressed in the clay still soft, the message was meant to the time of their use, but, when it was incised on objects already broken, as it seems to be for most of them, their use as vessels, is out of question.

100

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

After the study of the signs available to us, we could presume the existence of a corpus of signs, bearing a number of messages. This hypothesis is also suggested by an inventory of signs, common to the entire BalkanCarpathian area (fig. 810), at which we may add the particular representations of certain regions, normal, if we take into account their vast area of spreading. The vessels bottoms have been chosen as means of diffusion because they were at hand, made of a material resistant and easy to incise/impress, then easy to stock and transport. A number of Asian civilizations proceeded similarly, when they wrote on clay plates and cylinders. Due to the fact that such signs have been put on the bottom (= hidden), they have no real artistic value, they have been found in common dwellings or in pits and not in sanctuaries, may lead to the hypothesis, not of a religious significance, but a magic one, or even of profane messages. Their existence on other categories of objects with certain cult value, as well as the anthropomorphic and zoomorphic statuettes, the clay plates or tables etc., all these stand for strong arguments in considering them as message bearers. Between the discoveries of this type, well mention the anthropomorphic figurines of Licoteanca Movila din Balt (fig. 11/2), Zorlen (fig. 11/7) and Para (fig. 11/3). Could these signs have formed a system of memory and transmission of information, consequently a communication system? Each sign represented, probably, a certain message/information, otherwise it would be difficult to believe they could constitute an "alphabet", because of the stage of the human society evolution and the great variability of signs. We are aware that, only a complete data basis containing all the signs known by now could bring a significant progress in the analysis and understanding of their significance. We couldnt, for the time being, launch other hypothesis, all we could say, in this stage of the research, is that these signs were not some kind of decorative elements, but they included a number of messages that, maybe, well never decipher. Bibliography: D. Berciu 1966 D. Berciu, I. Berciu 1949 Y. Bojadiev 1992 Y. Bojadiev et alii 1993 J. Chapman 2002 E. Coma 1994 M. Dimitrov 1969 M. Dimitrov 1976 Fl. Draovean 1996 H. Dumitrescu 1955 H. Dumitrescu 1984 Vl. Dumitrescu 1980 G. Georgiev 1983

Cultura Hamangia. Noi contribuii, Bucureti. Spturi i cercetri arheologice n anii 19471949, in Apulum 3, p. 1 Hronologia na preistoriceskite kulturi na teritoriata na Dobrua, in Dobruda, 9. Atlas du Nolithique Europeen I, ERAUL, Lige. Intentional fragmentation in the neolithic and copper age of southeast Europe: incised signs and pintaderas, in Festschrift fr Gheorghe Lazarovici, Timioara. Aezarea culturii cu ceramic liniar de la Glvnetii Vechi, in Hierasus Novi nahodki ot neolitnata kultura Karanovo IV v Starozagorko, in Izvestija na Blgarite Muzei 1, p. 2142. Za haraktera na kulturata Karanovo IV, in Izvestija na Muzeite ot Jugoiztoka Blgaria 1, p. 916. Cultura Vina trzie (faza C) n Banat, Timioara. antierul arheologic Traian (1954), in SCIV 6, 34, p. 459485. Cercetrile arheologice de la TulaDeva (I), AMN 21, p. 344. The Neolithic Settlement at Rast, BAR IS 72. Erforschung des Neolithikum in Westbulgarien, in Keramik und Gold Bulgarische Jungsteinzeit im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend, Frankfurt am Main,
p. 1519. 9. 43.

101

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

N. Haruche 1980 N. Haruche, Fl. Anastasiu 1968 N. Haruche, Fl. Anastasiu 1976 P. Haotti 1991 Gh. Lazarovici 1971 Gh. Lazarovici 1979 Gh. Lazarovici, H. Dumitrescu 1986 Gh. Lazarovici, M. Nica 1991 Gh. Lazarovici et alii 2001 J. Lichardus et alii 2000 S.A. Luca 1997 S.A. Luca 1997a

281354.

Preliminarii la repertoriul arheologic al judeului Brila, in Istros 1, p. Brilia. Aezri i cimitire omeneti datnd din epoca neolitic pn n pragul ornduirii feudale, Muzeul Brilei, Brila. Catalogul selectiv al coleciei de arheologie a Muzeului Brilei, Brila.

La culture nolithique Hamangia. Quelques remarques sur le stade actuel des recherches, in Le Palolithique et le Nolithique de la Roumanie en contexte Europen, BAI 4, Iai. Difuziunea unor civilizaii neolitice n regiunea Dunrii de Jos, in Pontica
4.

Neoliticul Banatului, in BMA 4, ClujNapoca. Cercetrile arheologice de la TulaDeva, in AMN 2223, p. 340. Chalcoliticul balcanoanatolian, in Cultura Vina n Romnia, Timioara. Para. Monografie arheologic. I, Timioara. Forschungen in der mikroregion von Drama (Sdostbulgarien), Bonn. Aezri neolitice de pe Valea Mureului (I). Habitatul turdean de la OrtieDealul Pemilor (punct X2), Alba Iulia. Relaiile culturale de la sfritul neoliticului dezvoltat dintre Transilvania i inuturile nconjurtoarereflectarea acestora prin materialele arheologice descoperite n aezarea de la TurdaLunc, jud. Hunedoara, in CCDJ 15, p. 252262. Aezri neolitice pe Valea Mureului (II). Noi cercetri arheologice la TurdaLunc. I. Campaniile 19921995, Alba Iulia. A tartariai leletek, Budapest. Cultura Precucuteni pe teritoriul Romniei, Bucureti. Neoeneoliticul din Transilvania. Date arheologice i matematico statistice, ClujNapoca. Ceramica culturii Hamangia din aezarea de la IsacceaSuhat (campania 1997), in Pontica 31, Constana, p. 2535. Aezarea neolitic de la Isaccea, punctul Suhat, jud. Tulcea, in Istro Pontica, Tulcea, p. 552. Gradenica, Nauka Iskustvo, Sofia. Notes on the Periodization and Chronology of the Neolithic in Thrace, in Thracia 11. Neolitnata kultura v. blgarskite zemi v konteksta na Anatolija i Balkanite, in Annuary of Department of Archaeology 23, Sofia. nceputul culturii Boian Giuleti n Cmpia Brilei, in Istros 7. Pamjatniki kultury linejnolentonoj keramiki na terirorij S.S.S.RI, Die Sammlung Zsofia von Torma, Cluj. Cercetrile arheologice de la Silitea, jud. Brila, campaniile 19911993, in Istros 7. Contacts between the Eneolithic tribes of Europe and Eastern Tripolyan population, in Cucuteni aujourdhui, Piatra Neam. * * * Erforschung des Neolithikum in Westbulgarien, dans Keramik und GoldBulgarische Jungsteinzeit im 6. und 5. Jahrtausend, Frankfurt am
Main. Arheologija S.S.S.R., Moskva. Cultura Petreti, Bucureti.

S.A. Luca 2001 J. Makkay 1990 S. MarinescuBlcu 1974 Z. Maxim 1999 C. Micu, S. Micu 1998 C. Micu et alii 2000 B. Nikolov 1974 V. Nikolov 1995 V. Nikolov 1996 St. Pandrea 1994 T.S. Passek, E. erny 1963 I. Paul 1992 M. Roska 1941 V. Srbu, St. Pandrea 1994 E. Tsvek 1996
* * *

1983

102

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 1. 19. Silitea Conac; 1011. Licoteanca Mo Filon.

103

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 2. 110. Licoteanca Movila din Balt.

104

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 3. 113. Licoteanca Movila din Balt; 14. Brilia.

105

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 4. 1. Isaccea Suhat; 16. Para Tell I.

106

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 5. 1. Alba Iulia Lumea Nou; 23. Turda Lunc; 49. Ortie Dealul Pemilor;10. Daia Romn Pru.

107

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 6. 1, 47, 911. Kalojanovec; 23, 8. Obruite; 1213. Nova Zagora Hlebozavod.

108

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 7. 12. Ceamurlia de Jos; 34. Isaccea Suhat; 5. Catalogue of signs made on the vessel bottoms found in the linearceramic and Precucuteni cultural areas: a. Traian Dealul Fntnilor, b. Glvnetii Vechi, cd. Nezvisko, ei. Traian Dealul Viei, j. Larga Jijia.

109

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 8. Catalogue of signs made on the vessel bottoms discovered in BoianGiuleti settlements of Brila Plain.

110

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 9. Catalogue of signs made on the vessel bottoms discovered in settlement of Turda Lunc.

111

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 10. Catalogue of signs made on the vessel bottoms discovered in the following settlements: 13. Zorlen; 48. Para Tell I; 910. Bucov; 1120. Rast; 2130. Gradenica; 3132. Deva Tuala.

112

Neolithic objects bearing incised signs on the bottom found in the carpatho-balkan area

Fig. 11. Anthropomorpfic figurines (23, 7, 9), zoomorphic figurine (8), small altars (4, 6) and clay objects (1, 5). 1. Brilia; 2. Licoteanca Movila din Balt; 3. Para Tell I; 4. Berezovka; 56. Turda; 78. Zorlen; 9. Balta Srat.

113

Valeriu SRBU, Stnic PANDREA

Fig. 12. Map with the settlements where were discovered vessels bearing signs on the bottoms. Legend1. vessels bearing signs on the bottoms; 2. clay plaques. List of localities1. Glvnetii Vechi; 2. Traian; 3. Brilia; 4. Silitea Conac; 5. Licoteanca Mo Filon; 6. Licoteanca Movila din Balt; 7. Daia Romn; 8. Trtria; 9. Ortie Dealul Pemilor; 10. Turda; 11. Deva Tuala; 12. Bucov; 13. Para; 14. Vina; 15. Rast; 16. Gradenica; 17. Nova Zagora Hlebozavod; 18. Zorlen; 19. Vrac; 20. Isaccea Suhat; 21. Ceamurlia de Jos; 22. Kalojanovec; 23. Alba Iulia Lumea Nou.

114

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de VldiceascaValea Argovei, dp. Clrai Adrian BLESCU* Mircea UDRESCU**
Rezumat: Studiul prezint analiza a peste 3200 de resturi osoase care provin din nivelul Boian, faza Vidra din aezarea preistoric de la Vldiceasca (judeul Clrai). Fauna este certificat prin mai multe clase de animale: Bivalvia (scoici), Pisces (peti), Aves (psri) i Mammalia (mamifere), dintre care mamiferele sunt cele mai numeroase (98,8 %). Studiul arheozoologic arat c mamiferele domestice sunt predominante n raport cu cele slbatice. n cadrul activitii de cretere a animalelor, bovinele sunt cel mai bine reprezentate ca NR i NMI, ele fiind urmate de ovicaprine i porcine. Studiul vrstelor de tiere relev c bovinele domestice prezint o exploatare mixt, att pentru carne, ct i pentru produsele lor secundare (lapte), n timp ce ovicaprinele sunt crescute mai ales pentru produsele lor secundare (lapte, ln). Vnatul este slab reprezentat ca NR (13,2 %) i NMI (22,7 %), predominante fiind speciile de talie mare: bour, cerb i cal. Rolul vntorii este secundar, aceasta suplimentnd i completnd resursele de carne i nu numai. Evoluia sedentarizrii comunitilor preistorice de la Vldiceasca a fost urmrit i prin prisma creterii ponderii resturilor de porc de la cultura Boian la cultura Gumelnia cu peste 10 %. Prelevarea unor oase ntregi ne-a permis estimarea taliei pentru diferite specii de animale domestice i slbatice. Astfel, la bovine (indice Matolcsi) talia medie la greabn are o valoare de 123,9 cm (N=8, limite 115,8138,3 cm); la ovine (indice Teichert) avem dou valori: 54,9 cm i 55,8 cm; la caprine (indice Schramm) s-a obinut o talie de 60,1 cm; la cine (indice Harcourt) s-au estimat dou talii: 40,9 cm i 45,8 cm; la mistre (indice Teichert), de asemenea s-au evaluat dou talii: 98,5 i 105,3 cm; la cerb (indice Godinicky) s-a obinut o valoare de 131,0 cm, la bour indice Matolcsi)avem o talie de 144.1 cm. Cuvinte cheie: Eneolitic, cultura Boian, arheozoologie, paleoeconomie, sudestul Romniei. Mots cls: Enolithique, culture Boian, archozoologie, paloconomie, sudest de la Roumanie.

Les restes ostologiques danimaux tudis proviennent des fouilles archologiques effectues entre 19811985 par D. erbnescu1 au lieu-dit Gherglul Mare, situ au sudouest du village Vldiceasca, commune Valea Argovei, dp. Clrai. Du point de vue stratigraphique, le niveau BoianVidra se trouve la base du tell; il est recouvert par des niveaux Gumelnia (A1, A2, B1) et, au sommet, par un niveau La Tne (G. Trohani 1975). Parmi les nombreux sites contemporains dcouverts dans la mme rgion, il nexiste des tudes archozoologiques que pour seulement deux dentre eux: celui de Bogata, dp. Clrai (O. Necrasov, S. Haimovici 1959) et celui de Vrti, dp. Clrai (Al. Bolomey 1966). Malheureusement, les chantillons tudis sont assez rduits: 109 pices Bogata et 366 Vrti (fig. 1). Les matriaux ostologiques qui font lobjet de la prsente tude sont assez riches: 3236 pices identifies. La plus grande partie a t attribue aux mammifres (98.8 %) (tab. 1). Le ramassage des os a t fait la main, ce qui explique en partie le nombre trs rduit despces de petite dimension; il ne faut pas oublier qu lpoque des fouilles, le tamisage des sdiments tait encore quelque chose de difficile raliser et qui, en plus, perturbait les bonnes habitudes dancienne cole. Aujourdhui, on parle de plus en plus des avantages de cette mthode si moderne et si utile pour la recherche archologique et archozoologique (D. Popovici et alii 2002). 1. Bivalvia Cinq coquilles dUnio sp. ont t identifies.
*

Centre national des recherches pluridisciplinaires, Muse national dhistoire de Roumanie, Calea Victoriei 12, 70412 Bucarest, Roumanie, cncp@mnir.ro. ** Muse royal de lAfrique centrale, section Vertbrs, 3080-Tervuren, Belgique, Mircea.Udrescu@ sciencesnaturelles.be 1 Nous remercions encore une fois Monsieur D. erbnescu, Directeur du Muse de la ville dOltenia, de nous avoir confi ltude des matriaux ostologiques. Malgr le fait que le travail tait dj fini il y a 15 ans, des raisons indpendantes de notre volont nous ont empchs de publier les rsultats. Nous nous en excusons et nous esprons que notre retard, difficilement excusable, na pas nui aux projets scientifiques de lauteur des fouilles.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 115133.

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

2. Pisces La seule pice prsente dans lchantillon est une vertbre caudale indtermine. 3. Aves Les 30 fragments ostologiques doiseaux nont pas t identifis faute de collection de comparaison adquate. A premire vue, ces restes proviennent despces de grande et de moyenne taille qui peuplaient le milieu aquatique avoisinant. 4. Mammalia Les mammifres reprsentent la majorit des restes: 2695 pices; cinq espces domestiques et dix sauvages ont t identifies (tab. 2-3). Nous signalons la prsence de traces dintervention humaine (de type cut et chop), de traces de feu et dimpressions de dents de carnivores, assez caractristiques des restes mnagers. 4.1. Mammiferes domestiques Les pices ostologiques attribues aux mammifres domestiques sont prdominantes comme nombre de restes (86.8 %) et comme nombre minimum dindividus estims (77.3 %). 4.1.1. Bos taurus Le buf est lespce la mieux reprsente comme nombre de restes 1876 pices ostologiques qui proviennent dun nombre minimum de 68 individus; tous les ges sont reprsents, partir de jeunes de 6 mois jusquaux individus trs gs (tab. 4). Le rapport immature/potentiel reproducteur est lgrement favorable la premire catgorie (35:33), ce qui nous fait penser une stratgie dlevage mixte, pour la consommation, mais aussi pour les produits secondaires (lait, reproduction, traction/animaux de bt?). Les sept chevilles osseuses montrent la grande variabilit dimensionnelle constate au niveau du squelette (voir biomtrie). Du point de vue morphologique, seulement une pice, provenant probablement dune femelle, a pu tre attribue au type brachyceros. Les six autres proviennent plus probablement de mles et sont intermdiaires entre les types brachyceros et primigenius. Il faut souligner labsence de chevilles osseuses de type primigenius, si caractristiques par leur forme et leur grandeur. Les tailles au garrot estimes daprs un radius et un tibia (coefficient Matolcsi): respectivement 117.2 cm et 117.3 cm, ainsi que les indices diaphysaires assez petits, nous font croire que les deux os pourraient provenir de deux femelles. Les six mtapodes entierscinq mtacarpes et un mtatarsenous ont permis de constater un fort dimorphisme sexuel au niveau de la taille au garrot: 115.8 cm et 118.2 cm pour les femelles et 130.4, 133.6 cm et 138.3 cm pour les mles. Le mtacarpe qui prsente des valeurs mtriques intermdiaires entre les femelles et les mles (120.2 cm taille au garrot) a t attribu un individu chtr (tab. 5) La taille moyenne au garrot de 123.9 cm (N=8, limites de variabilit: 115.8138.3 cm) est semblable celle trouve dans les sites Boian de Ciulnia (phase Giuleti) (A. Blescu, sous presse) et de Vrti (phase Vidra) (Al. Bolomey 1966). En revanche, la taille moyenne au garrot est presque 5 cm plus grande que celle obtenue pour le buf du niveau Gumelnia: moyenne 119.2 cm; limites de variation: 109.7132.2; N=11 (D. Moise, M. Udrescu, donnes indites). Reste savoir si cette diffrence signifierait une ventuelle tendance la diminution de la taille au garrot des bovins au long de lEnolithique ou si elle est due lchantillon. Signalons encore une fois la difficult de sparation du buf domestique et de laurochs surtout sur des pices squelettiques fragmentaires. Nous avons ainsi ajout dans le tab. 5 le mtacarpe provenant, notre avis, dune femelle daurochs; si les extrmits de cette pice avaient t trouves coupes, comme cest le cas pour la plupart des restes, elles auraient pu tre considres comme provenant dun buf domestique. Cette constatation est aussi bien visible sur les histogrammes de quelques dimensions prleves sur les matriaux ostologiques des bovins; ces histogrammes nous ont permis de mieux visualiser les zones de superposition de certaines de ces dimensions entre le buf et laurochs (fig. 4 ah). 4.1.2. Ovis aries/Capra hircus Les ovicaprins reprsentent 11.6 % des restes des mammifres identifis; un nombre minimum de 26 individus a t estim. En utilisant les tableaux de V. Forest (1997), lge dabattage des ovicaprins a donn un rapport immature/potentiel reproducteur de presque 1/2, ce qui suggre un levage orient surtout sur les produits secondaires (lait, laine etc). Le rapport entre chvres et moutons est de 6/1.

116

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Les deux tailles au garrot estimes pour les moutons (coefficient Teichert: 55.8 cm et 54.9 cm) sont semblables ce quon a rencontr dans les sites appartenant la culture Bolintineanu (A. Blescu, V. Radu 2003) et aussi dans le site Boian de Cscioarele (Al. Bolomey 1981); en revanche, ces valeurs sont plus petites que celles rencontres dans le site de Ciulnia (A. Blescu, sous presse). Les six chevilles osseuses de chvres, toutes de type aegagrus (droite), proviennent de cinq femelles et dun mle (voir biomtrie). Une seule taille au garrot de 60.1 cm (coefficient Schramm) a pu tre calcule pour la chvre. 4.1.3. Sus domesticus Les restes ostologiques de porc domestique reprsentent seulement 2.8 % des restes de mammifres. A cela sajoutent 40 fragments ostologiques pour lesquels nous navons pas mis une appartenance spcifique. Lge dabattage estim partir de la dentition montre que presque la moiti du nombre minimum dindividus estims (N=17) a t sacrifie pour la consommation pendant la premire anne de vie (tab. 4). 4.1.4. Canis familiaris Le chien est assez bien reprsent comme nombre de restes; les 46 pices proviennent dun nombre minimum de huit individus, parmi lesquels un seul immature. La longueur basale du crne, daprs Brinkmann, varie entre 146158 mm (moyenne 150,4 mm; N=4) et, daprs Dahr, entre 127150 mm (moyenne 139.1 mm; N=8). Ces valeurs sont semblables celles obtenues dans dautres sites appartenant la culture Boian, comme celui de SiliteaConac (A. Blescu, V. Radu 1999) et dIsacceaSuhat (A. Blescu, V. Radu, sous presse); par contre, elles sont plus grandes que celles obtenues dans le site contemporain de Vrti (Al. Bolomey 1966). Les deux tailles estimes (coefficient Harcourt) suggrent lexistence dindividus de taille et de robustesse moyenne: 40.9 cm et 45.8 cm (M. Udrescu 1990). Ces valeurs dpassent de peu les tailles au garrot rencontres IsacceaSuhat (A. Blescu, V. Radu, sous presse). Labsence de la P1 constate sur une mandibule a plutt t considre comme une perte intra vitam de la dent un trs jeune ge, suivie du remplissage de lalvole par du tissu osseux de noformation. Contrairement ce quon a constat dans le site dIsacceaSuhat (A. Blescu 2000), il ny a pas de traces qui pourraient suggrer la consommation de chiens Vldiceasca. 4.2.Mammifres sauvages 4.2.1. Canis lupus, Vulpes vulpes et Meles meles Les trois espces de carnivores identifies sont: le loup (deux pices), le renard (sept pices) et le blaireau (une pice). 4.2.2. Equus ferus Le cheval est assez bien reprsent comme nombre de restes (NR=42); ceuxci proviennent dun nombre minimum de quatre individus: un juvnile plus petit dun an et demi et trois adultes de plus de trois ans et demi. Des traces de feu sur quelques pices ne laissent pas de doute quant lutilisation du cheval dans lalimentation. 4.2.3. Sus scrofa Le sanglier est reprsent par 19 pices ostologiques qui proviennent dun nombre minimum de trois individus: un subadulte de deux ans et deux adultes de plus de trois ans et demi. Un astragale et un calcaneum nous ont permis davoir une ide de la taille au garrot des sangliers lpoque: 98.5 cm et 105.3 cm (coefficient Teichert). 4.2.4. Cervus elaphus Comme dans beaucoup dautres sites contemporains, le cerf est aussi, pour plusieurs raisons, le gibier de prdilection pour les habitants de Vldiceasca; les 88 pices proviennent dun nombre minimum de sept individus: deux jeunes et cinq adultes. La hauteur au garrot estime partir dun mtacarpe est de 131.0 cm, ce qui nous fait croire quil provient dun mle (coefficient Godinicky dans L. Chaix, P. Mniel 1996). 4.2.5. Capreolus capreolus Le chevreuil est assez bien reprsent; les 29 pices ostologiques proviennent dun nombre minimum de quatre individus: un juvnile g de 12 mois, un subadulte g de 1824 mois et deux adultes.

117

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

4.2.6. Bos primigenius Laurochs est lespce la mieux reprsente comme nombre de restes: NR= 156; un nombre minimum donze individus a t estim. Les histogrammes de certaines dimensions montrent un dimorphisme sexuel assez prononc. 4.2.7. Lepus europaeus et Castor fiber Le livre et le castor sont signals respectivement par sept et une pice. La prsence du castor nous renseigne sur certaines particularits du milieu naturel avoisinant: rgime hydrographique assez riche, bois et, surtout, encore peu perturb par la prsence humaine. 5. Conclusions Les restes ostologiques danimaux domestiques sont prdominants par rapport aux restes danimaux sauvages. Les bovins sont les mieux reprsents comme NR et comme NMI; ils sont suivis par les ovicaprins et les porcs. Lge dabattage suggre une exploitation mixte, pour la viande et pour les produits secondaires des bovins; les ovicaprins, en revanche, taient surtout levs pour les produits secondaires. Le gibier est moins reprsent comme nombre de restes (13.2 %). Les espces de grande taille sont prdominantes: laurochs, le cerf et le cheval, mais il est difficile de dire si cela reprsente la ralit, vu que les restes ostologiques ont t ramasss la main, ce qui suppose une sousestimation des espces de moyenne et, surtout, de petite taille. Du point de vue de la frquence des restes de porc, le site de Vldiceasca se situe entre le site contemporain de Bogata (O. Necrasov, S. Haimovici 1959) o il ny avait pas de restes de porc, et celui de Vrti (Al. Bolomey 1966) o les restes ostologiques de porc atteignent des pourcentages assez grands pour lpoque: 10.0 % comme nombre de restes (fig. 2). Il est probable que le site de Bogata soit plutt un site temporaire, contrairement celui de Vldiceasca et, surtout, de Vrti. Il faudrait noter en ce sens la dcouverte de quelques structures dhabitat de surface Vldiceasca. Lvolution de la sdentarisation de la population de Vldiceasca se poursuit et samplifie chez les populations appartenant la culture Gumelnia qui ont suivi et qui se sont installes au mme endroit; on remarque ainsi des pourcentages assez levs de restes ostologiques de porc qui atteignent 13.6 % (D. Moise, M. Udrescu, donnes indites). Par toutes ces particularits de lconomie animalire, Vldiceasca se situe entre les sites de type BoianGiuleti et ceux de type BoianSpanov; cette constatation rejoint ainsi la ralit temporelle. Bibliographie: A. Blescu 2000 A. Blescu 2001 a A. Blescu 2001 b A. Blescu (sous presse) A. Blescu, V. Radu 1999 A. Blescu, V. Radu 2003 A. Blescu, V. Radu (sous presse)

Studiu preliminar asupra faunei descoperite la IsacceaSuhat (cultura BoianGiuleti), dans IstroPontica, Tulcea, p. 1012. Studiul arheozoologic preliminar al faunei de mamifere descoperite pe Valea Teleormanului, dans SP 1, p. 5970. Preliminary archaeozoological study of mammalian fauna, dans Southern Romania Archaeological Project, Second Preliminary Fauna neolitic de la Ciulnia (cultura Boian, faza Giuleti), dans Ialomia 4. Studiul faunei neolitice de la SiliteaConac (judeul Brila), dans Istros 9, p. 197210. Paleoeconomia animalier a comunitilor Bolintineanu, dans M. Neagu, Neoliticul Mijlociu la Dunrea de Jos, dans CCDJ, 20, Omul i animalele. Strategii i resurse la comunitile Hamangia i Boian, Biblioteca Muzeului Naional, Seria Cercetri Pluridisciplinare
Report, Cardiff University, p. 129142.

Clrai, p. 7387. 9, Bucureti.

118

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Al. Bolomey 1966 L. Chaix, P. Mniel 1996 V. Forest 1997 O. Necrasov 1959 O. Necrasov 1973 O. Necrasov, S. Haimovici 1959 O. Necrasov, G.Gheorghiu 1970

Fauna neolitic din aezarea Boian A de la Vrti, dans SCA 3, 1, lments darchozoologie, Editions Errance, Paris. Donnes biologiques et donnes zootechniques anciennes. Essai de mise en quivalence, dans Revue de Mdecine Vtrinaire 148, 12, Etude de la faune de la station nolithique de Tangru, dans Dacia N.S. 3. p. 102111. Studiul resturilor de faun din aezarea neolitic de la Radovanu, Jud. Ilfov, dans MCA 10, p. 3946. Fauna din complexele Boian de lng satul Bogata, dans MCA 5,
p. 127130. p. 951958. p. 2734.

Studiul resturilor de faun din aezarea neolitic de la Izvoarele, dans MCA 9, p. 9196. Killoff patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Asvan S. Payne 1973 Kale, dans Anatolian Studies 23, p. 281303. D. Popovici, A. Blescu, C. Cercetarea Arheologic Pluridisciplinar. Concepte, metode i Hait, V. Radu, A.M.F. Tomescu, tehnici, Biblioteca Muzeului Naional, Seria Cercetri Pluridisciplinare
I. Tomescu 2002 E. Schmid 1972 3, Bucureti.

M. tirbu 1980 G. Trohani 1975 M. Udrescu 1990

Atlas of Animal Bones, for Prehistorians, Archaeologists and Quaternary Geologists, Elsevier Publishing Company. Paleofauna neolitic de la Radovanu i unele aspecte ale ocupaiilor locuitorilor din cultura Boian, dans Analele tiinifice ale Univ. Al. I. Raport asupra spturilor arheologice efectuate n aezarea geto dacic de la Vldiceasca, jud. Ilfov, dans CA 1, p. 151176 Les chiens de lhabitat civil romain de StoniceniVlcea ; donnes archozoologiques, dans Annuaire Roumain dAnthropologie 27, p.
38. Cuza (s.n.), sec. 2, a. Biologie, t. 26, p. 107108.

119

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

Tab. 1. Rpartition des restes ostologiques par classe danimaux. Classe NR 5 1 30 3200 3236 % 0,2 0,1 0,9 98,8 100,0

Bivalvia Pisces Aves Mammalia

Total

Tab. 2. Rpartition des restes ostologiques des mammifres par espce. Espce NR 1876 255 7 45 74 46 2303 2 7 1 42 19 88 29 156 1 7 352 2655 40 505 3200 % 70,7 9,6 0,3 1,7 2,8 1,7 86,8 0,1 0,3 0,1 1,5 0,7 3,3 1,0 5,9 0,1 0,3 13,2 100,0 NMI 68 26 17 8 119 1 1 1 4 3 7 4 11 1 2 35 154 % 44,2 16,9 11,0 5,2 77,3 0,6 0,6 0,6 2,6 1,9 4,5 2,6 7,1 0,6 1,3 22,7 100,0

Bos taurus
Ovicaprine

Ovis aries Capra hircus Sus domesticus Canis familiaris

Total domestiques

Canis lupus Vulpes vulpes Meles meles Equus ferus Sus scrofa Cervus elaphus Capreolus capreolus Bos primigenius Castor fiber Lepus europaeus
Total sauvages Total pices dtermines

Sus domesticus/Sus scrofa

Total pices indtermines Total restes mammifres

Tab. 3. Frquences relatives comme nombre de restes de buf, dovicaprins et de porc Vldiceasca.

Bos taurus Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Sus domesticus

Total

Espce

NR % 1876 83,1 307 13,6 74 3,3 2257 100,0

120

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Tab. 4. Lge squelettique chez les principaux animaux domestiques (daprs Forest, 1997); NMInombre minimum dindividus, ABge biologique. bovins AB foetal nonatal, infans juvnile juvnile juvnile subadulte subadulte subadulte adulte adulte adulte adulte mature mature ovicaprins NMI AB foetal nonatal, infans 5 juvnile 4 juvnile 5 subadulte subadulte subadulte subadulte 1 adulte 3 adulte 3 adulte 5 mature mature mature 26 porcs AB foetal nonatal, infans juvnile juvnile subadulte subadulte subadulte adulte adulte adulte adulte mature mature mature

NMI < 0 mois 06 mois 612 mois 11,5 annes 1,52 annes 22,5 annes 2,53 annes 33,5 annes 3,54 annes 45 annes 56 annes 68 annes 810 annes > 10 annes Total 1 10 12 4 8 5 4 4 16 2 2 68

NMI

8 5 2 2

17

Tab. 5. Mtapodes de buf et daurochs: donnes biomtriques. Dimensions (Von den Driesch, 1976) GL 196,0 Bp 56,5 SD 32,0 Bd 60,0 I2 = Bp/GL x 100 28,8 I3 = SD/GL x 100 16,3 I4 = Bd/GL x 100 30,6 Sexe estim f Taille (coefficient Matocsi) (cm) 118,2

Bos taurus
Mtacarpe 192,0 195,5 206,0 57,0 59,5 64,0 30,0 33,5 40,0 59,0 62,0 67,5 29,7 30,4 31,1 15,6 17,1 19,4 30,7 31,7 32,8 f c? m 115,8 120,2 130,4 211,0 68,5 37,0 71,0 32,5 17,5 33,6 m 133,6 Mtatarse 246,0 60,0 33,0 68,5 24,4 13,4 27,8 m 138,3

Bos primigenius
Mtacarpe 239,0 68,0 37,0 68,0 28,5 15,5 28,5 f 144,1

121

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

122

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Vldiceasca- Gum B1 = 952 NR Vldiceasca- Gum A2 = 3062 NR Vldiceasca- Gum A1 = 313 NR Lceni-BS = 223 NR Izvoarele- BS = 1019 NR Radovanu- BS = 4107 NR Hrova- BS = 1179 NR Vrti-BV = 233 NR Vldiceasca- BV = 2257 NR Bogata- BV = 27 NR Bogata- BG =159 NR Lceni-BG = 164 NR Silitea- BG = 88 NR Isaccea- BG = 361 NR Ciulni a- BG = 2391 NR 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Bos taurus

Ovicaprine

Sus domesticus

Fig. 2. Frquences relatives des principaux pourvoyeurs de viande: buf, ovicaprins et porc dans diffrents sites (BGBoian Giuleti; BVBoian Vidra; BSBoian Spanov; GumGumelnia).
Vldiceasca- Gum B1 = 1013 NR Vldiceasca- Gum A2 = 3518 NR Vldiceasca- Gum A1 = 475 NR Lceni-BS = 252 NR Izvoarele- BS = 1136 NR Radovanu- BS = 4703 NR Hrova- BS = 1527 NR Vrti-BV = 260 NR Vldiceasca- BV = 2635 NR Bogata- BV = 33 NR Bogata- BG =170 NR Lceni-BG = 226 NR Silitea- BG = 141 NR Isaccea- BG = 547 NR Ciulni a- BG = 2489 NR

0%

20%

40% Domestiques

60%

80% Sauvages

100%

Fig. 3. Frquences relatives des restes ostologiques provenant des espces domestiques et sauvages dans diffrents sites (BGBoian Giuleti; BVBoian Vidra; BSBoian Spanov; Gum Gumelnia).

123

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

Fig. 4 ah. Graphiques et histogrammes des diffrentes dimensions prises au niveau du squelette des bovins (BtBos taurus; BprBos primigenius; mmle; ffemelle).

a - Humrus 110 100 Bpr f BT 90 80 70 60 70 Bt 80 90 100 Bd 110 120 130

65 75 Bt BFp 85 95

b - Radius Bpr ?

Bpr m

75

85 Bp

95

105

c - Tibia 8 6 NR 4 2 0 Bt f m f Bpr m

59-60- 61-62- 63-64- 65-66- 67-68- 69-70- 71-72- 73-74- 75-76- 77-78- 79-80- 81-82- 83-84- 85-86- 87-88- 89-90- 91-92- 93-94-

Bd

d - Calcaneum 6 NR 4 2 0
121125126130131135136140141145146150151155156160161165166170171175176180181185186190191195-

Bt f/

Bpr f m

GL

124

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

e - Astragale 10 8 6 NR 4 2 0
59-60- 61-62- 63-64- 65-66- 67-68- 69-70- 71-72- 73-74- 75-76- 77-78- 79-80- 81-82- 83-84- 85-86- 87-88- 89-90- 91-92- 93-94-

Bt f m f

Bpr m

GLl

f - Mtacarpe 8 6 NR 4 2 0 f Bt f Bt + m Bpr ? m Bpr

55-56-

57-58-

59-60-

61-62-

63-64-

65-66-

67-68-

69-70-

71-72-

73-74-

75-76-

77-78-

79-80-

81-82-

83-84-

85-86-

87-88-

89-90-

Bd

g - Mtatarse 8 6 NR 4 2 0
41-4243-4445-46- 47-4849-5051-52- 53-5455-5657-5859-60- 61-6263-6465-66- 67-6869-7071-72-

Bt f m

Bpr

Bp

h - Mtatarse 8 6 NR 4 2 0 Bt f m Bt + f Bpr ? Bpr m

51-52- 53-54- 55-56- 57-58- 59-60- 61-62- 63-64- 65-66- 67-68- 69-70- 71-72- 73-74- 75-76- 77-78- 79-80- 81-82- 83-84- 85-86- 87-88- 89-90-

Bd

125

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

Annexe biomtrique Note: les mesures (millimtres) ont t daprs von den Driesch (1976); les tailles au garrot sont en centimtres; ? = Bos taurus/Bos primigenius.

Bos taurus
Cheville osseuse 44 166 163 170 178 185 174 141 45 56,5 57 55 56,5 65 60 48 46 44 43 44 47 48 48 41 47 220

Bos primigenius

Crne 20 129 21 83 84,5 81 84 47 Mandibule 7 136 137,5 141 126,5 8 87,5 89 89 80,5 91,5 93 83,5 87,5 86,5 91,5 47 40 39 53,5 57 97,5 Scapula GLP 67 74 LG 55,5 63 63 Humrus Bd 78,5 80 80,5 83 BT 71,5 72,5 69,5 72 BG 48 51 51,5 Humrus Bd 100 102 123 101,5 BT 85,5 91,5 106 88 40,5 ? ? ? Scapula SLC 72 70 GLP 92 90 LG 76 72 82 BG 70 63 73 9 48 49 53 10 L 37 37,5 37,5 33 38,5 40 35 37,5 37,5 40,5 Mandibule 7 151,5 8 98 105 9 53,5 10 L 42 47 43 42 22 52

126

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

82 85 86 86 71,5 86 96,5 93 Radius GL 272,5

72 73 75 76,5 63 75 73 85,5 82 ? ?

106 104,5 118,5 116 101,5 100 102

93 90 100 104 91 86,5 89 87

Radius Bp 79,5 84 77,5 83 83 87 85 80 76 78 88 80 84 88 79 88 89 93 93 BFp 72 78,5 73 76,5 78 80 78,5 73,5 69 70 79 74 74 80 72 81 84 85 83 ? ? Tibia Bp 100,5 107,5 106,5 106,5 97 95 95 100 67 64 71 70 61 62,5 63 64,5 65 61 67,5 SD 41 Bd 65 Taille 117,3 Bd 78 79,5 87 89,5 93,5 SD 41 Taille 117,2 Bp 95 95 98,5 98 99 102,5 BFp 87 88,5 88 89 91 92

Tibia GL 340

127

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

69,5 64,5 61 73 73,5 74 59 68 60 71 62 61 Calcaneum GL 123 125 129 129 130 130 Astragale GL 59 61,5 62 62,5 63 64 64 64 GL 65 65,5 66 66,5 67 67 67 67,5 GL 67,5 68 68,5 68,5 69 69 69 69 Mtacarpe Bp 68,5 64 56,5 59,5 57 51 55,5 56 56 57 58 58 58 58,5 59 59 59 59 60 SD 37 40 32 33,5 30 Bd 71 67,5 60 62 59 Taille 133,6 130,4 118,2 120,2 115,8 sex m m f c? f GL 238,5 Bp 68 71 71 71,5 72,5 74 87 90 88 90 90 SD 37 Bd 68 Taille 144,3 sex f GL 70 70 70 71 72,5 73 76,5 GL 133 134 135 136 139 Calcaneum GL 153,5 159,5 168 168,5 171 175 Astragale GL 82 82 83,5 94,5 GL 183 184 186,5 190,5 190,5

Mtacarpe GL 211 206 196 195,5 192

128

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

60 61,5 62 63 63,5 63,5 66,5 67 68 68,5 68,5 69,5 70 56,5 57 57 58 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 64 67 67 68 68 69 72 72,5 73 71 72 72,5 73 Mtatarse GL 246 Bp 60 49 48 48 46 43,5 47 52 42,5 49 SD 33 Bd 68,5 Taille 138,3 sex m ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Mtatarse Bp 69,5 69,5 70 70,5 71 78 90 Bd ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

129

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

52,5 47 46 49 51 56 53 57 57 46 56 42 48 52 53 57 54,5 57 56 59,5 54 60,5 53 55,5 52,5 54 55 67 68 68,5 69 69,5 70 ? ? ? ? ? ?

Capra hircus
Chevilles osseuses 41 42 33 34 37,5 38,5 60 42 28,5 23 23 27,5 26 34 Mtatarse GL 112,5 Bp 19 SD 13 Bd 23 Taille 60,1

Ovis aries
Mtatarse GL 123 121 Bp 18,5 18 SD 11 11,5 Bd 22 22 Taille 55,8 54,9

Sus domesticus
Tibia Bd 27 30 32

130

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Canis familiaris
Crne 12 70 13 80 15 58 16 18 17 44 52 Mandibule 5 101 100 108 103 60 61 59 65 63 31 29,5 28 31 32 32,5 32,5 Radius GL 122,5 Bp 12 16 18,5 SD 9,5 Bd 16 Taille 40,9 31 33 32 34,5 8 65 65 67 10 30 35 33 11 36,5 33 35,5 13 21 22 21 21 19 18,5 18,5 20 20 20,5 21 Tibia GL 153,5 Bp 30 SD 11,5 Bd 20 Taille 45,8 18 50 19 22 23 21,5 21,5 21 18 18 24 20 22,5 12 11,5 11 10,5 10,5 9,5 10 17 24 147,5 146 157,7 150,4 130 132,9 127,1 144,5 138,7 26 144,5 144,5 150,3 47 25 29

Canis lupus
Mandibule 5 116 6 123 8 73 10 38,5 11 39 16 24,5 19 29 Calcaneum GL 60

Vulpes vulpes
Crne 32 36,5 33 30,5 Mandibule 5 81 8 54,5 10 26 11 31 16 17 18 36,5 19 16,5 Humrus Bd 20

Equus ferus
Humrus Bd 85,5 82,5 BT 76,5 74 Radius Bp 84 88 BFp 79 78 76 60 Bd BFd Tibia Bd 79 75

131

Adrian BLESCU, Mircea UDRESCU

Mtatarse Bp 50,5 Bd 48

Phalange 1 GL 81 88 Bp 53 52,5 BFp 47 SD 35 34 34 Bd 44,5 46,5 BFd 42 44 43 Phalange 3 Bp 50 49 BFp 45 43 SD 44,5 41,5 Bd 48 44,5 BF 54 46 Ld 60 52

Phalange 2 GL 45 46

Sus scrofa
Scapula GLP 50 Astragale GL 54 Talia 96,7 LG 36 BG 34,5 Humrus Bd 54,5 Calcaneum GL 110 Talia 102,7 Tibia Bd 38 41 42 42,5

Cervus elaphus
Scapula SLC 39 GLP 63 71 Humrus Bd 65 63 Radius Bp 62 67 Mtacarpe GL 288 Bp 47 49 46,5 50 49 45 55,5 SD 26) Bd 46,5 Taille 131 BFp 58 60 Phalange 1 GL 71 68 67 67 64 Bp 25 25 25 25 24 23,5 SD 20 20 20 21 18,5 19 Bd 25 25 25 25 22 21 BT 57 55 LG 50 54 BG 48 51 Astragale GLl 61,5 62 60 59,5 59 61,5 67 59 67 61,5 Tibia Bd 55 58 Mtatarse Bd 50 Calcaneum GL 126 127

132

Matriaux ostologiques du site nolithique (niveau Boian, phase Vidra) de Vldiceasca

Capreolus capreolus
Mandibule 7 69 8 40 9 29 28 Maxillaire 22 35 Scapula SLC 20 GLP 30 LG 23 BG 22 Humrus Bd 30 BT 25 Tibia Bd 29 28,5 10 L 15 Radius Bp 25,5 26 Mtacarpe Bp 23 Calcaneum GL 63,5 BFp 24 24

133

Les donnes archobotaniques du tell chalcolithique de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru Felicia MONAH* Dan MONAH*
Rezumat: Studiul de fa se dorete o trecere general n revist a descoperirilor de natur arheobotanic din tell-ul cucutenian de la Poduri Dealul Ghindaru, incluznd un istoric al cercetrilor pluridisciplinare din cunoscuta staiune moldav dar i o detaliere a inventarului su carpologic. Cuvinte cheie: Precucuteni III, Cucuteni A, Cucuteni B, analize arheobotanice, spectru floristic, utilizare ritual. Mots cls: Precucuteni III, Cucuteni A, Cucuteni B, archobotanique, spectre florale, utilisation

rituelle.

Ds le dbut des investigations de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru, on a imagin un ample programme de recherches dans le domaine des sciences naturelles, programme qui aurait permis une reconstitution du palo milieu habit par les communauts chalcolithiques, de lagriculture pratique par celles-ci et aussi des ressources naturelles, vgtales et animales dont elles ont bnfici et des stratgies dexploitation. Dans ce but on a effectu des analyses pdologiques (Gh. Lupacu, I. Donis, D. Monah 1987, p. 245248), des dterminations archozoologiques et des macro restes vgtaux. Bien que Marin Crciumaru ait rcolt des chantillons de deux sondes palynologiques ceux-ci nont pas t analyss. Une tentative de collaboration avec Ionel Lupu du Jardin Botanique de Iai pour les dterminations de charbon de bois a choue. Confronts avec limpossibilit deffectuer des investigations archobotaniques compltes nous nous sommes limits dterminer les macrorestes vgtaux: semences, fruits et empreintes, action qui ne demande pas un quipement sophistiqu. Mme ainsi, dans ces conditions, le laborateur de Iai est, prsent, le seul de Roumanie effectuer de telles dterminations. Les recherches archozoologiques effectues par Alexandra Bolomey, aprs le dbut sous de bons auspices ont t interrompues malheureusement cause du dcs de notre collgue et reprises seulement pendant la campagne de 2000 par le collgues du Muse Nationale dHistoire de la Roumanie Bucarest (A. Blescu et alii 2001, p. 198; A. Blescu, V. Radu 2002, p. 245). Le projet initial prvoyait aussi des recherches gobotaniques pour la zone de Poduri, recherches que nous esprions nous aider la reconstitution du palo milieu. Cette investigation a t en grande mesure ralise et nous prsentons brivement quelques informations. Le tell de Poduri est situ dans la zone sous carpatique, dans la dpression de Tazlu, la sortie de la rivire Tazlul Srat des montagnes. Le site se trouve sur la terrasse de 32 m la droite de Tazlul Srat une distance de 68 km de la Montagne de Zeme et des Montagnes de Berzuni (D. Monah et alii 1980, p. 86). Le paysage actuel est trs anthropis, seulement la zone situe prs des montagnes garde des restes de la vgtation naturelle. En sappuyant sur les observations faites sur les fragments de vgtation naturelle nous pouvons apprcier que le paysage correspondant aux habitats chalcolithiques tait domin par des forts de chnes, la station tant entre la limite de ltage du chne et du htre. La zone montagneuse situe aux alentours tait, sans doute, couverte par des forts de conifres. A cause des dimensions des communauts de Dealul Ghindaru et de lexistence, possible, dautres communauts plus petites dans la rgion, partir dun certain moment il a eu lieu, ds le chalcolithique, une anthropisation assez accentue du paysage, quelques zones tant dfriches. Les dimensions des territoires dfrichs dans le chalcolithique sont, malheureusement, impossibles dtablir ce moment. Un projet de collaboration, en cours de ralisation, avec des collgues dAngleterre se propose une investigation de ce type. Nos assertions sont soutenues aussi
*

Institute d'Archologie d'Iai, str. Lascr Catargi 18.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 135142.

Felicia MONAH, Dan MONAH

par les observations archozoologiques faites par Alexandra Bolomey qui nous ont t transmises il y a des annes. Nous ne nous proposons pas maintenant de prsenter toutes les informations obtenues pendant deux dcennies de recherches. Mais nous mentionnons que, selon les analyses pdologiques corrobores avec les observations archologiques, le terrain o se sont installs les premiers habitants de Dealul Ghindaru avait les caractristiques dun herbage inondable. Cette chose peut paratre, pour ceux qui connaissent la situation actuelle de la place, trange parce que leau de Tazlul Srat est une diffrance de niveau de presque 36 m. Il est peut-tre le moment de prciser que les habitats chalcolithiques dont nous nous occupons ont commenc vers le milieu de la priode climatique nomm Atlantique et ont fini en mme temps que cette squence climatique. LAtlantique est caractris comme une priode chaude (approximativement 24oC plus qu prsent) et humide (Kremenecki 1991, p. 72, 151152). Une srie dobservations archologiques nous dtermine de considrer que les rivires avaient un dbit beaucoup plus grand que lactuel. Cette observation est valable aussi dans le cas de Tazlul Srat qui, cette poque-l, dterminait aussi lexistence de plusieurs mares et lieux marcageux do les habitants du chalcolithique ont rcolt dimportantes quantits de roseau et jonc. Nous avons russi identifier des empreints des tiges de jonc (Phragmites australis) sur le torchis des parois des habitations (F. Monah, D. Monah 1996, p. 51). Nous rappelons lappui des affirmations concernant le climat appropri aux cultures Prcucuteni et Cucuteni les observations de Radu Popovici. Celui-ci grce aux analyses anthracologiques, confirme les conditions climatiques dun caractre plus chaud et humide par la prsence des espces thermophiles Junglans regia, Buxus sempervirens, Ostrya carpinifolia, Castanea sativa, Quercus cerris provenant des stations du nord de la Moldavie et de Boneti, dans lest de la Valachie (R. Popovici 1932, p. 235242; idem 1933, p. 244246; idem 1935, p. 283293). Le tell de Poduri se fait remarquer, entre autres, par la conservation dune immense quantit de macro restes vgtaux en comparaison avec dautres stations chalcolithiques. Du point de vue morphologique ceux-ci sont en grande partie des fruits et des semences entiers ou fragments, carboniss. On a collect aussi des empreintes de feuilles et de tiges conserves sur le torchis des constructions et dimportantes quantits de charbon qui, comme nous avons dj prcis, nont pas t encore dtermines. On na pas effectu des dterminations sur des empreintes de caryopses parce que nous ne leurs faisons pas confiance, et grce labondance des macro restes vgtaux de Poduri une telle investigation nest pas ncessaire. Le matriau archobotanique collect du tell de Dealul Ghindaru consiste dans sa plus grande partie dans des caryopses de crales, des fruits, des ppins, des semences et des empreintes de quelques espces ligneuses et aussi des semences de mauvaises herbes. De point de vue chronologique les dcouvertes appartiennent la phase Prcucuteni IIIclasique et aux tapes Cucuteni A2 et B1. La mthode de qute est simple. Pendant les fouilles on a observ attentivement les zones susceptibles de comprendre des restes vgtaux et ceux-ci ont t recueillis laide de la truelle ou dune pincette. Dans quelques situations on a procd la flottation simple des quantits de terre par deau faible pression, les macro restes vgtaux tant retenus dans de tamis de diverses dimensions. Pendant la campagne de 2000 on a cueilli ainsi quelques dizaines de kilos de matriaux susceptible dtre dtermin. Il faut mentionner qu Poduri on a rcolt intgralement les dpts dcouverts bien que, dans quelques cas, ceux-ci soient de grandes dimensions et posent des problmes de transport, de dtermination et danalyse statistique. Le niveau Prcucuteni IIIclassique, en plus de lavantage dune importante quantit de crales, offre aussi des situations claires de dpt (caisses, silos, vases), ce qui a permis la ralisation de quelques tudes statistiques. La quantit de crales carbonises et le nombre despces dtermines pour ce niveau archologique sont impressionnants. Dans lhabitation no 31 on a trouv pas moins de 16 dpts de crales dans des vases et caisses de crales, et dans la construction 44, ainsi nomme moulin, des quatre silos on a rcupr 34 kilos de crales

136

Les donnes archobotaniques de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru

carbonises (M. Crciumaru, F. Monah 1985, p. 704706; idem 1987, p. 169171). Dans les lots rcolts du niveau Prcucuteni IIIclassique on a identifi cinq espces de crales: Triticum aestivum, T. monococcum, T. dicoccum, Hordeum vulgare, Secale cereale. Lanalyse statistique (M. Crciumaru, F. Monah 1985, p. 704706; idem 1987, p. 169171) des espces des quatre silos montre que chaqun tait domin par une espce: le silo I: Hordeum vulgare (98%), le silo II par Triticum aestivum (91%), le silo III par Triticum monococcum (63,8%) et le silo IV par Hordeum vulgare (92%). De cette analyse rsulte que les espces de crales qui ont la plus grande importance dans lalimentation des prcucuteniens de Poduri taient les suivantes: Hordeum vulgare, Triticum aestivum, T. monococcum, T. dicoccum. Les espces de mauvaises herbes (Rumex acetosella, Polygonum aviculare, P. hydropiper, Vicia cracca, Galium spurium, Vicia sp.) sont communes, quelques-unes tant lies la culture des crales, dautres tant rudrales. Dans le mme niveau on a trouv plusieurs empreintes de feuilles imprimes sur le torchis dune construction. On a identifi des empreintes de feuilles de Corylus avellana et Tilia plathyphyllos, espces communes pour la priode et la zone de vgtation o est situ lhabitat (F. Monah 1985, p. 690). Les feuilles de Tilia formaient une couche paisse, tant utilises pour couvrir les troncs des arbres utiliss la construction de la plateforme dune habitation. Cette pratique tait probablement impose par lhumidit leve du sol et semble soutenir laffirmation du pdologue Gheorghe Lupacu concernant le caractre de pr inondable durant la priode des villages Prcucuteni II et Prcucuteni IIIclassique. Pour lhorizon Cucuteni A2, reprsent Poduri par plusieurs niveaux dhabitation (D. Monah et alii 1983, p. 322), les chantillons de macro restes vgtaux collects proviennent dans leur plus grande partie de la plateforme des habitations, ou de la couche de sdimentation Cucuteni A2, des ainsi dites caisses de graines, comme dune fosse rituelle contenant un crne humain (D. Botezatu, D. Monah 2001, p. 194195). La grande quantit de crales carbonises a cr des difficults, tant en ce qui concerne le prlvement du matriau comme en ce qui concerne la ralisation des tudes statistiques. Bien que la quantit de macro restes vgtaux rcolts du niveau Cucuteni A2, soit plus petite que celle prlev du niveau Prcucuteni IIIclassique, on a dtermin un nombre plus important despces. Le conspectus floristique pour ce niveau compte 28 espces, 9 espces plus que celui de Prcucuteni III. Lanalyse des chantillons collects pour les crales, indique la domination des espces Triticum dicoccum et T. aestivum, T. monococcum ayant un pourcentage insignifiant. Hordeum vulgare a la mme importance que pendant la priode Prcucuteni III. De nouvelles espces apparaissent: Secale cerale, Avena sativa et Panicum miliaceum, mais leurs pourcentages sont insignifiants. Selon Zoia Januevi les premires deux espces avaient pendant la priode Cucuteni Tripolye caractre de plantes sgtales dans les cultures de bl et dorge. Selon le mme auteur, seulement plus tard, et dans certaines rgions on a introduit les cultures pures des espces Secale et Avena (Z.V. Januevi 1976, p. 130131). Dans ce niveau on a identifi des empreintes de tiges de roseau (Phragmites australis), utilises la construction des habitations (F. Monah, D. Monah, 1996, p. 51). Trs intressante savre lidentification des espces ayant valeur alimentaire: Prunus domestica (1 ppin), Cerasus avium (1 ppin), Cornus mas (38 ppins), Rubus idaeus (1 ppin), Corylus avellana (1 fruit). A lexception de lespce Prunus domestica qui tait, videment, cultive, les autres proviennent de la flore spontane, les fruits tant cueillis. Toutes ces espces qui manquent du conspectus floristique de la phase Prcucuteni IIIclassique, nous offrent des informations importantes concernant lalimentation des habitants. Le fait que celles-ci nont pas t dtermines dans les niveaux Prcucuteni ne signifie quelles ntaient pas dans la flore et ntaient pas utilises. Cerasus avium, Cornus mas, Corylus avellana tait la porte des habitants du tell, pouvant tre cueillis du pr du Tazlul Srat et de la lisire des forts du voisinage. Le grand nombre de ppins de

137

Felicia MONAH, Dan MONAH

Cornus mas indique limportance de ces fruits pour les cucuteniens, probablement pour la quantit de vitamine C quils contiennent. Lespce la plus importante pour lhistoire de lagriculture, dtermine dans ce niveau, est Prunus domestica. La culture des arbres fruitiers est un procs longue et graduel. Ceci montre une importante volution de la mentalit des populations. La culture des crales et des lgumineuses dure quelques mois par anne, pendant que les arbres sont des espces prennantes; 510 anns sont ncessaires pour que les arbres atteignent la maturit. La culture des arbres fruitiers signale, avec certitude, une population sdentaire et un nouveau paysage domestique, aux environs de lhabitat. Rcemment, pendant la campagne de 2000, on a dcouvert prs du foyer de la maison no. 74 quelques ppins de pomme ou de poire (Malus/Pyrus). Nous ne pouvons pas prciser sils proviennent despces cultives ou de la flore spontane. Une dcouverte trs intressante, faite pendant les fouilles de 2000, est une coupe avec pied plein de fruits de Lithospermum officinale trouv dans une fosse rituelle. Dans la fosse situe prs de lhabitation no. 74 il y avait un grande vase dcor dincisions et peinture, dans lequel tait dpos une coupe peint trichrom dans lequel il y avait les fruits de Lithospermum officinale. Lespce est commune dans les buissons, la lisire des forts, bocages, au bord des chemins. Dans le vase de Poduri il y a une quantit de 160 g de fruits de Lithopsermum officinale sches. Un gramme contient 120 fruits, ainsi que toute la quantit du vase contenait par approximation 18.000 fruits de Lithospermum. La quantit dcouverte Poduri est trs grande si on tient compte que, 1 kg de fruits de Lithospermum fraches peut comprendre 140.000 fruits. La cueillette de ces fruits est pnible cause des ses petits dimensions. Le temps exig par une telle cueillette dmontre limportance du rituel effectu. Les fruits de Lithospermum purpoureocoeruleum ont t dcouverts aussi dans les stations Frumuica et Izvoare, dans la mme phase Cucuteni A (M. Crciumaru 1996, p. 78). La plante a des proprits mdicinales et colorantes. Les semences grce leur forme et une perforation naturelle, ont t utilises aussi la confection des colliers. Un tel collier provient du site Gumelnia de Ulmeni (M. Crciumaru 1985, p. 125127). Nous croyons quune investigation complexe, ethnobotanique simpose afin de dpister sa signification rituelle. Dans la seconde pice de lhabitation no. 74 on a trouv une quantit de cendre qui contenait plusieurs fruits de Coriandrum sativum, plante aromatique non ateste jusqu ce moment dans le complexe culturel CucuteniTripolye.
Le niveau Cucuteni B1. la diffrence des phases culturelles prsentes jusqu prsent, ltape Cucuteni B1 est plus pauvre en macro restes vgtaux. Cela sexplique par la petite profondeur laquelle on trouve les sdiments de cette tape. Dans le tell de Poduri on a trouv une trs petite quantit de macro restes vgtaux. Le dtermination a videnti un nombre de 10 espces. Les crales dtermines sont dans lordre de la limportance Hordeum vulgare, Triticum dicoccum et Secale cereale. Le nombre de grains est rduit, ce qui empche une analyse statistique. On peut observer cependant que lorge et le bl tendre sont les crales les plus utilises par les habitants de la phase Cucuteni B (F. Monah, D. Monah 1996, p. 5960). Parmi les lgumineuses, dans ce niveau apparat Vicia sativa. Une autre espce, Sambucus nigra, constitue la premire attestation de cette plante pour la culture Cucuteni. Parmi les arbustes on a dtermin, en sappuyant sur les ppins, lespce de Cornus mas. Les mauvaises herbes Rumex acetosella, Vicia sp. sont habituelles pour les dterminations de la culture Cucuteni (F. Monah, D. Monah 1996, p. 5960). Une dcouverte trs intressante a t faite au rez-de-chausse de lhabitation no. 75. Dans une amphore peinte dans le style on a trouv un dpt de fruits de Coriandrum sativum. Le dpt tait pur et on a dtermin 248 fruits. Prs de lamphore il y avait un autre dpt form de fruits de Coriadrum sativum et de Sambucus nigra. Les fruits se trouvaient sur les restes dune rcipient en bois, probablement un fond de tonneau. Le dpt avait le poids de 130 g dont 63 g taient fruits de Sambucus et 67 g de Coriandrum.

138

Les donnes archobotaniques de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru

*** Les recherches archobotaniques de Poduri ont men lidentification de 34 espces de plantes cultives o de la flore spontane (tab. 1). On a obtenu une srie de dates concernant limportance de quelques cultures mais ce problme sera tudi plus en dtail. Une tude minutieuse sur lutilisation rituelle de certaines plantes sera entreprise aussi. De point de vue archologique nous pouvons videncier le fait que le tell de Poduri contribue avec un nombre important despces au conspectus floristique de la culture Cucuteni. Cepandant il faut reconnatre que nous avons encore des lots de matriau archobotanique de Poduri qui nont pas t encore analyss et qui exigent un travail soutenu. Nous esperons que pendant les prochaines campagnes quand on fera des fouilles dans dautres stations du terroire du tell nous russirons complter le conspectus floristique de la culture Cucuteni.

139

Felicia MONAH, Dan MONAH

Tab. 1. Le conspect floristique du tell Poduri Dealul Ghindaru No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Espces /Familles Prcucuteni Cucuteni A2 * * * * * * * * * Cucuteni B1

Corylaceae Corylus avellana Chenopodiaceae Atriplex sp. Chenopodium album Polygonaceae Polygonum aviculare P. hydropyper Fagopyrum convolvulus Rumex crispus Rumex acetosa Rumex acetosella Rosaceae Prunus domestica Cerasus avium var. sylvestris Malus/Pirus Rubus idaeus Fabaceae Pisum sativum ssp. arvensis Vicia cracca Vicia sativa Cornaceae Cornus mas Umbelliferae Coriandrum sativum Tiliaceae Tilia platyphyllos Malvaceae Malva sp. Brassicacae Brassica nigra Thlaspi arvense Boraginaceae Lithospermum officinale Rubiaceae Galium spurium Caprifoliaceae Sambucus nigra Poaceae Avena sativa Hordeum vulgare var. nudum Panicum miliaceum Secale cereale

* * *

* *

* * * * * * * *** * *** * * * *** * * * * *** * * * * *

*** ***

140

Les donnes archobotaniques de Poduri Dealul Ghindaru

30 31 32 33 34 35

Triticum aestivum ssp. vulgare T. ssp. compactum Triticum dicoccum Triticum monococcum Triticum spelta Bromus sp. Phragmites australis

*** *** *** *

*** * *** * * ***

Bibliographie: A. Blescu et alii 2000 A. Blescu et alii 2002 D. Botezatu, D. nah 2001 M. Crciumaru 1985 M. Crciumaru 1996 M. Crciumaru, Felicia nah 1985 M. Crciumaru, Felicia nah 1987 Z.V. Januevi 1976 Gh. Lupacu, I. Donis, D. nah 1987 S. rinescuBlcu, M. Crciumaru 1992 D. nah, S. ntonescu, A. Bujor 1980 D. nah et alii 1982 D. nah et alii 1983 D. nah, t. Cuco 1985: D. nah et alii 1987 F. nah 1985 F. nah 1992 F. nah, D. nah 1987 R. Popovici 1932

Un craniu uman descoperit n nivelul Cucuteni A2 de la PoduriDealul Ghindaru, dans Cronica 2000, Bucureti, p. 194195. Le collier de semences dUlmeni (culture de Gumelnia), dans Dacia (N.S.) 39, 12, p. 125127. Paleoetnobotanica. Studii n preistoria i protoistoria Romniei, Iai. Raport preliminar privind seminele carbonizate de la PoduriDealul Ghindaru, jud. Bacu, dans MemAnt 911, p. 699706. Dterminations palobotaniques pour les cultures Precucuteni et Cucuteni, dans M. PetrescuDmbovia et alii (eds.), La civilisation de Cucuteni en contexte europen, BAI 1, Iai, p. 167174. . Unele caracteristici ale depozitelor terigene din staiunea arheologic PoduriDealul Ghindaru, jud. Bacu, dans MemAnt 1517, p. 245 Coliere de Lithospermum purpureocoeruleum i perle de cerb n neoliticul din Romnia n contextul centrului i sudestului Europei, dans SCIVA 43, 4, p. 355370. Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor arheologice din comuna Poduri, jud. Bacu, dans MCA 14, p. 8699. Spturile arheologice din tell-ul cucutenian Dealul Ghindaru, com. Poduri, jud. Bacu, dans CA 5, p. 922. Cercetrile arheologice de la PoduriDealul Ghindaru, dans CA 6, p. Aezrile culturii Cucuteni din Romnia, Iai. Raport preliminar asupra spturilor arheologice de la PoduriDealul Ghindaru (19841985), dans MemAnt 1517, p. 920. Amprente de frunze n staiunea arheologic PoduriDealul Ghindaru, jud. Bacu, dans MemAnt 911, p. 685692. Amprente de plante descoperite n aezri eneolitice din Moldova, dans AM 15, p. 185188. Macrorestes vgtaux dcouverts dans les niveaux Cucuteni A2 et B1 de PoduriDealul Ghindaru, dans Gh. Dumitroaia, D. Monah (eds.), Cucuteni aujourdhui, BMA 3, Piatra Neam, p. 4962. Beitrge zur Waldgeschichte NordRumniens, dans BFSC 6, p. 229
250. 322. 248. , tiina, Chiinu.

245.

Studiu arheozoologic, dans Cronica 2000, Bucureti, p. 198. Fauna de la Poduri (jud. Bacu), dans Cronica Bucureti, 2002, p.

141

Felicia MONAH, Dan MONAH

R. Popovici 1933 R. Popovici 1935

Ein weiterer Beitrag zur Waldgeschichte unseres Landes, dans BFSC Pdurile paleo i neolitice din nordul Romniei. Tez prezentat la Facultatea de tiine din Cernui pentru a obine gradul de doctor n tiinele naturale, dans BFSC 8 (1934), p. 277295.
7, p. 244249.

142

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946 Silvia MARINESCUBLCU* RadianRomus ANDREESCU**

Abstract: In this article are turned to account the results of the researches carried on in the 50th in the eneolithic settlement from Piscul Corniului, the one which designated Slcua culture, specific for the Olt river valley Western region. The settlement is placed on a hill on Desnui river right shore, on the territory of Plopor village, Slcua comune, Dolj county. The researches carried on by Hortensia Dumitrescu between 19451946 led to the discovery of two habitation levels represented by the wood and clay buildings burnished remains. There have been discovered at least 7 buildings, some of them massive, with inner hearts. The archaeological finds are varied: ceramics, antropomorphical figurines, flint, stone, bone, antler and cupper tools. The ceramics were discovered in quantites and well tipologically diversified. The ceramics analysis showed the existance of commun shapes for the two levels but also of some which seem to individualize the two habitation levels, for example the little amphora type vessels. The good resemblances with the material belonging to Gumelnia culture found on the Olt river left shore rise the problem of a regional variety (Slcua culture) found on the Olt river Western shore, included in the cultural complex KojadermenKaranovo VIGumelnia. Keywords: Slcua culture, habitation level, pottery shape and decoration. Cuvinte cheie: cultura Slcua, nivel de locuire, forme i decoruri ceramice.

n coleciile nc nevalorificate ale Institutului de Arheologie Vasile Prvan se gsesc, printre altele, i materialele rezultate din cele dou campanii de spturi arheologice efectuate de Hortensia Dumitrescu (n colaborare cu Dorin Popescu i C. S. NicolescuPlopor) la Piscul Corniorului, binecunoscuta aezare slcuean (Pl. 1; fig. 1-2). Se cuvin fcute de la nceput cteva rectificri. Aezarea de pe malul drept al Desnuiului1 (n opinia noastr de tip tell) se afl pe teritoriul satului Plopor, com. Slcua, jud Dolj, iar meritul descoperirii ei i revine lui C.S. NicolescuPlopor care, elev fiind n clasa a IV-a de liceu a cules de aici o serie de fragmente ceramice i vase ducndu-le Muzeului Theodor Aman din Craiova, al crui director era profesorul su de istorie t. Ciuceanu (carnet de note H. Dumitrescu). Dup cum se tie (din pcate) rezultatele spturilor ntreprinse pe Piscul Corniorului (fig. 2) de ctre I. Andrieescu n trei campanii (1916, 1919, 1920) sunt ca i pierdute (odat cu documentaia respectiv) cele trei plane publicate de autorul lor (I. Andrieescu 1929, pl. IIII) rezumndu-se la cteva vase, un fragment de statuet antropomorf i de acum celebrul (i att de discutatul) sceptru de piatr. Ct privete materialele rezultatele din cercetrile lui Carl Schuchard ele se afl (n copleitoarea lor majoritate) la Berlin, cele cteva restituite Muzeului Naional de Antichiti fiind la rndul lor rtcite. n mod bizar, numele culturii Slcua a fost dat de M. Al. TzigaraSamurca fapt ce pare s-l fi deranjat pe I. Andrieescu2, el fiind primul care a ntreprins spturi n aceast aezare (I. Andrieescu 1929, p. 18).

* 1

**

Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan, Henri Coand 17, Bucureti. Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Calea Victoriei 12, Bucureti. Autoarea spturii noteaz n carnet: Movila face parte dintr-un bot de deal care reprezint mai multe ei despritoare i care la rndul lor intr n Platforma Oltean. N-am insistat ns asupra descrierii zonei ntruct ea a fost fcut de D. Berciu (1961, p. 155-157) care a ntreprins la rndul lui spturi aici n anul 1951. Pe baza acestora a i mprit cultura Slcua n patru faze greu decelabile. I. Andrieescu (1929, p. 1, nota 1) scrie: Dans les Convorbiri Literare, LVI, 1924, pp. 224-225 et fig 12 M. Al. Tzigara-Samurca publie une autre figurine de Slcua, en lui donant ce nom. Cest une question discuter, bien que, en fait du batme, le rle de prter le nom incombre peut-tre en premier lieu celui qui a fait la dcouverte.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 143180.

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

n anul 1945 i 19463 au loc cele dou campanii, mai sus-amintite, ale Hortensiei Dumitrescu la care au participat, aa cum am mai menionat, Dorin Popescu i C.S. NicolescuPlopor. Materialele rezultate din aceaste campanii constituie obiectul preocuprilor noastre. Precizm de la nceput c o parte dintre aceste materiale i-au pierdut identitatea n timp ce o alta, din pricina diverselor mutri, nu ne-au mai fost accesibile. Totodat singura documentaie pstrat const din carnetul de note al Hortensiei Dumitrescu. Dar ntruct materialul, ca i informaiile conservate (cu toate carenele mai sus menionate) prezint un deosebit interes, am considerat util att publicarea lui, ct i a rezultatelor din teren obinute cu prilejul celor dou campanii de spturi. Astfel, n 1945 prima seciune, A (de 3X16 m, redui mai apoi la 10 m) situat n zona de nord est a fost extins (n vederea degajrii unei locuine) cu o alta notat cu B (de 3X10 m) ajungndu-se la o suprafa AB de 10X6 m; seciunea C aflat pe panta de sudest fusese de 5X3 m; seciunea D din sudestul aezrii de 19X3 a fost prelungit cu o alta E de 3x20 m; iar seciunea H din 1946, plasat n captul estic (dar n panta dinspre sud) a avut 10X4 m (fig. 2). n acest mod s-au cercetat aproximativ 232 m2. Sesiznd carenele cercetrilor limitate din aceea vreme, ntr-un raport asupra acestora Hortensia Dumitrescu scria: spturile (de la Piscul Corniorului n.n.) trebuie reluate cu mijloace mai ample i cu tehnic mai nou, aa cum s-a procedat la Hbeti. Revenind la cercetrile din 19451946 de la Piscul Corniorului, ntruct nivelurile de locuire au fost notate de sus n jos, vom respecta la rndul nostru aceast ordine, menionnd n acelai timp c diferenele de adncime sunt rezultatul amplasamentelor seciunilor, ele fiind trasate n unele cazuri pe pante, iar cota 0 (la acea vreme) nefiind marcat, adncimile au fost luate de la nivelul actual al solului. Toate fragmentele ceramice rezultate din primii 0.200.35 m, din stratul de pmnt vegetal la baza cruia se aflau, fuseser lipsite de context i deosebit de amestecate: Coofeni, Hallstatt, dacice i medievale, dei pe unele schie de profile pentru simplificare acest prim strat fr resturi de locuine, vetre etc. a fost notat uneori ca strat Coofeni4. La 0.350.40m adncime apare chirpiciul ars, deci locuinele propriu-zise, cu drmturi deosebit de consistente situndu-se ntre 0.40 (0.550.60) 0.70 (0.90)m. Un strat intermediar separ aceste locuine de grupa locuinelor incendiate aflate ntre 1 (1.20) 1.10 (1.451.65) m adncime. n acest strat intermediar (dintre cele dou niveluri marcate prin locuine incendiate) s-au descoperit att fragmente slcuene, ct i o vatr cu vase n preajm, care ns n-au suferit de pe urma arderii secundare, atestnd deci o locuire fie ea i pasager, care nu a sfrit printr-un incendiu. Nu l-am putea socoti deci un simplu nivel de abandon. Urmeaz un alt strat, gros de 0.500.60 m, lipsit de contexte dar coninnd fragmente ceramice arse n egal msur la rou i la negru5. Sub acest ultim strat s-a spat pn la 2.703.25m adncime n solul steril din punct de vedere arheologic; n cazul seciunilor aflate pe pant solul steril se afla la 1.601.80m (fig. 2; 3). n acest strat steril s-a descoperit i o groap, poate de bordei, n care se aflau pe lng fragmente de chirpici i dou greuti de lut, specifice acestei staiuni. O situaie deosebit de interesant a fost ntlnit n suprafaa E: nspre captul de vest al spturii, dar mai pe centrul ei, sub una dintre locuine (III?) a crei baz se afla la 1.15/1.20m s-a descoperit, pe o lungime de 6 m i o adncime de 0.60 m o alveolare (fig. 4) plin cu chirpici i mai
3 4 5

D. Berciu (1961, p. 158) ne surprinde susinnd c Hortensia Dumitrescu mpreun cu C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor i Dorin Popescu au ntreprins spturi la Piscul Corniorului n 1947. Noi am respectat strict adnotrile din carnetul de antier. D. Berciu (1961, p. 185-192, fig. 44-47) publicnd o serie de fragmente ceramice din cea mai veche locuire de pe Pisc le atribuie culturii Starevo-Cri. Noi am gsit printre materialele pstrate din spturile Hortensiei Dumitrescu o serie de piese tipic vinciene dar n carnet sunt menionate i fragmente ceramice cu slip portocaliu-rocat ca i o varietate de caneluri nguste, dese, plisate slab, dispuse vertical sau oblic. Ne ntrebm dac nu cumva este vorba att de dovezi de locuire starceviene ct i vinciene. Nu ndrznim s avansm ipoteza unor posibile resturi Precri, dei (date fiind descoperirile de la Crcea i Grdinile) am putea avea n vedere i o atare variant. Cum ns materialele respective s-au pierdut sau rtcit, semnelor de ntrebare nu li se poate da un rspuns valabil.

144

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

multe vase arse secundar. Autoarea spturii nclina n egal msur spre interpretarea ei drept bordei sau groap. Dat fiind mica ei adncime, situarea la baza nivelului de distrugere a locuinei, ca i coninutul vase arse secundar am putea-o interpreta, cu titlu ipotetic, fie drept groap de fundaie, fie drept o depunere al crui scop (probabil tot ritual) este greu de intuit. Ar putea fi evident i o locuin de suprafa anterioar. Din pcate, nu dispunem de nici o informaie asupra organizrii interne a aezrii deoarece nici una dintre cele apte locuine, din cele dou niveluri incendiate, nu a putut fi degajat integral, dei de pild latura sudic a suprafeei A a fost extins cu 3 m tocmai n vederea degajrii locuinei I, dar ea se continua pe pant i sub extremitatea sudic a noii suprafee, dovad a dimensiunilor apreciabile ale locuinelor de pe Pisc6 (fig. 3). n toate cazurile ns surprinde masivitatea stratului de chirpici ari la roucrmiziu atingnd uneori 4050 cm. Spre exemplu, n cazul unei locuine din nivelul al doilea al suprafeei H, resturile incendiate ale acesteia se aflau pe o lungime de 6 m, stratul de chirpici, cu tot restul inventarului, depind 6570 cm. grosime (fig. 3). Printre i sub drmturi este semnalat prezena numeroaselor vase (multe miniaturi), fragmente ceramice, utilaj litic, de os i de corn, un est de copt pine chiar unele elemente arhitectonice disc cu decor spiralic i pictur roie (fig. 28/7) fusaiole, greuti, mari suporturi frigrui (?), resturi osteologice etc. n cteva cazuri s-au observat i urme de pari (lemn ars), iar sub drmturile locuinelor, cenu i pmnt nroit de foc. De remarcat sunt i vetrele descoperite n aezare. Vatra din locuina I (suprafaa B) avusese 1.40X1.60 m (fig. 3) numeroase fragmente ceramice i vase ntregibile n preajm, iar din chirpiciul din jurul ei provin cteva dale mari de piatr (gresie). Care va fi fost funcionalitatea lor este greu de precizat. Alte dou vetre au fost gsite n suprafaa H, la 0.40 m adncime, desprite de aproximativ 1.80 m una de alta, ntr-o zon cu mult chirpici, deci tot n locuine/locuin. Prima se afla n zona sudestic a suprafeei i avusese depus la baz un vas globular. Cea de-a doua, deosebit de interesant, din zona nordestic fusese de dimensiuni relativ mari 1X0,70 (0,80) m avusese numeroase fragmente ceramice afumate, vase i o unealt de corn de cerb n prejm, dar i zece refaceri suprapuse cu aspectul mozaicat specific vetrelor neolitice, ultimele groase de 56 cm, denotnd o ndelungat folosire de vreme ce a necesitat attea refaceri care, la rndul lor, ridic implicit i problema refacerilor din locuin. Dou vetre relativ similare am descoperit i noi la Borduani (jud. Ialomia) n mediul gumelniean7. Din locuine, respectiv din cele dou niveluri cu resturi de construcii incendiate8, ca i din stratul intermediar de cultur, a fost recoltat ntregul inventar neperisabil: unelte, ceramic, plastic, diverse obiecte de lut, resturi osteologice de bovine, porcine, psri, coarne de cerb, scoici, iar n cel de-al doilea nivel de locuine incendiate din suprafaa H s-a descoperit crbune de lemn i smburi calcinai semnnd cu cei ai cireei (carnet de note H. Dumitrescu). Pentru utilajul litic cioplit s-a folosit chaille-ul adic accidentul silicos cu aspect nodular care face corp comun cu roca gazd (de obicei calcar i/sau dolomit). Chaille-ul este constituit din opal i

Ne surprind deci dimensiunile reduse ale unor locuine descoperite de ctre D. Berciu (1961, fig. 30) pe Pisc. De pild loc. 9 are 2.50X2 m; loc 10 1.50X1.75 m; loc. 11 2X1.50 m i aceasta cu att mai mult cu ct dimensiunile vetrei care suprapune locuina 12 1.50X1.50 m- le atingea aproape pe cele ale presupuselor (dup noi) locuine. Ne ntrebm pe bun dreptate dac nu cumva, n cazul locuinelor mai sus menionate, ne aflm mai degrab n faa unor simple gropi. i aceasta cu att mai mult cu ct, aa cum s-a vzut mai sus, dimensiunile locuinelor cercetate parial de Hortensia Dumitrescu vor fi fost destul de mari. Vatra din carourile G3-G4 avusese ase refaceri (i consecutive refaceri ale gardinei iniiale) ca i un gen de soclu, n timp ce aceea din carourile C6-D6 fusese mult mai elaborat. Ridicat pe un soclu cu dou coloane a avut optsprezece rnduri de mozaicuri ntre care se aflau, ca i la Piscul Corniorului, straturi de cenu i lemn carbonizat dar i un gen de jgheab pe una din laturi. D. Berciu (1961, fig. 25-26) a descoperit la Pisc tot numai dou niveluri de locuine incendiate.

145

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

calcedonie, are o culoare cenuie, galben, brun sau neagr, o sprtur neregulat sau concoidal i luciu sticlos sau de cear9 (N. Anastasiu 1999, p. 34). Sursa de materie prim necesar s-ar putea afla fie n Banat ori Serbia, fie n ramura estic a Carpailor Meridionali de unde roca ar fi putut fi adus pe vile apelor. Culoarea rocii de la Pisc este predominant brunglbuie, rar brunrocat i cu totul accidental cenuie. ntruct utilajul cioplit (dup cum reiese din carnetul de antier) este similar n ambele niveluri incendiate, l vom prezenta nedifereniat. Piesele cele mai notabile constau n patru vrfuri de lance (fig. 5/14) de diverse dimensiuni, minuios retuate (una descoperit ntr-o locuin fig. 5/1) i tot attea vrfuri de sgeat (fig. 5/58) dintre care unul miniatural (fig. 5/8). Numeroase sunt ns gratoarele (simple, mai rar duble fig. 5/12, 1416 cu sau fr encoche) pe achii sau pe lame (fig. 5/11, 17; 6; 7/89, 13), lamele cu i fr retue (fig. 7/17, 1012), avnd ns adeseori retue de uzur, vrfurile (fig. 5/9) i racloarele (fig. 5/10) fiind extrem de rare. Frecvente sunt i achiile. Unele piese cum ar fi de pild o lam de mari dimensiuni (fig. 7/10) ca i cteva alte piese au suferit de pe urma arderii secundare din locuine. n mod ciudat, lipsesc aproape cu desvrire nucleele, unicul exemplar (de mici dimensiuni) gsit fiind nesemnificativ. n direct legtur cu uneltele cioplite (care alturi de achii dovedesc o prelucrare local a uneltelor) stau i cteva percutoare din granite i gresii cuaritice. Uneltele lefuite sunt rare, tiate n roci magmatice i metamorfice i se reduc la cteva herminete ngrijit lucrate (fig. 8/13, 5), toate descoperite n nivelurile cu locuine incendiate, la un toporciocan perforat, uzat puternic de pe urma folosirii att la vrf, ct i la muchie (fig. 8/6) ajuns ca un fel de dublu ciocan, gsit n locuina I, i la alte dou fragmente de topoare, tot perforate, (fig. 8/4, 7) aflate de asemenea n zone cu chirpici. Un percutor i un frector (spart) de form relativ ovoidal, plat la unul din capete intens folosit la frecarea diverselor obiecte, ncheie seria utilajului litic. Din metapodii de cervide au fost realizate pumnale (fig. 9/10) vrfuri de diverse dimensiuni (fig. 9/12, 56, 89), dintr-o diafiz de os lung de mamifer de talie mare s-a tiat o dlti (fig. 9/3), din alte fragmente osteologice s-au tiat o serie de alte piese (fig. 9/4, 1314), un pandantiv (fig. 9/12), o pies tubular, fragmentar, decorat (fig. 9/11), iar din corn o mare splig cu o perforaie rectangular (fig. 9/15), descoperit n locuina din cel mai vechi nivel al suprafeei H, piese intermediare (fig. 9/20) pentru unelte mici, baghete (fig. 9/1619) etc. Defensele de mistre la rndul lor au fost transformate att n pandantive, ct i ntr-un gen de instrument (cuit?) de tiat (fig. 9/21, 22). Piesele de aram, dei nu prea numeroase, sunt prezente i ele n ambele niveluri constnd dintr-un fragment de inel, din mpungtoare cu seciune rectangular (fig. 8/89, 11) i dintr-o pies puternic deformat de arderea secundar (fig. 8/10).

Ceramica. Primul nivel cu locuine incendiate. Dintre categoriile ceramice cele mai bine reprezentate fac parte vasele bitronconice cu umr puternic rotunjit (fig. 10/13, 6, 8), unele dintre ele aducnd foarte mult cu un gen de castroane. Aceste vase sunt destul de diversificate morfologic dar n principal se individualizeaz prin corpul relativ bitronconic, fundul ngust, umrul puternic rotunjit, gura larg. Unele au un gt scund, rsfrnt spre interior sau drept, uneori cu o mic nuire la baz (fig. 10/3). Pe umr au fie tortie triunghiulare, fie proeminene perforate vertical (fig. 10/1, 3). Alte piese au tortie sau proeminene pe diametrul maxim (fig. 10/6) (unele piese nu au ns nici tortie, nici proeminene fig. 10/2, 8; 13/2). Vasele sunt lucrate n general din past relativ bun, arse la bruncenuiu sau brunrocat. Pe multe se mai pstreaz urme de lustru. nlimea acestor piese variaz n jurul a 15 cm. Alt categorie relativ numeroas este reprezentat de strchini de diverse mrimi (fig. 10/45, 7). Avnd o form tronconic, multe dintre ele au o buz scurt rsfrnt spre interior. Cteva au sub buz o mic proeminen perforat vertical. O pies deosebit este reprezentat de o strachin de mari dimensiuni cu buza scurt, rsfrnt spre interior. Pe umrul reliefat se afl dou toarte, dispuse vertical, n alternan cu doi butoni. ntre toarte i butoni sunt cte dou rnduri de caneluri. Pe buz
9

Silex n limbajul curent arheologic.

146

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

i pe caneluri se mai pstreaz urme de vopsea alb (fig. 11/1). O alt strachin are corpul tronconic i buza dreapt i lat, cu o torti relativ dreptunghiular cu cioc, lit la partea superioar. La exterior, partea superioar a vasului este decorat cu linii grafitate (fig. 11/2). Un alt exemplar, cu buza rsfrnt spre interior, are un picior tronconic, gol la interior (fig. 10/9). Strchinile sunt modelate din past relativ bun, arse la bruncenuiu sau brunrocat. Majoritatea pstreaz urme de lustruire att la interior ct i la exterior. Vasele de dimensiuni relativ mari sunt diversificate din punct de vedere morfologic. Un prim tip l constituie vasele bitronconice cu umrul mai mult sau mai puin rotunjit i gura dreapt (fig. 12/6; 14/1, 34). Fundul este ngust, uneori inelar, iar gura de obicei foarte larg. Majoritatea sunt decorate cu barbotin, de regul neorganizat, iar pe diametrul maxim (sau deasupra lui) au uneori proeminene organice. Un exemplar are partea superioar decorat cu ciupituri, iar cea inferioar cu incizii adnci dispuse oblic (fig. 14/1). Un alt tip este reprezentat de vase cu partea inferioar tronconic i buz dreapt sau cu umrul uor rotunjit (fig. 13/1; 14/5). Sub buz au o torti iar pe diametrul maxim proeminene organice. Sunt decorate cu barbotin, iruri de alveole sau de incizii. Pasta din care au fost modelate este mai degrab grosier, de culoare bruncenuie sau cenuie. nlimea lor variaz n jurul a 20 cm. Un vas piriform de mari dimensiuni din past bun de culoare bruncenuie are gtul foarte mic, gura larg i umrul puternic rotunjit. Partea superioar este decorat cu incizii adnci, dispuse n aa-numitul motiv al labirintului, ncrustate cu past alb (fig. 12/1). Vasele relativ globulare, de mici dimensiuni (circa 10cm), au fost modelate din past modest, decorate cu barbotin (fig. 13/7). O categorie specific acestei staiuni este reprezentat de cnile cu gtul nalt, buza oblic i corpul bombat. O toart tras din buz se sprijin pe umrul vasului, iar n partea opus se afl adeseori o proeminen (fig. 12/2, 45). Un exemplar are la partea superioar a corpului cte dou nervuri verticale (fig. 12/2). Un vas cu gtul nalt i corp bitronconic, cu dou toarte trase din buz are pe diametrul superior dou proeminene, iar pe umr incizii verticale (fig. 14/2). Un altul bitronconic, cu gt nalt, are o singur toart ce pornete de sub buz i se prinde pe vas deasupra diametrului maxim. La baza gtului are patru mici proeminene de la care pornesc cte trei incizii oblice rezervnd ntre ele iruri de incizii (paranteze) neglijent trasate (fig. 12/3). Cteva fragmente ceramice din past relativ grosier aparin unor strecurtori. n acest nivel au fost descoperite i cteva vase miniaturale, strchioare, dintre care unele cu tortie decorate cu mici caneluri precum i vase globulare (fig. 13/5, 89). Dintre vasele mai deosebite amintim un mic vas cu tub de scurgere sub buz (fig. 13/6) i unul oval cu patru piciorue scurte (fig. 28/6). niveluri individualizate prin locuine incendiate. Sunt prezente vasele bitronconice cu umr puternic bombat, cu buz scurt, rsfrnt spre interior, avnd fundul ngust i gura larg. Pe diametrul maxim au fie tortie perforate orizontal, fie proeminene organice perforate vertical, fie proeminene neperforate. Unele piese au pe corp barbotin, iar buza este lustruit. nlimea acestor piese este cuprins ntre 1015 cm. Unul dintre vase avea un picior tronconic gol la interior. Altele sunt mai simple, fr gt scurt i fr proeminene sau tortie, semnnd cu un fel de castroane. Au mai fost descoperite n acest nivel vase tip borcan cu pereii uor arcuii, din past relativ grosier, decorate cu barbotin i cu iruri de alveole i proeminene.

Nivelul intermediar. Cteva vase provin din nivelul intermediar, cel care separ cele dou

Al doilea nivel cu locuine incendiate. Vasele bitronconice cu umr puternic rotunjit, fund ngust i gura larg sunt prezente i n nivelul II (fig. 16/14). Pe diametrul maxim au proeminene perforate vertical (fig. 16/4). Un vas este decorat pe umr cu grupe de incizii verticale (fig. 16/3). Unele sunt asemntoare castroanelor, cu umrul rotunjit, buz dreapt, rsfrnt spre interior i o torti sub diametrul maxim (fig. 16/1). Alt vas de acest tip are pe linia diametrului maxim o torti, iar partea

147

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

superioar este decorat cu caneluri largi, orizontale (fig. 16/4). Sunt lucrate n general din past bun, arse la bruncenuiu, cu urme de lustru. Dimensiunile variaz ntre 1016 cm. Vasele de mari dimensiuni sunt reprezentate prin piese de form tronconic cu pereii uor arcuii i buza dreapt. Pe diametrul maxim se ntlnesc perechi de proeminene organice, iar corpul este decorat cu barbotin neorganizat (fig. 18/12). Altele au corpul tronconic, dar umrul uor rotunjit, iar buza rsfrnt spre interior. Pe diametrul maxim au proeminene sau tortie, iar corpul este decorat cu barbotin (fig. 19/5). Unele vase au o form accentuat bitronconic (fundul vasului are cam acelai diametru cu gura vasului), cu proeminene pe diametrul maxim, decorate cu barbotin neorganizat. Pasta este relativ grosier, ars la bruncenuiu, iar nlimea lor depete 2025 cm. n acest nivel au mai fost descoperite o strachin cu buza ngroat, avnd sub ea o proeminen perforat orizontal, un vas relativ globular, decorat cu barbotin, cu dou tortie alternnd cu dou proeminene pe diametrul maxim, precum i un capac mai deosebit de form tronconic cu toarta realizat prin dou mari perforaii orizontale (fig. 16/7). Cteva vase par a individualiza, prin forma i decorul lor, acest nivel n raport cu celelalte. Un exemplar bitonconic cu gtul nalt are buza uor rsfrnt spre exterior. Sub buz, are o toart dreptunghiular cu un cioc la partea superioar, iar n partea opus o proeminen organic (fig. 16/5). Un alt tip este reprezentat de piesele care au corpul relativ bitronconic cu gtul nalt, avnd pe umr dou tortie unghiulare perforate vertical (fig. 17/12; 22). Partea superioar a corpului este decorat cu puncte mari adncite sau cu linii incizate dispuse ntr-un fel de triunghiuri haurate (fig. 22). Un exemplar are corpul cvatrilobat decorat cu caneluri i puncte mari adncite (fig. 17/1). Gtul i partea inferioar sunt de obicei lustruite. Vasele sunt modelate din past bun de culoare brun cenuie. Un tip de vas am putea spune caracteristic pentru cultura Slcua este reprezentat de piese cu gtul lung i corpul tronconic, umrul mai mult sau mai puin accentuat, similar unui gen de amforete (fig. 16/6; 21/2). Dou toarte n band lat trase din buz se prind de umrul vasului. Corpul este uneori decorat cu nervuri dispuse vertical. Lucrate din past bun, de culoare glbuicrmizie cu urme de lustru, aceste vase se remarc prin elegana formei i calitatea modelajului. Printre materialele de la Piscul Corniorului se afl i cteva vase interesante lipsite ns de contextul descoperirii. Unul are gtul lung, uor evazat, corpul bitronconic, umrul puternic rotunjit de tip amforet. Dou toarte trase din buz se sprijin pe umrul lui, iar corpul este decorat cu caneluri nguste dispuse oblic. Vasul de o form elegant, elongat, era de mari dimensiuni, nlimea fiind de 24 cm (fig. 25/2). Alte vase sunt oarecum asemntoare morfologic cu cel descris mai sus, fr a avea ns forma elegant a acestuia. Gtul acestora era mai scurt, iar corpul este mai bombat i mai scund. Toartele trase din buz se prind de vas pe umr sau n zona diametrului maxim. Pe corp au proeminene alternate uneori cu un fel de caneluri oblice (fig. 25/1, 3). Un exemplar bitronconic cu corpul cvadrilobat i gtul nalt are la partea superioar dou tortie unghiulare i dou perforaii. Corpul este decorat cu incizii verticale adnci i mpunsturi (fig. 21/1). Au mai fost descoperite strchini de diverse mrimi (fig. 25/45) printre care una cu umrul carenat, cu o mic proeminen sub el. O alt strachin, nalt, are o form tronconic, cu o proeminen sub buz. La interior este pictat cu grafit (benzi liniare, unghiulare, unghiuri haurate, ove) iar la exterior are pictur bicrom (rouviiniu pe fond alb), foarte prost conservat, cu motive spiralice (fig. 23). O alt strachin de mari dimensiuni (d=41 cm) are la interior un decor format din caneluri spiralate. Un vas tronconic, de mari dimensiuni (27 cm) cu buza dreapt nalt, cu dou tortie sub ea are corpul decorat cu barbotin. Au mai fost descoperite strecurtori i vase cu tub de scurgere relativ oblic.

148

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Este destul de greu de fcut aprecieri pertinente pe marginea materialului ceramic pe care l-am avut la dispoziie, dat fiind faptul c el este destul de puin, sau mai precis vasele care au context arheologic clar sunt relativ puine. Piesele publicate aici provin n principal din cele dou niveluri marcate de locuine incendiate i este destul de dificil de fcut o difereniere clar ntre ceramica acestor dou niveluri. Lor le sunt comune att vasele bitronconice cu umr rotunjit ct i strchinile sau vasele mari tronconice sau bitronconice. n primul nivel cu locuine incendiate par a se individualiza cnile cu o toart i gura oblic, n timp ce aa-numitele amforete par s aparin celui de-al doilea nivel cu locuine incendiate. Tot nivelului doi par s-i fie specifice vasele bitronconice cu tortie unghiulare decorate cu incizii, benzi cruate i puncte adncite. Acest decor pare a fi specific acestui nivel. Tehnicile de decorare sunt cam aceleai pentru toate nivelurile: mult barbotin, de obicei neorganizat, incizii sau crestturi, caneluri, de regul verticale. Ca o particularitate a aezrii de la Piscul Corniorului, remarcm numrul mare de tortie, unghiulare, verticale, orizontale, oblice, ntlnite pe diverse tipuri de vase, precum i proeminenele organice plasate pe corpul vaselor. Ceramica pictat bicrom ca i cea cu grafit este foarte rar ntlnit10.

Statuetele antropomorfe i zoomorfe. Destul de slab reprezentate ele se reduc la numai cteva exemplare. Este vorba n primul rnd de trei modeste statuete plate de os cu capul rotunjit (fig. 26/1, 34), dou avnd sub el decupate dou zone relativ trapezoidale (fig. 26/1, 4), cea de-a treia, acolo unde de regul la statuetele de os gumelniene se stilizeaz trunchiul, are o unic poriune trapezoidal (fig. 26/3); partea lor inferioar, prelung, era fie uor rotunjit (fig. 26/2, 4), fie tiat relativ oblic (fig. 26/1, 3). Baza uneia dintre piese fusese perforat (fig. 26/1). Un exemplar aparine primului nivel de locuine (fig. 26/4), celelalte dou celui de-al doilea (fig. 26/1, 3). Pe lng acestea s-a mai descoperit o pies mult mai puternic stilizat, partea superioar pare s fi fost tratat miniatural, dar din pcate este rupt, fapt ce ar putea sugera o ncercare de refacere a unui exemplar deteriorat anterior, innd seama de modul ngrijit de tratare i fin finisare a prii inferioare cu baza rotunjit (fig. 26/2). i ea a fost descoperit tot n primul nivel de locuine. Am mai meniona nc o posibil statuet plat de os (rotunjit la baz), ngrijit finisat, a crei parte superioar este rupt din vechime (fig. 26/5) aparinnd aceluiai nivel. Sunt destul de bizare aceste piese (poate excesiv schematizate, sau n curs de prelucrare) avnd n vedere, pe de o parte c n aezare s-a descoperit i o statuet identic celor gumelniene (D. Berciu 1961, fig. 157/2), iar pe de alta, c toate au fost ngrijit finisate (deci posibil finite), dei alegerea prilor osteologice din care s-au tiat nu indic un meter prea priceput. Din piesele de lut descoperite, una singur este ntreag dar modelat grosier din past de proast calitate, capul, en bec doiseau cu ochiul drept marcat printr-o adncitur/cresttur, braele ciot ntinse lateral, partea inferioar masiv, baza relativ rotund cu diverse neregulariti (fig. 26/8), ars secundar ntr-o locuin a primului nivel. Celelalte exemplare sunt fragmentare, constnd dintr-o poriune de tors cu un bra ntins lateral i partea inferioar cu picioarele modelate separat, terminate cu un gen de tlpi (fig. 26/7). A fost redat n poziie vertical i lucrat dintr-o past grosier, cu impuriti, ardere secundar, crmiziecenuie provine sigur dintr-o locuin incendiat. Dintr-un alt fragment s-a pstrat doar partea central (asimetric), neglijent modelat din past ceva mai bine aleas, ars la crmiziu i decorat pe ambele fee cu puncte profunde dar neregulate i dispuse anarhic (fig. 26/9).
10

Analiza ceramicii este puin relevant n condiiile unui lot restrns de vase (practic au fost analizate doar vasele ntregibile descoperite probabil n locuine, dat fiind faptul c majoritatea au urme vizibile de ardere secundar rezultate n urma incendiilor care au distrus locuinele). De altfel, limitele acestei analize se pot evidenia i prin compararea descoperirilor fcute de Hortensia Dumitrescu cu cele ale lui D. Berciu (D. Berciu 1961). Dup cum se tie, D. Berciu identifica la Piscul Corniorului nu mai puin de patru faze ale culturi Slcua, fiecare cu mai multe subfaze. Analiza materialului ceramic nu susine n opinia noastr existena acestor faze i subfaze, multe dintre ele fiind ilustrate prin fragmente ceramice sau vase comune pentru ntrega cultur (vezi spre exemplu faza Slcua II, cu fazele IIa, IIb, IIc, subfaze care cu greu pot fi separate pe baza materialului ceramic prezentat).

149

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Un picior fragmentar provine de la o statuet lucrat dintr-o past de mai bun calitate ars la brun la exterior i cenuiu la interior, are laba piciorului ovoidal, glezna marcat printr-o mic proeminen (fig. 26/10) i a avut un nveli ngrijit lustruit. Fragmentul a fost descoperit n cel de-al doilea nivel de locuine incendiate. n sfrit, un alt fragment de picior modelat ntr-o past de mai bun calitate, ars la cenuiu, a fost decorat cu linii incizate pe partea anterioar i cu o spiral pe fes (fig. 26/6). Reinem pe de-o parte c este singurul exemplar de statuet decorat, similar majoritii pieselor gumelniene, i pe de alta c i din punct de vedere tehnologic (past, modelaj etc.) fragmentul se apropie tot de vecinii estici. Nici piesele de caracter zoomorf nu sunt prea numeroase. Un fragment de cornut n intenia modelatorului red destul de probabil un taur cu coarnele arcuite, greabnul marcat, botul perforat orizontal (fig. 27/4) lucrat din past modest, ars la negruptat. Un altul are cretetul capului rupt (dar perforat orizontal) i deci nu putem preciza dac a avut sau nu coarne; botul perforat i el (tot orizontal), picioarele anterioare masive (fig. 27/1), past modest, ardere cenuie, acoperit cu o pelicul albicioas. Interesant este ns un cap lucrat dintr-o past relativ bun, ars la negru, tratat mai ciudat: monocorn, ochii redai prin crestturi lunguiee i adnci, botul (rupt) uor ridicat n sus are la rndul lui, pe una din laturile mai bine conservate, o cresttur cu ajutorul creia se va fi indicat nara (nrile) animalului (fig. 27/2). Seria pieselor zoomorfe se ncheie cu o protom (de asemenea fragmentar) lucrat dintr-o past cu pietricele i nisip n compoziie, ars la brunptat, coarnele i una din urechi rupte din vechime, botul perforat (fig 27/3). Dei aparine altui orizont cultural (respectiv culturii Vina), fiind descoperit la adncimea de 2.50 m (n suprafaa H), prezentm aici i un fragment de vas altra cu aplicaii zoomorfe, lucrat dintr-o past de bun calitate, ars la cenuiu, pare a fi avut trei sau patru piciorue (s-a pstrat doar unul) i capul stilizat en bec doiseau al unui animal avnd pe nas dou puncte adncite. Corpul vasului a fost decorat cu scrijelituri neglijente dispuse n benzi (fig. 27/5), motive i tehnici tipic vinciene. Printre obiectele de lut am meniona un vasmsu altra cu patru piciorue (fig. 28/1), modelat neglijent dintr-o past modest i ars secundar ntr-o locuin a primului nivel; un gen de copaie din acelai nivel i past de proast calitate; un fragment de tron cu speteaza triunghiular lucrat din past cu impuriti i ars la negrucenuiu, dar cu un nveli ngrijit i bine lustruit (fig. 28/2). Tot n primul nivel cu locuine incendiate s-a descoperit i un model de picior (stng) dintr-o past relativ bun, ars la bruncenuiu, dar suferind i de pe urma arderii secundare, pstrnd pe alocuri urmele lustrului, aplicate pe un nveli de lut fin (fig. 28/5) i un altul de mici dimensiuni, fragmentar (fig. 28/4). Sunt de asemenea prezente fusaiole, de diferite tipuri i dimensiuni (fig. 29/48), conuri neglijent modelate, perforate (fig. 28/3), mici pastile, numeroase vase miniaturale cu i fr piciorue (fig. 28/1011), un vscior paralelipipedic cu unul din perei perforat (fig. 28/12). Deosebit de numeroase sunt ns la Piscul Corniorului greutile masive de lut de forme variabile ovoidale, dar cu dou prelungiri perforate (fig. 29/2) sau alungite avnd de asemenea extremitile prelungite mai mult (fig. 29/1) sau mai puin (fig. 29/3) dar tot perforate. Piesele au fost descoperite n preajma vetrelor, sunt lucrate din past grosier, arse la crmiziu dar suferind de pe urma arderii secundare sunt crpate, ptate, nnegrite de fum etc. Funcionalitatea lor rmne sub semnul ndoielii, cu att mai mult cu ct ele par a caracteriza aceast aezare. Nu credem a fi fost folosite drept greuti de plas de pescuit, ntruct aezarea nu se afl n preajma unui mare curs de ap. Privite n ansamblu materialele prezentate de noi par a ne ndrepti s ne ntrebm (au mai fcut-o i alii) dac nu cumva aspectul cultural de aici reprezint o variant regional (vestic) a culturii Gumelnia i nu o cultur de sine stttoare, arbitrar creat. Ce-i drept, unele forme i decoruri ceramice, cum ar fi de pild vasele tip amforet decorate cu caneluri, nu se regsesc n aezri gumelniene din Muntenia, dar n vasta arie a complexului KodjadermenGumelniaKaranovo VI s-au conturat (cum era i firesc) diverse aspecte/variante zonale.

150

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

De altfel, analogii interesante pentru materialele de la Piscul Corniorului gsim n aezarea de la DrgnetiOlt (M. Nica et alii 1994; idem 1997), n ultimul nivel al aezrii de la Vitneti, jud Teleorman (R. Andreescu et alii 2003) i n aceea de la de la Geangoeti, jud. Dmbovia (Gh. Olteanu 2002, 124). De ce nu ar fi deci i la vest de Olt, teritoriu din care se cunoate locuirea gumelniean de la DrgnetiOlt, tot o variant regional, cultura Slcua putndu-se la rndul ei integra marelui complex KodjadermenKaranovo VIGumelnia. Bibliografie: R. Andreescu, P. Mirea, t. Apopei 2003: I Andrieescu 1929: N. Anastasiu 1999: D. Berciu 1961: M. Nica, T. Zorzoliu, M. Vasilescu 1994: M. Nica, T. Zorzoliu, C. Fntneanu, B. Tnsescu 1997: Gh. Olteanu 2002:

Cultura Gumelnia n vestul Munteniei. Aezarea de la Vitneti, jud. Teleorman, n CA, XII, p. 7187. Des survivances palolithiques dans le milieu nolithique de la Dacia

(Communication prsente au VIe Congres Internationale dHistoire Oslo), n ARMSI, seria III, t XV, Bucureti, 1929, p. 18, 5 pl. PetroSed. Glossar de Sedimentologie i Petrologie sedimentar, Editura Tehnic, Bucureti, Editura Universitii Bucureti, 180 p.

Contribuii la problemele neoliticului din Romnia n lumina noilor spturi, Editura Academiei R.P. Romnia, Bucureti, 592 p. Tell-ul neo-eneolitic gumelniean de la DrgnetiOlt, n SCIV, 45, 1,p. Cercetrile arheologice n tell-ul gumelnieanoslcuean de la DrgnetiOlt, punctul Corboaica. Campania anului 1995, n Cercetri arheologice n aria nordtracic, II, p. 920. Repertoriul arheologic al judeului Dmbovia I, AM, Editura Cetatea de
Scaun, Trgovite p. 124. 4160.

Pl. 1. Amplasamentul staiunii de pe Piscul Corniorului, Valea Desnuiului.

151

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 1. Localizarea aezrii de la Piscul (Dealul) Corniorului (com. Slcua).

152

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 2. Planul spturilor arheologice de pe Pisc.

153

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 3. Resturile locuinei nr. 1 i diverse seciuni stratigrafice.

154

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 4. Profilul de sud al suprafeei E.

155

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 5. Unelte de silex: 1, din locuin; 6-9, 12, 14 din primul nivel.

156

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 6. Unelte de silex: 4, 10, 12, 20 din primul nivel.

157

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 7. Unelte de silex: 10, din locuin; 5, 13 din primul nivel; 2-3, 7 din nivelul II.

158

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 8. 17 unelte de piatr; 811 piese de cupru; 1-2, 4, 6-8 din primul nivel; 3, 5, 9 din nivelul II.

159

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 9. Piese de os i corn: 3, 11-12, 15 din primul nivel; 1, 10, 13-14, 20-22 din nivelul II.

160

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 10. Vase din primul nivel.

161

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 11. Ceramic din primul nivel.

162

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 12. Ceramic din primul nivel.

163

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 13. Vase din primul nivel.

164

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 14. Vase din primul nivel.

165

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 15. Ceramic din primul nivel.

166

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 16. Vase din nivelul II.

167

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 17. Ceramic din nivelul II.

168

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 18. Vase din nivelul II.

169

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 19. Ceramic din nivelul II.

170

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 20. Ceramic din nivelul II; 13, ncrustat cu culoare alb.

171

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 21. 1, Vas fr context arheologic; 2, vas din nivelul II.

172

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 22. Vas din nivelul II.

173

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 23. Vas pictat fr context arheologic.

174

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 24. Piese fr context arheologic.

175

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 25. Ceramic fr context arheologic.

176

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 26. Statuete antropomorfe: 1-5 de os; 6-10 de lut; 2, 4, 5, 8 din primul nivel; 1, 3, 10 din nivelul II.

177

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 27. Plastic zoomorf: 2, 3 din primul nivel; 1, din nivelul II; 5, pies cultura Vina.

178

Piscul Corniorului. 19451946

Fig. 28. Diverse piese ceramice; 1, 3, 5, 7, 12 din primul nivel.

179

Silvia MARINESCUBLCU, RadianRomus ANDREESCU

Fig. 29. Greuti i fusaiole de lut; 2, 4, 6 din primul nivel.

180

Selective pollen destruction in archeological sediments at Grditea Coslogeni (Clrai county, Romania) Alexandru Mihail Florian TOMESCU*
Rezumat: Rezultatele analizelor efectuate asupra a patru probe (una din nivelul Cernavod i trei din nivelurile Coslogeni) din aezarea Grditea Coslogeni (jud. Clrai) pun n eviden existena n sedimentele sitului a unor fenomene de distrugere progresiv a materiei organice (inclusiv polen) i de distrugere selectiv a polenului. Acestea sunt dovedite de scderea concentraiilor materiei organice insolubile i a frecvenelor polinice absolute ale probelor cu adncimea i de puternica dominan polenului de Asteraceae (Compositae). Dei frecvenele polinice absolute sunt relativ mari, gradul de conservare a palinomorfelor din cele patru probe este foarte redus. Toate acestea se datoresc n principal proceselor foarte active de umezireuscare i de nclzire a depozitelor analizate. Aceast situaie sugereaz c depozitele aezrii sunt puin favorabile unei bune conservri a palinomorfelor i c rezultatele obinute prin analizarea lor nu se preteaz unei interpretri n termeni de vegetaie regional. Rezultate cu un grad de ncredere mai ridicat ar putea fi obinute prin analizarea de probe prelevate chiar n momentul interceptrii fiecrui strat, n timpul spturilor. Cuvinte cheie: sedimente arheologice, cultura Cernavoda, cultura Coslogeni, Holocen, analize de pollen, conservarea polenului. Keywords: archeological sediments, Cernavoda culture, Coslogeni culture, Holocene, pollen analysis, , pollen preservation.

The archeological site of Grditea Coslogeni is located on an ancient alluvial bar in Balta Borcei. A large island encompassed by two arms of the Danube River, Balta Borcei is part of the river floodplain. The stratigraphy of the site comprises deposits attributed to several periods: Neolithic, Eneolithic to Bronze Age transition, late Bronze Age, Iron Age, Pre-feudal and Medieval (V. Cavruc, M. Neagu 1995). Pollen analyses were previously carried out at Grditea Coslogeni by E. Spiridonova (1995). Based on results from eleven samples, she inferred that during the Hamangia occupation (Neolithic, approximately 50004600 BC; C. Bem, pers. comm.), the regional vegetation was represented by Poaceae (Gramineae) and Artemisia (mugwort) steppe with rare Quercus (oak) and Fraxinus (ash) groves, and with isolated trees in the vicinity of the Danube. She noted an increase in number of the trees for the second part of the Hamangia period. The Eneolithic Bronze Age transition period, (Cernavoda; somewhere between 40003000 BC) was also characterized by steppe vegetation, but trees were more numerous. As for the Coslogeni period (late Bronze Age, approximately 14001250 BC), the author described a steppe vegetation witnessing a progressive thinning of the arboreal vegetation. However, the low pollen sums recovered in these analyses, as well as the dominance of Poaceae, Chenopodiaceae and Asteraceae pollen in all samples, suggest poor pollen preservation, questioning the reliability of such reconstructions of the regional vegetation as demonstrated by M. Tomescu (2000). This paper presents the results of analyses performed on four samples from Grditea Coslogeni, suggesting that selective destruction of organic matter, pollen included, occurred in the sediments. This questions the reliability of results from pollen analyses in such sediments, as means of reconstructing the vegetation. 1. Materials and method The samples were taken from the western profile of section S1 (see the excavation plans in V. Cavruc, M. Neagu 1995) for the exact profile location and are presented in stratigraphic order (beginning with the oldest). Sample 1 was taken in dark brown, compact silty clay with rare bivalve shell fragments. The sediment has the appearance of a natural soil horizon. Based on its stratigraphic position, the layer is considered to be of Cernavoda age (somewhere between 40003000 BC). The very rare anthropogenic remains (bones, potsherds), all of very small size, may represent allochthonous material dislocated from overlying layers by bioturbation.
*

Departament of Environmental and Plant Biology, Ohio University, Athens, OH 457012979, USA.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 181186.

Alexandru Mihail Florian TOMESCU

Sample 2 consists of yellowish silty clay. The tabular structure of the dried up sediment, formed of 13 mm thick and 12 cm wide flakes, as well as its compactness, are in accord with the archeological hypothesis according to which it represents an anthropogenic deposit termed platform by archaeologists (V. Cavruc, M. Neagu 1995). Sample 3 was taken in grayishbrown, homogeneous silt containing charcoal and burnt daub fragments; it may also contain ash. In the opinion of archeologists this layer represents an ash deposit. Sample 4 also consists of grayishbrown, homogeneous silt containing rare bones, potsherds. It is less cohesive than the one in sample 3 and considered to represent an ash deposit. Samples 2, 3 and 4 belong to the Coslogeni occupation level (approximately 14001250 BC). Processing of the samples included treatments with hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids, potassium hydroxide, heavy liquid floatation, 160 m sieving, fuchsine staining, volume measuring and mounting of the insoluble organic fraction in glycerol. 2. Results Samples 3 and 4 proved quite rich in calcium carbonate and in alkalisoluble organic matter. Samples 2, 3 and 4 contain frequent, millimetric charcoal. The general pollenanalytical information on the four samples is summarized in tab. 1. Concentrations of the insoluble organic matter (microlitres/gram of dry sediment) in the four samples are as follows: sample 1 3.87 l/g; sample 2 28.00 l/g; sample 3 109.67 l/g; sample 4 218.17 l/g. Concentrations of palynomorphs (per gram of dry sediment) in the four samples are: sample 1, 1163.1/g; sample 2, 2116.8/g; sample 3, 6360.7/g; sample 4, 8377.6/g. Both insoluble organic matter concentrations and palynomorph concentrations show a decrease with depth. There are great differences in palynofacies and in the state of pollen preservation between sample 1, on one hand, and samples 24, on the other hand. The palynofacies of samples 24 is characterized by the presence in large amounts of very small size (micrometric and sub micrometric) fragments of oxidized (brown) vegetal material, which renders observation of pollen very difficult. Concentrations of the oxidized vegetal fragments decrease with depth. Samples 24 contain very rare microscopic charcoal. The palynofacies of sample 1 is, on the contrary, very clean, with rare fragments of oxidized vegetal material or other components. Pollen preservation is poor in sample 1: only 46.3% of the 752 palynomorphs counted are identifiable taxonomically. In samples 24 pollen and spores could be identified and counted only based on their shape, size, and color from to fuchsine staining, but none of the palynomorphs are unidentifiable taxonomically. They are unidentifiable because of very poor preservation, comparable to that described by E.J. Cushing (1967) for his degraded pollen. The characteristic features of palynomorphs look as if melted to a certain degree: they are corroded on one hand, and thickened on the other hand, which results in loss of relief of their features. Small size fragments of oxidized vegetal material are occasionally attached to them. The same type of deterioration is observed on the rare un-oxidized vegetal tissue fragments. Palynomorphs in sample 1 show similar, but less pronounced, deterioration characteristics. The spectrum of sample 1 (tab. 2) is strongly dominated by herbaceous pollen (NAP, 96.0% of the palynomorphs identified taxonomically), whereas arboreal pollen (AP) is very rare (1.4%). Among NAP, Asteraceae and Tribulus terrestris are the most frequent taxa (more that two thirds of the total identified taxonomically), followed by Convolvulus (bindweed) and Chenopodiaceae. Diameters of the Poaceae pollen range 25.142.1 m. 3. Discussion The marked difference in palynofacies between sample 1 on one hand and samples 24 on the other hand is very likely due to differences in the genesis of layers that produced the samples. The high content of oxidized vegetal fragments in samples 3 and 4 demonstrates that the sediment in the two layers contained originally large amounts of vegetal material. Although it comes form a layer interpreted as having a very different genesis than the layers that produced samples 3 and 4, sample 2 has a very similar (although somewhat lower) content of oxidized

182

Selective pollen destruction in archeological sediments at Grditea Coslogeni (Romania)

vegetal fragments. This may be due to infiltration of material from the layer that produced sample 3 in the fissures of the underlying layer of sample 2, a process favorized by the structure of the latter. The palynofacies of samples 3 and 4, characterized by high contents of oxidized vegetal material and rare microscopic charcoal, does not support the archeological hypothesis according to which the layers that produced these samples represent ash deposits. Absolute concentrations calculated for the four samples show rich pollen contents of the sediments at Grditea Coslogeni. The decrease of palynomorph concentrations with depth nevertheless represents evidence for progressive pollen deterioration, as demonstrated by S.A. Hall (1981). This conclusion is supported by the parallel decrease of the insoluble organic matter with depth, which suggests progressive destruction of total organic matter as a whole. A similar situation suggesting progressive pollen deterioration is recorded in the analyses by L. Stoian (1995) at Giurgiu Malu Rou. Sample 1, including 53.7% taxonomically unidentifiable palynomorphs, is dominated by Asteraceae pollen. According to several authors (A.J. Havinga 1967; idem 1984; S. Bottema 1975; M. Couteaux 1977; M. WeinsteinEvron 1986), Asteraceae pollen has good preservation potential and is resistant to deterioration. This is at least partly due to the relatively thick exine of the pollen and its high sporopollenin content in most Asteraceae. High relative frequencies of Asteraceae pollen therefore represent good evidence for selective pollen destruction, especially when supported by additional evidence from other sources. The situation at Grditea Coslogeni is not singular, and Asteraceae dominated pollen spectra are not rare in the region. They are present in the Romanian Plain at Pantelimon (V. Iliescu, G. Cioflica, 1964), Vdastra (A. LeroiGourhan et alii 1967), Bucov (M. Crciumaru 1972), Crlomneti (M. Crciumaru 1977), Padea (M. Crciumaru 1979), Radovanu (M. Alexandru 1990; M. Crciumaru 1996), Frcaul de Sus and Vldiceasca (M. Crciumaru 1996). The other taxa frequent in sample 1 (Tribulus terrestris, Convolvulus and Chenopodiaceae) also produce pollen with thick exine and/or high sporopollenin content and are corrosionresistant. Poor pollen preservation is principally due to physicochemical processes very active in the region at present and in the past. High porosity of the sediments allows good circulation of air in the soil, causing pollen oxidation. The reduced vegetal cover present today, the texture and, in some cases, the carbonate content of the sediments, all contribute to making them a hot environment (Ph. Duchaufour 1995) during the summer season. This renders the sediments highly unfavorable to pollen preservation, as heating and drying have been demonstrated to severely damage pollen (M. Reille 1978; J. Besancon 1981). The most important process leading to pollen deterioration under such conditions is probably the repeating of daily wetdry cycles. Experiments conducted by R.G. Holloway (1989) show that pollen grains exposed to only 25 cycles of alternating moisture conditions were very much altered. According to I.D. Campbell and C. Campbell (1994) pollen is rapidly degraded, with a significant loss of pollen of the samples, after only ten wetdry cycles. The position of the site in the Danube floodplain is responsible for abundant humidity (e.g., morning dew, fog), which deeply humidifies the porous sediments. In summer, these are subsequently dried and strongly heated (because of the scarcity of vegetal groundcover) during the day. Beside alternating wetting and drying, chemical and biochemical processes (e.g., oxidation, microbial degradation) must have also played a part in pollen deterioration. Poor pollen preservation that must have been caused principally by similar conditions and processes is reported at Vdastra (A. LeroiGourhan et alii 1967), BorduaniPopin (M. Tomescu 1997) and Hrova tell (M. Tomescu, M.F. Diot, in press). The clearcut difference in pollen preservation between sample 1 on one hand, and samples 24 on the other hand, may be the result of different exposure of the sampled layers to the action of pollendegrading agents. The four samples were taken from a profile that had been cut at least one year before sampling. Although the profile was carefully cleaned and scraped prior to sampling, samples probably still fell within the depth range of pollendegrading agents. Considering the period of at least one year of exposure of the samples to the action of these agents, the poor preservation of pollen is fully explainable. The better preservation of pollen in sample 1 may be due to the fact that at the greater depth where this sample was taken, the

183

Alexandru Mihail Florian TOMESCU

profile had been covered until sampling took place, with sediment discarded during subsequent excavations. This particular situation does not contradict the evidence of selective pollen destruction and progressive deterioration of the organic matter (including pollen) mentioned above, which support the conclusions already inferred by M. Tomescu (2000) on the basis of pollen spectra published by E. Spiridonova (1995) and other authors. 4. Conclusions Although absolute pollen frequencies are quite high in the four samples, poor pollen preservation, as well as the evidence of selective destruction of organic matter including pollen, render impossible the taxonomic identification of palynomorphs in three of the samples (samples 24) and forbid any interpretation of sample 1 in terms of regional vegetation. It is nevertheless worth mentioning that the five arboreal pollen grains identified taxonomically correspond to five different genera, which points to the taxonomic diversity of the arboreal vegetation. Information yielded by the four samples analyzed at Grditea Coslogeni raises once again the problem of the reliability of results coming from pollen analyses carried out in such sediments, as means of reconstructing the vegetation. This reliability proved to be very low so far (M. Tomescu 2000). In the particular case of this site, more reliable results could possibly be obtained by analyzing samples of fresh sediment, taken immediately after the interception of each layer. As suggested by the situation in sample 1, this would avoid the exposure of sediments to pollen destructing agents and processes and improve the reliability of the results. As long as palynological samples are taken otherwise, the reliability of the analyses will remain low. Bibliography: M. Alexandru 1990 J. Besancon 1981 8, p. 116117.

Analiza palinologic a profilului La Muscalu de la Radovanu, in CCDJ Stratigraphie et chronologie du Quaternaire continental du Proche Orient, in Prhistoire du Levant Colloques Internationaux du CNRS, The interpretation of pollen spectra from prehistoric settlements (with special attention to Liguliflorae), in Palaeohistoria 17, p. 1735. Pollen preservation: experimental wetdry cycles in saline and desalinated sediments, in Palynology 18, p. 510. Date noi privind stratigrafia Grditei Coslogeni, in CCDJ 1314, p. 71 Analiza polinic a stratelor de la Bucov (jud. Prahova), in SCIV 23, 3, p.
598, Maison de lOrient, Lyon, 1014 juin 1980, Editions CNRS, Paris, p. 3353

S. Bottema 1975 I.D. Campbell, C. Campbell 1994 V. Cavruc, M. Neagu 1995 M. Crciumaru 1972 M. Crciumaru 1977 M. Crciumaru 1979 M. Crciumaru 1996 M. Couteaux 1977

79.

Cercetri paleoclimatice i paleobotanice n staiunea de la Crlomneti (jud. Buzu). Date privind cultivarea unor cereale i plante de cultur, in SCIV 28, 3, p. 353364. Analyse pollinique des couches nolithiques de Padea et de Leu (dp. de Dolj), in Dacia N.S. 23, p. 6568. Paleoetnobotanica. Studii n preistoria i protoistoria Romniei, Iai. A propos de linterprtation des analyses polliniques de sdiments minraux, principalement archologiques. Chapitre 2 in Le milieu vgtal, les faunes et lhomme. Supplment du Bulletin de lAssociation Evidence for differential pollen preservation in Late Quaternary sediments in Minnesota, in Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 4, Pdologie. Sol, vgtation, environnement, Masson, Paris. Deteriorated pollen grains and the interpretation of Quaternary pollen diagrams, in Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 32, p. 193206.
p. 87101. Francaise pour lEtude du Quaternaire 47, p. 259276.

432.

E.J. Cushing 1967 Ph. Duchaufou 1995 S.A. Hall 1981

184

Selective pollen destruction in archeological sediments at Grditea Coslogeni (Romania)

A.J. Havinga 1967 A.J. Havinga 1984 R.G. Holloway 1982 V. Iliescu, G. Cioflica 1964 A. LeroiGourhan et alii 1967 M. Reille 1978 E. Spiridonova 1995 L. Stoian 1995 M. Tomescu 1997

Palynology and pollen preservation, in Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 2, p. 8198. A 20year experimental investigation into the differential corrosion susceptibility of pollen and spores in various soil types, in Pollen et Spores 26, 34, p. 541558. Experimental mechanical degradation of the pollen exine (abstract), in Palynology 6, p. 283. Studiu palinologic asupra carierelor de la Pantelimon, Dri de Seam ale Sedinelor (Comitetul Geologic, Bucureti) 49, 1, p. 113118. A. LeroiGourhan, C.N. Mateesco, E. ProtopopescoPake, Contribution ltude du climat de la station de Vdastra du Palolithique suprieur la fin du Nolithique, in Bulletin de lAssociation Francaise pour lEtude du Quaternaire 4, p. 271279. A propos de la disparition du pollen dans certains sdiments minraux, in Apport des techniques recentes en palynologie (Lige, 1923

septembre 1977), Annales des Mines de Belgique 6, p. 707712. Les rsultats prliminaires de lexamen palinologique du site Coslogeni, in CCDJ 1314, p. 8194.

A.M.F. Tomescu 2000 M. Tomescu, M.F. Diot, in press M. WeinsteinEvron 1986

researches at BorduaniPopin (Ialomia County). Preliminary report 19931994. Cercetri arheologice (Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Bucureti) 10, p. 128131. Evaluation of Holocene pollenrecords from the Romanian Plain, in Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 109, p. 219233. Apports des analyses palynologiques ltude du tell de Hrova. Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Bucureti.

Studiul palinologic al depozitelor cuaternare din aezarea paleolitic de la Giurgiu Malu Rou, in SCIV 46, 1, p. 5162. Palynology (3.7.), in S. MarinescuBlcu et alii, Archaeological

Pollen spectra from the Acheulean site of Mitzpeh Yiron, Israel: a cautionary tale, in Pollen et Spores 28, 2, p. 157165.

Tab. 1. Palynological information on the Grditea Coslogeni samples. Sample 1 Insoluble organic matter concentration (l/gram of dry sediment) Palynomorph concentration (per gram of dry sediment) Palynomorphs counted Unidentifiable Unidentifiable (%) Identified Identified (%) Identified AP (%) NAP (%) Spores (%) Algae (%) Deteriorated (%) 3,87 1163,1 752 404 53,7 348 46,3 1,4 96,0 0,6 2,0 26,1 Sample 2 28,00 2116,8 100 Sample 3 109,67 6360,7 100 Sample 4 218,17 8377,6 100

185

Alexandru Mihail Florian TOMESCU

Tab. 2. Palynomorph spectrum of sample 1 from Grditea Coslogeni. Taxon Count 1 1 1 1 1 11 102 18 127 68 1 1 6 2 341 1 6 348 404 752

Pinus cf. nigra Corylus Alnus Ulmus Tilia

Chenopodiaceae

Tribulus terrestris Convolvulus

Asteraceae Asteroideae Asteraceae Cichorioideae

Typha Sparganium
Poaceae

Polystichum
Total

Concentricystes
Algae Total Unidentified TOTAL

186

Lanalyse anthracologique et carpologique du site de Madretz (Nova Zagora, Bulgarie) Tzvetana POPOVA*
Rezumat: Autoarea prezint materialele antracologice i carpologice descoperite n nivelul cultural de epoca bronzului timpuriu din tell-ul de la Madretz. Cuvinte cheie: antracologie, carpologie, eneolitic timpuriu, bronz timpuriu. Mots cls: anthracologie, carpologie, Enolithique ancient, Age du Bronze ancient.

Introduction L'anthracologie apporte des informations sur la vgtation locale au cours des diffrentes periodes d'occupation des sites archologiques. Grace cette mthode, il est possible de cerner l'influence de l'homme sur la vgtation, ainsi que les changements de cette vgtation au cours des diffrentes priodes. Des donnes tant paloecologiques que paloethnobotaniques peuvent tre ainsi obtenues. La carpologie, d'autre part, apporte des informations sur les plantes cultives, le dveloppement de l'agriculture, les routes des migrations etc. La flore sauvage et les mauvaises herbes fournissent aussi des informations sur les stades de dveloppement de l'agriculture et de la domestication. En effet, grce l'apport complmentaire de ces deux disciplines, nous pouvons obtenir des renseignements relatifs au paloenvironnement des populations prhistoriques. Cette tude s'inscrit dans le cadre du projet "Maritza Iztok", concernant des sites archologiques du Sud de la Bulgarie, qui se trouvent dans la partie Est de la plaine de Gornotrakiiska. Des sites de plein air, ainsi que des ncropoles, sont tudies dans le cadre de ce projet. La majorit de ces sites s'inscrivent dans une continuit depuis le Nolithique jusqu' l'Age du Bronze. Leur tude est donc fondamentale tant d'un point de vue archologique, que dans un contexte pluridisciplinaire. Dans le prsent article, seules l'tude anthracologique et ltude carpologique du site de Madretz (Nova Zagora, Bulgarie) seront prsentes. Materiel et methodes Le site relief et climat Du point de vue physicogographique, la region est caracterise par la prsence de vastes tendues de plaine et collines. Le climat est de type continental de transition, avec des influences mditerranennes. Les ts sont chauds et les hivers doux. En hiver les vents dominants sont ceux de NNO. Les plus basses tempratures sont atteintes en Janvier et les plus leves en Juillet et Aout. La moyenne des tempratures minimales est de 14C, celle des tempratures maximales est de 35.7C. Les maximums pluviomtriques sont enregistrs en Juin et Novembre, et les minimums en Janvier et AoutSeptembre. Quant aux sols, les terrasses alluviales ont fourni depuis toujours des terrains favorable au dveloppement de l'agriculture. Le substrat de la rgion est riche en gypse et calcaire. A l'heure actuelle, les cultures de la rgion sont orientes vers la production de cotton, tabac, mais, etc. Caracteristiques archologiques Le tell Madretz est situ environ 800 m du rivire Sokolnitza, prs du village de Madretz. Du point de vue archologique, le site se rapporte aux priodes Enolithique ancien et Age du Bronze ancien. Les fouilles ont dbut en 1988 et se sont poursuivies les annes suivantes, mais pas d'une faon systmatique. Le matriel tudi reprsente des restes vgtaux comprenant des charbons de bois, des graines, des semences et des fruits. Tout ce matriel provient du niveau de l'Age de Bronze. Le matriel provenant du niveau Enolithique n'a pas t tudi jusquau prsent. Prelevement des chantillons: Nous avons chantillonn les structures suivantes:
*

L'Institut d'Archeologie et Muse, 2, Saborna, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 187190.

Tzvetana POPOVA

Horizon IV: dans le niveau doccupation et dans un four (carrs N20; N2; O19; P18) 8 chantillons; Horizon III: 23 chantillons prlevs dans un four, un silo et deux maisons (carrs O19P19 four; O19 silos; P18 une des maisons; 018 lautre maison); Horizon II: 21 chantillons prlevs dans 3 maisons, un niveau doccupation et en proximit d'une accumulation d'os (carrs N14O14 maison; N15O15 maison; P18 maison; N2 niveau d'occupation; P18 accumulation d'os). Quelques autres chantillons proviennent de fosses, en proximit de fragments cramiques. Au total, 67 chantillons ont t flotts. L'ensemble du matriel carpologique a t obtenu par flottation en utilisant une colonne de tamis (maille 0.20.5 mm). Aprs sparation des diffrentes fractions, les rsidus ont t schs l'abri du soleil. Identification des charbons de bois L'identification des charbons de bois a t ralise selon la mthode traditionnelle, au microscope optique a reflection. Pour chaque fragment carbonis, les trois plans anatomiques transversal, longitudinaltangentiel et longitudinalradial ont t observs. Les fragmentes carboniss dorigine archologique ont t compars avec ceux de la collection de rfrence de bois actuels carboniss (collection du Laboratoire de Palobotanique, Environnement et Archologie de L'Universit Montpellier II). Nous avons aussi utilis les atlas xylologiques de P. Greguss (1955, 1959) et F. Schweingruber (1986). L'ensemble du matriel anthracologique se rapporte 10 genres et une famille. Identification des graines carbonises Les graines ont t dtermines a partir de leur morphologie, par observations en stereomicroscopie. Une partie du matriel a t compar avec les donnes des atlas carpologiques (J. Montegut 1988; H. Schoch et alii 1988; J. Vilarias 1992). Vingt-deux taxons (six crales, trois legumineuses, sept mauvaises herbes et six fruits) ont t dtermins. Rsultats et discussion L'objectif de ce travail est de prsenter les rsultats prliminaires de l'tude anthracologique et carpologique et de proposer une premire interprtation. Resultats anthracologiques L'analyse anthracologique a t effectue sur le matriel provenant du four dune maison (carrs O19, P19) dont le niveau doccupation couvre presque toute la suface des carrs. Dans le niveau I (1.46 m) on a dtermin: Quercus feuillage caduc 37 fragments Ulmus sp. 1 Acer sp. 3 Leguminosae 4 Dans le niveau II (1.43 m): Quercus feuillage caduc 2 fragments Acer sp. 1 Carpinus sp. 2 Dans le niveau III (1.41 m): Quercus feuillage caduc 12 fragments Betula sp. 2 Alnus sp. 1 Corylus sp. 1 Dans le niveau IV (1.13 m): Quercus feuillage caduc 2 Acer sp. 1 Carpinus sp. 3 Pomoideae 2

188

Lanalyse anthracologique et carpologique du site de Madretz

On doit admettre que la diversit des essences et la quantit de fragments de charbons de bois rcolts et tudis sont faibles. Cela empche d'obtenir des rsultats quantitatifs fiables d'un point de vue palocologique, donc les charbons de bois ne peuvent pas tre interprts en termes de paloenvironnement. Indpendamment de l'insuffisance des fragments carboniss, la liste floristique est assez riche puisque 9 taxons ont t dtermins. Le chne feuillage caduc est le plus frquent taxon. Cet arbre a t identifi aussi parmi les charbons de bois du site de Galabovo, l'Age du Bronze (Tz. Popova, sous presse). Les autres essences les mieux reprsentes sont Acer sp., Acer campestre, Ulmus sp. et Pomoideae. Acer sp. et Ulmus sp. sont des essences typiques des collines, des bords de rivire, mais aussi des lieux anthropiss. Les taxons heliophiles comme Betula sp., Corylus sp., Alnus sp. apparaissent aussi en contexte de haies. Le bois des espces telles Prunus sp., Sorbus sp. est aussi ramass par l'homme comme combustible. Le nombre de fragments de charbons de bois rcuprs du four est pauvre. Les donnes acquises ne sont pas suffisantes pour tirer des conclusions. Rsultats carpologiques La rcolte des graines carbonises a t ralise, de mme que pour les charbons de bois, par flottation. Le matriel a t prlev dans les contextes suivants: foyers, fosses, silos, niveau d'occupation; a proximit des fragments cramiques. Soixantesept chantillons ont t tudis, parmi lesquels trois attirent lattention. Dans le carr B2 niveau d'occupation nous avons trouv les espces Triticum monococcum L., Hordeum vulgare var. nudum L., Panicum miliaceum L. Dans ce carr nous avons recolt une grande quantit de Vicia ervilia Willd., ainsi que des noyaux de Prunus avium et des pepins de Vitis sylvestris Gmell. Quelques espces de mauvaises herbes sont aussi prsentes, telles Chenopodium album L., Gallium spirum L., Polygonum aviculare L. Une grande quantit de fruits (23) de Prunus domestica ssp. institia (l.) Schneider a t recupere du carr O14, ainsi que des glands de Quercus sp. et Cornus mas L.. Dans le cas du carr N2, un niveau doccupation a livr les plus grandes quantits de restes pour les taxons suivants: Hordeum vulgare var. vulgare L., Triticum monococcum L. et Lens culinaris Medik. La quantit de restes indique que les graines proviennent de diffrentes activits; il n'existe pas des preuves pour affirmer qu'il s'agit de restes de prparation culinaire, ou que les graines constituent un mlange de crales (ou crales legumineuses). Conclusions L'analyse a permis d'observer Triticum monococcum, suivi par Hordeum vulgare. Celuici est reprsent par deux varits Hordeum vulgare var. vulgare et Hordeum vulgare var.nudum. Parfois la distinction des deux varits a t difficile, cause de la mauvaise conservation des graines. Parmi les lgumineuses, Vicia ervilia est lespce la mieux reprsente. Lens culinaris et Lathyrus sativum sont aussi cultives, mais la dernire nest reprsente dans les chantillons tudis que par quelques graines. Cueillette Cette activit est documente par la prsence des fruits de Prunus avium, P. domestica L. ssp.institia (L.) Schneider, Cornus mas L., Sambucus ebulus L., Vitis sylvestris Gmell. et des glands de Quercus sp., ce qui confirme l'utilisation de ces plantes comme plantes comestibles. Le matriel tudi comprend 7 espces de mauvaises herbes. Habituellement les mauvaises herbes donnent une bonne image des conditions de milleu. Ont t observs les taxons Agrostemma githago L., Bromus secalinus L., Chenopodium album L., Galium spirum L., Polygonum aviculare L., P.convolvulus L. et Rumex acetosa L. Agrostemma githago, Chenopodium album et Bromus secalinus caractrisent les semailles de printemps. Dautre part, ces trois dernires espces et Galium spirum sont des espces annuelles indicatrices dune agriculture bien developpe (N. Stojanov, B. Kitanov 1980). Toutes ces espces sont connues depuis l'Age du Bronze et jusqu'a nos jour sur le territoire de la Bulgarie. La majorit de ces mauvaises herbes sont utilisables les feuilles, les racines, les semences, dautant plus quelles poussent dans et

189

Tzvetana POPOVA

autour des villages (F. Couplan 1984; J. Montegut 1988; J. Vilarias 1992). Quandmme, le matriel est insuffisant pour en tirer une conclusion gnrale. Les quelques restes de fruits de Cornus mas, Sambucus ebulus, Prunus domestica sp. institia, P.avium, Vitis sylvestris et les glands de Quercus sp. confirment d'une part la prsence de ces essences, et d'autre part la pratique de la cueillette pour complter lalimentation. En comparant les rsultats de cette analyse aux rsultats des autres analyses effectues sur les restes carboniss des autres sites archologiques Dijadovo et Nova Zagora de la mme poque (Tz. Popova 1992; eadem 1995), on ne voit pas des diffrences considrables, ce qui montre la cultivation des mmes espces (crales et lgumineuses). Il ne faut pas oublier que le matriel dont on discute les rsultats de lanalyse reprsente seulement une partie des chantillons. Il sagit donc de rsultats prliminaires; au futur cette tude sera continue. Je veux remercier aux archologues I. Panaiotov, S.Alexandrov et K.Lestakov pour la fructueuse collaboration pendant les fouilles. Je tiens aussi remercier pour leur aide les tudiants de la Facult dArchologie de lUniversit de Sofia Nikolina Stojanova, Vessela Gercheva et Vladimir Slavchev , et spcialement Bogdan Atanassov (Universit dAthenes, Facult dHistoire), qui a collect une grande partie des chantillons, ainsi que toute lquipe du projet Maritza Iztok. Bibliographie: F. Couplan 1984 P. Gregus 1955 P. Gregus 1959 J. Montegut 1988 Tz. Popova 1992 Tz. Popova 1995 Tz. Popova, sous presse H. Schoch et alii F. Schweingruber 1986 N. Stojanov, B. Kitanov 1980 J. Vilarias 1992 vol.2. Debard, Paris.

La cuisine sauvage. Encyclopdie des plantes comestibles de l'Europe, Identification of living Gymnosperms on the basis of xylotomy. Holzanatomie der europaischen laubholzer und straucher. Akademiai Cl de dtermination des smences de mauvaises herbes. Laboratoire
Kiado, Budapest. de Botanique, Ecole Nationale Suprieure d'Horticulture de Versailles.

Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.

Bern, Stuttgart.

L'analyse des restes vgtaux carboniss du tell de Dijadovo, dans Symposia Thracologica 9, Bibliotheca Thracologica 11, p. 238241. Plant remains from Bulgarian Prehistory (70002000 B.C.), in Bailey, D.W., Panayotov, I., Alexandrov, S. (eds.) Prehistoric Bulgaria, Monographs in world archaeology 22. Prehistory Press, Madison. L'analyse des restes carboniss du tell de Galabovo, dans Maritza Iztok 4. H. Schoch, B. Pawlik, F. Schweingruber Botanical macroremains, Microscopic Wood Anatomy, Zurcher AG. Divi i polezni rastenija v Balgarija, BAN, Sofia.
Atlas de malas hierbas. Ediciones Mundi Prensa, 2 edication.

190

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren (?) in Rumnien Cristian SCHUSTER*

Rezumat: Studiul se ocup cu barele de cupru sau bronz de tip "Ochsenhaut" n spaiul balcanic, cu privire special pentru descoperirile din Romnia, Bulgaria i Turcia. Descoperirea de la PalatcaTogul lui Mandrusca va beneficia de o atenie special. Se va discuta i problema tipului "Ochsenhaut" din zona Mrii Mediterane." Cuvinte cheie: Ochsenbarren, Romnia Bulgaria Turcia european, Marea Mediteran. Schlsselwrter: Ochsenbarren, Rumnien Bulgarien europsche Trkei, Mittelmeerraum.

Wissenschaftler in einem lteren Aufsatz (M. Rotea 1997, p. 1319) unterzogen. Hier wird eingehender ber die Siedlung und archologischen Materialien diskutiert. Anhand dieser, insbesondere der Keramik, wird der Fund der Bdeni IIIDevaZeit zugewiesen (ders., 13)3. Nach Rotea ist diese Periode die kulturelle uerung (eine Synthese) des Beginns der Sptbronzezeit im stlichen Gebiet der Westkarpaten (ders. 1994b). Zu den interessantesten Artefakten, die gefunden wurden, zhlen eine Nadel mit vier Protuberanzen (ders. 1997, p. 14 und Abb. V/3), die in meisten Fllen der NouaKultur (d.h. Br. D) zugeteilt wird4, ein Ambo (ders., Abb. V/1) und ein Bronzekuchen (ders., Abb. V/4). Der bronzene Ambo (taf. III/4) wiegt 2.260 kg, hat eine zylindrische Form und besitzt eine rhrenfrmige Bohrung, die einige Zentimeter unter der Ambokalotte endet. Auf einer der Seiten ist ein 5.7 cm langer Einschnitt, der als Markenzeichen des Metallkundlers gedeutet wird, zu sehen. Die erwhnte Lngsbohrung hatte wahrscheinlich die Funktion des Befestigens des Amboes auf ein auf Holz oder Hornteil zu ermglichen. Der Bronzekuchen (taf. III/3) wurde etwa 50 m nrdlich entfernt von der Siedlung durch Zufall gefunden. Er wiegt 2.150 kg, hat ein halbkalottenfrmiges Aussehen, mit einem Durchmesser von 11.7 cm und einer maximalen Hhe von 3.8 cm. Metallkuchen sind keine Seltenheit fr die Bronzezeit auf dem Gebiet Rumniens (C. Schuster, Tr. Popa 2001, p. 5253). Nach einigen Meinungen sind Metallkuchen, abfallreste oder Schlacke Beweise des Vorhandenseins von Metallbearbeitungswerksttten (C. Schuster, Tr. Popa 2001, p. 52; M. Neagu, B. Nanu 1986; I. MotzoiChicideanu, M. andorChicideanu 1999, p. 65).
* 1 2

aufflligsten bisher erhaltenen Nachweise von Metallbearbeitungswerksttten stammen aus Palatca1 (Bez. Cluj); sie werden in eine Zeit nach der mittleren Phase der Bronzezeit datiert. Die Werkstatt liegt nur wenig auerhalb der Siedlung. Die Forschungen brachten zahlreiche Guformen fr Metallgegenstnde ans Licht, ein Fragment eines Bronzebarrens, einen bronzenen Ambo, Schlacke, zahlreiche Fragmente von Handmhlen, stark gebrannte Feuerstellen und verschiedenes Gestein. Der Raum dieser Werkstatt war funktionell eingerichtet, je nach der durchgefhrten Ttigkeit. Das Vorkommen von Bronzebarren vom Halbkugel oder vom gischen Typ und das anzunehmende Fehlen von fen zeigen, da das Ausschmelzen der Erze am Gewinnungsort stattfand. Der Erklrungstext unter den Abbildungen 1415 in Roteas Beitrag lautet: Palatca. Werkstatt zur Metallbearbeitung. Ambo und kretische Barren (taf. I/1; II/1). Die Entdeckung von Platca2Togul lui Mndruc wurde der Analyse von dem genannten

Fr das Gebiet Rumniens gibt es, mit einer einzigen mglichen Ausnahme, keine Funde, die uns von Ochsenhautbarren sprechen lassen wrden. ber die angesprochene Ausnahme, uert sich Mihai Rotea (2001, p. 25 und Abb. 1415) folgendermaen: Die vollstndigsten und

3 4

Institutul de Arheologie, str. Henri Coand, Bucureti. M. Rotea redet von Palatca, aber der rechtlich eingebrgerte Namen des Dorfes ist Platca. Vgl. I. Iordan, P. Gtescu, D.I. Oancea 1974, p. 195. Auf dem Gebiet der Ortschaft (in den Punkten Sub pdure, Gruiu, Coast, Poderei) wurden entlang der Jahre Materialien aus mehreren Epochen (Neolithikum, Bronze, Hallstatt, Rmerzeit, Goten, Slawen) (I.H. Crian 1992, p. 301304; M. Rotea 1994a, p. 47; M. Rotea, O. Fenean 1994, p. 351356; N. Boroffka 1994, p. 64 Katalog der Fundorte Nr. 321) entdeckt. T. Soroceanu (1974) sprach ber eine WietenbergSiedlung. Weitere Funde sindin Corlteni, Piatra Neam, Tvrdireti, Teaca, Vleni (alle Noua IIStufe), Grbov, Brboasa, Tvrdreti (alle Noua IStufe) (A.C. Florescu 1991, Abb. 98/10, 99/2, 102/10, 103/5, 104/3,9 10, 105/3, 107/6) zu verzeichnen.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 191201.

Cristian SCHUSTER

Zu diesen knnten die Entdeckungen (viele von ihnen Depots) von Ulmu und GrditeaCoslogeni (beide der CoslogeniKultur angehrend; S. Morintz 1978, p. 126; A.C. Florescu 1991, p. 153; B. Nanu, M. Neagu 1992, p. 103105, taf. I, III/1), Cugir Prul Bugului (CugirBandGruppe; H. Ciugudean, I.Al. Aldea 1997, p. 109, 114f., 118f., abb. 8/716, 13/16), Livezile Baia (Livezile Gruppe; H. Ciugudean 1996, p. 93, 119), Neni Znoaga (MonteoruKultur; I. MotzoiChicideanu, M. andorChicideanu 1999, p. 65), Pecica anul Mare (Mure/PeriamPecicaKultur; Gogltan 1999, p. 100, abb. 39/18), Bozia Nou (NouaKultur; Morintz 1978, 183), Cetea, Chintelnic, Perior, imleul Silvaniei, Unirea (alle WietenbergFunde; Tr. Soroceanu, A. Retegan 1981, p. 209, Abb. 28/18=32/4; N. Boroffka 1994, p. 231, taf. 35/10) und weitere andere (C. Schuster, Tr. Popa 2001, 53f.), gerechnet werden. Andere Archologen reden eher von wandernden Metallbearbeiter, deren Existenz aber archologisch schwer zu bezeugen ist (Gogltan 1999, 128). Sdlich der Donau, in Bulgarien, wird von mehreren Ochsenhautbarrenfunden gesprochen. Darber schrieben neulich J. Lichardus und seine Mitarbeiter (J. Lichardus et alii 2002). Wir erinnern an diese Entdeckungen: 1. In der Nhe des Kap Kaliakra (Dep. Tolbuhin) (taf. I/2) wurde ein Ochsenhautbarren (taf. III/2) aus einer Legierung aus Gold (32%) Silber (18%) Kupfer (43%), mit dem Gewicht von 1.455 kg und Gre von 25x12x1.4 cm, gefunden (G. Toneva 1973, p. 18, abb. 1; eadem 1982; eadem 1984; I. Karajotov 1977; H.G. Buchholz 1988, p. 212; K. Porozhanov 2000, 34f., abb. im oberen Teil der S. 28; J. Lichardus 2002, p. 17; I. Zmejkova 2002, p. 161; J. Lichardus et alii 2002, p. 165, abb. 19/1). Ein kreisfrmiger Eindruck ( = 1,2 cm, Tiefe = 0,3 cm) ist auf einer der Seiten zu sehen. Weitere rundfrmige Ausschnitte sind an beiden Endseiten zu bemerken. Der Barren ist huffrmig gebogen. Wie G. Toneva (1973, p. 22, abb. 7) unterstreicht, lag auf dem Meeresboden nicht weit entfernt vom Barren ein ovaler Steinanker, ein mglicher Beweis, da unser Ochsenhautbarren von einem gesunkenen Schiff stammt. 2. Der Ochsenhautbarren (taf. II/2) von erkovoemata (Dep. Burgas) (taf. I/3) ist nur aus Kupfer, hat ein Gewicht von 26 kg und ist 58x34x4 cm gro (G. Toneva 1973; eadem 1982; eadem 1984; I. Karajotov 1977; H.G. Buchholz 1988, p. 212; K. Porozhanov 2001, abb. 1; idem 2002, p. 382; J. Lichardus 2002, p. 17; I. Zmejkova 2002, p. 161; Lichardus et alii 2002, p. 165, abb. 19/12). Auf ihm wurden typische kretanische Markenzeichen (ein Kreuz und Linien) identifiziert. Der Fund liegt in der Nhe des Flusses Rusokastren und, wie J. Lichardus et alii (2002, p. 165) schreiben, etwa 35 km vom Ufer des in frheren Zeiten schiffbaren Mandrensko Sees entfernt, nicht weit vom Schwarzen Meer. 3. Interessant ist auch der Fund von ernozemLambanskoto kladene (taf. I/4) an der Unteren Tunda (taf. II/3) (J. Lichardus et alii 2002, p. 161, abb. 1718). Es handelt sich um einen Zufallfund. Der Barren hat folgende Dimension: Lnge = 72 cm, Breite = 34 cm, Breite der Talle = 23.5 cm, Dicke = 3.05.2 cm und Gewicht = 26.2 kg. Er gehrt typologisch dem Typ 2a nach G.F. Bass (1967, 52f., abb. 55) an. Seine Herkunft ist, so wie die fachmnnischen Analysen zeigen, in Zypern zu suchen. 4. Ein Ochsenhautbarrenfragment wurde auch in KirilovoBjalata prst gefunden (J. Lichardus et alii 2002, Anmerkung 97a, abb. 12/2). Im europischem Teil der Trkei, und zwar in debalar (taf. I/5), nicht weit entfernt von Sarky, wurde ein Ochsenhautbarren (taf. III/1) aus dem 16.14. Jh. v. Chr., hnlich dem von erkovo neulich, entdeckt (J. Lichardus et alii 2002, 165, abb. 19/3). *** Ochsenhautbarren, Englisch oxhide, wurden in Tonguformen hnlich der aufgespannten Haut der genannten Hornvieher gegossen. Die Wissenschaftler sprechen von zwei Typen: flach konvex (Englisch "bun"/ planoconvex type) und plattenfrmig (Englisch "slab" type). Einige Eintiefungen und Einschnitte, die auf den Barrenoberflchen zu sehen sind, wurden, wie schon erwhnt, als Markenzeichen der Hersteller gedeutet. Zu unterstreichen ist, da diese Hypothese nicht von allen Wissenschaftler, die sich mit dieser Gattung von Artefakten beschftigten, als einleuchtend betrachtet wurde. Wie aus den Funden aus Rumnien, Bulgarien und der europschen Trkei zu ersehen ist, war der Rohstoff aus denen die Ochsenhautbarren gegossen wurden verschieden: Bronze in Platca Togul lui Mndruc, GoldSilberKupfer in Kaliakra, Kupfer in erkovo emata, ernozem Lambanskoto kladene, debalar.

192

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien

Wird die Karte der Verbreitung der Kupferartefakten des bulgarischen Chalkolithikum und der Herkunftsgebiete des Rohstoffes der Analyse unterzogen, ist festzustellen, da gegen dem Ende dieser Epoche eine wichtige Rolle Aibunar und Medni Rid gespielt haben, whrend spter die Ressoursen von Majdanpek in den Vordergrund tretten (E. Pernicka et alii 1997, p. 145, abb. 30). Die Daten bezglich der Kupferausbeutung in Aibunar, Gorno Aleksandrovo und Tymnjanka in der Bronzezeit sind sprlich (E.N. Chernykh 1978a; idem 1978b). Kupfer wurde in mehreren Regionen Europas gefrdert (Irland, Wales, Spanien, Frankreich, Slowakei, Serbien; B. Jovanovi 1982; N. Tasi 1995, 17; A.F. Harding 1998, p. 149; idem 2000, p. 197201, abb. 6.1; u.a.). Aber, wie es des ftern betont wurde, stellte diese Rohstoffart eine in Osteuropa, im Vorderen Orient und Mittelasien rege gehandelte Ware. Zu den Ausbeuteorten zhlen z.B. in den von uns genannten Zeiten Alium, Kutchia, Trebizond in Anatolien, Khorasan, Astrabad, Tabriz in Iran. Zeugen dieses Handels sind Barren, die sowohl auf dem Festland, wie auch auf den flieenden Gewssern und insbesondere auf dem Mittelmeer transportiert wurden. Im Mittelmeer und seinen benachbarten Zonen gibt es mehrere Funde die uns von dieser Ttigkeit sprechen lassen (aus der reichen Literatur nennen wir: K. Demakopoulou 1998; J.D. Muhly, R. Maddin, T. StechWheeler 1980; idem 1988; H.W. Catling 1984; N.H. Gale, Z.A. Stos Gale 1986; idem 1987; idem 1988; idem 1995; R. Maddin 1989; N.H. Gale 1989; 1991; J.D. Muhly 1993; P. Budd et alii 1995; E. Kaptan 1995; M. Hall 1995; E.V. Sayre, K.A. Yene, E.C. Joel 1995; N.H. Gale, Z.A. Stos Gale, Maliotis, Annetts 1997; F. Lo Schiavo 1998a; idem 1998b; J.W. Shaw, M. Shaw 1999; A.B. Knapp 2000; A.F. Harding 2000, 218f.; N.H. Gale 2001). Ochsenhautbarren aus Kupfer wurden z.B. von dem kanaanitischsyrischen Schiff, welches gegen Endes des 13. Jh. v. Chr. in der Nhe des Kaps Gelidonya (Oberanatolia, Trkei) (G.F. Bass 1967; idem 1973; idem 1975; idem 1988; idem 1991; C. LambrouPhillipson 1995; K. Demakopoulou 1998; S. McGrail 2001, p. 124) gesunken ist, transportiert. Nach den weiteren Gtern, die im Wrack zu finden waren, begann der Weg des Schiffes wahrscheinlich aus einem Hafen irgendwo an der syrischpalstinensischen Kste und wahrscheinlich wurde in Zypern eine Zwischenlandung durchgefhrt. Desgleichen Rohstoffe (10 Tone Kupfer in 354 Ochsenhautbarren und 120 konvexe Barren; eine Tone Zinnbarren; eine Tone Terebinthharz = Pistacia terebinthus in 150 kanaanitischen Gefssen; Glasbarren, von denen 175 scheibenfrmig waren; Ebenholzstmme = Dalbergia melanoxylon; Straueierschalen; Elfenbein; ein Dutzend Nilpferdstozhne etc.) und verschiedene Objekte gyptischer, zyprischer, europischer, vorderasiatischer Abstammung (Werkzeuge, Schreibzeug, Waffen, Keramik, Schmuckstcke, Anker etc. s. J.S. Mills, R. White 1989; C. Haldane Ward 1990; idem 1993; N.H. Gale 1991; D. Symington 1991) stellten die Ladung des groen Schiffes, deren Wrack bei Ulu Burun (nicht weit vom Kap Gelidonya gelegen) (G.F. Bass, D.A. Frey, C. Pulak 1984; G.F. Bass 1984; idem 1987; C. Pulak, D.A. Frey 1985; C. Pulak 1988; idem 1990; idem 1993; idem 1994; idem 1997; idem 1998; idem 1999a; idem 1999b; G.F. Bass et alii 1989; K. Demakopoulou 1998, p. 36; S. McGrail 2001, 123f.) geortet wurde, dar. Das Schiff, levantischer Herkunft, fand sein Ende um 1300 v. Chr. (wenn nicht genauer im Jahr 1306 v. Chr., so wie es die Dendrodaten einiger Holzstcke, die von der Schiffsmannschaft fr den Brennholzvorrat geflt wurden, zeigen) und wurde in einer Tiefe von 4452 m entdeckt (einige der Ladungsteile lagen sogar in 61 m Tiefe). Der bestvertrettenste Teil der Schiffsmannschaft stammte hchwahrscheinlich aus dem kanaanitischen zyprischen Raum, aber zwei der Seeleute waren Mykener, so wie ihre erhaltenen Trachtteile beweisen. Die Verbindung zwischen der gis und dem Westen des Schwarzen Meeres ist durch eine Steinaxt mit gerollter Schneide auf dem Schiff von Ulu Burun bezeugt (H.G. Buchholz 1999). Ein Schiff zyprischer Abstammung, welches Transporte im Raum Zypern Kreta Argolis durchfhrte, sank gegen Ende des 13. Jh. v. Chr. in der Nhe des Kaps Iria (Argolis) (J.P. Delgado 1997, p. 190; K. Demakopoulou 1998, p. 37; S. McGrail 2001, 124f.). Bronzezeitliche Wracks wurden auch im westlichen Teil des Mittelmeers, bei Lipari, Capo dAgde und Rochelongues, westlich der Strae von Gibraltar Huelva und im rmelkanal, in Moor Sands und Langdon Bay (A.F. Harding 2000, 181f., abb. 5.9), geortet. Auer den schon erwhnten Schiffswracks, die auch Ochsenhautbarren trasportiert haben, sind weitere Barren desselben Typs in Griechenland, in Kyme/Euba (17 Stck, die wahrscheinlich auch ein Teil einer Schiffsladung waren; 16.15. Jh. v. Chr.; L. PapazoglouManioudaki 1998) und

193

Cristian SCHUSTER

Mykene; andere an der Kste Kleinasiens, in Antalya (auch eine wahrscheinliche Schiffsladung; 16.15. Jh. v. Chr.); im Innenland der Sdosttrkei, wo sieben kupferne Ochsenhautbarren zyprischen Ursprungs neben Urfa, am GorkusFlu, ein Nebenflu des Euphrates, die nach groer Wahrscheinlichkeit desgleichen von einem gesunkenen Schiff stammen; in Zypern aus Ekomi und Mathiati (13.12. v. Chr., Endbronzezeit III/ Endzypriotisch III; Phlourentzos 1998); in Kreta, und zwar aus Palaikastro, Mochlos, Knossos, Kommos, Zakro und Ayia Triadha; in Sizilien, Sadinien und gypten (Theba) oder von der syrischkanaanitischen Kste bei Ras Shamra und Tell Beit Mirsin, gefunden. Darstellungen von Ochsenhautbarren (S. Wachsmann 1998, 51 ff.) sind auf den Tontafeln des Linears B von Knossos, auf einigen minoischen und endbronzezeitlichen zyprischen Siegeln, auf einer bronzenen Unterlage aus Zypern aus dem 12. v. Chr. von Kourion und auf dem "Dieu au lingot" von Enkomi zu finden. Wichtig ist, da Barren solcher Art auch zwischen den Bemalungen der gyptischen Grbern aus Thutmosis des III.Zeit von Rekhmire, Meryra und Useramon zu unterscheiden sind. Erscheinungen mit demselben Inhalt wurden auch im Rameseum des Ramses des II. von Theba und auf dem Relieful des Ramses des III. von Medinet Habu entdeckt. Im letzten Fall handelt es sich um Abbild lterer Bilder, den Barren waren in der Ikonograhie gyptens nach 1200 v. Chr. kein bevorzugtes Thema mehr. In Rekhmire, die die solche Barren transportierten, wurden Keftiu genannt. Diese Benennung entfachte widersprchige Diskussionen, insbesondere bezglich der Herkunftsregion dieser. Ohne in Einzelheiten eingehen zu wollen, mu gesagt werden, da die einleuchtendste Hypothese die des syrischkanaanitischen Ursprungs ist. Die isotopische Analyse einiger der Ochsehautbarren erlaubten das Bestimmen des Ursprungsortes des Kupfers (Z.A. Stos Gale et alii 1998). Aus Zypern (Enkomi, Kition, Athienou, Ambelikon, Alambia, Epishopi, Kalopsidha) sind die Funde von Ulu Burun, Capul Gelidonya, Kommos (Sptminoikum III), ein Teil jener aus Sardinien (F. Begemann et alii 2001, mit lterer Literatur). Die Barren des Sptminoikum I von Ayia Triadha stammen aus Anatolien, ein andere Teil aus Sardinien aus einheimischen Quelle (dies.). Eine Guwerkstatt der Ochsenhautbarren wurde in Ras Ibn Hani (Siria) (A.F. Harding 2000, p. 218) entdeckt. Bezglich Zypern, mu darauf hingewiesen werden, da in der Zeitspanne von 5.000 Jahren die bentzte Holzmenge zur Produzierung der 200.000 Tonen Kupfer, Gewicht das nach der Einschtzung der Fachleute gefrdert wurde, Ergebnis von 16 totalen Abholzungen der Insel gewesen sind (G. Constantiniou 1982, p. 22). Es wurde ausgerechnet, da die Herstellung eines einzigen Barrens (ca. 30 kg Standardgewicht) war eine Karawane von 80 Esel ntig um des Erz und das Holz von dem Ausbeutungs bis zum Produktionsort irgenwo an der Kste zu transportieren. Es ist sehr mglich, da Ochsenhautbarren von der Mittemeerkste nicht in den Balkan eingedrungen sind, sondern auch in Mitteleuropa, nach Slowenien (B. Teran 1999, 121), ja sogar bis Sddeutschland (UnterwilflingenOberwilflingen: M. Primas 1997; M. Primas, E. Pernicka 1998). *** Wenn der GoldSilberKupferOchsenhautbarren von Kap Kaliakra, mit 43% Kupferinhalt einigermassen, trotz seinem geringen Gewicht, nicht ganz so abweichend von der Reihe der im unserem Beitrag besprochenen Barren ist, so stellt der Fund von Platca eine Kuriositt dar. In den Bronzedepots, zu denen auch einige einzelne Funde zu rechnen sind, ist das unbearbeitete Metall in Form von senringe (Englisch ring ingots: A.F. Harding 2000, p. 218), Rippenbarren u.s.w. (M. PetrescuDmbovia 1977; C. Schuster, Tr. Popa 2001; und viele andere), Zustand der fr das ganze Mitteleuropa gltig ist (S. Hansen 1994, p. 230232; F. Innerhofer 1997; s. auch A.F. Harding 2000, 218f.), zu finden. So da die genannte Entdeckung einige Fragen aufwirft: a. Warum ein Ochsenhautbarren in Siebenbrgen, wenn bis jetzt nrdlich der Donau, im rumnischen Gebiet, kein Objekt dieser Art entdeckt wurde? b. Warum ein Ochsenhautbarren aus Bronze und nicht aus Kupfer oder einer in Kupfer reichhaltiger Legierung, so wie die anderen Funde dieser Gattung? c. Warum ein bronzener Ochsenhautbarren mit kretanischem Markenzeichen, also aller Wahrscheinlichkeit ein Importstck aus dem Mittelmeerraum, in einem Gebiet Siebenbrgen das reich an Erzen ist? Das Fehlen mehrerer Ochsenhautbarrenfunde in Rumnien knnte eventuell durch den lckenhaften Forschungstand erklrt werden. Das sogenannte kretanische Markenzeichen ist

194

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien

mglicherweise nur ein Zufallabdruck (Vertiefung, Einschnitt). Unter dem Zeichen des Zufalls liegt wahrscheinlich auch die Form des Barrens. Daher kann mit der ntigen Vorsicht behauptet werden, da unser Barren vielleicht als ein Objekt das in Siebenbrgen produziert und fr den Export gedacht wurde, und das zuflligerweise eine Ochsenhaut hnliche Form hatte. Es mu nicht ausgeschlossen werden, da die zuknftigen Forschungen ein neues Licht auf diesen Fund werfen knnen. Aber bis zu dem Zeitpunkt, fragen wir uns: gibt es wirklich Ochsenhautbarren in Rumnien, besser gesagt in Siebenbrgen? Literatur: G.F. Bass 1967 G.F. Bass 1973 G.F. Bass 1975 G.F. Bass 1984 G.F. Bass 1987 G.F. Bass 1988 G.F. Bass 1991 G.F. Bass, D.A. Frey, C. Pulak 1984 G.F. Bass et alii 1989 F. Begemann et alii 2001 N. Boroffka 1994 H.G. Buchholz 1988

Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age Shipwreck, in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 57 (Teil 8), Philadelphia. Cape Gelidonya and Bronze Age Maritime Trade, in H.A. Hoffner (Hrsg.), Orient and Occident, Kevelr, p. 2938. Archaeology Beneath the Sea, New York. A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun (Kas): 1984 Campaign, in AJA 90, p. 269296. Oldest Known Shipwreck Reveals Splendors of the Bronze Age, in National Geographic Magazine 172.6 (December), p. 692733. Return to Cape Gelidonya, in INA Newsletter 15.2 (June), p. 25. Evidence of Trade from Bronze Age Shipwreck, in N.H. Gale (Hrsg.), Bonze Age Trade in the Mediterranean, in Jonsered, p. 6982. A Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Kas, Turkey, in IJNA 13, p. 271279.
29.

The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun: 1986 Campaign, in AJA 93, p. 1 Chemical Composition and Lead Isotopy of Copper and Bronze from Nuragic Sardinia, in EJA 4/1, p. 4385. Die WietenbergKultur. Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Bronzezeit in Sdosteuropa, Teil 1+2, Universittsforschung zur Prhistorischen Der Metallhandel des zweiten Jahrtausends im Mittelmeerraum, in M. Heltzer, E. Lipinski (Hrsg.), Society and Economy in the Eastern Mediterranean. Proceedings of the International Symposium University Haifa 1985, Leuven, p. 187228. Ein auergewhnliches Szepter im stlichen Mittelmeer, in PZ 74, p. 6878. Oxhide Ingots, Recycling and the Mediterranean Trade, in JMA 8, p. 132. Workshop and Heirloom: Prehistoric Bronze Stands in the East Mediterranean, in RDAC, p. 6991. Geological Features and Ancient Exploitation of the Cupriferous Sulphide Orebodies of Cyprus, in J.C. Muhly, R. Maddin & V. Karageorghis (Hrsg.), Early Metallurgy in Cyprus 4000500 BC, p. 1324. Aibunar, a Balkan Copper Mine of the Fourth Millennium BC, in Proc.
Prehist. Soc. 44, p. 203217.

Archologie 19.

H.G. Buchholz 1989 P. Budd et alii 1995 H.W. Catling 1984 G. Constantiniou 1982 E.N. Chernykh 1978a E.N. Chernykh 1978b H. Ciugudean, I.Al. Aldea 1997 I.H. Crian 1992 J.P. Delgado 1997 K. Demakopoulou 1998

Gornoe Delo i Metallurgija v Drevnejsej Bolgarii, Sofia. Depozitul de la Cugir i raporturile sale cu manifestrile culturale ale bronzului trziu, in H. Ciugudean, Cercetri privind epoca bronzului i prima vrst a fierului n Transilvania, Bibliotheca Musei Apulensis VII, Alba Iulia,
p. 99134. Platca, in I.H. Crian, M. Brbulescu, E. Chiril, V. Vasiliev, J. Winkler, Repertoriul arheologic al judeului Cluj, BMN V, ClujNapoca. Encyclopedia of Underwater and Maritime Archaeology, London. Shipwrecks in the Eastern Mediterranean, in Gods and Heroes of the Bronze Age. Europe at the Time of Ulysses, Copenhagen, p. 3537.

195

Cristian SCHUSTER

A.C. Florescu 1991 N.H. Gale 1989

Repertoriul culturii NouaCoslogeni din Romnia, in CCDJ 9. Archaeometallurgical Studies of Late Bronze Age Copper Oxhide Ingots from the Mediterranean Region, in A. Hauptmann, E. Pernicka und G.A. Wagner (Hrsg.), Old World Archaeometallurgy (Der Anschnitt, Beiheft 7), Copper Oxide Ingots: Their Origin and Their Place in the Bronze Age Metals Trade in the Mediterranean, in N.H. Gale (Hrsg.), Bonze Age Trade in the Mediterranean, Jonsered, p. 197239. Archaeology, Sciencebased Archaeology and the Mediterranean Bronze Age Metals Trade: A Contribution to the Debate, in EJA 4/1, p. 113130. Oxhide Copper Ingots in Crete and Cyprus and the Bronze Age Metal Trade, in BSA 81, 81100. Oxhide Ingots from Sardania, Crete and Cyprus and the Bronze Age Copper Trade: New Scientific Evidence, in M.S. Balmuth (Hrsg.), Studies in Sardinian Archaeology 3: Nuragic Sardinia and the Mycenaean World, BAR International Series 387, p. 135177. Recent Evidence for a Possible Bronze Age Metal Trade between Sardinia and the Aegean, in E.B. French und K.A. Wardle (Hrsg.), Problems in Aegean Prehistory, Bristol, p. 349384. Comments on Oxhide Ingots, Recycling, and the Mediterranean Metals Trade, in JMA 8, p. 3341. Lead Isotope Data from the Isotrace Laboratory, Oxford: Archaeometry Data Base 4, Ores from Cyprus, in Archaeometry 39, p. 237246. Shipwrecked Plant Remains, in BA 53.1, p. 5560. Direct Evidence for Organic Cargoes in the Late Bronze Age, in World Archaeology 24, p. 348360. Comments on Oxhide Ingots, recycling, and the Mediterranean Metals Trade, in JMA 8, p. 4244. Studien zu den Metalldeponierungen whrend der lteren Urnenfelderzeit zwischen Rhnetal und Karpatenbecken, Universittsforschungen zur NorthSouth Exchanges of Raw Materials, in Gods and Heroes of the Bronze Age. Europe at the Time of Ulysses, Copenhagen, p. 3842. European Societies in the Bronze Age, Cambridge World Archaeology, Natural Resources as a Factor in the Evolution of the Bronze Age Groups in the Carpathian Area, in C. Kacs (Hrsg.), Der nordkarpatische Raum in der Bronzezeit, Bibliotheca Marmatia 1, Baia Mare, p. 119124. Frhbronzezeitliche Barrenhortfunde Die Schtze aus dem Boden kehren zurck, in A. und B. Hnsel (Hrsg.), Gaben an die Gtter. Schtze der Bronzezeit Europas, Bestandskataloge Bd. 4, Berlin, p. 5359. Indicatorul localitilor din Romnia, Bucureti. Rudna Glava, najstarije rudarstvo bakra na Centralnom Balkanu, Beograd. Tin and Ancient Mining in Turkey, in Anatolica 21, p. 197203. Metalen slitk ot selo erkovo, Burgaki okrg, in Numizmatika H. 1, p. 13 Archaeology, Sciencebased Archaeology and the Mediterranean Broinze Age Metals Trade, in EJA 3/1, p. 3156. Smiths on Board Late Bronze Age Ships, in Tropis 3, p. 243248.
Prhistorischen Archologie Bd. 21, Bonn. Bochum, p. 247268.

N.H. Gale 1991 N.H. Gale 2001 N.H. Gale N.H. Gale Gale, Z.A. Stos 1986 Gale, Z.A. Stos 1987

N.H. Gale, Z.A. Stos Gale 1988 N.H. Gale, Z.A. Stos Gale 1995 N.H. Gale et alii 1997 C. Haldane Ward 1990 C. Haldane Ward 1993 M. Hall 1995 S. Hansen 1994 A.F. Harding 1998 A.F. Harding 2000 A.F. Harding 2001 F. Innerhofer 1997 I. Iordan, P. Gtescu, D.I. Oancea 1974 B. Jovanovi 1982 E. Kaptan 1995 I. Karajotov 1977 A.B. Knapp 2000 C. Lambrou Phillipson 1995 J. Lichardus 2002

Cambridge.

17.

Sdostbulgarien zwischen gis und Pontikum in der Vorgeschichte, in: A. Fol (Hrsg.), Thrace and the Aegean. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Thracology, Sofia Yambol, 2529 September

196

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien

J. Lichardus et alii 2002 F. Lo Schiavo 1998a F. Lo Schiavo 1998b R. Maddin 1989 S. McGrail 2001 J.S. Mills, R. White 1989 S. Morintz 1978 I. Motzoi Chicideanu, M. andorChicideanu 1999 J.D. Muhly 1993 J.D. Muhly, R. Maddin, T. Stech Wheeler 1980 J.D. Muhly, R. Maddin, T. Stech 1988 B. Nanu, M. Neagu 1992 M. Neagu, B. Nanu 1986 L. Papazoglou Manioudaki 1998 E. Pernicka et alii 1997 M. Petrescu Dmbovia 1977 P. Phlourentzos 1998 K. Porozhanov 2000 K. Porozhanov 2001 K. Porozhanov 2002

2000, Vol. I, Sofia, p. 935. Die Spbronzezeit an der unteren Tunda und die ostgischen Verbindungen in Sdostbulgarien, in Eurasia Antiqua 8, p. 135184. Sardinian Oxhide Ingots 1998, in T. Rehren, A. Hauptmann und J.D. Muhly (Hrsg.), Metallurgica Antiqua. In honor of HansGert Bachmann and Robert Maddin (Der Annschnitt, Beiheft 8), Bochum, p. 99112. Zur Herstellung und Distribution bronzezeitlicher Metallgegenstnde im nuraghischen Sardinien, in B. Hnsel (Hrsg.), Mensch und Umwelt in der Bronzezeit Europas, Kiel, p. 193216. The Copper Ingots and Tin Ingots from the Kas Shipwreck, in A. Hauptmann, E. Pernicka und G.A. Wagner (Hrsg.), Old World Archaeometallurgy (Der Anschnitt, Beiheft 7), Bochum, p. 99105. Boats of the World. From the Stone Age to Medieval Times, Oxford. The Identity of the Resins from the Late Bronze Shipwreck at Ulu Burun (Kas), in Archaeometry 31, p. 3744. Contribuii arheologice la istoria tracilor timpurii I. Epoca bronzului n spaiul carpatobalcanic, Bucureti. Cercetrile arheologice de la NeniZnoaga (jud. Buzu). Campaniile 19821986, 19881993 i 1996, in MCA S.N. 1, p. 5997. Early Bronze Age Tin and the Taurus, in AJA 97, p. 239254. The Oxhide Ingots from Enkomi and Mathiati and Late Bronze Age Copper Smelting in Cyprus, in RDAC, p. 8495. Cyprus, Crete and Sardinia: Copper Oxhide Ingots and the Bronze Age Metals Trade, in RDAC, p. 281298. Un complex al tracilor timpurii, descoperit n zona Dunrii de Jos, in Danubius 1314, p. 103115. Consideraii preliminare asupra aezrii eponime de la Grditea Coslogeni, judeul Clrai, in CCDJ 2, p. 99128. Nr. Kat. 19, in: Gods and Heroes of the Bronze Age. Europe at the Time of Ulysses, Copenhagen, 213. Prehistoric Copper in Bulgaria. Its Composition and Provenance, in Eurasia Depozitele de bronzuri din Romnia, Bucureti. Nr. Kat. 20, in Gods and Heroes of the Bronze Age. Europe at the Time of Ulysses, Copenhagen, 213. Thracia Pontica, in Al. Fol, K. Porozhanov, V. Fol (Hrsg.), Ancient Thrace,
Sofia, p. 2740. p. 6169. Antiqua 3, p. 41180.

Moretata na trakite ili Traikia Pontica prez drevnstta, in Arheologija 42/12,

La Thrace Pontique (avant et aprs la colonisation Grecque), in A. Fol (Hrsg.), Thrace and the Aegean, Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Thracology. Sofia Yambol, 2529 September, vol. I, Sofia, p.
377389. 115130.

M. Primas 1997 M. Primas, E. Pernicka 1998 C. Pulak 1988 C. Pulak 1990

Bronze Age Economy and Ideology: Central Europe in Focus, in EJA 5/1, p.

Der Depotfund von Oberwilflingen. Neue Ergebnisse zur Zirkulation von Metallbarren, Germania 76, p. 2565. The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun, Turkey: 1985 Campaign, in AJA The Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun, Turkey: 1989 Excavation Campaign, in T. Carell (Hrsg.), Underwater Archaeology Proceedings from
92, p. 137.

197

Cristian SCHUSTER

C. Pulak 1993 C. Pulak 1994 C. Pulak 1996 C. Pulak 1997

the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference, Tucson, p. 5257. The Shipwreck at Uluburun: 1993 Excavation Campaign, in The INA Quarterly 20.4 (Winter), p. 412. 1994 Excavation at Uluburun: The Final Campaign, in The INA Quarterly Continuing Study of the Uluburun Shipwreck Artifacts: Dendrochronological Dating of the Uluburun Ship, in The INA Quarterly 23, p. 1213. The Uluburun Shipwreck, in S. Swiny, R.L. Hohlfeder & H.W. Swiny (Hrsg.), Res Maritimae: Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean from Prehistory to Late Antiquity, Nicosia, Cyprus, October 1994, American Schools of Oriental
21.4 (Winter), p. 816.

C. Pulak 1998 C. Pulak 1999a C. Pulak 1999b

Hull Construction of the Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Uluburun, in The INA Quarterly 2.4 (Winter), p. 1621. The Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Uluburun: Aspects of Hull Construction, in W. Phelps, Y. Lolos und Y. Vichos (Hrsg.), The Point Iria Wreck: Interconnections in the Mediterranean ca. 1200 B.C. Proceedings of the International Conference, Island of Spetses, 19 September 1998, Athens
(Hellenic Institute of Marine Archaeology), p. 209238. The Search for a Bronze Age Shipwreck, in Archaeology 38.4, p. 1824.

Research Archaeological Reports 4, Atlanta, p. 233262. The Uluburun Shipwreck: An Overview, in IJNA 27, p. 188224.

C. Pulak, D.A. Frey 1985 M. Rotea 1994a M. Rotea 1994b M. Rotea 1997 M. Rotea 2001

M. Rotea, O. Fenean 1994 E.V. Sayre, K.A. Yene, E.C. Joel 1995 C. Schuster, Tr. Popa 2001 J.W. Shaw, M. Shaw 1999 Tr. Soroceanu 1974 Tr. Soroceanu, A. Retegan 1981 Z.A. Stos Gale et alii 1998 D. Symington 1991 N. Tasi 1995 B. Teran 1999 G. Toneva 1973 G. Toneva 1982

Hochdorf/Enz 4, p. 2230.

Platca Togul lui Mndruc, jud. Cluj, in Cronica cercetrilor 1993, p. 47. Penetraia culturii Otomani n Transilvania. ntre realitate i himer, in Apulum 31, p. 3957. Cercetri arheologice la Palatca Togul lui Mndruc. Observaii preliminare, in Revista Bistriei 1011, p. 1319. Die Mittlere Bronzezeit im KarpatenDonauRaum (19.14. Jahrhundert v. Chr.), in Thraker und Krlten beidseits der Karpaten. Sonderausstellung vom 14. September 200029. April 2001, Schriftenreihe des Keltenmuseum Sondajul arheologic la Platca Poderei, in AMN 31/1, p. 351356.

Comments on the Paper Oxhide Ingots, Recycling, and the Mediterranean Metals Trade, in JMA 8, p. 4553. The Fire and the world of the living in the Romanian Bronze Age, in C. Schuster, A. Coma, T. Popa, The Archaeology of Fire in the Bronze Age of Romania, Bibliotheca Musei Giurgiuvensis 2, p. 2576. A Proposal for Bronze Age Aegean ShipSheds in Crete, in H. Tzalas (Hrsg.), Tropis V. 5th International Symposium on ShipConstrction in Antiquity, Athens, p. 369382. Aezarea de tip Wietenberg de la Palatca (j. Cluj), in Centenar Muzeal Ordean 1972, Oradea, p. 165172. Neue sptbronzezeitliche Funde im Norden Rumniens, in Dacia N.S. 25, p. The Copper and Tin Ingots of the Late Bronz Age Mediterranean: New Scientific Evidence, in Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Beginning of the Use on Metals and Alloys (BUMAIV), May 2527, 1998, Kuniibiki Messe, Matsue, Shimane, Japan, p. 115126. Late Bronze Age WritingBoards and Their Uses: Textual Evidence from Anatolia and Syria, in Anatolian Studies 41, p. 111123. Eneolithic Cultures of Central and West Balkans, Belgrade. An Outline of the Urnfield Culture Period in Slovenia, in Arheoloki Vestnik Novi danni za trgovijata po ernomorskoto krajreije prez XVIXIV v. pr.n.e. Vekove 1973, H.3, p. 1724. Thracia Pontica a lge de Bronze ancient, Thracia Pontica 1, p. 176182.
50, p. 97143. 195229.

198

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien

G. Toneva 1984 S. Wachsmann 1998 I. Zmejkova 2002

Monumentalni skulpturni pametnici ot ksnobronzovata I ot rannoeljaznata epocha v Blgaria, in Thracia 6, p. 71103. Seagoing & seamanship in the Bronze Age Levant, London. La propagation de la culture Tei (IIII) en Bulgarie du NordEst, in A. Fol (Hrsg.), Thrace and the Aegean. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Thracology, Sofia Yambol, 2529 September 2000, Vol. I,
Sofia, p. 159166.

Taf. I. Die genannten Fundorte im rumnischbulgarischtrkischem Raum: 1 = Platca Togul lui Mndruc, 2 = Kap Kaliakra, 3 = erkovo emata, 4 = ernozem Lambanskoto kladene, 5 = . (nach J. Lichardus et alii 2002 und Ergnzung).

199

Cristian SCHUSTER

Taf. II. Ochsenhautbarren: 1. Platca Togul lui Mndruc; 2. erkovo emata; 3. ernozem Lambanskoto kladene (1. nach M. Rotea 2001; 23. nach J. Lichardus et alii 2002). Verschiedene Mastbe.

200

Zu den Ochsenhautbarren(?) in Rumnien

Taf. III. Ochsenhautbarren: 1. debalar; 2. Kap Kaliacra; Platca Togul lui Mndruc; 3. Bronzekuchen; 4. Ambo (1. nach J. Lichardus et alii 2002; 23. nach J. Lichardus et alii 2002 und K. Porozhanov 2000; 4. nach M. Rotea 2001). Verschiedene Mastbe.

201

Noi puncte de vedere privind cronologia bronzului trziu i a nceputului epocii fierului n Dobrogea Ctlin DOBRINESCU*
Rsum: Ce papier passe en revue les points de vues actuels concernant la fin de lEpoque du Bronze et il conclue que la culture Coslogeni et partiellement contemporaine avec celle du Babadag. Mots cls: Epoque du Bronze, Epoque du Fer, culture Coslogeni, culture Babadag, Dobrogea, chronologie. Cuvinte cheie: epoca bronzului, epoca fierului, cultura Coslogeni, cultura Babadag, Dobrogea, cronologie.

Cum bine se cunoate astzi, sectorul inferior al Dunrii de Jos prezint n epoca bronzului o situaie aparte fa de restul spaiului carpatobalcanic, fiind integrat cultural regiunii nord pontice. Din punct de vedere arheologic, acest fapt este ilustrat de absena aparent a aezrilor n Bronzul timpuriu i mijlociu, prezena comunitilor de origine rsritean fiind atestat prin morminte tumulare (S. Morintz 1978, p. 85100; I. Manzura, E. Sava 1994, p. 178189; I. Vasiliu, 1995, p. 178189). Presiunea populaiilor rsritene continu i la nceputul Bronzului trziu , n secolul XIV a. Chr., cnd arheologic se constat o extindere spre vest a comunitilor culturii Sabatinovka, din zona de origine nordul Mrii Negre n Dobrogea i sudestul Munteniei, determinnd apariia unei culturi noi, denumit Coslogeni (S. Morintz, N. Angelescu 1970, p. 373415). Comparativ cu celelalte comuniti culturale carpatodunrene ( Tei, Verbicioara, Otomani, Monteoru .a.), care dispuneau de o ceramic diversificat i bogat ornamentat, n arealul culturii Coslogeni ntlnim o ceramic cu un repertoriu redus de forme, foarte puin ornamentat, decorul fiind abandonat n favoarea unor elemente practice, de uz imediat, stil specific populaiilor stepice, cu o economie bazat, n principal, pe creterea animalelor (M. Neagu 1993, p. 193198; E. Lebedeva, 1995). Sfritul acestei culturi este legat de fenomenul hallstattizrii, care nseamn o schimbare a raporturilor culturale estvest, curentul vestic impunndu-se, n regiune, spre sfritul secolului XII i nceputul secolului XI a. Chr. Acest fenomen cuprinde ntreg spaiul carpato balcanic la nivelul acestui palier cronologic i ca urmare direct n Dobrogea apare o nou cultur, diferit mult celei anterioare, denumit Babadag, dup numele aezrii eponime din judeul Tulcea (S. Morintz 1964, p. 101117; idem 1987, p. 62). Aceast cultur prezint caracteristicile specifice noii epoci, a fierului, i anume: o ceramic neagr, lustruit, aezri stabile i, mai trziu, n faza a doua de evoluie, o metalurgie a fierului dezvoltat. Totui, cteva probleme rmn n atenia specialitilor, i anume: cronologia absolut a celor dou culturi i raporturile existente ntre ele. O contribuie important la cunoaterea epocii bronzului i a primei epoci a fierului n sectorul inferior al Dunrii de Jos, a avut S. Morintz, cel care a definit, de altfel, cele dou culturi (S. Morintz 1964; S. Morintz, N. Angelescu 1970 ). Pentru cultura Coslogeni, cercettorul amintit propunea ncadrarea acesteia n intervalul cuprins secolelor XIVXII a. Chr., iar pentru cultura Babadag secolele XIVII a. Chr., ntre cele dou existnd un orizont intermediar denumit Prebabadag (S. Morintz, N. Angelescu 1970; S. Morintz, D. erbnescu 1985; S. Morintz 1978; idem 1987). n datarea acestor culturi un rol important a fost atribuit, de autor, att cronologiei de contact cu Sabatinovka, Noua, Monteoru, Tei, ZimniceaPlovdiv ct i cronologiei egeeo anatoliene (troiene), identificnd, pe baza analogiilor din nivelul Troia VII b trei valuri de ptrundere a populaiilor originale din sectorul inferior al Dunrii de Jos pe coasta vestic a Asiei Mici: primul, reprezentat de elemente ZimniceaPlovdiv, n secolul XIII a. Chr., al doilea de elemente Radovanu, n secolul XIII a. Chr., ultimul reprezentat de elemente Babadag IPenievo, n secolul XI a. Chr.(S. Morintz 1979, p. 151155). S. Morintz a identificat trei faze de evoluie n cadrul culturii Coslogeni. Faza I a culturii a fost denumit SabatinovkaCoslogeni, datorit similitudinilor materialului ceramic de la Ulmu, Sultana i Dorobanu, din judeul Clrai, cu acela din aezrile Sabatinovka. Un ac de bronz cu
*

Muzeul de Istorie Naional i Arheologie Constana, Piaa Ovidiu, nr. 1.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 203206.

Ctlin DOBRINESCU

plac rombic i un cuit, descoperite la Ulmu, respectiv Sultana, precizeaz, n opinia autorului, sincronismele cu fazele II a i II b ale culturii Monteoru i constituie un argument pentru datarea n secolul al XIV-lea a debutului culturii Coslogeni. Faza a II-a ar corespunde momentului de contact cu comunitile Tei (fazele IVV) i ZimniceaPlovdiv. Faza a III-a sau aspectul Radovanu este ilustrat de descoperirile de la Cscioarele, Zimnicea, Chirnogi i, bineneles, Radovanu, etap ce corespunde cu extinderea comunitilor Coslogeni la vest de Mostitea, pn n zona Zimnicei, punnd capt, astfel, existenei grupului ZimniceaPlovdiv (D. Alexandrescu 1973; S. Morintz, N. Angelescu 1970; S. Morintz, D. erbnescu 1985). Analiznd elementele de origine apusean din Dobrogea (depozitele de bronzuri, ceramica de tip Gva), aspectele Meri Celul Nou, grupele Insula Banului, Psenievo, Tmoani, Cozia, SaharnaSolonceni, Belozerka, Basarabi i descoperirile egeeoanatoliene, S. Morintz identifica trei faze i n cadrul culturii Babadag. Propunea ca faza Babadag I s fie ncadrat n secolul XI a. Chr., specificul etapei fiind vasul bitronconic de tip Gva i decorul incizat, iar faza a II-a, creia i sunt caracteristice decorul imprimat cu cercuri concentrice i tangente, este cuprins cronologic aproximativ ntre 1000800 .e.n. (S. Morintz 1987, p. 5068). Faza a III-a, cu ceramic canelat, este cuprins ntre secolele VIIIVII a. Chr. (S. Morintz 1987, p. 68). Descoperirile din ultimii 15 ani au adus cu ele i noi puncte de vedere la tabloul cronologic i cultural al regiunii, propus de S. Morintz. V. Vasiliev, n baza descoperirilor de la Grditea Coslogeni (M. Neagu, N. Basarab 1986, p. 99128), care atestau evoluia culturii Coslogeni i n secolul XI a. Chr., propunea o datare mai trzie, cu un secol, pentru nceputul culturii Babadag, adic n secolul X a. Chr. (V. Vasiliev 1987, p. 66). ntr-un studiu recent, privitor la cronologia primei epoci a fierului n vestul rii, acelai cercettor afirma c descoperirile actuale indic faptul c ptrunderea i generalizarea culturii Aceast opinie ar schimba ntreaga cronologie a regiunii, dac acceptm rolul elementelor de tip Gva n formarea culturii Babadag, ns o serie de elemente de datare pe care le prezentm mai jos, vor arta n ce msur aceast opinie se justific sau nu. A. Lszl accept periodizarea i cronologia propus de S. Morintz, dar sugereaz o genez, cu legturi, mai degrab, n zona de sudvest a rii, descoperirile de tipul celor de la Meri, judeul Teleorman (E. Moscalu 1985, p. 163170), Chitila (V. Boronean 1984), Ctunu (C. Stoica 1989) i Radovanu, judeul Clrai (S. Morintz, D. erbnescu 1985, p. 521), jalonnd un posibil traseu. Totodat, un rol important n geneza culturii Babadag l-ar fi avut grupul Tmoani, propunnd o succesiune Coslogeni Tmoani Babadag I (A. Lszl 1997, p. 7784, A. Lszl, Al. Vulpe 2001, p. 300). i la aceast ipotez se pot ridica o serie de obiecii, legate n principal de realitile arheologice din Dobrogea. Cercetrile ntreprinse de M. Irimia la Rasova Malu Rou (M. Irimia 1974) i la Satu NouValea lui Voicu (M. Irimia, N. Conovici 1993), n judeul Constana, G. Jugnaru i G. Simion la GarvnMljitul Florilor (G. Jugnaru 1997), Revrsarea Tichileti (G. Simion 2003b) i Beidaud (G. Simion 2003a), n judeul Tulcea, N. Haruche, la Silitea Nazru, n judeul Brila, demonstreaz o evoluie mai ndelungat a culturii Coslogeni, cel puin pentru Dobrogea i o parte din sudestul Munteniei. G. Jugnaru observa, analiznd situaia din numeroase situri hallstattiene timpurii cercetate n sectorul inferior al Dunrii de Jos, c Nu s-a

Gava (pe deplin constituit) n Transilvania nu poate fi plasat anterior sfritului Ha. A2 ci, mai probabil, n Ha. B1 (V. Vasiliev 1997, p. 95).

Coslogeni de la Durankulak, susin afirmaiile de mai sus, J. Boyadiev apreciind ncetarea locuirii din Bronzul final cndva ntre anii 11001000 a. Chr.(Y. Boyadiev 1995). n concluzie, constatm c n stadiul actual al cercetrilor n Dobrogea, se poate constata existena culturii Coslogeni la nivelul secolului XI a. Chr., precum i o scurt perioad de coexistena cu elementele noi de tip Babadag, la acelai orizont cronologic. Deci, n momentul de fa nu este sigur existena unui orizont preBabadagTmoani sau o datare mai cobort pentru nceputul culturii Babadag n Dobrogea.

putut efectua n nici un caz o separaie stratigrafic a materialelor Coslogeni de cele Babadag I, astfel nct enunm posibilitatea unui contact direct CoslogeniBabadag I deci o parial contemporaneitate a celor dou culturi sau, pe de alt parte, putem considera prezena materialelor Coslogeni n straturi Babadag I drept o preluare motenire din fondul local nehallstattian (G. Jugnaru 1997, p. 105). De altfel, datele C14 ce provin din aezarea de tip

204

Noi puncte de vedere privind cronologia bronzului trziu i a nceputului epocii fierului n Dobrogea

Totodat, analiznd situaia de la Satu NouValea lui Voicu, Rasova, Beidaud, Garvn, SiliteaNazru i din alte puncte n care apar materiale Coslogeni n contexte cu ceramic hallstattian, incizat sau imprimat, nedifereniate stratigrafic clar, denumit Babadag I i Babadag II, credem c putem sugera ipoteza existenei, mai degrab, a dou stiluri ceramice contemporane. Contieni c o asemenea ipotez pare speculativ n momentul actual al cercetrilor, apreciem c o analiz atent asupra decorului ceramicii de tip Babadag i a contextelor stratigrafice ar putea aduce informaii edificatoare n acest sens. Bibliografie: D. Alexandrescu 1973 V. Boronean, 1984 Y. Boyadziev 1995 N. Haruche, 1983 M. Irimia 1974 M. Irimia 2001 M. Irimia, N. Conovici 1993 G. Jugnaru 1997

La ncropole du Bronze rcent de Zimnicea, n Dacia N.S. 17, p. Chitilaferm, un aspect cultural al nceputului primei epoci a fierului. Date preliminare, n ThracoDacica 5, 12, p. 156166. Chronology of Prehistoric Cultures in Bulgaria, n Prehistoric Bulgaria, Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin, p.141191. Raport preliminar asupra spturilor arheologice de la Silitea (Nazru), judeul Brila, n Istros 23, 19811983, p. 6780. Cercetrile arheologice de la RasovaMalu Rou. Raport preliminar, n Pontica 7, p. 75137. Descoperiri din Bronzul trziu pe teritoriul Dobrogei i unele probleme privind cultura Coslogeni, n ThracoDacica 22, 12, p.
183195. 7798.

Descoperiri hallstattiene n zona davei getice de la Satu Nou(com. Oltina, jud. Constana), n Pontica 26, p.51114. Manifestri timpurii ale primei epoci a fierului n Dobrogea (Descoperirile de la GarvnMljitul Florilor, jud. Tulcea), n vol. Prima epoc a fierului la Gurile Dunrii i n zonele circumpontice,
p.103110.

A. Lszl 1996 A. Lszl 1997 A. Lszl, Al. Vulpe 2001 E. Lebedeva 1995 I. Manzura, E. Sava 1994 S. Morintz 1964 S. Morintz 1977 S. Morintz 1978 S. Morintz 1979 S. Morintz 1987

Legturi ntre regiunea Dunrii de Jos i spaiul egeeoanatolian la sfritul epocii bronzului i nceputul epocii fierului, n MemAnt 21, Despre originea i evoluia primei epoci a fierului la Dunrea de Jos, n vol. Prima epoc a fierului la Gurile Dunrii i n zonele circumpontice, p. 7783. Epoca metalelor. Prima epoc a fierului, n Istoria romnilor, vol.1, Les rsultats prliminaires des tudes palothnobotaniques du site Coslogeni, n CCDJ 1314, p. 95102. Interaciuni estvest reflectate n culturile eneolitice i ale epocii bronzului din zona de nordvest a Mrii Negre (schi cultural istoric), n MemAnt 19, p. 143189. Quelques problmes concernant la priode ancienne du Hallstatt au BasDanube la lumire des fouilles de Babadag, n Dacia N.S. Cteva consideraii cu privire la complexul cultural Sabatinovka NouaCoslogeni, n Peuce 6, p.2329. Contribuii arheologice la istoria tracilor timpurii, I, Bucureti. Les Traces et la Troie dans le dernir quart de II-nd millenaire av.n.., n Thracia Pontica 1, p. 151155. Noi date i probleme privind perioadele hallstattian timpurie i mijlocie n zona istropontic(cercetrile de la Babadag), n ThracoDacica 8, 12, p. 3971.
8, p. 101117. p. 289 326. p. 115130.

205

Ctlin DOBRINESCU

S. Morintz, N. Anghelescu 1970 S. Morintz, D. erbnescu 1985 E. Moscalu 1985 M. Neagu 1993 M. Neagu, N. Basarab 1987 G. Simion 2003a G. Simion 2003b C. Stoica 1989 V. Vasiliev 1987 V. Vasiliev 1997 I. Vasiliu 1995

O nou cultur a epocii bronzului n Romnia. Cultura de tip Coslogeni, n SCIV 21, 3, p. 333415. Rezultatele cercetrilor de la Radovanu, punctul Gorgana a doua, judeul Clrai. Aezarea de epoca bronzului, n ThracoDacica 6, Mormintele tumulare hallstattiene timpurii de la Meri(com. Vedea, jud. Clrai), n MemAnt, 911, p. 163170. The eastern component of the Coslogeni culture, n CCDJ 10, p. Consideraii preliminare asupra aezrii eponime de la Grditea Coslogeni, n CCDJ 2, p. 99128. Aezarea hallstattian de la BeidaudTulcea, n vol. Culturi antice n zona Gurilor Dunrii, ClujNapoca, p. 7998. Situl hallstattian de la RevrsareaTichileti, n vol. Culturi antice n zona Gurilor Dunrii, ClujNapoca, p. 99114. Complexe de la sfritul epocii bronzului descoperite la Ctu (jud. Dmbovia), n Symposia Thracologica 7, p. 258259. Probleme ale cronologiei Hallstattului pe teritoriul Romniei(II), n Sargetia 20, p. 67 80. Din nou despre cteva aspecte privind cronolgia primei epoci a fierului n Transilvania, n vol. Prima epoc a fierului la Gurile Dunrii i n zonele circumpontice, p. 93 98. Noi informaii privind epoca bronzului n nordul Dobrogei. Movilele funerare de la Luncavia, punctul Drumul Vacilor, n Peuce 11, p.
116 140. 193198. 12, p. 521.

206

Noi date privind depuneri rituale n peteri din Mehedini Cristian LASCU* Silvia MARINESCUBLCU**
Rsum: Dans les grottes dOltenie les expditions splologiques ont dcouvert quelques offrandes appartenant lEpoque du Fer. Mots cls: Oltenie, Hallstatt, La Tene, offrande, grotte. Cuvinte cheie: Oltenia, Hallstatt, La Tene, ofrand, peter.

Peterile au fost uneori utilizate n preistorie i ca situri funerare. n unele cazuri cadavrele au fost nhumate n sedimentul speleal, alteori au fost depuse direct pe planeul galeriilor. n preajma scheletelor au fost adesea puse n eviden ceramic, unelte, obiecte de podoab. Majoritatea descoperirilor arheologice de acest gen s-au fcut n peteri din Transilvania i dateaz din neolitic, bronz i Hallstatt. Sunt bine cunoscute descoperirile din partea de nord a Munilor Pdurea Craiului i zona Depresiunii Beiuului peterile Moanei, Gaura Ungurului, Vadu Criului, Vacilor din Valea Albioara, etc. Unul dintre autori a participat la investigaiile asupra sitului excepional din Petera cu Morminte (G. Halasi et alii, 1985, p. 247251; G. Halasi, I. Emdi 1985, p. 232234). n ciuda faptului c n nordul Olteniei se afl unele dintre cele mai mari caviti carstice care prin configuraia galeriilor i contextul morfologic prezint condiii favorabile, n foarte puine cazuri a fost pus n eviden o utilizare funerar, sau o depunere de alt gen. De aceea, considerm c prezint interes semnalarea a dou cazuri recent descoperite n Valea MotruluiMunii Mehedini i Pestera EpuranPodiul Mehedini. Petera Epuran este situat n satul Jupneti, com. Cireu (jud. Mehedini), la cca. 24 km spre nord de DrobetaTurnu Severin. n lungime de 3650 metri, cu un cavernament complex dispus pe dou nivele principale, petera reprezint sectorul nordestic al complexului carstic Topolnia Epuran, cel mai important din sudul Romniei. Intrarea se afl la baza unui perete calcaros de peste 30 m nlime care domin lunca prului Ponor care se pierde printr-un ponor, 8 m mai jos. n abriul ce domin intrarea i imediat dup intrare au fost fcute sondaje arheologice ce au pus n eviden creamic getic. Dup culoarul scund de la intrare, galeria ia proporii. Urmeaz o zon descendent cu numeroase blocuri ce sugereaz c procese mecanice recente au modificat masiv configuraia iniial a galeriei. Dup cca. 35 m de coborre, panta galeriei se atenueaz i urmeaz o poriune ascendent mai abrupt. n acest punct am observat, cu prilejul unei vizite mai vechi, o pies de os de 14 cm lungime, cu urme evidente de prelucrare (fig. 2/3). Pe baza acestui indiciu am efectuat ulterior o investigaie mai amnunit, obsevnd cu atenie puinele petice de sediment speleal neacoperite de blocurile de prbuire recent (fig. 1). ntr-un sector foarte accidentat situat lng peretele nordic, cu o suprafa de cca. 6.5 m2 am observat un numr de peste 30 fragmente de oase lungi, cu aspect de achii mai mult sau mai puin regulate i cu indicii de prelucrare, dar i oase ntregi sau prezentnd urme de percuie cu un obiect dur. Oasele proveneau de la diverse resturi scheletice de animale. Chiar la baza peretelui calcaros (fig. 1), ntre blocuri de incaziune de peste 2 m grosime (n zona unde gsisem resturile osteologice), am mai descoperit un galet de amfibolit, o fusaiol i, ntr-o acumulare de argil de decalcifiere amestecat cu fragmente angulare de roc, am remarcat o intruziune de form tronconic neregulat, de 2530 centimetri nlime, contrastnd cromatic cu restul sedimentului, prezentndu-se ca o pat cenuiumaronie cu contururi difuze, pe fondul rou ocru al argilei plastice speleale, pigmentate cu cteva puncte negre. Pata era ncadrat de fragmente ceramice n poziie vertical. La o examinare sub lup am constatat c sedimentul maroniucenuiu
*

**

Institutul de Speologie Emil Racovi Bucureti. Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan Bucureti, str. Henri Coand 11.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 207213.

Cristian LASCU, Silvia MARINESCUBLCU

este un amestec de argil pmntoas cu cenu. Punctele negre erau buci de 315 cm de crbuni, provenind de la conifere (?). Fragmentele ceramice au fost colectate i prezentate spre expertizare Institutului de Arheologie Vasile Prvan. n urma restaurrii a rezultat un vasborcan lucrat cu mna, din past modest cu nisip i impuriti n compoziie, ars inegal la diverse nuane brune cu pete cenuii la exterior i bruncenuiu la interior. Netezit cu grij pare a fi fost iniial i lustruit, dar acesta s-a pierdut aproape complet. Pe linia diametrului maxim au fost plasate trei proeminene organice albiate din care pleac spre buz cte un bru alveolar (fig. 2/1). Forma, decorul i modul de tratare a suprafeelor pledeaz pentru ncadrarea lui n sec. IVIII a.Cr. Fusaiola, de form bitronconic, fusese lucrat din past relativ bun, ars la negrucenuiu ptat, lustruit cu grij, dar tocit la ambele extremiti (fig. 2/2). Galetul de amfibolit (puternic rulat), de culoare cenuiuverzui nchis, avnd o form lenticular, prezint urme de uzur pe dou fee alturate (cu tendine de faetare), iar pe cele dou muchii dintre ele sprturi semicirculare de mici dimensiuni (ciobituri) rezultate din percuie pe un obiect dur (fig. 2/12). Ct privete ocurena posibil a rocii, ea este de aflat n isturile metamorfice aparinnd Autohtonului danubian din vecintatea de vestnordvest a oraului DrobetaTurnu Severin, deci foarte aproape de locul descoperirii complexului n discuie. Printre resturile osteologice, remarcm patru vrfuri mai sus amintita pies de os lucrat pe un metapod de Equs caballus1 lateral II sau III, ngrijit finisat cu proximitatea distal bine ascuit i lefuit (fig. 2/3); un altul tiat pe o uln dreapt de Ovicaprin/Capreolus, juvenil/subadult (fig. 2/7); cel de al treilea lucrat dintr-o diafiz stng de tibie de Ovicaprin/Capreolus (fig. 2/4); i, n sfrit, cel de al patrulea tiat pe o diafiz stng tot de Ovicaprin/Capreolus (fig. 2/5). Alte resturi osteologice neprelucrate provin de la un metapod proximal de Bos taurus, rulat i fosilizat (fig. 2/9); de la ulna stng a unui Cervus elaphus, poate aleas n vederea transformrii ei tot ntr-un vrf (fig. 2/10); de la un metacarpian stng epidistal, subadult/adult avnd pe una din fee desprinderi intenionate n vederea obinerii unei baghete (fig. 2/11) i, n sfrit, o uln stng de Ovis/Capra, care prin prelucrare ar fi putut fi transformat tot ntr-un vrf. Din analiza materialului identificat i a contextului n care acesta se prezint putem trage urmtoarele concluzii: situl descris este accesibil prin depirea unei strmtori foarte scunde i parcurgerea unui traseu accidentat i se afl n zona de obscuritate total. De aceea, accesul nu putea fi fcut dect folosind surse de lumin, opaie sau tore. din cauza pantei descendente partea inferioar a galeriei unde au fost identificate obiectele, prezint o temperatur realtiv sczut i supus fluctuaiilor anotimpuale. Vara temperatura nu depete 89 grade dar iarna ea acioneaz ca o capcan de aer rece, putnd fi atinse frecvent temperaturi negative. Faptul este dovedit prin prezena unor cruste calcitice de descuamare epilitic produse prin gelifracie, microforme de dezagregare foarte caracteristice, folosite ca indicator paleoclimatic. Pe baza tuturor acestor observaii suntem, credem, ndreptii s vedem n descoperirea noastr o depunere intenionat legat probabil de un anumit ritual, posibil individual, avnd mai cu seam n vedere resturile osteologice prelucrate sau pregtite n vederea prelucrrii. n momentul descoperirii, n vasul spart am gsit un amestec de cenu, sol i mici fragmente de crbuni, care n urma unei solifluciuni locale s-a amestecat parial cu argil. Dar, ntruct nu s-a fcut o analiz chimic a coninutului lui, mai cu seam a cenuii n vederea identificrii unei eventuale depuneri de cenu uman, ar fi riscant s avansm pe aceast linie o ipotez ct de ct plauzibil. Desigur, n-ar fi fost imposibil s ne aflm n faa unei urne funerare, deci a unei depuneri funerare, dar lipsa mai sus amintitelor expertize ndeamn la pruden. Cu certitudine este ns vorba de o depunere (chiar dac nu funerar) ce va fi fost fcut de ctre un numr mic de persoane, ntruct morfologia peterii limita numrul participanilor.

Determinrile specifice au fost realizate de ctre dl Adrian Blescu (MNIR CNCP), cruia i mulumim i pe aceast cale.

208

Noi date privind depuneri rituale n peteri din Mehedini

Datnd, aa cum am vzut mai sus, n limitele sec. IVIII a.Cr., depunerea poate fi legat de membrii unei/unor comuniti getice, tiut fiind faptul c n aceea perioad nordul podiului Mehedini era populat de aceste comuniti care au lsat n preajma Topolniei numerose dovezi de locuire, att la intrrile peterilor din zon vetrele din Galeria VetrelorTopolnia, unelte i arme din fier n grotele din Faa Prosecului, cuptoarele de prelucrat fier n Cireu. n Lunca Ponoreului, n vecintatea peterii Epuran, am colectat fragmente de hematit folosit ca minereu de fier pentru centrul siderurgic local. *** Cea de a doua depunere a fost descoperit tot ntr-o peter. Este vorba despre Petera Cloani2, situat n comuna cu acelai nume, judeul Gorj, n versantul drept al Motrului Mare, la o altitudine absolut 440 m i cca. 100 m deasupra talvegului. Petera i vecintile ei sunt intens vizitate i temeinic studiate interdisciplinar de peste 40 de ani. Surprinztor, n cursul unei aciuni de ecologizare a Galeriei Laboratoarelor din petera Cloani, un grup de elevi, membri ai clubului speologic Delta din Tulcea, au descoperit la numai 20 m spre sud de intrare i pe acelai nivel de carstificare, o cavitate nou. Dup o intrare scund de 40/80 cm urmeaz un culoar strmt care oblig la avansare n poziia tr. Dup numai civa metri, planeul orizontal se frnge trecnd ntr-un pu vertical de 4 m adncime care se poate cobor prin crare liber (fig. 3). La baza acestui pu se afl o ni de 0.8 m adncime n care exploratorii au descoperit trei vase de ceramic de diferite dimensiuni i forme, precum i cteva fragmente ceramice de mici dimensiuni, provenind de la un al patrulea vas ce nu a putut fi reconstituit. Vasele erau culcate pe o parte i nu conineau nici un fel de resturi. n continuare, galeria avanseaz nc circa 35 mspre nordvest, avnd o lungime total de 56 m. Exceptnd cteva pasaje scunde, este nalt de pn la 7 m i foarte frumos ornat cu stalagmite, draperii i stalactite. Cu excepia vaselor nu s-a observat nici o alt urm a unei prezene umane. Piesele din aceast depunere se rezum la un vas bitronconic cu gtul relativ nalt, buz puternic evazat i uor teit, el avnd pe linia diametrului maxim patru proeminene organice (fig. 4/1); i la dou ceti, una de form tronconic cu toart supranlat i buza uor rsfnt spre interior (fig. 4/2), cea de a doua bitronconic, buza uor evazat i toarta supranlat (fig. 4/3). ntregul complex aparine epocii hallstatt-iene (probabil Hallstatt A) cele dou ceti ns avnd similitudini cu piese ale epocii anterioare, respectiv epoca Bronzului. Deoarece vasele nu puteau ajunge intacte prin cdere n nia de la baza puului, este clar c cineva le-a transportat cu grij, cobornd cu ele pasajul vertical de 4 metri, dup care le-a depus acolo. Este de presupus c singurul motiv pentru care ele au fost transportate ntr-o peter mic, mult mai greu accesibil dect Petera Cloani (aflat la numai 20 m distan), coborte n pu i apoi abandonate n ni fusese unul ritual, legat probabil de cultul morilor i nu numai. Deoarece n alte situaii vasele ce nsoeau depunerile funerare sau de alt gen din peteri puteau conine alimente, este plauzibil ca i n vasele de la Cloani s fi fost puse grne, buci de carne, etc. Dar acestea au fost consumate de roztoarele i mustelidele care frecventeaz cavitile carstice. Aceasta ar explica de ce vasele au fost gsite goale i culcate pe o parte, dei este de presupus c iniial ele au fost depuse n poziie vertical. Ipoteza este susinut, eventual, de identificarea n galerie, n diferite puncte, a unor fragmente izolate de oase de capr. Ca i n cazul depunerii din Petera Cloani este riscant ipoteza unei depuneri funerare dat fiind tocmai lipsa oricror resturi din interiorul vaselor. De asemenea, contextul morfologic al zonei n care s-au depus vasele limita strict numrul participanilor la respectivul ritual.

Materialul arheologic pe care se bazeaz expunerea de fa este nregistrat la Institutul de Speologie Emil Racovi i se afl expus la Muzeul Speologic Subteran din Petera Cloani.

209

Cristian LASCU, Silvia MARINESCUBLCU

Addenda n cursul unor prospeciuni geologice pe Valea Cernei autorul a descoperit o peter nou, suspendat ntr-un perete vertical n versantul stng al vii, n dreptul sectorului 7 Izvoare Reci. Petera este situat la 180 m altitudine relativ i, dei intrarea sa este vizibil de la distan, pentru a urca la ea este necesr escaladarea unui pasaj aproape vertical, dificil, din cauza prizelor foarte instabile. Dup un portal impuntor, de cca 8 m nlime, urmeaz o galerie foarte scund, apoi o sal mai spaioas, uscat i lipsit de speleoteme, cu planeul orizontal presrat cu fragmente angulare de calcar desprinse din bolt. O acumulare de pietre de la baza peretului estic ni s-a prut a nu fi natural. Dup ndeprtarea unui strat de o jumtate de metru de bolovani am gsit un vas simplu de lut, de cca 25 cm lungime, cu dou toarte simetrice, fr ornamentaii, vas asemntor cu ulcelele nc n uz n Oltenia. Vasul avea un capac din lut ntrit i coninea bulgri de argil amestecat cu sol, de culoare cenuiu nchis. Este probail ca unele populaii din zonele bogate n peteri s fi perpetuat un ritual strvechi, ncredinnd muntelui diverse ofrande puse ntr-un loc secret.
Bibliografie G. Halasi et alii 1985 G. Halasi, I. Emdi

Archaelogical discovery in the Izbucul Topoliei Cave, n Travaux du l'Institute de Speologie Emil Racovi 19. Descoperire arheologic n Petera Izbucul Topoliei, n SCIVA 36, 3.

Fig. 1. Zona depunerii din Petera Epuran.

210

Noi date privind depuneri rituale n peteri din Mehedini

Fig. 2. Piesele din depunerea din Petera Epuran.

211

Cristian LASCU, Silvia MARINESCUBLCU

Fig. 3. Planul Peterii Cloani (dup M. Dobrescu, Fl. Dianu Clubul Speologic Delta Tulcea).

212

Noi date privind depuneri rituale n peteri din Mehedini

Fig. 4. Vase hallstattiene din Petera Cloani.

213

Descoperiri paleolitice n nordul Dobrogei Adrian Dobo* Mihaela Iacob** Dorel Paraschiv**
Rsum: Pendant les fouilles menes dans la forteresse romaine Ibida, dans les secteur de la ncropole, il y a eu de dcouverts des pices lithiques palolithiques. Ultrieurement, les recherches de terrain ont trouves des pices nouvelles dans des divers points, qui sont peut-tre des possibles habitations palolithiques. Mots cls: Palolithique, Dobrogea, pices lithiques. Cuvinte cheie: paleolitic, Dobrogea, piese litice.

Cu ocazia spturilor arheologice de la cetatea roman Ibida, pe teritoriul satului Slava Rus, com. Slava Cerchez, jud. Tulcea, au fost descoperite, n sectorul necropolei, mai multe piese litice paleolitice. Prin cercetri de teren efectuate ulterior n zon au fost gsite noi piese n diverse puncte, ce ar putea atesta locuiri paleolitice.

Necropol . Punctul se afl cca. 300 m sudvest de zidurile cetii. Aici au fost descoperite n 2002 (perieghez Mihaela Iacob, D. Paraschiv) 34 de piese de silex cu granulaie mare (identificare macroscopic), de culoare glbuie, cteva avnd o uoar nuan roietic. Ele se grupeaz astfel: opt nuclee, toate de silex. Unul dintre acestea (fig. 1/1) este globular (dimensiuni 7.3 x 7.2 x 6.2 cm); pe suprafaa acestuia au fost identificate cinci planuri de lovire, iar negativele indic desprinderea de lame i achii lamelare. Al doilea este prismatic, cu un plan de lovire, prezentnd negative ale unor desprinderi lamelare (4.3 x 4.6 x 2.8 cm). Al treilea este cvasiprismatic (5.6 x 4.1 x 3.1 cm), cu un plan de lovire; prezint negative de achii i lame. Al patrulea, cvasipiramidal (4.7 x 3.8 x 2.2 cm) are dou planuri de lovire i a fost folosit pentru obinerea de achii i achii lamelare. Al cincilea nucleu este pe achie (5.9 x 4.3 x 2.8 cm) i prezint negativele a 4 desprinderi. La acestea se adaug un nucleu alungit (8.6 x 3.7 x 3.4 cm), cu o suprafa cortical; la unul din capete are 2 negative ale unor desprinderi lamelare microlitice. Ultimele dou nuclee sunt informe (7.4 x 6.7 x 4.2 cm, respectiv 6.6 x 5.1 x 3.1 cm). o achie masiv (10.7 x 4.9 x 1.8 cm), cu talon neted (fig. 1/2). o achie nucleal (fig. 1/3) masiv (9.5 x 5.4 x 1.8 cm) prezint pe faa ventral, la extremitatea distal, o sprtur ce sugereaz folosirea unei percuii pe nicoval; probabil provine dintr-un nucleu prismatic, iar negativele indic desprinderi lamelare, de pe dou planuri opuse. A mai fost descoperit i un fragment de tablet de ravivage, cu dimensiunile de 4.5 x 3.2 x 1.6 cm. trei piese Levallois. Prima este o achie (6.1 x 5.6 x 1.4 cm), cu talon neted (fig. 1/4), nclinat spre faa ventral; o poriune a extremitii distale este fin retuat. Urmeaz o nou achie (6.6 x 5.1 x 0.9 cm), de asemenea cu talon neted. Ultima pies este o lam ntreag (fig. 1/5), neretuat (6.5 x 2.6 x 0.7 cm), cu talonul neted, nclinat spre fa ventral. 14 achii simple, medii. dou lame simple, de dimensiuni medii. cinci piese indeterminabile. La vest de cavou. Punctul de afl la cca. 100 m SV de cavoul roman. n urma perieghezei efectuate n 2003 (participani Mihaela Iacob, A. Dobo, C. Micu), au fost descoperite 79 piese de silex. Aceast roc prezint n mare, n urma examinrii macroscopice, caracteristici asemntoare celei din care au fost prelucrate piesele descoperite pe teritoriul necropolei. Piesele sunt:

* **

Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan, Str. Henri Coand. 11, Sector 1, Bucureti, addobos@yahoo.co.uk. Institutul de cercetri Eco-Muzeale Tulcea.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 215219.

Adrian DOBO, Mihaela IACOB, Dorel PARASCHIV

apte nuclee. ntre acestea, trei prismatice (8.8 x 4.7 x 3.7 cm, 8.7 x 6.6 x 3.8 cm, respectiv 5.6 x 5.1 x 4.3 cm) i prezint negativele desprinderii unor achii lamelare i lame. Primul are doua planuri de lovire, al doilea unul singur (fig. 2/1), iar ultimul, dou planuri perpendiculare. Urmtoarele dou sunt plate (7.1 x 6.8 x 3.6 cm i 9.6 x 7.0 x 3.1 cm); primul dintre ele are mai multe planuri de lovire, iar al doilea o fa cu desprinderi centripete, opuse uneia corticale (fig. 2/2). Ultimele dou nuclee sunt informe (5.3 x 3.4 x 3.0 cm, 4.5 x 2.9 x 2.3 cm), cu mai multe planuri de lovire. Unul dintre acestea are o mic suprafa acoperit de cortex. patru piese Levallois: o achie masiv (11.1 x 6.9 x 2.8 cm), cu talon neted (fig. 2/3), nclinat spre faa ventral; faa dorsal prezint negative de desprinderi centripete. A doua (8.8 x 6.0 x 1.1 cm), cu talonul de asemenea neted (fig. 2/4), prezint urme de preparare bipolar. O achie Levallois (fig. 2/5) este lat (5.5 x 8.0 x 1.7 cm), cu talonul ndeprtat, cu urme de desprinderi centripete pe faa dorsal. n fine, a fost descoperit i o lam Levallois (fig. 2/6), ntreag (8.9 x 2.9 x 1.0 cm), cu talonul neted. o achie simpl, macrolitic 26 de achii simple, ntegi sau fragmentare, de dimensiuni medii; 25 de achii i fragmente microlitice; patru achii lamelare, din care 2 macrolitice i 2 medii; o lam macrolitic simpl; trei lame simple, de dimensiuni medii; opt fragmente indeterminabile; ntre acestea, trebuie amintit unul care a suferit aciunea focului. Dm mai jos un tabel n care am grupat tipurile de piese dup dimensiuni. Tipul de suport Achie Levallois Dimensiuni Macrolitice Medii Microlitice Macrolitice Medii Microlitice Macrolitice Medii Microlitice Macrolitice Medii Microlitice Macrolitice Medii Microlitice Nr. piese 2 1 0 0 2 2 1 26 25 1 0 0 1 3 0 3 2 2 8

Achie lamelar

Achie simpl

Lam Levallois

Lam simpl Nucleu prismatic Nucleu plat Nuclee informe Indeterminabil

Dup cum se observ, n lotul studiat nu exist unelte; o caracteristic destul de frapant a pieselor Levallois este talonul neted, cvasiprezent la cele descoperite aici.

Mnstirea Uspenia. Punctul se afl la cca. 100 m nordvest de mnstire, pe panta unui deal. Aici au fost descoperite 11 piese: un nucleu discoidal (4.8 x 3.8 x 2.3 cm), din silex fin granulat, o lam neretuat (fig. 1/6), reflechi (9.2 x 3.4 x 0.9 cm), cu talon neted, cioplit din roc gresoas albstruie. trei fragmente distale de lam, de dimensiuni medii, dou de silex cu granulaie mare, unul din roc gresoas albstruie.

216

Descoperiri paleolitice n nordul Dobrogei

ase achii de silex, trei de dimensiuni medii iar trei microlitice.

Fntna Mare (Bapunar) Dealul Ciolpani. Punctul se afl la cca. 4 km vest de sat, pe un platou la care se ajunge pe un drum forestier. La cca. 500 m de punctul topografic 03334, spre centrul platoului, C. Micu a descoperit un vrf pseudoLevallois (5.2 x 3.5 x 0.7 cm) din silex gri, fin granulat. Piesa are talonul faetat i prezint retue de folosire pe partea dreapt. Partizani. n centrul satului, Mihaela Iacob i D. Paraschiv au descoperit o achie de silex maroniu deschis, cu unele poriuni albstrui (5 x 3.8 x 1.5 cm). Piesa prezint, la extremitatea distal, retue de folosire.
Este nc prematur s ncercm ncadrarea acestor piese, pn nu vom avea descoperiri in situ, dar ele reprezint, fr ndoial, repere care trebuie luate n calcul pentru viitoarele cercetri, mai ales c pn acum pentru nordul Dobrogei, descoperirile paleolitice sunt destul de puine, i limitate mai cu seam la semnalri (Al. Punescu 1999, p. 2028, 6470). Bibliografie: Al. Punescu 1999

Paleoliticul i mezoliticul de pe teritoriul Dobrogei, Bucureti.

217

Adrian DOBO, Mihaela IACOB, Dorel PARASCHIV

Fig. 1. Piese din silex 15. Slava Rus Necropol; 6. Slava Rus Mnstirea Uspenia.

218

Descoperiri paleolitice n nordul Dobrogei

Fig. 2. Piese din silex 16. Slava Rus La vest de cavou.

219

Obiecte getice din fier descoperite la Cscioarele Ostrovel George TROHANI

Rsum: Pendant les fouilles archologiques de 1963 dans le tell nolithique dOstrovel Cscioarele on a dcouvert 10 objets en fer cinq crampons, un couteau, une serpette, un collier (?), un ciseau, une point de lance. Il sagit de pices gtes du Ier sicle av.J.C. la dcouverte, importante par sa composition, pourrait reprsenter un dept votif. Mots cls: objets en fer, La Tne, dpt votif. Cuvinte cheie: obiecte de fier, La Tne, deposit votive.

n timpul campaniei de spturi din anul 1963, la o adncime de 0.35 m, n caseta din S.XII, s-a descoperit un lot de 10 obiecte getice din fier. Descoperirea nu este ntmpltoare, pe Ostrovelul din mijlocul lacului Ctlui fiind scoase la suprafa i alte obiecte getice din sec. III a.Chr. fragmente ceramice i monede din argint (S. MarinescuBlcu 1966, p. 113124), iar n zona nconjurtoare, pe malurile lacului, identificndu-se n cursul vremii mai multe aezri getice din sec. IVIII a.Chr. i III a.Chr. Piesele, pe care le vom prezenta n cele ce urmeaz, ne-au fost puse la dispoziie de ctre Silvia MarinescuBlcu, participant la spturile arheologice din punctul respectiv, fapt pentru care i mulumim i prin prezenta. 1. Scoab n form de U realizat dintr-o bar cu seciunea rectangular, mult mai lat n zona median. Prile active sunt arcuite. H = 9 cm, lime baz = 3.8 cm, seciunea n zona median 1.1x0.2 cm, iar la capete 0.5x0.3 cm (fig. 1/1). 2. Scoab n form de U realizat dintr-o bar cu seciunea rectangular, mult mai lat n zona median. Prile active sunt drepte. H = 11.4 cm, lime baz = 4.7 cm, seciunea n zona median 1.2x0.3 cm, iar la capete 0.5x0.55 cm (fig. 1/2). 3. Scoab n form de U cu laturile mult evazate spre exterior, realizat dintr-o bar cu seciunea rectangular, mult mai lat n zona median. H = 3.3 cm, lime baz = 5 cm, seciunea n zona median 0.5x0.2 cm (fig. 2/1). 4. Scoab n forma unui cui, realizat dintr-o bar groas, ascuit, avnd unul dintre capete ndoit n unghi drept. H =12.3 cm, grosime = 0.4x0.2 cm (fig. 2/2). 5. Ferectur dintr-o tabl fragmentar, ndoit la unul dintre capete. L = 5 cm, lime = 2 cm, grosime 0.2 cm (fig. 2/3). 6. Cuit realizat dintr-o lam lung, triunghiular ca form i seciune. n dreptul mnerului sunt urmele a dou orificii pentru prindere. L = 15.2 cm, lime baz 1.9 cm (fig. 2/4). 7. Cosor constnd dintr-o tij lat, lung i rectangular n seciune (0.8x0.2 cm) care servea la prins n mnerul de lemn; lama scurt este arcuit i triunghiular n seciune (1.4x0.1 cm). L total = 10.7 cm (fig. 2/5). 8. Cerc ce putea reprezenta o eventual brar (?), avnd seciunea rotund. D = 8.7 cm, grosime = 0.15 cm (fig. 2/6). 9. Dalt cu toc longitudinal pentru coad, capul cu seciunea oval, tiul mai lat dect restul piesei i drept. L = 9 cm, D bazei = 1.9 cm, lime ti = 1.4 cm (fig. 3/1). 10. Vrf de lance mare, prelung, cu nervur median unghiular. Tubul de nmnuare este lung, cu seciunea oval i prevzut cu un orificiu de prindere. L total = 43 cm (L lam = 28 cm), lime lam = 4 cm, D tubului de nmnuare = 2 cm, grosimea lamei = 1 cm (fig. 3/2). *** Se constat o diversitate a formelor i utilizrii obiectelor descoperite. Scoabele dintr-o bar patrulater, avnd capetele ascuite iar marginile ndoite n unghi drept sau obtuz i mai lungi dect corpul propriu-zis, au diferite ntrebuinri sunt folosite la mbinarea brnelor, la ui i ferstre etc. (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, p. 113, fig. 58/1624). Scoaba n form de cui (nr.

Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Calea Victoriei 12, Bucureti.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 221225.

George TROHANI

4) seamn cu o pies de acelai tip, avnd o lungime de 41.5 cm, descoperit la Sarmizegetusa (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, fig. 58/2627) de provenien roman (?). Ferecturile serveau n special la ntrirea uilor (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, p. 114 115). Cuitul este o unealt larg rspndit n mai toate aezrile getodace, dar cel de la Cscioarele se remarc prin lungime i starea relativ bun de conservare. Cosorul, utilizat la curatul viei-de-vie i la altoit, este de tipul cu tija lung ce se fixa ntr-un mner de lemn. Lama scurt i arcuit are seciunea triunghiular. Astfel de piese s-au descoperit n numeroase aezri getodace din sec. II a.Chr.I p.Chr. (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, p. 75). Dalta se ncadreaz n tipul III cu toc longitudinal pentru coad, varianta a avnd seciunea oval a corpului, iar tiul mai lat dect restul piesei i drept (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, p. 54, 8991, fig. 48/79, 17, 1920; 49), variant folosit n special de ctre tmplari. Piese de acest tip s-au descoperit n numeroase aezri din sec. I a.Chr.I p.Chr. Vrful de lance se nscrie n tipul I, varianta b mare, prelung, cu nervur median unghiular. Prin lungimea ei, piesa descoperit la Cscioarele este una dintre cele mai lungi din nordul Dunrii. Analogii se ntlnesc n special n mediul roman dar i la Cplna sau Costeti (I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi 1971, p. 133, fig. 70/2526). Dou vrfuri de lance oarecum asemntoare, datnd din sec. I a.Chr., s-au descoperit i ntr-un mormnt de la Radovanu (Al. Vulpe 1976, p. 208, fig. 18/23), deci nu departe de Cscioarele. Toate aceste piese par a reprezenta un depozit de unelte de fier. Depunerea lui pe Ostrovelul de la Cscioarele ar putea avea un caracter votiv, dei urme de vieuire, dar nu de locuire, s-au mai descoperit, dup cum am amintit, n acest loc. Dar locuirile propriu-zise erau n diferite puncte pe malurile actualului lac Ctlui i nu pe Ostrovel, care probabil i n vremea geilor era o insul. n ceea ce privete o eventual ipotez a existenei unui atelier de fierar, att pe Ostrovel ct i n locuirile din mprejurimi, descoperirile de pn acum sunt neconcludente singurul astfel de atelier descoperit se afl la cca. 7 km, n aezarea de la Chirnogi Rudrie (G. Trohani 1975, p. 125145).

Bibliografie: I. Glodariu, E. Iaroslavschi: 1971 S. Marinescu Blcu: 1966 G. Trohani: 1975 A. Vulpe: 1976

Civilizaia fierului la daci, ClujNapoca. Cteva descoperiri getodace de la Cscioarele, n SCIV, 17, 1, p. 113124. Spturile arheologice efectuate la Chirnogi, n CA, I, MNIRSR, p. 127145. La ncropole tumulaire gte de Popeti, n ThracoDacica, I, p. 208, fig.

18/23.

222

Obiecte getice din fier descoperite la Cscioarele Ostrovel

Fig. 1. Cscioarele Ostrovel 12. scoabe.

