Big Fish Hunting: interpretation of stone clubs from Lepenski Vir

Ivana ivaljevi Laboratory for Bioarchaeology, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade ivziv81@yahoo.com Abstract - In this paper, I discuss a specific type of stone tool found at Lepenski Vir: clubs or mallets - which may have been used in fishing as stunners. The significance of large fish species (especially beluga sturgeon) in the diet, settlement patterns and cosmogony of the inhabitants of the Mesolithic-Neolithic settlement of Lepenski Vir (c. 6200-5900. cal. BC) is amply manifested in the archaeological record, namely by significant quantities of sturgeon bones, the famous fishlike sandstone sculptures and isotopic dietary signatures of humans buried at the site. Ironically, there is less evidence to suggest how exactly these great animals were caught. The massive and often ornamented stone clubs were initially interpreted as magic and ritual devices; however, it should be noted that the ritual and profane uses of an object need not exclude one another. The aim of this paper is to present the material and stylistic properties of these tools, look into and interpret their contextual provenience, and offer an understanding of them not as passive objects, but as powerful agents in dramatic encounters with the big fish. Keywords: objects, agency, Lepenski Vir, Padina, Vlasac, Danube Gorges, Mesolithic, Neolithic, sculpted boulders, stone clubs, mallets, scepters, fish stunners, fishing, sturgeons, beluga sturgeon Introduction Similarly to human beings, material things possess the power to influence the outcome of events, regulate relationships or express and reinforce beliefs. In recent years, social sciences have brought forward the idea of non-human agency; either in the form of meanings bestowed upon objects, animals and natural phenomena by human agents (Dobres and Robb 2000; Ingold 2007), or through deconstruction of ontological differences between people and things (Latour 2005; Webmoor 2007; Witmore 2007; Webmoor and Witmore 2008). Latour admits that things themselves do not necessarily determine or cause social activity. However, one can not imagine playing football without a ball, boiling water without a kettle or hitting a nail without a hammer. In this sense, things might be understood as participants in social action (Latour 2005: 70-74). The interrelationship between human and non-human agency is perhaps best described by Wagner (1975: 59), who acknowledges that in learning how to use tools, we are secretly learning how to use ourselves (see also Chapman 2001). Material things outside of us objectify the skills which reside inside of us, they enable and participate in specific culturally learned body techniques (sensu Mauss 1973 [orig. 1934]). At Lepenski Vir, the use of massive stone fish stunners enabled not solely a good catch, but also a specific type of fishing technique, body technique, and a specific mode

of human-animal interaction, which should be understood in the context of a culturally specific worldview. In the following chapter, I turn to this world of Lepenski Vir, in which fishing had a prominent role, not only in subsistence strategies, but also in making relationships, tracing origins and constructing fluid boundaries between people, animals and objects. Fishing as economy and ideology in the Danube Gorges Archaeological excavations in the Danube Gorges region (fig. 1) revealed fascinating evidence of human occupation, settlement and burial practices over a long time span of c. 10.000 to 5.500 cal. BC (corresponding to the local Mesolithic and Early Neolithic). At the site of Lepenski Vir, the later phase of the sequence (c. 6200-5900. cal. BC) (Bori 2002b; Bori and Dimitrijevi 2009) witnessed extensive building and occupational activity: trapezoidal structures with rectangular hearths (figs. 2, 8), often containing both complete and fragmented human bodies, sculpted sandstone boulders representing human/fishlike beings (figs. 3, 6), and a significant number of stone and bone tools. The richness of the data and a variety of settlement and burial practices observed at Lepenski Vir and neighbouring sites Padina and Vlasac (fig. 1) inspired the excavators to interpret them as a new cultural phenomenon in European prehistory the Lepenski Vir culture (Srejovi 1966; 1969; Radovanovi 1996).

Fig. 1. Map of the Danube Gorges with Mesolithic and Early Neolithic sites (after Bori and Miracle 2004: fig. 1)

Fig. 2. Preserved limestone floors of trapezoidal buildings at Lepenski Vir (after Srejovi 1969: fig. III) Located on river terraces on the banks of Danube, in vicinity of large whirpools and small river tributaries, the sites of Lepenski Vir, Padina and Vlasac have been recognized as attractive fishing spots. The crucial role of fishing in formation of the Danube Gorges settlements has been emphasized by many authors (Jovanovi 1969; Srejovi 1969; 1972; Bartosiewicz et al. 1995; Radovanovi 1996; 1997; Bartosiewicz et al. 2001; Bori 2001; Bori and Dimitrijevi 2007; Jovanovi 2008; Dinu 2010). According to Radovanovi (1996: 37) (see also Dinu 2010), the intensified exploitation of fish at the beginning of Holocene probably led to the prolonged stay of hunter-gatherer communities in the Gorges and to the establishment of first semi-sedentary settlements. The importance of fishing at these three sites is manifested by high proportion of fish remains in the faunal samples

Fig. 3 - Sculpted boulders Danubius and First Mother in front of the hearth of building XLIV/57 (after Srejovi 1969: fig. 35)

