Neo- Eneolithic Cult Constructions in Southeastern Europe

UNION INTERNATIONALE DES SCIENCES PRÉHISTORIQUES ET PROTOHISTORIQUES INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR PREHISTORIC AND PROTOHISTORIC SCIENCES

PROCEEDINGS OF THE XV WORLD CONGRESS (LISBON, 4-9 SEPTEMBER 2006)

ACTES DU XV CONGRÈS MONDIAL (LISBONNE, 4-9 SEPTEMBRE 2006)

Series Editor: Luiz Oosterbeek

VOL. 48

Session C35

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Archaeology in Eurasia: Building

Techniques and Spatial Organisation

Edited by

Dragoş Gheorghiu

BAR International Series 2097 2010

Published by Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED England [email protected] www.archaeopress.com BAR S2097 Proceedings of the XV World Congress of the International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Actes du XV Congrès Mondial de l’Union Internationale des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques Outgoing President: Vítor Oliveira Jorge Outgoing Secretary General: Jean Bourgeois Congress Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek (Series Editor) Incoming President: Pedro Ignacio Shmitz Incoming Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek Volume Editors: Dragoş Gheorghiu (C35) Neolithic and Chalcolithic Archaeology in Eurasia: Building Techniques and Spatial Organisation © UISPP / IUPPS and authors 2010 ISBN 978 1 4073 0573 8 Signed papers are the responsibility of their authors alone. Les texts signés sont de la seule responsabilité de ses auteurs. Contacts : Secretary of U.I.S.P.P. – International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Av. Dr. Cândido Madureira 13, 2300 TOMAR Email: [email protected] www.uispp.ipt.pt Printed in England by 4edge Ltd, Hockley All BAR titles are available from: Hadrian Books Ltd 122 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7BP England [email protected] The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com

119

NEO-ENEOLITHIC CULT CONSTRUCTIONS IN SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE: BUILDING TECHNIQUES AND SPACE MANAGEMENT –

A BRIEF OVERVIEW

Gheorghe LAZAROVICI and Cornelia-Magda LAZAROVICI

Abstract: In this article we focus on the Neo-Eneolithic cult constructions from Southeast Europe, taking as examples the first ones from Near East and Anatolia, with which there are many analogies. The area under investigation shows the existence of temples, sanctuaries, home or communitarian altars, within a complex organized society. We have analyzed some of their architectonic elements, as entrance, fireplace, oven, stellae, pillars and sketch some tentative interpretations. Key-words: temple, sanctuary, architectonic elements, fireplace, oven, pillar, stella

Résumé: L’article présent discute les analogies fréquentes qui existent entre les constructions de culte Neo-Enéolithiques de l’Europe du Sud-Est et celles du Proche Orient. La zone analysée démontre l’existence des temples, sanctuaires et autels des résidences privées ou communautaires dans le cadre des societées très organisées. Les auteurs présentent le résultat de l’anayse de quelques éléments architecturaux comme l’entrée, l’âtre, le four, les stellae, les colonnes, et proposent quelques interprétations sur leur signification. Mots-cléf: temple, sanctuaire, éléments architecturaux, âtre, four, colonne, stella

DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PERSPECTIVE

In our opinion, a temple is a monumental cult building, that has several altars and sanctuaries where religious rituals were performed. A typical temple example is Sanctuary 2 at Parţa (Banat culture) (fig. 14.1), partially reconstructed in Banat Museum, at Timişoara. This temple was devoted to several divine couples such as the Great Mother (with anthropomorphic or zoomorphic heads) and the Bull or Sun and Moon. Another cult present here is related to the Pillar, axis mundi (single or double pillars marking the entrance or other sanctuaries: Lazarovici Gh. 1998; Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 214; Lazarovici Gh. and Maxim 1995 etc.). At Parţa there are several buildings used for sacral rituals: a monumental altar with a double statue, Altar A for the ritual of burning; Altar D for ritual offerings and blood sacrifices offered to the Great Mother – Bull couple; the cult of grinding is represented on the western wall, where a grinding stone and a cup have been discovered; ritual offerings in pots, Altar B; Altar C for cereal offerings dedicated to the Sun – Moon couple; Altar E, with ritual offerings for the Great Mother – Bull couple and others. In this temple, in front of the double statue, there was a large opening, probably used for the adoration of the sunrise. The opening was marked by two pillars with bullheads, having different symbols between their horns, suggesting the Sun and respectively the Moon. Another example of a temple is at Madjari, where a monumental altar has been discovered (Lasota Moskalewska and Sanev 1985-1986).

The sanctuary or the altar is only a part of a temple. Sometimes it might even be a separate building intended for the adoration of a divinity or of some of its attributes. It might also take the form of a sacred, inviolable place.

The building of sanctuaries and altars supposes some rules determined by the basic elements and cult needs, or socio-religious factors present in a community. For the Neolithic and Copper Age periods one can speak of temples, sanctuaries, communitarian or domestic altars. We must also mention clay models or models made of perishable materials.

THE FIRST SANCTUARIES

Building techniques differ from one period to another, from one epoch to another, from civilization to civilization. They are related with the dominant architecture of each civilization and the existing raw materials.

Impressive monumental stone temples and sanctuaries appear starting with Pre Pottery Neolithic anterior to the Southeastern Neolithic.

Monumental stone sanctuaries with altars, statues, pillars, some of them decorated have been discovered at the springs of the rivers Tiger and Euphrates, in the southern part of eastern Turkey, partly in Syria and Israel, in sites such as Göbekli Tepe, Nevali Çori, or 'Ain Ghazal (Schmidt 1995; 1999; 2000; 2001; Hauptmann 1993; 2001; Hauptmann and Schmidt 2000; Rollefson 1983; 1985; 1986; 1987; 1997: fig. 2-4, 9; Kafafi and Rollefson 1994; 1995). We do not insist too much on these, but we must underline that their architecture, the shape of the pillars, the raw material used show the existence of a civilization with a strong spiritual life, in which signs and symbols had a specific well established place.

These examples show the high level reached by the religious art during the Stone Age period, which rivals

NEOLITHIC AND CHALCOLITHIC ARCHAEOLOGY IN EURASIA: BUILDING TECHNIQUES AND SPATIAL ORGANISATION

120

Fig. 14.1. Parţa, Sanctuary 2

with the French-Cantabric art, when the transition from the cave-temple to the temple-house can be observed.

The apogee reached by the semisedentary or full sedentary communities is marked by the Early Neolithic discoveries at Çatal Hüyük.

EUROPEAN SANCTUARIES

Returning to the European area this impression of monumentality is revealed by the Lepenski Vir discoveries (Srejović 1969; 1971), where sculpted stone blocks showing fish faces, have been deposited in communitarian or domestic sanctuaries (fig. 14.2).

Similar discoveries are mentioned on the Romanian bank of the Danube, on the opposite part of Lepenski Vir, under the Trescavăţ mountain (a natural sanctuary maybe, where the Lepenski Vir communities prayed: Srejović 1969: fig. 3) at Piatra Elişovii (fig. 14.3), Cuina Turcului or Veterani (Mesolithic), (Păunescu 1970).

The Lepenski Vir discoveries bring new elements in the architecture of the communitarian or domestic sanctuaries. This site presents mostly socio-religious elements, much more related with the spiritual and social life of the Mesolithic communities in the Iron Gates area

Fig. 14.2. Lepenski Vir sanctuary (after Srejović)

than with the economic one. Starting with the first stages the site maintains a special spatial organization that in-cludes groups of five-seven dwellings, with constructions that have sculptures (domestic sanctuaries?). In the later phases, each group has such a sculpture. This grouping may be only our interpretation, but it might also reflect the spatial organization of the Mesolithic sites from the area: Lepenski Vir, Padina, Vlassac, Hajducka Vodenica, Schela Cladovei and maybe others.

This grouping might also explain the large number of sanctuaries and domestic sanctuaries present here. In our

G. LAZAROVICI & C.-M. LAZAROVICI: NEO-ENEOLITHIC CULT CONSTRUCTIONS IN SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE…

121

Fig. 14.3. Piatra Elişovii, sculpture of Lepenski Vir type (after Păunescu)

interpretation of the term, Lepenski Vir was a cult centre, maybe also a socio-cultural one, similar to Çatal Hüyük in South Anatolian Early Neolithic, or Parţa in the Banat culture.

At Çatal Hüyük, in over 10 levels, more than 30 commu-nitarian and domestic sanctuaries have been discovered, proving the existence of a religious centre. We do not intend to analyze these sanctuaries that pose many problems regarding their building manner and the spiritual life of these communities. The discovered elements, such as altars, pillars, benches, cassettes, monumental busts, monumental figures, allegories painted on the walls as well as eyes, breasts, niches and others, show that Neolithic Naology (the study of sacred edifices) has impressive dimensions and philosophers of the prehistoric religions are just at the beginning of their interpretations.

It is very difficult to make a sharp separation between domestic sanctuaries, altars and temples, but we have to imagine these types of models for the mythology of the Developed Neolithic in the Danubian area.

During Developed Neolithic, while in the south, in Greece (Aslanis 1990) and Macedonia (Veluška Tumba, Grgur Tumba, Porodin, Trh Tumba etc.: Simoska and Sanev 1975; 1976; Simoska et al. 1979) the tell type sites appear, in Vinča, Banat cultures and maybe in the horizons related with Polychromy in the Carpato-danu-bian region the first fortifications have been noticed (for the Balkano-Anatolian Chalcolithic see Gh. Lazarovici 1993: 11-47). They include temples and sanctuaries, as well as dwellings with a monumental architecture. Unfortunately there are only very few information about these types of dwellings and few reconstructions.

