The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Ornamental traditions in Western Siberia


V.A. Zaha

At a research of development of ornamental areas (communities) in Western Siberia M.F. Kosarev noted that on the eve of a metal era the autochthonic (samussky) area of cultures from the ware otstupayushche-drawn by figuration, is mainly localized in southeast Priobye, and edge cultural area which ceramics is in many respects similar to ware of the Cis-Urals edge Neolithic — generally and East Trans-Ural region [1974. Page 6]. These ornamental areas at the end of the late Neolithic, on mneniyuucheny, were divided by community with edge and patching figuration of ceramics. It was considered by us earlier [Zaha, 2004]. The peak of its blossoming falls on an era of early metal — late bronze when edge and patching ornaments decorated ware from Yamal to Altai and from Minusinsk Depression to east slopes of the Urals. Except the main traditions which arose with the advent of ceramics and existing practically before the late Middle Ages in the territory of Western Siberia are fixed and occurring rather not for long.

We connect peak of development of tradition first of all with the greatest area of cultures of community — this principle, is kept and in this case when studying other ornamental traditions (otstupayushche-drawn edge, yamochno-edge, figured shtampovoy, etc.) (fig. 1).

Tradition of the otstupayushche-drawn ware figuration

With the advent of new materials on the early periods of the Neolithic as in Western Siberia and in adjacent territories the problem of emergence of ceramic production beyond the Urals and together with it distribution of the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition became current.

Most of researchers consider that ceramic production in Western Siberia arose independently and the most ancient autochthonic ware — with otstupayushche-nakolchaty figuration [Kosarev, 1991; Molodin, 1985]. According to V.F. Starkov, at early stages of the east Ural and sredneirtyshsky neolytic cultures the ware was decorated with the otstupayushche-drawn ornament that probably, also assumes its autochthony [Starkov, 1980]. The close position is taken by V.T. Kovalyova, spo to opinion of which, the neolytic culture of the forest Trans-Ural region was created on the basis of local Mesolith, and kozlovsky continued development of local traditions, koshkinsky came under influence, and it is possible, and direct infiltration of the southern population. "Apparently, in both cases it is appropriate to assume influence of the southern impulse on development of ceramic production. These can explain many common features in figuration of koshkinsky and kozlovsky groups" [Kovalyova, 1989. Page]. Some researchers believe that ceramic production in Western Siberia, in particular in the Trans-Ural region, was borrowed. So, O.N. Bader noted that "transition from Mesolith by the Neolithic resulted at primitive Ural residents from development on the place, but under the influence of related to them the southern neighbors from whom some elements of culture, ability to do pottery, specific forms of ware were borrowed... Pottery of the most ancient stage (Kozlowski. — V.Z.) differs in quite developed technologies, forms and figuration that speaks against its independent, local emergence" [1970. Page 159].

L.L. Kosinskaya, pointing out the general similarity of early neolytic ware of the Urals and Western Siberia to ceramic complexes of some cultures of the central and northeast part of the European Russia, connects it with identical processes of a neolitization of forest cultures of Eurasia. She considers,

"that the mechanism of interaction of the North and South was difficult, and the nature of communications is diverse and included not only migrations. The migration hypothesis can be accepted only for boborykinsky archaeological culture today. The initial area — the place of formation of boborykinsky archaeological culture

— lies, most likely, in forest-steppe Pritobolye as to the south, in steppe areas, the makhandzharsky and atbasarsky cultures of the southern circle are localized. In other cases it is necessary to consider promotion of ceramics on the North as result of cultural diffusion, i.e. as stage-by-stage loan of ready technology by more and more northern groups of the population of UZS CO — the last stage of the process which began during neolytic revolution in the Middle East. As the transferring links of this cultural innovation from steppes the cultures of the southern (forest-steppe) part of its area had to serve" [Kosinskaya, 2002]. According to the logic of the researcher, loan had to go from steppe makhandzharsky and atbasarsky cultures — the cultures of the southern circle. However the boborykinsky ceramic complex has more similarity to materials of Caspian and Central Asian regions, than to ware of these cultures. Therefore, it is more lawful to consider that ceramic production in Western Siberia, including in forest-steppe and southern taiga Tobolo-Ishimye, appears as a result of migration of groups of the population of carriers of ware with the otstupayushche-drawn figuration, most likely, from the Areas of Priaralya and Prikaspiya.

Fig. 1. Development of the otstupayushche-drawn, figured and stamped, edge and yamochno-edge ornamental traditions in Western Siberia:

1, 2, 4 — Tashkovo 3; 3 — the Fox Mountain; 5, 6 — Yin 11; 7-9 — SAD 18; 10-12 — Samus 1;
13 — the Birch island; 14, 15 — Chepkul 21; 16, 17 — Velizhana 1; 18, 19 — Samus 4;
20 — Horde 12; 21, 22 — Horde 11; 23-25 — Mysayevka 1; 26 — the Tomsk burial ground;
27 — the village of Myshayly (Baraba); 28 — St. - Maslyanskoye settlement; 23-30 — Pritobolye's Average;
31-37 — Tyutrinsky and Savinovsky burial grounds; 38, 39 — the burial ground the Stone Cape;
40 — Loginovskoye ancient settlement; 41-44 — the ancient settlement Lyulikar; 45-48 — the ancient settlement Chechkino 1

Thus, the peak of development of the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition in Western Siberia falls on the early period of the Neolithic when it extends from the Kazakh melkosopochnik to nizoviya of Ob and from the Urals to Entre Rios of Irtysh and Ob, a little later complexes with the otstupayushche-drawn ornaments are noted in Prisalairye and on Yenisei. At an early stage the otstupayushche-drawn figuration is noted on boborykinsky and koshkinsky ware, later — to the east, in izylinsky and unyuksky complexes [Zaha, 2003; Zyablin, 1973].

During the subsequent period of the Neolithic there is a gradual reduction of a share of the otstupayushche-drawn patterns on — kozlovsky, poludensky and kokuysky ware almost to a gapolovin — and replacement with their edge ornaments. Similar processes are observed in the taiga regions of Priirtyshje, Priobye and to the north of the basin of the Ob River where complexes of so-called northern cultural types — sumpanyinsky are investigated, bystrinsky, amninsky and other [Kosinskaya, 1999, 2001; Yu.P., 2001].

Gradually by the end of the Neolithic in the Lower Pritobolye, Priishimye, Priirtyshje and Barab the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition fades. In Pritobolye, edge and yamochnogrebenchaty traditions (shapkulsky and andreevsky cultures), and from Priishimya to Baraby — grebenchatoyamochny extend (Ekaterina's culture, on Aleksandrovsk a stage of which still remains the ornament which is carried out by the receding stick, for example in a complex of the settlement of Vengerovo 3 [Molodin, 1977]). To the east, in districts of the Tomsk and Top Priobye, Prisalairya otstupayushche-drawn

the ornamental tradition remains almost in pure form until the end of early metal (irbinsky complexes) [Zaha, 2003].

During the doandronovsky period in Pritobolye, along with edge and patching tradition, appears otstupayushche-drawn again (tashkovsky culture). Complexes with the loginovsky ware decorated in the otstupayushche-drawn equipment concern later in the Lower Priishimye [Gening, Evdokimov, 1969]. To the east, in Priirtyshje and the Top Priobye, the otstupayushche-drawn patterns differ on ware of the third and fifth group of the burial ground Size and in materials of samussky culture (30.1% of ceramics of the last are ornamented with the receding stick) [Matyushchenko, Sinitsyna, 1988; Matyushchenko, 1973a; Molodin, Glushkov, 1989].

With arrival on the territory of Western Siberia of the andronovsky population all autochthonic cultures (and their ornamental traditions) are absorbed by the culture of newcomers. Only with disintegration of the uniform fedorovsky cultural massif edge and patching ornaments and to a lesser extent — the ornaments executed by the receding stick renew. The last appear with inflow to the forest-steppe of the taiga population

— carriers of cultures with cross and printing figuration in transitional from bronze to iron time during an era of iron and the Middle Ages [Trufanov, 1984; Matyushchenko, 1973b].

Thus, the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition with the advent of which in Western Siberia there is ceramic production dominated in the early Neolithic, in a consequence it begins to be forced out autochthonic edge and edge and patching, and at the end of a neolytic era they already dominate.

Edge ornamental tradition

At the beginning of the 2000th L.L. Kosinskaya in the territory of Nadymo-Purovsky Entre Rios on northern slopes of Siberian Ridge explored the settlement Et 1 containing ceramics with edge figuration. Similar ware with an edge ornament is met on the ancient settlement Amnya 1, the settlements of Barsova Gora 1/8a, the Damned Mountain and other monuments within a taiga zone [Kosinskaya, 2003; Glushkov, 1998; Sobolnikova, 2001]. For two dwellings of the settlement Et 1 on coal six radio-carbon dates, two of which, are received: 6740 ± 65 l. N (LE 6594) and 6880 ± 80 l. N (LE 6596) — are close to one of dates for the ancient settlement Amnya 1 — 6900 ± 90 l. N (LE 4973) and date for the Kama edge Neolithic of Pezmog 4 in the basin of the Vychegda River 6820 ± 70 l. N (GIN 11915) [Kosinskaya, 2003; Pockets, 2003].

By results of the researches L.L. Kosinskaya came to a conclusion that in "a taiga zone of Cisural area and Western Siberia the edge ornamental tradition, probably, arose early enough, had wide territorial circulation and left a mark on shape of ceramics of later time" [2003, page 101].

The similar situation, in our opinion, is traced also in forest Tobolo-Ishimye. Here boborykinsky complexes appear and exist earlier, than northern cultural types (sumpanyinsky, bystrinsky, amninsky and so forth [Kosinskaya, 2001; Yu.P., 2001]), created in the course of advance to the North of carriers of the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition and their interaction with the local community which is not owning skills of ceramic production or only mastering him.

Edge patterns are present at single vessels already at the boborykinsky Tobolo-Ishimya complexes. Generally it is prints of the "walking" and mnogozuby comb. On the settlement Uk 6 on 10 of 124 vessels the edge ornament typical "for sosnovoostrovets" is noted. On the basis of the received materials the researchers considered possible to synchronize boborykinsky and sosnovoostrovky complexes in the considered region [Vasilyev, etc., 1998]. From 36 vessels of a boborykinsko-koshkinsky ceramic complex of the settlement of Borovlyanka 2 on 19 prints of edge "rocking chair" are noted [Panfilov, etc., 1991]. In the analysis of boborykinsky ceramic complexes it is possible to notice regularity which is expressed in increase in number of vessels with edge ornaments at reduction of a share of not ornamented. Presence at the otstupayushche-drawn ceramic complexes of a certain quantity of ware with edge figuration allows to assume existence already at early stages of the Neolithic of independent ornamental tradition.

Blossoming of edge figuration is the share of the end of the Neolithic — the beginning of early metal and is connected with formation of sosnovoostrovsky and shapkulsky complexes. Then reduction of the territory in which cultures with edge figuration of ware developed is planned, generally at this time the edge and patching ornamental tradition widely extends [Zaha, 2004]. The area of edge tradition is narrowed to a strip of the forest-steppe and forest territory along east slope of the Urals where ayatsky complexes were created. After the small period of expansion of the territory with edge figuration of ware in doandronovsky and andronovsky time when in Pritobolye there are settlements close koptyakovsky, and in the territory of the northern forest-steppe — settlements of cattle-farmers of alakulsky and fedorovsky cultures, there is its reduction again. Similar processes happen approximately to the middle of the II millennium AD, time when practically all lesostepnuyuy and the forest territory of Western Siberia is occupied by the population producing ware with edge figuration — ancestors of the modern Ugrian people.

of Yamochno-grebenchataya

Rather long time materials of andreevsky culture were considered in total with lipchinsky, shapkulsky and other complexes. Only after the research of single-layer settlements with the called ceramics andreevsky materials began to be considered as independent. Pritobolya allows to say studying new monuments in the territory of Nizhny Novgorod that andreevsky culture with a peculiar yamochno-edge figuration of the ware not characteristic of cultures Tobolo-Ishimya and Western Siberia, and close figuration of ceramics of the East European cultures, passed in the development two stages — andreevskiya and mysayevskiya.

The center of an area of culture at an andreevsky stage can be considered the system of Andreevsky lakes where obnaru-

wives the remains of andreevsky constructions and the cultural layer extended to hundreds of meters on the southern and northern coast of Small and Big Andreevsky lakes. The southern border of distribution of andreevsky ware passes approximately in the district of Kurgan, northern is marked by the valley of Irtysh, western it is possible to hold on an average current of the Round River, east in a right-bank part of Tobol where settlements with yamochno-edge figuration of ware and the remains of dwellings of a land design with the walls powdered with soil and a roof [Zaha, are found 1987; Panfilov, 1987; Zaha, etc., 1988; Kosarev, Galkin, 1988].

The Andreevsky ceramics is presented by vessels of sharp and round-bottomed forms with straight lines or walls inclined inside. In a decor the poles put obliquely put ornamentiry, in a form oval, subtriangular and tear-shaped prevail. Vdavleniya, as a rule, deep, with negatives in the form of pearls on vessel wall inside. The pattern densely covers all outer surface of a vessel, including the bottom. In most cases poles alternate with the prints of an edge stamp applied also on an internal surface of a nimbus and its cut. Ware is rather same, similar ornamental compositions are noted on ceramics practically of all monuments of andreevsky culture including located on a right bank of Tobol [Kovalyova, 1995].

Many researchers were engaged in studying a question of origin of andreevsky culture. V.T. Kovalyova and N.M. Chairkina consider it alien and connect with neolytic complexes of a forest strip of Eastern Europe [Kovalyova, Chairkina, 1991; Kovalyova, 1995]. According to M.F. Kosarev, addition of yamochno-edge ornamental tradition happened in Pritobolye on a boborykinsky basis of [1993]. L.N. Koryakova and S.F. Koksharov believe that they a number of eneolitichesky cultures, including andreevsky, developed on "local neolytic base, but under a certain influence from the North and from the South" [1991. Page 37].

Undoubtedly, when comparing ceramics andreevsky and the East European yamochno-edge cultures (lyalovsky, Balakhna, Ryazan, etc.) there are many common features: technology of drawing patching patterns, their domination in figuration, a form of poles (subtriangular, rounded conic, etc.), ranks of prints of an edge stamp as dividing belts of the ornamental field [Polyakova, 1973; Raushenbakh, 1973; Tsvetkova, 1973]. However the narrowness of localization of andreevsky complexes — only in the Lower Pritobolye suggests an idea that their genetic roots should be looked for in local, perhaps, still to the doneolitichesky environment [Zaha, Fomin, 1999]. Their formation, in our opinion, was a component of process of formation of local late neolytic cultures. The similarity of andreevsky complexes to the East European yamochno-edge is explained, most likely by the general possibly finnoyazychny, substrate.

According to A.N. Panfilov, andreevets are widely settled and partially dissolved in the massif of local doandronovsky cultures. Elements of andreevsky figuration are traced in ceramic complexes of the kondinsky and lipchinsky population. Yamochnotekstilny ware of mysayevsky type Pritobolya and Priishimya continues the andreevsky line of development [Panfilov, 1989]. The researcher dates a complex of the settlement of Mysayevka 1 beginning of the II millennium BC, the initial stage of an early bronze age.

The area of monuments with yamochno-textile mysayevsky ceramics partially coincides with the territory of distribution of andreevsky settlements in the Lower Pritobolye, but in comparison with andreevsky is considerably displaced on North and to the southeast. Mysayevsky ware is found on the settlements of Yurtobor 3, Karbansky Bridge 8, 21, 28, in the Lower Pritobolye, in lower reaches of the river Vagay on the settlement of Mysayevka 1 where it makes the main complex. In Priishimye the similar ware is found on monuments of Kokuy 2, Pakhomovsky Pier 3 and Mergen 6 [Krizhevskaya, 1969; 1977]. Close settlements the ceramics is met as a part of ceramic complexes of the settlements of Vishnevka 1 (group 3 on N.S. Tatarintseva), 2, Bishkul 1, 4, 5 [Zaybert, 1973; Zdanovich, 1973; Tatarintseva, 1984]. An area of monuments with yamochno-textile figuration of ceramics of a mysayevsky stage of andreevsky culture Tobolo-Ishimya covers generally southern taiga and forest-steppe territories.

