The city, whose name is translated from Greek as “beautiful harbor,” arose on the shores of Uzkaya Bay in the 4th century BC. e. By the end of the century, he became dependent on Chersonesos, and in the 3rd century BC. e. - into the sphere of Scythian interests. The strengthening of the Scythians forced the Greeks to significantly update the defensive line of the settlement, building into it a fortress wall with towers near the bay. However, the measures taken did not save the city - in the 2nd century BC. e. it nevertheless passed into the hands of the Scythians. At the end of the 2nd century BC. e. Kalos Limen became part of the power of Mithridates VI, but after his death it returned to the Scythians. The end of the settlement dates back to the 1st century AD. BC: it is believed that it was completely destroyed by the nomadic Sarmatian tribes invading from the northern steppes.

Kulchuk

High relief “Feasting Hercules”, found in 2008 at the Kulchuk settlement. Stored in the Kalos Limen museum in the village of Chernomorskoye

The settlement on the southern coast of the Tarkhankut Peninsula (2.5 km south of the modern village of Gromovo) arose in the 4th century BC. e. and became one of the largest in the Chersonesos state. Like many other Black Sea cities, it was forced to repel constant attacks by Scythian tribes that occupied some areas of the steppe Crimea. During the Greco-Scythian conflicts, Kulchuk changed hands several times, but nevertheless remained a major trading point. The Scythians built their own fortification system here - a rampart and a moat lined with stone. The last owners of the settlement in the ancient era were the Scythians - with them in the 1st century AD. e. life in this place died out, as researchers believe, due to drought and the threat from the Sarmatian tribes. In the Middle Ages, when Crimea was under the control of the Khazar Kaganate, a settlement arose again on Kulchuk, now Khazar.

Belyaus

Another settlement founded in the 4th century BC. e. immigrants from Chersonesus. It was a block of five estates, fenced with stone walls, along which outbuildings were located. At the beginning of the 2nd century BC. e. Belyaus was captured by the Scythians, who, as in Kulchuk, built a rampart and a ditch lined with stone. In the second half of the 1st century BC. e. life on Belyaus was dying out - a few inhabitants reappeared in the settlement only in the 3rd century AD. e. During the Great Migration of Peoples (IV-V centuries AD), the Huns stayed in this place, and the last inhabitants of Belyaus were the Khazars.

Kara-Tobe

Defensive tower

The settlement on the western coast of Crimea was, like many others, founded in the 4th century BC. e. and then included in the Chersonesos state. But, unlike other cities, early Greek buildings were practically not preserved here: the surrounding areas were poor in stone, and therefore the buildings that had served their purpose were immediately dismantled in order to erect new structures. At the beginning of the 2nd century BC. e. the settlement fell into the sphere of influence of the Scythians, and Scythian buildings arose on the site of Greek estates. The Scythians were driven out by the troops of Mithridates VI, but after the death of the Pontic king they returned to the Black Sea settlements, including Kara-Tobe. Around 20 AD e. the settlement died in a fire - the residents left their homes in a hurry, not even having time to save their utensils. After this, life on Kara-Toba was restored, but never reached its previous level. During the confrontation between the Scythians and Rome, which in the third quarter of the 1st century AD. e. came to the aid of Chersonese, the residents left Kara-Tobe without a fight. At the end of the 1st century AD. e. a small village arose there again, but at the beginning of the 2nd century AD. e. the life of the settlement finally died out.

Chersonese Tauride

The polis was founded in 529 BC by immigrants from Heraclea Pontus and existed for a long time as a Greek colony. Over time, it turned into the capital of the state, to which many Black Sea cities submitted. But the problem was the Scythian tribes, with whom Chersonesus was forced to wage constant wars, which caused enormous harm to its economy. In the end, Chersonesus resorted to the help of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator - and was eventually absorbed by his power. After the death of Mithridates, Chersonesus became part of the Roman Empire, and in the 5th century AD it submitted to Byzantium. However, despite the consistent dependence on three empires, the city of Chersonesos remained the largest political and cultural center of the Northern Black Sea region until the beginning of the 13th century. With the weakening of Byzantium, Muslim and nomadic tribes became more active in the region, who repeatedly plundered the city, until in 1399 the Golden Horde temnik Edigei completely destroyed Chersonesos.

Panticapaeum

Ruins of the prytaneum, a city council in ancient Greece

The city on the shores of the Cimmerian Bosporus, on the site of modern Kerch, was founded in the 7th century BC. e. came from Miletus. In the 540s BC. e. Panticapaeum led a military confederation that gathered the surrounding Greek city states, which found it difficult to resist the nomads attacking them alone. In the 5th century BC. e. The Archeanactid dynasty reigned in Panticapaeum, and then the Spartocid dynasty, which turned the confederation into the Bosporan state, and Panticapaeum into a huge prosperous city (its territory grew to 100 hectares). At the end of the 2nd century BC. e. The Bosporan kingdom lost its former power and submitted to the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator. However, this did not greatly damage Panticapaeum, which now became the capital of another state. Mithridates annexed a huge territory to his kingdom - in addition to the Black Sea region, it included Asia Minor, Colchis and Greater Armenia - but began to be at enmity with Rome. The wars that began were unsuccessful for him - as a result, fleeing from Roman troops, Mithridates took refuge in his own palace in Panticapaeum and, seeing that enemy troops were approaching the city, committed suicide.

Almost simultaneously with the appearance of the Scythians in the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region, in the 7th century. BC e. The colonization by the Greeks of the eastern and southern coasts of Crimea, the western and northwestern coasts of the Sea of ​​Azov and some regions of the Northern Black Sea region, mainly along the Dnieper-Bug estuaries, begins.

Meotida, as the ancient Greeks called the Sea of ​​Azov and the Pontus Euxine (Black Sea), attracted them with the wealth of fish, mild climate and convenient bays for ships.

Apparently, not all Greeks lived well in their homeland. Some were oppressed by rich and noble landowners; others were prevented from engaging in crafts and trading their products; still others were involved in rebellions and protests against their masters; the peasants suffered from a lack of land, so they had to seek refuge outside their homeland, in remote areas, and they moved to the Crimea, the Northern Black Sea region.

The metropolis of the first Greek colonists of Crimea was Miletus, which itself was a Greek colony on the Black Sea coast in Asia Minor. Then immigrants began to arrive from other cities of Asia Minor - Heracles, Meot and Teos. And even later, the metropolitan authorities began to send their guilty citizens here from Atena and other Greek cities.

Initially, the Greeks founded small coastal settlements, such as trading posts, and engaged in trade and exchange with the local population, attracting them with bright fabrics, unknown objects, and women's jewelry.

It is unlikely that the local population greeted them enthusiastically. The first colonists in Crimea had to meet the Taurians, who inhabited the coastal strip at that time. Many Taurians felt the danger that threatened them and did not want to voluntarily part with their land, so the meetings of the first colonialists sometimes ended tragically. Therefore, when settling on the sea coast of Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region, the Greeks at first, for the sake of safety and to prevent unnecessary clashes with the local population, did not move far from the sea coast. In addition, in order to interest the aborigines, they resorted to cunning; at the first stage, trade was carried out with some benefit for them, which lulled their vigilance and gained trust.

The trade exchange gradually grew, the local population got used to the traders arriving from overseas, and, not seeing the danger, they began to calmly treat their settlements.

Over the centuries, these small settlements with berths for small merchant ships began to grow into larger ones, and over time they formed powerful fortified cities. They settled primarily at the mouths big rivers or in convenient sea bays. IN different time Over the centuries, such large colony cities arose: at the mouth of the Bug - Olbia, at the mouth of the Dniester - Tire, at the mouth of the Don - Tanape, and on the site of modern Kerch - Panticopeia, opposite Panticapaeum across the strait on the Taman Peninsula - Phanagoria. Almost simultaneously with Panticapaeum on the eastern coast of Crimea - Feodosia, somewhat later Myrmekia, Mimphaeum, Nymphaeum, Taritaka, Chimeric and a number of smaller cities.

Chersonesus appears in the west of Crimea, not far from modern Evpatoria - Kirkinitad, which became a transshipment trade base with the metropolis in the west of Crimea.

All these cities became the main Greek colonies and centers of trade, the development of crafts and the spread of ancient culture.

Each of them arose at different times and each entered history in its own way.

Panticapaeum, Feodosia, Olbia arose in the 6th century. BC, Kerkinitida (Evpatoria) - at the junction of the 6th and 5th centuries. The founding of these cities dates back to the period when Greek merchants from Miletus began to actively develop the coast of Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region. As they grew, these cities turned into city-policies, and their relations with the metropolis began to develop as partnerships, and they became less dependent on it.

PANTICAPEA - founded by Greeks who came from Miletus, the largest city in Asia Minor at that time. It is believed that Panticapaeum also had a prehistory. Even the name of the city indicates this; it is not of Greek origin at all. It is believed that in one of the ancient local dialects it means “fish path”. The city was known under the name “Pantikapaeus” twenty-six centuries ago, but it existed as a small settlement much earlier. Now in its place stands the city of Kerch. Before that, depending on whose power it was under, it was called Bosporus, Cherchio, Korchev, Cherzeti.

During its existence, this city was an intermediary transshipment base between Scythia and Greece, a center of international trade in the area east coast Crimea, a fortress that restrained and repelled the onslaught of nomads, was the capital of the Bosporan kingdom or just a seedy provincial town.

But it always remained the center of the Kerch Peninsula and everything that happened on this peninsula was connected with this city.

THEODOSIA. There are several different assumptions about the beginning of the city, most of them are similar to legends. One of them says: in the 6th century. BC. Milesian merchants sailed on ships to the shores of the Crimea. At sea they were caught in a strong storm and heavy ships loaded with goods were tossed by the wind like splinters. Desperate merchants lost all hope of salvation and prepared for death, and suddenly, the ships were thrown into a cozy sunny bay, where there was no storm, and on the high shore there were white houses of a small village. Not believing their salvation, the joyful merchants raised their hands to the sky and shouted: “Oh, Theodosius!”, which translated from Greek meant: “Oh, given by God!” This enthusiastic cry remained the new name of the small village on the high bank, which was previously called Ardavda.