At Veluška Mađjari tell (in the IIIrd level), near Skoplje, a temple with monumental pieces has been discovered

(Lasota Moskalewska and Sanev 1985-1986: 56; Sanev 1988). Inside this temple (9.7 x 8 m) there is an altar, the walls were in relief and decorated. The floor was covered with clay. Inside several storage pots, pots for liquids, pots for ceremonial, some decorated with barbotine or painted have been found (Lasota Moskalewski and Sanev 1985-1986: 55-59).

A monumental altar is mentioned on the high terraces of Topolka river at Mramor and another (with many reparations) in Macedonia, in the phases III-IV of the Anzabegovo – Vršnik group.

In the Danubian region, the first temples and communitarian or domestic sanctuaries appear now. Initially, temples have one room (Parţa Sanctuary 1 = Temple 1) and later two (Sanctuary 2 = Temple 2). This evolution may be connected with the necessity to separate different rituals that took place here. Some rituals were public, while others may have been secret (initiation); some took place only inside, others outside. In some cases, only priests or priestesses practiced or supervised the rituals, others could have been lead by profanes. A temple requires a certain organization, different from that of communitarian or domestic sanctuaries or altars, where only offerings were brought, fired or deposited. Such delimitations are not very rigorously linked with the mythological evolution of the beliefs regarding genesis, numbers, organization, attributes of divinities or those of their “priests” or “priestesses”.

When speaking about prehistoric “priests” or “priestesses”, we must confess to having little arguments about their existence, but some information can be found in the first sources regarding the priests from the old Summer, the genealogy of the divinities and their attributes, in the “Ghilgamesh”, “Enkidu and the inferno” poems and in others tablets (Krammer 1962: 138-142).

It is rather sure that the Neolithic mythology is not based on this one, but such structures and myths must have existed here, too. Some proofs are offered by different examples related to the sacred numbers, but these sort of discoveries also contain information regarding the attributes of the divinities or of their “priests” or “priestesses”.

We intend to analyze in the next pages some situations and arrangements in temples, sanctuaries, altars, models of sanctuaries and altars, to establish which are the architectonic elements, what sort of associations are present and try to make some short interpretations. Some of our hypotheses seem to be very bold, but without an inquisitive approach (cf. Blaga 1944) to ancient spirituality we think we cannot progress in the understanding of the spiritual life of past societies. The road opened by Eliade and Gimbutas, sometimes criticized, seems to be even today an efficient way of investigation, when written mythologies or literary sources are missing (the latter being sometimes very


122

subjective, to cite for example Procopius of Caesarea’s Arcana Historia).

STATIC MONUMENTAL ELEMENTS, ARCHITECTONIC ONES, PRESENCE, MEANING

The entrance in temples and sanctuaries/altars has specific elements, sometimes decorated. In Sanctuary 2 at Parţa, a niche above the entrance hold an idol torso with a zoomorphic head (fig. 18); in other cases, decorated frames were used. Near the eastern entrance, a grinding stone and a cup for cereals were positioned close to the wall, under the Sun – Moon couple (Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 225). In other temples, like Sabatinovka (Precucuteni-Tripolye A, ca. 4750-4600 CAL B.C.) the threshold was paved with stones and an idol was discovered on top of it (Makkay 1971: 138; Gimbutas 1984: 25, 74; 1991: 261, fig. 7-59-a-b; Zbenović 1996: 33; Monah 1997: 35; Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 290; Lazarovici C.-M. 2004: 48, fig. 2). Sanctuary models offer very interesting information regarding the type of dwelling, showing one or more storeys, with different shapes of entrances (fig. 18c, d), reflecting the most evolved architectural patterns of Precucuteni-Tripolye A (Lazarovici C.-M. 2004: 7-8, 11-15).

Another ritual used at the beginning of the building is the placing of specific idols, pots or other artefacts in the foundation, as reflected by the Parţa discoveries (Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 284) or these related with Cucuteni –Tripolye culture (Dumitrescu H. and Dumitrescu Vl. 1959: 166; Niţu et al. 1971: 59; Dragomir 1996: 64; László 2000; Marinescu-Bîlcu and Bolomey 2000: 25).

Entrances or windows are bordered by inner pillars (Parţa, Sanctuary 2) or have pillars in front of the entrances, in the exterior, as at Rife, Egypt (Müller-Karpe 1974: pl. 123/15-23; Lazarovici C. -M. 2004: fig. 55/1-2).

Fireplaces for burnings and offerings. Even from the first earlier PPN sanctuaries, fireplaces were very sophisticated. There are round fireplaces with a hole in the middle and underground channels, from where air came up to intensify the fire, as at ‘Ain Ghazal. Other fireplaces have a semiround shape, bordered by big stone blocks or pillars, true altars. During the Developed Neolithic, in the Danubian region, fireplaces have a rectangular or oval shape. In Banat culture at Parţa there are two types of fireplaces. At Kormadin some have been built on top of old (‘8’ shaped) ovens (fig. 14.4) (Jovanović 1991: Fig. 1) and some were mobile.

Fig. 14.4. Kormadin (Serbia) Sanctuary, Vinča C phase (after Jovanović)


123

On these last ones, the offerings were burned and then removed to deposit ashes in other places (Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: fig. 165-168). Two fireplaces with high frames (20-25 cm) are noticed in the Boian sanctuary at Gălăţui Movila Berzei (Neagu 2000: 29-30). Another fireplace is mentioned at Pietrele in the sanctuary (Berciu 1956: 511). In the sanctuary models of the Cucuteni (B) – Tripolye (C) culture cross shape fireplaces are present, as shown by archaeological excavations. At Véstö Magór the fireplace in the sanctuary was rectangular in shape and had a central hole, fig. 35 (Hegedus and Makkay 1987).

Big fireplaces have been noticed in most of the sanctuaries and altars of the Precucuteni-Cucuteni culture: at Isaiia (Dwelling (D7), a fireplace and a central oven in a horseshoe shape in sanctuary 2: Ursulescu 2001: 54-55; 2002: 5; Ursulescu and Tencariu 2004: 139), at Târgu Frumos (Ursulescu 2002: 3-7; 2003: 43), at Poduri – Dealul Ghindaru (D36) with fireplace 1: Monah 1997: 35; Monah et al. 1997: 179), at Truşeşti, in sanctuaries 1 (D24), 2 (D40), 4 (D61), (Petrescu-Dîmboviţa 1963: 172; Petrescu-Dîmboviţa et al. 1999: 67, 89, 121, fig. 372; Monah 1997: 38, fig. 9/1; Lazarovici C.-M. 2004: 47, fig. 1). House/dwelling 60 at Truşeşti had a fireplace with three compartments, consisting of a domestic altar, a big idol and five pots. The altar from Petreşti culture at Pianul de Jos also had a fireplace (Paul 1965: 5, fig. 1-4, pl. I-II; Gimbutas 1984: 81, fig. 34: Monah 1997: 34).

The most impressive oven is the one from Sabatinovka temple. Such ovens have been used for the ritual burning of different products. Very significant are the altars or models of altars used also as lamps starting with Vinča culture (one can imagine a priestess sitting on a throne or altar and supervising the fire like at Fafos, see Gimbutas 1991: 116/118, plate 9). Ovens similar to the Sabatinovka one are to be found in the sanctuary models from Popudnja or Šuškova in Ukraine, or Ovčarovo, in Bulgaria (Todorova and Horisjan 1976). At Parţa, an 8-shaped oven with a fireplace in front of it was transformed into a domestic altar, by adding a cassette and a wooden pillar. The pillar was covered with clay and had a bull head made of clay on top of it (Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 275, 279).

Stella is one of the main elements present in sanctuaries. Such a stella, related with the fertility and fecundity cult and depicting a schematic representation of the Great Mother (and a phallus) was found at Gura Baciului, in P24a, a Starčevo-Criş complex. In Cyprus, one of the prismatic idols has a stella shape (Idole cat. 1985: fig. 16). In some cases the stella represents a phallus (Sandars 1985: 247).

The monumental statue at Parţa (fig. 14.1) and the altar at Târgu Frumos (fig. 14.5) have a stella shape (Ursulescu and Cotiugă 2000; Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 289). Stellae are present in the first sanctuaries of the first Near East cities, at Boğazköy – Buyukkale (Müller-Karpe 1974: 305; The Anatolian 1983: 230, fig. 612), where

Fig. 14.5 Târgu Frumos (Romania), altar from a Precucuteni sanctuary (after Ursulescu)

they are associated with the fireplace or the pillar. At Beycesultan (fig. 14.6) we see the association of a double pillar, a fireplace with a bucrania, a pillar in front and some pots nearby. Small size stellae (cca. 30 cm), with bucrania on top have been discovered at Isaiia, in D7 (fig. 14.7) (similar to the Véstö Magór discoveries, see Ursulescu and Tencariu 2004: 143), in the dwelling with a cult character at Stara Zagora Bath (Karanovo II = Starčevo-Criş IIIB), or in the Karanovo II-III levels at Jaša Tepe (see Kalicz and Raczky 1981; Lazarovici et al. 2001: 278-279). A wall stella in the sanctuary at Dolnoslav depicted a human face (see Radunčeva 2003: fig. 59 and 68).

Fig. 14.6. Stellae at Beycesultan (after Setton Lloyd)

The pillar, or its variant the tree world, axis mundi, is another main theme in sanctuaries. This suggests the connection between the Sky and the Earth. Many sanctuary models from Cucuteni – Tripolye have legs or walls divided by pillars of different sizes (fig. 14.8). We believe that they play the same role as the altars from the Vinča, Banat or other Danubian civilizations. In the Boian sanctuary at Căscioarele, the pillar was quite monumental and related with the sacred number seven (fig. 14.9) (seven white and seven black triangles, seven spirals:


124

Fig. 14.7. Isaiia (Romania), stellae with bucrania in building D7 (after Ursulescu, Tencariu)

Fig. 14.8. Roszochuvatka (Ukraine), Cucuteni-Tripolye culture, sanctuary model (after Gusev)

Fig. 14.9. Painted pillars from Căscioarele (Romania) sanctuary, Boian culture (after Vl. Dumitrescu)

Dumitrescu Vl. 1970: 21; 1974: 477-478, fig. 487/1; 1986: 69-72, fig. 1; Monah 1997: 33; Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 246, 286, 292).

We must mention that seven posts appear in many situations: at the Vinča megaron (Milojčić, apud Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 270, fig. 242); seven posts surrounded the small pillar at Căscioarele (Dumitrescu Vl. 1970: 21; 1986; Lazarovici Gh. et al. 2001: 246, 286, 292), seven vertical posts are inside Kormadin sanctuary (fig. 14.4) (Jovanović 1991: Fig. 1). These posts may represent in the Near East and Old European mythologies the seven posts supporting the Sky, a symbol to be found in the seven levels of the ziggurat, or in the seven terraces of the Borobudur temple (Eliade 1991: 34; Lazarovici Gh. 2001: 61). Also the underground world had seven doors in the old Babylonian mythology; there were seven planetary circles, seven questions, seven important gods and seven judges (Krammer 1962: 144, 262; Eliade 1981: 67; Lazarovici Gh. 2001: 61). At Çatal Hüyük sanctuary seven vultures are depicted (Lazarovici Gh. 2001).

The number seven is present on the sanctuary model found at Căscioarele II sanctuary (Gumelniţa) which presents seven big holes (seven windows), (Dumitrescu H. 1968; 1973; Dumitrescu Vl. 1970: 21). Other examples came from the Lengyel culture (seven posts in the house models, at Strelice, see Gimbutas 1991: 81, fig. 3-34; Müller-Karpe 1968: 285, table 208/34) or from Cucuteni culture (seven phalloi made of small conic idols at Isaiia, Ursulescu 2001: 65), and the series of seven feminine statuettes, representing old, mature or juvenile characters, sometimes associated with groups of 7, 13 (or 14) objects or with seven big and seven small thrones like at Isaiia, Poduri, Sabatinovka or Pietrele (Monah 1997: 35; Monah et al. 1997: 109, cat. 14a-d; Berciu 1956; Lazarovici Gh. et al 2001: 289; Ursulescu 2001: 65; 2004) etc. A group of two pillars is present at Dolnoslav in the sanctuary related with the fertility and fecundity cult (Radunčeva 2003: fig. 59, 63).

Pillars and their meanings. The head of some pillars is extremely interesting, suggesting the divinity that connects the Sky and the Earth. Some of these pillars have bull, ram, or male-goat heads. These heads have cult signs and symbols. In some cases the head is the symbol of that divinity, as in many examples at Çatal Hüyük.

The most significant stella altar with three pillars supporting bull, male-goat or ram heads is from Old Cypriote Kachti (Karagheorghis 1977: 43). On this stella there are also two erected phalloi (fig. 14.10). The lower part could be interpreted as representing a masked person that receives the sacred “seed” in an amphora, to be spread on the fields, houses and women to obtain the divine fertility and fecundity. At the base of this stella there is a bench.

The pillars in front of the monumental statues at Parţa have been decorated with eyes, and other symbols. On the


125

Fig. 14.10. Kachti altar (after Karagheorghis)

southern pillar, a clay prominence reproduces the Sun and on the northern one the Moon. Altar P16 from the same temple has a rectangular wooden pillar supporting also a bullhead.

At Çatal Hüyük one sanctuary (fig. 14.11) contains three clay horned bull heads decorated with lozenges and other decorations, such as (left) hands. Big pillars suggesting monumentality border the heads.

Fig. 14.11. Altar with pillars, bullheads and painted hands at Çatal Hüyük (after Mellaart)

At Kormadin the bullheads have been fixed in the walls or on the pillars and were plastered with clay (fig. 14.4). Bullhorns decorate the altar table too. Meanders cover the walls and the altar table. At Véstö Magór the pots

decorated with bucrania also suggest fertility and fecundity (Hegedus and Makkay 1987).

