Prehistoric Figurines in Albania_ a Review_ Rudenc Ruka

8/10/2019 Prehistoric Figurines in Albania_ a Review_ Rudenc Ruka

1/13

NEW DIRECTIONS IN

ALBANIAN ARCHAEOLOGY

Edited byLorenc Bejko and Richard Hodges

International Centre for Albanian Archaeology Monograph Series No. 1

Studies presented to Muzafer Korkuti


2/13

Published by:

International Centre for Albanian ArchaeologyAddress:RrugaIsmail Qemali 12/1TiranaALBANIA

Printing & binding :

Mali Pleshti Printing HouseTel. (04) 272206E-mail: [email protected]

ALBANIA

2006 International Centre for Albanian Archaeology

All rights reserved. No parts of the publication may be reproduced in any form or

by any means, without the prior permission of the International Centre for Albanian

Archaeology.

ISBN: 99943-923-0-1


3/13

v

1. Richard Hodges & Lorenc Bejko

Introduction 12. Michael Galaty From Points A to B: The Shala Valley Projectand the Albanian Middle Palaeolithic 18

3. Ilir Gjipali Recent research on the Palaeolithic and Mesolithicarchaeology of Albania 31

4. Sknder Aliu Recent prehistoric research in southeast Albania: Areview 43

5. Rudenc Ruka Prehistoric gurines in Albania: A review 566. Rovena Kurti Appearance and modes of dress: Theory and practice

in the case of Bar tumulus 65

7. John K. PapadopoulosMounds of Memory: Burial tumuli in the Illyrianlandscape 75

8. Sharon R. Stocker & Jack L. DavisThe Earliest History of Apollonia: Heroic reectionsfrom beyond the acropolis 85

9. Sarah Morris Illyrica Pix: the exploitation of bitumen in ancientAlbania 94

10.Maria Grazia AmoreUse and reuse of the Konispol cave: The terracotta

gurines 10711.Jack L. Davis, Vangjel Dimo, Iris Pojani, Sharon R. Stocker, Kathleen M. Lynch,

Tammie Gerke & Evi Gorogianni

Bonjakt excavations, Apollonia: 2004-2005 11812.Jean-Luc Lamboley

La stle apolloniate de la descente aux enfers 12813. Olgita Ceka Observations sur quelques stles hellnistiques

dApollonia dIllyrie 13614.Albana Meta A note on the principal coins of the Epirote League

(234168 B.C.) 14715. Iris Pojani Le motif de lamazonomachie sur les reliefs

dApollonie dIllyrie 155


4/13

vi

16.Saimir Shpuza The Roman Colonies of south Illyria: A review 16417.John J. Wilkes The signicance of road-stations for the archaeology

of Albania in the Roman era 16918.Neritan Ceka Recent excavations in Butrint (2004-5): Notes on the

growth of the ancient city centre 17719. Giuseppe Lepore

Problemi di interpretazione delle necropoli antiche: Ilcaso di Phoinike 186

20.Enrico Giorgi Problemi di metodo per lo studio del paesaggio antico:Considerazioni sul territorio di Phoinike 207

21. Richard HodgesSaranda, ancient Onchesmos, and the corrupted sea 22322. Kim Bowes The Durrs amphitheatre: Archaeology and memory 24223.Afrim Hoti Monograms, inscriptions and palaeochristian symbols

from Albania 257

24.John Mitchell Strategies for salvation: The triconch church atAntigonea and its mosaic pavement 26125. William Bowden

Procopius Buildingsand the late antique forticationsof Albania 277

26.Esmeralda AgolliThe distribution of arrowheads in Koman culture burials(6th-8thcenturies) 287

27.Marin HaxhimihaliHommes, cultures et territoire dans la Dyrrachium

byzantin 29428.Joanita Vroom Durrs amphitheatre's afterlife: The Medieval and

Post-medieval ceramics 30329. Lorenc Bejko, Todd Fenton & David Foran Recent advances in Albanian mortuary archaeology,

human osteology, and ancient DNA 30930. Sabina Veseli Archaeology, nationalism and the construction of

national identity in Albania 32331. Ols Lafe An overview of extensive and intensive survey in

Albania (1945-2005) 331

32. Oliver J. GilkesRebuilding the triconch palace at Butrint 339

33. Philippa M. PearcePracticable solutions: The use of basic methodsand equipment in archaeological conservation 356

34. Sally Martin Archaeology at the crossroads: The future ofAlbanias past 367

34. Kostantinos L. Zachos The Antigonea Project: Preliminary report on the

rst season 379Bibliography 391Index 447


5/13

27

5

Rudenc Ruka, Institute of Archaeology, Tiran.

Within the context of material culture studies, the representation ofhuman and animal forms during the Neolithic in Albania has been thesubject of different classications of terracotta gurines, and analogies

with neighbouring cultures in Albania and abroad. Despite this, there is

limited discussion concerning their function, archaeological and socialcontext. This article aims to reassess previous studies of gurinesin Albania, an area where Muzafer Korkuti has made considerablecontributions, in the context of the existing theoretical framework, andto present the international developments in the study of material culturein general and gurines in particular. By doing this, the intention is tointroduce new perspectives on gurine studies in Albania and offer theprospect for new directions in this eld.

The culture-historical approach and its inuence in the study ofmaterial culture in Albania

The study of Albanian prehistory began when the Balkan traveller, SirArthur John Evans, declared in 1886 at a meeting of the AnthropologicalInstitute of Great Britain and Ireland that: So far as I am aware, noimplements of prehistoric date have been found either in Epirus or

Albania, though several polished stone axes of diorite and, I believe,other material have come to light (Evans 1887: 66). The rst substantialresearch into prehistory was carried out during 1900-1929 by thepioneering Albanian archaeologist Shtjefn Konstantin Gjeov Kryeziu(1874-1929) who excavated several Bronze/Iron Age tumuli and createda large archaeological collection (Gjeovi 1914: 1; 1920a: 109112; 1920b:


6/13

Prehistoric fgurines in Albania: A review

28

157158; 1920c: 182184; 1920d: 207208; 1920e: 231232; 1925: 12; 2000:166167; Buda 1979: 113; Kamsi 1985: 106115; Zojzi 1985: 128; Prendi, 1988a:79; Kamberi 1993: 4; Gae 2000: 3840; Brahaj 2003: 4548). In 1921, anotherimportant contribution was made by the physical anthropologist Eugene Pittard

who discovered a Neolithic site in the vicinities of Prespa Lake. His work inAlbania has remained almost unnoticed (Milaj 2005: 4950; Mustilli 1965: 457;Valentini 2005: 971). Note should also be taken of the German archaeologist,Bolko von Richthofen (it should be noted that the name appears in differentspellings such as, B. Richtofen [Korkuti 1983a: 39; 1989: 14], Bolko vonRithoffen [Kamberi 1993: 6], and B. von Richthofen [Mustilli 1965: 457; Harroldet al. 1999: 372; Fracis and Gjipali 2005: 199]), and especially of the Italianprehistorian, Luigi Cardini. The former discovered a Palaeolithic site during the1930s at the foot of Dajti mountains in the vicinity of Tiran (Mustilli 1965: 457;Korkuti 1983a: 39; 1989: 14; Kamberi 1993: 6; Harrold et al. 1999: 361; Francisand Gjipali 2005: 199), while Cardini carried out surveys and excavations during1930-1939 throughout southwest Albania (Gilkes 2005: 3; Kodhelaj 2002). BothRichthofens and Cardinis work, nevertheless, had no inuence on post-warstudies in prehistory in Albania as Mustilli, Anamali, Prendi and Korkuti haveshown (Mustilli 1965: 458; Anamali 1969: 92; Prendi 1972: 83; 1976: 21; 1982:189; Korkuti 1983a: 3940; 1984: 5).

The establishment of a stable Communist state in the 1950s led to a growthin interest in archaeology among political circles, encouraging archaeologicalexcavations (Prendi 1988a: 910). Archaeological studies were mainly dened

by a culture-historical ideology, which characterised the theory of Albanianarchaeology throughout the communist period. This approach originates in the19thcenturywhen archaeological material was recovered throughout Europe asa result of economic development, and the concomitant founding of museumsand research institutes. As the archaeological database grew, this encouraged theclassication and comparison of artefacts in a more careful manner (Trigger 1997:148149). It was for these reasons that during the early 19th century ChristianJorgensen Thomsen clearly dened the idea of the three age system, which wasadopted worldwide through the work ofJens Jacob Asmussen Worsaae (Daniel1981: 5960). In addition, Gustav Oscar Montelius in the 1880s introduced a

typological method, dividing the Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages into severalperiods, which he regarded as applicable to Europe as a whole. Within each ofthese periods he noted regional variation and rejected the idea that all parts ofEurope had reached the same stage of advancement simultaneously (Bibby 1956:181182).

Although initially archaeology was used primarily as an instrument for theclassication of material culture, there were also attempts to interpret culturalunits in ethnic terms. Due to political, economic and ideological pressures duringthis period, European societies were particularly engaged with nationalisticmovements, an association which was equally evident in archaeology practice as

well. In this context archaeology played a major role by encouraging a sense ofethnic identity amongst many of the European nations (Trigger 1997: 156158).


7/13

Rudenc Ruka

29

These concerns with historical and ethnic problems focussed the attention ofarchaeologists on the geographical distribution of distinct types of artefacts andartefact assemblages in an effort to relate them to historical groups. This practicedominated European archaeology until the end of the 1960s (Kohl and Fawcett

1995: 320).With regard to Albania, the main concern of archaeologists during the

communist era (1945-1992) was to prove that the Albanians had inhabitedtheir country since prehistory to the present day (Hodges et al. 2004: 11).As a consequence of border conicts, nationalist ideas had also inuencedarchaeological studies (Kurti 2004: 10). Material culture studies were focussedin constructing typologies, cultural groups and in proving their autochthonousdevelopment (Kurti 2004: 12). While discussing the development from the MiddleNeolithic to the Eneolithic, Muzafer Korkuti writes: The autochthonous originof the Eneolithc culture was shaped by the revival of the autochthonous elements

of Middle Neolithic (Korkuti 1974a: 387). Aiming fora complete chronologicalsequence of prehistory, archaeologists built up a strong tradition of typologicalstudies and sequences, making cultural and cross-cultural comparisons basedmainly upon pottery. This theoretical context characterised Albanian archaeologyuntil the end of the1980s (Miraj and Zeqo 1993: 123125) when, together withpolitical changes, western schools of archaeology and advanced theories wererst introduced.

The study of prehistoric gurines in Albania: a literary review

As with other elements of material culture, the study of gurines deals withgeneral classication into categories, and also involves identifying parallels fromother sites within or outside Albania. On the other hand, no clear interpretationswere formed and limited interest was taken in their specic archaeological andsocial context. In this context no classication or interpretation was attemptedwhen the rst Neolithic anthropomorphic gurines were discovered in 1962 atduring excavations beside the river Dunavec (Fig. 1) (Prendi and Andrea 1971:1).

Slightly later some attempt was made to devise categorisations (Prendi 1966:

260) of the rst prehistoric gurines deriving from an archaeological excavationdiscovered during 1963 (Rebani 1964: 243) in an Eneolithic context of themulti-period site of Maliq (Korkuti 1987: 7). The gurines were rst divided intotwo categories - anthropomorphic and zoomorphic; then they were categorizedaccording to the production method such as hand made or mould made; andnally, groups were dened with distinctive types and subtypes. However, nodetailed description was made for individual gurines or any association withany of the categories mentioned above. In addition, only a few gurines wereillustrated (Prendi 1966: 260, Tab. X).

A change occurred in the early 1970s, when nine fragmented anthropomorphic

gurines of the Middle Neolithic from the settlement of Cakran (Korkutiand Andrea 1972: 154) were included within the category of cult objects, a


8/13


30

Figure 1. Neolithic terracotta gurine from Dunavec discovered in 1962: a. Drawing(Korkuti 1995: tab. 48), b. Front view (Prendi 1988b: 179).

a

b


9/13

Rudenc Ruka

31

classication which was used in all later studies. Some analogies were also madewith Neolithic cultures of the Aegean and afew of the gurines were describedand illustrated (Korkuti and Andrea 1972: 154155, 172).

Preliminary categorisations were made during this time taking account

of their function and production, as is the case with gurines from the LateNeolithic site of Kamnik. These were regarded as objects with magical andreligious properties and were classied on the basis of being decorated eitherbefore or after ring (Prendi and Aliu 1971: 25). However, none of theseinterpretations was correlated to particular cases or gurines and no analysis wasmade to support this typology.

The same methodology was applied in the study of the gurines fromDunavec when these were rst published in 1971. In addition, Korkuti states:gurines are important indicators that express ethno-cultural relations betweenDunavec, Cakran and the Neolithic sites of Greece (Patisia, Amorgos, Sparta andNaxos) (Korkuti 1971: 1415). In two different articles published in 1974, in thecontext of analysing the ceramic differences that dene Dunavecs Phase I andII, Korkuti notes similar changes also in the appearance of the anthropomorphicgurines, but the observation was not supported with any specic evidence(Korkuti 1974a: 387; 1974b: 5, 7).

During the 1980s there was increased interest in gurines leading to debatesabout their meaning as well as more detailed descriptions. Nevertheless, thegurines from the Early Neolithic settlement of Vashtmi were still includedwithin the category of cult objects and were dened as either anthropomorphic

or zoomorphic. Special emphasis was given to the quantity of each of thecategories found at the site. Eight out of 15 gurines are described in detail andshown in illustrations. Even though the posture, production method, measures,clay description, and shapes of the gurines are emphasised, this categorisationis not systematic as not all of the gurines were considered. The zoomorphicgurines were described in detail, illustrated and some interpretations are offeredon the basis of their function, type of animal and production (Korkuti 1982: 91,108111, 116, Tab. XVI).

Further attempts were made to understand meaning, by considering thegurines as creations of Neolithic art through which the makers expressed their

world view. In this context the concept of the cult of Toks-nn (Mother Earth)was introduced, considered by Korkuti as obvious because of the prominentrepresentation on the gurines of female traits. The cult, so the argument went,was related to reproduction and fertility, and was paralleled in other Balkan andAnatolian cultures of theEarly Neolithic (Korkuti 1982: 91, 108111). Analogieswere made with gurines from Macedonia, Thessaly, thewestern coast of AsiaMinor, theAegean, and Anatolia, and interpreted as belonging to a commonconceptualisation in the iconographic representation of the gurines and inthe existence of the cult of Toks-nn (Mother Earth). In this context thegurines were considered as representing, to a certain degree, the common origin

of these cultures.A further attempt was made to categorize the gurines from Middle


10/13


32

Neolithic Kolsh II according to their steatopygia (steatopygia is the accumulationof large amounts of fat on the buttocks, especially as a normal condition inthe Khoikhoi and other people of arid parts of southern Africa [Pearsall 1999:1405]) or non-steatopygia (Korkuti 1983b: 4042). In addition, once again these

were all described and illustrated.In the following years the same methods of research were published in a

sequence of articles (Lera 1987: 32; 1988: 2930; 1993: 1516; Bunguri 1993: 54,5657; Gjipali 1995: 2931) with few minor additions such as the introductionof the term Magna-Mater (Big Mother) in Latin, which corresponded to Toks-nn (Mother Earth) in Albanian (Korkuti 1985: 46).

A signicant publication of 1995 on theNeolithic and Eneolithic periods(Andrea 1996: 6971; Gjipali 1996: 103105; Kalogirou 1997: 594595)demonstrated an increased interest toward gurines with detailed descriptionsand illustrations (Korkuti 1995). However, because the publication is in German,it is difcult for the wider Albanian audience to use it. Therefore, for the purposeof this article I will use the 1989 original version of the manuscript, which again,due to the fact that is not been published in Albanian has had a limited inuenceon Albanian prehistory.

If Dunavec is taken as an example to illustrate the publication, thediscussion (Korkuti 1989) for the rst time contained a detailed descriptionand illustration of each gurine. The gurines along with other aspects of thematerial culture have been divided chronologically into Phase I and Phase IIgurines. In addition, for each Phase there is a categorisation into groups based

on attributes such as cylindrical neck, exaggerated buttocks, beaklike nose. Notall the gurines are included in this classication though,and the author refersto the most notable examples and does not follow a clear method consideringall the attributes. Moreover, in some instances the categorisation did not aimto explain meanings or draw conclusions. In a different case the presence ofgood proportions, decoration, and careful modelling have been considered as thecriteria for dening these as true works of Neolithic art (Fig. 2).

The basis of the interpretation was a simple question: what do theanthropomorphic gurines represent? It was assumed, for example, that thegurines representing women can be identied with the cult of Magna Mater

and the Goddess of fertility. These cults signify the reproduction of life and theprotection of society. Further assumptions were made that the Neolithic age

was sustained by a matriarchal society, with the woman playing a central role.It is during this time, so the thesis goes, that humans may have correlated thesimilar functions of woman and the earth, the former as being important for thereproduction of life and the latter for the reproduction of natural produce thatprovided subsistence. In addition, the large number of gurines at the settlementof Dunavec was interpreted as a factor underlining the importance of this cultamong the inhabitants. By drawing upon information on gurines from other

Albanian sites and abroad, Korkuti attempted to establish broad chronological

relationships which in turn might explain the origin of the Dunavec inhabitants.Regarding the zoomorphic gurines, Korkuti has noted the small number


11/13

Rudenc Ruka

33

Fig. 2. Neolithic terracotta gurine from Dunavec showing size reduction: a. drawing(Korkuti 1995: tab. 42), b. front view, c. side view.

a

b c

of examples during Phase I. Additionally, he has considered for further analysisthe meaning of only two gurines that represent bulls. These are regarded asrepresenting the cult of cattle which might have played an important role in the

economy of Dunavec. The inuence of this cult is considered to be derived fromCatal Hyk in Anatolia (Korkuti 1989: 179193, 196197, 219224, 226229,231232), whereas in a later publication Korkuti interprets all the zoomorphicgurines of this period as related to the cult of the household animals by stressingtheir important role in the economy (Korkuti 2002: 29).

International theoretical developments in material culture studies

The theoretical perspective in Albanian archaeology followed the same track asthe rest of the international community until the 1960s. It was after this period

that the international theoretical framework shifted toward a new perspectiveon material culture (Gamble 2001: 7). The culture-historical approach largely


12/13


34

explained change in terms of migrations of people and supposed inuences(Renfrew and Bahn 2000: 38). The dissatisfaction with culture-historicalarchaeology led to a turning point in archaeological theory which was developedthrough Anglo-American archaeology in the 1960s and early 1970s (Johnson 1999:

20). In 1958, Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips argued for a greater emphasison social aspects, a broader processual interpretation or study of the generalprocesses at work in culture history (Willey and Phillips, 1958). These conceptswere introduced to American archaeologists by Lewis Binford who added newelements (Trigger 1997: 294). Binford and other authors saw the earlier approachas using the archaeological data to write a kind of counterfeit history (Binford1968: 313341). Archaeological evidence was appropriate, so Binford and hiscolleagues believed, for reconstructing the social and economic aspects of pastsocieties (Renfrew and Bahn 2000: 38).

In this context Bartel, through sophisticated quantitative techniques suchas the computerised statistical treatment and patterning of gurines, tried tomake possible the testing of conclusions such as the functional continuity ofthe mother goddess from the upper Palaeolithic to the Neolithic (Bartel 1981).

Analytical methods of this kind were used to attempt to determine the functionalrelationship of cultural traits in social systems by viewing the cultures as adaptivesystems composed of interrelated subsystems which interacted with each otherand the environment in which the system is set (Darvill 2002: 341; Trigger 1997:298). During the 1980s a number of criticisms were made of processualistarchaeology (Johnson, 1999: 90). A series of new theoretical approaches deployed

in archaeological thinking, which were included under the term post-processualarchaeologies, were introduced for the rst time by Ian Hodder in 1985 (Hodder1985: 126). These theories have little in common, except for being critical ofprocessual archaeology, although emphasis was now placed upon the role of socialfactors in the way human societies operate. Hodder felt that the same pattern ortraces in the archaeological record could be produced by a range of differentsimulated processes and that patterns might be explained or interpreted in manydifferent ways. Meskell has put this cogently: Today, rather than trying to embedsites and cultures within broader, universal classications, archaeologists examinethem in their own individual context, so that local variation and character is

stressed. (1998: 47). It is in this context that the new work has a greater level ofsophistication to the gurine analysis by emphasizing the diversity and focusingon the meanings and uses of the gurines in particular times and places (Lesure2000: 12). Therefore, the fertility concept underpinning the early interpretationsof gurines has been considered as a signicant variable, but its cultural meaningand social impact can only be determined within the socio-economic frameworksof particular societies (Mukhopadhyay and Higgings 1988). In other words, anyinterpretation of the meaning of a gurine is associated with a much moresignicant concept or its social life. In these circumstances Hodder tries toconstruct the domus and its signicance, the different role of gender in the

activities of the every day in order to recreate the social dimension of a gurinewithin each particular local context (Hodder 1990: 4499).


13/13

Rudenc Ruka

35

In complete contrast to Hodders thesis, a recent study of prehistoricgurines by Bailey (2005) advances the hypothesis that there are universal traitsrelated to gurines such as, size reduction, and miniaturism. His observationsappear to hold true for Albanian gurines as well.

Conclusions

Five points need to be considered for future studies of Neolithic terracottagurines in Albania:

1) A detailed catalogue needs to be made of all gurines, based on various

attributes such as clay, morphology and decoration patterns. This will lead tomore reliable classications, which will contribute to a better understanding oftheir function, values and the meaning of the variables presented.

2) The study of clay and production methods applied will give informationon the energy expended for the different types, and as a consequence the valuesattached to gurines and the social status of their users.

3) Rigorous excavation methods and multidimensional studies ofarchaeological data will contribute to a better insight into the socio-economicframework, the use of gurines and their archaeological and social context.

4) The combination of the local context and broader phenomena whichlead to the creation of universal traits in the representation of human and animalforms.

5) The use of contemporaneous social anthropological case studies inorder to generate ideas about the use of gurines.

Documents

Prehistoric Figurines in Albania_ a Review_ Rudenc Ruka