The landed merchants founded their colony here, calling it Feodosia. The convenient location of the city on the shore of a saving bay, on a busy trade route, quickly promoted Feodosia to one of the major ports of the world. The city, with its grandeur and luxury, began to compete with the best ancient cities of the world.

According to Strabo, the port could accommodate up to 100 ships. Wheat alone was exported through this port annually up to 22,500 tons.

KERKINITIDA is a city of ancient Greek colonialists, it was founded by them on the territory of a convenient bay in the west of the Crimean Peninsula, so soon after its foundation it became a transshipment trading base for Greek merchants with the metropolis.

On the western outskirts of the city of Evpatoria, near the children's sanatorium "Chaika", the remains of an ancient settlement founded by the Greeks have been preserved. It is believed that at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 5th centuries. BC. During the Greek colonization of the western coast of Crimea, the ancient city of Kerkinitida arose on this site. It became a major port trading with Athens, Sinop, Rhodes and Crimean cities Chersonesus Panticapaeum. The first written reports about him belong to Hecataeus of Miletus, then they are mentioned by Herodotus, Ptolemy, Arrian.

On the territory of the settlement, archaeologists discovered unique works of ancient masters - a bronze sculpture of an Amazon and a bas-relief of Hercules, which speak of the high culture of the ancient inhabitants of Kerkinitis. In the 4th century. BC. The city became part of the agricultural chora (district) of ancient Chersonesos.

OLVIA was founded on the shore of the Dnieper-Bug estuary. Archaeologists found its remains near the village of Parutino, south of the city of Nikolaev.

During excavations of all the above cities, the remains of residential areas, defensive walls, towers, gates, burials, many household items and women's jewelry were found. In addition, during excavations in Olbia, the remains of temples, artisans' workshops, remains of baths and an agora were discovered.

CIMMERICK - also founded in the 5th century. BC. on the southern shore of the Kerch Strait, named after the Cimmerian Bosporus. It was a connecting port with the Taman Peninsula of the Caucasus. Remains of defensive walls, houses, and utility structures were found.

TANAIS - founded in the first quarter of the 3rd century. BC e. at the mouth of the Don River. This is confirmed by excavations of the Nedvigov settlement by the Nizhne-Don archaeological expedition of the Ukrainian SSR. Many amphorae, clay vessels for wine and grain, and roofing tiles with the marks of masters were found. These finds allow us to draw a conclusion about the economic and trade connections of Tanais with the cities of the Bosporan kingdom and the metropolis.

The descendants of the founders of these cities, modern Greeks, can be proud of the courage and dedication of their ancestors, who founded new lands - the coasts of Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region, bringing them closer to culture ancient Hellas, which at that time stood at a high level of world civilization. During colonization, they were more humane and tolerant of the local population, compared to other conquerors.

Hellenic civilization spread not only among the subject peoples, but also among their neighboring peoples and, above all, among the Scythians.

From the first years after the settlement of Greek merchants, the pioneer Greeks in the Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region, they immediately began to enter into trade contacts with the early Scythians who appeared from the East. Initially, they treated the Scythians arrogantly, considering them “barbarians,” putting into this word a concept meaning “a person with incomprehensible speech.” Moreover, the Greeks classified as “barbarians” everyone who did not speak their language and led a lifestyle that, in their opinion, was less cultural than they were.

But centuries passed and the attitude towards the Scythians changed, also because many of them accepted what was useful from the Greeks and what they considered “cultural” for themselves, thus enriching their lives with examples of Greek culture, thereby raising their rating in the face of the Greeks . In addition, it was profitable to trade with them, mediating with war-ravaged Athens.

They bought grain, animal skins, wool, honey, fish, and timber at a cheap price, but sold it to the metropolis at a higher price. The Scythians were sold beautiful weapons, various household items, items for decorating Scythian dwellings, painted vases, grape wine, olive oil - and much more, without which the Scythians, having entered the stage of a higher culture, could no longer do without, bought in Greece much more cheaper.

Having come into closer contact with the Scythians, Greek merchants began to penetrate far to the north with their goods, covering the lands of the modern Kiev region, Poltava region and Kharkov region. For example, in the Lubyanka region the remains of Greek temples were found: Dionysus, Apollo, Artemis, which indicates that there were already many Greek colonists in these areas.

During archaeological excavations in Scythia, the remains of ancient settlements and burial grounds found coins of Greek Black Sea cities, Greek painted dishes for grain, wine and oil, and jewelry items made by Greek craftsmen. This indicates that the peoples who lived here, purchasing goods from the Greeks, gained culture from them, learned the art of Greek craftsmen, and various crafts. Some tribes completely switched to their customs and accepted their religious beliefs.

All Greek colonial cities were built according to the model and, as it were, according to the tradition of the metropolis. They were small in area, compact city-policies (city-states). These were a kind of small independent republics with a center in the city and cultivated fields around, which provided the city with food. This affects Greek feature, expressed in dislike for large kingdoms and empires.

Each city-polis lived on its own, but in cases where they were threatened with serious danger from the outside, they united to jointly repel the enemy.

Bosporan Kingdom

Temporary unions of colonial cities more than once ensured their victories over a strong and treacherous enemy, but life predicted the need for closer unity and unification of individual cities into a single kingdom.

In 480 BC. On the initiative of the ruling elite of Panticapaeum, a large slave-owning state arose, named after the Cimmerian Bosporus Strait - the Bosporan Kingdom. It was named so because the lands on both banks of this strait came under the authority of the formed state.

Of the Meotian tribes, the largest were the Sinds, who settled on the northeastern coast of the Black Sea and the Taman Peninsula. In the V -IV centuries. BC. it created the independent state of Sindiku, which also included the Dandaria and Doskh tribes.

However, the state of Sindika did not last long; with the formation of the Bosporan kingdom, it became part of it.

The Greek cities, having united into a single state, could already resist external, stronger enemies - tribes of wild nomads and Scythians, pressing from the east and north, and, to some extent, dictate their terms to them.

The first rulers of the Bosporan kingdom were from the Archeanactid dynasty, who were in power from 480 to 438. BC. Initially, the rulers, in imitation of Athens, bore the republican title - archon, and later began to call themselves kings. Little is known about the reign of this dynasty and its kings, except that they were the creators of the Bosporan kingdom with a slave-owning form of government.

In 438 BC, as a result of a coup d'etat, the Spartokid dynasty came to power, the first king of which was Spartok I, the organizer of the coup.

The Spartokid dynasty was of Thracian origin, from the local ellised nobility, but came from Thrace. Spartok I, having become king, created a royal guard, staffed mainly by Thracians.

The most prominent statesmen of this dynasty, who called themselves kings, whose names have been preserved by history, except for Spartok I (438-433 BC), were Satyr, Leukon I (399-369 BC) , Perisad I, Persid I and his son Eumelus, who came to the throne as a result of the strife.

Life on the very edge of the ancient world was still tense and restless for the Bosporan kingdom and took place in constant struggle with the warlike Scythian nomads who settled in the Crimea and the Tauri. This tension especially intensified after the Sarmatians appeared in the Northern Black Sea region, who ousted the Scythians and began to directly threaten the Bosporan kingdom. Therefore, having united into a single state, it was easier for them to organize defense: build defensive structures, erect walls, ramparts, ditches, and maintain military garrisons.

The unification of various ethnic groups into a single state contributed to their cultural and economic rapprochement, served as an impetus for the development of craft production at a higher level in cities, agriculture and livestock farming in rural areas, increased trade volumes with neighbors, distant countries, including with the metropolis.

An active period of ethnic and cultural rapprochement of the Bosporan kingdom began. This rapprochement was especially noted between the Greeks and Scythians. Mixed, so-called Hellenic-Scythian settlements began to form.

This period in the history of the Bosporan kingdom is well confirmed by archaeological finds. Archaeological exploration of Crimea began shortly after its conquest by Russia. The first excavations were carried out in Kerch in 1816-1817, which provided a lot of new information about the history of Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region. This was followed by excavations of other ancient cities and burial mounds of Crimea. Based on these finds, found during excavations at the site of ancient Panticapaeum, Chersonesus, Olbia and other cities of the Bosporan Kingdom, one can judge the high culture of this period, as well as the interconnection of the peoples of the Bosporan Kingdom, their trade, economic and cultural relationships with the outside world.

An equally important discovery was made during excavations of the ancient Bosporan city of Mimphaeum, south of Kerch; in 1982, multi-colored plaster was discovered that had fallen from the wall of one of the sanctuaries, built in the first half of the 3rd century. BC. On the plaster, decorated with transverse bright yellow and red stripes in the center, various inscriptions have been preserved, among which there are lengthy texts relating to the gods Aphrodite and Apollo, the patrons of the seas. The fresco also has many different drawings, which are dominated by sailing ships. The inscriptions reflect aspects of the private and public life of the ancient Nymphaeus during the reign of Perisada II. The main place in the fresco is occupied by a warship - a trireme, a vessel with three tiers of oars, called "Isis", named so, as can be seen, in honor of the goddess Isis.

There is reason to believe that the ship was a diplomatic vessel that brought Egyptian ambassadors to the Bosporus to discuss some important issues of trade between Egypt and the Bosporus and strengthen friendly relations with the Bosporan kingdom.

Under the reign of kings from the Spartokid dynasty, the borders of the state expanded significantly to the east and west, its political and international position was strengthened, and crafts, art, and trade were further developed. Under them, the Bosporan kingdom maintained a well-armed and trained army. Many neighboring cities and peoples were captured and conquered.

Under Leukon I, Feodosia was annexed, which had a convenient location on a busy trade route and was at that time one of the major ports of the world. Ships not only of Greek merchants, but also of many other, even very distant countries, entered it with their goods. Feodosia competed with luxury and splendor of architecture best cities the ancient world. All this attracted the attention of the rulers of the Bosporan kingdom. Leucon I, seeing a serious rival and dangerous competitor in Theodosia, decided to put an end to this. In 393 BC. he took possession of the prosperous polis by force and annexed it to his state.

Under the Spartokids, a large and strong navy was created, with the help of which the Pont Euxine (Black Sea) was cleared of pirates who attacked ships sailing between the ports of the Bosporan kingdom and Hellas.

After this, the Bosporan kingdom not only continued the trade tradition of the city-states, but also intensified trade exchanges with the metropolis. Leucon I encouraged this trade in every possible way, but especially with bread. His decree is known, ordering first of all to load Greek ships and not impose duties on them. Strabo testifies: King Leukon sent 2,100,000 medimni of grain to Athens (a medimni is equal to 51.5 liters). In addition to bread, furs, animal skins, honey, wax, fish, domestic animals and cheap labor - slaves captured in battles with local and neighboring tribes - were sent to the metropolis.

In difficult circumstances for the metropolis, the Spartokids helped her, but they themselves, if necessary, resorted to her help. A profitable mutual assistance partnership has developed.

Under the Spartokids, the Bosporan kingdom reached great prosperity and power, especially its capital Panticapaeum. Having close ties with the metropolis and other cities and states of the ancient world, it was not inferior to them in beauty and architectural design. The center of the city was a 90 m high mountain, later named Mount Mithridates in honor of the late king Mithridates VI. The city was built around this mountain. As now, the mountain was surrounded by streets - terraces with retaining walls-crepids. At the top, surrounded by powerful walls, stood the Acropolis - the upper city. On the northern slope, a building for the city authorities was built - Prytanei. Panticapaeum had good water supply and sewerage. In fact, at that time Panticapaeum became the political and economic center of Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region.

The cultural flourishing of Panticapaeum is evidenced by finds during archaeological research. The frescoes of the Stasovsky crypt (as archaeologists called it) on the northern slope of the mountain depict battle scenes showing the battles of the Bosporans with the Tauri and Sarmatians.

Of particular interest is the fresco of the famous crypt of Demeter, the goddess of agriculture and fertility of the Hellenic world. This is an outstanding monument of painting of that era. It suffered greatly during the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945).

Having reached the apogee in the development of military power, the Bosporan rulers began to have ambitious plans: to unite all the Black Sea peoples under their rule.

But this was not destined to come true. First of all, because the cities that became part of the Bosporan kingdom still remained poleis (city-states). They recognized the central authority of Panticapaeum, but retained their self-government and even administrative and economic isolation. The rulers of these cities were not inclined to participate in the military adventures of the kings. In this sense, the Bosporan kingdom was more a union of isolated cities than a monarchical state.

The Bosporan kings achieved military power, but were unable to achieve the political unity of the city-states, and a city like Chersonesos completely separated from them into an independent republic.

This was the first and main obstacle to the implementation of the aggressive plans of the Spartokids.

The second obstacle was that the Bosporan kingdom was under the constant threat of invasion from the Sarmatians, who had captured the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region and came close to the Crimea.

The third obstacle was the emergence on the southern coast of the Black Sea and Asia Minor of a stronger Hellenic state - the Pontic Kingdom, whose rulers had the same aggressive plans.

To all this it must be added that the fulfillment of the aggressive desires of the Spartokids was hampered by constant military skirmishes with the Tauri, the Scythians, who formed their own state in the steppe part of the Crimea, and Chersonesus, which did not want to be subordinate to the Bosporan kingdom.

Agora - among the ancient Greeks - a national assembly, as well as the square where it took place. Temples, government buildings, and porticos with trading shops were built on the sides of the agora. (author's note)

Archon - in ancient Greece - the highest official in Athens. (author's note)

Isis - in ancient Greek mythology - the goddess of heaven, earth and hell - the wife of Ovaris. (author's note)

The first civilized people to settle in the Crimean lands were the ancient Greeks, or Hellenes. It was these people who made such a contribution to the development of all human civilization that cannot be overestimated. The influence of the ancient Greeks on the development of our peninsula is enormous.

The main reason for the resettlement of this people on the territory of the Northern Black Sea region was the search by low-income citizens for conditions for a normal life. The metropolis was overpopulated, there was no longer enough food and land for all free citizens, which gave rise to such a phenomenon as mass colonization. This movement dates back to the 7-6 centuries BC - the archaic era in the history of Ancient Greece. The first two waves of colonization affected lands close to Greece. The colonizers of the third wave crossed the Pont Euxine (the ancient Greek name of the Black Sea, translated as “Hospitable Sea”) and discovered fertile lands, an abundance of animals, birds, and fish. Being seafarers, the Greek settlers appreciated the local harbors and bays.

The first settlers who managed to create their own colonies on the territory of Crimea were the Ionian Greeks and the Dorian Greeks. It was they who, after some time, united other colonies around themselves and created two states - the Cimmerian Bosporus and the Tauride Chersonese.

The first city that the Hellenes founded in Crimea was Panticapaeum - present-day Kerch. The appearance of this city dates back to the turn of the 7th-6th centuries BC. A little later, in the 6th century BC, Feodosia was built, and the agricultural towns of Tiritaka, Parfeniy, Porfmiy, Myrmeky appeared on the Crimean coast of the Kerch Strait. The main inhabitants of these Hellenistic settlements were inhabitants of the western coast of Asia Minor (mainly from the Ionian city of Miletus) and the cities of the Aegean Sea.

Very quickly the colonists established their economic life: agriculture, cattle breeding, fishing and hunting developed; various crafts are emerging - construction, jewelry, metalworking, weaving, ceramics; the emergence of surplus products and goods makes it possible to establish trade with the metropolis and natural exchange with neighboring tribes. Already in the middle of the 6th century BC, their own coins were minted in Panticapaeum, and a little later - in other cities.

Gradually, the colonies, increasing territorially and in number of inhabitants, became cities and turned into small state policies. Their centers in the east of Crimea were Panticapaeum, Feodosia and Nymphaeum.

The threat of attack from barbarian tribes and economic interests became the reason for the unification of most of the cities of the Kerch Strait. The new state that emerged as a result of this unification was called the Cimmerian Bosporus. The first mention of this state belongs to the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus, who named the time of its birth - around 480 BC. This state is not only expanding, but also becoming ethnically diverse: in addition to the Greeks, it is inhabited by Scythians, Taurians, and on the other side of the Kerch Strait - Sindians and Maeotians.

Everything that the Greeks achieved in their historical homeland is widely used in Crimea. Urban planning, architecture, painting, philosophy, education, lawmaking, medicine, literature, theater, sports, high level development Agriculture and crafts - all this finds fertile soil on the Crimean land for application and distribution. Most likely, the Cimmerian Bosporus also included a settlement located on the site of the present Old Crimea. Numerous archaeological finds of Hellenistic origin and Panticapaean coins confirm this assumption.

At the end of the 4th century AD, after the invasion of the Huns, the Bosporus had to recognize their supremacy, and in the 6th century, the heiress of the fallen Roman Empire - Byzantium - subjugated these lands to itself.

