UDK 903(497.11 )"633/634"
Documenta Praehistonca XXVI
Places that created time in the Danube Gorges and beyond,
c. 9000-5500 BC
Dušan Borič
Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, UK db231 @ hermes.cam.ac.uk
ABSTRACT - Vie history of the region of the central Balkans and south east Pannonia is reviewed over the period ofc. 9000-5500 cat BC. The rich and exciting evidence of the Danube 0'orges region (the Djerdap) is presented in relation to the ecological setting and Early Middle Seolithic settlement evidence of the uider region. It is suggesteil that the nature of these first Seolithic societies itselfpro-tides answers to the question of their origins, despite the recurrent invisibility of extensive Mesoli-tliic occupation in Southeast Europe as a whole.
IZMEČF.K - \ članku pregledamo zgodovino osrednjega Balkana in jugovzhodne Panonije v obdobju med približno 9000 in 5500 kalibrirano BC. Predstavimo bogate in vztumirijive najdbe Djerdapa. jih umestimo v okolje in jih povežemo z zgodnje srednje-neolitskimi naselbinami v širši regiji. Menimo. da narava teh prvih neolitskih družb že sama /*> sebi odgovarja na vprašanje o njihovem isvo-ru. kljub temu da ekstenzivna mezotttska poselitev v jugovzhodni Evropi kot celoti ni vidna
KEY Vi ORDS - Danube Gorges; Mesolithic: Seolithic: settlement pottery: conceptualisation of death
Mankind feeds on itself more and more, tout if it does not vanish or return to the Stone Age it trill eat itself in ever-greater portions. This means that anywhere, in time and space, where peof>!e expresses their creatirity, this thing that thev did would explore more steadily and even emotionally overwhelm as their own ait who belong to the human species This kind of universalisation hlurs the difference betuven cultural centres and instead of the notion of imitation, introduces the notion of mutual exchange and interdependence
Czeslaw Milosz. Kontynentv (1986.85) (translated by the author)
INTRODUCTION
A step towards writing the local histories of whole regions and particular histories of archaeological sites together with all the folklore' accompanying any excavation, subsequent analyses and publication might offer a means for a proper understanding of what motivated the interpretations that have been offered. Without providing here a complete and detailed history, as the title might misleadingly suggest. I would like to offer the possibility of a com-
prehensive guide to the multidimensional nature of accumulated data and ideas for the case study considered. Thus, deposited layers of thoughts and disputes. long conversations between immediate participants and their listeners, and imaginative loops, along with the striking materiality of dusty boxes and excavated objects, and the specific metaphorical reality of photographs and plans (Tiller 1999.11) need a full involvement and a phenomenological exercise {if. Tiller 1994.74).
There are two major issues that I want to raise here. The first is intended to set straight the record of Mesolithic and Neolithic sequences in the Danube Gorges region of Southeast Europe, at least in several aspects. Some of the questions thus posed are eventually directed to answering the question of the nature and reasons for changes in material culture and the introduction of a Neolithic package, A necessary reminder is that all these changes most probably echoed moves in the wider world, with various kinds of communicative route and mechanism. Local his-
41
Dušan Boric
tories are inscribed only with the background of these grand narrative moves. In this sense, the variety of expressiveness of the same phenomenon and specificity of any particular case play equal roles in reaching an understanding. Although in what follows I use labelling such as Mesolithic' and Neolithic extensively. this practice finds its justification only as a kind of heuristic device necessary to explain how currently formulated conceptual frameworks operate. However, 1 hope to show that close-up, contextual w indows in the presentation of the case study that follows make it impossible to sustain these categories as such, and that at lexst an awareness of a need for their reconstruction should be anticipated.
Secondly , it seems necessary' to integrate the Early Holocene archaeological record in the area of the Danube Gorges and the central Balkans into wider thinking on the specific historical period, on origins and reasons for the creation of features and artefacts, diachronic changes and the creation of landscapes; all these, along w ith issues of perceptions of time and its creation', as a part of fundamental ontologi-cal processes of being-in-the-world and dwelling-in-the-world. in Heidegger's words (Heidegger 1962.78).
another among the grand realities' (Geertz 1973 /1993121), is to be approached in a proper way. I feel close to Clifford Geertz when he says, "1 grow uncomfortable when I get too far away from the immediacies of social life" (ibid. t i). It seems that the immediacies of the archaeological record are often too easily neglected and left to their antiquarian melancholy. Thus, the created tokens of theoretical debates have been models of change that shrink material evidence as necessary; long theoretical exposures w ith nice, neat presentations of grand realities. or long critical accounts with archaeological case studies merely appended, often complaining and aw aiting a better quality of and the resolution of empirical data to support theoretically laid foundations. It remains to be seen how this kind of habit is also reflected in the particular case study discussed here, which shows that this particular kind of politics of intellectual manufacture to a great extent neglects the very raw material of materialised and patterned human action, whose primacy should be vital in our accounts.
THE DANUBE GORGES. C. 8500-5500 BC
The intertwining of these themes is seen as necessary if a fresh understanding is to be reached, and if the question of the places that created time, as yet
We move to the Danube Gorges (Figs. 1. 2) as the point of departure for this account, an areas of Southeast Europe w here continuities in the mater-
RO MANIA
Qamjbf
&jie Hercuione
ROKvra'n
vtocneac
KxiroJL
S1U.C a*	Cuho
LeoensW V«1
Vlasco 1
cka Vodenica
I Banuu'
»Sergio Oodcwel
Velesriiccj
A!
	'1000 m I
	?3C-1000 1
	500 MOm [
	xosaam
	IO-XO-T.
	• IX m
SERBIA
Kito"
Osftovu CoitXJlU
f Osirovul Mare i 875 & 873
Fig. 1. Map of the Danube Gorges region showing sites with tarty Holocene sequences (drawn by I). Ro-ric and V. \orakovic).
42
Places thai created t.-ne in the Danubo Gorges and beytxvj, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 2. Satellite image of the Danube Gorges region and eastern Serbia (courtesy of P. Popotic).
ial record of Early Holocene sequences are abundant and complex. Specific geological development (Mar-kovic-Marjanovic 1978.11 sq.) created the landscape: the Danube runs through narrow gorges, with steep sides that in many places rise vertically from the river, sometimes reaching a height of 500 m (Fig. 3). The drama of the cliffs and the water, and the mystery of cov es and cliffs above, attract the attention. Sites with traces of human occupation were discovered in several gorges where the Danube had cut a narrow and w inding route through the south-em fringes of the Carpathian Mountains. After its gentle and slow run through the Pannonian Plain, the river speeds up, passing through narrow passages: in the narrowest, there are quartz-porphyry cliffs, and also deposits of greenish slate. Jurassic sandstones and limestones, gabbro. crystalline rocks and other deposits, rising sheer from the waters. In the gorge known as Gospodjin Vir (The Lady's Whirlpool) the river flows between rocks that rise from the riverbed to the surface: the power of the waters has eroded the rocks into the shape of whirlpool cauldrons, sometimes almost 30 m deep. Similar features are observed in the Lower Gorges, especially in one called Kazan (The Cauldron) (Fig. 3)- The constant erosion of the banks and constant accumulation, has created several types of fluv ial terrace, frequently narrow and rocky, in different periods, from the Pliocene to the Holocene. In the course of the
Quaternary, some of the coves sedimented two ty pes of loess-sandy covers of different age. blown by the south-easterly wind. In some places these eolian sediments are deposited in natural pockets protected by rocky ridges, on fluv ial terraces or. as in the case of the archaeological site of Padina. in a giant fossil whirlpool at Sector III of this site, making an especially interesting feature (ibid 15. Fig. 5). The older eolian sediments cover scree that eroded in the Pleistocene. and were found on a higher terrace (39/95 m above sea level), being from the Late Pleistocene. The younger sediments (from 1 to 10 m thick), consisting of light yellow sandy loess, cover the lowermost terraces (which in particular demonstrates the low water level of the Danube at the time of their deposition), and their formation falls into the Younger Dryas (ibid. 14). Material eroded from the upper mountain slopes - scree of more recent origin and its accumulation (of several metres) in some places -actually protected the archaeological deposits found on this kind of surface from slow , down-slope erosion. At sites without considerable vegetation cover, down-slope movement of scree can be observed even today (ibid lj). On the other hand, concerning the extent of erosion by the river (with fluctuating rates)1, many of the sites were discov ered directly as a consequence profiles being exposed by the river's undercutting, which eroded their lowermost parts.
Some of the features of the landscape have often been cited as pointing to the isolation and refugial character of the region. However, it is here that we immediately we encounter the first unclear and sometimes misleadingly presented point. To what
1
Fig. j. Passage through the lower Gorge today - the narrowest route in the region (photo: D. Horic).
I It seems that tlu- regime of die Danube s water lewis was drastically changing especially during the last two centuries i.e. since the beginning of melioration works in the Pannonian plains that drained out massive annual accumulation of undernrimnd waters all over the Carpathian Basin (see Fig. 2S) directing these into the Danube and its tributaries This probably caused sufficient rise of the water level of the Danube, and as a consequence increased further erosion of its banks.
43
Duiar Bork:
extent is it possible to speak of the isolation of settlements uncovered in these gorges? Many smaller or larger river valleys and streams of the Danube's tributaries intersect cliffs along around 130 km of the Danube's passage through the gorges (Fig. 4). The region of the hinterlands is thus accessible, and this fact needs to be appreciated. Moreover, a much wider region is represented in the settlement record of the Gorges' sites, as will be more clearly shown below.
Previous vieu s and ideas - a selected guide
A number of settlements, linearly aligned along the Danube Gorges' banks and sited in small coves, with Late Palaeolithic, Mesolithic (also referred to as Epi-Palaeolithic) and Early Neolithic layers and features, was excavated in the late 1%0's and early 1970's (for a review of the history of research, see Radovanovic 1996a.3-8) All these were rescue excavations conducted to save sites along the banks of the river from an inevitable rise in w ater levels (up to 30 m) caused by the building of a hy droelectric dam
Evidence of houses, burials, and sculptured art was interpreted as representing complex' hunter-gatherer groups on the basis of frequent analogies, in terms of settlement pattern, supposed reduced mobility, and one of the subsistence staples being an ana-dromous species of Acipenseridae fish, found in the ethnographic example of hunter-gatherer groups of the North-West American coast.
There has been a continuous attempt to define a classic version of the phenomenon specific to the sites in the Danube Gorges (primarily known by houses, burials and sculpted boulders) as mainly Mesolithic' (e.g.. Srejotic 1966. 1967; 1968a. 1968b; 1969a; 1969b; 1969a 1969d; 1972; 1989; Radovanotic 1992; 1996a; 1997; Radovanotic and Voytek 1997) or primarily Neolithic' (jovanovic 1968a, 1968b. 1969a; 1969b. 1971; 1974a; 1974b; 1975; 1987; see also Milisauskas 1978.96). For over thirty years this argument has divided researchers in the area (cf Radovanovic ll)96a. 8-12). The two main reasons for this situation are the low level of publishing. not allowing all the evidence to be taken into account and, presumably, a very personal struggle between excavators for the primacies of their own respective interpretations of the evidence encountered. This kind of situation encourages continuing controversy in attempts to explain how trapezoidal floor plans, with elaborate rectangular hearth constructions and the corresponding absolute dating of the two major sites - Lepenski Yir and Padina -
Fig. i. View from Ma.sac (photo: Centrefor Archaeological Research. Belgrade).
have been presented as in the first case (Lepenski Vir) lacking Early Neolithic pottery and other Early Neolithic material culture (such as yellow-spotted Balkan' flint and polished stone axes, to mention only two), while at the other site (Padina), associations of this kind of material culture with classic buildings have been unquestionably confirmed.
There also has been little doubt among researchers, with few exceptions (Chapman 1989; 1992; Nan-dris 1968; 1971; Whittle 1996; 1998), that well-known features at these sites clearly represent cases of sedentary settlements of "increasingly complex" hunter-gatherers (e.g.. Srejotic 1969; 1972: Srejotic and Letica 1979: Whittle 1985. Radovanovic 1992; 1996a: Radovanovic and Voytek 1997), or rather belong to an amalgam of incoming farmers and surviving local fisher folk (the Neolithic' perspective of Jovanovic /1975; 1987/). For some of the authors, these groups, in the later stages of their development. reacted to emergent Early Neolithic food-producing groups, reluctantly accepting some of the Neolithic paraphernalia (e.g. Radovanovic 1992; 1996a; 1996b; Radovanotic and Voytek 1997; Voytek and Tringham 1989). Especially considering the issue of supposedly appearing/increasing sedentism. continuing studies of animal bones associated with a number of different contexts from these sites, involving cementum increment analyses on red deer teeth, will, it is to be hoped, make these issues clear (Boric in preparation; Dimitrijevic and Boric in preparation).
In a recent synthesis of previous research and analyses in the Danube Gorges by Iv ana Radovanovic. the emphasis is on the Mesolithic' (economic) aspects of these settlements (e.g., Radovanovic 1992; 1996a; 1997). Radovanov ic rightly points out the long continuities in the creation of most of the sites. How-
44
Places thai created t.-ne in the Danubo Gorges and beytxvj, c 9000-5500 BC
ever, the state of publishing, even in this synthetic account, obscures a final conclusion, ami it remains unclear to what extent Early Neolithic material culture should be associated with certain stratigraphic contexts, and especially what role it should play in connection with some of the best-known features, such as sculpted boulders and elaborate houses/ shrines. Also, this author sometimes uses an over-functional argument in an interpretation of a large number of uncovered burials, connecting them with a concept of formal disposal areas and assigning to them primarily the function of territorial markers connected with the control of resources in a certain territory, and with the ideological integration of communities in the Danube Gorges, and also in other European Mesolithic contexts (Radovatioiic 1992; ¡996a 14-15. 295:1994). This argument was strongly formulated to underline the conceptual dichotomy between what should be defined as Mesolithic in contrast to Neolithic.
Subsequently, it has been suggested that these increasingly complex' societies of hunter-gatherers, w ith incipient stages of sedentism and storage facilities. faced a new challenge in the appearance of Neolithic material culture through contacts with surrounding (incoming?) Early Neolithic populations, thus engaging in the process of exchange, acquiring,/ importing new forms of material culture, and also new subsistence staples, such as domesticates (Voy-lek and Tringham 1989: Radovanovic 1996b, Radovanovic and Voytek 1997). Terms often used in this kind of model are dominance', 'resistance1, control, power and prestige', all implying the notion of an ideology which serves to manipulate, restricting human actions hv control over knowledge, reproduction. or a landscape (Radovanovic and Voytek 1997.28; also Tiller 1994. 26. 208). Thus this view sees the existence of organised systems with the domination of experience and knowledge of landscapes (Tiller 1994.26) as "harnessed to legitimise patterns of social control and relating to restricting access to knowledge" (ibid. 208). Along this line, Radovanovic and Voytek suggest (but see also Srejovic 1969) that in the Danube Gorges "...an ideology which promotes power over a landscape masks control over people by placing it in realms that are further removed from the human actors'" (1997.28). Thus, power over a landscape is seen only as serving to control people, as mystification by a small number of cy nical men' (Althusser 1971.37; cf. Trelier-ne 1995.115). However, a different conception of ideology should be anticipated here (.«v below: also Treherne 1995.113-117).
Some notions similar to those just mentioned concerning the introduction of Early Neolithic material culture to the Danube Gorges have been expressed by John Chapman (1989; 1992.111-113) He introduced the term arenas of social power' in order to explain the meaning and reasons for the creation of specific sites and the material record in Southeast Europe (Chapman 1992.72-75). In doing this he uses the ideas of Mann (1986). suggesting that certain places were chosen on the bases of their "biographical suitability' for certain activities, where human actors use and manipulate power that originates from these places. However, again through the concept of power over ancestors, landscapes, imagery etc. (Chapman 1992.116). it is presented as an abstract force that lies behind human motives and actions. In this sense, the concept suggested by this author also lacks multidimensionality when confronted with the archaeological record. Instead of the possibility of a dense and detailed account of die infinite variations of human behaviour, this is a route towards reducing human reality to a few crucial' components. In another account on the beginnings of farming in Southeast Europe he employs the argument of the creation of arenas of social power', maintaining that "...the theme of social power in the Iron Gates gorge is central to these reconstruction of forager-farmer interactions" (Chapman 1992.115; 1994.140). The theme of interaction and resistance to farming is exploited for the region {also Chapman 1992 passim). Also, in his more recent account. Chapman lists the possible reasons for the introduction of farming, such as the accumulation of possessions, increased economic intensification, resource competition, increased family size and place-based world-views (Chapman 1994.136). Again the intention is to reduce things to a few basic' components. so the whole explanatory process eventually leads only further away from interpretative possibilities. subsuming data under already-knowns. On the other hand, in challenging ideas about established sedentism. especially in connection with the (changing) perception of time (Chapman 1992.76 sq.). this author has opened up some interesting interpretative possibilities.
In The Domestication of Europe. Ian Hodder (1990) claims the existence of common underlying structures in the narrativ e and real' w orld of the Eastern Mediterranean before and through the adoption of Neolithic material culture, as well as the subsequent configurations that these underlying structures took in different local contexts throughout Europe. He defined the competing structure through the dialec-
45
DuSan Boric
tic interplay of downs and agrios stories (Hodder 1993.269). which specify sets of rules and practices with shifting emphases. This scheme was then contrasted with the material evidence of the Eastern Mediterranean and European Neolithic. For Ilodder, the case of the Danube Gorges and. in particular, the site of Lepenski Vir (Hodder 1990.21-31) stands among points of departure w here the stories were most elaborately expressed. His remark that, on the basis of the publications about this site, one has the impression that the excavated houses form a scene for some drama (ibid. 29). w here material objects and houses, together with graves and carved boulders. deliberately take particular relations, appears strikingly true. He confronts the position of hearths and graves with the house shapes and spatial relations of portable objects inside them, and the use of human bones as active tools in expressing meanings of domestication and control of the wild and death (agrios) by placing the dead beneath house floors, with a strong emphasis on the nurturing aspect (do-mus) of houses/shrines and hearths. This exciting and inspiring account, however, falls short on important problems concerning the stratigraphic sequencing of houses and graves, lacking the wider contextual picture of Lepenski Vir formed in the context of its local regional history. Also, although very useful for a comprehensive view from the standpoint of large-scale movements, on the theme of the creation/formulation/spread of these two competing narratives across Eurasia, there is almost no mention of the possibilities, mechanisms and ways in w hich ideas and values spread, in the construction of a new grand narrative or worldview at this time. One of the important assumptions put forward in this account is that "...the agricultural revolution may have been an epiphenomenon of deeper changes" (ibid. 3D-
Recendy, two main models of the neolithisation process in Southeast Europe and Europe have emerged which strongly dominate current debate. The first is motivated by research into the genetic mapping of present-day Europe which, in the opinion of its followers, finds enough evidence in the archaeological record to support the idea of the spread of the Neolithic package' as a quick and smooth process in the form of demic diffusion and population infiltration/ replacement (Ammerman and Caralli-Sforza 1973). A view of the spread of the Indo-European language at this time is one of the most important elements in this model (Renfrew 1987; for the most tiff-dated views., with a strong emphasis on the necessity for a consensus on this issue, see the proceedings of
the round table The Neolithic Transition in Eurofte: looking Back - Looking Forward held in Venice, 29-31 October 1998). A second model, partially standing in opposition to the first, and mainly promoted by Marek Zvelebil. has become known as the •availability model" (Zvelebil 1986). This model allows a certain degree of colonisation for Southeast Europe and the necessity for the adoption of farming. w ith a high level of materials and information available among foragers and farmers, together with the establishing of new breeding networks (Zvelebil 1994/19951.116-120). However, one of the most important points is that local populations, i.e. foragers. took an active part in this process, in contrast to the view of demic diffusionists that the change w as largely introduced/diffused by the spread of farming communities. The availability model transposes the idea of existing frontiers betw een foragers and farmers in other parts of Europe and their coexistence for certain periods of time, and suggests that it is possible to see the same kind of process in the Danube Gorges (ibid. 119-120). This is also close to the idea suggested by Radovanovic (1996b). Although this kind of nunlel might work in some other parts of Europe, it is not necessarily applicable to Southeast European contexts. It seems that the scale of the whole process is lost again. Created entities have become foragers and farmers, with clear-cut boundaries between the two. It does not appear so easy to qualify the first Neolithic communities across the Balkans with such a loose designation its farmers', as I shall try to show later. On the other hand, it is not clear why we would assume that the foragers of the Danube Gorges, or any other region for that matter. might have viewed themselves or been viewed as "culturally and economically inferior to farmers" (Zvelebil 1994[19951.116).
It seems that both predominant models attempt some sort of uniform and often straightforw ard explanation of changes, probably spending too much time on the grand scale. Hence the recurrent problem of running into the senseless side of history ' (Ricoeur 1984.131, following Whitehead), where large-scale historical phenomena and social processes exist on an abstract scale loo distant from the acts of individuals and single events. At the same time, these models clearly show our main metanarrative fascinations here: talk of origins, continuities and identities, with a slightly different emphasis.
Yet another recent view of the beginnings of the Neolithic in Southeast Europe, which also concerns the Danube Gorges region to some extent, is pre-
46
Places thai created t.-ne in the Danubo Gorges and beytxvj, c 9000-5500 BC
sented by Alasdair W hittle (1996: 1998). In this account there is an important shift from some well-rooted conceptual frameworks towards a decon-struction of the most common assumptions of the Neolithic metanarrative, such as the beginnings of sedentary life and farming, and towards understanding what the whole change was about. Also, Whittle allows a much greater role in the neolithi-sation process to local forager groups. For the Danube Gorges region he places an important emphasis on the correct sequencing of phases represented in the settlement record of the region (Whittle 1996. 24-29. 44-46). Writing of the Mesolithic-Neolithic dichotomy in other European contexts he interestingly advances the assumption that the difference may be more apparent than real" (ibid 196).
These are only some of the previous perspectives on the Gorges sites that receive some response in the following discussion. My intention now is to go beyond them, inevitably challenging their validity along the way.
There are four points that deserve particular attention here. Firstly, as the problem of architectural phasing and pottery association at Lepenski Vir remains unsolved, it is still unclear how this site should be designated: belonging to pure' hunter-gatherers, with no pottery, as suggested by some, or in contrast, there is the possibility that the abundant material culture with Early Neolithic attributes is associated with most of the classic' trapezoidal houses. Secondly, the quantities of pottery found at the Padlna site are enormous, clearly associated with dugouts, creating the same trapezoidal house floors and hearth constructions as can be seen at Lepenski Vir. This situation greatly obscures the previously mentioned interpretation of the pottery at these sites as originating through an exchange pro-
cess (Voytek and Tringhatn 1989). or the idea that the first pottery could have been a prestige item (Radovanotic I996a.43). Thirdly, these architectural features are often instantly equated and used is proof of the presence of sedentary hunter-gather-fishers. thus completely neglecting the necessity for a clear evaluation of the many phises represented in the long tern! build-up of these settlements and their features. In fact, older features such is stone and some rectangular hearth constructions and grav es were probably used and recognised' in various activities during later phases. Lastly, a lack of radiocarbon dates greatly obscures any diachronic resolution of our scale in connection to phasing particular features at these sites,
SETTLEMENT RECORD: STORIES OF LEPENSKI MR AND PADINA
In several accounts the excavator of Lepenski Mr reported the appearance of pottery in association with Lepenski Vir I and II phase buildings (Fig. 5), interpreting pottery here as intrusions from the upper Early Neolithic layer. Thus, fragments of monochrome pottery were reported between some house floors of superimposed buildings (e.g. buildings and 36 or 23 and IS) (Srejovic I968c.86:1969.153). These floors at Lepenski Vir were made of a special kind of hard limestone plister, with a thin burnished surface coat, varying from red to white, w hich exhibited a high degree of hardness and calcification with organic residues such is bones (cf. Sey 1971). Although it is may he said that in a few instances some kinds of intrusion might have appeared, it is interesting to note Srejovic's opinion that "only" 15 houses of Lepenski Vir phises Ic, Id. Ie and II, representing Mesolithic lev els in his div ision, "contained some sherds of monochrome w are" (Srejovic 1968a.
Fig. 5. lepenski Mr III. excavated houses (photo: Centre for Archaeological Research, Belgrade).
47
DuSan Boric
24): these are houses 1.4,15.16,19, 20. 24, 26, 28, 32,35.37.46.47 and 5-» (Srejovic 1969a. 153). Also, larger fragments of the bases and walls of semi-globular bowls were found in the front of houses of Le-penski Vir, namely in buildings 19, 24 and 47 (ibid. 154). The same kind of pattern of spatial distribution of whole pots appears as found in some of the houses at the Padina site (houses 7,15 or 18, Sector III) (Joianovic 1969bJ0; 1987). In Srejovic s opinion these whole pots at the rear of houses at Lepen-ski Vir belong to layer llla-b. i.e. Early Neolithic settlement. and are not connected to the trapezoidal houses as at Padina.
To try to clarify this possibly confusing account I shall primarily refer to finds from the site of Padina. wliich in this context appear strikingly important. Also, at Padina it is possible to better understand how building activity was organised in the first place, i.e. in what way the loess slope of the cove in Sector III was approached in building classic houses. This important site contains four different sectors (i.e. coves created by the Danube's activity) divided only by bedrock ridges. It seems that excavated deposits from these coves, for general orientation, contain very early and also the latest deposits of the Danube Gorges sequence. But I shall return later to a more detailed stratigraphic sequence of different coves at this site. For the moment I shall concentrate on Sector III of Padina (Fig. 6), where the same kind
of architecture and similarly organised settlement deposits as at Lepenski Vir were excavated. For the moment the most importance difference is that the smaller number of houses and floors at Padina are made of a less durable hard coating of burnt earth.
However, a number of features, such as the placement of floors in trapezoidal houses on the same kind of geologically formed loess sandy surface [Brii-nnacker 1971; Shtrkovic-Marjanovic 1979.14. see above), their proximity (2 hours walking distance along the Danube), the basic shape of the houses, the position of hearths, and elements of hearth constructions, are all overwhelmingly similar to Lepenski Vir. Also, the series of absolute dates from these two sites (see Radovaumic 1996a359-360; Gob 1990.196-198; Gróningen Database: Bonsalietal. 1996:1997) which gave consistently corresponding results in dating the charcoal from hearth constructions and timber found on the floors of the houses (see Fig. 7) confirms the contemporary coexistence of these two sites. It is reasonable to expect that a full publication of stratigraphic contexts and all finds from the site of Lepenski Vir, reportedly including over 200000 Early Neolithic potsherds (SrejoiHc 1969a. 166) with their exact location, would surely make the whole issue clearer. However, growing arguments concerning the nature of this important site and the whole phenomenon speak of a need to clarify the problem now.
Podno - sek»Of 1
a AMflOkrrt.
\ WTHFH C0 ra lITOlr ÍJf*J 11
iram*< cm nano* »• W OÄ'äMxt-acaiwr n>*( tMIlU MiyaiHl^Oqwc IM?'	nAM «É	0
««It-X KM>U MrniM mfi Qn'm	i.'-.jw *«*	^^^^	^^^^
Fig. 6. Man of settlement at Sector III of Padina - location of the stone construction of the necropolis and trapezoidal houses (redrawn by. D. Boric and V. Sovakovic according to an original plan courtesy ofB. Joianovic).
48
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 7. lepenski Mr-plan of settlement uith locations ami provenience of radiocarbon dates from and beneath house floors (adopted after Srejovic 1969c.pian).
Lepenski Vit I
•VMC «ax&toofip
ÊrftSô B6BÛT
► 6« MOfeiOC tx-
sm jh ««athittnp
vn cnoroa Un to i»^
troocQWiOMl
jcj- 'a«rortotc
ttfKttfi

46
d\ /A at
. * ' 56 . A >
45 mjoe^K
•/V-n,	......................W?	^

r 19«» eeUcMui

,4 % r.
'to
_	n 'Xtc
fc>*4J .niOctOCCB
.y s . j^t
*< v \ r. I
*4SltlMCO KMXOM
ikiLac* âjn>1W2Ml

Mn «MûtlBlv
fc'M TZntltXOO 1 Hi
; )XQ:'14tO Mi .-VEOiUIMto'ftiWf
danube
a I'M«
to' M' MO.I0C*

As I will try to show below, the whole issue can be contextualized through a comparison between similar features at Padina and Lepenski Vir. xs well as other sites in the Gorges, that might yield some convincing clues for our reasoning2. Despite certain (important) differences created by their respective life stories, these two sites share all the main characteristics of this specific development in the Gorges.
Pottery and architecture
To begin with pottery, most often the key artefactu-al issue in debates over Mesolithic-Neolithic labeling. I have already indicated that at Padina the excavator reported a stratigraphie connection between classic houses with trapezoidal plans and Early Neolithic
pottery . It seems crucial to attend to some of the features reported by the excavator and to attempt an explanation of some of the ambiguities that also ap pear here in interpreting the stratigraphic sequence.
The phase represented by trapezoidal buildings and elaborate hearth constructions is represented at sectors I and III. which is reported by the excavator to have a clear association of pottery with hearths and house floors (Joianovic 1968a, 1968b J. 111. Fig. 4; 1969a: 1969b.T. X, Figs. 1-2, XII, Fig. 3: 1971; 1974a, 1974b, 1987.Fig. 6-8). Complete pots found in situ on the floor and inside the hearth construction on the plan and photographs of House 18 (Figs. 8.9). together with numerous potsherds, are hard to explain xs intrusions from an upper "unrecognised"'
1 Behind the official scene, preparations for publishing the site of Padina an- under way and the current author is also involved in this project. At the same time my insight into some of the finds from Lepenski Vir enable me to talk about it from a perspective that goes closer to very details of things It is still dy namic issue in deciding how the publication of Padina would look like (even concerning the choice of authors) and in w hat way and especially who would take over the full publishing of Lepenski Vir. These dynamics and decisions are in die core of arguments of two main factual and inseparably interpretative presentations already mentioned above that have been offered in Serbian archaeology concerning this topic The core of this long lasting debate are argu ments of diffuison i.e. autochthonous developments But the whole debate is far from straightforward and for the full discussion see Boric in preparation There is a great interest among archaeologists in Serbia and in the wider context of European archaeological audience for presentation of the data. In this way. publishing of this paper is another intentional programmatic step in try ing to overcome the confusing points of the debate to a certain extent. By doing this it is possible that many new rifts in relations of participants in the debate would ap|K-ar And It might be one of the reasons that this kind of remark still finds its place only in die footnote of this text.
49
DuSan Boric
Fig. House 18, in situ pottery al Padina, sector Hi Rafter Jovanovic 1969b.T. \. Fig. 1-2/
layer (contra Telenbach 1983), Also, in the course of a recent analysis of pottery from the Padina site it has become clear that the large number of complete Early Neolithic pots and potsherd fragments is clearly associated with architectural features, and represented in quantities equal to those as at any other Early Neolithic site in the Balkans3.
To properly understand these associations it is necessary to refer to the stratigraphic relation of houses on this slope of Sector III. as well as to move from a misleading two-dimensional representation of house plans. Thus, from Padina's published sec-
tions {Jovanovic 1969. T. VIII, Figs. 1-2), in contrast to those from Lepenski Vir (cf. Srejoiic 1969a. 1972. Fig. 6). it is possible to see clearly the level from which the houses were dug up to 1.5 m into the slope (Jovanovic 1969b. 28) of a loess sandy deposit which was formed on the bedrock that slopes towards the Danube. In photographs of a cross section of Houses 11/1 > (superimposed building floors). 13 and 14 shown here (Fig. 10). as well as in the section draw ing of House 12 (Fig. 11) (ibid. T. VII, Fig. 2: T. VII/, Figs. 1-2). one can easily follow the line of a cut made into the slope, and distinguish between the culture layer infill of cuts and the sterile soil on
tig. 9. House 18. in situ pottery inside the hearth construction at Padiiui, sector III (courtesy of ft. Jovanovic).
S During June '998, pottery from Padina wxs analysed and draw n and has been currently prepared for publishing h\ Dr. Borislav Jovanovic. My participation In this analysis enables me to get a close insight into the variety of quantities, shapes and ornamentation represented at the site.
50
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 10. Middle rttir of Houses at Sector III. Padina irilh a section running across Houses 11/12, 13 and 14 showing the level from which the houses irere dug into the slope (after Jovanovic 1969b. T. VII. Fig. 2).
each side of the cut. Also, the house floors that were furnished at the bottoms of these culs w ith a central hearth construction correspond to the location of the cut visible on the section. Also, the difference in height between the floors of houses, here placed in three different rows, w as created as a consequence of digging into the slope at different heights (ibid. 29). It is obvious that this kind of digging of levelled areas into die slope could have been one of the main reasons for the formation of trapezoidal shaped house plans in the first place, as has been already indicated (ibid. 27). It is possible, however, that this is not the only reason, but there will be more suggestions concerning this later.
Bearing in mind all the similarities between Padina and Lepenski Yir, it is possible to suggest that, al-
though at die moment without adequately published section drawings, and in a way misleadingly presented terraces with house floors of the settlement (Fig. 5) (which was done by stripping off the cuts' sides: the same happened to the lowermost row of houses at the beginning of the Padina excavations, fortunately with well-documented sections), the same kind of building procedure was practised here. This is of crucial importance, since the infillings of houses representing occupational activity debris from the house itself and (probably after the abandonment phase) neighboring contemporary houses appear differendy excavated at the two sites and not differently deposited. Also, this might explain the excavator's remark that very few finds were unearthed betw een the houses at Lepenski Vir (Srepvic 1969a). On the other hand, the architectural features of the
Fig. 11. House 12, section. Ptutina, sector III (after Jovanovic l%9b. T. VIII, Fig. 1-2).
51
Duian Boric
Lepenski Vir III layer have been reported as being very scant, and no plan of this layer, showing the reported pits, has been published to enable an evaluation of the position of Early Neolithic pits in connection with the limestone house floors. So it seems that there are a few indications that the layer termed Lepenski Vir III. with subphases a and b. was at lexst in part misleadingly created by the excavator from the occupational infillings of the houses in Lepenski Vir I and II. Rather than looking for another explanation and the possibility that the floors of the building were created at this site in a way totally different from at Padina, 1 would suggest that the same practice of horizontally levelling spaces for floors by digging into the slope, created pit-dwellings at Lepenski Vir, as at Padina, that were subsequently elaborated with subsequently famous limestone plastered floors and hearth constructions.
Suggesting this different understanding of major stratigraphic features at Lepenski Vir. it is necessary to understand in w hat w ay the two sites correspond in portable material culture and, more importantly, what the stratigraphic and architectural associations of different classes of artifacts at these two sites are.
The pottery found at Padina has already been described as being associated with the houses, and I have also described the ambiguities concerning Early Neolithic pottery associations at Lepenski Vir. One almost metaphorical piece of evidence appeared in association with the animal bone assemblage at Le-
penski Vir4. In the context of the floor level of House 28 (Lepenski Vir Ib-c phase according to Srejocic 1969a), from the floor of this house, a large piece of sediment lying on the floor contained the calcified upper jaw of a red deer w hose antlers were also lying on the floor of the house. At the time of the excavation this piece was removed and packed in a bag, ending up in the boxes with sorted animal bones. Between the teeth and the chopped piece of floor was a very firmly embedded fragment of Early Neolithic (StarCevo culture) monochrome pottery. Also, among animal bones from other contextual units (some of them representing "closed" contexts of deposits between superimposed house floors) (Fig. 12), isolated fragments of Early Neolithic monochrome pottery also appear as a product of occasional mistakes in sorting finds from these uniLs. reinforcing the argument about the presence of pottery in these units too.
This find, although presented here as an isolated instance, is significant for proving that the Early Neolithic pottery was directly associated with the floors, i.e. with the buildings of Lepenski Vir I—II and any activities there. For the time being, it is impossible to suggest to what extent and in what variety this pottery was associated with the respective buildings and phases, at lexst not before the full publication of the pottery assemblage. However, it is almost certain that it resembles the pattern seen at Padina. As to the Padina pottery assemblage (Jovanovic imb.T. 1V/1-4; J969bJJ, T.XVl/Figs. 1-4; 1974a.
Fig. 12. House IS - this house uas superimposed by House 2.1 ill its rear part, lepenski Vir (photo: Centre for Archaeological Research. Keograd).
4 The preserved animal bones from this site »ill he analyzed by Dr. Vesna Dimitrijevic. Reported context was examined during WIS HC samples' collection in the National Museum of Serbia, Belgrade. July 1999. that was permitted by the c urator Mrs L|uhinka Babovic.
52
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. J; 1974b.35-39, 77-/1; l987.Figs.8-l2: also see note 3)- the Early Neolithic pottery assemblage examined appears to consist of a large number of possibly locally made pots, some of w hich are receptacles with large open mouths, standing on low pedestals (Jovanovic 197-tb.T.UF). interpreted so far as preparing/serving dishes for large species of fish, such as catfish or anadromous fish. These forms were also found at llajducka Vodenica (ibid T.UI/1-6) and some other Early Neolithic sites along the Danube. such as Donja Branjevina (Karmanski ¡968.3. 22. Fig. I) and also in large numbers at Lepenski Vir, interpreted here as primarily serving sacrificial purposes (Srejoric 19681).Fig.I.'10; l%9a.Fig.70; 1972. Fig. 72, 86). Some from the varieties of vessels found at Padina also have traces of intense firing, Ilie quality of pottery varies from \ery crude w ith thick w alls, to fine pottery of thin w alls, frequently burnished with a red slip over the inner and/or outer surface. Hie temper of most of the potsherds is also full of organic-chaff inclusions, w hich is the main common characteristic of pottery technology in almost all Early Neolithic assemblages in the central Balkans.
Flint assemblages
But it is not only pottery that is an Early Neolithic feature associated with classic' houses. The striking distribution across the Balkans of one kind of flint raw material at this time is of some importance here. So-called Balkan flint, also termed yellow-spotted flint, is the most abundant raw material at all sites with the material culture of the Starcevo-Koros-Cris-Karanovo complex of the tarly Neolithic in the central and northern Balkans (cf. Voytek /987). The inevitable associations of artefacts with this type of raw material were reported at Padina. associated here with the dug-outs in Sectors I and III. Some major technological and typological characteristics of artefacts made from this kind of raw material include a pronounced trend tow ards the familiarisation of blades. Although a clear picture of the source of this raw material is still lacking, there are some indications that certain regions of north east Bulgaria (ibid.), such as Surnen, are the most probable locations for its origin (Dinan 1996b. 19). The uniformity of distribution of this kind of raw material across the Balkans at these times is striking at almost all Early Neolithic sites with reported lithic assemblages. and it is possible to envisage several models of its acquisition and distribution.
Regarding the Padina site, one find provides an important clue to the use of this material, i.e. to the
participation of the site's inhabitants in w ider regional networks. It is a nodule with a large chalk cortex that could be refitted with a retouched piece of blade found together in the same context at Sector I of this site (Fig. 13). Such a large nodule and the possibility of refitting could serve as an example showing that a large number of nodules and cores of this raw material could have been acquired from the primary contexts, perhaps as a river pebble, (which is indicated by the presence of cortex on the surface of this nodule), and brought to the site from a long distance. One site for the production of certain artefacts, such as this retouched blade, w as Sector I, next to architectural features such as hearths and houses. Everything indicates that this kind of raw material and the typologically specific artefacts made from it represent an inseparable contextual unity of material culture associations with Early Neolithic Starčevo pottery and features such is dug-in houses with trapezoidal plans.
This fact is again important in regard to the lithic assemblage of Lepenski Vir. The published report on the lithic assemblage from this site indicates that the previously mentioned ambiguities of stratigraphic relations of classic buildings and artefacts attributed to the Mesolithic or Neolithic become clear even in the presented report. Thus, among the raw materials there is a considerable increase in the use of Balkan/yellow-spotted flint and ga'y radiolarite its compared to the Vlasac site (Kozlouski and Kozlouski 1983.261). Also, some of the artefacts made from these raw materials were obviously found associated with the architectural features of Lepenski Vir ■—II (ibid, appendix I). These artefacts show some of the indicated techno-ty pological trends in the production sequence, such as the pronounced laminar-ization of blades, again if compared to V lasac (ibid. 265). and the occurrence of larger retouched artefacts, mainly on the Balkan flint (ibid. 267, Fig. // 14-15, Fig. 3/1-3, 7). In the presented report on the chipped stone industry at this site, the authors studied only well-stratified artefacts, assigning them to major phases (Lepenski Vir I-III). However, in the published form it is impossible to follow their exact stratigraphic location. It is important that a large number of artefacts and debitage. mainly of local flint and with flake-based technological characteristics. are found here too which are also typologically comparable to the earlier sequence (termed Epi-Pa-laeolithic, Mesolithic) in the Gorges. Presently, it is possible to assume that these finds are mostly connected with the deposits mainly underneath the house floors, or in connection w ith stone construc-
53
Dutan Bone
Fig. l.i. Nodule refilled uith a retouched blade made of Halkan yellow-spotted flint found til Sector I. Pa-dina (drawing and photo: D. Boric).
lions that possibly represent older occupational zones at this site comparable to the lowermost levels of occupation at Sector II of Padina (sec below). An absence of information on stratigraphie associations of this assemblage hampers clear contextual insights. The reported increase of artifacts made of Balkan Hint that come not only from the deposits of Lepenski Vir III layer, but also from Lepenski Vir layers I and II, in view of the above proposed nature of a certain number of these deposits, could favour this explanation. It is worth mentioning that two hoards (Hoards 3 and 4) of blanks and cores made from the Balkan flint at this site were placed in Early Neolithic pots (Srejovic 1969.T. 95; 1972.Fig. #2-83).
Ground polished axes
Yet another class of artifacts is of interest here: ground polished stone axes and other ground stone artifacts. A number of axes at Padina were found on the floors and inside the hearth constructions, as well as underneath house floors (Padina. field documentation). Some of the designs and raw materials are also found in abundance at Early Neolithic sites
in the central Balkans. A large number of finds of this kind are also found in various deposits of Lepenski Vir (Srejovic 1972.Fig 76-77): however, with scant publishing of the contextual position of stone axes from this site, it is hard to determine the exact context or suggest any particular conclusion.
An inevitable question is how it was possible that this kind of misreading of stratigraphic relations and material culture associations in the case of Lepenski Vir happened. There are probably several explanations; I w ill try to summarise the main points by con-textualizing the excavations at Lepenski Vir (see Boric in preparation). The first point is that these rescue excavations were done in a great hurry , immediately before the whole area along the Danube was submerged up to 30 m, and that the sequence of settlement evidence turned out to be surprisingly complex. Secondly, the discovery of sculpted boulders. some w ith astonishing caned representations of human-fish faces and rich ornamental diversity, together with the discovery of specially built house floors and hearth constructions that had never been reported in European prehistory before, all caused a sensation on a scale never experienced until that time. This inevitably leads to the third point, that of the personality of the excavator himself, and the professional dynamics that appeared in Serbian archaeology between some of the archaeologists involved and between the main archaeological insti-
54
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
unions. All these factors played certain roles in Lepenski Yir's presentation. However, it is necessary to underline that one of the greatest accomplishments of Srejovic was his recognition that the sequence at this site has deep roots in the past which are connected to certain features, as w ill be shown below. On the other hand, to the excavator of Padina. Jova-novic. we owe a debt for the possibility of a detailed understanding of the complex stratigraphic history of the site he excavated, and for the possibility of view ing the Lepenski Vir sequence in retrospect by a comparison of the two sites.
To summarise the stories of the two sites, it is important to underline that amounts of pottery and other described Early Neolithic paraphernalia found at the site of Padina indicate that it might be misleading to understand them as prestige or imported artifacts, for the simple reason that the whole variety of forms are present in amounts similar to any other site of the Early Neolithic in the central Balkans. However, this is not the only reason. In the exposition of the stratigraphic sequences and artifact associations I have tried to argue that it is necessary to fully contextualise all finds in order to make an interpretation (cf Hodder 1991; 1999). Apart from die insights to he achieved on the scale of longue duree, with unquestionable metanarrative importance. it is important to emphasize that a particular awareness of contextual associations should lead to a thick description" (Geertz 1973119931-6) of time-specific deposits, with the idea of the singularity and specificity of events.
The kind of immediacies reported here demand an urgent reexamination of probably all the houses/ shrines of Lepenski Vir, and of their role, dating, wider context and significance in relation to issues raised in numerous debates. It is also time to reevaluate thinking on the claims that a process of increasing sedentisni was initiated by so-called "increasingly complex hunter-gatherer" groups, and that the houses of Lepenski Vir clearly serve as a proof of this, having in mind their elaboration and durable architectural elements. It seems that we should expect nothing to be that straightforward. Primacy of proper phasing has turned out to be of great importance in making a coherent story out of the excavated record. The outline of the sequence that has been proposed could partially indicate a different and new understanding of the upper sequence in the Gorges. But I need to go deeper, beneath the floors of the houses, all the way to the bedrock, to understand the time when these places were created.
THE BEGINNINGS OF DEATH
1 have written above of doubts over the models constructed so far to interpret and understand the sequence of the Danube Gorges region. I tried to show that this is inseparable from the necessity of clearing up some of the confusing details intertwined with the way our data have been collected, presented, etc. Also. I put forward the assumption that we must re-read the archaeological reports from the sites discussed. These details appear crucial for understanding the question of the origins of the Neolithic in the central Balkans and Southeast Europe. This means diat the sequence and architectural associations suggested above should set the stage for the proper connection of well-known architectural features from Lepenski Vir and portable material culture, contextualising its identity through w ider regional connections. However. Lepenski Vir in isolation gives neither a full insight into the complexity of the record in the Gorges, nor into the well-known features of trapezoidal plan dug-out houses, and the boulders placed in connection to the central location of hearths make the only significant features here. Thus far in my discussion 1 have not gone beneath the house floors much, or entered the space outside the houses at these sites. Still obsessed with the durable character of floors and w ith the scene set by the placement of features and material forms over them. Now I need to draw closer to the individuals who set this scene and also to their forbears, going deep into time.
Who were these people in the Danube Gorges? Where were their identities anchored? What was their ideological framework, speaking of ideology- as of the everyday action of individuals and the creation and realisation of their social reality, as of a system with its own logic and rigor of representation through myths, images etc.. inseparable from existence, and a historical role (Duby 1974 cited by Ricoeur 1984.110): as a worldview of people involved in practical habitual activities (Bourdieu 1977) in their own time/space context? Questions about the identity of the men, women and children who dwelt in the Gorges have already been posed primarily to determine if they were immigrants, an outcome of the process of adv ance, or if they w ere autochthonous elements surviving in the unapproachable area of the Gorges. An anthropological argument has often been used which frequently refers to so-called Cromagnoid-robust' elements vs. gracile' Mediterranean ty pes (cf. Jovanovic 1975: Srejovic 1969b. 17: Zivanoiic 1975; 1976; 1979;
55
Dušan Bone
etc.). An alternative perspective that physical anthropology may offer in this context is connected to the examination of signs of occupational stress left on human bones by people's participation in various everyday activ ities Bridges 1989). Thus it is practical, everyday activities that particularly shape the morphology of a human body and have a great impact on what the features of the body, such as bones and teeth are like, assigning to them, crudely speaking, robust or gracile characteristics (see also Zoffmann 1980.1.i2-I33) But I will not enter into that debate here. First. I need to phase the indiv idual bodies buried at the sites in the Danube Gorges and discuss the possible meanings of their placement. It is also necessary to know how recognizable they were to later inhabitants of these sites.
Although the phasing of the sites has been established for some time (e.g., Srejovič 1969a: ¡972: Jovanovic 1987) and has been re-defined recently (Radovanovic 1992. 1996a), it appears that is necessary to rev iew the stratigraphy and chronological attributions of certain contexts. It seems that insufficient attention has been focused on clearly establishing the older features and zones in the settlements of Padina, Lepenski Vir, or Hajdučka Vodenica (another site further dow nstream in one of the most dramatic and mysterious parts of the Danube Gorges, even today), representing sites where contrasting interpretations appeared in connection with the presence of Early Neolithic material culture. Given the stratigraphie relation of the classic buildings to older zones in the settlements, lack of careful recognition of older features in correct relation
to later contexts could have been the main point of confusion in the attribution of artefacts to particular units. It has often been overlooked that a very considerable lime depth should be envisaged in the remains of these settlements. With this in mind, it is important to focus primarily on features that were, in the course of excavations ai Padina (Fig. 14) and Hajducka Yodenica (Fig. 15) dubbed the "stone construction of the necropolis" |Jovanovic I969I)JI-32. T. XIII. Fig. 3. T. XIV, Fig. /. 1969c. T. XX/X/3-4: I972.T. I/I, 11/1-3, 1974.Fig. 1; 1984) (these sites were dug by the same excavator). At both sites these features were neatly made in a dry-wall technique (and excavated as) built from stones in a manner that gives an impression of organised architectural intent There were four lev els of stones laid in this way at both sites; every layer of stones was cov ered with a layer of soil above which followed another level of stones that remarkably followed the exact outline of the first to be laid down (B. Jovanovic, personal communication). Graves are associated with these stone constructions.
At HajduCka Yodenica stone constructions are situated beside an area where there was a grave with a number of others in an extended position underneath. and in association with specific rectangular hearths (Jovanovic 1984.307 si/ ). Also in this area w ere hearths made of circles of stone blocks cov ered w ith sev eral lev els of stone constructions and placed on different levels. The excavator also notes the remains of burning, and smaller circles of piled stones in this area (Fig. 15). Only in upper parts (horizons I and II) of the constructions, were Early Neolithic
Fig. 14. 'Stone construction of the necropolis '. sector III, Padina (af 1er Jovanovic 1974.T. V, Fig. 1/
56
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 15. Stone construction of the necropolisHa} dučka Vodenica (courtesy of B.Joranoric).
(Starčevo culture) pottery fragments detected {ibid. 309-310). This might suggest the use of these features in later periods. It is possible to envisage long-term continuity of use of these places, where later inhabitants in their practices - with both profane and ritual associations - find the use of tradition, through its constant changing elaboration, a useful and fruitful exercise in coping with the needs of a new world.
But could w e properly envisage the scale of change? The scale on which archaeologists operate varies from capturing single events to reconstructing continuities, etc. However, instances described speak of places where a constant and enduring practice of (re)building stone constructions captures a very long time span, where even the introduction of new material objects, such as pottery, in great amounts, probably only introduces new possibilities for old/ new metaphorical and symbolic reference points and their further elaboration.
Some dated graves from Padina give results that put the absolute age of the human remains associated with the stone construction at the end of the 10th millennium cal BC (Burleigh and Živanoric 1980. table I). I shall turn later to this point to capture the absolute dates in the context of the mortuary space and individual bodies.
The few chipped stone artifacts found associated with these constructions, especially since local raw-
materials were used for their manufacture, could also point to an early date for these constructions (Radovanovic 1981.26). At the same time the first occupation at sector II of Padina clearly belongs to what might be chronologically termed the Mesoli-thic, in the stratigraphy of this cove, at Padina represented by a black earth layer that covers the bed rock of this sector at Padina. and with no pottery. The chipped stone assemblage from this layer (Ra-dovanoiic 1981) and also bone tools (Boric in preparation) (Fig. 16)5 are akin to the early developments in this region unambiguously seen in the chipped stone and bone industries and stratigraphies of Vlasac (Kozlouski and Kozlowski 1982), or in the early levels of Cuina Turcului (Nalbanl 1970: Paunescu 1970:1978: Dinan 1996b). Icoana (Boroneant 1970; 1973). Schela Cladovei (Boro-tieanl 1970; 1973; Boronenat et at. 1999). Ostrovul Corbului (Mogosanu 1978; Paunescu 1990; 1996). Baile Herculane (xs an important inland cave site) (A;coldesat-Plopsor et al. 1957; Dinan 1996a) and other sites on the Rumanian left bank of the Danube. Also, some bone tools bear traces of a specific incised net design or zigzag continuous lines resembling examples from the Vlasac site (Srejovic and Mica 1979) and some other sites in the Gorges.
At some of these sites burials are mostly associated with two types of feature. The first are rectangular hearths in the open air made of stone slabs, where burials cluster around a hearth or a hearth was placed over the graves (Fig. 17) (for Vlasac Srejovic and Letica ¡978.passim; for Hajducka Vodenica: Jo-vanovic 1966.Fig.l/2; 1972. T. 114; for Schela Cladovei: Boronenat 1970.Fig3/l; Boroneant et al. 1999; for Ostrov ul Corbului: Paunesat 1990; 1996; see also Radovanovic 1996a). The second kind of feature connected to burials are stone constructions found in large numbers and well recognised at Ma-sac (Srejovic and Letica 1987).
That the stone construction of the necropolis is found on Padina at Sector III. where most of the later classic phase buildings also appear, deserv es particular attention. A closer examination of the burials that are connected with the stone construction. reveals that the skeletons of the two elderly
5 Most of tilt' tools from Padina were analysed and published by I. Radovanovic (/iW/). The artefacts presented here (Fig. 16) were additionally uncovered in the course of (re)anahsis of the animal bone assemblage from (he site of Padina. done by paleontologist Dr Yesna DimitrijevK and myself. This contextual unit with lithics, animal bones and bone tools could be presented as a characteristic example of the activity spaces in the lowermost levels at Sector II of the site of Padina generally attributed to the Early Mesolithic sequence for the wider region according to the radiocarbon dates and typological attributes of the studied lithic assenv blage (see quotations in the text).
57
Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
males were placed in a sitting a la turque' position, leaning against the bedrock lacing the Danube (Fig. 18). Some of the bodies were In this position, with crossed legs encased in a conical stone structure up to the skull (Jownoiic 1971.31-32. T. Mil/1. XIV/1: 1972.53, T 1/1). Also, more skeletons were uncovered in this sector mainly in the area of the upper row of houses, in the division proposed by the excavator as the latest level of occupation. However, i-»C analyses gave to a certain extent results contradicting the proposed division (Closoii 1981, Grdnin-gen Database). One of the reasons for this might be that the stone construction already described and well recognised is not the only older feature here. There are two clearly visible rows of stone in front of Houses 15 and 18 (see Fig. 6). These were also connected to the placement of graves around them, next to the houses, and beneath them. The strati-graphic associations of these burials were not established during the excavation with any certainty. It could be that these graves (as already shown to some extent by ambiguities in the >'C) are also older and existed before the houses were built, since "the floors of these houses (...) do not show any noticeable damage or repairs corresponding to the position of the burial pit" (Jovanovic 1972.53; also Jovanovic I969b.3l). More importantly, they also could be connected to the row s of stone in front of these two houses at Padina that probably existed here before the houses were built. If this is so. the building of these houses would somehow be an extension of the stone constructions. Also, the internal chronology of these rows of houses does not require retrieval of building activity from the river up the slope, as suggested by the excavator {Jovanovic 1969b.30; 1987.2-4), but could also have a completely opposite sequence. The new dates will clearly help to sort out some of these dilemmas.
Here also, we arrive again at the inevitable question of how to deal w ith the presumably similar development at Lepenski Vir itself. By analogy to the proposed development at Padina. I would like to suggest that the very close relation of some of the houses and uncovered graves below or beside some of them might be misleading and falsely apparent as represented in some of the published photographs {Srejovic 1969:1972; Radovanovic 1996a. 178 sq). The term condensed stratigraphy, used in geology to describe contexts where layers of different ages lie close to one another, might appear appropriate here. This means that a continuity of use of a certain location over a long period and recognition of older features by later inhabitants could create a
1 i 1 V Ik	t • ,'. .-> v i: .\ \ \ . 1 I ' O i zzm	* ♦ , V » ,-v •, .'iV% • - v . > i jc ' ' t <
•	^ m • rt-fmP. \ f v	. > i V
	f. .* >	
•	¡¿v • " i v ' -'-* . ,	X -%
■	\ ^i."	
	r . . % '	•.
Fig. 17. till Hals no. 51. 52 and the hearths 19, l'Ja at Vtasac (photo: Centre for Archaeological Research. Belgradef.
situation where there was no massive debris accumulation. I w ant to suggest that a certain number of graves beneath the floors of houses at Lepenski Vir belong to the early phases of creation of features at this place, as well as at some other locales along the Danube, and just may be as a phenomenon particularly confined to the right bank of the Danube. Large amounts of stones often regularly forming piles, and found in many instances underneath or beside the famous houses next to the graves and hearths at Lepenski Vir (Fig. 19) Fit the picture also seen at Haj-ducka Vodenica, Ylasac. or Padina. One of the newly acquired AMS dates on skeleton 72 from the site of Ylasac, in two repeated trials, gave a consistent range of 10482-9043 with 2o cal BC (Bonsall el al. 1996; 1997.66. table 6). Despite possible problems with the absorption of old carbon' in human bones thus obscuring the dating and giving an indication of older dates (Bonsall et al. 1997.84), it seems that this finding strongly confirms some of the mentioned points.
