The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

About a periodization of the early Iron Age in the Surgut Priobye


UDC 903 (1/9) "61/63"

L.V. Pankratova


Tomsk state pedagogical university

In the early seventies. The Ural archaeological expedition of the Ural State University developed a full-scale archaeological research of the natural boundary of Gora Barsov located on the right coast of the Ob River in 8-15 km west of Surgut. As a result of inspection 55 ancient settlements were revealed [1, page 201]. For clarification of chronology and cultural accessory of monuments stationary researches which are conducted in parallel with prospecting works were undertaken. The Ural colleagues actively introduce sources for scientific use. The material which is saved up for years of studying the natural boundary allowed archeologists to develop the cultural and historical scheme of development of the Surgut Priobye in general and a periodization of the early Iron Age in particular.

The cultural and historical periodization of the early Iron Age of the region is developed by Yu.P. Chemyaki-ny [2-4]. The first stage of the early Iron Age - Beloyarsk and Vasyugan (USh-UP - 1U-Sh centuries BC) is characterized by the researcher as a transition period, time of disintegration of cultural formation of an era of bronze and emergence of the Beloyarsk and kalinkinsky cultures. Yu.P. Chemyakin believes that "interaction of two cultures came to the end with formation on their basis of kulaysky antiquities" [4, page 35]. The second stage - kulayskiya - breaks up to two stages: rannekulaysky (1U — the III-I centuries BC)

Periodizations early

and Sarov (the 1st one or III century BC of century AD). At the first stage there is "a considerable leveling of material culture in borders of the North West Siberian historical and ethnic IEO2, kulaysky culture is formed" [4, page 35]. The Sarov stage characterizes the final stage of the early Iron Age [4, page 37].

However the periodization offered by Yu.P. Chemyakin causes objections. First of all, in it the terminology which developed and fixed in a historiography of science is not considered. It concerns the name of the first stage of the early Iron Age - Beloyarsk and Vasyugan. Proceeding from Yu.P. Chemyakin's position, kulaysky culture in the Surgut Priobye develops by the end of the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage of the early Iron Age as a result of interaction of the Beloyarsk and kalinkinsky cultures. At the same time in the second part of the offered name of a stage the name of a stage of kulay-sky culture (rannekulaysky or Vasyugan) from the periodization developed by L.A. Chindina [5] is used. If to compare periodizations of two researchers, then it turns out that they differ both according to contents, and on chronology (see the table). The Beloyars-co-vasyugansky stage (according to Yu.P. Chemyakin) begins and comes to an end before the Vasyugan stage of kulay-sky culture on L.A. Chindina's periodization. In other words, the Vasyugan stage is broken by Yu. Item Chemya-

Iron Age of Priobye

L.A. Chindina, 1984, page 120, 122 Yu.P. Chemyakin, 1999, page 35 E.M. Danchenko, 1996, page 81 N.V. Polosmak, 1987, page 105

The Vasyugan (rannekulaysky) stage of kulaysky culture VI - P-[centuries BC The Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage of the early Iron Age of the Surgut Priobye USh-UP - IV-Sh of centuries BC Zhuravlyovsky type of monuments of South taiga Priirtyshje UNU of centuries BC The Novochyokinsky culture of the Barabinsk forest-steppe of U-highway of centuries BC

Kulaysky stage: 1 rannekulaysky stage ^-01 - the 1st centuries BC Bogochanovsky type of monuments IU-II of centuries BC

Sarov (pozdnekulaysky) stage of kulaysky culture of P-! centuries BC - At a century AD The Kulaysky stage: The 2nd Sarov stage of the 1st one or III century BC of century AD

1 Work is performed with financial support of RGNF, project No. 04-01-00379a.
2 IEO - historical and ethnic community.

kiny on two stages, and the early stage kulay-sky is not yet, but is called the researcher Vasyugan. The second stage - already kulaysky - has no own name.

It is represented inexact and Yu.P. Che chaff statement that "at the beginning of the second quarter of the I millennium BC there are antiquities of kulminsky type, gamayuns-ky, Beloyarsk, bogochanovsky, novochyokinsky cultures, monuments with ceramics of 2-4 groups (according to L.A. Chindina)" [4, page 30]. Apparently from provided in our data table, the bogochanovsky type of monuments (third quarter of the I millennium BC) is not synchronous Beloyarsk, and coincides with a rannekulaysky stage (according to Yu.P. Chemyakin). E.M. Danchenko connects a transition period from a bronze era by the early Iron Age in Priirtyshje with zhuravlyovsky type of monuments [6]. The Novochyokinsky culture of the Barabinsk forest-steppe is also dated only the third quarter of the I millennium BC that already chronology of the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage of the early Iron Age of the Surgut Priobye (see the table). The lower date of novochyokinsky monuments comes to the upper bound of the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage. Partly novochyokinsky complexes are synchronous late zhuravlyovsky and, probably, early bogochanovs-ky. Considering the datings [U] offered N.V. Polosmak, novochyokinsky monuments probably appear Vasyugan a little later, but also stop existing before the last. However this conclusion, proceeding from the text of the monograph N.V. Polosmak, is not obvious. Moreover, synchronizing novochyokinsky and Vasyugan monuments,

N.V. Polosmak incorrectly refers to the chronology of the Vasyugan stage offered L.A. Chindina. N.V. Polosmak writes that "the ceramics of novochyokin-sky type keeps within a chronological framework of existence Vasyugan (according to L.A. Chindina - the IV-II centuries BC)" [At, page of iGS], but in the text to which the researcher refers another is specified one or VI-II dates of centuries BC [S, page of iG6]. Thus, comparison of the offered periodizations shows that the stages and cultural formations allocated with archeologists are synchronous only partly.

Allocating the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage of the early Iron Age in the Surgut Priobye, Yu.P. Chemya-kin is based that such cultural formations as the Beloyarsk, bogochanovsky, novochyo-kinsky cultures and also the monuments with ceramics of 2-4 groups of Narymsky Priobye which were considered by L.A. Chindina within the Vasyugan stage of kulaysky culture (or communities) have no typical kulaysky signs: the vessels decorated with a stamp a duck, massive trihedral tips of arrows, specific cult casting [4, page 30]. However E.M. Danchenko specifies that "in the 4-3rd centuries BC the bogochanovets used arrows as

with kulaysky tips... and with tips of steppe types" [6, page 60]. The ceramics with an ornament element a duck is revealed on the Bogochanovsky ancient settlement and the settlement the Backwater [6, fig. 68, 3.5]. Also the bronze metalplasticity is found on bogochanovsky monuments [6, fig. 56]. Is known of ware of novochyokin-sky culture a little. Unlike publications of bogochanovsky or sredneobsky ceramic complexes, statistical data neither on monuments separately, nor on culture in general are not provided in the monograph N.V. Polosmak. In drawings it is possible to see nimbuses about fifty vessels among which there is also a vessel ornamented with a stamp a duck [7, fig. 63, 3]. Tips of arrows of kulaysky type are found in Novochyokino's burial ground 2 and on the settlement of Novochyokino 1 [7, page 71]. Only the metalplasticity comparable with kulays-which is not revealed in novochyokinsky monuments. Things of kulaysky shape are found also in monuments of the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan time of the Surgut Priobye. The massive bronze trihedral tip of an arrow is cleared away in the center of the Beloyarsk dwelling of the settlement of Barsov the mountain of Highway/38 [4, page 36, fig. 11, 5; 8, page 117]. Among products of the Beloyarsk culture finds of nine flat bronze cult figures are known [4, page 32]. Judging by the publication of bronze products, they have kulaysky shape (the ancient settlement Barsov the town of U3, Barsov's settlement the mountain of Highway/49) [4, page 36, fig. 11, 2, 3, 4]. Probably, therefore in other work of Yu.P. Chemyakin these castings are published in the table among the artifacts characterizing the Surgut option of kulaysky culture [2, page 71, fig. 5, 25, 26]. Thus, "a set of typical kulaysky signs" is found both in Surgut, and in bogochanovsky, and in novochyokinsky materials. For priirtyshsky and Barabinsk monuments it is not surprising, and on L.A. Chindina's periodization, and on Yu.P. Chemyakin's periodization both that and others treat wounds-nekulaysky time. As for monuments of the Beloyarsk and Vasyugan stage of the early Iron Age, presence of products of kulaysky shape at them can be explained with import from territories where kulaysky culture was already created. Then it is probably necessary to assume that emergence of ku-layets in the Surgut Priobye is result of migration. Or it is necessary to recognize that the Beloyarsk and kalinkinsky cultures are a part of kulaysky cultural and historical community.

At the beginning of the early Iron Age in the Surgut Priobye migrants - carriers of kalinkinsky culture really appear. Yu.P. Chemyakin does not see in a twiddle of kalinkinsky ware of local roots and assumes that kalinkinsky culture could develop "in more southern (southeast?) areas" [4, page 35]. Considering dating

kalinkinsky antiquities (VI - _u — ІІІ centuries BC) and bogochanovsky, novochyokinsky and Vasyugan monuments, it is not difficult to assume from where migrants-kalinkintsy in the Surgut Priobye could appear. By the way, Yu.P. Chemyakin himself notes that the ceramics reminding Surgut is found in the Vasyugan Priobye [2, page 69]. Thus, the earliest and synchronous are monuments of the Surgut and Narymsky Priobye, similar in ceramic stock. In the circumstances becomes obvious that the originality of the marked-out cultures and types of monuments comes down to specifics of ceramic complexes of transitional time and the beginning of the early Iron Age of these regions.

Researches of the Tomsk archeologists convincingly prove that in Narymsky Priobye the formation of kulaysky culture happened on a local basis, and evolution of a twiddle has continuous forward character. The beginning of the early Iron Age in Narymsky Priobye is presented by the New Vasyugan settlement (Vasyugan River) and the Kar-binsky ancient settlement (Ket River). Ceramic complexes of the monuments which are at considerable distance from each other are decorated by the ornamental compositions executed by the general rules of syntagmatics. The ceramics of the New Vasyugan settlement, on the one hand, has similarity to ware of the final of an era of bronze of the Average of Priobye and Priirtyshje; on the other hand, in a twiddle of ware there are lines typical for the early Iron Age [9, page 44, 45]. Among ornaments of the New Vasyugan settlement the motives executed by a stamp a duck are not revealed, but on the Kar-binsky ancient settlement one fragment decorated with it ornamentiry is found. Besides, on the ancient settlement the kulaysky cult metalplasticity is found. The chronology of monuments is established on the basis of datings of bronze tips of arrows. In a cultural layer of the Karbinsky ancient settlement two three-blade tips of arrows with the broken-off scapes are cleared away, analogs which are widespread in "east cultures of the Scythian world in the 7-3rd centuries BC" [10, page 128]. The three-blade tips of arrows known for the fragments found on the New Vasyugan settlement, according to Yu.F. Kiryushin, preceded kulaysky tips and "were a link with tips of an era of late bronze" [9, page 46].

The further direction of evolution of a twiddle is well traced on ceramics of the New Vasyugan ancient settlement and the Stepanovsky complex of monuments. In materials of the New Vasyugan ancient settlement are revealed as the vessels similar to ware of the No-vovasyugansky settlement and Karbinsky fence -

shcha, and the vessels ornamented with typical kulaysky compositions including with use of a stamp a duck [11, page 76, fig. 8]. The ornamental compositions containing stamp prints a duck are revealed in ceramic complexes of all stepanovsky monuments. Evolution of a twiddle of the Vasyugan type of ceramics and its genetic linkage with a twiddle of ware of the Sarov type is convincingly shown in L.A. Chindina's research [12].

Emergence new figured shtampovogo an element (duck) did not cause radical changes in a twiddle of ware of narymsky monuments. On the contrary, the element fitted into the general structure of composition, and the trend of development of an ornamental decor from geometrical continuous to discrete was continued [11]. Figured shtampo-vaya the equipment more corresponded to this trend, but the direction of development of a twiddle had immanent character. It is represented that comparison of ornamental compositions at the level of elementary units - ornament elements - does not yield convincing results, as well as emergence of one element of an ornament (duck) is not enough for differentiation of ceramic complexes on stages and cultures. The stamped duck appears on ware of monuments of final bronze as in Narymskom (settlement Tukh-Sigat of IV), and in the Surgut Priobye (Bartsevk IV'S settlement) [13, page 267, fig. 1; 14, page 108, fig. 1, 17, 20, page 110, fig. 3,

3, 15]. It follows from this that to refuse a hypothesis of formation of kulaysky culture in the Surgut Priobye it would be premature. However process of formation of kulaysky culture in the Surgut region, obviously, differed from genesis of kulaysky culture in Narymsky Priobye.

We believe that the solution of the problem of formation of kulaysky culture on average Priobye is possible by consideration of an ornament as systems which steady invariant characteristics form its structure. However we do not know any work in which study and comparison of structure of ornamental compositions of monuments of the early Iron Age from different areas Ob-Irtyshya would be carried out.

Thus, the early stage of an era of iron is fixed by similar ceramic complexes both in Surgut, and in Narymsky Priobye. However in Narymsky Priobye the autochthonic evolutionary line of development of a twiddle is traced while in the Surgut Priobye only the alien component appears. Proceeding their concrete istochnikovy base, L.A. Chindina and Yu.P. Chemyakin use different methodological approaches in a solution of the problem of a periodization. L.A. Chindina considers a stage of genesis of kulaysky culture in

culture framework, and Yu.P. Chemyakin is inclined diff- cultures: Vasyugan and Sarov. For harakte-

to rentsirovat a periodization, allocating transitional ristik of the local phenomena of formation of culture

periods. In methodological aspect both positions it is necessary to use other, it is accurately reasonable -

have the right for existence. However a position the ny terminology reflecting real Real

L.A. Chindina about formation kulaysky to a cult- the richesky processes happening in the region. Plank beds on average Priobye it is proved typological an example, the initial stage of early iron in Surguts-

mi constructions, stratigraphic nablyude- Priobye it would be expedient to call a lump white

niya, data of radio-carbon dating, and to yarsko-kalinkinsky, having emphasized with that two -

it is not disproved by other researches. Poe- component, non-uniform structure of the population, and

to that we believe that it is necessary to adhere behind the following stage to keep the name vasyu-

offered by this researcher naimenova- a Ghanaian stage of kulaysky culture.

niya in definition of the periods of evolution kulaysky Arrived in edition 14.09.2006


1. Frosts V.M., Yu.P. Chemyakin. Coastal kulaysky ancient settlements on Barsova a grief//Archeology of the Urals and Western Siberia. Yekaterinburg, 2005.
2. Yu.P. Chemyakin. The Surgut Priobye during an era of bronze and early iron//Cultural and economic traditions of the people of Western Siberia. Novosibirsk, 1989.
3. Yu.P. Chemyakin. Problems of archeology of the early Iron Age in the Surgut Priobye//Problems of chronology and a periodization of archeological sites of Southern Siberia. Barnaul, 1991.
4. Yu.P. Chemyakin, K.G. Karacharov. Ancient history of the Surgut Priobye//Essays of history of traditional land use of Khanty: Materials to the atlas. Yekaterinburg, 1999.
5. L.A. Chindina. Ancient history of the Average of Priobye during an iron era. Kulaysky culture. Tomsk, 1984.
6. E.M. Danchenko. South taiga Priirtyshje in the middle - the second half of the I millennium BC Omsk, 1996.
7. Polosmak N. V. Baraba during an era of early iron. Novosibirsk, 1987.
8. Yu.P. Chemyakin, Zykov A.P. Barsov Gora. Archaeological card. Surgut; Omsk, 2004.
9. Kiryushin Yu.P. The new Vasyugan settlement//From the history of Siberia. Tomsk, 1975. Issue 16.
10. Yakovlev of Ya.A. Karbinskoye the ancient settlement of I - a monument of the early Iron Age of the Average of Priobye//Dwelling of the people of Western Siberia. Tomsk, 1991.
11. Kiryushin Yu.F., L.V. Pankratova. New Vasyugan ancient settlement//Works of the Museum of archeology and ethnography of Siberia of V.M. Florinsky. Tomsk, 2002. T. 1.
12. L.A. Chindina. Ornament of ceramics of stepanovsky monuments//Art and folklore of the people of Siberia. Tomsk, 1984.
13. Kiryushin Yu.F. Eneolit and bronze age of a South taiga zone of Western Siberia. Barnaul, 2004.
14. Yu.P. Chemyakin, S.F. Koksharov. New settlement of barsovsky culture (preliminary publication)//Dwellings of the people Western

Siberia. Tomsk, 1991.

UDC 39

M.A. Ovcharova


Barnaul state pedagogical university

For understanding modern ethnic about - groups. Among the factors defining the nature of tsess in Russia great importance the study is of courses of ethnic processes, the important place

the history of formation of any given ethnic dynamics of number of ethnic groups, their instant - borrows

groups. As a result of internationalization, urbani- radio sets, the policy of the state.

zation, increases in social mobility in on- Questions of formation of ethnic group a pestilence -

ibolshy degree ethnic groups, dva of Altai Krai suffered, its ethnographic and etni-which due to various reasons were it is torn off- chesky characteristics on until recently -

ny from the patrimonial territory also live in inoet- were gone beyond the scope of interest regional etnog-

nichesky environment. Before the researcher rises rafichesky science. We are faced by a task an osve-task of studying ways and specifics of development of such problems of a shcheniye of resettlement and number of a mordva

Berge Vegar
Other scientific works: