«ÐÎÑÑÈÉÑÊÀß ÀÊÀÄÅÌÈß ÍÀÓÊ ÎÐÄÅÍÀ ÒÐÓÄÎÂÎÃÎ ÊÐÀÑÍÎÃÎ ÇÍÀÌÅÍÈ ÈÍÑÒÈÒÓÒ ÀÐÕÅÎËÎÃÈÈ ÐÎÑÑÈÉÑÊÀß ÀÊÀÄÅÌÈß ÍÀÓÊ ÎÐÄÅÍÀ ÒÐÓÄÎÂÎÃÎ ÊÐÀÑÍÎÃÎ ÇÍÀÌÅÍÈ ÈÍÑÒÈÒÓÒ ...»
upper chronological boundaries of these two types of Kartamyshevo 2 and Ternovka 2. At first stage sites have not been determined yet. Kartamyshevo 2 buildings are divided into single Kiev culture settlements emerged after Pochep sites dwelling and single economic areas. On the second in the Desna region. Their earliest date is also vague. stage the buildings are divided into 2 groups.
Lavrikov Les, Desnyanka, Kireevka 2 – these are the Ternovka 2 was a place inhabited by a maximum of settlements, the chronology of which is more or less two small families that mastered separate households.
distinct, they are dated not earlier than the second half 24 dwellings are known in the settlements of of the 3rd century AD. Kartamyshevo Ternovka circle. Most of them were The problem of Pochep population future destiny is rectangular with wall length from 2.4 to 5.5 m, but rather complicated. Available data indicates that pop more often about 3.5 – 4.5 m, deepened into the ulation changed in the Desna region with appearance ground from 10 cm to 1 m. The walls of most houses of Kiev culture. Nevertheless, some Pochep traditions had log construction. Clay daubing was not used dur are felt in the archaeological complex of Kiev culture ing the house building. The holes for central support (primarily, in house building). posts were rare. In a number of houses remains of open In the Oka basin Pochep population became one of fires were found, usually in the form of fireplace traces.
Moshchiny culture components, which emerged in The remains of land surface house and a house with a the 3 rd century AD. part deepened into the ground were studied.
Utility buildings in the settlements of Chapter 5. Sites of Kartamyshevo type are extremely rare, but, on the other hand, they are numerous in Ternovka circle set Kartamyshevo 2 and tlements. The fireplaces located outside of buildings were found. Specific objects of Kartamyshevo circle Ternovka 2 types settlements are so called conical stoves in the form of holes overlaid with pottery fragments and coated by a (A.M. Oblomsky) thick layer of clay.
The first settlements of Kartamyshevo 2 type were Handmade pottery is divided into kitchen pottery found in the 1970's by D.Ya. Telegin, S.A. Beliaeva, with rough surface and polished pottery. The polished E.A. Syimonovitch, O.N. Melnikovskaya;
these sites pottery makes up in average from 3 to 6.4%. Wheel were investigated afterwards by E.A. Gorunov, made pottery (including fragments of amphorae) is V.M. Gorunova, O.A. Shcheglova, A.A. Uzianov, very rare. It was found in very few sites because it had N.A. Tikhomirov, R.V. Terpilovsky, A.M. Oblomsky, been imported.
I.N. Kulatova, A.B. Suprunenko. Kitchen ceramics of Kartamyshevo Ternovka type The first settlement of Ternovka 2 type was rougher than pottery of Marianovka, Pochep, and (Novodonovka 1) was studied by V.I. Mitrofanova in Lutezh types. The surfaces often have traces of fingers.
1960. Afterwards the sites of this type were studied by Sometimes the pottery has artificially rough surface U.V. Buinov, E.N. Petrenko, A.S. Smirnov, A.N. Sorokin, and is ornamented by comb scratches. Some vessels A.M. Oblomsky, I.V. Zinkovskaya, and A.P. Medvedev. have traces of chips touches and strokes. Favorite way The sites of Kartamyshevo Ternovka circle were of rough pottery ornamentation – notches and dim determined as a special cultural and chronological plings put by finger on rim edge. The body of vessels type of antiquities by A.M. Oblomsky and majority has no ornamentation. In general, vessels R.V. Terpilovsky in 1991. ornamentation is more widely met in Kartamyshevo All the materials of this cultural group come from sites type than in Ternovka sites type.
cemeteries have not been Pottery is shown on Fig. 72 78, 81, 82, 118 120, found yet. The only exception is a cremation in 128 135. Closed pots with round bodies with rim Gochevo 1 site. bended outwards prevail among rough vessels, though 20 settlements of Kartamyshevo type have been ribbed pots and can type pots were also found as well as recorded, out of them 7 are located in the Ukraine. miniature vessels of different forms. Discs were discov (Appendix 1, table 1). These settlements are located in ered in Ternovka type sites. Handmade polished pots the Middle and Upper Seim regions and in upper and were solitary. Bowls were found most often. High middle streams of the rivers that flow into the Dnieper ribbed forms with zigzag profile (Fig. 74: 12;
from the east: Sula, Vorskla, and Orel. 119: 8) were the most widespread in sites of The settlements of Ternovka type are widespread in Kartamyshevo type. Sometimes high bowls were orna forest steppe part of the Severskij Donets basin and in mented by a belt of stricken zigzags on the body sur ÐÀÍÍÅÑËÀÂßÍÑÊÈÉ ÌÈÐ • face, meander elements, vertical lines with hatches Early sites of the Seim Donets variant show inter and swastikas (Fig. 145: 30, 31). Low ribbed bowls connection of two types of Late Zarubintsy antiquities without ornament and with straight rims are wide (of Kartamyshevo circle, from one side, and Ternovka, spread in the Severskij Donets basin and Oskol (Fig. from the other side) that existed in the previous period 131: 4, 8;
132: 4 6;
135: 1). separately. Thus, the Seim Donetsk version of Kiev Spindle whorls are the most numerous of house culture formed as a result of Late Zarubintsy popula hold items. Fragments of teagels are related to metal tion micro migrations.
lurgy. Knives, arrowheads, spurs, pins, frame buckle, Sites of Kartamyshevo 2 type are directly related to sickle, and an axe are made of iron. formation of the Desna antiquities variant of Kiev cul Pins, bracelets, long beads, neck ring, cover plates, ture. Ceramics complex of the earliest Kiev culture frame buckles, and eye fibula of Almgren 61 type from sites of the Desna and the Middle Seim regions Kartamyshevo 2 are made of bronze. Of particular (Popovo Lezhachi 4, Veseloe, Greblia) have proto interest are the decorations with notched enamel and types in the east of the Dnieper left bank area.
the accompanying plate items found in the settlements Chapter 6. Topography and Bobrava 3, Golovino 1, Gochevo 1, Ezdochnoe, Zhernovets, Kartamyshevo 2, Kolesniki, Osipovka layout of settlements, Pliag, Rodnoi Krai 1, Ternovka – 2 (Fig. 146: 17, 22). A small series of glass beads are imported items.
building types According to amphorae material (Fig. 75), eye fibula from Kartamyshevo 2 (Fig. 146: 14), fragments (U.U. Bashkatov, G.L. Zemtsov) of neck ring from Golovino 1 (Fig. 146: 16) and beads, the sites chronology of Kartamyshevo Ternovka type The problems of topography, planigraphy, and is determined within the limits of Late Zarubintsy house building of Late Zarubintsy period are examined period in whole, i.e. within middle second half of the in detail in the 6th chapter. All sites currently known 1st 2 nd centuries AD. have been analyzed.
A.M. Oblomsky and R.V. Terpilovsky stated a the The sites may be divided into 3 groups in terms of sis in 1991 that Kartamyshevo Ternovka type sites are topography.
close to the Middle Dnieper region antiquities of The first group consists of settlements located in Lutezh circle due to common handmade rough pot the slopes and capes of first bottomland terrace (41of tery and house building traditions. A.M. Oblomsky 86 recorded sites, 47%). Overwhelming majority of and R.V. Terpilovsky also concluded that these sites such settlements is situated no more than 5 m above emerged as a result of the Middle Dnieper region bottomland level.
