Dragana Antonović: "Stone tools from Lepenski Vir"

Stone tools from Lepenski Vir

Arheolo{ki institut

\erdapske sveske, Posebna izdanja 5

Beograd 2006.

Institute of Archaeology

Cahiers des Portes de Fer, Monographies 5

Belgrade 2006

Published byInstitute of Archaeology Knez Mihailova 35, BelgradeSerbia & Montenegro

General editorMiloje Vasi}

Editorial boardRastko Vasi}Marko Popovi}Nikola Tasi}

RedactorSlavi{a Peri}

Reviewed byBorislav Jovanovi}Du{an Mihailovi}

Translated byMirjana Vukmanovi}Vladica Cvetkovi}

DrawingsDragana Antonovi}

Graphic design byDragoljub Proti}

Cover image: Ferdo Predrag Mikala~ki, Marionettes XIII, etching, aquatint, engraving, 78 x 106 cmCover design: Dragoljub Proti}

Printed byAltaNovaUgrinova~ki put 16aZemun, Serbia & Montenegro

Printed in1000 copies

The monograph is published thanks to the financial support of the Serbian Republic Ministry of Science and Environmental Protection as a result of Projects num. 1801 and 147009D

ISBN 86-80093-46-7

STONE TOOLS FROM LEPENSKI VIR 5

Contents

ForewordIntroductionRaw material1. Metamorphic rocks

2. Magmatic rocks

3. Sandstones

4. Limestones

5. Other stone raw materials

Typological-functional analysisMallets (scepters)

Weights

Grinding stones

Querns

Miscellaneous objects

Anvils

Hammers

Sling balls

Retouchers

Pebbles with ambiguous traces of use and work

Ground-edge tools

Axes

Adzes

Chisels

Fragmented ground-edge tools of undistinguishable shape

Material stored at unknown location

Distribution of stone tools within stratigraphic entities and arbitrary layersFinds from the houses

Finds from the arbitrary layers

7

9

15

19

19

19

19

19

21

23

24

25

26

26

26

26

27

27

28

28

28

29

30

31

31

33

39

43

6 STONE TOOLS FROM LEPENSKI VIR

Catalogue

Mallets (scepters)

Weights

Grinding stones

Querns

Miscellaneous objects

Anvils

Hammers

Sling balls

Retouchers

Pebbles with ambiguous traces of use and work

Pebbles with indistinct traces of use

Pebbles with indistinct traces of trimming

Pebbles with indistinct traces of trimming and use - raw material

Ground-edge tools

Axes

Adzes

Chisels

Fragmented ground-edge tools of undistinguishable shape

Material stored at unknown location

Conclusion

BibliographyRezime: Kameno oru|e sa Lepenskog Vira

Appendix: Petrographic analysis of samples of ground stone artifacts from Lepenski Vir (Vladica Cvetkovi}, Kristina Resimi}-[ari})

47

49

66

70

74

75

76

80

84

85

86

86

90

90

93

93

108

111

115

118

125

131

135

143


Lepenski Vir culture possibly the most intriguing cul-tural phenomenon in the early prehistory of Europe with original architecture and unique monumental sculpture influenced by spiritual life of the bearers of this culture unfortunately even after forty years of its discovery has not been presented to the full extent and it has remained unavailable to the academic and general audience.

The book by Dragana Antonovi} ‘Stone tools from Lepenski Vir’ is the first in the forthcoming series of pub-lications of archaeological material from the decennial archaeological excavations within projects Djerdap I and Djerdap II. Namely, in order to finally make available the results of these investigations Institute of Archaeology in Belgrade set up the project ‘The Lepenski Vir culture: cul-tural processes and transformations between the 9th and 6th millennium BC’. This theme was accepted and includ-ed in 2002 in the projects of fundamental investigations of the Ministry of Science and Environmental Protection of Republic of Serbia. In the project realization besides as-sociates of the Institute of Archaeology are engaged the experts from Department of Archaeology and Center for Archaeological Investigations of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade, National Museum in Belgrade and Faculty for Mining and Geology in Belgrade according to their special interests. Two phases were planned in the realization of the project. During the first phase lasting three years the mate-rial from the eponymous site – Lepenski Vir was studied and publishing of that material is in progress. After that in the five ensuing years we planned publishing of archaeo-logical material from other sites in the Iron Gates includ-ing Padina, Hajdu~ka Vodenica, Velesnica, Knjepi{te and U{}e Kameni~kog potoka.

After realization of this project the Lepenski Vir cul-ture and its associated phenomena as well as its successors will finally take appropriate place in the early prehistory of Europe and thus Serbian archaeology will regain equal po-sition with other archaeological schools studying cultural phenomena of the Mesolithic and Neolithic of Europe and the Near East. Within first phase of the project material and themes were assigned according to the special interests of the authors but it is important to say that great work of fil-

ing and sorting of available documentation was carried out by special team of the National Museum in Belgrade. We must emphasize that problems in realization of this project were multifarious first of all because of considerable time interval between investigation of the site and studying of the material and documentation as well as because of lack of authentic information as scholars working on the mate-rial had not been direct participants in the investigations.

In this book Dragana Antonovi} completes the series of works devoted to the problem of typology and genesis of stone tools from Lepenski Vir but it is only the first step in solving the problem of final comprehension of cultural and chronological character of the site in general and its phases of development in particular. Thanks to this work we are today in a situation to come gradually but steadily much closer to the real picture concerning the role of stone tools in everyday and spiritual life of the inhabitants of Lepenski Vir, the Iron Gates and generally the bearers of the Neolithic cultures in the territory of Serbia. There is no doubt that after publishing of new volumes concerning other material there will be more discussion about certain conclusions presented in this book but it is undeniable that work of Dragana Antonovi} sheds new light on interpreta-tion of portable finds and is the basis for comprehensive discussions, which have so far been lacking.

Taking into consideration the conditions of work on documentation and material on behalf of all participants of this project we wish to express our gratitude to the institu-tions and individuals that by showing understanding for the importance of this work made possible first concrete results to be brought to light. So our thanks are due to all as-sociates of the National Museum in Belgrade, Department of Archaeology and Archaeological Collection of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade and in particular to Dr. Dubravka Nikoli}, Ljubinka Babovi}, Bojana Mihailovi}, Mirjana Glumac, Vasoje Vasi} and Aca Djordjevi}.

Slavi{a Peri}Director of project „The Lepenski Vir culture:

cultural processes and transformations between the 9th and 6th millennium BC”

Foreword

Introduction


The Lepenski Vir site has become famous world-wide for its artistically modeled pebbles, which had been the objects of cult in the Lepenski Vir cul-ture. These stone objects were the subject of many works so in the shadow of the epochal discovery of monumental Mesolithic art remained those findings reflecting everyday life and the study of which is ac-tually the most interesting segment of archaeology.

Lepenski Vir became after its discovery an epo-nymous site of one Late Mesolithic culture, which in the time of its existence was of local importance and self-sufficient no matter how much it is today estab-lished as an exceptional phenomenon in the prehis-tory of entire Europe. This site experienced its most dynamic evolution within long period from the 9th to the 6th millennium BC. Inhabitants of this settle-ment, established and enduring within exceptionally rich natural environment, which made possible safe sedentary life and rich cultural and spiritual achieve-ments created their small universe and developed auto-chthonously a dazzling culture never again echoed in these regions. Just this fact supports the need to investigate all characteristics of such material culture and also those simple stone tools as a basis of its eco-nomic life.

History of investigations

The Lepenski Vir site was discovered in 1960 in the course of site survey of the Iron Gates region prior to the rescue excavations because of construc-tion of hydroelectric plant Djerdap I. It was situated on the right Danube bank, 1.5 km upstream of its confluence with Boljetinska reka (Fig. 1). The prehistoric settlement itself was situated on a low tongue-shaped plateau protruding into the river and its name is associated with the Danube whirlpool (Vir – whirlpool) existing there before the construction of Djerdap I dam. According to the data acquired in the course of 1960 site survey archaeologists planed to investigate at this site one rather inferior Star~evo settlement in addition to the visible remains of small

Roman tower. Already the excavations conducted in 1965 suggested that Lepenski Vir was to become an eponymous site of a culture so far unknown in the prehistory of Europe. In 1971 the architectural remains of the Lepenski Vir I settlement have been transfered to the higher location where they are still standing today within the complex of the Lepenski Vir Museum.

In the period from 1965 to 1970 an area of 3352 square meters was investigated revealing cultural layer, which at some sections of the site was up to 3.5 meters thick (Fig. 2). Cultural layer consisted of 9 habitation horizons dating from two periods (Mesolithic and Neolithic) and 5 cultural stages (Proto-Lepenski Vir, Lepenski Vir I, Lepenski Vir II, Lepenski Vir IIIa and Lepenski Vir IIIb, of which two final ones are of Neolithic character; Srejovi} 1969a: 28 - 37). After later analyses of architectural elements within the houses of Lepenski Vir I this cultural stage was divided into 3 building phases (Radovanovi} 1996: 76 - 113), hence the cultural layer of Lepenski Vir consisted of 7 building hori-zons within above mentioned cultural and chrono-logical framework. Proto-Lepenski Vir settlement of modest size is represented by only few hearth struc-tures. The houses of highest quality of construction with solid floors and of very consistent proportions have been recorded in the Lepenski Vir I a-e settle-ment while in Lepenski Vir II settlement the houses were rather carelessly built, of irregular proportions and without solid floors. The Neolithic Lepenski Vir IIIa was the settlement with pit-dwellings while the finds from the Lepenski Vir IIIb horizon indicate the use of aboveground huts (Srejovi} 1969a: 161 - 164). The settlement at Lepenski Vir had been abandoned after horizon IIIb and there were no more settlements at this site. From the later periods were encountered graves from the Eneolithic and Bronze Age buried into the Neolithic layer. In the time of construction of the Roman limes Roman rectangular tower was erected in the very center of the settlement (sq. a/2-4, AB/2-4). From even later periods possibly originate two graves generally dated to the Middle Ages.


INTRODUCTION

Natural environment

In the Pleistocene period the Iron Gates region was because of its distinct climatic conditions a natural refugium for many plants and animal species and consequently the area exceptionally suitable for settling of human communities. Such suitable condi-tions had become particularly attractive for the people after the end of glaciations and therefore this area, especially the Danube banks, was densely settled and there developed a very prosperous Mesolithic culture as was the Lepenski Vir culture. Gradual cultural deg-radation ensued in this area in the Neolithic times as a result of changes in the system of economy and intro-duction of agriculture not suitable for climatic and pe-dologic conditions of the Iron Gates. This part of the Danube valley has rocky barren banks unsuitable for greater development of agriculture and it is isolated from the hinterland by high mountains thus diminish-ing cultural influences from the areas experiencing more dynamic evolution. However, affluent flora and fauna and in particular the richness of the Danube waters could have provided diversified and abundant food supply and safe existence for the people from Lepenski Vir throughout the entire year. According to

osteological analyses, hunting and especially fishing played significant part in the food supply of the settle-ment inhabitants (Bökonyi 1969: 224 – 225).

The abundance of the Danube in fish prompted the inhabitants of this area to stay there for genera-tions as it was the case in ancient prehistoric times but also in more recent historical periods. Distinctive characteristic of the river are large fish like sturgeon, beluga and catfish that were the most important prey of the fishermen from the Iron Gates as late as the end of the 19th century (Petrovi} 1941). Distinctive regime of the river in this section of its course con-tributed to its exceptional affluence in fish. Before the first regulation carried out in the end of the 19th century and the construction of HE Djerdap I in 1970 the Danube downstream of Golubac and Moldova island (nowadays flooded) to the village Davidovac was rapid river with unpredictable whirlpools, under-water cataracts and sharp rocks protruding from the water. Alternating expanding and narrowing of the riverbed in this section was related to the increase and decrease of depth from 2-3 meters to 20 meters and at some spots in the Gorge even to 50 meters. The

Fig. 1. – Iron Gates Gorge with settlements of the Lepenski Vir culture.


INTRODUCTION

Fig

. 2. –

Sur

face

exc

avat

ed a

t Lep

ensk

i Vir

: 1. i

n 19

65, 2

. in

1966

, 3. i

n Ju

ly-A

ugus

t 196

7, 4

. in

Oct

ober

196

7, 5

. in

1968

, 6. i

n 19

69 a

nd 7

. in

1970

.


INTRODUCTION

mountainous landscape of the Iron Gates through which the river passes caused frequent changes of direction of the river course. Thus from Drencova to Donji Milanovac the Danube flows towards the southeast, from the confluence of Pore~ka reka it abruptly changes direction towards northeast to Ogradena and then it resumes its eastward direction with only slight diversions. The section of the river 22 km long where it is flowing to the southeast was just the one where was the epicenter of Lepenski Vir culture and where the eponymous site is situated. It is characterized by underwater cataracts Izlaz and Tahtalija creating strong water currents and whirl-pools of which the largest and most favorable for fishing was Gospodjin Vir near the rignt bank be-tween the rocks Kozla on Romanian side and Dojka on the Serbian side. Between Gospodjin Vir and Greben were other smaller whirlpools like Lepenski Vir of less importance for fishing in the historical times but sufficiently abounding in fish for sustain-ing life in long-lasting prehistoric settlements.

Stone industry

Considering the stone material the most attention was paid to the sculptures and also other cult ob-jects of smaller size including scepters and amulets (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983). Not much attention was paid to the simple tools from Lepenski Vir probably because this material is not attractive enough. These tools have never been completely catalogued. They were only the objective of the works interested in the problems of stone use in Early Holocene communities in the Iron Gates and in Neolithic settlements in the central Balkans (Antonovi} 2003a; Antonovi} 2003b; Antonovi} 2004; Antonovi}, in preparation) and this material was treated only from statistical point of view in or-der to explain the mentioned problems.

When studying the stone material from prehis-toric sites in particularly the Early Holocene ones as Lepenski Vir there is always a problem of distin-guishing tools and weapons from cult and decora-tive objects. There is no such problem for crude and roughly worked specimens of indisputably utilitarian character but for those finely trimmed and decorated objects often without distinct traces of use. The con-crete example are mallets or scepters from Lepenski Vir (Catalogue 1 – 38). All these long stone objects are explained by this author without difference as fishing tools1 while decorated specimens in some earlier works had been explained as scepters or cult and magic objects (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 183).

Bordering cases are also sacrificial altars, which have always been mentioned as cult objects (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 157 - 181) and for which some au-thors think that they could be identified as querns or mortars (Radovanovi} 1996: 277 - 278).

I studied in this book only stone tools and weapons. This group includes all stone objects that achieved their final shaped by the use of techniques of chipping, pecking and grinding as well as semi-finished objects, which according to their shape and function could not be attributed as objects of the chipped stone industry. Transitional forms like al-ready mentioned altars – mortars or aniconical sculp-tures-pebbles with some traces of use have not been taken into consideration first of all because they are already studied and published as objects of art from Lepenski Vir (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 150 - 181). The sample I studied here consists of 202 specimens. Of that number 184 are housed in the Archaeological Collection of the Faculty of Philosophy and in National Museum in Belgrade.2 For one small group of ground-edge tools is unknown so far where are they stored but they are known from the field inven-tory. These tools have been studied separately at the end of our catalogue as group identified as ‘Material stored at unknown location‘ and data about them as well as uncorrected drawings have been taken from the field inventory books. Unfortunately, these data and drawings are imprecise and of modest character so the mentioned specimens could not have been in-cluded in any more serious statistical analysis.

Unfortunately, the catalogued sample could not provide the genuine picture of real quantity and char-acter of stone tools at Lepenski Vir for few reasons: 1. certain amount of material including atypical frag-ments of smaller size had been discarded immedi-ately upon discovery;3 2. in cases when groups of un-attractive tools (hammer-pebbles, anvils, sling balls) had been found only one characteristic specimen of each type had been preserved and the rest was dis-carded and 3. tools of large size (grinding stones and querns) were recorded only as architectural features and are not preserved in the Lepenski Vir material. I did not suggest in the catalogue the evolution se-quence of stone tools and weapons within already established stratigraphy of the site (Proto-Lepenski Vir, Lepenski Vir I – III) but that will be done when all material (portable and stationary) is analyzed so the stone material could be comprehended as the seg-ment of greater entity.

2 For each catalog entity I provide the information about storage.3 Such attitude was in agreement with methodology of field work of that time. Pottery and osteological material had been treated in the same way. Only larger and dignostic pieces – rims, bases, handles, decorated fragments, skulls, mandibles and long bones and the like have been collected.

1 Opinion that these were tools and weapons for killing big fish and game was expressed also by other authors (Srejovi} 1969a: 152 and (Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 99).

Raw material


Already at first glance we can notice great di-versity in the selection of raw materials in the stone material from Lepenski Vir. Also, there is an obvi-ous difference between the stone used for manufac-turing ground-edge tools and the stone used for other tools. The tools used for pounding, grinding and similar rough activities (mallets, weights, grinding stones, anvils, hammers etc) were made of pebbles, which were shaped into the final form by minimal working. The pebbles used for manufacturing such kind of objects had most often been of sandstone and magmatic rocks sometimes of certain metamorphic rocks like amphibolite, mica schist, gneiss, gneiss-granite etc. On the other hand the ground-edge tools used exclusively for woodworking had been made because of the fineness of the intended work of fine-grained, resilient rocks represented in the mate-rial from Lepenski Vir by different metamorphites (Chart 1; Table 5).

The stone used for production of tools from Lepenski Vir was mostly analyzed macroscopically and such an analysis was the basis for classifying the raw materials into 5 main groups. The rocks are grouped according to origin: 1. metamorphic rocks, 2. magmatic rocks, 3. sandstones, 4. limestones and 5. other stone raw materials including heteroge-neous rocks and minerals occurring only as single specimens. In the process of this basic macroscopic classification we took into account following charac-teristics of the stone: hardness (after Mohs), com-pactness, presence of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), structure, texture and mineral contents determined with the naked eye, i.e. with magnifying glass, which magnified 6 and 16 times. In such a way we obtained elementary petrographic data so most of the rocks were defined precisely in particular those coarse-grained ones of which stone tools not intended for woodworking had been produced. In order to deter-

mine raw materials used for production of ground-edge tools used exclusively for woodworking and as because of their fine-grained structure it was not possible to identify them only macroscopically we carried out 15 microscopic tests.4 The analyses have revealed that selection of raw materials for this type of tools was relatively uniform and consisted mostly of fine-grained metamorphites.

4 Analyses were conducted by Dr Vladica Cvetkovi}, Associate Professor and Kristina Resimi}-Šari} MA assistant in the Institute for Mineralogy, Crystalography, Petrology and Geochemistry of Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade. Results of these analyses are published in detail as the appendix of this book.

Chart 1. Distribution of stone raw materials from Lepenski Vir according to the tool types.Rock type: A – fine-grained metamorphites, B – sandstones, C – limestones, D – magmatic rocks, E – metamorphic rocks, F – other stone raw materials; I – ground-edge tools, II – other types of tools.


RAW MATERIAL

1. Metamorphic rocks

The metamorphic rocks are without doubt the most used raw material at Lepenski Vir. They had been evenly used for production of pounding tools (mallets-scepters, anvils and hammers) but also for production of ground-edge tools that had generally been made of fine-grained metamorphites. Table of distribution of metamorphic rocks and their use for certain tool types illustrates in the best way the hetero-geneity of the raw materials (Table 1).

Metamorphic rocks used for the tools from Lepenski Vir are hard and resistant to dynamic impact and hence very suitable for making tools sustaining constant pounding. Middle- and coarse-grained rocks like gneiss, gneiss-granite, amphibolite etc. were used for massive tools like mallets (scepters), weights, an-vils and hammers. Fine-grained schists identified on the basis of microscopic analyses were distinguished as distinct group of metamorphic rocks. Of these rocks had exclusively been produced the ground-edge tools (axes, adzes and chisels) used for woodworking.

Eighty-four tools studied in this book were made of metamorphic rocks.

Table 1. – Types of metamorphic rocks and their quantity among the Lepenski Vir tools.

Rock typeMallets

(scepters)Weights Anvils Hammers

Ground-edge tools

Other

Gneiss 4 1Gneiss-granite 1Amphibolite 1 2 1 1 4Mica schist 9 1Phyllite-mica schist 1Phyllite 2Serpentinite 5Schists 4Fine-grained schists* 29Metadiabase 9Metabasalt 1Metasiltstone 8

* Within fine-grained schists are included the following rocks mostly detected by microscopic analyses: chlorite-epidote, epidote-amphibole, quartz-albite-epidote, quartz-epidote, albite-epidote, amphibole-epidote and albite-bearing epidote schist.

Table 2. – Types of magmatic rocks and their quantity among the Lepenski Vir tools.

Rock typeMallets

(scepters)Weights

Grinding stones

HammersSling balls

RetouchersGround-edge

toolsOther

Granite 1 1 2 1 1 1Granite porphyry 1Andesite 1Syenite 1 1Granodiorite 1Diabase 1Diorite 1 1 1Gabbro 1 1 4Aplite 1Peridotite 1Other magmatic rocks*

1 1 2 2

* Under the caption ‘Other magmatic rocks’ are included various insufficiently defined rocks, which precise macroscopic determination was impossible due to damaged surface (dirt, calcification and exposure to fire).


RAW MATERIAL

2. Magmatic rocks

Many specimens (30 in total) from Lepenski Vir had been produced of different kinds of magmatic rocks. They were very heterogeneous and there was not a rule of using just one type of rock for one type of tool. This claim is supported by the fact that gen-erally all rocks were represented by a single tool specimen (Table 2).

Magmatic rocks are exceptionally high qual-ity raw material for production of stone tools. They pertain to the group of hard and rocks resistant to dy-namic impact, capable of sustaining constant pound-ing as it had been the main requirement for the most of Lepenski Vir tools.

3. Sandstones

Sandstones are perhaps the most frequently rep-resented raw material at Lepenski Vir. They were used for 26% of all tools at Lepenski Vir but it should be mentioned here that all sculptures and altars had also been made of sandstone (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 203). Of sandstone had been produced mal-lets (scepters), weights, grinding stones, querns, an-vils, hammers, sling balls, retouchers and there are also pebbles with ambiguous traces of working and use. One hammer and one adze were made of fine-grained sandstone. There are 48 specimens made of sandstone studied in this book and their distribution according to type is presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Quantity of sandstones among the tools from Lepenski Vir.

Type of tool Number of specimens

Mallets (scepters) 5Weights 4Grinding stones 11Querns 2Anvils 9Hammers 5Sling balls 1Retouchers 1Pebbles with traces of use and trimming

8

Ground-edge tools 2

There was no uniformity in the sandstones iden-tified in the material from Lepenski Vir. Large num-ber of varieties was registered. The most frequently used were quartz sandstones with siliceous cement and considerably less used were those with carbon-ate and marly cement. Color of sandstones is mostly ochre turning to gray and red and white varieties

were encountered extremely rarely. Certain amount of sandstone objects have the traces of natural red pigmentation while for others red color is the result of fire exposure.

4. LimestonesAlready the ancient masters from Lepenski Vir

were aware of the fact that limestone because of its brittleness was not a suitable raw material for the tools sustaining blows. This knowledge could be noticed also in the selection of raw materials for stone tools from this site. Only mallets (scepters) – objects equal-ly used as tools and cult objects – had been produced of limestone. But limestone had not been used for production of tools actually used for everyday work (hammers, axes, adzes etc.). Limestones of beautiful colors and fine structure are the kind of decorative stone so such varieties had been used for production of certain decorative and cult objects, which are not included in this study. Distribution of limestones ac-cording to the tool types is presented on Table 4.

Table 4. – Quantity of limestones among the tools from Lepenski Vir.

Type of tool Number of specimens

Mallets (scepters) 11

Pebbles with traces of use and trimming 3

Miscellaneous objects 1

There are 15 specimens of tools made of lime-stone. The varieties used are fine-grained, of almost all colors with few exceptions being of yellow/white color and sometimes slightly silicified and hence harder than common limestones.

5. Other stone raw materialsOnly chalcedonic pebbles (2 specimens) used as

hammers were encountered of other stone raw ma-terials used for tools. Chalcedony is very hard rock (7 after Mohs) although not particularly resistant to dynamic impact but nevertheless the pebble of this stone was quite suitable for use as pounder.

For 5 objects (2 axes, one mallet-scepter, one weight and one pebble with traces of use and work) it was not possible to establish macroscopically of which raw material they had been produced because of con-siderable damage of the object surface (thick layer of patina or fire exposure that damaged the surface).


RAW MATERIALTa

ble

5. –

Roc

k ty

pes

and

thei

r qu

anti

ty a

mon

g th

e to

ols

from

Lep

ensk

i Vir

Roc

k ty

peM

alle

ts

(sce

pter

s)W

eigh

tsG

rind

ing

ston

esQ

uern

sM

isce

llane

ous

obje

cts

Anv

ilsH

amm

ers

Slin

g ba

llsR

etou

cher

sP

ebbl

esA

xes

Adz

esC

hise

lsF

ragm

ente

d gr

ound

-edg

e to

ols

Gne

iss

41

Gne

iss-

gran

ite

1A

mph

ibol

ite

12

11

4M

ica

schi

st9

1P

hyll

ite-

mic

a sc

hist

1P

hyll

ite

11

Ser

pent

init

e1

13

Mus

covi

te-c

hlor

ite

schi

st*

3

Gar

net-

bear

ing

amph

ibol

e sc

hist

*1

Chl

orit

e-ep

idot

e sc

hist

(D

LV

1, 1

2, 1

4)5

21

51

Epi

dote

-am

phib

ole

schi

st

(DL

V 2

, 3)

2

Qua

rtz-

albi

te-e

pido

te

schi

st (

DL

V 4

, 8)

61

Qua

rtz-

epid

ote

schi

st

(DL

V 5

)1

Alb

ite-

epid

ote

schi

st

(DL

V 6

)1

Am

phib

ole-

epid

ote

schi

st

(DL

V 1

1, 1

3)1

1

Alb

ite-

bear

ing

epid

ote

schi

st (

DL

V 1

5)1

Chl

orit

e sc

hist

11

Epi

dote

sch

ist

21

Sil

tsto

ne (

DL

V 7

)5

2M

etad

iaba

se (

DL

V 9

)8

1M

etab

asal

t (D

LV

10)

1S

ilic

ifie

d gr

een

clay

ston

e*1

San

dsto

nes

wit

h si

lice

ous

cem

ent

37

28

51

18

San

dsto

nes

wit

h ca

rbon

ate

cem

ent

11

21

1

San

dsto

nes

wit

h m

arly

ce

men

t1

Fin

e-gr

aine

d sa

ndst

ones

41

11

Gra

nite

11

21

11

Gra

nite

por

phyr

y1

And

esit

e1

Sye

nite

11

Gra

nodi

orit

e1

Dia

base

1D

iori

te1

11

Gab

bro

11

21

1A

plit

e1

Per

idot

ite

1C

halc

edon

y2

Insu

ffic

ient

ly d

efin

ed

rock

s**

12

11

41

1

*

Det

erm

inat

ion

afte

r S

rejo

vi},

Bab

ovi}

198

3.**

Ins

uffi

cien

tly

defi

ned

rock

s be

caus

e of

dam

aged

sur

face

(di

rt, c

alci

fica

tion

and

fir

e ex

posu

re).

5 D

esig

nati

on o

f sa

mpl

e fo

r m

icro

scop

ic a

naly

sis.

See

the

appe

ndix

on

anal

yses

.

Tipological-functional analysis


Mallets (scepters; catalogue 1- 38)

Dual name for these massive tools is a compro-mise solution for their profane and cult purpose. Conspicuous traces of use determine these objects as tools (mallets for clubbing to death large fish and game) but their use in cult is absolutely certain as it is suggested by finely executed and very nicely deco-rated specimens. This is the reason why I retained their already accepted name ‘scepter’ (Srejovi}- Babovi} 1983: 183 – 189) even though their possible role in the cult has nothing to do with the meaning of this word.

These massive tools were made of large stones of elongated shape that could be even 50 cm long. The stone for this type of objects was by all appearances carved directly from the rock mass. In favor of this clearly speaks the tool cat. no. 16 that is enormous flake, 293 mm long and without any trace of work-ing! The objects achieved their final shape by peck-ing, chipping and grinding that had been executed very summary on some specimens. Certain tools reveal the traces of sawing as preliminary technique in reaching the final shape of the artifact (catalogue no. 19). Certain amount of these tools used in the cult was decorated by engraved ornament (catalogue 9, 10, 11, 17 and 36).

It is assumed that their main use was in fishing to kill large fish (sturgeon, beluga, catfish) as it is indi-cated by traces of use. These traces are identified as rather shallow circular depressions with rough sur-face concentrated on one end of the tool (catalogue 3, 18, 19, 20, 27, 28, 35). Many mallets (scepters) were secondary used as anvils, hammerstones or retouchers,6 and this is indicated by damages on the tool surface (catalogue 2, 6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 22, 29, 32, 33, 38). Some of the objects do not reveal the traces of use mostly because of the type of the rock used, which was so friable that it did not permit more permanent preservation of the traces of work and use (catalogue 1, 15, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 36, 37).