The monumental statues, benches, grinding stones, painted or incised walls or other architectonic elements will discussed in a separate paper.

References

ASLANIS, I., 1990, Befestigungsanlagen in Nordgrie-chenland von dem Chalkolithikum bis zum Beginn der frühen Bonzezeit. In Vinča and Its World, Ed. SASA, LI, Hist. 14, Belgrad, p. 183-188

BERCIU, D., 1956, Cercetări şi descoperiri arheologice în Regiunea Bucureşti. Materiale II, Bucureşti, p. 493-562.

BLAGA, L., 1944, Trilogia culturii. Orizont şi stil, spaţiul mioritic, geneza metaforei şi sensul culturii. Fundaţia regală pentru literatură şi artă, Bucureşti.

DRAGOMIR, I.T., 1996, Săpăturile arheologice la Târgu Bujoru (r. Bujoru, reg. Galaţi). Monografia arheologică a Moldovei de sud, I, Danubius, XVI, Galaţi, p. 63-68.

DUMITRESCU, H., 1968, Un modèle de sanctuaire découvert dans la station énéolithique de Căscioarele. Dacia NS XII, Bucureşti, p. 381-394.

DUMITRESCU, H., 1973, Sur une nouvelle interpreta-tion du modèle de sanctuaire de Căscioarele. Dacia NS, XVII, Bucureşti, p. 311-316.

DUMITRESCU, H. and Vl. DUMITRESCU, 1959, Săpăturile de la Traian-Dealul Fântânilor. Materiale, VI, Bucureşti, p. 157-175.

DUMITRESCU, Vl., 1970, Édifice destiné au culte découvert dans la couche Boian-Spanţov de la station tell de Căscioarele. Dacia NS XIV, Bucureşti, p. 5-24.

DUMITRESCU, Vl., 1974, Arta preistorică în România, Bucureşti.

DUMITRESCU, Vl., 1986, A doua coloană de lut ars din sanctuarul fazei Boian-Spanţov de la Căscioarele (jud. Călăraşi). Cultură şi Civilizaţie la Dunărea de Jos, II, Călăraşi, p. 69-72.

ELIADE, M., 1981, Istoria credinţelor şi ideilor religioase. Bucureşti.

ELIADE, M., 1991, Cosmologie şi alchimie babiloniană Ed. a II-a, Ed. Moldova, Iaşi.

GIMBUTAS, M., 1984, The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe. Myths and cult Images. Thames and Hudson, London.

GIMBUTAS, M., 1991, The Civilization of Goddess. The World of Old Europe. San Francisco.

GUSEV, S.A., 1995, Hausmodelle der Tripolje–Kultur. Prehistorische Zeitschrift, 70, 2, Berlin, S. 175-189.

HAUPTMANN, H., 1993, Ein Kultgebäude in Nevali Çori. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani,


126

P. Matthiae and M. Mellink [eds.], Between the rivers and over the mountains. Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica, Alba Palmieri dedicata. Rome, Università “La Sapienza”, p. 37-69.

HAUPTMANN, H., 2001, Possible Contacts between upper Mesopotamia and Central Anatolia during the Early Neolithic. Rond Table, Istanbul. Available on www: http: / The CANEW Project.

HAUPTMANN, H. and K. SCHMIDT, 2000, Frühe Tempel – frühe Götter?. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Archäologische Entdeckungen. Die Forschun-gen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts im 20. Jahrhundert, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie: 258-266.

HEGEDUS, K. and J. MAKKAY, 1987, Véstö Magór. A Settlement of the Tisza Culture. In The Late Neolithic of the Tisza Region, Budapest-Szolnok, p. 85-103.

IDOLE (Cat.), 1985, Idole. Frühe Götterbilder und Opfergaben. Prähistorische Staatssammlung München, Museum für Vor-und Frühgeschichte, Gisela Zahlhaas (Verantworlich für die Ausstellung und Katalogredak-tion), Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein.

JOVANOVIĆ, B., 1991, Die Kultplatze und Architekture in der Vinča-Kultur. Banatica 11, Reşiţa, Internatio-nales Symposion “Die Vinča Kultur – Rolle und Ihre Beziehungen”, p. 119-124.

KAFAFI, Z. and G. ROLLEFSON, 1994, 'Ain Ghazal 1993-1994. Biblical Archaeologist 57 (4), p. 239-241.

KAFAFI, Z. and G. ROLLEFSON, 1995, The 1994 Season at 'Ain Ghazal: Preliminary report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 39, p. 13-29.

KALICZ, N. and RACZKY P., 1981, The Precursor to the “Horns of Consacration” in the South-East European Neolithic. Acta Archaeologica Hungarica, 33, Budapest, p. 5-20.

KARAGHEORGHIS, J., 1977, La grande déese de Cypre et son culte. Collection de la maison de l'Orient et Mediterannée ancienne, ser. Arh., 5, 4, Lyon.

KRAMMER, S.N., 1962, Istoria începe la Summer, Bucureşti.

LASOTA MOSKALEWSKA, A. and V. SANEV, 1985-1986, Preliminary analysis of bones remains of animals from the Neolithic archaeological site Tumba Madžari near Skoplje (Yugoslavia). Macedonica Acta Archaeologica 10, Prilep, p. 55-71.

LÁSZLÓ, A., 2000, Some data on house-building techniques and foundation rite in the Ariuşd-Cucuteni culture. Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, VII, Iaşi, p. 245-253.

LAZAROVICI, Gh., 1998, Monumentale Plastik in Parţa. Acta Musei Napocensis, 35, 1, Cluj-Napoca, p. 9-15.

LAZAROVICI, Gh., 2001, The Eagle – the bird of death, Regeneration – Resurection and Messenger of Gods. Archaeological and Ethnological Problem. Tibiscum, X, Caransebeş, p. 57-67.

LAZAROVICI, C-M., 2004, Sanctuarele Precucuteni-Cucuteni. Arheologia Moldovei, 25/2002, Iaşi, p. 47-64.

LAZAROVICI, Gh. and Z. MAXIM, 1995, Parţa und die Arhitektur der Banater–Kultur. Symposium. Verona-Lazisse, Memoriae Museo Civico, 4, Verona, p. 55-66.

LAZAROVICI, Gh., F. DRAŞOVEAN and Z. MAXIM, 2001, Parţa. Monografie arheologică, Vol. 1.1 341 p.; vol. 1.2, 115 pl., 137 fig., “Waldpress”, BHAB, 12.

MAKKAY, J., 1971, Altorientalische Parallelen zu dem ältesten Heiligtumstypen Südosteuropas, Alba Regia 11, Székesfhérvár, p. 137-144.

MARINESCU-BÎLCU, S. and A. BOLOMEY, 2000, Drăguşeni. A Cucutenian Community. Ed. Enciclope-dică, Bucureşti.

MELLAART, J., 1975, The Neolithic of the Near East. Thames and Hudson, London.

MONAH, D., 1997, Plastica antropomorfă a culturii Cucuteni-Tripolie, Bibliotheca Memoriae Antiquitatis, III, Piatra Neamţ.

MONAH, D., F. MONAH, C.-M., MANTU and Gh. DUMITROAIA, 1997, Cucuteni. The Last Great Chalcolithic Civilization of Europe, ed. C.-M. Mantu, A. Tsaravopoulos, Gh. Dumitroaia, Athena Publishing & Printing House, Bucharest, 246 p.

MÜLLER-KARPE, H., 1968, Handbuch der Vorge-schichte, I. München.

MÜLLER-KARPE, H., 1974, Handbuch de Vorge-schichte, II, Jungsteinzeit. München.

NEAGU, M., 2000, Comunităţile Boian-Giuleşti din Valea Dunării. Istros X, Brăila, p. 25-34.

NITU A., S. CUCOS and D. MONAH, 1971, Ghelăieşti (Piatra Neamţ, I, Săpăturile din 1969 în aşezarea cucuteniană “Nedeia”). Memoria Antiquitatis, III, Piatra Neamţ, p. 11-64.

PAUL, I., 1965, Un complex de cult descoperit în aşezarea neolitică de la Pianul de Jos (r. Sebeş, reg. Hunedoara). Studii şi comunicări, 12, arheologie–istorie, Muzeul Brukenthal, Sibiu, p. 5-18.

PAUNESCU, Al., 1970, Epipaleoliticul de la Cuina Turcului. Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche, 21, 1, Bucureşti, p. 3-29.

PETRESCU-DÎMBOVIŢA, M., 1963, Die wichtigsten Ergebnisse der archäologischen Ausgrabungen in der neolithischen Siedlung von Truşeşti (Moldau). Prehistorische Zeitschrift, XLI, Berlin, p. 172-186.

PETRESCU-DIMBOVITA, M., M. FLORESCU, A.C. FLORESCU, 1999, Truşeşti, monografie arheologică. Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti – Iaşi.

RADUNČEVA, A., 2003, Kîsnoeneolitnoto obšcestvo v Bîlgarskite zemi. Raskopki i proučvanija, Sofija.

ROLLEFSON, G., 1983, Ritual and Cemetery at Neolithic 'Ain Ghazal (Jordan). Paléorient 9 (2), p. 29-38.


127

ROLLEFSON, G., 1985, The 1983 Season at the Neolithic Site of 'Ain Ghazal. National Geographic Research 1 (1), p. 44-62.

ROLLEFSON, G., 1986, Neolithic 'Ain Ghazal (Jordan): Ritual and Ceremony II. Paléorient 12 (1), p. 45-52.

ROLLEFSON, G., 1987, Local and Regional Relations in the Levantine PPN Period: 'Ain Ghazal as a Regional Center. Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan, 3, p. 29-32.

ROLLEFSON, G., 1997, Developments in Social Organization at Neolithic 'Ain Ghazal Based on Changes in Architecture. In Gebel, H.G.; Kafafi, Z.; Rollefson G., eds. The Prehistory of the Jordan II. Perspectives from 1997, p. 287-307, Berlin ex Oriente.

SANDARS, N.K., 1985, Prehistoric Art in Europe, London.

SANEV, V., 1988, Neolitska Svetilište od Tumba vo Madjari, Srpska. Macedonica Acta Archaeologica 9, Prilep, p. 9-10.

SCHMIDT, K., 1995, Investigations in the Upper Mesopotamian Early Neolithic: Göbelki Tepe and Gürcütepe. Neo-Lithics, A Newsletter of Southwest Asian Lithics Research, H. 2, p. 9-10.

SCHMIDT, K., 1999, Frühe Tier- und Menschenbilder vom Göbekli Tepe: Kampagnen 1995-98. Ein kommentierter Katalog der Großplastik und der Reliefs. Istanbuler Mitteilungen 49, Istanbul, S. 5-21.

SCHMIDT, K., 2000, Zuerst kam der Tempel, dann die Stadt. Vorläufiger Bericht zu den Grabungen am Göbekli Tepe und am Gürcütepe 1995-1999. Istanbuler Mitteilungen, Istanbul, 50, S. 5-40.

SCHMIDT, K., 2001, Göbekli Tepe, Southeastern Turkey. A Preliminary Report on the 1995-1999 Excavations. Paléorient 26.1, p. 45-54.

SIMOSKA, D. and V. SANEV, 1975, Neolitka naselba Veluška Tumba kai Bitolja., Macedonica Acta Archaeologica 1, Prilep, p. 25-88.

SIMOSKA, D. and V. SANEV, 1976, Praistorija vo Centralna Pelagomia, Ed. Narodni Muzej Bitola.

SIMOSKA, D., D. SIMOSKA, B. KITANOVSDKI and J. TODOROVIĆ, 1979, Neolitcko naselbas vo selo Mogila kai Bitolja. Macedonica Acta Archaeologica 5, Prilep.

SREJOVIĆ, D., 1969, Lepenski Vir, Belgrad.

SREJOVIĆ, D., 1971, Die Lepenski Vir Kulture und der Begin der Junstenzeit an der Mitteldonau. Fundamenta, A, 3, Köln-Wien.

The Anatolian, 1983F, The Anatolian Civilisations, I, Prehistoric / Hittite / Early Iron Age. The Council of Europe, XVIIIth European Art Exhibition, Istanbul May 22 – October 30, 1983, Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism, ed. Ferit Edgü, 311p.

TODOROVA, H. and HORISJAN, S.T., 1976, Ovčarovo. Sofia.

URSULESCU, N., 2001, Dovezi ale unei simbolistici a numerelor în cultura Precucuteni. Memoria Anti-quitatis, XXII, Piatra Neamţ, p. 51-70.

URSULESCU, N., 2002, Construcţiile sanctuar în cadrul organizării interne a aşezărilor din eneoliticul timpuriu al României. In Istorie şi Conştiinţă, Analele Universităţii “Al.I. Cuza” Iaşi, p. 3-7.

URSULESCU, N., 2003, Position des constructions-sanctuaires dans les habitats de l’énéolithique ancien de la Roumanie. Cultură şi Civilizaţie la Dunărea de Jos, XVI-XVII, Călăraşi, p. 42-47.

URSULESCU, N., 2004, La valeur sacrée des nombres dans l’énéolithique de Roumanie. Actes du XIVème Congrès UISPP, Université de Liège, Belgique 2001, BAR International Series 1303, p. 325-331.

URSULESCU, N. and V. COTIUGA, 2000, Târgu Frumos, Baza Pătule. Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 1999, CIMEC, Bucureşti, p. 106-107.

URSULESCU, N. and F. TENCARIU, A., 2004, Aménagements de culte dans la zone des foyers et des fours de la culture Precucuteni. Memoria Antiquitatis, XXIII, Piatra Neamţ, p. 129-144.

ZBENOVIĆ, V.G., 1996, Siedlungen der frühen Tripol'e-Kultur zwischen Dnestr und Südlichem Bug. Archäologie in Eurasien, Band I, Berlin.

Neo- Eneolithic Cult Constructions in Southeastern Europe

Documents