011 026 arh kovacs_layout 1

8/2/2019 011 026 ARH Kovacs_Layout 1

1/16

11

ANGVSTIA, 14, 2010, Arheologie, pag. 11-26

The hearth is one of the most importantelements of the sanctuaries and homes. Thisis defined with several meanings. The pri-mary meaning refers to the basic function: Akind of raised platform, built in the entranceof the houses, in which there is a fire to pre-pare food; the flat part of the oven (forbread) or of the stove or kiln, a heated plat-form where one can sit or sleep1.

The concept ofhearthin Romanian lan-

guage contains, in addition to its purposes offood preparation, several other meanings:housing, stable foundation, home, house,place of native origin. The term hearth of thevillageis used in two ways: the perimeter ofthe village or the central area of the ruralcommunity. The first hearth is the firsthouse where the family was settled foundinga village (the first hearth that burned in a vil-lage). All these meanings are included todayin the global expression parental hearthorancient hearth 2. Moreover, it seems thatthe word hearthmust have been behind theoriginal term for house and not walls or en-closed space3, an obvious fact if we considerthe second definition given by the dictionarymeaning: the main place, the central area ofa settlement, of an installation etc., the placeon what something was built or where some-thing is placed4.

The concept of cultic hearth is difficult todefine, because the hearth must contain cer-

tain elements to highlight the fact that a fire-place was used only for certain activities orthat it was not only used for cooking. Thehearth is an important element for all com-munities regardless of space and time. SomeNeolithic buildings present around the hearthobjects of worship, without them beingshrines and/or community places. In mostsanctuaries, we find cultic elements in thehearths area, probably because it was the

most protected place in the building5. Therepeated rebuildings of the hearth by succes-sive layers of clay demonstrate that it has notbeen located by accident, but instead theplace was searched and kept for a long timeas a family centre 6. The general signifi-cance of the fire-hearth is linked to the sexu-ality and fecundity7. In addition, the hearth isone of the ways of manifestation of the GreatMother; by the heat (combustion chamber)her womb exudes the life and maintains it8.The idea can be carried forward from theanalogy of the wood, placed in the hearth asa suggestion of the sexual act9.

To specify a particular building plan, weused the buildings typology proposed by Prof.Dr. Gheorghe Lazarovici and researcher Dr.Cornelia Magda Lazarovici, in the work The Architecture of Neolithic and Copper Age inRomania, Trinitas Publishing House, Iai, 2006.We used the codes for the house types10 and,in some circumstances, it was necessary to

Statistic analysis on the Neolithic and Eneolithic shrinehearths from south-eastern Europe

Cuvinte cheie: vatr, tipologie, neolitic, sud-estul Europei, analiza statisticKey words:hearth, typology, Neolithic, south-eastern Europe, statistic analysis

Rezumat Vatra reprezint unul dintre cele mai importante elemente din cadrul sanctuarelor, dar i din cadrul locuinelor.

Conceptul de vatr cultic este dificil de definit, deoarece trebuie s cuprind anumite elemente care s scoat neviden faptul c o anumit vatr era folosit doar n anumite activiti sau c nu era folosit doar pentru gtit. Vatraeste un element de mare importan pentru toate comunitile indiferent de spaiu i de timp. Unele cldiri neoliticeprezint n jurul vetrei obiecte de cult, fr a fi sanctuare sau locuri comunitare. Pentru analiza vetrelor din sanctuaream folosit tipologia vetrelor alctuit de ctre aceiai cercettori, adugnd cteva tipuri noi, care nu au fost observatepn n prezent n locuine, respectiv A15 A20, precum i tipul B8 (fig. II/1, 2).

Am introdus vetrele din sanctuare, conform tipologiei, n baza de date, realizat n Access, fcnd ulterior corelaiintre diverse elemente descoperite n cldirile comunitare. Remarcm prezena unor vetre cu forme interesante, pe carenu le gsim n locuine, precum vatra cruciform sau n form de potcoav. Articolul se refer i la anumite vetre cuamenajri cultice care ar fi putut avea rolul unui altar. Analiza statistic a vetrelor din cldirile obinuite sau din sanctuarepoate dezvlui o serie de aspecte legate de modalitatea n care cei din perioadele neolitic i eneolitic i concep spaiulde locuit sau de cult. Urmrirea unor anumite tipare de aranjament ar putea dezvlui tipare comportamentale care in

de obiceiuri, credine sau mod.


2/16

add some new codes. The need arosebecause certain structural forms are usedonly for houses. For the analysis of thehearths from the sanctuaries, we used thehearths typology made by the same resear-chers, adding some new types that have notbeen observed so far in the dwellings, likeA15 - A20 and B8 type (Fig. I /1, 2).

We introduced shrine hearths, according tothe typology, in the database made inMicrosoft Access and then we made correla-tions between the various elements found incommunity buildings. First, we wanted to seethe correlation between the types of buildingsand types of hearths used.

The greatest variety of fireplace types arisein A1a type of building, respectively rectan-gular building, with approximately equalsides, with the entrance through the roof,type of building widespread in atal Hyk

site11. In the buildings with annex or porch,E1 or B8 types of buildings, type A17 fire-places have been used, of circular shape,closed and with a raised edge (Fig. II/1). Thefireplace type A13 is used in almost all typesof buildings. The rarest occurring types areB1 and B2, which are used but are not gen-eralized. As geometric shapes the circularhearths are preferred, followed by the rec-tangular ones (Fig. II/2). In terms of fre-quency of the fireplaces in the sanctuaries,we followed which is the type most exten-sively used. We correlated the types ofhearths used with the discovery sites. In gen-eral, we see that a certain type of fireplace ispreferred in a given area or in a particularsettlement (Fig. II/3).

