I

INSTlTUfE FOR BALKAN STUDIES

Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts - Special edition No. 6 I
in association with
Publishing House DRAGANI -The Heritage Series

Edito r
Academician Milutin Garaanin
General editor of the series
Dragoslav Antonijevi
Correspondin g member of the SASA

BELGRADE 1995

~661

J
30\t'tl9139

SNb'>llb'8 .LS3M ONb'

lb''tI.LN3J ~O S3't1n.LlnJ JIH.L1103N3

JIS\il
\ilO)fIN
,

Reviewer
Academician Milutin Garaanin

English translation
Ivana orevi (pp. 9-93)
Nenad Tasi (pp. 103-175)

Proof-readers
Marina Adamovi
Nenad Tasi

Layout
Nenad Tasi

Drawings
Plates l-XLIII Sead erkez (from PJZ III. 1979)
Figs. in the chapter Register. .. Sneana Bekri

Published by
The "DRAGANI" Co.

The publication of this book has been financi ally supported by

the Ministry for Sciences and Technology of the Republic of Serbia.
The Research Funds of the SERBIAN ACADEMY of SCIENCES and ARTS
and
"M ADLENA JANKOVI FOUNDATION"

CONTENTS

~_......... ....... .... . .... ........ ........... ....... . ....... . ... ............................. . ........ ... ...... . ....

--=X....:.t:non ... ... . .... .... ..... ...... .. ........................... .... ... . ..... ........................... .... .... .....

=-~_'LY

E.'>EOLlTHI C........................................................................................ ... 19

::c ::x)Uthem Pannonian zone ......... ................ .................................... ....

20

-:::e Central Bal kan zone ................................................ .. ........................

28

-;-:,e Alpine slopes zone ........... ....................... .... .... ........... ........................

35

-:-:.e Adriatic zone ..................... ................................................................

38

,.c)::lLE ENEOLITHI C ............... ""'''''''''''''''''''''''' .................................. ........... 43

':;e Cerna voda III . Boleraz culture ................. ..... ... .... .. ...... ........ ......... ...

46

' ::e Baden culture .............................. .. .... .... .... .... ............. .. .. .... .... .. .........

Sl

-:-:le Kostolac culture ................. ............................ .... .... ... ..... .. ........ .. .... ....

59

-:-:, e Cotofeni culture .... ........................................... ..... .... .... .... .. ..............

65

-:-'" e Re u.Gajary horizon....................................... ........ ................ .... ..... ...

69

-:-:'1e Pitgrave culture and the turnuli.... ........ ........... .... ......... .. ............. ....

72

:...:..~ E},"EOLITHI C .... ............................ ............ ......................... ... ..................... 75

-:-:-:e Vue dol culture ................................................. .... ...... ...... .. ........ ... ...

76

-:ne terminal Eneolithic of the Alpine zone ............. .... ........ .......... .. .... ....

85

T ne tenninal Eneolithic of the Adriatic zone ... ............. ..........................

88

.,0-:1:5 .. ................................................................................................................. 93
~C:STER

OF MAJOR ENEOLl1HIC SITIS IN FORMER YUGOSLAVIA .. 103

:; ~. ! OGRAPHY

...................... ___ ...... ___ .......................... ___ .................................... l 75

:O"'\ ~Y ............................................................................................................ l 9 l

-::-JE LIST OF PLATIS (IXLlII) ............................................. ............................. 20 l

PREFACE

The TWble wish of Alojz Benac, the originator of the five- volume SerbaCroot version of the Prehistory of the Yugoslav Lands (Sarajevo 1979; 1983 ; 1987)
... as tO produce a book which would give a synthetic account of that subject not only
. Serbo-Croat, but also in English and Gennan. This wish, we are sorry tO say,
-u. been fu lfilled. A. Bertac' s death and, later, the disimegration of famler Yugoslavia
'~-"tc p-revented the completion of that project. By that time, some autiwrs had alread)
7--ished tileir manuscripts, and some others were still working on tileir porticn15 of the
':e:x:. According ta the editor's arrangement, tile texts for the English edition were ta
=-e u:rinen by Mitja Brodar ("The Palaeolithic") , Alojz Benac ("Tile Neolithic"),
':kola Tasi ("The Eneolitiue") ; Borivoje ovi ("The Bronze Age", apart from the
?::rJ101uan region, wlUch was to be discussed by Nikola Tasi) ; and Mi/utin
G.lraanin ("The Iron Age"). Tile Editorial Board made certain general guide-lines
::;- che autlwrs. They were mostly based on the methodology used in tile original
S~Croat edition of the Pre/us tary of tile Yugoslav Lands. Tile illustrative material
" .:lS reduced, but it was also updated with new drawings, plans and charts. Unfor.
='.ll!ely, tlUs part of the work seems to Itave been lost in the tragic developments wlUch
~"::t afflicted parts of the fonner Yugoslavia, especially Sarajevo and tile Centre for

,=

3.:zJ<Gnological Research, in which the documentation was kej)t.

The autlwr of tlUs book on the Eneolitluc of Yugoslavia submitted lus text
OJ che Editorial Board as early as 1987. He was given valuable comments and
~estions by A. Benac, B. ovi and M. Garaanin. In the 1Yleantime, the
:':OTtUnate events mentioned above have shown that the projected English edition is
-.o: likely tO be produced in the near future, and therefore Ile has decided to update
'is zn and publish it as a separate 1Ywnograph.
What are the most Twtable changes and additions in the present text l First
. .:ill, the fomJer admirlistrative entity (tiJe Socialist Federative Republic of Yugosla-

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

via) exists no longer, and therefore the earlier title has been replaced by the temi "The
Central and Western Balkan", which is llOt fully adequate, but which does cover
approximately the territory of fonneY Yugoslavia. The book discusses four regional
wholes as in the original Prehistory of the Yugoslav Laru1 (Vol. Ill) : the south
Pannonian region, the central Balkan regiml, the A lpine region and the Adriatic
region. The two former regimiS belong to the central Balkans, and the two latter anes
to the western part of the Balkan region. ln view of the character and the development
of the individual Eneolithic culture (the Kostolac culture, and particularly, the
Vuedo l culture), which extended over more than one rel(ion, this approach ,eemed
appropriate. ln order to avoid long descriptive expreSSiOns, the text uses tenns such as
"former", or "previous" Yugoslavia, and it is IlOped that the well-meaning reader will
accept them in the sense in which they are used.
Another im/Jo rtam modific ation of the original text is the addition of the
second part, which contains a Ust of the fifty most important Eneolithic sites in the
regions. lt includes those that have been used by the author for the synthetic part of
his text, those are archaeological material from which is well known to the author.
Since 1990, which nta)' be considered the upper chronological limit of the greater
portion of the text, a number of major Eneolithic sites have been explored, especially
in the western parts of the Balkan Pminsula, but they have not been discussed here
either because they have llOt been fully published of because of evidence on their
chronology and cultural traits is still not available. lt may be observed tltat the list of
sites shows cmlSiderable regional variations as regards their distribution. lt should be
added, besides, that these regions Itave not been explored equally thoroughly: for
example, the sites in Slavonia, Srem or Pelagmua are co1lSiderably better known than
those in Istria, on tite Adriatic coastline or Herzegovilta.
The illustrations used in the book are of various origin, and tltat is specified
in the appropriate place. The tables are mostly tllOse used in Vol. 1Il of the Prehistory
of the Yugoslav Lands, and they were made by Sead erkez after the instructimlS of
N. Tasi, S. Dinlitrijevi and B. Jovanovi. They Itave been complemented by a few
drawings made for the English edition by EIma Buo fro m the Centre fo r Balkanological Research of the Academy of Science and A rts of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The
drawings in the chapter on the sites have been made by Sneana B ekri.

INTRODUCTION

The study of Eneoli thic sites and cultures , and of the Eneolithic in
general, does not have a long tradition in fonner Yugoslavia. If we take as its
starting point the systemati c excavations of 19 (Ljubljansko Barje) carried out
by K. Deschman in 1875 1 we are left with a period of some 120 years. Extensive
material has been collected during tha t time, rela ring to Eneolithic se ttlements
and necropolises, the material and non-material culture of th e period, the
relative and absolute dating of the cultures, cultural groups, and their variants,
as well as the period as a whole, so that it is now possible to offer a fairly accurate
syntheric survey of the development of the cultures, their stylistic and typological feat ures.
Deschman's research was followed by the investigation of other Eneolithic sites, most notably by F. Fiala at Debelo Brdo (1893) , J. Brunschmidt at
Sarva (1 897 ) and Vuedo l (1898), Vohalski at Gomolava (1904) , M. Vasi
at Kostolac (1906) and Vina (1908), F. MiIleker's many smaller-scale excavations in southern Banat in the late nineteenth century and the first decades
of the twentieth, and many others .1 Ljubljansko Barje, Vuedol, Vina, and
Bubanj excepted, the first large-scale and systemaric excavations were to take
place only after W orld War II: at Gomolava, Hrus tovaa, Vinkovci, Zecovi,
Ravlia Peina, Grapeva pilja, Gudnja, Vela Luka , Odmut, several sites in
Pelagonia, Hisar and Lipljan in Kosovo, Ajdovska jama in Slovenia, and
elsewhere. This survey of the Eneolithic in the Yugoslav Danube Basin, and
the central and western Balkans is based on material gathered at these sites.
In addition to archaeological excavations and the collecring of archaeolOgical data, the nineteen-thirties saw the first attempts at systematizing the
material from the Eneolithic sites and drawing up a periodization of the
Eneolithic cultures. These attempts are to be found in the first volumes of what

10

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

was then a ground-breaking series, the "Corpus vasorum antiquorum", chiefly

the 1937 volumes by N. Vuli and M. Grbi dealingwith the material contained
in Belgrade's Prince Paul Museum (Muzej Kneza Pavla) l and, to a lesser extent,
V. Hoffil1er's volumes of 1933, devo ted to Vue dol, and 1938, publi shing the
results of excavations at Sarva, Dalj , and Velika C;orica 4 A more thorough
sys tema tization of the Eneolithic cultures and their rel ative chronology became
available only with the works ofV. Mil oji (1949), M. Garaanin (1959), A.
Benac (1962), S. Dimitrijevi (1961), N. Tasi (1967) and, ofcourse, comprehensive monographs such as Tite Preltistory of Serbia by M. Garaanin and The
Prehistory of Vojvodina by B. Brukner, B. J ovanovi , and N. Tasi 5 These
synthetic works, numerous studies, articles and papers, excavation reports, and
unpubli shed material, served as a basis for the five volumes of The Preltistory of
Yugoslavia, whose third volume (by N. Tasi, S. Dimitrij e vi, and B. J o vanovi)
is devoted to the Eneolithic cultures of former Yugoslavia. 6 The present text
is, in a sense, a summary of that volume, which have been updated with the
information on recent excavati ons and recent insights of domestic and foreign
scholars relating to the Eneolithic in Central and Southeast Europe.

***

The tenns Eneouthic, Copper Age and The Period of Traruition Between
the Ne olithic and tite Bro1!ze Age are all used in archaeological literature;? we
have opted for the tem) Eneolithic, not so much because it was the most
appropriate to the period under consideration but because it best suits the
general out1ine of the book and is the most frequent1y used in recent literature.
Of course, we could very well have used the term Copper Age, but not The
Period of Transition for it implies shorter duration of the epoch and a transi tional nature of cultures , which is by no mean s true of the Eneolithic c ultures,
especially Baden, Kostolac, V ue do l , and least of all the Culture of Tumuli
(Pit-grave culture) in the Danubian region. The main reason for singling out
the Eneolithic as a period in its own right is provided by the new categories that
emerged during that period, characterized by changes in the economy of
prehistoric society (advanced development of stock-breeding), the emergence
and development of mining and primary metallurgy (the extraction and use of
copper ores), the appearance of crafts in connection with the manufacture of
copper artefacts, the stratification of Neolithic society, the emergence of new
populations, especially in the northeastern parts of the Balkan Peninsula, etc.
However, the transition from the Neolithic Age to the Eneolithic was not in
itself abrupt, with cultures and their bearers succeeding each other in a
clear-cut way. It was a gradual and long-lasting process, which started midway
through the development of the Neolithic agrarian cultures of the Vina ,
Lengyel, Butmir and Theiss (Tisza) types, and lasted as long as the culture s
themselves. These were superseded by the first true Copper-Age (Eneolithic)
cultures, in which the extraction and processing of copper, the manufacture of
artefacts and their exchange (initial trade) assumed the nature of economic
categories. In the Balkans the "Eneolithicization" of the Neolithic cultures was

Introduction

II

nm a unifornl process, either chronologically or geographically. Depending on

rhe strength of the indigenous base, the geographic features of the land, and
rhe in tensity of outside influences (from the Carpathian Basin, the north
Pontus, or the Aegean), some regions were quicker to accept innovation,
especially in the field of prehistoric economy. Two factors particularly promoted
the "Eneolithicization" of the cultures in eastern and central parts: the swift
development of the mining and processing of copper and gold in the "circumPontic zone", especially in the eastern Balkans (the mines of Ruk Bair and
Rudna Glava, the horizon of gold finds of the Vama type, etc. ) on rhe one hand
and, on the other, Indo-European nomadic migrations from the steppes. This
is why the beginnings of the n omadic settlements of the Bubanj-Salcuta-Krivo dol type in eastern Serbia coincided with the continued existence of the Late
Vina culture (Vina D horizon) in the Sava , Danube and lower Morava basins
and of the even later Lengyel (Sopot) culture in Srem and Slavonia.
As regards the cultural-historical processes in the central and western
Balkans, rhe mapping of the sites and the delimitation of the various Eneolithic
cultures have revealed specific fe atures in the continuous development in
particular geographic entities or, to be more precise, four main zones: southern
Pannonia, the central Balkans, the Adriatic, and the Alpine slopes. With some
minor oscillations, the cultures and style s there succeed each other in a
continuum, thus laying the foundations for future palaeoe thnic entities which
were to develop their distinctive features in the first millenium B.e. Of course,
the boundaries of these zones did not remain static throughout the Eneoli thic.
Some cultures would occasionally encroach on others but, with time, integrative processes grew stronger and were most apparent at the time of the Vuedol
culture. Nevertheless, regional development remains one of the main detenninants of the continuity of the existence of autochthonous cultures and their
successors over a lengthy petiod of time (e.g. Baden-Kostolac-Vuedol in
southern Pannonia). The cultural-geographic zones would thus be the followmg:
a) The south Pannonian zone includes the Yugoslav Danube Basin and,
in the words of ].Cviji,8 the hinterland gravitating to it: lower courses of the
Drava, the Sava, the Velika Morava, the Tisza, and the Timok ti vers. During
the Eneolithic this was mostly a zone of transmission between the cultures of
the Pannonian Plain and the central Balkans, and vice versa. By its culturalhistorical development it is rela red to the Tiszapolgar -Bodrogkeresztur complex
(the central and eastern parts) and, to a lesser extent, to Lengyel and postLengyel developments (the western parts), with the possible addition of the
Lasinja (Balaton- Lasinja I) culture . In the second h alf of the Eneolithic period,
from the establishment of the Cernavoda III-Boleraz culture to the Baden,
Kostolac, and Vuedol cultures, the region became integrated into a wider
Pannonian-Balkan area which also attracted the Alpine and Adriatic zones
during the final stages of the Vuedol culture.
b) The central Balkan zone consists of the mountainous parts of fonner

Map I

12

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

Yugoslavia, with &)snia, most of Serbi a, anJ Kosovo forming its nucleus. Here
the continuity of cultural development is not as clear as in, say, southern
Pannonia, as the region had frequendy been exposed to encroachment by
already fonned cultures, most often from the north or northeast. In the Early
Eneolithic the Bubanj-Salcuta-Krivodol complex developed in the eastern
reaches of the region (sites in eastern Serbia and Kosovo), while Kostolac and,
afterwards, Vue do l cultures predominated in the late phase. Owing to the
mountainous nature of the region, there was intensive movement of nomadic
stock-breeders, especially aloIJg the line stretching from the Ca rpathians to
Homoije, Mts. Kopaonik and Sara, and the Pindus. 9 The northern parts of thi s
zone were also, no doubt, characteri zed by uanshumance between the Sava
valley and the mountainous parts of northern &)snia, as testifieJ to by Pivnicatype Kostolac sites or Vis-type Lasinja sites near Modran (Derventa ) . 10 The
same rela tionships are [o be obse rved in the so uthern part of the zone, between
the Adri atic coast and its hinterland (Ravlia peina, Ha tvel jska pe ina , etc.),
especially since the recent excava tion work in Herzegovina. ll
c) The Alpine slopes zone or, to be more precise, the southeast Alpine
region, include Slo venia and most of northwest Croatia . In the Early Eneolithi c
the cultures of the region lay under a strong west-Pannonian influence,
especially that of the Lengyel and Balaton-Lasinja cultures. In the latter half
of the Eneolithic the Vue dol culture exerted a powerful influence, most
particularly on the fonnati on of the Ljubljansko Barje (lg I) culture and, less
decisively, on the emergence of the Ljubljana cultureY The continuity of
development and the more specific nature of the different cultures are more
pronounced in the latter part of the Eneolithic rather than in its early stages,
when the Lengyel culture and the "Alpine facies of Lengyel" were merely
regional variants of their parental cultures: Lengyel , Balaton-Lasinja \. One of
the fa ctors to have influenced this was the strong development of copper
metallurgy, testified to by the many finds of both copper tools and moulds used
in their casting (Ljubljansko Barje) .
d) The Adriatic zone encompasses a long and narrow strip of land along
the Adriatic sea, from Istria in the north [o the Skadarsko Lake in the south. Recent
excavations in the hinterland (Herzegovina) have shown that some areas north of
the Dinaric range also gravitate to it. The cultures of the region display greater
.independence and point to a continuity of development from the Hvar culture to
the proto-Nakovana and the Nakovana cultures. As elsewhere, this continuity was
disrupted by the expansion of the Vuedol style, i.e. the ljubljana culture, as
evidenced by sites such as Tivat and Rube, pottery of the kind found at Grapeva
pilja, from the early phase of the Cetina culture, or the Istrian sites, including the
caves in the Gulf of Trieste (Grotta dei Oclami, etc.).

*
The chronological framework for the study of the emergence and
development of Eneolithic cultures in this book is something of a problem,
especially in dealing with the beginning of the period under consideration. In

""

~.

ro

co

co

iii
oo

oo

::;

ii u!'

:o.

~
~

o n
:to
oo

co

ao

ro

co

~
~

oo

co

ro

ao
o
co

iii

co

oo

co
co
co

-o

5'

:to
ooo

ro

co

111111
I II II
1111111111
1111111111
111111111
111111111
111111'

I I I I I
I I I I I I I

uOI1JnpOJlUI

14

PI. I. 4-7

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

recent years, especially since th e discovery of the prehis toric mine at Rudna
Glava near Majdanpek , but also on the basis of the presence of copper artefacts
at Vina sites (Pl o nik, Vin a, Fafos near Kosovska Mitrovica, Gornja Tuzla)
and necropolises (grave no. 12 at Uomolava), there has been a tendency to
include the later Vina culture in the Eneolithic period, II i.e . to shift the upper
chronological limit to the middle of the fourth millennium B.e. Vina-type
pottery from the platforms of the Rudna Ula va mine dates from the period of
transition between the earlier and later Vina cultures ; the copper bracelet
from the grave no. 12 at (,omolava and the copper beads fl)und at the same
site also support such a dating. Th ese and many other copper t1nds of a similar
kind have placed the present writer in a quandary: should the Eneolithi c period
begin with the much later Vina culture or, as is usual, with Tiszapolgar,
Buban j-Salcuta, Lasinja, or protu-Nakovana? We have opted for the la tter
approach , even th ough quite a few "Neolithic agrarian cultures" of the Lengyel,
Vina, Theiss, and Hvar types pa rtly belong to the Eneolithic period.
The upper chronological limit of the Eneol ithic in the central and
western Balkans is more clearly drawn, although some problems remain there,
especially as regards the post-Vu edol cultures of thc Adriatic or Ljubljansko
Barje. In most cases the "disintegration of the Vuedol culmral complex" and
the formatio n of new post-Vuedol culmres such as Kosihy, aka, Mah),
Ljubljana, the early Cetina, etc. , marks the end of the Eneolithic an d the
beginning of the Early Bronze Age . This phase was not in cl uded in P. Reinecke',
periodization , but it is to be found in most of the mOte recent publications
dealing the subject (cf. Kulturen Der Friihbronzezeit des Karpatenbeckem und
N ordbalkam). In tenm of absolute chronology, the end of the t hird and
beginning of the second millennium B.e. ca n be taken as the end of the
Eneol ithic in the central and westem Balka ns. W e have thus estahlished a
ehronologieal fram ework of some 1,000 years for the Eneolithic cultures, from
the late fourth to the late third millennium B.e.
11,ere have been seve ral attempts to systematize the phases of development of the Eneolithic in the Balkans on the basis of either the cultural-historical picture of the period or the econ omic fe atures of individual cultures.
11,e Eneolithic could thus be divided into: Early and Late Eneolithic; Early,
Middle, and une Eneolithic; there is (or was) also a view of the Eneolithic as
a brief period of transi tion between the Neolithi c and the Metal Age. 14 In recen t
literature the Eneolithic is usually divided into the Early, Middle, and Late
phases , and this ternary division has also been applied in the third volume of
The Prehiswry oj Yugoslavia . 11,e Early Eneolithic saw the further evolution of
the Neolithic cultures which were familiar with copper and its processing and
produced copper jewellery, weapons , and tools, but whose material and nonmaterial culture preserved the chief characteristics of the preceding period.
Owing to these characteristics we tend to refer to these cultures as post-Neolithic, i.e. cultures whose evoluti on from the Neoli thic to other, new styles, was
generally smooth. In the Yugoslav Danube Basin this process is evidenced on

In troduction

15

the one hand in the emergence of T iswpolg5r on thc foundations bid by the
ll,eiss, the Corzsa and the Herpaly cultures and, o n the other, in the evoluti on
of the Bubanj-Saleu(8 eompicx south (lf the Danube which in cludes, among
others, a Vina component. In the west, the tran st()tmation of Neolithic
cultures in to Eneolithic one, can be traced in the repl ace ment of Lengyel
(Sopot-l..cngyel) by Early Lasinja- Ba!Jton, wh erea s the A lpin e region offers the
"Alpine faci es of Lengyel", i.e. the Lasinja culture. Finally, in the Adri atic
region, the Nako vana (proto-Nakovana) hori zon wa s tormed on the basis of
the Hvar -Lisi ii group, and it largely preserved the preceding culture's teatures . ll,ese changes al most always took place sm(Klthly, as a graJual evoluti on
sp urred o n by th e avai lahility of new disCllV<.!ries in the ti e lei of material
production, primarily thm of early copper metallurgy.
T he end of the Early Eneolithic witnessed major changes in material
and non-materi al cul ture, and probably in ethni c structure roo, th ro ughuut
Southeast Europe. ll,e changes were more marked in the Danube Ba sin and
the eastern and northern parts uf the Ba lkon Penimula; elsewhere they were
essentially echoes <,(larger-scale population mowments, especia lly by nomads,
wave after wave of whom left thc stcppes uf southern Russia and t,x,k ,he
northern and southern Carpathian road towards the Pannonian Plain anJ
then ce to the Balkan Pcn insu\a. This cultural change marked the bec~nnll1g ",'
the Middlc Ellcolititic, which saw the definite end ot' [he a ~anan :\d,li,nlC
cultures and their descendants. It was a sharp hreak, signalled h\ [he emd~encc
offle xibic nomadi c cultures integrating vast areas from the Ca rpathi3n5 :v ::-:e
Alps and from so uthern Poland in the north w the central Baikans 111 ,he ,ou:h.
The first cul ture of the new style and the new econ 'mic, wa, B. 1",5 :-('.c:-:13voda Ill , soon to he foll owed by Baden. 11leir dC\'d,'pment \11 che ~. L ,):-S!3\
Danube Ba sin must be viewed within a hr<'ader prxe,s where[,\' :n"
auroehth onous I\eoli thic population was replaceJ hl' nlCW !X'pulan, 'n,. ~ ,
Iieved to have been Indo- European. In those regk'ns whIch haj not experi enced direct migrational processes (Pe!a?"'l1la, the Adria[ie c,)ast, and, w a
certain extent, th e Alpine zone), the de\'e!opment or' Early Ene()lithi c cultures
went on, th ough mo difications to therr stl'lrmc reatures ;) re apparent (in
Pelagonia, for instance, the Crnobuki-Bakarnl1 Gumno group is succee ded by
uplevec-[ype settlements, while in the :\lpine rone pottel)' of the Re[z-Cajary
type followed Early Lasinj a POt tery) .
In the east , especially in the Danube regi()n, the Larc Ellcolirhic was
in augurated by an onrush of steppe peoples, bearers oi the Pit-grave cul ture. It
was the third and last wave ot cultural and ethnic shiits which helped lay the
foundations for [he subsequent constitution lli the palaeo-Balkan tribes in the
Bronze and Iron Ages. S[ratigraphically rdiable evidence tllr the delimita tion
of the Middl e and Late Eneo\i[hic is oiiered hl' the Jabuka tumulus near
Panevo, where a steppe- type grave oi the late Pit-grave cul ture was dug into
a laye r containing a Kostol ac house . IS lt is to be concluded, therefore , that the
Kos tolac culture 'in th is part of [he Danube Basin belonged to the terminal

cl~6_

_____ __ _ __ __ --,Th,,-e::...=.:
En,-,e=o:.::
lit:.::h::.:ic:...:::
cultu res of Cen tral and West Balkans

phase of the Middle Eneolithic, as is the case with the Cotofen i culture in
western Romania . In areas left untuuched by the direct migrat ion of the bearers
of steppe cultures (Bosnia, most of Slavonia), the Kostulac c ulture wcnt on
developing, evolving [()wards the "carving" stylc of the Vue dol culture. Contacts between the Pit-grave and Vuedol cultures during rh e Late Eneolith ic
are refl ected in the adoption by t he Vuedo l culture of the custom of burials
under tumuli and the och re staining of gmve goods (Batajni ca, Vojb, Moldo va
Veche) , the appearance of "carac()mb grave;" in Vuedol, and th e like . lo The
expansion of the Vuedol culture westwards and southwards was to be the
hall mark of the La te Eneolith ic in the central and western Balkans, too. The
pressure exerted by the steppe peoples can be taken as the cause of th ese shifts.
T he Alpin e region witnessed the cmergence of the Ljubljans ko Barj e culture,
while a local variety of the Tivat-Rubd type "fbte Vue dol appeared o n the
Adriatic Cl)ast and in its hinterl and . As stated above, the end of the Late
Eneolith ic, and of the Eneoli thi c as a whole, is marked by th e disintegrari on of
the Vuedol complex and the formation of numerous regional groups and
cultures, which inaugurated the Earl y Brome Age in the Pannonian , ca ntral
Balbn, Danubian, and Adriatic zones.
Besides th e nomadic component, one of the main features of the
Eneolithic c ultures' cconomy wa s the early, llr primary, copper metallurgy - Drc
min ing, processing, and the manufactu re ofcopper artebcts - i.e. initial mining,
metallurgy, and manufacturing technology. TIlesc new activities speeded up
the stratiflcation of Neolithic society , the emergence of specialized economic
activities , and the differentiation between settl ements within the same culture
or between various cultures. T he Enelllithic sites in thc Yugoslav Danube Basin
played a crucial part in these processes , characteri stic of a broad area of Central
and Southeast Europe . TIlese sites were both important mining and metallurgical ce ntres and maj or links in the transmissi on of new disco veries in material
c ulture between the A egean and the Near East on the one hand and the
Panno nian cultures on the o ther. The importance ntthe sites and findings from
the region is amply illustrated by the prehistorical mine at Rudna G lava, the
processing ce ntre in Zlocska peina, the remains of metal-casting workshops at
Debelo Brdo, Alihode, Sarva, Ljubljansko Barj e, o r th e copper hoards found
at Pl o nik, Bemen and De in Srem, Vranovi i and Kozarac in Bosnia, Stabanj
and Split-Gripe in Dal matia, etc. Several extensive studies of copper finds (by
B. Jo van o vi, A. Durman, M. Kuna - to mention hut thc more recent ones) 17
have emphasized the richness and diversity of artefacts of this kind. Regrettably,
most of them have been found o utside an archaeological context , which has
rather restri cted the possibility of interpretation . Only a few come from systematica lly excavated sites (Zlocska peina, Vu e dol, Sarva, Ljubljansko Barj e) 18
and these , together with copper-mo ulds (Sarva, Ljubljansko Barje, A lih ode,
Debelo brdo, Zecovi, etc .), 19 allow us to connect the forms of certain copper
arte facts with particular Eneol ithic cultures (th is issue will be payed partic ular
attention tO later in the book).

Introduction

17

Extensive study of ca rly mini ng anJ metollurgy in the central anJ

eas tern Balkans has foregrounJeJ twO basic a$S ump tions "bout their origins.
According to somc (S. Jungha ns, E. Sangmeister, M. Sch rclJer, J. Deshayes, G.
Clark, S. Piggo t(, and others) ,20 (he use of copper haJ been importeJ from the
Aegea n and Asia Minor; more recently, its aurochthonl)us origin has been
claimed for (B. Jovanovi) ZI Considering the greater concentra tion of copper
artefacts in the Early Eneolithic cultures of the eastern Balkans (CJumein ita ,
Salcuta, Mari ca) as compareJ with west"rn reilions, it woulJ s"em that the view
which places the eastern Balkans within the "circumPontic : one of the Early
Eneolithic" and gives it preceJence in tim" is the correc r on" (1' . ernih) 22
The necropolis near Varna and the mines Oi' Ai Bunar anJ Rudna Glava might
provide sufficient evidence tl) supp..)rt such an opinion.
The im]X)nance o r mi~rawf\ trenJs ror the perioJi :ation l)tTneolirhic
cul tures in foml"r Yugosla\ia has alr"aJy heen stresse J . A few worJs need to
he said about their mechanism and [heir significance tllf the relmive Jating of
the steppe culrures or southern "'LC;;:3 in th"ir relation fl) rhose of rhc Balbn
Danubian :o ne. i(o doubt che m.:..l\-cnkn:~ 1".)i che ItS [ cPp pas(oralist::;n towarJs
:;,e Pa:l:1cnian Plain, rh" YU~c , ~3\' D3~;;he re!!ion, and rhe central Balkans
"'it" c' ~;::ial impl1nanc" i~'r thc:r "n:,:" subsequ"m development. n je
:::e\-xt::: : 0::'1 !110n in a rch ac''1k''\f:'!~3: b ~cr::H,-,-:-e (P. Rl1111an, A. Benac M.
-;:; :-3i:;;--lli-.. B. jO\'3no\i, " . T 3S:~. ,,:;::. \:' ;, ih3i ih" n1c1\,ementS of the steppe
"1 nl.....:'I~
Et.:. r\..l!k3n :T.l ~..:;~~a,r '.."'-~ '~ h
?c\,:,p l eS. :.c. :::e
[ e'
iOfl11 ot.successive l nig ra~
:: ':::;5. OVt:::- 3 '?--'"::C~.: C ~ 3tx.. . C: 3 :h (~..:s.:::.::": \c:3:-S: 3;: :lfSr lt was merely () question
~i c ... rtW',,1 ~. n:3~i' :;~.: iru~;.:"~;:,,, ~ [\!;::J \:ureSulul, the Klado vo hoa rd of
\,
J _ __ -- \. :- .--- - . --. - ~- . ;.
;;;'--:h Eneo l'l( h"IL, ( h c ::,teppe
.
. l,nQ .,,llnt. ua
,=~ c.~. C~.......
....!~c ....l...~...!.~ ~.x ~11h. . . ........:e \." ... e
1

peoples ac[uallv amn:':. :::-~;: ;:..) ;:r.c lli:--.:..6t: :-C'tiun. and rht:n tO [he regions
Sc)urh o r the Sa\'a and D3:1L::>e. Tn~ e~"r~enLe o:' ,h" C:ma\'oJ3 11I&)lera :
cul ture, the appearance Oi' 'Sch"ltxnhen\;el" ]X)"". \,:n rhe Yu!?c"!a,, pans or
rhe Danube region, and rhe s_'urhwarJ sprad oi rh Buban, Saicura culrure
tH." Koso\'o , and [hence [ O Pelago nia) we re resulrs Q i ~(r('n g pressure e xerreJ
by the newcomers on the au[()chrhonous culrures or rhe Carparhian. Danubian,
and Balkan regions.

ln addition to these largescale movemems of rhe bearersofrhe Eneolirhic

cultures, the endof the period al sosaw the expansion of the Vuedol culture. Air"r
a period ofconcenrrated growth during the Iasr third ofehe Eneolithic, me Vuedol
style sprea d from its native SremSbvonian region in all directions: fl) the wSt, to
ta m) the Alpine nucleus of "carveel" p<.mery (Ljubljansko Barje "i th irs If! I phase);
to the south, all the way to the mountains ofcentral Serbi a and Bosnia; to the north
and the Pannonian Plain (Zuk); and tO the east, to rhe so uthern spurs of the
Carpathians (Moldova Veche) . Somewhat later, towards rhe end nf rhis major
cultural complex, local variants of the TivatRube type appear on the Adriatic
coast, or the Ljubljana culture in Slovenia, the northern Adriatic, and Istri a, as well
as a number of other "]Xlst. Vuedol groups" of the types Kosihy, Make), and aka,
ina ugura ting the Early Brome Age .

The Eneolithic cultures of Cen tral and West Balkans

18

Central
Ba lkan zone

Alpin e s lopes
zone

Adriatic
zon e

Lengyel final
Bubanj I
-Saieula II

La sinja I
II

Cernavoda III

Kevdere

Kosto lac
(Cotofeni)

Vu e do l

(lg I)
(l g II)
Vu edo l

Proto- Nakova na
Nakovana

Adriatic faeies of
the Vued o l culture
(Tivat- Rube)

Note: W hen pointing to the illustrative material in the margins . followin g

system has been established: PI. 1 1 I is the reference to the table within the text: PI. IXlIlI
is the reference to the tables given at the end: Fig. 1 50 stands for the number of the site
and the individual number for each drawing in the chapter "Registre of mahor Eneolithic
sites in former Yugoslavia" (e.g. Fig. 1/1 stands for the figure number one in Ajdavska Jama) .

EARLY ENEOLITHIC
Post - Neolith ic cultures

As already no ted, a clea r lin e dividin g the Neoli thic and Eneol ithic
c ultures cannot be drawn . W e have opted, therd()tc , fo r the term post-Neolithic
tO refer to cultures whi ch were familiar with copper and its techno logy, but
which preserve d Neolithic characteristics in th e main features of th eir material
and non-material culture. Continuity of developme nt is the hallmark of these
cultures, and it is refl ected in the shape of th eir vessels, their material culture,
the loca tion of their settlements, thei r economy, and their buri al practices. The
pottery of Tiszapolgjr o r Bubanj-Salc uta preserved the basic shapes and similar
fa bri c - refined clay and burni shed grey or bl ack surfaces, typical of the agrarian
cul tures of Central and So ut heast Europe. A good example are th e conical
bowls with thickened , turned-i n rilll s, known as "(;radac plates" and found both
in the Vin a culture and in the Bubanj -Salcuta-Krivo dol and Gumelnita
complexes . T11e decora tion of the inside is burni shed in the Vin a culture,
graphi te burnished or red-painted in Bubanj -Salcuta or Gumel nita Z5 Then
there is the infl uence of Neoli thi c figurines on Eneolithic ones fo und at early
Eneolithi c sites in eastern Serbi a, Koso vo, and Pelagonia , whi ch also belong to
the widespread Bubanj-Salcuta- Krivodol complex and th ar of the "graphite
burni shed ware llf th e eastern Balkans". Numero us other exampl es point to
close ties between the Early Eneolithic cultures and the autoch tho nous base .
lt is enough, for instance, to compare the graves orthe Vina culture necropolis
at Gomolava with the late r necropolises of Tiszapo lga r or another Early
Eneolith ic culture to reali ze how st rong the tradition wa s I The crouched
positi on of the body laid on the side, its orient<J tion, the n umber and disposal
of grave goods, are almost identical in the ea rlier and later cul tures . All this,
and the fac t that the more recent period inh erited its chief fea tures - in itial
mining and early copper metallurgy - from the I\eolithic cultures, allow us to
trea t the earliest cultures of the new epoch - thc A ge of Metal , i.e. of Copper
- as post-Neoli thic , o r Early Eneolithic. In former Yugosla via, these would

Fig.8

20

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

~--------------------~~~

include: in the east, Bubanj-SalcutJ , its Pelagonian varian t (C rnobuki-Bakarno

Gumno), and Tiszapolgar-Bodrogkeresztur; in the Sava valley and the Alpine
zone, Balaton-Lasinj a ; o n th e Adriatic coa st and the islands, the Nakovan a
c ulture .
a) The Sou t hern Pa n non ian zone
In its c ultural-historical develo pment, the region north of thc Danube
and the lower Sava (Vojvodina) has been close ly connected wi th the c ultures
of the eastern Pannonian Plain. TI1e Neoli thic tradition which produced Thei
in the east and Lengye l in the west of the Pl ain survived intO the Early
Eneolithic. Theiss and its desccndants, Herpaly -Csciszh alom- Cimzsa -O borin ,
served as the base for the fo nnntion ot T iszapt)lga r, whil e Balaton I-Lasinja I
evolved fro m Lengyel. T he integration of the eastern and western areas would
come about o nly later, with the emergence of Bo leraz- Cernavoda III , i.e . the
Baden culture . TI1e area wo uld preser ve its unity th ro ughout th e Middle and
La te Eneolithi c, until the disintegration of thc Vu e do l comp lex and the
advent of the early Bronze Age cultures .

T he Tiszapolgar culture is th e first genuine manifestati on of the

Copper Age (Eneolithic) in the So uth Pan nonian zone . It was the produc t, as
most authors agree,n of a long evo luti o n of thc Neolithi c cultures in the T isza
valley, some of which, alth ough familiar with copper and its use in the
manufacture of weapons, tools, and jewell ery, still belonged to the Neoli thic
civilizati on. TI, is is especi ally true of Hcrpal y-Csl)zshalom in Hungary, Obo rin
in Slovakia, and proto-Tisza polgar in Vojvodina. Some a uth ors have cl assified
these cultures as transiti onal dating them in to the Early Pann onian Eneolithic.
The problem of th e "proto-Ti szapo lga r" group, noticed by B. Brukner in
southern Baka and Srem, remains ope n. The gro up is illustrated by material
from Gospodjinci, Sirig, and the "Eneol ithic hu mus" at Gomolava (Gomolava
II), whi ch migh t belo ng partly to the Lengyel style, and partly to Balaton
I-Lasin ja l. TI1 e q uestion of the genesis of the Tiszapolgar c ulture may therefore
be best resolved by recourse to stratified sites in Hungary and Slovaki a (Herpaly, Luky, Ti ba va) whi ch, in our opinion, offer much more evidence. The
Tiszapolgar culture was alre ady well formed wh en it rea ched th e southern areas
of its expansio n.
Another questi on concerns the stylistic and chronologica l differentia tion be tween the Tiszapolgar and the Bodrogkeresztur cultures. In Hungarian
literature, they are treated as independent cultures. zo However, the evidence
of stratified sites, the fact that large necropolises belong, as a rule , to bo th
cultures , and the charac teri stic fe atures of their pottery in dicate that the two
c uitures are part of the same line of develo pment, with the later one di splaying
new po ttery shapes and types of decorati on (the "milk pot" sh ape, net patterns)

22

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

Bodrogkeresztur, whe n rhe same region was to wirness the appearance of

Salcura IV -Scheibennenkel portery on the one hand (Baranda) and, on the
orner, of the Bole r<'iz-Cernavoda Ill -type (Brza Vrba) .JJ

PI. V, 1-5

W e owe most l)f our knowledge abour the Tiszapolgar and Budrugkeresztur culrures to finds from nccmpolises , Th e 11 umber of in vestig3teJ settlements, espec ially in the south, is practically negligible . We dispose of some more
data from rhe srratified site of Crna Bara nea r Kikinda and, to a lesser extenr,
Sirig, GospoJj inci, and anine (Belegi) 34 A vertical srratigraphy Dferna Bara
has been esrablished on the basis of data provided by M . and D. Garaanin ; the
lowes t levels (Crna Bara 1) conrain Theiss-Sakalhat pottery, level JJ the
Tiszapolg5r fi nJs, and level III Bodrogkereszru r ware. This is important because
it can help both to establish a relative chronology and to resolve the problem
of th e genesis of T iszapolgar pottery. Moreove r, ir would seem on rhe basis of
publish'ed material that portery from level l may belong to t he very end of the
Theiss developmenr, i.e. to the Herp51y culture . The geographic position of
Crna Bara (n orthern Banar) allows us to assume that the settlement could have
e xperienced the same development as neighbou ring sites in the Hungarian part
of the Tisza valley . Marerial found elsew here offe rs scantie r data : in Belegi, a
level was found conraining Ti szapolgar pi ts si milar to rhose of Batka nea r Senta ,
the selfsame site where a necropolis belonging to the same culture was also
excavatcd,JS B. Rrukn er me n tions several 6.)otings of "pruto~ Ti sz8polgarll

houses in Sirig and Gospodjinci; as many as IS, with dimensi ul1S of lO x IS m,

have been registered in Sirig o n rhe basis of surface remains. J6 No systematic
research has been carried out ar these sires, however, nor has tll e marc rial been
publishe d in its entirety, which is why the data should be used with caution,
all th e more so as the cultural arrriburion of the sires in question is also
controversial: do rhey bclong to pmto-T iszapolga r, T iszapolgar, or a larer phase
of Lengyel 7

Fig 45

PI. VII, 7,8

PI. IX, 7

Necropolises have provided more Jata on rhe Ti szapolgar and Bodrogke resztur cultures. A recent addirion to the well -known sites ne ar Suborica a nJ
Senta and to the regrerrably incomplete e vidence about the 40 graves in Srpski
Krs tur h as bee n a smaller-scale necropolis from Belo brdo in Vina which,
together with two graves near RDspi uprija (Belgrade), is the southernrnost
find of this kin d .31 Mosr of the graves belong to Bodrogkereszrur, though all
rhe necropolises excepr Vina conta in Tiszapolgar burials too. Eigh r graves
have been excavated at Biserna Obala near Subotica: numbe rs l, 2, and 5
belong to an advanced stage in rhe developmenr of Bodrogke resztur, while the
orhers are somewhar earlier;]S of the se ven graves in Senta, six belong to
I30drogkeresztur and one to T iszapolgar;J9 both graves from RDspi uprij a are
T iszapolgar graves . Fin ally, it is important to note rha t these necropolises
(Senta, Rospi uprija) ofren feature sertle me nr remains as well (pirs, pirwellings) , which indica res th at buri als took place in the immediate vicinity of
the settlements. The sires in quesrion have not been excavared o n a large
enough scale tO yield more data for the reconstructi on of burial practices and

Early Eneolithic

_ _~. 23

the organization of the necropolises, nor have they provided sufficient anthropological evidence to establish a demographic picture of the neeropolis as a
reflection of life in the settl ement. Instead we have the grave goods, whose
typological features can be used to determine the position of the Vojvodina
necropolises within the devel o pment of T iszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur
throughout the Pannonian Plain. They belong to the same cultural circle as
the much more thoroughly investigated nec ropolises in Hungary and Slovakia,
such as Ti szapolgar-Basatanya, H(idmez(\vas6rhely-Kot3cpart, Tape, Deszk,
Tibava, Lucska, and many o thers. 4o If ou r purpose is a more accurate locatio n
of our necropolises, we might place the ea rli er graves in the Deszk group
according to the division by I. Bogn6r-Kutzi6n, while th e others (Vina,
Subotica) would belong to a mature Bodrogkeresztur (Pusztaistvanh aza -Bodrogkercsztur II) culture. 41
11le material culture of the Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur sites in
our parts corresponds entirely to the finds ITom necropolise~ and settl ements
in neighbouring countries, especially the Hungarian part of th e Tisza valle y.
Tiszapo lgar pottery is generally ofa good fabric, finely burnished, but plain. 11le
only excepti on is the portery from Vrac, which is of somewha t inferior
workmanship.42 A characteristic shape is that of the footed goblet, one of the
main features of the Tiszapolg6r styl e: the tall goblets have a holl ow cylindrical
or slightly profiled foot; the receptacle has the telrm ufconical or bi conical bow!.

PI. I

PI. VI. I

Lugs, at tinles ve ry prOllline nt , are a constant feature of must sbapes of

Tiszapolgar pottery - bowls, globular vessels, pots, etc. 111e difference between
ho usehold porrery and grave goods is negligible and lies chiet1y in th e quality
of workmanship (grave goods are finer) and diversity of shapes (household
pottery is more varied, especiall y at Crna Bara or Vrac). The Bodrogkeresztur
culture saw two maj or changes in pottery-making: the appearance of decoration
and of new shapes - the characteristic "milk po t" vessel an d the calotte-shaped
bow!. The footed goblets, so frequent in Tiszapolgar, were gradually abandoned.
Bodrogkerezstur decoration takes the form of incised lines, pricks, and circular
appliques. Ir is very rich, oft en covering the entire surface of a vessel (milk
containers from Dubovac and Batajnica, Vina bowls, etc.).
Besides po ttery, which is no doubt the chief cha racteristic of the
Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur style , the se ttlements and necropolises have
yielded other artefacts, mos t significantly long flint knives, copper and gold
artefacts . 111e knives were fc)und in a grave from the Biserna Obala necropolis
near Subotica, in enta (Mali Ala s site), and Kla do vo, in a well -known hoard
which might belong to another c ultural complex (Bubanj-Salcuta, or th e
inc ursi on of "steppe pastoralists" into th e Yugoslav Dan ube region).4 J The
Importance of the knives lies in their connection with an early steppe cul tures'
imoa d into the Carpathian Basin and the Danube regi on . Thei r presence in
the necropolises of Decia Muresului horizon anci Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkeresztur graves (Kisvarda - grave l; Deszk B - grave 8 ; Csongnid-Kettbshalomgrave l; Basatanya - several graves)44 is related to their frequency at Sredni

PI. V. 1 9

PI. VII. 1.2.8

PI. VII. 7
flg.45/1 - 2

P V I. 2
PI. XI . 5.9

~ ------------

PI. XI. 5.9

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

Stog II necropoli ses (Clleksandriski anJ Novodanill)Vski 1l1ogilnik, etc .) anJ

their reappearance later, within the Pit-grave c ulture ." M. (Jar"anin mwehes
panicul ar significa nce to the Klado vo hom'd, whic h cnnmin ed 22 lo ng flint
knives anJ a c ruc ifonn copper a xe.40 Th ey arc probably co nn ected with t he
steppe c ultures, th o ugh wh en placed in th e cultural Cllntext of th e groups
de veloping in th e Yugosl"v Danube Basin some reserve remains in M.
Garaanin's article regarding th eir "ttributi on. Th e KlaJo vo hoarJ wa S t,) unJ
in the border zone separating Ti szapolgar and Bodrogke resztu r (the south ern
Banat sites) from Bubanj-Salcura sites in their imme diate vicinity (Saicuta
grave at Lepenski Vir in easte rn Serbia ). Ne vertheless, th e Kladovo find is of
maj or signifk"n ce , both on acco unt of its li nks with the steppe cultu res and
bec ause it allows us [o connect th e coppe r finJs (c rucif, lfIil axes) with "n
important c ultura l hori zon fro m the tail-end ut t he E"r1y Eneulithic. C rllcifonn
axes o f the kind fu und in Kla do vu bclo ng to [\mlrogke re szt Llr rath er t ha n
Ti szapolgar, anJ that is impon:ant in establi shing the relali vc chronology of the
E"r1y Eneolithic c ultures of th e C arpathian-Balbn- Danuhian zon e.
lInfortun a tely, th e Cllppe r anJ gold arte facts whic h m ight bdo ng to
T iszapolgar and I:lod rogkereszt ur arc most often chance finds. On the basis of
analogues fi'om Hungarian sites t hey coulJ,
the most part, be rega rded as
belonging ro this horizon. This is especially true of a smaller hoard uf coppe r
rools from LivaJe near Kikinda and the finds from :ob, th e Subot ica region,
etc H Th e cultural a ttributi on l)f t he copper ho arJs anJ individua l find s from
Srem remains unclear. Th ey encopmass bo th earli er t'1fl11S ufaxes fm m De,
whi ch might we ll bclnng to th e Tiszopolgar horizon, anJ l\umewus cru ciflll'lll
axes (th e Bem e n and Dobanovci hoarJs)4S Jating from Bodrogkeresztur's
shon-lived inc urslc)n into this and neighbouring are as (Surin, th e graves in
Vin a) hut also from the period of th e B"de n c ulture , wh ich was very stl'llng in
thi s regio n (Do banovc i, Lice near Erde vik, C;ollllllava, e tc.) 49 11)e same a pplies
to th e gold find from Progar, which some "uthl) rs have arrrihme J to Tiszapulgar
and ml~e r s to FloJl'llgkeresztur. ,n The manufac turing tec hnology, intricacy, anJ
quality o f th e gold amulet Ii'om Progar "re more advanced than, say, th ose uf
similar finds fro m Tibava or thc Hencid" hoard. lt is typologicall y close r (o the
finds from Homi ca, grave no . 97 in V"rna, anJ e ven (~um e jnita (le vel A2a). "
ll) e gold pins from grave no . 2 of the Nosa nee ropolis n ear Suboti c a be lollg to
the same hori zon; o n the b" , is of "mi lk pot" vessels anJ analogue s with the
Jaszladany necropoli s and grave no . II at Fe nycslitkc the y are Jated into the
late Bodrogke reSztLlr horizon. ;)

t,,,

PI. III. 1.2.5

PI. VII. 5-6

PI. I -- Pottery types

of the Tizsapolgar culture
frorn sites in Vojvodina

JI41110.U] APE]

26

Eneol ithic cul tures

_ _The
.c::..::c-=c

of Central and West Balkans

***

PI. V III. 1-8

Fig,2/4-5

T he development of th e pus t-Neolithic (Early Eneolithic) c ultu res

e nds with the emergence of the Hunyadi-Vajska sites in the Southern Pann onian zone. T he pwhle m uf this culture, gro up, ur variant is a complex o ne
fi)!' a n umber of reasons. To begin with, opiniul\s va ry as tu its inde pen dence ,
its place within the development of the Ti szapolgar-Bodrugkeresztur complex,
and its absolute da ting. So far it has been described in literature as an
indepe ndent c ulture, a phase of Bo drogke reszt ur, ur part uf a larger clltl1plcx ,
the so-called Scheibenhenkel pottery.\J T he phe nomenon has not been studied
thoruughly eno ugh for a definite sta nd to bc rnken. W e sha ll herc disc uss the
stylistic and chtl1nulogica l att ri bution of the fin ds from wh at is by now the on ly
certain site - the Baba Sivaka necro polis near Vaj ska , south of SOlllbor. '4
Small-sca le excavation work at the site has uncovered six graves with typical
H un yadih alolll material. W hat is specific of the culture, and of Vajska in
part ic ular, is its plain ware with fluring handles , which is why some archaeologists have placed it within the Sch eibenhenkel horizon and rela tcd it to Salema
IV ware in western Ro mania, southern Banat (O pOV() , Barand a) , an d Srem
(Zelllun- Pri grevica) . Pec ul iar to Vajsko arc th e gold pendan ts f,)und in grave
no. 5 of the necropolis . Th eir significan ce is more than typological: they are
important in establishing thc chronologica l framework of H un yadi-Vajska ware
an d the Vajska necropolis. Ana logues fur these fi nds are to be encountered in
Bodrogke resztur and o ther con temporary cult ures, most particularly the Hen cida hoa rd, grave 16 in jaszl ad:S n y, grave no. 4 in Pusztai stvanhaza, and a ho use
in T raian, Romania. II B. Brukner notes th at the ch emi cal composition (l the
Vajska pendants (Ag 4,Cu 0.09, As 0.04) is very similar to that of Tibava finds;
he dates them somewhat larer, to phase II of Bodrogkeresztur. )O
The profile of H unyadi -Vajska, its mate ri al culture and ch ronology
might become cl earer with rhe publi cation of the resu lts oflarge-sca le systematic excavations a r T izsal uc near Mikole, in itiared as far back as 1974. 5)
Preliminary reports say that it is a sizable se ttl emen t (29 houses have been
registe red) with plenti ful ce ramic, lithi c, and copper material, and sound
analyses of palacozoological material. A report by P. Patay indicates that the
culture in quest ion is an independent one, whose position has been srrari graphically determined: it emerges near the end of Bodrogkeresztur (the prese nCt' of
BodrogkeresztLrr decoration on H unyadi potte ry) and outl ives the earlier
culture. It is replaced, at thi s particular site, by Boleraz. n 1is allows us tu
establ ish more acc urate ch ronological relati ons not on ly among the cultures of
the upper T isw val ley but also a111 (l11g those of the broa der arc'a of the eastern
Carpathian Basin, including southern Panno nia .
n 1ese daw, as well as o ther comparative st udies (e.g. oi the relation ships between Tiszapolga r, Vin a and Lengyel poucry on the one ha nd an d

Earl y Eneolith ic

_ 27

Bodrogkeresztur- Hunyadi-Vaj ska and Salcum IV o n the other), allow us to

establish relative chronology of the Early Eneolith ic cultures in the South
Pannonian zone and the cul tures which devel oped in the regio n' s immediate
vicinity . Fo ur chronological horizons can be distinguished:
I. Transitiona l horizon: Herpaly-Csl1szhalom-Oborin - final
Lengyel - Vin a D I
II. Early Eneolithic I : Ti szapolgar - Sopo t-Lengyel lll Vina D2 - Sa lcura II
Ill. Early Eneo lithic II : Bodrogkeresztur l - Balaton-Lasinja I
- Salcura III - Buba nj la
IV. Early Eneolithic Ill: Bodrogkeresztur ll, Hunya di- Vajska,
Ba laton-Lasinj a II - Salc ura IV Seheiben henkel hori zon
Thi s periodiza tion of the Early Eneolithic (post-Neolithic) cultures is
an elaboration of that provided in Volume III of Tite Preltistory of Yugoslavia.
The end of th e Early Eneulithie in the South Pannonian zone and further afield,
all the way from south ern Poland to the central Balkans and from the Carpathians tO the Alps, was marked by the emergence of a funda menm lly new
culture, which in augurated the Middle En eoli th ic in these regio ns. It was
Cern a voda Ill -Boleraz, the comerstone of a new process of development, the
continuity of which wo uld remain un broken til i the very end of the Eneolithic
and the beginning of the Early Brom e Age.
The western parts of South Pannonian zone experienced a slightly
diffe ren t cultural development. During the Middle and Late Neolithic, the area
west and southwest of the Dan ube was dominated by Lengyel and its variants.
Such an autochtho no us fo undation wa s bound m produce, in the Early
Eneoli thic , the cultures differing from the ones nase d o n 1l,eiss . South of the
Danube, more precisely between the Sava, the Drava , and the Danube ,
numerous Lengyel, i.e . Sopot -Lengyel, settl ements have b$cn une arthe d
(SOPOt , Bapska , Sarva, Vinkovci, Gradina on the Bosut near Sid, Budjano vci
near Ruma, etc.). Quite a few belong m "SOPOt III" according loS . Dim i trijevi's
c1assifi cati on;58 by analogy wi th the situation in Vi na (sy>1Chronieity with
Vina 01 -02), this level already belongs to th e Eneoli th ic , although it is
essentiall y sti ll a part of Neoli thic civilization . In any case, the late phase of
Sopot (Sopo t-Lengyel) has served as a foundati on for th e new cultures of the
Early Eneolithic in the region . 1l,ere is not enough reliabl e stratigraphic data,
although most of the sites en umerated are stratified. Reports on excava tions
in the late thirties and early forties (Bapska , Sarva) have not been published
in full, which has made it diffi cul t lo reconstruct the gradual development from
terminal Neoli thic cultures to early Eneolithic ones. 1l,e more recen tl y exeavated Gradina on the Bosut (near id) has yi elded more informati on, not so
much because of the ri chness of its Neolithic and Encolithic layers but beca use
continuity of development has been established betwee n late SOPOt, Bala m nLasinja I and Boleraz 59 Level I belongs lo th e tail-end of Sopot- Lengyel ; Ila

28
The Eneol ithic cul tures of Central and West Balkans
""---_._- - - - -

conmin s eDfly Lasinja (Balmon- Lasinja I) mate ri al, whil e II b belo n~s tl> J
Boleraz sett leme nt. The impression left hy th e site's stmtigraphy and the
typ olo~i ca l a nalysis of its potte ry is of continuo us ue velopmenr un bro ken hl'
maj or populmion anu other cha nges . Anal ysis ot the mate rial cultu re of the
Lengyel and Lasinja styles trom othe r si tes has conn rmed thi s, anu so me a uth ors
O. and P. Koroec, fu r instance) refer to th e new c ul w re, tl)unued on Lengycl
in the En eoli thi c period, as "thl' Alpine facies of Le ngyel"60 The same view is
to be founu, some whm moditl eu, in F. Le hen' s and S. Di mi trijevi 's e xpl a nati on
of the origins of Lasinja. bl Since L~ s inja (Balaton-Lasinja I) is only a pe riphe ral
phenome non in the South Pannonian Zlme, ha v in.~ affec teu only its southwest
pam, we sh all uisc uss it in gre me r ue mil in a section dc voteu to the Earl y
Eneolithic c ultures of the Alpil1l' regio n.

b) The central Balkan zone

PI. I. I 7

PI. II I. 4-7

Fig. 36/ 1-4

PI. III. 3. 4. 6. 7

T he geographic feawres of the regi on, crisscrosse u as it is by mo unmins, are a major obstacle to the study of the eme rgence and de velo pment of
the Early Eneolithi c cultures. Besides, they had helped creare aurarc hic zones
whe re cu ltures have Ia sted lo nger and ass umed highly conse rvative traits. This
is especially true of th e ve ry heginning of thc' Eneolithi c, the tim e wh en
Tiszapolgar and Bubanj -Sa lc um eme rged and de veloped in the Danube region
and eastern Serhia, whil e Vin a still survive d in th e re mOte a reas uf western
Serbia and in KOSOVL). The questicm of their relationship, espec ially thn t of
Vin a and th e early Bu banj-SalcutD, is c,fspecial rele vance in thc Moravn basin ,
Kosovo , and southwest Serbia, as regarus both rela tive c hronology a nd mutual
influences in mate ri al and non-ma terial culture . In th e Morava basin, Buhanj
sites have been registe red (Owards the north, 31most as far as Krucva c
(Makrdani, En eolithic layer) ;62 in eastem Serbi a, the border runs near Rudna
Glava a nd Majdanpe k; in Kosovo, Vi n a set tlements are to be tl)und in the
Ibar valle y (Vala, bfl)s), whil e Bubanj sites are encountered furth er so uth,
near Lipljan and Suva Reb. T he rela tionship be tween the two c ultures, which
must have been partly cuntempo mneo us, is therefo re v e ry inte resting tO srudy .
In areas whi ch remained unaffec ted by the spread of Bubanj-Salcuta and the
incursions of the T iszapolg5r-Bodrogk eresztur comple x (e .g. westem Serbia)
Vina se ttl e ments !ived un in isolation (Stapari, Radojnja) .bJ
A related problem is that of the Pl o nik copper hoards. The fo ur
hoards unearth ed at Pl o ni k co ntain copper axes, chiscl s, brace lets, pins with
curving heads, and light white stone axes . Most a uthors belie ve that the hoards
"ptobably belong to the te rminal phase of this important settle me nt of the later
Vin a gro up in the southern Morava basin" (B. ] ovano v i ) b4 and are contemporaneous with Vina-Plonik II, Gumelnita- Karanovo V I B, a nd Tiszapo lgar
(M. Kuna) .b\ If these views are acce pted, the Pl onik hoards would ha ve to be
da ted into a late r period fo r, according to M. (Jaraanin, "Bu banj -Hum I
directly succeeded V in a- P lonik I at Plo ni k " . "b Bubanj material !l)und ar

EarlyEneo~[~it~h~
ic~__________

29

Pl oni k has less often been mken into account in atte mpts to attribute the

coppe r hoards . Recent excavati ons at the site has esmbli shed the existence of
a Bubanj settlement destroyed fo r the most part by land c ultivation; in view of
13. Stalio" remark that hoard IV was dug imu the Vina /wrizu)l, the more logical
conclusion would be that thc hoards belonged to the time when the bearers nf
rhe Bubanj culture arrived ar the sire. b ) Suc h a soluti on o bviates the illogica lity
of linki ng the latest Vina horizon ar Pl onik wi th Ti sza polg6r, Karannvo V I,
( ;umeinit3, and thereby Buba nj-Saicuta.
The Bubanj culture , pan of the e xte nsi ve Bu ban j-Salcu ra -Kri vodol
comple x, de ve lo ped in the central and eastern parts oi th e ce ntral Bal ka n zon e ,
whe nce it spread so uthwards to Sko psko Polje and Pelagoni a. The a rea can be
subd ivided into three zones, each with spec ific local ieatures in the styl e o f its
material culture: easte rn Serbia with the Danubian region (from (;olubac to
I\ego tin); a part of Kosovo with southeast M e tohija and the Skopje basin; and
Pclagonia. Three t)'pes o f settl ements a re c urre nt : the most freljue nt are bu il t
o n elevated ground by a river, protected by the river's cou rse and stee p slopes;
cave settle ments make up th e second gtelUp; the third type, typical of the
southern zon e, cons ists of lowland settleme nts of th e "tum be" (tell) type . The
best examples of the first type are Bubanj ne ar Ni, Kovilovo near Zajear,
Krivdj near Bor, Uadimljc a nd Hi sar in Koso vo, and Skupsko kale b8 A
dominant pelSition, n atumlly or artificially fl)rtihed, is characteristi c of these
se ttl ements . The Krivdj settlement was protected by a wall nf srackeJ stune ,
while Bubanj and Gadimij e we re deiended by a ditch and a palisade. T he
tendency to look for safe dwel ling-placcs is reflec ted in thc choice o f caves as
dwe llings. A number of caves inhabited at the time of Bubanj-S akuta have
bee n registered in Romania and Bulgaria (Horilor, Romanesti, Deve taka,
Magura, etc.);69 Zimska and Bogo vinska caves, as well as the caves in
Knja e vac area, are e xamples from easte rn Serbia. ln Pe lagonia and ne ighbo uring Albania there are twO groups of se ttl ements belonging to the sa m e cultural
co mplex : the so-ca ll ed "tum be" are the most numerous an d belong to the fai rl y
widespread type of tell-settle me nt pa rticularl y frequent in Macedonia, TI1race ,
a nd Thessaly. O f special rele vance fo r th e study of the Pelagonian fZrouP of the
Bubanj-Salcuta-Krivo dol comple x are the e xcava tions of strarified se ttle ments
at Bakarno Gumno, Crnobuki , Karam an, ctc .10 Fin ally, there are also fortified
settle ments built on elevate d ground, such as uplevec .7J
TI1 0ugh many se ttl ements belo nging to Bubnnj-Saicuta have been
discovered so uth of the Danube, onl y one grnve has been une nrthed, providing
minimal information about the c ulture 's burini cus to ms. A Bubanj-Saicuta
grave has been found dug inw the Ently En coli thi c strn t um of Lepenski Vir.
The body was lying pronc (!), in a crouch ed position . ( ;rave goods w nsisted of
four vessels; of gre at typol ogic al importa nce is a In rge , t hick-rimmed bowl-dish

fig.8/1 8

Fig.50/1 -5

30

The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

with a broad band uf graphite-bumished deCllration, Using analogues fi-om

Romanian sites (Ostrovul Corbului) , Z, Letica placed the grave in the Salcuta
II peri od according to D, Berciu,72

EASTERN SERBIA

PI. X, 2-4

Fig. 24/9

Fig, 8/5

PI. XI. I
PI. XII. 1,4, 7, 8
PI. XI. 7,8

Numerous Bubanj-Salcuta sites have been discovered in eastem Serbia, from the Niava in th e south tO the Danube in the north. Their greatest
concentration is in the region ofNi; and, especially, Bor, Zaj e ar, and Negotin,
Besides Bubanj and Humsb Cub, both excavated partly before and partly
after W orld War II, the sites having ptOvided most information about material
culture include Kovi lovo, Vajuga-Pesak near Korbovo, Krivelj, and Zlotsb
peina, where systematic research has been carried out. lJ The best-preserved
settlement remains (houses, hcmths, remains off,xtifications) have been found
at Bubanj and, to a lesser extent, Krivel j and Kovilovo, They have ena bled us
to attempt at least a partial reconstruction of this type of settlement: small er
in scale, they were built on elevated ground by a ri ver, with houses rath er close
tO each other. Their shape has best been registered at Bubanj, where three
houses of approximately square shape (6,40 x 5,50 m) have been excavatcd,
all containing hearths (sroves) ,74 The settlements have yielded an abundance
of pottery, especially in houses that had been destroyed by fire (e,g. in Kovilovo
and Bubanj), The most frequent shape is that of characte ristic two-handled
cups ("kamaros") ; also numerous are bowls of various shapes and profiles
(conical with a thickened rim, biconical with or without a neck, etc. ), deep
pors, amphorae, lids, etc. Decoration is typical of the entire culture : by fluting,
pinching, pricking; graphite-burni shed decoration is also found at so me sites
(Zlo tska pe ina, Bubanj, the Lepenski Vir grave), Analysis of the material has
shown that two horizon s of the culture can be distinguished: one containing
graphite burnished ware and f1aring handles (Bubanj, Zlotska peina), and one
;"hich entirely lacks both these two elements and high-quality fabri c (Krivelj,
Smedovac, Kovilovo), The two horizons have not been confirmed by vertical
stratigraphy, and it is hard tO say which is the earlier one , Other finds worthy
of mention include anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurin es, frequcnt bone
tools and copper finds, in remarkable quantities for this culture. An especially
good site in this respect is Zlo tska peina, where the Bubanj-Salcura layer has
yielded more than 50 copper artefacts: pins, aw ls, axes, daggers, etc. 75 The cave
is supposed to have been an important processing centre, for pieces of amorphous copper have also been found there, as well as smaller vessels which could
have been used in casting,

Early Eneolith ic

31

KOSOVO
Kosovo and Metohija was the second region affected by the south wards movemen t ofBubanj-Salcuta from th e Danube Basin . Seve ral sites have
been registered in the mountain-encircled area, but major eXGl vati ons have
only be~n ca rri ed o ut at Hisar and Cadimlj e near Li pljan.l b lInfonuna te ly,
although it ha s been q ui te a while since the compl etion of excava tion work
( l963 in the case of H isar), no results have been published, except for a
preliminary report on Hi sa r. TI,e present text will therefore have to be based
on the author's own in sight into the material, which is of grea t importance both
because it presents a clear pictu re of the style of a local variety of Bubanj -Salcuta
and because of the cul ture's relationship with Vina, whi ch was very strong
and long-lived in this regi on (Predionica, Vala, Fafos, itko vac, etc.).
TI,e position of Bubanj-Salcum sites in Kosovo is simila r to that of the
sites in eastern Serbia . TI,e se ttlements at Hi sar and Gad imij e have bee n built
on hills overlooking river valleys, and bear traces of fortification . TI,e footi ngs
of the houses are well -preserve d, and th ere is a considera ble amount of ceramic
material. The fact th at bo th sites, especially Hi sa r, are stratifi ed has made it
possible to study the relationship between Bubanj-Salcuca .a nd the later Eneolithic cultures of the regio n. The classification of Hi sar' s En eoli thi c layer has
not been sufficiently backed by arch aeological material, and sho uld be taken
with some rese rve. lt is certai n, however, that the lowest layers contain the
remains of a Bubanj-Salcura settle ment , and that another settlement was
formed above them, belonging to a variety of the Baden -Kostolac style where
Kostolac elements predominated. The problem of the chronological conti nuity
of the two settlements rema ins unresolved. Analog ues from other regions (the
Yugoslav parc of the Danube Basi n , Oltenia, north Bulgaria) suggest the
possible existence between these twO cultural phenomena of another phase in
Eneolithic development, the phase contemporaneous with Bolen'iz-Cernavoda
III and Ba den .

PI. IX. 1-4

PI. X. I. 7
Fig 18/ 1-9

PELAGONIA
Bubanj-Salcuta sites in the Skople region form a transitional zone
between the Kosovo sites and those in Pelagonia. There is very sca nt dara abo ut
them. Apart from Skopsko kale, where some typical finds have bee n discovered
(bowls, pieces of a lid, do uble weights), they are irrelevant to the problem of
the En eoli thic cul tures of thc region .II Much more information is provided by
the sites in Pelagonia , some .of which have been systematically excavated
(Crnobuki, Baka rn o Gumno , Suplevec) .18 Two basic tYRes of settlement are
to be fo und there ; one is characterized by its defences (uplevec) while the
other, much more frequent , developed overl ying the Late Neoli thic lowland
settlemenrs and be long to the tell type widespread in Thrace, Macedonia,
Thessaly, and Albania at the time .

Flg 3

Fig_ 1 1
Fig_ 4 1

32

PI. X. 5-6
PI. XI I. 2. 3. 6

PI. XIII. 1. 3.5

- - - - - - -Th e Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

.-~~-~

The strati graph y of the sites (Babrno Gumno, Crnobuki, uple vec )
an d the typologica l analysis of the porre ry have allowed us to single o ut at least
two stages in the development of th e PeiJgonia n vari ety llI' Bu banj-SalcutQ or
Crn obuki and Bakarn ll Gumno-upl evec, as the culture is also referred roN
Tl1e situation is very much th e same as in eastern Serbi a: some sites have yielded
thick-rimmed bowls, and graph ite burni sheJ anJ painteJ (with thick red or
white paint) ware, which is entirely miSSing from o ther sites. This is why it is
believe d thDt the lowest layers ot Crno buki (strata I anJ Il) and the lower ones
at Bakar~1(l C;umno bdong tu the ve ry beginning of the En eoli thic, while sites
such as Suplevec (the later Inye rs - Suplevec Il) belollg to a later Enelliithi c
period, whe n "steppe clements" appeareJ, e .g. corded wa re, the "corde [Otdue"
technique, and the well -known sceptre whose steppe llrigi n is undeniable 80

***

Fig. 41
PI. X. 6
PI. XII. 18

Throughout the eastern pan of the central Balkan zone, Kosovo, and
Pelagon ia, the materi al cul ture of the Bubanj-Salcu ta- Kri vodol compl ex displays both a unity of style and some spec ific traits due to the intluence of
autoch thonous culture s and their mingling with more recent ph eno mena
(Kosovo, Pelagoni a) . ThLlugh not all the si tes in this extensive area belLlng to
the sa me chronological horizon , it is possible, especially in pottery, to single llut
certain ubiq uirous shapes ur types of decora tion. Shallow , thic k-rimm ed plates,
often decorated on the insiJe by painting, burnishing, or gra phite burnishi ng
(Bubanj, Zlo ts ka peina, C rn Ll buki), arc one of thc main featu res of th e style,
even of its earliest phase, as wirn essed by th c sa me l,m11 of pl ate f'J und at later
V in 8 sites (Gradac, Predi on ica) . A nothe r very widespread shape is that of the
two-ha ndled goblet uf the "kantaros" type encou ntered wi th the same frequency in eastern Serbi", the Niava valley , Kuso vo, anJ Pelagoni a. Severni
varieties h ave bee n founJ . Tl1C presence of such goblets and uf the sa me type
of sh allow plate as the une described above at sites in Romania , Bulgaria, and
even northern Greece (Dikili T ash, Sitagroi ) indica tes that they all belong to
the same complex of the east Balbn gmphite burnished ware , located in t he
areas between the Carpathians to thc north and the A egea n CLlast in thc suuth,
as the Gumelnita (Karanovll V I) culrure 81 O ther pottery sh apes include
bowls with turned-in rims, biconi cal bowls, pots of vmi ous profiles, anJ amphorae decorated with pinch ings, cuts ur incised lines (Krivdj, Bubanj, Hi sa r).
Fin ally, mention shLluld be made of the fairly freljuent trun cated lids (Bubanj,
Hisar, Crno buki) an d do uble weigh ts of th e kind fo und in abundance 111
Sateuta, Romania s2 (Skopsko kale', uplevec) .
Figurines are anoth er importa n t tra it of the materi al culture of
Bubanj-Salcuta. Tl,ey are not as numerous as in, say, the Vina culture, but
PI. 2. -- Pottery shapes of
the Bu banJ--Sal cuta--Krivodol cl uture
from si tes ln Serbia and Macedonia

lU

fl{ JI

::.34-'--_ _ _ __ _ _ __ ___--'Tcch."e En eolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

PI. XII. I

PI. XI. 78

PI. I. 1-7
Fig.38/2

they are an impo rtant typologic<ll fe<lture of a broad area of this cultural
complex. There are some typologic<ll differences between the terra-co((a figurines of thc Danube Basin an d those of the southern sites, of Kosovo and
Pelago nia. The group of anthropomorphic figurines in eastern Serbia consists
of finds fro m Kovilovo, Krivelj , Zl otsb pein<l, and Bub<lnj. The style is closer
to Vin a models, with the exception of a Kri vdj find - a swnding woman's
figure - whose prototypes <lre to be found to the east , within the Cumelni ta
compl ex and re b ted cultu res (decoration of the steato pygic part of the figurin e
with either flmed or paimed spir<l ls)81 1l1C southern gro up of figurin es , bes t
illustrated by finds from Gadimije <l nd Crnobuki, is represe m ed by semi-sea ted
fi gures wit h shorrened legs and a stylized con ical head. No dcwils of the face
are indicated. Such m<lnner of mode lling has its <lnalogues at lace (JumeInita
sites (Karanovo V I) .84 Zoomorphic oncsare less frequent. T hey include rather
stylized figurcs of bovines o r othcr four-l egged animal s, and <lnimal- headed
vessels.
The presence of copper finds h<ls <ll ready been disc ussed. However,
we sh o uld further stress the importancc of certain elemems flor understanding
the level of de velo pmem of emly mining and meta llurgy within the BubanjSaicuta c ulture. Copper artefacts have been found , in varying quantities, at
nearly all the exca v<Jtcd sites . 1l1CY usu<llly include awl s, pins, 8nd chi sels,
produced by hammering (Zimska pe in 8, Bubanj, Hisar) ; flnt or cruciform 8xes
made by casting are muc h r<l rer (Zimska pe i na , Smedovac). Copper finds are
more numerous in eastern Serbia; underscandably so, since the area is rich in
copper ore and mining was develo ped there as early as the later Vin a c ulture
(Rudna GInva). However, we muSt mention here the copper axe and axe mould
found in a tell nea r the village of Kravari (Pel8gonia). 1l1C axe is single-bladed,
with a tubulnr sh ah _hole. s5 They are very pro bably related to the Eneo lithi c
c ultures of the Bubanj -Saicuta complex, especially since the sam e site has
produced Eneoli thic po ttery too.
1l1e periodizatio n of Bubanj-S alc um, particul a rly the rel ative chronology ofi ts vario us regions 8nd the relations within each of them, is a complex
problem. Recent exc8va tio ns (M.Garna nin, P. Roman, N. Ta si)86 have
refuted D. Berciu's division of S8 ic u(3 into fo ur sca ges o n the basis of suacigraphic and typological e vidence from the e ponymous site. His divi sion is of a
regional nature and valid only for the se ttiemem in questio n. A frequent
questi on in recent years has been that of the IVb stage (pottery with flattened
handie ends) whi ch, according to some authors, goes beyond the Saicm a
c ulture (Pecica-Satu Mare, the Scheibenhenkel horizon). Sites in Banat, and
even Srem, where this type of ware has been fo und (Baranda, Opo vo, ZemunPrigrevica, ctc.) 87 date from the time when Saloma IV b was spreading westward. It is indicative that m8ny elements typical of the Bubanj-Salcma style
(thick-rimmed bowls, graphite-burnished decora tio n, two-handled goblets,
etc.) are missing at sites in Vojvodina; the inevitable conclusion is that Salcuta
IVb pottery is closer to Hunyadi-Vajska than to the cla ssical Bubanj-Salc m a

~arly

Eneolithic

35

culture, i.e. that it belongs to J wider horizon, known as Scheibenhenkel.

A stylistic analysis of the available material, potte ry in the first place,
and, tO a lesser extent, stratigraphic inf'Jrmation (Bubanj, Hisar), have made
it possible to define two phases of Bubanj-Salcuta in Yugoslavia: the tIrst is
eharaeterized by shallow, thick-rimmeu plates, graphite-burnisheu ueeoration,
the use of white or reu lean paint, e tc (Bubanj la, Zlotska peina, Hi sa r - the
lowest level, Crnobuki, Bakarn o Cumnll l, etc .); the features of the second are
a somewhat coarser fabric a nu the absence of the above elements (Krivdj,
KO\~lovo, Hisar lb, Bakarno C3umno ll , uple vec). So-ealleu "steppe elements"
are more frequent in the later phase; the l: include cordeu ware (Krivelj,
Kovilovo) and "corde tordue" decoration (Suplevec) , anchor pe ndants, o r
stone seeptres (uplevec) . The hiswrical development of Bubanj -Salcuta south
of the Danube could be deduced as follows: the culture', primary nucleus was
in the Serbian, ROl11anian, and Bulgarian parts of the Danube Basin (sites like
Salcuta, Herculana, Zimska peina, etc.). The pressure of the "steppe cultures"
on the Early Eneolithic cultures of the lower Danube Basin resulted in a
southward move. ln a chain reactilm, the cultures from Oltenia, eastern Serbia,
and northwest Bulgaria l110ved towards Kosovo, Pelagonia, and as far as
Albania (Maliq Ib).88 ln this phase, steppe elements appea r at Early and Middle
Eneolithic sites as far as 1l1essaly and the Greek Aegean coast. 89

e) The Alpine slopes zone

The continental part of Slovenia and nllfthwest Croatia bclong to a
broad ly conceived sourhwest Alpine zone, which was a unitIeu region al e nti n
during the Eneolithic periou . lt is characte rized by a huge hiatus between the
termina l Neolithic cultures and the early Eneolith ic ones, f,x which no da ta
about life in this particular region is available. lt is hard, therefore, ro speak of
"post-Neolithic development" h ere anu of ties with autuchthonous cultures.
W e should rathe r discuss "Le ngyel colonization", the movement of the bearers
of Lengyel from west Pannonia tu the hilly areas of the Alpi ne region . They
entered, so to speak, an empty space and, with time, created a new local culture
in different geographic and climatic conditions. ln archaeological literature it
is encounte red under various names, which reflect the inui viuua l autho rs' \~ e ws
of its origins and eme rgence . .J. Koroec, who insisted on the Lengyel compelnent in its style, named the ne w culture tite Alpine faci e, of Lmg}el 90 R.
Pittioni, one of the tIrst to have defined this type of potte ry in A us tri a, called
it PolshaLI-Strappel<ogel (or the Kanzianberg typc) 91 S. Dimitri je vi , who
denied that its origin was exclusively Lengyel, referred to it as tite Lasinja culture,
very close to the Balaton culture in Hungary. 92 Other, compmmise na mes are
also to be found (Kanzianberg-Drulovka-Lasinj a); th ey emphaslzc the local
trai ts of the ceramic style and of the culture as a whole .93 Howeve r, nearly all
these authors have underlined the strong presen ce of Le ngyel elements in
Slovenia and northwest Croatia. Links with Baden, and eve n Vina, are also

Flg.8/1 8
Fig.18/1 9

PI. XI II. I. 3 S

36

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

~--------------------~~~~~~,

PI. XXXV. 4.9

Fig. I

stressed (S. Dimitrij evi ),94 nnd with the cultures of the Adriatic coast (T.
Bregant, . Ba tovi) 9.5
Excavations in Slovenia in the past twenty-odd years have enabled a
elearer view of the Early Eneolit hic in the area. The stratigraphy of some sites
(Resnikov preko p, Ajdovsb jama pri Nemki Vnsi, Drul ovka, etc.) and a
typological nnalysis of the mnterial have shown that two phases can be demonstrated in the development of the "Alpine facies of Lengyel", a view supported
by J. Koroec. 96 The first, ch aracterized by the finds from Resnikov prekop,
the lowest levels at Ptuj ski grad, Drulovb, and even Ajdovska jama, is closer
to Lengyel models. It consists of fragments of coloured and painted vessels, .
tall-footedgoblets, bowls of vari ous shapes. 97 Th e later phnse is that of ceramic
vessels viewed as belonging to the Lasinja culture: bowls whose upper part is
decorated with sloping incised lines Oermnnovn jama, Drulovb), vesse ls with
ribba"n handl es starti ng from the rim (Ptuj ski grad), goblets on a broad foot with
linear decorati on (Krievci) , etc. 98 By this phase the painted wnre, a key
element of the style of most varieties of bte Lengyel, has disappeared. The
suggested division of the Earl y Eneolithic of the Alpine zone refl ects the logica l
development of cultures in the area as the effect of the westward and southward
shift of the nucleus of the Lengyel culture. At fi rst, the ea rl y phase of the "Alpine
facies" has all the features of the Lengyel style (e .g. Blatna Brezo vica ). It ha s
not yet had time to emancipate itself from the cultural development of its
original area. On ly se veral generations bter, under the influence of changed
economic condi tions and wenkened ties with the lands of ori gin, does the
creation of a new styl e and cultural group take place. This would seem to justify
the opinions relating both to the name of the culture and to its origin. The
earliest phenomena registe red at Eneolithic sites in Slovenia, Styria, and
Carinthia belong to tite Lengyel culture; they are somewhat modifi ed and bear
loca l traits, but not to su~ h an extent as to represent another culture altogether.
On the other hand, as a result of further development, the Adriatic influence
in Slovenia, and the central Balkan influences (Butmir, Vina) in Croa tia and
north Bosnia, a new c ulture emerged. The fonner is best referred to as "the
Alpine facies of Lengyel" , which , stylisti cally, it is, while the latter might be
tenned the Lasinja culture, as S. Dimitrijevi would have it, or Balaton-Lasinj a;
this, however, would encoinpass only the material attributed to Lasinja I and
II (i.e. Balaton I and II) , while pottery with Furchenstich decoration is not
related to this cultural and stylistic phenomenon. 99

The Lasinja culture in Slovenia and northwest Croatia is part of a

large post-Lengyel complex which comprised all of Transdanubi a, Carinthia,
and a part of Styria . Having crossed the Sava in the south, it is to be found in
north and central Bosnia (Ljupijanica and Vis near Derventa, Gornji Drugovii, Donji Klakar, Gornja Tuzla, and the site at Radosavska near Banja
Luka), while its easternmost si tes are Trnica near Vinkovci and Gradina on
the Bosut near id. F. Leben and S. Dimitrijevi list some 50 sites oofthe Lasinja

Ea rly Eneolithic

37

culture, most of them concentrated between the Drava and Sava rivers lOO
Most settlements are temporary ones, with pits and pit-dwellings. The re are no
remains of permanent architecture, which has led to th e conclusion that they
were, in fact, seasonal nomadic stations, built also at greater altitudes (Kevderc
is at 810 m) . Cave settlements, especially frequent in Slovenia (Ajdovska jama,
Ljubnika jama, Krka jama, etc .) and northwest Croati a (Vindija cave), arc
of the same nature. Howe ve r, settlements built in the Lt' ngye\ (Zengc)varkony)
tradition appear simultnneously; they are to be t'Jund in the lowbn ds and
consist of exceptionally large houses partly dug into the soil (Drague vac nea r
Cerje Novo). As a rule the cultural layer is thin (up to 0.80 m) , as elsewhere
at Lasinja sites, with one habitation horizon. This makes it diffi cult to pe ri odize
the culture with accuracy; judging by the typo logical features of the pottery, it
went through several stages in its development. More evidence might, perhaps,
be provided by the stratigraphy of Ajdo vska jama, both th e settl e m nt and th e
necropolis; there a stra tum containing Lengyel pottery is followed by two strata
with Lasinja pottery, more precise\y Lasinja I, lA, and IIB, accurdin g co S.
Dimitrijevi. I OI Working with these dara, stratigraphic conclusions fi-om Vis
near De rventa and Gornja Tuzla, anU typological analyses, S. Dimitr ijevi
divided the Lasinja culture into three phases (f,)Ur levels: I, ilA, IIB, III). This
is close tO N. Kaliez's division of Bala con, tho ugh the two differ in the contents
of the individual phases. 102 As already noted, Lasinja III and Bala ton III, which
have not been stratigraphically confirmed, consist of pottery with Furche nstich
decoration. Stylis(ically it differs eonsiderably fro m Lasinja I and II pottery, and
it seems that S. Dimitrij evi ' s ea rlier opini on, as modifi ed by Z. Mark ovi , might
be more correct, i.e. that Lasinja we nl through two srages ,,( development ,
Lasinja A and Lasinja B. IOJ The ca rlier phase is charneterized by plain ware
of Lengyel affiliations, while the later comprises pottery with linear mocifs,
dotted pricks, and new shapes (bowls with a ribbon handie starting from the
rim, cups with a handie above the rim, etc.). Compared with the most recent
division of Lasinja in Vol. III of Tite Preitistory of Yugoslavia, Lasin ja A wo uld
he rhe equivalent of stage I, while Lasinja B would correspond to stages II and
III. L04
The chronological framework of the L1sinja culture has been estab lished on the basis of two elements: a) its genesis and b) stratigrnphic data in
Ajdovska jama, Vis, and Gornja Tuzla. If we accept the conclusion that Lasinja
is the result of the evolution of a Lengyei substratum, influenced also by later
Vina (Vina D- l and D-Z) and Sopot (Sopot-Le ngyel) in th e south and cast,
then the end of these cultures would provide a tenniHus post quem for the
emergence of early Lasinja se ttleme nts. In Ajdovska jama, thc eontin uity of
development has been confirmed by vertical stratigraphy . On the other hand,
setting an upper chronologicallimit CO the duration of Lasin ja is a much more
complex matter. According to some authors, it lasted until Vuedol, and even

PI. XXXV. 1-3 . 7. 8

PI. XXXVI. 7

PI 3

",38,,---~~~~~~~~~~~~T'.Ch,,:e,-,Ec"n.'::
eo~l,,:
it~
h l:c cultures of Central and West Balkans

ran parallel with it (S. Dimitri jevi ).I O) If, however, we el imin ate rurchenstich
po ttery as a constitucnt part of Lasinja- Bala ton, th en its enu wo ulu be somewhat earlier. In the Alpine zone, th at wo uld mean before or at the beginni ng
of Retz-Gajary. ll1C srratigraphies of Gradina on the Bosut an d partly of Vis
near Derventa have establisheu an approximate upper lim it for thc duration uf
Lasinja in these parts. At Grauina on the Bosut, a layer belonging to a Roleraz
se ttlement was o verlying a layer containing early Lasinja pottery. IOb W e could
conclude, thcrei()re, th at La sinja survived in Slavonia anu wes tern Srem until
the appearance of the bea rers of Cerna voda III-Boleraz, i.c. that it co vered the
period of the Early Eneolithi c in these regions. In th e eastern Alpine zon e it
might have la steu slightly longer, but not much later than thc appearance of
Retz-Gajary potte ry (Ke vdcrc, Postojna) whi ch some authors unjustifiably
assign to Lasinja or Balaton (N. Kalicz, F. Leben)., o7 If Retz- Ua ja ry po ttery is
placed within the same Furchenst ich horizon as Kostolac, it wo uld mean that
in Sloveni a La sinja was conrempo raneo us with Boleraz, anu even Baden . On
the basis of a fragm ent of a Kostolac vcssel fo unu in stra tum III of Ajdovska
ja ma , S. Dimi t rij e v i drew hi s conclusion abo ut the longevity of Lasinja. lOS
However, even if this can be accepteu in the case of thc relatively isolateu
Alpine zone, the conclusion coulu nor be appli ed to the regions of Srem and
Slavonia, where La sinja was succeeded first by Boleraz, and thcn by Bauen.
d) The Adriatic zo ne

Fig. 17
Fig. 44

ll1e long and narrow strip of the cast coast of the Adriatic , from Istria
in the north to th e Skauarsko Lake in the south, foll owed a specific CDurse of
developm ent. Thi s was conditioned by the vari ous cultural influences that were
fel t in the region : that of the "Alpine facies of Lengye l" on thc Encoli thic
cultures ofI stria and the karst regi l)n; that nf Lasinja, fe lt in the same areas but
also, to a lesser extent , in centra l Dalmatia; and finally, the presence of a strong
Vina tradition and elements of Bubanj-Salcuta at sites in so uth Dalmatia and
the Montenegrin li ttoral. ll1e heterogeneous develo pm ent of the cultures,
insufficient research, especia lly in the hinterland, and the non -publication of
results from some strati fied sites (Gudnja, Vela Luka) make it very difficult to
present.? complete picture of the development of Eneolith ic cul tures in the
regi on. S. Ba rovi ha s described two phases in th e "Adriatic Eneolithic" of
northern and central Dal ma tia : the fi rst is illustrateu by finds fro m Brijuni (the
Brijuni group) in the north anu the central Dalmatian sites of Biskupija near
Knin, Crape v a pilja, K a i i, Cct ina , and others; the other comprises pottery
from the later strata ofGudnj a, Grapeva pilja, the Tradanj ca ve near ibenik,
Gradina Sveti Spas near Knin, ctC . I09 This division has been harshly criticized,
PI. 3. -- Pottery shapes
of the Lasinja cu lture
from the si tes in Croatia and Bosnia

~
.' l'::

,.

"

...... <I . . . . . . . . <I ~ ....

'"

{{})m~)tm{)

40

PI XLII, 1-9

PI XLII , 1-3

Fig, 16/ 1-3

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

primarily because ofits earl y dating of the Cetin a gro up (placed in the first stage
of the Eneoli thi c) but al so bec au se of a lack of clea r strarigraphic evidence
which would support it, A mo re realistic approach tO the problem of the
Adriatic En colithic is ro be found in the works of N, Pe tri, S, Dimitrij e vi and,
more recently, B, Marijanovi and , Marko vi , wh o dealt with th e En eolithic
of Herzegovin a and the Montenegrin litwral. llo S, Dimitrij e vi suggested the
existe nce of three cultural and chro nological hori Zllns, noting, however, tha t
the scarcity of material was bo und to make this d ivisio n hypothetica l. Thc first
hori Zlln wo uld be marked by the appearance of prom-Na ko vana and Nakovana
pottery, th e second by the penetratio n of th e continental Eneo lithi c (Lasinj a
and steppe elemcnts), and thc third by the second impact of a post - Vue dol
type of th e continental Eneolithic , i,e. the Ljubljmw culture, On thc basis of
these divisions and of issues raised in the works of A. Benac , N, Pe tri , B, ovi,
. Markovi , . Barovi, 13. Ma rijanovi , B, (;ovednrica, and othersi ii it is
possible tO describe th ree stages in the development of the Eneolithi c on the
Adriatic coast and in the hinterland (Montenegro, H erzegovina): a) the
hori zon of fl uted ware (Odmu t IV, C;udnja IV, Spila Ila, Grap e va pilja,
Markova pilj a, etc.); b) the hori mn of the Nako van a culture (Odmut V, Vela
pil ja near Vela Luka, (;udnj a V, Spila in Nakovana), and c) a post-Vuedol
culture of the Ti vat-Rube type, chronologically fo llowed by a ho ri zon of the
Ljubljana culture (Grape vn pilja , Trndanj, Gudnja VI and V II , Ra vli a peina
IIIA, Gradina Sv, Spas near Knin), The hori zon of the Cetina cultu re is set
aside ; althLl ugh , Barovi pl aced it in the first phase of the Adriatic En eol ithic,
it actually belongs to the peri od of transition rowards the Early Bronze A ge , III
Th e first two stages of th e above division form an evo luti onary unity, with the
earlier based directly on Neolithi c tradition and preserving many of its stylistic
features , while the later gradually moves away frLlm autochthonLlus models and
introd uce s new stylistic elements characreri sti c of the Peljeac and Nakovana
cultures. Viewed in this perspective , the development of the Eneo li thi c cul tures
of th e central and southern Adri atic best illustrates the theory of their postNeolithic nature. In this context f1uted ware is of particular importance,
especially in explaining the genesis of the Early Eneolithic on the Adriati c coast ,
The frequent presence of this kind of pottcry at coastal and island sites has
been linked with its appearance in the Hvar c ulture o n the one h and and with
a strong continental Vin a influence on the o ther. At Hvar, in Marko va pilja
and Grape va pilja, this kin d of ware is fo und in the Neolithic stratum, whe nce
it was taken o ver by the bearers of the Nakovana culture, along with some o ther
eleme nts ("crusted" painting), says N , Petri, l lJ S. Dimitrijevi, o n th e o ther
hand, gives priority to the Vin<l culture as th e so urce of fluted ware found
eventually on the coa st, 114 Recent excavations at Mo ntenegrin sites, both on
the coast (Spil a cave near Perast) and inl and (Beran kr), have helped tra ce
the road taken by Vina pottery on its way to central and so uth Dalmatia ,l iS
At Beran kr, fo r instance, stratum Ile contai ns plentifu l po ttery decorated o n
the sh o ulder with shallow verti cal flutings , lt is easily linked both to the almost

Ea rly Eneolithic

41

ide ntica l shapes of th e Nakovana culture and with the Vina c ulture in Kosovo
and furth er north. Simllar ware has bee n found in the Spi ln cave near Per3st;
it was loca ted in strata ll a-c which, according tO . M a rkovi, bel ong to th e
Early and Middle Eneolithic. 116 At Monren egrin sites, it has to be noted, fluted
ware is also found in earlier, Neo lithic strata (Spila lc , Bera n kr I, Odmut III),
when ce it was obvio usly adopted by the Early Eneolith ic. l 11;s could also apply
to sites in Herzegovina (Ravli a pe in a IIc , individual finds from Badanj),
wh ere fluted ware is also found in the lowes t En eolith ic strata. 111is is why B.
M a rijan ovi considers the mconremporaneous wi th the final phase of the Hvar
cul ture,'17 there by pos tulating a "H var o rigin of flute d ware" in the Adriatic
hinterland (Badanj), in spite of the fl)regoing arguments, ver y c on\~ncing,
abo ut Vina mode ls fo r the flut ed ware of ce ntral and south Dal mati a.
The sca rcity of data o n th e c ultural devel opment of the Adriatic
region, the restri c ted n umber of systematically excavated sites and th e lack of
published mate rial make it impossible [o present mo re than a summary picture
of tbe post-Neo lithic (Early Encolithic) cultures of th e region. It consists, as
we have already noted, of three sub-regions: a) Istria and Kvarner, b) central
and south Dalmatia, and c ) the Montenegrin littoral with the hinterland. The
Eneoli thic cultures in th ese regions deve loped by a gradual e volution of a
Neolithic basis. The Brijuni group (or c ulture) emerged in Istria anci Kvarner,
its develo pment based on both the "Alpine facies ofLengyel" and the traditions
of the Hvar culture. On the basis of these lin ks and th e appearance nf fluted
decoration , . Baro vi dated the gro up as tra nsitional be twee n the Neolith ic
and Eneolithic. " s In its furth e r de velo pment , the region was submitted tel
strong Lasinja influence from Sl ove nia. Central and south Dalmatin and their
hinterland (the Ne re tva valley, Herzegovi na) are characterized by the emergence of the Nakovana c ulture, a product, according to S. Dimitrij evi , of a
symbiosis of thc Hvar and Vin a cultures. 119 A number of sites belonging to
th is culture have been registered (Spila in Nakovana , and Gudnja in Peljeac,
Vela pilja near Vela Luka on Korul a, Ravlia peina, Badanj, etc.); most
have been excavated but, unfortunate ly, there has been no e xtensive data,
e xcept in the case of Ra vlia pe ina. Better insight into the excava ted material
and appropriate documentation will no doubt allow us to distinguish between
a t least two stages in the early Eneolithic development of the regions. S.
Dimitrij e vi's suggestion abo lIt the e xi stence of th e proro-Nakovana and
Nakovana cultures is n ot sufficiently backed by material and stratigraphic
e viden ce. Viewed in a broadercontext, this division fits in with the theory that
there was an earlier, post-Neol ithic horizon containing flu ted ware, which
wo uld comprise the prolO -Nako vana style, and a later one, whe re new styl istic
elements appea red (under the influe nce of Lasi nja, Bubanj-Salcuta, Maliq Il a,
etc .) re lated with the Nakovan a c ulture.
On the Montenegrin coas t and furth er inland (the Piva and Lim
valleys), the Early Eneolithic was largely charac terize d by the development of
the Nakovana c ulture, but also by strong influences of the Vin a culture . The

Fig.30/1-4
Flg.40

PL 4/a -d

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

42

Fig.30

stratigraphy of Spib near Perast allows the possibility of as many as three phases
Llf Eneolithic development (Spila Ila-c), with Ila and IIb belonging to the
region's Early Eneolithic. The stratigraphy of Odmut and Seran kr has added
tD o ur knowledge about the Eneolithic in these parts. lt should be nL)ted,
however, that the habitarion of Beran kr ceased as early as the beginning of
the Eneolithic (Beran kr Ile), while at Odmut it ran parallel with the development of the Spila near F'erast (Odmut IV, V, VI).m Th e end of the Early
and Middle Eneolithic in these parts was marked by a powerful thrust uf a
post-Vue dol culture uf the Tivat-Rube type putting an end tD the lengtllY
development of th e post-Neolithic cultures, which endured much lunger in this
region than in the more turbulent areas uf eastem and northern Yugosla via.

/'" /'

,,
----

-----~

---

_/

'"

" '"
,,/

PI. 4 -- The pottery

of the Nakovana culture from
Briun i - Istria (acc. to N. Petri. 1979.216)

MIDDLE ENEO LITHIC

Cultures of the period
of Inda-European migration

The term "lndo-European migrati on" is here used conditi Llna lly. lt is
used to deno te a le ngthy period of mi>:r8ti ons, of cu ltu ral shi ft s fmm east tO
west, from the steppes of southern Russia tO the Pannonian Plain and the
Balkans. 12l 1l1ese movements were the cause of numero us changes in material
and non-materi al culture , and especially in prehiswri c economy, where nomadic paswralism superseded the already worn o ut agrarian civilizati on of the
Neoli thic. The bearers of these changes were the tribes nf steppe pastoralists,
mobile , witho ut Hxed abode, and quickly spreading over the vast e xpanses of
East , Central , and Sout heast Europe . lt is IIp to palaeolin guist s and furhter
st udies to establish whether they are tO be identified with the bearers of the
grea t lndo-European migrat ion . ln any case, archaeological materi al shows that
the Middle Eneolithic in the Danube Basin and further afielJ , in the Carpath ian
Basin and the Balkans , witnesseJ the demise of post-l\eolithic cultu res of the
Tripo lye, later Vin a, Theiss, Lengyel, Bubanj -Salcura, and GUll1el nira types
and their varieties, and th e emergence of the widesprea d cultural complex of
Cerna voda lll -Bo leraz and the Baden c ulture, whose economy, way of life , anJ
organiza ti on of se ttlements was entirely J ifferent. 1l1e cause of these changes,
so important for the furth er deve lopment of prehisrori c society in the Yugoslav
Danube Basin and th e Balkans, is w be sought in a wave of migrati ons, th e shift
of the steppe tri bes from the Euro-Asian zone (the Orenburg steppes and the
area north of the Caspian Sc a) in the east towards Central and Southeast
Europe in the west. 1l1is movement was spearheaded by the bearers of thc
Pit-grave culture with their specific material culture , economy, and burial
customs . ln dealing with the development of Eneolithi c cultures in the central

44

Map 2

PI. XI. 5. 9
PI. XIII. 1-6

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkan s

and westem Balkans it is impormnt to establi sh the modd of these migrations

and explain th e process of the "Indo-Europeanization" through the gradual
assimilation of post-Neolithi c cultures and modificati on of their stylistic and
ethno-cultural traits. From the nucl eus of the migra tory wave (proba bil' north
of the Caspian Sea), th e Pit-grave culture mo ved westward, fo rmed a secundary
cenITe between the Dnieper and Dniester, and assimilated the beate rs of the
Sredni Stog II c ulture. Moving furth er to the west , it created a third ce ntre
between the Dniester and the Danube, where the agrarian culture of Tripolye
(Tripolye B l and L;sarovo) was developing at the tim e. Having reached the
Danube , the "Indo-Eu ropean" tribes were in an ideal position to move onwards
to the Pannonian Plai n and the I3alkans. This was the beginning of th e
"Indo-Europeanizati on " of the post-Neolithic cultures in the CarpathianDanubian-Balkan region, wherein the aurochthono us cultures of the Danube
I3asin were forced ro move westward and southward, and e ventually conti-o nted
with the physica l presence of the steppe tribes in these regions. Fo r example,
under pressur e fr o m Cerna voda III , its e lf a mixtur e of steppe and
aurochthonous c ultures, post- Neolithi c groups of the Gumelnita and Salcuta
types had ro move on . T he fo rmer retreated to their strongholds in central
Bulgaria and Thrace, while the latter sought a "modus vivendi" in the west and
southwest, fo rming the Hun yadi- Vajska group on th e one hand and , on the
other, varieties of BLlbanj-Salc uta in eastern Se rbia, Kosovo, and as far as
Pelagonia and Albania to the south . III
The "Indo-Europeanization" of the Balkans was slowed down by the
weakening of the migrat ional wave, its mingling wi th autoc hth onous cultures,
and the grea ter coh esion of the post-Neolithi c cultures of the Danube Ba sin.
Direct migrati on was replaced by the gra dual inreraction be tween tht: already
mixed c ultures, at first through mutual contact , impo rts, and other forms II
communication. The appearance, at this time, of nUll1crous artcfacts that can
be explained as Originating from the steppes -long fli nt kni ves (Decia Muresului, the hoard fm m Kl adovo, the graves at Nosa near Subotica, Perlez, Ketegyhaza etc.), c" rded ware, anchor pen dants (Covora -Sat, Zlotska pein a, Ezero) ,
stone "sce ptres" (Casill1cea, Reevo, uplevec) is followed by the acrua l presence of new populati ons in the regions (tumuli of the Pit-grave culture wi th
ochre graves). The process wa s a lengthy o ne ; it lasted some 500 years and
affected the cul tures of the terminal Middle and Late Copper Age. The
appearance of rumuli with ochre graves marks the end of the process . It has
been fairly accurately dated thanks to stratigraphic data fro m rumuli in the
Romanian and Yugoslav Danube Basin . V. Zirra, E. Comsa and other authors
have provided info~mation about ROll1anian tutnuli with ochre graves, filled in
with earth contain ing Cotofeni pottery.1 2J At the Jabuka tumulus near
Pan e vo , on the other hand, it has been esta blished beyond doubt that the
"steppe grave" had been dug into a Kostolac layer thus. having disturbed thc
footings of a Kostolac house .124 It has thus been established that the fi nal stage
of the Indo-European migrati ons coincided with the end of the Cotofeni and

45

Late Eneolithic

Kostolac cultures, i.e. that it was contemporaneous with early Vuedol in the
west and Ezero in the south.
The last echoes of the steppe cultures' thrus t across the Danube and
into the eastern and central Balkans, which were earlier marked by the
~

t -

ii

__ _ Migrations of the s:eppe population

.. during the EneoW;c

"-

"

'\,,-, ."\

../

----~
The Cernavoda IIlintrusion
- ~

~).//~
... i . . .. .~
. ..... .. ,-.~~ . '':'~ . .
...~
~~"", '
~... . ."... ~ W"

:,
'
'

.:

-'-,"

I-..!

'- \...,.~

.""

~ '\y-....,~\
i

'\'

'\"

______

. .

.. . .

, .'.;:.. ,.' -:-... .

---...-.~

' ) ",.\\\\\ ,

."' ::~,...~.!..
'4,

y.

/;. "

'~
"'"
" '.
"' . ~. ~
.
. ...

,.-I~.:

":'" -.-~~"
-~....' ' ,' -.5 "t .
' .~...
,.~.----~
~,. .
----..........
..
~.
~-------'.
CK- -:-~._!
,. ~, . .
~ ..; - .'.
\
/
.l::::=:oo: :.='
:>=='---=-~
:::- 3> "-~1\ . '
~:.. .
~_~~::.::: __.,...i
-~"
~
..
.
t
=
.'--3'
~\, \\~-:f
- -'.,-,
- ~
. r....
.~
.
. ..,'!>'
'. '"
-."~ ':' .

"

"

," ..

-- --oo

...

.. .

-o- '

'"

t:'

..

.~.

,o ~"~RHENI
- _oo . . .

'"

;': -~"~: ._~ .-'o

'

IONIAN

SEA

. ..../-; . - ;
. .

:-,-

'"

- - - ; 7' . '

I
.. ~
"'--_ ,

:,'.-

'~ij;~

. ..

'o.

'-.

~.

"

....

- --==tv1EDITERRANEAN SEA

i=----::-. ...

___ _ _ _

..

i-- ----BLA
..
SEA.::
- ____

1
., ~~

- ft !"'- '"' -'

-1

____"'i

~1. -- :::. -.
!I :~
.. : '
I, ';~;' .

,oo

--

......

._.....

. ~'-

~~.:
,

..J/

.,'.

.. ::<,~..

.. ,.::,~~:/ . :~ _-=

.r.:;r.o .

"

,,=0=' .--=-- -:;;:4-

~----r'

Map 2 -- Migrations of the step pe cu ltu res and the position of th e (ernavoda III cu lture

appearance of Cernavoda III pottery (n~ar Smederevska Palanka, at Gradina

Likodra in Radjevina) , corded ware, the Suplevec stone sceptre and the anchor
pendants, are the turnuli containing steppe burials. 125 Fifteen turnuli of the
kind have been excavated in northern Bulgaria, notably Dobruja. The most
important seems to be a tumulus from the Plaidol necropolis, where the body,
lying on a mat (?) in a chariot, was sprinkle d with ochre.n 6 The grave best
illustrates the mobility of the steppe tribes, whose princes lived, died, and were
buried in chariots. There is a degree of analogy between this kind of burial and
a tumulus in Herzegovina, where the body was laid onto a sled. m Other
examples of steppe tumulj in these parts of the Balkans include those fo und
near the village of Bare in Sumadija, whereas a somewhat later tumulus at Mala
Gruda near Tivat exhibits some steppe features. l2B It might well be the
southernmost witness of the steppe tribes' migrations from EuroAsia to the
Adria tic Seao

'.'

. ___

1.

46

The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

The Cernavoda III - Boleraz culture

111e firs t of a seri es ofnew c ultures to have appeared in the PannonianDanubian-Balkan expanse was Cemavoda III ur Boleroz, in recent lite mture
ofte n refe rred to as thc Cernavoda III-Boleraz (Boleraz-Cernavoda III) culture
or group. 111e different names are products of different approaches tu the
culture and its attribution; a) that is was an early phase of Badcn (V. Ncmejcov6-Pavukuva, S . Dimitrij e vi, E. Ne ustupny) ;' N b) that th ese were tW(l
distinct cultural phenomena whose de vel opment was largely independent (S.
Morintz, P. Roman)lJO ur c) thm tlle' two constituted a single cultural, historical, and stylistic hori zon of the Middle Eneoli thic, from th e l(]wer Danube Basin
(Dobruja) in the east to th e Alps in the west, and from southem Poland in the
north to thc ce ntral Balkans in thc so uth (N. Tasi).' J1 Al tho ugh the diffe rences ma y appear considera ble at first sight, they do ll(lt seem to be very
important b r the study uf this new phe nomc non in the Eneulithic de velopment
of the regions unde r considern ti on . Th e bct is that the "post-Neoli thic cultures"
of the Early En eoli thic in the Panno nian Plain and thc ce ntral Balbns we re
succee ded by an entirely novel culture : novel in i ts material culture, its economy,
e ven in its burial customs. ln the de velopm ent oith e Eneolithic in these regions ,
it represents a boundary line be tween the agrarian post-Neolithic cultures and
the new cultures of nomadic stock-breede rs of the Middle and Late Eneolithic.
Research into this culture and its treatme nt as a stylistic phenomen on
in its own right is of a relatively rece nt datc . So mc auth ors have long considered
its po ttery a part oi the Baden culture. Argume nts tlx treating it as a cultura l
group in its own righ t , if not a cul ture , were given us with the puhlicatio n of
the results obtJin ed by the excavatio n of Cernavo da (D. Berciu),I J2 several
sites in Slo vakia (Ia, Nitriansk y Hradok, Beladice, e tc.), l JJ Austria (Donnerskirche n, Schwechat), lJ4 Yugoslavia (Mostonga, Gradina on the Bo sut, Vajuga-Korbovo, Brza Vrba), l JI and especially the necropolis Pilismarc)t- Basaharc
north of Budapest.I JOAll these sites have yielded stylistically unique pottery,
mutually similar, or eve n identica l, in shape and decoration . Volume III of The
Prehistory of Yugoslavia treats it partly as an independent phenomenon: in the
chapter on Bade n, S. Dimitrij e vi includes it as the tirst phase, "smge A-l of
the early, or preclassical Baden", while the present author discusses it in the
"Conclusion" as a culture in its own right. 1J7 Recent research cited above has
confirmed this opinion .
Cerna voda llI-Bole raz se ttleme nts and necropoli ses are to be found
over a vast te rritory, vaster, it seems, than any previously covered hy a singl e
c ulture. Even the area covered hy Baden, its ge netic successor, is more restri cted. TIle territury encompasses; th e lower co urse of the Danube tu the east

and so utheast (Do bruja, th e ROl11anian and Bulgari a n Danube Basin); in its
central part~ all of the Pannonian Plain, the Yugoslav Danube Basin, and the
sites south of the Sava and Danube, as far as the central Balkan wne; to (he
west, the easte rn parts of Austria (Niedercisterreich anu Burgenland) ; to the

Middle Eneolithic

47

north, Slo vakia and areas towards sourhern Poland, where Poli sh archaeologists used to rrear it as part of the f1uted, i.e. Prominisra culrure . 1JS Some local
differences were inevirab le over such a huge rerri tory, regardless of the unity
in the m ain fea rures of rhe material culrure . Fo r example , in rhe zone covered
by Cern a voda III and rhe relared E:ero culrure (hl'n :ons XI\' and XIIl of rhe
eponymous sire) coarse wme decorared wirh plasric bands or rough cu rs is more
frequent th an in, say, Pannonia (Bolera : ), where porre1')' is iiner, ofren wirh
f1ut cd decorari on. 1J9
Th e diffe re nc es a re uu" LO rhe im1uence o f
autochth ona us cul t ures on rhe newly -fanned one.
To the so uth and sourhwesr, Cerna voda III- &'Icra: wa, \\l.}"spread
in the Danube Basin, with a high concentrari on of si res in s..'urhem &na: and
western Baka, between rhe Sava and rhe Dan ube, anu, as reCent "XC8\aG.:11S
have revealed, south of the Danube - in umadija , wesrern Serbia. and &-"',118.
This last group is less prominent; with the exception of a single SIt" n,,3~
Smederevska Palanka, others are of the type where coarse Cerna voua III ware
predominates . They are also characrerizeu by a lack of t1ured decoration anJ a
profusion of plastic bands, impressions, anJ slanting cuts. T he Graanic a sire,
erroneously dated into the Early Bromc Age, woulJ partly belong to rhis
cultural circle. 140
There are some thirty registered Cerna vo da III-Boleraz sires in thc
Yugoslav Danube Basin, but the only ones to have been excavateu tD any exrent
are Brza Vrba near Kovin , Vaju ga near Korbo vo, Mostonga nea r O daci,
Gradina on the Bosur and Gradina in T olisavci in western Serbia. 1l1e partia l
publication of. results from thcse sites has made it possible to sketch a rough
picture of this culture in the Yugoslav Danube Basin and south of it, and define
the characteristics of irs marerial cultute, type of dwellings and of settlements.
ln this respect, the most helpful sites have been Brza Vrba, Mos tonga, and
Gradina on the Bosut. 141 T opographical features make it possible to di sringuish betwee n two types of settlem ents: the first are built on river banks in rhe
lowlands , and the second on higher grounJ, or even in hilly areas n o t typical
of Cernavoda III-Boleraz sertlements. Brza Vrba, Beljarica near Zem un,
Mostonga, and a few settlements in Banat are , or used to be, located on th e
banks of the Danube anu its arms. Gradina on the Bosut, though its present- da y
name wo uld suggest a hillfort settlement ( gradina = hillfort ), is in fa ct a
lowland settlement buil t on the river bank (Bosut). 1l1e Smederevska Palan ka
site was built by the Morava, and Cladnice n ear Graani ca on a bank of the
eponymo us river. On the othe r hand, (Jradina Likodra in T olisavci wo uld
belong to the other, hilltop type of settlement, rypical of the culture's thrust
towards the ce ntral Balkans.
There is very little data about the types of dwellings and habitation
J?factices in Cemavoda III-Boleraz. Excavati ons at Gradina on the Bosut near
Sid and Brza Vrba have revealed the footings of several houses, budt using
practically rhe same techniqLLe: potsherds or pebbles (Bosut) were used to
solidify the fl oor; this was coateJ with a layer of cl ay, which was then packe d

PI. XI
PI. 'iN

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

~---

PI. 5

PI. XV. 4
PLXV. 3
PI. XIV. 2. 4
PI. XV. 2

Fig29/1
PI. XV. I

anu bun1t. The upper part uf thc houses was executeu in a widespread
prehistoric technique uf builuing: wattle-and-daub and rounu posts. Also
frequent were pits and pit-dwellings (Mustunga, Brza Vrba), as we ll as open
hearth s amJ stuves built using the technique applieu in the con str ucti un uf
above-grounu uweilings (Brza Vrha).
Pottery finds are quite frequent in Cerna voda III-Boleraz settlements,
but not as vari eu as in the sumewhar late r Bauen culture. We shall here uescribe
only a few distinctive pottery types, which can help us explain the genesis of
the culture and are equally important as evidence of the cultural and stylistic
unity of the vast arca that the culture covered. There are, first of all, deep pots
with a plastic banJ atOunJ (or below) the rim, uecorate d all over wi th a coarse
herringbone ornament. The shape is tl)UnJ at many sites from Dobruja to the
Alps and from southern Polanu to the centroi Balkans (Cernavuda , Brza Vrba,
Gradina un the Bosut, Schwechat, la, Nitriansky Hradok, etc. ) .142 This and
th e other shapes to be uiscusseu are placed by V. Ne mejcuva-Pavukov:1 within
the Baden l b hotizon of her chronu logy uf the Baden culture . : 4J Anuthe r
characteristic shape is thar dbrge pithoi, often with a roughene d surface and
decorated with plastic banus (Locllsteni, Brza Vrba, Donne rskirche n, Nitliansky Hradok). Finer ware includes cups with a single handie above the rim anu
broad fluting on the hdly and slmuluer. Typi cal are th eir "subcutane()us",
vertically perfo rateJ tunncl handles (Gradina un the Bosut, Mostunga, Dunnerskirchen, Pilismarot-Basarhac).144 hnally, there is a fairly widespread type
of bowls with a tlIrned-down rim whose inside (ufte n the entire surface) is
decorated with shallow paralld fluting. Sometimes they are exceptionally large,
over 50 c m in diameter (Gradina un the Bosut, Mostonga, Dunn erski rch en,
etc. ) .145 The greater frequency of these buwls at Boleraz sites and the absence
of the fluted cups described ahove have leu V. Nemejcov6-Pavuk ov:1 to treat
Cernavllda III and Bo kraz as tWl) distinct cultllral groups. However, "transitional" sites such as Lxusteni in Oltenia, Vajuga near Kor hovo, or Brza Vrba
in Banat, where both fluting and bowls with turned-down rims are present,
show that these were merely local traits of a broader c ultural complex. T o this
group of rare but characteristic vessel shapes shoulJ be added a spl,cific kind
of plate (or lid), richly decornred on burh sides, with spiral or crosshatc hed
mutifs. It was f()unu in Brza Vrba, Uladnica near C;raanica, Ezero, but abu at
sites in Slovakia Oeviovice, Bratislava). 146
1l,e analysis of pottery f()und at Cerna voda III-Boler"z si tes, including
those in the Yugoslav Danube Basin, has provided a basis for resulving the
problem of the genesi, of this culture as a whole . Assul11ing that the primary
nucle us of the Cerna voda III style was situated in the lower Danube Basin,
along thc border between the steppe cultures and the "pl)st-Neulithic" cultures
PI. 5 -- Pottery shapes
of the Cernavoda III-Bolera, culture
from sites in Serbia (Brza Vrba, Gradina na Bosutu)

0 '

Jj)})))
~~()

6"

,-5-c
0 _ _ _ _ _ __ ______T
.:.:h.:.oeC'E"'n":eo""lithi e eu Itu res of Central an cl Wes t Balkans

Fig. 14/1

of the Balkans, its origins sho uld be sought in that arco. In the introductory
part of this chapter we drew atte ntion to the "successive" movements of the
steppe tribes towards the lower Danube Basin, Central ond South east Eumpe.
Cernavoda III sites in Roman io and nortwest Bulgaria (Do bruja) appear at the
time when the Sredni Stog (II) culture was penetroting the area of T ripolye
(B), whi ch soon resulted in th e disappea rance of the latter. Elements of the
Sredni Srog c ulture are foun d in Cerna voda III pottery: coarse ware decorated
with obliq ue cuts on the upper half, the appearance of a rudimen tary form of
the herring bone motif, of a festoon below the ri m, consisting of pricks or cuts,
etc. 111is kind of pottery is most frequently found in the Dereivka II hori zon,
where terra-corta figurin es with flatten ed upper parts are a lso present
(Dereivka); 147 the same were fo und at Cernavod3 III sites and, somewh3t
later, in the C3 ri y ph3se of the Baden culture (Vin a, Bela dice , arovce, e tc.) 148
Also to be nored are the close ti es between Ce rn avoda III po ttery and Ezero
finds in Bulg3ria , most particul3r1y the comse ware and decora tion by means
of plastic bands and obl ique cutS (Dipsiska mogila -Ezem , horizons XIII -VII) .149
By co rrec ting the synchronization of Ezero potte ry with Baden, i.e. Cern avoda
III and Boleraz, we are able to connect these finds with phenomena in the
Yugosla v Danube Basin and th e Carpathian Basin at large.
111e Sredni Stog compo nent and li nks with the Ezero cult ure are only
one aspect of the genesis of Cernavoda IlI -Boleraz. Also of importance fo r
Bolen'iz sites is the influence of autochthonous curtures on the emergence of
the new style : that of the late Lengyel and of Balaton- Lasinja. The latter is
especially prominent at Gradina on th e Bosut , whose vertica l st ratigraphy
shows a sequence of the Lengyel (Sopot- Lengyel), Balaton -Lasinja IIII , and
Cern avodo III -Boleraz culturall ayers. 15o The influence of Balaton-Lasinj a on
the Bolen:iz group is reflected in pottery of the same fabric and simil ar shapes,
and in the direct stratigraphic continui ty be tween thc two cultures . 111is, of
course, is a regiona l pheno menon, characteristic of the area between the Sava,
Drava, and Danube rivers, although , in the words of E. Neustupnl', 151 the
theory of the "polygenetic o rigin" of the Baden culture (to whose carly phase
he attribu tes Boleraz) migh t be accepted.
lt is not hard to establish the relative chronology of Cerna voda
Ill -Boleniz. Mos t archaeologists agree that in the east it succeeded Cernavoda
I (type Renie ll ), Salcuta IV, and Gumelnita (K aranovo Vl) ; in the central
parts, the Yugosla v Danube Ba sin, and most of the Pannonian Plain, it was
later than Bodrogkeresztur, Hunya di-Vajska, and Balaton-Lasinja I-II ; in the
north, it followed the final stages of the Lengyel (Ludanice) culture . Throughout most of this atea it was succee ded by the Baden culture, except in the east,
where an early stage of Cotofeni (Cotofeni I) emerged. In absolute terms, and
on the basis of uncalibrated C-1 4 dating, Cernavoda Ill -Boleraz would cove r
the period be tween 2850 and 2700 B.e. (data provided by the Berlin and
Groningen la boratories). 151

Middle Eneolithic

SI

The Baden culture

Among the Rrst excavateJ prehistori c sites in the Yugoslav Danube
Basin were those that yieldeJ Bade n pottery (Bogoj e vo, Comoiava, Vina,
Vuedol). However, it was only fifty years later that it was regis tered in domestic
archaeological literature as a culture in its own right, having already won a
place of its own in the literature of neighbouring countries (Austria, Hungary).
[n publishing his findings from Vuedol, R. R. Schmidt accepted the name of
"Baden culture", introduced by O. Menghin (afte r the Baden-KLinigshL)hle site
in Niederl1sterreich, 153 and it is (hc unly une encountered in d01l1t'Stic lite r3~
ture, tho ugh othe r names fix the same culture abound in Central European
archaeology (th e Ossarn culture or type, the tlured ware c ulture, Pwmi nista
and Pece! culrure, etc .). Since R. R. Schmidt had done his work several Baden
sites were excavated (Beli Manastir, Ilok, Dl)ban ove i, Erdevik, Vin J and
Como lava - additional research, etc.) , and several mure or less extensi ve studies
have been published, most of them dealing with Baden in a regional context
(A . Benac, M. Garaanin, B. Jovan o vi). ll1e re has also been a fi rst atte mpt at
its systematizat ion within a Yugoslav framework (N. Tasi ).1 54 All this has
allowed S. Dimitrijevi to put forth a genera l review of the Baden cu[rure in
The Prehistory of Yugoslavia, classifl' all available data, and define the place of
the cultu re and its relationship with other contemporaneous cultures of Ce ntral
an d Southeast Europe 1 5 \ Baden sites and th e Baden culture ha ve thus bee n
srudic d in a comprehensi ve and complete mann er.
Te rritory, settlements. necropolises

Baden sites: settle ments, individual graves, and chance finds, are
located in the southern section of the vast Baden complex - practically on its
periphery. In the south, the border runs along the lower course of the Sava and
the Danube, spreading to the ROl11anian and Serbian BJi1at to the east, mainly
in rhe lowlands. T o the south, Baden settle ments dil not reach furth er than
the narrow Danubian zone (Vina) . Certain sites in Se rbia, for instance
C ladnice near Craanica (Kosovo), Bubanj, Hisar, and others, are typologically
o utside the framework of the Baden style, though some resea rchers hold
contrary views. Thc finds from CJladniea, for instance, are closer to Cerna voda
[ll , while "Baden" or "Baden-Kostolac" pottery from Hisar and Bubanj be!ong
to the Kostolac culture . Djurdj e vo, in umadija (Djurdjevaka glavica), however, belongs to Vuedo l, not Baden, etc. IS6 llw apparent conclusion would
be that Baden settlements belong chielly to the Pannonian Plain, including
Slavonia and Srem. [n th e mo untainous regions south of the Sava and the
Danube , in Bosnia, Serbia, Transyl vania to the east, there are no Baden sites,
as P. Roman has shown . ISl ll1cir predilec tion f~) r low ground proceeds from
(he I!n Olnadic, steppe cOlnponent" of the culture'::; economy_
Ove r 100 Baden sites ha ve been registered in the region between th e

",
52~_ __

Fig. 9/ 1 ~ 4
Fig. IO/I-3

_ __ _ _ __ _ _ T,-,-h"e--,E"-,n-"eo:"l,,ith'.':i:c;. cultu res of Central an d West Balkans

Slavonski Brod-Va lpovo line to the west and the Romanian-Yugoslav border
to the east, but only a few have been in vestigated. The basis fo r a discussion of
the mate ri al culture, type of settlements, stylistic tra its, burial customs, and
other fea tures of the Baden culture in the southern zone of its expanse is
provided by the sites of Beli Man astir, O daci, Bogojevo , Vuedol, Sarva,
Dobanovci, Gomolava, Vina, Erdevik, and a fe w others where small- scale
sondage o r systematic excavations have been carri ed out. I 18 All th ese sites
have one thing in common : they are single-layer, short-tenn settlements, even
where the Baden habitation horizon is part of averticall y srratifi ed site
(Vu e dol, Gomolava, Sa rva, Bapska, Vina). No site has yielded two or mo re
habitati on horizons in the vertical strat igraphy. lllis also has to do with the
economic feat ures of the culture as a whole.
By their tOpographic features, the Baden set tlements in the middle
Yugoslav Basin belong to the widespread type of lowlan d settlement known
thro ughout the Panno nian Plain, in Slo vakia, and as far as southern Poland in
the north. These are the so-called pit-dwelling set tlements, whi ch deve loped
horizontally and left no significa nt cultural layers. Mos t of the material is to be
found in pits, less often in a cultura l layer. Another characteristic of t hese
se ttlements (e .g. Beli Manastir, Dllba novci) is the lack of surface dwellings , of
house s whi ch had been present in the area in the days of th e Vina, Lengyel,
or llleiss c ultures. The foo tings of (apsidal and rectangular) houses in Vu edol
and Sarva are not of the Baden cult ure. The fact that R. R. Schmidt did not
differentiate between Baden and Kostolac pottery might also account fo r t he
erroneous cu ltural attribution of the surface buildings ~at these sites . 159 Exca vations at Gomolava have clearly shown that the Bade n horizon contains only
pits and semi-subte rranean dwellings Llverlied by a settlemen t with earl y
Kostolac ho uses. '6o lllis is wh y it is believed th" t the bearers of th e Baden
culture in the Yugoslav Danube Basin were using only temporary set tlements
with pits o r semi-subterranean dwell ings; longer-lasting dwellin gs were to be
built only in the Kostolac culture. This is an effect of the nomad ic way of life
which characterized the Baden culture . Dobanovci and Beli Manastir arc
typical exampl es of this ki nd of settlement: numerous pits and semi-subterranean dwellin gs with quite a few remain s of materi al culture, open hearth s and
hearths in pits, are the only mark of settled life at these sites . 161 They often
cover an extensive area (several hec tares) and are usua lly located on permea ble
loe ss ridges above rivers, streal11S, o r marshes. In addition to Do banovci and
Beli Manastir, this group also includes the sites in Baka near Odaci and
Moston ga , Bogojevo, Perlez, and a number of Baden sites li sted in Tite Eneolithic

of Southern Banat.162

Fig. 26/1 ~3

A variant of the above, most widespread, type of Baden se ttlement is

represe nted by the sites on the right ban k of the Danube, built on elevated
terraces , such as Sarva, Vuedol, or Ilok. Severa l sites on the to p or slopes of
Fruka Gora (Lice kod Erdevika) could also be included in thi s gro up. Due to
the topogra phic features of the terra in they "re more compact , but tbey are still

Late Eneol ithic

53

te mporary pit-dwelling settl ements and, as we shall see, unifonn in material

culture and chronologicaliy contemporancous with the mher lowland settlements.

While the number of Baden settlements is considerabl e, evidence

abo ut necropolises and burial customs is rather scan ty . It consists chi efly of
separate burials discovered either by chance or during the excavati on of Baden
se ttl ements. Thi s is the case of Dobanovc i, where a gra ve containing a crouched
body and grave goods wa s found within th e settlement, of se vera l graves in
Bogojevo, a double burial at Vuedol, some graves lacki ng grave goods at
Gomolava, etc. 16J The bodi es were always buried in a crouched pt)si tion and
in accordance with the canons of the Baden culture. Exceptions arc' the J..)t.:b'e
burials at V ue dol and Bogojevo, and the anima l burials at the \and Sl'e. CT.
the othcr h and, an important new phenomenon is the apP<'arance L : b",:-:3:,
unde r rumuli, ofte n, bur not always with good reason, conn ected \\,Hh 'SteD~
influences". Two such sites arc worthy ofmention: Ara djansk a humka (barh' w
in northern Bana t (near Kikinda) and a barrow near Perlez, in central BanaE.O"
The former containcd a single cremati on burial wi th a larger cup COntamm~
thc ashes of thc deceased and a bowl typical ot the H6dmezQvasarhel\, hO'e:,',"
of the Baden culture . Several barrows have been discovered at Perle: . "1Whl~h
th ree have bee n exca vated. Their cultural attri bution is n,'t absduteh re!J2::,;,,:
elements found in sorne gn:lves (the r0 1l1b dug iIHO [he CenITe o r- lne a!..-n:J-..!..!"
into the "urhumuslr, the use ofochre , re n10tnS ot" a \\'I..Xhlen 5~:""'L~;-::. t.'" l':. ) ".ro.:...:d
suggest their attribution to n Inter horizon of the Pit~Qfi3\'(,: cuirG.:"C: wh:lt.'"oc:.c:"'S.
despitc the lack of grave goods, migh t belonE! to an earJl<:r he':-. :":". w Ba.i::-l_

Such a con clusion might be furhter corroborared h the ;-a~; rna: ;h" ;,,;:-..:l:'"
ot a devastated Baden 'settlement were t<-)und nearb,. Th" [mO;"",1,:'! " :~..:l: a,
the ti me of the Pit-grave culture the barrows were buil, ""~" e:!c:h :':-.::n ;~e
immediate vicin ity, whi ch would explain the presence o; Baj,,~ ;x::":'.
Biritual burials have been registered at m2:1\ BaJc~ ne;:;",?-'.'5c,
outside Yugoslavia. However, barrows with Cf:113riO:: n:......-:~~ J.;-t.'" !-~.C-'-':-'~2:
rarer and probably to be li nked wi th Baden's inh":-:::J~~" :':-..:-::: r;., &';,,:i :
substratum (Pili sm ar6t~ Basahare) . 105 Mos[ orht.'"f r.cc~. . ,~ ::SC~ ':,J:'. ~31 ....a;1g crc~
mation burials are of the flat type (G : d, Viss, S:~~,~:':. e:~.). :\radjanska
humka is th e only such find in the southern areas';- :b: Baden culture, and is
therefore of some chronological importance. In :h~ :l, c:n. rhe presence of
cremation buria ls in tumuli has been registered in S: '\'3 k:3, espcialiy in the
Slana va lley , whcre several such mounds have been dl".: Yere': near Stranska,
Ve l ince, and Gemer near Rimavska So bora. loo The matcnal [.)und rhere
belongs to the ea rly and cl assical stages of the Baden culture (Fony6d,
Budakal:'isz), which is al so the probable chronological attribution e';- the grave
at Aradjanska humka .

figo l

:>'

.. ',....

.' ,= l.'

I -

S4

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

Material culture

PI. 6/b

PI. XVII. 1-7

PI. XVI II . 1-9

PI. XVI

PI. XV. 3- S
PI. 6/a

Muc h hns been written nbout the typologicnl tea tures llf the Baden
culture, especin lly its po[[e!)', nnd we shnll nor dwelIon them. W e wo uld onl y
like [o poim [o some specific chnracre ristics relevnm for thc southern si tes, and
especinlly for the d nti ng of the sites in the Yugosbv Danube Bnsin wi thin the
overall de velo pmem of the Bnden c ultuml CClIilplex. In the nbse nce of stmtigraphic dara, it wn s from po[[ery thnt many authors (] . Bnn ne r, V. NemejcovaPaVllk ov6, E. Ne ustupny , S. Dimi t rijevi , M. (~n m n nin , N. Tns i ) 16) have
ded uced intcrnnl periodiwtion, fol lowing its stylistic develupment through
severa l phn ses ( 3 to 5) . It seems that an analysis of mnte rial fro m sites in the
Yugosbv Danube Basin Cl1uld sign ificantly contribute to the so luti on of this
problem, especinlly sin ce the h"rizun in questi on is limited in time nnd likely
to represent n separate phase in the developmen t of th e Baden culture.
A general conclusion to bc dmwn from the nnnlysis of potte ry would
be the stylisti c unity of the nmterial found almost througho ut the sou thern zone
of the Baden culture. Simil ar or identical sh npcs, th e sn me ornnme n wtion, nnd
even the nbsencc of cerwi n c harncteristic fentures of the cemmics, present at
some other sites in thc Panno nian Plain, would be the first factor pointing to
the synchronism of the Bnde n sites in the Danube Bnsin, Sre m, and Slav()nia .
TI,e most frequent shape, characteristic oi the entire Bn den c ultural comple x,
is that of a c up wi th a bulbous recepracle nnd n ribbun h nndle nbove the rim .
Ir was modelle d, no doubt , nfte r Boleraz-Cern nvod n III prowtypes, cups which
still did not hnvc n bulbous recipient, but in all the o th er detn il s (ribhon ha ndle,
fluting) nnticipnted the new sha pe, which wo uld reach its npex in the Baden
culture . T his develo pme nt could bc t,)lIowed through an a na lysis of the po ttc ry
found in Rnde n settle ment nt Vuedol. Assuming that this po tte ry, publ ish ed
by R.R. Sc hmidt, is unique and tha t the re is no Role ra z hori zon nt the site , we
could interpret some purely Boleraz forms of cups and goblets ns their cont inuation into the Baden c ulture . 168 T he c up with n ribbon handie nppears
nbundantl y, in vnrious forms, at nil Baden sites, from those in Ban ne to Vina,
Dobanovci, Gomo lava, Vuedol, a nd Beli Mannstir. In terms of the usual
divisio ns of the Baden c ulture, most of these fon m would belo ng to p hases B
an d C of its de velopment, i.e . the classical phase of the Bade n c ulture .
Anothe r very widesptead fmm nt Baden sites in the so ut he rn reaches
of this c ultural compl ex is a bowl assuming different vn rinnt shapes _On e of thlO
variants, a sOl11ewh at biconi cnl bowl with n tum ed-down ri m , also e volved
from Boleraz models. Bowls were "ftlOn decorated with dotted prick> or zigzag
lines . TI,e twO ornnl11ents nre oft en combined tu form a complex multi-pointed
srar (Do bnnovci, Vu e do l, etc.) . 169 Next among the widespread Baden shapes
in the Danube Basin nre th e deep pots. TI,eir shape vari es from a simpl e deep
por, unprotlied a nJ wi th (l r without a thickened rim to sOl11 ewhat more
PI. 6 -- Potte ry shapes of the Early (A) and 'classical' (B)
phases of the Baden cu lture from sites in Croatia and Serbia

00000001

*,

~~ ~-~---"-

O'Yl'loa Uj aIPp' V1

S6

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

~~-~~~~~~~~~~~=

PI. XVIII, S, 8

PI. XIX, 2

PI. 6

PI XIX, 4-7

developed forms, some of which are reminiscent of Bell Beaker shapes

(Vuedol), On the upper part uf sume vessels, just below the rim, which is at
times thickened, an ornament is to be found consisting of oblique parallel or
crossed cuts (Vu e dol, Dobanovci, Vina, Beli Mm13stir, etc) , 17O T he bestdeveloped example of this form is a vessel from Beli Manastir, decorated with
( incised pendant triangles framed with dotted pricb, in a way often encounte red
in bowls and amphorae thro ughout the Baden culture area, Finally, another
shape worthy of ment ion, not all that freLjuent but very cha racteristic, is a vessel
with ellipsoid section, known in archaeological literature as "Fischbutte", It is
found chiefly in the southern zone of the Ba den cultural complex and, which
is important, survives as an element of stylistic continuity in later cultu res,
Kostolac and Vuedol. In the Baden culture it is a simple, short-necked vessel,
sometimes with sh allow fluting i,e, channell ing as one of th e main features of
the Baden style (Dobanovci, Gomo lava) , 111 -Kostolac vessels arc not channell ed, while Vue dol one s are decorared by carving (e,g, Batajnica) ,
Even a superficial analysis of the Baden pottery style shows that the
sites' in the Yugoslav Danube Basin (Vina, Gomolava, Dobanovci, Vuedol,
Ilok, Erdevik, the Ban at sites) belong to the culture's early phase, Various traits
have been inherited from Boleraz-Cernavoda III. To the above -mentioned
shapes we should add elemen ts of decoration such as the plastic ban d, a coa rse
ornament of broken lines (Vina, Dobanovci), and another chronologica lly
important el ement: figurines of a kind fairly seldom found within thc Baden
culture, but so characteristic that they might play a signit1cant rol e in determining its periodization, According to archaeological li tera ture, the "Baden flat
idols" have bee n found in the Yugoslav Danube Basin - Vina, Dubano vci, the
Baden layer of Vu e dol (7), in Romania (Salacca), Hungary (Tlihi\, Tape,
Ozd), and Slovakia (arovce, Levice, Bran), always together witb pottery
belonging to the early Baden culture, 172 Especially important are [he finds
from Vina, where several fragments and an intaC[ flat idol with a hole for the
subsequent inserti on of the head (Kopflosidole) have been foun d, The decoration of the idol's body shows early Baden characteristics with prominent
Boler:'iz-Cernavoda III elements, Arguments for the early dating of this phenomenon at Baden sites include pottery on thc o nc hand, and, on the othet ,
the presence of the idols at other sites in Hungary, Slovakia, apd Romania, l\,
Kalicz has dated the finds from T c)hi\, T ape-Malajdok, and Ozd to "the early
phase of the c1as,sical epoch of thc Baden culture", while B, Novotny has placed
the finds from Sarovce, Levice, and Bran in the early phase of channelled
(Baden) pottery,17l T o this we might add a find from Cernavoda, where a
terra-corta figurine of the same type has been found and placed within the
Cernavoda III cultute of the lower Danube Basin, 174 Nu idols of this kind are
known from the later Baden culture, which leads us to conclude that the sites
where "flat headless idols" have been found belong to rhe early phase of thc
Baden culture, a conclusion supported by the style of its pottcry too (Dobano vci, Vina, Erdevik, Ilok, etc ,),

Middle Eneolith ic

57

On the o ther hanJ, it is important to nme that some elements

charac teristic of the mature phase of Baden, i.e. oi the i\eviJzany-Viss-Ossarn
(Ba den III , according (o V. Ncmejcovn-Pavuh)\'a) and Cny-Ozd (Ba den IV)
hori zons are absent at Baden sites in the Yugoslav Danube Basin . m Chi ef
among them are double vessels, often with knobbeJ rims, rec tangular-foo ted
gobl ets, hanging vessels (H anggefass), crested handles, etc. All this suggests
that the Baden sites in southern Banac, Srem, Sla\,)nia. and the Serbian
Dan ube Basin (Tri Jabuke near Panevo, DGbanG\'Ci, Erdevik. Ilok, Vi na,e tc . )
bekmg to th e early phase of the Baden culture, (hat whIch wa5 based di rectly
on Bo leraz-Ccrn avoda II I. A nd so we reach the problem ,)1' ,he !!enc5is \)t Baden
and its internal periodization .
Several authors have attempted a di\isiLm c' ,h~ &Je~ cl.:~: .."e ""_
ph ases of development. W e shall here cite the opinion, <)1 twO 1':-,el!!:': a~': :w,'
domestic experts, whose divi sions have been accepted in archae<']c'!r.cal ["era ture. E. Neustupny dealt wi th the pro blem twi ce; his 10 73 \iew; :ep:esee:: 2
modifi cation of his original periodization , published in 10 59 .. ' 0 . HIS :e:-:-.3;\
divi sion in (O an earl y, middle, and late ph ase, was rhen dabc)rared ". 35 :
include fi ve phases (A- E). 11. e earli er phase wo uld include Ohro:lIn. Jen;,.,w:ce
C-l, Boleraz, Neusiedl, f ony6d; the mi ddle - Drevenik, O : d, Baden, Ossa:-n.
Ni triansky Hradok, l Jn y, H6dmezlivasa rhely, erc.; and the larer - &)saa and
the Kostolac gro up. Also on the basis of Czech, Slovak and H ungarian mar~rial,
V. Nemejcova-Pavuko va diviued rh e Baden group into four pha ses with several
subd ivisions : Baden I, with St urovo-NitIian sky Hr6dok material; Baden II, with
material of the Fony6d-e rveny Hradok type ; Baden lli , with Nevidza ny-VissO ssam; and Baden IV wi th l Jny-Ozd material. 177 Ea ch of the four peri ods has
been subdivided into two stages of develo pment. O f the domestic archaeologists, S. Dimitrij e vi did mos t work on the problem of Baden, and the chronology he offered in Volume lli of T"" Prehistory represents a synthesis ofh is earli er
writings . He also propose s a quaremary divisi on, with severa l subsrages: A . the early, or preclassica l phase , with two stages: Boleraz (Deronj e-Mostonga I
in Ba ka) and Fon yCld (Vu e do l-Grada c , Zemun-Be lja rica, Bapska, Vina); B.
- the early cla ssical phase , with two stages: Vuedol - G radac I (Vinkovc i) and
Vue dol-Gradac II (Gomolava, Od:lci Ill); C. - the classical phase, with several
regional types: Budakalasz, Beli Manastir, l Jny, Viss, H6clmezl)vasarhely, Ossarn;
D. - the post-classical phase, or rhe disintegration horizon, when porte!)' of (he
Kostolac and Sosaa rypes appears.1)8
The pre,~nt author has also dealt with the pro blem of Baden periodization, and suggested a ternary division into an eariy, middle, and mature Oate)
phase l )9 When quoring the views of E. Neustupny, V. Nemejcova-Pavukova,
and partly S. Dimitrij evi, it is important to note that their divisions include both
Soleraz-Cern avoda III material (Sturovo, Ohrozim, Soleraz, Odaci-Mostonga,
etc.) and Kostolac and Bosaa pottery. If wc exclude these stages and substages
from the chronology of the Baden culture, which has recently been accepted even
by the above authors themselves, we can concl ude rhat the culture could nor have

_ _ _ The Eneolithic clllt u ,-es ~~~~n~,-aliln~ \Vest Balkans

58

gone through more than three phases of development, defined by specific

stylistic features of their material culture. 11,eret(Xe:
Tlu, carly p/ULle of Baden would still be characterized by the presence of
BolerazCernavoda III clements anu of char8ctcristic "flat headlcss ideM' (Vina,
Dobanovci, Vue dol the lowest layer of the "Baden building hm1zon", Ilok and,
in its central and northern zone, Fony6d, Tlikjl, Nitriansky Hradok, etc.) .
Tite ciassicallJJwse would include most Pann onia n sites, fi-om Como
lava, Odaci, Beli MaJ13stir, and Hungarian sites such as Budakal5sz, H6d
mcz(jvasarhely, l Jny, to those in Romania (Moldova Veche) , Slovakia (er.
veny Hr6uok, Nevi dzany), and Austria (Ossarn, Mel k.Hirschkogel).
Finally, tltc larc I)ltasc of the Bauen culture comprises sites where
elements of the Bosaa style appear (cone.ended cups, bowls with pruminent
knobs akJng the rim, the saueebo8t shape, etc.), which E. Neustupny has placed
in phase D of his divisi on of Baden .1so ln the south ern areas of th e Baden
cultural complex this phase is nor tO be 6.)u nd. In stead, the first settlements of
a new cu lture, Kostolac, appe ar.
V Nemejcova-Pavukova

E. Neustupny

S. Dimitrijevi

N. Tasi

Boleraz
II Fony6d. Gradac-

Cernavoda lIIBoleraz

- -- -

Bo ler az-Ohrozim
Jev isovice C - l

lSturnovo
Nitriansky Hradok

Vuedol. Vina

f - - --

Nitriansky Hradok
Ossarn. Baden. 6zd

Bosaa

Early Baden
Vina

Kostolac

I B Vuedol-Gradac II
VinkOVCI. Gomolava
II Fony6d. erveni Vrh
I,
II I Nevidzany. Ossarn. Viss
C Budalakaz. Uny.
Viss. Beli Manastir

IV Uny-6zd

i-

Bosaa

Class ical Baden

Dobanovci
--,
I
Early Kosto lac
I
Gomolava Ill. 2a I

---~

Th e penodizalIon of the Baden (and Cernavoda III-Boleraz) cultures after :

E. Neustupny. V. NemejcovaPavukova. s. Dimitrijevi . N. Tas i

Middle Eneoli thic

59

The Kosto lac culture

The stabilizatio n of the nomadic Baden culture in the Yugoslav
Danube Basin and the Pannonian Plain at large wa s paralied by changes in the
Eneolithic economy, a return to famling and to the con tinuity of life in a single
spot. Thi s led to the construction of pennanen t surface buildings and their
regular renovati on. In other words, the nomadic way of life was replaced by a
sedentary on e. The new c ulture wh ich appeared at th e timc was first regi stered
at Kostolac (1943 and 1953) by V. Mil oj i , who described it as an Eneoli thic
c ulture in its own right , styli stically and chronologicall y differentiated . :61 He
was followed by others, who ha ve revised the cultural attribution of some earlier
finds, for instance from Gomolava, Vue dol, Sarva, Z6k, Vin a, and other sites
in the Yugosla v Danube Basin. Gradually, tha nks to the work of A. Benac at
Pivnica, of a gro up of archaeo logists ;Jt Go molava (M. Gi ri , R. Raajski , B.
Brukner, B. jo va n o vi , N . Tasi), R. Gal o vi at jelenac , S. Dimitri jevi (rc\i .
sion work) at V ue dol, and the present auth o r nea r Doban ovc i and around
Kragujevac,182 we now have all the elements neeucd to define th e style o r the
Kostolac mate rial c ulture, its stages of develo pment, th e characteristics ot irs
settleme nts and all the o ther features that combin e to make Kostolac a
independent phenomeno n in the Eneolithi c of Central and So utheast Europe .
lt is on the basis of these elements that the cul ture was treated in The Prehisran
of Yugoslavia (l li ) as one of th e most important Eneoli thi c cul tures which had
served as the basis fo r the further development of the termi nal cultures oi the
period.

The territory and the sites (settlements and necropolises)

Though the Kostolac culture was at fi rst tho ught of as limited to the
Serbian Danube Basin, recent research has shown thar ir covered a much more
extensi ve area, which partly coincided with th at of the Baden culture, especially
in the central and so uthern parts of the Pann oni an Pla in. Kostolac ware has
been found as far south as central Serbia (Jelenac near Aleksinac, Makrane
near Krue vac, and sites near Svetozarevo and Kraguj evac) and northern
Bosnia (Pivnica, Donj a Mahala, Dvorovi near Bijeljina) . Its elements are also
to be found furth er south, at sites aro und Ni, in Koso vo, Metohija, and rosnia
(near Alihode). The sourh ernmost sites in Se rbi a belong to a somewhat
modified form of the Kostol ac c ulture, which M. Ga raa nin, J. Todoro vi, and
j. Gli i h ave ca ll e d Ba de nKos to lac (Bu ba nj, Hi sar, Gl adnice n ear
Gra a nica).1 8 3 T o the east, sites with Kos tolac wa re are fo und in the Roma
nian part of Banat, Ol tenia, and Transylvania, but very often within Cotofeni
culture . A ccording to recent research, the bo undary line between the two
cultures lies in eastern Serbia, some where between the Timok and Poreka
reka. Ir should be noted, however, that the two cu lt ures have mixed a lot in
rhi s area, so th at some sites (Cmajka, Kl ok oevac ) have yielded rhe two types

60

The Eneolithi c cul tu res of Central and West Balkans

of pottery mixed in a 50 : 50 rotio IS 4 ln the area of Djerdap l and ll, the

Kostolac and Cotofen i cultures also mingleJ a lot: tu the west are Kostoloc sites
(Gospodji n vir), while Cotofeni ones are to th e east (Donj e Buturk e, ZhradiloFunJ, LjLLb i evoc - oba la, Hercu lana, etc. ). ln the wes t, the Kostolac culture
covered all of Srem an d a part of Slavonio, as tOr as the massif formed by Mts.
Krndi jo, Dilj, Psun j, and Papuk (Aikovci neD r Plete rni ca, Ce ri-PlanJ i te). ln
this area it wOs in close co ntact and mingleJ with the Retz -Caja ry group
(Hmj evac near Kutj evo, Satnica near Djakovo, VinJija, Vinjevac). IS) ln the
north we can trace the spreaJ of the Kostolac culture from a number of si tes
in the Hungarian Danube Basin (Dun aszekcsli-V5 rhegy, Palatoboszok) and the
Danube Bend (Szentendre, Szentpctri-Ji.iki, Bek:)smegyer, SzigennonostorDunapart, etc .) to sites in southern Slovakia, espec iolly la, a sua titleJ site
whose vertical stratigraphy has yielded typicol Kostolac ware. ISo Further
north, Kostolac pottery is !'Jund in a somew ha t modifi ed fo nn at Bosa a type
si tes (Trenin) .1 87 Considering the exte nt of the area, Kostolac si tes in Serbia,
Croatia and Bosnia belong to th e cultu re's southern zone . Th ey croSs the Sava
and the Danube and appeor in th e hilly area s of Serbi a alld Bosnia (K o riani,
ot near Raa Kraguj e va ka, Ali hode) , a regi()n untouched by the bearers nf
the Ba den culture during the previous period.
T hough a large number of Kostolac sites has been registe red o ver an
extensive area, only a few have been thc subject of systematic research on any
scale. In fo rmati on about dwellings, habitation, th e organiw tion oflife, and th e
settlemen ts themselves is thcretore extremely scarcc . All we really knuw about
is th e sha pe and size ofhouses ond pit-dwell ings, and the inhabitants' predilec tions in the choice nf building sites. ln the Yugoslav Danube Basin and the
Sava valley we ca n distingLlish betwee n two topographic types of settlem ents:
settlemen ts of the so-called "open" type , built on the hanks of rivers in the
lowlands, on dry loess terrac es, and hill-type settlements built in the mnuntainous regions of Serbia and Bosnia . Indi viJual tlnds of Kostolac pottery in caves
(Zlo tska peina and Bogovinska peina in eastem Serbia) are not sufficient
proof of habitati nn by th e beare rs of the Kostolac culture. Typical Kostolac
settlements uf the former type were built in the lowlands along the Danube and
Sava rive r::; and include Vu e dol, Sarva, UOll1ulav<J. , nU111erous sites in and
arOLmd Zemun (Pravoslavno groblje/Orrhodox cemetery, (~ardo, C;ovedji
brod, etc.), Pi vnice in Bosnia and, ofcoLLrse, most other sites in the Pannonian
Plain, which have aroused interes t by being concentrated alo ng the Dan ube .
11leir profusion between Slovakia to the north an J DjerJap area to the south
suggests the routes of communication between different regions, an J the
directions taken by the cultu re in its expansion from its n ucleus , which is
righteously presumed to have bee n situated somewhere in Srem-Slavonia .
PI. 7 --The pottery shapes of the Kosto lac
culture from sites in Serbia

;-

/
L_--.J_ _--"
J141110"U3 "IPP'Vi

19

62

Fig. 13/1-3

PI. XII. 1- 10

Fig.3 1/ 1-2

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkan s

Two sites have been particularly helpful in providing us with evidence

about Kostolac set tl ements and their architec ture: Vuedol and Gomolava . A t
the fonner, after the suggested revision of the cultural at tribution of certain
habitation horizons (V. Miloji, S. Dimitrijevi, N . Ta si ), 188 quite a few
"Baden houses" sho uld now be assigned to the Kostol ac habitatio n hori zons.
One of the issues raised is the cultural attribution of the apsidal houses at thi s
site and of similar houses at Sarva, which we re considered as Baden . Due to
a lack of closed finds, publi shed material with ground pl ans of buildings, and
the fa ct that R. Schmidt failed to distinguish between Baden and Kostolac
po ttery (both typologica lly and stratigraphica lly) , the numero us set tl ement
remains can be of limited use only . However, wi th recent research and excavati on s stil l underway at this important site, 189 we should get close r to a
solution of the problem. T hough not very extensi ve, ini tial reports suggest that
the foundations of most of thc houses found at the depth between 3.40 and
2.65 m at V u edolsk i Gradac belong to the Kostolac culture. The situation is
simi lar at the neigh bouring location "kukuruzite (corn fie ld) S treim", where S.
Dimitrijevi has done excavation work. According to his res ults, the layer
between 1.85 and 1.25 m contain s a mixture of Baden and Kostolac material.
Gomolava has provided more reli able data on building ac tivity. B.
Brukner has published the groun d plans of several ho uses fro m the Kostolac
level (Gomolava III b); some of them stand in an immediate vertical stratigraphic relationship (houses VI a and b).' 90 Their constructi on is identical
with that encountered in th e late Neolithic and ea rly Eneolithic cultures
throughout Central and So utheast Europe . Th e floor is of packed ea rth coated
with a clay paste, in places (probably were hearths o r oth er work surfaces used
to be) soli dified with potsherds or pebbles. Walls were of watde and daub.
Fragmentary data (the fl oors have been considerably damaged by subsequent
building) suggest that the houses were rectangular, of medium size (ea. 8 x 6
m), with indoor hea rths. Pottery found on the floors and well -documented
stratigraphi c data have made it possible for the first time to trace the evolution
of the material culture of Kostolac through several stylistic and chronological
stages, whic h we shall disc uss la ter on.
Important information about the Kostolac culture is also provided by
apottery hoard from Sremski Karlo vci and several graves. The contents of the
hoard are not particularly important, consisti ng as they do chiefly of typical
Kostolac cups, bowls, and deep vessels , but the graves are of considerable
significance because rhey show that burial was biritual in thc Kostolac culrure:
by cremation and by inhumation. Of all the sites, only the graves at Padina
(Dj erdap) may have belonged tO a necropolis, as well as, possibly, the Kostolac
graves at Vuedo l, while the others appear so fa r to be individual phenomena.
The group of skele tOn graves includes finds from Gomolava and Vuedol. One
of the severa l Eneoli thic graves at Gomolava is certainly a Kostolac grave: it
contained a crouched body with a finely ornamented bowl placed on (he pelvis.
Since there were no grave goods in the other graves, their cultural attribution

Middle Eneohthlc

63

is uncertain. 111e same might be said of the Vuedol graves. The double grave
attributed to the Baden culture by R. Schmidt conrained no unquestionable
grave goods (a bone awl and shards of a vessel which need nut have belonged
tu the grave) 1 91
More reliable, though incumple(e, are dara give n by T.
Teak-Gregl about the recenrly excavated tombs in Vuedol. She mentions,
without describing them in detail, five skele m n graves (crouched or extended
burials), of which two belong to (he Baden culrure, (WO fl) Vuedol, and one
91
(o Kostolac.1
As ar Gomolava, burials wok place within (he se(riement , ofte n
below (he floors of houses, which might well be linked fl) (he cusrom of
"preserving the Jeceased\ presencelI in the senielnenr after his death, an
exclusive privilege of (h e ranking membe rs of (he community.
The other group consists of graves cuncail1lI1,g cren1areu burin ls, a
non-traditional and quite alien custom in l\:eol i(hic and Eneoli(hic c ul(ures in
Yugoslav these regions. One ofrhe finds, so far isob (cd, is (ha( ofa grave from
(he Silaje( sire , in the village of DVlll'llvi near Bijeljina (nllr(h eas( Bosnia),
where a Bronze Age nec ropolis yi el ded a (ypical Kostolac bowl covering (he
calc ined bones l,fan incinerated body.19J The other site was discovered farther
east, in the area of Djerdap region, more precisciy ar Padina, in the Danube
gorge (Sector III). Systematic excava(ion at the site, known for much earlier
finds (Mesolithic, Neolithic), has yielded the remains ob necropolis containing
cremated burials: five bowls (f()ur aligned Kosmiac graves dug in tu approximately the same depth). B. Jovanovi believes thar this was a smaller Kostolac
cemete ry with cremated burials, which would be bmh the earliest necropolis
with cremated burials in the Yugoslav Danube Basin and thc easternmost site
of the pure Kostolac culture. 194 Cremation was not unknown in the Pannonian Plain in the Early and Middl e Eneolithic (Ohrozim, Tibava, Luky,
Pilismarot, etc.), but it was much less frequent than inhumation. This phenomenon, especially within the Kostolac culture, deserves more attention and
we shall return to it in the concluding chapter.
Material culture and periodization
As is the case with most En eolithic cultures, the contents of Kostolac
settlements, too, consist basically ofpottery, smaller quantities ofHint and bone
tools, an d occasional copper finds. Pot tery is particularly important in the
Kostolac culture, being numero us and very typical, especially in omamem3(ion
(echniques and motifs. 11,e wide repenoire of shape, includes lllany kinds of
bowls, starting from those which represem an evol u(ion of Bade n fClflns - bowls
with a turne d-down rim, a short shoulder and a lower part e nding in a small,
sometimes convex base, conical bowls and deep bowls which gradually develop
into pots. Another product of the evolution of Baden forms is the cup with a
ribbon hanJIe above (he rim, whose recepracle is in (he shape of a cylinder,
cone, or sharp-ended funnel. These thtee types of vessels are all to be found in
the Sremski Karlovci hoard. The well-modelled ribbon handie sometimes

Pl. 7

64
PI. XXII

PI. XXIII

PI. XX. 7
PI. XXI. 4
PI. XXV. 15.8

Fig. 13a

PI. XXV

Fig.23/13
Fig. 24/2. 4. 8

The Eneolithic cultures of Cen tral and West Balkans

exceeds the size of the recepwcle several by times. Both this vessel and most
of the o thers arc made of well purified clay, burnisheo, and well baked. Other
shapes worthy of mention incluoe pots, some wi th a strengtheneo rim (Pi vnica,
Como lava, Sremski Kar1ovci, etc.), amphorae (Pivnica , Gomolava), and another shape deri ving from Baden models, th e ell ipsoid vessel (Fischbutte) often
found at Kostolac sites (Comoia va, Lepenska potkapina, Vueool, !a, etc.).
However, tho ugh the shapes ore many, varied, and often typical, ornamentation remains th e most characteristic oetenninant of the Kostolac style, easily
recognized rega rdless of whether the site is in Sbvakia, H ungary, Romania, or
Yugoslavia . TI,e ornamenration of vessels from, say, Ia, Varhegy, Comolava,
Pivnica, or the sites in the Djerdap area (including Romanian ones, such as
Cuina Turcului m Hercu lana) 19 \ is very similar, often even identical. lt
includes: va rious motifs made up uf dotted pricks (bands, stars, chequers),
crescenr-shapeJ cuts, the hen-ingbone 1110tif, triangu\af pricks , etc.; sorneriInes
several motifs are combined on a single vessel (chequ ers with bands , or
herringbone with a band made of pricks, etc .). Also characteristic, especially
in the later phase lOf Kostolac, is Furchenstich decuration. Most of these
techniques have been adapted (by roughening) fm the application uf white
encrusted paint. T his favourite technique ofpottery decoration in thc Kostolac
culture originated in Baden and was to reach its zenith in the Vuedol culture.
On the basis of an analysis of the pottery style, the stratigraphy of
certain sites (Comolava, Vuedo l) , the culture's norrhward and eastward
spread and its contacts with other cultures, we can distinguish between two
phases of development within the Kostolac culture. Of special importance in
this connection are stratigraphic dara, notably from layer III b at Comolava. At
this site, where we find rhree building horizons, rwo of rh em in superposition
(houses VI a and b), wc can dlstinguish (on the basis of porrery too) two
chronological entities . T he earlier horizon is characterized by an ornament of
pricks and cuts, a modest range of motifs, and the complete absence of the
Furchenstich technique. Even white encrusted paint is rather scarce in this
horizon . In the later phase, on the other hand, Furchenstich decoration
predominates, and the application of white paint to the ornament in negative
is m uch more frequent too . If the formation and development of the Kostolac
culture and its style are vicwcd comprehensively, the first phase would be that
of the culture's emergence and its stabilization in Srem, Slavcmia (Comolava
house VI a), and northem Bosnia (Pivnice), while the second phase would he
that of the culture's mo vements toward the late Baden settlements of the
Pannonian Plain and Slovakia on the one hand, and the Serbian and Romanian
Dan ube Basin, where it came into contact with the already fonned Cotofeni
culture, on the other. In the north it entirely displaced the bearers of the late
Baden culture, while in the east it entered into a symbiosis with Cotofeni; that
is why it is often referred to as Kostolac-Cotofe ni, when sites in the Djerdap
gorge, eastern Serbia and the Romanian Danube Basin are discussed. 196 Irs
relationship with sites in the west has not been sufficiently investigated. There

Middle Eneoli thic

65

were no direct contacts with the Eneoli thi c cultures of the Alpine zone, but an
analysis of the material shows that the Kostolac culture might ha ve been related
to the development of th e Re tz-Gajary cu ltu re . We should here quote the
opinion of Z. Mark ovi , who believes thur the ea rly Retz-Gajary culture
prece ded Kostolac in Slavo nia, whil e the later phase was contemporary with
It . 197 The situa tion is particularly signifi ca nt in northwest Croatia, where there
are no Baden or Kostola c sites at all, but Retz-C;ajary settle ments of thc Vinjica
and Hrn jevac types are e ncountered instead . It is norew()rth y that they all
belo ng to the so-called Furche nstich complex of the Alpine zone, and Furchenstich decoration is, as we ha ve shown, onc of the basic trai ts of the later phase
of the Kostolac culture . S. Dimitrij e vi is righ t in saying that Retz-Cajary and
rel ate d gro ups (Baj , W alrrahiihle-Jeviovice C- I, Mondsee , the Erdely type)
trace an arc which extends from the Alps vi a the north of th e Ca rpurhian Basin
to Transylvan ia , avoiding the area ofSlavo nia, Srem, north ern Bosn ia , Serbia,
and the Romani an and Serbian Danube BaSin, which belonged, in fact, to the
Kostolac culture. 198 lt is in this context that the relatio nship between the twO
cul tures , wh ich we beli eve to have been contemporaneo us, should be viewed.
Of course , the questi on is where the Furche nstich technique originated: within
Retz-Gajary or Kostol ac! S. Dimitrijevi and Z. Markovi fav Ll ur Rerz-Gajaf)',
which is acceptable since the technique only appears in the later stage of
Kostolac. 199 The technique was obviously widespread in Ccntral and parrly
Southeast Europe . S. Di mitrij evi may be ri ght in suggesting that ir ca me into
being somewhere in the eastern Alpine region , on the basis of the pricked band
(Sti chband) ornament 2OO lt the n spread rowards the east and so utheast, ro
the Kostolac culrural area . Thi s could be an expl ana tion of why Furchenstich
decoration does not appear in the ea rliest phase llI' the Kostolac culrurc and
why its frequency steadily decreases south of the Sava and Danube rivers
(Pivnice , Bubanj, Hi sar).
The Co tofeni culture
Eastern Serbi a has long been treated as a peripheral area of the
Corofe ni c ulture, wh ose traces are to be fo und there spo radically. ln recent
yea rs, excavations in th e Timok valley, southeastern Homoije and, most
especiall y, near the Dj erdap l and Djerdap II rese rvoirs, have shown that the
area was intensively occ upi ed by the bearers of thc Corofeni culture . ~ol Thinytwo sites ha ve been discovered and partly investigated; the material fo und there
is closely related to sites in neigh bouring Romania . Vi ewed througho ut its
exte nt, the Corofeni cul rure may be desc ri bed as a phenomenon typica l of the
sLluthern Carpathi ans and th e Danube Basin. Th e culture affec ted the area of
Tran sylvania, Marumures, th e uplands of Ban at, Oltenia, Muntenia, northwest
Bulgaria along the Dan ube (Magura , Vidin , Vraca), and northeast Serbia. P.
Roman , who srudied the c ulrure in great detail and whose monograph C ultura
Corofeni introduced it inro archaeological litera ture, registered over 300 sites

66

PI. 8

The Eneolithic cu ltures of Central and West Balkans

in southwest Romania, concen trated densell' ;)Iong the upper Mures, Olta and,
especially, the Danubion part of 0lte nia 202 T o his dota we shl)uld add the
considerable numbe r of sites in the Serbian Danube Basin and the T imok
valley. When the results of excavations in northwest Bulgaria m e publi shed wc
shall have a relatively accur;)tc picture of the territory encompassed by the
c ulture at the time uf its greotest expansion .
ln the Se rbi an Danube Basin and eastern Serbia, the Cotofeni culture
extended along the Danube almost w Golubac, and along th e Timok valley to
the confluenee of th e Crna IZcb with the Timok .2O; Ind ividual finds west of
C30lubac (e.g. Jabuka near Pan e vo) can be interpreted as no more than the
presence of some ele ments or influence of the Cotofeni culture on its western
neighbours. Of the thirty Eneolithic sites at Dj erdap I and II citeu by M. J evti,
twenty-two belong !-la rtl l' or e ntirely to the Curofeni culture 204 At some, only
Cowfeni pottery was found (Donje Buturke, Zbradila-Fund); elsewhere it was
mixed with Kosto lac ware (Vajuga-Pesak, Lepensb !-lorkapina) . A mixture of
these two cultures is typical of many sites in eastern Serbia and southwest
Romania. Important information f(.1f th e srudy of the Cotofeni culture is also
provided by two groups o(sites in eastern Serbia: in the Timok valley (GrabarSvraar near Smedovac, Cetae near Kovilovo, and Kapu Djaluluj near Veljkovo), and in the area between Bor and Majdanpek, wh e re sites with Cotofeni
ware have been registered nea r Kri veij, Zlotska !-leina, tubik, Crnajka, and
Kloko evac. 2 os Must uf thc sircs have been more or less excavated; in addition
to ponery rhey have yidued infnrmariun on settlements ami buildings, Jnd on
the stratigraphic !-losition l,fCorofe ni in its rela tion to the Eneolirhic culrures
of rhe region.
The Corofeni c ulture shuws no preference.s in the choice ofsettle ment
sires. The settlements arc II various kinds: a) <lpen luwland sertlements
characterisric of isles in the Danube (Ostrovul Curbului), rhe Olte nian Plain
and the area along the Danube (Zbradila, Vajuga) ; b) settlements on cievared
ground by rivers or srreams (Krivelj, Kovilovo, Smeuovac); c) settlements at
almost inaccessible s!-l0ts or steep hi!lsides, where ho uses were builr on an
artificial escarpment or close to the rocks (K lokoevac, C rnajka); ca ve sites,
such as Zlotska pe in a in our pmtsor Horilor, Pestera cu apa, Romanesti, Cheile
T urzii, and orhers in Romania . Most of the sites in easrem Se rbia and the
Serbian Danube Basin were herdsmen's temporary dwelling-places; habiwrioI1S
are, for the mosr part, badly preserved, and the Corofeni cultural layer is thin
and shows no signs of prolonged habirarion in the same !-llace.
Though only temporary, the settlements are usually rich in ceramic
material. Vessel shapes fit in with a broader complex of Eneoli thic c ultures of
rhe Carpathian-Danubi an- Balbn zone. 111ey are related tO Bole raz-Ce rnavoda III and Baden backgrounds, and similar (o Kosrolac. Th e mosr frequent
PI. 8 .. Pottery shapes of the Cotofeni cultu re
from si tes in eas tern Serbia

L9

68

PL XXIV

PL XXV. 8
Fig. 24/2. 4
Fig. 50/4

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balka ns

shapes are those of various bowls (conical, biconica l), cups with ribbon
handles, deep pots, sauceboat shapes, etc. The ornament a tion, however is qui te
specific, and it is the most characteristic trait of the Cotofeni style . Incision is
the most frequent technique, as well as prick s, cuts, and plastic bands. Pcculiar
to the culture are the \jentiform (Linsen) appliques, usua lly combined with
incised motifs. Other techniques and motifs were also used (Furche nstich ,
crescent- shaped c uts or stamped motifs combined intO a chequered pattern),
bU( we are inclined to treat them as a phcnomeno n alien to Cotofeni: mos t of
them have been taken ITom Kostolac, while some decora tive elements (plastiC
bands, channeIling) originated with Cernavoda IJJ or Baden. Corded ware is
usually taken to be of steppe origin WO On the whole, the Corufeni style of
decoration developed under the influence of other styles: ITom th e inh elited
tradition s of Boleraz-Cernavoda III , through Baden and KostOlac stylcs, to
influences fro m the steppes of south Russia.
111e question of the strcltigraphic position of the Cotofeni culture, it.1 origin
and developmem seems tO have been more or less satisfactorily resolved, thanks
to the fact that its place at stratified sites has been identified and to analyses
of its potte ry and its rela ti ons with other contemporary cultures. Cocofeni ware
is found at sites in eastern Se rbia above the Bubanj-Salcura-Krivodol layer
(Zimska pe in a, Krivelj, Kovilovo, etc ). P. Roman belie ves there wa s a hia tus
between the two cultures in Romania, presumably co be filled by the incursions
of Cernavoda III ,z07 It foll ows that the Cotofeni culture spread towards the
south and southwest after it had been stabilized, i.e. in phase II according to
its ternary division. This seems an acceptable vi ew, all the more so as nu
material belonging to phase l uf Cmofeni has been found at sites in th e Serbian
Danube Basin and eastern Serbia. 111e earliest settlements in the region could
be those at Donje Bmorke or Zbradila, where there is a comp le tc abscnce of
Furchenstich decoration. Serbian sites would bel ong to phases II and III of the
Cotofeni culture ; sites where Furchenstich decoration is prominent, or even
predominant (Klokoevac, Cmajka) would thus belong to the final phase.lOS
In view of the symbiosis of the two techniques of ornament3tion and styics at
a single site we are inclined to describe this phase as the Kostol ac-Cotofeni
culture.
111e question of the ori gin of the Cocofeni cu lture should be viewed
within the ITamework of the emergence and expan sion of Boleraz-Cernavoda
III and, for a somewhat later peri od, of Baden, as well. NumerolIS elements of
Cotofeni pottery, especially as fou nd at Romani an sites, derive from the styl e
of Cernavoda III: the use of plastic bands, a rather coa rse version of the
herringbone motif, and broad channel ling. 111is kind of poctery ITom Romanian
sites (Petresti, Brateiu-Niiparie , the ea rlier layers of Locusterri) 209 is dated by
P. Roman to phase I of the Corofe ni culture. This pha se is also characteri zed
by the compl ete absence of Furchenstich decorati on and of the motif of cuts
organized into chequer patterns in Kostolac manner (Herculana-PestcraHotilor, Girbova de Sus) 210 The presence of Boleraz-Cernavl)Ja lli elements

Middle Eneoli thic

69

in the early ph ase of Cotofeni does not indicate, however, a direct e voluti on,
The Cotofeni culture probably ca me in to being as a res ult of the very same
process which gave ri se to Baden in the Pann onian Plain , Only their
autochthon ous bases were different: in the case of Baden, the line followed was
Balaton-Boleraz-Baden, while the basis of Corofeni was a combination of
Cemavoda III and Salcuta,
In the conte xt of the other contemporaneous phenomena in the
Ca rpathian-Danubian-Balkan region, the relative chronology of the Corofeni
culture would bc as follows: phase I of P, Roman's coincides with the emergence
of th e Baden culture in the Panno ni an Pl ain (in the Serbian Danube Basin at
the time, Boleraz-Cernavoda III settlements were still in existence here and
there: Vajuga nea r Korbovo, Brza Vrba near Kovin); Corofeni II would be
parall el with the further development of Baden (classical phase) and the
appearance of Kosrolac elements; Corofeni III was co ntemporaneous with the
mature Kostolac culture and the first Vue dol serrlements in Srem and SlavoniaJ ll lt is hard to say what exactly happened in the Serbian Danube Basin
and eastern Serbia after the Cotofeni culture, The next settle ments there
belong to the Verbicioara and Varin cultures, bur this does no t exclude the
possi bility of a temporal hia tus between the twO cultures,
The Retz-Gaj ary horizon

While Boleraz-Cern avoda III, Baden, and Kostolac were developing

in southern Pann onia and the central Balkans, the west of the Balkan Peninsula, especially the south ern Alps and northwest Croatia, developed along
entirely different lines, As noted above, the La sinja culture lasted for quite a
long tinte , throughout the Early En eolithic and th e beginning of the Middle
Eneolithic. It was succeeded', over an extensive terri tory (northern and eastem
Slo venia, the region wes t of Krndija and Dilj in Croatia) by the Retz-Gajary
c ulture with its varieti es Kevdcrc-Hmj evac and Vinjica, In addition to
Slovenia and western Croatia , the culture also enco mpassed the eastern pans
of Austria, so uthwest Slo vakia, and Erdely in Romania, tracing, in the words
of S, D i mitrij e vi , an arc above the Carpathian Basin (the Pannonian Plain) 2 12
Th e sites in Croatia and Slo venia belong to the southernmost, western ann of
this huge arc which spanned the regions of the Baden and Kostolac cultures in
the Pannonian Plain, This can be explained by a fac t which many authors have
no ted, namely that the bea rers of Retz-Gajary were hillmen, stock-breeders
who held to the lower parts of the Carpathians, Alps, and their branches,2JJ
To use more up-to-datc terminology, it was a kind of transhumance with
season al migrati ons from mo untains to lowlands and back as well as larger-scale
movements, depending on climatic conditio ns, This is why Eneolithic sites with
very similar po ttery are found o ver a va st area stretching from Slo venia and
Austria to Slo vakia and Erdely, Bearing in mind chronological fa ctors as well,
S, Dimitrij evi has distinguished between eight regiona l types: the Kevderc-

70

- --- --- -

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

- ~-~-

Hmjevac ,md Vinjica types in Sl ovenia and Cruatia; Retz and Waltrah0hle]eviovice Cl in Austria and Moravia; Mondsee in lIpper Austria; Gaj ary- Baj
in Slovakia; Retz-Cajary in the upper T isw valley, and the Erdely or Tran sylvanian type in Rom ania Zi4 Po ttery is the most characwrist ic tearure of the
material t,)und owr thi s extensive area (cups with rib blln handles, bowls, and
deep pots), The decoratio n was by Furchenstich, rustica ting, ca rving, rough en ing, and impression before tiring in o rder tD prepare the surface f,x the
application l1f white encrusted paine.
Comparativeil' tew Rerz-Cajary sites have been discovered in northwest Croatia and Slovenia , S, Dimitrijevi listed seven, to whi ch Z, M arkov i
has added another f(lur, Sl) that we can COUnt with eleven sites at present 2l 5
Charac terist ica lly, they are all cave settlements located at higher altitudes:
Kevderc and Ljubika jama at 810 m, [,redjama nea r Posteljna at 41 0 m, Velika
peina at 428, and M akuva peina near Vindija at no more th an 275 m, The
other sites are situated either in the hilly area llf Hrvatskll zagorje or they bdong
to the hillfo rt type (Hmjevac, at 405 m), l1)e ropogra phy of Retz-Gajary sites
in Croatia and Slo venia has conn nncd the presumption tha t their inhabitants
were srock-breeders, shmvi ng also thc importance of hunting in their economy,
111e analysis of ostenlogi c material from Velika pe ina nea r Vinj ica has
de monstrated the presence in the cultural layer " fbo th do mcsticated animals
and big game, such as deer, wild buar, wild buvi nes, or small, such as fl)X2l6
11,e positi on of the caves at Kevderc, Ljubika jama, and even Predjama, alsn
suggests that they could have been high-altitude hunting stations too , Cave
settlements werc found beYlll1d this area as well (Waltrahtihlc, Austria) although, according tl> data trom other regions, including Austria itself, pitdwelling settleme nts on loess de va tions (Ret' in Austria, Baj- Vlaka novo in
Slovakia, Pecsbagota-Cseralya in west Hungary, etc.) and pile-settlements (in
the Mundsee and Altersee regions of Austria) were more frequent.
On the basis of typological features, of pottery in the fi rst place, S,
has distingui shed between twO different types of this culture in
fa mler Yugoslavia; in our view, they mayaiso be ofch runological imporrance 21 7
11,e first is the Vi1ljica t)'pe, found near the epon ymous settlement, at Vindija
and Predjama , and at localities in Hrvatsko zagorje listed by Z, Markovi, ! lS
This type is cha ra cte ri zed by cuarse ware (rounded vessels , often with a very
narrow neck, big-belli ed pots, globular receptacl es, ete.), sometimes with a
Iightly barbotin ed surface or with a plastic band bearing finger impressions,
Finer ware includes small bowls, c ups with han dles above the neck , decper
conical vessels, small er terrines, ete. Fine ware is decorated with gmoved
incisions (a kind of Furchenstich) or th e ground is prepared for the laying on
of white encrusted paint , The motifs are arranged in zones, as in other
Eneolithic cultures (Kostolac, Vuedol, Bell Beaker, etc ,), Globular vessels,
closed receptacles, and carved decoration are typical of stock- tearing cult ures
whose bea rers dwelt in hill I' and mo untaino us regions (pmper woodcarving) ,
Dimitrijevi

PI. XXXVII. 2~ 10

PI. XXXVII. I, 10

Middle Eneolithic

71

The Kevderc- Hrnjevac type has been named after a si te in Slovenia

(Kevderc) and another in Slavonia (Hmj evae), the culture's easternmost site.
At first, Kevderc-Hrnjevac pottery was trea ted as late Lasinja or Balaton III.
111is has subsequently been rectified by S. Di m itrijevi, who described it as a
type of Retz_Gaj ary 2 19 In addition to the two eponymous si tes the type would
include, though this is to be treated with some reserve, some po n ery finds from
Predjama and two caves near Krko (Ajdovska jama and Jermanova jama).
These sites have produced comparatively modest remains of material culture:
ponery, stone and bone material. T he fin e pottery consists of amphorae of
various types, cups with a handie above the rim, and small er one-handled pots.
There is considerable difference in shape and ornamentarion in compari son
wi th Vinj ica-type pottery . Kevderc-Hrnjevac ware is more open (slightly
biconical bowls). TIle Furchenstich technique is not used at all; instead,
decoration is exclusively incised and carved (excision of squa re or triangular
sl-lapes), combined with the use of white en crusted paint. The difference
between the two types of pottery is of some chronological imponance : KevdercHmjevac is closer to the autochthonous Bala ton -La sinja base, unlike Vinjica,
which fostered a specific kind of Furchenstich, series of pricks, and excision.
It follows that in the Eneolithic devel opment of the Alpine region and
northwest Croatia Kevderc-Hrnjevac was earlier th an Vinjica. The Retz-Gajary culture is thus seen as a phenomenon of considerable duration, which
covered the period of the Middl e and early Late Eneolithic in these pans. There
have been several attempts to resolve the problem of its relative dating. Some
have dated it fairly early, as contemporary with H unyadi -Vajska and Salcuta
IV (Z .Markovi) or as the third phase of Balaton -Lasinja (1\ . Kahcz, F.
Leben) ,220 while others believe d that it had run para llel with Vue dol and
traced its development all the way to the Early Brome Age (S . Dimitrijevi
and, earlier, Z. Markovi) . 221 If we take into considerati on the enti re area of
the Retz-Gajary culture and the emergence of thc Furchenstich technique as
a new decorative fashi on in a number of Eneohthic cultures of Central and
Southeast Europe, we might resolve the problem of relati ve dating as follows:
the early phase of the culture, represented by the Kevderc-Hmjevac type,
appeared in western Croatia and continental Slovenia after the Lasinja culture
(Balaton-Lasinja I-II). At the same time, early Baden was emerging in Slavonia
and Srem in the east, but it spread no further west th an Stari Mikanovci and
Donja Bebrina, as demonstra te d above. The second ph ase , that of the Vinjica
type, chronologically succeeJed the Kevderc-Hrnj evac settlements and be longed to the period of the formation of early Kostolac settlements in Srem,
Slavonia, and northem Bosnia. It is possible that the Furchenstich decoration,
a new fashion typical of more than one Eneolithic culture, found its way to the
Kostolac and Cotofe ni cultures from the Retz-Gajary compl ex.

Fig. 22/ 1

PI. XXXVIII. 1-6

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

72

The Pit-grave culture and the tumuli

Map 2

In th e Middle and bte Eneuli thic a considerable numbe r of tum uli

appear in th e Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian Danube Basin. T hey have been
mechanically linked with th e "steppe culrures", "steppe influenc es", "Pit-grave
culture", "oehre graves \ 'T I ndo~Europeans" , Obviously, the ir cultura l and
l

Fig. 42

PI. XIII. 6

Fig.34

chronological determi nation is a highly cunrrove rsial issue. O ne of th e firsr

questiuns to be answe red is whether a ll En eol ithic barrows sh uuld be seen as
belonging to the steppe cultures, i.e. wh ethe r they all bdong tl> the Pit-grave
culture or the culture Gf the oc hre graves. Clea rly nut, for somc tumuli in the
Yugoslav Danube Basin and rhe lowe r T isza valley precede d the Pit-grave
culture . Aradjanska humka, smaller barrows within the Boleraz-Cem a vuda III
culture, tumuli wi th Cutufeni ma te ria l in Roma nia, Baden tum uli in Slo vakia,
e tc., are all earlie r than mOLlI1ds such as Jabuka near P ane vo or Vujluvica ,
which are cl early anriburable, hoth c ulturally and c hrunul ugica lly, tu thc
Pi t-grave culture. Barrows and c rouched buri als with the use of uchre staining
could be connected with early in tluences thar had reached th e Carpathian
Basin and the Yugoslav Danube Basin e Yen be fure the ethnic migration of the
bearers of the Pit-grave culture .
The systematic study ,)f rl", tllmuli in Yugoslavia is of a relatively
recent date. Tllis kind of find was first menti une J by F. Mill eker, along with
individual itcms of minur importance (Srpski Krstur) ,222 but only the cxcavati ons at Batajnica (1959), Vojlovica ( 1965 ), those nea r Kikinda, Pe rlez,
Panevu, anJ afOund Kragujevac marked the beginning of systematic work.'2!
T o this we should add the exte nsive registration and mapping of barrows in
Vujvudina carried out in the past ten years as part of a project of the Serbian
Academy of Sciences and Arts. 'X/e now have information abollt nearly 600
mounds registere d in Voj vudina (Banat ca. 360, Sre m 130, Baka 50) ,
umadij a, and the lower Morava valley, whic h all might belong to the Eneolithic periud. The Banat tullluli are usually ofcunsiderable size, with adiametre
of 30 tO 70 m, and a height of up to 4 Ill, rarely more. (Aradjanska h umka: J.
50 m, H. 3 m; Padcj: d . 60 m, H. 4.5 m; VojIoviea: J. 35 Ill, H. 1.5 ill; Pe rlcz:
d . 30-40 m, H. 0.80-3.00 m; Vlajkovac: d . 40 m, H. 3.5 m, etc.) In Srem and
central Serbia, the barrows are somewhat smaller, with adiametre Gf lOto 20
m an d a height of l - 2 m. The exceptions to this are Vu e dol tumuli near
Batajnic a and Vojka, which were slighrly bigge r (d. 35 m, H. 2 m). Tho ugh a
numbe r of tumuli have been registcred, archaeological research has been
carried o ut at onl y fifteen, including the Dnes e xcav3te d by F. Milleke r early in
this century and, a lit tle later, L. Nadlaki . 224 Our knowledge o f this complex
problem is therefore rather modest. In orde r to a rrive at more accurate
concl usions we shall have to use data ti-om neighbouring regions , especia lly
Romania, Hungary, and nort hem Bulgaria, where a considerabl e n umbe r of
tumuli h a ve bee n investigate d in a past few years. l l l

Middle Eneolithic

73

Ifwe leave o ut the above-menti oned tum uli near Mo krin (Arndjanska
humka), Batajnica, Voj ka anJ Srpski Krstur, as well as some unreliabl e data
about Perlez anJ Skorenovac, it is lm the basis of bu rial custllms that the others
may be classifieJ in to the same cul tural anJ, it sccms, ch ronologica l horizon,
whi ch cou ld be linked to the ph enomena of the Pit-grave culture . TI,e ba rrows
in question are those near PDnevo (Voj lovica and Jabu ka) , Vrac (Uljma,
Vl aj kovac, Vatin) , Perlez (Batka), and KikinJa (Padej) . They are charac terizeJ
by the presence of cro uched burials within a rectangular grave covered by a
barrow. A wooden structure, especially prominenr at Vojlovica, the use of ochre
staining, and rare bu t ch aracteristic grave goods (the sil ver hai r orna menr from
Voj lo vica o r the gold locks-ring from Vrac and Vlajkovac) are other features
linkin g these tum uli with thc steppt:s of southern Russia. TI,e best-Joc um enteJ
is the Vojlo vica grave , where the burial chamber wa s su nno unted by a wooden
structure, a lid set on pillars. The body was laid on a mat and spri nkled wi th
ochrc. On the basi s of the burial ri te and the silver lock-rings, B. J o vanovi
decided th at the grave belonged tu the steppe Pit -grave culture.m TI, e grave
no. 6 from Paia humka (barrow) near Perlez is important in this context; its
"buri al chamber" contained a cro uched burial on a wooden plank Z27
The tumuli discovered south of the Danube , nea r Kraguj evac anJ
Kostolac , are not typical of the Pi t-grave culture, altho ugh there sho uld be no
doubt abo ut their stcppe nature 22S TI,e barrow nea r Rogujevac (d. 13 .5 m,
H. 1.50 m) containeJ at its centre two graves built of stone slabs (two burial
chambers). The body was buric d in a crouched position. The burial ri te haJ
included animal sacrifices (remains of the charred bones of J og, steer, horse,
deer, and wild boar). The tumul contained no "pit graves", but the presence o rochre might be connec ted with customs encountered in the Danube Basin,
Transylvania, and as far as th e ste ppes of so uthern kussia. r ur lack of sufticic:nt
elements the barrows at Bare near Kragujevac and several newl y-exca \-atc:J
tumuli near Kostolac cannot be ascribeJ to th e Pit -grave cultu re. Specific ri.)nl1S
of burial (a scorched platform at Bare, a stone cornice, etc .) and gold grave
goods from tumul I ha ve analogues in other regi ons, incl uding the A egean anJ
Anatolia (Troy and T epe Hi ssar) 129 Care is therefore necessary in attempting
a cul tural attribution of these fi nds, all the more so as analogues with the
Cotofeni culture, which wa s also familiar with inhumation buri als under
barrows (Cheile Aiudului) are not to be ruled out either.2JO
The dating of Pit-grave culture burials in the Yugoslav Danube Basin
is based on some stratigraphi c evide nce and a C-1 4 Jate . The appea rance of
ba rrows whose depOSi t contains Baden, Kostolac, or Corofeni pot tery is a
terminus post quem for the Pit-grave cul ture al sites in Romania , Hunga ry, and
Serbia. Th e tumul us near Perlc z was built uf earth containi ng shards of vessels
fro m the classical phase of BaJen. The sa me is true of the PaJej mou nd, while
the Bare tumulus was co ve red with earth conrainit'g Co rofe ni pottery
shards .231 The same phenomenon has bee n noteJ at several si tes in Roman ia.
TI,e stratigraphy of Jabuka near Pan evo proviJes much mure accurate data.

Fig_ 34
Fig_42

Fl g

3~

74

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balka ns

The tumul was erected over a stratified prehismric settl ement with Baden and
Kostolac pottcry. Lj. Buk vi 's doc umentation from this site is perfectly clea r: a
Pit-gra ve cu lture grave was dug into earlier layers and and thus di sturbed the
footings of a Kostolac house 2 l2 This ca n be taken as a more accurate tenni)lus
post quem for the Pit-grave culturc in thc Yugoslav Danube Basin.
Finally, C-1 4 dating ha s also been instrumental in providing an
acc urate date for these graves. An analysis of the remains of the wooden lid
from Padej by the Berlin La boratory has yielded the following result: Bln -2219
- 432050 B.P. (237050 B.C). 2JJ The laboratory's clata for some Pit-grave
culture burials from Ketegyh:'iza arc almos t identical: gra ve no. 4 from tumulus
3: 231580 2l4 When we know that the mature phase of the Pit -grave culture
between th e Dnieper and Dnies ter is dated to between 2500 and 1900 B.c.,m
it is clear that the Berlin data are in absolute accordance with the situation as
it was when the bearers of the Pit -grave culture or, shall we say, the Indo- European wave, arrived. The tumuli subsequently appearing in the Yugoslav and
Romanian Danube Basin as part of the Vuedol c ulture (Batajnica, Vojka,
Moldova Veche) belong to a somewhat later peri od, that of the te rmin al
Pit-gra ve culture, and may have been somehow (ochre-painted vessels) related
to ir.

LATE ENEOLITHIC
(The Vuedol cultural complex)

Thanks to its anractive po n ery, the Vuedo l culture was among the
fi rst pre historic cultures registered by archaeological scie nce. Incidentally , it is
with the excavation, towards the end "f th e 19-th century, of Vu edo l sites,
mostly on the territory of the ex-Austro-Hungarian Monarch y, that the work
on pre historic archaeology has begun. T hc firsr sire to be inves tigated were the
pile-dwellings in Ljubljansko Barje, which K. Deschmann started excavat ing
in l875 2 J6 ll, ough interr upted fi-om time to ti me, thi s w" rk has continued to
the present day. In anoth er area, at Debelo Brdu near Sarajevo, F. h ala began
his own work in 1896.1l7 ll, eir findings were soon described in the first
publications devoted to prehistory. Besides Oeschm an n's reports on hi s Barje
work, these findings , in the first place incrusted pottery, were also the subj ect
of writings by M. Hoem es (1898) and, in a now classical work The [,,[aid Pot tery
of the Stom and Bronze Ages (1904), by M. W osin sky2J8 In th e first phase of
resea rch, Vue do l sites were also excava ted by J. Brunschmidt, wh ose exceptionally ramified activity covered sites in Srem and Slavonia too, most notably
Vuedol , where he started exca vating in 1897 2J9 ll,e second phase of research
comprises the inrerwar years, when research was largely concentrated on
already excavated sites (Ljubljansko Barj e, Vue do l, Sa rva). ll,e mate ri al
ITom these , and from Z6k in the Hungarian part of Baranja (Dj. Kara pandi
in 1919 and 1920), was publis hed by Yugoslav and foreign archaell logists (N.
Vu li , M. Cr bi , V. Hoff1l1 er, R. Loar, R.R. Schmidt, etc .) .24 T hc third phase
started as soon as W orl d W ar II was over: at Hr usrovaa (1947) and Zeco vi
(195 4) , at Ptujski grad (1946) and (~ o mo lava (1 953 ); o ur picture of the culture
was further added to by the in vestigation of si tes near Vinkovci, Belegi, Rudina
I, or the ones in central Serbia Oasik and Djurdjevo) 241 Excavation was
accompanied by publication of excavation reports, articles and studies (A.

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

76

Benac, J. and P. Koroec, M. C,araanin, S. Dimitrij evi, N. Tasi , A. Durman,

etc.). In Volume III of Tite Prehistory of Yugoslavia ( 1979) S. Dimitrij evi
provided a maj or syntheti c acco unt of the Vuedol culture .
The term "V ucdo l cultural complex" is here used in order to underline the cultural and styli stic unity of a broau area fi-om Central Europe in d,e
north (Slovakia, Austria) via the Alpine zone (Lj ubljansku Barje) , Srem and
Slavonia, to central Serbia (Sumadija), Bosnia, anu the Auriatic coast. 11,is
unity is reflecteu in the shapes anu mnamentation of pottery rather than in the
economy, way of life (ch oice of settlement locations), and burial customs
(inhun13tion, incin eration, tum uli , etc .). In the central anu weste rn Balkans
we can distinguish between three regional varieties of Vu e uo l: Srcm anu
Slavonia, with sites in Bos nia and central Serbia gravitating towards them;
Ljublj ansko Barj e anu the Alpine zone at large (with sites in Austri a); thc
insufficiendy ho mogeneous, or rather, insufficientiy investigated, Adriatic
zone. 11,e differences in their material culture could be a res ult of differences
in cultural-historical, or geo-climatic conditions, o r of chronological differences
which are not tO be ruled out over such a large expan se. Outsi ue this arca,
cultures belonging to the Vuedol complex anu thei r varie ties arc to be I<Jund
in southeast Romania (the tum uli near Moldova Veche), southern Hungary,
especially Baran ja (whi ch may be trea ted as an integral part of the Srem-Slavonia region), north ern Hungary, Slovakia, and between the Danube and the
Tisza, where specific groups emerge, such as Mako, Kosihy, Nyirsg and even,
in a cenain way, aka; they are all described hy S. Dimitrij e vi as special types
within "th e late phase - that of the regional division of the Vu edo l culture,
the C stage" or, as we have defined them, "peripheral cultures produced by the
disintegration of the Vu e d ol complex".242 11,e region of Srem and Slavonia
is hete central, not o nly geographically but also as the primary nucleus where
the Vuedol style was formed and from which it subsequently spread to other
areas.

The

Vu edol

culture

11,e term "Vue uol culture" refers to the regional phenomenon within
the Vuedol complex which has all the characteristic traits of the Vueuol style
in pottery and the main features of Vuedol settlements, in oth er words the
phase which archaeological literature calls classical or true Vuedol culture. It
c.omprises the central area of the Vuedol compl ex, th;: terri t.ory of Baranja
(south of Lake Balaton), Srem, and Slavonia, including northwest Croatia,
central Serbia, and Bosnia south of the Sava. A number of sites have been
registered and panly investigareu in the area. Their concentratio n is especia lly
high between the Sava, Drava, and Danube rivers: fi-om the Hungarian part of
Baranja (Za k, Dunaszekcsii-V arhegyrbl, Szava, etc.) and the stratified sites on
the left bank of the Danube (Sarva, Vuedol, Belegi) tO those in the Sava
valley and the lowlands of Slavonia (Gomolava, severalloca li ti es near Vink-

Late Eneolithic

77

ovci, Mari gradina in Mikl euka near Kutina, and sites in the Bj elovar and
Koprivni ca areas),
The position of tl", scttlC11lCnL\ indicates that their inh abitants preferred
commanding sites, They built their dwellings on elevated gro und by the banks
of rivers or in their hinterland, The settlements were additionall y fortified by
ditches or palisades , Characteristic are the man y settlements on the high loess
bank of the Danube be tween Zemun and the contluence of the Drava and
Danube rivers, whi ch always have a deep ditch or mher fonns of artificial
fortificati on , Simil ar settlements were built em the slopes ot Mt. Fruka Gma,
especially the north side, which slopes down to the Danube (t'etin, Sot, Vizi)
and the sO llth, where the hilly terrain mee ts the lowlands otSrem (Peine near
Vrdnik , Gradac in Bapska , in a way even (lomolava near Hnkovci) , 1l1e best
examples of Vlledol fortifi ed se ttlements are (;radac in Vuedol, anine in
Belegi, or Prisonj aa in Vodjinci near Vinkovci, 1l1e present-da y toponyms
I1Gmdac", !lCrad't, tranine", or, in Hunga ry, HVaraJU, "Varhegy!l, best iJlusrrare
thc hil1fo n nature of th e Vuedo l settlements, Thanks to the fact that it has
been investigated in its entirety, the Vue dol Gradac is tO be taken as the
paradigm of V ue dol fo rtifi ed settlements, 1l1e deep di tch that ran ro und the
high loe ss plateau separated Uradac ITom other se trlem e nt~ in the immedia te
vicinity and made it a fairly safe place for th ose ti mes, A t Sa nin e in Belegi,
elements offonifica ti on we re strengthened: the pla tea u was surrounded by twO
ditches with a wooden pali sade between them,
In Bosnia and central Serbia another type of settl ement is widespread,
but it also features the elements so important fo r Vuedo l settlements - safety
and security, The position of the hillfon vi llages in umadija (Djurdjevo, Jasik
near Kragujevac)24l is simi lar to that of the Fruka Gora sett lements (Pe in e
near Vrdnik) and the Vue dol settlements in Bosnia (Zecovi, Debelo Brdo) ,244
An exception to the rule is the only cave settlement, H rusrovaa in western
Bosnia; nevertheless, it toO belongs to the type of safe set tl ement favo ured by
the Vuedol culture,245
Excavati on has shown th at there was a busy buil ding activity at
Vue dol sites, On e of its aspects was the erection of fortifIcation s, another
concerned the construc tion of dwellings, and even sacred structures, Gelud
so urces of information on this aspect of the culture are Gradac in Vuedo l ,
Trn ica in Vinkovci and, to a lesser extent, anine in Belegi and Rudine nea r
Koprivni ca , On the levelled surface of Gradac there was a "megaron"-shaped
ho use of some size (15.40 x 9,50 m) which belonged to the early phase of the
Vue dol se ttlement, Because of the five "smel ting" furnaces (three in th e ho use
and two just outside), R. Schmidt desc ribed the building as the "copper-smelters' megaron" ("Megaron des Kupfergiessers") 2 46 A later Vuedol building at
the same spot , and of roughly the same size, conta ined a potter's kiln , Gradac,
however, is not a typical V ue dol settlement, It was built for a special purpose,
possibly as a seat for dignitari es or, in Schmidt's upinion, a place where copper
was smelted and processed, Much more infonn ation is provided by a site nea r

78

PL 9

PI. 9 - The

Vuedol

culture grave

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-'T.he Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Ba lkans

Vi nkovci (Trnica-Hotel) where severnI medium- and large-sized rec tangu lar
ho uses (between 14 and 16 m in length) have been discovered in an men of
2,000 squnre metres. As a rule they contain n horseshoe- or oval-shaped hearth;
in one of thc houses there was also a sacrificial structure in the shape ofhorns
of consecration, a symbol often encountered in the Vuedul culture 241 The
settlement was not o rgnnized; buildings were erected without a defini te plan
or orientation. Characteristic are the renovation of buildings, the levelling of
the ground in preparation il,r furt her construction work, all ofwhich indicates
n lengthy stay by a consi derable pupulation in a single place, unduubtedly
conditioned by its economy tou . Most Vu edol settlemcnts in Srem and
Slavuni a are characterized by thc existence of several building phases. Ths is
especially truc of sites on the high loess bank (Sarva , Lovas, Erdut, etc.).
Necro/Jolises in the classical sense are not known to the Vue dol
culture. Individual buri al; have been discovered within settlements, besidc
houses or under their fuut ings .Burial was by inhumation, in a crouched position
and in pits of various shapes. Characteristic is the do uble grave in front of a
later "mega ron" house in Vuedol, with the L- shaped buria l chamber resembling the catacomb graves of steppe origin. The large number of grave goods
fuund there (2 I whole vessels, 30 fragmented ones, and 800 pmsherds) mea ns
that the grave was a special one ; R. Schmidt called it "the Cllupl e's romb"; while
S. Dimitrij evi interpreted it as a "pmto-princely grave" 24S Individual burials
with Llf with Llut grave gOLlds have been found elsewhere roo, for instance 011
the plateau ofStreim's Vinograd (Vineyard), where a Vue d o l pit has yielded
8 skeletons. S. Dlmi t rij ev i alSl) mentions a small group romb in Vinko vci,
contalning three skeleron graves H9
ln the easte rn parts of the Vuedol cultural area, burial under barrows
was also practiced, probably under the influence Llf the steppe peLlples' inc ursion s into th e Carpathian Basin and the Yugoslav Danube Basin. Two barrows

Late Eneol ithic

79

containing a central cremati on buri al (an um and grave goods) ha ve been

exca vated at Batajnica and Vojka 2SO A similar phenomeno n has been registered at Moldo va Veche in Romani a, where two tu muli holding Vue dol um s
have been excavated in the inunedi ate vici nit y ot a settlement containing twO
Vu e dol horizons. It is characteristi c, as P. Roman nores, that the urns and
grave goods from these rumu li belong to a later V uedol stratum and the Ilnal
phase of the cu lrure 25 1 Thi s is an important element in the da ting of Vuedo l
tumuli near Bataj nica an d Vojka, whose material typologi ca lly co rresponds to
finds from the later stratum of the settlement an d tumuli at Moldo va Veche.
Animal burials in the Vue dol cul tu re are tu he underStlXld as th e
mani fes tation of a phenome non which was fairly widespread in the Carpa th ian
Basin during the Encolithi c, most partic ularl y in the [laden culture. 111is kind
of fin d has already been discussed. W e sho uld o nly add another grave com ain ing an excellc ndy preserved dee r skeleton, located in front of th e Megaron Il
ho use at the Gradac site in Vu edol. ln the life and bel iefs of th e inh abitan ts
of thi s se triement , the dee r o bvio usly had an important place as a major q uarry,
found in abun dance in thi s marshy lowland area, which explains its prominent
role in the cul t. Another fi nd should be mentioned in thi s conn exion, a
terra-cotta figurine from Vu edol re preseming the hea d and neck of a dee r
bearing a con ica I vessel on its 11ea d.

The scracigraphic posicioJl of the V ue dol c ul ture within the development of the prehistoric comm unities of Srem and Slavnnia is well-known ,
chi ef1y owing to the systematic excavations at V ue dol, Sarva, Clomolava, an d
Vis near Derve nta. Their res ults have been entered in archaeological literature
on the basis of acc urate data provi ded by R. R. Schmi d t and the comment aries
ofS . D imitr ij e vi and N . Tasi . m Mo re recent findin gs ha ve added details tO
the pict ure , wi tho ut, however, changing it essentiall y. At the Trnica site in
Vink o vci a relationship ha s been establi shed between the late Vue dol culture
(B-2 stage) and early Vinkovci, containi ng element s of the final phase of
Vuedol (V u e do l C) , wh ich po ints tO the existence of a transitio nal period
between the two c ultures 2 5J On the o ther hand , some data (Vi s near Derve nta, Gomolava, Peine near Vrdni k) in dicate th at there is stra tigraphic,
chronological, and c ultural continuity between the Kostolac and ea rl y V u e dol
(Vue do l A) c ultlIres. Also important are P. Roman's rema rks on the Vuedo l
site at Mol dova Veche , wh ere he disti nguished betwee n twO Vu e do l hori zons:
level l, where Vuedol po ttery is mixed wi th Kostolac, and level Il , containing
excl usively Vuedo l carved pottery. Th e latte r is contemporaneo us with the
barrows in the immediate vici nity, which belong tO the fina l phase of the
Vue dol culture 254 With these addi tional data, wh ich are more reie vant tO
the internal periodizati on of the culture, it is possible to place it acc urately in
relation to the cultures that preceded and succeeded iL lt has been es tabli shed ,
stratigraphica lly, geneti cally, and culturall y, th at the de ve lopment of th e
Vue dol culture immedia tely fo llowed that of Kostolac, and that the two may
ha ve been contemporaneous for a tiIlle, as S. Dim i t ri j l' v i belie ves 2 iS A simila r

Fl g.

13;

Fig. 46

48: 49

80

PI. 10

PI. XXVI. 1-5

PI. XXVI. 7

The Eneolithic cultu res of Central and West Balkans

conclusion can be drawn rega rding its end: Vue d o l elements appear in the
Vinkovci culture (e.g., Rudin e I). In some isoloted regions, especially south of
the Sava, in Bosnia and Serbia, the Vuedol culture may have been partly
contemporan eo us with the emergence of the new Early Brome Age c ultures.
TI,is, however, is another problem, that of the genesis, duration , and pe riodi zation .of the Vuedol culture and Early Brome Age cultures , a problem we
shall tum to later.
Th" material culture of Vuedol sites is rich and vari ed. As has often
been noted, the style is best exemplified in pottery, richly decorated usin g
various techniques . T ec hnologically and artistically it is among tne most
advanced prehistoric cultures of the region, as evidenced by the 4uality of
modelling, fabric, and omamentation. TI, e tables of pottery types and the
illustrations provide an insight into the richness and variety nf shapes. However, since R. Sch mi dt and his Die Burg Vuedol there has been no extensive
survey of Vuedol pottery which would include recent finds from the region
affected by the classical Vuedol culture. Nor would such an analysis be possi blc
here, our space being limited. Instead we shall point to some basic fomls, sna pes,
and decoration, of importance for the evolution of the Vu e dol culture . In the
early phase, bowls are the most frequent shape . An inheritance frum the
Kos tolac culture, they are sometimes very shallow and with a small ba se. Their
variants range from mildly biconical to fully articulated bowl s (neck, shoulder,
upper and lower cone) . Nearly all are decorated with a ca rved o r Furchenstich
horizontal band. Footed goblets are rather scarce in the earl y ph ase . In the latcr
stages, especially near the end of th e Vuedol period, they become in crea singly
frequent bearing importance for the internal pe ri odization of the Vue dol
culture . A shape inherited from the Kostolac c ulture is that of th e "terrine", a
deep bowl with a ribbon handie between the shoulder and lower cone or on
the long neck. TI,e "terrine" was widespread throughout the durati on of the
Vuedol culture. Often, but without much ground, it is though t of as exclusive
to Vuedol, though it had been known to the KDstolac culture too. One of the
most sumptuous, in both workmanship and decoration , was fo un d in a Vue do l
grave . Amphorae of various sizes , hanging vesse ls, pots and pithui of different
shapes complete to the list of the pottery forms Df the Vuedo l culture. Most
vessels, of medium and smaller size, are richly decorated, chiefly by ca rving. It
is the technique by which the Vue do l culture is defined in literature as the
one where decorati on by applying white paste OntO the rusticated su rface of a
vessel reached its apex. The effect is that of a contrast between the burnished
black surface of the vessel and the white paste. In addition to vessels used fo r
practical purposes, cult and ritual objects were also often found at Vuedol
sites. Frequent are the "altars" - rectangular or sa ddle-shaped (the shape of
horn s of consecration) pedes tals, present in all the stages of the Vued o l
culture. Some altar sh apes deri ve from the Kostolac culture, e.g. the ope found
at Pl andite in Ceri; 250 similar form s have been fo und in Belegi (San ine)
together with material belonging to the earli est phase of the Vuedol culture .

Late Eneolithic

81

These data are of importance fl)r the periodization of the culture and point to
the existence of a transitional horizon between the Kostolac and Vuedol
cultures. To this group of special-purpose artefact s also be long small tripodal
vessels from Vuedo l and Hrustovaa and ring- based vessels, whose surface,
even the parts not normally visible, is richly decorated all over (Vinkovci,
Vu e dol). Finally, there are anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines, not
very fTequent at Vuedol sites, but with characteristic, unusual shapes and
ornamentation. l1le anthropomorphic terra-cOlta figurines from Vue dol
(Gradac) and Vinkovci (Trnica) are roughly modelled, but richl y decorated
with incised lines. Femal e figures have th e genital area covered with a kind of
apron. Althuugh different in shape from the well -known Ljubljansko Barje
figurine, they display similar ornamental motifs.
Metal artefacts are comparatively rare at Vue dol sites, though there
are indications, both direct and indirect , that th e bearers of the culture were
familiar with copper metallurgy (smelting, casting and the manufacturing of
artefacts) . In addition to the "copper -smel ters' mega ron" , as R. Schmidt named
the house with several smelt ing (?) furnaces at Cr adac in Vuedol, the same
site has yielded a few artefacts which could confirm that this, indeed, had been
the inhabitants' occupatiun. I S1 A flat-axe mould was found near one of the
furnaces, and a copper axe of the same shape near another. Also, a number of
ingots, whole or in fragments, have been found in a layer belonging to the
Vuedol culture. A preci ous fi nd of exceprional importance for the study of
copper metallurgy in the Vu e do l culture was the content of a pit in Vinkovci
(Trnica-Hotel, excavated in 1978) referred to as ".Jama-livaa" (foundry pit)
by S. Dimitrijevi. 15S Close to the bemom of the pit (of an up turne d funnel
shape) were three sets of moulds for casting "battie-axes" (single-bladed shafthole axes), a miniature set of the same kind and a mould for casting chisels.
The same pit contained two smaller Vuedol vessels which made it possible to
be veryaccurate in chronological and cultural attributior, of the moulds .
According to S. Dimitrij e vi , they belong to the B-2 ph ase of the Vue dol
culture. More information for the study of the earl y copper metallurgy in the
Vuedol culture was provided by finds from Debelo Brdo near Sarajevo and a
well-known find from Sarva consi sting of moulds for leaf-shaped daggers an d
a copper chise!. Th ough the Debelo Brdo fin ds are mentioned as earl y as the
end of the 19th century , in the works of F. Fiala, they have been treated in
greater detail only by B. ovi 2 59 Three fragmented mo ul ds for si ngle -blade
shaft-hole axes are al so among the finds from this site, as well as three smail
fragments of a dagger mould, an awl mould and twO fragments of a funneIshaped vessel which was also used in cas ting. The fin ds from Debelo Brdo,
Zecovi, and Alihode testi fy to the high level of develo pment tha t copper
metallurgy had reached in Bosnia at the time of the Vuedo l culture 2 6()
The problem of the origin and chronology of the V uedo l culture seems
to have been satisfactorily resol ved by now, thanks Iargely to the extensi ve work
carried out at sites in Srem and Sl avoriia and to more recent information

PI. XXXII. 1 3

Fig. 46/4

Fig. 12/1 -3

82

PI. XXVI
PI. XXVII . 1-3
PI. 10

Th e Eneolith ic cul tures

of Central
and West Balkans
.-

provided by sites in ce ntral Serbia, BosniQ, and Slovenia. Having adopted a

historical approach, th e present author is obliged to say a few wo rds about the
main theories of the origin s of the Vue dol culture and styl e, though most of
them have been almost entirely abandoned. A No rdic o rigin had been proposed
nrst by C. Schuchart and subsequently by P. Reinecke, R. Schmidt, R. Pitti"n;,
and others; F. Tompa, A. Benac (for a while), A. Mozsolics, and K. Willfonsedcr
fo und a connection wi th the eastern Alps; a southern origin was assumed by
M. Hoern es and C;. Chiide; the , teppe compo nent was underlined by M.
(]araanin and N. Kalicz; most authors, howe ver, have sought the origin s of
Vuedol in the autochtho nous basis of the area where th e culture llourish ed.
This idea was first promoted by W. Butrler and subsequently advocQted by Il.
Novo tny, G. Childe, and A. Benac in his more rece nt work 2b1 Th eir theory
of autochthonous development has been reasonably conf1rmed by S. Dimitri j e vi and N. Tasi, whose conclusions were ba se d o n stratigraphic data and a
stylistic analysis of Vue do l and Kostolac n1<Jterial 2b1 Wc can now say with a
great. dea l of certainty tha t th e Vue do l culture and style were a product of
fu rthe r evol ution of the full y deve loped Kostolac culture in Srem and Slavoni a.
Kostolac Ilnds from Ce ri , Pivni ca , and Aikovac and Vue do l pottery from
Belegi ( a n ine), Lo va s and Mitrovac clearly indicate that Vuedol had
adopted pottery shapes and decoration (both mo tifs and their arrangm ent)
from the earlier culture. Of course, it is impossihle (o rule out foreign el ements
(from the Alpine region , the Carpathian BaSin, o r the central Balkans) in
dealing with the genesis of the Vue d ol culture bo th in general and in its
particular areas . ll1ese influences, however, were of secondary importance fo r
the formati on of the new c ulture .
According to what we kn ow ofit, the Vu c dol culture was a long- li ved
one. This is why thcrc have been severni attempts at internal periocii zation. If
we except the works of P. Koroec, who was chi elly interested in a chron ology
of the "Slavonian" culture on the basis of finds from Lj ubli ansko Barje, or rathcr
19, and those of M. Garaanin, who treated th e problem only in passing in
Prehistory ill Serhia,2bJ we are left wi t h the work of S. Dimitrij e vi (1956 and
1966) and N. Tasi (1 96 7).111e former wrote on se veral occasions abo ut the
division of th c Vue d ol culture, putting forward a number of suggestions; the
most recent contribut ion, in Volume ill of Tite Pre!tistory of Yugoslavia, is a
synthesis ofhis views. ll1e ternary division by the present author is esscntially
the same as Dimitrij e vi 's, which we here quote as the most comprehensivc 264
The early phase of the Vu e dol culture (stage A according to Dimitrij e vi ) is
that of th e fornlation of a new style which still contains elements inherited from
Kostolac (Furchenstich decoration, forms of bowls, terrin es). ll1is phase lacks
the carved decorati on typical of Vue do l, the extensive use of white paste,-and
the excess ive decoration characteristic of the cla ssical phase. ll1 e best reprePI 10 -- The pottery shapes or the Early Vuedol culture
from sites in Serbia

..

84

PI. XXVIII.
PI. XXIX.
PI. XXX.
PI. XXXI.

1-4
14

1-4
1-7

PI. XXXII. 1 6
PI. XXXIII. I g

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balka ns

sentatives of this phase in the development "fthe Vuedol culture are the sites
at Belegi (anine) , Lovas, and Mitrovac ; it seems that a detailed analysis of
material ITom Vuedol (Gradac) and Sarva might point to the existence of a
transitional or ea rly phase still exhibiting some features of the Kostolac style.
In H ungary, this phase is represented by the site Dunaszekc sb-Varhegyrol 265
The classical tj/tase, or the ea rly classical and classical phases (stages B-l and
B-2 according to Dimitrijevi), is marked hy the stabilization of the culture and
its apex in building, metallurgy and ponery. Most of the finds fi-om Vuedo l,
Vinkovci, C30molava, Aparovac, Sarva, Hrusruvaa, Z6k, and oth er sites
belong to this phase of Vuedol. Pottery shapes are varied (an entire series of
new ones appear), there is an abundance of ornamental motifs, especially
carved ones combined wi th th e application of white paste. Th e prosperity of
the culture is best illustrated hy the construction of permanent settlement
structures (houses and hearths), which were combin ed with fortification systems to give th e inhabitants of Vu e dol settlements increased safety. At the
tail-end of this phase cremation burials under barrows appea r alongside inllumation; this can be interpreted as the beginning of the crisis provoked by the
arrival of new populations into the C:arpathian Basin and the Balkans, a crisis
that would eventllally bring abou t the disintegration of the culture. These
phenomena ushered in the third, late phase (the phase of regional di versification
- stage C according to S. Dimitrij evi ) of the Vue dol culture, marked by th e
emergence of regional types . ln their further development they kept drawing
away from the original area of Vuedol and, somewhat later, formed new
cultures that already belong to the Early Bronze Age. These regional phenomena, according to S. Dimitrijevi, include the south and west Bosnian types
(Debelo Brdo), the umadija type with sites around Kraguj evac Oasik, Djurdjevo), and sites ou tside o ur country, such as Molduva Veche or Mak6 and
Nyi rseg in Hungary and Slovakia.
. 1l1e chronological position of the Vuedol c ulture and its relationship
with other phenomena in neighbouring areas (Alpine, Adriatic, Carpathian,
etc.) have been established on the basis of the stratigraphy of stratified sites
(Vue dol, Vis near Derventa, Comolava), the presence of similar shapes and
decoration, the typology of metal finds, and the prese nce of imported material.
Kosrolac and its neighbour, Cowfeni to the east and Retz-Cajary to the west,
chronol ogi cally preceded the Vu e dol culture; in absolute terms, that would
be ca. 2200/2100 B.e. T he end of the C srage of Vuedol is seen as connected
with the disintegration uf this cultural complex and the emergence of the first
cultures of the Early Bronze Age. It is the time of local groups such as Ma k6,
Nyirseg, and Kosihy-aka in the north, Ljubljana in the west, Ul ina III Schneckenberg in the north, and T ivat-Rubc in the south. In Srem, Slavonia,
and the Hungarian part of Baranja, the end of Vuedol was marked by the
appearance of Vink ovci-Somogyvar wa re, approximately around 1900/1800
B.e., when the Early Bronze Age began in Central and Southeast Europe (the
Aegean excepted) .

Late Eneolithic

85

The terminal Eneolithic of the Alpine zone

At the end of the classical ['hase of Vuedol (stage B-Z) th e bearers
of the culture began to spread to the south (central Serbia, Bosnia), ea st (the
Romanian parts of Banat), and west (Ljubljansko Barje and the arca gra vit<Jting
towards it), T o the west, their penetratiun was only gradual, and uf a "graJa tional nature". The tlrst stage of their expansion is exemplitl eJ by sites in
northwest Croatia,2bb whence the culturl' sprcad further west, tl)Jllling a new
seconda ry centre at Ljublja nsko Barj e. T he latter went on de veloping inde pendently, witho ut closer co ntacts with the zon e ofmigin, Srem and Slavo nia.
ll, e differe nces in style, wllich would subsequently become mote prono unced,
resu lted from the presence of a strong tr adition and influences fmm northern
Italy (the Fulada culture) a n d the Alpine region (the Mlidling group).llle term
"Sl avonian type of Vuedol" might be accepted fll!' the first phase. but in (he
secon d, wh en ties with the area of u ri gin are broken, thc culture went nn
developing independently, both in style and in other ch aracteri stic trai ts . lt
seemscorrect , thereillre , to treat Liubljansko Barje (phase l or 19 I) as a region al
phenomenon within the Vuedol culture and phase II (lg ll) as a culture o fth e
post-Vuedol complex, i.e . th e Ljubljana culture, as S. Dimitrij evi has named

it. 2bi
ln order to unde rstand how terminal Eneolithic gwups, most parti cularly Li ubijansko Barje - as central ly located and heS[ investiga ted - were !()()ned
in the southeastern Alpin e zone (ii-0111 Vienna in the north to Krievci in the
south ) wc need to e xamine the long period d continuu us development in the
region . A general survey of Eneoli thic development in the area of Ljubljansko
Barje (as discussed earlier in the book) shows that we can distinguish between
five phases of the Early, Middle, anci Late Enculithic; their rel ative chronology
with rega rd to Slavonia, Srem, and northwest Croa tia would be as follows:
ll, e above table clearly shows tha t the Vuedol culture reached the
area of Ljubljansko Barj e after a long periud uf continuuus de velopment of the
!lAlpine facies uf Lcngyel l' , i.e . ;) variant flXt11 uf t he LJsinja c ulture. Th e
Kevderc-Hrnjevac group had already disturbed th e homogen eity of the region,
preparing it for assimilation by the uncoming Vu e dol population.
T he above division of Lj ubljansko Barj e by H . Parzinge r 268 might also
be presented in a synthetic way, as in th e works of P. Koroee, S. Dimitrij ev i,
F. Le ben , anci others. 209 p, Kowec Jistinguishes between three differe nt phases
in the development of the Eneolithic of the region; the first would comprise
fi nal Lengye l and the eme rgence of th e "Slavonia n" (Vu edol) cul ture ; the
second is tha t of 19 I (Sla vonian, acc,)rcling to P. Koroec), and the third
corresponds to 19 II (S. Dimit ri jevi's Ljubljana culture) 2)0 Mos t au thors agree
about the relative dating lOf the Vuedol culture: it appears after the "Alpine
facies of Lengyel", mure prec iseiy afte r the Lasinja a nd Re tz-Cajary cultures,
and corresplOnds to the 19 l horizon in the periodization dO Ljubljansko Barje,
whi ch is characterized ove r J rnore e xten sive Zlre;] by Vuedul styk pottery
decotated either by incision or by carving combin ed with white cncruste,l paint.

Fig, 27

The En eolithic cultu res of Central and West Balkans

86

Lj ubljan sko Barj e

(H. ParZlnger)

I
I

Srem. Slavonia. NW Croatia

(S. Dimi trijevi . N. Ta si)

(Resnikov prekop - a.
Ajdovska jama) terminal Lengyel

Sopot-Lengyellll

(Resnikov prekop - b)

Early Lasinja culture

LB III

(Ma harski prekop - a)

early phase of Maha rsk i
prekop group

La te Las inja culture

LB IV

(Mah arski prekop - b)

Retz-Gajary group
late phase of Maharski
prekop group
, Kostolac culture I and II

LB I

I LB

II
I

I
I

(lg - a) the Vuedol

culture

LB V
Comparat ive table
of t he Ljubljan sko Barj e cu lture
and cultures of Srem. Slavonia
and NW Croatia

LB VI

I,

(lg - b) Ljubljana
cu lture

Slavonian type
of Vuedol B- I and B-2
(early and classical)

beginnings of
the Vinkovci culture

The area of the Slavonian type of Vuedol includes Niederosterreich,

Burgenland, most of Slovenia with the Istrian karst, and the extreme northwest
of Croatia .lll Three basic types of settlemen ts are to be found in the region:
hill rop set tlements (Ptujski grad, Kevderc, Aparovac near Kri evci, BadenRaucheneck and Molding-Hirschkogel in Austria, etc .) ; cave settlements
(Ajdovska jama near Krko, Jama pod Predjamskim gradom, and a number of
caves near Trieste which, though not strictly belonging to Vuedol, can be seen
as part of a more broadly conceived culture: Grcltta dei Ciclami, Caverna del
Pettiroso, Grotta della T artaruga, etc.); finally, the most frequent type of
settlement in Ljubljansko Barje is represented by pile-dwellings (Pfalbausiedlung). This type has a long tradition in the regi on (Maharski prekop,
Resnikov prekop, Studenec pri Igu) . The best known pile-dwelling settlements
in the Sl ovene variety of Vuedol are no doubt the ones around 19, on the Parta
canal, near !ica, etc.2n In addition to information about the construction nf
pile-dwellings, these sites have yielded a wealth of portable material roo. Its

Late Eneolithic

87

use, however, is often limited, due to o lock of accumte strotigraphic dow ond
the fact thot most finds have been produced by excavations corrie d out ot the
close of the nineteenth century, or by otht' r eoreh works (the digging and
expansion of the ne twork uf cJna ls, etc.) .
111e material culrure of the Alpine vari ety of Vu e dol, most particularly thot of the pil e-dwelli ng settlements at Lj ubljansko Borje, is well known
th oriks to reg Ldar publication. Seve ral catal ugues, numerous repurt; in " Po ruila
o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sl uveniW' anu <) llUlnber of other v.'flrings
make up a very good survey uf this type of mmerial, especially potte!)', lithic
and bone 1113reria i, and, tO;) lesse r e xte nt, copper finJ5.~j' -, TIle 11)OSr frequent
ve ssel shape at Ljubljonsko Borje ond othe r si tes in Slovenia and nonhw.:;tem
Croatia is that of a jug, o single-handled, high -nccked \'eSse! with rich decl)ra tion on the globular or biconical rece placl e, or on the bwad rihb.m handle.
Oth.:r shapes include a two-handled amph ura, oiso richly o mamented on the
belly, bowls or conical vessels on a crucif()(J11 or cylindrical tl)() t. 111ere are also
heavie r vessels of crude workl1lanship, usua lly plain. In spite of ubvio us si milari ties in shapes andornamentation between the Vuedol cul ture of Sre m and
Slavonia and its Slovene (Alpine) type, some teatures are fJ<'culia r to sites in
[he Ljubljansko Barj e region: first ofall, the uSe ofcarved decoration dec reascs,
the same motifs being e xecuted by incisi on. Furr hennur.:, thde appea r vessels
with one proper handie and o smaller tunne l Ont' un the ,)pptlSlte side, fi xed in
a position [h3t corresponds (O chc sumewhat later Vinh)\'ci wnfe . Finc:dly ,
globular and big-bel li ed vessels appear, uf a kind which wl)uld be freqUent in
the Ljubljana culture and wh os analogues are to be found in "ther Central
European cultures of the Early Brunze Age (!:lell!:leaker , CsefJ<'l, ('Alrded ware,
etc.).
Jn addition to portery , Ljublj ansko Barj e (lg J) si tes have alsn \ielJeJ
copper finds and ceramic artebcts used in thei r casting. Th e finds inci uJe a
mould for casting single-blade shaft-hole axes, several sma ller vessels ",hleh
migh t have been Llsed in casting, and o number uf copper ancfacts, most nurably
a coppe r dagger of characteristic shape and o fr agmented flat axe. 111eir
analogues have been fl)und in Srem and Slavonia at Sarva (daggers), Vinkuvci,
and Vuedol (single-blade and flat axes) . Besides the wel l-kn own memllurgical
centres such as Debelo Brdo near Sarajevo, Sarva, Trnica-Vinkovci, or
Gradac in Vuedol, the site of Ljubljansko Barj e also oppears as an important
regional metallurgical centre of the Vuedol cultural complex.
&111e and stone rools , with sume all tou rare wood artcfncts, 11elp to
complete o ur picture of th e material culture (lf the Ljubljansko !:larje sites.
Besides well-made bone artefacts used for practical purposes there is also a
sizeable collection of fine bifacial stL1ne tools struck in a broad retouch . Most
of them are some sort of wedges and "daggers" that used to be fIxed in 3 wooden
or bone haft. T hey are exclusive [ O this area and have nu analogues in Srem
and Slavonia, where the culture origin3ted.

PL. XXXIX. I 7
Fig 27/ 1-7

PI. XL. 1-8

PI. XXXIX. 1-5

F,g_27JI -3
PI. I. 7
PI XL l e

88

The Eneol- ithi c cultures

of Central and West Balka ns
-

)uclging by available Jara (the typology of the mate rial anJ matigraphy
of th e sites), the Alpine vari ety of Vue dol was shorter-lived than the culture
itself. lt emerged simultaneously with the B2-CI stage and ran parallel to it,
surviving until the appearance of th e Ljubljana culture in the area. Since the
Ljubljana culture is rightly taken to be the first Early Bronze Age cu lture and
dated to the sa me period as the Bell l:leaker, Corded Ware, Somogyvar- Vink ovci, Csepel , Polada, and other cultures , the end of the Alpine type of Vuedol
should he dated to abo ut 1700 B.C. In view of its short duration, however, it
may have first appea red aroun d 1900/ 1800 B.C.

3. The terminal Eneolithic of the Adriatic zone

1l1e long strip of the Adriatic cnast from th e Gulf of Trieste to
norrhwesrern Albania is a region where the Eneolithic had heen a specific
phenomenon, insufficiently explored so far. Geographic conditions determined
its separate develo pment, th llugh there was some communication with other
regions via th e Krka, Cetina, and Neretva river valleys and Lake Scutari . Th e
modest level of exploratilln of the area, especially of the late Eneolithic cultures,
is not a very good basis for reliable conclusions. Thi s is why there are man y
conflicting scholarly op inions on the subj ec t (P. Kllroec , S. Dimitrij evi, .
Batovi, N. Petr i, B. Covi, B. Govedariea, etc.) 274 Different terms are used
to refer to the same phenomena, interpretations of the material differ comiderably, and there is no consensus on the dating and cultural attribution of
indi vidual f,nds, sites, or cultures in general.!Ir is unclear, to begin with, wheth er
we are deali ng with a single whole, the "Adriatic culture" as P. Koroec would
have it,171 different regional ph eno mena, or chrnnolLlgically disti nct phases in
the same line ofc ultural development. S. Dimitri jevi has nor been able to offer
a sa tisfac tory soiutiLln in Volum e III dT/te Prehiswry of Yugoslavia, nor can we
produce anything conclusive here. The region has not been sufficiently investigated, published material is scant, and necessary stratigraphic and other data
are often \acking. The main question to be answered is wnetner a\\ tne
"Adriatic" pottery belongs to a single culture and period, or to two phases in
Pl. XLIII. 1-8
the development of the single culture , or else to twO different c ultures . P.
Koroec and . Batovi believe that they all bclong to the same horizo n .276 S.
Dimitrijevi distin guishes between two chronological and cultural entities, "the
Vue dol cul ture of th e Adriatic coast" and "the Adriatic type of the Ljubljana
sulture".277 The former wo uld be represented by finds from Vrpolj e nea r
Sibenik and some fragments from Markova pil ja on the island llI' Hvar, while
the latter would comprise a number of sites from the Gulf oi Trieste and Ist ria
in the north (Caverna del Pet tiroso, Grona dei Ciclami, Daneva pe i[1 a) and
Pl. XLII I. 6. 7 central Da lmatia (Sveti Spas and Biskupija near Knin, Tradanj near Sibenik,
tumulus no.2 at Ce tina) to th e Dalmatian islan ds (M arkova pilja and
Pl. XLIII. I-S. 8
Grapeva pilja on Hvar, Vela pilja on Korula) and the Dubro vnik and
Montenegrin littoral (Gudnja near Ston, Mala Gruda near Tivat and, in the

89

Late Eneol ithic

continental zone, Rube near Niki). Some of the finds from th is group already
belong to the Early Bronze Age (the early tumuli at the hea d of the Cetina).
There are few reliable data for the interpretat ion of "Vue d ol finds on
the Adriatic cnast". One of the theori es proposed is that it had been an
aftermath of th e incursion of the bearers of the cult ure, or rather style, from
southern Bosnia (Debelo Brdo) towards the Adriatic coast. This would make
it possible to' explain certain finds of Vu edol-like pottery in Montenegro
(Rube near Niki, some finds from the Odmut cave - part of stmtum VI ) <md,
in some ways, th e well-known grave fi-om the Mala Gruda rumulus near
Tivar.278 On the other hand, thc many sites of "the Adriati c type oi [he
Ljubljana culture" all along the Adriatic coast and in its hinterl and (Ravlia
pein a, Badanj near Stola c, Slime near Posuje) offer much more informatio
about the origins and develo pmem of the culture. Howeve r, disa~eement
arises as soon as it comes to dating. Is the culture Eneol ithic or does it belon2
to the Earl y Bronze Age? P. Koroec and . Barovi dated it to the tail-end o:'
the Eneolithic. With some variation, F. Leben, B. ovi, B. Marijano\'ic, .-\.
Miloe vi and B. C;ovedarica did the same. IN S. Dimitrijevi, on the l)th~ e
hand, believes that this culture marks the beginning of the Early Bron :e ,-\ ~"
on the Adriatic coast 2 80 Another source of confusi on is the fa c[ that all
phenomena preceding the Al stage of th e Bronze Age uf Reinecke's pencu zation should be classified as Eneolithic. If we post ulote an e ven earlier ~nc":
than A 1 within the Eorly Bronze Age of Central Europe, whi ch has been IarEd,
accepted in orchaeological Iiterature,2S I the period encomp a$$m~ 2~I :::~
"post- Vuedo l cultures" and variants of the Bell Beaker complex, th~:: :::~
"Adriatic type of the Ljubljana cul ture", by onalogy with the Ljubljana c~~=t
of the Alpine region or with Mak6-Nyirseg in the Pannonia n Pb;r., WC"'.!!c
belong to the Early Bronze Age or the transitional period between ::'" ::.:-."'~
lithic and the Bronze Age. We shall therefo re deal with it oni\' 1115<.':3::;> 1:
to clarify the rather obscure peri Od uf heterogeneou s phenc'mc:'.o .:h. :'-.<
Adriatic coast in the Late Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age.

:-.t::

nl e specific features of the ropography and climate v:- ~':t ."= 3~~
eoast have detemlined the appearance of diffe rent [ypes l'l s"'::~:::c:-.'-' ;:-:.:;~
ited by the bearers of "the Adriatic type of the Ljubljana cdtur~. T-." :-:-,c ; :
frequent type is the c ave settlement, both in [he nonh (ca\'e; ::1 ::-.e G~' a;,'
Tri es te and Istria), in central Dalmatia and on [he island, ,T",in;. 50.:C::3
draga, (]rape va pilja, Gudnja, etc.), in Herzegovina (RadIa ",,':...-.2. Exd:;::;,
etc.), and in the south, in M ontene~o (Odmut, Vranjan). r.il::.:." >erde:-:-..,:-.::;
are slightly less frequent (Gradina Sv. Spas nea r Kmn and G:3J:m "e:'le K:;,;-;.:i,.
More recently, sett lements in karst holes have been Jisco'~re'::, ".2. '-" :; nE::
plateau near the village of Otii (some 100 ka[$[ holes are m~;1Ll G::~.:! ::,,2:
Sinj, one of which has been excavated 282 Mos[ s.:tt!ements Wdc: shNt -teiTIl.
intermittent!y inh abited stations of nomadic stock - breed~rs. :"1any
their
features indicate that these noma ds were engaged in a kind oi prehisroric
transhumance and, indeed, condi tions in the re!!ion favou red [his [ype of

or

r'g
PI

30
:- g 2E

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

90

,.:a"'!GI'OWI'I '~:II"
. ,,:., , ; : ,
.

' ~ '( '~ "

. \./~'':
'o"

.:

O tJ
6

(J
4

,,'

PI. I I Mala Gruda. Tivat

Grave goods from the
central grave in the tumulus
oo

91

Late Eneolithic

ac tivity. Thi s ca n pa rtly e xplnin th e prese nce of sites of "th e Adriatic type
of the Ljublj a na e ulrure" in He rzegov ina and th e co ntin e n tal parts of
Mo nte negro .
The ceramic mate ri al of "the Adria ric type of thc Ljubljana e ulrure"
is for the most part fragm ente d as it com es from caves , hillfo rts, ,md brst h oles
(where th ere is greater de nudarion uf th e Sl)i1). Specimens prese rved inta C[ are
rare . The most frequent shapes arc those of gl obldar or he misphe riea l vessels
(Gra peva pi lja, Otii ), tall-fl)()ted gu blets (Grapeva pilja, Ori i), conical
a nd calotre-sha ped vessels with a thi ekened rim (Rube , C ra peva pilja ,
Otii), gobl ets on a cruc if'Jn11 t'Jot (Mala Gruda near T ivat), e tc.'S) Mosr
ve ssels are ri ehly decora ted wirh incise d lin es or by ca rving.ll1e omamenrarion
is often o rgani zed in zon es, simil arly to that oi the Reli Rea ke r, RenedelIL" and
Po lada c ultu res . In carryin g OUt a typologieal anal ysis o ( rh e potter), it is p<')ssihlc
to si ngle out Mala (,ruda and Rube as specifi c phen,)me na difle rent Tn)m ,)ther
sites of thi s circle. They proba bil' represent a regional type wi thin rh" (ulwral
complex as a whole, o r dse an insufficientiy diflc renti ated pha se in rhe
development of the c ulwrt' .
ln addition to settleme nts, four tu muli have bee n disco vered th a r
mi ght well be long to the "Adriatic type of the Ljubljana culrure" : a tumulus at
the hea d of th e Cetina (barruw n o . 2) , ha rrows near Rube and at PazhLlk
(Albania), and the chronologicall y very important tumulus ar Mala (~r uda near
T ivar. l 84 T his last, the o n ly systematically xca vated tlllnulus , ha s yidded a
grave with grave goods. lS I 111e body oi th e deceased was I()und in a cist of
stone slabs dug into the suhsoil. A ca lLltte-sha ped st ruc(ure made of boulders,
se veral pyres, exceptiona l grave goods, and the si ze of the tumulus (o ver 20 m
in dia me ter, with a h eigh t d2.S - 4.0 m) indic ate th a t the deccased had been
an important figure and tha t burial rires had bee n vry elaborate . In a ddition
to two vesse ls, the gra ve goods included a tri angular electrum dagger, a
s ing l-blade d sh afl-hole axe of the samc mate ri a l a nd (WO go ld hai r rings
(Noppe nring) . While th e cera mic finds arc clearly rdated tD rh" VUd,,1
c ul tu ra l comple x, th e elecrrum tlnds are co nsid red to be an Aegean impC'rt
(rom the time of the "Middle Minoan phase of the Aegean c ulr ure", atOund
1800 H.C.ll,i s is an impo rtant piece ll in (o rmation as r gards ch ronology, and
it ca n easily he confwnted with Other post- Vuedol ph n Ll111 e n a (the Ljubljana
culture , Mak6 , Nyi rseg, etc .) .

***
111e e nd nf th e Vu e do l complex a nd of t h c ultures rh a r di rec riy
originated from it, both through a local evol ution and under fore ign inlluences,
marks the en d 01 the Enel)lithic in the central and western Balkans. A series
of new cul tures , groups, and variants ap peared all ,,,,cr the vast te rritory it had
covered : Csepel-Bell Be ake r and SOl11ogyvar- Vinkovci in the north, with th e
Be l ori-l3eiD Crkva variant in th e central a rea ; Glina IIl -Sch n eckcnhe rg in th e
east ; in the west the influence of the I3e lll'leaker and related cultu res grew in

PI. XLI II. 1-8

PI. II

92

The En eolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

intensity, while the Cetin a culture emerged in the south, no doubt as part of a
more comprehen sive process. ll1ey ushered in the "true Earl y Bron ze Age",
where the influence of the Vue dol substratum was still felt for a while,
especially in the areas of irs origin - Srem, Slavonia , Baranja, an d in the
Vinkovci-Somogyvar culture. Th at would be the period around 1800 B. e., as
testified to bot h by the "Aegean connexion", and the chronological framework
of the Early Bronze Age of Central Europe.

NOTES
l. K. Deschman, 1875.
2. F. Fiala, 1894, pp. 107 ff.; F. Milleker, 1889, pp. 16;]. Brunmid, 1902; M.
Vasi, 1906.
3. N. Vuli M. Grbi, 1937.
4. V. Hofmer, 1933; Idem, 1938. T. I, V, VII, VIII
5. V. Miloji, 1949, pp. 88 ff.; M. Garaanin, 1959, pp. 29 ff.; Idem, 19 73, pp.
161288; A. l:lenac, 1962, pp. 131 ff.; S. Dimitrij e vi, 1961, pp. 24 ff.; N. Tasi ,
1967, pp. 990; PraLwnija VojIlOdine, 1974, pp. 113183.
6. N. Tasi. S. Dimitrij evi. B. Jovanovi in; PJZ III, passim.
7. N. Tasi, 1968, p. 266.
8. J. Cviji, Balka1lSko IJOluo.mvo , Beograd 1987.
9. N. Tasi, 19753, pp. 51 ff.
10. A. Benac, 1948, pp. 3 ff. (Hrustova3); Idem, 19623, pp. 21 ff. (Pivnica): B.
Beli, 1964, pp. 22 f. (Vis nea r Modrana).
ll. B. Marijanovi, 1981, pp. 53 ff.
12. S. Dimitrijevi, 1967, pp. 810; Idem, in: PJZ III, RP. 307, 317320.
13. For rbe opinions concerning this issue, cf.; B. Covi, 1973 , pp. II cO.: B.
Jovanovi, 1971, passim; Idem, in; PJZ III, pp. 33 ff.; B. Bruk ner, 19". :o;::.;:
ff.
14. N. Tasi, 1968,265; M.Garaanin, 1973, p. 161; Praistorija Vojtod;;cc. : ~ - ~
pp . II Hf.
15. Lj. Bukvi, 1978 (1979), pp. 14ff.
16. P. Roman, 1980, pp. 220 ff.; M. Garaanin, 1967 , p. 31; 1'. T a5l::. ::;5';. ;:-;:.
23-27.
17. B. Jovanovi, 1971, passim; M. Kuna , 1981, pp. 13 ff.; A. Durman. ,05.3. ';:;5:.
18. N . Tasi, 1973, 14 ff. (Zlotska peina) ; R.R. Schmid r, 1945. pp. =: .=:> , ::2:-'~ '
and Vuedol) ; PJZ III , T. XLIV /1 113 (Ljubljansko barje) ; :\. k--:n2:'_ ! :;2~
pp. 39 ff.
19. B. ovi, 1976, pp. IlOff., T. 1111; PJZ III, T. XLIII ; A. Durma:1. !:;o.3. ;o;:.
37 ff., T. 16.
20. B. Jovanovi in: PJZ III, p. 36, and quot. bibliog.
21. Ibid., pp. 3536.
22. E. ernyh, 1975, pp. 132 ff.
23. M. Garaanin, 1971; Idem, 1973, p. 281; B. Jovanovi in: PJZ II!. pp. 35: ;'i'.:
N. Tasi, 1983, pp. 15 ff.; A. Benac, 1986, pp. 78 ff., and qUOL bib~iog.
24. M. Garaanin, 1954, pp. 225 ff.; Idem, 1973, p. 222 ; B. J ovana-i;", rIZ m.
p. 382, and quot. bibliog.
25. B. Stalio, Zlokuani-Gradac, Caralogue of the ceramics I, :-\arodni :TI
Beograd, 1955, pp. 9 ff.; A r!teoloki lokaliteti Bubanj i HW1lSka uka. ea
of the exposition, Ni 1983, sl. 20, 25, 79.
26. B. Brukner, 1977, pp. 9 ff.
27. N. Tasi in: PJZ III, pp. 80-82.
28. For more information on Tiszapolgar and Bodrogkerezstur culrures and their

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

94

rebtion, cf. : I. Bognar-Kutzian, 1963; Idem, 1972; P. Patay, 1961, pp . 25 ff.;

Idem, 1978, pp. 54 ff.; N . Tasi in: PJZ III , pp. 55 ff.
29. S. ib, 1968, pp. 61 ff, 138.
.
30. M. Zo[()vi, 1963, pp. 18-20, T. I/3-4.
3 1. En!!olit javIO!; B!l1Iata, p. 39.
32. Ibid ., pp. 21-22, 29. T . I.
33. Ibid., p. 15, T. III/ I 7 -21.
34. [l. and M. C;araanin , 1957, pp . 199 tf.: B. llrukner in : PwislCJrija Vojvodin!!, p.
120; N. Tasi in: PJZ III , pp. 64 ff.
3 5. J. Korek, 1958, pp . 21-30, T. I-II.
.16. B. Brukner in: PmiSlrlrija Vojvodin!!, pp . 114-115.
3 7. N. Tasi in: PJZ III, p. 69; Idem, 1984, pp . 72-74, sl. 43-44, 272-273; J.
Todorovi , 1956, pp. 50-52, sl. 37 .
3S. M. ulman, 1952, 1'1'.157 tf: Idem, 1954. pp. 70 ff.
39. J. Korek. 1958, pp. 22-26.

40. I. Bognar-K urzian, 1963, pp. 20-229 : Idem, 1972, pp . 179 tr; S. Silo , 1968,
pp. 6 1 ff.
41. I. Bognar-K utzian, 1972 , pp . 178 tT.
42. Eneolitj,<iJwg BWlUta, pp. 2 1-22 , 29 .
43. M. ulman , 1952, pp. 157 tf.; M. Garaanin, 1954, pp . 225 ff.; Eneolirjunrlg
Ballata, pp. 34-35.
44. l.11ogner-Kutzian, 1972, pp. 30-31 , T. XXXIV; I. [,ccdy, 1979, p. ll, Figs.
2-4.
45. [l. T elegin, 1973, pp. 17 tf, Ris. 7, 34, 56-57
46. M. C;araanin, 1954, pp. 225 fT.
47 , B. jovanovi, 1971, p. 29, App. 4; Idem in: PJZ III, pp. 38 ff.
4S, J. Brunmid, 1902, 1'.43 , sl. 3; B. J ovanovi , 1971, T. VI/l-J .
49. N. Tasi, 1959, pp. 227 ff. , sl. 15.
50. K. Vinski-Casparini, 1957, pp. 6-10.
51. S. ika, 1968, p. Ill, obr. 20; H. T odorova, 1986, p. 204, Ris. l l 1/9; I.
Bognar-Kut,ian, 1973, pp. 303 ff., figs. 2-3.
52. P. Patay, 1958, T. XV / 1,2; sl. 5; B. Brukner in : Praistorija Vojvodine, 1'. 138 .
53. I. Bogner-Kutzian, 1969, pp. 32 ff.; B. Brukner, 1970, pp. 1-14; N. Tasi in:
PJZ []j, pp. 129 ff.
54, ll. Bruknet, 1970, pp. l tf.. T. I-VIII.
55. I. Bognar-Kutzian, 1973, p. 304, tig. 3.
56, B. Brukner in: PraislOrija VOj"odille, pp . 144-145.
57 . P. Patay in: C; o)flolava l, pp. 151-153, Abb. 2 -5.
SS . S. Dimittij e vi in : PJZ II , pp. 263-303 .
59. N. Tasi, 1985, pp. Sl
60. J. Koroec, 1958, pp . 83 ff.; P. Koroec, 1975, 1'.169.
61. T. Breganr, 1972, pp. 118 tT.; F. Leben, 1973, pp. 187-197; S. Dimitrijevi,
1961, pp. ZZ ff.: Idem in: PJZ []j, pp. 137 ff.
62. Investigati on carried out by the National Museum of Kruevac and the
Institute I()[ Balkan Stuudies of the SASA. Material has not been published.
63. A. Jurii, 1961, pp. 99 ff.
64. For the hoards in Pl onik, cf.: B. Stolio, 1964, pp. 35 -40; Idem, 1973, pp .
157 -160; B. J o vanovi in: PJZ III , pp . 37 -38.

tr.

Notes

-----~

65.
66.
67.
68.

M. Kuna, 1984, pp. 17 ff.

M. Ga raanin, 1973, p. 201.
B. Stalio, 1973, pp. 157 tT.
M. Garaa nin, 1973, pp. 164 ff.; V. Trbuh ovi . Lj. Vukovi, 1967, pp. 98.99;
N. Tasi in: PJZ Ill, pp. 98 100; Ooekova . Slavska 1955, pp. I ff.
69. P. Roman, 1971, pp. 32 ff.
70. Cf.: B. Ki tanoski, 1971, 139140, Fig . 112; D. Simoska . B. Kitanoski . J.
Todorovi , 1976, pp . 43 ff., T. IX.
71. M. Garaanin D. Sim osb, 1976, pp. 9.31, T. IX.
72. Z. Letica, 1972, pp. 117 tr; D. Bereiu, 1961, pp. 566 ff., figo I 10/ 1.
73. V. Trbuhovi . Lj. Vukovi, 1967, pp. 97 ff.; M. Garaanin, 1973, pp. 164 ff.,
and quot. hibliog. ; N . Tasi, 1981, p. 9 ff.; M. J e vti, 1987, pp. 2 I ff.
74. M. Ga raanin, 1973, p. 170, sl. 3.
75. N. Tasi, 1982, p. 27, T. IV/7, 8a.g.
76. J. Todorovi, 1963 , pp. 25 ff. Investigation of the site ofGadim lj e by Unjilane
was ca rried out by J. GIii. The materia l is un published. It is kept in the
Museum of Kosovo in Pritina.
77. P. Goekova Slavska, 1955, pp. I ff. (Skopsko kale).
78 . M. Oaraanin,I959, pp. 118 ff.; B. Kita noski, 1971, p. lJ9; M. Garaanin D.
Simoska, 1976, pp. 9 tT.; N. Tasi in: PJZ III , pp. 92 ff.
79. M. Garaanin, 1959, pp. 118 ff.; D. Sim oska . B. Kitanoski . J. Todorovi, 1976,
p. 62; D. Simoska . V. Sanev, 1976, p. 22.
80. M. Garaanin D. Simoska, 1976, pp . 21 ff. (n. 45).
81. N. Ta si, in PJZ III , pp. 8889.
82. D. Bereiu, 1961, pp. 155350; P. OoekovaSlavska 1955, p. 6; N. Tasi in PJZ
Ill , p. 92.
83. N . Tasi , 1982, p. 27, T. III ; H. Todorova, 1986, pp. 196 ff., Ris. 97 (Ovarovo) ,
Ris. 100 (Poljaniea) .
84. H. T odorova, 1986, T. 122123, Ris. 112.
85. D. Simoska V. Sane v, 1976, p. 48, sl. 230231 .
86. D. Bereiu, 1961, pp. 159 ff.; Idem, 1961a , pp. 128 ff.; M. Garaanin,I973, pp.
175 ff.; P. Roman , 1971, p. 104, Abb. 35; N . Tasi in: PJZ Ill, pp. 94 ff.
87. Eneolit junog Banata, p. 6, T. 1lI117 21; Praiswrija Vojvodine, p. 141.
88. F. Prendi, 1966, pp. 271 ff., T. IlI , IV, V!3,16,1 8, X.
89. H.J. Weishaar, 1980, pp. 34 ff.; N. Tasi , 1978 (1979), pp. 15.
90. J. Koroec, 1958, pp. 8393.
91. R. Pittioni, 1954, pp. 169 ff., 208 ff.
92. S. Dimitrijevi in: PJZ Ill , p. lJ7, and quot. bibliog.; F. Leben, 1973, pp. 187

ff.
93. S. Pahi, 1973, pp. 12 ff.
94. S. Dimitrijevi, 1961, pp. 41 ff.
95. T. Bregant, 1972, pp. 181 ff.; . Barovi , 1975 , pp. 91 1 08 .
96. J. Koroee , 1953, p. 64; P. Koroee, 1975, p. 169; Idem, 1980. 198 1, p. 12, and
Sluot. bibliog.
97 . S. Barovi, 1975, T. 14, 15, 1711 .
98. S. Dimitrijevi in: PJZ III , p. 156, sl. 5.
99. Ibid ., p. 137, and ns. 13; N. Kaliez, 1973, pp. lJ I ff.
100. S. Dimitrijevi in: PJZ Ill , p. 139, map. 3.

96

The Eneolithic cul tures of Central and West Balkans

P. Koroee, 1975a, T. IX IV; S. D imitr ij evi ill: PJZ Ill , 1'.1 44, n. 14.
N. Kalicz, 1973, W 131 ff.
S. Dimit rijevi, 1971, 1'.151 (plates); Z. Markovi, 1977, pp . 51 tf.
S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ III, p. 146.
Ibid ., p. 176.
N. Tasi , 1986, pp. SI ff.
N. Kaliez, 1973,pp. 15S.159; F.Lebe n, 1973 ,pp.I S7tl.;I de m, 1975,1'1'.1 51
tf.
10R. P. Koroee, 1975a: S. D imitrij e v i ill: PjZ III , ~p . 144145.
109. . B arov i . 1975, pp. lOS ff.
.
llO. N . Pet ri, 1976, pp. 305 tf.; S. D imitr ij ev i in: PJZ Ill , pp. 367 ff.; . Markuvi,
1985, pp. 79 81; B',Mar ijano vi, 1982,1'.219.,
,
111. A . !:le nac, 1962; S. lla tCJvi, 1975, pp. 62 ff.; ll. Covi, 1980, p. 35; C.
Mark ovi, 1974, passim; IJem, 1985; B. MarijaIl ov i, 1981, pp. 50 tf.; Idem,
1982, p. 219; B. C,,, veclarica, 1987, pp. 57.70.
112. . Barovi, 1975, 1'.108, T. 2224; R. ovi in: PjZ IV, 1'.162; B. CJuveclarica,
1987, p. 65 .
111 . N . Petr i , 1976, p. 305; B. Marijanovi, 1982, p. 219.
114. S. Dimitrij ev i in : I'JZ Ill. p. 373.
115 . . Mark ov i, 1985 , p. 82 .
116. Ibid, 1'1'. 78 82, T. VIl I/I2, X/S , LXV/ I2, LXVI/I6.
117. B. M ar i januvi, 1981, p. 50.
llR. . B arovi, 1975, pp. 106 ff.
ll9. S. Dimitirj e vi in : PJZ III , p. 376.
120. . Mark ovi, 1985, p. 80, allJ the plates.
121. For this matter, cf. : P. Bosch.(Jimpe ra 1960, pp . 3 tf.; V. Dumitrescu, 1963;
M. ( ,imilutas, 1970; 11.. Crossland, 1971; Idem, 1971a, pp. 232 ff.; N. Ham
mond, 1972; A. H3usle r, 1976. As t(lr the Yugoslav bihl iography, cf.: M.
(Jaraanin, 1961, pp . Sifi'.: A. Be nac, 1964, pp. 164 ff.; B. J ovanovi in: PJZ
III , pp. 397 tf. ; N . Tasi , 1983, 1'.16 , anci quot. bibliog.
122. N . Tasi, 1975a, pp . 51 ff.; B. Brukne r, 1970, pp. 114; Idem, 1976, pp. 273 1;
H. T odoruva in: Oobn,dja l, pp. 5859; F. Frendi, 1966, pp. 270 ff.; M.
Caraanin, 1973 , pp. 165168.
123. V. Zirra, 1960, pp. 90 tf.; E. COlma , 1976, pp. 43 ff.
124. Lj. Bukvi , 1978 (1979), 1'1'.1418, figs. 13.
125. N . Tasi, 1978 (1979), pp . 2 4; D. Srej ovi , 1976, pp . II ? ff.
126. I. Panajorov . V. ne rga ov , 1984, p. 107, A bb. 4; H . T odorova in: [)obnija
l, pp . 6263 .
127. A. Be nae, 1986, pp. 53 ff., sl. 5 11.
J 28. D. Srejovi, 1976, pp. 11 7 ff. (Bare): M. Pa to vi V . T rhuhovi, 197 I, p.
!.l8, T III V.
129. V. Nem ejCLlv3.Pavukuv;i, 1981. pp. 261 ff.; Idem, 1973 . pp . 297 ff.; S.
Dimitrij e vi in: FJZ III , p. 194, T. XXII/I6 ; E. Ne ustllpny, 1973, p. 320, Abb .
I.
130. S. Morintz P. Roman, 1973, p. 268, A bb. 5.
131. N . T asie, 1975, pp. 12 20; IJ em in: PJZ III, pp. 41 8 ff.
132. D. [lereiu, 1964, pp. 269 ff.
133. V. Nemejcuv5 .Pavllk()V3, 1964. pp. 163 tf., Idem, 1968, pp. 353 ff.; Idem,

lO J.
102.
103 .
104.
105.
106.
107.

Notes

97

1973, pp. 303-306, Abb. 4-7.

134. E. Ruttkay, 1973, pp . 441 ff., Abb. 1-4; M. Kaus, 1984, pp. 7-20, Tl-llI.
135. S. Karamanski, 1970, pp . 1-2, T I-XV III ; P. Medo vi, 1976, pp. 105 ff., T.
I-III ; N. Tasi , 1975, p. 10; Idem, 1986a, pp. 1-3; M.J e vti, 1987, pp . 21-26.
136.1. TorOla, 1973, pp. 483 ff., A bb . 1-3.
137. Cf.: PJZ III, p. 194 (S. Dimitrijevi), and pp. 418 ff. and sl. II (N . Tasi).
138. J. Koziawski, 1973, pp. 167 ff., and ns. 1-2.
139. S. Morintz - P. Roman, 1973, Abb . 5; V. Nemejcov;;- Pavukova, 1981, pp.
268 ff., Obr. 6- 10.
140 .J.Glii, 196 1,pp. 116ff.
141. P. Medovi, 1976, pp. 105 ff.; S. Karamanski, 1970; Idem, 1970a; l". Tasi,
1986a , pp. I -3, sl. 1.
142. S. Morimz - P. Roma n , 1973 , pp. 268 ff., Abb. 5/ 11; P. M edovi, 1976, p.
108, T 1/3 ; E. Ruttka y, 1973, pp . 441 tr., Abb. 315; V.l"emejcov';-Pavukova,
1968, p. 368, Abb. 14/ 10.
143. V. Nemejcov<1-Pavukov6, 198 1, Ohr. 1-2.
144. N. Tasi , 1986a, sl. II I, and 6; M. Kaus, 1984, T Ill/I S; I. T onll3, 1973, p.
492, Abb. 3/5,9.
145. N. Tasi , 1983, sl. 3/5 ; M. Kaus, 1984, T 1l!6; S. Karamanski, 1970, T I, and

llI.
146. P. M e dovi, 1976, T. II!9; J. Gli i , 1961, p. 133; V. Nemejcov3-Pavukova,
1981,Obr. 12/1-2, 14/3 .
147. D. Ja. T elegin, 19 73, Ris. 19 and 55.
148. V. Nemejco v5-Pavukova, 1973, Abb . 6/1; B. Novotny, 198 1, pp. lJI ff.; N.
Tasi , 1980- 1981, pp. 27 ff., Abb. 1-3.
149. Ezero, pp. 230 ff., Obr. 134, and 140.
150. N. Tasi , 1986, pp . 53-54.
15 1. E. Ncustupny, 1959, pp. 260 ff.
152. S. Dimitrijevi in : PJZ III , pp. 232-233; V. Nemc)cova -Pavukova, 1981, p.
285.
153. O. Mengin , 1926; R.R. Schmidt, 1945, pp. 54-68. For broader information
on the name, cf.: J. Banner, 1956, pp. 257 -260, and N. Ta si, 1967, pp. 12-14.
154. A. Benac, 1962, pp. 21 ff.; M. Garaanin, 1959; Idem, 1973, pp. 226 ff.; N.
Tasi, 1967, pp. 12 ff.; S. Dimitrijevi, 1962, pp. 239-256; B. Jova novi in:
Praisrorija Vojvodine, pp. 154- 160.
155. S. Dimitrijev i in: PJZ III, pp . 183-234.
156. N. Tasi, 1961, pp. 143 ff. (Djurdjevo).
IS 7. P. Roman - I. Nemeti, 1978, p. 82, Pl. 1.
158. K. Vinski-Gaspari ni, 1956, pp. 5 ff. (Beli Mana stir); S. Karam.nski, 1970, pp
l ff. (Odaci) ; R.R. Schmidt, 1945, passi m (Vuedo l and Sarva); N. Tasi ,
1959, pp. 22 7ff. (Dob. novci); Idem, 1984, pp. 69- 72 (Vina) ; M. Giri, 1960,
(Gomola va).
159. R.R. Schmidt, 1945, passi m.
160. B. Brukner, 1978-79, pp. 8-13 .
16 1. K. Vinski-Gasparini, 1956 , pp. 8 ff., sl. 10; N. Tasi, 1959, p. 229, sl. 1-3 .
162. Eneoliljunog Banata, p. 30.
163. ". Tasi , 1967, pp. 19-21; J. Banner, 1956, p. 10; KR. Schmidt, 1945, pp.
Lj tL S. Dimitrijevi in; PJZ III , p. 202; M. (,araanin, 1967, pp. 27-31.

98

Th e Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

---

164. M. Gir i, 1982, pp. 99-100; S. Dimitrijev i in: PJZ Ill, p. 204; P. Medo vi ,
1987, pp. 77 ff.
165. I. Torma, 1973, pp. 483 ff
166. St. Ko vacs, 1987, pp. 99 tT.
167. J. Banner , 1956, pp. 226 ff.; V. Nemejcova -Pav(lk ova, 198 1, pp. 261 ff; E.
Neustupny, 1959, pp. 260 ff.; Idem , 1973, pp. 320 ff.; M. Garaanin, 1973, p.
232; S. Dim itrijevi in: PJZ III, pp. 191-195, ami quot. bibliog.; N. Tasi , 1967,
pp. 3-3 4; Praistorija Vojvodine, pp. 158-160.
168, Cf. the vessels in: R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Taf. 24/9 -1 I, and 25/ 12 .
169. N. Tasi , 1959, p. 231, sl. 5,7 (Dobanovci); R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Textbd.
36/6, T af. 22 / 1.
170, R.R. Schmidt, 1945, Tal. 20/1-2; N. Ta si, 1959, sl. 10; K. Vinski-Gasparini,
1956, T. XIII/52.
171. N. Tasi, 1959, sl. 8.
172, N. Kalicz, 1976, p. 126, T. 54, 55; P. Roman - I. Nemeti, 1978, Pl. 44/3-4; B.
Novotny, 1981, p. 132, Abb . 1-4; N. Tasi, 1980-81, pp. 27 ff.; Idem, 1984,
pp. 70-71, sl. 39-42.
173. N. Kalicz, 1976, p. 127; B. Novotny , 1981, p. 132 .
174. V. Dumitrescu, 1960, p. 448, tig. 2/7, and quot. bibliog.
175 . V. Nemejcova-Pavukov:i, 1981, pp. 261 tl
176. E. Neustupny, 1959, pp. 265 ff.; Idem, 1973, p. 320.
177. V. Nemejcova-Pavukova, 1981, p. 261.
178. S. Dimitrije vi in: PJZ III , pp . 194-195.
179. N. Tasi, 1967, pp. 33-34.
180. E. Neustupny, 1973 , p. 32 4, Abb. 3.
181. V. Miloji, 1943, pp. 42 ff. ; Idem , 1949, pp. 157 ff.; Idem, 1953.
182. A. />enac, 1962a, pp. 21 ff.; R. Raajski, 1954, pp . 187 ff.; M. G iri, 1960, p.
130; N. Tasi, 1965. pp. 39 ff., Id em, 1967, pp. 45-48, B. Jovanovi in:
Praistorija Vojvodine, pp. 160 ff. , R. Galovi, 1959, pp. 37 ff., S. Dimi trij evi ,
1971, pp. 147 fT., ll. 98: B. Brukner, 1978-79, pp. 813 .
183. M. Garaanin, 1973, pp. 226 ff., J. Todoro vi , 1963 p. 26 (Hisar by Suva
Reka) ; J. Glii, 1961, pp. 133 ff. (Gladnice by Pritina).
184. N. Tasi, 1982, pp. 26-28; P. Roman, 1976, pp. 143 ff.
185. S. Dimi trij e vi in: PJZ Ill, p. 346 .
186. I. Escedy , 1985, pp. 97 ff., Pl s. I 7, V. Nemejcova. Pavukova, 1968 , pp. 380
tT. , Abb. 2338, Kart. Abb. 42.
187. M. Novoma, 1961 , pp. 21 fT., T. IX-XVII.
188. V. Miloji, 1953, p. 160, S. Dimitrij e vi, 1971, p. 147, n. 98 , N. Tasi, 1970,
pp . 2628.
189. T. T eak-Gregl, 1985, pp. 57 59.
190. B. Bruk ner, 197 8- 79, pp. 8 fT. , Abb.
191. R.R. Schmidr, 1945 , p. 41, T af. 10/2.
192. T. Teak.Gregl, 1985, p. 58.
193 . M. K osori, 1965, pp. 83 ff., sl. I.
194. B. J ova novi , 1976 , pp. 131 ff., sl. 12.
195. V. Nemejcova. Pavuk ov:l, 1982, p. 380, Abb. 23.38; I. Escedy, 1985, PIs. l -lO,
P. Roma n, I 976a, p. 143, T. Ill ; V. Boroneant, 1960, p. 350, A. Benac, 1962a,
pp. 21 ff., N. Tasi, 1965, p. 180, sl. 6, T. II IV.

~ .o~es

99

196. B. J ovanovi, 1976, pp. 135136; N. Ta si in: PJZ Ill , pp. 12 ?ff.; Idem, 198 1,
p. 20 ff.; Idem, 1982, pp. 27 ff.
197. Z. Ma rk o vi , 1985, p. 20, sl. 8.
98. S. Dimitrije vi in: PJZ III, p. 364.
199. Ibid., p. 359; Z. Markovi, 1985, p. 20.
200. S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ Ill , p. 362 .
201. N. Ta si in: PJZ III, pp. 11 5 ff.; Idem, 198 1, pp. 9 ff., T. lIII V: M. Je vri ,
1987, pp. 2 l ff.
202 . P. Roman , 1976, pp. 7986, Pl. 2.
203. K Tasi , 1982, p. 19.
204. M. J evt i, 198 7, pp. 2 124.
205. V. Trb uho vi . Lj. Vukovi, 1967, pp. 97 ff.; N. Ta,i, 1981, pp o li
206. P. Roman, 1976a, T. 11/ 1-4 (Cerna voda III), T. IlI 1V (Kostolac): Idem. !?7c.
Pls. 55, 56/8 (Cerna voda Ill).
207. S. Morinrz P. Roman, 1973, p. 280.
208. I'. Tasi , 198 2, T. Vl.
209. P. Roman, 1976, Pls. 5360.
no. Ibid ., Pls. 78 79, and 8 1: Idem, 1976a, T. Ill.
21 1. P. Roman, 1976, pp. 53 ff., fig o8.
2 12. S. Dimitrij e vi in: pJZ Ill, p. 346.
213. Ibid ., pp. 358 ff.; Z. Markovi 1981, p. 243.
21 4. S. Dimitrij e vi in: pJZ III, pp . 348351.
215. Ibid., p. 352; Z. Mark ovi, 1985, p.20.
216. M. Malez, 1967, pp. 1415 (Stratunl b).
217 . S. Dimitrij e vi , 1967, pp. 68: Z. Matko vi , 1981, pp. 243 ii.
218. Z. Ma rko vi . 1985 , pp. 20 ff.
2 19. S. Dimitrije vi , 1967, pp. 6 ff.: Idem in: pJZ III , p. 355: F. Ld",,,. :';' l ~. T,O.
188 ff.
no. K Kalicz, 1973, pp. 158 ff.; Z. Marko vi , 1985, p. 20: F. Ld",n. :~'i3. ;:-;:-.
187 ff.
22 1. S. Di mitrije vi , 1975; Idem in: PJZ III, pp . 363 ff.
222. F. Milleker, 1906, p. 183: M. Gataanin, 1973, p. 280, and quot. OU-::v2.
223 . N. Ta s i , 1959, pp. 3032 (Batajnica); B. J ovanovi , 1976, pp. l~ [:... >.. :
(Voj iDvica) ; D. Srej o vi , 1976, p. 117 (bare and Rogojevac in ~umaillla I: 1.;.
Bukvi , 1978, pp. 14 ff. (Jabuka by Pane vo ) ; M. Giri, 1987, pp. ,;75
(rumuli in northern Banat) ; P. Medovi, 1987, pp. 77 82 (tumuli near Per'e-:l.
n 4. F. Milleker, 1906, pp. 193 ff.: M. Giri, 1982, pp. 102 ff.. and qUOL bibliog.
225. V. Dumitrescu, 1960: Idem, 1963: V. Zitra, 1960, pp. 90 ff.; E. Comsa. ' 976,
pp. 43 ff; I. Ecsedy, 1979: I. Panajotov . V. De rgaov 1984, pp. 100 r..
226. B. Jo vano vi, 1976, pp. 12 ff., sl. 56.
22 7. P. M edo vi , 1987, pp. 7981, Abb. 4.
228. D. Srej ovi, 1976, pp. 11 8 ff., sl. l , T. I V.
229. Ibid. , pp . 125 126.
230. N. Vlassa M. Takaes Gh. Lazaroviciu, 1987 , pp. 114 ff., T. VI VII: P.
Roman, 1976, p. 98.
23 1. P. Medovi , 1987, p. 79: M. Giti , 1987, pp. 72, 76; D. S rejovi, 1976, p. 122,
sl. 35 .
232. Lj. Bukvi , 1978 79, pp . 14 ff.

100

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

233. M. Giri, 1982, p. 103.

234. I. Eseedy, 1979, p. 52.
235. D. Ja. T elegin . LD. Potehkina, 1987, p. 200.
236. K. Deschman, 1875.
237. F. Fia!a, 1894, pp. 107124.
238. M. Wozinsky, 1904; M. Hoernes, 1915, pp. 337 ff.
239. J. Drunmid, 1902.
240. N. Vuli M. Grbi, 1937, passim; V. Hoffilcr, 1933, passim; R.R. Schmidt,
1945.
241. A. Denac, 1948; Idem, 1959; M. Giri, 1960, pp. 139 ff.; J. Korocc, 1946;
Idem, 1951; S. Dimitrij evi in: PJZ III, pp. 270272, and quot. bibliog.
242. S. Dimitrij evi in: PJZ III , p. 278; N. Tasi, 1983, p. 39.
243. N. Tasi, 1961, pp. 143 ff. (Djurdj e vaka Glavica by Djurdj evo) ; B. Stali" .
A. Jurii, 1961, pp. 157161 (Jasik by Kraglljlvac).
244. A. Benac, 1959, (Zecovi); F. Fiala, 1894, p. 102, T. VIII; B. ovi , 1976,
pp. 107 ff. (Debelo brdo near Sa raj evo).
245. J. Koroec, 1946, pp. 738; A. Denae, 1948, pp. 539.
246. R.R. Schmidt, 1945, pp. 21 ff.
247. S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ III, p. 283.
248. KR. Schmidt, 1945, pp. 41-47, sl. 2426, T. 1214; M. Garaanin, 1967, pp.
z3 ff.; S. Dimitrij evi in: PIZ III , p. 285 .
249. T. T eak.Gregl, 1985, pp. 5759, Abb . 5; S. Dimitrij evi in: PJZ III , p. 285 .
250. N. Tasi, 1983, p. 26. Id em, 1959, pp. 3032.
251. P. Roman , 1980, p. 224, T. I i 12.
252. KR. Schmidt, 1945, pp. 127 135 ; S. Dimitrijevi, 1962, p. 252; Idem, 1971,
p. 147, Abb. 2; N. Tasi, 1967, pp . ZZ23; Id em, 1970, pp. 2628.
253. S. Dimitrij e vi, 1982, pp. 15 ff., Abb. 2.
254. P. Roman, 1980, pp. 224225 .
255. S. Dimitrijevi, 1977, p. 86, T. lill.
256. S. Dimitrij evi, in: PJZ llI, 1'1'.276.278.
257. R.K Schmidt, 1945, p. 22, Abb. 1011.
258. S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ Ill, p. 296.
259. D. ovi, 1976, pp. 107110, T . IlII 3, III/l6.
260. Ibid., pp. 105113.
261. S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ III, p. 299, and quot . bib1iog.
262. S. Dimitrij e vi, 1966, p. 23; Idem, 1982, pp . 2127; N. Tasi, 1967, p. 65.
263. P. Koroec, 195859, p. 105; M. Garaanin, 1973, p. 239.
264. S. Dimitrijevi, 1967, pp. 2 ff.; Idem, 1982, pp. 711; N. Tasi, 1967, pp.
67 68.
265.1. Escedy, 1985, p. 93, Pls. 8-16.
266. Z. Markovi, 1981, pp. 219 ff.
267. S. Dimitrij evi, 1967, pp. I ff.
268. H. Parzinger, 1984, pp. 1359, T. 4.
269. P. Koroec, 1959, pp. 94ff.; F. Leben, 1973, pp. 145 ff.
270. P. Koroec, 1973, p. 193 .
271. E. Ruttkay, 1973, pp. 38 ff.; F. Leben, 1973, pp. 145 ff.; Z. Markovi, 1981,
pp. 219 ff.
272. J. Koroee, 1955, pp. 243 ff.; P. Koroec, 1959, pp. 5 tr, T. IIV ; T. Bregane,

Notes

10 1

1964-65, pp. 179 ff.; Z. H arej, 1974, pp . 76 fr

273. P. Koroec - J. Koroec , 1969, pa ssim; T. Bregant, 1964-65, pp. 179 ff.; H.
Parzinger, 1984, pp. 13 ff., T. 6-8.

274. P. Koroec, 1962 , pp. 213 -236, and quo t. hibli og.; S. Batovi . 1973 , pp. 62
ff.; N. Petri , 1977, pp. 143 ff.; S. Dimitrij e vi in : PJZ III , pp. 321325; B. Covi
ln: PJZ IV, pp. 109-112.
275. P. Koroec, 1962, pp. 213 ff.
276. Ibid ., p. 214 ; . Barovi, 1973, pp. 1131 19.
277. S. Dimitrij e vi in: PJZ Ill , p. 313.
278. M. Pa rovi - V. Trbuh o vi , 1974, pp. 138 tf., T. Ill -V: A Benac, 1955 . p. 85,
T. l; . Mark ovi , 1974, pp. 7 ff. , figo 5.
279. P. Koroec, 1962, pp. 213 ff.; . Barovi , 1973, pp. 133 ff.: r. Leben , 1973 , p.
151; B. ovi in: PJZ IV, p. II I; B. M a rijano vi, 1981, p. 52; .A. Mil oe vi
B. Go veciarica, 1986, pp. 65 -69.
280. S. Dimitrijev i , 1967, p. 18; Ide m in : PJ Z Ill, pp . 321 fr
28 1. N. Ta si in: FBK, pp. 10- 13.
282. A. Miloevi - B. (Jovedariea, 1986, pe. Sl ff.
283. P. Ko roec, 1962, pp. 2 15 ff., T IV II; S. Ba tovi , 1973, pp. 133 ff., T 2527;
A. Mil oe vi - B. Govedariea, 1986, pp. 59 ff., T. IXI!.
284. S. Dimitrije vi in: PJZ Ill , p. 322 , and quot. hibliog.
285. M. Parovi V. Trbuhovi , 1974, pp. 138 ff.

\iIA\ilS09nA CI3lAJCIO~ NI
S31lS )IHIIl03N3 CIOr\itAJ ~O
CI31S193CI

THE LIST OF SITES

(The nu mber of the site corresponds wi th the number on th e map)

Aj DOVSKA JA MA pri Nemeki Vasi by Krko 27

(S loven ia)
28
2 BABA SIVAKA near Vaj ska (Baka)
29

3 BAKARN O GU MNO near Prilep (Pelaganla)

4 BATKA near Senta (Vojvodina)
5 BEKETINEC by Kri evci (NW Croatia)
6 BELEGI near Stara Pazova (Srem)
7 BRZA VRBA by Kovin (South Banat)
8 BUBANJ near Ni (Serbia)
9 CIGLA NA in Beli Manaslir (Baranja)
10 CI GLANA ln Dobanovci near Zemun (Srem)
II

CRNOBUKI near Bitala (Pelagonia)

12 DEBELO BRDO near Saralevo (Bosnia)

LJUBLjANSKO BA RjE near Ljubljana (Slovenia)

MA LA GRUDA near Tivat (Mon tenegro)
MOSTONGA I near Deranje

(Baka)

30 ODMUT (NW Mon tenegro)

31

PADINA ln the Upper Gorge of Djerdap (Serb ia)

32

PEClNE

33

PEPELANE near VI[ovitica (NW Croatia)

lO

Vrdnik near Ruma (Srem)

34 PERLEZ near Zren)an in (Banat)

35 PIVNICA near Odaci in Bosnia
36 PLO NIK near Prokuplje (South Serbia)
37 RUDI NA I near Kopnvnica (NW Croalla )
38 RUDNA GLAVA near Ma)danpek (NE Serbi a)

13 GO MOLAVA near Hrtkovci (Srem)

39 SE E near Kopri vn ica (NW Croalia)

14 GRADINA on the river Bosut near id (Srem)

40 SP ILA near Perast (Boka Kotorska - Montenegro)

41
15 GRADINA ZECOVI nea r Prij edor (North Bosnia)
16 G RAP EVA AND MARKOVA PILJA on the island 42
Hvar (Adn atic Coast - Croatia)
43
17 GUDNjA on Pelj eac (Adriatic Coast - Croa tia)
44
18 HISAR near Suva Reka ln Metochia (Serbia )

UPLEVEC near Bi tala (Pel agoni a)

TRI HUMKE by village jabuka near

Pa nevo

(Banat)

VAJUGA - KORBOVO (S erbia - D)erdap II)

VELA PI LJA near Vela Luka on the island Korula
(Croa tia)

19 HRNj EVAC by Ku tj evo (West Slavan la - Croatia)

20 HRUSTOVAA near Sanski Most (North Bosn ia)
2 1 JELEN AC near Aleksan drovac (Central Serbia)

45 VINA - BELO BRDO near Belgrad e (Serbia)

22 KEVDERC on Lubnik (NW Slovenia)

47 VIS near Derventa (North Bosn ia)

23

KLOKO EVA C near Don)1 Mi lanovac (East Serbia)

KRIVElj near Bor (East Serbia)

24
25 LASTVINE by

Bukovi i

near Benkovac (Dalmatia)

26 LICE near Erd evi k (Srem)

46 VINKOVCI

STA RA PIJACA - Market and Hotel

(Croa tia)

48 VLASTELI NSKI BREG (G rada c) in Sarva nea r Osijek

(Croatia)

49 VUEDOL near Vu kovar (West Srem )

50 ZLOTS KA PEI N A near Bor (East Serbia)

The following chapter represents the list of si tes which were taken as a
basis for this book. In our o ppinion this list will proove itself usefull for unde rstanding of tl,e phenomenon and the development of Eneolithic cultures, theit
geographical distribution, the model of settlements , as well as the material culture
and spiritual life. It has been done by choosing the most important eneolithic sites
exca vated, wi th material that was, at least partly published (repurts in Arheoloki
pregled , Starinar, Atheoloki vesenik, Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, Godinjak
Centra za balkanoloka ispitivanja ANl' BiH , Clasnik Zemaljskog muzeja in
Sara jevo or in some other publications). Of course, more detailed studies and fe w
monographs on these sites werc far more hclpfu!. The author is aware that some
sites were neglected, especi ally those investigated after 1989 when this book was
actually written. TI1e autho r was either no t in the position to (]cquire the data o n
the material from few sites (Guelnj a, n ew results from Vela Luka, excavarion s by
. Barovi near Zaelat etc.), ot could find only vague or inadeq uatly published data
on ce rtain sites, whic h could not be of any help to the reade r of this book (sties
in the Timok Valley n ear Negotin, Kovilovo, Hisa r in Kosovo etc.). In spite of
that, we believe that all of those interested in the matter will be able to find basic
information on the site, particularly on its eneoli thic horizan, and to look t(:Jr further
information in the relevant bibliography. In order to simplify the manipulation, in
the bibliography we quo ted only the author, journal, year anel page, and in the
bibliography listed in a separate chapter at the enel of this book , only the authors
name, the year of publishing and the page.
Meticulaus reader will notice the difference in the number of Eneolithic
sites from different regions. The reason for this lies in the fact that the former
Yugoslav region was unevenly investigated. This was also due ro unequal de velopment of cultures, and sometimes due to archaeologists lust to excavate sites with
more atractive material (e.g. the Vuedol culture cera mic ware , or the abundance
of finds on Bubanj-Salc uta complex), and sometimes due to other reasons. 111e
fact is that as we go from the East towards the West, the number of excavated
eneoli thic sites diminishes (unlike some other periods, HaUstatt for example). We

,1"'0"'
8_ _ __ __ _ _ __ ___ Th e Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

hope that the author of this book will not be judged as subjective for choosing 50
Eneolithic sites discussed further in the text .
ln the end we owe an e xplanation regarding illustrations. The selection
was made according to the data available from published material. The part of
ceramica l and other characteristic material was represented on the plates in this
book. The reason for different quality of ill ustra tions was the serious financial
difficulties. The list of sites was made in alphabetical order, and their numera tion
was made according to the numera tion on the map of sites which could be found
at the end of this chapter.

I. AJDOVSKA JAMA PRI NEMEKI VASI

BY KRKO (SW SLOVENIA)
Stratified settlement and Eneolithic graves

The cave Ajdovska or Kartueva Jama, as some call it, is situated on the
right bank of the river Sava, west of Krko. lt has two hallways and a central
chamber. The entrance is located beneath the cliff call ed Nemeko Vasjo, on the
altitude of227 m.
The excavations in this cave were started in the end oflast century by K.
Oeschmann, and were latter continued by local amateur archaeologists. The
material has been collected for years, when in 1938 S. Brodar decided to commence
first wide-range excavations. Tllese were inspired with authors desire to find the
remnants of the Pleistocene period. Prehistoric material was brought in light by J.
Koroec (Rasprave SAlU 3,1953) . ln the year 1967 excava tions ofprehistoric
deposit started and gained wider range in 1982.
According to the published results, in this cave exist five cultural
horizons. The first belonging to the Pleistocene, the second was the horizon of the
Late Neolithic graves, the third -- Eneolithic, the fourth -- Roman and the fifth
was of the Medieval period. Here we are interested in horizons II and Ill.
According to P. Koroec, they could be dated from the end of the Neo1ithic and
to the beginning of the second phase of the Eneolithic. These horizons contain the
material of the Alpine facies of the Lengyel culture, which could correspond to the
Lasinjska culture (1l1 h01izon). The data acquired by M. Horvat, the author of
latter investigations on this site , show the existance of 14 skeletons which belong
to the II horizon (the final Neolithic or, in our opinion the Early Eneo1ithic). This
could confirm J. Koroec's hypothesis tha t this ca ve was once used as a ri tual place ,

_ _ __ _ ----'109

Register o r major En eoli thic sites in rormer Yugos lavia

where deceased were simply laid on th e ground , nnd somecimes put in a sitting
position by the cave wall , and sometimes merely covered wich stones.
TI1e analysis of 14C give the dates from 534 ' \30 BP for horizon Il (the
final Neolithic), and 5175-4800 130 for the Enea lithic ha rizon Ill.
Lit.: J. Koroec, Rasprave SAZU 3, 1953 ; P. Komec, 1975, 167 169: M. Horvat, Af'

1988,4042 .: PJZ III, 144.

,;
,...::::---,
2~
....

----

.------ - , -~
~-~~
D ' ~.
_~,
~
~=:=c.:.:::=c::?~~~"
'~
I .,~
~
~
~
.
-------:
--.
.
"'
~
,
'
,
---;
.
.
,
~
\i
-------~---- ~.---'---------=-~
~ -' -..-----------::....
~ ------::::---------------- --, ~~ -------'-~
\.
,
I ,....
-

- .

- -

~- -

- ---

----

"

---------

"
/"

--"~~~O,
,

.,

--:>/-- ..... "1::-=- --

-------- -- _______
,/
_______________
~/

- ----- ------------= ----- ------- ------

"' - -- -

\,

Fig. 1 -- Ajdovska jama . t he

groundplan or th e cave (arter
M . Horvat. 1988. 40)

110
---~

The Eneoli thic cultures of Central and West Balkans

2. BAB A S I VA KA NEA R VAJSKA ( B AKA)

Th e Eneolithic necropolis
During the constructi on works for the e mbankmcn,t 1.5 km northwest
ofVaj ska, on thc loca lity called Baba Sivaka one sma ller nccropolis wa s f()und.
TIle terrain was somewhat higher than the old river bed of the Danube. During
the big flood in 1965 this was the place from whic h thc' earth was taken
the
e mbankme nt, and latter, during the first ground surveying one Eneolithic grave
was found in the proAle. lt was the impetus for thc' rescue-excavations of 1966
and 1967 (B. Brukne r and P. M edo vi ) . During these works 6 trcnches werc
opened . All t renches were streched on the right side of the road that goes
from Vajska to Kara vukova. Six skc1etons were discovered, t11at were laid into
sandy ground. One could get an impressio n that this could easil\, be sma ller
necrop~) li s with individua! graves (only 3 our of6 rre nches showed the existance
of the gm ves) .
The burial ritual, orientation, and the distribution of grave goods show
that they obeyed strict funerar\, routine: skc1etons were laid in rec ta ngular grave
pits in extremly flexed position, with arms positioned under the chin or under the
head. Skelerons were o riented East-W est, with the exception of the grave number
5 which was oriented Northwest- Southeast and the grave 6 which was dislocated .
The decesed were laid on either left (Gr. 3, 5) or right side ((Jr. l ), whi ch co uld
perhaps depend o n the sex of rhe individuals. (; r avc goods were almosr always put
infront of the face (gr. 1,5) while the grave 5 had one extra grave offering placed
near the legs . Thc grave goods were coa rse pots and bowls, and in the grave 5,

tc"

which was the richest one, nea r the head on the both sides two golden pendants
we re found.

The typological analysis of the ceramic material, espec ially the appereance ofSclteibenltmkel handles, show that the necropolis belongs to the Hunyadi halolll
culture of thc Eneolithic period. This is the single necropolis of this culture in
Vojvodina. On the account of the specific material ((lund here, B. Brukner n amed this

Fig 2 -- Baba Sivaka. pot- pheno111el1ol1 Vajska-l-ILl11yadi culture . lt could be placed into the el1d of the Early
tery from the grave I. 2. S [l1eo!ithic of this region.
and golden pendant (ace. to
B. Brukner 1970) Lit.: B. Brukner, AILlg. Xl, 1970, 1-14, PL l-V]]] and Pr. 1-2 .

Register of major Eneolith ic sites in former Yugoslavi_

a ~__~_

III

3. BAKARNO GUMNO NEAR PRILEP (P ELAGONIA)

Stratified site
The site Bakarno (;unmo near village epi govo is of the tell-type
(tumbe), as they call them locally. lt is situated 17 km south ofPrilep, on the hank
of the river Blato which empties in the Crna Reb . The excavations were commenced in 1959 by tlle expert team from the Museum in Prilep (B. Kitanoski,
1971). The depth of the cultural layer is 3.10 meters. Three difTerent horizons/phases (with two sub-phases) of occupation could be dis tingui shed here.
Bakarno Gumno b (3.10- 2.60 m) - with characteristic black ware which

some times has chann clcd decoration . lt belongs to the end o f tht. Neolithic period

of Pelagonia .
Bakarno Gumno lb (2.60-1.70 m) - with houses of rL'ctangular basis and
the wate decotated with channels and burnishing (shallow bowls with swolkn
rims). The f(lrIns from the pre vious phase still appear.
Bakarno Gumno II (1.70-0.50 m) - horizon ofburnt houses. Although
the con tinuity of ce ramic f()rms and decoration e xists, red painting appears
(crusted), as well as te rra-cotta. TIle re are also burials in se mi-seated position.

Bakarno Gumno III (0.50-0.00 m) - the youngest phase with significant

transformation of the material culture. According to its manifestati()[1S (decoration
with incisedlines, wol f teeth, net ornaments) it belongs to the beginning of the
Early Bronze Age, phase Kritzana.
The first two phases on Bakarno Gumno belong to the period of the Eorly
and the Middle Eneolithic of Pelagonia, with the fl1ll owing distinction : the first
l?hase could be marked as Crnobuki- Bakarno Gumno, and the second as CrnobukiSuplevec.

(rv),..
'Jt
~

.J,

Lit.: B. Kitanoski, 1971, 139- 140, fig, 1-12.

Flg. 3 -- Bakarno Gumno. pot-

tery and terra -cotta (ace. to

B. Kitanoskr. 197 1. 139)

112

The Eneolithic cu ltures of Central and West Balkans

Regis ter of major Eneolithi c si tes in former Yu goslavia

I 13

4 BATKA NEAR SENTA (VOJVODINA)

Th e necropo lis and th e settlement of th e Tisza polgar
and Bodrogkerezstu r cu ltu re s
Batka is freque nt ropographical te rm in Vojvodina and is sometimes
associated with high loess te rraces o r large r mounds which are never tl uoded (Batka
nea r Pe rlez, Ba tka n ea r Subotica). On such amound O. Korek calls it "","ka) graves
an d remains of the settlement were c xcavatcd from 1873, and later on with tew

gaps until 1944. Some of these graves, es pecially those excavateu in 1882 by Gy.
Dud as, belong to Sa rmates, and some of them to the Medieval pe riod, and only a
sma ll fraction belo ngs to the Eneolithic period (the T iszapolgar and the Bodrogke rezstur c ultures). .
Except for the typology of ceramic mate rial, findings from Batka are not
very significa nt (the lack of complete grave asse mblages), with t he exception of
the material collected by J. Korek in 1944, and published fourte en years latter.
According to his infor mation there were seven burials and th ree pits from the
Eneoli thic period. The deceased were buried in tle xed position a nd we re regularly
o riented North-West - South-East. Grave offerings were smaller bowls, pots
which resemble Milchwpf or coa rse pots. The only exception is the grave I in which,
apart from one bowl, the top of the copper knife and the stone polisher were found.
Being partly devastated, this grave could not bc ta ken as a reliable one, as it could be
placed in the T iszapolgar culture only according to the shape of the pot. ll,e uther
graves a re somewha t yOW1gc r and belong to the Bodrogkerezstur culture.
According to th e pottery sh apes, t h ree pits, excavated by j. Korek, can
be attrib uted to the 'Tiszapolgar c ulture. T his could lead us tO the conclusion that
o ne d ugou t- type settlement of the T iszapo lgar cultu re existed here, and was used
latter as a n ecropoli s. 111is is frequent phe nome no n on sites uf this two c ultures in
H unga ry. Other gra ves in flatka, belung to the Sa rmatian pe riod (8- 10 graves),
a nd th e Medieval pe riod (1 8 graves).
Lit.:)' Korek, RVM 7, 1958, 21-30 .

Fi g. 4/1 -7 -- Batka . offerings

fr om graves : 9 (I. 7. 8): 8
(2.5): 2 (4): I (6) and Pi t
(3). (ace. toj. Korek 1958.
21 ff.)

The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Bal kans

11 4

s. BEKETINEC BY KRiEVC I
The settl ement of the La sinj a culture
A mong the num ber of sites of the LasinjG culture ofNonh- West Croatia,
Beketinec could be of notabil' importance, due to the fact that it reptesents single
layered settlement with chronoiogicG lly unique material. It means that it gi ves clear
info rmatio n un cl single phase in the development nf thl' Lasinja culture . An
am ate ur archaeologist was 'responsible' fo r thl...' JisC<.lVery uf this site . It was

Vjekoslav Duk i who gathered the material, perform ed test-trcnch exca vations
and aroused the interest for thi s site, among the professionals. S. Dimitrij evi has
quoted his investigations in the PJZ III , along with the data gathered by Z. Homen
in later works.
The topog taphy show that Beketinec , accord2

ing to its location, represents the prototy pe of the

Lnsinja culture sites he twee n the ri ve rs Sa va and Drava.

lt is situGted on an elongated Illound with t1arrened

plateau and relatively steep sisles which descend towards marshy tE'rr<lin and the C rnec c reck whic h runs

nearhy . From the preiiminGry report by Z. Homen

(1 980) we see that the first rescue excava tions werc
unde rtaken in 1978 on the locality Imbra lovec left of
thc road that leads fr om Dobovac to Beke tinec. T h e
locality on the right side of thc same road, on which
sounding excava ti ons wok place in 1979 is called
T opolje . I t is e vi dently the same archaeological site wi th
different nGmes. As S. Dimitrijevi already did, we shall
also use only the name Beketinec.
The investiga tions of 1978 and 1979 show
that the cultural layer is either poor, or has been destroyed by t1eld works, and was preserved merely in pits, dugllUtS and natural
de pressions. During the campaign of 1978 one dugout was found. T he other one,
di scovered in 1979 was very la rge (l5 x 15 m), which makes it undoubtedly one
of the biggest objects of the Lasinja c ulture in th is region . The dugo ut had twO
rooms, and in its vicinity there was an unusual triangular hearth sunk 15 en1 into
the ground. ll.i s area was very ri ch wit h ceramic material , bone and flint tools.
This abundance of ceramic material was not comple tely published, but the published material clearly shows t he classical ph ase of the Lasinja culture (phase IIb,
according to S. Di mitrijevi) . Those are well known shapes like cups with the
handle, bea kers on decorated foot, bowls with in verted rim s, dee p am phora e and
Fig.5 -- Beketi nec. sha rds of
similar ware. They were decorated with incised lines combined wi th pierced dots,
pottery (acc. to Z. Homen.
which is characteristic fo r the classical phase of the Lasinja culture.
1980.30)

Lit. Z. Homen, AP 21 , 1980,30.

Regis ter of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

115

6. BELEGI NEAR STARA PAZOVA (SREM)

Stratified se ttlement
On the high loess bank, in the district of village Belegi, few archaeologisal sites were recognized. Excavations were und ertaken on only three of them:
Sanine, Grada c and Stojia Gumno. First two are important for the study of the
Eneolithic cultures, while the third one was the necropolis with cremated individuals with urns that gave name to whole Bronze Age cultu re: Belegi culture.
Excavations were performed from 1954 to 1965.
TI)e site Sa n ine is model fo r fortified, multy-laycred settlements similar
to those along the left bank of thc Danube from the contluence of rivers Dra va
and Sava. The platea u with the settlement was fo rtified with two deep rrenches
divided with the pa lisade. The stratigraphy shows the following horizons:
L the hori zon with T iszapolgar culture pits.
2. the horizon which should correspond with the Eneolithic humus.
3. the horizon of houses of the Early Vuedol culture.
4 . the horizon with remains of the Vatin culture houses.
5. the horizon with the Bosut culture pottery {phase Kalakaa }.
6. humus layer with La Tne ceramic materi aL
TIle fir>t and the third horizon belong to the Eneolithic period. The
settlement of the Tiszapolga r culture would represent the southernmost point of
anine

Gradac

/ - - - The level of modern road

Double ditch

(Surduk)
The present level of the Danube

its penetration, while the Vuedol culture settlement would belung to the time of
the erection of thc fortiftcations (the trenches and the palisade) . According to the
cetamic material it could be dated to the Early phase uf this culture.
TI)e site Gradac is sepa rated trom the site a n ine with one deep trench,
as it wa s the case on Vuedol. During the excavations on this site, rem ains of the
V uedol culture settl~ ments were detected, together wi t h graves which belong to
the Vinkovci culture and dugout-type settlement of the La te Belegi culture (Ha
A2) . The Vuedol culture ware is slightly younger than that found on anine and
probably preceded the Vinkovci culture ware.
Lit.: V. Trbuhovi , RVM 5,19 56, 147-1 88; N. Tasi , [p.)ques ... , 164-166: S. DimitriPJZ IlL

jevi ,

Fig.6 .- The cross-section of

the site anin e and Gradac
in Belegi

~I-,-I"-6_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ____T
-'-'h-"e:.:E
: :n::e"'ocolit""hic c_ul_tu_res _o_f e_e_ntral and West Balkans

7. BRZA VRBA BY KOVIN (BA NA1)

Stratified settlement
On the left bank of the Danube, only twelve kilometers upstream fro m
Kovin, there are re mains of larger prehistoric and antique settlement. In the
opened profile one can follow the loess layer some 200 m in length, and 3 m decI',
thus forming smooth terrace ahove marshy terrai n. The site was spotted for the
first time by F. Milleker in his notes , and rescue archa eological excavations were
conducted from 1969 to 1970, before Oerdap power plant was built. and the terrain
submerged. The occupation horizon varies in depth from 1.2 tO 1.6m. Three main
horizons could be traced, among whi ch the youngest belongs to the Roman period,
the middle to the Bronze Age, and the oldest, and major ho rizon to the Eneolithic
period .
Few dwelling objects we re notified in this horizon: pirs dug in the virgin

soil , zones with house rubble, few bigger (2.70 x 1.8 m) and few smaller (1.5 x I A
m) calotte kilm. The ceramic material is pooriy preserved due to fl oods that
occasionally afflict this area. The reconstruction was made possible because
ceramic moreri al wa s predominantl y discovered near kilns. Generally, those were
large massive potS made of pooriy refined clay, deco rated with plastic ribbons, nail
incisions, and often with haring bone ornam ent. The pottery from the Eneolithic
layer belongs to one unique, charac teristic style, that could be marked as Cernavoda III. With the exception of few fragments decorated with shallow c hannels

.....

, 78809

e
-

fig. 7 .. Brza Vrba. the pro- (on the rim ofla rger bowls), other pot tery bares attributes of robust, rough manner
fd e of the trench (ace. to P. of decora tion.
The site near Brza Vrba be longs to the beginning of the Middle Eneolithic
Med ovi. 1969. T. XLIV)

in this part of the Danube basin and is the first exca vated site of this type in fo rmer
Yugoslavia. In the vicinity of Vrac, superficial fin ds of similar settlements were
also registered .
Lit. : P. M e d o vi 1976, 105; Idem, 19763,5 tf.

Register of major Eneoli th ic si tes in former Yugoslavia

117
------

8. BUBANJ NEAR Ni
Stratified site
TI1e hill with the pla teau which dominates the whole surrounding region
is loca ted in the the very center of the Ni va lley. O nce, in t he period of prehistoric
cultures, the ri ve r Nia va used to merge here with t he Juna Morava. TI1is si te is
exrremly well situated on important crossrodads of South-East Europe. Roads th at
lead rowards the South and the Aegean , to t he East and the Sofi a valley, TI1tace
and futher tO Asia Mino r, towards the So uth West and Kosovo and Metoch ia and
further to the Adria tic coast, and finally toward s t he North, along Morava valley
to the Pan nonian plain all clustered in this pla ce. Its' geographic position played
importa nt role in the dispersion of cultural groups that belong to the Buba nj-Sal cuta- Kri vodol complex.
TI1e fi rst investiga tion on this si te wa s pub lished by A. Ori- S lave ri in
193 5. T he fi rst scien tific e valuation of Bub anj was made by M. Ga raanin in 1950.
and his division. with somc la tter revisi ons is still va lid. T he existance of the Bubanj
or the Bubanj -H um gro up was certified primarily through the ana lysis of thc
material from Bubanj. Latte r exca vations of thi s site remained associated wi th M.
Garaanin, and partl y D. Garaa nin's o pus.

If we neglected t he lowest le vds in the stratigraphy of Bubanj, which

hclong ro one still insuficienrly investigated S ta revo c ultu re horizon, as well as
the horizons of thc Earl y Bro nze Age (Buba nj Ill), the most impressive part of the
occupation hori zon, wi t h houses, pits and hearths belong ro the Eneolithic. T hree
diffe rent cultural and chro nologica l en tities could be divided : l. Bubanj la, the
settlement of the Bubanj-Salcura -Krivodol culture period ; 2. Buban j lb, with the
material of the Baden-Kostolac c ulture provenien ce; 3. the ma terial with elements
of the Co tofeni I II culture as well as of the Earl y Bronze Age of TI1race and Greek
Macedonia.
The ri chest and the most important part of the cultural horizon on
Buban j (la) contains abundant and miscellanco us cera mic material with c hantaroi
and shallow pla tes with black burnish ed surface often om ated in graffito technique
or pa inted with red colour.
Lit. : A . Ori,~Sl C\ve ti , Mitteilungen de r praehist. Kommisslon de r Akademie de r
W issenschafte n, Wien 19 40, 1-40, M. Garaanin, Bubanj i Humska uka (catalogue),

Ni 1983, 7- 19, and lit.cit.

The En eolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

118

figo 8

oo

Pottery of the Buba nj

Saclu ta

Krivodol culture from Bubanj

119

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

9. "CIGLANA" IN BELI MANASTI R

Stratified prehistoric settlement
An ample site of the Baden culture and the culture of the Tram -Da" ,,bian enerusted ware was found near the brick plant in Beli Manastir. The >lre or"
some
hectares is located on a plateau, in the triangle formed of rhe =
rail road, local road Beli Manastir Baranjsko Petrovo Selo and the local railro2c.
that goes in the crescent from the main railroad to Baranjsko Petrovo Selo. T ne
plateau is 6.6 meters higher than the adjacent southern marshy terra in, which
was ideal position for the settlement.
Small rescue investigations of this area were conducted in 1954. ln che
meantime the site was largely deva stated by the exploitation of the clay. Than..<s
to the excavations of K. Vinski-Gasparini, the fellow of the Archaeologica
Museum in Zagreb and the Museum of Slavonia in Osijek, some 23 5 square
meters were excavated, the archaeological material was gathered and a clear

la

stratigraphic position of the cul tural horizons obtained. There were 5 geological stra

and only the second one (from the bottom) tumed up to be cultural horiwn. The
layer was 0.4 meters thick, while in the pits it reached almost 2 meters. ln this layer
there were two cultural and chronological periods: one, older, which would belong

3
to the Baden culture, rather

4
pOOf,

except in pits, and the other, yaunger which

belongs to the Encrusted Pottery culture of the South Trans-Danubian, i.e. the
transition from the Early into the Middle Bronze Age (Br Bl/2). This unstratified
Baden culture settlement had simple pits and dugouts, similar to that near the brick
plant in Dobanovci. Pits 8 and 9 wi th annexes are characteristic for this site. They

had ceramic material which determines them clearly. For example, the pit 9
contained cups with ribbon handles and bulb-like containers, bowls with net and
do tted decoration, as well as other findings that date it into the classical phase of the
Baden culture.
Lit. : K. Vinski-Gasparini, 1956.

Fig. 9 - Po::.er, iro;n 8eli

Ma nasur

20:

Gaspo nm 95

<-

.'i1ski-

120

Th e Eneolithi c cul tures of Central and West Balkans

10. "CIGLANA" IN DOBANOVCI NEAR ZEMUN (SREM)

Stra tified prehistoric settlement

In the easte rn part of S r~ m , in the sub urbs of village Dobanovci, not far
from Zemun, on the terrace above the river (lalovica (now canal), one larger
prehi storic site wi th ho rizon ta l stratigraphy was (o und . The Galovica rive r runs

from thc so uthern slopes of Frub Gora, and then via Srem region, flows into the
rive r Sava . In the prehi story this was vcry impo rta nt communication.

Very intensive work of the brick plant, between 1950 and

1970 devasta ted large part of the si te , its numerous obj ects and Encoli thi c gra ves . Smal le r e xcavati ons we re pe rfor med in 1954 (V.
T rbuho \~ ) , while larger exca va tions were beeing undertaken wi th gaps
from 1960 tO 1969 (N . Tasi ). Substa ntial collection of archaeological
material dated main ly in the Baden culture was gathered.

During the excavations of 1954, 1960, 1964, 1968 and 1969

an area of some 1000 square me ters was examined . In this arca, whi ch
covered merely the endangered pa rt of the site, the remains of the
se ttlement and individua l gra ves of di fferent cultures like the Starevo ,
Baden, KostOlac and individ ual fi ndings of the V ued ol c ul ture together with few meral findings and fragments of pots from the end of
the Early Bronze Age were fo und. The settlements ha ve de veloped in
the horizonta l stratigraphy so that we do not ha ve any da ta on the
position of each and eve ry individual phase. They belong to the
sin g l e ~lay e rl.:d typ e with nU1l1crous pits, dugouts or semidugo uts without
any significan e stratum. 1l1e largest settlement was the one tha t belongs
to the Baden culture with 80% of objec ts excavated (pi ts, heart hs,
dugouts) together wi th two graves. One of them (the one with t1exed
skele ton) , wa s d isco v~ red during archaeological research and, unfortunately, did not have any grave offerings, while the other, with grave
goods, was discovered during the exploitation of the clay fo r the brick
plan t. Few larger d ugouts (6- 7m in diame ter) also belong to the Baden
culture settlement with ela bora te ho use structute: hea rths, banks e tc.
The ware was typica l for the classi cal phase of th e Baden cul ture. There
are numerous c ups with bulb sha ped container, bowls and amphorae
decorated wi th haring bone, stars and dotted ornament, then deeper
pots decorared with broken lines, co called Fischbutte shapes etc.

1l1e Kostolac culture pits were discovered in the west part of

Fig. 10 -- Dobanovci. pottery the site, and the ceramic materi al wa s found outside the horizon as well as in other
of the Baden. Kostolac and pa rts of the site. It belongs to the Furchemtich phase of the Kostolac culture. Few
Vuedol cultures (accordin g pottery finds with thc V ued ol culture elemen ts (the cup on the ring shaped foot)
to N. Tasi . 196 9.39)

Re~s ter of major En eolith ic sites in former Yugoslav!a

121

show that there are remnants of thc settlement dated probably in the end of the
Encoli thic on the part of the Lll lexcavated site.

Lit. : N. Tasi , 1959 , 227 ff: IbiJ ., 1969 , AI-' 11,39-42, T XVI.

I I. CR NOBUKI NEAR BITOLA (PELAGONIA)

Stratified settlement
ll1is tell-type settlement is situated norh-east of Fli tola on the right side
of the road Bi rola - Prilep, on the bank of the river emnica , no t fa r from the
vill age C rnobuki. It is circul ar in shape, somc 150 meters in diameter, and 4 meters
in height. [ts dime nsions confo rm with average prehi sroric tell s frequen t in
Pela gon ia fro m Prilcp ro rIorina in Greece. T h is site entered the archaeological
li terat ure rather early, tha nks to t he work of V.J. Fewkes in Macedonia. During
his surveying in Pela goni a in 193 4 he disco vered this site and made sm aller test
soundings . His disco very wa s brought fo rward by V. Mil oji in 1949 when hc
attempted tO settle it in hi s system of thc Macedonian Neolithic. La ter, in 1953,
M. Gara anin dealt with this material for the sa me o bj ective. 111e excava tions
were renewed in 1974 (B. Kitanoski. D. Simosb, J. Todoro vi). The precise
sequencc was esta blisllcd: the c ultural layer was divided in fo ur hori zons (I . IV) .
According to the analysis of pottery, the authors proved tha t horizons I-Ill belong
to the Eneolithic, and horizon IV to the Early Bro nze Age . ll, is yo ungest hori zun
develops continually above t he yo ungest (III) hori zon of thc Eneolithic settle men t.
ll,e stylc types of cera mic ware and plastic art of Eneolithic horizons
attributed this site to the Bubanj-Salcuta- KrivodoI complex. Even more, this site
could be dated in to a region al va ria nt of the sa me comple x, some times mentioned
as C rnobuki , Bakarno Gumno-Crnob uki, C rnobuki-uplevac group, or merely as
the variant of the Pelagonian Eneolithic. Ha ving in mind thc frequent appeara nce
of burnished ware, o the r pottery shapes as well as terra-co tta , Encoli thi c horizons
at Crnobuki could bc se ttled in the horizon of East Balkan graffito ware, roge ther
with sites fro m Saleuta and G umelni ta in the l\orth, over Bubanj and Karanovo
VI, ro the si tes of Dikili-Tash - Sitagroi type in t he South.

/
~,

,
l,

Fi g. 1 I -- Crno buki . terra-cotta

and pottery (a cco rding to
Simoska - Kitan oski -

Lit. : D. Simoska, B. Kitanoski , j.

Todorovi ,

1976,43 -72, T . I-Xl.

Todorovi. 19 76.43)

122

___T
'C.he Eneolithic_c_u_ltu_res of Central and West Balkans

12. DEBELO BRDO NEAR SARAJEVO

Stra tified site

Debelo Brdo nea r Sa rajevo bdongs to the prchistoric hill-type scttlements. It wa s largely devaswted so tha t rich ceramic findings of diffe rent cultures
could be discovered in secondary posi tion on thc slopes of the hill. This site is one
of the Ilrst sites of the Vueu ol culture. TI,e first data on the site wert' gi ven hy r.
Fiab in 1894. ((JZM VI, 1894, 107-124, T V III , 9,11,12), when he published his
e xcavations from pre vio us ye ar. The first conclusion he made: was thar the material

was dislocated when was hcd down from the plateau. Few yea rs ln ter he wrote about
the ma terial from Debelo Brdo in WMBH IV (1 896, 33 fT.). Almost se venty years
elapsed until the day when t he material t1naly atrained thc pro per place in the study

d\

JJ

of the Vue d o l culture and the development of the ca rly meta Ilurgy in Bosnia. The
credit for tha t goes tu B. o vi , who investigated in the Archaeo logical Collection
of the Zemalj ski Muzej in Sa raj e vo and worked on F. Fi ala's already I("gotten
materia l. He divided t hree cultural and chronological hori zons on Debelo Brdo:
one, that belongs to the Late Neolithic, the second - thl Eneoli thic or t he V uedo l
culture horizon and the thi rd one, that belongs to the La tL' Bronze A ge, i.e. the
South-Bosnian group, as he n amed it.
According tD its ty po logical att ributes , the Eneol ithic pottery belongs to
one mature phase of t he V uedo l culture , the So uth- Bosnian facies of the Vuedo l
cul ture , or the Debelo Brdo ty pe , as S. Dimitrijevi calls it. W e are dealing with
rathe r coarse modded , ca rved o r Ftlrchenstich' ware . Alo ng this material onE' simple,
I

fragmen ted re rra'co[[a was discoven: J. However, what is morL' impo rtant is thc fact

,hat Debelo Brdo in the Eneoli thic period was big metall urgical center. Seven pieces

Fig. 12 -- Debelo Brdo. of casts, larger and small er, came ffllm this site (3 1(" axes with tubular extension fur

shards of pottery of the the handie and 2 for daggers). TI,ere are two ceramic objec ts used during casting of
cu lture (ace B. metal. T ogether wi th Ljubljansko Barje anci Vinkovci, Debelo Brdo could be the
OVI 197 6. 10 7 riches t site with this type of objects.

Vued ol

Lit.; F. Fial", 1894. (UZ M VI , 107, T V III) ; B. C\>v i, 1976 , 107-1 10, PL II -III: A.
Durman, ~A. 8, 1983, I ff.

Regi ster of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavi!' _

123

13. GOMOLAVA NEAR HRTKOVCI (SREM)

Stra tifi ed settlement

ln the SUhLlfbs of village Hrtkovci, Dn the bank of the rive r Sava on the
place where it makes the turn towards the South, there is amound fl)rmed by
stra tifk a tion of cultural ho ri zons from the I\:eolithi c m the Medieval period. It is
assumed that the re maining surface is merely rhe third of irs original size . Even
toda y we can see the trench tha t surrounded the 11lound and made the life o n it
more sec ute. 11lis fo rt ificatio n wete made probalhy as ea rl y as Eneolithi c, and the
trencl, was latter widened and deepened .
11lis settlement was spotted early in the protile of the river bank and
instanrly entered the archaeological li teratu re. It was me ntio ned firsrly in the end
of the las t century in the reports of M. Wnhalsk i (18 98), then in
1904 in the works of M. Br unschmidt who started with mino r
rre nc hing on Go mo la va . Systematic e xcava..,tio ns (the second
phase) star ted in 1953 . and lasted until 1957 (S . Nad , R. Raajski ,
M. Giri , L. Sekerd et a l!.); fin ally, the th ird phasL' wete extensive
archaeological excavatio ns performed in accord wi th the btt's t
methodological stadnards (larger surface , palaco-zoologica l and
pala ca- bo tanical resea rch , 14C dating and so o n). These investi gatio ns mok place fro m 1965 to 1985 (Il. Bruk ner, N. Tasi , B.
Jovanovi , J. Petrovi and n ume ro us assistants) .
ll,e stratigraphy of the clllmral horizon , of some 6.5
meters th ick, showed that the lowest horizons (Gomolava la-b)
bclong to the N eolithic, while above it there are di tle rent layers of
Eneolithic humus (Il), Eneolithic, (lll a-c), Bronze Age (IVa-c).
Ea rl y Iron Age (Va-b), La T ene (Vla-c). Roman period (V II ) anci
at last t he Medieval hori zon (V Ill) . 111e Eneoli thic horizon s II and III Were !(JrIned
above the youngest Vin a c ulture settlement and a smaller necropolis ofehe same
culture (Gomalava lc). A ccording to indi vid ual pottery shards the Eneolithic
humus (Gomolava ll), belong to the time of pen etra tion of the Tis:apolgar and
Bod rogkerezstur cultures. 11lis was evidenced in the entire area of the plateau,
which co uld be seen in the profile tOwards the ri ver. Phases C omolava lIIa-c
co ver: a) a smallet settl ement of the Baden culture with pits (Ill a); b) one
lo ng-teremed and abundant settlement of the Kostola c culture with three clwell ing hori zons (lllb 1-3) , and finally c) one modest settlement of the Vuedol cultre
that belongs to the end of the Eneolithic (l Ilc) . A bove these Eneoli thic ho rizons ,
there was a horizon fo rmed d uring the Early Bro nze Age (I Va), with the ma terial
of the Vati n c ulture and individ ual findings of the incrus ted T ransdanubia n ware ,
as well as fragments of the Vinkovci cul t ure ware .
Individual graves wi th or without grave goods were also found during
these excavations. ll,ose were skeletal graves with dece seci in fle xed position. In
one of these gta ves there was on e Kostolac type vessel.
Li t.: M.

Giri,

in: Gomolava 1,1988,1 7 (anJ the bibliog raphy) .

Fig. l} -- Gomol ava. bowl of

the Vuedol cul ture

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Bal kans

124

,-,,-,--- --=._-====---

~-

__ J /

'.

'-o

. - - .::

COMOl AVA- Il~~~':~~'~~~~

'9B- il.
19('5.- 69.

l'

figo 12a -- Gomolava, plan

and profil e (ace. to Gomolava I, 9-10)

I9fH - 7/.

,==';O=";';;'=~J;;
;
'=,,;"';:,,,...;c.o rn

19 77 - 1\5

--

~ej(lster

of major Ene~lithic sites in former Yugoslavia

125

14 GRADINA ON THE RIVER BOSUT

NEAR iD (SR EM)
Stra tified settlement
The se ttlem~nt C;radina on Bosut, 7 km south of id, " nten::d the
archaeologicall iteratute first of all as a stratitied settlement of the Iron Age and
as a eponymous sitt' f(lf one new culture then c"lIed the Bosut- Basara hi culture.
1'\0

importance was th e n given to lo wer hori:on5 1 cspeci<Jll y

tO

the Eneo lithic

horizon.
Tl1" plmeau Gradina , (di m. 265 x 60 m), i, situated on the bank uf tht
Bosut river (partiy devasta ted byerosion) and the ri vet Struga which fl ows near
its western foothills. Thc pla tea u is about 10 me ters higher then surrounding
terrain) thus having dominant position. This site helo ngs to the tortified type or
prehistoric settlements. The other twu sides that were not protected by the Bosut
and Struga river were CI1co111passcci w ith

<J

Jeep trenc h. In the eastern part therl'

is one smaller and even bener to rtitled plateau (Gradac). This elaborate system
was prohably built in thc time of the Bosut culture, although one ca n suppose
that natural con veniences h"d heen important t(lC the building of the settlement
in boch Eneolithic and Bronze Age.
Although this sitc wus already we ll known, e xcavatio ns startcu as late

as 1964. They were continued during next 1965 (N. Tasi , P. Miluev i ) , and
since 1975. they became e xtensive systematic in vt:stigarions which lasted until
1985 (P. Medovi , D. Popovi , i'i. Ta si ). Thanks to results uf this reseatch ,
precise sttatigrophy of cultutallayers up to 6.5 m thick was established . Abundanr
archaeological material was gathered, thus covering periods from the Late Neoli thic (Bosut l), Eneolithic (Bosut ll), Bronze Age (Bosut llI) and Early and Late
Iron Age (Bosut IV and V).
Two Eneolithic horizons (Ila and b) were t() rmeci, one should say, in
continuu above the oldest horizon with ma te rial tha t belongs to the Sopot- Lengyel
culture. Tl,e earlier Eneolithic settlement (Ila) according to its ware belongs to
a variant of the ea rly phase of the Bala to n-Lasinj e culture, and the yo unger (lIb)
belongs to the Boleraz-Cemavoda III culture. Tl,e transition between these twu
phases was gra dual, which was asc('rtain t:!d by stratignl phic evide nce::; and rypulogical
c haracteristics of ceralnic ware . From 1981 to 1985 twn larger features were eXC<l~

vatcd. Opulent cera mic matericd was found which he lo ngs tn the Boleraz . . Cenlavoda

III culture. Tlns could be the first evidence on the architecture of this culture in the
Yugoslav Danube Basin. Tl,is was tbe main reason why another relative chronology
of tlns site was made. Instead of previous, corrected division on tlve horizons was
introduced. T he Ene,)lithic is lll"rked " S ll, above th is ldlnws III - the Rronze Age
(divided into

t\Vt)

suh . . phases a nn J b) l then thc richest nne tha t belungs

tD

the E<-1rly

126

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

Iron Age (wirh three sub-phases a-e), and the youngest prehistoric honzon (V) which
belongs to the La Tene.

Lit,: D. Popovi, 1981, Mate rij ali XI X, 57 -62: P. MeJ<)vi, 1978, 13-14: N. Tasi, 1985,
1-11: N. Tasi , 1987,85-92.
,

,~,.-rrn1'TrrI11TTITmlTITmlTITmTTITmlTITmn1TrnTr___ _-,F="'-Fhorizons
I,suU,]lnll l Dwelling

'"

"
III

Fig.14 - Gradina on the

flver Bosut. the profile of
the treneh 2

____________~127

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

I S. 'GRADINA' ZECOVI NEAR PRIJEDOR

Stratified settlement
Above the village Zecovi, 7 km south of Prijedor, there is on e fo rtifieu
prehistoric site Gradina. In the foothill of the mound runs the ri ver Sa na wi th
broad plain behind it. This sitc dominates the surrounding and has im portant
strategic position near the road Prij edor - Sans ki Most. As an archaeological site
it was mentioned for the first time in the end of the last century (1891) in t he
works ofV . Radimsky. He ment ions it as a I'eolit hic settlement used also in la ter
periods (Roman period). Similar data could be found few years later in the nores
of F. Fiala (1894). First archaeological excavations were commenced in 1953
(excavation of Roman period rema ins) , and from 1954 A . Benac made in vesti gations on prehistoric h orizons. TI1is re search made this si te impo rtant prehisroric
site of the Vuedo l culture in the fi rst place.
In the restric ted,

:511100 rh

plateau Gradina ~ with the architectural

rcmnants ohhe Roman and Medi eval period - A Benac opened some 75 square
meters. Regardless of the fact that the cxcavated surface was rather small, stratigraphic data and prehistoric material show goud oppo rtunity tn identify the Encolithic se ttleluent. From the documentatio n enclosed one can see thar the lowest levels
(V -rV) on Gradina belongs to the Vue dol (Slavonian , <IS wa s called at that time)
culture. The next dwelling horizon (IlO, that fl) 1l0WS the horizon or charcoal and
ashes , belongs to the Bronze Age and 'Illyric culture', and after that come objec ts
from the Roman and Medieva! period.

:zn
C\ ;'>,;,g fC~,.
" ',

" "'~ .: ~.,.",",

~.

>'.

1:
11,e Vu edol culture settlement is rich in ceramic material and dwelling
obj ects (pi ts, hearths and houses) which were rather de va stated with following
horizons . Vuedol culture ware was fo und mainly in pits . lt was decoratec! with
deep incised lines, ,vith carving and white incrustation. Certain shapes (botele
shaped vessel) and the manner of the decoration uetermine this Vuedol culture
settlement on Gradina Zecovi into the final Eneo1ithic, Le. imo the end of the
period which it belongs to. 11,e parts of casts and casting vessels also belong to
the Vuedol culture horizon.
Lit.: A.

Bcnac, 1956, GZM XI, 147-166 , TI -X; Ibid, EpoqLles ... , 78-81.

