Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 brill.nl/acss Silver Phialai from the Prokhorovka Burial-mound No. 1 Mikhail Yu. Treister* Abstract he completed analysis of the shape and decoration of silver phialai from Burial-mound 1 near the village of Prokhorovka in the southern foothills of the Urals makes it possible to assume that they could have been manufactured in different workshops and at different times: Phiale No. 2 possibly as early as the second half of the 5th century BC and Phiale No. 1 probably in the second half of the 4th century BC: the latter is thought to have been manufactured in a workshop in Alexandria. he inscriptions on the phialai were evidently executed before the phialai fell into the hands of the Sarmatians and began to be used as phalerae. he formula for the inscription regarding weight and observations regarding the genesis of early Sarmatian phalerae provide grounds for assuming that the phalerae found their way into the burial no later than the end of the 3rd century BC. Keywords Prokhorovka, phialai, phalerae, Hamadan, Asia Minor, Oxus Treasure, Mariinskaya, Uspenskaya, Coppa Tarentina, Achaemenid, belted garlands, Western Cave Treasure, Isakovka, Akhalgori, weight standards, Sarmatians, Dachoi, Massagetae 1. Historiography A short report by P.K. Kokovtsev devoted to an analysis of inscriptions on the phialai was published in a monograph by M.I. Rostovtsev.1 Meanwhile, Rostovtsev himself did not undertake any study of the phialai as such, confining himself to references to the opinion of Kokovtsev giving dates for the phialai provided in his various articles, ranging from the 4th century to the 2nd or 1st century BC.2 H. Luschey was the first to analyse the phialai from Prokhorovka in his monograph “devoted to ancient phialai and dated phiale No. 2 to the * Weißenburgstr. 59, D-53175 Bonn, Germany, Email mikhailtreister@yahoo.de 1 Kokovtsev 1918, 82-83. 2 Rostovtzeff 1922, 124; cf. Rostowzew 1931, 434. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 95 DOI: 10.1163/092907709X12474657004728 9/10/2009 8:51:33 PM 96 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 period around 300 BC.3 M. Pfrommer dated it to the Hellenistic period.4 According to the classification proposed by Abka ‘I-Khavari, both phialai belong to the F3c group (Flache Schale + ausladende Wandung + ausladender Rand ),5 and this scholar regarded them as Late Achaemenid.6 Abka ‘I-Khavari points to the fact that the phialai from Prokhorovka could be dated to the 3rd-2nd centuries BC not merely on the basis of their Aramaic inscriptions, but also in view of their flatter shapes, similar to plate shapes, and of their decorative features.7 Moreover it is evident, firstly that the profile of the phialai from Prokhorovka is not at all similar to a plate shape, while the ideas put forward concerning their decoration are too general and superficial for any serious analysis. In the opinion of L.T. Yablonskii and his co-authors, the phialai “do not have close typological parallels”.8 V.I. Mordvintseva drew attention to groups of double holes in the phialai and established with every justification that the phialai had been re-used as phalerae. he dimensions of the phialai and the presence (in antiquity) of three loops provide, in her opinion, grounds for assigning the said artefacts to an early group of Sarmatian phalerae.9 In the opinion of V.A. Livshits and V.Yu. Zuev, who have analysed the inscriptions on the phalerae, “the phialai from Prokhorovka could have been manufactured in the 3rd or even the 4th century BC, but they are unlikely to have been placed in the burial inside the tumulus, where they were found re-fashioned as phalerae for horses, earlier than the 1st century BC”.10 Yablonskii and his co-authors voiced the opinion that “the indications of date provided by the inscriptions on the phalerae were probably of limited significance and can, at any rate, not serve as an indisputable reference point for chronology”. Also Grave No. 1 in Burial-mound 1, where they were found, “on the basis of the whole range of finds in that burialmound (taking into account the relatively later burials let into the burialmound as well) has to be assigned a date definitely no earlier than the end of the 4th century and no later than the 3rd century BC”.11 Luschey 1939, 61, EB7; 72 f. Pfrommer 1987, 98, notes 582-583; 158. 5 Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 125-126. No. F3c16-17. 6 Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 108. 7 Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 107. 8 Meshcheryakov et alii 2006, 112. 9 Mordvintseva 1996. 10 Livshits and Zuev 2004, 11. 11 Meshcheryakov et alii 2006, 113, see also the article by Balakhvantsev and Yablonskii in this journal. 3 4 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 96 9/10/2009 8:51:34 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 97 2. Analysis. Shape and Decoration From among the phialai assigned by Abka ‘I-Khavari to the same group as those from Prokhorovka, one of those stemming from a hoard found in Akhalgori provides the closest parallel as regards profile.12 At the same time it is clear that the phiale profiles used in Abka ‘I-Khavari’s work are not absolutely precise and in accordance with the real items. As regards their profile the Prokhorovka phialai (Figs. 1-8) resemble more closely those from Hamadan bearing inscriptions of Artaxerxes, in particular a phiale held in the Metropolitan Museum.13 Four silver phialai, assumed to have originated from Hamadan (ancient Ecbatana)14 and currently held in the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington,15 the Metropolitan Museum,16 the British Museum (Fig. 9, 1)17 and in the Reza Abbasi collection in Teheran,18 bear identical inscriptions containing the name of Artaxerxes I (465-425 BC). It is indicated in these that the phialai has been made in his royal palace. Another phiale of this kind with an inscription of Artaxerxes is held in the collection of the Miho Museum (Fig. 9, 2).19 2.1. Phiale No. 2 What links a phiale held in Almaty (Figs. 6-8) with the above-mentioned specimens is the presence of a small undecorated umbo, a number of almondshaped feet-cum-ledges (16) and the decoration of the base of the phiale with a rosette that has petals with pointed ends. A similar umbo, a similar rosette on the base consisting of petals with pointed ends, out of which grow three-petalled flowers, and also 16 almondshaped feet are to be found on bowls of a somewhat different profile, most of which were found in Asia Minor. One of them is thought to have come from Smirnov 1934, 45, No. 62, pl. IX-X; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 125-126, No. F3c15. Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 127-128, No. ÜF2c9. 14 Herzfeld 1935, 1-8, pl. I-IV; Luschey 1939, 43, No. GB 29-32; see: the review by Zournatzi 2000, 696, note 83. 15 Inv. F1974.30: Gunter and Jett, 1992, 69-73; Gunter and Root 1998; Zournatzi 2000, 697, fig. 11. 16 Inv. MMA.47.100.84: Amandry 1953-1954, 12-13, fig. 2; Muscarella 1980a, 32-33, pl. XII, fig. 10. 17 BM1994-I-27: Curtis et alii 1995; Cat. London 2005, 114-115, No. 103; Cat. Speyer 2006, 118, No. a. 18 Gunter and Root 1996, 16, 34, note 71. 19 Cat. Miho 2002, 49, ill.; 235, No. 34. 12 13 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 97 9/10/2009 8:51:34 PM 98 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 1. Phiale No. 1. Photograph. Orenburg, Museum of Regional History. Inv. No. ChKM. 47/3. Photograph by L.T. Yablonskii. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 98 9/10/2009 8:51:35 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 99 Fig. 2. Phiale No. 1. Drawing by L.T. Yablonskii. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 99 9/10/2009 8:51:36 PM 100 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 3. Phiale No. 1. Details of the central part. 1 – View of the inside. 2 – View from the outside. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 100 9/10/2009 8:51:37 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 101 Fig. 4. Phiale No. 1. Details of the decoration. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 101 9/10/2009 8:51:39 PM 102 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 5. Phiale No. 1. Inscription. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 102 9/10/2009 8:51:40 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 103 Fig. 6. Phiale No. 2. Photograph. Almaty. Central State Museum of Republic Kazakhstan. Photograph from: Rostovtsev, 1918. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 103 9/10/2009 8:51:41 PM 104 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 7. Phiale No. 2. General view and detail (omphalos). Photograph from: Cat. Mantua 1998. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 104 9/10/2009 8:51:43 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 105 Fig. 8. Phiale No. 2. Inscription. Erzincan in Turkey and is held in the British Museum (Fig. 10, 1),20 and another comes from Düzdje in Bithynia.21 A similar shape and decoration are exhibited by a silver phiale from the Erzerum area, now hold in the Louvre (which has 14 almond-shaped feet-cum-ledges),22 a silver phiale with 20 almond-shaped ledges said to be found in the southern coast of the Black Sea and once in the Khanenko collection in Kiev,23 a silver phiale with 12 almondshaped ledges from the so-called second part of the Oxus Treasure in the Miho Museum,24 a small (d. only 8.8 cm) silver phiale from Gradnitsa in Bulgaria,25 and also a bronze phiale from Deve Hüyük, now held in Berlin, which has 13 feet-cum-ledges (Fig. 10, 2).26 A similar profile and decoration are exhibited by fragmentary silver phialai from Babylon held in the British Museum, which were found in a hoard of metal items together with coins, of which the latest 20 Luschey 1939, 42, No. GB 12; Dalton 1964, 44, pl. 23, No. 180; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 126-127, No. ÜF2c4; Cat. London 2005, 116, No. 104. 21 Herzfeld 1935, 4, pl. IV; Luschey 1939, 42, No. GB 10; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 121-122, No. F2c15. 22 Luschey 1939, 42, No. GB 11; Amandry 1953-1954, 11-12, fig. 1; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 126-127, No. ÜF2c5; Cat. Nantes 1996, 212-213, No. 194. 23 Collection B. Khanenko 1907, 30, No. 406, pl. XXVII; Iessen 1952, 212, fig. 3, 2. 24 Cat. Miho 2002, 100 (ill.), 243, No. 101. 25 Cat. Cologne 1979, No. 226; Luschey 1983, 324, fig. 4; 326, No. A9. 26 Luschey 1939, 41, 48 f. , 162, No. 18, fig. 18a-c; Cat. Speyer 2006, 196, No. c. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 105 9/10/2009 8:51:45 PM 106 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 9. Phialai with an Artaxerxes inscription. 1 – British Museum, Inv. No. ANE 1994-1-27.1. Photograph from: Cat. London 2005; 2 – Miho Museum. Photograph from: Cat. Miho 2002. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 106 9/10/2009 8:51:46 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 107 Fig. 10. Phialai from Erzincan and Deve Hüyük. 1- Erzincan. British Museum, Inv. No. ANE 124082. Photograph from: Cat. London 2005 and 2 – Deve Hüyük. Berlin, Staatliches Vorderasiatisches Museum, Inv. No. VA 7086. Photograph from: Cat. Speyer 2006. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 107 9/10/2009 8:51:48 PM 108 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 date from the beginning of the 4th century (the hoard itself is dated to the middle of the first quarter of the 4th century BC).27 Similar long petals with pointed ends decorate the base of five comparable silver phialai found in a tomb in the Naip burial-mound in Propontine hrace, dating from the last decades of the 4th century BC.28 A similar system of decoration is encountered on a silver vessel of a different shape – a cup (so-called Buckelbecher) from a hoard found in Tuch el-Karamus,29 which M. Pfrommer classifies as a pre-Hellenistic artefact of the 4th century BC. 2.2. Phiale No. 1 While Phiale No. 2 has an – albeit small – umbo (Figs. 6-7), Phiale No. 1 has none (Figs. 1-4). To judge from the arrangement of the base of the phiale, there is reason to regard it as a transitional variant between vessels like Phiale No. 1 and phialai without an umbo in which the central part of the base floor is decorated. We know of two such phialai. One of these was a chance find near the stanitsa Mariinskaya in the region of the River Kuban (Fig. 11).30 he second – the so-called Coppa Tarentina – came from Tarentum (Fig. 12).31 Among the finds of plaster casts used for making metal items found in Mit Rahine in Egypt, there is a mould for a phiale with a similar pattern of decoration (Fig. 13).32 he decoration on the outside of the phiale found near Mariinskaya (Fig. 11) is of an intricate pattern: in the centre there is a double, intricate rosette with eight oval petals grouped around a circle. his rosette, in its turn, is framed by a 16-petal one with straight alternating acanthus and lily leaves. From out of the lily leaves emerge four whimsical tendrils with scrolls alternating with depictions of Rankengöttinen. he central medallion is framed by a ridge con27 Reade 1986, 80-81, Nos. 27-28, pl. IIIc, fig. 1; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 126-127, No. ÜF2c3. 28 Delemen 2006, 259-260, fig. 9. 29 Pfrommer 1987, 268, No. KTK 7, pls. 9-10; Pfrommer 1999, 44, fig. 71. 30 State Historical Museum, Inv. No. 4240 List B-164: Bapst 1887a, 121; Bapst 1887b, 147-148, pl. 21; Odobesco 1889/1890, 510, fig. 214; Mayer 1910, 31, fig. 2; Cat. Moscow 2002, No. 514. 31 Delbrueck 1912, 315-316, figs. 31-32; Nachod 1918, 115-118, pl. IV-V; Segall 1965, 557-558, fig. 1; Wuilleumier 1968, 338-343, pls. VII-VIII; XIX, 1; Reinsberg 1980, 81 ff., 124 ff.; Hausmann 1981, 215, fig. 80; Pfrommer 1987, 132-136, 249, No. Kbk 17, pl. 35; Hausmann 1995, 88-97, fig. 2; Webster 1995, 81. No. ITA 1; Schwarzmaier 1997, 94-95, 168-169, pl. 19, 2; Cat. Trieste 2002, 119, fig. 3. 32 Rubensohn 1911, 26 f., No. 16, pl. 9; Luschey 1939, 62, No. 12; Reinsberg 1980, 55-56, 299, No. 13, fig. 21; Pfrommer 1999, 44-45, 48, figs. 79-80. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 108 9/10/2009 8:51:51 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 109 Fig. 11. Phiale from Mariinskaya. Moscow, State Historical Museum, Inv. No. 4240 List B-164. 1 – Photograph by M. Treister and 2 – Drawing from: Odobesco 1889/1890). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 109 9/10/2009 8:51:51 PM 110 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 12. Phiale from Tarentum (so-called Coppa Tarantina). Whereabouts unknown. Photograph from: Pfrommer 1987). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 110 9/10/2009 8:51:53 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 111 Fig. 13. Plaster cast from Mit Rahine (Egypt) in the collection of the Römer- und Pelizaeus-Museum in Hildesheim, Inv. No. 1141 and a reconstruction of the phiale cast by M. Pfrommer; drawing by U. Denis (from: Pfrommer 1999). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 111 9/10/2009 8:51:55 PM 112 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 taining a gilded frieze in the form of a double plait, which is, to some extent, reminiscent of the ridge found on the Prokhorovka phiale. he edge of the phiale is decorated with a frieze consisting of 18 raised sections, the ends of which point towards the centre and between these there are pairs of lotus flowers. In the modern literature the phiale from Tarentum is dated, as a rule, to the second quarter of the 3rd century BC and it is defined as an artefact from a workshop in Tarentum or Alexandria. he dates given for the phiale from Mariinskaya vary from the end of the 4th century BC33 to the beginning34 or second quarter35 of the 3rd century BC. he cast from Hildesheim is dated to the very beginning36 or the first half of the 3rd century BC.37 he extremely close resemblance between the cast from Mit Rahine and the phiale from Mariinskaya – is one of the arguments cited in favour of perhaps defining the phiale from Mariinskaya as an artefact from Alexandria. We shall not at this point launch into a detailed analysis of the said group of phialai, since we plan to devote a special article to the phiale from Mariinskaya, but would merely point out that in this particular case it is not so crucial whether we date the Mariinskaya phiale to the end of the 4th or first half of the 3rd century BC, although the earlier date would seem to us preferable. What is clear, however, is that Phiale No. 1 from Prokhorovka belongs to an earlier series and could be dated to the 4th century BC – most probably to its second half. 2.2.1. he Central Rosette here exist compositional parallels in the toreutics of the 4th century BC for the double rosette in the very middle of the phiale’s base (Fig. 3). As a rule, complex rosettes of this kind decorate the base of silver “Achaemenid cups” of the Macedonian type and of phialai dating from the second half of the 4th or first half of the 3rd century BC.38 In particular, a double rosette – admittedly consisting of leaves of a different shape – decorates the central part of the five above-mentioned phialai from the Naip burial-mounds.39 We do not know of any exact parallels for the rosette on the base of the phiale from Prokhorovka: the closest of them is that on the base of a silver “Achaemenid” cup of the Luschey 1939, 61, No. 6; 71. Reinsberg 1980, 47 ff. 35 Pfrommer 1987, 100 f., 261, No. KBk 106: find-spot incorrectly indicated as: “Mariinskaya Hill”, as was its current location as the “Pushkin Museum”, pl. 59a. 36 Reinsberg 1980, 299, No. 13: c. 290 BC. 37 Pfrommer 1999, 44-45, 48. 38 Pfrommer 1987, 234-236, pl. 55; Delemen 2006, 259, note 73. 39 Delemen 2006, 259-260, fig. 9. 33 34 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 112 9/10/2009 8:52:02 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 113 Macedonian type originating from the Karagodeushkh burial-mound from from Trans-Kuban area.40 2.2.2. Whirl-shaped Rosette he base section of a phiale held in Orenburg is decorated with a whirl-shaped rosette (Figs. 1-2). It was customary to link this motif in Parthian art with Achaemenid influence.41 Among metal items from the 5th-3rd centuries BC originating from Asia Minor, those executed in the Achaemenid style and in the Anatolian-Achaemenid style and found in Colchis, whirl-shaped rosettes decorate the lid of a silver alabastron originating from looters’ excavations in Ikiztepe in Lydia,42 the base section of a silver phiale from Burial No. 6 (1961) in Vani (Fig. 14, 1), which dates from the first half of the 4th century BC43 (all in relief ); also the base of a silver cup found in the Sairkhé burial-ground (incised)44 (Fig. 14, 2). A similar motif (but with anti-clockwise scrolls) decorates phalerae from the stanitsa Uspenskaya45 (Fig. 15). A primitive imitation of such a whirlshaped rosette with scrolls is found on two phalerae discovered in Grave No. 2 of Burial-mound 4 near the farmstead Verkhnii,46 which belongs to the chronological group No. 3, as classified by I.I. Marchenko47 and assigned a date on the basis of the bits with cruciform cheek-pieces of Type 1b between the second quarter of the 3rd and the first quarter of the 2nd century BC.48 In the context of this study special attention is paid to the motif of a whirlshaped rosette round a small omphalos on a silver phiale fromVani (Fig. 14, 1), with account being taken of the fact that in the metalwork from Colchis of the period under discussion a strong influence from the Achaemenid-style metalwork of Asia Minor (the Lydian school) was to be felt.49 he dating of the phiale on the basis of the assemblage from the Vani burial, i.e. to a time no later than the first half of the 4th century BC, gives some grounds for suggesting 40 Mal’mberg 1894, 151-152, pl. V, 2; Schefold 1938, 27, fig. 16; Pfrommer 1987, 234, No. KaB M12, pl. 55. 41 Shchukin 2001, 142. 42 Özgen and Öztürk 1996, No. 75. 43 Khoshtaria et alii 1972, 115, No. 43, fig. 59; Gagoshidze 2003, slide 20. 44 Gagoshidze 2003, slides 28-29. 45 Treister 2006, 429 ff.; 435, figs. 1-2. 46 Cat. Mannheim 1989, No. 131, fig. 46 top left and right; Marchenko 1996, 78 ff., No. 1; 278, fig. 58, 4; Mordvinceva 2001, 72, No. 11, pl. 5. 47 Marchenko 1996, 97. 48 Marchenko 1996, 73, 79. 49 Treister 2007a, 67-107. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 113 9/10/2009 8:52:02 PM 114 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 14. Finds from Georgia. 1 – a silver phiale from Burial No. 6/1961 in Vani. Tbilisi, State Museum of Georgia. Photograph by M. Treister and 2 – silver bowl from Sairkhé. Tbilisi. Museum of Art. Drawing from: Gagoshidze 2003. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 114 9/10/2009 8:52:02 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 115 Fig. 15. Phalera from Uspenskaya. Tbilisi, State Museum of Georgia. Inv. No. 2986. Photograph by M. Treister. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 115 9/10/2009 8:52:03 PM 116 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 that it could have been a copy of that ornamental motif as found on metal articles in the Achaemenid style. 2.2.3. Belted Garlands he earliest example of the use of a belted garland to decorate metal articles is the conical object bearing a depiction of battle scenes from Periderieva Mogila, which dates from the middle or third quarter of the 4th century BC.50 Subsequently belted garlands became one of the most widespread decorative motifs of the Hellenistic era and moreover the base of such garlands was usually decorated with rows of pointed laurel leaves.51 Examples of garlands, the base of which consisted of “plait pattern” or patterns of dots derived from the latter, are quite rare: they include a garland found on the shoulder of a silver cup thought to have originated from the southern part of Asia Minor and now held in Boston, in which the ‘belting’ consists of alternating elements of plait pattern and pointed laurel leaves and which dates from the end of the 4th or beginning of the 3rd century BC,52 and there also the following specimens which date from the Hellenistic era: a fragmentary silver vessel from the Nogaichik Burial-mound,53 conical bowls from a Sarmatian burial (No. 3) in Burial-mound 4 of the Maierovskii III Burial-ground in the Volga region54 and from Hoard I in the Getty Museum.55 Belting with pointed leaves, arranged so that the points face each other, decorate garlands on phalerae with lions’ heads from the hoard found at the Fedulov farmstead in the Don region.56 If we take into consideration the fact that plaited decoration was considerably more widespread in the metalwork of the 4th century BC than in that of the 3rd-2nd century, and that belted garlands as such were not to be found in metalwork before the middle of the 4th century BC, the garland on the phiale from Prokhorovka (Fig. 4, 1-4) provides one of the reasons for dating the vessel to the second half of the 4th century BC. Indirect confirmation for this is 50 Cat. Schleswig 1991, No. 90; Moruzhenko 1992, 70 ff., No. 5, figs. 3-7; Cat. Zurich 1993, 121-123, No. 63; Moroujenko 1994, 22-23; Schiltz 1994, 335, fig. 243; 370-371, fig. 277; Alekseev 1997, 35, 38, No.15; 43, fig. 4, 2; Cat. San Antonio 1999, No. 124; Rusyaeva 1999, 208-215; Savostina 2001, pls. XLII, XLIII, XLV, figs. 17-19, 24, 25. 51 Pfrommer 1993, P. 36 ff.; Treister 2007b, 255-257, fig. 59. 52 Cat. Toledo 1977, 40, No. 10; Pfrommer 1987, 235, No. KaB M11. 53 Mordvintseva and Zaitsev 2003, 221 f., figs. 3, 21; 12, 3; 250. 54 Skvorcov and Skripkin 2006, 258, No. 14; 259, fig. 14, 2; 261, fig. 18. 55 Pfrommer 1993, 151, No. 24. 56 Berkhin 1962, 37-39: last quarter of the 3rd century BC; Zasetskaya 1966, 28-30: 3rd century BC; Pfrommer 1993, 8-9, fig. 2: 2nd century BC; Mordvinceva 2001, 71, No. 1, pl. 1: last quarter of the 3rd century BC; Treister 2006, 430, figs. 7-8: with a complete bibliography. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 116 9/10/2009 8:52:05 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 117 provided by the decoration of the phialai from Mariinskaya (Fig. 11) and Tarentum (Fig. 12) with similar ridges: the latter example is covered all over with decoration consisting of double plait pattern. 2.2.4. Flowers Flowers interpreted in a similar way (Fig. 4, 5-8) also constitute elements in intricate decorative compositions on the phiale from Tarentum (Fig. 12), on the casts from Mit Rahine,57 in mosaics from the middle or second half of the 4th century BC from Greece and Macedonia58 and wooden sarcophagi of the late-4th or early-3rd century BC from the North Pontic region.59 2.3. Phiale No. 1 and the Phiale Auctioned at Sotheby’s in 1996 V.Yu. Zuev drew attention to the similarity between a phiale held in Orenburg (Fig. 16, 1) and a silver phiale exhibited for a Sotheby’s auction in December 1996 in New York60 (Fig. 16, 2). Indeed the phiale exhibited at Sotheby’s does belong to the type of low phialai with feet in the shape of 22 almond-shaped raised sections. he similarity between the phialai extends no further. here are parallels for the central rosette, decorating the base of the phiale to be found in the decoration of phialai from the Oxus Treasure.61 he phiale exhibited at Sotheby’s is larger in size – its diameter is 30.8 cm (cf. diameter of Phiale No. 1–24.8 cm): it was most probably from the so-called “Western Cave Treasure” (Kalmakareh Cave in Luristan), which was looted between 1989 and 1992.62 It is thought that the hoard contained approximately 360 silver vessels, some of which made their way into various Iranian museums, some to the Miho Museum, two to the Louvre and one to the Metropolitan Museum: single specimens were also exhibited at Sotheby’s (1996) and Christie’s (1999) auctions in New York and a further single vessel at Bonham’s in London (2003). It is highly likely that a considerable proportion of the hoard is in the collection of H. Mahboubian (London) and it has been published by the collection’s owner.63 To judge from the New-Elamite and New-Assyrian Rubensohn 1911, 61, No. 44, pl. 13; Reinsberg 1980, 303, No. 19, fig. 32. See, for example: Salzmann 1982, 112, No. 118: Sicyon; 114, No. 130: Vergina. 59 Sokol’skii 1969, 32, No. 21, fig. 15: from the environs of Anapa; 31 ff., No. 22; 125, pl. 16: from the Zmeinÿi Burial-mound; 36 ff., No. 24; 129, pl. 19, 1: Pavlovskii Burialmound). 60 Sotheby’s 6937, 1996, No. 165; Zuev 2000, 316, pl. IV, 3; 317. 61 For example, from the collection of the British Museum: Dalton 1964, No. 19, pl. V; Cat. London 2005, 116, No. 105; from the Miho Museum: Cat. Miho 2002, 100 (ill.), 243, No. 101. 62 On that hoard see, for example: Van Rijn; Muhly 2004. 63 Mahboubian 1995. 57 58 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 117 9/10/2009 8:52:05 PM 118 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Fig. 16. 1 – Phiale No. 1 from Prokhorovka; 2 – Phiale exhibited in December 1996 at a Sotheby’s auction in New York. Photograph from: Sotheby 6937, 1996. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 118 9/10/2009 8:52:05 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 119 cuneiform inscriptions on many of these vessels, including the phiale under discussion, the hoard dates from the end of the 7th or beginning of the 6th century BC. his means that the phiale exhibited at Sotheby’s can be discussed, in conjunction with many of those listed above, as the prototype of one of the Prokhorovka phialai. 3. Phialai as Phalerae As already noted above, Mordvintseva, in my opinion is perfectly justified in her interpretation of groups of three holes made through these bowls. hey made it possible to attach and fasten loops and they were made when the phialai were being adapted to serve as phalerae. Pfrommer assigned all the large phialai of between 25 and 30 cm in diameter to the late group, considered by him to date from no earlier than the 2nd century BC.64 Mordvintseva, on the other hand, assigns with good reason the largest of the known phalerae – those from the Fedulov hoard and from Uspenskaya, with a diameter of 30-31 cm – to the earliest group of Sarmatian phalerae, the date for which falls within the confines of the late-3rd century BC.65 he author of this article reached a similar conclusion regarding the early date for the largest of the shoulder phalerae, while preparing his publication of the Uspenskaya phalerae.66 4. Repair of One of the Phalerae One way or another it is clear that phalerae had proved useful to their owner (or owners) for long enough and at some stage were restored with the utmost care. Zuev, who appropriately drew attention to traces of repair on Phiale No. 2, noted as follows: “he base of the central hemisphere had suffered along the edge from pressure resulting from long use of the phiale as a vessel. he ancient craftsman had attempted to pull together the edges of the tear which had appeared by ‘darning’ the base with a very fine strip of silver, however he had not succeeded in this way in making the vessel functional again. It is precisely this repair, which had made Phiale No. 1 impossible to use as a vessel, which led to the change in its fate. After being acquired by nomads both phialai served their new masters for a fairly long time as phalerae, decorating their horses’ harness”.67 64 65 66 67 Pfrommer 1993, 8-9. Mordvintseva 1996, 155; Mordvinceva 2001, 43, 56. Treister 2006. Zuev 2000, 317. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 119 9/10/2009 8:52:08 PM 120 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 It is not totally clear what led Zuev to suggest that the traces of repair on one of the phialai are linked with the time when it was used as a vessel, before it fell into the hands of the Sarmatians. he way in which the torn piece of the phiale was re-attached by linking together the two edges with a narrow strip of silver (Fig. 17, 1) enables us to assume that the restoration task was carried out not in a highly specialized metal-smith’s workshop, but more primitively: although we are aware of such kind of repair already in the Anatolian Bronze Age,68 this type of repair was typical for wooden vessels of the 4th century BC found at Scythian sites in the North Pontic region,69 for example, or in Sarmatian burial-mounds in the southern foothills of the Urals,70 such as those found in burial mounds at Filippovka (Fig. 17, 3)71 and Prokhorovka.72 he suggestion that one of the phialai had been repaired, when it was already being used as a phalera, indirectly confirms not only that it would have been inconvenient to use it as a vessel after a repair of that kind – something which Zuev himself points out – but also the fact that the torn edges of one of the phalerae found near the stanitsa of Uspenskaya had been repaired in a similar way (Fig. 17, 2) and that these objects had originally been used as phalerae.73 5. Inscriptions on Phalerae Kokovtsev drew the conclusion that the inscriptions on the phialai (Figs. 5; 8) had been executed in the Early Parthian script of Aramaic origin and could 68 An early 2nd Millenium BC obsidian vessel repaired with narrow strip of gold from Accemhöyük in the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara (I am grateful to Søren Handberg, Aarhus, who pointed me to this parallel). 69 See, in general: Mantsevich 1966, 25. One of the wooden bowls from the 1st Zavadskaya Mogila had been repaired using a narrow strip of gold forming a diagonal seam (Mozolevskii 1980, 105, fig. 44, 5; 111), and also a bowl from a burial-mound near the stanitsa Elizavetinskaya (Mantsevich 1966, 24, fig. 1, 9) and a wooden dish from Burial No.8 in Burial-mound 4 near the village of Pervomaevka (Evdokimov and Fridman 1987, 113, No. 8; 114, fig. 23, 2). Seams formed by thin strips of bronze forming a cross were also used to hold together a bowl from the side grave at Solokha (Mantsevich 1966, 24, fig. 1, 7; Mantsevich 1987, 50, No. 5), while thin strips of gold were used to repair a bowl from Burial-mound 2 near the village of Malaya Lepetikha (Mantsevich 1966, 24, fig. 1, 8). 70 For example, a fragmentary wooden bowl repaired with strips of bronze arranged in the shape of a cross and found in Grave No. 4, in Burial-mound 8 near the village of Pokrovka: Yablonskii et alii 1995, 34, 159, fig. 56, 2. 71 See, for example: the strips of gold arranged in a cross together with a gold appliqué on a wooden bowl from Cache No. 1 in Burial-mound 1 (Cat. Milan 2001, 202, No. 144). 72 From Grave No. 3 in Burial-mound B, vessels with strips of metal arranged on them in a cross in conjunction with gold appliqués (Yablonskii and Meshcheryakov 2005, 67, fig. VI, 4). 73 Treister 2006, 441. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 120 9/10/2009 8:52:08 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 121 Fig. 17. Articles repaired using narrow bands of metal. 1 – Phiale No. 2 from Prokhorovka, detail; 2 – phalera from Uspenskaya, detail; 3 – gold appliqué from a vessel found in Burial-mound 1 at Filippovka. Photograph from: Cat. Milan 2001. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 121 9/10/2009 8:52:08 PM 122 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 only be given a very broad date from the second half of the 3rd century BC to the 2nd or 1st century BC and even simply the 1st century BC: nor did he rule out the 4th century BC from the date range.74 Rostovtsev had also hesitated when seeking to determine the date for the inscriptions on the Prokhorovka phialai, as mentioned earlier. K. Schefold pointed out that the bowls can be dated to the 3rd-2nd century BC on the basis of their Aramaic inscriptions.75 In their special study of the inscriptions on phalerae, Livshits and Zuev conclude that on the basis of palaeographic data the inscriptions on the phialai can be dated to the 2nd-1st or to the 1st century BC.76 Detailed analysis of the inscriptions is presented in the current issue of this journal in the article by A.S. Balakhvantsev and L.T. Yablonskii and we shall therefore confine ourselves to a detailed analysis of the inscription concerning weights. 6. Data Concerning Weights Phiale No. 1 weighs 436 g and Phiale No. 2 516 g. he silver phiale found in a burial on the Susa acropolis weighs 562 grammes,77 which virtually corresponds exactly to 100 sigloi. If it is assumed that the Late Persian system of weights with sigloi provided the basis for the metrology of phialai, knowing that the weight of siglos fluctuated between 5.4 and 5.67 g (as opposed to the early sigloi which weighed between 5.2 and 5.49 g),78 then the weight of Phiale No. 1 will be approximately 76.9-80.7 sigloi and that of Phiale No. 2 – 91-95.5 sigloi. If we calculate the weight of phialai in hracian-Macedonian drachms (average weight 3.48 g), which, in the opinion of M. Vickers, were also widely used as a weight standard for silver vessels,79 then the weight of Phiale No. 1 comes to 125.3 drachms and that of Phiale No. 2 to 148.3 drachms; in Athenian drachms (average weight 4.31 grammes) Phiale No. 1 would weigh 101.2 drachms and Phiale No. 2 – 119.7 drachms. At the same time it is by no means appropriate always to expect that the weight of an individual vessel will have been “rounded up”, since very often a craftsman would have been given an order for a series consisting of several vessels, for which he would have been given a round figure for the weight of all Kokovtsev 1918, 82-83. Schefold 1938, 13. 76 Livshits and Zuev 2004, 10. 77 Cat. London 2005, 178, No. 277. 78 Vickers 2002, 334. On the date for the transition from the early to the late weight standard, see: Vickers 2002, 336 with bibliography. 79 Vickers 1989, 101; Vickers and Gill 1994, 47. 74 75 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 122 9/10/2009 8:52:16 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 123 the vessels taken together. In particular, a series of three silver cups from Dalboki weighs 560.5 grammes or approximately 100 sigloi.80 Four silver phialai with Artaxerxes I inscriptions mentioned above, thought to have come from Hamadan, have a total weight of 3262.4 grammes or 600 sigloi, according to the early weight standard (1 siglos = 5.44 grammes).81 In inventories from the Parthenon the weight of silver vessels is also cited in groups: totals for three silver rhyta (528 Atttic drachms), 4 silver phialai – 329 drachms (= 260 sigloi), 7 silver phialai – 910 drachms (= 700 sigloi), 7 silver phialai – 643 drachms and 2 oboloi (= 500 sigloi)82. Round figures are not given in sigloi, nor the weight of some of the silver phialai cited above as parallels: for phialai assumed to be from Erzincan83 – 541.3 grammes (= 96 sigloi); for a phiale from the Oxus Treasure in the British Museum84 – 247 grammes (= 43.8 sigloi); phiale with an Artaxerxes I inscription from the British Museum85 – 803 grammes (= 142.4 sigloi); phiale, assumed to have come from Mazanderan, held in the British Museum86 – 952 grammes (= 168.8 sigloi). he inscription on Phiale No. 1 contains a designation of weight. In an article published in 2001, it was read by Livshits as follows: “9 karša, 2 staters, 1 drachm”87 and Livshits pointed out that 1 karša, equal to10 sigloi, weighed 83.3 g, that a stater weighed 16.5 g and that the weight of a drachm fluctuated between 4 and 4.25 g. his meant, judging from the inscription, Phiale No. 1 should – according to the calculations of Livshits – have weighed c. 777 grammes88 (in actual fact c. 787 g). Later Livshits introduced modification to the text of the inscription and it was then read as “5 karša, 2 staters, 1 drachm”,89 i. e. c. 425 g, which is much more in line with the actual weight of the phiale – 436 g. Livshits notes that weights were indicated in units of this kind, i.e. karša, staters and drachms on the silver bowl from the Isakovka burial-ground (15 karša, 1 stater, 1 drachm, while the weight of the bowl according to the inscription was 1249.5 g slightly less than the actual weight of the bowl – 1290 g) and on the gold bowl from the Hermitage collection 80 Vickers 1989, 102; Vickers and Gill, 1994, 49; Pfrommer 1993, 198, No. 77; Vickers 2002, 334. 81 Vickers 2002, 335-336. 82 Vickers 1989, 101-102; Vickers and Gill 1994, 47-49. 83 See above: note 20. 84 See above: note 61. 85 See above: note 17. 86 Cat. London 2005, 114, No. 102. 87 Livshits 2001, 169. 88 Livshits 2001, 170. 89 Livshits 2003, 167-168; Livshits and Zuev 2004, 10-11. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 123 9/10/2009 8:52:16 PM 124 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 (9 karša, 1 stater, 3 drachms; the weight of the bowl according to the inscription was 778 g, significantly more than its actual weight – 677.5 g).90 he silver conical bowl from the Isakovka burial-ground91 could, from the typological point of view, be given a date within the 3rd-2nd centuries BC.92 he golden bowl from the Siberian Collection in the Hermitage,93 on account of its shape could hardly be given a date earlier than the 3rd century BC, as proposed by R. Zahn,94 who put forward the suggestion that it had been manufactured in Armenia. Pfrommer believed that the bowl was more likely to be Bactrian and dated it to the 2nd century BC.95 We shall point out, for purposes of comparison, that the weights indicated in Aramaic inscriptions with weights on silver bowls of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC from Hoards I and III in the Getty Museum are only cited in Parthian drachms (c. 4.3 g).96 he weight of a 2nd-century BC bowl from the Toledo Museum is also indicated in drachms (51) in Greek letters.97 On a bowl dating from the 1st century BC from Sisian in Armenia there is an Aramaic inscription indicating its weight of 100 drachms.98 his means that, for silver vessels of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC bearing Aramaic inscriptions indicating weight, it was typical for weight to be given in drachms. he earlier date of the vessels with inscriptions indicating weights, given in karša, staters and drachms provides, in our opinion, fairly convincing testimony to the fact that designations of weight of that kind were characteristic for periods no later than the 3rd century BC.99 Livshits 2001, 169; Livshits 2003, 168; Livshits and Zuev 2004, 10-11. Livshits 2002, 54 ff., No. 3, figs. 8-9; Livshits 2003, 165 ff., figs. 8-9; Koryakova 2006, 112, fig. 17; Koryakova and Epimakhov 2007, 304-306. 92 Cf., for example, bowls from Sashova Mogila in Bulgaria (Cat. St. Louis 1998, No. 11; Cat. Bonn 2004, No. 240c; Cat. Paris 2006, No. 51); from the hoard found during looters’ excavations in Morgantina (von Bothmer 1984, 54-55, Nos. 92-94), which has been dated with reference to a silver coin of 216-212 BC. (Bell III 1997, 31-41). 93 Zahn 1967, 15-26; Ivanov et alii 1984, 22, No. 27, fig. 31: Iranian workshop of the 4th-3rd century BC.; for a comprehensive bibliography, see: Pfrommer 1987, 138-139, note 911. 94 Zahn 1967. 95 Pfrommer 1993, 89, note 451. 96 Pfrommer 1993, 112, No. 2: 151 drachms; 114, No. 3: 105 drachms; 132, No. 12: 114 drachms; 134, No. 13: 136 drachms; 136, No. 14: 190 drachms; 138, No. 15: 157 drachms; 142, No. 17: 206 drachms; 186, No. 71: 165 drachms; 190, No. 73: 188 drachms [Aramaic]; 148, No. 22: 120 drachms; 198, No. 77: 194 drachms – weight of two bowls [Greek]). 97 Cat. Toledo 1977, 79, No. 43. 98 Khachatrian 1989, 305. 99 See also the article by Balakhvantsev and Yablonskii in this issue, note 94. 90 91 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 124 9/10/2009 8:52:16 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 125 7. How long might the Prokhorovka phialai have been in existence? heoretically it could have been for a long time. Zuev has written about the possibility that there could have been a long interval of time between the manufacture of the phialai and their adaptation by the Sarmatians as phalerae. He substantiated his suggestion to the effect that the phialai used as phalerae decorated harness for quite a long time as follows: “hree pairs of crudely pierced holes, essential for fastening phalerae to straps on the shoulders of horses: on the inside of the former phialai there are deep traces of wear made by the long dragging of knots in straps of tanned leather across the surface of the metal. If we take into consideration these observations regarding use-andwear, then the date when this burial complex in Burial-mound 1 near the village of Prokhorovka was constructed could be between the end of the 2nd and the first decades of the 1st century BC”.100 We should note at this point that a little earlier in that same article Zuev had written that his observations regarding the phialai were based on his work “with J.I. Smirnov’s photo-archive and his visual examination of one of the phalerae”,101 which means that he could not have undertaken any real use-and-wear examination of the phalera from the Orenburg Museum: moreover, even if he had, no well established method exists, as far as we know, for dating the use of artefacts made of precious metals on the basis of traces of wear at all, let alone to within a few decades. A clear example of the use of phialai is provided by finds from Grave No.6 in Burial-mound 3 of the Isakovka burial-ground near Omsk, which those leading the excavations have dated provisionally to the 3rd-2nd centuries BC.102 In this burial complex a silver phiale weighing 612.2 g and bearing a Khorezmian inscription103 was found: also a low bowl segment-shaped in profile, decorated on the inside of the base with a rosette, around which are arranged depictions of three palmettes and three dolphins, and with a frieze on the inside underneath the edge with three ducks and three dolphins depicted alternately104 and the conical bowl mentioned above.105 he latter two bowls are artefacts of a kind quite widespread in the Hellenistic era: we have already drawn attention to parallels for the conical bowl as regards its shape and decoration from among vessels of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. his date would be Zuev 2000, 317. Zuev 2000, 317. 102 Livshits 2003, 147. 103 Livshits 2003, 147-161. figs. 1-4; Koryakova 2006, 110-111, figs. 14-15; Koryakova and Epimakhov 2007, 304, 308, pl. 8.3. 104 Livshits 2003, 161-165, figs. 5-7; Koryakova 2006, 111, fig. 16; Koryakova and Epimakhov 2007, 304-305, fig. 8.17. 105 See, above: note 91. 100 101 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 125 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM 126 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 justified in the case of the segment-shaped bowl as well. Numerous bowls of this shape were found in the so-called Hoard I in the Getty Museum, which is assumed to date from the Early Parthian period and to have originated from North-western Iran.106 he phiale with eight almond shaped feet or ledges and with stylized lotus flowers between then is fairly similar in profile to the phialai from Prokhorovka. As regards its decoration, the closest parallels are provided among bronze phialai from Deve Hüyük107 and Gezer108 or by two phialai in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum.109 A close parallel in silver is provided by one of the phialai found in Akhalgori,110 and also by a phiale from a hoard found in the vicinity of Sinope and held in Athens.111 hus there is every reason to regard the phiale from Isakovka as roughly contemporary with the phiale from Prokhorovka and to date it to the 4th century BC. We can therefore conclude that the phialai-phalerae from the Prokhorovka Burial-mound 1 could have been used by the Sarmatians over a long period. We know of a case when a 4th-century BC silver phiale was found together with bowls in the Isakovka burial-ground, which as regards their typology could have been given a broad date of the 3rd-2nd century BC. Yet the formula in the weight inscription on one of the bowls, as pointed out above, would seem rather to indicate that it should be dated to some time in the 3rd century BC. It would not seem justified to date the burial in Grave No. 1 to the end of the 2nd or beginning of the 1st century BC on the basis of signs of wear on one of the artefacts from Prokhorovka. 8. Conclusion he analysis which has been carried out makes it possible to assume that the phialai from Prokhorovka could have been manufactured in different workshops at different times. While Phiale No. 2, to judge from the parallels cited above, could have been made as early as the second half of the 5th century BC, there are definite grounds for dating Phiale No. 1 to the 4th century BC – probably its second half – and assuming that it was manufactured in a workshop in Alexandria. 106 107 108 109 110 111 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 126 Pfrommer 1993, 45 ff., Nos. 1-16. Moorey 1980, 32, fig. 6, 94-99. Stern 1982, figs. 89. 4, 240. Muscarella 1980b, 218-219, Nos. 326-327. Smirnov 1934, 46-47, No. 63, pl. XI. Amandry 1953-1954, 11-13, No. 1, pl. I; Summerer 2003, 21-22, fig. 2. 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 127 We are without doubt unable to answer with any 100% guarantee the question as to whether both phialai fell into the hands of the Sarmatians at one and the same time or at different times and by different routes, although the first suggestion would appear to us preferable. Only one thing is clear, namely that the Aramaic inscriptions on the phialai had been executed previously. Any reconstruction of the historical circumstances in which the phialai could have come into the hands of the Sarmatians is therefore most unlikely to be unambiguous. N.E. Berlizov suggests that the phialai from Prokhorovka could have come into the hands of the Sarmatians when a Macedonian cart was looted,112 referring to data to the effect that the “Dachoi” and the “Massagetae” served Darius III and valiantly came into their own at Arbela (Diod. XVII. 59; Curt. IV. 15.1-12). his is clearly only one of the possible explanations as to how the phialai might have come into the hands of the Sarmatians. At any rate, a similar route (via the Dachoi) is suggested by Balakhvantsev and Yablonskii for the silver “Achaemenid” bowl resembling the Macedonian type of the late4th century BC, decorated with plait and plant patterns, found in Grave No. 3 in Burial-mound B at Prokhorovka.113 No doubts are voiced as to the fact that phialai used as phalerae were early Sarmatian, as can be seen both from their measurements and their structural features. his assumption is also borne out by the fact that one of the Prokhorovka phalerae has been repaired in the same way (No. 2) – the only parallel for which among phalerae we also find on one of the very earliest phalerae dating from the last quarter of the 3rd or the first quarter of the 2nd century BC. Finally, the following assumption would appear extremely logical: it is highly likely that the re-using of dishes or phialai as phalerae would have preceded the appearance, in the late-3rd century BC, of specially manufactured large phalerae worn on the shoulders. While being fully aware of the relative nature of such reconstructions, we are nevertheless certain that it is far more feasible than the suggestion to the effect that the adaptation of phialai as phalerae took place in the 2nd or the 1st century BC. he phalerae of that period, as a rule, are significantly smaller in size and are of a different shape,114 and silver hemispherical bowls with decoration in relief and so-called Megarian bowls115 can be regarded as their prototypes. Moreover, among the phalerae of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC there are specimens with decoration that has clearly been adopted from the decoration of phialai. his applies, in particular, 112 113 114 115 Berlizov 1997, 103. Balakhvantsev and Yablonskii 2006, 105. For detail on this, see: Mordvinceva 2001, 43. Mordvintseva 2005, 96-97. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 127 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM 128 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 to one of the phalerae from the hoard found in Galiche in Bulgaria.116 hus the assumption that phialai could have been turned into phalerae in a GraecoBactrian workshop and only then have fallen into the hands of the Sarmatians – put forward as an alternative solution by Mordvintseva117 – would appear to us unlikely. Catalogue 1. Phiale with a flat floor base (without an omphalos). In the centre there is an intricate rosette framed by a smooth ridge. he central part of the rosette is made up of seven petals of a rhomboid shape with accentuated lines representing the main veins. Where the petals join, larger lily petals oval in shape protrude (7), edged by narrow ridges, between which small petals rhomboid in shape have been arranged. he central and somewhat sunken part of the floor of the phiale is decorated with a pattern consisting of a whirl-shaped rosette with petals, curved round in a clockwise direction. he craftsman, however, miscalculated the curve of these petals and four of them do not extend down as far as the base of the rosette. he inside of the bowl’s base is framed by a ridge hemispherical in section and presented in the form of a garland with four double fillets equidistant from each other. he garland is arranged in the form of a double plait, elements of which have been worked as small circles ridged round the edges. he fillets of the two types are arranged so that those of one and the same type are opposite each other. he fillet of the first type is decorated in the centre with a horizontal stripe across it containing three engraved circles. Each of the wide spaces at the side of the central stripe contains two groups of three arc-shaped lines. Along each edge of the fillet there is a narrow undecorated band. All elements of the fillet are set apart from each other by horizontal grooves. he fillets of the second type consist of three parts: a central field formed by two pointed leaves with accentuated main veins, the pointed ends of which touch. he small circles were worked subsequently. he narrow stripes framing the central element of the fillet are decorated with a zigzag pattern. Along the slightly raised edge of the lower part of the phiale – there are 16 almond-shaped ledges-cum-feet in relief: their ends point towards the centre. Between them there are two different variants of flowers embossed from 116 117 ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 128 Cat. Cologne 1979, 195, No. 392; Cat. Montreal 1987, 261, No. 474. Mordvintseva 1996, 159. 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 129 underneath and arranged alternately forming a pattern in relief on the floor of the phiale consisting of lotus flowers with tendrils at the side of them. he flowers of the first type have an ovary trapezoid in shape, arranged in their lower part as vertical petals. he upper part of the ovary is presented as three curved petals, decorated with curved parallel ridges. he actual flower is elongated and has three petals in its upper part. From out of the ovary, parallel to the outline of the almond-shaped ledges emerge curved tendrils, each of which ends in a small round flower with six or seven petals. he ovary of the flowers of the second type has a base semi-circular in shape also presented with curved parallel ridges and similar petals growing out of it similar to those growing out of the ovary of the flowers of the first type. he flower itself represents that of an aracea. On the stems growing out of the ovary there are flowers arranged as three small hemispheres with impressed dots in their centre. he walls of the phiale flare sharply near the top; the thickened edge is outturned. In the central part of the walls there are three groups of two holes of irregular, roughly triangular shape at the outer edge of the phiale: these have been made from the outside of the bowl and the groups are more or less equidistant from each other. he inscription regarding weight has been worked on the external wall of the phiale in pricked dots. Diameter 24,8 cm. Weight 435,9 g. Orenburg, ChKM 47/3. Literature: Rostovtsev 1918, 6, No. 7, pl. I, 1; Rostovtzeff 1922, 123, pl. 24, 1 (top); Schefold 1938, 13; Luschey 1939, 61, No. EB7; 72 f.; Iessen 1952, 217-218, fig. 10; Savel’eva and Smirnov 1972, 119; Pfrommer 1987, 98, notes 582-583; 158; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 107, 108, 125-126, No. F3c17; Mordvintseva 1996, 156, fig. 1 (top); Berlizov 1997, 105, fig. 7; Zuev 1998, 13-14, 22-23, fig. 1, 3; 2, 2; Zuev 2000, 309, 314-317, pl. IV, 1-2; Zuev 2003, 21-22, pl. 8; Livshits 2001, 163 (illustrations); Livshits and Zuev 2004, 4, fig. 1. – On the inscription, see: Livshits 2001, 163 (bottom illustration); Livshits and Zuev 2004. 2. Phiale with a flat base and a small hemispherical omphalos. he central slightly sunken part of the base of this phiale is decorated with the pattern of a 12-petal rosette consisting of elongated pointed leaves with midribs down the centre. Along the edge of the lower part of the phiale there are 20 almondshaped feet-cum-ledges worked in relief with their narrow ends pointing towards the centre. Between these there are lotus flowers growing out of the pointed leaves of the rosette. he walls of the phiale flare sharply towards the top: the thickened edge is out-turned. In the central part of the walls round ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 129 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM 130 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 the edge of the phiale there are three groups of two holes of irregular, roughly triangular shape, which have been made from the outside of the bowl and they are more or less equidistant from each other. he Aramaic inscription on this “bowl of Atarmikhr” has been worked on the outside of the bowl under its edge in pricked dots. Weight 516 g. Almaty, Central State Museum of Republic Kazakhstan. Literature: Rostovtsev 1918, 6, No. 7, pl. I, 2; Rostovtzeff 1922, 123, pl. 24, 1 (bottom); Ebert 1927/1928, 317, pl. 112A, c; Luschey 1939, 43, No. GB 25; Iessen 1952, 217-218, fig. 9; Savel’eva and Smirnov 1972, 119; Abka ‘I-Khavari 1988, 107, 110, 125-126, No. F3c16; Mordvintseva 1996, 156, fig. 1 (bottom); Berlizov 1997, 105, fig. 6; Cat. Mantua 1998, No. 456; Zuev 1998, 13-14, 22-23, fig. 1, 2; 2, 3 (with incorrect information regarding the theft of the phiale from the Central State Museum of Republic Kazakhstan); Zuev 2000, 309, 314-317, pl. III, 1-3; Zuev 2003, 21-22, pl. 11; Livshits 2001, 161 (with incorrect information about the theft of the phiale from the Central State Museum of Republic Kazakhstan); 162 (illustrations); Livshits and Zuev 2004, 4, fig. 2. – On the inscription, see: Livshits 2001, 162 (bottom illustration); Livshits and Zuev 2004, 10; cf. Meshcheryakov et alii 2006, 112-113, with a date given for the burial no later than the 3rd century BC. Bibliography Abka ‘I-Khavari, M. 1988: Die achämenidischen Metallschallen. AMI 21, 91-137. Alekseev, A.Yu. 1997: K rekonstruktsii odnogo utrachennogo predmeta éllino-skifskoi torevtiki V-IV vv. do n.é. Stratum+Peterburgskii arkheologicheskii vestnik (St. Petersburg and Kishinev), 29-43. Amandry, P. 1953-1954: Vaisselles d’argent de l’époque achéménide. Collection Hélène Stathatos. Ά α ο ογ η̃ Έ ηµε ί , 11-19. Balakhvantsev, A.S., Yablonskii, L.T. 2006: Serebryannaya chasha iz Prokhorovki. RosArkh, no 1, 98-106. Bapst, G. 1887a: Les fouilles de Siverskaia (Caucase). Gazette archéologique 5-6, 116-123. Bapst, G. 1887b: Les fouilles de Siverskaia (Caucase) (Suite). Coupe en argent doré. Gazette archéologique 12, 147-149. Berlizov, N.E. 1997: K interpretatsii akhemenidskogo importa v ranneprokhorovskikh pogrebeniyakh. Stratum+Peterburgskii arkheologichskii vestnik (St. Petersburg and Kishinev), 101-105. Berkhin, I.P. 1962: O meste proizvodstva falarov „Fedulovskogo klada“. SGÉ 22, 37-39. Bell III, M. 1997: La provenienze ritrovata: cercando il contesto di antichità trafugate. BdA Supplemento al Nr. 101-102 (P. Pelagati and P.G. Guzzo, Antichità senza provenienza 2. Atti del colloquio internazionale 17-18 ottobre 1997), 31-41. Cat. Bonn 2004: R. Echt (ed.), Die hraker. Das goldene Reich des Orpheus (Bonn). Cat. Cologne 1979: Gold der hraker. Archäologische Schätze aus Bulgarien (Mainz). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 130 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 131 Cat. London 2005: J. Curtis and N. Tallis (eds.), Forgotten Empire. he World of Ancient Persia (London). Cat. Mannheim 1989: A.M. Leskov (ed.), Gold und Kunsthandwerk vom antiken Kuban. Sonderausstellung Mannheim (Stuttgart). Cat. Mantua 1998: G.A. Popescu, C.S. Antonini, K. Baipakov (eds.), L’uomo d’oro. La cultura delle steppe del Kazakhstan dall’età del bronzo alle grandi migrazioni (Venice). Cat. Miho 2002: Treasures of Ancient Bactria. Miho Museum (Miho). Cat. Milan 2001: J. Aruz, A. Farkas, A. Alekseev and E. Korolkova (eds.), Oro. Il misterio dei Sarmati e de gli Sciti (Milan). Cat. Montreal 1987: Gold of the hracian Horsemen. Treasures from Bulgaria (Montreal). Cat. Moscow 2002: D.V. Zhuravlev (ed.), Na krayu oikumenÿ. Greki i varvarÿ na severnom beregu Ponta Évksinskogo (Moscow). Cat. Nantes 1996: J. Santrot (ed.), Arménie. Trésors de l’Arménie ancienne des origines au IV e siècle (Paris). Cat. Paris 2006: L’or des hraces. Trésors de Bulgarie. Musée Jacquemart-André (Paris). Cat. Saint Louis 1998: I. Marazov (ed.), Ancient Gold: he Wealth of the hracians. Treasures from the Republic of Bulgaria (New York). Cat. San Antonio 1999: E.D. Reeder (ed.), Scythian Gold. Treasures from Ancient Ukraine (New York). Cat. Schleswig 1991: R. Rolle, M. Müller-Wille, K. Schietzel (eds.), Gold der Steppe. Archäologie der Ukraine (Schleswig). Cat. Speyer 2006: Historisches Museum der Pfalz Speyer (ed.), Pracht und Prunk der Grosskönige. Das persische Weltreich (Stuttgart). Cat. Toledo 1977: A. Oliver, Jr, Silver for the Gods. 800 Years of Greek and Roman Silver (Toledo). Cat. Zurich 1993: M. Karabelnik (ed.), Aus den Schatzkammern Eurasiens (Zurich). Collection B. Khanenko 1907: Collection B. Khanenko. Antiquités de la region du Dniepre et des côtes de la Mer Noire 6 (Kiev). Curtis, J.E., Cowell, M.R. and Walker, C.B.F. 1995: A Silver Bowl of Artaxerxes I. Iran 33, 149-153. Dalton, O.M. 1964: he Treasures of the Oxus. 3rd ed. (London). Delbrueck, R. 1912: Italien: Archäologische Funde im Jahre 1911. AA, 270-322. Delemen, I. 2006: An Umplundered Chamber Tomb on Ganos Mountain in Southeastern hrace. AJA 110, no 2, 251-273. Ebert, M. 1927/1928: Prochorovka. In M. Ebert (ed.), Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte 10 (Berlin), 317-318. Evdokimov, G.L. and Fridman, M.I. 1987: Skifskie kurganÿ u s. Pervomaevka na Khersonshchine. In E.V. Chernenko (ed.), Skifÿ Severnogo Prichernomor’ya (Kiev), 85-115. Gagoshidze, Yu. 2003: Achaemenid and Achaeminidizing Silver Vessels found in Georgia. Paper delivered at the University of Aarhus 26 September 2003. Seminar on the Occasion of the 60th birthday of Niels Hannestad (3 August) and Lise Hannestad (15 October), 2003, professors of Classical Archaeology. http://www.pontos.dk/Birthday_Lise_Niels/gagoschidze.htm. Gunter, A. and Jett, P. 1992: Ancient Iranian Metalwork in the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and the Freer Gallery of Art (Washington). Gunter, A.C. and Root, M.C. 1998: Replicating, Inscribing, Giving: Ernst Herzfeld and Artaxerxes’ Silver Phiale in the Freer Gallery of Art. Ars Orientalis 28, 3-38. Hausmann, U. 1981: Reliefmedallion Herakles und Hesperide. In X. Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia (Berlin), 209-227. Hausmann, U. 1995: Aphrodite und Adonis. Eirene 31 (In honorem Jan Bouzek), 88-97. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 131 9/10/2009 8:52:17 PM 132 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Herzfeld, E. 1935: Eine Silberschüssel Artaxerxes’ I. AMI 7, 1-8. Ivanov, A.A., Lukonin, V.G. and Smesova, L.S. 1984: Yuvelirnÿe izdeliya Vostoka. Drevnii, srednevekovÿi periodÿ (Leningrad). Iessen, A.I. 1952: Rannie svyazi Priural’ya s Iranom. SA 16, 206-231. Khachatrian, J.D. 1989: Silver bowls and Basins of Armenia in the Late Hellenistic Period. Iranica Antiqua 24, 297-310. Khoshtaria, N.V., Puturidze, R.V., Chkonia, A.M. 1972: Itogi arkheologicheskikh rabot, provedennÿkh v 1961-1963 gg. v severo-vostochnoi chasti Vanskogo gorodishcha. In Vani I. Archaeological excavations 1947-1969 (Tbilisi), 111-134 (in Georgian with summary in Russian). Kokovtsev, P.K. 1918: O nadpisyakh na serebrannÿkh blyudakh. In Rostovtsev, M.I. Kurgannÿe nachodki Orenburgskoï oblasti épochi rannego i pozdnego ellinizma. MAR 37, (Petrograd), 82-83. Koryakova, L. 2006: On the Northern Periphery of the Nomadic World: Research in the TransUral Region. In J. Aruz, A. Farkas, E. Valtz Fino (eds.), he Golden Deer of Eurasia. Perspectives on the Steppe Nomads of the Ancient World (New York), 102-113. Koryakova, L. and Epimakhov, A. 2007: he Urals and Western Siberia in the Bronze and Iron Ages (Cambridge). Livshits, V.A. 2001: O datirovke nadpisei na serebryannÿkh sosudakh iz kurgana 1 u derevni Prokhorovka. In V.Yu. Zuev (ed.), Bosporskii fenomen. Kolonizatsiya regiona. Formirovanie polisov. Obrazovanie gosudarstva. Materialÿ mezhdunarodnoï konferentsii 2 (St. Petersburg), 160-170. Livshits, V.A. 2002: Tri serebryannÿe chashi iz Isakovskogo mogil’nika No. 1. VDI, no 2, 43-56. Livshits, V.A. and Zuev, V.Yu. 2004: O datirovke parfyanskikh nadpiseï na fialakh iz kurgana 1 u derevni Prokhorovka. VDI, no 2, 3-11. Livshits V.A. 2003: hree Silver Bowls from the Isakovka Burial-Ground No. 1 with Khwarezmian and Parthian Inscriptions. ACSS 9, no 1-2, 147-172. Luschey, H. 1939: Die Phiale (Bleicherode am Harz). Luschey, H. 1983: hrakien als ein Ort der Begegnung der Kelten mit der iranischen Metallkunst. In R.M. Boehmer and H. Hauptmann (eds.), Festschrift K. Bittel (Mainz), 313-329. Mahboubian, H. 1995: Treasures of the Mountains. he Art of the Medes (London). Mal’mberg, V.K. 1894: Pamyatniki grecheskogo i varvarskogo iskusstva, naidennÿe v kurgane Karagodeuashkh. In Lappo-Danilevskii A. and Mal’mberg, V. Drevnosti Yuzhnoi Rossii. Kurgan Karagodeuashkh. MAR 13 (St. Petersburg), 121-192. Mantsevich, A.P. 1966: Derevyannÿe sosudÿ skifskoi épokhi. ASGÉ 8, 23-38. Mantsevich, A. P. 1987: Kurgan Solokha. Publikatsiya odnoi kollektsii (Leningrad). Marchenko, I.I. 1996: Siraki Kubani (Krasnodar). Mayer, M. 1910: La coppa tarantina di argento dorato del Museo provinciale di Bari Commissione provinciale di archeologia e storia patria. Documenti e Monografie 9 (Bari). Meshcheryakov, D.V., Fedorov, V.K. and Yablonskii, L.T. 2006: Staraya kollektsiya nakhodok iz Prokhorovki v svete noveishikh arkheologicheskikh issledovanii. RosArkh, no 1, 107-116. Moorey P.R.S. 1980: Cemeteries of the First Millenium B.C. at Deve Hüyük (Oxford). Mordvintseva, V.I. 1996: O vtorichnom ispol’zovanii akhemenidskikh blyud iz Prokhorovskogo kurgana. RosArkh, no 2, 155-160. Mordvinceva [Mordvintseva], V.I. 2001: Sarmatische Phaleren. Archäologie in Eurasien 11 (Rahden). Mordvintseva, V.I. 2005: Pontic Graphical Style on the Objects of Toreutic of the 2nd and 1st Centuries B.C. in the North Black Sea region. In he Black Sea Area in the System of the Hellenistic World. he 11th International Symposium on the Ancient History and Archaeology of the Black Sea Area. Vani, 26-29 September 2005. Abstracts of Papers (Tbilisi), 96-97. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 132 9/10/2009 8:52:18 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 133 Mordvintseva, V.I. and Zaitsev, Yu.P. 2003: he Nogaichik Burial-Mound in the Steppes of the Crimea. ACSS 9, no 3-4, 193-257. Moruzhenko, A.O. 1992: Skifskii kurgan Perederieva Mogila. Arkheologiya (Kiev) 4, 67-75. Moroujenko [Moruzhenko], A.A. 1994: Le kourgane scythe de Perederieva Moguila. Les Dossiers d’Archéologie 194, 22-25. Mozolevskii, B.N. 1980: Skifskie kurganÿ v okrestnostyakh g. Ordzhonikidze na Dnepropetrovshchine (raskopki 1972-1975 gg.). In A.I. Terenozhkin (ed.), Skifiya i Kavkaz (Kiev), 70-154. Muhly, J.D. 2004: Rec. ad. G. Lanfranchi, M. Roaf, R. Rollinger, Continuity of Empire (?). Assyria, Media, Persia. Proceedings of the International Meeting in Padua, 26th-28th April 2001. History of the Ancient Near East. Monographs, V. Padova: S.a.r.g.o.n., 2003. Pp. 468; pls. 22. $100.00 (pb). Bryn Mawr Classical Review 11.11. Muscarella, O.W. 1980a: Excavated and Unexcavated Achaemenid Art. In B. Schmandt-Besserat (ed.), Ancient Persia. he Art of an Empire (Malibu, Undena), 23-42. Muscarella, O.W. 1980b: Bronze and Iron. Ancient Near Eastern Artifacts in he Metropolitan Museum of Arts (New York). Nachod, H. 1918: Die Silberschale aus Tarent in Bari. RM 33, 103-124. Odobesco, A. 1899-1900: Le trésor de Pétrossa 1 (Leipzig). Özgen, I. and Öztürk, J. 1996: Heritage Recovered. he Lydian Treasure (Istanbul). Pfrommer, M. 1987: Studien zu alexandrinischer und grossgriechischer Toreutik frühhellenistischer Zeit. Archäologische Forschungen 16 (Berlin). Pfrommer, M. 1993: Metalwork from the Hellenized East (Malibu). Pfrommer, M. 1999: Alexandria. Im Schatten der Pyramiden (Mainz). Reade, J. 1986: A Hoard of Silver Currency from Achaemenid Babylonia. Iran 24, 79-90. Reinsberg, C. 1980: Studien zur hellenistischen Toreutik. Die antiken Gipsabgüsse aus Memphis. Hildesheimer ägyptologische Beiträge 9 (Hildesheim). Rostovtsev, M.I. 1918: Kurgannÿe nachodki Orenburgskoi oblasti épochi rannego i pozdnego éllinizma. MAR 37 (Petrograd). Rostovtzeff [Rostovtsev], M.I. 1922: Iranians and Greeks in South Russia (Oxford). Rostowzew [Rostovtsev], M. 1931: Skythien und der Bosporus (Berlin). Rubensohn, O. 1911: Hellenistisches Silbergerät in antiken Gipsabgüssen (Berlin). Rusyaeva, A. S. 1999: Zolotoi predmet ritual’no-kul’tovogo naznacheniya iz kurgana Perederieva Mogila. In M.Yu. Vakhtina, V.Yu. Zuev, E.Ya. Rogov and V.A. Khrshanovskii (eds.), Bosporskii fenomen: grecheskaya kul’tura na periferii antichnogo mira. Materialÿ mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii (St. Petersburg), 208-215. Salzmann, D. 1982: Untersuchungen zu den antiken Kieselmosaiken (Berlin). Savel’eva, T.V. and Smirnov, K.F. 1972: Blizhnevostochnÿe drevnosti na Yuzhnom Urale. VDI, no 3, 106-123. Savostina, E.A. 2001: he ‘Bosporan Style’ and Motifs from Herodotus in Plastic Arts from the Northern Pontic Area. In E.A. Savostina (ed.), Bosporan Battle Relief (Amazonomachia?) (Moscow and St. Petersburg), 304-323. Schefold, K. 1938: Der skythische Tierstil in Südrussland. Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua 12, 1-78. Schiltz, V. 1994: Die Skythen und andere Steppenvölker (Munich). Schwarzmaier, A. 1997: Griechische Klappspiegel. Untersuchungen zu Typologie und Stil. Athenische Mitteilungen 15, Beiheft (Berlin). Segall, B. 1965: Alexandria und Tarent. Eine tarentinische Fundgruppe des frühen Hellenismus. AA, 553-588. Shchukin, M.B. 2001: O falarakh tak nazÿvaemogo greko-baktriiskogo stilya. In N.A. Zakharova (ed.), Yuvelirnoe iskusstvo i material’naya kul’tura (St. Petersburg), 137-161. ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 133 9/10/2009 8:52:18 PM 134 M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 Skvorcov, N.B. und Skripkin, A.S. 2006: Eine sarmatische Adelbestattung aus dem Wolgograder Wolgagebiet. Eurasia Antiqua 12, 251-267. Smirnov, J.I. 1934: Der Schatz von Achalgori (Tiflis). Sokol’skii, N.I. 1969: Antichnÿe derevyannÿe sarkofagi Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. SAI G1-17 (Moscow). Sotheby’s 6937, 1996: Fine Egyptian, Classical and Western Asiatic Antiquities and Islamic Works of Art. Sale 6937. December, 16th, 1996 (New York). Stern, E. 1982: Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period, 538-322 B.C. (Warminster). Summerer, L. 2003: Achämenidische Silberfunde aus der Umgebung von Sinope. ACSS, 9, no 1-2, 17-42. Treister, M.Yu. 2006: Phalarÿ iz stanitsÿ Uspenskoi (k voprosu o vremeni poyavleniya bol’shikh naplechnÿkh falarov éllinisticheskogo vremeni). Drevnosti Bospora 10, 429-462. Treister, M. 2007a: he Toreutics of Colchis in the 5th-4th centuries BC. Local traditions, outside influences, innovations. ACSS 13, no 1-2, 67-107. Treister, M. 2007b: Ziselierte und gravierte Ornamente. In V. Mordvinceva and M. Treister, Toreutik und Schmuck im nördlichen Schwarzmeergebiet des 2. Jhs. v. Chr. – 2. Jhs. n. Chr. (Simferopol, Bonn), 252-262. Van Rijn, M.: A Report on the “Western Cave Treasure” (Kalmakarreh Cave, Luristan) (www. michelvanrijn.nl/westerncave.htm). Vickers, M. 1989: Panagyurishte, Dalboki, Loukovit and Rogozen: Questions of Metrology and Status. In B.F. Cook (ed.), he Rogozen Treasure. Papers of the Anglo-Bulgarian Conference, 12 March 1987 (London), 101-111. Vickers, M. 2002: “Shed no Tears”? hree Studies in Ancient Metrology. In A.J. Clark, J. Gaunt and B. Gilman (eds.), Essays in Honor of Dietrich von Bothmer (Amsterdam), 333-338. Vickers, M. and Gill, D. 1994: Artful Crafts. Ancient Greek Silverware and Pottery (Oxford). von Bothmer, D. 1984: A Greek and Roman Treasury. BMetMus 42, no 1 (New York). Webster T.B.L. 1995: Monuments illustrating New Comedy. 3rd ed. rev. and enlarged by J.R. Green and A. Seeberg. BICS Suppl. 50 (London). Wuilleumier, P. 1968: Tarente des origines à la conquête romaine. BEFAR 148 (Paris). Yablonskii, L. T., Davis- Kimbell, J. and Demidenko, Yu.V. 1995: Raskopki kurgannÿkh mogil’nikov Pokrovka 1 i Pokrovka 2 v 1994 g. In L.T. Yablonskiï (ed.), Kurganÿ levoberezhnogo Ileka 3 (Moscow), 9-47. Yablonskii, L.T. and Meshcheryakov, D.V. 2005: Raskopki kurganov u d. Prochorovka (predvaritel’noe soobshchenie). KSIA 219, 64-77. Zahn, R. 1967: Ein goldener Becher in der Ermitage zu Leningrad. JdI 82, 15-26. Zasetskaya, I.P. 1966: Naznachenie veshchei Fedulovskogo klada. ASGÉ 7, 28-36. Zournatzi, A. 2000: Inscribed Silver Vessels of the Odryssian Kings: Gifts, Tribute and the Diffusion of the Forms of “Achaemenid” Metalware in hrace. AJA 104, 683-706. Zuev, V.Yu. 1998: Prokhorovskie kurganÿ v Yuzhnom Priural’e i problema khronologii rannesarmatskoï kul’turÿ. Summary of the PhD hesis (St. Petersburg). Zuev, V.Yu. 2000: Problemÿ khronologii prokhorovskoï kul’turÿ i kurganÿ u derevni Prokhorovka. In V.Yu. Zuev (ed.), Ι ΙΑ. Pamyati Yuriya Viktorovicha Andreeva (St. Petersburg), 304-330. Zuev, V.Yu. 2003: Materialÿ k istorii izucheniya prochorovskikh kurganov v Orenburzh’e (St. Petersburg). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 134 9/10/2009 8:52:18 PM M. Y. Treister / Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 15 (2009) 95-135 135 Abbreviations AA ACSS AJA AMI ASGÉ BEFAR BICS BMetMus JdI KSIA RM RosArkh SAI SGÉ VDI Archäologischer Anzeiger. Beiblatt zum Jahrbuch des DEutschen Archäologischen Instituts (Berlin). Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia. An International Journal of Comparative Studies in History and Archaeology (Leiden, Boston, Cologne). American Journal of Archaeology (Princeton). Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (Berlin). Arkheologicheskii sbornik Gosudarstvennogo Érmitazha (St. Petersburg). Bibiothèque des Ècoles Française d’Athènes et de Rome (Athens, Rome, (Paris). Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies (London). Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York). Jahrbuch des Deutschen Arcäologischen Instituts (Berlin). Kratkie soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii Akademii Nauk SSSR (Moscow). Rheinisches Museum (Frankfurt a.M.). Rossiiskaya Arkheologiya (Moscow). Svod Arkheologicheskikh Istochnikov (Moscow). Sbornik Gosudarstvennogo Érmitazha (St. Petersburg). Vestnik Drevnei Istorii (Moscow). ACSS 15,1-2_f4_95-136.indd 135 9/10/2009 8:52:18 PM