Talk:Samara culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is both village of Syezzheye and a small river Syezzhaya (Syeszhaya), also being mentioned in archaeo context. mikka (t) 17:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

My source, EIEC gives the bare date "fifth millennium BC", while the Khvalynsk culture, its reported successor, have the dates 4900-3500 BC. The fifth millennium, of course, is 4000-4999. The main archaeological site is indeed the Syezzheye cemetery, named for the village in the Neftegorsk district of the Samara Oblast of the Privolzhsky (Volga) Federal District, Russia, in the area of the Samara bend. The date is difficult.--FourthAve 14:02, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi, fourthave. There is a good sequence of C-14 dates placing Khvalynsk I at 5000-4500. They are published on the Internet at "the horse in mortuary symbolism" site. The main question is, is that the same as Samara? Samara isn't too well dated. Gimbutas thought it was earlier and you know who she was. There are a few real early dates on Samara. Kindest regards.Botteville 04:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

There is only one Samara when speaking of horses or Indo-European studies, and it's this one. The one in Iraq has nothing to do with it. Your discussion of the horse is wonderful, but probably should be off on its own article, or merged with Domestication of the horse. There are some obsessives who insist domestication dates from 2000 BC, which is silly as this is the date for the earliest horse-drawn chariots. --FourthAve 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

FourthAve or anybody with access to the literature, could you help me with some references on Samara culture? I failed to obtain ANY information on standard sites as well as encyclopedias, both online and printed sources! I even browsed Russian archaeological internet sites: while you find a lot about Khvalynsk culture and Yamna cultures, not a world about самарска культура! I have Russian textbook of Archaeology printed in 2005 and again nothing.

Basically, whole article is based only on two referenced books, both obviously pro-kurgan-theory. Therefore obvious question is: what is the role of this culture viewed from common, let say historical approach?

Especially dating of Samara culture seems to be intriguing, what exactly is the source of those data? I mean what is the original source, not pointing again to Gibutas/Mallory (e.g. what are their references /unfortunately, both books are unreachable in Eastern Europe/)! And then - why you call it ENEOLITHIC! All I can see is group with some agriculture, pottery and a lot of fishing and hunting. Where are the metal objects, where are the rich burials or signs of long-distance exchange? Or is THIS really the oldest Eneolithic culture of Europe?!! For now I see article with invaluable information, set into very confusing and spurious background.

With regards and many thanx for future answers, Andy 21:50, 6.6.2006 (GMT)