The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

New materials to the historical fate of the sintashtinsky population in the Volga-Ural region



a. V. Epimakhov NEW MATERIALS TO the HISTORICAL FATE of the SINTASHTINSKY POPULATION IN the VOLGA-URAL REGIONE1

Article on the basis of new materials considers the historical situation which developed in the Volga-Ural region at a turn of a middle and late bronze age.

Rather short period of studying sintashtinsky and potapovsky antiquities with interest pays off intensity and fruitfulness of its study. Various constructions have to lean on concrete materials, therefore their introduction to a scientific turn was and remains demanded zhanrom2. Increment went generally through a research of settlements in recent years, however outside the Southern Trans-Ural region this type of monuments is presented otryvochno3. There is also some dissonance in cultural attribution of a part of materials. Examples such it is possible to gather, for example, from discussion of results of excavation of the burial ground in Berezovoy4. The list with ease can be increased at the expense of other "pozdneabashevsky" monuments. The reasons of divergences root, first of all, in assessment of cultural accessory of a ceramic complex. For the western periphery of sintashtinsky antiquities there is also an uncertainty in the ratio with potapovsky and partly with the Pokrovsk materials. Thus, representation of concrete archaeological sources from this zone remains a relevant genre, and their rather small number obliges to the detailed publication even of separate complexes.

The burial ground at the village of Grachevka

The neighborhood of the village and Kinelsky district in general were actively studied in the 1990th by archeologists of Samara who revealed and investigated excavation a number of interesting objects of a bronze age. The presented materials are received by S.V. Bogdanov (Institute of the steppe OURO RAHN) during excavation of 2008. The burial ground is located in a right bank of the Grachevka River

>- left inflow of the Kutuluk River (left inflow of river. Big Kinel), in 0.8 km to the east of the village of Grachevka of Kinelsky district of the Samara region. The necropolis included two barrows dated for jubate top of a watershed. Geographical coordinates of a monument

>- 53 °09&46.8" NL, 51 °07&25.7" EL of Raznotravno-zlakovye and feather-grass tipchakovye steppes are replaced with an anthropogeocoenosis now. Long-term plowing strongly distorted also shape of nadmogilny constructions (height varies from 0.2 to 0.6 m, diameters

>- from 25 to 40 m). The barrow 1 which removal of an embankment was carried out by means of the equipment with leaving of three meridional brows (fig. 1) underwent stationary study.

Features of ceremonial practice

The top part of an embankment is destroyed by a plowed land on depth of 0.4-0.5 m, height of the remained part of an ancient embankment - 0.6-0.9 m. The remains of the buried soil (0.25-0.4 m) are recorded in the form of the wrong circle with a diameter of 24-26 m. On perimeter of an embankment it is revealed superficial rovik 4.8-6.5 m wide 0.25-0.4 m in depth from continent level. Barrow contained two burials: No. 1 - in the center and No. 2 - in the northeast sector, in the area of a ditch. The top filling of the first sepulchral hole focused in the area of SV-YuZ was strongly broken by holes, for this reason it had a little nepra-

vilny form. Along the western border it was distributed vykid (power of 20-30 cm), partially filling and the area of a construction. In close proximity to east edge of a hole at the level of the buried soil the fragment of the stone pest from dense gray sandstone by the Filling sizes of 5.3 by 8 cm except continental sandy loam is found it is presented by heavy, dense black loam with horizontal lamination with carbonate new growths, separate scales of sinks of freshwater mollusks, prints of near-water plants (cane and reed). According to the author of excavation, the hole was filled in with the damp silty heavy loam taken from flooded lowlands along coast of the Grachevka River. The sepulchral hole (3.96 by 3.11 m) found rather steady subsquare outlines slightly lower than the level of the continent. Further there was its some narrowing, generally at the expense of YuV of a wall and SZ of a corner. The bottom is revealed approximately in meter from a continental surface (2.45-2.50 m from the top point of an embankment). Fragments of the charred longitudinal overlapping are recorded in the western part of a hole approximately in meter from a bottom.

Slightly lower than these nivelirovochny marks the altar was revealed. It included fragments of carcass of a large goat and a clay vessel (No. 1). In situ remained a front part of ink with the vessel placed before a breast of an animal and a back extremity with a basin wing. Fragments of carcass of the same animal, including edges with vertebras, lay before a muzzle of an animal. Judging by the parts which kept initial situation, the dismembered carcass of an animal was laid on overlapping (or in filling) on the left side along a long axis of a hole and focused by the head on the northeast.

Below an altar, in the central part of a hole, at a depth of-1.95-2.30 in a layer of black very dense loam with plentiful carbonate formation of different types, a uniform chaotic congestion fragments of two more clay vessels were located. At the bottom of any material remains it was not recorded. It is important to emphasize absence on walls of a hole of carbonate new growths. It assumes that between a construction of a hole and filling with its soil containing disorders of two vessels, the time interval was insignificant. The lack of human remains allows to consider all this complex as a cenotaph or a sacrificial and funeral construction.

Burial 2 is revealed in northeast the field of a barrow in filling of a rovik at a depth of 1.13 m. By the time of commission of a ritual the sandy embankment strongly became swollen in rovik that allows to assume existence of a chronological gap burials 1 and 2. Walls of sepulchral hole No. 2 were traced very badly, but, judging by separate particles of cretaceous powder and carbonate new growths in the form of exudates, its sizes were 0.6 * 1 m, orientation meridional. Human remains are presented by three small fragments of a skull of the baby in the center of a hole. To the West, to the North and the northeast of fragments of a skull three clay vessels were located. Their morphological and technological lines (sink impurity in the test), it is equal to feature of dressing allow to see rannesrubny stereotipy5. Not only negligence of processing of a surface, but also extremely weak roasting attracts attention. The assumption of production of this ware especially for a ritual arises. The thesis about existence of such ceramics often appears in works, but has reliable confirmations in materialakh6 much less often.

Description of finds

In the light of the stated task further we will focus on a complex of finds of burial 1 where except three vessels, probably, the pest fragment entered.

Tiny pot No. 1 (height - 8.9 cm, diameter of the mouth - 12.5 cm, the maximum diameter - 13.2 cm) is made of dough with plentiful impurity of a sink is characterized by the neck which is sharply unbent outside, low located shoulder expressed by an edge

upon transition to a trunk, the flattened bottom. The vessel nimbus flattened (thickness - 0,60,9 cm), the neck has an internal edge. In this part according to the dry test two symmetric openings are drilled. The ornament is executed by the gear tool. On a neck the double horizontal line and specularly symmetric isosceles triangles above and lower the edges which are visually forming rhombuses is located. The horizontal line on space between tops of triangles is complemented with slanting prints of the same stamp. Triangles have filling with a multirow zigzag. Internal and external surfaces burned out, walls are covered with soot. A porous crock, gray color, in a break black.

Kubkovidny vessel No. 2 is placed in burial in the form of separate fragments, disorder is not full, the form and an ornament are reconstructed only graphically. In the test sink impurity is visually fixed. Height of a vessel of 19.8 cm, diameter can do - 14.8 cm, diameter of the mouth - 23.5 cm, a bottom - 9.4 cm, wall thickness fluctuates from 0.3 cm to 2.3 cm. It has slightly priostrenny nimbus, strongly expanded trunk, a shoulder in the form of a smoothed edge, the narrow bottom issued by well pro-thinned out high zakrainy. The geometrical ornament executed by a gear stamp is dated for the top and benthonic parts of a vessel. The shoulder and a neck are decorated by two slantwise the shaded tapes consisting of prints of a stamp and limited by horizontal lines. Lower than both tapes are put the shaded triangles isosceles slantwise with tops down. In a benthonic part are located a belt slantwise of the shaded triangles tops up and a single-row zigzag. The basis of triangles is put so that to emphasize the line of a zakraina. The crock is quite dense, light brown color.

Vessel No. 3 is not ornamented ostroreberny pot with quite wide, flat bottom and a flat nimbus. Its height - 16.8 cm, diameter of the mouth of 23.9 cm, in the place of the maximum expansion (shoulder) diameter is 25.7 cm, wall thickness from 0.5 cm, up to 1.1 cm. For a molding (on a template?) clay dough with addition of a shredded sink is used. On neck inside modelirovano a distinct edge. A vessel coat hanger outside and all internal surface of a vessel is covered with a thick layer of a prigar. Disorder of a vessel is also incomplete probably organizers of a ceremony moved to a hole of burial No. 2 together with soil already fragmented disorder.

Some aspects of interpretation of a complex

Search of analogy is complicated by a relative rarity of synchronous materials in the considered region. Besides, as it is already mentioned, there are divergences in assessment of the same materials. It is necessary to add to the list of problems and lack of full clarity in a question of relative chronology of cultures of this period which within the East European system of a periodization is the share of a boundary of average and late bronze - the beginning late bronze veka7. Ceremonial lines turn us to a subject of cenotaphs which it is hardly possible to call in details worked. Difficulties of diagnosing of this specific and very rare type of monuments affect. Nevertheless, examples are available. First of all, it is necessary to mention burial

2 in a barrow of 1 Pershinsky occurring at different times nekropolya8. This complex differed from grachevsky in the smaller sizes (1.1 * 0.9 * 0.4 m) and orientation of a hole and also lack of traces of overlapping. On the other hand, in a northwest part of a hole the burial of a kid on the left side and sosud9 is revealed. The obvious similarity of lines of a ritual obliges to comparison of ware. The Pershinsky vessel of the small size (13.0 * 19.3 cm) was molded from the clay test with sink impurity, had the kolokolovidny form, raschesa on an outer surface, the ornament was absent. The vessel and a complex in general is defined by researchers of a necropolis as "abashevsko-rannesrubny". Emergence of this syncretic term is connected not only with scantiness of material for attribution,

Fig. 1. The burial ground at the village of Grachevka. And - the plan of a barrow 1. and - an arable layer; - the horizon of modern soil formation (dark gray sandy loam); in - the lower department of an embankment (gray sandy loam); - the buried soil (the grayish-brown sandy loam sated with carbonate new growths); д - filling of a sepulchral hole 1 (black heavy loam); е - continent (light yellow sandy loam). B - burial 1. 1-Sh - vessels 1-3. and - the charred bar; - bones of animals; in - disorders of vessels.

Fig. 2. The burial ground at the village of Grachevka. Barrow 1. Stock. 1-4 - burial 1 (1, 2, 4 - ceramic vessels (No. No. 2, 1, 3); 3 - fragment of the stone pest). 5-7 - burial 2, ceramic vessels (No. No. 1-3).

but also idea of a steppe "syndrome of continuity" of cultures bronze veka10. From our point of view, the pershinsky vessel quite logically keeps within the Pokrovsk option of interpretation what also radio carbon date of a complex does not contradict to. Its calibrated value of 1950-1770 (2030-1690) to the 11th close sintashtinsky interval, but gravitates to its upper bound.

The ceramic complex of a barrow at the village of Grachevka is more informative. First of all, it is necessary to address tiny vessel No. 1. This type of ceramics is well presented in several cultural groups - abashevsky, potapovsky, sintashtinsky, Pokrovsk. As it is "through", despite relative malochislennost12, special attention is paid to it, moreover, it is considered sign of accessory or genetic linkage from abashevsky obshchnostyyu13. If a thesis about archaeological short pe-

a rioda of existing of type does not cause objections, so tough cultural interpretation seems excessively categorical. In our case of the abashevsky version a number of the facts "resists": localization of a monument out of an abashevsky oykumena; nature of ceremonialism; shape of other vessels coming from the closed complex.

Kubkovidny vessel No. 2 can be not less informative in this regard. To find to it direct analogs in sintashtinsky collections it appears zatrudnitelno14. The vessel which is available at our disposal possesses the developed form and the grown poor ornamental scheme. That and other conclusion has the nature of estimated judgment, but does not contradict the tracked direction of evolution kubkovidny sosudov15 that allows to carry this copy rather to sinashtinsky reminiscences, than actually to sin-tashtinsky antiquities. As indirect confirmation of such conclusion the lack of figuration on vessel No. 3 can serve that in general is not typical for sintashtinsky tradition - such ceramics makes some percent from total number.

Thus, concerning chronological attribution, it is much more clarity in comparison with an issue of cultural identification. This situation reflects not only features of regional kulturogenetichesky processes how many existence of stable relations on the extensive spaces of the Asian steppe and forest-steppe caused by the whole group of factors: similarity of substrate and superstratny participants of processes, proximity of the life support system and ideology, economic (including metallurgical) contacts, etc.

of Gratitude

With pleasure I express gratitude to the author of a field research S.V. Bogdanov (Institute of the steppe OURO RAHN) for the given opportunity to introduce for scientific use unpublished materials. I consider a pleasant debt to thank also O.D. Mochalov (SAMGPU) for fruitful discussion of materials and conclusions.

1 Work is performed with financial support of the Russian Federal Property Fund (projects 08-06-00380-a and 09-06-91330-NNIO_a).
2 See: Gening, V.F. Sintashta. Archeological site of Aryan tribes of UraloKazahstanskiy steppes. T. 1 [Text] / V.F. Gening, G.B. Zdanovich, V.V. Gening. - Chelyabinsk: Yuzh. - the Urals. prince publishing house, 1992. - 408 pages; Vasilyev, I.B. Potapovsky the kurganny burial ground of the Indo-Iranian tribes on Volga [Text] / I.B. Vasilyev, P.F. Kuznetsov, A.P. Semyonova. - Samara: Samara University publishing house, 1994. - 208 pages; Vinogradov, N.B. Mogilnik of a bronze age the Curve Lake in the Southern Trans-Ural region [Text] / N.B. Vinogradov. - Chelyabinsk: Yuzh. - the Urals. prince publishing house, 2003. - 362 pages; Epimakhov, A.V. Early complex societies of the North of the Central Eurasia (on burial ground materials the Stone Barn-5). - Prince 1 [Text] / A.V. Epimakhov. - Chelyabinsk: Chelyabinsk Publishing house, 2005.

>- 192 pages; Tkachyov, V.V. Steppes of the Southern Cisural area and the Western Kazakhstan at a turn of eras of average and late bronze [Text] / V.V. Tkachyov. - Aktobe: Aktyubinsk regional center of history, ethnography and archeology, 2007. - 384 pages, etc.

3 Tkachyov, V.V. Steppes It is southern Cisural area... - Page 15.
4 See: Halyapin, M.V. Burial of the founder of an era of bronze from the territory of steppe Cisural area / M.V. Halyapin//Questions of history and archeology of the Western Kazakhstan. - the Issue 4. - Uralsk, 2005. - Page 203-217, etc.
5 The point of view of the author of excavation differs from stated. S.V. Bogdanov believes that vessels of burial 1 have to be carried to number Pokrovsk though rannesrubny lines in a ceramic complex, undoubtedly, are.
6 Our experience of search of such certificates in a sintashtinsky collection of the burial ground Stone Barn-5 [Epimakhov, A.V.O of functionality and not functionality of funeral ware A.V. [Text] / Epimakhov, M.G. Epimakhova//Ancient ceramics: problems and prospects of an integrated approach. - Chelyabinsk: Southern Ural prince publishing house, 2003. - Did not give to page 77-84] absolutely evidences. Moreover, over a half of all ware had operation traces.
7 See: Chernykh, E.N. Formation of the Eurasian "steppe belt" of pastoral cultures: a look through a prism of an arkheometallurgiya and radio-carbon chronology [Text] / E.N. Chernykh//Archeology, ethnographies and anthropology. - 2008. - No. 3 (35). - Page 36-53.
8 Kargala, volume IV: Necropolises on Kargalakh; population Kargalov: paleoantropologichesky researches / sost. and nauch. edition of E.N. Chernykh. - M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2005. - Page 35-37.
9 As more remote, but very evident analogy to this option of a ritual of a sacrifice can serve children's sintashtinsky burial of the 15th barrow 4 burial grounds the Stone Barn-5 [Epimakhov, A.V. Ranniye complex... Page 138-139, fig. 102]. In this case in legs of the child the carcass of a lamb which is completely repeating situation and orientation of the dead was laid. For achievement of accuracy in imitation of position of legs of the person the organizers of a ceremony, probably, had to cut tendons of hind legs of an animal.
10 Chernykh, E.N. Kargala. T. V: Phenomenon and paradoxes of development; Kargala in the system of metallurgical provinces; Undercover (sacral) life of archaic miners and metallurgists / E.N. Chernykh. - M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2007. - Page 75-83.
11 Calibration is executed in the OhSa1 3.10 program. The first gave value with 68.2% probability of, in brackets - from 95.4%
12 For example, Tkachyov, V.V. Keramika of sintashtinsky culture / V.V. Tkachyov, A.I. Havansky. Orsk - Samara: OGTI publishing house, 2006. - Page 35, fig. 49
13 See: Kuzmina, O.V. Keramika of abashevsky culture / O.V. Kuzmin//Questions of archeology of the Volga region. - Issue 1. - Samara: Publishing house of SamGPU, 1999. - Page 154-205; Pryakhin, A.D. Ostrorebernye abashevsky vessels of the dono-Volga region / A.D. Pryakhin, V.I. Besedin//Dono-Volga abashevsky culture. - Voronezh: The Voronezh state. un-t, 2001. - Page 101-117, etc.
14 Tkachyov, V.V. Keramika of sintashtinsky. - Fig. 60, 61. In passing it should be noted that criteria of allocation of this class (narrow, less than a half of diameter of the mouth, a bottom; existence of a pallet and/or a S-shaped trunk) the mentioned authors are up to the end not sustained. From 24 vessels on illustrations 19 have a required ratio of diameters, 13 - a pallet, 12 - smoothly pro-thinned out trunk.
15 Mochalov, O.D. Early kubkovidny vessels of an era of bronze in the Volga region and in the Urals / O.D. Mochalov//RA. - 2004. - No. 2. - Page 131.

List of reductions

RA - "Russian Archeology" (Moscow)

SAMGPU - the Samara state pedagogical university

OGTI - the Orsk humanitarian Institute of Technology

Mills Steven
Other scientific works: