Page 31 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 9(1) (2021)
P. 31
ia universitatisconcluded based on the painted ornamentation surface and on the legs. In a word, they are very
(with pale white paint on their entire surface, interesting for this study given that they appear
ear ly neolithic in north macedonia and bulgar ia: geogr aphical and cultur al r elations 31 except for the specimen from Čuka-Topolčani, as if they were made by one manufacturer.
which has dark brownish/black paint). Their
composition is dynamic and diverse, for which Architecture
is difficult to find analogies in related cultures. The settlement of Cerje-Govrlevo was posi-
tioned on a flattened terrace (plateau) on a
Askoi are rarely found in the Neolithic, mountain slope, surrounded by two streams and
with the exception of some sites in North Mac- several mountains (Bilbija 1986, 35). Relatively
edonia, but this is a topic for another study. Of similar to the previous one is the settlement of
interest for this paper is the askos discovered in Barutnica-Amzabegovo which was settled on a
Vaksevo, which has analogies with the speci- river terrace, in a hilly relief (Weide 1976). Both
mens from Cerje-Govrlevo, thus suggesting very of them belong to the so-called flat settlements
probable communication (Fig. 6: 1, 2). Here pre- (or settlements on river terraces). In contrast, the
sented specimen from Cerje-Govrlevo (Fig. 6: settlements in Pelagonia – the ones of Veluši-
1) is typical for the site – with an eccentrical- na-Porodin culture are mounds, such as Veluška
ly manufactured neck on an irregularly round- Tumba-Porodin, Čuka-Topolčani and Vrbjan-
ed belly (the severe irregularity probably derives ska Čuka-Slavej, thus artificially made, slight-
from secondary reasons as layer/deposit destruc- ly higher than the surrounding area. Pelagonia
tions and fire), while the one from Vaksevo (Fig. Plain which is the largest plain in North Mace-
6: 2) is characterized by a centrally placed neck donia is characterized by small rivers and swamps
on a curved belly. Minor differences are pres- in some periods of the year (Naumov et al. 2018,
ent within the handles’ position – the handles 256–57). These not so high elevations (mounds
on the specimen from Cerje-Govrlevo are placed or tells), reffered as mogila, čuka or tumba, are of-
more apart and the fifth handle is placed higher, ten the toponyms from which the name was de-
than those on the specimen from Vaksevo. rived. In western Bulgaria, low elevated settle-
ments are rare, unlike flat settlements on river
At the very end, I point to two more speci- terraces, which in Thrace is opposite (Todorova
mens of ceramic objects. This category of objects and Vaysov 1993, 150). Except Gălăbnik, being a
contains a wide range of artifacts: anthropomor- mound – has settlement analogies with the Pel-
phic and zoomorphic representations, altars, ta- agonia sites (artificial elevation), the rest of them
bles, models of houses, anthropomorphic mod- (Slatina-Sofia, Krajnici, Vaksevo, Kovačevo and
els of houses, and sometimes a combination of Rakitovo were positioned on river terraces in
some of them – well defined by Naumov (2010, the immediate vicinity to mountainous relief
234) as Neolithic concepts of hybridism. Given (Nikolov 1992; Todorova and Vaysov 1993, 150;
the economical, social and symbolic complexi- Lichardus-Itten et al. 2002; Bakamska 2007, 175;
ty of this ceramic objects’ category, a complete- Čohadžhiev 2007; Čohadžhiev et al. 2007, 182).
ly different analysis is needed to clarify some of In that context, the affinity of settling flat areas
the questions arosen concerning these objects. on river terraces in Amzabegovo-Vršnik culture
For this study, I decided to present only two al- and almost all sites in western Bulgaria, except
most identical altars of three-legged tables found Gălăbnik is evident – unlike the settlements of
in Cerje-Govrlevo (Fig. 6: 7) and Gălăbnik (Fig. Velušina-Porodin culture and Gălăbnik.
6: 8). They are made of bulky clay lump, well flat-
tened and smoothed on the upper surface with Concerning architecture, in all the sites in-
a shallow oval recipient, placed on three legs on cluded in this paper, without exception one com-
the corners, thus forming a triangular object. mon element is present – the aboveground hous-
Both specimens have the same ornaments of tri- es were built of wooden construction daubed in
angular incissions in parallel rows on the upper
(with pale white paint on their entire surface, interesting for this study given that they appear
ear ly neolithic in north macedonia and bulgar ia: geogr aphical and cultur al r elations 31 except for the specimen from Čuka-Topolčani, as if they were made by one manufacturer.
which has dark brownish/black paint). Their
composition is dynamic and diverse, for which Architecture
is difficult to find analogies in related cultures. The settlement of Cerje-Govrlevo was posi-
tioned on a flattened terrace (plateau) on a
Askoi are rarely found in the Neolithic, mountain slope, surrounded by two streams and
with the exception of some sites in North Mac- several mountains (Bilbija 1986, 35). Relatively
edonia, but this is a topic for another study. Of similar to the previous one is the settlement of
interest for this paper is the askos discovered in Barutnica-Amzabegovo which was settled on a
Vaksevo, which has analogies with the speci- river terrace, in a hilly relief (Weide 1976). Both
mens from Cerje-Govrlevo, thus suggesting very of them belong to the so-called flat settlements
probable communication (Fig. 6: 1, 2). Here pre- (or settlements on river terraces). In contrast, the
sented specimen from Cerje-Govrlevo (Fig. 6: settlements in Pelagonia – the ones of Veluši-
1) is typical for the site – with an eccentrical- na-Porodin culture are mounds, such as Veluška
ly manufactured neck on an irregularly round- Tumba-Porodin, Čuka-Topolčani and Vrbjan-
ed belly (the severe irregularity probably derives ska Čuka-Slavej, thus artificially made, slight-
from secondary reasons as layer/deposit destruc- ly higher than the surrounding area. Pelagonia
tions and fire), while the one from Vaksevo (Fig. Plain which is the largest plain in North Mace-
6: 2) is characterized by a centrally placed neck donia is characterized by small rivers and swamps
on a curved belly. Minor differences are pres- in some periods of the year (Naumov et al. 2018,
ent within the handles’ position – the handles 256–57). These not so high elevations (mounds
on the specimen from Cerje-Govrlevo are placed or tells), reffered as mogila, čuka or tumba, are of-
more apart and the fifth handle is placed higher, ten the toponyms from which the name was de-
than those on the specimen from Vaksevo. rived. In western Bulgaria, low elevated settle-
ments are rare, unlike flat settlements on river
At the very end, I point to two more speci- terraces, which in Thrace is opposite (Todorova
mens of ceramic objects. This category of objects and Vaysov 1993, 150). Except Gălăbnik, being a
contains a wide range of artifacts: anthropomor- mound – has settlement analogies with the Pel-
phic and zoomorphic representations, altars, ta- agonia sites (artificial elevation), the rest of them
bles, models of houses, anthropomorphic mod- (Slatina-Sofia, Krajnici, Vaksevo, Kovačevo and
els of houses, and sometimes a combination of Rakitovo were positioned on river terraces in
some of them – well defined by Naumov (2010, the immediate vicinity to mountainous relief
234) as Neolithic concepts of hybridism. Given (Nikolov 1992; Todorova and Vaysov 1993, 150;
the economical, social and symbolic complexi- Lichardus-Itten et al. 2002; Bakamska 2007, 175;
ty of this ceramic objects’ category, a complete- Čohadžhiev 2007; Čohadžhiev et al. 2007, 182).
ly different analysis is needed to clarify some of In that context, the affinity of settling flat areas
the questions arosen concerning these objects. on river terraces in Amzabegovo-Vršnik culture
For this study, I decided to present only two al- and almost all sites in western Bulgaria, except
most identical altars of three-legged tables found Gălăbnik is evident – unlike the settlements of
in Cerje-Govrlevo (Fig. 6: 7) and Gălăbnik (Fig. Velušina-Porodin culture and Gălăbnik.
6: 8). They are made of bulky clay lump, well flat-
tened and smoothed on the upper surface with Concerning architecture, in all the sites in-
a shallow oval recipient, placed on three legs on cluded in this paper, without exception one com-
the corners, thus forming a triangular object. mon element is present – the aboveground hous-
Both specimens have the same ornaments of tri- es were built of wooden construction daubed in
angular incissions in parallel rows on the upper