In the southwestern part of Crimea there was another Hellenistic state - Tauride Chersonesos. Its center was Chersonesos (now Sevastopol), which was founded in the second half of the 5th century BC. colonists from Heraclea Pontica - a Dorian city on the southern coast of the Black Sea. The constant threat of attack from neighboring Tauri forced the settlers to quickly turn Chersonesos into a fortified city. The socio-economic development of the Chersonesos is taking place according to a scenario very similar to the development of their fellow countrymen, who mastered the Crimean lands a little earlier - the Bosporans. For a short time, Chersonesos was even under the Bosporan protectorate. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, Chersonesos became the center of Roman military occupation in Crimea. The city did not suffer from the Huns, since it was outside their routes of conquest. At the end of the 5th century, Chersonesos became part of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Greek colonization on the shores of the Black Sea proceeded, as mentioned above, in two ways. After repeated but random expeditions of individual brave sailors, who first became acquainted with the conditions of navigation on the Black Sea and its harbors (memories of these expeditions, clothed in the form of myth by Greek creative imagination, were preserved in the epic of the Argonauts and in the part of the Odyssey dependent on this epic) , the systematic exploitation of the Pontus Euxine, as the Greeks called the Black Sea, by Greek, mainly Asia Minor, navigators begins. In the 8th century the first trading posts and fishing stations appear on the southern coast; starting from the 7th century, when Persia begins to grow stronger, when it turns into a world power and gives this opportunity Greek cities develop widespread activity, these trading posts and stations grow into real cities with ever stronger and growing trade (Sinop, Amis, Trebizond, and later Dorian Heraclea). In parallel with this, from the 7th century, i.e., from the time of the growth and strengthening of the Scythian power, the same process begins on the northern shore, and here, too, fishing stations and trading posts initially appeared, turning into real cities only from the 6th century. BC
Greek navigators on the northern shore of the Black Sea chose mainly the mouths of large southern Russian rivers, which in their estuaries provided faithful shelter for Greek ships and at the same time were extremely rich in large and expensive river fish. The same fish wealth was found in abundance on the shores of the Kerch Strait and on the coast of the Sea of ​​Azov, where there were a number of harbors convenient for Greek sailors. The main colonizing activities of the Greeks of Asia Minor were concentrated in these two areas.
In the western part, Tiras arose at the mouth of the Dniester and Olviy at the Bug and Dnieper estuaries, in the eastern part, where, along with Miletus, the colonizer of the western part north coast Black Sea, Theos, Mytilene and Klazomenae worked energetically, more and more wealthy settlements appeared - Phanagoria, Hermonassa, Sind port, etc. east coast Kerch Strait, Feodosiya, Nymphaeum and Panticapaeum, not to mention less major cities, on the west. All these cities, in turn, populated with their trading posts the nearest points convenient for fishing and trade. For example, the city of Tanais, which arose at the mouth of the Don, is considered a colony of Panticapaeum.
All this enormous colonial work in the west and east was done in a relatively short period of time, during the era of magnificent prosperity of the Asia Minor coast - in the 7th and, especially, in the 6th century. BC
All these colonies did not form one whole. All the past of the northern Black Sea coast and geographical conditions Its separate parts sharply divided these colonies into two groups: western and eastern.
In the West, the leading role naturally belonged to the Milesian colony of Olbia, which was conveniently located in the Bug Estuary and thereby concentrated in its harbor all the products that were rafted to the sea along the Dnieper and the Bug. From it, as from a natural center, cultural Greek influences and works of Greek workshops moved along both named rivers, mainly along the Dnieper, where Greek influence met with the old prehistoric culture, which was discussed above.
The situation on the shores of the Kerch Strait was more complicated. The old culture here was concentrated mainly along the course of the Kuban, the delta of which - the Taman Peninsula (originally an island or, rather, a multi-island - Polynesia) would naturally play the role of Olbia in the west. But the Kuban delta is very complex, changeable and unsuitable for regular navigation; The sea coast of the Taman Peninsula does not have good harbors and therefore cannot serve as a center for all trade of the Sea of ​​​​Azov and the rivers flowing into it.
The European shore of the Kerch Strait was more convenient for navigation. Ancient Panticapaeum (now Kerch), both in ancient times and now, was a natural center for stopping and transshipping goods moving from the Sea of ​​Azov further along the Black Sea. The port of Feodosia, on the other hand, was the best access to the sea for the works of the northern and northeastern part of the steppe Crimea.
Naturally, therefore, the dispute for primacy had to go between Taman Phanagoria, the best and most convenient port of the Kuban delta, Panticapaeum and Feodosia. It was predetermined in favor of Panticapaeum by the fact that. The main importance for trade with Greece was not so much the products of the Crimea and Kuban with Taman, but the Don and Azov fish, cattle products of the Don steppes and those products of the Urals, Siberia and Turkestan, as well as central Russia, which went along the large eastern caravan route and in the estuaries The Don River came into contact with the Mediterranean waterway for the first time. Tanais, which arose naturally at the mouth of the Don, the final point of this route, could not play a decisive and independent role. This role naturally belonged to the one who would own the Kerch Strait and have the opportunity to release or not release goods moving from the Sea of ​​Azov into the wide waters of the Black Sea.
Of the cities near the Kerch Strait, the only one that combined all the advantages for owning the Kerch Strait was Panticapaeum. Its position is most bottleneck strait, its calm wide roadstead, the city’s acropolis, fortified by nature, extended into the sea (now the so-called Mount Mithridates), comparative wealth fresh water did not allow anyone to enter into successful competition with him.
A third smaller and less important group of Greek cities in southern Russia were the Greek settlements on the southern and southwestern coast of the Crimea. The mountainous southern coast of Crimea does not have convenient natural ports, and neither does the steppe western coast of Crimea. But the places near the Sevastopol Bay are extremely convenient for navigation, both the Sevastopol roadstead itself and the neighboring smaller and less protected bays, which are, however, very suitable for sailing and rowing ships. The Greeks could not not use these harbors. During the long and dangerous voyage along the coast of Crimea, Greek ships needed a place for a long and quiet anchorage. This is how Chersonesus arose, initially, probably, as an Ionian maritime station.
We must, however, take into account that this station could and should have acquired independent significance. First of all, all the products of the mountainous Crimea and the valleys associated with it were naturally sent here. Settlements along the western steppe coast of Crimea were naturally drawn to Chersonesus, primarily Kerkinitida, located near present-day Evpatoria. Finally, and most importantly, Sevastopol and Crimea have always been connected with the opposite southern shore of the Black Sea, with its network of flourishing Greek colonies. Having a harbor in Crimea was extremely important for these colonies, since this way they could get the products they needed from the steppe Crimea, mainly bread, which they themselves were never particularly rich in.
It is therefore clear that one of the Greek colonies on the southern coast of the Black Sea - the Dorian Heraclea, at the moment of its especially magnificent prosperity, took possession of the Ionian site in the Crimea and sent its colony there, thereby turning the previously insignificant Chersonesus into a large and relatively prosperous city, the fate of which is closely connected with the fate of the rest of the Greek world on the northern Black Sea coast.
Of the three complexes of Greek settlements outlined above, the group of Greek cities near the Kerch Strait, which the Greeks called the Cimmerian Bosporus, a group that we will call Bosporus and which is under This name was also known to the Greeks. Tiras and Olbia have always been and remained isolated advanced posts of the Greek world, surrounded on all sides by a sea of ​​tribes alien to them, numerous and constantly fed from outside by a new influx of forces. The Greek world was unable to create a strong, isolated Hellenized Greek power here. True, Olbia had a powerful cultural influence on the population closest to it. The lower reaches of the Dnieper and Bug were covered with a number of small agricultural and trading fortified settlements inhabited by half-Greek inhabitants. The areas closest to Olbia began intensive farming. Olbia's trade went far to the north. Not to mention the fact that Greek products saturated the flourishing middle Dnieper region and Poltava region, the influence of these products affects all the way to the distant Kama region and, perhaps, even Western Siberia and Altai.
But its significance and activities always depended entirely on its neighbors. As long as there was a strong Scythian kingdom, Olbia, dependent on it, could freely develop, enriching both itself and the Scythians. Its especially brilliant period was the 6th century. BC, when Olbia directly transferred, under the protection of the Scythians, the products of the north to their Asia Minor homeland, and in the 4th century. BC, when she freed herself from the tutelage and trade oppression of the Athenian maritime power and again entered into contact with her mother, the revived Miletus. The Scythian kingdom at this time was still strong enough to provide Olbia with relative calm and peace.
The situation became more difficult in the 3rd century, when the collapsing Scythian state demanded more and more sacrifices from Olbia, unable to protect it from Western and Eastern aliens who were destroying the Scythian state: Thracians, Celts, Sarmatians. This is clearly evidenced by the large Olbian inscription in honor of Protogen, a prominent Olbian citizen, a wealthy merchant, armorer and exporter, like all prominent citizens of Olbia of that time, who more than once rescued Olbia from difficult situations related to the demands of its overlord and strays approaching the walls of Olbia predators. He also helped Olbia in its defense, constructing towers and parts of a defensive wall at his own expense, and also helped her out of food difficulties associated with the constant devastation of the areas that fed Olbia with grain.
The situation was different for the Greek colonies on the shores of the Kerch Strait. Let me remind you, first of all, that they found here not a barbarian, but a relatively cultured population, which since the 2nd millennium had been under the strongest cultural influence of the East. The Cimmerians layered on top of this population. From the merger of these two elements, the tribes of the Sinds, Maeotians, Sauromatians, Satarcheans, and, in all likelihood, the Taurians, inhabiting the mountainous part of the Crimea, were created, and also, in all likelihood, the opposite coast of the Crimea, where they were driven out by the Scythians, who owned steppe Crimea, etc.
These tribes, although, as we have seen, were subject to the Scythians, nevertheless enjoyed comparative independence in the Scythian state, which increasingly increased as the focus of the Scythians moved more and more to the west and their main efforts were concentrated on the fight against the Thracians Balkan Peninsula.
They have long had a strong sedentary lifestyle, were in constant trade relations with their southern and eastern neighbors and lived a relatively developed economic life as farmers, cattle breeders and fishermen.
The Greek colonies immediately found in them ready customers for their goods and intermediaries in relations with the south and east. In them they could easily find support in defending their independence against the Scythians. The floodplains and swamps of Taman and the Sea of ​​Azov were reliable protection for the rich Kuban delta.
Naturally, the time of Taman’s political rise was also a time of great prosperity for the Greek colonies on the shores of the Kerch Strait and their intense influence on neighboring tribes. The necropolis of Panticapaeum, its first abundant mints of silver coins show that the end of the 6th and beginning of the 5th century BC. were an era of high growth of this city, its greater economic and cultural prosperity. On the site of an old non-Greek settlement, perhaps associated with the coast of the Caucasus and especially with Colchis (the name Panticapaeum is not Greek; Greek, probably a very ancient legend connects its origin with the ancient dynasty of Colchis kings), a real Greek city arises and a number of others around it smaller settlements. We see the same in Taman, where finds of ancient Ionian Greek dishes are not uncommon and the oldest burials in the necropolises of individual cities are burials of the 6th and early 5th centuries.
The decisive moment in the history of the Bosporan Greek colonies and especially Panticapaeum was the victory of Athens over the Persians and the great interest of Athens in the north that appeared at that time. the Mediterranean coast. sea, to Thrace and, especially, to the Black Sea coast. The main incentive was to provide its ever-growing and developing industry with raw materials and its ever-increasing population with bread, the production of which, as we have seen, was native both in the valley of the Dnieper and Bug, and along the Kuban, and naturally took over in the south of Russia, as demand grew , all large spaces.
Athens' attraction to new places along the Black Sea coast is natural and understandable. At the largest grain market in Hellas - in Italy and Sicily - Athens faced serious competition from the Dorians in general and Sparta in particular and was by no means the masters of this market. Egypt, rich in grain, was in the hands of the Persians and could not be wrested from them by Athens even after the failure of the Persian campaigns against Greece. There remained the north, communication with which was a monopoly of the Ionian Greeks of Asia Minor, whose trade routes and business connections were now claimed, after the Persian wars, by Athens, which had liberated but also ruined them.
The creation of great sea power by Athens, the seizure of the straits and important trading points on the Thracian coast put the entire Black Sea region - both southern and northern - in complete and direct dependence on Athens and allowed Athens, without resistance from anyone, to do a series of steps to strengthen and strengthen this dependence.
Among these decisive steps, the most serious was the occupation of Athens and the settlement of a number of important points on the southern coast of the Black Sea with its armed colonists. They did the same in the north.
Probably not having the opportunity to occupy the strong Panticapaeum, which was under the protection of the Scythians, they captured the neighboring Nymphaeum, which had an excellent harbor and was connected with a number of neighboring Scythian and non-Scythian tribes of the Crimea. They turned this minor city into a large trading harbor and an important center of exchange, thereby creating strong competition for Panticapaeum. His complete trading independence is evidenced by his excellent, artistic silver, which he minted at this time.
The great cultural flourishing of Nymphaeum at this time, its wide trade connections and close relations with neighboring tribes is evidenced by the rich and extensive necropolis of the city, the richest burials of which date back to the 5th century. BC It is characteristic that, along with the purely Greek burials of the Nymphaean necropolis, we have a number of mounds with non-Greek or semi-Greek burials, that is, with the burials of the leaders of neighboring tribes who were attracted to the Nymphaeum by its cultural influence and constant trade ties. The composition of the items from the richest Nymphaean burials is very typical. Along with things imported from Athens, we also find a number of products from other workshops, for example, excellent Samian bronzes, wonderful works of famous Samian foundries. VI and V centuries. BC
It is interesting to note that, in addition to Nymphaeum, Athens probably created other settlements on the Crimean coast of the Kerch Strait. One of them, as the name shows, could be the city or village of Atheneon - a competitor of the Ionian Theodosius, just as Nymphaeum was a competitor of Panticapaeum.
Athens also established a strong foothold in Taman in the land of the most cultured of the Taman tribes - the Sinds. And here they created their urban center - Stratocleia, probably not a new foundation, but the renaming and settlement of one of the old settlements of Taman by their colonists. To them, perhaps, the Sinds owe their state unification and the Greek physiognomy that this unification assumed, if this did not happen even earlier as a result of the settlement of the Taman coast by Greek colonies. This is evidenced by the unusually fine artistic coinage of silver of the new state with a horse's head on one side, the name of the tribe and the figure of an Athenian owl on the reverse.
The strong cultural influence of the Greeks on the local tribes, which had already begun earlier (I note, for example, one local burial containing a beautiful Rhodian vase of the early 6th century BC) was felt with particular vividness at this time. In the group of the so-called Seven Brothers Kurgans in the Kuban delta near the station. Krymskaya we find several burials of the 5th century. BC, the inventory of which is strikingly similar to the inventory of the just mentioned Nymphaean mounds. And here, next to things of undoubted Athenian origin, we find excellent works of Asia Minor workshops.
We do not know what the relations between Athens and Panticapaeum were at this time. The flourishing that we find in Nymphea and in the land of the Sinds in the 5th century. BC, we do not observe it in Panticapaeum. There are no traces of Panticapaeum's dependence on Athens. It is characteristic, however, that just at this time a major political revolution took place in Panticapaeum. The power, which until this time was in the hands of several leading families, perhaps the descendants of the ancient founders of the colonies - the leaders (Anacts) of the migrating Milesians, whom our legend calls, probably by the invented name of Archeanactids (descendants of the ancient Anacts), now falls into the hands of one tyrant, bearing the Thracian name Spartok (in 438 - 7 BC) · The Thracian name Spartok does not necessarily imply that we are dealing with a Thracian - a native of the Balkan Peninsula, with the commander of a mercenary Thracian squad, as is usually assumed. I have already indicated how strong the Thracian elements were in the ancient population of the Bosporus, Taman and Azov region. One can therefore think that Spartok belonged to a local rich Greek family that became part of the sovereign families of Panticapaeum. With this assumption, it is clear why Spartok and his descendants managed to firmly establish their power in Panticapaeum, uniting both the Greeks and the local native population around it.
The emergence of a strong unified power in Panticapaeum in the hands of an energetic and talented holder was a decisive moment in the history of the eastern Greek Black Sea colonies. It created here a serious and decisive force, which, under favorable circumstances, could become a natural center for uniting around it all the Greeks of the Bosporus and Azov region, without which the Greeks here, as in Olbia, would inevitably have been only a tool in the hands of the dominant Scythian tribe.
It is unlikely that the Bosporan tyranny arose with the consent and assistance of Athens; rather, it was created in opposition to their influence. One must think that its appearance was one of those reasons that caused, three years after its creation, the sending by Athens in 435 - 4 BC. a large naval expedition under the command of Pericles to the Black Sea. This armed demonstration had the ultimate goal of impressing both the Black Sea Hellenes and the Scythians, showing them the strength of Athens and forcing them to accept unquestioningly the terms of the relationship dictated by Athens.
One of the objects of the Athenian naval demonstration was, undoubtedly, Panticapaeum, whose role in the maritime trade of the Black Sea could not but be clear to Athens and whose strengthening, contrary to the wishes of Athens, a strengthening that Athens could hardly prevent without further exertion of forces, was formidable for them danger. As an ally and client, Panticapaeum could, however, be an excellent support for Athenian trade policy, a support that its necessarily weak colonies at Nymphaeum and Stratocleia could not give Athens. Let us remember that Athens faced serious complications in Greece and that the Bosporus was located hundreds of miles from the base of Athenian power.
Compensation for the Bosporus for this support of the trade interests of Athens was naturally the patronage of Athens for the newly born Panticapaean tyranny, which still felt far from being strong (a number of exiles from Panticaiaeum sat nearby in Feodosia and were ready to return at the first opportunity), as well as assistance in case a possible, although unlikely, dramatic clash with the Scythians. These could have been, and probably were, the conditions set by Athens to Spartok during Pericles' expedition to the Black Sea.
Spartok could not help but agree to these conditions, and as a result, those permanent and strong relations began between Athens and the Bosporan tyranny, which determined the subsequent fate of the Greek colony on the shores of the Bosporus. Panticapaeum temporarily became a client and trading agent of Athens in the Black Sea, he had to guarantee Athens the unlimited right to export grain from Panticapaeum and was forced to agree to limit his right to free trade in grain: without the permission of Athens, Panticapaeum could not release a single grain of Black Sea bread to other ports of Greece .
But, thanks to the support of Athens, the Spartok dynasty stayed in the Bosporus and began a series of consistent actions to consolidate its power and develop its economic and political power. The main tasks of the Bosporus state, consistently carried out by Spartok’s successor Satyr I (433/2 - 389/8 BC), and the latter’s son Leukon I (389/8 - 349/8 BC), and children and Leukon's successors, Spartok II (349/8 - 344/3 BC), and Perisad I (349/8 - 310/9 BC), were: strengthening their power on the European and Asian shores of the Kerch Strait, further strengthening of its independence in relation to the Scythians and gradual emancipation from pressure from Athens, while maintaining, however, close and friendly relations with this powerful power, which, despite military failures in the fight against Sparta and the failure of its great power policy, continued to be the decisive naval force in the Aegean Sea.
The first task that faced Spartok's successor, Satyr, was to strengthen all trade and, mainly, the grain trade in the hands of the Bosporus. The question was not so much about the grain of Taman and Panticapaeum’s own territory, but rather about the grain of the northern steppe Crimea, the natural export harbor for which was Feodosia. This grain was claimed not only by Athens and its counterpart Panticapaeum; it was also needed, as we have seen, by the cities of the southern coast of the Black Sea, mainly by the ever-growing Heraclea, which had already established a strong foothold in Chersonesos and was trying to gain primacy in Theodosius. The result of this rivalry was the war between Bosporus and Heraclea over Theodosius, which began under Satyr and ended by Leukon with the annexation of Theodosius to the Bosporan state.
At the same time, Satyrus, and then Leukon, managed, taking advantage of the defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War, to introduce their relations with Athens in a new direction. By bribery, Satyr forced the Athenian fortified colony in Nymphaeum to be surrendered to him, and then he and Leukon managed to insist on the right of free trade in grain from the Bosporus not only with Athens, but also with other Greek cities, guaranteeing, however, Athens special and very valuable privileges.
It is more difficult to understand the relationship of the Bosporan dynasts to the cities and peoples of Taman. It is very likely that the main shopping mall Taman - Phanagoria was not part of the Bosporan state. But it was surrounded by a number of Taman tribes subject to the Bosporus and, of course, was not completely independent. It is not for nothing that we had abundant independent minting of coins in Phanagoria in the 4th - 3rd centuries. BC We do not find and the main monetary unit in Taman is Panticapaean gold, silver and copper.
The question of the relationship of the Bosporus to the local tribes that inhabited Taman is very difficult. The Sinds, as we have seen, were already strongly Hellenized during the reign of Athens and had a certain independence. A number of individual indications suggest that from ancient times they were drawn to the same urban center with the Greek and local population (first the Sind port, then Gorgippia - now Anapa) and were under the control of their local dynasts, the same half-Thracians, half-Greeks as the Bosporan tyrants , maybe even related to these latter. Under Leukon, the Sinds formed part of his power, that is, they recognized him as their king, along with other neighboring tribes, the circle of which was expanding under Leukon's successors. Whether this meant that these tribes were ruled from Panticapaeum, or whether one must think that the Bosporan dynast was their overlord, while each individual tribe was headed by its own local rulers, is quite clear. The second, however, is more likely. A number of indications tell us that the Sinds, in parallel with the Bosporan rulers, had their own semi-Greek dynasty.
We have even less data to understand the attitude of the Scythians towards the emerging power, which was very unpleasant for them. The Scythians, however, undoubtedly did not abandon their claims to suzerainty over Panticapaeum. This can be confirmed by evidence of the fierce struggle of Perisada I against them.
More than a century passed from the founding of tyranny in the Bosporus to the end of the reign of Perisad I. The rule of the Spartokid dynasty over the Bosporus bore fruit. The Bosporus turned into a strong and fairly durable power that developed huge trade with Greece, mainly with Athens. The main export item was bread, or at least that is what we hear about most. But the products of the Sea of ​​Azov were also of no small importance - its fish, livestock and slaves from the Don region, furs and goods coming from the far East to the mouth of the Don, where, as mentioned above, a large trading settlement arose - Tanais, also dependent on the Bosporus .
The economic growth and material prosperity of the Bosporus were somewhat weakened only by the confused political relations that reigned in Hellas after the fall of the hegemony of Athens: constant wars that undermined maritime trade and gradually turned into an anarchic and disorderly clash between the leading forces of Hellas, and internal confusion that reigned in individual Hellenic states and the corrupting influence on Greek life in Persia with its powerful material resources.
At the end of this period, however, the situation changes. The growth of Macedonia and Alexander's conquests create the great world of Hellenism. The war of all against all temporarily ceases, and relative order comes. But for the grain trade of Panticapaeum, this plus is covered by the associated minus: Egypt, which has opened up to world trade, and the grain-rich areas in Asia are its competitors and very strong competitors. It must be taken into account, however, that if supply increased, then demand also increased, thanks to the growth and development of urban life throughout the Hellenistic world.
In any case, the 4th century. BC is a blessed time for Hellenism on the Black Sea. Safety at sea, supported by a strong Bosporan fleet, security of sales, and freedom of trade create a high rise in material security for all Greek cities in southern Russia, not only in the Bosporus, but also outside it. For Olbia and Chersonesos of the 4th century. BC the same brilliant time as for Bosporus.
Greek cities are being built up, temples and porticos are growing in them, and theaters are appearing in some places; squares and temples are decorated with statues, sometimes of first-class Greek masters. A lot of imported Greek things appear in everyday life best quality. Greek workshops operate successfully in the cities themselves, serving mainly the foreign market. In the most major centers their own writers and scientists, historians, rhetoricians, philosophers, poets appear, local myths are collected, local historical tradition is recorded. In the Bosporus, as we will see below, its own flourishing school of toregovs is being created. All this is clearly reflected, first of all, in the necropolis.
Never before have so many expensive, sometimes artistic things been placed in the grave with the deceased as now. The grave goods of rich people and the local aristocracy are especially luxurious. Their majestic stone crypts under high mounds are filled with a rare selection of expensive and artistic things: the best Greek red-figure and multi-colored ceramics from Attic workshops (see Table XII, 1), Eastern Greek variegated glass, an excellent set of Greek, especially Asia Minor jewelry, gems and carved stones with the names of famous masters, the finest necklaces of amazing technology, luxurious earrings, bracelets, tiaras (see plate XII, 2, 3 and 4). The wonders of turning technology are the sarcophagi in which the mortal remains of Panticapaean and Taman nobles and their wives rested. Superb turning work, enlivened by painting and inlays of glass, bone and stones, makes these sarcophagi one of a kind monuments of the artistic industry.
The crypts themselves are not inferior to the burial inventory in terms of the harmony of the parts, the breadth of the construction scope and the height of the construction equipment (see Table XI, 1, 2 and 3). These are vast, sometimes double, high rooms, made of monumental slabs, with long leading into them corridors, spectacularly covered with pointed, stepped, domed-stepped or box semi-cylindrical vaults. In Taman, some crypts inside were plastered and painted in the same manner in which the walls of temples and public buildings were painted; in Panticapaeum, the painting was probably replaced by canopies and carpets covering the walls of the crypt.
It is unlikely that in the manner of covering the crypts with stepped vaults one should see consciously supported archaism, the preservation of the old tradition of the Aegean, Mycenaean and Asia Minor tombs. The architects who built them were guided, it seems to me, by other considerations - aesthetic and technical. The aesthetic impression of these stepped vaults is amazing, much stronger than the impression left by box vaults, which certainly require painting or plaster modeling combined with painting. Technically, the stepped vault satisfies all the requirements of an under-mound structure with a colossal mass of earth pressing on the roof. It is no coincidence that the most monumental crypts of the Bosporus have reached us completely intact. Only those that were damaged by robbers and taken away by modern vandals after their discovery by archaeologists were destroyed.
No less indicative, however, are the ordinary, ordinary tombs: earthen pits covered with boards, slabs or tiles, the walls of which are sometimes lined with tiles, slabs or mud bricks - tombs of ordinary citizens of Panticapaeum and its neighbors, as well as the Greek cities of Taman. The ritual of corpse deposition, which was retained in the Bosporus, only in rare cases being replaced by cremation, makes it possible to judge the life and wealth of the mass of Bosporan citizens. The impression is very instructive.
The burial rite and grave goods are purely Greek. The usual selection of things for a Hellene dominates as funeral props, testifying to the role that the palaestra and the way of life associated with it played in his life. The first place is occupied by vessels for oil, which were used to rub the body, and shears, which were used to clean palestra sand and oil from the body. These objects, first of all, were needed by the Bosporan Greek beyond the grave, where he was supposed to continue his earthly life, the life of a Hellenic Palestrite (see Table XI, 4 - frieze of a painted Panticapaean crypt of the 4th century BC with an image of a funerary palestric equipment: shearlings, lekythos, aryballae, towels, tiaras, headbands, wreaths).
Weapons are much less common in tombs of this time. It is characteristic that the least number of weapons is in the tombs of the Panticapaean necropolis, much more on the periphery of the Bosporus and in the necropolises of the Taman Greek cities. There is a lot of jewelry in women's tombs. The vessels are all imported from good Attic factories; sometimes you come across vessels from the best craftsmen, sometimes signed. Often so-called Phoenician colored glass. Everything speaks of the contentment of the population and its purely Greek appearance. The same is confirmed, however, by the rare, excellent tombstone steles of the Bosporans and their tombstone inscriptions. Approximately the same picture is repeated in Olbia and Chersonesus; only monumental mound burials are absent in these more democratic cities, although there are some analogies to them, at least in Olbia.
With the death of Perisad I, troubled and alarming times begin in Panticapaeum. Immediately after the death of Perisad, an internecine war began between the three sons of Perisad, from which Eumelus emerged victorious. Legitimate power belonged to Satyr II, the elder brother of Eumelus. Eumelus raised the Tamanian tribe of Fatei against him. Satyr was supported by a mercenary army of Greeks and Thracians, that is, the usual Bosporan army, and the Scythians. Victory went to Eumelus, who also broke the resistance of the third brother Prytanis. As a usurper, Eumelus was forced to make great concessions to the citizenship of Panticapaeum. One must think that under him the Panticapaean civilian army appeared for the first time; Until this time, the Bosporan tyrants relied exclusively on mercenaries.
The short reign of Eumelus was followed by the reign of Spartok III (304/3 - 284/3 BC) and Perisades II (284/3 to approximately 252 BC). The reigns of these dynasts, who generally continued the old policy of the Spartokids, were not yet the time of the decline of the Bosporus. Economic conditions remained the same, trade developed and Panticapaeum grew richer. The closest counterparty of Bosporus continues to be Athens, which at this time concluded a real alliance agreement with Bosporus, its former vassal and agent for the purchase of grain, which indicates both the decline of Athens in this era of the emerging large Hellenistic monarchies, and the growth of the importance of Bosporus. But, along with Athens, the kings of the Bosporus of this and the next period deal with the mighty Rhodes, and Delos, and Delphi, acting completely in the role of the rest, albeit secondary, Hellenistic monarchs.
The well-being of citizens does not fall either. The tombs of this period are no poorer, although less numerous than the tombs of earlier ones.
At this time, as mentioned above, the Bosporan workshops, which produced things from precious metals for the Scythian market, lived an intensive life at this time. We have seen how their works fill the rich Scythian burials of this period. True, the height of their artistic achievements is gradually decreasing: a gold coin of the Bosporus of the 4th century. BC, which replaced the Ionian silver of the 6th and 5th centuries, with its amazing heads of satyrs and sileni, one of the best creations of ancient glyptics (see plate XII, 5, 6 and 7), is now replaced by quite a dozen Hellenistic silver, stereotyped, albeit second-rate (Table XII, 9).
The entire second half of the 3rd century. BC filled in the Bosporus with a long series of dynastic and political unrest, from which only vague echoes have reached us. It is not the Spartokids who temporarily appear at the head of the state: Archon Hygienon, perhaps a protege of Panticapaean citizenship, and some king Aces, apparently the head of one of the Scythian or Maeotian tribes that claimed to lead the life of the Bosporus.
Even more vague is the legend about the last years of the independent existence of the Bosporus, Fr. first three quarters of the 2nd century. BC A number of dynasts appear, whom we know only from coins and inscriptions; they all bear the Thracian name Perisada. It is very likely that these are the last scions of the house of Spartok. Their coins, like those of Hygienont, are a slave copy, and a rather poor one at that, of the gold staters of Lysimachus, the general of Alexander, the founder of the short-lived Thracian kingdom (see plate XII, 8). The general appearance of these kings is that of minor Hellenistic monarchs; secondary kings, like the kings of Bithynia, Pontus or Armenia, but of a lower rank. At their court and in their politics, as in the entire world of Hellenism at that time, a major role was played by the local subjects of these kings - the Scythians and Maeotians, who, as Hellenization progressed, more and more imbued the once purely Greek citizenship of the cities of the Bosporan kingdom.
The Spartokid dynasty was living out its last days. But she continued to fulfill her traditional mission, supplying the Hellenic world with bread and raw materials. Therefore, the material well-being of the Bosporus, although falling, still remains at the general level of the semi-Greek Hellenistic powers of that time, far from it. inferior, of course, to such powers as the cultural kingdom of Pergamon and unable to withstand political rivalry not only with its Black Sea vis-à-vis - Bithynia and the ever-growing Pontus, but even with its closest neighbors - the Crimean Scythians.
History of Crimea II century. BC stands under the sign of the revival of the power of the old Scythian power. Of course, there can be no talk of returning this power to its former role. All of the Kuban region, the Azov region, the Don region, the Dnieper region and the Buge region left the hands of the Scythians forever, but the Scythians retained two pieces of their old territory. A small Scythian kingdom continues to exist in Dobrudja and a larger Scythian power in Crimea. Favorable conditions: the absence of any leading force in the north, the weakness of Macedonia, the defeat of Thrace under the corrupting influence of the Celtic conquerors, the inability of the Sarmatians to weld a strong power from individual tribes, the absence of any outside support from the Greek colonies of southern Russia allowed several energetic Scythian kings again welded together part of their decayed power and, supporting it with armed force, declared a claim to supremacy over the Crimea and the Greek cities of the northern coast up to Olbia. The Scythian Crimean power reached its apogee under Skilur in the first and second half of the 2nd century BC.
We do not know whether the Scythians are still the former military power of nomads. In any case, they had a large urban center in Crimea near present-day Simferopol. It is possible that we are dealing with a half-Greek city that grew up among a Scythian half-nomadic, half-agricultural population, where Scythian kings also visited from time to time.
The basis for the well-being of this Scythian state and the Greek Scythian capital was, of course, trade with the Greek world in grain and livestock. It is no wonder, therefore, that the kings of the Scythian state strive to gain power over the most important Greek ports. They probably managed to capture Kerkinitis on the western coast of the Crimea and even Olbia, whose rich armaturians gave them the fleet and fleet they needed. naval forces to ensure their export from the robberies of Crimean pirates.
But this, of course, was not enough for them. They were attracted by the excellent harbor and the beautiful territory cultivated for vineyards of Chersonesus, which made it possible to enter into direct relations with the southern coast of the Black Sea. It is very likely that they tried to strengthen their influence in the Bosporus through diplomatic relations and marriage alliances. It is not for nothing that at the last Perisade one of the members of the Scythian royal family ends up in Panticapaeum, which, however, usually happened already at the end of the 4th and 3rd centuries. BC, as shown by the large Scythian tombs in the immediate vicinity of Panticapaeum and Nymphaeum among the tombs of the Greek population of these cities.
In connection with this revival of the Scythian power, which probably began already in the 3rd century. BC, there is a constant Scythian danger that threatened Chersonese, constant attacks on it by the Scythians and all sorts of efforts that Chersonese makes to ward off this danger. Several random inscriptions from Chersonese vividly depict to us this constant danger and the measures taken by Chersonese to avert it. Chersonese had few forces of its own, and he had to turn to stronger neighbors for help. While the Bosporus was strong, Chersonese sought its help; but the Bosporus weakened, falling more and more under Scythian influence, and the pressure of the Scythians became more energetic and persistent.
The natural protector of Chersonesus was its metropolis - Heraclea. But she was no longer independent. She had to submit to the Pontic kings. Tries to mobilize Chersonesos and the northern neighbors of the Scythians - the Sarmatians. Since all this is intertwined with the history of the Hellenistic kingdoms of Asia Minor, where the role of master and manager at this time was already played by Rome, it is natural that from time to time the imperious hand of Rome reaches out to Chersonesus.
In the second half of the 2nd century, when the power of the Scythian Crimean power especially increased, the position of Chersonese became critical. But at the same time, under the influence of the beginning devastation in Rome, the increasingly intensifying collapse of the Roman provincial administration and the first rumbles of the internal revolution in Italy, in the east, just on the southern shore of the Black Sea, the previously excluded possibility of the emergence of a strong power is created. The young, energetic and talented Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator takes up the task of creating it.
To implement his plan - to create, in contrast to Rome, a strong eastern power - he needed, first of all, a base. Asia Minor, whose life was closely watched by Rome, could not provide this base. The Pontic state - the basis of the power of Mithridates - itself had an extremely mixed population, where, next to the Alarodians and Thracians, there were Semites and Iranians, and the general character of the culture was strongly Iranianized and resembles the culture of neighboring Armenia. Let us not forget that the basis of the economic and cultural life of the country with this composition of the population was the Greek cities, gradually deprived of freedom by the Pontic kings - Heraclea, Sinop, Amis, Amasia, Trebizond, etc. This character of culture brought Pontus closer, mainly, to Armenia, but also more so with the Bosporan kingdom and in general the northern coast of the Black Sea, where we encounter the same connection and interpenetration of the population of Greek cities, with a purely Hellenic culture, and the tribes inhabiting the country, with an Iranian or Iranizing culture.
Mithridates should have strived for an alliance and, if possible, subjugation of these two powers in order to create for himself the necessary supply base of both human material, money and natural products. But Armenia was at that time a strong power, which was just as difficult to deal with as Pontus’s neighbor to the west, Bithynia, and which, moreover, was under constant surveillance by Rome.
Crimea was in a different situation. Crimea was not in the sphere of influence of the Roman power and did not attract the attention of Roman politicians. Meanwhile, he could give Mithridates exactly what he needed: bread, cattle, leather, money and people, huge reserves of which, in the person of the Scythian, Maeotian and Sarmatian tribes, the half-Iranian Mithridates, who considered himself to belong to the old Persian dynasty of the Achaemenids , could count on being used as allies and mercenaries.
On the other hand, the growth of the Scythian power, the danger threatening Chersonesos from the Scythians, and his requests for help directed to Mithridates created unusually favorable conditions for Mithridates’ intervention in the affairs of the Crimea. Mithridates took full advantage of the opportunity that presented itself. In two expeditions, his commanders Diophantus and Neoptolemus, showing their strength to the Scythian power, led after the death of Skilur by his son Palak, and to the allies of the Scythian power, the Sarmatians-Roxolans, took possession of both Chersonesos with all the Greek settlements subject to him, and the Bosporus with all its power and, finally, even Olbia with its territory.
This success unusually strengthened Mithridates and gave him hope of the opportunity to begin a long and consistent work of unifying Asia Minor, and then the entire east under the leadership of Pontus, in defiance of the resistance of Rome, torn apart by a civil war that flared up in 91 with a bright flame and lasted until 70 and even later, that is, for more than 20 years.
This is not the place to relate the story of Mithridates' failed attempt to create a world Greco-Eastern state. It is important for us to point out that the starting point of Mithridates in his struggle with Rome and his last reserve in this struggle were his Crimean and Caucasian possessions annexed to them, his Black Sea power. Having joined here, as well as in Asia Minor, initially to the Greek cities, Mithridates, however, quickly disappointed them in their hopes. The more he became involved in the war with Rome, the more he needed money and natural products, and the further he was driven out of Asia Minor by the Romans, the more the Greek cities of the northern coast of the Black Sea became suppliers of these resources. The Greek cities bore this heavy burden placed on them with more and more displeasure, submitting only to force.
Along with this, Mithridates, who needed people for his army, became closer and closer to the Maeotians who were once subordinate to the Bosporus, with his enemies - the Scythians and Sarmatians, entering into marriage alliances with their dynasts - both personally and through his numerous sons and daughters - and political treaties. Hellenism, just when it hoped, through Mithridates, to strengthen its primacy over the Iranians pressing on it, was in danger of being completely absorbed by Iran, which by that time had already managed to significantly change the previously pure Greek appearance of the population of the Greek cities of the Black Sea region. On the other hand, Iran apparently met Mithridates as a unifier and leader, despite the blows he initially inflicted on the Scythians, and surrounded him with a long-lasting aura of a national leader.
It is natural, therefore, that the Greek cities of Crimea, mainly of the Bosporan kingdom, tried to use the moments of Mithridates’ weakness to regain their independence and, when Mithridates, who was finally ousted from Asia Minor by Pompey, but managed to flee to Panticapaeum and not allow Pompey here, prepared here with all the tension forces a new campaign against the Roman power, this time through the steppes of southern Russia and along the Danube, they offered him sharp resistance and, uniting with his son Pharnaces, got rid of the hated rapist, who had brought them to almost complete ruin and betrayed them to the centuries-old enemies of Hellenism, the Iranians .
The death of Mithridates, however, meant submission to Rome. Pharnaces’ attempt to ensure his Pontic-Crimean kingdom not a vassal, but an independent existence, taking advantage of Caesar’s temporary failures in Alexandria, ended in a cruel defeat: Pharnaces, like his father devoted to him, did not find support for himself in the Greek cities of Crimea and died.
From this time on, a new era began in the life of Crimea - the era of subordination to Rome and a new rise of the Hellenic element, which found active and constant support in Rome.
The era of Mithridates was a time of difficult trials for the Black Sea Greeks. The era of their complete independence is over. The original form of supreme power developed by the Bosporus, i.e., the combination in one person of the supreme magistrate of the Greek cities - the archon and the king of the Iranian and semi-Iranian tribes, connected with the Greek cities by personal union, was finally replaced by a purely monarchical power of the Greek-Eastern type. The material well-being of the Greek cities was undermined, and Olbia suffered especially, since after the death of Mithridates it found itself between a rock and a hard place, between the Scythians and Sarmatians pressing from the east, and the revived power of the Thracians, united into the strong power of Birebista. Both of them sought to take possession, and the latter, in the end, took possession of this important port and the key to the entire Dnieper and Buge regions.
The cultural resistance of the Greeks also weakened. Even earlier it was difficult for them to maintain their pure Greek appearance. The necropolises of those Greek cities that from time immemorial had a particularly close connection with the local population, like Nymphaeum on the European side, Gorgippia on the Asian side, have long provided examples of burials of mixed Iranian-Greek culture. Now the Iranian element, which already in the era of the last Spartokids increasingly saturated the Greek cities, was able to unhindered penetration into the Greek population of the cities, especially since the influx of new forces from Hellas, exhausted and bleeding in the throes of the Roman civil war, completely ceased.
And here, therefore, due to the special conditions of development, we encounter a phenomenon common to the entire east of the late Hellenistic era. Behind the Greek shell, even in Greek centers, local elements begin to emerge more and more, changing all the foundations of political, economic, social, cultural and religious life.
The Bosporan state of the Spartokids, which existed for more than three centuries and during this time successfully fulfilled its mission as the advanced post put forward by Hellenism in the sea of ​​Iranian and Thracian tribes and peoples, is an unusually original and interesting political and social entity.
In terms of its external political structure, the leading city of the power, Panticapaeum, did not differ in any significant way from the ordinary city-state of Hellas. Its only distinctive feature is that for centuries the transitional form of government for most Greek city-states - military tyranny, based on mercenary troops - has been maintained here.
This long existence of tyranny requires an explanation. Of course, the essentially monarchical form of government, clothed in the shell of Hellenic democracy, could not survive for three centuries, maintaining itself only by force and relying only on the swords of mercenaries. There is no doubt that its existence and its strength were due to other deeper reasons that created its strong support among the population.
The main reason was the original social structure of the Bosporan, primarily a trading power, the welfare of which depended, first of all, on ensuring proper exchange with the Greek world on the one hand and with the world of Iranian and semi-Iranian tribes, partly part of the Bosporan power, partly neighboring it , with another. In this respect, the Bosporus most closely resembles Semitic Carthage, which fulfilled the same mission, under slightly different conditions, on the shores of Africa.
The difference in the position of Carthage and Bosporus was that the well-being of Bosporus was largely connected with the existence of the Scythian kingdom, which provided Bosporus with the opportunity for successful trade with its neighbors. Complete subordination to the Scythians, however, was by no means in the interests of the Bosporus.
In order to be able to maintain good relations with the Scythians without completely submitting to them, the Bosporus had to have support both in the population of its state and in support from outside. The second was given to him by his relationship with Athens, the first was the commonality of his interests with his strongly Hellenized closest neighbors, for whom the suzerainty of the Bosporus was more profitable and convenient than submission to the Scythians, especially since this suzerainty had the character of a personal union and did not deprive individual tribes of the opportunity to live their own ordinary life under the control of their local kings, dynasts and princes.