223

George TROHANI

Fig. 2. Cscioarele Ostrovel 12. scoabe; 3. ferectur; 4. cuit; 5. cosor; 6. brar (?).

224

Obiecte getice din fier descoperite la Cscioarele Ostrovel

Fig. 3. Cscioarele Ostrovel 1. dalt; 2. vrf de lance.

225

Prezentri de carte

LINDA ELLIS (ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory: An Encyclopaedia, Garland Publishing Inc., New York & London, 2000, 795 pag. Ctlin NICOLAE Lucrarea este editat de ctre Linda Ellis de la Department of Classics and Classical Archaeology and Museum Studies Program, San Francisco State University (San Francisco, California, USA), cunoscut, de altfel, i specialitilor romni prin activitatea desfurat de-a lungul mai multor ani pe teritoriul Romniei. Cartea este structurat n trei mari pri: o serie de articole introductive, enciclopedia propriu-zis i indexul. Lucrarea ncepe cu menionarea autorilor (p. VIIXI), n numr de 89, predominant arheologi, pe lng care gsim i specialiti n tiine conexe arheologiei precum arheozoologia, paleoecologia, arheometria sau specialiti n tiine exacte fizic, chimie, geofizic etc. ntre autori recunoatem multe nume deja consacrate pe plan mondial: George F. Bass, John Chapman, Robert C. Dunnel, Linda Ellis, Clive Orton, James M. Skibo, Christopher Tilley, pentru a nu meniona dect o mic parte. Dup o pagin de Mulumiri (p. XII), urmeaz o Introducere (p. XVXXVI), structurat n opt pri distincte care trateaz rapid problematica disciplinei arheologiei. Vom enumera n continuare titlurile n original ale acestor pri fiindc ele ilustreaz convingtor viziunea autorilor despre arhelogie i mai ales despre etapele cercetrii arheologice: 1. Archaeology: A Discipline and a Profession; 2. Site Formation, Exploration and Examination; 3. Excavation, Documentation, and Conservation of Archaeological Sites and Finds; 4. PostExcavation Analysis; 5. Quantitative Methods and Data Management; 6. Archaeological Disciplinary Theory and TemporalGeographic Area Studies; 7. TemporalGeographic Area Studies; 8. Management and Protective Legislation of Archaeological Resources. Introducerea este urmat de un ghid sumar (p. XXVIIXXXII) al principalelor articole legate de temele menionate deja n introducere i de o list a vocilor enciclopediei (p. XXXIIIXXXVII) dup autor. Aceast parte introductiv este urmat de enciclopedia propriu-zis, structurat alfabetic (cum era i normal) pe 682 de pagini (p. 1682). Aa cum reiese i din titlu, majoritatea vocilor se concentreaz pe metode arheologice, mai precis: tehnici de sptur, tehnici de analiz a materialului post-sptur, metode de conservare i restaurare, metode de datare, analiza materiilor prime, analize arheozoologice, palinologice, paleoetnobotanice, antropologice, metode fizicochimice spectrometrie, spectroscopie n infrarou, microscopie n infrarou, metalografie, metode nucleare, spectroscopie magnetic, radiografie, analiz prin difracia razelor X (XRD), metode cantitative i stilistice (care implic utilizarea masiv a computerului), dar i teorii i curente n arheologie: Behavioral Archaeology, Ecological Theory in Archaeology, Ethnoarchaeology, Experimental Archaeology, Gender Archaeology, Marxist Archaeology, New/Processual Archaeology, Postprocessual Archaeology, Social Archaeology, Symbolic Archaeology etc. Un numr destul de mare de voci se refer la managementul siturilor arhelogice i la legislaia monumentelor arheologice, precum i la o serie de programe de protecie a patrimoniului arheologic. Enciclopedia mai cuprinde i un numr de 60 de biografii ale unor arheologi celebri, dintre care 32 nc n activitate, marea lor majoritate provenind din spaiul anglosaxon, unii dintre ei fiind i autori de voci n enciclopedie. n ceea ce privete structura enciclopediei menionm c exist voci mici i voci mari, divizate la rndul lor n pri mai mici. Fiecare tip de voce are o bibliografie minimal i cel puin o trimitere la o voce nrudit, sau, n cazul lipsei bibliografiei, pentru o voce exist o trimitere ctre o voce care are bibliografie. Biografiile arheologilor sunt nsoite i ele de o bibliografie cu lucrrile mai importante ale fiecruia. Lucrarea are i ilustraii, prezente ns la o mic parte din voci. Lucrarea se ncheie cu un index foarte util, structurat i el n dou pri: indexul subiectelor (p. 683699) i indexul de nume (p. 701705). Aa cum precizeaz autorii nc din introducere, disciplinei arheologice i s-au adugat de-a lungul timpului alte tiine care au condus la rafinarea cercetrii i la o mai mare acuratee a interpretrii i reconstituirii trecutului, tiine i mai ales metode (sau teorii) care sunt relevate clar

Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Calea Victoriei 12, Bucureti, tekyr@hotmail.com.

227

Prezentri de carte

i comprehensibil de autori, enciclopedia constituindu-se astfel ntr-un instrument de lucru util pentru specialiti i nu numai.

STEFAN KAROL KOZLOWSKI, Nemrik. An Aceramic Village In Northern Iraq, Swiatowit Supplement Series P: Prehistory and Middle Ages, vol. VIII, Institute of Archaeology, Warsaw University, Warsaw, 2002, 117 pag., 29 fig., 174 pl., 11 tab. Irina NICOLAE Lucrarea de fa este un bilan al cercetrilor efectuate timp de patru campanii n perioada 19851989 n tell-ul de la Nemrik, situat n nordul Irakului, de ctre o echip compus din cercettori de la Institutul Polonez de Arheologie i de la Muzeul Naional de Arheologie din Varovia. Monografia este structurat n 11 capitole: 1. Introducere (p. 1518), 2. Situl (p. 1926), 3. Locuinele (p. 2735), 4. Mormintele (p. 3740), 5. Evoluia aezrii (p. 4148), 6. Industria silexului (p. 4966), 7. Industria litic (p. 6977), 8. Plastica (p. 7781), 9. Small finds (p. 8187), 10. Mediul (p. 8994), 11. Concluzii (p. 94100) la care se adaug un Cuvnt nainte semnat de Olivier Aurenche, o prefa i un masiv corp de anexe compus din 174 plane i 11 tabele. Descoperirea absolut ntmpltoare a tell-ului (merit amintit povestea sumar datorit unei defeciuni a mainii echipei, arheologii au fost nevoii s parcurg civa kilometri pe jos, ocazie cu care a fost identificat i tell-ul) a fost urmat de efectuarea unor spturi intensive ce aveau s releve importana sitului de la Nemrik pentru neoliticul Orientului Mijlociu. Din pcate, condiiile politice din Irak dar i din Polonia au determinat o anumit grab a echipei de arheologi ceea ce a fcut ca uneori cantitatea s primeze asupra calitii, dup cum cu sinceritate precizeaz autorul n introducere. Aezarea investigat de arheologii polonezi are o istorie de aproximativ 2700 de ani, materializat n teren prin apte faze de locuire de aproximativ 100200 de ani fiecare, ntrerupte de tot attea abandonri ale aezrii. n toate cele apte faze aezarea a acoperit o suprafa de 11.5 ha i a avut cel putin 46 locuine spaioase ntre care, ncepnd din faza a patra, este amenajat un pavaj de piatr, situaie ntlnit i la Mlefaat i Qermez Dere. Comunitatea, de numai 4850 de oameni, i baza existena pe exploatarea resurselor naturale. Din faza III b este atestat domesticirea animalelor oi, capre crora n faza IV li se adaug bovinele i porcul, dar ele au jucat un rol marginal n dieta celor de la Nemrik. Lipsesc cu desvrire dovezile care s ateste cultivarea cerealelor. Din capitolul destinat prezentrii mormintelor aflm c n fazele II i III ab exista obiceiul inhumrii decedailor sub sau ntre locuine, ncepnd cu faza a patra fiind amenajat un cimitir n afara zonei locuite. n urma spturilor ntreprinse n regiune de echipe britanice i germane s-a dovedit c Nemrik-ul avea n jur o reea de sate satelit, constituindu-se ntr-un centru al unui teritoriu destul de mare. Aezarea a fost abandonat la mijlocul mileniului IX BP probabil n urma unor secete prelungite. Aezri umane au continuat ns s existe n zona de step adiacent, precum Tell-ethTalath, Ginnig, Mazgalia, fiind atestate pn la 7500 BP, dat la care se nregistreaz apariia culturii Hassuna. Caracterul reprezentativ al sitului este conferit i de abundena materialului arheologic mobil (peste 72000 de piese de lut, silex, piatr, os, scoici), prezentat detaliat n capitolele ase, apte, opt i nou. n opinia cercettorilor polonezi exist elemente care pot duce la definirea culturii Nemrik plasat din punct de vedere geografic ntre rurile Khabur, Tigru i Tartar, atingnd parial i cmpia turc Diyarbakir. ntre elementele caracteristice ale acestei culturi sunt amintite: plastica de piatr, acele de os cu perforaii rotunde, discurile mici i rotunde de lut (considerate obiecte de prestigiu), plcuele de os ornamentate cu incizii, precum i pavarea spaiului dintre locuine cu piatr i practica inhumrii ntre locuine n fazele timpurii.

cIMeC Bucureti, Piaa Presei Libere 1.

228

Prezentri de carte

Prezena materiilor prime provenind din zona anatolian (obsidian), dar i prezena obiectelor de tip Nemrik la Shimshara i Jarmo demonstreaz o activitate comercial intens i o mare mobilitate a locuitorilor aezrii de la Nemrik. n urma spturilor de la Nemrik i din siturile nvecinate, s-a formulat ipoteza existenei unui centru de neolitizare independent, dar contemporan cu cel din Levant, n acest proces complex Nemrik-ul jucnd un rol important. Textul este susinut de un numr impresionant de plane de o calitate grafic excelent i de o serie de tabele care cuprind ntre altele i 81 de date radiocarbon. Lucrarea se prezint ca o sintez a datelor disponibile, dar autorul nu ezit s corecteze sau s nuaneze unele interpretri deja formulate. Accentul este pus i pe unele probleme importante ale arheologiei precum: locul obiectelor n cadrul locuinei, durata folosirii unei locuine, cauzele mortalitaii, cauzele abandonrii aezrii etc. per total, nc o oper de calitate a colii poloneze de arheologie.

Frdric Grard and Laurens Thissen (editors), The Neolithic of Central Anatolia. Internal Developments and External Relations during the 9th6th Millennia CAL. BC., Proceedings of the International Central Anatolian Neolithic eWorkshop Table Ronde, Istanbul, 2324 November 2001: Istanbul 2002, Ege Yayinlari, ISBN 9758070525, Paperback, 348 pages. Distributed by Ege Yayinlari (30 EUR) and by Oxbow Books (33.95 GBP). Alexandru DRAGOMAN
CANeW, however, is an interesting sort of conference. Unlike the annual symposium in Ankara for instance, where the body of knowledge gets its passport picture taken, so to speak, in order to be presented to the bureaucracy along with its official I.D. card, CANeW is more like a family picture. Yet, not a snapshot. It is a formal family dinner lets say, where the young and the old, uncles and aunts and cousins meet, speaking within the family, yet not necessarily all too sincerely. The gathering is among people that are closely related, but it is not necessarily a cozy one. The less so, perhaps, for this dinner party is a first of its kind gathering around the same table, the young and the old, the youthful and the wise, the closer and the more distant, the joyful and the resentful, and so on. (Ouz Erdur, p. 285).

It all began after a discussion among a few archaeologists travelling to a common destination, in a hot summer day of June 2000 on the way from Istanbul to Aa Pnar, in Turkish Thrace. Taking into account the new data gathered from vast researches started at the end of the 80s and the beginning of the 90s (for instance, Ufuk Esin at Akl Hyk, Ian Hodder at atalhyk), they decided to initiate a project dedicated to the Neolithic in Central Anatolia. Consequently, in November of the same year, Frdric Grard and Laurens Thissen formed a closed discussion group, made up of 12 researchers (Americans, English, Dutch, French, Italians and Turks) who, via the Internet, were supposed to exchange opinions, ideas and data likely to contribute to a new understanding of the Central Anatolian Neolithic societies from the 9th6th millenia CAL. BC. At the same time with the discussion group, an flexible and dynamic website was created also, open to all those interested in the theme proposed, where were published the preliminary results of the project: syntheses of the online dialogues, geo-archaeological maps with the site distribution, radiocarbon databases etc. (www.chez.com/canew/). A year since the project started, the initiators have decided to transform the discussion group into a free debate in which anyone who wishes can take part. That resulted in the organizing on the 23rd24th of November 2001 of a round table in Istanbul. It was not by chance that a city in Turkey has been chosen for the event, as the organizers wished all the students and researchers in the country about which they speak to be present. At the same time, in order to make it easier for all the participants to attend this round table, admission was free, while the cheapest accommodation as well as the best transport offers in Istanbul was shown on the website. Due to this policy, the number of the participants was very high (over 100, 50 of whom Turks) and varied (Americans, Australian, Belgian, British, Bulgarians, Germans, Greeks, Israelis, Italians, Japanese, Dutch and Polish). Best represented was the young generation of British,

Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan Bucureti, Str. Henri Coand, nr. 11.

229

Prezentri de carte

Dutch, French, German, Italian and Turkish archaeologists. In order to prevent this event from becoming a formal one, enhancing the participants bibliographical list (namely to strengthen their professional/social status), the organizers decided to lay emphasis not on the presentation of the papers (for which 20 minutes were allowed), but on the debates brought about by each paper separately (for which 40 minutes were allowed). Meanwhile, only those papers tackling really important matters were accepted, not the excavations report type. The topics approached were varied, encompassing the following themes: proposals regarding the absolute chronology of the CentralAnatolian Neolithic (Craig Cessford; Peter Ian Kuniholm and Maryanne Newton), the importance of geoarcheological maps related to the distribution of Neolithic sites (Catherine Kuzucuolu), methodological discussions regarding the fieldwalking in the region (Douglas Baird; Geoffrey Summers), the creation of a useful regional terminology (Mihriban zbaaran and Hijlke Buitenhuis; Jean Perrot), new perspectives regarding the manenvironment relation in Neolithic societies (Eleni Asouti and Andrew Fairbairn; Louise Martin, Nerissa Russell and Denise Carruthers; Henk Woldring), hypotheses regarding the origin of the Neolithic in Central Anatolia (Didier Binder; Gne Duru), aspects of the cultural and homogeneity and transformations of social systems in the region (Bleda Dring; Frdric Grard; Roger Matthews; Laurens Thissen), ethnicity (Isabella Caneva), the evaluation of the extent and intensity of contacts between Central Anatolia and the contiguous regions: SouthEast Anatolia, northern Levant, Cilicia, the Lakes Region, the Egeean Sea and northwestern Anatolia (Harald Hauptman; Clemens Lichter; Mehmet zdoan) and an attempt at explaining the social representation by analysing the symbolic repertoires from two important sites of the Neolithic in Anatolia Gbekli Tepe and atalhyk (Damien Bischoff). In the annex of the volume are published two databases comprising the radiocarbon data (Laurens Thissen) and, the Neolithic sites in Central Anatolia, respectively (Frdric Grard). Everyone was invited to join the debates, irrespective of the hierarchy students and teachers as equal participants. Both for the papers and the debates only one international language was used English. All the debates were recorded on tape, and then transcribed on paper, as later the texts were presented on website in integrum. At the end of this workshop the tapes were offered to Ouz Erdur for him to make a sociological evaluation of the conference. His evaluation materialized in one of the most intriguing articles of the volume: Pages from the secret memoirs of a tapetranscriber: a Nitzschean note on knowledge. These transcriptions were also printed in a book only six months after the completion of the project, owing to an independent publishing house. For the printed volume, each participant was invited to speak once again. As well understood, while presenting this volume I did not insist upon the scientific content itself in the least. That not only out of competence reasons. I just wanted to point out the story of this volume, the debates, critical arguments and opinions, often contrary that are present in it. The papers, far from being simple statements of solutions, become pretexts and starting arguments for a type of debate understood as a series of questions whose answers become questions in their turn expecting answers: a number of readings of the past; a round table justified by debates only, not the position in the academic hierarchy or the appartenance to an age group. After having read this volume one cannot fail to remark that in Romania, unfortunately, we keep on showing the same apathy towards the issueing of an archaeological work, lack of interest in various archaeological issues, especially those linked to the theoretical background of our discipline. Todays Romanian archaeology is a series of monotonous, parallel discourses rarely intersecting. I have red this volume with pleasure, as a play in which one regrets being just a spectator gradually turns, while reading, into the joy of taking part in a beautiful discussion next to Frdric Grard, Laurens Thissen and their guests.

230

Prezentri de carte

NEA IERCOAN, Cultura Tiszapolgr pe teritoriul Romniei, Ed. Muzeului Stmrean, Ed. Nereamiae Napocae, ClujNapoca, 2002, 385 pag., 152 pl. Ctlin NICOLAE Cartea reprezint teza de doctorat a autorului, cercettor tiinific la Muzeul Judeean SatuMare, secia din Carei, susinut n 1998, avnd drept conductor tiinific pe dr. Petre Roman. Din pcate autorul a decedat subit n anul 1999, nainte de a putea aduce vreo modificare sau completare tezei i de a vedea cartea care face subiectul prezentrii noastre, tiprit postum. Structura crii urmeaz o schem devenit clasic, care cuprinde cinci capitole: 1. Introducere (p. 1125), 2. Catalogul descoperirilor (p. 25107), 3. Elementele componente ale culturii Tiszapolgr n vestul Romniei (p. 107161), 4. Periodizarea i cronologia descoperirilor Tiszapolgr n vestul Romniei (p. 163181), 5. Concluzii (p. 183187) i o bogat seciune de anexe, la care se adaug o prefa (semnat de ctre Petre Roman) i o postfa. n primul capitol, autorul prezint condiiile de mediu din epoc, aa cum au putut fi ele reconstituite pe baza informaiilor (destul de puine) publicate i arealul culturii Tiszapolgr care cuprinde: estul Ungariei, Slovacia oriental, Serbia de nord, iar n Romnia Banatul, Criana, Slajul, Stmarul, sudvestul Maramureului i o mare parte a Transilvaniei de vest. Dup cum reiese i din titlul crii, autorul se ocup numai de descoperirile de tip Tiszapolgr de pe teritoriul Romniei, mai precis din zona delimitat la sud de rul Mure, la est de Munii Apuseni (Masivul BihorVldeasa), la nord de munii vulcanici OaGuti, iar la vest de frontiera de stat cu Republica Ungaria, aceast regiune reprezentnd 1/5 din ntregul areal al culturii. Denumirea de cultur Tiszapolgr a intrat n uz odat cu publicarea lucrrilor cercettoarei ungare Ida Bognr Kutzin The Copper Age Cemetery of TiszapolgrBasatanya n 1963 i mai apoi a lucrrii The Early Copper Age. Tiszapolgr Culture in the Carpathian Basin n 1972, n Romnia cultura fiind cunoscut sub denumirile de cultura Tisa II, Tisa III, Tisa trzie sau Romneti. Autorul propune, n mod justificat, folosirea termenului de cultura Tiszapolgr care acoper un spaiu geografic mai larg i ntreaga problematic a culturii. Partea a doua a capitolului introductiv, privind istoricul cercetrilor i stadiul actual al descoperirilor, relev faptul c marea majoritate a cercetrilor arheologice n situri aparinnd comunitilor culturii Tiszapolgr au fost efectuate dup anul 1950, n anul 1972 aprnd monografia culturii, n care Ida BognrKutzin meniona 17 puncte pe teritoriul Romniei dintr-un total de 250 de puncte, la ora actual fiind cunoscute aproximativ 130 de puncte n Romnia cu material Tiszapolgr i peste 500 n Ungaria. Capitolul doi, cel mai mare, cuprinde catalogul descoperirilor, fiind repertoriate 94 puncte sigure i 21 nesigure sau care nu au putut fi verificate, unde au fost descoperite materiale de tip Tiszapolgr. n cel de-al treilea capitol sunt analizate pe rnd elementele componente ale culturii Tiszapolgr: aezrile, locuinele, gropile, vetrele de foc, ceramica, obiectele de lut, obiectele de piatr, obiectele de corn i os, obiectele de metal, mormintele. Din subcapitolul ce trateaz aezrile reinem c din totalul de 104 aezri repertoriate pe teritoriul Romniei doar 24 au fost cercetate prin spturi sistematice, sondaje ori spturi de salvare, o parte din cercetri fiind opera autorului, nici o aezare nefiind ns cercetat exhaustiv. Datorit acestei situaii, informaiile despre locuine, vetre de foc, gropi sunt puine i nu pot permite statuarea unui standard architectonic (nici mcar a unei reguli oarecare) pentru comunitile culturii Tiszapolgr. n mod oarecum firesc, analiza ceramicii ocup spaiul cel mai mare n analiza elementelor componente ale culturii, analiz fcut de autor dup criteriile tipologice i stilistice stabilite de Ida BognrKutzin n 1972, n monografia culturii. Lipsa cercetrilor de teren suficiente a avut consecine i asupra cantitii obiectelor de lut, piatr, corn, os i metal cunoscute n arealul studiat, numrul acestora fiind foarte mic. Plastica antropomorf este necunoscut n arealul studiat, iar plastica zoomorf este reprezentat de numai cinci piese. Ultima component a culturii analizat este reprezentat de morminte, unde remarcm numrul foarte mic de descoperiri funerare (opt, dintre care una incert) n raport cu numrul aezrilor, situaie invers celei de pe teritoriul Ungariei, i inexistena analizelor antropologice.

Muzeul Naional de Istorie a Romniei, Calea Victoriei 12, Bucureti, tekyr@hotmail.com.

231

Prezentri de carte

Capitolul al patrulea este mprit n dou pri inegale: A. Cronologia relativ i B. Cronologia absolut. La rndul lui, subcapitolul despre cronologia relativ este mprit n patru pri, n care sunt tratate succesiv problemele originii, evoluiei, stratigrafiei, legturilor i orizonturilor culturii Tiszapolgr, reinndu-ne atenia sincronismele: Tiszapolgr A Cucuteni A3 Gumelnia A2 i Tiszapolgr B Cucuteni A4 Gumelnia B1. n privina cronologiei absolute autorul menioneaz lipsa datelor 14C pentru arealul studiat, pe baza datelor din restul arealului i a cronologiei relative fiind propus intervalul 35003200 .Hr. ca perioad de existen a culturii Tiszapolgr. n ultimul capitol, cel de concluzii, autorul sintetizeaz statistic i rezumativ capitolele precedente. Lucrarea beneficiaz de anexe extrem de utile, sub forma a apte liste menionnd n principal localitile unde s-au descoperit diferitele categorii de artefacte prezentate n capitolul trei. Tot n cadrul anexelor este situat i studiul arheozoologic al Georgetei ElSusi: Analiza resturilor faunistice din groapa (m. 8) de la CareiCozard (p. 192194). Bibliografia, bogat, este urmat de ilustraie care cuprinde 152 de plane, 90% din ele fiind destinate ceramicii. Postfaa crii (p. 381385) nu are autorul menionat i repet n mare parte capitolul introductiv al tezei, cu mici observaii critice, ncheindu-se abrupt. Cartea era necesar, util, fiind i un omagiu adus celui care cu o modestie aparte a adus servicii remarcabile arheologiei romneti.

232

C. S. NicolescuPlopor i arheologia paleoliticului Adrian DOBO

Abstract. This paper provides an overview of C.S. NicolescuPlopors over 40 years of research and his contribution to the field of Paleolithic archaeology. Particular attention will be paid to his most interesting contributions to the field: providing periodization for cataloguing material within a chronological array and interpreting material culture.

C.S. NicolescuPlopor (19001968) reprezint una din personalitile care au marcat arheologia paleolitic romneasc. Activitatea sa nu s-a limitat doar la domeniul paleoliticului, cuprinznd, pe lng perioade mai trzii, i etnografia, folcloristica, literatura; biografiei i cercetrilor sale i-au fost dedicate numeroase studii i articole. n rndurile ce urmeaz voi ncerca s urmresc evoluia perspectivei sale asupra preistoriei i mai ales asupra paleoliticului, de-a lungul unei cariere de peste patru decenii. nc de pe vremea cnd era proaspt profesor de istorie, C.S. NicolescuPlopor era preocupat de identificarea i valorificarea numeroaselor vestigii care au aparinut trecutului Olteniei. Prin itinerariile sale arheologice urmrea s acopere ntreaga provincie, spre a gsi [] urme lsate de cei mai vechi oameni care au trit n Oltenia (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924 c, p. 6). Uor identificabile, mgurile i-au atras dintru nceput atenia, iar prime spturi efectuate au scos la iveal schelete chircite, cu ocru i uneori i cu inventar (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923c; idem, 1923d). Alte mguri i tumului (de data asta tell-urile) i trezesc atenia prin asemnarea cu Kjkkenmdding-urile; secionarea lor a scos la iveal urmele unei locuine, care l conduc la concluzia c, dac n nordul Europei avem de-a face cu Kjkkenmdding-uri, ca urme ale aezrilor de pescari i vntori, la noi ele reprezint rmiele unor aezri de agricultori i pstori (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923g, p. 374376). Megaliii, descoperiri spectaculoase din spaiul european erau de cutat, n opinia sa, i pe teritoriul romnesc, mai ales n Oltenia. Pornind de la ideea originii asiatice a populaiilor care au construit aceste monumente, el considera Carpaii ca fiind o barier n drumul lor spre vest, ceea ce le-a determinat s-i continue parcursul pe la sud (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923f, p. 199208). Printre activitile timpurii legate de preistorie se numr descoperirea unor piese pe care le ncadreaz ca neolitice, respectiv un idol antropomorf (1923a, p. 53) i un topor de piatr lefuit (1923e, p. 9798). Scrie de asemenea despre tehnica de decorare a ceramicii cu nurul (1924d, 133137), cu compasul! (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923b, p. 59), i chiar despre jocurile copiilor neolitici; ofer o argumentaie interesant pentru a demonstra existena aricului: Ar putea s mi se obiecteze c cele gurite au Este interesant de menionat un punct de vedere referitor la ceramic: descoperind, n diverse contexte, resturi de vase lucrate cu mna amestecate cu unele lucrate la roat, face o comparaie ntre aceste dou categorii, cea la roat fiind privit ca inferioar celei lucrate cu mna, deoarece a omort toat arta decorativ [] precum i formele vechi preistorice ale vaselor (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924e, p. 240). Inventarea roii a determinat o producie la scar mare, prin care omul nu mai e legat de vas, dar i dispariia anumitor forme, cum ar fi vasele n coluri. C.S. NicolescuPlopor considera iniial c cele mai vechi urme fosile din Oltenia erau neolitice. Pentru el existena paleoliticului rmnea problematic, date fiind condiiile aspre de clim din perioada respectiv; totui, nu excludea posibilitatea de a descoperi urme paleolitice, deoarece n Europa acestea au aprut i n zone unde condiiile de clim erau chiar mai aspre la acel moment. Un alt argument, foarte interesant, este furnizat de descoperirea unui craniu dolicocefal n stratele preistorice: n Oltenia nceputului de secol XX oamenii erau majoritar brahicefali (urmai ai populaiilor venite din Asia), dar pe lng acetia erau i dolicocefali, descendeni ai oamenilor paleolitici! (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924b, p. 39).

servit ca podoab, se purtau la gt. Atunci ce rost aveau n acelai loc mai multe arice, unele gurite, altele nu? (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926c, p. 239).

Institutul de Arheologie Vasile Prvan, Str. Henri Coand, nr. 11, sector 1, Bucureti, addobos@yahoo.co.uk.

Studii de Preistorie 2, 2005, p. 233247.

Adrian DOBO

Preocuprile sale legate de preistoria zonei l situeaz printre pionieri. El se strduiete s readuc n memoria cititorilor pe cei ce i-au premers pe acest drum, ntre care se afla Magnus Bileanu, autorul unui manual de preistorie, rmas inedit. C.S. NicolescuPlopor public prefaa acestuia, din care reiese c nc de la 1885, un profesor de istorie, pe nume Calloianu, a introdus n coal studiul preistoriei (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926d, p. 240242; idem 1965a, p. 21). Avem de-a face, aadar, cu o prim perioad dedicat aproape exclusiv trecutului Olteniei, n care C.S. NicolescuPlopor se strduiete s demonstreze vastitatea i complexitatea acestuia. Arta rupestr n 1926, el semnala dou desene schematice pe peretele unei peteri din Gorj; acestea nfieaz figuri omeneti, fiind fcute cu negru pe piatra neted i uscat a pereilor peterii, iar una din figuri este interpretat ca reprezentnd un rzboinic sau vntor cu lance. n acumulrile de sediment meniona numeroase resturi de oase de animale (mai ales de Ursus spelaeus) i ceramic neo-eneolitic (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926a, p. 4950). Preocuparea pentru arta preistoric nu era nou n Romnia. n 1923, M. Roska semnalase nite zgrieturi n petera de la Cioclovina, pe care le atribuise omului diluvial. n urma vizitei efectuate n 1924 n petera amintit, abatele H. Breuil a infirmat originea antropic a urmelor respective. La autoritatea acestuia din urm a apelat i tnrul arheolog oltean, iar concluzia abatelui a fost c aceste reprezentri umane erau neolitice sau eneolitice, din cel puin dou motive: modul de abordare era schematic (asemntor celui din petera Pilato din Spania), iar materialul cu care fuseser realizate era crbunele (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926b, p. 131 132). Este interesant de remarcat c autorul descoperirii nu indic numele peterii, dup cum precizeaz ntr-o not (1926b, p. 133, nota 1), fr a preciza motivul, dar este de presupus c prin aceasta dorea ca respectivele reprezentri s fie mai bine protejate. n anii urmtori i-a extins cercetrile n zona Olteniei, ajungnd s descopere un total de 34 de desene preistorice, la Baia de Fier (Petera Muierilor i Petera Prclabului), Vaideei, Runcu (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1928, p. 39). Dintre aceste desene schematice, 21 erau reprezentri umane, iar despre alte dou siluete (publicate anterior) considera acum c sunt oameni ce ador soarele. Tot n acest registru sunt menionate un soare umanizat i o alt reprezentare solar, toate fiind mrturii ale existenei cultului soarelui. n perioada imediat urmtoare, n Petera Boierilor din defileul Olteului au fost descoperite alte 18 desene schematice. Cu un numr deja semnificativ de reprezentri, C.S. NicolescuPlopor se considera ndreptit s vorbeasc de arta preistoric oltean. Dei asemntoare celei din spaiul franco cantabric, legtura acestor manifestri de art cu manifestrile din Spania e greu de fcut (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929a, p. 98); n opinia sa, acestea ar fi mai degrab de corelat cu cele din petera Magura din Bulgaria (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1930b, p. 7374). n fine, un desen n stil naturalist, un animal cornut din Petera Oilor, putea aparine paleoliticului. H. Breuil, dei l considera foarte vechi nu l-a catalogat drept paleolitic (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929c, p. 95). Dei nu se poate vorbi de arta preistoric oltean, trebuie remarcat atenia acordat cercetrii i sistematizrii acestor reprezentri, precum i ncercarea de a stabili analogii la nivelul ntregului continent. Periodizarea preistoriei Prima periodizare de acest fel fcut de C.S. Nicolescu Plopor se referea la Oltenia. El sublinia c nu peste tot istoria ncepe cu acelai leat (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924a, p. 165); astfel, innd cont de faptul c satele dacilor practicau acelai mod de via ca cel de 2000 de ani naintea lor, am avea de-a face tot cu un trai preistoric. Prin definirea istoriei ca perioada n care exist izvoare scrise, autorul conchide c preistoria Olteniei ine pn la desclecare (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924a, p. 167). El folosete termeni regionali pentru diferitele epoci preistorice: paleoliticul era vrsta pietrei cioplite, neoliticul vrsta pietrei neleite, epoca bronzului vrsta acioaiei, urmat de vrsta fierului, cea roman i cea a cavalerilor (epoca migraiilor). De remarcat c n acest sistem nu apare noiunea de protoistorie.

234

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

Pentru paleolitic, prima periodizare o face n 1924; aceasta urmeaz criteriul paleontologic propus de J. Dechelette (1912, p. 4144) i coreleaz epocile astfel numite i cu culturile definite pe criterii tipologice, dup cum urmeaz: n Pleistocenul inferior (epoca hipopotamului) ntlnim Chelleanul i Acheuleanul, n Pleistocenul mijlociu (epoca mamutului) ntlnim Musterianul i Aurignacianul, iar n Pleistocenul superior (epoca renului) ntlnim Solutreanul i Magdalenianul (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924b, p. 34). Voi prezenta mai jos, succint, alte cteva modele propuse, urmnd a le detalia mai departe. n deceniul patru amintete descoperirile atribuite paleoliticului inferior la nivel european, susinnd c n spaiul romnesc aceast epoc este inexistent. Astfel, Chelleanul, Acheuleanul i Micoquianul, a cror existen o susinuse M. Roska (1931, p. 99110), nu sunt reprezentate de nici o descoperire (cu o uoar rezerv, pentru Cpuu Mic, n cazul Acheuleanului). Paleoliticul mijlociu este atestat prin Levalloisian i Musterian, iar cel superior prin Aurignacian, Solutrean i Magdalenian (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 82106). n 1954 (p. 6369), n ceea ce privete paleoliticul inferior, discursul su este n mare msur acelai. Paleoliticul mijlociu are mai multe stadii, anume: Micoquian, Levalloisian i Musterian. Paleoliticul superior este n continuare mprit n Aurignacian, Solutrean i Magdalenian. O periodizare deja sensibil diferit o ntlnim n 1961, cnd descoperirile de pe teritoriul Romniei ncep n opinia sa la nivelul culturii de prund, denumit Eopaleolitic. Urmeaz Arhepaleoliticul, cu Abbevillianul, Acheuleanul (atestate prin piese specifice, dar fr a avea o provenien stratigrafic cert) i Clactonianul. Paleoliticul mijlociu este denumit Mezopaleolitic (mprit n Levalloisian i Musterian superior), iar cel superior, Acropaleolitic (mprit n Aurignacian i Kostenkian) (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1961c, p. 1519). n fine, urmeaz epipaleoliticul (Azilian i Swiderian) i preneoliticul Protocampignan. n cea mai recent periodizare (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a, p. 37), se pstreaz coordonatele celei anterior citate, aprnd n plus prepaleoliticul (Cultura Gruncean). Paleoliticul inferior Primele menionri ale paleoliticului inferior se refer la Arhepaleolitic i sunt legate n principal de descoperirile lui M. Roska n mai multe puncte din Transilvania: Iosel Cremenoasa, Gurahon Poieni, Brotuna Basarabasa, etc. i atribuite de acesta Chelleanului, Acheuleanului i Micoquianului. C.S. NicolescuPlopor consider c nu sunt rezultatul vreunei activiti antropice (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929g, p. 471; idem 1930c, p. 212213; idem 1931a, p. 4751), prere mprtit i de N.N. Moroan (1933b, p. 1) i M. Moga (1936, p. 521); ele s-ar datora mai degrab factorilor naturali (nghe-dezghe i rulare C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 3338). n plus, pe baza unui raionament pe care l vom mai ntlni, se face apel la situaia din teritoriile vecine, unde la acea vreme nu erau cunoscute urme ale perioadelor amintite, de unde i concluzia c nici la noi nu ar avea cum s existe (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929g, p. 471). Aici ar fi interesant de amintit episodul eslav Ambrojevici. Acesta descoperise pe malul drept al Nistrului, la ChilaNedjimova, Cormani i Darabani, piese pe care le considera micoquiene. Corectitudinea ncadrrii acestora a fost contestat de C.S. NicolescuPlopor (1931 a); mai mult, dac n cazurile anterioare am avut de-a face cu piese descoperite n poziie secundar, acum ne aflm n faa unei veritabile erori stratigrafice. Astfel, n cazurile respective reiese c nivelurile zise micoquiene ar fi posterioare [s.n.] celor musteriene (teoria lui O. Hauser, preluat i de . Ambrojevici) i nu anterioare, cum este firesc. Prezentarea acestui fapt neag dintru nceput caracterul micoquian al industriei (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 9092), pe care N.N. Moroan (1931, p. 910) o vedea posibil aurignacian. Noi descoperiri, mai ales de dup rzboi (Giurgiu, Valea Lupului, Frcaele, Slatina, etc.), sunt atribuite paleoliticului inferior, cu precdere Clactonianului i perioadei de trecere la paleoliticul mijlociu, aa-zisul Musterian de clim cald (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957a, p. 42 44; idem, 1957b, p. 285). Descoperirile din zona rurilor Olt, Arge, Olte, Drjov etc. aduc o modificare n discursul asupra paleoliticului inferior (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I.N. Moroan 1959, p. 1733). Astfel, pe lng urmele Arhepaleoliticului din regiunea respectiv, exist i piese (choppers i choppingtools) care ar atesta chiar mai vechea cultur de prund, ce mai trziu avea s fie denumit Cultura

Drjovian.

235

Adrian DOBO

n jurul anului 1960 sunt ncepute cercetrile n zona Bugiuleti, ca urmare a identificrii aici, ncepnd cu 1952, a mai multor puncte fosilifere. Odat cu aceste spturi avea s se schimbe perspectiva asupra nceputurilor manifestrilor umane la nord de Dunre. C.S. NicolescuPlopor considera c a descoperit urme de activitate contient nc de la nivelul unor presupui australopiteci (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1963, p. 1125). n punctul Valea lui Grunceanu au fost descoperite numeroase resturi fosile de animale de clim cald, dintre care multe nu se aflau n conexiune anatomic. S-a considerat c aici era unul din locurile de adpare a animalelor preistorice; ca urmare a micrilor de regresiune ale Lacului Getic, animalele erau obligate s nainteze spre ap prin zone mloase, ceea ce determina scufundarea unora dintre ele sau cel puin imobilizarea lor, ele devenind victime sigure ale animalelor de prad (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1965), situaie de care ar fi putut beneficia i eventualii antropoizi. Oasele rmase n urma ospeelor puteau fi folosite de ctre acetia din urm ca materie prim pentru producerea de unelte. Se face referire la industria osteodontocheratic, n care erau folosite doar materii dure de provenien animal. Au fost chiar identificate mai multe tipuri de astfel de unelte (numite prime mrturii ale procesului de munc), cu diverse funcii, cum ar fi: de rzuire, despicare i tiere (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1963, p. 1520; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964a, p. 310; idem 1964b, p. 49; idem 1965a, p. 3744). Pe lng existena acestor unelte, au mai fost aduse i alte argumente: descoperirea n acel punct a mai multor oase lungi (deci bogate n carne) dect vertebre i coaste, de unde ar rezulta c primele ar fi fost aduse aici intenionat. Multe din respectivele oase erau sparte la ambele capete i s-a considerat c sprturile erau fcute intenionat, pentru extragerea mduvei. n plus, n stratele respective se aflau dou pietre de ru rulate i un galet de cuarit albastru, care, dup prerea sa, nu ar fi putut ajunge pe cale aluvial din cauza diametrului prea mare, de unde concluzia c ele au fost aduse de fiine inteligente (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. Nicolescu Plopor 1965 a, p.3236; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964a, p. 311). Astfel, zona fosilifer Bugiuleti devine n clipa de fa veriga de legtur ntre descoperirile de acest fel din nordul Africii, Europa sudvestic i Asia sudestic (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a, p. 44). Referitor la aceste descoperiri, consider c argumentele prezentate1 sunt insuficiente i neconvingtoare pentru enunarea unei atari teorii, cu implicaii majore n reconstituirea procesului de antropogenez. n plus, din publicaii lipsesc planurile i profilele spturilor. Ca un scurt epilog, amintesc dou poziii din anii urmtori: D. NicolescuPlopor le citeaz ca cele mai vechi etape ale procesului de munc contient (1970, p. 83), n vreme ce Alexandra Bolomey meniona n Dicionarul de Istorie Veche a Romniei, la vocea Bugiuleti, diferitele puncte fosilifere i amintea doar cu titlu de ipotez concluziile de mai sus, legate de Valea lui Grunceanu (Al. Bolomey 1976, p. 115).

a) Existena uneltelor din materii dure animale, cu vizibile urme de prelucrare. Aceasta este, n fapt, preluarea teoriei lui R. Dart, legat de existena industriei osteo-donto-cheratice la nivelul lui Australopithecus africanus. Teoria a fost formulat n legtur cu cercetrile de la Makapansgat, din 1947, n cursul crora au fost descoperite 42 de cranii fragmentare de babuini, din care 27 prezentau urme de lovituri pe partea stng. R. Dart a tras concluzia c acestea fuseser provocate de ctre nite australopiteci dreptaci. A cutat, n zadar, uneltele de piatr cu care fuseser produse respectivele urme. n lipsa acestora, a considerat c e posibil ca loviturile s fi fost date cu arme produse din oase, coarne i dentiie de animale, iar apoi a ajuns chiar s identifice o gam mai mare de unelte. n realitate, aceste pseudounelte erau rezultatul comportamentului animalelor de prad, dintre care unele i consumau victimele n copaci, iar oasele n cdere se puteau sparge n cele mai diverse moduri (D. Johanson, M. Edey 1983, p. 76-82) b) Prezena unor pietre despre care, dup analiza petrografic, s-a considerat c fuseser aduse de la cca. 40 km spre a fi folosite ca unelte n stare natural pentru spargerea unor oase (C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor 1967, p. 7). Este imposibil de crezut c eventualii australopiteci aveau nevoie s parcurg o atare distan doar pentru a aduce cteva pietre cu care s sparg oase, indiferent ct de mari! c) Att oasele din strat, ct i pietrele, nu prezint nici o urm de rulare, n vreme ce nisipurile i argilele n care au fost gsite sunt puternic rulate. Este evident c oasele nu aveau cum s fie rulate, din moment ce s-a precizat c provin de la animale care au murit sau au fost omorte cnd ncercau s se apropie de ap n chiar respectivul loc. De asemenea, pietrele care se aflau lng oase erau pur i simplu pe loc n momentul n care se formau respectivele depozite fluvio-lacustre.

236

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

Paleoliticul mijlociu Prima industrie atribuit acestei perioade era cea Levalloisian (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 93) i se baza n principal pe descoperirile lui N.N. Moroan (1933 b2; idem, 1936) de la GhermaniDumeni i RipiceniIzvor (unde fuseser descoperite piese Levallois, n asociere cu resturi fosile de Elephas primigenius), la care se aduga semnalarea de la Colentina. Levalloisianul este un stadiu caracterizat prin unelte ovale, destul de regulate, cu o fa plan cu bulb de percuie i cealalt fa cioplit n faete largi, de obicei fr retue (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954, p. 65). Industria musterian se regsete n forma cea mai tipic n Transilvania i are un caracter acheulean trziu (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 94). Apare sub forma mai multor facies-uri, unele destul de diferite de cele clasice, ceea ce i-ar determina pe unii cercettori s introduc o serie de termeni noi (Premusterian, Pseudomusterian etc.), dei, n fond, formele i tehnica sunt musteriene (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a, p. 2223). Musterianul n general se caracterizeaz prin achii triunghiulare, iar piesele tipice, retuate, sunt vrfurile i rcitoarele (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a, p. 26; idem 1959 d, p. 27), la care se adaug toporaele de la sfritul Musterianului, lucrate n tehnica bifacial (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960, p. 13). n acelai timp, materia prim poate duce la forme specifice, cum e cazul n peterile din Carpai unde, silexul fiind, probabil n cantitate mic, era folosit n principal cuaritul, cu un comportament diferit la cioplire. Poate astfel se explic n opinia sa i prezena n proporie deloc neglijabil a uneltelor de os, care sugereaz similitudini cu Musterianul de tip Quina (Al. Gheorghiu et alii 1954, p. 81; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954, p. 66). Paleoliticul superior

Szeletianul i Solutreanul. Din cauza unei erori care a generat suprapunerea ultimilor doi termeni vreme destul de ndelungat, voi trata la un loc interpretarea descoperirilor care n mod normal sunt separate de un interval mare de timp. n vizita din 1924, H. Breuil a identificat n colecia J. Teutsch, o pies bifacial de pe valea Chicherului despre care credea c este contemporan cu cele din nivelul inferior de la Szeleta, considerate atunci ca aparinnd Solutreanului inferior (H. Breuil 1925, p. 197198). M. Roska efectueaz noi cercetri n zon i, pe baza ctorva piese, stabilete existena mai multor etape, anume Aurignacian mijlociu, Protosolutrean, Solutrean inferior i mijlociu. De asemenea, descoper i la Iosel, pe Valea Cremenoi, piese solutreene mijlocii (M. Roska 1927, p. 195 196; idem 1929, p. 8586; idem 1931, p. 120121; N.N. Moroan 1933 c, p. 9192). Pentru spaiul estcarpatic, etalonul era reprezentat de stratigrafia din petera Stnca de la Ripiceni, al crei nivel V era Solutrean (N.N. Moroan 1933a, p. 34; idem 1933c, p. 9294; idem, 1936, p. 1318). Pornind de la ideea originii vestice a Solutreanului, tabloul se prezenta astfel: n Transilvania i Polonia apar influene solutreene la nivelul Aurignacianului mijlociu, iar spre est la nivelul Aurignacianului superior (N.N. Moroan 1933a, p. 59). Dei contesta caracterul solutrean al unor piese descoperite n Oltenia, iar pe cele din nivelul V de la Stnca le atribuia Aurignacianului, C.S. NicolescuPlopor (1940b, p. 1516) mprtea ideea lui M. Roska despre existena Protosolutreanului i Solutreanului n Transilvania:
1929b, p. 103). Asupra prerii legate de spaiul estcarpatic avea ns s revin: materialul de la Stnca l-a ncadrat n Protosolutrean, similar celui din peterile Szeleta i Jermanowska, iar pe cel de la CuconetiBli n Solutreanul mijlociu, pe baza unui vrf foliaceu bifacial, gsit n poziie secundar (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936, p. 9596; idem 1954, p. 68). La acel moment credea c etapa de trecere de la paleoliticul mijlociu la cel superior era Aurignacianul inferior, iar unele descoperiri (Sgle, Cioclovina) reprezentau un jalon mai spre rsritul Europei, pentru aria de repartiie a industriei de tranziie ntre musterian i aurignacian (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929e, p. 352).

va s zic Romnia intr din plin n aria de repartiie a acestei culturi; [] acum toat lumea i ndreapt privirile spre Ungaria, ca centru de origine a acestei culturi (C.S. NicolescuPlopor

Acesta considera c cea mai veche industrie atestat n zon este aceea Levalloisian superioar Musterian mijlocie i face parte din paleoliticul mijlociu, p. 15.

237

Adrian DOBO

Scurtcircuitul s-a produs la jumtatea deceniului 6, odat cu spturile de la Nandru Petera Spurcat. Aici, J. Mallasz descoperise n 1932 dou piese foliacee bifaciale pe care le atribuise Protosolutreanului (J. Mallasz 1934, p. 1215; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957b, p. 29), la care se adugau alte dou, descoperite de C.S. NicolescuPlopor. Acesta din urm scria c industria de aici nu e strin de centrul din munii Bkk, iar descoperirea unor forme solutreene superioare n petera de lng Loveci, pe valea Iskerului, necesit reluarea cercetrilor de la Nandru, pentru elucidarea problemei originii i dezvoltrii Solutreanului n regiunile noastre (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a, p. 26). Imediat apoi, materialul de la Petera Spurcat este ncadrat ca Musterian superior, n care formele bifaciale tind s se confunde cu foile szeletiene. De asemenea, nu ar fi exclus ca i piesele de la OhabaPonor i Baia de Fier s aib o legtur cu cele de la Petera Spurcat, pentru c i acolo apar forme bifaciale (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957a, p. 49; C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1957a, p. 29; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Al. Punescu 1959 p. 2729). n ceea ce privete tipul uman din acele perioade, el semnala c Homo sapiens fossilis este contemporan cu ultimele manifestri ale Musterianului i nu ar fi exclus ca el s fie autorul lor (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a, p. 25). Astfel, prima industrie a paleoliticului superior devine cea Szeletian, care se nate din Musterian. Regional, tranziia se face uor diferit: n spaiul intracarpatic, n mediul Musterian superior ncepe aplatizarea toporaului de mn ctre forma foliacee bifacial, ceea ce ar nsemna c ne aflm n faa Musteroszeletianului (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1957b, p. 37; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Elena Covacs 1959, p. 3541). n acelai timp, n Moldova, nivelul inferior de la Ceahlu Cetica I, unde alturi de debitajul lamelar, ce anun paleoliticul superior, se menine vechea tehnic achiar clactonomusterian, avem de-a face cu o industrie Szeleto aurignacian (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1961, p. 3738). Musteroszeletianul era prezent i n spaiul extracarpatic, la Mitoc Dealul Srturii (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, N.N. Zaharia 1959, p. 3538). Concluzia din 1966 era c, dei, pe lng achii, lame, gratoare i racloare apar i piese bifaciale, n nivelul inferior de la Cetica este vorba de o tehnic special de cioplire, care apare la sfritul Musterianului i se perfecioneaz de-a lungul paleoliticului superior, iar problema unui Szeletian esteuropean nu se mai poate pune (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1966, p. 1921, 63 64). Aurignacianul. Etapizarea Aurignacianului este fcut n principal pe baza descoperirilor din Moldova, mai ales a celor de la Ceahlu. Pe lng stratigrafie, evoluia sa este urmrit pe baza tipologiei i a materiei prime. Industriile Szeletianoaurignaciene, denumite mai apoi Aurignaciene inferioare (sfrit de Wrm III), pstrau nc destule caracteristici musteriene la nivelul prelucrrii pietrei. Aurignacianul mijlociu din Ceahlu (nceput de Wrm II) era identificat prin prezena nucleelor prismatice, a lamelor, burinelor i gratoarelor, iar ca materie prim erau folosite roci silicioase de origine local ca i n nivelul subjacent. Aurignacianului mijlociu i sunt atribuite i majoritatea descoperirilor aurignaciene din restul rii, respectiv aezrile n aer liber, precum i sporadicele locuiri din peterile carpatine i dobrogene (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, C.N. Mateescu 1955, p. 395400; C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959 a, p. 1522; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Pop 1959, p. 3234; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Stratan 1961, p. 31). Noiunea de Aurignacian superior a fost asociat pe rnd unei perioade de tranziie de la Aurignacian la Gravettian/Kostenkian (v. infra Valea Bistriei), apoi ntregului tehnocomplex Gravettian, denumit Aurignacian superior rsritean, mprit la rndul lui n: inferior, mijlociu i superior (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960, p. 2123). n nivelul Aurignacian superior3 pregravettian/prekostenkian (Wrm II), ncepe s apar silexul zis de Prut, iar n inventarul litic se detaeaz piesele retuate abrupt, situaia fiind pus pe seama influenelor estice (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1966, p. 2324).

n legtur cu Aurignacianul superior, Plopor precizeaz c este cunoscut recent sub numele de Gravettian; el propune folosirea termenului de Kostenkian, pentru motivul c originea lui rsritean este general admis de toi cercettorii, precum i pentru faptul c aici a fost descoperit pentru ntia oar, n 1879 (C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor et alii 1962, p. 116, nota 1). Mai apoi a revenit ns la vechea denumire de Gravettian (C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor et alii 1966, p. 25-30).

238

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

Gravettianul oriental / Aurignacian superior rsritean, ultima mare manifestare a paleoliticului superior n spaiul esteuropean nu are, n afara unor similitudini de ordin morfologic, legturi cu Gravettianul din apusul continentului, deoarece este contemporan cu Solutreanul i Magdalenianul. Gravettianul era mprit n inferior, mijlociu (la sfrit de Wrm II), superior (Wrm II III) i final (nceput de Wrm III), i se caracteriza prin prezena n proporie tot mai mare a debitajului lamelar, a vrfului La Gravette, a gratoarelor i burinelor; n cazul vii Bistriei, ca urmare a venirii grupurilor de populaii dinspre est, materia prim predominant este silexul de Prut. Pe parcursul evoluiei sale, procesul de microlitizare este tot mai accentuat (C.S. Nicolescu Plopor et alii 1966, p. 2530).
Epipaleolitic/ mezolitic Cea mai veche menionare a mezoliticului ca fenomen ce poate fi ntlnit pe actualul teritoriu al Romniei este pus n legtur cu descoperirea unor harpoane: acestea erau ncadrate ca neolitice, dar autorul presupune c ar fi putut proveni din mai vechi forme mezolitice (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929d, p. 356). Alt argument n sprijinul existenei mezoliticului este enunat intuitiv: innd cont de faptul c n Germania, Rusia, Polonia, Cehoslovacia, Ungaria exist descoperiri de acest tip, ar fi firesc ca ele se apar i pe teritoriul nscris de acestea (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929f, p. 104). Cleanovianul i Ploporeanul. Cu ocazia participrii la al XV-lea Congres de Antropologie i Arheologie Preistoric, C.S. NicolescuPlopor prezint o ncercare de ncadrare sistematic a industriilor microlitice descoperite n Oltenia; el definete dou culturi, Cleanovianul i Ploporeanul, dup numele locurilor de descoperire, fcnd meniunea c acestea sunt provizorii, urmnd a fi folosite pn ce alte cercetri vor arta dac aparin sau nu aceluiai fenomen (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1931b, p. 405408). D. Berciu (1939, p. 11) le considera dou faciesuri ale aceleiai culturi microlitice, singura cunoscut n sudestul european; industria de la Plopor pare a avea asemnri cu Natufianul, dar ambele aparin zonei swiderotardenoasiene. Pe de alt parte, N.N. Moroan credea c e prea devreme s fie denumite, chiar provizoriu, deoarece materialul era la acel moment puin numeros. n opinia sa, Cleanovianul prea a semna mai degrab cu Chwalibogowicianul polonez, iar Ploporeanul cu industria de la Stancovoci, tot din Polonia, pe care S. Schmidt tindea s o numeasc tardenoasian; astfel, n Oltenia am avea de-a face mai degrab cu un Tardenoasian de facies local (N.N. Moroan 1932, p. 34). Denumirile au fost meninute i mai trziu (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1940a), pn cnd noi spturi (D. Berciu et alii 1952, p. 142147) au scos la iveal faptul c microlitele respective se gseau n asociere cu ceramic i piese de piatr lefuit, i drept urmare au fost ncadrate n neoliticul timpuriu (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Coma 1957, p. 1924). Azilianul. Descoperirile de la Bile Herculane Petera Hoilor au generat un nou episod polemic. Unul dintre protagoniti, D. Berciu, susinea c ne-am afla n faa unui neolitic preceramic (1958, p. 9497; idem 1960, p. 1529), n vreme ce C.S. NicolescuPlopor atribuia acest nivel Azilianului, ntruct coninea piese microlitice, ntre care i lame de canif , dar din inventar lipseau cele geometrice (specific tardenoasiene), ceramica i piatra lefuit (C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Coma 1957, p. 20; C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959a, p. 221226; C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Al. Punescu 1961, p. 203209). Swiderianul. Industriile de la Poiana Scaune i Bardosu erau ncadrate ca swideriene, pe baza debitajului lamelar, a prezenei gratoarelor, burinelor, pieselor bord abbatu, dar mai ales a vrfurilor pedunculate, piesele directoare. Interpretarea materialului din aezarea de la Poiana Scaune era fcut conform periodizrii lui L. Sawicki privind Swiderianul, n care existena Chwalibogowicianului ca o cultur mezolitic de sine stttoare nu se mai susine, aceasta fiind identificat cu faza ultim, a treia, a Swiderianului (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958a, p. 2224; C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1966, p. 3036, 102113).

Terminologia. Pn la al doilea rzboi mondial, C.S. NicolescuPlopor a folosit termenul de mezolitic pentru industriile microlitice dintre sfritul paleoliticului i nceputul neoliticului. n deceniul al VI-lea al sec. XX, afirma c numele de mezolitic va disprea, credem, din terminologia arheologic, fiind lipsit de un coninut precis i de sine stttor. Azilianul, tardenoasianul [] nu

239

Adrian DOBO

reprezint altceva dect ultimele etape de dezvoltare ale magdalenianului, magdalenianul dndu-i n aceeai perioad boreal mna cu campignianul, cu care ncepe epoca neolitic i deci nu se poate vorbi de o epoc a pietrei de mijloc mezoliticul, acesta neputndu-i justifica numele nici printr-o durat oarecare, nici prin vreun coninut (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954, p. 69). Civa ani mai trziu susinea (1958 b, p. 171), citnd rezultatele unor arheologi strini, c problema unei culturi intermediare ntre paleolitic i neolitic ncepe a deveni o iluzie. Foarte curioas apare, n primul capitol din Tratatul de Istorie a Romniei, folosirea
termenului de mezolitic! Este vorba oare de un text care, dei aprut n 1960, a fost predat cu muli ani nainte4, sau avem de-a face cu o revenire de scurt durat la vechile teorii?. Noiunea de mezolitic este legat de prezena pas cu pas a continuitii [s.n.] ntre epoca paleolitic i cea neolitic (1960, p. 26). n legtur cu epipaleoliticul susine c n perioada subarctic

formele de via caracteristice pentru paleoliticul superior continu, uor modificate i transformndu-se ncet. Se clasific de aceea descoperirile din acest rstimp ca innd nc de paleoliticul superior: vntoarea renului a jucat atunci nc un rol foarte important. Pentru astfel de manifestri termenul de epipaleolitic (oarecum: paleolitic ntrziat) este ntr-o oarecare msur potrivit, dei nu e vorba de o dinuire lipsit de adaptri noi a formelor de via (1960, p. 265).

Despre mezolitic menioneaz c exist ca urmare a schimbrilor survenite n preboreal, cnd omul ncepe a-i adapta n chip tot mai creator cultura la ele. n aceast perioad se dezvolt

apar numeroase vrfuri de sgei) i Campignianul (unde ntlnim topoare), aparin mezoliticului. n anii urmtori el avea s susin din nou caracterul epipaleolitic i nu mezolitic al unor descoperiri de pe teritoriul Romniei (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964b, p. 313318). Soluia acestei probleme urma s fie sintetizat civa ani mai trziu. Termenul de mezolitic se justific doar dac respectivele industrii microlitice reprezint realmente evoluia

culturile de caracter propriu-zis mezolitic, cu trsturi proprii i reprezentnd o nou form de via, care pregtete trecerea la neolitic. [] Ceea ce caracterizeaz perioada mezolitic i o deosebete de cea epipaleolitic este rspndirea aproape general, dac nu chiar inventarea arcului, inventarea toporului propriu-zis, a brcii lucrate dintr-un trunchi de arbore (monoxila) i domesticirea primului animal, cinele (1960, p. 26, 27). Astfel, Tardenoasianul, Swiderianul (unde

natural i transformarea paleoliticului pentru a trece n neolitic, ceea ce nu se constat n nici un fel (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965b, p. 767).
Metoda

Sptura. Cele dinti informaii despre tehnica de sptur dateaz nc din deceniul trei, din ele reieind concepia arheologului la acel moment: de exemplu, n cazul valului de aprare de la cetatea Jidoviile Bucov, procedeaz la secionarea lui. (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1922, p. 250251). n ceea ce privete mormintele tumulare, fie a croit dinspre miazzi spre miaznoapte spre mijlocul mgurii un an larg de 1.50 m (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923c, p. 82), fie a fcut anuri prin care s prind mijlocul tumulului (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923d, p. 8586). Observaiile stratigrafice sunt exemplificate prin cercetarea stratelor pmntului cum se rnduie ntr-o fntn curnd spat (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1925, p. 163). Pentru spturile de peter, dat fiind specificul mediului carstic, C.S. NicolescuPlopor precizeaz c acestea trebuie abordate ntr-o alt manier: trebuie s se porneasc de la gura peterii n trepte, de-a lungul ei, pentru a se putea astfel urmri evoluia stratelor, iar de-a lungul spturii se recomand trasarea de seciuni perpendiculare, pentru a obine o imagine ct mai complet a stratigrafiei. Ar trebui, de asemenea, lsat o rezerv de cel puin 40% din sediment, pentru verificri i spturi ulterioare (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a, p. 1819). Aezrile n aer liber erau n general spate prin anuri: fie paralele, ca de exemplu la Cleanov (D. Berciu et alii 1952, p. 143), fie n cruce, ca la PoianaScaune (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958a, p. 7, 9). Profilele mari, cum ar fi cel de la Mitoc, erau atacate n trepte nalte de cte 2 metri (fig. 1).
Este greu de crezut, deoarece articolul din 1954 (unde neag categoric mezoliticul) reprezint publicarea unei comunicri din 1951. 5 n nota 1 se precizeaz de ctre redacie faptul c unii cercettori susin c de fapt exist doar epipaleolitic, nu i mezolitic.
4

240

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

ntruct avem de-a face cu zone periglaciare se pot ivi o serie de fenomene specifice i de aceea este nevoie de o atenie sporit, pentru ca interpretrile s fie ct mai exacte. Un astfel de fenomen este reprezentat de penele de ghea, caz n care sptura trebuie s coboare n trepte de 510 cm, acompaniat de rzuiri, pentru a determina conturul acesteia. Materialul de aici este pus deoparte i, eventual, corelat cu nivelurile superioare. n astfel de situaii, autorul recomand cercetarea pe suprafee mici, cu anuri nguste separate de martori (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958c; idem 1961a).

aezat ntr-unul din rafturile scrii cronologice ale ornduirii comunei primitive, raft mprit la rndu-i n sertare i sertrae nsemnate n cifre arabe sau romane i litere latine sau, mai tii, chiar greceti (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1956, p. 232). Piesele atipice erau amintite doar ca
sum, iar pe baza raportului dintre acestea i cele tipice se stabilea caracterul staiunii, anume aezare propriu-zis sau aezare atelier. Materialul litic era prezentat n liste sau tabele, pe categorii de produse de debitaj i unelte6; de asemenea, erau fcute i corelri ntre concentraia pieselor pe adncimi, strate geologice i nivelurile arheologice astfel: se prezenta o seciune stratigrafic pe un sistem ortogonal de axe, n care cantitatea de piese era ilustrat n funcie de adncime i de numrul pieselor, sub forma unei linii ce i modific aspectul n funcie de atribuirea cultural a nivelului (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959 c, p. 18: v.m. fig. 3). Piesele erau denumite conform terminologiei europene, de inspiraie francez, dar uneori apare i un limbaj autohton; de exemplu, nucleele erau numite mtci, dup cum le spunea bine pe romnete Bolliac (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1956, p. 228), burinele erau dltie, vrful La Gravette cuita din lam cu o latur teit (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960, p. 9), iar n cazul uneltelor compuse, de exemplu burinul pe racloar dublu convexconcav este dublu rzuitor convexoconcav scoab (C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1956, p. 230). Metoda tipologic de inspiraie francez, spre deosebire de cea sovietic, avea n opinia sa, un caracter reducionist: n vreme ce nvaii sovietici adncesc temeinic problemele

Denumirea culturilor. Ca urmare a contactelor cu lumea central i vesteuropean, ntre care i cu celebrul H. Breuil, arheologul romn adopt n bun msur metoda acestora. Primele sale lucrri discut prezena sau absena, pe teritoriul nostru, a diverselor tehnocomplexe definite pentru spaiul francez (Chelleanul, Acheuleanul, Micoquianul, Solutreanul, etc.). n acelai timp se constat o ncercare de adaptare regional a acestora (de exemplu, industriile microlitice din Oltenia sunt denumite dup locul descoperirii C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929f, p. 104; idem, 1931b, p 405408; idem 1940a, p. 310). Tendinele de regionalizare devin tot mai manifeste dup al II-lea rzboi mondial, probabil i datorit noii puteri, care nu ncuraja atitudini filooccidentale (de amintit aici culturile Gruncean, Drjovian, precum i alternana terminologic Gravettian/Kostenkian). Rspndirea acestor culturi i asemnrile, uneori izbitoare, ntre piese din aezri aflate la mare distan unele de altele, este pus pe seama deplasrii grupurilor care le creau (e de presupus ca aceast cultur s se fi nscut undeva C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a, p. 46), ceea ce explic faptul c ntlnim manifestri similare la momente diferite; astfel, denumirile date unor culturi nu implic neaprat i o valoare cronologic (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956b, p. 91). Totui, nu ar trebui exclus situaia n care unele nevoi au dus la crearea unor forme identice (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a, p. 46). Atribuirea cultural a industriilor. n aceast problem, un rol important l jucau piesele directoare i cele tipice, fapt ce reiese i din planurile ce ilustrau repartiia spaial a materialului: cele din aceste categorii erau marcate individual, n vreme ce piesele atipice erau reprezentate n funcie de ponderea lor pe m, cu diverse hauri (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958a, p. 9; v.m. fig. 2). De exemplu, materialul de la Giurgiu Malu Rou trebuia:catalogat, etichetat i

paleoliticului n toate aspectele lui geologice, paleontologice, paleoantropologice i social economice, apusenii au rmas la preocupri tipologice, care i-au dus la rezultate uneori ilariante. [..] Astfel, cercettorii francezi [] au nscocit un complicat sistem matematic de rezolvare a diferitelor faciesuri ale complexului musterianolevalloisotayacian, dup raportul statistic al felului
6

Am ntlnit i o categorie bizar, ce nu este explicat: piese demonstrative pentru nelegerea unor probleme privitoare la tehnica cioplirii cremenii (C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor et alii 1956, p. 229).

241

Adrian DOBO

de cioplire i tipologia pieselor descoperite. Dup aceast metod savant putem stabili indici pentru coada sapelor i chiar un indice pentru determinarea tiinei apusene (C.S. Nicolescu

Plopor 1954, p. 70, 71). Un alt pcat al arheologiei occidentale era caracterul ei rasist, promovat de unii specialiti care, n ncercarea de a argumenta superioritatea unor grupuri ce populau anumite teritorii, cutau dovezi nc din paleolitic. n viziunea lor, cartarea descoperirilor Abbeviliene i Acheuleene (considerate produsul unor specii mai evoluate) i a celor Clactoniene (produse ale unora mai puin evoluai) nu se suprapun. Pentru a demonstra contrariul, cercettorul menioneaz descoperiri recente, n care sunt incluse i cele din Romnia, arattnd c aceste industrii pot coexista n anumite zone (C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956b, p. 95; idem 1965 a, p. 58 59). *** Prin amploarea cercetrilor, C.S. NicolescuPlopor a acoperit ntreaga ar i toate perioadele paleoliticului, numele su fiind legat de majoritatea siturilor importante ale acestei epoci. Activitatea de arheolog, de-a lungul a mai bine de patru decenii, s-a desfurat la nivelul cercetrii tiinifice internaionale; a fost printre primii arheologi romni care au ncercat s imprime un caracter pluridisciplinar cercetrii arheologice. Astfel, n studiile publicate de el apar numeroase informaii despre fauna, flora, geomorfologia i petrografia zonei. Nu au lipsit influenele politicoideologice n interpretarea materialelor (vezi lurile de poziie mpotriva arheologiei occidentale). Bibliografie:

D. Berciu 1939 D. Berciu 1958 D. Berciu 1960 D. Berciu et alii 1952 H. Breuil 1925 J. Dechelette 1912 Al. Bolomey 1976 Al. Gheorghiu et alii 1954 D. Johanson, M. Edey 1983 J. Mallasz 1934 M. Moga 1936 N.N. Moroan 1931 N.N. Moroan 1932 N.N. Moroan 1933a N.N. Moroan 1933b N.N. Moroan 1933c N.N. Moroan 1936

Arheologia preistoric a Olteniei, Craiova. Neoliticul preceramic n Balcani, n SCIV 9, 1, p. 9496. Asupra protoneoliticului Europei sudestice, n Omagiu lui C. Daicoviciu, Bucureti, p. 1921. antierul arheologic Verbicioara, n SCIV 3, 1, p. 141149. Stations palolithiques en Transylvanie, n BSSC 2, p. 193217. Manuel dArcheologie Prhistorique, Celtique et GalloRomaine, Paris, vol. 1, Archeologie Prhistorique. Vocea Bugiuleti, n D. M. Pippidi (coord.) Dicionar de Istorie Veche a Romniei, Bucureti, 1976. Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor de paleontologie uman de la Baia de Fier, n Probleme de Antropologie 1, p. 7386. Lucy, Paris. A solutren els biztos megllapitsa Erdlyben, n Dolgozatok 910, Paleoliticul inferior in Transilvania, n ACMIT 4, p. 321. Existe-t-il du Micoquien en Bessarabie et quelle serait sa place dans la chronologie du plistocne?, n BSPF 4, p. 111. Asupra mezoliticului din Oltenia, n Institutul de Arheologie Oltean, Solutreanul din Romnia extracarpatic i raporturile sale cu acela din Transilvania i din rile limitrofe, Chiinu (extras). Evoluia cercetrilor preistoricepaleolitice din Romnia NordEstic i rezultatele obinute, Chiinu, p. 121 (extras). Cea mai frumoas dintre Pointes en feuille de laurier solutrenes din Romnia extracarpatic, n Revista tiinific V. Adamachi 19, 23, p. Restes de lhomme fossile en Roumanie, n Report of XVI International Geological Congress, Washington 1933, p. 19 (extras).
9195. Mem. 6, Craiova, p. 14 (extras). 12, p. 315.

242

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1923 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924d C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1924f C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1925 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1926d C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1928 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929d C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929e C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929f C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1929g C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1930a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1930b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1930c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1931a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1931b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1936 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1940a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1940b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1954

Kjkkenmdding-uri n Oltenia?, n AO 2, 9, p. 373376. Pn unde merg vremurile preistorice n Oltenia?, n AO 4, 1819, p. nsemntatea cercetrilor preistorice n Oltenia, n AO 3, 11, p. 3340.
n Oltenia, cartea II, fasc. I, p. 6. Olrie nsforit n Oltenia, n AO 3, 12, p. 132137. 164168.

ntia dovad despre traiul omului din vrsta pietrei cioplite n Oltenia,

Roata olarului, n AO 3, 13, p. 239241. O aezare roman necunoscut, n AO 4, 1819, p. 163. Desenuri paleolitice n Oltenia?, n AO 5, 23, p. 4950.
131134.

Cu privire la desenurile paleolitice din peterile Gorjului, n AO 5, p. Din jocurile copiilor preistorici: aricul i sprnelul, n AO 5, 2526, p. Un manual romnesc de preistorie la 1895, n AO 5, 2526, p. 240 Travaux sur les peintures rupestres dOltnie, n AO 7, 35, p. 3746. Desenurile rupestre de la PolovragiGorj, n AO 8, 4142, p. 9698. Cultura solutrean n Romnia, n AO 8, 4142, p. 98103. Un desen paleolitic n Oltenia?, n AO 8, 4142, p. 9395. Harpoane mezolitice n vecintatea Dunrii inferioare?, n AO 8, 4344, Aurignacianul inferior n Oltenia, n AO 8, 4344, p. 351353. Mezoliticul n Romnia, n AO 8, 4142, p. 103105. Cultura elean n Romnia?, n AO 8, 4546, p. 469473. Cercetrile preistorice i cuaternarul, n AO 9, 4748, p. 7273. Art rupestr n Bulgaria, n AO 9, 4748, p. 7374. Iari cultura elean n Romnia, n AO 9, 4950, p. 211213.
p. 355357. 238240.

242.

4752.

Asupra culturii acheuleene i micoquiene n Romnia, n AO 10, 53, p. Institutul de Arheologie Oltean la al XV-lea congres de antropologie i arheologie preistoric, n AO 10, 5658, p. 403408. Le Palolithique en Roumanie, n Dacia 56, p. 41107. Industries microlithiques en Oltnie, n Dacia 78, p. 112. Solutreanul n Oltenia?, n Oltenia, cartea I, 1, p. 1516. Introducere n probleme paleoliticului din R.P.R., n Probleme de Antropologie 1, p. 5971.

243

Adrian DOBO

C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1956b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1957b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1958c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1959d C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1960 C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1961a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1961b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1961c C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1964b C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965a C.S. NicolescuPlopor 1965b C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1967 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, C.N. Mateescu 1955 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1956 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Coma 1957 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1957a C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1957b C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I.N. Moroan 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Al. Punescu 1959

Rezultatele principale ale cercetrilor paleolitice n ultimii patru ani n RPR., n SCIV 12, p. 739. Noi descoperiri paleolitice n RPR, Probleme de antropologie 2, p. 75 Le palolithique dans la Rpublique Populaire Roumaine la lumiere des dernieres recherches, n Dacia NS 1, p. 4160. Cercetri asupra paleoliticului timpuriu, n Materiale 3, p. 281290. Sur la presence du Swiderien en Roumanie, n Dacia NS 2, p. 534. Noi puncte de vedere n cercetarea i interpretarea paleoliticului, n SCIV 9, 1, p. 170172. Les phnomnes priglaciaires et la geochronology du palolithique superieur de terasse en Roumanie, n Dacia NS 2, p. 383391. Discuii pe marginea paleoliticului de sfrit i nceputurile neoliticului nostru, n SCIV10, 2, p. 221237. Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956 (Mitoc), n Materiale 5, p. 3438. Cercetrile de la Mitoc, n Materiale 6, p. 1119. Spturile de la Petera, n Materiale 6, p. 2529. Apariia societii omeneti i nceputurile organizrii gentilice matriarhale. Epoca veche i mijlocie a pietrei (paleoliticul i mezoliticul), n Istoria Romniei, p. 329. Fenomenele periglaciare i stratigrafia paleoliticului, n SCIV 12, 1, p.
6574. 98.

Cercetri privitoare la paleoliticul inferior, n Materiale 7, p. 1113. Geochronology of the Paleolithic in Rumania, n Dacia NS 5, p. 519. Date noi cu privire la cunoaterea nceputului i sfritului paleoliticului Romniei, n SCIV 15, 3, p. 307320. Nouvelles donnes sur la possibilit de lexistence de protohomminiens dans le villafranchien de Roumanie, n Dacia NS 8, p. 4752. Oamenii din vrsta veche a pietrei, Bucureti. Epipaleolitic sau mezolitic. O problem de terminologie?, n SCIV 16, 4,
p. 765773.

Dovezi i consideraii noi privind existena unui comportament uman n Villafranchianul de la Bugiuleti, n ARCIFE 1, Craiova, p. 313. antierul arheologic CernaOlt, n SCIV 6, 34, p. 391407. Paleoliticul de la Giurgiu aezarea de la Malu Rou, n SCIV 7, 34, p. Microlitele de la Bile Herculane, n SCIV 8, 1, p. 1726. antierul arheologic Nandru, n Materiale 3, p. 2939. antierul arheologic OhabaPonor, n Materiale 3, p. 4148.
933. 223235.

Sur le commencement du palolithique en Roumanie, n Dacia NS 3, p.

Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956 (Nandru) ,n Materiale 5, p. 2529.

244

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Pop 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, N.N. Zaharia 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, E. Kovacs 1959 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1959a C.S. NicolescuPlopor, Al. Punescu 1961 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, I. Stratan 1961 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1961 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1962 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1963 C.S. NicolescuPlopor, D. NicolescuPlopor 1965 C.S. NicolescuPlopor et alii 1966 D. NicolescuPlopor 1970 M. Roska 1927 M. Roska 1929 M. Roska 1931

Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956 (Cremenea), n Materiale 5, p. 2934 Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956 (Mitoc), n Materiale 5, p. 3438. Cercetrile paleolitice din regiunea Baia Mare, n Materiale 6, p. 3341. Raport preliminar asupra cercetrilor paleolitice din anul 1956 (Dobrogea), n Materiale 5, p. 1521. Azilianul de la Bile Herculane n lumina noilor cercetri, n SCIV 12, 2, Spturile de la Tincova, n Materiale 7, p. 2931 antierul arheologic Bicaz, n Materiale 7, p. 3741. Spturile din Petera Gura Cheii Rnov, n Materiale 8, p. 113121. The possible existence of the villafranchian, n Dacia NS 7, 925. protohominids in Rumanias
p. 203213.

Cu privire la nceputurile istoriei Romniei, n Omagiu lui P. ConstantinescuIai, Bucureti, p. 3137. Le Palolithique de Ceahlu, n Dacia NS 10, p. 5116. Vrsta omului, n Magazin Istoric 4, 36, p. 8384. Le Solutren en Roumanie, n BSSC 3, 2, p. 193196. Recherches nouvelles sur le solutren de Transylvanie, n BSSC 4, p. Paleoliticul Ardealului, n AIGR 14, p. 99126.
8586.

245

Adrian DOBO

Fig. 1. Stratigrafia staiunii paleolitice de la Mitoc Malu Galben (dup C.S. NicolescuPlopor 19).

Fig. 2. Planul spturilor de la Scaune (dup C.S. NicolescuPlopor 19).

246

C. S. Nicolescu-Plopor. Arheologia paleolitic

Fig. 3. Mitoc Malu Galben schem stratigrafic.

247