Ant 0770298

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

1/15

298

Iron Age society and chronology inSouth-east KazakhstanClaudia Chang1, Norbert Benecke2, Fedor P. Grigoriev 3 Arlene M. Rosen4& Perry A. Tourtellotte5

This new view of Iron Age society in Kazakhstan breaks away from the old documentary and ethnic framework and offers an independent archaeological chronology. Excavatedhouse types and new environmental data show that nomadism and cultivation were practisedside by side. Scholars had previously tended to emphasise the ability of documented Saka leaders to plunder and collect tribute from sedentary agriculture groups through military aggression. But what really gave them a political and economic edge over other steppegroups was a dual economy based upon farming and herding.

Keywords: Iron Age, Kazakhstan, chronology, economy.

For we live in the age of the iron race, when men shall never cease from labor and woe by day, and never be free from anguish at night, for hard are the cares that the gods will be giving.(The Poems of Hesiod , Translated with Introduction and Comments by R. M.Frazer, Stanzas 175180. 1983. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press)

IntroductionThree cultural or ethnic designations have been distinguished among the Iron Age culturesof the eastern or Asiatic regions of the Eurasian steppe (Phillips 1957). TheYuezhi,linkedlinguistically to the spread of the Tocharian language into Xinjiang, are the Inner Asiannomadic groups that were pushed out of Bactria into the Ili River and areas of the Taklakmandesert according to various readings of theShi ji,a famous Chinese chronicle documentingthe travels of Zhang Qian into Western Asia (Pulleyblank 1970; Di Cosmo 1994). The termSakais used to denote Scythian populations of Kazakhstan and Central Asia and the term

Wusun, is used as a designation for the later nomadic populations that conquered and subduedthe Saka and agricultural populations in the Ili Valley at the end of the first millennium BCand during the first half of the first millennium AD (Di Cosmo 1994; Moshkova 1992).

The use of these ethnic designations to characterise the archaeological remains of Iron Agepopulations in regions such as Semirechye is naturally problematic, a fact that is well-recognised by the historians and archaeologists who study the ancient populations of the

1 Sweet Briar College, Sweet Briar, VA. 24595 2 Eurasien-Abteilung, Deutsches Archaologisches Institut 3 Central State Museum, Almaty, Kazakhstan4 Institute of Archaeology, University College London5 Sweet Briar College, Sweet Briar, VA. 24595

Received: 13 March 2002; accepted: 17 March 2003

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

2/15

R e s e a r c h

299

Iron Age society and chronology in South-east Kazakhstan

Iron Age in this region of the world (Di Cosmo 1994). During the Soviet period, the Iron Age archaeological cultures of Semirechye (the Seven-Rivers region includes the Ili RiverBasin and the seven rivers that flow north from the Tian Shan Mountains, bounded by theChu River in the West) were placed into two roughly divided chronological periods based onburial chronologies put forth by Bernstam and Ageev (Istorii Kazakhskoi SSR 1977; 272;310): (1) the Saka epoch (eighth century BC to third century BC) and (2) the Wusun epoch(third century BC to fifth century AD). The Saka period has been further divided into theearly Saka period (eighth century BC to sixth century BC) and the later Saka period (fifth tothird century BC) (Moshkova 1992: 75). Here we choose instead to lump our archaeologicalmaterials into the broader category of Iron Age cultures of the Eurasian steppe that dateapproximately from the eighth century BC to the fifth century AD and in the discussions of the radiocarbon sequence established for the Talgar Iron Age settlement sites, it will becomeclear why we have chosen to avoid the use of ethnic labels for designating chronological time

periods, phases, or sub-phases.Our main objective in this paper is to apply the principles of settlement archaeology to thestudy of Eurasian steppe communities in the first millennium BC. The theoretical thrust of our research has been to establish the nature of pastoral and agrarian adaptations during theIron Age in this region of Kazakhstan. The Soviet archaeologists describing the Iron Agecultures of this region tended to refer to these cultures as Early Nomadic cultures, a misnomer,since they had already recognised that the Iron Age nomadic populations also practisedagriculture or at least had considerable interaction with settled agrarian populations (see

Yablonsky 2000:3 for a critique of these terms). In fact, Di Cosmo (1994) providesarchaeologists with a cogent discussion and argument for why the so-called nomads of the

Iron Age in the Dneiper region, Mongolia, Siberia, Western China and Kazakhstan eitherpractised agriculture or at the very least traded and interacted regularly with agrarianpopulations.

Archaeological surveys in the Talgar regionFrom 1994 to 2001, our international team conducted surface surveys and excavations inthe Talgar Region of southeastern Kazakhstan, along the northern flanks of the Zailiisky

Alatau Mountains of the Tian Shan Range and about 25 km east of the major city of Almaty in the Republic of Kazakhstan (Figure 1). The use of systematic surface surveys and field

walking in the Republic of Kazakhstan is a relatively recent practice, although productivesurveys were conducted in the Choresmia expeditions of the Amu Darya and Syr Daryavalleys (Moshkova 1992: 3133, citing the important work published by S. P. Tolstov on theChoresmia surveys conducted in the 1950s and 1960s). In the mid-1990s the Kazakh-

American Talgar Project initiated the systematic field survey of three areas: (1) the Talgaralluvial fan (ca. 150 sq. km. at 550 to 1100 m in elevation); (2) the upper Turgen/Asi valleys(c. 46 sq. km at 2100 to 2500 m in elevation) and (3) the upland plateau of Orman(c. 36 sq. km at 1350 to 1800 m in elevation). The majority of survey was done in ploughedfields or over open grassland terrain where surface features such as burial mounds, graves,and artefact scatters could be found on the surface terrain. In the Talgar alluvial fan, less than0.01 of the entire surface was surveyed and a site density of 2.8 places per sq. km was recorded.In the upper Turgen/Asi valleys the coverage was about 75 per cent of the total area, recording

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

3/15

300

Claudia Chang, Norbert Benecke, Fedor P. Grigoriev Arlene M. Rosen & Perry A. Tourtellotte

Figure 1

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

4/15

R e s e a r c h

301


a site density of 4.06 places per sq. km. (Chang n.d.). In Orman, a preliminary reconnaissancesurvey only was conducted.

In the Talgar alluvial fan approximately 63 per cent of the places recorded were Iron Agesites, while the remaining were either Bronze Age (c 1700 BC to 1000 BC, or post-Iron Ageto Medieval Period sites (c 500 AD to 1500 AD). This sample area was thus intensively occupied during the Iron Age (c 800 BC to 100 AD). During this time period there isevidence for an extensive mortuary cult of Saka burial mounds (large earthen mounds rangingfrom 30 to 70 m in diameter and from 5 to 16 m in height) and Wusun burial mounds(capped with stone cobbles and ranging from 5 to 15 m in diameter and from 1 to 2 metresin height) (Akishev and Kushaev 1963). Fifty-nine Iron Age settlements were found withina 1 km radius diameter proximity of the tumuli. Perhaps the alignments of tumuli alongancient stream beds signified a family or kin groups claim to prime arable land.

In the upper Turgen/Asi valleys, several Bronze and Iron Age settlements were found with

associated mortuary complexes. The mortuary sites included Bronze Age graves, Iron Ageburial mounds, Turkic period graves (c 600900 AD), Mongol and Kazakh period graves(c 12001900 AD). This upland zone was inhabited from the Bronze Age through the Mongoland historic Kazakh periods. Ethnographic accounts suggest that these upland mountainvalleys were used for the summer pasturing of sheep, goats, cattle, and horses from the lowlandareas of Talgar, Issyk, or Chilik or for the winter pasturing of herd animals by transhumantherdsmen migrating from the higher elevations of the Inner Tian Shan Mountains (3500 to3000 metres) to lower elevations.

The Orman Valley is the highest elevation zone where agriculture can be practisedsuccessfully. The preliminary reconnaissance survey identified Bronze Age graves, some Iron

Age settlements and Medieval and Kazakh hamlets. Most likely the Iron Age populationspractised farming and herding in this upland plateau, known for its richchernozemsoils.

Two Iron Age settlements on the Talgar alluvial fan: Tuzusai and Tseganka 8The Kazakh-American Talgar Project team excavated two Iron Age settlements on the Talgarfan. The methods included the use of the Wheeler box-grid system for each 2 m by 2 mexcavation unit which were excavated in 20 cm arbitrary levels. The stratification and culturalhorizons were subsequently determined from the four baulk walls in each unit. At the levelof the sub-soil ormaterik the baulk walls were destroyed. At Tuzusai, the deposits at some of the excavation units were screened using inch mesh screen so as to recover small fragments of animal bones and pottery sherds. In the 2000 excavations at Tseganka 8, larger 4 m by 4 munits were excavated in the eastern half of the site so as to recover the horizontal contexts of eight to ten different cultural horizons. The goals of our excavations were to recover largesamples of faunal remains; to define habitation features such as hearths, fireplaces, housefloors, activity areas, and middens for the recovery of micro- and macro-botanical remains;to establish stratigraphic sequences and cultural horizons at both sites that could be datedusing radiocarbon dating; and to cross-date the materials at both sites so as to reconstructIron Age settlement patterns on the Talgar alluvial fan.

Tuzusai is a large village settlement (c 1 ha in size) on the west side of the ancient stream of Tuzusai. An approximately 6 m (east/west) by 12 m (north/south) excavation block was

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

5/15

302


excavated during three fieldseasons (19941996).Excavations from 1994 to1996 uncovered over 30circular and rectangularstorage pits, fragments of house architecture and floors,and a Mongol-period burial.There are four to six differentcultural horizons at Tuzusaispanning from approximately 415 BC to 75 BC and a latersequence of about 1275 to

1950 AD. The 19941996excavation blocks are probably in a peripheral area of thevillage, rather than in thecentral area of habitation. Themajority of features are storageand trash pits, great depositsfor animal bone and plantremains. There are only partialremnants of plaster floor

levels, and the later storagepits (from Phases IV and V, see Table 1) probably destroyed the earlier contexts of this area of the site. The diagnostic sherds found at Tuzusai include mould-formed and hand madebowls, jars, pitchers, and storage vessels of local clays. Typically the ceramics are fired atbetween 800 and 900C., oxidised redwares with inclusions of crushed granite, plants, dungand sand (Kuznetsova 1998). Surface treatments include buff and red slips and red paint.These ceramics are primarily utilitarian wares that are similar to the grave goods found inSaka-Wusun burials in Semirechye (Akishev & Kushaev 1963). Imported ceramics such asburnished and polished black pottery, and red-slipped wares with fine sand temper, probably come from the Syr Daria area and Central Asia proper (Grigoriev 1995).

Tseganka 8 is located on the east bank of the present-day Tseganka stream. This Iron Agesite is about 1.5 km to the north-east of Tuzusai. A block of 8 m (east west) by 22 m (northsouth) was excavated along the edge of the eroding east bank of the Tseganka River (Figure2). There are approximately six to eight different cultural horizons at Tseganka 8 spanningfrom approximately 775 BC to 40 BC (Figure 3). It appears that more than fifty per cent of the site was destroyed by the current down-cutting of the Tseganka River, a streambed that ispart of the Soviet-period field irrigation system. The pit-houses and storage pits were excavatedby the original inhabitants into the subsoil ormaterik , that currently lies from 80 cm to 1.2m below the present ground surface. In fact Tseganka 8 was originally discovered in the

stream cuts along the eastern bank of the Tseganka River during our geomorphological surveysconducted in 1996. At the southern-most extension of the 2000 excavation units, the eastern-

Figure 2 Tseganka 8: the site.

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

6/15

R e s e a r c h

303


half of a destroyed Wusun tumulus was excavated (diameter was approximately 8 metres andthe centre height was 0.50 metres).

The main architectural features at Tseganka 8 were five intact pit houses, of which two (Pithouse 2 and Pit house 4) were circular in shape and approximately 3 to 3.5 metres in diameter,and two (Pit house 3 and Pit house 7) were rectangular, ranging from about 7 metres inlength to 3 metres in width, with side-walls measuring 0.5 to 1.2 metres in depth(measurements taken from the original occupation surface). There was one oval-shaped pithouse (Pit house 6) about 4.8 metres in length and 3.5 metres in width and with side-wallsmeasuring 0.5 to 0.8 metres in depth (measurements taken from the original occupationsurface) (Figure 4). In addition to these houses, there were small gravel-lined storage pits,earthen storage pits, and an oven. A total of about 200 diagnostic ceramics (rims, bases, andbody sherds with surface treatment such as painted designs) were found at the Tseganka 8.

These ceramics were primarily redwares, fired at 600 to 700 centigrade, usually oxidised.From a sample of bowl rim sherds, Kuznetsova (2000: 163) determined that these vessels

Table 1 Radiometric Dates from two Iron Age Settlements in TalgarChronology of Tuzusai 1 (excavated from 19921996) and Tseganka 8 (excavated from 19982000)

Stratigraphic Sequence Radiometric Date Calibrated Result (2 Sigma, 95%)

VIII-Tuzusai, Occupation 5, 140 +/ 70 BP Cal AD 1650 to 1950Unit V-11, Fire pit 1, B-98380VII Tuzusai, Burial 1, 650 +/ 50 BP* Cal AD 1275 to 1410 Animal bone collagen, B-142480VI Tuzusai, Pit 24, B-86747 2020 +/ 40 BP* (Oxford) Cal BC 100 to AD 75Tuzusai, Pit 17, B-86749 2070 +/ 40 BP* (Oxford) Cal BC 180 to AD 25VIa Tseganka 8, 2190 +/ 80 BP* Cal BC 400 to 40Unit V-10, B-133614V Tuzusai, Pit 30 B, B-098384 2170 +/ 30 BP Cal BC 335 to 290 and

BC 230 to 115Tseganka 8, Pit 13, B-133611 2130 +/ 40 BP Cal BC 350 to 300 andTuzusai, Pit 29, B-098383 2230 +/ 30 BP Cal BC 220 to 50Tuzusai, Unit V-13, ash deposit, 2170 +/ 60 BP Cal BC 380 to 190

B-98381 Cal BC 380 to 40Tseganka 8, Pit house 2, floor 2, 2130 +/ 40 BP* Cal BC 385 to 100

B-133611IV Tuzusai, Pit 22, B-86750 2310 +/ 50 BP* (Oxford) Cal BC 415 to 345 and

BC 310 to 210Tuzusai, Pit 8 92, B-098385 2320 +/ 40 BP* (Groningen) Cal BC 410 to 260 and

cal BC 230 to115III Tseganka 8, Pit house 3, 2390 +/ 70 BP Cal BC 775 to 370Floors 3a/b, B-133612II Tseganka 8, Pit house 3, 2120 +/ 40 BP Cal BC 350 to310 andFloor 4, B-153900 Cal C 210 to 40I Tseganka 8, Storage pit 98, 2300 +/ 80 BP* Cal BC 740 to 710 andB-129589 BC 535 to 80

* These radiometric dates were obtained through Accelerated Mass Spectrometry. If the place is unspecified the AMSdate was obtained at Beta Analytic, Inc. (Miami, Florida). All dates were calibrated by Beta Analytic, Inc.

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

7/15

304


Figure 4 Tseganka: Pit house 6.

Figure 3 Tseganka 8: section.

were about 0.7 to 1.1 cm inthickness and made of 98percent of clay with ironparticles and sand. Sixty percent of these bowl

fragments consisted of red wares with crushed graniteand/or gneiss and animaldung (Kuznetsova 2000:164). Forty per cent of thebowl fragments consisted of red wares with crushed graniteand/or gneiss, sand, andanimal dung (Kuznetsova2000:164). These typicalceramic vessel forms foundthroughout Semirechye werepresent: bowls with flat, angled rims, shallow bowls, storage vessels, jars, and kettle fragments.Imported ceramics such as grey wares, burnished and polished black-slipped and red-slippedceramics from Central Asia proper and the Syr Daria area were noted.

Zooarchaeological and Palaeoethnobotanical research at Tuzusai and Tseganka 8: some preliminary resultsThe excavations at Tseganka 8 and Tuzusai yielded large collections of animal remains thatprovide some insights into the pastoral economy of these Iron Age settlements. Bothassemblages consist mainly of domestic mammal remains sheep and goat being the most

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

8/15

R e s e a r c h

305


frequent species according toNISP, followed by cattle andhorse (Table 2). Theproportion between the fourdomestic mammals shows nosignificant changes during thelong period of occupation atTseganka 8 and Tuzusai(Figure 5). Remarkableidentifications are those of camel (probably Bactrian)and ass. The low number of teeth and bones that could be

assigned to these animalspoint to the fact, thatpresumably both species wereprimarily exploited forpurposes of transport, i.e. as pack animals and for riding. The dog completes the inventory of domestic species. Wild animal remains include that of deer, pig, fox, hare and vulture.Compared to the domestic species, their numbers are very low. Obviously, hunting was only

Table 2 Fauna remains from Tseganka 8 (excavations 19992000) and Tuzusai 1 (excavations 19941996), quantified in terms of the number of identified specimens (NISP) and bone weight (in grams).

A dog skeleton found at Tuzusai 1 has not been included here.

Tseganka 8 Tuzusai 1Species NISP Weight NISP Weight

Domestic MammalsSheep/Goat 1619 11839 890 7292(Sheep) (66) (1206) (68) (1639)(Goat) (22) (426) (20) (284)Cattle 570 15013 492 18296Horse 107 6056 90 10413 Ass 2 73 4 1154Camel 6 561 19 1457Dog 7 65 8 69

Wild MammalsRed deer 3 70 2 59Roe deer 1 2 3 41 Wild pig 1 4Fox 2 9Hare 1 1

Wild BirdsVulture 2 10

Unidentified 1280 2462 1288 2593Sum 3598 36152 2799 41387

10

20

30

40

5060

70

80

90

1 2 3 4 50

NISP Tseganka 8 and Tuzusai 1

Sheep/Goat Cattle Horse

P e r c e n t a g e

Figure 5

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

9/15

306


of marginal significance for providing food and raw materials at both sites. Various facets of zooarchaeological evidence imply that the pastoral system at these sites was probably sedentary village-based animal husbandry. The assemblages display the full complement of maindomestic taxa, including sheep, goats, cattle, horses, asses, camels and dogs, which is inaccordance with the diversity of domestic species maintained by small scale mixed farmers toprovide the optimal range of products and as insurance against stock losses and disease(Halstead 1996). In contrast, nomadic herders tend to specialise in a single species, due inpart to the difficulty of providing for the needs of a number of species with diverse nutritionaland watering requirements during migration. Relative species abundance of the maindomesticates may also be used to assess the degree of animal mobility in the economy. Therelatively high representation of cattle within the assemblages argues that at least a portion of the pastoral economy at both sites was sedentary. Numerous ethnographic accounts highlightthe unsuitability of cattle herding for nomadic systems in dry and/or mountainous regions

(see Barth 1965). Indeed, a large representation of bovine stock has typically been linked with more intensive agriculture (Khazanov 1984). Dental eruption and attrition data fromTseganka 8 and Tuzusaisuggest the presence of neonatal and juvenileovicaprids, and thus a rangeof age cohorts, implying thepresence of animalsthroughout the year. Forexample, dental attrition for

the deciduous fourthpremolar from the ovicapridassemblages indicatespermanent occupationthrough the continuousrange of wear stagesrepresented. This is incontrast to the discretegroupings of wear, which

would result from a seasonal occupation at the sites (Figure 6).Phytoliths recovered from samples taken from cultural horizons at Tseganka 8 (see above)

also clearly represent an agricultural component to the Iron Age Saka and later Saka-Wusuneconomy. The most important cereal represented at the site is foxtail millet (Setaria italica),

with barley and wheat forming a part of the phytolith assemblage as well. Although therehave only been a small number of samples analysed from each level at the site, there appearsto be some interesting trends in cereal cultivation which can be tested by further analyses. Inthe two earliest levels (Level 7 and Level 6), all cereal phytoliths are low in number relative tolater phases at the site. In these early levels the phytolith assemblages are dominated by wildgrass husks, possibly derived from the burning of animal dung at the site. The grass husks

indicate occupation at least during the spring and early summer flowering seasons at the site.There is a significant jump in millet phytoliths beginning with Level 5. After this time,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

N u m

b e r

Tseganka 8 Tuzusai 1

NISP Tseganka 8 and Tuzusai 1

Figure 6

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

10/15

R e s e a r c h

307


millet also generally continues to dominate the grass husk counts. Although barley is themost abundant cereal in the one sample from Level 7, both wheat and barley maintain aminor presence throughout most of the samples with a possible trend towards diminishingnumbers in later periods at the site.

Apart from the cereals and weed grasses, other plants represented at the site include largequantities of reeds (Phragmites sp.) and sedges (Cyperaceae ). The reeds were very likely tohave been used for roofing or flooring the pit-houses, and the sedges might have been usedfor basketry or matting. These plants would have been found close to the site along the watercourse of the Tseganka River. One of the unique findings of the phytolith study at Tseganka8 was the presence of phytoliths remarkably similar to the complex hair cells fromCannabis sativaleaves. These were located only within a hearth at the site (Fireplace 1, Floor 4, UnitD-13). This might indicate that the space associated with this hearth was used for ritual ormedicinal purposes.

The phytolith assemblages from Tuzusai are somewhat different from those at Tseganka 8,possibly a result of the later time periods represented at the site. Cereal in the early stages atTuzusai (Phase IV) are characterised by a dominance of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) with anadditional presence of wheat, barley, and rice. Through time, the millet decreases and ricephytoliths increase. Wheat phytoliths appear to maintain steady counts throughout theoccupation phases. It is also interesting to note that in the earlier levels, wild weed grassesappear to enter the site independently from those of the cereal grasses, primarily wheat. Thissuggests that the pathway of weeds into the site was primarily in the form of animal dung. Inthe later time periods at Tuzusai the weed grasses co-vary with the wheat phytoliths. Thisimplies that weeds later begin to enter the site as field weeds with the cereals, perhaps suggesting

a more intensive agricultural regime. The presence of rice at Tuzusai is unique to this area todate, and points to a much more intensive type of agriculture than has been traditionally assumed for Iron Age populations in this region (Rosenet al.2000; Rosen 2001).

The differences in the phytolith assemblages at Tseganka 8 and Tuzusai are quite significant. At Tseganka 8 millet is much more prominent than at Tuzusai. Millet is a cereal that isfavoured by semi-sedentary and nomadic peoples since it has a rapid growing season and is ahearty crop. It requires little attention throughout its growth and indicates a much less intensivetype of agriculture which can be conducted in an opportunistic fashion during good years

with abundant rainfall. It is possible that the abundance of millet at Tseganka 8 indicatesphases of occupation in which the site was inhabited only on a semi-sedentary basis. This isin marked contrast to the phytolith evidence from Tuzusai which indicates a progression tomore intensive cultivation and a larger investment in an agricultural economy.

Iron Age chronology at Tuzusai and Tseganka 8Table 1 is a chronology established for these two Iron Age sites based upon stratigraphicsequences and radiocarbon dates derived from charcoal samples taken from archaeologicalcontexts. The first column, labelled Stratigraphic Sequence represents the cultural horizonsor phases determined on the basis of artefact and/or feature horizons. The second column,labelled Radiometric date is the actual measured radiocarbon dates obtained from thelaboratory. The third and final column, Calibrated Result, are dates obtained statistically atthe laboratory using the INTCAL98 Statistical Measurements and represent 2 sigma limits

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

11/15

308


at 95 per cent probability (Stuiveret al.1998). The calendar age (BC/AD designations) areconsidered approximations since they can be subject to old wood effect or the potentialinclusion of younger or older material into the archaeological context or matrix. For example,

we are of the opinion that the radiocarbon sample from Tseganka 8, placed in Phase II, doesnot fit into the chronological framework, possibly because it represents charcoal from amixed context. Phases V and VI are the two periods when both Tuzusai and Tseganka 8 areoccupied.

Cultural changeTable 3 lays out the chronological framework for both sites, the features found for eachphase, and the possible evolution of architecture and features. Under each phase designationthere is a floruit , or range of calibrated radiocarbon dates that correspond to the samplesdated in each of these phases. The architectural house features in the Talgar fan evolved fromdeep subterranean, rectangular features with walls that ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 metres inheight with centre ridge poles to above-ground structures that were either sub-rounded orrectangular with centre posts and a thatch or waddle and daub super-structure (no longervisible in the archaeological record). The analogies to the subterranean and semi-subterraneanhouse structures can be found in the Soviet period literature on Bronze Age houses fromCentral Asia. At the Oshskoe settlement in the Sulaiman-Too, a late Bronze Age site in theFerghana Valley of the Republic of Kirghizstan,zemlyanka(pit-houses) XI and IX appear tobe rectangular and dug into the side slope (Zadneirovskii 1997). At the settlement of Yakke-Parsan in the Choresmia region of Central Asia, a large rectangularzemlyanka(measuring

about 7.1 metres by 6 metres), date to about the ninth to eighth century BC during the LateBronze Age (Etina 1963). A round or sub-rounded house (approximately 4 to 4.5 meters indiameter) was found at Kuyusai 2, Excavation B, House 1 in the Choresmia region of Turkmenistan, and dates to approximately seventh century to sixth century BC (Vainberg1979).

Why did architectural forms tend to evolve from subterranean and semi-subterraneanforms to above-ground structures from the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age to the Turkicperiod? The winter houses of the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age were replaced by semi-permanent, above-ground structures perhaps only used seasonally. In the later periods, plasteredfloors above the earlier floor and fill levels could indicate that these subterranean and semi-

subterranean houses were now utilised by the ancient inhabitants as above-ground structures.

A brief chronological comparison of the Talgar RadiocarbonSequence with other Eurasian SequencesEurasian chronology for the Iron Age has been muddled by the convention of assigningcultural and ethnic identifications to the nomadic peoples of the first millennium BC basedupon the textual references made by Herodotus and others to the Scythians of the PonticRegion, the inscriptions of Darius I at Bisutun in Persian, and the Chinese chroniclers whoreferred to the Sae and Dahae (see LIU 2000 for the Chinese usage of these terms; see

Yablonksy 2000: 38 for detailed discussions on current views of the Scythian world and are-evaluation of the Eurasian chronology for the Iron Age). We prefer to follow the current

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

12/15

R e s e a r c h

309


Table 3 A Comparison between Features and Architecture at Tseganka 8 and Tuzusai.

Evolution of Phase Designation Tseganka 8 features Tuzusai features Architectural forms

Phase VIII: Floruit AD Unit V-11, Fire pit 1; Outside fire places and1650 to 1950 Eastern half of yurt outline; possible yurt structureNicholas II 20 kopeck historical Kazakhpiece (19th century); component

Phase VII: Floruit Shaft burial with bronze AD 1275 to 1410 mirror (Han-copy): young

adult female supine body with head in northdirection, silk brocade fragment

Phase VI: Floruit Pit 24 fill; Pit 17 fill; Above-groundBC 180 to AD 75 pit used to hold spherical architecture: plastered

bottom storage vessel; floor surfaces associatedin Unit V-10 a plastered with upright postfloor with a stone-lined placed in a stone-linedpost mould fragments post mouldof three vessels

Phase VIa: Floruit Pit house 3, floor 2; Above-groundBC 400 to 40 Pit house 4, floor 1; architecture of

Pit house 6, floors 4a/b; rectangular and sub-Pit house 7, floor 2; rounded houses. TheOven 1 walls are generally no

more than 50 cm. inheight.

Phase V: Floruit Pit house 2, floor 2; Pit 24B; Pit 26; Pit 27A; Rectangular and roundBC 335 to 40 Pit 13, bottom Pit 27B; Pit 28A; Pit 28B; storage pits

Pit 29; Pit 30A; Pit 30B;Pit 31; Juvenile dog burial

Phase IV: Floruit Pit 8; Pit 19; Pit 21; Rectangular storage pitsBC 415 to 115 Pit 22; Pit 24A; Pit 25Phase III: Floruit Pit house 3, Floors 3a/b Semi-subterraneanBC 775 to 370 rectangular pit houses

with two stone linedpost moulds along the

north south axisPhase II: Floruit Pit house 3, Floor 4, Semi-subterranean orBC 350 to 40 Pit 1 (perhaps this subterranean

represents an intrusive rectangular pit housespit): Pit house 7, (wall heights are 75 cm.Stratum 6 in height or more) with

centre ridge polesupports

Phase I: Floruit Storage pit; Pit house 5, Semi-subterranean orBC 710 to 80 Stratum 1; Pit house 7, subterranean

Stratum 6 rectangular and oval pit

houses.*Floruit generally means the range of the calibrated date (see Hall 1997 for a precise definition).

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

13/15

310


practice of the local Kazakhstani archaeologists who use the terms Saka/Scythian and Wusunto describe chronological time periods, and not specific ethnic groupings of Iron Agepopulations (Ludmilla Koryakova, personal communication). A correlation between the Talgar

chronology and the historical sequence is given in Table 4.The most intensively occupied time period of the Talgar alluvial fan occurred during PhasesV and VI (fourth century BC to first century AD), and this coincides with the erection of large burial mounds. Recently, the Golden Warrior burial excavated in 1969, and locatedabout 15 km east of Tuzusai and Tseganka 8, has been re-evaluated to date from the fourth tothe third century BC, The Golden Warrior, a high status individual, was buried with ceramicvessels, a dagger, and a silver bowl with an undeciphered script (Akishev 1978). The Issyk tomb thus suggests the presence of social stratification among the indigenous populations of Talgar and Issyk.

According to the Iron Age chronologies re-evaluated by Hall (1997), our Iron Age

settlements span the early Saka/Scythian culture through the Wusun and Yuezhi time periods(Hall 1997). According to this chronology, Bashadar Kurgan, Tuekta Kurgan, the Pazyryk Kurgans and Yustyd Kurgans 2123 all fit within the Saka/Scythian period. Hall makes theintriguing suggestion that the Katanda Kurgan and Shibe Kurgan (also found in the Altai-Sayan complex) date slightly later in time (c 410 BC to 50 BC) and could possibly belong tothe Yuezhi rather than the Saka (Hall 1997: 867).

There are several very important points to be made about Halls tentative conclusions. If hissuggestion is correct and can be verified by more radiocarbon dates from the Altai-Sayan sites,then the chronological break in the Semirechye (Ili Valley) sequence that the Kazakharchaeologists have made between the Saka/Scythian burial mounds and cultural affiliations (c700 BC to 200 BC) and the Wusun burial mounds and cultural affiliations (c 200 BC to 500

AD) might also have existed in the Altai-Sayan sequence. There was also a chronological, stylistic,and cultural break in the Iron Age sequence, demonstrating that local, indigenous nomadiccultures were influenced in the first half of the Iron Age (c 700 BC to 200 BC) by the Saka/Scythian traditions to the west and then in the second half of the Iron Age (c 200 BC to 100

AD) were influenced by the Yuezhi/Wusun traditions to the east or Central Asia proper. With regard to the Talgar material, such chronological comparisons are extremely important

because art historical representations of animal style art from such finds as Golden Warriorburial from the Issyk Mound show much closer affiliations with the Ili Valley material from

China, than from the Altai. The more data that can be summoned to build reliable chronologiesin these three regions Semirechye, the Altai-Sayan, and the Chinese sites in north-western

Table 4 The Relationship of the Talgar Chronology derived from Tuzusai and Tseganka 8 with theLocal Chronology for Archaeological Periods in South eastern Kazakhstan

Standard Chronology for South eastern Kazakhstan Phase Designations at Tuzusai and Tseganka 8

Historic Kazakh Period (1500 AD to present) Phase VIIIMongol Period (1210 AD to 1500 AD) Phase VIIMedieval Islamic Period (750 AD to 1200 AD) (not present)Turkic Period (600 AD to 900 AD) (not present) Wusun Period (200 BC to 500 AD) Phases II, III, IV, V, and VISaka Period (700 BC to 100 BC) Phases I, II, III, IV, V, and VI

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

14/15

R e s e a r c h

311


China the more likely archaeologists will be able to determine the extent and degree of cultural influences.

ConclusionsThe most important insight gained from our surveys of the Talgar alluvial fan is the relatively high density of burial mounds, and therefore the high number of settlement sites, that date

within the Iron Age. From a demographic perspective, this indicates that the Talgar alluvialfan was well-populated during the Iron Age. The ancient agro-pastoralists of the Iron Agefarmed and herded along the ancient stream beds. It is entirely possible that the Iron Ageinhabitants did re-channel ancient streams in order to irrigate their crops of wheat, barley,and millet (and perhaps rice). Semi-sedentary pastoralism also occurred in the Talgar Region,although the pre-dominant herding was based upon sheep and goat husbandry. At Tseganka8, the pit houses and above-ground structures suggest that either the inhabitants lived inthese settlements seasonally or year-round. However, the residents at Tseganka 8 continuedto use rectangular house structures throughout all phases of occupation.

During the most intensive period of occupation at Tuzusai and Tseganka 8 (Phases V andVI, c 400 BC to 100 AD), such splendid tombs as the Issyk Mound were also constructed.The Issyk Mound, only 20 km east of the Talgar alluvial fan, demonstrates the existence of ahierarchical, stratified society perhaps similar to the kind of hierarchical military confederaciesdescribed for the Scythian cultures of the Black Sea area. What gave such military confederaciestheir apparent strength and wealth? While scholars have tended to emphasise the ability of groups such as the Saka to plunder and collect tribute from sedentary agriculture groups,

emphasising their military prowess and fierceness above all other aspects, what really gavethem a political and economic edge over other steppe groups was a dual economy basedupon farming and herding. The apparent population expansion during the middle of theIron Age (c 400 BC to 100 AD) was a result of the expansion of agro-pastoral production insuch areas as the Talgar alluvial fan. Control over this fan and ability to produce food surplusescould have only added to the social, political, economic, and military clout of the so-callednomads of the Talgar Region. Finally the chronology of the Talgar area gives us reason tobelieve that the relationship between the indigenous nomadic steppe cultures and pan-steppe cultural affiliations such as those of the Saka/Scythian groups maybe further explainedby the careful excavation of settlement sites as well as burial tumuli.

Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge these granting agencies for the sponsorship of our research: the Wenner-Gren Foundationfor Anthropological Research and the National Geographic Society for field and laboratory research from 1994to 1996 and the National Science Foundation Grant No. BCS-9603661, for research conducted from 1997 to2001. We especially wish to express our gratitude toward Karl M. Baipakov, Director of the Institute of Archaeology (Almaty, Kazakhstan); Yuri M. Peshkov, Cultural advisor for UNESCO (Almaty, Kazakhstan); Murat Nurpeisov,Researcher at the Institute of Archaeology; Alexi Mariashev, Senior Research Archaeologist of the Institute of Archaeology; Olga V. Kuznetsova, Researcher, Institute of Archaeology; Boris A. Zheleznyakov, Researcher, Instituteof Archaeology (Almaty, Kazakhstan); and Victor Mair, Department of Middle Eastern and Asian Studies,University of Pennsylvania. The authors wish to thank the two anonymous readers for their insightful and excellent

comments; although we have incorporated many of their suggestions we take full responsibilities for the contentsand opinions expressed here.

8/7/2019 Ant 0770298

15/15

312


References A KISHEV , K.A. 1978. Kurgan Issyk Iskusstvo Sakov

Kazakhstana. (Issyk Mound, The Art of Saka inKazakhstan. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publishers.

A KISHEV , K.A. & G.A. K USHAEV . 1963. DrevnyayaKultura Sakov I Usunei Dolini Reka Ili . (AncientSaka and Wusun Culture of the Ili River Valley).

Alma-Ata: Nauka.B ARTH , F. 1965. Nomads of South Persia: The Basseri

Tribe of the Khamesh Confederacy . HumanitiesPress: New York.

BERNSTAM A.N. & E.I. A GEEV . 1977. Istorii Kazakhskoi SSR . Alma-Ata. (op. cit . Moshkova 1992, p. 75).

CHANG, C. N.D. The Grass is Greener on the OtherSide: A Study of Pastoral Mobility on the EurasianSteppe of Southeastern Kazakhstan. Archaeology

and Ethnoarchaeology of Mobility , edited by R.

Greaves, F. Sellet, a P.L. Yu. Manuscript submittedto the University of Florida Press.

CHANG, C. & P.A. T OURTELLOTTE . 2000. The Kazakh- American Talgar Project Archaeological Surveys inthe Talgar and the Turgen-Asi Areas of Southeastern Kazakhstan: 19971999.Kurgans,Ritual Sites, and Settlements: Eurasian Bronze and Iron Age , edited by Jeannine Davis-Kimball, EileenM. Murphy, Ludmilla Koryakova, & Leonid T.

Yablonsky, pp. 8388. British ArchaeologicalReports International Series 890.

D I COSMO, N. 1994. Ancient Inner Asian Nomads:

Their Economic Basis and Its Significance inChinese History. Journal of Asian Studies 53 (4):10921126.

ETINA , M. A. 1973, Poseleniya Yakke-Parsan 2(Raskopke 195859 godu) Polevoie issledovaniyaChorezmskoe ekspeditsee v 19581961. (TheSettlement of Yakke-Parsan 2 (Excavation 195859): Field research of the Chorezm Expedition in19581961). Materialii XE Vrep. 6. M. pp. 107109.

GRIGOR EV , F. P. 1995. Pozdnsaksoi poseleniya Tuzusai.(Late Saka settlement of Tuzusai). Chimkent and

Almaty: Predvaritelvye igogi isledovaniyiya.H ALL, M. E. 1997. Towards an absolute chronology for

the Iron Age of Inner Asia. Antiquity 71: 863874.H ALSTEAD, P. 1996. Pastoralism or household herding?

Problems of scale and specialisation in early Greek animal husbandry. World Archaeology 28(1): 2042.

INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration. Stuiver, M.et al. 1998. Radiocarbon40(3): 10411083.

K HAZANOV , A. 1984. Nomads and the Outside World.Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

K UZNETSOVA , O. V. 2000. Tekhniko-Tekhnologiicheskii Analiz Keramiki s Posleniye Sako-Usunskvogovremeni iz raion Jetysu. (Technical Technological

Analysis of Ceramics from Saka-Wusun periodsettlements from the Jetysu (Semirechye) region.Izvestiya, Seriya Obshestvennih Nauk 1(224): 161168. Almaty: Ministry of Education and Science,National Academy of Science, Republic of Kazakhstan.

LIU, X INRU. 2000. Migration and Settlement of the Yuezhi-Kushan: Interaction and Interdependenceof Nomadic and Sedentary Societies. Journal of World History , Volume 12 (2): 261287.

MOSHKOVA , M. G. 1992. Stepnaya polosa Asiatskoi chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatoskoi vremi.(Steppe region of the Asiatic part of the SSR in the Scythe-Sarmatskitime). Moscow: Nauka Izdatelstvo.

P AYNE, S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: themandibles from A van Kale. Anatolian Studies 23:281303.

PHILLIPS, E. D. 1957. New Light on the AncientHistory of the Eurasian Steppe. American Journal of Archaeology 61(3): 269280.

PULLEYBLANK , E. G. 1970. The Wu-Sun and Sakas andthe Yueh-chih Migration. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London33(1) In Honour of Sir Harold Bailey: 154160.

R OSEN

, A. M. 2001. Phytolith evidence for agro-pastoral economies in the Scythian period of southern Kazakhstan.The Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Science and Human History.J. D. Meunierand F. Colin. Aix en Provence, CEREGE.

R OSEN, A. M., C. CHANG & F. P. G RIGORIEV . 2000.Paleoenvironments and economy of the Iron AgeSaka-Wusun agro-pastoralists in southeasternKazakhstan. Antiquity 74: 61123.

V AINBERG, V. E. 1979 Pamyatniki kuyusaiskoi kulturi// Kochevniki na granitsa Chorezm. (Monuments of the Kuyusai Culture//Nomads from the borders of Chorezm). M. 1979: 9.

Y ABLONSKY , L. T. 2000. Scythian Triad and Scythian World, In Kurgans, Ritual Sites, and Settlements:Eurasian Bronze and Iron Age,edited by J. Davis-Kimball, E. M. Murphy, L. Koryakova, & L. T.

Yablonsky. British Archaeological Report,International Series 890: 38.

Z ADNEIROVSKII, Y. A. 1997. Oshkoe poseleniye k istorii Ferghani v epochi posdnye Bronze . (Osh Settlementand the History of Ferghana in the Late BronzePeriod). Bishkek.

Ant 0770298

Documents

Transcript of Ant 0770298