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 initiastage- making the absolutechronolory more accurate(Fig. 1).
At present,for the areas of interest to us here, there is a chance for developing 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 developmentrelationshipscarried out so far, two branches 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; Kossack 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 - "Lusatian" - ones (mainly in weaponry) in cultureswest of the Dnieper justified the
formulatingof hypothesesof axpansionof the Scythianand Lusatian culturesin the
383
Na
.l.l:lil
e
r
mm^
----
ffi
sNn
e
D
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, CVysotskoculture,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 assemblagesto
identĘ internal divisionsof taxa' settling this matter seemsparticularlyinter€ s ting
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 chronologicaldeterminationsfor th.
Polish Lowlands [chieflyKujawy Uplands - see Ignaczak 2002:137-141],
wherefor 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 absolutechronologyis 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 presentedconclusionsare 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 1550-800/700
BC flgnaczak 2002:87tr,see Fig' and Tab.11.
Two groups of artifact assemblagesare the most interesting for 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:::
developmentphasesof the LC.
a. A significantanalyticaladvantageofiered by the assemblagesof the first group .
the possibilityof their synchronizationwith macrospatialidentifiersof UC tradiri;::,
such as socketedaxeheadswith loops, Reutlingen and Hemigkofen type swordsa::
lancet spearheads.This set of traits is supplementedby the stylistics of cera:.:goods featuring mainly ornamentsof incised lines (Fig. 2). Absolute dating ba..:
permits us to place : :
on calibratiofl nsiflg wiqqlematchĘ [Weninger1986:38-40]
beginning
the
14th
until
assemblagesin the interval from the
of
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\
l
0
u
5cm
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
(,
T a b le
1
Absolute dating (r4C)ol Lusatian cullure assemblageslrom t(rjawy
Site
No
Locstion
l
2
1.
2.
Narkowo 9
3.
4.
zgo\riączkA 3
Dat€
Sanple
Mate s.l
Culture"
Narkowo 9
5
LCI
czeb'esfu}' IgnacaŁ Łoś 1987
LCt
czebr€szuk'
lgna€zaĘ Ło.ś1987
LC IIa
Makarowi€z
1998
12
pit A84
LC Ila
Ignacza}' szsmałeĘ ctogowski 2003
56.
't.
sła!^to wielkie 12
pit B31
LC IIa
lgnacz.}' szanałeŁ Głogowski 2003
ltuczkowo 5
pit C189
LC IIa
Ignac!&k 2Ńz,2|n3
LC IIb
szamałek' Gtogo*ski' Ignacza} 2003
8.
9.
10.
Ciecbl"f
Pir A10
pit A15
LC IIb
szam3łek, Głogowski, Ignaczak 2003
LC IIb
sz3małek, Gło8o*ski lgnaczak m03
BożrjevicŁ 2.u23
Pit 81
pir E19
LC IVT
11.
t2.
13.
14.
Zego&i 3
pit 495
LC NNII
s7jJr]ateŁ Głogowski Ęnacak 2003
szanaleĘ Głogotski' Ignaczak 2003
Siniarfewo 1
pir H91
LC lII
Ignaczak fN2,20O3
Sinianewo 1
pit H91
LC nl
IEnaśzak2002,2003
Siriarfewo 1
pit H114
LCI
IEnaEzslK200f, m03
Sini,au ewo 1
tr'irH80
LC rV
lgna4za\ 2@2,2'/]3
Siniarz ewo 1
Pir I95
pit 1320
LC rV
LCIv
LCIv
LCN
LCV
I,C V
I,C V
Igna(zak 2Ń2,2003
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
slawsko wielki€
cieó'
2
siniaŹewo 1
Siniarzewo I
Siniarzewo 1
Pit 1392
pit J103
Siniarzewo 1
pit H54
Siniarrewo 1
pit 11
pir 1282
Conv. BP
Cal BC
(95,4%)b
3
Pit 1
pit 175
Lab. No
Ignaczak f002,2003
Ignaczak 200f,2003
IsnaczslK 2002,2003
Ignaczak 2002, 2003
I8nrcztrk201)2,2001
l8nrr, Órl2r)l'f.2lll)l
6
7
Gd-228
charcoal
Gd-2619
Ki-6886
Ki7821
Ki-1822
Ki-7820
Ki-7an
Ki-7818
Ki-8907
Ki-7816
K7U3
Ki-6250
Ki-6251
Ki-6244
Ki.ó249
Ki-6578
Kt-6579
Ki 6577
Ki-6574
Ki,65lr0
X i ór 7 ń
8
32m+9O
2880+80
3260+45
3090+60
3020+60
3010+60
2910+60
f940+60
2870+80
2845+60
2890ł50
31ó0+40
3120+35
3080+40
3070+40
3025+40
3010+35
3040+40
3065+35
2955r 40
Cal BC
(68,fEo).
