The metal behind the myths: iron metallurgy in the south-eastern Black Sea region

Erb‐Satullo, Nathaniel L.; Gilmour, Brian; Khakhutaishvili, Nana

doi:10.15184/aqy.2020.16

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent work in western Georgia has uncovered numerous copper and iron smelting sites, sometimes within the same area, but so far, they date to different periods. The closest coincidence of iron and copper smelting is in the region of Samegrelo, where an early 1st millennium BC copper smelting region transformed into an iron smelting center in the mid-late 1st millennium BC Erb-Satullo, et al, 2018;Erb-Satullo, et al, 2020a). Thus, the extent of integration between bronze and early iron economies remains unclear; the evidence is robust for integration among secondary working sites, but weaker in relation to primary mining and smelting sites.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Soviet-period research suggested very early dates for iron smelting sites in the Black Sea area (Khakhutaishvili, 1987), but more recent work has shown them to be copper smelting sites (Erb-Satullo, et al, 2014;Erb-Satullo, et al, 2015). At present, the earliest well-documented iron smelting remains in the Black Sea area date to the mid-late 1st millennium BC (Erb-Satullo, et al, 2020a). Reports of iron metallurgical debris are documented in other areas of the South Caucasus (Badaljan, et al, 1993:17;Gzelishvili, 1964:31-38;Maddin, 1975;Martirosyan, 1974:97), but none have combined robust radiometric dating with scientific analyses of the metallurgical debris.…”

Section: Iron Innovation In the Caucasusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Direct evidence for the co-manufacturing of early iron and copper-alloy artifacts in the Caucasus

Erb‐Satullo

Jachvliani

Kakhiani

et al. 2020

Journal of Archaeological Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models for iron innovation in Eurasia are predicated on understanding the relationship between the bronze and iron industries. In eastern Anatolia, South Caucasus, and Iran, the absence of scientific analyses of metallurgical debris has obscured the relative chronology, spatial organization, and economic context of early iron and contemporary copper-alloy industries.Excavation and surface survey at Mtsvane Gora, a fortified hilltop site close to major polymetallic ore sources in the Lesser Caucasus range, recovered metallurgical debris dating to the 8th-6th centuries BC. Optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and energy and wavelength dispersive spectrometry revealed evidence for both iron and copper-alloy metallurgy, including smithing and alloying. Metal particles trapped within clear iron smithing slags were contaminated with copper, arsenic, and tin, suggesting that iron and copper-alloy working took place in the same hearths. The discovery of a small fragment of unprocessed material consisting of pyrite and jarosite, minerals typical of major nearby polymetallic ore deposits, links the secondary smithing and alloying at Mtsvane Gora with nearby mining activities, though the nature of those connections remains unclear. While the earliest iron in the region probably predates the Mtsvane Gora assemblage, the remains date to a period when iron use was still expanding, and they are at present the earliest analytically confirmed, radiocarbon-dated iron metallurgical debris in the Caucasus. The remains are therefore significant for understanding the spread of iron innovation eastward from Anatolia and the Levant. When considered in light of evidence from other Near Eastern sites, the results support a model for innovation in which early iron manufacturing was at least partially integrated with the copper-alloy metallurgical economy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iron Innovation In the Caucasusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct evidence for the co-manufacturing of early iron and copper-alloy artifacts in the Caucasus

Erb‐Satullo

Jachvliani

Kakhiani

et al. 2020

Journal of Archaeological Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1987;Khakhutaishvili N.D. 2005;Khakhutaishvili N.D. 2006;Khakhutaishvili N.D. 2008;Khakhutaishvili D.A. 2009;Erb-Satullo, Gilmour, Khakhutaishvili N. 2014;Erb-Satullo, Gilmour, Khakhutaishvili N. 2015;Erb-Satullo, Gilmour, Khakhutaishvili N. 2017;Erb-Satullo, Gilmour, Khakhutaishvili N. 2020. 17 Tylecote 1981Wertime 1980, 18-19.…”

Section: Shota Mamuladzementioning

confidence: 99%

From the Pontic Area and Caucasus to the Nile Valley: Evidence of Graffiti on the Walls of a Pharaoh’s Tombs

Łukaszewicz

2024

Chrysomallos. Polish Archaeologists in the Black Sea Region. Światowit Supplement Series C: Pontica Et Caucasica. Volume IV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present article we discuss one of the key and final episodes of the military confrontation between the Byzantine Empire and Sassanid Iran which took place in the Lazica Kingdom, in particular, liberation in 551 by the Byzantines of the last foothold -the Petra fortress. This is examined on the basis of analysis of material obtained as a result of archaeological excavations in Petra-Tsikhisdziri (south western Georgia) carried out at different times and mostly in 2016-2020. Recent archaeological discoveries have produced more knowledge about the besiegement of Petra. This includes information on who was defending the fortress, what the garrison looked like, how it was equipped and supplied, how the siege was developed and finalized, etc. The significance of the findings and their consideration together with the written sources are very important to finally identify the city-fortress Petra, reinforced by the Byzantines, with modern Tsikhisdziri -an issue which is still debatable among the scholars.

show abstract

“…Erb-Satullo et al 2020.47 Лебедев 2021, 738-739, գրականությամբ։ 48 Ի միջի այլոց, Այա-Կոլխիդայի և Դիաուխիի նույնացումը Հայասային բավական մշակված է նաև վրացական գիտության մեջ, միայն այնտեղ այդ հին երկրները դիտվում են Վրաստանի պատմության համատեքստում, տե՛սGordeziani 2019, գրականությամբ: 49 ТУ, 84-85, 87. 50 Հմմտ.…”

unclassified

Արգոնավորդներ. Հնդեվրոպական Առասպելը՝ Որպես Հայոց Նախապատմության Աղբյուր

Պետրոսյան¹

2023

Herald of Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Այս առասպելում Այետես արքայի և նրա դուստր Մեդեայի կերպարները և անունները համեմատելի են հնդկական Յայատիի և նրա դուստր Մադհավիի և իռլանդական Էոխայդի և նրա դուստր Մեդբի առասպելների հետ, որոնք հնդեվրոպական համատեքստում մանրամասն ուսումնասիրել է Ժորժ Դյումեզիլը։ Այան՝ այն երկիրը, որտեղ նավարկում են արգոնավորդները, ակնհայտորեն առասպելական՝ կախարդական մի թագավորություն է, երանելի անդրաշխարհ, որը միայն հետագայում է նույնացվել Կոլխիդայի հետ: Հնագույն Կոլխիդան գտնվում էր հետագա Կոլխիդայի հարավ-արևմուտքում, այն տարածքներում, որտեղ մ.թ.ա. XIV-XIII դդ. եղել է խեթական աղբյուրների Հայասայի թագավորությունը։ Այսինքն՝ առասպելական Այան նույնացվել է պատմական Հայասայի հետ։ В этом мифе образы царя Ээта и его дочери Медеи сопоставимы с об-разами Яяти и его дочери Мадхави индийской и Эохаида и его дочери Медб ирландской мифологии, подробно изученной в индоевропейском контексте Жоржем Дюмезилем. Айа – страна, куда плывут аргонавты, очевидно, мифологическое волшебное царство, блаженный потусторонний мир, позже отождествляемый с Колхидой. Древнейшая Колхида располагалась на юго-западе позднейшей Колхиды, на территориях, где в XIV-XIII вв. до н.э. находилось царство Хайаса хеттских источников. Это дает основание считать, что мифическая Айа отождествлялась с исторической Хайасой. In the Greek myth on Argonauts the images of King Aeetes and his daughter Medea are comparable with the images of Yayati and his daughter Madhavi of Indian and Eochaid and his daughter Medb of Irish mythologies, studied in details in the context of Indo-European mythology by Georges Dumézil. Aia, the country where the Argonauts sail, is obviously a mythological magical kingdom, a blissful otherworld, later identified with Colchis. Ancient Colchis was located in the south-west of the later Colchis, in the territories, where in the 14th-13th centuries BC the kingdom of Hayasa of Hittite sources was located. This gives reason to believe that the mythical Aya was identified with the historical Hayasa.

show abstract

The metal behind the myths: iron metallurgy in the south-eastern Black Sea region

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

Direct evidence for the co-manufacturing of early iron and copper-alloy artifacts in the Caucasus

Direct evidence for the co-manufacturing of early iron and copper-alloy artifacts in the Caucasus

From the Pontic Area and Caucasus to the Nile Valley: Evidence of Graffiti on the Walls of a Pharaoh’s Tombs

Արգոնավորդներ. Հնդեվրոպական Առասպելը՝ Որպես Հայոց Նախապատմության Աղբյուր

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About