George Knysh wrote:
****GK: To possess elements (more or less significant)
> of the Celtic La Tene culture. There were indeed such
> in the Zarubynets'ka c. (perhaps this is when the
> toponym "Kobryn" arose in the western area thereof).
> But there is no problem here. After all the
> indubitably Slavic Kyiv culture (ca. 200-500 AD) is a
> direct offshoot of the Zarubynets'ka c. *******
Sorry, George, I can't agree here.
Yes, one finds the Kyiv culture on the place where earlier the Zarub. sites
were. However this does not mean that the former is an offshoot of the
latter. Just because the Kyiv culture is much more primitive and less
sophisticated than the Zarub. one.
I explain this situation as following.
Before coming the latenized tribes from the West (it is traced
archaeologically), this area was occupied by Milograd culture - a typical
Early Iron Age forest culture. A part of Milograd people was involved in
assimilation processes, accepted the culture of newcomers and became the
substrate of the Zarub. culture. Another part of the Milograd population
kept on living according to old traditions. After the Zarub. people went
away the territory of Middle Dnieper remained under command of aborigines
whose culture didn't changed considerably during the period of western
occupation. Thus one can consider the Kyiv culture as an offshoot of the
Milograd culture.
Alexander