http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
        see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php
==========================================================


Cucuteni-Trypillian culture


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Europe 


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 km^2 (13,500 square
miles).^[1] 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,^[2] . 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.^[2] . The reason 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.^[3]


Contents

[hide ]

* 1 Nomenclature 
* 2 Extent 
* 3 Periodization 
o 3.1 Early Period 
o 3.2 Middle Period 
o 3.3 Late Period 
* 4 Features 
o 4.1 The settlements 
+ 4.1.1 Largest settlements 
+ 4.1.2 House Burning 
+ 4.1.3 House Construction 
+ 4.1.4 Bordei dwellings 
+ 4.1.5 Interior of the house 
o 4.2 Diet 
+ 4.2.1 Agriculture 
+ 4.2.2 Livestock 
+ 4.2.3 Hunting 
+ 4.2.4 World's Oldest Saltworks

o 4.3 Rites 
+ 4.3.1 The Living Goddesses or Old European Goddesses

# 4.3.1.1 Circle of Goddess 
+ 4.3.2 The Bird Goddess 
+ 4.3.3 Funerary Rites 
# 4.3.3.1 Immolation 
o 4.4 Arts and Crafts 
+ 4.4.1 Pottery 
+ 4.4.2 Technology 
# 4.4.2.1 Modeling 
# 4.4.2.2 Decorating 
# 4.4.2.3 Firing 
+ 4.4.3 Binocular vessels 
+ 4.4.4 Figurines 
# 4.4.4.1 Anthropomorphic representations

# 4.4.4.2 Zoomorphic representations

+ 4.4.5 Weaving and Clothing 
o 4.5 Weapons and tools 
o 4.6 Symbols and Proto-writing 
+ 4.6.1 Tokens 
* 5 Interaction with other cultures 
* 6 Decline 
o 6.1 Gimbutist Kurgan Theory 
+ 6.1.1 Archaeogenetics 
o 6.2 Anatolian and Balkano-Danubian Hypotheses

o 6.3 Deforestation, ecological degradation, and climatic
change theories.

* 7 Notes 
* 8 Bibliography 
* 9 See also 
* 10 External links 


[edit ] Nomenclature



Anthropomorphic Cucuteni-Trypillian clay figure

The culture was initially named after the village of Cucuteni , located in
IaÅŸi 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).^[4]

Simultaneously, in around 1887^[5] , (possibly 1893 ^[6] or 1896^[7] ),
the Czech archaeologist Vicenty Khvoika uncovered the first of close to
one hundred Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements, and excavations started in
1909.^[8] 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)^[5] ^[9] .
In 1897, similar objects were excavated in the village of Trypillia
(Ukrainian : /Трипiлля/), 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/.


[edit ] Extent



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^[10]
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."/^[11]


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 .


[edit ] 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.^[12] The Cucuteni Periodization was proposed by the German
Archeologist Hubert Schmidt in 1932^[13] , and the Trypillian
Periodization was proposed by T.S. Passek in 1949.^[14]

The following chart shows the names of the various periods of both the
Cucuteni and Trypillian cultures, using dates from Cornelia-Magda Mantu's
1998 "Cultura Cucuteni. Evoluţie, Cronologie, Legături" as a reference:

Cucuteni Years B.C.  Trypillian Years B.C. Precucuteni I-III 5100-4600
Trypillian A 4800-4500 Cucuteni A1-A4 4600-4050 Trypillian BI-BII
4500-4000 Cucuteni A/B 4100-3800 Trypillian BII 4000-3800 Cucuteni B
3800-3500 Trypillian CI-CII 3800-3500


[edit ] 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.).^[15] It was also influenced by the earlier Bug-Dniester culture
(6500-5000 BC).^[16] 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.^[17] 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.^[18] 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.^[19]


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.^[20]


[edit ] 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.^[/citation
needed /]


[edit ] Late Period

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.^[/citation needed /]



Cucuteni Museum in Piatra Neamţ, Romania
	


A famous Cucuteni-Trypillian statue entitled: /Gânditorul din Târpești/
(/The Thinker of Tarpesti/)
	


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


Artefacts from Cluj History Museum


[edit ] Features

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.


[edit ] 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.^[21]

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.^[22] . The role of the
fortifications found at these settlements was probably to protect the
tribe's domestic animal herd from wild predators.^[23] Other hypotheses
are that the fortifications were for protection against enemy attacks, or
as a means to gather the community^[24] . 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.^[25] 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. ^[26]


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. ^[27]


[edit ] 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.^[28] 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.^[29]

Some archaeologists (ÄŒernjakov 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. ^[10]


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). ^[21]
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).^[21] * Maydanets ,
Ukraine – circa 3700 B.C. – up to 10,000 inhabitants (probably between
6000 to 9000 inhabitants), ^[30] }, up to 1575 houses, and covered an area
of 270 hectares (660 acres).^[21]

* Nebelivka, Ukraine - covered an area of 300 hectares (740 acres).^[31]



Interconnected Cucuteni-Trypillian houses in the Maydanets settlement.
Based on research done in 1996 by noted Ukrainian Trypillian scholar
Mykhailo Videiko.^[32]
	


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 Cucuteni-Trypillian village.
	


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.


[edit ] House Burning



Simulation of Cucuteni-Trypillian house immolation. No modern experiment
has yet successfully reproduced the results of one of these burned
Neolithic structures.^[33]

The archeological finds show that a vast majority of Cucuteni-Trypillian
houses were burned. According to Sergiu Krolevets, director of the
National History and Culture Museum of the Republic of Moldova, all of the
Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements were burned. Some historians claim that
houses were intentionally burned in a repeating cycle of construction and
destruction:

/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./^[34] ^[35]


/There is a consensus in the study of Neolithic and Eneolithic Europe that
the majority of burned houses were intentionally set alight./^[36]


Some of the burned sites contained large quantities of stored food that
was partially destroyed by the fires that burned the houses. Additionally,
there was a high risk of fire due to the use of the primitive ovens in
these homes. These two facts support the theory that the buildings were
burned accidentally, or due to enemy attack, as it could be argued that
nobody would intentionally burn their food supplies along with their
homes.^[37]

However, there is also evidence to support the theory that the houses were
intentionally burned at the end of a 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./^[38]

The first theory, holding that the burning of the settlements was due to
reasons resulting from accident or warfare, originated in 1949, and
referred only to some of the Cucuteni-Trypillian sites located in Moldava
and Ukraine (Richevski 1940; Passek 1949; Paul 1967). The second theory
that holds that the settlements were burned deliberately is more recent,
and focuses on the entire culture (McPherron and Christopher 1988; Chapman
1999; Stevanović 2002).

Scholars have proposed the following theories to account for the burning
of Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements: historians^[39] :

1. Accidental : According to this theory, the houses were burned by
accidental fire. To support this theory, the following conditions are to
be found at these sites: 1. Close proximity of the houses to one another
2. Grain, textiles and other highly combustible materials were stored in
the house 3. Improperly stored grain in the house increased the risk of
spontaneous combustion Although this theory may explain how some of the
structures might have burned, it does not satisfactorily explain the cause
for all of them. A number of experimental studies have been conducted in
order to demonstrate the effects of an accidental fire on a
wattle-and-daub structure, of the type found in the Cucuteni-Trypillian
sites. The results of these experiments suggest that sturdy
wattle-and-daub structures are difficult to burn down, due to the use of
clay, and that the level and kind of destruction that is found in these
Late Neolithic sites could not have likely been due to accidental
fires.^[40] 2. Weatherproofing : In 1940, the Russian archaeologist E.
Krichevsky proposed the theory that the Cucuteni-Trypillian houses were
burned as a way to strengthen the structure of the walls, and to insulate
the floor against dampness and mold. Krichevsky proposed that the fire
would harden the clay within the walls and floors, effectively turning it
into a hard ceramic surface. However, arguments against this theory point
out that the archaeological evidence includes burned rubble that came from
the collapsed walls and destroyed floors. Additionally, valuable artefacts
were also found burned and buried within the rubble, which would not
likely have happened if the inhabitants set the fires to harden the clay
in the structure, since they would most likely have removed such items
before starting the fire.^[/citation needed /] 3. Aggression : This theory
holds that the settlements were burned as a result of attacks from
enemies. However, as with the accident theory, this theory is also unable
to satisfy all of the archaeological evidence that has been found at
Cucuteni-Trypillian sites. For instance, there have not been any human
remains discovered within the burned ruins of the buildings. Neither have
there been found any human remains with projectile points such as arrow or
spear heads lodged within the skeleton. This would indicate that, although
acts of aggression were possible, they actually were not very common.
Certainly, it indicates that warfare did not play a large role in the life
of these Late Neolithic people of Southeastern Europe. Thus, due to the
lack of supporting evidence for aggression, it is difficult to support
this theory as the reason for the cyclical and repetitive burning of these
settlements.^[41] 4. Rubble Recycling : In 1993, Gary Shaffer used
archaeomagnetic dating and experimentation to substantiate the claim that
the houses were burned at the end of their life cycle for the purpose of
recycling the clay within their structure to use in the construction of
new buildings.^[/citation needed /] 5. Fumigation : Another theory posits
that the fires were used for sanitary reasons to smoke or fumigate a
building, in order to get rid of pests, disease, insects, and/or witches.
However, the evidence does not support this viewpoint. All of the
structures within these settlements were completely burned and destroyed.
Because the damage from the fire was almost total for the entire
settlement, it would be illogical if fumigation was the only intent
(Stevanovic 1997).^[42]

6. Symbolic End of House: Some scholars have theorized that the buildings
were burned ritually, regularly and deliberately in order to mark the end
of the “life” of the house. The terms /"Domicide"/ or /"Domithanasia"/
have been coined to refer to this practice.^[43] 7. 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.^[44]


[edit ] House Construction

See also: Neolithic architecture

Archaeologists have identified two types of house framing found at
Cucuteni-Trypillian sites. One type, somewhat resembling the post and beam
style, used evenly-distributed fork-shaped pillars that were partially
sunk vertically into the ground, so that the fork was located at the top
and supported the roof beams above. The other type of framing used beams
measuring 15–20 cm (6-8 inches) in diameter or greater, and rested on
ground-sills that were in turn fixed in place on the ground.

The walls were built in the wattle-and-daub style (commonly associated
with the "Tudor Style"). The construction of these houses first started
with erecting the framework of larger timbers in place, which would take
the weight of the structure, and then the space between these timbers
would be filled in with a "wattle" made of pliable smaller branches and
vines woven together to form a thin twiggy net, and which was then affixed
to the sturdy timbers. Onto this wattle framework, the "daub" would then
be applied, which was made of mostly dampened clay soil, and sometimes
mixed with small bits of straw and/or animal dung to help keep its
structural integrity. The daub had to be applied with some force against
the wattle in order for it to partially push through the twiggy framework,
to which it would stick. Sometimes there would only be a single layer of
wattle, at other times two wattle layers would be used, one for the
interior, and another for the exterior of the wall. Daub was then applied
on both sides of the wall, inside and out, creating a finished wall that
was usually about 5 cm (2 inches) thick. Once applied, it was then
smoothed before drying to create an air- and water-tight barrier against
the elements. Once dried, it was then sometimes painted with motifs or
pictures.

Sometimes the walls were made of horizontally layed timbers (similar to
log homes), that were then covered with clay daub. Some examples have been
found where the horizontal timbers were in turn covered with a
wattle-and-daub layer. At other times the horizontal timbers would be
covered with a layer of primitively-finished lumber. There was no standard
practice in building walls during Neolithic times; sometimes, even in the
same house, some walls would be constructed with horizontal timbers, while
others would be covered with finished lumber or wattle-and-daub.

Cucuteni-Trypillian houses were roofed with live turf or thatched reeds
.^[45] The shape of the house was usually rectangular, but some were laid
out in an "L" shape. Some of the houses were divided into separate rooms,
while others contained more-or-less open "functional spaces".^[46]



Floor reconstruction showing a log floor covered in clay
	


Wall reconstruction showing a wall with two layers of wattle and daub laid
over a timber frame post
	


Detail of a fork pillar holding a roof beam, with wattle-and-daub layers
revealed


[edit ] Bordei dwellings

See also: Bordei

Some of the houses found by archeologists were dugout earth houses , of
the style called /bordei/ in both Romanian and Ukrainian (бордей).
Unlike surface dwellings, characterized by walls with right angles and
rectangular shapes, the bordei houses were characterized by elliptical
shapes. These houses would typically have a wooden floor that was about
1.5 meters (5 feet) below ground, which would place the roof at just above
ground level.^[/citation needed /]



Clay models found at a Cucuteni-Trypillian site showing figurines sitting
on a couch-like piece of furniture
	


A clay model of a figurine in a chair
	


A clay Precucuteni Goddess and chair


[edit ] Interior of the house

Most of the Cucuteni-Trypillian houses were arranged by locating the front
door opposite from the where the fireplace sat. Large ceramic pottery
containers used to store water and grain were placed next to the
fireplace. Other ceramic containers, including the more valuable painted
pottery, would also be located near the fireplace. Some of the fine
painted pottery for which this culture is known for would sometimes be
used for clothing storage, but most of it seems to be destined for use in
rituals.^[47]

Although most houses had one single fireplace, some houses were found that
had none, while other houses would contain more than one fireplace, each
fulfilling a special need, such as one fireplace for cooking, one for
firing ceramics , etc. Cucuteni-Trypillian fireplaces actually were a kind
of fire pit , and were usually constructed on the floor by placing a bed
of mixed broken pottery shards and clay, and then covering this with a
smooth clay-plastered surface.

It is assumed that furniture was extensively used, however due to the
climate of this region, wood does not preserve well. However, the
Cucuteni-Trypillian sites have yielded many miniature clay models, some of
which include pieces of furniture. There is also some evidence of
furniture being incorporated into the walls of houses from woven branches
covered with clay.^[/citation needed /]


[edit ] Diet

See also: Neolithic Revolution See also: Paleoethnobotany See also:
Zooarchaeology

Cucuteni-Trypillian sites have yielded substantial evidence to prove that
the inhabitants practiced agriculture , raised domestic livestock , and
hunted wild animals for food.


[edit ] Agriculture

Archaeological remains of the Cucuteni-Trypillian sites include the
cultivated grain species of club wheat (Triticum compactum) , barley
(Hordeum vulgare) , oats (Avena sativa) , rye (Secale cereale) and proso
millet (Panicum miliaceum) . Other cultivated plant remains were found as
well, including hemp (Canabis sativa) , apricot (Armeniaca vulgaris) ,
cherry plum (Prunus cerasifera) , common grape (Vitis vinifera)  and wild
grape (Vitis sylvestris) .^[48]

Evidence also exists to indicate that plowing was done by the farmers of
these settlements. Cultivating, tending, and harvesting the crops was
probably the main occupation of most of the members of this society.



Animal remains used as tools by the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, including
a deer antler scratch plough , in the Piatra Neamt Museum, Romania.


[edit ] Livestock

The archaeological remains of animals found at Cucuteni-Trypillian sites
indicate that the inhabitants practiced animal husbandry. Their
domesticated livestock consisted primarily of cattle , and included
smaller numbers of swine , sheep and goats . There is evidence, based on
some of the surviving artistic depictions of animals from
Cucuteni-Trypillian sites, that the ox was employed as a draft animal
.^[49] Another working animal whose remains have been found in these sites
is the ubiquitous dog .

Archaeologists have uncovered both the remains as well as artistic
depictions of the horse in Cucuteni-Trypillian sites. However, whether
these finds were of domesticated or wild horses is a matter of some
debate. It is known that before domestication, humans hunted and ate wild
horses, and so far there has been no absolute proof uncovered that would
provide solid evidence that the horse remains found in these settlements
belonged to animals that were either consumed or were used as domestic
work animals. There is evidence that exists elsewhere that shows that
horses were kept by some humans as domestic meat animals (similar to
cattle), prior to their eventual use for draft work, and such may possibly
be the case with these settlements, as well. There are still many
questions as yet unanswered about this subject.^[50]

The first evidence of horse domestication for use as working animals did
take place around during the same time that the Cucuteni-Trypillian
culture flourished; depending on the source, this was from between
4000-2500 B.C., and took place in eastern Ukraine and Kazakhstan , not far
from the Cucuteni-Trypillian settlements. Archaeologists have also found
horse-head clubs in Cucuteni-Trypillian sites. However, these clubs were
actually imported from Suvorovo in Bulgaria. Still, this does not indicate
positively one way or the other whether the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture
utilized horses for transport and other work.^[51]


[edit ] Hunting



A hide scraper tool made from flint bits fitted into a deer antler handle


A copper fishhook, Piatra Neamt Museum

Members of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture supplemented their diet with
hunting. The archaeological remains of hunted prey include the red deer
(Cervus elaphus) , the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) , the wild boar (Sus
scrofa ferus) , the aurochs (Bos primigenius) , the red fox (Vulpes
vulpes) , and the brown bear (Ursus arctos) . The hunters utilized traps
to catch their prey. They used various weapons in hunting, including the
bow-and-arrow , the spear , and clubs . To help them in stalking game, the
hunters disguised themselves with camouflage .^[52]



[edit ] World's Oldest Saltworks

What may well be the world's oldest saltworks was discovered at the Poiana
Slatinei archaeological site next to a salt spring in Lunca , Neamt
County, Romania . Archaeological evidence indicates that salt production
began there as long ago as 6050 BC., making it perhaps the oldest known
saltworks in the world.^[53] Evidence based on discoveries in Solca ,
Cacica , Lunca, Oglinzi , and Cucuieți , indicates that the people of the
Precucuteni Culture were extracting salt from the salt-laden spring-water
through the process of Briquetage . First, the brackish water from the
spring was boiled in large pottery vessels, producing a dense brine . The
brine was then heated in a ceramic briquetage vessel until all moisture
was evaporated, with the remaining crystallized salt adhering to the
inside walls of the vessel. Then the briquetage vessel was broken open,
and the salt was scraped from the shards. ^[54]

The salt extracted from this operation may have had a direct correlation
to the rapid growth of this society's population soon after its initial
production began.^[55] Salt from this operation probably played a very
important role in the Neolithic economy of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture
through its entire duration.


[edit ] 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 symbols like gamma cross , some historians caracterize the
Cucuteni rituals as Chthonic and Uranians ^[56] still others historians
deny the uranic character of Tripolie rituals.^[57] 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 discovered at Gherlăieşti

	


Ritual vessel as discovered at Gherlăieşti

	


Sanctuary Clay Model

	


Antropomorhic Male Representation


[edit ] The Living Goddesses or Old European Goddesses



Antropomorhic representation using rhombus as a symbol for fertility ^[58]

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
.^[59]


Some researchers consider that the symbols used for representing the
feminity are rhombus for fertility and the triangle as a symbol for
fecundity .^[60]



Goddess antropomorhic representation,^[61] using double triangle
(hourglass)and bird hands

	
CucuteniHourGlassDeity.JPG
	
CucuteniGoddessRepresentation.JPG

	


Goddes representation


[edit ] Circle of Goddess



Goddess and stools


The masculinity and a cross representing moon phases. Symbolizing the
creative and fecund power of nature.^[62]

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 .


[edit ] 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


[edit ] 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.^[63]


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

^[64] 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.^[65]

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./

^[66]


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.^[67] 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.^[68]


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.^[69]



[edit ] 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.^[70] 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.^[71]


[edit ] Arts and Crafts


[edit ] 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.^[72]

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.^[10] 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 a ritualic
dance or /hora /, similar artefacts were founds in Berești and Dragușini
.


[edit ] Technology


[edit ] 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.^[73]


[edit ] 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 believed the source of black pigments for cucuteni
culture.^[74] ^[75] 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).^[76]


[edit ] 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 assessed 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 .^[74]


[edit ] 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.^[77]



Typical trichrome vessel: black, white and red decorated ceramics

	


FrumuÅŸica Dance


[edit ] 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./.^[78]


[edit ] Anthropomorphic representations



Furniture depicted in clay -around 4900-4750 BC

	


Anthropomorphic figure; there are some hipothesis that the incisions
represents tattoos

	


Cucuteni Male figure

	


Mother goddess


[edit ] Zoomorphic representations



Zoomorphic representation.

	


Zooomorphic vessel

	


Zoomorphic protoma

	


Bull representation



Bull Horn representation

	


Zoomorphic representation

	


Bull Horn/ Snake representation

	
CucutenireprezentareZoomorfica2.jpg



[edit ] 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.^[79] ^[80] . Still there were found weights for
vertical loom. The lavish decorating pottery suggest that the during
Cucuteni Tripolie the textiles were exceedingly beautiful.^[81] ^[82]

/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

^[83]


[edit ] 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. ^[84]



Knives reconstruction

	


There are few Weapons Artifacts found for Cucuteni Culture

	


Punch Tools/Needles

	


Stone tools


[edit ] 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 .^[85]



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.^[85] 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,
AriuÅŸd, 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.^[86]




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.^[86]


	


Three parallel lines joined by a bar on the backs of one of figurines from
Poduri similar ones found at Isaia artefacts. The tri-line topped by a
horizontal bar is an emblematic sign of the


[edit ] Tokens

/Thus between 8000 and 7500 BCE farmers were given a clay token for each
basket of grain placed in storage (Senner 1989: 23)./^[85]

/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)^[85] /
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.^[87]


[edit ] 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.^[88] 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.^[10]

/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./

^[89]


[edit ] Decline


[edit ] 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.^[90]

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,^[91] 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.^[92] " 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.


[edit ] 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./^[93]


[edit ] Anatolian and Balkano-Danubian Hypotheses



[edit ] 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.^[94]


Also ecological degradation from millennia of farming and deforestation,
also are cited as causal factors for the decline of /Old Europe/ ^[95]
^[96]

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./" ^[97]
The climatic change was also an 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."/
^[98]


[edit ] Notes

1. *^ * Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, VII, IaÅŸi, 2000
Cucuteni–Tripolye Cultural Complex: Relations and Synchronisms With
Other Contemporaneous Cultures From the Black Sea Area Cornelia-Magda
Mantu page 1 2. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/ Fulford, Robert (2009-03-17). "What we
don't know can't hurt us ". /National Post /.
http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1396118. Retrieved
2009-05-17.  3. *^ * Dan Monah Religie si arta in cultura Cucuteni 4. *^ *
http://www.arheo.ro/text/eng/istoric_eng.html Institutul de Arheologie –
Iasi 5. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/

http://www.trypillia.com/articles/eng/re1.shtml The Trypilska Kultura -
The Spiritual Birthplace of Ukraine? Natalie Taranec 6. *^ *
http://www.trypillia.com/museum/index.shtml Trypillia Museum 7. *^ *
Trypillian Civilization in the prehistory of Europe by Mykhailo Videiko 8.
*^ * Andrew Wilson, The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation, New Haven and
London: Yale University Press, 2000, pg. 25 9. *^ *
http://www.trypillia.com/museum/index.shtml 10. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/ ^/*c*/
^/*d*/ Biblioteca Antiquitatis The first Cucuteni Museum of Romania Foton
2005 11. *^ * Mallory (1997). 12. *^ * Prehistoric figurines:
representation and corporeality in the Neolithic By Douglass Whitfield
Bailey page 103 13. *^ * Hubert Schmidt Cucuteni in der oberen Moldau,
Rumänien Berlin-Leipzig 1932 14. *^ *
http://openlibrary.org/b/OL22401126M/Periodizat︠s︡ii︠a︡_tripolʹskikh_poseleniĭ
T.S. Passek Periodizatsiia tripolʹskikh poseleniĭ 15. *^ * Dan Monah
Religie si arta in cultura Cucuteni 16. *^ * Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXVII
2002 Archeological Transformations:Crossing the Pastoral/Agricultural
Bridge by Philip L. KHOL page 153 17. *^ * Dan Monah Religie si arta in
cultura Cucuteni 18. *^ * Dan Monah Religie si arta in cultura Cucuteni
19. *^ * Dan Monah Religie si arta in cultura Cucuteni 20. *^ * Dan Monah
Religie si arta in cultura Cucuteni 21. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/ ^/*c*/ ^/*d*/
Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXVII 2002 Archeological Transformations:Crossing
the Pastoral/Agricultural Bridge by Philip L. Khol, page 153 22. *^ *
Prehistoric figurines: representation and corporeality in the Neolithic by
Douglass Whitfield Bailey 103 23. *^ * Marinescu-Bîlcu 1981 50 24. *^ *
Prehistoric figurines: representation and corporeality in the Neolithic by
Douglass Whitfield Bailey 112 25. *^ * Prehistoric figurines:
representation and corporeality in the Neolithic By Douglass Whitfield
Bailey 105 26. *^ *
http://www.semioticon.com/virtuals/archaeology/symbolictech.pdf Symbolic
Technologies Dragos Gheorghiu, Centre of Research, National University of
Arts in Bucharest 27. *^ *
http://www.wac6.org/livesite/item.php?itemID=1683&itemType=PAPER abstract
of “The Tripolye house, a sacred and profane coexistence!” by
Francesco Menotti, Basel University 28. *^ *
http://www.iananu.kiev.ua/privatl/pages/Widejko/txt/cities.html Trypillya
Culture Proto-Cities: History of Discovery and Investigations © M. Yu.
Videiko Published: Відейко М. Ю. Трипільські
протоміста. Історія досліджень. Київ, 2002;
с.103-125: (Videiko M. Yu. Trypillya culture proto-cities. History of
investigations. Kiev,2002, p.103-125) 29. *^ *
http://www.iananu.kiev.ua/privatl/pages/Widejko/txt/cities.html Trypillya
Culture Proto-Cities: History of Discovery and Investigations © M. Yu.
Videiko Published: Відейко М. Ю. Трипільські
протоміста. Історія досліджень. Київ, 2002;
с.103-125: (Videiko M. Yu. Trypillya culture proto-cities. History of
investigations. Kiev,2002, p.103-125) 30. *^ * (Шмаглiй М. М.,
Вiдейко М. Ю., 1987) 31. *^ * Trypillya Culture Proto-Cities:
History of Discovery and Investigations © M. Yu. Videiko Published:
Відейко М. Ю. Трипільські протоміста.
Історія досліджень. Київ, 2002; с.103-125: (Videiko
M. Yu. Trypillya culture proto-cities. History of investigations.
Kiev,2002, p.103-125). 32. *^ * Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXVII 2002
Archeological Transformations:Crossing the Pastoral/Agricultural Bridge by
Philip L. KHOL page 183 33. *^ *
http://diva.berkeley.edu/projects/tringham/RET_DigPub/RET_Unsettling_Fire.pdf
Weaving house life and death into places: a blueprint for a hypermedia
narrative Ruth Tringham 34. *^ * The Age of Clay: The Social Dynamics of
House Destruction Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Volume 16, Issue
4, December 1997, Pages 334-395 Mirjana Stevanovic 35. *^ * Markevici V.
I., Pozdnetripolskie plemena Severnoj Moldavii, Chişinău 1981 36. *^ *
http://diva.berkeley.edu/projects/tringham/RET_DigPub/RET_Unsettling_Fire.pdf
Weaving house life and death into places: a blueprint for a hypermedia
narrative Ruth Tringham 37. *^ * Ștefan Cucoș Faza Cucuteni B în zona
subcarpatică a Moldovei Muzeul de Istorie Piatra Neamț 1999 38. *^ * The
Tripolye house, a sacred and profane coexistence! Francesco Menotti, Basel
University 39. *^ *
http://diva.berkeley.edu/projects/tringham/RET_DigPub/RET_Unsettling_Fire.pdf
Weaving house life and death into places: a blueprint for a hypermedia
narrative Ruth Tringham 40. *^ * House Construction and Destruction
Patterns of the Early Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain A Senior
Honors Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
graduation with distinction in Anthropology in the undergraduate colleges
of The Ohio State University by Nisha K. Patel The Ohio State University
March 2004 Project Adviser: Professor Richard Yerkes, Department of
Anthropology 41. *^ * House Construction and Destruction Patterns of the
Early Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain A Senior Honors Thesis
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with
distinction in Anthropology in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio
State University by Nisha K. Patel The Ohio State University March 2004
Project Adviser: Professor Richard Yerkes, Department of Anthropology 42.
*^ * House Construction and Destruction Patterns of the Early Copper Age
on the Great Hungarian Plain A Senior Honors Thesis Presented in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with distinction in
Anthropology in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University by
Nisha K. Patel The Ohio State University March 2004 Project Adviser:
Professor Richard Yerkes, Department of Anthropology 43. *^ *
http://diva.berkeley.edu/projects/tringham/RET_DigPub/RET_Unsettling_Fire.pdf
Weaving house life and death into places: a blueprint for a hypermedia
narrative Ruth Tringham 44. *^ * House Construction and Destruction
Patterns of the Early Copper Age on the Great Hungarian Plain A Senior
Honors Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
graduation with distinction in Anthropology in the undergraduate colleges
of The Ohio State University by Nisha K. Patel The Ohio State University
March 2004 Project Adviser: Professor Richard Yerkes, Department of
Anthropology 45. *^ * name="Cucos" 46. *^ * name="Vsorochin">Memoria
Antiqvitatis XXIII Așezările cucuteniene tip Soloceni Victor Sorochin
47. *^ * name="Monah" 48. *^ * Ștefan Cucoș Faza Cucuteni B în zona
subcarpatică a Moldovei Muzeul de Istorie Piatra Neamț 1999 page 164 49.
*^ * E.Comsa Cultivarea plantelor in cursul epocii neolitice pe teritoriul
Romaniei TN, 1973 50. *^ * Ștefan Cucoș Faza Cucuteni B în zona
subcarpatică a Moldovei Muzeul de Istorie Piatra Neamț 1999 page 168 51.
*^ * Dergachev, Valentin A. (2002). "Two studies in defense of the
migration concept". in Boyle, Katie; Renfrew, Colin; Levine, Marsha.
Ancient Interactions: East and West in Eurasia. Cambridge: McDonald
Institute Monographs. pp. 93–112. ISBN 1902937198 . 52. *^ * Ștefan
Cucoș Faza Cucuteni B în zona subcarpatică a Moldovei Muzeul de Istorie
Piatra NeamÈ› 1999 page 169 53. *^ *
http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/weller/ Antiquity Vol 79 No 306 December
2005 The earliest salt production in the world: an early Neolithic
exploitation in Poiana Slatinei-Lunca, Romania Olivier Weller & Gheorghe
Dumitroaia 54. *^ * http://www.cimec.ro/arheologie/sarea/index.html
Valeriu Cavruc Gheorghe Dumitroaia Vestigii arheologice privind
exploatarea sãrii pe teritoriul României în perioada neo-eneoliticã
55. *^ *
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/41/60/26/PDF/archaedyn2008_weller_brigand_etal.pdf
ArchæDyn – Dijon, 23-25 June 2008 Dynamics settlement pattern,
production and trades from Neolithic to Middle Ages 56. *^ * St Cucos,
SCIV, 1973, 2, page 212 57. *^ * S. Marinescu Balcu, SCIVA, 25, 1974, page
167 58. *^ * Vasile Chirca Teme ale reprezentării Marii Zeițe Memoria
Antiquitais XXIII 59. *^ *
name="uts.cc.utexas.edu">http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~gloria/Goddess.html
Will the "Great Goddess" Resurface?: Reflections in Neolithic Europe 60.
*^ * Vasile Chirca Teme ale reprezentării Marii Zeițe Memoria
Antiquitais XXIII 61. *^ * The Living Goddesses By Marija Gimbutas, Miriam
Robbins Dexter 62. *^ * Marija Gimbutas The Goddesses and Gods of Old
Europe: Myths and Cult Images 63. *^ * Prehistoric figurines:
representation and corporeality in the Neolithic By Douglass Whitfield
Bailey page 114 64. *^ * Prehistoric figurines: representation and
corporeality in the Neolithic By Douglass Whitfield Bailey page 115 65. *^
* Marinescu-Bîlcu, Bolomey 2000 page 157 66. *^ * Studia Antiqua et
Archaeologica, IX, IaÅŸi, 2003 The Human Bone With Possible Marks of Human
Teeth Found at Liveni Site (Cucuteni Culture) Sergiu Haimovici 67. *^ *
http://eneoliticulestcarpatic.blogspot.com/2008/04/comunitile-cucuteniene-din-bazinul_07.html
The Cucutenian Communities in the Bahlui Basin 68. *^ * This section is
heavily indebted to Gimbutas (1991) pages 331–332. Gimbutas, Marija
(1991). The Civilization of the Goddess: The World of Old Europe. San
Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers (HarperSanFrancisco). ISBN
0-06-250368-5 (hardcover) or ISBN 0-06-250337-5 (paperback). 69. *^ *
Prehistoric figurines: representation and corporeality in the Neolithic By
Douglass Whitfield Bailey page 116 70. *^ * Piatra Neamt permanent
exposition 71. *^ *
http://www.iananu.kiev.ua/privatl/pages/Burdo03/NB/articles/sacral.html
The Sacral World and the Magic Space of Trypillya Civilization (5400 -
2750 BC) © Natalija Burdo 2001 72. *^ *
http://193.2.104.55/documenta/pdf34/DPConstantinescu34.pdf Phase and
chemical composition analysis of pigments used in Cucuteni Neolithic
painted ceramics. B. Constantinescu, R. Bugoi, E. Pantos, D. Popovici
Documenta Praehistorica XXXIV (2007) 73. *^ *
http://arts.iasi.roedu.net/cucuteni/arheo/ceramica/ine.html 74. ^ ^/*a*/
^/*b*/

http://193.2.104.55/documenta/pdf34/DPConstantinescu34.pdf Phase and
chemical composition analysis of pigments used in Cucuteni Neolithic
painted ceramics. B. Constantinescu, R. Bugoi, E. Pantos, D. Popovici
Documenta Praehistorica XXXIV (2007) 75. *^ * Investigation of Neolithic
ceramic pigments using synchrotron radiation X-ray diffraction Roxana
Bugoi and Bogdan Constantinescu “Horia Hulubei” National Institute of
Nuclear Physics and Engineering, 077125 Bucharest, Romania Emmanuel Pantos
CCLRC, Daresbury Laboratory, Warrington WA4 4AD, United Kingdom Dragomir
Popovici National Museum of Romanian History, Bucharest, Romania 76. *^ *
www.nipne.ro/about/reports/docs/anuar20032004.pdf Horia Hulubei National
Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering Scientific report 2003-2004
77. *^ * http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20053/36 Platar —
an amazing collection of artifacts from the Neolithic age to Greco-Roman
Antiquity 78. *^ * http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~gloria/Goddess.html Gloria
Collins Will the "Great Goddess" Resurface?: Reflections in Neolithic
Europe 79. *^ * Pasternak 1963 80. *^ * Brjusov 1951 81. *^ * Prehistoric
textiles: the development of cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze By E. J. W.
Barber page 144 82. *^ * Rekonstrukcija Ženske Odjeće U Eneolitiku
Međuriječja Dunava, Drave I Save, Marina Milicevic 83. *^ * Prehistoric
textiles: the development of cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze By E. J. W.
Barber 84. *^ * http://eneoliticulestcarpatic.blogspot.com/The Cucutenian
Communities in the Bahlui Basin 85. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/ ^/*c*/ ^/*d*/ XXXIII
Marco Merlini, An Inquiri into the Danube Script Sibiu 2009, Alba Iulia
– Editura Altip 86. ^ ^/*a*/ ^/*b*/

http://www.brukenthalmuseum.ro/pdf/Biblioteca_Brukenthal/XXXIII/24%20overview%20Stamina.pdf
XXXIII Marco Merlini, An Inquiri into the Danube Script Sibiu 2009, Alba
Iulia – Editura Altip page 626 87. *^ *
http://www.brukenthalmuseum.ro/pdf/Biblioteca_Brukenthal/XXXIII/25%20Fall%20phase.pdf
88. *^ * Studia Antiqua et Archaeologica, VII, IaÅŸi, 2000
Cucuteni-Tripolye Cultural Complex: Relations and Synchronisms With Other
Contemporaneous Cultures From the Black Sea Area - Magda Mantu page 1 89.
*^ * The Farming Frontier on the Southern Steppes David W. Anthony 90. *^
* A Grammar of Modern Indo-European at Indo-European Language Association
91. *^ * Gimbutas (1982 :1) 92. *^ * Gimbutas, Dexter & Jones-Bley (1997
:309) 93. *^ *
http://dnghu.org/indo-european-grammar/1-proto-indo-european-2.htm A
Grammar of Modern Indo-European at Indo-European Language Association 94.
*^ * Iranica Antiqua, vol. XXXVII 2002 Archeological
Transformations:Crossing the Pastoral/Agricultural Bridge by Philip L.
KHOL page 152 95. *^ * ^ a b c Anthony, David W. (2007). The Horse, the
Wheel, and Language: How Bronze Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes
Shaped the Modern World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN
9780691058870 . 96. *^ * Todorova, Henrietta (1995). "The Neolithic,
Eneolithic, and Transitional in Bulgarian Prehistory". in Bailey, Douglass
W.; Panayotov, Ivan. Prehistoric Bulgaria. Monographs in World
Archaeology. 22. Madison, WI: Prehistoric Press. pp. 79–98. ISBN
1881094111 . 97. *^ * name="Trypillya Culture Proto-CIties 2002,
p.103-125" 98. *^ * http://www.geocities.com/vcmtalk/primalwound.html The
Primal Wound By Larry Gambone