Vinča
culture
From
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Vinča culture |
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
Middle Neolithic |
|
Dates |
c. 5500–4500 BCE |
|
Major sites |
Drenovac |
|
Characteristics |
Large tell settlements |
|
Preceded by |
|
The Vinča culture is a Neolithic archaeological
culture of Southeastern
Europe, dated to the period 5500–4500 BCE.[1] Named for itstype site, Vinča-Belo Brdo, a large tell settlement discovered by Serbian
archaeologist Miloje Vasić in 1908, it is thought to represent the material remains of a prehistoric tribal society chiefly characterised by their
settlement pattern and ritual behaviour. The development of
farming technology first introduced to the region during the First Temperate Neolithic fuelled a population boom that made Vinča settlements among the
largest in prehistoric
Contents
[hide] ·
1 Geography and Demographics ·
7 Notes |
[edit]Geography and
Demographics
The Vinča culture occupied a
region of Southeastern Europe (i.e. the Balkans)
corresponding mainly to modern-day Serbia, but also parts
of Macedonia, Hungary, Bosnia, Romania, Bulgaria, Montenegro, and Greece.[1]
This region had already been settled
by earlier farming cultures, but during the Vinča period sustained
population growth led to an unprecedented level of settlement size and density
along with the population of areas that were bypassed by earlier settlers. Vinča
settlements were considerably larger than any other contemporary European
culture, in some instances surpassing the cities of theAegean and early Near Eastern Bronze Age a millennium later. The largest sites, more than 29 hectares, may have had populations of up to 2,500 individuals.[2]
[edit]Chronology
The origins of the Vinča
culture are debated. Before the advent of radiocarbon
dating it was thought, on the basis of typological similarities, that Vinča and other Neolithic cultures belonging to the 'Dark Burnished Ware'
complex were the product of migrations from Anatolia to the Balkans. This had to be reassessed in light of radiocarbon dates
which showed that the Dark Burnished Ware complex appeared at least a
millennium before Troy I, the putative
starting point of the westward migration. An alternative hypothesis where the
Vinča culture developed locally from the preceding Starčevo
culture—first proposed by Colin Renfrew in 1969—is now accepted by many scholars, but the evidence is not
conclusive.[3][4]
The Vinča culture can be
divided into two phases, closely linked with those of its type site Vinča-Belo Brdo:[5]
|
Vinča culture |
Vinča-Belo Brdo |
Years BCE |
|
Early
Vinča period |
Vinča
A |
5500–4800 |
|
Vinča
B |
||
|
Vinča
C |
||
|
Late
Vinča period |
Vinča
D |
4800–4200 |
|
Abandoned |
[edit]Decline
In its later phase the centre of the
Vinča network shifted from Vinča-Belo Brdo to Vršac, and the long-distance exchange of obsidian and Spondylus artefacts from modern-day Hungary and the Aegean respectively became more important than that of Vinča figurines. Eventually
the network lost its cohesion altogether and fell into decline. It is likely
that, after two millennia of intensive farming, economic stresses caused by
decreasing soil fertility were partly responsible for this decline.[6]
According to Marija Gimbutas, the Vinča culture was part of Old Europe – a relatively homogeneous, peaceful and matrifocal culture that occupied Europe during the Neolithic. According to this theory
its period of decline was followed by an invasion of warlike, horse-riding Proto-Indo-European tribes from the Pontic-Caspian steppe.[7]
[edit]Economy
[edit]Subsistence
Most people in Vinča settlements would have been occupied
with the provision of food. They practised a mixed subsistence economy where agriculture, animal husbandry and hunting and foraging all
contributed to the diet of the growing Vinča population. Compared to
earlier cultures of the First Temperate
Neolithic (FTN) these
practices were intensified, with increasing specialisation on high-yield cereal crops and the secondary
products of
domesticated animals, consistent with the increased population density.[8]
Vinča agriculture introduced common wheat, oat and flax to temperate Europe, and made greater
use of barley than the cultures of the FTN. These
innovations increased crop yields and allowed the manufacture of clothes made
from plant textiles as well as animal products (i.e. leather and wool). There
is indirect evidence that Vinča farmers made use of the cattle-drivenplough,
which would have had a major effect on the amount of human labour required for
agriculture as well as opening up new area of land for farming. Many of the
largest Vinča sites occupy regions dominated by soil types that would have
required ploughing.[8]
Areas with less arable potential were exploited through transhumant pastoralism, where groups from the lowland villages moved
their livestock to nearby upland areas on a seasonal basis. Cattle was more
important than sheep and goats in Vinča herds and, in comparison to the
cultures of the FTN, livestock was increasingly kept for milk, leather and as draft animals, rather than solely for meat. Seasonal movement
to upland areas was also motivated by the exploitation of stone and mineral
resources. Where these were especially rich permanent upland settlements were
established, which would have relied more heavily on pastoralism for
subsistence.[8]
Though increasingly focused on domesticated plants and animals,
the Vinča subsistence economy still made use of wild food resources. The
hunting of deer, boar and auroch,
fishing ofcarp and catfish,
shell-collecting, fowling and foraging of wild cereals, forest
fruits and nuts made up a significant part of the diet at some Vinča
sites. These, however, were in the minority; settlements were invariably
located with agricultural rather than wild food potential in mind, and wild
resources were usually underexploited unless the area was low in arable
productivity.[8]
[edit]Industry
An anthropomorphic
figurine with incised lines depicting clothing.
Generally speaking craft production within the Vinča network
was carried out at the household level; there is little evidence for individualeconomic specialisation. Nevertheless,
some Vinča artefacts were made with considerable levels of technical
skill. A two-stage method was used to produce pottery with a polished, multi-coloured
finish, known as 'Black-topped' and 'Rainbow Ware'. Sometimes powdered cinnabarand limonite were applied to the fired clay for
decoration. The style of Vinča clothing can be inferred from figurines
depicted with open-neckedtunics and
decorated skirts. Cloth was woven from both flax and wool (with flax becoming
more important in the later Vinča period), and buttons made from shell or
stone were also used.[9]
The Vinča site of Pločnik has produced the earliest example of copper tools in the world. However, the
people of the Vinča network practised only an early and limited form of
metallurgy.[10] Copper
ores were mined on a large scale at sites like Rudna Glava, but only a fraction were smelted and cast into
metal artefacts – and these were ornaments and trinkets rather than functional
tools, which continued to be made fromchipped stone, bone and antler. It is likely that the primary
use of mined ores was in their powdered form, in the production of pottery or
as bodily decoration.[9]
[edit]Culture
The Lady of Vinča–in iconic Vinčaanthropomorphic
figurine
|
|
This
section is empty. You
can help by adding to it. |
[edit]Major Vinča sites
Map of Serbia with
markers showing the locations of major Vinča archaeological sites.
§
Drenovac
§
Gomolava
§
Pločnik
§
Selevac
§
Tărtăria
§
Turdaş
§
Vinča-Belo Brdo, the type site
§
Vršac
[edit]See also
[edit]Notes
1.
^ a b Chapman 2000, p. 239.
2.
^ Chapman 1981, pp. 40–51.
3.
^ Chapman 1981, pp. 1–5.
4.
^ Chapman 1981, pp. 33–39.
5.
^ Chapman 1981, pp. 17–32; calibrated with CalPal.
6.
^ Chapman 1981, pp. 132–139.
7.
^ Gimbutas 1976.
8.
^ a b c d Chapman 1981, pp. 84–116.
9.
^ a b Chapman 1981, pp. 117–131.
10.
^ Cvekic 2007.
[edit]References
§
Chapman, John (1981). The Vinča culture
of south-east Europe: Studies in chronology, economy and society (2 vols).
BAR International Series. 117. Oxford: B.A.R. ISBN 0-86054-139-8.
§
Chapman, John (2000). Fragmentation in Archaeology:
People, Places, and Broken Objects. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415158039.
§
Cvekic, Ljilja (12 November 2007). "Prehistoric women had passion for fashion". Reuters. Retrieved 23 September
2010.
§
Gimbutas, Marija A., ed
(1976). Neolithic Macedonia as reflected by
excavation at Anza, southeast Yugoslavia. Los Angeles: Institute
of Archaeology, University of California.
[edit]Further reading
§
Vasić, Miloje (1932). Preistorijska Vinča I
[Prehistoric Vinča I]. Beograd.
§
Vasić, Miloje (1936). Preistorijska Vinča II
[Prehistoric Vinča II]. Beograd.
§
Vasić, Miloje (1936). Preistorijska Vinča III
[Prehistoric Vinča III]. Beograd.
§
Vasić, Miloje (1936). Preistorijska Vinča IV
[Prehistoric Vinča IV]. Beograd.
[edit]External links
|
|
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Vinča culture |
§
Gallery of
Vinča pottery and ceramic sculpture
§
3D
reconstruction of a Vinča house on YouTube