You are on page 1of 14

Who were the Cyclopes?

Odyssey and Neolithic, Eneolithic and Bronze


Age pastoralists from the east Adriatic coast and Dinarides
Dimitrij Mlekuž, Ljubljana

Arheologija kot veda o človekovem bivanju, delovanju, iskanju v preteklosti že zaradi narave predmeta raziskave
ne more biti sama po sebi zadostna, ampak mora črpati iz dognanj mnogih znastvenih strok in le ob posrečen spoju se
porajajo nova spoznanja (Teržan 2001, 207).

The poems and archaeological record can only be properly understood when read alongside each other and woven to-
gether... (Morris 1997, 559).

Odisej, Kiklopi, etnografija, arheologija, pašništvo, vzhodni Jadran


Odysseus, Kyklopen, Ethnographie, Archäologie, Hirtentum, Ostadriatische Küste
Odyssey, Cyclopes, Ethnography, Archaeology, pastoralism, east Adriatic

V članku poskušam brati opis Kiklopov iz Odiseje 9 kot etnografski tekst. Sprašujem se, kakšno je
razmerje med “etnografskim” opisom Kiklopov in arheološkimi zapisi pastirskih skupin iz
vzhodnojadranske obale in Dinaridov.

Es wird eine Interpretation der Beschreibung von den Kyklopen durchgeführt, die in Buch 9 der
Odyssee vorkommen, und zwar in dem Sinne, als handle es sich um einen ethnographischen Be-
richt. Dabei wird eine Beziehung zwischen der „ethnographischen“ Darstellung der Kyklopen und
der archäologischen Überlieferung von Hirtengruppen an der östlichen Adriaküste und auf den Di-
nariden untersucht.

The paper presents reading of the description of Cyclopes from Odyssey 9 as an ethnographic
text. It addresses the relationship between “ethnographic” account of Cyclopes and archaeological
record of pastoral groups from east Adriatic coast and Dinarides.

Introduction understand those societies better? What is the


relation between both diverse sources?
Homer’s epic was often used as a source for
understanding archaic Greek society. Classical
study of the kind is M. I. Finley’s The world of Odyssey 9 as ethnography
Odysseus (2002). But Odyssey doesn’t talk about
Greeks as such; it talks about Greeks by relating I propose that we read the Odyssey 9 as an
them to the “Other”. This text is about the par- ethnographic text. I do not suggest that Odyssey
ticular “Other” represented in the Odyssey, is ethnographic text in the same sense as Evans-
about pastoral group of Cyclopes. Prichard’s study The Nuer. Odyssey is primary
This text is about prehistoric pastoralists from and most of all literature, but it is in many ways
Dinarides also. What occurs if we wove together also ethnography. It is a poem about travel and
“ethnographic” account of Cyclopes from Od- cross-cultural contact, a story of foreign and
yssey with the archaeological record from east fantastic places and peoples as that of any eth-
Adriatic and Dinaric caves? Can it help us to nographer. The practice of ethnography is lo-
2 Dimitrij Mlekuž

cated at the interface of two worlds or cultural They are categorically distinguished from
systems; it decodes one and recodes it for an- Greeks in a series of diametric oppositions.
other. Ethnographic writing depends on the They have no skill or experience with seafaring
structural difference between “here” and and shipbuilding. Although they enjoy a rich and
“there”, “us” and “others”. Ethnography serves productive landscape, they do not practice agri-
to make strange familiar and, by doing so, to culture but limit themselves to the care of sheep
make the familiar strange, the better to under- and goats. As a result, the landscape is still in
stand them both (Clifford and Marcus 1986). pristine state, wild, untamed, the only sign of
This leads us to the question of the historicity human presence is smoke from camp-fires.
of the poem. It is a product of an oral tradition Their wild, uncivilized, state is reflected in con-
rather than product of a single author (see Nagy sumption practices also. Cyclopes do not eat
1996). Most of scholars agree that the poem bread, they consume raw meat and drink milk.
itself was produced in the eight century BC, but Even worse, they do not stop at devouring hu-
that doesn’t mean that we can read it as an ob- man meat. Cyclopes do not worship gods and
jective source for historical information about do not respect the rules of hospitality, the ex-
the Greek Archaic period (Morris 1997) or even change of hospitality gifts (xenia) is perverted
Mycenaean Greece (Bennet 1997). Relation be- with Polyphemous’s “gift”, a promise that
tween poems and reality is much more complex. Odysseus will be eaten last.
Odyssey is the product of a culture that was try- Cyclops society is fragmented, consisting of
ing to construct a reading of the worlds and isolated, autonomous and auctarctic households:
peoples of its own mythic past (Dougherty Neither assemblies for council have they, nor
2001, 9). Contemporary and orally transmitted appointed laws, but they dwell on the peaks of
experience with world overseas is projected into lofty mountains in hollow caves, and each one is
the distant Mycenaean past, and it is the rela- lawgiver to his children and his wives, and they
tionship between myth and history, between reck nothing one of another (Odyssey 9, 112-
past and present and especially between foreign, 116).
“Other”, and Greek, that is revealed by an eth- Weak „coalitions of unwilling” are formed
nographic logic. Odyssey therefore embodies only in the time of conflict with the outsiders;
the “ethnographic imagination” of the early ar- this is obvious from the other Cyclops’ reluctant
chaic Greece, which may be the result of a long response to Polyphemus’ call for help when
line of orally transmitted accounts, stories and blinded by Odysseus. However, eager to get
myths, skillfully woven together to make sense back to sleep to their caves, they readily accept
of the early archaic Greece society (Dougherty his statement about “Nobody” as an excuse to
2001, 5-11). dismiss his complaint.
Let’s read Book 9 of the Odyssey as an ethno- Among those observations, which clearly posi-
graphic text. This deliberately naive “histori- tion Cyclopes among the barbaric “Other”,
cizing” reading is primarily interested in the Book 9 brings some precise observations of Cy-
poem’s fascination with the “Other”, the com- clopes’ way of life. Cyclopes live in the caves
munity of Cyclopes, a pastoral group inhabiting which they share with their stock:
a distant island. Their customs, rules, political ...we saw a high cave, roofed over with laurels, and there
structure and way of life are completely alien to many flocks, sheep and goats alike, were wont to sleep.
the Greeks, so alien that they are portrayed as Round about it a high court was built with stones set
subhumans or even monsters, one-eyed giants.1 deep in the earth, and with tall pines and high-crested
oaks. There a monstrous man was wont to sleep, who
1
Brent Shaw has demonstrated in his illuminating paper shepherded his flocks alone and afar, and mingled not
Eaters of flesh, drinkers of milk (1982), that this dichotomy
between settled, civilised farmers and mobile, barbaric
pastoralists was enshrined into an organised and structur- continued to function as a part of European though con-
ally consistent ideology of nomadic pastoralists, which cerning outsiders from Antiquity to the present times.
Who were the Cyclopes? 3

with others, but lived apart, with his heart set on law- Stock rearing geared to intensive production
lessness. (Odyssey 9, 183-190). of wool, compatible with specialisation for ex-
Animal dung is left in the caves in “great change, is apparent in the Linear B records of
heaps” (Odyssey 9, 329-331). Cave space is wool flocks, which were recognised as such on
structured by numerous pens, separating lambs the basis of their distinctive age and sex compo-
from lactating ewes: sition. The Linear B archives at Knossos and
...the pens were crowded with lambs and kids. Each Pylos provide detailed evidence about herding
kind was penned separately: by themselves the firstlings, activities on a massive scale (Killen 1985; Hal-
by themselves the later lambs, and by themselves again stead 1993). However, since most of the animals
the newly weaned (Odyssey 9, 218-222). controlled by the palaces were castrated wethers
Herds are mixed, consisting of goats and and therefore used only for production of wool,
sheep, however rams are separated from ewes there also existed small-scale subsistence herd-
and kept outside the cave. Flocks are extremely ing. With the collapse of the Mycenaean polities,
specialised, consisting entirely of small stock, the 11 to 9th centuries in Greece polities at wit-
There is no single mention of other domestic nessed a reversion to more localised, intensive,
animals such as cattle or pigs. mixed non-specialised farming systems in which
Polyphemus’ daily schedule consists of tending animals served much the same function as they
his sheep, milking and preparing dairy produce, had before the rise of stratified states (Cherry
mainly cheese: 1988; Halstead 1996).
Thereafter he sat down and milked the ewes and bleat- Archaeological and written sources points to
ing goats all in turn, and beneath each dam he placed her conclusion that Archaic period Greece was an
young. Then presently he curdled half the white milk, and agricultural society. Animals were kept in small
gathered it in wicker baskets and laid it away, and the numbers as primarily back-up resource. Cy-
other half he set in vessels that he might have it to take clopes, as heavily specialized small-stock pastor-
and drink, and that it might serve him for supper (Od- alists, depending on animals products such as
yssey 9, 245-250). meat and milk, were alien to the bread eating
Herds are taken to the mountain pastures each Greek farmers. However, detailed description of
morning and returned at evening when milked herd management strategies (separation of ani-
again. mals, sheep pens, milking ...) demonstrate, that
In Odyssey, „Cyclopeness” is defined as op- the authors and audience of the poem have
position to the “Greekiness” or Greek way of knowledge on animal management strategies.
life way. To better understand Cyclopes Description of the Cyclopes’ social system and
pastoralism, we have to contrast it to the Greek way of life corresponds very closely to the “car-
pastoral economy. What do we know about nivorous pastoralism” defined by Tim Ingold
Greek pastoralism? Greek farming systems (1980). Carnivorous pastoralism is a small stock
involved a very close symbiosis of crop economy, with no possibility of conversion to
production with animal husbandry. Most large stock. Small stock is usually exploited for
Neolithic stock keeping seems to be small scale, meat; although milked on occasion; it is not spe-
involving localized movements around cialized for this purpose. Sheep and goats have
settlements, predominately in the lowlands. very high rates of increase – up to ten times
Although some faunal assemblages are greater than that of cattle – but they are particu-
dominated by small stock, most display a larly vulnerable to epidemics. With no alterna-
mixture of livestock species more reminiscent of tive form of security available, a household is
small-scale mixed farmers. Grazing systems forced to accumulate herds by minimizing their
began to extend into the uplands, maybe as a off-take. Carnivorous pastoralism thus combines
part of the transhumance, in the forth and third a restriction of household size with a tendency
millennia BC. Cattle were being used as traction toward the maximal concentration of animals.
animals and donkeys as pack animals (Cherry Households in carnivorous pastoralism avoid
1988; Halstead 1996).
4 Dimitrij Mlekuž

reciprocal obligations beyond the household. households, which are reflected in herds. Ani-
Hospitality is definitely not a feature of carnivo- mals become symbols of social cohesion (Ev-
rous pastoralism: “the successful pastoralist ans-Pritchard 1993).
hoards rather than hosts” (Paine 1971, 167), an Cyclopes are therefore highly specialised „car-
accurate description of Cyclopes’ attitude to- nivorous” pastoralists, even if their main animal
wards hospitality. This leads to a “very careful product is milk. Their main security strategy is
life” (Barth 1961, 108) of avoiding any unneces- accumulation of herds by minimizing the off-
sary slaughter of animals. The rationality of ac- take.
cumulation follows the fragmentation of eco-
nomic responsibility and leads to the fragmenta-
tion of society into autonomous households. Long tradition of Dinaric pastoralism
Description of Cyclopes as very specialized,
autonomous, self sufficient pastoralist groups, It is of course utterly pointless to search for
avoiding obligations between households and the archaeological record of the Cyclopes. They
lacking political institutions corresponds ex- inhabit the “mythical space” (Vidal-Naquet
tremely well to the carnivorous pastoralism. 1985) of “ethnographic imagination”, poetically
Main feature of carnivorous pastoralism is ex- woven together using accounts and stories about
treme specialization, herding animals with high people overseas.
reproductive potential (such as sheep) allow Better question is, do we have an archaeologi-
rapid expansion of herds. But there are also al- cal record which can be better understood
ternative forms of pastoralism. Herding com- through the “ethnographic analogy” provided by
plementary types of animals (such as sheep, cat- description of Cyclopes in the Odyssey?
tle and pigs) enables alternative forms of secu- I believe we have. There is a staggering conti-
rity to emerge. Complementary types of animals nuity in the way of life that can be observed
allow poorer households to exploit the high re- from the beginning of the Neolithic to the Mid-
productive potential of small stock to build their dle Bronze Age in the carstic hinterland of the
herds and then exchange them for larger stock eastern Adriatic coast and Dinarides (Fig. 1).
(Dahl and Hjort 1976, 230-234). Wealthy own- This tradition is manifested in the economy and
ers whose holdings exceed the maximum man- way of life that is based on sheep rearing and
ageable size will find it mutually advantageous to seasonal use of caves as sheep pens and camps
loan or give some animals to other households. for pastoral households. This stable, traditional
Conversely, if someone is short of animals, they core remained unchanged over millennia despite
may seek gifts or loans from the better-off. Most introduction of metal tools and numerous
important animal product of large, slow repro- changes in pottery styles.
ducing animals (such as cattle) is milk. Animals This archaeological record is in striking con-
produce milk for the household where they are trast to contrast to the lowland settlements lo-
situated, irrespective of who owns a particular cated near the land suitable for agriculture and
animal; however, the owner retains control over water sources. They usually yield evidence of
the slaughter of an animal and over its offspring. architecture, large quantities of pottery and do-
While in a carnivorous pastoral economy a herd mesticated plants and animals. They can be
is the exclusive property of the household, identified as villages, practicing mixed farming
households in this “milch pastoralism” (Ingold subsistence economy. Lowlands are settled by
1980) spread their interests by distributing ani- predominately small-scale, dispersed settlement
mals as gifts and loans to a range of stock- units, often abandoned or relocated (Chapman
associates. Milch herds typically consist of ani- et al. 1996, 335-343). In the Bronze age process
mals from a number of separate owners under of nucleation begins resulting in the emergence
the management of a single household. This of “protourban centres” such as Monkodonja in
establishes a network of social relations between Istria (Hänsel et al. 1997; Mihovilić et al. 2005)
Who were the Cyclopes? 5

Figure 1: Map of
east Adriatic and
Dinarides with the
sites mentioned in
the text.

Archaeological record from east Adriatic hin- Which are the core components of the east
terland and Dinarides therefore represent socie- Adriatic and Dinaric pastoralists which distin-
ties with a way of life completely different from guish them from lowland farmers? How can this
their lowland neighbours (Mlekuž 2005). In the archaeological record be interpreted in the light
following section I’ll discuss this evidence. of “ethnographical” reading of Cyclopes?
6 Dimitrij Mlekuž

Use of caves Figure 2:


Layered heap of
burnt animal
The identification of archaeological sites oc- dung from Neo-
cupied by pastoralists is not always straightfor- lithic/Eneolithic
ward. Based on ethnographic observations, pas- layers of Mala
toralists tend to leave few material remains in Triglavca.
their abandoned sites. Therefore many pastoral
sites preserve only a few features detectable in
the archaeological record (Robertshaw 1978;
Chang and Murray 1981; Banning and Kohler-
Rollefson 1992; Chang and Tourttellortte 1993).
J.-É. Brochier (1983, 1990, 1991, 1996, 2006)
suggested that prehistoric herding activities can
be identified by the structure of deposits and The intensive presence of grazing animals
occurrence of spherulites, microscopic crystals around the caves can be attested also by the
of calcium salt and phytolits which represent the presence of ‘open vegetation’ pollen and the low
mineral residue of animal dung. Periodically percentage of grasses in palinological record
burned dung deposits created the “layer cake” (Podmol pri Kastelcu, (Turk et al. 1992), which
structure of sediments, made up of finely alter- indicates that grasses were grazed before flower-
nating black and white lenses. They appear in ing (Groenman-van Waateringe 1993).
the form of ‘heaps’ and are mainly found near One of the features of the Cyclop’s cave are
the cave walls (Fig. 2), and may be result of numerous dry wall sheep folds. These features
cleaning the ash from the centre of the cave and can also be found in modern staje3 shelters
of heaping in marginal areas (Boschian and where animals are kept during the midday heat
Montagnari Kokelj 2000; Boschian 2006). The and during bad weather or for overnight shelter,
thin, finely layered charcoal lenses suggest that especially if pastures were too far from villages
this process was repeated cyclically, probably (Vilfan, 1957). Recent excavations in the Mala
over a long period. Less obvious are “homoge- Triglavca have revealed that dry stone walls
nous” deposits consisting of only sparse copro- build in the front of the cave are very old and
lithic aggregates. Compactness of those deposits can be dated at least to the to the Eneolithic
suggests that they are result of reworking and (Fig. 3). Similar prehistoric dry walls were re-
trampling of coprolites. Large patches of phos- ported in the Sicilian cave sites (Brochier et al.
phates are common. This type of “sheep-pen 1992, 83). Stone platform located inside caves
deposits” is usually found in the centre of the were excavated in the Bronze Age layer of Mala
caves.2 Triglavca and possibly identified in the Podmol
pri Kastelcu (Turk et al. 1992b, 48-51).
2 J.-É. Brochier classified similar sites from
Sheep pen deposits were identified in the
French Midi Pyrenees as grottes-bergeries, caves
Edera/Stenašca, Caterina/Katrina, Azzura/Pečina na
Leksovcu in Zingari/Ciganska (Boschian and Montagnari where herds of ovicaprines were kept. They be-
Kokelj 2000), Pupićina (Boschian 2006) and Mala long to a complex agropastoral system in which
Triglavca caves. Such deposits can be identified also in transhumant shepherds move seasonally to the
other sites, even if no micromorphological analyses were
carried out, such as VG 4245, Cotariova/Čotarjeva,
3
Podmol pri Kastelcu (Boschian and Montagnari Kokelj Staje are usually natural shelters, caves, rock shelters
2000), Acijev spodmol (Turk et al. 1992a), Vaganaćka peć and doline, used mainly for sheltering animals, although
(Forenbaher and Vranjican 1985), Odmut (Marković shepherds may use them too. Most of the excavated caves
1977), Hateljska peć, Lazaruša (Marijanović 2000), Vela in the Triestine Karst and Dalmatiawere used as staje in
špila (Čečuk and Radić 2005), Spila (Marković 1985), historical times, which can be attested by the reports of
Gudnja (Marijanović 2005), to mention only more informants and the dry wall structures visible in excava-
obvious cases. tion reports.
Who were the Cyclopes? 7

Figure 3: whose ages can be accurately determined from


Cumulative plan tooth eruption patterns.
of the features
from Mala In the Neolithic we have a evidence of short,
Triglavca cave. seasonal visits in the caves. Most of the caves
Based on Le- were visited during lambing time (probably, but
ben’s excavation not necessary spring) as remains of foetuses,
documentation newborns, kids and lambs (younger than 2
and new excava-
tion data. months) from Pupićina (Miracle and Pugsley
2006, 331-336) and Grotta dell’Edera/Stenašca
suggest (Boschin and Riedel 2000). Animals
from the age range of 2-6 months are absent on
those sites.
On the other hand, it appears that the majority
of animals in Grotta dell Mitreo/Mitrej were
culled at age between 2-6 months in the Neo-
lithic (Petrucci 1997; Mlekuž 2005, 37-38). No
highland caves from the lowlands (Brochier foetal remains are present indicating that animals
2006). were probably not present at the site at the time
However, caves were not only used as sheep of lambing.
pens but also as habitational places. The relative Other assemblages offer some hints on sea-
frequency of different body parts can provide sonality patterns. The majority of animals from
valuable information about processing of dead Grotta degli Zingari/Ciganska jama are older
animals on the site. Evidence shows that ovi- than six months, aged on the basis that most
caprines were culled, processed and eaten on site mandibles that had milk premolars were also
(Mlekuž 2005, 38-40; Miracle and Pugsley 2006, characterised by molars in the process of erup-
339-341). Deposition rates of bones are generlly tion. The presence of neonatal animals demon-
low (Miracle and Pugsley 2006, 262-263) and strates lambing on the site (Bon 1996).
can be compared to the deposition rates of sin- This complementary seasonal patterns may
gle Navaho family (Mlekuž 2005, 32-35, Tab. 2). suggest that cave sites in the Neolithic were not
Caves were therefore regularly used both for merely outstations of a larger pastoral system,
penning animals and camping pastoralists. Ani- with central sites elsewhere, but they comprised
mals were slaughtered and consumed on site, a full yearly cycle of seasonal mobility (Mlekuž
although wild animals and cattle (Miracle and 2005, 37-38).
Pugsley 2006, 339-341) were processed on site In the Late Neolithic/Eneolithic seasonal pat-
and consumed elsewhere. tern changes; suggesting less seasonal use of
caves (Mlekuž 2005, 37-38; Miracle and Pugsley
2006, 331-336). This could mean more frequent
Seasonality of activities in the caves visits of the caves that could indicate more in-
tensive use of landscape around the cave and
A basic tactic for enhancing the productivity increased territoriality of the herding groups.
of herds is mobility, seasonal, and inter-annual, This is in a way similar to Cyclopes’ pattern of
to exploit the best available pasture or to pre- mobility, with daily mobility of herds from cave
vent local overgrazing. An examination of sea- to the pastures. However, periodic burning of
sonality of site use is an essential step if any light the animal dung, which may last some months
is to be cast on the organization of an economic (Acovitsioti-Hameau et al. 1988) indicate certain
system. Patterns of the presence or absence of cyclically and periodicity of cave use.
animals at sites through the seasonal cycle are
represented in the distribution of young animals,
8 Dimitrij Mlekuž

Composition of herds and specialization

Specialization refers to concentration on one


or a very limited range of species. Cyclopes were
extremely specialized pastoralists. Their herds
consisted of ovicaprines only. The economic
rationale may be to focus on animals with
greater productivity in local environments or on
animals with specific desired yields. Thus in the
context of carnivorous pastoralism it may be
desirable to focus on small stock which have
extremely high reproductive capacities and allow
rapid accumulations of herds. Specialization is Figure 4: Comparison of diachronic trends in the structure of bone assem-
often a risky strategy, since all stock may be af- blages from cave sites. Bar segments from left (dark) to right (light): ovi-
fected by localized disease or disaster. However, caprines, cattle, pigs. Faunal assemblages were grouped into four chrono-
the relative expense of maintaining exclusively logical phases: 1 – early and middle Neolithic, 2 – late Neolithic/Eneolithic
one kind of stock may be expected to decrease (Hvar and Nakovana culture), 3 – late Eneolithic/Early Bronze Age (Cetina
group and Adriatic type of Ljubljana culture), 4 – early and middle Bronze
with a large number of animals, primarily due to age. However, loose stratigraphic control over contexts, a general lack of
the organization of labour, which is aimed at the radiocarbon data, and difficulties connected with traditional chronologies
rather predictable requirements of only one spe- based on pottery typology mean that this chronological sequence has only
cies. Carnivorous pastoralism is often based on heuristic value. Data sources: Acijev spodmol (Turk et al. 1992a), Caverna
only one species, for example reindeer in the dei Ciclami/Orehova pejca (Riedel 1968), Grotta dell’Edera/Stenašca
(Boschin and Riedel 2000), Gospodska pećina (Cvitanić 1979), Grapčeva
case of Siberian peoples (Paine 1971; Ingold špilja (Frame 1998), Mitreo/Mitrej (Steffe De Piero 1978; Petrucci 1997),
1980), or sheep and goats in the case of the Na- Odmut (Marković 1985), Pećinovac (Brajković et al. 1997), Podmol pri
vajo (Gary 1973; Kelley and Whitley 1989) or Kastelcu (Turk et al. 1992b), Pupićina peč (Miracle and Pugsley 2006), Spila
Basseri (Barth 1961). It can even be said that it (Marković 1985), Tartaruga (Cannarella and Redivo 1981), Trhlovca at
is specialization, that does not enable conversion Triglavca (Turk 1980), Grotta degli Zingari/Ciganska jama (Bon 1996).
of stock and therefore alternative forms of secu-
rity, which drives households towards the accu-
mulation of herds and the fragmentation of
economic responsibility, the signature of car-
nivorous pastoralism (Ingold 1980).
Most of the faunal assemblages from the cave
sites demonstrate high proportion of ovicapri-
nes and very low proportion of cattle and pigs
(Fig. 4). There are some outliers where wild Figure 5: Comparison of diachronic trends in the structure of bone assem-
animals predominate (Mala Triglavca, Zin- blages from open air sites. Legend on Fig. 4. Data sources: Buković-Lastvine
gari/Ciganska and Odmut). An interesting case (Schwartz in Chapman et al. 1996, 203-205), Monkodonja (Brajković et al.
1998; Becker 1999), Nin and Smilćić (Schwartz 1988), Tinj-Podlivade
is Grotta Tartaruga with high proportion of cat- (Schwartz in Chapman et al. 1996, 186-196).
tle in the Neolithic/Eneolithic and Eneo-
lithic/Bronze Age. This diversification may indi- remain the most common animal in the herds.
cate complementary use of sites within the set- This trend may demonstrate transition to more
tlement pattern, with some sites used as pre- diversified herds.
dominately hunting camps or cattle stables. Diversification refers to a strategy in which
A shift towards lower proportion of ovicapri- multiple kinds of animals are kept, and are usu-
nes and higher proportion of cattle and domes- ally managed for different products. There are
tic pigs can be observed from the Eneolithic many advantages to be gained from the diversi-
onwards (Fig. 4 and 6), although ovicaprines fication of stock holding. Since different animals
Who were the Cyclopes? 9

Sherrat (1981; 1987). However, the


analysis of remnant dairy lipids pre-
served in ceramic vessels from Early
Neolithic farming settlements in central
and eastern Europe clearly demon-
strated that dairying was practised by
some of Europe's earliest farming
groups (Craig et al. 2005; Copley et al.
2005a; Copley et al. 2005b).4 Neverthe-
less, it should be noted that identifica-
tion of small-scale dairying in the Early
Neolithic does not rule out the latter
intensification in the Eneolithic and
Bronze Age, as proposed by Sherrat in
Figure 6: Combined long term trends in the structure of bone assemblages from revision of his model (Sherratt 1997).
cave and open air sites. See legend and data sources on Fig. 4 and 5. The key archaeological issue is therefore
the scale of dairying and its significance
graze on complementary plants, their combina- in the Neolithic, Eneolithic and Bronze
tion permits a more effective utilization of land. Age pastoral economies.
They are attacked by different diseases and para- The traditional method of detection of animal
sites, so a diversified herd is less vulnerable to strategies is an analysis of survivorship graphs or
loss due to the diseases. Diversification may kill-off curves. Sebastian Payne proposed a mid-
help to even out irregularities in the food supply, dle range theory, based on the ethno-archaeo-
for in pastoral species oestrum, duration of ges- logical research among Turkish pastoralists,
tation, and lactation periods vary. Moreover, the which links flock management strategies to kill-
presence of different stock within pastoral off curves (Payne 1973). It is based on the as-
economy creates the possibility of conversion sumption than an optimization of animal prod-
from one to another through exchange (Dahl ucts can be obtained by manipulating the sex
and Hjort 1976, 223-230). and age structure of the herd. In the ideal dairy-
In the contrast, assemblages from open air ing model, most animals younger than two
sites (Fig. 5, 6) demonstrates generally higher months are culled in order to reduce competi-
ratio of domestic animals (up to 95 %), lower tion for milk with people. With an optimal meat
proportion of ovicaprines and higher proportion strategy most animals are culled after one to
of cattle and pigs. This pattern is typical for sed- three years, as they achieve their maximum
entary agropastoralism. Mixed farmers build a weight. There are problems with interpretation
herd of sheep, goats and cattle, which serve dif- of kill-of curves and there is no place to discuss
ferent functions. It supplies manure, milk and them there (see Halstead 1998; Munson 2000).
meat and acts as a back-up resource which can In my opinion the main problem behind use of
as be used after bad harvest or when dowry is idealized curves is assumption that optimality in
required (Halstead 1996, 22-24). the context of domestic production and con-
sumption is equal to the optimality in the con-
text of production for market.
Meat or milk? Combined kill-off curves were constructed us-
ing ovicaprine dentition data from cave sites
Cyclopes milked their sheep and made cheese. (Fig. 7). Combined curves display trend towards
That dairying was an innovation of the 3rd mil-
lennium BC as a component of the secondary 4 Milk lipids were recently identified also in the Middle
products complex was first proposed by Andrew Neolithic Vlaška group pottery from Mala Triglavca cave
(Lučka Šoberl, pers. comm.).
10 Dimitrij Mlekuž

lower cull of infantile and juvenile animals and


greater cull of adult sheep and goats. While
more than 80 % of animals were slaughtered
before they reached two years in the Middle
Neolithic, this proportion falls to the 50 % in
the Eneolithic/Early Bronze Age.
No curve resembles either the ideal meat or
milk model. Examples of optimized meat
economies can be found – among others – in
Neolithic Greek (Halstead 1996) and Dalmatian
open-air sites (Mlekuž 2005, 36). However, these
are relatively large, occupied all year round, and
provide evidence of domestic and agricultural
activities.
Similar curves from Pupićina Cave (Miracle
and Forenbaher 2005; Miracle and Pugsley
2006) and Arene Candide (Rowley-Conwy 2000) Figure 7: Combined survivorship (kill-off) curves for cave sites. Data
were interpreted as a result of dairying strategy. I sources: Edera/Stenašca (Boschin and Riedel 2000), Mitreo/Mitrej (Petrucci
1997), Ciclami/Orehova, Zingari/Ciganska (Bon 1996). Data was collected
believe that this might not be the case. from available published reports, standardized and compared to the idealized
Neolithic curves are only superficially similar survivorship curves of herd management for the production of milk and
to the ideal dairy curve. Extremely low cull of meat compiled by Payne (1973).
adult animals – characteristic of early curves – is
typical signature of carnivorous pastoralism, as it where a small number of a variety of animals is
is aimed at maximization of the number of ani- kept for a mixture of products (meat and milk)
mals in the herd. In my opinion, Neolithic principally for domestic use. This pattern not
curves demonstrate a economy aimed at maxi- only seems more economically plausible, but is
mization of herds and domestic, small scale con- also evident in a trend toward diversity that ex-
sumption of meat and not strategies aimed at ists in the Late Neolithic, Eneolithic and Broze
maximizing dairying products. Age faunal assemblages.
However, this does not exclude small-scale
dairying of sheep and goats. Since goats are
more effective milk producers than sheep one Conclusions
would expect that goats were milked and sheep
were slaughtered. Goats are present in the herds There are many similarities between Cyclopes
since the introduction of domestic animals in and east Adriatic and Dinaric pastoralists, such
the eastern Adriatic. However, their proportion as use of caves as sheep pens and camps and
to sheep in assemblages from where kill-of specialized pastoralism based on ovicaprines.
curves were constructed is low, around 20 %, This similarity of course doesn’t mean that
rendering their role in small-scale dairying in- east Adriatic and Dinaric pastoralists are the Cy-
visible in the crude resolution of survivorship clopes. Account of the Cyclopes in the Odyssey
curves. 9 suggests that pastoral way of life that was radi-
In diversified herds, small stock is exploited cally different from Greek experience existed on
principally for meat, while cattle are kept as a the edge of the Aegean world. On the other
source of milk (Dahl and Hjort 1976). Survivor- hand, archaeological record indicates that groups
ship graphs from the Late Neolithic/Eneolithic from east Adriatic and Dinarides practised spe-
onwards may demonstrate trends towards the cialized pastoralism, which is different from
optimization of meat production of ovicaprines, small-scale mixed farming practised in Greece at
which is a result of mixed herding strategies, the same time.
Who were the Cyclopes? 11

East Adriatic and Dinaric groups can be un- seen as result of long process of transformation
derstood as full-scale pastoralists. Although full of pastoralist groups towards more territorial
scale pastoralism is rare in ethnograhical record, and competitive groups. This transformation
“ethnographical” account from the Odyssey was probably accelerated through external
woven together with archaeological record pro- stimulus with complex Bronze Age societies of
vides evidence of the existence of full-scale pas- the Aegean. There is now an emerging evidence
toralists on the edge of Greek world. of contacts of north Adriatic coastal communi-
Encounters with specialised pastoralist on the ties with Mycenaean societies (Hänsel and
edge of the Aegean world became part of “eth- Teržan 2000; Mihovilić et al. 2005). Through
nographic imagination” which was then woven these overseas contacts, stories and accounts of
into the epic. Odyssey can therefore put a lot of contacts with specialized pastoral groups could
meat on the dry archaeological bones. Archaeo- enter into “ethnographic imagination” of
logical data suggest that east Adriatic and the Greeks, leading to the creation of the Cyclopes.
Dinarides were settled by small, autarchic and Odyssey 9 therefore provides an alternative,
very mobile groups, which relied heavily on and in my opinion, much betters analogy than
flocks of ovicaprines. They moved around a lot modern ethnographies of pastoral groups, such
and used caves as stations in a annual cycle of as Vlachs. Modern, ethnographic documented
migration. Although they drank milk from the pastoral practices are neither remnants from the
beginning of pastoralism, there is a visible shift deep past neither timeless adaptation to the
in animal management strategies, geared towards Mediterranean landscape. Modern ethnographi-
greater importance of dairy products from the cally documented pastoralism is a complex result
Eneolithic onwards. Their society was frag- of adaptation to different natural and historical
mented and consisted of households, which rhythms, economical conjectures, political proc-
moved around the landscape with their flocks. esses and events and most of all the response to
The political life was kept to minimum. Al- the emergence of the capitalism. To project it
though they adopted many external influences back in the prehistory, with far more restricted
such as metal tools and new pottery styles, core exchange, absence of centralised markets and
features of their way of life, such as tending less hierarchical political systems is utterly
sheep and visiting fixed places in the landscape anachronistic (Mlekuž in press).
remained very stable and unchanged over mil-
lennia.
However, shifts connected with less special- Re f e re nc e s
ised pastoralism and greater importance of dairy
products, may lead to profound social changes ACOVITSIOTI-HAMEAU A., J.-É. BROCHIER and P.
HAMEAU 1988, Témoignages et marqueurs du pasto-
which are reflected in the Bronze Age archaeo- ralisme actuel en Grèce: une ethnographie des gestes et
logical record. Less pronounced seasonality des restes et les applications archaéologiques corrélées.
which can be observed from the Eneolithic on- – Ethnologia 6–7, 93–135.
wards may be result of greater territoriality of BANNING I. and I. KOHLER-ROLLEFSON 1992,
the groups. This process can be linked to the Ethnographic lessons for the pastoral past: camp loca-
tions and material remains near Beidha, Southern Jor-
emergence of enclosed hilltop settlements and dan. – In: O. BAR-YOSEF AND A. KHAZANOV
erection of stone cairns (Čović 1980; Goveda- (eds.) Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological materials and
rica 1989). In Dalmatia, cairns are result of local anthropological perspectives, Monographs in World Archae-
cultivation of stony soils of the carstic hinterland ology 10, 181–204. – Chichago.
at the beginning of the Bronze Age (Chapman et BARTH F. 1961, Nomads of South Persia. – Boston.
BECKER C. 1999, Initial comments on slaughter and
al. 1996, 335-343) and therefore mark the shift consumption refuse from monkodonja, a Middle
in the use of the landscape, which was previ- Bronze Age castelliere in the Istrian coast. – In: C.
ously used for pasture only. Middle and late BECKER, H. MANHART, J. PETERS and J.
Bronze Age settlement pattern can therefore be SCHIBLER (eds.) Historia animalium ex ossibus. Festschrift
12 Dimitrij Mlekuž

für Angela von den Driesch, Studia honoraria 8, 55–64. Lei- in the Grevena Region, Greece. – Journal of Field Archae-
dorf, Rahden/Westf. ology 20, 249–264.
BENNET J. 1997, Homer and the Bronze Age. – In: B. CHANG, C. and P. MURRAY 1981, An Ethnoarchae-
B. POWELL and I. MORRIS (eds.) A New Companion to ological Study of Contemporary Herder's Site. – Journal
Homer, 511 – 533. – Leiden. of Field Archaeology 8, 373–381.
BON M. 1996, La fauna neolitica della Grotta degli Zin- CHAPMAN, J., R. SHIEl and Š. BATOVIĆ 1996, The
gari nel Carso Triestino. – Atti della Societá per la Praistoria changing face of Dalmatia. – Leicester.
e Protoistoria della Regione Friuli – Venezia Giulia 9, 127– CHERRY, J. F. 1988, Pastoralism and the role of animals
135. in the pre- and protohistroic economies of the Aegean.
BOSCHIAN G. and E. MONTAGNARI KOKELJ 2000, – In: C. R. WHITTAKER (ed.) Pastoral economies in classi-
Prehistoric Shepherds and Caves in the Trieste Karst cal antiquity, 6–34. – Cambridge.
(Northeastern Italy). – Geoarchaeology: An International CLIFFORD, J. and G. E. MARCUS 1986, Introduction:
Journal 150(4), 331–371. partial truths. – In: J. C. CLIFFORD (ed.) Writing culture.
BOSCHIAN G. 2006, Geoarchaeology of Pupićina Cave. The poetics and politics of ethnography, 1–25. – Berkeley, Los
– In: P. T. MIRACLE and S. FORENBAHER (eds.) Angeles.
Prehistoric herders of nortehern Istria. The archaeology of Pu- COPLEY, M. S., R. BERSTAN, A. J. MUKHERJEE, S.
pićina cave. Volume 1, Monografije i katalozi 14, 123–162. N. DUDD, V. STRAKER, S. PAYNE and R. P.
– Pula. EVERSHED 2005a, Dairying in antiquity. III. Evi-
BOSCHIN F. and A. RIEDEL 2000, The late Mesolithic dence from absorbed lipid residues dating to the British
and Neolithic fauna of the Edera cave (Aurisina, Trieste Neolithic . – Journal of Archaeological Science 32(4), 523–
Karst): a preliminary report. – Società Preistoria Protoistoria 546.
Friuli – Venezia Giulia, Trieste, Quaderno 8 , 73–90. COPLEY M. S., R. BERSTAN, S. N. DUDD, S. AIL-
BRAJKOVIĆ D., M. PAUNOVIĆ and M. POJE 1998, LAUD, A. J. MUKHERJEE, V. STRAKER, S.
The fauna of the Bronze Age Hillfort Monkodonja. – PAYNE AND R. P. EVERSHED 2005b, Processing of
In: K. BURŠIĆ-MATIJAŠIĆ (ed.) Monkodonja Hillfort, milk products in pottery vessels through British prehis-
Monografije i katalozi 9, 125–154. – Pula. tory. – Antiquity 79, 895–908.
BRAJKOVIĆ D., V. MALEZ, L. MARJANAC, J. CRAIG, O. E. , J. CHAPMAN, C. HERON, L. H.
MAUCH LENDARIĆ, M. PAUNOVIĆ and M. POJE WILLIS, L. BARTOSIEWITZ, G. TAYLOR, A.
1997, Paleontološka i sedimentološka istraživanja špilje WHITTLE and M. COLLINS 2005, Did the first farm-
Pećinovac kod Okreti (Kanfanar), Hrvatska. – Histria ers of central and eastern Europe produce dairy foods?.
Archaeologica 28, 5–36. – Antiquity 79, 882–894.
BROCHIER J.-É. 1983, Bergeries et feux de bois néoli- CVITANIĆ, A. 1979, Osteološki nalazi in Gospodske
thiques dans le Midi de la France. – Quartär 33./34., pećine kod izvora Cetine. – Vjesnik za arheologiju i his-
181–194. toriju damatinsku 72–73, 51–64.
BROCHIER J.–É. 1990, – Des techniques géo- ČEČUK, B. and D. RADIĆ 2005, Vela spila : višeslojno
archélogiques au service de l'étude des paysages et de pretpovijesno nalazište Vela Luka – otok Korčula. – Vela
leur exploitation In: J. L. FICHES and S. VAN DER Luka.
LEEUW (eds.), Archéologie et espaces 453–472. – Antibes. ČOVIĆ, B. 1980, La prima e media età del bronzo sulle
BROCHIER, J.-É. 1991, – In: J. GUILAINE (ed.) Géoar- coste orientali dell'Adriatico e sul suo retroterra . –
chéologie du monde agropastoral, 303–322. – Paris. Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka istraživanja 18(16), 5–20.
BROCHIER, J.-É. 1996, Feuilles u fumiers? Observations DAHL, G. and A. HJORT 1976, Having herds: pastoral herd
sur rôle des poussièers sphérolitiques dans l'interpréta- growth and household economy. – Stockholm.
tion des dépôts archéologiques holocèenes. – Anthropo- DOUGHERTY, C. 2001, The Raft of Odysseus: The Ethno-
zoologica 24, 19–30. graphic Imagination of Homer's Odyssey. – New York.
BROCHIER, J.-É. 2006, Des hommes et des bêtes : une EVANS-PRITCHARD, E. 1993, Ljudstvo Nuer. Opisi nači-
approche naturaliste de l'histoire et des pratiques de nov preživljanja in političnih institucij enega izmed nilotskih ljud-
l'élevage. – In: J. GUILAINE (ed.) Populations néolithiques stev. – Ljubljana.
et environnements, Collection des Hespérides, 137–152. – FINLEY, M. I. 2002, The World of Odyssey. – New York.
Paris. FORENBAHER, S. and T. VRANJICAN 1985, Vaga-
BROCHIER, J.-É., P. V. VILLA, M. G. GIACOMARRA naćka pećina. – Opuscula Archaeologica 10, 1–21.
and A. T. TAGLIACOZO 1992, Shepherds and Sedi- FRAME, S. A. 1998, Poetic spaces: The archaeology of a Medi-
ments: Geo-archaeology of pastoral sites. – Journal of terranean landscape. – PhD thesis, University of California,
Anthropological Archaeology 11, 47–102. Berkeley.
CANNARELLA, D. and B. Redivo 1981, La grotta della GARY, W. 1973, Sheep in Navajo Culture and Social
Tartaruga. Liveli a ceramica. – Atti della Societá per la Prei- Organization. – American Anthropologist, New Series 75(5),
storia e la Protoistoria del Friuli – Venezia Giulia 4. 1441–1447.
CHANG, C. and P. A. TOURTTELLORTTE 1993, Eth- GOVEDARICA, B. 1989, Rano brončano doba na području
noarchaeological survey of pastoral transhumance sites istočnog Jadrana. – Sarajevo.
Who were the Cyclopes? 13

GROENMAN-VAN WAATERINGE, W. 1993, The MORRIS, I. 1997, Homer and the Iron age. – In: B. Pow-
effect of grazing on pollen production of grasses. – ell and I. Morris (eds.) A New Companion to Homer, 535 –
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 2, 157–162. 559. – Leiden.
HALSTEAD, P. 1993, Lost sheep? On the Linear B evi- MUNSON P. J. 2000, Age – correlated Differential De-
dence for breeding flock at mycenaean Knossos and Py- struction of Bones and its Effect on Archaeological
los. – Minos , 345–365. Mortality Profiles of Domestic Sheep and Goats. – Jour-
HALSTEAD, P. 1996, Pastoralism or household herding? nal of Archaeological Science 27(5), 391–407.
Problems of scale and specialization in early Grek ani- NAGY, G. 1996, Homeric questions. – Austin.
mal husbandry. – World Archaeology 28(18), 20–42. PAINE, R. 1971, Animals as capital: comparision among
HALSTEAD, P. 1998, Mortality models and milking: northern nomadic herders and hunters. – Anthropological
problems of uniformitarianism, optimality and equifinal- Quartely 44(3), 157–172.
ity. – Anthropozoologica 27, 3–20. PAYNE, S. 1973, Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the
HÄNSEL, B. and B. TERŽAN 2000, Ein bronzezeitliches mandibles from Asvan Kale. – Anatolian studies 23, 281–
Kuppelgrab außerhalb der mykenischen Welt im Norden der Ad- 303.
ria. – Berlin. PETRUCCI, G. 1997, Resti di fauna dai livelli neolitici e
HÄNSEL, B., K. MIHOVILIĆ and B. TERŽAN 1997, post – neolitici della Grotta del Mitreo nel Carso di
Monkodonja, utvrđeno protourbano naselje starijeg i Trieste (Scavi 1967). – Atti della Societá per la Praistoria e
srednjeg brončanog doba kod Rovinja u Istri. – Histria Protoistoria della Regione Friuli – Venezia Giulia 10, 99–118.
archaeologica 28, 57–107. RIEDEL, A. 1968, I Mamifer domestici della Caverna dei
INGOLD, T. 1980, Hunters, pastoralists and ranchers. – Ciclami nel Carso Triestino. – Atti e Memorie della Com-
Cambridge. missione Grotte ``E. Boegan'' 82, 79–110.
KELLEY, K. B. and P. M. WHITLEY 1989, Navajoland: ROBERTSHAW, P. 1978, The archaeology of an aban-
family, settlement and land use. – Tsaile (Arizona). doned pastoralist camp-site. – South African Journal of Sci-
KILLEN, J. T. 1985, The Linear B tablets and the ence 74, 29–31.
Mycenaean economy. – In: A. MORPURGO-DAVIES ROWLEY-CONWY, P. 2000, Milking caprines, hunting
and Y. DUHOUX (eds.) Linear B: A 1984 Survey. Pro- pigs. – In: P. ROWLEY-CONWY (ed.) Animal Bones,
ceedings of the Mycenaean Colloquium of the VIIIth Congress of Human Societies, 124–132. – Oxford.
the International Federation of the Societies of Classical Studies SCHWARTZ, C. A. 1988, The Neolithic animal Hus-
(Dublin, 27 August – 1st September 1984), Bibliothèque des bandry of Smilćić and Nin. – In: J. CHAPMAN, J.
Cahiers de l'Institut de Linguistique de Louvain 26, BINTLIFF, V. GAFFNEY AND B. SLAPŠAK (eds.)
241–305. – Leuven. Recent developments in Yugoslav Archaeology, BAR Interna-
MARIJANOVIĆ, B. 2000, Prilozi za prapovijest u zaledju tional Series 431, 45–75. – Oxford.
Jadranske obale. – Zadar. SHAW, B. 1982, "Eaters of Flesh, Drinkers of Milk": The
MARIJANOVIĆ, B. 2005, Gudnja – višeslojno prapovijesno Ancient Mediterranean Ideology of the Pastoral No-
nalazište. – Dubrovnik. mad. – Ancient Society 13–14, 5–31.
MARKOVIĆ, Č. 1977, The stratigraphy and chronology SHERRATT, A. 1987, Wool, Wheels and Ploughmarks:
of the Odmut cave. – Archaeolgia Iugoslavica 15, 7–12. Local Development or Outside Introductions in Neo-
MARKOVIĆ, Č. 1985, Neolit Crne Gore. – Beograd. lithic Europe. – Bulletin of the London University Institute of
MIHOVILIĆ, K., B. TERŽAN, B. HÄNSEL, D. MA- Archaeology 23, 1–15.
TOŠEVIĆ and C. BECKER 2005, Rovinj prije SHERRATT, A. 1981, Plough and pastoralism: aspects of
Rima/Rovigno prima dei Romani/Rovinj vor den Römern. – the Secondary Products Revolution. – In: I. HODDER,
Kiel. G. ISAAC and N. HAMMOND (eds.) Pattern of the past:
MIRACLE, P. T. and L. PUGSLEY 2006, Vertebrae Studies in honour of David Clarke, 261–306. – Cambridge.
faunal remains from Pupićina cave. – In: P. T. MIRA- SHERRATT, A. S. 1997, The Secondary Exploitation of
CLE, and S. FORENBAHER (eds.) Prehistoric herders of Animals in the Old World (revised). – Economy and Soci-
nortehern Istria. The archaerology of Pupićina cave. Volume 1, ety in Prehistoric Europe. – Edinburgh.
Monografije i katalozi 14, 259–399. – Pula. STEFFE DE PIERO, G. 1978, Note sui resti faunistici
MIRACLE, P. T. and S. FORENBAHER 2005, Neolithic racolti nella Grotta del Mitreo (Carso Triestino). – Qua-
and Bronze Age Herders of Pupićina Cave, Croatia. – derni di Storia Antica ed Epigrafia dell'Universita degli Stdui di
Journal of Field Archaeology 30, 255–281. Trieste 29, 31–38.
MLEKUŽ, D. 2005, The ethnography of the Cyclops: TERŽAN, B. 2001, Dolgoživi spomin. Prežitki
Neolithic pastoralists in the eastern Adriatic. – Docu- halštatskega obredja v pustnih šegah na Slovenskem? –
menta Praehistorica 32, 15–51. Arheološki vestnik 52, 207–219.
MLEKUŽ, D. in press, Preden so ovce jedle ljudi: pred- TURK, I. 1980, Začasno poročilo o najdbah favne v jami Trigla-
kapitalistične oblike pastirstva. – In: J. REPIČ (ed.) vci pri Divači. – Institute of Archaeology at ZRC SAZU.
Brumnov spominski zbornik. Županičeva knjižnica 18. – – Ljubljana. (Unpublished report)
Ljubljana. TURK, I., A. BAVDEK, V. PERKO, M. CULIBERG, A.
ŠERCELJ, J. DIRJEC and P. PAVLIN 1992a, Acijev
14 Dimitrij Mlekuž

spodmol pri Petrinjah, Slovenija. – Poročilo o raziskovanju VILFAN, S. 1957, Podobe iz nekdanje živinoreje med
paleolita, neolita in eneolita v Sloveniji 20, 27–48. Trstom in Slavnikom. – Kronika V(2), 69–88.
TURK, I., Z. MODRIJAN, T. PRUS, M. CULIBERG, A.
ŠERCELJ, A. PERKO, J. DIRJEC and P. PAVLIN
1992b, Podmol pri Kastelcu – novo večfazno najdišce Dimitrij Mlekuž
na Krasu, Slovenija. – Arheološki vestnik 44, 45–96. Oddelek za arheologijo
VIDAL-NAQUET, P. 1985, Religiozne in mitčne vred- Filozofska fakulteta / Univerza v Ljubljani
nosti zemlje in žrtvovanja v Odiseji. – Črni lovec. – Lju- Aškerčeva 2
bljana. SI - 1000 Ljubljana
e - mail: dimitrij.mlekuz@guest.arnes.si

You might also like