ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA The Earliest Maritime Voyaging in the Mediterranean: View from *

Archaeology gives us proofs of an attempt with a building of a dug-out needs of prehistoric people’s (Tzalas 1989; 1995) deserve more polished stone axes or at least large presence on islands and attention. knapped axes. Fire is not enough seacoasts; natural sciences to shape a large boat. The current give us information on the The hypothesis on the importance finds presume contemporality of of dug-out for the earliest gatherers and farmers which leads conditions of early maritime maritime voyaging in the Mediter- to the appearance of a view (Nowicki voyaging. The concrete designs ranean (Tichý 1992; 1994) was based 2014, 48) that there was no obvious of the earliest vessels from on the evidence of woods on the functional difference between the before the third millennium Mediterranean coast (Butzer 1970), types of vessels in Mesolithic/Epi- BC are still unknown. We the find of a dug-out boat on the palaeolithic and Neolithic. Com- can hypothetically list the former sea coast in Northern Eu- parison of their characteristics is possible concepts or we rope (Andersen 1986), and the tradi- therefore very important. The views can create model solutions. tion of longboats, probably made presented here or in earlier works Two experimental voyages from wood, at the beginning of the (Tichý 2000; 2001) do not push the in dug-out canoes called the Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediter- dug-out boat as the only or preva- Monoxylon Expeditions took ranean (Broodbank 1989) and evi- lent type. They can be considered dence of polished stone axes in the as a type that lead to the tradition place in the Mediterranean Neolithic. The find of the Neolithic of wooden boats in the Mediter- in 1995 and 1998. We do dug-out canoe in the Bracciano lake ranean. That means that tradition not need to presume that (Fugazzola Delpino – Mineo 1995; Fu- which was basis for the later mari- ­­dug‑out canoes were the gazzola Delpino 1995) possibly used time developments. only type of vessel used, but to transport obsidian from the Li- we can presume that they pari Islands makes the hypothesis What was the Earliest are the vessel most suitable more probable. The possible use Maritime Voyaging due to their characteristics. of dug-out boats in earliest mari- The aim of this article is to time voyaging is an alternative to The categorisation of islands in take a look at the finds in the the hypothesis of reed boats use to the Aegean Sea created by Cypri- an Broodbank (1999) suggests that Mediterranean from the eras carry obsidian suggested by Harry Tzalas (1989; 1995). In the context this region was suitable for early of Mesolithic/Epipalaeolithic of ground-breaking finds of Late maritime voyaging because of the and Pre-Pottery Neolithic Dryas gatherers (Ammerman 2010; islands configuration. Maritime (PPN)/Neolithic utilising 2011; 2013; 2014) and farmers from travel started in the eastern Medi- experience from the mentioned PPN A and PPN B (Vigne et al 2013; terranean during the cold climate voyages. Such approach could Vigne 2013) in Cyprus, possible con- of late Dryas, when the gatherers be called ‘view from sea’. It tacts of Mesolithic populations in inhabited Cyprus (Broodbank 2006; uses results of a hands-on the Aegean Sea (Sampson 2014; Ef- Ammerman 2010; 2013). It is possi- approach to view new facts or stratiou 2013) and ‘pioneering’ set- ble that people reacted intensively views concerning the earliest tlements with ‘maritime knowl- as in Levant where they switched maritime voyaging. edge package’ on the west coast of to agriculture or extensively with Turkey (Horejs et al. 2015) the ques- sea voyages looking for sources on tion becomes topical: Is it possible new coasts (Ammerman 2010, 88). n Radomír TICHÝ to relate reed boats only to gather- On the Greek mainland and Ae- ers and dug-out boat to farmers? Is gean Islands there is little evidence The results of the Monoxylon Ex- a reed boat suitable for the trans- of farming earlier than 9000 years peditions (see boxes 1–4) got into port needs of farmers? It is neces- ago (Ammerman 2013, 9). From the specialised literature selectively sary, especially with important dis- seventh millennium BC many sty- and with delay (Broodbank 2006, cussions on the character of cargo listic and technological parallels of 209; Zilhão 2014, 187–188; Vigne (Zilhão 2014; Vigne et al. 2013) to re- material culture reminds us that 2013; Howitt-Marshall – Runnels spect technological possibilities of Greece was colonised via maritime 2016). They were more extensive- gatherers and farmers to build one processes coming from Levant and ly used only by Jean-Denis Vigne or other type of boat. Seán McGrail the southern Turkish coast (Perlès (Vigne 2014; Vigne et al. 2013). Even (2010, 104, Tab. 8.1) suggests that 2001; 2005). On the Aegean Islands the more often used results (Brood- a plank boat could not have been the Mesolithic settlements from bank 2006; Farr 2010; Ammerman built before the arrival of Neo- the eight millennium BC using 2010; Sampson 2014; McGrail 2010) lithic technologies. Similarly, the sheep husbandry were identified.

*Dedicated to Harry Tzalas, not just for his brave deed

26 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016 TÉMA ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU

The sheep had to be transport- to use planks (Broodbank 2010, 253) 100 km long? Not even the spread ed there via Cyprus from Levant either to heighten the sides of the of obsidian supports the idea of (Sampson 2014). The presence of dug log or to develop a truly plank long distance voyages. Obsidian pigs on these islands is also men- boat. from Melos did not travel to Italy, tioned as they are not indigenous obsidian from the sources in the (Efstratiou 2013, 209–210). There is other evidence that the Tyrrhenean Sea is not found in vessels from the Epipaleolith- Greece or in the Aegean. The per- The Neolithic is the era of the most ic/Mesolithic/Neolithic periods centage of obsidian decreases with intensive island colonisation (Farr could have been simple and that distance from source, which would 2010, 184). The analysis of the Med- crossing distances was difficult. suggest only short voyages (Am- iterranean islands showed that in Albert J. Ammerman (2011) point- merman 2014, 218). The speed of the Neolithic they preferred to col- ed out the ‘paradox’ between the agriculture spreading from South- onise islands visible from the main- speed of agricultural colonisation ern Italy to Portugal though in- land. In the Pre-Neolithic the more of Cyprus and Southern Italy. The creased. From Central Italy it took remote islands were visited for raw colonisation of Southern Italy fol- only just above six generations to materials and in the Bronze Age for lowed some 2000 years later, that Portugal, that means an average trade. In the earliest maritime voy- would mean speed 0.75 km in speed of 5 to 10 km per year (Zil- aging the distances of up to 50 km a year. Why is the spread of agri- hão 2001). The reason for the speed were easily attainable (Dawson 2010, culture to Crete so slow (about increase could be the fact (apart 205, 210). How does that fit with 1000 years later than Cyprus)? from those named by Zilhão 2001) the development of vessels? It is And from Crete to the mainland? that in the Western Mediterranean possible that even in the Neolithic Is it truly the low speed of vessels, Neolithic culture could spread via a voyage of 100 km was risky and which, based on the circulation of coastal voyaging along its North- therefore used only to get to the obsidian, carried out voyages 60 to ern coast. sources of obsidian (although even here it was possible to cut the dis- tances by using chains of islands as stepping stones). The common dis- tance in colonisation of islands and coasts was 60 km, that means a day long trip with live cargo. It is pos- sible that the difference in the use of navigation between the eastern and western Mediterranean was so- cial. The east had more developed hierarchy and greater population density (Zilhão 2014, 196), it could be characterised by stronger pres- sure to realise maritime voyages even without obvious innovations in vessels construction.

C. Broodbank (2010, 250) lists the changes in the Late Dryas as first maritime revolution, with the sec- ond only in the third millenni- um BC. The period between 5500 to 3500 BC he considers a peri- od without changes. That does not mean that a development of a dug-out boat (or any other vessel) stopped for such a long time. Just the opposite, the above mentioned evidence of longboat depictions in the Early Bronze Age (Broodbank 1989, 327; 2000, 98, Fig. 23) shows that development of a long and slim ship continued. A dug-out boat, documented for very early pe- riods by finds in North Greece (Ma- rangou 1997; 2001) and especially Slovenia (Erić 1993–1994), could be a base for construction of a future vessel. It is possible that because of the lack of large trees they started n Fig. 1 The route of Monoxylon I Expedition and the route of Monoxylon II Expedition.

18/2016 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 27 EXPEDICE MONOXYLON / Pocházíme z mladší doby kamenné

EXPEDICE MONOXYLON / Pocházíme z mladší doby kamenné

ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA

Monoxylons was 1.2 m, while that of suggesting a trend which then pre- the Papyrella was 1.5 m (Tzalas 1995, vailed. 447). H. Tzalas (1995, 453) though states that in future it would be bet- During all expeditions the vessels ter to make the outside bundles of were propelled by paddles, H. Tza- reed thinner so they do not decrease las (1995, 447) does not presume the vessel speed. He presumes that a sail for this period because of the larger vessels were needed in thekapitola Ne 2- / Po soušitechnological jako po vodì? limits of that time. At kapitola 2 / Po souši jako po vodì? olithicRákosovéObr. 2.7 due plavidloHlavní to neolitické a vyplulo greater lokality8. øíjna demand v 1988 jižní aEgejdì vzdálenost for a potenciální 125the kilometrù obchodní beginning mezi cesty. ostro- Køížky of vyznaèují Expedition Mon- transportvy pøekonalodnes již neexistující za ( 7Tzalas dní. Do ostrùvky tohoto1995 (podle výsledku, 454). van všakAndel If nejsou -we Runnels zapoèítány 1988,oxylon fig. dny 1). seI n ašpatným simple sail for following/ poèasím, kdy plavba nebyla možná. V prùbìhu pokusu muselo Rákosovébýt vymìnìno plavidlo 7 % vyplulo 8. øíjna 1988 a vzdálenost 125 kilometrù mezi ostro- wantprovazù toa 5 %utilise papyru. Každýthe zoldest neprofesionálních clear de pádlaøù- vydennìside pøekonalo spotøebovalwind za 7was dní. litr Doused tohoto ( výsledkuFig. 4 však) but nejsou it zapoèítány dny se špatným Obr. 2.7 Hlavní neolitické lokality v jižní Egejdìpictionstekutin, a potenciální které of byly obchodnívessel uchovávány cesty.in theve Køížky dvou Aegean vacíchvyznaèují z kozí Sea kùže o objemupoèasím,was not 12 kdy litrù usefulplavba a hmot- nebyla for možná. the Vdug-out prùbìhu pokusu ca- muselo být vymìnìno 7 % dnes již neexistující ostrùvky (podle van Andelnosti - Runnels 12,5 kg. 1988, Náklad fig. však 1). n mohly tvoøit ètyøi takové vaky, což provazùby pøedstavovalo a 5 % papyru. vodu Každý z neprofesionálních pádlaøù dennì spotøeboval litr fromna týdenní the plavbu. Early Denní Bronze dávka jídla Age pro posádku (Brood pøedstavovala- tekutin,noe. hmotnost It které decreased byly 4 kilo-uchovávány the ve stability dvou vacích ofz kozí the kùže o objemu 12 litrù a hmot-kapitola 2 / Po souši jako po vodì? n Fig. 2 Three meters of the dug-out canoe were made with a sto- bankgramù. Náklad1989 ,by 327;však musel 2000 být ,uschován 98, Fig. ve zvíøecích 23) kùžích,nostivessel protože 12,5 andkg. vlny Náklad becausemáèe- však mohly of tvoøit the ètyøi wind’s takové vaky,di- což by pøedstavovalo vodu na týdenní plavbu. Denní dávka jídla pro posádku pøedstavovala hmotnost 4 kilo- ly celý èlun. Rákosové plavidlo vyplulo 8. øíjna 1988 a vzdálenost 125 kilometrù mezi ostro- ne axe. for design comparison there is a no- gramù.rection Náklad it bycould však musel not být be uschován used ve to zvíøecích pro- kùžích, protože vlny máèe- vy pøekonalo za 7 dní. Do tohoto výsledku však nejsou zapoèítány dny se špatným I pøed naší expedicí Monoxylon jsme postavili nejdøívely tøi celý menší èlun. dlabané èlu- ticeableny. Až tøetí zdifference nich mìl prùmìr in pøes size 1 m of a pøedstavoval a small náznakpel námoøního the boat. plavidla. The crewspoèasím, of all kdy expe plavba- nebyla možná. V prùbìhu pokusu muselo být vymìnìno 7 % Recent experimental boatExpedièní from èlun Naxos byl dlouhý with 6,2 metru, a human široký maximálnì fig- 1,2ditions Imetru pøed našís ponoremwere expedicí physically Monoxylonprovazù jsme prepared, postavili a 5 % papyru. nejdøíve Každý tøi menší z neprofesionálních dlabané èlu- pádlaøù dennì spotøeboval litr tekutin, které byly uchovávány ve dvou vacích z kozí kùže o objemu 12 litrù a hmot- ure0,35 metruand a hmotností quadruped 800 kilogramù. and longboats. Cílem plavby bylo ovìøitny.the Až možnosti tøetícrew z nich members pøepra- mìl prùmìr pøescould 1 m a keeppøedstavoval reg -náznak námoøního plavidla. maritime voyages vy ranì neolitického obyvatelstva a jeho kultury z Anatolie Expediènína øeckou pevninu.èlun byl Zadlouhý 6,2 metru,nosti široký 12,5 kg. maximálnì Náklad však 1,2 mohly metru tvoøit s ponorem ètyøi takové vaky, což by pøedstavovalo vodu Thesetímto úèelem longboats byla vybrána have trasa meziangular ostrovy bows napøíè Egejským0,35ular metrumoøem. paddling a hmotnostíNepøímé 800rhythm kilogramù.na týdenní Cílemfor plavbyplavbu.long bylo Denní ovìøit dávka možnosti jídla pro pøepra- posádku pøedstavovala hmotnost 4 kilo- gramù. Náklad by však musel být uschován ve zvíøecích kùžích, protože vlny máèe- The experimental voyages of the reminiscentdùkazy o užívání takových of wooden plavidel v Egejdìboats a nález and dlabaného vyhours. ranìèlunu neolitického z Atjezera lower Brac- obyvatelstva speed thea jeho vessel kultury zwas Anatolie na øeckou pevninu. Za ciano byly zmínìny již výše. tímto úèelem byla vybrána trasa mezily celý ostrovy èlun. napøíè Egejským moøem. Nepøímé two basic types of vessels – the Ex- dùkazy o užívání takových plavidel v Egejdì a nález dlabaného èlunu z jezera Brac- I pøed naší expedicí Monoxylon jsme postavili nejdøíve tøi menší dlabané èlu- ciano byly zmínìny již výše. pedition Papyrella in 1988 and the ny. Až tøetí z nich mìl prùmìr pøes 1 m a pøedstavoval náznak námoøního plavidla. Expeditions Monoxylon in years Expedièní èlun byl dlouhý 6,2 metru, široký maximálnì 1,2 metru s ponorem A B 0,35 metru a hmotností 800 kilogramù. Cílem plavby bylo ovìøit možnosti pøepra- 1995 and 1998 (Fig. 1) are helpful vy ranì neolitického obyvatelstva a jeho kultury z Anatolie na øeckou pevninu. Za 0 1 m in assessment of earliest maritime tímto úèelem byla vybrána trasa mezi ostrovy napøíè Egejským moøem. Nepøímé dùkazy o užívání takových plavidel v Egejdì a nález dlabaného èlunu z jezera Brac- voyaging. The aim of all the expe- ciano byly zmínìny již výše. ditions was to test the given vessel Obr. 2.8 Trasa expedice0 Papyrella 1 m v roce 1988 a použité rákosové plavidlo (podle Tzalas 1989). n in the conditions they would have been used in and to find out their # SUPPLEMENTUM 1

navigationalObr. capabilities 2.8 Trasa expedice including Papyrella v roce 1988 a použité rákosové plavidlo (podle Tzalas 1989). n transport capacity. We would like # SUPPLEMENTUM 1 to compare the conditions and re- C0 1 m sults because views have been pre- 0 1 m sented that the maritime condi- tions in the Aegean Sea did not allow for a use of canoe while Papy-

rella of a suitable size would have 0 1 m been more effective (Sampson 2014, 68). Or a simple statement that ear- Obr. 2.9 Srovnání plavidla expedice Monoxylon 1995 a originálního nálezu z jezera Bracciano n(podle Fig. Fugazzolo 3 Comparison Delpino-Mineo, of 1995). the vesselsn of Papyrella Expedition 1988 (A), Monoxylon Expedition ly vessels were made from reed (Farr Obr. 2.9 Srovnání plavidla expedice Monoxylon 1995 a originálního nálezu z jezera Bracciano 1995SUPPLEMENTUM (B) and 1the dug-out canoe from the lake Bracciano(podle Fugazzolo (C Delpino-Mineo,). # 1995). n 2010, 183). SUPPLEMENTUM 1 # The hypotheses of all expeditions

were formulated given geographi- Obr. 2.9 Srovnání plavidla expedice Monoxylon 1995 a originálního nálezu z jezera Bracciano cal region (till recently small vessels (podle Fugazzolo Delpino-Mineo, 1995). n of both types were used in coastal SUPPLEMENTUM 1 # navigation), way of life of people in the Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic (Pa- pyrella) and the Neolithic (Mono­ xylon), climatic conditions and tool possibilities (Fig. 2). H. Tzalas (1995, 442) states that the limits of stone tools available would have prevented the making of wooden vessels in the Mesolithic.

The important parameter for com- paring is the size (length) of all vessels (Fig. 3). The comparison of length of the vessels Papyrella (5.48 m) and Monoxylon I (6.2 m) did not show much difference but Monoxylon II with 9.2m length was on average faster (4 km/h) than Pa- pyrella (3 km/h). The width of the n Fig. 4 Under sail near Tinos at the beginning of the expedition in 1995.

28 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016 TÉMA ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU

more difficult to steer. The Greek expedition found, thanks to meas- uring output of specialised sports- Box 1: Reconstruction of the crafts men, that they used only just over 50 % of physical capacity (Tzalas In contrast to the Monoxylon 1995 Expedition the boat for 1998 1995, 454). A question is how much Expedition didn’t have a hypothetical design (similar to model of it would be possible to increase the a boat from Tsangli) but it was a reconstruction of a real Neolithic speed of the given vessel with high- log-boat which was discovered in the Lake Bracciano in 1994. The er output of the crew within the boat belongs to the early Neolithic, it was found close to the sea co- limits of its design. Monoxylon II ast and there fore it could be a sea going craft. It was studied from reached maximum speed on the many perspectives, it survived relatively well and the site as a whole voyage of 5 km/h. gives us number of interesting insights (evidence of distant contacts, models of boats, situation of a possible port and so on). We have a The voyage of Monoxylon I in the radiocarbon date for the layer which corresponds with the time of Aegean Sea started on the 8th of the work on the boat. The date was extracted from the post P765 September 1995 and of Papyrel- (dated 6565 ± 64 BP, calibrated 5450 BC), which was blocking the Fugazzola Delpino 1995 Fugazzola Delpino – Mineo la on the 8th of October 1988, the bow of the craft ( , 1995 time was therefore similar. The pre- ). sumption of the Papyrella Expe- dition was that strong northeast Because our object was to build a craft able of faring and we wan- wind Meltemi blows from mid-Ju- ted to test it on sea we tried to reconstruct the original look of the ly to mid-September. Despite that boat. We had to estimate some of the data because of the damage. the weather conditions were un- The whole boat was dug from one trunk without any of the cracks or favourable. The voyage took place repairs which were on the original. We considered the free wooden even in wind of 5 to 6° Beaufort (in parts as rope supports (maybe mast and sails?). We excluded a flo- case of Monoxylon II Expedition ater. The object was to build a stable craft not needing any supports there was during the sailing along that would slow it down. French coast a wind speed of 7–9° Beaufort). Although it is presumed The boat was powered with paddles but with retrospective we think (Papageorgiou 2014) that the decisive that use of sail might be possible. factor for the development of early maritime voyaging is the circulation While building the reconstruction of the boat we used these parame- at sea surface, all expeditions noted ters: as the main factor was strong winds which created unfavourable waves. The length – was shorten by 1.25 m to 9.2 m because the used tree Concerning sea currents H. Tzalas was rotten at its crown. Otherwise the size of the trunk corresponded (1995, 454) states that their influ- with the presumed scale of the trunk from which the Bracciano boat ence would be possible to study if in was built. This didn’t really influence the journey. the future an expedition would also travel back, that means from Melos The number of cross-braces – with shortening the length the number back to the Greek mainland. In the decreased to 3 in comparison with the original 4. case of the Monoxylon Expedition 1995 there was a clear influence by The height of the sides – because of the damage to the original and the northwest wind which created because we were going to test it on the sea was increased to 90 cm. large waves but neither in the Ae- This proved very successful while going into waves. gean Sea (Monoxylon I) nor in the western Mediterranean (Monoxy- The width of the sides and the bottom – smallest size on the recon- lon II) was there a notable influence struction was 5 cm. The smaller sizes of the original (2–4 cm) were be- by sea currents or seemed in com- lieved to be a result of changes in the wood. The scale corresponded. parison to the strength of the wind Our estimates were based on supposition that thinner sides would en- negligible. danger the integrity of the craft. The drying on the land might be also dangerous then. The log-boat of the Monoxylon II Expedition was The problem of both experiments built according to the find from Bracciano. It is possible to consider was the human factor. If I state at it as a replica more than a reconstruction. All the characteristics are the end of this article that the re- very close to the original despite the shortening of the length because sults of the experiments corre- of the rotteness of the trunk. The biggest problem open to discussion sponded with archaeological evi- is the thickness of the sides and the bottom. The original dehydrated dence and models of the possible by long term storage had very thin sides and bottom. We needed to earliest maritime voyaging, these keep them thicker otherwise the wood would crack in higher tempera- are influenced by the current level tures. On the other hand during the voyage it was clear that the mass of knowledge (currently known ar- was still slowing the speed of the boat. More thinning of the sides chaeological evidence, modern level might mean that it wouldn’t be possible to pull the boat from water of experiences and abilities, knowl- because of possible damage. That seems to be the limits of the right edge of natural conditions). We parameters of the boat. however do not know the diffe­rence

18/2016 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 29 ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA

As cargo we can presume people, connected by a deck and equipped obsidian, ceramic vessels, agricul- with a sail for higher speed. ture produce and domesticated an- imals. The first concrete model of From the experience of our voyage agriculture colonisation with stat- of a total length of about 1100 km ing parameters of a hypothetical in a dug-out canoe in the Mediter- cargo was presented on the exam- ranean, I would like to point out ple of Crete by Cyprian Broodbank some alternative possibilities or and Thomas F. Strasser (1991). They problems. Primarily connecting two presumed a one-time settlement of dug-out canoes into a catamaran Crete with a functional communi- like vessel creates a boat with radi- ty of about 40 people and a cargo cally decreased speed. That indicates of one to two tonnes with a fleet to me a model of animal transport of 10 to 15 vessels. The presumed in a single boat, especially as the n Fig. 5 Monoxylon II vessel has enough space for two paddlers to time limit was two days otherwise inner space of Monoxylon II was sit side by side, the first two benches in the bow were occupied by transported cattle would become sufficient (Fig. 5) would still leave one paddler only. uncontrollable. More recently the enough space for crew. In reality the problem was discussed in detail by space was enough for 13 paddlers in the paddling performance and J.-D Vigne et al. (2013), who used re- while the experiment showed that level of maritime knowledge be- sults of the expeditions mentioned ten were enough (Fig. 6). It should tween modern and prehistoric peo- here in his interpretation. To trans- also be mentioned that the length ple. Some authors do not under- port big ruminants to the island of the canoe was cut for transport value the potential for maritime they do not presume the use of reed on EU roads from the original voyaging already in the Palaeolithic vessels as they are not firm enough 12 m to 9.2 m, so the original car- peoples (Howitt-Marshall – Runnels (Vigne et al. 2013, 170). However, they go capacity was larger still. Animals 2016). It is possible that in the Epi- do not see the dug-out boat as suit- would not need to be transported palaeolithic or in PPN experience able either. They consider it usable lying down with tied legs but could of generations of maritime voyag- for transportation of people and ob- be transported for example in a cage ers could have reached our current sidian but not for animal cargo. The (Fig. 7). That would allow them to knowledge gained by modern anal- transfer of 70 km from Anatolia or either stand or lay down, accord- ysis (model for Cyprus for example 100 km from Levant would take, ing to need. Modern transport of Bar-Yosef Mayer et al. 2015). It is pos- with regard to the speed of Mon- animals by car is done in a similar sible that ‘pioneering’ settlements oxylon II voyage, about 30 hours way. Even if some of the animals with ‘packages of maritime knowl- according to the authors, but rumi- would die during the transport, we edge’ were already established in the nants according to them would not always have to account for repeated Neolithic on the west coast of Tur- tolerate transport longer than three voyages. J.-D. Vigne et al. (2013, 170) key (Horejs et al. 2015). The tempo- or four hours, then they would suf- identified the domestic mouse as an rary firm point is our knowledge is fer serious physiological problems invasive species on the island and the performance of vessels in recent (fermentation of food while digest- therefore they count at least two maritime voyaging experiments. ing; Vigne et al. 2013). Even if the voyages to Cyprus a year. If we im- They are the basis for judging cargo PPN voyagers, according to the au- agine cargo of corn or animal feed capacity and performance of vessels, thors, used the speed of sea currents these would probably give an ideal which with further studies we can the crossing would still take 10 to shelter to unwanted rodents. either reduce or increase. 12 hours. The animals would have to be transported standing because Repeated voyages were modelled The Cargo Point of View of the above given reasons. That by Daniella E. Bar-Yosef Mayer et al. would cause problem for bigger (2015) for the most favourable con- animals, like cattle. If it was solved ditions (wind directions, stable by transporting young animals in- weather). They suggested an opti- stead of adults, they would have mal route with a use of sail from to have been weaned. Animals of southern Turkey to the northern about seven to eight months would coast of Cyprus, where the finds weigh 100 to 150 kg. The only so- of Anatolian obsidian are the lution J.-D. Vigne et al. (2013) see in most numerous. The return voy- use of larger and more complex age seems to be most favourable boats, which were presumed in Cy- easterly to Levant and against the prus case already by Steven Mithen clock along the coast back to south (2003, 101). The ruminants are not Turkey. Transfer from northern to the only reason (Vigne et al. 2013, southern Cyprus (where there is 169–171) but also the transport of smaller amount of Anatolian ob- a domestic mouse, though as an un- sidian) would have happened along wanted passenger. They do not sup- the coast. The voyage from Tur- pose that mice could find refuge in key to Cyprus could have taken n Fig. 6 The Monoxylon II crew used nine to ten paddlers, though a simple dug-out boat. As a solution 14 hours and in summer could all there was enough space for 13. they presume two dug-out boats have happened during daylight.

30 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016 TÉMA ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU

Box 2: Building the crafts The first dug out canoe was from a poplar and was built in 1992 with help of fire setting. The log got its rough shape within 10 days. Another 100 hours were spent on cutting to the final shape.

Since January to May 1988 we were building the log-boat according to the original from the Lake Bracciano in The Centre of Experimental Ar- chaeology in Vsestary. The boat was partly dug with polished stone tools (the front 3 m from the 8 m of inner space length). With one replica of a polished stone axe and an original Neoli- thic adze it was cut out space 72 cm deep, 80 wide and 300 cm long. The tools never worked together. There were usually 1–3 experimenters with variable experience. Most of the time they n Fig. 7 Hypothetical placing of a cage to transport domesticated animals. were using the axe, only while working the outer surface did the use of the adze. Together it was worked 100 hours, one fifth of it with the adze. Problems of the Sail Use reached Iberian peninsula probably The axe was sharpened once half way through Origins only in the second millennium BC. the work. After 50 hours of work the axe han- The reason of the slow speed could dle cracked. With the axe they cut out chips up There is a problem for the use of sail be tradition, difficulties with tech- to 5 cm diameter and about 50 cm long or wi- as suggested above (Vigne et al. 2013) nology transfer or relation to social der and shorter splinters. The adze was creating at such an early period. C. Broodbank complexity documented mostly in smaller splinters up to 2 cm while cutting across (2010, 254) places the earliest use of the east Mediterranean (Broodbank and big splinters to 10 cm while cutting the sur- sail in the southeast Mediterranean, 2010, 255–258). It is difficult to ima­ face. In the upper part of the trunk a 20 cm thick and . In gine the use of sail in Cyprus in a pe- layer of the surface was cut out with help of oak the last named region there is evi- riod earlier than in the Persian Gulf. wedges. The full length of the boat is 9.2 m, wi- dence of reed boats (Fig. 8; Schwartz dth 1.0–1.2 m and height up to 1 m. The rest of 2002) from the sixth millennium Conclusion: View from Sea the boat was worked with iron axes, adzes and BC, including depictions of a mast wedges. The tree was cut down in December (Carter 2010, 192, Fig. 15.2b). It Coastal navigation is from the ex- 1997 and all the time it had enough humidity seems that these boats were created perience on the Monoxylon II Ex- necessary for working. The experimenters esti- by an outside layer of reed bundles pedition easier than crossing open mate the time demand for building the whole (one imprint of a cord documents sea. Even there waiting for favour- boat with stone tools to be 300 hours. That me- tying a bundle, another construc- able wind seems important and not ans at least a month of work for one person or tion of a boat), not rafts made because of sail use (Fig. 9). The sec- at least 10 days for a three men group. In one from large bundles as used by Thor ond fundamental factor was the moment more people could work and swapping Heyerdahl (Vosmer 2000). The old- ability to land, or pull the vessel on allowed faster progress. est wooden hulls on Nile appeared the bank. During the Monoxylon probably in the mid fourth millen- Expeditions anchoring the dug-out nium BC, together with evidence canoe proved difficult on sandy of sail (Ward 2006, 119–120). That and rocky coasts. In the former could mean that the origins of sail and case the vessel filled with sand use were connected to reed boats and water, in the latter waves threw as the propulsion of larger vessels it on the rocky bank (Fig. 10). So would probably not have been real- sea currents are not the only factor ised any other way. The advantages governing the use of boats in their were obvious. With a sail it was pos- period (for example Papageorgiou sible to transport up to 20 tonnes 2014). of cargo in one go (Broodbank 2010, 259). In comparison, a longboat Crossing to small distant islands with a presumed cargo of one tonne was probably very difficult. After was still propelled by oars. C. Brood- João Zilhão (2014) revision of obsid- bank proposes that the oldest Medi- ian in North Africa he states that terranean sailing boats appear in the in the Mesolithic and the Neolith- Nile delta at the end of the fourth ic there is no evidence for voyages millennium BC. The surviving de- over 150 km, which means there pictions show only slow a spread is no evidence of a connection of n Fig. 8 Finds of reed boats in Near East (after Schwartz 2002, of sail use in the Mediterranean. It the Aegean to North Africa via the Fig. 4).

18/2016 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 31 ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA

Box 3: The Expeditions Routes The route of the 1995 voyage was planned to the South leeward sides of the islands. Most of the occupation is still situated there. The sea surface there can be completely calm. Between the islands there is a different situation. The greatest distance is more than 50 km (Ikaria–Mykonos), the rest is only about 25 km. Most of it was easily crossible in the log–boat. No influen- ce of sea currents showed, not even in the places where they are supposed by V. Nikolov. Strong wind creating waves caused problems and on the open sea therefore there some places were very difficult to cross. We had to be tugged by an accompa- nying craft for 40 km between Ikaria and Mykonos as because of time reasons we couldn’t wait for the weather to improve. According to the experience of local inhabitants this area is difficult to cross most of the year. Such areas I named for myself ‘zones of discontinuity’.

The Monoxylon II Expedition was through the Western Mediterranean (Fig. 1) where the Bracciano boat came from. Italian archaeologists suppose that it was used for sea faring. The voyage took place under different conditions from those in the Aegean Sea. We chose that to test the crossing to the Lipari Islands and coastal faring, the most probable early sea going in the area. We selected coastal areas with supposed relation to Neolithic coast that meant places where sea faring could have taken place in prehistory. Even here we had to remember that there was a different shape of coast in the Neolithic, especially in Northern and Central Italy, Southern France and Eastern Spain.

The route of the expedition 1998 was divided into 5 stages. The main object was to observe the faring characteristics of the boat and influence of natural conditions as they are supposed by various theories and models.

Monoxylon I (1995) 17/8 San Remo – Nice 57 km 6.05–20.00 3 crews (5 h = 23 km + 6,30 h = 24 + 2,30 h = 10 km) 8/9 Ormos – Kirikos (Samos – Ikaria) 30 km 9,15 h 2 crews 18/8 Nice – Miramar 38 km 7.15–16.00 2 crews 9/9 Kirikos – Nikolaos (Ikaria) 25 km 7 h / 2 crews (4 h = 21 km + 5 h = 17 km) mistral in the afternoon 13/9 Nikolaos – O. A. Annas (Ikaria–Mykonos) 14 h 2 crews 19/8 Miramar – Gigaro 58 km 6.45–20.45 3 crews (11 km + 40 km pulled*) (4,15 h = 19 km + 5,45 h = 21 km + 4 h = 18 km) 14/9 O. A. Annas – Ormos Ornos (Mykonos) 11 km 4 h 20/8 Gigaro – La Tour Fondue 43 km 7.30–18.20 2 crews 1 crew (4,30 h = 18 km + 6,20 h = 25 km) 15/9 Ormos Ornos (Mykonos – Tinos) 24 km 9,30 h 2 crews mistral in the afternoon 17/9 Tinos – Petrangathi (Tinos – Andros) 35 km 11 h 21/8 La Tour Fondue – Port Niel 5 km 7.00– 9.00 1 crew 2 crews mistral – pulling the boat out 18/9 Petrangathi – Gavrio (Andros) 20 km 7 h 2 crews 22/8 Saintes Maries –de–la–Mer, mistral 19/9 Gavrio – Karystos (Andros – Euboia) 7 h 2 crews 23/8 Saintes M.–Ecluse de St Gilles 38 km 8.00–23.00 (14 km + 15 km pulled*) 3 crews (6 h = 15 km + 6 h = 15 km + 3 h = 8 km) 20/9 Karystos – Marmari (Euboia) 25 km 7,45 h 2 crews 21/9 Marmari – cape (Euboia) 12 km 3 h 1 crew La Pettit Rhone 22/9 cape – Marathon (Euboia – Attika) 17 km 3,30 h 24/8 Ecluse St Gilles – la Grande–Motte 29 km 7.15–16.00 2 crews 3 crews (2,30 h = 14 km + 3,30 h = 11 km + 2,30 h = 4 km) 23/9 Marathon – Nea Makri (Attika) 7 km 1,30 h 1 crew mistral – pulling the boat out (* pulled by the accompanying craft) 25/8 le Cap’Agde – Portiragnés 10 km 7.00–13.00 1 crew Monoxylon II (1998) Spain 26/8 Valencia – Playa de la Dehesa 10 km 17.00–20.00 Sicily 1 crew 7/8 Milazzo – Vulcano: 31 km 12.30–20.45 1 crew 27/8 Playa de la Dehesa – Piles 54 km 7.00–21.00 3 crews 8/8 Vulcano – Milazzo: 31 km 9.00–18.00 1 crew (5,30 h = 26 km + 5,30 h = 18 km + 2,40 h = 10 km) 9/8 Milazzo – Bagnara: 51 km 5.15–21.30 3 crews 28/8 Piles – Cala Blanca 38 km 7.50–16.30 3 crews (4,15 h=17 km + 4,30 h=19 km + 3,45 h=15 km) (2,30 h = 12 km + 3,30 h = 17 km + 2,30 h = 9 km) 10/8 Bagnara – pulling the boat out 29/8 Cala Blanca – Altea 43 km 7.45–19.20 3 crews (4,30 h = 18 km + 4,30 h = 20 km + 2,15 h = 5 km) Central Italy 30/8 Altea – Campello 37 km 7.20–16.30 2 crews 11/8 Mondragone – Sinnessa: 6 km 19.00–20.20 1 crew (5 h = 20 km + 4 h = 17 km) 12/8 Sinnessa – Lido di Fondi: 50 km 6.45–20.05 3 crews 31/8 Campello – Alicante 16 km 8.20–12.10 1 crew (6 h = 21 km + 6 h = 27 km + 1 h = 2 km) pulling the boat out 13/8 Lido di Fondi – Terraccina: 12 km 8.05–10.30 1 crew 1/9 Sevilla – transfer pulling the boat out 14/8 Rome – Museo L. Pigorini Portugal 15/8 the Lake Bracciano 22 km 9.00–18.00 2 crews 2/9 Sines (4 h = 8 km + 6 h = 14 km) 3/9 Sines – Setúbal 20 km 9.00–13.00 1crew + tugging of the boat to Setúbal Northern Italy – France 4/9 Setúbal – Sesimbra 29 km 9.00–17.15 1 crew 16/8 San Remo 4 km 14.00–15.00 1 crew pulling the boat out

32 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016 TÉMA ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU

importation of obsidian from Pan- telleria. During the Monoxylon Expedition 1995 we experienced problems on the route from Ikaria to Mykonos (50 km which I called a ‘zone of disconnection’; Tichý 2001). At the same time as the expe- dition (September 1995) the same route was, by coincidence, described as a ‘barrier to agriculture spread- ing’ (van Andel – Runnels 1995).

An example of a ‘careful progress’ is also the crossing of the Adriatic Sea with an intermediate landing on the Palagruža island with evi- n Fig. 9 Monoxylon II is entering ‘mistral’ in the French territory. dence of Neolithic impresso pot- tery (Forenbaher – Kaiser 2011). Or of data on the presence of gather- Cyprus could have worked for the did they cross directly to the ‘heel’ ers also decreases (Ammerman 2014, agriculture colonisation of Crete, of Italy? The closest landing place 204). The connection to the main- where the only site with Early Ne- from Palagruža in any direction is land is documented in Cyprus for olithic evidence is Knossos X. Re- 45 km on other islands and 57 km PPN A, in PPN B there was already cently there are documented Mes- on the Italian coast. Stašo Foren- established a number of new mam- olithic sites on the southern coast baher and Preston T. Miracle (2014) mals (Ammerman 2014, 205–206; Vi- (Strasser et al. 2010), but A. J. Ammer- have since adjusted the model of gne 2013). I believe that as Cyprus is man does not consider their dat- spread of agriculture in the Adriatic 70 km from the closest mainland, ing certain (2014, 204). The discov- Sea. It seems that the oldest settle- the voyage did not need to take ery of the Mesolithic on Crete has ment on the Italian side (Tavoliere) more than 30 hours as stated by J.- weakened the ‘one-time’ hypothesis and the Adriatic impresso pottery D. Vigne (2014, 136). The Monoxy- (Broodbank – Strasser 1991), there was could have originated between Ta- lon II vessels reached daily distanc- even considered a possibility of a re- voliere and Dalmatia. That means es of up to 58 km in 14 hours. D. E. lationship between gatherers and in the area connected by islands of Bar-Yosef Mayer et al. (2015) consider farmers (Nowicki 2014, 48–49). De- the Adriatic Sea (Tremiti, Pianosa, similar time for voyage from Tur- spite this Crete remains an exam- Palagruža, Sušac, Vis). key to Cyprus under optimal con- ple of ‘a jump’ over a long distance ditions realistic. Another possibility (Leppard 2014 presumes use of eco- Cyprus and Crete stand out among is the use of the small island north- logic niches). Although the route the big ‘true islands’ with early evi­ east of Cyprus, which is nowadays using the Kasos Island could have dence of domesticated species. submerged bellow the sea surface, been only 50 km long (Broodbank – Their presence though is later to- for stopovers. Although J.­­‑D. Vigne Strasser 1991, 239), it is navigation wards the west, despite the evidence et al. (2013) are not certain if it was from a small to a big island over of early Preneolithic settlement on still available in the Epipalaeolithic. open sea. Even such distance could Sardinia and Corsica proved navi- be surmountable in a simple vessel gational abilities in the area (Vigne There is still the question if the same although the navigation over open 2013). Towards west the reliability mechanism of repeated voyages to sea could be the most demanding of the voyages discussed here.

It seems that the results of the ex- perimental voyages correspond with archaeological evidence and models of earliest maritime voyag- ing. The possibility of coastal nav- igation was used frequently with regards to its feasibility (along the southern coast of modern Turkey, from northern to southern coast of Cyprus, along coast of the north- west Mediterranean). Routes over open sea navigation from main- land to Islands (Cyprus) require a deep empirical maritime knowl- edge. Where there is evidence of human presence on smaller is- lands, chains of islands were pro­ bably used to reach them (Melos, n Fig. 10 Night surf threw Monoxylon II on the rocky shore in Spain. Lipari Islands) or they were used

18/2016 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 33 ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA

as a stepping stones (Paraguža) regions. Even then the reach of ear- Oxford, 203–236 but the open sea would be more ly maritime voyaging would be lim- van Andel, T. H. – Runnels, S. C. N. 1995: The earliest farmers in Europe, Antiquity 69, 264, of a barrier. In case of navigation ited in certain regions. 481–500. between smaller islands or on the Andersen, S. H. 1986: Mesolithic way to a bigger island such a ‘bar- Bibliography Dug-outs and Paddles from Tybrind Vig, rier’ would be the distance around Acta Archaeologica 57, 87–106. 50 km (Ikaria – Mykonos, Rhodos – Ammerman, A. J. 2010: The first Argonauts: Arbuckle, B. S. et al. 2014: Data Sharing Reveals Complexity in the Westward Spread Karpathos – Kasos – Crete). De- Toward the study of the earliest seafaring in the Mediterranean. In: A. Anderson – of Domestic Animals across Neolithic spite all this there was no place in J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle (eds.), The global Turkey. PLoS ONE 9(6): e99845. doi:10.1371/ the Mediterranean Sea untouched origins and development of seafaring. journal.pone.0099845. by early maritime voyaging. During McDonald Institute Monographs. Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. E. – Kahanov, Y. – the colonisation both transport of Cambridge, 81–92. Roskin, J. – Gildor, H. 2015: Neolithic Voyages Ammerman, A. J. 2011 to Cyprus: Wind Patterns, Routes, and people (for the routes to Cyprus, : The paradox of early voyaging in the Mediterranean and the Mechanisms, The Journal of Island and Crete and Aegean Islands: Haak slowness of the Neolithic transition between Coastal Archaeology 10/3, 412–435. et al. 2010; Fernándes et al. 2014; Pas- Cyprus and Italy in Seascapes in Aegean Broodbank, C. 1989: The Longboat and chou et al. 2014) and animals (along Prehistory, ed. G. Vavouranakis. Monographs Society in the Cyclades in the Keros-Syros the coast of southern Turkey; Ar- of the Danish Institute at Athens. Athens. culture, American Journal of Archaeology Ammerman, A. J. 2013 93, 319–337. buckle et al. 2014 : Introduction. In: ) occurred. The A. J. Ammerman – T. W. Davis (eds.), Island Broodbank, C. 1999: Colonization and contrast between ‘careful progress’ Archaeology and the Origins of Seafaring Configuration in the Insular Neolithic of using available land and historical in the Eastern Mediterranean. Eurasian the Aegean. In: P. Halstead (ed.), Neolithic consequences (migration of people, Prehistory 10. Oxford, 9–30. Society in Greece. Sheffield, 15–41. transport of live animals) can be Ammerman, A. J. 2014: Setting our sights on Broodbank, C. 2000: An Island Archaeology of the distant horizon In: A. J. Ammerman – the Early Cyclades. Cambridge. explained by the deep knowledge T. W. Davis (eds.), Island Archaeology and Broodbank, C. 2006: The Origins and Early of first navigators on the choice the Origins of Seafaring in the Eastern Development of Mediterranean Maritime of suitable conditions in given Mediterranean. Eurasian Prehistory 11. Activity, Journal of Mediterranean

Box 4: Sea going characteristics of the experimental crafts

The following text considers only the Monoxylon II vessel, as it people were able to use it they achieved much. We don’t know was based on an excavated example. To follow the requirements about beginnings of sails but if the square groove in the bottom of archaeological experiment it would be necessary to remove of the Bracciano boat was a socket for mast and a bit of cloth the influence of the human factor (modern person) which is not found near by remain of a sail then it had to be very early. We possible with some features of a replica dug-out canoe. felt the strength of head wind in Miramara in France where it was catching leaves of our paddles and de­creased our speed to During the Monoxylon II Expedition the average day travel was a minimum. 32 km in day and the crews worked on average 11 hours a day, once 15 hours and three times 14 hours. There were altogether The mass of the craft helped to cut the waves. The influence 15 full days on sea. Others didn’t mean a whole day journey of sea sickness seemed to be stronger on the modern yacht usually because of pulling out the boat or putting it on water. but that wasn’t general. The mass was increased by a massive Altogether about 800 km was covered in 200 hours giving an bow and stern that hold together a thin shell of bottom and average speed of 4 km/h. Transfer over mainland between sin- sides. The same function was played in the Bracciano boat by gle stages or bad weather on sea took several days. The accom- the 4 cross braces. Because they are found in many prehisto- panying craft finished in Southern Italy and next changing of ric and historic European log-boats there was a lot of discu- crews depended on landing by coast which was made difficult ssion about their function. According to our experience from by modern built-up space. Wind of 2 Beaufort was probably the building, through manipulation both on land and in water to weakest we encountered. In France the wind reached in several faring I believe they were there to reinforce the boat. The mass places up to 7–9 Beaufort. The strength was verified by weather also influenced the possibilities of steering. We can barely pre- forecasts and reports from the port authorities. The boat went sume a more complicated helm than a big paddle, as we can on in the end even in two metre high waves although this was see still on the pictures from the Aegean Early Bronze Age. For not possible without bailing. the paddle to work it was necessary to keep the boat moving. Problems started in 2 m waves when the helm was leaving the The boat of the Monoxylon II Expedition was stable. In contrast water. to 1995 we didn’t need to use a side float that increased water resistance and decreased speed. During the whole time, even in The load capacity is an important parameter to consider for the biggest waves we were never in danger of turning over. That the possibilities of Neolithisation and transfer of materials. The was because the centre of gravity was below the sea surface. The crew of the log-boat could be made of at maximum 15 peo- maximum speed was 5 km/h. It wasn’t in the power of the crew ple. Although it was more than meter shorter than the original, to increase it without being exhausted. We were testing speed the original length wouldn’t increase this number by more than mostly on Bracciano where the going was easy. The speed of two people. There were usually 9–11 people paddling, one was the craft was influenced only by sea currents, tide and wind. I a steersman. There was still plenty of space for load. During would mark the wind as the most influential among them. If the expedition we were carrying only obsidian, dinkel wheat and

34 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016 TÉMA ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU

Archaeology 19(2), 199–230. Cambridge, 203–212. Forenbaher, S. – Miracle, P. 2014: Transition Broodbank, C. 2010: ‘ a-sail from over Efstratiou, N. 2013: Knossos and the to Farming in the Adriatic: A View from the the rim of the sea’: Voyaging, Sailing and the Beginning of the Neolithic in Greece and Eastern Shore. In: C. Manen – T. Perrin – Making of Mediterranean Societies the Aegean Islands. In: N. Efstratiou – J. Guilaine (eds.), La Transition Néolithique c. 3500–800 BC. In: A. Anderson – A. Karetsou – M. Ntinou (eds.), The en Méditerranée. Actes du colloque. J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle (eds.), The global Neolithic Settlement of Knossos in Crete. Transitions en Méditerranée, ou comment origins and development of seafaring. New Evidence for the Early Occupation of des chasseurs devinrent agriculteurs. Arles, McDonald Institute Monographs. Crete and the Aegean Islands. Philadelphia, 233–242. Cambridge, 249–264. 201–214. Fugazzola Delpino, M. A. 1995: Un tuffo nel Broodbank, C. – Strasser,T. F. 1991: Migrant Erić, M. 1993–1994: Začasno poročilo passato 8.000 anni fa nel lago di Bracciano. farmers and the Neolithic colonization of o deblaku iz Hotize, Zbornik soboškega Roma. Crete, Antiquity 65, 247, 233–245. muzeja 3, 115–129. Fugazzola Delpino, M. A. – Mineo, M. 1995: La Butzer, K. W. 1970: Physical conditions in Farr, R. H. 2010: Island Colonization piroga neolitica del lago di Bracciano (‚La eastern Europe, western Asia and Egypt and Trade in the Mediterranean. In: Marmotta 1‘), Bullettino di Paletnologia before the period of agricultural and Urban A. Anderson – J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle Italiana 86, n. s. IV, 197–266. Settlement, The Cambridge ancienit history, (eds.), The global origins and development of Haak, W. et al. 2010: Ancient DNA from vol. I, part 1, chapt. II, 40–49. seafaring. McDonald Institute Monographs. European Early Neolithic farmers reveals Carter, R. A. 2010: The Social and Cambridge, 179–189. their Near Eastern affinities. PLoS Biol, Environmental Context of Neolithic Fernández, E. et al. 2014: Ancient DNA 8(11), e1000536. doi:10.1371/journal. Seafaring in the Persian Gulf. In: A. J. analysis of 8000 BC Near Eastern farmers pbio.1000536. Anderson – J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle (eds.), supports an Early Neolithic pioneer Horejs, B. – Milić, B. – Ostmann, F. – The global origins and development of maritime colonization of mainland Thanheiser, U. – Weninger, B. – Galik, A. 2015: seafaring. McDonald Institute Monographs, Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean The Aegean in the Early 7th Millennium Cambridge, 191–202. Islands. PLoS Genetics, 10(6), e1004401. BC: Maritime Networks and Colonization, Dawson, H. 2010: A Question of Life or doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004401. Journal of World Prehistory 28/4, 289–330. Death? Seafaring and Abandoment in the Forenbaher, S. – Kaiser, T. 2011: Palagruža Howitt-Marshall, D. – Runnels, C. 2016: Middle Mediterranean and Pacific Island. and the spread of farming in the Adriatic. Pleistocene sea-crossings in the eastern In: A. J. Anderson – J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle In: N. Phoca-Cosmetaton (ed.), The first Mediterranean? Journal of Anthropological (eds.), The global origins and development of Mediterranean islanders: initial occupation Archaeology 42, 140–153. seafaring. McDonald Institute Monographs. and survival strategy. Oxford, 99–112. Leppard, T. P. 2014: Mobility and migration

water supplies but in the mentioned number of crew there was The possibility of landing and anchoring is an important charac- still plenty of space left. The transport of obsidian was optimal teristic of the coast. We don’t know anything about ports and the load functioned as ballast. We loaded more than 100 kg of anchoring during the Neolithic if Bracciano itself wasn’t such a the stone which we carried from Sicily as far as Portiragnes. It port. The look of the coast certainly changed so we don’t have would be possible to carry more. Even our amount would be a firm base for our presumptions. It is only possible to say that enough for making a large number of knapped tools. Two linen a certain type of coast is represented by the Greek islands roc- bags of dinkel wheat were from the load point of view no bur- ky coast. There it is necessary to pick a place for landing. Ano- den. One of them was left in Portiragnes and about a half of the ther possibility is the Central Italian sandy coast where the soft other one was sown in March 1999 and it germinated 100 %. sand makes landing difficult. In France the line of the coast was An area about two to four metres means space with amount broken and it was necessary to look for a port. It was possible of wheat sufficient to provide after a second sowing harvest for to suppose suitable places in big bays. The main problem was the new cereal colony. The width of the boat would allow you to the infamous mistral that can enforce several days break in voy- carry a much bigger load. age. In extreme conditions when we were testing the boat when others would barely set on sea. In the area of Spanish Valen- Some experience relate also to observing the boat on dry land. cia the coast is again very sandy. In combination with breakers The necessity for protection from sun might be well documen- it creates an unfavourable landing situation by bank and even ted also by the supposed boat shelter found at Bracciano. The less suitable situation for anchoring or fastening the boat to the swelling of wood should probably be balanced with the braces bank. We used to bail sand and water in the morning but it‘s left in the bottom. During our handling of the boat on sea and not too elegant. But in Spain there are inland lakes connected to on dry land it was possible to see the vibrations of wood. The sea. They could have been suitable ports. cross braces were functioning as armatures. This feature clearly shows the experience of Neolithic boat builders. The log-boat Faring along the Atlantic coast of Portugal was a separate task. from Bracciano could have had several generations of prede- There we tested part of the coast between today Sines and cessors. Sado estuary which connected two concentrations of Neolithic occupation. There is a strong tide which demands anchoring in This experience is also a reason why to look in different way at ports. One of them could have been hidden on the rocky pro- the ethnological and ethnographic parallels. In the case of Bra- montory in Sines where it would precede its famous medieval cciano the log-boat gained thanks to different material (oak) successor. We can suppose the next landing possibility only 90 completely different qualities. The building of the craft in the km to the North in the estuary of the Sado River. Between them original scale showed its hugeness. I think personally it would there is a long sandy beach hammered with breakers. The condi- be pointless to build such a big boat just to go over a lake. tions couldn’t be better in the past as the evidence as the Roman That also supports the view of Dr Mario Mineo from L. Pigorini settlement swept by an Atlantic tidal wave shows. That would Museum that these boats were used for sea faring. again mean higher speed or night faring to cover the distance.

18/2016 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 35 ARCHEOLOGIE POHYBU TÉMA

in the Early Neolithic of the Mediterranean: the Mediterranean islands as an indicator of (1989; 1995). V kontextu převratných nálezů questions of motivation and mechanism, early voyaging. In: A. J. Ammerman – z období kořistníků mladého dryasu (Am- World Archaeology 46(4), 484–501. T. W. Davis (eds.), Island Archaeology and merman 2010; 2011; 2013; 2014) a zemědělců Marangou, Ch. 1997: Evidence about the Origins of Seafaring in the Eastern PPN A i PPN B (Vigne et al. 2013; Vigne 2013) a Neolithic Dugout (Dhispilio, Kastoria) Mediterranean, Eurasian Prehistory 10. na Kypru, možných kontaktů mezolitických (Preliminary Report), Tropis 5, 275–282. Oxford, 45–56. populací v Egejském moři (Sampson 2014; Marangou, Ch. 2001: Neolithis Watercraft. Vigne, J.-D. 2014: Nouveaux eclairages Efstratiou 2013) a „pionýrské­ osady“ s „ba- Evidence from Northern Greek Wetlands. chypriotes sur les debuts de la domestication líčkem námořních znalostí“ na západním In: B. A. Purdy (ed.), Enduring Records. The des animaux et sur la neolithisation au pobřeží Turecka (­Horejs et al. 2015) se stává Environmental and cultural heritage of Proche-Orient mediterraneenne espagnole. aktuální otázka, zda rákosový člun spojovat Wetlands. Oxford, 192–205. New insights from Cyprus on the pouze s kořistníky a dlabaný člun se země- Mc Grail, S. 2010: The Global Origins of beginning of animal domestication and dělci. Vyhovuje rákosový člun i potřebám Seagoing Water Transport. In: A. Anderson on the neolithisation in the Near East. In: přepravy nákladu zemědělců? Je nezbytné, – J. H. Barrett – K. V. Boyle (eds.), The global C. Manen – T. Perrin – J. Guilaine (eds.), La zároveň s důležitými diskuzemi o povaze origins and development of seafaring. Transition Néolithique en Méditerranée. nákladu (Zilhão 2014, Vigne et al. 2013), stále McDonald Institute Monographs. Actes du colloque. Transitions en respektovat technolo­gické možnosti kořist- Cambridge, 95–107. Méditerranée, ou comment des chasseurs níků a zemědělců stavět to či ono plavidlo. Mithen, S. 2003: After the Ice: A Global devinrent agriculteurs. Arles, 125–140. Seán McGrail (2010, 104, tab. 8.1) navrhuje, že Human History 20 000–5000 BC. London. Vigne, J.-D. – Zazzo, A. – Cucchi, T. – loď z prken nemohla být postavena před pří- Nowicki, K. 2014: The Neolithic Beginning. Carrere, I. – Briois, F. – Guilaine, J. 2013: The chodem neolitických technologií. Podobně In: K. Nowicki (ed.), Final Neolithic Crete transportation of mammals to Cyprus i stavba dlabaného člunu z kmene vyžaduje and the Southeast Aegean. Boston – Berlin, sheds light on early voyaging and boats in existenci kamenných broušených seker, nebo 43–79. the Mediterranean Sea. In: A. J. Ammerman alespoň velkých štípaných seker, protože Papageorgiou, D. 2014: The marine – T. W. Davis (eds.), Island Archaeology k tvarování většího plavidla nestačí jen oheň. environment and its influence on seafaring and the Origins of Seafaring in the Eastern Protože aktuální nálezy současnost kořistní- and maritime routes in the prehistoric Mediterranean, Eurasian Prehistory 10. ků a zemědělců předpokládají, objevil se i Aegean, European Journal of Archaeology Oxford, 157–176. názor (Nowicki 2014, 48), že nebyl asi žádný 11(2–3), 199–222. Vosmer, T. 2001: The reconstruction of the zřejmý rozdíl mezi typy plavidel v mezolitu/ Paschou, P. et al. 2014: Maritime route of Magan boat, Prehistoria 2000, 1/2001, epipaleolitu a neolitu. Porovnání jejich vlast- colonization of Europe. PNAS. http://www. 169–173. ností je tedy důležité. Již dříve (Tichý 2000; pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320811111. Ward, Ch. 2006: Boat-building and its social 2001) i zde uvedené názory neprosazují dla- Perlès, C. 2001: The Early Neolithic in Greece. kontext in early Egypt: interpretations from baný člun na úkor ostatních plavidel jako The First Farming Communities in Europe. the Firt Dynasty boat-grave cementem at plavidlo jediné nebo převládající. Považuji Cambridge. Abydos, Antiquity 80, 307, 118–129. jej ale za plavidlo, které směřovalo k tradici Perlès, C. 2005: From the Near East to Greece: Zilhão, J. 2001: Radiocarbon Evidence for dřevěných lodí ve Středomoří. Tedy k té tra- Let’s reverse the Focus, Cultural Elements Maritime Pioneer Colonization at the dici, která byla základem pozdějšího vývoje that didn’t transfer. In: C. Lichter (ed.), Origins of Farming in Mediterranean mořeplavectví. Byzas 2. How did Farming reach Europe? Europe, PNAS 98(24): 14180–14185. Anatolian-European Relations from the Zilhão, J. 2014: Early prehistoric voyaging in „Pohledem z moře“ se zdá, že možnost pří- second half of the 7th through the first half the Western Mediterranean: Implications břežní plavby byla využívána frekventovaně of the 6th Millennium cal BC. Proceedings of for the Neolithic transition in Iberia and s ohledem na její realizovatelnost (podél již- the International Workshop, Istanbul 20–22 the Maghreb. In: A. J. Ammerman – T. W. ního pobřeží dnešního Turecka, ze severní- may 2004. Istanbul, 275–290. Davis (eds.), Island Archaeology and ho na jižní pobřeží Kypru, na pobřeží středo- Sampson, A. 2014: The Aegean Mesolithic: the Origins of Seafaring in the Eastern západního Středomoří). Mezi plavbami na environment, economy, and voyaging. In: Mediterranean. Eurasian Prehistory 11. otevřeném moři se snadnější zdála být plav- A. J. Ammerman – T. W. Davis (eds.) Island Oxford, 185–200. ba od pevniny k ostrovům (Kypr), i když i ta Archaeology and the Origins of Seafaring předpokládala hluboké znalosti o námořní in the Eastern Mediterranean. Eurasian plavbě. Tam, kde je archeologicky doložena Prehistory 11. Oxford, 63–74. Souhrn přítomnost lidí na menších ostrovech, byly Schwartz, M. 2002: Early evidence of reed na cestě k nim využívány v co největší míře Nejstarší námořní plavba ve Středomoří: boats from southeast Anatolia, Antiquity 76, řetězce ostrovů jako jistota (cesta na Mélos, pohled z moře 293, 617–618. cesta na Liparské ostrovy), nebo přímo za- Strasser, T. F. – Panagopoulou, E. – Runnels, Cílem této stati je pohled na nové překvapu- stávka (Paragruža). Na otevřeném moři C. N. – Murray, P. M. – Thompson, N. – jící nálezy ze Středomoří v obdobích mezoli- mohly vzniknout „bariéry“. V případě plav- Karkanas, P. – McCoy, F. W. – Wegmann, tu/epipaleolitu a PPN/neolitu se zkušeností by buď mezi menšími ostrovy nebo na vel- K. W. 2010: Stone Age seafaring in the z plavebníchch pokusů expedic Monoxylon. ký ostrov mohla být „bariérou“ i vzdálenost Mediterranean: Evidence from the Plakias Takový přístup je možné označit jako „po- kolem 50 km (Ikaria – Mykonos, Rhodos – region for Lower Palaeolithic and Mesolithic hled z moře“, který využívá výsledky praktic- Karpathos – Kasos – Kréta). Přesto nezůstalo habitation of Crete, Hesperia 79, 145–190. ké činnosti k náhledu na nová fakta či názo- místo ve Středozemním moři, které by bylo Tichý, R. 1992: Dlabané čluny. Příspěvek ry týkající se nejstarší námořní plavby. časnou plavbou zcela nedotčeno. Z podstat- k poznání dávné plavby, Diploma Thesis, né části tudy probíhala při kolonizaci pře- Univerzita Hradec Králové. Hradec Králové. Hypotéza o významu dlabaných člunů pro prava lidí (pro trasu Kypr, Kréta a egejské Tichý, R. 1994: Egejské moře před 9000 lety, nejstarší námořní plavbu ve Středomoří (Ti- ostrovy Haak et al 2010; Fernándes et al 2014; Listy katedry historie a historického klubu chý 1992; 1994) byla založena na výskytu lesů Paschou et al 2014) i zvířat (při jižní pobřeží pobočky Hradec Králové 6, 51–60. na pobřeží Středomoří (Butzer 1970), nálezu Turecka Arbuckle et al. 2014). Protiklad mezi Tichy, R., 2000: L’Expedition Monoxylon: dlabaného člunu na bývalém mořském po- „opatrným přístupem“, využívajícím na tra- Une Monoxyle en Mediterranée břeží v severní Evropě (Andersen 1986), tradi- se dostupné pevniny, a historickými důsled- Occidentale. Hronov. ci „dlouhých lodí“ zřejmě dřevěné konstruk- ky (migrace obyvatel, přeprava živého nákla- Tichý, R. 2001: Expedice Monoxylon. ce na počátku doby bronzové ve východním du zvířat) lze vysvětlit hlubokými znalostmi Pocházíme z mladší doby kamenné. Středomoří (Broodbank 1989) a výskytu ka- prvních mořeplavců o volbě vhodných pod- Hradec Králové. (Monoxylon expeditions. menných broušených seker v období neolitu. mínek v daných oblastech. I tak zůstal využí- Our Journey from the Neolithic, English Nález neolitického dlabaného člunu v jeze- vaný dosah časné plavby uzavřený v určitých summary pp. 198–216.) ře Bracciano (Fugazzola Delpino – Mineo1995; regionech. Tzalas, H. 1989: O dromos tou opsidianou Fugazzola Delpino 1995) s možným využitím me ena papyrenio skaphos stis Kyklades, pro transport obsidiánu z Liparských ostro- Archaiologia 32, 11–20. vů učinil hypotézu reálnější. Možné využití Radomír Tichý, Katedra archeologie, Tzalas, H. 1995: On the obsidian trail: with dlabaných člunů pro nejstarší námořní plav- Filozofická fakulta, a papyrus craft in the Cyclades, Tropis 3, bu je alternativou k hypotéze o použití ráko- Univerzita Hradec Králové, adresa: 441–471. sových plavidel k přepravě obsidiánu, kterou Rokitanského 62, 500 03 Hradec Králové, Vigne, J.-D. 2013: The origins of mammals on praktickým pokusem nastínil Harry Tzalas e-mail: [email protected]

36 ŽIVÁ ARCHEOLOGIE – REA 18/2016