Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:17:35.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neolithic Priorities: Ritual and Visual Preferences within Burials and Corporeality in the Balkans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Goce Naumov
Goce Naumov*
Affiliation:
Archaeological Museum of Macedonia, FYR Macedonia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Neolithic bodies are not only manifestations of subjective principles. Social and symbolic norms are also incorporated within the bodies of both actual and represented individuals. These norms often relate to economic and religious notions of society, as well as to effigies. Owing to high population densities in Neolithic villages, only a select group of the inhabitants were buried within settlements or represented in images. This generated a category of privileged individuals and body features, which were related to symbolic principles rather than social hierarchy. Such practices among Neolithic societies in the Balkans are evident within burials and human representations. Individuals buried inside settlements, anthropomorphic house models, and figurines from several sites in Ovče Pole, Pelagonia, and the Skopje Valley are used as case studies in this paper. Placing these sites into a wider geographical context, it is argued that gender, age and body parts were significant criteria in funerary practices and features of corporeality.

Les corps néolithiques ne sont pas seulement des manifestations de principes subjectifs; aux corps d'individus réels ainsi que représentés sont également associées des normes sociales et symboliques. Ces normes se rattachent souvent à des notions économiques et religieuses de société de même qu'à des effigies. En raison de la densité de population élevée dans les villages néolithiques, seul un groupe favorisé de défunts fût enterré au sein des agglomérations ou représenté en images. Ceci engendrait une catégorie d'individus et de caractéristiques physiques privilégiés, apparentée à des principes symboliques plutôt qu'à une hiérarchie sociale. De telles pratiques au sein des sociétés néolithiques des Balkans sont évidentes parmi les sépultures et représentations humaines. Des individus enterrés à l'intérieur des villages, des modèles de maison et des figurines anthropomorphes provenant de plusieurs sites de Ovče Pole, Pelagonia et de la vallée de Skopje ont fait l'objet d'études de cas. En plaçant ces sites dans un contexte géographique plus large, on fait valoir que le sexe, l'âge et les parties du corps étaient des critères significatifs pour les pratiques funéraires et caractéristiques de corporéité. Translation by Isabelle Gerges

Zusammenfassung

Zusammenfassung

Neolithische Körper sind keinesfalls allein Manifestationen subjektiver Prinzipien; auch soziale und symbolische Normen sind in die Körper von gleichermaßen tatsächlichen und dargestellten Individuen eingeschlossen. Diese Normen beziehen sich häufig auf ökonomische und religiöse Auffassungen der Gesellschaft wie auch auf die Figuralplastik. Aufgrund der hohen Bevölkerungsdichte in neolithischen Dörfern wurde nur eine ausgewählte Gruppe von Verstorbenen innerhalb der Siedlungen bestattet oder in Bildern dargestellt. Dies schuf eine Gruppe privilegierter Individuen und Körpermerkmale, die sich eher an symbolischen Prinzipien als an sozialer Hierarchie orientierten. Derartige Praktiken in den neolithischen Gesellschaften der Balkanhalbinsel spiegeln sich bei den Bestattungen und menschlichen Darstellungen deutlich wider. Siedlungsbestattungen, anthropomorphe Hausmodelle und Figurinen von verschiedenen Fundplätzen im Ovče Pole, in Pelagonien und der Skopje-Ebene werden in diesem Beitrag als Fallstudien angeführt. Indem diese Fundstellen in einen weiteren geographischen Kontext gesetzt werden, soll dargestellt werden, dass das soziale Geschlecht, Alter und Körperteile bei Bestattungspraktiken und Merkmalen der Korporealität eine signifikante Rolle spielten. Translation by Heiner Schwarzberg

Keywords

anthropomorphic figurinesbodyburialssymbolismNeolithicBalkansfigurines anthropomorphescorpssépulturessymbolismeNéolithiqueBalkansanthropomorphe FigurinenKörperBestattungenSymbolismusNeolithikumBalkanhalbinsel