And to me it appears that these places created time here. Follow ing up on the ontological significance of
59
DuSan Sort
Fig. 19. House 26 and burial no. 63. iepen-ski Vir (photo: Centre for Archaeological Research. Belgrade).
Fig. 18. Graces 15 and 16. leaning against the bedrock, facing, watching the Danube, Padina. sector III f after Jov anovic I969b.T.XIll, Fig. I).
human existence, in relation to the nature of time that through St Augustine s aporias ( doubts of what to do ) comes down as a three fold present - the past present, the present and the future present -and. also building on Paul Ricoeur s exposition of the dialectic connection of time and narrative through a hiearchised mimesis of creation (Ricoeur 1984. passim), I propose that in the Danube Gorges our sites materialised the memory of the past through constructed stone piles and the placing of human remains, divorcing the continuum of eternity even further from the present, widening the gap of an already existing distentio anima in St. Augustine's words. Significantly, this distentio, i.e. extension of time as an extension of mind, is mirrored in language (see also Thelin 1990) thus confirming the being nature of time (Ricoeur 1984.9), but it is to
be emphxsised that it equally significantly appears through the materiality created by human action, materiality that is real, that endures and resists. A significant ontological dialectics is created between eternity and time, between intentio and distentio.
Support for the significance of this concept is to be found in the recurring ontological theme seen in numerous myths of traditional societies. The theme of the death of humans stands up as marking the beginnings of story telling in the ethnographic record. As if narration became possible along with a comprehension of the concept of death, with facing the Sein zum Tod in Heidegger's words (Heidegger I972.passim). The death of humans created landscape for the Australian Kuri. In connection to the mythological base of many peoples, e.g. the Cree: "...in the Distant Time the landscape acquired its present form. Humans died and were transformed into the animals and plants encountered in the environment and features of the earth, such as hills or mountains." (Tilley 1994. 56). The beginning of death is thus an aw areness of death, and subsequently this awareness creates a myth of temporality, creates time in connection to the landscape, and establishes the time before, making possible a grasping expectation of w hat is to come. It seems that burials serve this purpose in the first place and are unlikely to be territorial markers with the idea of formal disposal areas. The recurrent motif is the death of humans, which was crucial for establishing temporal relations. Therefore, the dead first became sedentary (Chapman 1992.81). The bodies of those two elderly males at Padina that were leant against the bed-
60

Places that created time in ttve Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 20. Burial no. 17, Ylasac (photo: Centre for Archaeological Research. Belgrade).
rock facing/watching the Danube are directly engaged with the bedrock, the forest, the Danube, and with the piled stones. The very materiality of their endurance, still strongly underlined by the piled stones, created and emphasised space for the existence of human time w hich, in St. Augustine's words, enabled expectation, attention and memory as the actions that the mind performs (Ricoeur 1984.19).
But nothing is simple again. The burial sequence in the Danube Gorges is rich and varied (see Radova-novic 1996a. ¡64-224). Radovanovic (1997) gave a particular meaning to a certain number of burials placed in the extended position, with their heads pointing downstream, parallel to the course of the Danube. In her opinion, this could hav e symbolised the notion of souls going down the river. The true meaning of this practice is grasped in connection with the existence of the large anadromous beluga (Huso huso) in the Danube that swam upstream every spring to spawn. In the eyes of people coming to the Danube's shores in later phases of the use of these sites it might have looked as if ancestors were returning every year (ibid ). But some of the places where the major sites are located could have the best 'view' as well, especially of the huge whirlpools. At these places the Danube runs very fast and with strong currents and rapids (Markovic-Maryanoiic 1978.11. 16). Also, the route thus created might have been connected with various rites of passage representing ceremonial stages through which an individual has to pass (cf. Tiller 1999.154-155: also Turner 1967; 1969:1974). And this practice could at the same time mark the stages of the passage of time in connection w ith the practical seasonal activities of fishing and hunting (cf. Bourdieu 1990), thus blurring the distinction between the sacred and profane. In this context it is possible to see the sculpted boulders with fish/human like figural rep-
resentations as these very ancestors materialised in stone (Radovanovic 1997). As to how impressive the whole sight could have been: this species of fish could have been up to 5 m long, as estimated from the remains of the largest specimen from Padina (Brinkhuizen 1986.23. 33, Tig. 8). So, could this he the reason that the two men at Padina, one at Ylasac (Srejovicand Letica 1978) (Fig. 20) and one at Lepenski Vir (Srejoric 1969: 1972. Fig. 52) sit with the crossed legs and watch the Danube, to enjoy the view and follow a rite of passage?
And it is possible that a particular metaphorical relation w as established here that, in the course of the long history of these places, changed its paraphernalia and elaboration - its theatrical performance. That the dead is buried with the head pointing downstream might actually represent a materialised practice of allowing some of the dead to flow down the Danube. Equally, it could be connected to dia-chronic change and/or with the selection of certain individuals, all strongly depending on circumstances in w hich the death took place. However, it is important that only the site of Lepenski Vir was assigned special importance here, with permission' to exhibit the ancestors in sandstone boulders and. again in connection w ith the burials, some of them are already beneath the floors and have stone blocks piled around them. However, other features of the landscape might have given it this special importance as well.
The famous massive and trapezoidal bare porphy ry mountain in front of Lepenski Vir (Fig. 21) is an impressive landmark, even in a photograph. But only a phenomenological experience of this place and its wider landscape could bring out other meanings. This bare mountain, especially in heavy rains, at-
Fig. 21. View of Ml. Treska vac from the terrace above lepenski Vir (photo: I). Boric),
61
Duian Bone
cm
Fig. 22. Close-up of a piece of floor from House 34. lepenski Yir (photo: D. Boric).
tracts lightning strikes (experienced during June 1998), bringing enchanting, powerful and mysterious feelings. At the same time, in the upper Gorges of the Danube, where Lepenski Vir, Vlxsac and Padi-na are situated, this landmark might have appeared as almost ever-present, there forever, at least since the time when these places were created. And there is no contradiction in the fact that the houses at Via-sac, Lepenski Vir and Padina were built to trapezoidal plans for the practical reasons of situating these architectural units on the sides of slopes, and the fact that these houses imitated a mental image of the solid and enduring landscape. And as it is for Ye cuana of Guiana that mountains represent 'the only enduring houses...the dwellings of invisible spirit beings (Riviere 1995.201) it seems that at Lepenski Vir there was an arising need to harden the floor, to announce durability. The floors at Lepenski Vir are literally solid proof of this (Fig. 22). Constructed on a bxse of limestone particles forming a breccia-like feature (Ney 1971), it seems that in the later phase of development in the Gorges they metaphorically replaced features of stone constructions widi the meaning of indicating referential points for the longevity of time. They also mediate "...between the body and cosmos, between the present and the past; and provide a ritual switch point between microcosm and macrocosm on which continued access to ancestral potency depends" (Carsten and Hugh-Jones ¡995 42). It seems that besides those ancestors that annually swam upstream, there was a special realm of spiritual beings of even greater ancestry, although possibly more anonymous than those sitting or lying in connection to the Danube. These were the spirits of mountains that marked the beginnings of time and played a continuous role in the lives of people here.
BEYOND THE CLIFFS
Is it possible now to feel the least comfortable with the above given interpretation of our data in discussing the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition of southeast Europe? The questions in mind, such as. what are, in historical terms the contributions of the local population to the creation of varied Neolithic paraphernalia in the material culture, might he answered here with a greater ease in comparison to the other regions. In the Danube Gorges the appreciation of deep time and its recognition strike us everywhere. But it does not confine these people to the past only, rejecting them as some kind of lost cause, defeated in a battle with new technology. And the striking appearance of all the features that the new world brings to the Danube Gorges only shows once again that this area w as perhaps never isolated from the rest of the world (Fig. 23). There is no reluctance to take up novelties, xs suggested by some authors, only a readiness to participate in yet another New World.
But then, what was actually going on beyond the cliffs of the Gorges? The Early Neolithic of the central Balkans is not without sites where people buried
Fig. 23. View of cliffs above Hajducka Yodenica (photo: D. Boric).
62
Placcs that created lime in the Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
their dead. These are less aggregated, less visible, but present. A map showing only Early Neolithic sites with traces of burials adds to this point (Fig. 24). .VII these sites share what has been argued for as very uniform traits of purely Neolithic populations who, in the opinion of some, spread in an advancing
wave over Southeast Europe. Although clay models of houses appear at some of the sites (e.g.. Carasa-niti et al. 1971.70, Fig. 81-82, 43, Fig. 116). it seems that this development does not immediately associate them with increasing sedentism. But in order to get to know these people better, again going
Fig. 24. Early Seolithtc sites tvilli traces of burials across the central and northern Balkans (drau n by V. Sovakovic). Sites: 1. Cipau. 2. Cluj-Str. .ft), liecembrie, J. Gura Baciului. 4. Soka. 5. Endrod. 6. Szar-vas-Szappanos. 7. Szenies-Jaksorpart. 8 (1-3). Hödmezovasarhel^orza, HiulmezovasarhelyKotacpart-Yalatanya and HödnwzovasarhelyBodzaspart, 9. Maroslele Pana, 10. Oeszk, 11. Balatonendröd. 12. La-nycsok, 13. Yaskt. 14. Bački Monoštor-Opoljenik. 15. Donja Branjevina-Deronje. 16. Bač-Iopole. 17. 11» koiri Tržnica and \aina, 18. Stari Žabalj. 19. ¿abalj-Put. 20. TemerinKlisa, 21. PerlezBatka, 22.Jaša To-mic, 23. AlibuuarBanalska Duhica. 24. YtzicJ,olokut. 25. Sašinci-Kudoš. 26. Runui-Zlutara, 27. Pečinci-Bara Alicija. 28. Obrez Baštine. 29. Yima-Belo Brdo. 30. Pančevo-Sadela 1.31. Starčevo^,rad, 32. Yršac Kozluk. 33■ Divostin. 34. Yisesava-Kremenilo. 35. Obre (l)-Kaskršce. 36. Grivac. 37. Jagodina-Bukot ačka cestna. 38. Rekovac-Tecici, 39. Blagotin-Poljna. 40. Merošina-Kamenjar. 41. Rudnik (Kosmetski), 42. Gra-dešnica-Malopole. 43■ Yaksevo, 44. Sofia-kv. Slatina, 45. Anzabegovo-Bnrulntca. 46. Yrsnik iarinci. 47. Slavonski Brod - Galovo.
63
Duia/i Bouc
Fig. 25. Hie region of Vojvodina before melioration uork (from the larger nuilt of the Carpathian Basin: Museum of Vojvodina).
to the real contexts seems the best point of departure. I shall here try to shed some light on a few contexts through a close-up view of several Early Neolithic burials in the area.
The context of a skeleton found at the site of Golo-kut in the region of Vojvodina of present-day Serbia does not differ from many others found across the region. It is a crouched burial, with no grave offerings. as shown in the published photo (Figs. 2(u, b) (Petrovič 1986-1987.Figs. 7-8). However, reading the report and close first-hand insight on this find reveals a somewhat different story. There is a mention in the published report of an aurochs' head with horncores being associated with the burial (ibid. 19, Fig. 9). However, only later examination of this find provided a clue to the particularities of this association. The lapse of time between the uncovering of the head and the skeleton created the confusion. However, still the calcified palm at the
forehead of the aurochs' skull and the calcified knee in the horncore gave two reference points on the skeleton front which to reconstruct the original positions of the skull and skeleton (Fig. 27). So, the picture that emerged was of an auroch skull placed at top of the body, looking down. This position of looking down of red deer and auroch s skulls in association with the dead appears strikingly similar to some cases of burial at Lepenski Yir (if. Srejovic 1969: 1972. Fig. 61: Srejovic and Babovic 1983). Was there the same Weltanschauung among contemporaneous people in the Gorges and those across the Balkans? Perhaps.
Similarly, various animal bones were placed in the graves at Zlatara (Lekoric 1985). At Perlez, between two bodies w ith grave goods, a large pit was uncovered with an enormous number of animal bones, including dogs, wild horses etc. (National Museum. Zrenjanin. unpublished field documentation). This may indicate feasting or the intentional deposition of these animals in the grave. Yet another example, the placement of the two individuals at Topole-Bac (Trajkovic 1978: 1988), was done deliberately to create a binary meaning in the symmetrical arrangement of the two corpses (Fig. 28). Many other burials show this striking diversity. Yet they also have some similarities and. again, a striking uniformity of ceramic styles and used Balkan flint as raw material.
Traces of Early Neolithic occupation have been found at very different locations, ranging from marshes that have been occasionally flooded in the lowlands of the Carpathian basin (Fig. 25) to cave occupations in the central Balkan region. And yet we have not had enough reliable evidence of continuities with the previous period. I believe that this is partly an outcome of specific survey methodologies to date and many other factors connected to the investigation of the whole region. However, that the evi-
Fig. 26a. b. Grave in pit-duelling 7, C'olokut (photo: courtesy of J. Petrovič).
64
Placcs that created lime in the Danube Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
Fig. 27. limiting of the grave in pit-duelling 7 with the original postHon of the auroch skull. Golokut ^modified after Petrovic 1986 1987. plan 2).
dence of a much deeper past is also present in the material record of what in the Balkans is known as Early Neolithic communities, i.e. the Starčevo-Kdros-Cris-Karanovo culture complex, has not been very clear. In my opinion even some of the points mentioned concerning their mortuary practices indicate long histories and possibly local roots to these new Neolithic communities. The variety of rituals practiced indicate localised beliefs rather than uniformity. One of the above-mentioned double burials at To-pole-Bač (Fig. ¿8) in Vojvodina, however, has the first strong indications that it is possible to connect the first ceramic users at this site with their local forebears. In the course of a recent AMS UC dating project6 one of these two skeletons gave a result that on 2a gave a range of 7300-6800 cal BC. This is the first such date from this region and it certainly shows that strategic sampling could make of absolute dating a powerful interpretative tool. Even more importantly, the age of this skeleton indicates the same practice of relation to ancestral traces seen at Lepenski Vir, Padina or Vlasac. This is not to claim that all the burials from the Early Neolithic sites in the Balkans indicate the existence of older features in the mortuary domain, but it is certainly to be expected that some contexts and artefacts from some of these sites conceal traces of much older occupation. The point that deserves particular attention, however, is that the recognition of the past is asto-
nishing here. as. for example, was particularly demonstrated in the dating of Vlasac burial no. 72, mentioned above.
Fig. 2H. Double burial. Topole-Bac Rafter Traj kovic 1988.99).
6 The results came out of the VMS project for dating Early Neolithic sites of the northern Balkans, directed hy Prof Alasdair % hittle (University of Cardiff M ales) and funded by Natural Environmental Research Council. UK.
Ar OLfOChs tcccuti
tr« odm of me le« hand is calcined to r® torohoad at r® aurochs sujl see tig. 27)
^r - pottery
yellowish tal •,1 daili brown sol I -charcod •tgd bum! «ol
Ä-w«
the let dslol ferrut is colcfed with re rorcae
65
Dudan Bone
As have 1 tried to show in the examples of some of the burials, they could be interpreted as a reflection of myths, religious practices and beliefs w ith roots in a much deeper past. If Richard Breadly (¡998. 24-25) is correct in speaking of Mesolithic burials as almost exclusively containing organic materials as offerings, such as animal bones and bone tools, should I consider some of the burials described above as Mesolithic? I do not know. It seems to me that I cannot use terms such as Mesolithic and Neolithic with the absolute meaning ascribed to them. If used at all. they would have to indicate only a certain historical milieu, trajectories of time. But to distinguish between them on the basis of economies and specific cultural stages does not appear easy or possible.
CONCLUSION
As in the epigraph by Czeslaw Milosz, it seems that only in these general terms is it possible to grasp the spread of new ideas, technologies and ways of doing things. But particularities of how the whole historical process happened are hard to envisage. However. looking into the richness of the material record would be the only way to break out from well-routed concepts that freeze the picture and create a static landscape. Instead, everything is moving, and every time one opens the lid of a dusty box. smelling the soil and moisture, creates the opportunity to participate in the game with a new understanding.
I have tried primarily to focus on the correct sequencing of Mesolithic and Neolithic features in the Danube Gorges and Early Neolithic sites across the Bal kans. This sequencing is crucial for understanding the process of habitation (cf. Ingold 1993) during this period. Only this understanding offers the possibility of a metanarrative understanding of the ori-
gins of the death and creation of the temporal dimension. The metaphoric and symbolic are at the core of this understanding. They could be seen as a way back, opposite to distentio. Metaphorical thought is inseparably connected to the ontological value of human existence (Tilley 1999.51). And dreams and myths bring back a time of w holeness. However, once established, temporal relations acquire ontological weight in connection to places, in connection to a landscape, and layers of materiality at these places pile up proof of the being nature of time. The people of Padina, Lepenski Vir and Vlasac who sit on the bedrock w ith crossed legs and w atch the Danube bring back the idea of a pleasure that once was; they speak of the passage of time. At the same time, their corporeal selves here infinitely strongly erase the culture/nature divide.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I wish to thank Prof. Mihael Budja for accepting my paper at the seminar in Ljubljana and for his great hospitality. Many colleagues influenced writing this paper. I would primarily like to acknowledge those that inspired me to think about the sites in the Danube Gorges and beyond. The experience and ideas of Ivana Radovanovic, Borislav Jovanovic. Dragoslav Srejovic, Ljubinka Babovic and Vladimir Lekovic left direct traces in my thinking. I especially feel great admiration for all their research at these sites for their pioneering work. My friends Elisabetta Starni-ni. Vladimir Novakovif, Sofija Stefanovic and Stephanie Vleece helped in shaping this paper in various ways. 1 want to thank to Barbara Voytek for her helpful comments. I want to thank to Ana for her love, and my family for everything. I am also grateful to Churchill College in Cambridge for granting me a three-year graduate research studentship to finance my research and preparation of this paper.
REFERENCES
ALTHUSSER L. 1971. Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. In L. Althusser (ed.). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays 121-173
AMMERMAN A. J. and CAVALLI-SFORZA L. L. 1973. A population model for the diffusion of early farming in Europe. In C. Renfrew (ed.). The Explanation of Culture Change. Models in Prehistory: 343-357.
BARTOSIEWICZ L.. BONSALL C., BORONEANT V., STALUBRASS S. 1995. Schela Cladovei: a preliminary review of the prehistoric fauna. Mesolithic Miscellany 16(2): 2-19.
BONSALL C.. BORONEANT V., SREJOVIC D. 1996. AMS Radiocarbon Determinations on Human Bone from Lepenski Vir, Vlasac and Schela Cladovei. Mesolithic Miscellany 17(2). 6-10.
66
Placcs that created lime in the Danube 
Gorges and beyond, c 9000-5500 BC
BOMSALL C, LENNON R.. MCSWEENEY K.. STEWART C HARKNESS D.. BORONEANT Y. BARTOSIEWICZ L.. PAYTON R. and CHAPMAN J. 1997. Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in the Iron Gales: a palaeodietary perspective./tw/nw/ of. European Archaeology 5f I): 50-92.
BORIC I), in preparation. Mesolithic - Neolithic time views in the Balkans. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Cambridge.
BORONEANT V. 1970. La période épipaléolithique sur la rive roumaine des Portes de Fer du Danube. Praeliistorisclie Zeitschrift 45(1): 1-25.
1973. Recherches archéologiques sur la culture Schela Cladovei de la zone des Portes de Fer'. Dada 17:5-39.
BORONEANT V.. BONSALL C.. MCSWEENEV K.. PAYTON R., MACK LIN M. 1999. A Mesolithic Burial Area at Schela Cladovei. Romania. In A. Thevenin (éd.), L 'Europe des derniers chasseurs - Epifuileolithique et Mésolithique. 385-390.
BOL RDIEU P. 1977. The outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
1990. The logic of practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
BRADLEY R. 1998. The significance of monuments. On the shaping of human experience in Neolithic and Bronze Age Europe. London and New York: Routledge.
BRIDGES P. 1989. Changes in activities with the shift to agriculture in Southeastern United States. Current Anthropology 30(3): 385-394.
BRINKHUIZEN D. C. 1986. Features observed on the skeletons of some recent European Acipenseridae: their importance for the study of excavated remains of sturgeon. In D. C. Brinkhuizen and A. T. Clason (eds.). Fish and Archaeology. Studies in Osteometry. Taplionomy Seasonality and Fishing Methods. 18-32. Oxford: BAR Int. Ser. 294.
BURLEIGH R. and ZIYANOVIC S. 1980. Radiocarbon dating of a Cro-Magnon population from Padina, Yugoslavia, with some general recommendations for dating human skeletons. Zeitschriftfiir Morphologie und Anthropologie 70(3): 269-274.
CARSTENJ. and HUGH-JONES S. 1995. Introduction. In J. Carsten and S. Hugh-Jones (eds.), About the House. Lévi-Strauss and Beyond. 1-46.
CHAPMAN J. C. 1989. Demographic Trends in Neo-thermal South-East Europe. In C. Bonsall (ed.). The Mesolithic in Europe. Pa/nrs Presented at the third International Symposium Edinburgh 1985: 500515.
1992. Social Power in the Iron Gates Mesolithic. In J. Chapman and P. Dolukhanov (eds.), Cultural Transformations and Interactions in Eastern Europe: 71-121.
199-t. The origins of farming in South East Europe. Préhistoire Européenne 6. 133-156.
1)1 NAN E. H. 1996a. A preliminary report on the li-thic assemblages from the early Holocene level at the Iron Gates site of Bdile Herculane. Mesolithic Miscellany 17(2): 15-24.
19%b. Preliminary lithic analysis of the Epigra-vettian levels from the Iron Gales site of Cuina Turcului. Mesolithic Miscellany 17(2): 25-40.
DIMITRIJF.Y1C V. and BORIC D. in preparation. Animal bones from the site of Padina in the Iron Gates, Serbia. In B. Jovanovic (ed.). Padina.
DUBY G. 197-4. Histoire sociale et idéologies des sociétés. In J. LeGoff and Nora (eds.). Faire de l'histoire, vol. 1: 149.
CARAVAN-IN M.. SANE Y V„ S1M0SKA D.. KITANOSKI B. 1971. Les civilisations préhistoriques de la Macedoine. Slip: Musée National.
GEERTZ C. 1973 [1993J. The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.
GOB A. 1990. Chronologie du Mésolithique en Europe. Atlas des dates "C. Liège: C.I.P.L.
HEIDEGGER M. 1962. Being and time. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
HODDER I. 1990. The Domestication of Europe. Structure ami Contingency in Neolithic Societies. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
1991. Interpretative archaeology and its role. American Antiquity 56(1): 7-18.
67
Duian BonC
1993. The narrative and rhetoric of material culture sequences. In R Bradley (ed.), Conceptions of time and ancient society. 268-282.
1999. The archaeological process. An introduction. Oxford: Blackwcll Publishers.
INGOLD T. 1993. The temporality of the landscape. In R. Bradley (ed.), Conceptions (¡/'time and ancient society. 152-/74.
JOVANOVIČ B. 1966. Sculptures de la nécropole de l'âge du fer ancien à Hajdučka Vodenica. Archaeolo-gia lugoslavica VII. 31-34.
1968a. Padina. naselje starijeg neolita i starijeg gvozdenog doba. Arheološki pregled 10:89-93.
1968b. Elements of die Early Neolithic Architecture in the Iron Gate Gorge and their Functions. Ar-chaeologia lugoslavica IX: 1-9.
1969a. Padina - naselje starijeg neolita i starijeg gv ozdenog doba. Arheološki pregled 11: 129-136.
1969b. Chronological Frames of the Iron Gate Group of the Early Neolithic Period. Archaeologi-ca lugoslatica X: 23-38.
1969c. Hajdučka Vodenica - naselje i nekropola starijeg gvozdenog doba. Arheološki pregled 11: 92-97.
1971.	Padina kod Gospodjinog Vira Materijali 6: 65-70.
1972.	The autochthonous and the migrational components of the Early Neolithic in the Iron Gates. Balcanica III. 49-58.
1974a. Praistorija gornjeg Djerdapa (La préhistoire du Djerdap supérieur). Starinar XII (1971): 1-22.
1974b. Relativnohronološki odnos starijeg neolita Djerdapa i Vojvodine. Materijali X: 31-49.
1975. The origin of early Neoltihic in Djerdap. Go-dišnjak XIV: 5-18. Sarajevo: Centar za balkano-loška ispitivanja. knjiga 12.
1984a. Hajdučka Vodenica, praistorijska nekropola. Starinar XXXlll-XXX/V (1982-1983): 305- 313.
1987. Die Architektur und Keramik der Siedlung Padina B am Eisernen Tor. Jugoslawien. Germania 65(1): 1-16.
KARMANSKI S. 1968. Slikana keramika sa lokalite-ta Donja Branjetina kod Deronja. Odzaci.
KOZLOWSKI J. K. and KOZLOWSKIS. K. 1982. Lithic industries from the multi-layer Mesolithic site Vlasac in Yugoslavia. Inj. K. Kozlowski (ed.). Origin of the chipped stone industries of the early farming cultures in Balkans: 11-109
1983. Chipped stone industries from Lepenski Vir. Preistoria Alpina 19 259-294.
LEKOV1C V. 1985. The Starcevo mortuary practices -new perspectives. Godisnjak XXIII (Centar za bat-kanoloska ispitivanja): 157-172.
MANN M. 1986. The sources of socila power. Vol 1. A history of powerxfrom Ute beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MARK0V1C-MARJAN0\ i£ J. 1978. Geologija i strati grafija. In M. GaraSanin (ed.), Vlasac - mezolitsko naselje u Djerdapu (Vlasac. A .Mesolithic Settlement in the Iron Gates) Vol. II: 11-27.
MILISAUSKAS S. 1978. European Prehistory. New York: Academic Press.
MOGOSANU F. 1978. Mezoliticul de la Ostrovul Cor-bului. o noua asezare de tip Schela Cladovei. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche 29(3): 335-51.
NALBANT T. T. 1970. Citeva obseravatii asupra res-turilor de pesti descoperite in locuirile romanello-aziliene (I-ll) de la Cuina Turcului - Dubova. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche 21(1): 41-3.
NANDR1S J. 1968. Lepenski Vir. Science Journal 4(1) (January 1968). 64-70.
1971. Europe's First Monumental Sculpture: New Discov eries at Lepenski Vir. Reviews. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 38. 426-429.
NEY P. 1971. Mineralogische Analyse einer fussbodenprobe von Lepenski Vir I. In H. Schwabedissen (ed.), Die Anfänge des Neolithikums vorn Orient bis Nordeuropa. Teil 2: Ostliches Mitteleuropa: 3334. Köln/Wien: Fundamenta, Monographien zur Urgeschichte. Reihe A. Band 3.
68
Places »hal croaled time in the Danube Gorges and beyonc. c 9000- 550C BC
NICOLAESCU-PLOPSOR C. S., COMSA E. and PÄU-NESCU A. 1957. Santierul arheologic Bäile Hercula-ne (reg. Timisoara, r. Almas). Materiale 3: 51-58.
PAUNESCU A. 1970. Epipaleoliticul dc la Cuina Tur-cului-Dubova. Studii si eercetari de istorie reche 21(1): 3-29.
1978. Cercetarile archeologice de la Cuina Turcu-lui-Dubova (Jud. Mehedinti). Tibiscus istorie. Volum inchiiuit celei de-a 60 a aniversari a Unirii: 11-56.
1990. Locuirea mesolitica de tip Schela Cladovei de la Ostorvul Corbului (jud. Mehedinti). Studii si cercetari de istorie reche 41(2): 123-47.
1996.	Ostrovul Corbului. Die mesolithisehe Siedlung der Schela Cladovei-Kultur l.b. In H. Hauptmann and P. Roman (eds.), Ostrovul Corbului: 155-214.
PETROVIČ J. 1986-1987. Zemunica u naselju starče-vačke kulture na Golokutu. Rad ivjvodjanskili muzeja 30: 13-28.
RADOVANOV1Č I. 1992. Mezoiit Djerdapa. l'npuhli-shed Ph.D. Dissertation. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet.
1996a. The Iron Gates Mesolithic. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 11.
1996b. Mesolithic/Neolithic contacts: a case of the Iron Gates region. Poročilo o raziskovanju paleo-litika. neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniß XXIII: 39-48.
1997.	The Lepenski Vir Culture: a contribution to interpretation of its ideological aspects. In Anti-dorian Dragoslav Srejovic completis LXVannis ad amicis. colleges, discipulis oblatun: 85-93
1994 \ Review of Formal Disposal Areas in the Mesolithic of Europe. StarinarXLIII-XLIV(1992-1993): 92-103.
RADOVANOVIČ I. and VOYTEK B.. 1997 Hunters, fishers or farmers: sedentism. subsistence and social complexity in the Djerdap Mesolithic. Aimlecta Prae-historica leidensia 2919-31-
RENFREW C. 1987. Archaeology and Language. Dindon: Cape.
RlCOF.l'R P. 1984. Time and narrative. I vol. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
RIVIERE P. 1995. Houses, places and people: community and continuity in Guiana. In J. Carsten and S. Hugh-Jones (eds.). About the House. Levi-Strauss and Beyond: 189-205.
SREJOVIC D. 1966. Lepenski Vir - a New Prehistoric Culture in die Danubian Region. Archaeologia lugo-slavica VII. 13-17.
1967. Lepenski Vir - iskopavanja 1965-1967. g. Starinar XVIII: 156-166.
1968a. Lepenski Vir 7000 Years Ago. The Illustrated London News, January 20: 23-25.
1968b. Lepenski Vir Pottery and Sculptures. The Illustrated London News, February j. 27-29.
1968c. Lepenski Vir (Boljetin) - predneolitska i neolitska naselja i nekropole. Arheološki pregled 10: 85-87.
1969a. Lepenski Vir - Nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavlju. Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga.
1969b. Lepenski Vir. Boljetin - predneolitska i neolitska naselja i nekropole. Arheološki pregled 11: 121-122.
1969c. Lepenski Vir - naselje iz doba predneolita i starijeg neolita. In D. Boškovic (ed ). Stare kulture u Derdapu/A nciennes cultures du Djerdap: 49-56.
1969d. The Roots of the Lepenski Vir Culture. Archaeologia lugoslavica X: 13-21.
1970. Lepenski Vir. Boljetin - predneolitska i neolitska naselja i nekropole. Arheološki pregled 12.
72-73.
1972. Europe's First Monumental Sculpture: New Discoveries at lepenski Vir. London: Thames and Hudson.
1989. The Mesolithic of Serbia and Montenegro. In C. Bonsall (ed.). The Mesolithic in Europe. Papers Presented at the Third International Symposium Edinburgh 1985: 481-491.
69
Du&an
Borič
SREJOYIC D. and BABOYIC L1983- Umetnost Lepen-skog Vitra. Beograd: Jugoslavia.
SREJOYIC D. and LETIC\ Z. 1978. Vlasac. Mezolit-sko naselje u Djerdapu (Vlasac. A MesolilhicSettlement in the Iron Gates) (1 arheologija). Beograd: Sr-pska akadcniija nauka i umetnosti.
TELLENBACH M. 1983. Materialien zum Prakerami-schen Neolithikum in Süd-Ost-Europa Typologisch-stratigraphische Untersuchungen zu lithischen Gerätschaften. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 64: 21-137, Tafeln 1-48.
THEUN N. B. 1990. On the concept of time: Prolegomena to a theory of aspect and tense in narrative discourse. In N. B. Thelin (ed.), Verbal Aspect in Discourse: 91-129.
TILLEY C. 1994. A phenomenology of Landscape Places. Paths and Monuments. Oxford/Providence: Berg.
1999. Metaphor and Material Culture. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
TRAJKOVIC1 1978. Secerana, Topole, Bac - praisto-rijsko naselje i grobovi. Arheoloski pregled 19. 2324.
1988. Topole - Bai. In D. Srejovic (ed.). The Neolithic of Serbia. Archaeological Research 19481988: 99-101.
TREHER.NE P. 1995. The warrior s beauty : the masculine body and self-identity in Bronze-Age Europe. Journal of European Archaeology 3(1): 105-144.
TURNER V. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: aspects of Ndembu ritual. Ithaca. N.Y.
1969. The Ritual Process, structure and antistructure. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
1974. Dramas. Fields and Metaphors: symbolic action in human society. Ithaca. London: Cornell University Press.
YOYTEK B. 1987. Analysis of lithic raw material from sites in eastern Yugoslavia. In K. T. Biro (ed.), Papers for the First International Conference on Prehistoric Flint Mining and Lithic Raw Material Identification in the Carpathian Basin. Budapest-Sirneg, 1986. 287-295.
YOYTEK B. and TRING1IAM R. 1989. Rethinking the Mesolithic: the Case of South-East Europe. In C. Bonsall (ed.). The Mesolithic in Europe. Papers Presented at the Third International Symposium Edinburgh 1985. 492-499.
W HITTLE A. 1985. Neolithic Europe: A Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press.
1996. Europe in the Neolithic. The creation of new worlds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1998. Fish, faces and fingers: presences and symbolic identities in the Mesolithic-Neolilhic transition in the Carpathian Basin. Poročilo o raziskovanju paieolitika. neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji XXV: 133-150.
ZOFFMANN K. Z. 1983. Prehistorical skeletal remains from Lepenski Vir (Iron Gate, Yugoslavia). Homo 34. 129-148.
1979. Further evidence on Cro-Magnon Man in the Iron Gate Gorge of the Danube. Current Anthropology 20(4): 805.
ZYELEBIL M. 1986. Mesolithic prelude and Neolithic revolution. In M. Zvelebil (ed.). Hunters in Transition: 167-187.
1994 (1995). Neolithization in Eastern Europe: a view from the frontier. Poročilo o raziskovanju paieolitika. neolitika in eneolitika v Sloveniji XXII. 107.
ŽIVANOVIČ S. 1975. A note on the anthropological characteristics of the Padina population. Zeitschrift fur Morphologic und Anthropologic 66(2): 161175.
1976. Cromagnon in the Iron Gate Gorge of the Danube. Nature 260: 518.
70