From Lepenski Vir come 38 mallets (scepters): 27 were found on the house floors (houses 1, 3, 9, 18, 19, 22, 24, 27, 36, 38, 39, 41, 44, 47, 48, 51, 54, 57, 61, 63, 65), one was found under the floor of house 1 and ten specimens were discovered in the cultural layer.7

For production of mallets (scepters) had been used first of all the resilient rocks resistant to per-manent pounding as it was the main purpose of this type of objects. The stones used were fine-grained metamorphic sandstones, fine-grained slightly silici-fied limestones, granite, diorite and various kinds of schistose metamorphic rocks (Table 6).

6 About these damages and traces of use see in the text concerning with tools of that type – Anvils, Hammerstones, Retouchers.

Rock type Number of mallets

Sandstones (fine-grained metamorphosed, siltstones)

5

Limestones (fine-grained, slightly silicified)

11

Granite 1

Diorite 1

Mica schist 9

Gneiss 3

Gneiss-granite 2

Amphibolite 2

Muscovite-chlorite schist 3

Undefined 1

Table 6. – Types of rocks used for production of mallets (scepters) at Lepenski Vir.

7 For the time being the precise dating of horizons has not been established but this work is in progress based on the analysis of pottery and its distribution within stratigraphic entities. We did not take in consideration in this book earlier dating by Srejovi} (Lepenski Vir I – III) because it is not precise.


TYPOLOGICAL-FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS

Mallets (scepters) are distinctive phenomenon in the Mesolithic of southeast Europe and they are exclusively characteristic of the Iron Gates region. Most of these tools and at the same time the most beautiful specimens originate just from Lepenski Vir. Considerably smaller amount of these tools was found also at Hajdu~ka Vodenica (Radovanovi} 1996: 323), Vlasac (Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 99) and Padina (Antonovi} 2003b: 18).

Weights (catalogue 39 – 48)

This type of objects were mentioned in some earlier works under the name mallets-weights be-cause of traces of use, which clearly suggested that they had been used as hammers (mallets; Antonovi} 2003b: 18), but also because of incredible similar-ity with Neolithic/Eneolithic mining mallets from Rudna Glava in eastern Serbia and Mali [turac at Rudnik (Jovanovi} 1982; Bogosavljevi} 1988). However, the very shape of these artifacts indicate that they are weights certainly secondary used for other purposes.

These are pebbles of rather large size (the small-est is 95 x 68 x 69 mm and the largest is 213 x 140 x 83 mm) which natural shape was altered insigni-ficantly by minimum pecking and very rarely by grinding. The groove for rope fixing was executed by pecking. The weights are mostly of irregular ovoid shape with one transversal groove in the mid-dle following the circumference of the tool. On some specimens the groove does not make full circle but it stops at one end (catalogue 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45). Rather rarely are encountered weights with two grooves intersecting at right angle (catalogue 47, 48) and absolutely exceptional is symmetrically shaped cylindrical weight with two parallel grooves at the ends (catalogue 46).

Traces of use indicate that they had been second-ary used as mallets (hammers) and anvils (catalogue 39, 41, 42, 44, 46). Rather small amount of speci-mens does not reveal clear traces of secondary use (catalogue 43, 45, 47, 48).

According to the ethnographic analogies (Petrovi} 1941: 75 – 82) these tools were by all appearances primarily used for fishing the large Danube fish. Namely, in the earlier times and as late as the end of 19th century in the Iron Gates had been organized fishing for large Danube fish like beluga, sturgeon, fringebarbel sturgeon, Russian sturgeon and catfish. For such method of fishing had been used various complex devices-traps constructed especially for large fish and rapid Danube waters and one of the

most simple devices to construct was beluga rod created especially for catching the largest Danube fish – beluga. This device had been placed at suit-able spots, which were known to be on the beluga route going upstream. The fish was not caught by the method of swallowing bait but it was hooked for the stomach, sides, tail and other parts of the body. The most important elements of this device were large stone weights sufficiently heavy not to be displaced by rapid Danube waters. For these stones were at-tached gourds floating on the surface and between the rods was stretched another rope with sharp hooks (without baits) for catching large fish (Fig. 3). There were many hooks and on the spots where beluga had been caught there was always many such devices so when the fish swimming upstream and struggling with strong Danube currents enters the entangled hooks there was no chance for escape. Thus the fish could not swim any more so the fishermen pulled it into the boat and killed it by clubbing with the mal-lets. Fishing with beluga rods was in the past the spe-ciality exclusively used in the lower Danube basin. We can only assume that weights from Lepenski Vir had been used in a similar manner.

Weights had been made mostly of sandstone and magmatic pebbles, and more important was the weight of the stone no matter how hard and resistant to dynamic impact it was (Table 7).

From Lepenski Vir come 10 weights mostly found in the cultural layer (8 specimens) and two were found on the floors of houses 16 and 36.

Identical type of tools had been found also at Velesnica (Antonovi} 2003a: 118 – 122), Ajmana (Stalio 1986: 29), in all Early Holocene horizons of Padina (Antonovi} 2003b: 18) and at Hajdu~ka Vodenica II (Radovanovi} 1996: 323). They were usually explained as weights used for fishing or as some kind of primitive mallets because of their size, weight and worn butt.

Table 7. – Types of rocks used for production of weights at Lepenski Vir.

Rock typeNumber of

weights

Fine-grained quartz sandstones with siliceous and carbonate cement

4

Granite 1

Diorite 1

Insufficiently defined magmatic rock 1

Amphibolite 2

Undefined 1



Grinding stone (catalogue 49 – 60)

The grinding stones are tools used for making of artifacts of hard materials (stone, bone, horn/ant-ler) by grinding and polishing. Hence they had been made exclusively of rocks with abrasive characte-ristics like sandstones and rarely also of magmatic rocks with higher contents of quartz. Few types of polishers were encountered at Lepenski Vir: station-ary ones, of fine manufacture therefore called ‘palet-tes’ (catalogue 49-51), those for making awls and pins with one groove (catalogue 52-54) or without groove (catalogue 60), small hand polishers for pot-tery (catalogue 59) as well as crude massive station-ary grinding stones sensu stricto (catalogue 55-58). Among this last group should be attributed also rather large trapezoid slabs of reddish fine-grained sandstone embedded in the house floors and which according to the opinion of Lepenski Vir investiga-tors were used for making of stone tools (Srejovi} 1969a: 153) but which are not preserved in the mate-rial from this site.

Traces of use reveal that they had been used for manufacture and trimming of stone tools (cata-logue 55 - 58) for fine trimming of bone implements (catalogue 49 – 54, 60) and polishing of surfaces of pottery vessels (catalogue 59). Some of them were secondary used as hammers (catalogue 56) and an-vils (catalogue 55, 58).

The purpose of these tools determined the selec-tion of raw material so the most of them was made of sandstone as stone with distinctive abrasive charac-teristics (Table 8).

Grinding stones from Lepenski Vir were mostly discovered on the house floors (houses 17, 19, 35, 40, 48 and 54) and only few were found in the cultural layer. This type of tools had been encoun-tered also at other Early Holocene sites in the Iron Gates. They were found at Vlasac I – III (Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 99), Padina (Antonovi} 2003b: 22), Velesnica (Antonovi} 2003a: 122), Ajmana (Stalio 1986: fig. 5).

Rock type Number of specimens

Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement

7

Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement

2

Fine-grained marly sandstone 2

Altered peridotite 1

Table 8. – Types of rocks used for production of grinding stones at Lepenski Vir.

Fig. 3. – Graphic representation of the Iron Gates „beluga rod“ – simple device created for catching beluga (after Petrovi} 1941).



Querns (catalogue 61 – 62)

Only two querns from reliable archaeological context have been preserved in the material from Lepenski Vir.8 They were both found in the cultural layer without more precise stratigraphic determina-tion. These massive stone objects with flat or slightly concave working surface were used for grinding grains and they differ from similar in shape and size stationary grinding stones only according to the stone they were made of and which was not friable. There are certain opinions that some of altars from Lepenski Vir (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 158 - 172) should be rather identified as querns and mortars and not as cult objects (Radovanovi} 1996: 277 - 278).

Of the two mentioned specimens one is complete and 286 mm long (catalogue 62). They both have traces of use characteristic of querns (concave and polished working surface) and the specimen, which is complete had also been used as hammer. They were made of compact fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement.

Simple querns were found in the Iron Gates also at Padina, Sector IV – Babice (Radovanovi} 1996: 341) and at Velesnica (Antonovi} 2003a: 122).

Miscellaneous objects (catalogue 63 – 64)

For two stone artifacts we could not find analo-gies to help us determine their purpose. These are one complete ithyphallic point made of sandstone (catalogue 63) and an artifact made of mica schist and resembling in shape the metal spearheads (cata-logue 64). The shape of the latter could be assumed to be the result of natural splitting of a rock of mica schist type. However, the first artifact, ithyphallic point, is certainly an interesting find in the Lepenski Vir culture and it is a question whether it could be at-tributed as tool. Problem in defining its function is its surface damaged by fire, which probably destroyed also the traces of use.

They were both made by grinding and they were found in the cultural layer.

Anvils (catalogue 65 – 74)

Within this group we gathered partially worked pebbles used as base in the process of stone working as it is indicated by traces of use consisting of one or many rather small depressions with rough surface on their working parts.

For this purpose had been used spherical, ovoid and discoid pebbles of average size (diameters from 80 to 145 mm) which natural shape had been insig-nificantly altered by flaking and grinding. There are specimens with one (catalogue 65 – 68), two (cata-logue 69, 72) and many depressions (catalogue 70, 73, 74). They were primarily used as anvils but there are also specimens used also as hammers (catalogue 65 – 71, 73), polishers (catalogue 66, 68) and re-touchers (catalogue 72).

For most of these tools were used pebbles of sandstone and only one specimen was made of meta-morphic rock (Table 9).

Anvils from Lepenski Vir mostly come from closed associations – houses 26’, 36 and 38, oven in house 5, under the floors of houses 1, 47 and 21-22-30. Two specimens were found in the cultural layer. Similar objects have been found also at other Mesolithic sites (Kula, Vlasac, Hajdu~ka Vodenica, Padina, Velesnica etc.; Sladi} 1986: 432 – 433; Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 99 – 100; Radovanovi} 1996: 323; Antonovi} 2003a: 122; Antonovi} 2003b: 22;).

Hammers (catalogue 75 – 87)

Under this caption were included objects es-sentially intended for pounding. According to shape these tools were made of damaged and fragmented ground-edge tools trimmed by flaking, pecking and grinding (catalogue 75 –79) and of pebbles without traces of work that were used as hammerstones in its original form (catalogue 80 – 87).

8 A few querns in the Archaeological Collection of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade are identified as chance finds from the Danube bank so even though they could be typologically attributed as Mesolithic/Neolithic I did not take them into consideration.

Table 9. – Types of rocks used for production of anvils at Lepenski Vir.

Rock type Number of anvils


8

Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement

1

Amphibolite 1



The most numerous are hammer-pebbles while other types are represented by only one specimen each (Table 10).9 The tools are of various size – their lengths varying from 49 mm to 177 mm.

Traces of use on this kind of artifacts indicate that they had mostly been used as hammers but smaller amount of them besides main purpose was also used as retouchers (catalogue 75, 86, 87), anvils (catalogue 78, 79) and polisher (catalogue 81).

As for the pounding function was necessary the stone, which is not easily breakable hence the basic common characteristic of raw materials used for the hammers was regardless of their petrological diversi-ty their resistance to dynamic impact and substantial hardness (Table 11).

The largest amount of hammers from Lepenski Vir was found in the cultural layer and three of them come from the floors of houses 3, 8 and 51. Hammer-pebbles have been frequently found also at other Early Holocene sites in the Iron Gates (Antonovi} 2003b: 18 – 22) while hammers made of tools with cutting edge are so far registered only in the material from Lepenski Vir.

Sling balls (catalogue 88 – 90)

Stone artifacts shaped by pecking and grinding into almost symmetrical spherical shapes were iden-tified as sling balls. These are rather small pebbles (diameter 50 – 73 mm) made of firm compact rocks. These objects are rather rare finds and with good reason as they were used as hunting devices. Three specimens of this kind were encountered at Lepenski Vir; one was found on the floor of house 3, one under the floor of house 24 and one in the cultural layer.

Sling balls were secondary used as hammers (catalogue 88) and anvils (catalogues 89 – 90). They were made of fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement, of syenite and some insufficiently defined magmatic rock.

Besides at Lepenski Vir they were encountered in the Mesolithic layers of Vlasac (Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 100) and at Padina (Antonovi} 2003b: 24).

Retouchers (catalogue 91 – 93)

Small number of stone objects from Lepenski Vir was attributed to the group of retouchers only on the basis of the function performed with them. These are two pebbles without traces of work but with traces of use characteristic of retoucher (catalogue 92 – 93) and one proximal part of some fragmented ground-edge tools made by polishing that was after damage secondary used as retoucher (catalogue 91). One of pebbles was also used as anvil (catalogue 92). All these artifacts are of medium size (length 67 – 95 mm). They were made of compact rocks – gabbro, granite and fine-grained quartz sandstone with sili-ceous cement.

They were found on the floor of house 5 and un-der the floors of houses 47 and 54. Such tools were not encountered at other Early Holocene sites in the Iron Gates as distinct type of tools because for that purpose had been used damaged tools of all kinds as it was the case at Lepenski Vir as well.

Table 10. – Types of hammers (after Vin~a material typology) and their quantity at Lepenski Vir.

Type of hammer Number of specimens

VI/1/c 1

VI/2/b 1

VI/2/c 1

VI/6 8

Fragmented tools 2

Table 11. – Types of rocks used for production of hammers at Lepenski Vir.

Rock type Number of hammers

Fine-grained quartz sandstone with

siliceous cement4

Conglomeratic quartz sandstone

with siliceous cement1

Granite 2

Granodiorite 1

Aplite 1

Gabbro 1

Amphibolite 1

Chalcedony 2

9 For the ground-edge tools and hammers originating from them I applied typology established for material from Vin~a (Antonovi} 1992: 7-17).



Pebbles with ambiguous traces of use and work (catalogue 94 – 114)

From Lepenski Vir originates certain amount of pebbles found in the cultural layer and in closed as-sociations but which could not be identified as tools with certainty. Three groups of pebbles could be distinguished: 1. those without any trace of work but with damages, which could equally result from natu-ral causes or from humane use (catalogue 94 - 104), 2. pebbles with vague traces, which could represent the consequence of minimal human activity or natu-ral environment (catalogue 105 – 106) and 3. pebbles without any traces on their surface and which could be explained as possible raw materials (catalogue 107 – 114).

The pebbles are of different size (length from 53 to 169 mm). Ambiguous traces of use indicate that some of them had possibly been used as hammers (catalogue 94 – 95, 97 – 103), polishers (catalogue 96, 98), anvils (catalogue 103) and retouchers (cata-logue 104). The most frequent are those made of fine-grained quartz sandstone and various magmatic rocks (Table 12).

They were found on the floors of houses 16, 21, 32, 39, 50 and 51, under the floors of houses 21-22-30 and 24 and 12 of them were found in the cultural layer.

Ground-edge tools (catalogue 115 – 184)

Under this collective name are included all axes, adzes, chisels and various fragmented ground-edge tools the form of which could not be determined due to considerable damage. This tool group represent dis-tinctive phenomenon in the Lepenski Vir material dis-tinguished from previously described tools (catalogue 1 – 114). Objects 1 – 114 in the catalogue used the pebble as their basic form, which was only finished off while ground-edge tools had been mostly made on rather large flakes of fine-grained gray and gray/green rocks thus acquiring the looks characteristic of Star~evo-Vin~a ground stone industry. Ground-edge tools had been used exclusively for woodworking. They were found in larger quantities only at sites with intensive building activity like Lepenski Vir and Padina-Sector III and in considerably less quantity at other Early Holocene sites in the Iron Gates.

Classification into axes, adzes and chisels was conducted according to shape and not use as it most-ly negate the typological classification as it would be seen in the catalogue.

Axes (catalogue 115 – 159)

As axes have been determined the tools of differ-ent shape but always with symmetrical profile (cut-ting edge was in the plane of symmetry). Main pur-pose of these tools was according to definition to cut trees. Twelve (12) types of axes have been recorded at Lepenski Vir (Table 13). The most numerous are those of massive appearance as a result of circular, ellipsoid or quadrangular cross-section. The tools are between 50 and 223 mm long and most of them are up to 100 mm long (Table 14). Anyway, a total of 41 axes were discovered at Lepenski Vir and 37 of them are complete and 38 final products.10

The greatest amount of axes was used as adzes (catalogue 116 – 118, 126, 129, 132 – 137, 139, 140, 142, 143) and considerably smaller number as wedge for splitting wood (catalogue 124, 127, 147, 152, 153). Some of the tools have vague traces of use in woodworking. These are axes, which in the process of sharpening the cutting edge all traces had been obliterated except those along the very edge and ac-cording to which we can conclude nothing more but that they had been used for woodworking (catalogue 115, 130, 131, 138, 141, 144 – 146, 155). Smaller amount has been used as retouchers (catalogue 129,

Table 12. - Types of rocks used as pebbles with ambiguous traces of use and work at Lepenski Vir.

Rock typeNumber of

pebbles


8

Limestone 3Granite 1Syenite 1Gneiss 1Amphibolite 4Basic magmatic rock 1

Insufficiently defined magmatic rock 1

Undefined because of calcificated surface 1

10 Such statistic result is certainly the consequence of selective collection of material in the course of excavations as we explained in the Introduction.



Table 13. – Types of axes at Lepenski Vir (after typology of the Vin~a material) and their quantity.

Type of axe Number of specimens

I/1/a 5

I/1/b 2

I/1/c 15

I/1/d 1

I/1/e 7

I/2/b 4

I/2/d 1

I/3/b 2

I/3/d 1

I/4/a 1

I/4/b 1

I/5/e 1

Table 14. – Sizes (length) of the Lepenski Vir axes.

Length in mmNumber of specimens

50 – 100 24

100 – 150 5

150 – 200 5

> 200 3

145, 151) and only one as hammer (catalogue 128). Some of them have in the butt segment traces of shafting into the shaft of softer material, most probably wood (catalogue 153).

Rocks used for production of axes as well as for other tools with cutting edge differ substantially from macroscopic point of view from those used for production of other types of tools at Lepenski Vir. These are fine-grained, hard and rocks resistant to dynamic impact, able to sustain prolonged work with wood. Prehistoric masters thus preferred to use schists and other metamorphic rocks like metasiltstone and metadiabase but along with them also compact fine-grained magmatic rocks (Table 15). In their selection of raw materials for axes the masters from Lepenski Vir followed certain standards as suggested by mi-croscopic analyses performed for the purpose of this study.11

Table 15. – Types of rocks used for production of axes at Lepenski Vir.

Rock type Number of axes

Fine-grained rocks* 30

Granite 1

Granite porphyry 1

Andesite 1

Diabase 1

Gabbro 2

Fine-grained basic magmatic rock 1

Silicified serpentinite 1

Phyllite-mica schist 1

Fine-grained rock with patina on its surface 2

* Under the caption ‘fine-grained rocks’ were classified the rocks of different origin but with very similar physical and technical characteristics (fine-grained, hard and resistant to dynamic impact of various nuances of gray and gray/green color) including: chlorite-epidote schist, albite-bearing epidote schist, quartz-albite-epidote schist, amphibole-epidote schist, quartz-epidote schist, chlorite schist, epidote schist, metasiltstone, metadiabase, silicified phyllite, claystone, fine-grained sandstone.

Most of axes come from layers with the Star~evo pottery and from stone structures above the house floors and considerably smaller number was found on the house floors (houses 5, 44, 54 and under burial 93 in house 27).

Adzes (catalogue 156 – 162)

As adzes were identified ground-edge tools with asymmetrical profile (cutting edge is not in the plane of symmetry). Tools of this shape are infrequent at Lepenski Vir – only 7 (6 complete) specimens of this kind in 4 different shapes were encountered (Table 16). Two specimens are semi-finished products. Tools had been made using techniques of flaking and grinding. Their lengths vary between 47 and 122 mm and most numerous are those exceeding 100 mm (Table 17).

Table 16. – Types of adzes at Lepenski Vir (after typology of the Vin~a material) and their quantity.

Type of adze Number of specimens

III/1/a 4

III/4/a 1

III/7/b 1

III/5/a 111 More details in the appendix concerning analyses.



Table 17. – Lengths of adzes from Lepenski Vir.

Length in mm Number of adzes

< 50 1

50 – 100 1

100 - 150 4

Tools of this kind were used as adzes (catalogue 156, 160) and as wedges for splitting wood (cata-logue 157, 161) while some reveal ambiguous traces resulting in the process of woodworking (catalogue 159).

As for axes for production of adzes were also used fine-grained, compact and rocks resistant to dynamic impact, mostly metamorphites (Table 18).

Table 18. – Types of rocks used for production of adzes at Lepenski Vir.

Rock typeNumber of

adzes

Schists (quartz-albite-epidote, chlorite-epidote, amphibole-epidote)

3

Metasiltstone 2

Fine-grained carbonate sandstone 1

Serpentinite 1

Adzes have been found generally in the cultural layer and just two of them on the house floors (houses 7 and 51-corner B).

Chisels (catalogue 163 – 174)

As chisels are identified tools with cutting edge no longer than 25 mm (Antonovi} 2003a: 55) while their shape could be that of axes and adzes respec-tively. This type of tools was not particularly numer-ous at Lepenski Vir – 12 specimens and all of them complete were found in total. Five specimens are actually damaged distal parts of larger ground-edge tools that had been secondary used as chisels with minimal or none additional trimming (catalogue 164, 165, 167, 171, 173). All these tools are final products and they were produced using techniques of flaking and grinding. Their length varies from 37 to 80 mm (Table 20). From typological point of view chisels are very diversified (Table 19).

Table 19. – Types of chisels at Lepenski Vir (after typo-logy of the Vin~a material) and their quantity.

Type of chisel Number of specimens

V/1/a 1

V/1/b 3

V/1/c 1

V/1/d 1

V/2/c 1

V/4/a 2

V/4/b 1

V/5/a 2

Table 20. – Lengts of chisels from Lepenski Vir.

Length in mm Number of chisels

< 50 5

50 – 100 7

Chisels had been mostly used as adzes (cata-logue 164 – 165, 167, 169 – 171, 173 – 174), to much smaller extent as wedges (catalogue 163, 168, 172) and only one have ambiguous traces resulting from woodworking (catalogue 166).

Considering the raw materials the tools of this type do not differ from other ground-edge tools. For their production were also used fine-grained com-pact and rocks resistant to dynamic impact, mostly metamorphites (Table 21).

Table 21. – Types of rocks used for production of chisels at Lepenski Vir.

Rock type Number of chisels

Chlorite-epidote schist 5

Metadiabase 1

Serpentinite, silicified serpentinite 3

Silicified phyllyte 1

Diorite 1

Gabbro 1

Chisels have been found on the house floors (houses 26, 31 and 35) under the skeleton in house 21, in the pit 1-2 next to house 26, in the Neolithic oven in sq. d/III as well as in the cultural layer.



Fragmented ground-edge tools of undistinguishable shape (catalogue 175-184)

For 10 fragmented tools it was not possible to determine the original type but it is quite certain that these were the ground-edge tools (axes, adzes and chisels). These fragments are mostly butt parts of the tools (catalogue 176, 180-184) much more rarely distal ends (catalogue 178), one specimen was actu-ally an adze (type III/1/a) with cutting edge broke off (catalogue 175) and two specimens are fragments of medial segment of the tool (catalogue 177, 179). Only in one case it was attempted to make new tool from the fragment by additional trimming but with-out success (catalogue 177).

Table 22. - Types of rocks used for fragmented ground- edge tools at Lepenski Vir.

Rock typeNumber of specimens

Schists (chlorite-epidote, albite-epidote, epidote-amphibole, chlorite, epidote)

7

Metabasalt 1

Gabbro 1

Basic magmatic rock 1

When raw materials are concerned there is no difference in comparison with other ground-edge tools. Fine-grained rocks resistant to dynamic impact, which are pound-resistant were used (Table 22).

They have mostly been found in the cultural layer and only two specimens were found on house floors (houses 9 and 10).

Material stored at unknown location (catalogue 185 – 202)

Data for certain amount of ground-edge stone

tools were found in the field daily logs and field in-ventory books but for the time being we do not know where this material is housed. Therefore on this oc-casion we quote basic information and insufficient descriptions together with imprecise drawings from the inventory books but which are not sufficient to determine their shape, technique of production and raw material. Main reason for quoting these artifacts here is that they are inventoried.

Distribution of stone tools within stratigraphic entities

and arbitrary layers


As Lepenski Vir had been excavated during six years and as the scope of investigation was not de-cided from the very beginning three trenches were excavated (without construction of a grid) in the first year. In such a way – by excavating trenches on the spots presumably most suitable for investigat-ing, the excavations continued also in the following year (1966) and grid for systematic excavations was established only in 1967. Therefore when quoting stratigraphic units from 1965 and 1966 I always explained their position in relation to subsequently established grid.

Three trenches – I, II and III (Fig. 4) were exca-vated in 1965. Trenches I and II were located on the spots where agglomerations of the Star~evo material were discernible in the river profile and trench II was extended during this campaign and this south exten-sion was marked as trench IIa. Trench III was located 0.75 m to the west of trench II. The excavated layer was at certain spots over 2 meters thick. In this first campaign was discovered a house floor (later identi-fied as house 5) in the south section of trench II and this was the reason for extending of this trench.

In the following year (1966) the excavations were resumed in a larger extent and in two campaigns – in July and October. The excavations were carried out in blocks so blocks A, B, C, D-D1, E, F-F1, G-G1, H-H1, a and b were investigated. Blocks D1, F1, G1 and H1 are extensions towards the southeast of blocks D, F, G and H. Some blocks were overlapping trenches excavated in 1965 – Block A and Trench I and Block E and Trench II-IIa. Blocks B, C and D were excavated between trenches I and II from 1965 and block F is an extension of trenches I and II from 1965. In this campaign 15 houses had been completely discovered and marked according to the blocks where they were found (houses A, B, F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, G, G1, G2, G3, G4, b1, b2) but in 1967 all the houses were renumerated ( e.g. house b1 became house 1, b2 house 2, house G – house 12 etc.). Therefore for certain houses I quoted their original mark as the material collected remained classified under the earlier caption.

In 1967 the grid was established covering the entire site (Fig. 2). The coordinate system was es-tablished in such a way that as apsis was used south

profile of blocks F1 and G1 and as ordinate east pro-file of block F1. The entire site was divided in 4 x 4 m squares. In addition, material being discovered in the houses was separated according to the segments. Each house was divided in four squares A, B, C and D. Squares A and B were in wider, entrance section of the trapeze – A to the left and B to the right look-ing from the entrance. Squares C and D were in the narrower section of the house - C to the right and D to the left from the entrance. The largest number of houses had been discovered during two campaigns (July-August and October) of that year (Fig. 5).

The excavations continued within already estab-lished coordinate system in 1968 (July, August and September), in 1969 (July and August) and in 1970 (July and August) and during the final year of exca-vations the houses were lifted as the whole site was dislocated to the higher position where it is still part of the Lepenski Vir Museum.

The following is the list of stone artifacts grouped according to stratigraphic entities and arbitrary layers. In the first section I singled out finds from the house floors. For these finds I provided short description of the finding circumstances (state of preservation of the floor and accompanying finds) and relative chronological determination of the house according to the authors studying this problem (Srejovi} 1969a; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983; Radovanovi} 1996). For some of the houses there are also the absolute dates so I included them as well. These dates were obtained by 14C method from the samples taken during exca-vations (Quitta 1969), subsequently calibrated after OxCal v.3.4 (Bori} 2002: 283) and AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) dates obtained from the animal bones samples (Whittle et al. 2002: 113).

For the finds which were not discovered on the house floors I quoted only arbitrary layers and as-sociations without further description of layer and its cultural and chronological determination concerning the fact that we still expect detailed analyses of com-plete portable material from Lepenski Vir (Fig. 6).12

12 Detailed analysis of portable and other material from Lepenski Vir is in progress as part of joint project of Faculty of Philosophy, Institute of Archaeology and National Museum in Belgrade. The aim of the project is publishing of complete material from excavations of this site.


DISTRIBUTION OF STONE TOOLS WITHIN STRATIGRAPHIC ENTITIES AND ARBITRARY LAYERS

Fig

. 4. –

Sur

face

exc

avat

ed in

196

5-19

66: 1

. cam

paig

n 19

65, 2

. Jul

y 19

66 a

nd 3

. Oct

ober

196

6.


DISTRIBUTION OF STONE TOOLS WITHIN STRATIGRAPHIC ENTITIES AND ARBITRARY

Fig

. 5. –

Hou

ses

at L

epen

ski V

ir.



Fig

. 6. –

Gra

phic

rep

rese

ntat

ion

of d

istr

ibut

ion

of s

tone

art

ifac

ts a

t Lep

ensk

i Vir

: ○ –

gro

und-

edge

tool

s, ●

– o

ther

sto

ne to

ols.



