On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time

On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time

The article is dedicated to the analysis of bimetallic swords and daggers of Cimmerian time, which were found both at Ukrainian territory and neighboring countries. The previously known and new findings are analyzed.

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Datum:2020
1. Verfasser: Klochko, D.D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: Інститут археології НАН України 2020
Schriftenreihe:Археологія
Schlagworte:
Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
Online Zugang:http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/195747
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Назва журналу:Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Zitieren:On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time / D.D. Klochko // Археологія. — 2020. — №. 2. — С. 62–70. — Бібліогр.: 13 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
id irk-123456789-195747
record_format dspace
spelling irk-123456789-1957472023-12-07T10:59:17Z On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time Klochko, D.D. Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв The article is dedicated to the analysis of bimetallic swords and daggers of Cimmerian time, which were found both at Ukrainian territory and neighboring countries. The previously known and new findings are analyzed. Біметалеві мечі та кинджали з хрестоподібним руків’ям були предметом активного вивчення у 1970—1990-х рр. Серед дослідників тією чи іншою мірою відзначилися такі науковці як О. І. Тереножкін, В. Подборський, С. В. Махортих, Я. Хохоровський, С. Л. Дударєв та ін. Під час вивчення теми з’явилися три концепції походження зброї зазначеного типу: північно-причорноморська, кавказька та поліцентрична. За останні роки не було праць, в яких би дослідники розглядали мечі та кинджали цього типу. Значний обсяг нових знахідок на території України дозволяє повернутися до цієї теми, одночасно розглянути знахідки вже відомі, а також ввести до наукового обігу нові. З урахуванням порівняння східносибірських та українських знахідок, пропонується така гіпотеза: прототипами біметалевої зброї з хрестоподібним руків’ям є бронзові кинджали карасукської культури, на подальшу трансформацію яких на території Північного Причорномор’я вплинуло опанування заліза, а також розвиток бою на мечах. Розвинута форма руків’я (наявність перехрестя (гарди) та грибоподібного навершя) вказує на існування повноцінного фехтування. Значна зона поширення знахідок (від Татарстану на сході до німецько-польського кордону на заході) вказує на територію військових походів загонів, озброєних біметалевими мечами та кинджалами з хрестоподібним руків’ям, а також засвідчує ефективність зброї. Значна концентрація знахідок цього типу на Поділлі свідчить про близькість цієї території до первинного центру їх виготовлення, однак точно встановити цей центр наразі не є можливим. Биметаллические мечи и кинжалы с крестовидной рукояткой были предметом активного изучения в 1970— 1990-х гг. Среди исследователей в той или иной мере отличились А. И. Тереножкин, В. Подборський, С. В. Махортых, Я. Хохоровський, С. Л. Дударев и др. В процессе изучения, возникло три концепции происхож­дения оружия данного типа: северно-причерноморская, кавказская и полицентрическая. В последние годы не было работ, в которых исследователями рассматривались бы мечи и кинжалы этого типа. Значительное количество новых находок на территории Украины позволяет вернутся к данной теме, одновременно рассмотреть уже известные находки, а также ввести в научный оборот новые. Учитывая сравнение восточносибирских и украинских находок, предлагается такая гипотеза: прототипами биметаллического оружия с крестовидной рукояткой являются бронзовые кинжалы карасукской культуры, на дальнейшую трансформацию на территории Северного Причерноморья повлияло освоение железа, а также развитие боя на мечах. Развитая форма рукояти (наличие перекрестия (гарды) и грибовидного навершия) указывает на существование полноценного фехтования. Значительная зона распространения находок (от Татарстана на востоке, до немецко-польской границы на западе) указывает на территорию военных походов отрядов вооруженных биметаллическими мечами и кинжалами с крестовидной рукояткой, а также свидетельствует об эффективности оружия. Значительная концентрация находок этого типа на Подолье свидетельствует о близости этой территории к изначальному центру их изготовления, однако точно установить этот центр на данный момент не представляется возможным. 2020 Article On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time / D.D. Klochko // Археологія. — 2020. — №. 2. — С. 62–70. — Бібліогр.: 13 назв. — англ. 0235-3490 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/archaeologyua2020.02.062 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/195747 904.22(477)“638” en Археологія Інститут археології НАН України
institution Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
collection DSpace DC
language English
topic Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
spellingShingle Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
Klochko, D.D.
On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
Археологія
description The article is dedicated to the analysis of bimetallic swords and daggers of Cimmerian time, which were found both at Ukrainian territory and neighboring countries. The previously known and new findings are analyzed.
format Article
author Klochko, D.D.
author_facet Klochko, D.D.
author_sort Klochko, D.D.
title On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
title_short On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
title_full On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
title_fullStr On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
title_full_unstemmed On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time
title_sort on one of the weapon types of cimmerian time
publisher Інститут археології НАН України
publishDate 2020
topic_facet Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв
url http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/195747
citation_txt On One of the Weapon Types of Cimmerian Time / D.D. Klochko // Археологія. — 2020. — №. 2. — С. 62–70. — Бібліогр.: 13 назв. — англ.
series Археологія
work_keys_str_mv AT klochkodd ononeoftheweapontypesofcimmeriantime
first_indexed 2025-07-16T23:55:55Z
last_indexed 2025-07-16T23:55:55Z
_version_ 1837849804671025152
fulltext ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 262 Публiкацiї археологiчних матерiалiв On One Of the WeapOn types Of Cimmerian time УДК 904.22(477)“638” © D. D. KlochKo, 2020 D. D. Klochko * https://doi.org/10.15407/archaeologyua2020.02.062 * KlochKo Danylo Dmytrovych — Master program student. Archaeology Department, Faculty of humani­ ties, National University of “Kyiv­Mohyla Academy”, oRcID 0000­0002­2154­5611, klochko.danil@ukr.net The article is dedicated to the analysis of bimetallic swords and daggers of Cimmerian time, which were found both at Ukrainian territory and neighboring countries. The previously known and new findings are analyzed. K e y w o r d s: Northern Pontic Region, Cimmerians, Karasuk daggers, bimetallic swords and daggers. The subject of cimmerian weapons of East and central­East Europe was initially raised by o. I. Terenozhkin in his article “Kimmeriiskie mechi i kinzhaly” in 1975, which was a part of “Skifskiy mir” collection (Тереножкин 1975, с. 3—34). o. I. Terenozhkin further developed this topic in his work “Kimmerijczy” (1976), where a separate chapter is dedicated to the swords and daggers. however, oleksii Ivanovych managed only to divide pre­Scythian daggers from North caucasus into variants, leaving most of the weapons without further attention and division into types. Based on his work the type of bimetallic swords and daggers with cross­shaped handle was specified. In the scientific literature of that time, such type was called BMK KR (“Биметалические мечи и кинджалы с крестовидной рукояткой” in Russian). In 1970—1990­ies the cimmerian weapons were a subject of interest of many scientists, including V. Podborsky (1970), S. l. Dudarev (Дударев 1991; 1999), J. chochorowsky (1993), S. V. Makhortykh (Махортых 1997) etc. Three assumptions were made about the genesis of the weapons: — bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped handle originated from the North Pontic Region, based on the Karasuk type daggers, which was supported by o. I. Terenozhkin himself; — bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped han­bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped han­ dle originated from the caucasus and spread to the East and central­East Europe from there, which is supported by scientists including S. l. Dudarev and S. V. Makhortykh; — B. A. Shramko in 1977 assumed that these weapons did not have a specific center of ori­ gin (Дударев 1999, с. 27—28). later the subject seems to evade the attention of scientists, howev­ er, the amount of the artifacts found in recent years in Ukraine, which have the morphologic signs of BMK KR type allows returning to the subject. The aim of the paper is the examination and analysis of bimetallic swords and daggers of cim­ merian time, the handles of which have the same or similar features, which allows combining them into one type. The weapons of this type are found on wide area: from the west region of modern Rus­ sia (at the east) to the east borders of the Germany (at the west). The type has the following general features: non­ornamented bronze handle with cylinder hilt, mushroom­shaped pommel and the crossguard. The weapon is very practical: the guard provides the protection for the wrist against enemy blade, and with the required agility could have been used as the stunning weapon just as the pommel, which could have been no less dangerous then the blade. Also the pommel was used as the counterweight for the blade. Such handles were forged in ceramics forms. Such complexity of the handles can be the sign of the cimmerian sword­fight development, possible even to the level of fencing. It is indirectly indicat­ ed by the absence of the stirrups at that time that makes mounting fighting impossible (even though ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 2 63 some figures of that time (for example, on the sar­ cophagus at Klazomenai (fig. 1) (Дьяконов 1956, илл. 41), suggest otherwise), therefore, the com­ bats happened on foot. obviously, some features (the width of hilt, the length of the guard, etc.) can be different, since various weapons were crafted on different territories at different time by various mas­ ters, but the general pattern remained the same. In order to make a picture of bimetallic swords and daggers of cimmerian time spreading, the ar­ tifacts will be examined and analyzed from east to west. The predecessors of these weapons are the so­ called Karasuk daggers. According to N. l. chlen­ ova they originate at Minusinsk hollow (Krasno­ yarsk krai, Russia) (Членова 1976, с. 71; табл. 3). later such weapons spread to the North china and ordos (fig. 2: 1—5) in the east to the North Pontic Region in the west (fig. 2: 6—7) (Членова 1976, табл. 9; Mounted Nomads of Asian Steppe 1997, р. 37). Upon arrival to the North Pontic Re­ gion the people of Karasuk culture met with local people, who knew the iron at that time, judging by the archaeological findings. Therefore, as a result of combination of Karasuk technologies with local resources, the bimetallic swords and daggers with cross­shaped crossguard occured. The first weapon to be examined is the bimetal­ lic sword with bronze handle and iron blade, which was found near Biljarsk village at modern Tatarstan (fig. 3: 1). The handle has big mushroom­shaped pommel and long straight crossguard. According to o. I. Terenozhkin, the sword’s handle is i­beam in section (Тереножкин 1976, с. 117). In the west (Diomkino village, Volsk district, Saratovo Region) the bimetallic dagger was found (fig. 3: 2). It has the following specifics within the type: narrow hilt, long and thin guard, small pom­ mel, narrow and rhomboid in section blade. The handle is 10,5 cm long, the blade is 2 cm wide (Тереножкин 1976, с. 125). The lengths of the handle and of the blade are disproportional, which allows assuming that the blade was damaged and later the damaged edge was sharpened. Three artifacts of the type were found in the north of caucasus. The first one is the handle from Mugergan grave field (Dagestan) (fig. 3: 3). o. I. Terenozhkin called it the handle of the sword, however, it remains questionable since the blade decayed almost completely (Тереножкин 1976, с. 110). comparing to others, this handle has a spe­ cific feature: the guard is not straight, but slightly inclined to the blade. It can be explained by either casting mold defect or the transformation into lat­ er forms. The latter would indicate that the finding from Mugergan grave field is somewhat earlier than others examined in the article. The dagger from Serzhen­Yurt grave field has a little hole on one side of its crossguard (Тереножкин 1976, с. 114) (fig. 3: 4). There are only three dag­ gers including this one, which have such feature. The blade of the dagger does not have the fuller. only a few other artifacts have the same feature, Fig. 1. The image from Klazomenai sarcophagus Fig. 2. The Karasuk type daggers: 1 — North china; 2 — North china; 3 — ordos; 4 — ordos; 5 — ordos; 6 — Sybotiv; 7 — Kyiv Region ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 264 however, it is impossible to be sure, since some of the findings do not have the blade. Still, the weap­ ons without the fuller are probably older than those with it, as the appearance of such a detail is the sign of technology development. Also, the dagger from Serzhen­Yurt has a part of the scabbard on the edge of its blade. At the grave field near the city of Kislovodsk the large amount of weapons of different variants and types were found in its time, including the one that this article is dedicated to (Тереножкин 1976, с. 125). Unfortunately, just as some other findings, it has only the bronze handle and small piece of the blade. Therefore, it’s impossible to say whether it was a sword or a dagger (fig. 3: 5). Similar artifact (6 cm long) was found recently near Mariupol (ac­ cidental finding 17.05.19) (fig. 4: 1). however, the blade didn’t remain. Two other findings come from Kharkiv Region. The first one is a well­preserved bimetallic sword (accidental finding 28.11.14) (fig. 4: 2). It has wide hilt with flattened mushroom­shaped pommel and long narrow crossguard. The blade most likely had the fuller. The second finding is a bronze handle with mushroom­shaped pommel which is simi­ lar to the one of the sword. The crossguard is ap­ proximately 8,5 cm long, the total length of the handle is 9 cm and it is wider than the blade. The blade is preserved partly, its width is 3 cm. The arti­ fact was found in october 2019 (accidental finding 05.10.19) (fig. 4: 3). The most famous cimmerian time weapon, which was found in Ukraine, is the bimetallic sword discovered as a part of the treasure at Subotiv set­ tlement (Тереножкин 1976, с. 82—84). The total length of the sword is 1,08 m, the blade is 94,8 cm long. The bronze handle is inlaid with the imita­ tion of the spiral (fig. 4: 4). It is assumed that this decoration had a practical meaning: for the better grip, the handle was coiled by the leather stripe, which was fixated by the spiral. Despite these two specific features, the sword is within the type due to the materials and handle shape including the crossguard and the pommel. The bronze bouterolle was found at the edge of the blade. This indicates that the sword was carried on a belt with the edge of the blade touching the ground if not constant­ ly being dragged. could the swords of such size be carried behind the back? It is really doubtful, con­ sidering the number of anthropological nuances, first of all — the length of the hands. The alterna­ tive — on the shoulder with the scabbard, but such option does not require the tough bouterolle at the edge. Therefore, the owner of the sword was not a high man. It is possible that originally the sword (without the scabbard with bronze bouterolle) be­ longed to someone with more appropriate com­ plexion and later became the property of his last owner as the inheritance, a gift or a trophy. The first two assumptions suggest the close relationship be­ tween people of chernoless culture who occupied Subotiv settlement and people of chernogoriv­ ka culture who were proto­Scythians, according to V. I. Klochko (Клочко 2009). The c14 dating indicates that the sword was the coeval of Subotiv settlement decease (the end of IX — beginning of VIII cen. Bc) (Klochko et al. 1998, p. 672). how­ ever, the treasure, where the sword comes from, also included artifacts attributed to the local chernoless culture, which means that the sword belonged to the settlement resident. The handle of the “Subotiv sword” has an analogy — the Karasuk sword from Andreevskoe lake (outskirts of Tumen, Russia) (Членова 1976, табл. 7: 1­Б) (fig. 5). The handles are identical: mushroom­shaped pommel, the hilt surrounded with the spiral, small and straight cross­ guard. however, the handle is the only similar thing of two swords: the blade of “Andreevskoe sword” is made of bronze and is much smaller comparing to “Subotiv sword” making it similar to Karasuk pro­ Fig. 3. Bimetallic weapons from Russia: 1 — Biljarsk; 2 — Diomkino; 3 — Muger­ gan grave field; 4 — Serzhen­Yurt grave field; 5 — Kislovodsk ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 2 65 totypes. Despite this, the connections between the regions of initial Karasuk daggers spreading and North Pontic Region are obvious. Another well­known (and also accidental) find­ ing is a dagger from holoviatyno village Smilian­ skyi district in cherkasy Region (Тереножкин 1976 с. 70) (fig. 4: 5). According to o. I. Terenozhkin, V. Podborsky named one of two dagger variants of central­East Europe after this one. other weapons included by V. Podborsky to this type will be exam­ ined later. The artifact has a typical bronze handle: a small mushroom­shaped pommel, a rather long crossguard. The handle is 10,5 cm long, the blade is 2,5 cm wide. The fuller is absent. The blade was pre­ served partly (approximately 6 cm), therefore, only a small pommel can be considered as a feature of this artifact in favor of being a dagger and not a sword, and it cannot be considered a solid evidence. 50 cm long bimetallic sword was found near Kropyvnytskyi at the end of 2018 (accidental find­ Fig. 4. Bimetallic weapons from Ukraine: 1 — Mariupol; 2 — Kharkiv Region; 3 — Kharkiv Region; 4 — Sub­ otiv; 5 — holoviatyno; 6 — Kropyvnitskyi Region; 7 — Vinnytsia Region; 8 — Vinnytsia Region; 9 — Vin­ nytsia Region; 10 — Khmelnytska Region; 11 — Suvorovo; 12 — lviv Region ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 266 ing 12.12.18) (fig. 4: 6). The length of the handle is approximately 9 cm. The guard is short and some­ what asymmetrical. The iron blade is preserved completely, however, is in bad condition, there­ fore, it is impossible to determine the presence of the fuller. The large amount of findings comes from Vin­ nytsia Region. The most recent is a 39 cm long weapon found in the middle of 2018 (accidental finding 24.05.18). The handle is 15 cm long. The pommel is small, the guard is long and has a small hole on one side, which is similar to the hole on the crossguard of the dagger from Serzhen­Yurt grave field (fig. 4: 7). The blade is well­preserved and has a fuller. It is possible that the blade was longer orig­ inally, just as with the dagger from Diomkino vil­ lage. The handle of the sword that was discovered in 2017 has an unusual disposition of the pommel, which appears to be an added detail ( accidental finding 27.08.17). It is possible that its own pom­ mel was lost in the fight and later negligently re­ placed (fig. 4: 8). This fact indicates two things — the importance of the pommel and the caring at­ titude to the sword. The reasons for the latter can be different — from sentimental (the sword was a gift or a family relic) to economical (inability to ac­ quire another sword). Short crossguard and the ab­ sence of the fuller are the signs of the sword’s ar­ chaic origin. The third sword was found in 2016 ( accidental finding 18.05.16). The total length is approximately 35 cm, the handle is approximately 8,5 cm. The bronze handle is quite wide, the guard is narrow and small (fig. 4: 9). Therefore, the sword has direct analogies with the examined swords from Kharkiv Region, Kropyvnytskyi and two former swords from Vinnytsia Region. An interesting treasure was found in Khmelnyt­ ska Region in 2015 (accidental finding 27.02.15). It includes two bimetallic swords of different size (fig. 4: 10). The long swords have a wide handle, a large pommel and a short crossguard. The blade does not have the fuller. The guard on the short sword inclines to the blade. Its form and the size of the sword makes it similar to the weapons of Scythian time. In other words, the treasure con­ tains swords of two types divided chronological­ ly — archaic Karasuk form and transforming pre­ Scythian. This does not mean that the swords themselves came from different periods, especial­ ly considering the fine preservation of them both. The archaic form could have been the tribute to the tradition. The usage of the swords remains ques­ tionable — either the long or the short ones could have been used depending on the situation, but also both of them could have been used simultaneous­ ly — the long sword was used for strikes, while the short one — for the blocks and counterattacks. The question of simultaneous usage of swords will be additionally examined below. one more classical artifact of this type is a han­ dle, which comes from the burial 2 of mound 5 near Suvorovo village (Ismail district, odessa Region). It was described by o. I. Terenozhkin in his work (Тереножкин 1976, с. 64—65). only the piece of blade remained, but its width was 2 cm. The handle is 9,6 cm long, its surface is covered by a zigzag or­ nament, the crossguard has a hole, which is much bigger than the hole on the crossguards of daggers from Vinnytsia Region and Serzhen­Yurt grave field (fig. 4: 11). It is possible that the hole was used for the noose, which surrounded the wrist in order not to lose the weapon during the battle. however, the presence of such a hole with a loop would neg­ atively affect the efficiency of the attacks. An al­ ternative was presented by S. l. Dudarev in 1999. Judging by the images from “cimmerian steles” the author suggested that the loops, which were coming through the holes, were used to connect to the belt (Дударев 1999, с. 95). Primarily, such a stele was found at Kizburun­I settlement (Kab­ ardino­Balkarian republic, Russia) (fig. 6: 1). The image from the sculpture can really be interpreted as the connection of the dagger to the belt through the hole. Also, this and other steles show that the Fig. 5. Bimetallic sword from Subotiv (1) and bronze sword from Andreevskoe lake (2) ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 2 67 sword in the scabbard was held behind the belt or perhaps between its layers (fig. 6: 2). The questions rise: why were some daggers not carried the same way? And how practical this way of caring was? Two explanations are possible: the lace could have been weak enough to be torn by sudden and rush move or it could have been tied the way it could have been easily untied. Another explanation, which seems to be appropriate is that such daggers were the marks of a high rank in the society and were either com­ pletely decorative or were used only in ritual pur­ poses (for instance, during a noble duel, etc.). The image on the stele is quite schematic, therefore it is hard to determine the connection algorithm be­ tween the dagger and the belt correctly as well as to answer to the raised questions. Also, the steles provide us with the information about the battle arts in cimmerian times: double caring (stele from Zubovsky small village (fig. 6: 3)) and possible simultaneous using of long and short weapons (a sword and an axe or a sword and a dag­ ger), which also indicates the high level of sword­ fight tradition at that time. The bimetallic dagger found in lviv Region in 2018 has interesting features (accidental find­ ing 11.05.18). Its total length is 40 cm. The blade is well­preserved and is approximately 5,5 cm wide at its top, but becomes thinner upon moving to the edge. The handle is approximately 9 cm long. The size of the crossguard is middle and the pommel is lost (fig. 4: 12). The hilt deserves a special atten­ tion. It is covered with small bolsters, presumably for the better grip. There is only one other object with this technique: bronze Karasuk dagger found at Tomsk grave field (West Siberia) (Членова 1976, табл. 7: 5) (fig. 7). Just as the handles of swords from Subotiv settlement and Andreevskoe lake it is a mark of close connections between Karasuk cul­ ture and North Pontic Region. After reviewing the classical findings of Russia and Ukraine and also examining new artifacts in Ukraine, we are going to look at the western analog­ ical findings. As it was said, the type of such artifacts was called after the artifact from holoviatyno village by V. Podborsky. The alternative name was suggested by J. chochorowsky — “leibniz type” after one of the local findings (1993, p. 113). Such name seems incorrect since some scientists (including S. V. Ma­ khortykh) consider that the sword from leibniz as well as other artifacts of this “type” are not authentic products, but were brought to those lands by nomads during their campaigns. It is supported by the ab­ Fig. 6. Steles of cimmerian time: 1 — Stele from Kizburun­I settlement (fragment); 2 — Stele from Armavir museum (frag­ ment); 3 — Stele from Zubovsky small village ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 268 sence of findings that would support the local origin of such weapon (Makhortykh 2008, p. 171). In oth­ er words, the so­called “leibniz type” is the west­ ern variant of bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped handle from North Pontic Region just as findings from Russia are the eastern variant. The most eastern artifact of this western vari­ ant is a bimetallic dagger found in Penade vil­ lage (Romania) (fig. 8: 1). The total length of the dagger is 39 cm. The pommel is somewhat atypi­ cal: it is not mushroom­shaped, but has a shape of a ball. The crossguard on the other hand is rath­ er typical — long and straight. Despite the advance form of the dagger, the blade does not have a fuller (Тереножкин 1976, с. 121). From Komarno village (Slovakia) comes a bronze handle, which o. I. Terenozhkin consid­ ered as a handle of a dagger (fig. 8: 2). Generally, it is similar to the rest of the artifacts, however, the crossguard has a unique feature of the nervure (the protruding rib) (Тереножкин 1976, с. 120). The most obvious explanation is the production spe­ cifics, however, the possibility of aesthetic aspect is high as well. last, but not least, such feature can be a result of damages inflicted on the crossguard by enemy’s blade. Also, the signs of a fuller are visible on the fragments of the blade. The sword from leibniz (Austria), which gave the name to J. chochorowsky’s typology, has all features of the type: a bronze handle, a small mush­ room­shaped pommel and a long straight cross­ guard (fig. 8: 3). The iron blade does not have a fuller and is 45,5 cm long. The rectangular piece of the scabbard remained as well near the handle (chochorowsky 1993, p. 114). The most western artifact of the type was found at the beginning of the previous century near Klein Neudorf village in Eastern Germany. The handle itself is typical, however, the dagger has some spe­ cific features (fig. 8: 4). First of all, unlike the rest of the examined weapons, it is completely bronze, similar to Karasuk prototypes. The blade is much wider comparing to bimetallic weapons. The wide blade is a typical feature of all bronze weapons that is a result of questionable toughness of the met­ al. The blade has a clearly visible fuller, the total length of the dagger is 34 cm (Тереножкин 1976, с. 121). Just as the finding from Khmelnytska Re­ gion in 2015, the dagger was found alongside weap­ ons of another type. To sum up, the following conclusions can be made: after spreading to the North Pontic Region from Siberia, the Karasuk daggers evolve on this territory into bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped handle. It happened as a result of two factors: the conflicts during the migration processes and the adaptation of iron. The effectiveness of the weap­ ons is indicated by the wide area of their spread­ Fig. 8. Bimetallic weapons at Europe: 1 — Penade; 2 — Komarno; 3 — leib­ niz; 4 — Klein Neudorf Fig. 7. Karasuk dagger from Tomsk grave field (1) and the dagger from lviv Region (2) ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 2 69 ing — from Northern caucasus in the east (Tatar­ stan, if including the lone findings) to the east­ ern edges of Germany in the west — which marks the zone of Protoscythian campaigns. The theory of North­Pontic origin of the bimetallic weapons with cross­shaped handle is supported by a large amount of findings on this territory both classical and new. Most of them are concentrated in Podil­ lia, therefore the conflicts between people of cher­ nogorivka culture (the owners of bimetallic weap­ ons with cross­shaped handle) and local peoples happened quite often (but obviously were not con­ stant), which seems natural considering their close­ ness. Unfortunately, the present findings cannot help us answer the question of the location, where proto­Scythian smiths “got acquainted” with the iron and adapted it to their products. Дударев, С. Л. 1991. Из истории связей населения Кавказа с киммерийско-скифским миром. Грозный. Дударев, С. Л. 1999. Взаимоотношения племен Северно- го Кавказа с кочевниками Юго-Восточной Европы в предскифскую эпоху. Армавир. Дьяконов, И. М. 1956. История Мидии от древнейших вре- мен до конца IV в. до н. э. Москва; Ленинград: Изда­ тельство Академии Наук СССР. Клочко, В. И. 2009. Происхождение скифов. Эпоха ранне- го железа. Ред: Бессонова, С. С. Киев; Полтава. Махортых, С. В. 1997. Происхождение и хронология бронзовых ножей Северного Кавказа X­VIII вв. до н.э. Памятники предскифского и скифского времени на Юге Восточной Европы. МИАР, I. M. Тереножкин, А. И. 1975. Киммерийские мечи и кинжалы. Скифский мир. Киев: Наукова думка. Тереножкин, А. И. 1976. Мечи и кинжалы. Киммерийцы. Киев: Наукова думка. Членова, Н. Л. 1976. Карасукские кинжалы. Москва: Наука. chochorowsky, J. 1993. Znaleziska horyzontu kimmeryjskiego w Europie Srodkowej. Ekspansja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy Srodkowej. Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagiellonski. Klochko, V. I. et al. 1998. The chronology of the Subotiv settlement. Radiocarbon, vol. 40, № 2, pp. 667­673. Makhortykh, S. V. 2008. on the question of cimmerian imports and imitations in central Europe. In: Biehl, P. F., Rassamakin, Yu. A. (eds.). Import and imitation in archaeology. Beier & Beran, langenweißbach, pp. 167­186. Mounted Nomads of Asian Steppe. 1997. Chinese Northern Bronzes. Tokyo. Podborsky, W. 1970. Mahren in der Spatbronzezeit und an der Schwelle der Eisenzeit. Brno. Received 27.03.2020 Д. Д. Клочко Студент-магістрант, кафедра археології, Національний університет “Києво-Могилянська академія”, ORCID 0000-0002-2154-5611, klochko.danil@ukr.net ПРо оДИН з ТИПіВ зБРої КіММеРійСьКоГо ЧАСУ Біметалеві мечі та кинджали з хрестоподібним руків’ям були предметом активного вивчення у 1970—1990­х рр. Серед дослідників тією чи іншою мірою відзначилися такі науковці як о. і. Тереножкін, В. Подборський, С. В. Махортих, Я. Хохоровський, С. Л. Дударєв та ін. Під час вивчення теми з’явилися три концепції походження зброї зазначеного типу: північно­причорноморська, кавказька та поліцентрична. за останні роки не було праць, в яких би дослідники розглядали мечі та кинджали цього типу. значний обсяг нових знахідок на території України дозволяє повернутися до цієї теми, одночасно розглянути знахідки вже відомі, а також ввести до наукового обігу нові. з урахуванням порівняння східносибірських та українських знахідок, пропонується така гіпотеза: прототипа­ ми біметалевої зброї з хрестоподібним руків’ям є бронзові кинджали карасукської культури, на подальшу транс­ формацію яких на території Північного Причорномор’я вплинуло опанування заліза, а також розвиток бою на мечах. Розвинута форма руків’я (наявність перехрестя (гарди) та грибоподібного навершя) вказує на існування повноцінного фехтування. значна зона поширення знахідок (від Татарстану на сході до німецько­польського кордону на заході) вказує на територію військових походів загонів, озброєних біметалевими мечами та кинджа­ лами з хрестоподібним руків’ям, а також засвідчує ефективність зброї. значна концентрація знахідок цього типу на Поділлі свідчить про близькість цієї території до первинного центру їх виготовлення, однак точно встановити цей центр наразі не є можливим. К л ю ч о в і с л о в а: Північне Причорномор’я, кіммерійці, карасукські кинджали, біметалеві мечі та кинджали. Д. Д. Клочко Студент-магистрант, кафедра археологии, Национальный университет «Киево-Могилянская академия», ORCID 0000-0002-2154-5611, klochko.danil@ukr.net оБ оДНоМ Из ТИПоВ оРУжИЯ КИММеРИйСКоГо ВРеМеНИ Биметаллические мечи и кинжалы с крестовидной рукояткой были предметом активного изучения в 1970— 1990­х гг. Среди исследователей в той или иной мере отличились А. И. Тереножкин, В. Подборський, С. В. Махортых, Я. Хохоровський, С. Л. Дударев и др. В процессе изучения, возникло три концепции происхож­ ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2020, № 270 дения оружия данного типа: северно­причерноморская, кавказская и полицентрическая. В последние годы не было работ, в которых исследователями рассматривались бы мечи и кинжалы этого типа. значительное количе­ ство новых находок на территории Украины позволяет вернутся к данной теме, одновременно рассмотреть уже известные находки, а также ввести в научный оборот новые. Учитывая сравнение восточносибирских и украинских находок, предлагается такая гипотеза: прототипами биметаллического оружия с крестовидной рукояткой являются бронзовые кинжалы карасукской культуры, на дальнейшую трансформацию на территории Северного Причерноморья повлияло освоение железа, а также раз­ витие боя на мечах. Развитая форма рукояти (наличие перекрестия (гарды) и грибовидного навершия) указывает на существование полноценного фехтования. значительная зона распространения находок (от Татарстана на вос­ токе, до немецко­польской границы на западе) указывает на территорию военных походов отрядов вооруженных биметаллическими мечами и кинжалами с крестовидной рукояткой, а также свидетельствует об эффективности оружия. значительная концентрация находок этого типа на Подолье свидетельствует о близости этой территории к изначальному центру их изготовления, однако точно установить этот центр на данный момент не представля­ ется возможным. К л ю ч е в ы е с л о в а: Северное Причерноморье, киммерийцы, карасукские мечи и кинжалы, биметаллические мечи и кинжалы. References Dudarev, S. l. 1991. Iz istorii sviazei naselenia Kavkaza s kimmeriisko-skifskim mirom. Groznyi. Dudarev, S. l. 1999. Vzaimootnoshenia plemen Severnogo Kavkaza s kochevnikami Jugo-Vostochnoi Evropy v predsifskuiu epokhu. Armavir. Diakonov, I. M. 1956. Istoria Midii ot drevneishykh vremen do IV v. do n. e. Moskva; leningrad: Izdatelstvo Akademii Nauk SSSR. Klochko, V. I. 2009. Proishozhdenie skifov. In: Besonova, S. S. (ed.). Epokha raniego zheleza. Kyiv; Poltava. Makhortykh, S. V. 1997. Proishozhdenie i khronologia bronzovykh nozhei Severnogo Kavkaza X­VIII vv. do n. e. Pamiatniki predsifskogo i skifskogo vremeni na Yuge Vostochnoi Evropy. MIAR, I. M. Terenozhkin, o. I. 1975. Kimmeriiskie mechi i kinzhaly. In: Skifskii mir. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. Terenozhkin, о. I. 1976. Mechi i kinzhaly. In: Kimmeriitsy. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. chlenova, N. l. 1976. Karasukskie kinzhaly. Moskva: Nauka. chochorowsky, J. 1993. Znaleziska horyzontu kimmeryjskiego w Europie Srodkowej. Ekspansja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy Srodkowej. Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagiellonski. Klochko, V. I. et al. 1998. The chronology of the Subotiv settlement. Radiocarbon, vol. 40, № 2, p. 667­673. Makhortykh, S. V. 2008. on the question of cimmerian imports and imitations in central Europe. In: Biehl, P. F., Rassamakin, Yu. A. (eds). Import and imitation in archaeology. Beier & Beran, langenweißbach, p. 167­186. Mounted Nomads of Asian Steppe. 1997. Chinese Northern Bronzes. Tokyo. Podborsky, W. 1970. Mahren in der Spatbronzezeit und an der Schwelle der Eisenzeit. Brno.

Ähnliche Einträge