(Bknyi 1969; 1970; 1972; 1978; Clason 1980). These originate from freshwater fishes (carp, catfish, bream, pike, perch, huchen), and also from various anadromous (migratory) sturgeon species (beluga sturgeon, Russian sturgeon, sterlet, stellate sturgeon). Fish bones have been found in the majority of trapezoidal buildings at Lepenski Vir (Bknyi 1969; 1972; Dimitrijevi 2008) and Padina (Jovanovi 1974; Bori 2001; Jovanovi 2008), as well as in some dwellings and burials at Vlasac (Srejovi i Letica 1978). Furthermore, the stable isotopes evidence manifests a predominantly aquatic diet throughout the Danube Gorges sequence, with an additional intake of terrestrial food sources (Bonsall et al. 1997; Cook et al. 2001; Grupe et al. 2003; Bonsall et al. 2004; Bori and Miracle 2004; Bori et al. 2004; Nehlich et al. 2010). Both archaeozoological and isotopic data suggest that fishing played a major role in the economy of Lepenski Vir and neighbouring sites. However, it should be kept in mind that there is much more to animals than sources of food, as there is much more to food than simply a source of calories. Radovanovi (1996: 37) believed that fish, acting as a vital resource, eventually moved from the domain of economy to the domain of ideology. This idea could be explained by a particular phenomenon taking place in the Danube each year. Anadromous Acipenserids (various sturgeon species) migrate from the Black Sea each spring to spawn in the fresh waters of Danube (Bartosiewicz et al. 2008; Dinu 2010); in order to succeed, they must fight the current and swim upstream. One might easily imagine that in the eyes of Fig. 4 - Sturgeon caught in the fishermans net the inhabitants of the (after Petrovi 1998b [orig. 1941]: fig. 29) Gorges, these were the only animals that were coming back, repeating their journey year after year. Srejovi and Babovi (1983) emphasized the relationship between anatomical features of the fish and the sculpted boulders found at Lepenski Vir (figs. 4-6), while Radovanovi (1997) associated the annual sturgeon run and a specific burial position/orientation of the dead. She interpreted the practice of placing the deceased extended on their backs, parallel to the river, with their heads oriented downstream, as a manifestation of a belief that fish would carry the deceaseds soul on its downstream voyage in the autumn and bring it back upon their return next spring. Similarly, Bori mentions the practice of placing the deceased in a seated position with legs crossed and facing the river as the best position to sit down and enjoy the view (Bori 1999), possibly waiting for and observing the arrival of fish. According to this author (Bori 2005), sculpted boulders from Lepenski Vir represent various stages of metamorphosis of the deceased into fish. It is significant that individuals buried within trapezoidal buildings and commemorated with boulders

were predominantly adults, possibly because the transformation into a fish ancestor required fully human individuals to complete the cycle.

Fig. 5 - Shape of mouth in two different sturgeon species (after Stephen 2004: fig. 2(a))

Fig. 6 - Frontal and dorsal views of the quartz sandstone sculpture Danubius, representing a humanfish hybrid (after Srejovi and Babovi 1983: p. 116). The large downturned mouth and the row of bony scutes on the back resemble anatomical features of sturgeon (see figs. 4-5) Another significant aspect of the relationship between fish, humans and material objects is the difference in design of carved boulders found at Lepenski Vir, Vlasac and Padina. The boulders from Lepenski Vir are numerous, ranging from aniconic to more elaborate ones with carved human or fishlike faces (figs. 3, 6) (see Srejovi and Babovi 1983; Bori 2005). At Padina and Vlasac, they are much fewer in number and not a single one bears any apparent resemblance to human or animal physique. According to Bori (2005: 65-66), the Lepenski Vir locale might have had an exclusive right to power of depicting the face. Given that Lepenski Vir and Padina are the only sites in the Gorges with a settlement-like appearance and a similar outline of the settlements, including similar architectural shape and furnishing of the houses, the absence of burials

and faces from the houses at Padina is intriguing. However, there might be an addittional explanation of occurrence of representational boulders at Lepenski Vir. According to preliminary archaeozoological analysis (ivaljevi, in preparation), these three sites also differ in choice of hunted fish species. At Vlasac, carp remains (Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus 1758) predominate in the ichtiological assemblage, while at Padina the majority of fish remains belong to catfish (Silurus glanis Linnaeus 1758) (see also Clason 1980). Large quantities of fish bones from Lepenski Vir belong to Acipenserids, notably to beluga sturgeon (Huso huso Linnaeus 1758), the largest sturgeon species in Danube. Therefore, the elements of sturgeon anatomy represented on Lepenski Vir sculptures (fig. 6) are hardly a coincidence; similarly, at Vlasac (the carp fishing spot) many individuals were buried with applications made from perforated carp pharyngeal teeth (see Srejovi and Letica 1978; Bori 2002a). Perhaps, these sites could be understood as specialised centres oriented towards fishing of different species, and possibly as places where identities were constructed through totemic relationships with different animals. Fishing techniques: how did they do it? Based on archaeological, archaeozoological and isotopic evidence, there seems to be a significant body of data to support the crucial role of fishing in the MesolithicNeolithic Danube Gorges. Ironically, there is less evidence to suggest how exactly these animals were caught. According to Srejovi, the landscape itself enabled a succesful catch. He states that at Lepenski Vir the Danube is shallow close to the banks but ten meters out it suddenly falls into deep gullies abot 30 meters deep. Therefore the stream... suddenly breaks into violent rapids...These conditions make fishing easy, for the current itself drives the fish along in a specific direction and the fishermen await them in the shallows and catch them in the most primitive manner, by the use of dams and traps, almost without any sort of fishing tackle (Srejovi 1972: 130). However, fishing must have been a strenuous task, given that some Danubian species tend to be quite large. For example, the predatory beluga sturgeon reaches 4 to 6 m in total lenghth and may weigh 1000 kg or more (fig. 7) (Sokolov 1989: 154). Archaeozoological evidence from Padina confirms that some of the beluga specimens whose remains have been found at the site reached up to 5 meters (Brinkhuizen 1986: 33); and catfish remains from the same site belonged to specimens which could weight up to 300 kg (Clason 1980).

Fig. 7 - Professor Mihailo Petrovi Alas (centre, holding rope) and his fishermen with a caught beluga sturgeon (after Petrovi 1998a [orig. 1940]: fig. 3)

Tools that could be interpreted as fishing equipment on the basis of direct analogy with more recent fishing practices were scarce. Reports mention a couple of bone hooks from Lepenski Vir (Srejovi 1969: fig. VIII; 1972: fig. XII; see also Dinu 2010: fig. 2B), and a couple of harpoons from Vlasac (Srejovi and Letica 1978: 86, T. LVII, XCII2-3). In addition, a couple of rounded stone artefacts with grooves (which could have been used as weights for fishing nets) were found at Lepenski Vir (Srejovi 1969: figs. 42-43; 1972: 133, figs. 35-36; Radovanovi 1996: 278; Antonovi 2003: 18, fig. 4; 2006: 24, 6669; 2008: fig. 4). There is a possiblity that prehistoric fishermen in the Danube Gorges used boats, perhaps similar to the Neolithic dugout canoe found on the Romanian bank of Danube (Dinu 2010: fig. 4). Unfortunately, boats, as well as fences, reeds, baskets, nets and other devices made from organic material are not likely to survive in the archaeological record. However, there are numerous finds of a specific type of stone tool possibly used in fishing the elongated and massive clubs or mallets (figs. 9, 10, 11). These have been found throughout the Lepenski Vir settlement (fig. 8), and to a much lesser extent at the sites of Padina, Vlasac and Hajduka Vodenica (Srejovi and Letica 1978; Srejovi and Babovi 1983; Radovanovi 1996; Bori 2002a; 2005; Antonovi 2003; 2006; 2008). According to Antonovi (2006) these artefacts are exclusively characteristic to the region, and were an outcome of strong local Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic traditions. The raw material used in their production came from a variety of locally available rocks: finegrained metamorphic sandstones, fine-grained slightly silicified limestones, granite, diorite and various kinds of schistose metamorphic rocks (Antonovi 2006: 23; see Table I). These rocks were resistant to permanent pounding, which was the main purpose of the tools. As Antonovi (2006: 23) has observed, the majority of them bore traces of use, in the form of shallow circular depressions with rough surface concentrated on one end of the tool, which probably resulted from pounding large fish on the head (fig. 12).

Fig. 8 Plan of the Lepenski Vir settlement: 1) Limestone floors; 2) Construction stones attributed to phase Lepenski Vir I (according to Srejovi 1969); 3) Construction stones attributed to phase Lepenski Vir II (according to Srejovi 1969); 4) Stone clubs/mallets (according to Srejovi and Babovi 1983; Antonovi 2006) (plan modified after Bori and Dimitrijevi 2009: fig. 27)

It is significant that a similar fishing technique in the Danube Gorges (up to the begginning of the 20th century) was recorded by the renown Serbian mathematician and passionate fisherman Mihailo Petrovi Alas (1868-1943) (fig. 7). In his book erdapski ribolovi u prolosti i sadanjosti (originaly published in 1941, and reissued in 1998) he mentions that Danube fishermen were using massive wooden clubs to stun the fish. The fishermen would set up traps with attached nets (called sets) at locations where the strong rapids or whirpools would drive the fish right into traps; once they were caught, a couple of men in boats would pull the nets closer, stunning the fish by two or three strong blows to the head (see Bori 2002a: fig. 5.12). In this manner, fishermen could catch large sturgeons swimming upstream in the spring, or swimming downstream in autumn. It is obvious that fishermen (in prehistory, as well as in more recent times) must have had a deep understanding of fish behaviour and habits, and also of the various features of the landscape. It is striking that the majority of whirpool fishing spots mentioned by Petrovi (1998b) [orig. 1941] overlap with the locations of MesolithicNeolithic sites in the Gorges (Bori 2002a: 153). Clearly, the comparison with ethnographic evidence does not imply a direct translation of modern practices into the world of Lepenski Vir; rather, it can add to our understanding of fishing in the past and offer means of interpreting how prehistoric stone tools could have been used. Fig. 9 - Two engraved stone clubs/mallets (inv. nos. IB. 941 and IB. 937, see Table I), made from fine-grained carbonate sandstone (after Bori 2005: fig. 14)

The agency of stone: scepters, stunners, participants Often ornamented with elaborate engravings, coloured with red pigments and shaped to resemble fish bodies, stone mallets from Lepenski Vir have originally been interpreted as ritual scepters used in imitative magic (Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 183). Wide range of motifs related to flowing water, in the form of wavy and zig-zag lines observed on these tools (figs. 9-11, Table I), can be traced to the local Late Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic tradition of decorating stone, bone and antler objects (see Srejovi and Babovi 1983: figs. 6, 8-10, 12-13). Some of the ornaments are thought to represent fish (fig. 9, below) or even boats (fig. 11, middle). The use of red colour is another important tradition in the Danube Gorges: at Vlasac, the practice of sprinkling the dead with red ochre was particularly related to bodies of women (some of them pregnant) and infants (Srejovi and Letica 1978; Bori and Stefanovi 2004); at Lepenski Vir, it was applied to some of the stone boulders, a striking example being a sculpture representing a human vulva (Srejovi and Babovi 1983: p. 84). It is possible that red colour was related to important stages of birth and death, and in the case of stone clubs to the dramatic event of taking the life of the fish (i. e. the ancestor) (Bori 2005).

Fig. 10 Two engraved and one nonornamented stone club/mallet (inv. nos. SM. 575, IB. 78 and IB. 942, see Table I), made from rugose chlorite-muscovite chist (top and bottom) and fine-grained sandstone (middle) (after Srejovi and Babovi 1983: p. 187)

Fig. 11 Three engraved stone clubs/mallets (inv. nos. IB. 720, IB. 78 and IB. 7, see Table I), made from siltsone without carbonate (top), marlstone (middle) and fine-grained quartz sandstone (bottom) (after Srejovi and Babovi 1983: p. 188)

However (as shown in the previous chapter), Antonovi (2006) has demonstrated that the use of these objects was not restricted to the symbolic arena. Although the majority of stone mallets with traces of use wear were not ornamented or coloured (Antonovi 2006; Table I), some of the finely executed and nicely decorated tools were actually used (inv. nos. IB. 720 (fig. 11, top), SM. 575 (fig. 10, top), IB. 679 (fig. 10, middle). In addittion, Antonovi (2006: 23) notes that in case of some tools (one of them decorated with parallel lines inv. no. IB. 830), the traces of wear could not be identified due to the friable nature of the rock. As Brck (2007) has shown, the dichotomy between ritual and profane (often insisted upon in archaeological literature) may be more apparent then real; as symbolic meanings can be built upon practical solutions and functional objects, and vice-versa. Also, another manifestation that ritual and profane uses of an object need not exclude one another is withessed in the very nature of deposition of these stone tools. The majority of them were found on building floors in vicinity of rectangular hearths (fig. 8, Table I), probably left in the act of house abandonment. The hearth area was often associated with stone and bone tools and pottery

fragments (i. e. remains of everyday activities), but at the same time with a number of burials and/or representational boulders (see the context of mallets nos. IB. 720 and IB. 677, Table I), connecting the living with the dead and with ancestral locales. Similarly, given the complex biographies of buildings at Lepenski Vir, which have been utilised as domestic space for the living and ultimately as burial grounds for the dead, their interpretation as houses or shrines is equally problematic. Another possible interpretation of stone mallets, perhaps mediating between their ritual and everyday use, is their understanding as participants in the social action (sensu Latour 2005). For example, the very act of clubbing the great fish to death (fig. 12) may seem agressive or macho to us. Hower, the right way of killing an animal (including the proper sharing of meat within the community or disposal of body parts) may be seen as necessary for enabling the constant flow and transmission of essences in animistic societies; or as a mean of sharing ancestral substance in a totemistic worldview (Fowler 2004: 123). In more recent times, Danubian fishermen have perceived the beluga sturgeon (as well as sterlet and stellate sturgeon) as a stupid fish, not aware of its great strenght, which once caught, shows practically no resistance (Petrovi 1998a [orig. 1940]; 1998b [orig. 1941]). This view is in direct opposition with those of many contemporary hunter-gatherer communities, in which the relationship with animals is based on the idea of reciprocity rather than exploitation. Reciprocity implies that animals present themselves to the hunter to be killed; in turn, humans must follow proper procedures of butchering, consumption and disposal of animal bones (Ingold 1994: 9). Therefore, if the relationship between people and fish in the Danube Gorges is understood in terms of recipocity rather then exploitation, the role of massive fish stunners could be understood as an extended hand or a weapon of choice in enabling the natural order of the world, the proper way of doing things. Conclusion In this paper, various approaches to matrial objects were discussed in the context of Mesolithic-Neolithic Danube Gorges and Lepenski Vir in particular. As we have seen, stone clubs/mallets from Lepenski Vir have been interpreted as utilitarian tools, ritual and magical objects, or both. Another possible approach to looking at them is as agents. To do so, one must go way back, to the root of Modernist division between subject and object, and Nature and Culture. This powerful metanarrative implies that the environment (object) is there to be exploited by mankind (subject). In this sense, animals are understood as resources (if hunted), or even as products (if bred) similarly to tools. However, such embedded concepts have a history in European thought, and are hardly universal. For example, in various cultural contexts, the nature-culture dichotomy may be less pronounced, or even non-existent (Ingold 1994), while the category of human may extend to include other living and non-living things. Animals, places and objects might be treated like persons, similarly to persons, or may encapsulate something of a person (Fowler 2004), while humans, similarly, can easily slip into the world of animality (Bori 2007).

10

In the world of Lepenski Vir, social relations were created through complex webs of engagement of humans, animals and objects. In these relations, the agency of all actors was interdependant, and necessary for maintaining the social order. One cannot catch a fish unless the fish alows itself to be caught, nor can one kill it without the use of tools. The boundaries beween subjects and objects in this particular interaction can be seen as both unstable and fluid. The metamorphic or hybrid nature of stone sculptures representing human/fish beings speaks in favour of such fluidity. Similarly, in the case of interrelationships of humans and tools, it is difficult to say where the hand stops and tool begins; for without the tool, the hand could not act the way it does. It might be concluded that Lepenski Vir stone mallets, interpreted as both ritual scepters and fish stunners, could also be understood as powerful agents, enabling the inhabitants of Lepenski Vir to use their bodies in specific ways and to form relationships with other living beings.

Fig. 12 Clubbing beluga sturgeon (drawing by Nemanja Vukainovi)

11

INV. no.
IB.843

ROCK
Garnetbearing amphibole chist Muscovitechlorite chist

DIMESIONS
39.5x4.8 cm

ENGRAVING
/

COLOURING
/

CONTEXT
House 61

REFERENCE
Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 185-cat. no. 90; Antonovi 2006: 51-cat. no. 6 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 185-cat. no. 91; Antonovi 2006: 52-cat. no. 8 Srejovi 1972: fig. 77; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 185-cat. no. 92; Antonovi 2006: 55-cat. no. 13 Srejovi 1969: fig. 81; 1972: fig. 77; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 186-cat. no. 93; Antonovi 2006: 50-cat. no. 4 Srejovi 1969: figs. 39, 94; 1972: figs. 34, 77; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 186-cat. no. 94; Antonovi 2006: 57-cat. no. 17 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 186-cat. no. 95; Antonovi 2006: 52-cat. no. 7 Srejovi 1969: fig. 39; 1972: fig. 34; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 187-cat. no. 96; Bori 2002a: fig. 5.11; Antonovi 2006: 54cat. no. 11 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 187-cat. no. 97; Antonovi 2006: 54-cat. no. 12 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 187-cat. no. 98; Antonovic 2003: fig. 3A; 2006: 51-cat. no. 5; 2008: fig. 3A Srejovi 1969: fig. 81; 1972: fig. 77; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 188-cat. no. 99; Bori 2002a: fig. 5.11; Antonovi 2006: 53cat. no. 10 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 188-cat. no. 100 Srejovi 1969: figs. 39, 79; 1972: figs. 34, 74; Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 188-cat. no. 101 Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 189-cat. no. 102; Antonovic 2003: fig. 3B; Bori 2005: fig. 14; Antonovi 2006: 53-cat. no. 9; Antonovi 2008: fig. 3B Srejovi and Babovi 1983: 189-cat. no. 103; Bori 2005: fig. 14 Srejovi 1969: 81; Antonovi 2006: 49-cat. no. 1 Antonovi 2006: 49-cat. no. 2

IB.753

11.6x4.7 cm

Dark pigment on one end

House 38. Other finds in context: animal bones, stones, chipped stone tools

IB. 256

Gneissgranite

24x5.8 cm

Ochre on both sides

House 18

SM. 257

Limestone

45.6x6 cm

Ochre on one side

House 22, next to the hearth. Other finds in context: red deer antlers, bone hook, bone awls, chipped stone artifacts

IB. 757

Limestone

34x2.8 cm

Wavy line, dots

Red-brown pigment on the whole surface

House 48

IB. 370

Marly limestone

29x8 cm

Brown pigment around the center

House 1, next to the hearth. Other finds in context: bone awl

SM. 575

Rugose chloritemuscovite chist

25.4x5 cm

Wavy and zigzag lines

Red pigment on the whole surface

House 47, corner B. Other finds in context: pottery fragments

IB. 679

Fine-grained sandstone

22.5x5.6 cm

Circular line

Dark pigment around the center

House 27, next to the hearth. Other finds in context: stone club/mallet IB. 678, stone axe Zone of dark soil (pit). Other finds in context: stone club/mallet IB. 941, animal bones

IB. 942

Rugose muscovitechlorite chist

46.7x5.2 cm

Traces of redbrown pigment

IB. 720

Siltstone without carbonate

21x4.2 cm

Parallel short vertical lines

Traces of dark red pigment

House 44/XLIV, next to the hearth. Other finds in context: sculpture "Forefather", stones, bones, antler

IB. 78

Marlstone

39.5x4.8 cm

Boat motif, continuous vertical, horizontal and diagonal lines Parallel, wavy, circular and intersecting lines

Dark red pigment on the whole surface

Unknown

IB. 7

Fine-grained quartz sandstone

35.2x6.1 cm

Traces of dark pigment

Unknown

IB. 941

Fine-grained carbonate sandstone

43x 5cm

Groups of short vertical and zigzag lines, "fish motif" Continous rows of short vertical lines, "fish motif" /

Red pigment on the whole surface

Zone of dark soil (pit). Other finds in context: stone club/mallet IB. 942, stones, animal bones

IB. 937 SM. 473 IB. 755

Fine-grained carbonate sandstone Mica chist

11.8x4.3 cm

Pigment on the whole surface /

Unknown House 47, corner B. Other finds in context: pottery fragments, calcinated animal bones House 51, corner B. Other finds in context: chipped stone tools, animal bones, traces of carbonized wooden post

28.5x5.4 cm

Amphibolite

25.6x6.7 cm

12

IB. 678 IB. 677 IB. 754 IB. 762 IB. 761 SM. 576 SM. 1282d IB. 756 SM. 1028 SM. 1028 SM. 195 IB. 676 SM. 970 IB. 681 / SM. 860 / SM. 12671277 / SM. 365 IB. 477 SM. 102 IB. 830 / /

Mica chist

31.5x6.2 cm

Gneiss

27.7x9 cm

Gneiss Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone Fine-grained metamorphosed sandstone Mica chist Fine-grained metamorphosed sandstone Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone Mica chist

30.5x5.1 cm

29.3x4.6 cm

29.4x5.1 cm

33.5x5.8 cm 26.5x5 cm 27.5x4.5 cm

/ / /

/ / /

House 27, area D. Other finds in context: chipped stone tools, stone axe, stone club/mallet IB. 679 House 24, area A. Other finds in context: burials 8, 9 and 10, animal bones House 39, area C. Other finds in context: animal bones, chipped stone tools House 57, by the profile 'c'. Other finds in context: pottery fragments, animal bones, stones House 51. Other finds in context: chipped stone tools, animal bones, remains of carbonized wooden post House 51, corner B. Other finds in context: chipped stone tools, animal bones Pit. Other finds in context: pottery fragments House 54. Other finds in context: animal bones, chipped stone tools House 65. Other finds in context: bone tool, chipped stone implement House 65. Other finds in context: bone tool, chipped stone implement House 19. Other finds in context: pottery vessel, animal bones, stone tools, chipped stone implements House 9, in front of the hearth. Other finds in context: animal bones, stone tools, chipped stone artifacts House 63, on a stone in front of the hearth House 41, area A. Other finds in context: chipped stone artifacts, animal teeth Under the floor of House 1 Layer of dark soil. Other finds in context: pottery fragments House 36. Other finds in context: stone tools Concentration of stones and animal bones Layer with pottery fragments Disturbed layer with Neolithic and Roman pottery House 9, in the back of the house. Other finds in context: animal bones, pottery fragments and bone tools Stone structure. Other finds in context: pottery fragments, animal bones Yellow soil Layer with pottery fragments, animal bones and stone tools House 3

Antonovi 2006: 50-cat. no. 3 Antonovi 2006: 55-cat. no. 14 Antonovi 2006: 56-cat. no. 15 Antonovi 2006: 56-cat. no. 16 Antonovi 2006: 57 - cat. no. 18 Antonovi 2006: 58 - cat. no. 19 Antonovi 2006: 58-cat. no. 20 Antonovi 2006: 59-cat. no. 21 Antonovi 2006: 59-cat. no. 22 Antonovi 2006: 60-cat. no. 23 Antonovi 2006: 60-cat. no. 24 Antonovi 2006: 61-cat. no. 25 Antonovi 2006: 61-cat. no. 26 Antonovi 2006: 62-cat. no. 27 Antonovi 2006: 62-cat. no. 28 Antonovi 2006: 62-cat. no. 29 Antonovi 2006: 63-cat. no. 30 Antonovi 2006: 63-cat. no. 31 Antonovi 2006: 63-cat. no. 32 Antonovi 2006: 64-cat. no. 33 Antonovi 2006: 64-cat. no. 34 Antonovi 2006: 64-cat. no. 35 Antonovi 2006: 65-cat. no. 36 Antonovi 2006: 65-cat. no. 37 Antonovi 2006: 65-cat. no. 38

34x6.1 cm

12.5x6 cm

24.4x3.1 cm

Mica chist Mica chist Fine-grained limestone Gneiss Gneiss-granite Granite Fine-grained limestone Mica chist Mica chist Unknown (unavailable) Diorite

12.9x5.1 cm 20x5.5 cm 15.8x4.8 cm 17x5.5 cm 17.4x5.7 cm 16.7x4.9 cm 14.7 x 5.7 cm 8.8x3.9 cm 12x3.7 cm 8x5.5 cm

/ / / / / / / / / /

/ / / / / / / / / /

15.9x4.5 cm

/ Wavy line, two parralel straight lines / /

Mica chist Fine-grained limestone Fine-grained spotty limestone

14.2x 5.7 cm 11x6 cm 7.6x4.7 cm

/ / /

Table I. Tabelar representation of published stone clubs/mallets from Lepenski Vir (after Srejovi and Babovi 1983; Antonovi 2003; 2006; 2008)

13

Acknowledgements This paper was inspired by my research on fishing techniques in the Danube Gorges, and will be integrated in my PhD dissertation Fishing in the Danube Gorges in the Early Holocene (10th 6th millennia BC). I am grateful to my mentor Professor Dr Vesna Dimitrijevi (Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade), for encouraging me to shape my ponderings on the subject into this paper, and for all of her support. Dr Duan Bori (Cardiff School of History and Archaeology, Cardiff University) has been a constant source of inspiration, and an important agent in my decision to make the Danube Gorges Mesolithic-Neolithic the subject of my research. Finally, I thank Nemanja Vukainovi for bringing the dramatic scene of beluga fishing to life in his wonderful drawing. This paper is the result of the Project Bioarchaeology of Ancient Europe humans, animals and plants in the prehistory of Serbia (III 47001) funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia. Bibliography Antonovi, D. (2003) Mezolitska i neolitska kamena industrija erdapa, Glasnik Srpskog arheolokog drutva 19: 9-35. - (2006) Stone tools from Lepenski Vir, Belgrade: Institute of Archaeology, Cahiers de Portes de Fer, Monographies 5. - (2008) The development of the ground stone industry in the Serbian part of the Iron Gates, in C. Bonsall, V. Boronean and I. Radovanovi (eds) The Iron Gates in Prehistory. New perspectives, BAR International Series 1893, Oxford: Archaeopress: 19-38. Bartosiewicz, L., Bonsall, C. and iu, V. (2008) Sturgeon fishing along the Middle and Lower Danube, in C. Bonsall, V. Boronean and I. Radovanovi (eds) The Iron Gates in Prehistory. New perspectives, BAR International Series 1893, Oxford: Archaeopress: 39-54. Bartosiewicz, L., Boronean, V., Bonsall, C. and Stallibrass, S. (1995) Schela Cladovei: a preliminary review of the prehistoric fauna, Mesolithic Miscellany 16(2): 2-19. - (2001) New Data on the prehistoric fauna of the Iron Gates: a case study from Schela Cladovei, Romania, in R. Kertsz and J. Makkay (eds.) From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic (Proceedings of the International Archaeological Conference held in the Damjanich Museum of Szolnok, September 22-27, 1996), Budapest: Archaeolingua: 15-21. Bknyi, S. (1969) Kimenjaci (prethodni izvetaj) in D. Srejovi (ed) Lepenski Vir. Nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavlju, Belgrade: Srpska knjievna zadruga: 224-228. - (1970) Animal Remains from Lepenski Vir, Science 167(926): 1702-1704.

14

(1972) The vertebrate fauna in D. Srejovi (ed) Europe's first monumental sculpture: new discoveries at Lepenski Vir, London: Thames and Hudson, 186189. (1978) The vertebrate fauna of Vlasac, in M. Garaanin (ed) Vlasac. A Mesolithic Settlement in the Iron Gates. Volume II. Geology Biology Anthropology, Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Monographies: 35-65.

Bonsall, C., Cook, G. T., Hedges, R. E. M., Higham, T. F. G., Pickard, C. and Radovanovi, I. (2004) Radiocarbon and stable isotope evidence of the dietary change from the Mesolithic to the Middle Ages in the Iron Gates: new results from Lepenski Vir, Radiocarbon 46: 293-300. Bonsall, C., Lennon, R., McSweeney, K., Stewart, C., Harkness, D., Boronean, V., Bartosiewicz, L., Payton. R. and Chapman, J. (1997) Mesolithic and early Neolithic in the Iron Gates: a palaeodietary perspective, Journal of European Archaeology 5(1): 5092. Bori, D. (1999) Places that created time in the Danube Gorges and beyond, c. 90005500 BC, Documenta Praehistorica XXVI: 41-70. - (2001) Mesolithic and early Neolithic hunters and fishers in the Danube Gorges: an analyses of archaeozoological data in R. Kertsz and J. Makkay (eds) From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic (Proceedings of the International Archaeological Conference held in the Damjanich Museum of Szolnok, September 22-27, 1996), Budapest: Archaeolingua: 101-124. - (2002a) Seasons Life Cycles and Memory in the Danube Gorges, c. 10000-5500 BC, Ph.D Dissertation, Cambridge, University of Cambridge. - (2002b) The Lepenski Vir conundrum: reinterpretation of the Mesolithic and Neolithic sequences in the Danube Gorges, Antiquity 76: 1026-1039. - (2005) Body metamorphosis and animality: volatile bodies and boulder artworks from Lepenski Vir, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 15(1): 35-69. - (2007) Images of animality: hybrid bodies and mimesis in early prehistoric art, in C. Renfrew and I. Morley (eds) Material Beginnings: A Global Prehistory of Figurative Representation, Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research: 89-105. Bori, D. and Dimitrijevi, V. (2007) When did the Neolithic Package reach Lepenski Vir? Radiometric and faunal evidence, Documenta Praehistorica XXXIV: 52-71. - (2009) Apsolutna hronologija i stratigrafija Lepenskog Vira (Absolute Chronology and Stratigraphy of Lepenski Vir), Starinar LVII(2007): 9-55. Bori, D., Grupe, G., Peters, J. and Miki, . (2004) Is the Mesolithic-Neolithic subsistence dichotomy real? New stable isotope evidence from the Danube Gorges, European Journal of Archaeology Vol. 7(3): 221248.

15

Bori, D. and Miracle, P. (2004) Mesolithic and Neolithic (dis)continuities in the Danube Gorges: new AMS dates from Padina and Hajduka Vodenica (Serbia), Oxford Journal of Archaeology 23(4): 341-371. Bori, D. and Stefanovi, S. (2004) Birth and death: infant burials from Vlasac and Lepenski Vir, Antiquity 78: 526-546. Brck, J. (2007) Ritual and Rationality. Some problems of interpretation in European archaeology, in T. Insoll (ed) The Archaeology of Identities, London and New York: Routledge: 281-307. Chapman, J. (2001) The fractality of personal relations in the Mesolithic and Neolithic of South East Europe, in R. Kertsz and J. Makkay (eds) From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic (Proceedings of the International Archaeological Conference held in the Damjanich Museum of Szolnok, September 22-27, 1996), Budapest: Archaeolingua, 145-165. Clason, A. T. (1980) Padina and Starevo: game, fish and cattle, Palaeohistoria 22: 141-173. Cook, G. T., Bonsall, C., Hedges, R. E. M., McSweeney, K., Boronean, V., Pettitt, P.B. (2001) A freshwater diet-derived 14C reservoir effect at the stone age sites in the Iron Gates Gorge, Radiocarbon 43(2A): 453-460. Dimitrijevi, V. (2008) Lepenski Vir animal bones: what was left in the houses?, in C. Bonsall, V. Boronean and I. Radovanovi (eds) The Iron Gates in Prehistory. New perspectives, BAR International Series 1893, Oxford: Archaeopress: 117130. Dinu, A. (2010) Mesolithic fish and fishermen of the lower Danube (Iron Gates), Documenta Praehistorica XXXVII: 299-310. Dobres, M-A. and Robb, J. E. (eds) (2000) Agency in Archaeology, London: Routledge. Fowler, C. (2004) The Archaeology of Personhood. An anthropological approach, London and New York: Routledge. Grupe, G., Miki, ., Peters, J. and Manhart, H. (2003) Vertebrate food webs and subsistence strategies of Meso and Neolithic populations of Central Europe, in G. Grupe and J. Peters (eds.) Documenta Archaeobiologiae 1. Jahrbuch der Staatssammlung fr Anthropologie und Paloanatomie. Mnchen: Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden/Westf.

16

Ingold, T. (1994) From trust to domination: an alternative history of human-animal relations, in A. Manning and J. Serpell (eds) Animals and Human Society: Changing Perspectives, New York: Routledge: 1-22. - (2007) Materials against materiality, Archaeological dialogues June 2007 Vol. 14. No 1: 1-16. Jovanovi, B. (1969) Chronological frames of the Iron Gate group of the early Neolithic period, Archaeologia Iugoslavica X: 23-47. - (1974) Praistorija Gornjeg erdapa, Starinar 12(1971): 1-22. - (2008) Micro-regions of the Lepenski Vir culture: Padina in the Upper Gorge and Hajduka Vodenica in the Lower Gorge of the Danube, Documenta Praehistorica XXXV: 1-36. Latour, B. (2005) Reasembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mauss, M. (1973) [orig. 1934] Techniques of the body (Translated by Ben Brewster), Economy and Society 2: 1, 70-88. Petrovi, M. (1998a) [orig. 1940] Beograd negdanji centar velikoga ribarstva, in D. Trifunovi (ed) Ribarstvo. Sabrana dela Mihaila Petrovia knjiga 14, Beograd: Zavod za udbenike i nastavna sredstva, 10-174. - (1998b) [orig. 1941] erdapski ribolovi u prolosti i budunosti u D. Trifunovi (ur.) Ribarstvo. Sabrana dela Mihaila Petrovia knjiga 14, Beograd: Zavod za udbenike i nastavna sredstva, 175-270. Radovanovi (1996) The Iron Gates Mesolithic, Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 11. - (1997) The Lepenski Vir culture: a contribution to interpretation of its ideological aspects, in Antidoron Dragoslavo Srejovi completis LXV annis ab amicis, collegis, discipulis oblatum, Beograd: Centar za arheoloka istraivanja, Filozofski fakultet, 8593. Sokolov, L. I. (1989) Huso Brandt, 1869, in Holk, J. (ed.) The freshwater fishes of Europe. Vol. 1, Part II: General Introduction to Fishes Acipenseriformes, Wiesbaden: AULA Verlag, 154-179. Srejovi, D. (1966) Lepenski Vir a new prehistoric culture in the Danubian region, Archaeologia Iugoslavica VII: 13-17. - (1969) Lepenski Vir: Nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavlju, Beograd: Srpska Knjievna Zadruga. - (1972) Europe's first monumental sculpture: new discoveries at Lepenski Vir, London: Thames and Hudson. Srejovi, D. and Babovi, Lj. (1983) Umetnost Lepenskog Vira, Beograd: Jugoslavija.

17

Srejovi, D. and Letica, Z. (1978) Vlasac. Mezolitsko naselje u erdapu (I arheologija), Beograd: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti. Stephen, D. (2004) Discovery of the Genus Huso in the Pacific Coast of North America: The White Sturgeon or Steluga: Huso transmontanus (Richardson, 1836), (manuscript, available at http://evolutionqed.com/Huso.html). Wagner, R. (1975) The Invention of Culture, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Webmoor, T. (2007) What about one more turn after the social in archaeological reasoning? Taking things seriously, World Archaeology 39: 4, 563-578. Webmoor, T. and Witmore, C. L. (2008) Things Are Us! A Commentary on Human/Things Relations under the Banner of a Social Archaeology, Norwegian Archaeological Review 41: 1, 53-70. Witmore, C. L. (2007) Symmetrical archaeology: excerpts of a manifesto, World Archaeology 39: 4, 546-562.

18