Subtitle:

Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 68 (2016)

Publisher:

Instytut Archeolgoii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk

Place of publishing:

Kraków

Description:

ill. ; 25 cm

Type of object:

Journal/Article

Abstract:

The paper proposes an interpretation of ornamental patterns in Tripolye-Cucuteni pottery. In the past decades, abstract and geometric ornamental motifs have often been viewed quite subjectively as images of the ‘moonfaced Goddess’, the ‘world egg’, ‘shells’, etc. The meaning of the ornamentation has been reconstructed on the basis of various ethnographic analogies, usually rather distant from the material under study. Within the framework of the structural-semiotic approach, the ornamentation has been analysed as a sign system or proto-writing where each element or motif is supposed to have a particular meaning. However, careful study of the dynamics inherent in the development of ornamental patterns shows that such interpretation cannot really be substantiated. Most signs seem to have been elements of technical design. The patterns were mostly created by dividing ornamented areas and not by building whole sequences of signs as it is done in texts. What was meaningful was the ornament itself as an integrated whole, not its elements. Ethnographic evidence shows that interpretation of identical motifs may vary considerably even within the same society. This has been confirmed by the author’s study of variation in the Tripolye patterns, which seem to have no unambiguous meaning. The main areas of future research lie in paleo-ethnological and paleo-cultural studies, where ornamental patterns are regarded as specific markers which reflect changes in the ethnic composition and social structure of prehistoric communities, and which provide information about interactions between different human groups

References:

Andreyev M. S. 1928. Ornament gornykh Tadzhikov verkhovev Amu-Darii i Kirgizov Pamira. Tashkent: Obshchestvo dla izuchenia Tadzhikistana i iranskikh narodnostey za ego predelami
Arnheim R. 1974. Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press
Bailey D. W. 1994. Reading prehistoric figurines as individuals. World Archaeology 25(3), 321–331
Bogaevsky B. L. 1931. Rakoviny v raspisnoy keramike Kitaia, Krita i Tripolia (= Izvestia Gosudarstvennoy Akademii istorii materialnoy kultury 6(8-9)). Leningrad
Bolsunovsky K. V. 1905. Simvol zmia v „Tripolskoy kulture”. Mifologicheskiy etiud (Referat, prigotovlennyi k chteniiu vo vremia XIII Arkheologicheskogo sezda v Ekaterinoclave v avguste 1905). Kiev: Tipo-litografiia N. A. Giricha
Bolsunovsky K. V. 1908. Simvolika epokhi neolita, s tablitsey risunkov. Kiev: Progress
Braithwaite M. 1982. Decoration as ritual symbol: a theoretical proposal and an ethnographic study in southern Sudan. In I. Hodder (ed.), Symbolic and structural archaeology (= New Directions in Archaeology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 80–88
Bunzel R. L. 1972. The Pueblo potter: a study of creative imagination in primitive art. New York: Dover Publications
Burdo N. B. 1999. Zmiia v rannotripilckikh ornamentakh ta mifakh. In Kratkie soobshchenia Odesskogo arkheologicheskogo obshchestva. Odessa: Odesskiy arkheologicheskiy muzey, 23–28
Chapman J. C. 1999. The Origins of Warfare in the Prehistory of Central and Eastern Europe. In J. Carman and A. F. Harding (eds.), Ancient Warfare: Archaeological Perspectives. Stroud: Sutton Publishing, 101–142
Chikalenko L. 1926. Naris rozvitku ukraenskoy neolitichnoy malovanoy keramiki 2. Bilche Zolote. In Tripilska kultura na Ukraieni 1. Kiev, 113-119
Čikalenko L. 1927. Studie o vývoji ukrajinské neolithické malované keramiky. I. Sidliště Petreni v Besarabii. Obzor praehistorica 5–6, 21–29
Dintses L. A. 1929. Procherchenniy tripolskiy ornament kultury A (= Sbornik biuro po delam aspirantov GAIMK 1). Leningrad, 15-29
Evans-Pritchard E. E. 1965. Theories of Primitive Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Friedrich M. H. 1970. Design structure and social interaction: archaeological implications of an ethnographic analysis. American Antiquity 35(3), 332–343
Gadamer H.-G. 1986. The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Gimbutas M. 1974. The Gods and Goddesses of Old Europe: 7000 to 3500 BC. Myth, Legends and Cult Images (= Hermeneutics, studies in the history of religions 4). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press
Golan A. 1991. Myth and Symbol: Symbolism in Prehistoric Religions. Jerusalem: Schoen Books
Greenberg L. J. 1975. Art as a structural system: a study of Hopi pottery designs. Studies in the Anthropology of Visual Communications 2(1), 33–50
Hardin M. A. 1979. The Cognitive Basis of Productivity in a Decorative Art Style: Implications of an Ethnographic Study for Archaeologists’ Taxonomies. In C. Kramer (ed.), Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology. New York: Columbia University Press, 75–101
Hardin M. A. 1983. The structure of Tarascan pottery painting. In D. K. Washburn (ed.), Structure and Cognition in Art (= New Directions in Archaeology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8–24
Hutton R. 1997. The Neolithic great goddess: a study in modern tradition. Antiquity 71(271), 91–99
Jablan S. V. 1995. Theory of Symmetry and Ornament. Belgrade: Mathematical Institute
Jablan S. V. 2002. Symmetry, Ornament and Modularity (= Series on Knots and Everything 30). Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing
Kandyba O. 1935. Die forlaufende Spirale in der bandkeramischen Ornamentik. Archiv für Anthropologie 23, 266–308
Kandyba O. 1936. S-spiral in the Decoration of the Dniestro-Danubian Neolithic Pottery. American Journal of Archaeology 40(2), 228–246
Kleyn L. S. 1993. Fenomen sovetckoy arkheologii. Sankt-Petersburg: Farn
Kleyn L. S. 2000. Arkheologiia v sedle. (Kosinna c rasstoiania v 70 let). Stratum plus 4, 88–140
Kozhin P. М. 1981. Znachenie ornamentatsii keramiki i bronzovykh izdeliy Severnogo Kitaia v epokhi neolita i bronzy dlia issledovaniy etnogeneza. In M. V. Kriukov, M. V. Sofronov and N. N. Cheboksarov (eds.), Etnicheskaia istoriia narodov Vostochnoy i Iugo-Vostochnoy Azii v drevnosti i srednie veka. Moskva: Nauka, 131-161
Kozhin P. М. 1991. О drevnikh ornamentalnykh sistemakh Evraziy. In Yu. V. Bromley (ed.), Etnoznakovye funktsii kultury. Moskva: Nauka, 129-151
Kozhin P. М. 2007. Etnokulturnye kontakty naseleniia Evrazii v eneolite – rannem zheleznom veke (paleokulturologia i kolesnyi transport). Vladivostok: Dalnauka
Kozhin P. М. 2014. Priskhozhdenie i razvitie keramicheskogo proizvodstva i raspisnoy ornamentatsii glinianoy posudy. In Trudy Margianskoy arkheologicheskoy ekspeditsii 5. Issledovaniia Gonur Depe v 2011-2013 g. Moskva: Stary Sad, 112-126
Krichevskiy E. Yu. 1949. Ornamentaciya glinyanykh sosudov u zemledel’cheskih plemen neoliticheskoy Evropy. Uchenye zapiski LGU 13, 54–110
Lazarovici G. 2003. Sacred Symbols on Neolithic Cult Objects from the Balkans. In L. Nikolova (ed.), Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in Southeast Europe (= British Archaeological Reports. International Series 1139). Oxford: Archaeopress, 57–64
Lazarovici G., Lazarovici C.-M. and Merlini M. 2011. Tărtăria and the Sacred Tablets. Cluj-Napoca: Editura Mega
Lesure R. G. 2011. Interpreting Ancient Figurines. Context, Comparison, and Prehistoric Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Linnichenko I. A. and Khvoyka V. V. 1901. Sosudy so znakami – iz nakhodok na ploshchadkakh tripolskoy kultury. Zapiski Odesskogo obshchestva istorii i drevnostey 23, 199-202
Luca S. A. 2014. Art and Religious Beliefs in the Neolithic and Aeneolithic from Romania. Sibiu: Editura Museului National Brukenthal
Luca S. A. and Mărcuţi F. 2015. Prehistoric Signs and Symbols from Transylvania (1). “The Secret Tablet” the Neolithic and Aeneolithic Archaeological Settlement from Tărtăria – Gura Luncii (Alba County). Brukenthal. Acta Musei 10(1), 7–16
Melnichuk I. V. 1990. Izobrazhenie zmei Tripole. In V. A. Dergachev (ed.) Arkheologicheskie issledovaniia molodykh uchenykh Moldavii. Kishinev: Shtnintsa, 39-46
Merlini M. 2006. The Gradešnica script revisited. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 5, 25–77
Merlini M. 2007. A semiotic matrix to distinguish between decorations and signs of writing employed by the Danube Civilization. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 6, 73–130
Merlini M. 2014. The sacred cryptograms from Tărtăria: unique or widespread signs? Putting the asserted literate content of the tablets under scrutiny. In J. Marler (ed.) Fifty Years of Tărtăria Excavations. Festschrift in Honor of Gheorghe Lazarovici on the occasion of his 73rd Birthday. Suceava, Sebastopol: Editura Lidana, Institute of Archaeomythology, 73–119
Merlini M. and Lazarovici G. 2008. Settling discovery circumstances, dating and utilization of the Tărtăria tablets. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 7, 111–196
Meskell L. M. 1995. Goddesses, Gimbutas and “New Age” archaeology. Antiquity 69(262), 74–86
Movsha T. G. 1991. Antropomorfnye siuzhety na keramike kultur tripolsko-kukutenskoy obshchnosti. In V. F. Gening (ed.), Dukhovnaia kultura drevnikh obshchestv na territorii Ukrainy. Kiev: Naukova dumka, 34-47
Nikolov V. and Karastoianova D. 2003. Risuvanata ornamentatsiia kato sistema za komunikatsiia mezhdu pokoleniiata (po materiali ot ranno- i srednonelitniia plast na tel Kazanlk). Arkheologia 44(2), 5-14
Palaguta I. V. 1999. Problemy izucheniia spiralnykh ornamentov tripolskoy keramiki. Stratum plus 2, 148–159
Palaguta I. 2007. Tripolye Culture during the Beginning of the Middle Period (BI): The relative chronology and local grouping of sites (= British Archaeological Reports. International Series 1666). Oxford: Archaeopress
Palaguta I. V. 2008. Mify i realnoct v interpretatsii ornamentov drevnikh zemledeltsev. In Dialog kultur i partnerstwo tsivilizatsiy: VIII Mezhdunarodnye Likhachevskie nauchnye chteniia. Sankt-Peterburg: SPGUP, 216-217
Palaguta I. 2009. “Technical decoration” of the Tripolye Ceramics. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37(2), 85–91
Palaguta I. V. 2009. Iavlenie obratimosti i osnovnye napravleniia razvitiia kompozitsiy ornamentov tripolsko-kukutenskoy keramiki. Materialy 9-11 zasedaniy nauchno-metodicheskogo seminaria „Tverskaia zemlia i sopredelnye territorii v drevnosti”. Tverskoy arkheologicheskiy sbornik 7. Tver: Triada, 411-418
Palaguta I. V. 2012. Mir iskusstva drevnikh zemledeltsev Evropy. Kultury balkano-karpatskogo kruga v VII-III tys. do n.e. Sankt-Petersburg: Aleteia
Pasto T. 1964. The Space-Frame Experience in Art. New York: Barnes
Peshchereva E. M. 1959. Goncharnoe proizvodstvo Sredney Azii (= Trudy Instituta etnografii im. N. N. Miklukho-Maklaia 42). Moskva, Leningrad: Nauka
Rice P. M. 1981. Evolution of specialized pottery production: A trial model. Current Anthropology 22(3), 219–240
Rindiuk N. V. 1994. Dejaki pitannia ideologii dawnozemlepobskikh plemen. Arkheologia 1, 145-147
Rybakov B. A. 1964. Semantika tripolskogo ornamenta. In Tezisy dokladov na zasedaniiakh, posviashchennykh itogam polevykh issledovaniy 1963 g. Moskva: AN SSSR, 23-24
Rybakov B. A. 1981. Iazychestvo drevnikh slavian. Moskva: Nauka
Schmidt H. 1924. Prähistorisches aus Ostasiens. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 5/6, 133–157
Shepard A. O. 1948. The symmetry of abstract design with special reference to ceramic decoration (= Contributions to American Anthropology and History 9(47). Publication 574). Washington D.C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington
Summers D. 2003. Real Spaces. World Art History and the Rise of Western modernism. London and New York: Phaidon Press
Telegin D. Ya. 1994. Obraz zmeelikoy bogini v Tripole. In Drevneishie obshchnosti zemledeltsev i skotovodov Severnogo Prichernomoria V tys. do n.e. – V v. n.e. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy arkheologicheskoy konferentsii 10-14 oktiabria 1994 g. Tiraspol: Nauchno-issledovatelskaia laboratoria „Arkheologia”, 73-74
Ţerna S. 2007. Consideraţii preliminare privind evoluţia decorului antropomorf pictat de pe ceramica culturii Cucuteni-Tripolje. Peuce 5, 33–42
Tkachuk T. M. 1991. Lichiny v rospisi keramiki kultury Tripole-Kukuteni. In V. F. Gening (ed.), Dukhovnaia kultura drevnikh obshchestv na territorii Ukrainy. Kiev: Naukova dumka, 47–59
Tkachuk Т. М. 1993. Znakova sistema Tripilskoy kultury. Arkheologia 3, 91-100
Tkachuk Т. М. 2002. Tripilskiy ornament ta zmineni stani cvidomosti. Galichina 8. Ivano-Frankivck, 13-22
Tkachuk Т. М. 2004. Znakovi sistemi tripilskoy kultury. In M. Yu. Videiko (ed.), Entsiklopediia tripilskoi tsivilizatsii: v 2-kh 1. Kyiv: Ukrpoligrafmedia 433-471
Tkachuk Т. М. 2005. Znakovi sistemi Tripilsko-Kukutenckoy spilnosti (malovaniy posud etapiv VIISII/γII) 1-2, Vinnitsia: Nova Kniga.
Tkachuk Т. М. and Melnik Ya. G. 2000. Semiotichniy analiz tripilsko-kukutenckikh znakovikh system (malovaniy posud). Ivano-Frankivck: Play
Tsvek E. V. 2004. Nekotorye ornamantalnye kompozitsii na keramike vostochnotripolskoy kultury. In Izobrazitelnye pamiatniki: stil, epokha, kompozitsii. Material tematicheskoy nauchnoy konferentsii. Cankt-Peterburg: SPBGU, 102-105
Winn Sh. M. M. 1981. Pre-writing in Southeastern Europe: the sign system of the Vinča culture, ca. 4000 B.C. Calgary: Western Publishers
Zbenovich V. G. 1998. Zoomorfnye motivy v rospisi keramiki kultury Tripole-Kukuteni. Arkheologia 4, 64-78
Zbenovich V. G. 1991. Drakon v izobrazitelnoy traditsii kultury Kukuteni-Tripole. In V. F. Gening (ed.), Dukhovnaia kultura drevnikh obshchectv na territorii Ukrainy. Kiev: Naukova dumka, 20-34

Relation:

Sprawozdania Archeologiczne

Volume:

68

Start page:

65

End page:

80

Detailed Resource Type:

Article

Format:

application/pdf

Resource Identifier:

oai:rcin.org.pl:61214 ; 0081-3834 ; 10.23858/SA68.2016.004

Source:

IAiE PAN, call no. P 244 ; IAiE PAN, call no. P 245 ; IAiE PAN, call no. P 243 ; click here to follow the link

Language:

eng

Rights:

Rights Reserved - Free Access

Terms of use:

Copyright-protected material. May be used within the limits of statutory user freedoms

Digitizing institution:

Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Original in:

Library of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Projects co-financed by:

Ministry of Science and Higher Education ; Activities popularizing science (DUN)

Access:

Open