Mihailovic and Mihailovic 2009 cultural regionalization

UNION INTERNATIONALE DES SCIENCES PRÉHISTORIQUES ET PROTOHISTORIQUES INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR PREHISTORIC AND PROTOHISTORIC SCIENCES

PROCEEDINGS OF THE XV WORLD CONGRESS (LISBON, 4-9 SEPTEMBER 2006)

ACTES DU XV CONGRÈS MONDIAL (LISBONNE, 4-9 SEPTEMBRE 2006)

Series Editor: Luiz Oosterbeek

VOL. 3

Session C16

Le concept de territoires dans le Paléolithique supérieur européen

Edited by

François Djindjian Janusz Kozlowski

Nuno Bicho

BAR International Series 1938 2009

This title published by Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED England [email protected] www.archaeopress.com BAR S1938 Proceedings of the XV World Congress of the International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Actes du XV Congrès Mondial de l’Union Internationale des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques Outgoing President: Vítor Oliveira Jorge Outgoing Secretary General: Jean Bourgeois Congress Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek (Series Editor) Incoming President: Pedro Ignacio Shmitz Incoming Secretary General: Luiz Oosterbeek Volume Editors: François Djindjian, Janusz Kozlowski and Nuno Bicho Le concept de territoires dans le Paléolithique supérieur européen, Vol.3, Session C16 © UISPP / IUPPS and authors 2009 ISBN 978 1 4073 0418 2 Signed papers are the responsibility of their authors alone. Les texts signés sont de la seule responsabilité de ses auteurs. Contacts : Secretary of U.I.S.P.P. – International Union for Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Av. Dr. Cândido Madureira 13, 2300 TOMAR Email: [email protected] www.uispp.ipt.pt Printed in England by CMP (UK) Ltd All BAR titles are available from: Hadrian Books Ltd 122 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7BP England [email protected] The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com

93

CULTURAL REGIONALIZATION IN THE PALAEOLITHIC OF THE MIDDLE DANUBE BASIN AND WESTERN BALKANS

Dušan MIHAILOVIĆ, Bojana MIHAILOVIĆ

Abstract: The territoriality in the Paleolithic of the Danube basin and western Balkans will be considered from two aspects: a) from the aspect of cultural differentiation and cultural and social interactions between bearers of various Paleolithic cultures and facies and b) from the aspect of system of settling, which human communities practiced in the given periods. Most recent investigations indicate that Balkan Peninsula in the past had the role of a) transitional area, b) area where influences from the Mediterranean and central Europe are clearly delimited and c) area characterized by entirely distinct cultural manifestations. Special attention will be paid to the cultural and social basis of settlement system within more restricted and wider regional level. Key words: Territory, Balkans, Upper Palaeolithic, Danube basin

Résumé: Le territoire du bassin moyen du Danube des Balkans occidentaux à l’époque paléolithique peut être considéré sous deux aspects: a) d’un point de vue de la différenciation culturelle et des interactions sociales entre les porteurs des diverses cultures et facies paléolithiques et b) du point de vue de la localisation des sites qui ont été occupés par les groupes humains au cours des différentes périodes du paléolithique. Les résultats des recherches les plus récentes indiquent que la péninsule balkanique dans le passé a joué le rôle de a) région de passage, b) de région où les influences de la Méditerranéennes et de l’Europe centrale sont clairement délimitées et c) une région caractérisée par des manifestations culturelles totalement différentes. Une attention spéciale est donnée aux bases sociales et culturelles du système de localisation des sites à une échelle régionale plus large ou plus restreinte. Mots-clés: Territoire, Balkans, Paléolithique supérieur, bassin du Danube

INTRODUCTION

Studying the relations between the Danube basin and the Mediterranean in the Palaeolithic means the compre-hension of the role played by the Balkan Peninsula in that period. The distance between the Adriatic coast and the Sava basin in the western parts of the Balkans generally does not exceed couple of hundreds of kilometers (fig. 7.1). Nevertheless, because of the small degree of investigations the connections between the Danube basin and the Mediterranean in the Palaeolithic are not sufficiently explained. Two groups of unsolved questions concerning the study of the cultural connections between these two regions could be distinguished. First, the question could be raised whether the differences noticed in the material culture in the certain periods of the Palaeolithic are the consequence of the regional cultural tradition, different life conditions or they are caused by some other reasons. Second, the groups from the neighboring regions in the past times often passed through the Balkan Peninsula and sometimes stayed there. The role of the Balkans in studying the transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic are well known considering the importance of the Danube route and the fact that the earliest Upper Palaeolithic industries are confirmed just in the Balkans. Also, some authors are of the opinion that in the period of the Last Glacial Maximum the Balkans represented some kind of refuge for the bearers of the Gravettian culture from the north (Kozlowski, 1999, 2005) and there are also opinions that in the late glacial, in the Epigravettian, cultural influences spread in the opposite direction, i.e. from the south towards the north of the peninsula (Djindjian et al. 1999; Kozlowski, 2005). We are not going, in this work, to deal with all the factors, which could have influenced the cultural differentiation of the Palaeolithic cultures in the

central and southeast Europe. But, we are going to point out to what extent the recent investigations of the Palaeolithic in the central Balkans made possible better understanding of these phenomena.

THE MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC

According to the evidence available so far certain cultural regionalization could be encountered in the Middle Palaeolithic of the Balkans. At the sites in the northwestern Croatia, the Charentian is existing in the early phase and typical Mousterian in the late phase. In the northern Bosnia typical Mousterian with more or less emphasized Levallois elements is encountered in the early phase (Zobište – Montet White et al. 1986) as well as in the late phase. At the coast and in its hinterland as well as in the south Europe were investigated many rich Middle Palaeolithic sites where prevailed layers with different variants of Pontinian, so-called Micro-Mousterian and Denticulated Mousterian encountered for instance in Mujina Pećina (Karavanić and Bilich-Kamenjarin, 1997; Rink et al. 2002) and at Crvena Stijena (Basler, 1975; Ivanova, 1979). In the eastern Balkans are well studied the industries with leaf-shaped points of the Muselievo Samuilitsa type while Typical Mousterian was registered at the most of important sites in the northern Bulgaria (Ivanova and Sirakova 1995).

The preliminary results of the recent investigations of the Middle Palaeolithic in Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia change this picture to a certain extent. At Petrovaradinska fortress near Novi Sad (northern Serbia) were investigated two Middle Palaeolithic horizons that contained an industry with prevailing Charentian elements but with the Levallois component also present (Marković

LE CONCEPT DE TERRITOIRES DANS LE PALEOLITHIQUE SUPERIEUR EUROPEEN

94

Fig. 7.1. Middle Palaeolithic and Upper Palaeolithic sites in Balkans, mentioned in the text: 1 – Vindija, 2 – Mujina Pećina, 3 – Zobište, 4 – Kadar, 5 – Petrovaradinska fotress, 6 – Šalitrena Pećina, 7 – At, 8 – Climente I, II, Cuina

Turcului, 9 – Velika Balanica, Mala Balanica, 10 – Kozarnika, 11 – Temnata, 12 – Crvena Stijena, 13 – Medena Stijena, 14 – Trebački Krš, 15 – Smolućka Pećina, 16 – Hadži Prodanova Pećina, 17 – Golema Pesht, 18 – Klisoura

et al. 2004; Mihailović 2006) (fig. 7.2). In the caves Velika and Mala Balanica in Sićevo near Niš (south Serbia) were investigated several Middle Palaeolithic layers. In the lower layers in Velika Balanica was confirmed the rich industry of the Charentian type (similar finds were also encountered in Mala Balanica) while Typical Mousterian was registered in the upper layers. In Hadži Prodanova Pećina near Ivanjica (west Serbia) were also investigated many Middle Palaeolithic horizons but with small amount of finds (Mihailović and Mihailović 2006). In the lower horizons were encountered the Levallois artifacts while in the upper horizons were discovered mostly the quartz finds.

It turned out that in the area of the south Pannonia and the central Balkans could be expected cultural phenomena, which appear in the neighboring regions. The industry from Petrovaradinska fortress corresponds from the cultural and technological point of view to the industries of the Tata-Erd type while the finds from Hadži

Prodanova Pećina confirm the previous assumptions about the distribution of the Typical Mousterian. Also the upper layers at Velika Balanica confirm that Typical Mousterian was the leading industrial complex in the Middle Palaeolithic of the Balkans. Large amount of sidescrapers and products indicating the use of Levallois technology was found in these layers.

On the other hand, it turned out that at some sites appear together many elements characteristic of the different cultural and technological traditions. It is most prominent at Petrovaradinska fortress where elements related to three technological traditions were found together. The Charentian component is most prominent, there is also the Levallois technology and there were also found bifacially chipped backed sidescrapers. All this indicates the high level of cultural unity in the entire area of the Carpathian basin. It is evident that in the south Pannonia took place the merging of cultural and technological traditions from the neighboring regions.

D. MIHAILOVIĆ & B. MIHAILOVIĆ: CULTURAL REGIONALIZATION IN THE PALAEOLITHIC OF THE MIDDLE DANUBE BASIN…

95

Fig. 7.2. Stone artefacts from Petrovaradinska fortress

Particularly surprising is the fact that in the central Balkans are confirmed the industries, which could be directly related to the Charentian. The Charentian elements occur at Petrovaradinska fortress in association with the Levallois technology while at Velika Balanica they occur without the Levallois artifacts. It should be

emphasized that the Charentian of the southeast Europe is so far best documented in the northwestern Croatia where it is dated at around 130.000 years ago (Simek & Smith, 1997). When the central Balkans is concerned it is not clear for the time being whether it was a phenomenon of an earlier date or it was a regional facies, which could be


96

synchronous with the Typical Mousterian in Bulgaria. In any case, the distinct style in tool production indicates that it is a cultural phenomenon and not an occurrence caused by the settling at this very site.

The fact that quartz artifact are very abundant at many Middle Palaeolithic sites in the south Pannonia and in the central Balkans could be explained in a different way. They appear at Petrovaradinska fortress and in Velika Balanica within the Charentian context while in the upper layers of Hadži Prodanova Pećina and particularly at the site Golema Pesht in Macedonia (whose cultural and chronological position is not yet reliably established – Shalamanov-Korobar in press) they appear outside that context. The finds made of quartz and quartzite are scarce at the sites in the neighboring regions, even in Montenegro. Nevertheless, the occurrence of the quartz industries in the central Balkans is most probably not culturally based. The intense use of this raw material was certainly influenced by the availability of resources and the settlement pattern. It is well confirmed in Hadži Prodanova Pećina where the quartz finds appear together with very worn-out tools made of high quality flint.

THE EARLY UPPER PALAEOLITHIC

The rather abrupt transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic could be noticed in the central and eastern Balkans and along the entire Adriatic coast. This transition happened in this area very early (before 40th millennium BP) and at the most of the sites on the Adriatic coast there was complete break in the settlement sequence while at the sites in the north of the west and east Balkans the Middle Palaeolithic is followed by the Aurignacian. Judging by the dates obtained for Mališina Stijena (Radovanović 1986) and Smolućka Pećina (Kaluđerović 1985) the possibility could not be excluded that Middle Palaeolithic lived in the mountainous regions somewhat longer (both sites are dated in the period before 38th millennium BP – Hedges et al. 1991). Because of that we already emphasized the possibility that the expansion of the Upper Palaeolithic along the coast and main river communications was followed by retreat of human groups in the inaccessible regions of the central Balkans that had been only periodically inhabited in the preceding period (Mihailović 1998a, 1998b).

In recent times the theory about the Danube corridor has been brought into question (Conard et al. 2004). In addition, it turned out that industries of the transitional type (similar to Bohunician) where the Upper Palaeolithic elements appeared even before the 45th millennium BP occur at some sites in the Balkans (Temnata – Drobniewicz et al. 2000). Nevertheless, if the bearers of the Early Upper Palaeolithic cultures were modern humans and that is still more probable, the very fact that there is no chronological overlapping at the more restricted regional level suggests the assumption that there was not only ecological but also social competition

between the Neanderthal man and modern man (Mihailovic 2004). Whether the consequence of this fact was topographic and/or geographic delimitation between these two populations is still unknown. Considering the relatively late dates obtained for the finds of the Neanderthal man from Vindija (Higham et al. 2006) and absence of the initial Upper Palaeolithic in the westernmost part of the Balkans this possibility should not be disregarded.

Early Upper Palaeolithic is very insufficiently investigated in the Balkans. The industries of the initial Upper Palaeolithic were so far encountered only in Bulgaria while the Aurignacian sites are randomly distributed throughout the entire peninsula. It would be interesting to check the chronological position of the 5a horizon of Šalitrena Pećina, which has no close parallels in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of the northern Balkans. In this horizon was discovered a collection of the workshop character that contained many cores and carinated endscrapers but also the symmetrical blades made by the extralocal raw materials as well as the unretouched bladelets. In the industry, at least for the time being (as investigations are still in the initial phase) are lacking many elements of the Typical Aurignacian. In the 5a horizon were encountered also two beads of the fossil dentalium shell and the fact that dentalium beads were registered in the Uluzzian layer at Klisura (Koumouzelis et al. 2001) only confirm the importance of this shell in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of the Balkans.

When the Aurignacian is concerned the impression is that cultural differentiation within this techno complex could be followed in the Balkans according to the geographic latitude. The industries with more or less prominent characteristics of the Typical Aurignacian have been confirmed in Croatia, northern Bosnia and northern Bulgaria. In the coastal zone was encountered the Aurignacian with depleted characteristics and of somewhat later date (Karavanić 2003). The exception of this rule is only Klisoura where have been registered many Aurignacian horizons spanning rather long period of time (Koumouzelis et al. 2001). Aurignacian of the Krems type related to the finds from the northern Banat was also registered in the south Pannonia at the site At near Vršac (Mihailović 1992) (fig. 7.3). In the industry from this site were encountered elements of the Typical as well as of the Krems Aurignacian. Whether it is the result of mixed layers (as the finds have not been collected in the course of regular excavations) or the cultural content of the collection possibly reflects the differences in the settlement at certain locations within this large area is not possible to establish at this moment.

THE LATE UPPER PALAEOLITHIC

The relationship between central Europe and the Mediterranean in the Late Upper Palaeolithic is almost impossible to comprehend without great generalizations.


97

Fig. 7.3. Stone artefacts from At


98

Epigravettian is relatively well studied in the immediate hinterland of the Adriatic coast (in Slovenia, Croatia and Montenegro) while in the area of the Dinaric Alps, south Pannonia and east Balkans it has been documented at only few sites. Situation is even less favorable when the Gravettian is concerned: the sites from this period were encountered in Bulgaria and Greece (Drobniewicz et al. 1992; Kozłowski 1999; Tsanova 2003) while in the central and western Balkans Gravettian was recorded with certainty only in layer 4 in Šalitrena Pećina (Mihailović and Mihailović in press).

In Šalitrena Pećina was recently collected rich Gravettian industry consisting of several thousands of artifacts. Among the cores were encountered typical prismatic single-platform and double-platform cores for blades and bladelets. The discovered tools include endscrapers on blades and flakes, various types of burins, retouched blades (including pointed blades) and combined tools (fig. 7.4). Among the backed tools prevail bilaterally retouched points with thinned base as well as the double truncations with back, similar to rectangles. In the considerably smaller amount were registered classic Gravettian points (one with rounded retouched base) and also the flechettes. The elements, which could possibly indicate somewhat later period are either scarce (shouldered points) or completely absent (microlithic endscrapers, arched bached bladelets and points, etc).

The industry from this site could be connected with the Willendorfian and Pavlovian industries from middle Europe, especially with the industry from layer 9 of Willendorf (dated between 25.000 and 23.000 BP – Otte et al. 1996). There are also substantial similarities with the material from level IVb in the cave Kozarnika in Bulgaria (26120 +/- 120 BP – Tsanova 2003) where were encountered bilaterally retouched micropoints with thinned base, the Gravettian points with rounded retouched base (points of Kozarnika type) and backed truncations.

More recent investigations definitely confirmed that middle European elements occur in the Gravettian of the central and eastern Balkans (Kozłowski 1999; 2005). However, there still remains an open question whether the Gravettian communities really shifted from the middle towards southeast Europe in the beginning of the Last Glacial as it was once assumed. It should be bore in mind that middle European elements (and Gravettian in general) appear in the eastern Balkans very early (Tsanova 2003) while numerous parallels between the Gravettian industries from Šalitrena, Kozanika and Temnata confirm the assumption about the Typical Balkan Gravettian.

When the Epigravettian is concerned it is obvious that common elements could be observed in the early phase within very large area from the south Pannonia to the east Adriatic coast. In the early phase Epigravettian is characterized by undifferentiated industry where except

backed points and bladelets occur also the endscrapers on blades and flakes and truncated blades but there are no geometric artifacts, endscrapers generally prevail over the burins and shouldered were registered sporadically (Mihailović 1998b). The elements of continuity in relation to the preceding period could be best observed at the site Kadar in the Sava basin (Montet White and Johnson 1976; Montet White et al. 1986; Montet White 2000) and they also appear in the Epigravettian layers of Temnata (Sirakov et al. 1994). For the time being there are no many elements, which could indicate the expansion of the Mediterranean influences before the Bölling-Alleröd oscillation.

In the final Epigravettian the situation is essentially different although it should be mentioned that sites from this period are almost unknown outside the coastal region and its immediate hinterland. In the Balkan interior the final Epigravettian was only confirmed in the northern Montenegro – at Medena Stijena (Mihailović 1996) and Trebački Krš (Đuričić 1996) but also much more to the north – in the cave Climente II and lower horizons of the rock shelter Cuina Turcului in the Iron Gates (Paunescu 1978; Boroneant 1999). There could be many reasons for sparse presence of the Mediterranean elements in the Early Epigravettian. First, the Mediterranean elements in this industries (if there were any at all) are difficult to recognize due to the absence of the characteristic artifacts. Second, contacts between the coast and Balkan interior could have been impeded during cold oscillations because of the inaccessibility of the Dinaric Alps. Third, each of these regions had its own cultural tradition. For instance, not at the single site in Montenegro in contrast to the sites in the eastern Balkans have been encountered bilaterally retouched backed bladelets.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

As it could be seen from this short and very general review it is clear that the Balkans was a barrier between the Mediterranean and the middle Europe only in some periods (Mousterian, Epigravettian). The greatest differences between the Mediterranean and the central European region could be noticed in the Middle Palaeolithic and Epigravettian. It is also conspicuous that central European influences reached in the Middle Palaeolithic and Aurignacian as far as the south Pannonia and in the Gravettian even to the north Balkans. However, certain phenomena in technology could not be related to the cultural factors. It concerns, first of all, the quartz technology, which obviously mostly depended on the settlement pattern and availability of resources. On the other hand, the Charentian industries could have represented either specific regional facies or they could have originated from the earlier phase of the Middle Palaeolithic in this area.

The cultural regionalization in the Balkan Palaeolithic is understandable as it is well known that Balkans was


99

Fig. 7.4. Stone artefacts from Šalitrena Pećina (layer 4)


100

always the zone of transition and merging of different cultures. It is evident in the Middle Palaeolithic (Petrovaradin fortress) bur also in the later periods. The communication with neighboring regions could have depended on the level of mobility of human groups in the different periods of the Palaeolithic. And as has been argued by many authors it was the most intensive in the Aurignacian and Gravettian.

It also turned out that entirely distinctive cultural manifestations appeared in the Balkans. It was not the case in the Early Upper Palaeolithic but obviously in the later periods as well, particularly in the early Holocene. On the basis of the results of investigations of the Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic in the central and eastern Balkans achieved so far it could be assumed that more and more evidence of that character could be expected. It reveals that in explaining the cultural phenomena within larger geographic area the Balkan peninsula should not be observed as an area where spreading of certain cultures is imminent only because their existence has been registered in the neighboring areas. The distinct cultural development in the Balkans was certainly influenced by paleogeographic and paleoecological conditions but cultural isolation of the peninsula never happened, first of all because of its geographic position. It means that main natural communications leading towards central Europe and southwestern Asia were passable in all periods. Against that background we think that key for comprehension of the cultural processes within larger regional level, especially when the transitional periods are concerned lies in the investigations along the routes of main natural communications (Danube basin, Nišava valley, Morava-Vardar route) and in the area of the Dinaric Alps.

References

BASLER, Đ. (1975) – Stariji litički periodu u Crvenoj stijeni. In Basler, Đ., ed. – Crvena Stijena – zbornik radova. Nikšić: Zajednica kulturnih ustanova. p. 11-120.

BORONEANŢ, V. (1999) – The Mesolithic habitation complexes in the Balkans and Danube Basin. Living Past. 1. URL: http://www.cimec.ro/livingpast/meso-lithic.htm

CONARD, N.J.; GROOTES, P.M.; SMITH, F.H. (2004) – Unexpectedly recent dates for human remains from Vogelherd. Nature. Jul 8; 430 (6996). p. 198-201.

DJINDJIAN, F.; KOZŁOWSKI, J.; OTTE, M. (1999) – Le Paléolithique supérieur en Europe, Paris: Armand Colin. p. 474.

ĐURIČIĆ, LJ. (1996) – The chipped stone industry from the rock-shelter of Trebački Krš. In SREJOVIĆ, D. ed. – Prehistoric Settlements in Caves and Rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro – Fascicule I. Belgrade: Centre for Archeological Research. p. 75-102. (Fascicule I; Vol. 16).

DROBNIEWICZ, B.; GINTER, B.; KOZŁOWSKI, J.K. (1992) – The Gravettian sequence. In Kozłowski, J.K. [et al.] eds. – Temnata Cave – Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area. Krakow. p. 295-501 (Vol. 1).

DROBNIEWICZ, B.; GINTER, B.; KAZIOR, B.; KOZŁOWSKI, J.K. (2000) – “Transitional” industry from layer VI, trench TD-II. In Ginter, B. [et al.] eds. – Temnata Cave: Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area – Bulgaria, Vol. 2, Part 1, Krakow: Jagellonian University, p. 243-316.

HEDGES, R.E.M.; HOUSLEY, R.A.; BRONK, C.R.; VAN KLINKEN, G.J. (1990) – Radiocarbon dates from Oxford AMS system: Archaeometry Datelist 11. Archaeometry. 32: p. 211-237.

HIGHAM, T.; BRONK RAMSEY, C.; KARAVANIĆ, I.; SMITH, F.H.; TRINKAUS, E. (2006) – Revised direct radiocarbon dating of the Vindija G1 Upper Paleolithic Neandertals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. Vol. 103. No. 3. p. 553-557.

IVANOVA, S. (1979) – Cultural Differentiation in the Middle Palaeolithic of Balkan Peninsula, In Kozłow-ski, J.K. ed. – Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic in Balkans, Warszawa-Krakow: Zeszyty Naukowe Uni-wersytetu Jagiellonskiego, Warszawa-Krakow. p. 13-33.

IVANOVA, S.; SIRAKOVA, S. (1995) – Chronology and Cultures of the Bulgarian Palaeolithic. In Bailey, D.W.; Panayotov, I. eds. – Prehistoric Bulgaria. Madison-Wisconsin: Prehistory Press. p. 9-54. (Mono-graphs in World Archaeology No 22).

KALUĐEROVIĆ, Z. (1985) – Istraživanja Smolućke pećine 1984-1985. Novopazarski zbornik 9. p. 5-18.

KARAVANIĆ, I.; BILICH-KAMENJARIN, I. (1997) – Musterijensko nalazište Mujina pećina kod Trogira. Opuscula Archaeologica. 21. p. 195-204.

KOUMOUZELIS, M.; GINTER, B.; KOZŁOWSKI, J.K.; PAWLIKOWSKI, M.; BAR-YOSEF, O.; ALBERT, R.M.; LITYNSKA-ZAJAC, M.; STWOR-ZEWICZ, E.; WOJTAL, P.; LIPECKI, G.; TOMEK, T.; BOCHENSKI, Z.M.; PAZDUR, A. (2001) – The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece: The Excavations in Klisoura Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science. 28: p. 515–539.

KARAVANIĆ, I. (2003) – L’industrie aurignacienne de la grotte Šandalja II (Istrie, Croatie) dans la contexte de la region de l’Est de l’Adriatique. L’anthropologie 107 (2003). p. 577–602.

KOZŁOWSKI, J.K. (1999) – Gravettian/Epigravettian sequences in the Balkans: environment, technologies, hunting strategies and raw material procurement. In Bailey, G.N. [et al.] ed. The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and Adjacent Areas: Proceedings of the ICOPAG Conference, Ioannina, September 1994. Lon-don: British School at Athens. p. 319-329 (Studies, 3).

KOZŁOWSKI, J.K. (2005) – The Upper Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic around the Mediterranean: cultural framework. L’anthropologie 109 (2005). p. 520–540.


101

MARKOVIĆ, S.B.; MIHAILOVIĆ, D.; OCHES, E.A.; JOVANOVIĆ, M.; GAUDENYI, T. (2004) – The Last Glacial climate, environmet and the evidence of Palaeolithic occupation in Vojvodina province, Serbia: an overview. Antaeus. 27. p. 147-152.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (1992) – Orinjasijenska kremena industrija sa lokaliteta Crvenka-At u blizini Vršca. Beograd: Centar za arheološka istraživanja.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (1996) – Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic chipped stone industries from the rock-shelter of Medena Stijena. In Srejović, D. ed. – Prehistoric Settlements in Caves and Rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro – Fascicule I. Belgrade: Centre for Archeological Research. p. 9-60. (Fascicule I; Vol. 16).

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (1998a) – Najnoviji rezultati istraži-vanja paleolita i mezolita na tlu Srbije i Crne Gore. In Tasić, N., ed. – Rad Dragoslava Srejovića na istra-živanju praistorije centralnog Balkana. Kragujevac: Centar za naučna istraživanja SANU i Univerziteta u Kragujevcu, p. 39-53.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (1998b) – Gornji paleolit i mezolit Crne Gore. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Belgrade. Belgrade. p. 290.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (2004) – Spirituality and Cultural Identity in the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic Transition in the Balkans. In Otte, M. ed. – Spiritualité, Actes du Colloque international de Liege (10-12 decembre 2003), E.R.A.U.L. – Etudes de Recherches Archeo-logiques de l’Universite de Liege. 106, p. 11-20.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D. (2006) – Petrovaradinska tvrđava – paleolitsko nalazište. Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva. 1(2003), p. 9-12.

MIHAILOVIĆ D.; MIHAILOVIĆ B. (2006) – Paleolitsko nalazište Hadži Prodanova pećina kod Ivanjice. Arheološki pregled Srpskog arheološkog društva. 1 (2003). p. 13-16.

MIHAILOVIĆ, D.; MIHAILOVIĆ, B. (in press) – Considération sur le Gravettien et l’Epigravettien ancien aux Balkans de l’Ouest, In Rigaud, J.-P. ed. – Entités régionales d’une paléoculture européenne: Le Gravettien. Bordeaux.

MONTET WHITE, A. (2000) – A scarcity of MUP sites in the Sava Valley, stratigraphic hiatus and/or depopu-lation. In Roebroeks [et al.] eds. – Hunters of the

Golden Age, Leiden: University of Leiden, p. 241-247.

MONTET WHITE, A.; JOHNSON, E. (1976) – Kadar: A Late Gravettian Site in Northern Bosnia, Yugoslavia. Journal of Field Archaeology. Vol. 3. No. 4, p. 407-424.

MONTET WHITE, A.; LAVILLE, H.; LEZINE A.-M. (1986) – Le Paléolithique du Bosnie du Nord. Chrono-logie, environment et préhistoire. L’Anthropologie. 90/1. p. 29-88.

OTTE, M.; NOIRET, P.; CHIRICA, V.; BORZIAK, I. (1996) – Rythme evolutif du Gravettien oriental. In Montet-White, A. [et al.] eds. – The Upper Palaeolithic, XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences Forlì- Italia, Colloquium XI, Forlì. p. 213-226.

PAUNESCU, A. (1978) – Cercetarile arheologice de la Cuina Turcului-Dubova (Jud. Mehedinti). Tibiscus Istorie, Volum Închinat Celei de-a 60 Aniversari a Unirii. p. 11–56.

RADOVANOVIĆ, I. (1986) – Novija istraživanja paleolita i mezolita u Crnoj Gori. Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva. 3. P. 63-76.

RINK, W.J.; KARAVANIĆ, I.; PETTIT, P.; van der PLICHT, J.; SMITH, F.H.; BARTOLL, J. (2002) – ESR and AMS-based 14C Dating of Mousterian Levels at Mujina Pećina, Dalmatia, Croatia. Journal of Archaeological Science. 29. p. 934-952.

SHALAMANOV-KOROBAR, LJ. (in press) – First Palaeolithic Researches in FYR Macedonia: the Cave “Golema Pesht” Near Village Zdunje.

SIMEK, J.F.; SMITH, F.H. (1997) – Chronological changes in stone tool assemblages from Krapina (Croatia). Journal of Human Evolution. 32. p. 561-575.

SIRAKOV, N.; SIRAKOVA, S.; IVANOVA, S.; GATSOV, I.; TSONEV, T. (1994) – The Epigravet-tian sequence. In Ginter, B. [et al.] eds. – Temnata Cave – Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area. Vol. 1. Part 2. Krakow. p. 169-314.

TSANOVA, T. (2003) – Le Gravettien en Bulgarie du Nord: Niveau IVb de la grotte Kozarnika. In Tsonev, T.; Montagnari Kokelj, E. eds. – The Humanized Mineral World: Towards Social and Symbolic Eva-luation of Prehistoric Technologies in South Eastern Europe. Liège-Sofia. p. 33-39. (E.R.A.U.L. 103)

Documents

Mihailovic and Mihailovic 2009 cultural regionalization