Fig. I S -- The ground plan of

Gradina _ Zecovi

128

Fig. 16 - Grapeva pi lja.

the plan and the pottery.
(ace. G. Novak 1955. 30)

The En eolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

Register of major Eneolith ic si tes in former Yugoslavia

12 9

16. GRAPEVA AND MARKOVA PILJA

ON THE ISLAN D HVAR

Prehistoric settlements
For this occa sion ,

( WO

cave-sites, in vesrigateJ tor year::; on dw island

w e rc ta ken as extre md y im(?o n anr fo r untk rsrancling of thl' AdriCJ tlc

Neolithic and Eneolith ic . G r ape va Spilja (l 6 B) is situateu in cent ral part of the
island (south fro m Jelsa), on the slo pes of the hill that uuminate, the island . T he
entrance in the cave is below the highest platea u near the village Humac. From
t his cave one can see the o pen sea, islands K orula, La, co vo, Suac anu Vi,. T he
conditions for li fe in this cave were remarkable, which was confirmed "oth
n umerous dwelling ho ri zon s. Markova pilja (16A), o n thc mher hand is located
in the west part (Jf the island, on norrhwt:'Stl'rn sinpe::; of the maune Pelegrin, on
the altitudc of 57 m. A s well as C;rap e v a pil ja , thc o ther one also dominates its
H V(lf ,

neighborhoocl , looking toward s the Korn ati archipeiago:::;. Trogir and Bra, and

across the Hvar channel tO rhe mo un t Biokovo. Ir was shelrered from southern
winds and had excellent conditio ns for in habiting, particula rl y in its hiuden part.
Th an ks to G. Nova k'> research, both caves entered t ht' li tera ture very ca rly. First
so unding exca vatio ns were pert()fm ed in 19 12 1914. Then, after '2ne longet gap
works were continued in 1955 and In sted until 196 1. CJ ra peva Spil ja was also
discovered in 1912 . C3. No vak had collected the material from that site for a lo ng
ti me and pub lished it in 1955 in his o utstanding book ' Praistorijski Hvar G rape va pilj a'.
Th anks to CI. N ova k" investigation, as well as to thc' noteworthy
contri bution of B. euk , we now h ave cl ea r stratigraph ic ", quence of the life in
the caves fro m the Neo lithic , Eneolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages to the Hellen istic
and Ro man peri ods . The strarigra phy is, at least during t he Neol ithic and the
Eneolithic petiods, similar in both caves. It is importa nt that abo ve the Late
Neolithic horizon of the Hvar culture (acco rding to some authors the Early
Eneolithic cul ture) ho rizons of the Pro to.Nako vanska and the Nako vamka
c ulture were fo rmed. They were covered by o ne interesting ho rizon with the
material of Adriatic fac ies of the Ljublja nska culture. 1l1e Ea rl y Eneoli thic pottery
of the t\ akovansb cult ure provenience , is similar to the findings from C;udnj a
and cave Nako vana o n Pel jeac, while the Ljubljanska culture potte ry, particu
larly that fro m Gra pe va ca ve , is yo unger from the Tivat Rube grou p and belon gs
to the period o f pen etration of t he Ljublj an ska culture in this region .

Lit.: cl. Novak, Prai.itorij ski Hvar, 1955; Ibid ., 1959, ARR I, 560; Ibid., 1962, ARR
I, 19 102, T. I XXXVI; Ibid., A RI<. VI, 61 . 179 , "1'. I XXII ; Ibid., Epollues... , 110113;
B. ellk , 1968 , A RR VI, 18 1212, T . I XII ; U. N'lVak B. C llk, 1982, ARIZ VIII.IX,
11 3 3, T. IXVIII ; S. Dimi trij evi , 1970, 105 ff, T. 1111 1.

The Eneolith ic cultures of Central and West Balkans

130

17. GUDNJA ON PELJEAC (ADRIATIC COAST)

Strat ified cave- type settlem en t

T he cave Uudnja is situated at the of the peninsula Peljeac, in the
vicin ity of Ston. It is one of the most important sites fo r the study of the Adriatic
Eneo lithic. Unfortunately, apart trom scarce published information (PJZ III , 368),
rich archaeological material gathered during excavations is still not a vail able. W e
shall discuss this site using merely vague info rmati on and the fa c t that thc author
had the opportunity to see the part of thc ma teri al in the Museum in D ubrovnik.
Gudnja was discovered during n umerous fi eld surveys of the Adriatic
coast by Vladimir Miro s l avlj e vi . According to his information, in 1963 S. Petrak
commenced systematic archaeo logical in vestiga tions. According to the informa~
tio n we have they lasted until 1968, and during that timl' remarkably interesting
and opulent archaeological material was gathered. Having heen introduced to thc
documentation and the material S. Dimitrij e vi attempted, to make a stratigraphic
valorization of cultural horizons, and ga ve the following scquence in Praistorija
Jugosloven skih Zemalja III , unfo rtuna tely without necessa ry illustrative material
and archaeological documentati on: c ul tural layer consists of six strata, the first
(going from the earliest) belongs to the impresso horizon: the second , belongs to
the Proto-Da n ilo culture; the thi rd , to t he Gudnja culture , as he called it; thc
fourth - the Hvar c ulture; the fifth, to the Nako vanska c ulture (the Peljeka
cultute) ; and the sixth to the Adriatic variant of the Ljubljanska culturt . First fo ur
strata belong to the Neolithic period, with the annotation th at the upper horizons
of the Hvar culture could be pl aced in the Eneolithic period. Fifth and sixth stratum
contain Eneolithic material of the Nakovanska and the Ljub ljanska cul tures. It is
characteristic that the Proto-Nakovanska c ulture matetiailacks, while the ware of
the Nako vanska culture is corresponds with the findings from the other cave on
Peljeac near Nakova na , the material !fom Odmut (stratum V), Vela Luka on
Kotula, Grapeva and Markova 5pilja on the island H var. S. Dimi t rij e vi supposed th at the six th stratum in Gudnja consisted of two horizons of the Ljub ljanska
culture, and that the o ldest one was close r to the South Bosnian facies of the
Vuedol culture , and yo,:nger one to the Ljubljanska culture horizon in the
Adriatic coas t (Grape va Spilja) .

Lit.: S.

Dimitrijevi ,

in: PJZ III , 327, 368, 378.

N ote: Unpublished material from excavations pe rfonned by Spomenka

Petrak are kept in Pomorski Museum in D ubrovnik. S. D imi trij e vi and
author of this study took this mate rial in the consideration after having bee n
brie fly introduced to it

Register of major Eneoli thic sites in former Yugoslavia

13

18. HI SAR NEAR SUVA REKA IN METOHIA

Stratified site
O ne section of th e platea u with steep sides that desct'nd st$'t'ply to the
plain (d im 180 x 190m) is loca ted o n t he north west slopes of the hill S iro ko . This
location is called Hi sar. The impression is that those sree p sid es, particularl y the
o ne which separa tes this site fro m t he othe r section of the plateau wete artificially
enhanced with t re n ehes whic h could defe nd th" settleme nt Gradoc. T he road
Suva Reka - Prizren goes in the foothills of Hisa r .
The first a rc h ocological discove ries from Siro ko we re mode by Lj. [la i
in 1957. The a uth or mentions th ot a mound was excavated by A ustrians d u ring
th e W orld Wa r l, a nd tha t in 1953, cu ra tor of the Museu m of Kosovo, L l\i k o li
also d ug on this place , b ut the documentation lac b. [la i also mentions H isar
(l sa r) whic h was separa ted from sur ro undi n g te rrai n with deep u e nch ond a wa iL
lt is o bvious that durin g the pre history the settle me nt hod comple x defense
system. 1l1a nks to th e latter excava tions conducted by J. Todoro vi in 196 1 and
1962, Hisa r entered arch aeological lite rature with considerably more data, al th ough the mate rial was aga in n Ot e n ti rely publish ed . D uring tha t ca mpaigns the
a rea of 350sq uare me tets was investigated . T he c ultural laye r is 3.2 m (2.8m)
thick and in pits it goes LIP to 4 .7 111.
T he stt atigraphic seq uence and the potte ry a na lysis fro m 9 d welling
ho rizons show that the major pm e o f thc c ultura! layer helo ngs to the En eoli thic
period.] . Todo ro vi recognized two main SUJta with two s llb~ p hases:
H isa r I A - 2.80 - 2.40 m, the lowest horizun of ho uses with pits (up to
4.70 m) ;
Hisar I B - 2.40 - 1. 10 m, with th tee ho rizo ns ofho uses, separated tro m
the ptevious wi th a debtis of ashes;
H isar II A and B - fl)u r h orizons ofhouses, (o ne from II A well pteserved;
dim. 8 x 16 m);
Hisat III 0.50 - 0 .00 m , belo ngs to the Hellenistic period .
Thc stratigraphic di vision was not illustrated with suffkie n t info rmation
(o nl y preliminary re po rt was publish ed). Howe ve r one ca n concl ude that olde r
; tcatum I wi th its sub-phases A and B belon gs to t11L' Buhanj - Saicuta c ulture
wit h elements of the Vi n a c ulture and infl uences of th e Adti atic Neolithic. The
proh le m of the su a rum II a a nd B is still not clear e no ugh. One part of publishecl
ce ramic mate rial ce rtJ inly belongs to the Kostolac c ulture (its southernmost
penetration ), while thc mate riallc:beled as "the Early Bro nze A ge of Maced onia"
(Ktitza n a type) is con side rably youn ger and helongs to thc Iron A ge ,,(Meto h ia,
with earl y Dard anian in fluen ces. lt is, howe vet, certain that th e majori ty of the
cultut al de pOSit belongs to long-termed Eneolithic de velopment of one Kosovo
and Metoh ia va riant of the Bubanj - Salcuta c ult ure. It is iII ust ratecl with the
cera mic ware from Hisa r I A and B, wh ich was decora ted wi th thic k red and white
painting, blac k burnished pottety, nume rous sha pes of shallow plates with thick e ned rims, beakers on the foot , and as we ll wit h Scileihcllilellkel h andles pots. T he

_--,-T:..::
he_En_eo_1i_thi"-cul t_u_res_o_f C_e_ntr_al_an_d_W_es_t _B_alkans

132

horizon II A certai nly belongs to t he Kostolac culture , which was confirmed with
the pottery (c ups with high banci handle, chess-field mOtifs). One large house, quire
fa miliar to the Kosto lac culture, seems to belong to this horizon.
Lit. : Lj . [l ali, GMK II , 1957,249 ff;

J. Tod,)["vi,

1963,25-29 , T. I-V \,

fl g.18/ 19 .. Hisar. Eneo

lithic pottery (accto J. To
dorovi 1963 . 25)

Register of major Eneolithic sites in form er Yu goslavia

133

19. HRNJEVAC BY KUTJEVO (WEST SLAVO NIA)

Eneolithic site
ll,e site Brdo (Hrnje vac) by Ku tjevo belongs to the hill ,i:H ,,-pe. I: is
situated on a dominant hill. As well as other sites of the Ke\d",c h..--;Ji",<K Q,-pe.
this one is also located on rather high altitude (405 m . "bove""" I",d). :\"".:rdinl1
to this one, and other settlements of the same type w e can
:ha: me\'
bclonged to the population of hunters or farm ers (Kevderc and u-.DCl:,:'a jama
are located on SlO m. abo ve see level).
ll,e first finds from Hrnj e vac were g"therecl by Milan T ur:'c,,~. :"l!o\\'
of the Muse um in Zagre b in 1898 . This J;)t;) ente red tht> litera(UIe i~ : c:!' ~ a:;d

""CL",,,

we re e rroneously attributed to the Lasinja cul ture . Late r on, (l0;5. !':SC. an2

especially in PJZ Ill, 343.) S. Dimitrij e vi has placed this tl nd in an m.:=>",xe:l'

culture . the Rctz.Gajary culture . as its variant with proposed m= . ,hoK e vd e rc~Hrnje vac

culture.
Among scarce Hrnj e v()c c ulture findings from the collec~vn

Cl :::he
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, which were published in the third '\Jl:...."'" c;
'Praistorija Jugoslavenskih Zemalja', three characte ristic cups wi th ban..: ha."::l,,,
which raise above the rim were also mentioned. The base on some Oi' me;,] ""'2.,
shaped as calotte . On thc site Hrnjcva c , be side the se fo rms, we come acr""'5S ~a :-?tr
spherical vesse ls. 'pointed vessels', as wel! ;) s coarse ware . 111ese were Jee....,:acc::C
with inci sed orname nts, some kind of Furche1l5tich and ro ugh c ar ving . ~. [).:t:.:.:::.
je vi also rne ntions one damaged ro ughly modeled fe male idol, and one .JCit:C~

that resembles the labry'. The manner of decoration is similar to that :n :.'>c
Mondsee culture, on one hand, and to the Kostolac and V uedol Cu lture5L~ ,h.:
other.
According to the criteria mentioned previously, the site Brdo '"""
Hrnjevac, perhaps should not be listed herc (the lack of the

scratigraphy, scarcity o f finds). Howe ve r, its characteristic

ceramic ware enabled S. Dimitrij e vi to ide ntify one new

Eneolithic variant of the Retz.C;aj"ry culture. Finds from

Drljanovo near Bielovar (A. Durman, ()A 7,1982,3 7 ff.),
Kevderc near kofja Loka and from some other sites in
Hungary, especially those separated in the Balaton III group
by N. Kalicz, also belong to this variant.
Lit.: S. Dimitrij e vi, in: PJZ, 343-365, '1'. XLVII, 16; Ibid., 6 I
BROK, Mainz 1980, 1589, T. 120.

shards of
S. Dimitri

Fig.19 - HrnWr.lc.

pottery (acc

lO

jevi 1980. 15. PL 12)

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

134

20. HRUSTOVAA NEAR SANSKI MOST

Stratified cave-type settlement

1l1e cave Hrustovaa nea r S,H1Ski Most is one of thc most impo rtant site s

in the river Sana valley. Ir is located in the vicinity of Vrhpolje, not far ti-om the
village Hrustovo . Near the Hrusrovaa cave there art' some other caves) among
which th e Dabarska

GIVe ,

located 3 krn northwes t is certainly thc most prominenr.

Archaeological site in this cave was discovered by M.

Mandi in 1938, who also performed first excavations in 1939 (M.
Mandi, GZM, 1939,65 ff.). Hi s excavations covered the right side
of the vestibul e and came across abundam archaeologica l materiaL
First stratigraphic information was also obtained: the first stratum

was humus (to 0.40 m), then very thin (some 0.10 m) Roman
stratum, the third was Hallstadr stra tum (about 1.00 m thick), then
stratum with 'Pannonian ware' tOJO m thick), and at last - clay
laye r with occasio nal osteological mmerial.

The material discovered by M. Mandi, togethe r with that

collected latter, was processed by j. Koroec in 1946 (GZM, 1946,
7-38). New excavations in the cave were undertaken a year bter by
A. Benac. He gave a relevant stratigraphic sequence and meticulous
analysis of the material. According tO A. Benac three strata existed:
upper, middle and lower. For the purpose of this book, we are
interested only in the middle, Eneol ithic stratum which varies from
0.40 - Ll O m, depending on the inclination of the terrain. The
abundance of the Vuedol culture ware (Slavonian, as he called it
at the time), bones of wild and domesticated animals (deer, doe,
bovine) is atypical, and what is also important are large quantitie ~
of cereals, parts of grindstones and few hearths. Two typological
groups could be distinguished in the Vuedol culture ware: one,
according to the shape and decoration closer to the Kostolac culture
ware (incised decoration, hanging triangles, and ribbons), ane! the
othcr which belongs to the developed Vuedol carving technique,
where certain forms resemble the Vinkovci culture ware. The deco~
ration of the Vuedol culture ware is regularl y combined with white
incrustation. This pheno111enon re presents the regional manifesta~
tion of the Vuedol culture that could be called 'Bosnian type' or
Debelo Brdo-Hrustovaa type.
Fig. 20 -- Hrustovaa. two

pots of the Vuedol culture

(after A. Benac 1948.)

Lit.:

J. Koroec, GZM,

1946, 7-38: A, Benac, GZM, 1948,5-40, T l-XV and op. cit.

Register of major EneElithic sites in former Yu goslavi~

135

2 1. JELE NAC NEAR ALEKS INAC

Eneo lith ic settlement

ln thc outskirts "fAleksinac raise's a pl ateau (dim. 200 x 100), some ten
me te rs highe r from the valle y of the rive r Moravica. T o pographic cha racte r of
th is site , particularl y its st(:(: p sides whic h desce nd toward s t11l' rive r, SUggL'st that
this se ttleme nt belongs to the Eneolithic type, al ready known in the Hubanj ,
Kostolac and Cotofen i cultures.
1l,anks to M. Vasi's excavatio ns in 1910, thi s setticml'nt ente red
archaeologica l li terature rather ea rl y. Preliminary results fro m these investiga,
tio ns wcre published in C;odinjak SKA XXIV (1910,273-3 14) and in Starina r
(1910,23). After 45 years the works were rene wed in 1950. Excava tio ns by R.
Galovi of 1955, were not ve ry extensive, but thanks to them it is now possible
[O make use o f the results o f the previous excavatio ns. in spite of the f~ct that
Vasi's mme ri al was irret rieva bly lost during the World W a r One . (;alovi o pened
about 70 square mete rs in three rre nches o n difft.:'r12nt parts of thl' plate;Ju .
Inspite the fact thar thc mate rial does not suggests this ci ivi ::;io l1 , two horizons
we re distingui shed . The d e pth of t he laye r was 1.20 m and three ilo()[' kvels we re
identified, probably helo nging to the same huuse which was re newed (0.7S, 0.90
and 1.01 m).
Ri ch cera mi c mate rial t()uml in these two ho ri zons he lo ngs mainly to
the Kostolac c ulture, although there are so n1l' othe r e lt:'111L'11tS connected to the

Hubanj-Hum as well as the C"roteni cultures. Thc' sha pes, an u the manner of
decoration of the potte ry, arc typica l fc". the Kostolac c ul ture . 1l,e re are coneshaped c ups with band Ilondi es that go abo ve the rim , anci howls ofdiffere nt shape .
They were Jecorated mainly with carved lines, net o rname nt, short incisions,
dotted incisions, while f(l r the Furc"c1lStich technique it could not bl' told that it
was freq ue nt in both horizons. Among the publi shed material we co me ac ross
ce rtain exa mples ofbowls with thickened rim which could be connected with the
Bubanj - Salcuta gro up, then frag me nts with lens-shaped a ppliqu or vertical
plastic bands that bdong to the Corot;, ni cul turt complex .
Lit. : R. v"lov i , ZRNM Il, 1959 ,329 -338, T. I-I X.

Flg.2 I -- Jelenac. the pottery

of th e Kostolac culture (ace.

to R. Ga l ovi 1959. 329)

136

The Eneolithic cu ltures of Central and West Balkans

22 KEVDERC ON LUBNIK (NW SLOVENIA)

Stratifi ed Eneolithic settlement
As wel! as Lubni ka jama, located nearby, th~ site Kevderc belongs to
Eneolithic highland-rype settlements. Both of these sites are on the altitude of81 O
meters, and one could say that the y have similar stratigmphic sequence , as we ll as
similar a rc haeological mate rial. Thc material from systematic excavarions was

published by F. L:ben ir 1963 in Acta carsologica 3,1963. The material is kept in

the museum ofLoka in Skofja Loka. Results ofexca vations are e xtremely important
for the study of the Eneolithic of Sloven ia, parti cularly of the Gorenjska d istrict.
Beside the author of the excavations, F. Leben, the material was also discussed hy
P. Koroce. Certain evident terminologica l differences in t he articles upon this
problem are the consequence of different ap proaches of the two authors. W e used
F. Leben's information for the interpretation of the srratigraphy.
Gathering all the info rmation and e vidence on Kevderc and Lubnika jama, F. Leben
distinguishes three, cultural!y and chtonological!y
independent horizons:
A. T he horizon of tik' Earl y Lasinja cul[Ufe with cups, bowls and semi . . sphe rical jug::; with

one handle. The decoration is modest and was

made with incised lines.

B. The horizon with unique ceramic material, determined by F. Lehen as the Lubnik type
of the Lasinja culture. However, according to th e
channele d o rnament, ca rvin g , rough carving ,

white incrustation and the sh apes of the pottery

(jugs without the base), th is horizon could be as
weil placed into therime of the Kevde rc - Hrnjevac
type of the Retz - Gaj ary cultute , as it was determined by S. Dimitrij e vi .

C. Th e youngest horizon in Kevderc belongs tu the Late Vuedol culture

(the
Ljubljansko
Barje II or rather to the Alpine facies of the Ljubljanska c ulture,
chalICe of the Kevdercdepending
on
which
terminology we use).
Hrnje'"l( type (ace. to s.

Fig 22 - Kevderc-cave. the

DlmltflJeYlc

980. PI. 13/ 1)

P. Koroec dates the habitation of caves Kevde rc and Lubnika jama in

the period between the fitst phase of the Eneolithic, o ver II and III to the Brome
Age ( Br A period).
Lit.: F. Leben, 1975, 151-156, anJ lit. cit., P. Koroec, 1973, AV XXIV , 171-176, T.
I-Il, and quoted literawre.

~egiste r of major Eneolithics ltes in fo rmer Yugoslavia

137

23 KLOKOEVAC NEAR DONJI MILANOVAC

(EAST SERBIA) Eneol ithi c settlem ent
Near the road that lead, to Negotin, in the outskirts of the village
there is one hill cal led Culmi a Sciopul ui and cl iff Stnllac. There was
a number of natural terraces on rhe stecp amphirheater-sha ped slopc, on which
bases of Eneolithic houses were found. During the excavation of 197 0 very
in teresting and unique architecture was discovered. Houses were situated on
terraces (there were 4 or 6 of them). The back side of the house was dug into the
hill. 111e dimensions did not exceed 6 x 3 meters. Due co the inclination of the
Klokoe va c ,

:;\ope , pottery was ofte n found in the secondary positi on. Howe ver, as this was

single layered , and apparently short term ed farm er' s settlement, the stratigraphic
sequence is no t of a great importance.
The style ana lysis of thc archaeological material , especially of the
po tte ry, shows that two groups we re re presented he re : Co tofe ni, wi th carved

dccoration, plastic bands and lens-shaped ap pliqu, and the Kostolac culture
pottery, decorated with crescen t-shaped incisions, chess field motifs and f'urc!Ic71stich technique. The blcnd of these twO st yi es of different cultures is obvious and
onc can find omaments of one group, on the ceramic form of the other culture
and vice versa. The mutual relationship between these two cultural manifestations is so strong he re , that it leads to the conclusion that it made quite new
c ultur;:'d phc no menon, whi ch also occurs on some o ther sites in East Serbia

.::,

"
"

'

~
~

(Kovilovo, Krivelj and also on sites in erdap I and II). 111ese regions wirnessed
the intensive mixture of twO contemporary styles, two cultures : western Kosto lac
culture (Srem-Slavonia and Central Bal ka ns) and the Cocofeni (south Carpathian and Danubian) culture.
111e site Kl o koevac is located in the mountain region of Homoije, in
its periphera i region , and was home for the population of farm ers. However, few
smaller copper objects (copper pin) show the interest tlll the exploitation of the
copper ore, abundant in this region, among the inha bitants of this settlement.
T he prehistoric Eneolithic mine near Rudna Glava is located only about 10 km
south from Klokoe va c .
Lit.: N.

Tasi,

1982, 19: Idem, 1987.

Fig. 23 .. K loko evac. the

pottery of the Cotofeni and
Kostola c cultures

138

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

fi g. 2411 - 9 -- Krive lj.

the pottery of the BubanJSalcuta. Kostolac and
Cotofeni cultu res

Register of major Eneoli thic sites inf(Jrmer Yugoslavia

139

24 KR IVELJ N EAR BOR (EAST SERBIA)

The settlement of the Bubanj -Salcuta

and Cotofeni cultures
ln rhe sl!burbs of rhe villoge Kriveij, 6 km nor rh (lf Bor, rhere is o ne
mound known as Cokulu Halal. Ir has f1arreneJ pla reau anJ slopes which decline
srecply rowarJ rhe Kriveljski creek. According ro its topog raphic characrerisrics
rhis settlement belongs the caregory of fortil1 ed settlements of rhe Bubanj -Salcuta- Kri vodal c ulrure, alreaJy known in Romania (Sa ic uta) , Bulgaria (Orlo va
uka), Serbia (Ko vilovo near l\egosin, Bub anj, (,adimije anJ Hi sa r on KosO\'o),
and in Macedonia (Skopsko kale, Suplevac in Pelagonia). 1l1l' on ly accessihle
sIope of the hill has the remains of a wall made ofhroken stones wirho ur mo rtar,
which had prorecred the entrance to rhe se ttlement.
T he archaeological eXGlvJtio ns we rc pcrt( )fJl1Cd by the Muse unl of
Metallurgy in Bor during 1971 and 1972. Largl'r area of rhe sertlement was
invesrigared. The culrurall ayer which was partl y
devastated is 0.40 - l.00 m. thick. Two strarigraphi c, cultural and chronological entiries were
8scert::lined: a) upper ho rizon up to O.SO !ll con/.";.~l1tt~"::~ i-<" -<f'=f"" '" "'--'-~--ri
tamed rypical Corofeni culrure material wirh rhl'
Kostolac culture influences, Jnd h) ailll ost inr8cr
ho rizon which belongs ((J one well preserved
Bubanj -Sa\c ura culrure sertlement with d\Velling
objects (house tioors, hearths, pirs) and rich archaeologica l mareri al. The older seulement and
irs contents is exceprionally imporrant. Ir represents rhe phase of rhe development of rhe
Bubanj-Sa lc uta culture in which inciseu, chan neled and doued po ucry appea rs, and painteJ
deco ration (either in white or red) and burnished
ware lacks. No pors with so called ScI,eiheniIellkd
type handles which were t~JundJ whilt ditfers this
settlement (ro m o the r settleme nts oI' the same culturl.! in Zl ntska Peina iocme d in
immediate vicin ity. 'TIlis should obv iously represent the e arli e r ph ,! se Dl' the s,-'me
culture, thus giv ing the c hro nological priority to Krivclj. -[llis s ti:ltt.: m e l1( Cl)lt! J be also
COnf1nl1cd with the sculpture ~ twn te rra-cotteIS, one with ,lnak1gie . . ;H1w n g Bulga ri an
figurin e:; of the () ume lniccl-Karanovo Vl style, .. md the l)che r with [h l' V ina c ulture .

Lit.: N.

Tasi,

1982, 19-36, T. I-IV: N.

THsi,

198 7, 13 -20, T. l.

140

The Eneolithi
c cultures
of Central
-- - -and West Balkans

-'--'-'----------~----"'-'

2S. LASTVINE BY BUKOV II NEAR BENKOVAC

Eneo lithic settlement
In unsuf1ciemly inves tigated Zadar hinrer\"nd region near the vill"ge
on the North-East edge of Be nk o vak o Polje, on the hill which has "n
e xcellent view all the way to R"vni Kota ri and Bribir, there is one dispersed
Eneo1ithic settlement. It is wellloc"ted, shelrered trom ,vind s from the North and
from the South. Overflowing springs of fresh water "re loc"ted in the vicinity of
this site. All ti,is gave excellent life conditions on this spot.
First discoveries which comprised mainly of potre ry "nd tlim implements,
c"me to the Arch"eologic"l Collection in Benk ov"c in 1983, whi ch w"s the sign
to the curator M. Savi tO cOIlJmence the trench,type surveying of that area (J im .
300 x SOOm). Two years bter S. S" tovi and j. Chapm"n beg"n new inves tig"tions
in order ro ca tch the contours of the settlement, the depth of the cultural layer
and its ch"racter. Tl,e best preserved port of the byer is located in o ne sm,,1I
de pression, where it reached 1.60 m, while in the outskirts of the se ttl ement it was
never thicker than 0.35 m. In " single horizon, without str"tigraphy, the authors
have fo und poorl\, preserved remains of the architecture - wattle "nd da ub hOLIses
and shards of house rubble, P"rts of the he" rths "nd sm"lI er pits.
The archaeological materi ,, 1 is "bund"m "nd common. Tl,e ponery is
simple, often very coarse. It is i.lecor"ted merel y with vertical channels on the
shoulder or horizontal on the neck. T he motifs like dots, incisi ons "nd ribs are
rare. Apart from the ponerl', latge number of flint "nd stone tools w"s fo und
(knives, picb, bores and parts of pierced stune axes). Two copper awls are certainly
of great importance. One of them was found during the e xca vations. Typological
analysis of the rema ins of thc material culture shows th"t the settlement near
Bukovii belongs to the Nakov"nska culture of the Adriatic Eneolithic with
specific continental influences, marked by the authors as the Vina and S"lcuca
influences.
Bukovi i ,

,-_o-

Fig. 25 .. Lastvine. channeled

Zoologica l remains (bones of sheep and goat), as well as the type of the
bowls (ace to Batovi . Cha p settlement with short-lasting architec ture imply th at this was proba bl\, a settlement
man . 1985.52) occupied only occasionally or seasonally.

Lit.: . Barovi - J. Chapman, Arheoloki pregled 26, 1985,52-53.

Register of major Eneolithic si tes in former Yugoslavia

141

26. "LI CE" NEAR ERDEVlK (S RE M)

Stratified settlem ent

The remains of prehisto ric settlement of the Eneolithic and the 8'0".:_
Age period are located on south slopes of the mountain Fruka Gora, c.'\'c""2
the area of 500x200 meters. ll.e loca lity "Li ce" is one mo und \\i[h rlartcnc-::
plateau. On its west is one wide plain which is the part of the Srem lowland. 1lk
stream Moh a ra flows thro ugh it (recently it became artinciallake). Steep slope,
of the mound give the impression of thc hill ,fort site.
During the arch aeo logica l excavations of 198 1 (Dragan Po po vi), remains of the seulement of the middle and late Eneoli thic and the middle Bron:e
Age were detected. ll.e depth of the cultural byer, without the pi ts, varies
between 0.2 and 0.6 meters. T he earli est settlement belongs tOcla ssical phase of
the Baden culture. It is single layered settlement witl\pits and earth-cabins, the
type 'luite frequent in this region (Dobanovci, Rim ski Sanevi, the Baden c ulture
horizon at Gomolava). One larger ea rth-cabin with a kiln is typi cal for this site .

'\:,"": ~::;: ,-,~":

\\-

r-

" "
~ ,r:"

,.

~,.-

oo
_

.. .... . ........

.,.,..,. ........
..

,.

Ar

__

~~

~~,

---......
.

> -;- ,..,,",,-"'i:~

".

""-~-

~ -""

....... .. _.'"

.;'l _ .. _....:-_~:~~7ir_~.~~-:.

. ..
i\t..
. ~ '""'"'--- ~---'\" -~~
"\ _~'":>.t:!
~- ..... ..... ~.I'U""~.,..., ~... ~. ""

~' -"'''

~J-_

...

.,.~~~
'. '
~-::i

~
......... + "";-A~__ ._~_!""'

' ......
-.:... .
~~=--a

-:; '"'.....

~~

)J(]

- '. <,'

. -,'- -

;-=-:.. ..-.~:-{~T~p~

- -- --

'/';1
:: , .:'~-4i;~X'
~
'r '
~" ~-)~"':(f '~
C""C''''~'''~~
.
~~~~~~-tr.
-- '

-=,!

-~="

11.0 po[[ery shapes are often carina ted (biconic) bowl s, decora ted with carving

Fig. 26 -, Erdevik. the potu ec.

and incisions, then cups with hulb-shaped container with handles that surpass
the rim , coarse pots and diffetent shapes of amphorae. The Kostolac c ulture
se[[lement with remains of dwellings and more durable houses , re presents the
younger period of life on this site, According to the pottery it belongs to one
younger phase of the Kostolac c ulture in which Fltrchenstich decoration appears,

of the Baden and Kos tol ac

Bowls of diffe rent shapes with rich decoration prevail among the pottery of this phase .
In the vicinity of the plateau there are rel11::tins of yo unger periods, ceramic ware
which has no stratigraphic links, but could bc , according tn its tYIXl!ogical ch arac ~
te ris[ics, chronologicall y placed : a) the potte ry which belongs [o incrus[ed T rans-

Danubian group of find s in Srem (Br Bl ) and b) the pot[ery which belongs to the
Belegi culture (Br e - Ha A).
ll.e materi al from these excavations is being kept in the Muse um in
Sid , and will be published by D. Po po vi.
<

cultures

The Eneoli t hic cultu res of Central and West Balkans

--

142

27 LJUBLjAN SKO BARjE (SLOVEN IA)

Complex of the Neolithic
and En eo lith ic pi le- dwe lling settlements
South and ,,)uth-east of Ljubljana stretches O )W geotl'cronic basin (20 x
10 km.) coverc:d with nUn1cr()us cha nne ls. During the prehistllri c pt'fi od thc arca

was covered with marches and bef(ne that with a larger giaciailake . In the end uf
the Neo li thic and the beginning of rhe Eneoli thic the lake was dried out and left
behind t he swamplond. In 19th ce ntury this region was meliora ted and dried.
T hanks to good c1imatic and other co nditions in the region of Ljublj ansko Barj e
numcrous Nenlirhi c and Eneolithi c seulemcnt::) were fl)fllled. These sites n:present
une regiona! group t xtremdy important for th e study Df cultural de velopm ent of
this area.

T he first excava tions in Ljubljansko Barje perfllflllc:d hy K. [)ecshmann

ti-om IS 75-IS 77 also marked the beginning of archaeologica l works in this part of
the- world. After Deschmann '~CxGl v;)ti ons, anothe r Glll1paign was pert(lrrn ed near

l\:marnje Goric (W. Schmid, 1907-190S), and atter the World War ll , thanks to
the Department fo r archaeology of the Faculty of Philosophy in Ljuh lj ana ( J. and
P. Koroec , T. Brega nt and ()the rsL systematic excavations were urganized on

many locations of Barj c (Blatna Brezovica, Resnik ov Prekop, Parte: Maharski

Prekop and so onL which gave more vivid irnprt'ssion uf thc de ve lopment in this

region . Hence, Ljubljansko !larje became rhe best investigated mi cro-region o(the
Alpine zone, as far as the final Neolithic, Eneoli th ic anJ Ea rl y Bronze Agl' cultures
arc concerned .

A large numbe r of pile dwelling sites were ascerta ined in the outskirts of
Ljubljansko Barje . ArchaL'ological e xc<1vations we rt' performed on some of the m

(lanska or Demanova K oli, Blatna Hrezovica, Resnikov Preko p, K olie on

Maharski Prekop, Kolia near Notarnje Goric etc.) , while other sites were topographica lly registered (Kamnik pod Krimom, ['rese rje) . All investigated sites are
located on the bank of the lake or in the marshy terrain, and belong to the
pile-dwelli ng setti emc:nt type (Slo. = ko!i(I; Un. = Pf"lbau). Thi s is suggested by
numero us renlains of animal bones and agricultural tools and grindstones. f\: urne r,
ous copper tools and casts show th;)t thc meta ll urgy was important activity.

Fig. 27 -- Ljub ljansko Barje.

pott ery of the phase 19 I
(fig. 1-3) and 19 II (fig4 - 7)
accordi ng to R. Schmidt

1945

11,e life in pile-dwelling settlements in Ljubljansku Barje lasted from the

end of the Neolithic to the beginning of the Early Bronze Age (between yea rs 3000
and 1800 BC). Some of them lived shurtly during thc Early Eneolithic, while others
la sted during the transition to the Early Bronze Age. The vertica l stratigraphy that
sho uld contlnn the continuity of life during these periods is not sufficient, and
therefore in order to establish the re lative chronology among sites wc must rely
on typolugical ana lysis of pottery and other materi al. The uldest settlements in
Barje belong to one local variant of the Lengye\ culture which develops in Slovenia
at the beginning uf the [neolithi c. According to j. KOf()ec it is 'Al pine facies uf
the Lengyel culture' and according to S. D imitrijevi it is the Lasinje c ulture. We
could put Resnikovand Maharski Prekop, the oldest pile-dwelling settlements in
Barje in the same group. Other sites (Veliki Mah, Studenec pri 19u, Parte and

Registe r of major Eneoli thic sites in former Yugos lavia

143
-~ ~ -~ ~

o ther) belong to the Ljubljansko Barje culture, i.c. phases 19 I and 19 II , o r to t he

Lj ubljanska culture that marke, the Early Bronze Age in this region.
Lit.: J. Koroec, in: Zgodovina Ljubljane 1, 1955,244268 and 277322: P. Koroec,
in: A rh. vestnik 9 ~ l 0, 19581959; articles in: Poroil o o ra:isknva nju neolitc\ i eneoli ta

v Sl oveniji (Kllltura Lj llbljansh)g Barja) Ill , 1974, pa.sim : T. Breg,nH, in : Po ro ilo ...
1, 1964: T. Bregant, in: Epoques ... , 2122 14: T. Eregam, in: P,,,,lilo ... , 1977: M.
Budja, in: Poroilo ... , XI, 1983,7383.

------------~-----

--

144 _ _ _ _ _ __

--

"
,

[I

.-

--

- ---,

--

:.---:=.

. ..

-)-- -

-- --- ._"-- --.-

--. ~--:
_ ._--~~
._.',:
_. ----- - -

-1;-:~

-'- -

-'1---

:ll5:'

...
- -- -

. _ '. - - .---- -

---'J-

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and W es t Balkan s

"l

'o"

"
>-"oz

___

Register of major Eneolithic sltes in former Yugoslavia

145

28. MALA GRUDA IN TIVATSKO POLJE

En eolithic tumu lu s

'Gruda', 'Glavi ca ', '(,omila' are Serbian words for tumuli sca ttered over
Tivatsko Polje, Krtole, GrbIj e and neighboring loca ti uns. T hey were all e videnced
and detailedly surveyed by the Archaeological Institute from Belgrade and the
Nautica l Museum trom Kotor . A rchaeologica l e xcavations wt're perfonned on
some of them (Milovia Lokva and Milovia (;umno). Beto r" the exca vations at
Mala Gruda, three of them wer" already exca vated (dim.: lS20 m. in dia m te r
and 1.5- 2.5 m in height). They contained skeletal graves (graves [Omled ni ston"
slabs) with deceased in f1 exed posirion withour grave otfe ring,. T he rir>[ resul"
from Tivatsku Pulje came from Mala Gruda, excavated during 1970 and 1971. lt
is the tumulus located in the va lley Polje and was, unlike [he other>, previously
investigated. lt is situated o n the crossroads Budva-T i,ar- Kotor. l[ was 3.5-4
me ters high and 20 me te rs in diame ter.
The re sults of e xc avations by M. Parovi -Peikan and \'. T rbuho \"i sho w

that there was only one, central, grave in this tumulu>. n,is gran" had iew t,replaces
which are thought to be places of cult. The grave constructIon was sunk, and is
now 4.5 meters lower from the present highest point of the tumulu>. T he grave pit
(dim.: 1.27 x 0.7010.76 m) was formed of rectangular scone slabs. lt was oriented
North -South, with slight decl ination to the West. T he gra"e contained poorly
preserved skeleton (parts of the legs, pelvis, scull and mandible ... ), probably in
f1exed position. n,e grave contained: one golden dagger and one silver ax in
abdominal region; two pots (a beaker and a bowl on low foot) positioned near the
legs, and five golden pendants and a fragment of copper tail by the head (Pl. II ).

r .

,
-------~

- . --- ~/-~

.~

J..,....':"

Lit.: M. Parovi-Peikan - V.

Trbuhovi

."

"
,
..-'

'"

1971 (1974), 132

/ -:.Y':.

r"'

,' \,

Extremly im portant findings from Mala Gruda such as rare gold and silver
obj ects (the dagger, the pendants and the ax with one blade and cylindrical hole
for the handle), and also pottery have initiated the discussion among archaeologists. n ,ey belong to the Early Brome Age ' POs t-Vuedol' culture period, i.e. to
the group that was labelled as the Mala Gruda- Rube (or Ti vat-Rubel) and was
dated in the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC.

;/

'I
; ,. ",

. .,....,.,.y

I"" (\\'1

Fig .. 28/ 1 ., Mala Gruda. the

ground' plan and the cross
section of the central grave

(ace to tv1. Parovi Peikan

and V. Tr b uh ovi. 1971)

'"

146

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

29. MOSTO NGA I NEAR DERONJE (B A KA)

St ratified site
D uring the construction works un the hank of the ancient river beJ of
the rive r D anube, few archat'()iogic:.d sites Wef t' disco ve red . One of [hern was

named 'Must[)nga I' m Krukov Kuren . It is located un a high loess bank of the
ri ve r Mostonga, that was later joined with th l' 'Danube ~Tis8 ~Danube ' channel.
knoll , from which the a rchaeological materi31 came, is luca ted 300 m south

11112

of Ka ra vuko vo, on the left side of the road that leads from th e brick plant towa rds
the 'OTO Channel'.
llw site 'Mostonga I' was discovered in 1964 by S. Ka rmanski, who
surveyed this area fm years, anJ metic ul llusly published thc mate rial h e gathered .
He made soundings on ChZlf(lCteris ric spots in o rder to establish rele vant facts
(srratigra phy, fear ~rcs etc. ). 5rnall~sized archaeological excavati ons were per-

formed h ere anJ it showeJ the e xistence of pits, dugo uts, h ea rths and probably
h o uses ofdifferent cultures in the horizontal stratigraphy(the Stare vo -late Donja
Branjevina phase, the Ea rl \' Vin:J culture, the lxngyel anJ Bole niz c ultu res).
Important discovery for the srudy o f rhe Eneolithic of southeastern Baka region
was the Jiscove ry of one dwelling (large r fi re place or burnt house) with abun dance
of cera mic ware (even wholc pots), charcoal, ashes anci burn t bones. T his assemblage belongs to the Boleraz (Ce rna voda III - Boleroz) culture. The rough ware

predominates: deep pots with plastic bands and finge r prints be low the rim (typical
for the Cernavoda III culture)' deep amphorae, and what is import:Jnt ICJf the
chrono \ogica\ detennination of these objects, t'ew fragmen ts of fine potte ry : bowls

witl1 bent our rim with shallow chan nels, bulhlikc c u ps wi th handles that raise
abo ve the rim, and tInally sim ilar , Jecp c ups with c hanne ls organized in triangles

Fig. 29 -- Mostonga . one in the upper pa rt. According to the typologica l analysis, this mate rial cOLdd bc
bowl of the Boleraz-Cerna da ted in the Bo lera z (or l'roto-Baden) c ulture period.
voda III culture (acc to S.
Karmanski 1970) Lir. : S. Karlllanskl, B;-lb1rnodllbni lokaliteti jugl)zapadnc Bak e I , 1970.

Regi~t_e r of major Eneolith ic ~)tes~n_ f~r~_er Yu_goslavia

14 7

30, ODMUT (NW MONTENEGR O)

Stratifi ed setti ement

11.e cave Odmut is situated in nmthwcstern part of Monten,,~, e:' :h"
canyon of the tiver Piva, in the loathills of Kulin, on rhe alritude OI' 555 In 3"-.'\"(':
sec level. Wide entra nce looking towards the South-Ea st and spaciolli h2~1 '" ,,;.,.,
cave offered excellent conditions fm longer inhabita tion of prehi>tcnc p.;p:.!:;tions. T his was also suggestcd by thc depth of the cultural hon :"" ..dlli:h i>
som e times 4 meters thick .

---.,

\.

T he main impetus for test~t rench i ng and the n systematic t'xcn"2::;)~

the interior of the cave was the construction of the power plant Piva. Th: ;::.)Iee
lasted from 1972 ro 1974, when in 1975 the cave disappeared under }he '.'"'''''' the lake. The excavations performed hy B. Gavela, D. S rejovi , C. !\~3r" l"-~
covered the largest part of the cave (80 square me ters).
T he sediment analysis of the the cave sh()wed eleven geolo2ic3, ;:::-.:.: _,

archaeological straw:
Odmut I AlB - the Mesolithic period
Odmut II A/B the Early Neolithic
Odmut III - the Late Neolithic
Odmut IV - the transitory period from the Nea lithi c ro the
Odmut V - the Early Eneolithic
Odmut VI - thc Final Eneolithic
Odmut VII - the Early Brome Age

EnQ..-'::'

The horizons III. IV, V and VI ate important for the srudy of rhe
Eneolithic of the continental Montenegro. First three horizons show th::- cnlltinui ry

of the life in this cave . They contain elements of the Adriatic Enenli' . 'c (th e
Nakovanska culture), on one hand, and the Vina culture, on the , < ,. These
elements are, primarily, black burnished ware decorated with cl13nneis. T he
findings from the horizon VI are different in style and, among other things, contain
elements of the Tivat-Rube group, which is dated in the Final Eneolithic of this
region.

Lit.: . Markovi, Arch. Iugosla V1Gl XV, 1974, 7-12: Idem, 1985, 3 1-44.

Fig. 30 - 00"1,, : :.ce

pot tery of tne \2'-0-,'2'l2
(fig I) and Tova:- '.LDeZ ~,pe.

(acc. to C. Mar:o'. 'C 9ES.

3 1)

'

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

148

!"-. _ __ _ __ . ______ . _

11

._---

Fig. 30a -- The cave Odmut. south -western profile of blocks II and III
(acc. to . Markovi 1985)

Register of major Eneoli thic sites in forme r Yugoslavia

3 I . PADINA IN THE UPPER GORG EOF

Stratifi ed si te

149

ERDA P

Padina is a loca l toponym for oline ofinlet, k>eateu unuer the stcep cliffs
which uescenu [Owards t he Danube near the localit\ calku (;,,,pouin Vir. Thcse
inlets (or bays) haYe been hiding the remain, of prehbtonc ,ertlem"m" \\hich
c!evelopeu in the narrow and tlat area hetween the cliii, anu th" warer. Pauina
compri ses of t()ur such inlets (I-I V), with the rc'mains 01 setr\"m"m, o , the
Mesolithic, t he ea rliest Neolithic period anu inuiviuual nnull1~' OI the Erk:"lirhic
pottery and graves with incineratt'd indi\ldual;:,.
ll,t' excav;)rion;:, of rhis impo rtant si tC' ;:,carn.:J rather la[t:.'.lu~r betore the
artificial lake for the power plant 'erdap I' W[lS made. Between 1968 and 1970
o nl y a fraction of this site was e xca vated. Four sectors we re investigated, and the
SL'c[()r III ga ve the rn ajori ty of the info rmation on the Eneo lirhi c peri od . Ont.'

smaller necropo lis U), with incinerated inuiviLiu[lls was t()und nea r thc Danuhe
bank. hve graves were excavated (an d te w devast<l ted), and only graves 2 and 3
con tained crematcd hone s. Graves we re dug in locss soil, 0 .9 ~ lA me te rs deep,
and were orga nized in a row. Gra ves contained vessels (pots or bowls) with calcified
bones in the recipi ent or in its immedime vic ini ty. Few pots (urns) we rc dislocated,
which e xplains thc abse nce of bones. According to thl' typological c haracteristics,
shape and decoration, the necropolis belo ngs to the Kostola c c ulture. Thc um from
the grave 2 was particularly interesting. Its shape and decoration is ty pical fo r (hL'
Kostolac culture.

Enco lirhic po tte ry was also to unJ outside thl' necro po1is , in othe r sectors
(I and II). The impo rtant fact is that the C'_otole ni culture fragments are found next
to the Kostolac potte ry, whic h comes 8S no surprise for this region.

Li t. : R. Jovanovi, Strinar XXII /l 97 I , 1974, II li., fig . 7, PL VII: IJem, 1976, \33- \36,
fig. 1-2.

Fig. 31 -- Padina. th e pottery (urns ') from gra ves o'

the Kostola c cultu re ao:
to B. JovanovIc 19 "0

"

150

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

32. PEINE IN VRDNIK NEAR RUMA (SREM)

Stratified site
Remains of the Eneolithic and Early Brome Age settl em ents were detected on the platea u rather un usually named Pe in e (Cm'es). Nearby was found
an isolated skeleton, from the Bronze Age period (early phase of the Bosut group).
The site is located on the hill that dominates the valley opened towards the South
and to the lower Srem valley . TI1e dimensions of the plateau are 350 x 250 m, and
it seems that it was once fortit1ed with a rampart whose remains are still visible .
The site near Vrdnik was disco vered in 1967 during ground surveying of
the region by the team of'Zavod za zatitu spomenika kulture Srema' (D. Popovi) .
Two years later one small-scale exc"vation was peril)fmed on the upper plateau.
According to the prel iminary reports and the in~
sight to the ma te rial we can establish: the strati2
graphic situation of the site ; its topog raphy, as well
<lS the typology of the material.
-Thc cultura l horizon in trenehes vari es between
0.5 and 2.5 meters. lt is thickest in the trencl1 II,
in its southe rn part.

-The lowest part of the horizon belongs to the

Kostolac culture horizon which was forrned ahave

the prehistoric humus. Following horizon, 0.3 m

thick, contained the Vuedol c ulture ware, while
in the youngest horizons, as well as in recent

humus, Vinkovci culture ware was found. This

part of the horizon is almost entirely devastated,
4
but
in the above mentioned trene h Il one pit was
3
discovered with a number of whole pots of the
Vinkovci culture. TI1e occurrence of these pits
Flg. 32 -- Pei ne - Vrdnik. with whole pots is known fi-om other sites of this culture in Srem (Gradina on Bosut
the pottery of the Kostolac or Tvrava in Ilok). Such stratigraphic situation (with the exception of the grave
culture (ace. to D. Popovi of the Early Iron Age) shows that this site was inhabited constantly from the Middle
1969.35) Eneolithic (the Kostolac culture settlement), then during the Late Eneolithic (the
Vuedol culture horizon) until the Early Bronze Age (the Vinkovci culture
findings) .
Bowls decorated with dots, incisions, and sddom FurchelLStich technique
are predominant in the Kostolac culture horizon. The Vuedol culture ware
belongs to the early phase of this culture (anine in Belegi) . lt was decorated
with concentric circles, rhomboids, triangles and wavy lines with white incrustation.

Lit.: D. Popovi - P, Medovi, AF ll, 1969, 35-36, T. Xlll-XlV: D.

Praistorijska nalazita Vojvodine (catalogue) 1971,33.

Popovi.,

Register of major Eneol ithic sites ln former Yugoslavia

- - --

I SI

33. PEPELANE NEAR VIROVITICA (NW CROATIA)

Stratified prehi storic site

During the excavations of 1985 on the slopes of Bilogora that descend
towards the river Brenica, one dispersed settlement was discovered. Pcpcianc is
small village some 20 kilometers southeast of Virovitica, in thc vicinity of the
rai1road Daruvar-Virovitica. This site , or rather the system of prehistoric settle ments is located in the southern suburbs of the village. The complex 'Pepelane'
comprises of two independent units, asce n ained with a large quantity of ceramic

shards, house rubble and other archaeological materiaL One them is circular tcll,
dimensions 90 x 90 meters, sometimes 4 meters high. K. Minichreiter, who

performed excavations here, marked this location as 'site l'. The other site,
connected with the previous and shaped as a elongated mound, was labelled as
'site Ila'. 11,at one was detected during the construction work tl" local gas pipeline.
111e material from 'site Ila', with the Sta revo culture ware, pits and
dugours, is not interesting for this occasion. H owever, trenehes opened across the

tell gave enough e\1dence on the stratigraphy of the site, particularly when
discussing the transitory phase - the Neol ithic - the Eneolithic and the problem
of the middle Eneolithie. T he depth of the cultural layer in the tell tren ch is,
according to the information by K. Minichreiter, about 3.60 m. Cultural horizons
are formed in follOwing order, from the present-day humus - downward :
a) The first horizon (0.00-l.00 m) belongs to the Retz-Gajary culture,
(its two different phases). 11,e ware is typical tc)r that culture, decoratecl with
incised and plastic ornament. The Lasinjska culture influences are also noted.
b) ll1e second horizon (l.00-2.40 m) belongs to the transition between
the Neolithic and the Early Eneolithic. Proposed name for this manifesta tion is the
'See' culture (or See-Pepelane, ace. to Z. Mark ovi) . lt is the blend of the Sopot,
Lengyel and Lasinja culture elements (pain ted ware, bowls, terra-cotta, etc.) ln
our opinion, this culture could be attributed to the Early Eneoli thic.
c) The third horizon (2.40-3.60 m) has dugouts and pits with abundant
ceramic material, and belongs to the Starevo culture.
ll,e importance of this site for the study of [he Eneolithic of [his region
is in gi\1ng further in formation aboU[ the life on [his sire from rhe end of the
Neolithic (,See' culture), and during two phases of rhe Rerz- Gaja ry culture to the
Middle Eneolithic period. ln thc Fina l Eneolithic one mus t coum on the presence
of the Vuedol culture population.
Lit.: K. Minichreiter, AP 26 (1985),40-41.

The Eneolit hic cultures of Central and West Bal kans

152

o
1

10

.. '

2.5
3m

Fig. 34/1 3 -- Perlez Vu na.

Tumulus 9. grave 1 (ace to P
Me dovi . 1987)

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

153

34 PERLEZ NEAR ZRENJANIN

The necrop olis with mounds
Two kilometers East of Pe rle: near Batka, thuc is a group nf 15 tum uli
which re present an inde pe ndent group in the system of prehisroric (Eneoli thic)
rumuli that follows the rive r Ti sa from its origin tO its contluence with the Danuhe .
The rnajoriry of them are located on the loe:;:::, terraCe of former river bed of the
BegeL nea r its conf1ut'!I1ce with the Ti sa. Only three' our ot- 15 mounds were

e xcavated: Vuna #9, Vuna # l Oand Paia Humka. T he diankt<'r orthese mo und s
is from 30 to 40 mete rs, while the height "aries from O.SO - 3 meter, (due tO the
inte nsity of ag riculture).

The in vestigation of mounci s nea r Perl cz

WZlS

commenceJ in 1972 and

wa s finished with systematic e xcavations (lf 1976 (P. Med o vi , 1987,77). The
resul ts could he following:
l. T hc mo unds were formed when t he earth was deposited over abamloned Baden
c ulture se ttle ment. T he pottery, fl)und h ere is prohably dislocated. It IlIarks onl y
the termiTII L.':> IJost quem for thc chrono\ogy of the graves.
2. T umulus Vuna #9 conrained only one grave with the deceased in f1exed
position, sunk into the basis of the rumulus. T umulus # 10 had also only one grave ,
similar to pre vious. In the tumulus Pai a Hurnka there were six skeletal graves ..
one senili.~ female and tl vc inf(l1lts about 2 years of age .
3. Graves were without offerings. 1llE' on ly element for rhe chronoiogic<l i uetermi ,
nation of these graves, apart from thc o riCl1w tio n of the deceased, is the ()cher as
well as wooden con struction, well-k nown in graves of the Steppe, Jamna culrure,
found in grave #6 in Pa i a Humka.

/
-)
/

4.TI1e stratigraphic superposition over thc Baden culture settlement, shows that
these mounds near Pe rle z probably bclong to thc time of the pe netrarion of the
Steppe population, or to the horizon of the Final Eneolithic (rumuli near Panevo,
Vojlovica anci Tri Jabuke , Padej etc.).
Lit.:

P.

Medovi,

1987,77 -82, Abb. 1-4.

Fig. 34/4 -- Centra l grave n

the tumulus 10 (ace . to p
Medovi 1987. 77

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

154

35. PIVNICA NEAR OOACIIN BOSNIA

Stratified site
Pivnico belongs to the hill-fort type settlements, so called 'lillgula type',
which depicts the form of the hill with three sides that descend stce ply towards the
river valley , and the fourth slope is connected with the hill. It is located near the
village Potoani, ond has the dominant position over rhe Sava valley.
1l1l' first data o n this site

Wl)S

presented

by Z.

Mari.

He discuvered it

during the ground surveying in 1958 when he also mode smaller test excava tions.
Two years la ter A . Benac commenced systernatic excavJrions. He uncovered some
233 square meters of the plateau and goinee! tlrst rele vant information on tbe
stratigraphy of the site as well as on the remains of the material culture. On the
plateau Gradina there were two dweIling, chronologica l and cultural layers: the
older one that belongs to the Eneolithic, and youngerwith the material ofthe Early
Iron Age. Due to the configuration of the si tt' the depth of the cultural horizon
varie::;. It goes trom 0.30 rn in the ea stern part t() the maximum of 1.50 m in the
weste rn pan o f the sire . The most comp le te info rmatio n derived frorn six opened
uenches, was from the rrench 3. The a uthor A. Benac has usee! it to establish the
above mentioned stratigraphic sequence . In this part of the site hc found one well
preserved Kostolac culture house with abundant archaeo logical materia l. The
fea ture wa s of irreg ular shape, dim. 9 x 7.50 m. Two building phases were
ascertained . The house was rt:newed so that certain details remained unchanged

in following phase. As the malter of fact, the object, we are discussing, was semi
subterranean house with few rooms (cells) and the hea rth.
The Kostolac culture ware from
Pivnice is rich in shapes and omanlents.

Conical and smoo(hly carinated bowls, deep

pots, amphorae and cups with stripe honclles
and cylindrical recipient are frequent. AImost all the motifs of this culture werc used
in the decoration of the pottery, especially
those frequent on other sites from Srem and
3 SlavoI1ia: dotted incisions in different combina tions (bands, hanging triangles, chess
fields combined with other techniques of decoration etc.). It seems thar Furchenslich
ornament is usee! rarely, (hough some elements imply that tl1is could be the late phase of
tl1is culture when ""me Vuedol culture elements already emerge.
The pottery of younger horizon belongs to the beginning of the Early Iron
Age, and was cha racterized with turban-like bowls, garlands and similar motifs.
Lit.:

fig . 35 .. The Kostolac

culture ware (ace. to

A.Benac 1962.21 )

A. Benac, 1962,21 AO, T. I-X.

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

155

36 . PLON IK NEAR PROKUPLJE (SOUTH SERB IA)

The hoard of copp er tools

Plonik is well-known, eponimous, site for one ph"seof the Vinb culture .
The discovery of four ho mds of cupper "nd other objects was" phenomenon . As

far as we know, similar d iscoveri es we re no r made on an\' o ther Eneoli thic si te in

the wider region of midd le "nd So uthe"sr Europe. \'( 'e shall lea\'e aside rhe
Neohthic settle me nt , whic h co uld be, in SOI11l' ways. ah,o uerenllineu as [neoli rhic,
and concentrate o ur aUcllri o n to these
hoards.
Hoard l was di scovered during ar~
ehaeologieal investigatio ns by M. Grbi in
j 92 7. Ir was located in the outs kirts of r11L'
Vina cult ure settleme nt, ne ar the railway.
Ir comprises of 12 copper chisels, one massive axe/hamme r and five (ongue ,sh8ped
axe s made of light white lime stone . The
hoard was dug into thc Vina c ulture ho ri,
zon 0.80 meters deep.
Hoard II came into the possession of
2
J
the 'Muzej knez<J Pavla' in the same year as thc
pre vio us as a random find. According to the information of tl1l' tinder, it was
discovered not far from the hoard I, also in the o utskirts of the Vi na culture
settlement. It contained t\vo 3xe/lnmmers, one of \'o,hich was decorated with
incisions on the cutting edge ; two chisels and threl' copper bracelets.
Hoard III was discovered during the construction works t() r wool facto ry, across
the railway sta tion, again in the ou tskirts of the Vina culture settlement. It was dug 0.7
m deep in the ground . It had 9 cupper objects (6 chiseb, axe/hammer, J ecorated with
groups of incisions, one massive copper bracelet similar to that (ronl o ne grave o f the
Vina culture necropJlis at Gomolava, and one needle with f()fked top with helical
ending, important for chronological detemlinatio n) .
Hoard N was fO Wld between hoarcIs I "nd II and h03rd III, in thc outskirts of
thc Vin a culture settlement, on the righ t side ofthl' railr<)~ld Pr()k llpljL>~ K lIrumlij 8. TI K'
culrural layer, accordi ng to rhc proti lc, "shallow, and thl' lloa rd wa, dug into thc gruund
on 0.30 m. It contains 5 copper ehisels, 8 tongue-shaped axes made of light white
limestone and o ne cylindrical casting vessel.
Although Bubanj-Salcum culture p.mery was f()und in the eariieS[ horizons of
Plonik, it is still nor certain wherher the hoards he long [() rh is yo wlger period Of ,
3ccmding to sto ne 3xes to thc \lina culture.

tt

Lit.: M. Grbi, 1929,9 ; B. Stali" , 1964, 35 <md further, (ig. 1-2;

1-14; B .J o vano v i, 1971 , 28-29, PI. IV.

n. Ibid,

1973, IS7, {igo

Plo ni k .

the hoard II
(acc. t o B Jovanovll 1971 .
PI. IV. 14-17)

Fl g.\6

I S6

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

--==--

37. RUDI NE I NEA R KOPRIVN ICA (NW CROATIA)

Th e Vue d o l culture settlement

Near the village Ko privni ka Rijeko, on the platea u of the hill Rudine,
southwesr of Koprivnica, there is one larger Vue " ol cul tu re settlement. It domi nates the surrnunuing and overlnoks the river Koprivnica whi ch runs in thc
footh ills. Tl,e position of thi s settlement is similar to the position of Other hill -fort
settl ements of rhe Late Vuedo l culture.
The excavarions were commenced in 1978, anci co ntinued during 1979.
Tl,c area of some 8 12 square meters was LlI1cove red. Ir was undo ubtedly established rhar rhis wa s singl e horizon settlement. The exca va ted area revea led one
house, nineteen pits (few of them were used as dwell ing objects) anel ten hearths.
Few dwelling obj ects suggest S that certain number of ho uses must have been
devasmted. Reside dugouts, pits with the remains of animal ske letons are also very
important. Tl,e pir 19 offered the skeletun of a wild hoar. Z. Markovi labelled the
pit 4 as an an im al grave , but did not specify the species.

Tl1e material culture from Rudine I comprises of numerous and miscellaneous cermnic ware , terra~cO tta of zoo ~morphic fIgurines, clay weighs, bone and
stone implements and weapons. According to typological characteristics, particularly regarding the decoration and the shapes of the ware, this site should belong
to the end of the Vuedol culture. Certain shapes (beakers with one handle) , bowls
or bottle -shaped containers a lready bdo ng to the early phase of the Vinkovci
Flg. 37 -- Rudine I. culture. In Z. M a rkovi' s o pinion it is the ph ase III in the develo pment of the
the pottery of the Kostolac Vuedol c ulture in the region of Northwestern Croatia.
and Vuedol cu ltures (aec
to Z. Mark ovi 1981.223) Lir.: Z. M a rkovi, 1981 , 223 -236, fig. 1-7, PI. VIl-XIX.

Regis ter of major En eoli thic sites in former Yugoslavia

IS '

38. RUDNA GLAVA NEAR MAJDANPEK (NE SERBIA)

Eneo lithic minin g sha ft s
One of t he oldest mines in ('kntral and W est Balkon s wa s d is(()vCfeu in
I1)()lInt Liskov<K
and Deli j ovan. It is located above the viiloge Rudna ("ava, on the altitude "f450
m. In geologicallite rature this loca lity is well known tllC its rich b yer> of magnetite
and chalcopyrite , essen ti al ores for ob taining qua li ty coppe r. In the sec tor of
ptehistoric shafts, modern min ing lasted un til the I 960's. In t he foot hills ofRudn a
the mo untain regio n of Eas t Serbia, in thc con tact zone be tween

Glava fl ows the river aka (Saka) whose nam e, a::; well as the wrirren sou rces

imply that mining in thi s region was well developed during the Mediaeval periou.
Systematic e xcavations of this unJuubtl'Jly most importan t mining com~

plex of pre historic Europe starteu in 1968. First pha se of t:xcavations \aStCU from
1968 to 1979, a nu werec rowned with the monogra ph (B. j ova novi , 198 2) . Second
phase lasrs even today, thanks to the commitm ent of research feIl ows in the
Museum ofEnr and those of Archaeological Institute in Belgrade. TI,i s site entered
archaeologica lliteratute through the monograph by ll. j ova no vi as well as
numerous articles on thc c <Jrii e s[ mining un this site .

A ccLlfding to the latest infLlfmation of

1990 the re a re over 40 Eneolithi c mining
shafts. Their diameter varie> from 0.80 to 2.00
m, and the depth depends on the ability to
fo llow th e source tilfOllgh the rock. These
shafts had wiu er access pla riilrlns, where most

of the archaeological material was fo unu. A mong other materi al, five hoards that
conta ined stone [,arons (sligh rly adjusted pebbl es), antler rools, por tery, and altars,
which were probably used also to illuminatc the shaft. T ypological analysis of the
archaeological material clearl y shows that this mine was in func tion during the
tra nsition of the Early Vina c ulture into the Late V ina . A ut hors of these
excavations dated this site in the Eneolithic period, and it was therefore incorporated in this register.

Fig.3 8 -. Rudna Gla,;a The

Vina

Lit.: B. J ova n o vi , 1982, passim; Z. S tan ojevi, Arhc olllct<llurki \nkaliteti

1990, 5-8.

II

Srbiji, Bor

cul ture po: ana

implement ,ace i.o 8

Jov an o'1c

9E2

5.~or.;:

158

------

The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and W est Balkans

39. S E E NEAR KOPRIVNICA (NW CROATIA)

Stratified site

privniki

One scat tered lowland -type settlement is situated near the village KoBreg (o r Bregi), 6.5 km so utheast o(Kopri vnica . It is located on a plateau

near the K oprivni k a rive r. fir st CXGlv;]ti o ns we re pe rfo rrn cd after gro und surveing

of the region in 1979 (Museum in Koprivnica, where the ma terial is kept). After
a short recess in 1984, th e work s were continued in 1987. The prelimina ry results
were published by Z. M a rk o vi (VAMZ IS, 19S5, A P 28, 1987, 50-51; Podravski
zbornik 81, 198 1, etc.). If we neglected scarce find s ot the Roman and Medieval
period (9th-14 th century) , thesl' info rm "tion suggest th at this wa s single layered
dugo ut-type settlcml' nt which developed hori zont"lIy ove r " lorger "re" . During
these excavations an arca of some l 000 square mete rs was investigated. Most of
the settlement was covered with test rrenches which g <1VL' eno ugh information
about its disposirion. The site is interesting and was pic ked up t"()r thi s occasio n , in

the tlrst place, due to the f"ct that it belongs to one still insutlkiently "cknowledged, early Eneolithic c ulture n"med See or Pe pe\a ni -See c ulture.
One dWe\ ling obj ec t with d abor"te interna l struc ture is very important
for understanding the ty pe of the settl ement and its architec ture. lt is a dugour (or
rather semi-dugo ut) with more rooms, with a hearth. lt w"s sunk from the level of
humus and goes down to thl' virgin soil. The depth of certnin parts of this house
varies and goes from 0.78 to 1.84 m. ll,e rem"ins of wa II supportS show thot it was
covered with some kind of " orgnnic material.
Potte ry ga the red from the pirs and dugo uts is unique in style and sho ws

ch"racteri stics of the Early Eneolithic of this region. Z. Mark o vi points OLl( one
strong Lasinja culture component, which could be expl"ined with the h ypothesis
that the See -Pe pe l an i culture could belong to the same c ul turni complex - as its
early ph ase (the Proto- Lasinj,,), .or rem"ins just region al phenome non. Among the
pottery sh"rds, one can tlnd rem"ins of bowls with tongue-sh" ped handles , smaller
POts wi th thc hand lc tha t goes from the rim, as well as of ampho", e and pithoi.
The decoration is ra re and was made with channeled lines, incisio ns o r sma ll and
shallow impressions.

ll,e resuirs of ca librated 14C analysis perti.ltmed in the laboratory Ruder

Bokovi in Zagreb, show th" t this settlement developed between 3 160 "nel 2S60
BC which should correspond to the end oithe Early Eneoli thic, i.e. to the beginning
of the Lasinj" c ulture.

Lit.: Z. Mark,w i , Ar 28 (1987) 1989 ,50-51.

Register of major Eneolithic sites in form er Yugosl avi a

159

40 SPILA NEAR PERAST (BOKA KOTO RSKA)

Stratified cave settlement

The cave 'Spila' is situated "hollt 1.5 km east o f Perast on an al tiruoe of
320 me ters "bove sec le vel. It overlooks the city OI' Risan ano the Koror bay. It is
shcltcred from the winds, which go"" ideol conoition, ll)f the lile llI ' prehistotic
men. This was also witnessed with rich cul tural layer:; ITtml [he \:et.)l1thic to [he
end of the Encolithic pe riod .
This cave was disco vered by local eler,
gyman don Cr"cian Braj k o vi in 1968 . He
ope ned one sm~dlcr so und ing and ga(hercJ
lorge numbe r of po tte ry shards " nd bones of
diffe rent animals. Six years loter, in 1974, firs r
systematic excavations were underta ken. T11ree
trend1es were opened on (he entrance of the
cave and in ito inte rior (A, B, Cl (JI' total 24
square me ters . The d epth of cultural laye r
vari es fi-om 0.60 m on thc' entrance Lip to 2.00
rn in the interior of tbc cave. Str3tigmphic
analysis submitted by . Markovi, show thot
thete are eight difrerent layers divided in two
cultural horizons. He marked thern as stratum
I anu II , with sub-phoses la, b, e and Ila , b, c.
Numerous archaeological matetiai show thot
continui ty of material culture e xisteu \vitho ut
2
sign ificant changes in style . Afte r the pot tery
anolysis it showed that stratum Ia-c belonged to
the final Neolithic of the AJriotie C(Jost - thL'
Hvor-Lisiii culture, while the strat um ]] be longs to the Adriatic Eneoli t hic closest (() the
Nakovanska culture. The single 14C ano lysis
(Ruder Bokovi loborotory ) token from the
laye r between stra to I onJ II , dates it between
379 5-36l7 col. BC
Important information com e through
paleo-zoologieal reseoreh. In both strata predomina te bones of domesticared animals, which
3
certainly comes as a surprise because ir seemed tholt this cave was used as cl hunters
shelte r. According to S. Bijk(jny's anolysis the [Otio between domesticated and wild
animals was 80 : 20 in favor of domesticoted in st[Orum I, onu eve n 87 : l3 fllr
stratum ll.

7!l~

------_ ---.1:----------:::

Lit.: . Marko vi, 1985, 15-27.

FrgAO -- pila nea r PeraSi

the shapes of the Eneoh~"'::
pottery (ace. to . '.'a'
19 85 . 15)

0"."

160

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Salkans

4 1. UPLEVEC NEAR BITOLA (PELAGON IA)

En eo lith ic sett lement

On t he e ast fringe of Pdagonian plain, in the vic ini ty ofehe village Dolno
Oreovo, there is one steep slope whic h goes fro m southern and western side towards

Pelagonian depression. Remaips (l f()rtitled,

Fig 41 The pottery from

upl evec (acc. to Gara anm Sim aska 19 76)

rwo ~l;)yc rl.'J

Ent'(}\i rhi c se ttl e ment was

found on small plateau ca ll ed S uplevec . According to its rupography this site diffe rs
from other Eneolithic t e ll~type se rdem.e nts in Pelagonia. Howeve r it contl)fJllS to
one well known type of the Bubanj-Salcuta sites in northe rn regions.
First rescue eXG.lvatio!1s on this place were comm enced in
1959 by P. M a ki and D. Simoska . Ne ve rtheless, the inte rest fo r this
site wa s rai sed onl y after one stone baton of the 'steppc proveni ence'
was f()unu , and insranrly entered ;)rchaeo\ogica llirerarurc. Tht' works
we re continued in 1971 . T he result was good srratigrap hic sequence
alld o the r importa nt data 0 11 the developme nt of thi s site during the
Eneoli thic pe riod.
According to M. Garaanin and D. S imoska, the stratigraphI'
sho ws that thL' c ultural horizon was divided into two separate aSSe m~
blages. These we rc' marked with I an d II with ano ther five sub -horizons
(1- 5). The stud y of the contents of these h orizo ns does no t show maj or
diffe ren ces in Style' o t potte ry and other tinds. The a utho rs bel ie ve thar
this was one culture of the Bubanj-Salcut3 CDmplex and proposed the
name - uple vec- Bab rno Gumno culture . The fa ct that n o c rusted

colour painting or graffIto decoration was found in the cultucal hori zon on this site,
is characte ris tic for c hronologica l determination of this culture in the Eneolithic
of Pelagonia. Instead, togethe r with obvious Bubanj -Salcurn fo rms, Sch1lur ware
appears (Wi1lckdsc!mur o rname nt), which was anrihuted to the 'ste ppe influe nce ',
Le . (he same curnplex to which the stone baton belongs to .
Lit.: M. G","""in - D. SinH)Sb 1976.

Register of major Eneoli thic sites in former Yugoslavia

161

42 ''TRI HUMKE" BY JABUKA -- P A N EVO

Stratifi ed settl ement and tu mulus

In the plain s (Jf southwest [Ianat , 8 km nurth of Panevo, near r11L' village
Jabuka, few mounds - tum ul i, call ed Three mounds' we re ascertained. On one of
them systematic xcavation was performed. That mound, 48 m in diam eter, 2.30
m in heigh t belongs to middle sized tum uli. It is located on smaller terrace risen
abo ve marshy te rrain. T he e xc avations, at tirse rescue tYpl:, became syste matic, anu
this rum ulus was derailedly investigated in 1981. Its imm euiate vicinity was also
surveyed , which showed that thi s mmmu was ereeteu upo n the srratitk'd Eneolithic
site .

,'" -, ,
"

,
\
I

1.',

,,
,
,

, '-- - - - - - -

( " ' "

l.

".

".

--j

Stratigraphic inf() rrnario n from the [um ul us. its surroundings <1nd layers

under it showed:
l) the lowest horizon with pits helong tu the Baden culture se ttlement :
2) in the widet area above the previous. onc Kosto lac c ul ture settlement
was confirm ed (during the e xca vatiom fo ur houses were discovered):
3) humus layer (Eneolithic ') 9 .5 cm thick:
4) the tumulus with one gra ve uf the Jamna culture.
ll1is complex situation shows that the tumulus was f("medafter a short
gap in the li fe oi the Kosroloc culture settlement, which ce rtainly has chronological
implicatiom. According to all obtainable dara, the tumulus belongs to the 'steppe
graves' horizon of the late janlna culture , suc h as Vojlovica and odler sites in
southern Banat , Potisje, Romania and north [lulgaria. The rumulus had only one,
central gtave dug into the base of the Kostolac culture house. ll1c grave irselfwas
1.50 m long and 0.90 m wide. ll1e deceased was laid on his back in flexed position,
over a mat covered with ocher. T he deceased was also covered with ocher. T here
were no grave offerings. T he deceased was male, about 40 years of age, 165 cm
high.
Two more graves were found on the periphery of the mound. ll1ey were
also without grave offe ri ngs, with individuals in conrrac ted position. lt is suppused
that they belonged to the Baden culture horizon of this site.
Lit.: Lj.

B llkvi,

1978 (1979) , 14-18.

,,
,----.

FigA2 .. Jabuka near

Pa n evo. The pottery of the
Baden and Kostolac cultures

162

The En eolithic cul tures of Central and West Balkan s

43 VAJUGA -KORBOVO (DEROAP II)

Stratified site
On a high te rrace of the [)an ube, in thC' viciniry of the vill agE' Vajuga, a
nUl11ber of prehisro ri c , n,0I11<J11 anu Medie vdl sites we rl' asce rtained. Fo r the stud y
of the Eneo lithic o n Oerdap II sites Vajuga-Zbradila, Vajuga-Pesak and VajugaKorhovo are particularl y important. The last one is situmed on the bank of the
Danube c hannel whi ch forms the isle Korbovo, \Ve il -known for its prehisroric sites
(the Eneolithic, The [orly and MidcIk BroIlZL' Age ).
The site near Vajuga was registered in 1980, during the trenc h surveying
of the area . [)uring next yea r, 1981, D. Krsti pe rformed rescue archaeological
e xcavatio ns whic h covereu some 360 square meters. The cultural horizon wa s

rather thin and wa s f()[med of the layer bE'tween the humus and sandy soil. The
depth varies between 0.4 and 0.9 m. It is partly destroyed with the necropolis dug
into the ho rimn during the Middle Hronze Age (II graves - investigated), and also
with later intrusi ons during the La Tene <J nd the Ro man period .
TI1e Eneolithic hori zo n un this sitE' is interest ing fo r both its finds and
stratigrap hy. Two dwelling ho rizons, belonging to ditle rent c ultures, frequent in
the erdap region, could be distingui shed herc. One belongs to the Buba nj-Sak uta
culture, and the orher to the Cerna voda III (i. e. Bole r6z-Cernavoda Ill). The
Bubanj -Salcuta settlement was very rich in matcrial, especially from one well
preserved ho use t hat o /fered a number of whole and frag mentcd pots felunu iH sil!<o
The typology of the pottery and some orhcr chara cteristics show that it was the
product of a single phase of this culture , but with gratllro pottery lack ing . Most
frequent fo rms were beakers with two handles with inverted rims as wdl as coarse
po ts. TI)i s materi al has closest analogies with the materi al trom Kovilovo near
Negorin and Krivdj near Bor. TI)e tlnds of the Cerna voda III c ulture are rare, but
figo 43 _. Vajuga - Korbava , typologically very clear. ll)ose were bowls with cha nnels in the interior of the rim,
The Bubanj -Sal cuta and Cer pots with double plastic bands beneath the rim , rugged zig-zag motifs and cups with
navoda III pottery (acc. to wide vertical channels. TI)e material is simila r to that from Rrza Vrba near Kovin.
D. Krsti 1986, 148)

Lit, ; D.

Krsti, e rJ"p ske

sveske 111,1986, 148-152, Fig. 1-16.

Regi ster of major Eneolith ic sites in former Yugoslavia

163

44 VELA SP ILJ A ON THE ISLAND KORULA

NEAR VELA LUKA - Stratified cave- type settlement

Thanks to d iligent archaL'Ological excavations, wh ich last tn o ur clays,
Vela Spilj a entered the literature as one of the mnst im portant sitcs fur the stucly
ofN eolithic and Eneolithic of the Adriatic coast and islands. T he cave is located
above Vela Luka, on t he peninsula callecl Pinski Rat, on the altitude ot 130 m. It
dominates the surro unding, and its ample interior (1 600 squa re meters) otTered
extraord inary conditions tor larger comm uni ty . The continuity of t he life here is
illustra ted wi th t he material frolll the !\eoli thic and Eneolithic peri<lds.
The fi rst information on this site could be !(lund in the middle o! the 19th
century in N. OstOj i's notes (1 853), but only regarding natural curi osit\" no t on
its arc haeological con ten ts. TIle first suunJin gs (s pcleo logical) we rc unde rtaken tn
1950 (M. Gljivoje) , ami then in 1951, than ks tu (;. !\ova k, th is cave entered the
hteraturc as an archaeological site . ln 1974 wid e sC<J icd cXGlvatio ns were com~

menced by G. No vak and in 1982 this wo rks wcre continued by B. E-uk.

The stratigraphic data shnw that the depth of the hori zon varils, depending o n the incl inat ion of the te rrain, bu t therc we re also ce rta in pan s in the cavt'

whete the virgin soil have not been reached. Thl dept h of 4. 5 meters of c ultural
la yer is men tioned in the documentation of ch i::! sieL: . However, it seem:'; that

stratigraphi c sequence is now clearl y establi shed: t here are th ree Nco lith ic horizons
(older, middle and younger) with Adriatic impresso ware, material of the Danil oKakanj-Ripoli culture, and tlnally the hori zon of the H va r - Li sii i c ulture . Eneolith ic, Bronze A ge and Iron Age sed iments \Vere superposed.

The Eneolithic hnri zon \vas distinguished in reCent years, LlIld <:lcco rciing
to B. euk 's inforrna tion o ne can aniculatt:' t\\'o c hro no iogica i and c ultural
ho rizons: the older o ne, which was intluenced \\ith rhe Hvar cul ture (!\ ak",anska) , and the younger (lne with elements of Adria(ic facie> of [he V uedol
(Ljublj anska) culture . One infant grave comes from the Eneolithic horimn , as well
8S one hoard (!) of long stone kn ives (steppe provenience ' ), and one copper ax
of the Pl onik culrure style . Thi s interesting material belongs to the Eneolithic
period , probably to its final phase, when the V uL'dol c ulture ciements appear
(Tivat-Rubc) .
Unfo rtunately, the rn ateriai from these exca v8t ion:::; were not comple tel y
published, so this in teresting site, will have to wa it another occasion for co mpre ~
hensive scie ntific valorization .

Lit.: B. e Llk, Arheoloki pregled 26, 1985, 46 -47 : Ibid, Arl1C'<l I"ki pregleJ 28 , 1987,
44-46 and li t. cit.

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

164

lombe

+f

ceramique

Baden

0'.0

".~8'eJ
,

O
(J.()
e"
sOl

du

tOUf

Register of major Eneolithic si!es in former Yugoslavia

165

45. VINA-BELO BRDO NEAR BELGRADE

Stratified prehistoric settlement
In the shadow of rich neolithic dwelling horizons of Belo Brdo in Vina,
numerous horizons of younger periods such as the Eneolithic and the Bronze Age
horizon remained neglected . The pottery found in these horizons was known since
M.M. Vasi's excavations. This material was also partly published, but its importance was never recognized. Therefore, in this place we shall bring forward only
eneolithic findings.
So called 'Non- Vina' pottery from younger levels M. Vasi simply
marked as 'Post- Vina culture pottery', Pannonian or Hellenistic. F. Holste (1939)
also in general terms marks horizon E as the last 'Pre- Metal Age horizon'. The first
accurate stratigraphic and cultural valorization of Baden and Vatin ware were
made by D. S rejovi (1957) and B . Jova novi (1963). Recent exca vations in Vina,
which lasted from 1978 to 1983, gave reasonably rich information on the Eneolithic
and Vatin culture horizon. These horizons, together with graves of a smaller
necropolis, were presented for the first tim e (N. Tasi, 1984) thanks to the material
from these excavations . Even though the Medieval necropolis (8-17th century),
with some 700 graves was dug into Eneolithic horizon, and partly devastated it,
numerous pits of the Baden culture were preserved as well as the part of the horizon
with the Kostolac culture findings and a smaller necropolis with four graves which
belong to the Bodrogkerezstur culture. The Baden culture settlement is of the
single-stratum type with pits, such as those near Dobanovci or Beli Manastir. The
pottery is typical, 'Early-classical', with bowls decorated with incised lines that end
with dotted ornament, cups with bulb-shaped container. The curiosity of this site
was the discovery of four anthropomorphic terra-cortas, one of which was completely preserved and represents the masterpiece of the Baden culture. The
Kostolac c ulture ware belongs to one earlier phase, where Furei1enstici1 ornament
lacks as a rule, or is extremely rare.
The important phenomenon was the appearance of four graves in flexed
position, laid in rectangular graves with abundant grave goods (grave 2 had five
pOts). The pottery (Milciuop[, spherical bowls with net ornament, semi-spherical
bowls) puts these graves into the late phase of Bodrogkerezstur culture. Graves
were concentrated in the periphery of the sector JI, so one can assume that this
necropolis possibly extends towards the South.
Lit.: N.

1-14.

Tasi,

1984,69-75, Fig. 39-44; Cat. 264-266; M. Jevti, 1986, 135-144, Fig.

Fig. 45/1 .. The base plan

with graves (4) and the ves,
sei of the Bodrogkerezstur
culture (1-2 ) and Baden eul
ture terra cotta (3)

The Eneolithic cu ltu res of Cen tral and Wes t Balkans

166

:. )"'~J, - 1 ---

1038C, ----r-- - - - - . - 7 } ~~b(.:; bl ----~...!!- ---

59,50

---- r.j-~ e""

1i

>I

\% 2

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - ~
- -~
- ~~ ,

-~
!

W l~ 1

-- 1--

i
, I

.,

milON

l!

., .

\', I N~OVll

~1

BI

--+-"OQI10IIC
tvIN'(QV ( \ ~ \

' _1_
milON ,
!'1 UllOOll

- 1UO<llG llH
l\i ~ Q(lVU \

-1--~

---

- -- - - - -- - -

---- - - - - --- - - - -

Ftg. 46/1- 4 Vi nkovCl Trnica. th e profile of th e

tren ch iz l 962, the casts
and two pots (ace. to S.
D i mi t rijevi 1982 , abb . 2)

.-

- -

- -- - ------- - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -

.- -- -

- -.- -

--

--

-- -- - - - -

Register of major En eolith ic sites in former Yugoslavia

167

46 VINKOVCI - STARA PIJACA (MARKET AND HOTEL)

Stratified site
In the center of Vinkovci ,md in its immediate vicinity (Borik), larger
number of Eneol ithic, mostly Vuedol culture sites, was discovered. Thanks to
systematic excavation s, it was e stablished that the most impo rtan t one was iT") the
very center of the town, in the region of o ld mmket (known in the literature as

Trnica and Hotel). From 1977 to 1978 , extensive rescue excavations were
undertaken which CLlvered ahout 2100 square meters .
The Vinkovci culture sites enter archaeological literature rather ea rly. In
1902 j. Brumchmidt published few pre historic finding s from this region. Howe ver,
wider systematic excavarion did not CLlmmence unti1l1951. T hese works were most
inteme during 1978, when they covered almost the entire area of the T ell , with
cultural hori zon some times up to 4 meters thick. The results of the invesrig3tion

showed that this se ttlement was simila r to orhers Belonging to the V uedol culture
in Srem. It was fo rtified with the trench and the river BoslIt which make a c rescent
around the rno und. The stratigraphic analysis give s the following sequence:

l. pre historic hum us wi th random tlndings and rhe Sta revo culture
earth-cabim ;
2. (horizon A) the Sta re vo culture settlement - spyraloid B phase;
3. (intermediate horizon - determined during 1978 campaign) the pottery
of the Lasinje III-Salcuta IV culture;
4. (horizon B) the Vuedol culture settlement - phase B2 (according to
S. Dimitrij evi) i

5. (horizon C) the Vi nkovci culture - phase A;

6. (horilO1l D I) the Vinkovci culture - phase B I,
7. (horizon 02) the Vinkovci cul ture - phase B2,
8. recent humus with random tlndings belonging tu the Iron Age, Roman
Age and Gepid period.
lmoprtant horizon s for the study of the Eneo lithic of this region were
1

those with the Lasinje III-Salcuta IV and the Vu edol culture tIndings, particularly
latter with a number ofhous es, heartl", altars and pits. Apart from the abundance
of the Vuedol culture ponery (younger phase), one 'melting pit' with the hoa rd
(1) with three casts for battle axes, one miniature of the same shape and a cast for
chiel, are of great importance.
Lit.: S. Dimitrijevi, 0 pLlscula Archaeologica 7,1982,7 tf: Ibid , in:PIZ III, 140 ((, A.
Dunnan, OPLlSCllIa ArchaeologlC<1 8, 1983 .

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

168
-----~

----~

47 VIS NEAR DERVENTA (NORTH BOSNIA)

Stratified prehistoric settl ement

Near the village Modran, II km southeast of Derventa in nurthern
Bosnia , there is prehistoric hill-fo rt site locally known as Vis. It has the position
which dominate s the surrounding area, l:'specially the vall e y tha t goe s t()wDrds the
North and thc river Sava. First archaeological excav<ltions, with smalle r tre nehes,
werc pe rformed from 19 5 7,1959 , and we re concL'ntr~HL'd on thc pmr of the
fortification wall that was still above the ground . Somewhm more e xtensive works

were undertaken trom 1962-1964 (B. Beli). T hL'Y COVL'red rhe pbteau insid e rhe
fortifications. While thc' first digs (LMari) gave material of younger cultures (Ha
A-Cl), exca vations by B. Beli "f)cred mure cumplete stratigraphy together with
Eneoli thic ho rizons. According (O the results of rhis e xcavations following stratigraphic sequence was made :
Vis A - the settlement of the Lasinja culture (the Early En eolithic) ;
Vis B - the settlement of the Kostolac culturL' (thL' Classical Encoli tilic) ;
Vis Cl - the se ttlement "hh e Umenfelder period (Ha A - the Late Bronze
Age);
Vis C2 ~ the period of the transition frum th e BroJlze Age in to the Iron
Age (Ha B-Cl) ;

For the putpouse of this hook horizons A anci tl are uf grea t importance .
1l1CY belong to the Lasinja and Kostolac cultures. According to B. Beli anci S.
Dimi trij e vi, the ea rliest horizon (0.45 - 1. 10 m) belongs to the early Lasinja culture.
It was dugou t ~type se ttl ement \vith pooriy decorared pottery. Above this horizon
was the settlement of the LJsinja culture with h()uses (relative height ~ 0 .4 5m) .

T he pot tery belongs to th e classical phase uf the Lasinja cul ture. T he next horizon
was with the Kostolac ware, its early phase ofthe Pivnic;)~Ce ri~Aikovci type . Th e
intetesting part was the appearance of the Vuedol cul tu te (Vuedol A- Mitruvac)
fragments in the Kos to lac ho rizon. T wo Lasinja culture horizons, together with

data from Gornja T uzla anJ AjJuvka Jama, enabled S. D imitrijevi to follow the
genesis of this culture from the Vina Dl pcriod to the Kostolac culture.
lit. : B. Beli, A rheoloki pregleJ 6,
Dimitrij e vi,

PJZ III, 142-147.

1964,22-23; Z.

Man,

in: Epoques... , 76-78; S.

169

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

48 VLA STELIN SKI BREG (GRA DAC) IN SARVA

NEAR OSIJEK
Stratified settlement
If the results of the excava tions wc re publi shed, Sarva would probahly
become the most prominent of all sites of the Eneolithi c period, particula rl y of the
Vuedol culture, in the region fro m the ri ver Drava to the conf1uence of rivers
Sava and Danube. Unfortunately, results of R. Schmidt's work of 1942 and 1943
were never published and the documentation was irre rrievably lost, and the
stra tigraphy of the 8 m thick layer can not be used. Nevertheless, Sarva has made
its way to the literature as the site of rema rkable im porta nce for the study of the
Eneolithic in Slavonia and Srem.
TIle topographic position of the pla tea u Vlastelinski Breg is similar to
other V uedol culture sites along the Danube. lt is a mound (dim. 185 x 175 m),
raised 15 meters above the river Drava, bordered with ancient ri ver beds and
fortified with the pa lisade, as Grad ac in Vuedo l which is merely 37 km away.
Sarva was mentioned for the fi rst time in the a rchaeological litera ture in the
publication eVA Fasc. 2 by V. Hofflller in 1938, and more stratigraphic data were
given by R.R. Schmid t in Die Burg Vuedo l in 1945. ln the latter were for the first
time mentioned results of the 1942/43 ca mpaigns.
ln the cul tural deposit, 8,20 m thick, the fi rst two hori zons belong to the
Neolithic period ( la, lb and ll) , then follow a massive eneolithic horizon (3.602 ,00

m) with twO subhorizons (Ill and IV) and finally horizons of the Bronze Age, La
T ene, Roman and Slavic period (V, Vl VII). The horizon III was the Baden c ulture
fortification with apsidal houses and melting casts. The horizon IV was the Vuedol
culture settlemen t wi th two building horizons, megaron houses and graves. These
information could be corrected by inte rposing of one Kostolac culture horizon
(probably the one with apsidal houses), to which melting casts could be a ttributed.
Lir.: R.R. Schmidt, 1945,127 -13 1: S . Dimitrijevi, in:

rJz Ill , 267270.

Fig. 48 Sarva. the pottery

of the Baden and Vuedol
cul tures and the cast (acc. to
R. Schmidt 1945 . 127)
oo

170

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

49 VUEDOL (WEST SREM)

Stratified prehistoric settlement
One of the most important Danubian and Middle Euro pea n Eno li t hi c
settlements is located on ly six kilome ters upstream fro m Vukovar, on a high loess
terrace of the ri ver Dan ube. lt is called Vued ol, the eponymous site of the c ulture.
In a wider region, fcw mo re prehistoric settlements and individual graves we re also
found: trojmo v vinograd i kukuruzite ('Streim 's vineyard and corn-field'), Vinograd K a rasovi(,Vi ne- yard K a rasov i ') ond G",doc (,(Jradac'). Vued ol was
mentioned in archaeological literature os ca rl y as 189 7, thanks to small-scale test
exca va tions by ). Brunschmid t. Since that time V uedol remained una voidable in
archaeology (eVA I, Yu, 1933), portic ula rl y after systematic excava tions of 1938
,md the monog"'ph 'Die Burg Vuedo l' by R.R. Schmidt (1945). After the W orld
War 2, smaller excavations were underta ken by S. Dimitrij evi in 1966 and 1967,
and after that came extensive excavations by A. Durman (1 981, 1984-1988).
ll1ese were all a imed in order to complete the sequence of the development of the
Neolithic and Eneolithic c ultures o n these sites.
from previously mentioned locations, Gradac is undoubtedly the most
importa nt. This was fortit1ed settlement with elaborate fortifi ca tion system, surrounded fro m rhree sides with the trench and the pa li sade, while on the fourth side
it was guarded with steep bank of the river Danube. Cultural h orizon on this site
was 4.00 meters thick, while on other neighboring sites it was consid erably thinner
(about 2.20 m). The ea rliest settlement, erected on the Neolithic humus, belonged
to the S ta re vo culture. T he development of thc Eneolithic cultures starts with
the Baden c ulture, and continues with thc Kostoloc and Vuedo l cultures and lasts
continually until the Earl y Brome Age and the c ultures of the Eorl y Iron Age. The
youngest prehistoric settlement belongs to the Celtic period . Following disposition
of the Eneolithic hori zons was obtained by combining of the stratigraphic sequences from (Jradac and both S. Dimitrij evi's and A. Durman's stratigraphic
data from 'Streim's vineyard and corn -fi eld':
I. the horizon of the Baden culture phase I A (with the Bolen\z cul ture
elements):
2. the horizon with mixed classical Baden and Kostolac pottery;
3. the horizon of the Kostolac c ul ture; 4. the horizon of the Early Vuedo l
culture with Kostolac c ulture elements;
5. the horizon of the classical Vuedol culture (B-I) ;
6. the horizon of the Vuedol culture with elements of the Vinkovci
culture.
The econ omy of the Eneolithic population was based on agriculture,
animal husband ry and fishing. Mctal implements, weapons and melting casts, as
well as numerous melting kilns, suggest th e existence of metall urgy. R. Schmidt

Register of major Eneolithic sites in former Yugoslavia

171

has also written about specialized workshops for casting of copper objects (Mq:aro71
des Kupfergissers).
New excavations gave numerous sampl es that were ana lyzed in the
laboratory Ruer Bokovi in Zagreb. 111e average age for the Baden culture is
4400 BP (uncalibrated) or 3365-3010 BC (calibrated). For the V uedol cultute
they are 4215 (uncalibtated) or 2935-2785 (calibrated).

fig o49 -- Vuedol the

ground-plan with m,cro
locations.

Lit.: R.R. Schmidt, 1945, passim; S. Dimitrij ev i , 1977: A. Dllnmll1, 1983, 1-75; T.
Teak, Arheoloki pregled 26 , 1985,5 7-59.

. .t/"

w- -

<J

"o

I.'EIN8!:R6 STREIM

/;1
il.f'':
/ ,1

i:
Ul/I

1'-

I<UtlURUZffLO

STRElM

!(II I~.

/"

./

,; i i
:' ./ (/"-\

;/,! / __-' \ .,./i

l((l"\i'\'"

l! / /
!!

I I
!

j,
I

!,Ii

---

/ 11. (,~11r-<~~~~=-==-~~
I 0- )\1\\ ----~~~-~ - -- =~0
~)I ! ~~-~--- -=-=-~///~
\ "V
----------..c_-- -- -------...----'
!

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

172

so. ZLOTSKA

PE INA NE AR BOR (EAST SERB IA)

Stratified cave-type settl ement

Zlotska (Lazareva) Pei na (cave) is situated twenty kilometers south-west
of Bor on the entrance of a deep ca nyon, which the river Zlotska carves into the
mountain. The Eneolithic pottery was also found in another cave called Vernjikica,
located abo ut 800 m from Zlocska Peina. T he caw Zimska ranks among other
caves of East Serbia with complex infrastructure (such as I:logovinska cave). It has
long corridors, small lakes and abundance of cave decoration . Its middle part
consists of one large gallery, ideal as a shel ter for larger population. Archaeological
investigations were started in 1963, after preparations for the exploitation of the
cave had been made. 111e interior of the cave was adequately illumin ated, and the
archaeological e xcavations could be performed properly. 111ese works were continued during 1964, and then again from 1968 to 1969. 111e archaeologica l
excavations covered large area in the central part of the gallery, as well as a sma ller
pan of side halls.
Clear stratigraphy anci abundant archaeological material was obta ined,
but exact disposition of the settlement coulcl not be seized because one part of the
cultural horizon was clevastated, and the other part remained unexcavatecl due to
the technical restrictions (elecrrica l wires, drainage etc). The depth of thc cultural
layer varies from 0 .2 m on the entrance to 1.00 m in the interior. following
sequence ofhllfizons was established.
A. The earliest Bubanj-Salcuta cul ture settlement with remains of house
fioors, hearths, and working surfaces was best preserved. 111e importance of this
horizon was its porre ry, abundance ufantl e r tools, flint implemen ts and particularly

copper obj ects (awls, pins, flat ax). The pottery was decora ted with carving,
channels, white and dry red painting, and also black burnishi ng. However, along
with this manner of decoration, pots with Scheibenhe1Lkel ty pe handles appear, which
could suggest that we deal here with one late phase of the Bubanj- Saleuta culture.
B. Above the ptevious horizon, the settlement of the final Eneolithic was
formed. According tO its pottery (ca rved lines, lens-sha ped plastic ornaments) this
settlement belongs to the Cotofeni culture with elements of the Kostolac culture
style (Furchenstich decoration). A large number of xlls, predominantly made ofantler,
was also found in this horizon.

The youngest horizon belongs to the Early Iron Age, to the Basarabi
culture. It is characterized with abundance of metal objects (bronze and iron).
Regarding the abundance of copper findings, and shards of native copper
and slag, Zimska cave was probably important meta ll urgical center in the time of
the first half of the Eneolithic period. Its must ha ve re tained its importance until
the end of the Eneolithic (the settlement of the Cotofeni- Kostolac culture), when

Regis ter of major Eneoli thic sites

i~ former

173

Yugoslavia

it became hunting station. La ter, in the 7th century AD, it becam e, once again,
important metallurgica l center.
Lit. : N. Tasi, 1978, passim; Ibid., 1973, 11 -28; IhiJ., 198 1,7 -26: Ibid., 1980,43-59.

figo 50 Zlotska Peina. the

ground plan of the cave (5)
and the pottery of the
Bubanj Sal cuta (I 2. 3) and
Cotofeni cultures (4).

liJ

~~~/

/>' , . . . . . . . . .

t '----_

"..,

..,....

BIBLlOGRAPHY
ABBREVIATIONS
AAHung

Acta archeologica Academiae Scientia rum Hungaricae,

Budapest.
Actes du VIII e Congres des Sciences prehistoriques et
Actes l, Il, Beograd
pratohistoriques I, Beograd 1971 ; II , Beograd 1973.
AE
Archaeologia Ertesitii, Budapest.
AH
Archaeologia Hungarica, Budapest.
Archaeologia lugoslavica , Beograd.
AIug
Akten Szekesfehervar Akten der Panonnia Konferenzen I, Szekesfehervar
1972.
Arheoloki pregled, Beograd.
AF
ARR
Arheoloki radovi i rasprave JAZU, Zagreb.
AV
Arheoloki vestnik, Ljubljana.
BaIcanica
BaIcanica, Godinjak Balkanolokog instituta SANU,
Beograd.
BAR International Series, Oxford, England.
BAR
BRGK
Bericht der Riimisch-Gerrnanischen Kommission des
Deutschen Archeologischen Institutes, Frankfurt arn
Main - Berlin.
GT
lanci i gradja za kulturnu istoriju Muzeja istone Bosne,
Tuzla.
Dobruda
Istorija na Dobruda, Tom I, Sofija 1984.
Eneolit junog Banata Eneolit junog Banata (katalog izlobe) , Panevo-Vrac
1987.
Ezero
Ezera, ranobranzanodobno selite, Sofija 1979.
FBK
Kulturen der Fruhbranzezeit des Karpatenbeckens und
Nordbalkans, Beograd 1984.
GeBI
Godinjak Centra za balkanoloka istraivanja ANUBiH,
Sarajevo.
Godinjak Muzeja grada Beograda, Beograd.
GMGB
GMKM(GMK}
Godinjak Muzeja Kosova (i Metohije), Pritina.
Gomolava I
Gomolava - Chranologie und Stratigraphie der vorgeschichtlichen und antiken Kultur der Donauniederung
und Sudosteurapas, Novi Sad 1988.
Hiigelbestattung ...
Hugelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone
warend der aneolithischen Periode, Internationales Symposium, Donji Milanovac 1985, Beograd 1987.

176

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

GZM
Is traivanja

Godinjak Zemaljskog Muzeja, Sarajevo.

Istrazivanja, Institut za istoriju Vojvodine, Novi Sad .

JPME

A Janos Pannonius Milzeum Evkbnyvebbl, Pecs.

Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, Prilep-Skopje.

MacAA
Materijali
NZMS
OA
OZ
PJZ llI, IV
Poroilo

Praistorija Vojvodine

PZ
RF
RVM
SA
SCVI
Simposio lazise

1982
Simpozium Zenica

1973

Materijali, Savez arheolokih drutava SFRJ, Beograd.

Nauni zbornik Matice srpske, Novi Sad.
Opuseula Archaeologica, Zagreb.
Osjeki zbornik, Osijek.
Praistorija jugoslovenskih zemalja, Tom JIJ, Sarajevo
1979; Tom IV, Sarajevo 1980.
Poroilo o raziskovanju neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji
I-XII, Ljubljana.
B. Brukner, B. Jovanovi, N. Tasi - Praistorija Vojvodine, Novi Sad 1974.
Priihistorische Zeitschrift, Berlin.
Regeszeti Filzetek, Budapest.
Rad vojvodjanskih muzeja, Novi Sad.
Sovjetskaja arheologija, Moskva.
Studii si cercetari de Istorie Veche, Bucarest.
Atti X Simposio Internazionale sulla fine del Neolitico e
gli inizi dell'eta del Bronzo in Europa, Lazise - Verona
1980 (1982) .
Materijali Simpoziuma "Rudarstvo i metalurgija BiH od
praistorije do poetka XX veka", Zenica 1973.
Slovenska archeologia, Brarislava.
Studia Albanica, Tirana.

SJA
St. Alb.
Symposium Bratislava Symposium ilber die Entstehung und Chronologie der
Badener Kultur, Bratislava 1973.
1973
Symposium Praha
Actes du Symposium consacre aux problemes du
Neolithique europeen, Praha 1959 (1961).
1961
Z
tudijne Zvesti AI SAV, Nitra.
Tbrtenelmi es Regeszeti Ertesitb.
TRE
VAMZ
Vjesnik Arheolokog muzeja, Zagreb.
VHAD
Vjesnik Hrvatskog arheolokog drutva, Zagreb.
WMBH
Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus Bosna und Herzegovina, Sarajevo.
Wiener Priihistorische Zeitschrift, Wien.
WPZ
Zbornik radova Narodnog muzeja, Beograd.
ZRNM

Bibl io~

177

BANNER}., 1956

Die Peceler Kultur, AH XXV Budapest 1956.

BATOVI ., 1975

Odnos jadranskog primorja prema podruju jugo.

i stonih Alpa u neolitu i eneolitu, AV XXIV,
Ljubljana 1975.

BELI B., 1964

Vis,. Modran, Derventa . vieslojno praistorijsko

naselje, AP 6, Beograd 1964.

BENAC A, 1948

Zavrna istraivanja u peini

Sarajevo 1948.

BENAC A, 1955

Nekoliko prethistorijskih nalaza sa p od ruja

Nikia u Crnoj Gori, GZM X, Sarajevo 1955.

BENAC A, 1959

Slavonska i ilirska kultura na prethistorijskoj gradi.

ni Zecovi kod Prijedora, GZM XIV, 1959.

BENAC A., 1962,

Studien zur Stein und Kupferzeit im nord

west!ichen Balkan, 42 BRGK 196 1 (1962).

BENAC A, 1962

Pivnice kod Odaka i neki problemi ko stolake

kulture, GMZ XVII, Sarajevo 1962.

BENAC A, 1986,

Pra istorijski tumuli na Kuprekom polju, CBI ,

knj. 5, Sarajevo 1986.

BERCIUD., 1961

Contributii la problemele neopoliticului ln Romania

ln lumina noilor cercetari, Bukuresti 1961.

BERCIU D., 1961a

Les nouvelles fouilles de Salcuta (Roumanie) et le

probleme des groupes Bubanj (Yougoslavie) et
Krivodol (Bulgarie) , Symposium Praha 1961.

BERcm D., 1964

Quelques donnees preJiminaires concernant la ci

vilisation de Cernavoda, SIA XII, Bratislava 1964.

BOGNARKUTZIAN I., 1963

The Copper Age Cemetery of Tiszapolgar-Basa

tanya, AH HUl, Budapest 1963.

BOGNARKUTZIAN 1., 1969

Probleme der mitt!eren Kupferzeit im Karpaten.

beken, SZ 17, Nitra 1969.

BOGNARKUTZIAN 1., 1972

The Early Copper Age Tiszapolgar Culture in the

Carpathian Basin, AH XLVIII, Budapest 1972.

Hrustovai,

GZM III,

178

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

BOGNARKUTZIAN L, 1973

The Beginning and Position of the Copper Age in

the Carpatho-Pannonian Region, Actes II, Beograd 1973.

BORONEANT V., 1966

Cultura Kostolac de la Cuina Turcului, SCIV 17(2,

Bukuresti 1966.

BOSCHGIMPERA P., 1960

Les Indo-europeens, Paris 1960.

BREGANT T., 1964-1965

Sondana raziskovanja v okolici Iga na LjubIjanskem barju, AV 15-16, 1964-1965 .

BREGANT T., 1972

Elemente der adriatischen Mittelmeerkulturgruppe im Alpenfazies der Lengyel-Kultur, Akten,

Szekesfehervar 1972.

BRUKNER B., 1970

Die Nekropole in Vajska. Ein neuer Beitrag zur

kulturellen und chronologischen Determinierung
des Aneolithikums Sudostpannoniens, AI ug. XI,
1970, Beograd (1973).

BRUKNER B., 1976

Funde der Salkutza-Gruppe in der Wojwodina,

Istraivanja 5, 1976.

BRUKNER B., 1977

Beitrag zur Feststellung des Beginns der Metallurgie und der Aeneolithisierung, Alug. XVIII, Beograd 1977 .

BRUKNER B., 1978-1979

Zur Chronologie der Kostolac-Gruppe, Alug. XIX,

1978-1979.

BRUNMID J., 1902

Nahodjaji bakrenoga doba iz Hrvatske i Slavonije

i susjednih zemalja, VHAD VI, Zagreb 1902.

BULAT M., 1962

Bakrene sj ekire u Muzeju Slavonije, OZ VIII, 1962.

BUKVI LJ., 1978/1979

Results of the Researches of the Mound near

Jabuka, AIug. XIX, Beograd 1978 (1979) .

BUKVI LJ., 1987

Die altesten Hugelbestattungen in sudlichen Banat, Hugelbestattung ... , 1987.

COMSA E., 1976

Considerations portant sur le tomb a ocre de la

Zone du Bas-Danube, Istraivanja 5, 1976.

Biblio~

179

CROSSLAND R., 1971

The Position in the Indo-european Language-family of Thracian and Prygian Studia Balcanica 5,
Sofia 1971.

ERNYH E., 1975

Ai-bunarskii mednii Rudnik IV tisoletie do N. E.

na Balkanah, SA, Moskva 1975.

OVI B., 1973

Praistorijsko rudarstvo i metalurgija u Bosni i Hercegovini, Simpozium, Zenica 1973.

OVI B., 1976

Metalurka djelatnost vuedolske grupe u Bosni,

GCBI XIII, Sarajevo 1976.

OVI B., 1980

"SchnurI! i "Litzen" ke ramika na podruju Neretve,

Simpozijum "Dolina Neretve od pra istorije do ranog srednjeg veka", Split 1980.

DESCHMANN K., 1875

Die Pfahlbautenfunde auf dem Laibacher Moore,

Verhandlungen der K. K. Geologischen Reichsanstalt, Wien 1875.

DIMIlRIJEVI S., 1961

Problem neolita i eneolita u sjeverozapadnoj Jugoslaviji, OA V, Zagreb 1961.

DIMI1RIJEVI S., 1962

Prilog stupnjevanju badenske kulture u sjevernoj

Jugoslaviji, ARR II, 1962.

DIMIlRIJEVI S., 1966

Rezultati arheolokih iskopavanja na podruju

Vinkovakog muzeja od 1957-1965. godine, Acta
musei Cibalensis l, 1966.

DIMIlRIJEVI S., 1967

Die Ljubljana-Kultur, AIug. VIII , Beograd 1967.

DIMIlRIJEVI S., 1970

Zur Frage der kannelierren Keramik in der HvarKultur, Adriatica - Praehistorica et Antiqua, Zagreb 1970.

DIMI1RlJEVI S., 1971

Zu emlgen Fragen des Spatneolithikum und

Fruhaneolithikums in Nordjugoslawien, Actes I,
Beograd 1971.

DIMI1RlJEVI S., 1975

Zur Frage der Retz-Gajary-Kultur in Nord-Jugoslawien - Aneolithische Studien II, V AMZ Za greb 1975.

DIMI1RlJEVI S., 1977,

Zur Frage der Genese und der Gliederung der

Vuedoler Kultur in dem Zwischenstromlande

180

The Eneolithi c cultures of Central and West Balkans

Donau-Draue-Save, VAMZ II, Zagreb 1977.

DIMITRIJEVI S., 1982,

Die frtihe Vinkovci-kultur und ihre Beziehungen

zur vuedoler Supstrat im Lichte der Ausgrabungen in Vinkovci (1977-1978), OA 7, Zagreb 1982 .

DURMAN A., 1983

Metalurgija vuedo lskog kulturnog kompleksa,

OA 8, Zagreb 1983.

DURMAN A., 1984

Ostava kalupa vuedolskog ljevaa bakra iz Vinkovaca , Zbornik "Arheoloka istraivanja u istonoj
Slavoniji i Baranji", Zagreb 1984.

DUMITRESCU V., 1960

La plus ancienne tombe a incineration trouvee sur

le teritoire de la R. P. Roumanie et autres decouvertes apparentees de la meme region, Dacia N,
1960.

DUMITRESCU V., 1963

The Date of the Earliest Western Expansion of the

Kurgan Tribes, Dacia VII , 1963.

ECSEDY 1.,1979

The PoepIe of the Pit-Grave Kurgans in Eastern

Hungary, Budapest 1979.

ECSEDY 1., 1985

Oskori Leletek Dunaszekcso - Varhegyl6r, JPME

XXIX, 1985.

FIALA F., 1894

Jedna prehistorina naseobina na Debelom brdu

kod Sarajeva, GZM VII , 1894.

FIALA F., 1896

Die prahistorische Ansiedlung auf dem Debelo

Brdo bei Sarajevo, WMBH IV, Wien 1896.

GALOVI R., 1959

Praistorijsko naselje "Jelen ae" kod Aleksinca,

ZRNM II, Beograd 1959 .

GARAANIN D. GARAANIN M. 1957

Praistorijsko naselj e u Crnoj Bari, RVM 6, Novi

Sad 1957.

GARAANIN M. 1954

Ostava iz Kladova i problem stepskih uticaja u

kasnom n eolitu donj eg Podunavlja, AV I,
Ljublj ana 1954.

GARAANIN M. 1959

Neolithikum und Bronzenzeit in Serbien und

Makedonien, 39 . BRGK 1958, Frankfurt aIM Berlin 1959.

Biblio~

181

GARAANIN M. 1967

Die Bestattungen des Vuedoler "Burghugels",

AIug. VIlI, Beograd 1967.

GARAANIN M. 1971

Nomades des steppes et autochtones dans le SudEst europ ee n ii l'e poque de transition du
neolithique ii l' Age du bronze. L'ethnogenese des
peuples balkanique, Sofia 1971.

GARAANIN M. 1973

Praistorija na tlu SR Srbije, Beograd 1973.

GARAANIN M. SIMOSKA D., 1976

Kontrolni iskopuvanja na uplevec-Bakarno

Gumno, MacAA 2, Prilep 1976.

GIMBUTAS M., 1970

Proto-Indo-European Cultures: The Kurgan Culture during the Fifth, Fourth, and Third Millenium
B.e. Indo-European an Indo-Europeans, Philadelphia 1970.

GIRI M., 1960

Iskopavanja na Gomolavi 1957, RVM 9, Novi Sad

1960.

GIRI M., 1982

Ober die Erforschung der Grabhugel in der Wojwodina, Simposio Lazise-Verona 1982.

GIRI M., 1987

Di e Erforschung der aneolithischen Hugelgraber

im Niirdlichen Banat, Hugelbestattung ... 1985,
Beograd 1987.

GUI J., 1961

Pojava ranih bronzanodobnih kultura na Kosovu i

Metohiji, GMKM VI, Pritina 1961.

GOCKOVASLAVSKAP., 1955

Ostatoci od edna praistoriska kultura na Skopska

tvrdina Kale, Skopje 1955.

GOVEDARICAB., 1987

Einige Fragen der Chronologie und Herkunft der

altesten Turnuli mit Steinkistengrabern im
ostadriatischen Gebiet, Hugelbestattung ... 1985,
Beograd 1987.

HAMMOND L G. N.,
1972

The Comming of the Indo-Europeans to the

South western Balkans, Actes Athenes 1972.

HAREJ Z., 1974

Poroilo o povrinskih naj db ah na koliu ob Partovskem kanalu i pri Igu, Po roilo Ill, 1974.

HAUSLERA., 1974

Die Graber der alteren Ockergrabkultur zwischen

Ural und Dnepr, Berlin 196!f.

182

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

HAUSLER A., 1976

Die Graber der alteren Ockergrab-kultur zwischen

Dnepr und Karpaten, Berlin 1976.

HOFFILLER V., 1933

Corpus vasorum antiquorum Yougoslavie, Fasc. I,

Paris 1933.

HOFFILLER V., 1938

Corpus vasorum anriquorum Yougoslavie, Fasc. 2,

Paris 1938.

JEVTI M., 1986

Grobovi Bakarnog doba iz

XXXVII, 1986.

JEVTI M., 1987

Les stations eneolithiques dans le secteur de Djerdap I-II, Hugelbestattung ... 1987.

JOVANOVI B., 1971

Metalurgija eneolitskog perioda Jugoslavije, Beograd 1971.

JOVANOVI B., 1976

Obredi sahranjivanja u
Sarajevo 1976.

JOVANOVI B., 1976a

Turnuli stepske kulture grobova jama

navlju, Starinar XXVII, 1976.

JURII A., 1961

Velika Gradina uStaparima, Starinar XI, 1981.

KALITZ N., 1973

Ober die chronologische Stellung der BalatonGruppe in Ungam, Symposium, Bratislava 1973.

KALITZ N., 1976

Tokal, Dunapart (Kom. Pest) , Mitt. des Arch.

Institutes des Ung. Academie den Wissenschaften,
1976.

KARMANSKI S., 1970

Bakarnodobni lokaliteti jugozapadne Bake Pregled materijala sa lokaliteta iz okoline Odaka,

I, Odaci - Baka Palanka 1970.

KARMANSKI S., 1970a

Bakarnodobni lokaliteti jugozapadne Ba ke Pregled materijala sa lokaliteta iz okoline Odaka,

II, Odaci - Baka Palanka 1970.

KAUS M., 1984

Einjungneolithisches Gefassdepot von Doners- kirchen

- Kentberg, Wiss. Arb. aus den Burgenland 69, 1984.

KITANOSKI B., 1971

Bakarno gumno, epigovo pres de Prile p, Epoque

prehistorique et proto historique en Yugoslavie,
Beograd 1971

Vine,

kostolakoj

Starinar

grupi, GCBI,

II

Podu-

Biblio~

KOREK J., 1958

KOROEC J., 1946

183

Groblje ka snog bakarnog doba i eneolitsko neseije

u Senti, RVM 7, Novi Sad 1958.
Peina Hrustova a ,

novi lokalitet slavonske kulo

ture, GZM I, 1946

KOROEC J., 1951

Predzgodovinska naselbina na Ptujskem gradu,

Ljubljana 1951.

KOROEC J., 1953

Kulturne ostaline v Ajdovskijami pri Nemki Vasi,

Razprave (Di sserrationes) III Classis I, Ljubljana
1953.

KOROEC J., 1955

Opis pred zgod ovine Ljubljane, Zgodovina

Ljubljane 1,1955.

KOROEC J., 1958

Eine neue Kulturgruppe des spaten Neolithikums,

AAHung IX/ lA, Budapesr 1958.

KOROEC P., 1958.1959

Kulturna opredelitev materijalne kulture na

koliih pri Igu, AV/lXX 2,1958.1959.

KOROEC P., 1959

Podela slavonske kulrure, njeno poreklo i relativna

hronologija, RVM 8,1959.

KOROEC P., 1962

Neka pitanja oko eneolita Dalmacij e, ARR II,

1962.

KOROEC P., 1975

Eneolitik Slovenije, AV XXIV , 1973/1975.

KOROEC P., 1975a

Poroilo
Poroila

KOROEC P., 1980.1981

Neuere archaologische Forschungen in der H6hle

Ajdovska jama bei Nemka Vas in Verbindung mit
dem Totenkult, AIug XX.XXI, 1980. 1981.

KOROECP .
KOROEC J., 1969

Najdbe s koliars kih naselbin pri Igu na Ljubljan.

skom barju, Ljublj ana 1969.

KOSOR1 M., 1965

Praistorij ska nekropola u selu Dvorovi kod Bi

jeljine, CGT VI, Tuzla 1965.

KOVACZ S., 1987

Hiige1graberfelder der Badener Kultur im Slanatal,

Hugelbestattung... 1987.

KOZLOWSKI J., 1973

Le probleme de la periodisation de la civilisation de

o raziskovanju v Ajdovski jami 1967. leta,

IV , Ljubljana 1975.

184

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

la ceramique cannelee en Pologne, Symposium,

Bratislava 1973.

KUNA M., 1981

Zur neolithischen und aneolithischen Kupferverarbeitung in Gebiet Jugoslaviens, GCBI XIX/l 7 ,

1981.

LEBEN F., 1973

Zur Kenntnis der Lasinja- Kultur in Slowenien,

Symposium Bratislava 1973.

LEBEN F., 1975

Opredelitev neolitske in eneolitske keramike iz

jamskih najdi jugovzhodnega alpskego prostora,
AV XXN, 1973 (1975).

LETICA Z., 1972

Grob Salkuta kulture sa Lepenskog Vira, Sta rinar

XXI, 1970, Beograd (1972).

MALEZ M., 1967

Paleolit Velike peine na Ravnoj gori u sjeverozapadnoj Hrvatskoj, ARR IV.V, Zagreb 1967.

MARIJANOVI B., 1981

Ravli a peina (Pe.

MARIJANOVI B., 1982

Novi eneolitski nalazi u Hercegovini, GMZ 37,

Mlini), GZM 35/36, 1981 .

1982.
MARKOVI ., 1974

The Stratigraphi and Chronology of the Odmut

Cave, AIug. XV, Beograd 1974.

MARKOVI ., 1985

Neolit Crne Gore, Beograd 1985.

MARKOVI Z., 1977

Problem eneolita u Naikoj regiji prilog genezi i

stupnjevanju La sinj ske kulture, AV XXVII,
Ljubljana 1977.

MARKOVI Z., 1981

Vuedolska kultura u sjeverozapadnoj Hrvatskoj,

AV XXXII , 1981.

MARKOVI Z., 1985

Problem ranog eneolita u sjeverozapadnoj Hrvat

skoj, VAMZ/XV III, 1985.

MEDOVI P., 1976

Die Cerna voda IIIKul tur im jugoslawischen

Donaugebiet, Istraivanja 5, Novi Sad 1976.

MEDOVI P., 1976a

Eneolitsko naselje "Brza vrba" kod Ko vina, Grada

Pokrajinskog zavoda za zatitu spomenika kulture,
VI.V II , Novi Sad 1976.

Bib[io~

185

MEDOVI P., 1978

Naselja starijeg gvozdenog doba u jugoslovenskom

Podunavlju, Beograd 1978.

MEDOVI P., 1987

Resultate de r Untersuchungen auf drei Grabhugeln in der Gemarkung des Dorfes Perlez im
mittleren Banat, Hugelbesta ttung ... 1987

MENGHIN O., 1926

Einfuhrung in die Urgeschichte B6hmens und

Mahrens, Reichenberg 1926.

MILLEKER F., 1889

A Rezkor emlekei Del - Magyarorszagon, TRE

1889.

MILLEKER F., 1906

Delmagyarorszag regisegleletei, III, T emesver

1906.

MILLEKER F., 1939

Vorgeschichte des Banats. Aeneolithikum, Kupfe r zeit, Starinar XIV, 1938 (1939).

MILOJI V., 1943

Das vorgeschichtliche Bergwerk " uplja Stena" am

Avalaberg bei Belgrad in Serbien, WPZ XXX, Berlin 1943.

MILOJI V., 1949

Chronologie der Stei zeit Mittel-und Sudosteuropas, Berlin 1949.

MILOJI V., 1953

Funde der Kosto lacer Kultur in der Samml ung des

Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars in MarburglLahn ,
W PZ XXXN, 1949/ 1950, Berlin 1953.

MILOEVI A. GOVEDARICA B., 1986

Otii -Vlake, Praistorijsko nalazite u

GCBI 22,1986 .

MORINTZS. ROMAN P., 1973

Uber die Ubergangsperiod von Aneolithikum zur

Btonzezeit in Rumanien, Symposium, Bratislava
1973.

NEMEJCOVAPAVUKOvA V., 1964

Sidlisko bolerazskeho typu v Nitranskom Hradku,

SlA XX/l , Bratislava 1964.

NEMEJCOVAPAVUKOvA V., 1968

Aneoli thische Sicdlung und Stratigraphie in IZa,

SlA XVI/2, Bratislava 1968.

NEMEJCOVAPAVUKOvA V., 1973

Zur Ursprung und Chronologie der BolerazGruppe, Symposi um Bra tisla va 1973.

Vrrai

I,

186

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

NEMEJCOvAPAVUKOvA V., 1981

Nacrt periodiz:icie badenskej kultury a jej ehro

nologiekyh vztahov k j.v Eur6pe, SIA XXIX/2,
1981.

NEUSTUPNY E., 1959

Zur Entstehung der Kultur mit kannelierten

Keramik, SlA VII/2, Bratislava 1959.

NEUSTUPNY E., 1973

Die Badener Kultur, Symposium, Bratislava 1973.

NEUSTUPNY E., 1979

Der Ubergang von Neolithikum zum Aneo.

lithikum und der Ausklang der Lengyel.Kultur, Z
17,1979.

NOVOTNA M., 1961

Boaeko. Ko stol aky horizont na strednem Povai,

Musaica XlIII, Bratislava 1961.

NOVOTNY B., 1981

Zur idololatrie der Badener Kultur in der Slowakei,

SLA XXIX/l, A981.

PAHI S., 1975

Najstareje se!ine najdbe v se verozahodni

Sloveniji, AV XXIV/1973 , Ljubljana 1975.

PANAJOTOV 1..
DERGAEV V., 1984

Die Okergrabkultur in Bulgarien (Darstellung des

Problems), Studia Praehistoriea 7, Sofia 1974.

PAROVI.

PEIKANM.

Iskopavanja tumula ranog bronzanog doba u Ti

vatskom polju, Starinar XXII, 1971 (1974).

PARZINGER H., 1984

Die Stellung der Uferrandsiedlungen bei Ljubljana

im aneolithisehen und fruhbronzezeitliehen Kul
tursystem der Mittleren Donaulander, A V XXV,
1984.

PATAY P., 1958

Rezkori aranyleletek, Af 85, Budapest 1958.

TRBUHOVI V., 1971

PATAY P., 1961

A Bodrogkerszturi kultura temet6i, RF 11/1 O, Bu

dapest 1961.

PATAYP., 1978

Das kupferzeitliehe Graberfeld von Tiszavalk .

Kenderf61d, Budapest 1978.

PETRI N., 1976

Prethistorijske kulture Peljeca, Pelj eki zbornik l ,

Zagreb 1976.

PETRI N., 1977

Prilozi pretpovijesti Istre, Jadranski zbornik X, Ri

jeka Pula 1977.

Bibliography

187

PITIIONI R., 1954

Urgeschichte des 6sterreichischen Raumes, Wien

1954.

POPOVI D., 1981

Uber die Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen a uf der

Siedlung Gradina am Bosut, Symposium Novi Sad
1979, Materijali XIX, Novi Sad 1981.

POPOVI D.MEDOVI P., 1969

Peine, Vrdnik - naselja eneolitskog i bronzanog

doba, AP ll, 1969 .

PRENDI F., 1966

La civilisation prehistorique le Maliq, St. Alb . l,

Tirana 1966.

RAAJSKI R, 1954

Gomolava kod Hrtkovaca, RVM 3, Novi Sad

1954.

ROMAN P., 1971

Strukturanderungen des Endiineolithikums im

Donau-Karpatenraum, Dacia XV , Bucarest 1971.

ROMAN P., 1976

Kontakte der Cotofeni- Kultur mit den Baden-Kosrolac und Vuedol Kultur im Westen Rumaniens,
Istraivanja 5, 1976.

ROMAN P., 1976a

Cultura Cotofeni, Bucuresti 1976.

ROMAN P., 1980

Der "Kostolac-Kultur" - Begrieff nach 35 Jahren,

PZ 55/2, 1980.

ROMANP.,NEMETI I., 1978

Cultura Baden in Romania, Bucaresri 1978.

RUTKAYE., 1973

Uber einige Fragen der Leibach - Vuedol-Kultur

in Nieder6sterreich und im Bur genland, A V
XXIV, 1973 .

SCHMIDT R R, 1945

Die Burg

SIMOSKAD. KITANO SKI B. TODOROVI J., 1976

Naselbara Cmobuki i problemot na isroimenata

kultura vo sverlinata na novite arheoloki istrauvanja, MacAA 2, Prilep 1976.

SIMOSKAD. SANEV V., 1976

Preistorija vo centralna Pelagonija , Bitola 1976.

SREJOvr D. , 1976

Humke stepskih odlika na teritoriji Srbije, GCBI

XIII, Sarajevo 1976.

Vuedol,

Zagreb 1945.

188

The Eneolithic cu ltures of Central and West Balkans

STALIO B., 1964

Novi metalni nalaz iz Plonika kod Prokuplja,

ZRNM IV, Beograd 1964.

STALIO B., 1973

etvrti nalaz bakren og i kamenog o rudja sa

Pl onika kod Prokuplja, ZRNM VII, Beograd
1973 .

STALIOB. JURII A., 1961

Jasik - Gornje Komarice, Starinar XI, 1961.

IKA S., 1968

Tiszapolgarska kultura na Slovensku, SIA XVIII,

Bratislava 1968.

ULMAN M., 1952

Grobovi iz bakrenog doba iz Subo tice, NZMS III,

Novi Sad 1952 .

ULMAN M., 1954

Groblje bakrenog doba u blizini Subotice, NZ MS

VI, Novi Sad 1954.

TASI N., 1959

Praistorijsko naselj e kod Dobanovaca i prilog

prouava nju badenske grupe u Vojvodini, Sta rin ar
IX-XJI958-1959, Beograd 1959.

TASI N., 1959a

Velika humka kod Batajnice, AP l, 1959.

TASI N., 1960

Djurdj e vaka

Glavica - prilog pr o u a vanju

vuedolske grupe juno od Save i Dunava, Starinar
XI, 1960, Beograd (1961).

TASI N., 1965

Poznoeneolitski, bronzanodopski i sloj starij eg

gvozdenog doba na Gomolavi, iskopavanja 1965
1966, RVM 14, Novi Sad 1965.

TASI N., 1967

Badenski i vuedolski kulturni kompleks u Ju.

goslaviji, Beograd 1967.

TASI N., 1968

Eneolitske kulrurne grupe i neolitska tradicija ,

Neolit centralnog Balkana, Beograd 1968.

TAsr N., 1970

Genetische Probleme der Gruppen Baden, Kostolac und Vuedol in jugoslawischen Donaugebiet
und Zentralbalkan, Balcanica I, Beograd 1970.

TASI N., 1973

Bor i njegova okolina u praistoriji, Bor i okolina,

Bor 1973.

Biblio~

189

TAsr N., 1975

Cernavoda III i Boleraz nalazi u jugoslovenskom

Podunavlju i problem hronolokog odnosa kultura
bakarnog doba u karpatsko-podunavskim
oblasrima, Balcanica VI, Beograd 1975.

TAsr N., 1975a

Der Einbruch des Salkuta-Bubanj-Krivodol-Komplexes auf der Balkan, GCBI XIV, Sarajevo 1975.

TAsr N., 1978(1979)

Der jugoslawische Donauraum und Agaa in Eneolithikum, AIug. XIX, Beograd 1978 (1979).

TAsr N., 1981

Aneolithische Kulturen Ostserbiens und dehren

Ve rhal tn is zu den Fundstatten in Oltenien,
Transsylvanien und im rumanischen Teil des Banats, Balcanica XII, Beograd 1981.

TAsr N., 1980-1981

Die Idole der Baden-Kultur in

XXI, 1980- 1981.

TAsr N., 1982

Naselja bakarnog doba u istonoj Srbiji, Zbornik

muzeja rudarstva i metalurgije 2, Bor 1982.

TAsr N., 1983

Jugoslovensko Podunavlje od indoevropske seobe

do prodora Skita, Novi Sad - Beograd 1983 .

TASI N., 1984

Vina

TASI N., 1985

o hronolokom odnosu eneolitskih kultura u jugoslovenskom Podunavlju, Starinar XXXVI, 1985.

TASI N., 1986

Sopot- Lengyel, Lasinja und Boleraz Funde am Bosut in der Nahe von id, A Beti Balogh Adam
museum Evk6nyve XIII, Szekszard 1986.

TASI N., 1986a

o hronolokom odnosu eneolitskih kultura

Vina,

AIug. XX-

u bakarno i bronzano doba, Vina u praistotiji i srednjem veku, Beograd 1984.

u ju-

goslovenskom Podunavlju, Statinar XXXV I, 1986.

TASI N., 1987

Stratigrafski i relativnohronoloki odnosi Gomolave kod Hrtkovaca i Gradine na Bosutu, RVM 30,

1980.
TELEGIN D., 1973

Srednostrogievska kultura epohi midi, Kiev 1973.

TELEGIND. POTENKHINA 1., 1987

Neolithic Ceme teries and Populations in the

Dneper Basin, BAR 383,1987.

The Eneolithic cul tures of Central and West Balkans

190

TEAKGREGL T., 1985

Vuedol

TODOROVA H., 1986

Kameno-mednata epoha v BIgarija, Sofija 1986.

TODOROVI

J.,

1956

Praistorijska nekropola na Rospi upriji kod Beograda, GMGB III, Beograd 1956.

TODOROVI

J., 1963

Die Grabung Hissar und ihre Verhalmisse zum

Anaeolithikum und der fruhen Bronzezeit, Alug.
IV, Beograd 1964.

kod Vukovara, AP 26, 1985.

TORMA I., 1973

Die Boleraz-Gruppe in Ungam, Symposium Bratisla va 1973.

TRBUHOVI V. VUKOVI LJ., 1967

O hronolokom odnosu lokaliteta ranog bronzanog

doba u Negorinskoj Krajini, Starinar XVII, Beograd 1967.

VASI M., 1906

Starosrpska nalazita u Srbiji, Starinar l, Beograd

1906.

VINSKI.
GASPARINI K., 1956

Iskapanje pr ethi sto rijskih na se lja u Belom

Manastiru, OZ V, Osijek 1956.

VINSKIGASPARINI K., 1957

Zlami nalaz iz Progara u Srijemu, VHAD 1954,

Zagreb (1957).

VLASA N. Die Hugelgraber aus dem Banat und aus SiebenT AKACS M. burgen an der spataneolithischen Periode , HugelLAZAROVICIU GH., 1987 bestattung ... 1987.

VULI N.GRBI M., 1937

Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Yougoslavie, fase. 3,

Beograd 1937.

WElSHAAR J. H., 1980

A gaische Tonank er, Mitteilung en das DAI

(Anthr. Abteilung) 95, Berlin 1980.

WOZINSKY M., 1904

Die inkrustierte Keramik der Stein-und Bronze

zeit, Temesvar 1904.

ZIRRA V., 1960

Kultura pogrebenija s' ohroj v Zakarpatskih obla stjah RNR, Materij ali i isledovanija po arheologii j-z
SSSR i RNR, Kiinev 1960.

ZOTOVI M., 1963

Kremenilo, Viesava, Bajina Bata - vieslojno

praistorij sko nalazite, AP 5, Beograd 1963.

ENEOLITSKE KULTURE CENTRALNOG

I ZAPADNOG BALKANA
- Rezime -

Prelaz iz neolitskog u eneolitski period na

podruju

srednj e i jugoistone

Evrope nije hio tako nagao, praen veim populacionim prome nama ili burnim
smenjivanjem kultura . Proces je zapoeo znatno ranij e ve li agrarnim neolitskim

kulturama: vinanskoj, lendjelskoj, butmirskoj, potiskoj i tra jao je sve do n jihovog

kraja, kada zapravo poinju da se pojavljuju prve, prave bakanodobne kulture, kod
kojih dobijanje i prerada bakra, izrada predmeta i njihova razmena poinju da
oznaavaju ekonomske kategorije. Ovaj proces "eneolitizacije" neolitskih kultura
nije bio istovremen na celom balkanskom prostoru niti su sve oblasti bile zahvaene
istim kulturama. Geografske odlike tla i prethodna heterogenost u razvoju n eolitskih zajednica, uslovili su, da se pod uticajem raznih kulturnih centara (Karpatski
basen, Egeja, severnopontske oblasti i sl.) na podruju centralnog i zapadnog
Balkana formiraju kulturne oblasti, tegije sa svojim loko lnim specifinim razvojem.
LJ pojedinim fazama eneolita one se nezavisno razvijaju jedna od druge , da bi se
kasnije, pod uticaj em snanih kultura i kulturnih grupa integrisale ujedan kulrurni
kompleks (vued olski npr.). Trajanje eneolita , kako pokazuju najnovija saznanja
u ovoj oblasti, iznosi negde oko 1000 godina, to je i razlog da se upraistorijskoj
arheologiji napustilo miljenj e o kratkotrajnom eneolitskom periodu kao prelaznom vremenu izmedju kamenog (neolitskog) imetolnog (bronzanog) doba. LJ
toku ovih 1000 godina, praisrorijsko rudarstvo i rana metalurgija doviljavaju punu
afirmaciju, nameu se kao neophodnost za dalji razvoj ekonomike drutva i ine
uvod za sledee e tape

li

kojima ce, najpre bronza a zatirn i gvodje, pokazati svoju

superiornost pri izradi orudja, oruja i nakita u odnosu na kost, kamen pa i bakar.
Posmatrajui kulturno-istorijske procese na prosroru bive Jugosl avij e
(centralni i zapadni Balkan), uz potovanje regionalnih specifinosti i autohronih

192 _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _--.-eT-ch"'e.'c"Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

osnova. mogu da se izdvoje etiri osnovne oblasti: centrolnobalkall$ka . jadranska

i istono-o l pska. Prva obuh voro podruje jugoslovenskog l'odunovlj o i njegovog
neposrednog ",ledja (donji tokovi Sove i Drove. sliv Velike Morove. donje Potijske.
dolina T imoka) . Drugo. Ccntrolnobolbll$ka znno ime prelazni karakter i es to se
(Bubonj-Salcuto-Krivodol kompleks i eneolit Pelagonije ili u vreme prodora
v uedolskog stila) pojavljuje kao zona t ransmisij e izmedju kultura Korpatskog
basena sa jedne i egejskih kultura sa druge strane. Treb. Jadral1$ka oblo st obuhvata
usko podruj e Primorja. od T rsta na severu do Albonije na jugu u kome se razvijaju
specifine kulture od koj ih neke prodiru i u balkansko zoledj e (eneolit u Crnoj (,ori
i Hercegovini), ali i obrotno primaju snone utieaje kontinentalnog eneolita. Trea,
Prialpsb zono se kasno ukljuuje u praistorijski razvoj jugo i stone Evrope.
Skromno neolitsko na sledje nij e bilo dobra podloga za razvoj ranih eneol itskih
kulturo. Medjutim. sa pojavom lasinjske ("alpskog faeiesa lendjelske kulture" ). a
kasnije vuedolske kulture (soj e niarska naselja Ljubljanskog barja) ova regija
postaje znaajan centar razvoja e neolitskih kultUr;) povezani h sa
susedima.

i s t on im

Pored pojave i razvojo merolurgije u istonim obl astima, gde se na laze

nojstariji rudokopi na Balkanu (Rudna glava kod Mojdonpeka), postoji jo nekoliko
moajnih pojavo koj e daju osnovni provac rozvoju eneoiitskih kultura na irem
podruju ukljuujui veliki deo srednje i jugoistone Evrope. Akeenot se stovlja na
dvo dogadjoja od kojih prvi oznaavo i renje indoevropskih populacija iz stepskih
oblasti june Rusije prema srednjoj i jugoistonoj Evropi i drugi. koji se monifestuj e
velikom ekspanzijom vuedo l skog stila prema jodranskoj zoni. Pononskoj niziji i
RUl11UIl Sko1l1 Banatu. Nj egovom dezintegracijum zapuinje mna bro nzano doba

ovih oblasti . Ovo dva dogodjoja oznoavaju one prelomne trenutke II razvoju
eneolita centralnog i ",padnog Bolkana koji nam slue kao podlogo stvaranja
PI. I~IV njegove periodizacije. Rani ""lcolil. na llsnuvu ovih i nekih drugi h kriterijum
oznaava dalju evoluciju neolitskih kultuto koje se postepeno upoznaju sa bo krom.
PI. III. 3~ 7 pre radj uju ga i izradjuju c d njega,

li

prvo vreme, sitnije prete no ukrasne predmete

PI. XI II ili sekire koje podraovojll k<!mene, neolitske uzore (nalazi baka rnih predme ta u
vinonskoj kultu ri, ostave kod Plonik<! i sL). Srednji cneolil ",po inj e so prvim
prodorom "ste pskih postira" najpre u jugoslavensko Pod unavlje. a kosn ije i juno
od njega. Najzad pozlIi ""leo/il noroiro u zapodnim oblastima zapoi nje fonniro njem
PI. XXV II ~ XXXIV rane v uedol ske kulture i traje kroz sve tri njene mzvoj nc faze, sve do raspoda
velikog vuedolskog kompleksa i formiranja i tovog ni za l"kolnih kultura ranog
bronzanog doba nostolih no njenim tradicijoma (T ivat-Rubd grupo, ljubljanska.
vinkovaka ili na severu Moko u Modjorskoj, Kosihy-aka u S l ovakoj, a na istoku
u Rum uniji Moldovo Veche. LJ apsolutnim ciframa koje se osbnjoju no C- 14
podatke (bez blibracije) rani eneoli t pripada vremen u 3100-2700, srednji en eolit
traje od 2700-2300, a pozni od 2300 do 1900 god . pre n.c.
U toku RANO G .ENEOLITA. u juno-panonskoj regiji. srpskom Podunavlju. istonoj Srbiji . Mokerioniji sve do Pelogonije. kulturnoisrorijski razvoj ioo
je u dva provca. Severne ob lasti, vei deo Vojvodine posebno. bile su zahvae ne
razvojem kultu ra tisapo lga rsko-bodrogkereswrskog (Tizsapolga r -Bod rogk-

SummaryL ._ __

193

crezstru) ko mple ksa koji je poniloo n a llC'o li tskom su pstratu potiske i He rpal j
(H erpnly) kulture, Jok su ism ni i juzni delovi hili whvat: ni sl1nznim ra zvojem
lokalnih grupa Buhanj-Salkuca (Saleuta) - Krivodlll kumpleksa. Ti sapolgarska i
bodrogkerestrus kn kultura na vujvodjallskolll prostoru ini integrn lni deo r,]Zvoj <l

ovih kultura i ston og dela Karpatskog basena . Nj ihovo m atin o p odruj e sc nalazi
u Illadjarskoll\ Potisju. Karak terie ih vrlo kval ite tn a ke ra milo , bogatstvo u
baknrnirn nalazima i relativno esta pojava zlatnih predm eta . Mmerijn\nn kultur;)
poznatJ jc: preteno ll;) osnov u velikog broja istraivanih t1l:kropo\a II koj ima se
pokojn ik sa hranjivao po kannIlima vaeim za neoli tske kulture i n;) osnovu bruj nih
priloga II njim a (k erarnik a, o rudjl', nakit). l ' Vojvodini SlI iS[fai vanl' dve nek ropole
ovih ku ltura Ueu na kod Sente i u ruga kod Suhllticc) i jed no nase lje otkriveno u
C rnoj Bari kod Zrenjanina. Na osnovu poj edina nih na laza zabeleen jL i jeda n
kratkotrajan prodo r ovih kultu," prema jugu, u SrL'm, srpsko Poduno vlje i zapadnu
Stbiju. Jedna manja n e kro po la sa hod rogke restutskim grobovima otkrivena je u
V in i kroj Beograda . Ona je dalo zanimljiv m ate rijal i potvrdila fi zi k o prisustvo

PI. V. 1 9

Pl. VII . 78: Fig. 45

nosilac;] hodrogkercsturske kulture i Ll o bb stirna zna tIlo junije od on ih koje su

smatrane nje no m junon1 grani cum. Ovoj grupi nal:Jz:] treba uoumi i dobro poznati

zlotan na laz iz Progara kod Ze muna koji predstavl ja stilizova nu antru po morlnu
figuru.

l vre me razvoja tisapolgarsk e i bodrogke rcstursk e kulture , prostor od

srpskog Pod unavlja do PdagonijL' biu je ",hva <, n dugim kontinuiranim razvojem
Bubanj-Sa lkuca kulture. Ono je deo jednug ireg, istono balbnskog kulturnog
komple ksa slikane, grafiti rane keramike (Bubanj-Salkuca- Krivodol-l;umelnica
kompl eks) ko me pri pada i tov ni z kultura i kulturnih grupo od is to ne Bugarske
do Po mo ra vlja i od junih Karpata du Pel agonije i dalj e do trakijskog uela Grke
na jugu (nala zita Dikili T ash, Pa rad imi, Sitagroja i dr.). Na lazi ta u naoj zemlji
kojo se svrsta va ju u regio nalnu varijantu ozn aen u kao buha njska kultura (ili
Bubanj-Salkuca) pripadaju za padnim oblastima ovog kulturnog kompleksa . Relativno je dobro istrae n a, naro ito zahvaljuju i radovim a u i stonoj Srbij i (Zimska
I)e ina, Kri veij, Rubanj, Kovilovo, Veljko vo i dr.), na Kosov u (Hisar kou S uve
Re ke i Uadimlje kod Lipljana) i u Pelagoniji gde je iskopavan vei broj nalazita
tipa "tumbi" (tella) u oko lini Bi tolja i Prile pa (Crno buki , Kara m ani, Balorno
gumno ) i graclinskih naselja bo to je uplje va c kod Suvodo la. Na ova ko velikom
prostoru, koji je zahvatila Bubanj-Sa lkuea i njoj srodna C rnobuki kultu ra pojavljuju
se, zavisno od geografsklh uslova i oU e konom skih ocl lika kultu re , razliiti tipovi
naselj a. LI iston oj Srbi ji, junobrpatskoj zoni u Rumuniji i use verozapadnoj
Bugarskoj koriste se pei ne za boravak i ve ih ljud skih zajednica (Zimska peina
koci Bora, Horilor kod Baie Herculo ne ili De vetaka pein a kod Vidim ). L: nji ma
se podiu k ue, kolibe, obje kti za stanovanje . Priliko m arheolokih iskop3vanja
nai lo se na vie nasenbinskih horizonam to ukazuje da sc ne radi u pri vremenim
sranitima, zakl o nim a stoara, ve o dugo trajnim naseljima II kojima su se o bavljale

i druge aktivnosti . LJ Zimskoj peini na prime r na lazio se zna ajan pre radjivaki
me talurki centar (m kopano je vie bakarnih alatki, ko nndi zgure, tukovi za
mr vlje nje ruue i sL). No prostoru od Ka tpa ta, pa preko Kosova, Skopsk e kotline

Pl. XIII. 3. 5

figo I I

Fig.5 0

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

PI. XIXII

PI. XII

PI. XXXV/III

Flg. I

r'g

16

do Pdagonije i Pinda II (Jrkoj p()stojao je jedan znaajan stoarski put Ll ene()li[ ~

sko m periodu. Na njemu Se nalazi veliki broj sli nih naselja polunol1wdskog
karaktera koja su podizana na uzvienim ukama iznad brdskih rt' ica i potoka
(Kovilovo kod Negotina, Krivdj kllJ Bora, Bubanj kud Nia, (,adimij e kod
Lipljana, Skopsko kale, upljevac ul'clagoniji). Ona prip;]daj u drugolll tipu naselja
ovog kulturnog kompleksa. T rei tip su "tell" naselja, nnnhe koje se nzdaze II
nizinama, esto na barskom tcrenu gde St' koriste mala uzvienj;] ~ grede na k()jim;)
se podie prvo !lJselje, a onda iznad IljegZ\ drug(), tree pa Se n;) t<Jj nain formir::!
uzvienje ~ "rumba", Ova vrsta naselja kar~lkteristin;) je za june i istone ()blasti
"istunohzdkanskog kompleksa gr<Jfirirant kerarnike" (naselj;) LI T rakiji, seve rnoj
(;rkoj) l kod nas su Jedn;] oJ osnovnih brakrt'l istika za plJllruj e Pebgonije.
Materijalna kultura Bubanj ~ Snikuca nabzita je izrazito bogata i raznovr~
sna. Njena keramika je poznara preko razliitih ohlika posudja (zdela, pehara, olja ,
amt(XZl, pitosa i dr.), bogatog i raznovrsnog nnina ukra<Jvanja: od tl'hnika urez;)
i bockanja, slikanja crvenom ili belom bojom du ukraavanja specifinom tehnikom
grafitir<111ja, to je jedna od osnovnih stilskih odlik8 n8 itnvom prostoru ovog
kulturnog kompleksa. Po red keramikih posuda na naiJzirima SlI este antropo~
mortine i zoonwrti,e figuril1L' (K ri velj, (;radimlje, Crnohuki), koje ukazuj u n;]
postojanjl:.' verovanja, kultova i magije eneolitskog ovek;) . Od ostalih l)blika
materijalne kulture broj ne su alatke (sekire, ila) od jeknjih rogova, zatim hakarne
sekire, igl e i ukrasni predmeti .
Lapadni delovi Baikanskog po]uosrrva prolazili SlI, tokom ranog eneolita
kroz drugaiji kllltllrnoistorijski f<JzvOj . Na podru.iu Sloveni.ie, severozapaJne
Hrvatske pa i sc verne Bosne, nasledjt' lenc!je ls ke ili supotsko-lcndjL'ish' kulture ,
osea se gotovo kroz eeo rani period cneolit<J . l f Slavoniji iseverozapadnoj
Hr vatskoj kao supstrat e neol itskoj lasinjskoj kulturi pominjt sc sopUlsb kultura
kao dco lcnc!jelskog kompleks;] . I I Sloveniji pak, kako pokazuju najnovija istraivanja prisustvo l)a lpsku~l enJjel ske!l kulture ()svcc!oeno jl n<J viL" nalazit3
(Drulovka, Ptujski grad, J;]ma na Luhniku kod kotje Loke) , a u peinskom
nalazitu Ajc!ovska jama kud Nemke Vasi (blizu Breica), u vertikalnuj stratigratiji,
"alpsko-Icndjdska " kultura n;]iazi se ispod slojeva sa iasinjskum kulturom. Im a se
utisak da jc lendjelska kultura na podruju Slovenijc, slin o soputskoj u Hrvatskuj,
neto due trjala, skor() kroz im vo \Terne ranog e neolita ovih oblasti. La ovo vrt.Tll t'
Jolu JC, pod uticajem kultura iz susednih "hlasti, do prerastanja lenc!jelske kulture
II jednu specifinu pojavu koja je dobila naziv "alpsk i beies lendjelskc kulture" ili
lasi njska kultura.
Jadranska zona jc najmanje istraena oblast u izuavanju t' neolitskih
kultura, p()sehnn kaJa SL" ima u vidu sam poe tak ()vog [Jeriocia. NedovoJ.ian broj
istraenih n;:dazita, neobjavljena gradja, neuj ed nae na terminologija kod naziva
kultura itd., sve je to razlog Ja se u uvom tre nutku mogu samo naslutiti putevi
razvoja eneolita u ovim oblastima . Hvarska kultur;) neslInlnjivu ini neolitski
supstrat, koji bi, anzdogno pojavam() II drugim s;)vre menim kulturama (vinanska,
lendjelska), Il10gao da se smatra ve eneolitskim ili har proto l'ncolitskim. l ;
Grab e voj pilji n3 Hvaru, u Gudnji kod Stona na Pel jec u, Vela Luci na Koruli

Su mmaryL -_ _

195

i jo na nekim drugim nalaziti nw nalaze se kerami ki obli ci koji pripadaju ranim

eneo litskim kulturama. Medju tim, izvesnu jc, kako to pokazuje strnrigrat1ja
pornenu[o.l: nalazita kuJ Stona, da na srednjem J ~\(..Iral1u prvu L'J1l'o[itsku kulturu

Pl. XLII

prL,dstavl ja peljeb (N.Pe tri ) ili nakovansb kul tura (po nalazicu Spila kod
Nakovan" na Peljecu) bko je jo naziva S .Dimitrij ev i . Nju ini crna kvalitetna
keramika ukra<lvana kanelurama koja sc sa ranirn cneolitom pojavljuje na veem
broj u nalazita na jadranskoj ohali (Grap~va i Markova peina, Jamina Sredi na
Cresu i dr.).
SREDNJI ENEOLIT gotovo na celom balkanskom prostoru obeleavaju
snane ku lturne i socijalne pro!llene: naputanj \.:' neolitskih tradicijn .~ot(lVO II svim
viuovima materija lne 1 uuhovne kulture . Im a se utisn k. da II ovom Vfl'!1ll'nu J olaZ]
Jo prodora novih pupulacija, vd ik ()~ etno kulrurnog porencijnia, kojI;:' na i rem
prostoru srednj e i jugoiston e Evrope dovode Ju prurnc-na, ne SJmo kuituw,

kulturnih grupa i stilova u kL'w mikoj proizvodnji, Ve znatnu ire, oni men.jaju
strukturu privrede i n3in ivota eneolitskog stnnovnitvJ na ovom prostoru.
Migracioni pokreti koji su zahvJt ili veliku teri torij u, ud stepskih ohlasti junt Rusije
pa do Poduna vlja , a zatim i daljL" du jadranske o ba l~, ostavili su duhok trag u
razvoj u eneolitskih kul t ura. Isto n e oblasti Podunavlja i Balkanskog poluostrva bile
su jae izloene ovim promenama pa je razumlji vu da je do smenjivanja kulturu
dolo uz vee potrese. Prcnw. zapO()U intenzitet P()puia c!unug talasa, kuji se puv('zuj e
sa prvom indoevropsko m seohom flstepskih pastir;)" slahi , to s(: ogledn i u
poste penom smenjivanju kultura, prerastanje lendjelske u \asi njsku ili razvoj
protonakovanskt' II nnkovnnsku kulturu II j3drJn sk()j zoni .
Kao prva kultura "novog talasali u usnuvi junu panonskJ, ali kuja prelazi
i juno od Sa ve i Dunava, javlj a se e rn avod a III Boleras kultura, koja se pod
pritiskom novih popula cija iri od istoka prema za padu. Zahvaljujui svojoj nomad
skoj komponenti u ekonomi i, pokretljivosti nj enih nosilaca, vrio brzo prekriva
prostor od don jeg Podunavlja do istonih Alpo i od june Poljske du ce ntralnog
Balkana. Nalazita ernavod" III i Bo le ra s kultu re (ove dve kulture i ne jedan
kulturni kompleks) skoncenrrisana su u jugoslovensko Podunnvlje, mach:! kako
pokazuju no va istr<Jivanja p ojedinano su otkrivena i II centrolnobalkatlskoj zoni
(nalazita kod Kraguj evca, Svetozareva, Smederevske Palanke, Valjeva i u Bosni).
Po tipu, o na u Podunavlju pripadaju ravnia rskim naseIj iIlla podizanim kraj reka
(Brzo Vrba kud Kuvina, Mostonga koJ Odaka, gradina na Bosutu kod iJa i dr.).
Izuzetak in e naselja juno od Save i [lun a vo ud koj ih se neka podiu u brdovitoIll
ambijentu, esto na uzvienim d ominantnim poloZajima (Uradina Likodra u Rad
jevini) . Nekropole ili pojedinani grobovi nisu poznati u jugoslovenskom Podu~
navlju, ali na osno vu nekib podataka iz susednih oblasti (Madj arska), u ovoj kulturi
sc naputa tradicionalan nain sahranjivanja pokojnika (ravni grobovi, skeletno
sahranjivanje u zgreno m puloaju) i pojavljuje sc spaljivanje pokojnika i sa hran.
jivanje u urnama koj e se pola u u manj e tum ul e . humke {nekrupola Pilismarot u
Madjarskoj }.
Materijalna kultura, posebno keramiki nalazi, znatnu se razlikuju od Pl. XIV-XV
o blika koji su karak terisa li kulture ranog eneolita. Sad a Sl' pojavljuju olje luk

196

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

oviastog oh lika ukraene plitkim kal1l'lurama, velike ,dele, plitki ranjiri - poklopci,

PL XIV, 4

lonci ukraa va ni p!n sr inim trakama, vdike dubok e posude ir. I I ornalllcllrici s reu
St' novi rllotivi i nove rel1nikc ukr;]av<Jnja to stilu ove kulture dajL' specifian

k'Haktl::'r. Duboki br;)zdasri urezi, motiv rihlje kosti izveden II tck prosLLcnu glinu

PI. XVI. 1 6

PI. XVI I. 5

PI. III
Fig.45

i plitke kan el ure ine, uz nahrojZlIll' ohlikc! osn ovne odlike novog stilskog izraza
nepoznatog II kulturama ran()g eneoi ira lt sfcJnj()j i jug() i stom)j Evro pi. T(J jl' rDZi(lg
to se II ge nt'zi ove kulturc! st rani e le menti uzimaju kao osnovna ()drL'cinic;) pri
formirnnju njenug stila.
Sa A:mavoda III i Bo icras kulturom za poinje nov c iklus u razvoju
eneolitskih kultur;) na pros toru jugoslove nskog Podunavlja i II oblastima koj e mu
gravi rirnju. lhd ~nsk:.l kultura koja postupnom l' volucijOIll nastaje jz B()iera s os~
novc, zahvata gotovo Isto podrujL' kao I njena prethodnica. ak je i nt1 n itt:'t p rema
s li nim poloajima za podizanje naselja ostao isti. l ' jun{)p('l llonskoj zoni brojna su
ravniarska nasel,ia, slobodno t()[Jllirana, p reteno zet1lunikog ripa u k()jlm ;) St:
boravi nekoliko ::;eZO!la a zatim se iut.: daije. Nomatbki nain ivom, pojava kola i
ko n ja, uinili su ovu kulturu izuzetno m o hilnolll tako Ja je postignuto jedin stvo
stila nQ velikom pros t ranstvu od Karpata na istoku do AlpQ (do !:lodemkog jezera)
na zapadu i od Mniopoljske 11::1 SeVL'ru J() Save i [)un<Jva na jugu. L' jugoslovenskom
Podunavlju (iako brojna), istraen JI:' reiarivno mali broj naselia ([)o hanovci koJ
Zt:'lllUnZl I Lice kod [ruevika na S rel11 u, Peril'z i Rimski ;Zlnt.:vi u Bako.i, Vuedo!,
Sarva; i !:lei i Manastir kod Osij eka), ali nam un;] pruaju dosta podataka za
rekonstrukciju n ainn ivota imate rijnin e kulturl'.
Posle promena h)jc Sll Sl' u na in u sa hranjivanja odigrak kao poslcLi icn
prodo ra ranih stepskih populacija, II hadcnsk()j kulturi, ponovo sreemo klasian
ritllal, nasiceljen iz neolitskih i ranih e neolitskih kultura - sahranjivanje pokojnika
u zgreno m po loaju ([)obanovci, Vuedol, Bogojevo, Gomolnva). Medjutim,
upo redo sa njim jn vlja Sl' i nov nain, sahranjivanJl' poJ h umka ma Ll kojima Sl'
nalaze urnl' sa spaljl:'l1lm kostlmn pukojnika, to St' bar jL'dnim ddorn pOVeZUll.' sa
stepskim nainom sahranjivanp (Aradianska humka kod Kikinde). Biritllaln()st u
sahranj ivanju kamktersitika je i badenske kultu re u Madjarskoj , gde St' esto i na
istim nek ropolama pojavljuje spaljivanje pokOjnika iskeletnu sahranjivan,ic.
I I mate rijalnoj kulturi badensk ih nalazita nastavlja se dalji razvoj Boleros
stila: olje sa lukoviastim recipi ent{)rn posmju vodea forma, zdele se ukr;]avaju
motivom urezane zvezde, nn uubljirn pos udam a nalazi se ornamen t riblje kosti itd .
Uporedo sa ovim ohl icima inasledj e nom o rn nmentikolll ernav()(.in III ~ Bolems
stila na keramici poinj e da Se upotrebljava bda inkrustacija a koJ o blika Se
pojavljuju e1ipsoidne posude (Fischbutte), am/l lfe i itav n iz novih varipnara kod
pehara i olja ija drka nQdvisuje ohod suda. l ; proizvodnji bakarnih predmeta
takodje se pojavljuju novi oblici m edju kojima su karakterist i ne ve like masivne
krstaste sekirL' i sekirc sn jednim seivo ln i Cl'v<lstim uoua[kom. OVt stilskl'
karakter istike pokazuju da se razvoj oblika pos uda iz prethodn e ku lt ure nastav lja
i kroz hdcnski stH; onc sc usavrnvaju, pOJavljUJU Ilovi nli St' mkoJj e naputaju
neki e le m enti karakteristini za stariji period. T ako se na primer antropomorfna

?ummary

197

plastika kakva je poznata sa naih baJenskih nalazita (Vina, [)obanovci,

VueJol) pojavlj uje samo u ranoj I;:'zi kulture' dok kasnije potpuno i sezava .
Evolucija t.'neolitskih kultur;) )1<:lst;:w\jn ::-ie nn veoj teritoriji jug()sl()vt'n~
skog Podul1nv\ja prenlstanj e m baue nsb..' II kos( uiD ku kulturu. Pro m e nl' SlI nastak
pre svega zbog izmenjel10g nain<J ivot;); nomadsko bnlk'nsko stanovnitvo SVL' Sl:

vie vezuje za uJreJjene lokacijl') poinje da Se h;)vi ratarstvom) menj n svoje navike
ivot;) tl time i svoje potrehe to Se SVe ugleda i II promeni nZl planu 111 J (c.:.'rij zli nl'
kulture. t\ornaJski nnin ivot;) II kOS[lltakoj kulturi skofo Sl' potpUIlO Ilnputa :
naselj a SL' podiu na odceunom terenu, visokim lesnim ohal;J.m~1 [ekZl ili na manjim

uzvienjimJ II ra vnia rskim oblastima. (~radL' Sl' vee nadzcmnt' ku e , sa vil'

prostorija i sc) vie' faza ohnnvljal1ja. Na (Jomoinvi n~l primer. u vertikalnoj strmi
grafiji nalaze SL' tn n:::l:jCOblnska horizul1[;) sn vl' im brolern klla i S8 vie faza
njihovog obnavljallja i rekons trukcije . Pm.l izanj l: kost()lakog f1::lsclja na (Jol1lolavi
na osnovam a badcl1skog llnselj:J zemunikog tipa i gradnjn trajnih swmbenih
objekata vezana je za poeta k intenzivnijeg havljenja zemljoraJnjom, za ta su na
okolnom terenu postojali povoljni usluvi.
l! ke ram i koj proizvodnji, kostnlaka kultura je prihvatila mnoge oblike
badenskih posuda (olj, sa trakast()!\l drkom , zele-It-, amtlJle" l'ischhutte i sL) ali ih PI. XX-XXI II
je t\)ko m vr~mt'na modelirala, davab im duh svoga ~t ila, To se naroit(l dobro
zapaa kod ukraavanja posuda gd L' SL' P()stq)~'n() gubi linearno ukraaVJnJL' i
takasti ubodi a pojavljuJ t' nova tl'hnik<-l ukraavanjJ: hrazdasti urez LI kombinaciji
sa belom inkrust3cijol1l (furchl'nstih) ili motivi wrl'za LI rmllim kombinacijama.
Kostola ki sti l ukraavanj l: je vrlo spccifiJn i javlja Sl' samo II UV()j kulturi ~
varijante koje se kasnije pojavljuju (duhorez u vuedolskoj kulturi na pr.) sa mo su
njegova clalja e voluc ija .
Smatra sc da su Slavonija i Srem oblasti u kojima je nastao kosrolaki stil
i kostolaka kultura. Odavde se 011;) iri prema jugu Ll Srhij II juno oJ Sa Vl' i Duna va
(Ko ri3 n c kod Kragujevca, Jelclla c kod Aleksinca, Hisa r na Kosovu. Klukoevac,
Crnajka kod Majdanpeka itd.), u Bosnu (Pivnice kod Od:akaj, a Ita ,evenI
kostolaka kermika se nala zi du Dunavskog ko lena II Madjnrskuj i na Ilnlazirima
u Sluvakoj u okviru jeune, kosrolakoj srodne kulture koja Se naziva Bosaa . I\:a
istoku, kako pokazuju nala zita na podruju Dj e rdapa, u istonoj Srb iji i jugozapadnoj Rumun iji dolo jc Jo simbioze Kostolake sa Kocuteni (Cotot,:ni) kulturom
ij e se matino podruje nalazi u Transilvaniji, junom Banatu i Olreniji.
l vre me razvoja kostolake kulture oblasti Balkanskog puluusrrva i
medjurcje Sava - Dra va karakterie dalji razvoj lasinjske kulture, sa jedne:, i pojava
kostolakOj srodne kulture koj;) nosi naziv Rcc. (iaj nri (Rl:tz .(~ajary), sa druge
stra ne. Lasinjska kultura st.' razvija istovremcno sa poe tk ol1t, a Rec,( iajari sa
krajem kostola ke kulture. Medj usobno to su Ll VL' pntpunn r azliite kulturne poj::Jvt'
prialpske zone i severozapaJne Hrvatske: lasinjska Se razvija, kaku le istaknuto na PI. XXXVII -XXXVIII
lcnd,ielskim oS l1ovarna dok st' l\l'c. (iajari stil razvija nezavisno, verovatno pod
uticajem I'Furchenstih modeli na podruju Karpatskug basena, i sronoalps kih
o blasti i Erdelja . Privre meni karakter rec-gajarskih naselja i eto korienje peina

198

The Eneolithic cul tures of Central and West Balkans

bo stanita (Vindjij", Velika peina u Vinjici) ukazujl' na polun omad sku komponentu II njenoj ekonomici.
POZNI ENEO LIT centralnog i isto n og dela Balkanskog Po luostrva,
posebno Pod una vl.ia , uhcleen jl' pre svega !lovim, snanim prodorom stepskih
populacija, nosilac:J kulrure jamnih grobova (oker grobovi), a odmah zatim i
ekspanzijom vuedolske kulture no jug, zapad i istok, OV:Jj vremen ski period u
eneolitu je , za razliku relativno mirne evolucije na relaciji lIoleraz- Bad e n -Kostolac
kul tuf<]) izuzetno (urhuil-nmtl, praen l'st im migracionim pokretima, integr:J~

cionim i ciezintcgracionim procesima. Nesumnjivo J3 jl' II istonin) ohlastima na c

zenllje prodor nosilaca jmnl1t: kulture imao posehan znaaj ZJ cl'iukup<ln kasniji
kulturni r:Jzvoj ireg podruja Karparokog basena i oblasti kojl' mu grovitiraju,
Nedosrawk I1nseija ove kulture ()bjanjava SL' izrazito nornn dskorn komp<lIlen()lll
u njenoj ekonomici , Medjutim, veliki broj registrovonih tumula (humki) na pod ruju rnacijJfSkog i srpskog Put isja , Ll ju.~osl()vens k()m Po<..iun;)vlju i na ccntrJln (l~
balkansko m tlu (njihov broj iznosi vie hiljad;)) ukazuje nn brojno prisustvo nosilaca
kulture u ovim ohlasrirll;J . L' Vojvodini je is tr;J ivano desetak tU l1lu!n ovog tipa i
svi su dali sigurne podatke o njihovorn srepskom k;)rakteru, poev od nClina
sahranjivanja (polaganje pokojnika nCl ;)suru, posipanjL: c rvenom hojom - okerom,
fig.42 drven;) konstrukcija Iznad rak~, nasipanje tumu!n), do priloga koji Se nalaze uz
pokojnika (zlatni i srebrni uvojci Z;] kosu) . Posebno su vani tumu!i ~ humke
iskopavani kod Paneva (Vojlovica, Ja buka), Vrea (Vlajkovoe, Vatin, l'ljma) i
fig.34 Pe rieza (Batka), koji sU dali maajne pod:Jtkc' o ovom fenomenu II ~ nl'()litll
jugoslovenskog Podunavlja, Veliko humka Jahuko kod Paneva (I, o ko 40 m,) bila
je n asuta izn:JJ naselja kostn!akL' kulture tako Ja je raka stepskog groha prohila
osnovu jedne kue sa koswlakol1l keramikom, l\a ovaj nain dubijen je znaajan
poci;)tak () vn..:mcnu prodora stepskih naroda u ove oblasti, odnosno da Sl' hUlukl'
o vog tipa javljaju krajem kustolake kulture (oko 2300 god,), Slinu situaciju
sreemo i na humkama kod Perlcza sa mu to iL' ovciL: humk;) (Paica hurn ka)
Z;:Jsip;)n;)
sa zemljom li kojoj su bili fragmenti badenske keramike.
Map.2
Prodor stcpskih kultura nije u svim oblastima nae zemlje prekinuo ra zvoj
autohtnonih kultura. LJ srernsk()~::;lavonskoj zoni, na osnllvama kos[oiakog stila
formira se vri" znaJjna vued"lska kultura, O na e ostat i dominantna pojava kroz
ceo po zni eneolit na prostoru oJ Slovake ll;) severu, UO jadranske obale na jugu,
i oe! Karpata na istOku e!o Alpa n:J zapadu, Zahvatajui ova ko veliko prostranstvo
formirale su se brojne loka lne grupe i kulture kOjl', zahvaljujui lI1icijalnom stilskom
jedinstvu in e vuedolski kulturni kompleks. Medjutim, kaJa se govori o istoj
vuedol skoj kulturi, obino Se pod tlm podrazumev;J njena pojava u srcmsk(l~sla
vonskoj oblasti, a zatim i na podruju severne Bosne i Central n e S rbije , Zastupljena
su dva osnovna tipa naselja: jedna pouizar1d na visokim IL-snim obaiama Dunava,
Save, Drave (Svara, Vuedol, llelegi, Gomolava) i druga koja se nalaze juno u
brdovitim predelima Bosne i Srbij e a koja imaju grad inski karakter (Debelo brdo i
delovi u Rosni, Jasik i Djurdjevo kod Kraguj evca) , Izuzetak ud pravila ine n"scij a
podizana u peinama (HrustovaJ u Bosn i na pL), Ono to karoktcrite vel iki broj
vuedolski h naselja tO je njihov u izvesnoj llle ri i odbrom beni karakter. (jradac u

?_IJmmar;

199

Vuedolu, nnine u Belegiu ili Sarva kod Osij eb imaju razvijen j<Jrtiilbcioni
sistem: jednostruki ili uvustruki rovovi, pzll is8d e i sl. l itvrdjeni knfnktL'r ima ju i
vuedolska naselja na pod r uju l10Sl1L' i Srbije to sve ukazuj e na prisustvo str;)nih
po pulacija u neposredno m susedstvu i no potrebu podizanja hezhcdnih nnse lja _
Kod sahranjivanja pokojnika, u vuedolskoj kulturi istovrem e no se pojnvljuje incine racija i inhumnc ijn pokojnika _ Skdetn() sahrnnjivnnj e wdrava u
osnovi odlike rnn ijih kultura ovog podruja ali se pojnvlj uju i novi oh li ci: dvojno
sahranjivanje ili sahranjivzlIlje cele porodice. LJ Vuedolu SLI na pr. zastupljenl' Sv e
tri vrste skclL'tll og sahrnnjivnnjJ ~ pojt'dinJnog, dvo jnog i grupnog S()ilr8lljiva njJ .
l iz tO, ka o jedna spec i finost Ilasiedjena iz hZldcl1ske kultu re sree se i sahranjivanje
ivotinja, Tirgrjber,i . Sn drugL' strane l1<.1roi[o II i stonim o blastima vuedols ke
kulture pojavljuje Se spaljivanje pokojnikn i sahra njivanj e pod humka m a _ Kod
Batajn ice i Vojke iskopavana su dva vuedolska tum ula u ij e m su sc srediru
n alaz ile urne sa spalj e nim kostima pokojn ikn a na podrujujunog dda rumunsk og
Banata, nedaleko od Dunava, o tkopavano je kod Moldova Vechc ne ko liko
vuedolskih rumul8 sa urnal1lJ l k8ll1 ell()m kalonnn. Ove odlikl' s<Jhranjiva nj3 II
vuedo I sknj kulturi pok8zuju da SLl promene II naj()st:rlj ivijoj i naj konzcrvarivnijoj
man ifestaciji praisto rij skog J r u~ tva - nain u snhranj ivanja - bil e spo re . Postepe no
se naputao tradicionalni na i n sahranj ivanja na raun n ovih o blib_
PI. XXVI-XXV II. 1-3
Ke ramika proizvodnja u vueclolskoj ku lturi predsrnv lj a najvii dom e t
kako li razn ovrsnosti oblika rako i II nainu ukraavanja . Poste br;:lZdastog urezi . .
va n ja koje je prih vatila iz kosrolah' kulture, svc se ee pojavljuje uubore z,
dubljene (rovaene) po vrine >uda J" b i Sl' U uduhljenja stnvlja li vei n anosi bell'
mase. Kontrast izm edju crne uglaane po vrine suda i bele inkrustaci je dosti," o je PI. XXVIII -XXXII
visok es tetski e fekat. Raznov rsnost mo ti\';) mk udj l: Josti c svoj I1Jjvii stepen:
ko ncen tr i ni krugovi, llfe Z;)ni rrougiuvi, rombo vi i k\,adr;:I[], : ve:de i elipse. S\'j ti
geometrijski mo tivi izvode Sl' II brOj nim varijant8ma i \'ari jete tima. t -kraa vaju Sl'
a k i povrine suda koje nisu vidlji veot\:Z1 :delam Zl, pch,:ml11J, ZlmforamZl, n eOblI1l111
predlne6 ma verovatno kuinlt' namellC, na teraknta ma i zoornotfm1l1 tlgur<1ll18
ukraava se maksi111n lno mog ua povrina. Kod p!irkih pch:Jra na no zi , ukra<Jvi.1
se i unutranjost suda. Sve ovo ini lb se vuc do lska keramika srrwtro jeclin~
stvenom pojavom po bogatsrvu llkranvanja nL'dostignuta u pra is torijskim kul turama srednje i jugoistone Evrope .
Iz svog;) matinog p()druja, Srema i Slavonije vuedol s ka kultura Sl~
proiriln vrlo hrzo II suseJne oblasti: najpre II Barnnju (Zok u Macijarskoj), zatim
na podruje Ljubljanskog barja (lg I, II) .~cie je na ila na vrlo pogodno rl o za da lji
razvoj, zatim II Bosnu i Srhiju i najzad u rumunski Banat i na jZlcimnsku ubalu.
ZZlhv;) t ajui ovako veliku podruje sa heterogenim '-iupstratolll, udaljuju i st' od
matinog jezgra i primarnug stil skog izra!;), II iZ1l1enjcni m uslovima vrlo hrzo je dole )
do ras pada velikog vuedolskog ko mple ksa i d u t<>fIniranjn n o vih kultura koje e
posluiti kao osnov za razvoj grup" i stil o va ranog hronza n og doba . I I sre msko -slavons kom pod r uju i u delu june Macljarske nastaje vinkovako (Vinkovci-Somogyvar) kulrura ; na zapadu u Sloveniji , a delom i na jadranskoj obali fo rmira se
ljubljanska kultura; na srednjem i junom Jadranu grupa T ivm-Rubc; na severu LI

200

The Eneol ithi c cultures of Central and We st Balkan s

srednjoj i severnoj Madjarskoj, zatim u Slovak oj grupe tipa Mako, Kos i hy-(~aka i
jo ne ke

va rijal1tt2 .

One

II

hrono \()kot11 pogledu ve pripadaju

[JI1<H11 hr()l1 zanom

dobu, ali po svojoj genezi, stilski m odlikam a i optim karnkte ristikama ma terij alne
i d uhovne kulture o ne su poslednji refleb hiljadugodinjeg eneolitskog razvoj a na
podruju cent ra lnog i zapadnog Balkana koji po inj e kraj em e tvrtog i traj e sve do
poetka drugog milenija oko 1900/ 1800 godine pre n.e.

THE LIST OF PLATES

PLATE I

Fig. 1-7 -- Stone anJ bone implements (1 -3) , pottery

(4-6) ami thl' altar (7) from Rudna <.;la va near Majdan.
pek . R 1:4 (1,2,7); 1:6 (4); l: 8 (3, 5,6).

PLATE II

Fig. l-R -- Casts fl)r copper ruols and caster'> pot (8 ).

Sarva (1,2,4); Vuedol Gradac (3); V inkovci . Trni ca
(5); De belo Brdo Ik'a r Sarajevo (6, 8); Ljublj ansko Barje
(7). R 1: 2 (58); 1:4 (1-4) .

PLATE III

Fig. 1-7 -- Coppe r axes. Bem en l1<'a r Zem un (1,2,5)

anJ Pl o nik nea r Prokuplj e (3,4,6,7). IZ - 1:2 (27);
1:4 (l).

PLATE IV

Fig. l a-e -- Copper axe from Osij e k. R 1:2 (b, c) and

1:4 (a).

PLATE V

Fig. 1-9 -- The pOtte' ry of t he Tizsapolgar culture . Crna

Ba ra (1-5,8,9) and Srpski Krstur (6, 7).]{ 1:2 (9); 1:4
(1 .8) .

PLATE Vl

Fig. 1-6 -- T he po tte ry o f the Tizsapolgar c ulture . Vrac

- 29. Novembe r p. (1,5) e nta. Mali Alas (2); Crna Bara
. Prkos (3,6); Belegi - anine (4). Diffe rent ratios.

PLATE VII

Fig. l-R -- The pottery and go lden find from the gra ves
of the BoJrogke rczstur c ulture . Nosa nea r S ubotica (1.6)
and Vina (78). l\ . 1:2 (3.6) ; 1:4 (l, 2).

PLATE VIII

Fig. l-R -- C;rav.: finds from Vajska, Hunyodi . Vojska

c ulture. Gra ve 1(3,6, 7); grave 2 (5); grave 5 (1,2,4,8).
Different ratios.

PLATE lX

Fig. 1-8 --The pottcry of the Bubanj . Soleura . Krivodol

complex frum Gadimij e (l), Hisar nea r Suva Reka (2,4,
6); l ist ja na OriOl n ear Struga (3), Baranda n ear Panevo
(5), Rospi uprija n ear Belgrade (7) anJ Kovilovo near
Negotin (8) . R 1:2 (2,4,5); 1:4 (l, 3, 68).

The Eneolithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

202

PLATE X

Fig. ]7 -- The finds of the BubanJ' Salcuta . Knvociol

complex from Hisat (1), Kovilovo (2), Ktivdj ne ar Bur
(3, 4), uplevec nem Bitola (5, 6) and (~adimljc near
Lipljan (7). R 1:2 (27); 1: 4 (I).

PLATE Xl

Fig. ]9 Bubanj , Salcuta ' Krivodol complex, Loo mor,

phic \vare, the lid ~lIlJ tilt' f1int, bOllt' and copper impk-,
ments fro m Kov il ovo (l), Kriv elj (2,4), H isar (3),
Kladovu (5,9), Gadimije (6, 7) and Zlotska Peina (8) .
R, 1:2 (1,3,5,7,9); 1:4 (2,6).

PLATEXIl

Fig, ]8 -- The seuipture of the Bubanj , SaicLlta '

Kri vodol style frum Kri velj (l, 7), uplevec (2), Kovilovo
(4,5), Crnubuki near Bitola (3,6), Llotska Pe i na (8) anJ

sitcs in Maccuo nia (with no closer references). R, 1:2

(1,8 )

PLATE XlII

Fig. ]6 -- Stcppe tlnds' within the site s of the Bubanj,

Salcuta Kri voJol culture trom uple vec (l), th e hoard
fro m Klad ovo (2), Crnobuki (3, 5), Zimska Pe ina (4)
and individual tlnding from Srps ki Krstur (6). R, l: l (I):
1:2(2,6) .

PLATE XIV

Fig. ]7 -- The potre ry of the Cerna voda III c ulture from

Brza Vrba near Kovi n. R, 1:2 (5); 1:4 (l-4, 6); l: 10 (7) .

PLATE XV

Fig. ].6 -- T he putte ry of thc Bolcroz typc from Mosronga

I ,De ronje (1,3, 5,6) a nd Vuedol (The Early !lade n
pottery). R, 1:2 (4); 1:4 (l,3, 5, 6).

PLATE XVI

Fig. ]6 -- T he potrery Df the carly phase of the Baden

culture (the trzmsition between the Bole-raz, Cernav()cb
III anci the !laden cu lture) from Mostonga I , De ronj e (l,
4,6). Beli Manastir (2) and Vuedo l, Cradac (3, 5).
Different ra tios.

PLATEXVIl

Fig. ] 7 " T he potrery of the classica l phase of th e Bade n

culture from Vuedol (1,3), OpOV() , Reli !lreg ne ar
Panevo (4). Ilok, Tvtd"v" (5), Beli Manastir, Ci glana
(6) and Vrac ' A. Rankovi st (7). Different r"tios.

PLATE XVIII

Fig, 19 " The pot te ry of the classical phase of th c Baden

culture from Sarva (2, 4), Ar"danska Humka (gr. 1,6),
Gomola ne ar Hrt kovci (3), Beli Manastir, Ciglana (5,
8) and Vuedol (7,9). R, 1:2 (2,4,7 ,9 ); 1:4 (1,3,5,
6).

V"

The list of pla~_

_ _ _ _ _ 203

PLATE XIX

Fig. 1-7 -- The pottery (l-3) ami the allthropomorphic

sculpture (4-7) trom Vina - Belo Brdo. The ca rl y phase
ofthc Baden culture. R- 1:1 (4,7); 1:2 (6); 1:4 (13).

PLATE XX

Fi~.

PLATE XXI

Fig. 1-7 -- The pottery of the Kostolac culture from

(;omoinv" (1,47). VuedolC;radac (2) and O strikovac
near Jagodina (3). Diffe rent ratios.

PLATE XXII

Fig. 1#10 " Potrl:ry <l the K()st(J lac culture (rorn Sremski
Karlovci (the hoard or the pit) . R - 1:4 (1-8); 1:6 (9-10).

PLATE XXIII

Fig. 1-7 -- I'otte ry of the Kustolac culture from Pivni ca

near Odaci . Bosnia. rz 1:4.

PLATE XXIV

Fig. 1-'; -- Pottery of thc' Cototeni culture fmm Zlots ka

Pe i na (I, 3), (;Iadni ce near Grabnica (2) and
Kl okoevac near Oonji Milanova c (4, 5). R 1:2; 1:4 (l ,
4,5).

PLATE XXV

Fig. 1-8 -- The mixture of the Kostolac and Cocofeni style

on sites in East Se rbia: K lokoevac (1.3,5,6) and Krivelj
near Bor (4, 7, 8). rz 1:1 (6); 1:2 (1,2, 3, 4,5,7,8) .

PLATE XXVI

Fig. 1-8 -- Pottcry of the ea rl y phase of thc

1-7 -- The pottc ry uf the Kostolac culture tro m

(,,,\llolav,, . I-!rtk ovci (l, 2, 4, 6, 7), Zimska Pcina (3)
and Srcmski Karl ovci (from the hoard #5). R 1:4 (l ,
36) and 1:6 (2,7) enlarged for 30%.

Vuedo l

culture wi th l,te rn en ts of the Kostolac cultu re style .

an int in Bclegi ( 2, 4 8): Vis Modran near Ouboj

(I) a nd Gradac in Mitrovac (3). Ditle rent ratios.

PLATE XXVII

Fig. 1-6 -- TI,e '[nina' sha pes of the ea rly and classical
phase of the Vuedol culrur,' {rom llclegi. a n i11l' (I),
Gomolava (2. 4). Sarva Vlastelinski Breg (3) and
Vinkovci Trnica (5,6). Oifre rent ratios.

PLATE XXVIII

Fig. 14
Vuedol

The punery of the classical phase of the

c ulture (phase B according to S. Oimitrij evi)
oo

frorn site CjmJac in Vuedol. Differl'nr ratios.

PLATE XXIX

Fig. 1-4 Ponery uf the classical phase of the Vuedo l

c ulture' trom Ivankovo near Vinkovci (l), Sarva (2) and
Vuedol (;raJac (3,4). f)i fterent ratios.
oo

The Eneol ithic cultures of Central and West Balkans

204

PLATE XXX

Fig. 1-4 -- Deco roted por tery of the cbssical ph ose (B I ,

2) according to 5. Dimi t rij ev i ) of the Vued o l cultu re
from Sarva (I, 3, 4) and Vinkovci (2).

PLATE XXXI

Fig. 17 -- Pottery and rhe altar of the 'haroq ue ' phase of

t he Vuedol culture (B.2) fro m 5arva (15 ), Batajn ica
(um fro m th e tumulus; figo 6) ami Vu edo l Vinogrodi
Streim (7) . Different rotios.

PLATE XXXII

Fig. )6 -- ['ottery of the late phose of thc Vuedo l cu lture

(B2/c according to 5. lJ i mi t rij ,'v i ) fro m V inkovci .
Zvijezda (I), Vinkovci T r n ico (2,3 ) , O patovac (4) ,
IJraganlug . Cigleni k (5) and Sotin (6). Di ffe ren t ratios.

PLATE XXXIll

Fig. 19 -- Pottery of thc Wes t Bosnian phose of the

Vuedo l culture from Hr usrov aa (1 .3,6, 8) and Zecovi
near Prij edor (4, 5, 7,9). rz 1:2 (1.3,6,8,9); 1:4 (4, 5,

7)
PLATE XXXIV

Fig, 12 -- The objeccso( cult from Vu edol Gradac ('the

pigeon' and tb e pedestal or altar) . The classica l pbase of
the Vuedo l culture. Different rat ins.

PLATE XXXV

Fig. 111 -- Pottery and anthropomotp bic sc ulp t ure of

tbc earl y phase of the Lasinja culture from: Vis Motiran
neor IJoboj ( 1.3,7,8 ), Ljubljansko Bot je Resnikuv
Preko p (4,9), Nuvosei ci . Pa njak (5, 6 ) and Ajdovska
Ja mo (10) . rz 1:2 (2, 3, 5 7, II); 1: 4 ( I, 4. 8, 9, 10).

PLATE XXXVI

Fig, 1.8 -- Po tte ry of t he late ph ase of the Losinj a cu lture

fro m sites: Pav lo vac near Krievac ( I), Gradac Panjak
(2-4) ond j ak i (5,6,8) near Slavon ska Poega and Vis
. Modran (7). rz 1:2 (1-4) ; 1:4 (5.8 ).

PLATE XXXVII

Fig. 110 .. Pot tery of the Retz.Gaj ary culture . Vinjica

ty pe acco rding tu S. Di m it r ijevi . fro m sites Do nja V oa
neat Vindija (I ) and Velika Peina near Vinjica (2. 10) .
R 1: 2 (I.IO) .

PLATE XXXVIII

Fig. 16 .. ['ot te ry of tht' !\etz .('ajary culwre, Ke vdc rc

Htnjevoc type accordi ng to S. Di m itrij e v i . Site I-I rnj cvoc
. Brdo neo r Kutjevo (16). R I: I.

PLATE XXXIX

Fig. 17 .. Pottery and sculpture (4) of west (East A lpine)

variant of the Vued o l culrure from Ljuhljansko Ba rje
19 (I 7). R . 1:2 (1,3.6 ) ; 1:4 (2, 7).

rhelist or plates_

20 5

PLATE XL

Fig. 1-1' llm,," (1.3), t1int (63), corpe r (5) onel c10y (4)
impleme nts fr(Jm 19 ill Liuhijansko Borjl' . West (Ea st
Alpine) va riarn ofthL' Vued,, 1 c lIILurL'.lZ I: I (6-8), 1:2
( I 5).

PLATE XLI

Fi~. 1-1' .. 1\)ttL' ry of t hL' fina l rho sc (JI' the V ueclL) 1

c ult u re ct )mple x . Ljubljanska culrure fro m 19 (lg II
according to p, Ko roec) . R 1:2 (1,3-8); 1:4 (2).

PLATE XLII

Fig. 1-9 Pottery of the ea ri y a nd middle Eneolithic of

thl'

Adri ;:nic

: OI1L' ~

Pro[o,j\a kovnn a Jnd t\ak ovi1na cll l ~

ture from sites (,mrev" pilja (1 . 3,6,72, M,,,k()V8 pi!j o

0 11 the island l-Ivo r (5) , and t'ako va no Spilja o n Peljeac
(4 , 9),lZ 12 (19) .

PLATE XLIII

Fig. 1-8 . POlIe rI' of rhe 1'1118 1 Eneolithic of th e Adriatic

zunL:. Adriatic type of thL' Ljubljansko c ulture occording
to S , Oillli t rij e vi . Sitl'S: Grapcva pilja (l 5, 8) allli
T relanj piljanea r ibeni k (6, 7), Oifte re nt ratios ,

,"

..

; .;.;J

.~

.
,

>

ir

>,~
',":i' f

>

, ~,

CD
2

Plate I -- Mining tools and pottery from Rudna Glava

3
2

-,

Plate II -- Casts for copper tools and casters pot

-'----J

L-,-------J

('---~(

_.:J

Plate IV -- Copper ax from Osijek

--

f,!~ ___-

Plate VI -- Ceramic ware of the Tizsapolgar cu lture

1i~
C; , .. 1,
'.

,,';

,. , '",,;..

~"~:

fl

II

~5

- o.

Plate VII -- Grave goods of the Bodrogkerezstur cu lture

-I

8
Plate VIII -- Grave goods from the graves of the Huniady-Vajska culture (Vajska)

I ~,

! 1\

!!

,J

i _/

.,

.~
/

__ l

(
\

\
\

~"..

'1 -

Plate X -- Pottery and the 'Ioom weigh' of the Bubanj - Salcuta - Krivodol culture

Jm11nJ 10POAIJ){ - e1nJles - fueq ns J41 JO

SWJWJldwl 1U 1U pue JJddOJ 'Juoq 'A.JJ11Od J41 -- IX J1eld

.-

J,
-

Plate XII -- Anthropomorphic fi gurines of th e Bubanj - Salcuta - Krivodol cu lture

f.
i

t)..,'"
,"tt>

.-

"

..

...

Pla te XIV

oo

Pottery of the Cernavoda III culture from Brza Vrba

rf\
,

\\
"~-'----

"-' - .

Plate XV -- Pottery of the Cernavoda III - Boleraz culture from Mostanga

II

"" I

Plate XVI -- Pottery of the Early phase of the Baden culture

..

, ~\~.~

i"ffit'~.

(~~~j;,,,,,.
~";;;'i&%
f.<'::-~-\":"
... ~ -. . ...c.,',.'._ .
,

,, , , ,

~3

/,....,,-~ - ~

Plate XVII -- Pottery of the cl assica! pha se of the Baden culture

'\
I

I
I
\

\'

Plate XVIII -- Ceramic ware of the classical phase of the Baden cultu re

,\

Plate XX -- Pottery of the Early phase of the Kostolac cultu re

.. - !".

~~~ ;~;-, ~--::\~'\~~" -:~ " ~'-,,, ",, """ - ""

-

. '.>/

,.

If-.~.

~,

_,-

f)

""

Plate XXI -- Pottery of the developed phase of the Kostolac culture

/,

fl

Plate XXII -- Pottery of the Kostolac culture from the deposit in Sremski Karlovci

fc:~
~\\
\,

"-

,I.

(j

5
Plate XXIV Pottery of the Cotofen i culture

(\
\ \

\\ \:
\\

} j
I

3
1

~
"

8
Plate XXV

oo

Potte ry

of t he Kostolac and Cotofeni cultures style

--.~
I __________--~~~~~~~~~~~================~==~==~

.'

Plate XXVI -- Pottry of the ea rl y phase of the Vuedol cu lture

"'\'~~"'~~" ;:,.;:~

..'~~~:jL~~~
,.~ .. . ..
Wj&;>~+t
.

/ , -'"

-=r
~ --

.;Ji,":~"~;"-"~:':~';~
""

-----

f ":' ,,-.,---.-.-:.' . . . ~~--

,~ {

'

Oo::..;

Plate XXVII -- Shapes of the 'teri na' pottery of the early (I -3 ) and classical pha se
of the Vuedol culture

Plate XXVIII __ Pottery of the classical phase of the Vuedol cultu re

Plate XXX

-o

Pottery of th e classical phase of the

Vuedol

culture

"

Plate XXXI -- Pottery of the 'baroque' phase of the Vuedol culture

Plate XXXII -- Pottery of the late phase of the Vu edol cu lture

i!iPf\'
,.
,

__ _.-::::: - --L _ ........

Plate XXXIII -- Pottery of the West-Bosnian pha se of th e Vuedol culture

~~.~~" ..

""

"~

.;
'/,

, oO,

;:. o

"' :00'

Plate XXXIV -- The objects of cul t of t he Vuedo l cult ure from V u edo l

17

Pl ate XXXVI -- Pottery of the late phase of the Lasi nja culture

Plate XXXVII -- Pottery of the Retz-Gajary culture (the Vinjica type)

Plate XXXVIII -- Kevderc- Hrnjevac type of the Retz- Gajary culture

<::::=>

Plate Xl -- Tools from ljubljansKO Barje (lg)

Plate XLI

o o

Pottery of th e final phase of the Vuedoi culture comolex.

The Ljubljana cu lture

"

'-- - -- - - - - --_ /

Plate XLII -- Pottery of the early and the middle Eneolithic on the Adrla Uc coasr

CIP - Katalogizacija u publikaciji

Narodna biblioteka Srbije
903(497. 1)"636"
TASI, Nikola

Eneolithic Cultures of Central and West Balkans I Nikola Tasi , [English translation
Ivana orevi. Nenad Task]. - Belgrade : Dragani : InstinIte for Balkan Studies
Serbian Academy of Sciences an d ,\rts, 1995 (Belgrade , Kultura). - 248 pp. III. 24
cm. - (Special Edition I Institute fo r Balkan Studies Serbian Academy of Sciences and
Arts: No 61) (Series Heritage Dragani)
Tira 1000. - Bibliog rafija, str 175- 190. - Rezime
ISBN 86-441-0117-X
a) Bakarno doba - Balkansko poluostrvo
1[}=41559564

r-