_______________________________________________
ART-SANAT 2014/1
_______________________________________________
3
In fact, nomads are often seen as destroyers of sedentary culture and, indeed,
of many of the achievements of human civilization. However after an initial period,
nomads did erect walls to protect themselves from the attacks of other nomadic
tribes, usually related to them, often during internecine wars. It seems likely that
this in fact represents the first step toward the transformation from nomadic to
sedentary life. Let’s concern now some peculiarities of archaeological sites that give
us a possibility to trace certain elements of this transformation.
In the description of a plan of archaeological sites, one finds a structure
sometimes called “enclosure for cattle”. One of the early examples of the application
of this term is the site of Dalverzin in the Fergana valley, belonging to the late
Bronze Age and Iron period.
2
This identification of a cattle enclosure wanders from
one publication to another, but only a detailed analysis of the structure and perhaps
a special study of soil under laboratory conditions can show whether it is justified.
Our task here is an attempt to explain some special features of this archaeological
structure. The example which we study in fact elucidate one of the peculiarities of
Central Asian archaeology and in certain measure fortification system. First, let us
note that to construct a wall four-meter-thick as an “enclosure for the cattle”
appears a little irrational. In reality it could be normal fortification wall which
included certain area for the nomad settlement inside of fortification system and we
should try to expose a sort of this mixed site as Dalverzin in the central Asian
antiquity.
The Dalverzin site is one of the most studied large settlements (Fig. 2). It
occupies the hill in the shape of an oval, whose area reaches 25 hectares, “the
greater part of which was empty, and several habitable complexes were located
along the internal wall; residential area (area 18 hectares); the area between them
(area 5 hectares) is not built on and apparently, it served as enclosure for the
cattle”.
3
The internal space of Dalverzin was divided by two walls into three sections
and all this was included in the ring of the external wall.
4
One of the internal walls,
which separate the enclosure from the residential area, has a thickness of 4 m
(preserved height of 1 m); another internal wall, which separates the citadel, was
built of (mud) bricks and has a thickness of 2.5 m (and a height of 2.6 to 3 m).
5
Building such massive walls would of course require large labor resources.
Examples from contemporary rural life suggest that these enclosures for domestic
2
See early publications: V. I. Sprishevskiy, “Chustskoe poselenie epohi bronzy,” Kratkie soobscheniya
Instituta istorii material’noy kul’tury, LXIX, 1957; V. I. Sprishevskiy, “Raskopki Chustskogo poseleniya v
1956 godu,” Izvestie Akademii Nauk Uzbekskoy SSR, 1, 1957; V. I. Sprishevskiy, “Raskopki Chustskogo
poseleniya v 1956 godu”, Sovetskaya Arkheologiya, 3, 1958.
3
V. I. Sarianidi, G.A. Koshelenko, “Fergana, Chustskaya cultura,” Drevneshie gosudarstva Kavkaza i
Sredney Azii., (Ed. G. A. Koshelenko), Izd-vo “Nauka”, Moscow 1985, 193, pl. LXX, 1.
4
The external wall was a clay platform with a layer of packed earth on top (width of 0.6 m); it was
made from raw brick, the thickness of the wall of 4-6 m, the preserved height of 2.5 m. Another section
of this wall is a complex made of clay blocks, and there is a intra-wall corridor (width of 2 m).
5
Yu. A. Zadneprovskiy, “Ukreplenya chustskyh poseleniy i ih mesto v istorii pervobytnoy fortificatsii
Tsentral’noy Azii,” Kratkie soobscheniya Institute arkheologi 147, 1976, 7.
_______________________________________________
ART-SANAT 2014/1
_______________________________________________
4
animals were made of branches or ordinary loess, and constructed for the sole
purpose of keeping the cattle in one with no opportunity to disperse.
When enemy attack or siege threatened, it is more likely that cattle were kept
in the city, where the animals could serve as reserve of provisions for possible long
durations of sieges. There are many examples of domestic cattle kept within the
fortress; one in particular, although dating from a later time, involved the ancient
cities of Fergana and the military expeditions of Han China (103, 101 BCE) to
capture the celestial horses (argamaks) of the reign of Dayuan, sent by emperor U-
Di (156-87 BCE). During the well-organized expedition of 103 BCE, General Lee
Guan-lee’s army besieged the city of Ershi. The siege lasted 40 days until the
Chinese broke the external wall and entered the city. Many Dayuan leaders,
including their leader Mugu, fell in battle. The rest of the (military) residents
[residents = Soldiers] were locked in the citadel and entered into negotiations with
the Chinese. Their proposition was that they would agree to give the argamaks as
well as to supply army with provisions; the only proviso was that the Chinese would
leave the country. Otherwise, the dwellers (protectors of the city) would smash the
argamaks and fight to the death, expecting aid from Kanghu.
6
What is particularly
interesting and relevant for us in this episode is the fact that the inhabitants of the
besieged city took their horses away and hid them inside the citadel walls.
So what was the meaning of the empty space in the ancient settlement of
Dalverzin, and the reason for keeping 5 hectares (a rather large area compared to
the entire area of settlement), without any traces of buildings? Whatever the
purpose, it has been definitively determined that the space between the walls of
settlement did not bear the traces of any building. It is possible that the area was
occupied with light constructions or by tent dwellings belonging to a semi-nomadic
population. We have another example.
The ancient settlement of Kalai Zakhoki Maron, located in the valley of
Kashkadarya (Uzbekistan), is by far the earliest known example of nomad city sites
7
and is even more surprising as an archaeological site, in terms of both its
dimensions of scale and its planning.
It would be logical to look for the existence of a city in transition. The Kalai
Zakhoki Maron site (Fig. 3), discovered in the territory of modern Karshi (the capital
of the Kashkadarya region), is evidently an example of such an archaeological site.
What is immediately striking about this site is its huge dimension. Its first
investigator, S.K. Kabanov, defined it as “one of the most considerable sites of the
6
Iakinf (N. Ya. Bichurin), Istoriya Tibeta i Khukhunora, 1, St. Petersburg, 1833, 17; N. Ya. Bichurin,
Sobranie svedeniy o narodah naselyavshih Srednuyuy Aziyu v drevnie vremena,1, Izd-vo Nauka, Moscow-
Leningrad, 1950,. 214; M. A. Castrén, Ethnologische Vorlesungen über die Altaischen Völker, St.
Petersburg: Kaiserlichen Akad. Wissen. ,1857, 35-36; L. Ligeti, “Mots de civilisation de Haute Asie en
transcription chinoise,” Acta Orientalia, 1950, 141-49; S. V. Kisilev, Drevnyaya istoriya Yzhnoy Sibiri
Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR, Moskva, 1951, 321.
7
M. Turebekov, “Arheologicheskoe izuchenie oboronitel’nyh sooruzheniy gorodischa Kalai-Zahoki-
Maron,” Istoriya material’noy kul’tury Uzbekistana 15, 1979, 68-75.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |