TRYPILLYA CULTURE PROTO-CITIES:
HISTORY OF DISCOVERY AND INVESTIGATIONS
di M. Yu Videiko
Civilisation of Old Europe with its fortified settlements, temples and developed religion flourished in Neolithic and Copper Age . From the end of VI till the beginning of III Mill. B.C. Tripillya – Cucuteni culture was the Eastern border of Old Europe. When in the second part of V Mil. B.C. civilisations of Vinca and Karanovo dissapeared, Tripillya for 1000 years the Old Europe Civilisation traditions conti-nied. We think, that Tripillya – culture proto – cities were the largest settlements in Europe 6000 – 5000 years ago. This book is about the history of their discovery an investigations.
On beginning of 70-th years of ХХth century two events happened, which played an important role in further researches of Trypillya culture. First from them - this is opening of Trypillya proto - cities, giants settlements- of Copper Age at Cherkassy domain. This event meant, that at the end of ХХth century, in the center of Europe, in Ukraine, opened unknown to science proto - urban civilization, contemporary with analogous phenomenons at Ancient East. Open-ing History and study Trypillya proto - cities in sort reminds of history of all Trypillya culture discovering: remains of ancient settlements were discovered a long while ago, but it were some time necessary and efforts in ordered to comprhectaresend, what was found.
A Second event is associated with first and imprescriptible from it. In order to find this settlements the new (for archaeology of Trypillya culture) research methods were used: aerial and magnetic survey. Own these methods were not in archaeology new. At all- then aerial survey used already on beginning of twentieth age, and magnetic survey in archaeology from end 50- years, and in Trypillya archaeology - from beginning of 60-th years of XXth century. The new was their complex combination with some traditional methods of archaeology.
Plans of the selttlement near Maydanets : A – aerial survey map (after K.V.Shyshkin); B – remains of settlement after field prospecting (after M.Shmaglij, K.Zinkovsky and V.Dudkin). Investigations of 1971 – 1972. 1,2,3 – remains of dwellings; 4- burial mounds from Bronze Age.
Trypillya proto - cities were discovered by К. Shyshkin, military topographer, a specialist in aerial identification. Learning the photos of different Ukraine regions, especially from Cherkassy domain territory, he found the traces of the large settlements, which were unknown to archaeologists.
In 1964 K.Shyshkin together with V. Stefanovich inspected fields near the village Vilkhovets, under Zvenyhorodka, where had view of one of such locations, which appeared by settlement of Trypillya culture, greater for all of known by then is 110 hectares.
Then K.Shyshkin analyzed 11 places, already described by T.Passek, a place of which was well definited. The results were shocking: Maydanetske had area 270 hectares, Kosenivka 70 hectares, Sushkivka 27 hectares, Chychyrkozivka 50 hectares, P'yanioshkove - 60 hectares. After aerialphoto's analysis was picked out over 100 settlements, in V.Stefanovych list were only 30 from them, among new - giants: Tallyanky with square near 450 hectares, Dobrovody - 250 hectares, Nebelivka - 300 hectares. On photos were read the large circle structures, that broke down under separate dwellings, streets and quarters, ditches traces. The Settlements Trypillya culture had size and appearance of cities (Шишкiн, 1973).
Usually, majority of mentioned above settlements were known to archaeologists before. Some of them in ХІХ end is on ХХ ctnturies beginning were explored ! These excavations can be con-sidered, as prehistory of proto - cities studying, cumulative material today one can be entangled for development of new problems. But scientific research to phenomenon conducts only last thirty years.
We shall describe here a history of field archaeological in-vestigations and arheometry works, than - problem of historiography.
PREHISTORY: 1891 - 1970.
In 1902- 1903 yy. E.Shtern dug out the oddments of eight dwellings into Petreny by Belcy in Moldova. In second ХХ half a. stood it's known, that this one of most of Trypillya culture settle-ments in Moldova - by 30 hectares. Neolithic sites from this region were included by this author to Danube cultures circle and borne to pre - Mycenae period , dated by third millennium BC. It is inter-esting, that a dating this is held out factually to beginning 60- years of XX century, while appeared the first absolute isotope dates for Trypillya - Cucuteni culture.
Remains of burnt dwellings. Maydanets’ke, Cherkassy domain. Excavated by M.Shmaglij and M.Videiko, 1988.
Excavations of V.Khvoika and E.Shtern cause bending to study of Trypillya culture in Russia. A Emperor archaeological com-mission committed to famous archaeologist O.Spicyn to see out the excavations at Kolodyste (now Cherkassy domain), where before that Vasyl Domanyts'ky opened " threshing-floors" - places, covered by the burnt clay(Доманицкий,1899, Спицын, 1904). So was been accorded first data about building and cultural belonging of Trypillya culture settlements - giants in country between South Bug and Dni-pro.
Considerable works by Popudya and villages and P'yanioshkove near Uman saw out in 1911 р. Marian Himner ( Himner, 1933). It dug out the big areas on this settlements, that represented the different development phases of Trypillya culture (ВІ-ІІ and СІ beginning ) in this region.
In 1916 р. V.Kozlovs'ka excavated some dwellings at Sushkivka , also at this region (Козловська, 1926). Already in this time the investigated remains was accounted special type of Trypil-lya culture, by basic distinction of which a presence was of painted pottery pottery in considerable amount. Materials from these exca-vations great while remained whether by not one source for study of Trypillya culture in country between South Bug and Dnipro. In 1924 - 1927 yy. Petro Kurinny digs out settlement by Tomashivka (real square near 250 hectares) at Uman district, (Курінний, 1925. 1926а; 1926б). In 1927 B.Bezvenglins'ky for the first time dug out settlement near Maydanets. To regret, materials from these excavations lost.
Pottery from Tripillya settlement near Stina, after excavations by Sergej Gamchenko at 1929.
S.S.Gamchenko at 1929 opened and M.L.Makarevich in 1958- 60 yy. Continied investigations of an settlement of late stage of Trypillya culture near Stina village on Dniste. Here an interesting complex of painted pottery, ceramics with impresses to textile fabrics were found. This СІ stage settlement had area into 1 square km., near a row of small settlements was found( Макаревич, 1958). Vale-ria Kozlovs'ka continued excavations near Sushkivka at 1926 (Козловська, 1928, 1926б), and in 1936 opened researches of set-tlement by Volodymyrivka on Synyukha river(Пассек, 1941). At that time a painted dwelling Model was found here. Excavations at Volodymyrivka continued T.Passek in 1945 and 1946. Was not only inquired into separate dwellings, but composed an instruction plan, on which was drifted to 200 dwellings (Пассек, 1947, 1949). It was first, and to beginning 70 years - the singular plan of big Trypillya settlement, formed exceptionally for data of visual researches without use of technical methods. Interestingly, that later it was in whole endorsed by K.Shyshkin by identification of aerial-photo(Шишкін, 1985).
Plan of the large Trypillya settlement near Volodymyrivka (after T.S.Passek, 1949)
In 60-and 70 years a considerable scope of investigative works was executed by expedition under guidance O.Tsvek, which learned the instructions middle of Trypillya culture from stages ВІ, ВІ/ІІ, and BII near Vesely Kut (150 hectares), Myropillya (200 hec-tares), Harbuzyn (70 hectares) and other places (Цвек, 1972,1974,1975,1976, 1978,1980а,1980б,1980в). By Result of these researches stood generalizing description of developed phase of Trypillya culture between South Bug and Dnipro(Цвек, 1987).
Considerable payment into archaeological inspections of Trypillya culture at Uman district into 60 - 70th years brought in the local naturalists V.Stefanovich and H.Hraban, who found and charted about 130 settlements (Храбан, 1961; 1963; Стефанович, 1968).
1971 - 1993.
Following researches bore out any amount of elements from these identifications ( Дудкин,1978, Шмаглий,1980, Круц, 1989), however together from that under time of field researches appeared, that to map of Trypillya culture settlements at Uman region K.Shyshkin settlements trace to treat critically. Works of K.Shyshkin came into notice of archaeologists, and already in 1970 - 1971 р. S.Bibikov, M.Shmaglij , M.Shtiglic saw out settlements, of settlements definite by it (Штиглиц, 1971).
In 1971 y. on Maydanets settlement worked Trypillya party from Institute of Archaeology from Kyiv under the guidance of M.Shmaglij and from 1972 - Trypillya Complex Expedition (TCE). Exclusive of visual inspection here will be pressed into the service of geophysical magnetic survey, the results of which audited by exca-vations. So was developed a new methods and broken the ice to complex study of Tripillya settlements (Шмаглій, Дудкін, 3iньковський, 1973). Excavations in Maydanets continued to 1991 (Шмаглій, Відейко, 1991). In 1972 - 1974 yy. By V.Dudkin skimmed a magnetic settlement plan (Дудкин, 1978).
In 1981 set to its work a Trypillya expedition under guidance of I.Artemenko. By Her aim was research of big Tripillya settle-ments and barrows on their territory. For hours together investi-gated a few instructions. In 1981 - 1999 O.Kruts explored settle-ment by area 450 hectares by Tallyanki (Круц, Рыжов, 1984: Круц, 1986; 1989; 1990. 1991 but oth.). Т. Г. Мовша conducted the excavations on settlements by Dobrovody and Kosenivka vil-lages (Мовша, 1982, 1983, 1984а. 1984б). O.Tsvek continued excavations at Vesely Kut and Onopriyivka (Цвек, 1982; 1983; 1987; 1990). In 1984 y. was gone on inspection in 30 - km terri-tory around around Maydanets (Шмаглій, Відейко, 1987; 1991).
I.Artemenko inquired into barrows on settlements territory in Tallyanki and Dobrovody, exclusive of that two barrows was dug out in Maydanets (Шмаглий, Видейко, 1987, 1994). All for nine ex-istence years of Trypillya expedition her collaborators dug out about 70 different objects type on enumerated settlements. Exclusive of that was gone on with stowage of plans for data of magnetic survey - fully skimmed Tallyanki, Pischana, partially - Kosenivka.
“Treasure” – pot with bone pedants , under the remains of burnt dwelling found . Maydanets’ke, Cherkassy domain. Excavated at 1979.
Exclusive of excavations were seen out inspections, stow-age of map of Tripillya sites on periphery of big settlements. Con-sequently, 17 settlements were inspected by Maydanets detach-ment in 1981-1985 (Шмаглий, Видейко, 1981, 1982,1985, 1992).Tallyanki detachment inspected the settlements in a little regions of Cherkassy and Kirovograd domains, saw out some exca-vations in Moshuriv and Pischana(Круц, Рыжов 1982, 1984, 1985). In Uman region saw out inspections T.Movsha(Мовша, 1983, 1984а). O.Tsvek found out and saw out research on settlements in pool of Velyka Vys river: Andriyivka, Lekarevo and other(Цвек,1988). In 1990 where found flint mine and workshops of Trypillya culture near Korobchyne at Kirovograd domain (Цвек, 1991а).
In 1990 O.Kruts and author explored remains of the seven dwellings an Tal'ne-2 settlement, in 5 km from Maydanets (Круц, Видейко, 1991). Beside Tal'ne is opened still one, synchronous to it, a small settlement is Tal'ne - 3(Відейко, 1991а). These excava-tions gave informations as for planning, building and disposition of small settlements composing,probably, periphery of big Tripillya centres like Tallyanky and Maydanets.
Realization of scientific sense of these researches in process of time brought over archaeologists to taking idea (by the way, whether for the first time for research history of Trypillya culture) of special scientific forum for discussion of problem. In 1990 - 1991 yy. two field seminars to study of settlements - the giants of Trypillya culture was devoted. Participants of field seminars had a possibility to acquaint with excavations in Maydanets and Tallyanky, Onopriy-ivka and Tal'ne - 2 and to discuss a wide circle of questions, as-sociated with house-building, planning, economy etc. Was lined the study sums of this phenomenon of old history.
1993 - 2001.
Into 1993 M.Videiko explored remains of two dwellings odd-ments on Vilkhovets settlement of Kosenivka type, phase Trypillya CII(Відейко, 1997). According to isotope dates, it was one of the last Trypillya proto - cities, burnt near 2900/2750 BC.
From 1997 E.Ovchinnicov inspected some large settlements in regions, closer to Dnipro. Excavations give evidences, that they are from BII and CI stages of Trypillya and belonged to Kaniv group of Trypillya culture. Among them - Vilshana - 1 (30 hectares), Voro-novka 1 (15 hectares), Vilshana - 2, Voronovka - 2, Petryky, Kvitky - II and Sukhiny (20 hectares), Kvitky - III (25 hectares) (Овчинников, 1999, с.132 - 136). Then E.Ovchinnicov and D.Chornovil excavated remains of dwellings at Nezamozhnyk settlement (settled are near 30 hectares)(Овчинников,Черновол, 1999). They were similar to dwellings, explored at Tallyanky and Maydanets. E.Ovchinnikov in-spected also some another large settlements at this region - Ksaverovo (30 hectares), stage CI or BII; Gorodysche - 2 (near 15 hectares) stage CI; Mliev - 1 (near 50 hectares), CI; and some small settlements (4 - 7 hectares), situated at their periphery (Овчинников,Назаров,2001, с.170 - 182).
At Zelena Dibrova settlement E.Ovchinnikov explored re-mains of dwellings and pottery workshop (Oвчинников,2001).So in this period at country between South Bug and Dnipro were two local groups of Trypillya culture, who built large settlements - protocities. But at eastern regions the largest settlements were only 30 - 50 hectares.
Aerial photography. By superiority of given method there is a possibility to overcome from height archaeological objects considerable for area, to orientate in their disposition, dimensions, planning peculiarities, etc. Following and possibility- of particular importance to see on photos the objects, which lie in earth on depths to 1 metre. Last identified on photographies due to different soil hues and vegetation. Attached to ploughing on fields soil relocates from below top, and on surface came clods of burnt clay from re-mains of Tripillya dwellings. Signs of old settlements loud also by reason of soils reaction and vegetation on building oddments and cultural layer of settlement. Over remainders of Tripillya build-ings congested soil with lesser humus contents weighed with ambi-ent area. So happened a tonal difference by grey locality back-ground general, and rows of dwellings, which give white tone on pied photo. Exclusive of that to exposure of buildings assist microrelief, erosions water and windy, the chemical changes and humidity level reverberate on vegetation state in archaeological instruction place. Are Reinforced by object-glass optics of the photographic camera they allow at first to pick out as general fig. so and separate where- thawed- up to separate buildings (Шишкін, 1985, с.72).
After ploughing the rows of dwellings on settlement visibly it been not that from aircraft, and from tree, from barrow embankment, or contrary beam shore whether nearest height. Namely so-and-so К.Shyshkin in 1964 y. checked out its impressions from identification of Trypillya culture settlement by Vilkhovets village: looked out on neighbouring hump and on ploughed tillage caught sight of part of settlement. Only so, according to his stories, resorted to imagine,
as is to look identical settlement on aerialphoto, namely: alter-nation of concentric figures (rows of dwellings)of tones dark and light attached to lustily weak contrast.
On aerial photography of the ancient settlement near May-danets K.Shyshkin emplaced of his disposition- western village neighbourhood, on to cape, limited by flood-lands of Tallyanky and nameless brook, dimensions - for about 1500х2000 m. Was set also planning is in ellipses appearance, written into one into other. Was loudly kurhan mounds on settlement territory and also separate dwellings. It's known three Maydanets aerialphotos identi-fication variants, carried out by K.Shyshkin.
However main problem was in that into K.Shyshkin open-ing do not believe archaeologists, which had its prettily existing looks on that, which is able and to which a Trypillya culture settle-ment go on with you. Correspondence on the subject of settle-ments-giants opening between K.Shyshkin and Archaeology Institute guidance in Kiev, and later - with M.Shmaglij protractedly a little years, while into 1971 y. successfully- ся to move business from place. Maydanets кий reconnaissance detachment drove out into field at autumn of 1971, being in dark, that on instruction already had been the colleagues from Moscow. A Moscow Archaeology In-stitute detached for data verification about gigantic housing ar-chaeologist M.Shtiglic (Штігліц,1971). It had view of field, but nor to lead, nor to disavow K.Shyshkin identifications M.Shtiglic inspection does not be able, showing helplessness of traditional archaeology in front of carriage of this problem.(Штиглиц, 1972)
The Kiev archaeologists from the first went towards other by dint of, which brought over them to invention, namely to invention of "complex research methods of Tripillya settlements". Usually, was pressed into the service of possibilities of archaeological in-spection- on plan by the medium of theodolite was drifted over 400 spot of burnt clay from Tripillya dwellings, damaged by plough-ing - but this was only one of five fields, which occupied a settle-ment area.
Magnetic survey. In summer 1971 V.Dudkin conducted geophysical survey at Maydanets. For magnetic survey were used М-17, М-23 and М-27 magnetometers. For the first time was allotted task to do a full plan of such settlement, which was finished in Autumn of 1974. A survey area composed by 180 hectares, and amount of ex-pressed anomalies from dwellings and other objects -1575 (Дудкин, 1978).
In 1983-1986 years it brushed works up on settlements-giants, subtracting 232 hectares, accessible for researches on set-tlement by с.Tallyanky in Cherkassy domain. General settlement area for given aerialphoto composes 450 hectares.
Into 70-80th years went magnetic survey on some settle-ments was provided by G.Zagnij, which took a search of separate dwellings on different settlements - Vesely Kut, Myropillya, plans of Pischana and Talne - 2.
In 1993 - 1994 by magnetic survey (program carried under guidance of V.Dudkin) were created plans of proto - cities at Yam-pil, Yatranivka, Glybochok, Vilkhovets (Cherkassy domain), Fedorivka and large Trypillya A settlement Mogyl'na - III (Kirovohrad domain).
After beginning of excavations in Maydanets at the begin-ning of 70-th years by his investigators was said thesis about exis-tence of proto - cities in Eneolithic of East Europe (Шмаглій, Дудкін, Зіньковський, 1973). Such determination does not win to oneself adherents into then. In further appearance of big settle-ments considered on plant-louse of global historic processes of cop-per age. V.Danilenko and M.Shmaglij establish into 1975 the "ecological " approach to this phenomenon, considering Eneolithic, as time "of violation of equilibrium between society and ambient envi-ronment. "
In 70 - on beginning 80-th M.Shmaglij gave a row of de-scriptions for big settlements. Consequently, they valued as " predecessors of ancient European towns", agrarian in base, but with some morphological and social signs of urbanization of public life, or populated locality of proto - city type. Myself urbanization process attached to this M.Shmaglij does not think completed. By expression of urbanization process, on his thought, were the plan-ning peculiarities, which bears witness to forming the towns of an-cient type with defensive walls, Acropolis and Agorae in. In first paleo - demographical reconstructions became deductions about possible amount of Maydanets population: at first 10000-15000. (Шмаглий, Дудкин, Зиньковский, 1975), than 20000 - 24000 peoples. (Шмаглий Н. М., 1980, 1982, ). Appearance of greater amount of data about building, dwellings types allowed to look through these reconstructions into ciphers lowering side to 6000 - 9000 (Шмаглiй М. М., Вiдейко М. Ю., 1987), that nearer to V.Kruts estimation near 8200 persons(Круц,1989 ). Authors under-stood, usually, relativity of its computations, looking over them in tie with expansion of archaeological data base.
M.Shmaglij characterized Maydanets not only as proto - city, but as centre of pedigree neighbourhood, by economic base of which agriculture is and cattle-breeding. Similarly at 1984 valued the big settlements V.Kruts and S.Ryzhov, leaning t own materials from excavations in Tallyanki and inspections. On their thought the big settlements were independent social and economic units, which quite provided oneself by agriculture products and cattle-breeding (Круц, Рыжов, 1984).
Yu.Zakharuk considered asking after appearance of big set-tlements, as supervention of demography processes. Augmentation of dimensions of separate settlements, on his thought, does not be able resque from relative overpopulation, and their segmentation continued together from by process settling of new territo-ries(Захарук, 1987).
Some of archaeologists turned mind to prevalence of big settlements both in space and in time. Consequently, V.Markevich picked out big (by area more ten hectares ) settlement on territory of Moldova, ( starting to from Trypillya A), and considered in them the administrative centres, associated with interchange concentra-tion and of religious dispatches of one or tribes groups. The small settlements near appeared by reason of segmentation of big. On his look appearance of big settlements bore witness to existence of clear tribal organization, necessary both for joint labour and for op-position to external threat. Was done together with V.Masson and suitable paleodemographical reconstructions, is said supposition about forming of settlements hierarchy in Moldova, starting to from Trypillya A.
Research of East settling apart zone of Tripillya tribes in allowed to O.Tsvek pick out here big settlements by area from ten to hundreds hectare, begining from ВI stage, and to disprove deduc-tions about some it lag in comparison from by Arrangement (Tsvek, 1980,1985,1989).
K.Chernysh considered a forming process of big settle-ments, as union supervention masses tracing-papers with view de-fense of from external threat (on the part of "steppe" tribes(, criti-cally under this valuing M.Shmaglij developments into industries pa-leodemography and them descriptions as "protocities", (Черниш 1977,1982). Not disclaiming against high level development of Trypillya society, that evinced in beginnings of this instructions type, it tied their death first of all from by economic weakness of it: quasi by big specific cattle-breeding weight, in point of weak developed handicraft, archaic labour implements. Here all reasons why this society does not overcome, on her thought, a scope, that sepa-rated it from real urban civilization.
Repeatedly applied to problem of big Tripillya settlements a famous explorer of old urban Namazga and Altyn-Depe civilizations in Turkmenistan V.Masson. He from the deginning marked, that main in this question are not quantitative, and qualitative signs reflecting internal settlement structure alteration in qualitatively new. From this point of view appearance in East Europe large settlements of Maydanets type was first of all by bearing witness to concentra-tion of population, and ourselves "super - centers" is by centres of agricultural neighbourhood. These instructions were by important forming precondition base of urban civilization.
On the ground of paleodemographical reconstructions V.Masson deduced as for causes of crisis situations in Trypillya society, which gave rise to appearing of big settlements. On his thought, they were low development of productive Trypillya forces. From the historic point of view Trypillya development showed by oneself process of "colonization", that was attended with handicrafts development, beginnings of social differentiation, creation of hier-archical system at the head with big centres, disintegration of which was by contradictions supervention between demography processes from one side, and development of productive forces and ecological situation from other. So Trypillya society reckoned in number "complex", went on "un-urban" development way, creating only settle-ments hierarchy. The largest settlements were intertribal capitals, centres of village neighbourhood. By This settlement do not belong, as thought V.Masson, functions of ideological or military leadership. So-and-so, V.Masson successively deprecated conception of Tripil-lya proto - cities, thinking, that in East Europe of this time from especially economic causes such phenomenon was impossible.
Near position occupied V.Zbenovich. It did attempt to study problem of big settlements, learning publications and results of Try-pillya expedition (Збенович В. Г., 1990, с. 10- 12). He thought this conception insolvent, for archaeological study of big settlements withholds materials for deductions about presence of such impre-scriptible fig. elementary urbanization ream, as administrative, in a civilized manner- ideological and, specially, trade- handicraft func-tions. Big type settlements like Vesely Kut (Trypillya BI/II) V.Zbenovich defined as tribal centres, and Maydanets - Tallyanki type (stage CI) as joint "under one house-top" a little related tribes. Without respect to lack of argumentation, last thought interesting, for bears witness to attempt to approach big settlements in process of their historic development.
OF TRIPILLYA CULTURE ABROAD.
From the settlements opening first - giants about them found out westering. To this on beginning assisted M.Shmaglij reports on international conferences, but in greater measure - Maria Gimbutas articles.
Already on beginning 70 - th. years M.Gimbutas published the aerial survey Maydanets plans Existence of such settlements, on her thought, was called by aggressive carriers actions of patriar-chal steppe kurhan cultures, which aimed to bring peaceable matri-archal tribes to submission of european farmers. This thesis is cut back in several publications, including a monumental books, devoted "To goddesses Civilizations " of Old Europe (Gimbutas, 1989, 1991).
Into 1984 y. went out a L.Ellis labour, devoted to Cucuteni culture technologies study problem is Trypillya and origin of complex societies (Ellis, 1984), to regret almost unknown in Ukraine, if to look on lack of references on it in articles and editions monographic dis-position. Interestingly, that into its L.Ellis turn demonstrates kind knowledge of soviet literature handed into seventies years from problem. In this labour, for six years before V.Masson (Массон, 1990), she gave voice to assertion about complex disposition of Try-pillya society. One of bases for identical assertions on thought of L.Ellis was existence of enormous settlements is as proto - cities, capitals old chiefdoms. Judging on references in other editions stated labor by with M.Gimbutas researches is the basic source about Trypillya proto - cities for most of European authors.
L.Ellis considered technological and economic subsoil of social Neolithic processes (Ellis, 1987, p.175 is 191), showing growth of population quantity, food productions and forming of handicraft centers in Cucuteni culture are Trypillya. Researches of ceramic production allowed she to arrive at conclusion about prod-ucts keeping technologies development (Ellis, 1987, y. 180). It con-siders Trypillya society, as distinctly hierarchical.
Its look on large Trypillya settlements said not long ago А. Whittle( Whittle, 1996). It applied to this theme in prettily synoptic appearance in tie with question about "steppe threat" (Sredny Stog culture cavalry). Author thinks, that the enormous settlements had foremost defensive disposition, attached to this something writes about ditches, which they're not. At the same timed offered an opin-ion not quite intelligible to us, that by better rescue from "maraud-ers"(?) was population dispersion, and not his concentration. But А. Whittle thinks a threat on the part of steppe tribes unlikely. On his thought somewhat quicker had a place a mutually beneficial ex-change, and not military opposition. At that it skeptical treats to set-tlements existence simultaneity - giants on all area, for they could be diversificated( Whittle, 1996, p.134 - 135). From references and bibliography visibly, that А. Whittle are unknown the basic publica-tions on Trypillya proto - cities, because it took information only from accessible to it from publications of V.Dergachov, E.Chernykh,D.Telegin and L.Ellis, published in 80- and years. From them only last (Ellis, 1984)relates in sort to theme, however written with use of materials accessible by then, when problems, associated from proto - cities, in that number the questions micro - chronology of sites not yet were explored.
The large settlements of Trypillya culture are mentioned in monograph of J.Kruk and S. Miliscauscas, which is devoted to rise and fall of Neolithic agricultural societies (Kruk, Miliscauscas 1999). Into research base laid down the Poland Neolithic study results - cultures of Lengyel - Polgar circle, FBC, globular amphorae. Authors compare settlement of mentioned cultures (especially Bronochice) with Trypillya in aspects of arhitecture and social significance. Un-der this they apply to more contemporary articles by V.Kruts and M.Videiko. J.Kruk and S. Miliscauscas in its monograph write about multi - level hierarchy of Neolithic settlements on Poland territories. They picked out there "big settlements" (under this most from them do not arrive at area into 20 hectares), considering them, as possible centers of chiefdoms (Kruk, Miliscauscas 1999, s.145, fig.45, s.137 is 146 and oth.).
Trypillya archaeological culture was discovered by archae-ologists over age to that. For this time they expressed the thou-sands, and dug out hundreds of old settlements. Arheometry re-searches gave into hands of new facts learned to thousand, won under time of researches laboratory and experimental field,, which eked out a mosaic, laid out by archaeologists from excavations.
After 30 years of investigations by the medium of magnetic survey was composed the full or partial plans of a little settlements ten (all in all by 50), which belongs to different periods of Trypil-lya culture existence. Was given different apparatus types try, devel-oped an interpretation methods of got results. Materials, got under time of these works, widely used by archaeologists as attached to taking of field researches, so and attached to spelling of scientific labor. Applications of magnetic survey allowed to heave up study of settlements of Trypillya culture ( and myself culture, as phenomenon) on qualitatively new level.
In result of archaeological excavations on extent by 100 years only in was seen out the explorations considerable for scope more as on 60 settlements of different periods, where explored about three hundred of different dwellings type, household com-plexes, etc. For inspections data are formed the settlements maps.
Analysis of all information cumulative for researches gives us possible today to tell about Trypillya, as one of most old agricul-tural European civilizations.
There are two points of view on Trypillya large settlements. Some archaeologists think, that they appeared on the borders before the threat of "Steppe invasion". Other thinks, that they appeared as a result of internal social development, under the threat of wars be-tween Trypillya culture tribes. The last investigations showed that some inside - cultural processes (and may be economical and so-cial) in Trypillya were connected not only with Steppe, but also with Central European cultures.
About arriving at home archaeologists in study to phenome-non Trypillya proto - cities to little it's known European archaeolo-gists. Such deduction can be done, looking through bibliography generalizing and even special labor from problems of European Neolithic. We must note, that similarly do not read so far in Ukraine articles of western authors, which touched a problem, which us in-terests. However diffusion process of scientific information by dint of publications in English (first of all at Baltic - Pontic Studies ) this problem now gradually decide.
"From Neolithic villages to organized state, from gardening to irrigation farming, from iconography to writing, from disorganized raids to institutionalized warfare, from custom to law, from matriarchal religious authority to patriarchal political power, from mystery to history; the transformation was so complete that the past itself was reinvented to create a new foundation for a radically altered present. Now that we ourselves are moving into a radically altered present, it is small wonder that the patriarchal image of prehistory is disintegrating. The movement into the future always involves the revisioning of the past." (Thompson, 1981,p. 208).
Changes in European Prehistory not so radical were and not at one moment happened.
Evidently, the civilization bases, in that number of urbaniza-tion, were established in Neolithic. The Researchers studied a cities beginnings process there, where he was successfully completed - above all things in Mesopotamia. Here this tradition erect to Chatal-Huyuk. Was spied a row of urbanization phases in Mesopotamia, where in the second half of fourth millenium BC the first cities aro-sed. One of urbanization aspects was a population concentration from small settlements in cities.
It is logically to suppose, that in Early agricultural societies can take place the like processes. They were related to decision of problems general for them - by population growth and overpopula-tion, lack fit for agriculture fields by conflicts between communities. Not nothing astonishing, that these problems everywhere by like by dint of decided. Population migrated on new lands, built fortified set-tlements. After trod a population concentration period in items, breaking the ice of early urbanization.
In Europe, as and in Mesopotamia had a place such an events development exemplarily at one and the same time is in fifth - fourth millennium BC. In this case Pre -Indoeuropean settlements with names 'ora?/ura?' endings and Sumerian "uru-sag" or "mas-ga-na-sag" the similar settlements structures significated .
In this situation is clear, that terms, corresponding with idea of such types of settlements, as "town" or "city" in Europe are very old and, perhaps, reflected real types of settling in V - IV milleniums BC. Than, the most probably candidates for an -ora? ending are the large settlements of Trypillya and FBC cultures.
With such point of viewing, the appearance of large settle-ments in Trypillya-Cucuteni culture one can be considered, as the first urbanization phase, as one of her possible models.
This process in territory of Ukraine at the beginning of Early Bronze Age was interrupted. Disappearance of proto-cities was an reflection of the crisis of extensive agricultural economy.
Decoration of painted vessels. Trypillya culture, 3700 – 3500 BC. Maydanets’ke, Cherkassy domain. Excavations of M.Shmaglij and B.Videiko, 1986.
Ancient East and Europe two ways of civilization develop-ment in IV Millenia BC showed - growth of first cities and states at Mesopotamia and temporary closing-down of social progress in some regions of Old Europe. With like point of viewing on example of Trypillya proto-cities growth and decline we can study first steps of urbanization, which in other places by the following development was covered. Therefore we think continuation of the large Trypillya settlements - proto-cities investigations in Ukraine may be perspective and interesting.
*****************************************************************
Fonte : http://www.iananu.kiev.ua/privatl/pages/Widejko/txt/cities.html
©M.Yu.Videiko
Published: Відейко М.Ю. Трипільські протоміста. Історія досліджень. Київ, 2002; с.103-125: (Videiko M.Yu. Trypillya culture proto-cities. History of investigations. Kiev,2002, p.103-125).
.jpg)
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento