The Beginning and the Maturity of Nomadic Powers in the Eurasian Steppes: Growing and Downsizing of...

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI: 10.1163/15700577-12341249

Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 19 (2013) 105-141 brill.com/acss

The Beginning and the Maturity of Nomadic Powers in the Eurasian Steppes: Growing

and Downsizing of Elite Tumuli

Hayashi Toshio*

AbstractFrom 1999 to 2007 Japan-Mongol joint archaeological expedition worked in the Ulaan Uushig site near the city Mörön, Northern Mongolia. The purpose of our survey is to determine the date of the beginning of nomadic powers in the Eurasian steppes. In places where early kingship occurred, various sizes of tombs were often built. The tomb size reflected the social status of the dead. And a powerful “king” built a big tumulus as a symbol of power. However, elite tumuli were abandoned along with the maturity of power structures. We consider that such a phenomenon can also be seen in the Eurasian steppes. For this reason we looked for the earliest tumuli in Mon-golia, the heartland of rider nomads, and studied the change of size and structure of nomadic elite tombs.

KeywordsMongolia, Eurasian steppes, Scythians, Xiongnu, Khereksur, Elite tumuli, Deer stone

1. Introduction

When did the political and military power of rider nomads first begin in the Eurasian steppes? Some scholars think that the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) horse riders emerged with strong military powers in the western part of the Eurasian steppes in the late fifth–fourth millennia BC1. Others consider that mounted horseman battles formed only at the beginning of the first millen-nium BC.2 E. E. Kuz’mina thinks that an ecological and economic crisis in the

* Soka University, Fac. of Letters, 1-236 Tangi-cho, Hachioji, 222-0012 Tokyo, Japan, Email [email protected]

1 Gimbutas 1997, 355-356; Anthony 2007, 236-237; but D. Anthony considers Eneolithic mounted raiders as tribal fighters (not as organized later cavalrymen).

2 Khazanov 1994, 90-95; Drews 2004, 68-69 ff.

106 T. Hayashi / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 19 (2013) 105-141

Final Bronze Age (12th–9th centuries BC) drove some steppe tribes to nomad-ism and this process was completed in the Scythian Period.3

In the ancient world the kings of the first unified kingdoms often built mon-umental structures, including gigantic tumuli. Those grandiose structures must have played a role as symbols which let people know the origin of first kingship. The earliest kings of the Egyptian Old Kingdom built the largest pyra-mids. In Anatolia the greatest tumuli are those of the Phrygian and Lydian kings. Qin Shi Huang, the First Emperor of unified China, built the largest tumulus in China. In Korea the early Silla kings built great tumuli and in Japan the biggest kofun-tumuli were built in the first stage of the Yamato Kingdom in the second half of the 3rd–5th centuries. Various sizes of kofun-tumuli clearly reflect the difference of the ranks of the buried persons. Can we observe the same situation in the Eurasian steppes?4

In Mongolia there are many stone mounds of various sizes with round or square stone enclosures, called khereksur5 in the Mongolian archaeological literature. The dating6 and the function of khereksurs are not so clear. Some archaeologists believe that khereksurs are not tombs but ritual sites for the sun. For example, Ulug Khorum, “Big Tumulus”, in Tuva has several stone rows radiating from a central round stone mound like a spoked wheel or the sun with rays.7

In many ways these khereksurs, especially big ones, might have been sym-bols of the first nomadic powers. Our Japan-Mongol joint archaeological expe-dition8 set itself the goal to elucidate the dating and the function of khereksurs for the study of the origin of the nomadic powers.

3 Kuz’mina 1994, 44.4 B. M. Mozolevs’kiï and A. Yu. Alekseev classified big Scythian tumuli of the northern Black

Sea region into several ranks on the basis of the heights and the numbers of killed followers; see Mozolevs’kii 1979; Terenozhkin & Mozolevskiï 1988; Alekseev et alii 1991.

5 Mongolians call it khirgis-khüür, “Kirgis (people) corpse (or tomb)”. In the 19th century, Russian archaeologists heard the name from local people and transcribed khereksur. After that the term of khereksur has been used by Russian archaeologists. The Mongolians of the Yulduz Highland in Central Tianshan, China, call this type of site as kirgis-yas, “Kirgis bone”. See Hayashi 1998, 32.

6 There are two reasons of difficulties of the dating. One is that excavated khereksurs are very few and the second is that almost nothing has been found in them.

7 Grach 1980, 62.8 The heads of the Japan side were T. Hayashi (1999) and Professor Takahama Shu of the Uni-

versity of Kanazawa (2003–2007) and the head of Mongol side was Dr. Diimaajav Erdenebaatar of the University of Ulan-Bator. Our research was done in 1999, 2003–2007; see Takahama et alii 2006; Takahama 2010.

T. Hayashi / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 19 (2013) 105-141 107

2. Ulaan Uushig I

We chose a site at the foot of Mt. Ulaan Uushig (“Red Lung”) near the city of Mörön, the center of Khövösgöl aymak, 550 km northwest of Ulan-Bator. Our survey revealed 10 groups (I–X) of various archaeological remains around the mountain (Fig. 1). Most of them are concentrated on the eastern and southern sides of the mountain and there is no group on the northern side. This distribu-tion is analogous to that of stone heaps around a khereksur.

In each group there are various sizes of khereksurs: big (Fig. 2), medium and small. Generally speaking, bigger khereksurs are located on the lower flat foot of the mountain and smaller ones are located on the upper slopes. The differ-ence of sizes probably indicate the hierarchical system of social organization.

We have researched mainly the site Ulaan Uushig I (49°39′32″N; 99°55′42″E), which includes 15 kherekurs, 15 deer stones and many small stone circles and stone heaps (Fig. 3). One of deer stones is very famous for bearing the relief of an human face9 (Figs. 4, 5). This site was surveyed in 1970 by Russian archae-ologists V. V. Volkov and E. A. Novgorodova.10 They drew a plan and a recon-structed picture of this site, excavating small areas around some deer stones. But their plan and pictures are not accurate; they also named the site Uushkiin-Uver (“South of Uushig”). Today we know several groups of sites on the southern side of the mountain, so we have changed the site name to Ulaan Uushig I.

3. Ulaan Uushig I, Kh-1 & 12

We excavated Kh-1 (medium–small size khereksur) with stone heaps, Kh-12 (small size) without stone heaps, Deer Stones 4 and 7 with stone circles (Figs. 6, 7).

The central mound of Kh-1 was 13 m in diameter and 1.5 m in height. The mound has two ‘horn’-like protrusions on the east. During the excavation of Kh-1 we found two important relics for dating Kh-1. The first are pottery frag-ments which were distributed among the stones of the mound (Figs. 8, 9). They belong to one or two vessels and are quite similar to the pottery of the “Slab grave culture”.11 Our pottery is of the same age or later than Kh-1.

9 Deer stones with human face are very rare: only 4 or 5 examples are known among a total of over 600.

10 Volkov, Novgorodova 1975; Volkov 1981, 61-66, 195-202; 2002, 78-83, 187-194; Novgorodova 1989, 203-212.

11 Tsÿbiktarov 2001, fig. 29. The Slab grave culture is dated to the Late Bronze and Early Iron ages: the end of the 2nd millennium BC – the middle of the 1st millennium BC.


Fig. 1. Groups I – X around Mt. Ulaan Uushig (Takahama et alii 2006).


The second is a deer stone (82 cm in length, 36 cm in width, 13 cm in thickness) on which two (large and small) circles are engraved (Fig. 10). It was unearthed at the edge of the stone mound. V. V. Volkov divided deer stones into three types. A deer stone without animal representations belongs to his first type.12

At the center of the mound we found a square stone cist (141 × 72 cm) on ground level. The inner space of the cist is small but sufficient for a crouched position (Figs. 11, 12). Unfortunately we could not find any remains in the cist. We continued digging under the cist and found only soft fresh grass, modern bootlaces and cotton gloves which we had used the year before. This was a tarbagan’s13 nest and the bones of a likely corpse may have been dislocated by a tarbagan. Dr. D. Erdenebaatar told us that it is very rare to unearth human bones from stone cists because of tarbagan’s activity.

On the eastern side of Kh-1 there are 21 stone heaps. In 17 stone heaps, except Nos. 1, 6, 19 and 21, we found horse bones on the ground or in a small pit: skull, mandible (lower jaw), a row of cervical vertebrae (neck bones), and sometimes the third phalanges (hooves) (Fig. 13) and in one case the caudal vertebrae (tail

12 Volkov 2002, 19.13 Marmota bobak: a kind of marmot.

Fig. 2. The biggest khereksur with round circle and hundreds of stone heaps, Ulaan Uushig V (photo by Hayashi).


Fig. 3. Ulaan Uushig I (Takahama et alii 2006).


Fig. 4. Deer Stone No. 14 (photo by Hayashi).


bones).14 In all the cases, the neck was cut between the atlas (first neck bone) and the axis (second neck bone).15 The skull and the mandible with the atlas were set parallel to the other neck bones with the nose pointing to the east.

14 We could not find any remains from the stone heaps on four corners of the enclosure.15 Hongo 2006, 79.

Fig. 5. Deer Stone No. 14 (Takahama et alii 2006).


Fig. 6. Ulaan Uushig I, Kh-1. Kite photo.

Fig. 7. Ulaan Uushig I, Kh-1. Plan (Takahama et alii 2006).

According to zooarchaeologist H. Hongo, the neck was probably skinned and the meat was taken out before the burial, but the cervical vertebrae were still articulated when they were placed under the heap. The same kind of horse sacrifice was found in Southern Buryatia.16

Stone heaps Nos. 1, 6, 19 and 21 were heavily disturbed. Therefore it is prob-able that horse bones had originally been placed in all of the stone heaps. This

16 Danilov 1995.


Figs. 8 and 9. Pottery fragments found in the central mound of Kh-1. Height of reconstructed pottery: ca. 24 cm (photo by Hayashi & Takahama et alii 2006).


situation means that 17–21 horses were slaughtered for sacrifice around Kh-1. H. Hongo investigated four horse burials. One of them is an adult and three are juvenile. From the state of eruption of teeth, all three juveniles were about the same age when they were killed, which suggests that the ritual of burying horses took place at a certain time of the year.17

Our next target was Kh-12. The central mound is 9 m in diameter, sur-rounded by a circular enclosure of 16 m in diameter (Fig. 14). During the exca-vation we found an iron knife among the stones of the mound. Its length is 16.7 cm (Fig. 15). The general shape resembles that of the bronze knives of the Spring and Autumn – Warring States period (770–221 BC). A similar iron knife was found at Maoqinggou in Inner Mongolia,18 but it is uncertain that this knife has a direct relation with Kh-12.

At the center of the mound there appeared an oval stone cist (ca. 120 × 60 cm) on the ground level (Fig. 16). Inside the cist we discovered bones (Fig. 17), mostly judged to be those of an human child of 5 or 6 years age.19 This deter-mination is very important, because it supports the idea that khereksurs must have basically been burial sites. According to Dr. Erdenebaatar, this is the fourth case of human remains to be found inside a khereksur cist in Mongolia.

17 Hongo 2006, 79.18 Tian & Guo 1986, 295.19 The bones were studied by the anthropologist Dr. D. Tümen, Professor of the National Uni-

versity of Mongolia, see Tümen 2006, 81.

Fig. 10. Deer Stone with large and small circles (photo by Hayashi).


Figs. 11 and 12. Stone cist under the mound of Kh-1 on ground-level. Small but sufficient for a crouched position (photo by Hayashi & Takahama).


Fig. 13. Stone heap No. 13 of Kh-1. Horse skull, mandible, neck bones and hooves (photo by Hayashi).

Fig. 14. Ulaan Uushig I, Kh-12. Kite photo.


4. Ulaan-Uushig I, Deer stone Nos. 4 and 7

Deer stones often stand near khereksurs, but the relationship between them remains uncertain. We have excavated the areas around two deer stones (Deer stone Nos. 4 and 7), and verified whether there is any relations or not.

Deer stone No. 4 was lying in the ground and hardly visible on the surface when Volkov found it in 1970,20 so the figures on it are preserved quite well.21 It has representations of earrings, shield, belt, axe, knife and a Karasuk type dagger besides the deer representations (Figs. 18, 19). The Karasuk Culture

20 Volkov 2002, 79.21 After that this deer stone was re-erected and fixed with cement, probably by the local gov-

ernment, like many other deer stones of Ulaan Uushig I.

Fig. 15. Ulaan Uushig I, Kh-12. Plan (Takahama et alii 2006).


Fig. 16. Stone cist, Kh-12 (photo by Hayashi).

Fig. 17. Bones of a child of 5–6 years age, Kh-12 (photo by Hayashi).


is dated to the end of the 2nd millennium – the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. The folding legs representation of deers is similar to that of the early Scyth-ian animal style (8th–6th centuries BC), but other representations of stags are far from natural ones: beak-like muzzles, extremely long necks, extremely small legs. These features cannot be seen in the early Scythian art.

Around the deer stones there are many stone circles and stone heaps. We excavated 8 stone circles around Deer stone No. 4. From 6 of the 8 stone circles we recovered horse skulls with neck bones and in one case they were accom-panied by hooves (Fig. 20). The nose is always oriented toward the east just like those of Kh-1.

Near Deer Stone No. 7 we found five sets of horse bones (skull, neck bones, and hooves) in stone circles and stone heaps. The nose was again always ori-ented toward the east.

It is noteworthy that all the horses, both around khereksur and the deer stones, did not wear any bridles.

5. Date of khereksur and Deer Stones

We have confirmed that the same ritual of horse sacrifice was conducted in the stone heaps of khereksurs, on the one hand, and in the stone circles and heaps around deer stones on the other hand. Based on the Karasuk type knife, both the khereksur and the deer stone can be dated to the same age: the end of the 2nd–the beginning of the 1st millennium BC.

This dating has been confirmed by radiocarbon analysis of the animal bones unearthed from Ulaan Uushig I, carried out at the University of Tokyo:

Sample ID Sample Name

Animal Species

Labo Code 14C Age (BP)

95% Cal Age Ranges

(2σ)

σ13C C/N

Ulaan Uushig 01 SC-7 Horse (Equus caballus)

MTC-12531 2749±50 1005-810 calBC

-20.3 3.2

Ulaan Uushig 02 Kh-1 SH-18 Horse (Equus caballus)

MTC-12814 2871±59 1259-903 calBC

-21.0 3.2

Ulaan Uushig 03 SC-5 Horse (Equus caballus)

MTC-12815 2923±59 1312-936 calBC

-20.3 3.1

Ulaan Uushig 04 Kh-1 SL-1 Ox (Bos taurus) MTC-12816 2069±57 347-57 calAD

-19.5 3.1

Ulaan Uushig 05 Kh-1 SH-11 Horse (Equus caballus)

MTC-12817 2835±57 1193-842 calBC

-20.8 3.1

Analyzed by Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo.


Fig. 18. Deer stone No. 4. H: 240 cm (photo by Hayashi).


Fig. 19. Deer stone No. 4. H: 240 cm (Takahama et alii 2006).

Two samples of Ulaan Uushig 01 and 03 were unearthed from SC (Stone Cir-cles) near Deer stone No. 4. The other two samples of Ulaan Uushig 02 and 05 were unearthed from SH (Stone Heaps) around khereksur No. 1. These four samples show that the khereksur and deer stone were constructed between the 13th and the 9th centuries BC or during the Karasuk period. Sample 04 might have been put on Kh-1 rather later, because it was unearthed in the surface layer of Kh-1.

In Mongolia there are much bigger khereksurs than our Kh-1. Two of them are located in Urt Bulagyn am, Öndör-Ulaan sum, Arkhangay aymak. The Southern big khereksur (Fig. 22; 48°04′47″N; 101°03′32″E) is a little larger than the Northern big one (Figs. 21, 23; 48°05′34″N; 101°03′24″E). The Mongol-


Fig. 21. Northern big khereksur, Urt Bulagyn am, Öndör-Ulaan sum, Arkhangay aymak (photo by Hayashi).

Fig. 20. Stone circle No. 7 of Deer stone No. 4. Horse skull, mandible, neck bones and hooves (photo by Hayashi).


Fig. 22. Southern big khereksur (Google earth).

American (Pittsburgh University) Expedition surveyed the Northern big one. It has a large rectangular enclosure (longer side is 200 m) and is surrounded by more than 1700 stone heaps and stone circles.22 The central mound is 4.9 m in height at its highest point and about 30 m in diameter at ground level.23 The team excavated 7 stone heaps and found a set of horse bones, skull and cervical vertebrae, oriented to the east-south-east in each heap.24 This suggests that about 1700 horses were sacrificed for a specific person. He must have been one of the first kings of the Mongolian steppe.

22 Allard & Erdenebaatar 2005, 549; Fitzhugh 2009.23 Allard et alii 2006, 209.24 Allard et alii 2006, 214.


Fig. 23. Northern big khereksur (Allard et alii 2006).

Radiocarbon analysis of the horse remains excavated from two different stone heaps at Urt Bulagyn am have shown dates of ca. 1040–850 BC and 975–680 BC.25 These dates nearly coincide with those of Ulaan Uushig I.

In conclusion we note that a strong power and hierarchical system of social organization began in Mongolia around the end of the 2nd–the beginning of the 1st millennium BC.

6. Big Tumuli in the Early Scythian Period

Some of the khereksurs must have been constructed later, because there are khereksurs which accompany later types of deer stones. More natural repre-

25 Allard & Erdenebaatar 2005, 551.


Fig. 24. Khereksur and deer stone. Dörvöljin am, Shine Ider, Hövsgöl aymak (photo by Hayashi).

sentation of the deer with straightening legs are typical for early Scythian art of the 8th–6th centuries BC (Figs. 24, 25).

The earliest Scythian tumulus of Arzhan-1 (52°03′45″N; 93°35′59″E) is dated to the boundary of the 9th to 8th centuries BC, according to the newest radio-carbon analysis.26 Arzhan-1 had a low and flat but large (3–4 m in height, 110 m in diameter) stone mound, in which a complex timber structure was found on the ground level.27 In the mound there were discovered 17 human skeletons, of which two were a “royal couple” and another 15 might have been followers. Furthermore 160 horse skeletons wearing bridles were discovered in the mound. The north, east and south sides of the mound were surrounded by lots of small stone heaps which might have included so many animal bones. M. P. Gryaznov estimated that about 300 horses might have been killed for the funeral feast, at which over 10,000 people might have participated.28 Gryaznov called it a “royal kurgan”.

26 Zaїtseva et alii. 2007, 648.27 Grjaznov 1984, 17.28 Gryaznov 1980.


Fig. 25. The deer stone with the stags in the early Scythian style. Dörvöljin am, Shine Ider, Hövsgöl aymak (photo by Hayashi).


Another smaller tumulus, Arzhan-2 (75–80 m in diameter and 1.5–2.0 m in height) was excavated in 2000–2004.29 It is located 9 km northeast from Arzhan-1 and is surrounded by over 200 stone circles and far more stone heaps.30 Two large square pits near the center of the mound were 2.40 m and 2.60 m in depth. Nothing could be found in these two pits. The excavators think that these pits might have been fake tombs to deceive grave robbers.31 The true grave for the “royal couple” was set in a log chamber which lay on a square pit bottom (5.50 m in depth). Under the mound 14 buried followers were found, 14 horse skeletons and rich grave goods besides those of the “royal couple.” The construction of the grave of the “royal couple” in Arzhan-2 occurred in the middle or the end of the 7th century BC (the most probable ages are 622, 659 and 634 cal BC).32

In the Bes-shatyr cemetery, south Kazakhstan, there are several big kurgans (tumuli) (Fig. 26). The biggest one measured 17 m in height and 100 m in diam-eter and is called “Bol’shoi kurgan” (Big tumulus) without number (Fig. 27) (43°55′22″N; 78°12′39″E). This biggest one has not yet been excavated, but sev-eral other mounds were excavated. The next tumulus in size is “Kurgan No. 3”, which consisted of 17 alternating layers of stone and soil, and a log chamber33 built on the ground level (Fig. 28). Other smaller mounds also consisted of stone and soil with timber chambers.

The Kazakh archaeologist K. A. Akishev dated this cemetery roughly to the Saka period, 7th–4th centuries BC, while he suggested a date of the 7th–6th cen-turies BC on the basis of the same structure of the log chamber on the ground level as the early Scythian tumuli, Zhabotin kurgan No. 524 and Ul’skii aul kurgan No. 1.34 I agreed with his suggestion and dated it to the early Scythian period, 8th–6th centuries BC.35 Recent radiocarbon analysis confirmed this dat-ing. The results of the analysis of the Institute of History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Le) and the University of Arizona revised the date of Bes-shatyr No. 3 to the 8th century BC (Fig. 29).36 In Chilikta

29 Čugunov et alii 2010, 15.30 Stone circles or heaps in the south and southeast might have been destroyed during road

construction; see Chugunov et alii 2004, 8.31 Čugunov et alii 2010, 125.32 Zaїtseva et alii 2007, 652.33 The log chamber of Mound No. 3 was burnt. In Akishev’s opinion, robbers wanted to hide

the traces of illegal digging (Аkishev & Кushaev 1963, 46). However, in Filippovka-1 (southern Ural), Chilikta (eastern Kazakhstan) and Arzhan-2 (Tuva) the logs were singed for the purpose of fire worship or durability.

34 Аkishev & Kushaev 1963, 80.35 Hayashi 2006, 327.36 Alimbay 2011, 46-49.


Fig. 26. Early Saka cemetery Bes-shatyr (“Five-tents”), ca. 8th–7th centuries BC, Altyn-emer National Park, Southeast Kazakhstan (Google earth in 2009).

(Shilikty), eastern Kazakhstan, a log chamber was a little sunken (1 m) in the ground (47°10′34″N; 84°31′04″E).37

In northern Caucasia there are three huge tumuli of the early Scythian period: Ul’skiï aul No. 1 (Fig. 30), Krasnoe Znamya No. 1 and Uashkhitu. Ul’skiï aul No. 1 might have been probably over 15 m in height and had a log chamber on the ground level with 360 horses.38 Krasnoe Znamya No. 1 might have been 14–15 m in height and 70 m in diameter and had a chamber made of slabs and

37 Chernikov 1965.38 Petrenko 1989, 221.


Fig. 27. The biggest kurgan in Bes-shatyr cemetery. Height: 17 m; Diameter: 100 m (photo by Hayashi in 1992).

Figs. 28. Plan and section of Bes-shatyr Kurgan No. 3. The mound consisted of stones and soil. The log chamber covered by stones on the original surface was

burnt (Akishev & Kushaev 1963).


Fig. 29. Log of Tianshan spruce, found in Bes-shatyr Kurgan No. 3. 117 cm in height. 8th century BC (Alimbay 2011).

Fig. 30. Ul’skiї aul-1 (Minns 1913).


timbers on the ground level.39 Uashkhitu kurgan had a tent-shaped log struc-ture and a shallow burial pit.40

The famous Kelermes kurgans did not have so big mounds (4–7 m in height and less than 70 m in diameter) but yielded rich grave goods. The burials were placed on the ground level or in shallow pits and no timber structures were found, but only wooden floors.41 Kostromskaya No. 1 also had a small mound and a tent-like log structure (burnt) on the ground level (Fig. 31). The mound was constructed on another small mound of the Bronze Age.42

The earliest Scythian kurgans in the middle reaches of the River Dnepr, Zhabotin No. 524 and Litoï (Mel’gunov) kurgans, had timber structures on ground level.43 Staïkin Verkh No. 1 (Starshaya Mogila) (Fig. 32) (over 20 m in height and over 40 m in diameter) and Staïkin Verkh No. 2 (10.5 m in height) had timber structures under the ground, but not deep.44 According to V. S. Ol’khovskiï, there are 64 pit graves, 7 timber graves and 8 catacombs in the early and middle Scythian periods of the northern Black Sea region. Most of the timber graves were made on the ground level, while timber graves under-ground were very rare.45

7. Big Tumuli in the Late Scythian Period: 5th–Early 3rd Centuries BC

Very many kurgans belonging to the late Scythian period in the vast Eurasian steppe have been surveyed. I will describe their structures briefly.

In the northern Black Sea region several “royal kurgans” were built. One of the largest, Chertomlÿk, is 21 m in height and 100 m in diameter. The mound consisted of soil covered with stones. The burial chamber was very deep at 12 m from the ground level.46 According to the reinvestigations in the 1980s at Chertomlÿk, the mound was piled up with “grass sods” of 15 × 25 cm cut from a grass plot. It needed about 270 grass sods to pile up 1 m3. So a grass plot of about 10 m2 was necessary for laying earth of 1 m3 (0.15 × 0.25 × 270 = 10.125). As the mound of the Chertomlÿk is calculated to 75,000 (or 84,000) m3, over

39 Petrenko 1983, 43-48.40 Erlikh 1994.41 Galanina 1997, 25-26.42 Il’inskaya & Terenozhkin 1983, 68; Petrenko 1989, 221.43 Il’inskaya & Terenozhkin 1983.44 Il’inskaya 1983, 24-27.45 Ol’khovskiï 1978.46 Alekseev et alii 1991.


Fig. 31. Kostromskaya-1 (Il’inskaya & Terenozhkin 1983).

Fig. 32. Section of Starshaya Mogila (Il’inskaya & Terenozhkin 1983).

75 (or 84) hectares of grassland were needed.47 In order to build the mound of the Oguz kurgan of 140,000 m3, 140 hectares of grassland must have been destroyed.48 This shows the mighty power of some Scythian leaders.

47 Rolle & Murzin 1991, 172.48 Boltrik & Fialko 1991, 177.


In the Pazÿrÿk kurgans of the Altai, mound No. 5 is considered a “royal kur-gan,” because a large wall hanging depicting the scene of divine rights of a king was found. The mound is not so big, measuring 3.75 m in height and 42 m in diameter, but the burial pit was deep at 4 m. In the pit there was a log chamber. The Pazÿrÿk elite tombs (Pazÿrÿk 1–5) have been dated to the 5th–4th centuries BC on the basis of comparative studies with Achaemenid art motives and den-drochronology.49 Differently, S. V. Kiselev dated kurgan 1 to the 3rd century BC.50 T. S. Kawami also thought that the Greek parallels seen in the griffins from kurgans 1 and 2 cannot be earlier than the 4th century BC and possibly more recent.51 The newest radiocarbon analysis shows that the earliest elite kurgan, Pazÿrÿk 2, was constructed around 300 BC and the latest, Pazÿrÿk 5, was built about 250 BC.52 In my opinion the Pazÿrÿk elite kurgans can be dated to the 4th century BC, because in the Pazÿrÿk art we can see a lot of Achae-menid art motives and a few Classic Greek motives but cannot see any Helle-nistic motives.53

In the Minusinsk basin of southern Siberia there was a huge rectangular tumulus, Great Salbyk kurgan: 11.5 m in height and 125 × 125 m. It has a tent-like log structure in a shallow pit.54 It has been dated to the 4th century BC, but recent radiocarbon analysis showed a somewhat older date: ca. 750–400 BC.55

In Kazakhstan, Issÿk kurgan No. 16 (6 m in height and 60 m in diameter) is very famous for the “Golden Man” found here.56 Two burial chambers made of timber were found, both of which were in shallow pits. K. A. Akishev dated this tumulus to the 5th century BC, but his son, A. K. Akishev was more critical and dated it to the end of 4th – the beginning of the 3rd century BC.57 I agree with the latter date. The Berel’ kurgans of the Altai in eastern Kazakhstan also have similar structure as Issÿk.58

In the southern Ural two “royal” kurgans, Nos. 1 and 4 of Filippovka 1 cemetery, were excavated. Kurgan 1 had a large mound of 7 m in height and 103–120 m in diameter (Fig. 39). The burial pit was round and shallow (1.8 m in depth, 17–18 m in diameter). The pit might have been covered with a tent-like timber

49 Azarpay 1959, 339; Rudenko 1970; Marsadolov 2000, 21.50 Kiselev 1951, 391.51 Kawami 1991.52 Hajdas et alii 2004, 114; Panyushkina et alii 2007.53 Hayashi 2012.54 Chlenova 1992, 211-212; Devlet 1976.55 Svyatko et alii 2009: 272.56 Akishev, K. A. 197857 Akishev, K. A. 1978, 39, 128; Akishev, A. K. 1984, 5.58 Stark et alii 2011.


roof.59 Kurgan 4 (6 m in height) had a big rectangular burial pit with rounded corners. The pit might have been covered with a timber roof.60

8. Royal Burials in the Xiongnu (Asiatic Huns) and the Sarmatian Periods

Since AD 2000 a lot of Xiongnu royal cemeteries have been discovered and excavated in Mongolia,61 while during the 20th century we knew only two cem-eteries: Noyon-uul (Noin-ula) and Il’movaya pad’. The common features of their big tombs are the followings:

1) The cemetery is located in a forest on the northern or northwestern slope of a mountain (Fig. 33).

2) The mound is rectangular with a ramp to the south (Fig. 34). This struc-ture might have been influenced by the Chinese.

3) The mound is not so high (1.5–3 m in height) but the burial chamber is abnormally deep (10–20 m in depth; Fig. 33).

4) The main mound is accompanied by satellite burials on both sides to the east and the west.

Xiongnu elite burials are less represented because of the low mound and the location in the forests of northern slopes, while the elite khereksurs and Scyth-ian elite kurgans are clearly distinguishable for the massiveness and the loca-tion on southern or eastern slopes or on the vast steppes. However, the burial chamber of the Xiongnu elite kurgans is unusually deep.

Lastly, we will take a glance at the nomad royal graves contemporary with the Xiongnu.

In the famous site of Tillya Tepe, northern Afghanistan, a royal tomb with rich grave goods and five females’ tombs were found, although these tombs had no visible structures on the surface.62 Therefore, these tombs had not been robbed. The buried “king” might have been a descendant of the Great Yuezhi or the Kushans. The burials are dated to the 1st century AD.

59 Pshenichniuk 2000.60 Yablonskiï 2011.61 Gol Mod 1 in Arhangai, see Desroches et alii 2002; Gol Mod 2 in Arhangai, see Miller et alii

2006; Noyon-uul in Töv, see Polos‘mak et alii 2006; Duurlig Nars in Hentii, see Kim et alii 2010; Tsaram in Buryatia, see Minyaev 2009.

62 Sarianidi 1985; 1989.


Fig. 33. Biggest tomb at Il’movaya pad’, Buryatia, 20 m in depth (photo by Hayashi).

Fig. 34. Low rectangular mound with ramp at Gol Mod 1, Arhangai, Mongolia (photo by Hayashi).


Kurgans of the middle Sarmatian period (end of the 2nd century BC–beginning of the 2nd century AD) are not so big. Large mounds of 1.5–2.5 m in height are quite rare and mounds of over 3 m in height are even fewer.63 In the late Sarmatian period (2nd–4th centuries AD) kurgans were smaller. Mounds of 2–2.5 m and higher in height are very rare.64

9. Conclusion

The first nomadic political power appeared in Mongolia at the end of the 2nd millennium – beginning of the 1st millennium BC during the Karasuk period. This nomadic power spread quickly from Mongolia through the Eur-asian steppe belt to Ukraine.

The first powerful individuals wanted to exhibit and advertise their force by visible means. Its symbol was a big tumulus with many sacrifices. The steppe plain was selected as the location of the royal cemetery. However, such a highly visible object was easy to rob. Therefore the burial chamber on the ground level was changed to one underground.

After several centuries, the steppe power was generally acknowledged and it became unnecessary to advertise its force. The individual holding power feared that his tomb could be robbed.65 Consequently he chose a less representative tomb, that is, a low mound but a deeper burial chamber, furthermore in forest. This shows a maturing of the nomadic power.

After the Xiongnu-Sarmatian period, none of the Turko-Mongol leaders ever built large mounds. In other words, the Pre-Scythian and Scythian period was the tumulus period.

63 Moshkova 1989a, 178.64 Moshkova 1989b, 191.65 Just before 78 BC, Wuhuan ransacked the tomb of the former shanyu of the Xiongnu. So the

Xiongnu hated the Wuhuan; see Hanshu, chap. 94a, biography of the Xiongnu, p. 3784.


Change of Size and Structure of Steppe Elite Tumuli

Northern Black Sea

Northern Caucasia

Southern Ural

Kazakhstan Altai, Khakassia,

Tuva

Mongolia

13th – 9th cc. BC

Stone mound. Stone cham-ber on ground level.

9th – 8th cc. BC

Stone mound.Log chamber on ground level.

8th – 6th cc. BC

Stone & soil mound. Log chamber on ground level or in shallow pit.

Stone & soil huge mound. Log chamber on ground level or in shallow pit.

Stone & soil huge mound. Log chamber on ground level or in shallow pit.

Stone & soil mound. Log chamber in ground.

5th – 3rd cc. BC

Stone & soil huge mound. Deep pit with catacomb.

Stone & soil huge mound. Log chamber in shallow pit.

Stone & soil mound. Log chamber in shallow pit.

Stone & soil mound. Log chamber in ground.

3rd – 2nd cc. BC

1st c. BC– AD 3rd c.

Stone & soil low mound. Pit grave.

Stone & soil low mound. Pit grave.

Stone & soil low mound.Log chamber in deep pit.

Bibliography

Akishev, A. K. 1984: Iskusstvo i mifologiya sakov (Alma-Ata).Akishev, K. A. 1978: Kurgan Issÿk (Moscow).Akishev, K. A. and Kushaev G. A. 1963: Drevnyaya kul’tura sakov i usuneï dolinÿ reki Ili (Alma-Ata).Аlekseev, A. Yu., Мurzin, V. Yu. and Rolle, R. 1991: Chertomlÿk: skifskiï tsasrskiï kurgan IV veka do

n. é. (Kiev).


Alimbay, N. (ed.) 2011: Culture of Saka and Wu-sun of Kazakhstan in Archaeological Collections of Central State Museum of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Scientific Catalogue (Almaty).

Allard, F. and Erdenebaatar, D. 2005: Khirigsuurs, Ritual and Mobility in the Bronze Age of Mon-golia. Antiquity 79, 547-563.

Allard, F., Erdenebaatar, D. and Houle, J.-L. 2006: Recent Archaeological Research in the Khunuy River Valley, Central Mongolia. In D.L. Peterson et alii (eds.), Beyond the Steppe and the Sown: Proceedings of the 2002 University of Chicago Conference on Eurasian Archaeology (Colloquia Pontica 13) (Leiden–Boston), 202-224.

Anthony, D. W. 2007. The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eur-asian Steppes Shaped the Modern World (Princeton).

Boltrik, Yu. V., Fialko, E. E. 1991: Der Oguz-Kurgan: Grabmal eines skythischen Königs. In R. Rolle, M. Müller-Wille, K. Schietzel (eds.), Gold der Steppe. Archäologie der Ukraine (Schleswig), 177-179.

Chernikov, S. S. 1965: Zagadka Zolotogo kurgana (Moscow).Chlenova, N. L. 1992: Tagarskaya kul’tura. In M. G. Moshkova (ed.), Stepnaya polosa aziatskoï

chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremya (Arkheologiya SSSR) (Мoscow), 206-224.Chugunov, K., Parzinger, H., Nagler, A. 2004: Arzhan 2: la tombe d’un prince scythe en Sibérie du Sud.

Rapport préliminaire des fouilles russo-allemandes de 2000-2002. Arts Asiatiques 59, 5-29.Čugunov, K. V., Parzinger, H., Nagler, A. 2010: Der skythenzeitliche Fürstenkurgan Aržan 2 in Tuva

(Archäologie in Eurasien 26. Steppenvölker Eurasens 3) (Mainz).Danilov, S. V. 1995: Zhertvennÿ kompleks u sela Nizhniï Burgultaï i nekotorÿe voprosÿ drevnikh

obryadov i verovaniï. In Kul’turÿ i pamyatniki bronzovogo i rannego zheleznogo vekov Zabaïkal‘ya i Mongolii (Ulan-Ude), 92-101.

Desroches, J.-P., André, G. 2002: Une tombe princière Xiongnu à Gol Mod, Mongolie (campagnes de fouilles 2000-2001). Arts Asiatiques 57, 194-205.

Devlet, M. A. 1976: Bol’shoï Salbÿkskiï kurgan. In Iz istorii Sibiri (Tomsk) 21, 146-154.Drews, R. 2004: Early Riders: The Beginnings of Mounted Warfare in Asia and Europe (New York).Erdenebaatar, D., Grizeaud, J.-J. 2002. La Tombe T1 de Gol-Mod. In Gol mod: Nouvelles découvertes

en Mongolie 2000-2001 (Paris), 18-22.Erlikh, V. R. 1994: U istokov ranneskifskogo kompleksa (Moscow).Fitzhugh, W. W. 2009: Pre-Scythian Ceremonialism, Deer Stone Art, and Cultural Intensification

in Northern Mongolia. In B. K. Hanks, K. M. Linduff (eds.), Social complexity in prehistoric Eurasia. Monuments, metals, and mobility (New York 2009), 378-411.

Galanina, L. K. 1997: Die Kurgane von Kelermes. »Königsgräber« der frühskythischen Zeit (Steppen-völker Eurasiens 1) (Moscow).

Gimbutas, M. 1997: The Fall and Transformation of Old Europe: Recapitulation 1993. In The Kur-gan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe: Selected Articles from 1952 to 1993 (Washington, D.C.), 351-372.

Grach, A. D. 1980: Drevnie kochevniki v tsentre Azii (Moscow).Grjaznov, M. P. 1984: Der Grosskurgan von Aržan in Tuva, Südsibirien (Materialien zur Allge-

meinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie 23) (Munich).Gryaznov, M. P. 1980: Arzhan: Tsarskiï kurgan ranneskifskogo vremeni (Leningrad).Hajdas, I. et alii 2004: Chronology of Pazyryk 2 and Ulandryk 4 Kurgans Based on High Resolution

Radiocarbon Dating and Dendrochronology: A Step towards More Precise Dating of Scyth-ian Burials. In E. Marian Scott, Andrey Yu. Alekseev, Ganna Zaitseva (eds.), Impact of the environment on human migration in Eurasia. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Impact of the Environment on Human Migration in Eurasia, St. Peteresburg, Russia, 15-18 November 2003 (NATO Science Series IV. Earth and Environmental Sciences 42) (Dordrecht), 107-116.

Hayashi, T. 1998: New Discoveries in the Tianshan Mountains Sinica 9(7), 30-35 (in Japanese).


Hayashi, T. 2006: First State Formation and the Construction of Tumuli: Especially Focusing on Scythian Tumuli. Helis V (Sofia), 324-332.

Hayashi T. 2013: Griffin Motif: From the West to East Asia via the Altai. In C. Lippolis (ed.), Fest-schrift in Honour of Boris A. Litvinsky (Parthica 14) (in print).

Hongo, H. 2006: Equid Burials at Ulaan Uushig I Excavated in 1999. In S. Takahama, T. Hayashi, M. Kawamata, R. Matsubara, D. Erdenebaatar, Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Investigations in Ulaan Uushig I (Uushigiin Övör) in Mongolia. Bulletin of Archaeology. The University of Kanazawa 28, 79-81.

Il’inskaya, V. A. 1983: Skifÿ dneprovskogo lesostepnogo levoberezh’ya (Kiev).Il’inskaya, V. A. and Terenozhkin, A. I. 1983: Skifiya VII-IV vv. do n é. (Kiev).Khazanov, A. 1994: Nomads and the Outside World. 2nd ed. (Madison).Kim, K. et alii 2010: A Western Eurasian Male Is Found in 2000-year-old Elite Xiongnu Cemetery

in Northeast Mongolia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 142 (3), 429-440.Kuz’mina, E. E. 1994: Stages of Development of Stock-breeding Husbandry and Ecology of the

Steppes in the Light of the Archaeological and Palaeoecological Data (4th Millenium BC- 8th Century BC). In B. Genito (ed.), The Archaeology of the Steppes. Methods and strategies. Papers from the International Symposium held in Naples 9-12 November 1992. (Istituto Univer-sitario Orientale, Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici, Series Minor 44) (Naples), 31-71.

Marsadolov, L. S. 2000: Arkheologicheskie pamyatniki IX-III vekov do n. é. gornÿkh raïonov Altaya kak kul’turno-istoricheskie istochniki (St.-Petersburg).

Menghin, W. et alii 2007: W. Menghin, H. Parzinger, A. Nagler, M. Nawroth (eds.), Im Zeichen des Goldenen Greifen. Königsgräber der Skythen (Munich, Berlin, London, New York).

Miller, B. K., et alii 2006: A Xiongnu Tomb Complex: Excavations at Gol Mod 2 Cemetery, Mongo-lia (2002-05). Mongolian Journal of Anthropology, Archaeology and Ethnology (Ulan-Bator) 2/2, 1-21.

Minns, E. H. 1913: Scythians and Greeks (Cambridge).Minyaev, S. S. 2009: Tsaram: A Burial Ground of the Hsiung-nu Elite in Transbaikalia. Archaeol-

ogy, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37 (2), 49-58. Moshkova, M. G. 1989a: Srednesarmatskaya kul’tura. In A. I. Melyukova (ed.), Stepi evropeïskoï

chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremya (Arkheologiya SSSR) (Мoscow), 177-191.Moshkova, M. G. 1989b. Pozdnesarmatskaya kul’tura. In A. I. Melyukova (ed.), Stepi evropeïskoï

chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremya (Arkheologiya SSSR) (Мoscow), 191-202.Mozolevs’kii, B. M. 1979: Tovsta Mogila (Kiev).Novgorodova, E. A. 1989: Drevnyaya Mongoliya (Moscow).Ol’khovskii, V. S. 1978: Ranneskifskie pogrebal’nÿe sooruzheniya po Gerodotu i arkheologiches-

kim dannÿm. Sovetskaya arkheologiya, no 4, 83-97.Panyushkina, I. et alii 2007: Floating Larch Tree-ring Chronologies from Archaeological Timbers

in the Russian Altai between about 800 BC and AD 800. Radiocarbon 49 (2), 693-702.Petrenko, V. G. 1983: Skifskaya kul‘tura na Severnom Kavkaze. Arkheologicheskiї sbornik Gosu-

darstvennogo Érmitazha 23, 43-48.Petrenko, V. G. 1989: Skifÿ na Severnom Kavkaze. In A. I. Melyukova (ed.), Stepi evropeїskoї chasti

SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremya (Arkheologiya SSSR) (Мoscow), 216-223.Polos’mak, N. V. and Bogdanov, E. S. 2006: Na 18 metrov v glubinu vekov. Nauka iz pervÿkh ruk,

no 12, 14-23.Pshenichniuk, A. 2000: The Filippovka Kurgans at the heart of the Eurasian Steppes. In J. Aruz

(ed.), The Golden Deer of Eurasia (New York), 21-30.Rolle, R. and Murzin, V. Yu. 1991: “Pyramiden” der Steppe und Viehweiden für die Ewigkeit. In

R. Rolle, M. Müller-Wille, K. Schietzel (eds.), Gold der Steppe. Archäologie der Ukraine (Schleswig), 171-176.

Rudenko, S. I. 1970: Frozen Tombs of Siberia: The Pazyryk Burials of Iron-Age Horsemen (London).


Sarianidi, V. 1985: Bactrian Gold from the Excavations of the Tillya-tepe Necropolis in Northern Afghanistan (Leningrad).

Sarianidi, V. I. 1989: Khram i nekropol’ Tillyatepe (Мoscow).Stark, S. et alii (eds.), 2011: Nomads and Networks: The Ancient Art and Culture of Kazakhstan (New

York).Svyatko, S. V. et alii 2009: New Radiocarbon Dates and a Review of the Chronology of Prehistoric

Populations from the Minusinsk Basin, Southern Siberia, Russia. Radiocarbon 51 (1), 243-273.Takahama, S. 2010: Research of Ulaan Uushig I (Uushigiin Övör) in Mongolia. In Drevnie kul’turÿ

Mongolii i Baїkal’skoї Sibiri: Materialÿ mezhdunarodnoї nauchnoї konferentsii (Ulan-Ude, 20-24 sentyabrya 2010 g.) (Ulan-Ude), 126-131.

Takahama, S., Hayashi, T., Kawamata, M., Matsubara, R. and Erdenebaatar, D. 2006: Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Investigations in Ulaan Uushig I (Uushigiin Övör) in Mongolia, Bulletin of Archaeology, The University of Kanazawa 28, 61-102.

Terenozhkin, A. I. and Mozolevskiї, B. N. 1988. Melitopol’skiї kurgan (Kiev).Tian, G. and Guo, S. 1986: Ordos Bronzes (Beijing).Tümen, D. 2006: Observations on Bones from Ulaan Uushig I in 2005. In: Takahama et alii,

81-82.Tsÿbiktarov, A. D. 2001: Buryatiya v drevnosti. Istoriya (s drevneїshikh vremen do XVII veka) (Ulan-

Ude).Volkov, V. V. 1981: Olennÿe kamni Mongolii (Ulan-Bator).Volkov, V. V. 2002: Olennÿe kamni Mongolii (Moscow).Volkov, V. V. and Novgorodova, É. A. 1970. Olennÿe kamni Ushkїn-Uvéra (Mongolia). In

Pervobÿtnaya arkheologiya Sibiri (Leningrad), 78-84.Yablonskiï, L. T. 2011: Novÿe raskopki Filippovskogo 1 mogil’nika. Estestvenno-nauchnÿe metodÿ v

izuchenii Filippovskogo 1 mogil’nika (Moscow), 7-19.Zaitseva, G. I. et al. 2007: Chronology of Key Barrows Belonging to Different Stages of the Scythian

Period in Tuva (Arzhan-1 and Arzhan-2 Barrows). Radiocarbon 49(2), 645-658.

The Beginning and the Maturity of Nomadic Powers in the Eurasian Steppes: Growing and Downsizing of...

Documents

Transcript of The Beginning and the Maturity of Nomadic Powers in the Eurasian Steppes: Growing and Downsizing of...