Some issues in defining “ethnic and cultural components” of the Andreevka-Piseraly type of sites: burial rite

Abstract

The authors consider the issue of the genesis of the Andreevka-Piseraly type of sites. The existing concepts are limited to the interaction of two “ethnic and cultural components” (or component groups) – “local” and “foreign”. The origin of the latter has been associated with the Sarmatians for a long period of time. The “Sarmatian” hypothesis was subjected to fair criticism by G.I. Matveeva and S.E. Zubov. The alternative concept of a Trans-Urals (Sargatka) “military outbreak” proposed by S.E. Zubov as a basis for the establishment of Andreevka-Piseraly sites is based on the similarity of the burial rite practiced at Sargatka and Andreevka sites and is presently considered as an commonly recognized concept. According to the authors, this is largely due to a lack of detailed criticism of its provisions. An attempt to verify the arguments in favor of this concept demonstrated that the majority of the drawn analogies are inaccurate, erroneous, or propagated to such a degree that they cannot be exclusively associated with the Sargatka culture. A possible alternative to the “Sargatka military outbreak” proposed by the authors is a working hypothesis concerning the establishment of the considered Andreevka-Piseraly burial rite elements as result of development or reminiscence of traditions associated with the population of the Upper and Middle Don region in the Scythian and Sarmatian periods.

Keywords

• archaeology
• the Middle Volga region
• final Early Iron Age
• Andreevka-Piseraly type of monuments
• genesis
• cultural components
• burial rite