Zarubintsy people descendants' migration to the east The second group of sites consists of the settle of the Dnieper left bank region and the Severskij ments found on the hills of the first bottomland ter Donets basin. race or on the bottomland dunes (34 sites, 40%). They The antiquities of Kartamyshevo circle are unique are located 4 m above the bottomland. The exceptions due to elements related to Pshevorsk culture. Some are settlements Novodonovka 1 in the Severskij small groups of Pshevorsk culture population migrated Donets region (6 m) and Berezniaki on the Sula river to the Dnieper Don watershed. There is no direct evo (3.5 7 m).
lutionary link between the antiquities of Kharievka The third group of settlements is located on the type (the 2nd century BC – beginning of the 1 st century native bank, its topography is similar to "classical" AD) and Kartamyshevo Ternovka type sites. Zarubintsy;
there are only 11 of them (13%). These Kharievka type sites were widespread in the north sites are located relatively high – on the 3.5 7 m level eastern part of the Dnieper forest steppe left bank (Vovki) and 10 14 m (Chulatovo).
these sites had features of Zarubintsy, the Examining this data on local variants, 4 traditions Middle Dnieper region, Pshevorsk, and Yastorf in may be distinguished in topography of Late Zarubintsy their archaeological complex. settlements. The settlements of first "eastern" tradition Direct evidence appeared in the 1980's – 1990's are located usually in bottomland and terraces, as that the Middle Dnieper region population penetrated Kartamyshevo 2, Ternovka 2, and Pochep, which are to the east. Late Zarubintsy handmade ceramics typi situated on the territory of the Ukraine and Russia cal for the Middle Dnieper region was discovered in (Oblomsky, 1991, table 1). Lutezh type sites of the sec Berezovka 2 and Zhernovets settlements, which are ond tradition are located in bottomland or near it in published in this monograph (Appendix, Fig. 102 117). the Middle Dnieper region. Settlements of Grini type At the end of the 2nd beginning of the 3rd century are situated most often on slopes and capes of the first AD settlements of the Seim Donets variant of Kiev bottomland terrace;
the Marianovka circle settlements culture spread around in the east of the Dnieper left – on native banks of rivers and streams.
bank region, the Severskij Donets region, and Oskol. The layout was analyzed on the basis of the most The initial phase of these settlements was named well studied settlements (Obolon, Kartamyshevo 2, antiquities of Shishino Shmiriovo type. Parkhomovka, Marianovka, Lutezh, and others).
Summary A.M. Oblomsky, R.V. Terpilovsky, and A.V. Petrauskas tangular or square shape, with an open hearth, log came to a conclusion in 1991 that the Late Zarubintsy construction walls, and central roof supporting posts.
settlements had 3 main types of layout: This tradition of house building continued in the 1. Large settlements of Obolon and Pochep types Desna region later. Large ground based houses of that consisted of several groups of dwelling places and Pochep type sites have been analyzed once again. In continued Pilipenkova Gora tradition;
these settle general, the authors do not deny the existence possi ments became rare in the 1 st 2 nd centuries AD. bility of above ground houses, nevertheless, they con 2. Settlements of Lutezh and Kartamyshevo 2 sider this problem debatable and requiring further field types with a common utility yard;
they are close to studies. Houses deepened into the ground of elongat Chaplin fortified settlement (the most widespread ed proportions often with shallow construction pit and type). without central supporting posts are typical for the east 3. Miniature settlements of Ternovka 2 type that of the Dnieper left bank area and the Dnieper Don consisted of one or two buildings. watershed.
These conclusions should be clarified. Layout of Chapter 7. At the Slavs settlement Lug IV (Obolon) coincides with Pilipenkova Gora only on early existence stages. It origin (Instead of conclusion) becomes more similar to the second type construction on later stages. Most likely, the situation is the same in (O.V. Arion, U.V. Bashkatov, A.M. Oblomsky, Pochep settlement. The earlier horizon is related to R.V. Terpilovsky) the same type in Kartamyshevo 2.
One more layout type may be distinguished accord In the beginning of the chapter the role of different ing to materials of settlements Lug IV (Obolon) and sciences (history, linguistics) in study of Slavs ethno Kartamyshevo 2 (upper horizon). The buildings are genesis is examined. According to archaeological data, located at a distance of 10 20 m from each other;
each the results of east line of this process are stated below.
construction has its own set of utility holes. This type This process led to formation of medieval Slavic peo was widely spread, as well as the second type, at later ples: Antes and Venety of Jordan. This concept repre time of Kiev culture. The appearance of this layout sents a further development of P.N. Tretyakov – V.N.
type is connected with the further disintegration of Danilenko theory, formulated in the 1960's – 1970 ies.
patriarchal family. The starting point of Eastern Slavs peoples forma The study of Late Zarubintsy dwellings has lasted tion is a crisis (or disintegration) of Zarubintsy culture.
for over fifty years;
it began with the works of Its characteristics are: disappearance of Zarubintsy A.K. Ambroz (1955, 1956, and 1957). Nevertheless, sites of the Pripiat forest region in a fairly short period some questions have not been resolved yet because of time, all Zarubintsy cemeteries and a number of the many materials have not been published, and some Dnieper region settlements stopped functioning, mass documentation is doubtful. The Late Zarubintsy house migrations of population from these native territories building is described in detail in the 6 th chapter accord to different directions from the Western Bug region in ing to our present knowledge level. the west and the Khoper basin in the west;
the topog U.U. Bashkatov stated a hypothesis that log con raphy of settlements changed, social organizations and struction type of house building appeared in the mid funeral ceremonies were innovated.
dle of the 1st century BC. This assumption supports The crisis of Zarubintsy culture gave impulse to the idea that the house building tradition of the Middle appearance of new archaeological phenomenon – Dnieper region was taken from the final classical Late Zarubintsy cultural and chronological horizon Zarubintsy culture sites through the Late Zarubintsy (middle – third quarter of the 1st century AD – the end settlements to Kiev culture. Also he made an attempt of the 2nd century AD).
to divide settlement Lug IV (Obolon) into construc The disintegration of Zarubintsy culture was a tion horizons according to house building data, which result of a complex of reasons, among which ecologi was confirmed by the ceramics materials in whole. cal processes took an important place.
The Southern Bug basin dwellings were divided Paleoclimatologists marked out minimal humidity into 2 groups of buildings: above ground constructions, level and significant increase of average annual tem which are similar to the Middle Dnieper region build perature for all the first millennium BC and the first ings and structures deepened into the ground for a half half of AD millennium. These circumstances created close to Pochep buildings. However, significant differ significant difficulties for Zarubintsy population tradi ences were found. tional ways of farming. This fact was perhaps an G.L. Zemtsov and U.U. Bashkatov examined in impulse to start migrations in search of better lands.
detail the buildings of the eastern Dnieper left bank Late Zarubintsy sites formed under these condi area and the Severskij Donets basin. Special type of tions may be divided into several groups or types:
dwelling place formation was recorded in the Desna Grinevichi Velki – Radost (the Upper Pripiat region region during the Late Zarubintsy period. The build and the adjacent part of the Western Bug basin), ings were with significantly much deeper floors of rec Marianovka – Rakhny (forest steppe part of the ÐÀÍÍÅÑËÀÂßÍÑÊÈÉ ÌÈÐ • Southern Bug basin), Lutezh (the Middle Dnieper type and "eastern" of Ternovka type. Pochep tribes, region), Pochep (the Middle and Upper Desna probably, left the Desna region during the 2nd century regions), the middle layer of Tushemlya settlement AD. Carriers of Kartamyshevo type antiquities pene (the Upper Dnieper region and adjacent regions), trated into this area later from the south east, the Kartamyshevo Ternovka (forest steppe part of the east Upper Dnieper region groups migrated there from the of the Dnieper left bank region and the Severskij north. The Desna region variant of Kiev culture Donets basin), Shapkino Rasskazan (the Khoper river emerged as a result of their integration. The issue on basin). Zarubintsy component is felt in Zubra culture the Upper Dnieper variant of Kiev culture origin has of Carpathian and Volyn regions. Sites of Grini type not been resolved yet. The study of Kiev culture of the appeared later than others. They did not form on com Volga region group has just begun. It is clear that Kiev pact territory and were widespread on forest steppe population penetrated into this region from outside.
part of the Dnieper region and the Severskij Donets Late Scythian and Sarmathian sites of forest steppe basin. region ceased to exist not later than the middle of the Late Zarubintsy settlements are located predomi middle of the 3 rd century AD nantly on first bottomland terraces above the rivers. Thus, the traditions of different Late Zarubintsy The innovation is the appearance of mansions in com groups changed during the process of Kiev culture for parison with the period before Zarubintsy culture col mation.
lapse. Deepened into the ground houses were relative Ceramics collection of early Kiev sites keeps a ly small in size. The houses had rectangular shape, number of Late Zarubintsy relicts. "Barbaric" decora open hearths, and walls of carcass or log construction. tions with notched enamels that appeared in Late Handmade ceramics of southern Late Zarubintsy Zarubintsy period continued to exist.
cultural groups is divided into rough (for kitchen) and Sites of Cherniakhov culture appeared in the sec polished (for dining). The first group prevails greatly: ond third middle of the 3rd century AD on the territo korchagas, pots and flat disks. Basic elements typolog ry of the Middle Dnieper region and the Dnieper left ical similarity of Late Zarubintsy material culture bank region. According to modern data, Cherniakhov antiquities, on the one hand, and early antiquities of culture corresponded to the proto state association following Kiev culture, on the other hand, indicates on headed by the Goths.
absence of chronological hiatus between them. Kiev culture people got in touch with Chernyakhov A special complex of decorations was formed dur tribes in the second half of the 3rd 4 th centuries AD.
ing Late Zarubintsy period, which included items with Imports, primarily, ceramics are widespread. Due to notched enamel. Late Zarubintsy archaeological arti expansion of Chernyakhov culture to the east, the part facts complex is close in different ways to classical of Kiev sites of the Middle Dnieper Region and east of Zarubintsy collection of artifacts, but elements of clas the Dnieper left bank region became a part of sical Zarubintsy culture are present in all of them. Chernyakhov culture territory. Kiev population, prob Except for Late Zarubintsy sites, sites of other cultures ably, abandoned their native territory partially. Part of were found on the territory of the Dnieper Don forest Kiev population was included directly in Chernyakhov steppe: Sarmathian and Late Scythian (Fig. 1). Their culture structure.
areas are located close to each other. Chernyakhov tribes moved to the east, and with At the turn of the 2 nd 3 rd centuries AD a new stage this expansion formation of a new cultural group in the of Late Zarubintsy population migration occurred in Upper Don region is connected (of Kashirka Sedelki the forest steppe zone. As a result of these events, a type), elements of Kiev and the Lower Dnieper region new archaeological phenomenon emerged – Kiev cul of Late Scythian origin are traced in its structure.
ture (turn of the 2nd 3rd centuries AD – beginning of The appearance of the Huns in the Eastern Europe the 5th century AD), that is divided into several cultur steppes and their destruction of Germanarikh power in al and chronological types (or variants): the Middle 375 AD caused a series of massive migrations in forest and Upper Dnieper types (of Abidini circle), the steppe zone. Cherniahkov population migrated to the Seim Donets type, and Khoper type. First informa west, to the frontiers of the Roman Empire, in the end tion on Kiev settlements and cemeteries in the Volga of the 4 th beginning of the 5 th centuries AD. Tribes that region of Samara appeared recently. Kiev culture sites lived in the contact with population of Kiev culture were found in the north in the West Dvina basin and in started moving. Thus, a group from Kiev Cherniakhov upper stream area of the Velikaya river. region of forest steppe borderland (settlements None of Kiev culture local variants arose as a result Aleksandrovka 1 and Roishche) moved to the north, of simple evolutionary development of local Late to the Lower Desna region.
Zarubintsy antiquities. Kiev culture formed in the The movement in opposite direction was more Middle Dnieper region by traditions merging of the intense. Settlements of the Desna variant of Kiev cul Middle Dnieper population of Lutezh type with the ture appeared in the forest steppe part of the Dnieper Upper Dnieper – Posozhsk elements. It appeared as a left bank region within the range of Cherniakhov area.
result of two related Late Zarubintsy groups on the The Desna river population penetrated into the Dnieper Don watershed – "western" of Kartamyshevo Middle Dnieper region and to the east of the Dnieper Summary left bank region. Pottery collection and house building A new cultural group emerged in the Upper Don traditions show that Kolochin culture, in general, region during this period: Chertovitskoe Zamatino formed on the basis of Desna variant of Kiev culture. settlements and cemeteries of Zhivotinnoe circle;
It is not impossible that it corresponds to the Early these sites have different ethno cultural elements of Middle Ages Venets of Jordan. Kiev, Late Diakovo, Moshchiny cultures, as well as The groups of "Kiev Kolochin" northern popula Germanic and nomadic traditions. It is possible that tion and Kiev groups of the Middle Dnieper and the the group of settlements near modern Zadonsk town Dnieper left bank regions took part in Penkovka cul played a role of maintenance base of one of Hun ture formation, which is associated with historical Empire departments and some groups of nomads Antes. The population of the forest steppe Dnieper after its collapse. The forest steppe Don region region experienced a strong impact of Chernyakhov antiquities of the 6th 7th centuries AD have not been culture. found yet.
ÎÃËÀÂËÅÍÈÅ Ââåäåíèå (À.Ì. Îáëîìñêèé)..................................................................................................................... ÃËÀÂÀ 1. Èñòîðèîãðàôèÿ äðåâíîñòåé ïîçäíåçàðóáèíåöêîãî ïåðèîäà. (Ð.Â. Òåðïèëîâñêèé).............. ÃËÀÂÀ 2. Ïàìÿòíèêè òèïà Ìàðüÿíîâêè áàññåéíà Þæíîãî Áóãà. (À.Ì. Îáëîìñêèé)............................ ÃËÀÂÀ 3. Ïîçäíåçàðóáèíåöêèå ïàìÿòíèêè Ñðåäíåãî Ïîäíåïðîâüÿ.
(Þ.Þ. Áàøêàòîâ, Ð.Â. Òåðïèëîâñêèé)................................................................................................... ÃËÀÂÀ 4. Ïàìÿòíèêè òèïà Ïî÷åï. (À.Ì. Îáëîìñêèé).............................................................................. ÃËÀÂÀ 5. Ïàìÿòíèêè òèïà Êàðòàìûøåâî 2 è Òåðíîâêè 2. (À.Ì. Îáëîìñêèé)...................................... ÃËÀÂÀ 6. Òîïîãðàôèÿ è ïëàíèðîâêà ïîñåëåíèé, òèïû ïîñòðîåê. (Þ.Þ. Áàøêàòîâ, Ã.Ë. Çåìöîâ)...... ÃËÀÂÀ 7. Ó èñòîêîâ ñëàâÿíñòâà (Âìåñòî çàêëþ÷åíèÿ).
(Î.Â. Àðèîí, Þ.Â. Áàøêàòîâ, À.Ì. Îáëîìñêèé, Ð.Â. Òåðïèëîâñêèé)................................................... ÏÐÈËÎÆÅÍÈÅ 1. Êàòàëîã ïîçäíåçàðóáèíåöêèõ ïàìÿòíèêîâ íà òåððèòîðèè Óêðàèíû........................ ËÈÒÅÐÀÒÓÐÀ È ÀÐÕÈÂÍÛÅ ÌÀÒÅÐÈÀËÛ......................................................................................................... ÑÏÈÑÎÊ ÑÎÊÐÀÙÅÍÈÉ............................................................................................................................... ÈËËÞÑÒÐÀÖÈÈ.......................................................................................................................................... SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................................