We note that A10 type, rectangular shapewith a raised edge, is used extensively, butnot as frequently as type A13 circular. The cir-cular type is often met with open furnacemouth, or with a raised edge (type A6) orwithout (type A5). Type A15 is used only inthe Danube Gorge sites, like Lepenski Vir andPadina, being a special category between the

hearths (Fig. II/3). Certainly, in the anthropo-morphic type of hearths, made of stone, likethe ones from the Danube Gorge (Fig. IV/3,4), one can distinguish a number of types andsubtypes. A typology of this kind of hearthswas made by our colleague Dr. Ioan Cojo-caru12. From the statistical graphs, weobserve a large variety of fireplaces used incult buildings (Fig. II/1, 3). On the dimen-

sional perspective, the overwhelming majo-rity of the sanctuaries have monumentalfireplaces. It is somewhat natural, given theparticular function they have inside the cultbuildings13.

For an accurate idea concerning the posi-tioning perspective, we introduced in thedatabases the different possible location,

depending on the building's general shape.Rectangular type - D and DD; trapezoidal T;square P; and circular C; for the rectan-gular type of building, we made a difference,for the location of the entry criteria: the shortside - building D and DD for entry into thelong side (Fig. III/1). In the case of the rec-tangular type of buildings, with the entranceon the short side, the type of building A2, thehearth is located behind the building in mostcases, which is the position D18, a placesomewhat away from the entrance. As a sim-ilar frequency, but more rarely, the places

near the entrance are used, like D13, D20and D17 spots. The corners and the most dis-tant place considering the entrance areextremely rarely used (Fig. III/2).

Square structures, in general, have notbeen used for arrangements of places of wor-ship. There are rare cases in which theyappear as perfectly square buildings, mostlybeing of various rectangular types. For thesample that was available, we have identifiedthree preferred spots for the location of thefireplace in the square buildings. The pre-ferred place is the one in the middle part ofthe building, in front of the entrance door, theevacuation of smoke being necessary. Thebuilding corners are used in equally rarecases, as opposite the entry, while those onthe same side of the door are not used at all(Fig. III/3).

The hearth is one of the interior elementsof the buildings with a large persistence intime and space. The first hearths are found incaves, dating from the Upper PalaeolithicAge. One of the earliest hearths discoveredwas at Tarnet-Garonne, in Bruniquel cave in

south-western France14

.In the cave, two structures of broken sta-lactites and stalagmites with a fireplace insidewere arranged (Fig. IV/1). The analyzedhearth, resulting 47 600 years old, was placedin the Mousterian Age15. In the oriental area,for the Aceramic Neolithic Age were discov-ered hearths in the sanctuary, often borderedwith stones (A20 type). One example comes

12

ADELA KOVCS


3/16

from 'Ain Ghazal16, where the central hearthof the square sanctuary was painted with redand bordered by seven large stones17. In fact,the hearth was kept in place and restored inall four phases of development and buildingrenovation18. In general, in the oriental area,during the Aceramic Neolithic the circularhearth is used in the shrines, as in Qermez

Dere19 but also in other Eastern and Levan-tine sites20.In the eastern area, the hearth of Beer-

Sheba is worth mentioning. This was embed-ded in the plastered floor and consisted of aspecial arrangement, made of small squarestones (Fig. IV/2). The discoverers named itas magic square, because every stone worea red drawing made on a surface. After ana-lyzing the hearths arrangement, the assump-tion that it was used by a priest, or a magi-cian, to guess or predict in the CopperAge period has been issued21.

For the same area, in the Early Bronze Age,we mention the sanctuary from Beycesultan,Turkey. The hearth discovered here is one ofmonumental type, with a possible bucraniaplaced inside a box behind it, probably usedto deposit offerings. Of course that the build-ing has many defining elements within thesanctuaries, such as columns and special ves-sels22 (Fig. IV/5).

For the Mesolithic Age, the fireplace is oneof the main elements of worship. The specialshape of the hearths from the Danube Gorgearea determined a special analysis in thesespecific sites, such as Lepenski Vir andPadina. The sites in this area present a spe-cial type of anthropomorphic fireplace thatdominates the room, being centrally located(Fig. IV/3, 4). Around the hearths the famousmen-fish statues were discovered23. In allthese structures, the hearth is in the centralposition. In the same time, it has funeral pur-poses, because of the several cases ofdeceased with inventory, deposited beneaththe hearth stones24. The dead deposited inthe buildings, often around the fireplaces, are

touching with their hands the stone-slab ofhearth25. The significance of the anthropo-morphic hearth (Fig. IV/4) is probably relatedto fertility or the heat of the fire26.

The researchers Gh. Lazarovici and C.-M.Lazarovici believe that Lepenski Vir couldhave been a place of learning about the maincrafts, catching, cooking and storage of fish.They also believe that the large number of

sanctuaries and shrines, present in everylevel, as well as the ritual deposits, lead us tothink of a site with special role of worship,sacred initiation, to all communities of theMesolithic Danube Gorge, perhaps on bothsides of it27.

One of the largest buildings in the centralarea of the site investigated in Lepenski Vir is

building L 54 (Fig. IV/3). Particular inventoryfound here provides arguments for its classi-fication in the category of shrines28. In thisstructure, among other elements, a ceramicbowl decorated with two spirals29 loca-ted ontwo opposite sides was discovered30. Thevessel appeared in the same context as atomb of a newborn and a hearth containing asecondary burial of a mature womans jaw(inside the hearth). Two stone sculptureswere placed in front of the fireplace, andbeyond the sculptures were placed the gravesof two children31. Both sculptures of oval

stone are decorated with meanders, possiblya representation of the water of life, as a pri-mordial element32. Taking a close look at thecarved stone, found in connection with thehearth (Fig. IV/3), it could be a small-scalerepresentation of the column, an elementconnecting heaven with earth33.

Funerary practices involving the fireplaceuse are not very extensive. We mention hereseveral other examples of funerary practicesinvolving the use of the hearth, besides thecases in Lepenski Vir. An interesting situationis the one documented at Crcea, where theskeleton of a child has been deposited on thehearth; in addition, it had traces of burningon the bones34. A discovery of this type ismentioned at Trtria-Gura Lunciiin C/1943,at a depth of 0.40 m. Here a child skeletonwas found, probably deposited on the hearth35.Gh. Lazarovici, however, does not believe thatthe skeleton was on the hearth, but on thefloor of the dwelling, being possible that inthis case there was a suspended floor36.

The Balkan region is a particularly impor-tant area on what it concerns the cultic con-

structions. In the Early Neolithic we find herebuildings resembling the shelters for fire-places. A famous example comes fromSesklo. Building 37 is located peripherally inthe settlement and has three access doors.All the interior space is occupied by a largefireplace, so that the building gives theimpression that it would actually be a protec-tor of the hearth37. Teocharis38 noted the

13

Statistic analysis on the Neolithic and Eneolithic shrine hearts from south-eastern Europe


4/16

similarity of building 37 with the Cranonhouse model.

At Achilleion site, next to Farsala, in south-ern Thessalia, the Neolithic layer is framed inSesklo culture. Here a sanctuary consisting oftwo rooms was found. The largest room hasinside an altar and it is a sanctuary itself. Thesmall room was probably a modest workshop

for the preparation of rituals39. We noticehere that this sanctuarys courtyard wasequipped with a series of elements that high-light the offering and sacrifice. One can seean (bread?) oven, a stone table-altar, proba-bly for displaying statues, inclined clay plat-form (for submission of offerings), and infront of it, the hearth is enclosed with stones(type A20)40.

In Para (Timi County) site, the largeamount of ashes from Sanctuary 1 (Temple1) and Sanctuary 2 (Temple 2), or the onesfrom bothros, with locations for burning and

ash depositing in special places, shows thatthere were several burnt grain offerings. Wenote the wide presence of portable hearths inboth temples41. One of the altars withinTemple 1, altar C, was intended for burningand fumigatio(smoking) activity. For the spe-cific purpose of this altar, the hearth wasembedded in a frame of clay (type B8).Traces of ash and charcoal from the pit nextto the fireplace concluded that the pit wasused for storage of ashes resulting from burn-ing the grain or straw42. In Temple 2, burningactivities related to grain were held, in seve-ral places inside the building43.

A similar situation, with a large fireplacelocated near the monumental altar and thecolumn, was found in the second sanctuaryfrom Kormadin (Serbia). In front of the altara huge hearth and an oven were placed44. Inthe Vina site, the hearth dominates the inte-rior of the sanctuary, and from it sevencolumns were extending towards the exit45.

The Sactuary building from Scnteia hadinside the remains of a hearth (1.10 x 0.75m) that was found near a large tile of sand-

stone46

. We do not dwell here on the veryrich inventory of this special room47, but wemention that this sanctuary can be linkedwith the cult of fertility and fecundity48.

A sanctuary linked with the hearthsfurnace cult was uncovered at Mrgineni-Cetuia. Near the furnace of the buildingan anthropomorphic head was found. This

had a circular support, triangular face and visi-ble nose (Fig. V/3). The alveolar crown was inthe form of a cup. This particular piece wasoriginally installed on the furnace cupola49.

Facilities for outdoor fire hearths, near theshrines, are often encountered. At Para,Timi County, near the second Temple, wenote the presence of a vigilance hearth,

located about 34 m west from the templesbuilding50. The hearth, of circular shape, wasin a free space, in the centre of the settle-ment. The purpose of the outdoor hearth waslikely to oversee and guard the sacred area ofthe settlement, but also to maintain thewatch fire51. Other outdoor fireplaces, loca-ted in the courtyard of the shrines, have beenresearched at Achilleion, Greece52, and inRomania, at Poduri-Dealu Ghindaru(BacuCounty), near Dwelling L153. It is importantto mention that in building L2, Block C, therewere seven fireplaces, including a cross-

shaped one (Fig. V/1) and two clay stellas, ofbucraniatype54. A cult outdoor space, whichconsists of four bovine heads placed in across next to a pavement and a hearth, fromCucuteni B, could suggest the presence of anoutdoor shrine55.

We see some hearths with interestingshapes that do not appear in the dwellings:cross-shaped or horseshoe-shaped hearths.These sometimes attract attention by theirdecoration, being painted. A single case ofovoid hearth discovered so far, appears atBuznea sanctuary, particularly in connectionwith its inventory (Fig. V/4)56. The inventoryconsists of two vessels with bird-shape decor,a fireplace and a cultic context. The shrineconsists of a large vessel surrounded by othersmaller vessels and a group of four anthropo-morphic statuettes57.

Cross-shaped fireplaces certainly attractattention, given the fact that they do notappear too often. These were documented sofar only in Cucuteni B. Two of them were dis-covered at Poduri-Dealu Ghindaru (BacuCounty), Dwelling 1458 and recently in House

2, C cassette. The general shape is Greekcross type, with equal arms, and a central cir-cular cell (Fig. V/1). It is possible to suggestthe presence of a cup59. Another example ofthe cross-shaped fireplace was discovered atStnca Doamnei, tefneti. There were fourbuildings investigated, of which house L3 hadthe hearth of this particular type (Fig. V/2).Its dimensions were approx. 1.20 x 1.35 m

14

ADELA KOVCS


5/16

and it was raised from the floor by 7-8 cm60.The same type was found at Cucuteni-Cetuia, in the level Cucuteni B61. Anothersettlement where this particular type ofhearth was discovered is at Volodymyrivtsi,Phase VII. The building had two rooms, eachequipped with one cross-shaped hearth. Thehearths were made of clay lying on the floor,

but always slightly raised above it. Some-times it was seen that their surface wasdecorated with concentric circles62.

The unusual shape and the fact that thistype of fireplace is more common for modelsof buildings (Fig. VI)63, triggers the ritual roleof the hearth fireplaces64. The house modelsin which this particular type of fireplace wasobserved are found in the Ukrainian area atPopudnja65, two pieces (Fig. VI/1, 2), erkas-sov Sad (Fig. VI/5)66, ukova (Fig. VI/4)67and two pieces from Platar collection (Fig. VI/3)68. Sometimes domestic activities are also

observed in these models, such as culticgrinding69.

The 8shaped hearth, single or associat-ed with an oven, is an indication for a cultarrangement. It appears in room C of theDeer House from Para, Timi County70;however, it is not an isolated case. This typeof fireplace has been documented in severalcircumstances in the same settlement71 P136B72, as well as in Moldova Veche site, inthe Late Neolithic73. One of similar shape hasbeen discovered at Vina74, also in the 1stsanctuary of Kormadin75 and in Bulgaria, inthe levels belonging to the Middle Neolithic76. As it regards the anthropomorphic hearth(type A15), it often dominates the room andis found only in a trapezoidal-type building,often encountered in Lepenski Vir77, Padina78,and later on, in the Balkan area, at Dolno-slav79 and in a single case at Rakitovo80.

Another interesting feature is the U-shaped hearth. This was identified atTrueti, in L60 sanctuary and L24 sanctuary,in front of the double monumental statue82.

Sometimes, the hearts are painted. The

purpose of depositing layers of red paint ishard to guess, probably a combinationbetween different beliefs: fireplace, as asource of light and heat, blood and life. Thefirst examples of painted hearths were foundat 'Ain Ghazal, related with standing stones,placed vertically, probably columns83. Anothercase of red paint was found at the hearthfrom Borduani, building L9. The fifth level of

rebuilding the hearth was painted red.The plastered columns placed near the

hearth could suggest a household shrine84. Inthe Voroshylovka settlement, in building 8,S.O. Gusev found traces of red painting on aclay platform, of approx. 1 sqm, locateddirectly on the floor, a possible hearth, whichthe discoverer considers an altar85. It is also

possible, given the numerous blades and flinttools, that the altar was used for ritualslaughter and sacrifice of blood86. Anotherexample of fireplaces decorated withpaintings can be found at Kolomisina, phaseII. In the first room was a circular hearth. Inthe second room was a red painted fireplace,along which were nine vessels, one of themcontaining animal bones87. A spectacular caseis the hearth from dwelling 8 from Scnteia.The hearth had circular shape, surrounded bya frame decorated with a circular groovededge. On the inner surface were some

imprints of thin branches88.Concerning the foundation rituals of the

fireplaces, it appears that they were directlyconnected with the building-foundation ritu-als. We mention just a few examples: atMalna site (Covasna County) in the vicinityof L2 was hearth no. 8, which had burnedbones and pieces of vessels under it and in itsstructure; two female anthropomorphic idolswere near the hearth89. This type of depositis encountered also in other sites from theAriud-Cucuteni-Tripillya cultural complex.

For example in building L28 from Hb-eti, the fireplace had underneath a pit (pitno. 58) and the hearth was as a real cap90.The situation is not singular, being oftenobserved in Trgu Frumos site Baza Ptule(Iai County)91. Near the fireplace in the L16,at Puleni-Ciuc-Dmbul Cetii (HarghitaCounty) was a small altar, used in some reli-gious type practices92. At Luka Vrublevet-skaya, in building L5, a bull's skull was foundnear the fireplace. In the site of Jura, in L3,near the hearth was a bowl of flint artefacts93.In addition, a noteworthy case is that of

Vesely Kut, where in a furnace wall structure7 clay cones were found94.As a possible abandonment ritual of a cer-

tain building, is indicated the destruction ofthe hearth, so the building is killed95.

If the porch and the hallway of the houserepresents the transitional space betweeninside and outside, between the communityand family, between secular and sacred, the

15



6/16

domestic hearth is supposed to be the centralplace of dwelling, mythical space of thefamily96.

Certain symbolic functions of the hearthwere preserved in many Romanian expres-sions, some of which are still in use. The lackof fireplace ash is a sign of poverty (to take(or sell) even the ashes from the hearth: to

get everything, not to leave anything), andcatch the hearth means material wealth(to hold with the hands the fireplace: toreach a very good material condition, tobecome rich). Other expressions such as theguest who falls in the fireplace means anuninvited and unwanted guest; to sit on thehearth(or to move from the hearth to thefurnace) means to spend time without anypoint, to lounge. Also aging on the hearthmeans to remain unmarried woman, not tomarry. There are some obsolete terms, liketo leave (a soldier) to the hearth: to release

(a soldier) after completing military service, tobe demobilized; and To remain with the uglywomen in the hearth: the women remainedunmarried97.

A statistical analysis of the hearths fromthe ordinary buildings or shrines can revealsome aspects related to the way the peoplefrom Neolithic and Copper Age designed theirliving or worship space. Pursuing somearrangement patterns could reveal behaviourpatterns that usually take in account faith,habits, customs or even fashion.

The hearth is one of the most importantfeatures of buildings and houses in all timesand in all spaces. Precisely because it is theelement of keeping and using the fire, it hasconnotations related to earth gods. Thehearth is the centre of worship and dailyexpressions of piety. Thus, the fire is sacredand functions as an altar98. At the same time,it may even become an altar itself, dependingon the items placed in proximity to or by wayof achievement. Fireplaces along with monu-mental statues such as those in Beycesultancan form shrines.

In the next age, the oven will be an espe-cially important cultic element, directly relat-ed to the metallurgic activities99.

16

ADELA KOVCS

Adela Kovcs


7/16

17


Notes / Note

1. DEX 19982. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 1243. Bnffy 1990-1991, p. 2024. DEX 19985. Ursulescu et alii 2002, p. 36; Lazarovici C.-M.

2004

6. Ursulescu et alii 2002, p. 367. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 548. Gimbutas 19899. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 5510. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 223,

fig. IIIb.1611. Mellaart 1962; Mellaart 196712. friendly information from prof. Univ. Dr. Gh.

