DOCSLIB.ORG

Nomadic Cultures in the Mega-Structure of the Eurasian World

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nomadic Cultures in the Mega-Structure of the Eurasian World Еvgenij N. Chernykh Nomadic Cultures in the Mega-Structure of the Eurasian World Translated by Irina Savinetskaya and Peter N. Hommel Translated by Irina Savinetskaya and Peter N. Hommel S TUDIE S IN R U SS IAN AND S LAVIC L ITE R AT U R E S , C U LT U R E S , AND H I S TO RY Nomadic Cultures Series Editor in the Mega-StructureLazar F LEISHMAN (Stanford University, Palo Alto, California) of the Eurasian World Еvgenij N.Chernykh LRC Publishing House Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data: A catalog record for this book as available from the Library of Congress. Copyright © 2017 Academic Studies Press, LRC Publishing House All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-61811-552-2 (hardback) ISBN 978-1-61811-553-9 (electronic) Book design by Irina Bogatyreva On the cover: sculptures by Dashi Namdakov (see pp. 692–693 for details). Published by Academic Studies Press and LRC Publishing House in 2017 Academic Studies Press 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com LRC Publishing House 13/16 B. Lubyanka Moscow, 107031, Russia [email protected] http://www.lrc-press.ru Table of Сontents Author's Preface to the English Edition ................................................................................................ Translator's Preface to the English Edition ......................................................................................... Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................ 15 17 Introduction 18 A Tragic Century… ............................................................................................................................. “Every Earth Zone...”......................................................................................................................... “Earth…the Progenitor of all Things” ....................................................................................... 20 20 Part I. 21 The Steppe Belt in the Mega-Structure of the Eurasian World Chapter 1. The Formation of the Eurasian World ...................................................................... Structure and Mega-Structure in Eurasian Geoecology.................................................... 27 Culture and Subsistence Strategy............................................................................................... The Long Road to a Continental Mega-Structure ............................................................... 27 Four Continental “Enclaves” ......................................................................................................... 27 29 Chapter 2. Transitions from North to South: Geoecology, Subsistence 30 and the Eurasian Steppe Belt .......................................................................................... ........................................................................................................... 32 ........................................................................................ DifferencesNorth—South, between East—West the Domains ............................................................................................. 32 The GeoecologicalGeoecology of “Cake”the Eurasian of Eurasia Steppe Belt ......................................................................... 33 The West Eurasian Steppe and its Borders ............................................................................ 35 The Dzungarian Gate and Mongolian Mountain Steppe ................................................... 36 Arabian Desert Plateaus ................................................................................................................. 37 The Domain of Nomadic Culture ................................................................................................ 39 45 Chapter 3. Transitions from East to West: Across the Layers of the Eurasian 46 Geoecology ................................................................................................................................. The East in Eurocentric Perspective ......................................................................................... 49 Dividing Lines and Defining Borders: The Mountains between East and West .................................................................... 49 The Line between Asia and Europe ........................................................................................... West and East Beyond the Geoecological Framework ...................................................... 50 Anthropology ...................................................................................................................................... 51 Linguistics ............................................................................................................................................ 55 Ideological Systems .......................................................................................................................... 55 56 58 ● 5 ● Table of Contents Part II. The Archaeology of Nomadic Cultures Chapter 4. Archaeology and History: Sources of Difference ................................................ Archaeology and History: Pre-Literate and Literate .......................................................... 67 Understanding Differences in Method and Approach ...................................................... Interpreting Archaeological Sources ........................................................................................ 67 The Complexity of Burial Structures ........................................................................................ 68 Archaeologists as the Denizens of the Afterworld .............................................................. 70 The “Mongolian Syndrome” of Nomadic Cultures .............................................................. 72 75 Chapter 5. “Gifts” from the Nomads: Pastoral Contributions to World History ........ 77 Self-Perception and the Perception of Others: Archetype of Narcissism .................. 79 Perception of the Steppe Nomads .............................................................................................. Horse Riding ........................................................................................................................................ 79 Monotheism ......................................................................................................................................... 80 Mounds and Mausoleums ............................................................................................................. 82 The “Bridge” between East and West ....................................................................................... 84 The Tides of Cultural Influence ................................................................................................... 85 88 Chapter 6. Nomadic Cultures in the Early Metal Age: Archaeological Time, 88 Technology and Territory ................................................................................................. The Duration of Archaeological Time ...................................................................................... 90 Riders and Metal ............................................................................................................................... Metal and the “Ages” of Prehistory ............................................................................................ 90 At the Origins of Metallurgy ......................................................................................................... 91 Other Innovations of the Early Metal Age .............................................................................. 91 Accepted Norms and Acceptable Industries ........................................................................ 92 Early Metal Age as a Eurasian Phenomenon ......................................................................... 94 Territorial “Leaps” of Early Metal Age Cultures ................................................................... 95 The Problem of Spatial Stagnation ............................................................................................ 96 96 Chapter 7. The “Proto-Metal” Age in Eurasia ............................................................................ 98 The Roots of the Early Metal Age ............................................................................................ 100 Eastern Anatolia (Çayönü Tepesi, Tell Halula, Nevali Çori and Göbekli Tepe, Körtik Tepe .......................................................................................................................... 100 ................................................................... The Levant (Jericho and Tell Aswad) ..................................................................................... 101 TheCentral End Anatolia of the “Proto-Metal” (Aşikli Höyük, Age Çatal-Höyük) ........................................................................................... 108 110 Chapter 8. Metallurgical Revolution in the Carpatho-Balkan Region ......................... 112 Beginning of the Metal Age: Chalcolithic/Eneolithic ...................................................... 114 The Balkan Neolithic..................................................................................................................... The Structure of the Carpatho-Balkan Metallurgical Province .................................. 114 The Central
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA)
    Eupedia Home > Genetics > Haplogroups (home) > Haplogroup R1b Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA) Content 1. Geographic distribution Author: Maciamo. Original article posted on Eupedia. 2. Subclades Last update January 2014 (revised history, added lactase 3. Origins & History persistence, pigmentation and mtDNA correspondence) Paleolithic origins Neolithic cattle herders The Pontic-Caspian Steppe & the Indo-Europeans The Maykop culture, the R1b link to the steppe ? R1b migration map The Siberian & Central Asian branch The European & Middle Eastern branch The conquest of "Old Europe" The conquest of Western Europe IE invasion vs acculturation The Atlantic Celtic branch (L21) The Gascon-Iberian branch (DF27) The Italo-Celtic branch (S28/U152) The Germanic branch (S21/U106) How did R1b become dominant ? The Balkanic & Anatolian branch (L23) The upheavals ca 1200 BCE The Levantine & African branch (V88) Other migrations of R1b 4. Lactase persistence and R1b cattle pastoralists 5. R1 populations & light pigmentation 6. MtDNA correspondence 7. Famous R1b individuals Geographic distribution Distribution of haplogroup R1b in Europe 1/22 R1b is the most common haplogroup in Western Europe, reaching over 80% of the population in Ireland, the Scottish Highlands, western Wales, the Atlantic fringe of France, the Basque country and Catalonia. It is also common in Anatolia and around the Caucasus, in parts of Russia and in Central and South Asia. Besides the Atlantic and North Sea coast of Europe, hotspots include the Po valley in north-central Italy (over 70%), Armenia (35%), the Bashkirs of the Urals region of Russia (50%), Turkmenistan (over 35%), the Hazara people of Afghanistan (35%), the Uyghurs of North-West China (20%) and the Newars of Nepal (11%).
    [Show full text]
  • Paleoclimatic Reconstructions Based on the Study of Structures of Large
    EGU21-6170 https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-6170 EGU General Assembly 2021 © Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Paleoclimatic reconstructions based on the study of structures of large kurgans of the Bronze Age and soils buried under different structures for the steppe zone of Russia Alena Sverchkova and Olga Khokhlova Institute of Physicochemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science, Russian Academy of Sciences, Group of genesis and evolution of soils, Moscow, Russian Federation ([email protected]) Geoarchaeological studies of soils buried under burial mounds (kurgans) and materials of kurgan structures make it possible to solve a wide range of scientific problems. In the steppe zone of Russia, such studies are carried out in order to determine and compare the composition of buried soils and materials of kurgan structures, as well as to study the structure of earth monuments and to obtain data on the technology used by ancient people for their building. We carried out geoarchaeological studies in two key areas: in Krasnodar (kurgan Beisuzhek 9) and Stavropol (kurgan Essentuksky 1) regions. For each object, the particle-size distribution and physicochemical properties of the earthen materials of the kurgans and buried soils were investigated. Kurgan Essentuksky 1 was built in the second quarter of the 4th millennium BC (Maykop culture) according to a single plan in a short time (several decades). The kurgan with a height of 5.5-6.0 m and a diameter of 60 m consisted of four earthen and three stone structures. The earthen structures consisted of alternating layers of dark, slightly compacted humified and light dense carbonate-rich material that were taken from buried soils, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Diet and Subsistence in Bronze Age Pastoral Communities from the Southern Russian Steppes and the North Caucasus
    PLOS ONE RESEARCH ARTICLE Diet and subsistence in Bronze Age pastoral communities from the southern Russian steppes and the North Caucasus 1☯ 2☯ 3 4 Corina KnipperID *, Sabine Reinhold , Julia GreskyID , Nataliya BerezinaID , 5 5 4 Claudia GerlingID , Sandra L. PichlerID , Alexandra P. Buzhilova , Anatoly R. Kantorovich6, Vladimir E. Maslov7, Vladimira G. Petrenko7, Sergey V. Lyakhov8, Alexey 8 8 2³ 5,9³ A. Kalmykov , Andrey B. Belinskiy , Svend HansenID , Kurt W. Alt a1111111111 1 Curt Engelhorn Center Archaeometry, Mannheim, Germany, 2 Eurasia Department, German Archaeological Institute, Berlin, Germany, 3 Department of Natural Sciences, German Archaeological a1111111111 Institute, Berlin, Germany, 4 Research Institute and Museum of Anthropology of Lomonosov Moscow State a1111111111 University, Moscow, Russian Federation, 5 Integrative Prehistory and Archaeological Science IPAS, Basel a1111111111 University, Basel, Switzerland, 6 Department of Archaeology, Faculty of History, Lomonosov Moscow State a1111111111 University, Moscow, Russian Federation, 7 Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation, 8 Heritage Organization Ltd, `Nasledie', Stavropol, Russian Federation, 9 Center of Natural and Cultural Human History, Danube Private University (DPU), Krems-Stein, Austria ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. ³ These authors are joint senior authors on this work. OPEN ACCESS * [email protected] Citation: Knipper C, Reinhold S, Gresky J, Berezina N, Gerling C, Pichler SL, et al. (2020) Diet and subsistence in Bronze Age pastoral communities Abstract from the southern Russian steppes and the North Caucasus. PLoS ONE 15(10): e0239861. https:// The flanks of the Caucasus Mountains and the steppe landscape to their north offered highly doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239861 productive grasslands for Bronze Age herders and their flocks of sheep, goat, and cattle.
    [Show full text]
  • Problems of Maykop Culture in the Context of Caucasian-Anatolian Relations
    Giorgi Leon Kavtaradze Proceedings of the International Archaeological Symposium Problems of Maykop Culture in the Context of Caucasian-Anatolian Relations Tbilisi The Circassian (Adyghian) Cultural Center Publishing House “Meridiani” 2013 ISBN 978-9941-10-748-1 1 Giorgi Leon Kavtaradze The relationship between the Caucasus and the Middle East during the “pre-Kura-Araxes” period [p. 192] The problem of chronological correlation of archaeological materials of the Caucasus and the Near East has a crucial value in the development of a common framework of Caucasian chronological system. To establish the absolute age of Caucasian cultures, it is necessary to take into account the dates received for the archaeological material of the Near East considered similar to the Caucasian materials. It goes without saying that in the Near East there is a high probability of getting more precise absolute dates, e.g., by means of correlation of the stratigraphy of multilayered settlements with the data of historical chronologies of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The determination of the links between the cultural and social developments of the Caucasus and distinct regions of the Near East within the Uruk cultural context (i.e. eastern Anatolia, the Levant, Mesopotamia and western Iran), is one of the most important aims for the archaeologists working on problems of archaeology of the northern periphery of Near East and basing themselves on recent researches in the Caucasus of the 4th millennium B.C. New indications on the overlapping in time of the Kura-Araxes and Uruk cultures, which have been revealed in last years with much more intensity than earlier, poses not only the problem of relation between these cultures but gives possibility to reconsider the character of cultural and social developments between the highly civilized societies of the core area of the Near East and its northern periphery and the regions located beyond of the latter.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalistics and Globalization Studies
    LOMONOSOV MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY Faculty of Global Studies RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES INSTITUTE OF ORIENTAL STUDIES The Eurasian Center for Big History and System Forecasting VOLGOGRAD CENTER FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH GLOBALISTICS AND GLOBALIZATION STUDIES BIG HISTORY & GLOBAL HISTORY Edited by Leonid E. Grinin, Ilya V. Ilyin, Peter Herrmann, and Andrey V. Korotayev ‘Uchitel’ Publishing House Volgograd ББК 28.02 87.21 Globalistics and Globalization Studies: Big History & Global History. Yearbook / Edited by Leonid E. Grinin, Ilya V. Ilyin, Peter Herrmann, and Andrey V. Korotayev. – Volgograd: ‘Uchitel’ Publishing House, 2015. – 384 pp. This yearbook is the fourth in the series with the title Globalistics and Globalization Studies. The subtitle of the present volume is Global History & Big History. The point is that today our global world really demands global knowledge. Thus, there are a few actively developing multidisciplinary approaches and integral disciplines among which one can name Global Studies, Global History and Big History. They all provide a connection between the past, present, and future. Big History with its vast and extremely heterogeneous field of research encompasses all the forms of existence and all timescales and brings together constantly updated information from the scientific disciplines and the humanities. Global History is transnational or world history which examines history from a global perspective, making a wide use of comparative history and of the history of multiple cultures and nations. Global Studies express the view of systemic and epistemological unity of global processes. Thus, one may argue that Global Studies and Globalistics can well be combined with Global History and Big History and such a multi- disciplinary approach can open wide horizons for the modern university education as it helps to form a global view of various processes.
    [Show full text]
  • A 5000-Year-Old Souslik Fur Garment from an Elite Megalithic Tombe In
    University of Groningen A 5000-year-old souslik fur garment from an elite megalithic tombe in the North Caucasus, Maykop culture Trifonov, V.; Shishlina, N.; Chernova, O.; Sevastyanov, V.; van der Plicht, J.; Golenishchev, F. Published in: Paléorient IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2019 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Trifonov, V., Shishlina, N., Chernova, O., Sevastyanov, V., van der Plicht, J., & Golenishchev, F. (2019). A 5000-year-old souslik fur garment from an elite megalithic tombe in the North Caucasus, Maykop culture. Paléorient , 45(1), 69-80. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal.
    [Show full text]
  • Proto-Indo-Europeans: the Prologue
    Proto-Indo-Europeans: The Prologue Alexander Kozintsev Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, Saint-Petersburg and Saint-Petersburg State University, Russia This study collates linguistic, genetic, and archaeological data relevant to the problem of the IE homeland and proto-IE (PIE) migrations. The idea of a proto-Anatolian (PA) migration from the steppe to Anatolia via the Balkans is refuted by linguistic, archaeological, and genetic facts, whereas the alternative scenario, postulating the Indo-Uralic homeland in the area east of the Caspian Sea, is the most plausible. The divergence between proto-Uralians and PIEs is mirrored by the cultural dichotomy between Kelteminar and the early farming societies in southern Turkmenia and northern Iran. From their first homeland the early PIEs moved to their second homeland in the Near East, where early PIE split into PA and late PIE. Three migration routes from the Near East to the steppe across the Caucasus can be tentatively reconstructed — two early (Khvalynsk and Darkveti-Meshoko), and one later (Maykop). The early eastern route (Khvalynsk), supported mostly by genetic data, may have been taken by Indo-Hittites. The western and the central routes (Darkveti-Meshoko and Maykop), while agreeing with archaeological and linguistic evidence, suggest that late PIE could have been adopted by the steppe people without biological admixture. After that, the steppe became the third and last PIE homeland, from whence all filial IE dialects except Anatolian spread in various directions, one of them being to the Balkans and eventually to Anatolia and the southern Caucasus, thus closing the circle of counterclockwise IE migrations around the Black Sea.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Europe Within the Ancient World-Systems*
    Eastern Europe within the Ancient World-Systems* Tatyana L. Shestova Eastern Europe is considered as a space of the world trade systems expan- sion/contraction process in the early world-systems from Chalcolithic to early Iron Age. The author identifies system-forming agents and six major periods in the development of the trade relations in the ancient world which involved East- ern Europe. The paper shows the relationship between the boundaries of early exchange systems and metallurgical provinces. Keywords: early world-systems, expansion/contraction of world-systems, East- ern Europe, system-forming subjects, the basic trade-system element, metallurgi- cal provinces, Balkan-Carpathian, Circumpontic, Trans Eurasian, Greek and Roman trade systems. In recent decades there have been many works devoted to the origin of the world econom- ic system and to the role of early civilizations in the formation of the foundations of long- distance trade (Frank 1993; Frank, Thompson 2005; Gills and Thompson 2006; Chase- Dunn and Manning 2002; Chase-Dunn et al. 2010; Chase-Dunn and Hall 1997; Hall et al. 2009; Abu-Lughod 1989; Barfield 1989; Grinin, Ilyin, and Korotayev 2012; Grinin and Korotayev 2012). Unfortunately, the authors of the world-system approach – Andre Gunder Frank, Barry Gills, William Thompson, Janet Abu-Lughod, Christopher Chase- Dunn, Thomas Hall and others – commonly pay little attention to the regions located in the north of the early civilizations and, in particular, to Eastern Europe. For example, Frank and Thompson excluded Eastern Europe from the list of areas of economic expansion, when highlighting their indicators of the world-systems ‘expansion/contraction’ in the ear- ly Iron Age (Frank and Thompson 2006: 144).
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Economic Foundations Supporting the Social Supremacy of the Beaker Groups
    Guerra Doce and Liesau von Lettow-Vorbeck (eds) Lettow-Vorbeck Doce and Liesau von Guerra Analysis of the Economic Foundations Supporting the Social Supremacy of the Beaker Groups Proceedings of the XVII UISPP World Congress (1–7 September, Burgos, Spain) Volume 6 / Session B36 Analysis of the Economic of the Beaker Groups of the Beaker of the Economic Analysis Edited by Elisa Guerra Doce and Corina Liesau von Lettow-Vorbeck Archaeopress Archaeology www.archaeopress.com Guerra Doce UISPP B36 cover.indd 1 03/02/2016 11:33:15 Analysis of the Economic Foundations Supporting the Social Supremacy of the Beaker Groups Proceedings of the XVII UISPP World Congress (1–7 September, Burgos, Spain) Volume 6 / Session B36 Edited by Elisa Guerra Doce and Corina Liesau von Lettow-Vorbeck Archaeopress Archaeology Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78491 307 6 ISBN 978 1 78491 308 3 (e-Pdf) © Archaeopress, UISPP and authors 2016 VOLUME EDITORS: Elisa Guerra Doce and Corina Liesau von Lettow-Vorbeck SERIES EDITOR: The board of UISPP SERIES PROPERTY: UISPP – International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences The editing of this volume was funded by the Instituto Terra e Memória, Centro de Geociências UID/ Multi/00073/2013, with the support of the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia FCT/MEC) KEY-WORDS IN THIS VOLUME: Bell Beaker – Prestige Items – Social Differentiation – Exchange Networks UISPP PROCEEDINGS SERIES is a print on demand and an open access publication, edited by UISPP through Archaeopress BOARD OF UISPP: Jean Bourgeois (President), Luiz Oosterbeek (Secretary-General), François Djindjian (Treasurer), Ya-Mei Hou (Vice President), Marta Arzarello (Deputy Secretary-General).
    [Show full text]
  • Early Indo-European Languages
    Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018 Linguistic supplement to Damgaard et al. 2018: Early Indo-European languages, The time and location of the Proto-Indo-European linguistic unity is uncertain, since it long Anatolian, Tocharian and Indo-Iranian predates the earliest historical records. A terminus ante quem for the dissolution of Proto-Indo- European is offered by the earliest appearances of the individual daughter languages, e.g. Mycenaean Greek in the 16th century BCE, Indo-Aryan in North Syrian texts from the 18th AUTHORS century BCE, and Anatolian as early as the 25th century BCE. Concerning the deeper origin of Guus Kroonen1,3, Gojko Barjamovic2, and Michaël Peyrot3. the proto-language, various theories exist (cf. e.g. Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1995; Renfrew 1987, 1999). Here we focus on the prevalent “Steppe Hypothesis,” which places the speakers of Proto- Indo-European on the Pontic steppe in the 4th millennium BCE (Anthony 1995, 2007; Gimbutas AFFILIATIONS 1965; Mallory 1989). 1Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. The time and location postulated by proponents of this hypothesis are dictated by cultural 2Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, USA. markers contained in the Proto-Indo-European vocabulary itself. These markers, which are found 3Leiden University Centre for Linguistics, Leiden University, The Netherlands. in the reconstructed lexicon shared by various Indo-European subgroups, consist of archaeologically salient terminology related to 1) copper-based metallurgy, 2) pastoral nomadism, 3) horse domestication (see Outram et al. 2018), 4) wheeled vehicles, and 5) wool production (e.g. ABSTRACT Beekes 2011; Mallory and Adams 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Yamnaya Culture Hoard of Metal Objects, Ivanivka, Lower Murafa: Autogenesis of ‘Dniester Copper/Bronze Metallurgy’
    Baltic-Pontic Studies vol . 22: 2017, 226-245 ISSN 1231-0344 DOI 10 .1515/bps-2017-0027 Viktor I. Klochko* YAMNAYA CULTURE HOARD OF METAL OBJECTS, IVANIVKA, LOWER MURAFA: AUTOGENESIS OF ‘DNIESTER COPPER/BRONZE METALLURGY’ ABstRACT In 2015 near the village of Ivonivka, Mohyliv-Podilskyi Region, Vin- nytsia Oblast, a hoard of copper objects was found by chance by the River Murafa . The majority of objects belonging to the hoard were fashioned out of a rather pure copper with a combination of admix- tures, which can be named ‘the Ivonivka group’ . Key words: hoard, yamnaya culture, Middle Dniester Area Up to only some years ago among the research results of barrow complexes along the Middle Dniester – Kamenka/Ocniţa and Yampil barrow cemetery com- plexes there was a lack of data related to metal objects from the Yamnaya culture (YC) and decline phase of Eneolithic culture [Manzura, Klochko, Savva 1992; Kośko, Potupczyk, Razumow (Eds) 2014; Kośko (Ed .) 2015; Klochko et al. 2015] . In this context, the discovery of a hoard of metal goods near the village of Ivonivka in the upper course of the Murafa, has significantly changed our conception of the beginnings of copper metallurgy and early phases of its development in this north- ern part of the Black Sea Region . In 2015 near the village of Ivonivka, Mohyliv-Podilskyi Region, Vinny- tsia Oblast, a hoard of copper objects was found by chance by the River Murafa [Klochko, Kozymenko 2016: 2 .1 .16] . The circumstances related to the discovery of the hoard, precise localisation and its connection to the settlement or encamp- * Department of Archaeology National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Skovorody 2, 04665 Kyiv, Ukraine; vklochko@ukr .net 227 F i g .
    [Show full text]
  • JIES Reviews
    JIES Reviews Archaeology Leonid Sverchkov, Tokhary, Drevnie Indoevropeytsy v Tsentral’noy Azii (Tokharians, Ancient Indo-Europeans in Central Asia)Tashkent, SMI-ASIA, 2012. ISBN 978-9943- 17-048-3 (paperback). Pp 239. This book, probably the most extensive attempt yet to tackle the origins of the Tokharians, is divided into three parts. The first, the “Tokharian languages and the Tokharian problem” provides a useful summary of the history of the discovery of the Tokharian languages and the debate concerning their temporal and geographical position within the spread of the Indo-European languages. These range from those who seek to anchor it in the vicinity of the Northwest group, or Greek or see it as a result of an early separation (after Anatolian) isolated on the eastern periphery. The author then briefly examines the range of archaeological solutions to Tokharian origins that range from north-eastern Europe (Corded Ware, Globular Amphora, Fatjanovo) across the steppe and forest steppe (Abashevo) to Siberia (Afanasievo, Okunevo, Sejma-Turbino horizon). The general thrust has been some acceptance for a Siberian solution although arguments that associate the Afanasevo culture of the Yenisei and Altay with those of the Tarim Basin itself are hardly supported by robust archaeological evidence. Sverchkov then provides a summary survey of the archaeology of Xinjiang. It begins with evidence for human settlement (or at least tool kits—stone tools and later pottery) that might be notionally set to range from c 9000 BCE (stone tool kits) to the millennium before 2000 BCE (the appearance of some pottery). Analogies for this material can be sought both in Central Asia (Afghanistan) and Mongolia.
    [Show full text]