Dereivka: A Settlement and Cemetery of Copper Age Horse Keepers on the Middle Dnieper 9780860543695, 9781407345123

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Copyright
Contents
Editor's Foreword
Introduction
I. The Settlement Site
II. The Eneolithic Cemetery
III. The Material Culture of the Settlement and Cemetery
IV. Dereivka and the Sredny Stog Culture
V. Horsebreeding at Dereivka
VI. Chronological Problems of the Eneolithic Cultures of the Ukraine
VII. The Role of the Sredny Stog Population in the History of Copper Age Europe
References
Appendix 1: Palaeoanthropological study of the Dnieper region in the Early Eneolithic (I.D. Potekhina)
Appendix 2: A study of the earliest domestic horses of Eastern Europe (V.I. Bibikova)
Appendix 3: On the history of horse domestication in south-east Europe (V.I. Bibikova)
Appendix 4: Calibration of radiocarbon dates

Citation preview

Dereivka A Settlement and Cemetery of Copper Age Horse Keepers on the Middle Dnieper

Drnitriy Yakolevich Telegin translated from the Russian by V. K. Pyatkovskiy edited by J. P. Mallory

BAR International Series 287 1986

B.A.R. 5, Centremead, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 ODQ, England.

GENERAL EDITORS A.R. Hands, B.Sc., M.A., D.Phil. D.R. Walker, M.A.

B.A.R. -s287, 1986: 'Dereivka'

© Dmitriy Yakolevich Telegin, 1986 The author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9780860543695 paperback ISBN 9781407345123 e-book DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860543695 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library This book is available at www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS Editor's foreword

V

Introduction

1

The settlement site

5

II. The Eneolithic cemetery

37

III. The material culture of the settlement and cemetery

45

IV.

Dereivka and the Sredny Stag culture

71

V.

,Horsebreeding at Dereivka

82

I.

VI.

Chronological problems of the Eneolithic cultures of the Ukraine

89

VII. The role of the Sredny Stog culture in Copper Age Europe

108

References

119

Appendix 1: Palaeoanthropological study of the Dnieper region in the Early Eneolithic (I.D. Potekhina)

127

Appendix 2: A study of the earliest domestic horses of Eastern Europe (V.I. Bibikova)

135

Appendix 3: On the history of horse domestication in south-east 163 Europe (V.I. Bibikova) Appendix 4: List of calibrated radiocarbon dates

iii

183

EDITOR'S FOREWORD The geographer may define the Ural river and the Ural mountains as the eastern border of Europe but this is probably not the impression one is likely to gain from a number of recent surveys of the European Neolithic and Eneolithic periods. Rather, there is a frequent tendency to halt one's review of early farming and metal using communities with the Tripolye culture of the western Ukraine, thus leaving over a thousand linear miles unaccounted for. Explanations for this phenomenon come easy. There is the obvious problem of linguistic access to Soviet archaeological literature. There is also the very nature of the archaeological evidence for the Pantie-Caspian region. Unlike the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture whose substantial settlements provide a wide range of superb archaeological data, much of the archaeologica l evidence east -of the Dnieper river is confined to burials. Naturally, when these burials serve as repositories of materials of general archaeological interest such as wheeled vehicles, then western archaeologists show attention. But other t han such special cases the Neolithic and Eneolithic periods of this region are dismissed as a specialist regional interest which may be treated by a handful of non-Soviet scholars among whom M. Gimbutas, A. Hausler, T. Sulimirski and R. Tringham have been perhaps the best known. It is against this background that we may assess the importance of D.Ya. Telegin's excavations at the site of Dereivka. Obviously, it serves a number of regional needs. In an area wher e so much archaeological information has been obtained primarily from burials, it offers critical evidence of settlement without which no understanding of the cultural system underlying the mortuary evidence can be obtained. Furthermore, it offers an extensive corpus of well dated material culture against which far less tractable evidence, especially that between the Don and the Ural, may be correlated and dated. But most importantly, Dereivka impinges on a remarkable number of major issues of European prehistory. Dereivka provides some of the earliest extensive evidence for the domestication of the horse anywhere in the world. It is for this reason that both the au~hor and editor have decided to include translations of several earlier published palaeozoological studies of the Dereivka horse remains by V.I. Bibikova of the Institute of Zoology, Ukrainian Academy of Science, Kiev. Appendix II provides her analyses of the more diagnostic skeletal remains from Dereivka while Appendix III offers a more general discussion of the emergence of the domestic horse in Eastern Europe. The horse is naturally · recognised as one of the major prerequisites for the type of Eurasian steppe nomadism that so charac erised many of the Iron Age and later cultures that spanned the territory from the Danube to North China. For this reason, Dereivka cannot help but intrude into any discussion of the origins of pastoral nomadism. Of great interest here is the fact that the inhabitants of Dereivka combined horse-keeping as a primary economic pursuit with such normally sedentary activities as raising domestic pig and extensively exploiting aquatic resources . All of this warns against too facile ascript ions of the Eneolithic peoples of the Pantie-Caspian region to purely pastoral nomadic economies and rather suggests far more complex, and in eresting, processes by which the inhabitants of the forest-ste ppe and the steppe evolved into the rapidly mobile economies encountered later.

V

Another major area on which Dereivka touches is the marked cultural transformations that begin to appear in Europe by the 4th millennium B.C. Both the collapse of the Karanovo VI culture and its contemporaries across southeastern Europe as well as the emergence of the extensive Corded Ware-Battle Axe horizon across central and northern Europe have all been attributed to intrusions from the Pontic region. Those archaeologists who support such an invasion hypothesis generally set the immediate source of these invasions to the Sredny Stog culture of which Dereivka is its major representative. It is also in the Sredny Stog culture that one encounters the earliest cord decorated wares in Europe. The osteological evidence from the Sredny Stog cemeteries has also played an important role in those theories which envision a migration from the Pontic region westward. Consequently, Appendix I offers a brief review of the anthropological evidence of the Sredny Stog culture prepared by I.D. Potekhina. As the absolute chronology of the Eneolithic cultHres of the Ukraine play an important part in evaluating the plausibility of various invasion hypotheses, Dr. Telegin provides an ext en s ive summary of the chronological position of the various Eneolithic cultures and all dates are again listed and calibrated in Appendix IV. Finally, anyone familiar with the literature on Inda-European origins will recognise a wide consensus, among both linguists and many archaeologists, that the . homeland of this vast language family was probably situated in the Pantie-Caspian region. In this context, Dereivka has often been presented as representative of the culture of the Proto-ludo-European speaking peoples. The author's original text was translated from the Ukrainian by V.K. Pyatkovskiy. Appendices II and III were translated from the Russian and Ukrainian respectively by the editor who would be the first to admit his inadequacy as either a Slavic linguist or an English stylist. I would like to thank both their author, V.I. Bibikova, and F. McCormick, Palaeoecology Laboratory, Queen's University of Belfast, for assistance in the translations. Furthermore, I wish to thank R.B. Warner, Ulster Museum, for access to his computer programme for the calibration of radiocarbon dates listed in Appendix IV. M.C. de Lopez assisted with the illustrations while A. Sheridan not only prepared the final typed copy but also helped throughout in editing arid proofreading. Finally, I wish to thank my colleague D.Ya. Telegin for permitting me to assist in making this important site better known among English readers.

J.P. Mallory Department of Archaeology Queen's University of Belfast Northern Ireland

vi

INTRODUCTION The many years of research conducted in the southern Ukraine and adjacent terri t or:es ave shown that here in the 4th-3rd millennia b.c. the Neolithic an d Eneolithic cultures developed along several genetic lines, the bes t stu died of which are the Dnieper-Donets ·, Sredny StogYamnaya and Tripolye-Gumelnita cultures (Fig. l; Archaeology 1971). The nu erous tribes of the Dnieper-Donets culture (known for its pointedand flat-based ceramics adorned with comb and comb-pricked decoration) inhabited the forest-steppe area of the Left Bank of the Middle Dnieper and the basin of the Middle Seversky Donets. This was predominantly a hunting and fishing population which had already domesticated some animals (cattle, pigs) and initiated the growing of cereals (barley). At some time in the first half of the 4th millennium b.c. the bearers of this culture pushed down the Dnieper to the south and penetrated into the Azov and Crimean Steppe regions where they left the remarkable monuments of the Mariupol cemetery type (Telegin 1968; Isaenko 1976). In the 4th-3rd millennia b.c., the areas north of the Black Sea and around the Lower Dnieper, as well as the steppeland to their east, were inhabited by the cattle-breeding tribes of the Sredny Stag and later the Yamnaya cultures which were characterised by rather primitive pointedand round-based ceramics decorated with various impressions, including those made by cord. These people raised the first kurgans (barrows) in the northern Black Sea steppe. The Yamnaya period saw here the appearance of wheeled vehicles and the earliest fortified settlements such as Mikhailovka on the Lower Dnieper (Lagodovskaya et al. 1962). Contemporary with the Sredny Stog monuments and within basically the same territory there are n· merous burials and hoards of flint tools of the so-called Novodanilovka group of monwnents. As a whole they are dated to the second half of the 4th millennium b.c., but probably extend into the early Yamnaya period (the first half of the 3rd millenniwn b.c.). The bearers of th i s culture were evidently a very mobile. _population whose · habitation sites remain a~ yet unknown to us. They buried their dead in stone cists (Novodanilovka, Yama, Chaply, Petro·svistunovo), accompanied by great numbers of large high quality flint tools of 'Eneolithic' form, m ~ng them knives, _spearheads, axes, and also many copper ornaments. In some instances these burials included cromlechs and small mounds raised over the graves. This group of monuments is associated with the remarkable finds of stone artifacts shaped as horsehead sceptres~ The Novodanilovka-type hoards revealed scores of large flint blades, _spearheads and polished stone axes. These f inds and the cores encountered there and in the burials indi cate the existence of highly skilled specialist flintworkers. Contemporary with the steppe cattle-breeding population there lived in the Right-Bank Ukraine and Forecarpathia the mutually related agricultural and cattle-breeding tribes of the Gumelnita and CucuteniTripolye cultures, characterised by a sophisticated level of ceramic manufacture (frequently with painted decoration), developed house building techniques and a vigorous plastic art. The genetic roots of these cultures go back to the Lower Danube and the Balkans (Passek 1935, 1949; Beilekchi 1978; Chernysh 1982).

1

e 0

Fig.

EARLY ANO MIDDLE IRlr'OlYE GUMElNlfA

1 The main Eneolithic

cultural 2

traditions

of the Ukraine.

In the area north of the Black Sea, on the Lower Dnieper and in the Crimea, sites have been found containing specific black- or greyburnished ceramics, often completely devoid of ornamentation. Monuments of this kind are ascribed by researchers to the Lower Mikhailovka and Kemi-Oba types which constituted a separate genetic line of cultural development in the southern Ukraine during the Eneolithic. Like the people of the Yamnaya culture, this was basically a tattle-breeding population which buried their deceased in barrows, usually including cromlechs under the mounds and frequently employing stone cists. It was this population, many scholars believe, that created the monumental anthropomorphic stele-shaped stone sculptures well-known in the Black Sea steppeland and in the Crimea. Specialists conclude that the bearers of the cultures of these three genetic lines differed not only in the contents of their material culture but also anthropologically. The people of the Dnieper-Donets culture belonged to the massive broad-faced late Cro-Magnons (Debets 1966, Gokhman 1966, Zinevich 1967), while the Sredny Stog and Yamnaya men, though generally described as the same anthropological type, had a much more gracile cranium (Kruts 1972, Potekhina 1983). Represented among them were also narrow-faced individuals approaching the eastern Mediterranean type. The latter group seems to have prevailed also in the Lower Mikhailovka-Kemi-Oba population. As to the Gumelnita-Tripolye people, they were chiefly of the Mediterranean type (Velikanova 1975). All important historical events in the southern Ukraine evolved in the Copper Age essentially under the impact of the mutual relations and links between these four ethnocultural entities. In the early Eneolithic of the Ukraine, a very important role in the history of the southern region was played by the emerging tribes of the Sredny Stog culture (SSC). This expressly horsebreeding culture occupied mainly the area around the Lower and Middle Dnieper, and the southern part of the Left-Bank Ukraine up to the Seversky Donets basin. Sites of this type are also known in the steppe areas of the Right-Bank Ukraine and the Lower Don. Monuments of this culture include settlements, cemeteries and single burials (Telegin 1969, 1971b, 1973) • . Among the first monuments of the Sredny Stog culture discovered before World War II was a small settlement explored by A.V. Dobrovolsky on Sredny Stog Island on the Dnieper (now .part of the city of Zaporozhye). The name of ihe island is used to designate the whole culture . Most of the other habitation sites and cemeteries were found and studied after the war, mainly in the process of surveying the zones of large man-made reservoirs in the valleys of the Dnieper and Seversky Donets. The best known monuments of the Sredny Stog culture are the habitation sites near the village of Dereivka on the Dnieper, Alexandria on the River Oskol in the Seversky Donets basin, and Konstantinovka on the Lower Don. In the vicinity of the Dereivka and Alexandria settlements archaeologists have also examined small groups of contemporaneous burials. One of the most important and prolific SSC monuments in the Ukraine is the settlement site and cemetery near Dereivka on the Middle Dnieper, which have been investigated by the author. The analysis of these excavations forms the basis of this work.

3

The very plentiful finds yielded by this habitation site are exceedingly important for understanding the essence of the whole Sredny Stog culture and the culture of stockbreeding tribes in the southern region of the European USSR in the 4th-3rd millennia b.c. The objects examined there include houses, settlement features, ritual complexes and a large quantity of material evidence. The ceramics of the habitation site are represented by scores of intact, restored or reconstructed vessels, as well as specimens of the culture's anthropomorphic and zoomorphic sculpture found for the first time. Among the tools and implements are numerous hammers and mattocks made of antler, primitive bridle cheekpieces and other objects of flint and stone. The large quantities of faunal remains collected at the habitation site make it possible to determine the composition of the livestock and suggest the predominant role of the horse in the economy. The materials of the habitation site and cemetery near Dereivka are noted for their comparatively pure cultural composition against whose background one can easily distinguish separate ceramic imports which penetrated from the Tripolye and Pit-Comb Ware cultures. A number habitation site.

of

radiocarbon

dates

have

been

of the cemetery are Finally, the materials composition understanding of the anthropological site's population. The research has been conducted at Science's Institute of Archaeology where all the excavation described below are stored.

obtained

from

the

important for the of the habitation

the Ukrainian Academy of the materials pertaining to

To provide a fuller and deeper insight into the problems of explaining the Dereivka habitation site and cemetery, as well as the Sredny Stog culture as a whole, appended to the monograph are separate works on the anthropological composition of the Sredny Stog population (I.D. Potekhina) and the palaeozoological materials of the habitation site (V.I. Bibikova).

4

I. THE SETTLEMENT SITE The Copper Age settlement site near the village of Dereivka in Onufriev District, Kirovograd Region, was discovered by archaeological survey in 1959. It is located on the right promontory of the River Omelnik, a righthand tributary of the Dnieper, and the site occupies a low elongated monadnock separated from the main bank by lowland. Apart from the habitation site, we examined two cemeteries, a Neolithic and an Eneolithic one, the first of which is situated on the western outskirts of the settlemen t and the second about 400-500 m. upstream from the site (Fig. 2). The height of the settlement is 4-6 m. above the summer water level of the Dnieper (Fig. 3). Regular excavations of the monuments were started in 1960 and continued intermittently until 1967. Further excavation was subsequently · carried out in 1983 . Before the work was begun, the whole area of the habitation site was divided into 100 sq.m. plots (l0xl0 m.) which, in turn, were broken down into 25 four-metre squares each. The total excavated area of the habitation site exceeded 2000 sq.m.

If II

II II

11

II

II

II 11

If

1,

II

Ii

II

II

II

II ii

II II

II

II II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

fl

II

II

II

I(

I(

II

11

If

II

II

"

If

II

II

II

II

II

ti

II

II

II

fl

II

I/

II

fl f(

If

II

II Ii

11

11 II

rl

II

fl

It

11

fl

,,

Fig~ 2 Plan of settle ment and cemeteries near the village of Dereivka on the promontory of the Dnieper and its righthand tributary, the 0melnik. 5

Fig.

0

40

3 The Dereivka

site

during

excavations.

80

Fig.

4 Stratigraphy in the northern part of the settlement: I - ploughsoil; II - humus; III - sandy loam; IV - accumulation of shells in the area of dwelling; V - charcoal and ash.

Fig.

5 (Opposite) General plan of excavation: 1 - broken vessels; 2 sherds; 3 - plastic objects; 4 - tools of flint and bone; 5 shell accumulation; 6 - semi-subterranean dwellings; 7 - hearths; 8 - pits; 9 - disturbed areas; 10 - "potter's place "; 11 "grinder's place"; 12 - eastern border of destruction of habitation site by builders in 1963; 13 - ash accumulation; 14 - dog's interment; 15 - cult burial of horse skull and dogs.

6

~~-...

·······················•·······•······•·

7

The strata in the areas of open excavation and trenches show the following sequence: a 20-30 cm. layer of ploughed soil, a 60-70 cm. layer of black humus, and a layer of grey sandy clay with numerous mole burrows from the depth of 1.0-1.1 m. downward (Fig. 4). At some places the sandy clay tapers away and the chernozem stratum lies directly on loessy loam. The archaeological finds were unearthed from the lower part of the black humus layer at the depth of between 0.4 and 1.0 m. The surface of the cultural horizon which yielded the major material evidence lies at a depth of 0.7-0.8 m. and is mostly associated with a bed of crushed shell (Unio and Palludino). Finds in smaller quantities were also encountered above and below this stratum, sometimes as far down as 1.2 m. The occurrence of finds at a depth of 1.1-1.2 m. was especially frequent in the north-eastern part of the settlement where at this level (i.e. 3040 cm. ,below the shell layer) there were found the remains of hearths, sherds and many other things. The layer of Unio and Palludino shells the habitation site, and filled the cavities fireplaces.

covered a large portion o~ of dwellings, pits and open

A limited number of finds in the many trenches dug around the main excavation area suggests that the settlement has been almost entirely excavated. It totalled slightly more than 3000 sq.m. in area. Judging by the density of the material, specifically in the shell layer, it would seem that the nearly 60x40 m. habitation site had a rectangular shape and extended from west to east. The north-eastern and south-eastern areas of the settlement are well defined by the contours of the shell agglomerations and the distribution of cultural debris. In the north, the cultural stratification is partly damaged by the erosion of the bank; the western part of the habitation site was destroyed in 1963 (already after we had started our work) by the builders of a wharf. Regrettably, the surface of the monadnock was also damaged in many places in the early Slav and Kievan Rus times. In the central part of the ancient settlement the strata are cut through by a large pit of modern origin. · In the habitation site we explored the remains of two slightly subterranean dwellings (Nos. i,2), two domestic activity complexes (DAC 1 and DAC 2), a small subterranean structure, probably a dwelling (Pit 2), a ritual site with buried animal skulls, and a number of separate fireplaces, pits and other features (Fig. 5). Fireplaces and pits were also found in the area of the houses and other structures of the habitation site. site , Below is a description of the features of .the habitation of House beginning with its northern half which houses the remains Domestic Activity No. 1, the small dwelling-type structure (Pit 2), Complex 1 and other features.

8

Northern

and north-easter

n par t of the habitation

site

(Fig.

6)

House No. 1 was not e ntirely intact, fully a half of it having been washe d away by the river o It wa s rect a gular in shape 9 10 m. long and (in the preserved par t) 2 m. wide. Its long axis had a north-eastern to south-western ori entat i on. The floor of the dwelli ng was sunk 0.2-0.3 m. in the ground and levelled. The entrancep in the form of a gently sloping passage c. l m. long, was on the short south-western side (Fig. 6). The whole sunken par t of the dwelling was covered with a layer of shell up to 40 cm. thick. In the north-western end of the structure was a round open hearth, c.l m. in diameter, and filled with ashes , burnt sh e lls, animal bones, etc. A circular pit, 0.8 m. wide and 0.3 m. deep, was found near the fireplace. It was filled with humus, ash and shell. A simila r pit found in the southern corner of the dwelling was round in shape, 1 m. in diamete r , and filled predominantly with shell; a large ox-horn was found together with other material on its bottom. Four stones of up to 35 cm. in cross section were lying along the long axis of the s tr ucture. A large number of finds were discovered near the fireplace, in the pits and throughout the dwel l ing (Fig. 7), among which were the fragmentary remains of ten pots decorated with comb impressions, incision s and U-shaped stampings (Fig. 8:1 - 3, Fig. 9:1). One of the vessels had its rim adorned wit h r ough flutings. The bottom of a miniatur e bowl with intricate pricked ornamentation was unearthed near the fir e place (Fig. 10:1). In the other parts of the dwelling there were fou n d a broken mattock or hammer (Fig. 10:7), a granite disc, net sinkers (Fig. 8:9), a fragment of a fish-hook made of bone and small flint artifacts: a core, knifel i ke blades, a flint knife, scrapers (Fig. 8:4-8), borers, arrowheads, etc. A feature directly associated with the dwelling was Hearth 1, uncovere d abou t 10 m. to the west of its entrance. The hearth was partly eroded by wate r . It contained four pieces of granite, 20 to 35 cm. in size, e ncircl i ng a pa t el li f orm hollow. The latter was filled with ashy earth mi xed with shell and anima l bones. Two smal l patches of ash were excavated not far from the f irep l ace and two beakers were found near the stones of the hearth, one qui t e int act, the pther split in hal f . Among the art ~facts was also a fragment of · a mattock or hammer but t (Fig. 10~6). Pit 2, a small habitatiori s t ructure, was located at a distance of 6-7 m. from the south-western corner of House No. 1 (Figs. 5,6). It had a round-oval shape and a patelliform profile, was 2x3 m. across and about 0.3 m. deep. An 8.5 m. · long t rough-shaped passage sloped down to the pit from the west. The whole pit and the passage were filled with a 10 cm. thick layer of shell; inside the layer but mainly under it were recovered a great many interesting Eneolithic finds. In the pit's southern part a small 0.4 m. wide hearth was located, stuffed with ash, charcoal pieces and charred animal bones. Ash and charcoal pieces were encountered throughout the hollow. The finds recovered in the pit and in its entrance area belong without a doubt to a single closed context. From the sherds collected it was possible to reconstruct and restore twelve pots , ornamented chiefly with cord impressions, incisions and stabbings; two vessels had cord stampings (Fig. 11:1-3) and the rim of one vessel had vertical

9

l(

~ -~

0

o,••

)f:~: o•

4

Fig.

6 Plan of nor th ern are a of settlement.

10

Fig . 7 Accumulat i on of ceramics , bones , stones

11

and s hells

i n House 1.

2 \

\

1

0

'..//

r ··-·.c.·.:.,

~ f\\ i .· .·.c:·.-.cc '- ··c::.:c.·,.

//~~ /i, ···.. ,:.-, ,::.,.. -

Df'P

59

3

6 Fig.

L__.!.___J

8 House 1: 1-3 - reconstr ucted vessels; - bone hook; 9 - net sinker fashioned

4-7 - flint artifacts; from body sherd.

'--'--'

Fig.

9 Ceramics

from House 1 (1) and Domestic Activity

12

Complex 1 (2).

8

1

Fig.

10 Fi nds from House 1 (1,7), in the vicinity of Hearth 1 (6), the area of Domestic Activity Complex 1 (2,3,8-11) and near

(4 , 5) .

13

in it

-: ..·

,.,

I

'

·1~~'' ' \

• , \ ••'

I

••

I ·

,'1

, 'I· I

1

,-'tf/

.

r:-'

'ij

iW.J

I~

I

'I

,\

I I

·J I ~ J

j~~ \ '(

J.,.'

3 4

'•

I ~

Fig.

~

11 Finds from small dwelling (Pit 2): antler (4,7); bone a r t ifac t (5);

(6,8).

14

7

.~8 vessels (1-3); artifacts of f ragments of plastic objects

ornamental scratches. In the pit were also fragments of a mattock and a hammer made of antler, a bone knife (Fig. 11:4,5,7), bits of awls, etc. Around the small dwelling and at its entrance four sculptures were discovered, among them a fragment of a statuette, an animal figurine and barely defined fragments of other artifacts of this kind (Fig. 11:6,8). The purpose of this structure is not clear but, supposedly, it was some type of habitation or a place of worship. Domestic Activity Complex 1 was dis cov ered eastward of House 1 where the cultural stratum becomes markedly lower. It occupied an area of approximately 50-60 sq.m. an d la y 30-35 cm. be lo w the accumulation of shell on the settlement's surface. Along the eastern border of this depression there occurred in the cultural layer stones of various sizes, some of them 35 cm. and even more in size (Figs. 5,6). Hearth II was located just about the centre of the depression. It contained stones of up to 15 cm. across distributed over an oval area 0.5-0.8 m. in diameter. The space between the stones and frequently behind them was filled with ash mixed with fish bones, scales, and so on. The stones displayed scorching on the outside. In two squares, a few metres east of the fireplace, the r e was discovered an agglomeration of 25-30 small stones of up to 10-15 cm. i n size, lying at random. Stones were also encountered in other place s i n the depression, sometimes forming ringed patterns, which suggests t heir use for post packing. The possibility cannot be excluded that the depression is all that has remained of another large dwelling whose configuration could not be traced, or of some kind of domestic structure. The finds collected in the area of this domestic activity complex are ascribed below to a single context (DAC 1). Among the finds were a large quantity of sherds occurring in 2-3 layers. Some squares yielded, for example, up to 200 sherds. Many of these belonged to vessels whose form could then be restored. Reconstructed, in particular, are the shapes of seven pots, two beakers and two bowls (Fig 10:2,3; Fig. 12:2). Four pots are adorned with comb ornamentation or incisions (Fig. 9:2), the rest with other decorative patterns, such as cord impressions and Ushaped or pit-like imprints (Fig. 12:1,3,4). One of the beakers is covered with stabbed and pit decoration (Fig. 10:2). The two bowls and ope beaker are plain. Special notice should be made of the presence here of the original decorative motif consisting of comb and cord elements (Fig. 12:1). Among other finds in DAC 1 mention should be made of a bridle cheekpiece (Fig. 12:6), a bone adze, scrapers , knife-like blades (Fig. 10:11; Fig. 12:7-10), variously sized bone awls, and a piercer* with a flat tip. Unearthed here were also c.20 ceramic violin-shaped net sinkers (Fig. 10:8-10), some of them occurring in groups of 3 to 4 pieces. Such accumulations of weights probably designed for fishing nets were found in no other part of the habitation site. Considering the large bone fish-hook recovered here (Fig. 12:5) and t he heaps of fish scales and fish bones in the hearth, one is led t o conclude that this is the place where the i nhab itants repaired their fishing gear and processed their catch.

* Piercer:

an awl-like

instrument

with a flat

15

end (Ed. note)

1

3

7

6

Fig.

12 Finds fro m Domestic Activity hook; 6 - bridle cheekpiece - stone quern.

Complex 1: 1-4 - ceramics; 5 - fish of bone; 7-10 - flint artifacts; 11

16

site's

Near the fireplace five grain querns

were also found three out of the habitation (Fig . 12:11), and fragments of a rubber.

There were also some other features located near DAC 1 and House 1 in the habitation site ' s north-eastern part, namely a stone-lined hearth (IV), an open hearth (V), three pits (5,6,7) and remains of a stone structure of some kind. Hearth IV was situated 4-5 m. east of DAC 1 in the area of the shell accumulation which occupies the whole north-eastern corner of the habitation site. The 20-30 cm. thick accumulation consists of largely broken and crushed shells with traces of fire, mixed with ash, animal bones, etc. In all probability, it is the usual kitchen waste which plainly marks here the level of the ancient habitation horizon. The hearth or, perhaps, oven was cleared below this shell stratum. It was round in shape and up to 60 cm. across, lined with small stones, predominantly in the form of 7-10 cm. long plates (41 pieces altogether). Some of the stones were placed vertically composing the 'oven's' walls, while others were used as its bottom. Some of the fla .t plates probably formed the 'oven's' primitive dome. After the upper stones had been cleared and stripped down, there appeared the distinct r emains of a 'stoke hole' facing east. A large accumulation of finds was discovered directly in Hearth IV, in the adjacent squares and within the area of the shell heap. Some places yielded as many as 30-35 sherds per square metre of the cultural layer. Apart from broken pots, there also came to ligh t individual small bowls. One large pot in the layer of shell and ash was split into dozens of fragments but retained its original form. Near this pot was a 1.2x2.3 m. compact accumulation of large pieces from four pots, a beaker and a bowl. Hearth V was located on the easter n border of the shell accumulation. Fires were laid in a small round pit 0.75 m. deep and 0.6 m. across. The upper part of the fire-pit was filled with shell overlying a layer of white a s h mixed with burnt animal bones and sherds. Pits 5- 7 wer e located southward of Hearth Von two adjacent squares behind the eastern _edge of the str i p of shell accumulation. The pits had · an irregular roundish form and were 0.6, 0.5 and 1.3 m. in diameter. Their depth varied between 0.3 and 0.45 m. · They were filled with shell, animal bones and fragments of pottery. To conclude the examination of the dwelling and domestic facilities in the settlement's northern part, notice should also be taken of a stone structure situated on the river bank 4-5 m. north of DAC 1. It was composed of more than ten large stones which overlapped one another in some places. The stones were partly covered with a layer of shell. In this accumulation of stones there was found a large fragmentary pot adorned with pinched decoration which was quite uncommon in Dereivka (Fig. 13:1), as well as sizeable pieces of a small pot with pit ornamentation, and so on. All in all, the area of the shell concentration in the northeastern sector yielded a great many ceramic fragments, among them nine vessels (Fig. 13:2-5; Fig. 14:1,2,8), a multitude of animal bones, flint tools (knives, scrapers), bone piercers, antler mattocks or hammers (Fig. 10:4,5), a two-hole bridle cheekpiece and other objects (Fig. 13:6-11; Fig. 14:3-7).

17

,,2 ......

'\ L....L....J

-'l111l!JJ,

I I[

I

'I

11

Fig.

13 Pots (1,2,4,5), bowl (3) and bone artifacts eastern part of habitation site.

18

(6-11)

from

north-

I ,.,

I

l I

I

\I

I

'7

4 0

'

Fig.

14 Ceramics (1,2,8); north-eastern part

I J

2, _j

to ols of bone (3,7) of habitation site.

19

and flint

(4-6)

from

"" 7JJ

616

7~

79'

DEREIVKA

, ::-y

l•

--=::::=

"78

.q

v ,,; :,•,:,,:l!f::/ I

"•

I~,,',, :~:1'1'. r:~

,~;,, ~,:~•r\',,'t',

~!: r,,;,:,;.--,\,!1~~

M1

~ I

I'•'1'l f• i' I 1f1 'J/11 11 ,, , ,,,

11

,-"a.• · '. IJ1T ~@ Im

5.50

N

0

I I

I

Ii -

.,,., •

I

4

•~:.'},:;: tr:•.'"-'' ._.,,,, ,r

....-:·,

,•:1:, ,1 :1;,l f~:-•,:,~: .:,::'.·::; rr · ,:.t:':::{?i ?~r0 ::,::;: ::•;;,,"juj ~ ···t, 62,; •1,,,,~,t1f, 1f

1-'T.1

1

, I t f1 • 1J, , 1 I • ,,, 111, 1 ti

13 ..

J ff

fl pff

I I,

\',:!~ ..:•,~ ~•,r/,::••', j~•~•: ;;,::::~ ;,'11,t

•'•,~;:'· I I I

~

,,,··

11 C ri,,• .,.-,,J''1t11'1 ~J t \t ,'• '•0 4q, 411/, _;;1,r , 1, •r,1r, • t .,.•,,:,;.,!~ !..,..,,,.•.•,-,;.:. ·~r~ ~. I!...i~ ,.~ ~:~•r. ,..;.·: :•...•.· · · ·· ··· I

1~:i~, !.•:':~~·'•:: !·~i:::~: ~1 ;:·:· ·r.:':1. l?f;:~,?':f,.,., :::.. ,.,..,.:-.~,,,,.,. · !T,:...,•, 11.•, .'~'•/•,,,,,,,',:,, ,',,,,, ,,''/,•.···•·.'.' .,;,,'••'..•~:.; ,•.,.•••.:~ ~•,!•~···•.'

1.w

•

·::\'.'_,'._~;

•

'•::

.;

:,,•:

,

t

• · 1•

. ,. , .,, ,

.

=· • ••

•,•: ~:•fi•.-.:,,:!·~ 1,·!:·,~ ·\·:.~:-:•·

..~... .... r····

• 60()

•.

....f_f ··· ·~ ~, ~.:.·· .., :~• t::,

• • , ~~&':!.I~.. ....; ..

HEART H,

fl

i ol!

tft

, ,,; ,.•~ •,

. n a. I

0 -

i l0 7 1 I•

Q

r.~

Fig.

15 Sou t he r n pa rt

•

.,

-, .

t

.,

.. ..

1 11 1 1 • 1 11 ,•::: } : • ,• f I' !

"•~:::f

•

I

I

·

• •

, . ,

· •

f

•

•

•

t: ;•t:

·::;,:\:;;,:i ~.~ft~ ••.~L?· ~!•1

·· ·~

0

--___J ·6,

i-11 C ''

I;,

,,, r:

:;;;,::;·::\,,

of se tt lement

a nd House 2.

It;::!:, .,.

I ~t : ' j

•

•'.',':u ;/

\6U

I

- - ~ U • , ~• •• I

't/,·•, .... ...... ,,

•

The southern

and south-western

part

of the habitation

The features explored in the southern half included House 2 with its fully preserved floor, Complex 2, a ritual interment of a dog, etc.

site

(Fig.

15)

of the settlement Domestic Activity

House 2 was rectangular in form and measured 13x6 m. Its semisubterranean foundation assumed a troughlike profile 0.35 m. deep. Its · contours could be traced in the lower part of the humus layer at a depth of about 0.8 m. Its bottom descended slightly to the east (c. five cm. per one metre of length). The structure was not uniformly preserved; its form was best traced along the northern, eastern and part of the southern walls. Also welldefined were the dwelling's south-eastern, north-eastern and northwestern corners (Fig. 15). The sunken floor of the structure was filled with shell in which were also found many sherds, tools, animal bones, etc. The layer of shell in the dwelling's eastern half closely follows the configuration of the hollow. However, in the western half the shell fill merged into heaps of waste west of the dwelling. Six pits were located at the eastern, southern and northern walls. They were round in shape, up to 0.5 m. deep and varied in size from 0.5 to 0.9 m. across. The pits were filled with large and small stones, sherds, animal bones and broken tools. The stones and sherds inclined towards the centre of the pits which were probably designed as postholes, packed on all sides with stones, shells and animal bones. The pit in the north-eastern corner contained mainly sherds from which it was possible to reconstruct the upper portions of three vessels. Two of them were decorated with cord stamps and one with rows of U-shaped imprints. Additional sherds and artifacts fashioned from antler were found in other post-holes. The sunken floor of the structure contained two open fireplaces, an eastern and a western one, three pits, and large stones lying at random singly and in groups. The eastern fireplace was located near the northern wall closer to tQe dwelling's north-eastern corner. It was circular in shape, 0.6 m. wide and 0.35 m. deep, with a lens-shaped profile and small stones laid along its border. The pit and the surrounding stones were completely covered with ash mixed with small pieces of charcoal and charred bones. A small heap of burnt and crushed shell was found on the pit's bottom. The fireplace was covered by a thick layer of shell. Near the fireplace was a small pit, up to 0.5 m. wide and filled with many pieces of broken · pottery. Another pit, 1.2 m. . in cross section, was located a little farther to the east along the wall. Near the eastern fireplace there were unearthed within the limits of the pit two small broken bowls, two shattered undecorated pots, and a clay object in .the shape of a Unio or Anadonta shell (Fig. 16:13). There were also found some fragments of a pot with pitted ornament. In this sector's large pit lay fragments of more than 30 vessels, among them three shattered undecorated pots, the form of one of which could be fully reconstructed . Resting on the pit's bottom was a crushed mattock-hammer made of antler and the remains of a small flat-based bowl.

21

~i_ .~_-y_~: , _(.;~~;--:~...:.~-::-~ ·.-:,. :.:_ , ~ ..

··\.:::/ .·:

•.

8

10 I

-

'

V

..... ,,1

11

% 1

._.

Fig . · 16 Vessels (1-6 , 8); antler hammers (9 , 12); flin t knives and plastic objects (7,13 , 14) from House 2.

22

(10 , 11) ;

Large fr agments of pots, and small bone and flin t tools such as awls, sc rape r s, flat spikes and knifelike blades were scattered haphazardly all over the dwelling's southern corner. The we s t ern fireplace comprised s i x small s t ones, each up to 15 cm. in s i ze, and distributed ove r an 0. 5-0.6 sq.m. area around a smal l hol low f i lled with ash and charcoa l . Many sherds were excavated in t he fou r squares next t o t he fi replac e , among t hem t en pots whose shape was t o a large degree recons tr uctable. Two of t he pots were decorated with rows of incisions, one wi t h a zi gzag, t hree with vertical or diagonal col umns of comb i mpressi ons and i nc is i on s , t he remaining four with cord, cater pil la r , pit a nd drawn or naments , r e s pec ti vely. Ot her finds near the wester n fireplace i ncl uded a 4 cm. hi gh cone-s haped mi nia t ur e vesse l , t wo i nt a c t matt oc k- hammer s and a br oken edge of such a tool, a n awl fra gment, small fli nt artif a ct s, and vi olin -s haped ne t sinke rs ( t hre e of them co mplete and the rest in pieces). Interesting finds were collected in the dwelling ' s north- western corner where an accumulation of stones was detected . Apart from fragments of three pots decorated with fingertip i mpressions and diagonal rows of incisions, sections of the cutting edges of two mattock-hammers, violin-shaped sinkers and a few awls , the place also yielded a large fragment of a female statuette and a piece resembling the head of another anthropomorphic image made of clay (Fig. 16:7,14) . Large pieces of a pot decorated recovered in the dwelling's north-eastern

with three corner.

incised

lines

were

In all, House 2 yielded more than 30 vessels whose shape and ornamentation could be either graphically reconstructed or restored. Among them were pots, bowls and beakers. The vessels' decoration included all the elements and motifs found in the Dereivka settlement generally (Fig. 16: 1-6 ; Fig . 17:1,2,4; Fig. 18:1-3) . Also unearthed in House 2 were many tools: c . 10 mattocks or hammers made of antler and smaller-sized bone and flint artifacts (Fig. 16:9 , 12 ; Fig . 18:4-6; Fig. 17:2). Of much interest was the presence here of clay figurines (Fig . 16:7 , 13,14). The complex of archaeological finds from House 2 is the most complete and varied in the settlement~ Unf ortunately , all we know about the structure of the dwelling itself is that it was slightly sunken and had posts in its frame . We have no data on the shape of · the roof and are uncertain about the dwelling's entrance. In all probability , it was at the north-eastern corner of the dwelling , close to the eastern hearth where there was a gently slo ping passage le ad ing •into the dwelling . Hence , the dwelling ' s exit led to DAC 2 (which will be descri be d belo w). Under the nort hern wall of House 2 we disco ve re d a rit ual inter ment of a do g . The ani mal was bur ie d i n a s pac i ous pit . at t he de pt h of 0 .4 m. below the ancient occ upa t ion le ve l . The dog was pos it ioned on its s id e with i ts legs exte nded and the he a d poi nti ng for war d ( Fi g. 20). Besi de the dog 1 s feet la y a f ew smal l st ones . The buri a l was cov ere d with occupation material i n which t here were fo und scattere d she rds of vessels typical of the whole settle ment. The dog ' s po siti on a nd t he state of its skeleton sho w t hat it was a ritual buria l, a ca s e of t he cult associated with the belief in guardian animals . Rit ua l i nter ments of dogs are known fairly well in the cultures of the Coppe r-Br on ze Age,

23

2

4

6

Fig.

Activity 17 Finds f rom House 2 (l, 2 ' 4) and Domestic

7).

24

Complex 2 (3,5-

8

12

Fig.

18 Finds from site (7-12):

House 2 (1-6) 1-3 - vessels;

and south-eastern 4-12 - artifacts

25

part of habi a ion of bone and ant er.

Fig.

19 Finds from House 2 and its

Fig.

20 Dog interment 26

environs.

near House 2.

!/II/NII :t ' ·~,. I

I

• •

/

.,\

f

I

• ~-

,·, •,: • • •

: .

:~/;/t XI;{;: , Ill ,

' \

Fig.

•

·.

• I

.

_ -:--, .",

•

;

. . -.·, ~.,

• •

21 Vessels (1-6,8), grinding tool (7) and awls (9-12) in the central part of the settlement.

27

near House 2

I

~

I

, 'I

'

.I

! I

I

L......I

5

~

'

\

I

I

4

3 ~I

-

(f I

--

•

'

10

'-----'

7

11

-

- - (///1)

L--L---1

8

~

I

I I

I I

~ ~

12

Fig.

13

I

I I

I

I

I'/

0

I

\J L..--,,1

~

14-

15

fB

22 Western ·part of the habitation site: vessel (l); hammer (2), mattocks (3-4), adze (8), pick (9), piercer (13), punch (14) and fastener (15) of bone and antler; stone and flint artifacts: pecked hammer (5), scraper (10), arrowhead (11), disk (16); plastic objects of clay (6,7) and stone (12).

28

as, for example, culture (Nerushai),

in the Late Tripolye culture (Tudorovo), the Yamnaya the Corded Ware culture (Stzhizhkov), etc.

In the squares next to the dog burial there were three large accumulations of ceramics consisting of hundreds of sherds, among them fractured parts and large pieces of ten pots and one beaker whose shape could in large measure be reconstructed. The beaker and one pot had cord decoration, and the rest were ornamented with fine-toothed comb patterns, incision, U-shaped stamping (Fig. 19:1,3; Fig. 21:1-5) or stabbing. Discovered near the accumulations were an intact vessel in the shape of a jug 6.5 cm. high (Fig. 21:6) and an almost undamaged small plain semicircular bowl. Apart from the fragments of pottery and animal bones, the accumulations contained tools, some whole and others broken in antiquity: two pieces of mattock or hammer butts, two bone awls, and small artifacts of flint. Domestic Activity Complex 2 (Fig. 5). This designation was used to identify the large aggregation of stones, ceramics and other finds located a few metres east of the dog burial, and the collection of domestic waste directly at the north-eastern corner of House 2. The · complex is probably what has remained of a surface structure which included a great number of large stones up to 35 cm. in size unearthed at the level of the ancient ground surface (at a depth of 0.8-0.9 m.). Judging by the stones' position, the structure was a 3x6 m. rectangle with the walls orientated towards the cardinal points. The stones were concentrated chiefly along the long northern wall and the short eastern and western walls. Particularly large stone accumulations showed at the structure's corners where piles of 2-3 stones were frequently encountered. In places, the stones were laid in rings, probably surrounding the holes of wooden posts. Considering the stones' location on three sides (northern, eas t ern and western), it may be suggested that the structure was sort of a shed or shelter facing towards the south. A circular eastern sector fish and animal

pit (5), 1.1 m. wide and 0.2 m. deep, was cleared in the of the shed. The pit contained three broken vessels and bones, and its upper part was filled with shell.

Beside the shed were the remains of a .hearth lined with seven 15x30 cm. stone slabs. The hearth consisted of t wo 0.6 m. long stone walls. A flat stone slab was also found on the hearth's bottom. The remains of the hearth were covered with a shell layer containing separate stones from the shed's framework. Between the pit and the hearth there were unearthed within the shed's boundaries two fragments · of th e cutting edges of a mattock and a piece of a similar . tool with shaft-hole (Fig. 17:5,7) as well as a large broken decorated pot. Large sherds of pots, small bone artifacts (a spatula and awls), flint and stone tools inclu ding spearheads, scrapers, blades and grinding stones were discovered also in the other corners of the shed. Just outside the shed's north-western corner there was a fragment of a female figurine, the other half of which had been found in House 2. A total of seven vesse l s were reconstructed from sherds collected at DAC 2. They had been decorated with rows of oblique crosses and zigzags impressed by mea ns of a fine-toothed comb, and incision (Fig. 18:6).

29

A part of the shed's wall directly adjoined the eastern corner of House 2 at its entrance. A gently sloping passage led from House 2 to a pit located at the corner formed by the eastern wall of House 2 and the shed of DAC 2. The pit (No. 1) was over 1 m. wide and 0.5 m. deep. When cleared of the upper layer of charcoal-speckled soil and ash, the pit revealed a large broken decorated pot and sherds of five other vessels, two of them with cord decoration, one with fingertip impressions and two with comb stampings. Craft working areas. At a distance of 3-4 m. from the shed's stones north of House 2 there were found large accumulations of archaeological material which made it possible to determine areas associated with certain craft activities, in particular with pottery and bone tool manufac t ure which involved abrasive grinding. The first area ('potter's place') was an accumulation of domestic remains over several sq. metres. It contained two broken vessels, one of which (Fig. 21:8) was filled with yellow clay and the other with finely crushed shell. Judging by the composition of t he clay paste used in t he settlement's ceramics, crushed shell was added t o the clay by the ancient potters as a tempering agent . . A small beaker was lying nearby. Beside the pots were three small stones with an evenly pol i shed sur f ace, probably designed to crush shell, a small heap of which accompanied the stones. One may believe this to have been the work place of an ancient pott er where he or she prepared the clay paste for the manufacture of earthenware pots. The 'grinder's place' near this complex comprised two slabs and small pieces of sandstone with traces of their use as grindstones (Fig. 21:7), four pieces of large animal ribs with marks of grinding, and several nearly finished bone tools including a knife made of an animal rib, a massive piercer and awls (Fig. 21:9-12). This 0.40.5 sq.m. accumulation also contained some ceramic fragments, among them the bottom part of a pointed-based pot embedded in the ground, which suggests its use as a container of water employed in the grinding process. The habitation site's borders west and north-west of House 2 and the shed were clearly defi ue d by shell accumulations on the ancient habitation surface. Other int eresting objects unearthed here included an aggregation of stones belon ging to a household structure or dwelling, open fireplaces and two pitsc The stone aggregation occupied several adjacent squares, forming a 10-12 m. long and 1-2 m. wide strip. The easternmost part of the strip visibly curved to the south. The granite stones, 25-35 cm. in diameter, overlapped one another at some places. In the area of this stone aggregation were located a fireplace (III) and a pit (3); another pit (4) was found a little north of the aggregation (Fig. 15). Pit 3 was round in shape, 0.6 m. wide and 0.4 m. deep. It was covered with a layer of shell, and its interior revealed a large broken pot decorated with vertical columns of incision. Pit 4 was elongated in shape and somewhat larger in size (0.2x0.8 m.). Its dark fill contained sherds and animal bones as well as a grain rubber. Among the ceramic fragments were sherds of a plain pot and pieces decorated with comb and fingertip impressions.

30

Hearth III was a rounded hollow, 0.4 m. wide surrounded by small stones. It was filled with ash, charcoal pieces, etc.

and 0.3 m. burnt stone,

deep, small

The area of stone accumulation between the pits and Hearth III in the habitation site's western part yielded many interesting finds: more than ten pots with comb decoration, one intact mattock-hammer and three pieces of similar tools, two bone adzes, a piece of an antler pick, two · fragments of clay artifacts (probably statuettes), a fish figurine fashioned from soft rock, a stone pestle, a disc, a grinding stone, missile stones, and a large number of bone and small flint tools including an awl, burnishers and half of some elongated object with bulging ends and a waist in the middle (Fig. 22). The eastern

part

of the habitation

site

and ritual

horse

burial

(Fig.

6)

The eastern part of the habitation site, the daybreak and sunrise side, apparently played a very important role in the life of its people, although no dwellings have been found there. The main object of study i~ this sector was the ritual burial of three animal skulls, as well as Pit 8 and Hearth VI which were both associated with the burial complex. Southward of the pit and fireplace in the settlement's eastern part was located another large fireplace, VI I. All these features were covered by an unbroken layer of shell. The irregularly shaped 1-2 to 5-6 m. wide strip of shell spreads over the whole length of the settlement's eastern border for nearly 30 metres. Its southern end curves to the west and almost reaches the previously described shed, while its northern end is separated from DAC 1 by only a narrow margin. The accumulation is composed of tightly packed Unio and Palludino shells, has an uneven configuration, and varies f r om 5 to 20 cm. in depth. Ash lenses were encountered both inside and beneath the shell accumulation. Here and there came to light stones 30-35 cm. in size, broken pots, whole and broken tools, a blade, etc. The ritual a nimal buria l contained a horse skull and the remains of the foreparts of two dogs (F ig. 23). The ho r se skull lay with its frontal bone turned .up and i ts front part pointing to the north-east. On the skull's western side lay t he bones of the ho r se's shank, pastern and hoof arranged in anatomical or der.* Partly overlapp i ng these bones was a dog skull. By V.I. Bibikova' s estimate, the horse skull belonged to a 78 year old stallion. The dogs' skeletons were ·positioned a little sideways and 5-7 cm. below it . · One or the dog skulls was turned to the west, the other to the so ut h-east. A chain of anatomically arranged vertebrae stretched in a bent line from the first dog' s skull westward. * Editor's note: This description can be supplemented by the observations of the palaeo-zoologist V.I. Bibikova who writes: ''Next to the skull there lay in anatomical orde~ the metacarpal and phalanges I, II and III of the left leg of qne individual. Although the process of epiphyseal fusion on all of these bones was already complete, some friability of t he external surface of the metacarpal in the epiphyseal suture indic a tes a somewhat younger age for the animal compared with that of the stallion to whom the skull belonged. In other words, two different a nimals were offered in the sacrifice." For fuller discussion and bibliography on horse sacrifices see Mallory 1981.

31

Fig . 23 Cult burial of horse skull (1) and second (2) clearing

with fore-limbs of feature .

32

,

an d t wo dogs . First

........~~:,:•.... .:.: ,·:·':" ,.·:,·." :1 , .:, ~

\

:: '

.

I

1

/2

'

•

.._, 3

.5

:-1

I

.___,

4 Fig.

24 Artifacts vessels; of clay.

of animal artifacts;

from neighbourhood 3-4 - bone and flint

burial: cult 5-7 - plastic

7

1-2 objects

The bones of the other dog's forelegs were well preserved and also lay in anatomical order. The whole accumulation of bones occupied a compact area measuring 0.4xl.O m. in the base of the chernozem layer at a depth of 0.9-1.0 m. The shape of the burial pit could not be determined. A large hearth (VI) and a pit (8) were examined on surface of the habitation beside the animal burial.

the

ancient

Hearth VI was a large egg-shaped pit with a patelliform profile, 1.4 m. in cross section and 0.35 m. in depth. Its upper part was filled with shells, ash and charcoal specks. On the bottom . lay two small stones and large pieces of pottery. Pit 8, egg-shaped, c.1 m. across and up to 0.3 m. deep, was located on the northern side of the hearth. Lying on the pit's bottom were several broken pots and bones of a horse. Between Hearth VI and the pit there was a chain of several stones of up to 35 cm. across; four more stones lay in a row slightly to the west of the fireplace. Both lines of stones ran perpendicular to each other. An i.ntact horse skull was the only occurrence of this kind in the Dereivka habitation site, and the remains of two dog skeletons in its . company strongly suggest some ritual behaviour connected with an ancient cult. The ritual purpose of the whole complex (buried animal skulls, Hearth VI, Pit 8 and rows of stones) is further evidenced by three objects of plastic art recovered from among the stones in the pit, namely a splendid figurine of a boar, a piece of an obviously identical artifact (Fig. 24:6,7), two fragments of statuettes (Fig. 24:5) and two 33

/ -./\..-'( '11

I

I I \ I I I \ \

'

\

I

\

'

1 2

I

'

I

4

3

("''''''''',,

'•,

t

,s,

HG

"· ~~: ...,~} , .....

·-~,,,,,,,, ~\\\\\\\\

-f '

j

3

5 Fig.

25 Vessels

~

R from Hearth VII and its

34

environs.

bridle cheekpieces fashioned from antler. Unearthed in the neighbourhood of this ritual site were five broken pots, a retoucher and a broken beaker adorned with cord decoration. Pot remains were also found in Pit 8 and Hearth VI; three of the pots were singularly ornamented by means of small decorative groups of comb imprints or with similar groups supplementing the customary ornamental row (Fig. 24:1,2). A few broken pots and large pot fragments were found in the shell accumulation area south of Hearth VI, among them pots with comb and pinched ornament. Another large hearth (VII) was found and inspected near the ritual animal burial and its associated objects. The fireplace was 1.8 m. long and 0.8 m. deep, and filled with shell and ash mixed with animal bones and sherds. Some small stones were also revealed there. On the southern side of the hearth was a small 0.4 m. wide pit, probably related to the general design of the hearth. Two other similar pits filled with ash were located farther south of Hearth VII. It was possible to reconstruct 19 pots from the large amount of fragments collected in the shell heap in the squares adjoining Hearth VII. Here and there clusters of sherds belonging to several pots lay in what seemed to be small hollows under the shell layer. One such cluster, for example, included the remains of six pots. Together with ceramic objects, the settlement's south-eastern part yielded three mattocks or hammers, a bridle cheekpiece, four bone adzes (two whole and two in pieces), a granite disc, a missile stone, about ten sinkers grooved around the middle, flint knives and small bone artifacts such as awls, spatulae, piercers, an antler polisher, etc. (Fig. 18:7-12; Fig. 19:4,5; Fig. 25:1-6). X

X

X

Judging by the composition of the finds, the settlement site near the village of Dereivka is a cultural and historical entity of paramount importance for the understanding of the Sredny Stog culture of the Copper Age in the southern region of the European USSR. This complex stands out among other monuments of this culture as the richest, the purest culturally, and the best explored. The dwellings and other cultural and domestic features of the habitation site constitute a single cultural and household unit. The settlement was laid out as a large, nearly rectangular courtyard surrounded by various structures. In the southern and northern parts of the settlement were located the slightly sunken dwellings Houses 1 and 2, DAC 1 and a surface structure that probably served as a shed (DAC 2). In the eastern part was a ritual site and a fireplace. The settlement's entrance was probably on its north-western side, i.e. on the side of the Omelnik river valley. The settlement was undoubtedly enclosed by a fence whose configuration is clearly marked by the area of shell accumulation. In the ~ettlement's central part, which probably served as a livestock pen, no structures were discovered, and the finds were limited to individual small accumulations of ceramic pieces and a few antler and stone tools. The place was almost completely devoid of shell and animal bones, so abundant in the habitation site's periphery.

35

As regards the layout of household objects around the empty yard, the Dereivka habitation site has a remote likeness to the arrangement of the Tripolye culture settlements in the Right-Bank Ukraine, but is smaller in size. On the other hand, the Tripolye settlements were not of nearly rectangular configuration but usually had a round form. Certainly, our habitation site differs from the Tripolye ones in both the nature of the structures and the quite dissimilar composition of material culture. The Dereivka habitation site is the first of the preYamnaya monuments of this type in the Dnieper area explored with such completeness. It has yielded ample material evidence, a total of c.23,000 finds. Despite the habitation site's prolific cultural layer attesting to its comparatively long occupation, it is impossible to discriminate typologically between the materials of different stratigraphic horizons. This becomes apparent from our study of the ceramics. For instance, there was practically no essential difference in the decorative elements and motifs of the ceramic remains in the shell layer and the horizons above it. The same was true of the ceramics from the upper (0.2-0.8 m.} and lower (0.8-1.2 m.) horizons of the shell-free sectors (Telegin 1973, fig. 29). Worthy of note is only a slight increase in the percentage of U-shaped and cord ornaments at the expense of comb decoration in the settlement's later period. There was also a certain reduction in the vertical column and diagonal stripe motifs against an increase in decoration by means of horizontal rows. As has been said above, variously decorated pots and bowls were rather uniformly distributed over all the sectors of the habitation site, including Houses 1 and 2, the closed complexes of the Pit 2 type, in the vicinity of all the hearths, etc. It can only be added that House 1 contained no sherds with comb impressions. The uniform character of the Dereivka sett l ement's material culture can be further substantiated by the fragments of one and the same vessel scattered over a considerab l e area. For instance, pieces of one pot decorated with rows of U-shaped imprints were f ound between Hearths VI and VII in the south-eastern part of the settle rrent, in the area of the shed and in House 2. In ~11 those places the fragments occurred at nearly the same depth (0.7 -1 .0 m.) of the cul t ural layer. Pieces of another pot with a zigzag de oration were unea rt hed in Houses 1 and 2 and also in Pit 4. Pot frag ents from House 2 and the shed were often selected to match sherds fro ~ House 1 in the s quares of the habitation site's north-eastern part. The results of our ana lysis underline the cultural-chronological integrity and pureness of the entire complex of t he finds yielded by the habitation site, which is ver y -important to the understanding of the history of the Eneolithic population in t he Dnieper area. The significance of this cultura l and historical phenomenon becomes still more apparent when we consider the cemetery of the same period situated nearby. The materials of th i s cemetery will be discussed in the next chapter.

36

II.

THE ENEOLITHICCEMETERY

Alread y dur i ng the 1959 exploration an interment was discovered in t he eroded Eneolithic cemetery. Then in 1960-1961 and in 1965 thirteen more skele t ons were unearthed and examined (Fig. 26). The buri a l s in t he Eneoli t hic cemetery were usually single, flat, i.e . bar row l ess, and well - sca tt er ed over an area of 400 sq.m. They were disc overed at a dep t h of 0.5 to 1.0 m. Paired burials were found only in two cases (Nos. 6 and 7, and Nos. 11 and 12). The shape and contours of t he buri a l pit s could not be t raced, and most of the skeletons were poorl y pre ser ve d . Of t he s e onl y fo ur (Nos . 5 ,8, 10,11) l ay i n a cl os e to anat omic a l pos iti on. The pos t ure of t he dead, where it cou l d be determined, was supin e, l e gs f l exed, hands on t he pel vi s. In one cas e only (No. 11) the deceased was in what app ear e d t o be a half-sitting position . Orientati on varie d fr om south-east t o e a st , north t o northeast. Three skelet ons (Nos. 10-12) revealed trace s of och r e , and three burials (Nos . 1,4 , 11) were accompanied by grave good s. In t he ce metery area there was foun d an adze or mattock tip (Fig . 27 :7) comparable with . similar finds from the habitation site. The dece a sed were chiefly adults, only three skeletons of children (Nos. 6 , 7 , 12) an d one of an a dolescent (No. 9) being found. The layout of the Dereivka cemetery is typical of the necropoleis of that culture. It is characterised in the first place by the distribution of the burials over a large area at a distance of 2-3 m. and even more from one another. There also occur isolated groups of several (2-5) burials spaced up to 10-15 m. apart. This is similar to other cemeteries of this culture as, for instance , at Igren (Telegin and Filenko 1982) and Alexandria (Telegin 1973 , fig. 6). It should be noted in this respect that the Sredny Stag cemeteries strongly differ from the preceding Neolithic burials which were distinguished by group pit graves or collective tombs containing sometimes several dozen individuals (Nikolskoye, Mariupol and others). All this may be proof of considerable changes that took place in the social organisation and ritual during the transition from the .Neolithic to the Copper Age. The possibility cannot be excluded that there began to emerge in the Sredny Stag culture the rite of raising small 2-3 m. high mounds over pit graves, which res ulted in the wide spacing of the burials. As to the group concentration of graves , t his peculiarity of the Dereivka cemetery may be associate d with allocating pl a ces in the cemetery to particular groups of kins me n, large fa milies , etc . To provide a better vie w of the types of gra ves an d their state of preservation , we descri be belo w each of t he gr a ve s an d the acc ompanyi ng grave goods . No. 1. Partly eroded adul t bur ia l , cont r acted sup i ne pos iti on , hea d pointed t owar d the nor t h- eas t , arms sl i ghtl y bent a t t he e lbows, hand s on pelvis . Legs well f lex ed and falle n t o t he le f t. Skul l sha r pl y t ur ned to t he rig ht , s pi na l c ol umn bent i n t he sa me dir ec t ion. A small pil e of Unio shells in t he area of t he knees . Nea r t he skull wer e f ound th re e copper beads fashi oned fr om wire of almost circ ul ar sec t ion (Fi g. 27:6). The s pectral analysis of the metal was performe d at a l abora t ory of t he UkrSSR Acade my of Sciences ( see Table 1).

37

~ Bet I

I

I

I

e,f10

/a

l.,-)

(X)

I

-►

1

-~1~5

.... . -1"'

2m

I

9

I

•

i!BJ1

~

3

-~

.,,,

€ 11 12;~f'\•'-

0

0

~~ ~ ~ ;.:

2

I

~

~

~1

Fig.

I

~8

..

~

4,..

I

.l4

i-sa

~~~ 6.7

....

\❖.

\· /. .

26 Plan of burials

in Dereivka's

Eneolithic

cemetery.

I

No. 2. Remains of an adult burial, supine position, legs flexed upward, north-eastern orientation. The preserved parts of the skeleton included only skull fragments, vertebrae and bits of leg bones. The burial was partly overlain by a layer of rough granite stones up to 30 cm. in cross section. No. 3. in situ.

A single

broken skull

of an

adult,

probably

not

lying

No. 4. Adult burial with northerly orientation. Skeletal remains include d portions of the pelvis and of limb bones. Legs were flexed and fallen to the left. Near the pelvis stood a small crushed bowl of red clay (Fig. 27:8) dated to Tripolye B-2. No. 5. Burial of a mature female (according to G.P. Zinevich), supine position, legs flexed and fallen to the right, northerly orientation. Arms bent at the elbows, hands on pelvis (Fig. 27:2).

Table 1: Description

Cu

Bead Bead

Results of spectral cemetery

analysis

of beads from Dereivka

Eneolithic

Si

Al

Mg

Ca

Fe

Mn

Ni

Pb

Ag

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

base

.04

.003

.02

.001

.006

.001

base

.1

.02

.04

.006

.006

Nos. 6- 7. Paired child the dead presumably .pointed

.003 .1

.06

.003

Note

oxides removed .001 oxides not removed

burial badly damaged by mole holes. toward the east.

Heads of

No. 8. Remains of an aged female, supine position, legs flexed upward, hands on pelvis, eastern orientation (Fig. 27:3). Only some fragments of skull preserved. No. Ba. Very poorly preserved burial of an adolescent. Uncovered in a trench in the cemetery's eastern end. Supine position, legs flexed and fallen to the left, north-eastern orientation. No. 9. Adolescent position, south-western

burial, supine position, orientation (Fig. 27:5).

legs

in

a

rhomboid

No. 10. Adult burial, supine position, l~gs flexed, north-eastern orientation, hands on pelvis (Fig. 28:1). Traces of ochre on bones. Nos. 11-12. Paired burial (Fig. 27:1; Fig. 28:2) of adult (11) and child (12). Adult in a half-sitting position, legs flexed, hands placed near abdomen. Near the left half of the pelvis lay a mattock or hammer, with a well polished surface (Fig. 27:9). Its preserved butt has a hole for · the handle. The tool is analogous to many artifacts of this kind unearthed in the habitation site.

39

N'

@

@ ICD

omcm

C

a::D

.__,_.__,6

\

'\I ' I

I

I

Fig.

27 Dereivka's Eneolithic cemetery: 1-5 - burials; 6 - copper beads in company with burial No. l; 7 - bone adze found in cemetery area; 8 - Tripolye type red clay bowl accompanying burial No. 4; 9 - piece of mattock or hammer of antler ·buried together with burials Nos. 11 and 12.

40

Fig . 28 Dereivka's

Eneolithic

cemetery : burials

41

10,11,12.

Child burial No. 12 was in a worse state of preservation No. 11. Supine position, legs well flexed, skull lying on its temple (Fig. 28:3), traces of red ochre on bones.

than left

As regards the burial ritual and pattern of grave location, the small Dereivka cemetery fully compares with this kind of site known elsewhere in the Ukraine. Similar cemeteries were unearthed by the author, for example, on the Igren peninsula near Dnepropetrovsk (Telegin and · Filenko 1982) and in the Alexandria settlement on the River Oskol (Telegin 1973:108-113). In contrast with the Dereivka cemetery's location outside the habitation site, the Alexandria cemetery was just inside the Eneolithic settlement. Interestingly, both Igren 8 and the Dereivka cemeteries yielded Tripolye ware made of red clay: among Igren's finds were a small pot and a bowl dated to Tripolye B-2 - C-1 (Telegin 1970, fig. 3; Telegin and Filenko 1982, fig. 1:1). All these cemeteries, as well as the second (Eneolithic) Dereivka necropolis, are characterised by single burials in a contracted supine position with no definite orientation and most of the deceased staineq with red ochre. With respect to the burial ritual and layout of graves, the Sredny Stog cemeteries are much the same as those of the Khvalynsk culture in the Volga region where contracted supine burials were prevalent and individual cases of sitting and half-sitting burials were recorded (Vasilyev 1980). Anthropological has I.D.

analysis

Anthropological material from the Sredny Stog culture's been studied by T.S. Surnina (1963), G.P. Zinevich Potekhina (1983).

cemeteries (1967) and

G.P. Zinevich took measurements of two female skulls from burials Nos. 5 and 8 (Table 2) of the Dereivka cemetery. The skulls are dolichocranic, have large absolute values, a broad forehead and moderately developed glabella. The face is low, broad (No. 5) and _of . medium height (No. 8), mezognathous in both skulls, and the fossa canina is deep . The facial profile of skeleton 5 is well pronounced in the region of the naso-malar angle and moderately expressed in the region of the zygomaxillar angle. Orbits are low. the nose is of medium breadth (No. 8) and markedly protruding (No. 5). The mandible is of medium ·size, moderately a low broad ramus and strongly projecting chin.

broad,

rather

high,

with

There is great similarity between the measurements of the Dereivka skulls and those from other Sredny Stog cemeteries, such as Alexandria (Surnina 1963) and Igren (Potekhina 1983). T.S. Surnina and I.D. Potekhina believe the Sredny Stog skulls in general to possess the traits of the large Europoid race. This series is characterise d by a massive skull, broad and strongly profiled dolichocranic face and projecting nose. I.D. Potekhina links the genesis of the Sredny Stog anthropological type with the tribes of the Dnieper-Donets culture represented in the Ukraine by the Mariupol-type cemeteries.

42

Howe ver , t he Sredny Stog skulls have smaller facial breadth and are les s massive t han skulls from the Dnieper-Donets region, which can be the resu lt of bot h temporal change and the influence of other more gracile Medite rranean anthropological types. While differing from the Dnieper - Donets population, the Sredny Stog people on the whole are an t hrop olog i call y cl oser to t he tribes of the Yarnnaya culture (Surnina 1963).

Tab le 2 : In di vidual measurements of female skulls Nos. 5 and 8 from the Derei vka Eneolit hic cemeter y (measurements in mm.) No. of buri a l Characteristics 1 8

17 20 5 9 10

11 12 7

16 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 FS OS 32

8: 1

17:1 17:8 20: 1 20: 8 9:8 9: 10 29: 26 FS: 29 30:27 31:28 OS:31

Greatest length from gla bella Greatest parietal brea dth Height of skull fro m basion ( ba- b) Height of skull from pori on (po-b) Length of cranial base Least breadth of forehead Gr eates t breadth of forehead Bi - auricular breadth Breadth of occ i put Length of foramen magnum Breadth of foramen magnum Hor i zontal circumference Transverse arch Sagittal arch Frontal arch Par i etal arch Occipital arch Fronta l cho r d Parietal chord Occipital chord Frontal convexity height Occipital convexity height Frontal angle from nasion (n-m) Cranial shape (norma verticalis ) Glabella (1-6 after Martin) Arcus supraor bitalis length (1-3 ) Processus mastoi de us ( 1-3 ) Protruberantia occi pitalis exter na (0 -5 ) Cranial index Height-lengt h i ndex I (from bas ion) Height-breadt h i ndex I (from basion) Height-lengt h i ndex I I (from porion) Height~brea dt h i ndex I I ( f rom porion) Transverse fr on t opa riet al index Frontal index Frontal convexity in dex Frontal convexity height index Parietal convexity in dex Occipital convexity index Occipital convexity height index

43

5

8

189 140 141 121 106 102 124 124

195 135 153 124 120 98 117 118 111

110

36 32 530 320 378 127 128 124

540 383 128 114

110

116 106 27 27 90 ellipt 3 2 3 2

74. 1 74.6 100.7 64.0 86.4 72. 9 82. 3 86.6 24.6 90.6 85 .5 25.5

25 .

ellipt. 2 2 2 1

69 . 2 78. 5 113 . 3

63 .6 91.9 72.9 83 .8 89.1

21. 9

40

Facial length Upper facial breadth 45 Bi-zygomatic breadth 46 Middle facial breadth 47 Total facial height Upper facial height 48 chord (mf-mf) so Maxilla-frontal 51 Orbital breadth (from maxillofrontale) Sla Orbital breadth (from dacryon) Orbital height 52 54 Nasal breadth 55 Nasal height Lower edge of apertura piriformis Spina nasalis anterior (after Broca; 1-5) Depth of fossa canina Palatal length 62 63 Palatal breadth bi-orbital breadth 43(1) Internal Zygomaxillar chord (zm'-zm') DC Dacryal chord DS Dacryal subtense SC Simotical chord ss Simotical subtense 72 Total facial angle 73 Midfacial angle 74 Alveolar angle 75 Angle of nasal profile with horizontal 75(1) Angle of nasal profile with facial profile Naso-malar angle (fmo-n-fmo) Zygomaxillar angle (zm'-ss-zm') 47:45 Total facial index 48:45 Upper facial index 48:17 Vertical facio-cranial index 52:51 Orbital index I (from maxillofrontale) 52:Sla Orbital index II (from dacryon) 54:55 Nasal index 63:62 Palatal index DS:DC Dacryal index SS:SC Simotical index 40:5 Index of pragmatism 45:8 Transverse facio-cranial index 65 Bicondylar breadth 66 Bigonial (angular) breadth 67 Distance between foramina mentalia 68 Mandibular projective length from gonia 68(1) Mandibular projective length from condyluses 69 Chin height 69(1) Height of mandibular body 69(3) Thickness of mandibular body Height of mandibular ramus 70 Least breadth of mandibular ramus 71a angle 79 Mandibular ramus inclination Chin angle (inf-po) 43

44

103 113 135 95 110

63 21 · 40 39 30 26 43

Anthr. 3 4

4 32 103 92 22 12 9.0 4.0 81 88 85 49 32 136 130 81.5 46.7

44.7 75.0 76.9 60.5 65.3 54.6 44.0 97.2 96.4 128 94 45 76 102 36

109

68

31 24 51 •p

•

2

4.5 4.5

44.4 47.1

90.8 98 82

31 13

56 36 123 77

31

III.

THE MATERIALCULTUREOF THE SETTLEMENT ANDCEMETERY

As already indicated, a wealth of finds were collected from the Copper Age settlement of Dereivka: in the neighbourhood of the dwellings and hearths, in household pits and in the whole of the occupation layer, especially in the shell accumulations. The finds included pottery, artifacts of flint, bone and antler, plastic objects and many faunal · remains - a total of 12,000 items, not counting animal bones. Particularly noteworthy is the exceptional typological uniformity and purity of the complex. This is especially true of its ceramics which are completely devoid of imports from other neighbouring contemporary cultures. Finds in the Eneolithic cemetery's burials were infrequent but among the m were such interesting and important artifacts as copper beads and a Tripolye bowl which nicely supplement the material culture of the settlement. Ceramics The Dereivka habitation site yielded 192 vessels comprising 26 whole or nearly intact (restored) and 166 vessels whose shape could be graphically reconstructed in large measure. In addition, the complex contained 9479 sherds from other vessels. The whole of the settlement's pottery was coil built. Ringed scratches near the bottom show that the process of pot manufacture began with forming the pointed base which was then inserted for convenience into an annular support of some kind. The ceramics were well-fired, although the core of fractured sherds displays a dark colour. The vessels have a greyish or yellowish well-burnished surface with traces of combing visible in some places, particularly on the inside. As regards the basic pottery shape, the Dereivka complex contains 168 pots and 9343 pot fragments, 9 beakers and 48 fragments of beakers, 8 bowls and 88 bowl sherds, and a number of miniature vessels. As already mentioned, the Dereivka cemetery yielded one Tripolye bowl fashioned from red clay. The pots range in size from 18-20 to 35-40 cm. high. They are rather uniform in shape but allow of certain variations. Their common feature is a pointed base and high neck. The neck either gradually or more or less sharply resolves itself into a shoulder (Fig. 29:1,3,4; Fig. 30:1-3). The tip is mostly rounded but may occasionally be flat. In profile, the rim may be straight (36.5%), slightly everted (37.5%), or curved inwards (26.0%). The straight and inward curved rims sometimes converge on the middle of the pot's top, and in a few cases their edge is inverted (Fig. 30:4). The pots' body is globular, being widest in the upper third from where the walls taper down towards the pointed base (Fig. 29:1,3). The complex also contains two or three bases from small flat-based pots. Ascribed to the category of beakers are small 12-13 cm. high vesiels with an 8-9 cm. wide neck. They are often similar in shape to pots but have a comparatively wide neck whose diameter falls only a

45

CIII

Fig. 29 Basic forms of ceramics: (7,8) and miniature vessel

pots (1,3,4); (6).

46

beake rs

(2,5) ;

bowls

J

2

rrr~ :'.,.

·,·:· ·:·\:T

. . .. .

,'

.·

.

6

Fig.

30 Types of pot s (1-4)

and bowls (5,6).

little short of their widest section (Fig. 10:2,3; Fig. 19:3; Fig. 29:2,5). The transition from belly to neck is usually not conspicuous but there are specimens which show a rather sharp turn at the base of the neck. The overwhelming majority of the beakers are decorated. The bowls are either conical and flat-bas e d or s pherical with a rounded or sligh t ly . flattenec base (Fig. 29:7,~ 9 Fig. 30:5,6). The flatb?sed bowls have a flat l i p, while the sphe r ical bowls' rims are frequently rounded. Two of tne bowls have inve rt ed r i ms. Judging by the rim shape, one may assume the number of fla t -based and spherical bowls to be nearly the same. The bowls are poor in de c oration: from 8 intact bowls only one was ornamented, and from 88 bowl sherds decoration was present on 35 rim fragments and 33 body fragments. The variously sized an d shaped miniature vessels include a small bowl with stabbed decoratio n on the bottom and body (Fig. 10:1), a beaker several centimetres high and a pot of similar size, and a miniature cone - shaped vessel without ornamentation (Fig. 21:6; Fig. 29:6). More than 40 per cent of the total number of pots, beakers and bowls were decorated in various ways: that on the pots and beakers usually covers only the neck and shoulders, while the bowls are more often decorated on the inside and under the outside edge of the rim. Pots with pit - comb patterns extending from rim to base are rather exceptional. In very rare cases the pot's rim bore stabbed decoration or had a slightly f l uted edge.

47

5 Fig.

31 Vessels

6 with comb stamping

48

7 (1-5)

and incision

(6 , 7) .

Fig.

32 Po tery with comb deco ra ion.

49

\I I

1111111

111'

I

,,

---"'-

,' {

~.

Fig.

33 Vessels · ornamented

50

with incision.

Nine major decorative elements occur (Table 3), the most frequent of them being vertical or oblique fine-toothed comb impressions with either sharp or faint dents (Figs. 9,31,32). Large teeth impressions show only in ornaments consisting of horizontally spaced comb patterns. Little different from the comb impressions in shape and general design are the incisions carried out with the edge of a notchless Unio shell (Fig. 29:4,5; Fig. 33; Fig. 34:1-6). Less frequent is a peculiar design impressed by a U-shaped stamp (Fig. 17:4; Fig. 35:1-3; Fig. 36:1-6); sometimes a too slight pressure on this stamp left angle-bracket marks on the vessel's surface. As in the case of comb impressions, the convex part of the "U's" on the vessel surface is usually turned on its side. Closely resembling the U-shaped pattern is the rectangular design (Fig. 17:1; Fig. 37:2). Cord and caterpillar (braided cord) decoration is a feature of the Dereivka complex. The ordinary (twisted) cord is used to make 2-5 mm. thick impressions (Fig. 21:1; Fig. 35:6,9; Fig. 36:8-10; Fig. 38), frequently in the shape of small crescents or knots. Some of the habitation site's pottery displays linear ornament of thinly cut threads or thicker smoothed lines (Fig. 17:2; Fig. 25:2). A small number of pots and bowls are decorated with irregularly shaped shallow stabbed impressions and pits. The stabs are superficial and never protrude through the sherd's opposite surface. In addition, a small percentage of pots are decorated with incisions drawn by a largetoothea comb around the pot's neck, channelling, fingertip impressions, pinched marks and bosses. Combed incisions ru n ver tically or, less frequently, diagonal l y and in a few cases i n diverse directions (Fig. 34:10). Channels usually consist of uneven projecting lines which, like comb impressions, cover the neck in vertical or diagonal rows (Fig. 35:10). Finger-pinched marks are shallow with well-defined nail impressions (Fig. 13:1,2; Fig. 36:7). Fingertip decoration is round in shape, of various sizes and located on the pot's exterior or interior surface (Fig. 16:6; Fig. 34:8; Fig. 36:11). In the latter case a bulge appea r s on t he pot's exterior (Fig. 34:9; Fig. 36:5). The ornamental motifs of the Dere i vka ce r ami cs are quite var i ed (see Table 3). More often than not they . ar e horizontal rows of vertically or obliquely arranged patterns (Fig. 12:3; Fig. 13:5; Fig. 25:6; Fig. 38:1), vertical columns and diagonal stripes (Fig. 8:1; Fig. 16:3; Fig. 17:1; Fig. 32:3), zigzag impressions (Fig. 22:1; Fig. 25:2; Fig. 31:5,6; Figo 32:4), crosslike and oblique-anged designs (Fig. 8:2; Fig. 25:3; Fig. 35:8), etc. Apart from purely decorative elements, the Dereivka pottery sometimes carries separate groups of characters which, in contrast to ordinary designs, are non-recurrent. The ornamental groups are usually made by means of incision and comb stamping and are found both among conventional patterns (Fig. 34:7) and on the surface of undecorated pots (Fig. 24:2; Fig. 29:7; Fig. 33:6). As a rule, each vessel is adorned with one motif impressed by one stamp, but there are specimens with two and even three elements and several motifs. Quite frequent is a combination of cord and comb elements in one and the same design (Fig. 11:3; Fig. 12:1; Fig. 38:3). Ten · vessels have intricate patterns comprising not less than three motifs and several elements.

51

Table

3: Decorative

techniques

and motifs

On whole, Motifs

Horizontal rows

"Dashed" lines

Decorative techniques Comb, incision (pits)

22

U-shaped, twotoothed stamp

10

Cord

2

Caterpillar

1

Pits,

1

stabs

7

restored

25

10

7

2

1

4

Channelling

1

Fingernail

dents

Lines

1

Without

decoration

Total %

6

1

2

2

2

3

2 1

pattern

Geometrical figures

5

1

Bulges

Pit-comb

2

Oblique cross, angle figures

2

2

marks

restored

and reconstructed

Zigzag Columns, Small Large diagonal stripes

Vertical comb imprints on ri ms

Pinched

on whole,

1

2

6

10

5

46 23 . 7

15

41

·7. 7

21.1

52

10

5. 2

3.0

5. 2

5

2. 6

and reconstructed

vessels

from the Dereivka

vessels

habitation

site

On fragments

Composite and mixed motifs

Sepa- Withrate out groups decoratiof chara- ion cters

6

7

Total Ves- % sels

Pots

Beakers

Bowls

Total

%

86

44.3

2194

2

11

2207

23.3

12

6.2

417

1

5

423

4.5

17

8.8

130

2

132

1.4

1

0.5

27

1

28

0.3

12

6.2

181

15

198

2.1

2

1.0

40

40

0.4

1

0.5

24

24

0.3

6

3.1

13

13

0.1

2

1.0

91

92

1.0

1

0.5

13

13

0.1

5

2.6

34

34

0.4

5

2.6

167

167

1.8

44

44

22.7

6012

43

53

6018

64.3

194

9343

48

88

9479

2

1

1

10

7

44

5.2

3.6

22.7

2

1

100

100

53

4

Fig.

34 Ceramics ornamented with incision (8), bosses (9 ) and streaks (10).

54

(1-7),

finger t ip

impress ions

\

I , I /

\

10

12 Fig.

35 Vessels decorated with U-shaped (1,5), incised (3,4,8,11), cord (6 ,9 ) and comb (7) impressions, and pits (12).

55

(2), stabbed fluting ( 10)

Fig . 36 Ceramics decorated with U-shaped (1-6) , pinched impressions, and fi ngertip impressions (11).

56

(7) , cor d (8 - 10)

Fig. 37 Ceramics with single (1,3,4) and double rectangular stamping (2), twisted cord (7,8) (9) decoration.

57

(4,5) s abbing, and braided cord

1

2

3

Fig.

38 Corded vessels

58

from Dereivka .

'

.

,f •

''

'

I./

,

.,

t • ·• ~

.' r,

'ft

t·

t

Fig.

39 Ceramics with pit

59

ornamentation

.

An interesting feature of the Dereivka ceramics is the presence of pottery (Spots, 167 fragments) with pit-comb decoration (Fig. 35:12; Fig. 39). These do not differ from the previously described pots in either fabric or colour or methods of surface finish and firing. The pit-comb decorated pots are of medium size, pointed-based, with gently everted rims. They are decorated over their entire body with dense unbroken patterns of large and small predominantly round deep pits and horizontal rows of incision or comb stamping. Under the rim of one pot is a row of deep cylindrical pits. A great many pots have two or three rows of similar pits along the neck, impressed from the inside and bulging from the outer surface. The rims are frequently incised or fluted. Judging by rim sherds, five or six pots had vertical or diagonal rows of widely spaced ornament, probably with the intervening areas devoid of decoration. From the point of view of their motifs and elements, the pots ornamented with widely spaced pits come very close to the conventional Dereivka pottery adorned with stabs and pits. On the whole, the pottery of the Dereivka settlement most closely compares with material from other Eneolithic monuments of the Dnieper and more eastern regions in the Dnieper-Don interfluve, which we ascribe to the Sredny Stog culture. Among those monuments we can cite the habitation sites near Voloshkoe above the Dnieper rapids (Strilchaya Skela), Alexandria on the River Oskol, Konstantinovka on the Lower Don, etc. All of these sites are characterised by pointed-based high-neck pottery made of shell-tempered clay and usually decorated with the same elements as the Dereivka ware. In origin, the Dereivka pottery is to a large extent the product of the developing traditions of the local East European Neolithic cultures. These traditions manifest themselves above all in the pointed-base shape of the vessels and in combed, stabbed, linear incised and other ornamental patterns. However, in Dereivka we see the emergence of new ornamental elements, such as twisted or braided cord impressions, bosses, channelling, etc. The appearance in Dereivka and its related settlements of cord ornament is an important feature of the Sredny Stog culture, and its occurrence here makes it the most ancient in Europe. This type of decoration developed in two stages, from twisted to braided cord. The former occurs already during the Voloshskoe -period (lb) of the Sredny Stog culture, while the latter becomes a feature in the second (Dereivka) period of that culture (Telegin 1973). Cord decoration makes up c.10% of all Dereivka's ceramic finds and is even 25% in Molyukhov Bugor. As has been said above, Dereivka boasts a great diversity of ornamental cord motifs, which underlines the significance of this decorative element. One can argue that it was from the Sredny Stog tribes that cord ornament began to spread over other neighbouring contemporaneous and later ceramic complexes, first of all the Tripolye and Lower Mikhailovka sites. However, corded vessels occur there quite rarely: Mikhailovka's lower stratum actually yielded only one globular amphora with this sort of decoration and a few fragments with twisted or braided cord impressions. Usually, vessels from Lower Mikhailovka barrows completely lacked ornamentation. The Cucuteni-Tripolye culture, like the SSC, first saw the appearance of twisted cord decoration, followed by braided cord. Twisted cord is known to have existed already on the kitchen-ware of the B-1

60

period, for instance in Kadievtsy and Kudrintsy (Movsha 1961), but the appearance of braided cord was not observed until the C phase in Darabany and Kolomiyschchina (Passek 1949a, fig. 63:1-4; fig. 77:6). At that time corded pottery was very rare there. In Romania corded decoration appears at approximately the same time, i.e. during the Cucuteni AB-2 period (Dumitrescu 1963). In the more recent Tripolye sites (C-2 period) corded ware became increasingly favoured, reaching at times a large proportion, as, for example, 16.5% in Chapaevka (Kruts 1977:49), and appearing in large amounts in Stena, Gorodska Yevminka, etc. However, since these settlements already existed in post-Sredny Stog times and were synchronous with Early Yamnaya sites, it is difficult to tell whose cord - Sredny Stag's or Early Yamnaya's - was inherited by Late Tripolye. Nevertheless, one thing is clear: in the post-Sredny Stog period, i.e. during the second quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c., there emerged an important Yamnaya-Tripolye nexus of cord ornamentation in the south-west USSR from whence it began to expand further west and east. In the early 3rd millennium b.c. cord decoration appears in the Funnel-Necked Ware (TRB) culture, and after some time it appears in the Globular Amphora culture. With the Tulip-shaped Ware this type of decoration first occurred in Poland during the so-called Wioreck period (c.3000 b.c.) where it was, however, an exception amongst other, more numerous decorative patterns (Wislanski 1970:240). About 2500 b.c. cord decoration appears also in the Globular Amphora culture, at first in a very limited quantity, but in larger numbers in this culture's second and third stages (Wislanski 1970:210). As already noted, on the Lower Danube and in the Balkans cord decoration appears on the ceramics of Cucuteni AB-2 (end of the 4th millennium b.c.) and is also present in the Cernavoda culture of the same period (Morinz and Roman 1973). It is interesting to note that according to E. Tudor's observation of the Cascioarele material, the first to appear in the Cernavoda I culture was twisted cord ornament (Ia phase), followed by braided cord in the lb phase (Tudor 1966). After that, corded ware . became rather widespread in the Balkan cultures of Karanovo VII, Ezero and others during the Early Bronze Age (Merpert 1965). In the territory of Slovakia cord decoration shows up in preBaden times on the ceramics of the so-called Boshatsk group. However, neither in the Balkans nor on the Danube was corded pottery so extensively used in the Early Bronze Age as in the Corded Ware cultures of Central Europe, the Baltic area and the central regions of Eastern Europe. As is well known, cord decoration also played a very important role in the ceramics of the Early Bronze Age in the steppe zone of Eastern Europe, where its Sredny Stag's origin is even more apparent than in the abovementioned cultures west of the Dnieper. It would be superfluous to enumerate all the steppe Eneolithic and Bronze Age cultures where corded ware emerged at this or that time. We should only mention a relatively late appearance of cord decoration on the Eneolithic pottery of the Volga region. It was completely absent, for instance, from the Khvalynsk cemetery complex, which convinced I.B. Vasilyev to synchronise it with the ·pre-cord period of the Sredny Stag culture. Cord was first observed on the Volga in the Alekseevskoe camp site complex of the late

61

2

5

I

6

3 Fig.

40 Flint knives (1,2), of stone (3,4).

4 spearheads

62

(5,7),

scraper

(6),

grinders

made

Eneolithic, from whence it spread widely over the Volga region only in the Late Yamnaya and Poltavka periods (Vasilyev 1980:47; 1981:48-49). To complete the analysis of the Dereivka ceramics, we may note with interest the presence here of other original decorative elements, such as channelling, vertical strokes along the rim, pinched fingernail impressions, etc. They are absent from the Neolithic ceramics of the Dnieper and more easterly regions, but occur on the pottery of the Right-Bank Ukraine, Forecarpathia and the Balkans. We may presume that it was from there that they penetrated into Dereivka's ceramic complex. Channelling, for instance, is widely represented in Gumelnita-Tripolye ceramics, where it survived until period B-1/B-2 and where pinched fingernail decoration also lasted a considerable time. It would perhaps be more difficult to trace the roots of the original ornament consisting of combed vertical strokes on the vessels' necks, which emerged simultaneously in Dereivka and Lower Mikhailovka. However, its occurrence there is infrequent in contrast to Tripolye where it was widely used on kitchen-ware from period B-1. Apparently, this pattern appeared in Tripolye somewhat earlier than in Dereivka, and was adopted . from Tripolye by the Sredny Stog and Lower Mikhailovka population. The analysis of the Dereivka settlement's ceramics is most important for determining the cultural affiliation of this site and its chronological position; this problem will be discussed further below. Artifacts

of stone

and flint

The settlement yielded 33 tools made of crystalline and sedimentary rock: granites, quartzites, sandstone and shale. Among the tools are those related to agriculture: six querns, frequently in pieces (Fig. 12:11), eleven grinders, five pestles (Fig. 40:3), three stone discs, etc. The querns are elongated stones with a well-smoothed concave surface, between 20 and 27 cm. in length. The grinders were flat stones with an even and also well-smoothed surface (Fig. 40:4). The stone discs were evidently designed for digging, and have the shape of flat oval slabs with pointed ends (Fig. 22:16). Among other finds are three grindstones for bone tool manufacture and four pecked hammers, all ball-shaped, 5-7.5 cm. in diameter, often with a starlike pocked surface (Fig. 22:5). Some of these balls may have been used as missile stones. One of the stones was irregularly shaped and had a 3 cm. wide, 1.5 cm. deep tapered hole in its surface, probably meant to hold the stem of a bow-drill. The habitation site yielded a great many flint artifacts. The flint was of very poor quality, and survived mainly as pieces of small nodules of probably moraine origin. The colour of the flint varies from white to brown-grey to completely black. The quality . of the white flint approaches that of quartzite; there are also . some articles made of quartzite. Only a few larger tools as, for example, knives and one scraper are manufactured from dark grey flint evidently of Donets origin. That flint was processed essentially on the settlement site itself is evidenced by the presence there of 12 cores, 63 core-like fragments, 142 smooth-edged knifelike flakes and 10 ribbed flakes, as well . as a great number (434) of debitage pieces. The cores are prismatic, of small size (up to 5 cm. long), rounded in cross section

63

6 '2

3 _.

L-

-

4

5

I

'

8

·,,,', 4·

·trl ... 1, 'l_ ..

L.LJ

10

I

. V 12

11

13

0

I

2

~

Fig.

41 Flint artifacts (14-17).

(1-9),

antler

64

hammers (10-13)

and bone

adzes

and with traces of small flake scars (Fig. 8:6; Fig. 41:1). The flakes are usually poorly facetted, and the majority (108) are of medium size (Fig. 8:4; Fig. 41:2); only a few are 10 cm. long and over 1 cm. wide (Fig. 14:4; Fig. 41:3). There are also some micro-flakes (33 items). The knives are fashioned from flakes; only two are large (10.5 and 12 cm. long: Fig. 40:1,2), the rest being of medium size. Shallow retouch has been applied to the knives' long edges, and some of the knives have a pointed tip (Fig. 8:5; Fig. 24:4; Fig. 41:4-6). Most of the 259 scrapers are made from flakes of various shapes and sizes; only 18 are made from blades and blade fragments (Fig. 12:8-10; Fig. 40:6). Of the flake scrapers, 142 are 2-4 cm. across and the remainder are smaller than this; the overwhelming majority have allround retouch, but a few have their working edge on only one of the flake's ends. The spearheads, javelinheads and arrowheads (14 objects) have shallow bifacial retouch. Twelve of them are of a sub-triangular form; the other two, somewhat larger than these (5 and 8 cm.), are subrhomboid (Fig. 40:5). Three of the sub-triangular heads are broad and thick, and the rest are narrow and thin (Fig. 22:11; Fig. 41:7-9). Most of these have a concave base; two are flat-based and one has a convex base. Apart from the finished heads there are seven half-finished pieces (Fig. 40:7). Ten points, 2.5-7 cm. in size and made from circularly retouched blades, were probably also used as arrowheads (Fig. 8:7). Among the other flint tools we may note borers (10 in number) fashioned from large thick blades or elongated flakes (Fig. 14:16). Their tips are extensively worn down and smoothed, probably because of their use in making holes in pot walls during repair. Artifacts

of bone and antler

Bone and antler processing evidently played a very important role in the life of the Dereivka po?ulation. This is demonstrated, above all, by the wide range of tools manufactured from these materials, among them hammers, mattocks, adzes and smaller artifacts - c.100 objects in all. As already mentioned, a fragment of a hammer or mattock butt and an adze were found in the cemetery (Fig. 27:7,9). The habitation site also yielded a collection of more than 100 red deer antler pieces. These finds are important for understanding the bone and antler processing technique. The antler was chopped off. basal section: 10-15 mm. deep which the antler was broken off. separate antler tines from the cutting a 1-1.5 cm. deep groove external part of the antler and note is the depth of the grooves, first somehow softened, probably made most likely not of flint but

from the animal's skull usually at the notches were made on all sides, after The same method was sometimes used to stem, but more often it was done by with some sharp tool around the hardest then breaking the tine off. Worthy of which suggests that the antler was at steamed, and then processed with tools of metal.

65

5 p·ig.

42 Antler

66

hammers.

A chopping or cutting tool was used to make a rough outline of the would-be antler axe, mattock, adze etc., and the final finish was accomplished by means of abrasive grinding. Bone was processed in a similar way. The Dereivka inhabitants knew how to make round holes in antler artifacts: they first removed the antler's hardest external layer by making notches on both sides of the intended hole and then bored or cut out the rather soft spongy core probably with a flint tool. The most impressive series of antler and bone tools are undoubtedly antler hammers and mattocks, and bone axe-adzes. Hammers and mattocks were fashioned from the massive basal part of antlers, frequently cut of f in one piece with the basal burr. They all have a round shafthole for fastening a 1.53 cm. thick hand le . The hammers (20 objects) differ from mattocks in having comparatively shorter proportions; their pointed edge on the side opposite the butt is very short and conical in form (Fig. 10:5-7; Fig. 18:6,7,9; Fig. 41:10,12; Fig. 42). Judging by their shape, antler hammers - like stone axe-hammers at a later ti me - wer e used as close range weapons. This is proved, for instance, by the fact that one of the hammers had been re-utilised after losing a piece from near the shafthole, by boring a new hole in the remaining part (Fig. 19:2; Fig. 42:1). Considering its uneven edges, it was unfit for any domestic use and could be intended solely as a combat weapon. It should be emphasised that in the large series of hammers only two (Fig. 11:7; Fig. 16:9) showed use-wear on their well-finished butts, which may suggest their domestic application. Some of the hammers, empty of the soft core near the antler tip, may have been used as sleeves to fit over inserted stone or flint axes (Fig. 10:4; Fig. 17:5; Fig. 22:4; Fig. 42:4,5). Most, however, seem to have been 'pure' combat weapons . The mattocks are eleven in number. They do not differ from hammers in manufacturing technology but are differently shaped, especially in the area of their working edge. This is elongated and normally flat and broad, or, conversely, very narrow, long, and pickaxe-like. These tools can be divided into two types which we may conveniently call mattockadzes (6 objects) and mattock-pickaxes (5 objects). The mattock-adzes have a broad flattened blade perpendicular to the line of the handle, and they are round when viewed from the top, tapered or slightly slanted in section (Fig. 17:7; Fig. 22:3). The blade's working surface is well smoothed, and the cutting edge has become polished in the process of digging or woodworking. · The mattock-pickaxes also have an elongated cutting edge, sometimes thick (Fig. 43:2), s ometi mes thin with a small pointed or slightly flattened end (Fig. 22:9 ; Fig~ 43:1,3). The whole working edge is well polished. Unfortunately, all the mattocks were in fragments. Their wear shows that they were mainly used as digging implements . Tools of the hammer and mattock type were numerous in the Eneolithic cultures, such as, for instance, the Tripolye, Gumelnita, Vinca or North Caucasian si tes (Serzhen Yurt), but no other settlement has ever yielded so large an ac cumulation of t hese tools . A great many hammerlike tools similar to the ba ttle hammers from Dereivka were f ound in the Late Tripolye settlements of Moldavia (Costeshti IV, Brynzeni III, Varvarovka-Kholm). V.I. Markevich (1981:179) is inclin ed to attribute their appearance to the influence of the TRB culture, although direct analogies can also be traced to the Sredny Stog culture.

67

'~1

-~

,i ·

11 •-:

l

~ ·

•· I i

\

l

i1

,l

-~

~

4

5

6

~

; 1;,11//JqJJ//JJ)

11

9

8

1--------1

Fig.

43 Artifacts

of antler

(1-3)

and bone (4-12) .

The adzes (14 objects) were manuf actured from split bones of large animals. They are flat tools, and well smoothed at the working edge which more often than not is asymmetrical in profile (Fig . 10: 11; Fig. 12:5; Fig. 22:8; Fig. 41:15). One of the adzes has a channelle d cu tt ing edge (Fig. 41:16,17). Traces of blows on the adzes' butts i ndica t e t heir employment in combination with mallets (Fig. 41 : 14). Some of t he a dzes have their butts n~rrowed, probably for insertion into a sleeve (Fig. 39:17). The adzes were be t ween 10 and 13. 5 cm. l ong. Among other bone artifacts mention should be made of a fe w fragments of what seemed to be pegs (Fig . 13: 6) a nd of va ri ously si zed and shaped awls. The awls are usually 5-7 cm. in le ngt h but ~ome are up t o 19 cm. long. They also differ in the form of their worki ng en d : most of t hem (31) have a conventionally shaped pointed tip, but there are also specimens with a flat tip (Fig. 43:4-6,11,12). The collection of finds also contains burnishers with dull and wel l -smoothed edges, manufactured from antler tips (Fig . 22 : 14; Fig. 24:3), knifelike tools made of animal ribs, with blunt or rat her sharp edges (Fig. 11:5; Fig. 14:3; Fig. 43:10), three small s pat ulae of

68

Fig. 44 Plastic artifacts fashioned of clay. various shapes (Fig. 43:7,8) and a few bone artifacts of unknown application as, for example, a piece of worked bone with two holes on one end and a sharp cut on the other end (Fig. 43:9). An important feature of Dereivka's antler artifacts is the presence of bridle cheekpieces which will be discussed below in Chapter V. Metal artifacts These are represented in the complex by three annular beads which accompanied burial I of the Dereivka Eneolithic cemetery. The beads are made of wire of semicircular section and are about 0.5 cm. in diameter. A spectral analysis of two beads was made by Ye.N. Chernykh at the Department of Geological Sciences in the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences. The quantitative analysis of the composition of the metal shows that the alloy is based on copper (see Table 1, above), the trace elements making up only a few hundredths to thousandths of a per cent. No metal artifacts were found in the area of the habitation site, although some of the bones from the bone accumulations showed traces of copper oxides. Employment of copper tools in the settlement is also evidenced by the antler tool manufacturing technology.

69

Plastic

art

and stone

carving

The objects of plastic art and stone sculpture found at Dereivka promote a better understanding of the Sredny Stag culture. Plastic objects are fashioned out of the same type of shell-tempered clay as the pottery. Of the 14 objects of this kind (regrettably discovered often in pieces), seven display anthropomorphic motifs. One of them is fashioned as a plano-convex disc with moulded breasts on its surface and a head at its edge. On the statuette's obverse side are two intersecting ornamental rows of comb-made stabs passing over the shoulders (Fig. 44:1). The bottom part of the statuette is missing; the preserved part is 7.8 cm. high. Two other figurines retain only their upper portions: columnlike heads and rounded shoulders (Fig. 44:2,3). One of these figurines is decorated with a stabbed girdle around its top part. There is a flat object of a nearly round shape resembling the head of a large statuette (Fig. 16:14). Two flat fragments with stabbed decoration seem to have belonged to the middle (waist) and bottom parts of statuettes (Fig. 22:6,7). The massive tapered piece (Fig. 24:5) may have been the lower part of a figurine. There are also three round flat fragments of unspecified nature in which no details could be recognised (Fig. 24:6). The most realistic of these finds is a 7.3 cm. long figurine of a boar (Fig. 44:5). The animal stands on four legs, has a well shaped head and slightly hunched back, and its mouth is half-open, the nostrils flaring. Apart from this almost intact representation of a boar, there are two fragments of obviously similar figurines; one of the fragments is covered with small shallow pits (Fig. 44:4). Other plastic objects include a massive life-size sculptural representation of a Unio shell (Fig. 16:13) with a modelled hinge as found in the bivalve shell of a mollusc. Stone carving technique is demonstrated by a fish figurine made of talcose shale. Unfortunately, the figurine is very poorly preserved. It consists only of the front section with an eye mark, fins and lateral line (Fig. 22:12). The vicinity two dogs.

bulk of the objects of fine of House 2 and near the ritual

art were concentrated in burial of the horse skull

The collection of art objects from Dereivka is unique and so without parallels in the Sredny Stag culture. We can only point several finds of Dereivka-like high-necked figurines in the Copper of this kind among Khlopkov cemetery on the Volga _and some articles Tripolye sites.

the and far out Age the

The complex of ceramics , stone, antler and bone to ols , plastic objects and faunal remains at the Dereivka habitation site is the richest among the sites of the Sredny Stag culture. The numerous and varied materials are fundamental to the all-round understanding of the material and spiritual culture and occupation of the SSC tribes .

70

IV. DEREIVKAANDTIIE SREDNYSTOGCULTURE The problems of cultural affiliation and chronology of the Dereivka settlement and Eneolithic cemetery are closely interconnected. As has been shown, the analysis of material culture and, above all, of the ceramics ascribes the Dereivka sites to the Sredny Stag culture (SSC) of the Copper Age. Sites of this culture are known on the Middle and Lower Dnieper (Molyukhov Bugor, Dereivka, Voloshskoe-Strilchaya Skela, Kvityana, Mayorka and others), in the Seversky Donets basin (Alexandria, Serdyukovo) and on the Lower Don (Konstantinovka, Radutka). More than 80 s i t es of this type are in evidence today, among them settlements, cemeteries and individual burials (Fig. 45). The SSC settlements and cemeteries have yielded distinctive pointed-based high-neck pottery ornamented with patterns of comb, cord, stabbed and incised . decoration. A typical feature of the SSC ceramics is the employment of clay tempered with finely crushed shell. Alongside pointed-based vessels t here sometimes appear flat-based ones, especially bowls. A full description of the ceramics from Dereivka has been given in the preceding chapter.

··~ • (

\

Fig.

/

~

•

45 Map of major Sredny Stag sites: 1 - Molyukhov Bugor; 2 - Buzki; 3 - Kamennye Pataki; 4 Uspenka; 5 - Dereivka; 6 - Igren; 7 - Voloshskoe (Strilchaya Skela); 8 - Mayorka; 9 - Kvityana; 10 - Pokhily; 11 - Sredny Stog; 12 - Alexandria; 13 - Radutka; 14 - Konstantinovka .

71

The SSC tools, weapons and ornaments were made of flint, stone, antler and bone. There were also a few copper artifacts. Axes were fashioned of polished stone or of flint with bifacial retouch. They were wedge-shaped, oval in cross section, and evidently designed to be inserted into an antler sleeve. Spearheads and arrowheads were made of flint and were triangular or close to rhomboid in shape; like the axes, they were retouched on both sides. The very well-developed antler-bone industry could be best studied on the basis of the materials from the Dereivka habitation site where about ten types of bone and antler artifact have been discovered (see above). Metal objects are as yet very infrequent, and consist only of ornaments (Dereivka) and a small copper axe (Khutor Rozy Luxemburg). Animal husbandry was the main subsistence population. It was an expressly horse-breeding horse was the major form of livestock.

occupation of the culture in which

SSC the

Our knowledge of the cultural traditions of the Sredny Stog people comes from the study of their cemeteries and ritual burials of animals, such as the one discovered on the Dereivka settlement. The position of the deceased is supine, with legs contracted. Burials in the sitting or extended supine position are of rare occurrence and can probably be regarded as reminiscent of Neolithic mortuary traditions. Among the grave gifts are vessels typical of the culture. The materials of the Dereivka habitation site suggest a rather high production level of plastic clay artifacts and reveal the presence of stone carving. Comparative analysis of the materials from the SSC settlements and burials suggests that this culture existed for rather a long time, possibly on the order of a millennium. Its development includes two main stages: the pre-corded or Voloshskoe period, followed by the corded, or Dereivka period. In turn, each of these periods can be subdivided into two phases: Ia, lb and Ila, IIb (Telegin 1973:118-124). The Dereivka habitation site is ascribed to the Ila phase of the Sredny Stog culture (Table 4). The difference between the monuments of the SSC consecutive phases can best be seen in the types of their ceramics (Fig. 46). SSC sites vary regionally. Three local variants of the culture can be singled out: the Dereivka variant on the Dnieper, the Alexandria in the Seversky Donets basin and the Konstantinovka on the Lower Don. The last two are best represented by the material - from the eponymous Alexandria and Konstantinovka sites. The Alexandria habitation site and cemetery were explored by the author in 1955-57 near the village of Alexandria on the left bank of the River Oskol in Kupyansk District ., Kharkov Region. The excavated area of 1200 sq.m. revealed four cultural layers in the up to 2 m. thick occupation horizon. These could be assigned to the Middle Bronze Age (I), Early Yamnaya (II), Sredny Stog (III) and Neolithic (IV) periods. The Sredny Stog stratum (III) consisted of an accumulation of sandy humus mixed with charcoal and ash, and was up to 60-70 cm. thick. As far as structural features are concerned, only eleven pits, of various sizes and shapes, were discovered. One of them was of an elongated-rounded form, 6.25x4.2 m. large and 0.4 m. deep. Two more pits were also

72

... : ,·:~.' ' . ·'-·

..

' .

,..l~i 8

17

18

19 Fig.

46 Vessel shapes (1-6, 12-15) and types of de coration (7-11, 16-19) on ceramics of the first (pre- cord) Voloshskoe (I) and the second Dereivka (II) periods of the Sredny Stog culture: 1,2 Molyukhov Bugor ; 3-11 - Dereivka; 12 - Ig :en ~ 13 - Sredny Stag 2; 14 - Mayorka; 15 - Kvity ana; 16-19 - St rilchaya Skela (Voloshskoe).

73

Table 4

-

Cl4 dates

Culture

b.c.

-------------2500

-----------------------------------------

Period phase

Dnieper basin

Seversky Donets basin

Don basin

Calibrated (."calendar") dates B.C.

--------------------------------------------------------

Yamnaya

I

Mikhailovka II b

Molyukhov Bugor

a

Dereivka

b

Sredny Stag, Voloshkoe (Strilchaya Skela)

a

Pokhily, Kvityana, Mayorka

Alexandria II

Repin Khutor

3245

Konstantinovka

II 3000

Sredny

Alexandria III

Koysug

3785

Stog

I 3500

4375

----------------------------------------------------------------------roundish but a little smaller in size (3 m. possible that, as in Dereivka, they were slightly sunken into the ground. The other 0.5-1.2 m. in diameter and these evidently some of them showed remnants of fireplaces.

and 3.2 m. across). It is the remains of dwellings habitation site's pits were ser ved household purposes;

The Sredny Stog settlement at Alexandria yielded essential material evidence: c .1500 sh_erds and over 500 flint and stone tools. The ceramic remains were often in the form of fragmented .vessels . The site also co.ntained bones of domestic animals (6 horses, 5 cattle, 3 sheep and goats) and wild animals (44%), including red deer, roe deer, boar and beaver, birds, fish and a tortoise. The habitation site's ceramics included two main groups. The first contained 664 fragments of high-neck, pointed-based vessels made of porous shell-tempered clay, decorated usually on their upper part with comb and cord impressions, incisions, lines, etc. (Fig. 47). We have seen their closest analogy in Dereivka. The second group of ceramics (960 she r ds) differs in the composition of the clay paste which is free of shell temper and is used for vessels with thicker walls, a less developed shape, a well-fo r med and slightly protruding rim, and pointed base. Apart from pots, the group included a few cups or bowls (Fig. 48). The vessels were decorated over their entire surface mainly with comb stamping, linear incisions, stabs, pits and sometimes braided cord (cate r pillar) impressions; twisted cord was not present. Today we single out the ceramics of Alexandria's second group as a separate Zasukha type pottery originating

74

------------------- ---------------

--------------

2

1

---

,--------

------------------------3

4

7

6

Fig.

47 Alexandria: Porous ceramics of group I (1 -6) and small polished greenstone axe (7). Ves~el (6) unearthed from burial , the rest from settlement.

from the Dnieper-Donets Neolithic culture. In the . settlement of ceramics was probably of an earlier date, but _ t here surely when both pottery groups existed contemporaneously.

this group was a time

The implements and tools of the Sredny Stag stratum comprised several dozen large flint knives, more than 200 scrapers made from flakes and blades, 80 arrowheads and spearheads, often in pieces, and seven wedge-shaped polished axes of flint and stone (F i g. 49).

75

2

.,.

..,

'C

*r'

v ·-· • · "-y

.. ..,..............._, ,

·-- ....

-

3 4

Fig.

48 Alexandria:

Ce~amics of group II (Zasukha

type).

The Alexandria cemeter y , synchronous and within the area of the settlement site, yielded 39 burials for invest i ga t ion. As in Dereivka, they were usually single and wi dely scattered in t erments (Telegin 1973, fig. 6). T.S. Surnina (1963) defines most of the burials as belonging to adults, but distinguishes three .adolescent and eight child burials. With respec t t o the bur i al ritual, t he i ntermen t s can be div i ded into two groups: supine extended position (7 skeletons) and supine contracted position (31 skeletons); the deceased from the first group were buried a little deeper, but · no clear stratification was observed. The contracted burials are generally in the supine position with legs flexed upward at the knees and hands placed along the body; some of the dead were evidently buried in a half - sitting position. Orientation varied, but most of the heads pointed to the east. The majority of the burials were single; three were paired, and one was a grave group (two adults and three children). Eight of the skeletons of this group were accompanied by large f lint knives, similar to those found in the settlement site, and one grave contained a small porous vessel appr .oaching in fabric the first group of the habitat ion site's ceramics.

76

The supine extended burials comprised two single interments and one communal grave (5 skeletons). All of them were richly painted with red ochre. The gifts in the communal grave included large flint blades analogous to the finds of this type in the burials of the first group and in the habitation layer. Judging by these materials, the extended burials of the second group were synchronous with the contracted burials of the first group or may have slightly predated them~ Comparison between the small porous vessel in one of the contracted burials and the materials of the cultural layer suggests that the first group of (porous) ceramics and the supine contracted burials form a single complex of the Sredny Stog culture, while the extended burials are hypothetically connected with the second group of ceramics and genetically originate in the later phase of the Dnieper-Donets culture. On the whole, the habitation site and cemetery near Alexandria should be dated to the borderline between the first and second periods of the Sredny Stog culture. The Konstantinovka habitation site on the Lower Don is important to. the understanding of the Lower Don variant of the Sredny Stog culture. The site is located on the right bank of the Don, 20 km. above the point where the Seversky Donets discharges into the Don. The site was investigated for a number of seasons by V.Ya. Kiyashko (1974). The excavated area of c.1300 sq.m. yielded over 20,000 finds, mainly ceramics and flint and quartzite tools, as well as animal bones. Located in this area were the remains of fireplaces and post-holes, which suggests the presence here of surface dwellings measuring 10x4 m. in size. Unfortunately, yet been published. University where the excavator.

the materials of the Konstantinovka site have not They are now at the Archaeological Museum of Rostov we were able to examine them through the courtesy of

On the basis of their typological characteristics, shapes and ornamentation, we divide the ceramics of the Konstantinovka habitation site into three unequal groups. The first includes porous, high-neck, pointed-based vessels which in general do not deviate from the typical Sredny Stog pottery. In addition to pots, the group contains conical fla~-base d bowls. Worthy of note here is the relatively large percentage of corded decoration covering the pot's upper part in various patte r ns. In contrast with Dereivka's ceramics of this type, the Konstantinovka pots are rather short, and their pointed base has a dull profile against Dereivka's sharp one (Telegin 1973, fig. 12). The second group of ceramics (30%) comprises pottery tempered with sand or plant remains. The reconstructed shapes include only high, widemouthed, pointed-based pots decorated mainly with fine-toothed comb stamping, incision and stabbing. The origin of this group is not quite clear, but it may be reminiscent of the Dnieper-Donets forest-steppe technology of pottery manufacture. The third (small) group is composed mostly of undecorated fragments , some with a smeared surface. The emergence of this group of ceramics in Konstantinovka can perhaps be explained by the site's proximtty to a Maykop-type culture from which this pottery was imported.

77

4

2

8

Fig.

49 Alexandria: Knives and knifelike various types of flint spearheads

78

blades (6-8).

(1-4),

scraper

(5) and

also third

The Konsta ntinov ka c eramics diff er f rom Dereivka's by the presence here of l ugged ve sse ls occurring groups of cera mi cs.

a nd Alexandria's in the f i rst and

Among Konsta nti novk a c e r ami c artifacts ment ion shou l d be made of clay supports install ed in f i replaces. Such i mpl ement s have not been encountered either on the Dnieper or on the Seve r sky Donets. A particular feature of Konstantinovka in compar i son wit h other sites of this culture is the composition of flint ass emblages, which are distinguished by a high pro porti on of bifacially wor ked a rtif ac t s, su ch as knife-sickles, spearhea ds, arrowheads, etc. In Konstantinovka's faunal remains, (sheep-goat, cattle, horse, etc . ) slightly animal bones (chiefly red deer and boar).

bones of domestic animals predominate (59%) over wild

The habitation site also brought forth a small number of bone artifacts and, significantly, individual items made from copper (awls), . pieces of slag, metal drops and fragments of crucibles for molten metal. Concluding our description of Konstantinovka we should add that a few small barrows were uncovered near the site which contained skeletons in a supine contracted position. One of them was accompanied by a small red clay vessel analogous in texture to the pottery of the third ceramic group. Taking into consideration the abovementioned peculiarities of Konstantinovka's material, V.Ya. Kiyashko (1974) proposes to regard this site as a separate ''independently classified continuum or culture''. The question of this site's cultural attribution must, however, remain open until the full publication of its finds. In our opinion, Konstantinovka and other sites on the Lower Don (Radutka, Kh. Solenovsky, Malaya Luchka, etc.) constitute a separate variant of the Sredny Stag culture. The absolute chronology of the Alexandria, Konstantinovka and Dereivka habitation .sites and their related cemeteries can be determined first and foremost on the basis of the chronology of the whole Sredny Stog culture. From A.V. Dobrovolsky's stratigraphic studies -(1929:120-134) during the excavations of the Sredny Stog settlement it was assumed that SSC habitation sites immediately follow the sites of the Mariupol and Nikolskoe cemetery type (Makarenko 1933; Telegin 1968:70-82) of the Dnieper-Donets culture.* This conclusion is confirmed by the materials of the second stratified habitation site on Strilchaya Skela near the village of Voloshskoe in Dnepropetrovsk District.

* Editor's

note: One of the major distinguishing f eatures of the earlier Neolithic Dnieper-Donets culture is its extensive cemeteries. The most famous is the Mariupol cemetery with over 122 burials arranged in groups, in the extended position, either east or western orientation, extensive use of ochre and accompanied by grave gifts which included flint knives, scrapers, numerous ornaments fashioned from boar tusk , shell or bone. The Nikolskoe cemetery included 9 burials .

79

T

1

2 3 4o

4b 4c

5

0

'Fig.

2M

50 Alexandria: stratigraphy of cultural horizon: 1 - white cindery sand; 2 - layer of dark sand containing Middle Bronze Age finds; 3,4b - sterile sand layers; 4a - sand with humus containing materials of Early Yamnaya period; 4c - black carbonaceous sand = Sredny Stog layer; 5 - brown sand= individual Neolithic finds.

80

On account of the Tripolye A - early B-1 imports and radiocarbon evidence we date the Nikolskoe cemetery to the the 4th millennium b.c., which means that the lower horizon of the Sredny Stog culture was somewhere near the 4th millennium b.c.

the available first half of chronological middle of the

A number of facts indicate that the SSC sites were replaced by the Yamnaya culture. This succession is also supported by stratigraphic observations. For example, in the multi-layered Alexandria settlement the SSC stratum was overlain by an Early Yamnaya stratum (Fig. 50). Ceramics pertaining to the second Dereivka period of the Sredny Stog culture appeared in the Lower Mikhailovka level under a layer of Early Yamnaya material (Lagodovskaya et al. 1962:37-38). As will be seen in Chapter VI, there are a large number of radiocarbon dates which attribute the later period of the Yamnaya culture to the second half of the 3rd - beginning of the 2nd millennium b.c. On the whole, the Yamnaya culture, including its early monuments for which no Cl4 analysis is available, is dated to c.2700-1900 b.c~ (Telegin 1977:5-18). As is generally believed~ the SSC was a major genetic precursor of the Yamnaya culture, which suggests their temporal contact and succession. Consequently, the upper chronological limit of the Sredny Stog culture should be dated to the centuries around 2750 b.c. Thus, the chronological range of the SSC lies between the middle of the 4th millennium and the end of the first quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c. This conforms in large measure with the Cl4 dates for Dereivka, some of which were obtained from domestic animal bones (Mallory 1975) at a California laboratory (UCLA 1671A: 2950±100 b.c.; UCLA 1466A: 3565±90 b.c.) and some from the cultural layer's shells at the Kiev labora t ory (Ki 466: 3450±100 b.c.; Ki 465: 3280±95 b.c.). All of these dates indicate activity during the second half of the 4th millennium b.c., and only one falls at the beginning of the 3rd millennium b.c. To the radiocarbon dates from Dereivka we may add that obtained for one of the buria l s from Alexandria (Ki 104: 3520±350 b.c.). The absolute chronology of the SSC sites . is also verified against Tripolye imports and the unquestionable existence of cultural contacts between the SSC and Tripolye populations. As already noted, a small red clay bowl ascribed to Tripolye B-2 was unearthed from the Der eivka cemetery. Tripolye B-2 imports were also found in the burials of the Igren cemetery of the Sredny Stog culture (Telegin 1973:124,125; Tel egin and Fi lenko 1982, fig. 1). The synchronisation of the -Sredny Stog and Tripolye be discussed in more detail in Chapter VI.

81

cultures

will

V. HORSEBREEDING AT DEREIVKA Judging by the composition of the faunal remains, the chief occupation of Dereivka's inhabitants was stockbreeding. An important role was played in their life by fishing and hunting. Food gathering and, probably, agriculture also played a part in their subsistence activities. The quality of stockbreeding and composition of the herd are best characterised by the osteological material collected from the occupation layer (Table 5). V.I. Bibikova estimates that domestic animal bones in Dereivka comprise over 80%, and the bones of wild mammals less than 20%, of the entire faunal assemblage. An essential feature of Dereivka's of the horse (74%), followed by cattle extent, ovicaprids, pigs and dogs.

livestock was the (19%) and, to a

predominance much lesser

Similar faunal compositions are known at other SSC sites, as, for example, in Alexandria and Molyukhov Bugor where the horse was likewise the major form of livestock. It should be emphasised that the Dereivka population's horsebreeding economy was evidently quite a large scale activity. This is confirmed not only by the large amount of horse bones, but also by some other important observations. According to V.I. Bibikova (1969), the Dereivka assemblage was composed of only young and adult animals; bones of old an i mals are altogether absent. The age range of these animals approximates to that of the horse herd in today's Mongolia. It is noteworthy that, judging by the skulls of the butchered horses, the overwhelming majority of them (over 80%) were male. This kind of selection for animal slaughter is naturally possible only in a domesticated stock (Bibikova 1969). That the Dereivka horse was adapted to riding is proven by at least two facts: firstly, it is impossible to pasture herds of these swiftfooted animals without riding one of them; and, secondly, the habitation site's complex of artifacts contains brid le cheekpieces. The absolute necessity of having mounted herders for grazing horse droves is also emphasised by other scholarsp e.g. Kovalevsk~ya (1977). Dereivka's finds include six cheekpieces 9 five single-hole specimens and one apparently with two holes. They are all made of red deer antler (Fig. 12:6; Fig. 18:11; Fig. 51:1-3). The artifacts are between 8 and 14 cm. long, their thick end is evenly cut, and their thin end (antler tip) is usually left unworked. Single-hole cheekpieces have an 0.4-1.0 cm. aperture closer to their thick end. This aperture is usually biconical, and its edge is heavily smoothed and worn, probably · owing to the continuous rubbing .by the bridle rope or strap. Some of the cheekpieces have a waist near the hole which may have been used to bind the bridle strap. One cheekpiece has two holes (Fig. 51:3), but regrettably the piece was broken in antiquity around the upper hole. We can only guess at the methods used to fasten these cheekpieces to other bridle elements. In all probability, each end of the bridle's soft bit was drawn through the hole of a cheekpiece, made fast and attached to the bridle's reins on the outside of each cheekpiece. The forked cheek straps were simply tied around the cheekpiece on both sides of ·the hole. It is hard to tell whether this type of bridle included nose and underlip straps. 82

,, I

I I,

I iI 11

11

~

'

\ 2

Fig.

51 Dereivka:

Bridle

cheekpieces

3

made of antler.

Antler cheekpieces were widely used alongside metal ones in ancient times. Bas-reliefs of antler cheekpieces are known to have existed in Assyrian ornaments. Two single-hole cheekpieces similar to those of Dereivka's were discovered in the second Pazyryk barrow (Rudenko 1948, table 1:4). It is quite possible that in the Sredny Stog period there were bridles with soft bits and wooden cheekpieces which have not survived. As we know, wooden cheekpieces were used on a ·par with antler and metal ortes in Scythian times. The abovementioned Pazyryk barrow contained four pairs of wooden cheekpieces in horse burials (Rudenko 1948:11). A pair of single-hole wooden cheekpieces were recently unearthed from a pit grave near the village of Vinogradovka in Odessa Region (Chernyakov and Shmagliy 1983). Single-hole bridle cheekpieces probably also occur in the Late Tripolye sites of Moldavia (Markevich 1981, fig. 71:3,11); the author of the monograph calli them 'miniature mattocks' and believes they were used in bartering. An important factor in the domestication of animals and their use for pulling loads or riding was the capacity to produce a whole range of horse trappings : bridle, reins, harness, bands, etc. These items could only be manufactured from straps and ropes . Judging by the cord ornamentation on ceramics, braided cord and, consequently, rope was already well known among the SSC tribes. During the Eneolithic the skill of rope making played a significant role in the management of animals, specifically in the breaking-in of horses for riding. Rope braiding provided the primeval cattleman with varied reins and ropes of practically unlimited length and strength. Bridles and other trappings were evidently manufactured here also from leather, which accounts for 83

Table 5: Details

of the faunal

----------

Description

--

assemblage

at the Dereivka

settlement

-------------------------------------Number of bones

----------------------------------------------------------

Minimum number of individuals

·-------------

Horse (Equus caballus) Cattle, domesticated (Bos tauros) Sheep/goat (Ovis aries, Capra hircus) Pig, domesticated (Sus scrofa domestica) Dog (Canis familiaris)

2412 618 88 114 33

52 18 16

Domestic animals,

3265

100

Red deer (Cervus elaphus) Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) Wild boar (Sus scrofa ferus) Elk (Alces alces) Badger (Meles meles) Bear (Ursus arctos) Otter (Lutra lutra) Wolf (Canis lupus) Fox (Vulpes vulpes) Beaver (Castor fiber) Hare (Lepus sp.)

394 99

12

18 12 11 3

9

4

5 2

so

2 2 2 7 15

22

7

Wild mammals, total

673

83

Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) Pintail duck (Anas acuta) Duck (Anas sp.) Goose (Anser anser) Teal (Querquedula querquedula) Coot (Fulica atra) ·

14

4

3 3

3

2 2 1 1 2

Birds,

25

12

94

21 5

total

so

4

26

1 1

total

Silurus (Silurus glanis) Perch (Lucioperca lucioperca) Roach (Rutilus rutilus) Red-eye (Scardinius erhythrophthalmus) Carp (Cyprinus carpio) Carp (Aspius aspius) Pike (Esox lucius) Fish,

20 11 2

-----------------------------------------------Tortoise

84

5

1 5 136

37

·----------------------177

(Emys onbicularis)

5

1 2 1 2

3

total

9

32

the great number of previously-described awls in Dereivka. Worthy of attention are large-sized awls (Fig. 43:6), fit to work solid thick hides into harnesses. Among other finds apparently related to horse trappings, mention should be made of a rod with a notch around its middle (Fig. 22:15). According to ethnographic evidence, such artifacts were attached to the ends of reins to fasten them to hitching posts. Obviously, such highly-organised forms of horsebreeding could not appear in Dereivka out of the blue. This branch of the economy seems to have made its start at an earlier, pre-cord phase of the SSC tribes' cultural development. Moreover, some specialists believe that the domestic horse existed i n the Dnieper area already during the Neolithic. For instance, bones of domestic horses were claimed for the Neolithic horizon of Surskoy Island at the Sobachka camp site, and so on (Pidoplichko 1938:19), i.e . in complexes attributed to the late 5thearly 4th millennia b.c. Thus, the Sredny Stag domestic horse can be regarded as among the most ancient in Europe. We can recall here the ritual burial of a horse skull and two dogs in Dereivka - a sure sign of the already existing horse cult which in the course of time became widespread among the IndaEuropean peoples. Burials of horse skulls, often together with leg frequent in the post-Sredny Stog period, as, for Yamnaya culture. Extensive lists of these supposedly the East-European steppe is cited by Ye.Ye. Kuzmina J.P. Mallory (1981).

bones, are rather instance, in the ritual burials in (1976:29,30) and

It may be assumed that from the Sredny Stog tribes the horse moved on to other cultures, first and foremost to their neighbours, where horsebreeding practices are frequently observed in embryo. This pertains above all to the Tripolye culture, the sites of the Lower Mikhailovka type, the Gumelnita, Tisza-Polgar and other cultures. In Mikhailovka's lower layer, for example, domestic horse bones make up 9.4% of the animal remains (Lagodovskaya et al. 1962, appendix:207). According to V.I. Bibikova's estimates (1969, table 2; see Appendix 3), in Early Tripolye the horse makes up a ·mere 0.5% of the herd, while in Late Tripolye it reaches an average of 9.6%. Interestingly, the percentage of the horse is visibly larger in the Tripolye settlements on the Bug, Dnieper and in Eastern Volhynia (Sabatinovka I - 8.33%, Grenovka - 14.7%, Gorodsk - 16.26%, Stena - 19.87%, Starye Bezradichi 19.87%, Podgortsy II - 26.9%), i.e. in the settlements located closer to the SSC habitation sites . In the Gumelnita culture (Bolgrad, Ozeryany, Vulkaneshti) horse bones make up a little over 10%, as shown by V.I. Tsalkin (1967). In recent years evi dence has been found for the presence of the domestic horse in the Tisza-Polgar herd, specifically at the Deszk B site (Gimbutas 1977) and in the horizons of Cernavoda III - Boleraz (Dimitriyevi~h 1982), but horse bones there are 6f very rare occurrence. As we know, some horse bones were also f ound in the sites of the TRB culture (Zakharuk 1959; Peleschipin 1971:234) and the Globular Amphora culture (Wislanski 1970:222 ; V.V. Shcheglov and M.M. Chernyavsky 1976; Sveshnikov 1983:17). The latest TRB sites (Ostorf, Tangermiinde) yiel ded single-hole bridle cheekpieces of antler (Lichardus 1980). 85

Many of the above cultures (Tripolye, Lower Mikhailovka, Gumelnita, Tisza-Polgar) are fully or partly synchronous with the Sredny Stag culture. In S. B6k6nyi's opinion, the horse of the Cucuteni-Tripolye and Tisza-Polgar cultures is of nearly the same build as the Sredny Stag one (B6k6nyi 1978; Lichardus 1980:12), which supports the view of this animal's propagation from the Sredny Stag region to more westerly cultures. This also correlates with the popular scientific concept of extensive cultural contacts between these cultures, especially between Sredny Stag and Tripolye. Analysing the East European Eneolithic cultures from the standpoint of the presence of horse bones, V.I. Bibikova (1969) defines two geographical ranges: the western one which includes the cultures west of the Dnieper (Tripolye, Gumelnira, Boian) with a small percentage of horse in the faunal assemblage, and the eastern range comprising the Dnieper-Donets, Sredny Stag and Yamnaya cultures. The latter is sure to have obtained the domestic horse from the Sredny Stag culture with which it was genetically connected. New data on taming the horse in the Eneolithic period substantiate this view in large measure, even if it requires some amendment. Firstly, as we have seen, some new cultures (Tisza-Polgar, Cernavoda II-Bolgrad, Globular Amphora) are now included in the western range of the expansion of the domestic horse. And secondly, recent data show the existence of initial forms of large-scale horse domestication not only in the Dnieper and Don steppeland (Dereivka, Repin Khutor) but also in more eastern territories. For instance, the domestic horse was present in the NeoEneolithic settlements of the Southern Ural region (Davlekanovo, Mullino, etc.) where V.I. Tsalkin and A.G. Petrenko estimate the amount of this animal at over 40% (Matyushin 1981, 1982). Considering that the domestic horse was known also in the Afanasyevo culture (Kiselev 1951:47), the eastern horse domestication area extends far beyond the Volga into the East Siberian steppe. It may be mentioned in this connection that some authors (Huppertz 1962) include even the TuranAltai area in the geographical range of horse domestication. Thus, current research on the origins of horse domestication still encourages the adoption of the view shared by many scholars that the hqrse was first tamed somewhere in the rich grasslands of the Eurasian steppe (Bibikova 1967; Lundholm 1947; Potratz 1966:7,8; Tsalkin 1970). According to the most recent data, the horse is .a descendant of the tarpan whose habitat also iricluded the Middle Dnieper area where Dereivka was located. Later, the rich economic experience in horse management was passed from the Sredny Stag and its kindred Yamnaya culture to the Bronze Age cultures of Eastern Europe where, judging by the spread of bridle cheekpieces, the animal was widely used for riding, e.g. in the Multiridge Ware, Poltavka, Srubnaya (Timber-Grav .e) and other cultures. In the 2nd millennium b.c. the domestic horse appears in large numbers also in Western Europe (Clark 1959:128-129), reaching there apparently from Eastern Europe where it had been known more than a millennium earlier. The mass emergence of the horse in ancient civilizations (Egypt, Asia . Minor, Mesopotamia, India) also began only in the 2nd millennium B.C. (Potratz 1966:7; Vitt 1952:194). Admittedly, a representation of a 86

rider was indeed found in the 3rd millennium layers of the Susa settlement at Elam, and early 3rd millennium sherds from Jemdet Nasr do show a picture of an animal-drawn cart; however, one cannot say with certainty whether the animal in the latter case was a horse or a donkey. In Cential (Tsalkin 1970).

Asia the horse

did not appear

until

after

the Eneolithic

Having synthesised a large amount of evidence on the initial stages of horsebreeding in the Old World, Ye.Ye. Kuzmina concluded that in the 3rd millennium B.C. the horse was still an exotic animal in the ancient Near East. This was reflected in its name - 'Foreign Highland Donkey'. As noted above, the Sredny Stog tribes brought horsebreeding into use in the late 4th-early 3rd millennia b.c. This assigns to the Sredny Stog culture an important role in the taming and mass employment of the horse, as well as in the development of general standards and methods of horse management. The significance of the horse in the life of the SSC population is evidenced by the special ritual of burying the animals' skulls. The riding horse was probably used by the SSC tribes in longrange marches and sallies. Armed with battle hammers, spears, bows and arrows, these tribes may have been a serious threat to their neighbours; as will be shown later, this factor had a noticeable impact on European historical developments in the 4th-3rd millennia b.c. X

X

X

Other branches of the economy, such as agriculture, fishing, hunting and food gathering were obviously of secondary importance to Dereivka's population. The mattocks and stone discs which were unearthed may be indicative of land tilling. Querns and grinders for crushing grain were also found, but they may have been used with wild seeds as well. No traces of cultivated cereals were discovered. The Dereivka people probably did much fishing using both nets and fishing tackle fitted with bone hooks (Fig. 8:8; Fig. 12:5). The employment of nets is indicated by the 176 sinkers, among them 74 intact and 6 half-finished, found in Dereivka. The sinkers were fashioned out of potsherds; some of them have traces of the pots' decoration (Fig. 10:8-10). They were between 4-5 and 9-10 cm. across, of a roundoval or, less frequently, irregular square shape; with a visible waist formed by two notches on the sides. The majority of sinkers became glossy from use; the side notches of the waist showed tracks left by the cord which attached them to nets. The usage of these sinkers with nets is also evidenced by the fact that they are heavily abraded and rolled smooth. The size and weight of the sinkers suggest their use with small nets. Large amounts of fish bones and scales indicate the important role of fish in Dereivka's diet. Judging by the wild fauna, the main animals hun t ed were red deer, roe deer, wild boar, etc. Missile weapons fit for hunting were equipped with flint heads (Fig. 40:5; Fig. 41:6-11) or, less f r equently, bone heads (Fig. 13:8-11) with flint inserts. As for f ood gathering, this concentrated on river molluscs and tortoises. · On the whole, Dereivka's stock-keeping was predominant.

economy was an integra t ed system in which

87

Editor's note: Below are added the summary faunal lists from the other Sredny Stog sites of Alexandria (Alex), Molyukhov Bugor (M.B.), Sredny Stog II (SSII) and Konstantinovka (Kons) extracted from Telegin 1973:132. Further comparanda are offered in the faunal lists from Lower Mikhailovka (L.M.) and the Yamnaya remains from the fortified site of Mikhailovka (Mikh) after Bibikova and Shevchenko in Lagodovskaya et al. 1962:207. Note: b = number of bones, MNI = minimum number of individuals. Alex b MNI Horse Cattle Sheep/goat Pig Dog Domestic, total Red deer Roe deer Wild boar Elk Badger Bear Otter Wolf Fox Beaver Stone marten Wild ass Hare Aurochs Saiga Onager Corsak Water vole

46 60 11

6 5 3

M.B. b MNI 47 28 5

SSII b MNI

-

15 50 147

2

4

3 3

Kons b MNI

8

1 1

58 64 150 19 60

2 2 8

104

4

9 36

7

217 760 20 5 1106

55

4

14

80

8

224

14

351

42

4 1 26

2 1 5

51 24 89 12 6 4 1 1

5 4 6 3 3 1 1 1

7

1

186

12

20

7

2

1

1 8 7 6

1 3 3 3

8 14 5

3 3 3

13

3

1 2

10

1

1

b

Mikh MNI

5393 30571 14958 4 229 2 390

6

8 17

117

1

L.M. b MNI

656 1627 1202 82 112

51541

3679

85

33

4

84

23

10

3

2

13 5 17 7

5 12 6

4 3

1 1

13 25 74 657 17 2

11 17 27 118 1 2

999

265

50

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wild mammals, total 44

11

189

25

4

18

257

39

---------------------------------------------------------------Birds Fish Tortoise

1 1

1 1

95 156

23

6

1 44 38

22

88

8 7

60

8

------

122 236 20

38 120 13

VI . CHRONOL OGICAL PROB LEMS OF THE ENEOLITH I C CULTURES OF THE UKRAINE Up to now, s e ver al genera t ions of researc hers have singled out more tha n twenty Neolit hic a nd Ene oli th ic c ultures an d groups in and around the Ukraine, characte r ised by varying degrees of s imila rity. The uneven his to rical develo pment of the ancien t population of t he Ukraine led to the coexistence there of Neolit hi c cultures (Dni epe rDonets, Pit-C omb Ware ) alongside Early Me ta l Age cul t ures. The f ormer occupied the more northerly ar eas of the Dni epe r basin and the whol e of the North-Eastern Ukraine, while the latter wer e l ocal i se d mai nly in t he Right-Bank and steppe Ukraine. The Eneolithic cultures are usually divided i nto an ea rly and a late period. The Early Eneolithic is represented by the Sredny Stog culture and sites of the Lower Mikhailovka and Novodanilovka type in the south Ukraine; the Gumelnita and earlier phases of the Cucuteni-Tripolye cultures in the forest-steppe Right-Bank Ukraine and Forecarpathia; and the as yet poorly studied monuments of the Lengyel culture (Zimno-Zlote~ Goshcha-Kostanyets-Verbkovitsky) in Volhynia and Podolye. The Late Eneolithic cultures include the Yamna-ya and Kemi -Oba steppe cultures, as well as the TRB and Globular Amphora cultures in Volhynia and Forecarpathia. The geography of all these cultures is described in the compendious Archaeology of the Ukrai nian SSR (1971 ) . Of great importance in understanding the mutu al relations be t ween these various ethno-cultural continua during the Str-3rd millennia B.C. is the correct dating o f the separate cultures and groups of cultures. As far as the overwhelm i ng majority of Neo-Eneolithic cultures in the Ukraine and Moldavia are concerned, their age is usually derived from the available data on the Sredny Stog, Tripolye and Yamnaya cultures. The absolute chronology and periodisation of these cultures is therefore of the highest importance and it should naturally be determined by the employment of all modern methods, including those provided by the physical and natural sciences. Regrettably, until recentiy have been used rather infrequently few radiocarbon dates were known, Groningen and some other laboraiories Romania (Haba~e~ti, Valea-Lupului, the Ukraine (Yevminka, Mayaki), the

the methods of th e physical sci e nces for dating Eneol i~ hic sites. Oni y a obtained at the Leningrad, Berlin, for individual habitation sites in Tirpe~ti) 9 Molda via (Novye Ruse ~ti) , Volga region (Tsatsa) , etc.

However, over the past 10-15 years considerable progress has been made in dating the Ukraine's Eneolithic sites , mainly thanks to the establishment of a coordinating centre for archaeological st udies by scientific methods under the auspices of the Institute of Archaeology of the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences. To this end, t he Institute spon so rs economic agreements by enlisting specialists from t he Academy' s other scientific bodies, including the Institute of Geochemistry and Physics of Minerals, the Institute of Geophysics, the Institute of Botany 9 a nd so on.

89

The present author devised a programme which enabled a large amount of work to be carried out on dating archaeological remains by the C14 method (Tripolye sites were dated by both the radiocarbon and archaeomagnetic methods.*) All C14 dating was directed by Professor E.V. Sobotovich and senior engineer N.N. Kovalyukh at the Radiocarbon Laboratory of the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences' Institute of Geochemistry and Physics of Minerals (Telegin, Sobotovich and Kovalyukh 1978). The archaeomagnetic research into the dating of Tripolye sites was conducted by specialists from the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences' Institute of Geophysics: O.M. Rusakov, M.Sc., and G.F. Zagniy, M.Sc. (1977). Charcoal samples for Cl4 analyses and compass-orientated samples of burnt clay for archaeomagnetic tests were obtained from the habitation sites excavated in the main by the expeditions of the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences' Institute of Archaeology, headed by Ye.V. Tsvek, N.M. Shmagliy and V.A. Kruts, and also from sites explored by V.I. Markevich, Ye.K. Chernysh, I.I. Zayets, and others. The new data supplied by the dated materials review of the absolute chronology of the Tripolye and other Neo-Eneolithic cultures of the Ukraine.

permits us a thorough and Yamnaya cultures

The absolute chronology of the Sredny Stog culture has already been discussed in this work. Now follows a brief review of current work on the chronology of the Cucuteni-Tripolye and Yamnaya cultures. The Cucuteni-Tripolye

culture

As is well known, the question of dating Tripolye was first raised by the initial discoverers of this culture's sites. V.V. Khvoiko ascribed the culture generally to the times of stone and copper (Khvoiko 1899). Applying the results of the excavations in Dimini and Sesklo where ornamented ceramics occurred below the Mycenaean layer, he dated Tripolye to the middle of the 3rd millennium B.C. At a later time the same view was shared by V.G. Childe. V.A. Gorodtsov, however, thought it possible to date the Tripolye culture as early as the beginning of the 4th millennium B.C. In her work on the division of Tr1polye sites into periods, T.S. Passek (1949) dated Tripolye as a whole to the 3rd - early 2nd millennia B.C. In particular, she ascribed the late phase of Tripolye to 2000 - 1700 B.C. Somewhat later (1962), on the basis of the newly obtained first radiocarbon dates for Europe's . Eneolithic, she shifted back Tripolye's beginning date to the early 4th millennium B.C. But while making Tripolye nearly a ·millennium more ancient, she introduced a few corrections to the dates of -later sites of Tripolye type and marked Tripolye's decline with the turn of the 2nd millennium B.C., thus assigning this culture a span of nearly two millennia (Passek ]962). T.S. Passek proposed to divide the development of the Tripolye culture into three main periods: early (A), middle (B) and late (C), splitting the last into two phases, namely B-1 - B-2 and C-1 - C-2. This view of Tripolye's absolute chronology and periodisation now dominates in the Soviet and foreign literature. As regards the Tripolye culture of the *

Test dating of ancient ceramics Thermoluminescence method.

90

is also

being

performed

by

the

Ukraine and Moldavia, Ye.K. Chernysh (1979) speaks of the 4th - 3rd millennia B.C. M. Gimbutas (1965) also once dated Tripolye to the 4th 3rd millennia B.C. This chronological range is today supported by our scholarship and textbooks. The author has held a similar position throughout his chronological studies of some Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures of the Ukraine. Several scholars of Tripolye go into some detail about the phases of Tripolye's chronology. For example, V.G. Zbenovich (1980), on the basis of several separate radiocarbon dates from Cucuteni A-2 (Mergineni), sets the range of Early Tripolye remains to 4000-3600 B.C., thus ascribing the beginning of the culture to an even earlier date than that of T.S. Passek. In his work V.G. Zbenovich (1974) time and again tackled the problem of dating Late Tripolye sites by means of the analysis of material culture (copper daggers) and typological comparisons of the Usatovo culture (Tripolye C-2) in general with Balkan cultures (Cernavoda, Ezero). On the basis of these correlations he dates Usatovo (the late Tripolye culture in the Black Sea area) "to the second half of the 3rd millennium B.C., i.e. c.2400 - 2000 B.C." As will be seen below, this supposition now needs major revision. V.A. Kruts (1977) generally supports V.G. Zbenovich's dating of Late Tripolye, but having considered some new radiocarbon dates he thinks it possible to affix the date of 2600-2400 B.C. to the Late Tripolye sites of the Chapaevka and Lukashai type in the Dnieper area around Kiev. As we know, there also exist other views of Tripolye's chronology. L.S. Klein, for instance, believes the most probable date of the burial of the Early Tripolye Karbuna hoard to be the end of the 3rd millennium B.C. (2150 B.C.), whereas the generally accepted chronology places this hoard about 1500-1000 years earlier. On the other hand, the calibrated radiocarbon dates shift Europe's Neolithic-Eneolithic cultures including Tripolye to a yet earlier temporal horizon. For example, E. Neustupny, introducing corrections by the Suess' scale, dates all Neolithic cultures of Central Europe 500-800 years earlier (Neustupny 1968). When the Tripolye dates are calibrated, V~S. Titov believes, the culture's upper date will fall within the 33002900 B.C. range and the whole Tripolye culture must be dated to the 5th4th millennia B.C. (Titov 1971). In her latest works M. Gimbutas (1977) also adheres to the calibrated dates for Tripolye. The general revision of the absolute chronology of the Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures of the Ukraine based on the dendro-calibration of radiocarbon dates remains to be decided in precise detail. This has little to do with the actual validity of calibration - a necessity which is acknowledged by all of those expressly concerned with the technique of radiocarbon dating. Rather, we confront difficult problems in assessing the correct magnitude of laboratory errors (Scott et al. 1983), selecting a universally agreed upon calibration scale among the many available, e.g. Suess, MASCA, Belfast, etc., and actually implementing the calibration when there are a variety of recommended procedures. Moreover, archaeologists and physicists appear to promote different ways of expressing radiocarbon and calibrated radiocarbon dates. Many archaeologists in English-speaking nations have adopted the convention of representing radiocarbon years as b.c./a.d. dates (lower

91

case) while this form has been expressly rejected by physicists in the past two international radiocarbon conferences, where they have insisted that raw radiocarbon dates should always be expressed as B.P. (upper case). Obviously, one cannot hope to satisfy all parties at the same time. In order to ensure maximum intelligibility in the discussion below the following conventions will be adopted. All raw radiocarbon dates will be quoted both as B.P. and b.c. at one standard deviation. A full list of the dates plus approximate calibrations at two standard deviations (95% probability) will be printed in Appendix 4 where a full resume of the procedures will be presented. When calibrated dates are used in the text they will always be prefaced CAL-B.C. Finally, in order not to misrepresent the intentions of other scholars whose work will also be reviewed in this chapter, especially since many have employed the evidence of both radiocarbon dates and historical cross-correlation, I will leave their discussion of chronology in the format in which they were originally presented, i.e. B.C. Below follows a short list of new dates for Tripolye sites, obtained by the radiocarbon and archaeomagnetic methods at the coordination centre, mainly from Kiev (Ki) laboratories. Zarubintsy, Monastyrishche District, Cherkassy Region. A Tripolye settlement excavated by Ye.V. Tsvek. Site (dwelling) A-B period. Dated by the archaeomagnetic (AM)method. AMSample 201: 3500 B.C. Krasnostavka, Mankovka District, Cherkassy Region. A Tripolye settlement excavated by Ye.V. Tsvek. Site (dwelling) B-1 period. Dated by the radiocarbon (RC) and archaeomagnetic methods. RC sample 232, Ki 882: 5310±160 B.P./3360±160 b.c. AMsample 202: 3400 BoC. Arbuzin, Korsun-Shevche nkovsky A Tripolye settlement of B-2 period. author. Dwelling sites. AM sample 88: 2800 B.C.

District, Excavated

No. 1,

No. 1,

(AM)

Cherkassy Region. by Ye.V. Tsvek and the

Shkarovka, Belaya Tserkov District, Kiev Region. A Tripolye settlement of Bl - B-2 period. Excavated by Ye.V. Tsvek. Eight radiocarbon and six archaeomagnetic dates. Site 5, AMsample 197: 3200 . BoC. Site 6, RC sample 226, Ki 881: 4620±100 B.P./2670±100 b.c. Site 6, RC sample 34, Ki 520: 5015±105 B.P./3065±105 b.c. Site 6, AMsample 196: 3200 B.C. Site 11, RC sample 24, Ki 201: 4320±170 B.P./2370±170 b . c . Site 11, RC sample 227, Ki 879: 4710±130 B.P./2760±130 B.P. Site 11, AMsample 126: 3200 B.C. Site 12, RC sample 230, Ki 878: 4580±150 B.P./2630±150 b.c . Site 12, RC sample 229, Ki 877: 4690±80 B.P./2740±80 b.c. Site 11/12, RC sample 228, Ki 520: 5015±105 B.P./3065±105 b.c. Site 11/12, RC sample 228, Bln 2088: 4940±45 B.P./2990±45 b. c. 1969 excavations, AMsample 69: 3200 B.C. 1973 excavations, AMsampl e 155: 3000 B.C. 1970 excavations, AMsample 87: 3300 BoC.

92

Miropolye, Korsun-Shevchenkovsky District, Cherkassy Region. A Tripolye settlement of B-2 period. Excavated by Ye.V. Tsvek. Site 1, AMsample 171: 3000 B.C. Site 5, AMsample 219: 2900 B.C. Site 4, RC sample 234, Ki 874: 5770±120 B.P./3820±120 b.c. Kharkovka, Mankovka District, Cherkassy A Tripolye settlement of B period. Excavated Site 2, AMsample 174: 3200 B.C. Site 1, AMsample 175: 3200 B.C.

Region. by Ye.V. Tsvek.

Vesely Kut, Talnoe District, Cherkassy Region. A Tripolye settlement of B-1,2 period. Excavated by Ye.V. Tsvek. Site 1, AMsample 221: 3200 B.C. Site 2, RC samples 238,239, Bln 2137: 5180±65 B.P./3230±65 b.c. Site 5/6, AMsample 220: 3100 B.C. 1976 excavations, charcoal RC sample 231, Ki 903: 5100±100 B.P./ 3150±100 b. c. Rakovets, Soroki District, Moldavian SSR. A Tripolye settlement of B-2 period. Excavated by Ye.K. Chernysh. AMsample 73: 3200 B.C. AMsample 83: 3000 B.C. Putynesti, Flore~ti District, A Tripolye settlement (III) of B-1 in 1974. Charcoal from pit 1, depth RC sample 71, Ki 613: 5060±120

Moldavian SSR. period. Excavated 1.45 m. B.P./3110±120 b.c.

by V.I. Markevich

Soroki-0zero, Soroki District, Moldavian SSR. A Tripolye settlement of B,C period. Excavated by V.I. Markevich. AMsample 57: 2700 B.C. Varvarovka 8, Floresti District, Moldavian SSR. End of Middle Tripolye s~ttlement. Excavated by V.I. Markevich in 1974. Dwelling 6, dated by charcoal from depth 0.6 m. RC sample 67, Ki 601: 4370±180 B.P./2420±180 b.c. Brinzeni, Yedintsi District, Moldavian SSR. A Tripolye settlement of B-2 - C-1 period. Excavated Site 1, AMsample 120: 2700 B.C.

by V.I. Markevich.

Koste~, Ryshkani District, Moldavian SSR. A Tripolye settlement. Excavated by V.I. Markevich . Hearth, AMsample 134: 2300 B.C. A sample of burnt clay from hearth dated at t he UkrSSR Academy of Science's Institute of Geology by the thermoluminesce nt method: 2320 B.C. Klishchev, Tyvrov District, Vinnitsa Region. settlement of B-2 period. Excavated by I.I. Zayets. Hearth in dwelling 5, AMsample 101: 3300 B.C. Site (dwelling) 7, AMsample 127: 3200 B.C. Dwelling 4, AMsample 128: 3100 B.C. Dwelling 11, AMsample 129: 3100 B.C. · Radiocarbon date for settlement obtained at Leningrad laboratory: Le 1060: 5100±50 B.P./3150±50 b.c. A Tripolye

93

Vignanka, Lyubar District, Zhitomir Region. A Tripolye settlement. Excavated by V.A. Kruts. Site 1, AMsample 215: 2900 B.C. Mayaki, Belyaevka District, Odessa Region. Fortified settlement of the Usatov type of Tripolye, period C-2. Excavated by V.G. Zbenovich in 1964. Charcoal dates from · a defensive ditch. RC sample, Ki 870: 4670±110 B.P./2720±110 b.c. RC sample, Le 645: 4340±65 B.P./2390±65 b.c. RC sample, Bln 629: 4400±100 B.P./2450±100 b.c. Maidanetskoe, Talnoe District, Cherkassy Region. A Tripolye settlement of B-2 - C-1 period. Excavated by N.M. Shmagliy in 1973. Site E. RC sample 264, Ki 1212: 4600±80 B.P./2650±80 b.c. RC sample 264, Bln 2087: 4890±50 B.P./2940±50 b.c. AMsample 218: 2800 B.C. Chapaevka, Kiev. A Late Tripolye settlement. Excavated by V.A. Kruts in 1972. depth 0.6-1.0 m. RC sample 245, Ki 880: 4810±140 B.P./2860±140 b.c. RC sample 245, Bln 631: 4870±100 B.P./2920±100 b.c.

Site

1,

Podgortsy 2, Obukhov District, Kiev Region. A Late Tripolye settlement. Excavated by V.A. Kruts. Site 2, AMsample 6: 2700 B.C. All in all, more than 50 dates were obtained through the coordination centre of the UkrSSR Academy of Sciences' Institute of Archaeology. Together with the dates previously obtained and the recent ones produced by other European centres, we are now in possession of over 70 absolute dates for Tripolye sites, of which c.40 are radiocarbon dates and more then 30 archaeomagnetic (Fig. 52). For enhanced reliability of Tripolye's chronology, we cross-dated a number of objects by using both the radioc?rbon and archaeomagnetic m~thods. Such dates overwhelmingly correlate with one another (Klishchev, Maidanetskoe, Krasnostavka, Vesely Kut). In one case (Shkarovka), however, the radiocarbon method showed more recent dates then the archaeomagnetic one. At our request, a number of charcoal samples from Shkarovka, Chapaevka and Maidanetskoe were dated also by the Berlin and Leningrad laboratories.* By now, dozens of dates are available from Tripolye sites of all three periods, which permi t s us to tackle the problem of Tripolye's absolute chronology against a background largely enriched by new sources of information. More exact dating of Tripolye's absolute chronology is also promoted by the new and more reliable data of recent years on the chronology of many other Neo-Eneolithic cultur~s of Eastern Europe and the Balkans, including the Boian, Gumelni~a, TRB, Globular Amphora, Yamnaya and other cultures. * We take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude and N.M. Yermolova for their help in dating the Tripolye

94

to H. Quitta samples.

As i s shown in Fig. 52, the overwhelming majority of Tripolye's r ad i ocarb on and arc haeomagnetic dates cluster together around 3700-3400 b . c . (c .4500 -41 00 CAL-B.C.). Upward and downward of this range the concentrati on of Tri polye dates ceases abruptly and the few outlying ra di ocarbon dat es r ange f rom the ver y early 24th century b.c. (Mayaki: 4340±65 B.P./2390±65 b.c.) t o t he 37th century b.c. (Novye Ruse~ti: 5565±100 B.P./3615±100 b.c.; Mergi neni : 5610±55 B.P./3660±50 b.c.). One of t he ar chaeomagnetic dat e s also be long s t o the 24th century (Kost e~ti , hea rt h) an d lie s 200 years apa rt fr om other dates (26th - 25th ce nt ur i es ) obt ained by t he s ame meth od. The absence of more a rc ha eoma gnet ic dates for these cen t ur i es is compensated for by the t wo a vaila bl e r ad i ocarbon dates (Mayaki : 4400±100 B.P./2450±100 b.c.; Varvarovka 8: 4370±180 B. P ./ 2420±180 b . c .). The abo ve f a ct s culture lasted c.1500 25th / 24th centuries b.c the Ri ght-Bank Ukraine centuries B.C. according

sugg est that t he deve l opment of t he Tri pol ye ra di ocar bon years, from t he 38th / 37th t o the ., so t hat Tripolye tribes must ha ve i nhabited and Moldavia from c. the 45t h t o t he 29th to dendro-calibrated dates.

Our dating of the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture can be compared with the chronologies proposed by other researchers (H. Quitta, V. Dumitrescu, D. Monah, etc.). S. Marinescu-Bilcu (1974), for example, dates the Precucuteni I-III (Precucuteni III-Tripolye A) culture to 4200-3600 B.C. V.I. Markevich (1981) thinks it possible to date the end of the Tripolye culture in Northern Moldavia to the middle of the 3rd millennium B.C. The proposed chronology of the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture may also be compared with specialists' views on the age of its preceding, contemporaneous and succeeding Neo-Eneolithic cultures in the neighbouring areas. For instance, in the expert opinion of T.S. Passek ( 1977), S. Marinescu-Bilcu (1974) and V.G. Zbenovich (1980), an important if not decisive role in the formation of Cucuteni-Tripolye was played by the preceding Boian culture. On the basis of a series of radiocarbon dates from the Cascioarele camp site this culture is ascribed to the end of the 5th - first third of the 4th millennia b.c. (Quitta and Kohl 1969), which appears to be a direct indication that the lower (more ancient) date of the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture lies somewhere in the region of 3700 b.c. Setting Early Tripolye to the middle or beginning of the second half of the 4th millennium b.c. also fits the pattern of data on the Gumelnira culture which was synchronous with Tripolye, judging by the presence there of Tri polye imports (T.S. Passek , Ye.K. Chernysh , S.N. Bibikov, V.S. Titov, L.V. Subbotin, etc.). The many radiocarbon dates for Gumelnita (Cascioarele, Vare~ti , Gumelnita A-2 , Vulkanesti) are with few exceptions consistent within the 3700-3400 b.c. ra~ge . G.F. Zagniy has obtained one archaeomagnetic date for Gumelnita (Nagornoe, 3400 B.C .). In all probability , the Gumel nita culture slightly preceded Trip olye and then coexisted wit h it s ea rl y phases . This supposition correlates well with the ascertai ned time of t he Kar~novo VI culture (a n an alogue of Gumelnita) · in Bul gari a f or whic h a series of dates (Tel Azmak habitation site , layer 4) were obt ai ned at the Berlin la boratory . Eight of these dates fall wit hi n a s hor t spa n between 3767-364 7 b. c . and onl y one date "d rifted " int o t he 31st ce nt ur y and one into the 40th ce ntury b . c . (Dolukhanov and Ti mof eev 1972) .

95

It should be noted that new radiocarbon and archaeomagnetic dates made it possible not only to define more exactly the general chronological limits of Tripolye but also to provide more reliable dates for separate periods of that culture. The first attempts along this line were initiated by T.S. Passek (1969), H. Quitta (1967), V. Dumitrescu (1974), D. Monah (1978) and others. For instance, H. Quitta, on the basis of the radiocarbon dates, sets the sites of Cucuteni A-3 (Tripolye B-1) to 3500-3300 B.C. V. Dumitrescu ascribes Precucuteni III (Tripolye A) to 3850-3475 B.C. D. Monah sets more precisely the Cucuteni A-2 period (transition from Tripolye A to B-1) to 3600-3475 B.C. Our use of the abovementioned new data opens up much broader for understanding the chronology of Tripolye's separate periods.

vistas

Regrettably, the practice of ascertaining the relative chronology of Tripolye's habitation sites is such that the excavators ascribe nearly half t he sites to two adjacent periods (by T.S. Passek's classification), e.g. to periods A and B-1, B-1 and B-2, B-2 and C-1, Cl and C-2. As the methods of exact sciences date the overwhelming majority of such sites within periods A, B-1, B-2~ C-1 and C-2, we group them into five chronological phases of 200-400 year duration each (Fig. 52): =

Phase I - second quarter of the 4th millennium b.c. (3700-3500 b.c. c.4500-4350 CAL-B.C.). Five radiocarbon dates (Fig. 52:1-3).

Phase II - third quarter of the 4th millennium b.c. (3500-3300 b.c. CAL-B.C.). Five radiocarbon and two archaeomagnetic dates (Fig. 52:4-9).

= c.4350-4000

Phase III 3000/2900 b.c. archaeomagnetic

- fourth

quarter

of the 4th millennium b.c. (3300CAL-B.C.). Six radiocarbon and fifteen 52:10-14).

= c.4000-3700/3650 dates

(Fig.

Phase IV - first quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c. (3000/29002700/2600 b.c. = c.3700/3650-3350/3150 CAL~B.C.). Nine radiocarbon and five archaeomagnetic dates (F i g. 52:15-22). Phase V - second quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c. (2700/26002500/2400 b.c. = c.3350/3150-3100/2900 CAL-B.C.). Nine radiocarbon and two archaeomagnetic dates (Fig. 52:23-30).

Fig.

52 The five chronological phases of Cucuteni-Tripolye (I-V). 1 Ruse~ti; 2 - Tirpe~ti; 3 - Mergineni; 4 _- Polivanov Yar ; 5 Zarubintsy; 6 - Dregusheni; 7 - Laka Unzhureni; 8 - Habase~ti; 9 - Krasnostavka; 10 - Klishchev; 11 - Vesely Kut; 12 - Rakovets; 13 - Miropolye; 14 - Shkarovka; 15 - Valea Lupului; 16 Evminka; 17 - Chapaevka; 18 - Vignanka; 19 - Garbuzin; 20 Maidanetskoe; 21 - Soroki-Ozero; 22 - Podgortsy; 23 - Gorodsk; 24 - Danku; 25 - Gorodishche-Gorodnitsa; 26 - Brinzeni; 27 Varvarovka; 28 - Mayaki; 29 - Usatovo; 30 - Koste?ti-Pech.

96

STAGE C -14

b.c. A J\-B B,

81-2

&C1

82

0-2

C1

CAL B.C.

C2

(approximate )

30

A,..,..i~r

•

2500

3100

l ~ l I I I

I I I

•

21

2022

'A

I

14

I

'A I

I

19

~

·1

♦ I

:..

i A'•'

.,5

-

I

11 :

I

I

1

I

:

I

I

I I

t-

+:

♦ I

I 1.

I I

18117 A:, I

I

I

I

I

3400

,

3500 3650

• 15

I

I

I

I

l"AA•, I

~

I

I

I~

Q

I

~

:

~;

~

•

' ,,-• ·-~ ·1 I

3000

I

24

I

4200

-

4

3500

♦ '

4350

-

I

• a. 1

4470

4000

e radiocarbon

A

orchaeomognf'tic

97

C-14 b.c.

1500

NORTH

1-

--

PONTIC

-----

DONVOLGA

DNIEPER - DONETS

-t----

--

~

-

---

--

-

-

-I

CALB.C.

1800

+

2500

'

2

3100

300Vlo-------------------------------3750

Fig.

53 Radiocarbon dates for Yamnaya culture burials: 1 Pervokonstantinovka; 2 - Borisovka; 3 - Chervony Yar; 4-7 Novoselitsa; 8-13 - 0tradnoe; 14 - Semenovka; 15 - Utkonosovka; 16-18 - Verkhne-Tarasovka; 19 - Shirokaya Balka; 20-21 Khristoforovka; 22 - Stryukovka; 23-25 - Vishnevoe; 26-28 Balki; 29-30 - Privolnoe; 31 - Ni kolaevka; 32 - Minovka; 33-40 Mogilev; 41-44 - Svatovo; 45-48 - Pereshchepino; 49-50 Chernyavshchina; 51 - Kremennaya; 52 - Gireeva Mogila; 53-55 Dmitrovsky Mogilnik; 56 - Tsatsa.

As is seen from Fig. 52, there is somet imes a 100-150 radiocarbon year overlap at the junctio~ of two neighbouring phases, as, for example, phases III and IV, IV and V. This can probably be explained in the first place by the imprec i se · dating of certain sites, specifically by the C14 method. It is also likely that some sites of the adjacent phases coexisted for a stretch of time. The possibility cannot be excluded that forthcoming series of dates obtained by the methods of exact sciences will require some revision of -the principles of our current periodisation of the Tripolye culture, which is based mainly on the typological analysis of material evidence. All things considered, we will make arbitrary use of a working the five scheme based on chronological correspondence between B-1, B-2, abovementioned phases (I-V) and the periods of Tripolye (A-1, C-1 and C-2) as classified by T.S. Passek.

98

The Yamnaya culture The traditional archaeological methods date this culture between the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd millennia B.C. (Merpert 1974), though some scholars narrow its life span to the second half of the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lagodovskaya, Shaposhnikova and Makarevich 1962). Other contrasting opinions set the beginning of the Yamnaya culture to the 4th and even 5th millennia B.C. (V.N. Danilenko). On the basis of a series of radiocarbon dates the author (Telegin 1977) proposed to date the Late Yamnaya sites to c.2500-1900 b.c. and the whole Yamnaya culture (including Early Yamnaya sites) to 2700-1900 b.c. Since then we have obtained over 30 new C14 dates which prevalently confirm this view (Fig. 53). Below Ukraine.

is a full

list

of absolute

dates

from Yamnaya burials

in the

Odessa Region Vishnevoe,

Tatarbunary

District.

Excavated

by

L.V. Subbotin

in

1978. Kurgan (barrow) 17, burial 4. Ki 1217: 3950±90 B.P./2000±90 Same, burial 37. Ki 1439: 3800±120 B.P./1850±120 b.c. Same, burial 38. Ki 1711: 4250±80 B.P./2300±80 b.c. Kurgan 17, burial 36. Ki 1424: 3750±60 B.P./1800±60 b.c. Novoselitsa,

Tatarbunary

District.

Excavated

b.c.

by L.V. Subbotin in

1978. Kurgan 19, burial 7. Ki 1219: 4490±70 B.P./2540±70 b.c. Same, burial 11. Ki 1220: 3770±60 B.P./1820±60 b.c. Same, burial 15. Ki 1712: 4350±70 B.P./2400±70 b.c. Kurgan 20, burial 9. Ki 1713: 4750±80 B.P./2800±80 b.c. Semenovka, Belgorod-Dnestrovsky District. Excavated L.V. Subbotin in 1975. Kurgan 11, burtal 6. Ki 1753: 4380±50 B.P./2430±50 b.c. Kurgan 14, burial 52. Ki 2126: 4600±90 .B.P./2650±90 b.c.

by

Utkonosovka, Ismail District. Excavated by N.M. Shmagliy in 1971. Kurgan 1, burial 3. Ki 660: 4770±120 B.P./2820±120 b.c. Nikolaev Region Otradnoe,

Novy Bug District.

Excavated

by O.G. Shaposhnikova

in

1971. Kurgan 1, burial 17. Ki 431: 3890±105 B.P./1940±105 b.c. Same, burial 21. Ki 452: 3830±120 B.P./1880±120 b.c. Same, burial 22. Ki 100/3: 3925±110 B.P./1975±110 b.c. ·Kurgan 24, burial 1. Ki 490: 3870±105 B.P./1920±105 b.c. Kurgan 26, burial 9. Ki 478: 3990±100 B.V./2040±100 b.c. Kurgan 36, burial 4. Ki 483: 3660±120 B.P./1710±120 b.c. Khristoforovka, Bashtanka District. Excavated by O.G. Shaposhnikova in 1973. · Kurgan 1, burial 1. Ki 578: 4170±170 B.P./2220±170 b.c. Same, burial 11. Ki 549: 3980±200 B.P./2030±200 b.c.

99

Kherson Region Podokalinovka, Tsyurupinsk District. Excavated by L.D. Yevdokimova in 1977 and 1979. Kurgan 5, burial 5. Ki 1441: 4400±150 B.P./2450±150 b.c. Kurgan 6, burial 12. Ki 1715: 4150±60 B.P./2200±60 b.c. Chervony Yar,

Berislav

District.

Excavated by L.D. Yevdokimova in

1978. Kurgan 1, burial

10. Ki ~436: 4100±130 B.P./2150±130

Shirokaya Balka, in 1977. Kurgan 3, burial Kurgan 4, burial

Belozerka

District.

b.c.

Excavated by L.D. Yevdokimova

6. Ki 1717: 4450±85 B.P./2500±85 b.c. 10. Ki 1716: 4850±120 B.P./2900±120 b.c.

Zaporozhye Region Balki, Vasilyevka Balkovsky Kurgan, Same, burial 40. Same, burial 57.

District. Excavated by V.V. Otroshchenko in 1973~ burial 40. Ki 587: 3990±140 B.P./2040±140 b.c. Le 1168: 4080±90 B.P./2130±90 b.c. Ki 606: 4370±120 B.P o/2420±120 b.c.

Volchanek, Aki movka District. Excavated by V.V. Dorofeev in 1979. Kurgan 1, burial 18. Ki Ll 91: 3860±50 B.P./1910 ±50 ).c. Starobogdanovka, Mikt ailovka District. Excavated V.V. Otroshchenko in 1980. Kurgan 1, burial 6. Ki 2120: 4760±55 B.P./28 : 0±55 b~c. Dnepropetrovsk Minovka,

by

Region Magdalinovka

District.

Excavated by

V.A. Safronova

in

1974. Kurgan 2, burial Kurgan 1, burial Pereshchepino,

5. Ki 858: 4570±110 B.P./2620±110 b .c. 3. Ki 421: 3970±80 B.P./2020±80 b. c . Novomoskovsk District.

Excavated b:, the author

in

1972. Kurgan 4, burial 13. Ki 659: 4405±120 B.P./2455±120 b.c. Kurgan 1, burial 6. Ki 100/4: 4290±90 B.P./2340±90 b.c. Excavations by the author and A;s. Belfaeva in 1971: Kurgan 1, burial 7. Ki 603: 4310±150 B.P./2360±150 b .c. Same, burial 7. Vilnyus: 4215±65 B.P./2265±65 b.c. Verkhne-Tarasovka, Tomakovka Distri ct . Excavated N.N. Cherednichenko in 1975. Kurgan 70, burial 13, first kurgan group. Ki 957: 4090±95 B.P./ 2140±95 b.c. Excavations by L.G. Yevdomikova in 1973: Kurgan 21, burial 11. Ki 582: 3740±150 B.P./1790±150 b.c. Kurgan 17, burial 3. Ki 581: 3820±190 B.P./1870±190 b.c. Kurgan 9, burial 18. Ki 602: 4070±120 B.P./2120±120 b.c.

100

by

Stryukovka,

Tomakovka District.

Excavated

by N.N. Cherednichenko

in

1975. Kurgan 105, burial

20. Ki 897: 4035±60 B.P./2085±60

b.c.

Chernyavshchin a, Pavlograd District. Excavated by the Donbas" expedition in 1974. Kurgan 3, burial 2. Ki 803: 4160±120 B.P./2210±120 b.c. Same, burial 2. Vilnyus: 3790±105 B.P./1840±105 b.c. Pervokonstantinovka,

Chaplino District.

"Dnieper-

Excavated by A.M. Leskov in

1972. Kurgan 12, burial Mogilev,

6. Ki 437: 3530±75 B.P./1580±75

Tsarichanka

District.

Excavated

b.c.

by S.N. Bratchenko

in

1970. Kurgan 1, burial 6. Ki 497: 3940±120 B.P./1990±120 b.c. Excavations by the author in 1972: Brilyuvata Mogila, burial 5. Ki 522: 4530±130 B.P./2580±130 Same, burial 6. Ki 495: 4020±80 B.P./2070±80 b.c. Same, burial 6. Le 1167: 4000±100 B.P./2050±100 b.c. Same, burial 17. Ki 494: 4080±100 B.P./2130±100 b.c.

b.c.

Dimit r ovsky Mogilnik, Nikopol District. Materials supplied Shilov. Kurgan 1, burial 5. Le 822: 3850±90 B.P./1900±90 b.c. Same, burial 16. Le 823: 3680±60 B.P./1730±60 b.c. Kurgan 10, burial 12. Le 824: 3920±50 B.P./1970±50 b.c.

V .P.

by

Cherka ssy Region Bashtechki, Zhashkov District. Excavated by I.I. Artemenko in 1980. Kurgan 4, burial 2. Ki 1720: 4450±70 B.P./2500±70 b.c. Nagornoe, Zhashkov District. Excavated by I.I. Artemenko in 1980. Kurgan 49, burial 3. Ki 2119: 4570±50 B.P./2620±50 b.c. Dobrovody, Uman District. Excavatej by I.I. Artemenko in 1982. Kurgan 2, burial 6. Ki 2107: 3980±45 B.P./2030±45 b.c. Kurgan 1, burial 2. Ki 2124: 4200±70 B.·P./2250±70 b.c. Kurgan 2, burial 4. Ki 2129: 3960±55 B.P./2010±55 b.c. Same, burial 3. Ki 2122: 4370±60 B.P./2420±60 b.c. Donetsk Region Kremnevka,

Volodarskoe

District.

Excavated

by S.N.

Bratchenko in

1977. Kurgan 6, burial Voroshilovgrad Astakhovo,

4. Ki 1708: 4250±50 B.P./2300±50

b.c.

Region Sverdlovsk

District.

Excavated

by G.L. Yevdokimova

in

1975. Kurgan 3, burial

in

15. Ki 853: 4750±140 B.P./2800±140

b.c.

Voitovo, Stanichno-Luganskoe District. Excavated by S.N. Bratchenko 1980. Kurgan 4, burial 8. Ki 1718: 3980±60 B.P./2030±60 b.c.

101

Nikolaevka, Stanichno-Luganskoe District. Excavated Bratchenko in 1971. Kurgan 5, burial 12. Ki 873: 4280±100 B.P./2330±100 b.c.

by

S.N.

Privolnoe, Lisichansk District. Excavated by S.N. Bratchenko 1974 and 1975. Kurgan 1, burial 9. Ki 1707: 4550±100 B.P./2600±100 b.c. Kurgan 8, burial 1. Ki 1214: 3770±100 B.P./1820±100 b.c. Kurgan 11, burial 5. Ki 1437: 4800±140 B.P./2850±140 b.c. Svatovo, Svatovo Kurgan 1, burial Same, burial 1. Kurgan 2, burial Same, burial 1.

District. Excavated by S.N. Bratchenko 1. Ki 585: 4000±90 B.P./2050±90 b.c. S0AN 1043: 4150±30 B.P./2200±30 b.c. 1. Ki 586: 4010±180 B.P./2060±180 b.c. S0AN 1044: 3830±30 B.P./1880±30 b.c.

in

in 1971.

Similar dates for Yamnaya burials were obtained both from more easterly territories (Gireeva Mogila: 3870±130 B.P./1920±130 b.c.; . Tsatsa, UCLA1270: 4210±85 B.P./2260±85 b.c.; Ustman, UCLA1271: 4150±80 B.P./2200±80 b.c.) and from the Danube and Balkan "ochre" graves (BaiaHamangia, Grn 1995: 4530±65 B.P./2580±65 b.c., Bln ,29: 4090±160 B.P./2140±160 b.c., KN 38: 4060±160 B.P./2110±160 b.c.; Cernavoda, Bln 62: 4260±100 B.P./2310±100 b.c., Bln 61a: 4505±100 B.P./2555±100 b.c., etc.). Today we have at our disposal a total of more than 70 radiocarbon dates for the Yamnaya culture. As already noted, a series of new measurements has confirmed in principle our dating of this culture's age to 2700-1900 b.c. radiocarbon or c.3400-2350 CAL-B.C. However, we now witness the emergence of some new aspects, such as a considerable increase in Yamnaya burial dates (five altogether) falling within the range 2850-2800 b.c. (c.3550 CAL-B.C.). Yet another date reaches back as far as 2900±85 b.c. (Shirokaya Balka). These earlier dates were obtained mainly from the area north of the Black Sea, but two originate from the Yamnaya kurgans in the Azov area (Astakhovo, Privolnoe). Proceeding from this evidence, we can confine the dating of the Yamnaya culture of the steppe Ukraine largely to the 29th-19th centuries b.c., i.e. c.3650-2350 CAL-B.C. X

X

X

More exact data on the absolute chronology of the Sredny Stog, Tripolye and Yamnaya cultures are important to the synchronisation of these cultures with one another and with many sites of other Ukrainian Copper Age cultures. Let us first tackle the problem of chronological relationships between the Tripolye, Sredny Stog and Yamnaya cultures. As is well known, scholars have long since taken note of Sredny Stog penetrations into the more westerly Tripolye-Cucuteni continuum (Movsha 1961; Dumitrescu 1964; Telegin 1971b; Todorova 1980). Such penetrations can be well ·traced starting from Tripolye period B-1 - beginning of B-2 or from Cucuteni A-3, A-B (the periodisation scheme of Romanian archaeologists).

102

As has been mentioned, the transition period from Tripolye B- 1 to B-2 marking the appearance of contacts with the steppe is dated to c.3500 3300 b.c., i.e. c.4350-4000 CAL-B.C. Considering the evidence of shelltempered pottery (analogous to the Sredny Stag ceramics) amounting to c.10% of the ceramics in a number of Romanian sites ( e.g. Dregu~eni), it may be assumed that the earliest influences of the Sredny Stag culture were in effect already present during Period 1 (pre-corded decoration) of SSC. This period precedes Dereivka and can therefore be dated to the beginning-t o- middle of the second half of the 4th millennium b.c., i.e. the fin al third of the 5th millennium CAL-B.C. Imports of Tripolye ceramics of the B-2 - C-1 period are encountered in the complexes of Perio d 2 , the corded or Der eivka period (Dereivka , Igren, Molyukhov Bugor) , which may be indicative of their contemporaneity. Consequently, the Sredny Stag culture as a whole was developing synchronously with the Cucuteni- Tripolye culture of the B- 1 and B- 2 - C-1 periods, which corresponds to phases II-IV by the abovementioned radi ocarbon archaeomagnetic classification (see Fig. 54). As already shown, the late Yamnaya culture generally succeeds the . Late Tripolye sites. This view is supported not only by the Cl4 dates but also by the stratigraphy of Ukrainian kurgans where in many cases the Late Tripolye (Usatovo) sites are covere d with Late Yamnaya ones, as, for instance, Nerushai, Glubokoe, Borisovka (Shmagliy and Cher nyakov 1970), Bolgrad 2 (Subbotin and Shmagliy 1970), Volchansk and Chkalovo (Nikolova 1981). While the Late Yamnaya sites postdate the latest Tripolye (C-2) ones, the Early Yamnaya sites which generally appear c.2700-2600 b.c. (Telegin 1977) run parallel with them. This is inferred not only from the comparison between the abovementioned dates but also from a number of archaeological observations. The contem por aneity of Late Tripolye (C2) and Early Yamnaya sites is evidenced, for instance , by Late Tripolye ceramic finds in the second (Early Yamnaya) la yer of Mikhailovka. This is corroborated by the finding of a pointed-based vessel of Early Yamnaya type in a Usatovo cemetery (Patokova 1979, figs. 35, 41). It should be noted that the Early Yamnaya and Late Tripolye parallels have been emphasised with good reason by many other scholars (V.G. Zbenovich, V.A. Kruts). On the other hand, T. G. Movsha beli e ves that the Usatovo pointed-based vessel may be associated with the Dereivka period of the Sredny Stog culture indicating this culture's contemporaneity with Late Tripolye. However, in the light of the new Tripolye dates this supposition appears to be erroneous.

Chronological relatio ns hips between the Sredny Stog and Yamnaya cultures are substantiated by · the stratigraphy of the Alexandria settlement site where the SSC stratum was overlain by Early Yamnaya material. That Dereivka predates the Early Yamnaya period is also indicated by the finding of Dereivka ceramics in Mikhailovk a 's lower stratum which preceded the Early Yamnaya layer. This chronology corre lates with the above radiocarbon dates for the Sredny Stog and Yamnaya cultures. The transition from the SSC to the Early Yamnaya culture appears to have taken place sometime between the first and second quarters of the 3rd millennium b.c., i.e. c.3400 CAL-B.C. (Fig. 54).

103

The chronology

of the Novodanilovka

and Lower Mikhailovka

groups

The contents and chronology of sites of the Novodanilovka type now under careful investigation. Whereas in the past we regarded monuments as a specific variation of burial within the Sredny culture and dated them to the Dereivka phase (Telegin 1971b), approach now needs revision.

are such Stog this

First of all, the presence in one of the Novodanilovka cemetery's burials of a globular burnished vessel with bosses entirely atypical of the SSC ceramics throws doubt upon direct genetic links between the Novodanilovka and the Sredny Stog sites. Besides, a more detailed analysis of the Early Eneolithic materials in the Black Sea steppeland permits us to extend considerably the inventory of the Novodanilovka sites in general. We have in mind the complexes of finds in the early "small" kurgans of the Suvorovo, Casimcea, etc. type, i.e. monuments containing the so-called "sceptres". This inference is based on the accompaniment of the sceptres by artifacts typical of the whoie Novodanilovka group: large flint objects constituting an "Eneolithic assemblage" (knives, axes, spearheads) and large disk-shaped beads made of shells, etc. It would be inappropriate to ascribe every known sceptre in the Volga - Lower Danube area to Novodanilovka sites but genetic links between certain types of these sceptres and Novodanilovka seem unquestionable. We will return to this matter later. Judging by the stratigraphy of the Mariupol cemetery, the Novodanilovka type sites succeed Mariupol type cemeteries (Mariupol main pit, Nikolskoe, Lysaya Gora, etc.). Consequently, their appearance should be dated as early as the beginning of the second half of the 4th millennium b.c. (c.4350 CAL-B.C.). Their early emergence is also evidenced by the sceptres of the Casimcea-Suvorovo type found in habitation sites of Cucuteni-Tripolye A and AB (Fedele~eni), Gumelnita (Salcuta) and other cultures (Nestor 1932). Excavations at Suvorovo and Casimcea indicate that sites of this type were also synchronous with the first "small" kurgans with cromlechs which should evidently be assigned to the . late 4th-early 3rd millennia b.c. The possibility cannot be excluded that their early occurrence (first ·half of the 4th millennium b.c.) is also proved by the burial at Kainary (Movsha and Chebotarenko 1969), although questions on the integrity of the find's context make their homogeneity problematical, as has already been pointed out by A. Hausler (1982). The Novodanilovka type burials in Voroshilovgrad and Suvorovo were overlain by Late Yamnaya graves. So monuments of this type generally relate to the second half of the 4th millennium b.c. and survive probably until the early 3rd millennium b.c., i.e. very roughly f~om the late 5th to the mid-4th millennium CAL-B.C. More accurate specification of the Sredny Stog, Tripolye and Yamnaya absolute chronology challenges the validity of our temporal estimates of the Lower Mikhailovka sites in the Dnieper, Azov and Black Sea steppe areas. We distinguish two main phases in their development: the early (Lower Mikhailovka) period and the late (Shirokoe-Baratovka) period. Sites of the latter type have their closest analogies (if not identities) in the earlier Kemi-Oba sites of the Crimea (Telegin 1971a). On the whole, we understand the Lower Mikhailovka type sites as the

104

early stage of the Kemi- Oba culture which in the Crimea and northern Black Sea survives unt il Late Yamnaya times. Cultural contacts between Lower Mikhailovka and Kemi- Oba on the one hand and Tripolye sites on the other have already been observed by many researchers (F. Lagodovskaya, O.G. Shaposhni kova, V.G. Zbenovich, V.K. Dergachev, etc.). This is also demonstrated by new evidence, specifically by the "Late Tripolye" figurines of t he Serezlievka type unearthed (in Shirokoe) from the Shirokoe-Baratovka t ype burials. Four more burials with similar figurines were investigated in 1979 near the village of Chkalovo in Ordzhonokidze District, Dnepropetrovsk Region. As may be expected, such figurines survived for only ·a short period, and their presence certainly indicates the contemporary existence of the Late Tripolye and Late Lower Mikhailovka (Shirokoe-Baratovka) settle ments. On account of this, the Shirokoe-Baratovka sites , like the Late Tripolye ones, should be dated to the first half of the 3rd millennium b.c. (c. 3700-3 100 CAL-B.C.) and not to the middle-to-second half of that millennium as has been postulated by scholarship until now. O.G. Shaposhnikova has recently arrived at the same conclusion. As to the early period of the Lower Mikhailovka sites among which O.G. Shaposhnikova singles out the earliest Leventsovka phase, it undoubtedly predates both the latest Tripolye (C-2) and the Early Yamnaya periods. This temporal sequence is well supported by the stratigraphy of the Mikhailovka settlements where the Lower Mikhailovka layer lies under the Early Yamnaya one. As a whole, early Lower Mikhailovka sites should evidently be ascribed to the first half of the 3rd millennium b.c. It should be stressed in this connection that the two available separate dates for the Lower Mikhailovka layer (Le 335: 2100±150 b.c. and Bln 630: 2380±100 b.c.) which cla im this culture to be much younger do not provide a ·good fit. The above amendment to the chronology and periodisatiori of the Copper Age cultures of the Ukraine and Moldavia is most helpful in under st andi ng t he course of historical development in the south - west USSR during the 5th-3rd millennia B.C. The evidence of absolute . chronology coupled · with stratigraphic observations, comparative analysis of material culture and the study of foreign imports allow one a more accurate insight into connections and mutual relations between the Copper Age tribes of the Ukraine and its adjacent territories. The chronology

of the TRB and Globular

Amphora cultures

of the Ukraine

As is well known, already _in the late 1950's the contemporaneity of the Late Tripolye period with the sites of t he TRB cu lt ure was verified by the works of both Polish (J. Kowalczyk, K Jazdzewski) and Soviet (Yu.G. Zakharuk 1959) scholars. This view which sets Tripolye's final phases within the first half of the 3rd millennium b.c. is well supported by new radiocar bon dates for the ·TRB culture. Among this culture's many available dates are those obtained from Poland (Chmelev, Grodek Nadbuzhny, Zarebovo, etc.), i .e. from areas in t he immediat e neighbourhood of Tripolye (Dolukhanov and Timofeev 1972). These dates cluster together around 2900-2700 b.c. synchronising the TRB cult ure with the similarly dated sites of the Evminka and Chapaevka types which never occur before the middle of the 3rd millennium b.c. The new data place this culture in Poland generally within the late 4th-middle of the 3rd millennia b.c. (Jankowska et al . 1979).

(14 b.c.

CAL

2000

2500

□

TR B

o□

0 Fig.

cco

'(

CV

1I

c-v

100

m 8 A

li

i

~

3750

4350 850

54 Synchronistic table of North Pontic steppe stockbreeding cultures and Right-Bank Ukraine, Balkan and Lower Danube farming cultures (according to V. Durnitrescu and D.Ya. Telegin): GA - Globular Amphora culture; TP - Tisza-Polgar; BK Bodrogkeresztur; TRB - Funnel-Necked Ware culture; GUM Gumelnita; SAL - Salcuta; CV - Cernavoda; C-T - Cucuteni Tripoly~; DD - Dnieper-Donets culture; SSC - Sredny Stog culture; Y - Yamnaya culture; ND - Novodanilovka; KO - Kemi-Oba.

As is generally believed by specialists, the TRB culture is succeeded by the Globular Amphora culture. This view is supported by new radiocarbon dates for this culture which directly fol ow those for the TRB culture. However, the distribution of dates suggests that there might not have been a complete coincidence between the Late Tripolye and TRB cultures, the latter evidently ceasing to exist already in the 26th century b.c., while the Late Tripolye cultures of Usatovo, Gorodsk and Sofievka survived until the 25th-24th centuries b.c. During this time Late Tripolye obviously coexisted with the earlier phases of the Globular Amphora culture. rhis follows not only from the radiocarbon dates but also from the material evidence supplied, for instance, by the Dorogostai I habitation site (Mlinov District, Rovno Region) recently excavated by I.K. Sveshnikov and V.M. Konoplya (1980), whose complex of ceramics shows traces of both the Tripolye and Globular Amphora cultures. With all this in view, we may presume that the TRB culture developed around the same time as the earlier sites of Late Tripolye, and that the Globular Amphora culture was contemporary with Tripolye's closing phases. A general idea of mutual relations between the various Copper cultures of the Ukraine and Moldavia is presented in Fig . 54.

106

Age

Recent research introduces certain corrections into our earlier periodisation scheme of the Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures · of the Ukraine and Moldavia (Telegin 1971b, 1978) which first subsumed five and then three periods and a number of subperiods. In particular, we are now able to employ a more specific classification system for . the sites of the second half of the second Neo-Eneolithic period separating it into at least four subperiods . On the basis of t he recentl y obta in ed data t he modified the Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures' deve lopment in the USSR may be as follows: b.c.)

scheme of south-west

Period I. The Neolithic period 5th- eginning of the 4th millennia divided into two subperiods (see Tel egin 1978).

Period II. The Neo-Eneolithic ("Tripolye") period of the 3rd millennia b.c.) divided into four subperiods:

(4th-firs

t half

II-I. Second quarter - middle of the 4th millennium b.c. Emergence of Tripolye: sites of phase ·A (Precucuteni III). Gumelnita in northwestern Black Sea area. Second phase (II-a and b) of the Dnieper-Donets culture in the areas above the Dnieper rapids and north of the Sea of Azov (Nikolskoe, Mariupol). Sites of t he Zimno Zlotoe type in Volhynia. Upper Neolithic layers of Rakushechny Yar. Syeszheye in the Volga area. II-2. Second half - end of the 4th millenpium b.c. Phase B of Tripolye. Pre-cord period of the Sredny Stog culture (Strilchaya Skela). Second (Ile) period of the Dnieper-Donets culture on the Middle Dnieper. Sites of the Goshcha-Verbkovitsa type in Volhynia. Emergence of Pit-Comb ware sites in north-east Ukraine. II-3. First quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c. Tripolye C-1. Second or corded period of the Sredny Stog culture · Dereivka). Early Lower Mikhailovka period. Third period of the Dnieper-Donets culture (of the Pustynka 5 and Zasukha type). The TRB cul t ure in Volhynia. The Pit-Comb culture in north-east Ukraine. Khvalynsk cemetery in the Volga area. · II-4. Second quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c. Late Tripolye (C-2) - Early Yamnaya - Lower Mikhailovka (Baratovka, Progress) chronological horizon. The TRB culture in Volhynia. Fourth period of the DnieperDonets culture in Byelorussia. The Pit-Comb Ware culture in the northeast Ukraine. Maykop (early phase) in the Northern Caucasus. Period III. The Neo-Eneolithic period ("Yamnaya") . Second half of the 3rd - beginning of the 2nd . millennia b.c. Disappearance of Tripolye. Late phase of the Yamnaya culture. The Globular Amphora culture in Volhynia. The Pit-Comb Ware culture in - north-east Ukraine. The late phase of Maykop in the Northern Caucasus.

107

VII.

THE ROLEOF THE SREDNYSTOGPOPULATIONIN THE HISTORYOF COPPERAGE EUROPE

In the preceding chapters we have discussed the material recovered from the Copper Age settlement and cemetery at Dereivka. On the basis of our analysis of the evidence, both of these sites can be ascribed to the Sredny Stog culture of the late 4th-early 3rd millennia b.c. Judging from the anthropological data, Dereivka's inhabitants were Europoids of the Late Cro-Magnon type. The Dereivka settlement is one of the most fully studied sites of the Copper Age in the Dnieper basin, and the excavations provided much new evidence relating to the living conditions, occupation, arts and crafts, etc. of the Sredny Stog culture and the cultures of the southern part of the European USSR generally. The habitation site contained a large complex of ceramics including high-neck pointed-based pottery, the first in Europe to be deco rate d with cord ornament (Fig. 36:8-10; Fig. 38). Worthy of notice is the presence among the flint and antler artifacts of many weapons - arrowheads, spearheads, and above all, battle hammers made of antler (Fig. 42). The coraplex of plastic objects from Dereivka, the only one for the whole Sredny Stog culture (Fig. 44), is stylistically and compositionally or i ginal an d u ique as compared with other copper-bronze cultures of Europe a~d Asia. Finally 9 the habitation site's faunal remains lead us to the conclusion that the SSC population made extensive use of the domestic hcr se which, in view of the accompanying bridle cheekpieces (Fig. 51), 1a s already employed for riding. The Sredny Stog riding horse was evi dently among the most ancient in Europe and in the whole wor l d. The essential role of the horse in the life of the SSC popu l ation an instance of which is the is evidenced by the cult of this animal, with two dogs burial in Dereivka of a horse skull in association and SSC on the whole to a (Fig. 23). All this elevates Dereivka prominent position among Europe's cultures of the 4th-3rd millennia b.c~ The importance of the SSC in understanding the history of the population of Eastern Europe and adjacent territories has many aspects, two of which will be discussed below: the SSC role in the emergence of the copper-bronze steppe cultures in the European part of the USSR, and SSC influences on the development of the Copper Age cultures in the Right-Bank Ukraine, the Balkans and the Danube area. Today specialists generalty presume the Sr~dny Stog culture to have been the main genetic precursor of the Yarnnaya culture in the Dnieper and Don basins. This theory is supported by a number of facts including the process of ceramic evolution from SSC into Yarnnaya shapes, the similarity o.f the two cultures' burial rites, th e essential function of horsebreeding in their economies, etc. (lagodovskaya et al. 1962; Telegin 1973:147-154). In more easterly territories in the Volga basin an important (if not predominant) role in the development of the Yamnaya culture was played by the remarkable sites of the Syeszheye and Khvalynsk type explored under I.B. Vasilyev's supervision (Vasilyev and Matveeva 1976; Agapov et al. 1979; Vasilyev 1981). Generally speaking, this culture which spread over vast expanses of Europe from the Volga to the Danube had a rather mixed genes i s ~ Judging by its ceramics, the culture's roots reach back into the Neolithic and Early Eneolithic 108

cultures of the Dnieper, reg ·o n (Fig. 56).

Seversky

Donets,

Don, and Volga-Caspian

steppe

The Yamnay a culture in t he steppe zone of Eurasia is succeeded by a number of ot her cultures in which cord decoration of Sredny Stog or i gin retains its salient place. Also the horse, domesticated in the Sredny Stog times, continues to be used widely by the population of the Polta vka, Catacomb-Grave, Multiridge Ware and Srubnaya (Timber-Grave) cultures. As stated a bov e , the Sredny Stog and Yamnaya cultures constitute a single cult ural - genetic line of the steppe Eneolithic which, some re searchers arg ue, was essential to the spread of Inda-European influences no t only over Eastern Europe but also over its adjacent territories including those of the west. This brings us to the problem o f mutual relations between the North Pontic steppe cultures o f the Sredny Stog-Yamn ay a line of development and the agriculturalstockbreeding world of the Right-Bank Ukraine and more westerl y Europe~n areas. As shown before, in t he Copper Age the Steppe Pontic influences were expanding westward in two directions: to the north - west t hrough Volhynia and Podolia, by-passing t he Carpath ia ns on the north, and to the so uth-west into the Forecarpathian, Lower Danube and Balkan re gio ns. We have already ment ioned that t he Late Tripolye tribes and the TRB and Globular Amphora population adopted cord decoration an d the skill of hor se taming fro m the steppe cult ures. This happened, however, at a relatively late date, sometime in the third quarter - first hal f of the 3rd millennium b .c., i .e. already in t he post-Sredny Stog period. This places the problem of the steppe cultures' i~pa ct on their north-western neighbours outside our temporal domain. However, contacts between the steppe tribes and the farming cultures to its south-west commenced at qu·te another time, undoubtedly during the Sredny Stog period , so we will exa mine this problem in more de ail (but only for as l ong as the SSC contin ued to ex·st, i . e . within -the range of the second half of the 4th - first quarter of the 3rd millennium b.c.). By way of emphasising he histor·cal i mportance of relationships be tween the steppe stock breeding cultures and the farming cultures of the Right-Bank Ukraine, the Bal kans and the Lower Danube, i t is necessary to say that t he problem involves two groups of European Copper Age cultures which were entirely antithetical in economic structure, material culture and, e viden tly , social organisation. The world of the steppe stockbreeders was a community which had t amed the horse and adopted it for riding early on. This rather mobile population lived in small settlements co nsisting of ve r y primitive semi -s ubterrane a n dwellings . Their material culture, especially ceramics (pointed-based vessels, stamped decoration), was a great deal inferior to that of the settled agriculturalist s of the Right -Ban k Ukraine. Appar e ntly, these steppe inhabitants were a very warlike people whose mounted warriors were armed with ba ttle hammers , spears, and bows and arrows. The farming world contrasted wi th the herdsmen in many respects. The agriculturalists boasted a much higher sta ndard of material culture, they perfected the manufacture of high quality variously-shaped and 109

decorated pottery, and they excelled in the development of plastic arts. They lived in spacious and fairly well-arranged surface dwellings, in large (sometimes huge, by that period's yardstick) settlements. Apart from crop cultivation, they raised cattle, ovicaprids and pigs. The horse was in very little use or probably unknown. The insignificant arms characterise them as more or less peaceful people. M. Gimbutas thinks that the steppe pastoralists traced their descent and kinship through the father, while the agriculturalists still preserved a matrilineal system. The former worshipped the warlike gods of the "thunderous .heaven" and glorified the lethal powers of the "sharp blade". The latter "focused their faith on the agricultural cycle of death and regeneration incarnated in the female principle of MotherCreator" (Gimbutas 1977:280-284). This rather bold suggestion may contain a grain of truth. The question of the steppe stockbreeding tribes' relations with Europe's agricultural population and their penetration into the territory of the latter was first raised by scholars long ago. The many publications on this subject postulate mainly two problems: the time of the steppe cultures' south-westerly penetration, and the nature of this process. It should be stressed that thanks to the newly obtained data it is possible now to tackle this problem against a better factual background. This involves a more accurate appraisal of the time and place of horse domestication and the appearance of cord decoration (see above); the isolation in the Steppe Pontic area of the Novodanilovka group of Copper Age sites , formerly attributed to the Sredny Stog culture (Telegin 1973); a much more precise dating of such major Eneolithic cultures of the Ukr aine as the Yamnaya, Tripolye and others (Fig. 54; Telegin 1977, 1982); and acquisition of new data on the cultural affiliation and chron logy of the so-called sceptres, such as were recently described, for instance, in the complexes of the Khvalynsk cemetery and the Konstantinovka habitation site. As is well known, scholars have diverging views as to the time the Steppe Pantie influences began to expand into Southern Europe. The overwhelming majority believe this penetration to have taken place already . in pre-Yamnaya times, some associating it with the period of the Mariupol type cemeteries (Garasanin 1959; Merpert 1965; Comsa 1980), and others assigning it to the somewhat later Sredny . Stog period (Gimbutas 1977; Ecsedy 1979:11-13; Tacic 1983). Finally, some authors (Hausler 1982; Vulpe 1980) argue that the first indications of the steppe invasion showed up only in the Yamnaya period. In the latter case the expansion of steppe influences is associated with the appearance of ochre graves in the Balkans, but many other related facts are ignored . The establishment of contacts between the steppe and Balkan cultures can be traced clearly to a period much earlier than the Yamnaya on the basis of many finds of distinctly steppe Pontic origin .in the Balkan and Lower Danube sites. Such finds include shell-tempered ceramics frequently ornamented with cord decoration (Cucuteni-C type), large flint artifacts (knives, axes), and the so-cal l ed sceptres. We have already mentioned an early appearance there of the domesticated horse. In most researchers' view, these objects infiltrated into this region from the steppe Ukraine where they existed during a clearly defined horizon.

110

Let us consider in more detail the appearance of these cultural elements in the Balkans and on the Lower Danube. Beginning with the shell-tempered ceramics, we must emphasise that it was the basic and only pottery in the Sredny Stog culture, practically unknown to other contemporary cultures north of the Black Sea. So, it~ presence on Cucuteni-Tripolye sites can confidently be derived from only the Sredny Stog tribes - a presumption already favoured by many authors (T.G. Movsha, V. Dumitrescu, etc.). The same is probably true of the other Balkan countries which reveal the presence of this technology, as , for ins~ance, Gumelnira, Salcuta, etc. (Comsa 1980) and perhaps a little later, Cernavoda I (Tudor 1966). According to T.G. Movsha (1961), V. Dumitrescu (1963) and E. Comsa (1980), the shell-tempered ceramics of the Cucuteni C type emerged during the Tripolye B-1 or Cucuteni A-AB period. A large amount of such pottery (10%) was contained in the A-4 period habitation sites of Dreguseni, Fedeleseni and the like, which indicates the stability of conta~ts between' the Sredny Stag and Cucuteni-Tripolye cultures. Comparative analysis of the shell-tempered ceramics from Romanian and Sredny Stog assemblages allowed the present author and S. MarinescuBilcu to detect a strong resemblance between the Cucuteni C type pottery from Dereivka and from the area above the Dnieper rapids (Strilchaya Skela).* The latter is dated by us to the SSC I-b period (Telegin 1973), so we can chronologically equate it with the Cucuteni A-4 period of Romania. Cucuteni A-4 is synchronous with the end of Tripolye B-1 which we set to 3500-3400 b.c. Thus, judging from the ceramics, it is at this time that influences from the Dnieper started to penetrate westward into the territory of the settled agricultural populations. This process continued up to the time when the SSC evolved into the Early Yamnaya Culture. This theory is supported by the emergence of cord decoration on the ceramics of the farming cultures of that period (see Chapter III above). Corded ware makes its earliest appearance there in the Tripolye B-1 period and increases markedly during Tripolye C. Large flint artifacts of the 'Eneolithic assemblage' (knives, lensshaped axes, triangular spearheads with bifacial retouch) first appear in the area north of the Black Sea during . the final phases of the Dnieper-Donets culture's second period. Their presence is then registered in the Sredny Stog settlements on the Seversky Donets (Alexandria). This remarkable ·technique of flint processing reaches its high point in the Novodanilovka type sites represented already by numerous supine contracted burials with ochre (Novodanilovka, PetroSvistunovo, Chaply, Yama, Voroshilovgrad, etc.) and by hoards of flint artifacts (Goncharovka, Novy 0rlik). Judging by the stratigraphy of the Mariupol cemetery, sites of the Novodanilovka type immediately followed the Mariupol-type cemeteries. They existed before the Yamnaya time and are generally ascribed to the second half of the 4th millennium b.c. This dating . is evidently supported by the Novodanilovka type burial mound in Kainary which produced a vessel from the Tripolye B period (Movsha and Chebotarenko 1969).

*

The analysis Archaeology

was done at the UkSSR Academy of Science's in 1980. 111

Institute

of

In the Balkan and Lower Danube area large-sized and 'Novodanilovka type' flint artifacts and supine contracted burials were first spotted in the Decia cemetery on the River Mures in Romania (Garasanin 1959) and in the Csongrad barrow in Hungary (Ecsedy 1979). Large flint knives and lens-shaped axes are also typical of some Lower Danube hoards, such as Schela Cladovei and Ostrovul Simian (Tacit 1983). This group of sites is synchronised by researchers with the final phases of the Tisza-Polgar culture and the beginning of the Bodrogkeresztur culture (Ecsedy 1979), which approximately corresponds to the middle of the 4th millennium b.c. (Dumitrescu 1964). In examining the Decia material, M. Garasanin typologically compared the finds from that site with those from the Mariupol cemetery. Today this analogy can be modified to the degree that the Decia burial ritual (supine contracted position, presence of ochre) and inventory of finds (knives, large beads made of shells) find their direct parallels not in the whole of the Mariupol complex but only in the group of later burials which we ascribe to the Novodanilovka type. Ecsedy (1979) arrived at a similar conclusion about the emergence in the Danube area of supine contracted burials and large 'Eneolithic' flint artifacts under the impact of the North Pontic Novodanilovka type sites. It can only be added that the composition of the Schela Cladovei hoard is analogous to that of the Novodanilovka hoards from the Seversky Donets valley (Goncharovka) and the Dnieper area (Novy Orlik). Thus, the comparative analysis of flint artifacts proves the reality of contacts between the steppe cattle breeding cultures and the farming cultures of the Right-Bank Ukraine on the one hand, and the cultures in the Balkan and Lower Danube area on the other in the middle of the 4th millennium b.c., i.e. before the Yamnaya tribes emerged into the historical arena. In this connection we may also add that in the post Sredny Stog-Novodanilovka period large flint objects completely disappear from the sites of the Ukrainian steppe. In tackling the problem of relationships between the North Pontic steppe cultures and the cultures of the Balkans and Lower Danube an important role is assigned to the so-called sceptres which acquired · currency over a huge territory from the Volga to the Lower Danube. Almost 50 such finds are known today. According to their shape and handle attachment, specialists (Danilenko and Shmagliy 1972; Tsutkin 1981) distinguish several types and subtypes of ~hese artifacts, among them sceptres with and without a hole for hafting. We will discuss only holeless maceheads with a spikelike lug on the narrow side (more than 30 objects)* which can be divided into three main types: a) CasimceaSuvorovo, b) Arkhara and c) Khvalynsk-Konstantinovka (Table 6; Fig. 55). The most perfect of them in ·quality and excellence of shape are the Casimcea-Suvorovo type sceptres; the splendid find in Suvorovo gives reason to perceive the likeness of a horse's head in these artifacts. The Arkhara .type sceptres have a somewhat different, flattened shape. A. Hausler compares them to the bone duck figurines unearthed from the Syeszheye cemetery. The Khvalynsk-Konstantinovka type maceheads are the most primitive of all and hardly bear any resemblance to animals.

* How maceheads with a hole for hafting discussion is unclear. them should probably sceptres.

are related to the group under They are typologically different and most of be assigned a later date than the lugged

112

'

,~ -\··~/ ~~.~

'

\

'/...,·.,.-~

\'-' ·. , ·.; ·.·. ...

.

.

'

..•.

A

B

C

Fig. 55 Three main types of sceptre: C - Khvalynsk-Konstantinovka.

A - Casirncea-S uvorovo;

113

B - Arkhar?;

Table 6 shows that all three types the East European steppeland (i.e. stockbreeding tribes during the Eneolithic) Dnieper (inhabited by agricultural-cattle one exception (Terekli-Mekhteb), all horsehead sceptres were encountered west Balkan and Lower Danube region. On the Konstantinovka type maceheads were found Volga interfluve. Table 6: Distribution

of sceptres

of macehead are known both in in the area inhabited by and in the areas west of the raising people). However, with the Casimcea-Suvorovo type of the Dnieper, mainly in the other hand, the Khvalynskpredominantly in the Dnieper-

by type

Area of distribution Type Right-Bank Ukraine, Balkans, Lower Danube

Dnieper, Northern

A. CasimceaSuvorovo

Suvorovo, Casimcea, Salcuta, Fedele?eni, Rzhevo, Ar iushu, Palade, Suvodol, Shuplevichi

Terekli-Mekhteb

B. Arkhara

Obir~eni, Szekelyvaja, Baia, Gavran

Arkhara, Ordzhonikidze, Kuibyshev

C. KhvalynskKonstantinovka

Berezovskaya Obirseni

Khvalynsk, Konstantinovka, Rostov, Igren, Kodachek

GES,

'

Don, Volga, Caucasus

The Arkhara type sceptres are distributed nearly equally west and east of the Dnieper. Although the majority of the sceptres, including the more exquisite types A and B, were encountered west of the Dnieper, all scholars believe that they were alien to the · agricultural - cattle raising people and had been imported from the eastern steppeland. This concept can be regarded as well-founded, since the overwhelming majority of the finds (if not all of them) were shaped as horseheads, and the horse was domesticated in the steppes of Eastern Europe, as already noted. The presence of sceptres in the complexes of the Khvalynsk cemetery on the Volga and the Konstantinovka habitation site on the Lower Don shows that in the East European steppeland these artifacts were known to the Sredny Stog - Khvalynsk horsebreeding cultures already in pre-Yamnaya times. They were also known to the bearers of t he Novodanilovka type culture, a s is evidenced by the finds from Suvorovo where a sceptre accompanied by large knifelike bl ades and shell beads was unearthed from a grave. This grave was covered by a barrow up to 4.5 m. high and containing Lat e Yamnaya and more recent interments , all of . which gives reason to ascribe the sceptre to the pre-Yamnaya period. That sceptres were known in the Early Eneolithic is testified by their presence among the finds from habitation sites of Cucuteni-Tripolye (Cucuteni A,AB - Tripolye B), Fedele~eni, Obir~eni, Berezovskaya GES 114

and Gumelni~a (Sa lc uta). Sceptres appear to have existed also Yamnaya times , as attested by a buria l in Arkhara comprising in association with an Early Yamnaya vessel.

in Early a sceptre

As we hav e seen, sceptres existed i n the East European steppes dur ing the Sredny Stog-Novodanilovka and Early Yamnaya times. They were used as a symbol of authority by the population of several cultures, such as Khvalynsk, Sredny Stog, Novodan ilo vka and Early Yamnaya, which probably explains the polymorphism of these articles (several types and subtypes). The period of their existence (middle and second half of the 4th millennium b.c.) attests to a rather early penetration of steppe infl uences into Southern Europ e . Marshalling the above facts, we may conclude that the earliest influences of the steppe stockbreeding cultures began to pene trate into the farming cultures of the Right-Bank Ukraine , Forecarpathia and Southern Europe in the middle to second half of the 4th millennium b.c. They were generated by the people of the Sredny Stog culture and Novodanilovka type sites and manifested themselves in the expansion of shell-tempered ceramics, cord decoration, sceptres and the domesticated horse into such farming communities as Cucuteni-Tripolye , Gumelni~a, Salcu~a and, at a later time, Cernavoda and other cultures. Some scholars (M. Gimbutas, G. Todorova, etc.) argue that the appearance in the Balkans of these cultural elements of the steppe was the result of a direct invasion of pastoral tribes into the world of agricultural Europe. This is probably an exaggeration . Until new anthropological data are obtained, it is hard to speak of large masses of people from the steppe penetrating south-west into the Balkans. In the Sredny Stog - Novodanilovka times such penetrations were rather of the nature of diffusion and did not involve great migrations of the steppe population. Presumably, such cultural innovations simply spread to the local culture and were then assimilated by it . Whilst manufacturing vessels in conventional local shapes, potters little by little began to employ crushed shell and impressions of twisted and braided cord. A similar view is now entertained by some Romanian researchers (A. Dodd-Oprirescu, E. Morintz) . . It should be emphasised that contacts between the stock-breed·ng and farming cultures were not unilateral, and alongside the noticeable cultural influences streaming from the North Pontic area towards the south-west, the diffusion of cultural elements also progressed in the opposite direction, mainly from Tripolye to the Dnieper-Donets, Sredny Stog, Lower Mikhailovka and other Neo-Eneolithic cultures of the Dnieper region. This is vividly demonstrated by the appearance of Tripolye vessels (see above) in the settlements and burials of the Dnieper-Donets and Sredny Stog cultures or of Late Tripolye figurines in the Lower Mikhailovka type graves on the river Ingul. Such penetrations we also attribute to the category of diffusion . So, judging by the available the idea of great migrations agricultural world and vice versa second half of the 4th millennium first half of the 3rd millennium tribes emerged in the world arena between the steppe stockbreeders

facts , it is difficult to entertain of people from the steppe into the during the above period (middle and b .c.). The same may be true of the b.c., i.e . until the Late Yamnaya and the character of mutual relations and agricult uralists unde r went a 115

DNIEPER

N. DONETS

Q)

1o

....J

~

J

:::, c...:>

l12 I

.;_;_ {;~,:'

Y"',;;~.......,-

::i{ f '-~-=~;~;i I

\ ·~2!' ~: .

~

··.f::i'':.

~~\ I

"

/4

1,

lg

Cl 0

ii: w

CL

JO c...:> (./') (./')

2J

29

u

~ ::::; 0 w

z

JI

Fig.

56 Development of Yamnaya ceramics in ct·fferent regions of the Pontic-Caspian: 1,2 - Nikopol ; 3 - Shpakovka ; 4 - Novo-Cherkessk ; 5 - Rovnoe; 67 - Zhdanovsky Musei; 8-11 - Mikhailovka II ; 12 - Cher malyk ; 1314 Alexandria II ; 15 - Repin; 16 - Bolshoi Lepyag ; 17 - Popov; 18 - Pereksna ; 19 - Bykovo ; 20 , 22 - Berezhnovka ; 21 - Kalinovka;

116

DON

TSNA

VOLGASTEPPE , Pre-Caspian

4

., Ill _ 18

I /.7 I

• tfJI\ \ \ f f~I I ,g

I I

i

120

l

I I

I

I

• 22

I

JB

32

I I

Jg

I

I

JJ

J5

J6

40

\

23 - Mikhailovka I ; 24 - Dereivka ; 25-26 - Nikolskoe ; 27-28 Strilchaya Skela ; 29-30 - Alexa ndria III ; 31 - Ustye 0skola ; 32 - Koysug ; 33-37 - Bessergenovka ; 38 - Asan Bai ; 39 - Dosang ; 40 - Djebel; 41 - 0rlovka ; 42 - Bek-Beke .

11 7

radical change. Archaeological and anthropological data from this later period speak of the direct invasion of the steppe people into the territories formerly occupied by the farming population of the RightBank Ukraine, the Balkans and the Lower Danube. Exploration of this problem is, however, beyond the scope of this work.

118

REFERENCES ABBREVIATIONS: KSIA SA SCIV ZfA

-

Kratkie Soobschenia Instituta Arkheologii Sovetskaya Arkheologia Studii si Cercetari de Istoria Veche Zeitschrift fiir Archaologie

Agapov, S.A., I.B. Vasilyev and V.I. Pestrikova. 1979 Khvalinsky mogilnik i ego mesto v eneolite Vostochnoi Arkheologia Vostochnoevropeiskoi stepi. Voronezh; 36-63.

Evropy.

Beilekchi, V.S. 1978 Ranni eneolit nizovyev Pruta i Dunaya. Kishinev. Behrens, H. 1964 Die neolithisch-frilhmetallzeitlichen Tierskelettfunde der Welt. Halle.

Alten

Berezanska, S.S. et al. 1971 Arkheologia Ukrainskoi RSR, 1971, tom I. Kiev. Bibikova, V.I. 1967 K izucheniyu drevneishikh domashnikh loshadei Vostochnoi Evropy. Byulleten Moskovskogo obshchestva ispytatelei prirody 72(3), 106117. 1969 Do istorii domestikatsii konya na Arkheologia 22, 55-66.

pivdennomu

skhodi

Evropy.

Chernyakov, I.T. and N.M. Shmagliy. 1983 Derevyani psalii yamnoi kultury. Arkheologia 42, 10-16. Chernysh, Ye.K. 1979 Problemy issledovania tripolskoi kultury v Moldavii. nauki. Moskva.

Budushchee

1982 Eneolit Pravoberezhnoi.Ukrainy i Moldavii. Eneolit SSSR. Moskva, 165-241. Clark, G. 1959 Doistoricheskaya Evropa. Moskva. Comsa, E. 1980 Contribution a la connaissance du processus d'indoeuropeenisation de regions Carpato-Danubiens. _A c__ te_ s_d_ u__C_o _n�g�r_e_s Intern. de Thracologie I. Bucuresti, 29-35. Danilenko, V.M. and N.M. Shmagliy. 1972 Pro odin povorotny moment v istorii eneolitichnogo Pivdennoi Evropy. Arkheologia 6, 3-20.

119

naselennya

Debets, G.F. 1966 Fizicheskiy tip lyudei dnepro-donetskoi kultury. SA 1966(1), 1422. Dimitriyevic, S. 1982 Zur einigen chronologischen Fragen des ikums. Germania 60, 2, 425-450.

Panonischen Aeneolith­

Dobrovolsky, A.V. 1929 Zvit za arkhaelogichni doslidy na territorii Dniprolstanu roku Zbirnyk Dnipropetrovskogo muzeyu, I. Dnipropetrovsk, 1927. 61-161. Dolukhanov, P.M. and V.I. Timofeev. 1972 Absolyutnaya khronologia neolita Evrazii. datirovania v arkheologii. Moskva, 52. Dumitrescu, V. 1963 Originea si 285-307.

evolutia

culturii

1964 Origine et evolution de la Archeologia (Warszawa), 14.

Problemy

absolyutnogo

Cucuteni�Tripolie.

civilisation

du

SCIV 14,2,

Cucuteni-Tripolie.

1974 Cronologia absoluta a eneoliticului romanesc in C 14. Apulum 12, 23-39.

lumina

datelor

Ecsedy, I. 1979 The people of the Pit-Grave Kurgans in Eastern Hungary. Budapest, 11-47. Garasanin, M.V. 1959 Neolithikum und Bronzezeit in Serbien und Makedonia. Bericht der Rom.-Germ. Korn. 39, 3-130. Gimbutas, M. 1965 The relative chronology of Neolithic ahd Chalcolithic cultures in Eastern Europe north of the Balkan Peninsula and the Black Sea. Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. Chicago, 459-502 . 1977 The first wave of Eurasian steppe pastoralists into Copper Age Europe. The Journal of Indo-European Studies 4, 277-338. Gokhman, I.I. 1966 Naselenie Ukrainy v epokhu mezolita i neolita. Moskva. Hausler, A. 1982 Zurn Problem des Vordringens Fruher· Steppen Elemente im Neolithikum Mittel- und Sudostern Europa. In Thracia Prehistorica Sofia, 99-114. Huppertz, J. 1962 Die friihe Pferdezucht in Ostasien. und Zuchtungsbiologie, 76, N 23. Isaenko, V.F. 1976 Neolit Pripyatskogo Polesya. Minsk.

120

Zeitschr.

fur

Tierzuchtung

Jankowska, 0., A. Kosko, 0. Sinchinski, H. Quitta and G. Kohl. 1979 Untersuchung zur Chronologie der neolithiscen Kulturen nischen Tiefland. ZfA 13, 237. Jazdzewski, K. 1936 Kultura Poznan.

Pucharow

Lejkowatych

w Polsce

Khvoiko, V.V. 1899 Kammeny vek Srednego Pridneprovya. syezda, tom I.

Zachodniej

Trudy

Kiselev, S.V. 1951 Drevnyaya istoria

Yuzhnoi Sibiri.

Kiyashko, V.Ya. 1974 Nizhnee Podonye kand. dissertatsii.

v epokhu eneolita Moskva.

XI

in

Pol-

i Srodkowej.

arkheologicheskogo

Moskva. i ranne

bronzy.

Avtoreferat

Konoplya, V.M. 1980 Issledovanie poseleniy u. s.s. Yaroslavichi i Malye Dorogostai. Arkheologocheskie 0tkrytiya, 1979. Moskva, 1980. Kohl, G. and H. Quitta 1969 Berlin - Radiocarbondaten und Funde 8, H.6. Kovalevskaya, V.B. 1977 Kon i vsadnik.

Proben.

Ausgrabungen

Moskva.

Kowalczyk, J. 1970 The Funnel Beaker Culture. 144- 177. Kruts, V.A. 1977 Pozdnetripolskiye ·Kruts, S.I. 1972 Naselenie

archaologischer

pamyatniki

territorii

In: The Neolithic

in Poland.

Srednego Podneprovya.

Ukrainy epokhi medi-bronzy.

Warszawa,

Kiev. Kiev.

Kuzmina, Ye.Ye. 1976 Rasprostranenie konevodstva i kult konya u iranoyazichnykh Srednei Azii i drugikh narodov Starogo Sveta. Srednyaya drevnosti i srednevekovye. Moskva, 28-46. Lagodovskaya, 0.N., 1962 Mikhailivske

0.G. Shaposhnikova poselennya. Kiev.

plemen Azia v

and M.L. Makarevich.

Lichardus, J. 1980 Zur Funktion der Geweihspitz~n des Typus 0storf. Ueberlegungen den vorbronzezeitlischen Pferdeschirrung. Germania 58, 1-24. Lundholm, B. _1947 Abstammung und Domestikation Makarenko, M. 1933 Mariupolsky

mogilnik.

des Hauspferds.

Kiev.

121

Uppsala.

zu

Mallory, J.P. 1977 The chronology of the early kurgan Inda-European Studies 5, 339-368.

tradition.

The

Journal

1981 The ritual treatment of the horse in the Early Kurgan Journal of Inda-European Studies 9, 205-226 . Marinescu-Bilcu, 1974 Cultura

S. precucuteni

Markevich, V.I. 1981 Pozdnetripolskie

pe teritoriul plemena Severnoi

Matyushin, G.N. 1981 0 vremeni staovleniya KSIA 165, 23-28. Matyushin, N.N. 1982 Eneolit Yuzhnogo Urala. Mellaart, J. 1965 Earliest

Civilizations

Monah, D. 1978 Datera

pring

skotovody

tradition.

Romanien. Bucuresti. Moldavii.

Kishinev.

proizvodyashchego

khozyaistva

na Urale.

Moskva. of the Near East.

Merpert, N.Ya. 1965 0 svyazyakh Severnogo Prichernomorya veke. KSIA 105, 10-20. 1974 Drevneyshie

of

London.

i Balkan v rannem

Volzhskovo-Uralskogo

C-14 a etapei

Cucuteni

mezhdurechya.

bronzovom Moskva.

A2. SCIV 29, 1.

Morintz,S. and P. Roman. 1973 Ueber die Uebergangsperiode vom Aeneolithikum Rumanien. In: Symposium fiber die Entstehung Badenerkultur. Bratislava, 260-295.

zur Bronzezeit und Chronologie

Movsha, T.G. 1961 0 svyazyakh mednogo veka.

stepnymi

plemen tripolskoi kultury SA 1961(2), 186-199.

so

Movsha, T.G. and G.F. Chebotarenko. 1969 Eneoliticheskie kurgannye pogrebenia KSIA 115, 45-49.

u st .

Nestor, J. 1932 Der Stand des Vorgeschichtsforschung Rom.-Germ. Korn.

in

Kaynari v

Rumanien.

plemenami

Moldavii.

Bericht

Neustupny, E. 1968 Absolute chronology of the ·Neolithic and Eneolithic periods Central and South-Eastern Europe. Slovenska Archeologia 16,1, 60.

122

in der

der

in 19-

Nikolova, A.V. 1981 Novye eneoliticheskie pogrebeniya Pravoberezhya Dnepra . Aktualnye problemy arkheologicheskikh issledovaniy v Ukrains koi SSR. Tezisy konferentsii. Kiev, 30 . Passek, T.S. 1935 La ceramique 1949a Tripilska

tripolienne.

kultura.

1949b Periodizatsia arkheologii

Izvestiya

Akademii v 1926. Moscu, 1935 .

Kiev .

tripolskikh poseleniy. SSSR 10. Moskva: 3-245.

Materialy

i issle dovania

po

1962 Relations entre l'Europe occidentale et l ' Europe orientale a l'epoque neolithique. VI Congres Internat. de Science Pre-et Protohistorigue. Moscu. 1977 Novye otkrytiya na territorii SSSR i voprosy pozdneneoliticheskikh kultur Dunaisko-Dneprovskogo mezhdurechya. Tezisy dokladov Instituta Arkheologii Akademii Nauk SSSR v 1976 godu. Moskva, 26. Patokova, E.F. 1979 Usatovskoe

poselenie

i mogilnik.

Peleshchisin, M.A. 1971 Kultura liychastogo 231-240. Petrenko, A.G. 1984 Drevnee i Preduralya.

posudu.

srednevekovoe Moskva.

K"ev. Arkheolohia

zhivotnovodstvo

Ukrainskoi

Srednego

RSR. Kiev,

Povolzhya

i

Pidoplichko, I.G. 1938 Materialy do vyvchennya minulykh faun URSR. Vyp.I. Kiev. 1956 Materialy do vyvchennya minulykh faun URSR. Vyp.II. Kiev. Potekhina, I.D. 1983 0 nositelyakh kultury Sredny dannym. SA 1983(1), 144- 154. Potratz, J. 1966. Die Pferdtrense Quitta , H. 1967 Radiocarbondaten Sudosteneuropaischen 115-125.

S og

des Alten Orient. und

II

Pazaryksky

antropologicheskim

Roma.

die Chronologie des Neolithikums. Ausgrabungen

Quitta, H. and G. Kohl 1969 Radiocarbondaten zum Neolithikum und fruher europas und Sovetunion. ZfA 3, 235-238 . Rudenko, S.I. 1948 Vtoroi

po

kurgan.

Leningrad.

123

Mittelund Funde,

Bronzezeit

und 12,

Sudost-

Rusakov, S.M. and G.F. Zagniy. 1977 Sozdanie magnitnoi opornoi shkaly dlya datirovki arkheologicheskikh obyektov. Nauchny arkhiv Akademii Nauk USSR. Scott, E.M., Baxter, M.S. and T.C. Aitchison. 1983 A comparative view of calibration. In: Archaeology, chronology and the Radiocarbon Calibration Curve B.S. Ottaway), Edinburgh Occasional Paper No. 9, 37-41. Shcheglov, V.V. and M.M. Chernyavsky. 1976 Fauna iz mogilnika kultury sharovidnykh skogo Volkoviskogo rayona. Doklady 7, 227.

amfor u pos. KrasnoselAkademii Nauk BSSR 20,

Shmagliy, N.M. and I.T. Chernyakov. 1970 Raskopki kurganov epokhi bronzy v Tatarbunarskom oblasti v 1965 g. SA 1970(1),115. Shtern, E.R. 1905 Doistoricheskaya arkheologicheskogo

grecheskaya kultura na yuge syezda, t.I. Yekaterinoslav.

Sinitsyn, I.V. and U.E. Erdyshev. 1966 Novye arkheologicheskie pamyatniki Elista. Smirnov, K.F. 1961 Arkheologicheskie Uralsikh stepei. Subbotin, L.V. 1983 Pamyatniki

Gumelnitsa

Subbotin, L.V. and Shmagliy, 1970 Rozkopky kurgannogo Arkheologia 24, 127.

v m.

Surnina, G.S. 1963 Palaeoantropologicheskie materialy cheskogo mogilnika. Trudy Instituta Sveshnikov, I.K. 1983 Kultura sharovidnykh Moskva.

amfor.

Tacic, H. 1983 Yugoslovensko Beograd.

Podunavlye

Telegin, D.Ya. 1959 Eneoliticheskoe 10-20.

poselenie

1968 Dnipro-donetska

kultura.

Rossii.

Kalmytskoi

Ukrainy.

Bolgrad

124

Kiev. oblasti.

iz Aleksandriyskogo eneolitiEtnograf'i 32, 144-153.

od indoevropske

Kiev.

ASSR.

Povolzhsko-

Odeskoi

Svod Arkhaeologicheskikh

i mogilnik

Odesskoi

Trudy XIII

vsadnikakh

yugo-zapada

N.M. mogilnika

rayone

na territorii

dannye o drevnikh SA 1961(1), 46-72.

kultury

Dendro(ed.

istochnikov.

seobe do prodora

u kh.

Aleksandria.

skita.

KSIA 9,

1969 Das Mitteldniepergebiet und die ostlich anschliessende der Epoche des Ne olithikum s und der friihen Metallzeit. 1-15 . 1970 Osnovni rysy Arkheolo gia 23.

khronologia

i

1971a Eneolitychni stely logia 4, 3-1 7.

serednestogivskoi

1977 Ob absolyutnom ologii eneolita 1978 Voprosy 46- 48.

kultury.

i pamyatky nizhnyomikhailivskogo

1971b O kulturno-territorialnom chlenenii i Ukrainy i Byelorussii . SA 1971(2), 3-31 . 1973 Serednestohivska

kultura

epokhi

midi.

tipu . Arkheo -

periodizatsii

i periodizatsii

neolita

kultury

voprosy

Ukrainy.

1982 Datuvannya arkheologichnykh pamyatok na Ukraini nauk. Visnyk Akademii Nauk URSR 11, 62-65 . Telegin, D.Ya. and O.S. Filenko. 1982 Mogilnik srednestogovskoi 1982(1), 80-87.

neol ita

Kiev.

vozraste yamnoi kultury i nekotorye Ukrainy. SA 1977(2), 5-18.

khronologii

Ukraine in ZfA. 3 ,

khron-

KSIA 153 ,

metodamy tochnykh

v Dneprovskom

Nadporozhye . SA

Telegin, D.Ya., E.V. Sobotovich and N.N. Kovalyukh . 1978 Radiouglerodnoye datirovanie arkheologicheskikh mater·alov. Ispolzovanie metodov yestestvennykh nauk v arkheologii. Kiev . Titov, V. S. 1971 The Tripolye culture ·n the chronological system of Neolith · c and Copper Age cultures of South-Eastern and Central Europe. VIII Congres Internat. de Science Pre- et Protohist. Moscow. Todorova, H. 1980 Eneolit

Bolgarii.

Tsalkin, V.I. 1967 Fauna iz raskopok

Sofia. poselenia

kultury

Gumelnitsa

v SSSR. KSIA 111 ,

43-49. 1970 Drevneyshie

domashnie

zhivotnye

Vosto chnoi Evropy.

Moskva.

Tsutskin, Ye.V. 1981 Arkharinsky "skipetr" kak svidetelstvo razloz henia pervobytnogo stroya na territorii Nizhnego Povolzhya. Arkheolog ic hesk ie pamyatniki Kalmykii epokhi bronzy i srednevekovya . Elista, 25-28 . Tudor, E. 1966 Ceramica Cascioarele

apartinind culturii . SCIV 3 , 16 , 561 .

125

Cerna voda

descoperita

la

Vasilyev, I.B. 1980 Eneolit lesostepnogo Kuibyshev, 27-82. 1981 Eneolit

Povolzhya.

Povolzhya.

Eneolit

Step i lesostep.

Kuibyshev.

Vasilyev, I.B. and G.I. Mateeva. 1976 Poselenie i mogilnik u. s.Syeszheye. Povolzhya. Kuibyshev, 76-96.

Ocherki

Velikanova, M.S. 1975 Palaeoantropologia

Prutsko-Dnestrovskogo

Vitt, V.O. 1952 Loshad Pazyrykskikh

kurganov.

Vostochnoi

istorii

i

mezhdurechya.

Evropy.

kultury

Moskva.

SA.

Vulpe, R. 1980 25 annees des etudes thracologues en Roumanie. Congres Intern. de Thracologie, I. Bucuresti, 11-17.

Actes du II

Wislanski, T. 1970 The Globular Amphora Warszawa, 178-231.

in

culture.

1979 Kataltowanie sie miejcowych kultur kultury Poharok Leikowatych. In: Neolit. Warszawa, 164-260.

In:

The

Neolithic

Poland.

rolniczohodowlanych. Plemiona Prahistoria ziem Polskich, II

Zakharuk, Yu.M. 1959 Do pytannya spivvidnoshennya i zvyazkiv mizh kulturoyu liychastogo posudu ta tripilskoyu kulturoyu. Mater·aly i doslidzhennya z arkheologii Prikarpattya i Volyni 2, 54. Zbenovich, V.G. 1974a Pozdnetripolskie 1974b Poselenie

plemena severnogo

Bernashovka

Zinevich, G.P. 1967 Ocherki paleoantropologii

na Dnestre. Ukrainy.

126

Prichernomorya. Kiev~ Kiev.

Kiev.

APPENDIX1 A PALAEOANTHR OPOLOGICALSTUDYOF THE DNIEPER REGION I N THE EARLY ENEOLITHIC I . D. Potekhina The territory of the Ukraine , i n part i cul ar the Lower Dnieper region, is richly represented by palae oant hropo l ogic a l material . The collections of bone remains of the ancient i nha bita nts of t hi s region in the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze Age and subsequent peri ods are among the most numerous in Europe, and they have been well studied by specialists, as is reflected in a number of monographs and articles (Gokhman 1966; Konduktorova 1973; Zinevich 1967; Kruts 1972). However, the Early Eneolithic is represented anthropologically much more poorly than these other periods and it has remained a missing link in the chain of ethnogenetic evidence that marks the transition from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age. But now recent excavations have provided new osteological evidence for the Early Eneolithic in the form of burials left by the Sredny Stag and Novodanilovka cultures. These enable us to reconsider the characteristics of the Early Eneolithic population of the Ukraine according to anthropological data. The first information about the physical anthropology of the Sredny Stag population was obtained by M.M. Gerasimov who examined a male skull from Igren 8 (burial nr. 2, layer C) and another male skull from Surskoy Island (burial nr. 2, layer 1). In comparing the lgren skull with two Neolithic skulls which were found in the same site (burials nr. 4 and 6), Gerasimov observed that they differed "in the general outline of the fornix profile and the form of the facial skeleton" and also in size (Gerasimov 1955). In the author's opinion, the Sredny Stag skull from Surskoy Island was very similar to Neolithic skull nr. 4 from Igren 8. Later, G.P. Zinevich examined two male Sredny Stag skulls from the village of Kamenny Potoky (Table 1) and two female skulls from the · Eneolithic cemetery at Dereivka (Table 2). In her opinion, these skulls as well as the skulls from Alexandria (see below) are very much alike. It was on this basis that she proposed "the existence of a common anthropological type in the . territory of the eastern part of the Ukraine" represented by the bearers of the Sredny Stog culture (Zinevich 1967). As a result of further . excavations on the Igren peninsula which were resumed in 1974-1978, information about the anthropology of the Sredny Stag culture increased. Data concerning the age and sex of the people buried in the Igren cemetery enabled us to estimate the life expectancy of the Sredny Stag population. Taking into consideration child mortality, the life expectancy was 29 . 1 years , a figure similar to that of the population of the Dnieper-Donets culture ( Potek hina 1983). The analysis of a small craniological series (5 males and 2 females) from Igren indicates that the skulls possess the features of the large Europoid type. The male skulls (Table 1) were characterised by their large size, strongly developed relief in t he area of the gla bella and supraorbital arcs, less prominent protuberantia occipitalis externa and a not very large processus mastoideus. The greatest length from the

127

glabella varies from medium (179 mm.) to very large (199 mm.) dimensions. The greatest parietal breadth is average but there did occur skulls with both small (136 mm.) and very large (152 mm.) measurements. The height of the skull is small (112 mm. from the level of the porions). According to the cephalic index the skulls were distributed as follows: 3 skulls were dolichocranic, 1 skull was mesocranic, and 1 skull was brachiocranic. The forehead is wide and bulging, the face very broad in the upper part (112 mm.) and mesoprosopic. The angle of the horizontal profile testifies to a certain flatness on the face on the orbit level (the naso-malar angle is 144°) and to a moderately profiled middle part (a zygomaxillar angle of 131°). The width of the orbit ranges from 47.4 to 50.5 mm.; there are both low orbits (31 mm.) and high orbits (36.8 mm.). The average height of the nose is large (53.9 mm.) and the breadth ranges from large in one case (26.5 mm.) to very small in another (21.0 mm.). According to the nasal index the nose is platyrhinic. The bridge of the nose is moderately high. The mandibula possesses some archaic features: a very long distance from the angles (86.0 mm.), a slight incline of the mandibular ramus (113°) and large breadth. The facial part is not preserved on either of the female skulls (Table 2). The brain cases are long (the longitudinal diameter reaches 181 and 185 mm.). One of them (burial nr. 13) is dolichocranic while the other (nr. 18) is mesocranic and very high. In both cases the forehead is wide and straight. The lower jaw from burial 13 is more massive. The mandibula from burial nr. 18 has a slight thickness of its body and high symphysis. The analysis of the long bones of the upper and lower extremities reveals that the stature of the Sredny Stog population was not so massive as that of their Neolithic predecessors, the people of the Dnieper-Donets culture. The height of the Sredny Stog population, estimated from one male and one female skeleton, was medium to above average according to the modern scale (Potekhina 1983). An additional series of Sredny Stag skulls (8 male and 2 female; see Tables 1 and 2) were recovered from the more easterly Alexandria cemetery (Surnina 1963). From this sample one must exclude three mal~ burials (nrs. 13 and 14 which, according to ·burial ritual do not belong ·to the Sredny Stog culture, and nr. 21 which may be assigned to the Bronze Age Timber-grave culture). A comparison of these skulls with the famous Neolithic series from the Dnieper rapids region examined by Surnina reveals some minor difference in the facial skeleton. It also showed that those features which distinguish the Alexandria skulls from those of the Dnieper rapids region are the very ones that make them resemble the Early Yamnaya (Pit-grave) skulls. In addition to the evidence cited above, in the region neighbouring the Dnieper there are also some remains of the Novodanilovka group which are synchronous with the Sredny Stog culture (Telegin 1973) . We have the evidence of a double male burial (nr. 21) in a stone cist from the Mariupol cemetery (Gokhman 1959) and three male skulls from the Eneolithic cemetery at Voroshilovgrad (Potekhina 1976). The skulls from these two sites show a great resemblance both among themselves and to the series of Neolithic skulls from the Dnieper Rapids-Azov region. specialists have examined a total of 22 male and 6 At present from the Sredny Stag and Novodanilovka cultures. female skulls in most cases information about the postcranial skeleton Unfortunately,

128

is missing. All the Sredny Stag skulls possess features which are characteristically proto-Europoid in type: they have large dolichocranic brain cases of considerable height and broad or moderate-broad (seldom narrow) faces, very often flat in the upper part and strongly profiled at the zygomaxillar angle. The orbits are low, seldom of moderate height; the nose is often broad and sharply protruding. The lower jaw is massive. Although many features in the general Sredny Stog series may range to a considerable degree, the differences among the skulls drawn from different cemeteries is not too great as the statistics indicate. For this reason there are ins ufficient grounds to speak of the anthropological variabili ty of the Sredny Stag population (Potekh i na 1983). A comparison of the Sredny Stog skulls with the contemporary Novodanilovka skulls from Mariupol and Voroshilovgrad reveal that the similarities are greater than the differences. The Novodanilovka skulls are a little less dolichocranic and their bi-zygomatic breadth (147 mm.) is 7.5 mm. longer than those of the Sredny Stag skulls. The population of the Tripolye cult ure was largely synchronous with the Sredny Stag culture and occupied the Right Bank territory of the Dnieper. This population possessed a quite different complex of features from that of the Sredny Stag culture, especially in its strong Mediterranean basis (Velikanova 1975). The Tripolye skulls reveal a narrow strongly profiled face and a small, moderately dolichocranic skull (Table 3). These features enable one to exclude them easily from the anthropological type represented by the Sredny Stag people. The proportions of both the skull and the postcranial skeleton of the people of the Sredny Stag culture links their genesis to the tribes of the Dnieper-Donets culture who populated the territory of the Dnieper Rapids -Azov region during the Neolithic. The peculiarities of this population such as their massiveness and their very broad face become attenuated in the skulls of the Sredny Stog culture (Table 3). This could have been the resul t of evolutionary piocesses or the result of a more gracile component part ici pating in their formation. It should be noted that populations of a similar type to the Sredny Stog culture are not confined to the Ukraine. The Early Neolithic population of the East Baltic represented by the craniological series of the Zveinieky cemetery (Table 3) shares a si mila r complex of features with the Sredny Stag. This, however, is insufficient to draw conclusions about genetic relationships between the tribes of the Early Neolithic of the East Baltic and the Sredny Stag culture (Denisova 1975). The population of the Yamnaya (Pit-grave) culture, which was partly synchronous with and then replaced the Sredny Stag culture, was very close to the latter anthropologically. One of the main anthropological types of the Yamnaya population, Type II which is the most protoEuropoid (Kruts 1972), is similar in numerous features to the Sredny Stag type (Table 3), especially those recovered from the Igren cemetery. The most probable successors of the anthropological features o f the Sr~ dny Stog tribes were the Yamnaya people buried in the cemeteries of Krivorozie and Nikopol-Mikhailovka.

129

It is obv·ous that at the present the quantity and preservation of anthropo1ogica1 materials from the Early Eneolithic enable us only to estab1 ·sh some individua1 details of this 'missing link' in the ethnogenetic development of the Ukraine. Further evidence will be required before we can entertain the possibility of resolving the issues of the origins and ethnic relations of the tribes of this area in the Early Eneolithic.

130

Table 1. Average dimensions Definitions (aft er Martin)

1 8 20 f-J

Lu f-J

9 45 48 54 52 77

8:1 48 : 45 54 : 55 52 : 51

and indices

of the male skulls

Characteristics Igren (Patekhina 1983)

Greatest length from glabella (g-op) Greatest parietal breadth (eu-eu) Height of the skull from porion (po-b) Least breadth of forehead (ft-ft) Bi-zygomatic breadth (zy-zy) Upper facial height (n-pr) Nasal breadth Orbital height Naso-malar angle (fmo-n-fmo) Zygomaxillar angle (zm'-ss-zm') Cranial index Upper facial index Nasal index Orbital index

from Eneolithic

Culture Sredny Stog Alexandria Mean Kamenny (Surnina Potoky (N) 1963) (Zinevich 1967)

burials

of the Ukraine .

Novodanil ovka Mean Mariupol Vorosh(grave ilov (N) grad 21) (Gokhman (Patek 1966) hina 1976)

187.4(5)

195.8(8)

210.5(2)

194.0(15)

194.5(2)

194.0(3)

194. 2(5)

141.4(5)

141.6(8)

145.5(2)

142.1(15)

143.0(2)

145.2(3)

145.0(5)

ll2.0(2)

119.8(8)

121.0(1)

ll8.5(11)

124.5(2)

117.5(2)

120.8(4)

101.8(5)

99.5(8)

105.5(2)

101.1(15)

98.5(2)

108.3(2)

103.4(4)

134.0(1)

140. 1(8)

140.0(1)

139. 5(10)

148.5(2)

145.5(2)

147. 0(4)

69.4(8) 25.5(8) 31.6(8)

72.0(2) 23.5(2) 31.5(2)

70. 3(12) 24.9(12) 31. 9(12)

71. 0(1) 28.0(1) 37.0(l)

68.0(1) 24. 0(1) 33.8(3)

69.5(2) 26.0(2) 34.6(4)

144.0(1)

139.3(8)

145. O(1)

140. 3(10)

142.5(2)

138.6(1)

141.2(3)

131.0(1) 75.6(5) 53. 7(1) 51. 5(1) 77 .1 (2)

126.4(8) 72.5(8) 49.6(8) 49.7(8) 73.5(8)

130.0(1) 66.0(2) 52.1(1) 46.6(2) 67.8(2)

127. 2(10) 72.8(15) 50. 2(10) 49.3(11) 73.2(12)

132.0(1) 73.5(2) 45.8(1) 51.0(1) 72.9(1)

137 .0(1) 74.9(3) 48. 9(1) 48. 0(1) 75.6(3)

134. 5(2) 74.4(5) 47.4(2) 49.5(2) 74.9 (4)

72.0(2) 23. 8( 2) 33.9(2)

Table 2 Average Definitions (after Martin 1 8 20 9 45 48 54 52 77

8:1 48:45 54:55 52:51

dimensions

and

indices of the female skulls burials of the Ukraine.

Characteristics

Greatest length fro@ glabella (g-op) Greatest parietal breadth (eu-eu) Height of the skull from porion (po-b) Least breadth of forehead (ft-ft) Bi-zygomatic breadth (zy-zy) Upper facial height (n-pr) Nasal breadth Orbital height Naso-malar angle (fmo-n-fmo) Zygomaxillar angle (zm'-ss-zm') Cranial index Upper facial index Nasal index Orbital index

Dereivka 2 (Zinevich 1967)

from

Eneolithic

Alexandria (Surnina 1963)

Igren (Potekhina 1983)

192.0(2)

180.5(2)

183.0(2)

137.5(2)

144.0(2)

139.5(2)

122.5(2)

108.0(2)

ll2.0(l)

100.0(2)

96.0(2)

135.0(1)

133.5(2)

63.0(1) 25.0(2) 30.5(2)

61.0(2) 25.5(2) 29.5(2)

136. 0(1)

148.0(2)

130.0(1) 71.6(2) 46. 7(1) 53.8(2) 75.0(l)

129.5(2) 79.8(2) 45.6(2) 54.8(2) 69.4(2)

132

96.0(2)

76.2(2)

Tabl e 3 Summary series Definitions ( after Martin)

1 8 17 9 I--'

Lu Lu

45 48 54 52 75(1) 77

8:1 48:45 54:55 52:51

Characteristics

Greatest length from glabella (g-op ) Greatest parietal breadth (eu -e u) Height of the skull from basion (ba~b ) Least breadth of forehead (ft- ·ft) Bi-zygomatic breadth (zy-zy) Upper fa cial height (n - pr) Nasal breadth Orbital height Angle of the nasal profile with the facial profile Naso- malar angle (fmo-n -fmo ) Zygomaxillar angle (zm'-ss-zm') Cranial index Upper facial index Nasal index Orbital index

of ma l e s kull s f rom Sredny St ag buri al s an d comparative Cultu r es Ear ly Yamnaya (Kruts 1972) Sredn y Sta g , Dni epertype 2 Donet s, s umm ar y su mm ary series (Potekhina ) Vas i lievka 2 (Gokhman 1966)

data.

Zveinieky,

mesocranic type (Deni sova 1975)

Late Tripolye ( Velikanova 1975)

194. 7(15)

189 . 3(10 )

191.0(52 )

189.5(32)

182.5(4)

183.4(5)

142.1 (1 5)

145 . 6(10 )

140.2(51)

141.2(30)

141.0(4)

132.6(5)

142.9 ( 9)

144. 3(3 )

140.0(24)

142. 2(12)

143.5(4)

135.5(2)

101.1(15)

106. 8(11 )

99.7(49)

99.9(32)

102.0(4)

92.8(5)

139.5(10 )

153. 5(9)

136.1(37)

136.6(23)

140.0(3)

127.8(4)

69.3(3) 25.8(3) 32.7(3)

69.0(2) 26 .2 (2) 31.9(4)

75 . 3(7) 26.8(8) 32. 0(8)

78.8(40 ) 24.5(32) 32.2(38)

69.2(25) 24.9(25) 31.6(26)

37.8(5) 140. 3(10)

31. 7(3) 144.0(8)

34 .8 (19) 135.5(34)

136.1(22)

29.0(2) 143.4(4)

38.0(1) 137.0(4)

127. 2(10)

129.5(6)

123.7(25)

124.0(19)

128.7(2)

123.1(2)

77.3(4) 49.6(3) 49.4(3) 72.8(3)

72.3(5) 52.1(2) 50.2(2) 74.0(4)

70.3(12 ) 24. 9(12) · 31.9(12)

72.8(15) 50. 2(10 ) 49.3(11) 73.3(12)

76.9(10) 49 . 1(7) 48.2(7) 67.3(8)

73.8(49) 52.9(31) 48.3(38) 74.7(38)

-

74.9(30) 50.5(21) 49.1(25) 75. 3( 2_1)

REFERENCES Denisova, R.Ya. ]975 Antropologia

drevnikh

baltov.

lita

po cherepu.

Gerasimov, M.M. 1955 Vosstanovlenie

Gokhman, I.I. 1959 Antropologicheskie materialy antropologia, No. 2, 105-114. 1966 Naselenie

Ukrainy v epokhu

Konduktorova, T.S. 1973 Antropologiya naseleniya bronzy. Moskva. Kruts, S.I. 1972 Naselenie

territorii

Riga. Moskva. Mariupolskogo mezolita

Ukrainy

Ukrainy

mogilnika.

i neolita. mezolita

2

Sovetskaya

Moskva. neolita

epokhi medi-bronzy.

i

epokhi

Kiev.

Potekhina, I.D. 1976 Cherepa iz eneoliticheskogo mogilnika v g.Voroshilovgrade. Eneolit i bronzoviy vek Ukrainy. Kiev, 29-36 . 1983 0 nositelakh kultury Sredny Stag II po antropologicheskim Sovetskaya arkheologia, No. 1, 144-154. Surnina, T.S. 1963 Palaeoantropologicheskie materialy iz icheskogo mogilnika. Antropologicheskiy Telegin, D.Ya. 1973 Srednostogivska VeJikanova, M.S. 1975 Paleoantropologia Zinevich, G.P. 1967 Otcherki

kultura

epokhi midi.

Prutsko-Dniestrovskogo

palaeoantropologii

Ukrainy.

134

In: dannym.

Alexandriyskogo eneolitsbornik, 144-153.

Kiev. Mezdurechia. Kiev.

Moskva.

APPENDIX2

I. A STUDYOF THE EARLIEST DOMESTICHORSES OF EASTERN EUROPE V. I . Bibi kov a (Translated from Byulleten' otd. biologiy, Vol. 72 , pt.

Moskovsko go Obs hc hes tv a Ispyta t eley 3 (1967 ), 106- 117).

Prir ody.

In the problem of the origin of the domestic a ni mals , t he question of the time and place of the domesticatio n of the ho rs e i s perhaps one of the most discussed. The original species of wil d horse which served as the basis for the creation of the domestic form is unknown; the very effect of the process of domestication and the constitutional changes which originated under its influence in the physical structure of the animal, includ ing the skeleton, is unstudied . A putative centre for the domestication of the horse has only appeared in very general outline. N.Ya. Marr, G.P. Sosnovskiy, I. Duerst and others regard the horse as one of the earliest domesticated animals; L.B. Bogaevskiy, F. Hancar, W. Herre and others maintain that the transition of the horse to its domestic state was significantly .later in comparison with the other species. In recent times one encounters in the literature extremely evasive attributions of subfossil horse remains as to their membership to the wild or the domestic form. The remains of this species from a site of one and the same cultural-historical area are ascribed to the domestic horse in one i nstance, in another to Equus przewalskii (Necrasov 1961). Sometimes the attribution of the remains of horse from an early site is pushed only as far as the species without indicating whether it belongs to the domestic or wild form (B6k6nyi 1959; Tsalkin 1962; Necrasov and Haimovici 1966). This marked disparity is explained primarily by the extraordinarily meagre palaeontological data about the horse in the Holocene and the fragmentary nature and paucity of bone remains of this species discovered in the excavations of the earliest settlements . It was long ago observed and is still remarked today that there is an unusual scarcity of horse ·bones on settlements of the Neolithic and Eneolithic in southeast Europe (Gromova 1927; B6k6nyi 1959; Behrens 1964; Tsalkin 1962 etc.). It is for just this very reason that investi gators sometimes attribute horse remains from early sites to the wild form. On the basis of this there is an obvious need to investigate horses from sites dating to the Ne9lithic and Eneolithic periods . Of the assemblages recovered in recent years the most interesting and important for ill uminating the early history of the horse belongs to the material from the settlement of Dereivka where excavations were initiated in 1962 by D.Ya. Telegin. The settlement is situated on the Right Bank of the Dnieper in the middle of its course some seventy kilometres s outh of the town of Kremenchug. It belongs to the Sredny Stog cult ure and dates to the second half of the 4th millennium B. C. The oste ol ogical c ollection from Dereivka contains 3703 mammal bones of which 2255 (more than 60%) belong to horse. This abundance of horse bones at Derei vka is of great interest especially when we take into consideration the meagre analyses of this species' remains from early sites . The predominance of t he horse

135

Fig.

1 Horse skull from Dereivka. (a-side view; b-top view; c-lower

136

view)

over all other speci e s of domest i c a nd wi ld animals furthers our interest in this si t e. Bot h t he volume of material and its archa eological a ge per mit us t o a sc ri be to t he Dereivka assemblage a ver y high value in t he i nvestigation of t he hist ory of the horse. The first and basic question to arise i s wheth er t o assign t he horse remains fro m Dereivka to the domestic or wild f or m~ I n order to ex amine the morphological characteristics of t he Dere ivka horses we co mpare d the most interesting and best preser ved bone s fr om Dere i vka with the corres ponding bones of domestic and wil d f orms. For t his we utilis ed the material from Repin, a settl ement of th e Early Yamnaya c ult ure on the Don, fr om settlements of the Timber-gra ve c ul tu r e on t he Middle Volga (Tsalkin 1958), data obtained from kurgans ( t umuli ) wi t h horses from the Dnieper region and contemporary horses fr om the Kirghiz (Brauner 1916) , and material from the Scythian and later peri od s in t he Altai (Vitt 1952; Tsalkin 1952). For the wild form data were obtaine d from the Przhevalski horse and the tarpan (Gromova 1949, 1959, 1963). Among the faunal remains from Dereivka the most interesting was an almost fully preserved skull with mandible (Fig. 1), which is housed in the osteological collection of the Institute of Zoology, Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR (collection No. 44-1192). The well developed canines of the upper and lower jaws, and the extent and form of wear of the biting surface of the incisors indicate that the skull belonged to a stallion aged 7 to 8 years. The skull had been broken to a considerable degree by its burial under layers of earth and after restoration several defects remained: a broken left wall of the brain case and the left cheek arch, the outer wall of the left maxillary bone, breaks in the upper parts of both maxillary bones, partial damage to the right nasal, sphenoid and pterion area, the vomer was represented fragmentarily not having contact with other bones, some insignificant damage to the palatine bone. Although the skull is broken in places along its length and breadth, it possesses good joins and the general picture of the skull along these two planes enabled its full reconstruction. A somewhat worse situation concerns the reconstruction of the height of the skull at its f acial part as the junction between the maxillary and nasal bones is missing on both sides. For this reason· the height of the skull at its fac i al part in our measurements may be a l i ttle overstated. Conditions were sufficient for taking two measurements of the length of the skull associated with the vomer. It was possible to take the majority of skull measurements with a reasonable degree of precision. The horse skull from Dereivka is rather large and with respect to both its basal and total length it exceeds all of the horse skulls examined in the present article ·. Its basal length is 500 mm., its total length is 546 mm. According to these figures the Dereivka skull is closest of all to the largest horse skulls of the Prz hevalski and Kirghiz horses, and thereby approximates the . skulls of t he Upper Pleistocene horses of northwest Asia and the Middle Pleist oc e ne hors e s of the Volga. The skull is also quite similar in length t o the s kulls of the large riding horses of the Pazyryk kurgans (V.0 . Vitt ' s Group I I), the basal length of which averaged 498 mm. and the total length of whic h was 545.5 mm. The skull of the Dereivka horse markedly excee ds bo th tarpan skulls, the basal lengths of which were 468 an d 470 mm.

137

Table 1 Some measurements and indices of skulls of Domestic Measurement

Dereivka, No. 44-1192

1(3) Basal length 2 Total length: akrokanionprosthion 3 Median palatal length 4 Basion-staphylion Short lateral facial length: 5 entorbitale - prosthion Lateral facial length: 6 ectorbitale - prosthion 7 Facial length: postorbitale prosthion 8 Upper neurocranium length: akrokranion - supraorbitale 9 Length of the diastema 10 Length of cheektooth row (measured along the alveoli) Greatest breadth of 'snout' 11 measured across the outer borders of the alveoli of I3 12 Least breadth in the region of the diastema 13 Facial breadth between the outermost points of the facial crest 14 Breadth between the outermost margins of orbits 15 Greatest breadth of forehead 16 Greatest neurocranium breadth 17 Least neurocranium breadth behind orbits 18 Height of skull behind M3 19 Greatest length of nasal.bones Greatest width of nasal bones 20

138

horses

Kurgans, 6 ex. (Brauner 1916) range M

500

462-472

466.2

546 c.270 c.225

520-525

523.0

215-222

217.0

390

362-372

368.5

198

192-200

197.0

c.386

370-370

370.0

182 108

175-181 83-107

179.0 97.2

170

149-175

163.0

76

66- 73

70.0

53

45.5-52

so.a

c.160

157-161

158.4

c.155 c.215 C .120

153-160 200-208 113-122

156.2 204.2 121.6

c. 90 c.136 c.220 c.120

82- 90 116-128 206-224 112-117

85.0 124.4 210.0 116.0

subfos sil

and contemporary

Kirghiz, 2 ex. (Br auner 1916)

horses

E. cab.gmelini (Gromova 1949) Kherson Tavri cheskoe

(mm., %) E. 2rzewalskii, 5 ex. (Gromova 1949 , 1959) range

M

476; 488

468

c .470

474-495

485

520 ; 533 220; 230

520 255 213

c .260 210

535- 545 252-269 219-225

539 263 223

372; 370

363

370

375-391

383

195; 208

198

195

196-20 4

199

364; 370

356

363

367-381

376

180; 190 102; 104

175

171

175-188

181

167; 161

171

153

182-193

185 . 5

67

71

70- 73

72

169; 162

157

158

162-165

164

- . 162 211;' 220 122; 121

183 202 104

181 205 97

186-192 · 203-212 109-11 7

189 207 112 . 5

77

82 122

86- 93 125- 132 253- 262 108-113

89 128 258

65;

72

42;

46

81; 89 120; 126 212; 232

122 239 108

139

Table 1

Indices 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Dereivka

Anatomical axis (7:8) Short lateral facial length (5:1) Facial length (7:1) Lateral facial length (6:1) Upper neurocranium length (8:1) Length of diastema (9:1) Length of cheektooth row (10:1) Breadth of snout (11:1) Breadth of diastema (12:1) Facial breadth (13:1) Breadth of skull (15:1) Forehead-basal index (1:15) Breadth of neurocranium (16:1) Brain case (16:8) Skull height (18:1) Palatal-basion index Position of orbit (5:6) Least neurocranium breadth (17:1)

c.212 78 c. 77. 2 39.6 36.4 21.6 34 15.2 10.6 c. 32 c. 43 c.232.5 c. 24 c. 65.9 27.2 120 198 18

Kurgans

204. 4-211. 4 70.0- 80.1 78.4- 80.1 41.6- 43.2 37.7- 39.0 17.9- 23.2 32.3- 37.7 14.3- 15.5 9. 7- 11.4 33.8- 34.8 42.6- 44.8 215.3-235.0 21.5- 23.5 63.8- 67.8 24.7- 27.7 17.4-

19.4

207.3 76.4 79.3 42.3 38.4 21.6 35.0 15.0 10.7 34.1 43.8 226.1 22.5 65.6 26.7 18.1

The special characteristics of the Dereivka horse skull are the narrow strongly extended facial part, the very shortened cheektooth row, the wide brain case and some shortening of the brain case. The extension of the facial part of the Dereivka skull reveals . itself further in absolute measurements. All the measurements, taken from the central incisor alveoli (prosthion) on the Dereivka skull, are greater than those from the skulls of the comparative forms (Table 1). At the same ti me, in the length of the brain case it does not differ essentially from the other skuils with the exception of the tarpan whose upper neurocranium length is significantly shorter. The elongation of the facial part of the Dereivka skull is well characterised by the high index of the anatomical axis (index 1 = facial length upper neurocranium length) which reaches 212%. In this, the Dereivka horse appears similar to the extreme limit of the kurgan horses from the Ukraine where this index reaches 211.4%, and also for individual skulls of the Przhevalski horse whose anatomical axis index ranges from 202.7 to 217.1%, averaging 209.5%. According to the same trait, the Dereivka skull differs from the skulls of the Kirghiz horses and the skull of the Tavricheskoe tarpan which have very small indices for the anatomical axis (Table 1). The diastema of the Dereivka skull is very narrow and strongly extended, its length is 21.6% of the basal length of the skull (index 6); on the skulls of the kurgan and Kirghiz horses the index of the · diastema ranges from 17.9% to 23.2%, average 21%.

140

(contin ued) Kirghiz

E . cab.

gmeli n i

E.

pr z e walskii

202.2;194.6 78.3; 75.8 76.6; 75.8 41.1; 42 . 6 37.9; 38. 9, 21.5; 21.3 35.2; 33.0 13.7; 14.8

203 77 . 6 76 . 1 42.3 37 . 4

212.3 78.7 77 .2 41.5 36.4

202 . 7-217 . 1

209.5 c.7 9 c .78 c . 40 c.37

36 . 5 14.3

32.5 15.1

37.9- 39 . 8 14.5- 15.2

38 . 7 14. 9

35.6; 33.2 44.4; 45.1 225.1;221.8 25.7; 24.8 67.8; 63.7 25.3; 25.8

33 . 5 43.1 231. 7 22.2 59.4 26.2 119. 7 183.3 16.4

33 . 6 43.6 229.2 20.6 56.7 26.0 123.8 189.7 17.5

32.9- 35.0 41. 5- 43. 7 229.0-241.0 22.6- 23.7 61. 9- 63. 3 26.3- 26.7 112.0-120.5 183.8-200.0 17.9- 18.9

33 . 8 42.7 234.5 23.2 62.3 26.5 117 .5 192.9 18.4

17.1;

18.2

The cheektooth row of the Dereivka horse is short at 170 mm. In the absolute length of the cheektooth row, the Dereivka skull is similar to the skulls of the kurgan and Kirghiz horses, the length of which ranges from 149 to 175, average 164 mm., and with the skulls of the Pazyryk horse (169.1 mm. for Group I, 166.6 mm. for Group II and 166.3 mm. for Group III according to V.O. Vitt 1952). The cheektooth row of the Dereivka skull is markedly larger than that of the Kherson tarpan, the exceptional shortness which was explained by V.I. Gromova (1959) by the great age of the animal. It was slightly snorter than the Tavricheskoe -example, and significantly shorter than 'the Przhevalski horses which possessed cheektooth rows which were both absolutely and relatively large at 182-193 mm. (Gromova 1963). This characteristic can also be traced in the relative measurements. The length of the cheektooth row of the Dereivka skull is 34% of its basal length (index 7). It compares with the average values typical for the skulls of the kurgan and Kirghiz horses but is significantly ·less than that of the wild Mongolian horse (37.9% - 39.8%). Only in rare instances do domestic horses , in the length of their cheektooth row , approximate the indices of the wild Mongolian horses. Thus out of 48 skulls of contemporary and subfossil domesticated horses examined by V.I. Tsalkin, the relative index of the cheektooth ·row ranges 30.2% - 37.9% with an av~rage of c . 34.7% an d only in two cases does the index reach 37.9% and 37.8% . For all of the ot her skulls it was significantly less (Tsalkin 1958) . The strongly elongated facial breadth of the Derei vka skull is rather narrow. Its width between the anterior points of the facial crest was about 160 mm. The range of absolute measurements of the width of

141

this part of the skull was small among all the compared forms. One of the skulls of the kurgan horses had a very narrow facial breadth at 157 mm. while the widest was found among the Kirghiz horses. In absolute terms the facial breadth of the Dereivka horse was wider than the tarpan but narrower than the Przhevalski horse. But in its relative width (index 10 = facial breadth: basal length) this part of the Dereivka skull exhibited the lowest index - about 32% - in contrast to the skulls of all other forms for which this index ranged from 32.9% to 35.6% (Table 1). Thus, the Dereivka horse had the narrowest brain among the forms examined. At the same time the skull of the Dereivka horse is distinguished by a markedly larger snout width, which surpasses in absolute measurement all the other forms examined. However, in its relative width (index 8 = greatest breadth of snout basal length) it differs significantly only from the skulls of the Kirghiz horses and the skull of the Tavricheskoe tarpan (Table 1). The Dereivka skull is set apart because of its wide forehead. The greatest breadth of forehead is about 215 mm. According to the index of the forehead-width (index 11 = greatest breadth of forehead basal length) it belongs to the medium-forehead group of horses defined by Gromova by an index ranging from 42.6% to 45.0%. However, all the other forms examined by us do not exceed the limit of this group. According to the relative width of the forehead the Dereivka skull (43%) appears very similar to the skulls of the kurgan horses and the tarpans and also the most broad-foreheaded examples of the Przhevalski horses (42.7%), but differs from the Kirghiz horses whose index is 44.4% and 45.1% (Table 1). The forehead-basal index (index 12 = basal length : greatest breadth of forehead) of the Dereivka skull is 232.5; this emphasizes its place among the medium-foreheaded group of horses. According to this trait the Dereivka skull appears to be similar to some of the skulls of the kurgan horses and it appears a little more narrow-foreheaded than the skulls of the Kirghiz horses. It is similar to the skull of the Tavricheskoe tarpan and is more broad-foreheaded than the Kherson example. According to the system of Yuart, the horse from Dereivka belongs to the group of · forest horses which are characterised by base-forehead indices in the range 230- 240. We now turn our attention . to the broad brain · case. In its absolute neurocranium width the Dereivka skull at c.120 mm. is near to the skulls of the domestic horses whose brain case width ranges 113-122 mm., but it exceeds the Przhevalski horses (109-117 mm.), not to mention the tarpans - 104 mm. for the Tavricheskoe and 97 mm. for the Kherson example. The skull of the Dereivka horse i~ similar to the skulls of the domestic horses also according to the relative width of the brain case: it is markedly wider than the Przhevalski horse and especially the tarpans. The greatest width of the brain case of the Dereivka skull is about 24% (index 13) of its overall length; among the domestic horses examined it ranges from 21.5% to 25.7%. Among the medium-foreheaded domestic horses of the Altai kurgans it is 23.5%-25.7% with an average of 24.2% (Tsalkin 1952). But among the Przhevalski horses the relative width of the brain case is far less (22.6%-23.7%) and among the tarpan it is still smaller - 20.6% and 22.2% of the overall length of the skull (Table 1).

142

According to the proportions of the brain case, the skull of the Dereivka horse also reveals the greatest similarity to the skulls of the domestic horses. The similarity is well characterised by the index of the relationship between the greatest neurocranium breadth to the upper neurocranium length (index 14) which totals c.66% in the case of Dereivka and for the kurgan and Kirghiz horses amounts to 63.7% - 67.8% with an average of 65%. According to this trait the Dereivka skull is substantially different from the skulls of the Przhevalski horse (61.9%63.3%) and especially the tarpan with the Tavricheskoe at 59.4% and the Kherson example at 56.7% (Table 1). One must emphasize that the traits observed for all three groups - the domestic horses (including Dereivka), the Przhevalski horses and the tarpans - is absolute. While it may be true that the gap between the minimal value of this index for the domestic horses (63.7%) and the maximum for the Przhevalski horses (63.3%) is small and additional material might bridge it, all the same the difference in the proportions of the brain case among them is rather great. The height of the skull of the and is 27.2% (index 15) of its basal it is larger than the skulls of relative height it is closest to the 27.7% (Table 1).

Dereivka horse behind M3 is 136 mm. length. In its absolute dimension all the forms examined and in its kurgan horses which measured 24.7%-

According to the morphological characteristics and measurements the Dereivka skull exhibits full similarity with the skulls of the domestic horses from the kurgans of the Ukraine and the Altai and also with contemporary Kirghiz horses. At the same time according to a series of traits it differs strongly from the skulls of the . contemporary wild forms - the Przhevalski horse and the tarpan. Thus, on the basis of the construction of the skull of the Dereivka horse, one can confidently assign it to the category of the domestic horse. Among these horses there is a relatively large skull of moderately light construction, with a narrow elongated muzzle, a short dental series and a wide brain case; its withers height reached 144 cm. estimated from the basal length of the skull. The horse from Dereivka belonged to the group of mediumforeheaded and according to Yuart's classification it is possible to ~ssign it to the forest horse. As has already been remarked, the skull of the Dereivka horse is in size close to the skulls of the Middle Pleistocene horses of the Volga region (E. cab. missii Grom.). Both forms have a similar basal length; among the Pleistocene ones it .ranges 446-488 mmo The relative length of the facial part (index 2) is also very similar for both forms wi th the Pleistocene horses measuring · 77.9% of the basal length. Especially similar is the absolute and relative length of the cheektooth row. The teeth of the Pleistocene horses are characterised by thei r small dimensions, _the length of the cheektooth row was 155-161 mm., averaging about 33% of the basal length (index 7). The greatest breadth of forehead is also similar with the Pleistocene horses averaging 212 mm. which constitutes about 43.5% of the basal length (index 11). There also exist other lesser common traits. Nevertheless, the Dereivka skull sharply differs from the skulls of the Quaternary horses in its greater absolute and relative breadth of the brain case and in the greater height of its skull. The skulls of the Pleistocene horses have a

143

neurocranium breadth of 100-115 mm., and in no instance does it attain 22% of the basal length (index 13). A still greater difference appears in index 14 (greatest neurocranium breadth: upper neurocranium length): the index characteristic for the skulls of the Pleistocene horses (56.560.8%) is recorded only for the tarpan and approximates that for the skulls of the Przhevalski horse. The Dereivka skull differs more strongly from the skull of the other Middle Pleistocene horse of the Volga region - E. cab. chosaricus Grom. According to size it is smaller, the facial part is more elongated and the brain section of the skull is smaller. With regard to the teeth there is a very great difference between these two forms. The cheektooth row of the Dereivka horse was much smaller in both absolute and relative size to the very large cheektooth row of the Pleistocene chosaricus. In respect to this trait, E. cab. chosaricus was much more reminiscent of the contemporary wild Przhevalski horse. The brain section of the skull of the Dereivka horse was more strongly developed than that of the fossil horses. Even such general and preliminary comparisons with the ancient forms indicates some similar traits between the Dereivka horse and the Middle Pleistocene E. cab. missii. Of the two Middle Pleistocene forms from the Volga region known at the present time and designated E. cab. missii, it is obvious that one ought to direct one's attention to them as possible ancestors of the late Holocene horses who then appeared as the basis for the domestic horse. The frontal part of the Dereivka skull (Fig. 2) is rather narrow, strongly extended in length, especially in the fore-part - the diastema and symphysis. Just as with the skull, it is characterised by its rather small teeth and an abbreviated cheektooth row. In size and construction, the Dereivka jaw appears to be very similar to the jaw of the domestic horses and essentially different from contemporary wild forms (Table 2). At a length of 434 mm., the Dereivka jaw is markedly larger than both the jaws of the tarpan and the Przhevalski horse (the maximum length of the jaw of the latter does not exceed 420 mm., the tarpan's is shorter. still). On the basis of the diastema, which is similar in size and construction to the kurgan horses of the Ukraine, it is possible to distinguish easily the jaw of the Dereivka horse from that of the tarpan and the Przhevalski horse. Its length is 93 mm.- and this constitutes 21.4% of the length from the angle (index 2); the tarpan's is less than 80 mm. with an index of 19.7%; the maximum length of the diastema of the Przhevalski horse reaches 90 mm., and its index averages about 19%. The length of the cheektooth row ·of the Dereivka jaw is 176 mm., for the kurgan horses it is 154-172 mm., for the Tavricheskoe tarpan it is 177 mm., and for the Przhevalski horse it is 189-194 mm. The relative length (index 3) for the Dereivka horse is 40.6%, the kurgan horses range from 38.0% to 42.0%, the tarpan is 44.2%, . and the wild Mongolian horse is 45.0-48.0%. In spite of the fact that the index for the kurgan horses is calculated according to the condylar length and not to the overall, as is done for the other jaws, still one does not find a substantial difference between the Dereivka jaw and those of the kurgan horses. These indices, even if they do not coincide entirely, are still nearer by far than the relative measurements obtained for the Dereivka jaw and for the jaws of the wild forms. The cheektooth row on the

144

Fig.

2 Mandible

of horse

from Dereivka

(side

view).

Dereivka jaw, although also similar in absolute size to that tarpan, is proportionally much shorter than that of the latter. very well distinguished from the jaws of the Przhevalski horse smaller teeth and short cheektooth row.

of It by

the is its

The mandible from Dereivka is relatively narrower, especially by its hind part, compared with the jaws of the wild forms. The breadth between the two condyles is 42.4% of the length (from the angle) of the jaw while the ratio for the tarpan and the Przhevalski horse ranges from 44.7% to 48.0%. The height of the Dereivka jaw before P2 is somewhat higher than the tarpans' and somewhat smaller than many of the jaws of the Przhevalski horse. The line of the lower branch of the Dereivka mandible is straight, similar to that observed for the kurgan and other domestic horses but different from the out-turned line of the dental part of the branch encountered on the jaws of the wild forms. From the above it is obvious that the Dereivka horse possessed a mandible similar to the jaws of the domestic horses and well differentiated from those of the wild horses. All observation distinguishes the Dereivka horse skull from the skulls of the wild forms, argues for full similarity in both construction and size with the skulls of the domestic horses, and therefore permits us to regard the Dereivka horse as a horse that has already been domesticated.

145

Table 2 Measurements and proportions

of the mandibles

Domestic Measurement

Dereivka, No. 44-1192

1 2 3

4 5

6

7

8 9

10 11

Length from the angle: 434 cronion caudale - infradentale* Length from the condyle: arboral border of the condyle 445 process: infradentale 105 Length of symphisis Length of the diastema 93 176 Length of the cheektooth row c.65 Incisor width 44 Width of the diastema Breadth of the two halves measured between the most lateral points of the two condyle processes 184 Height of mandible before P2 53 Length of the pre-molar row 88 Length of the molar row 78

Kurgans, (Brauner range

of

horses 6 ex. 1916) M

412-423

416.3

83-107 154-172

96.2 166.0

l 79(lex.)

54- 64

58.4

Indices 1 2

3. 4 5 6

7

Length of symphisis to length of mandible (3:1) Length of diastema to length of mandible (4:1) Length of cheektooth row to lertgth of mandible (5:1) Width of incisor to length of mandible (6:1) Width of condyle to length of mandible (8:1) Height of mandible to length of mandible (9:1) Length of molar row to length of premolars (11:10)

* Absolute measurement of length

24.2 21 ..4

20.1-26 . 0

23.2

40.6

37.6-41.6

39.7

15.0 42.4

43(1 ex.)

12.2

13.0-15 . 5

88.6 given by

146

V.r; Gromova

14 . 3

subfossil

and contemporary

Kirghiz, 2 ex. (Brauner 1916)

horses

E. cab.gmelini . (Gromova 1949) Tavri- · Kherson cheskoe

(mm.,%) E. przewalskii, 5 ex • (Gromova 1949, 1959) · range

414; 425 104; 104 165; 165

199; 200 54; 66

M

400

393

398-419

409.5

423 84 79.5 177 60 40

423 85

422-444 76- 90 76- 90 186-194 63- 69 43- 48

435 86 83 190 67 44.5

186 45 91 88

185 46

178-193.5 51- 55 96.5-102 89- 94

189 53 99.5 91

62 39

----------------------------------------------------------

21 25.1;24.5

19.7

39.9;38.8

44.2

21.6

19.1 - 22.1

21.0 c.19.0

40.7** 45.3-47.9

46.5

15.0

15. 7

15~0-16.8

16.4

48.1;47.0

46.5

47.1

44.7-48.0

46.1

13.0;14.3

11. 2

11..7

12.8-13.1

13.0

88.2-94.0

90.8

96. 7 ** Skull from a very old stallion

147

The difference in the construction of the skull between the Dereivka horse, the earliest domestic horse known at the present time, and the contemporary wild Mongolian horse is so great that it does not permit them to be assigned to a single direct genetic series. The tarpan skull, on the other hand, is craniologically much closer to the Dereivka example and to the skulls of the other domestic horses, with the exception of its very weakly developed brain section. To· speak of the genetic connections of the tarpan in any greater detail than has already been done by V.I. Gromova is difficult at the present time. It is possible only to emphasize that the Przhevalski horse and the tarpan differ morphologically so much between themselves that it is possible to view them as the root forms of two distantly separated branches, i.e. independent species. We may note also that in the post-cranial skeleton the tarpan shows greater similarity with that of'the ancient domestic horses while the Przhevalski horse differs from them substantially in the construction of the extremities. The great quantity of horse remains and the significant livestock at predominance of this species over the other domestic Dereivka points to the enormous role that it played in the economy of the Eneolithic inhabitants of the Middle Dnieper in the 4th millennium

B.C. The existence of the domestic horse in such an early settlement as Dereivka permits us to speak of a significantly earlier time for its domestication than was entertained up to now. It is possible to believe that the process of mastering the horse went parallel and contemporaneous with the domestication of the other basic forms of hoofed animals. The evidence that we have at the present permits us to assume that on the borders of south-eastern Europe and, in my opinion, the Volga region, there emerged conditions which made it possible for the domestication of the horse to successfully take its course. The basic factor of this process was the existence of the original genetic material - the wild horse - and the natural conditions which most favoured the development of the nomadic economy. In the arid steppes of the south-east edge of Europe and the Volga region only the horse with its biological characteristics could have turned oµt to be the most effective form for domestication and it was probably one of the first species in this territory which was solidly . included in the composition of the domestic animals. With reference to what has · been said above, it is necessary to turn to one more question. In analysing the fauna from the sites excavated from all the archaeological cultures of Europe known up to the present, the distribution of horse remains varies unevenly in the different territories. For the sites of the Neolithic and Eneolithic of western, central and the southern parts of south-eastern Europe there is a characteristic paucity of finds of horse bones and it is only with the beginning of the Bronze Age that it can be regul?rly counted with the other basic species. New evidence from the excavations of recent years on the border of south-east Europe shows that for the Eneolithic settlers of this area the horse was well known and already existed in its domestic form (Dereivka). Thus, in the territory of south-east Europe there developed two zones of remains - a western and an eastern with different quantities of horse remains in them. For the sites of the

148

Neolithic and Eneolithic periods in the west the presence of horse in the faunal remains was less than 10% of the bones (of the overall quantity of ungulate bones), a ratio that is entirely stable. In the east the relative quantity of horse remains is significantly greater, up to 80% of the remains. The western region includes the sites of the Neolithic-Eneolithic of the Right-Bank Ukraine and extends far to the west into central and southern Europe. The eastern zone i~ represented by remains from the Eneolithic period on the Left-Bank of the Ukraine~ Dereivka (Middle Dnieper), Alexandria (Karkov region) and sites of the Early Yamnaya culture of the Middle Volga - Repin (Middle Don) and, obviously, the Trans-Volga but not, however, as far as the Fore-Caucasus and the Caucasus zone as a whole. From the eastern area where the horse was mastered as a domestic animal at an early time, the species could then penetrate episodically into neighbouring regions occupied by tribes with different economic structures. Obviously, one should explain the small number of bones or their total absence on the sites west of the Dnieper by just such an infiltration of domestic horses and regard the rare finds of horse remains from the pre-Bronze Age as the remains of domestic horses.

149

II. A STUDYOF THE EARLIESTDOMESTICHORSESOF EASTERNEUROPE, PART 2 V.I. (Translated from Byulleten' otd. biologiy, Vol. 75, pt.

Bibikova

Moskovskogo Obshchestva 5 (1970), 118-125).

Ispytateley

Prirody.

Earlier we wrote about the horse skull from the Eneolithic settlement of Dereivka on the Middle Dnieper, which dates to the second half of the 4th millennium B.C. (Bibikova 1967). An analysis of the structural characteristics of this skull led us to conclude that it belonged to a domestic horse. In the present article, continuing our description of the horse remains from the Dereivka settlement, we turn to the evidence of the most diagnostic and well preserved bones of the post-cranial skeleton, comparing them with the corresponding evidence from bones of some domestic and wild horses. The metacarpals from Dereivka (Table l; Fig. 1) are distinguished by their significant variation in absolute size. Their greatest length ranges from 206 to 235 mm. Bones of a similar length are very common among many ancient domestic horses, in particular among the horses from the excavations of the Srubnaya (Timber-grave) settlements of the Middle Volga, from the kurgans in the territories of the Ukraine, the Altai and elsewhere (Brauner 1916; Vitt 1952; Tsalkin 1952). The examined bones are undoubtedly similar in their overall length to the same bones of the , Przhevalski horse, although they are on average somewhat shorter than the latter. It is characteristic that the Dereivka metacarpals are markedly longer than the metacarpals of the tarpan, with the exception of a single example (No. 44-704) which does bear a similarity to the tarpan metacarpal in length but differs from it in other features. With respect to their overall proportions, the Dereivka metacarpals distinguish themselves as significantly massive. They are distinguished especially sharply from the same bones of the Przhevalski horse where they are rarely exceeded in the value of the index in any given ipstance. The bones closest to those from Dereivka to interest us belong ·to the metacarpals of the tarpan which are distinguished from them only by their larger proximal ends whereas the width of the distal end and especially the diaphysis · corresponds between them. No significant differences exist in the proportions of this bone between the Dereivka and the numerous other subfossil horses although the average value of the former generally reveals a somewhat greater size. The exceptions are the horse bones from the Late Bronze Age settlements which differ from the Dereivka as well as from many other early domestic horses by their markedly larger diQensions and a few other proportions and in some instances the differences are very supstantial. However, in the structure of the metac~rpal the bones of the Dereivka horses reveal substantial similarity with the bones of early domestic horses. They are near to the metacarpals of the tarpan in a series of traits just as they approximated it in the structure of the skull. The difference in the metacarpal between the tarpan and the

150

1

Table Comparison Dereivka range

Trait

of horse

metacarpals

(N=21) M

Przhevalski range

(N=8) M

225.0

221.05

207.5

52.86

47.0

47.5-

52.5

50.0

55.5 . 51.18

47.0

45.0-

49.0

47.0

35.81

33.0

30e0- 33.0

32.0

21. 5- 25. 2

23.75

22.6

21.8- 22.9

22.2

Index of distal width to greatest length~%

21.5- 25.1

23.13

22.6

20. 5- 21. 1

20.8

Index of breadth of diaphysis to greatest length,%

13.8- 17.6

16.06

15.9

13.5- 15.1

14. 4

mm.

206.0-234.5

Tarpan (N=l) (Gromova 1949)

Greatest

length,

Greatest proximal

bre a dth of end, mm.

47.0-

56 ..0

Greatest breadth of distal e·nd, mm.

47.0-

Smallest breadth diaphysis, mm.

30.5- 39.0

Index of proximal breadth to greatest length,%

216.0-235 . 0

I--'

lJ1 I--'

of

Fig.

1 Horse metacarpals

152

from Dereivka.

Dereivka horse is essentially defined by their absolute size which is larger among the latter. Some differences between them also exist perhaps in the configuration of the bone. The Dereivka metacarpals have typically a high trapeze with a wider proximal end and a narrower distal. The width of the distal section of the Dereivka metacarpals constitutes an average of 96% of the proximal width [l] while among the tarpans the width of the metacarpal is similar at both ends. However, it is necessary to remember that the expansion of the distal end of the · tarpan metacarpal, which accords fully with the unusual massiveness of the phalanges, is observed on the sole existing skeleton of this horse. In my opinion, this does not serve as a distinguishing trait of this form; it may rather be explained as the result of the early castration of a captured tarpan foal and its further long keeping in a stall. Unfortunately, on the settlement of Dereivka was not found which denies us the possibility characteristics of this part of the skeleton.

a complete metatarsus of providing the

The Phalanx 1 bone of the Dereivka horse in both its absolute and relative dimensions reveals an almost total similarity with the corresponding bones of many subfossil domestic horses, differing substantially only from the Bronze Age horses. The greatest length of the front Phalanx 1 varies from 79.0 mm. to 92.5 mm., and averages 86.2 mm.; the rear is 76.5-91.0 mm., average 83.8 mm. (Table 2). These are unquestionably larger than those of the Przhevalski horse not to mention the tarpan. The similarity of the Dereivka first phalanges with the complete phalanges of domestic horses (excluding the Bronze Age horses) is also to be seen in their structure. At the same time they are markedly more massive than those of the Przhevalski horse which is obvious in both their absolute size as well as the indices of the proximal and distal ends and the diaphyses. The large dimensions of the Phalanx 1 of the Dereivka horses distinguish it well f rom the bones of the tarpan. Their smallest greatest length is significantly greater th~n that of the tarpan; the width differences · are not as pronounced, but they are still s~gnificantly more slender. The first phalanges of the tarpan are of proportionally greater width than those of the Dereivka horses as they are characterised by indices that are either not. matched at all (the width of the proximal end and the diaphysis of the foreleg, the width of the diaphysis of the hindleg), or are very rarely matched by the bones of the Dereivka horses as well as other domestic and wild subfossil horses. It is necessary to note also the certain differences in the · general outline of the first phalanges which are more slender and trapezoidal among the Dereivka horses while they approximate to a rectangle among the tarpan. A difference is observed also in the slenderness of the distal part which is very lo~ and expanded on the bones of the .tarpan and narrower with sharp relief on the bones of the Dereivka horses (Fig. 2). The Phalanx 2 bones from Dereivka, just as with the Phalanx 1, are in both size and proportion quite close to those of the domestic horses. With regard to the wild form, one can observe some differences from the

153

Table 2 Comparison of Phalanx 1 Dereivka (N=25*/43) range M

Trait Greatest

length,

mm.

Greatest proximal

breadth of end, mm.

Greatest breadth of distal end, mm. Smallest breadth diaphysis, mm.

Tarpan (N=l) (Gromova 1949)

Przhevalski range

(N=8) M

79 .-0-92. 5 76.5-91.0

86.2 83.8

74.5 71.0

79.5-88.0 74.0-84.0

83.0 79.0

51.0-62.5 51.0-62.5

55.9 57.2

52.7 53.7

48.0-53.5 49.5-54.0

50.0 52.0

42.0-49.0 41.0-48.0

45.3 44.9

42.0** 41.5

41.0-44.0 40.0-43.0

42.5** 41.5

- 34.0-39.0 32.0-40.0

36.6 36.2

33.8 34.0

32.0-35.0 30.6-35.0

34.0 33.0

59.9-69.8 59.0-75.6

64.9 68.4

70.7 75.6

58.5-64.8 63.4-68.9

62.0 66.0

48.9-56.3 -48.1-59. 0

52.6 53.6

56.4 58.5

49.1-52.0 48.8-53.0

50.0 50.5

38.1-46.7 38.0-47.4

42.2 43.2

45.4 47.9

37.8-42.1 37.8-44.6

40.0 41.0

of

~

u,

~

Index of proximal breadth to greatest length,% Index of distal breadth to greatest le~gth, % Index of breadth of diaphysis to greatest length

*

**

Here and in Tables 3 and 4 the upper number= quantity of bones from fore part, lower number= hind part. The width of the articular surface and not the lower end as in V.I. Gromova.

the

Tabl e 3 Comparison of Phalanx Dereivka (N=23/29) M ra _nge

Trait Greatest

length,

mm.

Greatest proximal

breadth of end, mm.

Greatest breadth of distal end, mm.

1--'

V1 V1

Smallest breadth diaphysis, mm.

2 Tarpan (N=l) (Gromova 1949)

Przhevalski range

(N=8) M

44.5- 52.0 47.0- 53.0

47.9 50.2

37.5 38.5

42.0- 47.0 43.0- 48.0

44.2 45.5

48.5- 58.5 48.5- 59.0

54.6 53.6

52.3 52.5

47.0- 52.5 47.5- 53.0

49.0 49.6

46.0- 53.5 45.0- 51.0

50.6 48.4

49.3 46.7

48.0- 52.0 45.0- 48.0

49.0 46.0

42.s- so.a 42.0- 48 •.S

46.7 44.5

47.3 43.3

42.0- 45.0 44.0- 42.S

43.0 41.0

107.4-123.1 95.5-118.O

114.1 106.9

139.S 136.4

108.7 - 120~2 112.0 110.2-114.9 112.6

98.0-115.4 88.5-102~4

105.9 95.6

131.S 121.3

107.8 - 121.4 111.5 98.9-107.4 101.6

84.2-109.9 84.3- 97.0

97.8 88.9

126.1 112.4

93. 3-101. 2 96.7 88.0- 94.2 90.0

of

Index of proximal breadth to greatest length,% Index of distal breadth to greatest length,% Index of breadth of diaphysis to greatest length,%

a

Fig.

2 First

from Dereivka

b

phalanges

a Fig.

of horses

(a) and tarpan

3 Second phalanges

from Dereivka

(b).

b of horses

(a) and tarpan

(b) .

Dereivka examples. They are somewhat larger than those of the Przhevalski horse that stands out especially among the second phalanges of the hind extremities (Table 3), but are rather si□ ilar in their proportions. On the other hand they are distinguished very sharply from the tarpan and this is evident in the much larger general size of the bones of the Dereivka horses as well as in the proportions evidenced by the unusual massiveness of the bones of the tarpan . What has been said above concerning the general configuration of the Phalanx 1 goes in full also for the second phalanges: they are more trapezoidal among the Dereivka horses while among the tarpans they approximate a rectangle with their extended width (Fig. 3). The relative width of the distal part to the proximal on the front phalange of the Dereivka horses is about 90%; with the tarpan it is more than 94% and on the rear phalange it is 84% to 90%. 9

The Phalanx 3 bones (Table 4) represented by the excavations at Dereivka are a comparatively large series of well preserved examples that differ markedly from the bones of the Przhevalski horse, especially in their greater size. This is clearly revealed not only by the mean figures but also in the range of variability. The length of the front side, and especially the height and width of the bones of the Dereivka horse are much larger, however, they are proportionally smaller and wider than the phalanges of the Przhevalski horse. The tarpan's hoof bones are markedly smaller than the majority of the Dereivka bones, and in height and width they are generally more often situated outside the range of the Dereivka phalanges. Less significant, and sometimes altogether absent are differences in the proportion of these bones between the two forms of horse.

156

Table 4 Comparison

Le·ngth of dorsal surface, mm. Height in region extensor process, ......

u,

.........

Greatest

of mm.

breadth,

mm.

Index of height to length of dorsal surface,% Index of breadth to length of dorsal surface,% Index of height to greatest breadth,%

3 (N=8)

M

Tarpan (N=l) (Gromova 1949)

51.0- 61.0 51.0- 63. 5

55.9 57.3

52.5 54.3

48.0- 54.0 51.0- 59.0

51.0 55.0

38.0- 45.0 "40.0- 48.0

41.8 43.1

36.8 38.3

39.0- 41.0

40.0 40.0

75.0- 91. 0 68.0- 87."0

82.7 77 .5

72.5 70.0

71. 5- 78 .o 69.0- 73.0

74.0 71.0

68.3- -Sl. 1 69.5- 81.1

74.9 75.3

70.0 70.5

74.1- 83.3 70.0- 76.5

78.3 73.7

148.0 135.5

138.1 129.0

50.6 55.6

50.6 54.6

Dereivka range

Trait

of Phalanx

(N=26/27)

130.0-160.7 126.7-146.3 45.9- 56.0 50.6- 59.5

Przhevalski range

140.7-150.0 118.6-135.3 51.3- 55. 9 55.0- 58.6

M

145.9 129.2 53.3 57.0

As with the preceding cases, the third phalanges from Dereivka appear fully similar to the bones of many subfossil and some contemporary domestic horses. And here again we observe the same difference between the Dereivka horses and the horses of the Bronze Age. Thus, on the basis of the comparisons adduced from all the extremity bones of the Dereivka horses, as well as ftom the skull described earlier on, we can maintain with certainty that the remains belong to domestic and not wild horses. We now turn to the morphological the Dereivka horseso

and biological

characteristics

According to the value of the index of the width of the of the metacarpal the Dereivka bones can be divided into the groups: index of diaphysis slender-legged semi-slender legged medium-legged semi-thick legged thick-legged

13.5 14.5 15.5 16.5 17.5

-

14.5 15.5 16.5 17.5

width,%

of

diaphysis foll owing

No. of examples N

%

2 5

9.5 23.8 19.0 42.9 4.8

4 9

1

As is clear from the preceding figures, the values for the width of the extremities of the Dereivka horses are quite varied. The most numerous are the semi-thick legged horses whose proportions amount to about 43% of the overall number. The medium-legged and semi-slender legged constitute a group equal in size. Thin-legged and thick-legged ones are encountered extremely rarely among the Dereivka horses. The latter is represented by a single bone which in the relative width of its diaphysis belongs essentially to the border between the semi-thick legged and thick-legged (No. 44-702). In comparison with the other domestic horses the Dereivka horses · :are characterised by a somewhat more massive metacarpal. This is evident in that the semi-slender legged and medium-legged horses, which are numerous among the majority of the subfossil domestic horses, are found at Dereivka in a lesser percentage. But chiefly there is the significantly higher presence of semi~thick legged horses at Dereivka in comparison with the population of domestic horses from later periods. It may be in this connection that the Dereivka horses are closest of all to the domestic horses of the Volga Bulgars, half of which belonged to the medium-legged group of horses (Tsalkin 1958). The Dereivka horses are thicker-legged than the kurgan horses of the Ukraine and even the tarpan. The somewhat greater massiveness of the m~tacarpals of the Dereivka horses may be possibly explained as a sign of primitiveness, a well noted marker of some Pleistocene horses.

158

The withers the length of 126 cm. to 144 according to the

height of the Dereivka horses, calculated according to the metacarpal in the method of Kiesewalter is from cm., in average about 136 cm. The Dereivka horses, scale of A.A. Brauner, fall into the following groups: withers

small small-medium medium

height

- 137 138 - 142 143 - 147

(cm.)

no. of examples N

%

16

76.2 19.0 4.8

4

1

The largest group at Dereivka are the horses of small stature (from 126 cm. to 137 cm.), among which one most often encounters those ranging between 133 - 137 cm. (12 out of 16 examples). In stature the Dereivka horses are similar to the kurgan horses of the Ukraine with a withers height from 134 cm. to 142 cm. The similarity among them appears also in the small variability of the sizes. In withers height they are also close to the horses of the Pazyryk kurgans of groups III and II, and individually may reach the size of the large Scythian horses of the Altai. For example, the size of the stallion, represented by the skull, reached 144 cm. and the average size of the Altai horses of group I was 145 cm. Thus, according to their size the Dereivka horses are rather homogeneous. The general mass of them constitute an animal that stood 133-140 cm. at withers, while much larger (especially more than 142 cm.) were very rarely encountered. The average size of the Dereivka horses was about 136 cm. A determination of the height of the Dereivka horses according to the method of V.O. Vitt leads to similar results which reveals the same uniformity in the withers height. In my opinion, all of this can be explained by the fact that this was a relatively homogeneous population and in its characteristics it does not reveal substantial differences with the kurgan horses of the Ukraine and the Altai as well as other subfossil domestic horses of south-eastern Europe. Among the latter they differ substantially only from the domestic horses of the Bronze Age which ar~ distinguished from all others by their markedly greater size. Their average withers height reached 139 cm. (Tsalkin 1964; Bibikova 1970). . Among the contemporary horses those from Dereivka are most reminiscent in their withers height of the domestic horses of the · western and central regions of Kazhakstan (the average size of the Turgay horse is 135.5 cm. (Dobzhanskiy and Voytyatskiy 1928)). Consequently, in the structure of the skull and the extremity bones analysed, the Dereivka horses are indistinguishable from many subfossil domestic horses that are known from the excavation of archaeological sites in the southern part of Eastern Europe and the Altai. Furthermore, the Dereivka horses differ substantially in a series of traits in both the skull and the post-cranial skeleton from the Przhevalski horse (among which we ought to mention the smallness of the teeth, the

159

strongly developed brain case, massiveness of the extremities etc.). Less sharply pronounced are the differences between the Dereivka horses and the tarpan among which there is the relatively weakly developed brain case and the distal elements of the extremities (especially the first and second phalanges) which are distinguished by their excessive massiveness. A series of similar characteristics point possibly to a considerable genetic similarity between the Dereivka horses and the tarpan rather than with the Przhevalski horse. It is possible to propose that the early domestic horses of south-east Europe and south-west . Siberia had a common original form with the tarpan and were not connected in origin with the Przhevalski horse. The attribution of the Dereivka horses as domestic has a very important significance not only for resolving the natural-historical questions connected with the formation of one of the links in the evolutionary line of the Eguus family, but it also assists in deciding the question of the time and place of the domestication of the horse in eastern and central Europe. In this way it also helps the analysis of the specifics of the spread of the domestic horse into these territories in the period of the Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures (Bibikova 1969). It is fully probable that the horse, which was domesticated in the borders of the eastern zone, penetrated further into the midst of the settled agriculturalists of the Right-Bank Ukraine, whose basic domestic livestock was cattle. Here, and in contrast to the Left-Bank, the horse appeared in the agricultural-stockbreeding means of production over the course of a long period as an auxiliary animal. In contrast, in the Left-Bank Ukraine, in the interfluve of the Dnieper and the Don, and in the middle Volga region, the horse was the main domestic animal among stockbreeding-agricultural tribes, who exploited it for transport and meat and, possibly, in some instances as a work animal.

Footnote T~o bones (Nos. 44-698 and 44-701) are excluded whose widths are the same. Both bones derive from animals not fully matured, although the distal epiphysis on them has fused. In being immature the process of growth of these bones shows in .the friability of the bony substance in the lower part of the diaphysis and also the considerable narrowness of the latter.

160

Bibliography Behrens, H. 1964 Die neolithische-fruhmetallzeitlichen Tierskelettfundes der Alten Welt. Veroffentlichen Landesmuseum fiir Vorgeschichte in Halle, Nr. 19. Berlin. Bibikova, V.I. 1967 K izucheniyu Evropy. Biol. part 1).

drevneyshikh domashnikh MOIP, otd. biol., t. lxxii,

loshadey Vostochnoy vyp. 3 (Appendix 2,

1969

Do istorii domestika tskii konya na pivdennomu Skhodi Arkheolohiya, t. xxii (Appendix 3)

1970

Fauna iz poseleniya u Kryma. In-t arkheologii

s. Kirovo. In. AN USSR. Kiev.

Drevnosti

Evrope. Vostochn.

Bokonyi, S • . 1959 Die Friihalluviale Wirbeltierfauna Ungarns (Vom Neolithikum bis zur La Tene-Zeit). Acta Archaeologica Acad. Scientarum Hungaricae, Bd. 11. Bogaevskiy, L.B. 1937 Orudiya prozvodstva

i domashnie zhivotnye

Tripol'ya.

L.

Brauner, A.A. 1916 Materialy k poznannyu domashnikh zhivotnykh Rossii. 1. Loshad' kurgannykh pogrebeniy Tiraspol'skogo u., Khersonskoy gub. Zap. Imp. o-va sel'sk. khoz-va Yuzhnoy Rossii, t.86, kn. 1. Dobzhanskiy, F.G. and B.P. Boytyatskiy 1928 Loshad' kochevogo naseleniya Semipalatinskoy gubernin. Materialy Osobogo komiteta po issled. soyuzn. avton. respublik, vyp. 18, ser. kazakhstanskaya. Domashnie zhivotnye Semipalatinskoy gubernin. L. Gromova,· V.I. 1927 Materialy k poznannyu fauny Zool. muzeya AN SSSR. L.

tripol'skoy

kultury.

Ezhegodn .

1949

Istoriya loshadey roda Eguus v Starom Svete. Chast' I. Obzor i opisannie form. Tr. Paleontol. in-ta AN SSSR, t. xvii, vyp. 1. M.-L.

1959

0 skelete tarpana (Eguus caballus gmelini sovremennykh dikikh loshadey. Chast I. biol., t. lxiv, vyp. 4.

1963

0 skelete tarpana (Eguus caballus dikikh loshadey. Tr. MOIP, t. x.

161

gmelini

Ant.) Biol. Ant.)

i drugikh MOIP, otd. i

drugikh

Hancar,

F. 1956 Das Pferd in Prahistorischer Wien.

und friiher

0. 1961 K izucheniyu domashnikh i ranneneoliticheskoy kultury Krish. Iasi, t. vii, No. 1,2.

historischer

Zeit.

Necrasov,

O. and S. Haimovici 1966 Studiul resturilor statiunea Gumelnita. vol. 17, no. 1.

dikikh zhivotnykh An Univ ·"Al Cuza" din

Necrasov,

de

fauna neolitica Studii si cercetari

descoperite in de Istorie Veche,

Telegin,

D. Ya. 1964 0 kulturno-istoricheskom meste nekropoley dnepro-donetskogo tipa. Tez. dokl. na VII Mezhdunar. kongresse antropol. i ethnograph. nauk v-Moskve.

Tsalkin,

V.I. 1952 K izucheniyu Issledovaniya

loshadey iz po Arkheologii

kurganov Altaya. Materialy SSSR, no. 24. M.-1.

1958 Fauna iz raskopok arkheologicheskikh Povolzh'ya. Materialy i Issledovaniya no. 61. M.-1. 1962 Mlekopitayushchie Drevney Moldavii. t. lxvii, vyp. 5.

i

pamyatnikov Srednego po Arkheologii SSSR, Biol.

MIOP, otd.

biol.,

1964 Nekotorye itogi izucheniya kostnykh o~tatkov zhivotnyt raskopok arkheologicheskikh Pamyatnikov pozdego bronzovogo veka. Kratk. soob. In-ta arkheologii AN SSSR, vyp. 101, M.

162

APPENDIX3 ON THE HISTORYOF HORSEDOMESTICATION IN SOUTH-EASTEUROPE V.I. (Translated

from Arkheologia

Bibikova

22 (1969),

55-66.)

The history of domesticated animals in south-east Europe has been elucidated in the literature to a fair degree only when one deals with herds of already domesticated livestock. Much less is known about the process of domestication. Most often there remains no resolution of the problem of the origin of the individual species and the emergence of the forms which constituted the basis of domestication. What is lacking is a direct examination of this process and those changes which appeared in the physical structure of the animal, especially in the bones. This is all well illustrated in the case of the history of horse domestication. The palaeozoological finds of the Ukraine have been enriched f~r decades by the bones of domestic animals which were found in the course of excavating Eneolithic settlements. The settlements best examined are on the Right-Bank of the Dnieper, in the basin of the southern Bug, the Dniester, the Prut and further west, particularly in the territory of Romania. In these sites, well known under the name of Tripolye, the major quantity of remains consists of the bones of domestic cattle, pig and ovicaprids. There also occur the bones of horse. But in the Tripolye sites the proportion of the individual species indicates that the horse is the least numerous compared with the other domestic animals. In addition, among the zoomorphic figurines and illustrations on ceramics the horse occurs very rarely at a time wh~n figurines and representations (on ceramics) of the other domestic animals, especially the cow, was a principal subject of Tripolye art. Consequently, with regard to the Tripolye remains one can speak quite definitely of a relatively small quantity of horse and an insignificant role for it in the economy. An insignificant amount of horse bones is characteristic not only for the Tripolye sites but also for other cultures of Europe during the Neolithic-Eneolithic period. [l] In the first place, it is explained by some scholars evading the ascription of subfossil horse remains as belonging to the domestic or wild forms. Fairly often, the horse remains from sites of this cultural-historical area are attributed to E. przhevalski, that is simply to the wild form. [2] Others considering horse remains from an early site limit their identification only to the species without considering their attribution to the domestic or wild form. [3] Much of the discussion on the problem 0£ domesticated animals concerns the · question of the time of the dom~stication of the horse. One group of scholars considers the horse as one of the oldest domesticated animals; [4] other authors, conversely, assert the marked lateness of horse domestication compared with the other basic species of animals. [5] Until now there has been no explanation of the oldest centre or centres of the first domestication of the horse and the oldest oikoumen where the nomadic economy began. [6]

163

The increase of archaeological research for the NeolithicEneolithic of Eastern Europe permits one to expand the evidence for the time and place of horse domestication in Eastern Europe. Below are listed those sites whose material will be employed in deciding the question that we have just presented. (7] Southern Bug Neolithic (End of the 5th - beginning of the 4th millennium

B.C.)

1. Baskov Island: a settlement near the village of Skybynets, Trostyanets District, Vinnytsa Region. Level of Keros age. Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in 1959. 148 mammal bones. 2. Mitkov Island: a settlement near the river Skybynets, Trostyanets District, Vinnytsa Region. Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in 1959. 933 bones. 3. Soroki: a settlement near the town of Soroki, V.I. Markevych in 1957-60. 724 bones.

Moldavia.

Excavated

by

4. Baskov Island II: a settlement near the village of Skybynets, Trostyanets District, Vinnytsa Region. Level of well developed Neolithic. Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in 1959. 810 bones. [8] 5. Savran': a settlement near the town of Savran', Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in 1955. 127 bones.

Odessa

Region.

near the village of NovoNikolayev Region. Excavated by

6. Mikolina Broyaka: a settlement Aleksandrovka, Pervomaysk district, V.M. Danylenko in 1955. 272 bones.

7. Mel'nichnaya Krucha: a settlement near the village of Sabatinovka, Ul'yanovka District, Kirovograd Region. Excavated by A.V. Dobrovolsky in 1947. 17 bones. Early Neolithic of the Middl~ Dnieper (End of 5th - beginning of the 4th millennium

B.C.)

1. Surskoy I: a site in the island of Surskoy in . Dnepropetrovsk Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in .1946. 228 bones. [9]

Region.

2. Igren V: a site near the village of Igren, Excavated by O.V. Bodyansky in 1947. 224 bones.

Region.

Dnepropetrovsk [10]

3.-4. Shulaev I and Shulaev II: a double level settlement on the island of Shulaev near the village of Mykilska, Solonyan district, Dnepropetrovsk Region. 47 and 271 bones. [11]

(Surski

Developed Neolithic of the Middle Dnieper culture - beginning of the 4th millennium

B.C.)

1.-3. Surskoy II, III and IV: three settlements on Surskoy island, Dnepropetrovsk Region. Excavated by V.M. Danylenko in 1946. 300, 102 and 533 bones respectively. [12]

164

Developed Neolithic of the Middle Dnieper Dnieper-Donets culture (First half of the 4t h millennium B.C.) 1. Buz 'k i: a se t tlement near t he vil lage of Buz'ki, Irkliev district, Che rk a s s y Regi on. Excavated by D.Ya. Teleg i n in 1957-58. 169 bones. [13] 2. Sobachki : a set tl emen t nea r th e vill ag e of Privilen, Verkhnyaya Khortitsa dist r i ct , Zapor iz h' ye Regi on. Excavated by A.V. Dobrovolsky i n 1928 . 207 bones. [14] 3. Sredny St og I : a se ttl eme nt Zaporizh ' ye. 94 bones . [15]

(First

near

the

vill age

Linear Ware culture half of the 4th millennium

of

Kichkas

by

B. C.)

1. Floreshty: a settlement in the basin of the river Prut near the village of Floreshty, Moldavia. Excavated by T.S~ Passek in 1956-58 . 528 bones reported by V.I. Tsalkin in the work of T.S. Passek . [16] Boian culture (Middle of the 4th millennium

B.C.)

1. Floreshty: a settlement near the vi llage of Fl oreshty, Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1956-58. 5293 bones. [17] Early Tr i polye culture (Middle of the 4th millennium

Moldavia.

B.C.)

1. Bernovo-Luka: a settlement near the village of Bernovo-Luka, Kelmennets di strict, Cherkassy Region. Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1951 . 2238 bones. [18] 2. Soloncheny I: a settlement near the village of Soloncheny,Rezina district, Moldavia. Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1962. 827 bones. [19] 3. Lenkovtsy: a settlement district, Cherkassy Region. bones. [20]

near the village of - Lenkovtsy, Kremenets Excavated by K.K. Chernysh in 1950-54. 1962

4. Luka Vrublevetskaya: a settlement near t he village of LukaVrublevetskaya, Kamenets-Podolskiy district, Khmel' nitskiy Regi on . Excavated by S.M. Bi biko v i n 1945-50 . 7982 bones . [21] 5. Sabatinovka II : a settle ment near the village of Sabat inovk a , Ulyan ov district, Kiro vogra d Regi on . Excavate d by M.L. Makarev ych in 1947- 48. 341 bones . [22] 6. Grenovka: a settlement near the village of Greno vka , Excavated by M.L. Makarevych in 1948 . 35 bones .

165

Odess a Re gion.

7. Gayvoron: a settlement near the village of Gayvoron, Gayvoron district, Kirovograd Region. Excavated by M.L. Makarevych in 1960-61. 351 bones.

(2nd half

Middle Tripolye culture and end of 4th millennium

B.C.)

1. Soloncheny II: a settlement near the village of Soloncheny, district, Moldavia. Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1952. 141 bones. 2. Polivanov Yar II and III: a settlement Kel'menetsy district, Chernovtsy Region. 1949-51. 5630 bones. [23] 3. Sabatinovka I: a settlement district, Kirovograd Region. bones.

a

near the village of Komorov, Excavated by T.S. Passek in

near the village of Sabatinovka, Ulyanov Excavated by A.V. Dobrovolsky in 1947. 96

4.-5. Nezvisko B/I and B/II: a settlement Obertyn district, Ivano-Frankovsk Region. 1953-54 and 1957. 179 and 2113 bones. 6. Vladimirovka: Pidvysots district, 186 bones. [24]

Rezina

near the village of Nezvisko ·, Excavated by K.K. Chernysh in

settlement near the village of Vladimirovka, Kirovograd Region. Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1937.

7. Kolomiyshchina II: a settleme ·rrt near the village of Khalepya, Obukhiv district, Kiev Region. Excavated by T.S. Passek in 1939. 186 bones. [25] 8. Grebeni: a settlement near the village of Grebeni, Rzhishchev district, Kiev Region. Excavated by S.M. Bibikova in 1961. 170 bones. Late Tripolye culture (3rd millennium B.C.) 1.-2. Pidgirtsi I and II: Pidgriptsi, Obukhiv distric in 1961~ 271 and 520 bones.

two settlements . near t , Kiev Region. · Excavated [26]

the village of by Yu.M. Zakharuka

3. Sandraki: a settlement district, Vinnytsa Region. bones. [27]

near the village of Sandraki, Khmel'nits Excavated by O.F. Lagodovka in 1949-50. 1151

4. Stena: a settlement near the village of Stena, Tomashpol' district, Vinnytsa Region. Excavated by M~L. Makarevych in 1958-59. 966 bones.[28] 5. Gorodsk: a settlement near the village of Gorodsk, Korostyshev district, Zhitomir Region. Excavated by M.L. Makarevych in 1939 and A.V. Dmitriyevsky in 1946. 1022 bones. [29] 6. Stary Bezradychi: a settlement near the village of Stary Bezradychi, Obukhiv district, Kiev Region. Excavated by Yu.M. Zakharuk in 1949. 167 bones. [30]

166

7. Kunisovtsy: a settlement near the village of Kunisovtsy, Chernolets district, Ivano-Frank ovsk Region. Excavated by Yu.M. Zakharuk and V.P. Kravets in 1953. 243 bones. [31] 8. Troyanov: a settlement near the village of Troyanov, Trostyanets district, Zhitomir Region. Excavated by T.D. Belanovsky and M.M. Shmagli in 1956-58. 648 bones. [32] 9. Pavoloch: a settlement district, Zhitomir Region. bones. [33]

near the village of Pavoloch, Popel'niya Excavated by M.L. Makarevych in 1947. 512

10. Kolomiyshchina I: a settlement near the village of Khalepya, 0bukhiv district, Kiev Region. Excavated by T.S. Passek and Ye.Yu. Krychevsky in 1934-38. 1228 bones. [34] 11. Koshylivtsi: a Tovstensky district, 1953. 195 bones. [35]

settlement near Ternopol Region.

12. Sukhostav: a settlement district, Ternopol Region. bones. [36]

the village of Koshylivtsi, Excavated by Yu.M. Zakharuk in

near the village of Sukhostav, Kopychiv Excavated by V.P. Kravets in 1953. 212

Sredny Stog culture (Second half of the 4th millennium

B.C.)

1.-2. Molyukov Bugor II and III: two settlements near the village Novoselyts, Chigyrin district, Cherkassy Region. Excavated V.M. Danylenko in 1955. 224 bones. [37]

of by

3. Aleksandria: a settlement district, Khar'kov Region. bones.

near the village of Aleksandriap Kupyansk Excavated by D.Ya. Telegin in 1956-57. 172

4. Dereivka: a settlement dtstrict, Kirovograd Region. bones. [38]

near the Excavated

5. Sredny Stog II: bones. [39]

a

settlement

villa ge of Dereivka, 0nufriyev by D.Ya~ Telegin in 1960-61. 3703

in the territory

Early Yamnaya culture (Beginning of ·the 3rd millennium

of

Zaporozh'ye.

234

B.C.)

1. Repin: a settlement near the village of Repin, Ilovlinskaya district, Volgograd Region. Excavated by I .V. Synytsyn in 1956. 819 bones. [40] Yamnaya culture (3rd millennium B.C.) 1.-2. Mikhailovka I and II: two settlements near the vil lage of Mikhailovka, Novovorntsov district, Kherson Region. Excavated by 0.F •. Lagodovska , M.L. Makarevych and 0.G. Shaposhnikova in 1952-55 and 1960. 1166 bones and 52542 bones. [41]

167

3. Skelya-Kamenolomnya: a Dnepropetrovsk. Excavated 1953. 833 bones. [42]

settlement near the village of Voloska by V.M. Danylenko and O.G. Shaposhnikova

by in

TRB culture 1. Zymne: a settlement near the village of Zymne, Vladimir-Volhynia district, Volyn' Region. Excavated by Yu.M. Zakharuk in 1951. 761 bones. [43] 2. Tsmelyuv: bones. [44]

a settlement

near the village

3. Grodek-Nadbuzhny: a settlement in Poland. 2137 bones. [45]

of Tsmelyuv in Poland.

near the village

2736

of Grodek-Nadbuzhny

A glance at the list of Neolithic and Eneolithic sites gives an idea of the large quantity of sites examined and the bones which hav~ been recovered from these settlements. In almost

all

of the enumerated

sites

horse

bones have been found.

There are some observations to be made concerning the methodology which has been applied to these data by scholars investigating the remains of horse bones. In the majority of cases, the faunal collections from the sites are very fragmentary which complicates even their most elementary analysis. But the main difficulty in working with horse remains rests in the fact that up till now there has not been developed a standard criterion by which one might distinguish the bones of the domestic from the wild horse. Such a situation permits us to deviate a little from the standard methods of analysis of osteological material from early sites, avoiding for the moment the task of assigning the bones to domestic or wild horses, and rather examine them as the remains of a single form. We then examine the ratio of the number of horse bones to the overall number of ungulate remains be they domestic or wild. As a . basis, data have ·been extracted from the summaries of the most fully investigated sites; moreover, we have incorpoiated indices obtained from study of a small collection of bones. This approach justified by its methodology leads us to establish a constant coefficient of correlation between the number of horses ~nd other animals and reduces the element of chance in our calculations (Table 1).

a

At first glance the number of horse bones from the individual sites differs markedly. The wide range of the quantity of horse remains may sometimes be explained by the small quantity of material analysed, e.g. Grenovka, sites of the Dnieper-Donets culture. But by and large these data do accurately reflect the individual faunas of this or that cultural-historical complex. The main conclusion which may be drawn from an analysis of the data in Table 1 is that there are two groups of sites with different quantities of horse bones. To one group belong those sites which are known from the west of the Dnieper and may be designated the Western Zone while the second group is composed of sites located generally to the east of the Dnieper, i.e. the Eastern Zone.

168

Tab]e 1 Correlation of the number of horse bones and other ungulates sites of the Neolithic-Eneolithic of south-east Europe. Site all Baskov Island Mitkov Island Soroki Baskov Island II Savran' Mikolina Broyaka Mel'nichnaya Krucha Surskoy Island Igren V Shulaev I Shulaev II Surskoy Island II Surskoy Island III Surskoy Island IV Buz'ki Sobachki Sredny Stag I Bernovo-Luka Soloncheny I Lenkovtsy (pit-house) Luka-Vrublevetskaya Lenkovtsy (surface house) Sabatinovka II Grenovka Gayvoron Soloncheny II Polivanov Yar II-III Sabatinovka I Nezvisko B/1 Vladamirovka Kol omi yshchina II N.ezvisko B/II Grebeni · Podgrortsi I Sandraki Gorodsk Stena Stary Bezradychi Kunisovtsy Troyanov Pavoloch Kolomiyshchina I Podgrortsi II · Koshylovtsi Sukhostav Sredny Stag II Dereivka Molyukhov Bugor II Molyukhov Bugor III Aleksandria

No. of bones ungulates horses

148 895 663 800 119 238 17 184 164 18 126 276 90 454 121 190 82 2206 862 983 7605 965 328 34 358 140 5544 96

972

931 163 .242 627

0.91 0.25

16

6. 72

1

5.88

2 8 30

1.11 6.35 10.87 2.22 2.20

2

10 49

5

25.79 9.76 0.18 0.35 0.65 0.29 1.14 4.88 14.70

1

o. 71

30

0.54 8.33

8 4

3 6

22 11

16

1 7

19 8

14 . 107 158 185 15 37

496

1

1224 420 194 211 224 3564 237 406 159

14 113

169

% of bones

6 2

8

174 185 178 2087 168 265 1007

in

2 2

15 2255 45 121 43

0.54 3.93 0.91 4.76 5.28 10.63 16.26 19.87 9.20 5.90 0.20 1.14 26.90 1.03 0.95 6.70 63. 27 18.99 29.81 27.04

some

Repin Mikhailovka I Skelya-Kamenolomnya Mikhailovka II Zymne Tsmelyuv Grodek Nadbuzny

817 1158 822 52076 737 2606 2082

652 104 70 5393 35 58 16

79.80 8.98 8.52 10.36 4.75 2.20 0.86

If we group all of the sites examined according to their culturalhistorical complexes, we can define clearly the two zones according to the index of the relative number of horse remains (Table 2).

Correlation archaeological

of horse culture.

remains

Table 2 and other

No. sites

Culture

ungulates

according

to

% horse

No. bones ungulates

No. horse bones

8 2 8 7

3949 5688 13333 2880

rare 67 25

0.4-14.7 0.3- 6.7