Lazarovici13. Ursulescu et alii 2002, p. 3614. Rouzaud et alii 1996, p. 3015. Clottes, Lewis-Williams 200716. Rollefson, Kafafi 199717. Rollefson 2002, p. 17718. Rollefson 2002, p. 17519. Nashef 1990, p. 286; Hayden 2003, p. 208;

Watkins 2000; zdoan 2007, p. 6020. Mellaart 1975, p. 17121. Larue 1997, p. 8822. Lloyd 195823. Srejovi 1969, p. 165 i urm.; Lazarovici C.-

M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 30, p. 3824. Bnffy 1990-1991, p. 3625. Hayden 2003, p. 15826. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 5927. Punescu 1970; 1972; 1976; Lazarovici C.-

M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 42, p. 50; Petrescu2000, p. 39-44

28. Srejovi 1971, p. 8-929. Cf. the M. Gimbutas opinion, the spiral is an

important sign of energy, associated with the regenera-tive function of the mother womb, after Gimbutas1989, p. 80

30. Garasanin, Radovanovi 200131. Budja 2006, p. 19132. Gimbutas 1989, p. 7933. Eliade 2005, p. 38134. Lazarovici, Maxim 1995, p. 19035. Gligor 2007, 215; Suciu 2009, p. 15036. Friendly information from Gh. Lazarovici37. Nanoglou 2001, p. 30838. Teocharis 1973, p. 322, n. 7239. Gimbutas 1997, p. 5240. Gimbutas 1997, p. 15241. Lazarovici et alii 2001, I.2, pl. 65/2-3;

Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 28442. Lazarovici 2003, p. 68; Lazarovici et alii

2001, fig. 170, I.2, pl. 40/3-4, pl. 41/343. Lazarovici et alii 2001, I.2, pl. 82, 89/1, 9144. Jovanovi 1991, p. 12245. Miloji 1955, p. 153; Lazarovici C.-M.,

Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 19546. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 229,

fig. Vd.8747. Mantu, urcanu 1999, p. 1348. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 22949. Monah 1997, p. 36; Tsvek 2001, p. 24;

Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 22950. Lazarovici et alii 2001, I.2, fig. 28.4, 55.2; 95.6

51. Lazarovici et alii 2001, p. 20752. Gimbutas 1997, p. 15253. Dumitroaia et alii 2009, p. 3854. Preoteasa et alii 200755. Monah 2001, p. 18156. Boghian, Mihai 1987, fig. 2-8; Mihai, Boghian

198557. Boghian, Mihai 1987, p. 311-32458. Monah et alii 1982, p. 959. Dumitroaia et alii 2009, p. 2060. Niu, adurschi 1994, p. 182, fig. 461. Petrescu-Dmbovia, Vleanu 2004, fig. 4262. Burda 2005, p. 5963. Lazarovici C.-M. 200464. Dumitroaia et alii 2009, p. 2165. Lazarovici C.-M. 200466. Lazarovici C.-M. 2004, p. 5667. Gusev 1995b, cat 42, fig. 5/2; Monah 1997, p.

46; Lazarovici C-M. 2004, fig. 2068. Burda 2005, p. 13669. Lazarovici et alii 2001, p. 206; Lazarovici 2003,

p. 68; Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2009, p. 257

70. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006, p. 25871. Lazarovici et alii 2001, p. 151, fig. 12272. Lazarovici et alii 2001, p. 151, fig. 12373. Lazarovici 1979, pl. IB; Lazarovici, Rus 1991,

p. 92, fig. 974. Staljo 1984, p. 39, fig. 29-3075. Jovanovi 199176. Todorova, Vaisov 1993, p. 163, fig. 134/135;

Petrasch 1986, fig. 3-477. Srejovic 1972; Gimbutas 1989a, pl. 19;

Budja 2006, p. 192; Radovanovi 2000, p. 334;Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006

78. Budja 2006, p. 192, fig. 779. Raduneva 2004, p. 32680. Matsanova 2003, p. 68; Raduneva 2004, p.

32; Budja 2004, p. 12581. Petrescu-Dmbovia et alii 1999, p. 117-121,

fig. 86-87; Lazarovici C.-M. 2004; Lazarovici C.-M.,Lazarovici Gh. 2008, p. 26, fig. 6

82. Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 235,fig.Vd.96; Petrescu-Dmbovia et alii 1999, p. 529;Monah 1997, p. 37, n. 72; Monah 1997, p. 206;Lazarovici C.-M. 2004, p. 47

83. Rollefson 2002, p. 177; Hayden 2003, p. 19884. Marinescu-Blcu, Bolomey 2000, p. 35685. Burda 2005, p. 5886. Burda 2005, p. 5987. Burda 2005, p. 6088. Mantu, urcanu 1999; Lazarovici C.-M.,

Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 21089. Lszl 2000, p. 24990. Dumitrescu 1954, p. 122; Boghian 2004, p. 6691. Ursulescu et alii 2002, p. 47, fig. 592. Buzea, Lazarovici 2005, p. 43; Pl. III/4; Pl.

XX/4; Pl. XXX/1; Buzea 2006, p. 12693. Tsvek 2005, p. 15194. Tsvek 2005, p.147 ; Lazarovici C.-M.,

Lazarovici Gh. 2007, p. 179-18095. Pashkevich,Videiko 2006, p. 11596.Avram 199697. DEX 199898. Burda 2005, p. 6099. Chevalier, Gheerbrant 2009, p. 319


8/16

18

ADELA KOVCS

Bibliography / Bibliografie

Avram 1996AVRAM S., Elemente de continuitate a practicilor i

credinelor legate de ofrande i sacrificii n construcii nspaiul carpato-danubian, n AVRAM S. (coord.), Istorie itradiie n spaiul romnesc (culegere de studii), Sibiu,1996

Bnffy 1990-1991BNFFY E., Cult and Archaeological Context in Middle

and South-East Europe in the Neolithic and Calcolithic, nAntaeus, nr. 19-20, Budapesta, 1990-1991

Boghian 2004BOGHIAN D.D., Comunitile cucuteniene din bazinul

Bahluiului, Suceava, 2004Boghian, Mihai 1987BOGHIAN D., MIHAI C., Le complexe de culte et le vase

dcor ornithomorphe peint dcouverts Buznea (dp.Iai), n La civilisation de Cucuteni en contexte europne,Session scientifique, Iai-Piatra Neam 1984, Iai 1987,BAII, ed. M. PETRESCU DMBOVIA, N. URSULESCU, D. MONAH,

V. CHIRICA, 1987, pag. 313-324Budja 2004

BUDJA M., The transition to farming and the revolu-tion of symbols in the Balkans. From ornament toentopic and external symbolic storage, n DocumentaPraehistorica, XXXI, Ljubliana, 2004

Budja 2006BUDJA M., The Transition to Farming and the Ceramic

Trajectories in Western Eurasia: from Ceramic Figures toVessels, n Documenta Praehistorica, XXXIII, Ljublijana,2006

Burda 2005BURDA N., Sacral world. Trypilliya Civilisation, Kiev, 2005Buzea 2006BUZEA D. L., Models of Altars and Miniature Tables

belongging to the Cucuteni-Ariud Culture, discovered atPuleni Ciuc-Ciomortan Dmbul Cetii, HarghitaCounty, nActa Terrae Septemcastrensis, V, 2006, p. 127

157Buzea, Lazarovici 2005BUZEA D. L., LAZAROVICI GH., Descoperirile Cucuteni

Ariud de la Puleni Ciuc Ciomortan Dmbul Cetii.Campaniile 2003 2005. Raport preliminar, nAngustia,9, 2005, Sfntu Gheorghe, p. 2588

Chevalier, Gheerbrant 2009CHEVALIER J., GHEERBRANT A., Dicionar de simboluri,

mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori,numere, ed. Polirom, Bucureti, 2009

Clottes, Lewis-Williams 2007CLOTTES J., LEWIS-WILLIAMS D., Paleolithic art and

Religion, n JOHN R. HINNELLS, A Handbook of AncientReligions, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2007,pag. 7-45

DEX 1998

Dicionar explicativ al limbii romne, Bucureti, 1998Dumitrescu 1954DUMITRESCU VL. cu colab., Hbeti. Monografie

arheologic, Bucureti, 1954Dumitroaia et alii 2009DUMITROAIA GH., MUNTEANU R., PREOTEASA C., GARVN D.,

Poduri-Dealul Ghindaru. Cercetri arheologice din CasetaC 2005-2009, n Bibliotheca Memoriae Antiquitatis, XXII,Piatra Neam, 2009

Eliade 2005ELIADE M., Tratat de istorie a religiilor, ediia a IV-a,

ed.Humanitas, Bucureti, 2005

Garasanin, Radovanovi 2001GARASANIN M., RADOVANOVI I., A pot in house 54 at

Lepenski Vir I, nANTIQUITY75, 2001, p. 118-25Gimbutas 1989GIMBUTAS M., Civilizaie i cultur. Vestigii preistorice n

sud-estul european, ed. Meridiane, Bucureti, 1989Gimbutas 1989aGIMBUTAS M., The Language of the Goddess, ed. Harper

& Row Publishers, San Francisco, 1989Gimbutas 1997GIMBUTAS M., Civilizaia Marii Zeie i sosirea cavalerilor

rzboinici, ed. Lucretius, Bucureti, 1997Gligor 2007GLIGOR M., Cercetri arheologice preventive la Alba

Iulia Lumea Nou. O descoperire aparinnd grupuluiFoeni, nApulum, Alba-Iulia, XLIV, 2007, pag. 4-28

Gusev 1995Gusev S. A., Hausmodelle der Tripolje-Kultur, n

Prehistorische Zeitschrift, nr. 70, Berlin-Lipzig, 1995Hayden 2003HAYDEN B.,A Prehistory of the Religion. Shamans, Sorce-

rers and Saints, Smithonian Books, Washington 2003Jovanovi 1991JOVANOVI B., Die Kultpltze und Architektur in der

Vina-Kultur, n Banatica, Muzeul Judeean Reia, nr. 11,1991

Larue 1997LARUE G. A., The People, form the Paleolithic to the

Chalcolithic Periods, n Old Testament Life andLiterature, 1997

Lszl 2000LSZLA., Some data on house-building techniques and

fondation rites in the Ariud-Cucuteni Culture, n Studiaantiqua et Archeologica, VII, Iai, 2000, p. 221-244

Lazarovici C.-M. 2004LAZAROVICI C.M., Sanctuarele Precucuteni-Cucuteni, n

Arheologia Moldovei, nr. 25, 2004, 47-64

Lazarovici 1979LAZAROVICI GH., Neoliticul Banatului, Cluj-Napoca, 1979Lazarovici 2003LAZAROVICI GH., Pinea, grul i rnitul sacru n

Neolitic, n Tibiscum-studii i comunicri de etnografie-istorie, vol. XI, Caransebe Caransebe, 2003, pag. 65-86

Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2006LAZAROVICI C.-M., LAZAROVICI GH., Arhitectura neoliticului

i epocii cuprului din Romnia, Vol. I Neoliticul, Iai, 2006Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007LAZAROVICI C.-M., LAZAROVICI GH.,Arhitectura Neoliticului

i Epocii Cuprului din Romnia, vol II Epoca Cuprului, ed.Trinitas, Iai, 2007

Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2008LAZAROVICI C.-M., LAZAROVICI GH., Sanctuarele culturii

Precucuteni-Cucuteni, n Angustia, 12 Arheologie,

Sfntu Gheorghe, 2008, pag. 9-40Lazarovici et alii 2001LAZAROVICI GH., DRAOVEAN FL., MAXIM Z., Para. Monogra-

fie arheologic, Vol. 1.1; vol. 1.2, n BHAB, Waldpress,12, 2001

Lazarovici, Maxim 1995LAZAROVICI GH., MAXIM Z., Gura Baciului. Monografie

Arheologic, Cluj-Napoca, 1995Lazarovici, Rus 1991RUS D., LAZAROVICI GH., Neolithic Architecture in Banat,

n Banatica, Muzeul Judeean Reia, nr. 11, 1991, 87-118


9/16

19


Lloyd 1958LLOYD S., Beycesultan Excavations, Fourth Preliminary

Report, nAnatolian Studies, 8, 1958Mantu, urcanu 1999MANTU C.-M., URCANU S., Scnteia. Cercetare arheo-

logic i restaurare, Iai, 1999Marinescu-Blcu, Bolomey 2000MARINESCU-BLCU S., BOLOMEYA., Drgueni. A Cucute-

nian Community, Ed. Enciclopedic, Bucureti 2000Matsanova 2003

MATSANOVA V., Cult Practices in the early NeolithicVillage of Rakitovo, n NIKOLVA L.(ed.), Early SymbolicSystems for Communication in Southeast Europe, British

Archaeological Reports International Series, 2003Mellaart 1962MELLAART J., Excavations at atal Hyk, first prelimi-

nary report, 1961, nAnatolian Studies12, 1962Mellaart 1967MELLAART J., atal Hyk. A Neolithic town in Anatolia,

London, 1967, Thames and Hudson.Mellaart 1975MELLAART J., The Neolithic of the Near East, London,

1975, Thames and HudsonMihai, Boghian 1985MIHAI C., BOGHIAN D., Complexul cututenian de cult

descoperit la Buznea (oraul Trgu Frumos), jud. Iai, n

Memoria Antiquitatis, vol. IX-XI (1977-1979), Muzeul deIstorie Piatra Neam, 1985, pag. 429-452Miloji 1955MILOJI VL., Zur Fragen der Schnurkeramik in

Griecneland, n Germania, 33, 1955, pag. 151-154Monah 1997MONAH D., Plastica antropomorf a culturii Cucuteni-

Tripolie, n Bibliotheca Memoriae Antiquitatis, PiatraNeam 1997

Monah 2001MONAH D., Organizarea social, religia i arta n epoca

neo-eneolitic, n Istoria romnilor, vol. I, Bucureti2001, p. 169-189

Monah et alii 1982MONAH D., CUCO T., POPOVICI D. N., ANTONESCU S.,

Spturile arheologice din tell-ul cucutenian Dealul

Ghindaru, com. Poduri, jud. Bacu, n Cercetri arheo-logice, V, 1982, p. 9-18Nanoglou 2001NANOGLOU S., Social and monumental space in

Neolithic Thessaly, Greece, n European Journal ofArchaeology, nr. 4, Sage Publications, UK, 2001

Nashef 1990NASHEF K.,Archaeology in Irak, nAmerican Journal of

Archaeology, vol. 94, no. 2, aprilie, 1990, pag. 259-290Niu, adurschi 1994NIU A., ADURSCHI P., Spturile de salvare de la

Stnca Doamnei (Sat Stnca tefneti, judeulBotoani), n HierasusIX, 1994, p. 181-193

zdoan 2007ZDOAN A., ayn, n Vor 12.000 Jahren in

Anatolien, Herausgegeben vom Badischen Landesmuse-

um Karlsruhe, Badisches Landesmuseum, Karlsruhe,2007, pag. 58-65Pashkevich, Videiko 2006PASHKEVICH G.O., VIDEIKOY., -

, , 2006Punescu 1970PUNESCU A., Epipaleoliticul de la Cuina Turcului, n

SCIV, 21, 1970, 1, pag. 3-29Punescu 1972PUNESCUA., The Early epipaleolitic, nATLAS, 1972,

pag. 205

Punescu 1976PUNESCUA., Romanelian, n DIVR, Bucureti 1976Petrasch 1986PETRASCH J., Typologie und Funktion neolithischer

fen in Mittel-und Sdosteuropa, nActa Praehistorica etArchaeologica1986, 18, S. 33-83

Petrescu 2000PETRESCU S. M., Locuirea uman a peterilor din Banat

pn n epoca roman, Ed. Mirton, ser. BHAB, XXVII,Timioara 2000

Petrescu-Dmbovia et alii 1999PETRESCU-DMBOVIA M., FLORESCUA. C., Trueti, mono-grafie arheologic, Ed. Academiei Romne, Bucureti-Iai 1999

Petrescu-Dmbovia, Vleanu 2004PETRESCU-DMBOVIA M., VLEANU M.-C., Cucuteni-

Cetuie. Spturile din anii 1961-1966. Monografiearheologic, n BMAntiq, XIV, Ed. Constantin Matas,Piatra Neam, 2004

Preoteasa et alii 2007Preoteasa C., Garvn D., Munteanu R., U L., Nicola

D., Dumitroaia Gh., Monah D., O locuin (sanctuar ?) cuetaj din etapa Cucuteni B1 de la Poduri-Dealul Ghindaru,

jud. Bacu, comunicare prezentat la simpozionulAezri i locuine preistorice. Structur, organizare, sim-bol, Institutul de Arheologie Iai, 2007

Radovanovi 2000RADOVANOVI I., Houses and Burials at Lepenski Vir, nEuropean Journal of Archaeology, vol 3(3), SagePublications, 2000, (Londra, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi)i Asociaia Arheologilor Europeni

Raduneva 2004RADUNEVA A., Neolithic and Chalcolithic Buildings of

Unusual Ground Plansand their Interiors, n NIKOLOV V.,BVAROV K., KALCHEV P. (eds.) Prehistoric Thrace, Sofia-Stara Zagora, 2004, 325-333

Rollefson 2002ROLLEFSON G., Ritual and Social Structure at Neolithic

Ain Ghazal, n KUIJT I. (ed.), Life in Neolithic FarmingComunities. Social Organisation, Identity, and Differen-tiation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002

Rollefson, Kafafi 1997

ROLLEFSON G., KAFAFI Z., The 1996 Season of AinGhazal, n Annual of the Department of Antiquities ofJordan, nr. 41, 1997

Rouzaud et alii 1996ROUZAUD F., SOULIER M., LIGNEREUX Y., La Grotte de

Bruniquel, n Spelunca, nr. 60, p. 2834Srejovi 1969SREJOVI D., Lepenski Vir, Beograd, 1969Srejovi 1971SREJOVI D., Die Lepenski Vir Kulture und der Begin

der Jungsteinzeit an der Mitteldonau, n Fundamenta, A,3, Kln-Wien, 1971

Srejovi 1972SREJOVI D., Europes First Monumental Sculpture.

New Discoveries at Lepenski Vir, Thames and Hudson,Londra, 1972

Staljo 1984Staljo B., Naselje i stan neolitkog perioda, n Neolitc

Centralnog Balkana, Belgrad, 1968, pag. 77-106Suciu 2009SUCIU C., Cultura Vinca in Transilvania, in Biblioteca

Brukenthal, XLIV, Sibiu, 2009Teocharis 1973TEOCHARIS D. R., Neolithic Greece, Atena, 1973Todorova, Vaisov 1993TODOROVA H., VAISOV I., Novo-kamennata epoha v

Bulgaria, Sofia, 1993


10/16

20

ADELA KOVCS

Tsvek 2001TSVEKE.V., Certain aspects of World View of the Tribes

of the East Tripolian Culture, n Interacademica II-III,Bucureti 2001, pag. 24-38

Tsvek 2005TSVEKE.V., On the Problem of distinguishing manufac-

turing Cults among Trypolian populations, n Cucuteni.120 ans des recherches, 2005, p. 145-156

Ursulescu et alii 2002URSULESCU N., BOGHIAN D., HAIMOVICI S., COTIUG V.,

COROLIUC A., Cercetri interdisciplinare n aezarea

precucutenian de la Trgu Frumos (jud. Iai). Aportularheozoologiei, n Acta Terrae SeptemcastrensisI, Sibiu2002, pag. 29-54

Watkins 2000WATKINS T., The Neolithic Revolution and the

Emergence of Humanity: a cognitive approach to the firstcomprehensie world-view, n Conference on TheTransition and Assimilation of Culture in the Near East,Council for British Reasearch in the Levant, Jerichon,2000


11/16

21


Figure I / Figura IThe hearth typology /Tipologia vetrelor

1. Type A hearths (open hearths); 2. Type B hearths (oven hearths, podium hearths and kilns)1. Tipurile de vetre din categoria A (vetre deschise); 2. Tipurile de vetre din categoria B (cuptoare, vetre de cuptor,

cuptoare i vetre cu podium)

2

1


12/16

22

ADELA KOVCS

Figure II / Figura IIQuantitative and qualitative graphs about the different types of hearths /

Grafice cantitative i calitative ale diferitelor tipuri de vetre1. The correlation between the building types and the used hearth types; 2. Geometric shapes preffered for hearths;

3. The use frequency of different hearths types1. Corelaia dintre tipurile de cldiri i tipurile de vetre folosite; 2. Forme geometrice preferate de vetre; 3. Frecvena

de folosire a tipurilor de vetre

1

3

2


13/16

23


Figure III / Figura IIIHearth locations within the buildings / Localizarea vetrelor n interiorul construciilor

1. The different places for hearths in the buildings, considering the building shape (rectagular D and DD; trapezoidal T; square P; circular C); 2. The hearth location in the rectangular building, with the entrance on the short side,

D type; 3. The hearth location in the square buildings1. Diferenierea locului de amplasare, n funcie de forma cldirii (dreptunghiular D i DD; trapezoidal T; ptrat P

i circular C); 2. Amplasarea vetrei n cldirile dreptunghiulare cu intrarea pe latura scurt, tip D; 3. Amplasareavetrei n cldirile ptrate

1

3

2


14/16

24

ADELA KOVCS

Figure IV / Figura IVDifferent cult arrangements and sanctuaries / Diferite amenajri cultice i sanctuare

1. Stalagmite and stalagtite arrangement in the Bruniquel cave, France, Mousterian Age (after Clottes, Lewis-Williams 2007); 2. The cultic hearth from Beer Sheba (after Larue 1997); 3. Sanctuary L 54 from Lepenski Vir:the inner arrangement (after Budja 2006); 4. Sanctuary L 54 from Lepenski Vir: vertical photo; 5. Isometric recon-

struction of the level XVa Sanctuary from Beycesultan, Turkey (after Lloyd 1958, 105, fig. 4)1. Amenajare din stalagmite i stalagtite n petera Bruniquel (Frana) din perioada Mousterian (dupClottes,

Lewis-Williams 2007); 2. Vatra cultic de la Beer Sheba (dupLarue 1997); 3. Sanctuarul L 54 de la LepenskiVir: aranjamentul interior (dupBudja 2006); 4. Sanctuarul L 54 de la Lepenski Vir: fotografie vertical; 5.

Reconstrucia izometric a Sanctuarului n nivelul XVa de la Beycesultan, Turcia (dupLloyd 1958, 105, fig. 4)

5

3

2

1

4


15/16

25


Figure V / Figura VCross-shaped hearths and other special hearths inside the cult buildings /

Vetre cruciforme i alte vetre speciale din cldirile de cult1. Cross-shaped hearth from Dwelling L2 from Poduri Dealu Ghindaru(after Dumitroaia et alii 2009); 2. Cross-

shaped hearth from Stnca Doamnei, tefneti (after Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, 213, fig. Vd. 66); 3.The sanctuary plan from Mrgineni Cetuiaand the antropomorphic statue (after Monah 2001); 4. The sanctuary

plan from Buznea (after Boghian, Mihai 1987)1. Vatra cruciform din Locuina 2 de la Poduri Dealu Ghindaru (dupDumitroaia et alii 2009); 2. Vatra

cruciform de la Stnca Doamnei, tefneti (dup Lazarovici C.-M., Lazarovici Gh. 2007, 213, fig. Vd. 66); 3.Planul sanctuarului de la Mrgineni-Cetuia i statuia antropomorf (dupMonah 2001); 4. Planul sanctuarului de la

Buznea (dupBoghian, Mihai 1987)

4

3

2

1

1


16/16

26

ADELA KOVCS

Figure VI / Figura VIHouse models with cross-shaped hearth inside / Machete de case coninnd vetre cruciforme

1, 2 The two house models from Popudnja, Ukraine (after Lazarovici C.-M. 2004, fig. 13, 14); 3. House model fromPlatar collection (after Burda 2005, p. 136); 4. The house model from ukova (after Gusev 1995); 5. The house

model from erkassov Sad (after Burda 2005, p. 141)1, 2. Cele dou machete de la Popudnja, Ucraina (dupLazarovici C.-M. 2004, fig. 13, 14); 3. Machet din coleciaPlatar (dupBurda 2005, p. 136); 4. Macheta de la ukova (dupGusev 1995); 5. Macheta de la erkassov Sad

(dupBurda 2005, p. 141)

53

2

41

011 026 arh kovacs_layout 1

Documents