Figured shtampovaya ornamental tradition

Figured shtampovaya the ornamental tradition is not defining and independent as, for example, edge or edge and patching, appeared at early stages of the Neolithic though the first prints of a figured stamp were applied on ware in neolytic time. On separate fragments of izylinsky ceramics of the Neolithic Prisalairya prints in the form of a rectangle, a circle, a bear paw and others, by the ornamentira executed natural and specially made [Zaha, are met 1990; 2003]. Close ornaments are found by F.I. Mets on ceramics of early metal from Narymsky Priobye [Metz, 1993].

The most considerable splash figured shtampovoy figuration is observed at the end of a bronze era, the early Iron Age and the early Middle Ages. The stamp in the form of a cross in a circle is known on ware of elovsky culture of the settlement Horde 12 [Zaha, 1991]. In transitional time from bronze to iron there is an advance of carriers of northern cultural traditions to the south from the Urals to Yenisei. As a result of foreign culture penetration on Wednesday of forest-steppe cultures hybrid cultures with ware in which ornament figured stamps in the form of a slanting cross and "snake" [Borzunov, were applied 1990 will everywhere be created; Vasilyev, 1982; Abramova, Stefanov, 1985; Beavers, 1999]. In the course of assimilation of the alien population by the beginning of the early Iron Age the figured stamps in the form of a slanting cross from ware figuration gradually disappear.

New rise in use of figured and stamped ornaments, generally in the form of "duck", is noted in the early Iron Age, in cultures kulaysky and close to it from Yamal to Altai and from Irtysh to Yenisei [Gryaznov, 1956; Troitsk, 1979].

Later figured stamps appear on ware of molchanovsky type (UIChH of centuries), potchevashsky culture (UNH of centuries), orontursky ceramics (US-H of centuries) and in ceramic complexes of relkinsky culture

(UkUSh of centuries) [Archeology USSR., 1987]. In all cases the stamps represent prints of rectangular, rhombic and round shape with hillocks, crosses or lines inside. Figured stamps, as a rule, are combined with an edge ornament. In the late Middle Ages the figured stamps are applied on pottery seldom, but they decorate birch bark products at the Ob ugr up to the present (see, for example: [Kulemzin, Lukina, 1977. Page 179, tab. XVI, 28-30]).

Thus, in Western Siberia three main ornamental traditions representing certain ethnocultural communities are noted. With the population producing ware with edge figuration, most likely, it is possible to identify the Ugrian people, with carriers of edge and patching tradition — Samoyeds, and we connect ceramics with the otstupayushche-drawn ornaments with praindoyevropeyets. Blossoming of ornamental traditions, so, and ethnocultural communities happens during the different periods. For the otstupayushche-drawn ornamental tradition it is early stages of the Neolithic when groups of the southern population get into Western Siberia. The community with edge and patching figuration of ware gained the highest development during a bronze era, and edge

— during a Middle Ages era, during the so-called heroic period. Except the main ornamental traditions in Western Siberia are noted also such which were inherent in one culture or existed rather short time and reflect emergence and development of separate ethnic groups.


M.B. Abramova, Stefanov V.I. Krasnoozerskaya culture on Irtysh//Archaeological researches in regions of new buildings of Siberia. Novosibirsk, 1985. Page 109-130.

Archeology of the USSR. Finno-Ugra and Balts during a Middle Ages era. M, 1987. Page 163-352.

O.N. Bader. Ural Neolithic//MIA. 1970. No. 166. Page 157-171.

V.V. Bobrov. Ceramics complexes with figured and stamped figuration in the southeast of Western Siberia//Archeology, ethnography and museum business. Kemerovo, 1999. Page 32-43.

V.A. Borzunov. Genesis and development of gamayunsky culture//SA. 1990. No. 1. Page 15-33.

E.A. Vasilyev. North taiga Priobye during an era of late bronze: Chronology and cultural accessory of monuments//Archeology and ethnography of Priobye. Tomsk, 1982. Page 3-14.

I.B. Vasilyev, A. Vybornov. And, Glushchenko S.A. Settlement Uk of 6 V Tyumen Pritobolye//Historical researches: Sb. nauch. tr. Samara: Publishing house of SamGPU, 1998. Issue 2. Page 254-267.

V.F. Gening, Evdokimov of V.V. Logigovskoye the ancient settlement (At! - UI of Centuries AD)//WOW. Sverdlovsk, 1969. Issue 8. Page 102-125.

I.G. Glushkov. Neolytic ceramics of Konda (on materials Damned Gore and Kand)//Siberia in a panorama of the millennia. Novosibirsk: IAiE Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science publishing house, 1998. T. 1. Page 131-137.

M.P. Gryaznov. History of the ancient tribes of Upper Ob.//MIA 1956. No. 48. Page 44-98.

V.F. Zaybert. New monuments of early bronze on the Ishim River//KSIA. 1973. No. 134. Page 106-113.

V.A. Zaha, A.V. Matveev, N.P. Matveeva. Researches of the Tyumen university//joint-stock company of 1986 of M., 1988. Page 231-234.

V.A. Zaha'

>. Figured and stamped ceramics of the parking of Yin 11//Ancient ceramics of Siberia: Typology, technology, semantics. Novosibirsk: Science, 1990. Page 5-9.

V.A. Zaha. Era of Neolithic and early metal forest-steppe Prisalairya and Priobye. Tyumen: IPOS Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science publishing house, 2003. 168 pages

V.A. Zaha. Development of community of cultures with edge and patching ceramics//VAAE. Tyumen: IPOS Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science publishing house, 2004. Issue 5. Page 4-12.

V.A. Zaha, E.N. Fomin. To a question of origin of andreevsky culture//VAAE. Tyumen: IPOS Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science publishing house, 1999. Issue 2. Page 14-21.

G.B. Zdanovich. Ceramics of an era of bronze of the North Kazakhstan area//WOW. Sverdlovsk: USU publishing house, 1973. Issue 12. Page 21-43.

L.P. Zyablin. The neolytic settlement of Unyuk on the Top Yenisei//Problems of archeology of the Urals and Siberia. M.: Science, 1973. Page 65-73.

V.N. Karmanov. Monuments of the Kama edge Neolithic in the European northeast//the International XVI Ural meeting: Materials international nauch. konf. On Oct. 6-10, 2003, Perm. Perm, 2003. Page 49-50.

V.T. Kovalyova. Neolithic of the Average of the Trans-Ural region. Sverdlovsk: USU publishing house, 1989. 80 pages

Kovalyova V.T. Eneolit of the Average of the Trans-Ural region: Andreevsky culture. Pre-print. Yekaterinburg: USU publishing house, 1995. 62 pages

V.T. Kovalyova, N.M. Chairkina. Ethnocultural and ethnogenetic processes on average the Trans-Ural region at the end of stone — the beginning of a bronze age: Results and problems of a research//WOW. Yekaterinburg, 1991. Page 45-70.

L.N. Koryakova, S.F. Koksharov. Archaeological aspects of ancient history of the Trans-Ural region and Western Siberia: (Era of a stone and bronze)//Problems of chronology and periodization of archeological sites of Southern Siberia. Barnaul: ALTGU, 1991. Page 36-39.

M.F. Kosarev. To a problem of the West Siberian cultural community//SA. 1974. No. 3. Page 3-13.

M.F. Kosarev. Ancient history of Western Siberia: Person and environment. M, 1991.

M.F. Kosarev. From the ancient history of Western Siberia: General historical and cultural concept//Russian ethnographer. 1993. Issue 4. Page 6365.

M.F. Kosarev, V.T. Galkin. Works on the Lake Yurgarkul//the joint-stock company of 1986 of M., 1988. Page 240.

L.L. Kosinskaya. About schemes of development of the northern Neolithic//Ob Ugra. Materials II of Sib. simp. "Cultural heritage of the people of Western Siberia". Tobolsk; Omsk, 1999. Page 38-41.

L.L. Kosinskaya. Ceramics of ettovsky type in the Neolithic of the North of Western Siberia//Ugra. Materials VI of Sib. simp. "Cultural heritage of the people of Western Siberia" (on Dec. 9-11, 2003, Tobolsk). Tobolsk, 2003. Page 95-101.

L.L. Kosinskaya. Neolithic of the North of Western Siberia: Genesis and communications//Tver archaeological collection. Tver, 2002. Issue 5. Page 215-223.

