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.
State and Church in the Later Roman Empire: Valentinian I, Valens and the Arian crisis
Tyragetia, serie nouă, vol. I [XVI], nr. 1, Arheologie. Istorie Antică
In the 4th century AD, the emperor, absolute monarch though he was, ruled by consensus, and consensus could only maintained at the price of compromise. Thus, emperors who failed to understand the principle of clemency not only violated the common code of proper conduct, they also threatened the foundations of their rule.
Valentinian I and Valens were largely indifferent to the diversity of religious belief in their worlds, and both tried primarily to maintain the status quo by privileging Christianity without attacking paganism. Valens differed from his brother, primarily because of the different circumstances in which the two operated.
The new strength of Christianity in the 4th century opened an alternative avenue to power through the bishops, who successfully challenged the authority of the emperor and his officials. The rise of powerful bishops also helped fractionalize the church and pulled emperors into ecclesiastical power struggles. Thus, the Homoians were the dominant church in the east when Valens attained the throne, and they gained their dominance at the expense of the Homoiousians. In upholding the council of Constantinople (360) by suppressing the Homoiousians, Valens was carrying on the task initiated by Constantius II of defending the official state church. Valens was also willing to entrust ecclesiastical affairs to a small though powerful group of Homoian clerics.
Jovian’s rhetoric of concord was kept alive by his successor, Valentinian – who was a Nicene, but did not favor Nicenes any more than any other Christian faction. Valentinian maintained a detached indifference to the doctrinal debates of his day, a luxury he was allowed by the much calmer atmosphere in the churches of the west. Valens, by contrast, was forced to clean up the mess Julian had created by forcibly applying the doctrines of the council of Constantinople (360), which had imposed Homoian Christianity in the east and deposed some of the most important Homoiousian bishops there. Having done this, Valens was able to operate with much the same indifference as his brother during the middle years of his reign, when he aimed primarily at achieving peace and concord in the church. After the death of Athanasius in 373, Valens began to exert considerable force in order to achieve the illusory end of unifying the church around the Homoian creed. The violence Valens wreaked in Egypt constituted something of a turning point in his relationship with the church. Only at the end of his reign did Valens turn to the scorching persecutions that have left him with the reputation of a religious persecutor; by 376, Valens’s name became synonymous with heresy and religious violence.
Like his brother, Valens desired harmony in the church. Unlike his brother, he had not learned that belief cannot be dictated by force. Valens failed to understand that ecclesiastical loyalties were a local matter and could not be controlled from on high. Many 4th–century emperors attacked religious dissenters, but very few suffered a catastrophic fate like Valens’s to prove, in the eyes of contemporaries, that they had provoked the wrath of the divine.
Valens’s disaster at Adrianople guaranteed the victory of the Nicene faction in the long-standing battle over the person of Christ. Without the destruction of the Arian emperor Valens and without the political and military chaos that it provoked, there probably would never have been this solidarity effect under emperor Theodosius I – the solidification of a formerly divided church around the Nicaena fides. Thus, Valens helped the church become what it is, however paradoxical this may sound.
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