This explains the dual nature of the Bosporan tyranny. For the Greek population, they are the magistrates-archons vested with exclusive supreme power. For the tribes of Crimea and Taman, they are their supreme kings, providing them with their independence, non-subordination to the Scythians, support of the Hellenic world and the possibility of wide world exchange.
But even for the Greek citizens of the cities of the Bosporan power, personal leadership was a necessity that ensured their existence. Their national traditions they were not allowed to see their supreme magistrate as a king, but, as their archon, they were ready to give the head of the state unlimited powers, since their material well-being depended on it.
The Greeks of the cities of the Bosporan kingdom, as far as we can judge from the meager data available to us, were mainly exporters and armatures, owners of sea vessels on the one hand, owners of large trading offices that maintained constant contact with neighboring tribes, and intermediary traders with another. The citizens of the Bosporus, as far as one can judge, preferred to do the latter; the first, a risky and difficult task, they provided to the citizens of other Greek cities of Asia Minor and Hellas, for whom the products delivered to them by the Bosporus were a matter of vital necessity.
Along with this, there were a considerable number of artisans and artists who worked for the foreign market and created those specific items that Greek and Asia Minor craftsmen could not supply them with.
Finally, of considerable importance were the farmers, landowners, who exploited the territories closest to the Greek cities, which they cultivated with the hands of the local population, as hired workers, sometimes with the hands of slaves, most often with the hands of the enslaved population, who became to them in the same relationship as the helots to the Spartans, the Penestes to the Thessalian nobility, the conquered Mariandines to the Heracleans.
In general, the Greek population of the Bosporus, even excluding the particularly wealthy aristocracy closely associated with the supreme power, was a population of wealthy merchants, artisans and landowners. There is no reason to assume the existence of a significant number of working proletariat. The merchant fleet with its army of oarsmen, as has been repeatedly attested, was not local; the loaders, in all likelihood, were recruited from those slaves that Panticapaeum successfully traded and which were supplied to them by neighboring nomads who were always at war.
This wealthy Greek population was primarily and mainly interested in the government providing them with a calm and secure existence, involving them less in military duties and guaranteeing them the opportunity for unhindered communication with neighboring tribes and the Greek world.
The Bosporan tyranny completely ensured this order of things for the Greek population. She did not need an army of citizens; it was rather dangerous for her. The local population, especially the warlike Thracians, provided her with a sufficient number of mercenaries; in case of need, she resorted to alliances with neighbors and contingents of vassals. The Bosporan tyrants received a permanent squad, expensive, but well armed and technically trained, from Greece. It was from there that they mainly obtained people for their navy.
For all this, only funds were needed. These funds were provided by the same trade with Greece, mainly grain. There is no doubt that the largest exporters of grain were the archons and kings of the Bosporus themselves. Attic speakers - Aeschines, Isocrates, Demosthenes - also tell us about this. This is also attested to by a number of inscriptions.
Both import and export duties gave them large incomes, especially when the Bosporus managed to get rid of the heavy hand of Athens. Finally, there is no doubt that the Spartokids and their relatives were also the largest landowners, whose lands provided a very significant amount of grain. And this has been witnessed to us repeatedly.
On these foundations the power of the Spartokids rested and remained firmly in place. From time to time they had to resort to military assistance from citizenship, to create a Greek army from the Bosporan Greeks, but this, obviously, was a transitory phenomenon, and the foundations of the Bosporan system remained, in general, the same until last days existence of the dynasty.
The culture of Panticapaeum and the Bosporan Empire in general has already been discussed several times above. I pointed out the purely Greek appearance of the urban population, which only became permeated with Iranian elements towards the end of Spartocid rule. I also said that in the 4th and 3rd centuries. BC Panticapaeum is by no means just a storage place for Greek and Asia Minor goods, but has its own rather independent cultural life and is developing into one of the centers of Hellenic cultural creativity.
I have already spoken about the original funerary architecture of the Panticapaeans and the Bosporans in general, about their undoubted creativity in the development of certain archaic forms, associated with the difficult task of creating the type of monumental structures under burial mounds.
But the creativity of Bosporan artists is even more clearly reflected in local works made of precious metals (the specialty of Bosporan craftsmen), the development of which was caused by the greed for crafts made from gold and silver of their Scythian and Meotian neighbors. The starting point for characterizing their work in this regard are the coins of the Bosporus, the local origin of which cannot be doubted. Silver coinage of the 6th and 5th centuries. keeps within the framework of the general Ionian template and is not of particular interest. But the beginning of the coinage of gold, coinciding with the era of trade independence of the Bosporus, with the reign of Leukon I and his successors, and the silver accompanying this gold, is original in nature and testifies to the high artistic achievements of the Panticapaean Greek masters. The very choice of types is interesting, especially the heads of the bearded and beardless Silea and Satyr in profile and almost in full frontal view, one way or another connected with the legends about the past of Panticapaeum and the past of the ruling dynasty (Fig. 63, 64 and 65). The usual explanation - the incorrect etymology of the city's name from the name of the Greek god Pan - does not satisfy me much. I do not see any undoubted grounds for calling the deity depicted on the coins of Panticapaeum Pan. It seems that we are dealing here with some kind of tradition, the traces of which have not been preserved by the meager literary tradition. Clearer turns. The Iranian, Persian phiphon with a dart in its mouth and an ear under its feet (Fig. 64 and 65) brilliantly symbolizes the semi-Iranian military power of Panticapaeum, based on its economic power, the basis of which was the grain trade. Another common type - the Greek Apollonian griffin and below it the Don sturgeon (Fig. 63) - clearly indicates the ideas associated with Panticapaeum among the Greeks; here you can hear echoes of the legend about the Apollonian Hyperboreans, about the Arimaspians fighting with griffins for the gold of the East - in a word, about all those myths that stated the northern and eastern connections of Panticapaeum, which were considered and were the direct or indirect source of its extraordinary wealth. One of the real sources of this wealth appears right there; These are weighty Don sturgeons, valued throughout the river world. The head of a bull on silver may have the same meaning.
But these coins are even more interesting from an artistic point of view. The coins of Panticapaeum are rightly considered one of the highest achievements of ancient glyptics. The subtlety and grace of the modeling, the energy of expression, and the boldness of the interpretation of the head are almost truly inimitable and original, although they reflect the general features of Greek art of that time. But what is especially captivating is the idealized realism of the ugly, but beautiful and attractive in their ugliness heads of satyrs and sileni. There can be no doubt that the Panticapaean masters were influenced not only by the Greek originals, who set themselves the same goals, but also by the observation of the main features of the barbarian types, so familiar to Panticapaeum from daily observation.
The desire for realism is the main property of Panticapaean toreutics. It manifests itself with great force once again in the silver of the third and second centuries. BC, in a magnificent realistic, emphatically realistic depiction of a local steppe horse grazing in the steppe (Fig. 67). Next to the formulaic, powerless, flat, graceful head of Apollo on the main side of this coin, the image of the horse stands out for its rough but powerful realism. Decline of Panticapaeum in the middle and end of the 2nd century. nowhere is it clearer than on coins. The creativity of the old gold of Panticapaeum is replaced by a stereotyped and slavish copy of the most popular coin of that time - the gold staters of Lysimachus (Fig. 66).
The same features of Panticapaean artistic creativity appear in a huge, ever-increasing series works of art, made in the workshops of Panticapaeum for the neighboring Scythians. Here it is extremely instructive to compare the gold items from Solokha with somewhat, but slightly later, items from Kul-Oba and the Voronezh mound (Table IX, 8) and then with items from Chertomlyk and Karagodeuashkh. The now famous golden comb of Solokha (Table XIII, 1) generally gives the usual plot of equestrian combat, especially close to M. Asia, in the usual classical composition. The only way it differs from contemporary Asia Minor sculptures, which live in the traditions of already academic Athenian art, is an even greater everyday realism than in Asia Minor in the interpretation of weapons, clothing, horse harness, exactly copied from reality. There is less realism in the depiction of faces and in the types of fighters, although the desire for realism is visible here too.
We see the same thing, to an even greater extent, on a gilded silver vessel from Solokha (Table XII, 3), which gives an ordinary, well-executed hunting scene, so typical of Asia Minor Greek art. Even more interesting, overlaid with silver, it burns with a battle scene between two types of local steppe inhabitants - on foot and on horseback (Table XII, 1). And here the realism of the costume and weapons is complete. The types of faces, however, remind us of the Panticapaeum coins of the same time. Horse archers give a rougher interpretation of the face of the bearded silenus of the coins, their young companion is the familiar young satyr of Panticapaean gold and silver. The two foot opponents of the described fighters from the same camp also approach the same type. But here we already see the first glimpses of the trend that in Pergamon art gives us eternal images of the Celts. From the type of satyr, art moves to an amazingly subtle rendering not so much of trifles as of the main character traits of the depicted barbarians. We do not know which barbarians were depicted by the Panticapaean artist who worked for the king buried in Solokha. But you involuntarily remember the northern Celts or Thracians or some tribes related to them.
A step forward was made in the artifacts of Kul-Oba (Table IX, 1 and 2) and the Voronezh mound (Table IX, 3). Everyday realism remains the same, but we see two new features. An idealized type of Scythian is emerging in art, just as the same type simultaneously emerged in literature. Along with this, there is a tendency towards greater expression, towards conveying an expression of suffering and pathos - and here we come to the future features of Pergamon pathetic art. This is especially clear in the scene of dental surgery and bandaging of a wounded leg on the famous Kul-Ob electric vessel.
The last stage is the amazing horses of Chertomlyk (Table IX, 4 and 5). They are older, thinner and more artistic than the horse of the coin mentioned above. The horses are realistic in their structure and strikingly artistic in their movement. Moreover, despite the difficulties that seemed to the master to give a narrow frieze of a vase, he managed to make one feel the spaciousness and breadth of the steppes, the enthusiasm and revelry of a wild steppe herd.
The somewhat later ritual scenes of Karagodeuashkh are also interesting (Table X, 1 and 2). Here we are no longer looking at purely Greek art. On the rhyton (Plate X, 1) we have an Iranian type and design, on the plate of the headdress (Plate X, 2) an interesting Greek composition, but purely Eastern solemnity and ritualism of the central monumental figure, her servants and two male figures in the foreground - a young noble Scythian and enarean eunuch, a servant of the goddess, in women's clothing and with her round sacred cup in his hand. The true East seeps into the world of Hellenic creativity, influencing Hellas and preparing the future flowering, however, not in the steppes of Scythia, but in Sasanian Persia, of the revival of Iranian art.
We see that Panticapaeum had its own era of creativity, contributing something to the treasury of Greek art, and what new it contributed was due to its proximity to the Iranian world and its connection with the great Oriental art. He will continue to carry out the same mission in the next stage of his historical development.