Mediating Marginality: Mounds, Pots and Performances at the Bronze Age Cemetery of Purić-Ljubanj, Eastern Croatia 178969972X, 9781789699722, 9781789699739

'Mediating Marginality' draws on eight years of excavation and survey at the newly discovered Bronze Age Cemet

176 92 14MB

English Pages 158 [159] Year 2022

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

Table of contents :
Cover
Frontispiece
Copyright Page
Contents Page
List of Figures and Tables
Acknowledgements
Preface
A look at the research of prehistory in the Spačva-Ljubanj-Studva interfluve
Archaeological/historical research in Cvelferija in recent times
Introduction
Chapter 1
Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj
Excavation strategy
Research history and initial survey at Purić-Ljubanj
Geophysical survey at Purić-Ljubanj
GPS and topographic survey at Purić-Ljubanj
Surveys and trial excavations on other mounded cemeteries in the area
Chapter 2
Figure 1.1: Initial GPS survey data from Purić-Ljubanj.
Figure 1.2: Damaged mound.
Figure 1.3: The excavation area.
Figure 1.4: The extent of the excavations.
Figure 1.5: Position of trenches on Tumulus 1.
Figure 1.6: Position of trenches on Tumuli 2 and 3.
Figure 1.7: Results of geo-radar and resistivity surveys.
Figure 1.8: Diagnostic pottery from Trial Trench 1, the first conclusive evidence to be found at Purić-Ljubanj (drawing: Lisa Waldock).
Figure 1.9: Results of the gradiometry survey (50cm resolution) conducted at Purić-Ljubanj in 2019.
Figure 1.10: DEM and contour models of the Purić-Ljubanj cemetery.
Figure 1.11: Map of mounded sites discovered in the Spačva Forest to date.
Figure 1.12: Lidar scanning of four sites was conducted in 2016. Site J (top left), site C (top right), site D (bottom left) and site B (bottom right).
Figure 1.13: The shapes of the eighteen mounded cemeteries in the Spačva Forest measured in 2017 (the shapes of sites B and I are not visible due to their small size).
Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context
Regional Bronze Age chronologies, groups, and research history
Belegiš II group
Belegiš II sites
Belegiš II burial practice
Typical finds of Belegiš II group
West-Serbian variant of Vatin
West-Serbian variant of Vatin sites
West-Serbian variant of Vatin burial practice
Typical finds of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin
Late Bronze Age groups in Županjska Posavina
Conclusion
Chapter 3
Figure 2.1: Late Bronze Age groups in the region (after Ložnjak Dizdar 2005: 35).
Figure 2.2: Belegiš urns: a) Belegiš I; b) Belegiš II (after Coxon 2018: 109).
Figure 2.3: The areas of Tumulus and Belegiš (I and II) Cultures in Vojvodina (after: Tasić 1974, Pl. 24).
Figure 2.4: Map of Belegiš II sites in Croatia (after Forenbaher 1991: 48).
Figure 2.5: A typical Belegiš burial – Kaluđerske Livade (Petrović 2006, after Ljuština 2017: 349).
Figure 2.6: Belegiš II (Pseudoprotovillanova) urns (after Forenbaher 1988: 25).
Figure 2.7: Most common types of Belegiš II pottery in eastern Slavonia (after Forenbaher 1991: 58).
Figure 2.8: Side-by-side comparison of Gava and Belegiš II urns. Left: Gava; Right: Belegiš II (after Forenbaher 1988: 30).
Figure 2.9: Area of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin.
Figure 2.10: Map of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin cemeteries in Serbia. Left: Middle Bronze Age; Right: Late Bronze Age (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 166, 170).
Figure 2.11: A typical burial of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin group (Tumulus 1 at Dubac, after Nikitović 1999, Pl. V).
Figure 2.12: Left: MBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Mosinje; Right: LBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Baluga (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 169, 171).
Pottery Assemblages and Burial Features at Purić-Ljubanj
Defining pottery and burial at Purić-Ljubanj: an overview
Fabric Series
Notes on methodology and terminology
Presentation of the data
Pottery and burial: Tumulus 1 (Trenches 1 and 2)
General nature, description, and deposition of the pottery
Burial 1/1
Burial 1/2
Burial 1/3
Burials 1/4 AND 1/5
Burial 1/6
Burial 1/7
Building Tumulus 1
Pottery and burial: Tumulus 2
Pottery recovered from Tumulus 1 not linked to any specific feature
Tumulus 2: pottery and burial features
Burial 4/1A
Burial 4/1B
Burials 4/8 (4/2 and 4/9)
Burial 4/3
Burials 4/4 A-Q, 4/7
Burial 4/5
Burial 4/6
Burial 4/10
Burial 4/11
Burial 4/12
Burial 4/13
Burial 4/14
Burial 4/15
Burial 4/16
Burials 4/17, 4/18, 4/19, 4/20, 4/21
Trench 5 and Trial Trench 2
Building Tumulus 2
Pottery and Burial: Tumulus 3
Burial 3/1
Burial 3/3 (with 3/2, ¾)
Burial 3/2
Burial 3/4
Burial 3/5
Pottery from Tumulus 3:
Building Tumulus 3
Key themes for further discussion
Chapter 4
Figure 3.1: Section view of the final burning episode (pyre) on Tumulus 1, demonstrating the ephemeral nature of deposits at Purić-Ljubanj.
Figure 3.2: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 1.
Figure 3.3: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 2.
Figure 3.4: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 3.
Figure 3.5: Plan illustration of Feature 1/1, Tumulus 1.
Figure 3.6: Photographs of (from left to right) carbonised woven matting, overview of Feature 1/1, detailed image of intense burning around the carbonised matting, overview of area in which the carbonised matting was discovered.
Figure 3.7: Burial pit 1/2.
Figure 3.8: Feature 1/4 and 1/5.
Figure 3.9: Exterior and interior view of the cleaned pot from 1/4 and 1/5.
Figure 3.10: Burial pit 1/7 throughout its excavation, and cut marks on deposited human long bone.
Figure 3.11: Illustrated pottery from Tumulus 1.
Figure 3.12: Illustration of the Belegiš chalice from burial 4/1a.
Figure 3.13: Burial 4/1a.
Figure 3.14: Jar form from burial 4/1b.
Figure 3.15: Burial 4/8 (including 4/2 and 4/9).
Figure 3.16: Illustration of pottery from 4/8 (including 4/2 and 4/9).
Figure 3.17: Plan view of burial 4/3.
Figure 3.18: West baulk adjacent to burial 4/3 post excavation, showing disturbed stratigraphy south of 4/4 burials.
Figure 3.19: Pottery within burial 4/3 during excavation.
Figure 3.20a: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.20b: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.20c: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.20d: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.20e: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.20f: Pottery from Burial 4/3.
Figure 3.21: Loess dolls/limestone platform in the west baulk of trench 4.
Figure 3.22: Burial 4/7 during excavation.
Figure 3.23: Stratigraphic sequence at 20 cm intervals through 4/4n, showing the complex nature of the construction.
Figure 3.24: Plan view of calcitic burial settings.
Figure 3.25a: nos. 1–4: Pottery from Burial 4/4i and 4/7.
Figure 3.25b: nos. 5–7: Pottery from Burial 4/4i and 4/7.
Figure 3.26: nos. 1–4: Pottery from Burial 4/4a, c, h and j.
Figure 3.27: 1, 2: Pottery from Burial 4/4n.
Figure 3.28: 1: Pottery from Burial 4/4q.
Figure 3.29: Pottery from Burial 4/5.
Figure 3.30: Pottery from Burial 4/6.
Figure 3.31: 1, 2: Pottery from Burial 4/10.
Figure 3.32: Plan view of burial features in phase 2 of Trench 2.
Figure 3.33: Pottery from Burial 4/11.
Figure 3.34: Burial 4/13 being excavated.
Figure 3.35: Pottery from Burial 4/13.
Figure 3.36: Working photograph of Burial 4/15.
Figure 3.37: Pottery from Burial 4/15.
Figure 3.38: Pottery from Burial 4/16.
Figure 3.39: Plan drawing of the area.
Figure 3.40: Plan view of Burials 4/20 and 4/21, highlighting the area with fingertip impressions in the daub casing surrounding the deposits of bone and pottery.
Figure 3.41: Close-up view of the spread of pottery and bone during excavation.
Figure 3.42a: Pottery from the burial group.
Figure 3.42b: Pottery from the burial group.
Figure 3.43: Pottery from Trench 5, Tumulus 2.
Figure 3.44: Stratigraphy of the east baulk of Tumulus 3 at the end of excavation, note the position of the Pit Burial 3/5.
Figure 3.45: Plan illustration of funeral pyre/Burial 3/3.
Figure 3.46: Section taken through Burial 3/3 prior to its removal.
Figure 3.47: Stratigraphy and position of Burial 3/2 in the south baulk of Tumulus 3.
Figure 3.48: Pottery from Tumulus 3.
Translating Geology, Resources, and Redistributed Materials into Skill and Performance
Geology
Introduction
Resources and redistributed materials
Clay
Carbonates
Wood, scrub, and dung
Making: skill and performances at Purić-Ljubanj
Skill and performance
Making pots
Making tumuli
Performances of making at Purić-Ljubanj
Chapter 5
Figure 4.1: Geological map (after Galović 2014: Figure 2: 115).
Figure 4.2: Pottery being made at Purić-Ljubanj.
Figure 4.3: Students’ pottery warming prior to firing.
Figure 4.4: Photomicrographs showing (top) coarse, (middle) medium, and (bottom) fine examples of clay fabrics used at Purić-Ljubanj.
Figure 4.5: Orange/red (oxidised) carinated bowl and black (reduction-fired) chalice, indicating deliberate firing strategies in play with regard to vessel types at Purić-Ljubanj.
Figure 4.6: Pots from the Belegiš cemetery of Surćin, Croatia showing the potential for variability of skill and thus performances made. Reproduced with the kind permission of The Museum for Archaeology, Croatia
Figure 4.7: Painted sherd from the carinated shoulder of a Belegiš bowl form
Scales of performance at Purić-Ljubanj
Morphology of Purić-Ljubanj
Assembling the mounds
Tumulus 1
Tumulus 2
Tumulus 3
Scales of performance at Purić-Ljubanj
Building the landscape
Assembling the ancestors at the margins
Chapter 6
Figure 5.1: Possible MBA (left) and LBA (right) mounds at Purić-Ljubanj, marked with red dots.
Figure 5.2: A suggestion for the early (possibly MBA) appearance of the Purić-Ljubanj necropolis.
Figure 5.3: Mound-site intervisibility.
Figure: 5.4: Visibility of other mound sites from Purić-Ljubanj.
Mediating Marginality
Marginality and archaeological research
Expressions of identity at Purić-Ljubanj
UAISK’s future plans
Concluding remarks
References
Index
Back cover
Recommend Papers

Mediating Marginality: Mounds, Pots and Performances at the Bronze Age Cemetery of Purić-Ljubanj, Eastern Croatia
 178969972X, 9781789699722, 9781789699739

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

Mediating Marginality Mounds, Pots and Performances at the Bronze Age Cemetery of Purić-Ljubanj, Eastern Croatia

Sandy Budden-Hoskins, Andreja Malovoz, Mu-Chun Wu, and Lisa Waldock

a za arhe g u olo r d U

skog kraj o van l ik ač

straživanja s i a p k š

a a

a uga z arheo r lo Ud

skog kra j o van lik ač

straživanja s i a p šk

Mediating Marginality Mounds, Pots and Performances at the Bronze Age Cemetery of Purić-Ljubanj, Eastern Croatia

Sandy Budden-Hoskins, Andreja Malovoz, Mu-Chun Wu, and Lisa Waldock

Archaeopress Archaeology

Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com

ISBN 978-1-78969-972-2 ISBN 978-1-78969-973-9 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress and the individual authors 2022

Front cover illustration by Lisa Waldock Front cover design © UAISK.ORG

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com

Contents

List of Figures and Tables����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� iii Acknowledgements����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������v

Preface�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������vi A look at the research of prehistory in the Spačva-Ljubanj-Studva interfluve������������������������������vi Archaeological/historical research in Cvelferija in recent times��������������������������������������������������� vii

Introduction���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������x Chapter 1: Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj����������������������1 Research history and initial survey at Purić-Ljubanj��������������������������������������������������������������������������1 Excavation strategy�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������1 Geophysical survey at Purić-Ljubanj �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������6 GPS and topographic survey at Purić-Ljubanj������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 Surveys and trial excavations on other mounded cemeteries in the area ������������������������������������12 Chapter 2: Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context���������������������������������������14 Regional Bronze Age chronologies, groups, and research history �������������������������������������������������14 Late Bronze Age groups in Županjska Posavina���������������������������������������������������������������������������������16 Belegiš II group����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������16 Belegiš II sites ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������19 Belegiš II burial practice�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������21 Typical finds of Belegiš II group �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������22 West-Serbian variant of Vatin���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������25 West-Serbian variant of Vatin sites �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������27 West-Serbian variant of Vatin burial practice������������������������������������������������������������������������������29 Typical finds of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin ����������������������������������������������������������������������32 Conclusion������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������34 Chapter 3: Pottery Assemblages and Burial Features at Purić-Ljubanj�����������������������������������35 Notes on methodology and terminology���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35 Presentation of the data�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35 Defining pottery and burial at Purić-Ljubanj: an overview �������������������������������������������������������������35 Fabric Series����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������39 Pottery and burial: Tumulus 1 (Trenches 1 and 2)�����������������������������������������������������������������������������39 General nature, description, and deposition of the pottery�������������������������������������������������������39 Burial 1/1��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������42 Burial 1/2��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������42 Burial 1/3��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������43 Burials 1/4 AND 1/5���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������43 Burial 1/6��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������45 Burial 1/7��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������45 Pottery recovered from Tumulus 1 not linked to any specific feature�������������������������������������������46 Building Tumulus 1���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������46 Pottery and burial: Tumulus 2���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������48 Tumulus 2: pottery and burial features�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������49 Burial 4/1A������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������49 Burial 4/1B������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������52 Burials 4/8 (4/2 and 4/9)������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������53 Burial 4/3 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������54 Burials 4/4 A-Q, 4/7 ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������64 Burial 4/5��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������70 i

Burial 4/6��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������72 Burial 4/10������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������73 Burial 4/11������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������74 Burial 4/12������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������75 Burial 4/13������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������76 Burial 4/14������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������77 Burial 4/15������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������77 Burial 4/16������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������78 Burials 4/17, 4/18, 4/19, 4/20, 4/21������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������79 Trench 5 and Trial Trench 2�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������84 Building Tumulus 2���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������85 Pottery and Burial: Tumulus 3���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������89 Burial 3/1��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������90 Burial 3/5 (with 3/2 and 3/4)�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������90 Burial 3/2��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������91 Burial 3/4��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������92 Burial 3/5��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������92 Pottery from Tumulus 3:������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������94 Building Tumulus 3���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������95 Key themes for further discussion�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������95

Chapter 4: Translating Geology, Resources, and Redistributed Materials into Skill and Performance������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96 Introduction���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������96 Geology�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������96 Resources and redistributed materials �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������97 Clay�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������100 Carbonates����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������103 Wood, scrub, and dung�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������104 Making: skill and performances at Purić-Ljubanj �������������������������������������������������������������������������105 Skill and performance���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������105 Making pots��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������107 Making tumuli ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������110 Performances of making at Purić-Ljubanj�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������112 Chapter 5: Scales of performance at Purić-Ljubanj: assembling the cemetery, the landscape, and the dead����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 114 Introduction�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������114 Notes on methodology of scales of performance�����������������������������������������������������������������������������114 Morphology of Purić-Ljubanj��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������115 Assembling the mounds�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������118 Tumulus 1 �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������118 Tumulus 2 �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������120 Tumulus 3 �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������122 Scales of performance at Purić-Ljubanj���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������122 Building the landscape�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������125 Assembling the ancestors at the margins�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������126 Chapter 6: Mediating Marginality������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 129 Marginality and archaeological research������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������129 Expressions of identity at Purić-Ljubanj�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������131 UAISK’s future plans�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������132 Concluding remarks������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������133 References�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 134 Index����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 140

ii

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1.1: Figure 1.2: Figure 1.3: Figure 1.4: Figure 1.5: Figure 1.6: Figure 1.7: Figure 1.8:

Initial GPS survey data from Purić-Ljubanj.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2 Damaged mound.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3 The excavation area.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4 The extent of the excavations.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 Position of trenches on Tumulus 1.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 5 Position of trenches on Tumuli 2 and 3.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 Results of geo-radar and resistivity surveys.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7 Diagnostic pottery from Trial Trench 1, the first conclusive evidence to be found at PurićLjubanj (drawing: Lisa Waldock).���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8 Figure 1.9: Results of the gradiometry survey (50cm resolution) conducted at Purić-Ljubanj in 2019.������� 8 Figure 1.10: DEM and contour models of the Purić-Ljubanj cemetery. ��������������������������������������������������������������� 9 Figure 1.11: Map of mounded sites discovered in the Spačva Forest to date.��������������������������������������������������� 10 Figure 1.12: Lidar scanning of four sites was conducted in 2016. Site J (top left), site C (top right), site D (bottom left) and site B (bottom right).��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11 Figure 1.13: The shapes of the eighteen mounded cemeteries in the Spačva Forest measured in 2017 (the shapes of sites B and I are not visible due to their small size).������������������������������������������������������ 13 Figure 2.1: Late Bronze Age groups in the region (after Ložnjak Dizdar 2005: 35).���������������������������������������� 15 Figure 2.2: Belegiš urns: a) Belegiš I; b) Belegiš II (after Coxon 2018: 109).����������������������������������������������������� 17 Figure 2.3: The areas of Tumulus and Belegiš (I and II) Cultures in Vojvodina (after: Tasić 1974, Pl. 24).� 18 Figure 2.4: Map of Belegiš II sites in Croatia (after Forenbaher 1991: 48).������������������������������������������������������� 20 Figure 2.5: A typical Belegiš burial – Kaluđerske Livade (Petrović 2006, after Ljuština 2017: 349).������������� 21 Figure 2.6: Belegiš II (Pseudoprotovillanova) urns (after Forenbaher 1988: 25).�������������������������������������������� 22 Figure 2.7: Most common types of Belegiš II pottery in eastern Slavonia (after Forenbaher 1991: 58).���� 23 Figure 2.8: Side-by-side comparison of Gava and Belegiš II urns. Left: Gava; Right: Belegiš II (after Forenbaher 1988: 30).���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 24 Figure 2.9: Area of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26 Figure 2.10: Map of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin cemeteries in Serbia. Left: Middle Bronze Age; Right: Late Bronze Age (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 166, 170).����������������������������������������������������� 28 Figure 2.11: A typical burial of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin group (Tumulus 1 at Dubac, after Nikitović 1999, Pl. V).���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 30 Figure 2.12: Left: MBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Mosinje; Right: LBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Baluga (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 169, 171).�������������� 33 Figure 3.1: ection view of the final burning episode (pyre) on Tumulus 1, demonstrating the ephemeral nature of deposits at Purić-Ljubanj.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 36 Figure 3.2: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 1.�������������������������������������������������� 38 Figure 3.3: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 2.�������������������������������������������������� 38 Figure 3.4: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 3.�������������������������������������������������� 39 Figure 3.6: Photographs of (from left to right) carbonised woven matting, overview of Feature 1/1, detailed image of intense burning around the carbonised matting, overview of area in which the carbonised matting was discovered.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 41 Figure 3.5: Plan illustration of Feature 1/1, Tumulus 1.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 41 Figure 3.7: Burial pit 1/2.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 43 Figure 3.8: Feature 1/4 and 1/5.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44 Figure 3.9: Exterior and interior view of the cleaned pot from 1/4 and 1/5.������������������������������������������������� 44 Figure 3.10: Burial pit 1/7 throughout its excavation, and cut marks on deposited human long bone.������ 46 Figure 3.11: Illustrated pottery from Tumulus 1.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 47 Figure 3.12: Illustration of the Belegiš chalice from burial 4/1a.������������������������������������������������������������������������ 50 Figure 3.13: Burial 4/1a.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 50 Figure 3.14: Jar form from burial 4/1b.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 51 Figure 3.15: Burial 4/8 (including 4/2 and 4/9).���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52 Figure 3.16: Illustration of pottery from 4/8 (including 4/2 and 4/9).�������������������������������������������������������������� 53 Figure 3.17: Plan view of burial 4/3.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 55 Figure 3.18: West baulk adjacent to burial 4/3 post excavation, showing disturbed stratigraphy south of 4/4 burials.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 56 Figure 3.19: Pottery within burial 4/3 during excavation.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 56 Figure 3.20a: Pottery from Burial 4/3.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 57 Figure 3.20b: Pottery from Burial 4/3.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 58 Figure 3.20c: Pottery from Burial 4/3.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 60 Figure 3.20d: Pottery from Burial 4/3.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 61 Figure 3.20e: Pottery from Burial 4/3.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 62 Figure 3.20f: Pottery from Burial 4/3.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 63 Figure 3.21: Loess dolls/limestone platform in the west baulk of trench 4. ���������������������������������������������������� 65 iii

Figure 3.22: Burial 4/7 during excavation.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 65 Figure 3.23: Stratigraphic sequence at 20 cm intervals through 4/4n, showing the complex nature of the construction.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 66 Figure 3.24: Plan view of calcitic burial settings.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66 Figure 3.25a: os. 1–4: Pottery from Burial 4/4i and 4/7.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 67 Figure 3.25b: nos. 5–7: Pottery from Burial 4/4i and 4/7.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68 Figure 3.26: nos. 1–4: Pottery from Burial 4/4a, c, h and j.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 70 Figure 3.27: 1, 2: Pottery from Burial 4/4n.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 71 Figure 3.28: 1: Pottery from Burial 4/4q.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 71 Figure 3.29: Pottery from Burial 4/5. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 72 Figure 3.30: Pottery from Burial 4/6.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 73 Figure 3.31: 1, 2: Pottery from Burial 4/10.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 74 Figure 3.32: Plan view of burial features in phase 2 of Trench 2.������������������������������������������������������������������������ 74 Figure 3.33: Pottery from Burial 4/11.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 75 Figure 3.34: Burial 4/13 being excavated.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 76 Figure 3.35: Pottery from Burial 4/13.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 76 Figure 3.36: Working photograph of Burial 4/15.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77 Figure 3.37: Pottery from Burial 4/15. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 78 Figure 3.38: Pottery from Burial 4/16.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 78 Figure 3.39: Plan drawing of the area.��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 80 Figure 3.40: Plan view of Burials 4/20 and 4/21, highlighting the area with fingertip impressions in the daub casing surrounding the deposits of bone and pottery.���������������������������������������������������������� 80 Figure 3.41: Close-up view of the spread of pottery and bone during excavation.������������������������������������������ 81 Figure 3.42a: Pottery from the burial group.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 82 Figure 3.42b: Pottery from the burial group.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 83 Figure 3.43: Pottery from Trench 5, Tumulus 2.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 84 Figure 3.44: Stratigraphy of the east baulk of Tumulus 3 at the end of excavation, note the position of the Pit Burial 3/5. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 89 Figure 3.45: Plan illustration of funeral pyre/Burial 3/3. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 90 Figure 3.46: Section taken through Burial 3/3 prior to its removal.������������������������������������������������������������������ 91 Figure 3.47: Stratigraphy and position of Burial 3/2 in the south baulk of Tumulus 3. ��������������������������������� 93 Figure 3.48: Pottery from Tumulus 3.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 94 Figure 4.1: Geological map (after Galović 2014: Figure 2: 115).������������������������������������������������������������������������� 98 Figure 4.2: Pottery being made at Purić-Ljubanj. ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 100 Figure 4.3: Students’ pottery warming prior to firing.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 100 Figure 4.4: Photomicrographs showing (top) coarse, (middle) medium, and (bottom) fine examples of clay fabrics used at Purić-Ljubanj.���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 102 Figure 4.5: Orange/red (oxidised) carinated bowl and black (reduction-fired) chalice, indicating deliberate firing strategies in play with regard to vessel types at Purić-Ljubanj. ������������������� 103 Figure 4.6: Pots from the Belegiš cemetery of Surćin, Croatia showing the potential for variability of skill and thus performances made. Reproduced with the kind permission of The Museum for Archaeology, Croatia��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 106 Figure 4.7: Painted sherd from the carinated shoulder of a Belegiš bowl form������������������������������������������� 108 Figure 5.1: Possible MBA (left) and LBA (right) mounds at Purić-Ljubanj, marked with red dots.����������� 116 Figure 5.2: A suggestion for the early (possibly MBA) appearance of the Purić-Ljubanj necropolis.������� 117 Figure 5.3: Mound-site intervisibility.����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 124 Figure: 5.4: Visibility of other mound sites from Purić-Ljubanj.���������������������������������������������������������������������� 125 Table 1.1: Number of tumuli on individual cemetery and site surfaces.������������������������������������������������������� 12 Table 3.1: Vessel-type series for Tumulus 2.������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37 Table 3.2: Fabric series for Purić-Ljubanj. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40 Table 4.1: Relationship between fabric and vessel types.������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 102

iv

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank The Leverhulme Trust, The Croatia Ministry of Culture and The Stjepan Gruber Museum, Županja for the initial funding that allowed research at Purić-Ljubanj to commence. Further thanks must be given to the Stjepan Gruber Museums director, Janja Juzbašić and all of the staff at the museum for their extended support with equipment, office facilities, administration and logistics through the early years of the project’s duration. We also are grateful for the cooperation and guidance offered by Marko Mikolašević in his role as conservator for the region. Purić-Ljubanj sits in land owned by The Croatian Forestry Commission and we are grateful for the co-operation they have offered throughout the project and for their vision in allowing Purić-Ljubanj to become a permanently protected site. We are also grateful to The Mayoral Office, Vrbanja for all the support received ‘in kind’ in the early years of our research, and more recently for including us in the village plan, funding, and administrative support. This project would not have been possible without the many students from The University of Southampton and National Taiwan University who have attended our field schools over many years, some returning numerous times. These students were lucky to have working alongside them a number of local residents who taught us so much about the forest, about how to use a spade properly (!), and about the true meaning of camaraderie. Mirko, Ilija, Pavo, and, again, Tunja and Bukvin – we owe you a debt of gratitude. It was always the intention that this project would be a collaborative venture with the local communities that live close to Purić-Ljubanj and we would particularly like to thank Ivan Ćosić Bukvin for all his endeavours over the years to share his wealth of knowledge of the region’s history, terrain and customs, and for facilitating a good relationship with the local media and the communities that became the bedrock that enabled our research to become embedded within the community of Vrbanja Village. Away from the site, but nonetheless most important, are those who have helped us write this book. We are most grateful to Stephen Hoskins for his undying patience in teaching Sandy to digitise drawings and for all his editorial input. We would also like to thank him for the two occasions he attended the dig as our artist in residence and the contribution this made to the two village opendays that he participated in. Finally, because archaeology must always take us away from our homes for lengthy periods of time while our families stay behind, our final thanks go to them for their generosity and forbearance in letting us go and dig! This book is dedicated to the people of Cvelferija.

v

Preface A look at the research of prehistory in the Spačva-Ljubanj-Studva interfluve In the area of ​​the Spačva forests, belonging to the Spačva-Ljubanj-Studva interfluve, the so-called Cvelferija, or the Vrbanja Municipality in the cadastral communities of Vrbanja, Soljani and Strošinci, and the forests of Vrbanja and Štrošinci, there are many hitherto unexplored prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. Adhering to the recent and indisputably proven thesis based on substantiated material and other available evidence the area of ​​Cvelferija and the Bosut interfluve, was far more than just the watery and forested emptiness that past administrative authorities have tended to present it as The latest archaeological research has placed the area, and, with it, the village of Vrbanja, in a broader historical context, i.e. outside the boundaries of the generally accepted idea of historical darkness and ‘nothingness’ of the area. Looking back to the pre-war past, we should not be surprised by the lack of interest shown by the former Yugoslavia’s powers that be, which were not interested in the systematic historical exploration of the border area of ​​Bosut, artificially created in 1945, and thus Cvelferija itself, except for the town of Vinkovci, where, as much as one may want to, one cannot ignore the Roman, and the much older Sopot culture. However, one must really give recognition to the efforts of the ‘Society of Museum Friends’ in Županja and to several of its members who, through their work, tried to bring out of oblivion many historical sites and folk traditions, mainly in the area of Županja ​​ and its surroundings, while Cvelferija and the forests around the river Spačva were, regrettably, only briefly touched upon in the research expeditions. Following these and other such activities, with the lack of interest of the wider social community of the time, prehistoric, Celtic, Roman, Medieval and possibly Ottoman sites and some traditions, as well as original source material in Cvelferija, were reduced to the well-known ‘Zvizdan grad’ and the legend of ‘Alšan monastery’. With the aim of getting to know the misunderstood and neglected history of the Bosut interfluve and Cvelferija in recent decades, several amateur historians, such as Mr Tomislav Lunka, with several short works and three books about the village of Soljani; Luka Maroševac, with his publications on the village of Račinovci; Stjepan Bogutovac, with his works on the village of Gunja; and Ms Vera Erl and the late Father Marko Đidara, with their researches on the village of Drenovci. Andrija Matić is the driving force for historical knowledge on Rajevo Selo, and the monograph on the village of Strošinci by the late Mr. Zlatko Filipović is also highly relevant. The five books on Vrbanja, together with several other works related to this area, by Ivan Ćosić-Bukvin occupy a special place within the historical literature on Šokci, the Bosut interfluve, Srijem, Slavonija, the military border, and beyond. It cannot be denied that the role of the above researchers, and several small associations, which bring together the lovers of history and other aspects of cultural expression within this area, would be more significant if the social community at the level of the Croatian State had more understanding for its eastern regions of Slavonija and Srijem, which cannot be replaced by the occasional, however generous, help from the local communities, some of which are in financial trouble themselves. New knowledge, which is breaking through the prehistoric/historical ‘darkness’ in the area of Cvelferija and, especially, the municipality of Vrbanja and beyond (Bosut interfluve), is materialising after fifteen years of research on the Bronze Age prehistoric site of Purić-Ljubanj with its numerous burial mounds/tumuli. This discovery of a completely new culture with a hitherto unknown ritual way of burying the cremated remains of the deceased, prompted the discovery of several other sites of the same and other cultures, and has, somewhat, changed the established opinion about vi