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 17 , Issue 2: Special Issue—Body Practices and Concepts in Later Prehistoric Europe , 2014 , pp. 184 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © European Association of Archaeologists 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bačvarov, K. 2003. Neolitni pogrebalni obredi. Sofia: Bard.Google Scholar
Bacvarov, K. ed. 2008. Babies Reborn: Infant/Child Burials in Pre- and Protohistory. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1832. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Bailey, D. 1994. The Representation of Gender: Homology or Propaganda. Journal of European Archaeology, 2 (2): 215–27.Google Scholar
Bailey, D.W. 1996. Interpreting Figurines: The Emergence of Illusion and New Ways of Seeing. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 6 (2): 291–95.Google Scholar
Bailey, D.W. 2005. Prehistoric Figurines: Representation and Corporeality in the Neolithic. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, J.E. 2005. The Archaeology of Childhood: Children, Gender and Material Culture. Oxford: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
Becker, V. 2010. Anthropomorphe Plastiken Westbulgariens und ihre Stellung im südosteuropäichen Frünhneolithikum. Studia Praehistorica, 13: 23–40.Google Scholar
Berger, L. 2004. Anthropomorphe und zoomorphe Statuetten der Stufen Karanovo II-III bis III-IV aus dem Nordsüd-Schnitt am Tell Karanovo. In: Nikolov, V., Băčvarov, K. & Kalchev, P., eds. Prehistoric Thrace: Proceedings of the International Symposium in Stara Zagora. Stara Zagora: Institute of Archaeology with Museum, pp. 178–87.Google Scholar
Biehl, P. 1996. Symbolic Communication Systems: Symbols of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic from South-Eastern Europe. Journal of European Archaeology, 4: 153–76.Google Scholar
Bilbija, M. 1986. Cerje, neolitsko naselje. Arheološki Pregled, 1985: 35–36.Google Scholar
Bolger, D. 2003. Gender in Ancient Cyprus: Narratives of Social Change on a Mediterranean Island. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
Borić, D. & Stefanović, S. 2004. Birth and Death: Infant Burials from Vlasac and Lepenski Vir. Antiquity, 78: 526–46.Google Scholar
Carr, C. 1995. Mortuary Practices: Their Social, Political-Religious, Circumstantial, and Physical Determinants. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2 (2): 105–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Čausidis, N. 2011. Neolitski antropomorfni modeli na kući. In: Naumov, G. & Čausidis, N., eds. Neolitski antropomorfni predmeti vo Republika Makedonija. Skopje: Magor, pp. 11–20.Google Scholar
Čausidis, N. & Naumov, G. 2011. Neolitski antropomorfni modeli na kući od Govrlevo. In: Naumov, G. & Čausidis, N., eds. Neolitski antropomorfni predmeti vo Republika Makedonija. Skopje: Magor, pp. 21–36.Google Scholar
Cavanagh, W. & Mee, C. 1998. A Private Place: Death in Prehistoric Greece. Jonsered: Paul Åström Förlag.Google Scholar
Chapman, J. & Gaydarska, B. 2007. Parts and Wholes: Fragmentation in Prehistoric Context. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
Chausidis, N. 2010. Neolithic Ceramic Figurines in the Shape of a Woman — House From the Republic of Macedonia. In: Gheorghiu, D. & Cyphers, A., eds. Anthropomorphic and Zoomorphic Miniature Figures in Eurasia, Africa and Meso-America: Morphology, Materiality, Technology, Function and Context. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2138. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 25–35.Google Scholar
Chausidis, N. 2012. Mythical Representations of ‘Mother Earth’ in Pictorial Media. In: Meaden, T.G., ed. An Archaeology of Mother Earth Sites and Sanctuaries Through the Ages: Rethinking Symbols and Images, Art and Artefacts From History and Prehistory. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2389. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 5–19.Google Scholar
Crawford, S. & Shepherd, G. eds. 2007. Children, Childhood and Society. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1696. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Dommasnes, L.H. & Wrigglesworth, M. eds. 2008. Children, Identity and the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Fidanoski, L.J. 2011. Arheološki iskopuvanja na neolitskata naselba Cerje-Govrlevo vo 2004 godina. Macedonia Acta Archaeologica, 20: 53–76.Google Scholar
Fidanoski, L.J. 2012. Cerje-Govrlevo and Miloš Bilbija. Skopje: Museum of Skopje.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. 2004. The Archaeology of Personhood: An Anthropological Approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Galović, R. 1964. Neue Funde der Starcevo — Kultur in Mittelserbien und Makedonien. Bericht der Romisch — Germanischen Kommision, 43–44 (1962–1963). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co.Google Scholar
Garašanin, M. 1979. Centralno — balkanska zona. In: Benac, A., ed. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja II — neolit. Sarajevo: Academy of Science and Art of Bosnia and Hercegovina, pp. 79–212.Google Scholar
Garašanin, M. & Bilbija, M. 1988. Kuća 1 vo Zelenikovo. Macedonia Acta Archaeologica, 9: 31–41.Google Scholar
Georgiadis, M. 2011. Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: A Synthesis. Childhood in the Past, 4: 31–45.Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1976a. Neolithic Macedonia: As Reflected by Excavation at Anza, Southeast Yugoslavia. Los Angeles: The Regents of the University of California.Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1976b. Figurines. In: Gimbutas, M., ed. Anza, Neolithic Macedonia: As Reflected by Excavation at Anza, Southeast Yugoslavia. Los Angeles: The Regents of the University of California, pp. 198–241.Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1982. The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
Gimbutas, M. 1989. The Language of the Goddess. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
Golan, A. 2003. Prehistoric Religion. Jerusalem: Golan.Google Scholar
Grbić, M., Mačkić, P., Nadj, Š., Simoska, D. & Stalio, B. 1960. Porodin: kasno-neolitsko naselje na Tumbi kod Bitolja. Bitolj: Narodni muzej Bitolj i Arheolośki institut — Beograd.Google Scholar
Hansen, S. 2007. Bilder vom Menschen der Steinzeit: Untersuchungen zur anthropomorphen Plastik der Jungsteinzeit und Kupfzeit in Südosteuropa I und II. Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern.Google Scholar
Insoll, T. 2005. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
James, P.O. 1959. The Cult of the Mother Goddess: An Archaeological and Documentary Study. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
Joyce, R.A. 2003. Making Something of Herself: Embodiment of Life and Death at Playa De Los Muertos, Honduras. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 13: 246–61.Google Scholar
Kitanoski, B., Simoska, D. & Todorović, J. 1983. Novi arheološki istražuvanja na naselbta Čukaj vo Topolčani kaj Prilep. Macedonia Acta Archaeologica, 6: 9–20.Google Scholar
Kitanoski, B., Simoska, D. & Jovanović, B. 1990. Der kultplatz auf der fundstatte Vrbjanska Cuka bei Prilep. In: Srejović, D. & Tasić, N., eds. Vinča and Its World. International Symposium. The Danubian Region from 6000–3000 BC. Beograd: Serbian Academy of Science and Arts, Centre for Archaeological Research, Faculty of Philosophy. Beograd. Bigz, pp. 107–12.Google Scholar
Korošec, P. & Korošec, J. 1973. Predistoriska naselba Barutnica. Prilep: Arheološko društvo na Makedonija.Google Scholar
Lesure, R.G. 2002. The Goddess Diffracted: Thinking About the Figurines of Early Villages. Current Anthropology, 43 (4): 587–610.Google Scholar
Lesure, R.G. 2011. Interpreting Ancient Figurines: Context, Comparison and Prehistoric Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lillehammer, G. 2010. Archaeology of Children. Complutum, 21 (2): 15–45.Google Scholar
Lorentz, K.O. 2003. Cultures of Physical Modifications: Child Burials in Ancient Cyprus. Stanford Journal of Archaeology, 2: 1–17.Google Scholar
Meskell, L. 1995. Godessess, Gimbutas and ‘New Age’ Archaeology. Antiquity, 69: 74–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mina, M. 2008. Carving Out Gender in Prehistoric Aegean: Anthropomorphic Figurines of the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 21 (2): 213–39.Google Scholar
Mitkoski, A. 2005. Sadova keramika od Vrbjanska Čuka. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, 16: 29–53.Google Scholar
Moore, A.M.T., Hillman, G.C. & Legge, A.J. 2000. Village on the Euprathes: From Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nakamura, C. & Meskell, L. 2009. Articulate Bodies: Forms and Figures at Çatalhöyük. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 16: 205–30.Google Scholar
Nanoglou, S. 2008. Representation of Humans and Animals in Greece and the Balkans During the Earlier Neolithic. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 18: 1–13.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. 2007. Housing the Dead: Burials Inside Houses and Vessels from Neolithic Balkans. In: Malone, C. & Barrowclough, D., eds. Cult in Context. Oxford: Oxbow, pp. 255–65.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. 2009a. Patterns and Corporeality: Neolithic Visual Culture from the Republic of Macedonia. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1910. Oxford: Archaeopress.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumov, G. 2009b. Neolithic Visual Culture and Rituals. In: Naumov, G., Fidanoski, L.J., Tolevski, I. & Ivkovska, A., eds. Neolithic Communities in the Republic of Macedonia. Skopje: Dante, pp. 87–135.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. 2010a. Neolithic Anthropocentrism: Imagery Principles and Symbolic Manifestation of Corporeality in the Balkans. Documenta Praehistorica, 37: 227–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumov, G. 2010b. Symmetry Analysis of Neolithic Painted Pottery from Republic of Macedonia. In: Biro–katalin, T., ed. Data Management and Mathematical Methods in Archaeology. Archaeologia e Calcolatori 21. Roma: Dipartimento Patrimonio Culturale, pp. 255–74.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. 2011. Visual and Conceptual Dynamism of the Neolithic Altars in the Republic of Macedonia. In: Nikolov, V., Bacvarov, K. & Popov, H., eds. Interdisziplinäre Forschungen zum Kulturerbe auf der Balkanhalbinsel. Sofia: Humboldt Union, pp. 89–129.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. 2013. Embodied Houses: Social and Symbolic Agency of Neolithic Architecture in the Republic of Macedonia. In: Hoffman, D. & Smyth, J., eds. Tracking the Neolithic House in Europe—Sedentism, Architecture and Practice. New York: Springer, pp. 65–94.Google Scholar
Naumov, G. in press. Together We Stand-Divided We Fall: Fragmentation of Neolithic Figurines in Republic of Macedonia. In: Kohring, S.E. & Farbstein, R., eds. Representation, Image and the Materiality of Technology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Naumov, G. & Čausidis, N. 2011. Neolitskite antropomorfni predmeti vo Republika Makedonija. Skopje: Magor.Google Scholar
Nemeskéri, J. & Lengyel, L. 1976. Neolithic Skeletal Finds. In: Gimbutas, M., ed. Neolithic Macedonia: As Reflected by Excavation at Anza, Southeast Yugoslavia. Los Angeles: The Regents of the University of California, pp. 375–410.Google Scholar
Özdoğan, M. 1999. Çayönü. In: Özdoğan, M., ed. Neolithic in Turkey. Istanbul: Arkeoloji Sanat Yayinlari, pp. 35–63.Google Scholar
Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud: Sutton.Google Scholar
Perlés, C. 2001. The Early Neolithic in Greece. The First Farming Communities in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pyke, G. 1996. Structures and Architecture. In: Wardle, K.A., ed. Nea Nikomedeia I: The Excavation of an Early Neolithic Village in Northern Greece 1961–1964. London: The British School at Athens, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
Reingruber, A. & Thissen, L. 2005. Aegean Catchment (Greece, E., Balkans, S. and Turkey, W.) 10,000–5500 cal BC. [online] Formerly available at: <http://www.canew.org/data.html>>Google Scholar
Romero, M.S. 2008. Childhood and Construction of the Gender Identities through Material Culture. Childhood in the Past, 1: 17–37.Google Scholar
Sanev, V. 1994. Mlado kameno vreme. In: Arheolośka karta na Repblika Makedonija — Tom I. Skopje: Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts, pp. 26–42.Google Scholar
Sanev, V. 2004. Some Characteristics of the Amzabegovo — Vrśnik Cultural Group in Macedonia. In: Perić, S., ed. The Central Pomoravje in Neolithization of South East Europe. Belgrade: Archeological Institute, pp. 35–47.Google Scholar
Sanev, V. 2006. Anthropomorphic Cult Plastic of Anzabegovo-Vršnik Cultural Group of the Republic of Macedonia. In: Tasić, N. & Grozdanov, C., eds. Homage to Milutin Garaśanin. Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Science and Arts, pp. 171–91.Google Scholar
Sanev, V. ed. 2009. Anzabegovo: naselba od raniot i sredniot neolit vo Makedonija. Štip: Nacionalna ustanova za zaštita na spomenicite na kulturata i muzej — Štip.Google Scholar
Simoska, D. & Sanev, V. 1975. Neolitska naselba Veluśka tumba kaj Bitola. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, 1: 25–85.Google Scholar
Sofaer Derevenski, J. 2000. Children and Material Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Srejović, D. 1968. Neolitska plastika Centralnog Balkana. In: Trifunović, L., ed. Neolit Centralnog Balkana. Beograd: Narodni muzej, pp. 177–270.Google Scholar
Stanković, S. 1992. Sakralna mesta i predmeti u starijeneolitskim kulturama Centralno — balkanskog područja (, University of Beograd).Google Scholar
Stefanovic, S. & Boric, D. 2008. The Newborn Infant Burials from Lepenski Vir: In Pursuit of Contextual Meanings. In: Bonsall, C., Boroneant, V. & Radovanović, I., eds. The Iron Gates in Prehistory: New Perspectives. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1893. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 131–69.Google Scholar
Stojanova Kanzurova, E. 2011. Arhitektonski nedvižni objekti od Tumba-Madjari. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, 20: 35–52.Google Scholar
Stojanovski, D. 2012. Grncharica Pottery Typology: Contribution to the Early Neolithic Puzzle on the Balkans (, University of Ferrara).Google Scholar
Talalay, L.E. 1994. A Feminist Boomerang: The Great Goddess of Greek Prehistory. Gender and History, 6 (2): 165–83.Google Scholar
Talalay, L.E. 2004. Heady Business: Skulls, Heads and Decapitation in Neolithic Anatolia and Greece. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 17 (2): 139–63.Google Scholar
Tasić, N. 2011. Anthropomorphic Figurines from Vinča excavations 1998–2009. Documenta Praehistorica, 38: 149–57.Google Scholar
Temelkoski, D. & Mitkoski, A. 2001. Neolitski antropomorfni statuetki vo predistoriskata zbirka na Zavod i muzej Prilep. Makedonsko nasledstvo, 17: 53–69.Google Scholar
Temelkoski, D. & Mitkoski, A. 2008. Docnoneolitska naselba na lokalitetot Kutline kaj selo Rakle. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, 18: 93–108.Google Scholar
Tomaž, A. in press. Depiction of Hairstyle, Reflection of Identity? Some considerations concerning Neolithic Hairstyle Depictions in Anzabegovo — Vršnik and Velušina -Porodin Cultural Milieu. In: Boric, D. & Miracle, P., eds. Identities of the Early Neolithic Balkans. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Google Scholar
Triantaphyllou, S. 2001. A Bioarchaeological Approach to Prehistoric Cemetery Populations from Central and Western Greek Macedonia. British Archaeological Reports International Series 976. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Ucko, P. 1962. The Interpretation of Prehistoric Anthropomorphic Figurines. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 92: 38–54.Google Scholar
Veljanovska, F. 2000. Antropološki karakteristiki na naselenieto na Makedonija od neolit do Sreden Vek. Skopje: Republički zavod za zaštita na spomenicite na kulturata.Google Scholar
Veljanovska, F. 2006. Neolitski skeletni naodi od Pista — Novo Selo. Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica, 17: 341–50.Google Scholar
Voigt, M.M. 2000. Çatal Höyük in Context: Ritual at Early Neolithic Sites in Central and Eastern Turkey. In: Kuijt, I., ed. Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity and Differentiation. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 253–93.Google Scholar
Whittle, A., Bartosiewicz, L., Borić, D., Pettit, P. & Richards, M. 2005. New Radiocarbon Dates for the Early Neolithic in Northern Serbia and South-East Hungary: Some Omissions and Corrections. Antaeus, 28: 347–55.Google Scholar
Zlatunić, R. 2003. Neolitički pogrebni ukopi na prostoru istočne jadranske obale i njezinu širem zaledu (prijelazna zona), tipološka analiza. Vjesnik arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu, 36 (3): 29–95.Google Scholar