--- Alexander Stolbov <
astolbov@...> wrote:
the scheme given by M.B. Shchukin in
> "Rozhdenie slavyan"
> (
>
http://stratum.ant.md/stratum%20plus/articles/schukin/Sciukin.htm
> ,
> unfortunately without pictures) shows that the
> Milograd culture survives in
> a small scale till the beginning of our era (1st c.
> AD), and practically
> simultaneously emerges and develops the line the
> Kisteni-Chechersk group -
> sites of the Grini-Vovki type - the Kyiv culture.
*****GK: I must confess that while I appreciate some
of his contributions, by and large I have a great deal
of scepticism towards Schukin. I will certainly review
his archaeological reports. The Grini ceramic type is
acknowledged by everyone as an important element of
the Kyiv culture style, as is its derivation from
Chechersk-Kisteni (cf. e.g. the Ukrainian Academy of
Sciences' "The Slavs of Southeastern Europe" (1990),
which adds an important qualification: "We must
nevertheless underline that, EXCEPT FOR THIS SINGLE
TYPE OF POT (my emphasis GK), all the others [i.e. the
many other types of pots used in the Kyivan culture
GK] originate from pots of the Zarubynetska
culture".(p. 148). Schukin's interpretation of
classical texts is quite unsatisfactory. For instance,
he completely misinterprets Strabo on the Bastarnae.
Strabo's Geography (7.3.17) in no way implies that the
B. occupied any lands beyond Moldavia. Ptolemy (III.5)
is a useful indicator of their location, but since
this source conflicts with S's notion, he disparages
it. In fact, S's desire to identify the Zarubynetska
c. with the Bastarnae reaches almost grotesque
proportions, when he claims that the culture of the
upper Dnister Galicia was Bastarnian, even to the
extent of ignoring the presence of the Costoboci (a
pretty important group in the 1rst and 2nd cs.)******
>
>(AS) BTW, what is "Pidhirtsi"? Are there synonyms in
> other languages?
*****GK: It is the name of a locality just north of
Kyiv. Its iron age culture is very similar to
Milograd, so that occasionally the two cultures are
united as the "Milograd-Pidhirtsi" c. in writings of
Ukrainian archaeologists. The fact that P. was
territorially closer to the Scythian cultures of the
South and shared a few elements with them explains why
it is more frequently mentioned as a distinct
culture.*****
>
> > There was indeed some outmigration by part of the
> > Zarubynetska population, prompted by or in the
> wake of
> > Sarmatian pressure. But the population that left
> and
> > that which remained was in both cases
> "Zarubynetska"
> > as to culture. Everyone is agreed that the Kyiv
> > culture is more "primitive" than the Zarubynetska.
> > Whatever the reasons for this (changed historical
> > circumstances) mainstream archaeology continues to
> see
> > Zarubynetska as "the genetic foundation" of the
> Kyiv
> > c.
>
> (AS)If my supposition of Milograd c. -- (Zarub.
> influence) --> Kyiv c. is wrong,
> the next supposition must be: the Kyiv culture
> people are newcomers.
> I can not believe in Zarubinetskaya c. --> Kyiv c.
> Do you believe in such a
> thing as "delatenization"?
*****GK: Don't be so tragic! (:=)) Certain elements of
a culture can certainly be lost under different
historical circumstances. The Kyiv culture developed
from the Late Zarub., and did involve some population
shifts and changes. The entire third of classical
Zarub. (Polissia) outmigrated. Much of the Middle
Dnipro population did also (some to the southwest,
many to the north and northeast). There is also
evidence for the infiltration of Baltic elements from
the north and Germanic from the west, But the great
bulk of the population remained, although the new
centers became more northern (which probably explains
why it is THOSE "local" aspects of Zarub. which
contributed more to Kyiv c.).******
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus