Tatuiranje i stigmatizacija kod nekih prapovijesnih populacija jugoistočne Europe
Tattooiog and Stigmatization in Some Prehistoric Populations of South-eastern Europe

Summary/Abstract: In order to establish the existence of tattooing customs and stigmatization ( cicatrization, that is scarification and cauterization) in prehistoric cultures, the author can oni. use those materials that could have been related to human body. lt is for this reason that the author of the paper studied statuettes -plastic products represented especially in the Neolithic prehistoric period. Prior to this period and partly after it, it is not (or at least ha not to date been) possible to find plastic products that would enable such studies. Relative numerousness or the statuettes enabled a selection of such artifacts thai can be regarded as realistic and in the creation of which the hand of prehistoric artist interpreted authentically the realistic images from lives of people at the time. The best examples used in these studies belong to the Butmir cultural complex, that is the archaeological site of Butmir situated near Sarajevo, wherein the found plastic products are of such an excellent workmanship that they were even used in determining of racial and ethnic characteristics of the inhabitants or the settlement. Accepting the findings of anthropologists and archaeologists related to racial and ethnic characteristics of the Butmir settlement inhabilant, the author was able to study the existence of tattooing and cicatrization customs with stronger argumentation. Establishing of the Negroid and Armenoide racial features or the Butmir inhabitants is only one in the line of evidence that the plastic scarves and punctured ornaments on statuettes can be trea ted as marks that in reality created a part of its inhabitants' customs at the time. This would, in other words, mean that the Butmir inhabitants knew tattooing and cicatrization customs. The examples given by the author show that this custom was aiso known in some other Neolithic sites (Vinca, Šesklo, Cueteni, etc.). Numerous examples listed in this paper clearly confirm that this is truly the case of transposition of the images from real life on the statuettes and that the images we claim to be tattooed, that is cicatrized marks, should not be doubted. This would at the same time provide a "missing link" that can connect the discussed Neolithic epoch with later Illyrian -Trachian period also mentioned in this paper.

• Details
• Contents