Fw: Re: [tied] Re: Mid-first century BCE Yazigian prerequisites

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
> --- On Fri, 8/7/09, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> I found in Shchukin in his comments to chapter IX
>
> ****GK: Which Shchukin work are you citing?****
>
> '* It is noteworthy that from the mid-first century AD the burials
> started to appear in what is now a long chain of barrows along the
> Kuban' river, called "The Golden Cemetery". Male burials with
> weapons decidedly predominate here, and the number of Roman objects
> is so impressive that N.I. Veselovskiy supposed that these are
> burials of barbarised Romans28. However, one would have more reason
> to speak of Romanised barbarians. Possibly, what we have here is
> the cemetery of the detachment of catafracti warriors employed by
> the Romans to maintain order in the former Siracian lands. So far,
> it is hard to decide whether this auxiliary contingent of foederati
> consisted of the Aorsi, the Alans, or the Siraci enrolled to the
> Roman service. It could even consist of the representatives of
> different tribes.'
>
> That means these Romanized Sarmatians left no particularly
> Sarmatian trace.
>
> ****GK: Why? Shchukin doesn't say that, and Veselovskyi must have
> reasons to feel they are "barbarised" Romans (elements of the
> burial rite? objects?)****
>
> In fact this could be a description of the suddenly appearing new
> upper layer in Przeworskia and later. Whatever Sarmatian relics was
> found among them might as well by archaeologists have been
> characterized as stray finds.
>
> ****GK: Were Sarmatian relics actually found? That's news to me. As
> to the Shchukin text: :one would need to have a look at the
> description of these graves. The defeat of the Siraci by combined
> Roman, Bosporan, and Aorsan auxiliaries occurred in 49 CE. We know
> of many Aorsan (and Alan) graves in the ensuing period. It would be
> totally unusual for these "Golden Cemetary" burials to be so
> "Romanised" as to be genetically indistinguishable (if they are
> indeed "Romanised" barbarians.) But independently of what one
> decides as between the hypotheses of Veselovskyi and Shchukin (the
> former seems much preferable, given the cultural environment of
> these burials), I don't see how this applies to the Przeworskia of
> the time frame which is important for you, viz. 75-50 BCE. There
> can be no talk of Sarmatian Romanization at that time. Or
> "Germanization" for that matter. We have good examples of
> "Germanized" Scythians and (various) Sarmatians in the Gothic
> Chernyakhiv state. From what we know of the (incompletely
> discussed) Przeworsk inhumations of Ariovistus' time there is no
> reason to view them as the reliquiae of Germanized Sarmatians.
> Germanized Celts at most or Celticized Germanics more probably. And
> when one gets to the 1rst c. CE it's too late for you isn't it?****
>

Anatoly S. Skripkin
Östliche und westliche Neuerungen in der materiellen Kultur der Sarmaten der europäischen Steppen in den ersten Jahrhunderten n. Chr.
in
Claus von Carnap-Bornheim (ed.)
Kontakt - Kooperation - Konflikt
Germanen und Sarmaten zwischen dem 1. und dem 4. Jahrhundert nach Christus
'Und zuletzt war für Rom auch die Situation im Bosporischen Herrschaftsgebiet, das bis zu dieser Zeit ein Vasall Roms war, nicht gleichgültig. Rom war stark an einer prorömischen Orientierung des Bosporusgebiets interessiert, und beim Versuch, die Situation zu ändern, benutzte es Kontingente benachbarter Nomadenstämme. Dies war beispielsweise in der Mitte des 1. Jh. n. Chr. der Fall, als Mitridatos VIII. versuchte, sich von der Vormundschaft Roms zu befreien und die Römer die Aorsen zu einem Bündnis gegen ihn heranzogen28.'

"And finally, Rome would worry about the situation in the Bosporan state, which until this tome was its vassal. Rome was strongly interested in a pro-Roman orientation of the Bosporus area, and in the attempt to change the situation it employed contingents of neighboring nomadic tribes. This was eg. the case in the middle of the 1st cent. CE, when Mithridates VIII tried to free himself from the authority of Rome and the Romans enlisted the Aorsans to an alliance against him."

'Es ist nicht auszuschließen, daß sich ein Teil der Sarmaten als besoldete Bundesgenossen in Diensten Roms befand, dem die Verpflichtung zufiel, die Ruhe in den Grenzgebieten wiederherzustellen. Möglicherweise zählte dazu der Teil der Bevölkerung am Kuban', der den "Goldenen Friedhof" hinterlassen hat29.

"It cannot be excluded that a part of the Sarmatians stood in the services of Rome as allied mercenaries on whom rested the obligation to restore order in the border areas. The part of the population on the Kuban' which left behind the 'Golden Cemetery' should possibly be counted as such."

28 Tac. ann. XII, 15.
29 I.I. Guschtschina/I. P. Zaseckaja,
"Zolotoe kladbischtsche" rimskoj epochi v Prikuban'e
(Sankt-Peterburg 1994)


Torsten