Finds from the houses

House 1 (House bI)Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1-2 (Radova-novi} 1996)5980 – 5560 BC (Bori} 2002)13

House was discovered in 1966 in Block b (sq. D/8-9) in arbitrary layer 4 and at that time was marked as house bI. From the house come two objects – one (catalogue 186) was found on the house floor near the hearth and the other (catalogue 7) in the layer of yellowish sand with larger trimmed stones suggesting the existence of a house at the bottom of arbitrary layer 4. Two stone tools were discovered on the floor.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-370 – Catalogue 7Axe – Inv. no. IB-369 – Catalogue 186

Under the floor of house 1 Mallet (scepter) – Without designation – Catalogue 28Anvil – Without designation – Catalogue 66

House 3 (House A)Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)Discovered in 1966 in Block A (sq. C, D/7-8) and originally marked as house A. Finds mentioned here have been gathered only in 1970 on the house floor on the occasion of house removal to the higher location.Fragmented mallet (scepter), secondary used as hammer – without designation – Catalogue 38Hammer – Inv. no. IB-35 (incorrect inv. no.) – Catalogue 79Sling ball, anvil – Inv. no I-1291 – Catalogue 89

House 5Settlement I (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983)House was discovered in 1965 in trench IIa (later sq. C,D/1) in arbitrary layer 10 and on that occasion was identified only as house. Floor of the house was in the east and south section cut through in the course of construction of the Neolithic horseshoe-shaped stone oven. All finds mentioned here come from this section of the house while in the area with preserved floor there were no finds.Anvil, hammer – Inv. no. I-120 (incorrect inv. no.) – Catalogue 69Retoucher – Inv. no. IB-129 – Catalogue 91Axe – Inv. no. LV-247 – Catalogue 130Axe – Inv. no. IB-124 – Catalogue 142Axe – Inv. no. IB-123 – Catalogue 143Axe – Inv.no. IB-122 – Catalogue 185

House 7 (House FI)Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)House was discovered in October of 1966 in Block F 1 (sq. D/I) in arbitrary layer 11 and was initially marked as house F1. Floor of the house was well preserved with considerable amount of fish and animal bones. The find mentioned here was found in 1967 in the course of investigating of house 17, overlaying to the certain extent house 7.Adze – Without designation – Catalogue 161

House 8 (House F) Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)House was discovered in July of 1966 in Block F (sq. C,D/I-II) at the bottom of arbitrary layer 7. The find mentioned here comes from a mass of broken stone on the bottom of arbitrary layer 7 and among the stones were many pottery fragments, animal bones, ash and soot.Hammer – Inv. no. IB-334 – Catalogue 78

House 9 (House F5)Settlement I d (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)5980 – 5550 BC (Bori} 2002)House 9 was discovered in October of 1966 in Block F 1 (sq. D,E/I-II) in the arbitrary layer 11 and was then identified as house F5. Finds studied here were found on the house floor within 1 cm thick soot layer where was also preserved fragment of carbonized post, 4-5 cm in diameter, along with large quantity of singed animal bones, a few flint and bone tools.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-676 – Catalogue 25Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-477 – Catalogue 34Butt part of the ground-edge tool – Inv. no. LV-260 – Catalogue 180Chisel – Inv. no. IB-476 – Catalogue 187

House 16 (House G4)Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova- novi} 1996)5970 – 5530 (Bori} 2002)House was discovered in October of 1966 in Block G 1 (sq. B,C/II-III) in the arbitrary layer 9 and was initially identified as house G4. Two stone artifacts were found together with few fragments of rather fine pottery and singed animal bones, flint tools and one bone awl at partially damaged house floor.Weight – Inv. no. SM-91 – Catalogue 47Pebble with indistinct traces of trimming – Without designation – Catalogue 10613 These are 14C dates. When other kind of dates is concerned it

is specially emphasized.



House 17

Settlement I a (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)House 17 was discovered in July of 1967 in sq. D/1 (originally Block F 1) to the east of house 7 and underneath one of its corners. Two stone artifacts as only portable finds from this association were found on the partially preserved floor, along the western edge.Grinding stone for awls and pins – Inv. no. IB-478 – Catalogue 52Grinding stone for awls and pins – Inv. no. IB-478 – Catalogue 53

House 18Settlement I d (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)House was discovered in 1967 in sq. A/II-III in arbitrary layer 7 and only partially as one of its segments lies under the house 23. On the well preserved house floor was discovered one stone tool as the only object found within this association.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-256 – Catalogue 13

House 19Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in Block A/III-IV in arbitrary layer 10. Three stone tools together with other portable finds (pottery fragments, animal bones, bone and flint tools) were found on well preserved floor in different areas of the house.Mallet (scepter) – Without designation – Catalogue 24Grinding stone-palette – Without designation – Catalogue 51Butt part of the ground-edge tool – Without designation – Catalogue 183

House 21Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. B/V-VI in arbitrary layer 7, within the complex of partially overlapping houses 21, 22, 29 and 30. Artifacts mentioned here were discovered on poorly preserved floor disturbed by a burial. One artifact was actually found under the crouched skeleton, practically on the floor of house 22.Pebble-raw material – Without designation – Cata-logue 111Chisel (found under the skeleton, on the floor of the house 22) – Without designation – Catalogue 167

Under the floor of houses 21-22-30

Hammer – Without designation – Catalogue 73Pebble-hammer – Without designation – Cata-logue 103

House 22Settlement I d (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. B/V-VI in arbitrary layer 7, within the complex of partially overlapping houses 21, 22, 29 and 30. House 22 is partially covered by house 21. Stone tool mentioned here was found on the floor together with large stag’s antlers and a few artifacts of bone and chipped stone.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-257 – Catalogue 4

House 24Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was found in 1967, in sq. a, b/IV-V in arbitrary layer 7. House floor was preserved and there were burials 8 and 9 from the later period. One massive stone tool (catalogue 14) was found in section A of the house and another (catalogue 173) in a layer covering the house floor.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-677 – Catalogue 14Chisel – Inv. no. IB-646 – Catalogue 173

Under the floor of house 24Sling ball, anvil – Without designation – Cata-logue 90Pebble-grinding stone – Without designation – Cata-logue 98

Houses 26 and 26’House 26 – Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a)House 26‘ – Settlement I b-d (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983)House 26 was discovered in July of 1967 in sq. A/VI underneath arbitrary layer 11 and in October under this structure were discovered the traces indicating earlier phase of this house and marked as house 26’. Two burials (5 and 6) later than the house itself were discovered on the preserved house floor. Stone tool mentioned here was found on the floor together with a few pottery fragments and chipped stone artifacts. Specimen from house 26’ is the only portable find from that association.House 26 – Chisel – Without designation – Catalo-gue 172House 26‘ – Anvil – Inv. no. IB-60 (incorrect IB) – Catalogue 71



House 27

Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)6450 – 5700 BC (Bori} 2002)House 27 was discovered in 1967 in sq. a,b/1-I, under arbitrary layer 8. The floor was well preserved and only stone tools mentioned here were discovered.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-678 – Catalogue 3Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-679 – Catalogue 12Axe – Inv. no. IB-633 – Catalogue 152

House 30Settlement I c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)Fragment of the floor of house 30 was discovered in 1966 in Block H 1 in the arbitrary layer 9 but in 1967 it was established that it belongs to the complex of partially overlapping houses 21, 22, 29 and 30 in sq. B/V-VI. House 30 was under the houses 21 and 22. House floor is poorly preserved and from the layer covering the floor comes just one stone artifact as a single find from this house.Axe – Inv. no. IB-459 – Catalogue 117

House 31Settlement I c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. a/III underneath the arbitrary layer 7. One stone chisel and two bone awls were discovered as only portable finds on the partially damaged house floor.Chisel – Inv. no. IB-619 – Catalogoue 174

House 32 Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)5840 – 5560 BC (Bori} 2002)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. a,b/II-III, underneath the arbitrary layer 8. One stone artifact as a single portable find in this association was discovered on the preserved floor.Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. IB-667 – Catalo-gue 113

House 35Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was partially unearthed in 1967 in sq. a,A/4-5 and it was in part overlapping house 36 so it was removed in the process of unearthing house 36 in 1968. Following artifacts were discovered:Grinding stone – Without designation – Catalogue 57Chisel – Inv. no. LV-253 – Catalogue 168

House 36

Settlement I a (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)6420 – 5990 BC (Bori} 2002)It was partially discovered in 1967 in sq. a,A/4-5 and part of it was lying under house 35, which was removed in 1968 in order to unearth house 36 completely. On that occasion the following stone artifacts were found on the solid and almost completely preserved floor where burial 70 was also encountered:Mallet (scepter) – Without designation – Catalogue 30Weight – Without designation – Catalogue 45Anvil – Without designation – Catalogue 70

House 38Settlement I b (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. A,B/7-8, in arbitrary layer 9. Three stone tools together with animal bones and artifacts of chipped stone were discovered on well preserved floor to the east of the hearth.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-753 – Catalogue 8Weight, anvil – Inv. no. SM-592 – Catalogue 42Anvil – Inv. no. SM-592 – Catalogue 65

House 39 Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. A/9-10. On the preserved floor in a layer of dark soil and soot covering the floor were discovered following stone tools together with flint implements and animal bones:Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-754 – Catalogue 15Pebble-hammer – Without designation – Catalogue 94

House 40Settlement I c-d (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967, in sq. B/10 and it is of very small size. Stone tool mentioned here was found on poorly preserved floor together with one bone tool and pottery fragment.Polisher for pottery – Inv. no. SM-553 – Catalogue 59

House 41 – area ASettlement I a (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)House was discovered in 1967, in sq. A,B/8-9. Stone object mentioned here was found together with two bone artifacts on partially preserved floor damaged by construction of house 38.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-681 – Catalogue 27



House 44

Settlement II14 (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983)Stone structure with rustic hearth and without solid stone floor directly overlying house 57 was identified as house 44. It was discovered in 1967 in sq. b,c/3-4. Later on the house was renumbered as XLIV in order to emphasize its stratigraphic pertaining to Lepenski Vir II horizon. The mentioned mallet was found in the accumulation of stones, animal bones and antlers near the hearth.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-720 – Catalogue 10

House 47 – corner BSettlement I e (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983); Phase 2-3 (Radovanovi} 1996)5990 – 5720 BC (Bori} 2002)It was discovered in 1967, in sq. a,A/2 in the arbitrary layer 15. Both stone tools mentioned here were found together with one fragmented pottery vessel, calcined animal bones, antlers and shells on well preserved floor.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-473 – Catalogue 1Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-575 – Catalogue 11

Under the floor of house 47Anvil, hammer – Without designation – Catalogue 67Anvil – Without designation – Catalogue 72Retoucher, anvil – Without designation – Catalogue 92

House 48Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2-3 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967, in sq. a,b/8-9, in the arbitrary layer 9. The intrusion from the later, habitation horizon III reaches to the house floor and all portable finds are related to this intrusion. The house floor was considerably scorched and of uneven surface. Stone tools discussed here were found on the floor itself with conspicuous traces of burning.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-757 – Catalogue 17Grinding stone (found in corner D) – Without designation – Catalogue 56

House 50Settlement I d-e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1967, in sq. a/6, in the arbitrary layer 9. Only the frontal part of the house is preserved while the rest is underneath the house 45. Stone artifact discovered here is the sole find in this association.Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. IB-758 – Catalogue 107

House 51

Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Rado-vanovi} 1996)5730 – 5370 BC (Bori} 2002); 6220 – 5920 BC (AMS dates; Whittle et al. 2002) It was discovered in 1967, in sq. a,b/2-3. House floor is well preserved and there were found tools mentioned here together with chipped stone implements and animal bones. All tools come from corner B.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-755 – Catalogue 2Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-761 – Catalogue 18Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-576 – Catalogue 19Hammer-pebble, hand polisher – Inv. no. SM-576 – Catalogue 81Pebble-grinding stone – Inv. no. SM-576 – Cata-logue 99Adze – Without designation – Catalogue 162

House 54Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)6450 – 5660 BC (Bori} 2002)It was discovered in 1967 in sq. A,B/3-4, in the arbitrary layer 17. Stone tools mentioned here were found together with chipped stone implements, animal bones and pottery fragments on well preserved floor covered with layer of dark soil mixed with soot.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-756 – Catalogue 21Grinding stone-palette – Inv. no. SM-577 – Cata-logue 50Axe – Inv. no. SM-531 – Catalogue 126

Under the floor of house 54Grinding stone, anvil – Without designation – Cata-logue 58Retoucher – Without designation – Catalogue 93

House 57Settlement I e (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 3 (Radova-novi} 1996)6220 – 5920 BC15 (Whittle et al. 2002)It was discovered in 1967, in sq. b,c/3-4, directly under the house 44 (XLIV) and is the largest house at Lepenski Vir. The tool mentioned here was found on the preserved floor along the profile ‘c’ without more precise determination of the finding circumstances.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-762 – Catalogue 16

House 61Settlement I a-b (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1968, in sq. a/11 at the bottom of arbitrary layer 7. The house was disturbed by

14 There are dates for the layer under house 44 (XLIV): 6220 – 5920 BC (AMS dates; Whittle et al. 2002). 15 AMS dates for the layer under house 44 (XLIV).



intrusions from the later horizons (house XXXIV from Lepenski Vir II horizon with burials 45 a,b,c and structures of Lepenski Vir IIIa horizon; dating according the journal of excavation). Stone tool related to the house 61 was found in such disturbed layer.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-843 – Catalogue 6

House 63 Settlement I b-c (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 1 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1968, in sq. D/6 in arbitrary layer 1. Stone tool mentioned here was found on the stone in front of the hearth.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-970 – Catalogue 26

House 65Settlement I a-b (Srejovi} 1969a); Phase 2 (Radova-novi} 1996)It was discovered in 1968, in sq. b/12-13, underneath the arbitrary layer 10. Layer above the floor was disturbed by interment of graves (54d,e) from the later period. Fragmented tools studied here were found on the stones of the house structure.Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-1028 – Catalogue 22Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-1028 – Catalogue 23

Finds from the arbitrary layers

Campaign 1965

Trench II (sq. C/1-2), arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. IB-40 – Catalogue 132Axe – Inv. no. IB-41 – Catalogue 139

Campaign 1966

Block B (sq. C/5-6), arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-205 – Catalogue 136

Block C (sq. C/3-4), arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. IB-285 – Catalogue 149 arbitrary layer 5Axe – Inv. no. IB-305 – Catalogue 140

Block F (sq. B,C,D/1-2), arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-240 – Catalogue 141

Block F 1 (sq.A,B/I-II), arbitrary layer 5Axe – Without designation – Catalogue 116

Block G 1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 1Fragmented adze – Inv. no. IB-414 – Catalogue 160 arbitrary layer 3Butt part of ground-edge tool – Inv. no. IB-426 – Catalogue 176 arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. IB-431 – Catalogue 151Fragmented axe – Inv. no. IB-432 – Catalogue 155Axe – Inv. no. IB-433 – Catalogue 118 arbitrary layer 5Axe – Inv. no. IB-440 – Catalogue 144Adze – Inv. no. LV-241 – Catalogue 159

Block H 1 (sq. B,C/III-IV), arbitrary layer 1Fragmented ground-edge tool – Inv. no. IB-447 – Catalogue 178

Block b (sq. D/8-9), arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-356, LV-231 – Catalogue 127

Campaign 1967

Sq. A/V, arbitrary layer 5Axe – Inv. no. IB-512 – Catalogue 188

arbitrary layer 8Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-102 – Catalogue 35

Sq. A/1, arbitrary layer 8Grinding stone for awls and pins – Inv. no. SM-354 – Catalogue 60Hammer-pebble – Inv. no. SM-354 – Catalogue 80Sling ball? Anvil, retoucher – Inv. no. SM-354 – Catalogue 88

Sq. A/2, by the wall of Roman towerFragmented ground-edge tool – Inv. no. IB-685 – Catalogue 177

Sq. A/3, arbitrary layer 10Axe – Inv. no. IB-723 – Catalogue 197

Sq. A/4, arbitrary layer 8Hammer – Inv. no. IB-708 – Catalogue 76 arbitrary layer 12Axe – Inv. no. IB-732 – Catalogue 125 arbitrary layer 14Chisel – Inv. no. IB-738 – Catalogue 166 arbitrary layer 16Chisel – Inv. no. IB-742 – Catalogue 165

Sq. B/VII-VIII, arbitrary layer 2Pebble-hammer – Without designation – Cata-logue 100



Sq. B/2, arbitrary layer 9

Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-365 – Catalogue 33Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. SM-365 – Cata-logue 110

Sq. B/9-10, between houses 40 and 41Pebble of indistinct traces of trimming – Inv. no. IB-682 – Catalogue 105

Sq. D/VIII, arbitrary layer 11Axe – Inv. no. IB-608 – Catalogue 133Axe – Inv. no. IB-607 – Catalogue 147

Sq. D/IX, arbitrary layer 13Butt part of ground-edge tool – Inv. no. SM-187 – Catalogue 184

Sq. a/I, arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-515 – Catalogue 135 arbitrary layer 3Mallet (scepter) – Without designation – Catalogue 32

Sq. a/1, arbitrary layer 3Pebble-raw material – Without designation – Cata-logue 109 arbitrary layer 5Adze – Inv. no. IB-647 – Catalogue 156

Sq. a/3, arbitrary layer 5 – by pyramidal stoneAxe – Inv. no. IB-745 – Catalogue 137

Sq. a/6, arbitrary layer 1 Axe – Inv. no. IB-684 – Catalogue 194 arbitrary layer 5Pebble-retoucher – Inv. no. SM-449 – Catalogue 104

Sq. a/8, arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. IB-725 – Catalogue 198

arbitrary layer 5Hammer-pebble, hand polisher – Inv. no. SM-415 – Catalogue 82

Sq. b/I, arbitrary layer 1Axe – Inv. no. IB-531 – Catalogue 128 arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. LV-235 – Catalogue 150Fragmented ground-edge tool – Without designation – Catalogue 175

Sq. b/III, arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-611 – Catalogue 189 arbitrary layer 3Axe – Inv. no. IB-614 – Catalogue 190

Line between sq. b/III and sq. b/IV, arbitrary layer 3, point 151 m

Axe – Inv. no. IB-615 – Catalogue 191Axe – Inv. no. IB-616 – Catalogue 192Axe – Inv. no. IB-617 – Catalogue 193

Sq. b/VI, arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. IB-602 – Catalogue 134

Sq. b/8, arbitrary layer 3Butt part of the ground-edge tool – Inv. no. IB-719 – Catalogue 181 arbitrary layer 4Hammer – Inv. no. SM-399 – Catalogue 87

Sq. b/9, arbitrary layer 4Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. SM-400 – Cata-logue 108

Sq. c/2-4, layer overlaying horizon III (above stone structure)Axe – Inv. no. IB-717 – Catalogue 196 layer overlaying house 44Axe – Inv. no. IB-700 – Catalogue 122Axe – Inv. no. IB-701 – Catalogue 195

Campaign 1968

Sq. A/IX, arbitrary layer 3Axe – Inv. no. SM-594, LV-243 – Catalogue 120

Sq. A/11, arbitrary layer 6Butt part of the ground-edge tool – Inv. no. SM-823 – Catalogue 182

Sq. A/13, arbitrary layer 9Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-860 – Catalogue 29

Sq. C/X, arbitrary layer 3Chisel – Inv. no. SM-993–995 – Catalogue 171

Sq. C/XII, arbitrary layer 1Axe – Inv. no. IB-892 – Catalogue 138

Sq. C/XIII, arbitrary layer 7Pebble-hammer – Inv. no. SM-1059 – Catalogue 95

Sq. C/XV, arbitrary layer 4Axe – Inv. no. IB-894, LV-229 – Catalogue 123

Sq. C/10, arbitrary layer 4Chisel – Without designation – Catalogue 164

Sq. a/VI, arbitrary layer 7 – pit 1Weight – Inv. no. IB-791 – Catalogue 46



Sq. a/12, arbitrary layer 1

Hammer – Inv. no. IB-814 – Catalogue 77 arbitrary layer 2Hammer-pebble – Inv. no. SM-701 – Catalogue 84 Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. SM-701 – Cata-logue 112

Sq. b/I-II, between houses 20 and 336440 – 6230 BC (AMS dates; Whittle et al. 2002)Grinding stone for awls and pins – Without desi-gntaion – Catalogue 54

Sq. b/12, arbitrary layer 6Grinding stone-palette – Inv. no. IB-881 – Cata-logue 49

Sq. c/I, arbitrary layer 2Hammer-pebble – Inv. no. SM-653 – Catalogue 85 Pebble-raw material – Inv. no. SM-653 – Cata-logue 114

arbitrary layer 3Axe – Inv. no. IB-810 – Catalogue 119

arbitrary layer 8Chisel – Inv. no. SM-954a, LV-252 – Catalogue 169

arbitrary layer 9Axe – Inv. no. LV-248 – Catalogue 146

Sq. c/II, arbitrary layer 2Quern – Inv. no. SM-653 – Catalogue 61

arbitrary layer 3Hammer-pebble – Inv. no. SM-762 – Catalogue 86

arbitrary layer 7Adze – Inv. no. LV-234 – Catalogue 158Pebble-hammer – Without designation – Cata-logue 102

Sq. c/III, arbitrary layer 5Axe – Inv. no. SM-817 – Catalogue 121

Sq. c/IV, arbitrary layer 4 – Hoard 2As hoard 2 was identified one small Star~evo globular vessel containing 4 ground-edge tools. It was chronologically determined by the investigators of Lepenski Vir as dating from horizon IIIb.Adze – Inv. no. IB-833, LV-250 – Catalogue 157Chisel – Inv. no. IB-833, LV-251 – Catalogue 170Fragmented small tool – Inv. no. IB-833 – Cata-logue 179Axe – Inv. no. IB-833 – Catalogue 200

Sq. c/1, arbitrary layer 5Axe – Inv. no. IB-836 – Catalogue 145Hammer-pebble, anvil, hand polisher – Inv. no. SM-818 – Catalogue 68

arbitrary layer 7Hammer – Inv. no. LV-240 – Catalogue 75

Sq. c/2, arbitrary layer 1Axe – Inv. no. IB-775, LV-227 – Catalogue 115Axe – Inv. no. IB-776, LV-230 – Catalogue 124 arbitrary layer 6Quern – Without designation – Catalogue 62

Sq. c/6, arbitrary layer 2Weight – Inv. no. SM-834 – Catalogue 43

Sq. d/I, arbitrary layer 3Weight, mallet – Inv. no. IB-805 – Catalogue 41

Sq. d/II, arbitrary layer 1Axe – Inv. no. LV-232 – Catalogue 153 arbitrary layer 5Pebble-polisher – Inv. no. SM-769 – Catalogue 96

Sq. d/III, arbitrary layer 3Weight – Inv. no. IB-804 – Catalogue 40

Sq. d/1, arbitrary layer 3Grinding stone, anvil – Without designation – Cata-logue 55 arbitrary layer 7Axe – Inv. no. IB-863 – Catalogue 201Axe – Inv. no. IB-863 – Catalogue 202

Sq. d/2, arbitrary layer 2Axe – Inv. no. SM-705–706, LV-245 – Catalogue 131

Sq. d/3, arbitrary layer 3Axe – Inv. no. IB-813 – Catalogue 148Axe – Inv. no. IB-812 – Catalogue 199

Sq. d/4, arbitrary layer 1Pebble-hammer – Without designation – Catalogue 97 arbitrary layer 3Mallet (scepter) – Without designation – Catalogue 37 arbitrary layer 4 – zone of yellow soil by the profileMallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-830 – Catalogue 36

Sq. d/6, arbitrary layer 1Weight – Inv. no. SM-846 – Catalogue 44



Campaign 1969

Sq. B/XII, arbitrary layer 6 – zone of dark soilAxe – Inv. no. SM-1120, LV-238 – Catalogue 154 arbitrary layer 8Weight – Inv. no. IB-920 – Catalogue 39

Sq. B/XIV-XV, arbitrary layer 11Weight – Inv. no. SM-1163 – Catalogue 48

Sq. b/15, arbitrary layer 5Object of unknown purpose – Inv. no. SM-1102 – Catalogue 64

Campaign 1970

Sq. d/3, arbitrary layer 8Chisel – Inv. no. SM-1228, LV-249 – Catalo-gue 163

Sq. f/II-4 (f/1),16 arbitrary layer 4 – zone of dark soil (pit)

Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-942 – Catalogue 5Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. IB-941 – Catalogue 9

Sq. f/1, arbitrary layer 6Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-1276–1277 – Cata-logue 31Pebble-hammer – Inv. no. SM-1276–1277 – Cata-logue 101

Sq. f/1, arbitrary layer 6 – pit underneath grave 93, near house 72Axe – Inv. no. IB-947 – Catalogue 129

Sq. f/4-3, arbitrary layer 9Mallet (scepter) – Inv. no. SM-1282d – Catalogue 20

Sq. f/4½-3, arbitrary layer 9Anvil, fishing weight – Without designation – Cata-logue 74

Sq. f/4½, arbitrary layer 11Hammer-pebble – Inv. no. SM-1283d – Catalogue 83

By the house 13Point – Inv. no. IB-940 – Catalogue 63

16 In the inventory is stated that object was found in the line of square f/II–4, but in the journal is stated that it had been found in square f/1.

Catalogue


Mallets (scepters; 1 – 38)

1. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. A/2, arbitrary layer 15, house 47 – corner BInv. no. SM-473; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 30Mica schist; 285 x 54 x 38 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Tool made of elongated piece of schistouse rock. The surface was briefly trimmed by grinding just so for the tool to achieve symmetrical shape with parallel lateral sides and ellipsoid cross-section. There are no explicit traces of use.Finding circumstances: it was found with few frag-ments of pottery and calcined animal bones on the house floor.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 81 (above)

2. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner BInv. no. IB-755; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 45Amphibolite; 256 x 67 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Mallet symmetrically modeled and thus resembling an axe – one end looks like blunt cutting edge. Half of the tool was ground and the rest of surface was pecked. One edge was secondary used as retoucher.Finding circumstances: it was found together with chipped stone tools, animal bones and traces of car-bonized wooden post on the completely preserved floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

3. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. a,b/1-I, underneath arbitrary layer 8, house 27 – area DInv. no. IB-678; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 3Mica schist; 315 x 62 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Mallet of symmetrical shape, damaged at one end. Tool was made of elongated piece of compact rock roughly trimmed by grinding. Flat surface of the mallet near the preserved end has ambiguous traces of use – broad shallow depression of uneven surface perhaps resulting from using the tool for killing the big fish.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone tools, mallet catalogue 12 (inv. no. IB-679) and axe catalogue 152 (inv. no. IB-633) on well pre-served floor.

Unpublished

4. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. B,C/IV-V, house 22 – right of hearthInv. no. SM-257; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 59Limestone*;17 450 x 60 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Symmetrically shaped and meticulously trimmed elongated spindle-shaped mallet. The tool was made by grinding with visible traces of previous chipping and pecking. One side of the object has red pigmen-tation.Finding circumstances: it was found together with large stag’s antlers, bone hook, two bone awls and a few chipped stone artifacts on a house floor.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 81 (second from above); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 74 – cat. no. 46; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 186 – cat. no. 93.

17 Asterisk (*) denotes that petrological determination was taken from Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983.


CATALOGUE

5. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1970, sq. f /1, arbitrary layer 4 – zone of dark soil (pit)Inv. no. IB-942; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 28Rugose muscovite-chlorite schist*; 467 x 55 x 40 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Fine elongated mallet made of schistouse rock. The tool was made by grinding with conspicuous traces of previous pecking. Red/brown pigmentation is vis-ible on the surface.Finding circumstances: found together with mallet catalogue 9 (inv. no. IB-941) in the zone of rather dark soil with lot of stones and mostly singed animal bones.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 72 – cat. no. 45; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 187 – cat. no. 98; Antonovi} 2003a: fig. 70/2; Antonovi} 2003b: fig. 3/A; Antonovi}, in preparation.

6. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1968, sq. a/11, base of arbitrary layer 7, house 61Inv. no. IB-843; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 42Garnet-bearing amphibole schist*; 395 x 60 x 48 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Large, finely modeled mallet, nicely ground. Execution indicates considerable skill of Lepenski Vir craftsmen if considering the hardness of the rock of which it had been made. On the body of the object are discernible traces of use characteristic of anvil.Finding circumstances: found in a house disturbed by intrusion from later (Neolithic) horizon.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 74 – cat. no. 48; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 185 – cat. no. 90.


CATALOGUE

7. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1966, Block b(sq. D/8-9), arbitrary layer 4, house 1 (b1) – by the hearthInv. no. IB-370; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 10Marly limestone*; 290 x 80 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Mallet of irregular conical shape. Tool was trimmed by grinding but with conspicuous traces of previous chipping. On the tool surface are visible traces of brown pigmentation explained by some authors as painted ornament.Finding circumstances: found together with frag-mented bone awl next to the hearth in the course of house cleaning.


8. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/7-8, arbitrary layer 9, house 38Inv. no. IB-753; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 45Muscovite-chlorite schist*; 280 x 47 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive mallet made of naturally shaped piece of rock briefly trimmed by rough grinding.Finding circumstances: found together with animal bones, stones and chipped stone tools on perfectly preserved house floor.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 185 – cat. no. 91.


CATALOGUE

9. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1970, sq. f /1, arbitrary layer 4 – zone of dark soil (pit)Inv. no. IB-941; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 28Fine-grained carbonate sandstone*; 430 x 50 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled elongated spindle-shaped mallet richly decorated with engraved ornamental composition. Object was meticulously trimmed by fine grinding. Traces of red pigmentation are visible on the surface.Finding circumstances: found together with mallet catalogue 5 (inv. no. IB-942) in the zone of rather dark soil containing stones and lot of animal bones.

Srejovi} 1969b: pl. VII/6; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 75 – cat. no. 54; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 189 – cat. no. 102; Antonovi} 2003a: fig. 70/3; Antonovi} 2003b: fig. 3/B; Antonovi}, in preparation.

10. Mallet (scepter)

Campaign 1967, sq. c/2-4, house 44 – near hearthInv. no. IB-720; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 19Siltstone without carbonate*; 210 x 42 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Fragment of cylindrical mallet of fine manufacture. The tool is meticulously trimmed by grinding and in the butt segment decorated with engraved ornament. On the body of the artifact are discernible traces of use as anvil as well as red pigmentation.Finding circumstances: found next to the sculpture ‘Forefather’ (sculpture Inv. No. 41) in the agglo-meration of stones, bones and antlers.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig.81 (third from above); Srejovi} 1969b: pl. VII/5; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 188 – cat. no. 99.


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. A/2, arbitrary layer 15, house 47 – corner BInv. no. SM-575; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 39Rugose chlorite-muscovite schist*; 254 x 50 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Mallet of irregular square section made of schistouse rock. Tool was trimmed by grinding and decorated with engraved ornaments. On the object are visible traces of use characteristic of anvil and hammer. Red pigmentation is discernible over the entire surface.Finding circumstances: found together with frag-ments of fine red-fired pottery in the course of clean-ing of well-preserved house floor.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 39 (below); Srejovi} 1969b: pl. VII/2; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 74 – cat. no. 50; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 187 – cat. no. 96.


Campaign 1967, sq. a,b/1-I, underneath arbitrary layer 8, house 27 – by the hearthInv. no. IB-679; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 3Fine-grained sandstone*; 225 x 56 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Cylindrical mallet of circular section. Artifact was meticulously trimmed by grinding and it has rather narrow and shallow incision – ornament or groove for fixing rope. Along the lateral sides of the tool are visible traces of use as anvil.Finding circumstances: found together with another mallet (catalogue 3; inv. no. IB-678) and one stone axe (catalogue 152; inv. no. IB-633) on the preserved house floor.



CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. A/II-III, arbitrary layer 7, house 18Inv. no. SM-256; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 56Gneiss-granite*; 240 x 58 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Crude massive mallet of irregular triangular section. Tool is very briefly trimmed by grinding while its greatest part remained unworked emphasizing natu-ral shape of a stone taken from the rock mass. Traces of pigmentation are visible on some portions of the tool body.Finding circumstances: found on well preserved house floor.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 185 – cat. no. 92.


Campaign 1967, sq. a,b/IV-V, house 24 – area AInv. no. IB-677; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 61; October 1967, p. 3.Gneiss; 277 x 90 x 65 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive mallet of elongated shape tapering towards one end in order to be better held in the hand. The tool is made of flat piece of rock partially trimmed by grinding. At the narrower end on one of lateral sides are visible traces of use – shallow depression resulting from using the tool as anvil.Finding circumstances: found together with few ani-mal bones in the vicinity of burials 8, 9 and 10 on the preserved house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. A/9-10, house 39 – area CInv. no. IB-754; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 69; October 1967, p. 45Gneiss; 305 x 51 x 43 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Mallet of irregular shape, meticulously trimmed. Elongated piece of rock was carefully ground but working did not change the original shape of the stone. One end of the tool is shaped into a point. There are no clear traces of use on the surface.Finding conditions: found together with animal bones and chipped stone tools in a layer of dark soil with traces of soot on preserved house floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. b,c/3-4, house 57 – by the profile ‘c’Inv. no. IB-762; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 19Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone; 293 x 46 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished mallet, which is in fact the elongated piece of rock of the same shape as it had been flaked of basic rock mass – real macroflake! The tool was used although not finished – narrow butt for pound-ing and edges as retoucher. There are no traces of additional trimming of the object.Finding circumstances: found together with few pot-tery fragments, animal bones and stones on a house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. a/8-9, arbitrary layer 9, house 48Inv. no. IB-757; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 35, 45Limestone*; 330 x 35 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Elongated mallet of irregular shape of the stone quarried from a deposit. Additional trimming did not change this shape but surfaces were only ground. Artifact is decorated with engraved ornament in the wider segment. There are brown/red traces on the entire surface of the tool resulting either from sprin-kling with pigment or from burning.Finding circumstances: found on damaged and here and there very scorched floor; there is Neolithic layer reaching to the floor and damaging whole house.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 81 (below), fig. 39 (above); Srejovi} 1969b: pl. VII/4; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 74 – cat. no. 51; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 186 – cat. no. 94.


Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51Inv. no. IB-761; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 45Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone; 294 x 51 x 43 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of symmetrical shape and me-ticulous manufacture. Elongated piece of rock was ground to achieve almost regular rectangular shape. It is tapering towards the butt. On one flat site next to the butt there is rather small shallow uneven depres-sion possibly resulting from use of object for killing fish by pounding it on the head. The tool had been burning and thus its surface is insignificantly dama-ged.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone tools, animal bones and remains of carbonized wooden post on a completely preserved floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner BInv. no. SM-576; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Fine-grained metamorphosed sandstone; 335 x 58 x 34 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Mallet is shaped as almost regular cube with slightly bulging lateral sides in the central section. It was fin-ished by grinding and on one lateral side are visible traces of previous sawing. Next to one (narrower) butt is shallow uneven depression possibly resulting from use of object for killing fish by pounding it on the head. There are no other traces of use. Object is damaged by fire.Finding circumstances: found together with animal bones and chipped stone tools on preserved floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1970, sq. f/4½-3, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. SM-1282d; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 32Mica schist; 265 x 50 x 43 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of symmetrical shape and fine manufacture. Tool is of conical shape with almost circular section. Surface was carefully trimmed by grinding and tip by chipping. Near the tip, on one side, there is very shallow uneven depression – trace of using the object for killing fish by pounding it on the head.Finding circumstances: found in a large pit contain-ing Star~evo pottery in the lower layers.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/3-4, house 54Inv. no. IB-756; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Fine-grained metamorphosed sandstone; 275 x 45 x 27 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet damaged by fire. Tool is of regular shape – elongated cube with one end slightly narrower and rounded. Surfaces are meticulously trimmed by grinding. There are no conspicuous traces of use.Finding circumstances: found together with animal bones and chipped stone tools on the preserved floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. b/13, house 65Inv. no. SM-1028; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 88Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone; 340 x 61 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet (consisting of three pieces) without preserved ends made of rather long piece of stone. It was finally shaped by grinding. Lateral sides of the object were used as retoucher and anvil.Finding circumstances: found with one bone tool and one chipped stone implement within stone structure of a house.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. b/12-13, house 65Inv. no. SM-1028; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 88Slightly silicified fine-grained limestone; 125 x 60 x 38 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Two fragments of rather large mallet of ellipsoid cross section. Tool was meticulously trimmed by grinding. There are no conspicuous traces of use.Finding circumstances: found with one bone tool and one chipped stone implement in the stone structure of a house.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. A/III-IV, arbitrary layer 10, house 19 Inv. no. SM-195; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 58Mica schist; 244 x 31 x 34 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of crude manufacture, made of elongated piece of schistouse rock. Surface of the tool reveals discrete traces of trimming. Traces of use are not discernible on such crudely trimmed surface.Finding circumstances: found together with frag-mented pottery vessel, animal bones, stone tools and chipped stone implements on well preserved house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. D/I, arbitrary layer 11, house 9 – in front of hearthInv. no. IB-676; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 3.Mica schist; 129 x 51 x 24 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of symmetrical shape. Tool was made of schistouse rock in such a way that we can assume that prehistoric master had chosen as raw material rather large flat stone, which he ground into the final shape with irregular square section. Traces of use are not discernible on the fragment.Finding circumstances: found with many singed ani-mal bones, a few fragmented stone tools and few chipped stone artifacts on the house floor covered with 1 cm thick layer of soot.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. D/6, arbitrary layer 1, house 63Inv. no. SM-970; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 78Mica schist; 200 x 55 x 28 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of a mallet of symmetrical flat shape with convex lateral sides. Surfaces were briefly trimmed by grinding. There are no conspicuous traces of use.Finding circumstances: found on a stone in front of the hearth.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. B/8-9, house 41 – area AInv. no. IB-681; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 5Fine-grained limestone; 158 x 48 x 30 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of symmetrical shape. Complete tool was trimmed by grinding. On one flat side next to the butt are visible traces of use possibly resulting from killing fish by pounding it on the head. Tool (or just this fragment) had been burning and thus the surface is partially damaged. At the point of fracture is preserved fragment of the floor of Lepenski Vir house that was stuck to it in the process of burning.Finding circumstances: found together with 15 chipped stone artifacts and 3 animal teeth on partially damaged floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1970, under the floor of house 1Without designationGneiss; 170 x 55 x 34 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet with one preserved butt. Tool has almost symmetrical trapezoid cross section. Surfaces are briefly trimmed by grinding just so to achieve the desired shape. On one side next to the butt there is shallow uneven depression possibly resulting from use of the tool for killing large fish by pounding it on the head.Finding circumstances: dislocation of the site.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. A/13, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. SM-860; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 55Gneiss-granite; 174 x 57 x 20 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet with one preserved end of fan shape. Surface of the object was trimmed by grinding. There are traces of pounding on one edge resulting from the use of object as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer of dark soil.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. a,A/4-5, on the floor of house 36Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 103 – 104Granite; 167 x 49 x 27 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished mallet resembling semifinished axe of I/5/b type. Surfaces were evened by pecking and ends by chipping. There are no conspicuous traces of use.Finding circumstances: found on preserved floor without other findings except for stone tools (cata-logue 42 and 65).

Unpublished


Campaign 1970, sq. f/1, arbitrary layer 6Inv. no. SM-1276–1277; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 31Fine-grained limestone; 147 x 57 x 43 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of semifinished mallet (or semifinished axe of I/5/e type). Object was symmetrically shaped by chipping (ends, top and bottom side) and by pecking (nicely rounded lateral sides). There are no conspicu-ous traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in the course of re-moving concentration of stones and animal bones.

Unpublished

32. Mallet (scepter), secondary used as anvil and hammerstone

Campaign 1967, sq. a/I, arbitrary layer 3Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 21Mica schist; 88 x 39 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of asymmetrical circular section. The surface was meticulously trimmed by grinding. After breaking the fragment was for a rather long time used as anvil and hammerstone as it is suggested by traces of use on the surface.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with few fragments of the Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

33. Mallet (scepter) secondary used as anvil and hammerstone

Campaign 1967, sq. B/2, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. SM-365; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 17Mica schist; 120 x 37 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented mallet of circular section. The surface was meticulously trimmed by grinding. After break-ing the fragment was for a rather long time used as anvil and hammerstone as it is suggested by traces of use on the surface.Finding circumstances: found in a layer disturbed by construction of Roman structure, with mixed Neolithic and Roman pottery.

Unpublished


Campaign 1966-1967, sq. D/I, arbitrary layer 11, on the floor of house 9Inv. no. IB-477; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 280 x 55 mm (incorrect width)Stored at unknown location

Fragmented partially trimmed stone tool.Finding circumstances: tool was found together with singed animal bones, Star~evo pottery and bone tools on the floor covered with 1 cm thick layer of soot in the narrower part of the house.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. A/V, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. SM-102; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 17Diorite; 159 x 45 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of mallet made of compact and hard rock and meticulously trimmed by grinding. Tool is taper-ing toward the butt. One of flat sides was roughened either by pecking or as a result of using the object for killing big fish by pounding it on the head.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery and animal bones within stone structure.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. d/4, arbitrary layer 4 – yellow soil by the profileInv. no. IB-830; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 33Mica schist; 142 x 57 x 30 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of mallet made of elongated piece of schis-touse rock. Surface was briefly trimmed by grinding just for the tool to achieve symmetrical shape with parallel lateral sides and ellipsoid cross section. There are no conspicuous traces of use. Three inci-sions – two rectilinear and one curvilinear are visible on one lateral side.Finding circumstances: found in a layer denoted in the journal as Lepenski Vir IIIb horizon.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. d/4, arbitrary layer 3Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 30Fine-grained limestone; 110 x 60 x 50 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of massive mallet of ellipsoid cross section. Tool was meticulously trimmed by grinding. There are no conspicuous traces of use on the surface.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery, animal bones and stone tools.

Unpublished

38. Mallet (scepter) secondary used as hammer

Campaign 1970, sq. C,D/7-8; house 3Without designationFine-grained spotty limestone; 76 x 47 x 32 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Rather small fragment of mallet secondary used as hammer. Both butts reveal traces of use characteristic of a hammer. Surfaces of the objects were trimmed by grinding.Finding circumstances: dislocation of the site.

Antonovi} 2003a: fig. 68/7.


CATALOGUE

Weights (39 – 48)

39. Weight

Campaign 1969, sq. B/XII, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. IB-920; Journal of excavation: 1969, p. 29Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 120 x 139 x 82 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled and nicely executed weight. The pebble of suitable shape finally modeled by grinding was used as raw material. Broad groove, which ends on one lateral side is made by pecking. Portion of the object is of red color – natural pig-mentation, use of ochre or traces of high tempera-ture? There is a roughened surface on the lateral side (where groove ends) possibly resulting from use of artifact as hammer.Finding circumstances: found with considerable amount of Star~evo pottery in a layer of dark loose soil.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 78 – cat. no. 74; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1982: fig. v.

40. Weight

Campaign 1968, sq. d/III, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-804; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 27170 x 130 mmStored at unknown location

Pebble of grayish/yellow color, of oval shape, with groove along the middle that does not make full circle.Finding circumstances: found together with a lot of Star~evo pottery in a stone structure.

Srejovi} 1969a: 160 – fig. 43; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 78 – cat. no. 76.


CATALOGUE

41. Weight, mallet

Campaign 1968, sq. d/I, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-805; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 22Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 167 x 115 x 95 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive weight with transversal groove along the middle. Weight was made of pebble, which was lat-erally trimmed by pecking. Groove ends on one of two flattened surfaces. It is possible that one butt of the tool was used as hammer as is indicated by the traces of use.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery and other stone tools in a layer directly on top of virgin soil.

Antonovi} 2003a: 110 – fig. 70/1.

42. Weight, anvil

Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/7-8, arbitrary layer 9, house 38Inv. no. SM-592; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 45Amphibolite; 95 x 68 x 69 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Weight with groove along the middle shaped by pecking. Object was secondary used as anvil as is suggested by traces of use on one butt and on the artifact body.Finding circumstances: found together with animal bones, stone tools and chipped stone implements on perfectly preserved house floor.

Unpublished

43. Weight

Campaign 1968, sq. c/6, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-834; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 47Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 141 x 118 x 87 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive ovoid sandstone pebble with groove along the middle made by pecking.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of gray soil with scattered fragments of Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

44. Weight, anvil

Campaign 1968, sq. d/6, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. SM-846; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 48Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement; 145 x 124 x 97 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive pebble shaped as weight by pecking and rough grinding. Shallow groove divides object in two uneven parts. Top and two lateral sides have shallow depressions resulting from using this weight as anvil. Depression on top surface is larger and gives to the object an appearance of altar.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of yellow sandy soil with scattered fragments of Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished

45. Weight

Campaign 1968, sq. a,A/4-5, house 36Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 103-104Granite; 122 x 77 x 60 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Naturally smooth pebble additionally egg-shaped by pecking and with groove for fixing rope along the middle.Finding circumstances: found on preserved floor without other findings except stone tools (catalogue 30 and 70).

Unpublished

46. Weight, secondary used as anvil and hammerstone

Campaign 1968, sq. a/VI, arbitrary layer 7 – pit 1Inv. no. IB-791; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 17Diorite; 104 x 52 x 51 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Slightly damaged object of cylindrical shape with one side flattened. Next to slightly bulging butts are shallow grooves for fixing the rope. Surface of the object was trimmed by grinding and grooves executed by pecking. After the damage of one butt object was used as anvil and hammerstone as is sug-gested by traces of use on one butt, lateral sides and flattened surface.Finding circumstances: found together with a lot of Neolithic pottery and animal bones in an intrusion of habitation horizon III (dating after the journal).

Srejovi} 1969a: 159 – fig. 42; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 76 – cat. no. 58.


CATALOGUE

47. Weight

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B,C/II-III), arbitrary layer 9, house 16Inv. no. SM-91; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 22-23Amphibolite; 213 x 140 x 83 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive pebble was transformed into the weight by adding two intersecting grooves. One was placed transversally along the entire circumference of the pebble while the other was made on one side only. Grooves were executed by pecking.Finding circumstances: found together with few fragments of rather fine Neolithic pottery, chipped stone artifacts, singed animal bones and fragments of carbonized wooden post on a house floor.

Unpublished

48. Weight

Campaign 1969, border edge of sq. B/XIV – B/XV, arbitrary layer 11 Inv. no. SM-1163; Journal of excavation: 1969, p. 39Insufficiently defined magmatic rock; 171 x 120 x 92 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Weight made of massive and very heavy pebble. To the rough pebble surface were added one transversal groove running along the entire circumference of the pebble and one shorter longitudinal groove on the lateral side intersecting with the former groove.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery and animal bones on a ‚virgin rock‘.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

Grinding stones (49 – 60)

49. Grinding stone – palette

Campaign 1968, sq. b/12, arbitrary layer 6Inv. no. IB-881; Journal of excavation: 1968, p.66Fine-grained marly sandstone; 84 x 82 x 25 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented symmetrical quadrangular grinding stone – palette of very fine manufacture. Palette had been used on both sides so both working surfaces are concave. There is a longitudinal groove on one side.Finding circumstances: found in the layer with stone structure and just a few portable finds.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/3-4, house 54Inv. no. SM-577; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 275 x 253 x 40 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Nicely modeled stationary grinding stone – palette (type XI/6/a)18 made of reddish fine-grained sand-stone. Grinding stone had been broken and after fragmentation one of its parts was subsequently used for the same purposes but as working surface was used bottom side of original grinding stone. In the middle of the grinding stone is symmetrical circular depression resulting from use. Fragment next to the fan-like edge had also been used as working surface. Lateral sides were trimmed by crude grinding.Finding circumstances: found together with Early Neolithic vessel with molded spiral ornament and chipped stone artifacts on a house floor.

Unpublished

18 Types according to the typology of Vin~a stone tools; Antonovi} 1992: 7 – 19.


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. A/III, arbitrary layer 10, house 19Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 25, 57Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement; 216 x 117 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented double-sided stationary grinding stone (type XI/6/b) made of reddish fine-grained sandstone. As working surfaces had been used top and bottom sides where shallow spherical depressions resulted from use. Complete grinding stone was meticulously trimmed by grinding.Finding circumstances: tool fragments were found together with the Neolithic pottery on a house floor to the east and west of the hearth.

Unpublished

52. Grinding stone for awls and pins

Campaign 1967, sq. D/1, house 17Inv. no. IB-478; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 3Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 135 x 57 x 25 mm; width of groove 9 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented (?) grinding stone for awls (type XI/4/b). Surface was trimmed by crude grinding and groove for modeling awls is polished in the same way as the remaining portion of the tool. It possibly makes a set with tool catalogue 53 – they do not correspond in shape but the raw material is identical.Finding circumstances: found together with grind-ing stone catalogue 53 (Inv. no. IB-478) on partially preserved floor next to the western edge.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 76 – cat. no. 64


Campaign 1967, sq. D/1, house 17Inv. no. IB-478; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 3Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 125 x 52 x 24 mm; width of groove 8 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented (?) grinding stone for awls (type XI/4/b). Surface was trimmed by crude grinding and groove for modeling awls is polished in the same way as the remaining portion of the tool. It possibly makes a set with tool catalogue 52 – they do not correspond in shape but the raw material is identical.Finding circumstances: found together with grind-ing stone catalogue 52 (Inv. no. IB-478) on partially preserved floor next to the western edge.



CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. b/I-II, between houses 20 and 33Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 102Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 88 x 47 x 26 mm; width of groove 6 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented grinding stone for awls (type XI/4/b). Surface was trimmed by crude grinding and groove for modeling awls is polished in the same way as the remaining portion of the tool.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone artifacts, animal and fish bones between the houses in a layer of loose soil.

Unpublished

55. Grinding stone, anvil

Campaign 1968, sq. d/1, arbitrary layer 3Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 22Altered peridotite; 182 x 125 x 58 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of massive stationary double-sided grind-ing stone (type XI/6/b). Top and bottom sides are well ground and slightly hollowed as a result of use. Along the edge of mentioned depressions are visible traces resulting from use of this object as anvil.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery and other stone tools in a layer on top of the virgin soil.

Unpublished

56. Grinding stone

Campaign 1967, sq. a/8-9, arbitrary layer 9, house 48 – corner DWithout designation; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 35, 45Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 129 x 106 x 83 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of large grinding stone (or quern). Two sides of the tool are preserved – both well ground and slightly concave as a result of use. Blunt edge where these two sides were meeting was used as hammer. There are traces of burning over the entire surface of the artifact.Finding circumstances: found together with many fragments of Neolithic pottery on the floor of a house totally disturbed by intrusion from habitation horizon III (according to the journal).

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

57. Grinding stone

Campaign 1968, sq. a,A/4-5, house 35Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 103-104Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 134 x 68 x 43 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of massive stationary grinding stone (type XI/6/d) having one working surface with shallow concavity resulting from continuous use.Finding circumstances: found together with few ani-mal bones, chipped stone artifacts and 2 fragments of Neolithic pottery on a house floor.

Unpublished

58. Grinding stone, anvil

Campaign 1970, under the floor of house 54Without designationFine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 178 x 95 x 90 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Stationary grinding stone with one working surface (type XI/6/d). Working surface is well ground and slightly hollow as a result of continuous use. On other surfaces are visible traces of use of the object as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished

59. Polisher for pottery

Campaign 1967, sq. B/10, house 40Inv. no. SM-353; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 46Fine-grained red marly sandstone; 65 x 18 x 18 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Small object of prismatic shape. One side is well polished and flattened as a result of use. It is possible that it was a polisher for smoothing walls of pottery vessels. Finding circumstances: found together with one fragment of Neolithic pottery and one bone tool on partially preserved house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

60. Grinding stone for awls and pins?

Campaign 1967, sq. A/1, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. SM-354; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 16Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement; 168 x 100 x 41 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Flat pebble with originally smooth surfaces. One side is slightly better ground probably to be explained as trace of using object as grinding stone.Finding circumstances: found within large group of pebbles (15 in total) used as tools in their original form; only 4 specimens looking according to their shape as most distinguished representatives were retained in the non-inventoried material.

Unpublished

Querns (61 – 62)

61. Quern

Campaign 1968, sq. c/II, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-653; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 18Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 160 x 173 x 38 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

‘Classic’ Neolithic quern. Lower side is con-vex and smooth and top side – working surface – is slightly concave as a result of use. Quern is broken along the middle. Lateral sides re-veal traces of shaping the quern by pecking.Finding circumstances: found in the layer with lot of Star~evo pottery, shells and few fish bones.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

62. Quern

Campaign 1968, sq. c/2, arbitrary layer 6 – pit in the profileWithout designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 58Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 286 x 167 x 95 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive quern made of compact sandstone. Working surface is slightly concave and better polished in comparison with other portion of the tool. ‘Butts’ of the tool reveal traces of using this tool also as hammer.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with lot of Star~evo pottery, shells, river snails and small fish bones.

Unpublished

Miscellaneous objects (63 – 64)

63. Point

Campaign 1970, by the house 13Inv. no. IB-940Limestone; 178 x 30 x 23 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented lanceolate object with body of sym-metrical quadrangular section and point made by faceting. Point is shaped in such a way that object looking from the side has an ithyphallic appearance. The object had been burning so the surface is so damaged that it is not possible to recognize traces of use neither to determine the raw material. However, it is obvious that it was meticulously trimmed by grinding.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

64. Object of unknown purpose (fragment of mallet – scepter?)

Campaign 1969, sq. b/15, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-1102; Journal of excavation: 1969, p. 7Mica schist; 95 x 24 x 10 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented object resembling metal spear. ‘Tang’ reveals traces of grinding while remaining part of object is unworked. Mallets (scepters) had been pro-duced of the same raw material.Finding circumstances: found in the first cultural layer under the surface (according to the journal) in loose brown soil with few fragments of Neolithic pottery, animal bones and shells.

Unpublished

Anvils (65 – 74)

65. Anvil

Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/7-8, arbitrary layer 9, house 38Inv. no. SM-592; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 68-69; October 1967, p. 45Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 112 x 88 x 51 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of original shape used as anvil and hammer. Conical depression of uneven surface suggesting it being used as anvil is discernible on the top surface while on lateral sides are visible traces of pounding.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone artifacts and animal bones on perfectly pre-served house floor to the east of a hearth.

Unpublished

66. Anvil, hand polisher, hammer


Pebble of original shape used as anvil and hand poli-sher (type XI/3/a). One side of the pebble used as polisher is well polished and slightly hollowed. In the middle of this surface are visible initial traces of use of this object as anvil. Lateral sides of the tool were used as anvil and hammer.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

67. Anvil, hammer


Pebble of original shape used as anvil and hammer. Traces characteristic of anvil are discernible on top and lateral sides while part of object resembling butt was used as hammer.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished

68. Hammer-pebble, anvil, hand polisher

Campaign 1968, sq. c/1, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-818; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 43Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 83 x 81 x 44 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble trimmed by chipping on one side only to become suitable for holding in a hand. Smooth side was perhaps used for polishing (hand polisher type XI/3/b). In the middle of that surface are traces of use characteristic of anvil. Lateral sides were used as hammer.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Neolithic pottery, animal bones and shells.

Unpublished

69. Anvil, hammer

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 11, house (5) – horseshoe-shaped ovenInv. no. I-120 (incorrect inv. no.); Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement; 93 x 88 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Slab-shaped anvil used on both sides. Object was shaped as flat disc by grinding. Traces of its use as anvil discernible as conical depressions of uneven surface are identified on top and bottom side. Lateral sides are considerably roughened by using the tool as hammer.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in the horseshoe-shaped stone oven, which penetrated the house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

70. Anvil

Campaign 1968, sq. a,A/4-5, house 36Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 103-104Amphibolite; 145 x 110 x 74 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of natural shape used without transformation as anvil and hammer. Traces of use as anvil are dis-cernible on lateral sides and only one edge was used as pounder.Finding circumstances: found on almost completely preserved floor when the house 35 was removed.

Unpublished

71. Anvil

Campaign 1967, sq. A/VI, underneath arbitrary layer 11, house 26

,

Inv. no. IB-60 (incorrect inv. no.); Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 15Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 118 x 88 x 64 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of natural shape used without transformation as anvil and hammer. Top side of implement has deep conical cavity with rough surface while similar but considerably smaller depressions are visible on lateral and bottom sides. Parts of pebble resembling butts were used as hammer.Finding circumstances: found underneath house 26 on a floor of some earlier structure.

Unpublished

72. Anvil

Campaign 1970, sq. a,A/2, under the floor of house 47Without designationFine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 80 x 65 x 30 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of natural shape used without transformation as anvil and retoucher. On flattened sides are shallow conical depressions with rough surface - traces of use as anvil. Lateral sides were used as retouchers.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

73. Hammer, anvil

Campaign 1970, sq. A,B/4-5, under the floor of houses 21-22-30Without designationFine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 103 x 73 x 69 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Most probably river pebble of natural shape used as anvil and hammer. All surfaces reveal traces of use: protruding butts were used as hammers and hollows resulted from using it as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished

74. Anvil, fishing weight?

Campaign 1970, sq. f /4½-3, arbitrary layer 9Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 32Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 124 x 64 x 32 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Flat object with ground top and bottom surface but not as a result of use. Lateral sides have rather small depressions, which perhaps resulted from using this object as anvil. It was perhaps the fishing weight with lateral notches used for fixing the rope.Finding circumstances: found in rather large Star~evo intrusion.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

Hammers (75-87)

75. Hammer

Campaign 1968, sq. c/1, arbitrary layer 7Inv. no. LV-240; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 58Fine-grained granite; 117 x 58 x 48 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Hammer (type VI/2/c) of fine manufacture. The tool is shaped as truncated cone and meticulously trimmed by grinding. All parts of this object were used as retoucher as it is suggested by traces of wear on the entire surface.Finding circumstances: found in an agglomeration together with Star~evo pottery, bone tools and ani-mal bones.

Unpublished

76. Hammer

Campaign 1967, sq. A/4, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. IB-708; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 17Gabbro; 115 x 67 x 60 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented massive tool resembling in appearance perforated hammers. One butt is preserved suggest-ing that tool was used as hammer. Uneven surfaces next to the butt according to preserved gloss indicate perhaps that tool was inserted in the wooden haft. Tool surface was meticulously trimmed by grinding.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Neolithic pottery and animal bones in a layer dis-turbed by construction of the Roman tower.

Unpublished

77. Hammer

Campaign 1968, sq. a/12, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-814; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 28Granodiorite; 49 x 51 x 48 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Butt of a tool, which shape could not be determined on the basis of preserved fragment. There are traces of pounding on the butt so it could have been a hammer.Finding circumstances: found in a layer where was encountered concentration of large stones together with Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

78. Hammer

Campaign 1966, Block F (sq. C,D/I-II), arbitrary layer 7, house F (house 8)Inv. no. IB-334; Journal of excavation: July-August 1966, p. 8Granite; 96 x 57 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Hammer (type VI/2/b) with conspicuous traces of use on both butts and on lateral sides. On one lateral side and on ventral side are discernible traces of use of this tool as anvil.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery, bone tools and amulets shaped as stylized ox head within a mass of broken stone overlaying the hearth at the bottom of a layer.

Unpublished

79. Hammer

Campaign 1970, sq. C,D/7-8, house 3Inv. no. IB-35 (incorrect inv. no.)Conglomeratic quarts sandstone with siliceous cement; 160 x 99 x 108 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive stone artifact damaged on lateral side. It was trimmed by pecking and crude grinding. Artifact is shaped as hammer with both butts rounded (type VI/1/c). Larger butt has traces of pounding and sides suggest that it had been used as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished

80. Hammer-pebble

Campaign 1967, sq. A/1, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. SM-354; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 16Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 133 x 63 x 77 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble with naturally polished surfaces and with traces of pounding on the butts and on narrower lat-eral side.Finding circumstances: found within large group of pebbles (15 in total) used in natural form as tools; only 4 specimens seeming the most distinctive rep-resentatives of this form were preserved for study collection.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

81. Hammer-pebble, hand polisher

Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner BInv. no. SM-576; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Amphibolite; 177 x 64 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble with naturally smooth sides and with both butts worn-out by pounding. One side where it is flat has additionally polished surface, possibly as a result of use of the object as hand polisher (type XI/1/b).Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone tools, animal bones and remains of carbonized wooden post on a completely preserved floor.

Unpublished

82. Hammer – pebble

Campaign 1967, sq. a/8, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-415; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 23Chalcedony; 120 x 83 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Natural chalcedony pebble used because of its suit-able shape as hammer. One butt and edges have traces of use resulting from pounding.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with a few fragments of the Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished


Campaign 1970, sq. f/4½, arbitrary layer 11Inv. no. SM-1283d; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 33Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 148 x 98 x 61 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of natural shape. Its protruding parts – butts and lateral sides – were used as hammer as is sug-gested by traces of wear. The artifact had been burn-ing and it damaged its surface insignificantly.Finding circumstances: found in a pit with large group of stones together with two fragments of the Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. a/12, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-701; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 28Chalcedony; 90 x 61 x 30 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Naturally smooth river pebble used as hammer as confirmed by traces of use on the protruding parts of the pebble.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Neolithic pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq.c/I, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-653; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 18Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 102 x 90 x 64 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of untransformed natural shape with lateral sides used as hammer.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery, shells and few animal bones in a layer with stone structure.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. c/II, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. SM-762; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 26-27Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 116 x 85 x 50 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Naturally smooth pebble with all protruding parts – butts and lateral sides – used as hammer or re-toucher.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery and animal bones in a layer with stone structure.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

87. Hammer

Campaign 1967, sq. b/8, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. SM-399; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 21Aplite; 127 x 65 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented pebble with butts used as hammer and lateral sides as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer with stone structure of settlement II (according to the Journal).

Unpublished

Sling balls (88-90)

88. Sling ball? Anvil – retoucher

Campaign 1967, sq. A/1, arbitrary layer 8Inv. no. SM-354; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 16Fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonate cement; 73 x 73 x 71 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Artifact of almost symmetrical spherical shape, me-ticulously trimmed by fine pecking and grinding. On the surface are visible traces of wear resulting from use of the object as hammerstone. It could be assumed according to its shape that this artifact was used as sling ball.Finding circumstances: found within large group of pebbles (15 in total) used in natural form as tools: only 4 specimens seeming the most distinctive rep-resentatives of this form were preserved for study collection.

Unpublished

89. Sling ball, anvil

Campaign 1970, sq. C,D/7-8, house 3Inv. no. I-1291 (incorrect inv. no.)Syenite; 56 x 50 x 54 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Artifact of spherical shape with surface trimmed by pecking. Two sides are slightly flattened and have shallow depressions resulting from use of the object as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

90. Sling ball, anvil

Campaign 1970, sq. a,b/IV-V, under the floor of house 24Without designationInsufficiently defined magmatic rock; 50 x 45 x 41 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Artifact of spherical shape – pebble with surface trimmed by pecking and crude grinding. Top and bottom sides have rather shallow concavities sug-gesting that object had been used as anvil. Lateral side at some spot has rather shallow groove, which perhaps was used for fixing the rope.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished

Retouchers (91-93)

91. Retoucher

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 10, house (5)Inv. no. IB-129; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Gabbro; 72 x 54 x 20 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Possibly proximal part of some large broken tool with nicely polished sides. This artifact was used as retoucher in a rather long period of time as is indicated by traces of use on entire surface: protruding lateral sides were used for direct treating of object (surface pecked due to prolonged use) while on flat surfaces could be noticed oblique grooves in all directions as extension of dot-ted traces along the edges of the pebble. Spot of earlier fracture reveals traces of polishing so it is assumed that from that side the retouched was inserted into a haft.Finding circumstances: found on a floor considerably damaged by Neolithic intrusion and construction of horseshoe-shaped stone oven.

Unpublished

92. Retoucher, anvil

Campaign 1970, sq. A/2, under the floor of house 47Without designationGranite; 67 x 75 x 18 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Originally flat pebble with lateral side used as re-toucher. Both flat sides – top and bottom – have dis-crete traces resulting from using the pebble as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

93. Retoucher

Campaign 1970, sq. A,B/3-4, under the floor of house 54Without designation Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 95 x 77 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble of natural shape with lateral sides used as re-touchers. Artifact had been burning and that slightly changed its surface.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished

Pebbles with indistinct traces of use, trimming and potential raw materials (94 – 114)

Pebbles with indistinct traces of use (94 – 104)

94. Pebble – hammer

Campaign 1967, sq. A/9-10, house 39Without designation; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 46Amphibolite; 147 x 47 x 25 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Originally smooth flat pebble with one edge and butts revealing traces resulting from use of artifact as hammer.Finding circumstances: found together with animal bones and chipped stone tools within a layer of dark soil with traces of soot on preserved house floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. C/XIII, arbitrary layer 7Inv. no. SM-1059; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 96Amphibolite; 116 x 56 x 28 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Natural pebble trimmed by pecking to resemble an axe. ‘Cutting edge’ and ‘butt’ have traces of unsub-stantial pounding. We could not claim whether it is an artifact or pebble with natural damages.Finding circumstances: found as a single find in a layer leaning onto a rock.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

96. Pebble - polisher

Campaign 1968, sq. d/II, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-769; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 38Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 169 x 53 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Flat pebble with one side naturally polished while for other surface it is not certain whether they are of natural form or purposely made by pecking. In that case the object could have been used as polisher.Finding circumstances: found with Star~evo pot-tery, animal bones and remains of daub in a semi-pit dwelling with structure of small stones.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. d/4, arbitrary layer 1Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 24Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 110 x 56 x 49 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Originally smooth pebble resembling a hammer with butts having slight damages resulting from pounding.Finding circumstances: found in a layer, which is a bottom of silt and beginning of cultural layer with stone structure.

Unpublished

98. Pebble – grinding stone

Campaign 1970, sq. a,b/IV-V, under the floor of house 24Without designationFine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 130 x 62 x 36 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Originally smooth pebble with butts showing scarce traces of pounding. Flat side is slightly concave possibly as a result of using the pebble as grinding stone.Finding circumstances: found in the process of site dislocation.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

99. Pebble – grinding stone

Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner BInv. no. SM-576; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41, 46Granite; 91 x 63 x 54 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented pebble with originally uneven surfaces and with butt having damages resulting from use of artifact as hammer. The pebble had been burning.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone tools, animal bones and remains of carbonized wooden post on completely preserved floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. B/VII-VIII, arbitrary layer 2Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 13Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 63 x 74 x 54 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented originally smooth pebble with preserved butt worn-out as a result of pounding as purposeful human activity. The pebble had been burning.Finding circumstances: found together with coarse Star~evo pottery in a layer of loose black soil.

Unpublished


Campaign 1970, sq. f/1, arbitrary layer 6Inv. no. SM-1276–1277; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 31Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 94 x 55 x 45 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragment of naturally smooth pebble resembling a hammer. The butt is roughened due to pounding.Finding circumstances: found in the process of re-moving concentration of stones and animal bones.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. c/II, arbitrary layer 7Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 62Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 77 x 75 x 47 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented naturally smooth pebble with preserved butt revealing damages resulting from pounding. The pebble had been burning.Finding circumstances: found in a pit with plenty of Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished

103. Pebble - hammer

Campaign 1970, sq. A,B/IV-V, under the floor of houses 21-22-30Without designationGneiss; 163 x 90 x 63 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented massive naturally smooth pebble with traces of pounding on one butt. One flat side had been used as anvil.Finding circumstances: found in the course of site dislocation.

Unpublished

104. Pebble – retoucher

Campaign 1967, sq. a/6, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-449; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 26Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 53 x 48 x 25 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Flat pebble with lateral sides used as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found with Neolithic pottery and animal bones in a layer of dark soil.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

Pebbles with indistinct traces of trimming (105 – 106)

105. Pebble with indistinct traces of trimming

Campaign 1967, sq. B/9-10, between houses 40 and 41Inv. no. IB-682; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 5Amphibolite; 109 x 33 x 29 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented pebble with two originally smooth sides. Third side and butts have traces that could resemble trimming by pecking but could also be traces of natu-ral fracture.Finding circumstances: found in the process of clean-ing the area around the houses.

Unpublished

106. Pebble with indistinct traces of trimming

Campaign 1967, sq.B,C/II-III, house 16 – “ash-bin”Without designation; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 24Fine-grained yellow/white limestone; 78 x 50 x 17 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Originally flat pebble with traces of chipping visible on the butts. It is not certain whether this chipping is a result of purposeful human activity or it is natural damage.Finding circumstances: found in the course of clean-ing the house hearth.

Unpublished

Pebbles without traces of trimming and use – raw material (107 – 114)

107. Pebble – raw material

Campaign 1967, sq. a/6, arbitrary layer 9, house 50Inv. no. IB-758; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 36, 45Undefined rock because of thick CaCO3 layer of patina on the surface; 131 x 35 x 27 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but its shape deceived the Lepenski Vir investigators who thought it to be a tool and even inventoried it.Finding circumstances: found on a preserved house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. b/9, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. SM-400; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 21Fine-grained quartz sandstone with siliceous cement; 117 x 31 x 23 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: found together with about thirty fragments of Star~evo pottery in a layer over-laying the virgin soil.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. a/1, arbitrary layer 3Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 43Syenite; 100 x 41 x 21 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of loose dark soil without any other finds.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. B/2, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. SM-365; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 17Fine-grained gray spotty limestone; 85 x 27 x 29 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the tool with cutting edge.Finding circumstances: found in a layer disturbed by construction of the Roman tower.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. B/V-VI, arbitrary layer 6, house 21Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 32, 59Amphibolite; 60 x 20 x 10 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: found on relatively poorly preserved house floor.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. a/12, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-701; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 28Insufficiently defined magmatic rock; 115 x 66 x 25 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Neolithic pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. a,b/II-III, underneath arbitrary layer 8, house 32 – floor, northwest area in broader part of the houseInv. no. IB-667; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 66Fine-grained limestone; 95 x 50 x 44 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool. Thus investigators of Lepenski Vir thought it to be an implement and inventoried it.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone artifacts on the preserved house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1968, sq. c/I, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-653; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 18Basic effusive magmatic rock; 119 x 80 x 42 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Pebble without traces of trimming and use but it is of a shape suitable to produce by small corrections the ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of Star~evo pottery, shells and few animal bones.

Unpublished

Ground-edge tools (115 – 184)

Axes (115 – 155)

115. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/2, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-775, LV-227; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 15Compact silicified siltstone**;19 223 x 79 x 32 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/a) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding with somewhat discernible traces of preceding chipping. Used for a short period of time for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with stone structure and concentration of Star~evo pottery.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 80 (centre); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 90 – cat. no. 263.

19 Two asterisks (**) denote that information was taken from Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981.


CATALOGUE

116. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block F1 (sq. A,B/1), arbitrary layer 5Without designation; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 11Granite; 97 x 53 x 23 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled complete axe (type I/1/a) very meticulously trimmed by grinding. One corner of cutting edge is damaged. The tool was for a short period of time used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with numer-ous fragments of the Neolithic pottery in a layer of loose dark soil.

Unpublished

117. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block H1 (sq. B/IV) – southwest corner of the block, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. IB-459; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 22Chlorite-epidote schist; 73 x 40 x 17 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe with slightly arched cut-ting edge (type I/1/a). It was completely trimmed by grinding. One corner of the cutting edge is damaged. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of loose dark soil without any other finds.

Unpublished

118. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-433; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 16Metasiltstone; 61 x 35 x 16 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled and completely finely ground axe of the type I/1/a. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer of loose dark soil.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

119. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq c/I, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-810; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 27Albite-bearing epidote schist (sample DLV 15); 92 x 55 x 26 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Distal part of an axe (type I/1/a) symmetrically mo-deled and completely trimmed by grinding. The tool broke along the natural stone fissure so the fracture is even and looks as the tool was cut on purpose. Traces of use could not be determined because the tool sur-face is covered with patina.Finding circumstances: found together with frag-ments of Star~evo pottery and animal bones in a layer with stone structure.

Unpublished

120. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. A/IX, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. SM-594, LV-243; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 4Fine-grained rock with patina on its surface; 87 x 51 x 20 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Axe (type I/1/b) of fine manufacture completely trimmed by grinding and with discernible traces of earlier chipping only on the butt. The surface is covered with patina and that makes impossible dis-tinguishing of the traces of use.Finding circumstances: found together with frag-ments of Star~evo pottery and large quantity of shells in a layer with a group of pottery on the floor of small stones.

Unpublished

121. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/III, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. SM-817; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 43Quartz-albite-epidote schist; 85 x 43 x 20 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished axe (type I/1/b) originating from the flake of some large tool with preserved sections of the ground sides. Thus complete tool has only rough surfaces resulting from fracture and only smaller part is ground, just the one which is the remnant of previ-ous larger tool. There are no traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer together with Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

122. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. c/2-4, layer overlaying house 44Inv. no. IB-700, LV-228; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 15Silicified green claystone**; 196 x 74 x 28 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding with somewhat visible traces of previous chipping. There are no dis-tinctive traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer underneath thick silt together with the Neolithic pottery.


123. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. C/XV, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-894, LV-229; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 83Phyllite-mica schist; 217 x 60 x 22 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding with somewhat visible traces of previous chipping. It had not been used.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of dark soil with stones and Neolithic pottery.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 80 (left); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 90 – cat. no. 265


CATALOGUE

124. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/2, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-776, LV-230; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 15Andesite**; 218 x 69 x 62 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and completely trimmed by grinding. Cutting edge reveals traces of use resulting for woodworking, characteristic of a wedge for wood splintering. The butt has traces of use of this tool as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with stone structure and concentration of Star~evo pottery.

Srejovi} 1969a: fig. 80 (right); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 90 – cat. no. 260

125. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. A/4, arbitrary layer 12Inv. no. IB-732, LV-233; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 25Fine-grained silty sandstone**; 126 x 62 x 43 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding. The entire middle section of the tool had long been used as retoucher as suggested by dense traces of use on the surface. The cutting edge does not indicate distinct traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer together with Neolithic pottery and animal bones.



CATALOGUE

126. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. A,B/3-4, house 54Inv. no. SM-531; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Metadiabase; 156 x 62 x 29 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive tool (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding. Damages on dor-sal side originate from natural fissures of the stone. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with Early Neolithic vessel with molded spiraloid ornament and chipped stone artifacts on a house floor.

Unpublished

127. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block b (sq. D/8-9), arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-356, LV-231; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 4Fine-grained basic magmatic rock**; 185 x 72 x 51 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed. Complete tool was made by grinding with somewhat visible traces of previous chipping. The cutting edge reveals traces of use char-acteristic of a wedge used for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a loose gray soil.



CATALOGUE

128. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. b/I, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-531; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 13Metadiabase; 190 x 83 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/1/c) symmetrically modeled and trimmed by grinding. Cutting edge, butt and lateral sides had been used as hammer and hence there are considerable damages on those parts of the artifact.Finding circumstances: found in a layer together with Neolithic pottery.

Unpublished

129. Axe

Campaign 1970, sq. f/1, arbitrary layer 6, pit underneath grave 93Inv. no. IB-947; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 31Metadiabase; 138 x 48 x 35 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe of massive appearance (type I/1/c) complete roughly ground while only the segment around the cutting edge was highly polished. Lateral sides of the tool had been used as retouchers and cutting edge displays clear traces of use as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of animal bones and stone in a pit underneath grave 93.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

130. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 10, house 5Inv. no. LV-247; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Gabbro; 68 x 30 x 16 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An axe (type I/1/c) of symmetrical shape and me-ticulously trimmed. Complete tool was trimmed by grinding except the butt, which remained untrimmed. The cutting edge had been sharpened so the traces of earlier use for woodworking remained visible along the very edge.Finding circumstances: found on a floor considerably disturbed by Neolithic intrusion and construction of stone horseshoe-shaped oven.

Unpublished

131. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/2, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. SM-705–706, LV-245; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 29Slightly silicified siltstone; 76 x 38 x 16 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An axe (type I/1/c) of symmetrical shape and meticu-lously trimmed. Complete tool was finely ground. The cutting edge displays traces of short use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery in a layer with stone structure.

Unpublished

132. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench II (sq. C/1-2), arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-40; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 4Gabbro; 70 x 42 x 19 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe (type I/1/c) of fine manufacture – complete tool is well-polished so the traces of preliminary trimming are not discernible. Distal end is modeled as arched cutting edge while at proximal end instead of butt is narrow cutting edge worn-out due to exten-sive use. The distal cutting edge displays clear traces of use characteristic of adze.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer immediately overlaying house 5.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

133. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. D/VIII, arbitrary layer 11Inv. no. IB-608; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 37-38Fine-grained metasandstone; 85 x 36 x 17 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe (type I/1/c) made by grinding with slightly visible traces of chipping. Tool had been used as adze. Cutting edge is worn-out and chipped due to extensive use.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer overlaying the virgin soil.

Unpublished

134. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. b/VI, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-602; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 37Quartz-albite-epidote schist; 103 x 45 x 22 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe (type I/1/c) meticulously trimmed by grinding. Cutting edge is considerably damaged but before the damage the tool had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with Neolithic pottery in a layer mixed with silt.

Unpublished

135. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. a/I, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-515; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 14Amphibole-epidote schist (sample DLV 13); 99 x 50 x 22 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished axe (type I/1/c) made by subsequent trimming of distal part of some larger fragmented tool with cutting edge. One lateral side, portion of the cutting edge and butt are made by chipping while the rest of tool was ground. The ground corner of the cutting edge, which is the preserved portion of the original tool has traces of use characteristic of adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer together with few fragments of the Star~evo pottery and small amount of animal bones.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

136. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block B (sq. C/5), arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-205; Journal of excavation: July-August 1966, p. 2Quartz-albite-epidote schist (sample DLV 4); 85 x 53 x 16 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented axe (type I/1/c) without proximal part, symmetrically modeled and nicely trimmed by grinding. The cutting edge is slightly arched. On the surface are visible traces of earlier chipping. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer abounding in Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

137. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. a/3, by piramidal stone, arbitrary layer 5 (horizon III)Inv. no. IB-745; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 33Chlorite-epidote schist; 77 x 42 x 15 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe (type I/1/d) but roughly trimmed – only distal part with cutting edge was ground while the rest of tool was trimmed only by chipping. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer on top of dilapidated remains of destroyed and battered house floor.

Unpublished

138. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. C/XII, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-892; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 80Chlorite schist; 56 x 33 x 15 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe with slightly arched cutting edge (type I/1/e) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding. The cutting edge had been sharpened and along the edge are preserved traces of previous use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in the mixed layer with Bronze Age and Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

139. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench II (sq. C/1-2), arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-41; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 4Quartz-epidote schist (sample DLV 5); 78 x 45 x 15 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Nicely modeled tool made of flat stone. Axe (type I/1/e) has arched slanting cutting edge indicating prolonged use of the tool. It is completely ground but with visible traces of previous chipping. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer immediately on top of house 5.

Unpublished

140. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block C (sq. C/3-4), arbitrary layer 5 – stone blocksInv. no. IB-305; Journal of excavation: July-August 1966, p. 4-5Metadiabase; 75 x 36 x 16 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe with slanting cutting edge (type I/1/e). It is symmetrically modeled but roughly trimmed. Body of the tool was roughly ground with very conspicu-ous traces of chipping while only the cutting edge was nicely ground. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with few fragments of Star~evo pottery in a layer with stone blocks.

Unpublished

141. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block F (sq. B,C,D/1-2), arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-240; Journal of excavation: July-August 1966, p. 4Silicified phyllite; 50 x 36 x 10 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe (type I/1/e) made on rather small flat piece of stone. Only the cutting edge is well polished while other planes are roughly ground with clearly visible traces of previous chipping. Traces of use reveal that tool had not been used after sharpening and traces of previous use for woodworking are preserved along the very edge.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

142. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 10, house 5Inv. no. IB-124; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Metadiabase; 71 x 33 x 14 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe (type I/1/e) trimmed by grinding but with conspicuous traces of previous chipping. The cutting edge is slightly arched and slanting. The tool reveals traces of short use as an adze.Finding circumstances: found next to the Neolithic stone oven of horseshoe shape that penetrated the house floor.

Unpublished

143. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 10, house 5Inv. no. IB-123; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Epidote schist; 50 x 35 x 14 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Small axe (type I/1/e) symmetrically modeled and meticulously trimmed by grinding but with com-pletely unworked butt! Cutting edge is slightly arched. It had been used for a short time as an adze.Finding circumstances: found next to the Neolithic stone oven of horseshoe shape that penetrated the house floor.

Unpublished

144. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. IB-440; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 16Albite-epidote schist (sample DLV 8); 56 x 33 x 16 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled axe (type I/1/e) made on a flake, which was very slightly additionally trimmed. Only cutting edge on dorsal side and lateral sides were ground while remaining surface was left com-pletely untrimmed. There are indistinct traces of short-time use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

145. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/1, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. IB-836; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 43Diabase; 80 x 43 x 23 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled and meticulously ground axe (type I/2/b). Slightly slanting cutting edge could be the result of wearing out of one corner due to prolonged use. Cutting edge also displays traces of sharpening but along the very edge are visible traces of earlier use for woodworking. Butt and adjacent lateral sides were used as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery, animal bones and shells in a layer overlaying the virgin soil.

Unpublished

146. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/I, arbitrary layer 9Inv. no. LV-248; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 33, 71Metadiabase; 74 x 27 x 16 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An axe type I/2/b of fine manufacture. The tool is of symmetrical shape and meticulously trimmed all over by grinding with partially visible traces of chip-ping. Cutting edge had been subsequently sharpened but along the edge remained visible traces of earlier use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer with stone structure.

Unpublished

147. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. D/VIII, arbitrary layer 11Inv. no. IB-607; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 37-38Quartz-albite-epidote schist; 104 x 34 x 19 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Elongated axe with slanting cutting edge (type I/2/b). Tool is symmetrically modeled and surface is only partially trimmed by grinding with visible traces of earlier chipping. It had been used as wedge for splin-tering wood.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer overlaying the virgin soil.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

148. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/3, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-813; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 30Quartz-albite-epidote schist; 86 x 48 x 22 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished axe of type I/2/b. After the damage the cutting edge was once again made by chipping but the tool was never finally trimmed by grinding nor it was used in this form. The rest of tool was ground with visible natural uneven spots of the stone struc-ture.Finding circumstances: found together with axe cat. no. 199 (inv. no. IB-812) in a group of fragmented and complete Star~evo vessels and stone.

Unpublished

149. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block C (sq. C/3-4), arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-285; Journal of excavation: July-August 1966, p. 4Metadiabase; 62 x 32 x 10 cmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

An axe with slanting cutting edge (type I/2/d) indi-cating prolonged use of the tool. The tool was shaped only by chipping and only the cutting edge was well ground. It was made on a flake (ventral side is flat) and shape was adjusted by chipping dorsal and lateral sides. The cutting edge was sharpened thus obliterat-ing all traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with signifi-cantly less Star~evo pottery then in the upper layers.

Unpublished

150. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. b/I, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. LV-235; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 21Fine-grained rock with patina on its surface; 115 x 55 x 41 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Semifinished axe of type I/3/b. Cutting edge and butt are chipped while rest of the surface is partially ground with visible traces of chipping. It seems as the axe was made from middle part of some larger broken tool. The surface of artifact is covered with patina.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of pottery, animal bones, stones, ashes and soot.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

151. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block G1, sq. B/I-II, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-431; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 16Granite porphyry; 113 x 68 x 49 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented massive axe (type I/3/b) with one half and butt missing. Thus fragmented axe was second-ary used as retoucher as indicated by traces of use on blunt cutting edge, fracture towards proximal end and body of the tool.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer of loose dark soil.

Unpublished

152. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. a/I, house 27Inv. no. IB-633, LV-244; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 64Epidote schist; 80 x 30 x 19 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An axe of massive appearance due to its square cross-section with slightly convex sides (type I/3/d).The tool is mostly trimmed by grinding except unworked butt and with visible traces of previous chipping. It had been used for a short time as a wedge.Finding circumstances: found on preserved house floor.

Unpublished

153. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/II, arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. LV-232; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 10Metasiltstone; 156 x 46 x 40 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive axe (type I/4/a) symmetrically modeled and partially meticulously trimmed with entirely un-trimmed parts like butt. Other surfaces were partially ground with clearly visible traces of previous chip-ping. Cutting edge displays traces of use as wedge for splintering wood while traces on the butt indicate that axe had been hafted.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with mixed Bronze Age and Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

154. Axe

Campaign 1969, sq. B/XII, arbitrary layer 6 – zone of dark soilInv. no. SM-1120, LV-238; Journal of excavation: 1969, p. 24Silicified serpentinite; 117 x 42 x 20 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An axe (type I/4/b) of symmetrical shape and me-ticulously trimmed. Complete tool was trimmed by grinding with visible traces of previous chipping. Cutting edge was so damaged that traces of use could not be discerned.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery and animal bones in the loose dark soil in the periphery of rather large concentration of stones.

Unpublished

155. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-432; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 16Metadiabase (sample DLV 9); 87 x 67 x 44 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Distal part with arched cutting edge of massive axe (type I/5/e). Cutting edge itself is well-ground while on other parts of implement are discernible traces of chipping. It had been used for a short time for wood-working.Finding circumstances: found with plenty of Star~evo pottery in a layer of loose dark soil.

Unpublished

Adzes (156 – 162)

156. Adze

Campaign 1967, sq. a/1, arbitrary layer 5 – stone structuresInv. no. IB-647; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 46Quartz-albite-epidote schist; 73 x 31 x 16 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Symmetrically modeled adze with slightly slant-ing cutting edge (type III/1/a). It was completely trimmed by grinding with hardly visible traces of previous chipping. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found together with few fragments of Star~evo pottery in the loose dark soil with stone structures.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

157. Adze

Campaign 1968, sq. c/IV, arbitrary layer 4 – Hoard 2Inv. no. IB-833, LV-250; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 39Serpentinite**; 47 x 28 x 11 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Small adze (type III/1/a) representing one of tran-sitional shapes to the chisels. The tool was meticu-lously trimmed by fine grinding with conspicuous traces of previous sawing on the ventral side. Cutting edge has traces of use typical for a wedge for splin-tering wood.Finding circumstances: in a layer of yellow soil with Star~evo pottery, animal bones, shells and snails was found potbellied vessel with four small ground stone tools (catalogue 157, 170, 179 and 200) in it.

Srejovi} 1969a: 174 – fig. 51 (second from left), pl. XIII (right); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 90 – cat. no. 268

158. Adze

Campaign 1968, sq. c/II, arbitrary layer 7Inv. no. LV-234; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 62Metasiltstone; 121 x 49 x 33 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

An adze (type III/4/a) originating from distal part of larger broken tool. Distal part of the tool was trimmed by grinding while butt part as fracture spot of earlier larger tool was entirely trimmed by chipping. Cutting edge has conspicuous traces of sharpening.Finding circumstances: found in a pit with plenty of Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished

159. Adze

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. LV-241; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 16, 19Fine-grained carbonate sandstone; 122 x 48 x 30 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Massive adze (type III/1/a) of asymmetrical shape and crude manufacture. Except the cutting edge, which is meticulously ground rest of the tool is just smoothed with clear traces of previous chipping. Cutting edge is rather blunt due to use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

160. Adze

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-414; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 12Metasiltstone (sample DLV 7); 60 x 47 x 20 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Distal part of an adze with arched cutting edge (type III/1/a). Tool was symmetrically modeled and very meticulously trimmed by grinding. It had been used for a short time as adze.Finding circumstances: found in the loose dark soil with lot of pottery fragments.

Unpublished

161. Adze

Campaign 1967, sq. D/I, house 7Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 3Amphibole-epidote schist (sample DLV 11); 113 x 57 x 36 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished adze (type III/7/b) – an attempt to make an adze from the fragment of some larger tool. Cutting edge, one side edge and butt were made by chipping. Tool was never finished but even in this form it was used for woodworking as a wedge.Finding circumstances: found on damaged part of a house in an area next to house 17.

Unpublished

162. Adze

Campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner BInv. no. 73 (incorrect inv. no.); Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 41Chlorite-epidote schist (sample DLV 14); 100 x 73 x 37 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Semifinished adze (type III/5/a) produced from dis-tal part of some larger grond-edge tool. Cutting edge, one lateral side and butt were trimmed by chipping while rest of the tool was ground. This adze had not been used.Finding circumstances: found together with chipped stone tools, animal bones and remains of carbonized wooden post on completely preserved floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

Chisels (163 –174)

163. Chisel

Campaign 1970, sq. d/3, arbitrary layer 8 – Neolithic ovenInv. no. SM-1228, LV-249; Journal of excavation: 1970, p. 13-14Chlorite-epidote schist; 51 x 37 x 9 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/1/d) of fine manufacture. Tool was symmetrically modeled and completely trimmed by grinding with visible traces of previous chipping. Cutting edge has traces of use resulting from use as wedge for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of Star~evo pottery, animal bones and chipped stone ar-tifacts in the course of cleaning the Neolithic oven.

Unpublished

164. Chisel

Campaign 1968, sq. C/10, arbitrary layer 4Without designation; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 44Chlorite-epidote schist; 61 x 24 x 10 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/4/b) originating from a flake of some larger ground stone tool. Dorsal side is ground sur-face of the flake while ventral and lateral sides as well as pointed butt were trimmed just by chipping. Cutting edge is well polished on both sides. Traces of use on the cutting edge are characteristic of an adze.Finding circumstances: found in stone structure above house 62, which was damaged by burying of grave 47 from later layer.

Unpublished

165. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. A/4, arbitrary layer 16Inv. no. IB-742; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 31Chlorite-epidote schist; 80 x 26 x 11 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/5/a) made on a flake of some larger tool with ground surfaces. It was completely trimmed by chipping except narrow strip next to the cutting edge. It had been used as adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer mixed with virgin soil and without other finds.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

166. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. A/4, arbitrary layer 14Inv. no. IB-738; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 29Gabbro; 42 x 22 x 9 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/4/a) with cutting edge damaged in central area. According to its shape and selection of raw material chisel resembles small Star~evo tools made of jadeite/nephrite. Tool is symmetrically mod-eled and completely trimmed by grinding. Cutting edge has visible traces of sharpening but the edge retained traces of previous use for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

167. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. B/V-VI, arbitrary layer 7, house 21, underneath the skeletonWithout designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 59Diorite; 38 x 29 x 11 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/5/a) made of fragment of cutting edge of some larger broken tool in such a way that lateral sides were modeled by chipping. Cutting edge, dorsal and ventral sides are ground while lateral sides and butt remained chipped. One of the sides was for a short time used as retoucher. Cutting edge has traces of use characteristic of an adze.Finding circumstances: found on the floor of house 21 damaged by a burial, underneath the skeleton, which actually lies on the floor of house 22.

Unpublished

168. Chisel

Campaign 1968, sq. a,A/4-5, house 35Inv. no. LV-253; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 103-104Silicified serpentinite; 55 x 17 x 9 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/4/a) of symmetrical shape and fine manufacture. Complete tool was trimmed by grind-ing. Cutting edge has traces of use characteristic of wedge for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found together with few ani-mal bones, chipped stone artifacts and 2 fragments of Neolithic pottery on a house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

169. Chisel

Campaign 1968, sq. a/VI-VII, pits 1-2, by the house 26Inv. no. SM-946, LV-252; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 72Silicified serpentinite; 37 x 12 x 8 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Small chisel (type V/1/b) of fine manufacture. Complete tool was meticulously trimmed by grind-ing. Cutting edge is worn-out due to extensive use. Tool was used as an adze judging by traces of use on the cutting edge.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery in the course of hearth removal.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 91 – cat. no.269

170. Chisel

Campaign 1968, c/IV, arbitrary layer 4 – Hoard 2Inv. no. IB-833, LV-251; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 39Serpentinite**; 60 x 17 x 10 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/1/b) of fine manufacture. Complete tool was meticulously shaped by grinding. Cutting edge has traces of use characteristic of an adze.Finding circumstances: in a layer of yellow soil with Star~evo pottery, animal bones, shells and snails was found small potbellied vessel with four small ground stone tools (catalogue 157, 170, 179 and 200) in it.

Srejovi} 1969a: 174 – fig. 51 (right), pl. XIII (below); Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981: 90 – cat. no. 267

171. Chisel

Campaign 1968, sq. C/X, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. SM-993–995; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 83Chlorite-epidote schist; 49 x 13 x 15 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel (type V/1/c) obviously made of one corner of cutting edge of some larger tool. Only one side of this fragment had been additionally trimmed by chipping while other parts of the tool had not been trimmed after breaking of original implement. Cutting edge is well polished while other surfaces were left almost unworked with traces of crude chipping. There are traces of use typical for an adze.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer of dark soil with stones.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

172. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. A/VI, underneath arbitrary layer 11, on the floor of house 26Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 29, 62-63.Chlorite-epidote schist; 46 x 13 x 7 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel with distal end shaped as genuine cutting edge narrower than the rest of the tool (type V/2/c). Only very narrow cutting edge is well polished while the rest is roughly ground with visible traces of previ-ous chipping. It had been used for a short time as a wedge.Finding circumstances: found together with few frag-ments of Star~evo pottery and chipped stone artifacts on the house floor next to graves 5 and 6.

Unpublished

173. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. b/IV, arbitrary layer 8, above house 24Inv. no. IB-646; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 45Metadiabase; 55 x 23 x 12 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel with distal end with genuine cutting edge nar-rower than proximal end (type V/1/a). Chisel was made of a piece of distal part of some larger tool by additional chipping of one lateral side to achieve final shape of a new chisel. It had been used as an adze.Finding circumstances: found in a layer of dark soil with very few fragments of Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

174. Chisel

Campaign 1967, sq. a/III, arbitrary layer 7, house 31Inv. no. IB-619; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 38, 65Silicified phyllite; 75 x 27 x 12 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Chisel with distal end with genuine cutting edge nar-rower of the proximal end (type V/1/b). Only narrow strip surrounding the edge is well polished while other parts remained just chipped. Chisel had been used as adze and its lateral edges near the butt as retoucher.Finding circumstances: found together with two bone awls on the house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

Fragmented ground-edge tools of indistinct shape (175 – 184)

175. Fragmented ground-edge tool

Campaign 1967, sq. b/I, arbitrary layer 4Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 21Chlorite-epidote schist (sample DLV 12); 134 x 62 x 19 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Tool with broken off cutting edge, probably original-ly an adze (type III/1/a). It was symmetrically shaped but roughly trimmed by grinding with visible traces of previous chipping. It had not been in secondary use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of pottery, animal bones, stones, ash and soot.

Unpublished

176. Butt part of ground-edge tool

Campaign 1966, Block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-426; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 12Metabasalt (sample DLV 10); 130 x 66 x 40 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Butt part of some massive ground-edge tool of un-distinguishable shape. Fragmented tool had not been used.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer above the floor of rammed earth.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. A/2, by the wall of Roman towerInv. no. IB-685; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 9Chlorite schist; 88 x 43 x 24 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Fragmented tool of indiscernible shape. Surfaces were meticulously trimmed by grinding. There are traces of grinding and chipping on both ends so it was perhaps unsuccessful attempt to make new implement.Finding circumstances: found in a layer disturbed by construction of Roman tower.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1966, Block H1 (sq. B,C/III-IV), arbitrary layer 1Inv. no. IB-447; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 13Albite-epidote schist (sample DLV 6); 52 x 63 x 25 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Distal part with slightly arched cutting edge of some larger tool, which could not be identified as being axe or adze. Fragment was meticulously trimmed by grinding. Fine marly patina prevents the analysis of traces of use and cutting edge suggests that tool was used for woodworking.Finding circumstances: found in the upper layer of a pit with Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

179. Fragmented small tool

Campaign 1968, sq. c/IV, arbitrary layer 4 – Hoard 2Inv. no. IB-833; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 39Gabbro; 45 x 25 mm (the object consists of 8 small fragments)Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Some small tool, which completely disintegrated be-cause it had been made of low quality friable stone. It seems to be butt part of small ground-edge tool.Finding circumstances: in a layer of yellow soil with Star~evo pottery, animal bones, shells and snails was found potbellied vessel with four small ground stone tools (catalogue 157, 170, 179 and 200) in it.

Srejovi} 1969a: 174 – fig. 51 (third from left).

180. Butt part of the ground-edge tool

Campaign 1966-1967, Block F1 (sq. D,E/I-II), arbitrary layer 11, house 9Inv. no. LV-260; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 2-3Basic magmatic rock; 82 x 58 x 29 mmNational Museum in Belgrade

Butt part of some ground-edge tool. Fragment dis-plays meticulous surface trimming by grinding with hardly visible traces of previous chipping.Finding circumstances: found together with carbon-ized animal bones on a house floor covered with layer of soot.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. b/8, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-719; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 17Epidote schist; 46 x 32 x 14 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Proximal end of some ground-edge tool and butt shaped as cutting edge. Tool was meticulously trimmed by grinding. There are no traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished


Campaign 1968, sq. A/11, arbitrary layer 6Inv. no. SM-823; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 42Chlorite-epidote schist (sample DLV 1); 48 x 42 x 13 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Proximal part of some ground-edge tool of indistinct shape. Surface of the fragment was ground with vis-ible traces of previous chipping. There are no traces of use.Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery, animal bones and pieces of daub in a layer with stone structures.

Unpublished


Campaign 1967, sq. A/IV, arbitrary layer 10, house 19Without designation; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 41Epidote-amphibole schist (sample DLV 2); 42 x 44 x 17 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Proximal part of some ground-edge tool of elliptical cross-section but the shape could not be determined. Surface is well ground but not enough to obliterate all traces of previous chipping. Fragment does not have traces of use.Finding circumstances: found together with one chipped stone artifact on a house floor.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE


Campaign 1967, sq. D/IX, arbitrary layer 13Inv. no. SM-187; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 39Epidote-amphibole schist (sample DLV 3); 62 x 49 x 19 mmArchaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade

Proximal part of some ground-edge tool shape of which could not be determined. Fragment reveals incomplete trimming – surface was roughly ground with visible traces of previous modeling by chipping. There are no traces of use.Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

Material stored at unknown location (catalogue 185 – 202)

185. Axe

Campaign 1965, Trench IIa (sq. C,D/1), arbitrary layer 10, house 5Inv. no. IB-122; Journal of excavation: 1965, p. 8Length 150 mmStored at unknown location

‘Large cylindrical axe.’20

Finding circumstances: found on a floor considerably damaged by Neolithic intrusion and construction of stone horseshoe-shaped oven.

Unpublished

186. Axe

Campaign 1966, Block b (sq. D/8-9), arbitrary layer 4, house 1Inv. no. IB-369; Journal of excavation: October 1966, p. 665 x 30 mmStored at unknown location

‘Stone axe.’Finding circumstances: found in a layer with stone structure above the house 5.

Unpublished

20 All other descriptions for this kind of material have been taken from the field inventory.


CATALOGUE

187. Chisel

Campaign 1966-1967, Block F1 (sq. D,E/I-II), on the floor of house 9Inv. no. IB-476; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 235 x 23 mmStored at unknown location

‘Miniature axe.’Finding circumstances: found on a house floor covered with 1cm thick layer of soot with plenty of scorched animal bones, a few fragmented stone tools and several chipped stone artifacts.

Unpublished

188. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. A/V, arbitrary layer 5Inv. no. IB-512; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 12Length 90 mmStored at unknown location

‘Ground stone axe.’Finding circumstances: found together with plenty of coarse Star~evo pottery in a layer of loose dark soil with parts of stone structure.

Unpublished

189. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. b/III, arbitrary layer 2Inv. no. IB-611; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 37Length 130 mmStored at unknown location

‘Tongue-shaped axe.’Finding circumstances: found in a cultural layer still mixed with layer of silt.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

190. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. b/III, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-614; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 39Length 70 mmStored at unknown location

‘Tongue-shaped axe of black stone.’Finding circumstances: found in proper cultural layer with Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished

191. Axe

Campaign 1967, in the line between sq. b/III and b/IV, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no. IB-615; Journal of excavation: July-August 1967, p. 39Length 70 mmStored at unknown location

‘Tongue-shaped axe of white stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a group of three small axes at point 151 m.

Unpublished

192. Axe


‘Tongue-shaped axe of white stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a group of three small axes at point 151 m.

Unpublished

193. Axe


‘Tongue-shaped axe of black stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a group of three small axes at point 151 m.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

194. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. a/6, arbitrary layer 1 – under the humus layerInv. no. IB-684; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 742 x 29 mmStored at unknown location

‘Small ground stone axe of greenish color.’Finding circumstances: found together with Star~evo pottery in a layer of dark soil immediately under the humus layer.

Unpublished

195. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. c/2-4, layer overlaying house 44Inv. no. IB-701; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 15160 x 65 mmStored at unknown location

‘Roughly ground axe.’Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery overlaying a stone structure.

Unpublished

196. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. c/2-4, layer overlaying house 44Inv. no. IB-717; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 15110 x 25 mmStored at unknown location

‘Small axe of bluish stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a layer with Star~evo pottery overlaying a stone structure.

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

197. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. A/3, arbitrary layer 10Inv. no. IB-723; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 20100 x 43 mmStored at unknown location

‘Tongue-shaped axe of bluish stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a loose dark soil with plenty of Star~evo pottery.

Unpublished

198. Axe

Campaign 1967, sq. a/8, arbitrary layer 4Inv. no. IB-725; Journal of excavation: October 1967, p. 21100 x 60 mmStored at unknown location

‘Tongue-shaped roughly ground axe of bluish stone.’Finding circumstances: found in a layer with plenty of Star~evo pottery and animal bones.

Unpublished

199. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/3, arbitrary layer 3Inv. no IB-812; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 3080 x 35 mmStored at unknown location

‘Axe made of whitish stone, finely ground.’Finding circumstances: found within a group of complete and fragmented Star~evo vessels and stone together with axe inv. no. IB-813 (catalogue 148).

Unpublished


CATALOGUE

200. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. c/IV, arbitrary layer 4 – Hoard 2Inv. no. IB-833; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 3965 x 35 mmStored at unknown location

‘Rather small axe of white stone.’Finding circumstances: in a layer of yellow soil with Star~evo pottery, animal bones, shells and snails was found small potbellied vessel with four small ground stone tools (catalogue 157, 170, 179 and 200) in it.

Srejovi} 1969a: 174 – fig. 51 (left)

201. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/1, arbitrary layer 7Inv. no. IB-863; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 5985 x 48 mmStored at unknown location

‘Small axe of white color, partially damaged at one end’.Finding circumstances: found in a Star~evo pit.

Unpublished

202. Axe

Campaign 1968, sq. d/1, arbitrary layer 7Inv. no. IB-863; Journal of excavation: 1968, p. 5967 x 27 mmStored at unknown location

‘Small axe of white color, partially damaged at one end.’Finding circumstances: found in a Star~evo pit.

Unpublished

Conclusion


Stone was most frequently used raw material at Lepenski Vir. Besides being used as basic building material for structures in Settlement I and II it was also used for production of cult objects (sculptures, altars, amulets, etc.), objects for personal adornment (necklaces, pendants), massive stone tools and weap-ons for hunting and fishing, ground stone implements and chipped stone artifacts. Thus it is small wonder that stone artifacts of all kinds display considerable level of technical skill represented at the same time in adroit selection of raw materials suitable for par-ticular requirements of produced objects and in the way of working the stone. In all these artifacts are interwoven many centuries of tradition of Paleolithic stone industry of the communities recorded in this region, on the left Danube bank.

Generally speaking all stone material from Lepenski Vir reveals great diversity in selection of raw materials and massive and ground stone tools are main representatives of this diversity. For pro-duction of cult objects mostly sandstone was used (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983) and for decorative objects limestone and marble very prevailing. Artifacts of chipped stone industry display slightly greater di-versity in selection of raw materials but not in the slightest such heterogeneity as is the case with large stone tools.

Selection of raw materials observes specializa-tion of tools and weapons. Different types of stone had been used for the ground-edge tools and other types for massive pounding tools and weapons and implements for hunting and fishing or tools for mak-ing other objects of hard materials. Masters from Lepenski Vir had never used coarse-grained rocks for production of ground-edge tools mainly intended for fine woodworking. They sought raw materials for this type of tools far away from the area of their habitation where they mostly found all other stone raw materials for their needs. They valued those raw materials brought from distant regions so much that they used them to the maximum as it is suggested by some ground-edge tools, particularly chisels, which had been made of fragmented tools of larger size

revealing in such a way tendency (or necessity) of prehistoric masters from Lepenski Vir to use to the maximum the raw material, which was not so easy to obtain. Here we can state another assumption about maximal use of the same raw material when ground-edge tools are concerned. Ground-edge tools by their shape and macroscopic appearance look identical to the tools of Star~evo-Vin~a technological tradition. Perhaps inhabitants of Lepenski Vir by the selection of raw material for their production tried in tangible way to represent their wish and determination to es-tablish new order – Neolithic. Such role of raw materi-als has already been assumed for obsidian (Tripkovi} 2001: 30 - 38). Just on the basis of specialized used of raw materials in Early Holocene settlements in the Iron Gates it has been assumed that contact was established between traditional Mesolithic and new, Neolithic way of life much earlier than this contact was indicated by pottery in the Mesolithic layers at the Iron Gates settlement. Massive stone tools made of various kinds of coarse- or medium-grained magmatic and metamorphic rocks, of pebbles and by minimal trimming represent local Mesolithic tradi-tion in stone working and ground-edge stone tools made exclusively of fine-grained metamorphites represent ‘imported’ component (Antonovi} 2003b). This was not real import but import of technology or perhaps import of symbols of new way of life. Massive tools of Mesolithic tradition were used for hunting and first of all for fishing and pebble as main raw material for production of objects, which provid-ed existence and sedentary way of life had become the element of cult. On the other hand, ground-edge stone tools as tools illustrating the arrival of new times had never become part of Mesolithic spiritual life but they had been deposited in the graves of the bearers of Lepenski Vir culture as offerings, i.e. ob-jects of exceptional value.21

21 They were found in the necropolis at Hajdu~ka Vodenica and few finds come from the graves at Lepenski Vir. Nevertheless only one find from Lepenski Vir could be with certainty dated into the period of Mesolithic and Neolithic contact (Roksandi} 2000) while others are more likely to date from the Neolithic period.


CONCLUSION

Raw materials do not directly indicate premedi-tated organized procurement but there are indica-tions that there was some kind of organization in that activity. It has already been established earlier that large pebbles for sculpture making had been brought from one very restricted area. It concerns the pebbles of sandstone originating from formation of conglom-erates from the [omrda hill and which by brooks and torrents reached the rivers Boljetinska and Pesa~a whence they had been retrieved by the bearers of Lepenski Vir culture (Grèti} 1983: 203). It could be assumed that other kinds of stone had been obtained in the same way as all raw materials identified among stone tools from Lepenski Vir could be found in the wider surrounding of the site. However, the fact that there were small series of ground-edge tools made of almost identical raw material (fine-grained schist) indicate that certain sorts of stone had been acquired for certain types of tools with evident intention.

The collision of two traditions conspicuous in the use of raw materials reflects also in the technological approach. All stone tools could be generally classified in two groups. First group includes objects made ac-cording to the local Mesolithic tradition like mallets (scepters), weights, grinding stones, querns, anvils, hammers and sling balls and often completely un-trimmed pebbles had been used as implements. Such tools were made of pebbles, which original shape usually suitable for use was transformed into a tool by minimal chipping, pecking and grounding. According to the investigations conducted so far it seems that these tools developed entirely autochthonously in the circumstances of sedentary life, which is not related to the changes in economy – main source of food is still gathering. Massiveness of objects, traces of use and ethnographic parallels indicate that they had been used for unsophisticated everyday activities, i.e. for production and shaping of objects of hard materials (stone, bone, antler), for hunting, fishing, grinding of grains and other activities, which could not be pre-cisely detected. Second group includes ground-edge stone tools (axes, adzes and chisels) used for wood-working and hammers made of blunted ground-edge tools. All these artifacts represent tools made in new Neolithic technique. Concerning technology these tools were made of stone suitable for chipping so the ground-edge tools were mostly made of large-size flakes by chipping while final shape was realized by grinding. Such technology as well as selection of fine-grained rocks as raw material resulted in these tools achieving shape and appearance characteristic of axes and adzes of Star~evo-Vin~a techno-com-plex. They are of smaller size and they have without exception almost symmetrical semicircular cross-section and they were made of fine-grained rocks of light to dark gray/green color – rocks, which at first

sight resemble raw materials used for chipped stone tools. Transition phase between these two traditions are massive axes, which according to their way of manufacture but also according to the selection of raw materials correspond more with tools made in the Mesolithic technological tradition: they were made of pebbles, they were of larger size and they are massive because of circular cross-section and as raw material were used fine-grained magmatic and metamorphic rocks.

Tools of ‘imported’ ground stone industry (ground-edge tools – axes, adzes and chisels) were used exclusively for woodworking and they were en-countered in larger quantity only in the settlements with more intensive building activity. In that light is somewhat more understandable greater abundance of such tools at Lepenski Vir where many houses were encountered22 while it is surprising that they are completely lacking at Vlasac. Perhaps, this is the an-swer to the question of use of raw material as symbol of new life. At all three sites same type of houses not differing in structural elements had been built. Carbonized posts found on the floors of some houses at Lepenski Vir23 reveal that wood as basic material for aboveground parts of houses was trimmed ex-plaining thus greater quantity of tools with cutting edge and with traces of use characteristic of wood-working. At the Mesolithic Vlasac ground-edge tools used for woodworking had not been found while at Padina – Sector III and at Lepenski Vir their quan-tity is quite sufficient for construction of the number of houses discovered at these two sites. Presence of ground-edge tools as tools made in the Neolithic technique actually does not represent import but cul-tural influence and it has no impact on chronological determination but reveals to what extent some Early Holocene settlements in the Iron Gates accepted Neolithic traits from the outside. Thus, for example, Lepenski Vir and settlement at Padina – Sector III represent already to the great extent Neolithizied set-tlements with basically hunting-gathering economy, with focus on fishing. In contrast to them Velesnica with very small quantity of ground-edge stone tools considerably falls behind Lepenski Vir and Padina – Sector III and according to the stone material indi-cates a strong fishermen’s settlement although pot-tery finds suggest an entirely Neolithic settlement.

Horizontal distribution of stone tools at Lepenski Vir reveals an interesting dispersion of finds (Fig. 6). Massive stone tools of local Mesolithic tradition

22 Similar ratio of ground-edge stone tools and number of houses has been encountered at nearby Padina in Sector III.23 Trimmed carbonized posts were discovered on the floors of some houses at Lepenski Vir: house 9 (F5), 16 (G4), 34, 37, 47 and 51 (Journals of excavation: October 1966, p. 21; July-August 1967, p. 2; October 1967, p. 28, 32, 46 – 47).


CONCLUSION

were more frequently found within Lepenski Vir houses whence come 55% of those finds and some-what smaller proportion, 45% comes from the cul-tural layer related to the houses. However, picture is completely different when we consider ground-edge stone tools. Only 17% of these objects was found within houses of Settlement I and out of that number 10% was on the house floors undisturbed by sub-sequent intrusions (houses 1, 7, 9, 19, 27, 35, 51, 54) and 7% in the houses with floors disturbed by later structures (house 5) or by burials of Neolithic inhabitants from Lepenski Vir IIIa horizon (houses 21 and 24). Much larger quantity of ground-edge tools, 83%, comes from the cultural layer above and around the houses of Lepenski Vir I and their concentration is highest in the north section of the settlement.

Stone industry from Lepenski Vir so complex and consisting of two components has no analo-gies outside the Iron Gates region. It is interesting that local Mesolithic component displays relation-ship with stone finds from very distant areas with whom Lepenski Vir culture had no direct contacts. Relationship in their basic characteristics display stone industries of Dniester-Don region (Levenok 1966: 93; Telegin 1982: 110), coastal area of eastern Germany (Gramsch 1973: 19 – 30; Gramsh, Kloss 1989: 318), Pomerania in Poland (Galinski 1992: 103, 156 - 157, 162), coastal regions of Finland

(Matiskainen 1989: 387 –389) and great similarity in shapes and system of raw materials use reveal stone tools of Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in the northwestern regions of European parts of Russia (Gurina 1961: 190 - 201; Gurina 1973: 46 - 49). All mentioned finds are neither geographically nor cul-turally close to the Early Holocene of the Iron Gates but their common trait is that they originated within cultures relying first of all on aquatic food and where evolution of stone tools was generated by fishing of large fish as in the Iron Gates. Therefore, it could be claimed with certainty that stone industry, in its local Mesolithic variant, had an autochthonous evolution dictated by natural environment and living condi-tions of the inhabitants of the Iron Gates. Stone in-dustry had been adapted for most successful fishing and hunting as is suggested by diversity of pounding tools while the tools of ‘imported’ Neolithic variant could be understood as later superstructure in the quality of life of Lepenski Vir population. Contact of two civilization stages, Mesolithic and Neolithic is once again confirmed in the stone material besides the one demonstrated in the anthropological remains from the Iron Gates (Roksandi} 2000: 85 – 87). Still, this contact and parallel life with Neolithic commu-nities in the neighborhood suggested also by absolute dates had no decisive impact on the evolution of the Lepenski Vir culture, which remained Mesolithic in its essence.

Bibliography


Antonovi} 1992D. Antonovi}, Predmeti od gla~anog kamena iz Vin~e (The ground stone industry from Vin~a), Beograd, 1992.

Antonovi} 2003aD. Antonovi}, Neolitska industrija gla~anog kamena u Srbiji (Neolithic ground stone industry in Serbia), Beograd, 2003.

Antonovi} 2003 bD. Antonovi}, Mezolitska i neolitska kamena industrija \erdapa (The Mesolithic and Neolithic stone industry of the Iron Gates), Glasnik Srpskog arheolo{kog dru{tva 19 (2003): 9 – 35.

Antonovi} 2004D. Antonovi}, Stone Objects from Padina and Hajdu~ka Vodenica, Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, University of Liège, Belgium, 2-8 September 2001. 7. The Mesolithic: Landscape-Use During the Final-Palaeolithic and Mesolithic in NW-Europe: The Formation of Extensive Sites and Site-Complexes. Late Foragers and Early Farmers of the Lepenski Vir-Schela Cladovei Culture in the Iron Gates Gorges. A Metamorphosis of Technology. BAR S1302, Oxford, 2004: 69-75

Antonovi}, in preparationD. Antonovi}, The Development of the Ground Stone Industry in the Serbian Part of the Iron Gates, in C. Bonsall, I. Radovanovi} & V. Boroneanţ (eds.) The Iron Gates in Prehistory: New Perspectives, BAR. International Series, Oxford.

Bogosavljevi} 1988.V. Bogosavqevi}, Pokretni materijal sa prais-torijskog rudnika na Malom [turcu (Matériel archéologique meuble de la mine préhistorique de Prlju{a – Mali [turac), Zbornik radova Narodnog muzeja XVIII (1988), â~ak: 13 – 35.

Bökonyi 1969S. Bökonyi, Ki~mewaci (prethodni izve{taj), u D. Srejovi}, Lepenski Vir: nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavqu, Beograd, 1969: 224 – 228.

Bökonyi 1972S. Bökonyi, The Vertebrate fauna, in D. Srejovi}, Europe’s first monumental sculpture: new discoveries at Lepenski Vir, London, 1972: 186 – 189.

Bori} 1999D. Bori}, Places that created time in the Danube Gorges and beyond, c. 9000 – 5500 BC, Documenta Praehistorica XXVI, Ljubljana, 1999: 41 – 70.

Bori} 2002D. Bori}, Seasons, life cycles and memory in the Danube Gorges, c. 10000 – 5500 BC, PhD Dissertation, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, 2002.

Galinski 1992T. Galinski, Mezolit Pomorza, Szczecin, 1992.

Gramsch 1973B. Gramsch, Das Mesolithikum im Flachland zwisch-en Elbe und Oder, Teil 1, Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Potsdam 7, Berlin, 1973.

Gramsh, Kloss 1989B. Gramsh, K. Kloss, Excavations near Friesack; an Early Mesolithic Marshland Site in the Northern Plain of Central Europe, in C. Bonsall (ed.) The Mesolithic in Europe: Papers presented at the Third International Symposium, Edinburgh 1985, Edinburgh, 1989: 313 –324.

Gurina 1961N. Gurina, Drevnaç istoriç severo-zapada evrpeÜskoÜ ~asti SSSR, Materialß i issle-dovaniç po arheologii SSSR 87, Moskva, Leningrad, 1961.

Gurina 1973N. Gurina, Drevnie pamçtniki Kolâskogo po-luostrova, u Etnokulâturnße obänosti lesnoÜ i lesostepnoÜ zonß evropeÜskoÜ ~asti SSSR v æpohu neolita, N. N. Gurina (red.), Materialß i issledovaniç po arheologii SSSR 172, Lenin-grad, 1973: 45 - 53.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Grèti} 1983I. Grèti}, Poreklo kamenog materijala sa lokaliteta Lepenski Vir, u D. Srejovi}, Lj. Babovi}, Umetnost Lepenskog Vira, Beograd, 1983: 203.

Jovanovi} 1982B. Jovanovi}, Rudna Glava, najstarije rudarstvo bakra na Centralnom Balkanu (Rudna Glava: der älteste Kupferbergbau im Zentralbalkan), Bor, Beograd, 1982.

Journal of excavationJournals of excavation of Lepenski Vir, campaigns 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969 and 1970, Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade.

Levenok 1966V. P. Levenok, Mezolit srednorusskogo Dneprovsko-Donskogo me`dure~éç i ego rolâ v sloènii metnoÜ neoliti~eskÜ kuléturß, u U istokov drvenih kulâtur (æpoha mezolita), N. N. Gurina (red.), Materialß i issledovaniç po arheologii SSSR 126, Moskva, Leningrad, 1966: 88 - 98.

Matiskainen 1989H. Matiskainen, The Chronology of the Finnish Mesolithic, in C. Bonsall (ed.) The Mesolithic in Europe: Papers presented at the Third International Symposium, Edinburgh 1985, Edinburgh, 1989: 379 –390.

Petrovi} 1941M. Petrovi}, \erdapski ribolov u pro{losti i u sada{wosti, Srpski etnografski zbornik 25, Beograd, 1941.

Quitta 1969H. Quitta, Datirawe radiokarbonskih proba, u D. Srejovi}, Lepenski Vir: nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavqu, Beograd, 1969: 229 – 238.

Quitta 1972H. Quitta, The Dating of radio-carbon samples, in D. Srejovi}, Europe’s first monumental sculpture: new discoveries at Lepenski Vir, London, 1972: 205 – 210.

Radovanovi} 1996I. Radovanovi}, The Iron Gates Mesolithic, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1996.

Roksandi} 2000M. Roksandi}, Between Foragers and Farmers in the Iron Gates Gorge: Physical Anthropology Perspective: Djerdap Population in Transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic, Documenta Praehistorica XXVII, Ljubljana 2000: 1 – 100.

Sladi} 1986M. Sladi}, Kula près de Mihajlovac – un site préhis-torique. \erdapske sveske 3 (1986): 432 - 442.

Srejovi} 1969aD. Srejovi}, Lepenski Vir: nova praistorijska kultura u Podunavqu, Beograd, 1969.

Srejovi} 1969bD. Srejovi}, The Roots of the Lepenski Vir Culture. Archaeologica Iugoslavica 10 (1969): 13 – 21.

Srejovi} 1972D. Srejovi}, Europe’s first monumental sculpture: new discoveries at Lepenski Vir, London, 1972

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981D. Srejovi}, Lj. Babovi}, Lepenski Vir: Menschen-bilder einer frühen europäischen Kultur. Mainz an Rhein, 1981.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1982D. Srejovi}, Q. Babovi}, Lepenski Vir: vodi~. Beograd, 1982.

Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983D. Srejovi}, Lj. Babovi}, Umetnost Lepenskog Vira, Beograd, 1983.

Srejovi}, Letic 1978D. Srejovi}, Z. Letica, Vlasac: mezolitsko naseqe u \erdapu. Tom I: arheologija (Vlasac: a Mesolithic settlement in the Iron Gates, Volume I: Archaeology), Beograd, 1978.

Stalio 1986B. Stalio, Le site préhistorique Ajmana à Mala Vrbica. \erdapske sveske 3 (1986): 27 - 50.

Telegin 1982D. Â. Telegin, Mezoliti~ni pamâçtki Ukraini (IX – VI tisç~olittç do n.e.), Kiiv, 1982.

Tripkovi} 2001B. Tripkovi}, Uloga opsidijana u neolitu: util-itarni predmeti ili sredstvo prestià? (Role of obsidian in the Neolithic: utilitarian objects or means of prestige), Glasnik Srpskog arheolo{kog dru{tva 17 (2001): 21 – 42.

Whittle et al. 2002A. Whittle, L. Bartosiewicz, D. Bori}, P. Pettitt, M. Richards, In the Beginning: New Radiocarbon Dates for the Early Neolithic in Northern Serbia and South-East Hungary, Antaeus 25 (2002): 63 – 117.

Rezime


Lokalitet Lepenski Vir postao je poznat {irom sveta po umetni~ki oblikovanim oblucima koji su u kulturi Lepenskog Vira bili objekti kulta. O ovoj vrsti kamenih predmeta pisano je puno, pa su u senci epo-halnog otkri}a monumentalne mezolitske umetnosti ostali svi oni nalazi koji odslikavaju svakodnevni ìvot, a ~ije prou~avanje zapravo predstavlja naj-interesantniji deo arheolo{ke nauke.

Lepenski Vir je, posle otkrivanja, postao epo-nimni lokalitet jedne kasnomezolitske kulture koja je u vreme svog postojanja bila od lokalnog zna~aja i sama sebi dovoljna, bez obzira koliko se ona da-nas pojavljuje kao izuzetna pojava u praistoriji cele Evrope. Lokalitet je imao svoj najdinami~niji razvoj u dugom periodu od 9. do 6. milenijuma pre nove ere. Stanovnici ovog naselja, nastalog i opstajalog u izuzetno bogatom prirodnom okruènju koje je omogu}avalo siguran sedela~ki ìvot i bogatu kul-turnu i duhovnu nadogradnju, stvorili su svoj mali univerzum i sami autohtono razvili jednu blistavu kulturu nikada vi{e ponovljenu na ovim prostorima. Upravo ta ~injenica predstavlja potrebu da se svi vi-dovi jedne takve materijalne kulture potpuno istraè, pa i ono obi~no kameno oru|e koje je ~inilo bazu njenog ekonomskog ìvota.

*

Lokalitet Lepenski Vir je otkriven 1960. godine prilikom rekognosciranja \erdapa radi za{titnih is-kopavanja koja je nametala izgradnja hidroelektrane \erdap I (sl. 1). Iskopavan je od 1965. do 1970. godine i u tom periodu istraèna je povr{ina od 3352 m2 u sloju koji se na pojedinim delovima lokaliteta kretao i do 3,5 metra debljine (sl. 2). Kulturni sloj ~inilo je 9 stambenih horizonata koji su se hronolo{ki protezali kroz 2 perioda (mezolit i neolit) i 5 kulturnih etapa

(Proto-Lepenski Vir, Lepenski Vir I, Lepenski Vir II, Lepenski Vir IIIa i Lepenski Vir IIIb, od kojih su poslednje dve neolitske; Srejovi} 1969a: 28 - 37). Prema kasnijim analizama arhitektonskih elemenata u okviru ku}a Lepenskog Vira I ova kulturna etapa podeljena je na 3 gra|evinske faze (Radovanovi} 1996: 76 – 113), pa bi prema tome kulturni sloj Lepenskog Vira ~inilo 7 gra|evinskih horizonata u ve} pomenutom kulturno-hronolo{kom rasponu. Naselje Proto-Lepenskog Vira, skromnih razmera, predstavljeno je sa tek nekoliko ognji{nih konstrukci-ja. Najkvalitetnije gra|ene ku}e, sa ~vrstim podovima i veoma skladnih proporcija, zabeleène su u naselju Lepenskog Vira I a-e, dok Naselje II predstavljaju nemarnije gra|ene i grublje proporcionisane ku}e bez ~vrstih podova. Neolitski Lepenski Vir IIIa ve} predstavlja naselje zemuni~kog tipa, dok u horizontu Lepenskog Vira IIIb nalazi iz arheolo{kog sloja uka-zuju na postojanje nadzemnih koliba (Srejovi} 1969a: 161 - 164). Naselje na Lepenskom Viru napu{teno je nakon horizonta IIIb posle ~ega nije bilo nastanj-ivanja na ovom mestu. Iz kasnijih perioda zabeleèni su grobovi iz eneolita i bronzanog doba na pojedinim mestima ukopanim u neolitski sloj. U vreme gradnje rimskog limesa u samom centru naselja (kv. a/2-4, AB/2-4) podignuta je rimska pravougaona kula. Iz kasnijih perioda mo`da poti~u 2 groba koja su {iroko opredeljena u srednji vek.

*

[to se ti~e kamenog materijala, najvi{e pa`nje je pridavano skulpturama, a uz njih i drugim kult-nim objektima manjih dimenzija, kao {to su skip-tri i amuleti (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1981; Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983). Obi~nom oru|u sa Lepenskog Vira nije poklanjana ve}a pa`nja verovatno zato {to ne

Kameno oruđe sa Lepenskog Vira


REZIME

predstavlja dovoljno atraktivan materijal. Ono ni-kada nije integralno katalo{ki predstavljeno. Njime se bave samo radovi koji obra|uju problematiku upotrebe kamena u ranoholocenskim zajednicama \erdapa i neolitskim naseljima centralnog Balkana (Antonovi} 2003a; Antonovi} 2003b; Antonovi} 2004; Antonovi}, u pripremi) i oni ga predstavljaju jedino sa statisti~kog aspekta koji moè da posluì u poja{njavanju promenute problematike.

U kamenom materijalu sa praistorijskih lokalite-ta, a posebno sa ovih ranoholocenskih kao Lepenski Vir, uvek predstavlja problem kako odvojiti oru|e i oru`je od kultnih i ukrasnih predmeta. Problem ne postoji kod nemarno i grubo obra|enih primeraka kod kojih je potpuno nesporan utilitarni karakter, ve} kod fino obra|enih i ornamentisanih predmeta ~esto bez jasnih tragova upotrebe. Konkretan primer predstavljaju batovi ili skiptri sa Lepenskog Vira (Katalog 1 – 38). Ti duga~ki kameni predmeti su od strane autora ovih redova protuma~eni, svi bez razlike, kao ribolovne alatke1, dok se ornamenti-sani primerci u nekim ranijim radovima tuma~e kao skiptri odnosno kultno-magijski predmeti (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 183). Grani~ni slu~aj predstavljaju i `rtvenici koji se uvek pominju kao kultni objekti (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 157 – 181), za koje neki autori smatraju da mogu da se opredele kao `rvnjevi i stupe (Radovanovi} 1996: 277 - 278).

U ovoj knjizi obra|eno je samo kameno oru|e i oru`je. Ovu skupinu ~ine svi kameni predmeti koji su svoj finalni oblik dobijali tehnikom okresivanja, oz-rnjavanja i gla~anja, kao i njihovi polufabrikati koji oblikom i funkcijom ne spadaju u objekte industrije okresanog kamena. Prelazni oblici kao {to su ve} pomenuti `rtvenici-stupe ili anikoni~ne skulpture-obluci sa izvesnim tragovima upotrebe ovde nisu uzeti u obzir, pre svega zato {to su ve} obra|eni i prikazani kao umetni~ki predmeti sa Lepenskog Vira (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983: 150 – 181). Uzorak koji je ovde obra|en broji 202 primerka. Od tog broja 184 se ~uva u Arheolo{koj zbirci Filozofskog fakulteta i u Narodnom muzeju u Beogradu2. Za jednu manju grupu alatki od gla~anog kamena sa se~icom za sada se ne zna gde se nalazi, ali su one poznate iz terensk-og inventara. To oru|e je posebno obra|eno na kraju kataloga pod radnim nazivom „Materijal sa nepozna-tim sme{tajem“, a podaci o njima kao i nekorigovani crteì su preuzeti iz inventarnih svezaka. Naàlost, ovi podaci i crteì su neprecizni i skromnog obima, pa pomenuti primerci nisu mogli biti uklju~eni u oz-biljniju statisti~ku obradu.

Katalo{ki obra|en uzorak, na àlost, ne moè da stvori sliku o pravoj zastupljenosti kamenog oru|a u Lepenskom Viru iz nekoliko razloga: 1. jedan deo materijala kao {to su atipi~ni fragmenti manjih dimen-zija odbacivan je odmah na terenu;3 2. u slu~ajevima kada su nalaène koncentracije neatraktivnog oru|a (~eki}i-obluci, nakovnji, kugle za lov), zadràvan je samo po jedan karakteristi~an primerak, a ostali su odbacivani i 3. oru|e ve}ih dimenzija (gla~alice i `rvnjevi) beleèno je samo kao deo arhitekture i nije sa~uvano u materijalu sa Lepenskog Vira. U katalogu nije dat pregled razvoja kamenog oru|a i oru`ja u ve} postoje}oj stratigrafiji lokaliteta (Proto-Lepenski Vir, Lepenski Vir I – III), ve} }e to biti u~injeno kada budu analizirani svi pokretni i nepokretni nalazi tako da kameni materijal moè da se sagleda kao deo ve}e celine.

*

Po{to je lokalitet Lepenski Vir iskopavan tokom 6 godina i kako se na samom po~etku nije znao obim iskopavanja, prve godine su postavljene tri sonde bez prethodnog pravljenja mreè. Na ovaj na~in – post-avljanjem sondi na mestu koje se ~inilo najpogodnije za istraìvanje – nastavilo se iskopavanje i slede}e 1966. godine, a kvadratna mreà za sistematsko is-kopavanje postavljena je tek 1967. godine. Zato je prilikom navo|enja stratigrafskih jedinica iz 1965. i 1966. godine uvek obja{njeno i gde se one nalaze u kasnije postavljenoj kvadratnoj mreì lokaliteta.

Godine 1965. otvorene su tri sonde – I, II i III (sl. 4). Sonde I i II postavljene su na mestima gde su se u re~nom profilu videli ostaci ve}ih ukopa sa star~eva~kim materijalom, s tim {to je Sonda II to-kom kampanje pro{irena, pa je to ju`no pro{irenje dobilo oznaku IIa. Sonda III otvorena je zapadno od sonde II na rastojanju od 0,75 metara. Iskopan je sloj koji je na pojedinim mestima dostizao debljinu preko 2 metra. U ovoj prvoj kampanji oktriven je pod ku}e (kasnije ozna~ene kao Ku}a 5) u ju`nom delu Sonde II zbog ~ega je ova i pro{irena.

Slede}e 1966. godine iskopavanje je nastavljeno u ve}em obimu i kroz dve kampanje – julsku i ok-tobarsku. Istraìvanje je sada vr{eno po blokovima, pa su tako otvoreni blokovi A, B, C, D-D1, E, F-F1, G-G1, H-H1, a i b. Blokovi D1, F1, G1 i H1 predsta-vljaju pro{irenja blokova D, F, G i H. Neki blokovi su se poklopili sa iskopima iz 1965. godine – Blok A sa Sondom I i Blok E sa Sondom II-IIa. Blokovi B, C i D sme{teni su izme|u sondi I i II iz 1965. godine,

1 Mi{ljenje da se radi o oru|u i oru`ju kori{}enom za ubijanje krupne ribe i divlja~i izrazili su i drugi autori (Srejovi} 1969a: 152; Srejovi}, Letica 1978: 99).2 Uz svaku katalo{ku jedinicu dat je podatak o sme{taju.

3 Ovakav postupak bio je u skladu sa tada{njom metodologijom rada na terenu. Isti tretman vaìo je i za kerami~ki i osteolo{ki materijal. Sakupljani su ve}i i prepoznatljivi komadi – obodi, dna, dr{ke, ornamentisani fragmenti, lobanje, vilice, duge kosti itd.


REZIME

a blok F predstavlja produètak sondi II i III iz 1965. godine. U ovoj kampanji kompletno je otkriveno 15 ku}a koje su ozna~ene prema blokovima u kojima su na|ene (ku}e A, B, F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, G, G1, G2, G3, G4, b1, b2), da bi 1967. godine sve bile pre-numerisane (npr. ku}a b1 je postala ku}a 1, b2 ku}a 2, ku}a G – ku}a 12 itd.). Zato se kod pojedinih ku}a navodi njena prvobitna oznaka, po{to je i materijal prikupljen tom prilikom ostao zaveden pod starom oznakom.

Godine 1967. napravljena je kvadratna mreà preko celog lokaliteta (sl. 2). Koordinatni sistem je postavljen tako da je za apscisu uzet ju`ni profil blo-kova F1 i G1, a za ordinatu isto~ni profil bloka F1. Teren je podeljen na kvadrate dimenzija 4 x 4 metara. Pored toga, materijal nalaèn u ku}ama se odvajao po segmentima. Prostor svake ku}e je podeljen na ~etiri dela ozna~ena sa A, B, C i D. Prostori A i B su se nalazili u {irem, ulaznom delu trapeza – A levo, a B desno, gledano od ulaza. Prostori C i D su bili u uèm delu ku}e i to C desno, a D levo gledano od ulaza. U toj godini, tokom dve kampanje – julsko-avgustovske i oktobarske – otkriven je najve}i broj ku}a (sl. 5).

U okviru ve} postavljenog koordinatnog sistema nastavljena su iskopavanja i tokom 1968. (juli, av-gust i septembar), 1969. (juli i avgust) i 1970. go-dine (juli i avgust), a te poslednje godine izvr{eno je i podizanje ku}a radi izme{tanja lokaliteta na vi{u lokaciju na kojoj se i danas nalaze u okviru Muzeja Lepenskog Vira.

*

Kada je re~ o sirovinama, u kamenom materijalu sa Lepenskog Vira uo~ava se velika raznovrsnost koja vlada u njihovom izboru (Tabela 5). Isto tako o~igledna je razlika izme|u kamena kori{}enog za izradu alatki sa se~icom i onog upotrebljenog za ostale kamene alatke. Oru|e kori{}eno za uda-ranje, bru{enje i sli~ne grube radnje (batovi, tegovi, gla~alice, nakovnji, ~eki}i itd.) pravljeni su od oblu-taka koji su minimalnom obradom oblikovani u finalnu formu. Obluci kori{}eni za izradu ove vrste predmeta naj~e{}e su bili od pe{~ara i magmatskih stena, ponekad i od pojedinih metamorfnih stena kao {to su amfibolit, mika{ist, gnajs, gnajsgranit itd. Nasuprot njima alatke sa se~icom, kori{}ene isklju~ivo u obradi drveta, zbog fino}e posla koji se njima obavljao su pravljene od finozrnih ̀ ilavih stena koje su u materijalu iz Lepenskog Vira predstavljene raznovrsnim metamorfitima (Grafikon 1).

Kamen upotrebljen za izradu oru|a sa Lepenskog Vira analiziran je uglavnom makroskopski i ta vrsta analize bila je osnova za podelu sirovina u 5

osnovnih grupa. Stene su grupisane po postanku: 1. metamorfne stene (Tabela 1), 2. magmatske stene Tabela 2), 3. pe{~ari (Tabela 3), 4. kre~njaci (Tabela 4) i 5. ostale kamene sirovine me|u koje su svrstane raznorodne stene i minerali koji se pojavljuju samo u pojedina~nim slu~ajevima. Prilikom ovog osnovnog makroskopskog razvrstavanja sirovina cenjene su slede}e osobine kamena: tvrdo}a (po Mosu), kom-paktnost, prisustvo kalcijum karbonata (CaCO3), struktura, tekstura i mineralni sastav utvr|ivani go-lim okom, odnosno ru~nom lupom sa uve}anjem 6 i 16 puta. Na ovaj na~in dobijani su osnovni petro-grafski podaci tako da je najve}i broj stena precizno definisan, naro~ito one krupnijeg zrna od kojih je bio izra|en kameni alat ~ija namena nije bila vezana za obradu drveta. Radi odre|ivanja sirovina upotrebljen-ih za izradu alatki sa se~icom kori{}enih isklju~ivo u obradi drveta, koje zbog finozrne strukture nije bilo mogu}e precizno definisati samo makroskop-skim putem, izvr{eno je 15 mikroskopskih proba4. Analize su pokazale da je za ovu vrstu alata izbor sirovina bio relativno ujedna~en i da se uglavnom svodio na finozrne metamorfite.

*

U tipolo{kom smislu oru|e sa Lepenskog Vira grubo moè da se opredeli u dve osnovne grupe: ma-sivno kameno oru|e i alatke sa se~icom od gla~anog kamena.

U prvu grupu svrstano je masivno udara~ko oru|e i oru`je za lov, ribolov i alatke za obradu dru-gih predmeta od ~vrstih materijala: batovi (skiptri; katalog 1 – 38), tegovi (39 – 48), gla~alice (49 – 60), `rvnjevi (61 – 62), predmeti nepoznate namene (63 – 64), nakovnji (65 – 74), ~eki}i (75 – 87), kugle za pra}ku (88 – 90), retu{eri (91 – 93) i obluci sa nejas-nim tragovima upotrebe i obrade (94 – 114).

Grupa alatki sa se~icom od gla~anog kamena obuhvata sekire (katalog 115 – 155), tesle (156 – 162), dleta (163 – 174), kao i fragmentovane alatke sa se~icom ~iji pravi oblik ne moè da se odredi zbog znatne o{te}enosti (katalog 175 – 184). Ove dve skupine oru|a razlikuju su po sirovinama od kojih su izra|ene, funkciji i tehnici izrade. Ova grupa oru|a predstavlja posebnu pojavu u materijalu sa Lepenskog Vira koja se izdvaja od masivnog kamenog alata, o ~emu }e biti re~i dalje u tekstu. Alatke sa se~icom se koriste isklju~ivo u obradi drveta. Na|ene su u ve}em broju samo u naseljima

4 Analize su izvr{ili Dr Vladica Cvetkovi}, vanredni profesor i Mr Kristina [ari}, asistent u Institutu za mineralogiju, kristalografiju, petrologiju i geohemiju Rudarsko-geolo{kog fakulteta Univerziteta u Beogradu. Rezultati ovih analiza dati su detaljno u posebnom prilogu u okviru ove knjige.


REZIME

sa intezivnijom gra|evinskom delatno{}u kao {to je Lepenski Vir i Padina – Sektor III, a znatno manje na ostalim ranoholocenskim lokalitetima u \erdapu.

*

Kamen je bio najzastupljenija sirovina na Lepenskom Viru. Osim toga {to je kori{}en kao os-novni gra|evinski materijal u arhitekturi Naselja I i II, od njega su bili izra|eni predmeti kulta (skulpture, `rtvenici, amuleti itd.), predmeti za li~no ukra{avanje (ogrlice, privesci), masivno kameno oru|e i oru`je za lov i ribolov, oru|e od gla~anog kamena i arte-fakti industrije okresanog kamena. Zato ne ~udi {to kamene izra|evine svih vrsta pokazuju zavidan nivo tehnolo{kog ume}a izraènog podjednako kako u ve{tom izboru sirovina koje prate posebne zahteve predmeta izra|ivanih od njih, tako i u na~inu ob-rade kamena. U svim ovim izra|evinama satkana je vi{evekovna tradicija paleolitske kamene industrije zajednica koje su zabeleène u ovim krajevima, sa leve strane Dunava.

Generalno gledano, sav kameni materijal sa Lepenskog Vira pokazuje veliku raznovrsnost u iz-boru sirovina, a masivno i gla~ano oru|e je glavni nosilac te raznovrsnosti. Kod izrade objekata kulta uglavnom se koristio pe{~ar (Srejovi}, Babovi} 1983), a za ukrasne predmete upotrebljavao se prete-`no kre~njak i mermer. Oru|e okresane kamene in-dustrije pokazuje ne{to ve}u raznovrsnost u izboru sirovina ali ni izdaleka onoliku kao {to je to slu~aj sa velikim kamenim oru|em.

Izbor sirovina prati specijalizaciju oru|a i oru`ja. Razli~ite vrste kamena kori{}ene su sa jedne strane za oru|e od gla~anog kamena sa se~icom, a sa druge za masivno udara~ko oru|e i oru`je za lov i ribo-lov ili ono za pravljenje drugih predmeta od ~vrstih materijala. Majstori iz Lepenskog Vira nikada nisu koristili stene krupnijeg zrna za izradu alatki sa se~icom ~ija je osnovna namena bila fina obrada drveta. Sirovine za ovu vrstu oru|a traìli su mnogo dalje od areala svog stani{ta, u kome su nalazili ug-lavnom sve kamene sirovine za svoje potrebe. A onda su upravo te sirovine donete iz ne{to udaljenijih kra-jeva toliko cenili da su ih maksimalno iskori{}avali na {ta ukazuju neke alatke sa se~icom, posebno dleta, pravljena od fragmentovanih ve}ih primeraka, pokazuju}i na taj na~in te`nju (ili prinu|enost) prais-torijskih majstora iz Lepenskog Vira da maksimalno iskoriste ne toliko dostupnu sirovinu. Ovde moè da se, po pitanju sirovina za alatke sa se~icom, iznese jo{ jedna pretpostavka o maksimalnoj upotrebi iste sirovine. Mo`da su stene kori{}ene za izradu alatki sa se~icom, koje po obliku, na~inu izrade i vrsti kamena od koje su izra|ene potpuno odgovaraju alatkama

star~eva~ko-vin~anske tehnolo{ke tradicije, poku{ali da na opipljiv na~in prikaù svoju èlju i re{enost da uspostave novi poredak – neolit. Tuma~enje ovakve uloge sirovine ve} je pretpostavljeno za opsidijan (Tripkovi} 2001: 30 - 38). Upravo je na osnovu specijalizovane upotrebe sirovine u rano-holocenskim naseljima \erdapa pretpostavljeno da je postojao susret tradicionalnog, mezolitskog i no-vog, neolitskog na~ina ìvota znatno pre nego je taj susret nagovestila keramika u mezolitskim slojevima |erdapskih naselja. Masivno kameno oru|e, izra|eno od raznih vrsta krupno i srednjezrnih magmatskih i metamorfnih stena, od oblutaka i uz minimalnu ob-radu, predstavlja lokalnu mezolitsku tradiciju u ob-radi kamena, a gla~ane alatke sa se~icom, pravljene isklju~ivo od finozrnih metamorfita predstavljaju „uvoznu“ komponentu (Antonovi} 2003b). Ovde se ne radi o importu u pravom smislu re~i, ve} o uvozu tehnologije ili, mo`da, o uvozu simbola novog na~ina ìvota. Masivno oru|e mezolitske tradicije bilo je kori{}eno za lov i pre svega za ribolov, a oblutak kao glavna sirovina za pravljenje predmeta kojima se obezbe|ivala egzistencija i sedela~ki ìvot postalo je deo kulta. S druge strane, gla~ane alatke sa se~icom, kao oru|e koje odslikava dolazak novih vremena, ni-kada nije postalo deo mezolitskog duhovnog ìvota, ali su zato one bile ostavljane u grobove nosioca kul-ture Lepenskog Vira kao prilozi odnosno predmeti izuzetne vrednosti.5

Sirovine direktno ne pokazuju osmi{ljenu orga-nizovanu nabavku, ali ima indicija da je neka vrsta organizacije postojala u tom poslu. Ve} je od ranije ustanovljeno da su veliki obluci za izradu skulptura dono{eni iz jedne veoma usko ograni~ene regije. Re~ je o oblucima od pe{~ara koji poti~u iz for-macije mla|ih konglomerata sa brda [omrda i koji su potocima i bujicama dospeli u tokove Boljetinske reke i Pesa~e iz kojih su va|eni od strane nosilaca kulture Lepenskog Vira (Grèti} 1983: 203). Moè da se pretpostavi da su na isti na~in dobavljane i ostale vrste kamena po{to sve sirovine konstatovane me|u kamenim oru|em sa Lepenskog Vira mogu da se na|u u {iroj okolini samog lokaliteta. Ipak, ~in-jenica da su postojale male serije alatki sa se~icom koje su bile izra|ene od skoro identi~ne sirovine (finozrni {kriljci) ukazuje da su neke vrste kamena sa sasvim jasnom namerom dobavljane za odre|ene vrste alata.

Sudar dve tradicije o~igledan u upotrebi sirovina, odslikava se i u tehnolo{kom pristupu. Svo kameno oru|e moè da se generalno opredeli u dve grupe.

5 Na|ene su na nekropoli u Hajdu~koj Vodenici, a nekoliko nalaza poti~e i iz grobova na Lepenskom Viru. Ipak, za sada samo jedan nalaz iz Lepenskog Vira sa sigurno{}u moè da se opredeli u period kontakta mezolita i neolita (Roksandi} 2000), dok se ostali pre mogu da veù za puni neolit.


REZIME

Prvu grupu ~ine predmeti ra|eni u lokalnoj mezolits-koj tradiciji i to su: batovi-skiptri, tegovi, gla~alice, `rvnjevi, nakovnji, ~eki}i i kugle za pra}ku, a ~esto su i potpuno neobra|eni obluci kori{}eni kao alat. Ovo oru|e proizvodi se od oblutaka ~iji se prirodni oblik, obi~no pogodan za upotrebu, minimalnom obradom okresivanjem, ozrnjavanjem i gla~anjem pretvara u alatku. Na osnovu dosada{njih istraìvanja ~ini se da se ono sasvim autohtono razvija u uslovima sedela~kog ìvota koji nije povezan sa promenom u ekonomskom smislu – glavni izvor hrane je i dalje sakupljanje. Masivnost predmeta, tragovi upotrebe i etnografske paralele ukazuju da je bilo kori{}eno za obavljanje grubih svakodnevnih poslova, odnosno za izradu i oblikovanje predmeta od ~vrstih materi-jala (kamena, kosti, roga), lov, ribolov, usitnjavanje zrnaste hrane i drugih aktivnosti koje se ne mogu vi{e detektovati. Drugu grupu predstavljaju alatke sa se~icom od gla~anog kamena (sekire, tesle i dleta) kori{}ene u obradi drveta, kao i ~eki}i nastali od otu-pljenih alatki sa se~icom. Svi oni predstavljaju oru|e izra|eno u novoj neolitskoj tehnici. U tehnolo{kom smislu ovo se oru|e pravi od kamena koji moè da se obra|uje okresivanjem te se alatke sa se~icom naj~e{}e izra|uje od odbitaka ve}ih dimenzija tehnikom okresivanja, pri ~emu se finalni oblik iz-vodi bru{enjem (gla~anjem). Takvom obradom, kao i izborom finozrnih stena od kojih su pravljene, ove alatke dobijaju izgled koji je karakteristi~an za sekire i tesle star~eva~ko-vin~anskog tehnokompleksa: manjih su dimenzija, obavezno imaju skoro pravilan polukru`ni popre~ni presek i izra|ene su od finozrnih stena od svetlo do tamno sivozelene boje – stena koje na prvi pogled li~e na sirovine od kojih su pravljene alatke industrije okresanog kamena. Prelaz izme|u ove dve tradicije predstavljaju masivne sekire koje i po na~inu obrade, ali i po izboru sirovina vi{e od-govoraja oru|u ra|enom u mezolitskoj tehnolo{koj tradiciji: prave se od oblutaka, ve}ih su dimenzija i masivne zbog svog kru`nog popre~nog preseka, a kao sirovina se koriste sitnozrne magmatske i metamorfne stene.

Oru|e „uvozne“ industrije gla~anog kamena (alatke sa se~icom – sekire, tesle i dleta) koriste se isklju~ivo u obradi drveta, a ima ga u ve}em broju samo u naseljima sa intezivnijom gra|evinskom delatno{}u. U tom svetlu je ne{to jasnija ve}a zastu-pljenost ove vrste alata na Lepenskom Viru gde je zabeleèn veliki broj ku}a, dok iznena|uje potpuno odsustvo ove vrste alata na Vlascu. Mo`da je up-ravo to odgovor na pitanje o kori{}enju sirovine kao simbola novog ìvota. Na sva tri lokaliteta gradi se ista vrsta ku}a koje se ne razlikuju u konstruktivnim elementima. Ugljenisane grede na|ene na podovima nekih ku}a u Lepenskom Viru pokazuju da je drvo, kao osnovni materijal za nadzemni deo ku}e bilo

obra|eno, {to opravdava ve}i broj alatki sa se~icom i sa tragovima upotrebe karakteristi~nim za obradu drveta. Na mezolitskom Vlascu alatke sa se~icom za obradu drveta nisu na|ene, dok ih na Padini – Sektor III i na Lepenskom Viru ima sasvim dovoljno za potrebe izgradnje onog broja ku}a koji je otkriven na ova dva lokaliteta. Prisutnost alatki sa se~icom kao oru|a ra|enog u neolitskoj tehnici zapravo ne pred-stavlja import ve} kulturni uticaj i nema zna~aj za hronolo{ko opredeljivanje, ve} pokazuje u kojoj meri su neka ranoholocenska naselja u \erdapu prihvatila neolitske tekovine sa strane. Tako, recimo, Lepenski Vir i naselje na Padini - Sektor III predstavljaju ve} dobrim delom neolitizovana naselje sa lova~ko - sakuplja~kom ekonomikom u osnovi, sa teì{tem na intezivnom ribolovu. Nasuprot njima Velesnica, sa veoma malim brojem na|enih alatki sa se~icom od gla~anog kamena, znatno zaostaje za Lepenskim Virom i Padinom - Sektor III, i po kamenom materi-jalu pokazuje da se radi o jednom ribarskom naselju, dok kerami~ki nalazi ukazuju na potpuno neolitsko naselje.

Horizontalna distribucija kamenog oru|a na Lepenskom Viru pokazuje interesantan raspored nalaza (sl. 6). Masivne kamene alatke lokalne mezolitske tradicije ~e{}e su nalaène u ku}ama Lepenskog Vira, odakle poti~e 55% nalaza ove vrste, a ne{to manje, njih 45%, je iz kulturnog sloja vezanog za ku}e. Me|utim slika je sasvim druga~ija kada se radi o alatkama sa se~icom od gla~anog ka-mena. Samo 17% ovih predmeta na|eno je u ku}ama Naselja I, od toga 10% na podovima neporeme}enim kasnijim ukopima (ku}e 1, 7, 9, 19, 27, 35, 51, 54), a 7% u ku}ama ~iji su podovi probijeni kasnijim naseljavanjem (ku}a 5) ili sahranjivanjem nosilaca neolita iz horizonta Lepenskog Vira IIIa (ku}e 21 i 24). Mnogo ve}i broj alatki sa se~icom, ~ak njih 83%, poti~e iz kulturnog sloja iznad i oko ku}a Lepenskog Vira I, a njihova koncentracija najve}a je u severnom delu naselja.

Kamena industrija sa Lepenskog Vira, ovako kompleksna i sastavljena od 2 komponente, nema analogija van oblasti \erdapa. Zanimljivo je da lo-kalna mezolitska komponenta pokazuje srodnost sa kamenim nalazima iz veoma udaljenih krajeva, sa kojima kultura Lepenskog Vira nije imala fizi~ke kontakte. Srodnost u osnovnom karakteru imaju kasnomezolitske kamene industrije dnjestrovsko - donskog me|ure~ja (Levenok 1966: 93; Telegin 1982: 110), priobalnog podru~ja isto~ne Nema~ke (Gramsch 1973: 19 – 30; Gramsh, Kloss 1989: 318), Pomeranije u Poljskoj (Galinski 1992: 103, 156 - 157, 162), priobalja Finske (Matiskainen 1989: 387 – 389), a veliku sli~nost u oblicima i na~inu kori{}enja sirovina pokazuje kameno oru|e mezolita i ranog neolita severozapadnih oblasti evropskog


REZIME

dela Rusije (Gurina 1961: 190 - 201; Gurina 1973: 46 - 49). Svi pomenuti nalazi nisu ni teritorijalno ni kulturno bliski ranoholocenskom \erdapu, ali im je zajedni~ko to da nastaju u kulturama koje se pre svega oslanjaju na akvati~nu hranu i u kojima je raz-voj kamenog oru|a podstaknut potrebama za ribo-lovom na krupne ribe, kao i u \erdapu. Stoga moè sa sigurno{}u da se tvrdi da je kamena industrija, u svojoj lokalnoj mezolitskoj varijanti, imala svoj autohtoni razvoj, diktiran prirodnim okruènjem i ìvotnim uslovima stanovnika \erdapa. Ono je bilo prilago|eno za {to uspe{niji ribolov i lov, na

{ta ukazuje raznovrstnost udara~kog oru|a, dok se alat „uvozne“ neolitske varijante pokazuje kao kasnija nadogradnja u kvalitetu ìvota stanovnika Lepenskog Vira. Susret dva civilizacijska stupnja, mezolitskog i neolitskog, jo{ jednom je potvr|en i u kamenom materijalu, pored onog dokazanog u antropolo{kim ostacima iz \erdapa (Roksandi} 2000: 85 – 87). Ipak taj susret i paralelan ìvot sa neolitskim zajednicama u susedstvu, na {ta ukazuju i apsolutni datumi, nije imao presudan zna~aj na razvoj kulture Lepenskog Vira koja u osnovi ostaje mezolitska.

Appendix


Sample DLV-1 Butt part of the ground-edge tool (inv. no. SM-

823, catalogue 182); campaign 1968, sq. A/11, arbi-trary layer 6; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.

Macroscopic description

The rock is dark-grey in color, massive to schistose and has a blastoophitic texture. Needle-shaped pla-gioclase and interstitial spaces filled by altered mafic minerals are only to be observed macroscopically.

Microscopic description

The rock is nematoblastic and lepidoblastic, rarely granoblastic in texture. Structure is schistose and subordinately folded. Ruptures oriented oblique to the schistosity are filled by chlorite and amphi-bole.

The rock is composed of chlorite, amphibole, plagioclase, epidote, quartz and opaque minerals.

Chlorite has an abundance of around 30 % vol. It appears as green aggregates of flakes. Chlorite is almost ubiquitously associated with amphibole and epidote in form of band- and nest-like aggre-gates.

Amphibole is probably represented by actino-lite. It occurs as prismatic crystals around 1 mm in length, which show a weak pleochroism in green color. Besides above mentioned bands and nest-like associations, it forms monomineral aggregates as well. In these aggregates fan-like oriented amphibole crystals are found. The modal abundance of amphi-bole is around 30 % vol.

Epidote appears as irregular fine-grained ag-gregates and only very rarely appeas as small and xenomorphic crystals. It shows a pleochroism in yellow to yellow-green color. Epidote is commonly associated by amphibole and chlorite.

Opaque minerals form fine-grained and irregular grains which are uniformly distributed within the rock mass. The shape of some larger grains are better developed. This, along with the apearrance of char-acteristic comb-like aggregates (Fig. 1a), are typical for metamorphosed diabases and gabbros. Their modal abundance ranges 10-15 % vol.

Plagioclase and quartz have a modal content of up to 10 % vol. Usually, they form lens-shaped ag-gregates which sometimes are folded. Plagioclase occurs as xenomorphic double-twinned albite crys-tals of metamorphic origin and very rarely as relicts of primary magmatic plagioclase. Quartz crystals are allotriomorphic and very fine-grained. Quartz and plagioclase aggregates alternate with chlorite-am-phibole bands.

Rock classification

According to mineral composition and texture the rock can be classified as chlorite-epidote schist. The rock is formed under greenschist facies condi-tions. Most likely protolith of this regional metamor-phic rock was a diabase.

Sample DLV-2

Butt part of the ground-edge tool (without desig-nation, catalogue 183); campaign 1967, sq. A/IV, ar-bitrary layer 10, house 19; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.

Vladica Cvetkovi}, Kristina Resimi}-[ari}

Petrographic analysis of samples of ground stone artifacts from Lepenski Vir


APPENDIX


The rock is dark-grey and shows lepidoblastic and granoblastic texture. Structure is massive to schistose. Reddish aureoles of iron oxides and hy-droxides can be clearly observed around opaque minerals.

Microscopic characteristics

The rock is nematoblastic and lepidoblastic in texture and has coarser constituents in comparison to the last one. It is schistose and shows elements of folding.

Amphibole, chlorite, epidote, plagioclase, opaque minerals and rare apatite crystals are main mineral phases.

Amphibole is idiomorphic, prismatic and rela-tively coarse-grained (sometimes above 2 mm in length). The crystals are concetrated in bands. Rarely appear crystals showing a characteristic amphibole cleavage. (Fig. 1b). Very large porphyroblasts ro-tated with respect to schistosity can also be observed. These grains demonstrate undulose extinction. Some amphiboles are accompanied with epidote and chlo-rite and form nests and bands. Modal abundance of amphibole is around 35 % vol.

Epidote has a modal abundance of around 15 % vol. It appears excludively in association with am-phibole, chlorite and opaque minerals. The orienta-tion of these aggregates forms a schistose structure of the rock.

Chlorite occurs as small, greenish flakes and flake aggregates always associated with amphibole and epidote.

Opaque minerals are ubiquitously xenomorphic and fine-grained, sometimes drop-like. They are oriented parallely to the schistosity and sometimes they form small folds. Their modal abundance is up to 15 % vol.

Plagioclase is represented by albite which is, most probably, metamorphic in origin. Relicts of igneous plagioclase are lacking. Plagioclase occurs together with quartz and both minerals are more abundant in this sample than in the previous one (35 % vol.).

Apatite is idiomorphic, prismatic or tabular, usu-ally around 0.2 mm in length/diameter. It is mostly concentrated in quartz-plagioclase zones. Its modal abundance is around 1 % vol.

Rock classification

According to mineral composition and texture the rock can be classified as an epidote-amphibole schist. The rock is formed under higher P/T condi-

tions than the previous one. The protolith of this regional metamorphic rocks was a diabase.

Sample DLV-3

Butt part of the ground-edge tool (inv. no. SM-187, catalogue 184); campaign 1967, sq. D/IX, arbi-trary layer 13; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is grey in color and shows lepidoblastic and granoblastic texture as well as a schistose structure.


Under microscope the rock sample is nemato-blastic and displays some characteristics of grano-blastic and lepidoblastic texture. It shows banding. Generally, this sample is very similar to the above described one, with small differences in mode of occurrence of its minerals and their relative modal abundance.

The rock is composed of amphibole, epidote, chlorite, quartz, albite, opaque minerals and apatite.

Amphibole appears as prismatic crystals show-ing yellow-green to bright-green pleochroism. It forms fan-shaped aggregates which are distributed in bands. The modal abundance of amphibole is around 35 % vol.

Epidote and chlorite are finer and less idiomor-phic than amphibole. They are developed along the margins of amphibole aggregates.

Opaque minerals have a two-fold appearance: in form of dusty aggregates which are uniformly distrib-uted within quartz-albite zones or as coarser crystals (diameter c. 2-3 mm) of more regular forms. Although they are similar to coroded magmatic opaque miner-als, there is textural evidence that these coarser grains formed by agglomeration of tiny crystals.

Quartz and albite are uniformly distributed and rarely form irregular or nest-like accumulations. They together have a modal abundance of around 25 % vol. Quartz is much more abundant than albite.

Apatite appears identically as in the previous sample. It is fine-grained, idiomorphic and associ-ated with quartz.

Rock classification

The rock shows very similar mineral composition and texture as the previously described sample. It is an epidote-amphibole schist formed under greenschist facies conditions. The protolith was a diabase.


APPENDIX

Sample DLV-4

Axe (inv. no. IB-205, catalogue 136); cam-paign 1966, block B (sq. C/5), arbitrary layer 2; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is light-grey in color, nematoblastic and granoblastic in texture and shows banding.


Under the microscope the rock shows nemato-blastic texture and banding (Fig. 1c). It is composed of epidote, quartz and small amounts of albite, am-phibole and opaque minerals.

Epidote has a modal content of around 40 % vol. It appears in form of fine-grained aggregates oriented as bands or elongated lenses. Somewhat coarser and more idiomorphic crystals fill tiny cracks, around 0.1 mm thick, which are developed oblique with respect to schistosity.

Quartz is xenomorphic and very fine-grained, very rarely above 0.1 mm in diameter.

Amphibole is developed as isolated yellowish-green grains, not larger than 0.1-0.2 mm in diameter.

Albite appears as rare double-twinned grains which are slightly coarser than quartz.

Opaque minerals are very subordinate and ap-pear as isolated grains exclusively.

Rock classification

According to mineral composition and texture the investigated rock sample is a chlorite-epidote schist formed under greenschist facies conditions. A possible protolith cannot be determined unequivo-cally. It could be a fine-grained volcaniclastic rock of basalti character, but a possibility that the proto-lith was a marl cannot be excluded.

Sample DLV-5

Axe (inv. no. IB-41, catalogue 139); cam-paign 1965, trench II (sq. C/1-2), arbitrary layer 4; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is light-grey in color and shows granoblastic and lepidoblastic texture and schis-tose structure.


The rock is slightly schistose to massive and dominated by a granoblastic texture. It also shows a weak banding. Tiny fractures filled with epidote and marked by oxidation are also observed (Fig. 1d).

Mineral composition is epidote, quartz, albite, amphibole and opaque minerals.

Epidote abundance is around 45 % vol. Together with quartz and albite, this mineral is the major rock constituent. Epidote appears as very fine-grained crystals which are uniformly distributed within the rock mass. Slightly coarser epidote graines occur in fractures. Similar fractures were described in the previous sample.

Quartz and albite together account for above 40 % of the total rock volume. They have roughly the same relative modal abundance. Very characteristic for this rock sample are irregular or tabular patches which probably are nuclei of albite porphyroblasts.

Opaque minerals are subhedral and appear as isolated grains with a modal abundance up to 2 % vol. In contrast to the previos sample, this rock con-tains more opaque minerals. Subhedral shape of the opaques can indicate their magmatic origin.

Amphibole is rarer but coarser than amphibole in the last described sample. It is green in color and often associated with opaque minerals.

Rock classification

According to mineral composition and texture the rock can be classified as a quartz-epidote schist. The rock is formed under greenschist facies condi-tions. The protolith is most probably an igneous rock.

Sample DLV-6

Fragmented ground-edge tool (inv. no. IB-447, catalogue 178); campaign 1966, block H1 (sq. B,C/III-IV), arbitrary layer 1; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


APPENDIX


The sample has the identical characteristics as the last one.


The rock is massive and granoblastic. It is com-posed of epidote, quartz, albite and opaque phasess. The only difference in respect the last sample is higher modal abundance of salic minerals.

Epidote appears as microcrystalline aggregates which are uniformly distributed within the rock mass. Some small epidote crystalls form irregular accumulations. Epidote accounts for around 50 % of the total rock volume.

Quartz and albite have an abundance of almost 50 % vol. Quartz occurs as very small, xenomorphic and sometimes simplectitic grains. Albite is repre-sented by coarser and xenomorphic aggregates. They are early nucleii of porphyroblasts and have a diam-eter of up to 1 mm (Fig. 1e).

Opaques appears as small, isolated grains, below 0.2 mm in diameter. Their abundance is below 1 % of the total rock volume.

Rock classification

The rock is determined as an albite-epidote schist, formed under greenschist facies conditions. The protolith can be a basaltic volcaniclastic rock or a marl.

Sample DLV-7Adze (inv. no. IB-414, catalogue 160); cam-

paign 1966, block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 1; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The sample has the identical characteristics as the last one.


The rock shows a silty texture and a massive and homogeneous structure (Fig. 1f). It is consisted of clasts of quartz, rare feldspars and opaque phases which lay in a weakly metamorphosed matrix com-posed of chlorite and sericite. The matrix makes more than 65 % of the rock volume.

The quartz lithic clasts are subhedral and very fine-grained - bellow 0.05 mm in diameter. Some grains can be mistaken for feldspars, therefore de-termination of very small crystalls is not reliable. Commonly quartz grains show undulose extinction and are generally uniformly distributed within the rock. Fragments of opaque minerals are small and are usually surrounded by oxidation aureoles.

The matrix is composed of homogeneously dis-tributed flakes of chlorite and sericite. It also con-tains irregular, mostly equidimensional aggregates of green color which can represent relicts of earlier mafic minerals.

Rock classification

According to textural relationships and mineral composition the rock is determined as a siltstone. The protolith can be a basaltic volcaniclastic rock.

Sample DLV-8Axe (inv. no. IB 440, catalogue 144); campaign

1966, block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 5; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is dark-grey and has a granoblastic to lepidoblastic texture. It shows a schistose structure.


The rock is granoblastic with characteristics of porphyroblastic texture. The structure is mostly massive but some banding can be also observed (Fig. 2a).

Mineral composition is epidote, albite, quartz and opaque minerals.

Epidote is represented by fine-grained aggregates with a grain size bellow 0.1 mm in diameter. Only in some nests and bands occur larger grains. The modal abundance of epidote is around 70 % vol.

Albite appears as xenomorphic porphyroblasts, predominantly around 1 mm in diameter. Some grains show double-twinning. Albite accounts for around 15-20 % of the total rock volume.

Quartz is extremely fine-grained and uniformly distributed within the rock mass. Slightly larger quartz grains are situated in rare quartz-albite nests


APPENDIX

and lens-shaped aggregates. The modal abundance of quartz is around 10 % vol.

Opaque phases are small and subhedral. They are homogeneously distributed.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as a quartz-albite-epidote schist, formed under greenschist facies conditions. The protolith can be a basaltic volcaniclastic rock or a marl.

Sample DLV-9 Axe (inv. no. IB-432, catalogue 155); campaign

1966, block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 4; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is dark-grey. It shows nematoblastic and granoblastic structure with characteristics of blastoophitic texture. The structure is schistose.


The texture of the rock is blastoophitic and struc-ture is massive (Fig. 2b).

Under the microscope are observed relicts of primary magmatic minerals – plagioclases and femic minerals. The rock is generally composed of epidote, amphibole, chlorite, opaque minerals, as well as of fine-grained apatite and some secondary quartz.

Plagioclase is represented by albite which appears as xenomorphic and double-twinned crystals of around 1 mm in diameter. The modal abundance of plagioclase and quartz is around 35 % vol.

Opaque minerals have a two fold occurrence: in form of individual grains with coroded margins or in form of comb-like aggregates. Centers of earler mafic minerals contain these comb-like forms or romboid metallic minerals. The opaques are uniformly dis-tributed and their abundance is around 15 % vol.

Amphibole formed on expence of primary igneous constituents – pyroxenes. They appear as prismatic crystals and have a weak pleochroism in brown color. Their margin are usually oxidized. It is clearly visible that some grains are kinked or irregularly deformed.

Epidote and chlorite are minerals which were formed after primary plagioclases and some femic minerals.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as a metadiabase.

Sample DLV-10Butt part of ground-edge tool (inv. no. IB-426,

catalogue 176); campaign 1966, block G1 (sq. B/II-III), arbitrary layer 3; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is dark-grey and shows grano- and lepidoblastic texture. There are also characteristics of blastoporphyritic texture. The rock shows a schis-tosity.


The rock sample is massive and has a blastopor-phyritic texture (Fig. 2c). The homogeneity is dis-turbed by large aggregates of epidote, amphibole and opaque constituents, which were formed by transfor-mation of earlier phenocrysts. In the groundmass can be observed plagioclase microlites which are well oriented and give the rock characteristics of a fluidal structure.

Mineral composition of the rock is: epidote, plagioclase, amphibole, quartz and opaque phases. They lay within the groundmass mostly composed of chlorite.

Epidote and amphibole are concentrated in form of irregular accumulations. Sometimes their form suggests that they originated as products of decom-position of phenocrysts, probably pyroxene. Besides, they appear as very small grains uniformly distrib-uted within the rock mass. The modal abundance of these minerals is around 50 % vol.

Opaques most frequently are accompanying above mentioned accumulations of epidote and amphibole or they appear as pseudomorphoses af-ter earlier magmatic constituents. They account for around 10-15 % vol.

Plagioclase and quartz have an abundance of around 35 % vol. They predominantly are associated with chlorite in the groundmass.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as a metabasalt.


APPENDIX

Sample DLV-11

Adze (without designation, catalogue 161); campaign 1967, sq. D/I, house 7; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is dark-grey in color and shows lepido- and granoblastic textures. It display schistosity with some folding.


The rock is nemato-, lepido- and granoblastic in texture. It also schistose and slightly folded (Fig. 2d).

The rock is composed of amphibole, epidote, chlorite, quartz, albite and opaque minerals.

Amphibole is represented by small prismatic crystals around 0,05 mm in length. Together with chlorite and epidote it forms bands. All these miner-als have a total abundance of around 65 % of the total rock volume.

Opaque minerals have an abundance ranging 10-15 % vol. They appear in form of fine-grained to dust-like aggregates which form a lineation and sep-arate bands of femic from those made of quartz and albite. Very fine-grained aggregates are usually con-centrated as subhedral accumulations. Distribution of opaque constituents define microfolding. The microfolds are at some places broken and the cracks are filled by tiny metallic minerals.

Quartz and albite appear mutually associated and mostly form nests and bands. Quartz is more abundant and commonly more fine-grained than albite. Their total modal abundance is around 20 % vol. There are also cracks filled by secondary silica.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as an amphibole-epidote schist. The rock is metamorphosed under greenschists fa-cies conditions and shows a slightly higher grade than the previous one. The protolith is a metamor-phosed diabase.

Sample DLV-12Fragmented ground-edge tool (without designa-

tion, catalogue 175); campaign 1967, sq. b/I, arbi-trary layer 4; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock sample is grey in color and has identi-cal macroscopic characteristics as the previos one.


The sample shows granoblastic and lepidoblastic texture and displays a distinctive schistosity and fold-ing. Cracks oriented oblique to direction of schistos-ity are filled by chlorite and epidote.

The rock sample is composed of quartz, albite, chlorite, epidote and opaque minerals. In general, mafic minerals are prevailing with respect to quartz, albite and opaques.

Quartz and albite form bands, sometimes boudi-naged in elongated nest-like forms. These forms de-fine the foliation. Opaque constituents have identical mode of occurrence as in the previos sample. Here veins composed of opaque minerals with some euhe-dral grains can be also observed.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as a chlorite-epidote schist. The rock was metamorphosed under greenschist facies conditions. The protolith is most probably a diabase.

Sample DLV-13Axe (inv. no. IB-515, catalogue 135); campaign

1967, sq. a/I, arbitrary layer 2; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is dark-grey to grey-green in color. It shows lepidoblastic, nematoblastic and granoblastic textural characteristics and shows schistosity and folding. Macroscopically can be observed fan-shaped aggregates of amphibole.


This rock is identical to sample DLV-11. It is nemato- and granoblastic texture and shows microfolding (Fig. 2e). It contains characteristic quartz-feldspar band which are usually folded.

The rock is predominantly composed of mafic minerals – epidote and amphibole, less abundant are opaques, quartz and albite.


APPENDIX

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as an amphibole-epidote schist. The protolith is a diabase.

Sample DLV-14Adze (incorrect inv. no. 73, catalogue 162);

campaign 1967, sq. a/2-3, house 51 – corner B; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock is of dark-grey to grey-green color and displays lepidoblastic, nematoblastic and granoblastic texture and schistose texture. Folding is also present. Fan-shaped amphibole aggregates are observed microscopically.


The rock has nemato- and granoblastic texture with characteristics of blastoporphyritic one (Fig. 2f). The microfolding is present.

It is composed of amphibole, epidote, albite, quartz and metallic, non-transparent minerals.

Amphibole and epidote form the groundmass. They appear in form of small and prismatic crystals.

Plagioclase has a twofold occurrence: as relicts of primary igneous twinned crystals or as tabular and subhedral, double-twinned albite grains.

Quartz appears exclusively in form of fine-grained crystal aggregates which rims show simplec-titic intergrowths. It is associated with plagioclase forming quartz-feldspar bands, nests and lens-shaped accumulations.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composition the rock is classified as a chlorite-epidote schist. It was metamorphosed under greenschist facies condi-tions and the protolith was most probably a diabase. Generally, the sample is very similar to DLV-1.

Sample DLV-15

Axe (inv. no. IB-810, catalogue 119); campaign 1968, sq. c/I, arbitrary layer 3; Archaeological Collection of Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade.


The rock sample is light-grey in color and shows granoblastic and nematoblastic textural characteris-tics. It is a massive rock.


Under the microscope the rock shows a grano-blastic texture and massive structure with some banding.

It is composed of epidote, amphibole, quartz, albite and opaque minerals.

Epidote is a dominant constituent. It appears in form of very fine-grained accumulations, whereas larger grains occur as nests and bands. In the latter epidote is associated with amphibole and opaques. Epidote alone has a modal abundance of around 70 % vol.

Amphibole is relatively rare and appears as greenish cystals with rims marked with aggregates of opaque minerals.

Opaque phases occur as rims around amphibole or as very fine-grained aggregates uniformly distrib-uted within the rock mass.

Plagioclase and quartz have uniform distribu-tion. Plagioclase can be observed as forming nucleii of porphyroblasts.

Rock classification

According to texture and mineral composi-tion the rock can be classified as an albite-bearing epidote schist. In comparison to the previously de-scribed samples this rock is characterized with the finest grains. The protolith can be a tuffaceous or hyaloclastic rock of a basaltic character.


APPENDIX

a. DLV 1: comb-like aggregates of secondary opaque minerals (arrow); cross nicols (Nx);horizontal length of the image is 1 mm;

b. DLV 2: amphibole cleavage (dashed lines); parallel nicols (N//);horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

c. banding of the rock sample DLV-4; Nx; horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

Fig. 1. Photomicrographs of analysed rocks:


APPENDIX

d. DLV 5: oxidized fractures (arrow) filled by epidote; N//;

horizontal length of the image is 1 mm;

e. DLV 6: nucleii of albite porphyroblasts (Ab); Nx;

horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

f. clastic-silty texture of sample DLV-7; Nx.horizontal length of the image is 1 mm;

Ab


APPENDIX

a. massive to slightly banded structure of sample DLV-8; Nx; horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

b. blastoophitic texture and massive structure of sample DLV-9; N//; horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

c. blastoporphyritic texture of sample DLV-10; N//;horizontal length of the image is 2mm;

Fig.2. Photomicrographs of analysed rocks:


APPENDIX

d. folding in sample DLV-11; Nx; horizontal length of the image is 2 mm;

e. DLV 13: a broken microfold (arrow); Nx;horizontal length of the image is 1 mm;

f. blastoophitic texture of sample DLV-14; Nx.horizontal length of the image is 1 mm;

903.21/.22”633/634”(497.11)

ANTONOVI], Dragana Stone Tools from Lepenski Vir / Dragana Antonovi} ; [translated by Mirjana Vukmanovi}, Vladica Cvetkovi} ; drawings Dragana Antonovi}]. - Belgrade : Institute of Archaeology, 2006 (Zemun : AltaNova). - 155 str. : ilustr. ; 30 cm. - (Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Monographies = \erdapske sveske. Posebna izdanja ; 5)

Na spor. nasl. str.: Kameno oru|e sa Lepenskog Vira. - Tira` 1 000. - Str. 145-155: Petrographic Analysis of Samples of Ground Stone Artifacts form Lepenski Vir / Vladica Cvetkovi}, Kristina Resimi}-[ari}. - Bibliografija: str. 133-134. - Rezime.

ISBN 86-80093-46-7 a) Alati - Lepenski Vir - Mezolit b) Alati - Lepenski Vir - Neolit c) Oru`je - Lepenski Vir

COBISS.SR-ID 127879180

CIP – Katalogizacija u publikaciji

Narodna biblioteka Srbije, Beograd

Documents

Dragana Antonović: "Stone tools from Lepenski Vir"