the past of our region, which was generally and, perhaps with a hint of malice, considered to have been ‘all forest and water’, especially in prehistory. The site of the archaeological excavations and researches into the prehistoric burial mounds/ tumuli in the cadastral municipality of Vrbanja, is located near the spring of the river Ljubanj, in the area around the Zagreb-Lipovac-Belgrade highway and near the settlement of Spačva. The site, which is now protected, consists of 117 mounds (while there are about ten such sites with hundreds of mounds in the Strošinci and Soljani forests, some of which are 30 m in diameter and 2 m high). This site, like the others, dates to the Late Bronze Age, which means that the age of these cremation graves is about 3500 BP. This discovery of a completely new culture with a ritual, hitherto unknown, way of burying the dead has provoked many discussions among the people of Vrbanja municipality and beyond, and has somewhat changed the attitude about the past of our region. The field research was conducted by the now former archaeologist of the Županja Museum Andreja Malovoz, Dr Sandy Budden Hoskins and the teams from The University of Southampton, England, who are joined by a team of professionally trained archaeologists from the University of Taiwan, Dr Mu-Chun Wu and others, and the students of archaeology and the field advisor Ivan Ćosić Bukvin. Several other sites unrelated to this prehistoric culture were found, mostly below the river Studva, around the already well-known medieval toponym Vojtiševci. In several places it was enough to follow the excavations made by the wild boar and find fragments of pottery at a depth of about 25 cm. There are several such new sites in the forests and fields of Vrbanja as well, which the locals of all villages have been paying more attention to for some time now, informing the lovers of our historical rarities. The historical picture from ancient times until the time of the liberation from the Turks is thus slowly being put together with these and similar discoveries. The new culture relies on those closest in this area at that time, i.e. with ceramics similar to the Belegiš II type, while the method of burial in mounds is most similar to one of the Vatin culture variants. Sandy Budden Hoskins wrote in the journal Contributions of the Institute of Archaeology in Zagreb in 2013, a paper titled ‘Complex of prehistoric mounds Purić-Ljubanj near Vrbanja in the Spačva basin, Županjska Posavina’, and Andreja Malovoz in 2015 wrote a paper in the proceedings of the University of Heidelberg, Identitäten/Identitets Interdiziplinäre Perspektiven, entitled ‘Late Bronze Age Place-Based Identity in Županjska posavina’. This significant prehistoric discovery has also been widely promoted in the works of I. Ćosić in various magazines and TV programmes, and in several publications that accompanied the various phases of these works. Many stakeholders from the local community and beyond assisted in the research, and gradually the attitude of the local community changed from the opinion that ‘these are Roman tombs’, which was already disputed in the late 1920s when a number of ‘educated people’ explored for their own interests, i.e. dug the largest mound/tumulus at Purić-Ljubanj. Today, the entire Cvelferija region has a different attitude towards research and joins the project in various activities. The attitude of the social community (rural communities from the places mentioned and beyond) towards its history and heritage has now radically changed and both local villagers and officials are understanding that this significant archaeological discovery can be used for tourism purposes. Archaeological/historical research in Cvelferija in recent times Archaeological sites in Cvelferija, even though poorly researched (especially those of prehistoric times), nevertheless give us certain indications of life and settlements at that time in the area. One such site, from the Middle Bronze Age, the old brickyard in Gunja along the banks of the Sava. The first research here was undertaken by the Županja Museum under the leadership of the curator Višnja Plemić, after having been informed by the workers at the brickyard, which opened in 1983, that there were unusual objects being found. Plemić reported on this research in her paper, Zaštitno arheološko iskopavanje na Ciglani u Gunji (1983) on the research in her paper about the rescue excavations at the Gunja brickyard’, in which there are drawings of the materials found. vii

Over the course of a century the site on the elevation was almost completely destroyed, thus only two excavation trenches could be opened according to Ms. Plemić. Thus, an area of only 30 m2 was explored, where a cultural layer, 1 m thick, was found in the trenches at a depth of 1.50 m. Various materials were found, as well as parts of earthenware, some stone tools, and two bronze objects only. The pottery found could be classified into three types: fine, transitional, and coarse. During the excavations and work on the trenches, the floor of a house was found. At the same time as the trenches were excavated, attention was being paid to the ground in the immediate vicinity of the trenches, where many other interesting materials related to the brickyard were found. Workers from the brickyard gave some the objects found, among which was a decorated bronze pin, to the local primary school. Not far from the two trenches was a flooded part in which there were burnt wooden beams, under which were many ceramic remains. Based on the materials found, the archaeological site, of which only its marginal part has remained over time, was classified as a type of settlement of the older phase of the Surčin group. In 2003, in the journal Opuscula Archeologica, Boško Marijan of the Županja Museum also wrote about the site, as well as one at Dubovo, near the highway at Županja, which was mostly destroyed during the construction of the road in 1946–1950. The author did not add much new information on the Gunja ‘Brickyard’ site, except that some Litzen pottery was found, made of levigated clay with additions of crushed calcite, and that the ceramic vessels were of the cylindrical type. Classifying the site and its finds, Boško Marijan writes: ‘As the highest concentration of pottery finds with ornaments was discovered in Austria and Hungary and northern Croatia, it is understandable that authors from these countries, each in their own way, discussed the origin and the techniques of Litzen decoration manufacture in more detail, that is, they already culturally and chronologically defined this interesting phenomenon.’ Litzen pottery was also discovered in Slovenia and Slovakia, then in north-eastern and central Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in central Dalmatia. The finds of pottery with Litzen ornaments in Vojvodina, primarily in Srijem, have a special place in terms of considering the cultural and chronological relations with east Slavonian sites. Litzen pottery finds its predecessors in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age cultures of central Europe, western Pannonia and the eastern Alps, and is divided into older ‘A’ and younger ‘B’ stages, representing an independent cultural phenomenon in Austria, western Hungary, and, possibly, north-western Croatia. Litzen pottery is the name for a specific type of prehistoric pottery decorated with a cloth imprint. Today, the Gunja ‘Brickyard’ falls within the spatial plan of the Municipality of Gunja (PPUO Gunja) as the undefined prehistoric site of ‘Bogutovac’, and, as such, is placed within the ‘Environmental Protection Study of Croatian Waters’ from 2016. Cvelferija, clearly, was neither uninhabited nor deserted, and was featured in another of Dr Marijan’s publications ‘A Find of the Vučedol Culture from Županjska Posavina’. In this work, the author deals with ceramic material from the Stjepan Gruber Museum in Županja, which originates from the ‘Hunting House’ site not far from the ‘Zvizdan’ fortress (Krnić forest, Soljani) near Studva. The site and finds were discovered in 1953 during the construction of a hunting lodge (during a recent visit to the site, the author and a team of experts also found pottery in the roots of a fallen oak) when workers were digging its foundations. In addition to photographs of all the 19 ceramic finds, the author adds an extensive description of the pottery, noting that the vessels were of various types, made of levigated clay with the addition or combination of crushed calcite, and with motifs belonging to the Late Neolithic and Eneolithic. These were from at least 14 vessels belonging to different periods and cultures; most of these finds belong to various types of Vučedol culture products, from the Eneolithic. In his recently published book Soljani Through the Past, Tomislav Lunka dedicates one chapter to several prehistoric objects from the Stone Age found at two sites in the Soljani area. The ‘Drageljina’ site revealed a stone axe of rough workmanship, while another (finely worked) axe, together with viii

some other objects, were found at a location not far from Popovac. Some finds were also recovered from the ‘Selište’ site; other stone tools were discovered at ‘Orgovci’. All this material was collected by individuals while cultivating the land, which points to an unbroken thread of life from the Stone Age to the present. One of the few works that comprehensively touches on the prehistoric and historical sites of the Bosut interfluve, including Cvelferija, is Kornelija Minichreiter’s Archaeological topography of Županjska Posavina. A Contribution to the knowledge of the past from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages (1995). The author begins with the first known archaeological finds held by various officials and institutions, and details research in the area of interest here – Cvelferija – referring to the stone axe found in 1889 by Antun Bogutovac near Struga (Gunja), near the river Sava. This find was the first object from Županjska Posavina to come to the National Museum in Zagreb, and in the same year was recorded as such in the list of the archaeological department of the museum within its prehistoric collection. The next sites of interest to us referred to by Minichreiter are from the Sopot Culture period (Middle Neolithic), with the author stating (and quoting S. Dimitrijević) that there are three locations, one of which is located in Račinovci. From the Bronze Age, i.e. the time of the Urnfield Culture in the area, the author mentions a number of sites (21), which are in Podgajci (it is written wrongly as Podravski), Račinovci and Gunja, as well as along the watercourses north of Županja and northwest and northeast of Bosnjaci. In this, the author is relying on the research and publications of the research results by the former curator of the Zupanja Museum, Višnja Plemić. From the period of the Early Iron Age-Hallstatt, the author mentions only one unexplored site, in Vrbanja, which consists of five tumuli, and mentions a settlement on ‘Gradina’ (probably Kubar, i.e. Kolešvar), again referring to authors who reported this earlier (K. Vinski Gasparini and S. Ercegović). Late Iron Age/La Tène was not represented by sites or descriptions of finds in Cvelferija and beyond.1 One of the great connoisseurs and collectors of fine prehistoric and historical artifacts in the area of the villages of Podgajci and Rajevo selo was the late Josip Abramović Pištin (Jola), who had a very rich collection of various objects and who donated many finds to museums. Today, alas, this collection is broken up and lost, but his finds were written about in the newspapers of the time and in collections of papers; many serious researchers have used his knowledge and parts of his collection, begun in the 1950s.

Ivan Ćosić Bukvin, March 2021

There are for certain two La Tène sites – ‘Omete’, in the village of Đurići, with finds of coins, and another at the confluence of the Smogvica Smogva and Studva in the Debrinja forest within Strošinci, with evidence of pottery. 1

ix

Introduction This monograph draws on the primary data provided by eight years of archaeological research from 2008–2015 at the Bronze Age tumuli cemetery of Purić-Ljubanj and the surrounding area in the county of Vukovar-Syrmia in eastern Croatia. It also addresses the growing evidence that Purić-Ljubanj is just one of numerous such cemeteries spaced across the region. After placing Purić-Ljubanj in its historic and geographic context, and presenting the data, we examine the role that skill, performance and a continuous project of landscape creation played in stabilising the lives of this cultural group living on the margins between a number of other established groups with strong identity markers. In Chapter 1 the research history of Purić-Ljubanj is presented highlighting the collaborative nature of the research undertaken. A core part of the research at Purić-Ljubanj has been, from the start, systematic reconnaissance and survey. In this chapter results of survey are presented and rationales given for the way in which research proceeded. Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its archaeological context is, of course, necessary, and thus Chapter 2 concentrates on introducing the known regional Bronze Age chronologies for the region, the geographic extent and overlap of the cultural groups present and the relationships between them; the main material culture repertoires and customs for each of the groups forms the basis of these discussions A core component of this monograph is to present the data from eight years of excavation. Thus, Chapter 3 provides detailed information on the phases and the nature of construction of the three tumuli within the cemetery excavated. Each burial and its contents, generally pottery and cremated human and animal bone, are discussed in detail and illustrated with either photographs or digitised illustrations. The general nature of the pottery assemblages is discussed alongside detailed descriptions and illustrations of key vessel forms and decoration. A pottery type series is established and parallels given, providing information to support hard dating evidence and cultural affiliations. Throughout an analysis of skill is also made which carries forward into the first interpretive chapter of the monograph, Chapter 4. The focus of interpretation in Chapter 4 is to interrogate the way in which the narrow range of available resources was ‘translated’ into meaningful, culturally enacted performances that relied on inherited knowledge and skill. The geology of the region is presented and the identified resources that are drawn on by the community are then discussed in more detail. Following from this a résumé of why and how a discussion of skill is relevant to understanding the social role of the cemetery is made. Tumuli construction and pottery methods are investigated through the lens of skilled performance, and a conclusion offered as to the insights this brings to an understanding of Purić-Ljubanj. The findings in terms of production of meaningful relationships between the people and their environments are discussed in Chapter 5 – ‘Scales of Performance at Purić-Ljubanj: assembling the cemetery, the landscape, and the dead’. Analyses of tumuli building activities, survey results, as well as intra-and inter-site spatial analyses, are used here to consider the way that Purić-Ljubanj sits within the wider landscape and to assess the impact of the different scales of embodied ritual activities on the burial landscape creation. This synthesis includes how the symbolic and social worlds were incorporated into the environment and what was the perceived level of agency ascribed to the funerary materiality of the group, and assesses how the production of unique cultural frames of reference, and associated ontological categories, relate to the broader psychosocial question of cultural marginality in the prehistory of the region. x

Chapter 6 (‘Life on the Margins: Conclusions and the Future’) looks at the key themes of importance that emerge from research at Purić-Ljubanj and the immediate area, in particular the relevance of regional research, particularly in borderland or ‘marginalised’ communities, aiming at a fuller understanding of the Bronze Age in Central Europe. Finally, the impact of the research on the village of Vrbanja and surrounding region is explored, as are plans for future research - in particular exploration of the newly discovered Bronze Age Tell of Tezga, which, as far as we can tell at this early stage, is contemporary to Purić-Ljubanj and the surrounding burial landscape.

xi

Chapter 1

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj Research history and initial survey at Purić-Ljubanj Purić-Ljubanj is situated in the Spačva Forest near Vrbanja and was discovered during a 2007 recognisance season. Even though the Županja Museum archives from the 1960s mentioned the existence of five tumuli at Kubarsko Polje, only 2.5 km away from Purić-Ljubanj, these were never explored and are today barely visible due to intensive ploughing. The discovery of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj in 2007, therefore, presented a research opportunity unique for the region. The initial field-walking included a hand-held GPS survey and suggested that over a hundred mounds of different sizes (104 to be precise, Figure 1.1) were situated on an area encompassing c. 5 ha of forest land. Local oral tradition suggested that one of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj had been subject to an unsystematic excavation by a group of engineers who worked on the construction of the Sava River embankment in the late 1920s and that, at the time, some ‘dishes’ were found and removed (Ivan Ćosić, pers. comm.). Soon after the start of the research project it transpired that the oral history was, indeed, accurate, as evidence of damage to the top of one of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj was confirmed in the course of the preliminary survey (Figure 1.2) and subsequent excavations. In 2008, a collaborative project between the Županja Museum and the University of Southampton was launched with the aim of investigating the nature of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj, the timespan and process of their construction, as well as their relationship with the wider landscape, in order to learn about the people who built and used these tumuli. The excavations and surveys lasted for eight years (2008–2015) with the National Taiwan University joining the project in 2011. In the course of fieldwork, the excavations were conducted simultaneously on three mounds at the site. The GIS analysis of the data collected during the total station site surface survey was conducted in 2011 and 2012 and the number of clearly detectable mounds at the site was established to be 117. In 2011, through contacts with the local community, it came to light that there were additional mounded sites to be found in the forest running in the south-easterly direction. In 2012 ground reconnaissance and a systematic GPS survey of the Spačva Forest area started and another eighteen mounded sites of differing sizes and complexities were discovered this and the following year. Trial excavations were conducted at two of these sites (B and J) to find out whether there was evidence of comparable construction processes or material finds between Purić-Ljubanj and other mounded sites in the region. The test pits on the two sites proved positive, with evidence in the form of oxidised layers and Bronze Age pottery. Excavation strategy In 2008, an area comprised of three tumuli and the space between them, which included the tumulus identified as having been robbed in the 1920s (Tumulus 1) and the two nearby tumuli (Tumulus 2 and Tumulus 3), was chosen to be systematically excavated (see Budden et al. 2013). This selection was based on the above-mentioned research aims, but included some pragmatic considerations as well. Firstly, this part of the cemetery, situated at the edge of the forest, contained comparatively fewer large oak trees than the rest of the site. Secondly, the inclusion of Tumulus 1 provided a unique opportunity not only to explore its origins, but also to determine the nature of the unsystematic excavations which took place in its more recent past, and, thereby, assess whether the local oral history held true. Thirdly, and most importantly, as the mounds at the 1

Figure 1.1: Initial GPS survey data from Purić-Ljubanj.

Mediating Marginality

2

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj

Figure 1.2: Damaged mound.

Purić-Ljubanj cemetery were of different sizes, it was found necessary to explore this variability to try and understand its cause. In that sense, this part of the cemetery was found to present an ideal opportunity, as Tumulus 2, one of the smaller mounds at the cemetery, lay nestled between the two larger ones. Additionally, Tumulus 3, of a similar size to Tumulus 1, was undamaged, and thereby offered an opportunity for direct comparison and supplementation of any information which could have been missing from Tumulus 1. Lastly, the close proximity of the three mounds, particularly of Tumuli 2 and 3, allowed for the exploration of the space between them and the investigation of their immediate spatial relationships. These decisions resulted in the delineation of an excavation area of 25 m x 80 m situated at the southern edge of the site (Figure 1.3). After this area has been cleared of smaller forest growth, a 2 m x 2 m grid was set up to facilitate a systematic appraisal of surface finds. The subsequent fieldwalking, however, resulted in little evidence, as only a few pieces of un-diagnostic pottery and some charcoal, none of which formed any sort of clustering, were to be found on the surface of the selected area. The most constraining factor for the development of a productive excavation strategy was the existence of fully grown trees, which were protected and could not be felled, on the tumuli. To avoid as much as possible damaging the trees and their roots, the decision was taken to proceed with excavation in several trenches. The extent of actual excavations conducted can be seen from Figure 1.4. Two trenches were placed on Tumulus 1 (Figure 1.5). Trench 1 was placed to explore the stratigraphy of this mound’s central area, which included the extent of the damage due to the aforementioned looting episode. Trench 2 was opened to explore the stratigraphy of the periphery of Tumulus 1 and determine if there were any traces of a surrounding construction, or a ditch, at its perimeter.

3

Mediating Marginality

Figure 1.3: The excavation area.

4

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj

Figure 1.4: The extent of the excavations.

Figure 1.5: Position of trenches on Tumulus 1.

5

Mediating Marginality

Figure 1.6: Position of trenches on Tumuli 2 and 3.

As mentioned, the closeness of Tumuli 2 and 3 allowed for the exploration of their direct spatial relationship. To accomplish this two trenches were placed accordingly, which were to meet at the mid-point between these two mounds. Trench 3 encompassed the area from this mid-point to the centre of Tumulus 3, while the adjacent Trench 4 included the full diameter of Tumulus 2 and stretched beyond its periphery (Figure 1.6), whereby it accomplished the same purpose as that of the combined Trenches 1 and 2 on Tumulus 1. To enable continuous in situ interpretation, all four trenches were excavated simultaneously, which enabled the ongoing comparison of their stratigraphies. Prior to excavations, geophysical and topographic surveys were conducted across the excavation area. Following these results and the placement of two trial trenches, it was decided to open up yet another excavation trench on Tumulus 2, Trench 5. Geophysical survey at Purić-Ljubanj Preceding the excavations, an attempt to view potential underground structures was made through geo-radar and resistivity surveys on the three selected mounds and the space between them (Figure 1.7). The geo-radar survey was conducted by transecting the mounds 42 times in two grids, one 26 m x 20 m, and another 20 m x 10 m. The two grids were transected in N–S and NW–SE directions respectively, with the scanning depth of 5. The resistivity survey was conducted in four transects across Tumulus 2 and Tumulus 3 and the area between them. Due to its heavily damaged condition, Tumulus 1 was not subject to resistivity survey. Initially it seemed that the geophysical survey had detected some distinct areas of disturbance, as well as a few more pronounced individual anomalies across the site, which was regarded as helpful in guiding further excavation strategy. At the same time, there was an acute awareness of the ambiguity of the Tumulus 1 geo-radar data, where the results might as well have been pointing towards robbing episode of the 1920s and subsequent wildlife disturbance. As well as the disturbance to Tumulus 1, the geo-radar results showed a potential subterranean structure in 6

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj

Figure 1.7: Results of geo-radar and resistivity surveys.

7

Mediating Marginality

Figure 1.8: Diagnostic pottery from Trial Trench 1, the first conclusive evidence to be found at Purić-Ljubanj (drawing: Lisa Waldock).

Figure 1.9: Results of the gradiometry survey (50cm resolution) conducted at Purić-Ljubanj in 2019.

8

Figure 1.10: DEM and contour models of the Purić-Ljubanj cemetery.

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj

9

Mediating Marginality the vicinity of Tumulus 2, and, accordingly, a trial trench (Trial Trench 2) was opened in this area. This trial trench was excavated to a depth of 1.2 m, but, aside from a small piece of undiagnostic pottery and an insignificant amount of charcoal, it yielded no data. The results of the resistivity survey, similarly, showed a clearer anomaly between Tumuli 2 and 3, where Trial Trench 1 was consequently placed. This trial trench yielded a small spread of diagnostic, conjoinable Belegiš II sherds (Figure 1.8.), providing first evidence of a potential date for the site. In association with this pottery, a spread of cremated bone was also found, which has later been identified as fragments of child’s crania. In spite of the overall success of Trial Trench 1, the impression remained that it was highly unlikely that the evidence found in this trench would in any way be related to that picked up by the georadar and the resistivity meter. The subsequent excavations proved this site to be entirely made of layers of clay, with no traces of central grave constructions, with finds distributed in relatively thin layers and with interfering tree roots and animal burrows spread out across the site. It was, therefore, concluded that the general usefulness of conducting a geo-radar and resistivity surveys on a site of this kind in the future would be slight, if any. In 2019, a gradiometry survey, conducted over the 80 m x 60m grid at the southern part of PurićLjubanj, gave more conclusive evidence than the above-mentioned, earlier geophysical surveys. Figure 1.9 shows the areas of burning, some of which clearly match the excavation results (the burnt burial platform in Trench 3). GPS and topographic survey at Purić-Ljubanj The preliminary GPS survey at Purić-Ljubanj suggested the presence of 104 tumuli clustered in the vicinity of the Ljubanj River; this figure was subsequently raised to 117 following further analysis of the total station measurements. The total station survey was conducted to determine the number of mounds over the site, as well as to make a record of their sizes, shapes and mutual

Figure 1.11: Map of mounded sites discovered in the Spačva Forest to date.

10

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj spatial relationships at the cemetery. This survey was done at a resolution of 1 m x1 m across the excavation area, 2 m x 2 m across the remaining tumuli, and 3 m x 3 m on the low ground between the mounds. The resulting digital elevation model (DEM) of the cemetery and the surrounding terrain, covering 96,422 m2, can be seen in Figure 1.10, together with a follow-on 10-cm contour representation. The results revealed Purić-Ljubanj to be of uneven shape and covering 51,291 m2 of the forest. The base diameters of the mounds were found to range from 9.38 m – 30.56 m, and their heights from just 25 cm to 1.8 m, thereby demonstrating considerable variation. These dimensions, of course, cannot be taken as representing the original sizes of the mounds which have, over time, been subject to slippage of the building material, and, especially, erosion and sedimentation from the frequent flooding of the area. The dimensions are, additionally, skewed due to the considerable build-up of loam over time, particularly in the areas between the mounds. All the same, the variations in mound size detected by the topographic survey were by no means random, which will be discussed further in Chapter 5. Tumulus 1 was found to be 1.8 m high, with a base diameter of 28 m; the height of Tumulus 2 was 97 cm, and its base diameter 17 m; Tumulus 3 was 1.5 m high, with a base diameter of 22 m. These dimensions represent the present-day sizes of the mounds. What the topographic survey results also exposed was that two of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj were of a different shape, with elongated rather than circular bases; the exact nature of these anomalies, however, can only be revealed through future excavations. On the whole, despite an initial impression of considerable morphological variability of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj, the topographic survey results show that all but the above mentioned two mounds are rounded in form. It was concluded that the first impression of variability was, therefore, brought about by the fact that some of the tumuli were built close to each other and that they have seemingly joined

Figure 1.12: Lidar scanning of four sites was conducted in 2016. Site J (top left), site C (top right), site D (bottom left) and site B (bottom right).

11

Mediating Marginality

Table 1.1: Number of tumuli on individual cemetery and site surfaces.

together over time due to the erosion referred to above, as well as sedimentation, collapse, and loam build-up. Surveys and trial excavations on other mounded cemeteries in the area The survey of the terrain surrounding Purić-Ljubanj confirmed it to be quite flat, which would make this site additionally stand out in the landscape. As many questions concerning the decision to build a highly visible place of commemoration in such a flat landscape were raised by the discovery of Purić-Ljubanj, it became of crucial importance to establish whether the cemetery represented an isolated phenomenon, or whether there were additional similar sites hidden in the forest. In 2012 a systematic GPS survey began in order to clarify the ever increasing number of local oral reports of more cemeteries of a similar character to Purić-Ljubanj lying across the Spačva Forest. This work has enabled eighteen further mounded cemeteries to be mapped (Figure 1.11) in the 2012–2015 period, thereby bringing their current number to nineteen and confirming the moundbuilding practice as an established phenomenon in this area in the Bronze Age. During this initial landscape survey, points were taken with a hand-held GPS device for each tumulus on each of the newly discovered sites. The numbers of tumuli on each cemetery were found to vary considerably, ranging from a single tumulus at two of the smallest sites to 178 mounds on the largest of the locations discovered so far. Despite this variation, the tumuli are visually very similar to those at Purić-Ljubanj. Test pits, placed at two sites (B and J), revealed yellow-ochre, levigated clay-capping consistent with that found at Purić-Ljubanj, and some pottery and charcoal recovered at a depth commensurate with the first finds from Purić-Ljubanj. Additional, detailed topographic surveys were conducted at four of the sites (B, D, E and J) in 2016 through terrestrial LiDAR scanning (Figure 1.12), and, in 2017, all of the mounded cemetery perimeters were measured with a total station to enable their precise mapping and official protection by the Croatian Ministry of Culture. All of the mounded site surfaces, and the numbers of tumuli they contain, can be seen in Table 1.1. As the sites were measured so as to facilitate their protection, an additional belt, 10 m wide, was added all around their perimeters, while preserving their original shapes (Figure 1.13). 12

Research History, Survey and Excavation Strategy at Purić-Ljubanj

Figure 1.13: The shapes of the eighteen mounded cemeteries in the Spačva Forest measured in 2017 (the shapes of sites B and I are not visible due to their small size).

13

Chapter 2

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context Despite its uniform lowland character, the eastern Croatian region did not make up a culturally uniform area in the past. In the Bronze Age various cultural groups can be found here, often with many regional variations. The current understanding of the Bronze Age in the wider area of the southern Pannonian Basin is that the culturally relatively simple picture of the Early Bronze Age (EBA) transformed into the evermore complex one of the Middle (MBA), and especially Late Bronze Age (LBA), as the trend for fragmentation of larger cultural complexes and increases in the number of smaller cultural groups gradually emerged. Additionally, more often than not, the archaeological evidence conveys that the borders of cultural regions do not match the geographical ones. Regional Bronze Age chronologies, groups, and research history In the EBA a large cultural entity, known as the Danubian-Balkan complex, formed in the southeastern part of the Pannonian Basin and central Balkans. The Moriška and Vinkovci groups were its representatives in the Pannonian-Danubian region. Later periods brought about the fragmentation of this great cultural complex, while the cultural patterns in this region, closely linked with those in the Carpathian and Lower Danube regions, started to differ from those of the western Balkans and other parts of Pannonia. A part of this complex was the Vatin group, which crossed the regional boundaries of Pannonia, entering western Serbia and the Podrinje areas in the form of its west-Serbian variant. At the same time, the remaining, larger area of the Pannonian region was culturally more closely connected to the northern Pannonian areas and the Alpine region. The contacts between these two areas are, nevertheless, evident, with the central European link manifested mostly in the metal inventory of the Vatin group (Garašanin 1983a). The LBA period shows similar traits. While the Urnfield Culture phenomenon was spreading in the western part of the Pannonian-Danubian region, its eastern part, and the Banat area in particular, saw a very strong internal evolution with an influx of new elements. This internal evolution can be seen in the relationship of Vatin’s later stage Belegiš-Ilandža I with the cemeteries of BelegišIlandža II type, while the stream of new elements from the Carpathian region is manifested in the expansion of the Gava finds. The mechanism of circulation of these new phenomena in the Pannonian-Danubian region is uncertain. What is certain, however, is that a complex process took place during this turbulent period, evidenced by numerous hoards of metal objects which were accumulating throughout the Panonian-Danubian area, while further south they were a rare occurrence (Garašanin 1983a: 462). In the period between the beginnings of the 13th until the last decades of the 8th century BC, the Urnfield Culture developed across a substantial part of the European continent. The southernmost branch of the Urnfield Culture with mid-Danubian characteristics is comprised of a series of interconnected and related groups located on the south-western edge of the Pannonian basin, bounded by the Sava and Drava rivers. The Urnfield complex is considered to have been a result of the new material and cultural circumstances, and the new social relations grounded in the horizontal stratification of the population caused by the rapid development of metallurgy, trade, and craft specialization. The extensive production of metal objects went beyond the immediate regional industries and provided the possibility of determination of the workshop centres and the information on the prehistoric trade routes. The most conspicuous feature of the Urnfield culture were the burials of the cremated remains of the dead in urns, which were usually placed in flat graves located in large cemeteries and often accompanied with jewellery, weapons, tools, or other

14

Figure 2.1: Late Bronze Age groups in the region (after Ložnjak Dizdar 2005: 35).

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context

15

Mediating Marginality grave goods (Dizdar et al. 2011; Karavanić 2009; Kristiansen 2000; Vinski-Gasparini 1973; 1983a; 1983b). As Ksenija Vinski-Gasparini mentions in her synthesis, a number of cultural groups in the Carpathian Basin, which, as early as the beginning of the MBA, exhibited the same ritual and burial method, were, despite different characteristics of material inventory, often referred to as Urnfield. This, she continues, led to their confusion with the culturally and temporally clearly defined Urnfield Culture of the central European area, and applies especially to the Belegiš group in Vojvodina (Vinski-Gasparini 1983a: 547). The Belegiš group was singled out by Nikola Tasić (1967) in the late 1960s as an independent group outside the Urnfield Culture complex, while Milutin Garašanin preferred the term Vojvodina-group of transitional period (Garašanin 1983a). At the time of its later, Belegiš II horizon, the western boundary of the Belegiš group territory in Srijem was reached by the southernmost complex of the Urnfield Culture (Vinski-Gasparini 1983a: 549). The discovery of Purić-Ljubanj has placed this border slightly further south-west, in the area between the villages of Bošnjaci and Vrbanja in Županjska Posavina. For the map of LBA groups in today’s continental Croatia, see Figure 2.1. Late Bronze Age groups in Županjska Posavina Even though Županjska Posavina has not been extensively explored by archaeologists, given its strategic position in the Sava Basin, on the routes towards the ore-rich Bosnian Mountains, it was reasonable to suppose that this region would be rich in LBA settlements and cemeteries. Two major groups belonging to the beginning of the LBA have been identified in this region – Belegiš II and Barice-Gređani (Ložnjak Dizdar 2005: 34–5; Marijan 2010: 145). Both are considered to have originated at the end of the Br C2 period and extended into the Br D and Ha A1 (Marijan 2010: 150). The Belegiš II group originated in Srijem at the end of Br C2 period and spans all of Br D and Ha A1 (after Reinecke) (Vinski-Gasparini 1983a: 547–646; Tasić 1974: 241). With the discovery of PurićLjubanj and the related Spačva sites, a new mound-building burial phenomenon was established in Županjska Posavina and a third possible influence came into play (Budden et al. 2013). The closest similarities in terms of burial practice can be found within the cemeteries of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin (Ložnjak Dizdar 2014; Malovoz 2015). Belegiš II group It is understood that the Belegiš II originated in Srijem at the end of Br C2 and spanned all of Br D and Ha A1 (Tasić 1974: 241; Vinski-Gasparini 1973: 28; 1983a: 547–646;). The Belegiš cultural group as a whole includes its Belegiš I and II phases (Br A2/B1 – Br D/Ha A1) and emerges at the end of the MBA Vatin group (Dizdar 1999: 34; Ložnjak 2002: 65; Tasić 1974: 233–234; 2003: 192). Even though the finds were dated to the end of the Middle and the Late Bronze Age ever since the early stages of research, the genesis and cultural connections of the group are still found to be a cause for debate. The finds are often linked to different cultures, usually to Vatin, Urnfield, or the Gava complexes. Belegiš was recognised as a distinct culture by Nikola Tasić (1974: 240–246; 2003b), who named it after the location of the Stojića Gumno site at Belegiš in Vojvodina. Prior to Tasić’s isolation of the group, Belegiš finds have been ascribed to other cultures and often referred to as Pannonian pottery, Pannonian goblets (M. Hoernest, G. Childe), Vrgac group (M. Grbić), Vrgac-Vatin type (M. Slavnik, M. Marijanski), the Urnfield Culture, the Flat urn-fields Culture (earlier N. Tasić), the Srijem variant of Vatin, the Belegiš-Ilandža stage of Vatin (M. Garašanin), the Regional variation of Vatin in Srem and southern Banat (D. Srejović), South-Belegiš-Ilandža (K. Vinski Gasparini), and the ‘channelled’ pottery of the transitional period (P. Medović). Other terms include BelegišIlandža, Surčin-Belegiš, Vatin-Belegiš, Be1egiš-Bobda, Belegiš-Cruceni and Pecska-Belegiš. More recently, Ljubo Bukvić made a synthesis of the Belegiš II stage of the culture, which he called the Gava complex of channelled pottery in Banat (2000). Nevertheless, since 1967 the term Belegiš 16

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context

Figure 2.2: Belegiš urns: a) Belegiš I; b) Belegiš II (after Coxon 2018: 109).

group or the Belegiš culture, introduced by Nikola Tasić (1967: 15) has been the one most widely accepted and used. According to Tasić (2003b), the different terms in use and the differences in opinion result from the complexity of the cultural interactions during the Bronze Age. He claims that his joining of the two phases into a single group is supported by the evidence from the cemeteries which were continuously in use through both phases, and which show no later disturbances or superposition of graves (Tasić 2003b). Figure 2.2. illustrates typical Belegiš urns of both phases. The cultural and temporal continuity between the late Vatin (or Belegiš I) and Belegiš II horizons is reconfirmed in Croatia, at the eastern Slavonian sites (Forenbaher 1989), where the first phase of Belegiš (the late phase of the Vatin Culture, i.e. its Vatin-Belegiš variant), represents a local predecessor from which the Belegiš II group developed (Forenbaher 1991). According to Tasić, the terms Belegiš-Cruceni, Belegiš-Bobda or Belegiš-Gava designate either phases of development or regional variants of this one and the same culture. Belegiš I and II stages were further subdivided into Belegiš I a–c and Belegiš II a–c. Tasić based this periodisation on the typology of the material from three necropolises: Stojića Gumno, Karaburma, and Vojlovica. At the eponymous necropolis of Stojića Gumno in Belegiš, three phases were distinguished: an initial phase (formation of culture), an earlier phase with its sub-phases (Belegiš Ia–c), and a later period with its sub-phases (Belegiš IIa–c) (Vranić 2002; Tasić 2003b). This division found an equivalent in Szentmiklosi’s proposition (2010) for the division of Cruceni-Belegiš into three distinct stages, phases I–III, where phase III is marked by the use of the elements of the Gava complex (such as channelled garlands). The end of the Belegiš Culture is thought to have coincided with the appearance of a large number of hoards of bronze artefacts which marked the end of the Bronze Age in the north of the Balkan Peninsula. The expansion of the Belegiš culture northwards is considered to have been prevented by people of the Tumulus Culture, who were, at the time, in the northern Bačka and Banat (Trogmayer and Szekeres 1968: 7) (Figure 2.3). South of the Sava and Danube, Belegiš pottery has been found only in a narrow zone by the Danube in the Belgrade area, and it has not been registered further south, possibly prevented by the carriers of the Paraćin Culture (Tasić 2003b: 171; Ljuština 2017: 339).

17

Mediating Marginality

Figure 2.3: The areas of Tumulus and Belegiš (I and II) Cultures in Vojvodina (after: Tasić 1974, Pl. 24).

The cremation necropolis of Stojića Gumno was also used for defining the final phase of the Vatin Culture (its Belegiš-Ilandža phase). For this, the terms Belegiš II-Gava Culture and Gava cultural complex also appeared in the archaeological literature. Many authors find the division of the Belegiš (or Cruceni-Belegiš) Culture, in the Belegiš I (considered to either represent the final phase of the Vatin, or a distinct culture/cultural group) and Belegiš II (or Belegiš II-Gava) groups to be an artificial one, causing confusion around the issues concerning the end of the Bronze Age within a large geographical area encompassing eastern Slavonia, Bačka, Srijem and Banat (Szentmiklosi 2010; Tasić 2003b). Their argument is the long evolution of the cremation necropolises coupled with the suggestion that it is unlikely that two distinct cultures would be using the same sacred spaces for their dead (Szentmiklosi 2010). Therefore, instead of the terms cultures or groups they prefer the terms phases or stages. Thus Szentmiklosi (2010) proposed a division of the culture in three distinct stages (Cruceni-Belegiš phases I–III), where stage III is marked by the use of the Gava complex elements, i.e. channelled garlands. As mentioned, the same was suggested by Tasić in 2003. The continuous development of the Belegiš Culture as a single, distinctive phenomenon that passed through stages (the early characterised by incised linear ornamentation and cord-impressed (Schnur) decoration, and the late represented by channelled pottery) has been studied by a number of Serbian, Romanian, Hungarian, and Croatian scholars (Forenbaher 1994: 49; Gumă 1997: 55, 65; Morintz 1978: 40–45; Tasić 1974: 243; 1984: 33; Trogmayer 1992: 351–355), while some other authors have accepted an assumption of two different cultures, as proposed by V. Trbuhović (1960: 163). This assumption supposes one culture to be represented by the vessels decorated with pseudocord ornamentation and the other by channelled ornamentation. The existence of transitional shapes and ornamentation types, however, together with the continuation of the cemeteries in Srijem and Banat through both phases, is seen as evidence against this assumption (Tasić 2003b). 18

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context The black-burnished pottery is thought to have come about due to the two influences that caused technological changes, namely the early Gava in the north-east and the early Urnfield in the north-west (Tasić 2003b). Therefore, at present, in spite of the different opinions of some authors, Belegiš is usually viewed as a unitary cultural and chronological entity with two basic phases of development – Belegiš I and II. In 1978, based on analogies between the discoveries from Belegiš and Cruceni, S. Morintz introduced the denomination Cruceni-Belegiš culture, which is used in Romanian archaeology (Szentmiklosi 2010). To sum up, the issues of the internal evolution and cultural contacts of the Belegiš Culture are subject to many hypotheses. The continuity between Belegiš I and Belegiš II phases is manifested in the burial rites, cremations in urns and the organisation of cemeteries. On the other hand, the ceramic finds show differences manifested in the appearance of some new pottery forms, pottery manufacture and decoration (the use of channelling), and the appearance of Gava-type pottery in the wider area. Attempts at achieving an overall view of the culture were and still are thwarted both by the limited research and, to a certain extent, by the lack of a unanimously agreed-upon terminology. Belegiš II sites The first finds, which are today attributed to this group, were discovered at the beginning of the 20th century by Josip Brunšmid at Surčin. Soon thereafter, a smaller settlement (Gradac) and a large necropolis (Stojića Gumno) were found at Belegiš. Excavations at the Stojića Gumno cemetery started in the mid 1950s by V. Trbuhović, and were continued by N. Tasić in 1964 (Trbuhović 1960; Tasić 1967). At around the same time, two large necropolises of the Belegiš Culture were excavated at Karaburma in Belgrade (Todorović 1977) and at Rospi Ćuprija (Todorović 1956). The smaller excavations in Banat (at Ilandža and Oregac) in the 1950s provided the data for this culture’s relation to the sites in Romania (Marijanski 1957: 5; Krstić 1962: 75), where a large number of Belegiš-Cruceni and Belegiš-Bobda sites have been registered in Caraş, Timiş and Aranca valleys. Since cemetery excavations have provided more representative materials than the excavations of the settlement sites, more information exists about Belegiš necropolises than settlements. The settlements are usually single-layered, short-lived, lowland types with only a few recorded hillforts (Tasić 2003a). The majority of the settlements belong to the later, Belegiš II stage (Tasić 2003a). The lowland settlement type is of a form typical for the region, found on slightly elevated ground, fitting the natural configuration of the terrain. The few examples of hill-fort settlements are built in dominant, easily defensible positions and are often surrounded by a moat (Garašanin 1983b). While the Belegiš II group is better known from the many sites in Serbian Bačka, Banat and Srijem, characteristic Belegiš II material was also found on several sites west of the Danube, in eastern Slavonia in Croatia (Forenbaher 1991). The periodisation of Belegiš II settlements was based on the Banat settlement of Gomolava, where horizon I is characterised by corded wares and horizon II by the appearance of channelled pottery. The final phase is assigned to the Gava horizon. Additionally, at Gomolava, the bronze artefacts in Layer IVc2, which also contained some black-burnished pottery of the Gava type, made it possible to trace the process of the Bronze to Iron Age transition (Tasić 2005). In general, the periodisation of Belegiš into the two phases has found direct or indirect confirmation at many other sites, necropolises and settlements alike. While settlements are generally smaller and single-layered, the cemeteries may contain as many as several hundred burials. The final phase of the Bronze Age is marked by hoards of Ha A1-A2 date, frequent in the areas where late Belegiš (or Gava in western Romania) settlements and necropolises can be found. In eastern Slavonia, several sites returned Belegiš finds from the beginning of the LBA. A summary of twelve sites – Aljmaš, Batina Skela, Dalj, Erdut, Klisa, Osijek, Privlaka, Sarvaš, Sotin, Trpinja, 19

Mediating Marginality

Figure 2.4: Map of Belegiš II sites in Croatia (after Forenbaher 1991: 48).

Vinkovci and Vučedol, containing Belegiš II finds in eastern Slavonia – was written by Forenbaher in 1991 (Figure 2.4). None of these sites were cemeteries, half of them were settlements and the rest were locations of chance finds, none of which could have been attributed to a cemetery (Forenbaher 1991). The Belegiš II horizons at these settlement sites are found to have been thin with features limited to shallow, irregular pits with a very few, albeit well-made, pottery finds, possibly suggesting short-term, temporary occupation. Forenbaher did, however, warn that such lack of evidence might be due to the damage of the LBA layers caused by levelling and burrowing in the La Tène period, or that they may have been destroyed by the later agricultural activities (Forenbaher 1991: 62). The archaeological knowledge about the sites and material of Belegiš II group in eastern Slavonia was evaluated as incomplete and insufficient, with all of the partly investigated settlements not to be considered particularly impressive (Forenbaher 1991: 62). It is worth noting, however, that Belegiš II settlements were often found at the locations of the earlier late Vatin settlements, as four of the six settlement sites (Privlaka, Vinkovci, Dalj, Aljmaš) showed 20

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context traces of both cultures, while the Belegiš II horizon at Dalj and Vinkovci was found directly above the late Vatin one, and could possibly be suggesting continuous habitation (Forenbaher 1991: 63). The area of Belegiš II finds distribution in eastern Slavonia was, at the time, considered to have been limited to a zone, 20 km wide, west of the Danube, with the Bosut River marking the southwestern border of the distribution (Forenbaher 1991: 62). Belegiš II burial practice The Belegiš II group is not known for burying its deceased under mounds, and, if Purić-Ljubanj is its representative, it is the first of its kind. Belegiš II cemeteries are known to be flat and comprised of cremation burials in urns placed in pit-graves (Tasić 1974: 241). The burial practice of the Belegiš II group strongly resembles the habitual Urnfield one practised in the wider area at the time. The burial practice from the Stojića Gumno cemetery at Belegiš is an example of this custom. Besides the 167 graves registered in the existing excavation records, the Belgrade City Museum keeps another ten chance finds from the site (nine chalices and one bowl). Tasić (2003b) considers it likely that these also came from burials, which would make a total of 167–177 graves at Stojića Gumno. The burial practice of the group can be described as follows: the body, clothed and adorned with jewellery, was cremated; the ashes, cremated bones and surviving metal pieces were gathered, and placed in a ceramic vessel which was then buried in the ground. The funerary urn could have been of varying shapes – closed (amphora, chalice), open (bowl), or neutral (jar or cooking jar) (after Tasić 2003b). At Stojića Gumno the remains of cremated bones were found in 82 urns. According to Tasić, such a high percentage of empty graves (46%) gives rise to a dilemma as to whether it reflects an actual situation, or represents an inconsistency in recording. In addition to ceramic vessels, the graves often contained metal objects, and, in a number of cases, the grave offerings included a ceramic vessel placed inside or adjacent to the urn. The typical burial of the Belegiš group can be seen in Figure 2.5. The question as to whether there were any above-ground grave markers at the Belegiš cemetery remains open, but, since the super-position of burials was recorded in only three

Figure 2.5: A typical Belegiš burial – Kaluđerske Livade (Petrović 2006, after Ljuština 2017: 349).

21

Mediating Marginality

Figure 2.6: Belegiš II (Pseudoprotovillanova) urns (after Forenbaher 1988: 25).

cases, it was concluded that the existence of some sort of grave marker was highly likely (Tasić 2003b). Typical finds of Belegiš II group The formation of the Belegiš culture is seen as influenced by Litzen and incrusted pottery on one hand, and by post-Vatin pottery on the other (Vranić 2002). The characteristic Belegiš II urns are often seen as a proof of the continuous development of the Belegiš group through phases. In eastern Slavonia, the characteristic Belegiš II (Pseudoprotovillanova) urns are represented in all variants, from the typologically earliest to latest (Figure 2.6), although all never appear on the same site. Much of the design and decoration is considered to have been taken over from this group’s late Vatin predecessors. In this regard, the precursors of the quadrilateral symmetry of Belegiš II pottery can be found in the quadrangular rims of late Vatin bowls and jugs. The same can be said for the occasional appearance of incised decorations along the necks and shoulders of some vessels, as well as for the appearance of small, pedestalled chalices with two handles (Forenbaher 1991). Generally, the ‘channelled pottery’ phase, distinguished as Belegiš II (Belegiš-Bobda or BelegišGava) Culture, is considered to represent a change in style and the appropriation of new technology of manufacture (Forenbaher 1994: 49; Gumă 1993: 150–157; Morintz 1978: 40; Tasić 2003: 168; Trogmayer 1992: 351), most likely under the influence of neighbouring, north-eastern and northwestern groups, i.e. Gava and Urnfield. However, as Bukvić (2000) systematised the material from more than 60 settlements and necropolises in the Serbian part of Banat from the Belegiš II phase, he saw it as an isolated phenomenon and a unique culture characterised by black-burnished channelled pottery (Bukvić 2000). This opinion was met with disapproval from some authors (Tasić 2003b). The general characteristics of Belegiš II ceramics include a dark (black), burnished outer surface, fluted decorations (horizontal along the neck, vertical or inclined along the shoulder), carinated shapes, and quadrilateral symmetry. Most common is the black-burnished, carinated urn of Belegiš II (Pseudoprotovillanova) type (Forenbaher 1988; 1991). There are two basic forms of bowls, conical with an inverted rim, and carinated with an everted rim. The first type appears in a number of variations, the most common having four horns protruding from the rim. The second type of bowl and the small, carinated, pedestalled chalices with two vertical handles, appear only in the western part of the Belegiš II distribution (Forenbaher 1991: 60, 61). Less frequent are the conical and carinated chalices with tall handles. Household wares are poorly known. Judging from the few existing fragments, one common form was probably a cylindrical jar with massive horizontal handles, sometimes decorated with finger-impressed bands of clay (Forenbaher 1991: 62).

22

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context

Figure 2.7: Most common types of Belegiš II pottery in eastern Slavonia (after Forenbaher 1991: 58).

Forenbaher (1991) gave a summary of the most commonly found types of Belegiš II pottery in eastern Slavonia (Figure 2.7). He found the repertoire to be modest, with only urns, bowls and pedestalled chalices to be found in more significant numbers and the remaining known forms (cups, coarse ware pots and lids) rare and only fragmentarily represented. The type of urn most characteristic for Belegiš II in the eastern Slavonia, Srijem, Bačka and Banat, and at the same time the most frequent type of Belegiš II pottery, is the Pseudoprotovillanova urn. This is a biconical (carinated), black, burnished urn with an everted rim and channelled (fluted) decoration, with four pairs of pointed (horn-like) bosses and tongue-shaped lugs along the belly. It evolved from the late Vatin round-bellied urns with cylindrical necks and incised or pseudo-cord impressed decoration (also known as the Belegiš I type). Most of the examples from eastern Slavonia belong to a typologically mature variant of the Belegiš II urn with a horizontally fluted neck, distinctly conical belly with diagonal, turban, or short vertical fluted decoration and pairs of horn-like bosses and lugs. Bowls are usually either conical bowls with an inverted rim, varying from coarse to carefully burnished, such as can be found almost all over the Carpathian Basin in the LBA, or conical bowls with four, symmetrically arranged horns on an inverted rim. Conical bowls with small, tubular, often saddle-shaped handles at the rim can also be found, as can the wide, shallow bowls with an everted rim and a very pronounced, sharply biconical body. These bowls are usually decorated with several horizontal channels, sometimes with turban-decorated biconical edge at the belly, directly above which there is a small tubular handle decorated with short vertical fluting. Their surface is usually brown or black and carefully burnished. This type of bowl was only ever found on 23

Mediating Marginality

Figure 2.8: Side-by-side comparison of Gava and Belegiš II urns. Left: Gava; Right: Belegiš II (after Forenbaher 1988: 30).

eastern Slavonian sites, and could represent a regional variation limited to the westernmost part of the Belegiš II area (Forenbaher 1991: 61). Pedestalled chalices with gently flaring rims and two vertical handles are another common find (Forenbaher 1989: 59; 1991: 61). The rim of such a chalice is squared, with two small horn-like bosses between the handles. The tops of handles also sport single or double bosses. The shoulder is usually decorated with horizontal channels, and sometimes with engraved lines. The manufacture is usually fine with very thin walls, and the surface is black and carefully burnished. It is relatively often found in eastern Slavonian sites, and, according to Forenbaher, it could also represent a regionally limited form (Forenbaher 1991: 61). Regarding the problem of Gava material in the area of the Belegiš II group, Forenbaher is of the opinion that although urns of the Gava and Belegiš II types belong to the same general type, they can be easily distinguished (Figure 2.8). The Gava type always has four tall, hollow, concentrically fluted horn-like bosses at the upper side of the belly, which are never accompanied by a lug underneath. In contrast, smaller pointed bosses of the Belegiš II type are never hollow and, as a rule, appear in pairs. These distinctions were noted and brought to our attention by a number of authors (Trogmayer 1963: 106; Foltiny 1968: 340; Forenbaher 1988: 34). A general opinion is that there is not a single typical fragment of this defined Gava urn hitherto found south of the Maros River. Also, no typical Belegiš II urn fragments have as yet been published from the principal area of the Gava group along the upper Tisa River. Forenbaher claims that the fact that the pottery and bronze finds exhibit general similarities was to be expected within the widely culturally interconnected area of the eastern Carpathian Basin (1988: 34). In general, the urn of the Belegiš II type is considered to have evolved from its local predecessors by applying new decoration and firing techniques to an already existing pottery form, which was followed by a gradual mutation of the form itself. This is thought to have happened in the area of the late Vatin Culture, at a time when such decoration and firing technique became a general practice in the eastern Carpathian Basin (Forenbaher 1988: 29). The transition from Middle to Late Bronze Age is seen as marked by the major changes in the area, as this is the time of forming of the Urnfield Culture in its western part, and of the related occurrences in its eastern part. Forenbaher does not believe that the substantial changes in the late Vatin were caused by an intrusion or invasion from the north, but prefers to view Gava and Belegiš II groups, as well as other contemporary related ones, as cultural units in a ‘highly interconnected and dynamic mosaic of the Late Bronze Age Carpathian Basin’ (Forenbaher 1988: 34). The Belegiš II phase in the eastern Slavonian area was dated through the bronze finds from Vučedol, the dagger and the pin, which were found to have most probably belonged to the Ha A1 period 24

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context (Forenbaher 1989). When it comes to the bronze finds at the Belegiš sites, they exhibit features of the wider area of the eastern Carpathian Basin and are entirely comparable to the above-listed bronze finds from the Barice-Gređani sites. The club-shaped pins (Keulenkopfnadeln) with the incised fir-twig motifs are found to be the most common type of jewellery (Szentmiklosi 2009: 10). West-Serbian variant of Vatin Barice-Gređani and Belegiš II groups were previously suspected to have met in this area, but with the discovery of Purić-Ljubanj and the related sites, a new, mound-building burial phenomenon was established in Županjska Posavina, and a third possible influence came into play. In this sense, particularly interesting are the areas of north-western Serbia and north-eastern Bosnia, especially the area along the Drina River, where burials under tumuli containing small amphorae of Belegiš II group have been documented (Carić-Tešanović-Gligorić 2001; Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 158– 159; Filipović 2008: 96, 99–100; Kosorić 1975: 6; 1976; Kosorić-Krstić 1988: 52; Ljuština and Dmitrović 2012: 39–41). Nonetheless, some immediately noticeable differences do exist in terms of burial practice. While the burials of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin are likewise under tumuli, they can be both skeletal and cremations, and usually include a stone grave architecture, as well as metal and amber grave-goods. The main indicators of this variant are the mounds as landmarks and the central places of graves in the mounds, both often interpreted as a sign of prestige and special status of the deceased (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2013: 105–129; 2012: 35). Mound burials have been practised in western Serbia from the Eneolithic to the Roman period, with a significant number of tumuli belonging to the Bronze Age (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2012; Ložnjak Dizdar 2014), albeit few of the investigated sites belong to the LBA period (compare Figure 2.10). Generally, mound building is considered to be a part of an autochthonous tradition, while the changes in ritual patterns and ceramics are increasingly being seen as an adoption of a foreign style, rather than a result of ethnic movements (Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013; Nikitović 2000: 11). The nearby tumuli of the Glasinac area represent a distinct group, with tumuli made entirely of stone or with stone covering, exclusively skeletal graves and different metal inventory (Garašanin 1983c: 736–753). The uniformity of pottery, amber, and bronze, and the appearance of kilns in mounds places the west-Serbian variant of Vatin in western Serbia in the area around the rivers Drina, Kolubara and the upper course of western Morava (Filipović 2008: 102). The disappearance of the group is thought to be connected with the appearance of the black channelled pottery, corresponding to that of the Belegiš II-Gava in the Danubian region (Filipović 2008). The diagnostic pottery found in Tumulus II on Purić-Ljubanj also bears the characteristics of the Belegiš II-Gava group. Milutin Garašanin (1983c) was first to place the west-Serbian variant of Vatin in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Generally, the Belegiš Culture is considered its contemporary across the Sava, while the Paraćin group in the Velika Morava Valley is thought of as partly parallel. However, no absolute date has as yet been established for the north-western Serbian necropolises or for the central Balkans in general, and the periodisation for the Bronze Age in Serbia is not yet synchronised with the same periods in the vicinity. Specifically, the connection with Vatin is considered to create a confusion (Filipović 2008: 99), and while the term west-Serbian variant of Vatin is still very much in use, most archaeologists hold that this variant, and Vatin itself, are, in fact, both culturally and chronologically divided. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the Belegiš Culture, understood when following Garašanin (1983c) as a third phase of Vatin, was facing the same issue for decades. As far as the issue of the Vatin Culture, especially in the case of this culture in Serbia, perhaps it will suffice to say that it is plagued by the lack of consensus and clear definition (Ljuština 2011: 103–10). The disagreements pertain to its origin, disappearance, pottery style, area of settlement, regional groups, as well as its chronological determination. Interpretations of the nature of Vatin Culture vary from those treating it as a local group, a pottery phenomenon (Vasić 2006: 452), or a vast complex spreading sometimes as far as southern Serbia (Stojić 2004). Chronologically, it is placed 25

Mediating Marginality exclusively in the MBA (Gogâltan 1996; 2004; Ljuština 2011), even though some researchers are still sceptical about this (Stojić 1998; Vasić 2006). Perhaps it will suffice to say that the west-Serbian variant of Vatin is indeed understood as a separate cultural entity, due to its specific funerary practice of burials under tumuli (Garašanin 1972: 18; 1973), even though the question about the lowest common denominator, which keeps this variant within a Vatin framework, its pottery style, remains open (Ljuština 2011). The first excavations of burial mounds in western Serbia took place at the beginning of the 19th century. In the EBA in western Serbia the Belotić-Bela Crkva group can be found encompassing the areas of Čačak, Dragačevo, and west Morava. This group’s members were burying their dead under mounds of medium size, up to 20 m in diameter and about 1.5 m in height. The central grave was either an inhumation or cremation and the grave-goods were sparse, mostly ceramic, and rarely lithic. A stone construction was sometimes to be found as part of the mound architecture or in the grave function (Garašanin 1983c). The mounds of the Belotić-Bela Crkva group in the Čačak area were generally earthen, sometimes covered with smaller or larger stones and pebbles and, on some occasions, surrounded with a stone wreath. The central grave might have had a coffin-like construction made of stone slabs for the inhumations, and sometimes the same kind of construction was used for the cremations and cenotaphs. Examples of cremations covered with earth, earth and stone, placed inside an urn, or covered with a stone construction were also found (Dmitrović 2013). The region of west Morava is considered to have been an area where the Belotić-Bela Crkva group met the Bubanj-Hum III group. One example of an EBA burial in this region consisted of several Bubanj-Hum III group vessels found in the central place, with the cremated remains placed on the periphery of the mound, even though this group’s carriers are generally considered to have buried their dead in the flat cemeteries. The pottery of the Belotić-Bela Crkva group is seen as connected with the Pannonian cultures of Mako, Vinkovci and Somogyvar (Garašanin 1983c).

Figure 2.9: Area of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin.

26

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context In the MBA, the west-Serbian variant of Vatin, which combines the elements of Vatin and BelotićBela Crkva groups, is said to have appeared in the areas previously occupied by the Belotić-Bela Crkva (Zotović 1985: 36) (Figure 2.9). According to Milutin Garašanin (1983c), the west-Serbian variant of Vatin, however, did not reach further south than the Danube Valley. In central Serbia the Paraćin I culture developed at the time and bordered the west-Serbian variant of Vatin to the south. The Paraćin I group placed the cremated remains of their dead in urns and buried them in flat cemeteries. According to some authors the chronology of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin corresponds fully to that of the Vatin group, that is, to the Br A2/B1-Br C/D periods. The lower limit of this range is fixed by the Belotić-Bela Crkva group and the upper by the finds from Konjuša (Br D-Ha A1). The west-Serbian variant of Vatin has been divided into three main phases: early (Br A2/B1), middle (Br B2/C), and late (Br C/D and Belegiš-Ilandža I). According to Kosorić and Krstić (1988: 29–55) the beginning of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin is placed in the Br B1 period of the MBA, its middle phase in the Br B/C period of the MBA, and its late phase in the Br D and Ha A/B periods of the LBA, with the very latest burials corresponding to the Ha C period. According to Ljuština and Dmitrović (2012: 37), the LBA in western Serbia is considered poorly investigated. This is due to the fact that a much larger number of mounds in this area can be attributed to the Early and Middle Bronze Ages, with only a few mounds thus far identified as LBA (see Figure 2.10). Most authors concur that the burial customs retained their MBA form, with an addition of the LBA inventory. West-Serbian variant of Vatin sites The noticeable lack of a west-Serbian variant of Vatin settlements possibly suggests that they were temporary, similar to that observed with other groups of the MBA, for example, with the settlements related to the central European tumulus burials (Garašanin 1983c: 736–53). Other authors, however, argue against such short-lived settlements, because several necropolises (such as Paulje, Bukovac in Serbia, Pađine in Bosnia, Ročević and Trnovice) are suggesting large populations (Filipović 2008; Kosorić 1976), while the lack of the overlap of graves within the cemeteries is found to be indicative of that population living nearby and taking care of the inner distribution of the graves in the mounds (Filipović 2008: 98). In the areas surrounding the west-Serbian variant of the Vatin group, larger numbers of settlements of Belegiš–Cruceni, Paraćin, Gasinac and Brnjica groups can be found. Burial of the west-Serbian variant of the Vatin is bi-ritual, with some variations between the different areas in terms of percentage of inhumations versus that of cremations. Generally, cremation is thought to be preferred on the right bank of the Drina, where 85% of burials are cremations and 15% inhumations. The situation is inversely proportional on the left bank of the river (Filipović 2008: 100). These zones are, nevertheless, found to be connected on the basis of the finds of pottery and bronze. The number of tumuli sites in western Serbia is rather large, with the most notable cemeteries of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin being Kruševlje in Lučani, Vranjani, Skakavci, Mrčići near Ražana, Lučani, Lug, Paulje, Prorište, Dubac, Krstac, Mosinje and Stapari. For the distribution map of this group’s cemeteries, see Figure 2.10. In western Serbia, the main influence from the Urnfield complex is reflected in the forms and decoration of pottery and metal (Garašanin 1983c). Changes which are mostly noticeable on ceramics show influences from the Danubian Basin (Peković 2007: 59–64). Most notable is the grave deposit from Baluga, near Čačak, which contains seven vessels showing parallels both with the midDanubian Belegiš II group and with the east and south-east Paraćin II group (Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 159). The situation in the west Morava Valley is generally described as an autochthonous funerary model coupled with influences from the Danubian Urnfield complex (such as fluted ornament and polished pottery). Dmitrović (2010: 189–190) stresses the differences in burial practice between the two geomorphological zones in the Čačak area (the river valley and hilly 27

Figure 2.10: Map of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin cemeteries in Serbia. Left: Middle Bronze Age; Right: Late Bronze Age (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 166, 170).

Mediating Marginality

28

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context and mountainous Dragačevo region), regarding the grave inventory and grave construction. While tumuli are used in the entire area, burial is bi-ritual in the mountains, while only cremation burials can be found in the west Morava Valley. The influence from the Drina River region is noticeable in the mountains west of Čačak, while in the valley, at the eastern part of the Čačak territory, the influence from the Velika Morava region is evident (Dmitrović 2010: 187–196). The west Morava Valley is considered to be a transitional territory in the Bronze Age, with mound building seen as a part of an autochthonous tradition, while the changes in ritual patterns and ceramics can be seen as an adoption of a foreign style (Nikitović 2000: 11). In the EBA this area represented a border zone between the Belotić-Bela Crkva and Bubanj-Hum III groups. Likewise, in the MBA this area represented a zone where the finds characteristic of west-Serbian variant of Vatin and those of Paraćin I groups mixed. In Šumadija, there is a noticeable mixture of the Danubian and central Serbian elements, which Stojić (1998) sees as a final phase of Vatin in the area south of the Danube and Sava. This has, however, been contested, as it was stressed that it is impossible to establish a vertical stratigraphy on the basis of the single-layer sites (Peković 2007: 54; Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 158). Even though no immediate geographical connection between the regions of west Serbia and Županjska Posavina can be said to exist, if Purić-Ljubanj is related to the west-Serbian variant of Vatin, it would be its north-westernmost example. Other than building of mounds, however, there is little similarity in burial ritual and deposition of material, as Purić-Ljubanj shows a marked lack of the main features of this group such as metal or amber finds, central grave constructions, or burials in urns, or funerary pyres at the bases of the mounds. One must bear in mind, however, that there is little consistency in the west-Serbian variant of Vatin sites in general. The cemeteries often encompass several periods, with some sites having mounds dating from the Early Bronze Age up to the Iron Age, only few of which are attributable to the Middle and, especially, to the Late Bronze Age. Several locations showing similarities to the nature of the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj nevertheless do exist. The most notable examples include a mound at Vranjani, where the remains of a previously prepared surface resembling a coarser weave of narrow strips of tree bark were found (Zotović 1985: 39); mounds at Skakavci and Mrčići with traces of an area of burning other than the funerary pyre (Zotović 1985: 61); a mound in Lug around the Drina’s middle course, with finds of biconical vessels of Belegiš type (Kosorić 1975); some graves at Mosinje containing Belegiš-style chalices (Ljuština 2017); or the Paulje cemetery near Loznica, where the cremation is sometimes conducted outside of the location of the future barrow (Filipović 2008). The distribution of features in the area around the lower course of the Drina, 20 km north of Zvornik, with sites spaced 200 m – 500 m apart (Kosorić and Krstić 1988), also resembles the situation in Županjska Posavina, even if the burial customs and finds do not. West-Serbian variant of Vatin burial practice As mentioned above, the burials of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin were exclusively under tumuli. The tumuli belonging to different periods appear in larger or smaller groups (Garašanin 1983: 736– 753). There is, however, little consistency in burial ritual and deposition of finds. In western Serbia the mounds are generally earthen, sometimes covered with smaller and larger stones and pebbles, and less often so surrounded with a stone wreath. The burials are bi-ritual, with a varying degree of preference for inhumation or incineration, of which the former is considered to be slightly earlier (Nikitović 1999: 6, 13), but both are generally considered to have been conducted in parallel. A simultaneous skeletal burial and a cremation burial have been found in mound 16 at Šumar in Belotić. The cremated bones, found here beside a skeleton, have been interpreted as a human sacrifice (Garašanin 1983c: 741; Zotović 1991: 80–81). Garašanin has also suggested human sacrifice (Garašanin and Garašanin 1962: 55–56) in connection with the oversized pins found in some graves 29

Mediating Marginality of this variant, even though they are more often than not thought to have been used for fixing the canvas which covered the deceased (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2012). The skeletal burials are most often found in a prostrated position, although in the Valjevo area the earlier tradition of skeletal burials in the crouched position is also present (Zotović 1985: 45). The cremations themselves were usually conducted at the centre of the base of the future mound. Whether skeletal or in urns, the burials often have some sort of a stone grave construction (Figure 2.11). Kosorić (1976) has categorised the stone grave constructions into two types – a surface paved with smaller and larger stones, and stone coffins with bottoms and sides paved with stone slabs. In the monumental coffin in mound 5 at Ćetenište, the pebbles and smaller stones which paved the coffin show traces of intense burning, which was interpreted as the ritual of purification conducted prior to the burial (Garašanin1983c: 736–753). The cremation graves have also been categorised into two types – those with cremation conducted at the place of the mound and the remains placed in urns, and those with cremation conducted on a separate pyre. The latter custom was observed only in relation to a few mounds at the Paulje and Vranjani cemeteries. While sometimes a stone construction can be found directly covering the cremated bones (Nikitović et al. 2002: 90), far more common are the burials in urns. Nevertheless, there are few examples of mounds erected directly above the pyre, with bones left in the pyre as is. In most cases, however, cremated remains were placed in an urn, and the urn is then placed directly on the remains of the pyre and, sometimes, also covered with stone slabs or with another

Figure 2.11: A typical burial of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin group (Tumulus 1 at Dubac, after Nikitović 1999, Pl. V).

30

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context pot. Usually, after cooling, the bones were found to have been placed in the urn together with the ashes from the pyre, with an exception of the late-stage graves from Dobrača, where the bones were first rinsed. The surplus bone which would not fit into the urn was sometimes placed in other pots or else scattered over or near the urn. One mound from Prorište gave evidence of a pit filled with the remains from a pyre, surplus bones, charcoal, and clumps of daub found near the primary urn. Secondary burials in urns were placed into the existing mounds and were sometimes accompanied by stone construction, or were just covered with earth and stones, another whole vessel, or a fragment of a vessel. The central places in graves are considered to have been reserved for the elderly or distinct members and linked with prestige, which some authors believe to have been connected to age and kinship rather than gender (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2013: 115). Other authors support the idea of a highly patriarchal society, with the central places reserved for the noblemen (Garašanin 1983d). At any rate, the mound building started after the central grave was placed on the ground, with later graves usually concentrically interred at a certain distance from the central grave. No later disturbances of central graves have been noted, indicative of a special treatment of the central place for centuries to come (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2012). The lack of overlap of graves is, additionally, thought to potentially indicate the existence of some sort of grave markers (Filipović 2008: 95–98). A seldom mentioned but noteworthy phenomenon, sometimes found in north-western Serbia in the tumuli dating from the MBA to the beginning of the Iron Age, are horseshoe-shaped kilns. These kilns are located at the periphery of the base of some of the mounds at the level of the central pyre and the central grave, but spatially detached from it. There is no regularity in their orientation, with no related finds, and they are suspected to have been built during mound building. Zotović (1985) was first to emphasise the significance of these kilns as a part of the funerary ritual, and Filipović (2008) has recently re-engaged with the issue. The kilns were found at sites having a large number of lithic finds in the fill of the mounds (Filipović 2008: 95–98). Coring was conducted at one of these sites (Mrčići) to establish the absence of a prehistoric village near the mound where the kiln was found. It was concluded that the kiln belongs to the mound and was in its function. As far as similarities of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin sites with Purić-Ljubanj, one of the mounds from Skakavci is particularly interesting because it gave evidence of what seems to be similar to the recurring layer of burnt, oxidised clay linked with the closing ritual at all three excavated tumuli at Purić-Ljubanj. Thus, at Skakavci, after the burials have already been conducted, over the already piled-up layers of soil, a narrower central zone of about 6 m in section was found where a fire was built from lighter and thinner wooden material (Zotović 1985: 60). Zotović (1985: 61) has stressed that this represents a special ritual, thus far unknown in the wider Balkan area. The mounds at Skakavci are dated from the end of Br D to the beginning of Ha A, which corresponds to the mounds at Purić-Ljubanj. This particular mound was dated to the Ha A period. It was suggested that the pyre formed above the central grave in this mound could have served a similar function as the abovementioned kilns (Zotović 1985). A mound in Mrčići near Ražana, which remained dateless due to the insufficiently sensitive material, is also similar, with the layers in its central zone compressed and exposed to high temperatures. These layers were mixed with baked red earth and fragments of daub with imprints of chaff and thin wooden wattle, and included flint and fragments of coarse prehistoric pottery, with small finds of animal bones in addition (Zotović 1985: 62). As far as other similar finds, there is a case of a mound in Vranjani where the incompletely burned remains of a woman were placed on a previously prepared surface that resembled a coarser weave of narrow strips of tree bark (Garašanin 1983c: 743; Zotović 1985: 39): this is thought, to a certain extent, to echo the skeletal burials on the wooden plank from Vatin. At Purić-Ljubanj the remains of a similar weave made of organic material were also found (Budden et al. 2013: 137; Ložnjak Dizdar 2014; Malovoz 2009). Ritually broken pottery fragments have been found under this same tumulus in Vranjani (Garašanin 1973: 365), mirroring the evidence of ritual fragmentation of pottery at Purić-

31

Mediating Marginality Ljubanj. Another similarity to the finds from Purić-Ljubanj can be seen in the lumps of red ochre in the fill of the mounds and graves from Rađevina and Prorište (Filipović 2008: 95–98). Typical finds of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin The grave inventory of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin includes bronze jewellery and, somewhat rarer, ceramics and weapons (Dmitrović 2010: 193), with more pottery found at the cemeteries in the west Morava Valley compared to the other parts of western Serbia (Dmitrović 2010). The bronze grave goods are usually to be found in female and children’s graves. In skeletal burials, jewellery was found on the anatomical places where it would have usually been worn, suggesting its ornamental function (Ljuština and Dmitrović 2013: 115). In cremation burials, bronze grave goods are often burnt with the dead and placed in or near the urns. Other burial inventory includes stone and horn tools, and metal weapons and tools (short swords, daggers, and axes with lateral fins); flint flakes were also found in the fill of the mounds and graves (Garašanin 1983c: 736–753). Since there are few comparable finds from the west-Serbian variant of Vatin sites to those at Purić-Ljubanj, what follows is a brief overview of the finds of this variant. When comparing PurićLjubanj to the sites of this variant, the most notable difference is in the nature of the deposition and in the incomparable amount of the metal finds. The finds of pottery and bronze from western Serbia are uniform with those from the cemeteries on the left bank of the Drina in eastern Bosnia, dated to 1500/1450–1200 BC. As previously mentioned, the only difference between these areas is considered to be the 85:15 prevalence of either inhumation or incineration (Filipović 2008). At the west-Serbian Vatin-variant sites, numerous bronze finds such as pins, swords, spiral wire, pendants, and bracelets were found, which show parallels with Belegiš-Cruceni, Paraćin I, the 1st phase of Brnjica, and the Dubovac-Žuto Brdo-Garla Mare groups. There is also a significant number of amber finds in the west-Serbian variant of Vatin graves. Some of the jewellery is considered exceptionally rare, the most notable example being a richly engraved torc with pentagonal crosssection from the Ravine site. The pottery is similar to Belegiš, but without corded-ware examples. The highest similarity is observable on the chalices with volute-shaped upper ends. In contrast to the Belegiš cemeteries, where the amphora was the favourite type of funerary pottery, the pottery here included pedestalled chalices with bosses on the belly, the most popular being a hyper-dimensioned chalice with burnished surface and channelling. Generally, the ceramics are considered to be similar to the classical Vatin group, but with specific forms and coarser than the classical Vatin examples, and are often considered to represent a rustic variant of Vatin pottery. Vasić (2006) has proposed that the term Vatin should only be used to designate the pottery phenomenon of which the twohandled chalice is the main determinant, but this was met with disapproval (Ljuština 2011). Urns of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin include: tall urns with a pronounced belly, cylindrical neck, everted rim and horizontal tubular handles; short urns with a short neck, handles, bosses, and engraved lines; globular urns with handles; urns with pronounced belly, flattened rim, short neck and handles with plastic ribs and bosses; or high, egg-shaped urns with a short neck, bosses and horizontal tubular handles. There are also bowls with mildly articulated profiles, bowls of Vatin type with 1 or 2 handles projecting above the rim and with horn-like bosses or volutes. Two kinds of amphorae can be found, one with a sharp and another with a milder profile. Dual vessels are also not uncommon. The ornamentation on pottery is usually scarce, with fluted and engraved motifs. The main impulse from the Urnfield complex is seen to reflect in the forms and decoration of pottery and metal (Garašanin 1983), where the changes, mainly noticeable on pottery, point to influences from the Danubian Basin (Peković 2007: 59–64). Additionally, influences from the Paraćin II group were noted. Thus, a grave from Baluga near Čačak contained seven vessels which were found to exhibit parallels both with the mid-Danubian Belegiš II and with the east and southeast Paraćin II groups (Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013), and some graves at Mosinje contained Belegišstyle chalices (Ljuština 2017) (Figure 2.12). 32

Placing Purić-Ljubanj in its Local and Regional Context

Figure 2.12: Left: MBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Mosinje; Right: LBA west-Serbian variant of Vatin ceramics from Baluga (after Dmitrović and Ljuština 2013: 169, 171).

The bronze finds, through which the west-Serbian variant of Vatin was usually dated, include the specific long bronze pins dated to the end of Br B2/ Br D, swords dated to Br B2/end of Br D and to Ha A1, bronze wire pendants dated to Br C/D, and massive hollow melted bracelets with triangle and S ornaments dated to Br D/Ha A1. There are also examples of Belotić type nail-headed pins (Br C), pins with transversely grooved heads (Br C/D), large pins of a later stage (Br D), pins with a wide, flattened head and transverse grooves of a late stage (Br D), ball-headed pins (Br D), pins with several expansions in the upper part (Br D), club-headed pins (Br D/Ha A1), decorative plates (Br B2-C), forged bronze sheet bracelets (Br D), torcs (Br A2 / B1), bronze belts (Br B2/C), and tweezers (Br C). The bronze weapons include swords, daggers, and arrows. The most typical bronze finds are bronze pins, bracelets, buttons, earrings, rings, tutuli, armlets, spectacle-shaped pendants, 33

Mediating Marginality hair rings, saltaleone pendants, heart-shaped or lunular pendants, bronze knives of the Aegean type, and arrows, followed by amber buttons and glass paste finds (Filipović 2008; Garašanin 1983d; Kosorić 1975; Kosorić and Krstić 1988; Ljuština and Dmitrović 2013). In an urn from Banjevci in Tolisavac, a fragment of a decorative bone object with an engraved ornament was found, seen as representing a connection with the finds from Vatin (Garašanin 1983d). To conclude, the burial custom of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin group is considered to be associated with the EBA tradition of the area, i.e. its predecessor, the Belotić-Bela Crkva group. On the other hand, even though the burial customs of the west-Serbian variant of Vatin and Vatin proper greatly differ, the pottery inventory of this variant is thought to be associated with the classical Vatin group and, thus, with the Danubian-Balkan complex. The metal finds are generally thought to exhibit forms of the central European centres, with certain local particularities (Garašanin 1983d). Even though the influences from the Urnfield complex reflected in the forms and decoration of pottery and metal (Garašanin 1983d) are noticeable, the mound burial remained in use, seen as representing a symbiosis of the two cultural elements in the LBA in this area. Conclusion As mentioned above, this chapter serves to illustrate the possible influences and connections with the already established groups, in order to show the complexity of the situation of the Spačva area in later prehistory. This is especially important in the studies of the Bronze Age, which are prone to generalisations across the large geographical regions, such as the Carpathian Basin, Balkans, and central or south-eastern Europe. There is no doubt that many cultural parallels, especially in terms of technologies of material culture production, can be drawn across these wider areas. There is, however, some doubt for their fundamental relevance in terms of the immediate social aspects and circumstances of life, as witnessed by the two local variations to the established practices of commemoration of the dead found in Županjska Posavina (Malovoz, forthcoming). Some important issues, nevertheless, do arise from the archaeological research in the wider area, as presented above. First of all, the lack of research in the Spačva region is clear and is most likely due to its current geographical and, above all, economic marginality. Second, the lack of consensus and clearly defined Bronze Age terminology complicates the archaeological practice in this and the neighbouring regions, and perpetuates the unresolved questions related to the cultural affiliations and wider intercultural connections observable in the typologies of ceramic and metal finds. While the similarities in this kind of material culture between the local group and the groups in the wider regions are obvious, whether or not such parallels can be seen as a basis for defining cultural belonging is an issue long debated (Adams and Adams 1991; Sørensen 2015).

34

Chapter 3

Pottery Assemblages and Burial Features at Purić-Ljubanj Notes on methodology and terminology The methodology used for the analysis of the pottery assemblages from Purić-Ljubanj is that of the Prehistoric Ceramic Research Group (PCRG), The Study of Prehistoric Pottery: General Policies and Guidelines for the Analysis and Publication of Prehistoric Pottery 2010, 3rd revised edition (2010). In addition the skills methodology of Budden (2007; 2008) was used to examine the nature of skill invested in the manufacture of the pottery. Given the variation between the three tumuli excavated (Budden-Hoskins et al. 2013: 153–156) pottery from each of the tumuli are treated as separate assemblages. All human bone discussed was analysed by the Anthropological Centre of the Croatian Academy of Sciences. The cremated animal bone was additionally examined by Sabine Deschler-Erb at the Institute of Prehistory and Archaeological Science at the University of Basel. Presentation of the data The data is presented firstly by Tumulus; working from Tumuli 1 to 3. Within each Tumulus the burials and the pottery are described and commented on in the order in which they were excavated. The general nature, description and deposition of the pottery, if offered, followed by a detailed description of each individual burial setting, its contents (including cremated bone), its stratigraphic position and dating evidence. This is followed by individual descriptions for the pottery recovered; its core characteristics and its parallels in the general literature for the period and region. Due to the complexity of the depositions within the 4/4, 4/7 and 4/0 burials, which were complex to decipher, the burials have been divided into events within which the above pattern of presentation is duly followed. At the end of each Tumulus section a summary is given presenting the data in terms of phases of activity and chronology. Defining pottery and burial at Purić-Ljubanj: an overview Burial throughout the Late Bronze Age (LBA) across Europe has been long acknowledged as complex and varied. However in central Europe and across the southern Carpathian Basin burial is most commonly associated with the placing of cremated remains into a pot, which can take various forms, with or without other grave goods, and then depositing this, albeit in varying ways, into a flat urnfield cemetery (for a recent summary of this phenomenon, see Ložnjak-Dizdar 2014: 238–239). As discussed in Chapter 2, this holds true for the immediate regions and contemporary cultural groups of Belegiš and Barice-Gređani closest to Purić-Ljubanj. This method of deposition provides a clearly definable burial ‘setting’, or grave. The same is true for the third cultural group with potential links to Purić-Ljubanj, the west-Serbian variant of the Vatin group. While this group employs the use of tumuli, the nature of their construction with internal grave architecture, deposits of both skeletal and cremated remains, and deposits of metal and amber grave goods, set them apart again from the tumuli at Purić-Ljubanj. At Purić-Ljubanj, where society chose to do things differently, while the mounds collectively provide the idea of a cemetery, the ephemeral nature of deposits within them makes defining various ‘graves’ a difficult task (Figure 3.1). Depositions are varied and complex and appear to alter through the lifetime of a tumulus, but never conform to the understood pattern of burial for the immediate region. Not all features have pottery; sometimes cremated human or animal bone is deposited with or in pots, and in some cases where there is pottery there is no bone. In 35

Mediating Marginality

Figure 3.1: Section view of the final burning episode (pyre) on Tumulus 1, demonstrating the ephemeral nature of deposits at Purić-Ljubanj.

some instances pottery appears to be carefully placed and in others there is evidence of it being scattered. Also, it can be suggested that in some instances we can talk of ‘cenotaph’ burial, where bone has been replaced by symbolic artefacts (see Chapman 2000, Introduction). Where bone is present it has always been cremated; the vast majority being completely calcified (Deschler-Erb, Institute of Prehistory and Archaeological Science 2017). In all cases the burial ‘setting’ is created from deliberately re-deposited materials. Some of these are used time and again in an identical manner, for example, finely levigated ochre clay is repeatedly used to seal the tops of burials of all types. In other instances materials used relate to a particular point in time within the historic time-line of the tumuli. Given this scenario, within this report a burial is taken to be any deliberate deposition within the bounds of an individual tumulus that can be said to have created a definable social event (feature) within the tumulus through the use of deliberately re-deposited materials; and thus through time to have collectively created a ‘space’ for acts of remembrance culminating in the emergence of a cemetery. Some of these features are large and complex, others simple, but all relate to the emergence of the tumuli and ensuing ritual landscape across the region of the Spačva Basin (Budden-Hoskins et al. 2013; Malovoz 2016). The complexity of burial at Purić-Ljubanj is further exacerbated by dates which suggest Tumulus 1 and Tumulus 3 to be earlier in origin than Tumulus 2 (a further discussion of this takes place in Chapter 5), and is a situation also corroborated to a small extent by the, albeit small, presence of pottery in Tumulus 1, which may be regarded as closer in character to the Belegiš I than the Belegiš II pottery repertoire. Within Tumulus 2 the pottery repertoire is without a doubt consistent with Belegiš II pottery but also has strong elements of Urnfield pottery in the form of carinated, faceted, bowls and a Gava influence in the form of amphora with hollow bosses and fingertip impressed swags beneath these. Key vessel types are shown in Table 3.1. 36

Pottery Assemblages and Burial Features at Purić-Ljubanj

Code

Vessel Type

1

2a

2b

3

4

5

Belegiš II Chalice

Carinated Bowl Type 1

Carinated Bowl Type 2

Shallow Bowl with everted bosses

Small bowl

Min. Qty.

Key Characteristics and Parallels

7

Fine walled ‘cups’ or ‘chalices’ with 2-4mm wall thickness and 68cm rim diameter. Highly burnished, finely decorated with handles, bosses and an omphalos / pedestal base. Most often reduction fired and black on surfaces and through core. Forenbaher 1990; 1991: 56, fig 6; Vranić 2002: 127, fig. 46.

11

Shallow bowls with facetting and / or tubular lugs on the carination, 20-30cm rim diameter. Wall thickness c. 5-8mm. Oxidised firing and the application of haematite produces a bright red / orange colour. Well burnished. Strong parallels lye with Urnfield pottery. Karavanić 2014: 212, fig 5, no.6; 215, fig 9, no1.

9

Shallow bowls with exaggerated everted rims and very sharp carination. Rim diameter 14-18cm / 18-30cm. Decorated with horizontal incised tooling or finger-tip channeling around the shoulder. Oxidised firing plus haematite produce a bright red colour. Burnished. Forenbaher 1991: 53, fig 4, no. 2 and fig 5a hybrid of no’s 1 & 2. Strong parallels also at Gomolava, pers. com., Jovan Koledin.

2

Shallow bowl with flattened rim and everted bosses emerging from the lip. Rim diameter c.20cm. Haematite coated and oxidised; bright orange / red on surfaces and through core. Burnished. Forenbaher 1988: 26, Table 1, Belegiš I bowl form; Forenbaher 1990 T. 6A, no. 4. Forenbaher 1991: 53, fig 4, no.7.

7

Small plain bowls with an inverted rim. Rim diameter 14-18cm. Finely made. Wall thickness of 4-5mm. Oxidised or irregular firing conditions. Often coated in haematite. Forenbaher 1990, T.3B, no. 6 and T.4, no. 4

2

Neutral jar form with x 4 tubular lugs placed at the rim, otherwise plain. Rim diameter c. 20cm. Wall thickness c. 7-8mm. Reduction or mixed firing. Forenbaher 1991: 53, fig. 4, no 8.

6

7

Jar

Amphora / Urn Type 1

5

Made with a coarse fabric and reduction fired. Highly burnished, ornate and always black all through the section. Medium to large vessels with a wall thickness of 6-8mm. Rim diameter can be c. 26 cm. Very friable. The bosses may be replaced with tubular lugs. Forenbaher 1991: 52, fig. 3, no 1

2

Technologically as above but taking its form from “Gava” type Amphora. The bosses are large, highly exaggerated and partially hollow. They are emphasized by finger tip decoration in the form of ‘swags’. They are irregularly or reduction fired. Forenbaher 1988: 30, fig. 3A (after: Kemenczei., T.)

Amphora / Urn Type 2 Table 3.1: Vessel-type series for Tumulus 2.

37

Mediating Marginality

2.70 metres

15.40 metres 22.50 metres metres

0

1

2

3

6

5

4

8

7

10

9

Loam

PHASE 1: pit [1/7]

PHASE 3: oxidised burnt clay surface/funeral pyre and [1/6]

Brown river clay, general tumulus build material

PHASE 2: pit [1/2]

PHASE 3: hearth area and carbonised matting

Natural/subsoil

PHASE 2: burial features with pottery [1/4] and [1/5 ]

PHASE 4: disturbance caused by 1920s unsystematic excavation

2 metres

Figure 3.2: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 1.

16 metres 22.5 metres metres

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Loam

PHASE 2: left to right burials 4/11, 4/12, 4/13, 4/14, 4/15, 4/16 east of the limestone platform

PHASE 4: burial 4/5

Brown river clay, general tumulus build material

PHASE 3: burial 4/6

PHASE 5: burial 4/3

Natural/subsoil

PHASE 4: limestone platform with burials 4a - q, 4/7 and 4/10

PHASE 6: burial 4/8 (4/2 and 4/9) oxidised burnt clay surface/funeral pyre

PHASE 1: burial 4/17, 4/18, 4/19, 4/20 and 4/21

PHASE 4: burial 4/10

PHASE 7: left to right burial 1b and 1a, late insertion burials with pottery/cremated bone

Figure 3.3: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 2.

38

Pottery Assemblages and Burial Features at Purić-Ljubanj

2.2 metres

Not excavated / Nije iskapano

8 metres 19 metres

0

metres 1

2

3

4

6

5

7

8

9

10

Loam

PHASE 2: oxidised burnt clay surface/funeral pyre 3/3 and 3/4

Brown river clay, general tumulus build material

PHASE 2: urn burial within oxidised burnt clay surface

Natural/subsoil

PHASE 2: intense area of burning with postholes

PHASE 1: early burial pit 3/5 with cremated human bone

PHASE 3: late insertion burial with cremated human bone

Figure 3.4: Schematic section drawing showing key features in Tumulus 3.

To provide an overview of the events that created all three tumuli, Figures 3.2 – 3.4 offer a schematic representation of where key features lay within each tumulus. These events are illustrated in greater detail as appropriate. Fabric Series The fabric series for Purić-LJubanj was developed through a series of investigations of sherds at microscopic x 10 and x 20 magnification, and through petrological thin-section analysis carried out at the University of Southampton. The clay fabrics used in the production of the pottery found at Purič-Ljubanj reflect the nature of the geology associated with the immediate region (Table 3.2). The dominant deliberate inclusions, or temper, of the pottery are grog and well-sorted limestone. All the clays used were iron rich, allowing for bright oranges and reds under oxidised firing conditions, and strikingly black under reduction firing conditions. With such a small assemblage it has not been possible to say that specific fabrics relate to specific vessel forms, however, there is a definite correlation between the texture of fabrics in relation to vessel forms. Fabrics range from being coarse and granular to extremely fine and levigated. The relationship between the regional geology, pottery fabrics and the social choices related to the making and using of pots at PurićLjubanj is further discussed in Chapter 4. Pottery and burial: Tumulus 1 (Trenches 1 and 2) General nature, description, and deposition of the pottery It is important to highlight that the ceramic assemblage from within the excavation area on Tumulus 1 is incomplete due to the unsystematic excavation that took place in the 1920s. This was corroborated during excavation, as evidenced by a series of pits dug across the mound, a number of which cut through Feature 1/1 (Figure 3.5). It is therefore unsurprising that while Feature 1/1, the closing event of Tumulus 1, follows the same morphological makeup as for Feature 4/2 on Tumulus 2 and Feature 3/3 on Tumulus 3, little pottery was discovered during excavation. Given this situation the few diagnostic sherds discovered are simply described and illustrated below. Elaboration as to the condition, fragmentation and nature of the assemblage is not viable.

39

Mediating Marginality Fabric Code G1 G2

G3

G4

G5 G6

G7 L1

GL1 GL2

GL3 Q1

Fabric Description

grog, orange, 10-15%, poorly-moderately sorted, 0.5mm in fine, sand matrix as silt, powdery; very occasional limestone grog, 15-25%, moderately sorted, 0.25-3mm in micaceous, silty sand matrix with high muscovite mica content, v. occasional red and black iron as whole rounded pellets, quartz as silt grog, up to 15%, well-moderately sorted, 0.250.75mm, both clear and white quartz as rounded sand, otherwise completely clean matrix, potentially levigated, little or no iron grog various colours, 15%, moderately sorted, 0.25-1mm; red and black iron throughout and as occasional rounded pellets, 3-5%, moderately sorted; muscovite mica throughout; finely levigated. grog (mostly oxidised, angular and sharp), 15%, moderately sorted, 0.5-2mm; black mica 10%, fine, clean quartz silty matrix grog, various colours, 5-7%, moderately sorted, up to 3mm, fine silty matrix with abundant q sand; very occasional sub angular limestone 2mm; otherwise clean fabric grog, mostly orange and angular, 40%, poorly sorted, 0.5-3mm; micaceous silty matrix; very coarse, ragged and loose; friable limestone, 3%, poorly sorted, 0.5mm + flecks throughout; up to 40% voids; 0.25mm; fine red iron up to 10% in a micaceous sandy (silt) matrix; occ., red iron pellets; very fine fabric grog and limestone, 10-15%, poorly – moderately sorted, 0.75-2mm; again in micaceous silty sand matrix; ragged, loose fabric but well fired grog and limestone up to 20 %, both well sorted, 0.25-.05mm; limestone voids same size range 20%; very occasional sparse (3%) limestone up to 2mm; red iron throughout as fine flecks, 5-10%, ; 5-10% muscovite mica throughout a sandy silt matrix. Clean, compact, well prepared fabric grog, mostly oxidised but from multiple sources and angular, 40%, poorly sorted, 1mm; limestone 0.5-1mm, 10%, poorly sorted completely clean, levigated fabric in a fine quartz sand matrix; occasional red and black iron 0.25mm, well sorted; v occasional