L.L. Kosinskaya. Monuments of bystrinsky cultural type in the Surgut Priobye//Materials on archeology Ob-Irtyshya. Surgut,

2001. Page 12-17.

V.M. Kulemzin, N.V. Lukina. Vasyugan vakhovskiye the Khanty at the end of XIX — the beginning of the 20th centuries. Ethnographic essay. Tomsk, 1977. 226 pages

V.I. Matyushchenko. Ancient history of the population of forest and forest-steppe Priobye (Neolithic and bronze age). Tomsk, 1973 Ah. 2: Samussky culture. 208 pages (IIS; Issue 10).

V.I. Matyushchenko. To a question of ethnic origin of elovsko-irmensky monuments and historical continuity in the culture of the population of Tomsk and Narymsky Priobye//IIS. Tomsk, 1973b. Issue 7. Page 78-94.

V. Matyushchenko. And, Sinitsyna G.V. Mogilnik at the village Size near Omsk. Tomsk: TGU publishing house, 1988. 136 pages

F.I. Mets. Figured and stamped ceramics of igrekovsky monuments of Narymsky Priobye//Problem of culture genesis and cultural heritage. SPb., 1993. Part 2. Page 79-83.

V.I. Molodin, Glushkov I.G. Samusskaya culture in the Top Priobye. Novosibirsk: Science, 1989. 168 pages

V.I. Molodin. Problems of Mesolith and Neolithic of a forest-steppe zone of the Ob-Irtysh Entre Rios//Archeology of Southern Siberia. Kemerovo, 1985. Page 3-17.

V.I. Molodin. Era of Neolithic and bronze forest-steppe Ob-Irtyshya. Novosibirsk, 1977. 172 pages

A.N. Panfilov. New type of monuments of an early bronze age in southern taiga Tobolo-Irtyshye//the West Siberian forest-steppe at a turn of bronze and iron centuries. Tyumen: Publishing house of TyumGU, 1989. Page 150-157.

A.N. Panfilov, E.M. Zaha, Zaha of V.A. Borovlyank 2 — a monument of the Neolithic and transitional from bronze to time iron in Lower


>//Sources of ethnocultural history of Western Siberia. Tyumen: TYUMGU, 1991. Page 25-50.

G.F. Polyakova. Neolytic tribes of headwaters of the Oka River//MIA. 1973. No. 173. Page 146-151.

V.M. Raushenbakh. Neolytic tribes of basins of Upper Volga area and Volga-Oka Entre Rios//MIA. 1973. No. 173. Page 152-158.

T.N. Sobolnikova. The neolytic settlement the Damned Mountain on the Konda River//Materials on archeology Ob-Irtyshya. Surgut, 2001. Page 411.

V.F. Starkov. Mesolith and Neolithic of the forest Trans-Ural region. M.: Science, 1980. 218 pages

N.S. Tatarintseva. Ceramics of the settlement Vishnevka-1 in forest-steppe Priishimye//the Bronze age of Uralo-Irtyshsky Entre Rios. Chelyabinsk: Publishing house of ChelGU, 1984. Page 104-113.

Troitsk T.N. Kulayskaya culture in the Novosibirsk Priobye. Novosibirsk, 1979. 128 pages

A.Ya. Trufanov. Materials to origin and development of krasnoozersky culture of forest-steppe Priirtyshje//Problem of ethnic history of the tyursky people of Siberia and adjacent territories. Omsk, 1984. Page 57-76.

I.K. Tsvetkova. Neolytic tribes of the Ryazan current of the Oka River//MIA. 1973. No. 173. Page 138-145.

Yu.P. Yu.P. Early complexes on the ancient settlement of Leopards the Town 1/8//Materials on archeology Ob-Irtyshya. Surgut, 2001. Page 18-25.

Tyumen, IPOS Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science

The paper proceeds with reviewing and analysing ornamental traditions (receding-and-blackened, comb, pit-and-comb, ornamented-and-stamped ones) developed in West Siberia. It points to the traditions existing during a long period, from the Neolithic to the Middle Ages, as well as those registered under a relatively short-term period. Most probably, they correspond to definite ethnic groups or ethnoses.

[1] Work is performed with assistance of a grant of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science and RAS "Ethnocultural interaction in Eurasia".

Brian Ethan
Other scientific works: