FRONTIER SOCIETY: THE POST-MONGOL POPULATION OF THE HLYNSK ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMPLEX

Abstract

The systematic analysis of archaeological evidence recovered from the Hlynsk archaeological complex enables the interpretation of this settlement as a representative example of a post-Mongol frontier society, shaped amidst the political and cultural transformations of the late medieval period. Artefactual data indicate a notable continuity and evolution of local traditions rooted in the earlier Kyivan Rus period, accompanied by significant external influences-primarily from the Golden Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This cultural synthesis is most clearly expressed in the material culture of the settlement’s inhabitants. Residential structures identified at the site bear strong typological parallels with contemporaneous complexes found across other Dnipro Left Bank settlements-particularly in excavation data from D. Berezovets at the Stan 2 site near Putyvl, as well as from the Komarivka and Ozarychi sites. In addition to domestic dwellings, evidence of production facilities has also been recorded. Foremost among these is a blacksmith’s workshop, whose output-judging by the recovered artefacts-met the settlement’s needs in horse-shoeing, weaponry and harness manufacturing, fishing implements, domestic tools, transport fittings, and instruments for artisans such as jewelers and metalworkers. There are also indications of local pottery production and possible amber processing. The ceramic assemblage is composed predominantly of locally produced kitchenware, complemented by imported storage and tableware. The kitchen ceramics share formal parallels with wares uncovered at Ozarychi and Putyvl (Horodok). The presence of imported vessels — originating from the Azov region, the Black Sea littoral, and Crimea-attests to the persistence of trade connections with these regions. Notably, such items were primarily in the possession of local elites, including amphorae used for the transportation of wine. Further evidence of intercultural interaction is provided by personal ornaments, particularly female adornments that align with typologies from Lithuanian territories or Bulgar workshops. Silver mirrors characteristic of Golden Horde sites also appear among the artefacts associated with local women. The Hlynsk complex demonstrates robust economic activity, the existence of specialized craft production, and indicators of social stratification. These are corroborated by numismatic finds of both Western and Eastern origin. The emergence and development of this settlement may have resulted from favorable conditions, particularly the collaboration of indigenous and incoming elite groups. It is within this context that one may tentatively associate the Hlynsk settlement with one of the centers of territorial control held by the notable princely family of Tatar origin within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania — the Hlynsky family. The multicultural nature of the Hlynsk complex — discernible in the typological diversity of its material culture — reflects intensive interethnic contact typical of frontier zones. As such, the site should be regarded not merely as a local archaeological context but as a representative model of a post-Kyivan Rus frontier society. In conclusion, the findings from Hlynsk enhance our understanding of sociocultural processes in the borderlands of Eastern Europe during the late 13th to early 15th centuries. Moreover, they contribute valuable insight into the adaptive strategies employed by the populations of the Intermarium region amid conditions of political volatility and cultural entanglement.