Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk
In the article, the results of excavations of the Barrow 1/2020 (no. 57) in Skorobir (Area “4th Field”) are presented. In the burial of the beginning of the transitional period (580/570— 560/550 BC), a set of handmade pottery, two iron bits, a spearhead and a quiver with arrowheads were found....
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | English |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут археології НАН України
2024
|
| Назва видання: | Археологія |
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/199640 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk / D.S. Grechko // Археологія. — 2024. — № 2. — С. 50-75. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-199640 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-1996402024-10-19T15:41:56Z Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk Grechko, D.S. Статтi In the article, the results of excavations of the Barrow 1/2020 (no. 57) in Skorobir (Area “4th Field”) are presented. In the burial of the beginning of the transitional period (580/570— 560/550 BC), a set of handmade pottery, two iron bits, a spearhead and a quiver with arrowheads were found. The arrowhead set makes possible to synchronise it with other warrior burials of the time of the eve of nomad campaign to the Hallstatt and Lusatian lands around the middle of the 6th century BC. Complexes with similar arrowhead sets could belong to warriors, who moved to the compaign to the west after the conquering of the Eastern European forest-steppe tribes. Під курганом №1/2020 (№57) в ур. Скоробір (ділянка «4-е поле») було виявлено поховання початку перехідного періоду (580/570—560/550 рр. до н.е). Поховальний інвентар складався з набору ліпленого посуду, залізних вудил та наконечника списа. Особливу увагу привертає перший випадок у східноєвропейському Лісостепу виявлення частини шкіряного сагайдака зі стрілами. Сагайдачний набір складався з 51 стріли з бронзовими наконечниками та 6 дерев’яних стріл. Склад сагайдачного набору поєднує типи наконечників ранньоскіфського часу та нові форми перехідного періоду. Це дозволяє поставити цей комплекс на шкалі відносної хронології відразу після фінальних комплексів ранньоскіфського часу (610/600—570 рр. до н.е.) серед комплексів початку перехідного періоду / передпохідного часу (умовно, 580/570— 560/550 рр. до н.е.). Цікаво що в цілому всі ці комплекси мають матеріальну культуру, включаючи вузду, ранньоскіфського типу і лише сагайдачні набори уточнюють датування. Зміна наборів стріл, очевидно, відбувалась набагато швидше, ніж інших категорій матеріальної культури, що й не дивно. Можна припускати, що після підкорення племен східноєвропейського Лісостепу нові володарі регіону на певний час зупинились для відновлення сил та створення нового війська з новопідкорених племен. Поховання з наборами стріл, які б чітко відповідали знахідкам у знищених фортифікаціях Центральної Європи, у східноєвропейському Лісостепу мені невідомі. Це може бути пов’язано з відсутністю основної маси воїнів у регіоні, які пішли у похід на захід. Деталізація картини масштабної дестабілізації військово-політичної обстановки у Центральній та Східній Європі близько середини VI ст. до н. е. може говорити про масштабність подій, які мали визначні наслідки для племен Центральної та Східної Європи. Період розквіту (ранньоскіфський час для Лісостепу та HaD1 для Гальштату) було перервано та розпочався час кардинальних змін і військово-політичної нестабільності (перехідний період / початок середньоскіфського часу та HaD2-3). 2024 Article Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk / D.S. Grechko // Археологія. — 2024. — № 2. — С. 50-75. — англ. 0235-3490 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/arheologia2024.02.050 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/199640 904.5 (477.53)"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 |
Статтi Статтi |
| spellingShingle |
Статтi Статтi Grechko, D.S. Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk Археологія |
| description |
In the article, the results of excavations of
the Barrow 1/2020 (no. 57) in Skorobir (Area
“4th Field”) are presented. In the burial of the
beginning of the transitional period (580/570—
560/550 BC), a set of handmade pottery, two iron
bits, a spearhead and a quiver with arrowheads
were found. The arrowhead set makes possible to
synchronise it with other warrior burials of the
time of the eve of nomad campaign to the Hallstatt
and Lusatian lands around the middle of the 6th
century BC. Complexes with similar arrowhead
sets could belong to warriors, who moved to the
compaign to the west after the conquering of the
Eastern European forest-steppe tribes. |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Grechko, D.S. |
| author_facet |
Grechko, D.S. |
| author_sort |
Grechko, D.S. |
| title |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk |
| title_short |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk |
| title_full |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk |
| title_fullStr |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk |
| title_sort |
оn the eve of the “scythian invasion” to central europe: a new warrior grave in bilsk |
| publisher |
Інститут археології НАН України |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| topic_facet |
Статтi |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/199640 |
| citation_txt |
Оn the Eve of the “Scythian Invasion” to Central Europe: a New Warrior Grave in Bilsk / D.S. Grechko // Археологія. — 2024. — № 2. — С. 50-75. — англ. |
| series |
Археологія |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT grechkods ontheeveofthescythianinvasiontocentraleuropeanewwarriorgraveinbilsk |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-17T05:39:48Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-17T05:39:48Z |
| _version_ |
1837871440760668160 |
| fulltext |
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 250
УДК: 904.5 (477.53)"638" https://doi.org/10.15407/arheologia2024.02.050
* GRECHKO Denys Serhiiovych — DSc, Leading
Researcher, the Institute of Archaeology of the National
Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the Early Iron Age
Archaeology Department, ORCID: 0000-0003-3613-
795X, grechko@iananu.org.ua
ОN THE EVE OF THE “SCYTHIAN INVASION” TO
CENTRAL EUROPE: A NEW WARRIOR GRAVE IN BILSK
© D. S. GRECHKO* 2024
In the article, the results of excavations of
the Barrow 1/2020 (no. 57) in Skorobir (Area
“4th Field”) are presented. In the burial of the
beginning of the transitional period (580/570—
560/550 BC), a set of handmade pottery, two iron
bits, a spearhead and a quiver with arrowheads
were found. The arrowhead set makes possible to
synchronise it with other warrior burials of the
time of the eve of nomad campaign to the Hallstatt
and Lusatian lands around the middle of the 6th
century BC. Complexes with similar arrowhead
sets could belong to warriors, who moved to the
compaign to the west after the conquering of the
Eastern European forest-steppe tribes.
K e y w o r d s: Dnipro Left Bank forest-steppe,
Bilsk hillfort, transitional period, HaD1, barrow,
arrowheads.
Introduction
Against the background of the modern situation,
events in the past, when warlike tribes of Eastern
Europe and Asia carried out military campaigns into
the lands of settled tribes of Central Europe, deserve
special attention. One of such episodes refers to the
so-called Scythian raids in the Late Hallstatt period.
An important aspect of this topic is the question of
who made these raids and from where. Its resolution
depends on the dating of these events.
The author has concluded that the arrowheads
from the layers of destruction of fortifications in
Central Europe certainly belong to the transitional
period (ca. 570/560—540 BC) and it was not two
raids of nomads, which were separated by a centu-
ry, but a single action, which lasted for a short time
(Grechko 2020, p. 23).
Accordingly, one can try to find traces of the
presence of warrior burials, which contain quiver
sets similar to or slightly older than those which
were found in the layers of the destruction of the
settlements in Central Europe. New information
regarding such complexes has been published re-
cently (Андрух, Тощев 2022; Шрамко І., За-
дніков 2020 с. 9-10). The discovery of a whole
arrow set in the warrior burial in the necropolis of
Bilsk hillfort in 2020 (Гречко et al. 2021, с. 16-23)
allows us to return to this topic.
Burial complex and inventory
In 2020, the Bilsk archaeological expedition of the
Institute of Archaeology of the National Academy of
Sciences of Ukraine investigated two burial mounds
in Skorobir tract (Area «4th Field») near Bilsk
village, the Kotelevskyi Region, the Poltava region
(fig. 1—2). In 1975 and 1979, the expedition of the
Kharkiv University led by B. A. Shramko explored
16 barrows. The eastern group of barrows on the
terrace of the Sukha Hrun River investigated in the
same field is dated to the 5th—4th centuries BC. Bar-
row 1/2020 (no. 57) is located to the west, spatially
closer to the group of excavated mounds of the Early
Scythian period (mounds nos. 22—26) (Шрамко Б.
1994, с. 102-126).
Under the Mound 1/2020 (no. 571) an almost
rectangular-shaped burial chamber oriented
along the northeast-southwest axis of a size of
4.94 × 4.60 m and a depth of 1,0—1.3 m from
the level of the ancient surface was investigated
(fig. 3). This burial was surrounded by a rampart
made of the soil from the grave pit.
The northwestern corner of the chamber, which
probably contained the remains of the deceased
and the most valuable items of inventory, was
completely destroyed by two robbery pits.
Above the wooden floor of the grave, the birch
(?) planks of the burial coverage, which collapsed in
ancient times, were clearly visible (fig. 3). At the pit
bottom, two wooden logs of 3.4—3.5 m long placed
1 According to the general numbering of the burial mounds
of the Bilsk hillfort necropolis of Skorobir-Marchenky-
Osniahy (Шапорда, Коротя 2018, с. 245, рис. 5). Further,
this barrow number will be used.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 51
Fi
g.
1
. B
ils
k
hi
llf
or
t a
nd
c
ul
tu
ra
l g
ro
up
s
of
C
en
tra
l a
nd
E
as
te
rn
E
ur
op
e
of
th
e
H
a
D
1
pe
rio
d.
I
—
W
es
te
rn
P
od
ill
ia
n
gr
ou
p;
II
—
E
as
te
rn
P
od
ill
ia
n
gr
ou
p;
II
I —
K
yi
v–
C
he
rk
as
y
gr
ou
p;
IV
—
V
or
sk
la
g
ro
up
. F
in
di
ng
s o
f a
rr
ow
he
ad
s o
f t
he
S
cy
th
ia
n
ty
pe
: 1
—
B
lu
či
na
; 2
—
B
or
ši
ce
u
B
la
tn
ic
e;
3
—
B
ru
sn
é;
4
—
H
or
ák
ov
; 5
—
C
hv
al
čo
v;
6
—
Ja
ro
m
ěř
ic
e
na
d
R
ok
yt
no
u;
7
—
K
ře
no
vi
ce
;
8
—
K
rę
pi
ce
; 9
—
M
al
é
H
ra
di
sk
o;
1
0
—
O
lb
ra
m
ov
ic
e;
1
1
—
O
sl
av
an
y;
1
2
—
P
ro
vo
do
v-
Lu
dk
ov
ic
e
“R
ys
ov
”;
1
3
—
R
ad
sl
av
ic
e;
1
4
—
S
uc
ho
hr
dl
y;
1
5
—
Š
tra
m
be
rk
K
ot
ou
č;
1
6
—
D
ol
y
R
ab
ou
ň;
1
7
—
L
ho
ta
; 1
8
—
M
ěr
un
ic
e;
1
9
—
M
in
ic
e;
2
0
—
P
ěš
ic
e;
2
1
—
T
op
ol
“
N
a
sk
al
e”
; 2
2
—
K
am
ie
ne
c;
2
3
—
K
ru
sz
w
ic
a;
2
4
—
S
ob
ót
ką
“
Śl
ęż
a”
; 2
5
—
S
trz
eg
om
; 2
6
—
W
ic
in
a;
2
7
—
K
os
to
ľa
ny
p
od
T
rib
eč
om
; 2
8
—
L
ip
to
vs
ká
S
ie
ln
ic
a;
2
9
—
P
ra
sn
ic
; 3
0
—
S
m
ol
en
ic
e–
M
ol
pi
r;
31
—
Š
tit
ár
e;
3
2
—
V
yš
ný
K
ub
ín
; 3
3
—
C
el
ld
öm
öl
k;
3
4
—
D
éd
es
ta
po
lc
sá
ny
; 3
5
—
V
el
em
; 3
6
—
H
el
lb
ru
nn
er
be
rg
; 3
7
—
H
eu
ne
bu
rg
; 3
8
—
K
irc
he
hr
en
ba
ch
(a
fte
r:
G
re
ch
ko
2
02
1)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 252
in parallel to each other at a distance of 1.8 m were
identified. The logs’ grooves had a depth of up to
0.1 m, and their width was ranging from 0.23 m
to 0.4 m. The latter indicates that the groove was
made directly to the shape of the existing wooden
log. The floor was made of oak planks. The walls
of the burial chamber, which was smaller than the
burial pit, were also built from wooden planks. The
space between the wooden walls of the chamber
and the burial pit was filled with chernozem of a
loamy texture.
In the unrobbed part of the grave, the
inventory was recorded in situ on the remains of
the wooden floor of the grave (fig. 3). The planks
of the wooden cover collapsed and damaged the
inventory, primarily handmade pottery2. In the
southeastern corner of the burial chamber, a hand-
made polished korchaga was found. Behind it, an
iron spearhead was found lying along the wooden
wall and, therefore, clearly identifying the edge
of the chamber. Next to the spear, an iron tassel-
holder was discovered. The remains of a wooden
case-cover are traced around the spearhead.
In the middle of the southwestern wall of the
chamber, two iron bits were found, which may have
been hanging on the wall. At a distance of 0.25—
0.35 m from the wall of the chamber, a handmade
ladle and “korchaga-shaped” polished cup (fig. 3)
were unearthed, which could have been placed at
the feet of the buried person3. The location of these
finds may indicate its possible western orientation
with slight deviation. An iron artefact, remains of
a quiver with arrows4 and an ornamented horn (?)
plate were found nearby.
The burial inventory is a fairly classic set of
finds for the complexes of the Early Scythian time/
transitional period of the Bilsk necropolis.
Ceramic vessels are represented by a handmade
korchaga, a ladle and a cup.
The deep ladle has a biconical profile (fig. 4:
1) (Type 3 according to Пеляшенко, 2020, с. 52).
It has a high cylindrical neck that passes into con-
ical shoulders and a rib decorated with oblique
2 Restoration of the pottery vessels has been made by the
restorer of the Bilsk Historic and Cultural Reserve, Anatolii
Shtanko.
3 A similar location of the pottery is typical for synchronous
burials of the Dnipro Left Bank forest-steppe (Пеляшенко
2020, с. 131-157, табл. 63).
4 The restoration and conservation of the quiver and arrows was
carried out with the comprehensive support of I. I. Korost, the
Director of the Bilsk Historical and Cultural Reserve, by the
Senior Restorer of the National Research Restoration Center
of Ukraine, Kharkiv branch, V. P. Bolotin.
impressions in the lower part of the body. The
looped handle of the dipper is oval in cross-sec-
tion and attached to the rim and to the rib on
the body. The diameter of the rim is 8.6 cm, the
base — 6.5 cm, and the height is 11 cm.
The closest analogies to the ladle were found in
the neighbouring barrows nos. 8 and 22 in the Sko-
robir tract (Шрамко Б. 1994, с. 106, рис. 4: 3—4;
с. 124, рис. 13: 4) and in the synchronous assem-
blage of Barrow 4, Burial 1 near Hladkivshchyna
(Григорьев, Скорый 2012, с. 454, рис. 13: 1, 3).
“Korchaga-shaped” polished cup (fig. 4: 2)
(Type 5 according to Пеляшенко 2020, p. 55) has
high conical shoulders, a slightly thickened profiled
rim, and a rib at the place of the widest part of the
body. The height is 9.4 cm, the diameter of the rim
is 8.5 cm, and the diameter of the base is 4.8 cm.
The largest diameter is 10.5 cm. Similar vessels
are well known in the burials of Vorskla basin area
of the Early Scythian period (Machukhy, burial
no. 19) (Ковпаненко 1970, с. 160-161, рис. 5: 1),
Kupievakha, burial no. 20, burial no. 4 (Бойко, Бе-
рестнев 2001, с. 42, 131, рис. 44: 3), Malyi Tros-
tianets, burial no. 3 (Гейко 2001, с. 94, рис. 6: 3) .
Korchaga has a biconical body, a rib in the
lower part of the body and a funnel-shaped rim
(fig. 4: 3) (Type 2 according to Пеляшенко 2020,
с. 42-43). The diameter of the rim is 22.3 cm, the
base is 11.0—11.6 cm, and the height is 38.7 cm.
The body diameter is 32.4 cm. Such vessels are
well known among the synchronous burials of the
Bilsk necropoleis (Marchenky, 8th Field, Burial 1)
(Черненко,и др. 2005, рис. 41), Skorobir, Burial
22 (Шрамко Б. 1994, рис. 13: 1), Pereshchepyne,
Barrow 10 (Мурзин, и др. 1997, рис. 2: 2) and
the Sula River basin area (Oksiutyntsi, Burial 2)
(Пеляшенко 2020, рис. 159: 4).
Two finds of unknown purpose were also
discovered: an iron object (workpiece?) (fig. 5: 2)
and a horn (?) plate with an ornament, which could
not be preserved.
The details of the horse bridle are represented
by two iron looped bits (fig. 5: 4—5). Similar
items are widely known during the Early Scythian
period (Могилов 2008, с. 19).
Weapons and military ammunition are
represented by the remains of a quiver with arrows
and an iron spearhead.
An iron spearhead with a laurel-shaped blade
and a rib (fig. 5: 1) is a classic example of Early
Scythian time weapons and does not have a narrow
dating. The total length of the spearhead is 28 cm
(blade — 16.2 cm; sleeve — 11.8 cm), the largest
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 53
width of the blade — 3.2 cm, the diameter of the
hole — 2.3 cm.
Conical iron tassel-holder (fig. 5: 3).
Similar products are known in the latest burials
of the Early Scythian period — the beginning of
the transitional period (Ohorodne, Perebykivtsi,
Barrow 2, Novozavedennoie II, Barrow 17)
(Гречко 2016, с. 48) and during the Middle
Scythian period.
Let us consider the remains of a part of a leather
quiver and a set of arrows found in it in detail.
This is the first case of identifying leather parts of
similar artefact in the forest-steppe.
Quiver 5. The lower part and a bottom of the
artefact, on which parts of the arrows laid, was
preserved (fig. 6). It was sewn from at least three
parts — outer (missing), lower and a bottom. The
remains of the wood, which was fixed directly on
the arrows, don’t differ from the wood of the floor
5 Another article dealing with the reconstruction of the quiver
is planned.
Fig. 2. Plan of the Skorobir necropolis (Шапорда, Коротя 2018)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 254
slabs. There is no reason to assume that the second
part of the quiver was made of birch. It can be
assumed that only a part of the quiver with broken
(?) arrows was specially placed in the grave.
The stack of 57 arrows was 11 cm long, which
fully corresponds to the classic (small) quivers, not
gorytoi, of the Scythian time (Ильинская 1968,
с. 96).
The part of the quiver with arrows had dimensions
of 11.0 × 9.5 cm. The edges of a piece of bottom skin
with a thickness of 0.2 cm were wrapped in the direc-
tion of the arrows. The lower part of the quiver was
uneven, but rounded in one direction (fig. 6). Along
the edge of the quiver, slightly above the arrows, laid
an iron chisel-shaped object measuring 9.8 × 0.9 cm,
which had a wooden handle (fig. 7: 8).
Fig. 3. Plan of the burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 55
It can be assumed that it was used in the repair-
ing and manufacturing of arrows. Probably similar
in purpose, a bronze four-sided rod with one end in
the shape of a spade was found in a quiver in Ma-
mai-Hora, Barrow 377, burial no. 1 (Андрух, То-
щев 2022, с. 408-409, 414, рис. 6, 9).
Arrows shafts. All shafts were broken and
remained at the same length — about 4.5 cm
(fig. 6; 7: 7). Four samples were selected for anal-
yses. The research established that two arrows
were made of ash tree (Fraxinus sp.), one from a
tree of diffuse vascular species (the willow family
(Salicaceae)), one from a broad-leaved tree6.
Arrowheads. The quiver set included 51 arrows
with bronze arrowheads and 6 wooden arrows.
Two-winged arrowheads were all casted in
indifferent moulds.
• Leaf-shaped arrowheads with blade bases
cut off at an obtuse angle to the socket, with spur
(fig. 7: 1, 3) or without it (fig. 7: 2), length — 3.2—
4.2 cm, weight — 4.6; 4.9 and 5.6 g. One arrow-
head has an incised mark in the form of a broken
line, which was not fully preserved due to sharp-
ening. One dash is present on the socket (fig. 7: 1).
• Arrowhead with a tower-shaped head, tetra-
hedral cross-section of the edge and outer socket,
length — 3.9 cm, weight — 3.9 g. (fig. 7: 4).
•Arrowhead with a tower-shaped head and out-
er socket with a spur, length — 5.1 cm, weight —
9.2 g (fig. 7: 5). It has an incised mark on the blade
in the form of 5 lines.
• Leaf-shaped arrowhead, one blade goes to a
barb, the second is cut at an obtuse angle, short
outer socket, length — 4 cm, weight — 5.9 g
(fig. 7: 6). It has incised marks on the wing in the
form of two triangles with mirrored vertices.
Three-winged arrowheads were all casted in
different moulds.
• Arrowheads with a leaf-shaped head, outer
socket and with (fig. 8: 5) or without a spur (fig. 8:
1—4), length — 2.9—3.5 cm, weight — 2.5—4 g.
One arrowhead has an incised mark in the form of
a broken line of seven dashes (three triangles and
one dash).
• An asymmetric-rhombic (sharp leaf-shaped)
arrowhead, a long outer socket, with or without
a spur, length — 2.9—4.2 cm, weight — 2.6—
4.2 g (fig. 8: 6—13). One arrowhead has relatively
smaller dimensions and weight, a relatively shorter
outer socket — 2.9 cm and a bushing length 0.7 cm
6 Attribution by DSc. M. S. Serheieva, the Institute of
Archaeology of the National Academy of Sciences of
Ukraine.
and a weight 2.6 g (fig. 8: 10). The two smallest
arrowheads have a length of 2.3—2.5 cm with a
weight of 1.8—2.0 g (fig. 8: 6—7).
• Narrow triangular-shaped arrowheads with
an outer socket, length — 3.2—3.5 cm, weight —
2.3—2.9 g (fig. 8: 14—17).
• Arrowheads with a tower-shaped head with
blades cut off at an obtuse angle to the base of
the blades with an outer socket, length — 2.8—
3.9 cm, weight — 2.7—4.9 g (the largest groups
are 3.4—3.9 g (7 pcs.) and 4.2—4.9 g (5 pcs.)
(fig. 9). Eleven items have the spur on the sockets,
another eight — do not. One arrowhead has an in-
cised mark in the form of a cross (fig. 9: 17). These
arrowheads vary in shape and do not form a series.
• Arrowheads with a tower-shaped head with
blades cut off at a right angle or one/all7 go to a barb,
length — 2.9—3.4 cm, weight — 2.8—4.5 g (fig.
10: 1—7). Three arrowheads have cast marks on all
sides (fig. 10, 4, 6—7). One of them also has an in-
cised mark in the form of three lines (fig. 10: 7).
Two massive arrowheads significantly differ
from the others. The first one is rather massive
(length — 4.1 and weight — 5.7 g) with a short
socket and two barb-blades, one barb was not
cast (fig. 10: 5). The second arrowhead has a
considerable length (4.4 cm), which visually gives
it slender proportions, but it weighs more than
two-winged specimens — 4.5 g (fig. 10: 1). The
item has a cast mark on one side (fig. 11: 8).
• An arrowhead with arch-shaped head with blades
cut off at an right angle, although all the blades were
supposed to form the barb, but they did not come out
during casting; length — 3.1 cm, weight — 3.5 g
(fig. 10: 8). It has a cast mark similar to the tower-
shaped ones (fig. 10: 1, 6, 7) and an incised mark in
the form of five slanting lines on one blade (fig. 12);
• A combined type of the arrowhead (two sides
are the wings and one — a facet), with blade bases
cut off at an obtuse angle to the socket, length —
3.2 cm, weight — 3.5 g (fig. 10: 9).
In addition, during the investigation of the re-
mains of the quiver, six wooden arrows were dis-
covered. One of them has a tip imitating a trihedral
bronze arrowhead with notches at the base of the fac-
es (fig. 10: 10). Others have the tips of simply sharp-
ened arrows with a ball-shaped point (fig. 10: 11—
7 The two arrowheads had to have all three bard-blades (fig.
10: 6—7). One has one blade that should have formed a
barb, but it did not work out during casting (fig. 10: 4). One
way or another, all the arrows of this group, according to the
caster's design, would have at least one barb. Accordingly,
none of them had a spur on the socket.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 256
Fig. 4. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. The handmade ceramic vessels (photos and drawings by
D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 57
15). They could be blank shafts, which with the help
of an iron item, if necessary, were processed to fit the
existing arrowhead. Many wooden shafts or models
of arrowheads were found in permafrost burials of
the Pazyryk culture. Researchers believe that these
arrows’ imitation carved on the ends of the shafts had
votive attribution (Кубарев, Шульга 2007, с. 73).
Arrowhead set from Scorobir, Barrow 57: Be-
tween the Early Scythian period and innovations
of the transitional period
Composition of the analysed quiver set combines
the arrowhead types of the Early Scythian period
and new forms of the transitional period.
Two-winged arrowheads with a pointed leaf-
shaped head, a long socket with and without a
spike, in which the blades merge into the socket
at an obtuse angle, appear in the late group of
the second phase of the Kelermes period (Греч-
ко 2016, с. 43; Махортых 2022, с. 105-109).
Similar arrowheads continued to be used during
the transitional period (Grechko 2020a, p. 15-17).
The two-winged arrowheads with a tetrahe-
dral cross-section head, blades that merge into the
socket at an obtuse angle, are unique. The closest
analogy is an arrowhead from the Dédestapolcsá-
ny-Verebce-bérc hillfort (Szabó, Czajlik, Reményi
2014, p. 5, fig. 8). This shape is probably related to
the further development of the leaf-shaped tips of
the Early Scythian period, which also have a tetra-
hedral cross-section8 (Дараган 2016, с. 69).
A massive arrowhead with a tower-shaped head
and a long socket with spurs and blades that merge
into the socket at an obtuse angle has analogies in
the latest complexes of the Early Scythian period
(Spasivka, Burial 8) (Могилов 2020, с. 144,
рис. 6, 9), Nemyriv hillfort (Смирнова, Вахти-
на, Кашуба 2018, с. 180, рис. 150,1) — transi-
tional period (Novosilka Hrymailivska, Mound
“S”, Hlybochok) (Могилов 2020, с. 144, рис. 6,
142, 160), Smolenice-Molpir (Hellmuth 2006,
taf. 1: 15-18), Dédestapolcsány-Verebce-bérc
(Szabó, Czajlik, Reményi 2014, p. 5, fig. 8). This
type is often represented in complexes by single
items. The concentration of this type of arrows in
Podillia attracts attention.
Two-winged arrowheads with a pointed leaf-
shaped head, in which one blade turns into a socket
8 As an example, we can cite the arrowhead from Barrow
1/1983 near the village of Lykhachivka (Daragan, Didenko
2021, с. 173, рис. 16, 1).
at an obtuse angle, and the other forms a barb,
were quite common during the Early Scythian
period and transitional periods (Grechko 2020a,
p. 14). During the transitional period, their number
decreases.
Three-winged arrowheads with a leaf-shaped
head, outer socket and with (fig. 8: 1—5) or
without a spur and with an asymmetric-rhombic
or sharp leaf-shaped arrowhead and long socketed
shaft are widely represented in the complexes of
the Early Scythian and transitional periods (Grech-
ko 2020a, p. 15). Arrowheads with a long sock-
et and blades cut at an angle to it, in which the
maximum expansion occurs in the lower part of
the head, are typical for the latest group of burials
of the Early Scythian (Махортых 2022, с. 109)
and transitional periods (Grechko 2016, p. 44).
Three-winged arrowheads with a triangular
head of slender proportions without spikes are
innovative for the beginning of the transitional
period (II.3.D.a according to Hellmuth 2006).
These are known in the layers of destruction in
Central Europe (Hellmuth 2006, Taf. 12: 8—24).
Three-winged arrowheads with a tower-shaped
head, a long socket, with blades that merge into
the socket at an obtuse angle are also innovative
for the beginning of the transitional period (Греч-
ко 2012; 2016, с. 44; Grechko 2021, p. 17).
Some observations and assumptions can be
made regarding the reasons for the appearance of
new types of arrowheads with a tower-shaped head
during the transitional period.
Only the upper part of the arrowheads of the
Early Scythian period was sharpened, each blade on
each side separately, which led to differences in the
shapes of the heads (Клочко 1977; Дараган 2015,
с. 150). Sometimes this led to the grinding of the
socket, which became multifaceted. This is a rather
complicated process, because the tip must be held
at an angle to the whetstone and all surfaces must
be sharpened. It is much easier to sharp the tips only
on three sides. For this reason, the planes must be
as flat as possible, because any non-coincidence of
the surfaces lead to quite significant losses of metal.
If a three-winged arrowhead with a laurel-shaped
head and a long socket is placed on one side on a
whetstone and sharpened, we will get an arrowhead
with a close to tower-shaped head with significant
metal loss on the blades and a socket. Thus, on
some of the three-winged arrowheads with an arch-
shaped head from Huliai-Horod, Barrow 38 and
Zhurivka, Barrow 432 attempts to sharp them in this
way are visible, which made the outline of a part
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 258
of them close to a tower shape (Daragan, Didenko
2021, p. 159, fig. 4: 1, 6; fig. 5: 1, 3—5,7, 9; fig. 6:
5, 9; fig. 11: 2, 4, 11). The only one three-winged
arrowhead from the Yahorlyk settlement received a
tower-like shape as a result of sharpening (Daragan,
Didenko 2021, p. 174, fig. 17: 15), which precisely
confirms the completion of the functioning of this
site at the end of the Early Scythian period (end of
the first quarter of the 6th century BC) (Буйских С.,
Буйских А. 2010, с. 30).
It can be assumed that the appearance of new
types of three-winged arrowheads in the latest
chronological group of the burials of the Early
Scythian period (Махортых 2022, с. 109) was the
first step in a path of changing the shape of their
head. At first, the socket and the hook, which
Fig. 5. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. The iron items (photos and drawings by D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 59
were rounded in cross-section, remained and were
sharpened.
In addition, the first three-winged arrowheads
with an inner socket appeared (Perebykivtsi,
Barrow 2). The next step in the transitional
period was to reduce the length of the sock-
et, which was gradually hidden and did not
protrude beyond the plane formed by the blades.
There are types with a slightly protruding sock-
et and even trihedral products with an inner
socket. This line of development will lead to
the mass distribution of arrowheads with a tow-
er-shaped head and an inner socket during the
Vitova Mohyla horizon and a little later to the
beginning of the dominance of basic arrowheads
in the next period, which were much easier to
sharpen with minimal loss of metal compared to
the Early Scythian ones. So, the change in types
of arrows at the beginning of the transitional
period, in particular, the spread of items with a
Fig. 6. The quiver in restoration process (photo by V. Bolotin)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 260
tower-shaped head, could be resulted from the
convenience of the new method of sharpening
and the economy of metal.
Apparently, the appearance of arrowheads with
a triangular head and a short socket (fig. 8: 14—
17) also belongs to the manifestation of the same
Fig. 7. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. Two-winged arrowheads, wooden parts of the arrows (7) and iron tool
from the quiver (8) (photos and drawings by D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 61
tendency. However, such arrowheads were not
widely distributed in the next period.
Three-winged arrowheads with a tower-shaped
head, an outer socket and blades that form spikes
are known among the burials of the beginning
of the transitional period (pre-invasion time)
(Skorobir, Barrow 57, Perebykivtsi, Barrow 2,
Novozavedennoe II, Barrows 6 and 17 (Петренко,
Маслов, Канторович 2006). They have prototypes
among the items of the Early Scythian period,
which had an arch-shaped head and blades — bards
(for example Khapry, Barrow 1/25, Likhachivka,
Barrow 1/1983) (Daragan 2016, fig. 4, 28—29;
Daragan, Didenko 2021, p. 173, fig. 16, 40—48).
They are represented in a high frequency in the
barrows of the second quarter of the 6th century in
the Transcaucasia (Петренко, Маслов, Канторо-
вич 2006) and from the Don to the Southern Urals,
where they were very common in complexes of the
6th century BC (Смирнов 1964, с. 297, рис. 5, 3г,
4а; с. 299, рис. 7, 3, 5, 6а, 7а, 9а, 10а, 11 and etc.).
Absolutely identical cast marks in the form of
a downward angle (fig. 10: 1, 6, 8) on arrowheads
similar in shape and parameters with an arch-shaped
head were found in the complexes of the end of the
transitional period/beginning of the Vitova Mohyla
horizon (post-invasion time) — Vovkivtsi, Barrow
478 and Basivka, Barrow 482 (Daragan, Didenko
2021, p. 178, fig. 19: 7, 9, 10—11; p. 180, fig. 21:
3—5)9. M. V. Darahan argues that similar marks
appear in complexes of the second half of the 5th —
early 4th centuries BC10, and cast marks in general in
the Northern Black Sea region appeared in high fre-
quency after the middle of the 5th century BC. She
9 I can agree that one arrowhead (Daragan, Didenko 2021,
fig. 21: 8) from Vovkivtsi, Barrow 478 accidentally
got there during the formation of the museum collection
(Daragan, Didenko 2021, p. 182). However, in general,
these two sets can be attributed to the end of the transitional
period/beginning of the Vitova Mohyla horizon. Thanks
to the high-quality publication of these materials, we have
an idea about the composition of quiver sets of the period,
which is extremely poorly provided by the source base. The
absence of complexes in Eastern Europe during the active
phase of the campaigns to the west can be explained by the
presence of the horde (?) outside the region, and the first
complexes that were created immediately after returning
from the campaigns — by the fact that their participans
died after a certain time, such as Skorobir, Barrow 1/2017
(Шрамко І., Задніков 2018, c. 7-16). Vovkivtsi, Barrow
478 and Basivka, Barrow 482 can fill this gap (conditionally
540—530 BC).
10 Analogies of arrowheads with cast marks of the 5th —
4th centuries BC have a different shape of the head and
dimensions, which fundamentally distinguishes them from
items of Posullia and Skorobir (Daragan, Didenko 2021,
p. 178, fig. 19: 8, 10—11).
thinks that before that time, the marks were incised
(Daragan, Didenko 2021, p. 182). The discovery of
numerous arrowheads with similar cast marks in a
well-documented complex from the Skorobir, Bar-
row 57 questions these conclusions and forces us to
return again to the issue of the possibility of using
the Vovkivtsi, Barrow 478 and Basivka, Barrow 482
complexes in chronological constructions. Nearby
cast marks were found en masse in the complexes of
the 6th century BC of the Volga-Don confluence and
the Southern Urals (Смирнов 1964, с. 297, рис. 5,
14; с. 307 рис. 14, 1; с. 314, рис. 21, 1; 317, рис. 24,
7; с. 319, рис. 26, 3д; c. 328, рис. 35А, 4; с. 330,
рис. 36, 1д and etc.).
In the burials of the beginning of the transitional
period, arrowheads of the combined type were
found, which have two three-winged sides and one
trihedral one with blades/faces (Skorobir, Barrow 57,
Perebykivtsi, Barrow 2). We can assume a significant
number of experiments to find new effective forms
for tips at the beginning of the transition period,
which caused their significant variety.
The analysis of the quiver set content of Barrow
57 of Skorobir shows that its innovativeness in re-
lation to the latest complexes of the Early Scyth-
ian period makes up 63%. It is worth noting that
the percentage ratio of arrowheads’ types is quite
specific for all sets of this time and it is currently
impossible to draw any conclusions on this basis.
All this makes it possible to place this complex
on the scale of relative chronology immediately
after the final complexes of the Early Scythian pe-
riod, together with the base complex for this time
of Perebykivtsi, Barrow 2.
The weight of the arrowheads of the pre-inva-
sion period indicates that on the eve of the cam-
paigns in Eastern Hallstatt and Lusatian lands and
immediately after returning to the Eastern European
forest-steppe, the types of bows of the previous pe-
riod (Early Scythian period) continued to be used.
Quiver sets’ changes as a basis for identifying the
chronological horizons of the first half of the 6th
century BC: iinnovation in war vs conservatism
of daily life
Survival of any collective of people depend-
ed and depends on the constant improvement of
weapons and everything that is one way or anoth-
er connected with war. Great inventions had al-
ways spawned waves of conquest (chariots, caval-
ry, stirrups, etc.) until they became widespread and
this advantage was eroded. During the Early Iron
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 262
Fig. 8. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. Three-winged arrowheads (photos and drawings by D. V. Karavaiko)
Age in the “steppe belt” of Eurasia, together with
the spread of nomadism, bows and arrows played
a prominent role in the battle. The wars of nomads
with various tribes made it necessary to constantly
take into account new experience, the emergence of
new combat tactics, armours, which led to the need
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 63
of improving the effectiveness of defeating the en-
emy at a distance (range, accuracy, rapid fire). The
shortage of non-ferrous metals also required consid-
ering the need to save it. All this made arrowheads,
which were mass-produced and expendable during
the battle, the most sensitive to changes. IIncreas-
ing intensity of conflict leads to a shorter use-life
for arrowheads, and thus to an increase in their rate
of production, which in turn increases variability of
shapes (see: Diachenko, Sobkowiak-Tabaka 2022
and references therein). Various transmission biases
related to the effectiveness, amount of material used
etc. should be also considered (Boyd, Richerson
1985). Therefore, sensitivity to change is especially
the case of periods of instability and migrations of
various tribes. At the same time, the complexes con-
tinued to include other categories of material cul-
ture of previously widespread types (pottery, deco-
rations, tools, etc.), which indicates that they did not
change so rapidly.
Complex processes of constant renewal of
material culture makes it possible to carefully
distinguish chronological horizons that are
interconnected by transitional periods. Increasing
the number of records and clarifying the dating of
complexes can gradually refine these chronological
constructions. The following version represents
ongoing work and reflects the current state of
research on this topic. The proposed conclusions
serve for a starting point of further discussion.
For the 6th century BC, the dating capabilities
of synchronous arrowhead sets can be compared
to antique imports. At the same time, pottery sets,
tools and most of the decorations may not change
so dynamically. All this complicates the dating of
settlement materials and parts of burial complexes
in which no antique imports or sets of arrowheadss
were found11.
In the complexes of the end of the Early Scyth-
ian time/beginning of the transitional period (pre-
invasion time), a significant number of antique im-
ports and whole arrowhead sets were found, which
allows them to be placed sequentially on a chron-
ological scale. Absolute dating of horizons/com-
plexes cannot be narrowed to less than 20—25
years at the moment.
Changes took place in an evolutionary way, so
the sets always contain a part of the arrowheads of
previous chronological horizons. The beginning of a
new era is indicated by the appearance of new types
11 Single finds of the arrowheads cannot be a reliable
chronological marker. In each specific case, they can
indicate only terminus post quem.
of arrowheads, changes in outlines and parameters,
and a gradual increase in their number in relation
to previously used shapes. The sufficiently large
variability of types does not allow us to clearly fix
this proportion — in all cases, the composition of the
quiver sets of the transitional period was different.
The presence or absence of arrowheads of the same
series (cast in the same mold) is interesting, which
may allow making assumptions about the nature of
the set formation12.
At the between, within the end of the 7th and
the beginning of the third quarter of the 6th century
BC, three consecutive chronological groups of
quiver sets/burials can be dis-tinguished: the
second phase of the Kelermes period, the late
group of burials (610/600-570 BC), the beginning
of the transitional period/pre-invasion13 time
(570 — 560/550 BC) and the time of the invasion
to the Central Europe (560/550 — 540 BC).
Second phase of the Kelermes period, late
group of burials (610/600 — 570BC). The com-
plexes and quiver sets of the end of the Early Scyth-
ian period (the first half of the 6th century BC) were
clearly distinguished and analysed by S. V. Mak-
hortykh (2022). I also paid attention to this topic
(Гречко 2012; 2016). It is possible to establish a
microchronology, primarily related to this layer of
burials, taking into account new discoveries and
progress in refining the dating of the 6th century
BC complexes.
Considering the composition of the quiver sets
of the Repiakhuvata Mohyla, Burial 2, these can
be attributed as the oldest in this horizon (Ильин-
ская, Мозолевский, Тереножкин 1980).
Then, taking into account the appearance of
certain types of two-winged arrowheads, there
are complexes with antique imports from Khapry,
Burial 1/25; Bushuika, Burial 2/10) and barrow
near in the Kytaihorod village (Беспалый, Пару-
симов 1991; Ильюков, Пашинян 1999; Ромаш-
ко, Скорый, Филимонов, 2014).
Complexes with ancient imports in District
7, Point 8 Novoaleksandrovka (Кореняко, Лу-
кьяшко, 1982), Burial 7/8 on Lower Don and
12 This issue requires a distinct analysis, because at the
moment it cannot be argued that the absence of a series of
identical arrowheads indicates the long-term participation
of warriors in combats and the replenishment of the stock
with what could be found on the battlefield, and not received
from the smelter master.
13 The term is not felicitous, as it can be confused with the
campaigns of the Cimmerians and Scythians to Asia Minor
in 7th century BC, but for now I will use it for a sake of
simplicity.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 264
Fig. 9. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. Three-winged arrowheads with tower-shaped heads (photos and
drawings by D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 65
Fig. 10. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. Three-winged bronze arrowheads and wooden arrows (photos and
drawings by D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 266
Tsukur-Liman in Kuban region can be considered
relatively the latest in this horizon (Копылов, Ру-
саков 2015, с. 92, табл. 1).
In general, to this horizon can be attributed the
Huliai-Horod, Barrow 38 (Ильинская 1975) and
Ohorodne (Мурзин 1984) complexes. The arrow-
head set from the defense structures of Trakhte-
myriv hillfort also corresponds most precisely to
this time (Фіалко, Болтрик 2003).
For this horizon, Serhii Mahortykh mentions the
following innovations (Махортых 2022, с. 109).
Among the two-winged arrowheads are examples
with an oval head and a long socket without spikes
and ones with an arched-shaped head, spikes, the
greatest width of which is at the base, and the
ends of the blades are obliquely cut to the sock-
et. Among the three-winged ones are arrowheads
without spikes with a tower-shaped head; arrow-
heads with a leaf-shaped head that has the greatest
expansion at the bottom with a long socket that
is up to half the length of the arrowhead. We can
agree with all these observations, except for the at-
tribution of the Lebedi-5, Barrow 11, Burial 8 to
this chronological group. A significant number of
tower-shaped arrowheads indicates that it belongs
to the beginning of the next, transitional period.
The beginning of the transitional period/pre-
invasion time (about 580/570—560/550 BC).
The transitional complex to this chronological
horizon is represented by Lebedi-5, Barrow 11,
Burial 8. According to the dating of the repaired
amphora and tower-shaped arrowheads, it can be
dated to the Late Early Scythian/early transitional
periods14.
14 The amphora from the burial dates to the end of the 7th —
the first half of the 6th BC (Sezgin 2017, p. 15), but it has
traces of repair and can only determine the terminus post
quem.
Fig. 11. Burial of the Barrow 57 of the Skorobir necropolis. The marks on the arrowheads. 1 — fig. 1: 5; 2 — fig. 1: 1; 3 —
fig. 7: 6; 4 — fig. 8: 2; 5 — fig. 9: 17; 6 — fig. 10: 7; 7 — fig. 10: 8; 8 — fig. 10: 1; 9 — fig. 10: 6; 10 — fig. 10: 4 (photos by
D. V. Karavaiko)
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 67
The composition of the quiver set of Skorobir,
Barrow 57 is typologically older compared to the
time of the active phase of the “Scythian invasion”
to Central Europe, while it is fundamentally
innovative compared to the sets of the sec-
ond phase of the Kelermes period, which allows
attributing this complex to this stage.
Chronologically similar complexes of Mamai-
Hora, Barrow 337, Burial 115(Андрух Тощев
2022), Perebykivtsi, Barrows 2 and 3 (Смирнова
1979, рис. 8; 9; рис. 12: 1—5), Novozavedenoye ІІ,
Burials 6 and 17 (Петренко, Маслов, Канторович
2006), Aksay-1, Barrow 3, Burial 3 (Дьяченко и
др. 1999) can also be attributed to this time.
The percentage of arrowheads of the previous
horizon in the set from Skorobir is quite significant
and counts 37 %. Various types of two-winged and
three-winged arrowheads with a tower-shaped head
(fig. 9), three-winged arrowheads with a triangular
head of slender proportions with a short outer sock-
et (fig. 8: 14—17) and the first tower-shaped items
with inner socket are innovative (Perebykivtsi, Bar-
row 2, close to II.4.V.a according to А. Hellmuth).
This time is characterised by a significant variabil-
ity of sets, which enables us to suppose both the ex-
periments in search of the optimal form, and the ap-
pearance of different groups of warriors with their
own traditions of making weapons.
It is interesting that, in general, all these com-
plexes have material culture, including a horse bri-
dle, of the Early Scythian type, and only the quiver
sets clarify the dating. The change of sets of arrows
obviously happened much faster than other catego-
ries of material culture, which is not surprising.
It is worth noting once again that the series of ar-
rowheads with cast marks from the set from Skoro-
bir, Burial 57 and the later Basivka, Barrow 482,
Vovkivtsi, Barrow 478 have numerous analogies in
the sets of the Volga and Don confluence and the
Southern Urals (Смирнов 1964, с. 297, рис. 5, 14;
с. 307 рис. 14, 1; с. 314, рис. 21, 1; 317, рис. 24,
7; с. 319, рис. 26, 3д; 328, рис. 35А, 4; с. 330, рис.
36, 1д and etc.). Part of the categories of material
culture and new fine arts traditions (Гречко 2016,
с. 46—55) and their absence in the North Caucasus
in the 6th century BC do not allow us to reject the
option of the arrival of some nomads from the East
to the East European forest-steppe. Unfortunately,
the small number of clear chronoindicators, first
15 A gray clay amphora was discovered in the burial, to which
the dating of the Lesbos amphoras should not be transferred
(Андрух, Тощев 2022, c. 415). This find does not have a
narrow dating and cannot specify the dating of the complex.
of all antique ceramics, prevent the complete
synchronisation of the «Scythian», «Sauromatian»
and «Sakian» chronologies. It is possible that the
complexes to the east of the Don may be suppressed
and then the origins of new types of things will
become more obvious. The “Hallstatt Plateau”
complicates the involvement of radiocarbon dating
into solving this issue.
Time of invasion to Central Europe (560/550—
540 BC). The sets of this time can be characterised
mainly by finds in the layers of destruction in Cen-
tral Europe, because burials in the Northern Black
Sea region are not known. At this time, arrowheads
of early Scythian types and those that appeared at
the beginning of the transitional period were still
used. Among the innovations, we can note the ap-
pearance of three-winged tower-shaped arrowheads
of types II.E, F according to А. Hellmuth, prod-
ucts with a short outer socket of slender proportions
(II.3.С.b according to А. Hellmuth, which will be
common in the subsequent period). At this time,
three-winged arrowheads with an arch-shaped head
and pointed ends of the faces disappear, and ІІІ.3.а
with faces that go to the socket at a right angle, with
a short outer or with an inner socket, appear. As sin-
gle archaisms from the Early Scythian period can be
considered ІІІ.3* IVBz, I.I*, III.2*.
The Vitova Mohyla horizon (540/530—520
BC) corresponds to the time of the return of no-
mads from their campaigns to the forest-steppe
(Гречко, Котенко, Крютченко 2020, с. 54-64)
and referred to a post-invasion time. Very similar
tower-shaped arrowheads with an inner socket and
a cast mark at Hellbrunnerberg (Moosleitner 1979)
and in the Basivka, Barrow 48216 are notable.
On the eve of the invasion to the Eastern
Hallstattian and Lusatian lands: From the
Transcaucasia to the Carpathian passes
The current state of the records allows arguing
that as of the middle of the 6th century BC several
regions of Eurasia did not have a permanent
population: the steppes of the Northern Black Sea
and the Azov region, the Volga-Don watershed and
the Southern Urals, that is, in fact, the entire steppe
from the Danube to the Urals. This was probably
due to the climatic conditions in this region at
that time. In the east, the potential source areas of
migration to the West could be Southern Trans-
16 Such an observation became possible thanks to the high-
quality publication of images of arrowheads from this com-
plex (Daragan, Didenko 2021, р. 178, fig 19: 6).
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 268
Urals, Northern and Central Kazakhstan (Tasmola
tribes), Eastern Kazakhstan, Altai, Tuva, Southern
Siberia and the Aral Sea (Гречко 2016, с. 36). The
initial territory of new nomads’ migration is dif-
ficult to determine. During migration, the tribes,
through whose lands the migration had taken
place, were often involved in the movement. All
this makes the process of reconstruction of popu-
lation migrations in the absence of data in written
sources more complicated.
Analysis of changes in the burial rites and ma-
terial culture of the new complexes of the transi-
tional period show that, apart from relatively small
groups of nomads from Central Asia, people from
the Northern Caucasus and Kuban region prevailed
among the warriors (Гречко 2016, с. 55-56). This
is consistent with the view of some researchers
about the returning of a part of the Scythians from
Asia Minor to the Northern Black Sea region after
staying in the Northern Caucasus after the bloody
feast of Cyaxares in 585 BC (Мозолевський 1990,
с. 27, 28). These new groups of nomads were the
“culprits” of the beginning of the transition period
and large-scale changes in the ethno-cultural map of
Central and Eastern Europe.
One of the oldest complexes with a cross-shaped
plate, a remarkable innovation of the transitional pe-
riod, is the burial of a teenager in the Aksay 1, Bar-
row 3, Burial 3 in Don-Volga watershed (Дяченко
та інші 1999, с. 96, 108). The most acceptable date
for today is the second quarter of the 6th century BC
(570/560—550 BC). The quiver set belongs to the
beginning of the transitional period. This complex
can mark the movement of nomads to the Northern
Black Sea region from the East directly or via the
Northern Caucasus and Kuban region.
Traces of fire and destruction were recently iden-
tified in Panticapaeum. Arrowheads from the destruc-
tion layer are close to the pre-invasion time ones.
V. P. Tolstikov dates the attack around the middle of
the 6th century BC, while the ceramics’ sets are dated
to the first half of the 6th century BC (Толстиков
2017). It is important that antique ceramics (Northern
Ionia), which were found in the layers of the destruc-
tion, allow to some extent the synchronization of this
event with the burial in Aksay and the assault on the
Trakhtemyriv hillfort at the end of the first third of
the 6th century BC (580's — middle of the 6th centu-
ry BC). It should be noted that no other traces of the
movement of new groups of nomads to the Northern
Black Sea coast via the Crimea have been recorded.
The mapping of the nomadic burials of the tran-
sitional period indicates the path of the new no-
mads to the Northern Black Sea region through the
Lower Don. A convenient crossing of the Lower
Don is located near Dugino village. Then the path
ran through the watershed of the rivers of the Dni-
pro basin and the Sea of Azov.
The appearence of new groups of nomads in the
Northern Black Sea region is marked by the discover-
ing of the early transitional period warrior graves on
the convenient roads to the Dnipro ferries, in which
stone sculptures were found (Sholokhove, Barrow
13, Velykomykhailivka, Gladkoe, Roblena Mohyla).
Such complexes were absent in the Northern Black
Sea in the Early Scythian time (Гречко 2016, с. 41).
The tradition of placing anthropomorphic sculptures
in a grave is known in the early Scythian barrows in
the Northern Caucasus (Nartan, Barrows 11, 16, 17,
20 etc.) (Бессонова 2009, с. 25-26).
Interesting burials were investigated near the vil-
lage Hladkivshchyna on the steppe territory along
the left bank of the Dnipro. These complexes repre-
sent a chronologically monolithic group. The arrow-
heads set from Barrow 4 belongs to the beginning
of the transitional period17. The Ionian kylix (Type
B2 according to Villard-Vallet or Type 9 according to
Schlotzhauer) was found in the Burial 499 (Галани-
на 1977). It can be dated to 590/580—540 BC.
At the end of the Early Scythian period, the forest-
steppe regions of Eastern Europe had a large settled
and semi-nomadic population. A few more complex-
es of the Left Bank Dnipro, which can be dated to the
end of the Early Scythian time — beginning of the
transitional period, were found in Bilsk necropolis in
Skorobir tract, i.e. Barrows 57 and 2/2019 (Шрам-
ко І., Задніков 2020, с. 9-10). Early Scythian peri-
od hillforts were not found in Left Bank Dnipro for-
est-steppe (Гречко 2016, с. 56), and perhaps because
of this no traces of assaults were found. It cannot be
ruled out that the local population recognised the
power of the new nomads without armed resistance.
Some of the warriors from this region could have
joined the march (Grechko 2021).
Traces of warfare at the end of the Ear-
ly Scythian period/beginning of the transitional
period were discovered in the Eastern Bank of the
Dnipro forest-steppe. Trakhtemyriv hillfort is lo-
cated on the Eastern Bank of the Dnipro near Za-
rubskyi ford (Фіалко, Болтрик 2003, с. 84). Ar-
rowheads, which were found in the rampart and
moat, belong to the end of the Early Scythian pe-
17 Publication of photos of arrows from the Burial 4/1
made by M. M. Darahan fundamentally influenced the
characteristics of the typological set of this quiver (Дараган
2016).
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 69
riod. It is important that in the moat, together with
the arrowheads, an oenochoe was found. It belongs
to the group Wild Goat Style “B” (mixed style) and
is dated by experts around 80s of the 6th century
BC. At the territory of the citadel of the settlement,
the remains of killed locals were found. Trakhte-
myriv hillfort stopped functioning after the assault
(Фіалко, Болтрик 2003). Accordingly, groups of
nomads could cross the Dnipro not earlier than the
580s BC. Taking into account that we have only
the terminus post quem dates, the fording of the
river could happen later.
Traces of the assault were recently discovered
at the Khotiv hillfort near Kyiv. The small collec-
tion of arrowheads from this excavation belongs to
the Early Scythian period (Шелехань 2017, c. 66,
рис. 64, 13). The authors of the excavation date
the assault of the settlement to the end of the 7th
century BC (Кравченко 2017, c. 119-120). It can
be assumed that this assault could have happened
simultaneously with Trakhtemyriv’s.
Further on, the path of nomads could turn to the
south and pass along the Black Shliakh. O. Ye. Fi-
alko and Yu. V. Boltryk argue that after the as-
sault of Trakhtemyriv, the Scythians on this route
went to Central Europe, which led to the destruc-
tion of the settlements in Central Europe (Фіалко,
Болтрик 2003, с. 86-87). Jan Chochorovski thinks
that for such a route the nomads had no “back-
ground” (Chochorowski 2014, p. 32).
It is possible to associate the abandonment of the
Nemyriv and Severynivka hillforts in the South Buh
basin (East Podillian group) with the advancement
of the nomads along the Black Shliakh. Materials
which can be dated to the beginning of the Middle
Scythian period (second half of the 6th century BC)
were not found at the Severynivka hillfort (Shele-
khan, Lifantii 2016, p. 244). Antique ceramics from
its fortifications are dated no later than by the sec-
ond quarter — middle of the 6th century BC, but
earlier dating of the oenochoe with a “striped” or-
nament is not excluded. Researchers date the aban-
donment of the hillfort to the first third of the 6th
century BC (Кашуба, Вахтина 2017, с. 219, 220,
рис. 8: 225). Despite of this dating of the end of
the settlement’s functioning, among the arrowheads
from the Nemyriv hillfort, the types characteris-
ing the transitional period are known (Смирнова,
Вахтина, Кашуба 2018, с. 180, рис. 150, 1, 10—
12). It is worth noting that two bronze three-winged
arrowheads with an inner socket, the edges of which
form spikes, are typical for Sauromatian complexes
of the Don-Volga watershed and further to the east
(Смирнов 1964, с. 297, рис. 5: 4а; с. 299, рис. 7:
5, 7а, 11). Unfortunately, all the arrowheads do not
have a certain context (Смирнова, Вахтина, Кашу-
ба 2018, c. 181) and it is impossible to claim that
they are related to the causes for the cessation of the
settlement functioning.
The time of functioning of the Western Podil-
lian group was determined by G. I. Smirnova around
the middle of the 7th — beginning of the 5th centu-
ries BC. The upper (late) date was based only on
one complex — Verkhni Panivtsi (Смирнова 2006).
O. D. Mohylov argued that this complex was re-
dated to the first half — middle of the 6th century BC
(Могилов 2010, с. 124). M. S. Bandrivskyi dates the
latest sites of the Western Podillian group (Stage IIIb)
to first quarter of the 6th century BC (Бандрівський
2014, с. 308). Perebykivtsi, Barrow 2 may be con-
sidered for the one of the latest sites of this group
(fig. 8: 2) (Смирнова 1993, с. 115-116; Мелюкова
2006, c. 28). The quiver set no. 2 finds direct corre-
spondences with burials of the beginning of the tran-
sitional period like Skorobir, Barrow 57.
The Kotsiubynchyky 2 burial complex included
a horse harness, a fragment of a bronze mirror, and a
set of bimetallic tops of the funeral carts and bronze
bells. The author of the excavation found the closest
analogy to the whole set in Volkivtsi, Burial 477 at
the Sula River (Бандривский 2009, с. 37), which is
dated to the end of the Early Scythian period — the
beginning of the transitional period (Гречко 2016,
c. 43-44). The hypothesis of M. S. Bandrivskyi about
the connection of these burials with complexes with
tops of funeral carts and bells in the Carpathian basin
is interesting (Бандривский 2009, с. 37-38).
Finds of the East-Hallstatt origin in the tombs
of the Western Podillian group indicate that the no-
mads of this region knew well how to pass the Car-
pathians and whom they would meet there.
At the end of the first third of the 6th centu-
ry BC this group ceases its operation, judging by
the materials available today, and the westernmost
outpost of the forest-steppe tribes becomes the Chot-
yniec agglomeration (Grechko 2020b, p. 597-598).
S. Czopek assumes the participation of its popu-
lation in the raids of nomads to the west (Czopek
2021, p. 384). The arrowheads of the ash-hill of the
Chotyniec hillfort do not belong to the time of the
destruction of hillforts in the Lusatian and Eastern
Hallstatt lands, but correspond instead to the earlier
Kelermes period (Гречко 2013, с. 133-154; Grech-
ko 2020а, p. 12-19). The lack of later arrowheads in
the collection, even those of the transition period, as
in the settlements and hillforts of the Western Podil-
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 270
lian group, once again indicates that these groups
did not experience nomadic raids to the west. It is
very likely that the end of the Chotyniec agglom-
eration and both Podillian groups is precisely con-
nected with this global destabilisation of the mili-
tary-political situation around the middle of the 6th
century BC in the broad areas of Eurasia.
I can agree with the researchers that the nomads
of the Middle Dnister joined the march through the
Carpathians to Central Europe 18 (Transylvanian and
Western Podillian nomadic aggression (Хохоров-
ски 2013, c. 67)). I. V. Bruiako thinks that the region
was their last stop before moving to the Hungarian
Plain (Бруяко 2005, c. 291). It can be assumed that
the nomads passed through Chotyniec and turned
to the south in the area of modern Rzeszów in the
direction of Kosice (Chochorowski 1985, taf. 5).
This corresponds to the direction of roads in the
Middle Ages. A significant number of complexes
with eastern materials in North-Eastern Hungary
(Dédestapolcsány, Győngyős, Miskolc, Diósgyőr,
Sajószentpéter, etc.) confirms this assumption
regarding the route along which the participants of
the western passage crossed the Carpathians.
Concluding remarks
The Skorobir, Barrow 57 can be attributed
to the beginning of the transitional period / pre-
invasion time (580/570—560/550 ВС).
This chronological horizon follows the latest
group of Early Scythian burials and precedes
the time of the destruction of the fortifications
in Central Europe. It was characterised by the
emergence of new groups of nomads from the
Transcaucasia and more eastern regions of Eurasia
and their establishment of control over the tribes of
the Eastern European forest-steppe, and continued
while the new rulers of the region were preparing
(?) for a campaign to the west.
It can be assumed that after the conquest of
the tribes of the Eastern European forest-steppe
and probably the plundering (?) of the European
Bosporus by the Greek colonists, the new rulers
of the region probably stopped for a certain time
to restore their strength and replenish their army
with representatives of the newly conquered
tribes. It is complicated to identify archaeo-
logically how long this period lasted, but it was
not long. This is indicated by certain changes in
18 The disappearance of the Western-Podillian group, the
researcher rightly links with the migration of its people to
the Carpathian Hollow (Хохоровски 2013, с. 67).
the composition of the quiver sets with which
fortifications in Eastern Hallstattian and Lusatian
lands were assaulted. That is, the chronological
horizon with arrowheads from Central Europe (ca.
560/550—540 BC) immediately follows the pre-
vious one (580/570—560/550 BC, Skorobir, Bar-
row 57, Perebykivtsi, Barrow 2). Burials with sets
of arrowheads that would clearly correspond to
the finds in the destroyed fortifications of Central
Europe are unknown to me in the East European
forest-steppe. This may be due to the absence of
the main mass of warriors in the region who went
on a campaign to the west.
Specifying the picture of large-scale destabilisation
of the military-political situation in Central and
Eastern Europe around the middle of the 6th century
BC, we can argue about the scale of events that had
significant consequences for the tribes of Central and
Eastern Europe. These events were not reflected in
written sources, in contrast to the early Middle Ages,
therefore, about the real scale of the tribes, movement
during the 6th century BC we can only guess. It is
interesting that the nomadic campaigns impacted the
development of the economics and material culture
of the East Hallstattian and Lusatian tribes at the final
stage of the HaD1 phase19 (Grechko 2020b, p. 597-
599). This largely indicates the synchronicity of global
changes in Eastern and Central Europe. The period
of prosperity (Early Scythian period for the forest-
steppe and HaD1 for Hallstatt) was interrupted and
the time of significant changes and military-political
instability (transitional period/early Middle Scythian
time and HaD2-3) had begun. This tumultuous pe-
riod resulted in the isolation of these two regions in
the 5th — 4th centuries BC, when two powerful forces
entered the historical arena: the Northern Black
Sea Scythians and the Celts. This balance of power
and stabilisation of the situation again leads to the
flourishing of these two worlds.
Acknowledgements
This project was supported by the Research
Scholarship of the German Archaeological In-
stitute (“Documenting, Recording and Saving
Ukrainian Archaeological Heritage”, June 1,
2023 — September 30, 2023).
I would like to express my gratitude to schol-
ars who were pleased to exchange information
on specific topics of my research. Particularly, I
19 This topic needs more comprehensive analyses and special
research.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 71
would like to thank D. V. Karavaiko, V. V. Ko-
tenko, O. N Diachenko, K. Yu. Peliashenko and
M. S. Serheieva.
This paper was written near the front line in
the Zaporizhzhia Oblast and in the combat zone in
the Donetsk Oblast. Considering this, I would like
to thank the soldiers and officers, primarily fight-
ing in the 1st Tank Brigade “Severia” of the Armed
Forces of Ukraine, for offering me time to work on
this project.
Андрух, С. И., Тощев Г. Н. 2022. Раннескифский
комплекс могильника Мамай-Гора в Нижнем Поднепро-
вье. Stratum plus, 3, с. 405-421.
Бандривский, Н. 2009. Коцюбинчики-2 — новый па-
мятник эпохи скифской архаики в Среденем Поднестро-
вье (предварительное сообщение). В: Зуев, В. Ю. (ред.).
Боспорский феномен. Искусство на периферии антично-
го мира. Санкт-Петербург: Нестор-История, с. 30-38.
Бандрівський, М. 2014. Культурно-історичні проце-
си на Прикарпатті і Західному Поділлі в пізній період
епохи бронзи — на початку доби раннього заліза. Львів:
Простір-М.
Батчаев, В. М. 1985. Древности предскифского и
скифского периодов. В: Марковин, В. И. (ред.). Археоло-
гические исследования на новостройках Кабардино-Бал-
карии. Нальчик: Эльбрус, с. 7-115.
Беспалый, Е. И., Парусимов, И. Н. 1991. Комплексы
переходного и раннескифского периодов на Нижнем
Дону. Советская археология, 3. с. 179-195.
Бессонова, С. С. 2009. Каменные изваяния в контек-
сте этнополитической истории Скифии. Stratum plus, 3,
с. 14-93.
Бойко, Ю. Н., Берестнев, С. И. 2001. Погребения
VII — IV вв. до н. э. курганного могильника у с. Купьеваха
(Ворсклинский регион скифского времени). Харьков: Ка-
равелла.
Бруяко, И. В. 2005. Ранние кочевники в Европе (X — V
вв. до Р. Х.). Кишинев: Высшая антропологическая шко-
ла.
Буйских, С. Б., Буйских, А. В. 2010. К хронологии ар-
хаических поселений хоры Ольвии Понтийской. Боспор-
ские исследования, 24, с. 3-64.
Галанина, Л. К. 1977. Скифские древности Подне-
провья (Эрмитажная коллекция Н.Е. Бранденбурга).
Свод археологических источников, Д1-33. Москва: На-
ука.
Гейко, А. В. 2001. Охоронні розкопки курганів скіф-
ського часу поблизу с. Малий Тростянець. Археологічний
літопис Лівобережної України, 2, с. 90-95.
Гречко, Д. С. 2012. О возможных «просветах» в «тем-
ное» время (VI в. до н. э.) скифской истории. Stratum plus,
3, с. 75-106.
Гречко, Д. С. 2013. О памятниках киммерийцев и
«раннескифской» культуре. Stratum plus, 3, с. 133-154.
Гречко, Д. С. 2016. От Архаической Скифии к Класси-
ческой. Археологія і давня історія України, 2 (19), с. 33-60.
Гречко, Д. С. 2021. Етнокультурна історія населен-
ня Дніпровського лісостепового Лівобережжя скіфського
часу. Автореф. дис. д.і.н. ІА НАНУ.
Гречко, Д. С., Билинский, О. О., Кушнир, А. С. 2021.
Человек и ландшафт в скифское время в Днепровском ле-
состепном Левобережье. Stratum plus, 3, с. 321-342.
Гречко, Д. С., Котенко, В. В., Крютченко, А. А. 2020.
Бельское городище: миграции и развитие комплекса.
Stratum plus, 3, с. 53-72.
Гречко, Д. С., Крютченко, О. О., Ржевуська, С. С.,
Фрунт О. С., Пукліч, О. С. 2021. Дослідження курганів
Більського археологічного комплексу в 2020 р. В: Ко-
рост, І. І. (ред.). Археологічні дослідження Більського го-
родища — 2020. Київ; Котельва: ЦП НАН України; УТО-
ПІК, с. 16-29.
Григорьев, В. П., Скорый, С. А. 2012. Курганы у села
Гладковщина — памятники эпохи скифской архаики в
Левобережной Приднепровской террасовой Лесостепи.
In: Blajer, W. (ed.). Peregrinationes archaeologicae in Asia
et Europa Joanni Chochorowski dedicatae. Kraków: Instytut
Archeologii UJ, с. 441-459.
Дараган, М. Н. 2015. Наконечники стрел предскиф-
ского и раннескифского времени: технология изготовле-
ния, метрология и маркировка. Труды Государственного
Эрмитажа, LXXVII, с. 127-170.
Дараган, М. Н. 2016. О колчанном наборе раннескиф-
ского времени из погребения 1, кургана 4 у с. Гладковщи-
на. В: Балахванцев, А.С., Кулланда, С.В. (ред.). Кавказ и
степь на рубеже эпохи поздней бронзы и раннего железа.
Москва (б.в.), с. 62-75.
Дараган, М. Н. 2017. О формировании скифских
колчанных наборов второй половины VI в. до н.э. Stratum
plus, 3, 2017, с. 51-111.
Дьяченко, А. Н., Мейб, Э., Скрипкин, A. C., Клепи-
ков, В. М. 1999. Археологические исследования в Волго-
Донском междуречье. Hижневолжский археологический
вестник, 2, с. 93-126.
Ильинская, В. А. 1968. Скифы Днепровского Лесостеп-
ного Левобережья (курганы Посулья). Киев: Наукова думка.
Ильинская, В. А. 1975. Раннескифские курганы бас-
сейна р. Тясмин. Киев: Наукова думка.
Ильинская, В. А., Мозолевский, Б. Н., Теренож-
кин, А. И. 1980. Курганы VI в. до н. э. у с. Матусов. В:
Теренож кин, А. И. (ред.). Скифия и Кавказ. Киев: Науко-
ва думка, с. 31-64.
Ильюков, Л., Пашиньян, К. 1999. На краю Меотиды.
Ростов-на-Дону: Рим-V.
Кашуба, М. Т., Вахтина, М. Ю. 2017. Некоторые
аспекты изучения материалов раннего железного века из
раскопок Немировского городища в Побужье. Археологи-
ческие вести, 23, с. 211-228.
Клочко, В. И. 1977. Новые данные о типах скифских го-
ритов и колчанных наборах в VI в. до н. э. В: Баран, В.Д.
(ред.). Новые исследования археологических памятников на
Украине. Киев: Наукова думка, c. 47-54.
Ковпаненко, Г. Т. 1970. Кургани поблизу с. Мачухи
на Полтавщині. Археологія, 24, с. 146-169.
Копылов, В. П., Русаков, М. Ю. 2015. О верхней хроно-
логической границе колчанных наборов в погребальных
комплексах раннескифского времени. В: Лукьяшко С.И.
(отв. ред.) Война и военное дело в скифо-сарматском
мире. Ростов-на-Дону: Изд-во ЮНЦ РАН, с. 91-95.
Кореняко, В. А., Лукьяшко, С. И. 1982. Новые
материалы раннескифского времени на Левобережье
Нижнего Дона. Советская археология, 3, с. 149-164.
Кравченко, Е. А. 2017. Просторова характеристика:
спеціальний простір — племінний простір — етнічний
простір. В: Кравченко, Е. А. (відп. ред.). Хотівське горо-
дище (новітні дослідження). Київ (б.в.), с. 115-124.
Кубарев, В. Д., Шульга, П. И. 2007. Пазырыкская куль-
тура (курганы Чуи и Урсула). Барнаул: Изд-во Алт. ун-та.
Махортых, С. В. 2022. Раннескифские колчанные
наборы первой половины VI в. до н.э. на юге Восточ-
ной Европы. В: Хасенова Б.М. (ред.). Степные миры в
зеркале археологии. Нур-Султан: ИП ARD-Print, 2022,
с. 104-111.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 272
Мелюкова, А. И. 2006. По поводу скифских похо-
дов на территорию Средней Европы. В: Петренко, В. Г.,
Яблонский, Л. Т. (ред.). Древности скифской эпохи. Мо-
сква: ИА РАН, с. 25-40.
Могилов, О. Д. 2008. Спорядження коня скіфської
доби у лісостепу Східної Європи. Київ; Кам’янець-
Подільський: ІА НАНУ.
Могилов, А. Д. 2010. К археологической карте Се-
верной Буковины раннего желейного века. Revista
arheologică, V (1), с. 98-129.
Могилов, А. Д. 2020. О формировании раннескифской
культуры на Среднем Днестре. Stratum plus, 3, с. 129-170.
Могилов, О. Д., Гуцал, А. Ф., Гуцал, В. А. 2016. Кур-
ган з кам’яним валом на Західному Поділлі. Археологія і
давня історія України, 2 (19), с. 212-230.
Мозолевський, Б. М. 1990. Кургани вищої скіфської
знаті і проблема політичного устрою Скіфії. Археологія,
1, с. 122-139.
Мурзин, В. Ю. 1984. Скифская архаика Северного
Причерноморья. Киев: Наукова думка.
Мурзин, В. Ю., Ролле, Р., Херц, В., Махортых, С. В.,
Белозор, В. П. 1998. Исследования совместной Украин-
ско-Немецкой археологической экспедиции в 1997 г. Киев:
Институт археологи НАНУ.
Пеляшенко, К. Ю. 2020. Ліплений посуд скіфського
часу населення Дніпро-Донецького Лісостепу. Київ; Ко-
тельва: ІА НАН України; ІКЗ «Більськ».
Петренко, В. Г., Маслов, В. Е., Канторович, А. Р.
2006. Погребения подростков в могильнике Новозаведен-
ное II. В: Петренко, В. Г., Яблонский, Л. Т. (ред.). Древ-
ности скифской эпохи. Москва: ИА РАН, с. 388-423.
Пьянков, А. В., Рябкова, Т. В., Зеленский, Ю. В. 2019.
Комплекс раннескифского времени кургана № 11 могиль-
ника Лебеди V в Прикубанье. Археологические вести, 25,
с. 206-228.
Ромашко, В. А., Скорый, С. А., Филимонов, Д. Г.
2014. Раннескифское погребение в кургане у села Китай-
город в Приорелье. Российская археология, 4, с. 107-117.
Смирнов, К. Ф. 1964. Савроматы. Ранняя история и
культура сарматов. Москва: Наука.
Смирнова, Г. И. 1979. Курганы у села Перебыковцы —
новый могильник скифской архаики на Среднем Днестре.
Труды Государственного Эрмитажа, 20, с. 37-67.
Смирнова, Г. И. 1993. Памятники Среднего По-
днестровья в хронологической схеме раннескифской
культуры. Российская археология, 2, с. 101-118.
Смирнова, Г. И. 2006. Западно-Подольская груп-
па раннескифских памятников в свете исследований к
концу XX столетия В: Петренко, В. Г., Яблонский, Л. Т.
(ред.). Древности скифской эпохи. Москва: Наука, с. 66-
92.
Смирнова, Г. И., Вахтина, М. Ю., Кашуба, М. Т. 2018.
Периодизация и хронология Немировского города в ран-
нем железном веке. В: Смирнова, Г. И., Вахтин, М. Ю.,
Кашуба, М. Т., Старков, Е. Г. (ред.). Городище Немиров
на реке Южный Буг. Санкт-Петербург: Государственный
Эрмитаж РАН, c. 223-236.
Толстиков, В. П. 2017. О времени основания и архи-
тектурной среде раннего Пантикапея по материалам но-
вейших раскопок. Труды Государственного Эрмитажа,
LXXXVIII, с. 259-269.
Фiалко, О. Є., Болтрик, Ю. В. 2003 Напад скiфiв на
Трахтемирiвське городище. Київ: ІА НАНУ.
Хохоровски, Я. 1994. Скифские набеги на террито-
рию Средней Европы. Российская археология, 3, с. 49-63.
Хохоровски, Я. 2013. Скифы и Средняя Европа — ис-
торическая интерпретация археологической действитель-
ности. Вестник Томского государственного университе-
та, 3 (23), с. 57-73.
Черненко, Е. В., Ролле-Герц, Р., Скорый, С. А.,
Махортых, С. В., Герц, В. Ю., Белозор, В. П. 2005. Ис-
следования совместной Украинско-Немецкой археологи-
ческой экспедиции в 2004 г. Киев: Институт археологи
НАНУ.
Шапорда, О. М., Коротя, О. В. 2018. Паспортизація
об’єктів кульутрної спадщини Більского мікрорегіону, В:
Корост, І. І. (відп. ред.). Археологічні дослідження Біль-
ського городища-2017. Київ; Котельва: ЦП НАН України;
УТОПІК, с. 240-249.
Шелехань, А. В. 2017. Вироби з металу і питання хро-
нології городища. В: Кравченко, Е. А. (відп. ред.). Хотів-
ське городище (новітні дослідження). Київ (б.в.), с. 61-68.
Шрамко, Б. А. 1994. Новые раскопки курганов в мо-
гильнике Скоробор. Древности, 1, с. 102-126.
Шрамко, І. Б., Задніков, С. А. 2020. Дослідження не-
крополю Скоробір у 2019 р. В: Корост, І. І. (відп. ред.).
Археологічні дослідження Більського городища — 2019.
Київ; Котельва: ЦП НАН України; УТОПІК, с. 5-13.
Chochorowski, J. 1985. Die Vekerezug Kultur
Charakteristik der Funde. Prace Archeologiczne, 36, s. 1-162.
Chochorowski, J. 2014. Scytowie a Europa Środkowa —
historyczna interpretacja archeologicznej rzeczywistości.
Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeo-
logicznego, XXXV, s. 9-58.
Czopek, S. 2021. On the Synchronization of the Chronol-
ogy of Phenomena and Artefacts. Sprawozdania Archeolog-
iczne, 73/2, p. 375-391.
Daragan, M., Didenko, S. 2021. Scythian Quiver Sets
of the Archaic Period: State of the Art and the Chronolog-
ical Considerations. Tyragetia, s.n., vol. XV (XXX), nr. 1,
2021, p. 155-188.
Diachenko, A., Sobkowiak-Tabaka, I. 2022. Self-Orga-
nized Cultural Cycles and the Uncertainty of Archaeologi-
cal Thought. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory,
29(3), p. 1034-1057.
Grechko, D. S. 2020а. About the Dating of the Scythian
Type Arrowheads of the Late Hallstatt Period from Central
Europe. Археологія, 4, p. 12-27.
Grechko, D. S. 2020b. Chronological Schemes of Central
Europe of the Late Hallstatt Period (НaD): New Opportunities
for Synchronization and Refinement of Dates. Sprawozdania
Archeologiczne, 72 (2), p. 585-605.
Grechko, D. S. 2021. How Far Did the Nomads Go to
the West Around the Middle of the 6th Century BC? Śląskie
Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 63, p. 15-24.
Hellmuth, A. 2006. Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten
skythischen Pfeilspitzen aus der befestigten Höhensiedlung
von Smolenice-Molpir. Universitätsforschungen zur prä-
historischen Archälogie, 128. Bonn: R. Habelt.
Moosleitner, F. 1979. Ein hallstattzeitlicher “Furstensitz”
am Hellbrunnerberg bei Salzburg, Germania 57, p. 53-74.
Sezgin, Y. 2017. Arkaik Dönemde Teos’ta ticari amphora
üretimi: sоrunlar ve gözlemler. Anatolia, 43, p. 15-39.
Shelekhan, O., Lifantii, O. 2016. The Elements of the
Horse Bridle from the Severynivka Hillfort. Baltic–Pontic
Studies, 21, p. 219-254.
Szabó, G. V., Czajlik, Z., Reményi, L. 2014. Traces of
an Iron Age Armed Conflict. New Topographical Results
from the Research into Verebce-bérc at Dédestapolcsány I.
Hungarian Archaeology E-journal/2014 spring, p. 1-7.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 73
Д. С. Гречко
Доктор історичних наук, провідний науковий співробітник відділу археології раннього залізного віку, Інститут архео-
логії НАН України, ORCID 0000-0003-3613-795X, grechko@iananu.org.ua
НАПЕРЕДОДНІ «СКІФСЬКОГО ВТОРГНЕННЯ» В ЦЕНТРАЛЬНУ ЄВРОПУ:
НОВЕ ПОХОВАННЯ ВОЇНА У БІЛЬСЬКУ
Під курганом №1/2020 (№57) в ур. Скоробір (ділянка «4-е поле») було виявлено поховання початку перехідного періоду
(580/570—560/550 рр. до н.е). Поховальний інвентар складався з набору ліпленого посуду, залізних вудил та наконечника
списа. Особливу увагу привертає перший випадок у східноєвропейському Лісостепу виявлення частини шкіряного
сагайдака зі стрілами. Сагайдачний набір складався з 51 стріли з бронзовими наконечниками та 6 дерев’яних стріл.
Склад сагайдачного набору поєднує типи наконечників ранньоскіфського часу та нові форми перехідного періоду. Це
дозволяє поставити цей комплекс на шкалі відносної хронології відразу після фінальних комплексів ранньоскіфського
часу (610/600—570 рр. до н.е.) серед комплексів початку перехідного періоду / передпохідного часу (умовно, 580/570—
560/550 рр. до н.е.). Цікаво що в цілому всі ці комплекси мають матеріальну культуру, включаючи вузду, ранньоскіфського
типу і лише сагайдачні набори уточнюють датування. Зміна наборів стріл, очевидно, відбувалась набагато швидше, ніж
інших категорій матеріальної культури, що й не дивно.
Можна припускати, що після підкорення племен східноєвропейського Лісостепу нові володарі регіону на певний
час зупинились для відновлення сил та створення нового війська з новопідкорених племен. Поховання з наборами стріл,
які б чітко відповідали знахідкам у знищених фортифікаціях Центральної Європи, у східноєвропейському Лісостепу
мені невідомі. Це може бути пов’язано з відсутністю основної маси воїнів у регіоні, які пішли у похід на захід.
Деталізація картини масштабної дестабілізації військово-політичної обстановки у Центральній та Східній
Європі близько середини VI ст. до н. е. може говорити про масштабність подій, які мали визначні наслідки для племен
Центральної та Східної Європи. Період розквіту (ранньоскіфський час для Лісостепу та HaD1 для Гальштату) було
перервано та розпочався час кардинальних змін і військово-політичної нестабільності (перехідний період / початок
середньоскіфського часу та HaD2-3).
К л ю ч о в і с л о в а: Дніпровське лісостепове Лівобережжя, Більське городище, перехідний період, HaD1, курган, на-
конечники стріл.
References
Andrukh, S. I., Toshchev, G. N. 2022. An Early Scythian Barrow of Mamai-Gora Burial Ground in Lower Dnieper Region.
Stratum plus, 3, p. 405-421.
Bandrivskii, N. 2009. Kotsiubinchiki-2 — novyi pamiatnik epokhi skifskoi arkhaiki v Sredenem Podnestrovie (predvaritelnoe
soobshchenie). In: Zuev, V. Iu. (ed.). Bosporskii fenomen. Iskusstvo na periferii antichnogo mira. Sankt-Peterburg: Nestor-
Istoria, p. 30-38.
Bandrivskyi, M. 2014. Kulturno-istorychni protsesy na Prykarpatti i Zakhidnomu Podilli v pizniy period epokhy bronzy — na
pochatku doby rannoho zaliza. Lviv: Prostir-M.
Batchaev, V. M. 1985. Drevnosti predskifskogo i skifskogo periodov. In: Markovin, V. I. (ed.). Arkheologicheskie issledovaniia
na novostroikakh Kabardino-Balkarii. Nalchik: Elbrus, p. 7-115.
Bespalyi, E. I., Parusimov, I.N. 1991. Kompleksy perekhodnogo i ranneskifskogo periodov na Nizhnem Donu. Sovetskaia
arkheologiia, 3, p. 179-195.
Bessonova, S. S. 2009. Stone Sculptures in the Context of Ethnopolitical History of Scythia. Stratum plus, 3, p. 14-93.
Boiko, Iu. N., Berestnev, S. I. 2001. Pogrebeniia VII—IV vv. do n. e. kurgannogo mogilnika u s. Kupevakha (Vorsklinskii region
skifskogo vremeni). Kharkiv: Karavella.
Bruiako, I. V. 2005. Rannie kochevniki v Evrope (X—V vv. do R. KH.). Kishinev: Vysshaia antropologicheskaia shkola.
Buiskikh, S. B., Buiskikh, A. V. 2010. To the chronology of archaic settlements of Olbia of Pontos Chora. Bosporskie
issledovaniia, 24, p. 3-64.
Galanina, L. K. 1977. Skifskie drevnosti Podneprovia (Ermitazhnaia kollektsiia N. E. Brandenburga). Svod arkheologicheskikh
istochnikov, D1-33. Moskva: Nauka.
Heiko, A. V. 2001. Okhoronni rozkopky kurhaniv skifskoho chasu poblyzu s. Malyi Trostyanets. Arkheolohichnyi litopys
Livoberezhnoi Ukrainy, 2, p. 90-95.
Grechko, D. S. 2012. About Possible Clearances within the "Dark" Period (6-th c. BC) of Scythian History. Stratum plus, 3, p. 75-106.
Grechko, D. S. 2013. On the Question of Cimmerian Sites and “Early Scythian” Culture. Stratum plus, 3, p. 133-154.
Grechko, D. S. 2016. From Archaic Scythia to Classical. Archaeology and Early History of Ukraine, 2 (19), p. 33-60.
Hrechko, D. S. 2021. Etnokulturna istoriia naselennia Dniprovskoho lisostepovoho Livoberezhzhia skifskoho chasu. Avtoreferat
dysertatsii d. i. n.: IA NANU.
Grechko, D. S., Bilinskii, O. O., Kushnir, A. S. 2021. Human and Landscape of Scythian Time on the Forest-Steppe Dnieper
Left-bank. Stratum plus, 3, p. 321-342.
Grechko, D. S., Kotenko, V. V., Kriutchenko, А. А. 2020. Belsk Hillfort: Migration and Evolution of the Assemblage. Stratum
plus, 3, p. 53-72.
Hrechko, D. S., Kriutchenko, O. O., Rzhevuska, S. S., Frunt, O. S., Puklich, O. S. 2021. Doslidzhennia kurhaniv Bilskoho
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 274
arkheolohichnoho kompleksu v 2020 r. In: Korost, I. I. (red.). Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia Bilskoho horodyshcha —
2020. Kyiv; Kotelva: TSP NAN Ukrayiny; UTOPIK, p. 16-29.
Grigorev, V. P., Skoryi, S. A. 2012. Kurgany u sela Gladkovshchina — pamiatniki epokhi skifskoi arkhaiki v Levoberezhnoi
Pridneprovskoi terrasovoi Lesostepi. In: Blajer, W. (ed.). Peregrinationes archaeologicae in Asia et Europa Joanni
Chochorowski dedicatae. Kraków: Instytut Archeologii UJ, p. 441-459.
Daragan, M. N. 2015. Nakonechniki strel predskifskogo i ranneskifskogo vremeni: tekhnologiia izgotovleniia, metrologiia i
markirovka. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, LXXVII, p. 127-170.
Daragan, M. N. 2016. O kolchannom nabore ranneskifskogo vremeni iz pogrebeniia 1, kurgana 4 u s. Gladkovshchina. In:
Balakhvantsev, A. S., Kullanda, S. B. (eds.) Kavkaz i step na rubezhe epokhi pozdnei bronzy i rannego zheleza. Moskva,
p. 62-75.
Daragan, M. N. 2017. On the Formation of Scythian Quiver Sets in the Second Half of the 6th Century BC. Stratum plus 3, 2017,
p. 51-111.
Diachenko, A. N., Mabe, A., Skripkin, A. C., Klepikov, V. M. 1999. Arkheologicheskiie issledovaniia v Volgo-Donskom
mezhdureche. Nizhnevolzhskii arkheologicheksii vestnik, 2, p. 93-126.
Ilinskaia, V. A. 1968. Skify Dneprovskogo Lesostepnogo Levoberezhia (kurgany Posulia). Kyiv: Naukova dumka.
Ilinskaia, V. A. 1975. Ranneskifskie kurgany basseina r. Tyasmin. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.
Ilinskaia, V. A., Mozolevskii, B. N., Terenozhkin, A. I. 1980. Kurgany VI v. do n. e. u s. Matusov. In: Terenozhkin, A. I. (ed.).
Skifiia i Kavkaz. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, p. 31-64.
Iliukov, L., Pashinian, K. 1999. Na krayu Meotidy. Rostov-na-Donu: Rim-V.
Kashuba, M. T., Vakhtina, M. Iu. 2017.: Nekotorye aspekty izucheniia materialov rannego zheleznogo veka iz raskopok
Nemirovskogo gorodishcha v Pobuzhe. Arkheologicheskie vesti, 23, p. 211-228.
Kravchenko, E. A. 2017. Prostorova kharakterystyka: spetsialnyi prostir — pleminnyi prostir — etnichnyi prostir. In:
Kravchenko, E. A. (vidp. red.). Khotivske horodyshche (novitni doslidzhennia). Kyiv (b.v.), p. 115-124.
Klochko, V. I. 1977. Novye dannye o tipakh skifskikh goritov i kolchannykh naborakh v VI v. do n. e. In: Baran, V. D. (ed.)
Novye issledovaniia arkheologicheskikh pamiatnikov na Ukraine. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, p. 47-54.
Kovpanenko, G. T. 1970. Kurgani poblizu s. Machukhi na Poltavshchyni. Arheologia, 24, p. 146-169.
Kopylov, V. P., Rusakov, M. Iu. 2015. O verkhnei khronologicheskoi granitse kolchannykh naborov v pogrebalnykh kompleksakh
ranneskifskogo vremeni. In: Lukyashko, S. I. (otv. red.) Voina i voennoe delo v skifo-sarmatskom mire. Rostov n/D: Izd-
vo YUNTS RAN, p. 91-95.
Koreniako, V. A., Lukiashko, S. I. 1982. Novye materialy ranneskifskogo vremeni na Levoberezhie Nizhnego Dona. Sovetskaia
arkheologiia, 3, p. 149-164.
Kubarev, V. D., Shulga, P. I. 2007. Pazyrykskaia kultura (kurgany Chui i Ursula). Barnaul: Izd-vo Alt. un-ta.
Makhortykh, S. V. 2022. Ranneskifskie kolchannye nabory pervoi poloviny VI v. do n.e. na iuge Vostochnoi Ievropy. In:
Khasenova, B. M. (ed.). Stepnye miry v zerkale arkheologii. Nur-Sultan: IP ARD-Print, p. 104-111.
Meliukova, A. I. 2006. Po povodu skifskikh pokhodov na territoriu Srednei Ievropy. In: Petrenko, V. G., Iablonskiy, L. T. (ed.).
Drevnosti skifskoi epokhi. Moskva: IA RAN, p. 25-40.
Mohylov, O. D. 2008. Sporiadzhennia konia skifskoyi doby u lisostepu Skhidnoi Yevropy. Kyiv; Kamyanets-Podilskyi: IA NANU.
Mogilov, A. D. 2010. K arkheologicheskoi karte Severnoi Bukoviny rannego zheleznogo veka. Revista arheologică, V (1),
p. 98-129.
Mogilov, A. D. 2020. On the Formation of the Early Scythian Culture on the Middle Dniester Region. Stratum plus 3, p. 129-170.
Mohylov, O. D., Hutsal, A. F., Hutsal, V. A. 2016. The Barrow with the Stone Bank on the West Podillia. Archaeology and Early
History of Ukraine, 2 (19), p. 212-230.
Mozolevskyi, B. M. 1990. Kurhany vyshchoi skifskoi znati i problema politychnoho ustroiu Skifii. Arheologia, 1, p. 122-139.
Murzin, V. Iu. 1984. Skifskaia arkhaika Severnogo Prichernomoria. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.
Murzin, V. Iu., Rolle, R., Kherts, V., Makhortykh, S. V., Belozor, V. P. 1998. Issledovaniia sovmestnoi Ukrainsko-Nemetskoi
arkheologicheskoi ekspeditsii v 1997 g. Kyiv: Institut arkheologi NANU.
Peliashenko, K. Iu. 2020. Liplenyi posud skifskoho chasu naselennia Dnipro-Donetskoho Lisostepu. Kyiv; Kotelva: IA NAN
Ukrayiny; IKZ “Bilsk”.
Petrenko, V. G., Maslov, V. Ie., Kantorovich, A. R. 2006. Pogrebeniia podrostkov v mogilnike Novozavedennoe II. In: Petrenko,
V. G., Yablonskiy, L. T. (red.). Drevnosti skifskoi epokhi. Moskva: IA RAN, p. 388-423.
Piankov, A. V., Riabkova, T. V., Zelenskii, Iu. V. 2019. Kompleks ranneskifskogo vremeni kurgana № 11 mogilnika Lebedi V
v Prikubane. Arkheologicheskie vesti, 25, p. 206-228.
Romashko, V. A., Skoryi, S. A., Filimonov, D. G. 2014. Ranneskifskoe pogrebenie v kurgane u sela Kitaigorod v Priorelie.
Rossiiskaia arkheologiia, 4, p. 107-117.
Smirnov, K. F. 1964. Savromaty. Ranniаіa istoriia i kultura sarmatov. Moskva: Nauka.
Smirnova, G. I. 1979. Kurgany u sela Perebykovtsy — novyi mogilnik skifskoi arkhaiki na Srednem Dnestre. Trudy
Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 20, p. 37-67.
Smirnova, G. I. 1993. Pamiatniki Srednego Podnestrovia v khronologicheskoi skheme ranneskifskoi kultury. Rossiiskaia
arkheologiia, 2, p. 101-118.
Smirnova, G. I. 2006. Zapadno-Podolskaia gruppa ranneskifskikh pamiatnikov v svete issledovanii k kontsu XX stoletiia. In:
Petrenko, V. G., Iablonskii, L. T. (eds.). Drevnosti skifskoi epokhi. Moskva: Nauka, p. 66-92.
Smirnova, G. I., Vakhtina, M. Iu., Kashuba, M. T. 2018. Periodizatsiia i khronologiia Nemirovskogo goroda v rannem zheleznom
veke. In: Smirnova, G. I., Vakhtina, M. Iu., Kashuba, M. T., Starkova, E. G. (eds.). Gorodishche Nemirov na reke Iuzhnyi
Bug. Sankt-Peterburg: Gosudarstvennyi Ermitazh RAN, p. 223-236.
ISSN 0235-3490 (Print), ISSN 2616-499X (Online). Археологія, 2024, № 2 75
Tolstikov, V. P. 2017. O vremeni osnovaniia i arkhitekturnoi srede rannego Pantikapeia po materialam noveishikh raskopok.
Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, LXXXVIII, p. 259-269.
Fialko, O. Ye., Boltryk, Yu. V. 2003, Napad skifiv na Trakhtemyrivske horodyshche. Kyiv: IA NANU.
Khokhorovski, Ia. 1994. Skifskie nabegi na territoriu Srednei Evropy. Rossiiskaia arkheologiia, 3, p. 49-63.
Khokhorovski, Ia. 2013. Skify i Sredniaia Evropa — istoricheskaia interpretatsiia arkheologicheskoi deistvitelnosti. Vestnik
Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 3 (23), p. 57-73.
Chernenko, E. V., Rolle-Gerts, R., Skoryi, S. A., Makhortykh, S. V., Gerts, V. Iu., Belozor, V. P. 2005. Issledovaniia sovmestnoi
Ukrainsko-Nemetskoy arkheologicheskoi ekspeditsii v 2004 g. Kyiv: Institut arkheologi NANU.
Shaporda, O. M., Korotia, O. V. 2018. Pasportyzatsiia obiektiv kultrnoi spadshchyny Bilskoho mikrorehionu, In: Korost, I. I.
(vidp. red.). Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia Bilskoho horodyshcha-2017. Kyiv; Kotelva: TSP NAN Ukrayiny; UTOPIK,
p. 240-249.
Shelekhan, A. V. 2017. Vyroby z metalu i pytannia khronolohii horodyshcha. In: Kravchenko, E. A. (ed.). Khotivske horodyshche
(novitni doslidzhennia). Kyiv (b.v.), p. 61-68.
Shramko, B. A. 1994. Novye raskopki kurganov v mogilnike Skorobor. Drevnosti, 1, p. 102-126.
Shramko, I. B., Zadnikov, S. A. 2020. Doslidzhennia nekropoliu Skorobir u 2019 r. In: Korost, I. I. (vidp. red.). Arkheolohichni
doslidzhennia Bilskoho horodyshch-2019. Kyiv; Kotelva: TSP NAN Ukrayiny; UTOPIK, p. 5-13.
Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J. 1985. Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Chochorowski, J. 1985. Die Vekerezug Kultur Charakteristik der Funde. Prace Archeologiczne, 36, p. 1-162.
Chochorowski, J. 2014. Scytowie a Europa Środkowa — historyczna interpretacja archeologicznej rzeczywistości. Materiały i
Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego, XXXV, s. 9-58.
Czopek, S. 2021. On the Synchronization of the Chronology of Phenomena and Artefacts. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 73/2,
p. 375-391.
Daragan, M., Didenko, S. 2021. Scythian Quiver Sets of the Archaic Period: State of the Art and the Chronological Consider-
ations. Tyragetia, s.n., vol. XV (XXX), nr. 1, 2021, s. 155-188.
Diachenko, A., Sobkowiak-Tabaka, I. 2022. Self-Organized Cultural Cycles and the Uncertainty of Archaeological Thought.
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 29(3), p. 1034-1057.
Grechko, D. S. 2020а. About the Dating of the Scythian Type Arrowheads of the Late Hallstatt Period from Central Europe.
Arheologia, 4, p. 12-27.
Grechko, D. S. 2020b. Chronological Schemes of Central Europe of the Late Hallstatt Period (НaD): New Opportunities for
Synchronization and Refinement of Dates. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 72 (2), s. 585-605.
Grechko, D. S. 2021. How Far Did the Nomads Go to the West Around the Middle of the 6th Century BC? Śląskie Sprawozdania
Archeologiczne, 63, p. 15-24.
Hellmuth, A. 2006. Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten skythischen Pfeilspitzen aus der befestigten Höhensiedlung von
Smolenice-Molpir. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archälogie, 128. Bonn: R. Habelt.
Moosleitner, F. 1979. Ein hallstattzeitlicher “Furstensitz” am Hellbrunnerberg bei Salzburg, Germania, 57, p. 53-74.
Sezgin, Y. 2017. Arkaik Dönemde Teos’ta ticari amphora üretimi: sоrunlar ve gözlemler. Anatolia, 43. p. 15-39.
Shelekhan, O., Lifantii, O. 2016. The Elements of the Horse Bridle from the Severynivka Hillfort. Baltic–Pontic Studies, 21,
p. 219-254.
Szabó, G. V., Czajlik, Z., Reményi, L. 2014. Traces of an Iron Age Armed Conflict. New Topographical Results from the Re-
search into Verebce-bérc at Dédestapolcsány I. Hungarian Archaeology E-journal/2014 spring, p. 1-7.
|