We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015
The Caucasus is by no means a homogeneous region. It consists of a very high mountain-chain, the main parts of which reach to a height of over 5000 metres, with others of 1000–1600 metres. Forming an isthmus between two seas, the Asiatic Caspian and the Mediterranean Black Sea, it is open to both eastern and western influence. There is no distinct boundary between its northern part and the endless Eurasiatic grasslands, and in the south it is connected with the Armenian and Anatolian highlands. South of the mountain-chain the Caucasus has a Mediterranean climate: vines, rice and tea are cultivated and it is rich in metals. North of the mountain-range also the soil is very fertile, especially in the valley of the Kuban river. There, in the northeast corner of the Euxine, prehistoric culture flourished very early and reached a high level. I shall here give an outline sketch of its character, and especially of the so-called Kuban culture of the Early Bronze Age, which takes its name from the Kuban river. This river flows into the Black Sea, but its upper course lies in the high mountains not far from the Elbruz. It has many tributaries, especially on the left, the Caucasian, side. Among these the Laba, the Belaya and the Abin may be mentioned.
1 Rostovtzev, G.M.I., ‘‘L’âge du cuivre dans le Caucase septentrional.’ Revue archéologique, 1920.Google Scholar
2 A more detailed description of the Caucasian dolmens will be published in the 9th volume of the Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua (=ESA) in Helsinki-Helsingfors.
3 Leshchenko, A., ‘Materials concerning the decorations on the Northwest Caucasian dolmens.’ Anthropologiu, 4, 237ff. Kiev, 1930. (In the Ukraine language).Google Scholar
4 Ivashchenko, M., ‘Beiträge zur Vorgeschichte Abchasiens.’ ESA, 7, 1932. Google Scholar
5 Ochót of the Imp. Archaeological Commission (=Ochót) 1898, p. 33ff, and pls. I-VI.Google Scholar Gordon Childe, V. The Dawn of European civilization, p. 140.Google Scholar
6 Ochót, 1897, p. 2ff ; Rostovtzev, op cit. note I.
7 Materials concerning Russian Archaeology (=MAR) 34. Petrograd, 1914.
8 Liverpool Annals of Archaeology, 6, Google Scholar pls. 19, 21, 24, 25 ; VII, pl. 22. Analogies also from north Persia. Cf. Supplement to the Bull. of American Instit. for Persian Art and Archaeology, vol. 2.Google Scholar
9 Hrozny, B., ‘Histoire et progrès du déchiffrement des textes.’ Archiv. Orientálny, 1931, p. 272ff. Google Scholar
10 Finskt Museum, 1924, p. 1ff.Google Scholar ‘Europaeus–Äyräpää’ in ESA, 8, 1932.Google Scholar
11 ‘L’âge du cuivre dans la Russie centrale.’ in Suomen Muinairnuisto yhdistyksen Aikukuuskirja, 32, 1918.Google Scholar
12 Ebert, Reallexifion: Göhlitz, IIefmscicrf, Züschen.
