Nenad Tasić

The end of the affair: formal chronological modelling for the top of the Neolithic tell of Vinca-Belo Brdo

Abstract Bayesian statistical frameworks have been used to calculate explicit, quantified estimates for site chronologies, and have been especially useful for resolving the complex probability distributions of calibrated radiocarbon dates to the level of individual prehistoric lifetimes and generations. Here the technique is applied to the Neolithic tell of Vinča-Belo Brdo in order to answer long-standing questions about the timing and circumstances of its demise. Modelled date estimates place the end of the site in the second half of the forty-sixth century cal BC. Two successive horizons of closely spaced houses each suffered extensive burning; the interval between them was placed at a maximum of 25 years, with the last house probably used for less than 15 years. The evidence suggests that these house burnings were deliberate, and opens new considerations for the causes of the end of the tell-based system in south-east Europe.

Interwoven strands for refining the chronology of the Neolithic tell of Vinca-Belo Brdo, Serbia

A formally modeled radiocarbon chronology for a new profile through the great Neolithic tell of Vinca-Belo Brdo, Serbia, is the third interwoven strand in refining the chronology of the tell. This now joins models for the whole sequence based on the archive of early excavations, and for the last two known horizons at the top of the settlement mound, investigated in recent decades. In the new deep sounding, Vinca culture occupation from the 52nd century cal BC is slightly later than in the main sequence, probably reflecting the horizontal extension of the tell as it began to grow. The last dated occupation falls in the late 47th–early 46th century cal BC, slightly earlier than in the main sequence, but the top of the profile is affected by the slippage that caused the new excavations. Formal estimates are given for the succession and varying durations of burnt and unburnt houses, and indicate a period in the first part of the 5th millennium without house burning. Overall, the combined results from the three interwoven strands serve to produce a radically enhanced understanding of the temporality of the tell, which builds on, rather than supplants, previous research. We knew previously that Vinca-Belo Brdo was very long-lived, but now we can time that history with much greater precision. We can assert with much greater confidence that its vertical buildup was steady and largely uninterrupted. We have begun, from the work on the top of the tell and in the new deep sounding, to grasp better the fluctuations in house durations from generation to generation, and can now contrast the relative fortunes of unburnt and burnt houses. We can say much more about the timing and tempo of the ending of the tell, and about the possible circumstances in which that took place.

A multi-criteria decision analysis with special reference to loess and archaeological sites in Serbia (Could geosciences and archaeology cohabitate?)

Abstract Geoarcheology is a term used to describe the work of experts who deal with the archeological record and combine the expertise of their different disciplines, mainly archeology and geology. Because such scientists have different educational backgrounds and use different research methods it was expected that they might value archeological sites (or geoarchaeological geosites) somewhat differently. The principal aim of this study is to show the results of the application of a GAM’s (Geosite Assessment Model) main values, rank indicators and sub-indicators according to the experts’ preferences and attitudes, as it was presumed that they are not of the same importance. For this purpose, the authors used a AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process), widely used in decision-making analysis, to define the criteria weights and rank the indicators. Two main groups of expert respondents, geoscientists and archeologists, were surveyed and gave their criteria weights. The results obtained by application of the AHP showed that there is a difference in indicator weights. While both groups gave their highest value to the scientific/educational indictor, the geoscientists gave their higher rank to the scenic/aesthetic rather than to the protection indicator, the archeologists ranked them opposite, and gave their higher rank to the protection indicator and lowest rank to the scenic/aesthetic indicator. This paper further provides information on group decision or consensus on weights and shows the final rankings for both groups, which are further examined and discussed.