Cucuteni–Trypillia culture

The Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, also known as Cucuteni culture (from Romanian), Trypillian culture (from Ukrainian) or Tripolie culture (from Russian), is a late Neolithic archaeological culture that flourished between ca. 5500 BC and 2750 BC, from the Carpathian Mountains to the Dniester and Dnieper regions in modern-day Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine, encompassing an area of more than 35,000 km² (13,500 square miles). At its peak the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture built the largest Neolithic settlements in Europe, some of which had populations of up to 10,000 to 15,000 people,. One of the most notable aspects of this culture was that every 60–80 years the inhabitants of a settlement would burn their entire village.. The reasons for the burning of the settlements is a subject of debate among scholars; many of the settlements were reconstructed several times on top of earlier settlements, preserving the shape and the orientation of the older buildings. One example, in Poduri, Romania, a total of thirteen habitation levels were constructed on top of each other at the same site.

Nomenclature

Cucuteni antropomorphic clay figure

The culture was initially named after the village of Cucuteni, located in Iaşi County, Romania, where the first objects associated with this culture were discovered. The first archeological diggings at the Cucuteni site were initiated in the spring of 1885 by N. Beldiceanu and D. Butculescu. The findings made were announced to the scientific world through articles signed by N. Beldiceanu, Antichitatile de la Cucuteni (The Antiquities at Cucuteni) (1885), and Gr. Butureanu, Notita asupra sapaturilor si cercetarilor facute la Cucuteni (Note on the Diggings and Research at Cucuteni) (1889), as well as through communications given by Gr. Butureanu at the International Congress of Anthropology and Praehistoric Archaeology in Paris in 1889, and by D. Diamandi within the Society of Anthropology in Paris (1889).

Simultaneously, in around 1887, (possibly 1893 or 1896), the Czech archaeologist Vicenty Khvoika uncovered the first of close to one hundred Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, and excavations started in 1909. V. Khvoika documented this discovery to the 11th Congress of Archaeologists in 1897, which is considered the official date of the discovery of the Trypillian culture in Ukraine (E-Museum, 2004). In 1897, similar objects were excavated in the village of Trypillia (Template:Lang-ua), located in the Kiev Oblast province, in Ukraine. As a result, this culture became identified in Soviet, Russian, and Ukrainian publications as the Tripolie, Tripolian or Trypillian culture.

Both the Romanian Cucuteni, and the Ukrainian Trypillia terms seem to be describing the same culture. To resolve this dilemma, a compromise was reached that combines the two terms in the English name of Cucuteni-Trypillia.

Extent

File:Cucuteni map.jpg

Cucuteni-Trypillia culture

Members of this culture belonged to tribes that stretched from the Balkans, through the Danube River Basin (up to the Iron Gate of the Danube, and along the Carpathian Mountains. This area encompasses territories in contemporary Romania, Moldova and Ukraine. As of 2003, about 3000 sites of Cucuteni-Trypillian culture have been identified in Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine. J.P. Mallory reports that the:

"...culture is attested from well over a thousand sites in the form of everything from small villages to vast settlements consisting of hundreds of dwellings surrounded by multiple ditches."

It was centered on the middle to upper Dniester River in present-day Moldova, and extended to the northeast as far as the Dnieper River in Ukraine, and to the west as far as the Carpathian Mountains.

Periodization

Scholars categorize the culture into three distinct periods

• Early - 5300-4600 B.C.
• Middle - 4600-3200 B.C.
• Late - 3200-2750/2600 B.C.

Due to the fact that the research of Cucuteni-Trypillian culture was originally conducted between two separate groups of scholars in separate countries, two classifications were created to describe its development: one for Trypillia, and another for Cucuteni. The traditional chronological subdivisions are based on differences in technology, morphology and decorations. The Cucuteni Periodization was proposed by the German Archeologist Hubert Schmidt in 1932, and the Trypillian Periodization was proposed by T.S. Passek in 1949.

Trypillian	Cucuteni	Time Frame BC	Bulgarian
A	Precucuteni I-III	4800-4500	Gumelnita
B1	A	4500-4200
B1-2	A/B	4200-4000
B2/C1	B	4000-3500
C2	-	3500-3200

Early Period

Precucuteni Clay Figures 4900-4750 BC Discovered in Balta Popii, Romania

From the second half of the 6th millennium, through the first half of the 5th millennium B.C., the tribes settled in the basin of the Dnieper and Bug rivers, and along the slopes of the Carpathian Mountains. The roots of Cucuteni-Trypillian culture came from the Starcevo-Cris culture, and the Vinča culture (which existed during the middle of the 6th millennium B.C.). It was also influenced by the earlier Bug-Dniester culture (6500-5000 BC). During this early period of its existence (in the 5th millennium B.C.), the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture was also influenced by the Linear Pottery culture from the north, and by the Boian-Giulesti culture from the south.Through colonization and acculturation from these other cultures, the Pre-Cucuteni culture was established. At the beginning of the first phase, named Precucuteni I, the area of development was limited to southeast Transylvania and western Moldavia. In the second phase the Precucuteni culture (Precucuteni II) reached as far as the Dniester River. In the third phase (Precucuteni III) it reached the Dnieper River, and beyond. Most of the settlements were located close to rivers, with fewer settlements located on the plateaus. Dwellings were made either below ground, or half-dug into the ground. The floors and fireplaces were made of clay, and the walls were made of wood or reeds, covered in clay. Roofing was made of thatched straw or reeds.

Some of the Cărbuna, Moldavia, copper Cucuteni "Treasure"

The inhabitants were involved with animal husbandry, agriculture, fishing and gathering. Wheat, rye and peas were grown. Tools included ploughs made of antlers, stone, bone and sharpened sticks. The harvest was collected with scythes made of flint-inlaid blades. The grain was milled into flour by stone wheels. Women were involved in pottery, textile- and garment-making, and played a leading role in community life. Men hunted, herded the livestock, made tools from flint, bone and stone. Of their livestock, cattle were the most important, with swine, sheep and goats playing lesser roles. The question of whether or not the horse was domesticated during this time of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture is disputed among historians; horse remains have been found in some of their settlements, but it is unclear whether these remains were from wild horses or domesticated ones.

Clay statues of females and amulets have been found dating to this period. Copper items, primarily bracelets, rings and hooks, are occasionally found as well. A horde of a large number of copper items (a treasure - see image) was discovered in the Moldavan village of Cărbuna, consisting primarily of items of jewelry, which were dated back to the beginning of the 5th millennium B.C. Some historians have used this evidence to support the theory that a social stratification was present in early Cucuteni culture.

Pottery remains from this early period are very rarely discovered; the remains that have been found indicate that the ceramics were used after being fired in a kiln. The outer color of the pottery is a smoky gray, with raised and sunken relief decorations. Toward the end of this early Cucuteni-Trypillian period, the pottery begins to be painted before firing. This white-painting technique found on some of the pottery from this period was imported from the earlier (5th millennium) Gumelniţa-Karanovo culture. It is from this moment when kiln-fired, white-painted pottery remains begin to be found, that historians have indicated marks the turning point where Precucuteni culture ends and Cucuteni Phase (or Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture) begins.

Middle Period

Archeaological finds, from around 3650 BC, discovered in Moldova

In the middle era the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture spread over a wide area from Eastern Transylvania in the west to the Dnieper River in the east. During this period, the population immigrated into and settled along the banks of the upper and middle regions of the Right Bank (or western side) of the Dnieper River, in present-day Ukraine. The population grew considerably during this time, resulting in settlements being established on plateaus, near major rivers and springs.

Their dwellings were built by placing vertical poles in the form of circles or ovals. The construction techniques incorporated log floors covered in clay, wattle-and-daub walls that were woven from pliable branches and covered in clay, and a clay oven, which was situated in the center of the dwelling. As the population in this area grew, more land was put under cultivation. Hunting supplemented the practice of animal husbandry of domestic livestock.

Tools made of flint, rock and bones continued to be used for cultivation and other chores. Axes made of copper have been discovered that were made from ore mined in Volyn, Ukraine, and in the areas around the Dnieper river. Pottery-making by this time had become sophisticated, however they still relied on techniques of making pottery by hand (the potter's wheel was not used yet). Characteristics of the pottery included a monochromic spiral ornament, painted with black paint on a yellow and red base. Large pear-shaped pottery for the storage of grain, dining plates, etc. has been found. Additionally, statues of female figures, as well as figures of animals and models of houses dating to this period have also been discovered. It is believed that the tribes were matrilineal.

Late Period

A statue from the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture, in the Trypillia Museum, Ukraine.

During the late period the Cucuteni-Trypillia territory expanded to include the Volyn region in northwest Ukraine, the Sluch and Horyn rivers in northern Ukraine, and along both banks of the Dnieper river near Kiev. Members of the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture who lived along the coastal regions near the Black Sea came into contact with other cultures. Animal husbandry increased in importance, as hunting diminished; horses also became more important. The community transformed into a patriarchal structure. Outlying communities were established on the Don and Volga rivers in present-day Russia. Dwellings were constructed differently from previous periods, and spiral-patterned ornaments disappeared from their pottery, with a new rope-like ornament becoming popular. Different forms of ritual burial were developed where the deceased were interred in the ground with elaborate burial rituals. The fate of this culture is tied in with the introduction of Bronze Age items coming into this region from other lands.

Features

Gânditorul din Târpești

Cucuteni Museum in Piatra Neamţ

Artefacts from Cluj History Museum

The largest collection of artifacts from the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture can be found in museums in Russia, Ukraine, and Romania, including the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg and the Museum of History & Archaeology in Piatra Neamţ, Romania.

The settlements

In term of overall size, some of Cucuteni-Trypillia sites, such as Talianki (with a population of 15,000 and covering an area of some 450 hectares – 1100 acres) in the province of Uman Raion, Ukraine, are as large as (or perhaps even larger than) the more famous city-states of Sumer in the Fertile Crescent, and these Eastern European settlements predate the Sumerian cities by more than half of a millennium. The reason that academicians have not designated the gigantic settlements of Cucuteni-Trypillia as "cities" (or even "proto-urban formations"), is due to the lack of evidence for internal social differentiation or specialization.

The Cucuteni-Trypillia settlements were usually located on a place where the geomorphology provided natural barriers to protect the site: most notably using high river terraces or canyon edges. The natural obstacles were supplemented with fences, earthworks and ditches, or even more elaborate wooden and clay structures.. The role of the fortifications found at these settlements was probably to protect the tribe's domestic animal herd from wild predators. Other hypotheses are that the fortifications were for protection against enemy attacks, or as a means to gather the community. The role of these fortifications, however, is still debated among scholars.

The most common arrangement of construction for Cucuteni-Trypillia settlements was to place most of the buildings in a circular pattern surrounding a central structure; some examples of this arrangements were found at Tîrpeşti, Ioblona, Berezkovskaya, Onoprievka, and Răşcani. The earliest villages consisted of ten to fifteen wattle-and-daub households. In their heyday, settlements expanded to include several hundred large huts, sometimes with two stories. These houses were typically warmed by an oven, and had round windows. Some of the huts included kilns used to fire pottery, which is one of the hallmarks of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture.
These settlements underwent periodical acts of destruction and re-creation, as they were burned and then rebuilt every 60–80 years. Some scholars have theorized that the inhabitants of these settlements believed that every house symbolized an organic, almost living, entity. Each house, including its ceramic vases, ovens, figurines and innumerable objects made of perishable materials, shared the same circle of life, and all of the buildings in the settlement were linked together as a larger symbolic entity. As with living beings, the settlements may have been seen as also having a “life cycle” of death and rebirth.

As the settlements grew larger, the houses were arranged in two elliptical rows, separated by a space of 70-100 metres (220–320 feet). Each household was almost completely self-supportive within these communities, as if instead of being located within a settlement, each family was living away from town and neighbors in the country. There was a lack of public infrastructure within these settlements, which compelled the inhabitants to include all aspects of their lives within their own domicile; ovens, kilns, working, and sleeping areas were all contained within the same space as the family’s sacred altars. Thus the buildings included both the sacred and profane, which some authorities see as evidence to support the idea that the inhabitants viewed their homes as living beings.

Largest settlements

The existence of the giant settlements was discovered in the 1960s, when the military topographer K.V. Shishkin noticed the presence of peculiar spots from certain aerial photographs.
Scholars posit two theories regarding the impetus behind the formation of the large Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements:

1. That they were created in response to the threat of invaders or attacks from people of the open steppes.
2. That they appeared as a result of natural development and growth, which included the threat of inter-tribal warfare from other Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, as the population growth exerted economic and social pressures on the limited resources of the area.

Some archaeologists (Černjakov 1993, 18-19) have also credited the large size of some of the Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements to their agricultural system, which was perhaps affected by the various climatic changes over the years. This can be seen by examining the historic and modern changes in sea level of the nearby Black Sea.

Some of these large settlements include:

• Talianki, Ukraine – circa 3700 B.C. – up to 15,000 inhabitants, up to 2,700 houses, and covered an area of 450 hectares (1100 acres). Talianki is the largest and best studied Trypillian settlement in Ukraine.
• Dobrovody, Ukraine – circa 3800 B.C. – up to 10,000 inhabitants, and covered an area of 250 hectares (600 acres).
• Maydanets, Ukraine – circa 3700 B.C. – up to 10,000 inhabitants (probably between 6000 to 9000 inhabitants),}, up to 1575 houses, and covered an area of 270 hectares (660 acres).
• Nebelivka, Ukraine - covered an area of 300 hectares (740 acres).

• 
  Cucuteni=Interconnected Cucuteni-Trypillian houses in the Maydanets settlement. Based on research done in 1996 by noted Ukrainian Trypillian scholar Mykhailo Videiko.
• 
  A clay model of a Cucuteni-Trypillian house, showing a pottery kiln in the upper-right, and a cross-shaped cooking hearth to the left.
• 
  Interior reconstruction of a Cucuteni-Trypillian house in the Piatra Neamt Museum, Romania.
• 
  Reconstruction of a Cucuteni-Trypillia hut, in the Tripillian Museum, Trypillia, Ukraine.
• 
  A scale reproduction of a typical Cucuteni-Trypillian village.

House Burning

Simulation of Cucuteni house ignition. So far no modern experiment has reproduced the results of a burned south-east European Neolithic house

The archeological finds show that a vast majority of Cucuteni-Tripolie houses were burned. According to the Sergiu Krolevets, director of the National History and Culture Museum of the Republic of Moldova all of the Cucuteni settlements were burned.Some historians claim that houses were burned on purpose on cyclic time:

Indeed the phenomenon of burned houses has been treated as a series of lucky accidents during the Neolithic, which are primarily responsible for the preservation of Neolithic sites. Contrary this view, I argue that it is unlikely that the houses were burned as a result of a series of accidents or for any structural and technological reasons but rather that they were destroyed by deliberate burning and most likely for reasons of a symbolic nature.

There is a consensus in the study of Neolithic and

Eneolithic Europe that the majority of burned houses

were intentionally set alight.

There are theories that states that the houses were accidentally burned due to the high risk of primitive ovens, or due to tribal rivalry, and considering that a large quantity of stored food was found in some burned sites. The stored food in some of burned sites excludes the ritual burning.
There are some hipothesis that the every house was burned at the end of lifespan.

Whether the houses were set on fire in a ritualistic way all together before abandoning the settlement, or each house was destroyed at the end of its life (e.g. before building a new one) it is still a matter of debate.

Even if the first discussion was about the reason for house burning has started in 1949 even if referred only to a limited Tripolie area in Moldova an Ukraine((richevski 1940; Passek 1949; Paul 1967) in the western world the research is recent (Alan McPherron and Chris Christopher 1988, 477 ; or John Chapman 1999 and Mirjana Stevanović 2002)

The following hypothesis are considered by historians:

1. Accidental. According to this theory the houses were burned by accidental fire if the following conditions are meet: close proximity of the houses,grain textiles and other combustion materials stored in the house, grain storage was present increasing the risk of spontaneous combustion. If this theory can explain some of the firing, does not explain all of them. Furthermore A number of experimental studies have been conducted in order to demonstrate the effects of an accidental fire on a wattle-and-daub structure. The studies conducted suggest that significant wattle-and-daub structures are difficult to burn down and that accidental fires are not enough to create the kind of destruction that is found at Late Neolithic sites...
2. Weatherproofing. In 1940 Krichevski has interpreted the the house burning was an attempt to strengthen the structure and insulate the floor against damp and other natural agents. As arguments against this theory stand that it appears that burned rubble originated from wall collapse as well as from floor construction. Also the fact that artefacts were found burned within the rubble, does not sustain the theory.
3. Aggression. Some consider that even if aggression explain the phenomenon of house burning like the accident theory does not explain all of the events, since the aggression was possible but not very common. There is no evidence of skeletons within burned structures to suggest that warfare played a large role in the life of the Late Neolithic people of Southeastern Europe. Indications of hostility such as projectile points lodged in skeletons is absent.
4. Ruble Recycling.In 1993 Gary Shaffer has used archaeomagnetic and experimental studies to argue that in order to recycle the clay for later building the houses were burned at the end of their life cicle.
5. Fumigation. Another theory is related to smoke or fumigate a building, for sanitary reasons, in order to get rid of pests, disease, insects, and/or witches. However, the evidence does not support this viewpoint. The structures of the Late Neolithic were burned and destroyed. The amount of fire that was used in house burning would have been too much if fumigation was the only intent (Stevanovic 1997).
6. Symbolic End of House. Consider the house burning as a ritual performance marking the end of a house. Some historians name this Domicideor domithanasia.
7. House Burning as a Means of Demolition and Creating Space. This hypothesis argues that the residents of Late Neolithic sites burned their own structures in order to free up space within the walls of the settlement and eliminate the danger that an old, dilapidated wattle-and-daub house may pose to its occupants and others.

House Construction

Houses

There were identified two type of house structure, one with fork shape beam sunk in the soil and the another one with beams over the ground plates fixed on the soil.The verticals beams were distributed at even distances, the round beams used having around 15–20 cm in diameter, but also bigger timber were used. Usually the walls were from woven branches covered with clay, and finished with plastic motifs or with pictures. The clay layer was usually under 5 cm. Sometimes the walls were from horizontally timber beams covered with clay,in such cases sometimes over the walls of timber beams was applied a woven from branches. The was no "neolithic standards", even in the same house some walls sere realized with timber beams covered with finished lumber and other walls were realized with woven branches.Cucuteni houses were roofed with turf or reeds. The shape of the Cucuteni Tripolie houses was usually rectangular still the L type shape was used. Some of the houses were divided in rooms or at least in "functional spaces"..

• 
  Floor reconstruction; log floor covered in clay
• 
  Wall reconstruction
• 
  Fork pillar reconstruction
• 
  Furniture

Bordei/Earth lodge dwellings

Some of the houses found by archeologists were dugout type.Unlike the surface dwellings, characterized by rectangular shape, the bordei house types are characterized by ellipse shape. Usually the the floor is somewhere around 1.50 meters under the ground level.

Interior of the houses

Chair

Precucuteni Goddess and a Chair

The most of the cucuteni houses arranged in the following way: opposite to the door were the heating fireplace.Near Fireplace were placed big vessel for water and grains. In the same area were kept the painted vessels. Some of the pottery was used for clothing storage. Still most of the pottery seems to be destined for rituals. There were found houses with no fire place, but there were sometimes more the one in a house having distinct functionality: hearth; klin; fireplaces;. The fireplace was usually constructed on a bed of mixed pottery shards with clay and covered with quality clay. It is assumed that the furniture was extensively used, Cucuteni wood furniture is known only from miniature clay models. In houses walls was used funiture from woven branches covered with clay.

Agriculture

Agriculture is attested to, as well as livestock-raising, mainly consisting of cattle, but goats/sheep and swine are also evidenced. Based on fauna remains from archaeological discoveries the hunting was also a secondary practice.

Plants Used

Common wheat (Triticum Compactum), Wheat (Triticum Vulgare), Oat (Avena Sativa),Rye(Secale cereale),Proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) and also technical plants Hemp (Canabis sativa), also the Apricot (Armeniaca Vulgaris) and Cherry plum (Prunus cerasifera) were known, and also Common Grape Vine andForrest Grape Vine.

• 
  Plough Horn from Deer used in Cucuteni agriculture (Piatra Neamt Museum)

Livestock

Considering some zoomorphing representations, the Ox was use as a draft animal. For meat production there was use sheep, and goat also pigs and dogs were also known as a domesticated animals. There is no proof about using horses during eneolitic even if there are some representations on pottery, no one know if there are representations of wild horses or domesticated horses, even if some historians argue that the horse was domesticated(V.V Gromova V.I Tolkin)., the most probable the archeological evidences of horse-head maces found in Cucuteni sites, which support the theory of domesticated horse, are imports from Suvorovo culture imigrants.

Hunting

Silex Tools for fur processing

Cucuteni, Solutrean like, fishing cooper needle, Piatra Neamt museum

Even if the main occupation was the plant cultivation, afeter livestock the hunting was also a secondary occupation. The archeological proof show that during Cucuteni culture, there was hunted: Red Deer, Roe Deer, Wild boar, Aurochs, fox and Brown Bear. For hunting purpose the following methods were used: Archery, spear, Mace (club), traps were also used, and also hunters were using disguise as pray.

Salt Exploitation

The Salt was having a very important role for the neo-eneolithic economy ncluding cucuteni Culture. At Poiana Slatinei-Lunca a salt water spring exploitation, used during Precucuteni stages, was discovered. Recent studie show a direct link between the salt spring exploitation and Cucuteni population growth.

Based from discoveries in Solca, Cacica, Lunca, Oglinzi, Cucuieți, the technology used for salt exploitation has using briquetage. First of all the salt waters from springs was boiled in big pottery vessel, obtaining dense Brine. The brine was heated in briquetage vessel, broken at the end of the preocess in order to extract the salt.

Rites

Based on the fact that some figures discovered in Gherlaiesti were arranged in cardinal position, considering the cross shape of the altars, and some simbols like gamma cross, some historians caracterize the Cucuteni rituals as Chthonic and Uranians stil others historians deny the uranic character of Tripolie rituals. In the same way were arranged, the mini clay figures (Circle of goddesses) found in Isaiia and Poduri. In all cases the figures were surrounded by grain straws.

• 
  Ritual vessel discoverd at Gherlăieşti
• 
  Ritual vessel as discoverd at Gherlăieşti
• 
  Sanctuary Clay Model
• 
  Antropomorhic Male Representation

The Living Goddesses or Old European Goddesses

Antropomorhic representation using rhombus as a symbol for fertility

As evidence from archaeology, thousands of artifacts from Neolithic Europe have been discovered, mostly in the form of female figurines.As a result a goddess theory has occurred. The leading historian was Marija Gimbutas, still the this interpretation is a subject of great controversy in archaeology due to her many inferences about the symbols on artifacts.

Some researchers consider that the simbols used for representing the feminity are rhombus for fertility and the triangle as a symbol for fecundity.

• 
  Goddess antropomorhic representation, using double triangle (hourglass)and bird hands
• 
• 
• 
  Goddes representation

Circle of Goddess

Goddess and stools

The masculinity and a cross representing moon phases. Symbolizing the creative and fecund power of nature.

This ritual assemblies lay in a vase that had a very anomalous shape to the Precucuteni style and were full of soil and straw. The cultic objects were put on display and worshiped during magic-religious ceremonies. The repeated use of them is proven by the presence of some chipping from wear. When not in motion, they were probably stored in this special container. The presence of soil under some statuettes kept in the vase, and the evidence of cariossids on the surface of two figurines and four stools, led some researchers to hypothesize that the pieces had been deposited in soil and straw for magical purposes: they had been left to bud. all the statues were distinct. Some of them bear geometrical decorations. There were observed mature statuettes (that have already given birth), young statuettes (that have not yet given birth), and a babies . Only the mature figurines may sit by right on clay stools.

The Bird Goddess

According to some researchers as Gimbutas, Lazarocici, for the Precucuteni communities, mythic birds possibly embodied a solar principle and the revival of the life, serving as a symbol of prosperity and protection.

Bird Goddess

Funerary Rites

Bull horn representation, symbol of masculinity

One of the unanswered questions regarding the Cucuteni Culture is the lack of artifacts regarding the funerary rites. While the evidence for settlements is strong the mortuary activity is almost invisible.

There are no Cucuteni cemeteries and the Tripolye one's which have been dicovered are very late

The discovery of skulls is more frequent then other parts of the body, still no statistic study was carried out.

Bolomey and Marinescu-Bîlcu suggest that the common practice was the abandonment of the body to the "good mercy" of Mother Nature.

Pasek and Movșa have an hypothesis that some bones were considered to have magic powers and were scattered on purpose across the settlement.

Other suggest the antrophagy or at least excarnation.

It is the merit of Alexandra Bolomey (BOLOMEY 1982) that, in an ample paper published in the ninth decade of the last century, made a review of a series of these human remains, found within the respective culture, reaching, among others to the conclusion that, at least partly, they have a cultic character and maybe even there was an antropophagy of cultic type.

Some historians taking into consideration the indirect relation to the Linear-Pottery civilization and its subsequent civilizations, where incineration was practiced besides inhumation, it is expected that archaeologists should find other funerary rites besides inhumation, and that detection of some incineration traces should be endeavoured. The early Neolithic in Europe featured burials of women and children under the floors of personal residences. Remains of adult males are missing. It is probably safe to say that Neolithic culture featured sex discrimination in funerary customs, and that women and children were important in ideology concerning the home.

The only conclusion which can be draw from archeological evidence is that the in Cucuteni culture in vast majority of cases the bodies were not formally deposited within the settlement area.

Immolation

Various researchers have some hipothesys about Cucuteni rituals.

1. Incineration Ritual of Cucuteni-Trypillya houses, most probable associated with interment and immolation.
2. a ritual , who consider sacrificice buried under houses or on settlement, animals, their heads or parts, possibly associated with immolation ceremony.
3. a ritual ,who consist in burying (by interment) under dwellings or on settlement of human skulls, bone, sometimes burnt, the deceased with stock, possibly is also associated with immolation.
4. Rituals, associated with use of fire, when into pit, exclusive of ashes get the various things, possibly immolation oddments. Also some researchers argue, that in some rituals Cucuteni culture has use anthropomorphous, zoomorphous clay figurines, binocular vessels.

Arts and Crafts

Pottery

The Cucuteni pottery is connected to the Linear Pottery culture. from some points of view it is considered the queen of prehistoric pottery, not only due to the fact that the manufacturing process was very well mastered (including temperature control and modeling)but also considering the genuine and well developed aesthetic sense.

In early stages of the Cucuteni culture, the polychromy was poor, the ceramics was decorated with incisions, sometimes the incisions were filled with white or red, in order to emphasize the model.

As time progressed the Cucuteni-Trypillians began creating better weapons using stronger metals, and the effort put into pottery became less noticeable.

Frumusica Dance, a ceramic anthropomorphic support, was discovered in 1942 on Cetatuia Hill near Bodestii de Sus (Neamt county, Romania), it was considered a masterpiece symbol of Cucuteni Culture.

It is considered that the neollitic artist has represented an ritualic dance or hora, similar artefacts were founds in Berești and Dragușini.

Technology

Modeling

Reenacting of technology used for Cucuteni pottery

The first step wad the clay was cleaned of little stones, earth, organic matter, second it was crumbed and dipped so all the particles would mix very well. Then the paste was trampled and kneaded with the hands until the paste resembled to dough. In order to smash even the smallest particles, in the end the paste had to be beaten with the rammer. After that the next operation is that of making the twists. The clay is rolled in palms or on a wooden surface and the size of the twists depends on the thickness of the vase walls we want to make. The bottom of the pot is first made and then the twists are placed one above the other. The edges of the twists are stretched until they merge and then the walls are smoothed with a wooden tool. Then the pots were left to dry, usually in a place with shadow, to avoid the cracking of the clay, somewhere inside without drafts that would make the dry uneven. The time needed differed according to the size and thickness of the pots. Some discoveries in Cucuteni area show that some sort of slow pottery wheel was used.

Decorating

The pigments used were based on Iron oxide for red hues, calcium carbonate and calcium silicate for white ones and for the black iron and manganese compounds (magnetite and jacobsite). In the case of the black pigments some sort of primitive trade was shown, the Iacobeni-Moldova and Nikopol-Ukraine are belived the source of black pigments for cucuteni culture. No traces from Nikopol black pigments were found in Cucuteni area ceramics which show that the trade was limited. Further more some pigments used were of organic origin (bones or wood).

Firing

Pottery kiln possessing a controlled air flow - reconstruction

In the late period of Cucuteni culture, klins with controlled atmosphere were used for pottery production, and the temperature reached around 1000-1100°C inside the combustion chamber, the klins were with two separate chambers separated by a grate, the combustion chamber and the filling chamber. The ceramics presents some fissures and firing cracks were presents in mass of the vessel, the temperature in the firing chamber was maintained at around 900°C, fact assesed by the uniform and complete firing of the most of the vessels. After cooking a cooling stage was used, lasting half a day with draught reduced to minimum. the materials used for ceramics has been local clay.

Binocular vessels

They are believed to date from 4,600 to 3,400 BCE. Since no usability was found, it is believed by some historians that this model represent stylized human figures holding hands, but no consensus either of their meaning or possible use has so far been reached though the first artefacts of this kind were unearthed more than a hundred years ago. There is some hypothesis that this tipe of ceramics has been used as ritual objects which involved the use of fire, probably in sacrifices.

• 
  Typical trichrome vessel: black, white and red decorated ceramics
• 
  Frumuşica Dance

Figurines

Extant figurines excavated at the Cucuteni sites are thought to represent religious artefacts, but their meaning or use is still unknown.Some historians as Gimbutas claim that: the stiff nude to be representative of death on the basis that the color white is associated with the bone (that which shows after death). Stiff nudes can be found in Hamangia, Karanovo, and Cucuteni cultures.

Antropomorphic Representations

• 
  Furniture depicted in clay -around 4900-4750 BC
• 
  Antropomorphic figure; there are some hipothesis that the incisions represents tatoos
• 
  Cucuteni Male figure
• 
  Mother goddess

Zoomorphic Representations

• 
  Zoomorphic representation.
• 
  Zooomorphic vessel
• 
  Zoomorphic protoma
• 
  Bull representation
• 
  Bull Horn representation
• 
  Zoomorphic representation
• 
  Bull Horn/ Snake representation
• 

Weaving and Clothing

Cucuteni Vertical Loom Reconstruction

Due to the fact that the Danube Basin is not conducive to the preservation of the textiles, no material was found, still the impression on pottery shreds are fairly common.. Still there were found weights for vertical loom. The lavish decorating pottery suggest that the during Cucuteni Tripolie the textiles were exceedingly beautiful.

There were round ones with narrow holes,round, rather flat ones with fairly large holes, con-like shapes, with holes in the narrow top part, pear like shape with a drilled narrow top part. The size of the weights varied from 5 to 10 cm in diameter. Such weights could be used both in fishnets and weaving looms. There were also some group of weights which were obviously for the role of fishing weights because of their inadequate firing or suitable material.

Neonila Kordysh

Weapons and tools

The raw material used in Cucuteni Culture for tools manufacture was composed from sedimentary rocks like: local flint , chert , jasper, sandstone, marls tuffs; volcanic rocks including: granite, obsidian, basalt; metamorphic rocks: schists (gneisses); skeletal materials, clay and also copper. A large parts of the tools used were lithic:the axes, the chisels and chisel-lets, the adzes, the flint axes, the axe with two parallel edges, adzes, hammers, club heads, hand-mills, rubbers-crushers, “anvils”, plungers, pressing tools, retouching tools, and abrasive pieces. Tools and weapons made of horn: piercing tools, grubbing hoes, planting/scratching tools, furrowing tools made of stag horns, hammers, hammer-axes, hammer-grubbing hoes, fighting axes (with handles); and of those made of bones: the piercing needles and one knitting needle, chisels and chisel-lets, spatulas, harpoons, knives and daggers, shuttle, handles,arrow tip, handles, polishing tools. The copper tools were not used extensivelly, but there were used: the needles, the piercing tools, the hooks for the fishing rod, the knives, the daggers, various hammer-axes (axes with crossed branches, chisel-axes). The clay tools made and used, were: truncated-conical twisting spindles weights and pyramid-trunk-like weights for the weaving loom, and circular weights flat, cylindrical and parallelipipedic for the fishing net, clay nozzles, supports, balls and so on.

• 
  Knives reconstruction
• 
  There are few Weapons Artifacts found for Cucuteni Culture
• 
  Punch Tools/Needles
• 
  Stone tools

Symbols and Proto-writing

Considering the canonical view consolidated by manuals and schoolbooks, writing has appeared at Urukthe biblical Erech (Mesopotamia, around 3300-3200 BCE,in a sudden manner,in the framework of the growing authoritarian city-states and under economic-administrative pressure,although it was not an unexpected invention. It matured from more or less stylized drawings to express the sounds of a language, based on ancient traditions of symbol systems that cannot be classified as writing proper, but have many characteristics strikingly reminiscent of writing. These systems may be described as proto-writing. They used ideographic and/or early mnemonic symbols to convey information yet were probably devoid of direct linguistic content. These systems emerged in the early Neolithic period, as early as the 7th millennium BC.

Following the innovative path of the multi-localized birth of the homo scribens, some linguists and archeologists are trying to demonstrate that Southeastern Europe developed a system of writing that was original and more ancient than the proto-cuneiform, the so called Old European Script. The existing inscribed objects are enough to refute the hypothesis that in the Cucuteni area populations reproduced imported signs of writing just for magical purposes, without reading, nor even realizing, their communicative value, therefore some researchers consider that there was some sort of tradition of literacy. According to Marija Gimbutas: Inscribed or painted signs…are now being recognized on…Cucuteni … ceramics… The investigation of clues of a script in the Precucuteni, Ariuşd, Cucuteni and Trypillia cultural complex is very recent. Therefore, some fascinating questions are now being raised: Are the Cucuteni script-like signs indeed signs of writing, or the signs were reproduced for magical purposes?, without realizing their communicative value? Are the geometrical signs being accumulated in that area just decorations, symbols, ownership manufacturer marks, or simple scratches?

A ritual ideogram appears on the backs of one of the figurines from Poduri and[[ Targu Frumos]=], three parallel lines joined by a bar. This mark is a single sign, positioned prominently. It is located on the figurines on the same strategic part of the anatomy (the shoulder blade). It is preserved from superimposed scratches made during the rituals or by accident. In conclusion, some researchers consider that it is more advantageous to consider the tri-lines and the four-lines present on the figurines as divinity identifiers, than as signs of a writing system, decorations, or generic symbols.

• 
  Four parallel lines joined by a bar on the backs of a statuette from Poduri similar with a statuette found at Târgu Frumos (Moldavia, Romania) belonging to Precucuteni III culture.
• 
  Three parallel lines joined by a bar on the backs of one of figurines from Poduri simillar ones found at Isaia artefacts. The tri-line topped by a horizontal bar is an emblematic sign of the

Tokens

Thus between 8000 and 7500 BCE farmers were given a clay token for each basket of grain placed in storage (Senner 1989: 23).
Counting and data storage with tokens started in open air compounds where subsistence was based on cultivating or, at least, hoarding cereals. Their first purpose was to record quantities of the traditional Near Eastern staples: grain and small stock (Schmandt-Besserat 2001) Researchers like Schmandt-Besserat consider that the tokens were the earliest system of signs for transmitting information

• 
  Cucuteni Tokens
• 
  Decorative Tokens, some with M sign.

Interaction with other cultures

Bronze artifacts

Few copper artifacts were found, like these ones, the copper toools were imported from Balkans.

The Cucuteni culture was based on Balkan-Anatolian tradition, who grew on a Carpatian-Danubian fond, Cucuteni-Tripolye communities took new elements from the neighbouring communities, at the same level of evolution or from other neolithic ones, which led in the end to an eneolithic evolution. Copper was extensively imported from the Balkans.Other productssubject of exchange or trade were: elegant painted pottery of Cucuteni/Tripolye,the raw material for making tools (silex or other kind of stones) and not ultimately salt.

Most of the new customs that defined the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture (house styles, pottery styles, and domestic rituals centered on female figurines) were copied from the Boian culture of the Lower Danube Valley, and indicate a strong new connection with that region.

Decline

Gimbutist Kurgan Theory

Indo-Europeans.The Kurgan hypothesis (also theory or model),proposed by Marija Gimbutas in 1956, is one of the proposals about early Indo-European origins,theory combining archaeology with linguistics ,which postulates that the people of an archaeological "Kurgan culture" (a term grouping the Pit Grave culture and its predecessors) in the Pontic steppe were the most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language.

It is believed that the expansions of the Kurgan culture were a series of essentially hostile, military incursions where a new warrior culture imposed itself on the peaceful, matriarchal cultures of "Old Europe", replacing it with a patriarchal warrior society, a process visible in the appearance of fortified settlements and hillforts and the graves of warrior-chieftains:

"The process of Indo-Europeanization was a cultural, not a physical, transformation. It must be understood as a military victory in terms of successfully imposing a new administrative system, language, and religion upon the indigenous groups."

The extinction of Cucuteni culture is synchronized with the 3rd Wave of Kurgan expansion, 3000–2800 BC, expansion of the Pit Grave culture beyond the steppes, with the appearance of the characteristic pit graves as far as the areas of modern Romania, Bulgaria and eastern Hungary, coincident with the end of the Cucuteni culture (c.2750 BC)

Still regarding the Kurgan Theory there are some voices,such is J. P. Mallory, who pledges for a non-violent culture assimilation, a diffusion scenario.

Archaeogenetics

The current interpretation of genetic data suggests a strong genetic continuity in Europe; specifically, studies of mtDNA by Bryan Sykes show that about 80% of the genetic stock of Europeans originated in the Paleolithic.

Deforestation, Ecological Degradation, and Climatic change theories.

Stone Axe

The sudden disappearance of the gigantic Cucuteni Tripolie Sites is seen as a switch from extensive agricultural and mixed economy to one placing more emphasis on herding the livestock particularly cattle.

Also ecological degradation from millennia of farming and deforestation, also are cited as causal factors for the decline of Old Europe

The ecological approach was considered by historians since 1975 (V.Danilenko and M.Shmaglij), which consider Eneolithic, as time "of violation of equilibrium between society and ambient envi-ronment."
The climatic change was also a important factor of Old Europe (including Cucuteni culture): According to The American Geographical Union, "The transition to today's arid climate was not gradual, but occurred in two specific episodes. The first, which was less severe, occurred between 6,700 and 5,500 years ago. The second, which was brutal, lasted from 4,000 to 3,600 years ago. Summer temperatures increased sharply, and precipitation decreased, according to carbon-14 dating. This event devastated ancient civilizations and their socio-economic systems."

Bibliography

English

• Andrew Wilson, The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000.
• J. P. Mallory, "Tripolye Culture", Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture, Fitzroy Dearborn, 1997.
• Europe in the Neolithic: the creation of new worlds By A. W. R. Whittle
• http://james.fabpedigree.com/lmclade.htm

German

• Schmidt H. Cucuteni in der oberen Moldau, Rumanien: Die befestigte Siedlung mit bemalter Keramik von der Steinkupferzeit bis in die vollentwickelte. Berlin-Leipzig: Gruyter, 1932.

Romanian

• Dumitrescu, V. Arta culturii Cucuteni. Bucureşti: Editura Meridiane, 1979.
• Biblioteca Antiquitatis The first Cucuteni Museum of Romania Foton 2005
• Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, IX, Iaşi, 2003 THE HUMAN BONE WITH POSSIBLE MARKS OF HUMAN TEETH FOUND AT LIVENI SITE (CUCUTENI CULTURE) SERGIU HAIMOVICI
• Marius Alexianu, Gheorghe Dumitroaia and Dan Monah, The Exploitation of the Salt-Water Sources in Moldavia: an Ethno-Archaeological Approach, in (eds.) D. Monah, Gh. Dumitroaia, O. Weller et J. Chapman, L'exploitation du sel à travers le temps, BMA, XVIII, Piatra-Neamt, 2007, p. 279-298;
• Ștefan Cucoș Faza Cucuteni B în zona subcarpatică a Moldovei Muzeul de Istorie Piatra Neamț

Russian

• Археология Украинской ССР, Киев, 1985, т.1
• Бибиков С. Раннетрипольское поселение Лука-Врублевецкая на Днестре. МИА н. 38. М. — П. 1953.
• Пассек Т. Раннеземледельческие (трипольские) племена Поднестровья, МИА, н. 84. Москва, 1961.
• Пассек Т. Периодизация трипольских поселений. МИА, н. 10. М. — П. 1949.
• Рыбаков Б.А., Космогония и мифология земледельцев энеолита // Советская археология, 1965, № 1—2.
• Рындина Н.В. Древнейшее металлообрабатывающее производство Восточной Европы, М., 1971.
• Хвойко В. Каменный век Среднего Поднепровья // Труды одиннадцатого археологического сьезда в Киеве. І. Киев, 1901.
• Черныш Е.К., К истории населения энеолитического времени в Среднем Приднестровье // Неолит и энеолит юга Европейской части СССР, Москва, 1962.

Ukrainian

• Бібіков С. Трипільська культура. Археологія Української РСР, т. І. Київ, 1971.
• Енциклопедія Трипільської цивілізації, Київ, Укрполіграфмедіа, 2004, т. І-ІІ.
• Захарук Ю. Пізній етап трипільської культури. Археологія Української РСР, т. I. Київ, 1971.
• Пастернак Я. Археологія України. Торонто 1961.
• Трипільська культура, т. І, АН УРСР, Інститут Археології. Київ, 1940.
• Черниш К. Ранньотрипільське поселення Ленківці на Середньому Дністрі. АН УРСР, Інститут Археології. Київ, 1959.

See also

• Prehistoric Romania
• Vinča culture
• Yamna culture
• Neolithic Europe

External links

• Cucuteni Museum and some reconstructions
• Cucuteni culture
• Dacian Museum
• Trypillian civilization homepage
• [1]Трипільська культура в Україні» з колекції «Платар» Platar Collection