| Annotation |
One of the important directions in the study of military affairs of the Pyanobor culture is the study of weapon
sets. A set of weapons means armaments in a specific closed complex. Their study allows us to understand the
degree of the population’s armament, its diversity, the demand for certain types of weapons. The problem of the
research lies in the fact that such conclusions were made on the basis of an analysis of complexes with weapons
from only one burial ground. It was for this reason that the decision was made to analyze the larger-scale
necropolis of the Pyanobor culture, in which the number of those buried with items of weapons significantly
exceeds those previously studied. This was the Kushulevsky III burial ground. The purpose of this article is to
identify and analyze sets of weapons for male burials at the Kushulevsky III burial ground. It is also necessary to
compare the data obtained on the weapon sets of the Kushulevsky III burial ground with the necropolises already
studied in a similar way: the Okhlebininsky Kara-Abyz culture and the Yuldashevsky Pyanobor culture. It will be
fundamentally important to identify the types of arrowheads from the burials of the Kushulevsky III burial ground. An explanatory model for reducing the number of horse bridle sets in military burials of the Pyanobor culture is
also presented. In the specialized literature, these theoretical conclusions are described for the first time, which
determines the novelty of this work. This work was made possible by the use of statistical calculations, the
comparative historical method, as well as the methods of chronology and typology. The use of these techniques
made it possible to establish the number of weapons items, their types, types of weapon sets, chronology, etc.
The result of the work performed was a demonstration of the proximity of the weapon sets of the Pyanobor and
Kara-Abyz cultures. In some cases, certain categories of weapons predominate, for example, bone arrowheads.
In bladed weapons, the single-edged combat knife is the most used. In the same category of weapons, there is
an electiveness and singularity of swords hitting the drunken population. The combination of a combat knife with
a bow or spear forms a standardized complex of weapons of the Pyanobor culture. |
| References |
1. Tal Kan Cipor Meron Metal Weapons of “Warrior’ Burials” Found in the Middle Bronze Age II Southern
Levant – Economical and Social Aspects. Global Journal of Archaeology & Anthropology, vol. 6, pp. 1–3, 2018.
(In Engl.)
2. Sabine Reinhold Tradition in transition: some thoughts on late bronze age and early iron age burial
costumes from northern Caucasus. European journal of archeology, vol. 6, pp. 25–54, 2003. (In Engl.)
3. Zubov, S. E. On the military structure of the Middle Belian tribes of the early Iron Age (based on materials
from the Okhlebin burial ground, vol. 12, pp. 108–123, 2012. (In Rus.)
4. Lyasovich, V. I. Burials with Weapons and Horse Bridle of Yuldashevsky Burial Ground in the South Ural
Region. Humanitarian Vector, no. 3, pp. 152–167, 2021. (In Rus.)
5. Ageev, B. B., Mazhitov, N. A. A new monument to the Pyanobor culture in Bashkiria (preprint). Ufa, 1985.
(In Rus.)
6. Ageev, B. B. The Pyanobor culture. Ufa: BNTs UB RAS, 1992. (In Rus.)
7. Kurinskikh, O. I. Arrowheads of the early nomads of the Left Bank Ilek, 6th – 1st centuries. BC (based
on materials from burial grounds near the village of Pokrovka). Russian archeology, no. 3, pp. 42–54, 2011. (In
Rus.)
8. Khazanov, A. M. Essays on the military affairs of the Sarmatians. Moscow: Nauka, 1971. (In Rus.)
9. Gening, V. F. The history of the population of the Udmurt Kama region in the drunken era. Part 1:
Cheganda culture (III century BC ‒ II century AD). Questions of archeology of the Urals, issue 10, pp. 3–224,
1970. (In Rus.)
10. Erlich, V. R. Two rich Hellenistic burials from the Psenafa burial ground. Scripta antiqua. Questions of
ancient history, philology, art and material culture, vol. 6, pp. 13–47, 2017. (In Rus.)
11. Zasetskaya, I. P. Classification of arrowheads of the Hunnic era (late 4th ‒ 5th centuries AD). History
and culture of the Sarmatians. 1983: 70–83. (In Rus.)
12. Zubov, S. E., Sattarov, R. R. Arrowheads of the Pyanobor culture as chronological markers (based on
materials from the burial complexes of the Kipchakov I Kurgan-ground burial ground). XXI Ural Archaeological
Meeting. Materials of the All-Russian scientific conference with international participation. Samara: Publishing
house SGSPU, 2018: 210–214. (In Rus.)
13. Zubov, S. E. Military migrations of the Roman period in the Middle Volga region (I–III centuries AD).
Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG, 2011. (In Rus.)
14. Skripkin, A. S. Asian Sarmatia. Saratov: Saratov University Press, 1990. (In Rus.)
15. Fengyan, Z., Manli, S., Xiuhui, L., Guo M., The manufacturing technology of iron swords from the
capital of the Han Empire in China. Web. 10.06.2021. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs42452-020-
03312-x. (In Engl.)
16. 朱棒, 江苏仪征出土永光元年羊头铁剑考 /朱棒 // 总第260期>>年第6期>>地域文明, 2017: 55–58. (In
Chin.)
17. Goldina, R. D., Krasnoperov A. A. Nyrgynda I burial ground, 2nd – 3rd centuries. on the Middle Kama.
Izhevsk: Publishing House “Udmurt University”, 2012. (In Rus.)
18. Grishakov, V. V., Zubov, S. E. Andreevsky Kurgan in the system of archaeological cultures of the Early
Iron Age in Eastern Europe. Kazan: Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan,
2009. (In Rus.)
19. Smirnov, K. F. Mounds near the villages of Ilovatka and Politotdelskoe, Stalingrad region. MIA. 1959:
206–322. (In Rus.)
20. Bugrov, D. G. Pianobor culture settlements in the Iksko-Belsk interfluve. Cand. sci. diss. Kazan, 2006.
(In Rus.) |
