saqarTvelos mecnierebaTa erovnuli akademiis moambe, t. 8, #2, 2014 BULLETIN OF THE GEORGIAN NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, vol. 8, no. 2, 2014 B O O K R E V I E W Innovations in Archaeology of the Caucasus One-volume collection of works “Ethnocultural chaeological Expedition to Troy at Eberhard-Karls- System of the South-East Caucasus in the Bronze- University in Tübingen, etc. He had scholarly con- Iron Age”, in four languages (Georgian, German, Eng- tacts with American, Turkish and Italian colleagues. lish and Russian), was published within the Georgian A series of lectures on the antiquities of Bronze Age National Academy of Sciences (Tbilisi, 2013, 559 pp.). in the Caucasus delivered by the author in Germany The author of the book is a prominent Georgian for many years inspired the interest of some Euro- archaeologist Konstantine Pitskhelauri. pean young researchers in studying the past of Geor- The editors of the volume are academicians Otar gia. To my mind, it was a great event for Japaridze and Roin Metreveli. The volume under Caucasiologists to receive published research in the review familiarizes us with the results of a system- context of antiquities data of Asian Near East and atic, labor-consuming research conducted by the Europe. The author’s purpose was to show the reader scholar. that “while interpreting archaeological cultures each Kakheti being a blank spot, terra incognita on concrete issue must be studied only against the back- Georgia’s archaeological map for a long time, longed ground of a new database and the reality created for an intelligent, talented, well-educated, purpose- with it”. ful, devoted researcher and this very person turned Konstantine Pitskhelauri presented the results of out to be Konstantine Pitskhelauri. In 1960, being his tireless long-term research in one-volume collec- quite young, he was appointed the head of Kakhetian tion of works in the following major directions: archaeological group. He determined the directions - the dynamics of archaeological works in Kakheti, for the future research Udabno, Sighnaghi, Cheremi, problems, prospects; etc. and founded the centers equipped with deposi- - archaeological excavations in Kakheti and their re- tories and libraries and laboratories. Within a short sults; period of time he turned Sighnaghi into a large re- - stages of the formation of state institutions in the search centre for archaeological study of Kakheti central part of the Southern Caucasus; where archaeologists work fruitfully side by side with - interdisciplinary researches, ethnicization of ar- anthropologists, historians, ethnologists, art histori- chaeological cultures; ans, paleobotanists, paleozoologists, etc. His long- - principles of the topography of settlements, term archaeological strategy based on the latest meth- periodization and chronology. ods and technologies approved in the world ap- Of great value are chronological schemes for the peared to be very successful. Archaeological inves- south-eastern Caucasus, Georgia of the Bronze-Iron tigations conducted under his leadership in Kakheti Age compiled in the research centers of Russia, Eu- region were completed with brilliant discoveries. Over rope, Armenia attached to the volume (pp. 483, 557), the years Konstantine Pitskhelauri has been in close which will be extremely useful to the specialists in collaboration with such leading research centers as ancient history of the Caucasus. German Archaeological Institute at Saarland Uni- I focus my attention just on a few of the main versity, the Martin Luther University of Halle, Ar- research directions, where the author’s vision seems © 2014 Bull. Georg. Natl. Acad. Sci. Innovations in Archaeology of the Caucasus 143 particularly important and, in my opinion, makes a chaeological artifacts of neither previous nor subse- significant contribution to the development of quent periods. The multilayered settlement of the Caucasiology as a science. This volume clearly shows Khashuri Natsargora revealed in the Khashuri dis- that Konstantine Pitskhelauri holds the view accord- trict casted light on the understanding of this issue. ing to which in Neolithic period western and eastern Typical ceramic products of the Alazani-Bedenic cul- Georgia represented one cultural area and distinctive ture were detected just on this archaeological monu- features between two large regions emerged only in ment. In the context of this innovation, on the one the Eneolithic period. hand, chronological frames of archaeological culture In the reviewed volume several works of were specifically determined and, on the other hand, Konstantine Pitskhelauri are devoted to the scrupu- the light was finally shed on its cultural genesis. It lous analysis of the monuments of the Eneolithic became obvious that it appeared in completely formed period of the central part of the south Caucasus. In way in this region of the Caucasus. these essays the attention is mainly focused on infil- While studying the above issue, K. Pitskhelauri tration of the Mesopotamian Uruk culture in the first discovered numerous monuments belonging to the half of the fourth millennium BC. In the author’s ar- Alazani-Bedenic culture in Kakheti in the form of a gumentative viewpoint, this culture penetrates to the large burial constructions (in this respect it would be southern Caucasus by several ways, totally covers it sufficient to mention a complex containing a monu- and throughout the Great Caucasus Range spreads ment of a golden lion), which played a great role in to the North Caucasus too and lays the foundation the study of Georgia’s culture. to the brilliant Maikop culture. The scholar assumes Konstantine Pitskhelauri made assumption on the that the infiltration of the Uruk metallurgists in the existence of the layers belonging to the Alazani- Caucasus was most probably motivated by the de- Bedenic culture based on accidentally obtained ce- sire for the search of metal raw materials and con- ramic material on multilayered settlement of the Alazani cludes that the formation of local Kura-Araxes cul- valley and Iori gorge settlement. Unfortunately, the ture in the Southern Caucasus during the Early Bronze scientific study of these valuable artifacts has not Age must have been realized with participation of yet been conducted due to the various objective or the migrants. It should be also noted that the scholar subjective reasons. links the explosive development of metallurgy and Alazani-Bedenic culture is not genetically linked exceptional advancement of culture in the Southern with the early culture of the Kura-Araxes of the cen- Caucasus during the Early Bronze Age with the ap- tral part of the Southern Caucasus in the Early Bronze pearance of a Mesopotamian ethnic flow. According Age. As seen from the book it is quite clear for the to the author the trace of the Uruk migrants has not author that since that time Alazani-Bedenic culture been sufficiently revealed so far and it is necessary steadily takes roots in that region and already at the to expand and deepen research in this direction. final stage of the Kura-Araxes culture takes an active It is known that on the territory of the present- part in its formation together with the southern vari- day eastern Georgia, on the Tsalka Plateau, in the ant of this culture. The author considers as such the Mtkvari River valley and Iori-Alazani basin at the monuments of the so-called “Martkopi group”. This end of the last century there was revealed a brilliant, assumption expressed by Konstantine Pitskhelauri so-called Alazani-Bedenic culture of the Early Bronze represents an important scientific novelty and makes Age, mainly as the burial mounds. Naturally, this dis- the basis for more valid understanding of the monu- covery was accompanied with a number of unan- ments of the contemporary to that time culture. Ac- swered questions. The thing is that the materials be- cording to the scholar the arrangement of the large longing to this culture are genetically related to ar- mould in the central region of the Southern Cauca- Bull. Georg. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 8, no. 2, 2014 144 Nana Khazaradze sus begins just at the stage of functioning of the arrived at the conclusion that Trialeti culture almost Bedenic culture, which testifies to the fact that in the reached the Black Sea coast including southern Geor- society of that time the rich and socially advanced gia. strata were formed. From the author’s discussion it is The scholar pays attention to that important cir- clearly seen that rich tombs of the so-called “Martkopi cumstance that the monuments of the Trialeti culture period” in his view are largely due to Alazani-Bedenic bear not only the features of the Western Asia cul- culture. In the central part of the Southern Caucasus ture but also those of the north-steppe catacombs the appearance of four-wheeled wooden wagon-buri- which at the final stage of Trialeti culture was re- als became traditional at the final stages of the Early flected both in the diversity of the tombs and adorn- Bronze Age and characteristic to the Middle Bronze ment of ceramic items. the so-called Trialeti culture. The volume under review also presents some The ideas maintained by the author of the single other important results of the scholarly researches volume relating to the Alazani-Bedenic culture which conducted by Konstantine Pitskhelauri. The scholar are quite possible to be shared, fail to go beyond the is the first in Georgian archaeology who managed to scope of hypothesis so far. It will become possible to discover the settlements of the Trialeti culture un- achieve the truth only as a result of discovery of known before, which he attributed to agricultural ac- multilayered settlements and archeological study. It tivity. At the same time, it was he, who as a result of is noteworthy that according to the author it would paleoecological research conducted in the Iori-Alazani be very difficult to establish genetic relatedness of basin established that natural conditions in this re- the cultures in the central part of the Southern Cau- gion changed because of incorrect economic activ- casus between the Early and Middle Bronze Ages if ity in the post-Middle Bronze Age.