THE RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY of Tttr URNFIELD COMPLEX and TT{E DATING of CULTURAL PHENOMENA in the PONTIC AREA (LATE BRONZE AGE and EARLY IRON AGE

Baltic-Potrtic Sn:i:! vol.12: 2003, 361-::: PL ISSN 1231-t,:.r-

Marcin IgnaczaĘ Katarzyna Slusarska-Michali\

THE RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF TTtr URNFIELD COMPLEX AND TT{E DATING OF CULTURAL PHENOMENA IN THE PONTIC AREA (LATE BRONZE AGE AND EARLY IRON AGE

The study of developmentrelationships - "contacts" betweentaxa general.. associatedwith the Urnfield Complex (UC) and Pontic Area cultures - holdir. in the late Bronze Age and in the early Iron Age calls for - already in the initia- stage- making the absolutechronolory more accurate(Fig. 1). At present,for the areas of interest to us here, there is a chance for develo- ping an integratedperiodization scheme supportedby referencesto absolutedates and covering the Lusatian culture (LC) in the Baltic area and the Bilogrudovka (BgC), Chornoles (ChC) and Bilozerka (BzC) cultures in the Pontic area (Fig. 1). An obstaclein developingsuch a scheme is the "fragmentariness"of data comins from individual zones. This is particularly true for UC contact areas- its eastem frontiers and steppe and forest-steppecultures of the Northern Pontic Area west of the Dnieper. In the studies of the developmentrelationships carried out so far, two bran- ches can be distinguished:an "eastern" one and a'lpestern" one. The "eastern" branch is concerned chiefly with pre-Scythian- read Cimmerian - influences on the cultures of the Carpathian Basin and the LC [cf. Bukowski 1976; Kos- sack 1980:109-143;Chochorowski 19921;while in the "western" branch, the key issue is whether western or southwesternelements (Mediterranean)had a share ir the origins of cultures of the westernDnieper drainage.As the groundworkfor such studies served the "traditional", typochronologicaldating [cf. Otroshchenko, Radiocarbon..., in this volume, see there for further literature].The prevailing view was that the presence of eastern - Scythian - traits and western - "Lu- satian" - ones (mainly in weaponry) in cultureswest of the Dnieper justified the formulatingof hypothesesof axpansionof the Scythianand Lusatian culturesin the 383

Na mm^ ---- D .l.l:lile r ffi e sNn F ig. l. Tbe range of cultural units encountered in the alea between the Baltic and Black sęas in the |ate Bronze Age and early Iron Age, Culture groups: A - Lusatian culture, B - Gava-Goligrady culture, C- Vysotskoculture,D-Chornolesculture,E-Bilozerl(aculture,F-Bilogrudovkaculture,G-Hordeevka type' H - chiśinau-corlitetri l.c datęd sitęs: l - Nalkowo 9' 2. zgłowiączka 3' 3 . słaq,skowięIkie 12' 4 - Ifuczkowo5,5 - cięchrz 2,6 - Bozejewice22,7 - z.Łgotki3,8 - Siniarzewol,9 - czerniak 3, r0. Krusryica 2/4, 11 . Radojewice, 12 - Kochłovatoe, 13 - stepnoy, 14 - Hordeevką 15 - Dnestrovka-Luka, 16 - Subotiv, 17 - Obukiiv

fate Bronze Age and early Iron Age [Sulimirski 1936:40-54;Klochko 1992:.783-7901' 1993; 20071.The studies cited seem to suggest a pulsative nature of information flow within the Baltic-Pontic ecological and cultural borderland.It has to be kept in mind, however, that the absence of consistent cfuonological scales may result in a false picture. Any further study of these matters must be preceded by an accurate dating of relevant cultural phenomena,i.e. tating into account radiocarbondates. This task requires maling a series of measurements for diagnostic assemblages to identĘ internal divisionsof taxa' settling this matter seemsparticularly inter€sting when viewed from the perspectiveof the subsequentcultural changesthat afiected c€ntral and eastern Europe in the decline of the Bronze Age and the dawn of the Iron Age, specifically,the substitutionof UC traits by those of the Hallstatt culture and the appearanceof nomadsrelated to CimmeTiansand Sc)'thianson Pontic steppes. 384

The goal of this paper is to review brieffy the state of radiocarbonexploratio: of the Urnfield Complex and to outline the plans for further necessaryresearch. Fc: the area of the UC (LC), the study relies on chronologicaldeterminations for th. Polish Lowlands [chieflyKujawy Uplands - see Ignaczak 2002:137-141],where- for the Northern Pontic Area west of the Dnieper the same role is played by lanc. lying betweenthe Dniester and Dnieper rivers (Fig. 1). The point of departurefor the discussionof absolutechronology is the class:: typochronologicalperiodization, therefore, it shall be a frameworkfor our discussic: hęre as well'

1. THE FOUNDATIONS OF ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY OF TH' DIAGNOSTIC TRAITS OF THE URNFIELD COMPLE\ THE LUSATIAN CULTURE IN KUJA\\-:

The presentedconclusions are selectiveand concernonly a fragmentof the L i oecumene,namely, the Polish Lowlands (Kujawy).According to a recentlysugges!:: taxonomicdivision, LC phenomenain Kujawy relating to the Bronze Age and t:. early Iron Age may be placed in five horizons dated using the radiocarbonmethc: Thę horizons cover the period of 1550-800/700BC flgnaczak 2002:87tr,see Fig' - and Tab.11. Two groups of artifact assemblagesare the most interestingfor the subje--: at hand. They are dated approximatelyat (a) the Bronze Age IV-V periods a:: (b) the Hallstatt C/D periods (accordingto classicperiodŁations by Montelius a:: Kostrzewski)for they make up a supraregionalset of artifactstlpical of the youn::: developmentphases of the LC. a. A significantanalytical advantage ofiered by the assemblagesof the first group . the possibilityof their synchronizationwith macrospatialidentifiers of UC tradiri;::, such as socketedaxeheads with loops, Reutlingen and Hemigkofen type swordsa:: lancet spearheads.This set of traits is supplementedby the stylistics of cera:.:- goods featuringmainly ornamentsof incised lines (Fig. 2). Absolute dating ba..: on calibratiofl nsiflg wiqqlematchĘ [Weninger1986:38-40] permits us to place : : assemblagesin the interval from the beginningof the 14thuntil the end of the 1--:: century BC (cf. Table 1, lines 15-25). b. In the case of the second group, an important characteristicis the possibl:: of synchronizingth€ altifacts with late Lusatian phenomenaidentified by their :. naments and pottery moryhology. The chief reference is assemblagescontaix-: pottery decoratedwith pricks under the rim and incised lines (arrangedin a :::' ditional Lusatian way - horizontal lines enhancedby angular elements arrani:: horizontallyas well - see Fig. 3). They are recorded throughoutthe oecumenĆ : 385 fl\-l\" !_:\( ffi\

0 5cm

u 5dn

Fig. 2. A selection of ceramic forms of the LusatiaD cultue in Ifujaviy ftom the Bronze Age ry-V periods. siniarzedo, site 1' Kujawy-Pomerania Pfovincę (, ot Table 1 Absolute dating (r4C) ol Lusatian cullure assemblages lrom t(rjawy

Site Dat€ No Culture" Mate s.l Lab. No Conv. BP Cal BC Cal BC Locstion Sanple (95,4%)b (68,fEo). l 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 l0 1. Narkowo 9 Pit 1 LCI czeb'esfu}' IgnacaŁ Łoś 1987 Gd-228 32m+9O 1780-14m 1ó90'1500 2. Narkowo 9 pit 175 LCt czebr€szuk' lgna€zaĘ Ło.ś1987 charcoal Gd-2619 2880+80 1400,800 1220-980 3. zgo\riączkA 3 LC IIa Makarowi€z 1998 Ki-6886 3260+45 1680-1440 1620-1500 4. slawsko wielki€ 12 pit A84 LC Ila Ignacza}' szsmałeĘ ctogowski 2003 Ki7821 3090+60 1520-1210 1440-13m 5- sła!^to wielkie 12 pit B31 LC IIa lgnacz.}' szanałeŁ Głogowski 2003 Ki-1822 3020+60 1430-1090 1400-1210 6. ltuczkowo 5 pit C189 LC IIa Ignac!&k 2Ńz,2|n3 Ki-7820 3010+60 1420-1060 1390,1200 't. cieó' 2 Pir A10 LC IIb szamałek' Gtogo*ski' Ignacza} 2003 Ki-7an 2910+60 131G920 1ff0-lJn 8. Ciecbl"f pit A15 LC IIb szam3łek, Głogowski, Ignaczak 2003 Ki-7818 f940+60 1320-990 1260-1050 9. Pit 81 LC IIb sz3małek, Gło8o*ski lgnaczak m03 Ki-8907 2870+80 1290-830 rL30.920 10. BożrjevicŁ 2.u23 pir E19 LC IVT s7jJr]ateŁ Głogowski Ęnacak 2003 Ki-7816 2845+60 1220-8m 1100-920 11. Zego&i 3 pit 495 LC NNII szanaleĘ Głogotski' Ignaczak 2003 K7U3 2890ł50 1260-920 1160-1000 t2. Siniarfewo 1 pir H91 LC lII Ignaczak fN2,20O3 Ki-6250 31ó0+40 1520-1390 1460-1415 13. Sinianewo 1 pit H91 LC nl IEnaśzak2002,2003 Ki-6251 3120+35 1510"1310 1440-138t) 14. Siriarfewo 1 pit H114 LCI IEnaEzslK200f, m03 Ki-6244 3080+40 1440-12ć0 1,4f0,1310 Sini,au ewo 1 tr'irH80 LC rV lgna4za\ 2@2,2'/]3 Ki.ó249 3070+40 1430-1250 1410-1310 Siniarz ewo 1 Pir I95 LC rV Igna(zak 2Ń2,2003 Ki-6578 3025+40 |410.12Ń 139G1250 17. siniaŹewo 1 pit 1320 LCIv Ignaczak f002,2003 Kt-6579 3010+35 1400-1130 1320-12j0 18. Siniarzewo I Pit 1392 LCIv Ignaczak 200f,2003 Ki 6577 3040+40 1420-1210 1390-r26t) 19. Siniarzewo 1 pit J103 LCN IsnaczslK 2002,2003 Ki-6574 3065+35 1420.12(fi 1405"1310 20. Siniarzewo 1 pit H54 LCV Ignaczak 2002, 2003 Ki,65lr0 2955r 40 t:l2t)l0-10 t?7t) tt) 21. Siniarrewo 1 pit 11 I,C V I8nrcztrk201)2,2001 Xiór7ń t,,/0 |tJ0 22. pir 1282 I,CV l8nrr,Órl2r)l'f. 2lll)l Il,|l |||'ł|l trlt Itl 1 2 3 5 6 1 8 9 10 23. pit t20f LCV lgnac'.* 2W2; 2003 Ki-6575 2925+40 1270-10m 1f20-1$0 24. Sinianewo 1 Pit K164 LCV tg a.r.ak2002;2003 Kj-6573 2950+40 1310-1030 1260-1100 25. trtuczkowo 1 pit A44 LCV Ignasz{|{20(n; 2003 Ki,7819 2930+50 1310-990 1220-1060 26. Czemiak 3a LCV lgn .zak 2002 Ki-6494 2820!35 110G900 1010-920 21. Czemiak 3a LCV Ignaczak 2002 Ki'ó495 2745+40 1000,820 93G835 28. Knszwica K-2l4 pit 48 LCV Na'ożna.szarnałek 1987; szafi\^ł.k |99f . cd-5047 2ó80+60 1000.7ó0 865-795 29. Kruszs,ica K-2f4 pit 46 LCV Narcżna.sz€nałek 1987; szźmalek 1992. Gd.5&ó 2ó50+60 940-750 900-780 30. Kruszwic{ K-2J4 pit 45 LCV Naroź a.szamałek 1987; sfamalek 1992. cbarcoal Gd-3302 2460+60 n0-4n 760-680 Pit B11 LCV szarndeĘ GIogowski, Ign5czal. 2003 Ki-8904 2680+80 105G750 920-790 32. Ze8otki 18 pit c10 LCV samałek' Głogol'./ski,Ignacz.k 2003 Ki-8905 2590+80 90G480 700,540 Ciechrf Z pit A12 LCV szamałeŁ Gło8owski, lgnaczŹ} 2003 Ki.890ó 2550+70 83G480 '700-5m 34. BożŁjegłi.e2a pit A21 LCV szamałeŁ ologo$,ski' Ignaczak 2003 Ki-8908 2540+70 810,480 7fi-sm 35. Radojewice 24 LCV |gnaęak2f0.z Ki.ó493 2510+35 8fir520 ó40.540 Radojewice 24 LCV tgn8truak2ffi2 Kj-6492 'IO+4O 7m-410 770-520 shwśko wielkie 12 pit 434 LCV IgnaczjŁ szalrMłek' Glogowski 2003 Ki-8m3 2800+70 r05G840 116G810 lłielkie 38. sławśko 12 pit 4108 LCV Ignacz'Ł szanałek' Glo8owski 2003 Ki-8902 2i90+1O 'tffi-690 770-380

" Aiter lgnasak 2002 ' " oxcal 3-4.

-l 388

..eastern the LC''l (the area east of the Noteć River line - see Fig. 1).A signińc-: factor is certain spatial continuiĘ of these traits in Kujawy [Ignaczak,Głogo*-1 20031as well as in southeasternPoland [Czopek 1996,Fig. 11].This group of cui:-- ral traits may be dated at the time intewal from the middle of the 10th to the .:: of the 7th century BC (see Tab. 1, lines 31-38).

2. THE TYPOCHRONOLOGY OF "WESTERN" TRAITS IN THE NORTHEi'' PONTIC AREA WEST OF THE DNIEPE..

It must be observedfust that Uklaine west of the DnĘer was coveredby n : zones of east-westcirculation of cultural information in the late Bronze Age a:: the early Iron Age. These were (a) Polesie-forest-steppeand (b) steppezones. a. The first zonę was inhabited by the groups that had glown from thę tradili:: of the Tizciniec Cultural Circle (TCC): the BgC and ChC, genetically related :- the former and being its continuation, as well as the Vysotsko culture (VC, tr: questionof its origin and the participationof TCC environmentin it is debatable Among "western" traits, associatedchiefly with the LC, a number of metal goo:. are counted in this environment.They include weapons (socketed axeheads\\ii: loops, Reutlingen and Hemigkofen type swords and lancet spearheads)and orn"- ments.It is worth mentioninghere that the origins of a certain group of ornamen:-. demonstratingcentral European traits may be related to the genetic substratu: of these cultures the TCC environment.Furthermore, it was to the impact .: western influencesthat cremations in vessels-urnswas attributed.The range an: dynamicsof the spreadingof these traits east are, however,a subjectof discussi(-: [cf. Berezanskaya1982; Klochko 2001]. b. In the other - steppe- zone,Bzc groupsdeveloped in the late Bronze Age ar: early Iron Age. They were related to the environmentof the Srubnaya or Sabat:- novka culture [cf. Otroshchenko 1986].In the assemblagesof this taxon,"westem- traits - characteristicof the environment of Thracian Hallstatt - were treatea as elementshelpful in building chronologies.They were most readily observablei: pottery assemblages,with ornamentation(fluting)' Suńace treatment (burnishing and morphologryof vessels being the major tell-tale signs. Pottery showing "rve- stern" traits is found mainly in burials. Another element displaying '\restern" c: "southwestern"characteristics in the contextsof the BzC is the bowJike fibula [see Otroshchenko,Radiocarbon. . . , in this volume]. It must stressedthat the impact of the cultural centre related to the circle of Gava-Goligrady (and cliental cultures) is readily observablein both the steppe

l ldentifi€d Ę tbe absence of..boss sry]e'' in pottery lrnore on this issue _ Ignaczak' cłogowski 2oo3]' t89

-P:/ \a W I ..+7 Y \,-liV A \'ź, \2 u ,r4^'.:---':. '\Ń\\\\i(:.

ą Dq Ę\q ł4h, /Ń a t'ti:::"!MudnA '

F i g. 3. A selectionof ceramic forms (with eastern influences) of the Lusatian culture in KujaBy fiom the Hallstatt C,D periods.Piecki, sire8, KujaBy PomeraniaProvince: 1-12 390 zone, Polesie-foreststeppe zone of the Nolthern Pontic Area and southeŁr::- Poland. Furthermore,for the studyofthe spreadingofcultural patterns,Pontic exch..: trails, going along the Prut, Dniester, Boh and Dnieper rivers, are of conside:.: ,: importance.Their significance,also for transcontinentalexchanges, is supporte: :- the case of the Hordeevka cemeteryfor one. The chronologicalposition of the taxawas determinedrelying mainly on str::- graphicdata and the typochronolos/of metal goods.The stratigraphicobservati: r. of settlementsrelated to the Bgc set the position of this taxonbetween the ęasie:: TH (Tizciniec-Komarów) and early Iron phenomena linked to the chc' Ta}C- the turn of the 12th century bc (i.e., on uncalibratedscale) to be the decline :: Tizciniec groups,S.S. Berezanskayadetermined the chronologyof the taxon at ::: 11th-9thcentury bc. This chronologr was supposedlysupported by the appearar-- of pottery forms and metal goods from the Noua environment in BgC conter,. [Berezanskaya1982]. The concurrenceof the set of metal goods in the conteril -: the discussedtaxon and BzC groups, as well as affinitieswith the products of t:. Krasniy Mayak metallurgicalcentre, were the reasonsfor moving the chronologi..Ł bracketsof the cultural system to 141hi13th-11thcentury bc [Chmykhov,Chem-'- akov 1988].The final date of the functioning of BgC groups coincides with ti: appearanceof ChC assemblageśin the same area geneticallyrelated to the fc:. mer culture. Until recently, this taxon has been dated to the period of 1050----- bc [Illinskaya,Terenozhkin 1986].This dating was corroboratedby the analysis:: ceramic assemblagesf€atuling fluting and stamp ornamentsshowing affinities lrit: Gava-Goligrady,Chiśinau-Corlóteni i Saharna/Coziaassemblages. Besides potter.. evidence for building a ChC chronology was supplied by the presence of meta. indicatingC-arpathian connections and, above all, objectsrelated to the Cimmeria- horizon. Initially,BzC assemblageswere taten to reflect the late phase of the SrubDa\: culture.The tTaditionalapproach to their chronologywas affectedabove all by stra- tigraphic observations.The assemblagesoccupied a place between the stratum o: Sabatinovkaand that of the Chernogorovka phase of the Cimmerian culture. O. T. Terenozhkin,relying on the presenceof fibulae showingaffinities with bow-5pe fibulae(Pantalica type) in the contextsof the BzC, dated this culture to 1150-900bc fTerenozhJcin1965]. Of high importancefor building the chronolory were A. L Me- liukova's observations,who drew attentionto the presenceof traits from the circle of Thracian Hallstatt in ceramic and metal assemblages[Melyukova 1979].Havilg distinguishedBilozerka-t'?e phenomenaas a separatearchaeological culture, v.v. Otroshchenko suggestedto date it at the interval of 12th-10thcentury bc [1981: 1985].Such chronologicalbrackets, synchronous with the BD/HaA1-HaA2,ts1 period, have been maintainedin V. P. Vanchugov'smonograph [1990]. 397

3. THE RADIOCARBON CHRONOLOGY OF "WESTERN" TRAITS IN THE NORTHERN PONTIC AREA WEST OF THE DNIEPER

In pursuance of the observationsmade above, the chronologicalschemes of Late Bronze and Early Iron taxa of Ukraine westof the DnĘer were developedfor the most part relying on stratigraphicand typochronologicalfindings. The growing numberof laC measurementsallows us to verify the assumed,"classic" chronological brackets(Fig. 7; Tab. Z). The researchhas brought about a more accuratechronology of the BzC based on dates for the cemetery in Stepnoy. Relying on the obtafueddata, one can set the period when this cultural systemfunctioned at the interval from the middle of the 12th to the middle of the 9th century BC [cf. Otroshchenko,Radiocarbon.. ., in this volume].Such a late dating of this taxon corroboratesthe hypothesesabout the independentdevelopment of Hordeevka-gpe complexesand their share in the formationof the BzC [Klochko 2001:256]and/or ChC [Krushelnitska1998:193-797), which is suggestedin the literature. In respect of the BgC and ChC, we do not have a satisfactorynumber of measurements.A series of dates for the Subotiv site is an exception. An older stratum,which can be related to the decline stage of the BgC, has been dated at 1300-1200BC, whereas strata correspondingto the ChC, in agreementwith the obtained dates,match with the period of 1200-1000BC. A proposal to date earlier the onset of Cimmerian eĘansion into the Pontic Area, i.e. to the end of the 9th centuryBC, has a direct bearingon the discussionof cultural transformationsat the thresholdof the Iron Age [cf. Klochko, Kovaliukh, Skripkin, Motzenb ecker 7998:667-673].In respect of the ChC, there are available four measurementsfrom the fortified settlementat Dniestrovka.They can be gro- uped into two chronological levels: 1300-1100and 1000-800BC, with older dates having been rejected as being too early [Smirnova 1986].In the light of analyses made for the Subotiv site, it seems necessaryto review the chronologyof Dniester ChC complexesrelying on the new series of dates. The data available for building a radiocarbon chronolog;rcome for the most part from sites located in the Dnieper drainage,namely, Subotiv and Stepnoy.For any further studies,it seemsnecessary to obtain a seriesof dates from sites of the following cultures:Bilozerka, Bilogrudovka, Chornoles and Vysotsko.They are all . located in the interfluvialarea betweenthe Dniester and Boh rivers,i.e. in the area where both "Lusatian" and "Gdva" influencesare oarticularlvclear. (r) NJ

Abso|ule dating (]ac) assemb|ages from the Nońhern Pontic A.ea West ol the Dnieper

Site Date No Lab. No Smple BP BC 1 z 3 5 7 8 1. Kochkovatoe, Odesa Region berow 32, grave 1 Bilozerka vanńugov 1990 ? Ki-1714 2880+45 1140,980 2_ Stepnoy, Zaporizhzhia Region bsrow 2 grave 1 Bilozerka Otroshchenko 2003 Ki 887 2100+45 900820 3. Stepnoy Zaporizbzhia Regiot barow 11 grave 3 Bilozerka Otooshchenko2003 Ki,889 2850+40 109094t) 4. Stepnoy Zaporizhzhia Region Bilozerka Otrosbchenko2003 Ki,575 3050+70 1390-1180 5. stepnoy Zaporizhńia Region Otroshchenko 2003 Ki-885 2805+55 1030,880 Stepnoy Zaporizhzbia Region barow 15 grave 2 Bilozerka Ot oshchenko 2003 Ki 88ó 2690+50 900815 '7. stepnoy Zaporiózbia Region barow 15 grave 2 Bi]oz€rka Otroshcbenko 2003 Ki-9823 2920+5O 1210-1030 8. stepnoy Zaporizhńia Region banow 3 grave 1 Bilorerka Olroshchenko2003 Ki 959ó 2975+45 12001030 stepnoy Zaporińzhia Region banow 9 grave 1 Bilozerka Otroshcherko2003 Ki-9820 2880ł55 1160-970 10. Stepnoy Zaporizhzhia Region barow 11 gave 3 Bilozerka OtJoshchenko 2003 Ki 9821 2830+55 1080910 11. stepnoy Zaporizhńia Region baffow 2 grave 1 Bi-lozerka Otroshchenko 2003 Kt-9822 2780r55 1000-850 1,2. Hodewka Vinnltsia Region f7 Type Hordeąka Ś]usa]ska.Micha]ik2003 Ki,5080 3460+70 1870-r680 13. t{ordeevka Vinn}tsia Region 322 Type Hordeevka ś]usmkaMichalik 2003 Ki-5079 3020+55 1360'11ó r4. Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region 33 'łpe Hoideevka ŚlusaJska.Michalik 2003 Ki 5083 3010{50 13501150 15_ Hordeąka vinnytsia Region 35 Type Hordeevka Ślusajska.Michalik 2oo3 Ki-5081 2980+60 1310-1090 1Ó. Hord€evka vinnyisia Region 3',7 Type Hordeevka Ślusanka.Michalik 2003 Ki,5082 2920+50 1210,1030 17. Hordeevka Vinn)tsia Region 26 Type Hordeevka Ślusłska Michalik 2oo3 Ki 9252 3180+50 15051405 18. Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region 26 Type Hordeevka Ślusarska.Michali} 2003 Ki-9253 3240,r50 1590-1450 19. Hordeevka Vinnytria Region 26 lpe Llordeevka ślusaJskaMicha1ił 2003 Ki 9254 3120+50 14401310 20. Hordeevka Virnytsia Region z7 Type Hordeevka Ślusarska.Michalik 2003 Ki-9255 2980+50 1300-1110 2r. Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region z7 Type Hodeevka Ś]usmka Michalik 2003 Ki 9256 2950+50 1250Ioan) 22. Hordeevka Vin.ytsia Region ZE 'IYpc Ilordccvka Śll|slrsłx Mnt.lik 2()():] Ki e257 :11lll r5l) t4r{)t:ł )() Hordcevka viónytsh Rcgion 3l 'l!t! ll{'rka vlr Ś||||n||]|(tMi''l|tr|ik,)|)|)l t i) it) ?Ą |)1(.Ś|ll'vll |'tIkn' ('|!.||livIry l.'.IilllI t)ri-' I 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 25. Dnest ovka'Luka, Chemnty Region pir 5 Smimova 1986 Le-2161 f970+40 If'|0,11t0 26. Dnestiovka.Luką chemntsy Region prt 4 Chomoles Smimova 1986 Le 2165 2800*40 995-890 21. Dnestsovka.Luka' ch€mhtśy Region Chomoles Snimova 1986 Le-2164 2ó30+50 845,770 28. Subotiv, Cherkasy Regiot Bilosrudovka Klochko' Kova]iuk}'' Możenbeckel 1998 Ki-5505 3r00+40 1410-1310 29. Subotiv, Cberkasy Region Bilo$udovka Klochko' Kova]iuló, Motsenbeckel 1998 Ki,5502 3040i50 1370-1210 30. Subotiv, Chertasy Region hut 4, pit 1 Bilogludovka K]oc}to' Kovaliuk,Ę Motzenbecke! 1998 Ki,5504 3030+60 7370-1170 Subotiv, Cherkasy Region hut 4 Bilogludovka Ktoó}o' Kovaliukh, MoEenbeckel 1998 Ki-5501 2950r45 1250-1010 32. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region hut 4 Bilogrudovka Klochlo, Kovaliulh, MoEenbecka 1998 Ki,5503 2980+50 1310-1090 33. subotiv' chelkaśy Regio. Bilogrudovka Klochko, Kovaliukh, Możenbecker 1998 Ki-5506 2940+50 1f40-1050 34. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region hut 4 Bilogrudovka Klochko, Kovaliukh, Motzenbecter 1998 Ki-5507 2910+55 1f101010 35. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region "sq.0'11" Cbomoles KLochko, Kovaliulh, MoEenbecker 1998 Ki,s863 293s+40 1220-1050 3ó. Subotiv, CherkasJ Region "sq.0-11" Cbomoles Klochko, Kovaliuklr, MoEenbecker 1998 Ki-5859 f930+40 12101050 subotŁ cherkasy Region "sq.0'11" Chomoles Kloóko' Kova]iuk}' Możenbe€kel 1998 Ki-5858 2910+35 1180,1030 38. Subotiv, Cherkary Region "sq.0-11" Chomoles Klochko' Kova1iul.h' MoĘ€nb€ckel 1998 Ki 5862 2890+30 1090-960 39. Suboriv, Cberkasy Region "sq.0-11" Chomoles Ktochko' Kova]iuki, Możenb€cker 1998 Ki-5869 28ó0+30 1090,960 40. Subotiv, Che*asy Region "sq.0-11" Chomoles Klochko, Itur/aliukh, MoEenbecker 1998 Ki-5861 2875+40 1lm"980 4r. Subotiv, Che*asy Region 'tq.0-11" Chomoles Ktoch}o' Kovatiuk]r' Możenbeckel 1998 Ki-5865 2850+35 1080-940 42. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region "sq.0-11" Chomoles Klochko' Kovaliuk'Ł Możenbecker 1998 Ki.58ó0 2845!35 107G940 43. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region 'tq. 0-11" Chomoles Kloó}o, Kovaliut.Ą MoEenbeckel 1998 Ki 586ó 2870+50 1130,960 Subotiv, CberkasJ Region "sq.0'11" Chomoles Klochko, Kovaliukh, Motzenbecker 1998 Ki-5864 2820+30 1005925 45. Subotiv, CberkBsy Region "sq.0-11" Cbomoles Klochko' Kova'liukĄ MoEenbecker 1998 Ki,5868 2830!40 1040-920 46. obutttŁ Kid Region Bilogrudovka Otmshchenko 1986 Ki gtf 3090+70 1430-12,44

. 2003 = . .'in thiśvotume

^3, 394

BC Baltic BlackSea

500 600 700 lallsla(c/D 800 900 1000 1100 1240 1300 IV.V OEE 1400 1500

F i g ' 4. A radiocarbonchronolog/ schemeirr the area betwe€n the Baltic and Black seas in the Ia:. Bronze Age and early Iron Age

CONCLUSIONS

Relying on the presented radiocarbon measurementsconcerning taxa found in the lands stretchingbetween the Baltic and Black seas,specifically between the drainagesof the Vstula and Dnieper rivers,one can venture to outline their deve- lopment relationships.The outline should tałe into accountthe fact that the area in questionwitnessed multiple and multidirectionaltransmissions of cultural elements. The difierencesrevealed in the dating of similar cultural elementsin the areasun- der investigationpermit us to surmisewhat the dynamic of cultural contactslooked like in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age (see Fig. 4). At present,one can discern two opposingtrends in the transmissionof cultural lraits in the archaeologicalmaterials: 1. The first trend continued along the followingpath: the LC (late Bronze Age) . presumed (gloup) _' the BzC (Fig. 4). An earlier appearanceof thę cultural ' VC patternsmentioned above in the LC settingjustifies the view that the LC could be 395 the carrier of early Urnfield traits. We do not wish to deny a possibility, thouqh, that the said c'ultu.es had other traits testifying to their separate genetic connotations. 2. The other trend of cultural transmissionsshould be placed in a spatially opposite dtection of cultural contacts. The existence of such a direction is strongly suggestedby the latest research into late (originating in the early Iron Age) LC assemblagesin Kujawy |Igaczak, Głogowski 2003 - cf' Fig. 3]' They are a record of a possibilĘ that cultural traits infiltrated along the east-west line reflected by the following cultural trail: the Chornoles culture -- Scythians--+ Iate LC groups (or, possibly, the Chornoles culture --' Srythians ---' the Milograd culture ---.'late LC groups).This transmissiontrail should be treated as opposite to that outlined under 1 above, both culturally and chronologically. Its substratum could have been a cultual element identified with nomadic Scythianpopulations' Materia|s eńibi- ting markersof this trend ("egg-shapedpots" with perforationsunder the rim, iron razors and nailJike earrings) have been identified so far in assemblages found in southeasternPoland [Lewandowski1979:7?A-726] and Kujawy [Grygiel 1996;Igna- czak' Głogowski 2003]. The picture of cultural infiltration between the two seas briefly outlined above needselaborating, The proposalspresented here are, therefore,highly preliminary. A major shortcomingwas an insufficientnumber of 1aCdates from the direct "contact zone" (eastern Poland and western Ukraine) and a narrow scope of reference of the chronology to the existing periodization schemes based, for the most part, on metal soods.

Tmnslatedbv Piatr T. Zebrowski