9
l0
1780-14m
1400,800
1680-1440
1520-1210
1430-1090
1420-1060
131G920
1320-990
1290-830
1220-8m
1ó90'1500
1220-980
1620-1500
1440-13m
1400-1210
1390,1200
1ff0-lJn
1260-1050
rL30.920
1100-920
1260-920
1520-1390
1510"1310
1440-12ć0
1430-1250
|410.12Ń
1400-1130
1420-1210
1420.12(fi
t:l2t)l0-10
1160-1000
1460-1415
1440-138t)
1,4f0,1310
1410-1310
139G1250
1320-12j0
1390-r26t)
1310
1405"
t ?7 t ) t t )
t,,/0 | tJ0
t r lt It l
I l ,|l | | | ' ł | l
ot
2
1
23.
24.
25.
26.
21.
28.
29.
Kruszs,ica K-2f4
30.
Kruszwic{ K-2J4
32.
Ze8otki 18
Sinianewo 1
3
pit t20f
Pit K164
pit A44
tg a.r.ak2002;2003
LCV
Ignasz{|{20(n; 2003
Czemiak 3a
LCV
lgn .zak 2002
Czemiak 3a
LCV
Ignaczak 2002
pit 48
pit 46
pit 45
LCV
Na'ożna.szarnałek 1987; szafi\^ł.k |99f .
LCV
Narcżna.sz€nałek 1987; szźmalek 1992.
LCV
Naroź a.szamałek 1987; sfamalek 1992.
Pit B11
pit c10
pit A12
pit A21
LCV
szarndeĘ GIogowski, Ign5czal. 2003
LCV
samałek' Głogol'./ski,Ignacz.k 2003
LCV
szamałeŁ Gło8owski, lgnaczŹ} 2003
LCV
szamałeŁ ologo$,ski' Ignaczak 2003
LCV
|gnaęak2f0.z
Knszwica K-2l4
34.
BożŁjegłi.e2a
35.
Radojewice 24
Radojewice 24
shwśko wielkie 12
sławśkolłielkie 12
pit 434
pit 4108
6
lgnac'.* 2W2; 2003
LCV
trtuczkowo 1
Ciechrf Z
38.
5
LCV
LCV
tgn8truak2ffi2
LCV
IgnaczjŁ szalrMłek' Glogowski 2003
LCV
Ignacz'Ł szanałek' Glo8owski 2003
cbarcoal
1
Ki-6575
Kj-6573
Ki,7819
Ki-6494
Ki'ó495
cd-5047
Gd.5&ó
Gd-3302
Ki-8904
Ki-8905
Ki.890ó
Ki-8908
Ki.ó493
Kj-6492
Ki-8m3
Ki-8902
8
10
2925+40
2950+40
2930+50
9
1270-10m
1310-1030
1310-990
2820!35
110G900
2745+40 1000,820
2ó80+60 1000.7ó0
2ó50+60 940-750
2460+60 n0-4n
2680+80 105G750
2590+80 90G480
2550+70 83G480
2540+70 810,480
1f20-1$0
1260-1100
1220-1060
1010-920
93G835
865-795
900-780
760-680
920-790
2510+35
'IO+4O
2800+70
2i90+1O
8fir520
7m-410
r05G840
'tffi-690
700,540
'700-5m
7fi-sm
ó40.540
770-520
116G810
770-380
" Aiter lgnasak 2002
' " oxcal 3-4.
-l
388
the ..easternLC''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-steppe
and (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 groupsdevelopedin 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,"westemtraits - 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 "rvestern" traits is found mainly in burials. Another element displaying '\restern" c:
"southwestern"characteristicsin 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
I\,- ..+7
liV
\'ź,
W
Y
A\2
u
,r4^'.:---':.
'\Ń\\\\i(:.
ą
Dq
ł4h,
Ę\ q
/Ń a
t'ti:::"!M
A
udn
'<g/
S___-10(m
F i g. 3. A selectionof ceramic forms (with eastern influences) of the Lusatian culture in KujaBy fiom
the Hallstatt C,D periods.Piecki, sire 8, 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 determinedrelyingmainly on str::graphicdata and the typochronolos/of metal goods.The stratigraphicobservati:r.
of settlementsrelated to the Bgc set the position of this taxon betweenthe ęasie::
TH (Tizciniec-Komarów) and early Iron phenomena linked to the chc' Ta}Cthe turn of the 12th century bc (i.e., on uncalibratedscale) to be the decline ::
Tizciniec groups,S.S. Berezanskayadeterminedthe chronologyof the taxon at :::
11th-9thcenturybc. This chronologr was supposedlysupportedby 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
century bc [Chmykhov,Chem-'brackets of the cultural system to 141hi13th-11th
akov 1988].The final date of the functioning of BgC groups coincides with ti:
in the same area geneticallyrelated to the fc:.
appearanceof ChC assemblageś
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€ a tuling fluting and stamp ornamentsshowing affinitieslrit:
Gava-Goligrady,Chiśinau-Corlótenii Saharna/Coziaassemblages.Besides potter..
evidence for building a ChC chronology was supplied by the presence of meta.
indicatingC-arpathianconnectionsand, above all, objectsrelated to the Cimmeriahorizon.
Initially,BzC assemblageswere taten to reflect the late phase of the SrubDa\:
culture.The tTaditionalapproachto their chronologywas affectedaboveall by stratigraphic 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 showingaffinitieswith bow-5pe
fibulae(Pantalicatype) in the contextsof the BzC, dated this culture to 1150-900bc
1965].Of high importancefor building the chronolory were A. L MefTerenozhJcin
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 separatearchaeologicalculture,v.v.
Otroshchenko suggestedto date it at the interval of 12th-10thcentury bc [1981:
1985].Such chronological brackets,synchronouswith the BD/HaA1-HaA2,ts1 period, have been maintained in 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 chronological schemesof
Late Bronze and Early Iron taxa of Ukraine westof the DnĘer were developedfor
the most part relying on stratigraphicand typochronologicalfindings.The growing
numberof laC measurementsallowsus to verify the assumed,"classic"chronological
brackets(Fig. 7; Tab. Z).
The researchhas brought about a more accuratechronologyof 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 independentdevelopmentof Hordeevka-gpe complexesand their share in the
formationof the BzC [Klochko 2001:256]and/orChC [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 threshold of 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 grouped 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 seems necessaryto 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
No
z
1
Lab. No
Smple
3
5
7
1.
Kochkovatoe, Odesa Region
berow 32, grave 1
Bilozerka
vanńugov 1990
2_
3.
4.
Stepnoy, Zaporizhzhia Region
bsrow 2 grave 1
Bilozerka
Otroshchenko 2003
Stepnoy Zaporizbzhia Regiot
barow 11 grave 3
Bilozerka
Otooshchenko2003
Bilozerka
Otrosbchenko2003
5.
stepnoy Zaporizhńia
Stepnoy Zaporizhzhia Region
Region
?
Otroshchenko 2003
Stepnoy Zaporizhzbia Region
barow 15 grave 2
Bilozerka
Ot oshchenko 2003
'7.
stepnoy Zaporiózbia
Region
barow 15 grave 2
Bi]oz€rka
Otroshcbenko 2003
8.
stepnoy Zaporizhńia
Region
banow 3 grave 1
Bilorerka
Olroshchenko2003
stepnoy Zaporińzhia
Region
banow 9 grave 1
Bilozerka
Otroshcherko2003
10.
11.
1,2.
13.
r4.
15_
Stepnoy Zaporizhzhia Region
barow 11 gave 3
Bilozerka
OtJoshchenko 2003
stepnoy Zaporizhńia
baffow 2 grave 1
Bi-lozerka
Otroshchenko 2003
f7
Type Hordeąka
Ś]usa]ska.Micha]ik2003
t{ordeevka Vinn}tsia Region
322
ś]usmkaMichalik 2003
Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region
33
Type Hordeevka
'łpe Hoideevka
Hordeąka vinnytsia Region
35
Type Hordeevka
Ślusajska.Michalik 2oo3
1Ó.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Hord€evka vinnyisia Region
3',7
Type Hordeevka
Ślusanka.Michalik
Hordeevka Vinn)tsia Region
26
Type Hordeevka
Ślusłska Michalik 2oo3
Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region
26
Type Hordeevka
Ślusarska.Michali} 2003
Hordeevka Vinnytria Region
26
ślusaJskaMicha1ił 2003
Hordeevka Virnytsia Region
lpe Llordeevka
Type Hordeevka
Ś]usmka Michalik 2003
Ś ||||n||]|(t
Mi''l|tr|ik, )|)|)l
Hodewka
Region
Vinnltsia Region
2r.
Hordeevka Vinnytsia Region
z7
z7
22.
Hordeevka Vin.ytsia Region
ZE
Type Hodeevka
'IYpc Ilordccvka
Hordcevka viónytsh Rcgion
3l
'l!t! ll{ 'rka vlr
?Ą
|)1(.Ś|ll'vll
|'tIkn' ('|!.||livIry
l.'.IilllI
t ) ri- ' I
ŚlusaJska.Michalik 2003
2003
Ślusarska.Michalik 2003
Śll|slrsłx Mnt.lik 2()():]
Date
BP
BC
8
Ki-1714
Ki 887
Ki,889
2880+45 1140,980
2100+45 900820
2850+40 109094t)
Ki,575
Ki-885
Ki 88ó
Ki-9823
Ki 959ó
Ki-9820
Ki 9821
Kt-9822
Ki,5080
Ki-5079
Ki 5083
Ki-5081
Ki,5082
Ki 9252
Ki-9253
Ki 9254
Ki-9255
Ki 9256
Ki e257
3050+70 1390-1180
2805+55 1030,880
2690+50 900815
2920+5O 1210-1030
2975+45 12001030
2880ł55 1160-970
2830+55 1080910
2780r55 1000-850
3460+70 1870-r680
3020+55 1360'11ó
3010{50 13501150
2980+60 1310-1090
2920+50 1210,1030
3180+50 15051405
3240,r50 1590-1450
3120+50 14401310
2980+50 1300-1110
2950+50 1250Ioan)
t4r{)t:ł)()
: 11lll r 5l)
t
i)
it )
1
2
3
5
6
25.
26.
21.
28.
29.
Dnest ovka'Luka, Chemnty
30.
Subotiv, Chertasy Region
hut 4, pit 1
Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
hut 4
Bilogludovka
Ktoó}o'
Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
hut 4
Bilogrudovka
Klochlo, Kovaliulh, MoEenbecka
Bilogrudovka
Klochko, Kovaliukh, Możenbecker 1998
32.
33.
34.
35.
3ó.
Region
pir 5
Dnestiovka.Luką chemntsy Region
prt 4
Smimova 1986
Chomoles
Smimova 1986
Dnestsovka.Luka' ch€mhtśy Region
Chomoles
Snimova 1986
Subotiv, Cherkasy Regiot
Bilosrudovka
Klochko' Kova]iuk}'' Możenbeckel 1998
Bilo$udovka
Klochko' Kova]iuló, Motsenbeckel 1998
Bilogludovka
K]oc}to' Kovaliuk,Ę Motzenbecke! 1998
Subotiv, Cberkasy Region
subotiv' chelkaśy Regio.
Kovaliukh, MoEenbeckel 1998
1998
Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
hut 4
Bilogrudovka
Klochko, Kovaliukh, Motzenbecter 1998
Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
"sq.0'11"
Cbomoles
KLochko, Kovaliulh, MoEenbecker 1998
Subotiv, CherkasJ Region
"sq.0- 11"
Cbomoles
Klochko, Kovaliuklr, MoEenbecker 1998
subotŁ cherkasy Region
"sq.0'11"
Chomoles
Kloóko'
38. Subotiv, Cherkary Region
39. Suboriv, Cberkasy Region
40. Subotiv, Che*asy Region
4r. Subotiv, Che*asy Region
42. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
43. Subotiv, Cherkasy Region
"sq.0- 11"
Chomoles
Klochko' Kova1iul.h' MoĘ€nb€ckel
1998
"sq.0- 11"
Chomoles
Ktochko' Kova]iuki, Możenb€cker
1998
"sq.0- 11"
Chomoles
Klochko, Itur/aliukh, MoEenbecker 1998
't q.0- 11"
Chomoles
Ktoch}o' Kovatiuk]r' Możenbeckel 1998
"sq.0- 11"
Chomoles
Klochko' Kovaliuk'Ł Możenbecker 1998
'tq. 0-11"
Chomoles
Kloó}o,
Subotiv, CberkasJ Region
"sq.0'11"
Chomoles
Klochko, Kovaliukh, Motzenbecker 1998
45. Subotiv, CberkBsy Region
46. obutttŁ Kid Region
"sq.0- 11"
Cbomoles
Klochko' Kova'liukĄ MoEenbecker 1998
Bilogrudovka
Otmshchenko 1986
. 2003 = . .'in thiśvotume
Kova]iuk}' Możenbe€kel
1998
Kovaliut.Ą MoEenbeckel 1998
7
8
9
Le-2161
Le 2165
Le-2164
Ki-5505
Ki,5502
f970+40
2800*40
2ó30+50
3r00+40
3040i50
3030+60
2950r45
2980+50
2940+50
2910+55
293s+40
f930+40
2910+35
2890+30
28ó0+30
2875+40
2850+35
2845!35
2870+50
2820+30
2830!40
3090+70
If'|0,11t0
995-890
Ki,5504
Ki-5501
Ki,5503
Ki-5506
Ki-5507
Ki,s863
Ki-5859
Ki-5858
Ki 5862
Ki-5869
Ki-5861
Ki-5865
Ki.58ó0
Ki 586ó
Ki-5864
Ki,5868
Ki gtf
845,770
1410-1310
1370-1210
7370-1170
1250-1010
1310-1090
1f40-1050
1f101010
1220-1050
12101050
1180,1030
1090-960
1090,960
1lm"980
1080-940
107G940
1130,960
1005925
1040-920
1430-12,44
394
BC
Baltic
BlackSea
500
600
700
800
900
10 0 0
1100
1240
1300
1400
lallsla(c/D
IV.V OEE
1500
F i g ' 4. A radiocarbonchronolog/ scheme irr 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 stretchingbetweenthe Baltic and Black seas,specificallybetweenthe
drainagesof the Vstula and Dnieper rivers,one can venture to outline their development relationships.The outline should tałe into accountthe fact that the area in
questionwitnessedmultiple and multidirectionaltransmissionsof cultural elements.
The difierencesrevealed in the dating of similar cultural elementsin the areas under 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 opposingtrendsin the transmissionof cultural
lraits in the archaeologicalmaterials:
1. The first trend continued along the followingpath:the LC (late Bronze Age)
. presumedVC (gloup) _' the BzC (Fig. 4). An earlier appearanceof thę cultural
'
patternsmentioned above in the LC settingjustifiesthe 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 eńibiting markers of 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;Ignaczak' Głogowski 2003].
The picture of cultural infiltration between the two seas briefly outlined above
needselaborating,The proposalspresentedhere are, therefore,highly preliminary.
A major shortcomingwas an insufficientnumber of 1aCdatesfrom 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