THE VINCA SYMBOLS – ARE THEY THE EARLIEST KNOWN WRITING?
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
JULY 23, 2018


FOR BASIC INFORMATION ON THE DANUBE PREHISTORY, GO TO WIKIPEDIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danube.

THE ORIGIN OF THE VINCA SYMBOLS ARE THE DANUBE VALLEY CIVILIZATION. TO UNDERSTAND THIS ARTICLE, YOU WILL HAVE TO SEE THEM, AT THE FOLLOWING WEBSITE. ONE THING YOU WILL RECOGNIZE IMMEDIATELY IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE SWASTIKA. IF THE EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHS CAN BE CONSIDERED WRITING, THEN SO SHOULD THESE. THEY ALSO RESEMBLE CHINESE WRITING SYMBOLS IN SOME CASES, AND CLEARLY ANIMALS IN OTHERS.

THIS ARTICLE IS AT LEAST TWENTY YEARS OLD, SO THERE IS PROBABLY MORE INFORMATION ON THE NET SOMEWHERE. LOOK UP “DANUBE VALLEY CIVILIZATION.” THERE ARE A NUMBER OF VIDEOS AS WELL. THE DANUBE VALLEY IS NOT AS WELL-KNOWN AS THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE NEAR EAST, MESOPOTAMIA, WESSEX AND SKARA BRAE IN THE BRITISH ISLES, BUT IT IS AS ANCIENT OR EVEN OLDER. BELOW THIS ARTICLE ARE SOME VIDEOS AND WRITTEN ARTICLES ON THE ANCIENT DANUBE VALLEY.

http://www.prehistory.it/ftp/winn.htm
The Global Prehistory Consortium at EURO INNOVANET
The Old European Script. Further evidence
by Shan M. M. Winn

In(1)recent decades interest has been renewed in incised script-like signs [now referred to as the "Old European (OE) script"] found on artifacts dating to the middle Neolithic Vinča-Tordos culture of Yugoslavia and western Romania.
Although evidence of these signs had been known since the late 19th century excavation at the site of Tordos (Turdaş) (2) in Transylvania, it was the discovery of tablets at the nearby site of Tartaria in1964 that kindled a wave of controversy regarding both the origin and chronology of the signs.
The claims of certain scholars that the signs were influenced by early Mesopotamian script (c. 3000 B.C.) not only disregarded the possibility of independent European innovation in sign usage but also presented the supposed Mesopotamian origin of the signs as a refutation of the new and radically altered Neolithic chronology, based on radiocarbon dating, for southeastern Europe. However, while archaeologists have continued to clarify and substantiate the new chronology (e.g. Renfrew 1973), the issue of the signs has been side-stepped in most analyses dealing with the middle and late Neolithic cultures of southeastern Europe.
The author's participation on excavations in former Yugoslavia and his interest in the signs eventually resulted in the opportunity to visit excavations and to study museum collections in Romania, former Yugoslavia and Bulgaria.
Signs were collected from approximately 50 sites belonging or related to the Vinča culture, named after the important site of Vinča (see map, Fig.1) on the Danube River, near Belgrade. The earliest use of signs, dating to the Vinča-Tordos phase of this culture, is best evidenced at the site of Tordos in Transylvania.
The purpose of the present article is to introduce and evaluate new evidence for the sign system and to appraise the consistency of the evidence with the conclusions reached earlier by the author in his published study of the signs (Winn 1981).(3) Therefore, the conclusions reached in the previous study are only briefly reviewed herein.


Figure 1. Partial distribution of sites having evidence of sign usage

SIGN USAGE
Signs are incised on pottery, spindle whorls, figurines and other clay artifacts. The signs are not components of ornamental motifs, although a few examples are abstractions from decorative prototypes.
A sign may occur as a single, isolated sign on an otherwise unmarked area, or as a component of a sign group.
This study includes correlations of sign usage according to context - pottery, figurines, spindle whorls, miniature vessels, "tablets" and artifacts of undefined use.

Single signs.

Signs found in isolation frequently appear on pottery and occasionally on figurines, but rarely on spindle whorls.
Signs on pottery were analyzed according to their location on the vessel: (a) rim/upper body; (b) side near base; and (c) base.
Certain signs, including



are inscribed anywhere on the vessel; they are also found in sign groups and, indeed, later appear as script signs in the Mediterranean. Pictographic signs and symbolic elements are generally located on highly visible portions of the vessel:


At Tordos, pictographs, or abstractions from them, are common; they are occasionally placed on the base, perhaps as information or to facilitate sign recognition on vessels that were inverted when stored.
A few signs seem to be restricted to the lower side of vessels, where they are not readily visible unless one intentionally observes the basal angle of the vessel. At certain sites, such as Medvednjak and Banjica, many of these are unique signs and may identify the owner or producer:


Signs suggesting the utilization of a numbering system appear on the base or on the lower side adjacent to the base:


Many of the Tordos signs restricted to the base are distinctive; such signs frequently are thought to denote identification of contents, provenience/destination or manufacturer/owner.
However, basal signs are frequently zoomorphic representations,


comb or brush patterns


and symbols.


A specialized category confined to the base is a type of filled cross


,which is generally divided into symmetrically arranged quadrants. A similar arrangement is often found on stamp seals or artifacts considered to have cultic usages.
Certain signs are randomly placed on pottery but are excluded from the base. Most of these


appear commonly on figurines and may refer to a different sign subset dependent on other contexts.
Particularly common representations on figurines are triple chevrons, 6 chevrons or 6 parallel lines; such arrangements probably reflect an ideological feature of the Vinča cultural template. Distinctive figurine signs


found at several sites perhaps may signify specific concepts, personal identifications, or even an attempt to acquire magico-religious powers during rituals associated with specific figurine usage.
Similar signs are also found on spindle whorls and are sometimes randomly placed on pottery.
In short, the distribution of single signs contradicts the notion that the Vinča signs are merely owner's or maker's marks.
Sign groups.

Sign groups occur principally on spindle whorls and to a lesser extent on pottery, but a small number of tablet-like objects and figurines are marked with groups of signs. Sign groups on pottery usually consist of only two signs, though there is ample space for more; in contrast, numerous signs are incised on whorls, despite the limited available space.
Neither the order nor the direction of the signs in these groups is readily determinable; moreover, judging by the frequent lack of arrangement, precision in the order probably was unimportant.
Miniature vessels also possess sign-like clusters which are disarranged, but concepts or mnemonic aids most likely were inferred or interpreted by an individual familiar with the culture-specific content of the signs.
The range of signs on whorls and tablets is more extensive and generally consists of signs commonly found in groups.
Figurine signs are limited in variety but are prominently displayed and are more distinctive than the elemental signs on vessels.
A few signs found on figurines are also observed on spindle whorls and tablet-like objects, e. g.



Some whorls and loom weights are incised with a single distinctive sign. Others are incised with combinations of parallel and perpendicular lines that may be magical marks or may symbolize the intent to successfully spin or weave into fruition one's desires - whether that be a material object, a wish or simply good luck.
Other whorls suggest a complex, deliberate marking which is more in line with signs incised in the more arranged format typical of tablets and seals.


Figure 2. Spindle whorls: a, b, c (Tordos); d (Fafos) figurines: e, f (Jela); g (Selevac); h (Medvednjak)

RECENT EVIDENCE AND SCRIPT SIGNS
The distribution of signs

During the summer of 1981 the author had the opportunity to collect more than 100 additional examples of incised artifacts from the sites of Tordos and Parţa (4) (see Figs. 5-11).
The new data continues to show remarkable consistency with previous observations pertaining to distribution of signs as well as sign usage at widely separated sites (Table I).
Many common signs appearing on pottery as well as on spindle whorls and figurines were employed both as single signs and as components of sign groups (Table I, column B).
The new evidence supports this distribution in sign usage. Certain signs, primarily found on spindle whorls and figurines, have been observed only in the context of sign clusters (column D).
A class of widely used signs has been found only on pottery, except for occurrences on the Tartaria tablets and the Lepenski Vir stone. The new evidence supports the pottery associations of these signs (column C).
Thus, different subsets within the sign system may be postulated:

signs that are generally important in a group context are significantly associated with usage on spindle whorls, tablets and figurines;
commonly used single signs are found almost exclusively on pottery;
signs on spindle whorls, figurines and in unrestricted use on pottery are found singly or as components of sign groups.

The latter signs are characteristic script signs and many of them occur on the Tartaria tablets and the Lepenski Vir stone.


Figure 3. Examples of new evidence pertaining to Parţa and Tordos (Turdaş)


The Tartaria tablets and the Lepenski Vir stone
The Tartaria tablets (Fig. 4a,b) initially received a great deal of attention due to a few posited Mesopotamian parallels (chronologically later).
However, the Tartaria signs have more precise parallels in shape and usage with signs at other sites of the Vinča culture (Winn 1981: 185-195).
In addition, certain signs on the Tartaria artifacts are found elsewhere in the Vinča culture but not in Mesopotamia. Therefore, no Mesopotamian impact need be postulated at Tartaria.
The discovery of artifacts with greater attention devoted to division of sign groups makes the shape and careful organization of the tablets seem less incongruous within the context of the Vinča culture (Winn 1981:210 ff.). For example, a plaque found at Gradešnica, in northwestern Bulgaria, is carefully divided by horizontal lines into four registers with three or more signs in each register (Fig. 4f). The double and triple vertical lines recall similar incisions on the Tartaria tablets, the Lepenski Vir stone and many Vinča figurines.
Even "blank" tablets (Fig. 4g) display an intentional division which can be considered evidence for a cultural trait for organizing tablet-like objects.
The unusual inscribed stone object found at Lepenski Vir is introduced here for comparative purposes. The spherical stone has a complex organization and neatly incised signs typical of the Vinča culture.
Partial boring of the stone suggests that a staff was inserted so that the stone could be displayed as an object of prestige or easily manipulated in ritual.
The inscription is divided into four rows, three of which have ten columns (Fig. 4c-e). Irregular demarcating lines indicate intentional efforts to avoid crossing over signs, thus enhancing their importance.
The possible functions of this unique object include usage in divination or for keeping records relating to important cyclical events.
The signs show convincing comparisons with common Vinča signs at other sites. (5) The Tartaria tablets and the Lepenski Vir stone are included in Table I (column A) as further evidence showing that sign distributions are not random and that the signs on these objects appropriately fit within the sign system of the Vinča culture.
Each of these objects is inscribed with a cluster of signs that appear in sign groups on artifacts found at distant regional sites.
The additional Parţa and Tordos evidence presented herein is consistent with conclusions reached in the author's earlier work.
The "blank" tablets are probably meaningful ritualistic substitutes for the inscribed type that may have been used by someone familiar with the tablets but perhaps not yet with the signs; they even may have been used as a sort of training ritual. "The Lepenski Vir object may have been modeled after a type of sign-bearing spindle whorl, a weight, or a mace head used by someone of importance, probably in divination.
This artifact seems to indicate that some signs were headings or markers; deliberate effort was made to demarcating the rows and columns without crossing over the signs, thereby suggesting their magical importance. Intentional inclusion of spaces/insertion of blanks may indicate a pause/message divider, etc." (Winn 1990:272-3; for greater detail, see Winn 1981: 258-63). (6)


Figure 4. (a,b) Tartaria (Vlassa 1963); (c) Lepenski Vir (Winn 1981); (d,e) actual and regularized composition on the stone; (f) Gradešnica (Nikolov 1970); (g) Tangiru (Berciu, 1961)


SUMMARY OF THE SIGN SYSTEM
A complex and standardized pattern of communication

The consistent use of a set of signs in a similar manner suggests purposeful distinctions in sign usage and implies that they represent cultural conventions shared by widely separated communities. Signs from the site of Parţa as well as those collected from Torma's manuscript of Tordos show that observations made in Winn 1973 apply to new finds as well: earlier observations of sign usage are pertinent and consistent. This standardized pattern of communication was composed of several elements:

simple markings on pots, likely representing ritual marking or magic;
distinctive marks on or near the base of pottery vessels, possibly reflecting (a) economic aspects - indicating the number of pots produced - or (b) a form of identification, such as the owner/producer, or (c) they may identify "powers" called upon during a ritual;
several common motifs or symbols, some of which may be schematizations or abstractions from decorative motifs;
a limited number of pictographs, too few to establish a system based on natural representations;
signs that may represent concepts (i.e. ideograms), which frequently occur in sign groups.


Figure 5. Artifacts from Parţa excavation

Three subsets of signs in the system
Although many common signs occur both as single signs and as components of sign groups, some distinctive signs - e.g., complex or modified signs, pictographs and ideograms - are not used in conjunction with other.
In addition, certain ancient and enduring symbols, such as the swastika and the Maltese cross are found in isolation. In contrast, simple-shaped signs that are found in developed scripts are correlated with sign clusters.
There are three subsets of signs in the system:

signs generally found in a group context, with a significant association with tablets, spindle whorls and figurines;
common single signs located principally on pottery, with some types (e.g. pictographs) limited to certain areas on pottery;
basic signs - appearing both as single signs and in sign groups - on pottery, figurines and spindle whorls.

Many of those found in sign groups are evidenced in later scripts. The Tartaria tablets and the Lepenski Vir spherical stone not only are appropriate objects for inscriptions, but they bear signs frequently found in scripts. Differences in complexity of sign usage are revealed by the ordering of signs, as seen on tablets and similar objects.
Clay spindle whorls were the medium for recording strings of signs; objects having signs with an unclear or disordered arrangement, such as the jumbled signs on miniature vessels, probably have ritualistic uses.
Some ritual objects, however, have orderly abstract signs, such as the Tartaria tablets, which were placed in a grave (Winn 1990:274-76).


Figure 6. Signs on Parţa pottery

Limited evidence for sign usage in economic contexts
Metallurgy and other specialized crafts in the Neolithic of southeastern Europe are indicators of an increasing techno-economic development that, aided by the strategic location of Tordos near the sources of gold and copper, promoted extensive trading networks that could have facilitated the emergence of a system of record-keeping. However, the Tordos signs provide only limited evidence for sign usage in economic contexts.
Many probable numerical signs, as stated above, appear on the base or adjacent to the base. Although these signs could represent a system of numbering or quantification used during their production (since incision generally took place before firing), no system is at present ascertainable. (7)
Dots and lines are generally mutually exclusive but in at least one case dots are combined with a line (Fig. 10, end of 4th row). Possibly related to these numerical indicators are certain ligatures occurring on or near the base.
Three signs



appearing on the tablets (two on the Lepenski Vir stone object) may have numerical connotations, judging by their frequent appearance in the same environment (on or near the base of pots) as other probable numerical signs.
The first sign


belongs to the same category as several signs appearing only on or adjacent to pottery bases.
The second


while it appears in sign groups (and is, indeed, a common sign of scripts elsewhere) is found only on or near the base of pottery, except for the Tartaria example.
The third sign


appears frequently in conjunction with vessel bases, but it also is quite common on spindle whorls and occurs on figurines as well; thus, it may be a numerical indicator or have other meaning, depending on the context. Well-executed unique signs on Tordos pottery (lower vessel or base) could relate to the economics of ownership or production, and prominently displayed pictographs could function as symbols or serve to identify place names. Nevertheless, indisputable evidence for an important economic role for sign usage is lacking.
The investigation of signs from sites other than Tordos makes even more tenuous their possible economic role. Signs on pottery are too varied to identify contents or destination of vessels, and even those few signs that may be numerical in nature are often less precise than those at Tordos.
The jumbled signs on spindle whorls would not contribute to an efficient accounting system, and the recurrent use of indistinct signs at many sites probably renders them useless for individual identifications.
Little effort appears to have been given to possible numerical marks found at various sites, e.g., Parţa ; in fact, careless techniques and haphazard demarcation are more characteristic of ritualistic marking.
Indeed, as the diffusion of sign usage proceeded, any original economic associations of the signs may have been weakened by their increasing role in religious ideology, with which they eventually were probably identified during the later phases of the Vinča culture, at least.
"Even if there was an economic motivation for the introduction of sign usage at Tordos, which has produced the best examples of signs that might represent economic functions, other sites such as Jela in the west and Divostin in the southern periphery of the Vinča culture have far less clear examples for an economic interpretation. Many possible numerical marks found at scattered sites reveal a careless technique and poor demarcation that probably reflects ritualistic marking" (Winn, 1990:276-7).


Figure 7. Parţa signs/symbols on pot bases

Religious use of the signs
Evidence for ritualistic use of signs is well represented throughout the Vinča-Tordos and later Vinča cultural sequence.
The prominent use of signs, including those abstracted from symbolic motifs, on cultic objects implies an association of signs with religion and the belief system.
Signs, as expressions of the world view, represent a significant set of information about daily or cyclical affairs.
Signs on figurines, which likely were regularly prepared for household magico-religious ceremonies (as suggested by the frequency of figurines in excavated houses), are among these expressions. In the context of a ritual, a sign incised on the figurine may be expressive of a desire, request, vow, etc.
After completion of the ceremony the figurine need have no further significance and can be discarded; this is a probable explanation for the abundance of figurine fragments recovered from the excavation of pits and other refuse areas.
Typical meander-like incisions are found on figurines and also appear in conjunction with organized signs on cult objects.
"The vast majority of figurines are female, as are virtually all figurines bearing signs. Figurines are frequently found in houses, and have been noted in clusters around benches and other architectural features sometimes interpreted as 'shrines'. These figurines are thought by some scholars to represent votive offerings" (Winn, 1990:277).
The Tartaria tablets have ritualistic associations in that they were placed in a burial pit together with the charred bones of an individual.
Lengthy sign groups on miniature vessels may reflect ritualistic or magical formulae; indeed, the notable correlation of these rather haphazard sign clusters with miniature vessels and figurines strongly suggests their usage in ceremonial contexts.
Religious or ideological considerations offer, so far, the best explanation for the use of signs in the Vinča culture.
"It is intriguing that the signs are already differentiated according to artifact context during the earliest period of sign use at Tordos.
Single distinctive signs occurring particularly on vessel bases contrast with the presence of complex sign groups on spindle whorls, and signs on figurines are also distinguished.
The distinction between signs on pottery and the more organized signs on tablets and other artifacts may signify functional differences or different levels of usage and formality. Success attainable solely through an individual's own careful efforts (pottery manufacture, spinning) may require only simple magical notations; however, individuals facing more serious life events (birth, illness or death) may seek the services of a religious practitioner (shaman or priest)" (Winn, 1990:277).


Figure 8. Tordos (Turdaş) artifacts from Zsófia Torma notebook

Lack of development of the signs and system
The static nature of the signs may reflect a persistent world view and belief system that endured for centuries. Lack of change or development in the system simply indicates that a pervasive ideology, adequately expressed by the signs and symbols, necessitated little or no further evolution.
"Equally enigmatic is the fact that, notwithstanding these early distinctions in sign usage, scarcely any evolution in signs or sign usage ever took place, although the signs are a principle feature of the Vinča culture.
At later settlements (Vinča C-D period) a few new signs, especially ligatures, were introduced, but many of these are limited to specific regional sites. Otherwise, signs at Tordos, (except for the later disappearance of swastikas and whorls) are consistent with those of the Vinča culture....
The lack of change or development in the system may simply indicate that an established ideology, adequately expressed by signs and symbols, does not necessitate further evolution.
The Vinča sign system probably had no need to develop further because it primarily served temporary or cyclical ritual needs of traditional horticultural societies not yet undergoing political or economic pressure to institute changes in sign usage.
The thousands of excavated figurines impressively demonstrate the cardinal role of domestic ritual in Vinča society; thus it is significant that the near abandonment of figurine manufacture at the close of the Neolithic is accompanied by the discontinuance of signs on pottery and spindle whorls.
The decline of such prominent ritual items and associated symbolism in the fourth millennium signals an important transformation in ideology as well as in subsistence patterns and social structure characterizing the early Bronze Age" (Winn 1990:278).


Figure 9. Tordos (Torma notebook)

ORIGIN OF THE SIGNS
Decoration and symbolism

Clear antecedents for the Vinča sign system, which apparently emerged suddenly can not as yet be linked to the long heritage of pre-Neolithic ritual marking. (8)
Engraved bands on stone objects at Vlasac and Lepenski Vir, in the Iron Gates region of the Danube River, precede and resemble the early Neolithic register pattern of decoration, and the disorganized linear incisions on pottery of the Neolithic Starčevo culture may reflect an old tradition whose cultural content has been lost.

But, in any case, Upper Paleolithic symbolism was integrated into a world view that was fundamentally altered during the development of a food-producing economy. (Note, however, that Foster (1984) observes continuity of the Paleolithic signs (as set forth by Leroi-Gourhan) for female and male in early alphabetic and hieroglyphic depictions for the phonemes "w" and "y".
It will be noted that these signs are significant in the Vinča sign system and occur frequently on the Lepenski Vir stone).


Figure 10. Tordos (Torma notebook)

Economic and religious stimuli
The growth of permanent settlements dependent on the cultivation of crops not only sowed the seeds of incipient social stratification but also resulted in significant elaboration of religious ideology.
It is probable that eventual techno-economic developments at sites like Tordos and Vinča laid the foundation for craft specialization as well as for a formalized religious structure.
Innovations in technology during the Vinča-Tordos period represented by metallurgy and stimulated by exploitation of economic resources in the area, spurred the growth of trading networks that enhanced the potential to augment personal prestige and wealth.
While such economic stimuli conceivably was the basis for the introduction of sign usage at Tordos, it can be inferred from the increasing social complexity throughout the Vinča culture that the status of religious functionaries was enhanced.
In effect, even if the original use of signs at Tordos was fostered by both economic and ritual roles, the signs must have become increasingly associated with ritual and ideology/world view and eventually were identified as components of the belief system in numerous sites of the Vinča culture.
The fifth millennium Neolithic village of Banpo, near Xian, China, has yielded pottery vessels incised with signs having striking parallels with the Vinča signs. The 22 different types of rectilinear marks, including are also common Vinča-Tordos signs. Chinese scholars suggest that the signs were used for recording events or quantities and can be considered "precursors of writing".
The seemingly impressive correspondence between the Vinča-Tordos and Banpo signs does not imply diffusion of signs or sign usage; rather, it is probable that a limited range of elementary signs would be independently innovated by societies having a cultural role for sign usage. Similar signs have been noted in pre-dynastic Egypt, and in Linear A and other Mediterranean scripts (Winn 1981:246ff; 1990:280).
Pontius (1984a,b), using the Banpo evidence, has introduced an interesting hypothesis linking accurate pictorial representations of the human face with literacy skills.
In view of the relevance of this theory to the Vinča-Tordos figurines, a study of figurines from various settlements is of interest; in fact, a brief investigation by the author suggests that certain Tordos figurines provide evidence of incipient literacy, according to the Pontius hypothesis. However, this question is beyond the scope of the present study.



Figure 11. Tordos (Torma notebook)
Notes

1
Evidence for this study was collected in Romania in 1981 and the manuscript was prepared by the author in 1984 in response to a publisher's invitation.
Unfortunately, following a lengthy delay, that publication did not take place; however, when a later request was received to submit a paper on the Vinča signs, the author wrote an article that essentially incorporated the earlier manuscript as well as a few script signs from the 1981 research; the expanded version was published in 1990 in The Life of Symbols, edited by Foster and Botscharow.
Recently the author was informed that many prehistorians and archaeologists interested in the Vinča script are not familiar with or have been unable to locate his work, including the 1981 book, The Sign System of the Vinča Culture, which is essentially an update of his dissertation on the Vinča a signs, including a corpus of 210 signs collected in 1971 from numerous sites in former Yugoslavia. [The dissertation was published by microfilm xerography in 1973 by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan].
The present article is intended to introduce what was "New Evidence" in 1981; hence, it is possible that a few of the signs may have been published during the intervening two decades. In addition, it is apparent that many readers interested in the script have no access to the 1990 publication of "A Neolithic Sign System in Southeastern Europe"; therefore, relevant portions from that article have been introduced at demarcated points in the following article. The reader thus is given the opportunity to compare the "new" Parta evidence (and Tordos material not included in previous analyses) with what has previously been published about the Vinča script.

2
This important site, situated on the south bank of the Maros (Mures) River, is known as Tordos in Hungarian and Turdas in Romanian. Many of the unusual artifacts from this site are known only from the unpublished but meticulously illustrated notebook of Zsófia Torma. The Tordos examples herein (not previously seen nor published by the author in his corpus of signs) are taken from this work, which was made available to me through the kindness of N.Vlassa of Muzeul de storie al Transilvaniei in Cluj.

3
An analysis and catalogue of previously collected evidence is presented in Pre-Writing in Southeastern Europe: The Sign System of the Vinča Culture.

4
Unpublished examples from Parta are included in the present study. The Parta evidence was seen in the private collection of A. Agotha, K. Germann and F. Resch of Timisoara, Romania. I am very grateful for their kind and gracious assistance in providing photographs and drawings of numerous artifacts from the site of Parta and for permission to publish them. Although many of these finds were retrieved from the Timis River, due to erosion of the riverbanks on which Parta is situated, stratified excavations at the site by Gh. Lazarovici have produced similar finds, which date to the Vinča B period and to the later Vinča C-D sequence. I wish to express my appreciation for the assistance of Prof. Lazarovici.

5
Details regarding this object were provided by Dr. Alexander Marshack. For further description and discussion of this rare find see Winn 1981. If the sign in B-5 (Fig. 4e) is inverted, it may be an anthropomorphic representation; other signs recall ligatures in the Vinča system.

6
Additional commentary from the expanded 1990 version of the 1984 "New Evidence" paper is inserted throughout the remainder of this article wherever relevant; it should be noted that these views emerged from thoughts first expressed in Winn 1973, 1981.

7
The following paragraph on the limited evidence that might be construed to represent economic uses of the signs does not appear in Winn 1990, as by then the author had abandoned any consideration that the script signs were related to economic usage. In 1984, however, many prehistorians and archaeologists still considered the signs to be at most simple potmarks or possibly a method of enumerating. This paragraph nevertheless is of interest in documenting the history and development of ideas about the Vinča script.

8
Note, however, that this article was formulated in the mid 1980's; recent research may have produced such links


BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berciu, C., 1961. Contributii la Problemele Neoliticului in Lumine Noilor Cerecetari, Bucharest.

Evans, A.J. 1897. Further Discoveries of Cretan and Aegean Script: with Libyan and Proto‑Egyptian Comparison, Journal of Hellenic Studies XVII:327‑395.

Falkenstein, A., 1965. Zu dem Tontafeln aus Tartaria, Germania, 43:269‑273.

Foster, M.L. , 1984. Iconic Representations in the Paleolithic. Paper delivered at the symposium, Symbolism in Lithic Cultures, American Anthropological Association, Denver.

Georgiev, V.I., 1969. Un Sceau inscrit de l'epoque Chalcolithique trouve en Thrace, Studi Micenei ed Egeo‑Anatolici, IX: 32‑35.

Hood, M.S.F. , 1967. The Tartaria Tablets, Antiquity, 41:99‑102.

Lazarovici, Gh. 1970. Cultura Vinča A in Banat. Acta Musei Napocensis VII:473-487.

Makkay, J., 1968. The Tartaria Tablets, Orientalia 37:272‑289.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1969. The Late Neolithic Tordos Group of Signs, Alba Regia, X, Székesféhervár, 9‑49.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1971. A Chalcolithic Stamp Seal from Karanavo, Bulgaria, Kadmos, X: 1‑9.

Mikov, V., G.I. Georgiev, and V.I. Georgiev, 1969. Nadpis't v'rkhu kr'glija pecat ot Karanovo Najdrevnata pismenost v Evropa, (Resumé: L'inscription du sceau circulaire de Karanovo‑‑la plus ancienne écriture d'Europe), Arkheologija XI:4‑13.

Nikolov, B., 1970. Glinena plocka c pismeni znaci ot s. Gradešnica, Vra_anski okr'g, Arkheologija, XII:1‑6.

Pontius, A.A. , 1984a. Emergence of Written Language: Neuro‑Biological Substrates, International Journal of Biosocial Research, 6: 15‑28.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1984b. Model of Ecological (Cultural) Evolutionary Neuropsychiatry, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 58:143‑148.

Renfrew, C., 1969. The Autonomy of the south‑east European Copper Age, Proceeedings of the Prehistoric Society, 35: 12‑47.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1973. Before Civilization: The Radiocarbon Revolution in Prehistoric Europe. New York.
Roska, Marton, 1941. A Torma Zsófia Gyüjtemény (Die Sammlung Zsófia Von Torma). Kolozsvar (Cluj).

Schliemann, H. 1875. Troy and its Remains. (Tr. by L.D. Schmitz from Trojanische Altertümer, same date); P. Smith, ed., London: J. Murray.

Schmidt, H. 1903, Tordos, Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 35:438‑469.

Todorovi_, J., 1970. Written Signs in the Neolithic Cultures of Southeastern Europe, Archaeologica Iugoslavica, X: 74‑84.

Vasić, M. M. 1908. Southeastern Elements in the Prehistoric Civilization of Servia. Annual of the British School at Athens XIV:319‑341.
-----, 1932‑36. Preistoriska Vinča, 4 vols. Belgrade.
-----, 1948. Jonska kolonija Vinča, Zbornik Filozofskog fakultet Belgrade. 1:.85-235, tables l‑XLV
-----, 1957. Arkheologija i lingvistika, Starinar ser. 4, VII‑VIII:1‑11.

Vlassa, N., 1963. Chronology of the Neolithic in Transylvania, in the Light of the Tartaria Settlement's Stratigraphy, Dacia, N.S. VII: 485‑494.
-----, 1969. Einege Bemerkungen zu Fragen des Neolithikums in Siebenbürgen, Studijné Zvesti, 17:513‑540.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1970. Kulturelle Beziehungen des Neolithikums Siebenbürgens zum Vorderen Orient, Acta Musei Napocensis, VII:3‑39.
‑‑‑‑‑, 1974. Neue Beiträge Zur Frage orientalischer Einflüsse im Neolithikum Siebenbürgens, Praehistorische Zeitschrift, 49:181‑192.

Winn, Shan . M. M. , 1981. Pre‑Writing in Southeastern Europe: The Sign System of the Vinča Culture ca. 4000 B.C. Western Publishers, Calgary.
-----, 1973. The Signs of the Vinča Culture: an Internal Analysis; Their Role, Chronology and Independence from Mesopotamia. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
-----, 1990. A Neolithic Sign System in Southeastern Europe, The Life of Symbols, ed. by Mary Le Cron Foster and Lucy Jayne Botscharow. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Zanotti, D.G., 1983. The Position of the Tartaria Tablets within the Southeast European Copper Age, American Journal of Archaeology, 87:209-213.


MORE DANUBE VALLEY SOURCES --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUSefgpyT38
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzVL0Rw15sc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eybIgUIeIZo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSfY5n_ZKmM
https://vimeo.com › March Of The Titans › Videos
www.documentary-campus.com/p/the_mystery_of_the_danube_script/
https://www.ancient-origins.net/.../danube-valley-civilisation-script-oldest-writing-wor...