Russia the formation of the state in the 9th century Veneds and the severjans (northerners), part of the Huns, which became the basis of a new community

Srubnaya culture

Srubnaya cultural-historical community is an ethnocultural association of the late Bronze Age (XVIII – XII centuries BC, according to other estimates – XVI – XII centuries BC. Some scientists, like I. Berestnev S.I., that the Timber culture existed until IX BC, widespread in the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Eastern Europe between the Dnieper and the Urals, with individual monuments in Western Siberia and the North Caucasus.It was originally identified as a culture in 1901—1903 by the Russian archaeologist V.A.Gorodtsov, but in the 1970s, N. Ya. Merpert and E. N. Chernykh drew attention to local differences within culture and introduced the concept of “timber-frame cultural and historical community” into scientific circulation. Represented by monuments of the Pokrovskaya (XVIII – XV centuries BC) and Berezhnovsko-Mayevskaya (XVII – XII centuries BC) log cultures, representing settlements, necropolises, workshops, mines, treasures and single finds. Dwellings – dugouts, semi-dugouts and ground. Necropolis are represented by burial mounds and soil commodity burial grounds. In the kurgan stratigraphy, log burials occupy the upper position in relation to the tombs of the pit and catacomb communities. The ceremony provided for the burial of the deceased in pits or wooden log cabins in a bent position, on the left side, hands in front of the face. There are also known cases of cremation. Burial items are represented by sharp-ribbed and canned vessels, less often – metal items. Changing climatic conditions, depletion of natural resources and overpopulation led to a sharp decline in the population and cultural transformation of the tribes of the Timber community. The pioneer of the log culture was V. A. Gorodtsov, who in 1901—1903, in the process of researching the barrow antiquities of the Seversky Donets, turned his attention to twisted burials in wooden frames – log cabins. In accordance with the design features of the burial structure, the culture allocated by him was called Srubnaya. The concept of the origin of culture from the Poltava monuments of the Volga region and its migration at a later stage was developed in the mid-1950s by O.A. In the 1970s, N. Ya. Merpert and E. N. Chernykh turned their attention to local differences within the Srubnaya culture, but the selection of individual local variants or cultures, in their opinion, at that time was problematic. Later, in the course of scientific research, a number of researchers turned their attention to the anthropological, chronological and cultural differences between steppe and forest-steppe monuments, which confirmed the hypothesis of local differences in the environment of the logging cultures. N. Ya. Merpert and E. N. Chernykh introduced the concept of a “log-house cultural-historical community” into scientific circulation, which reflects its cultural heterogeneity. In the mid-1970s, NK Kachalova, based on materials from the Lower Volga, identified the Berezhnovsky type of monuments, and IF Kovaleva, based on materials from the Mayevsky burial ground (Dnepropetrovsk), identified the Mayevsky type of monument]. In the 1990s, N. M. Malov and O. V. Kuzmina, based on materials from the Pokrovsky burial ground, distinguish a separate Pokrovsky culture. The common features of the burial rite of the Berezhnovsky and Mayevsky types of monuments allowed V.V. Otroshchenko to combine both types into a separate Berezhnovsky-Mayevsky culture as part of the Timber Cultural-historical community of the Late Bronze Age. Yu. M. Brovender identified the Stepanov type of monuments in the environment of the Berezhno-Mayovskaya logging culture. Thus, the Pokrovskaya and Berezhnovsko-Mayovskaya logging cultures and the Stepanovka type of monuments are distinguished in the environment of the Timber Cultural and Historical Community of the Late Bronze Age, which reflects its cultural heterogeneity and formation features. The problem of the origin of the Srubnaya culture (later the Srubnaya cultural and historical community) was posed by V.A.Gorodtsov in 1907, almost immediately after the discovery of burials under the kurgan in log cabins on the Seversky Donets. The researcher formed the migration concept of origin, which was finally formalized in the mid-1950s by O. A. Krivtsova-Grakova. The researcher believed that the Srubnaya culture was formed in the Volga region on the basis of the Poltava culture of the Middle Bronze Age. One of the variants of this hypothesis is V.S.Bochkarev’s concept of the Volga-Ural cultural genesis. Migration theory has not received absolute support in the scientific community. N.N. Cherednichenko spoke in favor of the autochthonous origin of the Timber culture. In his opinion, all local variants of the Srubna culture are synchronous, and there was no single center of culture origin, and the formation of each variant should be explained proceeding from the specifics of the local archaeological situation. V.V. Otroshchenko developed in the 1990s the concept of the development of the Timber Cultural and Historical Community from the Sintashta, Don-Volga Abashev, Baba cultures and monuments of the Potapov type of the Middle Volga region in the process of their ethnocultural interactions. In accordance with it, the researcher identified the Pokrovskaya and Berezhnovsko-Mayovskaya log cultures among the community, which, in his opinion, developed on a different basis. The Pokrovskaya Srubnaya culture develops in the forest-steppe interfluve of the Don and Volga due to the political and cultural influences of the carriers of the Sintashta culture on the late Bashevo population, from where it spreads to other regions.

Protoberezhnovskie sites are common in the Lower Volga region, where, according to the researcher, the Novokumak ethnic component, which came from the east, is layered on the Late Catacomb population. Later, the tribes of the Pokrovskaya Srubnaya culture moved to the left bank of the Seversky Donets, where they were completely assimilated by the bearers of the Baba culture. As a result of the assimilation of the Pokrovsky population by the Babinsk tribes Berezhno-Mayovskaya Srubnaya culture is being formed. The Pokrovskaya Srubnaya culture (XVIII – XV centuries BC) is widespread in the steppe and forest-steppe zone from the Seversky Donets to the Volga. Some monuments are presented in the Urals. An eponymous monument is the Pokrovsky burial ground in the Saratov Volga region, which was investigated by P.S. Rykov in the 1920s near the town of Pokrovsk (now – Engels). Highlighted in the early 1990s by N.M. Malov and O.V. Kuzmina as the Pokrovskaya culture. It was formed on the basis of the Don-Volga Abashev culture under the direct influence of the Sintashta and Potapov-type monuments of the Middle Volga region. Monuments are represented by settlements, burial grounds, treasures, mines, workshops and accidental finds. The settlements were located in the immediate vicinity of rivers on small heights. The most studied settlements are Lake Usovo, Mosolovka, Kapitanovo, Yanokhino, Rubtsy and Prokazino.

Dwellings of that time, above-ground, dugouts and semi-dugouts of a frame-and-pillar structure with a gable or hipped roof. The walls are made of turf, logs, rarely of stone. In large buildings, the residential part is most often separated from the utility part. Inside the dwellings there were one or more hearths, pits, and sometimes a well. Funeral monuments are represented by burial mounds and ground burials. They are mainly located on terraces or hills along river banks, less often on watersheds. The burial mounds of the Pokrovskaya culture include a small number of embankments – from 2 to 15. Single burial mounds and huge necropolises are rare.

The mound was erected after the last burial. The number of burials in the mound varies from 1 to 100. The deceased were buried in sub-rectangular pits, sometimes in log cabins in a crumpled position on their left side, in an adoration position, with their head to the north. Vessels serve as burial implements, less often weapons and jewelry. The graves also contain animal bones – the remains of meat food. The most studied burial grounds are Pokrovsky, Staroyabalaklinsky and Novopavlovsky. The ceramic complex of the culture is represented mainly by sharp-ribbed pots with geometric patterns. Tools and weapons made of stone are represented by a variety of axes and maces, arrowheads, scrapers, hammers, knives, anvils, miners and abrasives. Ornaments are also known – earthenware beads, grooved temple pendants and bracelets. Bone products are widespread: cheekpieces, awls, polishes, punctures, needles, knitting needles, arrowheads. Tools made of metal are represented by axes, sickles, testers and chisels, punctures, cutting knives with a wide rhombic crosshair and daggers with a cast-in handle. Decorations made of bronze, antimony and gold are also widespread: rings, temporal lobular rings, plaques, spiral-shaped bracelets and open bracelets with a spiral ending. In general, the spiral pattern was widespread.

The basis of the economy of the carriers of the Pokrovsk culture was stall and distant pasture cattle breeding. Ethnically, the population of the Pokrovskaya Srubnaya culture represents an Indo-Iranian ethnic group and had certain signs of an Indo-Aryan ethnos at an early stage of its development.

The Berezhnovsko-Mayevskaya Srubnaya culture (XVII – XII centuries BC) is widespread in the steppe and forest-steppe zone from Ingulets to the Volga. Eponymous monuments are the Berezhnovsky burial mound in the Volga region and the Mayevsky burial ground near the city of Dnepropetrovsk. In the 70s of the XX century, N.K. Kachalova identified the Berezhno type of monuments, and I.F.Kovaleva – the Mayev type. The general features of the funeral rite made it possible for V.V. Otroshchenko to combine both types into a separate Berezhno-Mayev culture as part of the Timber Cultural-historical community. Yu. M. Brovender distinguishes the Stepanov type of monuments in her environment. It was formed on the basis of Babinskaya and Pokrovskaya Srubnaya cultures. Monuments are represented by settlements, burial mounds and earthen burial grounds, mines, workshops, treasures and random finds. The settlements were located in the immediate vicinity of rivers on small heights. Dwellings are represented by dugouts, semi-dugouts and ground structures with stone walls. Fireplaces were used to heat the dwellings. Funeral monuments are represented by burial mounds and ground burials. Kurgan necropolises are located mainly on terraces or hills along river banks, less often on watersheds. They include a small number of fillings, usually with several fillings. The construction of long mounds was practiced. The deceased were buried mainly in sub-rectangular pits, sometimes in stone boxes, in log cabins in a crouched position on their left side, with their heads to the east. Cremation is also known. Soil burial grounds of the Berezhnovsko-Mayevskaya culture are located mainly on the edges of the indigenous banks, the first terraces above the floodplain, and on small natural elevations in the floodplain – in the immediate vicinity of rivers and settlements synchronous to them. Burials are represented by inhumations and cremations. Burials according to the inhumation rite were performed in sub-rectangular pits and stone boxes. Burials in log cabins on the territory of ground burial grounds were not recorded. The deceased were located in a crumpled position on their left side, with their heads to the east. Cremations are represented by burials in urn vessels and in small ground pits. Vessels are used as burial implements; metal products are less common.

Ceramics is represented by jars, pot-shaped and sharp-ribbed vessels with geometric patterns in the form of horizontal and inclined lines, flutes, zigzags, Christmas trees and other geometric shapes. Sometimes on vessels, mainly in their upper part, there is a cord ornament and various signs in the form of crosses, solar signs, rectangles, schematic anthropomorphic and zoomorphic images. At a later time, the swastika and meander pattern began to be depicted. A number of researchers see them as primitive pictographic writing. The content of these signs has not yet been deciphered. The burials also contain wooden cult utensils, sometimes with bronze fittings. Tools and weapons made of stone are represented by a variety of axes and maces, side-scrapers, hammers, knives, anvils, miners and abrasives. Bone products are widespread: cheekpieces, awls, polishes, punctures, needles, knitting needles, arrowheads. Tools made of metal are represented by axes, sickles, whips and chisels, punctures, needles, cutting knives with a marked crosshair and daggers with a ring stop.

Metal jewelry is also widespread: rings, temporal lobed rings, wire pendants, spiral bracelets, and open bracelets with double volute. Volute, appears in the form of hairpins and images. The basis of the economy was stall and distant cattle breeding, which supplemented agriculture. Ethnically, the carriers of the Berezhno-Mayev culture represent the Iranian-speaking group of the Indo-European language family. Recently, there has been an active scientific debate regarding the upper chronological limit of the Timber Cultural-historical community. … S. I. Berestnev in his work “The Timber Culture of the Forest-Steppe Left Bank of Ukraine” extends its existence up to the 9th-8th centuries BC, that is, the Timber culture is replaced by the Cimmerian-Scythian culture.

Neutralizing the dead

Gubin A.S. In his article, “Uncommon Burials Burials of the Timber Culture of the Ural-Volga Region,” he writes that, according to excavations, in the Ural-Volga region, and conducting a study of materials from excavations of the Timber culture burials, it was possible to establish that signs of neutralization were found in 7 cases out of 30 (23, 3%). The term “neutralization” by Gubin means deliberate mutilation of a corpse: cutting off the head, limbs, and other parts of the body. A burial with a missing skull was recorded at the Kachkinovskoye burial ground (burial mound no. 15, burial no. 1), here in burial no. 1 of mound no. 20 the skull was present, but it was located 50 cm to the north of the ridge [5: 13]. In a single burial of kurgan No. 37 of the Staro-Yabalaklinsky burial ground, there were no hand bones, and in adolescent burial No. 1 of kurgan No. 104, hands, feet, and a skull were missing from the skeleton [6: 47]. Gubin notes that grave goods were present in all burials with signs of neutralization.

Culture

The type of economy of the carriers of the Srubna cultural and historical community was based mainly on stall and distant pasture cattle breeding, which, among the population of the Berezhno-Mayovskaya Srubna culture, partially supplemented agriculture. In the Dnieper-Donetsk interfluve, single grains of cultivated cereals were found, which indicates the presence of floodplain agriculture in the economy of the Timber tribes. In the Ciscaucasian and Caspian steppes and semi-deserts, it is possible that semi-nomadic livestock raising was practiced. Nevertheless, the basis of the economy of the sedentary log house population of the Late Bronze Age was stall and distant cattle breeding. The priority was the breeding of cattle, a smaller percentage of the herd were horses. An important role in the economy of the population of the Srubna cultural and historical community was played by mining and metallurgical production, which was based on cuprous sandstones of the Urals (Kargalinskoe deposit) and Donetsk ridge (Bakhmutskoe deposit), ore occurrences of the Middle Volga region were also used. The basic production of metal products was predominantly located in several villages of metallurgical foundry workers – Lake Usovo (Podonechye), Mosolovka (Podonye), Lipovy Ovrag (Middle Volga region), Gorny 1 (Urals).

The tools required for metalworking are represented by axes, hammers, hammers, ore grinders, flat and grooved tesserae and chisels, “log” type cutting knives and daggers. In the late Timber period, the Timber blacksmiths master the secret of obtaining critical iron, from which the first few items are forged, mostly small in size and weak in workmanship. There are also gold jewelry.

The absence of written sources significantly complicates the solution of the issue of the ethnicity of the tribes of the Timber Cultural and historical community of the Late Bronze Age. Thus, the main method for determining ethnicity is to establish a connection between the area of the tribes of the Timber community with the spread of Indo-Iranian hydronyms and toponyms. Their pre-Scythian origin was convincingly proved by the linguist V.I. Abaev. Later, N.L. Chlenova traced the Iranian hydronyms in the steppe and forest-steppe zone from the Dnieper to the Ob, which completely coincided with the distribution area of the tribes of the Timber and Andronov cultural and historical communities and proved their belonging to the Iranian-speaking group of the Indo-European language family.

According to V.V. Napolskikh, borrowings in the Finno-Ugric languages indicate that the carriers of the Bronze Age steppe cultures spoke the language of the Indo-Aryan type. Such attribution, as evidenced by the phonetics of borrowings, has traditionally been rejected for historical reasons. The Eastern Iranian speech spread in the steppe only with the culture of roller ceramics at the end of the 2nd millennium BC. e. The bearers of the Srubna culture chronologically preceded the Scythians and Cimmerians. For this reason, the Srubnaya culture is often regarded as an archaeological analogue of the first Iranian dialects of the Northern Black Sea region. In other words, the carriers of culture are the predecessors of the Scythians and their kindred peoples. However, there is another point of view: the area of the Srubnaya culture is a bridgehead from which the migration of ancient Iranians to the northwest of modern Iran took place. According to this point of view, the semi-nomadic cattle-breeding tribes of the Timber and Andronovo cultural and historical communities represent the Iranian group of the Indo-European language family at an early stage of its development.The early and middle phases of the Late Bronze Age in Eastern Europe coincide with favorable climatic conditions – mainly humid and warm weather. There is a sharp rise in the productive forms of the economy. Accordingly, in the XVIII – XIII centuries BC, the maximum population density of all regions of the Eastern European steppe and forest-steppe is observed. The Srubna cultural and historical community is born, which was destined to complete the tradition of the formation of great ethnocultural associations in Eastern Europe in the Bronze Age. The demographic explosion in the environment of the Timber Community, which peaked in the forest-steppe in the 16th-15th centuries BC, and in the steppe in the XIV – XIII centuries BC, led to the depletion of natural resources and the collapse of the Timber-Cultural and Historical Community. Aridization (drying out) of the climate at the end of the Bronze Age (XI – VIII centuries BC) led to the degradation and disappearance of the Timber culture.

The change in climatic conditions for dry and cool weather, together with total overpopulation, led to disastrous consequences. The population is sharply decreasing, which according to archaeological data is recorded in a decrease in the number of settlements and their cultural transformation. The bearers of the Srubna cultural and historical community took a direct part in the formation of the Belozersk and Bondarikha cultures of the final stage of the Bronze Age and had a noticeable impact on the population of the forest belt of Eastern Europe in the form of the Pozdnyakovsk and Prikazan cultures.

Pozdnyakovskaya culture, swastika pattern, State Historical Museum