Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga:
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
Simferopolʹ
Sonat
2007
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Item Description: | In kyrill. Schr., russ. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora |
| Physical Description: | 407 S. Ill., Kt. |
| ISBN: | 9789668111846 |
Staff View
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV022468900 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20100719 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 070618s2007 ab|| |||| 00||| rus d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789668111846 |9 978-966-8111-84-6 | ||
| 020 | |z 9789668111842 |9 978-966-8111-84-2 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)163617446 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV022468900 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a rus | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a DK508.9.K47 | |
| 084 | |a 6,12 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Golenko, Vladimir K. |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |c V. K. Golenko |
| 246 | 1 | 3 | |a Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora |
| 264 | 1 | |a Simferopolʹ |b Sonat |c 2007 | |
| 300 | |a 407 S. |b Ill., Kt. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a In kyrill. Schr., russ. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Archaeology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Auxiliary sciences of history | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Archäologie | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Funde | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) |z Ukraine |z Kerch peninsula | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Crimea | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Ukraine | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom) |x Antiquities | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine) |x Antiquities | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Halbinsel Kertsch |0 (DE-588)4497586-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Halbinsel Kertsch |0 (DE-588)4497586-7 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. |A z |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015676426 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09014 |g 38 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09014 |g 477 |
Record in the Search Index
| _version_ | 1804136555247304704 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | СОДЕРЖАНИЕ
ГЛАВА
I.
1.
1.
ФИЗИКО-ГЕОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ ОЧЕРК ЮЖНОГО ПОБЕРЕЖЬЯ
КЕРЧЕНСКОГО ПОЛУОСТРОВА И ОБЩАЯ ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКА
РЕГИОНА
..................................................................................................................10
1.2.
ГЕОМОРФОЛОГИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК (Раздел подготовлен Клюкиным
A.A.
и Голенко В.К.)
..........................................................................................................15
1.3.
ГИДРОГЕОЛОГИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ПРИЛЕГАЮЩЕЙ ТЕРРИТОРИИ
......22
1.4.
ОБЗОР ПИСЬМЕННЫХ ИСТОЧНИКОВ И НЕКОТОРЫЕ
СПОРНЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ ИСТОЧНИКОВЕДЕНИЯ
................................................25
1.5.
ИСТОРИЯ ИЗУЧЕНИЯ ДРЕВНОСТЕЙ ОПУКА
...........................................50
1.6.
ПРОБЛЕМА ЛОКАЛИЗАЦИИ «ПОЛИСА» КИММЕРИК
............................64
ГЛАВА
II.
ФОРТИФИКАЦИОННЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ГОРЫ
ОПУК И ЕЕ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
...............................................................................73
11.1.
ВВЕДЕНИЕ. СТРАТЕГИЯ И ТАКТИКА ОБОРОНЫ
....................................73
II.
I.A.
ВОЕННАЯ ТАКТИКА СКИФОВ, САРМАТОВ И БОСПОРЯН
...............74
11.1.
В. СТРАТЕГИЯ И ТАКТИКА ОБОРОНЫ БОСПОРА
....................................75
11.2.
ГОРА ОПУК И ОСНОВНЫЕ ПРИНЦИПЫ АНТИЧНОЙ
ФОРТИФИКАЦИИ
...................................................................................................86
11.3.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ГОРОДИЩА КИММЕРИК
...........91
II.3.A.
КРЕПОСТНЫЕ СТЕНЫ И БАШНИ
...........................................................91
Н.З.В.АКРОПОЛЬ КИММЕРИКА И ЕГО ВНУТРЕННЯЯ ЗАСТРОЙКА
..........97
П.З.С. «ЗАПАДНАЯ» ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНАЯ СТЕНА И ПРОБЛЕМА
ЛОКАЛИЗАЦИИ ПОРТА КИММЕРИКА
..............................................................102
11.4.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ЦИТАДЕЛИ НА
ВЕРШИННОМ ПЛАТО ГОРЫ ОПУК
....................................................................107
II.4.A.
КУРТИНЫ И БАШНИ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
..........................................................107
II.4.B.
ВНУТРЕННИЕ ПОСТРОЙКИ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
...............................................112
II.4.C.K
ВОПРОСУ О ВРЕМЕНИ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
........................122
HAD.
СООРУЖЕНИЯ НА ПЛАТО ВНЕ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.........................................135
II
АЕ. ЗОЛЬНИК ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.................................................................................135
II.4.F.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ВОДОРАЗДЕЛА ГОРЫ
ОПУК И ДРУГИЕ ВЫНЕСЕННЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ
.......................................161
II.4.J.
АНТРОПОГЕННОЕ ТЕРРАСИРОВАНИЕ СЕВЕРНОГО СКЛОНА Г.
ОПУК
..........................................................................................................................166
Н.5. ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ ГОРЫ ОПУК..
175
II.5.A.
КОЯШСКИЙ ВАЛ
.........................................................................................175
П.5.В.
УКРЕПЛЕНИЯ НА ГОРЕ КОНЧЕК
............................................................178
11.6.
ФОРТИФИКАЦИОННАЯ СИСТЕМА КИММЕРИКА
.................................179
ГЛАВА
III.
АРХЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
....................................................................................................188
111.1.
ВЛИЯНИЕ ПРИРОДНЫХ ФАКТОРОВ НА СОСТОЯНИЕ
АРХЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ПАМЯТНИКОВ РЕГИОНА
............................................188
111.2.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ДОАНТИЧНОГО ПЕРИОДА
..............................................191
Ш.З. ПАМЯТНИКИ АНТИЧНОГО ВРЕМЕНИ
...................................................195
Ш.З.А. РАННЕАНТИЧНОЕ ПОСЕЛЕНИЕ НА ХОЛМЕ «А»
..............................195
111.3.
В. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК
..............................................197
Ш.З.С. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ДОЛИНЫ КЫЗ-АУЛЬСКОГО
МАЯКА
......................................................................................................................200
Ш.З.Э. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ ЧЕБАКСКОЙ
БАЛКИ
.......................................................................................................................206
Ш.З.Е. ПАЛЕОГРАФИЯ КИРКОЯШСКОГО СОЛЕНОГО ОЗЕРА И
ПАМЯТНИКИ КИРКОЯШСКОЙ КОТЛОВИНЫ
.................................................209
III.3.F.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ КОЯШСКОГО (ЭЛЬКЕНСКОГО,
ОПУКСКОГО) СОЛЕНОГО ОЗЕРА
........................................................................213
Ш.З.Ј.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ УЗУНЛАРСКОГО ОЗЕРА
.................218
111.4.
ПОЗДНЕАНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.....................................................................................................221
111.5.
РАННЕСРЕДНЕВЕКОВЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.....................................................................................................233
111.6.
ПРИРОДНОЕ И АНТРОПОГЕННОЕ ВОЗДЕЙСТВИЕ НА
ЭКОСИСТЕМЫ РЕГИОНА В ИСТОРИЧЕСКОЕ ВРЕМЯ И НЕКОТОРЫЕ
ОСОБЕННОСТИ ЕГО ХОЗЯЙСТВЕННОГО ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЯ
(Раздел написан совместно с А.А.Клюкиным)
.......................................................243
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ. ОСНОВНЫЕ ЭТАПЫ ОСВОЕНИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.....................................................................................................258
SUMMARY. ANCIENT KIMMERIKON AND ITS CHORA
...................................266
БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ И СПИСОК СОКРАЩЕНИЙ
...................................................280
ИЛЛЮСТРАТИВНЫЙ МАТЕРИАЛ
...............................................:.......................304
SUMMARY
ANCIENT KIMMERIKON AND ITS CHORA
Ancient Kimmerion is one of the insuffi¬
ciently explored «minor» towns of Bosporus.
Owing to recording of reliable geographic
reference-point
—
sea rocks called
«Slups»
(«Elken-Kaya» in Crimean-Tatarian)
—
in
rather late1
Périples
of
Pontus
by Anonymo¬
us Author (Pseudo-Arrian) the European site
Kimmerikon. situated on the slopes of
Opuk
Mountain (Black Sea coast of Kerch Penins¬
ula) is well localized. Anonymous Author in¬
forms us:
«
The distance between town
Kuta
(Kuteon site
—
VG.) and Kimmerikon is
60
stadii,
8
miles; there is mooring protected
from western winds. In front of it in the sea,
not far from the shore there are situated two
small rocky islands. The complete distance
between the mouth of Meotian Lake (Azov
Sea
—
VG.) and Kimmerikon is
300
stadii
or
40
miles and the distance between Pantik-
apaiton and Kimmerikon is
240
stadii,
or
32
miles» [Anon., PPE,
76-77].
An other town
with the similar ethnikon
—
Kimmerion. un-
localizated jet,
—
according to the literary
sources, was situated on the opposite, Asiatic
coast of Kimmerian Bosporus.
Existence on both coasts of Kimmerian
Bosporus of two towns bearing common etlin-
ikon
—
European Kimmerikon
(ΚιμμΓρικον)
and Asiatic Kimmerion
(Κιμμεριον)
-
can be
easily explained from the point of view an¬
cient Greek literary tradition. But this fact
and closed consonance of the names has led
to situation when localization of both towns,
determination of authenticity of evidences of
ancient authors about each center and deter¬
mination of their role in the history of Bosp¬
orus became one of the most debatable prob¬
lems of historiography and study of original
sources, and the discussion of it does not stop
till present days.
The complication of evaluation of the
role of both towns in the history of Ancient
Greek colonies in the Bosporus and later in
the history of Bosporian Kingdom is first of
all connected with the evidence of the other
author
—
Strabo
—
dedicated to the Asian
Kimmerion [Strabo, XI.11,4-5]. In spite of
accuracy of Strabo study and trustworth¬
iness of his sources, in Strabo s description
of Kimmerion can be find some diffidence
of the ancient author, having described the
settlement (village) Kimmerikon (Kimmerion,
Kimmeris) on the Asiatic bank of Bosporus,
in the following paragraph he lias made a
reservation that «in former times Kimmeri¬
kon was a town on the isthmus and locked
the isthmus with ditch and rampart» [Stra¬
bo, XI.
2,5].
Though this evidence is discrep¬
ant and still debatable, it remains very important
for the history of Bosporus, especially in
the light of discovery of the Tribute List of
425 424
ВС
of the I Athenian Naval Allian¬
ce foimd on the Athenian Acropolis. In this
psephisma among the otlier towns of Euxine
Tribute Region Kimmerikon was probably
mentioned. Some scholars aspire to recogn¬
ize in the Tribute List the Asian, not Europ¬
ean, Kimmerikon which as it was mentioned
above is not still localized in nature. But it is
not possible to ignore important evidence of
Pliny who marked out that at previous times
tlie Asian Kimmerion
(Κιμμεριον)
lias got
another name
—
it lias been called Cerberion
[Plin..
NH, VI,
18].
Another author
—
Pseu-
do-Scymn
—
calls the neighboring to Asian
town the town of Kepoi as a colony of Mile¬
tus underling its
polis
origin and contrasting
it to neighboring Kimmeris «founded (and
renamed
—
VG.) by Bosporian tyrants» [Ps.
Scymn..
896-899].
As far as the Asian town
was re-founded already during tlie Bosporian
«state colonization» of lands adjoining to Ki¬
mmerian Bosporus which lias taken place not
earlier then the beginning of the V century
ВС,
the renamed town already had no politi¬
cal independence and correspondingly could
not be the member of Athenian Alliance. On
tlie Northern Black Sea Littoral there are no
other centers which names started with letters
Κιμ-.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
267
The critical analysis of literary sources
and archaeological situation on the
Opuk
Mountain and its environs shows that Strabo
really mixed the evidences about both towns
and his information about former localiza¬
tion of Kimmerion is to the point of Euro¬
pean Kimmerikon whose strategically role in
fortification system of Bosporus is doubtless
—
in the visual distance of it, on the north¬
ern coast of Uzunlar Salt Lake the famous
Uzunlar (Asander s) rampart with deep ditch
finishes. Moreover, on the isthmus of Uzun¬
lar and Koyash Salt Lake, on whose south¬
eastern bank Kimmerikon is situated, are
still visible the remains of the other rampart
and ditch. On the bank of Koyash salt Lake
this pampart was strengthened by settlement.
The excavations of it have shown that it was
founded not earlier the first half of the IV
century
ВС.
It represents a dwelling of two-
three rooms completely demolished and a
paved with milestone tiles little yard. Some
other dwellings were situated near. The small
dimensions of settlement make possible to
suppose that it was a guard point on the ram¬
part. Behind the Koyash rampart there were
situated the settlements of Kimmerikon
chora
meanwhile three of them dated by the IV-III
centuries
AB
practically attach the rampart
from its eastern inner side.
Simultaneity of erection and functional
similarity of both ramparts is doubtless: they
are common fortification system locking
at Kimmerikon the general defensive line
which crossing Kerch Peninsula from Azov
to the Black Sea defended the Eastern part
of peninsula which was the native Bospo-
rian lands in the Crimea. Both from point of
view of Ancient Greeks and modern opinion
this system was an impressive military and
engineer installations. If we ll keep in mind
the stages of transgression of the level of the
Black Sea when the level of the sea in the
first centuries AD reached the modern one
and even exceeded it, the Uzunlar Lake at the
present times running deep into land about
10
km at the times of Strabo was probably a sea
gulf and intensified impression about Kim¬
merikon as about the town situated on the
isthmus between
Pontus
and Meotian Lake (a
large Kazantip Bay). It is important to note
that, according to the evidence of
Constan¬
tine
Porphirogenitus (which was confirmed
by archaeological data2), by the same defen¬
sive line and through the town Kimmerikon
(«Kibernik» of
Constantine)
the final border
of the Late Bosporian State ran [Const. Por-
ph.,
De adm.
Imp.,
53]
(See below).
Opuk
Mountain is one of the highest he¬
ights of Kerch Peninsula
(184
m), it is based
of limestone of Meotian Layer of not more
than
50
m
of thickness which is laid under
by Sarmatian clays. From the ancient relief
of the mountain not great structural-denudat¬
ive top plateau of triangular form armored by
stratums of limestone there only remained. It
is situated on the altitude
160—184
m. The
slopes of mountain are undergone with ancie¬
nt and new landslides which have complicated
the building of the town and have stipulated
the poor safety of the site in general. Artifacts
show the activation of processes of landslide
in the maritime part of
Opuk
in Historical Pe¬
riod
—
after IV
—
II centuries
ВС
and before
VIII—
IX centuries AD. In the first half of the
IV century AD on the stable surface of the
top plateau there a citadel was erected (See
below) which was well joined into surroun¬
dings and did not get seismic deformations.
The sites of Early Medieval Period on
Opuk
were also well joined into modern landslide
relief and on them there were not found trac¬
es of catastrophic motions. These facts make
possible to specify the date of the latest ca¬
tastrophic seismic-gravitate dislocations and
to limit them by the IV century
ВС
and III
century AD
—
just the time when ancient
Kimmerikon actively existed. At that time in
the Black Sea the so named «Nymphaion»
transgression was taking place. As a result of
268
Summary
transgression the processes of abrasion and
caused by it processes of landslides on the
maritime slope of the mountain. But all these
complications of geological situation compe¬
nsated by abundance of fresh water of cond¬
ensate origin, building materials and fertility
of lands in adjoining coastal steppe.
First, who supposed that the remains of
ancient urban fortifications situated on the
slopes and top plateau of
Opuk
Mountain be¬
long to Bosporian town of Kimmerikon was
the famous Russian explorer and traveler Pet¬
er Simon Pallas
( 1741 — 1811 ),
who was tra¬
veling in Taurika in the end of
XVIII
century.
While detailed investigation and small exca¬
vations of antiquities of
Opuk
belong to the
famous Russian explorer and collector, one
of the founder of Kerch Museum of Antiqui¬
ties
—
Paul Augustine Dubrux
(1773-1835).
In collaboration with Dubrux investigations
on
Opuk
mountain was undertaking the first
director of Kerch Museum
Jean Mare de B1-
aramberg
( 1772 — 1831 ).
Very soon the pas¬
sion of Russian archaeologists for antiquities
of Pantikapaion and neighboring Bosporian
towns together with increasing of investigat¬
ions on the Asian side of Bosporus excluded
Kimmerikon from attention of investigators
nearly for a century. Only in
1927
expedition
of Kerch Museum guided by director of mu¬
seum
—
Yu.Yu.
Marti during only one field
season has investigated the coast from
Akra
to Kimmerikon (the last is situated in the dis¬
tance of
50
km westward of Kerch in the poor
inhabited region of peninsula).
The location of European Kimmerikon is
traditionally localized on three maritime hills
of the south-western slope of
Opuk
(«wes¬
tern site»)
—
between the shore of the sea
and Koyash salt Lake. As far as the date of
foundation of Kimmerikon is not proved arc-
haeologically, several archaeological objects
situated on the slopes pretender to right to
be called the earliest Kimmerikon. They are
—
the mentioned above «western» site, early
Greek settlement («Hill A»
)
on the south¬
eastern maritime slope and some other sites
which will be described below. Dubrux for
example, supposed that on
Opuk
Mountain
there have existed just two different towns
—
Kimmerikon and Kutaion
—,
and the bo¬
rder between them has been a road running
from Koyash Lake to the main ancient «fou¬
ntain» of the mountain functioning in present
time. Not great excavations undertaken on
the «western» site by different investigators
—
Dubrux (first half of
XIX
century), Yu.Yu.
Marti
(1928),
I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kraglikova
(1948-1951)
and by the author of present
paper
(1989-1997)
have revealed mainly the
building remains of the first centuries AD
while some finds of early artifacts in the cul¬
tural layers made possible to suppose that the
settlement on the Western slope «already exi¬
sted in the V century
ВС»
(Kruglikova,
1952,
P.
57; 1958,
P.
222).
The absence of Late
Classical building remains I.B.Zeest explain¬
ed by the fact that «in conditions of mountain
rocky country the cultural deposits belonging
to the previous period of urban life could not
to remain: probably they has been cleared
away to the surface of the rock in the process
of subsequent urban life» (Zeest,
1949,
P.
98),
like, for example, in Pantikapaiton,
Chersonesus and some other towns of Tau¬
rika.
As it is possible to judge on the basis of
historical topography of site, observations of
previous investigators and results of recent
explorations and small excavations, the for¬
tification system of the site consisted of few
elements. First of all, the special role played
the relief, particularly the rocky ridges surr¬
ounding territory in the East and North-East
and precipice shore on the South. The fort¬
ifications of Kimmerikon themselves were
rated at repulse of attacks from land and sea:
the territory of site was surrounded by walls
with towers3 which were able to stand the
siege of short duration even with the use of
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
269
battering-rams. It is proved by constructive
peculiarities of «wall-fences» which have
1,5
m
width and filling by clay and small ston¬
es inner space. By special wall adjoining the
south-western part of the site the port part of
town between the sea and Koyash Salt Lake
was also flanked. On one of maritime rocks
the fire-place of light-house was hewed on
the rocky surface. The separate walls were on
the foot of the maritime hills of the site. In
this case, the separate fortification of Acrop¬
olis hill and last ones played an additional de¬
fensive role, because the burst into the urban
territory enemy found himself in depression
between two fortified hills and rested on the
steep slope of the mountain. Any traces of ra¬
mparts and ditches on the borders of the site
were not found.
In
1947—1951
archaeological investig¬
ations of antiquities of
Opuk,
especially of
Kimmerikon site were undertaken by Ker¬
ch State Historical-Archaeological Museum
(I.B.Zeest) and Department of Classical arc¬
haeology of Institute of archaeology4 (I.T.Kr-
uglikova, D.B.Shelov) which on the first
stage made possible to define more exactly
the chronology of different archaeological
objects situate on
Opuk.
By excavations of
1948—1950
by I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kruglikova
were discovered the remains of dwelling and
producing assemblage of II-III centuries AD
situated on the terrace of one of the Maritime
hills of the site. The assemblage was skillfu¬
lly entered in natural relief of the hill. In the
central part of assemblage a paved by limes¬
tone tiles yard was situated. Minimum three
rooms covered by clay roofs adjoin the yard.
From the East the. assemblage was limited
bj^
breast-wall. One of the rooms communicat¬
ed with the yard by means of stairs built of
hewed limestone blocks. In an other room
there were found stone mortars, grinding-
stone, working table and handle grain grater
(Zeest,
1950,
P.
97).
It was a manufacturing
room which communicated with the yard by
means of door and window and with the other
—
by door. By excavations there was unc¬
overed granary situated in the room which
was practically whole hewed in the rock. The
big dimensions of grain-pits show the trade
character of manufacturing. The assemblage
has perished in the fire which I.B.Zeest dated
by the III century AD (not earlier the middle
of the century
—
V.G.) and I.T.Kruglikova
—
by the end of the III or beginning of the
IV centuries AD.
In
1950 — 1951
by the same expedition
near the maritime precipice an other similar
assemblage partly destroyed by the coastal
abrasion was excavated. It represented an as¬
semblage of the I-II centuries AD consisted
of several rooms with grain-pits which was
limited by powerful external wall. Accord¬
ing to the peculiarities of relief, the uncov¬
ered part of assemblage ruined down to the
sea. The excavations of an area adjoining the
assemblage gave an exclusively important
materials: in the sandy soil stretching under
the cultural depositions of «Hellenistic» lay¬
ers there were found numerous fragments of
hand-made pottery of Late Bronze Epoch.
In
1952—1991
the
Opuk
Mountain and its
environs have passed into jurisdiction of Mi¬
nistry of Defense of the USSR and investig¬
ations were stopped. They were re-newed by
author only in
1989.
In
1991
near «flour-grin¬
ding workshop» there was excavated an other
assemblage adjoining the workshop above by
the slope. It represents an yard paved with li¬
mestone tile also strengthened by breast-wa¬
lls which limited an assemblage from North
and East and semi cellar room with dug in
pythoses of Bosporian production. The living
room of which only rocky floor and eastern
wall remained, was also partly hewed in the
rock. The assemblage was also hardly ruin¬
ed by the processes of abrasion and landslip.
The fissure crawling away origin practically
completely ruined the semi-cellar room with
pythoses, a part of a yard, other constructions
270
Summary
of assemblage ruined down the sea. Inhabita¬
nts of assemblage have made some attempts
to stop this process by the means of pouring
soil, but soon have had to leave the assemb¬
lage. Among the finds found during excava¬
tions of this assemblage there predominated
fragment of storage amphorae of Bosporian
and Southern
Pontic
production, fragments
of red-lacquered and red-clay table pottery,
fragments of typically bosporian hand-made
kitchen pottery. In the whole, the assembla¬
ge can be dated by II
—
first half of the IV
centuries AD while the process of forming
of fissure has started just very soon after the
foundation of assemblage.
The inhabitants of Kimmerikon of that
times were fairly well off and the general ec¬
onomical level of live of population of Ki-
mmerion in II-III centuries AD probably did
not differ from the level of the other ordinary
Bosporian town like Ilurat and Tiritaka, toge¬
ther with neighboring Kutaion it represented
one of the centers of Bosporian grain trade.
The grain-pits of large dimension for grain
keeping had a pear-shaped form with stony
facing of the mouth which was covered by
limestone tile. They were of
6.5
m
depth with
diameter of bottom
2,2
m
and contained up
to
76
cubic meters of grain while all pits of
one assemblage contained
228
cubic meters.
For example, in Pantikapaiton the maximum
capaciousness of pits was only about
12-22
cubic meters. That is why it is possible to un¬
derline the trade character of grain producing
in Kimmerikon in the I
-
beginning of the IV
centuries AD. The find of pithos containing
the remains of salted fish in one of the rooms,
pyramidal plummets, fragments limewater-
like coating found in cultural deposits show
that grain production was not only one sphere
of economic activity of inhabitants.
The problem of localization of «Early
Greek» Kimmerikon from which the master¬
ing of environs of
Opuk
had started, has got
an actuality in the light of debated problem
of Kimmerikon membership in I Athenian
Naval Alliance.
Some scholars tried to connect the rema¬
ins of
polis
infrastructure of Kimmerikon of
the VI-V centuries
ВС
with remains of early
Greek settlement at the «Hill A» (which I am
going to describe a few lines below) suppos¬
ing that later on it was moved to the place of
«Western» site but this supposition contradict
with real archaeological and geological situa¬
tion on
Opuk
Mountain.
In
1950
on the south-eastern maritime
slope of mountain, on the distance of more
then
1,5
km eastward of «Western» site Ki¬
mmerikon, the were found building remains
and cultural deposits of early Greek settlem¬
ent. During excavations there were uncover¬
ed the remains of large dwelling assemblage
situated on the narrow maritime terrace. The
hill called by investigators as hill «A» on wh¬
ich foot the settlement is situated, represents
the stable rock of degraded mountain which
lies on the landslide south-eastern maritime
slope of the mountain. The assemblage has
an unusual planning consisting of four sep¬
arate isolated rooms with personal outlet to
the door-lying paved yard. The rooms are at¬
tached to the common blank wall and one of
the rooms was of household purpose. Three
other rooms of small dimension had floors
slightly deepened into the ground. All rooms
had door-ways with the traces of fastening
wooden doors. In two rooms fire-places were
built of lime stone tiles erected on verges. In
the third room the fire was kindling just on
the floor and this fact is testified by a spot
of fired clay in the center of the room. The
grain pits with covered with clay walls and
deepened into the virgin rock were met in
two rooms. In the yard of assemblage there
were situated objects of household
—
small
annex, dust-hole covered with limestone tile
and stone box built of limestone blocks erec¬
ted on verges etc.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
111
The assemblage has taken two building
periods and few stages of pouring of floors.
The found artifacts are common for the ordi¬
nary Bosporian towns
ofthat
period
—
num¬
erous fragments of storage or transport amp¬
horae, mainly of Chian production, fragments
of black-lacquered kylikes, lekythoi and oth¬
er kind of vessels,
terracota
figurines, hand¬
made pottery, bones of small cattle, leaves of
mollusks etc. The artifacts permitted to date
the settlement by the end of the VI
—
beg¬
inning of the IV centuries
ВС.
The cultural
deposits of the settlement cover the remains
of the settlement of the Epoch of Late Bronze
with mud-huts deepened into the virgin loa¬
my soil. The settlements are separated with
chronological period about
500
years.
The dwelling assemblage was erected in
the end of the VI century
ВС5
and in the V
century
ВС
here were undertaken some reco¬
nstruction works: the floors were heightened,
new fire-places and grain-pits were built and
the pavement was repaired.
Investigator underlined singularities of
planning of the assemblage (Kruglikova,
1952,
P.
64).
S.D.Kryzhitskiy characterizing
this building as an assemblage of blocking
houses of megaron type, writes that this type
of houses «can be hardly relate to category
of the most typical Greek schemes. But ne-
ther-the-less, the type of <collective> farm¬
houses (ancient Torik) revives in the North¬
ern Black Sea Littoral at Hellenistic Period,
while megaron type but in developed variati¬
ons was characteristic for Asia Minor during
the whole Period of Antiquity» (Kryzhitskiy,
1993,
P.
45 — 46).
The settlement perished
in the beginning of the IV century
ВС.
eit¬
her as result of earthquake or some changes
of political situation caused by war between
ancient Feodosia and Bosporus (Kruglikova,
1958,
P.
243).
The first explanation, on my
point of view, is more acceptable: I.T.Krugli-
kova was the first who noticed that the slope
surface of mountain was more plane in anc¬
ient times but its relief has changed «in the
result of earthquake and influence» of water;
there have formed new ravines, the part of sl¬
ope including «the biggest part of settlement
of the VI-IV centuries
ВС»
moved apart and
crashed down the sea, and as a result «the rest
territory between sea and hill at present time
presents the virgin soil turned out as a result
of splitting off and falling of soil» (Krugliko¬
va,
1958,
P.
234).
Similar movements of soil are not sole
on that section of the slope
—
they take pla¬
ce even at present time6. On the basis of our
excavations on the Northern periphery of the
site we can state that the deposits of the Late
Bronze Epoch stretch under the cultural layer
of early Greek settlement before its foundati¬
on were covered with sterile alluvium loamy
soil of
0,3-0,5
m
thickness. Moreover, the
look micro relief of terrace is still changing
under influence of new landslides and proc¬
ess of abrasion.
The small dimensions of the settlement
did not allow investigator to recognize in
it the early Kimmerikon. But observations
of surroundings of it by l.T.Kruglikova and
later by the author provided important resu¬
lt
—
the inexpressive remains of buildings,
areas of ruined cultural layers, separate pits
of the VI
—
V centuries
ВС
were met on the
scaled territory of the maritime Southern slo¬
pe of the mountain. Modern surface of some
terraces and depressions shows that landslide
processes took place there recently and the
slope is in temporary stable condition. In the
«chaos of stones» of the Southern slope at
some sections of it near settlement there are
visible fragments of masonry and buildings
including fragment of powerful wall of
2,5
m
width built of limestone blocks about
1,0
and
more
—
all disfigured by landslips. Some of
these remains could belong either to fortific¬
ations of Early Kimmerikon, or to fortificati¬
ons of the maritime part of fortress of the IV-
VI centuries AD (See below). Never-the-less,
272
Summary
fragments of amphorae and other pottery of
both period were found on the modern surfa¬
ce of «stone chaos», in alluvium soil of coast¬
al recipices and stony beaches. Moreover, the
fragments of amphorae of the second quarter
of the VI
—
V centuries
ВС
and of the first
centuries AD were met in numerous quantity
on surface on different sections of this slope.
The observations carried out by the auth¬
or revealed the anthropogene terraces on the
northern more stable slope of the mountain
(under citadel
—
see below) with the remains
of breast-wall and dwellings also inhabited
from the edge of the VI century
ВС,
there
were also found artifacts dated from the edge
of VI-V centuries
ВС
to the Early Mediev¬
al Period. Moreover, on the rest sections of
maritime there were also found remains of
small archaeological objects which gave arti¬
facts of the VI-V centuries
ВС,
of Hellenistic
Period and first centuries AD. All these facts
show that as initially and later on apart from
territories of the «Western» site and settleme¬
nt at «Hill A» there were mastered all slopes
of mountain.
So, the problem of precise localization
of early
«polis»
although remains opened
for debates and further single-minded exca¬
vations but at present time it has got some
clearness: as we can see, the concrete pra-Ki-
mmerikon has not existed as an urban unity
which later was moved to the other slope of
mountain, while the
polis Kimmerikon
par¬
adoxically existed. It is known that in Anti¬
quity, the existence of urban center was not
the determining factor of
polis:
«such defi¬
nition of
polis put
first and foremost one but
not most important peculiarity of this social
organism: rather small territory and urban ce¬
nter united around it. The first peculiarity is
not determining one and it is derivative from
more important characteristics of
polis,
the
other is incorrect. This proves the example of
two most famous poleis of Greece. In Attica
,
for example, there were not only one but two
urban centers (Athens), Sparta has no urban
center at all it represented the society of five
villages. The same system of settling we see
in Tarentum. On the whole in Greece there
were widely spread political institutions wh¬
ich have no own urban centers but taken as
polies as
by their own citizens and other
Hel¬
lens
too. Probably, same political institutions
were more typical in the Archaic Epoch, to
this testifies Phukididus
[1,5,1 ]
but more wide
they were spread and later
—
up to the first
centuries AD. At any case Pausanius knows
political formations devoid of urban centers
but having
polis
status as we can understa¬
nd from his description of Panoneum [X,
4]»
which represented itself a village situated al¬
ong mountain stream (Greece in Antiquity, I,
1983,
P.
10-11).
At present time we can surely note that
Kimmerikon also has not formed the regular
urban structure. This fact can be explained by
different reasons, and first of all, by compli¬
cated geological structure of mountain: in its
landslide relief there are fixed up minimum
(V.G.) three catastrophic events. First was
great and took part in geological time, pro¬
bably in Late Pleistocene. Other events took
part not long ago
—
in Historical Time. With
them the activation of great Late Pleistocene
maritime landslide and formation of a new
ditch in its head part are connected (Klukin,
1995,
P.
112 — 117).
The date of this activa¬
tion testify deformation of the shore and ar¬
chaeological sites, including settlement «Hill
A», situated there. These deformations could
cause the moving of cultural deposits to the
sea or burying of these layers by landslide
soil. During the time of existence of Bospor¬
ian State it, as far as
Opuk
mountain, under¬
went earthquakes for several times (Vinokur-
ov,Nikonov, 1999,Tolstikov, 1999,Nikonov,
2001).
Some of them, like earthquake of
63
ВС
were disastrous, demolishing complete
Bosporian towns
(«Pontus
has absorbed near
Meotis towns Pyrrha and Antissa»
—
И
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
273
NH, II,
206,
situated in the distance of few
dozen km off
Opuk)
and devastating envir¬
onments. To antiquities of
Opuk
having not
ordinary geological structure the consequen¬
ces of earthquakes were not less destructive.
Probably, in the time of Strabo the European
Kimmerikon either could be still lying in rui¬
ns or it only started to rehabilitate itself after
earthquake of
63
ВС.
Probably it was a rea¬
son of contamination of two different towns
with the similar names and poor knowledge
of geographers of that time. The presence on
top plateau on
Opuk
Mountain with precipice
edges which make it inaccessible, of a shel¬
ter (and later citadel) probably permitted on
some stages of its development to avoid the
erection of fortifications round official center
of town. And, at last, the probably insignifi¬
cant division of labor among first citizen of
Kimmerikon mainly dealing with agriculture
and trade transporting do not contradict with
possible unity of group of farm-houses and
some public objects under the name
«polis
Kimmerikon».
So, we should realise
polis
Kimmerikon
and later Bosporian town Kimmerikon as the
whole assemblage of sites situated on the sl¬
opes of mountain. The fact that Kimmerikon
was really a town and at period of independ¬
ence from dynasty of Spartokids was really
polis
is proved by numerous of unfortified
rural settlements situated round the mounta¬
in, on the whole existed in the
V
-ПІ
centuri¬
es
ВС.
For these settlement
Opuk
Mountain
and Kimmerikon were the best and the only
one
refugium
in the case of danger
—
the pr¬
esence of early cultural deposits covered by
late dust deposits in the ash hill near citadel
insure the presence of an early shelter of the
top of mountain. Here it is necessary to note
that singular rural settlements in the maritime
environs of
Opuk
have appeared practically
simultaneously with settlement at «Hill A»
and they leaned upon this shelter.
So, we can suppose that the process of
urban building on
Opuk
Mountain in a lar¬
ge measure depended on concrete geologic¬
al conditions which did not permit to create
there habitual regular urban planning. These
conditions probably promoted the creation of
specific for Bosporus form of urban institut¬
ion which, never-the-less was not unique in
Antiquity.
The observation of this territory have sho¬
wn that there had been several areas of active
agricultural use. Besides adjoining to Koyash
salt Lake land there was actively mastered
the hollow of Kyrkkoyash (continental) Salt
Lake with fertile lands. There by observations
of the author were found the remains of seve¬
ral rural unfortified settlements of the IV
-
II
centuries
ВС.
The biggest of them consisted
of minimum
5
separate buildings divided by
space about
50
m. The ruins stony basements
of dwellings are still visible on the modern
surface. The farm-houses were, probably, not
large, about two-three rooms. On the surfa¬
ce there were found numerous fragments of
amphorae (including stamped samples) of the
majority leading Hellenistic centers of
Pont¬
us
and Asia Minor
-
the material common to
all bosporian sites of that period. Also there
were well represented an ordinary wheel-th¬
rown and hand-made pottery. The lands of
environs of Koyash and Kyrkkoyash Lakes
limited on the North by hill edge was prob¬
ably the nearest
chora
of Kimmerikon of the
IV-II centuries
ВС.
At that period there were
also mastered distant lands adjoining the ea¬
stern bank of Uzunlar Lake which probably
was the border of Kimmerikon
chora
in the
West and the lands deeper in steppes.
There is no doubt that join of Kimmeri¬
kon to the State of Spartokids in the end of
the V century
ВС
(about
406
ВС)
stimulat¬
ed the mastering of distant environs of
Opuk
Mountain
—
the process of wide mastering
of rural territory of Bosporus is characteri¬
stic to the IV century
ВС
—
between
410-
274
Summary
406
ВС
the sharp change of foreign policy of
Early Spartokids took place
—
after a period
of some confrontation Pantikapaion and its
«tyrants« conclude the alliance with Athens
(Blavatskaya,
1959,
P.
71—72)
and since that
time Bosporus starts the wide and active gr¬
ain trade which is well illustrated by literary
sources. In the light of Bosporus expansion
against still independent Feodosia which was
started by Satyros I and participation of He-
racleia in conflict (Rostovzev,
1925,
P.
130
—132;
Gaydukevich,
1949,
P.
215;
Shelov,
1950,
P.
173;
Blavatskiy,
1981,
P.
21—22;
Shelov-Kovedyaev,
1985,
P.
118-119
etc.),
K.immerikon with its mooting and water spr¬
ings besides agricultural importance gained a
strategic value.
The majority of rural settlements of Kim-
merikon
chora
occur til! the middle
—
second
half of the HI centuries
ВС,
only few of them
outlast the edge of the III and II centuries.
The process of development and decline of
rural settlements of Kimmerikon
chora
does
dot differ from the evolution of the same sites
of Bosporian
chora.
Up to I century
ВС
the
majority of rural settlements near
Opuk
mo¬
untain stopped their existence and population
concentrated on the territory of mountain ma¬
stering its slopes. At this period Kimmerikon
do not distinguish with its economic activity
—
the layers and artifacts of the end of the
II
—
I centuries
ВС
are weak and not num¬
erous. Probably the town has hardly suffered
from earthquake of
63
ВС
while at Mithrad-
ates and Post-Mithradates Period when geop¬
olitical influence spread on the whole Taurika
Kimmerikon lost its strategic importance and
was for a long time restoring and developing
as an ordinary agricultural center and its hi¬
ghest flourishing in this role falls at the I-III
centuries AD
—
the quantity of rural settle¬
ments of its
chora
do not increase while it is
noticeable a significant rustication of town s
life
—
probably at that time some changes of
land-tenure take place.
In the middle of the III century AD the
«barbarian» tribes (Sarmatians, Alans, An¬
cient Germans etc.
—
Jordanie,
Getica,
28,
117)
settled on the Azov Littoral. So named
«Scythian wars» (Remennikov,
1954,
P.89-
120)
concerned Bosporus are usually con¬
nected with these tribes. Zosimus notes that
the legal dynasty stopped on Bosporus and
«unworthy people» came to power (co-reign
of Pharsanzes and Reskouporis V, see: Go-
lenko,
1978,
P.
93,
note
38).
Bosporus which
was probably in alliance relations with bar¬
barians had to place its fleet in their disposal
for undertaking robber campaigns of the ter¬
ritory of Roman possession in Asia Minor
(Zosimus, I,
31,32).
If after momentary invasions of barbarian
tribes in
260—
270-ies AD the Kimmerikon
site on the western slope («western site») prac¬
tically stopped its existence as a town, mean¬
while the life on the terraced northern slope
and on top plateau does on. After the defeat
of Phophorsus in the battle with Chersonesus,
Kimmerikon (now top plateau and northern
slope) again becomes a frontier town on the
Western borders of Bosporus (Kruglikova,
1966,
P.
18—19;
Golenko,
1999).
At that time
also was undertaken a complete reconstruc¬
tion of top citadel of Kimmerikon (Golenko,
1999)
which completely coincide with simi¬
lar works on Uzunlar (Asander s) rampart
which again becomes the western border of
the State (Lantzov, Golenko,
1999,
P.
177—
181).
The rest part of Bosporian «barbarian»
army having been released from captivity
by Chersonesians themselves (Const. Porph.
De adm.
Imp.,
LIII,
195)
was settled as fed-
erats on the frontier lands (Yurochkin,
2001,
P.131—
132)
to which on the South-Western
border of Bosporus besides Kimmerikon and
its
chora
were reckoned the lands of neigh¬
bor Kutaion. This fact is testified by the finds
from necropolis of Djurga^Oba near Kutaion
(Ermolin, Yurochkin,
2002).
Ancient
Kimmerïkon
and its
chora
275
The top citadel of Kimmerikon is one of
the best preserved site of
Opuk
Mountain.
The safety of fortress and elements of its de¬
fensive system was much better at the time
when it was visited by P.Dubrux (Dubrux,
1858,
P.
69—77)
and l.Blaramberg and it is
well testified by descriptions and graphical
materials carried out by them. We do not exa¬
ctly know in what condition has been citadel
at the time of the visit of expedition of Yu.Yu.
Marti in
1927
(Marti,
1928,
P.
103—115)
and
what were losses which the site suffered in
the Second World War, but since the time
of excavation of I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kruglik-
ova the safety of the site practically did not
changed7. Citadel is situated on the distance
about a little bit more then
2
km North-East-
ward of site of Kimmerikon and it is erected
on the North-Eastern brink of top plateau on
the altitude
170-165
m
above the level of the
sea. The triangular plateau armoured by lim¬
estone is impregnable from all sides
—
the
height of its precipices is
15-40
м.
This fo¬
rtress has minimum five lines of defense:
first of all, precipices of plateau, preserved
ditch-scarp,
προτειχισμα,
outer curtains
and a large bastion-tower in the North-We¬
stern part of fortress which, probably, repr¬
esents the fortress «citadel» or donjon. Into
fortification system of top citadel are also
included the remains of fortifications pushed
of the territory of citadel and adjoining the
precipices of plateau. They are erected on the
watershed of the Eastern slope of
Opuk
but
represent the impact assemblage. The most
monumental is the defensive wall running
by watershed of the Eastern slope from the
North-Eastern precipice of plateau to the sea
coast to the distance of
650
м,
the traces of
its destroyed part used for stone extraction by
inhabitant of
Opuk
village is visible in micro
relief on the distance of 300m more. The So¬
uthern maritime extremity of the wall runs to
the large rock with vertical walls of
5—15
m
height while its maritime extremity is ruined
by landslides. The wall were erected of large
stones (about
1,6x1,0x0,5
m) which formed
two «armours» filled in with stones and loam.
The width of it oscillates from
2,9
to
3,5
m.
On all its length the wall was strengthened
by towers (ruined) which were attached (or
hewed in) to the rocks included into the body
of the wall. The section of this wall situated
near the biggest rock («tower» by Dubrux)
was excavated by author, in deposit near the
wall there were found not numerous fragme¬
nts of amphorae of the III-V1 centuries AD.
Probably the remains of that wall were the
basement of less powerful wall with adobe
elements of construction.
The citadel itself represents a rectangular
fortress stretched along the Eastern precipice
of plateau. The Western outer curtain preser¬
ved practically on all its length
—
about
176
m. The wall of curtain surpasses the modern
surface on
0.5 — 1.4
m
and more. On it the
traces of two small towers remained
(5,0—
7,0
x
5,0—7,0
m). They were built of large
blocks of limestone and situated on the dista¬
nce
40
m
from each other. The section of in¬
ner curtain divides the territory of citadel into
two parts, in the place of its junction with the
outer curtain there visible the remains of an
other tower, the eastern extremity of the inner
wall was also strengthened by tower
6,0—7,0
x
6,0—7,0
m. At present time the complete
square of citadel is
1,45
hectares. One of the
sections of the western outer curtain was ex¬
cavated by author. The curtain of
2,60—2,80
m
width is built of big slightly worked up
blocks of limestone which were skilfull ad¬
justed one to an other, the space between the
outer armours of the wall was filled in with
stones and loam soil. The curtain was erected
in traditional for the ordinary Bosporian tow¬
ns mode. The wall remained on the height of
2,6
m. It was built of the leveled surface of
virgin rock and artificial pouring of limestone
crumb, and, probably, the remains of the pr¬
evious curtain (distinguishes by the slightly
276
Summary
different manner of masonry). On the dista¬
nce of
4,2
m
near the curtain the remains of
προτειχισμα
were excavated. It was built of
limestone on the loamy substruction. It rema¬
ined on the height of about
1,0
m
and width of
0,8
m. Behind proteichisma the ditch-scarp is
situated. On the North the curtain completes
with a large «bastion» of dimensions
20,3
x
23,5
m,
with the traces of inner building co¬
nstruction. Probably the Southern, opposite,
extremity of curtain has been strengthened by
tower of more modest dimensions but it was
either ruined by Tatars. The traces of eastern
and southern curtains were not found, prob¬
ably the absence of them were compensated
with the height of precipices.
To the inner face of curtain the assembl¬
age of «barracks» sides with. It is stretch al¬
ong the fortress wall and is separated from it
by the free space of
1,1—1,2
m
width where
probably the stairs to the wall were situated.
The assemblage represents the building of
casemate type with numerous separate roo¬
ms. Three rooms of barracks were excavated
by author. The barracks have two common
walls: one wall faced to curtain and the opp¬
osite one
—
to the street running along barra¬
cks and curtain. The walls forming the rooms
by their extremities attach perpendicularly
to these common walls dividing assemblage
into several isolated sections. Two excavated
rooms have a common entrance which just
at threshold transforms into two entrances to
each room. The same constructive mode was
used in the towers of Kutlak fortress in the di¬
stant Bosporian border near Sudak. The walls
of
0,8
m
width remained on the height up to
1,65
m. On the floor of one room a kiln was
built and round it the fragments of amphora
(red-clay, with wide mouth, IV—VI c.AD),
probably fallen from the probable second flo¬
or, was dispersed. Near the mouth of kiln the
diorite
grain grater was found.
Before excavation of curtain, inner buil¬
dings of citadel and its ash-hill (see below)
the dating of citadel (to say correct, its last
constructive period) was approximate and of¬
ten subjective: the first investigators of
Opuk
—
P.Dubrux and I.Blaramberg dated it by the
time of Antiquity in general; Yu.Yu.Marti
—
be Late Hellenistic Period; I.B.Zeest
—
by
the beginning of present era; I.T.Kruglikova
—
by the first centuries AD. The last point
of view confirmed in Russian and Ukrainian
science (among the latest publications, See:
Gorlov, Lopanov,
1997,
P.
141).
While dating
the remains of citadel the scholars usually le¬
ant upon casual finds from its territory and on
analysis of historical situation in suppositio¬
nal period of foundation of that fortification.
For all these, according to active fortification
activity of Asander to the time of his reign the
preference was usually given.
The citadel was undoubtedly built on the
remains of previous fortress or shelter in pe¬
riod not earlier then the first half of the IV
century AD. Just on that period falls the final
stage of wars between Bosporus and Cherso-
nesus which started in the end of the 111 centu¬
ry AD. In these wars Kimmerikon has played
his concrete role connected with the gradual,
but quick changes of Bosporian borders. This
period of history of both States is poorly ill¬
ustrated by literary sources. The main source
in this question remains Chapter
53
of
Co¬
nstantine
Porphirogenitus study
«De ad-mi-
nistrando
imperio».
The historical reality of
events described in this literary source is still
debatable among some scholars.
Constantine
informs us about three war between Cherso-
nesus and Bosporus. First one take place at
the reign of Emperor Diocletianus about
291-
292
AD (Charmatta,
1967,
P.
204
f); the sec¬
ond one burst out after joint military actions
of Romans and Chersonesians at
Ister in
the
second decade of the IV century AD. In loc¬
ality «Kafa» (modern and ancient Feodosia)
the Bosporian army was defeated and there
the border landmarks were erected marking a
new border of Bosporian State.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
277
The third war took place not earlier then
336
ВС.
In the result of the next defeat of
Bosporians the border of Bosporian posse¬
ssion on Kerch peninsula again was moved
from Kafa and established at Kibernik (Ki¬
mmerikon) where the border landmarks were
erected. With the events of this final Bospor-
us-Chersonesus war the cardinal reconstruc¬
tion of citadel on the top plateau and erection
of monumental wall on the watershed of the
Eastern slope of
Opuk
were connected (Go-
lenko,
1999).
In period of not early then the
first half of the IV century AD and not in the
reign of Bosporian king Asander as it was su¬
pposed before, to the final reconstruction was
subjected not only citadel of Kimmerikon
and its defensive wall, but Uzunlar rampart
and ditch. These two fortifications together
for many centuries formed an entity frontier
system defending the native lands of Bospo¬
rus (Lantzov, Golenko,
1999).
The ditch was
deepened and the rampart poured some more.
Here it is necessary to note that the choice
of Uzunlar rampart flanked by Kimmerikon
on the sea coast was not casual
—
after the
defeat to Bosporus were specially left the ter¬
ritory subjected to Bosporus on the eve of its
territorial expansion.
The find of runar inscription under the
walls of Kimmerikon citadel8 allow to supp¬
ose that the guard of the border was carried
by «barbarians-federates» from the number of
ancient German tribes settled on the coast of
Meotis and Bosporus and involved into confli¬
cts between Bosporus and Chersonesus (Gole¬
nko, Yurochkin and others,
1999,
P.
77—97).
Important artifacts dating the main stages
of development of shelter-fortress-citadel on
the top plateau of
Opuk
Mountain were found
during excavations of ash-hill of citadel whi¬
ch have been undertaken by the author twice9
on different areas of this object, and excava¬
tions of dust deposits formed under the outer
face of western curtain of citadel.
According to the excavated artifacts, the
life on the territory of plateau and forming of
dust deposits lasted continuously with diffe¬
rent degree of activity since the edge of the
VI and V centuries
ВС
till the first half of the
VI century AD. The dust deposits under the
western outer curtain of citadel were formed
during the final stage of its existence
—
from
the first half of the IV to the first half of the
VI centuries AD.
The life on citadel continued even after
the appearance in the Crimea of Huns who
in the edge of IV and V centuries inhabited
the territories between Chersonesus and Bo¬
sporus.
After the demolition of citadel in the first
third of the VI century AD (conflict between
Huns and Byzantine) the life in Kimmerikon
and in its environs was gradually coming to
standstill, probably there still existed some
separate villages or single dwellings hidden
in the rocks but from the point of view of his¬
torical demography the demolition of citadel
have caused the serious catastrophic conseq¬
uences. After annexation of Bosporian lands
by Byzantine Empire ant the reign of Justin-
ianus, the citadel was not restored because it
probably has lost its previous importance as
frontier town.
After appearance in the Crimea and on
Opuk
Mountain of «carriers» of Saltovo-
Mayatskaya Culture (of Khazar Kaganat) the
infrastructure of
Opuk
cardinally changed
what was causes by different traditions and
economical development of new population.
The life in citadel stops. In
1989—1990
on
the southern slope of
Opuk
Mountain there
was found by the author large early Medieval
settlement
—
one of the biggest settlement
of Saltovo-Mayatskaya Culture on the Kerch
Peninsula. To the settlement separate farm¬
houses scattered in the nearest small bays
and depressions of the maritime slope were
neighboring. The similar small separate dwe¬
llings appeared and on the site of
Kimmerik-
278
Summary
on. The open territories of the northern slope
of mountain (terraced) were less inhabited
by new population. Moreover, in the steppe
space of environs of Kimmerikon there was
found only one settlement of this culture
-
se¬
ttlement near Uzunlar Lake, and it also leant
upon natural fortification of Mountain Konc-
hek situated there.
The settlement mentioned above is situ¬
ated in the hollow-like valley of the south¬
ern maritime slope of
Opuk.
The dwellings
of settlement are dispersed on the square of
14
hectares on the bottom of the hollow, its
slopes and separate terraces of adjoining edg¬
es. The settlement is well sheltered by rocky
edges and is practically indiscernible in com¬
plicated relief. In the hollow there are visible
in micro relief the remains of minimum
25
separate farmhouses of practically similar
planning. Each farmhouse consisted of adj¬
oining to each other dwellings (two or three)
and attached buildings of household needs.
Not large rectangular personal plots of hous¬
es were protected by stone fences one wall of
which was usually facing at the road crossing
the hollow (probably existed from the time of
Antiquity) and running to fountain.
On the slopes of terraces there were fo¬
und remains of numerous building of house¬
hold purposes. Most of them are the circular
buildings erected from stones of limestone
with the usage of elements of natural relief.
To some buildings small rectangular rooms
are attached. These constructions probably
represent sheep-fold and adjoining stalls.
By author and A.Djanov (Sudak Muse¬
um-Preserve) there was excavated a farmh¬
ouse situated in the central part of the holl¬
ow (Golenko, Djanov,
2002).
It represented
a rectangular building consisted of two large
rooms (of
56
and
31
sq.m) deepened into gr¬
ound. To the building was attached annex for
domestic needs. The walls of the building (of
0.70-1,0
m
width) remained on the height up
to
0.8
m.
In the cultural deposits of the farmhouse
were met not numerous but representative ar¬
tifacts: fragments of early medieval pythoses
and amphorae, oinochoai, typical kitchen po¬
ttery, clay tile etc. On the whole, the assem¬
blage of pottery is typical for site of Khazar
Epoch situated on the Kerch Peninsula which
can be dated by the second quarter of the IX
century. In the IX century in settlements of
Saltovo-Mayatskaya Culture in the Crimea
starts the building of Christian churches and
the changes of burial rites are fixed up
(Bar¬
anov,
1990,
P.
135-139).
Up to the beginning
of the X century in cultural and religious as¬
pects the population have been more drawn
towards Byzantine Empire then to Khazar
Kaganat. Here, it is important to note that du¬
ring exploration of the territory of settlement
there were found the remains of building by
its configuration resembling single nave ba¬
silica. The stones of the building lie on the
modern surface. The settlement of Saltovo-
Mayatskaya culture discontinue in the second
quarter of the X century. In subsequent time
up to time of arrival of Tatar villages on the
foot of
Opuk
mountain the live stops there.
Footnotes
1
Till present time this
Périples
remains very debat¬
able: some scholars date it by V-VI centuries AD, others
—
to more early period
—
probably the evidences of
it originate from
Périples
of Menippes (I AD) or from
Arrian
himself.
2
See Lantzov, Golenko,
1999;
Golenko,
1999.
3
The biggest part of them was pull down in the end
of
XIX
and beginning of the XX centuries, part of them
remained visible on the modern surface. The complete
plan of the city walls before their destruction was made
by Dubrux and Blaramberg.
4
At that time
—
Institue
of History of Material Cul¬
ture of Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Moscow.
5
Recently there was made an attempt to rise the date
of foundation of Kimmerion to more late time
-
begin¬
ning of the V century
ВС,
but the supposed date is very
debatable.
6
The whole body of mountain lies on virgin clay
and undergoes landslips. In
1991,1997
and
2003
the
au-
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
279
thor of present paper was an eye-witness of small land¬
slides on the same slope covering territory of several
hudreds of sq.m.
7
The description of antiquities of
Opuk
carried out
by P.Dubrux show that up to the first half of
XIX
cen¬
tury the site has been used by Tatars for stone extraction,
moreover, in
1990
some destruction were made by mili¬
tary builders there. Since
1997
on
Opuk
Mountain the
National Preserve is functioning.
8
The find of so unique for
Notti
Black sea littoral
epigraphic document has risen to non-adequate reaction
verging on (compair for example: Shalyga,
2000).
9
First in collaboration with Yu.V.Gorlov.
|
| adam_txt |
СОДЕРЖАНИЕ
ГЛАВА
I.
1.
1.
ФИЗИКО-ГЕОГРАФИЧЕСКИЙ ОЧЕРК ЮЖНОГО ПОБЕРЕЖЬЯ
КЕРЧЕНСКОГО ПОЛУОСТРОВА И ОБЩАЯ ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКА
РЕГИОНА
.10
1.2.
ГЕОМОРФОЛОГИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК (Раздел подготовлен Клюкиным
A.A.
и Голенко В.К.)
.15
1.3.
ГИДРОГЕОЛОГИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ПРИЛЕГАЮЩЕЙ ТЕРРИТОРИИ
.22
1.4.
ОБЗОР ПИСЬМЕННЫХ ИСТОЧНИКОВ И НЕКОТОРЫЕ
СПОРНЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ ИСТОЧНИКОВЕДЕНИЯ
.25
1.5.
ИСТОРИЯ ИЗУЧЕНИЯ ДРЕВНОСТЕЙ ОПУКА
.50
1.6.
ПРОБЛЕМА ЛОКАЛИЗАЦИИ «ПОЛИСА» КИММЕРИК
.64
ГЛАВА
II.
ФОРТИФИКАЦИОННЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ГОРЫ
ОПУК И ЕЕ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.73
11.1.
ВВЕДЕНИЕ. СТРАТЕГИЯ И ТАКТИКА ОБОРОНЫ
.73
II.
I.A.
ВОЕННАЯ ТАКТИКА СКИФОВ, САРМАТОВ И БОСПОРЯН
.74
11.1.
В. СТРАТЕГИЯ И ТАКТИКА ОБОРОНЫ БОСПОРА
.75
11.2.
ГОРА ОПУК И ОСНОВНЫЕ ПРИНЦИПЫ АНТИЧНОЙ
ФОРТИФИКАЦИИ
.86
11.3.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ГОРОДИЩА КИММЕРИК
.91
II.3.A.
КРЕПОСТНЫЕ СТЕНЫ И БАШНИ
.91
Н.З.В.АКРОПОЛЬ КИММЕРИКА И ЕГО ВНУТРЕННЯЯ ЗАСТРОЙКА
.97
П.З.С. «ЗАПАДНАЯ» ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНАЯ СТЕНА И ПРОБЛЕМА
ЛОКАЛИЗАЦИИ ПОРТА КИММЕРИКА
.102
11.4.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ЦИТАДЕЛИ НА
ВЕРШИННОМ ПЛАТО ГОРЫ ОПУК
.107
II.4.A.
КУРТИНЫ И БАШНИ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.107
II.4.B.
ВНУТРЕННИЕ ПОСТРОЙКИ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.112
II.4.C.K
ВОПРОСУ О ВРЕМЕНИ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.122
HAD.
СООРУЖЕНИЯ НА ПЛАТО ВНЕ ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.135
II
АЕ. ЗОЛЬНИК ЦИТАДЕЛИ
.135
II.4.F.
ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ВОДОРАЗДЕЛА ГОРЫ
ОПУК И ДРУГИЕ ВЫНЕСЕННЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ
.161
II.4.J.
АНТРОПОГЕННОЕ ТЕРРАСИРОВАНИЕ СЕВЕРНОГО СКЛОНА Г.
ОПУК
.166
Н.5. ОБОРОНИТЕЛЬНЫЕ СООРУЖЕНИЯ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ ГОРЫ ОПУК.
175
II.5.A.
КОЯШСКИЙ ВАЛ
.175
П.5.В.
УКРЕПЛЕНИЯ НА ГОРЕ КОНЧЕК
.178
11.6.
ФОРТИФИКАЦИОННАЯ СИСТЕМА КИММЕРИКА
.179
ГЛАВА
III.
АРХЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.188
111.1.
ВЛИЯНИЕ ПРИРОДНЫХ ФАКТОРОВ НА СОСТОЯНИЕ
АРХЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ПАМЯТНИКОВ РЕГИОНА
.188
111.2.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ДОАНТИЧНОГО ПЕРИОДА
.191
Ш.З. ПАМЯТНИКИ АНТИЧНОГО ВРЕМЕНИ
.195
Ш.З.А. РАННЕАНТИЧНОЕ ПОСЕЛЕНИЕ НА ХОЛМЕ «А»
.195
111.3.
В. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК
.197
Ш.З.С. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ДОЛИНЫ КЫЗ-АУЛЬСКОГО
МАЯКА
.200
Ш.З.Э. АНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ ЧЕБАКСКОЙ
БАЛКИ
.206
Ш.З.Е. ПАЛЕОГРАФИЯ КИРКОЯШСКОГО СОЛЕНОГО ОЗЕРА И
ПАМЯТНИКИ КИРКОЯШСКОЙ КОТЛОВИНЫ
.209
III.3.F.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ КОЯШСКОГО (ЭЛЬКЕНСКОГО,
ОПУКСКОГО) СОЛЕНОГО ОЗЕРА
.213
Ш.З.Ј.
ПАМЯТНИКИ ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ УЗУНЛАРСКОГО ОЗЕРА
.218
111.4.
ПОЗДНЕАНТИЧНЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.221
111.5.
РАННЕСРЕДНЕВЕКОВЫЕ ПАМЯТНИКИ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.233
111.6.
ПРИРОДНОЕ И АНТРОПОГЕННОЕ ВОЗДЕЙСТВИЕ НА
ЭКОСИСТЕМЫ РЕГИОНА В ИСТОРИЧЕСКОЕ ВРЕМЯ И НЕКОТОРЫЕ
ОСОБЕННОСТИ ЕГО ХОЗЯЙСТВЕННОГО ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЯ
(Раздел написан совместно с А.А.Клюкиным)
.243
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ. ОСНОВНЫЕ ЭТАПЫ ОСВОЕНИЯ ГОРЫ ОПУК И ЕЕ
ОКРЕСТНОСТЕЙ
.258
SUMMARY. ANCIENT KIMMERIKON AND ITS CHORA
.266
БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ И СПИСОК СОКРАЩЕНИЙ
.280
ИЛЛЮСТРАТИВНЫЙ МАТЕРИАЛ
.:.304
SUMMARY
ANCIENT KIMMERIKON AND ITS CHORA
Ancient Kimmerion is one of the insuffi¬
ciently explored «minor» towns of Bosporus.
Owing to recording of reliable geographic
reference-point
—
sea rocks called
«Slups»
(«Elken-Kaya» in Crimean-Tatarian)
—
in
rather late1
Périples
of
Pontus
by Anonymo¬
us Author (Pseudo-Arrian) the European site
Kimmerikon. situated on the slopes of
Opuk
Mountain (Black Sea coast of Kerch Penins¬
ula) is well localized. Anonymous Author in¬
forms us:
«
The distance between town
Kuta
(Kuteon site
—
VG.) and Kimmerikon is
60
stadii,
8
miles; there is mooring protected
from western winds. In front of it in the sea,
not far from the shore there are situated two
small rocky islands. The complete distance
between the mouth of Meotian Lake (Azov
Sea
—
VG.) and Kimmerikon is
300
stadii
or
40
miles and the distance between Pantik-
apaiton and Kimmerikon is
240
stadii,
or
32
miles» [Anon., PPE,
76-77].
An other town
with the similar ethnikon
—
Kimmerion. un-
localizated jet,
—
according to the literary
sources, was situated on the opposite, Asiatic
coast of Kimmerian Bosporus.
Existence on both coasts of Kimmerian
Bosporus of two towns bearing common etlin-
ikon
—
European Kimmerikon
(ΚιμμΓρικον)
and Asiatic Kimmerion
(Κιμμεριον)
-
can be
easily' explained from the point of view an¬
cient Greek literary tradition. But this fact
and closed consonance of the names has led
to situation when localization of both towns,
determination of authenticity of evidences of
ancient authors about each center and deter¬
mination of their role in the history of Bosp¬
orus became one of the most debatable prob¬
lems of historiography and study of original
sources, and the discussion of it does not stop
till present days.
The complication of evaluation of the
role of both towns in the history of Ancient
Greek colonies in the Bosporus and later in
the history of Bosporian Kingdom is first of
all connected with the evidence of the other
author
—
Strabo
—
dedicated to the Asian
Kimmerion [Strabo, XI.11,4-5]. In spite of
accuracy of Strabo' study and trustworth¬
iness of his sources, in Strabo's description
of Kimmerion can be find some diffidence
of the ancient author, having described the
settlement (village) Kimmerikon (Kimmerion,
Kimmeris) on the Asiatic bank of Bosporus,
in the following paragraph he lias made a
reservation that «in former times Kimmeri¬
kon was a town on the isthmus and locked
the isthmus with ditch and rampart» [Stra¬
bo, XI.
2,5].
Though this evidence is discrep¬
ant and still debatable, it remains very important
for the history of Bosporus, especially in
the light of discovery of the Tribute List of
425\424
ВС
of the I Athenian Naval Allian¬
ce foimd on the Athenian Acropolis. In this
psephisma among the otlier towns of Euxine
Tribute Region Kimmerikon was probably
mentioned. Some scholars aspire to recogn¬
ize in the Tribute List the Asian, not Europ¬
ean, Kimmerikon which as it was mentioned
above is not still localized in nature. But it is
not possible to ignore important evidence of
Pliny who marked out that at previous times
tlie Asian Kimmerion
(Κιμμεριον)
lias got
another name
—
it lias been called Cerberion
[Plin.
NH, VI,
18].
Another author
—
Pseu-
do-Scymn
—
calls the neighboring to Asian
town the town of Kepoi as a colony of Mile¬
tus underling its
polis
origin and contrasting
it to neighboring Kimmeris «founded (and
renamed
—
VG.) by Bosporian tyrants» [Ps.
Scymn.
896-899].
As far as the Asian town
was re-founded already during tlie Bosporian
«state colonization» of lands adjoining to Ki¬
mmerian Bosporus which lias taken place not
earlier then the beginning of the V century
ВС,
the renamed town already had no politi¬
cal independence and correspondingly could
not be the member of Athenian Alliance. On
tlie Northern Black Sea Littoral there are no
other centers which names started with letters
Κιμ-.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
267
The critical analysis of literary sources
and archaeological situation on the
Opuk
Mountain and its environs shows that Strabo
really mixed the evidences about both towns
and his information about former localiza¬
tion of Kimmerion is to the point of Euro¬
pean Kimmerikon whose strategically role in
fortification system of Bosporus is doubtless
—
in the visual distance of it, on the north¬
ern coast of Uzunlar Salt Lake the famous
Uzunlar (Asander's) rampart with deep ditch
finishes. Moreover, on the isthmus of Uzun¬
lar and Koyash Salt Lake, on whose south¬
eastern bank Kimmerikon is situated, are
still visible the remains of the other rampart
and ditch. On the bank of Koyash salt Lake
this pampart was strengthened by settlement.
The excavations of it have shown that it was
founded not earlier the first half of the IV
century
ВС.
It represents a dwelling of two-
three rooms completely demolished and a
paved with milestone tiles little yard. Some
other dwellings were situated near. The small
dimensions of settlement make possible to
suppose that it was a guard point on the ram¬
part. Behind the Koyash rampart there were
situated the settlements of Kimmerikon
chora
meanwhile three of them dated by the IV-III
centuries
AB
practically attach the rampart
from its eastern inner side.
Simultaneity of erection and functional
similarity of both ramparts is doubtless: they
are common fortification system locking
at Kimmerikon the general defensive line
which crossing Kerch Peninsula from Azov
to the Black Sea defended the Eastern part
of peninsula which was the native Bospo-
rian lands in the Crimea. Both from point of
view of Ancient Greeks and modern opinion
this system was an impressive military and
engineer installations. If we'll keep in mind
the stages of transgression of the level of the
Black Sea when the level of the sea in the
first centuries AD reached the modern one
and even exceeded it, the Uzunlar Lake at the
present times running deep into land about
10
km at the times of Strabo was probably a sea
gulf and intensified impression about Kim¬
merikon as about the town situated on the
isthmus between
Pontus
and Meotian Lake (a
large Kazantip Bay). It is important to note
that, according to the evidence of
Constan¬
tine
Porphirogenitus (which was confirmed
by archaeological data2), by the same defen¬
sive line and through the town Kimmerikon
(«Kibernik» of
Constantine)
the final border
of the Late Bosporian State ran [Const. Por-
ph.,
De adm.
Imp.,
53]
(See below).
Opuk
Mountain is one of the highest he¬
ights of Kerch Peninsula
(184
m), it is based
of limestone of Meotian Layer of not more
than
50
m
of thickness which is laid under
by Sarmatian clays. From the ancient relief
of the mountain not great structural-denudat¬
ive top plateau of triangular form armored by
stratums of limestone there only remained. It
is situated on the altitude
160—184
m. The
slopes of mountain are undergone with ancie¬
nt and new landslides which have complicated
the building of the town and have stipulated
the poor safety of the site in general. Artifacts
show the activation of processes of landslide
in the maritime part of
Opuk
in Historical Pe¬
riod
—
after IV
—
II centuries
ВС
and before
VIII—
IX centuries AD. In the first half of the
IV century AD on the stable surface of the
top plateau there a citadel was erected (See
below) which was well joined into surroun¬
dings and did not get seismic deformations.
The sites of Early Medieval Period on
Opuk
were also well joined into modern landslide
relief and on them there were not found trac¬
es of catastrophic motions. These facts make
possible to specify the date of the latest ca¬
tastrophic seismic-gravitate dislocations and
to limit them by the IV century
ВС
and III
century AD
—
just the time when ancient
Kimmerikon actively existed. At that time in
the Black Sea the so named «Nymphaion»
transgression was taking place. As a result of
268
Summary
transgression the processes of abrasion and
caused by it processes of landslides on the
maritime slope of the mountain. But all these
complications of geological situation compe¬
nsated by abundance of fresh water of cond¬
ensate origin, building materials and fertility
of lands in adjoining coastal steppe.
First, who supposed that the remains of
ancient urban fortifications situated on the
slopes and top plateau of
Opuk
Mountain be¬
long to Bosporian town of Kimmerikon was
the famous Russian explorer and traveler Pet¬
er Simon Pallas
( 1741 — 1811 ),
who was tra¬
veling in Taurika in the end of
XVIII
century.
While detailed investigation and small exca¬
vations of antiquities of
Opuk
belong to the
famous Russian explorer and collector, one
of the founder of Kerch Museum of Antiqui¬
ties
—
Paul Augustine Dubrux
(1773-1835).
In collaboration with Dubrux investigations
on
Opuk
mountain was undertaking the first
director of Kerch Museum
Jean Mare de B1-
aramberg
( 1772 — 1831 ).
Very soon the pas¬
sion of Russian archaeologists for antiquities
of Pantikapaion and neighboring Bosporian
towns together with increasing of investigat¬
ions on the Asian side of Bosporus excluded
Kimmerikon from attention of investigators
nearly for a century. Only in
1927
expedition
of Kerch Museum guided by director of mu¬
seum
—
Yu.Yu.
Marti during only one field
season has investigated the coast from
Akra
to Kimmerikon (the last is situated in the dis¬
tance of
50
km westward of Kerch in the poor
inhabited region of peninsula).
The location of European Kimmerikon is
traditionally localized on three maritime hills
of the south-western slope of
Opuk
(«wes¬
tern site»)
—
between the shore of the sea
and Koyash salt Lake. As far as the date of
foundation of Kimmerikon is not proved arc-
haeologically, several archaeological objects
situated on the slopes pretender to right to
be called the earliest Kimmerikon. They are
—
the mentioned above «western» site, early
Greek settlement («Hill A»
)
on the south¬
eastern maritime slope and some other sites
which will be described below. Dubrux for
example, supposed that on
Opuk
Mountain
there have existed just two different towns
—
Kimmerikon and Kutaion
—,
and the bo¬
rder between them has been a road running
from Koyash Lake to the main ancient «fou¬
ntain» of the mountain functioning in present
time. Not great excavations undertaken on
the «western» site by different investigators
—
Dubrux (first half of
XIX
century), Yu.Yu.
Marti
(1928),
I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kraglikova
(1948-1951)
and by the author of present
paper
(1989-1997)
have revealed mainly the
building remains of the first centuries AD
while some finds of early artifacts in the cul¬
tural layers made possible to suppose that the
settlement on the Western slope «already exi¬
sted in the V century
ВС»
(Kruglikova,
1952,
P.
57; 1958,
P.
222).
The absence of Late
Classical building remains I.B.Zeest explain¬
ed by the fact that «in conditions of mountain
rocky country the cultural deposits belonging
to the previous period of urban life could not
to remain: probably they has been cleared
away to the surface of the rock in the process
of subsequent urban life» (Zeest,
1949,
P.
98),
like, for example, in Pantikapaiton,
Chersonesus and some other towns of Tau¬
rika.
As it is possible to judge on the basis of
historical topography of site, observations of
previous investigators and results of recent
explorations and small excavations, the for¬
tification system of the site consisted of few
elements. First of all, the special role played
the relief, particularly the rocky ridges surr¬
ounding territory in the East and North-East
and precipice shore on the South. The fort¬
ifications of Kimmerikon themselves were
rated at repulse of attacks from land and sea:
the territory of site was surrounded by walls
with towers3 which were able to stand the
siege of short duration even with the use of
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
269
battering-rams. It is proved by constructive
peculiarities of «wall-fences» which have
1,5
m
width and filling by clay and small ston¬
es inner space. By special wall adjoining the
south-western part of the site the port part of
town between the sea and Koyash Salt Lake
was also flanked. On one of maritime rocks
the fire-place of light-house was hewed on
the rocky surface. The separate walls were on
the foot of the maritime hills of the site. In
this case, the separate fortification of Acrop¬
olis hill and last ones played an additional de¬
fensive role, because the burst into the urban
territory enemy found himself in depression
between two fortified hills and rested on the
steep slope of the mountain. Any traces of ra¬
mparts and ditches on the borders of the site
were not found.
In
1947—1951
archaeological investig¬
ations of antiquities of
Opuk,
especially of
Kimmerikon site were undertaken by Ker¬
ch State Historical-Archaeological Museum
(I.B.Zeest) and Department of Classical arc¬
haeology of Institute of archaeology4 (I.T.Kr-
uglikova, D.B.Shelov) which on the first
stage made possible to define more exactly
the chronology of different archaeological
objects situate on
Opuk.
By excavations of
1948—1950
by I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kruglikova
were discovered the remains of dwelling and
producing assemblage of II-III centuries AD
situated on the terrace of one of the Maritime
hills of the site. The assemblage was skillfu¬
lly entered in natural relief of the hill. In the
central part of assemblage a paved by limes¬
tone tiles yard was situated. Minimum three
rooms covered by clay roofs adjoin the yard.
From the East the. assemblage was limited
bj^
breast-wall. One of the rooms communicat¬
ed with the yard by means of stairs built of
hewed limestone blocks. In an other room
there were found stone mortars, grinding-
stone, working table and handle grain grater
(Zeest,
1950,
P.
97).
It was a manufacturing
room which communicated with the yard by
means of door and window and with the other
—
by door. By excavations there was unc¬
overed granary situated in the room which
was practically whole hewed in the rock. The
big dimensions of grain-pits show the trade
character of manufacturing. The assemblage
has perished in the fire which I.B.Zeest dated
by the III century AD (not earlier the middle
of the century
—
V.G.) and I.T.Kruglikova
—
by the end of the III or beginning of the
IV centuries AD.
In
1950 — 1951
by the same expedition
near the maritime precipice an other similar
assemblage partly destroyed by the coastal
abrasion was excavated. It represented an as¬
semblage of the I-II centuries AD consisted
of several rooms with grain-pits which was
limited by powerful external wall. Accord¬
ing to the peculiarities of relief, the uncov¬
ered part of assemblage ruined down to the
sea. The excavations of an area adjoining the
assemblage gave an exclusively important
materials: in the sandy soil stretching under
the cultural depositions of «Hellenistic» lay¬
ers there were found numerous fragments of
hand-made pottery of Late Bronze Epoch.
In
1952—1991
the
Opuk
Mountain and its
environs have passed into jurisdiction of Mi¬
nistry of Defense of the USSR and investig¬
ations were stopped. They were re-newed by
author only in
1989.
In
1991
near «flour-grin¬
ding workshop» there was excavated an other
assemblage adjoining the workshop above by
the slope. It represents an yard paved with li¬
mestone tile also strengthened by breast-wa¬
lls which limited an assemblage from North
and East and semi cellar room with dug in
pythoses of Bosporian production. The living
room of which only rocky floor and eastern
wall remained, was also partly hewed in the
rock. The assemblage was also hardly ruin¬
ed by the processes of abrasion and landslip.
The fissure crawling away origin practically
completely ruined the semi-cellar room with
pythoses, a part of a yard, other constructions
270
Summary
of assemblage ruined down the sea. Inhabita¬
nts of assemblage have made some attempts
to stop this process by the means of pouring
soil, but soon have had to leave the assemb¬
lage. Among the finds found during excava¬
tions of this assemblage there predominated
fragment of storage amphorae of Bosporian
and Southern
Pontic
production, fragments
of red-lacquered and red-clay table pottery,
fragments of typically bosporian hand-made
kitchen pottery. In the whole, the assembla¬
ge can be dated by II
—
first half of the IV
centuries AD while the process of forming
of fissure has started just very soon after the
foundation of assemblage.
The inhabitants of Kimmerikon of that
times were fairly well off and the general ec¬
onomical level of live of population of Ki-
mmerion in II-III centuries AD probably did
not differ from the level of the other ordinary
Bosporian town like Ilurat and Tiritaka, toge¬
ther with neighboring Kutaion it represented
one of the centers of Bosporian grain trade.
The grain-pits of large dimension for grain
keeping had a pear-shaped form with stony
facing of the mouth which was covered by
limestone tile. They were of
6.5
m
depth with
diameter of bottom
2,2
m
and contained up
to
76
cubic meters of grain while all pits of
one assemblage contained
228
cubic meters.
For example, in Pantikapaiton the maximum
capaciousness of pits was only about
12-22
cubic meters. That is why it is possible to un¬
derline the trade character of grain producing
in Kimmerikon in the I
-
beginning of the IV
centuries AD. The find of pithos containing
the remains of salted fish in one of the rooms,
pyramidal plummets, fragments limewater-
like coating found in cultural deposits show
that grain production was not only one sphere
of economic activity of inhabitants.
The problem of localization of «Early
Greek» Kimmerikon from which the master¬
ing of environs of
Opuk
had started, has got
an actuality in the light of debated problem
of Kimmerikon membership in I Athenian
Naval Alliance.
Some scholars tried to connect the rema¬
ins of
polis
infrastructure of Kimmerikon of
the VI-V centuries
ВС
with remains of early
Greek settlement at the «Hill A» (which I am
going to describe a few lines below) suppos¬
ing that later on it was moved to the place of
«Western» site but this supposition contradict
with real archaeological and geological situa¬
tion on
Opuk
Mountain.
In
1950
on the south-eastern maritime
slope of mountain, on the distance of more
then
1,5
km eastward of «Western» site Ki¬
mmerikon, the were found building remains
and cultural deposits of early Greek settlem¬
ent. During excavations there were uncover¬
ed the remains of large dwelling assemblage
situated on the narrow maritime terrace. The
hill called by investigators as hill «A» on wh¬
ich foot the settlement is situated, represents
the stable rock of degraded mountain which
lies on the landslide south-eastern maritime
slope of the mountain. The assemblage has
an unusual planning consisting of four sep¬
arate isolated rooms with personal outlet to
the door-lying paved yard. The rooms are at¬
tached to the common blank wall and one of
the rooms was of household purpose. Three
other rooms of small dimension had floors
slightly deepened into the ground. All rooms
had door-ways with the traces of fastening
wooden doors. In two rooms fire-places were
built of lime stone tiles erected on verges. In
the third room the fire was kindling just on
the floor and this fact is testified by a spot
of fired clay in the center of the room. The
grain pits with covered with clay walls and
deepened into the virgin rock were met in
two rooms. In the yard of assemblage there
were situated objects of household
—
small
annex, dust-hole covered with limestone tile
and stone box built of limestone blocks erec¬
ted on verges etc.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
111
The assemblage has taken two building
periods and few stages of pouring of floors.
The found artifacts are common for the ordi¬
nary Bosporian towns
ofthat
period
—
num¬
erous fragments of storage or transport amp¬
horae, mainly of Chian production, fragments
of black-lacquered kylikes, lekythoi and oth¬
er kind of vessels,
terracota
figurines, hand¬
made pottery, bones of small cattle, leaves of
mollusks etc. The artifacts permitted to date
the settlement by the end of the VI
—
beg¬
inning of the IV centuries
ВС.
The cultural
deposits of the settlement cover the remains
of the settlement of the Epoch of Late Bronze
with mud-huts deepened into the virgin loa¬
my soil. The settlements are separated with
chronological period about
500
years.
The dwelling assemblage was erected in
the end of the VI century
ВС5
and in the V
century
ВС
here were undertaken some reco¬
nstruction works: the floors were heightened,
new fire-places and grain-pits were built and
the pavement was repaired.
Investigator underlined singularities of
planning of the assemblage (Kruglikova,
1952,
P.
64).
S.D.Kryzhitskiy characterizing
this building as an assemblage of blocking
houses of megaron type, writes that this type
of houses «can be hardly relate to category
of the most typical Greek schemes. But ne-
ther-the-less, the type of <collective> farm¬
houses (ancient Torik) revives in the North¬
ern Black Sea Littoral at Hellenistic Period,
while megaron type but in developed variati¬
ons was characteristic for Asia Minor during
the whole Period of Antiquity» (Kryzhitskiy,
1993,
P.
45 — 46).
The settlement perished
in the beginning of the IV century
ВС.
eit¬
her as result of earthquake or some changes
of political situation caused by war between
ancient Feodosia and Bosporus (Kruglikova,
1958,
P.
243).
The first explanation, on my
point of view, is more acceptable: I.T.Krugli-
kova was the first who noticed that the slope
surface of mountain was more plane in anc¬
ient times but its relief has changed «in the
result of earthquake and influence» of water;
there have formed new ravines, the part of sl¬
ope including «the biggest part of settlement
of the VI-IV centuries
ВС»
moved apart and
crashed down the sea, and as a result «the rest
territory between sea and hill at present time
presents the virgin soil turned out as a result
of splitting off and falling of soil» (Krugliko¬
va,
1958,
P.
234).
Similar movements of soil are not sole
on that section of the slope
—
they take pla¬
ce even at present time6. On the basis of our
excavations on the Northern periphery of the
site we can state that the deposits of the Late
Bronze Epoch stretch under the cultural layer
of early Greek settlement before its foundati¬
on were covered with sterile alluvium loamy
soil of
0,3-0,5
m
thickness. Moreover, the
look micro relief of terrace is still changing
under influence of new landslides and proc¬
ess of abrasion.
The small dimensions of the settlement
did not allow investigator to recognize in
it the early Kimmerikon. But observations
of surroundings of it by l.T.Kruglikova and
later by the author provided important resu¬
lt
—
the inexpressive remains of buildings,
areas of ruined cultural layers, separate pits
of the VI
—
V centuries
ВС
were met on the
scaled territory of the maritime Southern slo¬
pe of the mountain. Modern surface of some
terraces and depressions shows that landslide
processes took place there recently and the
slope is in temporary stable condition. In the
«chaos of stones» of the Southern slope at
some sections of it near settlement there are
visible fragments of masonry and buildings
including fragment of powerful wall of
2,5
m
width built of limestone blocks about
1,0
and
more
—
all disfigured by landslips. Some of
these remains could belong either to fortific¬
ations of Early Kimmerikon, or to fortificati¬
ons of the maritime part of fortress of the IV-
VI centuries AD (See below). Never-the-less,
272
Summary
fragments of amphorae and other pottery of
both period were found on the modern surfa¬
ce of «stone chaos», in alluvium soil of coast¬
al recipices and stony beaches. Moreover, the
fragments of amphorae of the second quarter
of the VI
—
V centuries
ВС
and of the first
centuries AD were met in numerous quantity
on surface on different sections of this slope.
The observations carried out by the auth¬
or revealed the anthropogene terraces on the
northern more stable slope of the mountain
(under citadel
—
see below) with the remains
of breast-wall and dwellings also inhabited
from the edge of the VI century
ВС,
there
were also found artifacts dated from the edge
of VI-V centuries
ВС
to the Early Mediev¬
al Period. Moreover, on the rest sections of
maritime there were also found remains of
small archaeological objects which gave arti¬
facts of the VI-V centuries
ВС,
of Hellenistic
Period and first centuries AD. All these facts
show that as initially and later on apart from
territories of the «Western» site and settleme¬
nt at «Hill A» there were mastered all slopes
of mountain.
So, the problem of precise localization
of early
«polis»
although remains opened
for debates and further single-minded exca¬
vations but at present time it has got some
clearness: as we can see, the concrete pra-Ki-
mmerikon has not existed as an urban unity
which later was moved to the other slope of
mountain, while the
polis Kimmerikon
par¬
adoxically existed. It is known that in Anti¬
quity, the existence of urban center was not
the determining factor of
polis:
«such defi¬
nition of
polis put
first and foremost one but
not most important peculiarity of this social
organism: rather small territory and urban ce¬
nter united around it. The first peculiarity is
not determining one and it is derivative from
more important characteristics of
polis,
the
other is incorrect. This proves the example of
two most famous poleis of Greece. In Attica
,
for example, there were not only one but two
urban centers (Athens), Sparta has no urban
center at all it represented the society of five
villages. The same system of settling we see
in Tarentum. On the whole in Greece there
were widely spread political institutions wh¬
ich have no own urban centers but taken as
polies as
by their own citizens and other
Hel¬
lens
too. Probably, same political institutions
were more typical in the Archaic Epoch, to
this testifies Phukididus
[1,5,1 ]
but more wide
they were spread and later
—
up to the first
centuries AD. At any case Pausanius knows
political formations devoid of urban centers
but having
polis
status as we can understa¬
nd from his description of Panoneum [X,
4]»
which represented itself a village situated al¬
ong mountain stream (Greece in Antiquity, I,
1983,
P.
10-11).
At present time we can surely note that
Kimmerikon also has not formed the regular
urban structure. This fact can be explained by
different reasons, and first of all, by compli¬
cated geological structure of mountain: in its
landslide relief there are fixed up minimum
(V.G.) three catastrophic events. First was
great and took part in geological time, pro¬
bably in Late Pleistocene. Other events took
part not long ago
—
in Historical Time. With
them the activation of great Late Pleistocene
maritime landslide and formation of a new
ditch in its head part are connected (Klukin,
1995,
P.
112 — 117).
The date of this activa¬
tion testify deformation of the shore and ar¬
chaeological sites, including settlement «Hill
A», situated there. These deformations could
cause the moving of cultural deposits to the
sea or burying of these layers by landslide
soil. During the time of existence of Bospor¬
ian State it, as far as
Opuk
mountain, under¬
went earthquakes for several times (Vinokur-
ov,Nikonov, 1999,Tolstikov, 1999,Nikonov,
2001).
Some of them, like earthquake of
63
ВС
were disastrous, demolishing complete
Bosporian towns
(«Pontus
has absorbed near
Meotis towns Pyrrha and Antissa»
—
И
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
273
NH, II,
206,
situated in the distance of few
dozen km off
Opuk)
and devastating envir¬
onments. To antiquities of
Opuk
having not
ordinary geological structure the consequen¬
ces of earthquakes were not less destructive.
Probably, in the time of Strabo the European
Kimmerikon either could be still lying in rui¬
ns or it only started to rehabilitate itself after
earthquake of
63
ВС.
Probably it was a rea¬
son of contamination of two different towns
with the similar names and poor knowledge
of geographers of that time. The presence on
top plateau on
Opuk
Mountain with precipice
edges which make it inaccessible, of a shel¬
ter (and later citadel) probably permitted on
some stages of its development to avoid the
erection of fortifications round official center
of town. And, at last, the probably insignifi¬
cant division of labor among first citizen of
Kimmerikon mainly dealing with agriculture
and trade transporting do not contradict with
possible unity of group of farm-houses and
some public objects under the name
«polis
Kimmerikon».
So, we should realise
polis
Kimmerikon
and later Bosporian town Kimmerikon as the
whole assemblage of sites situated on the sl¬
opes of mountain. The fact that Kimmerikon
was really a town and at period of independ¬
ence from dynasty of Spartokids was really
polis
is proved by numerous of unfortified
rural settlements situated round the mounta¬
in, on the whole existed in the
V
-ПІ
centuri¬
es
ВС.
For these settlement
Opuk
Mountain
and Kimmerikon were the best and the only
one
refugium
in the case of danger
—
the pr¬
esence of early cultural deposits covered by
late dust deposits in the ash hill near citadel
insure the presence of an early shelter of the
top of mountain. Here it is necessary to note
that singular rural settlements in the maritime
environs of
Opuk
have appeared practically
simultaneously with settlement at «Hill A»
and they leaned upon this shelter.
So, we can suppose that the process of
urban building on
Opuk
Mountain in a lar¬
ge measure depended on concrete geologic¬
al conditions which did not permit to create
there habitual regular urban planning. These
conditions probably promoted the creation of
specific for Bosporus form of urban institut¬
ion which, never-the-less was not unique in
Antiquity.
The observation of this territory have sho¬
wn that there had been several areas of active
agricultural use. Besides adjoining to Koyash
salt Lake land there was actively mastered
the hollow of Kyrkkoyash (continental) Salt
Lake with fertile lands. There by observations
of the author were found the remains of seve¬
ral rural unfortified settlements of the IV
-
II
centuries
ВС.
The biggest of them consisted
of minimum
5
separate buildings divided by
space about
50
m. The ruins stony basements
of dwellings are still visible on the modern
surface. The farm-houses were, probably, not
large, about two-three rooms. On the surfa¬
ce there were found numerous fragments of
amphorae (including stamped samples) of the
majority leading Hellenistic centers of
Pont¬
us
and Asia Minor
-
the material common to
all bosporian sites of that period. Also there
were well represented an ordinary wheel-th¬
rown and hand-made pottery. The lands of
environs of Koyash and Kyrkkoyash Lakes
limited on the North by hill edge was prob¬
ably the nearest
chora
of Kimmerikon of the
IV-II centuries
ВС.
At that period there were
also mastered distant lands adjoining the ea¬
stern bank of Uzunlar Lake which probably
was the border of Kimmerikon
chora
in the
West and the lands deeper in steppes.
There is no doubt that join of Kimmeri¬
kon to the State of Spartokids in the end of
the V century
ВС
(about
406
ВС)
stimulat¬
ed the mastering of distant environs of
Opuk
Mountain
—
the process of wide mastering
of rural territory of Bosporus is characteri¬
stic to the IV century
ВС
—
between
410-
274
Summary
406
ВС
the sharp change of foreign policy of
Early Spartokids took place
—
after a period
of some confrontation Pantikapaion and its
«tyrants« conclude the alliance with Athens
(Blavatskaya,
1959,
P.
71—72)
and since that
time Bosporus starts the wide and active gr¬
ain trade which is well illustrated by literary
sources. In the light of Bosporus expansion
against still independent Feodosia which was
started by Satyros I and participation of He-
racleia in conflict (Rostovzev,
1925,
P.
130
—132;
Gaydukevich,
1949,
P.
215;
Shelov,
1950,
P.
173;
Blavatskiy,
1981,
P.
21—22;
Shelov-Kovedyaev,
1985,
P.
118-119
etc.),
K.immerikon with its mooting and water spr¬
ings besides agricultural importance gained a
strategic value.
The majority of rural settlements of Kim-
merikon
chora
occur til! the middle
—
second
half of the HI centuries
ВС,
only few of them
outlast the edge of the III and II centuries.
The process of development and decline of
rural settlements of Kimmerikon
chora
does
dot differ from the evolution of the same sites
of Bosporian
chora.
Up to I century
ВС
the
majority of rural settlements near
Opuk
mo¬
untain stopped their existence and population
concentrated on the territory of mountain ma¬
stering its slopes. At this period Kimmerikon
do not distinguish with its economic activity
—
the layers and artifacts of the end of the
II
—
I centuries
ВС
are weak and not num¬
erous. Probably the town has hardly suffered
from earthquake of
63
ВС
while at Mithrad-
ates and Post-Mithradates Period when geop¬
olitical influence spread on the whole Taurika
Kimmerikon lost its strategic importance and
was for a long time restoring and developing
as an ordinary agricultural center and its hi¬
ghest flourishing in this role falls at the I-III
centuries AD
—
the quantity of rural settle¬
ments of its
chora
do not increase while it is
noticeable a significant rustication of town's
life
—
probably at that time some changes of
land-tenure take place.
In the middle of the III century AD the
«barbarian» tribes (Sarmatians, Alans, An¬
cient Germans etc.
—
Jordanie,
Getica,
28,
117)
settled on the Azov Littoral. So named
«Scythian wars» (Remennikov,
1954,
P.89-
120)
concerned Bosporus are usually con¬
nected with these tribes. Zosimus notes that
the legal dynasty stopped on Bosporus and
«unworthy people» came to power (co-reign
of Pharsanzes and Reskouporis V, see: Go-
lenko,
1978,
P.
93,
note
38).
Bosporus which
was probably in alliance relations with bar¬
barians had to place its fleet in their disposal
for undertaking robber campaigns of the ter¬
ritory of Roman possession in Asia Minor
(Zosimus, I,
31,32).
If after momentary invasions of barbarian
tribes in
260—
270-ies AD the Kimmerikon
site on the western slope («western site») prac¬
tically stopped its existence as a town, mean¬
while the life on the terraced northern slope
and on top plateau does on. After the defeat
of Phophorsus in the battle with Chersonesus,
Kimmerikon (now top plateau and northern
slope) again becomes a frontier town on the
Western borders of Bosporus (Kruglikova,
1966,
P.
18—19;
Golenko,
1999).
At that time
also was undertaken a complete reconstruc¬
tion of top citadel of Kimmerikon (Golenko,
1999)
which completely coincide with simi¬
lar works on Uzunlar (Asander's) rampart
which again becomes the western border of
the State (Lantzov, Golenko,
1999,
P.
177—
181).
The rest part of Bosporian «barbarian»
army having been released from captivity
by Chersonesians themselves (Const. Porph.
De adm.
Imp.,
LIII,
195)
was settled as fed-
erats on the frontier lands (Yurochkin,
2001,
P.131—
132)
to which on the South-Western
border of Bosporus besides Kimmerikon and
its
chora
were reckoned the lands of neigh¬
bor Kutaion. This fact is testified by the finds
from necropolis of Djurga^Oba near Kutaion
(Ermolin, Yurochkin,
2002).
Ancient
Kimmerïkon
and its
chora
275
The top citadel of Kimmerikon is one of
the best preserved site of
Opuk
Mountain.
The safety of fortress and elements of its de¬
fensive system was much better at the time
when it was visited by P.Dubrux (Dubrux,
1858,
P.
69—77)
and l.Blaramberg and it is
well testified by descriptions and graphical
materials carried out by them. We do not exa¬
ctly know in what condition has been citadel
at the time of the visit of expedition of Yu.Yu.
Marti in
1927
(Marti,
1928,
P.
103—115)
and
what were losses which the site suffered in
the Second World War, but since the time
of excavation of I.B.Zeest and I.T.Kruglik-
ova the safety of the site practically did not
changed7. Citadel is situated on the distance
about a little bit more then
2
km North-East-
ward of site of Kimmerikon and it is erected
on the North-Eastern brink of top plateau on
the altitude
170-165
m
above the level of the
sea. The triangular plateau armoured by lim¬
estone is impregnable from all sides
—
the
height of its precipices is
15-40
м.
This fo¬
rtress has minimum five lines of defense:
first of all, precipices of plateau, preserved
ditch-scarp,
προτειχισμα,
outer curtains
and a large bastion-tower in the North-We¬
stern part of fortress which, probably, repr¬
esents the fortress «citadel» or donjon. Into
fortification system of top citadel are also
included the remains of fortifications pushed
of the territory of citadel and adjoining the
precipices of plateau. They are erected on the
watershed of the Eastern slope of
Opuk
but
represent the impact assemblage. The most
monumental is the defensive wall running
by watershed of the Eastern slope from the
North-Eastern precipice of plateau to the sea
coast to the distance of
650
м,
the traces of
its destroyed part used for stone extraction by
inhabitant of
Opuk
village is visible in micro
relief on the distance of 300m more. The So¬
uthern maritime extremity of the wall runs to
the large rock with vertical walls of
5—15
m
height while its maritime extremity is ruined
by landslides. The wall were erected of large
stones (about
1,6x1,0x0,5
m) which formed
two «armours» filled in with stones and loam.
The width of it oscillates from
2,9
to
3,5
m.
On all its length the wall was strengthened
by towers (ruined) which were attached (or
hewed in) to the rocks included into the body
of the wall. The section of this wall situated
near the biggest rock («tower» by Dubrux)
was excavated by author, in deposit near the
wall there were found not numerous fragme¬
nts of amphorae of the III-V1 centuries AD.
Probably the remains of that wall were the
basement of less powerful wall with adobe
elements of construction.
The citadel itself represents a rectangular
fortress stretched along the Eastern precipice
of plateau. The Western outer curtain preser¬
ved practically on all its length
—
about
176
m. The wall of curtain surpasses the modern
surface on
0.5 — 1.4
m
and more. On it the
traces of two small towers remained
(5,0—
7,0
x
5,0—7,0
m). They were built of large
blocks of limestone and situated on the dista¬
nce
40
m
from each other. The section of in¬
ner curtain divides the territory of citadel into
two parts, in the place of its junction with the
outer curtain there visible the remains of an
other tower, the eastern extremity of the inner
wall was also strengthened by tower
6,0—7,0
x
6,0—7,0
m. At present time the complete
square of citadel is
1,45
hectares. One of the
sections of the western outer curtain was ex¬
cavated by author. The curtain of
2,60—2,80
m
width is built of big slightly worked up
blocks of limestone which were skilfull ad¬
justed one to an other, the space between the
outer armours of the wall was filled in with
stones and loam soil. The curtain was erected
in traditional for the ordinary Bosporian tow¬
ns mode. The wall remained on the height of
2,6
m. It was built of the leveled surface of
virgin rock and artificial pouring of limestone
crumb, and, probably, the remains of the pr¬
evious curtain (distinguishes by the slightly
276
Summary
different manner of masonry). On the dista¬
nce of
4,2
m
near the curtain the remains of
προτειχισμα
were excavated. It was built of
limestone on the loamy substruction. It rema¬
ined on the height of about
1,0
m
and width of
0,8
m. Behind proteichisma the ditch-scarp is
situated. On the North the curtain completes
with a large «bastion» of dimensions
20,3
x
23,5
m,
with the traces of inner building co¬
nstruction. Probably the Southern, opposite,
extremity of curtain has been strengthened by
tower of more modest dimensions but it was
either ruined by Tatars. The traces of eastern
and southern curtains were not found, prob¬
ably the absence of them were compensated
with the height of precipices.
To the inner face of curtain the assembl¬
age of «barracks» sides with. It is stretch al¬
ong the fortress wall and is separated from it
by the free space of
1,1—1,2
m
width where
probably the stairs to the wall were situated.
The assemblage represents the building of
casemate type with numerous separate roo¬
ms. Three rooms of barracks were excavated
by author. The barracks have two common
walls: one wall faced to curtain and the opp¬
osite one
—
to the street running along barra¬
cks and curtain. The walls forming the rooms
by their extremities attach perpendicularly
to these common walls dividing assemblage
into several isolated sections. Two excavated
rooms have a common entrance which just
at threshold transforms into two entrances to
each room. The same constructive mode was
used in the towers of Kutlak fortress in the di¬
stant Bosporian border near Sudak. The walls
of
0,8
m
width remained on the height up to
1,65
m. On the floor of one room a kiln was
built and round it the fragments of amphora
(red-clay, with wide mouth, IV—VI c.AD),
probably fallen from the probable second flo¬
or, was dispersed. Near the mouth of kiln the
diorite
grain grater was found.
Before excavation of curtain, inner buil¬
dings of citadel and its ash-hill (see below)
the dating of citadel (to say correct, its last
constructive period) was approximate and of¬
ten subjective: the first investigators of
Opuk
—
P.Dubrux and I.Blaramberg dated it by the
time of Antiquity in general; Yu.Yu.Marti
—
be Late Hellenistic Period; I.B.Zeest
—
by
the beginning of present era; I.T.Kruglikova
—
by the first centuries AD. The last point
of view confirmed in Russian and Ukrainian
science (among the latest publications, See:
Gorlov, Lopanov,
1997,
P.
141).
While dating
the remains of citadel the scholars usually le¬
ant upon casual finds from its territory and on
analysis of historical situation in suppositio¬
nal period of foundation of that fortification.
For all these, according to active fortification
activity of Asander to the time of his reign the
preference was usually given.
The citadel was undoubtedly built on the
remains of previous fortress or shelter in pe¬
riod not earlier then the first half of the IV
century AD. Just on that period falls the final
stage of wars between Bosporus and Cherso-
nesus which started in the end of the 111 centu¬
ry AD. In these wars Kimmerikon has played
his concrete role connected with the gradual,
but quick changes of Bosporian borders. This
period of history of both States is poorly ill¬
ustrated by literary sources. The main source
in this question remains Chapter
53
of
Co¬
nstantine
Porphirogenitus' study
«De ad-mi-
nistrando
imperio».
The historical reality of
events described in this literary source is still
debatable among some scholars.
Constantine
informs us about three war between Cherso-
nesus and Bosporus. First one take place at
the reign of Emperor Diocletianus about
291-
292
AD (Charmatta,
1967,
P.
204
f); the sec¬
ond one burst out after joint military actions
of Romans and Chersonesians at
Ister in
the
second decade of the IV century AD. In loc¬
ality «Kafa» (modern and ancient Feodosia)
the Bosporian army was defeated and there
the border landmarks were erected marking a
new border of Bosporian State.
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
277
The third war took place not earlier then
336
ВС.
In the result of the next defeat of
Bosporians the border of Bosporian posse¬
ssion on Kerch peninsula again was moved
from Kafa and established at Kibernik (Ki¬
mmerikon) where the border landmarks were
erected. With the events of this final Bospor-
us-Chersonesus' war the cardinal reconstruc¬
tion of citadel on the top plateau and erection
of monumental wall on the watershed of the
Eastern slope of
Opuk
were connected (Go-
lenko,
1999).
In period of not early then the
first half of the IV century AD and not in the
reign of Bosporian king Asander as it was su¬
pposed before, to the final reconstruction was
subjected not only citadel of Kimmerikon
and its defensive wall, but Uzunlar rampart
and ditch. These two fortifications together
for many centuries formed an entity frontier
system defending the native lands of Bospo¬
rus (Lantzov, Golenko,
1999).
The ditch was
deepened and the rampart poured some more.
Here it is necessary to note that the choice
of Uzunlar rampart flanked by Kimmerikon
on the sea coast was not casual
—
after the
defeat to Bosporus were specially left the ter¬
ritory subjected to Bosporus on the eve of its
territorial expansion.
The find of runar inscription under the
walls of Kimmerikon' citadel8 allow to supp¬
ose that the guard of the border was carried
by «barbarians-federates» from the number of
ancient German tribes settled on the coast of
Meotis and Bosporus and involved into confli¬
cts between Bosporus and Chersonesus (Gole¬
nko, Yurochkin and others,
1999,
P.
77—97).
Important artifacts dating the main stages
of development of shelter-fortress-citadel on
the top plateau of
Opuk
Mountain were found
during excavations of ash-hill of citadel whi¬
ch have been undertaken by the author twice9
on different areas of this object, and excava¬
tions of dust deposits formed under the outer
face of western curtain of citadel.
According to the excavated artifacts, the
life on the territory of plateau and forming of
dust deposits lasted continuously with diffe¬
rent degree of activity since the edge of the
VI and V centuries
ВС
till the first half of the
VI century AD. The dust deposits under the
western outer curtain of citadel were formed
during the final stage of its existence
—
from
the first half of the IV to the first half of the
VI centuries AD.
The life on citadel continued even after
the appearance in the Crimea of Huns who
in the edge of IV and V centuries inhabited
the territories between Chersonesus and Bo¬
sporus.
After the demolition of citadel in the first
third of the VI century AD (conflict between
Huns and Byzantine) the life in Kimmerikon
and in its environs was gradually coming to
standstill, probably there still existed some
separate villages or single dwellings hidden
in the rocks but from the point of view of his¬
torical demography the demolition of citadel
have caused the serious catastrophic conseq¬
uences. After annexation of Bosporian lands
by Byzantine Empire ant the reign of Justin-
ianus, the citadel was not restored because it
probably has lost its previous importance as
frontier town.
After appearance in the Crimea and on
Opuk
Mountain of «carriers» of Saltovo-
Mayatskaya Culture (of Khazar Kaganat) the
infrastructure of
Opuk
cardinally changed
what was causes by different traditions and
economical development of new population.
The life in citadel stops. In
1989—1990
on
the southern slope of
Opuk
Mountain there
was found by the author large early Medieval
settlement
—
one of the biggest settlement
of Saltovo-Mayatskaya Culture on the Kerch
Peninsula. To the settlement separate farm¬
houses scattered in the nearest small bays
and depressions of the maritime slope were
neighboring. The similar small separate dwe¬
llings appeared and on the site of
Kimmerik-
278
Summary
on. The open territories of the northern slope
of mountain (terraced) were less inhabited
by new population. Moreover, in the steppe
space of environs of Kimmerikon there was
found only one settlement of this culture
-
se¬
ttlement near Uzunlar Lake, and it also leant
upon natural fortification of Mountain Konc-
hek situated there.
The settlement mentioned above is situ¬
ated in the hollow-like valley of the south¬
ern maritime slope of
Opuk.
The dwellings
of settlement are dispersed on the square of
14
hectares on the bottom of the hollow, its
slopes and separate terraces of adjoining edg¬
es. The settlement is well sheltered by rocky
edges and is practically indiscernible in com¬
plicated relief. In the hollow there are visible
in micro relief the remains of minimum
25
separate farmhouses of practically similar
planning. Each farmhouse consisted of adj¬
oining to each other dwellings (two or three)
and attached buildings of household needs.
Not large rectangular personal plots of hous¬
es were protected by stone fences one wall of
which was usually facing at the road crossing
the hollow (probably existed from the time of
Antiquity) and running to fountain.
On the slopes of terraces there were fo¬
und remains of numerous building of house¬
hold purposes. Most of them are the circular
buildings erected from stones of limestone
with the usage of elements of natural relief.
To some buildings small rectangular rooms
are attached. These constructions probably
represent sheep-fold and adjoining stalls.
By author and A.Djanov (Sudak Muse¬
um-Preserve) there was excavated a farmh¬
ouse situated in the central part of the holl¬
ow (Golenko, Djanov,
2002).
It represented
a rectangular building consisted of two large
rooms (of
56
and
31
sq.m) deepened into gr¬
ound. To the building was attached annex for
domestic needs. The walls of the building (of
0.70-1,0
m
width) remained on the height up
to
0.8
m.
In the cultural deposits of the farmhouse
were met not numerous but representative ar¬
tifacts: fragments of early medieval pythoses
and amphorae, oinochoai, typical kitchen po¬
ttery, clay tile etc. On the whole, the assem¬
blage of pottery is typical for site of Khazar
Epoch situated on the Kerch Peninsula which
can be dated by the second quarter of the IX
century. In the IX century in settlements of
Saltovo-Mayatskaya Culture in the Crimea
starts the building of Christian churches and
the changes of burial rites are fixed up
(Bar¬
anov,
1990,
P.
135-139).
Up to the beginning
of the X century in cultural and religious as¬
pects the population have been more drawn
towards Byzantine Empire then to Khazar
Kaganat. Here, it is important to note that du¬
ring exploration of the territory of settlement
there were found the remains of building by
its configuration resembling single nave ba¬
silica. The stones of the building lie on the
modern surface. The settlement of Saltovo-
Mayatskaya culture discontinue in the second
quarter of the X century. In subsequent time
up to time of arrival of Tatar villages on the
foot of
Opuk
mountain the live stops there.
Footnotes
1
Till present time this
Périples
remains very debat¬
able: some scholars date it by V-VI centuries AD, others
—
to more early period
—
probably the evidences of
it originate from
Périples
of Menippes (I AD) or from
Arrian
himself.
2
See Lantzov, Golenko,
1999;
Golenko,
1999.
3
The biggest part of them was pull down in the end
of
XIX
and beginning of the XX centuries, part of them
remained visible on the modern surface. The complete
plan of the city walls before their destruction was made
by Dubrux and Blaramberg.
4
At that time
—
Institue
of History of Material Cul¬
ture of Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Moscow.
5
Recently there was made an attempt to rise the date
of foundation of Kimmerion to more late time
-
begin¬
ning of the V century
ВС,
but the supposed date is very
debatable.
6
The whole body of mountain lies on virgin clay
and undergoes landslips. In
1991,1997
and
2003
the
au-
Ancient Kimmerikon and its
chora
279
thor of present paper was an eye-witness of small land¬
slides on the same slope covering territory of several
hudreds of sq.m.
7
The description of antiquities of
Opuk
carried out
by P.Dubrux show that up to the first half of
XIX
cen¬
tury the site has been used by Tatars for stone extraction,
moreover, in
1990
some destruction were made by mili¬
tary builders there. Since
1997
on
Opuk
Mountain the
National Preserve is functioning.
8
The find of so unique for
Notti
Black sea littoral
epigraphic document has risen to non-adequate reaction
verging on (compair for example: Shalyga,
2000).
9
First in collaboration with Yu.V.Gorlov. |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Golenko, Vladimir K. |
| author_facet | Golenko, Vladimir K. |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Golenko, Vladimir K. |
| author_variant | v k g vk vkg |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV022468900 |
| callnumber-first | D - World History |
| callnumber-label | DK508 |
| callnumber-raw | DK508.9.K47 |
| callnumber-search | DK508.9.K47 |
| callnumber-sort | DK 3508.9 K47 |
| callnumber-subject | DK - Russia, Soviet Union, Former Soviet Republics, Poland |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)163617446 (DE-599)BVBBV022468900 |
| era | Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02310nam a2200577 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022468900</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20100719 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070618s2007 ab|| |||| 00||| rus d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789668111846</subfield><subfield code="9">978-966-8111-84-6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="z">9789668111842</subfield><subfield code="9">978-966-8111-84-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)163617446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022468900</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">rus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">DK508.9.K47</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">6,12</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Golenko, Vladimir K.</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga</subfield><subfield code="c">V. K. Golenko</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Simferopolʹ</subfield><subfield code="b">Sonat</subfield><subfield code="c">2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">407 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., Kt.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">In kyrill. Schr., russ. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr.</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Archaeology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Auxiliary sciences of history</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Archäologie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology)</subfield><subfield code="z">Ukraine</subfield><subfield code="z">Kerch peninsula</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Crimea</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ukraine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom)</subfield><subfield code="x">Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine)</subfield><subfield code="x">Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Halbinsel Kertsch</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4497586-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Halbinsel Kertsch</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4497586-7</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr.</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015676426</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09014</subfield><subfield code="g">38</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09014</subfield><subfield code="g">477</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Crimea Ukraine Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom) Antiquities Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine) Antiquities Halbinsel Kertsch (DE-588)4497586-7 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Crimea Ukraine Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom) Antiquities Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine) Antiquities Halbinsel Kertsch |
| id | DE-604.BV022468900 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T17:43:44Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T20:58:15Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789668111846 |
| language | Russian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015676426 |
| oclc_num | 163617446 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 407 S. Ill., Kt. |
| publishDate | 2007 |
| publishDateSearch | 2007 |
| publishDateSort | 2007 |
| publisher | Sonat |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Golenko, Vladimir K. Verfasser aut Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga V. K. Golenko Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora Simferopolʹ Sonat 2007 407 S. Ill., Kt. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier In kyrill. Schr., russ. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. gnd rswk-swf Archaeology Auxiliary sciences of history Archäologie Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Ukraine Kerch peninsula Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd rswk-swf Crimea Ukraine Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom) Antiquities Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine) Antiquities Halbinsel Kertsch (DE-588)4497586-7 gnd rswk-swf Halbinsel Kertsch (DE-588)4497586-7 g Geschichte 600 v. Chr.-300 v. Chr. z Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 s DE-604 Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Golenko, Vladimir K. Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga Archaeology Auxiliary sciences of history Archäologie Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Ukraine Kerch peninsula Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4071507-3 (DE-588)4497586-7 |
| title | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |
| title_alt | Ancient Kimmerikon and its chora |
| title_auth | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |
| title_exact_search | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |
| title_full | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga V. K. Golenko |
| title_fullStr | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga V. K. Golenko |
| title_full_unstemmed | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga V. K. Golenko |
| title_short | Drevnij Kimmerik i ego okruga |
| title_sort | drevnij kimmerik i ego okruga |
| topic | Archaeology Auxiliary sciences of history Archäologie Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Ukraine Kerch peninsula Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd |
| topic_facet | Archaeology Auxiliary sciences of history Archäologie Funde Excavations (Archaeology) Ukraine Kerch peninsula Crimea Ukraine Cimmerian Bosporus (Kingdom) Antiquities Kerch Peninsula (Ukraine) Antiquities Halbinsel Kertsch |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015676426&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT golenkovladimirk drevnijkimmerikiegookruga AT golenkovladimirk ancientkimmerikonanditschora |