Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ethnoarchaeology
Author(s): J. G. Nandris
Source: World Archaeology, Vol. 17, No. 2, Ethnoarchaeology (Oct., 1985), pp. 256-268
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/124514
Accessed: 29/11/2008 01:01
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World
Archaeology.
http://www.jstor.org
lhe Stina and the Katun:foundations of a
Zone
researchdesign in EuropeanHigghland
ethnoarchaeology
J G. NIandris
Introduction.
This paper aim to outline som of the assumptions and researchdesign underlyingwork in
progress on the Highland Zone Ethnoarchaeology Project, which is supported by the British
Academy and the. Society of Antiquaries,and by the CentralResearchFund and the Hayter
Funds of London University.It also describesvery briefly a spectrumof traditionalsettlement
types in south-eastEuropewhich should be of some interest, since they lie outside what usually
seem. to be the accepted norms among archaeologistsfor prehistoric village or homestead
settlement.
The Project itself deals with the landscapearchaeology,recordingand ethnoarchaeologyof
small sites and the history of exploitation of the highlandzone of south-eastEurope. It aimsto
promote the excavation of upland sites of many periods;and the expernmentalexcavation of
recently abandoned sites setting their interpretationagainstoral testimony and ethnographic
data.
The objectivein this paperis to clarify some of the aims and methods, and to drawattention
to the potential of the subject in the limited space available;it is not primarilyto describe
results,which would take up a greatdeal more space.
One important distinction which has arisen in the course of the work will however be
mentioned; namely that between the settlement types of the Katun and the Stina. For the
ethcnoarchaeologist this is not an ethnic but a generalisedworkingdistinctionbetween pattemns
of highland zone settlement, albeit characteristicallywell representedamong certain'human
grotups.
It is necessary first to outline the research design; then to define the Stina and Katun,
a.d to say something about human groups in the areaof south-eastEurope. It can be assumed
that some aspects of behaviour are described in the historic present. Ethnoarchaeologyis
not simply the projection into the past of minute ethnographicparticulars(Nandris 1984;
Nandris forthcoming (a)). To do ethnoarchaeologyis not to renounce the methods available
to scntific archaeology, but rather to use them to capture an abundant body of anthro-
pological data which has notably failed to evolve for itself an adequateexplanatoryframework.
It also provides a reciprocalcritique of archaeologicalmethodology. The exploration of the
highland zone in the course of the Project revealsnew sites and neglected aspects of its pre-
historic exploitation.
WorldArchaeology Volume 1 7No. 2 Ethnoarchaeology
?R.K.P. 1985 0043-8243/85/1702-256 $1.50/1
EuropeanHighlandZone ethnoarchaeology 25 7
Researchdesign
The aim of the HighlandZone EthnoarchaeologyProject is to plan and record in detail small-
scale sites of variousperiods with special attention to the materialoutcome of behaviour,and
to comparethese regionallyso as to offer explanationsat a level which may compensatefor the
imperfections of the individual records. Small ethnoarchaeologicalsites can be studied and
even excavated economically and flexibly; what they show is that even the simplest of these
sites is extremely complex. A higher level of interpretationcan often be achievedby treating
regionsand sites comparatively.
As a samplingprocedure this is or should be analogous with archaeologicalresearch;but
without the great investment of time, money and effort in individualexcavations, in order to
justify which the archaeologistis too often anxious to offer explanations at a far higher level
than the actual data from his particularsite will warrant.The aim is alwaysto relate to archae-
ological problems, and to increase knowledge of highland zone exploitation by detecting
new sites. Their environmental and economic histories must be studied according to the
resources available,and the Project brings together unusual combinations of techniiquesand
problems.
The study of highlandzone sites has its own difficulties, and these are not merely logistical.
One of the characteristicsof highlandzone exploitation is the ephemeral,often seasonal,nature
of the site, with a technology based on organics, such as bone, wood, bark, furs and hides,
cheese and milk products. Wooden vessels are traditionallypreferredat the RomanianStina,
being far better suited to the rough conditions of life and travel to and fro than is pottery.
Mountainsites tend to be in areassusceptibleto hill wash and rapidgeomorphologicaldestabil-
isation; sheepfolds are located on slopes for preference,to give the animalsbetter drainageand
protection from foot infections. An appreciationof the many factorswhich condition this form
of settlement is one of the immediateresultsof the project, togetherwith an idea of the impor-
tance of the relationshipto the lowland economic and social context. The complementarityof
highlandand lowlandexploitation is a constant featurethroughoutthe Neothermalin Europe.
In this sort of work, where it would be rashto rely solely on one researchobjective, a highly
flexible seriesof aimshas been evolved, centringon:
1 Katun and Stina sites in occupation;behaviouraland materialstudies.
2 Experimentalexcavationof recently abandonedsites; using oral testimony.
3 Location of Mediaevaland Prehistorichighlandsites; their conformity to or departurefrom
criteriaestablishedby ethnoarchaeologicalwork.
4 Environmentaland interdisciplinarystudies.
Some of the associatedmethods are self-evident:
1 Recording of the site location and total situation in the context of landscapearchaeology,
in-site plan, in-structureplan, on-site and regional(inter-site) activities, seasonalbehaviour,
place in seasonal cycle, material objects, location and uses of materials. Measuredergo-
nomics of the site and its structures, e.g., assessmentsof numbers of occupants against
dimensions and features. Loss exercises on organic materials (proportions of surviving
evidence). What happens when the sites decay? How do material remains correlate with
behaviour?How do artefactsget deposited?(Examplesof such plans,recordingevery feature
and artefact,are givenin Figs. 3, 4 and 5.)
258 J. G. Nandris
Ethnoarchaeologyin south-eastEurope
The remoter highlaid areas of south-east Europe preserve some rapidly vanishingsocial and
occupational forms, among which are some specialised in seasonal pastoralism. There are
also agriculturaland other groups which are not discussedhere. The indications are that com-
parableforms of behaviour and material culture formerly extended much more widely both
in space and time over the Europeanscene. In the geographicaldimension indications of this
can be detected even in the hearvilyindustrialisedcountries of western Europe; while as a
chronologicalexample, artefactsstill used at the RomanianStina can be found in the Cortaillod
sites of Switzerland.
By 'south-eastEurope' is meant the countriesgroupedsouth and north of the lower Danube
and adjacentBlack Sea and Mediterranean.To the south of the Danubethese comprisemodern
Greece, Bulgaria,Albania, and eastern YugoslaviaparticularlyMacedoniaand Serbia.North of
the Danube are included Romania and the adjacent parts of the Hungarianbasin together
with the YugoslavVoivodina.
The main highlands in the north are the Carpathianchain, rising to over 2,500 metres,
curving through Romania as a pastoralcontinuum through Czechoslovakiaand into southern
Poland. South of the Danube are the Balkan and Rhodope rangesof Bulgaria(2,900 metres),
the fragmentedhighlandsand basinsof Serbiaand Macedonia,and the high peaks of the Pindus
and Albania,risingto over 2,600 and 2,700 metres.
The individualityand variety of human culture in this region is proverbial.For political or
religiousreasons it is often complicatedby mimesisand disguise,with many a pitfall of nomen-
clature, definition and history for the unwary Balkanologist.It is necessaryto distinguishnot
only between but within such groups as Gypsies,Yuruks,Pomaks,Gagauzi,Sarakatsani,Turks,
Arvanites,Morlahi, Cici, Motii, Mijaci, Farsherotes,Karaguni,Gramosteni,Bunjevci,Cincari,
Karakachani,Arornani,and a numberof others.
The distinctions between these groups and the complex relationshipsobservable in them
between behaviour, identity, and material culture, should ideally give momentary pause to
archaeologistseager to press ahead with explanationsof prehistoricsocial structure.Failureto
comprehend the complex ethnoarchaeology of these groups, or the relationships of their
behaviourto their materialculture, constitutes the rejection of a livinglaboratoryof vanishing
material.
It is neither possible nor necessaryto describeall these groupshere. Only three of them wiil
be summarised:the Aromani,the Sarakatsani,and the RomanianPastoralists,becausethese are
of fundamentalimportancein the basic categorisationof the Stina and the Katun,to which we
are drawingattention.
The Aomani
South of the Danubethe most importantgroup arethe Aromani.Theirname, with its character-
istic 'a' prefix,simply means 'Ronans', and they speak a form of provincialLatin. The Aromani
EuropeanHighlandZone ethnoarchaeology 261
The Sarakatsani
An importantgroup although less numerousthan the Aromaniare the Sarakatsani.They speak
Greek, and may owe their origins to the dispersalof villagesin the Epirus at the time of the
destruction of Moschopoljeby Ali Pasha(see e.g. Beuermann1967; 140 sqq.). Their assump-
tion of a totally new life and identity in this way is fully consistent with other examples of
such changes, of which ethnoarchaeologistsin particular need to be aware. A comparable
example is provided by the assumptionfor historical reasons, by south-eastEuropean 'Vlahs',
262 J. G. Nandris
Figure 1 Strategic location of sites in the Pindus, on cols and passes. Aminciu (Metsovo), a
central place of the Aromanisystem, is at 1,156 metresin the Pindus,at the junction of all the
majorriversystems of Greece.
Sarakatsaniwere almost truly 'nomadic', which is a much misused term, and something
ratherrare. They rangedover much of the northern Greek mainland,Albania, Macedoniaand
Bulgaria,and like the Aromaniused beehive huts of thatch on a saplingframework,organised
in Katun sites. Both cultures formed in their time an extension into Europeof the neareastem
European Highland Zone ethnoarchaeology 263
I.:: I. _ -I -- o- - - w _l??-~? _ a
I
n/-
II
POLYVALENT
r.
SEASONALITY
- - _r r
s
Metres I
ALPINE PASTURAGE
15000 r
I HAY- I
I
I MAKING
_ |~~~
i VILLAGES
500 n
'
LOWLAND
MAIZE
i
SEASONALALTITUDE/LOCATION
IN THEVRANCEAREGION
OF ROUMANIA
r
I?
i
ALPINE PASTURES I
IE"~-1
-
1 HAY-
, -|
HAY MEADOWS J I 1 MAKING
I i ; II I
II mI
i (Stubble)
_I
_ I j 1
AGRICULTURAL ZONE j
I
_
I I
s
S George S. MariaMare Christmas i
J 'F'M'A'M' J I J'A'S O N D
- --- OF PROFESSIONALPASTORALISTSSUCH AS THE MAiRGINENI
LOCATION
I - OF VILLAGERS
LOCATION
IN THEHATEG
OF POPULATION
SEASONALZONE/ LOCATION
REGIONOF ROUMANIA
.1111r_
?--.-- - =
r',' I I I - X ? I - .- - - - 8sl()
-7 ?~ 1I
technocomplex of pastoralism (not to be confused with the Yumk expansion under the Otto-
man Empire).
Romanian pastoralists
A third important group found north of the Danube is that of the Romanian shepherds based
264 J. G. Nandris
on Stina sites (see e.g., Butura 1978, Vuia 1980) who exploit the pasturesof the Carpathian
chain. These mountains are favoured with peneplanationsurfaces at high altitude (Boresco
surfaces),ideal for pasture.Even where these featuresare absentin the north the characteristic
features perfected in Romanian pastoralismcan be traced through Czechoslovakiaand into
southern Poland, where they are reflected in the culture of the Gorale mountaineersof the
Tatra. High-altitude settlement (e.g., 1,400 metres) exploiting these capabilities is known
archaeologicallyin Romaniafrom at least the Iron Age (Nandris1981).
There is a whole rangeof adaptationswithin Romanianpastoralism,too complex to trace
here. They range from the isolated wholly male society of professionalshepherdsin the high
Stine, engaged in long-distance transhumance;to cooperative arrangementsinvolving both
hired shepherdsand the families of the villages on the lower slopes; to womens' Stine with
sheep, pigs and perhaps cattle or hens; or to the purely local grazing practised from quite
low-lying villages.The functions of the village are often complementedby the existence of the
Stina, as the Mandracomplementsthe Katun.
0 10 20m
Figure 3 Plan of KK 4.
Seasonality
That there are pitfalls in the interpretationof seasonality is clear from the ethnoarchaeology;
for example the Strunga (milking gate) will usually, but by no means universally,indicate
summer occupation, and the wooden feeding trough winter foddering. Howeverthe troughs
may be used to give salt in the summer;and sites with Strungimay be occupied in the winter.
EuropeanHighlandZone ethnoarchaeology 265
1..
t 19 2
-* '.~:-,
F:":'? Figure 4 Plan of KK 7. KK 7 and KK 4 are
\'"'fs':, VI~
~sites in the Kurucay-Kompsatos valley of the
..___
...._____..._...w_ Rhodope mountains, showing the features
0 10 2?m of the Mandrasof the region.
ments attested by the ethnoarchaeologyof the Stina in Romania,where the exploitation of the
mountains is graded from the immediate vicinity of the villages,through Stine further away
served on a weekly rota basis from the village, up to highlandStine which have little or no
relation with villages. There are important social distinctions, especially between male and
female roles.
0 to 20 30 .
Figure 5 Petrota is a goat 'Mandra'from coastal hills of Greek Thrace near Maronia:the
internalareawithin the penannularroofing is an acre, andthe sub-divisionsarehighly functional,
for milking, young kids etc. It is worth comparing the size of most archaeological excavations
with this site.
By contrast, under empires such as that of Rome, or under the Ottoman occupation of
eastern Europe, conditions were favourablein several ways for transhumananceon a larger
scale: profitable markets were made availableand the problem of frontiers as obstacles to
pastoralmovement was minimised,though like taxation it was not abolished.Underthe Soviet
empire in eastern Europe and in general under Marxist regimes the obstacle presented to
seasonalmovement by closed frontiershas been intensified. The profitabity of pastoralsm as
European Highland Zone ethnoarchaeology 267
Conclusion
This paperis predicatedon a numberof simplepropositions,even if the south-easternEuropean
materialto which it refers is unfamiliar.It recognisesthat ethnoarchaeology,with the aims of
clarifyingthe materialoutcome of behaviour,and of enlargingthe rangeof archaeologicalinter-
pretations,is a legitimate but not a novel concept. It seeks to show that the ethnoarchaeology
and archaeologyof the highlandzone urgently demand the special attention being given them
by the HighlandZone EthnoarchaeologyProject.
Just as archaeology itself is not entirely about the past, so ethnoarchaeologyis primarily
archaeologyand not anthropologyor ethnography.The practiceof ethnoarchaeologydoes not
entail the abandonmentof scientific archaeologicalmethods, but on the contrary the capture
of more data, primarilyfrom ethnography,on which to test such methods.
It ought to be more widely recognised that Europe itself has an ethnography,the ethno-
archaeologicalpotential of which, particularlyin application to its own prehistory,has been
sadly neglected. The currentproject tries to draw attention to what is a fast vanishingsource
of evidence. One of its results is the recognitionboth of the complexity of quite simple sites,
and of the fact that the mechanismsof seasonality and of social and regional variation are
more complex and polyvalent(in the sense defined above) than is usually allowed for in archae-
ological interpretations. Traditional and prehistoric European societies evolved their special
features without the benefit of doctrinalhelp from social theorists, and this paperhas tried to
do the same.
References
ment of Cucuteni in the European context. (Sent to press in: Proceedings of Cucuteni Ceentenary
Symposium. Petrescu-Dimbovita, M. edo, Iasi, Moldavia, Sept 1984.)
Nandris, J. G. (forthcoming (b)). The r- and K- strategy societies of Lepenski Vir in Early
Neothermal perspective. (Sent to press in: J. Mediterranean Anth. & Arch. Proc. Int. Confer-
ence on Lepenski Vir. Kl6n, February 1981).
Simionescu, I. 1940. TaraNoastra. Bucharest.
Vuia, R. 1980. Studii de etnografie si folclor. Bucharest: Editura Minerva.
Abstract
Nandris, John G.
The Stina and the Katun: foundations of a research design in European ethnoarchaeology
The article says something about the methods and assumptions involved in the Highland Zone
Ethnoarchaeology Project in south-east Europe, and about the implications of the fact that
Europe still has an ethnography. It goes on to distinguish two important types of primarily
pastoral site, whose definition is effectively social rather than narrowly morphological. Stina
sites are specialised pastoral complexes, often of small all-male occupational sub-groups, and
potentially analogous with hunting sites. Katun sites include perhaps 50 family units with
women and children; and both have a range of structures and behaviour which are of interest
to archaeologists.