Archaeological Explorations of Bronze Age Pastoral Societies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
and evolution of Indo-Iranian and ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPLORATIONS OF BRONZE Indo-European languages across the Eurasian Steppes (Mallory and Mair AGE PASTORAL SOCIETIES IN THE 2000); and 3) the widespread transfer of metallurgical and other MOUNTAINS OF EASTERN EURASIA material culture across the Eurasian Steppe Zone (Chernykh 1992). Each of these processes is documented by archaeological and/or historical Michael D. Frachetti linguistic evidence, and debates University of Pennsylvania concerning these materials have produced an extensive and detailed literature, which cannot be fully Throughout history, nomadic (Fig. 1). Academically, as a result of addressed here. Commonly, how- societies of the Eurasian steppes are its huge geographic expanse and its ever, all of these innovations of the known to have played a major role geo-political role in the historical second millennium BCE have been in the transfer of technology, developments of the region, the connected with the widespread commodities, language, and culture Eurasian steppe zone is commonly development of “nomadic pas- between East Asia, the Near East, considered a key part of the broader toralism” in the steppe zone, and and Europe (e.g. The Silk Road). territory of Central Asia (present day framed in relation to the evolution of However, the organization of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Bronze Age steppe societies Eurasian steppe societies in Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and (Kuz’mina 1994) — collectively known prehistory is still poorly understood. Xinjiang). as the “Andronovo Cultural Com- The problem lies in the lack of The Bronze Age of the Eurasian munity”. scientifically analyzed archaeological steppe zone (c. 2500-1000 BCE) is The “Andronovo Cultural Com- data from the region, and in the considered by archaeologists and munity” is the name used to describe ineffectiveness of previous archae- linguists to be a time in prehistory a cultural phenomenon that became ological approaches to provide a when a number of major tech- widespread across the Eurasian dynamic model of social interactions nological, linguistic, and cultural steppes during the second mil- between pastoral societies during innovations changed the way lennium BCE (Sorokin 1966). the Bronze Age (c. 2500-1000 BCE). societies of Eastern Europe, Asia, Specifically, the Andronovo Culture is Geographically, the Eurasian and the Near East interacted. Among a general term that describes a steppe zone spans from the grassy these innovations are: 1) the widely distributed set of archaeo- plains north of the Black Sea to the proliferation of horse riding tech- logically documented materials steppes of Mongolia, and from the nology and the development of including: 1) open form ceramic jars forest steppes of southern Siberia to wheeled transport in the form of with incised geometric decorations; the deserts and arid grasslands of horse drawn chariots (Anthony and 2) stone-lined burials located under Semirech’e, in southern Kazakhstan Brown 2000); 2) the transmission round mounds of earth or within rectangular stone structures; and 3) specific bronze objects such as axes, weapons, and jewelry (Fig. 2, next page). These are the main elements used in the general classification of the Andronovo Culture, and there are “cultural” sub-groups that are based on variations in the decoration and attributes of this material package. Furthermore, the sub- cultures of the Andronovo are associated with different regions of the steppe zone as well as different time periods in the culture history of the region. This framework is commonly used to define the movements of people and artifacts in the region and over time (Zdanovich 1988). It is important to recognize that the basis for the traditional Andronovo classification is rooted in comparative material culture, which only in the past 5-7 years has come under serious Modified from: neespi.gsfc.nasa.gov/maps.html Fig. 1 - Eurasian Steppe Zone and Study Zone 3 associations be- scientific methods, e.g. recent tween ceramics (or projects by David Anthony; Claudia metals) as evi- Chang, Natalia Shishlina, and others dence for inter- (e.g. Miller-Rosen et al. 2000; active conditions Parzinger et al. 2003). between mobile Although these new projects are populations of the beginning to improve our picture of second millennium Eurasian Bronze Age systems, the BCE (also Potem- main problem remains that tradi- kina and Shilov tional claims concerning the role that 1985; Mej 2000). the Andronovo Culture played in the Critics of this innovations and developments that stance have noted occurred across the Eurasian steppe that the overriding zone in prehistory are not based in image of the scientific reconstructions of the “nomadic pastor- economic and socio-political charac- alists” that occu- teristics of Bronze Age nomadic pied the steppe pastoral society. Therefore, the goal region during pre- of my research is to contribute new After After Kuz’mina 1994 and Kadyrbaev and Kurmankulov 1992 history is primarily scientific data and approaches to based on an his- modeling systems of mobile pas- Fig. 2. Archaeological Material of the Andronovo Culture torical under- toralism in Eurasia during prehistory, scrutiny by world scientists as to its standing of nomadic migration and in order to develop an archaeo- effectiveness in helping us to explain interaction, rather than on detailed logically based explanation of dynamic processes that occurred archaeological reconstructions (for interaction and communication during the Bronze Age (Lamberg- discussion see Renfrew 2002). In between regional populations during Karlovsky 2002; Renfrew 2002). fact, to date there are few archae- the Bronze Age. Only then can we ological approaches specifically begin to have a more detailed under- More precisely, the problem with designed to explain local systems of standing of how language, tech- the traditional classification is that pastoralism in the steppe zone nology, and culture may have spread similarities in the material artifacts during the Bronze Age, and even across the region in prehistory. from different regions are used as fewer that illustrate how economic THE DZHUNGAR MOUNTAINS evidence for interactions, migrations, and social interactions between ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT: METHODS, and regional relationships, yet there regional populations may have been RESULTS, AND QUESTIONS is little scientific research that generated by actual nomadic or semi- explains how those interactions may nomadic practices in prehistory. The problem of Bronze Age mobile have taken place. The most Notable research within the past 5- pastoralism in Eurasia is the main prominent explanation of the way 7 years has shown that the archae- focus of my ongoing research and is materials, technology, and language ological data have more to tell us the focus of the “Dzhungar “spread” across the steppe is when approached with modern Mountains Archaeology Project” provided by Elena Kuz’mina (Kuz’mina 1994), who models interaction as a result of migration, with “waves” of steppe societies slowing moving from the Ural region of south Russia to the southeastern boundaries of the steppe zone. According to Kuz’mina, migration to the southeast was a response to environmental change and popu- lation pressure during the second millennium BCE, and was made possible by increased mobility that was part of the pastoral economy of the Bronze Age, specifically through horse riding and wagon technology (Kuz’mina 1998). Although else- where migration models are widely questioned, Kuz’mina’s model is echoed in the work of many other scholars (Kosarev 1984; Mallory and Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=4435 Mair 2000) — all of whom cite formal Adapted from: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ Fig. 3. Semirech’e and the Dzhungar Mountains 4 (DMAP). The goal of the DMAP is to New collaborative archaeological in May 2002, the surface survey develop theoretical and analytical studies in the Koksu Valley began in accounted for more than 1500 km2 approaches to the study of pre- 2002, within the structure of the of total landscape analysis, and historic pastoral societies of the Dzhungar Mountains Archaeology 106.7 km2 (10,671 hectares) of field- steppe through new archaeological Project. The goal of the field research walked polygons. For archaeological studies in the Semirech’e region of was to reconstruct the paleo- recovery, the Koksu River valley and southeastern Kazakhstan. Specif- environment and archaeology of the floodplain was divided into ten ically, the study zone is located in the study region, so that scientifically topographic landscape polygons: Koksu River Valley, and includes the collected data could be used to test two lowland polygons, five mid- surrounding steppe meadows of the hypotheses about the mobility elevation polygons, and three upland Dzhungar Mountains (Fig. 3, p.4). To patterns and areas of interaction of elevation polygons. Prehistoric sites date, archaeological studies have mobile pastoralists in prehistory. The were recorded in all of these areas. been carried out in the form of an primary focus of our archaeological Excavations: In order to have more extensive landscape survey and four excavations was at the site of scientific details concerning Bronze small-scale excavations (one Bronze Begash, which includes a Bronze Age Age social and economic ways of life, Age settlement and three Bronze Age settlement and two large Bronze Age cemeteries. The field research was excavations were conducted of a burials). 1 carried