Archaeological Survey in the eastern Kugitang Piedmonts (South Uzbekistan), Preliminary Report for Seasons 2016 and 2017
Abstract
121
Full text
STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2, 121–138 Archaeological Survey in the eastern Kugitang Piedmonts (South Uzbekistan), Preliminary Report for Seasons 2016 and 2017 Ladislav Stančo– Shapulat Shaydullaev– Alisher Shaydullaev– Anna Augustinová– Jakub Havlík– Petra Cejnarová ABSTRACT This brief report presents apreliminary overview of the results and data gained during the extensive ar‑ chaeological surface survey conducted in the eastern foothills of the Kugitang Mountains, especially in the northern Pashkhurt basin in the late summer of 2016 and 2017. KEYWORDS Pashkhurt basin; Kugitang piedmonts; surface survey; kurgans; Bactria; Yaz culture; Sapalli; cave; Kaptar Kamar. INTRODUCTION In 2016 and 2017, the Czech ‑Uzbek team resumed the extensive surface survey based on field walking, as started in the field seasons 2014 and 2015 (Stančoetal. 2015; Stančo 2016). In 2016, some areas in surroundings of Burgut Kurgan and of the villages of Kayrit and Zarabag– pre‑ viously omitted from the survey for various reasons– were subject to our research. Our aim was to cover as much of the landscape in the neighbourhood of the excavated Yaz Iperiod site as possible. We focused predominantly on prominent topographic features including stone structures preliminarily called kurgans. Those were detected and systematically mapped. Extensive field walking was undertaken by Ladislav Stančo, while Jakub Havlík and Petra Cejnarová documented in detail the detected sites, especially presumed burial grounds with kurgans– or kurgan ‑like features– making their topographic plans. This latter activity turned into aspecial project lead by J. Havlík in 2017 focused on kurgans only (see Havlíketal. 2017 in this volume). In the late summer of 2017, having finished the survey of immediate neigh‑ bourhood of Burgut Kurgan, we turned our attention to other parts of the Pashkhurt Valley, as well as to the specific places in the other valleys north of it, still belonging to the foothills of the Kugitang Mountains. We focused especially on the zones and roads that we, for objective reasons, regarded as giving in the past the best options to reach piedmont oases from what is today the Sherabad lowlands. As always, Shapulat Shaydullaev is responsible for most of the preliminary chronological determination of the pottery assemblages. In both field seasons our work ran along the other sub ‑projects of our international team, consisting of surface survey within the northern Paskhurt Valley oases, led by A. Augustinová (Augustinováetal. 2017; 2018), the above mentioned new kurgan research project (Havlíketal. 2017), as well as the excavations of Burgut Kurgan (Kyselaetal. 2017).
122 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 OBJECTIVES AND METHODS Our methods were closely linked to our principal long term aims and also to the objectives related to our current research questions. Among the former, one of the most important ones was the study of complex landscape of the Early Iron Age (Yaz Iperiod) and its individual as‑ pects, particularly the spatial distribution of the settlements, walled settlements, kurgan ‑like features and rock art that all belong– or hypothetically belong– to the period in question. The latter encompassed our research related to the conquest of the area by Alexander the Great and consequent developments, including search for historical roads and communications. Resuming our previous research, 1 we employed and further developed basic field walking methods. Every survey activity consisted of walking selected area, collecting of surface material, especially pottery and measuring basic topographic data concerning the site (location, size, altitude, etc.). Basically, small group of 2–4 people 2 walked the selected transect in visual contact to each other, checking all topographically and morphologically significant features in the terrain, such as river terraces, flat summits, tell ‑like mounds, stone structures, narrow mountain passes and gorges. If detected, pottery fragments were collected and further processed, in order to obtain general chronological information. All data were immediately entered into the GIS database, allowing us to change the next research step operationally. The field work was closely coordinat‑ ed with that of our other team (surveying oases), and both groups worked frequently together for sake of completeness and logistic issues. In very specific situations we decided to carry out asmall trial excavation in order to understand better amorphological terrain feature we had discovered. Doing so we continued the praxis that was successfully adopted in 2014. RESEARCH AREA The research area in 2016 was situated in the north ‑western part of the Sherabad District, Sur‑ khandarya Province, South Uzbekistan, more precisely in the micro ‑region to the north of the Pashkhurt village itself, covering limited territory of the northern Pashkhurt basin and partly also neighbouring stream valleys (Gurjak, Khojaunkan) (Pl. 6/1). As in the previous two field seasons (2014 and 2015), our main ‑target area was situated around modern villages of Maydan, Karabag, and Zarabag, with some exceptions. In 2017, the survey expanded also to the south of Pashkhurt to the neighbourhood of the Goz village and beyond to the west and south on one hand– including Goz Dagana, agorge linking Pashkhurt basin with the Sherabad plains –, and between Maydan and Loyliq village on the other. Outside of the Pashkhurt Valley, we surveyed part of the steppe zone related to the Loylagan stream valley situated to the north of Pashkhurt. Generally speaking, selected areas in the foothills of Kugitang Mountain ridge have been surveyed with emphasis on the communication corridors linking the Sherabad oasis and settled areas in the Kugitang foothills. Since the targets of our research were planned in close collaboration with the team surveying oases, also our results are closely spatially interrelated. In the final report of the survey in the Pashkhurt Valley planned for the 2019, we plan to put all this scattered data and related evidence together. The maps (Pl. 6/2–7) shows location of research areas, as well as walking trajectories. 1 For abrief overview of the previous research see Stančo 2016, 75; cf. Rtveladze 2013, 11–8, for the summary of archaeological research in the Pashkhurt basin in general. 2 Occasionally, only the principal author took part in the survey, especially in cases, where we intended that only aparticular and limited terrain feature has to be surveyed.
123L. STANČO– S. SHAYDULLAEV– A. SHAYDULLAEV– A. AUGUSTINOVÁ– J. HAVLÍK– P. CEJNAROVÁ SURFACE SURVEY PROCESS / PROGRESS Unless otherwise stated in the ‘description’ entry, all of the following 21 traces / routes were located in the Pashkhurt basin. With afew exceptions, every trace / route represents one ‑day, or several hours, work.3 Altogether, we walked route 139.4 km long. Tab.1: Itinerary of the surface survey, an overview. 3 The trace no. 21 took ca. 30 minutes to accomplish with two sites discovered in the process. Trace / Route no. Description of the itinerary Length (km) Finds / Sites found Date 1 2 Along both banks of the dry Shelkan Say / Kayrit Say between the Zarabag and Kayrit villages. 4.5 5.88 Settlement 23 and 25 August 2016 3Along the left bank of the dry riverbed of Machayli river to the south of Zarabag village. 9.55 Settlement (Tulki Tepa) 26 August 2016 4 6 8 Along the right bank of Kayrit Say between Kampyrtepa and Zarabag. 7.05 9.71 5.12 Settlements, rock‑art 28 and 31 August, 2 September 2016 5 Along the northern edge of the flat basin be‑ tween Zarabag and Karabag; from the Zarabag village to Burgut Kurgan. 7.73 Kurgans 29 August 2016 7 10 Along the left riverbank of the Karabag Say north of the Karabag village. 10.41 14.32 rock art, kurgans, Medieval site 1 and 7 September 2016 9 Along the asphalt road connecting the villages of Gurjak and Khojaunkan, north of Pashkhurt valley. 3.05 two groups of kur‑ gans, rock shelter Kaptar Kamar 4 September 2016 11 Along the edge of the flat plateau of Burgut Kurgan and basin below to the north, between Zarabag and Burgut Kurgan. 4.97 group of small kur‑ gan‑like structures 9 September 2016 12 On the northern margin of the village of Kho‑ jaunkan, gardens around the site of Lungitepa. 0.8 human bones; Medie‑ val pottery and archi‑ tectural fragments 26 August 2017 13 Along the left bank of Maydan Say above the vil‑ lage of Maydan, around the site of Gaza Kutan. 3.0 almost negative (a few pottery sherds) 28 August 2017 14 Along the Dabil Say / Goz say around confluence of three seasonal streams, south of the Goz vil‑ lage. 5.61 settlement (Bronze Age, Medieval) 29 August 2017 15 Along the right bank of Dabil Say between Pash‑ khurt and Goz. 10.12 seven settlements / significant pottery scatters 30 August 2017 16 Along (to the north of) the road linking the village of Goz and Ak Tosh, place of abandoned village of Kyzylbay. 3.10 cluster of sites (Sapa‑ lli, Yaz I, Hellenistic, Medieval) 3 September 2017 17 19 In the Goz Dagana, from the confluence of Dabil Day and Goz Say to the south. 3.65 11.13 Yaz I / Sapalli site 3 and 10 September 2017 18 21 Along the banks of Maydan Say / Loiliq Say between two mountain ridges, to the east of the Maydan village. 7.78 0.929 Sapalli and Medieval sites 8 and 19 September 2017 20 Along (to the left of) the road connecting Ishto‑ ra and Loylagan and Khatak, in the vicinity of Kulaltepa. 10.63 Hellenistic and Kus‑ han Sasanian sites 12 September 2017 22 To the south of Khojaunkan, around Kaptar Kamar rock shelter. 3.0 Rock shelter Kaptar Kamar; other caves 6 September 2016
124 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 RESULTS: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE UNCOVERED SITES SAPALLI PERIOD (LATE BRONZE AGE) Tulki Tepa Since the very beginning of the surface survey in the northern Pashkhurt basin in 2014, our team encountered individual fragments of pottery resembling closely those of Sapalli culture belonging to the Late Bronze Age. Despite the discoveries of many sites of Yaz Iculture, we were not able to detect any proper site, be it anecropolis or asettlement, with one exception. In 2015 afew fragments of Sapalli pottery have been collected by A. Augustinová at the site of Kosh Tepa (Augustinováetal. 2015, 272), located southeast of Zarabag. Morphological promi‑ nence of the site, as well as later phases of its development documented by rich assemblage of pottery, attest clearly to the existence of long term settlement, even if of limited size. In field season 2016, Augustinová’steam was shown amound at the southern margin of Zarabag called Bobolangar covered with significant pottery scatter, substantial part of which is dated to the Sapalli culture, particularly to its Jarkutan phase. Due to the specific characteristics of the site we believed it represented anecropolis of the given period (Augustinováetal. 2017, 125–126). Fig. 1: Tulki Tepa, photo by L. Stančo. The discovery of Bobolangar, meanwhile partly excavated by A. Augustinová and J. Kysela, stimulated further detailed survey in this area conducted in order to detect asettlement be‑ longing to the supposed burial ground. Further down the stream of Machayli (ca. 1.5 km to the SE), at the elevation of 924 m.a.s.l., we have actually found alow triple ‑mound with aflat oblong adjoining terrace to the south that gave the expected result (Pl. 6/2; Figs. 1 and 9). While the seasonal riverbed of Machayli runs some 250 m to the NE, aless substantial sea‑ sonal stream ran around the triple ‑mound, and in its present state could represent remains of aprehistoric water canal bringing water to the very settlement. Otherwise, we have not detected any water source in the close proximity to the site. While on the surface of the three mounds only few pottery fragments have been collected, its majority comes from the terrace. Our inquiry among the locals did not give apositive answer to the question of aparticular place name, so the site was given the name of Tulki Tepa by us (with tulki meaning fox in Uzbek). Subsequently, intensive surface survey was conducted in order to collect as much
125L. STANČO– S. SHAYDULLAEV– A. SHAYDULLAEV– A. AUGUSTINOVÁ– J. HAVLÍK– P. CEJNAROVÁ of the material as possible. Abundant archaeological material (45 diagnostic / 37 dated frag‑ ments) attests to two principal periods of the site use: The Late Bronze Age (Sapalli) and the High Medieval periods (Fig. 2). Additionally, the site has been measured with total station and the data used to compile simple topographic plan (Fig. 3). Despite our plans for the 2017 season, no excavations were carried out so far, thus all the data we have at the moment comes from the surface of the site. According to the extent of the pottery scatter distributed with various density across the surface of the three mounds and the terrace, the site measures ca. 160×150 m (EW and SN axe). Fig. 2: Pottery of Tulki Tepa (selection), drawing by L. Damašek. Fig. 3: Tulki Tepa, topographical plan by J. Havlík, P.Cejnarová and J. Souček.
126 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 Yul Tepa The site is situated ca. 570 m.a.s.l. on aslightly elevated second river ‑terrace of Maydan / Loyliq Say (Pl. 6/3; Figs. 4 and 10). The terrace overlooks most of the narrow valley 3,300 m long, which is closed on both east and west end by steep mountain ridges with only narrow gorges allowing for passing through. This corridor belongs to only three routes permitting access from the Sherabad plains to the Pashkhurt Valley and connects it with the main historical long ‑distance route leading from Termez to Samarkand via the Sherabad Darya Valley at the same time. This importance is confirmed by the existence of present ‑day asphalt road that perhaps follows exactly the historic unpaved trail. The road itself takes the easiest way across the valley cutting the site in halves in the process, hence the working name given to the otherwise no ‑name site– Yul Tepa (Mound on the road). As for the size of the settlement, we are sure about the part of the site situated to the south of the road, which is semi ‑oval in shape ca. 230 m long (EW axis) and 50 m wide (SN axis). The northern part, although not that clearly delimited as amorphological unit, seems according to the pottery scatter, to mir‑ ror the south one forming together an oval shape 230×100 m. The surface of the site yielded abundant pottery assemblage including rims of shapes typical for the Sapalli culture. Some medieval intrusions may belong to the site itself, but also to the find spot on the third terrace ca. 100–150 m to the north ‑west of Yul Tepa. The strategical location of the site is highlighted by presence of water source in immediate neighbourhood: some 30–40 m from the site, there is aspring located directly in the seasonal riverbed. Nowadays, this source provides water for herds of goats and sheep passing regularly through the valley. Fig. 4: Yul Tepa (right center), photo by L. Stančo.
127L. STANČO– S. SHAYDULLAEV– A. SHAYDULLAEV– A. AUGUSTINOVÁ– J. HAVLÍK– P. CEJNAROVÁ YAZ IPERIOD (LATE BRONZE / EARLY IRON AGE) Kaptar Kamar cave One of the most important discoveries of the field season 2016 was the cave of Kaptar Kamar. The cave, or rather huge rock ‑shelter, was found on September 4, 2016 by Ladislav Stančo in course of the exploration of the kurgan burial ground Gurjak ‑West. The site was closely ex‑ amined in detail by the authors on September 6, 2016. The cave itself is located 1.15 km along the straight line to the southwest of the village of Khojaunkan, at the point with coordinates 37.886213°N 66.768001°E in the northwest steep slope of asmall limestone ridge at the foot of the Kugitang Mountains (Pl. 6/7).4 The Kaptar Kamar (Fig. 5) is ahuge overhang in the altitude of 1,380 m.a.s.l., having the maximum 25.3 m in height (in the centre it reaches 14.5 m and in the innermost interior just 10.9 m), 29.5 m in width (in the centre it measures 24.5 m and in the interior it was 16.6 m), and 30.5 m in length (measured by alaser device). Fig. 5: Kaptar Kamar, photo by L. Stančo. At the site, alarge amount of archaeological material was collected from the surface in order to establish abasic chronology of the settlement. Apreliminary evaluation of the pottery finds by Shapulat Shaydullaev showed that the cave was undoubtedly settled in the Yaz Iperiod (most 4 In the surrounding of Khojaunkan, there are reported several other caves (such as Ajina Kamar, Kukinak Kamar, etc.), all of them smaller than Kaptar Kamar. Some of them are visible even from the village itself.
128 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 fragments are handmade and of reddish colour with characteristic shapes of this period), in the Middle Ages, and perhaps also in the Neolithic period (Fig. 6). In addition, ametal de‑ tector survey of the interior was carried out by Tomáš Smělý. As aresult, small metal objects and two copper coins of the Early and High Middle Ages were unearthed (see the list below). Stone tools have not yet been found on the surface. Let us note that not far from the Kaptar Kamar cave are some of the most important sites of the early prehistory of Central Asia. Approximately 4.7 km southwest of the cave as acrow flies lies the Zaraut Say gorge and the Zaraut Kamar grotto that is adorned by the famous rock paintings of– most probably– Mesolithic and Neolithic date. The famous Teshik Tash grotto with Neanderthal finds is situated about 55 km to the north ‑north ‑east of Kaptar Kamar. Small finds from Kaptar Kamar include: ‑ an iron arrowhead with alength of 12.5 cm and awidth of 3.2 cm (Fig. 6:18); ‑ an iron needle 17 cm long and 0.5 cm wide (Fig. 6:19); ‑ acoin– Abbasids, Harun al ‑Rashid (786–809 AD), Copper Fels, Balkh, Year of Hijri 182 (Lowick 1999, 378–9, number 780‑2); ‑ acoin, probably Ghurids from Ghazni, Muizz ‑ad ‑Din Muhammad (1173–1203 AD), Copper Jital minted in Delhi (Tye– Tye 1995, 119, No. 185).5 For the 2017 season, amultidisciplinary international team lead by Ladislav Nejman has been assembled in order to investigate the rock ‑shelter in detail. This project took place in September 2017. Report of the excavations and paleoenvironmental research is currently being prepared. Other Yaz Isites in the eastern Kugitang foothills The pottery of the Yaz Iperiod has been attested at several sites throughout the Kugitang Piedmonts, including such sites as Kyzyl Bay (near Goz), Kayrit XXVI, no name to the west of Zarabag, no name to the north of Gurjak, and two spots in the Goz Dagana (gorge), all of them are briefly described in the Tab.2. Three find spots around the village of Goz demonstrate anew Yaz Isettlement cluster outside the so far known Kayrit area. The occurrence of finds in the Goz gorge hints at the use of this natural corridor for communication between the Pashkhurt basin and Sherabad plain as early as in the second half of the 2nd millennium BC. The most important site of Yaz Iperiod in Pashkhurt basin discovered so far is represented no doubt by the hillfort of Gaza Kutan near the village of Maydan. This site is preliminarily described by A. Augustinová in this volume (Augustinováetal. 2017, 144). Our investiga‑ tion continued in season 2017, however, also at the two already known walled settlements of the given period, at Burgut Kurgan and Kayrit Tepa. The excavations of the former have been conducted in September 2017 by J. Kysela and Sh. Shaydullaev, while those of the latter took place already in June under Sh. Shaydullaev and O. Khamidov. Preliminary reports on these excavations, as well as study of J. Lhuillier (CNRS, Lyon) on pottery from both sites, are currently being prepared. Moreover, geomagnetic survey has been conducted by L. Darras (CNRS, Lyon) at Gaza Kutan and Burgut Kurgan with most interesting results confirming our assumptions concerning circumferential stone walls. 5 Both coins were classified by Vlastimil Novák, National Museum in Prague.
129L. STANČO– S. SHAYDULLAEV– A. SHAYDULLAEV– A. AUGUSTINOVÁ– J. HAVLÍK– P. CEJNAROVÁ Fig. 6: Pottery and other small finds of Kaptar Kamar: 1–12 handmade pottery, 13–17 wheel ‑made pottery, 18–19 iron tools, drawing by L. Damašek and J. Kysela.
136 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 Nr. ShD Site Trace Longitude Latitude Elevation Surface area (sq m) Period Detected / surveyed (date) Notes 232 No name 15 66.751742 37.641892 637 1020 High Medieval 30 August 2017 11:26 Small tepa with a tomb of an imam on the top 233 No name 15 66.748031 37.633090 635 ?High Medieval 30 August 2017 11:58 Large tepa; extent of settlement uncertain 234 Kyzylbay 1 16 66.706011 37.610843 630 1100 Medieval 30 August 2017 by Augustinová; 3 September 2017 KuPi_073 235 Kyzylbay 2 16 66.705260 37.609634 630 1420 Medieval 30 August 2017 by Augustinová; 3 September 2017 KuPi_073 236 Kyzylbay 3 16 66.704231 37.608542 623 730 Sapalli, Yaz I, Early Hellenistic? 30 August 2017 by Augustinová; 3 September 2017 KuPi_072 237 Kyzylbay 4 16 66.700816 37.606599 618 74000 Medieval 30 August 2017 by Augustinová; 3 September 2017 KuPi_071 238 Goz Dagana 1 17 66.746960 37.621782 605 ca. 100 Sapalli; Yaz I; Early Medieval (5th–6th c.) 30 August 2017 by L. Nejman, 3 September 2017 Small outpost 239 No name 18 66.904323 37.742841 601 44 000 Medieval 8 September 2017 Cluster of pottery scatters 240 No name 18 66.921460 37.745907 588 ?Medieval 8 September 2017 241 Goz Dagana 2 19 66.752110 37.615715 582 ca. 2000 10 September 2017 Pottery scatter 242 Goz Dagana 3 19 66.760590 37.603066 527 2300 Yaz I 10 September 2017 Terrace with a pottery scatter 243 Iskandar Tepa 20 66.973576 37.920690 829 9100 Hellenistic 12 September 2017 Trial trench excavated on 16 September 2017 (by L. Stančo) 244 No name 20 66.974344 37.922585 806 240 Kushan‑Sasanian 12 September 2017 Core of large pottery scatter (generally linked to the site 108 – Kulal Tepa) 254 Yul Tepa 21 66.923728 37.744933 570 ca. 16300 Sapalli 19 September 2017 Site divided by the road 255 No name 21 66.922049 37.742026 565 2700 Medieval 19 September 2017 Tab.2: Overview of the archaeological sites detected during the survey.
137L. STANČO– S. SHAYDULLAEV– A. SHAYDULLAEV– A. AUGUSTINOVÁ– J. HAVLÍK– P. CEJNAROVÁ CONCLUSION During the two field seasons 2016 and 2017, substantial archaeological data on the settlement dynamics in the Pashkhurt basin of the Kugitang foothills have been accumulated. The most important archaeological sites that were detected during the survey are described briefly above and the other ones listed ‘in order of appearance’ in the Tab.2. Among them, let us highlight only those that have the greatest potential for further exploration. These include the rock ‑shelter of Kaptar Kamar with pottery of Early Iron Age, the Late Bronze Age settlements of Tulki Tepa and Yul Tepa, clusters of kurgan ‑like features to the west of Zarabag, north of Karabag, north of Burgut Kurgan, between Gurjak and Khojaunkan, as well as the group of settlements belonging to various periods located along the right bank of Dabil Say between Pashkhurt and Goz (Pl. 6/4). All of these offer great opportunity for further research, both for non ‑destructive investigation and excavations, since they are mostly easily accessible and not covered with any structures or vegetation, not to mention singular convenience given by the fact that the cultural layers belong typically to only one period at each site. The same goes for the Hellenistic settlement of Iskandar Tepa near Loylagan, which– rare in itself– is not covered by any later settlement phase. Further survey in the piedmonts of Kugitang and trial excavations of selected ones of the above mentioned sites are planned by the Czech‑ ‑Uzbekistani team in cooperation with French team for the field season 2018. At the same time, we are preparing an in ‑depth analysis of the settlement pattern in the Pashkhurt Valley and its dynamics both in Prehistory and historical periods. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The report was created with the financial support of the Neuron Foundation for promotion of science and also of the Programme for the Development of Fields of Study at Charles Univer‑ sity, No. Progress 11 ‘History, Key for Understanding the Globalised World’, sub programme ‘Society, culture and communication in Czech history’. The work was further supported by the grant SVV ‑ 2017 ‑ 260422 realized at the Charles University, Faculty of Arts. BIBLIOGRAPHY Augustinováetal. 2015 = Augustinová, A.– Stančo, L.– Shaydullaev, Sh.– Mrva, M. 2015: Archaeological survey in micro ‑oasis Zarabag (South Uzbekistan): preliminary report for season 2015. Studia Hercynia XIX/1, 262–281. Augustinováetal. 2017 = Augustinová, A.– Stančo, L.– Shaydullaev, Sh.– Damašek, L.– Mrva, M.: Archaeo‑ logical Survey of the Oases (Zarabag, Karabag and Kampyrtepa) in the Piedmont of Kugitang Mountains, south Uzbekistan– Preliminary Report for the Season 2016. Studia Hercynia XXI/1, 104–148. Augustinováetal. 2017 = Augustinová, A.– Stančo, L.– Damašek, L.– Khamidov, O.– Kolmačka, T. – Shay‑ dullaev, Sh.: Archaeological Survey in the Oases of Maydon and Goz in the Piedmont of the Kugitang Mountains (South Uzbekistan)– Preliminary report for season 2017. Studia Hercynia XXI/2, 139–159. Bobokhojaevetal. 1990 = Бобоходжаев, А.– Аннаев, Т.– Рахманов, Ш. 1990: Некоторые итоги изучения дрeвних исредневековых памятников предгорной игорной полосы Кугитанг– Байсунтау. История Материальной Кулътуры Узбекистана 23, 25–36.
138 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 Havlíketal. 2017 = Havlík, J.– Stančo, L.– Havlíková, H.: Kurgans of the Eastern Kugitang Piedmonts: Pre‑ liminary Report for Season 2017. Studia Hercynia XXI/2, 160–182. Lowick, N. 1999: Early Abbasid Coinage. London. Rtveladze 2013 = Ртвеладзе, Э.В. 2013: Историко ‑географический и археологический обзор Пашхурдской долины. Географическое местоположение. In: Поселение Дабилькурган вСеверной Бактрии. Материалы Тохаристанской экспедиции 9. Елец, 5–32. Stančo, L. 2016: Archaeological Survey in the Surroundings of Kayrit (South Uzbekistan). Preliminary Report for Season 2015. Studia Hercynia XX/2, 73–85. Stančoetal. 2014 = Stančo, L.– Shaydullaev, Sh.– Bendezu‑Sarmiento, J.– Pažout, A.– Vondrová, H. 2014: Kayrit Burial Site (South Uzbekistan): Preliminary Report for Season 2014. Studia Hercynia XVIII/1‑2, 31–41. Stančoetal. 2016 = Stančo, L.– Shaydullaev, Sh.– Bendezu ‑Sarmiento, J.– Lhuillier, J.– Kysela, J.– Shay‑ dullaev, A.– Khamidov, O.– Havlik, J.– Tlustá, J. 2016: Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Burgut Kurgan in 2015. Studia Hercynia XX/2, 86–111. Stančo, L.– Tušlová, P.eds. 2018: Sherabad Oasis: Tracing Historical Landscape in Southern Uzbekistan. Praha, in print. Tye, R.– Tye, M. 1995: Jitals. ACatalogue and Account of the Coin Denomination of Daily Use in Medieval Afghan‑ istan and North West India. Isle of South Uist. Ladislav Stančo Anna Augustinová Jakub Havlík Petra Cejnarová Institute of Classical Archaeology Faculty of Arts, Charles University Celetná 20, CZ‑11000 Prague 1 [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Alisher Shaydullaev National University of Uzbekistan Faculty of History, Department of Archaeology Alabalar shaharchasi, Universitet‑4 Tashkent, Uzbekistan [email protected] Shapulat Shaydullaev Termez State University Faculty of History, Department of History of Uzbekistan and Archaeology 190100, 42, Fayzulla Khojaev Termez, Uzbekistan [email protected]
194 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 Pl. 6/1: Map of the Kugitang foothills, south Uzbekistan. Pl. 6/2: Survey area I, Kayrit, Zarabag, Karabag.
195PLATES Pl. 6/3: Survey area II, Maydan– Loyliq Say. Pl. 6/4: Survey area III, Pashkhurt– Goz.
196 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXI/2 Pl. 6/5: Survey area III– detail of the settlement cluster Goz ‑south with Qushilish Tepa and Goz Kala. Pl. 6/6: Survey area IV, Loylagan– Kulaltepa.
197PLATES Pl. 6/7: Survey area V, Khojaunkan– Gurjak. Pl. 7/1: Researched area on the Soviet military topographic map created in 1983 (1: 100 000) – highlighted areas of the Maydon and Goz Oases.