Valves of the Unio sp. processed to be made into personal adornments are discovered from several settlements of Gumelnița culture (the second half of the 5^th millennium B.C.). These assemblages includes pieces in different phases of transformation, from irregular splinters, to finished pieces in the shape of circular beads used as personal adornments. In this study, the raw material was interpreted as local, obtained as a by-product of the gathering process. Among the food waste products from the few settlements, the Unio sp. valves are well-represented quantitatively, their nutritional contribution being quite substantial. In order to identify the costs invested in the manufacturing of this type of items, both in point of time and in point of effort, we have developed an experimental program, allowing us to record all the variables (raw material aquisition, technological stages, time recorded for each operation, tools used, evolution of the wear following the usage etc.). Finally, the items were put together in a bracelet, tracking the evolution of the surface wear and of the perforation, which would allow us an evaluation of the use of archaeological pieces.

[1] Adrian Bălăşescu, Valentin Radu, and Dragoș Moise, Omul şi mediul animal între mileniile VII-IV î.e.n. la Dunărea de Jos [The Man and the Animal Environment Between the 7^th and 4^th Millennia BC on the Lower Danube] (Târgoviște: Editura Cetatea de Scaun, 2005); Stéphanie Bréhard et al., “Food Supply Strategies in the Romanian Eneolithic: Sheep/Goat Husbandry and Fishing Activities from Hârşova Tell and Borduşani-Popină (5^th Millennium BC),” EJA 17, no. 3 (2014): 407-433; Valentin Radu et al., “Harvesting Molluscs in the Eneolithic: A Study of Freshwater Bivalve Accumulations from the Tell Settlements of Borduşani-Popină and Hârşova (Romania, 5^th Millennium BC),” Environ. Archaeol. 21, no. 4 (2016): 334-350.

[2] Jorune Sakalauskaite et al., “‘Palaeoshellomics’ Reveals the Use of Freshwater Mother-of-Pearl in Prehistory,” eLife 8 (2019): e45644, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45644; Karina Apolinarska and Aldona Kurzawska, “Can Stable Isotopes of Carbon and Oxygen be Used to Determine the Origin of Freshwater Shells Used in Neolithic Ornaments from Central Europe?,” Archaeol Anthropol Sci 12 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-019-00978-2.

[3] Cătălin Lazăr, Monica Mărgărit, and Valentin Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints: Spondylus Ornaments from the Balkans in the 5^th Millennium BC,” in Interchange in Pre- and Protohistory. Case Studies in Iberia, Romania, Turkey and Israel, eds. Ana Rosa Cruz and Juan Francisco Gibaja (Oxford: BAR International Series 2891, 2018), 5-21.

[4] See also Cătălin Bem, “Noi propuneri pentru o schiță cronologică a eneoliticului românesc” [New Proposals for a Chronological Sketch of the Romanian Eneolithic], Pontica 33-34 (2001): 25-121; Stéphanie Bréhard and Adrian Bălășescu, “What’s Behind the Tell Phenomenon?,” JAS 39, no. 10 (2012): 3167-3183; Agathe Reingruber, “Absolute and Relative Chronologies in the Lower Danube Area During the 5^th Millennium BC,” in Neolithic and Copper Age between the Carpathians and the Aegean Sea Chronologies and Technologies from the 6^th to the 4^th Millennium BCE, eds. Svend Hansen et al. (Bonn: Habelt-Verlag, 2015), 301-324.

[5] Monica Mărgărit, Valentin Radu, and Dragomir Popovici, “From Operculum to Bead: Production of Pearls from Opercular Bones of Cyprinus carpio in the Romanian Eneolithic,” Environ. Archaeol. 21, no. 4 (2016): 351-360.

[6] Rosalind Gillis et al., “Sophisticated Cattle Dairy Husbandry at Bordușani-Popina (Romania, Fifth Millennium BC): The Evidence from Complementary Analysis of Mortality Profiles and Stable Isotopes,” World Archaeol. 45 (2013): 447-472.

[7] Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[8] Cătălin Lazăr, Monica Mărgărit, and Adrian Bălășescu, “Dogs, Jaws, and Other Stories: Two Symbolic Objects Made of Dog Mandibles from Southeastern Europe,” JFA 41, no. 1 (2016): 101-117.

[9] Cătălin Lazăr et al., “Gumelnița: Research Results of the 2018 and 2019 Fieldwork Seasons,” RCAN VI (2020): 13-100.

[10] Arne Ludwig et al., “Coat Color Variation at the Beginning of Horse Domestication,” Science 324, no. 5926 (2009): 485; Bréhard and Bălășescu, “What’s Behind the Tell Phenomenon?”

[11] Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[12] Ibid.

[13] Lazăr et al., “Gumelnița: research results of the 2018 and 2019 fieldwork seasons.”

[14] Mircea Petrescu-Dîmbovița, “Eneoliticul dezvoltat” [The Middle Eneolithic], in Istoria românilor [The History of the Romanians], vol. I. Moştenirea timpurilor îndepărtate [The Legacy of distant Times], eds. Mircea Petrescu-Dîmbovița and Alexandru Vulpe (Bucharest: Editura Enciclopedică, 2001), 154-168; Cornelia Magda Lazarovici and Gheorghe Lazarovici, Arhitectura neoliticului şi epocii cuprului din România [The Architecture of the Neolithic and of the Copper Age in Romania], vol. 2 [Bibliotheca Archaeologica Moldaviae 6] (Iași: Trinitas, 2007); Dragomir Popovici, “Copper Age Traditions North of the Danube River,” in The Lost World of Old Europe. The Danube Valley, 5000-3500 BC., eds. David W Anthony and Jennifer Y Chi (New York: Princeton University Press, 2010), 112-127; Cristian Eduard Ștefan, Settlement Types and Enclosure in the Gumelnița Culture (Târgoviște: Editura Cetatea de Scaun, 2010).

[15] Bréhard and Bălășescu, “What’s Behind the Tell Phenomenon?.”

[16] John Chapman, J., “Social Inequality on Bulgarian Tells and the Varna Problem,” in The Social Archaeology of Houses, ed. Ross Samson (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1990), 49-92; Vladimir Slavchev, “The Varna Eneolithic Cemetery in the Context of the Late Copper Age in the East Balkans,“ in The Lost World of Old Europe, 193-210; Arne Windler, Rainer Thiele, and Johannes Müller, “Increasing Inequality in Chalcolithic Southeast Europe: The Case of Durankulak,” JAS 40, no. 1 (2013): 204-210.

[17] Alasdair Whittle, Europe in the Neolithic. The Creation of New Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Julian Thomas, Understanding the Neolithic (London: Routledge, 1999); Douglass Bailey, Balkan Prehistory: Exclusion, Incorporation and Identity (London: Routledge, 2000).

[18] Laurence Manolakakis, “La production de l’outillage lithique dans les sociétés hiérarchisées de l’Enéolithique en Bulgarie: évolution, traditions culturelles et spécialisation du travail,“ (PhD diss., Panthéon-Sorbonne University, 1994); Idem, “So Long Blades... : Materiality and Symbolism in the North-Eastern Balkan Copper Age,” in European Archaeology. Identities & Migrations. Hommages à Jean-Paul Demoule, eds. Laurence Manolakakis, Nathan Schlanger and Anick Coudart (Leiden: Sidestone Press, 2017), 265-285.

[19] Monica Mărgărit and Valentin Radu, “The Use of Autochthonous Aquatic Resources in the Technologies of Gumelniţa Communities/Utilizarea resurselor acvatice autohtone în tehnologiile comunităților Gumelnița,” in An Overview of the Exploitation of Hard Animal Materials During the Neolithic and Chalcolithic/ O privire asupra exploatării materiilor dure animale de-a lungul neoliticului și calcoliticului, eds. Monica Mărgărit, Gaelle Le Dosseur, and Aline Averbouh (Târgoviște: Editura Cetatea de Scaun, 2014), 221-240.

[20] Eugen Comșa, “Parures néolithiques en coquillages marins découverts en territoire roumain,” Dacia N.S. 17(1973): 61-76; Monica Mărgărit, “Personal Adornments in the Romanian Eneolithic: Local versus Exotic Raw Materials,” Quat. Int 539(2020): 49-61.

[21] Vladimir Dumitrescu, “Découvertes de Gumelniţa,” Dacia I (1924): 325-342; Idem, “Fouilles de Gumelniţa,” Dacia II (1925): 29-103; Lazăr et al., “Gumelnița: Research Results of the 2018 and 2019 Fieldwork Seasons,” 13-100.

[22] Monica Mărgărit and Dragomir Popovici, “From Block to Finished Object. Function of the Personal Ornaments in the Eneolithic Settlement from Hârşova-Tell (Constanţa County, Romania),” AAC XLVII (2012): 91-114.

[23] Bălăşescu, Radu, and Moise, Omul şi mediul animal între mileniile VII-IV î.e.n.

[24] Monica Mărgărit, Valentin Parnic and Adrian Bălășescu, “L’industrie en matières dures animales de l’habitat Gumelniţa de Măriuţa (département de Călăraşi),” Dacia N.S. LVIII (2014): 29-64.

[25] Dumitru Berciu, “Cercetări și descoperiri arheologice în regiunea București” [Archaeological Research and Discoveries in the Bucharest Region], MCA II (1956): 491-562; Monica Mărgărit and Meda Toderaș, “Industria materiilor dure animale din tell-ul gumelnițean de la Pietrele. Reevaluarea vechilor colecții arheologice” [The Industry of Animal Hard Materials from the Gumelniţa Tell from Pietrele. The Reassessment of Old Archeological Collections], MCA XV (2019): 61-80.

[26] Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[27] Monica Mărgărit and Camelia-Mirela Vintilă, “Podoabe și figurine confecționate din materii dure animale descoperite în așezarea eneolitică de la Vidra (jud. Ilfov),” SPre 15 (2018): 73-105.

[28] Mărgărit and Radu, “The Use of Autochthonous Aquatic Resources.”

[29] Lucian Pârvulescu, Sistemica și biologia nevertebratelor acelomate. Ghid practic [Systematics and Biology of the Acoelomate Invertebrates. Practical guide] (Cluj-Napoca: Editura Bioflux, 2010).

[30] John David Taylor, William James Kennedy, and Anthony Hall, “The Shell Structure and Mineralogy of the Bivalvia,” Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History). Zoology, Suppl. 3 (1969).

[31] Andrew P. Jackson, Julian F. V. Vincent, and Jeffrey M. Turner, “Comparison of Nacre with Other Ceramic Composites,“ J. Mater. Sci. 25 (1990): 3173-3178.

[32] Valentin Radu, Le Néolithique de la Roumanie Méridionale: Exploitation des ressources aquatiques dans les cultures Boian et Gumelnita (Sarrebruk: Edition Universitaires Européennes, 2011); Mărgărit and Radu, “The Use of Autochthonous Aquatic Resources.”

[33] Bălăşescu, Radu, and Moise, Omul şi mediul animal între mileniile VII-IV î.e.n.; Bréhard and Bălășescu, “What’s Behind the Tell Phenomenon?”; Bréhard et al., “Food Supply Strategies in the Romanian Eneolithic”; Radu et al., “Harvesting Molluscs in the Eneolithic.”

[34] Mărgărit and Popovici, “From Block to Finished Object.”

[35] Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[36] Monica Mărgărit, Personal Adornments in the Prehistory of the Northern Danube Area: From Aesthetic to Socio-Cultural Symbol (Târgovişte: Editura Cetatea de Scaun, 2019).

[37] Mărgărit, Parnic, and Bălășescu, “L’industrie en matières dures animales de l’habitat Gumelniţa de Măriuţa.”

[38] Bălăşescu, Radu, and Moise, Omul şi mediul animal între mileniile VII-IV î.e.n. la Dunărea de Jos.

[39] Berciu, “Cercetări și descoperiri arheologice în regiunea București”; Mărgărit and Toderaș, “Industria materiilor dure animale din tell-ul gumelnițean de la Pietrele.”

[40] Mărgărit, “Personal Adornments in the Romanian Eneolithic.”

[41] Dumitrescu, “Découvertes de Gumelniţa”; Idem, “Fouilles de Gumelniţa”; Lazăr et al., “Gumelnița: Research Results of the 2018 and 2019 Fieldwork Seasons.”

[42] Mărgărit and Toderaș, “Industria materiilor dure animale din tell-ul gumelnițean de la Pietrele.”

[43] Berciu, “Cercetări și descoperiri arheologice în regiunea București.”

[44] Mărgărit and Vintilă, “Podoabe și figurine confecționate din materii dure animale.”

[45] Sandrine Bonnardin, La parure funéraire au Néolithique ancien dans les Bassins parisien et rhénan Rubané, Hinkelstein et Villeneuve-Saint-Germain (Paris: Societé Préhistorique Française, 2009); Solange Rigaud, “La parure: traceur de la géographie culturelle et des dynamiques de peuplement au passage Mésolithique-Néolithique en Europe“ (PhD diss., Bordeaux 1 University, 2011); Eadem, “Les objets de parure associés au dépôt funéraire mésolithique de Große Ofnet: implications pour la compréhension de l’organisation sociale des dernières sociétés de chasseurs-cueilleurs du Jura Souabe,” Anthropozoologica 48, no. 2 (2013): 207-230; Emanuela Cristiani and Dusan Borić, “8500-Year-Old Late Mesolithic Garment Embroidery from Vlasac (Serbia): Technological, Use-Wear and Residue Analyses,” JAS 39, no. 11 (2012): 3450-3469; Marian Vanhaeren et al., “Thinking Strings: Additional Evidence for Personal Ornament Use in the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa,” J. Hum. Evol. 64, no. 6 (2013): 500-517; Emanuela Cristiani, Ivana Živaljević, and Dusan Borić, “Residue Analysis and Ornament Suspension Techniques in Prehistory: Cyprinid Pharyngeal Teeth Beads from Late Mesolithic Burials at Vlasac (Serbia),” JAS 46 (2014): 292-310; Frederico Tátá et al., “Shell Bead Production in the Upper Paleolithic of Vale Boi (SW Portugal): An Experimental Perspective,” JAS 42 (2014): 29-41; Solange Rigaud, Francesco d'Errico, and Marian Vanhaeren, “Ornaments Reveal Resistance of North European Cultures to the Spread of Farming,” PLoS ONE 10, no. 4 (2015): e0121166, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121166; Michelle C. Langley, Sue O’Connor, and Elena Piotto, “42,000-Year-Old Worked and Pigment-Stained Nautilus Shell from Jerimalai (Timor-Leste): Evidence for an Early coastal Adaptation in ISEA,” J. Hum. Evol. 97 (2016): 1-16; Geoffrey Clark et al., “Shell Beads as Markers of Oceanic Dispersal: A Rare Cypraeidae Ornament Type from the Mariana Islands,” in Archaeology of Portable Art: Southeast Asian, Pacific and Australian Perspectives, eds. Michelle Langley et al. (London: Routledge, 2018), 142-161; Catarina Guzzo Falci et al., “New Insights into Use-Wear Development in Bodily Ornaments Through the Study of Ethnographic Collections,” J. Archaeol. Method Theory  26, no. 2 (2019): 755-805.

[46] Radu, Le Néolithique de la Roumanie Méridionale.

[47] Monica Mărgărit, “Testing the Endurance of Prehistoric Adornments: Raw Materials from the Aquatic Environment,” JAS 70 (2016): 66-81.

[48] Mărgărit and Popovici, “From Block to finished Object.”

[49] Pierre Pétrequin, “Perdu ou jetés ? Les objets de parure du Néolithique de Chalain et Clairvaux (Jura, France),” in Tradition und Innovation. Prähistorische Archäologic als historische Wissenschaft. Festschrift für Christian Strahm, ed. Barbara Fritsch (Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf, 1998), 183-200.

[50] Bem, “Noi propuneri pentru o schiță cronologică a eneoliticului românesc.”

[51] Senica Țurcanu, “Considerații privind obiectele de podoabă realizate din cochilii de moluște în cadrul complexului cultural Cucuteni-Tripolie” [Considerations for Ornaments Made from Mollusk Shells within the Cucuteni-Tripolie Cultural Complex], in De Hominus Primordis. Studia in honorem professoris Vasile Chirica, eds. George Bodi, Mihaela Danu, and Radu Pîrnău (Iași: Editura Universității Al. I. Cuza, 2013), 169-194.

[52] Diana-Maria Sztancs, “Around Black Sea in Prehistory: Neolithic and Copper Age Adornments Discovered in Romania and Ukraine”, in Challenges and Opportunities for a Multilateral Cooperation. First International Conference on EU and Black Sea Regions, eds. Antonello Biagini, Constantin Hlihor, and Andrea Carteny (Bagheria: Giovanni Mineo Editore, 2012), 199-208; Diana-Maria Sztancs and Corneliu Beldiman, “The Ariuşd (Erősd) - Cucuteni Culture: Osseous Materials Artefacts,” in L'impact anthropique sur l'environnement durant le Néo-Énéolithique du sud-est de l'Europe. In Honorem Dr. Gheorghe Dumitroaia, eds. Constantin Preoteasa and Dorin Nicola (Piatra Neamț: Bibliotheca Memoriae Antiquitatis XXXI, 2014), 239-282.

[53] Daniella E. Bar-Yosef Mayer, “Mollusc Exploitation at Çatalhöyük,“ in Humans and Landscapes of Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons [Çatalhöyük Research Project Series Volume 8, BIAA Monograph No. 47], ed. Ian Hodder (Ankara: British Institute at Ankara, 2013), 329-338.

[54] Marianna Nikolaidou, “Items of Adornment,” in Prehistoric Sitagroi: Excavations in Northeast Greece, 1968-1970 (vol. II), eds. Ernestine S. Elster and Collin Renfrew (Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, 2003), 331-360.

[55] Fotis Ifantidis, “Shell Personal Ornaments,” in Shell Assemblage Analysis of the Neolithic Lakeside Settlement of Dispilio, Kastoria. The Eastern Sector, eds. Rena Veropoulidou and Fotis Ifantidis (Thessaloniki: Institute for Aegean Prehistory, 2005), 49-94; Idem, Πρακτικές Προσωπικής Κόσμησης στη Νεολιθική Ελλάδα / Practices of Personal Adornment in Neolithic Greece (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2019).

[56] Claudina Maréchal and Hala Alarashi, “Les éléments de parure de Mureybet,” in Le site néolithique de Tell Mureybet (Syrie du Nord). En hommage à Jacques Cauvin, vol. II, ed. Juan Jose Ibañez [BAR International Series 1843] (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2008), 575-617.

[57] Sztancs, “Around Black Sea.”

[58] Nataliia Mykhailova, “Personal Ornaments of the Children in the Mariupol Type Cemeteries (Ukraine) ”, in Beauty and the Eye of the Beholder. Personal Adornments Across the Millennia, eds. Monica Mărgărit and Adina Boroneanț (Târgoviște: Editura Cetatea de Scaun), 371-382.

[59] Apolinarska and Kurzawska, “Can Stable Isotopes of Carbon and Oxygen …?”.

[60] Irina V Kirillova et al., “The Origin of Objects of Invertebrate Descent from the Khvalynsk Eneolithic Cemeteries (Northern Caspian Region),” Quat. Int 465 (2018): 142-151.

[61] Alin Frînculeasa et al., “Between Worlds and Elites at the Beginning of the Early Bronze Age in the Lower Danube Basin: A Pluridisciplinary Approach to Personal Ornaments,” Archaeol Anthropol Sci 12, no. 9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01177-0.

[62] E.g., Monica Mărgărit, “Shell Adornments from the Hamangia Cemetery excavated at Cernavoda – Columbia D. Techno-Typological Analysis”, in HOMINES, FUNERA, ASTRA. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Funerary Anthropology (5-8 June 2011) Alba Iulia, eds. Raluca Kogalniceanu et al. [BAR International Series 2410] (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2012), 97-106; Monica Mărgărit and Mădălina Dimache, “Personal Adornments from the Eneolithic Necropolis of Chirnogi-Suvita Iorgulescu (Romania): A Picture of Symbolism in Prehistoric Communities,” Doc. Praehist. XLVI (2019): 398-413; Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[63] Mărgărit, Radu, and Popovici, “From Operculum to Bead.”

[64] Mărgărit and Popovici, “From Block to Finished Object”; Lazăr, Mărgărit, and Radu, “Between Dominant Ideologies and Techno-economical Constraints.”

[65] Berciu, “Cercetări și descoperiri arheologice în regiunea București”; Cătălin Lazăr, Monica Mărgărit, and Valentin Radu, “Evidence for the Production and Use of Lithoglyphus naticoides Beads in Europe During the Holocene: The Case of Sultana-Malu Roșu Site (Romania),” Quat. Int 472 (2018): 84-96.

[66] Radu, Le Néolithique de la Roumanie Méridionale.

Fig. 1. Gumelnița sites with personal adornments mentioned in the text.

Fig. 2. Number of products and byproducts of the operating chain found at Gumelnița sites north of the Danube.

Fig. 3. Shell midden in the tell settlement of Hârșova (after Radu, and Moise, Omul şi mediul animal între mileniile VII-IV î.e.n. la Dunărea de Jos).

Fig. 4. A. Beads made from Unio valves (Pietrele). B, J. Abrasion of the debitage edge. C-D. Perforation details. E. Debitage waste. F-G. Sawing marks. H-I. Beads with use-wear deformation. K-L. Depression at the perforation level. M. Deformed wall of perforation.

Fig. 5. A-B, J. Beads made from Unio valves (Căscioarele). C. Debitage waste. D-E, K. Abrasion of the debitage edge. F-H. Perforation details. I. Red pigment spots. J. Bead with use-wear marks. L. Deformation of the perforation (after Monica Mărgărit, “Personal adornments in the Romanian Eneolithic”).

Fig. 6. A, E, F. Preforms made from Unio valves (Hârșova). B-C, I. Details of the edge. D. Unfinished perforation. G-H, M. Perforation details. J. Finished beads. K-L. Abrasion marks.

Fig. 7. A. Beads made from Unio valves (Vidra). B. Abrasion of the debitage edges. C. Abrasion of the surface. D-E. Perforation details. F-G. Deformation of the perforation (after Monica Mărgărit and Camelia-Mirela Vintilă, “Podoabe și figurine confecționate din materii dure animale”).

Fig. 8. Different stages of valve processing for the experimental programme: A. Debitage by percussion. B. Debitage by cutting. C. Blank perforation. D. Blank abrasion. E. Transformation process.

Fig. 9. A. Different degrees of use-wear at the perforation level (archaeological items from Hârșova). B. Different degrees of use-wear at the perforation level (experimental items).