UDK 903 ' 12/ ' 15(4/5)' ' 633/634 ' ' :575-17; 903 ' 12/ ' 15(4/5)' ' 633/634 ' ' >574 91
Documenta PraehistoricaXXXV (2008)
Micro-regions of the Lepenski Vir culture:
Padina in the Upper Gorge and Hajdučka Vodenica
in the Lower Gorge of the Danube
Borislav JovanoviC
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia
bjovanovic@yubc.net
ABSTRACT - This paper was compelled into existence when confronting the fact that the most com-
monly discussed transitional period connecting the Late Mesolithic and the Early Neolithic in the
Đerdap or the Iron Gates Gorges (present-day Serbia and Romania) is determined by the often em-
phasized lack of adequately published evidence, thus leaving this period largely unknown. We exam-
ine previous conclusions concerning the Lepenski Vir culture, or at the very least, try to put such dis-
cussions back in their archaeological context. We discuss the features that are essential for the organ-
isation of the settlements, stratigraphy, and adaptability of architecture caused by geomorphology
and climate, as well as the remarkable loss of settlement space due to different types of erosion.
IZVLEČEK - Članek je nastal kot odgovor na dejstvo, da pogoste diskusije o prehodu med mezolitikom
in neolitikom v soteski Đerdap (v današnji Srbiji in Romuniji) ne temeljijo na ustrezno objavljenih
rezultatih izkopavanj in katalogih najdb. V članku reanaliziramo interpretacije kulture Lepenski vir
in jih s pomočjo rezultatov naših izkopavanj umestimo v arheološke kontekste. Predstavljamo nam-
reč ključne značilnosti prostora, ki so vplivale na organiziranost naselij in arhitekturo, prilagojeno
geomorfološkim in klimatskim pogojem. Predstavljamo tudi krčenje njihovih obsegov in spremenje-
nih stratifikacij kot posledic velikega števila erozij.
KEY WORDS - Late Mesolithic; Neolithic; Iron Gates Gorges; Lepenski Vir culture; settlement struc-
tures; stratigraphy
Introduction
Viewed from a distance of nearly forty years (1970-
2007), the excavations at Padina and Hajdučka Vo-
denica were done in the same way as those that are
usually conducted at prehistoric lowland and hill-
fort sites. To date, the results have been published
fragmentarily, which has contributed to conflicting
views on the origins and chronologies of these two
sites. Such discussions were mostly concerned with
unique features of the Lepenski Vir culture, such as
stone sculpted boulders, specific architecture and
typical settlement organization situated at specially
selected locations (Fig. 1). Evaluations of the archa-
eological content of such sites based on stratigraphic
and typological grounds alone has proven inade-
quate - among other reasons, due to the lack of rele-
vant analogies in the prehistory of the Balkans and
south-eastern Europe (Banffy 2004.367-69). The
stagnation in the study of the Lepenski Vir culture,
however, was avoided largely thanks to the activi-
ties of the Neolithic Seminars that have been conti-
nuously held at the Department of Archaeology, Ljub-
ljana University, and publications of the Documenta
Praehistorica series.
The immediate surroundings of the Late Mesolithic
and Early Neolithic in the Upper Gorge of the Da-
nube was the winding coastal zone, i.e. the space be-
tween the steep cliffs of the hinterland and the Da-
nube basin. Such a position, narrowed by the rocky
cliffs and the course of the river was the site of var-
ious types of erosion (Fig. 3). The geomorphology of
the Danube Gorges must be emphasized, with slight
differences visible everywhere in this landscape -
which restricted the settlement space for both the
Late Mesolithic populations and the Lepenski Vir cul-
ture. After the abandonment of these settlements,
the impact of erosion significantly altered the origi-
nal configuration of the terrain, and to a large extent
reduced the original size of settlements. Hence, for
the stratigraphic determination of architectural fea-
tures and portable material culture, it is necessary to
estimate the extent of the preservation of different
settlements at Sectors I-IV at Padina (Jovanovic
2004.63-74).
Longitudinal and transversal erosions are related to
the dynamics of the Danube River, as well as smal-
ler rivers, streams and seasonal torrents in the im-
mediate vicinity. Their channels, full of cascades
carved in the rocky base, crossed sidewise settle-
ment spaces, occasionally producing floods of de-
structive power. The simplified classification of ero-
sion dynamics we recognized in the stratigraphic se-
quence at Sectors I-III of Padina is as follows:
•	1. Erosion caused by the Danube (erosion activity
visible on river banks; changing river courses).
2.	Erosion caused by seasonal torrents (outbursts
that caused large quantities of sediment to be
washed down the steep cliffs).
3.	Erosion caused by short watercourses (water in
established channels; from the spring to their
confluence with the Danube, altering the direc-
tion of the river course).
•	1. Eolic and atmospheric erosion in the deposition
of anthropogenic layers (mini erosions within a
settlement of upper and lower terraces, be-
tween buildings).
2.	Stratigraphic significance of archaeological finds
that were impacted by the Danube River erosion
(accumulated or redeposited artefacts next to
the cleaned river banks).
3.	Stratigraphic significance of archaeological finds
that were impacted by seasonal torrents (destru-
ctive power that such torrents had within semi-
subterranean buildings and crofts, accumulated
archaeological finds).
•	Stratigraphic significance of archaeological finds
at palaeo-surfaces and occupation levels (settle-
ment surfaces placed on different terraces).
• Relative chronological significance of 14C results in
comparison to the stratigraphy (inconsistencies be-
tween 14C results and their stratigraphic position).
Padina. Gospođin Vir (Upper Gorge)
The site of Padina consists of several settlements lo-
cated at horseshoe shaped coves downstream from
the Gospođin Whirlpool (Sectors I-III). The earliest
phase here belongs to the Late Mesolithic of the Iron
Gates, followed by the entire development of the Le-
penski Vir culture. After a long hiatus, the Late Neo-
lithic Kostolac culture, which at the time spread ac-
ross the Danube and the Sava river basins, is the
next cultural manifestation at this site, finally fol-
lowed by the Early Iron Age Kalakača culture. Spo-
radic finds have been assigned to the Roman and
Medieval periods.
Sectors I to III were connected, while the signifi-
cantly larger Sector IV looked like a spacious pla-
teau, bordered with steep cliffs. Various geomorpho-
logical characteristics affected formation processes:
Sector Ia, which was almost at the same level as the
Danube River, was significantly affected by high wa-
ters (Fig. 2).
Padina A. Sector I, Trench 1, Profile 1
The Late Mesolithic period. Sector I consists of two
stepped stony terraces: the lower is bounded by the
high river bank profile, at the base of which is a pa-
laeosoil sporadically covered by river sand. Partly
preserved remains of architectural features at this
sector provided a reliable vertical stratigraphy. De-
pressions in the bumpy rocky base surfaces of both
terraces, as well as of segments 1 and 2 in front of
the river bank profile, are largely filled with this
palaeosoil of intense black colour. It contains Late
Mesolithic flint and bone artefacts. No Early Neoli-
thic Starčevo pottery is found at this level (Fig. 4).
Padina A - B. Base of a building structure.
Phase of contacts. Iron Gates Late Mesolithic,
the Early Neolithic Starčevo culture
The layer of river-deposited sand in segments 1 and
3 extends almost to the high river bank profile. In
segments 2-3, this deposit covers the flattened base
of an architectural feature from the final stage of the
Late Mesolithic - the phase of contact. A long rectan-
gular hearth, made from vertically placed stone
blocks, was found in the central part of this base. In
the vicinity, there is a scatter of split and slab-like
stones left behind on the levelled palaeosoil. Only a
few stone and bone artefacts were found here, while
the Early Neolithic Starčevo pottery is absent (Jova-
nović 1971.Pl. III, Figs. 1, 5, 6).
Padina B1. House 1. The Lepenski Vir culture
On a narrow ridge of one of the cliffs that slopes to-
ward the river (segment 3), a rectangular hearth of
House 1 was found, directly above the previously
described feature dated to the contact phase. The
hearth platform was composed of two parallel stone
slabs, while between them was a partly damaged
boulder-altar in situ occupying a standard place
when it comes to architectural features of all phases
of the Lepenski Vir culture. Here, in the washed-out
layer around the platform of House 1, only a few
fragments of coarse and monochrome ware were
found (Fig. 6).
Padina B2. House 2. The Lepenski Vir culture
Houses 2 and 3 mark the next two building horizons.
These were semi-subterranean structures dug into
the culture layers deposited on two rocky terraces
up to a depth of 2m. The terraces slope toward the
Danube. In other words, segment 1 represents a se-
ries of settlements located in a small arc-shaped cove.
These settlements were built on river terraces, like
hill-top sites, where their downtowns are placed on
their steep slopes all the way to the base of the hill.
The riverbank profile of Sector I, which was the re-
sult of river erosion, in segments 1 and 2 exposes
the trapezoidal base of the semi-subterranean House
2, assigned to the Lepenski Vir culture. The hard-
beaten clay floor and a rectangular hearth with an
aniconic boulder were found next to the back of the
platform. The floor of House 2 levelled the palaeo-
soil, i.e. the Late Mesolithic layer found on terrace 1.
This layer is only sporadically preserved next to the
rocky base, and contains bone tools, and no pottery.
On the floor of House 2, similar bone artefacts were
associated with Starčevo-Cri§ pottery (Jovanović
1971.T. V.1) (Fig. 7).
Padina B2. House 3. The Lepenski Vir culture
Although two buildings on these terraces were not
built at the same time - House 3 is definitely youn-
ger - their end was simultaneous. They were de-
stroyed by a torrent wave; and marked in the sec-
tion of this Sector as layer 3b. It had prominent con-
tents of torrent-like washed-out materials: deposited
mud and a light yellow deposit of gravelly sand. The
torrent's thrust crossed both terraces diagonally, hit-
ting with full force across the area of the current ri-
ver bank to the old channel of the Danube, split both
terraces diagonally, and continued with full strength
down to the present river bank area into the Da-
nube. Since House 2 was built at the highest spot of
the settlement, it was the first to be hit by the tor-
rent: its walls of piled stones were cut through, while
its simple ridged wooden roof was destroyed. The
rectangular hearth of stone blocks was moved from
its foundations and transported down the slope be-
tween the terraces and stopped by some kind of
barrier, but in the inverse position from the one in
the base of House 3. It is unusual that the hearth
construction was preserved, as well as both A-sup-
ports, one on each of the longer, lateral sides (Fig. 8).
On the floor of House 3, a semi-subterranean con-
struction next to the rocky edge of terrace 2, frag-
ments of coarse pottery were found, as well as a
complete model of an oven (25 x 35cm) decorated
by impresso technique (Fig. 30 A).
After this catastrophic event, these buildings on ter-
races 1 and 2 were not renewed. However, it did not
mean that life had stopped down at the coastal part
of the settlement, which was at this time covered by
river sand or washed out down to the rocky base (as
was the case at Sector Ia).
Padina B2. Pottery workshop between Houses
2 and 3
One more feature found between Houses 2 and 3 re-
lates to settlement horizon B2. This was probably a
large, open-air hearth, ellipsoid in shape, paved with
small flat stones, and encircled by a wider ring of
piled stones (1.50m by 1.10m). The hearth and the
area around it were carefully levelled. Pieces of car-
bonized wood and ash were found, along with clus-
ters of larger fragments of coarse pottery. One such
cluster allowed a reconstruction of a typical pot-am-
phora, ornamented with impresso technique, and
with symmetrical placed handles, similar to those of
the Starčevo-K0ros-Cri§ cultural complex. This fea-
ture is most likely a pottery kiln, or an open-air (?)
hearth with or without a dome. This might have
been a workshop with a simple hearth, where pre-
pared pots were covered by wooden brunches, and
fired in a pyre. It is the first indication of the exis-
tence of local pottery workshops in the Lepenski Vir
culture.
Padina B occupation level
As previously shown, the architectural features of
the upper and lower terraces fairly precisely define
the occupation level in the immediate vicinity of
Houses 2 and 3. The croft of House 2 was also clear-
ly outlined in segment 2 of the riverbank profile,
and can also be seen in the longitudinal sections of
Trench 1 (quadrants 1 and 2). The occupation levels
of the croft and of the floor of House 2 are identi-
cal, which is also confirmed by a round base made
of split stones found at the same level in quadrant
1a. The surface level of the occupation zone outside
the semi-subterranean croft is identical to the level
from which the trapezoidal base of House 2 was
dug, and this is clearly visible on segment 1 of the
riverbank section (Fig. 7).
In this way, there is a more secure stratigraphic de-
termination of surface activities for the period when
Houses 2 and 3 were in use. This horizon yields a
larger concentration of finds in comparison with
the culture layer above and below the given level.
Leaving aside the division of the Late Mesolithic and
the Lepenski Vir culture settlements on the erosive
zones of both terraces and the costal zone, it is pos-
sible to comprehend the connections between these
occupation levels of the terrain, which sloped even
more steeply toward the Danube in those days. Ar-
chaeological material was in this way washed away
from the occupation levels upslope and deposited at
the base of the terrace, in the costal zone. This pro-
cess caused inverted and complex stratigraphy in
the costal zone, characterized by inverted 14C dates
(see below). This inverted stratigraphy of absolute
dates was noticed at Padina immediately after the
first 14C results in 1978 (Clason 1980). The inverse
stratigraphy was also noticed in the costal zone of
Sector III, after it was realized that every higher ter-
race with semi-subterranean buildings of the Lepen-
ski Vir culture had been gradually depositing its
waste on the lower horizon of abandoned buildings.
Thus, some finds from Sector I, such as a cult table,
were refitted from pieces that originated from two
different culture levels (segments 3 and quadrant 1a)
(Fig. 30 B).
The dynamic of formation processes at Padina ena-
bled definitions of different zones of the settlement
on the basis of an approximate order by which the
archaeological material was deposited. The stratig-
raphy and relative chronology of this sector can be
reduced to the order of occupation levels of succes-
sive living horizons. The absolute heights of the liv-
ing horizon start from architectural features in or-
der to connect a particular cultural layer with the
base of a feature, i.e. ideally its floor.
Padina. Sector I. Relative chronology of the
settlements
It is obvious that occupation levels at settlements
based on slopes are not characterized by signifi-
cant horizontal deposits, since the cultural layers
are formed around horizontally placed buildings.
The occupation layer should be considered as the
ensemble of single surfaces inserted and placed on
the steep sides of the gorge, or secondarily connec-
ted to the costal zone. The cultural layer of Sector I
rests on a natural, rocky base, which prevented the
pit-digging that characterizes settlements located on
loess or clay soils.
Stratigraphy at Sector I begins with costal palaeo-
soil, which contains Late Mesolithic finds. On this
thin layer of palaeosoil, with an average thickness of
0.30m, the first Mesolithic dwellings were placed in
pockets of the cliffs and on the sloping platforms of
the rocky base. Such dwellings were more promi-
nently present at Sector II.
Another important aspect related to Sector I was de-
termining the precise stratigraphic position of the
rectangular hearth connected to phase Padina A-B.
This architectural feature enables us to connect the
heights of the stone-lined hearth and the occupation
horizon around it. The entire feature covers the le-
velled zone of the palaeosoil (Mesolithic cultural la-
yer), and does not reach down to the rocky base of
segment 2 of the costal zone (Fig. 5). This leveling,
made here before the feature was built, confirms that
the hearth (or oven) covers undisturbed palaeosoil
with Late Mesolithic occupation residues. It is un-
clear how much time elapsed between the Late Me-
solithic occupation in this zone and the period when
this later feature was built, although there is perhaps
some continuity of occupation. There is no evidence
that this feature was built by digging into the ground.
It is probable that the period that followed the Late
Mesolithic occupation was characterized by an archi-
tectural form different from the preceding period as
much as from the architecture built during the en-
suing phase of the Lepenski Vir culture.
The anthropogenic layer formed over this atypical
architectural feature upon its abandonment was for-
med after a considerable temporal hiatus, since at
this location one finds a building with recognizable
elements of the early Lepenski Vir culture. This buil-
ding (No. 1) had only the rear platform of the hearth,
with two stone slabs and an ornamented boulder be-
tween them. Between this surprisingly well-preser-
ved architectural detail of the building (▼ 1.50m)
and the feature from the contact phase (A-B ▼
2.80m) is a cultural layer 1.28m thick (Fig. 5-6).
When it comes to the architecture of the Lepenski
Vir culture at Padina, the level of the hearth and
floor mark the average depth of digging for a parti-
cular building - around 0.85m (cut of House 2 in
Trench I, quadrant 16). From this, one can indirect-
ly calculate the accumulation of cultural layers: the
difference between the floors of the contact phase
feature and the Lepenski Vir culture building (House
1) is 1.28m. One can then add the average depth for
the latter feature of 1.50m. These two values indi-
cate the build-up of the occupation layer at this point
in the settlement (2.75m), which can then be chec-
ked against the section of Sector I, Profile I, seg-
ments 2-3. One notices an accelerated development
of the settlement during the contact phase (A-B)
(Fig. 7).
Three settlement horizons - the Late Mesolithic, con-
tact phase and the early Lepenski Vir culture phase -
were preserved only in the coastal zone (segments
1-3). This also means that Sector I represents the
periphery of these settlements, which spread up to
the steep cliffs of the gorge. Unfortunately, the cen-
tral area of these settlements used to be in the pre-
sent-day Danube channel. Architectural features
(Houses 2 and 3) at both terraces were well-elabo-
rated, containing elements from sedentary Balkan-
Danubian Early Neolithic communities, such as pot-
tery and polished stone tools. However, it is less
clear what caused the abandonment of the youn-
gest settlement horizon of the Lepenski Vir culture.
It seems this might have been caused by local clima-
tic changes (some isolated catastrophe in the case of
House 18), but even more probably by a more signi-
ficant series of events, which also might have cau-
sed the abandonment of other settlements of the
Lepenski Vir culture that were concentrated in such
a narrow zone of the Upper Gorge of the Danube.
The pottery from Sector I is important for two rea-
sons: its first appearance at the site dates to the be-
ginnings of the Lepenski Vir culture, and, its typolo-
gical classification to a special (Iron Gates) variant of
Early Neolithic culture known as the Starčevo and
Cri§ culture complex.
The stratigraphic significance of this pottery is deter-
mined on the basis of its context in Sector I, and
divided into the following zones:
O Pottery of the coastal zone (Profile I, segments
1-3), which was deposited secondarily by hill-wash
erosion from terraces 1 and 2, as well as by the ad-
ditional accumulation of pottery finds from eroded
blocks of Profile I undercut by the Danube. The pot-
tery that was washed down from the terraces be-
longs to various levels of the cultural layer, or from
damaged and abandoned buildings; the pottery that
came from the eroded profile I could be connected
to older levels of the cultural layer, characterized by
a mixture of archaeological material from both ter-
races. The chronological classification of these find-
ings is primarily based on typology and is thus not
completely reliable.
© Pottery (in much smaller amounts) from architec-
tural features, found both on and beneath the floors,
around open-air hearths or ovens, as well as in situ
pots - these can be considered as closed finds; in
addition, those finds connected with the occupation
horizon can be said to have a slightly less prominent
stratigraphic significance.
Early Neolithic pottery from Padina leaves the im-
pression of a coherent typological and ornamental
whole. The narrow range of ornamental motifs and
techniques is noticeable when compared with the
Starčevo culture settlements outside of the confines
of the Danube Gorges. The pottery assemblage at
Sector I is dominated by coarse ware, weakly tempe-
red, with chuff and larger sand grain inclusions. The
dominant form is the large open dish with a rectan-
gular hollow pedestal with openings, as well as chro-
nologically younger specimens with flat bases and
shallower receptacle. Spherical pots and deeper sphe-
rical bowls and amphorae are less numerous, but
were of better quality and temper.
Most of the ornamentation of these vessels involved
two techniques: coarsening or engraving surfaces,
i.e. polishing. The first technique relies on impres-
sions made by fingertips or semi-circular nail/im-
pression (impresso), producing various combina-
tions of horizontal and vertical impressions, often
showing the recognizable motif of a wheat ear. So-
metimes, these imprints were made with the tip of
a wooden or bone tool. Thin lines, cut by a sharp
blade, form asymmetrical sheaves or simple geome-
trical motifs, occasionally coupled with a series of
triangles. The second technique, used on mono-
chrome vessels by polishing their surfaces, was con-
fined to bowls and amphora-like vessels.
Ornamentation by painting or barbotine (the surface
of the vessel is channelled with irregular plastic ap-
pliques imitating tree bark), widespread across the
area of the Starčevo culture, were not found on pot-
tery from the Lepenski Vir culture settlements at Pa-
dina Sectors I-III.
Horse-shoe polished stone axes, which characterize
the Starčevo culture, were found in pottery horizons
at all 3 Sectors of Padina, mostly outside closed con-
texts (Antonovic 2004.Fig. 4-6). Cult objects from
the Lepenski Vir culture settlement at Sector I were
few and had different roles. The aniconic boulder
from House 2 and damaged boulder-altar (ornamen-
ted) from House 1 were the only finds of this kind
in buildings. Admittedly, the hearth of House 3 was
moved from its original location, and the presence
of the boulder-altar (on the rear platform) is not
completely certain. However, an ornamented mo-
del of an oven (Fig. 30) with close typological links
to a similar model from Ajmana, the settlement of
the Starčevo culture in the Ključ (lower Danube re-
gion) (Stalio 1986.Fig. 13), comes from the floor of
this building.
Padina. Sector I. Relative-chronological division
Settlement of the Iron Gates Late Mesolithic
As previously explained, the occupation layer of the
Late Mesolithic settlement is primarily related to pa-
laeosoil full of organic material and discarded arte-
facts. The most important among these finds were
flint blades and flakes, as well as fragmented bone
tools found beneath the rectangular hearth. This la-
yer had lenses of charcoal and burning, distingui-
shed from the strip of burned soil under the fire-
box. The hearth was placed on the palaeosoil. In the
layer under the rectangular hearth, no pottery was
found. A similar context was found beneath the part-
ly damaged floor of House 2; the layer contained flint
and bone artefacts found in the palaeosoil deposited
over the rocky base.
Architectural feature with elongated rectan-
gular hearth. Profile I. Segments 2-3
We have already explained the stratigraphic position
of this feature found between House 1 of the Lepen-
ski Vir culture (segment 3) and the occupation ho-
rizon of the Mesolithic settlement (palaeosoil) (seg-
ments 2-3). The functions as well as construction
details of this feature remain unclear. The interior
of the feature has no partitions, unless the piles of
stone slabs were not the remains of partitioning
walls. There were no traces of a floor or any kind of
subsidiary stone construction. The elongated hearth
has analogies only in the architecture of Vlasac and
Hajdučka Vodenica (the latter in the Lower Gorge of
the Danube, see below), although in a different con-
text (Figs. 5 and 6).
Architectural elements - cult place of House 1.
The Lepenski Vir culture. Profile 1
Leaning against the steep cliff, which limits the
downstream edge of the cove, the base of House 1
was partially preserved, with the rear platform of
the hearth and ornamented boulder-altar. On the
one hand, this architectural detail dates House 1;
and on the other, it testifies the long duration of the
early phase of the Lepenski Vir culture settlement
to which this building belongs. The orientation of
House 1 did not deviate from the generally accept-
ed rule found in the Upper Gorge: in all settlements
of this culture, the buildings faced the Danube with
their (wider) frontages most commonly at a right-
angle or slightly deviating, depending on the topo-
graphy of a particular terrain. It has been mentio-
ned previously that the approximate dimensions of
the base of House 1 cover the whole gauge of the ol-
der feature with the rectangular hearth. In this way,
a clear stratigrafic relationship was established be-
tween two architectural features, or two different
phases in the development of the Lepenski Vir cul-
ture (Fig. 5).
House 2. The Lepenski Vir culture. Trench 1,
quadrant 1b
The floor of this building was situated on a levelled
surface of the palaeosoil. The floor, made of fine
clay, was not preserved entirely. The trapezoidal
base, which was fairly accurately constructed, had
a rectangular fireplace with slab-free firebox embed-
ded on its front. The ash-place with massive slabs ar-
ranged fan-like, extended to the front (entrance) area
of the base. On the cross-section of the frontal of
House 2 and segment 1 (Profile 1), one can clearly
notice the cut into the cultural layer that was formed
before the construction of the trapezoidal base. This
section of the cultural layer confirms that the settle-
ment spread farther on the sloping, wide terrace 3,
where the riverbed is found today. The accumula-
tion of this layer confirms that the primary phase
of the settlement (B1), which precedes the construc-
tion of House 2, was not only related to terrace 3,
but that it lasted considerably longer, before the
construction of Houses 2 and 3 (Fig. 7).
House 3. The Lepenski Vir culture. Trench 2,
quadrant 2b
This building was located at the far end of the area
occupied by the settlements of the Lepenski Vir cul-
ture, and bordered by the semi-circular cove of Sec-
tor I, above which there are steep, uninhabited cliffs.
We have previously mentioned the destruction of
House 3 in a catastrophe which left only part of the
floor, while the fireplace slid down along the steep
edge of the ridge. The context of finds from this base
has already been considered. The settlement of the
Lepenski Vir culture expanded to this natural border
only during its youngest phase (Houses 2 and 3; B2)
(Figs. 5 and 8).
Stratigraphy and chronology
The first 14C date for Sector I at Padina was ob-
tained through the collagen analysis of Burial 2, dug
next to the edge of House 2 (Trench 1, quadrant 1b)
belonging to phase B2 of the Lepenski Vir culture
settlement: BM-1143, 6220 (95.4%) 5740 calBC. In
the absence of a larger series of 14C dates, it is use-
ful to connect the archaeological evidence with avai-
lable 14C dates in order to estimate their correspon-
dence. On the basis of this date, Burial 2 could have
been interred between the last quarter of the 7th
millennium and the first quarter of the 6th millen-
nium BC (Borić and Miracle 2004.315). A similar
date probably refers to the collective burial interred
in the vicinity of the house 3 (Fig. 9).
It is not possible to make a reconstruction of the Le-
penski Vir culture settlements at Sector I, and even
less so of the Late Mesolithic settlement. We can only
estimate the area of the settlement space. Previously
discussed evidence indicates a significant loss of the
cultural layer, including portable finds and archi-
tectural features, to the Danube. On the basis of the
dimensions of segments of Profile 1, which was re-
searched at the low water levels of the Danube, the
eroded cultural layer was found in a range of 6.0m
from Profile 1. This layer was coverd by sand and
gravels, thinning gradually down the slope of ter-
race 3, which was in part already under the Danube
waters.
The settlement of the Late Mesolithic phase left no
trace of building features at this sector and consis-
ted only of the cultural layer that is the same as the
palaeosoil. Between the palaeosoil and layer of the
Lepenski Vir culture, two architectural features were
found with a particular building element and a spe-
cial stratigraphic position: the elongated rectangular
hearths in Trench 1, block 1. Both features were pla-
ced on the palaeosoil, making them stratigraphically
younger than the Mesolithic settlement.
The position of the building with the rectangular
hearth indicates the periphery of the settled area
at this time, which also included terrace 3, the low-
est and widest of which is today under the Danube.
It is certain that this entire terrace was settled dur-
ing the phase of contact between the autochthonous
population and the Early Neolithic Starčevo culture
incomers (Padina phase A-B).
If the architectural pattern of the base with the rec-
tangular hearth is compared with the rear platform
with boulder-altar of House 1, one notices a progress
in the development of architecture, for which one
lacks transitional examples. The evidence of such a
transitional example must have disappeared with
the erosion of the cultural layer of terrace 3 and the
coastal zone. On the other hand, a certain level of
development can be determined by comparing Hou-
ses 1-3 of the Lepenski Vir culture (Profile 1, seg-
ment 2; Trench 1, quadrants 1b, 2b). The last two
features repeat the same form, with likely differen-
ces in details and dimensions. The exclusive use of
a dry wall technique was undoubtedly conditioned
by the rocky terrain of terraces 1 and 2, unsuitable
for a wooden dwelling construction (Fig. 5).
Yet another characteristic of the stratigraphy of
phase B1-B2 at Sector I is the existence of the 'invi-
sible dwelling horizon', which is represented by the
remains of stone constructions of abandoned or
destroyed buildings. The damaged trapezoidal base
between Houses 1 and 2, found along the edge of
segments 2 and 3 of profile 1, belongs to this hori-
zon. This trapezoidal base was noticed on the basis
of horizontal groups of split stones and stone slabs
that were at first marked as 'stone constructions'.
Further, the remains of the rear hearth platform
were preserved in the profile of segment 1, near
House 2. Judging from their stratigraphic position,
these construction elements point to the existence
of an interpolated horizon with 2 building features
between House 1 and the end of segment 1 (Profile
1, point A).
One can thus speak of settlements rather than of a
settlement of the Lepenski Vir culture at Sector I. In
this way one recognizes, at least in basic outlines,
the evolution of the architecture typical of this cul-
ture, formed during phases B1-B2 at Sector I. The
same relative-chronological framework can be ap-
plied to the presence of the Early Neolithic pottery
at Sector I. Depending on the stratigraphic position
of such pottery finds, it is possible to follow the evo-
lution of this local variant of the Starčevo-Cri§ cul-
ture.
Padina A. Sector II. The settlement of the Iron
Gates Late Mesolithic
A narrow ridge that diagonally slopes down the
stepped cliffs into the Danube, divided Sectors I and
II as two separately populated spaces. Less under
the impact of river erosion, Sector II is characteri-
zed by more favourable conditions for the Late Me-
solithic settling of this area than Sectors I and III. It
was exactly at this place that the central settlement
of the Late Mesolithic period at Padina was located.
This layer, with lenses of burning and rich in decom-
posed organic materials, was characterized by a dark
colour and the compactness of the deposit (Fig. 10).
Similar to Sector I, flint artefacts and modified bo-
nes were found in this layer. Here, such finds were
concentrated around the remains of dwelling struc-
tures: oval or ellipsoid surfaces built of split or slab
stones.
This central part of the sector (Trench II, quadrants
2a-3a; 3b-4b) was not under the erosion impact of
the Danube, which does not apply to the parts of the
settlement closer to the river bed. In comparison to
the river bank of Sector I, it is likely that approxima-
tely only half of the original Late Mesolithic settle-
ment was eroded away. The riverbank profile of Sec-
tor II extends for 52m, with an average height be-
tween 2.20 and 2.80m. This profile was firstly ver-
tically cut and then marked similarly to the longitu-
dinal section of the whole sector.
The pattern of the distribution of the Late Mesoli-
thic dwelling features at this sector indicates some
degree of organisation, based on the chosen posi-
tion, and indicates a semicircular arrangement on
the left shore of a small tributary of the Danube.
Coming down the steep slopes of the Gorge, this
stream cut a narrow bed in order to flash out onto
the open and sloping terrain of Sector II.
For the base of dwellings, people chose shallow or
wider depressions, as well as channels between par-
ticular rocky blocks. The oval base of the biggest
dwelling, placed approximately in the centre of the
settled space, had two floor levels made of piled
stone slabs and smaller pebbles. Dwellings were pla-
ced along the left bank of the tributary, where the
central dwelling was found.
According to the bases with piled stones, there were
eight dwellings, the size of which varied between
3.60 by 1.90m and 0.80 by 0.54m. The total area ap-
proximated 30m2, but it might have been conside-
rably larger, since the paving of the bases of dwel-
lings was done in particular due to the special func-
tions of these surfaces: hearths, workshops, sleeping
areas. On these surfaces, along with the remains of
charred wood, there were residues of stone and
bone tools, next to flat, massive boulders with shal-
low depressions in the centre (anvils and pounders).
The structure of particular paved areas in blocks 3a-
4a of Trench 2 provides enough examples of this
kind: Base 4 pavement consisted of sparsely distri-
buted stones, among which was a larger slab stone
(dimensions 0.46m x 0.20m) indicating a working
surface like a table; the construction of Base 5 pave-
ment was an exception, since it was built entirely of
massive stone slabs from 0.50m by 0.21m to 0.24m
by 0.20m; Base 7 pavement was the biggest, oval
surface (around 6.50m2) and was constructed from
stone slabs of the following dimensions: 0.40m by
0.18m and 0.10m by 0.08m; Base 8 pavement had
an approximately square shape, with a massive table-
like stone slab that was 0.50m by 0.22m.
The gully of the brook was fan-shaped across the
sector close to the riverbank, providing an outlet for
periodic outbursts of seasonal torrents down the
steep slopes of the Gorge. The diagonal course of
this gully and its gradual shifting towards the down-
stream rocky ridge was caused by the higher terrain
in the north-western part of the sector. The south-
eastern part of the sector, according to this evidence,
was composed of the following zones of Mesolithic
settlement: a functional zone next to the right bank
of the brook, without dwellings; a central, settlement
area along the left bank of the brook, with a concen-
tration of dwellings; a periphery, towards the south-
eastern border of the excavation area, with no dwel-
lings.
As visible on the profiles of the costal zone, the Me-
solithic cultural layer (palaeosoil) is present in seg-
ments 1-3, Profile 2 due to hill wash processes that
accumulated Mesolithic occupation residues in this
zone. As a consequence, in this part of the profile
the Mesolithic layer has a thickness of up to 0.75m,
covering the rocky ground evenly.
These differences in the occupation of the upper and
lower zones/terraces at Sector II depended on the
course of the torrential brook and topography of the
rocky base. Two preconditions for settling during
the Mesolithic period were fulfilled at this sector: a
source of running water and a convenient place for
the construction of dwellings. Such differences in
the use of space at Sector II affected the stratigraphy
here. It remains unclear how large was the area that
the Mesolithic settlements covered in this cove, and
it probably depended on the width and depth of
bordering rocky ridges at Sector II.
The most frequent category of Mesolithic material
culture at Padina were chipped stone tools, which
can be separated by form and function into 14 basic
types. Most of these finds were found at Sector II,
i.e. in the preserved part of the settlement. It was
possible to separate these finds stratigraphically: the
majority were found in the central dwelling that had
two floor levels (the intermediate layer between
them was 0.16m thick), while a similar pattern was
seen in other dwellings. One should also mention
workshop areas on the left side of the brook, closer
to the downstream ridge of the sector (Radovano-
vić 1981).
Besides the secure stratigraphic position of flint finds
and retouched boulders, the irregularity in their de-
position was caused by a specific terrain of the sec-
tor. We should also remember that a part of this set-
tlement was destroyed by the Danube. The most nu-
merous chipped stone artefacts were scrapers and
sidescrapers (32.83%). This is followed by denticu-
lates and notched tools (17.16%). Retouched flakes
constituted 23.19%. These percentages together make
up 73.18% of all 332 retouched specimens. There is
a notable increase in burins between the older A1
(1.28%) and younger A2 (5.42%) phases, which may
indicate more frequent wood-working activities.
Other tools must have been used for hide-working,
and were possibly hafted in wooden or bone han-
dles (Radovanović 1996.Fig. 5.4; Fig.5.5; Mihailo-
vić 2004.67-86; Kozlowski 2001.61, Fig. 9).
A special category of knapped stone tools at Padina
were trapezoidal choppers/axes (ranging in size be-
tween 3.5cm-6.5cm). They also occur in the Upper
Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of the Lower Danube
area, the Ukrainian steppes, and in the north and
north-east of Europe. This common trait may indi-
cate that this type of tool originates in the early Me-
solithic of the Lower Danube region (Fig. 12).
That these artefacts are related on typological
grounds is based on the following common featu-
res: straight and trapezoidal head and slightly ban-
ded, edge as well as massive shafting, part rectangu-
lar in section. This tool must have been hafted in a
wooden or bone handle, which enabled its multipur-
pose use. Interestingly, this type of tool is very rare
in the collection of chipped stone tools from the dis-
cussed area: the duration of this type of tools is re-
stricted between the use of larger Late Mesolithic
chipped stone tools and polished stone tools, and
were similar in shape to shoe-last axes that charac-
terize the Early Neolithic of the Danubian-Carpathian
zone (Figs. 12 and 29). The largest number of these
tools were found at Padina. Moreover, it seems that
there is evidence for their relatively longer use at
this site: two specimens can be assigned to phase A1,
and the other four specimens to phase A2 of the
Mesolithic settlement at Sector II. There is also a
slight typological difference between them - during
phase A1, their typical form was not completely de-
veloped, while they are perfected during phase A2.
The stratigraphy of stone constructions of the cen-
tral dwelling in square 2a from where these finds
originate is securely established, and this also holds
for artefacts found in this area. It is clear that be-
tween the two phases there is a typological progress
in the symmetry of these specific tools, as well as in
the shape and retouching of the cutting edge, and
also in variations in size. All these elements indicate
that such improvements were directly proportional
to the use of such a new tool for wood-working,
which resulted in the gradual development of a more
secure type of dwelling structure. In this way, the
population minimized its dependence on the local
(rocky) relief of Padina (Fig. 12). On the basis of the
spread of this type of tool across the plains of north-
ern Europe and southern Danubian areas, such inno-
vations could be understood as signs of the process
that conjoined the early experience of plant cultiva-
tion with a long tradition of hunting and gathering.
Bone artefacts. Trench II, square 2a. Phase A1-
A2
Bone artefacts were made for specific purposes and
their form is more or less constant, hence they are
usually a chronologically less sensitive class of ma-
terial culture. One of the larger closed features of
this class of tools from Padina relates to the two pre-
viously described horizons of the Mesolithic settle-
ment (Trench 2, block 2a - A1-A2) (Fig 11).
Phase A1
The layer under the construction of the older floor
of the central dwelling in the settlement (block 2a),
lying directly on the rocky base, contained the follo-
wing forms of bone tool:
1.	Projectile, ellipsoidal cross-section, length 4cm.
2.	Awl tip - prod, end broken (5.2cm x 1.2cm)
3.	Awl - pin, round cross-section (6.8cm x 2cm)
4.	Awl - prod (10.8cm x 2.1cm)
5.	Scraper - polishing tool, rounded tip (9.2cm x
2.2cm)
On the stone construction of the floor of the central
dwelling bone artefacts were few:
6.	Pin - prod, tip of red deer antler (12.5cm x 2.0cm)
7.	Fragmented polishing tool of good quality (9.5cm
x 2.3cm)
8.	Boulder/anvil, found with bone artefacts (Fig. 13)
Phase A2
The following finds come from the younger floor of
the central dwelling and directly above it:
1.	Projectile, round cross-section (Length 5cm)
2.	Arrow tip (pin with spike) (5.3cm x 1.3cm)
3.	Perforator, lower part in the form of a chisel
(3.9cm x 1.3cm)
4.	Knife (blade?) made of boar tusk (5.4cm x 1.5cm)
5.	Dagger (top of spear?), hollow bone (8.0cm x
2.2cm)
6.	Double-sided awl, round cross-section (length
10.8cm)
7.	Needle, lower portion broken (6.7cm x 1.1cm)
8.	Polishing tool - scraper (6.2cm x 1.8cm)
9.	Head of scraper, oval blade (6.5cm x 5.0cm)
10.	Chisel, damaged, flat blade (6.5 cm x 3.5 cm)
From the renewed floor of the central dwelling of
the Mesolithic settlement, there is a complete list of
bone artefacts belonging to the younger phase of
the settlement, made of red deer antler, wild boar
tusk, hollow and cylindrical animal bone (Fig.14).
From the upper level of the palaeosoil above the
floor of the central dwelling (block 2a).
1.	Awl, oval cross-section (Length 6.2cm)
2.	Perforator, red deer antler (Length 5.5cm)
3.	Perforator, red deer antler (Length 5.6cm)
Padina B-2. The Lepenski Vir culture
Although larger than Sector I, Sector II was not in-
habited so extensively during the Lepenski Vir cul-
ture phase. The advantage of having running fresh
water in this zone was of less importance than the
fear of the destructive power of the occasional tor-
rential flood. However, the terrace of Sector II had
other purposes during this period. The south-eastern
corner of the terrace that was outside of the flood
zone seems to have served as a workshop zone for
Houses 1-3 from Sector I, or even of a part of the
settlement of Sector III. Separated by a diagonal
ridge, the terrace might have served as a corral for
stock-breeding, or as a workshop for fishing activi-
ties, with some additional stone constructions that
can be recognized here. A larger amount of split
stones, the remains of fireplaces and smaller stone
constructions, as well as a significant amount of pot-
tery fragments of Starčevo-Cri§ (the Iron Gates),
along with other finds, indicate an everyday range
of activities.
Burials in the course of the Lepenski Vir culture
phase are few at this sector, without particular buri-
al constructions or offerings. The deceased were
lying in extended positions on their backs, with their
arms along their bodies. The dead were mostly bu-
ried in the costal zone (Trench 2, block 1b).
One should also mention another burial where no
burial cut was recognized. The burial contained only
a skull, and was found at the periphery of the ter-
race in the foothill of the steep sides of the gorge.
This partial burial, with some symbolic significance,
was found in block 5d, Trench 2, cut into the Meso-
lithic palaeosoil that was later covered by a massive
layer of hill wash; such a stratigraphic position could
date this cut to the contact phase (A-B). The skull
was covered by several stone plaques which were
encircled with split stones, partly damaged by ero-
sion. The remains of burning were noticeable in the
vicinity of this construction to a diameter of 1.20m.
Among broken bone finds there was a haft of a red
deer antler. Apart from skull fragments, no post-cra-
nial fragments were found here (Fig. 15). There is
one 14C date on a skeletal inhumation (Burial 7)
from this sector (analyzed bone collagen) with the
result BM-1144: 8250-7600 calBC (Borić and Mi-
racle 2004.Tab. 1).
Padina B1 - 3. Sector III
The chronology of prehistoric cultures at Padina in-
dicates how particular locations were used during
these periods, which depended on the micro-charac-
teristics of the terrain, as well as on the technical ca-
pabilities of the culture to adapt to a particular cho-
sen location. The settled area of Sector III is much
larger than the two previous sectors, and is also
more complex with regard to the organization of the
settlement, including the separate area of a necro-
polis. Although the erosion of the costal area is also
prominent at Sector III, due to the higher absolute
level of the terrain, it was less destructive than at
two other sectors (Fig. 16). The following functional
zones can be separated on the basis of their relative
chronological order:
•	The costal area with high profiles is the limit of
the river erosion.
•	The lower level of the costal zone, with partly pre-
served traces of buildings (B-1) - the second row
is in a better preserved part of the settlement,
above the costal profile (B-2). The upper horizon
of the terrace at the periphery of the settled area,
i.e. the third row of buildings (B-3).
•	Necropolis: a group of burials around elongated
stone constructions of the necropolis (A2); a group
of burials beneath dome-like and other stone con-
structions (A-B); a group of burials buried around
buildings of the third row (B-3).
•	All burial groups were found in the foothills of the
steep sides of the gorge at the very periphery of
the terrace and were south-north orientated.
•	The necropolis of Sector III of the Lepenski Vir
culture settlement can be divided into two groups:
The first was contemporaneous with those settle-
ments (B-3), while the other one significantly
precedes it (A-B; A2). In both instances, one must
accept the possibility of burials of people who
were not part of the settlement at Sector III (Fig.
16).
Padina A2. Trench 7. Sector III. The necropolis
with elongated stone constructions
The oldest building feature at Sector III was not pla-
ced next to the costal zone as one would expect. The
opposite was the case: a relatively long construction
(10-12m), some type of a shallow base, built in four
levels of piled stones, extended along the foothills
of the vertical massive gorge. Built and piled one on
top of the other, separated by a levelled layer of soil,
the stone constructions were a sacred feature - a
site place for only few, single burials. However, the
dead were not placed inside constructions, but be-
side them or in their vicinity (Figs. 17 and 18).
Another important (technical) characteristic of these
stone piles was a layer of loessic soil with some gra-
vels that separated the layers of stones. In this way,
the whole area of the necropolis was gradually ele-
vated, reaching a height of 0.50m-0.65m and a
width of 0.80m-2.60m. Inside the construction, or
in the levelled zones, there were broken bone arte-
facts, small pieces of chipped stone, fragments of
animal bone and, in places, notable remains of bur-
ning and charred wood.
In total, in all three levels of the necropolis, there
were four burials: in the older levels (1-2) there
were three burials - Burials 19, 21, 22; in the youn-
gest level (4) there was only one - Burial 23. Burials
were of two types: with the deceased lying supine in
an extended position oriented towards the Danube
(Burials 19 and 22); in a sitting position, which de-
manded more complex stone constructions. Usually,
the latter stone constructions and the burial remains
in them were less preserved. An older burial of this
kind comes from level 2 (Burial 21), and a younger
one from the final level 4 (Burial 3).
Burial concentration with domed stone con-
structions. Trench 6, block 2
Immediately beside the necropolis of elongated stone
construction, there was a burial zone with domed
stone constructions. They were constituted of a stone
ring, wider at its base, narrowing toward its top. In-
side these constructions, there were one or two bu-
rials in sitting positions with crossed legs - Burials
15 and 16 (two burials in the same stone construc-
tion); it is not absolutely clear about Burials 17 and
18, since the stone construction was damaged, al-
though the individual in Burial 17 was most likely
placed in a sitting position (Fig. 19). However, with-
in this group of burials there are also interments
placed in flexed positions and with their hands be-
low their heads: Burials 14 and 26. Domed-like bu-
rials were less frequent on the left bank of the Da-
nube; a good example is found in the mortuary re-
cord of the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of
Ostrovul Corbului; a burial of this type was discov-
ered there, and assigned to the Starčevo-Cri§ culture.
On the right bank of the Danube, at the sites of Kula
and Velesnica, burials in sitting positions were also
discovered. Kula was situated across the Mesolithic
site at Ostrovul Mare, and dated to its younger phase
(Kula II) was a burial in sitting position, covered
with a layer of split stones. Velesnica is situated in
the region of Ključ - in the vicinity of the Mesolithic
settlement at Ostrovul Corbului - and in the Early
Neolithic horizon of this multi-layered site, there
was a group burial with seven burials: one of the de-
ceased was buried in a sitting position; according
to the pottery found in association with this inter-
ment, the group burial was dated to the Early Neoli-
thic (the Starčevo-Cri§ culture) (Paunescu 1996.
177, Fig. 10; Sladic 1986.432; Vasic 1986.268, Figs.
15-16).
A larger number of this type of burials and their links
with the Lepenski Vir culture phase characterize the
right bank of the Upper Gorge. At Vlasac, in a dou-
ble Burial 16-17, one of the individuals was buried
in a sitting position: the long bones were crossed,
the spine was banded, and the skull was lying on
top of the pelvis; one could suppose a domed stone
construction here. The stratigraphic position of this
burial is in the early phase, Vlasac I. The date is in
the range 8286 to 7749 calBC at 95 per cent confi-
dence (Borić, French, Dimitrijević this volume Ta-
ble 1). At the site of Lepenski Vir, a burial of this
type was found in an undisturbed anatomical posi-
tion, with legs lying wide open, banded at the knees,
while the heels were touching. It is dated to Lepen-
ski Vir phase Ia (Srejović and Babović 1981.55-
56).
To some extent, Padina is an exception in this case:
burials with the deceased in sitting positions were
found in elongated stone constructions (Burials 18b,
21 and 23) and within the group of burials with
domed stone constructions (Burials 12, 15-16 and
17) (Fig. 19). Three of them have been radiocarbon
dated recently. AMS dates give a range of 9250 to
7960 calBC at 95 per cent confidence (for details see
Borić and Miracle 2004.348-357, Tabs. 1 and 5).
In total, there are 6 burials with the deceased in sit-
ting positions, which by far outnumbers burials of
this type from other sites. One notices very strict bu-
rial rites, with an emphasis on burying the dead with
stone constructions specially built for the purpose.
However, burial offerings were absent; burials in
pairs is not a strict rule, while all of these burials
faced the Danube.
Padina A1-2, A-B and B1-3. Architecture
As previously published works show, it is clear that
the Lepenski Vir culture is accepted and identified on
the basis of its peculiar architecture and ritual and
figurative artworks. Other categories of finds were
connected to the Epi-Palaeolithic/Mesolithic tradi-
tions. Hence the terminology of the Mesolithic-Neoli-
thic transition was applied to, at the time, the newly
discovered culture of the Danube Basin. The enigma-
tic question about contacts and the appearance of
the Lepenski Vir culture was in this way equated
with the Late Mesolithic of the Danube Gorges on
the one hand, and with the Starčevo-Cri§ pottery
complex, as the representative of the Early Neolithic
in the wider region, on the other.
To date, the published and debated evidence about
the architecture of the Lepenski Vir culture has been
primarily limited to building floors with recogniz-
able trapezoidal bases, built-in stone foundations,
stone artworks, which were grounded in the symbo-
lism of the Danube Gorges sandstone boulders of
specific colouration and different sizes.
Not much ink has been spilled on the fact that this
cultural phenomenon was confined within such a
small area of the gorges at the time of its flourish-
ing, exhibiting its exceptional stylistic and typolog-
ical features at only two known settlements in the
course of its entire development: Lepenski Vir and
Padina in the Upper Gorge of the Danube. Although
Padina was occasionally discussed when talking
about this specific phenomenon of the Middle Da-
nube Basin, there have been limitations due to de-
layed publishing of its rich corpus of finds and data.
This has limited the spectrum of evidence documen-
ted about the site during the 1968-1970 excava-
tions. To some extent, these limitations are being rec-
tified here. For instance, Sector III at Padina offers a
unique possibility to fill in the gaps in our knowl-
edge of the Lepenski Vir architecture, both with re-
gard to building techniques as well as the organiza-
tion of the settlement.
Built along the steep cliffs of the Gorge, the settle-
ments of the Lepenski Vir culture at the eponymous
site and at Padina were built in parallel rows, one
higher than the other, forming stepped terraces.
Such was the layout of Padina after excavations.
However, it was necessary to establish the stratigra-
phic relationship between different living horizons,
with complex distribution - previously unknown
buildings characterized by dug-in bases of trapezoi-
dal shape (example of House 12, middle row, phase
B-2) (Figs. 21, 22, 23). Rows of such buildings placed
parallel to the Danube were the main stratigraphic
features with a contemporaneous existence. One pos-
sibility is that each row was inhabited during the
same period as a single settlement horizon, while
the older horizon was abandoned and littered with
the residue of the settlement (Fig. 20). In the follo-
wing, we discuss the function of Houses 13, 15, 17,
and 18 from the younger and middle rows of the
Lepenski Vir culture settlement at Sector III, chosen
due to their position, size, architectural details and
artefacts found in situ.
House 13. Middle row. Profile III, segment 2
It is unnecessary to repeat the main construction de-
tails of this and other buildings described here, since
these are common to the whole architectural tradi-
tion. It is more useful to discuss specific, i.e. local
construction details. House 13, for instance, was the
only building at Padina with its rear zone limited by
blocks of rock placed vertically, similar to a massive
stone wall. Bringing such large rocks (1.50m-
0.80m), which probably originated from the cliffs
that overhang the costal zone, must have depended
on developed engineering skills. The configuration
of the terrain at this site excludes any ritual func-
tion for such a dry wall in the back of the building -
House 13 had, in fact, a stone dam as protection
against the torrential brook that ran down the hill
into the Danube, and that also impacted House 18,
which will be mentioned later. Hence the protective
role of this rocky dam: preventing flooding, washing
out or destruction of the building, similar to the
problem that caused the destruction of House 3 at
Sector I (Figs. 16 and 21).
House 18. Trench 5, block 1 - Trench 6, block 2
With regard to this building, it was most important
to establish the time of its abandonment, which
might have been caused by the torrential brook or
preceded this event. The base of this building was
completely preserved, its complete inventory was
found in situ, which was rare for the settlements of
the Lepenski Vir culture at Sector III. House 18 was
also one of the youngest buildings in this row (B3)
and certainly indicates the end of the use of this set-
tlement (Fig. 27); on the floor of the building a group
of pots was found which were typologically differ-
ent from the typical Starčevo-Cri§ pottery found in
other buildings (with the exception of House 15 in
the same row), in the occupation layer or middens
of the costal zone.
It seems that the torrential brook took the inhabi-
tants by surprise, but was not the only reason for
the abandonment of this settlement. It seems that
the abandonment of this building marks much larg-
er changes in the traditional economic system, such
as a decline in demand for fish from the Danube, es-
pecially of anadromous fish, such as beluga and
other species of Acipenseridae, or other large fish
species that were fished by collective efforts. Thus,
the abandonment of House 18, i.e. its youngest set-
tling horizon, certainly was not sparked by a sudden
disappearance of these species, since up until the
hydroelectric dams Đerdap I and II were built, the
whole region was famous for fishing on these spe-
cies.
In stratigraphic terms, House 18 cut the front of
House 17, built on higher terrain (0.30m-0.40m),
hence its lower position is an exception to the rule
of building the Lepenski Vir culture settlements -
younger buildings always being on higher terrain.
The exception to this rule must have been related to
the lack of adequate space in the given area; shifting
House 18 to the lower position exposed it to the tor-
rential brook. Being positioned on loessic sand,
House 18 could not have been supported by a wall
of massive stone blocks like House 13.
In front of wider side of House 18, i.e. in front of its
entrance, there was a preserved part of the floor,
partly levelled by gravels and small size split stone,
like a porch of some kind. The buildings of the se-
cond row, and to some extent those of the first hori-
zon, or at least some of them, could also have had a
similar paved porch, thus giving horizontal access to
the building, as some kind of narrow platform that
was cut into the layer of loessic sand (Figs. 16 and
17).
House 15. Trench 5, block 2
The entrance area with the porch is clearly visible
in the case of this building, similar in its construc-
tion to House 18. What distinguishes this building
from other buildings is a completely preserved cut
for the building, with dug-in sides that were almost
vertical, and with a carefully levelled, trapezoidal
floor, along with the massive rectangular built-in
hearth. There is an exception in this building when
it comes to the construction of the hearth. The longer
massive stone slab was found slanting on the side of
the hearth, as thrown into the hearth; it might have
served various functions. There is also a large block
of rock in this building with a slanting flat surface in
the back of the building. The stone might have ser-
ved as a firm construction element for the longitu-
dinal beam of a gabled roof with the necessary incli-
nation. Pots found on the floor of House 15 were
few, and were typologically similar to those found in
House 18 (Figs. 16, 26, 28).
House 17. Trench 5, block 1
The floor construction of this building, in the youn-
gest settlement horizon at Sector III, was carefully
furnished, while the building can be connected to a
special sacred/sacrificial function. At the bottom of a
funnel-shaped pit (depth from the floor level 0.50m),
an oval stone slab was placed as a lid of some sort,
while underneath it, a carefully manufactured ellip-
soidal stone altar with a shallow receptacle and a
draining lip (0.35m by 0.20m) was found. Similar to
other cult places in the settlement, at this place there
were neither visible traces of ritual offerings nor
animal bones. Remains of burning and charcoal were
not very prominent here, which is clear judging by
the absence of ash and soil burning. A ritual rite de-
dicated to a particular divinity might have been sym-
bolic. House 17 was also abandoned without any vi-
sible traces of violent or hasty abandonment. Yet the
inventory of finds discovered on the floor of this
building is quite modest (Figs. 16 and 24).
Padina B1 - 3. Sector III. Settlement organiza-
tion
The settlement of the Lepenski Vir culture at Sector
III is not found on top of a previous settlement as
was the case with contemporaneous trapezoidal
buildings at Sector I. However, this could be related
to the loss of settlement space due to the erosion
caused by the Danube. This was the reason test tren-
ches were dug in the costal zone in order to check
the possibility of the existence of the oldest horizon
in the settlement. In the immediate vicinity of the
excavation area (1968-1970), using a sandy ridge
formed during the low water table, Trench 3, Sec-
tor 3 was excavated to a depth of 2.50m, when un-
derground water was reached. This showed that the
slope of the terrace was significantly steeper at the
time of the duration of this settlement than at the
time of the excavation. This conclusion was also con-
firmed by a limited number of Early Neolithic finds
in this zone, putting the boundary of the prehistoric
coastal zone 15-20m toward the Danube from the
riverbank profile encountered in the 1960s.
It is clear that the width of this zone was irregular,
depending on the topography, although it is possi-
ble to assume that approximately one third of the
settlement of Sector III was lost. Such an estimate
could be supported on the basis of the current cos-
tal profile, with a cross-section of the bases of trape-
zoidal buildings in the middle row (B2), while the
bases of the first, and the oldest, row of buildings
were covered by layers of sand which accumulated
when the water table of the Danube was high, i.e.
during inundations.
The organization of the settlement space at Sector
III during the Lepenski Vir culture phase was not de-
pendent on the complex of necropolises, which
were significantly older than this settlement, or on
the preceding phase of contacts with the Early Neo-
lithic groups, since the space where we might have
had such traces is now covered by the Danube. What
survived was a settlement from the time of the de-
veloped Lepenski Vir culture, with three rows of ty-
pical buildings. This settlement was gradually built
up. It is realistic to suppose that the main settlement
horizon (B2) was connected with the buildings of
the older phase (B1), during which the preparations
for the building of a new row of buildings was anti-
cipated (B3) (Fig. 28).
The middle row of buildings on the settlement plan
contained Houses 11-15/1 (in total 5 floors); the
older, lower horizon contained Houses 5-10 (in to-
tal 6 floors) (Fig. 25). One can notice that the mid-
dle row is reduced by one building (6:5), although
it is advanced on the basis of a new architectural de-
tail that was introduced at the time: A-frames placed
asymmetrically over the hearth. This reduction in
the number of buildings continues, if one compares
the middle row of buildings (B2) with the latest,
higher row (B3), which was also reduced by one
building (5:4), since the space for building was nar-
rowed. The conclusion that the settlement space pre-
viously used went out of use at this time, and even
stopped being visible during the latest horizon (B3),
is based on the existence of an exceptionally large
midden zone (c. 28m by 6.5m), covering the middle
and older parts of the settlement, reaching up to the
very platforms of Houses 15 and 18. The thickness
of the midden was uneven, and it was formed by a
gradual accumulation of residues from each higher
level of buildings (Fig. 16). This explains why no
rubbish pits were found at the sectors of Padina.
This role was taken up by the costal zone (with the
zone of the abandoned settlement horizon) and high
waters of the Danube. The most important palaeo-
zoologial and ichthiological finds from Padina (for
the settlement of the Lepenski Vir culture) were
found in this particular stratigraphic feature. The
scarcity of finds from the contact phase is understan-
dable, since these were probably washed out by the
Danube at Padina, in this way deepening the enig-
ma about the appearance/disappearance of the Le-
penski Vir culture.
Padina. Sectors I-III. Pottery and the chronol-
ogy of the Lepenski Vir culture
Pottery is not often found within closed contexts in
the Lepenski Vir phase buildings at Padina, despite
the small settlement area and density of finds with-
in the buildings. Therefore, we focus on the disco-
very of circumstances and contexts of those finds
and not on the typological or chronological schemes
based on pottery. There are only two, quantitative-
ly different groups of pottery finds. The first type
of pottery comes from the cultural layer, including
middens, and the second, much smaller, from buil-
dings, hearths and burials. Traditionally, most atten-
tion has been paid to the Starčevo-Cri§ pottery from
the Lepenski Vir settlements, mostly representative
vessels, which are even more scarce than the second
group of finds (Budja 1999.134-35; 2007.50, Figs.
31, 32, 33, 34, 35).
However, the first group of pottery finds is surpri-
singly large in number, even if it is compared to
the assemblages from the Early Neolithic sites from
the middle Danube area. But formal analogies do
not imply that the pottery is the same, as pottery
from the Upper Gorges sites represents a distinctive
variant of the Starčevo-Cri§ complex. This pottery is
robust and poorly made. Vessels of large dimensions
are common; monochrome pottery of better quality
is rare, while the painted pottery is almost absent.
At Padina, this last technique of ornamentation is
completely missing. On the other hand, decoration
of the outer surface of the vessel by pinching and
impressing is the dominant method of decoration
from the beginning to the end, when it becomes less
common. Typical Starčevo ornamentation techniques
such as combing, relief furrowing and the applica-
tion of wet clay (barbotine) is completely absent
(Borić 1990.49-53).
The stratigraphic position of concentrations of pot-
tery within the cultural layer is uncertain, due to
the formation of large middens upslope. Like on hill-
forts, large fragments tend to move down slope,
where they cover abandoned parts of the settlement.
An important issue when discussing the emergence
and the development of the Iron Gates variant of
Early Neolithic pottery is to locate its production.
There is now evidence for local production at Padi-
na (at Sector I, block Ib), but only after the contact
phase. The same can be said, at least in principle, for
chipped and polished stone tools, especially at Sec-
tor III (Fig. 29).
Padina. Sectors I-III. 14C dates and their corre-
lations with stratigraphy
A series of 14C dates from several laboratories have
been obtained for samples from Padina over the
years, and due the publication of new AMS dates
from Padina and Hajdučka Vodenica, we present the
full list here. We stress the context of samples and
their correlation with the stratigraphy of the settle-
ment.
O The first contradictions between the stratigraphy
of building horizons at Padina and corresponding
14C dates (from 1978 and without calibration which
was performed subsequently) were caused by the
inverse relative chronology, where younger horizons
were defined as the oldest:
GRN-8229; 6570 ± 55 BP; 5630-5380 calBC at 95
per cent confidence (charred wood, the hearth from
House 8, Sector III, Profile 3);
GRN-7981: 7100±80 BP; 6160-5780 calBC at 95 per
cent confidence (cultural layer, Sector III, Trench 6,
block 1 [phase B3]);
GRN-7981: 7075 ±50 BP; 6030-5800 calBC at 95
per cent confidence (charred wood, House 15, Sec-
tor III, Trench 5, block 2 [phase B3]).
This contradiction was later attributed to the conta-
mination of samples due to the middens. A large vo-
lume of the midden material affected the samples,
while middens were also post-depositionaly distur-
bed by flash floods.
Obtained dates can be arranged in two intervals -
the first half of the 6th millennium for phase B3, and
the second half and end of the 7th millennium for
phase B2 (Borić and Miracle 2004.345).
A part of the same sample of charred wood from the
floor of House 8 (B1) was dated to 7065 ± 110 BP;
6105-5725 calBC at 95 per cent confidence, which
is approximately contemporary with the date GrN-
8229. This unpublished analysis was carried out by
the University of Minnesota (USA) in 1974. Absolute
dates for House 9 (B1), situated immediately adja-
cent to House 8, is according to the date of the sam-
ple from the floor calibrated in the range 6410-
6090 calBC at 95 per cent confidence (Canis famil-
iaris, 0xA-9056), which puts the date for phase B1
(according to its stratigraphical priority) in the ex-
pected place. House 9 is therefore dated to the mid-
dle and second half of the 7th millennium BC (Borić
and Miracle 2004.346).
© Temporal interval between Houses 15, 17 and 18
of the youngest dwelling horizon, Sector III, Trench
5-6 (B3).
Houses 18 and 15
OxA-9052, floor of House 18 (deer antler, Cervus
elaphus): 6965 ± 60 BP; 5990-5720 calBC at 95 per
cent confidence.
OxA-9054, under House 15 (Mammalia, worked
bone): 6790 ± 55 BP; 5780-5560 calBC at 95 per
cent confidence.
The absolute temporal gap between both houses,
which is between 210 and 160 calendar years, sug-
gests that they are more or less contemporary, which
confirms the stratigraphic relationships recognized
during the excavations (Borić and Miracle 2004.
347).
Houses 17 and 18
OxA-11103, from the hearth of House 17 (Mam-
malia, bone tool): 7315 ± 55 BP; 6250-6025 calBC
at 95 per cent confidence.
Absolute temporal gap between both houses from the
same horizon, B3, which is between 305 and 260 ca-
lendar years. This confirms the stratigraphical rela-
tion between houses, where the floor of House 17
was cut during the construction of House 18. The que-
stion remains as to whether they are really separated
by three centuries (Borić and Miracle 2004. 347).
Two chronological terminus, related to the
base of House 18
OxA-9052. House 18 (red deer antler, Cervus ela-
phus): 5990-5720 calBC at 95 per cent confidence.
OxA-9053. House 18 (under the house floor/Canis
familiaris): 6440-6210 calBC at 95 per cent confi-
dence.
The age difference of both samples corresponds to
their stratigraphical position. However, the interval
between dates seems to be too large, almost half a
millennium (450-490 calendar years). It is possible
that the sample of Canis familiaris belongs to the
Late Mesolithic phase, which in turn leads us to dis-
cuss the age of dog domestication at Padina (Borić
and Miracle 2004.346).
Age difference between Burial 11, under the
floor of House 15 and the base of this building
OxA-11104. Burial 11, under the floor of House 15
(Sector III, Trench 5, block 2): 9360-8920 calBC at
95 per cent confidence.
OxA-9054 (Mammalia, worked bone): 5780-5560
calBC at 95 per cent confidence.
These dates are separated by three millennia. Igno-
ring the issue of the acceptability of this difference,
we can observe that the pit for Burial 11 could not
have been cut during the existence of House 15. Bu-
rial 11 is located 0.6m below the building floor,
which together with the depth for the cut made for
the building floor (0.65m) amounts to 1.25m. This is
significantly deeper than the depth of burials next
to the stone structure of the Late Mesolithic necropo-
lis in test Trenches 6 and 7 of the same sector. This
is similar to the case of Burial 13 under House 18,
which was interred before the building was con-
structed. As the radiocarbon dates indicate, Burial
11 is older than House 18. The large age difference
can be provisionally explained by the early settling
of the local Late Mesolithic population of the Danube
Gorges (Borićand Miracle 2004.Tab. 3 and5; Bon-
sall at al. 2002/3. Figs. 3-4).
Burials 1a and 2. Sector 1, Trench 1, blocks 1
and 1b
Burial 1a is greatly disturbed, only the bones of lo-
wer extremities were preserved. Their position indi-
cates an unusual position of the body, which was po-
sitioned supine (test Trench 1, block 1). However, in
the photograph published by Boric and Miracle
(2004.Fig. 4) instead of Burial 1a, Burial 2 (test
Trench 1, block 1b) is shown, located next to the Le-
penski Vir culture House 2. This is due to the misla-
belling of the photograph of this burial in Živanovic
(1973-1974) that Boric and Miracle used in their
paper. However, the stratigraphic position of both
burials puts them in the contact phase or the earli-
est stage of the Lepenski Vir culture (B1) (Fig. 5).
The comparisons of 14C dates with the stratigraph-
ic evidence from Padina does not end with these
examples, and it remains important to provide an
adequate correspondence between these sets of evi-
dence as one of the key issues in the study of the
Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic settlements at Pa-
dina and the Upper Gorges.
Padina I-III. The Lepenski Vir culture
The study of the stratigraphic relationships of the
Mesolithic settlements of the Lepenski Vir culture is
focused on those parts of the cultural layer, occupa-
tion surfaces and features that were spared post-de-
positional disturbances caused by erosion or the mo-
vement of material from middens in areas outside
the living settlement zone. This approach has
brought new ideas about the appearance of settle-
ments, based on the excavated area with the hori-
zontal and vertical arrangement of trapezoidal buil-
dings with stone constructions on the inner sides of
their cuts. These entities are composed of past occu-
pation surfaces, positioned on terraced surfaces out-
side the areas exposed to flood hazards caused by
the Danube and away from torrent streams coming
down the slopes of the Gorges. Building horizons ex-
cavated at the Sectors I and II provide a good exam-
ple of their primary function on which the organiza-
tion of the settlement is based, by adapting to the
specific environment. Thus, there is a symbiosis be-
tween the natural environment and the technology
for extracting particular resources.
People were making very selective choices about
where to settle in the Upper Gorges in the Late Meso-
lithic, sometimes even inconsistently in the choice
of suitable locations, as some less favorable locations
were selected. However, as a general rule, settle-
ments were located in the vicinity of whirlpools (Le-
penski Vir, Gospođin Vir), or in the vicinity of rapids
and cataracts (Greben near Vlasac), usually located
downstream from a particular settlement. The hos-
pitable riverbank at Sector IV at Padina, from the
fossil Gospođin Vir at Sector III to the outlet of the
Cezava River was not settled, nor was the river bank
between Stubica and Padina. However, it should be
stressed that the shallow coves of Padina's sectors
were located along the last rapids of the Gospođin
Vir whirlpool.
These locations were suitable for collective fishing
focused on large fish. The presence of large Euro-
pean sturgeon, which weighed around 200 kg and
was up to 5m in length, was attested by ichthyologi-
cal analyses of fish bones from Padina (Brinkhui-
zen 1986.18). However, no fish hooks were found
at Padina. Bone fish hooks present in riverine set-
tlements can often be the evidence of organized fish-
ing. Therefore, we must assume the use of fish nets
and traps at these locations, where similar fishing
techniques were used until the construction of the
Iron Gates dam.
Fishing in the course of the Lepenski Vir culture is
an interesting issue. The cultural development of
communities was based on the exploitation of cer-
tain natural resources with a highly developed spe-
cialized technology, which resulted in unique cultu-
ral expressions. We will only briefly touch upon
these phenomena. One of the more general points
about the essence of the Lepenski Vir culture is that
its uniqueness can be connected directly with the
transformation of the Late Mesolithic populations
into the communities of the first producers of food
in the area.
If we observe the whole process of transformation
outside the existing classificatory schemes, we can
note that Mesolithic populations were already in-
volved in a system of production, fishing the large
seasonal migratory Acipenseridae, which was very
similar to food production. A careful consideration
of the material and religious superstructure of these
early communities before the adoption of farming
may indicate constant efforts at achieving the stage
of a food-producing economy. The moment of aban-
doning the millennia-long tradition of hunting and
gathering at Lepenski Vir and Padina was preserved
by chance.
Hajducka Vodenica, Mali Kazan (Lower Gorge)
The prehistoric site of Hajdučka Vodenica is located
in the Lower Gorge of the Danube (Mali Kazan) and
consists of two locations: the settlement in the cen-
tre of a large semicircular depression below the Mali
Štrbac mountain massif, while the necropolis was lo-
cated beside the Danube to the west. However, nei-
ther of these two locations have been extensively re-
searched or studied, despite large-scale systematic
excavations between 1965 and 1969. Hypothetically,
the settlement might have been situated in the mid-
dle of the cove, near a large spring. This water source
was strong enough to run a wooden mill, hence the
name of Hajdučka Vodenica (meaning Hajduk's mill
or outlaw's mill).
The construction of Roman and Byzantine settle-
ments, which were parts of the Danube limes, signi-
ficantly disturbed the earlier Early Neolithic settle-
ment. The construction of a guardhouse in the mid-
dle of the last century further demolished the site.
The rescue excavations revealed a large quantity of
residual Starčevo pottery, redeposited in the foun-
dations of the Roman rampart, and discovered a ne-
cropolis of the Lepenski Vir culture that was located
at the western entrance to the Mali Kazan Gorge (Fig.
36). The site can be described as a necropolis, more
so on the basis its purpose than on the basis of its
contents. There were complex architectural elements
and stone constructions, previously unknown in the
Iron Gates and in the wider region.
Due to significant post-depositional destruction of
the cultural layer here, similar to other sites in the
Danube Gorges, it is very difficult to provide a de-
tailed description of this feature of the Lepenski Vir
culture. The location of the sacrificial feature was
identified due to a large slide from the riverbank
profile. Test trenches dug at this spot revealed a tan-
gle of stone constructions full of charcoal, ash, bur-
ned soil, washed out human bones, and finally bu-
rials. The site could be characterized initially as both
a settlement and a necropolis, although we are still
seeking a more detailed description (for details, see
Jovanović 2004.58; Fig. 4).
Whilst clearly differing from other necropolises of
the Lepenski Vir culture in the Upper Gorge, Hajduč-
ka Vodenica belongs to the same tradition. Firstly,
here, no clear relations between the settlement and
the necropolis can be established. There are some
similarities between the oldest building horizon at
Hajdučka Vodenica and other sites. This oldest hori-
zon consists of chaotically distributed hearths on a
flattened living floor, which are not on the same le-
vel as the building horizons. These hearths were ori-
ented in different directions, mainly with the nar-
row side facing the Danube. Sometimes stone pla-
ques covered these constructions made of vertically
placed stone blocks, crudely worked. There were vi-
sible traces of burning, sometimes on the edges of
the hearth construction in the form of a strip of bur-
ning, which could indicate that such hearths were
covered with a dome of some kind. Hearths were not
damaged, but had been abandoned long enough to
be covered by a layer of intense black colour contai-
ning organic remains. Lithic and stone tools were ge-
nerally absent from this layer, reduced only to a few
cores, debitage, and massive stone tools such as an-
vils and hammers (Figs. 48 and 49; Horizon 1).
This contrasts with the abundance of bone tools
found in horizon 1, such as points, awls, chisels,
scrapers, projectiles and small hoes made from ant-
ler. No pottery was found in this horizon. Moreover,
this horizon was excavated at the depth of 0.8-1m
below the current level of the Danube. Therefore the
expanse of the founder horizon at this settlement,
which perhaps might have been attributed to an un-
articulated phase of the Lepenski Vir culture, remains
completely unknown (Figs. 52, 53, 54; Horizon 1).
Above this, a new cultural layer was deposited which
is characterized by a completely new building tech-
nique: it begins with piling large stone constructions;
large, split stones were used and arranged more or
less horizontally, consisting of groups, circles and ir-
regular heaps at particular locations. Bone tools are
also present here, as well as traces of burning, and
sporadic burials that were interred within the stone
constructions. The deceased were placed in extended
positions and were differently oriented, although the
general orientation was made in relation to the Da-
nube. Thus building activities using the same tem-
plate continued, forming four horizons of roughly
piled stone. There was an unexpected exception
here. In horizon 2, a small feature was built resem-
bling a model of a classic building of the Lepenski
Vir culture. However, it was constructed on an un-
even, rocky surface, where it was not possible to
identify the floor level or even less the floor. This
structure had a rectangular hearth, covered by a
stone slab, and with an accompanying aniconic boul-
der (Figs. 49, 50, 51; Horizon 2).
The dry stone wall, which was 2.0-4.0m wide, was
almost 2.0m high, with vertical and very stable sides,
with no traces of tear, except some later erosion cau-
sed by the Danube, which covered the earliest phase
with hearths in a thick layer of sand (Figs. 44, 45,
46, 47, 48).
In the last two horizons of the stone feature, Early
Neolithic Starčevo-Cri§ pottery appears. Here one
finds fragments of large, crudely made and mono-
chrome vessels, which predominate; mainly bowls
and pots-amphorae were present. Pottery was obvi-
ously broken at specifically chosen locations, since
fragments were not uniformly distributed at the le-
vel of the construction, but were found in piles and
associated with traces of burning (Figs. 44, 45; Ho-
rizon 3-4).
All the above could indicate a new type of sacrificial
construction in the burial ritual of the early phases
of the Lepenski Vir culture. Downstream from the
stone constructions, builders set apart a special area,
clearly planned in advance. In the stratigraphic
sense, this is a secondary shift of the sacrificial al-
tar, which would be in the tradition of the Lepenski
Vir culture, although the feature in itself is slightly
different from this tradition (Fig. 37).
The first construction of a narrow and long hearth,
with elongated lateral sides, was carried out on the
level of loessic sand, based on preserved foundation
ditches. Similar to the construction technique in the
horizon with rectangular hearths in the zone of stone
constructions, long and large stone slabs were in-
serted in the foundation trenches here. The immedi-
ate area around this hearth remains unknown, al-
though it is certain that on both sides of this first
hearth burial rites were performed, connected with
the burials found in the cultural layer (Figs. 38, 43).
The hearth was accompanied by an older boulder of
green volcanic stone, the surface of which was chan-
nelled by narrow flutings, which form an ornamen-
tal motif distantly related to patterns found on the
boulders of Lepenski Vir (Srejović and Letica 1983.
Fig. 27) (Fig. 55).
After some time, the space around the sacrificial
hearth was filled in and the whole construction was
moved back, away from the river bank. A burial
chamber, cut deep into the layer of flowstone be-
tween two ridges which ran into the Danube, was
extended further (dimensions 7.5 x 4.0m, Fig. 41).
A new hearth was built, no longer rectangular, but
in a funnel-like shape, with a narrow channel along
one of its lateral sides. There can be no doubt about
its function - it is a conduit for liquid, which does
not come immediately from the sacrificial altar, but
accumulates at the end of the channel. The design of
this type is unknown among the hearths of the Le-
penski Vir culture (Figs. 38, 39, 42).
The time lapse between the older and younger sac-
rificial hearths is evident in the basis of the change
in style of decorating the boulder associated with
the younger hearth. It is a sandstone boulder, with
some anthropomorphic details (Srejović and Letica
1983; Antonović 2004.73-74) (Fig. 56).
The floor, built on both sides of the hearth (6.0 x
2.5m), does not respect the symmetry of the con-
struction - with the hearth on the main axis - which
is one of the main construction rules of the Lepenski
Vir culture. The part of the floor that was upstream
the Danube from the location of the hearth was twice
as large in comparison to the one on the opposite
side; the floor even partly covered the hearth and
was on the same level with two stone slabs. The
first, a massive rectangular slab, functioned as the
threshold, while the other one, much narrower,
leads to the hearth. There is no ash place, as both
stone slabs were located where the ash place is
usually found. The hearth might not have been con-
structed for keeping a continuing fire, but for special
(cult), periodic events (Fig. 39).
Some burials (Burial 11 and partial remains of other
burials, Figs. 38, 39, 40) were located below the ho-
rizon with hearths, in a layer of dark earth with con-
siderable quantities of charcoal.
The burial chamber extends directly from the sacri-
ficial hearth. Here, a large number of bodies were
buried in single, double or multiple burials, in the
extended position, parallel to the Danube, with the
heads pointing downstream (Roksandić 2000.37-
38). In the latest horizon, burials were covered by
stone plaques, and the whole feature was abando-
ned. It was preserved until the excavation, with both
sculpted boulders accordingly in association with
the hearths to which they belonged.
We have no answer to the question about the popu-
lation which maintained this as well as other ritual
constructions for such a long period. Preliminary
comparisons can be made with Hajdučka Vodenica,
Vlasac (Borić, French, Dimitrijević this volume) and
Padina A-B during the contact phase. For example,
the long hearth from this phase at Padina (approxi-
mately 1.50m x 0.50m in Sector I, segment 2-3) is
the only example of the elongation of lateral sides
of the hearth.
These similarities are related to the earliest phase in
the formation of the Lepenski Vir culture, namely
with the first material evidence of the contact phase.
They demonstrate the influence of local traditions in
the process of accepting the sedentary life-style and
food production. The strong presence of the Lower
Danube variant of Starčevo culture, with important
settlements found distributed down from Kladovo
to Prahova and to the mouth of the Timok River,
should be taken into consideration when discus-
sing the process of transformations at Hajdučka Vo-
denica. On the other hand, there are no reliable data
on the fate of the destroyed settlement with Starče-
vo pottery found in the middle part of the Hajdučka
Vodenica cove. Such pottery was also found in hori-
zons 3 and 4, with elongated stone constructions of
the necropolis.
Hajdučka Vodenica necropolis, radiocarbon
dates - correlations with the stratigraphic po-
sition of burials
A series of 4 AMS dates from Hajdučka Vodenica date
4 burials from the necropolis with the sacrificial
construction (Borić and Miracle 2004.346, Tab. 3;
for OxA-13613 this replaces previously published
OxA-11128 see Borić et al. 2004.Tab. 3). They be-
long to different levels of this construction:
© OxA-13613. Burial 8: 7076-6699 calBC at 95 per
cent confidence. One of the oldest double burials
cut into loess, at the south-east corner of the founda-
tion trench of the first sacrificial hearth. The body
was placed supine with arms crossed, parallel to the
Danube, elevation ▼ 46.86m.
© OxA-11127. Burial 12: 6500-6230 calBC at 95
per cent confidence. The burial was placed directly
on the floor next to the sacrificial hearth, after the
sacrificial hearth had been abandoned. Here, one
again finds a double Burial (12 and 9): both skele-
tons were fully articulated, elevation ▼ 47.74m.
© OxA-11109. Burial 20: 6440-6090 calBC at 95
per cent confidence. The burial was placed in the ex-
tension of the burial chamber and belonged to a
group burial (Burials 17, 17a, 18, 19), elevation ▼
48.14m.
© OxA-11126. Burial 15: 6470-6230 calBC at 95
per cent confidence. This burial was covered with
stone constructions and belonged to the burials of
the second, younger horizon, elevation ▼ 48.54m.
The elevation of the excavated area of the site lo-
cated on the riverbank is ▼ 48.86m, which makes a
height difference of 3.32m, exactly the height of the
section above the construction of the necropolis.
The deposition of the scree hill-wash can be attribu-
ted to the time interval between the abandonment
of the site and our excavations. This thick deposits
contributed to the preservation of the cultural layer
and stone constructions.
AMS dates suggest two chronological horizons of the
necropolis. The older belongs to the beginning of
the 7th millennium BC (Burial 8), while the younger
can be dated to the middle and second half of the
7th millennium BC. In other words, there may be a
temporal gap of several hundred years in the use of
the necropolis. Both sacrificial structures are clearly
related, and the renovation of the younger necropo-
lis continues from the use of the older.
Discussion of the date of the construction of the first
sacrificial structure is hindered by the lack of analo-
gous features from other areas. Certain architectu-
ral analogies with the contact phases of Vlasac and
Padina point to the middle and the second half of
the 7th millennium BC (Borić, French, Dimitrijević
this volume). We must also consider the amount of
work put into the construction of massive stone
structures layered one on top of the other. In this
way, a monumental stone structure was built, the
dimensions of which can only be guessed at. The ap-
pearance of Early Neolithic pottery in the third and
the fourth horizons of the stone structure places the
whole (sacral?) settlement in the formation phase of
the Lepenski Vir culture.
Conclusions
The results of the systematic excavations of Padina
and Hajdučka Vodenica have been concisely presen-
ted here. However, since these views are very dis-
tant from the time of the initial excavations, they
are viewed through the lenses of several decades of
research and interpretation of the the Lepenski Vir
culture. The issues presented here are the result of
heterogeneous strands of evidence in the present
knowledge of the Lepenski Vir culture, which has for
a long time served as a model for the Neolithisation
of the frontier area on the Danube. This discussion,
based on facts and finds gathered from Padina and
Hajdučka Vodenica, actually announces their immi-
nent monographic publication.
If Padina is taken as a point of departure, then the
issue was the difficulty of establishing the relative
chronological position of the material from Sectors I
and III in relation to other settlements of the Lepen-
ski Vir culture.
Sector I was first thought to be chronologically older,
as its closed assemblages are typical of the blooming
of the traditional elements of this culture, while the
considerably larger settlement at Sector III, organi-
cally incorporated into the known scheme of rows
of buildings with trapezoidal floors, is distinguished
by a unique find - a closed assemblage of pottery
from the floor of the latest House 18. This assem-
blage has no stylistic or formal similarities with Star-
čevo-Cri§ pottery; it is more similar to an unexpected
phenomenon of the "Proto-Vinča pottery", with black
burnished or grey vessels, of rather biconic than
spherical forms, together with the entire absence of
ornamental styles of classic Starčevo-Cri§ produc-
tion. After the abandonment of this building in the
final phase (B-3) of the settlement, Padina was not
settled. In that sense, Sector I rather indicates the
origin of this culture in the Late Mesolithic of the Da-
nube Gorges and in the subsequent contact phase
(A-B).
It is impossible to define precisely the bearers of
these changes and the range of relationships that
might have existed between the older sedentary
(static) community in this region and newcomers,
i.e. expanding Early Neolithic populations. However,
the community of the Lepenski Vir culture might
have been complex in make-up:
•	the generation from downstream areas of Danube
Gorges that was first exposed to contacts and be-
came familiar with Early Neolithic sedentary
groups who established settlements in the Ključ
and Oltenia.
•	the generation from the Lower Gorges of the Da-
nube, for example from Hajdučka Vodenica, might
have experienced the first melting of populations
and the appearance of 'interbreeding' through
biological reproduction or merely through the dif-
fusion of the experience or knowledge of the Early
Neolithic cultures.
•	the generation from the Upper Gorges forms a
new indigenous lifestyle based on interbreeding
with incoming Early Neolithic populations. This
generation lived to see the end of the Lepenski
Vir culture, when its specific ways of fishing were
declining as the primary food procurement stra-
tegy.
If we accept this outline as a point of departure for
further discussion, then the process of transforma-
tion consisted of a mosaic of micro-processes depen-
dent on the production stage of individual commu-
nities.
Outside the Danube Gorges, there were no condi-
tions for the existence of the Lepenski Vir popula-
tion sensu stricto. All the elements of this culture
originated from the gorges during the phase of con-
tact: the organization of settlements and unification
of the big river cult, which countered the agricultu-
ral fertility cult. In this way, the respect for the 'deity
of fertility of the water world' is a response to the
adoration of the 'Magna Mater' of the Early Neolithic
agriculturists. Instead of sacral areas in Starčevo-Cri§
dwellings, in the buildings of the Lepenski Vir cul-
ture, the rear area of the hearths of trapezoidal buil-
dings was appropriated with sacrificial pits covered
by sacred boulders.
The history of the Lepenski Vir culture after the
abandonment of its settlement remains unclear, es-
pecially of Lepenski Vir and Padina. If the buildings
were left desolate, the good preservation of their
floors and the household inventories is surprising.
How can we explain that anthropomorphic, fishlike
deities at Lepenski Vir were concentrated in one of
the buildings ('sanctuary XLIV'), placed in two rows,
facing each other, where they awaited the excava-
tors? It is more likely that one relatively scarce,
mixed population of fishermen, hunters and proba-
bly even cattle breeders, already accepting the new
mode of sedentary, Early Neolithic lifestyle, peace-
fully abandoned their previous environmental zone.
While the locations of previous settlements were
still respected, they remained without visible traces
of seasonal camps, until the Late Eneolithic, when
Kostolac and Cotofeni settlements appear in the Iron
Gates Gorges.
REFERENCES
ANTONOVIC D. 2004. Stone Objects from Padina and Haj-
dučka vodenica. Late Foragers and Early Farmers of the Le-
penski vir - Schela Cladovei Culture in the Iron Gates Gor-
ges. Acts of The XIVth UISPP Congress. Liege 2001, BAR
International Series 1302. Archaeopress. Oxford: 69-75.
BANFFY E. 2004. The 6th Millennium BC Boundary in
Western Transdanubia and its Role in the Ventral Euro-
pean Neolithic Transition (The Szentgyörgyvölgy-Pityer-
dombSettleme. Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 15. Pub-
licationes Instituti Archaeologici Academiae Scientiarum
Hungaricae Budapestini. Budapest.
BONSAL C., MACKLIN G. M., PAYTON R. W., BORONEANT
A. 2002. Climate, floors and river gods: environmental
change and the Meso - Neolithic in Southeast Europe. Be-
fore Farming 3-4 (2): 1-15.
BORIC D. 1999. Places that created time in the Danube Gor-
ges and beyond c. 9000 - 5500 BC. In M. Budja (ed.), 4th
Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica 24:41- 70.
BORIC D. and MIRACLE T. P. 2004. Mesolithic and Neoli-
thic (dis)continuities in the Danube Gorges: New AMS
dates from Padina and Hajdučka vodenica (Serbia). Ox-
ford Journal of Archaelogy 23(4): 341-371.
BORIC D., GRUPE G., PETERS J. and MIKIC Ž. 2004. Is the
Mesolithic-Neolithic subsistence dichotomy real? New sta-
ble isotope evidence from the Danube Gorges. European
Journal of Archaeology 7(3): 221-248.
BRINKHUIZEN D. C. 1986. Features observed on the ske-
letons of some recent European Acipenseridae. Their im-
portance for the study of excavated remains of sturgeon.
In D. C. Brinkhuizen and A. T. Clason (eds.), Fish and Ar-
chaeology, BAR International Series 294. London: 18-33.
BUDJA M. 1999. The transition to farming in mediteranean
Europe - an indigenous response. In M. Budja (ed.), 4th
Neolithic Studies. Documenta Praehistorica 24:119-141.
2007. The Dawn of Ceramics. In Blečic M., Črešnar M.,
Hansel B., Hellmuth A., Kaiser E. and Metzner-Nebelsik
C. (eds.), Scripta Praehistorica in Honorem Biba Ter-
žan, Situla 44: 41-55.
CLASON A. T. 1980. Padina and Starčevo, Game, fish and
cattle. Palaeohistoria 20:141-173.
GARASANIN M. and RADOVANOVIĆ I. 2001. A pot house
54 at Lepenski vir I. Antiquity 75(287): 118-125.
JOVANOVIC B. 1971. Chronological Frames of the Iron
Gate Group of the Early Neolithic period. Archaeologia
Iugoslavica 10:23- 38.
2004 Padina and Hajdučka vodenica: Sites of the Le-
penski vir Culture in the upper and lower Gorges of
the Iron gates. Acts of The XIVth UISPP Congress.
Liege 2001, BAR International Series 1302. Archaeo-
press. Oxford: 55-59.
KOZLOWSKI K. S. 2001. Eco-cultural/stylistic zonation of
the Mesolithic/Epipaleolithic in Central Europe. In R. Ker-
tesz and J. Makkay (eds.), From the Mesolithic to the Neo-
lithic. Proceedings of the International Archaeological
Conference held in the Damjanich Museum of Szolnok,
September 22-27.1996. Archaeolingua Foundation. Bu-
dapest: 261-282.
MIHAILOVIC D. 2004. Chipped Stone Industry from hori-
zons A and B at the site Padina in the Iron Gates. Acts of
The XIVth UISPP Congress. Liege 2001, BAR Internatio-
nal Series 1302. Archaeopress. Oxford: 61-68.
PAUNESCU A. 1996. Die mesolitische Siedlung der Schele
Cladovei - Kultur. In H. Hauptmann und P. Roman (eds.),
Ostrovul Corbului. Institutul Roman de Tracologie. Bu-
curesti: 115-155.
RADOVANOVIC I. 1981. Ranoholocenska kremena indu-
strija sa lokaliteta Padina u Djerdapu. Građa, knjiga 4.
Arheološki institut, Beograd.
1996. The Iron Gates Mesolithic. International Mono-
graphs in Prehistory. Archaeological Series 11. Ann Ar-
bor, Michigan.
ROKSANDIC M. 2000. Between Foragers and Farmers in
the Iron Gates Gorge: Physical Anthropology perspective.
In M. Budja (ed.), 7th Neolithic Studies. Documenta Prae-
historica 27: 1-100.
SLADIC M. 1986. Kula pre Mihajlovac - un site prehisto-
rique. Đerdapske sveske - Cahiers des Portes defer III:
271-285.
STALIO B. 1986. Le site prehistorique Ajmana a Mala Vr-
bica. Đerdapske sveske - Cahiers des Portes de fer III:
27-35.
SREJOVIC D. and LETICA Z. 1978. Vlasac I. A Mesolithic
settlement in the Iron Gates. In M. Garasanin (ed.), Vol. I
Archaeology. Serbian Academy of sciences and arts, Bel-
grade.
SREJOVIC D. and BABOVIC L. 1983. Umetnost Lepenskog
vira. Izdavački zavod Jugoslavija, Narodni muzej Beograd.
VASIC R. 1986. Compte - rendu des Fouilles du site prehi-
storique a Velesnica 1981- 1982. Đerdapske sveske - Ca-
hires des Portes de fer III: 271- 301.
Figures
Fig. 3. Padina. View over Sectors I and II during
excavations (1968) from the top of the steep side
of the gorge.
Fig. 1. Upper and Lower Gorges of the Danube with
settlements of the Lepenski Vir culture (protective
excavations on the territory of the hydroelectric
dam Đerdap I; 1965-1970).
Fig. 2. Padina - Gospođin Vir. Sectors I-III, semi-circual coastal coves with the settlements of the Iron
Gates Late Mesolithic and the Lepenski Vir culture.
Fig. 4. Padina. Excavated areas at Sector I (with-
out segments 1-3 in the coastal zone).
Fig. 10. Padina. Sector II, Trench 2, profile 2. Grid
over the excavated area. Half-circular cove divided
by the mountain creek.
Fig. 6. Padina. Architectural features of phase A:
the feature with long rectangular hearth, covered
by the remains of House 1 (phase B1, the Lepenski
Vir culture) with slabs of the rear platform of the
hearth and the ornamented boulder (altar in situ,
Sector I, Profile 1, segments 2 and 3 of the coastal
area.
Fig. 9. Padina. Sector I, Trench 1, block 1a. Group
burial at the level of palaesoil. Burials 4, 5 and 6
interred in different positions. Burials were made
in the croft of House 2 (B2).
nouse 1	rectangular hearth
Fig. 5. Padina. Excavated areas at Sector I with features and burials belonging to chronological phases
Padina A, A-B, B1 and B2.
Fig. 7. Padina. Sector I,
Profile 1, segments 1-2,
cross-section of the cut
for the trapezoidal base
of House 2 (B2) of the
Lepenski Vir culture. Le-
gend: A - hillwash la-
yers. (1) Yellow sandy
soil. Grey soil with peb-
bles and sand (3a); B -
palaeosoil/cultural la-
yer of the Mesolithic set-
tlement formed on the bedrock (2); C - layers associated with the Lepenski Vir culture. Cut for House 2
(B2) filled with the torrential hillwash and archaeological finds (3b). Cutting of the building and its croft
in the older layers of the same settlement (3). D - Layer of the Late Eneolithic and the Iron Age (4). E -
Modern humus and subhumus (5 and 5a).
Fig. 11. Padina. Sector II, Trench 2, block 2a. The
base of dwellings of the central part of the Iron
Gates Late Mesolithic settlement on the level of pa-
laesoil layered over the bedrock.
Fig. 12. Padina. Trench 2, block 2a, 5e. Flint axes,
Fig. 8. Padina. Sector I, Trench 1, block 2b. Hearth Late Mesolithic settlement. No. 1 - 3. From the floor
of House 3 (B2) of the upper terrace in the secon- of the dwelling, block 2a (phase A2). No. 5. From
dary position after the impact of the torrential out-
burst. On the moved base, two A supports were pre-
served.
the floor of the dwelling, block 2e (phase A2). No.
4. From Profile 2, Trench 2 (phase A1). No. 6. From
the floor of the dwelling, block 2a (phase A1).
Fig. 15. Padina. Sector II, Trench 2, block 2e. Par-
tial burial; ritually buried skull from the level of
the palaeosoil, cut from the Lepenski Vir culture la-
yer (late phase A-B).
Fig. 14. Padina. Trench 2, block 2a. Bone artefacts,
from the floor of the dwelling, Late Mesolithic set-
tlement (phase A2).
Fig. 13. Padina. Trench 2, block
2a. Bone and stone artefacts,
from the floor of the dwelling,
Late Mesolithic settlement (phase
A1).
Fig. 16. Padina. Sector III. excavated area of the Lepenski Vir culture settlement (phases B1-3); necropo-
lises with elongated stone constructions, Iron Gates Late Mesolithic (phase A2); necropolises with domed-
like stone constructions (contact phase, A -B); single burials around the building of phase B3.
Fig. 17. Padina. Sector III, Trench 7, block 3. Necro-
polises with elongated stone constructions, hori-
zon 1, Late Mesolithic settlement (phase A2).
Fig. 18. Padina. Sector III, Trench 7, block 3. Necro-
polises with elongated stone constructions, horizon
2. Distinguishing different horizons of the necro-
polis was difficult due to layers of soil between
them and due to the existence of separate surfaces
with piled stones. Late Mesolithic settlement (phase
A2).
Fig. 19. Padina. Sector III, trench 6, block 2. Bu-
rials with domed-like stone constructions; the de-
ceased were placed in sitting positions with cros-
sed legs, protected by dome-like piles of stone. Dou-
ble Burial 15-16 (phase A).
Fig. 21. Padina. Sector III. details of the coastal
profile, segment 2, position of the cross-section of
semi-subterranean House 12 (points A-B). Order
of the deposition of layers (1-6) in the cut of House
12 upon its abandonment.
Fig. 20. Padina. Sector III, Profile 3 with cross-sec-
tions of the bases of Houses 12,13,14 of phase B2
and the remains of building floors of phase B1.
A-B: position of the cross-sesction of semi-subter-
ranean House 12.
' 63,68
I
I
fe'Jji
house 8
Fig. 22. Layer no. 6. Natural, sandy loess. Layer no.
5. Lower level. Dark strip of the floor made of com-
pact and at places burned clay, the limit of the ellip-
soid cut for House 12, which came down the depth of
1.16m in the loessic base (vertical T. A - 1.10m verti-
cal T.B). In this way, between the floors of buildings
12-13 and 12-15 there is a zone of sterile loess, li-
mited by the level of palaesoil and rocky base. Layer
no. 5. Upper level. Floor of House 12 was covered by
a compact layer of crushed black soil that contained
a large quantity offish bones and remains of char-
coal (0.20m -0.50m). This layer was formed after
the abandonment (or demolishion) of the building,
with the remains of the wooden construction of the roof or household inventory that was left behind. La-
yer no. 4. Horizon of mixed grey soil, smaller crushed stones, fragments of pottery, and remains of bur-
ning (0.20m-0.40m) with a large amount offish bones. This horizon corresponds with the successive
backfill of the building's cut with the remains coming from buildings of the upper row (B3), i.e. midden
layers (Fig. 16). Layer no. 3. Level of lighter soil and crushed stone belonging to the deposition in the part-
ly backfilled cut of House 12 from the level of present-day humus (0.20m-0.40m). Layer no. 2. Light grey
cultural layer also covers other bases of the middle row buildings (B2) and contains common categories
of finds, belonging to the end of the leveling process that probably took place after the abandonment of
the upper, third horizon of buildings (B3). Layer no. 1. Massive modern humus, composed of eroded ma-
terials of hillwash scree, with darker soil and the remains of vegetation (0.50m-0.80m).
Fig. 23. Padina. Sector III,
Anthropomorphic boulder
(altar from House 12, rear
platform of the hearth).
Fig. 25. Padina. Sector III, coastal strip, segment 2.
Trapezoidal base and floor of House 8, lower set-
tlement horizon (phase B1). Burned remains found
on the floor from the upper construction of a gab-
led roof.
Fig. 24. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5, block 1. Lon-
gitudinal cross-section of House 17 (B3). Installa-
tion of the inner stone constructions: 1. cut for the
ash-place; 2. cut for the rectangular hearth; 3. cut
for the cult pit with ritual stone bowl at its bottom.
Fig. 26. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5, block 2. Longitudinal cross-section of House 15 (B3). 1. Hearth with
a stone slab for ash disposal or for heating and preparation of dry fish. 2. Rear platform of the hearth
with a cult pit at the bottom, covered by a large stone slab. 3. Large stone blocks at the rear edge of the
cut for the trapezoidal base served to support the main beam for the roof construction. Slanted construc-
tion of this support reflects the slant of the gabbled roof.
Fig. 27. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5, block 1. Tra-
pezoidal base of House 18 (B3) with the household
inventory in situ and circular space for ceramic
vessels next to the right (entrance) side of the
frontal platform and the base of the approaching,
paved porch.
'V'f:,'''/S*-:
<''<'>'■■''7:<

Fig. 28. Padina. Sector III. View over lower (B1),
middle (B2) and upper (B3) rows of buildings;
House 15 with approaching paved porch. The Le-
penski Vir culture settlement.
Fig. 30 A. Padina. (B2) Model of an oven (25 x
35cm) decorated by impresso technique, found on
the floor of House 3.
Fig. 29. Padina. Sector III. A selection of polished
stone tools. The Lepenski Vir culture settlement.
Fig. 32. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5; 1 - 3 vessels
from the floor of House 18 (B3); the Lepenski Vir
culture.
Fig. 30 B. Ritual table. Parts of the cultic vessel
found in two different zones of the settlement. The
Lepenski Vir culture. Sector I. Coastal zone, Profile
I, segment 2; Trench I, block 1a.
Fig. 31. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5 and 6; 1-2 ves-
sels from the level of occupation of the third row of
buildings (B3); 3. Altar from thefloor of House 17
(B3), Trench 5, block 1. The Lepenski Vir culture.
Fig. 33. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5, block 1. Vessels
from the floor of House 18 (B3); the Lepenski Vir
culture.
Fig. 35. Padina. Sector III, Trench 5, block 2. Large
pot/pythos from thefloor of House 15 (B3). The Le-
penski Vir culture settlement.
Fig. 34. Padina. Sector I, space between Houses 2
(B2) and 3 (B2); 1. Amphora-like pot, pottery oven
(open-air hearth?); Sector I, block lb; 2. Half-sphe-
rical bowl, thefloor of House 2 (B2). The Lepenski Fig. 36. Hajdučka Vodenica. Position of the site; en-
Vir culture settlement.	trance to Mali Kazan, Lower Gorge of the Danube.
Fig. 37. Hajdučka Vodenica. Excavated
areas of the necropolises 1967-1969 with
the functional organization of space. Ex-
cavated area 630m2.
Fig. 38. Hajdučka Vodenica,
isometric reconstruction of the
sacrificial/ritual construction
and the burial chamber with
four horizons of burials.
Fig. 39. Hajdučka Vodeni-
ca, isometric reconstruction
of the sacrificial/ritual con-
struction and the burial
chamber with two horizons
of burials.
Fig. 40. Hajdučka Vodenica. Stratigraphic position
of the sacrificial construction of the necropolis.
Fig. 42. Hajdučka Vodenica. Stratigraphy of buil-
ding phases of the sacrificial construction; older
phase: foundation channel of the first elongated
heart, dug into the loessic base; younger phase: ap-
proaching platform; elongated with associated finds;
surrounding zone furnished with burned clay.
Fig. 41. Hajdučka Vodenica. Section of the burial
chamber behind the sacrificial construction of the
necropolis. Lower level of the section filled with
abundant remains of burning belonging to the ho-
rizon of burials.
Fig. 43. Hajdučka Vodenica. Outline of the older
elongated hearth on the basis of its foundations
for the stone construction, level of sterile loess.
Fig. 44. Hajdučka Vodenica. Elongated stone con-
structions of the necropolis, horizon 4.
Fig. 46. Hajdučka Vodenica. Elongated stone con-
structions of the necropolis, horizon 2. In the fore-
ground grouped stone blocks with a rectangular
hearth.
Fig. 45. Hajdučka Vodenica. Elongated stone con-
structions of the necropolis, horizon 3.
Fig. 47. Hajdučka Vodenica. Stratigraphy of elon-
gated stone constructions of the necropolis, hori-
zons 4-2; Facing south-west, upstream from the lo-
cation of the sacrificial/ritual constructions and
burial chamber of the necropolis.
Fig. 48. Hajdučka Vodenica. Longitudinal section
of the elongated stone constructions of the necro-
polis, north-east and south-west, with horizons 3-4
under excavations and noticable stratigraphic po-
sition of horizons 1-2.
Fig. 50. Hajdučka Vodenica. Detail of the rectangu-
lar hearth of horizon 2 of the elongated stone con-
structions of the necropolis.
Fig. 51. Hajdučka Vodenica. Stratigraphic relation-
ship of horizon 1 and rectangular hearth of hori-
zon 2 of the elongated stone constructions of the
necropolis.
Fig. 52. Hajdučka Vodenica. Horizon 1, lower le-
vel, rectangular hearth placed on the level of pala-
eosoil. In the foreground a hearth covered with
piled stones.
Fig. 55. Hajdučka Vodenica. Older sacrificial/ritu-
al construction, ornamented boulder (volcanic
rock, green colour, channeling technique) (dimen-
sions 25cm x 18cm x 19cm).
Fig. 54. Hajdučka Vodenica. Horizon 1, selection
of red deer antler tools.
Fig. 56. Hajdučka Vodenica. Younger sacrificial/
ritual construction, ornamented boulder (sand-
stone, chalky colour, incision technique) (dimen-
sions 31cm x 27cm x 24cm).
back to contents