It is well known that an object can fulfill several functions, some only apparent during special conditions; the change of function could sometimes trigger physical changes of the object.  This is also the case for pieces known as clay discs, ornaments etc, that can have different functions depending on the formal quality of the object. Our study presents such pieces identified in the Neolithic site from Suplacu de Barcău / Port “Corău”, for which different ways of use can be assumed.

[1] Nicolae Vlassa, “Probleme ale cronologiei neoliticului mijlociu în lumina stratigrafiei așezării de la Tărtăria,” [The Middle Neolithic chronological problems in light of Tărtăria settlement], in Neoliticul Transilvaniei (Cluj-Napoca,1976), 31–33; Doina Ignat, Grupul cultural neolitic Suplacu de Barcău [Suplacu de Barcău. The Neolithic Cultural Group] (Timișoara: Mirton, 1998), 62, 137, Fig. 47/1–2; Gruia Fazecaș, “O tăbliță de lut de la Suplacu de Barcău,” [A clay tablet from Suplacu de Barcău], in Sargetia XXXIII, (2005): 41–49; Sabin Adrian Luca et al., “Incised amulet from Turdaș, Luncă. Archaeological excavation,” in Proceeding signs and symbols from Danube Neolithic and Eneolithic (Sibiu/Alba Iulia: Altip, 2009), 67–76; Gheorghe Lazarovici and Cornelia Magda Lazarovici, “The role of the tablets,” in Tartăria and the Sacred Tablets, Eds. Gheorghe Lazarovici, Cornelia Magda Lazarovici, Marco Merlini (Cluj-Napoca: Mega, 2011), 162–190; Florin Drașovean and Florentina Marțiș, “A clay tablet discovered in the Late Neolithic Settlement from Sînandrei (Timiş County, SW of Romania),” in Fifty years of Tartăria excavation, Ed. Joan Marler (Sebastopol/Suceava: Lidana 2014), 67–72; Tiberiu Tecar, “A new Neolithic tablet discovered at Cluj Napoca,” in Fifty years of Tartăria excavation, Ed. Joan Marler (Sebastopol/Suceava: Lidana 2014), 56–66; Sabin Adrian Luca and Florentina Mărcuți, “Prehistoric Signs and Symbols from Transylvania (1). ‘The secret tablet” the Neolithic and Aeneolithic Archaeological Settlement from Tărtăria–Gura Luncii (Alba County), in Brukenthal Acta Musei X, 1 (2015): 7–16.

[2] Sanda Băcuet-Crişan et al., “Porț–Corău,” in Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România, campania 2010 (2011): 215–218; Sanda Băcuet-Crişan et al., “Porț–Corău,” in Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România, campania 2011 (2012): 245–246; Sanda Băcuet-Crişan et al., “Porț–Corău, in Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România, campania 2012 (2013): 173–174.

[3] Ignat, Grupul cultural neolitic, 62, Pl. 47/1–2.

[4] Fazecaș, “O tăbliță de lut,” 44, Pl. II/1a,b; 2a,b.

[5] Sanda Băcueț Crișan and Cristian Virag, “Plastica antropomorfă neolitică din Nord-Vestul României,” [Neolithic human figurines from Northwest Romania], in Fontes Historiae. Studia in honorem Demetrii Protase, Eds. Cristian Găzdac and Corneliu Gaiu (Bistriţa/Cluj-Napoca: Accent, 2006), 43-59, Pl. II/3a-d; Pl. III/4-5,7; Sanda Băcueț Crișan, “Descoperiri ale artei miniaturale din situlul de la Porţ–Corău. Statuetele antropomorfe. Studiu preliminar,” [Miniature art at the Porț–Corău site: Anthropomorphic figurines. Preliminary study], in Annales Universitatis Apulensis. Seria Historica 17, II (2013): 83–99, Pl. IV, VI/11a–b, VII, IX/21, 22, X; Fazecas, “O Tăbliță de lut,” 44.

[6] Fazecas, “O Tăbliță de lut,” 41, 44, Pl. II/1–2.

[7] Tecar, “A new Neolithic tablet,” Fig. 56–66, Fig. 4a–b, 5a–b.

[8] Nicolae Vlassa, “Contribuții la problema racordării cronologiei relative a neoliticului Transilvaniei la cronologie absolută a Orientului apropiat,” [Contributions to the connecting the relative chronology of the Transylvanian Neolithic to the absolute chronology of the Middle East], in Neoliticul Transilvaniei (Cluj-Napoca, 1976), 165, 167, Fig. 5/8.

[9] Sabin Adrian Luca, “A new special discovery from Turdaș,” in Banatica 12 (1993): 21–22, Fig. 1; Luca et al. “Incised amulet from Turdaș,” 67–72, Fig. 4.

[10] Lazarovici and Lazarovici, “The role,” 169–190.

[11] Nicolae Vlassa, “Contribuții,” 165, 167, Fig. 5/8.

[12] Luca et al., “Incised amulet from Turdaș,” 68–72.

[13] Pál Raczky, “Öcsöd Kováshalom,” in The Late Neolithic of Tisza region. A survey of recent excavations and the findings, Ed. Lászlo Talas (Budapest/Szolnok, 1987), 61–84; András Fűzesi and Pál Raczky, “Ocsöd–Kováshalom. Potscape of a Late Neolithic site in the Tisza Region,” in Dissertationes Archaeologicae 3, 1 (2018): 43–146, Fig. 21, 40/1; Pál Raczky and András Fűzesi, “Unusual clay artefacts and their imagery from the Late Neolithic Settlement of Ocsöd–Kováshalom on the Great Hungarian Plain,” in Materiality and identity in pre- and proto-historic Europe. Homage to Cornelia-Magda Lazarovici, Eds. Senica Țurcanu and Constantin-Emil Ursu (Suceava: Karl A. Romstorfer, 2018), Fig. 6–8.

[14] Kalicz et al., Preserved by Ancestral Fires. Picture of an excavation. The Neolithic village at Berettyóújfalu–Herpály (Budapest: Pytheas, 2011), 36.

[15] Katalin Sebők, “Ceramic form of Polgar Csoshalom. A case study,” in The Lengyel, Polgar and related culture în the Middle /Late Neolithic, Eds. Janusz K. Kozłowski and Pál Raczky (Krakow: Polish Academy of Art and Science, 2007), 102.

[16] Luca et al., “Incised amulet from Turdaș,” 72.

[17] Sabin Adrian Luca, “Cercetări arheologice la Oradea–Salca și câteva probleme legate de cultura Salca–Herpály – lui Gheorghe Lazarovici la împlinirea vârstei de 60 ani,” [Archaeological research at Oradea–Salca and some problems related to the Salca–Herpály Culture], in Apulum XXXVIII, 1 (2001): 32, Fig. 5/3.

[18] Diana Tomuș, “Piese ceramice perforate de tip small-finds din situl neolitic și eneolitic de la Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă. Posibile interpretări”, [Small finds as ceramic perforated artefacts from the Alba Iulia-Lumea Nouă Neolithic and Eneolithic site. Possible interpretations], in Buletinul Cercurilor Ştiinţifice Studenţeşti 22 (2016): 5–22, Pl. 6/a.

[19] Cornelia Magda Lazarovici, “Clay breads and tablets with signs and symbols,” in Signs and symbols from Danube Neolithic and Eneolithic, (Sibiu/Alba Iulia: Altip, 2009), 125–135. 

[20] Zoia Maxim et al., “Catalogue of signs,” in The Danube script in light of Turdas and Tărtăria discoveries, Eds. Maxim et al. (Cluj-Napoca: Mega, 2009), cat. 90.

[21] Lazarovici, and Lazarovici, “The role of the tablets,” 208, Fig. VIIC. 72b.

[22] Florin Drașovean, “Spondylus Gaederopus Linnaeus, 1753 spiny oyster pendant from the Neolithic settlement of Sânandrei–Ocsăplaț (Timiş County, Western Romania),” in Studii de Preistorie 15 (2018): 29–50.

[23] Sabin Adrian Luca et al., “A Belt Buckle Made of Spondylus gaederopus Linnaeus, 1758, Discovered at Tărtăria–Gura Luncii–the 2010 Campaign,” in Brukenthal. Acta Musei XII, 1 (2017): 15–43.

[24] Fotis Ifantidis, Practices of personal adornment in Neolithic Greece (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2019), 220, K 0147.

[25] Ifantidis, Practices, 167–168, EIK 4.56.

[26] Katalin Sebök, “On the possibilities of interpreting Neolithic pottery,” in Dissertationes Archaeologicae 3, 6 (2018): 21.

Plate I. 1a-1b;2a-2b - lids: Porț–Corău

Plate II. 1a-1b;2a-2b - lids: Porț–Corău

Plate III. 1a-1b; 2a-2b- disks: Porț-Corău

Plate IV. 1a-1c; 2-disks: Porț-Corău

Plate V. 1a-1c; 2-disks: Porț-Corău

Plate VI. 1a-1b; 2a-2b-disks: Porț-Corău

Plate VII. 1a-1b-disk; 2a-2b-lid: Porț-Corău

Plate VIII. 1a-1b-ornament/ buckle?; 2a-2b-clay tablet?: Porț-Corău

Plate IX. 1;2-pots and lids. Way of usage-proposal: Porț-Corău

Plate X. 1-ornament/buckle?-H-RM-analyses (default view); 2-vectorial lines