The sudden hierarchization of societies in the last centuries BCE.

Koryakova/Epimakov
The Urals and Western Siberia in the Bronze and Iron ages
pp. 326-333
'SOCIAL STRATEGIES IN THE IRON AGE

The transition to the wide use of iron tools and weapons occurred in temperate Eurasia between 800 and 300 BC. As we saw, iron was known in the southern Urals one thousand years before, when it was used for prestige goods in the Yamnaya culture. Despite this, iron seems not to have been used for this purpose for a long period after its actual introduction. The beginning of the Iron Age is marked by the last "explosion" of the bronze industry, which supplied growing military needs. At this time, iron was valuable, and therefore it was not put into graves, but later it became a common metal. Gold and silver, and also imported objects, were used as criteria for nobility and wealth in this epoch. Very soon, bronze was in short supply.

The broad decline of the Bronze Age cultures resulted partly from climatic deterioration, followed by an economic reorientation to nomadism. This event itself cannot be seen as having only one implication. On the one hand, nomadism made it possible to assimilate such a huge space and to create a partial solution to demographic problems. On the other hand, it had no great potential resources for urbanization. Yet, because a nomadic economy cannot exist without links with settled civilizations, even if such contacts are not always peaceful, nomadism helped them spread their achievements and thus participate in the general historical process. Our understanding of social and cultural trends in Eurasia in the Iron Age depends on how we understand the nomadic world. As has been demonstrated in earlier research, the tendency toward nomadism always existed within the societies inhabiting the Eurasian steppe. It took a considerable amount of time and experience in stock breeding before proper mechanisms of natural adaptation could be worked out. In the archaeological record, the transition to nomadism seems to have happened relatively quickly, but we should not forget that the development of animal husbandry during the Late Bronze Age, when horses were trained to be ridden, may have been an unintentional preparation for this shift in the subsistence economy (Kuzmina 1996a, 1996b).

In the ninth - seventh centuries BC the earliest kurgans of a nomadic elite appeared - first in the east, in Siberia, and then they became a part of the steppe landscape in the west. The largest of these barrows demonstrating a great investment of labor are not common. They are known in Siberia (Arzhan and Salbyk), in the northern Caucasus (Kelermes and Ul'skiye), and in Chorasmia (Tagisken). It is true that many steppe barrows have either not yet been excavated, or have been destroyed. The large elite barrows that have been studied in the most detail relate to the fifth - second centuries BC. Some of them were about 100 m in diameter and have been interpreted as royal funeral sites. They also performed the function of ceremonial centers (Grach 1980; Gryaznov 1980; Murzin 1990). It is not necessary to discuss high levels of social differentiation in early nomadic cultures, which are well known. More crucial is the question of how and why Eurasian society reached such levels so quickly. We broached this issue in Chapter 6 and will now continue this discussion.

It is reasonable to take as a model the territory of northern Kazakhstan that provides an archaeological sequence from the Bronze Age to the epoch of nomads. Khabdulina (1994; Khabdulina & Zdanovich 1984) and other researchers explained the social change in this area with reference to economic reasons, largely stemming, from the local pluvial conditions of the tenth to ninth centuries BC, when the weather gradually became cooler. The impact of the forest ecosystems to the south made some groups of the Sargary culture population leave their settlements Traces of flooding has been discovered at many settlements in northern Kazakhstan (Khabduhna & Zdanovich 1984, Zdanovich 1970). In some places, the population tried to maintain its traditional economy based on pastoral cattle-breeding and land cultivation as long as possible. However, in new conditions, that system of material production had exhausted its potential. Archaeologically, this time period is characterized by small, short-term camps, and only rarely by settlements with traces of craft production. The latter were employed as centers of small communities At the same time, some rare settlements situated in more or less good climatic conditions became centers of population growth (e g , the Kent settlement in Central Kazakhstan). Yet, the more nomadism spread, the more settled elements moved out of the steppe area.

One can see that the cemeteries also were transformed. Instead of the compactly arranged burial grounds of the Bronze Age, there appeared separate solitary barrows out of river valleys and usually located on watersheds. Burials acquired a more individual character. The most characteristic feature in the eighth - sixth centuries BC was the above-ground architectural construction, which was the most elaborate and sophisticated part of the funeral complex, and which reflected an idea of distinctiveness and served to establish the new ideology. Undoubtedly, at this time the size and complexity of funeral construction as indicators of social status and prestige were of paramount significance As has been demonstrated by recent research, a barrow might originally be erected as a stepped pyramidal construction of topsoil bricks placed on a base of an imposing wooden funeral chamber. Such barrows were usually situated on high ground and dominated chains of other barrows. With regard to the early period, we can assume that changes came into being earlier at the elite level of barrows, which contrasted sharply with the majority of the ordinary population buried in extremely modest graves. The material culture associated with the new barrows demonstrated a significant military character.

Similar transformations took place in many parts of the Eurasian steppe, but because of cultural and social asymmetry, they did not coincide in time Medvedev (1999a) noticed that the transition to nomadism in the eastern European steppe was inspired by the collapse of the mixed economy of the late Srubnaya society, which could not preserve itself in conditions of cooling and aridity. The anthropogenic factor played its negative role as well.

Hence, in this divergence process, society was definitely separated into groups differentiated according to economic orientation (Koryakova 1996). These groups occupying different ecological niches had to adapt to the new ecological conditions. In addition, some new groups of mobile populations came here from the east.

Fierce competition for pastures is supposed to have been of great importance. It is logical to suggest that these communities were successful in exercising control over the land, that they were socially organized, centralized, and more militant. Their strategies potentially could have led to war. Migrations involved different groups of people in active interaction. As Murzin (1990: 78) has demonstrated, the formation of the Scythian ethnos (in the Pontic area) at the beginning of the seventh century BC can be considered as one of the results of this process. The ethnic and social structure of the Scythian union at the time of its campaign in Trans-Caucasus stemmed from the conquest of the Cimmerians by the proto-Scythians who arrived from the east. The exploitation of conquered people was effected within the framework of the early three-part political structure.

A similar model serves to describe the origin of the Hsiung-nu tribes, who were descendants of the Hsiung-nu tribes that had come to northern Mongolia from the south, and of aboriginal people. In the fourth century BC, they were organized into an early political union, consisting of twenty-four clans. It was ruled by a hereditary chief and by tribal leaders interacting with him in hierarchical early relations (Gumilev 1993b: 462). The stability of this social structure was promoted by a political and military organization based on the three-part principle: "left side," "center," and "right side." As usual, the left side clans were less significant with respect to the most powerful center than the right side clans. The left side provided the ordinary militia, the right side the army, and the center wielded political and administrative power. Later, in the medieval period, this structure was known among the Kazakh tribes.

Hence, during the early stage of the Iron Age the social landscape of Eurasia tended toward a great structural transformation. Traditionally, this has been explained by economic transformations, and that is so. We would, however, suggest that the establishment of a new means of subsistence and a new mode of life, in which livestock was used as moveable wealth, depended on how communities were socially organized in order to adapt to new ecological and political conditions.

The main distinction of the Iron Age from the preceding epoch lies in technological changes and the political field. This situation was closely connected with a militarization of society. The beginning of the first millennium BC is represented by a clear rise of influence coming from the statehood area. New World empires, which were not known in the second millennium BC, extended their interests toward the forest zone of Eurasia. In fact, they divided northern Eurasia into several spheres of influence and formed their own close peripheries, the size of which were determined by the level of social maturity of its populations. First the steppe (nomadic) population, then the forest-steppe, and finally the forest groups were involved in this system of core/periphery relationships.

The stable trade system with the participation of nomadic societies was established by the fifth century BC and developed later. The second source of the nomadic population's wealth was their control of trade routes. This period is marked by an increase in warfare that led to advances in weaponry but that initially still continued in the early tradition. Still, the growing demand for iron brought the marginal societies of the forest steppe, where wood was available, into the sphere of the nomads' interest. The northern periphery of the nomadic world very soon become an additional source of wealth, provided by the tributary dependent population. It is not surprising that the Early Iron Age is characterized by an increase of fortified settlements in this area, some of which were designed as military camps. Degrees of resistance varied: it was stronger in the forest-steppe of eastern Europe, where well-defended fortresses appeared, and less noticeable beyond the Urals (the pre-Sargat phase of the Sargat culture).

Strictly speaking, the appearance of fortresses in the forest zone indicate the beginning of a new social order there. Yet some communal traditions as represented by large flat cemeteries of the Ananyino culture and by open settlements concentrated around small fortresses were preserved. Undoubtedly, this region was drawn into Scythian politics. Its metal-working was oriented to their needs. The Trans-Ural cultures had no visible cemeteries. The part of the aboriginal population changed their mortuary practices only after the fifth century BC, when this territory had become part of the nomadic world.

We would like to stress that, during the early Scythian period, the Eurasian temperate zone was drawn into a large interregional network, accompanied by growing militarization and social complexity. By the sixth - fifth centuries BC in the steppe and the forest-steppe, a specific system of chiefly organized societies had been established. The closer these were to the states, the more centralized they were. The second factor that we should not forget is that the nomads reached the empire level when they included the agricultural or other more settled population territorially and economically. As an example, one can note that the Scythian Kingdom, which existed from the sixth to the fourth centuries BC in the northern Pontic region, was involved into regional politics and controlled forest-steppe societies of eastern Europe (Artamonov 1972; Khazanov 1975; Murzin 1990). Such a system was quite vulnerable to many internal and external violations. From time to time, the leadership passed to new more powerful tribes, which changed the contours of the areas under their control.

The second half of the first millennium BC is better represented archaeologically compared to the preceding period. The sites are numerous throughout Eurasia. Unfortunately, we do not have sufficiently effective methods to help us understand all the diverse information hidden in countless barrows and settlements of the Sarmatian epoch, which can be called the "Golden Age" of Eurasian late prehistory. We are not, however, pessimistic with regard to prospects for tracing basic tendencies and long-term patterns. There also are written sources that report the names of some peoples and some states in the historical arena.

From this point of view, we shall only dwell on certain aspects of social development as represented in archaeological material from the area under study. Primarily, this material provides evidence of new demographic growth and a general increase in wealth in many societies. Almost all cultures were completely based on iron technology, whereas bronze became a metal used for manufacturing certain prestigious or cult objects. The conclusive introduction of iron and its wide proliferation had leveled the social and economic background in vast portions of Eurasia. In the last centuries of the first millennium BC, even the societies of the northern forest zone demonstrated the indication of social stratification, militarization, and the rise of an elite. In conditions of total predominance of the mythological world outlook, social orders and stratification were primarily reflected in funerary rituals. Comparison with the preceding period reveals new elements in their archaeological representation.

The analysis of funerary sites undertaken in different regions and different cultures demonstrates a more clearly expressed heterogeneity than was found before. For example, Grach (1980) classified the burial grounds discovered beyond the Urals. He distinguished several basic categories of sites presumably corresponding to different social strata, brilliantly argued by Khazanov (1975):


1. Royal burials. Royal burials have been found in the Altai mountains (the Pasyryk culture), large barrows in Tuva (Arzhan), in the Minussinsk depression (Tagar culture), and in Kazakhstan (Beschatyr, Chilikty). We can extend this list through reference to royal barrows in the Urals left by the Saka and Sarmatians (Filippovka), and, of course, to the famous Scythian burials, most of which date from the fourth - third centuries BC. All royal barrows are not identical to each other in size and complexity. Unfortunately, they have been plundered almost totally and only some lucky exceptions to the rule enable us to imagine how rich and imposing these must have been. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish true royal burials from those of local chiefs.


2. Elite burials. These are indicated either by complex burial constructions, or by rich and unusual grave goods. In this connection, we need to refer to the new "glacial" barrows recently excavated in the Altai region, which have yielded extraordinary finds, representing the culture of the middle rank of the military aristocracy: in the fifth - third centuries BC (Polos'mak 1994; 2000). These were not large in size but were furnished with objects associated with funeral repasts, and contained complex funeral chambers with double wooden walls. The dead also were accompanied by many sacrificed harnessed horses, but the burials did not contain imported objects and the deceased were dressed quite simply. Most of these people's wealth was contained in their horses. Therefore, the splendid wooden decoration belonged to them (Polos'mak 1994: 60—80). It is interesting that the described burials produced virtually no gold objects. Meanwhile, there was a great deal of decoration made from wood in the Animal Style and only covered by thin gold foil.

Burials or their remains presenting extremely valuable objects made from gold or silver are particularly well known in different areas. The famous Animal Style usually indicates high social status. The prestige goods system of the fifth - fourth centuries BC was oriented predominantly to the local nomadic culture, the main feature of which was the Animal Style. During close relationships, first with classical civilizations, then also with Parthia and China, distinctive status came to be indicated by foreign objects of luxury. This tendency became rather noticeable in the last centuries BC and at the beginning of the first millennium ce, when the interregional trade system was fully established. Interestingly, the elite burials of this time were located not only in the center as was traditionally accepted, but often on the periphery of the funerary space. Sometimes they were arranged at the bottom of a deep hole, under a second burial, which was destined to distract the robbers' attention. After several discoveries of rich graves between the Urals and the Irtysh river one can be sure that part of the Siberian Collection (Rudenko 1962) comes from this area. It is precisely the Sargat culture that must have had considerable demographic and military resources in order to compete successfully with the Sarmatians and to maintain trade links with Central Asia and China. The elite of this society was mainly responsible for assuming control over the trade routes, passing through western Siberia. This is why rich burials of this time contained many imported objects: decorative objects from Central Asia and Iran, pottery from Chorasmia, mirrors, silk, and bronze utensils from China of the Han dynasty.

The cavalry was recruited mainly from the elite. As has been clearly demonstrated by many researchers, statistical analysis always bears out this pattern. In particular, analysis of the large database of graves of the forest-steppe beyond the Urals has demonstrated that about 20 percent of graves contained a "horse bit-sword-bow" set (Koryakova 1988; Matveyeva 2000). A similar proportion was recorded in connection with materials from other regions. Bunatyan (1985), for example, established statistically the number of such graves in Scythia as 15 - 20 percent. She also distinguished several smaller groups within this category. As a rule, the elite included several levels of nobility.


3. Burials of the ordinary population. These are most numerous in all cultures (60-70 percent), and usually they yielded a restricted range of tools, arrowheads, personal jewelry, vessels, animal bones. Quite often, however, female graves contained beads that had been imported from India, the Mediterranean, and Iran. There was no local bead production in temperate Eurasia. The fact that they were encountered in almost every female grave gives evidence about the large bead trade market.

The group of people, which were designated as "foot archers" and who were found buried in 23 percent of graves, may constitute the highest level of this stratum.


4. Burials of the dependent population (3 - 5 percent) are the graves of people without any property. Sometimes they are laid out in unusual positions, sometimes in a ditch, surrounding a barrow mound, and sometimes they manifest traces of a violent death.


Indeed, the groups described here do not exhaust the variety found in the social structure. Certain combinations were at the same time both the reflection of specific regional characteristics and the expression of general patterns. A high percentage of the elite that had concentrated the biggest part of the financial wealth in their own hands needed to make every effort to keep this position, but in competitive conditions this might be done via active expansionist politics. In order to have access to wealth, demonstrated by prestigious luxury, the elite would have made every effort to organize the population under its control. This obviously resulted in an increase in various forms of tribute and an increase in administrative functions. We should not forget that at this time there existed a number of fortresses that were centers of craft specialization, of population, and communication. If we recall the complexity of the spatial structure and fortification of some fortresses such as those in the forest-steppe, which have been discovered in all regions, we cannot doubt that they had an administrative role. There is no doubt that Eurasian society of the Iron Age tended toward hierarchical structures. Nevertheless, the extremely unstable political situation against an unstable ecological background time and time again turned society back to simpler chiefdoms or some kind of tribal groups.'


This looks exactly like what happened to Przeworsk: sudden hierarchization. It's tempting to guess the causes were the same.


Torsten