The Scythian Neapolis (2nd century BC to 3rd century AD): Investigations into the Graeco-Barbarian city on the northern Black Sea coast 9781841715797, 9781407326306

Table of contents :
zaytsev0
zaytsev1
zaytsev2new
zaytsev3
zaytsev4new
zaytsev5new
zaytsev6new
zaytsev7
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Table of Contents
List of Illustrations
Preface
Chapter 1 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS: THE RESEARCH HISTORY
Chapter 2 TOPOGRAPHY AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL MAP OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS
Chapter 3 STRATIGRAPHY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE CULTURAL LAYERS OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS
Chapter 4 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIODS E AND D (2nd century BC)
Chapter 5 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD C (TURN OF 2nd/1st CENTURY BC TO MIDDLE OF 1st CENTURY BC)
Chapter 6 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD B (SECOND HALF OF 1st/THIRD QUARTER OF 2nd CENTURY AD)
Chapter 7 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD A (LAST QUARTER OF 2nd/FIRST HALF OF 3rd CENTURY AD)
Conclusion THE MAIN STAGES IN THE HISTORY OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS
Bibliography
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 INSCRIPTIONS, SCULPTURE AND RELIEFS FROM THE SOUTHERN PALACE OF THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS
Appendix 2 THE MAUSOLEUM OF KING SKILUROS
ILLUSTRATIONS

Citation preview

BAR S1219 2004

The Scythian Neapolis

ZAYTSEV: THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS (2ND CENTURY BC TO 3RD CENTURY AD)

(2nd century BC to 3rd century AD)

Yurij P. Zaytsev

BAR International Series 1219 2004 B A R

The Scythian Neapolis (2nd century BC to 3rd century AD) Investigations into the Graeco-Barbarian city on the northern Black Sea coast

Yurij P. Zaytsev Translated from Russian by Valentina Mordvintseva

BAR International Series 1219 2004

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1219 The Scythian Neapolis (2nd century BC to 3rd century AD) © Y P Zaytsev and the Publisher 2004 Typesetting and layout: Darko Jerko 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 9781841715797 paperback ISBN 9781407326306 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841715797 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2004. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Contents List of Illustrations .................................................................................................... ii Preface .................................................................................................................. viii Chapter 1. Scythian Neapolis: The Research History ............................................ 1 Chapter 2. Topography and Archaeological Map of Scythian Neapolis ................. 6 Chapter 3. Stratigraphy and Chronology of the Cultural Layers of Scythian Neapolis ............................................................................ 8 Chapter 4. Scythian Neapolis in Periods E and D (2nd century BC) ................................................................................ 18 Chapter 5. Scythian Neapolis in Period C (turn of 2nd/1st century BC to middle of 1st century BC) ................... 25 Chapter 6. Scythian Neapolis in Period B (second half of 1st/third quarter of 2nd century AD) .......................... 29 Chapter 7. Scythian Neapolis in Period A (last quarter of 2nd/first half of 3rd century AD) ................................. 32 Conclusion The Main Stages in the History of Scythian Neapolis ........................ 35 Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 40 APPENDICES Appendix 1. ........................................................................................................ 49 Appendix 2. ........................................................................................................ 53 ILLUSTRATIONS .................................................................................................. 61

i

List of Illustrations Fig. 1. Fig. 2.

Fig. 3. Fig. 4. Fig. 5. Fig. 6. Fig. 7. Fig. 8. Fig. 9. Fig. 10.

Fig. 11. Fig. 12. Fig. 13. Fig. 14. Fig. 15. Fig. 16. Fig. 17. Fig. 18. Fig. 19. Fig. 20.

A general map of Scythian Neapolis. A detail from the city plan of Simferopol showing the location of Scythian Neapolis and its surroundings: 1) the settlement area. 2) the southern defensive wall. 3) the area of the south suburb. 4) modern springs. 5) ancient water reservoirs with dams. 6) parts of the west necropolis. 7) the east necropolis. 8) the Bitak necropolis. 9, 10) 1st century AD settlements of the on the lower terrace. 11) Kizil-Koba culture settlements of 9th/6th centuries BC. 12) Kizil-Koba culture settlement of end of 4th/beginning of 3rd century BC. 13) boundary of the ancient high water level of the Salgir river. A general view of Neapolis from the west, 1946. 3A-C - details. The rocky precipices of Scythian Neapolis. Water-colour by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1945. Scythian Neapolis. View of ash mounds Nos. 2 and 3. Drawing by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1945. Plan of the Scythian Neapolis settlement by I.P. Blaramberg. Plan of the settlement by F. Dubois de Montpéreux. Plan of Scythian Neapolis by N.I. Veselovsky. Plan of Scythian Neapolis drawn in 1946. A modern plan of Scythian Neapolis showing all the excavated sections. 1) prospecting excavations (1993). 2) excavation, sector 9 (1989-1990). 3) section D (1955-1963). 4) prospecting excavations G (1958-1959). 5) north trench (1955). 6) prospecting excavations Zh (1957-1958). 7) section O (1985). 8) section I (1985). 9) section M (1985). 10) south trench (1954-1956). 11) section A-B-V (1945-1999). 12) section 7 (1983). 13) sections 7a, 7b, 7v (1983-1984). 14) section I (1959). 15) excavations by I.P. Blaramberg (1827) and A.S. Uvarov (1854). 16) section E (19571959). 17) excavations by N.L. Ernst (1926). 18) section 6 (1981-1984). 19) excavations of ash mound No. 3 (1956, 1978-1990). 20) section 1 (1958, 1980-1981). Plan of the excavations of the east necropolis of Scythian Neapolis made in 19561958. Catacombs from period D. Plan of the excavations of the Bitak necropolis. (After Puzdrovsky, 2001). Plan of section A-B-V. A-E stratigraphical horizons. Section A-B-V. Basic stratigraphy. A-E stratigraphical horizons. Section A-B-V, Stratigraphical column of the layers of the Southern Palace (1) and floors of megaron N (2). Plan of section D. A-F stratigraphical horizons. Semi-dug dwelling from horizon C at section D (1963). 1) plan of sections 7a, 7b, 7v. 2) plan of section 1. 3) stratigraphy of section 1. A-E stratigraphical horizons. General view of section E, 1958. I) plan of section E: 1) building of the horizon E. 2) megaron E. 3) buildings of horizon C. 4) ash mound from horizon B. II) stratigraphy of a section of megaron E. Water-colour, 1958. ii

Fig. 21.

Fig. 22. Fig. 23.

Fig. 24. Fig. 25. Fig. 26. Fig. 27. Fig. 28. Fig. 29. Fig. 30.

Fig. 31.

Fig. 32. Fig. 33.

Fig. 34. Fig. 35.

Fig. 36.

Fig. 37. Fig. 38. Fig. 39. Fig. 40. Fig. 41. Fig. 42. Fig. 43. Fig. 44. Fig. 45.

Stratigraphies. 1) section 6. 2-5) ash mounds No. 3. 6) west part of section O. 7) prospecting excavations in 1993. 8) northwest part of section D. 9, 10) section Zh. 11) section 7. A-F stratigraphical horizons. The main building types at Scythian Neapolis. Some masonry styles. 1) farmstead from sub-horizon E3 at section 1. 2) megaron N. 3) external façade of east wall of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 4) internal façade of north wall of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 5) semi-dug dwelling No. 2 from horizon C below ash mound No. 3. 6,7) masonry from horizon C at section 1. 8) adjoining the defensive at section 6 (horizon C). 9) west wall of building M from horizon C. 10) supporting wall of ash mound No. 3 from horizon B. 11,12) edges of semi-dug dwellings at section 6 (horizon A). 13) supporting wall in pit No. 1 at section 7a. 14) semi-dug dwelling in northeast part of ash-hill No. 3 (horizon A). Some date indicators of horizons E-D at section A-B-V. Some date indicators of horizons F-A from other excavations. Excavating section B. The 1948 investigation of a deposit of broken ceramics from sub-horizon A1. The director of excavations, P.N. Schultz, is on the left. Excavating ash mound No. 3 in 1956. O.A. Makhneva (left), P.N. Schultz (centre). The internal area of the defensive wall at section 6. 1981. On the right is S.G. Koltukhov. Section 7b. The clearing of a semi-dug dwelling from horizon E. 1983. In the centre is Yu. P. Zaytsev. Central gate section of Scythian Neapolis (after D.G. Koltukhov, 1999). I-VI building periods: 1) wall dated to the first building period. 2) gateway. 3) pylons (of the tower base). 4) front wall. 5) Mausoleum. 5A) east tower. 6) tower anti-ramming areas. 7) peribole. 8) additional zone of proteichisme. 9) small courtyard in front of entrance to tower/.mausoleum. 10) wall built after filling in of the courtyard. 11) gateway in proteichisme. 12) household pits in a passage in front of city gate. 13) steps in Mausoleum. 14) masonry zone in peribole. 15) stone work narrowing the gateway and blocking east entrance to peribole. 1) plan of Scythian Neapolis with presumed features of sub-horizon E3: A) farmsteads. B) ash mounds. 2) plan of the excavation in 1926 with an area of defensive wall and find sites of Rhodian stamps. Fragments of mould-made bowls from the suburban ash mound of sub-horizons E3E2. 1988 excavations. Fragments of terracottae from the suburban ash mound of sub-horizons E3-E2 (1-6) and sub-horizon E1 (7-8). A fragment of red plaster with graffiti from the layer of Fire 1 (9). Plan of part of section A-B-V: megaron N. A-E stratigraphical horizons. Closed deposit (horizon E1) from the building east of megaron N: 1) handmade ceramic weight. 2) jug rim. 3) handmade ceramic spinning-wheel. 4) drilled astragal. 5) cooking pot. 6) pot rim. 7) Rhodian amphora. 8) upper section of handmade pot. 9) lagynos. Closed deposit (horizon E1). Local accumulation west of megaron N: 1) amphora of unknown origin. 2) Rhodian amphorae. 3,4) black-glazed cups. 5) lower section of ungventarium. 6) Egyptian faience bead. 7) astragali. 8) bronze plaque. 9) fragment of thimiatherion representing Demeter. Closed deposit (horizon E1). Local accumulation west of megaron N: Necks of Rhodian amphorae with stamped handles. Rock-cut pit in southwest area of the Southern Palace. 1948. Secondary use of stone slab in the masonry facing the earliest defensive wall at section E (1959). Plan of the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis. Alternative reconstructions of the Southern Palace. Horizons E-D. Alternative reconstruction of megaron N. Reconstruction of the frescoes from the west wall of megaron N. Clay table/hearth from megaron N. Axonometry, longitudinal and cross-sections. Fragment of the marble herma of Hecate (1) and a version of its reconstruction (2). From megaron N of the Southern Palace. iii

Fig. 46. Fig. 47. Fig. 48. Fig. 49. Fig. 50. Fig. 51. Fig. 52. Fig. 53. Fig. 54. Fig. 55.

Fig. 56. Fig. 57. Fig. 58. Fig. 59. Fig. 60.

Fig. 61. Fig. 62. Fig. 63. Fig. 64. Fig. 65. Fig. 66. Fig. 67. Fig. 68. Fig. 69. Fig. 70. Fig. 71. Fig. 72. Fig. 73.

Fig. 74. Fig. 75. Fig. 76. Fig. 77. Fig. 78.

Fig. 79. Fig. 80. Fig. 81.

Limestone herma of a female deity from megaron N. The head of the herma of a female deity from megaron N. A fragment of drapery of the herma of a female deity from megaron N. Ritual pool (sub-horizon D4) from the Southern Palace. Reconstruction of frescoes in the east apartment (1st floor) of House R in the Southern Palace. Rock-cut pit and remains of the Mausoleum/Heroon of Argotus. 1) east section (1999). 2) plan of the pit. 1) Alternative reconstruction of east façade of the Heroon of Argotus. 2) pilaster capital. 3) antis capital. 4) antis capital in situ (1949). Situation of finds around rock-cut pit: 1) fragments of slab with inscription and relief. 2-15, 19) gold items. 16) bronze coin. 17) bone plate. 18) bronze brooch. Situation of the reliefs, inscriptions, and fragments of sculpture on the plan of the Southern Palace. Architectural remains in the south of Scythian Neapolis: 1) part of the masonry of the south façade. 2) the monumental alter. 3) architectural details of the monumental altar. 4) the monumental altar in 1946. 5) fragment of a small marble altar (?) with Greek inscription. 6) limestone slab with remains of Greek inscription. Slab with inscription referring to Argotus (1999). Inscription referring to Argotus from the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis. Pedestal with inscription referring to king Skiluros (2002). Pedestal with inscription referring to king Skiluros. Drawing. Pedestals of statues with dedications: 1) to the goddess of Rhodes. 2) to Athena Lindia. 3) to Zeus Atabirios. 4) to Achilles. 5) inscription referring to Khodarz. 6) inscription with a dedication to the all gods. Pedestal with dedication to Zeus Atabirios (2002). Pedestal with dedication to Athena Lindia (2002). Fragments of marble statues: 1) female hand. 2) male torso. Fragment of a male torso (2002). Fragments of the statue of Zeus Atabirios placed on the reconstruction of a statue of Zeus seated (19th century). Fragments of bronze statues from the Southern Palace. Fragment of the relief representing two persons. (Gypsum copy from the Bakhchisarai State Historical/Cultural Reserve, 2002.) Fragment of the relief representing two persons. (Gypsum copy.) Relief representing a young horseman. Relief representing a young horseman (2002). Relief representing a young horseman (2002, detail). Relief representing a young horseman (2002, detail). 1) Previous alternative reconstruction of “Building with porticos K” from the Southern Palace complex. 2) Recent alternative reconstructions: A) the south façade. B) the Heroon of Argotus. C) central gate. Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon E). 1) Handmade vessels from the suburban ash mound of the horizon E. 2) plan of semidug dwellings excavated in the west of section O (sub-horizon E2). Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon D). Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon D). Samples of amphorae from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D) 1, 10) Sinopa. 2, 11) Kos. 3, 13) Rhodes. 4) Chersonesos. 5) brown-clay amphorae. 6, 8, 12) unknown centres. 7) Knidos. 9) southern Pontus (light-clay amphorae). Pottery from the Southern Palace (horizon E). Samples of graffiti on amphorae from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). Samples of supposed ceramic production from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). iv

Fig. 82. Fig. 83. Fig. 84. Fig. 85. Fig. 86. Fig. 87. Fig. 88.

Fig. 89. Fig. 90. Fig. 91.

Fig. 92. Fig. 93. Fig. 94. Fig. 95. Fig. 96. Fig. 97. Fig. 98. Fig. 99. Fig. 100. Fig. 101. Fig. 102. Fig. 103. Fig. 104. Fig. 105. Fig. 106. Fig. 107. Fig. 108. Fig. 109. Fig. 110. Fig. 111. Fig. 112. Fig. 113. Fig. 114. Fig. 115. Fig. 116. Fig. 117. Fig. 118. Fig. 119. Fig. 120.

Ungventaria from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), cups. Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), plates, dishes. Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), lagynoi. Ceramic altars (and fragments) from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). Imported cooking ware from the Southern Palace. (horizons E-D). Closed deposit (sub-horizon D1) from the east house of the Southern Palace: 1) upper section of handmade incense-burner. 2) neck of lagynos. 3) very small amphora. 4) terracotta representing Aphrodite and Eros. 5) lead weight. 6) bronze key. 7) painted jug. Fragments of mould-made bowls from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). (19921993 excavations.) Finds at section D, horizon E. Finds at the section 7v, horizons E-D: 1-3) fragments of mould-made cups. 4) fragment of iron sword. 5) upper section of red painted jug. 6, 8-9) handmade vessels. 7) ceramic altar. 10-13) ceramic spinning-wheels. Bone items (1-10, 14, 15, 18), stone (11-13, 23), clay (19-22) and shells (16-17) from different sections. Horizons E-D. Casting moulds made from handles of Rhodian amphorae, horizons E-D: 1-2) section A-B-V. 3) section E. Plan of the lower level of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Façades of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. East view of the Mausoleum of Skiluros, after excavation (1948). West view of the Mausoleum of Skiluros, after excavation (1948). Plan/reconstruction of the Mausoleum within the fortification system of the central gate. Mausoleum of Skiluros. Door/aperture. Mausoleum of Skiluros. Door/aperture (1948). Stone crypt of the Mausoleum (1946). Stone crypt of the Mausoleum. Stone crypt of the Mausoleum. Plan of the burial in the stone crypt (detail). Skull from the stone crypt (1946). Skull from the stone crypt. Drawing by M.M. Gerasimov. Reconstruction of the face modeled on the skull from the stone crypt. After M.M. Gerasimov. Helmet from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Sword (1) and spearheads (2) from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Finds from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros: 1, 3, 6) silver. 2) gold. 4) iron. 5, 7, 8) bronze. 9) glass. Finds from below the throne-bier of the Mausoleum of Skiluros: 1-10, 12, 14-22) gold. 11) cornelian. 13) glass, gold, amber, cornelian. Iron items from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Gold ornaments from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Location of the remains of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Location of the details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Alternative reconstruction of the throne-bier. Vessels from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) burial No. 34. 2, 3) coffin III. 4, 6) the main burial. 5) coffin X. 7) coffin II. Vessels from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) burial No. 34. 2, 7) coffin III. 3) coffin II. 4) coffin XII. 5, 6, 8, 9) coffin X. v

Fig. 121. Ceramic altar from the Mausoleum of Skiluros. Fig. 122. Some finds from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) coffin VII. 2) coffin IV. 3-5) coffin II. 6) coffin III. 7) coffin XXIV. Fig. 123. Some finds from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1, 2, 10-12) coffin I. 3, 5, 7) coffin VII. 4, 6, 8) coffin X. 13) coffin II. 14) coffin XXVII. 15) coffin III. 16) coffin XV. Fig. 124. Grave No. 21 from the east necropolis: 3, 7, 8) gold. 5, 9) silver. 4) bronze, iron. 6) clay. 10-11) bronze. Fig. 125. Grave No. 57 (1982) from the east necropolis: 3) jade. 4) stone. 5) shell. 6) bronze, iron. 7-11) iron. 12) clay. Fig. 126. Megarons Z, K, L from the suburban territory, horizon C. Plan and alternative reconstruction. Fig. 127. Some finds from excavations of megarons Z, K, L: 1) whetstones. 2) spinning-wheels. 3) pestle. 4) bone file. 5-8) fragments of zoomorphic figures. 9) stone ball. 10) bone plates with engraving. 11) lead item. 12-14) astragali. Fig. 128. Closed deposit of layer from Fires 3/4 found near megarons Z, K, L. 1) handmade items. 2) handmade incense-burner. 3) handmade ceramic lid. 4-5) handmade ceramic lamps. 6-7, 11) red-slip cups. 8-10) grey-gloss pottery. 12) fragments of light-clay amphorae. Fig. 129. Semi-dug dwelling No. 1 (horizon C) found below ash mound No. 3 (1986). Fig. 130. Semi-dug dwelling Nos. 1 and 2 (horizon C) found below ash mound No. 3: 1) plan. 2) alternative reconstruction. Fig. 131. Amphorae from horizon C, section A-B-V. Fig. 132. Pottery (1, 3, 5, 6), red-slip vessels (7-9) and handmade pots (2, 4) from horizon C. 13) megaron N, layer of Fire 4. 4) layer from horizon C at section B. 5) infant burial in square 90 of section A. 6-9) megarons Z, K, L. Fig. 133. Crypt No. 155 from the Bitak necropolis (After Puzdrovsky 2002). Fig. 134. Finds from crypt No. 155 of the Bitak necropolis (After Puzdrovsky 2002). Fig. 135. Location of objects (horizon B) from ash mound No. 3: 1) defensive wall. 2) ash mound E. 3) paved road. 4) supporting wall of sub-horizon B2. 5) “Sanctuary of the three menhirs”. 6) ash mounds from sub-horizon B3. Fig. 136. 1-2) “The sanctuary of the three menhirs” (1979). Fig. 137. Fragments of terracottae from ash mound E (horizon B). Fig. 138. Bronze statuettes of the Dioscurae from the ash mound E (horizon B). Fig. 139. Fragments of glass vessels from ash mound E (horizon B). Fig. 140. Fragments of glass vessels (1, 9-11, 16, 19) and beads (2-8, 13-15, 17-18) from ash mound E (horizon B). 12) glass inlay. Fig. 141. Finds from ash mound E (horizon B): 1, 2, 8) brooches. 3, 5-7, 11) bronze details of caskets. 4) gold pendant. 9, 12, 13, 15, 18-19) fragments of iron items. 10) fragment of a green-glazed relief vessel. 11) bronze buckle. 16) handmade incense-burner. 17) bronze bar. 20) fragment of handmade ceramic zoomorphic figure. 21) chalk incenseburner. 22, 24) fragments of bone pyxidae. 23) fragments of a red-slip lamp. Fig. 142. Individual finds from ash mound No. 3: 1) gold stater of Bosphorean king Remetalk (150/151 BC). 2) zoomorphic handmade ceramic figure (horizon B). 3) terracotta fragment. 4) fragment of figured red-slip vessel. Fig. 143. Some horizon B finds from ash mound No. 3. 1-3, 17) red-slip vessels. 4) bronze pincers. 5) handmade ceramic spinning-wheel. 6) graffito on amphora sherd. 7) ceramic item. 8, 12) bone awls. 9, 14, 15) handmade ceramic vessels. 10, 16, 18) ceramic zoomorphic figures. 11) whetstones. 20) ceramic weight. Fig. 144. Some horizon B finds from different sections: 1-3) ceramic handmade vessels found together in northeast part of section A-B-V. 4) fragment of tile with black paint from ash mound No. 3 (horizon B). 5) whetstone with an image in black paint from ash mound No. 3 (horizon B). 6-9) finds from household No. 31 at section A-B-V: redslip vessel (6), fragments of zoomorphic figures (7, 9), and amphora neck with red paint (8). Fig. 145. Reconstruction of the frescoes from megaron A (after I.V. Yatsenko). vi

Fig. 146. Graffiti on the west wall of megaron A, horizon B (after O.D. Dashevskaya). Fig. 147. Plan of the burial in the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V (1). Plans of some of the accompanying horse burials (2). Fig. 148. Some finds from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V. 1, 2, 9) bronze. 38) gold-covered bronze. 11, 20, 22) gold-covered iron finds. 12-17, 19, 21) iron. 18) cornelian, glass. Fig. 149. Rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V (1949). Fig. 150. Sword from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V. Fig. 151. Chalcedony beads from rock-cut grave of (horizon B) at section A-B-V. Fig. 152. Iron horse-bridle bits, with cheek-pieces, from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V. Fig. 153. I) Finds from section A-B-V, the elite necropolis of horizon B. 1-2) gold items from the rock-cut infant burial. 3-9) iron and bronze details of horse trappings from horse burial No. 4. II) Finds from the rock-cut grave at section 7v. 1) glass and jet beads. 2) silver earring. 3) plan of the grave. 4) 1983 photograph. Fig. 154. Grave No. 120 from the Bitak necropolis. Plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 2001). Fig. 155. Grave No. 172 from the Bitak necropolis. Plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 2001). Fig. 156. Graves No. 71/1983 (a) and 73/1984 (b) from the east necropolis (after Puzdrovsky 1992). Fig. 157. Horizon A granaries at section A-B-V. 1) 1948 photograph. 2) Drawing by A.N. Karasev, 1949. Fig. 158. Complex of horizon A granaries at section A-B-V (1948). Fig. 159. Set of astragali from the closed deposit (horizon A1) at section A-B-V (1948). Fig. 160. The closed ceramic deposit (horizon A1) at section A-B-V. Fig. 161. Handmade ceramic vessels from section A-B-V (horizon A). Fig. 162. Handmade ceramic vessels and amphora from section A-B-V (horizon A). Fig. 163. Ceramic vessels from section A-B-V (horizon A). Fig. 164. Ceramic vessels from different sections (horizon A1). Fig. 165. Finds from different sections (horizon A): 1, 11) bone. 2-4) glass. 5,7, 8, 10 ,12-17) bronze. 6) iron. 18-20) clay. Fig. 166. Finds from section D (sub-horizon A1). 1, 3) handmade ceramic vessels. 2) red-slip jug. 4) iron spearhead. Fig. 167. Fragments of millstones from section A-B-V (horizon A). Fig. 168. Closed sub-horizon A1 deposit from section A-B-V (1948). Fig. 169. Closed deposit in the household pit (square 2v) of section D (1960). Fig. 170. Silver plate of the Bosphorean queen Gepepyreos from section D (sub-horizon A1) (After I.V. Yatsenko). Fig. 171. Red-slip vessels from the closed deposit at section D. (sub-horizon A1). Fig. 172. Tile samples from megaron A. Sub-horizon A1, section D. Fig. 173. Child burials in pots. Section 7v. Horizon A. Fig. 174. Skeletons of people killed near entrance to megaron A. Sub-horizon A1. Section D (1958). Fig. 175. Male skeleton in household pit. Vicinity of east necropolis (1983). Fig. 176. Interior of crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Water-colour by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1946. Fig. 177. Crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Details of painting (1946). Fig. 178. Crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Representation of a musician (1) and a version of reconstruction of his costume (2). Fig. 179. Grave No. 70/1983 of east necropolis: 1-14) plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 1992). 15) reconstruction of the youth’s costume. Fig. 180. Graves Nos. 75 (1-3), 76/1984 (4-21). Horizon A, east necropolis. Fig. 181. Handmade pot containing animal bones. Section 6, horizon A (1984).

vii

Preface Scythian Neapolis (Fig. 1) is the largest and most investigated barbarian fortress of the northern Black Sea region. It is mentioned by Strabo and in several epigraphical documents. Over different periods, this site has revealed the remains of fortifications, public buildings, and unique rock-cut crypts with paintings. The history of Scythian Neapolis covers a period from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD. The most spectacular and significant time in the life of the settlement was in the second half of the 2nd century BC, when the fortress was the capital and residence of the famous king Skiluros, and the main barbarian stronghold in the struggle against the armies of the king of Pontus, Mithridates VI Eupator. The central complex of the fortress in this period was the Southern Palace, containing the mausoleums of kings Argotus and Skiluros. As a result of various ethnic-cultural interactions, the settlement became a centre of the distinctive Greco-Barbarian culture. For more than 170 years the site has attracted the attention of researchers into Barbarian and Classical antiquities. The long-term excavation of the settlement has resulted in the accumulation of huge amounts of the archaeological material which has presented us with a distinct image of Late Scythian culture. However, more than 20 years has now passed since publication of the only summarizing monograph on Scythian Neapolis (Vysotskaya 1979). Since then, large-scale fieldwork has been undertaken over the territory of the settlement, suburbs, and necropoli. These excavations have resulted in a thoroughly revised database that obliges us to reconsider many of the former opinions and hypotheses. For instance, it became necessary to address again the questions of the general system of the fortress’s construction and the architectural analysis of single complexes, as well as the definitions of their functions. The stratigraphy and chronology of Neapolis also required a fresh look. Up until the mid-1990s, across the whole spectrum of research into Neapolis, only its fortifications had been analyzed using modern scientific approaches (Koltukhov1992; 1999). This present monograph undertakes an attempt to construct (on the basis of modern knowledge) a uniform chronological model of for Scythian Neapolis over the period from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD. It is based on the author’s 1996 dissertation completed at the Institute of Archaeology (National Academy of Sciences) of the Ukraine (Kiev). This work reviews nearly two centuries of investigations into this remarkable monument, and over this period tens, even hundreds, of researchers have preoccupied themselves with its study, including well-known scientists such as I.P. Blaramberg, A.S. Uvarov, N.I. Veselovsky, Yu.A. Kulakovsky, N.L. Ernst, P.N. Schultz, A.N. Karasev, N.N. Pogrebova, O.I. Dombrovsky, O.D. Dashevskaya, E.I. Levi, I.V. Yatsenko, V.P. Babenchikov, D.S. Raevsky, E.V. Chernenko, T.N. Vysotskaya, I.I. Guschina, A.A. Schepinsky, E.A. Symanovich, I.D. Marchenko, A.N. Scheglov, V.I. Tsalkin, O.A. Makhneva, S.G. Koltukhov, A.E. Puzdrovsky, and many others. All have added valuable new insights to the understanding of Scythian Neapolis. Since 1979, I have been fortunate enough to work with several senior colleagues. O.A. Makhneva, S.G. Koltukhov, I.V. Achkinazi, and A.E. Puzdrovsky have all greatly helped me in developing viii

my special interest in the field of archaeology and I am very pleased to be able to take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude to them. I would also like to convey my sincere thanks to all those who have helped with the development of this work. I am particularly grateful to my scientific supervisor, S.D. Kryzhitsky, and all the staff of the Department of Scythian Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology (The Ukrainian Academy of Science, Crimean Department). Much help was also provided by the staff of the Department of Antique Archaeology at the Russian Academy of Science, St. Petersburg (The Institute of the History of Material Culture). Preparing this monograph, the author researched in those museums housing collections from the excavations of Scythian Neapolis: The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts and State Historical Museum (Moscow), The Ukraine Museum of Historical Jewellery (Kiev), The Odessa State Archaeological Museum (The Ukrainian Academy of Science), The Bakhchsarai Historic-Cultural State Reserve, and The Crimea Republic Museum of Local Lore (Simferopol). I would very much like to thank the following staff of these museums for their invaluable assistance: V.P. Tolstikov, S.I. Finogenova, L.I. Akimova, O.V. Tugusheva, I.I. Guschina, D.V. Zhuravlev, K.B. Firsov, E.P. Podvysotskaya, T.F. Shamina, E.F. Redina, I.V. Bruyako, G.I. Zolotova, L.B. Lobas, and L.N. Khrapunova. All the photographs reproduced in this book date from 1946 to 2003, and the majority of the drawings were undertaken by the author between 1983 and 2003. I am particularly grateful to my parents, Tamara and Pavel Zaytsev, who from my early childhood fostered my interest in archaeology. This work could not have been completed without the support of my friends and to whom I am extremely indebted. Elena Zaytseva provided invaluable encouragement throughout the preparation of my dissertation. Igor Novikov, Dmitry Napalkov, Vladimir Naletov, and Sergey Demyanov have for many years been my constant companions during fieldwork at the Southern Palace, and the witnesses of many exciting discoveries. Final words of gratitude are reserved for my wife and colleague, Valentina Mordvintseva, with whom this monograph was prepared.

ix

x

The Scythian Neapolis

Chapter 1 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS: THE RESEARCH HISTORY The ruins of the ancient fortifications known as Kermenchik, located south of the Tatar settlement of Ak-Mechet’ (now in Simferopol), were actively used for building materials at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1827, collector of antiquities, A.I. Sultan-Krym-Girey Kata Girey, encountered a vehicle carrying stone from Kermenchik. Inside the vehicle he has noticed a limestone slab decorated with a relief representing a horseman (Figs. 69; 70; 71; 72), as well as three pedestals (one limestone and two marble) with Greek inscriptions (Figs. 58; 59; 61; 62; 65). After purchasing these finds, SultanCrym-Girey has informed I.P. Blaramberg, Director of the Odessa Museum of Antiquities. The latter at once hurried to Simferopol and on the site where the slabs were found he undertook a limited excavation (Fig. 10, 15). He soon discovered fragments of limestone and marble reliefs (Figs. 67; 68), several gold plaques, and a fragment of a stamped tile (Tunkina 2002, 538-541). The finds were brought to Odessa, and were published in 1827 in the “Journal d’Odessa”, Nos. 47, 69 and 73. In the article, the author claimed to have discovered the Neapolis built by the Scythian, King Skiluros. The reliefs (Figs. 67; 69) were defined as representations of Skiluros and his son Palakus. In 1831, Blaramberg’s work was published in Odessa in a monograph with figures of the reliefs, inscriptions, and a plan of the Kermenchik settlement (Fig. 6); representations of the Olbian coins, with portraits of Skiluros, were also included for comparison (Blaramberg 1831, 10-16). Simultaneously with the Kermenchik finds, the south-western part of the settlement unexpectedly revealed a hoard of 165 coins dating from Alexander the Great to Emperor Makrinus (Tunkina 2002, 543-544).

Mazurkevich, who published a brief description of the area and reached the conclusions as Blaramberg (Mazurkevich 1837, 334). The Russian archaeologist, Count A.S. Uvarov, carried out considerable fieldwork on the settlement in 1853 (Fig. 10, 15) (Tunkina 2002, 544-545, fig. 146). At the same location where the reliefs and inscriptions were found, Count Uvarov unearthed a pedestal with a dedication to Achilles on behalf of Posideos (Fig. 60, 4), and fragments of inscriptions mentioning Khodarz and Achilles (Fig. 60, 5) (Uvarov 1856, 526). As well as the excavation data, A.S. Uvarov, in his report to the Imperial Archaeological Commission, presented a detailed description of the settlement. Summing up, he noted that Neapolis originally arose as the Greek settlement founded by Rhodian colonists, but subsequently this settlement became a residence and fortress of the Scythian kings until the 3rd century AD. In 1872, a student of local lore from Simferopol, G.Ch. Karaulov, noticed, and partially explored, several crypts cut into the rock on the west necropolis. Some years later, research on this necropolis was continued by G.D. Filimonov (Filimonov 1880, 17), and then by N.P. Kondakov (Tolstoy, Kondakov 1889, 116). In the beginning of 1880s, the area of the western necropolis was excavated by teachers from the Simferopol Gymnasia, Ch.P. Yaschurzhinsky, F.F. Lashkoa, and A.O. Kashpar (Yaschurzhinsky 1889, 46-55). In 1887, the Tauric Scientific Archival Commission was created in Simferopol, and this began to supervise the future research into the Western necropolis (Lashkov 1890, 20; ITUAK No. 6, 113; No. 7, 52).

In 1834, the research at Kermenchik was continued by the Swiss traveller Friederike Dubois de Montpereux. He carefully examined the settlement and its vicinity, and made a new plan of the site with drawings of the fortifications (Fig. 7). He dug some crypts and a kurgan mound on the east necropolis (Dubois de Montpereux 1843, 199, vol. VI, tab. XXXI). In 1833, the settlement was further investigated by P.I. Köppen (Köppen 1837, 334), and, in 1836, by N.I.

In 1889, the Imperial Archaeological Commission directed N.I. Veselovsky to carry out further work on the site; he supervised investigations into the settlement and the western necropolis (Fig. 8) (Veselovsky 1894, 27). However, the results of this excavation, according to Veselovsky “did not result in any important discovery, nor bring to light any interesting finds” (Veselovsky 1889, 20-27). However, the 1

Yu. Zaytsev

famous Russian archaeologist and historian, M.I. Rostovtzeff, considered that Kermenchik was the major fortress of the Crimea - “the former Greco-Scythian city of King Skiluros” (Rostovtzeff 1925, 145).

human and horse burials (A.N. Karasev, N.N. Pogrebova, O.D. Dashevskaya). On the lower terrace of the river Salgir, at the foot of the hill, a Kizil-Koba culture settlement (8-6th centuries BC), and a crypt of the 3rd century AD are investigated (O.D. Dashevskaya). A kurgan mound is partly unearthed on the eastern necropolis (V.P. Babenchikov).

In Soviet times, the 1926 excavations began as a result of the construction of a water tank at the site of the eastern façade of the southern defensive wall. The excavation was supervised by the talented Crimean archaeologist, N.L. Ernst (Fig. 10, 17). During this fieldwork, essential new material on the stratigraphy and chronology of Kermenchik were revealed for the first time (Ernst 1927, 24). In 1927, the same scientist investigated several crypts from the western necropolis.

1950. Sections A and B are united in one section. A.N. Karasev, E.I. Levi, and O.D. Dashevskaya undertake a complete excavation of buildings “K” and “L”, the “house R”, the granary, and other sites close to these features. The results of these investigations were published in various editions soon after the fieldwork (Schultz 1947; 1947a; 1949; Karasev 1951; 1953; Pogrebova 1947). Of special note is the article “Investigations of Scythian Neapolis in 1945-50” written by P. Schultz (1957). The material from the Mausoleum was presented in a separate monograph (Schultz 1953). Other volumes were subsequently published. These were devoted to different categories of finds: pottery (Dashevskaya 1968), amphorae (Zeest 1954), and gold eyeand mouth-pieces (Pogrebova 1957).

In 1945, immediately after the war, the so-called TauroScythian expedition began work on Neapolis, under direction of P.N. Schultz (Fig. 26; 27). The Simferopol group of archaeologists became involved, and the excavation of the settlement itself was generally supervised by A.N. Karasev. The chronicle of excavations: 1945. The trenches in the ash mounds are surveyed. Excavation starts on sections A (supervised by N.N. Pogrebova1), B, and V (N.N. Pogrebova and V.P. Babenchikov), on the line of the defensive wall, near the central gate, and around the site where the reliefs and inscriptions were found. Several rock-cut crypts are investigated on the western and eastern necropolis, including those with paintings and carved ornaments (V.P. Babenchikov).

Fieldwork was re-started in 1954. The chronicle of excavations: 1954. A line of the so-called “southern trench” is noted and partly investigated (T.N. Troitskaya) (Fig. 10, 10). 1955. Work on the “southern trench” continues (M.A. Frondzulo). An excavation of the “northern trench” starts (K.A. Brede, O.D. Dashevskaya, A.N. Karasev) (Fig. 10, 5). The remains of Megaron A (with frescoes) and B are partly uncovered.

1946. The work at sections A (T.Ya. Kobets) and B (V.A. Golovkina) continue. At section À1, the Mausoleum chamber is investigated by N.N. Pogrebova. V.P. Babenchikov continues the research of the crypts and burials on the eastern and western necropolis.

1956. Investigations of the “southern trench” continue (L.I. Ivanov). Section D is expanded to investigate Megaron A and B (A.N. Karasev, O.D. Dashevskaya, I.V. Yatsenko) (Fig. 10, 3). Work at section Z starts (Fig. 10, 10), revealing the remains of Megaron Z. Scale work begins on the Eastern necropolis (E.A. Symanovich).

1947. At sections A and À1, remains of the central gate and the western tower of the Mausoleum are discovered (N.N. Pogrebova). At section B, excavations of the “building with cellar” is continued (V.A. Golovkina). The excavation of the eastern necropolis also continues (V.P. Babenchikov).

1957. Work at section D continues (A.N. Karasev, I.V. Yatsenko, O.D. Dashevskaya, E.I. Levi). Excavation of section E begins (Fig. 10, 16), revealing Megaron E (E.N. Cherepanova, A.N. Scheglov). Investigations begin at other areas in the vicinity (O.A. Makhneva) (Fig. 27). Excavations of the eastern necropolis continue (E.A. Symanovich, I.D. Marchenko).

1948. Work continues at sections A-À1 (N.N. Pogrebova). The central gate, some parts of the fortress and its neighbourhood are completely discovered. There is a general expansion of the excavations at section B: the “house R” and the “house with hearth”: a complex dating from the time of the destruction of the settlement (V.A. Golovkina and I.M. Dryabkin). Work on the eastern necropolis continues (V.P. Babenchikov).

1958. Further researches are made at sections D (A.N. Karasev, I.V. Yatsenko, O.D. Dashevskaya, E.I. Levi) and E (E.N. Cherepanova). The defensive wall at section E1 is excavated (T.N. Vysotskaya). Preliminary work is undertaken at section Zh - at the location of supposed acropolis (V.M. Malikov, T.N. Vysotskaya) (Fig. 10, 6). Further investigation of the Eastern

1949. At section A, there are the discoveries of the eastern tower, buildings “K” and “L”, a granary, and several 1

Names of supervisors are occasionally mentioned.

2

The Scythian Neapolis

necropolis continues (E.A. Symanovich, O.A. Makhnyova).

“The defensive structures; public buildings”; “Dwellings and domestic buildings”; “Cults and customs”; “Economic life”, and “Art objects”. Critical observations of this work are contained in many special investigations (Kryzhitsky 1982, 135-136; Tolstikov 1992, 64; Dashevskaya 1991, 9-11; Koltukhv, Makhneva 1988, 89; Koltukhov 1990, 184-188; Puzdrovsky 1993, 20, 26). Importantly, a significant part of the archaeological data (including many rare and unique finds) is not mentioned in her monograph. The stratigraphical observations are completely absent, and analysis of complicated monument such as the Neapolis can be hardly presented without them. The typology of constructions and architectural remains made by T.N. Vysotskaya is also arguable (Kryzhitsky 1982. pp.135-136). All these result in the distortion of her chronology, and in the questionable validity of her conclusions about the occurrence and initial stages of the history of Scythian Neapolis, the ethnic-cultural attribution of many objects, and about the population generally.

1959. Investigations continue at section D (A.N. Karasev, I.V. Yatsenko), section V1 (O.A. Makhneva), section E (V.M. Malikov), section E1 (T.N. Vysotskaya), section I (L.I. Ivanov), and section G (T.N. Vysotskaya) (Fig. 10, 3, 4, 11, 14, 16). Sections A (A.N. Karasev) and B (V.M. Malikov) undergo supplementary examinations. Four rock-cut crypts are excavated on the northeastern edge of the eastern necropolis (E.V. Chernenko). 1959 saw the last work undertaken by the Tauro-Scythian expedition at Neapolis. Later fieldwork was continued only at section D by a team from the State Historical Museum (Moscow), and Moscow State University under the direction of I.V. Yatsenko (with the participation of I.I. Guschina, D.S. Raevsky, and others). Between 1960 and 1964, the remains of several buildings from different periods were examined. The most interesting of these were Megaron V, and several buildings from the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD contained rich finds of red-slip ceramics and other pottery. In 1975, T.N. Vysotskaya undertook fieldwork on a section of the defensive wall, and section A-B-V.

Information on several sites and some funeral complexes from the eastern necropolis was published in the works of V.P. Babenchikov (1949; 1957), O.D. Dashevskaya (1951), V.S. Zabelina (1964), O.A. Makhneva (1967) and E.A. Symanovich (1963). E.A. Symanovich has also published separately the brooches (1963), the Egyptian items (1961), and coins from burials (Symanovich, Golenko 1960). His monograph appeared later: “The population of the capital of the Late Scythian realm” (Symanovich 1983). It was an attempt to publish in toto the material from the excavations of the eastern necropolis between 1955 and 1958. The huge amount of material (plans of the graves, burial goods, etc.) was summarized and shown in the form of tables. These were not presented by site location, but by object type. The dating of the material appears broad.

Publications devoted to work on Scythian Neapolis between 1945 and 1964 divide into those either reporting on the settlement or on the eastern necropolis. The epigraphical monuments were published by O.D. Dashevskaya (1960) and E.I. Solomonik (1962). Frescoes from Megaron A were analyzed by I.V. Yatsenko (1960). Graffiti from the same megaron were discussed by O.D. Dashevskaya (1962). Some sites and several examples of imported ceramics were published by O.A. Makhneva (1967; 1967a) and D.S. Raevsky (1970). Analyses of reliefs and bronze statuettes are given by P.N. Schultz (1946; 1969). The silver plate with the name of the Bosporean queen, Hepepyreos, is published by I.V. Yatsenko (1962). The fundamental work of N.N. Pogrebova (1961) is devoted to the Mausoleum burials and analysis of the burial rites. L.P. Kharko published the numismatic finds (1961) and an essay on the manufacture of some gold ornaments from the Mausoleum (1961). An article by O.I. Dombrovsky concerns the technique of decorative paintings from Neapolis (1961). The osteological material was partly analyzed by V.I. Tsalkin (1954; 1960). The anthropological collection was published by G.F. Debets (1948) and M.M. Gerasimov (1955. P. 452).

The work by D.S. Raevsky, “The Scythians and the Sarmatians in Neapolis” (1971), is also based on the material from the eastern necropolis. It is devoted to analyses of the ethnic structure of the population (1971). The anthropological characteristics of the skeletons from the eastern necropolis have been examined several times by T.S. Konduktorova (Konduktorova 1964; 1972, 37-54). A new stage in the archaeological investigation of Scythian Neapolis began in 1978. From 1978 to 1988, the Simferopol expedition of the Institute of Archaeology of the Ukrainian Academy of Science was directed by O.A. Makhneva. From 1989 to 1991 the expedition was headed by A.E. Puzdrovsky. From 1992 to 1993, and in 1999, excavations of Scythian Neapolis were undertaken by a team from the Crimean branch of the Institute of Archaeology, under the direction of Yu.P. Zaytsev.

Two general works by P.N. Schultz (1953; 1957), and the article by E.I. Solomonik (1952), present historical and theoretical conclusions. Results of investigations into Late Scythian antiquities are summarized in the “The Late Scythian culture and its versions on the Dnieper and in the Crimea” (P.N. Schults, 1971).

The chronicle of excavations: An important place in the history of the study of Scythian Neapolis is occupied by the works of T.N. Vysotskaya (1975; 1976; 1978) which are nearly all included in her subsequent monograph (1979). The monograph consists of the following essays: “The history of the investigation into the settlement”;

1978. Investigation starts on ash mound No. 3 (O.A. Makhneva, S.G. Koltukhov) (Fig. 10, 19), and on the eastern necropolis (O.A. Makhneva, K.K. Orlov, S.G. Koltukhov). 3

Yu. Zaytsev

1979. Excavations continue on ash mound No. 3 (S.G. Koltukhov); the remains of the sanctuary are uncovered.

1991. Section B, and the site at the northern part of Neapolis are investigated (Yu.P. Zaytsev).

1980. Excavations on ash mound No. 3 continue (S.G. Koltukhov). Investigations of the local vicinity (I.N. Khrapunov, A.E. Puzdrovsky) and the burials of the eastern necropolis are carried out (A.E. Puzdrovsky).

1992. Work continues at section B (Yu.P. Zaytsev). A magnetic investigation is carried out at the northern part of the settlement (T.N. Smekalova). 1993. Work is undertaken at section B (Yu.P. Zaytsev), and at the northern part of Scythian Neapolis (Yu.P. Zaytsev, W. Rudolf, T.N. Smekalova).

1981. Work on ash mound No. 3 continues (S.G. Koltukhov). Investigations are undertaken at section 1 (A.E. Puzdrovsky) (Fig. 10, 20), section 3 (S.G. Koltukhov), and the defensive wall at section 6 (S.G. Koltukhov).

1999. Investigations are made at the south-western part of section A, formerly excavated between 1945 and 1950 (Yu.P. Zaytsev).

1982. Excavations continue on ash mound No. 3, and at sections 3 and 6 (S.G. Koltukhov). Work is carried out around the vicinity of the south-eastern part of the settlement, at sections 7 (I.V. Achkinazi) (Fig. 10, 7), and 8 (A.E. Puzdrovsky), and also on the eastern necropolis (A.E. Puzdrovsky).

The results of the fieldwork undertaken in the 1980s and 1990s were published in the following works: In several articles S.G. Koltukhov has stated the chronology and periodic divisions of the defensive system of Scythian Neapolis (Koltukhov 1990; 1999). Neapolis is appraised from the point of view of its levels of fortification and militaryadministrative organization.

1983. Limited work is undertaken on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev) (Fig. 29). Investigations are carried out at sections 7a (A.E. Puzdrovsky), 7 (I.V. Achkinazi), 6 (S.G. Puzdrovsky, A.E. Puzdrovsky), and on the site of the eastern necropolis (Yu.P. Zaytsev, A.E. Puzdrovsky).

A.E. Puzdrovsky has generalized the information received from the necropolis, and has offered his version of the ethnicpolitical history of Crimean Scythia between 2nd century BC and the 3rd century AD (Puzdrovsky 1987; 1989; 1992; 1993; 1993a). The Bitak necropolis was investigated under his direction (Puzdrovsky 2001; 2002).

1984. Work continues on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev), at sections 7b (I.V. Achkinazi), 7v (A.E. Puzdrovsky), on the east flank of the defensive wall at section 6 (S.G. Koltukhov, Yu.P. Zaytsev), and on the Eastern necropolis (A.E. Puzdrovsky, Yu.P. Zaytsev).

Yu.P. Zaytsev devotes several works to the study of Scythian Neapolis (Zaytsev 1990; 1990a; 1991; 1994; 1994a; 1995; 1995a; 1996; 1997; 1999; 2000; 2000a; 2001; 2002; 2002a; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994). Primary attention is paid to problems of chronology, typology of architectural structures and their reconstruction, and publication of several important complexes and objects. As a result, a new cultural and historical periodic horizon was suggested for Scythian Neapolis.

1985. Excavations are carried out at sections “O” (I.V. Achkinazi), “N” (I.N. Khrapunov), and also on the eastern necropolis (Yu.P. Zaytsev). 1986. Excavations are carried out on ash mound No. 3 (O.A. Makhneva, A.E. Puzdrovsky), and on the eastern necropolis (A.E. Puzdrovsky).

The location of Scythian Neapolis

1987. Scale work is undertaken on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev, A.E. Puzdrovsky), and on the eastern necropolis (A.E. Puzdrovsky).

A place with such a name is mentioned twice in the ancient source. In Strabo’s “Geography”, Scythian Neapolis is cited among the fortifications made by Skiluros [Strabo. VII, 4, 7] (Solomonik 1977, 54). In the Chersonesian Decree in honour of Diophantus, its geographical position was somewhere in central Scythia [IOSPE,I2, No.412. Line 12]. Khabei and Neapolis were mentioned during the campaigns of Diophantus - a well-known commander of Mithridates VI Eupator (Solomonik 1952, 114; Vinogradov 1987, 70).

1988. Excavations continue on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev, A.E. Puzdrovsky), on the suburban territory, on the eastern necropolis, and on the Early Iron Age settlement at the foot of the hill (A.E. Puzdrovsky, V.B. Uzhentsev). 1989. Work continues on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev), and resumes at sections A (A.E. Puzdrovsky) and B (Yu.P. Zaytsev).

The attempts to locate Scythian Neapolis began with the first finds from the settlement at Kermenchik in 1827. After Greek dedicative inscriptions, some reliefs, and a pedestal bearing the name of Skiluros were found here, I.P. Blaramberg recognized the settlement as the royal Scythian fortress of Neapolis (Blaramberg 1889). Following some new important finds, and on the basis of his observations, A.S. Uvarov also agreed with Blaramberg (Uvarov 1854).

1990. Excavations are carried on at sections A (A.E. Puzdrovsky) and B (Yu.P. Zaytsev), and on ash mound No. 3 (Yu.P. Zaytsev, A.E. Puzdrovsky). An investigation is undertaken at the northern part of the settlement (Yu.P. Zaytsev), and on the settlement at the foot of Neapolis (A.E. Puzdrovsky). 4

The Scythian Neapolis

In 1856, P. Becker raised objections to this hypothesis, and placed Scythian Neapolis near the village of Inkerman (Becker 1856, 41-46). In this he was joined by F.K. Braun in 1879 (Braun 1879, 70).

Northern Black Sea region. However, this proof has inconsistencies: modern investigations convincingly prove a much later occurrence for Neapolis (Golentsov, Golenko 1979, 78; Koltukhov, Makhneva 1988, 140; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 232; Zytsev 1995; 1997; 1999; 2001).

In 1881, after the Chersonesian Decree in honour of Diophantus was found, it became clear that Neapolis and Khabei were situated in the heart of the Crimean peninsula (Yurgevich 1881, 23). However, P.O. Burachkov, commenting in the first edition of the Decree, came out against this opinion (Burachkov 1881, 228). A little later, the identification of Kermenchik as Neapolis was supported by V.V. Latyshev, and then by the well-known Crimean scientists Ch. Yaschurzhinsky (1889, 46) and A.I. Markevich (1928, 14).

The modern location of the fortresses mentioned in the description of Diophantus’ campaigns (at the end of the 2nd century BC) is explored by S.G. Koltukhov in his work, “Notes about the military-political history of Crimean Scythia” (Koltukhov 1994). The author most convincingly attempts to compare ancient Scythian Neapolis with the settlement at Kermenchik. To date, the majority of researchers considers Kermenchik to be Scythian Neapolis. A Greek name for a barbarian metropolitan fortress is not easy to explain. Perhaps, if one bears in mind the numerous signs of Greek influence on the culture of the nobility of Neapolis, one could conclude that the Greeks might have perceived Neapolis as being their “own” settlement (Puzdrovsky 1988; Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 233). In the opinion of Yu.G. Vinogradov, the absence of any indication of citizenship (demotikon) in the dedications made by Posideos, son of Posideos, means that Scythian Neapolis could have enjoyed the status of pokir, enjoying full rights (including citizenship) (Vinogradov 1989, 243).

N.L. Ernst, director of the excavations at Kermenchik in 1926, wrote: “we may only conditionally and tentatively name the Simferopol settlement as being Neapolis” (Ernst 1927, 24). The results of the Tauro-Scythian expedition allowed P.N. Schultz to suggest that the main Scythian fortress was located in the territory of modern Simferopol, and accordingly named it Scythian Neapolis. His opinion was criticized by O.D. Dashevskaya, who countered with an article “On the question of the location of three Scythian fortresses mentioned by Strabo» (1958). The author concluded that the main fortress of Crimean Scythia was not positively distinguished in the written sources and therefore its exact name must remain obscure (Dashevskaya 1958, 148-149). She offered a different interpretation of the Kermenchik settlement and put forward the alternative of Palakium. This point of view was developed by D.S. Raevsky (1977, 106). In his opinion, Kermenchik was a residence of the Scythian military aristocracy, and the name of Palakium, he believed, was derived from the Iranian word for warriors, “pala”.

Another version is also possible: that the Greek name was given to the royal fortress by Skiluros in accordance with his political strategy of rapprochement with some Greek states in the Northern Black Sea region. To summarize, two points should be borne in mind when considering the modern understanding of the problem. 1. The available sources and archaeological material support the prevailing traditional point of view in terms of linking the Kermenchik settlement to the royal Scythian fortress of Neapolis.

T.N. Vysotskaya broadly supported Schultz’s position. She also sided with B.N. Grakov in the notion of the transfer of the Scythian capital from the settlement at Kamenskoe (in the Lower Dnieper region) to the Crimea in the 4th century BC (Grakov 1971, 31; Vysotskaya 1979, 190), and that the new capital was named “New City”, Neapolis. This opinion fitted well with the understood 4th-century-BC foundation of Kermenchik, and the general historical situation of the

2. All historical reconstructions, concepts, and opinions relating to Neapolis, unequivocally testify that it was the most powerful royal fortress and military-political centre within Skiluros’ realm.

5

Yu. Zaytsev

Chapter 2 TOPOGRAPHY AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL MAP OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS Water supply

The ancient settlement is located on one of the internal massifs of the third ridge of the Crimean mountains (Fig. 4). It is a clear ledge, limited on one side by the steep slope to the river Salgir and on the other by the deep Petrovskaya gully.

There is no a constant source of water bordering the fortress. At the same time, the excavated sites have not revealed traces of cisterns for collecting rainwater. This would indicate that, in antiquity, the water supply for the fortress was provided differently. Perhaps the area had one or more deep wells which have not yet been found. Several fast springs still flow in the Petrovskaya gully, and a further one exists at the foot of the north-eastern precipices of the plateau (Fig. 2, 4).

Geological structure The rocky massif on which Scythian Neapolis is situated is comprised of dense nummulitic limestone of the Tertiary period (Poznyshev 1955, 12). After weathering and erosion, the limestone was covered with a thin carbonate layer brownish-black earth.

Topographical plans The first topographical plan was made by I.P. Blaramberg (Fig. 6). This, with small additions, was reproduced by F. Dubois de Montpereux (Fig. 7) (Montpereux 1834, album, fig. 8). These plans show the line of the southern defensive wall with towers and gates, the find-site of a coin hoard, the location of the reliefs and inscriptions, the ash mounds, and the kurgan mounds. On the plan of 1853, the excavation sites of I.P. Blaramberg and A.S. Uvarov are carefully shown (Tunkina 2002, fig. 146). N.I. Veselovsky’s plan indicates his excavations on the western necropolis in the Petrovskaya gully (Fig. 8).

Climate Scythian Neapolis enjoys long, dry periods, with significant levels of solar radiation and a moderate amount of precipitation. Steady winds blow in winter and summer. The summer winds are dry and are usually accompanied by a sharp increase of temperature and noticeable falls in relative humidity (Babkov 1956, 9). The situation on the eminence gives something of a microclimate to the area. The deep valley of the Salgir River gives rise to specific winds that promote a difference between temperatures on the plateau of the settlement and in the valley of the river. Daily fluctuations of temperature are great and at night, cool air comes down from the heights and temperatures fall below those of the plateau. On the contrary, on the slopes and the top of the rocky massif, the nights and mornings are warm but afternoons are much cooler than in the valley.

A new layout of the Neapolis settlement was published by N.L. Ernst (1927, 26), on which are shown the excavations of the southern defensive wall, the trench, and the rock-cut crypts. In 1946, E.A. Stolyarevsky undertook a detailed survey of the settlement and necropoli. This plan consisted of the dug sections of the settlement, the situation of the rock-cut crypts, and the earthen burials of the necropoli (Schultz 1953, fig. 1) (Fig. 9). S.K. Sebekin carried out a new survey in 1958 (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 2) showing the sections that were investigated from 1945 to 1959.

The modern vegetative covering of the region is similar to the grass steppe. Remains of wood, found during fieldwork, show oak, pine, poplar, alder, and hornbeam all grew around the fortress (Babkov 1956, 12). This data indicates that the area of Simferopol was distinguished by forests and rich vegetation in ancient times.

The last, and most detailed, technical drawings of the settlement (scale 1:500) were undertaken by E.F. Chikalkin 6

The Scythian Neapolis

in 1978. This plan features, all the dug sections, trial trenches and trenches proper that were investigated between 1826 and 1993 (Fig. 10).

Near the ancient reservoirs were situated the necropoli of Neapolis. The western necropolis (ca. 3 ha) occupied both slopes of the Petrovskaya gully. The rocky ledges were suitable for cut crypts, and the clay ground, opposite the south defensive wall, was used for earth burials (Fig. 2, 6). The eastern necropolis (5-6 ha) was similarly organized (Symanovich 1983, 10, 14) (Fig. 2, 7).

The archaeological map of Neapolis and its immediate vicinity The settlement occupies part of the plateau and has an area of 16.5-16.0 hectares, shaped like an isosceles triangle (Fig. 2, 1). From the south, the settlement is limited by a vallum over the remains of the defensive wall (Fig. 2, 2). The northeastern and north-western borders of the settlement include the Petrovskie crags and the steep slopes of the Petrovskaya gully. The topographical study of the settlement allows one to distinguish three sites along the external defensive line. The southern site is the most massive. Here ran a wall which separated the steep scarp from the plateau (Koltukhov 1990, 176; 1999, 29). The walls of the western and north-western flanks are not recognized in relief and therefore their exact location has not yet been established. Probably the northwestern part of the fortifications is hidden under one of the three terraces (Uvarov 1856, 524-525; Koltukhov 1990, 177178; 1997, 30). The eastern defensive boundary (700-750 m in extent) was marked by the precipices of the Petrovskie crags.

A further necropolis synchronous to the settlement was discovered and investigated in 1978 and between1989-1991 (Koltukhov, Puzdrovsky 1983; Puzdrovsky and others 1991, 103-104, fig. 26; Puzdrovsky 2001; 2002). It was located on the right bank of the Salgir River, 700 m to the north-east of the precipice of the settlement (Fig.). Preliminary data gives it an extent of about 0.5-1 hectare (Puzdrovsky 2001).

Along the defensive wall 200 m south of the settlement, was the location of the southern “suburb” of approximately 9 hectares (Fig. 2, 3). Within the limits of the fortress and the suburban territory, the cultural layer covering the period from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD lies to a thickness of 0.1-2 m. The surface layer of the cultural deposits has been subjected to modern disturbances - holes, trenches, craters, etc. Three large ash mounds (Figs. 3; 4; 5) and a number of smaller ones are located here. Originally there were more large ash mounds but these have been obliterated by the zone of modern building.

Another settlement dated from the end of the 4th century to the first quarter of the 3rd century BC, and was found on the northern part of the plateau of Neapolis, below the level of the Late Scythian period (Fig. 2, 12). This settlement has a characteristically thin cultural layer. The full extent of the settlement has not yet been identified but it seems to have occupied 4-5 hectares.

The territory north and north-east of the eastern necropolis was occupied by settlements of different times (Fig. 2, 910). They date from the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD (Vysotskaya, Skory 1976, 315). In some areas, these settlements were covered again by the last burials of the eastern necropolis. Their plans and constructions are not clear, but on the basis of visual observation it is possible to assume that “the lower city” (Fig. 2, 9), occupied by the modern cemetery, had defensive walls. The cultural layer in its area reached a thickness of 3-4 m.

The development of the city of Simferopol - the capital of the Independent Republic of the Crimea - has had negative consequences for the archaeology of the region. Many sites, on which the mentioned ancient objects are located, are not now accessible for study. Systematic archaeological investigations are possible only in a limited area of about 15 hectares. This area includes approximately two-thirds of the internal territory of the fortress, several sites from the southern suburb, and the northern part of the escarpment - presumably the northern suburb.

West and east of the settlement, in the Petrovskaya and eastern gullies, the ancient hydraulic engineering structures were situated. They included stepped reservoirs with dams which survived until the 1960s (Babkov 1956, 10). Across the dam of the lower reservoir of the eastern gully ran the ancient road from Neapolis to the valley of the Salgir River (Fig. 2, 5).

7

Yu. Zaytsev

Chapter 3 STRATIGRAPHY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE CULTURAL LAYERS OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS Database

distribution of the cultural layers within the area of the settlement. Their expressive structure is shown only in the ash mounds and within the limits of the building complexes. In other places ceramic materials from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD, lay consistently in the homogeneous layer of the ash humus (Fig. 21). The average thickness of the cultural layers of Scythian Neapolis reaches 0.8-1.5 m. In some areas it decreases to 0.1-0.3 m, and in the ash mounds it can extend from 5-6 m (Fig. 21, 2-5).

The excavated area within the limits of the defensive walls totals approximately 2.6 ha, and 1.2 ha of the southern suburb (Fig.). The territory of the settlement was not investigated regularly, however every hectare is affected at least by trial trenches, prospecting sections or trenches proper, and these allow one to judge the character and sequence of the cultural layers. The basic excavated sections were: section D (about 2,000 sq. m) (Figs. 10, 3; 16); sections A-B-V (more than 4,000 sq. m) (Figs. 10, 11; 13); section 7 (about 1,800 sq. m) (Figs. 10, 12, 13; 18, 1); section 1 (about 1 200 sq. m) (Figs. 10, 20; 18, 2); ash mound No. 3 (about 4,000 sq. m) (Fig. 10, 19); section 6 (about 1,000 sq. m) (Fig. 10, 18). Apart from these excavated sections, during rescue works numerous stratigraphical data (longitudinal and cross-sections of the settlement) were recorded. The largest of these features included the northern trench (about 230 m in length) (Fig. 10, 5), section O (about 130 m in length) (Fig. 10, 7), and the southern trench (about 380 m in length) (Fig. 10, 10). Important information was also contained in the 1993 trial trenches (Fig. 10, 1), trial section G (Fig. 10, 4), and from the 1989 excavations, square 9 (Fig. 10, 8) in the northeast part of the settlement, section Zh between ash mounds No. 3 and No. 2 (Fig. 10, 6), section M (Fig. 10, 9), section I (Fig. 10, 8), section E (Figs. 10, 16; 19; 20), and also some of the areas excavated by Blaramberg/Uvarov (Fig. 10, 15) and Ernst (Fig. 10, 17).

2. The poor condition of the building remains. Many stones were removed between the 18th-20th centuries, but the inhabitants of Scythian Neapolis themselves also reused the material at the end of the 2nd-3rd centuries AD. The considerable quantities of ceramic material were primarily used to date the layers - first from amphorae and imported red-slip and black-glazed ceramics, ordinary pottery, and rare coins. For the Hellenistic period the stamps of amphora handles (about 600) were extremely important. Among them, more than 450 belonged to Rhodes, about 30 to Chersonesos, 55 to Knidos, 18 to Sinopa, 15 to Kos, and 14 to other centres. A separate group, occurring only within sections A and B, was formed by examples of more than 40 stamps from Sinopean tiles. Rhodian stamps (first of all eponymes) were used for chronological reconstructions, their dating being most fully developed (Grace 1952; Shelov 1975; Badal’yants 1976; Finkielsztein 2000; 2001).

Basic chronological features

Particularly indicative is the evidence of the Chersonesian stamps of groups 3b and 3v (Katz 1994) which were found during the Neapolis excavations. The author of the catalogue, V.I. Katz, dates them between 215-185 BC (Katz 1994, 77). These dates, however, were reached only on the basis of general analysis and reconstruction of events in the political history of the Chersonesos between 180-170 BC. In

Two features are characteristic of the cultural layers of Scythian Neapolis: 1. The absence of continuous building over all periods of the occupation of the fortress is displayed by the irregular 8

The Scythian Neapolis

particular, the destruction of the nearest chora of Chersonesos (and discontinuance of the amphora stamping) was believed to be simultaneous with the treaty of 179 BC made by Pharnak I - king of Pontus (Katz 1994, 72). The continuing tendency to review the date of this event is recently expressed by several researchers who prefer a date of around 155/154 BC (Højte 2003; Stolba 2003). Such changes to the dates are interesting when compared to the results presented by the joint finds of the mentioned Chersonesian stamps and the Rhodian stamps of eponymes ‘GqacËqar (ca. 156 BC) and CËqcym (ca. 154/ 153 BC) (Katz 1994, 74; Finkielsztein 2001, 192, Tab.19). They are also found in the cultural layers of Scythian Neapolis with Rhodian stamps of 160-120 BC (see Tab. 1).

horizons, shown in Arabic numerals (for example, D3). These mark more isolated events (reorganization, the building of separate structures, fires, etc.) that did not essentially change the functions, or plan of the architectural complex as a whole. All the archaeological material was strictly divided on the data provided by the stratigraphy. Ten years ago such a distribution would meet with certain contradictions to the chronological classification of the Rhodian amphora stamps as suggested by Virginia Grace. It turned out that each layer contained a majority of stamps of the V chronological group (150-108 BC). In addition, there were stamps of the III group (220/200-180 BC), and those of the IV group (180-150 BC). In 1994, I offered a detailed “subjective” chronology of the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis. This was based on the data of microstratigraphy, and framed by 140 and 110 BC. Now the chronology of the Southern Palace is completely coordinated with the chronology of the Rhodian amphora stamps as demonstrated by Gerald Finkielsztejn (Finkielsztein 2001, 192, tab. 19) (see Tab. 1). There are two of the nine eponymes from his group IVa (TiloÌqqodor, ca. 158/157 BC, and CËqcym, ca. 154/153 BC), three of the eight eponymes from group IVb (PausamÊar III, ca. 152 BC, PuhËdyqor, ca. 150 BC, and AÌtojqÇtgr I, ca. 146 BC), eleven of the twelve names from group Va, eleven of the twelve eponymes from group Vb, and ten of the eleven names from group Vc, of which the latest are the names DÇlym (ca. 110 BC) and ’AqatovÇmgr II (ca. 109 BC).

It is also necessary to note the characteristic finding at Neapolis of 4th century BC Sinopean tile stamps with Rhodian amphora stamps of 160-110 BC (Finkielsztein 2001). A similar combination was repeatedly found in the earliest unbroken layers, and in the closed complexes of sections A and B, where numerous import ceramics of the 2nd century BC were also found (Rotroff 1997, Kovalenko 2002, tab. 5). This was probably the result of secondary use of tiles as building material (Golentsov, Golenko 1979). Absolute and relative chronology The archaeological history of Scythian Neapolis covers an interval between the 2nd century BC and the 3rd century AD, and may be divided into 5 periods.

The most indicative is the microstratigraphy of the floors inside the main megaron (Fig. 15), where the layer of total destruction D1 covers 23 levels of the floor. Those wattle and daub levels were identical in structure and divided by thin layers, of equal thickness, formed of dirt. Thus, each new surface of the floor was supplemented by a new layer of wall plaster and central hearth. From this evidence, any updating to the megaron becomes obvious. Such a situation has many ethnographic parallels: in many cultures annual repairs to cult constructions and dwellings have a deep sacral, as well as practical importance (Zaytsev 1997).

SECTION A-B-V The situation regarding the most informative section, A-BV (Figs. 13; 14), is taken as the basis for the site’s chronology. The major features were in this area - the main complex of the fortress and the Southern Palace, with the mausoleums of Argotus and Skiluros (Zaytsev 1997; 1999; 2001; Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003) (Fig. 40).

Layer D1 may be connected to the wars Diophantus by several features and is dated accordingly to events from 112 to 108 BC. Two coins of the period were found - one of Amis (a head of Ares, sword and arms) (Figs. 15, 32; 24, 63) (ImhoofBlumer 1912, 169-184), and one of Pantikapaion (the head of Athena in a helmet, prow of a ship) (15, 31; 24, 65) (Anokhin 1986, 69-70).

As well as the architectural remains, a feature of special importance for the chronology is the well-divided layer of the Late Hellenistic period. In section A-B-V there were found more than 400 stratified amphora stamps, 8 coins, brooches, gold ornaments, beads, and various imported ceramics. During the 1946 excavation of the Mausoleum of Skiluros, plenty of Hellenistic pottery, weapon, gold ornaments, beads and other objects were also revealed. This range of material is comparable to similar finds from the cultural layer of the South Palace.

The stamp of the Rhodian eponyme ’AqistËceitor (ca. 140 BC) was found below the first floor of megaron N. A hypothetical span of 23 years (in accordance with the number of floors) fits well within a chronological period between 140 and 112/108 BC. If one accepts this, the first great fire would have occurred about 135/130 BC, and the second great fire about 126/124 BC. It is interesting that, according to Finkielsztein’s dating (2001), the last eponyme stamp from the stratum of Fire E1 is that of TilËheor (ca. 128 BC). The sequence of floors inside the megaron (in a concentrated form) is repeated in the general picture presented by the Palace as a whole.

Modern examination of this material has allowed us to construct a uniform chronological sequence, or “column” (Fig. 15). The primary horizons, or divisions, of the column have been given Latin letters – from top downwards. The horizons signify major architectural changes to the Palace, accompanied in almost every case by changes to the structural layers. In turn, each horizon has further sub9

Yu. Zaytsev

Horizon Å is the earliest. It is divided into 2 sub-horizons Å2 and Å1.

the third with the stamp of Jolor. The fourth pair – the eponyme PausamÊar (ca. 152 BC) and fabricant TilÍ belonged to a massive amphora, the shoulder of which was drawn with graffito. One handle is stamped with the brand of the fabricant LÊdar.

Sub-horizon Å2 consists of thin layers of loamy soil, clay floors and other surfaces in several earthen houses and ground level buildings (Fig. 13, E2). The remains of an earlier ground level construction (a proto-megaron), connected with the 9 first surfaces of the clay floor (Fig. 34) were found below the megaron. Judging by the stratigraphy, it was completely rebuilt into a new megaron.

Horizon D is divided into 4 sub-horizons: D4-D1. Sub-horizon D4 is represented by several further floors from megaron N, a cistern made of stone blocks, and by several defense walls. From the stratigraphy it directly follows Fire E1. At the same time the heroon of king Argotus was erected; it was constructed in antis in the Doric style (Fig. 13; 14; 15).

Sub-horizon E2 is dated by several handles of Rhodian amphorae with names of the eponymes PausamÊar III (ca. 152 BC), ’AqistËceitor (ca. 140), and HÈqsamdqor (ca. 137/ 136 BC), fragments of a painted black-glazed Attic amphora with twisted handles, and mould-made bowls (Fig. 32).

Sub-horizon D3 is a layer from the general reconstruction of the complex, the erection of buildings around megaron N and the courtyard (Fig. 41). Similar blocks of limestone (both whole and damaged) were used in their construction.

Sub-horizon Å1. This layer revealed the obvious traces of a major fire - scorched clay and wall plaster, plentiful charcoal, and tempered ceramic fragments. This sub-horizon is reflected in local layers and thin contexts found inside and close to the buildings of the complex. Megaron N was the only Palace building that seems to have been carefully cleared from the fire layer. Most of the fire débris was displaced 150 metres south of the building, where it was found during the excavations of 1979-1988.

Sub-divsion D2. This layer reflects the reconstruction of separate Palace features, and the damage caused by Fire 2, associated with floor nine of megaron N. The architectural remains from sub-horizons D4, D3 and D2, are accompanied by homogeneous ash-loamy soil to a thickness of 0.6 m. In many places they are divided by the thin layer from Fire 2, also seen on the floors of all three buildings.

The dating material from sub-horizon E1 (Fire 1) is extraordinarily rich and various. First of all there are more than one hundred Rhodian amphora stamps of groups IVb, Va and Vb (see Tab. 1, E). These include the Rhodian stamps of one eponyme from group IVb, stamps of five eponymes from group Va, and four eponymes from group Vb (after G. Finkielsztejn 2001). In addition, there were various glass beads, a Middle La Téne bronze brooch (Fig. 24, E3), hundreds of fragments from black-glazed and red-slip vessels (Fig. 84, 1-4, 6, 7, 10), large painted ungventaria (Fig. 82, 15, 7-8) and lagynoi (Fig. 85, 1-3, 5), lamps, small ceramic altars and thimiaterionae (Fig. 86, 1, 5, 6, 8-9, 14-15), frying pans and saucepans made of clay (Fig. 87, 1, 3, 5-9, 11-12), mould-made bowls, etc. (Zaytsev 1998).

Sixteen surfaces of clay floor were deposited after this fire until the moment of destruction of megaron N (sub-horizon D1). In these sub-horizons were found more than 200 handles of Rhodian amphorae with stamps from groups IVb-Vc (ca. 152 - ca. 109 BC, after Finkielsztein 2001) (Tab. 1). On floor¹ 21 of the megaron a bronze coin of Skiluros was found (Figs. 15; 30); a wide Synopean amphora was deposited by the hearth on this same floor level.

A small Rhodian amphora, a lagynos, and a pot with doublebarreled handles (Fig. 35) were found in one of the burnt buildings, and another revealed a red-slip kantharos and a plate, and several handmade pots and lamps (Fig. 74).

There were also plenty of various broken imported vessels (Figs. 82-85). These included plates (Fig. 84, 5, 8-9, 11-12), cups with figured handles (83, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12-13), fish-plates, kantharoi, mould-made bowls, lagynoi (Fig. 85, 4-6), and ungventaria (Fig. 82, 6, 9-14). More than half of these items were covered with red-slip. One lagynos has graffito in the form of XAIPE (Fig. 85, 4). Of special interest are fragments of several painted vessels with white glaze. These are very rare in the Northern Black Sea region. Sets of Greek cookingware are also characteristic (Fig. 87). These included saucepans with lids, frying pans and pots with rounded bases: this is the only instance of mass scale usage of such vessels in Scythia.

The local ceramic complex of Fire area E1 is also of special interest as it may indicate the contents of a burnt vehicle (Figs. 36; 37). West of the megaron, in an area of no more than 10-15 sq.m, were found: an amphora (presumably of Samian manufacture), 5 Rhodian amphorae, a black-glazed cup with stamped ornamentation, the lower section of an ungventarium, and the head of a terracotta thimiaterion in the shape of a half-figured Demetra with polychrome painting (Fig. 36). Particularly important were the necks of four Rhodian amphorae with rectangular stamps on the handles (Fig. 37). Three eponymian brands are stamped with the name ’AmÇnamdqor (ca. 143/142 BC) and the month Panam. Two of these correspond with the stamps of a fabricant by the name of DalojkÉr, also executed through one matrix, and

Sub-horizon D1. This level is represented by fallen yellow clay with fragments of white daub, sherds of tile and raw bricks, and pieces of painted plaster (Fig. 14, D1). It was created by the simultaneous destruction of the clay walls and tiled roofs of the Palace buildings. 10

The Scythian Neapolis Table 1. Correlation of Rhodian eponyme stamps found in various sections of Scythian Neapolis. The absolute dating follows G. Finkielsztein (2001). Group IIIb

IIIc

IIId

IIIe

IVa

IVb

Va

Vb

Eponyms Ξενοφάνης Πρατοφάνης Κρατίδας Ιέρων I ’Αρχοκράτης II Τιµασαγόρας Φιλόδαµος II Κλεώνυµος II Αγέµαχος ’Αρχίδαµος Αίνησίδαµος II Αίνήτωρ Καλλικράτης II ∆αµοκλής II Καλλικρατίδας II Κλευκράτης I Σύµµαχος Νικασαγόρας I Θεαίδητος ’Αθανόδοτος ’Αρατοφάνης I ’Αριστείδας II ’Αρίστων II ’Αριστόδαµος II ’Αρχιλαϊδας Ξενοφών ’Αγέστρατος II Πεισίστρατος ∆αµαίνετος Τιµούρροδος ’Αριστόµαχος I ‘Ηραγόρας Σωσικλής Γόργων Παυσανίας III Ξενόφαντος II Εύδαµος Πυθόδωρος Πυθογένης ’Αλεξίµαχος Αύτοκράτης I Τιµόδικος ’Αστυµήδης II ’Ανάξανδρος Τεισαγόρας ’Αριστόγειτος ’Αναξιβουλος Λαφείδης ’Αλεξιάδας Θέρσανδρος ’Αρίστακος ’Ανδρίας ’Αρχέµβροτος I ’Ανδρόνεικος Νικασαγόρας II Καλλικράτης III Αριστογένης Τιµόθεος Λεοντίδας Κληνόστρατος Πολυάρατος II Τεισάµενος

Date, BC c.189 c.188 c.187 c.186 c.185 c.184 c.183 c.182 c.181/179 c.180/178 c.179/177 c.178/176 c.177/175 c.176/174 c.175/173 c.174/172 c.173/171 c.172/170 c.171/169 c.170/168 c.169/167 c.168/166 c.167/165 c.166/164 c.165/163 c.164/162 c.161 c.160 c.159/158 c.158/157

Ash mounds E3-E2 in the south part of 1 Neapolis

North part of Neapolis, including section D

*

Southeast part of 2 Neapolis

Section Southern excavated in Palace, 1926 horizon E

Southern Palace, horizon D

*

Other sections of 3 Neapolis

*

* * **

*

** *

* ***

*

* c.154/153 c.152 c.151

** ***

c.150

*

* * * *

*

**

* *

*

* * *

c.147 c.146 c.145 c.144 c.143/142 c.142/141

* * *

*

* *

**** *

* ** c.137/136 * c.134/133 c.132 c.131 c.130 c.129 c.128 c.127 c.126 c.125

** **

*

** ** * *** ** * * ***** ***

**

******

*

*

* *** *

* ***** *

* *

*** ** * ******

*** ** ***** **

1

To this group belong the ash mound below the Mausoleum of Skiluros and the ash mound under the west part of ash mound No. 3.

2

Sections 6, 7, 7a-b-v.

3

Section 1, section E, chance finds in the vicinity of the east necropolis.

11

**

*

Yu. Zaytsev

Group

Vc

? ? ?

Eponyms ’Αρίστρατος Τειµαγόρας I ‘Ιέρων II ’Αρχίνος Εΰάνωρ ’Αριστόπολις ’Αριστοµβροτίδας Αίσχίνας ’Αρχίβιος ’Εστιεϊος Ναύσιππος ’Αριστάναξ II ’Αριστείδας III ∆άµων ’Αρατοφάνης II ’Αγοράναξ Ιεροµένος Τιµοκλέυς Φαίνιλα unclear stamps

Amount of defined stamps155 Total amount of stamps 204

Date, BC

Ash mounds E3-E2 in the south part of Neapolis

c.121 c.120 c.119 c.118 c.117 c.116 c.115 c.114 c.113 c.112 c.111 c.110 c.109 c.108 ? ? ?

North part of Neapolis, including section D

Southeast part of Neapolis

Section Southern excavated in Palace, 1926 horizon E

Southern Palace, horizon D

Other sections of Neapolis

* ** *** **** ** * **

*

** * * * * * **? ** * ****

*

23 27

5 6

** 8 8

8 10

*********** ************** ***** **** 32 70 48 88

******** 9 17

In this layer were found more than 30 stamps of Rhodian amphorae with names of eponymes from groups dated to 146-109 BC and synchronous fabricants.

119; 120), a gold brooch (Fig. 109, 2) Middle La Téne bronze brooches, two La Téne swords (Fig. 108, 1), an iron helmet (Fig. 107), and a huge amount of beads and gold ornaments.

Also found were fine gold ornaments (earring, various beads and appliqués), a Middle La Téne bronze brooch, and four bronze coins. Two of the latter are of Pantikapaion, and one of Amis (Fig. 24, D1).

As far as is known, the discovery of both a residence and burial site of a king - representing two parts of a uniform complex - is still unique in the archaeology of the Northern Black Sea region.

The imported ceramics were plentiful and various. The finds as a whole are comparable with those from earlier horizons of the Palace. Particularly interesting is a set of objects from the “Eastern house” of the Southern Palace. Here were found an original painted jag with double-barreled handle, a tiny painted amphora with fluted body, a terracotta of Aphrodite with Eros, leaden weights, and bronze keys from caskets (Fig. 88).

The dating is also partly confirmed by the complex of the Artyukhovsky Barrow, the main burials of which were undertaken between 140-125 BC (Maksimova 1979, 8-9). Many objects from these burials are similar to finds discovered in Mausoleum of Skiluros and the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis. Horizon C (section A-B-V0 is represented by local strata of ash-loamy soil-humus no more than 0.03-0.20 m in thickness (Fig. 14, C). Walls of an unclear purpose were connected to it (Fig. 13, C). This horizon is marked inside the megaron by ten clay floors. On floors Nos. 9 and 10 were noted the traces of Fires 3-4. The dating material included fragments of wide-necked light-clay amphorae of southern Black Sea manufacture, with double-barreled handles, and also fragments of earlier amphorae from of Rhodes, Kos, and Sinopa. In the household pit No. 34 (eastern part of the section A) a bronze buckle was found (Fig. 85, 20). This pit cut directly into layer D1 and can therefore be attributed to the transitive period D/Ñ. It is necessary to note also the paucity and plainness of the fragments of both brownishand red-slip cups and jugs, the absence of mould-bowls, and the appearance of the characteristic grey-glossy ceramics jugs, bowls of large diameter, and other forms (Fig. 128, 810). Light-clay amphorae with double-barreled handles of CIA variant (Vnukov 1988, 198-199) are widely dated, so

Thus, it is obvious that horizons D and Å of the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis should be definitely dated to the second half of the 2nd century BC. This may be primarily ascertained by the presence of the numerous Rhodian stamps from group 150-108 BC (after V. Grace) or groups 152-109 BC (after G. Finkielsztejn). Sub-horizons D2 and D1 may be synchronized with the majority of the burials from the Mausoleum of Sciluros, built during the general reconstruction of the Palace (sub-horizon D3) (Zaytsev 1997, 43; Koltukhov 1999, 35; Zaytsev 2001, 43-44) (Fig. 94-100). The main burial of Skiluros in the Mausoleum happened in 114/113 BC and for several years members of his clan were buried there - to be close to the body of the king. Burial finds include ungventaria, red-slip cups and other vessels (Figs. 12

The Scythian Neapolis

this horizon could well date from the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD. On the other hand, the insignificant thickness of the cultural layer accumulated directly on layer D1 and the small number of floors in megaron N, most likely indicate a date as early as in the second half of the 1st century BC, but this cannot be confirmed.

From a layer of horizon A occur various amphorae (Fig. 160) - narrow-necked light-clay amphorae of type D (Shelov 1978, 17-18), Bosporean red-clay amphorae of various shapes and types (Zeest 1960, tab.XXX-XXXI; Abramov 1993, 46-49), pink-clay amphorae with funnel-shaped necks (Zeest 1960, tab. XXXVII, 90), and one-handled amphorae of Samian production. The red-slip ceramics generally represent the typical styles of the time (Knipovich 1952, 301-308; Zhuravlev 1997; 1998; Domžalski 1998).

Mausoleum. In principle, it is impossible to define exactly the temporary border between the burials of periods D and C. Such finds as a grey-glossy cup, beads of mosaic glass of certain types, and specific bronze buckles (Zaytsev 1999, fig. 4, IX), all indicate a period from the turn of the 2nd century/1st century BC to the beginning of the 1st century BC (Zaytsev 1997, 165; Zaytsev, Mordvintseva 2003); stratigraphical analysis permits the attribution of not less than 18 burials to horizon C.

Among the metal objects, particularly interesting are the brooch with a figured winding of bow (Ambros 1966, tabl. 9, 2) and a bronze coin of Chersonesos (Fig. 25, 64). (Kharko 1961, 216). All this material unequivocally dates horizon A within the last quarter of the 2nd/first half of the 3rd century AD.

Horizon B was noted over all the area of section A-B-V as a layer of homogeneous ash-loamy soil, in some places divided by strata of clay and ash. Within the limits of the walls of former megaron N, it is represented by an ash mound up to 1 m in thick. On other sites the layer of horizon B reached 0.1-0.3 m in thickness. In many places it directly covered a layer of horizon D1. It could also testify to the short duration of the deposition of the layer at horizon C.

OTHER SECTIONS After the detailed analysis of the cultural layers in section AB-V and substantiation of their chronology, it is necessary to compare the results with the situations found at other sites within Scythian Neapolis. Some of them correct the data of section A-B-V. At best they allow the singling out of the earliest horizon (F), located in the northern part of the settlement.

The dating material included fragments of narrow-necked light-clay amphorae of types CA2 (Vnukov 1988, 205), B and C, dating from the last quarter of the 1st century to the 2nd century BC (Shelov 1978, 17-18), fragments of widenecked light-clay amphorae of type CIB (Vnukov 1988, 200), a denarius of Vespasian (72-73 BC) (Kharko 1961, 217) (Fig. 25, 41). The representative group is shown by numerous fragments of red-slip vessels ESB, and Pontic siggilata of various shapes dating to the 1st/2nd centuries AD (Knipovich 1952, 301-304, types 9a, 11, 12, 16; Zhuravlev 1997).

Horizon F is represented by a layer of humus, up to 0.2 m in thickness, which includes much rock and rubble. It is reliably traced on the surface of the sub-soil at section G, excavated in 1959 (Fig. 10, 4), in the eastern part of the trench investigated in 1955 (Fig. 10, 5), in the trial trenches dug in 1993 (Fig. 21, 7), and at section D (Fig. 10, 3). In the latter case this layer is linked to 3 household pits (Fig. 16, F). The layer produced fragments of amphorae from Chersonesos, Thasos, and Sinopa, stamps of the Chersonesian astynomae AqwÇmdqor and Gqoceitor (Fig. 25, 1-3, 5, 7) of groups IB - 315-297 BC (Katz 1994, 100), and also two stamped handles of amphorae (presumably from Thasos) and from an unknown centre (Fig. 25, 4, 6). Ten further Chersonesian stamps from group I are either not restored or occur from later layers of the same sections and trial trenches. As well as the Greek ceramics, horizon F also produced about thirty fragments of handmade gloss vessels with carved ornamentation which are indicators of the Kizil-Koba Culture (Fig. 25, 8) (Dashevskaya 1964, 206-207; Kolotukhin 1996). Such combinations of materials allow one to date horizon F to the turn of the 4th/3rd century BC.

The local necropolis situated in front of the defensive walls near to the mausoleum-heroon of Argotus (Fig. 13) relates to the same horizon. Here were discovered a child burial (accompanied by beads of mosaic glass, a gold earring, and a pendant in the shape of Heracles’ cudgel), a rich burial of a man and a woman placed in a rock chamber, and 6 horse burials (Schultz 1957, 76; Karasev 1951, 33-34; Vysotskaya 1979, 201). All these can be dated from the end of the 1st/ beginning of the 2nd century AD. More than twenty household pits, which were placed among the ruins of the former Southern Palace (Fig. 13, C), are not earlier than the middle of the 2nd century AD. On the basis of all the data, horizon B may be dated from the middle/last quarter of the 1st century to the third quarter of the 2nd century AD.

Horizon E is not noted on the majority of the excavated sections. In many places it was obviously not deposited absolutely, and in some places it cannot be distinguished because of the plainness of the material.

Horizon A is the latest. It is subdivided into two -A2 and A1. Sub-horizon A2 is represented by homogeneous ashhumus, reaching 0.1-0.4 m in thickness. It corresponds with numerous building remains (Fig. 14, A), household pits, and burials of children. A layer of sub-horizon A1 is formed of black earth, 0.1-0.5 thick, containing many stones.

At sections D, E, O, 1 and 7 (Fig. 16, E2), various monuments were investigated - buildings at ground level, semi-dug dwellings, household pits, and the layers connected to E2E1 (Fire 1). Besides the mass of ceramic material from these 13

Yu. Zaytsev

structures, there were Rhodian stamps of the eponyme ’AqÊstajor (ca.135 BC) and the fabricant Kimor (Fig. 25, 9), and a bronze crescent-pendant (Fig. 25, 14). In the same sections (Fig. 31), and also under the mound of ash mound No. 3, further building remains and a layer, obviously previous to horizon E1-E2, were investigated. They are conditionally defined as sub-horizon E3.

At present, 34 known handle-stamps from Rhodian amphorae have been located at the sections on the southern line of the defensive wall of Scythian Neapolis. Section E (Fig. 10, 16). In the loamy soil deposited above the subsoil, in an area of approximately 100 sq. m, were found 8 Rhodian stamps, 1 stamp of Knidos, and 1 stamp of a Koan amphora. The layer in which they were found was compacted between suburban megaron E and the oldest defensive wall. As well as the stamped handles there were numerous other finds, including fragments of red-slip tableware, mould-made cups, large fragments of amphorae and hand-made pottery, and a casting mould for manufacturing a horse head-piece with a hook (Fig. 93) which was made from the handle of the Rhodian amphora.

The small amount of datable finds accompanying the objects of sub-horizon E3 allows one to date it to the second quarter/ middle of the 2nd century BC. Only below the ash mound (No. 3), and lower than the layer of Fire E1, is there revealed the rather significant ash layer of sub-horizons E2-E3 (Fig. 21, 2-5), containing some tens of stamped handles of Rhodian amphorae, including those with the names of eponymes from groups IVa, IVb, Va, Vb, dating ca. 160-132 BC (Tab. 1). The fabricants include BqËlior, BoÌkaqwor, ´IÈqym, DalojqÇtgr, DqajomtÊdar, EÌvqÇmyq, LÊdar, LËswor, TilÍ, ´IppojqÇtgr, PuhËdyqor, and ´Ieqojkeor.

The accumulation of this layer can be connected with the functioning of the neighbouring megaron E. Its subsequent partial move northwards can be explained by the construction of the defensive wall. This is also supported by the fact that fragments of Hellenistic amphorae, a fragment of a mouldmade cup, and a handle of a Rhodian amphora with the stamp of eponyme KaveÊdgr (ca. 138/139 BC) were all found during the clearing of the fill from the oldest wall in 1959. This was the only occasion on which the fill from the defensive wall produced any finds. From this it is possible to assume that a part of the neighboring cultural layer, which was deposited before the fortifications were built, was incorporated into the body of the wall together with rocky rubble.

Horizon D is also only noted at some sections. The building remains obviously connected with it are only found at sections E (megaron E) and 7 (semi-dug dwelling, remains of a stone wall, household pits) (Fig. 18, 1, D). At first, this horizon is noticeable from stratigraphical data, and the sequence of the multi-strata clay floors in megaron E is fairly well repeated in terms of megaron N in the Southern Palace (Figs. 15, 2; 20, 1-2). In section 7, the Rhodian stamps with the names of eponymes PokuÇqator II (ca. 125 BC) (Fig. 25, 12) and CËqcym (ca. 154/153 BC) (Fig. 25, 13), a stamp of the fabricant DÊym (Fig. 25, 10), and also the handle from a Sinopean amphora (Fig. 25, 19) all belong to horizon D.

The most representative collection of amphorae handles with stamps occurs from the excavated section of 1926 (Fig. 10, 17). Their distribution within the section is of a certain interest (Fig. 31, 2). 13 stamps were compacted into the central part of the section, and this accumulation of stamps was then “cut” by the line of the defensive wall.

From horizons E-D of the settlement and suburb, which are unlinked stratigraphically, come further eponymean stamps on handles of Rhodian amphorae (Tab. 1). On the other amphorae handles were the names of fabricants ’AcahËboukor, ’AcahojkÉr, ’Apokkydoqor, ’AqistojkÉr, BoÌkaqwor, ‘IÈqym, DalojqÇtgr, DiËdotor, DÍqor, EÌjkeÊtor, FgmËdotor, KÊmor, LÇqsmar, ‘QËdym, TilËnemor, Vamiar, ‘EqlÊar, ‘Gvgstiym, and KusÊym. The rare finds of Chersonesian amphorae stamps of groups 3B-3V should also be noted (Katz 1994, 107).

In turn, it allows one to suggest that the defensive wall arose here after the formation of the localized cultural layer. As at other sites, the surface here could have been cleared for building the wall and the material removed to the sides of its base. This layer could be connected with the functioning of the house of sub-horizon E3, whose insignificant remains were investigated at section 7b (Fig. 18, 1, E3); these features are 25-30 m apart (Figs. 10; 13). Thus, the nature of these mentioned sites demonstrates the ambiguity of the stratigraphy near the defensive wall of Scythian Neapolis and suggests the possible existence of farmstead structures on the location of the fortress in the second quarter/middle of the 2nd century BC. Each of these complexes (Fig. 31, 1, A) was connected with rubbish/ash mounds containing the Rhodian amphorae stamps dated between180-140 BC (Fig. 31, 1, B).

The question of the interrelationship between the cultural layers of horizons E-D and the chronology of the Scythian Neapolis’ fortifications is a difficult one. S.G. Koltukhov, who specially investigated the settlement fortifications, dates the earliest wall to the last quarter of the 3rd century BC, or, more likely, to the first quarter of the 2nd century (Koltukhov 1990, 184-185; 1999, 31-32). Yu.P. Zaytsev proposed that the erection of the fortress should be dated close to Fire Å1, i.e. after the middle of the 2nd century BC (Zaytsev 1995, 87; 1999, 130).

The situation became clearer in 1999 after the excavation of the southeastern part of section A (Fig. 13). Here the stratigraphy of the earliest wall was carefully investigated and the results produced the following sequence of events.

In both instances the writers referred to the same amphorae stamps that were connected with the fortifications. 14

The Scythian Neapolis

The earliest feature of section A was the ash mound, the central part of which was later covered by the Mausoleum of Skiluros (Fig. 13). As well as other finds (including stamps of fabricants ’AlÌmtar and LÇqsuar), a significant discovery was made here: the scorched handle of a Rhodian amphora bearing the stamp of eponyme JqatÊdar (ca. 187 BC) - the earliest (after Finkielsztein) of all the Rhodian stamps found in Neapolis. Three semi-dug dwellings had been cut into the southern and northern parts of this ash mound (Fig. 13, E3).

grey-glossy jug and plate (Fig. 128, 8-10), red-slip cups (Fig. 128, 6-7, 11), a handmade incense burner of Sarmatian type (Fig. 128, 2), and a fragment of a small ceramic altar. Apparently this layer of the fire results from the complex of megarons Z, K, L, and M located 15 m eastwards (Fig. 126). In houses K, L, and M traces of a fierce fire were found on the earliest floors. In the stratum of a floor in house M a Sinopian coin of 100-70 BC (Fig. 25, 21) (Imhoof-Blumer 1912, 169-184) was found. Such evidence dates this fire to the first half/middle of the 1st century BC.

One of these dwellings (No. 2) was partially cut during the building of the earliest defensive wall. Its intact part was filled in with earth from a section of the ash mound that was destroyed when the wall was constructed.

A further fire (No. 5) occurred during the formation of the layer of horizon C. This fire is noted in front of the defensive wall at section 6 (Fig. 10, 18). S.G. Koltukhov and other researchers date this event to the first decade of the 1st century AD, linking it to a strained period in Scythian-Bosporean relations (Koltukhov 1990, 178; 1999, 36; Puzdrovsky 2001).

The next layer, which covered the fill of the foundation pit of the semi-dug dwelling, and the surface of the ash mound differ sharply in composition. The layer is very dense and contains clear signs of building material - clay, rubble, and stone debris from cutting. Such features were not noted on the subsoil surface or on the ash mound, so it may be assumed that this layer marks the level of the building of the earliest wall and the initial stage of its functioning.

Thus in terms of the relative chronology, horizon C may be separated into several sub-horizons: Sub-horizon C4 - the cultural layer deposited before Fires 3-4. It was noted inside and near palace megaron N, and also within the complex of megarons Z, K, and L.

The layer of Fire Å1 at this section was covered during the subsequent strengthening of the wall, when it was then attached to an “urban” zone from the north (Fig. 30).

Sub-horizon C3 - the layer from Fires 3-4 found in the same features. By its stratigraphy, these fires seem to have occurred almost simultaneously and therefore these fire layers are cannot be differentiated in most cases.

Thus, the southern defensive wall was constructed after the formation of the small rubbish/ash mounds of horizon E3, and after the semi-dug houses were cut into one of the ash mounds: this event probably occurred after 140 BC.

Sub-horizon C2 - the cultural layer of megarons Z, K, and L (Fig. 126, 1), deposited after Fires 3-4. The layer from Fire No. 5 probably belongs to the same sub-horizon.

Horizon C, over all the extent of Neapolis, is represented by a revealing cultural layer, containing ash, that frequently accompanied the building complexes (Fig. 21, C). It may be dated to the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD. This is confirmed by finds of archaeological material similar to that found in section A-B-V, however, over the settlement as a whole, it has a longer term of deposition - about 150 years. As well as numerous ceramic fragments (amphorae, red-slip and handmade pottery) from this layer, there were also some individual finds (Fig. 25, C) including glass beads (for analogies Alekseeva 1975, 1978, 1982, 60, type 27; 71, type 149; 53; type 341; 73, type 171; 29, type 1v), a fragment of an iron brooch, a rim of a glass cup of Rippenschale type (Kunina, Sorokina 1972, fig. 5, 11; Eggers 1953, Typen 182183), a figured pendant in the shape of a recumbent lion of Egyptian faience, and bronze arrow-heads.

Sub-horizon C1 - the layer from the destruction of megarons Z, K, and L. Horizon B of Scythian Neapolis is the most peculiar. As with section A-B-V, it was formed by a thin level of ash/ humus (Figs. 13; 21, B). Of the same date are three large ash mounds, one of which has been excavated completely (ash mound No. 3; Figs. 10, 19; 135), and also numerous small ash mounds that frequently appear between earlier ruins. The most interesting of these is the small ritual ash mound located by the ruins of megaron E (Fig. 135, 2). This feature revealed some bronze statuettes of the Dioscurae (Fig. 138) (Schultz 1969), a gold pendant (Fig. 141, 4), bone pyksidae, bronze brooches (Fig. 141, 1, 2, 8), bronze details of caskets (Fig. 141, 3, 5, 7, 11), beads of different kinds (Fig. 140, 28, 13-15, 17-18) (Alekseeva 1975; 1978; 1982, 46, type 82; 72, type 165; 25, type 44; 34, type 16b), fragments of glass vessels (Fig. 139-140) (Kunina, Sorokina 1972, fig. 3, 26; 5, 11, 47; 6, 4, 21, 42, 54; 7, 10, 19; 8, 24, 54; 11, 20), and other various objects (Fig. 141, 11, 16, 17, 20). Probably, from the same complex came the gold stater of the Bosporean king, Remetalk 150/151 AD (Fig. 142, 1) (Anokhin 1986, 110-111; Frolova 1997, 142-144) (Zaytsev 1990a). The majority of the mentioned finds can be dated from the second half of the 1st, or middle to third quarter of the 2nd century AD.

The broad dating of most of the archaeological material complicates the detailed chronology of horizon C. It is currently only possible to make suppositions from some informative sites. Important dating information from one of the fires comes from the northern part of ash mound No. 3. Here the burnt building ash directly covered the layer of horizons A/D. Finds included c. 10 light-clay amphorae with double-barreled handles of type CIA (Fig. 128, 12) (Vnukov 1988, 56), a 15

Yu. Zaytsev

The relative stratigraphy and chronology of horizon B was noted in detail during the excavation of ash mound No. 3 (Fig. 135).

ruins of the buildings and in the household pits (Figs. 168; 169; 174). By the combination of finds, horizon A may be dated from the end of the 2nd century to the first half of the 3rd century AD, and the time of destruction not later than the second quarter/middle of the 3rd century AD.

Sub-horizon B3 - an ash mound deposited directly on the ruins of megarons Z, K, and L (Fig. 135, 6).

Synchronization of the settlement and necropoli of Scythian Neapolis

Soon after, it was levelled and covered by the stone pavement and walls/fences of sub-horizon B2. This sub-horizon is linked to “the Sanctuary of three menhirs” (Figs. 135, 5; 136) (Vysotskaya 2001). During the same period the ash mound expanded within the limits of the masonry/fence.

The ordered chronology of the cultural layers and features of Scythian Neapolis permits comparison with the material from the necropoli.

Sub-horizon B1. In this period the ash mound further expanded, covering the features of sub-horizon B2.

Until now the earliest group of burials in the catacombs of various types (Puzdrovsky 1994; 199, 102) was traditionally dated to the end of the 2nd - 1st century BC. Such dating was determined by the finds of ungventaria (Symanovich 1983, tab. XIII, 1-3), a lagynos and imported vessels of other types (Symanovich 1983, tab. IV, 13), belt-hooks (Symanovich 1983, tab. XVII), pottery plates with horizontal handles (Symanovich 1983, tab. VII, 11, 12, 16), brooches of Middle La Téne construction (Ambroz 1966, 12-13; Symanovich 1983, tab. XXV, 1-10), and some other subjects. From examples found in the Mausoleum of Skiluros and the Southern Palace, all these categories of finds frequently occur in the layers of horizons D-E, while they are absent completely from the finds of horizon C. The same applies to new complexes discovered in other necropoli within northwestern Crimea (Dashevskaya 2001, 95).

Characteristic of horizon B is the almost complete absence of fundamental buildings. Presumably, it is only possible to connect this horizon to megaron A of section D (Fig. 16, 1). The dating of this building to the 1st or 2nd century AD was suggested by I.V. Yatsenko in her analysis of the frescoes from the megaron (Yatsenko 1960, 91), although this date is not absolutely proved by the archaeological material and stratigraphy. Disagreements in dating megarons A, B, and V of section D (as disparate as 2nd to 1st century BC (Vysotskaya 1979, 61-63) to 1st to 3rd century AD (Yatsenko 1960, 91; Dashevskaya 1962, 194)) are caused by the small amount of information afforded by the cultural layer connected to them. These buildings were certainly constructed on the surface of sub-horizon E1 and this could testify to their belonging to horizons D and C. On the other hand, these megarons are connected with the rich complex of finds dating to period of the destruction of Scythian Neapolis (sub-horizon A1). Thus, it is necessary either to suggest the continuous existence of these buildings from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD, or to recognize here an absence of cultural layers C-D. The final answer will only appear after a careful study of all the field documentation and a new excavation.

On this basis, one may presume synchronization between the early group of burials from the eastern necropolis and horizons E-D of the settlement (Zaytsev 1995, 88; 1999, 137, 140). Therefore the traditional contradiction between the former date for the beginning of the settlement (the 3rd century BC) and a supposed starting point for the functioning of the necropoli (end of the 2nd to 1st century BC) (Dashevskaya 1991, 43) may be eliminated. However, it is necessary to date the early horizon of the necropoli to the 1st century BC more carefully in so far as there are only few reliably dated closed complexes of this time in the northern Black Sea region (Sokolsky 1970, 89-110); often there is no sufficient basis for a wide dating of the majority of features that existed in the second half of the 2nd century BC.

Horizon A on all sites is shown by a distinct layer of dark ash/soil and numerous badly preserved building remains (Figs. 16, A; 18, A). The dating material from this layer is represented by the same types of amphorae and red-slip tableware as from section A-B-V. A layer of this horizon also revealed a bronze brooch (Fig. 25, 56), a bronze fingerring with glass inlay (Fig. 25, 60), a bronze-cast pendant (Fig. 25, 57), a bronze buckle (Fig. 25, 55), a bronze amuletring with knobs (Fig. 25, 63), a bronze pyramidal bell (Fig. 25, 61), and beads of various types (Fig. 25, 58-59).

Horizons B and A may be synchronized with the burials in rock-cut crypts, earth catacombs, and in graves with niches containing characteristic red-slip ceramics, brooches, various metal ornaments, etc. (Symanovich 1963a, fig. 3, 1-15; 18, tab. 1; 1983, 107-108) (Figs. 154-155; 179; 181).

Of special interest in this horizon is the complex of megarons A, B, V, section D. Apart from ordinary finds, there was a silver plate with an inscription of the Bosporean queen, Gepepyreos (Cgpapuqgyr) (Yatsenko 1962) (Fig. 170), some Roman denarii of Pertinax, Trajan, and Geta (Fig. 25, 64, 65, 66), and also a set of unusual red-slip pottery (Fig. 171) (Raevsky 1970).

The burials synchronous with horizon C occupy an intermediate position between the complexes of horizons E/ D and B/A. They are less expressive in terms of burial rites but have their own specific characteristics. Thus, from the 1st century BC to the first half of the 1st century AD the range of grave goods had changed. The number of catacombs became less than in former times but the number of those buried increased relatively.

The destruction layer (A1) may be traced by the presence of closed ceramic deposits and human remains found under the 16

The Scythian Neapolis

More detailed characteristics of the necropoli from horizons E-A will be suggested in the corresponding chapters of the monograph.

A uniform model for the chronology of Scythian Neapolis is offered in Table 2.

Table 2. Relative date Horizon F Horizon E E3 E2 E1 Horizon D D4 D3 D2 D1 Horizon C C4 C3 C2 C1 Horizon B B3 B2 B1 Horizon A A2 A1

Absolute date th

Historical period

rd

end of the 4 - early 3 c. BC 170-150s BC 150-130s BC 130-128 BC

}

128-124 BC

110/108 BC nd st from the turn of the 2 -1 c. BC st to the middle of the 1 c. AD st st 1 half of the 1 c. BC st ca. middle of the 1 c. BC st st middle 1 c. BC - middle 1 c. AD. st ca. middle of the 1 c. AD nd st from the 2 half of the 1 c. AD to the rd nd 3 quarter of the 2 c. AD nd st the 2 half of the 1 c. AD st nd end of the 1 - middle 2 c. AD rd nd middle - 3 quarter of the 2 c. AD nd from the last quarter of the 2 nd rd to the 2 quarter of the 3 c. AD 2

nd

rd

quarter of the 3 c. AD

pre-historical period. Kizil-Koba Culture. pre-Fortress period E st 1 stage nd 2 stage Fire 1 Fortress-Palace period D st 1 stage nd 2 stage Fire 2 destruction in time of Diophantus Fortress pre-urban period C st

1 stage Fires 3-4 nd 2 stage - Fire 5 destruction of buildings Period B st

1 stage nd 2 stage rd 3 stage Post-fortress period A destruction of the settlement

17

Yu. Zaytsev

Chapter 4 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIODS E AND D (2nd century BC) The archaeological situation

in 1926 (a presumed rubbish/ash mound) was most likely connected with this particular farmstead (Fig. 31).

The 2nd century BC is represented at Scythian Neapolis by two periods, E and D, corresponding to the stratigraphical horizons or divisions.

In the north of section 1 (Fig. 10, 3) a length of a stone wall with an aperture 3.2 m wide was found (Puzdrovsky 1988, 303). In period E2 the gate was closed with stones and in such a state the wall continued to exist in the later complex of sub-horizon E2-1. This could testify that the walling was constructed in period E3.

Pre-fortress period E Sub-horizon E3

Thus, 4 partly excavated farmsteads with 3 ash mounds presumably connected to them could be attributed to subhorizon E3.

In several places of the settlement and the suburb remains were found which preceded the features of sub-horizon E2. They amount mainly to parts of stone walls, up to 1 m thick. To the north of section D (Fig. 16) two such walls were found, forming an acute angle; they surrounded the limestone pavement on which was deposited a stratum with various 2nd century BC materials (Fig. 90).

Sub-horizon E2 The remains of 2 dug and 3 semi-dug buildings were discovered at section D (Fig. 16, 1, E2). Building D consisted of a row of 3 rooms. In the southeast room were noted an entrance and traces of a hearth. In the central room there was another hearth as well as a pythos buried in the floor. Near the west corner of the building was a thin stratum of Fire 1 from sub-horizon E1. To the southwest, close to this building, there were 2 round, semi-dug dwellings cut into the subsoil rock; they were filled with ash and soil covered by the stratum of Fire 1.

Another probable feature of sub-horizon E3 is the so-called “tower of the acropolis” in the central part of the settlement (Fig. 22, 2) (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 15; Koltukhov 1999, fig. 47). The tower was square in plan, with walls ca. 1.4 m thick, and enclosed spaces of 5 x 5.2 m. It was constructed on a layer of horizon F, and on its upper floors was noted a stratum of Fire 1. Later, this tower was joined to a supposed wall of the “acropolis”. Both constructions are dated to the 2nd century BC (Koltukhov 1999, 37), and it is likely that the tower appeared in period E and belonged to the fortified farmstead.

One more building was found in the southwest of section, represented by several masonry features, including surviving remains of clay floors. The layout of this construction (consisted of several rooms) is unclear.

In section 7b (Fig. 18, 1) were the remains of a wall, more than 1 m in thick, the remains of two enclosed spaces adjoining this wall, and parallel trenches with the foundations of two masonry features. The assumed farmstead here was dismantled at the time of the construction of the semi-dug dwelling of sub-horizon E2, which was destroyed in Fire 1. Thus its existence could be connected with sub-horizon E3. The accumulation of stamped amphorae handles, and fragments of imported ceramics in the section were excavated

To the north of these buildings a large (3.5 x 3.6 m) semidug dwelling house, square in plan, was investigated (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 27). Its foundation pit was cut into the subsoil, and the sides had benches or shelves 0.5 m wide. In the centre there was a clay table. As mentioned above, a stratum from Fire 1 of sub-horizon E1 was noted on the upper floor of the tower of sub-horizon 18

The Scythian Neapolis

E3 (Figs. 10, 5; 22, 2). Some time earlier, the supposed defensive wall of a small fortification (“acropolis”) was joined to this tower of sub-horizon E2 (Koltukhov 1999, 36-37). Near the tower are the partly investigated remains of another building, on the clay floor of which survived a stratum of burnt grain.

stratigraphy fixes this complex to horizon E, and this particular building directly preceded the later megaron E, which kept its orientation and layout. In section 1 (Fig. 18, 2, E2) a new complex (south) was adjoined to the farmstead of sub-horizon E3. From this survived a clay platform and the remains of a building with a burnt clay floor. The finds were limited to some amphorae fragments, handmade ceramics, pottery, a lamp, and a female terracotta figurine.

A group of semi-dug dwellings, with clay surrounds and paving (Fig. 75, 2), was discovered to the northeast of section O (Fig. 10, 7). The round-plan foundation pits of semi-dug dwellings Nos. 1-3 were of similar construction and arranged in line. A further 2 semi-dug dwellings (Nos. 5 and 6) were rectangular in shape. Semi-dug dwellings Nos. 1, 3, 5 shared an entrance. All the constructions had post holes and No. 6 contained 2 hearths in the western corner. The stratigraphy and modest finds link this complex to sub-horizon E2. It clearly existed for a short period: by the time of Fire 1 all the constructions were filled with a cultural layer.

Thus, a characteristic of sub-horizon E2 is the appearance of independent buildings often unconnected to existing farmsteads. In the topography and layout of Neapolis, this sub-horizon is represented by local zones distributed over the whole territory of the settlement. The megaron N complex is particularly distinctive among the features of sub-horizon E2; more than likely it accommodated the aristocracy of the settlement. Its special purpose is testified to by the following history of the fortress in period D.

At section A-B-V, sub-horizon E2 is represented by several features including megaron N (240 sq.m in extent), a large rock-cut pit, several walls, semi-dug dwellings and groundlevel buildings. All these constructions were conditionally named the “megaron settlement”, which was in fact a predecessor of the Southern Palace of horizon D (Fig. 41). After a short time, semi-dug dwelling No. 5 disappeared and was filled with a cultural layer and megaron N was rebuilt from a smaller building of a similar construction.

The southern defensive wall of the fortress appeared simultaneously with the construction of megaron N. As a result, the area of the fortress increased (in comparison with the earlier “acropolis”) to 18-20 ha. Fortress-Palace period D

The walls of megaron N were possibly covered with red plaster, fragments of which survive bearing illegible graffiti (Fig. 33, 9). A large hearth platform and stone shelf-bench were found in the main apartment of this megaron, and opposite its side entrance was a single wooden pillar had been erected.

Sub-horizon D4 Section A-B-V. After Fire 1, only megaron N was reconstructed in the complex of the Southern Palace. In addition 3 new features were built - the ritual pool, the formal south façade of the Palace (“building K with porticos” after the terminology of 1848-1950), and the sanctuary/heroon of Argotus.

Section 7b (Fig. 18) included a round semi-dug dwelling and a surface connected to it, both covered by the stratum of Fire 1. The building had a clay hearth (with a handmade clay pan) made in a special niche, and inclined post holes. This feature provided a clue for a reconstructed height of the dwelling - ca. 2.5 m. Finds included a Sinopean amphora, fragments of Rhodian amphorae, and sherds of handmade ceramics and pottery. The lower part of a semi-dug dwelling, rectangular in plan, was investigated in the central area of section 7a. This feature had a hearth situated to the left of the entrance and the floor was paved with small, flat stones. North of this was the clay surface of a courtyard covered with the stratum of Fire 1. West of this complex were the remains of a small, ground level, building with one room; its surviving features included the masonry of the north wall, the threshold and burnt clay floor (Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 227-228).

The ritual pool made of worked slabs (Fig. 49) was situated west of megaron N. The pool floor still retained areas of red and black paint. The east side featured a primitive conduit for rainwater from the adjoining courtyard. The south façade of the complex was probably constructed as a wall, with added projections. In front of this façade there was a small sanctuary/heroon of King Argotus (Zaytsev 2000; Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003). From this building survived a rock-cut pit of irregular rectangular shape (5.80 x 4.15 m, and 1.2 m deep (Figs. 51; 53)). This pit was cleaved from a cleft in the natural rock crack and was oriented west/east. A layer of friable stratum of rock crust 1-1.4 m wide was removed from around the pit at the time of construction. The rock surface shows traces of masonry preparation and rock fragments were either placed to the sides or lay scattered around the heroon. To the south, the layer of rock fragments reached the defensive wall and central gate. To the north, they reached the monumental south façade of the Palace (the former “building K with porticos”). After the fieldwork of 1949-1950 this layer was explained as the ceremonial paving

The remains of a ground level rectangular building (with multi-level clay floor, central hearth, and 4 post holes in the corners) were discovered at section E (Fig. 20, 1). To the north of this building a courtyard platform with hearth was investigated. At the edges of this platform were found 2 crushed handmade pots, a bronze crescent-pendant (Fig. 25, 14), and a fragment of a terracotta representing Kybela. The 19

Yu. Zaytsev

of the “City Square”, situated in front of the gate (Schultz 197, 69, fig. 4, 4).

The simultaneous destruction of all the Palace buildings, thereby marking the end of period D, occurred at the time (or just after) the occupation by Pontus’ garrison (Saprykin 1996, 147-148; Zaytsev 1997, 46).

The construction of this building is still hard to define in detail (Zaytsev 2000, 52). In accordance with one hypothesis, it was a two-level building in antis on a high stylobata erected in the Doric style (Fig. 52). It consisted of an underground tomb and a temple/heroon located above. A monument with an inscription was also erected. According to the newest research this construction was connected with the majority of the artistic monuments found here in different times (see Appendix 1) (Zaytsev 2002) (Fig. 54).

It is significant that the fortress area has still not revealed any major features connected to horizon D apart from the Southern Palace. In other words none of the building lost in Fire 1 was restored, and nor does period D hold examples of new building above the stratum of Fire 1. The situation in the area around the south suburb looks different. Here there were discovered semi-dug dwellings, the remains of ground-level houses, and household pits. Because of the inconclusiveness of the stratigraphy and archaeological material, none of these constructions could be exactly attributed to horizons E or D. Only under ash mound No. 3 were there noted several household pits dug into the layer of Fire 1.

In addition to the ground floor in the hall of megaron N, there was also supposedly a first floor gallery based on pillars erected along the walls. Approximately at the same time, the local layers of ash/rubbish started to be deposited in the rockcut pit, semi-dug dwelling No. 3, and near the side entrance to the megaron itself. Large amount of fragments from amphorae, black-glazed tableware, mould-made bowls, and cut bones of animals were found.

Megaron E would appear to exhibit the most complicated, impressive, and interesting history. It is to be found 12 m south of the defensive wall (Fig. 20, 3), its walls erected on the stratum of Fire 1. This fire destroyed a building with a clay floor (as described in sub-horizon E2), and judging by the inclusion of some of this structure within the layout of the new megaron (Fig. 20), one may suppose that the original building was restored in a grander manner.

Sub-horizon D3 Section A-B-V. A complete reconstruction and improvement of the Palace complex is linked to the period of this subhorizon. The west wall of the megaron (Fig. 42) had 2 niches made in it and the whole wall was painted with polychrome frescoes (Fig. 43). One of the niches presumably contained the limestone herma of a female deity (Figs. 46-48) (see Appendix 1, 1), and the altar would have had a polychrome geometric ornament. The second niche was constructed in the northwest corner, separated by a wooden partition. Here were placed several altars, a table, and 2 large statuettes. One of these represents a seated human figure and the other a half-figured female deity (Fig. 42). All the objects were made of terracotta with traces of polychrome painting and gilding. Near the second niche was placed a large marble Hecateion, of which a lower fragment has survived (Fig. 45) (see Appendix 1, 2).

The new building was 14 x 6.5 m, with walls ca. 0.7-0.8 m thick. Three pairs of pillars were placed on the long walls: two pairs in the main apartment, and one pair aligned to the Southern façade. In the west wall there was a wide niche, opposite a side entrance. In the centre of the main apartment there was a clay table/hearth, and the southeast corner contained a stone and clay shelf/bench. The walls of the megaron had been whitewashed many times. The hearth had been covered with a clay coating no less than 12 times, and the bench more than 14 times. On the sides of the bench survived a painting represented by horizontal lines of black (soot) and reddish-brown (ochre). A multi-level clay floor had been laid within the extent of the main apartment. An item of particular interest is the sacrificial shallow pit found in the southwest corner. This feature contained animal bones, and handmade anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines (Malikov 1967, 64-69). The stratigraphy did not reveal the megaron’s shift from horizon D to C.

Large areas were left free of buildings outside megaron N and these areas were fenced off. South and west of the megaron, 2 two-storeyed constructions (“House R” and the “East house”) were built. Evidently the east apartment of the upper floor of “House R” was formal. Its walls were decorated with frescoes (Fig. 50) similar to the style of painting found in megaron N. “House R” was also joined a wine cellar storing pythoi (Fig. 40).

In the period E-D, megaron E can be connected to the local thick deposits of the cultural layer situated 2-10 m north of the megaron and partly covered by the II-IV zones of the Southern defensive wall.

At this time the monumental south façade of the Palace was also reconstructed (“Building L with porticos” after the terminology of 1949-1950 - Schultz 1957, 71-72). The reconstruction featured large stone slabs and reached 30 m in thickness (Figs. 40; 55, 2, 3; 56).

It is important to underline the impressive similarity of megaron E to the Palace megaron (N), located approximately 80 m apart (Figs. 10, 11, 16; 21, 4, 20). As well as a similar stratigraphy (the sequence of repairs and multi-level flooring), the buildings have the same main features - the similar locations of hearth, shelf/benches, door apertures, niches, and pillars. In addition, they also show similar elements of internal ornamentation (whitewashing, coatings and paintings of

At the same stage the Mausoleum - a magnificent groundlevel stone tomb - was built (Figs. 96-98). This tomb was to contain, in time, king Skiluros (Zaytsev 2001) and other noble Scythians (see Appendix 2). 20

The Scythian Neapolis

hearth and benches). It is also likely that both structures functioned at the same time, or at least in period D. This all suggests that megarons E and N may be linked by origin, time of functioning, and, perhaps, by a continuity of certain ‘families’.

These new works suggest that, at this stage, Neapolis’ engineers were employing Hellenistic fortification techniques to create a new defensive system that could successfully resist sieges (and modern siege machinery) over a sustained period. Perhaps it indicates the real threat at the time of Pontus’ army landing in the Crimea (Koltukhov 1990, 186).

Architecture: Building techniques

The second and third building phases of the defensive wall (after Koltukhov) can be synchronized with sub-horizons D4D2.

The bad condition of the majority of buildings necessitates the exclusion from this analysis those constructions which comprised few remains, in terms of ground plan or actual features - masonry, rooms, floorings, etc.

In the fourth building phase, the peribola in the area of the main central gate was further strengthened - the east tower and the Mausoleum were also given additional walls (Fig. 30). Such walling, as found in section E, provided suitable projections for crossfire. There are reasons to accept P.N. Schultz’s opinions concerning the intensive refortification work carried out during the period of the Diophantus wars, and to date the fourth building phase to 110-107 BC (Koltukhov 1990, 187).

The typology of constructions found in Neapolis is based on surface position (either dug or on the natural) and the principles of layout. Fortifications The styles of fortification observed at Neapolis were written up in the works of S.G. Koltukhov (1990; 1999, 31-38), and are these are followed here, with slight deviations (Fig. 30).

Farmsteads (Fig. 22, E3, 1-3) A maximum of 6 farmsteads are known, but not one of them was ever more than half dug. Their assumed features include a rectangular layout occupying about 500-700 sq.m, fences with apertures, and adjoining rooms surrounding an internal courtyard. In some cases the farmstead possibly consisted of several towers with internal spaces (Fig. 22, 2), which must have been used for dwellings.

The first building phase (after Koltukhov 1999) correlates to sub-horizon E2 and is represented by the earliest wall. The total extent of its excavated area is 103 m (Fig. 10, 1). Based on the reconstruction by S.G. Koltukhov (1999), the wall (approximately 5-7 m high (Koltukhov 1999, 31) was entirely made of stone and had no defined parapet. The upper part of the wall might have featured stone on a clay mortar. The fighting platform probably consisted of wooden planking supported by logs inserted in the masonry and resting on pillars. It is possible that the first wall was either a temporary construction, or was intended for protection against barbarian forces unaccustomed to siege tactics and the storming of cities (Koltukhov 1990, 183-185).

Megarons (Fig. 22, 4, 19, 20) These are ground level constructions of the hierarchic style of layout (Kryzhitsky 1982, 132-135). This type of construction, in the 2nd century BC, was represented by buildings N and E (Fig. 22, 4, 20), a sequence of constructions rebuilt more or less to the previous plan, but enlarged. In period D, both megarons were evidently multi-functional operating as dwellings for the nobility and as cult/civil buildings (Kryzhitsky 1993, 226-227; Zaytsev 1995). Both megarons were of regular rectangular shape and had a single main apartment (naos) and portico (pronaos) formed in antis.

During the second building phase, the total extent of the wall was strengthened by a defensive zone 2 m thick and by several towers. The base thickness of the wall now reached 5-6 m. In the same period, rows of bricks were laid on the stone base of the walls (and towers). Thus, Neapolis acquired at this time fortifications worthy of a capital city, at least in terms of the height and plan of its main walls (Koltukhov 1990, 185).

Ground level houses of equal/parallel layout (Fig. 22, 17, 19) (Kryzhitsky 1982, 137)

Over the third building phase, the second and third defensive zones further strengthened the main wall. The tower investigated in section 6 was transformed into a bastion. Walls were erected in front of the gates and towers built near the main gate. The second defensive zone was constructed from inside the city as separate interrupted sectors. The third zone strengthened the wall from the outside, featuring curtain walls between 0.8-1 m thick. What was probably the base of a square tower was attached by 4 m long piers to the walls near the main gate (Koltukhov 1990, 185-186).

This type of construction is characterized by a clear geometrical layout, an occupied area of from 30 to 130 sq. m, and several rooms situated in a line (or other formation). Unlike farmsteads, these constructions lack adjoining room and internal courtyards. Two such constructions were discovered at section D. Ground level one-roomed buildings (Fig. 22, 5-7) These buildings feature a single room of irregular layout, and typically occupy an area of up to 40 sq. m. Such constructions are reliably found at section B (2 examples), Zh (1 example), 6 (1 example), 7 (1 example), and in the trenches of the 1955-1956 digs (3 examples).

A tower was also erected above the east gate (Figs. 13; 30; 40). The peribola was closed to the east of this gate by a new defensive zone. 21

Yu. Zaytsev

Ground level constructions - wooden conical huts (Fig. 22, 8, 12)

An exception to the overall poor standards of construction is the Southern Palace. From the first, megaron N was outstanding in terms of size, regular geometric layout, wall thickness (1.35 m at the base), and its tiled roof. The parameters of the megaron suggest a two-storeyed construction.

These were identified by round clay platforms of a small diameter - up to 2 m. In some cases they were surrounded by stones and slightly sunken into the ground. In different parts of the settlement more than 10 examples have been found.

Later construction phases at the Palace included the use of such materials as well-processed limestone slabs and blocks. Some Palace buildings - the heroon of Argotus, the Monumental Southern façade, the Mausoleum of Skiluros were professionally built to the standards of any contemporary Greek architecture. The surviving section of the stone base of the Monumental Southern façade shows carefully fitted stone blocks; these are precisely horizontally laid, despite the inclining sub-soil. Other features of the complex were also supplemented by elements of typically Greek building methods - tile roofs, frescoes, etc.

Semi-dug dwellings (Fig. 22, 9-11, 13-16) Their general features include dug foundations up to 8-9 sq. m in area; their lower walls incorporating benches/shelves. Primitive clay hearths were located inside and out. Sometimes there were floor post holes along the sides or in the centre. In some cases entrances were traced and the remains of unfired brick masonry around the foundation pit (example No. 4 at section B, and the example in section 7v). So far Neapolis has revealed 22 round and 9 rectangular semi-dug dwellings.

In brief, the architecture of Scythian Neapolis in the Hellenistic period is represented by a mix of Greek/Barbarian building traditions. (Kryzhitsky 1993, 220).

The question of the purpose of these constructions is a complicated one. For similar features with an area of more than 4 sq. m, a dwelling function may be presumed, but the majority of the Neapolis examples are of smaller size (up to 2 sq. m in diameter). One conclusion is that the site’s semidug dwellings were short-lived (seasonal?) constructions. Some may have been used for kitchens, storage rooms, etc, and their contents would leave no archaeological traces (kibitka, tent, horse-drawn carts, etc.).

The Necropoli of Scythian Neapolis: burial rites and grave goods The position of the catacombs of the early phases of the necropoli is shown in Figs. 11, 12. Investigations of the Eastern necropolis have revealed 32 burials synchronous to periods E-D. During fieldwork at the Bitak necropolis 12 burial complexes of the period were discovered (Koltukhov, Puzdrovsky 1983; Puzdrovsky and others 1993; Puzdrovsky 2001, 122).

The Southern Palace (Fig. 22, 19) This complex was a distinctive phenomenon in the architectural remains of Scythian Neapolis. This unique complex, over different periods in the area’s history, featured all the types of construction known at Neapolis - megaron, single- and multi-roomed houses of equal/parallel style layout, walls/fences, semi-dug dwellings, mausoleums, ceremonial pool, and altars.

Both necropoli featured several burial constructions in use in the transitional phase from periods D to C. Data does not exist for the burial rites carried out in the West necropolis which was excavated mainly in the 19th century. The museum collections house some finds from this necropolis - 2 ungventaria, a black-glazed plate with graffiti, brooches of the Middle La Téne types, and a bronze belthook with an image of horseman (Veselovsky 1897). The presence of these items also suggests some Hellenistic burials in the West necropolis.

Building techniques These were relatively primitive, using limestone, clay, unfired bricks, and timber. Ground levels buildings had stone bases/ plinths and unfired brick walls. The upper sections of the semi-dug dwellings were probably made entirely of clay. Masonry material included roughly cut stones, in ‘rubblework’ and/or orthostatic technique (Fig. 23, 1-4). Floors in all cases were of clay. Conical roofs are assumed for the round semi-dug dwellings; other buildings had span and lean-to roofs.

The main features of burial rites at this period. All the dead were buried in cut crypts/catacombs. The majority of chambers was small in size and contained from 2 to 10 bodies. Catacombs with one entrance and two chambers (Nos. 24, 29; 5, 101; 7, 8; 11, 12; 59, 60; 54, 71) were found in several cases. Some catacombs (Nos. 14, 37, 50) were bigger in size and contained up to 30-40 skeletons. All the tombs began construction at the end of period D (some of the earliest burials date to this time) and were completed during period C.

The building technique for the defensive wall was the same as for the dwelling/household architecture. The absence of skilled builders/masons and surveying is witnessed by surface and level variances, the in-fill in the lower masonry courses (Fig. 39), and the use of unsuitable stone. Technical miscalculations in this massive construction often reached a critical state and later attempts to repair the defensive system could not remedy the initial errors in the building work.

The dead were usually placed on their backs, with no standard positioning of limbs. The predominant orientation for the dead in the East necropolis is meridional (with some 22

The Scythian Neapolis

Crafts

variances), and south-north at Bitak (Puzdrovsky 2001,fig. 1). The characteristic feature of the burials in periods E-D is the modest nature and small number of grave finds (Fig. 125). The majority of skeletons were found accompanied with 1-3 items, and burials with no funeral objects are quite usual. Among these graves were found some impressive burials with diverse arrays of finds - Nos. 4, and 39 in the East necropolis (Symanovich 1983, 43), and the female burials (with gold ornaments) No. 21 in the East necropolis (Fig. 124) (Zabelina 1964) and No. 104 at Bitak (Puzdrovsky and others 1993, 104).

Professional pottery manufacture may only suggested for period E. The settlement revealed defective examples of ceramics and similar items (Fig. 81). Tiles, jugs and cups, lamps and altars, and terracotta figurines were made in small quantities for internal use. Traces of bone processing, spinning and weaving - but not of professional quality - have also been found. Many crafts were undertaken in the Southern Palace in period D. Apart from the professional pottery, there was also stone and wood processing (including sculpture and objects of high artistic value). Numerous traces of metallurgy (i.e. casting moulds) were also found during the excavation of the Palace.

From the earliest burials (second half of the 2nd century/ turn of 2nd/1st century BC) there were the characteristic burial items: imported pottery - ungventaria, lagynoi, cups with a single horizontal handle, tableware with a slip-coating; brooches of the Middle La Téne types; characteristic swordbelt hooks; triangular sheath-tips; iron belt-fittings; iron spearand arrow-heads; some types of bronze mirrors; spiral bracelets and finger-rings; various buckles; various styles of handmade pots; various golden ornaments; various beads (Symanovich 1983, 104, fig. 19; Zaytsev 1999, 137, fig. 5, 6).

Trade First among the imported objects of the period E were the amphorae from Rhodes, Sinopa, Chersonesos, Knidos, and other trading centres. A small amount of simple, slip-coated tableware, mould-made cups, and other objects was also found. In period D the Southern Palace was the main focus for the accumulation of imported objects. Numerous amphorae, slipcoated pottery, luxury objects, ornaments, armaments, and various other objects were found there.

Material culture Economy

Lifestyle

The materials of Scythian Neapolis during the Hellenistic period show only indirect traces of agriculture and cattle breeding. Therefore the farmsteads of sub-horizon E3 might be compared with analogous constructions of the Greek horae of Olbia, Chersonesos, and Bosphorus (Kryzhitsky 1993, 161-165; Kryzhitsky and others 1989, 120-123; Puzdrovsky 1988). These farmsteads are linked to the reservoirs and dams situated in the neighboring gullies and which already existed at the time of the appearance of the first burials in the Eastern necropolis (Fig. 11) (Symanovich 1983, 10, 14).

The lifestyle within most of the dwellings was very simple. Open fires were used for heating and preparing food. No traces of furniture were found apart from the splendid bier found in the Mausoleum. Closed ceramic lamps were used for lighting in the Southern Palace (Fig. 81). Handmade pots of various shapes provided the cooking ware and tableware (Dashevskaya 1958). The use of imported tableware was limited. Items from the necropoli show the widespread use of toilet accessories (mirrors, ungventaria, tweezers) and tools (knives, spinning-wheels, needles, awls).

Many features of the material culture of sub-horizon E2 testify to its non-settled or semi-settled way of life. These include the absence of building remains over much of the settlement, the temporary nature of most of the semi-dug dwellings, and the abundance of bones of domestic animals. Some of earlier farmsteads, however, continued to exist and started to develop long-lasting structural complexes. In the stratum of Fire 1, the burnt grains of wheat and rye were found on several occasions (Yanushevich 1983, 67).

As might be expected, life in the Southern Palace differed from elsewhere. Here were found a diverse range of Greek ceramics - lagynoi, caltharoi, fish-plates, moulded-bowls, pelikoi (Figs. 81-86; 89). Bone casket hinges, and carved bone fragments from Greek beds, wooden combs, and imported bronze mirrors were also discovered. It seems that dice was a popular game in the Palace megaron and elsewhere: on the floors of megaron N more than 30 sheep astragali were found, including drilled and polished examples. Such finds were also common in other areas of Neapolis.

The status of the main royal fortress and the presence of the Southern Palace in period D are hard to equate with the level of agricultural production found within the territory of the fortress. Some distinctive features of the Palace itself - the rich warriorburials of the Mausoleum, the images of horsemen in the ornamental finds, the mix of animal bones found among the cooking waste - presupposes a horse oriented (nomadic?) lifestyle.

Sacrificial sites, cult objects, amulets Shallow pits containing animal bones were regularly found in all areas of the settlement. Three of these were discovered 23

Yu. Zaytsev

in the north-eastern part of Palace megaron N, near of the clay altar. In megaron E there was a similar pit filled with the bones of 5 sheep, sherds from 9 very small ceramic vessels, and 4 anthropomorphic and 3 zoomorphic figurines (Malikov 1961; Vysotskaya 1979, 164-165). An anthropomorphic figurine identical to that from megaron E was found not far from the megaron in household pit No. 16.

The sanctuary found on the acropolis of Pantikapaion is central in trying to determine the attribution of the second herma. The acropolis at Pantikapaion revealed an altar-table with a dedication to Ditagoia on behalf of Senamotis - the daughter of king Skiluros (Vinogradov 1987). V.P. Tolstikov, the researcher of Pantikapaion, supposes that it was a rich cult complex of Artemis/Hecate belonging to nobility of the highest rank within the Bosporan capital (Tolstikov 1987, 107-108). V.P. Tolstikov also concluded that the deity Ditagoia was the main Barbarian goddess, particularly worshipped by members of the clan of Skiluros (Tolstikov 1987, 111-112). This goddess was so close to the essence of Artemis and Hecate, that in this case their merging to a mixed (triple) deity Artemis/Hecate/Ditagoia took place.

The distribution of the ritual ceramic items is very significant both territorially and chronologically. In horizon E, single finds of terracotta figurines of Demetra, Kybela, Aphrodite, Tyche (Fig. 33), as well as ceramic altars were discovered mainly from the farmsteads of sub-horizon E3, and the ground level houses of sub-horizon E2. Fragments of ball-shaped incense-burners came mainly from the semi-dug dwellings, or were found near the remains of the conical huts.

The conclusion at Neapolis is to attribute the limestone herma to a representation of Ditagoia - the main female deity worshipped in the Palace of Scythian Neapolis. This may be further confirmed by both the situation of this sculpture inside the Palace megaron and by its cultural context (it was located near the Hecateion).

The Southern Palace was the centre of ritual life and has produced the most obvious traces of it - royal mausoleums/ heroons, a significant altar, a ritual pool, sculptures of Greek and Barbarian deities (see Appendix 1), terracottas, tens of ceramic altars and handmade incense-burners.

The general structure of the Palace probably reflects the idea of a king-cult. The Mausoleums of Argotus and Skiluros (as places for the burial of divine kings) entirely correspond to this cult.

Most likely, the hall of megaron N was intended for regular meals and ritual ceremonies related to the royal cult (Zaytsev 1997, 39). Here were placed a marble herma of Hecate (Fig. 45) and a limestone one of another female deity (Fig, 46) (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 3, 4). According to the reconstruction (Fig. 42), the second sculpture was put in a visible place on a niche opposite the central hearth (Fig. 44) and this would seem to underline its special purpose in the megaron and in the life of the inhabitants there.

Evidently some ceremonies were connected to the ritual pool. The signs on the floor for the symbolic drawing off of rainwater (Zaytsev 1997, 37, 39) suggest astral/calendar events related to fertility cults.

24

The Scythian Neapolis

Chapter 5 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD C (TURN OF 2nd/1st CENTURY BC TO MIDDLE OF 1st CENTURY BC) Archaeological situation

Building L was 12.5 x 6.5 m, with walls 0.6-0.7 m thick. 6 post holes were found by the long walls and the central space had a hearth/pit. In the southeast corner of the room there was a wall of stone slabs.

Scythian Neapolis in period C was a settlement with a compact but irregular layout that would assume a comparatively numerous and constant population. This is confirmed by the situation within the suburban territory and dwellings nearest to the settlement. This situation looks similar to that of sub-horizon E2 just before Fire 1. Probably the same process of settlement development took place in both cases, the principle difference being the presence of the defensive system in period C. The structure of the architectural remains was also definitely changed.

Building Z was 12 x 6 m in size. No hearth or other constructions were found inside. The area on which the façades of the megarons faced was kept constantly neat and tidy: its surface revealed almost no trace of cultural layer. Behind the megarons, however, there were significant strata of clay /mud with ash deposits. West of the megarons there were numerous household pits containing material dating from the 1st century BC to the first half of the 1st century AD. Four semi-dug dwellings of unusual construction were found dating to the first half of the 1st century AD (sub-horizon C4) (Figs. 129-130).

The loss of the Palace specific to Scythian Neapolis during period C is obvious. Contrary to period D, the megarons, semi-dug dwellings, and ground-level houses of equal/ parallel layout became widespread. During this period not only were there no sculptures or frescoed decorations found, there were no examples even of the use of processed stone or tiles. In this period, of the whole Southern Palace complex (after its total destruction) only megaron N and its northern walls, and “House R” were restored. Clusters of masonry remains had appeared east and west of megaron N; some of these were walls adjoining the earlier architectural remains. The layouts of the other remains are harder to explain. They might suggest a complex of half-finished dwellings, since no clay floors were discovered. In its dilapidated state, the Southern Palace existed only for a short period - from the first half, to the middle of the 1st century BC - then it was completely deserted and its ruins were absolutely inviolable until the beginning of period B (ca. 100 years).

The megaron (E) (Fig. 20, 2) that had developed over the 2nd century BC was still functioning in the 1st century BC without any visible changes. The central gate of its main apartment had been sealed with stones at some stage, and a series of small rooms (containing hearths and household pits) had been attached to the south. The two megarons A and V possibly appeared at section D during period C (Fig. 16). It is more than likely that significant volumes of the earlier cultural layer were removed when they were being constructed. Both buildings are notable by their severe proportions, large dimensions (21 x 10 m and 20 x 9.5 m) and their solidity. Their walls were correspondingly thick - 1.2 m and 1.1 m.

The complex of megarons Z, K, and L was discovered under the northeast part of ash mound No. 3 (Fig. 126).

At the same time as these buildings were being built, there appeared several small houses of equal/parallel layout. These include house C (southeast of megaron A) and the complex of houses E (to the northeast of megaron B). In both cases these buildings consisted of three aligned apartments with

Building K was 8 x 4 m in dimension, its walls being up to 0.4 m thick. In the central space there was a small clay hearth/ table, with a household pit nearby. 25

Yu. Zaytsev

clay floors and corner-hearths. The megaron complexes were likely separated by several walls built on the foundations of earlier masonry from horizon E.

Southern Palace, a new “aristocratic quarter” within Scythian Neapolis was developing in its northern area, and two identical megarons, divided by a wall and gate, were erected in this sector.

To the northwest of megaron V, within the walled limits, there were also discovered the scanty remains of ground-level house D (with a hearth of complicated construction), and a semi-dug dwelling in very good condition. The latter was rounded in shape (diam. 4.1 m), with a clay shelf constructed along its wall. Judging by the stratigraphy and finds, dug dwelling functioned during the first half of the 1st century BC and then was filled in with ash and rubbish.

Other megarons from horizon C were most likely used as dwellings, their layouts and internal structures reflecting their inhabitants’ particular lifestyles. Ground-level houses of equal/parallel layout Such buildings appeared three times in the megaron complex (Fig. 22, 22), and twice (sections 6 and 7) as independent buildings. There were also 20 other similar layouts, but there was insufficient data to confirm their reconstructions. However, the presence of repeatedly used hearths suggests that they were at least used for dwelling or domestic purposes.

The last period of megarons A and V was not traced, as those buildings were reconstructed and included into a new aristocratic complex (Yatsenko 1962, 112-113). Architecture: Building techniques

Dug-dwellings and semi-dug dwellings

Fortifications

As with earlier examples, these may be divided into rectangular and rounded types. 2 semi-dug dwellings of rectangular shape (sections E and 6) and 4 rounded ones (sections D (sector 9), 6, M) have been found. Their features relate them to similar buildings from horizons E and D. A very different type of dug-dwelling (with rectangular layouts, long passages, and shelves along the walls) was found in the suburban territory, where they were situated in compact groups (Fig. 22, 29, 30).

In period C, the defenses of Scythian Neapolis were again based on the earlier walls, but in the 1st century BC the fortifications had lost their defensive function, as witnessed by the number of domestic buildings that were attached to the walls. The turn of the 2nd-1st centuries BC is marked by the rapid deposition of a clay layer near the defensive walls, followed by the construction of numerous household/dwelling structures.

The purposes to which these semi-dug dwellings were put have not yet been confirmed. Most of them were possibly only temporary constructions of auxiliary domestic use. The largest and best-equipped dug structures might also have been used as dwellings (Fig. 17).

Some strengthening of the towers, gates, and sections of walls was undertaken in a small way, just to effect ordinary repairs. For instance, in the 1st century AD, the east tower of the central gate was fortified with a supplementary zone of walls (Koltukhov 1990, 187; 1999, 36) (Fig. 30).

Farmsteads

At the turn of the 2nd-1st centuries BC, near the bastion at section 6 (Fig. 10, 18), there appeared a small ground-level house with hearth, a clay floor, and a household pit. Later, a further house (with a presumed internal courtyard) was built in the same area. Its detailed investigation shed some light on the fire that occurred in the first half of the 1st century AD (Fire 5 from horizon C) and that was very likely connected to the military activities of the Bosporean king, Aspurgos (Koltukhov 1990, 187; 1994, 218; 1999, 36).

The complex of stone walling discovered at section 1 might conditionally be attributed to this type of dwelling (Fig. 18, 2, C). The walls from the farmstead of horizon E were used in its construction.

Megarons

Building techniques

At least 7 new buildings of this type were erected in period C. Their layouts and interiors hardly varied in all phases (Fig. 22, 21-22, 24-25), but in period C they are characterized by their overall large dimensions, their layouts as one complex with ground-level houses of equal/parallel design, and instances of building units in twos or threes.

Traditional building materials include un-worked or roughly worked nummulitic limestone (often re-used), clay, and stones. Timber (oak, pine, etc.) was widely used. The walls of the ground-level buildings were constructed of unfired brick on stone foundations. The layouts of many of the buildings had been marked-out previously: this is an obvious feature of megarons A, V, Z, K, L, I, O, and some of the other constructions.

These architectural structures, unfortunately, do not present any regularity and only within the limits of a proven complex is it possible to ascertain the features of their layout (Fig. 22, 25) and development.

The situation of megarons A and V suggests a change in emphasis from the earlier megaron N and that there were shifts in the social structure of the ruling class of late Scythian society. It seems that during the period of the decline of the

Irregular rubble-work masonry is characteristic of period C., and there are very many examples of combined orthostatic 26

The Scythian Neapolis

and horizontal work (Fig. 23, 5-7). The stone foundations varied from 0.4 m to 1.2 m in breadth, depending on the dimensions and construction of the building. Interior materials included the use of clay (for flooring, wall plastering, hearths, etc.) and chalk (gypsum?) for whitewashing.

BC and also of the following period. The relationship became clear following chronological and stratigraphical analyses of the Mausoleum graves, finds from the cultural layers of the settlement, and materials from the new and informative graves discovered at the necropolis of Ust-Alma in southwest Crimea (Zaytsev 1997a). The Neapolis examples include small round mirrors (type VI, Khazanov 1963), buckles and brooches of various styles, three-bladed iron arrowheads, mosaic glass beads, red-slip cups, (Zaytsev, Mordvintseva 2003).

Apart from the two largest megarons (A and V), there is no evidence of any two-storeyed building in Scythian Neapolis in this phase, and, as already noted, period C revealed no trace of tiling.

The late group from the period C (from the turn of the era to the 1st century AD) is illustrated by finds of Roman brooches of the Aucissa type (stage B1a, 9 BC - 19 AD) and other definitive types (Ettlinger 1962, Abb. 93-94, Taf. 9, Ambroz 1966, 23, 43-45, 48-49, Tab. 9, 1-5). At this time the burials started to contain numerous figured pendants and beads made of Egyptian faience (Alekseeva 1975, 2743), finger-rings with glass inlays, mirror-pendants with conical protuberance, and many new types of beads. Among the red-slip pottery should be mentioned such types as round-based ungventaria, jugs with a single loop-handle, and a ‘barbotine’ cup.

The Necropoli of Scythian Neapolis: burial rites and grave goods During period C, Scythian Neapolis utilized the same three necropoli: in the west, east, and at Bitak. The east necropolis revealed 33 period C catacombs of the period C, whereas only 3 were found at Bitak. Unlike earlier phases from the east necropolis, more than 30 percent of the burials took place in earthen crypts with large chambers accommodating from 10-15 to 30-40 burials. The smaller catacombs also contained many human remains, and graves containing less than 5 burials are rare. The same situation was observed at Bitak: for example, crypt No. 104 contained 25 individuals, and crypt No. 155 contained 27 (Puzdrovsky 2002) (Fig. 133).

Throughout period C there are examples of characteristic rings (with three raised band), bronze bucket-type pendants, handmade ceramic incense-burners of several types, and redslip cups with in-turned brim.

The dead were arranged in the same posture as in the earlier graves. They were laid on their backs, legs often crossed at the ankles, and the hands (one or both) placed on the abdomen. The orientation of the bodies differed - mainly to the south or north in the east necropolis, and to the south at Bitak (Puzdrovsky 2002).

In general, the period C necropoli at Scythian Neapolis demonstrate a continuation of the burial rite from the previous period. Some alterations in the rites (a reduction in the amount of burials correlating to an increase in the number buried in one crypt) could be the result of an evolution in social structure. It is interesting to compare this with synchronous spread of megarons over the settlement: this might have had some bearing on funeral practice.

Period C burials may be divided into two chronological groups: early (1st century BC) and late (turn of 1st century BC/1st century AD).

Material culture The characteristic features of catacomb burials from the 1st century BC were the relatively modest quality and scant number of burial goods, the rarity of ceramics and sacrificial meat offerings, and also the total absence of armaments and horse trappings. In both period C necropoli only 20 iron arrowheads, 3 belt-hooks, a pair of iron bits and 1 bronze spur were found (Fig. 134) (Puzdrovsky 2002).

The material culture of Scythian Neapolis in period C was significantly barbarian, especially compared with the earlier period. However, many earlier cultural traditions continued to exist. Economy and crafts

At the turn of the era the burials tended to contain ceramic vessels, and various ornaments and brooches. Several items of armament also appeared (a sword from the crypt of the east necropolis), as well as gold ornaments (funeral wreaths, eye- and mouth-pieces). Occasionally imported vessels were found: a polychrome glass amphorisk from the kurgan dug in 1949, cast bronze ornaments in the shape of male masks (crypts Nos. 75 and 79 of the east necropolis), a Pergamian red-slip vessel in the shape of a Silenus-head (Fig. 134, 16), and a large cowrie shell (Puzdrovsky 2002, fig. 5; 9).

Cattle breeding was witnessed by finds of numerous bones from domestic animals. According to Tzalkin (1954; 1960), horsemeat (small/medium-sized breeds) was eaten most, followed (in order) by sheep and goats, cows, pigs, and donkeys (Tzalkin 1954, 285). Archeological evidence for agriculture is less obvious. So far no agricultural tools have been found on the settlement, and grain processing can only be testified by numerous finds of crude stone pestles (Fig. 127, 3). Household pits were found in comparatively small numbers (less than 40), and their features offer no conclusions regarding the development in this period of the agricultural economy at Scythian Neapolis (Vysotskaya 1979, 95-97; Puzdrovsky 1992, 128).

The correlation between the materials of the two periods (D and C) shows items that are characteristic of the 2nd century 27

Yu. Zaytsev

There are also no direct traces of crafts in the cultural layer of horizon C. As with the earlier period, it seems that items were made only for personal use - handmade pottery, crude bone and wood implements, yarn and cloth. Some form of professional pottering may still have existed, as witnessed by the series of ceramic altars made of local clay.

demonstrated by several finds of Sinopean coins of the 1st century BC. Cult objects A peculiar group of objects is represented by handmade clay figures of paired heads of rams and horses (Fig. 127, 5-8). These objects were wrongly interpreted as “hearth stands” or “spit stands” (Vysotskaya 1979, 87). At Neapolis these items were never found in direct proximity to hearths, and the most probable explanation is that they fulfilled some ritual purpose (perhaps in connection with the deities of the home hearth). These stands are believed to be Getic or Thracian in origin (Pogrebova 1958, 232).

Trade Imports included light-clay amphorae with double-barreled handles and late Sinopean amphorae (Figs. 131-132), brownslip and red-slip tableware, and some special types of ornaments and beads (Fig. 25, 22, 27-31). Compared to periods E and D, the earlier period of horizon C experienced a reduction in all categories of import. The situation changes in the 1st century AD, when there is an appearance of significant amounts of different red-slip pottery, some examples of Roman items (Fig. 25, 25), and articles made of Egyptian faience. There is a general orientation of Scythian Neapolis to the Southern Pontic region, as

Cult objects are represented by handmade ceramic incenseburners of different types, several ceramic altars, and amulets. In this period the amulets became more various and numerous - scarabs, lions, frogs, genitalia, figurines of infant Hor, Harpocratus, Bess, etc.

28

The Scythian Neapolis

Chapter 6 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD B (SECOND HALF OF 1st/THIRD QUARTER OF 2nd CENTURY AD) ashes, and burnt and loamy soil. It is indicative that its deposition was not accompanied by the removal of earlier stone ruins for reuse. In many cases the layer of ash/humus and various small ash mounds were deposited within the limits of half-damaged buildings, the walls of which had risen by a metre and more.

Archaeological situation In period B, Scythian Neapolis was a large fortress. Little new building seems to have taken place; megarons A and V (from the Northern Palace) may date to this period but no proof has yet been found for this.

The ash mounds - one of the features of horizon B - were mostly small but Nos. 1-3 were larger. The history of mound No. 3 may be divided into three stages.

Some features of these buildings and several finds suggest an attribution to horizon C as well as to period A. This also suggests that these megarons also functioned during period B, but this is still unclear.

During period B3, several small ash mounds developed above the ruins of megarons Z, K, and L, and numerous household pits were then dug into their surfaces. In period B2 these small mounds were leveled and, to the west, the platform thus made was covered by a road paved with limestone fragments (Fig. 153, 3). This road surrounded a new ash mound strengthened with stone masonry. To the south, the road was covered by an oval platform oval also made of limestone fragments. In the centre of this platform three vertical limestone menhirs/slabs were erected (Fig.136) (Vysotskaya 2001, 54). The central slab, found in situ, was 2.05 m in height. The two other slabs, which had fallen down in antiquity, were slightly smaller. All three stones were oriented from north to south and faced west to the road. This complex was named “The sanctuary of the three menhirs”.

The walls of megaron A were ornamented with frescoes (Fig. 145) and these have been reconstructed in detail by I.V. Yatsenko and dated to the 2nd quarter/middle of the 2nd century AD (Yatsenko 1960, fig. 1). Graffiti and tamga-signs (Fig. 146) drawn over the frescoes have also numerous analogies among barbarian antiquities of the second half of the 1st/2nd centuries AD (Dashevskaya 1962). The general reconstruction of the Northern Palace (section D) undertaken in the period A caused the destruction of the main part of an earlier cultural layer situated around megarons A, B, and V. This seems to be further evidence for the existence of megaron A in the second half of the 1st/2nd centuries AD.

During B1 the sanctuary was destroyed and the large ash mound continued to rise. After a certain time this covered both the road with stone masonry and the ruins of the sanctuary. Finally the height of the mound reached more than 5 m.

The fortifications from periods D-C continued to exist into period B. Some repair works were undertaken at section A, such as the laying of paving, constructing local supporting walls, and infilling the gate with stones (Koltukhov 1990, 82). The central gate was given a new closing feature and slabs with step-bearings fitted (Fig. 30).

The purpose of Late Scythian ash mounds has still not been determined (Vysotskaya 2001, 59). The only mound found so far that seems to have had a ritual purpose is the one discovered near the ruins of the earlier megaron E (Fig. 20, 4). This mound was formed of homogeneous amorphous ash and was 0.5 m high. There were many finds, including more

Numerous household pits, with typical rubbish deposits, were found at sites dating to horizon B (Fig. 144, 6-9). As noted previously, the cultural layer of horizon B was represented by a homogeneous humus level with strata of 29

Yu. Zaytsev

than 30 broken glass vessels (polychrome amphorisk, cups, balsamaria, dishes, and jugs), a gold pendant, bronze and iron brooches, details from caskets and other metal objects, 2 bronze statuettes of the Dioscurae (Schultz 1969), various beads, fragments of terracotta statuettes, bone pyksidae, a small limestone altar with the Sarmatian sign, and handmade incense-burners (Figs. 137-141). A gold stater of Remetalk (150/151 BC) probably also derives from the destroyed section of this ritual mound (Zaytsev 1990à) (Fig. 142, 1). The majority of the finds date the functioning of the mound from the second half of the 1st/middle of the 2nd centuries AD, although there were also much earlier items.

Neapolis were gradually changing: collective crypt burials in crypts were giving way to individual burials in graves with niches (Figs. 154-156).

A further expressive feature is characteristic of Scythian Neapolis - individual human burials within the territory of the settlement. Just in front of the central gate of the fortress, among the ruins of the Southern Palace and near the mausoleum/heroon of Argotus, a small necropolis was found (Fig. 13, C). During the excavations of 1949-50, 2 tombs with inhumations and 6 horse burials were found here (Karasev 1951; Schultz 1957, 76; Vysotskaya 1979, 201-203; Dashevskaya 1991, 131).

Typical dating factors of period C include light-clay amphorae of type B, red-slip pottery (Zhuravlev 1997), several types of glass balsamaria, several forms of wire brooches (Ambroz 1996, 49-50), brooches of provincial Roman types, mirrorpendants ornamented with Sarmatian signs, pyramidal bells, styles of beads and pendants, keys and metal details from caskets.

The dead were laid on their backs with arms positioned at the sides. The use of felt and fabric was often noted but there were rarely any remains of timber or coffins. It was customary to leave a gift of “farewell” food in red-slip or handmade pottery. There is an abundance of diverse personal ornaments and amulets. Occasionally there are rare burials with armaments and horse trappings (Puzdrovsky and others, 1992; Puzdrovsky 2001) (Figs. 154-155).

In the eastern necropolis, 54 graves with niches and 14 crypts/ catacombs could be linked to horizon B: the crypt burials were the earliest. One burial was of an infant in an amphora (Puzdrovsky 1987). In the Bitak necropolis, 100 niche graves from the second half of the 1st century to the 2nd century AD were excavated (Fig. 12) - the west necropolis also had many graves of this period.

One rectangular rock-cut tomb filled with stones contained the burials of a man and woman. The man had been placed on his back with limbs outstretched and head turned to the east. The female skeleton was found in the northwestern part of the tomb, at the man’s feet, in a semi-crouched posture (Figs. 147; 149).

Material culture

The grave goods included narrow-necked light-clay amphora of type C, an iron knife set in animal bone, an iron sword (to the right of the man’s skeleton), a bronze armlet, a bronze brooch, and beads (on the female’s skeleton). Other items were concentrated in the west of the tomb at a different depth. These included 2 pairs of iron bits, an iron openwork horse head-piece, iron and bronze phalerae of various forms and sizes, and which were covered by a gold foil, various belt furniture, 16 large chalcedony beads, rectangular plates made of a gold foil, and a massive iron item of unclear function (Figs. 148; 150-152).

The archaeological situation leads to the suggestion that the new population in Scythian Neapolis had changed from a mixed agricultural-nomadic economy to a purely nomadic way of life. This would probably entail decisive changes to the plan of the fortress, which perhaps became a sort of winter military camp. This could explain the absence of buildings and accumulations of ashes mounds within the settlement, as well as the instances of human burials. Crafts

The horse burials were most likely connected to the warrior grave. The animals were placed in earth graves on their bellies, with bent legs, and with the head placed on a special earthen rest. In three cases the horses were found with bits and buckles.

So far Scythian Neapolis has not provided any traces of manufacturing connected to horizon B. Trade

Another tomb contained a youth. Among his bones were beads, a golden earring, and a gold pendant (Fig. 153, 1).

Imported objects comprise a significant part of the finds from horizon B. These feature amphorae and numerous red-slip pottery, glass vessels, some types of ornaments and beads, and some metal items including enameled Roman brooches (Vysotskaya 1979, 140-147).

A further rock-cut tomb was investigated at section 7v. It contained a female skeleton. The arms (below the elbows) and legs (below the knees) were found in the eastern part of the tomb. Some joints of the skeleton showed traces of blows struck by a metal implement.

Life

The Necropoli of Scythian Neapolis: burial rites and grave goods

The population of Neapolis used simple day-to-day implements - female toilet items (mirrors, balsamaria, curlingirons for hair), etc. Warrior armaments consisted of long and short swords of Sarmatian types, and arrows with iron heads. Horse equipment sometimes varied in complexity and

As previously mentioned, at the end of period C, and over entire period B, the burial rites in the necropoli of Scythian 30

The Scythian Neapolis

Ceramics

accessories. The graves of nobles were accompanied by horse burials with phalerae, openwork head-pieces, and buckles ornamented with gold and silver foil (Fig. 148, 154) (Puzdrovsky 2001, fig. 6, 8).

Kitchenware is represented by diverse hand-made pots, jugs, open vessels, and cups, many of which were decorated with various stucco mouldings (Fig. 143). Sets of tableware (excluding the handmade items) consisted of many red-slip plates, jugs, and cups. Amphorae and large handmade pots and jugs were often used as containers.

Of special interest are the graffiti drawn on the plaster of megaron A (Fig. 146). According O.D. Dashevskaya (1962), these graffiti were individual “autographs”, left by the people sitting on the floor during ceremonies. Opinions as to their ritual meanings have also been expressed, as has the theory that they are the work of the Sarmatian conquerors who used building A as a barracks (Vysotskaya 1979, 184; Puzdrovsky 2001, 111). Probably these images spring from the original ideology of a barbarian aristocracy, represented by a scene of fortress capture, figures of armed men, herds of horses, tamga-signs, footwear, and other unexplained images.

Thus, the whole material culture of the population of Scythian Neapolis in the second half of the 1st century to the 2nd century AD was inspired by the influence of the Sarmatian culture. The settlement dwellers also had close connections with neighboring Bosphorus and Chersonesos.

31

Yu. Zaytsev

Chapter 7 SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS IN PERIOD A (LAST QUARTER OF 2nd/FIRST HALF OF 3rd CENTURY AD) Archaeological situation

In period A, megaron A preserved its former structure and wall paintings. In the centre of the main apartment there was a round, clay hearth surrounded by 16 shallow pits. The floor was covered with fallen tiles and numerous iron nails. In front of the gate, among the broken tiles, a spearhead and two male skeletons were found (Figs. 166; 174).

The last period in the life of Scythian Neapolis is represented by the double-strata horizon traced at all sections of the settlement and suburb. During the excavation of the defensive wall, numerous dugdwellings (with household pits) were found which frequently directly adjoined the walls. Infant burials in pots were also found (Fig. 173). At that time the walls no longer had a defensive function, but resembled more a stony embankment on which sat the remains of towers other walling.

In the northwest of section D the remains of a complicated complex of ground-level buildings were investigated. These buildings revealed finds of amphorae (Bosphorean types, light-clay types, and Samian types), handmade pots, red-slip dishes (in relief and painted) (Raevsky 1970), as well as coins of Trajan and Geta (Figs. 169; 171) (Yatsenko 1961, 11-16). There were also other finds to the north of the above mentioned buildings, including a silver plate with representations of Dionysian cult scenes and a Greek inscription (Fig. 170) (Yatsenko 1962), and also a terracotta statue of a dog.

In that period Neapolis was a large unfortified settlement with separate households and habitable complexes. Each complex presumably consisted of groups of small buildings united by courtyards, walls and large granaries. One such complex was discovered at section A-B-V (Fig. 13, A), and another at section 7a-b-v (Fig. 18, 1, A).

The architectural and archaeological context of the complete complex suggests these are “court” buildings (Yatsenko 1962, 113), i.e. the Northern Palace of Scythian Neapolis (Zaytsev 1995, 74).

Among the ordinary buildings of the complex, section D stands out. The main part of the section is formed by the three large megarons A, B and V, surrounded by other buildings and constructions (Fig. 16, A). Megarons A and V first appeared here in the 1st century BC - 1st century AD, when they presumably formed the heart of the Palace complex. In period B the walls of megaron A were decorated with frescoes. In period A the life of the settlement was marked by an active, if chaotic, building programme. As a result, megarons A and V were surrounded by different household constructions and dwellings.

Architecture and building techniques Despite the numerous discoveries of stone masonry, floors, hearths, and closed ceramic assemblages, it was difficult initially to define the type and layout of buildings within the complex. Megarons

The most important new building was megaron B (15 x 7.6 m), located to the southeast of megaron A. Its interior is unclear and the excavations revealed no floors, hearths etc. Southeast of megaron B there was a courtyard paved with limestone fragments. On its surface were found a human skull and a handmade clay mask.

Three known buildings of this type were constructed in period A: megaron B at section D, megaron P at section A-B-V (Fig. 22, 32), and megaron I at section 7 (Fig. 22, 45). Megaron B, with its severe and typical layout, is nearly identical to neighbouring megarons A and B. 32

The Scythian Neapolis

Megaron P was small; the combination of enclosed courtyard and household annex testify to its use as a dwelling.

dwellings, on the other hand, appear to have been constructed more accurately.

Megaron I was 12 x 5.2 m in dimension and had walls 0.60.7 m thick. It had a central, rectangular fireplace and the north section of the apartment was stepped.

The building materials were traditional ones – unworked or worked limestone blocks (often reused), and mud or clay mortar. Clay and limestone fragments were also used to cover courtyards and floors. All the known masonry of horizon A was laid using an irregular three-layer technique. Sometimes separate processed blocks from the Hellenistic times were reused. Timber use was best observed during the excavations of the megarons at the Northern Palace (section D). These sites revealed the remains of roof beams and large quantities of iron nails, and a substantial oak beam found in front of the entrance to the megaron. In other cases wooden constructions are suggested by finds of post holes and housings for pillars, stairs, and doorframes.

Ground-level houses of equal/parallel layout Only 2 examples can be reliably reconstructed - at sections D and B (Fig. 22, 35, 37) - but 10 further constructions may also be of this type (Fig. 22, 38, 40). All buildings of this type are small in size and are of irregular rectangular layout. Such constructions were used as household buildings within the area of the Northern Palace at section D. At section A-BV they were used for a range of domestic purposes. Ground-level one-roomed buildings

Over all, horizon A demonstrates a steep decline of architectural and building skills in last period of the fortress. This was the result of a major change in circumstances for the barbarian population of Scythian Napolis.

5 of these structures were identified in horizon A (Fig. 22, 36, 39); a further 10 were closely associated with this form. Their main features include a comparatively small area (up to 35-40 sq. m), an irregular layout, and arbitrary proportions. It is possible that they might have had dwelling and/or domestic functions.

The Necropoli of Scythian Neapolis: burial rites and grave goods

Dug-dwellings and semi-dug dwellings

Rock-cut crypts are characteristic of the necropoli during horizon A the (Ernst 1927, 13; Babenchikov 1957, 94-118; Puzdrovsky 1994, 119-121; 199, 111). These are located in small groups (3-5 chambers in a row) cut into the upper terraces of Petrovskaya and the east gullies - higher than the earth-dug necropoli. 20 crypts are known from the east necropolis, and more than 20 from the west necropolis. These crypts are mainly of similar construction - a dromos 1.5-3 m in length, a small rounded entrance, and a rectangular or trapezoidal chamber with a plain ceiling.

There were 8 such constructions excavated at different sites within the settlement (Fig. 22, 41-44). Their characteristic features include a rounded layout, an area of up to 3.5 sq. m, a depth of up to 1-2 m, and a wall coating of small stones on clay mortar. Benches/shelves were found along the walls of one of the structures. All the known dug-dwellings from horizon A were auxiliary domestic constructions functioning as cellars (a developed form of household pit). Granaries and household pits

In some cases the chamber interiors had additional niches (either rectangular in shape or arched (Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, 43, 44)) and other architectural details. The walls of crypts Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9 were painted with different scenes. These included images of griffins, so-called “Rankenfrau” figures, human figures in radial crowns (crypt No. 1), an archer, dancing figures, a horse (crypt No. 2), a man with a horse, and other human figures (crypt No. 8) (Babenchikov 1957, fig. 10, 11). The most intact polychrome painting was found in crypt No. 9 (Schultz 1947, 276; Popova 1984, 129-145) (Figs. 176; 177; 178). Apart from the rich geometric ornamentation, the crypt has other decoration around the chamber and its two additional architectural details (“tower” construction), including representations of a horseman with spear, a man with a lyra, a hunting scene, and two “chessboards”.

They are known from all the excavated sections and amount to more than 300 pits. The majority of them is concentrated in two large regular complexes at sections A-B-V and 7. In other cases there were also groups of pits, often situated near dwellings. All pits could be defined either as granaries or as pits of more universal purpose. Typical granaries featured a regular geometric shape, were of considerable volume and covered with stone lids (Figs. 157; 158). Their interiors were always covered with a clay coating. Other pits were of simpler construction and were used as cellars, rubbish pits, lavatories, etc. Building techniques Of note was the generally low, or even primitive, level of the building techniques employed in period A. Previous and ancient methods of building (using former layouts of a geometric plan, rectilinear masonry, tiles, plaster, and frescoes) were used only for megarons A, B and V at the Northern Palace. The other buildings were notable for their non-geometrical layouts and masonry, small dimensions, and imperfections of construction. The granaries and semi-dug

The mass looting of nearly all the rock-cut crypts makes it impossible to examine the burial rites employed, although the items found did not differ from those from the burial in the earth-dug necropoli. Niche graves are still characteristic of the earth-dug necropoli of this period. 50 such examples were found in the east 33

Yu. Zaytsev

necropolis and 46 at Bitak (Puzdrovsky etc. 1993) (Fig. 179; 180). Crypt/catacombs and simple earth graves are also known from period A (Dashevskaya 1951, 131-135).

being an agricultural hub, and site of grain storage and concentration. The material culture of Neapolis’ population demonstrates the general features characteristic of the northern Black Sea region: decline in lifestyle, total barbarization, and deep religious syncretism.

The system of niche graves (and main features of their burial rites) remained the same as for period B (Puzdrovsky 1994, 118). Burial goods are represented by red-slip and handmade pottery, brooches, finger-rings, beads, earrings, armlets, mirrors, amulets, knives, needles, spinners, awls, and whetstones (Figs. 179; 180). No armaments were found in the burials of this period, but there were some horse trappings.

Economy and crafts The whole archeological context of thorizon A clearly suggests a process of progressive, settled agriculture and cattle breeding in the area of Scythian Neapolis. This is confirmed by the presence of large, permanent granaries, finds of millstones, hand-mills, and primitive grain-pestles (Fig. 167). The existence of viticulture and horticulture is demonstrated by finds of carbonized apples and vines, and also of a special vine-knife (Fig. 165). The manufacture of handmade pottery, and items of bone, wood, yarn and cloth was restricted to the home and not undertaken professionally.

The main finds used for dating the period included typical brooches (Ambroz 1966, Tab. 9, 12) red-slip jugs, red-slip plates with horizontally curved brims, large glass beads with festoons, a Roman denarius of Septimius Sever, and several types of pendants and bronze buckles (Fig. 179) (Symanovich 1983, 107-108). The horizon A graves also revealed other ornaments and items known from earlier complexes. These included bronze rings with protuberances, mirror-pendants, pyramidal bells, anthropomorphic pendants, details of caskets, etc.

Trade The ceramic complex of Scythian Neapolis shows intensive relations with Bosphorus (numerous red-slip amphorae and jugs), Southern Pontus (narrow-necked, light-clay amphorae of type D) and Chersonesos (red-slip pottery). Small amounts of funnel-neck amphorae and one-handled jugs of Mediterranean provenance were also found (Fig. 160).

In general, the earth-dug burials of period A demonstrate a more stable burial rite, with more canonical and modest types of burial goods than those noted from period B. Material culture

Cults

During its final phase, Scythian Neapolis was a large, unfortified settlement with a strong agricultural base: it was not an ordinary residential community. The aristocratic complex of the Northern Palace might point to Neapolis as

More than 50 infant burials were found within the dwelling zone in this period. There were also ritual burials of domestic animal bones in pots and shallow pits (Figs. 173; 181). No special sanctuaries or cult complexes were found from this period.

34

The Scythian Neapolis

Conclusion THE MAIN STAGES IN THE HISTORY OF SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS Distinctions in terminology do not allow us to conclude whether Scythian Neapolis was ever a “city” or not, and if it was, then in which periods and to what degree.

Barbarian character to the culture of the first settlers who appeared on the site of the future fortress. The causes for the appearance of such a phenomenon in the central Crimea are still unclear: it was probably connected with the migration processes of the neighbouring regions (Puzdrovsky 1988), the increasing Sarmatian threat (Polin 1992, 116-117), and the events in the zone of the La Téne cultures (Schukin 1994, 95-119). There are also several other theories.

In this connection the evolution of Neapolis is of great interest. It may be compared to those cases where the basic structural kernel of a proto-city, from the moment of its occurrence, was a uniform palace/temple complex. In many cases, constructions of such a type preceded a proto-city in the form of isolated ritual/administrative centres (a possible variant of Neapolis?) (Andreev 1987, 16).

It is interesting that the discovered reservoirs and dams seem to exactly correspond with, and connect to these farmsteads, and that the earth-dug tombs of later periods are unknown in this particular horizon.

Period F As previously noted, the earliest cultural remains found in the territory of Scythian Neapolis are represented by the traces of a settlement of Kizil-Koba Culture that existed from the end of the 4th century to the beginning of the 3rd century BC (Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 67; Zaytsev 1995, 84). From all the available data its chronological, or any other connection with the later fortress of Neapolis is completely unproved. In turn, it voids all statements about the occurrence of Scythian Neapolis in the 4th/3rd centuries BC (Vysotskaya 1979, 6; 1992, 140).

E2 The beginning of the active, but chaotic, growth of the large settlement took place at some time in the middle of the 2nd century BC. The northern section probably already contained a small, fortified “acropolis”. The ordinary building complexes (of various structures) were distributed over an area of not less than 30 ha. In several cases the accumulations of buildings consisted of several semi-dug dwellings and small, ground level houses. The central building of one such complex located in the southern part of the settlement was “proto-megaron” - a building of lengthened proportions with central hearth. The material culture of stage E2 had changed little and continued its original mixed Greco-Barbarian character.

Pre-fortress period E E3 The modern dating of the stamping of both Rhodian and Chersonesian amphorae provides a date for the existence of the earliest objects in the territory of Neapolis to the second quarter/middle of the 2nd century BC. In this period a group of strengthened farmsteads of Greek type functioned here. Their extreme fragmentariness does not permit the detailed reconstruction of the initial historical stage of Scythian Neapolis; it is possible only to assume a settled agricultural basis for this phenomenon, and to give an original Greco-

As far as is possible to judge from the available data, several important events took place in the history of Neapolis around 130 BC that had a significant bearing on the look and functioning of this settlement. The “proto-megaron” was reconstructed into a new megaron of unusually large dimensions and layout in the Greek style. From this time the structure formed the core of a new complex - the Southern Palace. The Southern defensive wall was erected at 35

Yu. Zaytsev

Period D

approximately the date, and this feature transformed most of the settlement into a fortress of not less than 18 ha. The wall and its central gate were oriented towards the main megaron (N) (Fig. 13).

After the catastrophic fire the fortress was transformed into a powerful stronghold, but deprived of any major buildings. During the next two decades the only fundamental complex within the fortress was the Southern Palace at the central gate of Scythian Neapolis.

E1 Immediately after these events the fortress was enveloped by a catastrophic fire that destroyed all Neapolis’ known complexes and features. The events connected to this catastrophe are unknown. There have been attempts to explain it as the result of a Sarmatian attack (Zaytsev 1999, 143144; Puzdrovsky 2001, 93), but any evidence for this is very scanty.

After several extensive repair programmes, it was transformed into an isolated complex of complicated structure, the centre of which was a megaron with a closed courtyard surrounded by houses of Greek style. In front of the Palace façade, in consecutive order, were erected the Mausoleum/heroon of Argotus, the monumental altar, and the Mausoleum of Skiluros (previously situated outside the fortress). From this stage it is possible to conclude that this unique architectural feature functioned as a royal residence and sanctuary of a king cult (Zaytsev 1997), similar to palaces of the CretoMycenaean culture (Lindgren 1987, 39-42; Zois 1987, 4344).

The question of the initial period in the history of Scythian Neapolis is directly connected to the problem of the genesis of Late Scythian culture. At present there are some common hypotheses. The traditional point of view (Grakov 1947; Artamonov 1948; Vysotskaya 1992; Khrapunov 1995, 50) puts forward the certain genetic link between Late Scythian culture and the culture of the Steppe Scythians of the 7th/4th centuries BC. According to this opinion, the existence of Scythians in the Crimea from the 2nd century BC to the 3rd century AD is represented as the last stage in the “millennial history of the Scythians of the northern Black Sea region” (Olkhovsky, Khrapunov, 1990, 64-67).

By virtue of its function, the Southern Palace became a focus for the concentration of all the main aspects of Late Scythian culture. A unique “palace” version of the culture developed within this complex - linked to the nobility of the highest rank and having a strongly expressed Greco-Barbarian character.

A.N. Scheglov considers that “...the formation of the Late Scythian kingdom should be explained first of all by sharp and sudden changes in the demographic and political situation in the northern Black Sea region as a whole, rather than by the evolutionary, internal development of Late Scythian society” (Scheglov 1988, 32). Thus the event under discussion was dated by the researcher first to the 1st half of the 3rd century BC, and then to the third quarter/middle of the 2nd century BC (Scheglov 1998, 150).

This combination of factors has given rise to the theory that the Southern Palace was the main headquarters of king Skiluros, in turn making Neapolis a royal fortress and the centre of a political and military/administrative state (Koltukhov 1999, 92). Olbian Posideos, son of Posideos, to whom have been linked the dedications to Zeus, Athene, Achilles and the Rhodian deity, is supposed to have been a noted merchant and counselor to Skiluros (Latyshev 1887, 133; Solomonik 1962, 44; Vinogradov 1989, 241-245; Saprykin 1986, 204; Zubar 1996).

In many respects this concepts relates to an alternative theory that there was no continuity between the Scythian monuments of 7th/4th centuries BC and earliest monuments of the Late Scythian culture. Between them there was a gap of at least one century, and the material culture of the late Scythians has no well-expressed signs of the classical Scythian culture (Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994, 232; Zaytsev 1995, 87; Puzdrovsky 1999, 100-101; 2001, 87).

The heroon of Argotus was found near the Monumental gate, in front of the Southern Palace. This was erected no earlier than 130 BC, immediately after the catastrophic fire (Fire 1). The attribution of the monument follows the finding here of an inscription referring to Argotus (Figs. 56-57) (see Appendix 1, 17) (Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003). The inscription’s anonymous poet (a figure well-versed in Homer and early Greek lyrics) survives only from this one fragment, in which no less than 10 “Homerisms” (including examples of Homeric grammar) have been used. The style and contents of the verse, combined with the find’s context, permits the assumption that the references are to king Skiluros, ruler of Scythia. The absence of his actual name from this text might be explained by the fact that either to the right (on the stone just behind the relief of the horseman), or on the other side of the monument, there might have been a prosaic inscription that featured the names of both the honoured dead and the person responsible for erecting the tomb.

The finds of Neapolis Scythian confirm the hypothesis of the independent origin of Late Scythian culture. Its formation probably represented a process of synthesis between various cultures in the northern Black Sea region - the North Pontic Greeks, representatives of the La Téne cultures, barbarian tribes from the mountains and foothills of the Crimea, and the populations of the pre-Caucasus region and the Asian Bosphorus (Scheglov 1998, 150-151; Zaytsev 1995, 86-87; Puzdrovsky 1999, 101-102; 2001, 88-89; Koltukhov 2001, 61). An alternative cause might well have been the shortterm formation of a Crimean barbarian culture (middle of the 2nd century BC), the consequence of an impulse eastwards imposed on the local “Tauro/Scythian” populations (Zaytsev 1999, 142-143).

Two reconstructions of events are now possible. Argotus might have perished in the great fire and was then buried in the monumental tomb. Or, he might have died earlier and 36

The Scythian Neapolis

was buried elsewhere before being reburied in a special mausoleum after the fire.

What looks probable today is that Scythia underwent a transition of power from Argotus to Skiluros, even though there is no indication of their blood relationship in the inscription; perhaps in this particular case there is the suggestion of a more complicated method of succession to the throne.

In either case, the situation of the Mausoleum/heroon itself in the fortress, behind the central gate and directly in front of the portal of the royal palace - unequivocally testifies that an association with Skiluros gave this monument an exclusive significance.

The death of Skiluros, and the accession to the throne of his eldest son Palakus, coincided with the initial stages of the triumphant military campaign of Diophantus, a general of Mithridates VI Eupator, against the barbarians to protect the Chersonesos. Obviously the new governor undertook significant steps to strengthen the fortifications of Scythian Neapolis (Koltukhov 1999, 35; Zaytsev, 2001, 44-45; Puzdrovsky 2001, 95).

The mention in such a context of the name Argotus, necessitates a review of an inscription from the Pantikapaion [KBN-75], in which are mentioned king Perisad IV Philometr, his mother Kamasaria (daughter of king Spartok and widow of the deceased king Perisad III), and Argotus - the spouse of Kamasaria. There is an opinion that the widowed Bosphorean queen subsequently married a representative of the royal family from one of the neighbouring barbarian tribes. The dating of this event is hypothetical and located between 170 and 150 BC (Vinogradov 1997, 531-537; Stolyarik 1998, 66-67; Tolstikov, Vinogradov 1999, 295296). On the basis of two mentioned inscriptions, Argotus’ father may be restored as Idantemidos or Idant.

The course and aftermath of Diophantus’ military campaigns are well known [IOSPE I2, 352] (Saprykin 1986, 218-215; Vinogradov 1987, 74-75; Koltukhov 1999, 91-94; Zaytsev 2001, 43-45; Puzdrovsky, 2001, 95-97). The utter defeat of the united armies of Palakus and Roksolanae Thasius, the leader of the Sarmatian tribe, resulted in the final destruction of the barbarian realm of Skiluros.

In the Pantikapaion inscription, Argotus is mentioned without a title. At his marriage to Kamasaria he could have still been a young man, and his introduction into the reigning house of Bosphorus was an important political act. The event was obviously the beginning of a significant political career, ending in his honourable burial near Neapolis’ Southern Palace.

The government of Crimean Scythia during the reigns of Skiluros and Palakus has been much discussed over several decades (Schultz 1950, 89; Vysots’ka 1992; Khrapunov 1992; Zubar 1992; Puzdrovsky 1992). Among the modern points of view there have been definitions of Skiluros’ realm as a barbarian monarchy of Hellenistic type (Scheglov 1988, 3738), or as a state combining some elements of Hellenistic monarchy with the much earlier features of the Palace/Temple system of government, characteristic of the Mediterranean (Zaytsev 1999, 147).

Another mausoleum adjoining to the front defensive wall can be recognized as the ancestral crypt of the king Skiluros who was buried here on the eve of the wars with Diophantus, not later than 114/113 BC (Vinogradov 1989, 249) (see Appendix 2).

The latest research in this field belongs to V.M. Zubar. He has criticized all the previous opinions, and concludes that the realm of Skiluros was an early, stratified society with nothing in common with Hellenistic monarchies (Zubar 2002, 515).

With the new details known about the burial in the stone crypt, it is interesting to compare each of the basic stages of the development of the Southern Palace with the appropriate age of its celebrated occupant - king Skiluros.

Pre-urban period C

If he had lived until forty (i.e. until 114-113 BC), the chronology of the Southern Palace demonstrates an interesting coincidence. At the time of the most destructive fire (130 BC), Skiluros would have been 19-24. The development of this architectural complex and the strengthening of Neapolis’ defensive walls began immediately after the disaster. The first stage of the reconstruction occurred at once, and the second stage corresponded to the Skiluros’ most active period, between the ages of 25 and 32, and reflects the king’s active involvement. His rule may now be dated from 130 to 114-113 BC, and during these 15 years it is probable that Olbia was made a protectorate, the Chersonesian chora was captured, and dynastic connections with the Bosphorus were strengthened (Vinogradov 1987, 249-250; Zaytsev 1999, 144; Koltukhov 1999; Puzdrovsky 2001, 91-92). The mention in the inscription of the defeated Maeots and Thracians probably points to further, and unknown, military victories by Skiluros (although a different version of the restored ancient text could award Argotus these hypothetical victories).

A new stage in the history of Scythian Neapolis followed the wars with Diophantus. The former functions of the palace fortress were obviously lost, but the steady growth of the largest settlement in Crimean Scythia began. For a period of 150 years (turn of the 2nd/1st centuries BC - middle of the 1st century AD) Neapolis had a complicated urban structure consisting of the chaotically rebuilt fortress, complexes and suburbs. A significant percentage of the urban population formed large kin collectives that seem to have owned the complexes with megarons. From the point of view of material culture, the downturn in the standard of living (and the sharp reduction of Greek features) is obvious. On the other hand, there was a continuity of building traditions, burial rites, and many other aspects of daily life. Given today’s knowledge, the political situation in Neapolis during the 1st century BC - 1st century AD looks as follows. 37

Yu. Zaytsev

After the ending of military operations, Mithridates VI Eupator maintained Pontic garrisons in Scythia for some time, and barbarian forces fought by his side in the wars with Rome [Strabo. VII. 4. 6.; Appian. Mithr., 41, 57, 69] (Saprykin 1996, 170-171; Puzdrovsky 2001, 97-98). Pharnak, the successor of Mithridates in his struggle for the Bosphoran throne, was supported by some Sarmatians and Scythians [Appian. Mithr., 120]. It is supposed that Asandr, the Bosphorean king, entered into a military-political alliance with the governors of Scythia against Chersonesos (Puzdrovsky 2001, 100). In the first decades of the 1st century AD, the Bosphorean king Aspurg undertook successful military actions against the Scythians and Tauroi, the purpose of which was to subordinate barbarian territories within the Crimea to the Bosphorus (Koltukhov 1994, 217-218; 1999; Puzdrovs’ky 1992, 127-128; Puzdrovsky 1999, 108; 2001, 101; Saprykin 2002, 216-218).

of nomadic yurts” (Ernst 1927). Such widespread changes may be explained by two factors. The significant changes within Scythian Neapolis may have arisen as a result of a new population; the newcomers bringing new burial rites and a different lifestyle that is expressed in the distinctive character of the cultural deposits. Research has shown that this new population might have had Sarmatian roots (Puzdrovsky 1999, 108) and that its infiltration into Neapolitan society was both gradual and peaceful. According to modern investigations this event may have coincided with the second phase of Sarmatian penetration into the north Pontic region (Puzdrovsky 1999, 107-108; 2001, 104-106; Simonenko 1994, 116-117). On the other hand, the significant but gradual changes to the basic features of Neapolis’ culture in period B might be explained by unknown internal and external processes that led eventually to a conversion to a nomadic way of life. This is supported by the finds of elite burials placed near the ruins of the heroon of Argotus. These interesting finds suggest that the memories of celebrated ancestors survived here after more than 200 years. Newcomers would hardly bury their own nobility alongside the ancient tombs of alien kings.

In period C the life of Neapolis was interrupted by three fires, the traces of which remained in the cultural deposits of the settlement. Two fires (Nos. 3, 4) occurred in the first half of the 1st century BC, and their causes are not yet known. The fire at the beginning of the 1st century AD (No. 5) might be linked to the military actions of Aspurg (Koltukhov 1990, 187). A silver plate of the Bosphorean queen Gepepyreos (Cgpapuqgyr) was found at section D (Fig. 170), and this find has often been used as evidence of a resumption of diplomatic contacts between the Scythians and the Bosphorus kingdom (Yatsenko 1962, 112-113; Vysotskaya 1979, 145; Vinogradov 1992, 139; Puzdrovsky 2001, 102-103). However, the discovery of this precious find in a layer of horizon A that dates to around the 2nd/1st half of the 3rd century AD has not been sufficiently underscored. The time gap between the government of Gepepyreos and the archaeological context of the plate is at least 150 years, thus transforming any such conclusion into absolute hypothesis (Alekseev, Kotsievsky 1982, 43-44; Saprykin 2002, 241).

If one accepts the second version, it is interesting to compare the significance of the fortress at Neapolis in period B with that of period D. In both cases its distinctive features include the presence of a palace complex (the Southern Palace of period D and Northern Palace of periods B-A), the absence of other buildings, and the burying of nobility inside the fortress. These factors make it possible to accentuate a recurrence of the functions of the fortress as both governors’ residence and royal fortress in period B. The political history of the time was frenetic. The RomanBosphorean wars of the middle of the 1st century AD involved, apart from the main protagonists, various Sarmatian tribes; many areas of the northern Black Sea region became focuses of military operations (Tac. Ann, XII, 15-21; Plin, VI, 5, 16; Machinsky 1976, 129-132; Anokhin 1977, 77-78; Anokhin 1989, 62; Zubar 1991, 11; Koltukhov 1994, 218-219; Puzdrovsky 1999, 108; 2001, 104-106). On several occasions the increased military activities of the Scythians against Chersonesos and Bosphorus forced the Romans to react, notably the 68 AD campaigns of the Moesian legate, Titus Plautius Silvanus (Zubar 1988, 2324; Puzdrovsky 2001, 105). The Bosphorean kings Sauromat I and Kotis II also undertook successful operations against their Scythian opponents (KBN, Nos. 32, 33, 981; Puzdrovsky 2001, 106-107). Tauro-Scythian forces were constantly (and with varied success) at war with their neighbours until 175 AD, when they were finally defeated by the Bosporean king, Sauromat II [KBN, No. 1237] (Puzdrovsky 2001, 114).

The period from the middle to the end of the 1st century AD is marked by important events that had a great importance for Neapolis and all Crimean Scythia. The settlement and suburbs suffered a gradual decline of all the known building complexes, the ruins of which were covered by ash depositions; a similar situation was noted on the necropoli. Approximately in the same period (second half of the 1st century/beginning of the 2nd century AD), the general use of crypts/catacombs in the necropoli ceased, and a new form of burial featuring graves with niches was widely used (Puzdrovsky 1999, 108; 2001, 108). Period B The known archaeological material permits the reconstruction of Scythian Neapolis’ distinctive look in the second half of the 1st/third quarter of the 2nd centuries AD. The gradual change in the way of life of the Neapolitan population is particularly evident, and it was accompanied by the adoption of a new rite of individual burials. Most likely at this time the settlement was a metropolitan fortress - “a fortified camp

As shown, the archaeological history of Neapolis has reflected only the most common features of these events. The wars and other occurrences have not revealed themselves in the cultural layers of the settlement, although many attempts have been made at different times to trace 38

The Scythian Neapolis

documented historical actions in Neapolis’ archaeological material (Raevsky 1971, 114; Puzdrovsky 1992, 129-130; Zaytsev 1989; Puzdrovsky 1989, 101; Puzdrovsky 2001, 108111).

producing areas within a barbarian territory now belonging to the Bosphorus realm. The archaeological situation of upper horizon A1 shows an expressive picture of a simultaneous and sudden defeat of Scythian Neapolis; there was widespread destruction of most buildings. Under the ruins there were sets of ceramic tableware and the numerous remains of a suddenly conquered population who had no time to bury their possessions properly, or which were simply dumped in household pits (Figs. 159-163; 168-169; 171; 174-175).

Period A During the last quarter of the 2nd/1st half of the 3rd century BC, Scythian Neapolis was a large, unfortified settlement, characterized by its dense, chaotic building, presumably consisting of regular groups of primitive household/dwelling complexes, with adjoining granaries (Puzdrovsky 2001, 114). The archaeological situation of horizon A demonstrates the extreme degradation of the material culture of the Neapolitan population, with the possible exception of the aristocratic complex of the Northern Palace. The presence of this extraordinary architectural feature suggests that Scythian Neapolis was the administrative centre of a defined territory. However, this capital’s main function at the end of the 2nd/ 1st first half of the 3rd century AD was the concentration and processing of large quantities of agricultural produce (Koltukhov 1999, 97-98; Puzdrovsky 2001, 114). Such a function determined the look, structure, and main activities of the population of Scythian Neapolis.

The traditional opinion that Neapolis and the whole of Crimean Scythia was defeated by the Goths in 255-256 AD (Vysotskaya 1979, 204-205) is now under reconsideration. According to recent investigations, the catastrophe is dated to either 218 AD (Uzhentsev, Yurochkin 2000, 270), or to the turn of first/second quarter of the 3rd century AD (Koltukhov 1994, 219) or 230-240-s BC (Puzdrovsky 2001, 116). The researchers consider it feasible to connect this event with the military operations of the Alan nomadic tribes. *** This monograph proposes a uniform chronological and cultural model for Scythian Neapolis: phased characteristics show its historical evolution. A group of farmsteads developed into a settlement (period E), then into a royal fortress with a palace/temple complex (period D), then into a significant fortified settlement of some scale (period C), then once more into a royal (?) fortress (period B) before becoming the unfortified centre of an agrarian territory as the headquarters of a Bosphorean deputy (period A).

The political and economic reliance of most of Crimean Scythia on the Bosphorus kingdom is now considered proved, and its consequence was the region’s transformation into an agrarian auxiliary dependency (Koltukhov 1999, 98; Puzdrovsky 2001, 114-115). In the light of this, the Northern Palace might well have been the residence of a Bosphorean deputy whose job it was to supervise one of the main food-

39

Yu. Zaytsev

Bibliography Becker P. 1856. Die Herakleotische Halbinsel in archäologischer Beziehung. Leipzig.

Abramov 1993. - Абрамов А.П. 1993. Античные амфоры. Периодизация и хронология. // Боспорский сборник. Вып. 3. Москва. (In Russian).

Blaramberg 1889. - Бларамберг И.П. 1889. О местоположении трех крепостей тавро-скифов // ИТУАК. 7. (In Russian).

Akimova 1983. - Акимова Л.И. 1983. Новый памятник скульптуры из Пантикапея (К проблеме гекатейонов) // ВДИ № 3. (In Russian).

Blaramberg J. de. 1931. De la position de Trois fortresses TauroScythes, dont parle Strabon, avec cartes, plans, copies d’inscroptions et dessins d’après des mabres antiques. Odessa.

Alekseev, Kotsievsky 1982. - Алексеев В.П., Коциевский А.С. 1982. Херсонесская надчеканка на монете Боспорского царства // Нумизматика античного Причерноморья. Киев. (In Russian).

Braun 1879. - Браун Ф.К. 1879. Черноморье: сборник исследований по исторической географии Южной России. Одесса. (In Russian).

Alekseeva 1975. - Алексеева Е.М. 1975. Античные бусы Северного Причерноморья // САИ. Вып. Г1-12. М. (In Russian).

Burachkov 1881. - Бурачков П.О. 1881. Опыт соглашения открытой в Херсонесе надписи с природою местности и сохранившимися у древних писателей сведениями, относящимися ко времени войн Диофанта, полководца Митридата со скифами // ЗООИД. т.7-12. (In Russian).

Alekseeva 1978. - Алексеева Е.М. 1978. Античные бусы Северного Причерноморья // САИ. Вып. Г1-12. М. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1951. - Дашевская О.Д. 1951. Земляной склеп 1949 г. в некрополе Неаполя скифского // ВДИ № 2. (In Russian).

Alekseeva 1982. - Алексеева Е.М. 1982. Античные бусы Северного Причерноморья // САИ. Вып. Г1-12. М. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1958. - Дашевская О.Д. 1958. К вопросу о локализации трех скифских крепостей, упоминаемых Страбоном // ВДИ. 2. (In Russian).

Ambroz 1966. - Амброз А.К. 1966. Фибулы юга европейской части СССР II в. до н.э. - IV в.н.э. САИ. Вып. Д1-30. Москва. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1960. - Дашевская О.Д. 1960. Четвертая надпись Посидея из Неаполя скифского. // СА № 1. (In Russian).

Andreev 1987. - Андреев Ю.В. 1987. Ранние формы урбанизации. // ВДИ № 1. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1962. - Дашевская О.Д. 1962. Граффити на стенах зданий в Неаполе Скифском // СА № 1. (In Russian).

Anokhin 1977. - Анохин В.А. 1977. Монетное дело Херсонеса (IV в. до н.э. -XIII в.н.э.). Киев. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1964. - Дашевская 1964. О Таврской керамике с гребенчатым орнаментом // СА № 1. (In Russian).

Anokhin 1986. - Анохин В.А. 1986. Монетное дело Боспора. Киев. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1968. - Дашевская О.Д. 1968. Лепная керамика Неаполя скифского // МИА.64. (In Russian).

Artamonov 1948. - Артамонов М.И. 1948. Скифское царство в Крыму // ВЛГУ, №8. (In Russian).

Dashevskaya 1991. - Дашевская О.Д. 1991. Поздние скифы в Крыму. САИ (Д1-7). М. (In Russian).

Babenchikov 1949. - Бабенчиков В.П. 1949. Новый участок некрополя Неаполя скифского // ВДИ № 1. (In Russian).

Debets 1948. - Дебец Г.Ф. 1948. Палеоантропология СССР. М.Л. (In Russian).

Babenchikov 1957. - Бабенчиков В.П. 1957. Некрополь Неаполя скифского // ИАДК. К. (In Russian).

Dombrovsky 1961. - Домбровский О.И. 1961. О технике декоративной живописи Неаполя скифского // СА № 4. (In Russian).

Babkov 1956. - Бабков А.А. 1956. Природные условия Неаполя скифского. Рукопись. Научный архив КФ ИА НАНУ. Инв. Р № 21. (In Russian). Badal’yants 1976. - Бадальянц Ю.С. 1976. Хронологическое соответствие имен эпонимов и фабрикантов на амфорах Родоса // СА. № 4. (In Russian).

Domžalsky 1998. - Домжальский К. 1998. Из истории исследования краснолаковой керамики восточного производства // Эллинистическая и римская керамика в Северном Причерноморье. Труды ГИМ. Вып. 102. (In Russian).

Badal’yants 1982. - Бадальянц Ю.С. 1982. Опыт хронологической классификации родосских амфорных клейм // НЭ. - 1982. - Т. XIII. (In Russian).

Dubois de Montpéreux F. 1843. Voyage autour du Caucase, chez les Tcherkesses et les Abkases, en Colchide, en Géorgie, en Arménie, en Crimée. Paris. 40

The Scythian Neapolis Kovalenko 2002. - Коваленко С.А. 2002. О структуре и динамике импорта позднеэллинистической рельефной керамики в Северном Причерноморье // Археологiя № 3. (In Russian).

Eggers H.J.1951. Der römische Import im frein Germanien. Bd.III. Hamburg. Ernst 1927. - Эрнст Н.Л. 1927. Неаполь скифский (к столетию со дня первых раскопок) // Вторая конференция археологов СССР в Херсонесе. Севастополь. (In Russian).

Kolotukhin 1996. - Колотухин В.А. 1996. Горный Крым в эпоху поздней бронзы - начале железного века. Киев. (In Russian). Koltukhov 1990. - Колтухов С.Г. 1990. Новые материалы к периодизации и реконструкции оборонительных сооружений Неаполя Скифского // СА.2. (In Russian).

Ettlinger E. 1962. Die römischen Fibeln in der Shhweiz. Bern. Fedak J. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age: A Study of Selected Tombs from the Pre-Classoical to the Early Imperial Era. Toronto, London, 1990.

Koltukhov 1994. - Колтухов С.Г. 1994. Заметки о военнополитической истории Крымской Скифии // Древности степного Причерноморья и Крыма. Вып. 4. Запорожье. (In Russian).

Filimonov 1880. - Филимонов Г.Д. 1880. Антропологическая выставка 1879 г. Т. 3. Ч. 2. Вып. 2. М. (In Russian). Finkielsztejn G. 2000. Amphores importées au Levant Sud à l’époque hellénistique // Е’ еpistglomijg sumamtese cia tem ekkgmistijg jeqalijg. Wqomokocija pqobkglata jkeista sumoka - eqcastgqia. Ahga.

Koltukhov 1999. - Колтухов С.Г. 1999. Укрепления Крьмской Скифии. Симферополь. (In Russian). Koltukhov 2000. - Колтухов С.Г. 2000. К вопросу о времени основания Неаполя скифского // Пантикапей-Боспор-Керчь - 26 веков древней столице. Материалы международной конференции. Керчь. (In Russian).

Finkielsztejn G. 2001. Chronologie d’etaillée et révisee des éponymes amphoriques Rhodiens, de 270 à 108 av. J.-C. environ. BAR International Series 990.Oxford.

Koltujhov, Makhneva, 1988. - Колтухов С.Г., Махнева О.А. 1988. Новый участок оборонительной стены Неаполя скифского // ААИК. К. (In Russian).

Frolova 1964. - Фролова Н.А. 1964. Монеты скифского царя Скилура. // СА № 1. (In Russian). Frolova 1997. - Фролова Н.А. 1997. Монетное дело Боспора. Ч. 1. М. (In Russian). Gerasimov 1955. - Герасимов М.М. 1955. Восстановление лица по черепу . М. (In Russian).

Koltukhov, Puzdrovsky 1983. - Колтухов С.Г., Пуздровский А.Е. 1983. Грунтовый склеп из окрестностей Неаполя скифского. // Население и культура Крыма в первые века н.э. Киев. (In Russian).

Golentsov, Golenko 1979. - Голенцов А.С., Голенко В.К. 1979. Из керамической эпиграфики Неаполя // КСИА.159. (In Russian).

Konduktorova 1964. - Кондукторова Т.С. 1964. Населення Неаполя скiфського за антропологiчними данними // Матерiали з антропологiï Украïни. вып. З. (In Ukrainian).

Grace V. 1952. Timbres amphoriques trouvés à Délos. // Bulletin de Correspondance héllenique. LXXVI.

Konduktorova 1972. - Кондукторова Т.С. 1972. Антропология древнего населения Украины. М. (In Russian).

Grakov 1947. - Граков Б.М. 1947. Скiфи. Киïв. (In Ukrainian).

Kraus Th. 1960. Hekate. Studien zu Wesen und Bild der Göttin in Kleinasien und Griecheland. Heidelberg.

Grakov 1971. - Граков Б.Н. 1971. Скифы. М. (In Russian).

Kryzhitsky 1982. - Крыжицкий С.Д. 1982. Жилые дома античных городов Северного Причерноморья. К. (In Russian).

Højte J.M. 2003. The date of the alliance between Chersonesos and Pharnakes (IOSPE I/2, 402) and its implications // Proceedings of the Conference on chronology of the Black Sea Area in the period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus.

Kryzhitsky 1993. - Крыжицкий С.Д. 1993. Архитектура античных государств Северного Причерноморья. К. (In Russian).

Imhoof-Blumer F. 1912. Die Kupferprägung des Mithradatischen Reiches und andere Münzen des Pontus und Paphlagoniens // Numizmatische Zeitschrift. Bd. 45.

Kryzhitsky and others 1989. - Крыжицкий С.Д., Буйских С.Б., Бураков А.В., Отрешко В.М. 1989. Сельская округа Ольвии. Киев. (In Russian).

Karasev 1951. - Карасев А.Н. 1951. Раскопки Неаполя скифского в 1949 г. // КСИИМК Вып. 37. М. (In Russian).

Kulakovsky 1889. - Кулаковский Ю.А. 1889. Карта Европейской Сарматии по Птолемею. Киев. (In Russian).

Karasev 1953. - Карасев А.Н. 1953. Раскопки Неаполя скифского в 1950 г. // КСИИМК Вып. 49. М. (In Russian). Kats 1994. - Кац В.И. 1994. Керамические клейма Херсонеса Таврического. Каталог-определитель. Саратов. (In Russian).

Kunina, Sorokina 1972. - Кунина Н.З., Сорокина Н.П. 1972. Стеклянные бальзамарии Боспора // Труды Государственного Эрмитажа. Вып. 13. СПб. (In Russian).

Kharko 1961. - Харко Л.П. 1961. Монетные находки ТавроСкифской экспедиции 1946-1950 и1957. // МИА.96. (In Russian).

Lashkov 1890. - Лашков Ф.Ф. 1890. 3-я учебная экскурсия в Симферопольской мужской гимназии. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Kharko 1961a. - Харко Л.П. 1961а. К вопросу о производстве золотых бляшек из мавзолея Неаполя скифского // МИА.96. (In Russian).

Latyshev 1887. - Латышев В.В. 1887. Исследования об истории и государственном города Ольвии. СПб. (In Russian). Lindgren M. 1987. The function of the Minoan Palaces - Myth and reality // The function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceeding of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10-16 June, 1984. Stokholm.

Khazanov 1963. - Хазанов А.М. 1963. Генезис сарматских бронзовых зеркал // СА № 4. (In Russian). Khrapunov 1995. - Храпунов И.Н. 1995. Очерки этнической истории Крыма в раннем железном веке. Тавры. Скифы. Сарматы. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Machinsky 1976. - Мачинский А.Д. 1976. Некоторые вопросы этногеографии восточно-европейских степей во II в. до н.э. I в.н.э. // Археологический Сборник Государственного Эрмитажа N 16. Ленинград. (In Russian).

Köppen 1837. - Кеппен П.И. 1837. Крымский сборник: о древностях Южного берега Крыма и гор Таврических. СПб. (In Russian).

Makhneva 1967. - Махнева О.А. 1967. Эллинистический сосуд из Неаполя скифского. // СА № 2. (In Russian).

Knipovich 1952. - Книпович Т.Н. 1952. Краснолаковая керамика первых веков н.э. из раскопок Боспорской экспедиции 193540-х годов // МИА № 25. (In Russian).

Makhneva 1967a. - Махнева О.А. 1967а. Склеп с египетскими изделиями на Восточном участке некрополя Неаполя 41

Yu. Zaytsev скифского // Записки Одесского археологического общества. Т. 2. Одесса. (In Russian). Maksimova 1979. - Максимова М.И. 1979. Артюховский курган. Ленинград. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1994. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1994. О погребальных сооружениях юго-западного и центрального Крыма в первые вв. н.э. // Проблемы истории и археологии Крыма. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Malikov 1961. - Маликов В.М. 1961. Жертвенник из пригородного здания Неаполя скифского // КСИА АН УССР. Вып. 11. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1999. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1999. Этническая история Крымской Скифии (II в. до н.э. - III в.н.э. // ХС. X. Севастополь. (In Russian).

Markevich 1928. - Маркевич А.И. 1928. К столетию исследований на городище Неаполя у Симферополя // ИТОИАЭ. вып.З. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 2001. - Пуздровский А.Е. 2001. Погребения Битакского могильника первых веков н.э. с оружием и конской уздой // Поздние скифы в Крыму. - Труды ГИМ. Вып. 118. (In Russian).

Murzakevich 1837. - Мурзакевич Н.И. 1837. Поездка в Крым в 1836 г. // Журнал Министерства народного просвещения № 1. СПб. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 2002. - Пуздровский А.Е. 2002. Грунтовый склеп рубежа н.э. из окрестностей Неаполя скифского. // Северное Причерноморье в античное время. Киев. (In Russian).

Olkhovsky, Khrapunov 1990. - Ольховский В.С., Храпунов И.Н. 1990. Крымская Скифия. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky and others, 1991. - Пуздровский А.Е., Зайцев Ю.П., Новиков И.И. 1991. Сарматское погребение из окрестностей Неаполя скифского // Проблемы археологии Северного Причерноморья. Херсон. (In Russian).

Pichikyan 1991. - Пичикян И.Р. 1991. Культура Бактрии. Ахеменидский и эллинистический периоды. М. (In Russian). Pogrebova 1947. - Погребова Н.Н. 1947. Мавзолей Неаполя Скифского // КСИИМК, вып. 21. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky and others, 1993. - Пуздровский А.Е., Зайцев Ю.П., Гумашьян С.В., Новиков И.И. 1993. Работы Симферопольской экспедиции в 1991 г. // Археологiчнi дослiдження в Украïнi 1991 року. Луцк. (In Russian).

Pogrebova 1947a. - Погребова Н.Н. 1947а. Находки в мавзолее Неаполя Скифского // Памятники искусства. Бюлл. ГМИИ, вып. 2. (In Russian).

Raevsky 1970. - Раевский Д.С. 1970. Комплекс краснолаковой керамики из Неаполя. // Ежегодник ГИМ. 1965-1966 гг. М. (In Russian).

Pogrebova 1957. - Погребова Н.Н. 1957. Золотые лицевые пластины из погребений мавзолея Неаполя скифского // История и археология древнего Крыма. Киев. (In Russian).

Raevsky 1972. - Раевский Д.С. 1971. Скифы и сарматы в Неаполе // МИА. 177. (In Russian).

Pogrebova 1958. - Погребова Н.Н. 1958. Позднескифские городища на Нижнем Днепре. // МИА № 64. (In Russian).

Raevsky 1973. - Раевский Д.С. 1973. К истории греко-скифских отношений (II в. до н.э. - II в.н.э. // ВДИ.2. (In Russian).

Pogrebova 1961. - Погребова Н.Н. 1961. Погребения в мавзолее Неаполя Скифского // МИА. 98. (In Russian).

Raevsky 1975. - Раевский Д.С. 1975. Очерки идеологии скифосакских племен. М. (In Russian).

Polin 1992. - Полин С.В. 1992. От Скифии к Сарматии. К. (In Russian).

Raevsky 1976. - Раевский Д.С. 1976. Неаполь или Палакий // ВДИ. 1. (In Russian).

Polos’mak 1966. - Полосьмак Н.В. 1996. Погребение знатной пазырыкской женщины // ВДИ № 4. (In Russian).

Rostovtseff 1925. - Ростовцев М.И. 1925. Скифия и Боспор. Ленинград. (In Russian).

Ponomaryov 2001. - Пономарев Д.Ю. 2001. Антропологическая характеристика погребений №№ 37 и 70 Мавзолея Неаполя скифского // Поздние скифы в Крыму. - Труды ГИМ. Вып. 118. (In Russian).

Rotroff S.I. 1997. Hellenistic pottery. The Athenian agora. Vol. XXIX. Princeton, New Jersey, Saprykin 1986. - Сапрыкин С.Ю. 1986. Гераклея Понтийская и Херсонес Таврический. М. (In Russian).

Popova 1984. - Попова Е.А. 1984. О декоративном оформлении склепа № 9 восточного участка некрополя позднескифской столицы // ВДИ. 1. (In Russian).

Saprykin 1996. - Сапрыкин С.Ю. 1996. Понтийское царство. Москва. (In Russian).

Poznyshev 1955. - Познышев В.А. 1955. Геологические условия территории Неаполя скифского. Рукопись. Научный архив Крымского филиала ИА НАНУ. Инв. А № 64. (In Russian).

Saprykin 2002. - Сапрыкин С.Ю. 2002. Боспорское царство на рубеже двух эпох. М. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1987. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1987. Погребение в амфоре на некрополе Неаполя скифского. // Материалы к этнической истории Крыма. Киев. (In Russian).

Scheglov 1988. - Щеглов А.Н. 1988. Позднескифское государство в Крыму: к типологии эллинизма // Древний Восток и античная цивилизация. Л. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1988. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1988. К проблеме формирования Неаполя скифского // Тезисы докладов крымской научной конференции «Проблемы античной культуры» Симферополь. ч.З. (In Russian).

Scheglov 1998. - Щеглов А.Н. 1998. Еще раз о позднескифской культуре в Крыму (к проблеме происхождения // История и культура древних и средневековых обществ. Проблемы археологии. Вып.4. СПб. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1988a. - Пуздровский 1988а. К интерпретации захоронений в мавзолее Неаполя скифского // Проблемы исследований античного и средневекового Херсонеса (1888 - 1988). Тезисы докладов. Севастополь. (In Russian).

Schukin 1994. - Щукин М.Б. 1994. На рубеже эр. СПб. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1989. - Пуздровський О.Е. 1989. Сармати в Неаполi скiфському // Археологiя. № 3. (In Ukrainian).

Shelov 1978. - Шелов Д.Б. 1978. Узкогорлые светлоглиняные амфоры первых веков н.э.: классификация и хронология // КИСА АН СССР. Вып. 156. (In Russian).

Shelov 1975. - Шелов Д.Б. 1975. Керамические клейма из Танаиса III - I вв. до н.э. М. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1992. - Пуздровский А.Е. 1992. Новый участок Восточного некрополя Неаполя скифского // СА № 2. (In Russian).

Shultz.1946. - Шульц П.Н. 1946. Скульптурные портреты скифских царей Скилура и Палака // КСИИМК. вып. 12. М. (In Russian).

Puzdrovsky 1992a. - Пуздровський О.Е. 1992а. Кримська Скiфiiя в кiнцi II ст. до н.е. - перш. пол. Ш ст.н.е. // Археологiя. 2. (In Ukrainian).

Shultz 1946a. - Шульц П.Н. 1946а. Тавро-скифская археологическая экспедиция // Сов. Крым. 2. (In Russian). 42

The Scythian Neapolis Shultz 1947. - Шульц П. Н. 1947. Раскопки Неаполя Скифского // Краткие сообщения Института истории материальной культуры. Вып. XXI. М. (In Russian).

Tolstoy, Kondakov 1889. - Толстой И., Кондаков Н., 1889. Древности времен переселения народов // Русские древности в памятниках искусства. Вып. 2. С.-Пб. (In Russian).

Shultz 1947a. - Шульц П.Н. 1947а. Работа Тавро-скифской экспедиции (1945-1946 гг.) // Памятники искусства. Бюллетень Государственного музея изобразительных искусств им. А.С. Пушкина. Вып. 2. М. (In Russian).

Treister M.Yu. 1988. Bronze Statuary in the Towns of North Pontic Area // Griechische und römische Statuetten und Großbronzen. Akten. Wien.

Shultz 1949. - Шульц П.Н. 1949. Работа Тавро-скифской экспедиции // КСИИМК Вып. XXVII. М. (In Russian).

Treister 1999. - Трейстер М.Ю. 1999. Материалы к корпусу постаментов бронзовых статуй Северного Причерноморья / / Херсонесский сборник. Вып. Х. Севастополь. (In Russian).

Shultz 1953. - Шульц П.Н. 1953. Мавзолей Неаполя Скифского. М. (In Russian).

Tsalkin 1954. - Цалкин В.И. 1954. Домашние и дикие животные из Неаполя скифского // СА. Т. ХХ. (In Russian).

Shultz 1957. - Шульц П.Н. 1957. Исследования Неаполя Скифского (1945 - 1950) // ИАДК. К. (In Russian).

Tsalkin 1960. - Цалкин В.И. 1960. Домашние животные Северного Причерноморья в эпоху раннего железа // МИА. 53. (In Russian).

Shultz 1969. - Шульц П.Н. 1969. Бронзовые статуэтки Диоскуров из Неаполя скифского // СА № 1. (In Russian).

Tunkina 2002. - Тункина И.В. 2002. Русская наука о классических древностях юга России (XVIII - середина XIX в.). СПб. (In Russian).

Shultz 1971. - Шульц П.Н. 1971. Позднескифская культура на Днепре и в Крыму // Проблемы скифской археологии // МИА.177. (In Russian).

Uvarov 1954. - Уваров А.С. 1954. Несколько слов об археологических разысканиях близ Симферополя и Севастополя // Пропилеи. Кн. 4. М. (In Russian).

Simonenko 1993. - Симоненко А.В. 1993. Сарматы Таврии. Киев. (In Russian).

Uzhentsev, Yurochkin 2000. - Уженцев В.Б., Юрочкин В.Ю. 2000 Керамический комплекс III в.н.э. из Неаполя скифского // Старожитностi степового Причорномор’я i Криму. Вып. VII. Запорiжжя. (In Russian).

Sokolsky 1976. - Сокольский А.И. 1976. Таманский толос и резиденция Хрисалиска. Москва. (In Russian). Solomonik 1952. - Соломоник Э.И. 1952. 0 скифском государстве и его взаимоотношениями с греческими городами Северного Причерноморья // Археология и история Боспора. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Veselovsky 1891. - Веселовский Н.И. 1891. Скифский всадник (поясная пряжка) // Известия Таврической ученой архивной комиссии Вып. 14. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Solomonik 1958. - Соломоник Э.И. 1958. Четыре надписи из Неаполя и Херсонеса // СА. Т. XXVIII. (In Russian).

Veselovsky 1894. - Веселовский Н.И. 1894. Раскопки в Симферопольском уезде. Отчет императорской археологической комиссии за 1889, 1893. СПб. (In Russian).

Solomonik 1962. - Соломоник Э.И. 1962. Эпиграфические памятники Неаполя Скифского // Нумизматика и Эпиграфика. вып. 3. (In Russian).

Vinogradov 1987. - Виноградов Ю.Г. 1987. Вотивная надпись дочери царя Скилура из Gантикапея и проблемы истории Скифии и Боспора во II в. до н.э. // ВДИ. 1. (In Russian).

Solomonik 1977. - Соломоник Э.И. 1977. Сравнительный анализ свидетельства Страбона и декрета в честь Диофанта о скифских царях // ВДИ, № 3. (In Russian).

Vinogradov 1989. - Виноградов Ю.Г. 1989. Политическая история Ольвийского полиса VII - I вв. до н.э. Историкоэпиграфическое исследование. М. (In Russian).

Stolba V.F. 2003. Hellenistic Chersonesos: results and perspectives of establishing a local chronology // Proceedings of the Conference on chronology of the Black Sea Area in the period c. 400-100 BC. Aarhus.

Vinogradov 1992. - Виноградов Ю.Г. 1992. Полемон, Херсонес и Рим // ВДИ № 3. (In Russian). Vinogradov Ju. G. 1997. Pontische Studien. Mainz.

Stolyarik E. 1998. The reign and chronology of the arhon Hugiaenon // AJN. Second Series 10.

Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2003. - Виноградов Ю.Г., Зайцев Ю.П. 2003. Новый эпиграфический памятник из Неаполя скифского (предварительная публикация) // Археолiя № 1. (In Russian).

Symanovich 1960. - Сыманович Э.А. 1960. Египетские вещи в могильнике Неаполя скифского. // СА № 1. (In Russian). Symanovich 1963. - Сыманович Э.А. 1963. Итоги новых работ на могильнике Неаполя скифского в Крыму. // Краткие сообщения Одесского государственного археологического музея. Одесса. (In Russian).

Vnukov 1988. - Внуков С.Ю. 1988. Широкогорлые светлоглиняные амфоры Северо-Западного Крыма // СА № 3. (In Russian). Vysotskaya 1975. - Высотская Т.Н. 1975. Общественные здания Неаполя скифского // СА № 2. (In Russian).

Symanovich 1963a. - Сыманович Э.А. 1963а. Фибулы Неаполя скифского. // СА № 4. (In Russian).

Vysotskaya 1976. - Высотская Т.Н. 1976. Культы и обряды поздних скифов. // ВДИ. № 3. (In Russian).

Symanovich 1983. - Сыманович Э.А. 1983. Население столицы позднескифского царства. К. (In Russian).

Vysotskaya 1978 - Высотская Т.Н. 1978. Торговые связи Неаполя скифского в эллинистический период. (In Russian).

Symanovich, Golenko 1960. - Сымонович Э.А., Голенко К.В. 1960. Монеты из некрополя Неаполя скифского. СА. 1. (In Russian).

Vysotskaya 1979 - Высотская Т.Н. 1979. Неаполь - столица государства поздних скифов. (In Russian).

Tolstikov 1982. - Толстиков В.П. 1982. Неизвестные страницы истории Боспорского царства. // Археология и искусство Боспора. Сообщения ГМИИ. Вып. 10. М. (In Russian).

Vysotskaya 1992 - Высотская Т.Н. 1992. До питання про соцiально-полiтичну структуру пiзньоскiфськоï держави // Археологiя. № 2. (In Ukrainian)

Tolstikov 1987. - Толстиков В.П. 1987. Святилище на некрополе Пантикапея. // ВДИ № 1. (In Russian). Tolstikov, Vinogradov 1999. - Толстиков В.П., Виноградов Ю.Г. 1999. Декрет Спартокидов из дворцового храма на акрополе Пантикапея // Евразийские древности. М. (In Russian).

Vysotskaya 2001. - Высотская Т.Н. 2001. О назначении позднескифских зольников. // РА № 3. (In Russian). Vysotskaya, Skory 1976. - Высотская Т.Н., Скорый С.А. 1976. Работы на Неаполе скифском и в его округе // АО 1975 г. М. (In Russian). 43

Yu. Zaytsev Yanushevich 1983. - Янушевич З.В. 1983. Культурные растения Северного Причерноморья. Кишинев. (In Russian).

на Киммерийском Боспоре (VII-I вв. до н.э.). Тезисы докладов международной конференции. СПб. (In Russian).

Yaschurzhinsky 1989. - Ящуржинский Х.П. 1989. Разведки о древнем скифском укреплении Неаполисе // ИТУАК № 7. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 2001. - Зайцев Ю.П., 2001. Мавзолей царя Скилура: факты и комментарии // Поздние скифы в Крыму. - Труды ГИМ. Вып. 118. (In Russian).

Yatsenko 1960. - Яценко И.В. 1960. Декоративная роспись общественного здания в Неаполе скифском // СА. 4. М. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 2002. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2002. Скульптура и рельефы Южного дворца Неаполя скифского // Боспорский феномен. Погребальные памятники и святилища. СПБ. (In Russian).

Yatsenko 1962. - Яценко И.В. 1962. Тарелка царицы Гипеперии из Неаполя скифского. // Историко-археологический сборник. М. (In Russian).

Zaytsev, Mordvintseva 2003. - Зайцев Ю.П., Мордвинцева В.И. 2003. Подвязные фибулы в варварских погребениях Северного Причерноморья позднеэллинистического периода // РА. В печати. (In Russian).

Yurgevich 1881. - Юргевич В. 1881. Псефизм древнего города Херсонеса о назначении почестей и наград Диофанту, полководцу Митридата Евпатора // ЗООИД. т. 12. (In Russian).

Zaytsev, Puzdrovsky 1994. - Зайцев Ю.П., Пуздровский А.Е. 1994. Неаполь скифский в эпоху Диофантовых войн // СевероЗападный Крым в античную эпоху. К. (In Russian).

Zabelina 1964. - Забелина В.С. 1964. Золотые украшения из детского погребения некрополя Неаполя скифского // Сообщения ГМИИ. Вып. 2. М. (In Russian).

Zeest 1954. - Зеест И.Б. 1954. К вопросу о торговле Неаполя скифского и ее значении для Боспора // МИА. 33. (In Russian).

Zaytsev Yu.P., 2002. Skiluros and His Realm: New Discoveries and New Problems // Ancient civilization. N 1.

Zeest 1960. - Зеест И.Б. 1960. Керамическая тара Боспора // МИА № 83. (In Russian).

Zaytsev Yu.P. 2002a. Light and fire in the Palace of Scythian King Skilur // Fire, Light and Light Equipment in the Graeco-Roman World. BAR. International Series 1019.

Zhuravlev 1997. - Журавлев Д.В. 1997. Краснолаковая керамика группы Восточная сигиллята В из могильника Бельбек IV в юго-западном Крыму // Древности Евразии. Москва. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 1990. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1990. До питания про грецьке населения Неаполя Скiфського // Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian).

Zhuravlev 1998. - Журавлев Д.Б. 1998. Краснолаковая керамика Северного Причерноморья римского времени: основные итоги и перспективы изучения // Эллинистическая и римская керамика в Северном Причерноморье. Труды ГИМ. Вып. 102. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 1990a. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1990а. Золотой статер Риметалка из Неаполя Скифского // СА. N 1. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1992. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1992. Мавзолей Неаполя Скiфського // Археологiя. N 1. (In Ukrainian). Zaytsev 1994. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1994. Исследования Южного дворца Неаполя скифского// Археологические исследования в Крыму в 1993 г. - Симферополь: Таврия. (In Russian).

Zois A.A. 1987. The function of the Minoan Palace: A contribution to the definition of the main problem or a model for future research (outline) // The function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceeding of the Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10-16 June, 1984. Stokholm.

Zaytsev 1994a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1994а. Верховная знать Неаполя скифского (новое исследование захоронения в каменной гробнице мавзолея) // Элитные курганы степей Евразии в скифо-сарматскую эпоху. Санкт - Петербург. (In Russian).

Zubar 1988. - Зубар В.М. 1988. Про похiд Плавтiя Сiльвана в Крим // Археологiя № 63. (In Ukrainian).

Zaytsev 1995. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1995. Хронология Неаполя скифского // Древности Степного Причерноморья и Крыма. Запорожье. Вып.У. (In Russian).

Zubar 1991. - Зубар В.М. 1991. Новий латинський напис з Болгарiï i деякi питання iсторiï Таврики // Археологiя № 3. (In Ukrainian).

Zaytsev 1995a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1995а. Мегарони Неаполя скiфського // Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian).

Zubar 1992. - Зубар В.М. 1992. Про пiзньоскiфську державнiсть // Археологiя. 1. (In Ukrainian).

Zaytsev 1996. - Зайцев Ю.П., 1996. Памятники скульптуры из мегарона Южного дворца Неаполя скифского // Крымский музей. № 2. С. 16-23. (In Russian).

Zubar 1996. - Зубарь В.М. 1996. Ольвия и Скилур // РА. 4. (In Russian). Zubar 2002. - Зубарь В.М. 2002. Еще раз по поводу позднескифской государственности. // МАИЭТ. Вып. IX. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 1997. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1997. Южный дворец Неаполя скифского // ВДИ. 3. (In Russian). Zaytsev 1997a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1997а. Склеп № 390 УстьАльминского позднескифского некрополя // Бахчисарайский историко-археологический сборник. Вып. 1. Симферополь. (In Russian).

Abbreviations

Zaytsev 1998. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1998. Керамика с лаковым покрытием из слоя пожара 1 Южного дворца Неаполя скифского // Эллинистическая и римская керамика в Северном Причерноморье. Труды ГИМ. Вып. 102. (In Russian).

IOSPE — Latyschev B. Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae (1885—1916). Petropolis. VDI - ВДИ — Вестник древней истории. Москва. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 1999. - Зайцев Ю.П. 1999. Скилур и его царство. (Новые открытия и новые проблемы) // ВДИ. 2. (In Russian).

KBN - КБН — Корпус боспорских надписей. МоскваЛенинград. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 2000. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2000. Два сюжета из эллинистической хронологии Неаполя скифского // ХС. Севастополь. Вып. X. (In Russian).

VLGU - ВЛГУ - Вестник Ленинградского государственного университета. (In Russian). IADK - ИАДК - История и археология древнего Крыма. (In Russian).

Zaytsev 2000a. - Зайцев Ю.П. 2000а. Аргот - супруг царицы Комосарии (к реконструкции династийной истории Боспора и крымской Скифии // Таманская старина. Греки и варвары

ITOIAE - ИТОИАЭ - Известия Таврического общества истории, археологии и этнографии. (In Russian). 44

The Scythian Neapolis ITUAK - ИТУАК - Известия Таврической ученой архивной комиссии. (In Russian).

MIA - МИА - Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР. (In Russian).

KSIA - КСИА - Краткие сообщения Института археологии АН СССР. (In Russian).

NE - НЭ - Нумизматика и эпиграфика. (In Russian).

KSIIMK - КСИИМК - Краткие сообщения Института истории материальной культуры АН СССР. (In Russian).

SA - СА - Советская археология. (In Russian).

MAIET - МАИЭТ - Материалы по археологии, истории и этнографии Таврики. (In Russian).

ChS - ХС - Херсонесский сборник. (In Russian).

RA - РА - Российская археология. (In Russian). SAI - САИ - Свод археологических источников. (In Russian).

45

Yu. Zaytsev

46

The Scythian Neapolis

APPENDICES

47

Yu. Zaytsev

48

The Scythian Neapolis

Appendix 1 INSCRIPTIONS, SCULPTURE AND RELIEFS FROM THE SOUTHERN PALACE OF THE SCYTHIAN NEAPOLIS The Southern Palace was discovered after many years spent investigating the Scythian Neapolis: this palace was a supposed residence of Skiluros, and a centre of the official royal cult (Zaytsev 1997; 1999). A large amount of striking finds was made here, especially a group of epigraphical documents and art monuments – reliefs and pedestals of statues and their fragments.

Thus, from the vicinity of the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis a significant list of finds has been discovered, including: the limestone fragments of not less than six statue pedestals; fragments from a minimum of four marble sculptures, one marble relief, a limestone herm, more than fifty fragments of one or more bronze statues, and four limestone slabs with reliefs.

This site was first discovered by the inhabitants of Simferopol, who found the three pedestals with Greek inscriptions, as well as the large limestone relief with an image of a horseman. Minor excavations undertaken by I.P. Blaramberg in the spring of 1827 added to this collection a fragment of a marble (?) relief with images of two men. Later, A.S. Uvarov found four fragments from three pedestals, each with inscriptions (Schultz 1962, 35-40).

Sculpture 1. Herm (Figs. 46; 47; 48). Now housed in the Crimean branch of the Institute of Archaeology of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science. This sculpture is carved from dense limestone, in the shape of a tetrahedral draped pillar with a female head. It has been restored from six fragments. Its reconstructed height is c. 0.75 m. From the scant traces of paint that remain, the drapery was originally green, while the figure itself was reddishbrown (ochre) (Zaytsev 1997, 40; 1999, 146).

Between 1945 and 1950, this territory was investigated by the Simferopol group from the Tauro-Scythian expedition. This resulted in the discovery of a few remains from the original “buildings with porticos”, which were accompanied by finds of small fragments from several reliefs and statues (Schultz 1957, 71).

2. Hekataion (Fig. 45). Now housed in the Crimean branch of the Institute of Archaeology of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science.

In 1958, at section D in the northern part of the settlement, a further pedestal with an inscription came to light (Dashevskaya 1960).

This sculpture fragment is of fine-grained, white marble, and is from a work representing three draped female figures, touching hands. The fragment is 17.5 x 14 x 7 cm in size. The obverse surface of the item is carefully polished and all the elements are worked in detail. The general composition may be restored as a “prismatic draped herm of Hecate” (Kraus 1960; Akimova 1983). The supposed height of the sculpture is 0.7-0.9 m. The reconstructed height of the dancing women would be 35-40 cm (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 6; 1999, fig. 8).

The northern part of the Southern Palace was the subject of detailed survey and excavation in 1959, and later, between 1989 and 1993 (Zaytsev 1994). During the investigation of the palace, megaron fragments of two statues were found: both marble and limestone. And, finally, further to small-scale field work carried out in 1999, in the location of the excavations made by I.P. Blaramberg and A.S. Uvarov, tiny splinters from pedestals, a fragment of a bronze statue, a marble torso of a man, numerous fragments of stone slabs with reliefs, and a metric inscription were found.

3. Pedestal (Figs. 58; 59). Now housed in the Odessa state archaeological museum of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science. 49

Yu. Zaytsev

Found during the excavations of 1827, the flat, almost square slab of limestone has been carelessly worked by chisel. One of corners is destroyed. Size: 108 x 102 x 16 cm. The obverse has the remains of a two-line Greek inscription, referring by name to king Skiluros.

7. A fragment of a statue (Fig. 63, 1). Present whereabouts unknown. The fragment is of white marble and represents a right hand holding an object that would have been round in section (spear, scepter?). It was found during the excavations of 1950. The surface is carefully polished; the fingers and surface of the palm are worked in detail. Near the crushed wrist there remain the clear, drilled hollows of cylindrical shape. The soft outlines of the hand suggest that the hand once belonged to a female statue (Schultz 1957, fig. 6v; Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 15). The connection of this piece to the pedestal of Athena is rather probable.

Βασιλευς Σκιλουρος βασι ... ς το λεαυ του βασιλισας ...

On the upper surface there are five conic hollows, intended for pins to support a statue (Solomonik 1962, 34; Treister 1999, 136). 4. Pedestal (Figs. 60, 3; 61). Now housed in the Odessa state archaeological museum of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science.

8. A pedestal of a statue (Fig. 60, 4). Now housed in the State Historical Museum (Moscow, Russia).

Found during the excavations of 1827 and made of a marblelike limestone. There is a dedication to Zeus Atabirium on behalf of Posideos.

Made of marble-like limestone and carved with a dedication to Achilles on behalf of Posideos, son to Posideos, in which is mentioned the piratical Satarkhae. Found during the 1853 excavations (Solomonik 1962, 38-39; Treister 1999, 138).

∆ιί Αταβυρίωι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον

Άχιλλεί νήσου Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου Σαταρχαίους πειρατεύσαντας[]

On the upper surface there are two round sockets, and a single depression in the shape of a human foot, 16 cm in length (Solomonik 1962, 36-3; Treister 1999).

The dimensions of the pedestal: height 24 cm, reconstructed width - 60 cm. The top surface is carelessly finished and includes a lengthened depression, 15 cm long and 3 cm deep. Assuming a standing figure and the usual proportional correlation of foot size to the whole figure, the height of the statue was approximately 110 cm.

5. Torso (Figs. 63, 2; 64). Now housed in the Crimean branch of the Institute of archaeology of Ukrainian National Academy of Science. A fragment of a statue of a man. Made of fine-grained white marble, this was found during the excavations of 1999. Size of the fragment: 23 x 24 x 14 cm. It is much damaged, particularly in front. The surface of the sculpture has been carefully smoothed; the back and the chest are worked in detail. The apparent curve of the back, and features of the relief of the muscles, allow us to reconstruct a sitting pose for the figure, with the left hand raised. The proportions of this fragment and the previously mentioned pedestal with its dedication coincide, allowing us to consider them as one integrated work. If this were so, the general height of the statue with pedestal may have reached 1.3-1.4 m (Fig. 65).

9. A fragment of a pedestal (Fig. 60, 6). Now housed in the State Historical Museum (Moscow, Russia). The bottom right part of a pedestal, made from white, dense fine-grained marble, and with part of an inscription, presumably restored as a dedication to Zeus, Achilles and all the Gods (Solomonik 1962, 40). Found during the excavations of 1853. ... ...βασιλεία... ...λεί καί θεοίς ...ιν[]

6. A fragment of a pedestal (Fig. 60, 2; 62). Now housed in the Odessa state archaeological museum of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science.

10. A fragment of a pedestal (Fig. 60, 5). Now housed in the State Historical Museum (Moscow, Russia).

Made from marble-like limestone (25 x 22 cm), this fragment is part of a dedication to Athena Lindia on behalf of Posideos, son of Posideos (Solomonik 1962, 37-38; Treister 1999, 137). The find was made in 1827.

The upper part of a pedestal made of white fine-grained marble, 18 x 10 cm in size, with a fragment of a two-line inscription. Found during the excavations of 1853. The surfaces are carefully polished. Restoration text reads: “Achilles (son of) Khodarz...Ompsalak” (Solomonik 1962, 35).

Άθη]νάι Λινδίαι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον[]

...λλεύς Χωδ... ...καλάκου... []

The pedestal is much damaged. The upper surface has two hollows to support the statue.

11. A fragment of a statue (Fig. 54, 13). Now housed in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts (Moscow, Russia). 50

The Scythian Neapolis

This marble fragment represents part of a horse’s leg (?) with hoof touching a trousered human leg (?) that is bent at the knee (Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 19). The work is quite carefully done, but the surface of the sculpture shows some tool marks and is not smoothed. Taking the size of the fragment (12 x 8 cm), and assuming the correct above interpretation, then the remnant might well belong to a battle scene.

carefully worked. There are grooves on areas of the harness which obviously served for attaching details in metal. The relief represents a young man holding a spear in his right hand. His clothes and head-dress are identical to those depicted in relief No. 14.

12. Fragments of statues (Fig. 66). Now housed in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts (Moscow, Russia).

A further limestone relief fragment was found by I.P. Blaramberg during his excavations of 1827. This depicted an image of a body and the hind leg of an animal, under which a dog bares its teeth (Tunkina 2002, fig. 143).

16. A fragment of a relief. Current whereabouts unknown.

Fragments of one or several bronze statues found during the excavations of 1945, 1949-50, and 1999. To the present, more than sixty pieces are known, but the majority of them are very small - no more than 1.5 x 1.5 cm. Some of the larger fragments can be identified as representing locks of hair, and various body parts with worked muscles and skin (Schultz 1957, fig. 6b; Zaytsev 1997, fig. 7, 16).

17. A plate with a relief and inscription (Fig. 73 mentioning Argotus (Zaytsev 2000; Vinogradov, Zaytsev 2002). Now housed in the Crimean branch of the Institute of Archaeology of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science. During the excavations of 1999 more than two hundred fragments were found, at least fifty of which carried fragments of text. The reconstructed part of the heavy limestone plate is 78 x 64 cm. The upper part is shaped as a cornice in profile with traces of paint. The section with the inscription is carefully polished.

Reliefs 13. A fragment of a relief (Fig. 54, 17). Present whereabouts unknown. A limestone fragment, 25 x 16 cm, showing an uncertain schematic image (Vysotskaya 1979, 181). Found during the excavations of 1948.

The metric eight-line inscription is situated in the top left corner of the plate and is limited from the right by the relief image of a spear with a long tip. To the same plate belongs a fragment of a relief on which survived images of a man’s head in a head-dress, a shield (?), a horse’s head, and a vertical spear shaft. Other fragments are even more damaged and cannot be restored.

14. A fragment of a high relief (Figs. 67; 68). The gypsum mould is now housed in the Bakhchsarai State HistoricalCultural Reserve; the Crimean Republican Museum of Local Lore (Simferopol, Crimea, Ukraine); Odessa State Archaeological Museum of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science.

The average distance between the lines is 15 cm and they are faultlessly parallel. The letters are carved precisely and deeply; their average height varies between 1.2 - 1.5 cm.

The relief is made of marble, 38 x 22 cm in size. It was found during the excavations of 1827. The original is lost and the item is known only by gypsum copies. It represents the figures of a bearded man and a beardless youth, both wearing similar head-dresses with diadems. P.N. Schultz reconstructed these images as the kings Skiluros and Palakus, and interpreting the lower fracture as the contours of a horse’s neck and head (Schultz 1946, 55-56). Another variant of the reconstruction suggests a multi-figured composition with several standing figures - a scene of adoration, for example.

The restored text: 1 Λαΐνεον τόδε σηµα µεγαυχ[ήτοι]ο έ[στησεν] 2 [’Α]ργοτου ó Σκυθίης κοίρανος ίπποβό[του], 3[αί]ζηοις δέ λιπόντα ποθην προσ[ηκοντα] άγευς 4 [εί]νεκεν Ελλάνων στέργε φιλο[φροσύνης], 5 [π]ολλά δέ κ[αί ί]σχΰσι [προ]καµών [πάτρης έπί πλήθη] 6 Θραικών Μαιω[τών τ’’´ Αρει] όπιν κίδα[σεν], 7 υίεις δ[έ έξήκο]ντα κόρας ϊσας τε [έφυσεν] 8

15. A plate with a bas-relief of a horseman (Figs. 69-73). Now housed in the Odessa State Archaeological Museum of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science.

θρέψα[ς δ’ άντί] νυ τοϋ παιδός’ ’Ιδ[ανθέµιδος ?]

Translated as1: 1. This stone tomb was erected to much-gloried

The item is known as “the relief of Palakus riding” (Schultz 1946; Vysotskaya 1979, 180). The main fragments of the plate were found in 1827. A further fragment of a right hand holding a spear shaft (Fig. 54, 12) was found in 1949. Dimensions of the plate: 205 x 133 cm, with the thickness varying from 7-13 cm. The plate is made of limestone. Underneath there is a projection 54 cm wide. The reverse is roughly hewed. On the upper and lower edges of the plate there are longitudinal grooves, 10-12 cm wide and 3 cm deep. The surface of the relief is well finished and the details are

2. Argotus by the governor of Scythia, (which is) rich in horse pasture. 3. (Who) summoned the valorous warriors out of respect and fear of the Gods to leave their families 4. for the sake of love and friendship towards the Hellenes. 1

51

Translated from the Russian of the well-known epigraphist, Yury Vinogradov.

Yu. Zaytsev

5. (Who) who with great force came forward in defense (of their Motherland. And the hordes of)

1990; 1997, 41-43; 1999, 131). This assumption and its corollaries are of interest

6. Thracians (and) Meaotae has the God (Ares) dispersed and meted out his punishment,

In 1949, A.N. Karasev discovered a section of fundamental masonry made of processed stone blocks, near to which were found a limestone capital, fragments of bronze and marble statues, and a fragment of limestone relief. Based on the excavator’s own theory of the architectural layout of the site and its relation to the axis of the central gate, Karasev assumed that he had only discovered the eastern half of the building, which he at once defined as a portico. The 1950 excavations unearthed only insignificant traces of the supposed western part of the “Solemn Building” (Karasev 1953, 82), however its plan and purpose were ascribed from this moment (Schultz 1953, 50; 1957, 70-71). The former finds of inscriptions and sculptural monuments were confidently connected with the “Western portico”, although they were really found to the south of it.

7. (he who fathered) (six)ty sons and the same number of daughters, 8. bringing them up alike the son of Id(anthemidos). Other finds 18. A pedestal (Fig. 60, 1). Now housed in the State Historical Museum (Moscow, Russia). A pedestal with a dedication to the goddess of Rhodes on behalf of Posideos. It is made of marble-like limestone and has been broken into two parts. It was found during the excavations of 1958; section D, horizontal layer B-A, near Megaron A. On the upper surface there are two round hollows, one deepening into the form of schematic human foot, 16 cm long (Dashevskaya 1960; Solomonik 1962, 3637; Treister 1999). Although the pedestal was found far from the main accumulation of inscriptions and reliefs, it clearly should be grouped with them judging by its features (the same dedicatee, style of inscription, etc.) (Solomonic 1962, 43).

In the same year as the “Western portico” was partially discovered, a foundation pit was cut down into the rock. Later, this was filled with layers of mixed soil and then re-dug. At the time, this pit attracted practically no attention even though it was placed on the summary plan of the settlement as a feature of the excavations of I.P. Blaramberg and A.S. Uvarov (Schultz 1957, fig. 4z). The 1959 undertaking to further investigate this pit revealed no new results. In 1979, T.N. Vysotskaya, based on the conclusions of A.N. Karasev and P.N. Schultz, put forward a new graphic reconstruction of the «Building with porticos L» (Vysotskaya 1979, fig. 17) (Fig. 57, 1A). This reconstruction was amended repeatedly (Zaytsev 1990, fig. 9; 1997, fig. 1, fig. 7, 1; 1999, fig. 2, 8) (Fig.57, 1B, 1C).

Ρ[ό]δωι Ποσίδεος Ποσιδέου χαριστήριον

19. A fragment of a small marble altar (Fig. 55, 5). Now housed in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts (Moscow, Russia).

The recent examination of the information available on this site has shown that all the finds (both sculptures and reliefs, and also some of the architectural detailing) gravitate towards the pit cut into the rock (Fig. 54). After the 1999 fieldwork, this feature was interpreted as the underground section of a monumental cult building, or heroon (Zaytsev 2000; Vinogradov, Zaytsev, 2003). In addition to the other objects, there was also the monument bearing the inscription in honour of Argotus. It was built not earlier than 133-130 BC, a date determined by the Rhodian amphorae stamps found directly under the rubble extracted during excavation of the rock pit. Similar cult constructions are known in Asia Minor and in the Hellenistic East (Fedak, 1990, fig. 62, 70, 91, 101, 238; Pichikyan 1991, 232-238).

On the upper surface there is a round depression. On two sides of the corner survived the remains of a Greek inscription. It was found during the excavation of 1949 (Solomonic 1958, 310-312). ]µητρι Εύµέ[

20. A fragment of a plate (Fig. 55, 6). Now housed in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts. (Moscow, Russia). The right, lower corner of a carefully processed limestone plate (39 x 52 x 13 cm). The upper part of the fragment has the remains of a two-line inscription (Solomonik 1958, 2021, fig. 1).

Thus, the latest analysis of the area in front of the central gate of the Scythian Neapolis, near the façade of the Southern Palace, allows us to consider as unlikely the hypothesis concerning “buildings with porticos”, and their decoration. It is now possible to reconstruct the masonry fragment of well-dressed blocks (Fig. 55, 1) as being part of the base of the monumental façade of the Palace, erected in a “Solemn” and “fortified” style (Fig. 57, 2). A small sanctuary-heroon was erected in front of this and to which most of the art monuments and inscriptions found are connected.

... ...]ωτου

It was usually believed that the reliefs and statues with dedications decorated the so-called “Building with porticos” - the Solemn façade of the Oalace complex (Solomonic 1952; Schultz 1953; 1957, 70-71; Vysotskaya 1978, 58-59; Zaytsev

52

The Scythian Neapolis

Appendix 2 THE MAUSOLEUM OF KING SKILUROS1 The year 1946 occupies a special place in the history of the archeology of the Northern Black Sea region. The excavators of the Scythian Neapolis did not foresee sensational finds as they pursued their modest purpose of studying the site of the central gate and contiguous part of the fortress. However, on August 6, there began the excavation of the famous Mausoleum, which has become since then the most important monument of Late Scythian Culture. Discovering the Mausoleum and undertaking its great three-month excavation fell to P.N. Schulz, N.N. Pogrebova, O.I. Dombrovsky, E.A. Bolotnikova, A.N.Karasev, Kh.I. Kris, T.Ya. Kobetz, V.A. Golovkina, and T.A. Globenko.

– The crypt was constructed simultaneously with the Mausoleum. It was then covered with three stone slabs and left.

After a series of the preliminary information (Pogrebova 1947; 1947a; Schultz 1947; 1947a), two basic works on this magnificent find were published (Schultz 1953; Pogrebova 1961), and for many decades determining a circle of appropriate questions and problems. Schultz’s fundamental achievement was his conclusion about the internment of the famous king, Skiluros, in the stone crypt. N.N. Pogrebova’s main contribution was a detailed analysis of all the burials in the Mausoleum and the burial goods that accompanied them. The researcher put forward her own concept of the monument, and came to the conclusion that Palakus was buried in the stone; he was an elder son of Skiluros. Both points of view are still held as valid.

The fallen and slab was moved on an edge and leaned against the northern wall of the stone crypt. The gap between its base and the crypt was filled with several flat stones. Thus, from this moment access to the crypt could be made via the “hatch” thus formed (size: 0.6 x 0.8 m).

Research into all the data found in the archives and museum collections by the present author has resulted in a significant amount of field information and details of finds from the Mausoleum; a subsequent desire to retrace some of the key moments of the excavation has lead to their comparison with published data (Zaytsev 1992, 93-99; 1994, 94-105). As a result, the material from the burial in the stone crypt (No. 37) of the Mausoleum was radically reconsidered on the basis of the accumulation of all the field material, together with the repeated processing and personal study of all the finds.

The head of the deceased was dressed with a semi-spherical cap ornamented with gold plaques, which rolled off the skull during the destruction of the skeleton.

A stone crypt (Fig. 101). The author’s reconstruction of the funeral process in the stone crypt follows:

On each side of the dead, near the hands, lay a set of belt fittings: the left having bronze details (Fig. 110, 7, 8), the right with iron buckles, plates and rings (Fig. 111, 2-5). To the second set, a leather sheath with a silver triangular tip was probably attached (Fig. 110, 6).

1

– At a certain time, an attempt was made to move the central slab to a wall of the Mausoleum, probably for its subsequent lifting. – The attempt appears unsuccessful. It was obviously not possible to support the edge of the slab; it fell, having occupied an inclined position. In such a condition, the stone crypt undoubtedly became unsuitable for burial.

At a later stage several objects were placed in the east part of the crypt (Figs. 102; 103): two halves of a broken sword of La Téne type (Fig. 108, 1), a set of arrows (Fig. 111, 1), spearheads with short shafts (Fig. 108, 2), and a supposed staff with its top covered with silver (Fig. 110, 1). The deceased’s body was then laid on the crypt floor.

Several silver and bronze brooches were originally placed on the chest (Fig. 110, 35) but these subsequently fell to the pelvis area. A gold brooch (Fig. 110, 2) was found on the sacrum. (Similar finds have come to light in the synchronous burials of the barbarian nobility from the Asian Bosporus (Maksimova 1979, 69, 71).

The Appendix is a revised version of the work published in Russian (Zaytsev 2001).

53

Yu. Zaytsev

The location of the iron helmet (Fig. 107) during excavation was inconclusive, but nevertheless the impression arose that it had fallen to the right with the leg bones; hence it could have originally been placed on the dead man’s folded legs (Fig. 103).

the data of O.I. Dombrovsky’s reconstruction, to the left of the entrance, near the southern wall of the Mausoleum, a complex funeral construction was situated incorporating the remains of a rich female burial (No. 70). The complex was in two parts: a rectangular platform on four carved feet, and a coffin covered by a 4-pitch lid. The whole construction was richly decorated with carving and polychrome painting (Schultz 1953, 25-28, tab. VIII, IX, colour ill. I; Pogrebova 1961, 104). It is assumed that this burial was robbed in antiquity, and the sarcophagus itself subsequently destroyed by falling brick walls.

Gold plaques covered the area of thighs and knees. Work with the field material has cast doubt on the interpretation of this accumulation of gold plaques as ornaments of the sleeves and hem of a jacket, or, as a hypothetical horytos (a bowcase) (Schultz 1953, fig. 10, tab. 1). If ornaments with loops and beads could make sleeve decoration, the gold fittings might be treated differently. First of all they were not situated chaotically, but as a compact group extending aslant above the skeleton. Many plates and plaques in some layers covered each other, some were on edge, and others were turned. A triangular gold plate (Fig. 112, 1) laid at the edge of the main accumulation of gold items, near to the bone plate (Fig. 112, 2), was also overturned. Attention should be given to the equal number of many types of plates, prevalent among which were appliqués without holes, and the identical finish to the majority of them. The figured cuts to the bases of the triangular plaques (Fig. 112, 3) correspond to the bends of a “running wave” (Fig. 112, 4).

As with other objects from the Mausoleum, a critical approach to the data resulted in unexpected conclusions. Limiting ourselves to the relevant details of the research undertaken, the new results are as follows. Above the basic accumulation of carved details were laid the remains of two adults (burials Nos. 43 and 11), on their backs, with extremities extended and heads to the west. They were not placed in a special coffin, and were located on the top of a perimeter of decaying wooden planks. The lengths of the rectangles formed by these planks were much shorter than the lengths of the skeletons. It is clear that these two burials bear no relation to the “sarcophagus” and were placed here later.

It is obvious that the majority of the set of ornaments was glued in some way to organic material, and so could not represent decoration to particular objects. A small gold nail and a gold loop found among the ornaments testify some ways of fastening, or hanging, the ornamented object. And the presence of a plate slightly different to other plates of the type supposes repair to the whole composition, when the lost plate was replaced by a similar element, suitable by its form. About two-thirds of the ornaments showed an identical system of decoration: obvious evidence of artistic notions and the semantic unity to be had in a completed group of objects. Additionally, gluing as a means of adhering quite large gold plates to organic material assumes the relative rigidity of such a construction. Therefore, taking into account the multi-layered disposition of ornaments, the presence here of several parts from a single object is rather probable. In other words, the gold ornaments could be the remains of a complete set of ceremonial regalia (breast-piece, apron, or other variants?), which was laid on the knees of the deceased after his body had been placed in the crypt.

The lower accumulation of bones was made in a 20 cm layer of dense loamy soil between the limestone floor of the chamber and the level of the lower frame of “sarcophagus” No. 5 (Fig. 114). Special anthropological analysis (Ponomarev 2001) has shown that the accumulation of bones included the isolated and fragmentary remains of four individuals: a youth and three adults (ages: 12-15, 18-21, 30-40 and after 40) (Fig. 113). In different places among the bones were found a gold needle, massive gold beads, three plates with holes for stitching, various beads, and pendants made of gold, cornelian, glass and amber. A gold medallion and ring were found underneath one pelvis (Pogrebova 1961, fig. 7). Among the bones there were multiple traces of purple dye and gold threads. Therefore a direct interrelation between the carved wooden construction (a “sarcophagus”) and the human burials found beneath it may be questioned: either the carved construction was put above the collective burial, or isolated bones were inserted under the construction at a later date.

The conclusion to this obscure funeral ceremony should have been made by closing of the “hatch” - the actual entrance way. However, no trace of its ultimate closing was noted, but on the last slabs of the crypt’s top were found the remains of a wooden coffin (No. XII) with the burials of two adults and one child. Nearby, by a wall of the Mausoleum, coffin No. XI was found, containing the remains of two youths. The locations of these two coffins allow us conclude that coffins Nos. XI and XII closed the entrance hatch of the crypt.

A volumetric disposition of the restored elements of the lower section of the “sarcophagus” (Fig. 114) enables a reevaluation of the entire object. O.I. Dombrovsky was correct in suggesting that the construction undoubtedly represented a magnificent podium standing on four feet. However, it is also obvious that this structure had a clear and highly decorated frontal aspect: its northern side, carved with two angular columns and fantastic animals sitting facing each other. It was probably not by chance that the two rear feet (Nos. 3 and 4) showed no detail,

The strange situation of the stone crypt requires explaining and necessitates the expansion of our circle of search to the borders of the actual Mausoleum chamber. «Sarcophagus» (Figs. 113-118). Further to the conclusion of P.N. Schultz and N.N. Pogrebova, which was based on 54

The Scythian Neapolis

unlike the front pair (Nos. 1 and 2). The rear feet had other, less expressive design, perhaps being completely covered by drapery). Thus the symmetry of the item was not longitudinal, but lateral.

foreleg bones of horse No. 3 were linked. Lowest, and simultaneously the eastern-most horse skeleton No. 2, almost completely retained its primary positioning; the bones of other horses, already much disjointed lay on top of it. Thus the depth of the “blockage” formed increased towards the east. In other words, horse skeleton No. 2 was found in situ and in an initial situation. The skeletons of the other animals were also inverted northwards, with their heads lying on original “pillows” formed of flat stones, and later disorderly covered skeleton No. 2. The hind legs of one of the horses remained approximately in place - opposite the bottom step of the stairs, and most of its skeleton was displaced aslant the main accumulation of horse bones.

The actual dimensions of this construction exclude its use as a compound lower section of a sarcophagus. To assume that it might have been a pedestal-platform, one should take into account that the length of the “sarcophagus” itself was not more than 1.6 m (the distance between external planes of the facing columns, No. 6). If these are the remains of the “sarcophagus” itself, its useful length is reduced to 1.4 - 1.45 m. Both versions provide a smaller length than would be required for an extended adult body. Reconstructions based on the thighbones of the two adults from burial No. 70 indicate heights of not less than 1.65 to 1.68 m.

Finds on the chamber floor. These finds were never associated with the main burial (Schultz 1953, 40; Pogrebova 1961, 213). In former publications they were mentioned partially in another context, and even then not completely. By the bottom step of the stairs a rectangular iron buckle (Fig. 94, 1) was found, and under a coffin No. III, among the horse bones, there was a bronze ring (Fig. 94, 2). North of horse skull No. 2, at the east end panel of the stone crypt, there were a small crushed amphora (Fig. 119, 6), fragments of a handmade jug (not retained), and a massive iron arrowhead with the remains of its wooden shaft (Fig. 94, 4). Underneath one of the façade columns of the carved podium the upturned ceramic altar was found (Fig. 121); its square foot was discovered separately under the bones of burial No. 70 (Fig. 113, 7). Nearby was a bronze coin from Chersonesos, and by the lower vertebra of horse No. 2 (below horse skull No. 3) there was a large glass bead (Fig. 94, 6). The list of finds is concluded by a broken, brown-slip cup (Fig. 119, 4), fragments of which were found at the south edge of the stone crypt near the horse skulls.

It would seem clear that the carved wooden construction (as restored) is not a platform of a “sarcophagus”, but represents a richly decorated and complex podium, with a richly expressive frontal aspect. For an hypothetical reconstruction of the upper half of this construction, some factors are of special importance. First, a general height of the construction could not exceed the height of the door aperture of the Mausoleum - c. 1.6 m. The placing of later burials on this construction was possible only on a horizontal plane. Such a plane could only be achieved after dismantling the upper part of the construction up to the level of the top frame (Fig. 114, 7), and then the carved planks, with the others, could be placed flat on top of the podium at the level of the cornice (pattern-side down, then up, etc.). The column with a top-figure and the figures of “centauroi” were purposely broken off and discarded, where they were found during excavation (Figs. 114, 11, 12).

The architecture of the funeral chamber

In such a reconstruction for the carved planks, a higher location is assumed than that of the cornice found in situ (these were different construction details). A pair of free standing and large figures of “centauroi” obviously occupied symmetrical positions (in relation to the basic axis) approaching (taking into account where they were found) from the shorter sides of the construction, and were definitely designed to be seen from a frontal perspective.

The Mausoleum was built as a rectangular construction, of dimensions 8.65 x 7.5 m (Fig. 94). It was oriented with its sides on the four cardinal points, and its south side adjoined the front wall (Fig. 30) (Koltukhov 1999, 35, fig. 29, 5). The size of the funeral chamber was 6.6 x 5.75 m, and its walls were c. 1 m thick. The foundation pit was made of rubble built on a rock surface and surrounded by trenches which had been dug out in the earlier ash hill. Its height varied from 0.4 to 0.7 m, depending on the natural inclination of the subsoil. The layout of the bases of the masonry was complicated and unusual. The east (Fig. 95, 4), south, and west façades were monumental from the exterior and made with a high degree of skill. Their lower courses were laid in a system so that each cordon was on its edge with a slab facing it; orthostatic slabs produced traces of rust. The internal wall facings of the latter, at the height of these lower courses (Fig. 95, 1, 2) - and also the north wall as a whole - employed mixed rubble-work, using separate processed and rusted blocks, which were also defective.

Horse burials (Schultz 1953, 35; Pogrebova 1961, 215-216). In all the findings, the horse burials of the Mausoleum were unequivocally connected with the main burial in the stone crypt. From the plans of the Mausoleum, horse skeleton No. 4 was placed in the first layer (together with the stone crypt, the “sarcophagus”, and many wooden coffins), and horse skeletons Nos. 1-3 were placed in the second layer - with other coffins (Pogrebova 1961, fig. 1, A, B). But the actual picture was more complicated. From the plan, it may be seen (Fig. 94, 1), that horse bones occupied a corner that was limited from the south by chamber wall, and from east by end panels of coffins Nos. IX, X, as well as by the end panel of the carved construction to which the skull and

Above these facings, the masonry of the three obverse walls were made of well-processed blocks of approximately equal size (on average 1 x 0.8 - 1 x 0.25-0.30 m) laid on clay using 55

Yu. Zaytsev

the “tied” technique. From two to six lines of such masonry were noted, which from both sides looked equal (Fig. 95, 1, 2, 4). On the whole, the mixed construction of the Mausoleum walls is closest to the antique two-layer, one-line horizontal/ orthostatic masonry (Kryzhitsky 1982, 24, fig. 5, 7, 9).

(1.65 x 0.95 m) just exceeded the frame, and no trace of any form of hinge or fitting was found. A.N. Karasyov’s photographs and figures unequivocally show that this door barrier was barricaded from inside, at first by horizontal posts, then by stones and stakes, and finally by a homogeneous clay composition.

The blockages caused by brick rows, the two bricks found in situ on the north wall, and the abundance of decayed wood (logs, posts, planks) allow us to assume the presence of both a building on the additional storeys that were made of brick rows (beginning at a height of 2.65 m), as well as a wooden covering to the funeral chamber itself.

The archaeological situation from the external face of the entrance aperture (Fig. 95, 5) is also interesting. Up to a height 0.75 m it was blocked by large stones, compacted from above by a massive limestone slab. Above this was a dense clay layer with inclined strata of rubble, which, at a height of 1.7 m, was surmounted by another stone protective layer with a skeleton of a dog on top of it.

The constructional variance of the north wall of the Mausoleum from its other three suggests, as some researchers also consider, that the construction was attached to the external part of the front wall. The original look of the Mausoleum - the magnificent external façades with thin walls - testifies that it was obviously a funeral construction (Schultz 1953, 50) that was planned and erected beforehand, during the general reconstruction of the entire Southern Palace (Zaytsev 1997, 43). The joining of the lower funeral chamber to the defensive system suggests its importance. However, this function was secondary and was also dictated by the special purpose of the construction and by the necessity for its constant and strengthened protection. In other words, it was not the need for battle-towers by the central gate that determined the presence of the burial chamber in the lower floor of one of them. On the contrary, it was the necessity to build a splendid funeral construction at a point closest to the Palace that was the determining factor (Schultz 1953, 5051).

The external sealing of the door was done at the same time as the filling up of the courtyard in front of the Mausoleum. The logical conclusion was to then fit the processed blocks (Fig. 98, 12) along the eastern façade of the Mausoleum. There only purpose was to ensure exclusion to the entrance of the funeral chamber. The dog burial may be viewed as a ritual against possible attempts to penetrate the Mausoleum. Conclusions: The entrance was used until the second stage of the fortification works, the basic purposes of which were to strengthen the central gate and to isolate the funeral chamber completely. The wooden construction inserted into the entrance was actually not the main door barrier, but rather to be interpreted as some form of gravestone.

After a while the façades of the south and west walls were hidden by inclines made of rubble on clay (Schultz 1953, 16-17; Koltukhov 1993, 186; 1999, 35-36) (Fig. 30).

The relationship of this entrance to the Mausoleum was completed by its full and simultaneous preservation from both sides, and, in addition, the presence of the internal barrier (Fig. 94, 5) reveals something about the existence of the stairs within the monument: a second access way into the funeral chamber.

We have, so far, a canonical mausoleum look that does not occasion argument. However, different interpretations have been given to the entrance and stone stairs, whose chronological positions in many respects determined the reconstructions we have of the burial process, as well as the definition of their sequence and dating (Schultz 1946, 1417; Pogrebova 1961, 177-178).

The stairs were arranged along the west wall of the chamber (Figs. 94; 95, 7). Two its lower steps were stacked in the southwest corner, on the limestone floor of the chamber. They were inverted to the east and found in situ. Step No. 3 (the lowermost in the eastern line) was aligned to them and also remained in its initial location. The blocks forming steps 4 to 10 successively overlaid one another and were found in an inclined situation, edges up. They were all made of limestone and of the correct geometrical shape. Underneath them there was a layer of small stones and rubble that completely covered five decayed logs (Fig. 94). Of particular importance is the inclined position of the logs, their lower ends rested against the two first steps, and were slanted under steps 4-10 (Fig. 95, 3). Under the decayed wood was a mass of homogeneous clay, 0.2 - 1 m thick into which coffins Nos. I and II (Fig. 94) were inserted, resting on the limestone floor.

The door aperture (1.6 m high and 1.3 m wide) was made in the east wall. The aperture was closed by means of several logs on which was stacked a large stone slab c. 0.3-0.4 m thick. This slab subsequently cracked and crushed through the decayed logs (as was noted during excavation) (Figs. 99, 1; 100). Into the space between the limestone floor and the logs, a rectangular frame made of four oak posts (by section 10 x 10 cm and 12 x 10 cm) was inserted. The external width of this frame (0.9 m) was much less than the width of a door aperture (1.32 m) itself, and the space between the vertical members and inclines of the masonry was filled with small stones in a clay solution (Fig. 99). A rectangle of six oak planks, fastened by three pairs of crossbars, was firmly wedged into the frame from the side of the funeral chamber. The size of this rectangle

In the descriptions given by P.N. Schultz, N.N. Pogrebova, and A.N. Karasev the stairs were considered as later 56

The Scythian Neapolis

construction. Their purpose was suggested as providing an exit from the front wall, sometimes functioning together with the door (Pogrebova 1961, 177). From the researches mentioned by the above authors, the conclusion is that the stairs were designed to be suspended.

a top step that coincides with the border of the stone and brick row parts of walls; the presence of the crosspiece in the peribola and the monumental foundation of the “suspended” section of this corridor; and the platform in the vicinity of the fortress (a base on which the steps could rise). Most importantly, such a corridor could solve the two main problems that inevitably arose with the discovery of a tomb of such high rank - the complete external isolation of the funeral space and its protection (the only entrance was well guarded and supervised from within the palace territory) and the simplification of the process of transporting the deceased from the palace to the chamber.

However, even the most optimistic technical calculations made on a flight of stairs that consisted basically of five thin and inclined logs, on which a layer of rubble and 8 stone blocks were placed (with a constant loading of c. 2000 kg) mitigate against the idea of a suspended construction, and oblige us to search for other construction methods. The successive combination of the three constructional elements mentioned (stone steps, amorphous rubble filling, and logs) could only make sense in one case - the employment of a continuous support that was able to maintain a constant loading of approximately 2.5 tons. The only feasible solution would have been a ramp made of rows of stone and crossed logs. The presence of coffins Nos. I and II below the remains of such a ramp testify that it was constructed after they had been placed in the chamber.

Now it is possible to proceed to the complex restoration of the events connected with the main burial of the Mausoleum of the Scythian Neapolis. The preliminary construction of the funeral chamber and the assembly of the stone crypt do not create difficulties: it was a central burial location that had been well prepared. However, the body relating to the main burial entered somewhat unorthodoxly and after a minimum of two coffins (Nos. XI and XII) had already found there way in to the Mausoleum. The assumption that the main burial here was not the first contradicts with all ancient funeral traditions and cannot be taken seriously. Another explanation is more likely: before the important personage was buried in the stone crypt he was placed in another spot, still within the limits of the chamber. The crypt was obviously designed so that the body might lie on its back with legs stretched, but in our case the deceased was arranged in a semi-seated posture. Here it is appropriate to recall the carved construction, which: a) was not a sarcophagus, b) was not connected initially with the human burials found under it, c) was markedly different from the simple coffins of the Mausoleum in terms of its construction and splendid furnishing, d) was brought into the chamber through a door aperture before the installation of the wooden screen, obviously coinciding with the very first internment. The coincidence of its useable length (c. 150-160 cm.) with the area occupied by the semiseated skeleton No. 37 (140-160 x 60 cm.), becomes a last link in a chain of comparisons and leads to the main conclusion - that the carved podium was the lower part of a bed on which the body of the important personage was brought into the Mausoleum in a semi-seated position (Fig. 118).

One further details merits attention: the final, 11th step, which is square and the smallest in size (Fig. 95, 3). The situation of this step, at height 2.6 m is an exact vertical projection of the point of its horizontal location at the moment of excavation. Hence, at the gradual lowering of the stairs this stone was lowered directly downwards. An obligatory condition of such a result should be the presence of a vertical directional plane from the north side which would prevent the natural blocking of the top step, as happened with other steps here. Another inference that can be drawn from this detailed analysis of all the information is that above the stone crypt and the two coffins covering it there was a further superstructure which was dug through in 1946. The south side of this superstructure has brought about the lowering of the top step of the stairs. Conclusion: when the stairs were built they partially covered coffins Nos. I and II, and completely covered a corner of the chamber with the main burial. Now it is necessary to look at this construction in the context of the complete defensive system complex. First (Fig. 98), exactly opposite the steps and hypothetical entrance platform (the top of the superstructure above the stone crypt) a stone crosspiece, 5 m wide (Fig. 98, 4) was built in the peribola. Also opposite the stairs, but in the fortress, the remains of the eastern façade of the wide platform adjoining the earliest defensive wall were discovered in 1948 (Fig. 98, 5).

The special objective here is then to define the area where this bed was originally located before internment and it seems clear that it was not put in the eastern part of the chamber at a time when coffins Nos. IX and X already occupied the southeast corner, and the ceramic altar was broken and turned over. The southwest part of the chamber may also be excluded; it was reserved for horse burials. The northwest corner, therefore, seems the most likely option. In this part of the Mausoleum there was already a stone crypt, closed by three flat slabs and the platform formed by these slabs was the most convenient for the location of a funeral bed. If the bed had been located elsewhere there would have been no need for the slab platform to have been replaced beforehand, as happened.

Thus, the stairs in the Mausoleum chamber, the crosspiece in the peribola (No. 2), and the stone platform No. 5 were all located on one axis (Fig. 98). Such a layout could not be haphazard: all three elements were most likely united by a uniform plan. In the defensive wall there existed a corridor, 11 m long, which directly connected the funeral chamber of the Mausoleum to the vicinity of the Southern Palace of the Scythian Neapolis (Fig. 98, 13). This helps explain a number of findings: the features of the stairs construction, including 57

Yu. Zaytsev

The reconstruction of this extraordinary funeral ceremony is a matter for conjecture. Most likely, the deceased was to remain on the throne bed for a certain period before internment in the stone crypt. This important personage was to be accompanied by numerous burial goods as well as three sacrificed horses, their faces oriented towards their master. Of the actual burial objects, a handmade jug, a red slip cup, an amphora, and a ceramic altar were found. It is clear that one of the deceased’s wives was buried simultaneously, however it is now impossible to determine the place and circumstances of this burial. It is probable that her remains, together with the other bones, gold ornaments, and fragments of fabric ended up under the throne bed. The eastern part of the tomb, near the chamber entrance, was left free for subsequent burials.

It is possible to assume that the siting of the stairs relative to the overall layout of the chamber was the result of precise planning. The builders taking part in the assembly of the wattle and daub ramp and the entrance platform, saw only a line of the usual coffins facing the western wall (which were actually being prepared for blocking it), and they did not suspect that their actions would be protecting the main burial. In terms of the history of the Mausoleum, the assembly of the stairs was also important in another respect: when they were built, coffin No. III was drawn off (atop of the moved horse bones), and coffins Nos. II and I were partially blocked by the earth. Hence, at the time of the building, all the coffins had already been laid there. The synchronous works going on outside the Mausoleum chamber were concentrated on the complete and permanent sealing of the external entrance, and on the construction of a corridor inside the brick walls.

The activities that occurred here later show obvious signs of haste, giving the impression of sudden and extreme urgency and necessitating the reburial of the deceased with maximum speed, leading to several serious technical miscalculations:

In such a reconstruction, the initial history the Scythian Neapolis Mausoleum can be limited by a clear chronological framework. The lower section (the time of the erection of the funeral chamber, c. 130-125 BC) is determined by the general periodization of the palace complex (Zaytsev 1997, 43), and does not contradict traditional precepts (Schultz 1953, 40-41; Koltukhov 1990, 186). The top section can now be ascertained by the partial robbery of the burials (via the corridor and stairs) at the time of the total destruction of the Southern palace during the occupation of Diophantus’ armies (Zaytsev 1997, 36).

– An attempt to move the smallest, but still very heavy, stone slab has resulted in its failure at one edge into the stone crypt. To avoid this damage, the slab should have been carefully lifted by means of a narrow lever; – The relocation of the fallen slab to a wall, instead of extracting it by using the required equipment. (The two remaining slabs were considerably heavier.); – The insertion of a semi-seated body through the inconvenient hatch instead of the usual horizontal positioning of the body in the crypt;

In turn, one may compare the reconstructed history from the concrete archaeological finds to the written sources, which have been analyzed in detail many times (Solomonik 1977; Vinogradov 1987, 67-79; Koltukhov 1994, 210-216). Table 3 shows that this comparison is productive both in terms of the chronology and sequence of events.

– Sealing the hatch with coffins containing human remains, instead of replacing the covering with stone or wood. Subsequently the empty throne bed was moved near to coffin No. IX (where coffin No. XII should have been), leaving the entrance to the chamber free.

It is now relatively certain that the remains of man in the stone crypt performed an exclusive public and state purpose that merited all the activity made to protect it. It is clear that under all circumstances it was to remain in the Mausoleum of the Southern Palace - the main royal fortress of the Scythians. If this were not the case, the security and inviolability of the remains could have been achieved by reburying them secretly elsewhere, some distance from Neapolis, the scene of all the fighting.

The impression of all this is that the executors of these actions were unprepared and acting very quickly indeed. The chamber was completely changed internally, and no sign of the internment of the important personage remained: this was a deliberate course of events. Such actions required a minimum number of participants, interested in keeping their activities secret. Most likely these were high-ranking figures, closest to the deceased, and this could explain their technical failings.

Taking into account all the old and new data, and the complicated situation around Neapolis at the end of the 2nd century BC, the human remains in the stone crypt (burial No. 37) of the Mausoleum could only belong to man known from written sources - King Skiluros.

Now special steps to preserve the Mausoleum could pass to a second stage. The most important of these would be to obliterate the external entrance which in turn necessitated an alternative way into the funeral chamber. The construction of the stairs required significant labour and the transportation inside the chamber of not less than fifteen cubic metres of clay, wood, and stone. This meant that temporary workers would be needed within the funeral chamber and special measures were therefore needed to maintain the secrecy of the work undertaken.

The construction of the grand funeral chamber, as mentioned previously, was specially planned and took place between 130 and 125 BC - at the same time as the general reconstruction of the Southern Palace (Zaytsev 1997, 43). Everything indicates that there was no immediate external military threat, for example the elaborate, and ostentatious, Mausoleum exterior and door. 58

The Scythian Neapolis Table 3. Reconstruction of events on the basis of written sources 1 ... King of Pontus ... displaces the former authorities and assigns Diophantus, the outstanding general and diplomat, to command the armies. Diophantus arrived in Chersonesos c. 113 BC. Skiluros died at this time, and Palakus took power in the kingdom... (Vinogradov 1987, 70).

Stages of the Mausoleum building The erection of the anti-ramming defences that distorted the main aspect of the Mausoleum. The external door in the Eastern side still exists.

2 After the 1st victory over Palakus, Diophantus reduces military activity for a while. He provisions the land of the Tauroi, and conducts a parley with King Perisad. He then returns to his army in the Chersonesos ... and leads a field campaign to the heart of Scythia, where takes the fortresses of Khabei and Neapolis (Vinogradov 1987, 72-74).

Events in the Mausoleum funeral chamber The first and main burial ceremony in the Mausoleum.

Appearance in the chamber of not less than 8 coffins containing at least 11 burials.

3 C. 112 BC. Treacherous revolt of the Scythians from Pontic kingdom. In late autumn, Diophantus urgently returns to the Chersonesos with his army. The second campaign of Diophantus (late autumn’winter of 112-111 BC). The army sets out for the royal fortresses and turns to the Western Crimea. The siege of Kerkenitida and Kalos Limen. Complete victory of Diophantus (Vinogradov 1997, 74).

The external barricading of the door aperture in the eastern wall of the Mausoleum. It was replaced by the fighting platform flanking the gate of the fortress from the West.

Urgent and secret reburial of the important figure in the stone crypt. Sealing of the door aperture. Building of stairs and corridor connecting the chamber and the vicinity of the Southern Palace.

4 Early spring, the capture of the main Scythian fortresses. The panic retreat of Palakus and his retinue from the country (Vinogradov 1987, 74-75).

Total destruction of all features of the Southern Palace the rapid accumulation of the strata of crushed bricks (sub-horizon D1).

Partial robbery of the chamber via the corridor.

The erection of the anti-ramming defences, which so altered the external look of the Mausoleum, signifies the threat of enemies with battering rams. The only credible force at the time was represented by the armies of Pontus, hence the construction of the anti-ramming defenses is chronologically close to the beginning of the Crimean military campaign of Mithridates Eupator (Koltukhov 1990, 187). The date of Skiluros’ death is reliably determined as between 114 and 113 BC, corresponding to the first stage of the war, before the arrival of Diophantus (Vinogradov 1989, 249). There was then an interval (113-112 BC) during which there appeared in the chamber the c. 8 coffins with burials.

the skin with pitch and wax and extracting the internal organs (Polos’mak 1996, 165). It is very probable that Skiluros was partly mummified, and it was then impossible to alter the way his body was arranged on the throne-bed (Fig.??), without causing damage to his limbs. The partial robbery of some of the burials was the final part of the first stage of the history of the Mausoleum. The total destruction of Skiluros’ palace could have resulted from severe storm damage, or one of the obligatory conditions of the peace treaty (Vinogradov 1987, 75), or the final act of the presumed stay here by a garrison of the Pontic army.

Directly afterwards there was an emergency situation directly comparable to the events of autumn/winter 112-111 BC. Only the unexpected and complete defeat of the ScythianSarmatian army of Palakus could result in a breach of Neapolis’ walls and the profanation of the royal grave - the main sacred object of the state (Schultz 1953, 50-51). The immediate reaction was the fast and secret reburying of the royal personage, the complete external isolation of the chamber, and various additional actions whereby the defences were strengthened.

Of paramount interest is the age of those buried in the stone crypt. The literature leads us to believe that Skiluros died at a venerable age. However, in the written sources there is no indication of Skiluros’ age, and the writings of Posidonius and Appolonides differ on the subject. The sources constantly emphasize the large number of Skiluros’ progeny and this indirectly has an influence upon his image as an elderly man. However, the term “sons” mentioned in the sources is most likely conditional. It could be defined by the terminology in which Skiluros is the father of his people and the “sons” are his citizens, military and/or administrative chieftains (Koltukhov 1993, 213). Some probably were also his kin relatives. On coins, Skiluros was represented with a beard (Frolova); however, this attribute does not specifically represent old age.

There is a remaining puzzle. Why was the body of the king not laid to rest in a posture corresponding to the dimensions and construction of the stone crypt? The answer probably lies in the social status of the dead man. As is known, bodies of deceased nobles were often mummified [Herodotus, Hist., IV, 71]. The basic procedure, which did not require special knowledge and special preparation, consisted of saturating 59

Yu. Zaytsev

The age of the man buried in the stone crypt was defined by M.M. Gerasimov as approximately 40-45 years (Gerasimov 1955, 576) (Figs. 104-106). The modern examination of the skeleton and analysis of field photographs confirm such a conclusion (Ponomaryov 2001).

of this reconstruction took place immediately after the fire, and the second stage corresponds to the most Skiluros’ most active years - between the ages of 25 and 32. The unique situation regarding the significant burial within the Mausoleum demonstrates a paradoxical case and to which the archaeological dating can add nothing to the offered reconstruction.

If he lived until forty, and died around 114-113 BC, the comparison of these figures with the history of the Southern Palace reveals an interesting coincidence. At the time of the most severe fire (130 BC) the man would have been 19-24, and immediately after this disaster there began the development of this architectural complex and the strengthening of Neapolis’ defensive walls. The first stage

The burial goods can be widely dated from the middle of the 2nd to the middle of the 1st centuries BC, and a narrower date might be objectively limited to the second half of the 2nd century BC (Zaytsev 2001).

60

The Scythian Neapolis

ILLUSTRATIONS

61

Yu. Zaytsev

62

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 1. A general map of Scythian Neapolis.

Fig. 2. A detail from the city plan of Simferopol showing the location of Scythian Neapolis and its surroundings: 1) the settlement area. 2) the southern defensive wall. 3) the area of the south suburb. 4) modern springs. 5) ancient water reservoirs with dams. 6) parts of the west necropolis. 7) the east necropolis. 8) the Bitak necropolis. 9, 10) 1st century AD settlements of the on the lower terrace. 11) Kizil-Koba culture settlements of 9th/6th centuries BC. 12) Kizil-Koba culture settlement of end of 4th/beginning of 3rd century BC. 13) boundary of the ancient high water level of the Salgir river. 63

Yu. Zaytsev

A

B

64

The Scythian Neapolis

C

Fig. 3. A general view of Neapolis from the west, 1946. 3A-C - details.

Fig. 4. The rocky precipices of Scythian Neapolis. Water-colour by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1945. 65

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 5. Scythian Neapolis. View of ash mounds Nos. 2 and 3. Drawing by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1945.

Fig. 6. Plan of the Scythian Neapolis settlement by I.P. Blaramberg. 66

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 7. Plan of the settlement by F. Dubois de Montpéreux.

67

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 8. Plan of Scythian Neapolis by N.I. Veselovsky.

68

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 9. Plan of Scythian Neapolis drawn in 1946.

69

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 10. A modern plan of Scythian Neapolis showing all the excavated sections. 1) prospecting excavations (1993). 2) excavation, sector 9 (1989-1990). 3) section D (1955-1963). 4) prospecting excavations G (1958-1959). 5) north trench (1955). 6) prospecting excavations Zh (1957-1958). 7) section O (1985). 8) section I (1985). 9) section M (1985). 10) south trench (1954-1956). 11) section A-B-V (1945-1999). 12) section 7 (1983). 13) sections 7a, 7b, 7v (1983-1984). 14) section I (1959). 15) excavations by I.P. Blaramberg (1827) and A.S. Uvarov (1854). 16) section E (1957-1959). 17) excavations by N.L. Ernst (1926). 18) section 6 (1981-1984). 19) excavations of ash mound No. 3 (1956, 1978-1990). 20) section 1 (1958, 1980-1981). 70

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 11. Plan of the excavations of the east necropolis of Scythian Neapolis made in 1956-1958. Catacombs from period D.

71

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 12. Plan of the excavations of the Bitak necropolis. (After Puzdrovsky, 2001).

72

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 13. Plan of section A-B-V. A-E stratigraphical horizons. 73

Fig. 14. Section A-B-V. Basic stratigraphy. A-E stratigraphical horizons.

Yu. Zaytsev

74

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 15. Section A-B-V, Stratigraphical column of the layers of the Southern Palace (1) and floors of megaron N (2). 75

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 16. Plan of section D. A-F stratigraphical horizons.

Fig. 17. Semi-dug dwelling from horizon C at section D (1963). 76

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 18. 1) plan of sections 7a, 7b, 7v. 2) plan of section 1. 3) stratigraphy of section 1. A-E stratigraphical horizons. 77

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 19. General view of section E, 1958.

78

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 20. I) plan of section E: 1) building of the horizon E. 2) megaron E. 3) buildings of horizon C. 4) ash mound from horizon B. II) stratigraphy of a section of megaron E. Water-colour, 1958.

79

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 21. Stratigraphies. 1) section 6. 2-5) ash mounds No. 3. 6) west part of section O. 7) prospecting excavations in 1993. 8) northwest part of section D. 9, 10) section Zh. 11) section 7. A-F stratigraphical horizons. 80

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 22. The main building types at Scythian Neapolis.

81

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 23. Some masonry styles. 1) farmstead from sub-horizon E3 at section 1. 2) megaron N. 3) external façade of east wall of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 4) internal façade of north wall of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 5) semi-dug dwelling No. 2 from horizon C below ash mound No. 3. 6,7) masonry from horizon C at section 1. 8) adjoining the defensive at section 6 (horizon C). 9) west wall of building M from horizon C. 10) supporting wall of ash mound No. 3 from horizon B. 11,12) edges of semi-dug dwellings at section 6 (horizon A). 13) supporting wall in pit No. 1 at section 7a. 14) semi-dug dwelling in northeast part of ash-hill No. 3 (horizon A).

82

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 24. Some date indicators of horizons E-D at section A-B-V.

83

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 25. Some date indicators of horizons F-A from other excavations.

84

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 26. Excavating section B. The 1948 investigation of a deposit of broken ceramics from sub-horizon A1. The director of excavations, P.N. Schultz, is on the left.

Fig. 27. Excavating ash mound No. 3 in 1956. O.A. Makhneva (left), P.N. Schultz (centre).

85

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 28. The internal area of the defensive wall at section 6. 1981. On the right is S.G. Koltukhov.

Fig. 29. Section 7b. The clearing of a semi-dug dwelling from horizon E. 1983. In the centre is Yu. P. Zaytsev. 86

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 30. Central gate section of Scythian Neapolis (after D.G. Koltukhov, 1999). I-VI building periods: 1) wall dated to the first building period. 2) gateway. 3) pylons (of the tower base). 4) front wall. 5) Mausoleum. 5A) east tower. 6) tower anti-ramming areas. 7) peribole. 8) additional zone of proteichisme. 9) small courtyard in front of entrance to tower/mausoleum. 10) wall built after filling in of the courtyard. 11) gateway in proteichisme. 12) household pits in a passage in front of city gate. 13) steps in Mausoleum. 14) masonry zone in peribole. 15) stone work narrowing the gateway and blocking east entrance to peribole. 87

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 31. 1) plan of Scythian Neapolis with presumed features of sub-horizon E3: A) farmsteads. B) ash mounds. 2) plan of the excavation in 1926 with an area of defensive wall and find sites of Rhodian stamps.

88

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 32. Fragments of mould-made bowls from the suburban ash mound of sub-horizons E3-E2. 1988 excavations.

89

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 33. Fragments of terracottae from the suburban ash mound of sub-horizons E3-E2 (1-6) and sub-horizon E1 (7-8). A fragment of red plaster with graffiti from the layer of Fire 1 (9).

90

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 34. Plan of part of section A-B-V: megaron N. A-E stratigraphical horizons.

91

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 35. Closed deposit (horizon E1) from the building east of megaron N: 1) handmade ceramic weight. 2) jug rim. 3) handmade ceramic spinning-wheel. 4) drilled astragal. 5) cooking pot. 6) pot rim. 7) Rhodian amphora. 8) upper section of handmade pot. 9) lagynos. 92

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 36. Closed deposit (horizon E1). Local accumulation west of megaron N: 1) amphora of unknown origin. 2) Rhodian amphorae. 3,4) black-glazed cups. 5) lower section of ungventarium. 6) Egyptian faience bead. 7) astragali. 8) bronze plaque. 9) fragment of thimiatherion representing Demeter.

93

Fig. 37. Closed deposit (horizon E1). Local accumulation west of megaron N: Necks of Rhodian amphorae with stamped handles.

Yu. Zaytsev

94

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 38. Rock-cut pit in southwest area of the Southern Palace. 1948.

Fig. 39. Secondary use of stone slab in the masonry facing the earliest defensive wall at section E (1959).

95

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 40. Plan of the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis.

96

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 41. Alternative reconstructions of the Southern Palace. Horizons E-D. 97

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 42. Alternative reconstruction of megaron N.

98

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 43. Reconstruction of the frescoes from the west wall of megaron N. 99

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 44. Clay table/hearth from megaron N. Axonometry, longitudinal and cross-sections.

100

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 45. Fragment of the marble herma of Hecate (1) and a version of its reconstruction (2). From megaron N of the Southern Palace.

101

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 46. Limestone herma of a female deity from megaron N.

102

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 47. The head of the herma of a female deity from megaron N.

Fig. 48. A fragment of drapery of the herma of a female deity from megaron N. 103

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 49. Ritual pool (sub-horizon D4) from the Southern Palace.

104

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 50. Reconstruction of frescoes in the east apartment (1st floor) of House R in the Southern Palace.

105

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 51. Rock-cut pit and remains of the Mausoleum/Heroon of Argotus. 1) east section (1999). 2) plan of the pit.

106

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 52. 1) Alternative reconstruction of east façade of the Heroon of Argotus. 2) pilaster capital. 3) antis capital. 4) antis capital in situ (1949). 107

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 53. Situation of finds around rock-cut pit: 1) fragments of slab with inscription and relief. 2-15, 19) gold items. 16) bronze coin. 17) bone plate. 18) bronze brooch.

108

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 54. Situation of the reliefs, inscriptions, and fragments of sculpture on the plan of the Southern Palace.

109

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 55. Architectural remains in the south of Scythian Neapolis: 1) part of the masonry of the south façade. 2) the monumental alter. 3) architectural details of the monumental altar. 4) the monumental altar in 1946. 5) fragment of a small marble altar (?) with Greek inscription. 6) limestone slab with remains of Greek inscription. 110

Fig. 56. Slab with inscription referring to Argotus (1999).

The Scythian Neapolis

111

Fig. 57. Inscription referring to Argotus from the Southern Palace of Scythian Neapolis.

Yu. Zaytsev

112

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 58. Pedestal with inscription referring to king Skiluros (2002).

Fig. 59. Pedestal with inscription referring to king Skiluros. Drawing.

113

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 60. Pedestals of statues with dedications: 1) to the goddess of Rhodes. 2) to Athena Lindia. 3) to Zeus Atabirios. 4) to Achilles. 5) inscription referring to Khodarz. 6) inscription with a dedication to the all gods. 114

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 61. Pedestal with dedication to Zeus Atabirios (2002).

115

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 62. Pedestal with dedication to Athena Lindia (2002).

116

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 63. Fragments of marble statues: 1) female hand. 2) male torso.

117

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 64. Fragment of a male torso (2002).

Fig. 65. Fragments of the statue of Zeus Atabirios placed on the reconstruction of a statue of Zeus seated (19th century). 118

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 66. Fragments of bronze statues from the Southern Palace.

119

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 67. Fragment of the relief representing two persons. (Gypsum copy from the Bakhchisarai State Historical/Cultural Reserve, 2002.)

Fig. 68. Fragment of the relief representing two persons. (Gypsum copy.) 120

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 69. Relief representing a young horseman.

121

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 70. Relief representing a young horseman (2002).

122

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 71. Relief representing a young horseman (2002, detail). 123

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 72. Relief representing a young horseman (2002, detail).

124

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 73. 1) Previous alternative reconstruction of “Building with porticos K” from the Southern Palace complex. 2) Recent alternative reconstructions: A) the south façade. B) the Heroon of Argotus. C) central gate. 125

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 74. Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon E). 126

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 75. 1) Handmade vessels from the suburban ash mound of the horizon E. 2) plan of semi-dug dwellings excavated in the west of section O (sub-horizon E2). 127

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 76. Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon D).

128

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 77. Handmade vessels from the Southern Palace (horizon D).

129

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 78. Samples of amphorae from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D) 1, 10) Sinopa. 2, 11) Kos. 3, 13) Rhodes. 4) Chersonesos. 5) brown-clay amphorae. 6, 8, 12) unknown centres. 7) Knidos. 9) southern Pontus (light-clay amphorae). 130

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 79. Pottery from the Southern Palace (horizon E).

131

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 80. Samples of graffiti on amphorae from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). 132

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 81. Samples of supposed ceramic production from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). 133

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 82. Ungventaria from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). 134

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 83. Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), cups. 135

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 84. Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), plates, dishes. 136

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 85. Imported (coated) ceramics from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D), lagynoi.

137

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 86. Ceramic altars (and fragments) from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). 138

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 87. Imported cooking ware from the Southern Palace. (horizons E-D). 139

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 88. Closed deposit (sub-horizon D1) from the east house of the Southern Palace: 1) upper section of handmade incense-burner. 2) neck of lagynos. 3) very small amphora. 4) terracotta representing Aphrodite and Eros. 5) lead weight. 6) bronze key. 7) painted jug. 140

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 89. Fragments of mould-made bowls from the Southern Palace (horizons E-D). (1992-1993 excavations.)

141

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 90. Finds at section D, horizon E.

142

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 91. Finds at the section 7v, horizons E-D: 1-3) fragments of mould-made cups. 4) fragment of iron sword. 5) upper section of red painted jug. 6, 8-9) handmade vessels. 7) ceramic altar. 10-13) ceramic spinning-wheels.

143

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 92. Bone items (1-10, 14, 15, 18), stone (11-13, 23), clay (19-22) and shells (16-17) from different sections. Horizons E-D.

144

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 93. Casting moulds made from handles of Rhodian amphorae, horizons E-D: 1-2) section A-B-V. 3) section E.

145

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 94. Plan of the lower level of the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

146

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 95. Façades of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 147

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 96. East view of the Mausoleum of Skiluros, after excavation (1948).

Fig. 97. West view of the Mausoleum of Skiluros, after excavation (1948).

148

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 98. Plan/reconstruction of the Mausoleum within the fortification system of the central gate.

149

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 99. Mausoleum of Skiluros. Door/aperture.

150

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 100. Mausoleum of Skiluros. Door/aperture (1948).

151

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 101. Stone crypt of the Mausoleum (1946).

152

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 102. Stone crypt of the Mausoleum. 153

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 103. Stone crypt of the Mausoleum. Plan of the burial in the stone crypt (detail).

154

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 104. Skull from the stone crypt (1946).

Fig. 105. Skull from the stone crypt. Drawing by M.M. Gerasimov.

155

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 106. Reconstruction of the face modeled on the skull from the stone crypt. After M.M. Gerasimov. 156

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 107. Helmet from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

157

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 108. Sword (1) and spearheads (2) from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros. 158

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 109. Finds from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros: 1, 3, 6) silver. 2) gold. 4) iron. 5, 7, 8) bronze. 9) glass.

159

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 110. Finds from below the throne-bier of the Mausoleum of Skiluros: 1-10, 12, 14-22) gold. 11) cornelian. 13) glass, gold, amber, cornelian.

160

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 111. Iron items from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

161

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 112. Gold ornaments from the stone crypt of the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

162

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 113. Location of the remains of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

163

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 114. Location of the details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

164

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 115. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

165

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 116. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

166

Fig. 117. Carved details of the throne-bier from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

The Scythian Neapolis

167

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 118. Alternative reconstruction of the throne-bier.

168

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 119. Vessels from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) burial No. 34. 2, 3) coffin III. 4, 6) the main burial. 5) coffin X. 7) coffin II. 169

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 120. Vessels from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) burial No. 34. 2, 7) coffin III. 3) coffin II. 4) coffin XII. 5, 6, 8, 9) coffin X. 170

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 121. Ceramic altar from the Mausoleum of Skiluros.

171

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 122. Some finds from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1) coffin VII. 2) coffin IV. 3-5) coffin II. 6) coffin III. 7) coffin XXIV.

172

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 123. Some finds from the burials of the Mausoleum: 1, 2, 10-12) coffin I. 3, 5, 7) coffin VII. 4, 6, 8) coffin X. 13) coffin II. 14) coffin XXVII. 15) coffin III. 16) coffin XV. 173

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 124. Grave No. 21 from the east necropolis: 3, 7, 8) gold. 5, 9) silver. 4) bronze, iron. 6) clay. 10-11) bronze.

174

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 125. Grave No. 57 (1982) from the east necropolis: 3) jade. 4) stone. 5) shell. 6) bronze, iron. 7-11) iron. 12) clay.

175

Fig. 126. Megarons Z, K, L from the suburban territory, horizon C. Plan and alternative reconstruction.

Yu. Zaytsev

176

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 127. Some finds from excavations of megarons Z, K, L: 1) whetstones. 2) spinning-wheels. 3) pestle. 4) bone file. 5-8) fragments of zoomorphic figures. 9) stone ball. 10) bone plates with engraving. 11) lead item. 12-14) astragali. 177

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 128. Closed deposit of layer from Fires 3/4 found near megarons Z, K, L. 1) handmade items. 2) handmade incense-burner. 3) handmade ceramic lid. 4-5) handmade ceramic lamps. 6-7, 11) red-slip cups. 8-10) grey-gloss pottery. 12) fragments of light-clay amphorae. 178

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 129. Semi-dug dwelling No. 1 (horizon C) found below ash mound No. 3 (1986).

Fig. 130. Semi-dug dwellings 1 and 2 (horizon C) found below ash mound No. 3: 1) plan. 2) alternative reconstruction. 179

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 131. Amphorae from horizon C, section A-B-V.

180

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 132. Pottery (1, 3, 5, 6), red-slip vessels (7-9) and handmade pots (2, 4) from horizon C. 1-3) megaron N, layer of Fire 4. 4) layer from horizon C at section B. 5) infant burial in square 90 of section A. 6-9) megarons Z, K, L.

181

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 133. Crypt No. 155 from the Bitak necropolis (After Puzdrovsky 2002).

182

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 134. Finds from crypt No. 155 of the Bitak necropolis (After Puzdrovsky 2002). 183

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 135. Location of objects (horizon B) from ash mound No. 3: 1) defensive wall. 2) ash mound E. 3) paved road. 4) supporting wall of sub-horizon B2. 5) “Sanctuary of the three menhirs”. 6) ash mounds from sub-horizon B3.

184

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 136. 1-2) “The sanctuary of the three menhirs” (1979).

185

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 137. Fragments of terracottae from ash mound E (horizon B).

186

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 138. Bronze statuettes of the Dioscuri from the ash mound E (horizon B).

187

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 139. Fragments of glass vessels from ash mound E (horizon B). 188

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 140. Fragments of glass vessels (1, 9-11, 16, 19) and beads (2-8, 13-15, 17-18) from ash mound E (horizon B). 12) glass inlay.

189

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 141. Finds from ash mound E (horizon B): 1, 2, 8) brooches. 3, 5-7, 11) bronze details of caskets. 4) gold pendant. 9, 12, 13, 15, 18-19) fragments of iron items. 10) fragment of a green-glazed relief vessel. 11) bronze buckle. 16) handmade incense-burner. 17) bronze bar. 20) fragment of handmade ceramic zoomorphic figure. 21) chalk incense-burner. 22, 24) fragments of bone pyxidae. 23) fragments of a red-slip lamp. 190

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 142. Individual finds from ash mound No. 3: 1) gold stater of Bosphorean king Remetalk (150/151 BC). 2) zoomorphic handmade ceramic figure (horizon B). 3) terracotta fragment. 4) fragment of figured red-slip vessel.

191

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 143. Some horizon B finds from ash mound No. 3. 1-3, 17) red-slip vessels. 4) bronze pincers. 5) handmade ceramic spinning-wheel. 6) graffito on amphora sherd. 7) ceramic item. 8, 12) bone awls. 9, 14, 15) handmade ceramic vessels. 10, 16, 18) ceramic zoomorphic figures. 11) whetstones. 20) ceramic weight. 192

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 144. Some horizon B finds from different sections: 1-3) ceramic handmade vessels found together in northeast part of section A-B-V. 4) fragment of tile with black paint from ash mound No. 3 (horizon B). 5) whetstone with an image in black paint from ash mound No. 3 (horizon B). 6-9) finds from household No. 31 at section A-B-V: red-slip vessel (6), fragments of zoomorphic figures (7, 9), and amphora neck with red paint (8). 193

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig.145. Reconstruction of the frescoes from megaron A (after I.V. Yatsenko).

194

Fig. 146. Graffiti on the west wall of megaron A, horizon B (after O.D. Dashevskaya).

The Scythian Neapolis

195

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 147. Plan of the burial in the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V (1). Plans of some of the accompanying horse burials (2).

196

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 148. Some finds from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V. 1, 2, 9) bronze. 3-8) gold-covered bronze. 11, 20, 22) gold-covered iron finds. 12-17, 19, 21) iron. 18) cornelian, glass. 197

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 149. Rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V (1949).

Fig. 150. Sword from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V. 198

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 151. Chalcedony beads from rock-cut grave of (horizon B) at section A-B-V.

Fig. 152. Iron horse-bridle bits, with cheek-pieces, from the rock-cut grave (horizon B) at section A-B-V.

199

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 153. I) Finds from section A-B-V, the elite necropolis of horizon B. 1-2) gold items from the rock-cut infant burial. 3-9) iron and bronze details of horse trappings from horse burial No. 4. II) Finds from the rock-cut grave at section 7v. 1) glass and jet beads. 2) silver earring. 3) plan of the grave. 4) 1983 photograph. 200

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 154. Grave No. 120 from the Bitak necropolis. Plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 2001). 201

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 155. Grave No. 172 from the Bitak necropolis. Plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 2001). 202

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 156 a. Grave No. 71/1983 from the east necropolis (after Puzdrovsky 1992). 203

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 156 b. Grave No. 73/1984 from the east necropolis (after Puzdrovsky 1992). 204

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 157. Horizon A granaries at section A-B-V. 1) 1948 photograph. 2) Drawing by A.N. Karasev, 1949. 205

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 158. Complex of horizon A granaries at section A-B-V (1948).

Fig. 159. Set of astragali from the closed deposit (horizon A1) at section A-B-V (1948). 206

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 160. The closed ceramic deposit (horizon A1) at section A-B-V. 207

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 161. Handmade ceramic vessels from section A-B-V (horizon A).

208

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 162. Handmade ceramic vessels and amphora from section A-B-V (horizon A). 209

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 163. Ceramic vessels from section A-B-V (horizon A).

210

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 164. Ceramic vessels from different sections (horizon A1). 211

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 165. Finds from different sections (horizon A): 1, 11) bone. 2-4) glass. 5,7, 8, 10 ,12-17) bronze. 6) iron. 18-20) clay. 212

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 166. Finds from section D (sub-horizon A1). 1, 3) handmade ceramic vessels. 2) red-slip jug. 4) iron spearhead.

213

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 167. Fragments of millstones from section A-B-V (horizon A). 214

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 168. Closed sub-horizon A1 deposit from section A-B-V (1948).

Fig. 169. Closed deposit in the household pit (square 2v) of section D (1960).

215

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 170. Silver plate of the Bosphorean queen Gepepyreos from section D (sub-horizon A1) (After I.V. Yatsenko).

216

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 171. Red-slip vessels from the closed deposit at section D. (sub-horizon A1).

Fig. 172. Tile samples from megaron A. Sub-horizon A1, section D. 217

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 173. Child burials in pots. Section 7v. Horizon A. 218

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 174. Skeletons of people killed near entrance to megaron A. Sub-horizon A1. Section D (1958).

Fig. 175. Male skeleton in household pit. Vicinity of east necropolis (1983).

219

Fig. 176. Interior of crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Water-colour by O.I. Dombrovsky, 1946.

Yu. Zaytsev

220

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 177. Crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Details of painting (1946).

221

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 178. Crypt No. 9 of east necropolis. Representation of a musician (1) and a version of reconstruction of his costume (2).

222

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 179. Grave No. 70/1983 of east necropolis: 1-14) plan and finds (after Puzdrovsky 1992). 15) reconstruction of the youth’s costume. 223

Yu. Zaytsev

Fig. 180. Graves Nos. 75 (1-3), 76/1984 (4-21). Horizon A, east necropolis. 224

The Scythian Neapolis

Fig. 181. Handmade pot containing animal bones. Section 6, horizon A (1984).

225

Yu. Zaytsev

226