Bronze cauldrons of the Scythian time are rare in the Northern Black Sea region, especially on its western borders. Therefore, those few items found on the territory of the Republic of Moldova occupy a worthy place in the collection of the National Museum of History of Moldova (NMHM). In particular, in the archaeological exhibition, two bronze cauldrons are displayed, discovered near the village of Nicolscoe in 1988 in burial mounds no. 14 and 15. In addition, in 2020, two bronze cauldrons without any accompanying documents were found in the collection of NMHM; however, they were visually identified as coming from various excavations in the Low Dniester region, such as burial mound no. 45 near Dubăsari and burial mound no. 1 near the Răscăieții Noi village.
The object presented as the exhibit of the month is a little-known find discovered in 1979 in barrow 1 near the village of Răscăieții Noi in the Ștefan Vodă district. In addition to its outstanding size (about 10 m high), this mound is known for discovering a cast bronze finial in the Scythian animal style on its surface in 1953. However, by the beginning of excavations, the locals had damaged part of the mound and a Scythian cast bronze cauldron was found near it. The cauldron was seriously damaged by mechanical impact, as a result of which the rim was deformed, and the walls, with one preserved vertical handle, were bent inwards. Fragments in the upper part of the body and one handle have been lost. The total reconstructed height of the cauldron is 24 cm (excluding the handles), the reconstructed diameter of the hemispherical cauldron is 30 cm, and the weight is 6.5 kg. In 2020, data on the chemical composition of the bronze cauldron alloy were obtained, revealing that it was cast from an alloy of almost 95 per cent copper. Unfortunately, due to the loss of information on the context of the discovery of the cauldron at Răscăieții Noi, it is impossible to link its discovery with one or another Scythian burial of the barrow. Moreover, the grave goods of other Scythian burials of Barrow 1 do not allow them to date below the 4th century BC. However, the cauldron with vertical handles from Răscăieții Noi most likely belongs earlier. This may be indicated by a bronze finial from the first half of the 5th century BC, which was found on this barrow in 1953. In addition, burial 7 from the nearest excavated barrow 2 at Răscăieții Noi, containing a plaque depicting a rolled predator (a copy of which is also on display at the NMHM), belongs to the mid- 5th century BC. Thus, there is a high probability that the cauldron from Barrow 1 at Răscăieții Noi is associated with the late Middle Scythian period or the mid-5th century BC.
Scythian bronze cauldrons in the west area are concentrated in three main regions: Bukovina-Podolia, the Lower Danube, and the Lower Dniester. Some Scythian cauldrons have no reliable archaeological context. Nevertheless, in combination with the same "stray" finds like the Scythian statues, the finds of Scythian cauldrons mark the Scythian presence, most likely not earlier than the late 6th century or even the turn of the 6th-5th centuries BC. The cauldrons first appeared in Bukovina, where they have been known since the middle of the 7th century BC. Bronze cauldrons (with their carriers) entered the steppe region 150-200 years later, and the "military" burials that appeared in the western steppe regions were no earlier than the middle of the 5th century BC. Most burials with cauldrons (and, apparently, the stray finds) are dated back to the second half of the 5th century BC. Then, in the early 4th century BC, their quantity was reduced, and after the first quarter of the 4th century BC, they completely disappeared from the cultural practice of the population of the steppes of the North-Western Black Sea region.
A woman from Dănceni, or bow fibulae of Werner's class II C
Joachim Werner’s changing views on the so-called “Slavic” bow fibulae of his class II C have long influenced the views of archaeologists working on the early Middle Ages in East Central and Eastern Europe. A fresh look at the much enlarged corpus of evidence was therefore much needed. The near-neighbor clustering analysis of all whole specimens of Werner’s class II C reveals some interesting observations. First, very few II C fibulae found on neighboring sites are also alike, and that only in the Middle Dnieper region. More often than not, very similar specimens have been found at a long distance from each other, e.g., in Crimea, the Middle Dnieper region, or in the Carpathian Basin. Except the pair of fibulae from Dănceni, almost identical specimens are only known from assemblages in Left Bank Ukraine. A thorough examination of the archaeological context in which some of the II C fibulae have been found shows that the earliest specimens are those from Caričin Grad and Carevec, mainly because of their association with cast fibulae with bent stem, otherwise dated to the second half of, or the late sixth century. No fibulae are known which could be firmly dated later than the first half of the seventh century, which suggests that Werner’s class II C may have been in fashion shortly before and after AD 600. In Crimea, such fibulae often appear in combination with specimens of Werner’s class II D, a combination also attested in hoards of bronze and silver from the Middle Dnieper region. In burial assemblages from both that region and from Crimea, pairs of fibulae were sometimes connected with a necklace of glass beads and pendants, a fashion of north European, possibly Scandinavian origin. Trasological studies of fibulae found in the Middle Dnieper region showed that they were produced locally, even though to this date no mould is known from that region. In the Carpathian Basin, fibulae of Werner’s class II C were worn singly, but contrary to Werner’s own opinion, there is nothing “Slavic” about that fashion. The pair of fibulae from Dănceni represents a clear reference to the fashions sported by elites in the Middle Dnieper region, whom local elites in late sixth- or early seventh-century Moldova wanted to emulate.
List of illustrations: Fig. 1. Grave 280 in Dănceni: bow fibulae, bracelet, handmade pottery, and glass beads (after Рафалович 1986). Fig. 2. Werner’s class II C, brooch design parts: head-plates (1 A-G) and foot-plates (2 A-G). Fig. 3. Werner’s class II C, brooch design parts: foot-plates (2 H-l), terminal lobes (3 A-T), bow (4 A-K), and knobs (5 A-C). Fig. 4. Near-neighbor cluster analysis of 46 bow fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Fig. 5. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Teodor 1992; Корзухина 1996). Fig. 6. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Teodor 1992; Айбабин, Юрочкин 1995; Корзухина 1996; Nagy 1998). Fig. 7. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Sós 1963; Teodor 1992; Haralambieva 1993; Корзухина 1996. Photos after Кропоткин 1965; Ерцеговић-Павловић, Костић 1988). Fig. 8. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn by the author (14) and after Айбабин 1990; Корзухина 1996; Гавритухин, Приймак 2001-2002). Fig. 9. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Корзухина 1996; Ппиходнюк 1998. Photos after Маленко 1985; Корзухина 1996). Fig. 10. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawings and photos after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 11. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Айбабин 1993; Корзухина 1996; Аксенов, Бабенко 1998; Седин 2000; Aibabin, Khairedinova 2009). Fig. 12. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Корзухина 1996; Седин 2000. Photo after Kühn 1981). Fig. 13. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawings after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 14. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn by the author (40) and after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 15. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Werner 1950; Корзухина 1996; Nagy 1998. Photo after Csallány 1961). Fig. 16. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn after Калитинскйи 1928, Корзухина 1996; Воронцов 2003. Photos after Рыбаков 1953; Шаблавина 2004). Fig. 17. Fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix (drawn by the author (11) and after Калитинский 1928; Корзухина 1996; Garam 2004). Fig. 18. Plotting of the nearest-neighbor similarity of 46 fibulae of Werner’s class II C. Diminishing line thickness indicates the decreasing number of shared neighbors from 6 (thickest) to 3 (thinnest). Fig. 19. The distribution of fibulae of Werner’s class II C in Eastern Europe. Numbers refer to the list of finds in the appendix. Fig. 20. The Koloskovo hoard, selected artifacts: fibula with bent stem, belt mount, lance head, belt buckle, bow fibula, double-spiral eyeglass-shaped pendant, torc, and bracelet (after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 21. The Kozievka hoard, selected artifacts: bow fibulae, belt mounts and buckle, strap ends, fragmentary fibula with bent stem, double-spiral eyeglass-shaped pendant, hat-shaped pendant (after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 22. Luchistoe, burial chamber 38, grave goods associated with skeleton 9: bow fibulae, beads, pendants, buckle, and belt mounts (after Aibabin, Khairedinova 2009). Fig. 23. Chufut Kale, burial chamber 98: fragment of bow fibula and belt mounts (after Кропоткин 1965). Fig. 24. Suuk Su, grave 28 with associated bow fibulae (after Репников 1906; Корзухина 1996). Fig. 25. Eski Kermen, burial chamber 257, grave goods associated with skeleton 6: bow fibulae, cross and eagle- headed buckle (after Айбабин 1982). Fig. 26. Csákbéreny, grave 349: bow fibula, bone tube, glass beads, iron chain, circular mount, and iron ring (after Vida 1995). Fig. 27. Budapest-Pannonhalmi Street 2, grave 2: bow fibula, belt buckle, earring, and glass beads (after Nagy 1998). Fig. 28. Tiszabura, inhumation: earrings, knife, bow fibula, and beads (after Csallány 1961). Fig. 29. Szigetszentmiklós-Haros, grave 14: earrings, lancet, mounts, knife, bow fibula, chain, beads, buckle, and bracelets (after Nagy 1998). Fig. 30. Bakla, burial chamber 11, grave goods associated with the female skeleton: fibulae and buckle (after Айбабин, Юрочкин 1995). Fig. 31. Balakliia, inhumation: bow fibulae and bracelet (after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 32. The Nova Odessa hoard, selected artifacts: beads, bow fibula, lead mount, repoussé copper-alloy pendant, square pendant, bell-shaped pendant, chain (after Корзухина 1996). Fig. 33. Mokhnach, inhumation: fibula with bent stem, repoussé copper-alloy pendant, bracelet, ear(or lock-)ring with twisted end, bow fibula, finger-ring, circular mount, bell-shaped pendant, and fragment of a diadem (after Аксенов, Бабенко 1998). Fig. 34. Mena, stray find: bow fibula and bracelet (after Корзухина 1996).
Bronze cauldrons of the Scythian time are rare in the Northern Black Sea region, especially on its western borders. Therefore, those few items found on the territory of the Republic of Moldova occupy a worthy place in the collection of the National Museum of History of Moldova (NMHM)...
The National Museum of History of Moldova takes place among the most significant museum institutions of the Republic of Moldova, in terms of both its collection and scientific reputation.
The National Museum of History of Moldova takes place among the most significant museum institutions of the Republic of Moldova, in terms of both its collection and scientific reputation.
The National Museum of History of Moldova takes place among the most significant museum institutions of the Republic of Moldova, in terms of both its collection and scientific reputation.
31 August 1989 St., 121 A, MD 2012, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova
