Les Germains orientaux au nord de la mer Noire pendant la seconde moitié du V s. et au VI s

Присутствие восточногерманских (гепидских, остроготских и др.) элементов в материальной культуре Северного Причерноморья V-VII вв. убедительно показано в работах А.Амброза, А.Айбабина, А.Дмитриева и других исследователей. В даном докладе я попытаюсь представить причины и механизм распространения восточногерманского культурного влияния в понтийском регионе

Combat Knife with Eagle-Headed Handle from Cimmerian Bosporos

Поступила в редакцию 02.06.2021. Принята к печати 11.10.2021.Submitted: 02.06.2021. Accepted: 11.10.2021.В Римско-германском музее в Кeльне (коллекция Диергардта) находится боевой нож, происходящий с Боспора Киммерийского. Его рукоять украшена бронзовым изображением орлиной головы. Цель данной публикации – привлечь внимание к этому предмету, который остается практически неизвестным для восточноевропейских археологов. Рукояти мечей, украшенные орлиными головами, для римского времени хорошо известны в первую очередь по иконографическим данным. Обращает на себя внимание изображение на серебряной чаше из Авиньона (так называемая чаша Брисеиды), датируемая IV в. Здесь изображено оружие с довольно коротким клинком и бутеролью в форме U, все это напоминает боспорский боевой нож. В позднеримское время мечи с орлиноголовой рукоятью хорошо представлены на изображениях «статусных» персон, что, вероятно, свидетельствует об их знаковой роли как символе власти. Орел в целом хорошо представлен во властной символике поздней Империи, например, на консульских жезлах или щитах с эмблемами воинских частей, упомянутых в Notitia Dignitatum. Рукояти мечей с птичьими головами существовали в позднеримское время и за пределами Империи: об этом свидетельствует изображение сасанидского шаха Шапура II на блюде из Турушевой. В «вождеской» культуре восточно- и центральноевропейского Барбарикума и Северного Причерноморья эпохи Великого переселения народов инкрустированный декор в виде орла или птичьих голов хорошо известен на оружии, в том числе на мечах и на конском снаряжении. В Барбарикуме здесь, вероятно, проявляется хорошо известный феномен imitatio imperii.In the Romano-Germanic Museum in Cologne (Diergardt collection) there is a combat knife originating from Cimmerian Bosporos. Its hilt is decorated with a bronze image of eagle’s head. The purpose of this publication is to call attention to this artifact almost not known to Eastern European archaeologists. The handles of swords decorated with eagle’s heads from the Roman Period are well known primarily from iconographic data. Noteworthy is the image on a silver bowl from Avignon (the so-called “Briseis Cup”) dated to the fourth century. It depicts a weapon with a rather short blade and a U-shaped chape; all these features resemble the Bosporan combat knife. In the Late Roman Period, swords with eagle-headed hilts were well represented in the images of the persons of status, probably indicating their prominent role of a symbol of power. Generally, eagle is well represented among the symbols of power of the Late Empire, for example, on consular rods or shields with the emblems of military units mentioned in the Notitia Dignitatum. In the Late Roman Period, sword hilts featuring bird’s head also occurred outside the Empire. This is evidenced by the image of the Sassanian Shah Shapur II on a plate from Turusheva. In the “chieftain” culture of the Eastern and Central European Barbaricum and the Northern Black Sea Area from the Great Migration Period, the inlaid patterns showing eagle or bird’s heads is well known on weapons, including swords and horse trappings. In the Barbaricum, there probably appeared the well-known phenomenon of imitatio imperii

Inlaid Buckles and Plates from the Great Migration Period Showing Relief Scroll Decorations: Byzantium and Barbaricum

Поступила в редакцию: 17.07.2022. Принята к печати: 11.10.2022.Submitted: 17.07.2022. Accepted: 11.10.2022.Рассматриваются инкрустированные предметы с гранатами, украшенными резным декором в виде спиралей, происходящие из Керчи и датированные поздней фазой эпохи Великого переселения народов. По мнению Б. Аррениус, резные камни в Европе в гуннское и постгуннское время являются продукцией средиземноморских ателье, и, в первую очередь, Константинополя. Такая обработка камня требует особого мастерства и подобной техникой варвары тогда не владели. Керченские находки, возможно, являются импортом из Константинополя, посколку Боспор Киммерийский политически и экономически был тесно связан с Восточной Римской империей. Однако нельзя исключать, что вещи с таким резным декором могли производиться и в ателье Западного Средиземноморья. Бросается в глаза появление в это время в Барбарикуме значительного количества металлических изделий, имеющих сопоставимый спиральный декор. Стилистически наиболее близкие вещи концентрируются в Восточной Европе, хотя имеются они и в Центральной Европе, а также в Южной Скандинавии. Очень вероятно, что металлические предметы со спиральным декором, сами по себе достаточно престижные и в ряде случаев, несомненно, происходящие из «вождеских» комплексов или из центров власти, имитируют еще более престижные вещи с резными гранатами, вроде найденных в Керчи. В этом случае находки в Центральной Европе и в Скандинавии могут быть имитациями не только византийских предметов, но и каких-то украшений из Западного Средиземноморья, например, из Равенны. Но как бы там ни было, представляется, что достаточно широкое распространение металлических предметов со спиральным декором в виде двух волют свидетельствует о значительном влиянии аристократической средиземноморской/византийской культуры на элиту варваров, что проявляется и в других элементах «княжеской» цивилизации европейского Барбарикума в V–VI вв.This article examines the inlaid artefacts with garnets decorated with carved spirals, which originate from Kerch and date from the late stage of the Great Migration Period. According to B. Arrhenius, carved gemstones occurring in Europe in the Hunnic and Post-Hunnic Periods were the products of Mediterranean workshops, primarily of Constantinople. This stone-working technology requires specific skills; the barbarians did not have this technology in the period in question. The finds from Kerch were possibly imported from Constantinople, as the Cimmerian Bosporos was closely connected with the Eastern Roman Empire in political and economic respect. However, it is still possible that the artefacts featuring the carved designs in question were produced in the Western Mediterranean workshops. The first thing to meet the eye is the appearance of a significant number of metal ware showing comparable spiral decorations in the Barbaricum in the said period. The artefacts showing the most similar style concentrated in Eastern Europe; there also are the finds of the kind from Central Europe and southern Scandinavia. It is very likely that metal objects with spiral decorations, prestigious in themselves and in some cases undoubtedly originated from “chieftain” complexes or the centres of power, imitated even more prestigious artefacts featuring carved garnets, like those found in Kerch. If it was the case, the Central European and Scandinavian finds possibly imitated not only Byzantine ware, but also certain ornaments from the Western Mediterranean, for example from Ravenna. Be that as it may, it seems that the rather wide distribution of metal artefacts featuring twoscroll spiral decorations indicates a significant influence of the elite Mediterranean/Byzantine culture on the barbarian elite, which also occurred in other elements of the “princely” civilization of the European Barbaricum in the fifth and sixth centuries.Статья подготовлена в рамках выполнения темы НИР ИА РАН «Сохранение археологического наследия: методические аспекты и материалы полевых исследований 2010–2020 гг.» (№ НИОКТР 122011200265-6).This article has been prepared within the framework of the research at the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, project no. 122011200265-6 Archaeological Heritage Preservation: Methodological Aspects and Materials of 2010–2020 Field Researches

Ideas and perspectives: strengthening the biogeosciences in environmental research networks

Many scientific approaches are improving our understanding and management of the rapidly changing environment. Long-term environmental research networks are one approach to advancing local, regional, and global environmental science and education. A remarkable number and wide variety of environmental research networks operate around the world today. These are diverse in funding, infrastructure, motivating questions, scientific strengths, and the sciences that birthed and maintained the networks. Some networks have individual sites that were selected because they had produced invaluable long-term data, while other networks have new sites selected to span ecological gradients. However, all long-term environmental networks share two challenges. Networks must keep pace with scientific advances and interact with both the scientific community and society at large. If networks fall short of successfully addressing these challenges, they risk becoming irrelevant. The objective of this paper is to assert that the biogeosciences offer environmental research networks a number of opportunities to expand scientific impact and public engagement. We explore some of these opportunities with four networks: the International Long Term Ecological Research programs (ILTERs), the Critical Zone Observatories (CZOs), the Earth and Ecological Observatory networks (EONs), and the FLUXNET program of eddy flux sites. While these networks were founded and grown by interdisciplinary scientists, the preponderance of expertise and funding have gravitated activities of ILTERs and EONs toward ecology and biology, CZOs toward the Earth sciences and geology, and FLUXNET toward ecophysiology and micrometeorology. Our point is not to homogenize networks, nor to diminish disciplinary science. Rather, we argue that by more fully incorporating the integration of biology and geology in long-term environmental research networks, scientists can better leverage network assets, keep pace with the ever-changing science of the environment, and engage with larger scientific and public audiences

Re-evaluating the Quoit Brooch Style: Economic and Cultural Transformations in the 5th Century ad, with an Updated Catalogue of Known Quoit Brooch Style Artefacts

Quoit Brooch Style material, produced from the early 5th century onwards, has previously been considered mostly from a stylistic point of view, leaving much scope for further investigation. In addition, the known corpus of material has been much expanded through newly excavated and metal-detected finds. In this article, I bring together the known extant material for the first time, and document important evidence relating to contextual dating, gender associations, manufacture (including new compositional analysis of c 75 objects), repair, and reuse. The article questions previous interpretations of Quoit Brooch Style material relating to Germanic mercenaries and/or post-Romano-British political entities. It interprets the earliest material as part of wider trends elsewhere, in Britain and in Continental northwestern Europe, for the production of material imitating late Roman symbols of power. It presents new evidence for connectivity with Continental Europe via the western Channel route in the 5th century. A detailed investigation of individual artefacts shows that many Quoit Brooch Style objects were reused, sometimes being subjected to extensive repair and modification. This provides new insights into the 5th century metal economy, for instance, acute problems in the availability of new metal objects in southeastern Britain in the middle years of the 5th century. Compositional analysis contributes further to our understanding of metal supply in the 5th century and relationships with the post-Roman West. Insights are provided into wider cultural transformations in the 5th century and the gradual loss of value that occurred for Roman-style objects

АЛЬЦИАГИРЫ: ВОПРОС ПРОИСХОЖДЕНИЯ

International audienc

Du caractère « barbare » des boucles à double ardillon de l’époque romaine tardive au Nord de la mer Noire.

International audienc

ПЕРВЫЕ КОНТАКТЫ ДУНАЙСКИХ СЛАВЯН И АВАР:СВИДЕТЕЛЬСТВА ВИЗАНТИЙСКИХ АВТОРОВИ АРХЕОЛОГИИ

International audienceFIRST CONTACTS OF THE DANUBIAN SLAVSAND AVARS: THE EVIDENCES FROM THE BYZANTINEWRITERS AND ARCHAEOLOGYThis article addresses the question of the archaeological sites relating to the Danube Slavs(Sclavi), who first came into contact with the Avars in the sixth century. The isolatedgroups of the people of the Prague culture penetrated into the area in between of the Danubeand the Adriatic, Pannonia to the south-west of Lake Balaton and the Eastern Alpsin particular, from the first third of the sixth century onwards. These settlements possesssome features similar to the Slavic sites of the Prague culture. No doubts, this area appearedunder the rule of the Avars when the Pannonian Lombards migrated to Italy in568 AD and left their lands for the Avars. The cemetery of Regensburg-Grossprüfeningin Bavaria is of particular importance for the correct understanding of the situationin the region under study. The site contained 22 Slavic cremation graves, where Merovingiangoods appeared. There were a few graves featuring prestigious artefacts. It hasbeen assumed that there was the resettlement of the Slavs, most likely being an elitemilitary grouping, ca 568 AD, under the pressure of the Avar expansion. If this interpretationis correct, there was a departure of the elites of the Middle Danubian Slavs fromthe Avar power zone. Perhaps it resulted in a change of the social structure of the PannonianSlavs, which explained their more dependent place in the Avar Khanate, in contrast tothose of the Lower Danubian and Balkan Slavs, who also found themselves in the sphereof the Avar power