| British Archaeological Reports, International Series vol. 1139 ISBN 1 84171 334 1 EARLY SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS FOR COMMUNICATION IN SOUTHEAST EUROPE Vols. 1-2 Contents Thank you PRESENTATIONS IN LJUBLJANA AND IN VELIKO TURNOVO |
 |
| Copyright 2003 © Kultura All rights reserved. Published on November 14, 2003. |
|
| since 11/14/03 |
 |
 |
| NEW |
| Kultura (Culture Newspaper) Sofia, Bulgaria Translation of the article published in Bulgarian on 14 October, 2003 Prehistory, Precision, Prestige by Marin Bodakov On October 27 this year two new valuable books on prehistory were presented to the public at the University of Veliko Turnovo. The first was the two-volume edition Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in South-Eastern Europe, compiled and edited by Dr. Lolita Nikolova, Adjunct-Assistant Professor at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, US. Just published in English by British Archaeological Reports (Oxford, UK), the book is based on the scientific reports presented at two international archaeological symposia in Karlovo – on the early symbolic systems of communication (2002) and on the cult complex in Starosel (2001) Both forums were organized by the Prehistory Foundation (Karlovo – Salt Lake City), while the 2002 one is the result of a project supported by the European Science Foundation, Strasbourg. Some of the articles, written by both world-famous scientists and promising young academics are summarized at http://www.iianthropology.org/symbolsummaries.html, while the whole contents of the two-volume edition are listed at http://www.iianthropology.org/symbolBAR1139contents.html. The second book was Paleobalkanic Ethnicities and the Present-Day Challenges by Professor Mark Stefanovich, recently published by Vulkan4, Sofia. Written in Bulgarian, it presents the doctorate thesis of the professor at the American University in Blagoevgrad. Agreeing with Koselek that history was, is and will be history of the contemporary, I think that these two books open horizons to the changes undergone by humans and their communities from the depths of time to our day. And their sure-footed knowledge of prehistory seemed more invigorating than the election news of the day. Especially when set against the moving autumnal beauty of Veliko Turnovo in the first snowfall for the year. But to the point. In the last few decades the significant new findings in Balkan prehistory remained virtually unknown to the world academic community, being often written and published only in Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian, etc, explained Dr. Lolita Nikolova before the presentation. Besides, Eastern researchers dedicated their efforts to the export of facts and left interpretation to their Western colleagues. (I am purposefully exaggerating her claims to make the academic picture more legible). Therefore Dr. Nikolova’s main ambition is to overcome these unproductive distinctions. Her confidence is grounded in the fact that at the prestigious Berkeley University of California she has heard presented as scientific innovations in the field of prehistory ideas expressed 10 years earlier by Professor Dr. Habil. Alexander Fol before his colleagues and students. This led to the fundamental compilation of the newly published volumes on Early symbolic systems for communication in Southeast Europe. By the way, the two volumes comprise more than 600 A4 pages in 10 points – a colossal yet precise massif of information thanks to the efforts of the meticulous Dr. Nikolova. Since 1995 The Prehistory Foundation established by her, joined later by the International Institute of Anthropology in Salt Lake City, has published five issues "Reports of prehistoric research projects", dedicated to the newest findings and analyses on Balkan prehistory. The reason why Veliko Turnovo was chosen for the presentation of the two-volume edition Early symbolic systems for communication in Southeast Europe was the inspiring fact that it includes texts not only by Stefan Chokhadzhiev, Associate Professor at the University of Veliko Turnovo, but by PhD and MA archaeology students from the old capital as well. The authentic interest of the youngest (pre)historians to the issues raised in the edition showed in their visible concentration and academic curiosity throughout the freezing 3-hour evening premiere. The compilation of Dr. Nikolova was extensively presented by Professor Dr. Margarita Tacheva (included with her article "Le roi odryse Hebryzelmis et sa politique unificatrice vers le debut du IVs.av. J.-C."). The University of Sofia Professor said that her ‘hobby’ was prehistory and praised the Bulgarian Professor Georgi Georgiev pioneering work from 1961 as the equivalent of Mendeleev’s table for the sphere of archaeology and prehistory. Professor Tacheva asked what brings together antiquity and prehistory (all the time I was struck by the feeling that f or those gathered in the ‘Professor Stancho Kalinov’ auditorium even antiquity was quite contemporary) and said that it was the silence of their artifacts on the life of ordinary men. “Do not seek civilization in its highest vestiges only”, Professor Tacheva warned. Later she explained her vision on the earliest communications in South-Eastern Europe and defined the lands of today’s Bulgaria as the second chronological “contact zone” between the third old continents Europe, Asia and Africa (after Crete and Cyprus). This fact made the study of what brought people here together so important. Therefore Professor Nikolova’s edition can be called a ‘snapshot’ of the achievements of prehistoric science in the last millennium, especially regarding the system of communications. Later Professor Tacheva expounded the three introductory articles: "Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics: Indo-European Studies at the Beginning of the 21st Century" by Mark Stefanovich, "Archaeology of Social Change: A Case Study from the Balkans" by Lolita Nikolova and "The Household Cluster Concept in Archaeology: A Brief Review" by Tina Jongsma and Haskel J. Greenfield. Uninitiated in these highly specialized matters, I was impressed by the juxtaposed theses of Lolita Nikolova and Academic Milutin Garasanin. The Bulgarian researcher maintained that in prehistory social change was an aspect of cultural change, while the Serbian scientist claimed decades ago that there was practically no migration of Indo-Europeans, just an East-West flow of cultural influences. According to that view the cultural differences between Bulgaria and Serbia were generated by the different ways in which Eastern culture was absorbed by Bulgarians and transferred to our western neighbors. In this sense Professor Tacheva sees the prehistoric ‘contact zone’ as a mixer of various ideas and sensibilities; indeed, no artifact has a univocally ascertained origin. As regards the newly published book by Professor Mark Stefanovich Paleobalkanic Ethnicities and the Present-Day Challenges, Professor Tacheva presented it as an integral, economy-based analysis of how people survived on the Balkan Peninsula. “We were taught political economy – a discipline lacking in your education”, she explained to the students in the auditorium. “And no one who respects science can afford to disrespect Marx”. Dr. Nikolova expounded Professor Stefanovich’s theory that ethnicity is asynchronic because it permeates every element of culture. According to him, the prehistoric social organization required power and effectively produced it, sometimes using violence to compensate for its inefficacies. Dr. Nikolova also commented on Professor Stefanovich’s views on ‘the complex society’, as he calls those two and more family groups that fostered security and predictability in the prehistoric era and could comprise equal as well as hierarchical relationships. In fact Professor Stefanovich claims that culture conditions people to accept both irrational beliefs and rationality. Ultimately, the complex society gives meaning to the individual and the small human group. Browsing the book by the professor from the American University in Blagoevgrad, I was impressed by the idea that ethnicity is generated by the presence of a neighbor you have to differentiate yourself from for some insuperable reason. The special guest of the double premiere was the British archaeologist Professor John Chapman, renowned as one of the best interpreters of Balkan prehistory in the world. In his profound and humorous improvisation the distinguished scientist gave elaborate answers to the three main questions: why did he take up the Balkans, why did he pay a special interest to Bulgarian prehistory and what are his chances to make a significant contribution in this area. The professor mentioned not only his academic influences (especially Colin Renfrew) but also his fascination with Bulgarian scenery. Professor Chapman said that in Neolithic excavations in the UK only 30-35 artifacts were discovered per year, while on an early Chalcolithic site a young scientist like Petar Leshtakov (contributor to the two-volume edition) discovered 1000. “There are thousands of culture artifacts waiting to be discovered here”, Professor Chapman continued. The British author then amused and saddened the audience, retelling how the Serbian scientist Miloichich told Professor Dr. Henrietta Todorova: “We discover a meager 7 vessels and we make science with them; while you, Bulgarians, discover 700 in Malka Vereya (St. Zagora) only and do nothing”… Yet many objects of Balkan prehistory were visible in the very landscape, i.e. things can be studied in their context, in their symbolic meaning for material culture. Professor Chapman gave the example of the earth pillars near Varna. The archaeologists studying microliths and the geologists studying macroliths have never thought of uniting their efforts, putting objects from the other discipline in their own context and vice versa. And this professional limitation does not allow us to understand the mentality of prehistoric people. That’s how Professor Chapman summarized his innovative book Fragmentation in Archaeology: People, Places and Broken Objects (2000). He was inspired to write it by the eccentric will of a British archaeologist who wanted exactly 12 people to attend his funeral. After the ritual lunch at the restaurant they were required to take the urn with his ashes to the top of a hill where they had to break it and scatter his mortal remains in the wind. However, each one of them had to take a fragment of the urn back home… This story led Professor Chapman to the thought that, albeit fragmented, “things” continued to exist. In the prehistoric era, however, they could be purposefully fragmented so that new social connections could be formed, and lost ones – restored… In fact ‘The Fragmentation’ explains how people used not only objects but fragments of objects for communication. Anticipating the questions about his future plans, Professor Chapman described what occupies him at present. First, he claimed that we need even greater fragmentation. Here Professor Chapman drew a hill where one part of an artifact lay on one horizon, whereas its matching part lay on a totally different horizon, if not in another hill… As so far nobody took into consideration the purposeful fragmentation and the resulting geographical distance between the fragments of a whole, those fragments were dated differently and, what’s more, exhibited in the museums of different historical eras. Professor Chapman will also continue his inquiries into the prehistoric exploitation of salt on the Balkans, as well as into the issues of color, because, as he said, ‘the coloration of prehistory is a huge challenge’. Later Assoc. Professor Lilyana Pernicheva, Assoc. Professor Stefan Chokhadziev, Alexander Chokhadzhiev, Todor Dimov, Petar Leshtakov, Stoilka Terzijska-Ignatova, Georgi Katzarov and Martin Hristov presented their articles from Early Symbolic Systems for Communication in South-Eastern Europe. I was particularly impressed by the expressive vision of Alexander Chohadzhiev who maintains that the net of the loom presupposed the invention of most ornamental and letter signs – and, respectively, of symbolic communication through which Man implored and compelled nature to function in a certain way. In fact the edition comprises a total of 56 authors from Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, Greece, Slovenia, Turkey, Moldova, Ukraine, Germany, Great Britain, Canada and USA, covering the thematic specter of the theory of social anthropology, symbol and ritual, ceramic styles, cultural contacts, household archaeology, the archaeology of cults, etc. Dr. Nikolova’s next project is the Praehistorica Circumpontica, which will present the newest discoveries and studies on the earliest cultural development of the societies based around the Black Sea. It will be printed by the same publishers who, as Dr. Nikolova claimed, ”love us, because our books do sell well”. |
|
|