Studying materials of the protective structures is important in the field of military art. The fortifications of Eastern Europe are represented by defensive structures of ancient hillforts (shafts, moats and escarpments) and «long shafts» of Scythian time. These objects were important spatial and chronological markers of the Dnieper-Donetsk Forest-steppe cultures. The evidences of written sources are limited only by Herodotus’s remarks about the existence of a town in this region with wooden walls and the city of Gelon. The main source of research is archaeological materials. Most of the settlements in the region (123 of 148) are examined through exploration. The visual and instrumental plans were fixed, field materials were collected, and the trenches were carried out. At 36 fortifications, partial or full sections of protective structures were made. Despite the numerous preliminary studies, the genesis, chronology and functional load of ancient settlements still remain topical issues. Investigation of protective structures is connected with the study of ancient construction building techniques, definition of the relationship type of nomadic and settled population of Eastern Europe and the role of ancient settlements in this complex system of contacts.
The natural and geographical conditions of the environment were directly influenced by the place and the configuration of protective structures. The contours of the settlement directly depended on the shape of the cape, plateau or terrace. A large array of information on the planigraphic and topographical features of the fortifications was worked out by A.O. Moruzhenko and led to the creation of a working classification. Today, this particular systematization is widely used in scientific literature. One of the major drawbacks of this work is the perception of fortified settlements as static structures that were created simultaneously, with the same plan and didn’t evolve over time. We tend to perceive hillforts as settlements that had changed in space and had been rebuilt over the course of their existence. However, the lack of information leaves the concept of a new typology only a perspective.
Thus, the moat could serve as an element of passive and active defense, as well as a source for soil while constructing the shaft. The diversity of moat types, even in a single hillfort, indicates that when forming this element of defense, a special and conscious choice of ancient builders was made.
The entrance to the fortress was the most vulnerable place in the entire fortification system. The complex of entrances to the settlement was intended to provide a settlement with normal functioning of people and goods movement, both in peaceful and wartime. Therefore, the structure and its defense required great skills and high knowledge of military affairs. Most of the settlements are located on high, steep slopes, therefore the entrances most often were arranged on the lower side. Sometimes settlements had several entrances. The builders wanted to protect them as much as possible, creating an additional system of shafts and moats, or using the fortified suburb that surrounded the main courtyard, in order to achieve tactical flanking fire.
The protective structures of many ancient settlements contain signs of rebuilding, namely separate elements (shafts and moats) and protective lines. That is, they could radically change their contour, as to increase (Tsyrkunivske hillfort), and to the side of the decline (Southern Shaft of Bilsk hillfort). Despite the fact that the creation of tree-earthen structures of domestic and sacred nature was an integral part of life of the forest-steppe during Scythian time, the construction of protective structures was very laborious measure. The desire for rounded forms and attempts to make maximum use of natural barriers testifies to the efforts of ancient population to avoid large volumes of work, without prejudice to the defense capability. Despite the large volumes of labor, defensive structures shouldn’t be considered as long-term construction. Probably, in most cases, they were reduced to a short time in the conditions of mobilization of a large amount of labor.
Fastening of the Dnieper-Donetsk Forest-steppe corresponds to the level of development of Europe fortification in VІ-V centuries BC, in general. The population of the Dnieper-Donetsk Forest-steppe took over the building traditions from the Right- Bank Ukraine. From the middle-second half of VI century BC on the basis of specific natural-geographical conditions the process of forming own tradition took place. The common origin and ecological niche, contributed to the creation of such fortifications within this ethnocultural massif of tribes in VI-V centuries BC. Some features of
fortifications construction, presumably, could be taken by the northern forest tribes (protective fortified suburb, multi-row protection system, baked core of the shaft).
