BALCANICA XXXIX BALCANICA XXXIX (2008), Belgrade 2009, 1–318 УДК 930.85(4–12) YU ISSN 0350–7653 СРПСКА АКАДЕМИЈА НАУКА И УМЕТНОСТИ БАЛКАНОЛОШКИ ИНСТИТУТ БАЛКАНИКА XXXIX (2008) ГОДИШЊАК БАЛКАНОЛОШКОГ ИНСТИТУТА Уредник ДУШАН Т. БАТАКОВИЋ Редакцијски одбор ДИМИТРИЈЕ ЂОРЂЕВИЋ (Санта Барбара), ФРАНСИС КОНТ (Париз), ЂОРЂЕ С. КОСТИЋ, ЉУБОМИР МАКСИМОВИЋ, ДАНИЦА ПОПОВИЋ, Биљана Сикимић, НИКОЛА ТАСИЋ (директор Балканолошког института САНУ), АНТОНИ-ЕМИЛ ТАХИАОС (Солун), СВЕТЛАНА М. ТОЛСТОЈ (Москва), ГАБРИЈЕЛА ШУБЕРТ (Јена) БЕОГРАД 2009 UDC 930.85(4–12) YU ISSN 0350–7653 SERBIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND ARTS INSTITUTE FOR BALKAN STUDIES BALCANICA XXXIX (2008) ANNUAL OF THE INSTITUTE FOR BALKAN STUDIES Editor DUŠAN T. BATAKOVIĆ Editorial Board FRANCIS CONTE (Paris), DIMITRIJE DJORDJEVIĆ (Santa Barbara), DJORDJE S. KOSTIĆ, LJUBOMIR MAKSIMOVIĆ, DANICA POPOVIĆ, GABRIELLA SCHUBERT (Jena), BILJANA SIKIMIĆ, ANTHONY-EMIL TACHIAOS (Thessaloniki), NIKOLA TASIĆ (Director of the Institute for Balkan Studies), SVETLANA M. TOLSTAJA (Moscow) BELGRADE 2009 Publisher Institute for Balkan Studies Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Belgrade, Knez Mihailova 35/IV www.balkaninstitut.com e-mail: [email protected] The origin of the Institute goes back to the Institut des Études balkaniques founded in Belgrade in 1934 as the only of the kind in the Balkans. The initiative came from King Alexander I Karadjordjević, while the Institute’s scholarly profile was created by Ratko Parežanin and Svetozar Spanaćević. The Institute published Revue internationale des Études balkaniques, which assembled most prominent European experts on the Balkans in various disciplines. Its work was banned by the Nazi occupation authorities in 1941. The Institute was not re-established until 1969, under its present-day name and under the auspices of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. It assembled a team of scholars to cover the Balkans from prehistory to the modern age and in a range of different fields of study, such as archaeology, ethnography, anthropology, history, culture, art, literature, law. This multidisciplinary approach remains its long-term orientation. Volume XXXIX of the annual Balcanica is printed with financial support from the Ministry of Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia CONTENTS ARTICLES ARCHAEOLOGY. CLASSICAL STUDIES Marko Porčić, Nomadic Pastoralism in the Early Bronze Age of the Central Balkans: Evaluation of Background Knowledge . 7 Ivan Jordović, Critias and Democracy . 33 Vladimir P. Petrović and Vojislav Filipović, Locating the Timacum Maius Station on the Roman Road Lissus–Naissus–Ratiaria: New Archaeological Research . 47 Sanja Pilipović, The Triad Zeus, Herakles and Dionysos: A Contribution to the Study of Cults in Upper Moesia . 59 MEDIEVAL STUDIES Žarko Vujošević, Moses as a Role Model in Serbian Charters after 1371: Changing Patterns . 69 Boris Milosavljević, Basic Philosophical Texts in Medieval Serbia . 79 Valentina Živković, Clothing as a Symbol of Charity and Soul Salvation in Late Medieval Kotor (Cattaro) . 103 Živko Mikić, The Medieval Necropolis outside the Eastern Gate of Gamzigrad (Felix Romuliana): A Paleodemographic Interpretation . 115 HISTORY Čedomir Antić, To Crimea via Belgrade: ������Thomas �onblanque������������ to Lord Raglan 1854–1855 . 123 Radoš Ljušić, Ilija Garašanin on Serbia’s Statehood . 131 Miloš Luković, Valtazar Bogišić and the General Property Code for the Principality of Montenegro: Domestic and �oreign Associates . 175 Spyridon Sfetas, In the Shadow of the Macedonian Issue: International Re-alignments and Balkan Repercussions . 189 LINGUISTICS. ANTHROPOLOGY Svetlana Ćirković, Expressing Time in Autobiographical Discourses of Internally Displaced Persons from Kosovo and Metohija . 199 Despina Syrri, On Dealing with the Past, Transitional Justice and Archives . 221 KOSOVO DOSSIER Dušan T. Bataković, Kosovo and Metohija: Serbia’s Troublesome Province . 243 Scott Taylor, Bridging the Great Divide: Contested Kosovo Span is a Symbol of International �ailure . 277 SERBIAN SchOLARLY TRADITION Slobodan Jovanović (Slobodan Yovanovitch), Sur l’idée yougoslave : passé et avenir (1939), préface D. T. Bataković . 285 REVIEWS Annemarie Sorescu-Marinković: Studying Peoples in the People’s Democracies II: Socialist Era Anthropology in South-East Europe, eds. Vintilă Mihăilescu, Ilia Iliev and Slobodan Naumović . 301 Aleksandra Djurić-Milovanović: Magdalena Slavkova, Evangelical Gypsies in Bulgaria . 305 Miroslav Timotijević: Smilja Marjanović-Dušanić, Sveti kralj. Kult Stefana Dečanskog . 307 Ljiljana Stošić: Emanuel Mutafov et al., Greek Icon Painters in Bulgaria after 1453 . 310 Kosta Christitch: Dušan T. Bataković, Kosovo : un conflit sans fin ? . 312 Milan Ristović: In Memoriam Ioannis A. Papadrianos (1931–2009) . 314 Marko Porčić School of Philosophy University of Belgrade Nomadic Pastoralism in the Early Bronze Age of the Central Balkans Evaluation of Background Knowledge Abstract: The aim of the paper is to examine background knowledge about the orga- nizational properties of mobile pastoral groups in order to assess the likelihood of the existence of pastoral nomads in the Early Bronze Age in the central Balkans. The patterning found by A. L. Johnson (2002) is taken as a point of departure for the cross-cultural analysis conducted in this study. Johnson’s findings are in the main corroborated. Acquired knowledge about the workings of pastoral societies suggests that highly mobile pastoral groups should not be expected in the Early Bronze Age of the central Balkans. Keywords: mobility, pastoralism, transhumance, Early Bronze Age, central Balkans, cross-cultural analysis Introduction The existence of nomadic pastoralism in Neolithic and Bronze Age Eu- rope has been a widely-debated topic (e.g. Chapman 1979; Geddes 1983; Hielte 2004; Higgs 1976; Walker 1983), with the debate often focusing on the scale and range of mobility and the degree of pastoral specializa- tion. Generally, the post-Neolithic period in Europe is characterized by an increased emphasis on the pastoral mode of subsistence, which in turn can be considered as one aspect of the so-called Secondary Products Revolution (Sherratt 1983). The idea that animal husbandry and animal products other than meat gained importance in the post-Neolithic period has had implications even for pottery type terminology. So we have forms which were a priori (based on formal ethnographic analogy) identified functionally as milk jugs (Ger. Milchtopf, fossil type of the Bodrogkeresztúr group) and milk churns (Ger. Fischbutte, vessel type occurring in the Baden and Baden-related groups), although it has been shown later that such interpretations are not entirely correct, at least when it comes to milk jugs (Craig et al. 2003). Similarly, ethnographic analogy has been used to infer about orga- nizational aspects of post-Neolithic societies. For example, M. Garašanin (1977; 1994) relied on ethnographic analogy in his attempt to explain the apparent lack of settlement sites in the Early Bronze Age (EBA) central Balkans, western Serbia in particular. He postulated a resemblance of the subsistence and settlement system to that of the ethnographically known 8 Balcanica XXXIX Balkan pastoral nomads such as Vlachs and Sarakatchani (cf. Hielte 2004 for similar ideas). I have argued elsewhere (Porčić, forthcoming) that this interpretation is very unlikely to be true for many reasons, and that besides new problem-oriented archaeological research, the problem of the EBA in the central Balkans requires some new theoretical (anthropological and middle-range research) work. One of the basic objections to the nomadic pastoralism hypothesis in European prehistory was put forward by P. Halstead years ago. According to Halstead (1987: 80–81), in the prehistoric Mediterranean there was no propitious social environment (e.g. market economy) for the emergence of a specialized pastoral economy (such as that of e.g. Vlachs and Sarakatchani). This is a very strong theoretical argument against highly specialized pastoral adaptations in prehistoric contexts (at least in the Balkans). When it comes to theory, the results of A. L. Johnson’s (2002) re- search on pastoral adaptations are the most relevant source. Her inquiry into pastoral adaptations, conducted in the style of Lewis Binford’s (2001) seminal work on hunters and gatherers, can be seen as a landmark in build- ing background knowledge relevant to the study of pastoral groups. As a result of her preliminary study, she has been able to recognize three distinct pastoral adaptation modes ( Johnson 2002: 166): 1) Agropastoralists — who employ mixed subsistence strategies in- volving animal husbandry and agriculture, have moderate mobility, and oc- cupy habitats with a biomass greater than or equal to 1500 g/m²/yr. Depen- dence on acquired plant food is generally below 20%. 2) Subsistence pastoralists — who rely mainly on small stock and have mobility up to 100 km/yr. Agriculture is mostly absent and depen- dence on acquired plant food is between 20% and 40%. Their habitats ex- ceed 500 g/m²/yr in biomass. 3) Economic specialists — whose subsistence depends more than 40% on plant food acquired by trade or purchase. They occupy the least productive habitats in biomass terms (less than 500 g/m²/yr) and are highly mobile. These system states can be distinguished by reliance on acquired food, mobility and organization of labour ( Johnson 2002: 161). Although the sample size of Johnson’s study is very small (14 cases), her