Ivan Popović

Distribution of Holiday and Recreation Settlements in the Danube Basin From Belgrade to

Popović, Ivan1 INTRODUCTION fiably divided into two unequal parts, which A very small, stretched border part of , both belong to the northern () and i.e. such determined the Danube riverside, the southern (Prahovo) division of the east- Abstract also includes the localities where holiday ern Danube Basin. The northern Kladovo di- Observed within the frame of macro-ge- and recreation buildings have been gradu- vision includes four settlements (“Osojna”, ographical dimensions, the Danube Basin ally or hastily ”gathered” within such set- “Streževica”, “Meja” and “Slatinski most”, in Serbia belongs to the Pannonian (Mid- tlements. As it could be expected, these set- and additional three (“Dobra voda”, “Bare” dle) Danube Basin. In its larger, southeast- tlements have been distributed, at different and “Poljana”) which are far out the inher- ern part, the course of the Danube forms distances from one another, exclusively on ent riverside. The latter are not included in the territorial border between the parts of the right valley side of the Danube. Since it the southern Prahovo division because all of Serbia (on the south) and Romania (on the is not equally attractive for this kind of con- its settlements (“Blato”, “Kula”, “Barbulješće” north). As a spatial entity, this integral part of struction, it is understandable why these and “Vrkanj”) are situated on the immediate the Middle Danube Basin is divided into the settlements are more (or less) concentrat- riverside area of the Danube. northern Danube riverside which belongs ed only in certain places - localities, in the Such number (50) of the Danube Basin to Romania, and the southern, which be- parts of the Danube Basin. holiday and recreation settlements on the one longs to Serbia. Due to its position on west- Most holiday and recreation settlements, hand, and their unequal distribution over the ern end of peri-Pannonian Serbia, and to the even 20 of them (“Žežnica”, “Pajkovo brdo”, Basin divisions on the other, inevitably sup- Danube water current respectively, such ex- “Ključevac”, “Provalija”, “Plavinci”, “Lipovi- port their division which is primarily based tended border area has been interesting al- ca”, “Tarabe”, “Prokop”, “Careva glava”, on their belonging to the municipal territo- together for construction of buildings and “Cigansko brdo”, “Dubočaj”, “Rujnište”, ries. This facilitates their basic division into even settlements intended for holiday and “Straževica”, “Dunavski venac”, “Sedlarac”, holiday and recreation settlements (and col- recreation purposes. Initiated mainly by the “Orešački topoljar”, “Jugovo”, “Gvozdeng- onies) of: Grocka (“Žežnica”, “Pajkovo brdo”, objective social factors (particular and gen- lav”, “Donje livade” and “Metalor”) are sit- “Ključevac”, “Lipovica”, “Provalija”, “Plavinci”, eral) and to a certain degree modified by uated at some “ends” of the northernmost “Tarabe”, “Prokop”, “Careva glava”, “Cigan- subjective ones, the spatial distribution of part of Šumadija highlands, and also on sko brdo”, “Dubočaj”, “Rujnište”, “Straževica”, such settlements (from the outskirts of Bel- the immediate alluvial plane of the Danube. “Sedlarac” and “Dunavski venac”), Smederevo grade agglomeration to Prahovo) has not Mainly on the noticeably farther down- (“Orešački topoljar”, “Jugovo”, “Gvozdeng- been particularly regular. Therefore, it is es- stream riverside, i.e. in some northernmost lav”, “Donje livade” and “Metalor”), Kostol- pecially emphasized in this article that they flat or levelled parts of northern and north- ac (“Rovine”, “Šugavica-Kanal”, “Skupica”, are, unless the main spatial reason, the Dan- eastern Stig and Braničevo, there are slightly “Ušće” and “Sprud”), Veliko Gradište (“Šajica”, ube course is neglected, most irregular- fewer (15) settlements for holiday and recre- “Kalinovac”, “Kalinovčić I”, “Kalinovčić ly distributed both on its banks and in the ation (“Rovine”, “Šugavica-Kanal”, “Skupi- II”, “Rudarevo” and “Beli bagrem”), Golu- nearer or farther riverside areas. This influ- ca”, “Ušće”, “Sprud”, “Šajica”, “Kalinovac”, bac (“Male humke”, “Golubački peskovi”, enced their uneven distribution over the “Kalinovčić I”, “Kalinovčić II”, “Rudarevo”, ‘Duga šuma” and “Ridan”), Donji Milano- Danube alluvium and valley side, the valleys “Beli bagrem”, “Male humke”, “Golubački vac (“Ciganija-Krapaćos”, “Zlatica”, “Obljaga of its immediate tributaries and the Aeolian peskovi”, “Duga šuma” and “Ridan”). It mare” and “Gradišnica”), Kladovo (“Osojna”, relief shapes, as well as on the edges of Ključ is interesting that there are even as many “Streževica”, “Meja”, “Slatinski most”, “Do- area and ’’rear’’ slopes of Miroč. concentrated in the joint riverside area of bra voda”, “Bare” and “Poljana”) and Prahovo Kostolac, Veliko Gradište and Golubac. (“Blato”, “Kula”, “Barbulješće” and “Vrkanj”). Key words: the Danube Basin, holiday and Their number is almost four times small- The above distribution within the mu- recreation settlements, distribution with- er (“Ciganija-Krapaćos”, “Zlatica”, “Obljaga nicipal territories also raises the question in municipal territories, macro and mezzo mare” and “Gradišnica”) on terraced, but of their uneven distribution over the Dan- findings of the Danube Basin settlements steeper terrains of the rather narrow, typ- ube Basin (Popović I. B, 1988-1992, 1993- for holiday and recreation. ical Đerdap riverside, i.e. the area around 1999). Moreover, this is based on the fact . that only a small percentage of them (4 or Farther down the river, in a little differ- 8 %) are situated in three municipalities- ent topographically “shaped” area, 11 holi- Golubac, (Donji Milanovac) day and recreation settlements are situated and (Prahovo), and a little high- (“Osojna”, “Streževica”, “Meja”, ”Slatinski er percentage (5 or 10 %) in two munici- 1 Ivan Popović most”, “Dobra voda”, “Bare”, “Poljana”, “Bla- palities - Smederevo and Požarevac (Kos- Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” of to”, “Kula”, “Barbulješće” and “Vrkanj”). Be- tolac). Furthermore, more settlements are Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 9 cause it is considerably expanded, this area situated within the municipalities of Ve-

Đure Jakšića, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia is, according to the above mentioned, justi- liko Gradište and Kladovo (6 or 12 % and 7 09/2005 Pannonica Geographica 29 Distribution of Holiday and Recreation Settlements in the Danube Basin From Belgrade to Prahovo

and, by its partition from the both sides, of today’s Srebrno Jezero. Compared to the “lowlands” settlements, there is a slightly smaller number of those (8 or 16 %) situated on or along the eastern edges of the area of Ključ, which means that they are connected with the easternmost riverside parts of the Danube Basin. There- fore it is understandable that they comprise most settlements of Kladovo (“Streževica”, “Osojna”, “Meja” and “Slatinski most”) and all the settlements of Prahovo (“Blato”, “Kula”, “Barbulješće” and “Vrkanj”). Apart from the above mentioned, the Danube Basin also comprises the settle- ments whose “macro- existing” is firm- ly connected with the well known shapes of the Aeolian relief (dunes and valleys). Since the Aeolian relief (the sands of Golu- bac and Veliko Gradište) is divided by the shallow river Pek valley into the north- Figure 1 Map of recreation settlements in the Danube Basin from Belgrade to Prahovo western (of Veliko Gradište) and south- or 14 %, respectively), while it is considered ley”. Besides that, their “spatial arrange- eastern (of Golubac) part, with mostly natural that Grocka municipality compris- ment” is connected with the more west- wide dunes (elevations) and valleys (de- es the largest number of them (15 or 30 %). ern Grocka-Smederevo, as well as rather pressions) between them, it is natural to eastern Donji Milanovac part of the Dan- expect that these settlements are situat- Macro and mezzo localities of ube Basin, which indicates that such set- ed on the municipal territories of both Ve- the danube basin holiday and tlements do not exist not only among the liko Gradište and Golubac. More precise- ly, there are such three colonies and the recreation settlements others of Veliko Gradište and Golubac, but also among all the settlements of Kostolac, only two settlements in the Danube Basin, The careful observation of each settlement Kladovo and Prahovo. which make 5 or 10 % of all its settlements. separately renders the fact that most of According to their number, “valley set- Territorially, “Rudarevo” colony and the them (24 or 48 %) are situated in the val- tlements” are followed by those which are settlement “Beli bagrem” belong to Veliko ley of the Danube, as well as in the val- concentrated exclusively on the higher or Gradište, while the settlement “Golubački leys of its immediate tributaries (Popović, lower level of the Danube alluvial plane (10 peskovi” and two colonies (“Male humke” 2003). As observed from the west towards or 20 %). Appearing only in the lowlands of and “Duga šuma”) belong to Golubac. the east, the former certainly includes the Danube Basin, which are determined The smallest percentage (3 or 6 %) of the both the northern (“Žežnica”, “Pajkovo by the down courses of the Velika Morava Danube Basin settlements are situated with- brdo” and “Ključevac”) and the southern (in the west) and the Pek (in the east), “low- in their macrolocality on the “rear” slopes part (“Prokop” and “Careva glava”) of the lands” settlements differ from each other of Miroč. Concentrated near the deserted northwestern, as well as the eastern part only in the height of this alluvium. recreational and sport centre “Kraku Bal- (“Rujnište”, “Straževica”, “Sedlarac” and Thus, there is only one Smederevo set- ta”, three settlements (“Dobra voda”, “Bare” “Dunavski venac”) of the southeastern Gro- tlement (“Orešački topoljar”) on the lowest and “Poljana”) are incorporated into Miroč cka settlements, but also one (“Lipovica”) (inundated), i.e. periodically flooded allu- part of Kladovo settlements, which indi- from the central part of the northwestern vial level. The other Smederevo settlement cates their territorial belonging. and one from the western part (“Cigan- (“Metalor”) could also be such if it had not Considering the fact that the Dan- sko brdo”) of the southeastern Grocka set- been reshaped by individuals who gradual- ube Basin is, in the narrow sense, large tlements. In the neighbouring Smederevo ly covered it with slag (dross), which consid- and almost complete spatial entirety, glo- municipality, there are only two such set- erably helped it reach higher alluvial level, bal dispersion of holiday and recreation tlements (“Jugovo” and “Gvozdenglav”) thus eliminating any possibility of flooding. settlements can be better perceived only and there is also one in Golubac and one The Kostolac settlement “Rovine” is very through the prism of its most spread natu- in Donji Milanovac (“Ridan” and “Cigani- similar in reaching higher level, because its ral environmental features (Popović, 2003). ja-Krapaćos”, respectively). “alluvial locality” was also reshaped by pil- The important mentioned natural features The latter justifiably include the others ing slag from the nearby “Kostolac” mine. (the Danube valley side, the valley sides of from the central part (“Provalija”, “Tarabe” The Kostolac (“Šugavica-Kanal”, its immediate tributaries, higher and low- and “Plavinci”) and the part (“Dubočaj”) “Skupica”, “Ušće” and “Sprud”) and Veliko er level of the Danube alluvial plane, re- of the southeastern Grocka settlements. Gradište (“Kalinovac”, “Kalinovčić I” and lief shapes of Golubac-Veliko Gradište Two settlements in Smederevo and Veliko “Kalinovčić II”) settlements include almost sands, the edges of Ključ area and the “rear” Gradište (“Donje livade” and “Šajica”, respec- the same number (4 and 3) of other “low- slopes of Miroč) are also the basic “key fea- tively) are also among them. It is interesting lands” settlements of the Danube Basin. tures” for interpreting the settlement loca- that they also include all the remaining set- Although they occupy relatively higher al- tions, which have been adequately called tlements of Donji Milanovac (“Zlatica”, “Ob- luvial level, they still, to a certain degree, (Gosar, 1988) macrolocalities. Similar, but ljaga mare” and “Gradašnica”). differ in its “fluvial belonging”. The Kostol- to some extent different macrolocalities of Generally, it is obvious that the former ac settlements lie on the typical Danube al- such settlements can also be seen in other represent 15 or 30 %, and the latter 9 or 18 luvium, while these of Veliko Gradište are parts of Serbia, which is another reason to % of all the Danube Basin settlements, i.e. exclusively located on the alluvium of its appreciate them in finding the global fea-

Geographica Pannonica 09/2005 Pannonica Geographica every other settlement is denoted as “val- large former branch- Kisiljevski Dunavac, tures of these spatial phenomena. 30 Ivan Popović

Since within these macrolocalities of the “Skupica”, “Ušće” and “Sprud”). They are course of the Dubočaj stream, while the Danube Basin settlements, we can differen- followed by the equal numbers of these other is situated on a valley side of the mid- tiate parts which are situated, in relation to which belong to the macrolocalities on the dle course of the Jugovski stream. the Danube flow, within its bank zone, ei- shapes of Aeolian relief (“Rudarevo” and Both the alluvial plane of the Danube and ther almost beside it (immediate, closer riv- “Golubački peskovi”) and on the edges of the “rear” slopes of Miroč contain slightly erside), or rather away from it (indirect, far- Ključ area (“Slatinski most” and “Kula”). It smaller number (3 each) of such settlements ther riverside), such division can serve as the can also be said that mezzo bank zone lo- (“Rovine”, “Kalinovac” and “Kalinovčić II” basis for better understanding of the spatial calities of settlements are rather unequally within the former, and “Dobra voda”, “Bare” dispersion of settlements in the whole Dan- distributed in the Danube Basin. and “Poljana” within the latter macrolocali- ube Basin. More precisely, it enables the dif- It is almost the opposite situation with ty of the well known Miroč region). Because ferentiation of settlements according to the settlements from the mezzolocalities of they are situated on “Miroč terrain”, these set- which of these three middle (mezzo) “seg- the closer riverside, because they are, except tlements are the only in the Danube Basin ments” they belong, in each of the deter- for one, situated in all those closer riverside which are rather distant from the far Danube mined macrolocalities. Taking all of this macrolocalities. Thus, in the closer riverside riverside, while the “lowlands” ones are much into consideration, determining these mez- of the valley side of the Danube there are closer to it, but still within farther riverside. zolocalities, i.e. determining the bank zone, even six settlements, two of which (“Jugovo” Farther riverside of both the Aeolian immediate (closer) and indirect (farther) and “Ridan”) are positioned so close to its relief and surface edges of Ključ contain riverside settlements proved appropriate. bank zone that they largely touch it along- one settlement each. The settlement “Male On the basis of available data from sep- side. The other four (“Ključevac”, “Prokop”, humke” is the only one which belongs to arate studies of the Danube Basin settle- “Careva glava” and “Rujište”) are situated at the former, and “Osojna” is the only one in ments, it can be emphasized, with some shorter or a little longer distances from the the latter macrolocality. certainty, that they have rather uneven po- bank zone within closer riverside. sitions in relation to the Danube flow. They In the macrolocalities on both the valley Conclusion are sometimes positioned very close to it, sides of the Danube immediate tributaries The given review of the spatial dispersion of then more often a little farther, although and the edges of Ključ area there is the equal the Danube Basin settlements results in gen- there are sometimes rather farther ones. number of close riverside settlements, five in eral regularity of their frequency in the deter- Such are their mezzo positions not only each (“Plavinci”, “Šajica”, “Zlatica”, “Obljaga mined spatial localities. It indicates that their within the whole Danube Basin, but also mare” and “Gradašnica” in the former, and occurrence is more frequent in the western within almost each separate macrolocality. “Streževica”, “Meja”, “Blato”, “Barbulješće” Danube Basin (the valley side of the Danube For the correct understanding of their and “Vrkanj” in the latter). It is interest- on the northernmost slopes of Grocka and mezzolocalities (bank zone, closer and fur- ing that they all, except for one (“Plavinci”), Smederevo highlands) and that it is mani- ther riverside), it should not be forgotten partly penetrate into the inherent bank zone. fested in a noticeably larger area – to some that the bank zone of any larger water flow is Since the settlement “Plavinci” is a little far- extent the bank zone and larger part of closer considered to be (Jovičić, 1967; Gosar, 1988) ther from it, it represents a typical riverside and farther riverside. The situation is similar the land along the bank which is 350 m wide, settlement of the mentioned macrolocalities. in the central Danube Basin, i.e. “lowlands” although there are some opinions that it can The macrolocalities of the Danube allu- and the Aeolian Danube riverside. But ap- be up to 0.5 km wide, and sometimes even vial plane and the shapes of Aeolian relief proaching its eastern parts, i.e. the surface wider. According to these two opinions, it include a significantly smaller number (4) edges of Ključ, the settlements are less and is accepted that the immediate (close) river- of such riverside settlements, two of them less frequent and finally they are found only side must not be wider than 1.4-1.5 km and each (“Šugavica-Kanal” and “Kalinovčić in the shared area between the closer riv- 2.0 km, respectively, which clearly indicates I” in the former and “Beli bagrem” and erside and the bank zone. This may be ex- that indirect (farther) riverside is meant to “Duga šuma” in the latter). They are also plained by almost immediate presence of be beyond these dimensions. As the former in such stronger contact with the inherent “emanation area”, such as Belgrade agglom- opinion seemed geographically more valid bank zone, that they partly even lie on it. eration on the one hand, and higher quali- from the aspect of our field experience, we Since such riverside settlements do not ex- ty which would satisfy the need for changing adopted it in our considerations. ist only on the slopes of Miroč, it can be (sometimes or periodically) the environ- Adding the above mentioned into the said that they are more harmoniously con- ment, on the other. The influence of these knowledge about the settlement concentra- centrated than the former ones. factors is reducing as we go from the west to tion in the determined macrolocalities in There is also a settlement mezzolocality in the east of the Danube Basin, resulting in less the Danube Basin, we can draw the gener- the Danube Basin which refers to their pres- frequent and less “voluminous” dispersion of al conclusion that they are least distributed ence in farther riverside. As expected, the the Danube Basin settlements. (9 or 18 %) in the Danube bank zone, and Danube valley side comprises the most of twice as much (20 or 40 %) in its immediate these settlements (9). One of them (“Ciganija- References (in further text - closer) riverside, but there Krapaćos”) is partly situated in the closer riv- Popović, I. B. 2003. Naseobine za odmor i is almost the equal percentage (21 or 42 %) erside, while all the others (“Pajkovo brdo”, rekreaciju u Podunavlju na sektoru Be- in its indirect (in further text- farther) riv- “Žežnica”, “Lipovica”, “Cigansko brdo”, “Sed- ograd – Prahovo. Doktorska disertaci- erside. Concerning their macrolocalities in larac”, “Straževica”, “Dunavski venac” and ja u rukopisu. Departman za geografi- the Danube Basin, settlements are not sit- “Gvozdenglav”) are more or less farther. ju, turizam i hotelijerstvo, PMF, Novi uated in the bank zones which belong to There are almost half as many farther Sad, pp. 1-402. the valley side of the Danube and the val- riverside settlements (4) on the valley sides Gosar, A. 1988. Počitniške hiše kot ele- ley sides of its immediate tributaries. Also, of the Danube immediate tributaries. Two ment transformacije Slovenskih alpskih there are not any bank zone settlements on of them are, partly (“Provalija”) or com- pokrajin. Doctoral dissertation – Man- the “rear” slopes of limestone Miroč. pletely (“Tarabe”), situated in the source uscript. Geography Department, Facul- As it could be supposed, such settle- forehead of the Pravinački stream, so they ty of Philosophy, Ljubljana, pp. 1-359. ments are the most numerous within their are also in the farther riverside area of Jovičić, Ž. 1967. Gročansko Podunavlje – macrolocality on the alluvial plane of the the central waterflow. One (“Dubočaj”) is glavni izletnički rejon Beograda. Zbornik

Danube (“Orešački topoljar”, “Metalor”, on the sides of a small valley in the down radova Geografskog instituta 14 175-187. 09/2005 Pannonica Geographica 31