"Археологические Вести", СПб., 2002. Выпуск 10. Аннотация

НОВЫЕ ОТКРЫТИЯ И ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ

А. Е. Матюхин. Об элементарных способах раскалывания камня в палеолите

В палеолите существовали различные способы раскалывания (knapping techniques) камня для получения сколов-заготовок (blank flakes) и изготовления орудий (tool manufacture). Наряду с основным способом при помощи отбойника (hammer), когда предмет располагается в руке, использовались и другие, в данном случае более простые в технологическом отношении способы: а) на наковальне (anvil technique) или земле с использованием тяжелых отбойников (hammerstones); б) бросание крупных предметов на лежащие на земле глыбы (large blocks); в) техника "блок он блок" (block on block technique); г) биполярная техника (bipolar technique). Все эти способы (techniques) в той или иной степени описаны в работах по палеолиту. Как показывают эксперименты, первые два способа (techniques) (и особенно 2-й способ) в значительной мере являются неконтролируемыми действиями, по сути дела дроблением (shattering) камня. В то же время в первом способе проявляются определенные элементы технологического контроля. Его нельзя назвать полностью хаотичным дроблением (shattering), когда по предметам наносятся многократные и часто беспорядочные удары. Достаточно контролируемые следует признать технику блок он блок (block on block technique) и биполярную технику (bipolar technique), хотя элементы технологической случайности и ограниченности содержат и они.

В данной статье рассматриваются три первых способа раскалывания, для этого привлекаются материалы ашельской стоянки (acheulian site) Королево 1 в Закарпатье, а также мустьерских (mousterian) и позднепалеолитических мастерских (upper palaeolithic workshops), расположенных в долине Северского Донца (Seversky Donets), на территории Ростовской области (Rostov region). В индустрии Королево 1 интерес представляют орудия (tools), похожие на колуны (cleavers). Они изготавливались различными способами и в том числе в результате разбивания (breaking) крупных отщепов на ряд фрагментов с помощью отбойника (hammer) на земле или наковальне (anvil) (рис. 2: 1–2). В инвентаре мустьерских мастерских по первичной обработке кварцита (primary knapping) у ст. Калитвенская выявлены многочисленные нуклевидные обломки (core-like fragments), которые получались при разбивания (breaking) кварцитовых валунов (blocks) на земле или наковальне с помощью тяжелых валунов-отбойников (blocks-percussors) (рис. 3–4). На поверхностях этих обломков (fragments) отмечены характерные для данного способа морфологические признаки (attributes). Хорошо выражены в первую очередь точка удара (impact point) и ударная волна (compression ring). В меньшей степени использовалась техника "блок он блок". Она применялась главным образом для скалывания (detaching) крупных отщепов длиной 25–40 см.

В инвентаре мустьерских и позднепалеолитических слоев памятника Бирючья балка 2 выделены кремневые нуклевидные обломки (core-like fragments), обломки-отщепы (fragments-flakes) и грубые (crude) массивные отщепы (flakes), которые представляют интерес с точки зрения рассматриваемой темы (рис. 5–6). Здесь использовался практически один способ – разбивание желваков, плиток и обломков кремня (breaking nodules, slabs, blocks) на земле или наковальне с помощью отбойника на отдельные фрагменты, которые использовались преимущественно в качестве заготовок нуклеусов (core blanks). Кроме того, подобным образом оценивалось качество кремня. Разбивание желваков, плиток и обломков осуществлялось, с одной стороны, как технически целенаправленная операция, а с другой, довольно хаотично, о чем свидетельствуют характерные следы от ударов на поверхности расколотых обломков.

Вероятно также, что элементарные способы раскалывания (knapping) камня удастся проследить на материалах некоторых мустьерских памятников Крыма, долины Десны, а также интересного и во многом непонятного памятника Диринг в Якутии, т.е. там, где имеются богатые выходы исходного сырья (raw materials).

Оправданно считать, что простейшие способы раскалывания камня широко применялись на всех этапах палеолита. Что касается самых ранних его стадий, то применение этих способов требует подтверждения и доказательств. Следует подчеркнуть, что на всех продуктах, которые возникают в результате применения простых способов раскалывания (knapping) камня, в том числе дробления (shattering) фиксируются элементарные археологические признаки. Неправомерно также расширенно толковать понятие "техника дробления", относя сюда и другие простые способы, в частности "технику блок он блок" и грубое раскалывания камня с помощью тяжелого отбойника (percussor).

A. E. Matyukhin. About Elementary Knapping Techniques in the Palaeolithic Period

In the Palaeolithic period, various knapping techniques existed for obtaining blank flakes from stone and for tool manufacture. Along with the main technique using a hammer so that the object is held in the hand, also other methods were used, particularly those which are simpler in terms of technology: a) knapping on an anvil or on the ground using heavy hammerstones; b) dropping heavy objects onto large blocks lying on the ground; c) the “block-on-block technique”; d) the bipolar technique. All of these methods in a greater or lesser degree are described in the works concerned with the Palaeolithic. As experiments show, the first two techniques (especially the second) to a considerable degree were non-controllable actions or, actually, shattering of stone. Nevertheless, in the first technique, certain elements of technological control appear. This technique cannot be called an entirely chaotic shattering, in the course of which the objects are subjected to frequent and often irregular strikes. As fairly controllable, one should consider the block-on-block technique and the bipolar technique, though they also include some elements of technologically accidental and limited character.

In this article, the three first techniques of knapping are considered on the basis of materials from Acheulian site of Korolevo-1 in the Trans-Karpatian region and from Mousterian and upper Palaeolithic workshops situated in the valley of the Seversky Donets in the Rostov Region. In the industry of Korolevo-1 of interest are the tools resembling cleavers. They were manufactured by various techniques including those of breaking large flakes into a number of fragments with a hammer on the ground or an anvil (fig. 2: 1-2). Among the inventory from Mousterian workshops for primary knapping of quartzite near the railway station Kalitvenskaya, numerous core-like fragments were identified which resulted of breaking quartzite blocks on the ground or anvil by means of heavy blocks-percussors (fig. 3-4). On the surface of such fragments certain morphological attributes characteristic of this technique were discerned. Well expressed are, in the first place, the impact point and the compression ring. The block-on-block technique was used in a lesser degree. It was employed mostly for detaching large flakes 25-40 cm long.

Among the inventory from Mousterian and upper Palaeolithic layers of the site of Biryuchya Balka 2, flint core-like fragments, fragments-flakes and crude heavy flakes, which are of interest in terms of the subject of this paper, were segregated (fig. 5-6). Here, practically a single technique was used — that of breaking nodules, slabs and blocks into separate fragments by means of hammer on the ground or an anvil; those fragments were used mostly as core blanks. In addition, by that method the quality of stone was evaluated. Breaking nodules, slabs and blocks, on the one hand, was conducted as a technically purposeful operation, but on the other hand, it was done in a fairly chaotic way that is indicated by peculiar traces of strikes on the surface of the fragments knapped.

Perhaps it will be possible to trace the elementary techniques of knapping on materials from some Mousterian sites of Crimea, the Desna valley and from the site of Diring (in many respects still unclear) in Yakutiya where there are rich outcrops of raw materials.

It is generally supposed that the simplest knapping techniques were widely used at all stages of the Palaeolithic period. As to the earlier stages of the latter, however, the use of these techniques yet needs its confirmations and proves. It should be stressed that on all products that resulted of application of simple techniques of knapping stone, including shattering, elementary archaeological attributes are discernible. Neither a too broad interpretation of the term “shattering technique” is justified when it is expanded to other simple methods, including the “block-on-block technique” and rude knapping of stone with a heavy percussor.

В. Я. Шумкин, А. И. Мурашкин. Новые данные о могильнике на Большом Оленьем острове Баренцева моря

В 2001 году, после полувекового перерыва, были возобновлены работы Кольской археологической экспедиции на могильнике на Большом Оленьем острове Кольского залива Баренцева моря. В ходе этих работ выяснилось, что площадь могильника не была полностью изучена в предыдущие годы, и, что особенно важно, что памятник разрушается в процессе почвенной эрозии и из-за возрастающего антропогенного воздействия.

В ходе работ 2001 года было изучено одно разрушенное погребение и собрано большое количество подъемного материала. Особенно важно увеличение коллекции керамики. Всего было собрано 59 фрагментов. Все они относятся к типу асбестовой керамики.

В ходе раскопок 1928 г. и 1947–1948 г.г. в 23 погребениях было обнаружено лишь 5 фрагментов сосудов и 1 миниатюрный сосуд. И эта керамика относилась типу “вафельной”. Наличие разных типов посуды может говорить о длительности существования могильника или об использовании его разными группами населения.

Также в ходе обследования Большого Оленьего острова и, соседнего, Екатерининского острова были обнаружены 4 местонахождения предварительно датируемые эпохой раннего металла. Исследование этого хронологически одновременного комплекса памятников может принести очень интересные результаты.

V. Ya. Shumkin, A. I. Murashkin. New Evidences about the Cemetery on Bolshoy Oleny Island in the Kola Bay of the Barents Sea

In 2001, after a half-century-long interruption, the Kola Archaeological Expedition resumed its works at the cemetery on Bolshoy Oleny Island in the Kola Bay of the Barents Sea. In the course of these works it became clear that the area of the cemetery has not been studied completely during the previous investigations, and (the most important) the site is being disturbed by the process of soil erosion and as a result of the increasing anthropogenic intrusions.

During the excavations of 2001, one disturbed burial was studied and a great amount of surface materials were gathered. Of the greatest importance is the enlargement of the collection of pottery. In all, 59 fragments have been collected. They all belong to the type of asbestos ware.

During the excavations of 1928 and 1947–1948, only 5 fragments of pottery and 1 miniature vessel were found in 23 burials. However, that pottery belonged to the “waffle” type. The presence of different types of ware may indicate that the cemetery either has had a long history or that it was used by different groups of population.

In addition, during examination of Bolshoy Oleny Island and the neighbouring Ekaterinisky Island, four sites, preliminarily dated to the epoch of the Early Metal, were revealed. Excavation of this complex of synchronous sites may yield extremely interesting results.

О. В. Лозовская, В. М. Лозовский. Типология и функции каменных изделий стоянки Замостье 2 (поздний мезолит – ранний неолит Русской равнины)

Стоянка Замостье 2 (Сергиево-Посадский район Московской области) получила широкую известность благодаря богатой коллекции костяных, роговых и деревянных изделий, происходящих из поселений охотников-рыболовов позднего мезолита, раннего и среднего неолита. Уникальная стратиграфическая ситуация позволяет проследить изменения в хозяйстве и орудийном наборе древних жителей Волго-Окского междуречья на протяжении нескольких тысячелетий.

Впервые объектом изучения стал кремневый и каменный инвентарь стоянки, рассматриваемый комплексно с типологической, технологической и функциональной точек зрения. На основе сопоставления данных делается попытка выявить закономерности типообразования и определить экономическую роль кремневых индустрий в период перехода от мезолита к неолиту в лесной зоне Русской равнины.

Для изучения были взяты материалы трех основных слоев – нижнего (НМ) и верхнего (ВМ) позднемезолитических и ранненеолитического слоя верхневолжской культуры (ВВК) из раскопок 1989-91 гг. (экспедиция ИА АН СССР под руководством В.М.Лозовского, в настоящее время материалы хранятся в Сергиево-Посадском Историко-Художественном музее-заповеднике). Кремневые коллекции многочисленны: в нижнем слое найдено более 2 тысяч изделий, в верхнем мезолитическом – более 7 тысяч, в слое верхневолжской культуры – около 3,5 тысяч предметов.

Типологическая характеристика. Все три каменно-кремневых комплекса показали несомненное типологическое сходство, свидетельствующее о преемственности культурных традиций при переходе от мезолита к неолиту. Среди наиболее характерных общих черт следует отметить резкое преобладание отщепов над пластинами, при этом последние часто имеют неправильную форму и огранку, много массивных, реберчатых и с остатками корки. Отжимные микропластинки единичны. Как следствие, 3-5-кратное преобладание орудий на отщепах и обломках над орудиями на пластинах. В орудийном наборе доминируют скребки разных типов при почти полном отсутствии резцов. Резкое увеличение числа комбинированных орудий вследствие сочетания на одной заготовке разных типологических элементов – крутой скребковой ретуши, коротких приостренных выступов, пологих выемок, угловых микроскребков, волнистых и зубчатых лезвий; наиболее характерным примером является орудие “тип Замостье”. Среди проколок-острий отмечается очень большое разнообразие, связанное как с выбором нестандартных заготовок, так и с широким спектром размещения острий (на углах сломов, естественных выступах, дистальных концах, на краевых лезвиях – в этом случае жальца сформированы с помощью выемок). Выделяются также сверла и орудия с приостренным выступом, оформленным противолежащей ретушью. Остальная масса орудий типологически слабо выражена. В неолитическом слое появляется новый тип ретуши – струйчатая субпараллельная ретушь (на наконечниках и ретушированных скребках), а также небольшая группа резцов и новый тип – косые острия на пластинах. Во всех слоях отмечается наличие шлифованных тесел и большое число бифасов – их заготовок, а также полное отсутствие геометрических микролитов.

Технологический анализ, проведенный Е.Ю. Гирей (Гиря, Лозовский, Лозовская 1997), выявил две основные технологии расщепления: технологическая цепочка производства бифасов-рубящих-шлифованных тесел, в которую входило и побочное производство пластин. Поэтому число “чистых пластин” составляет меньшинство во всех 3 индустриях, а преобладают краевые и сколы с пренуклеусов. И производство отжимных микропластин-вкладышей. В неолите появляется новая технология – производство тонких бифасов. Таким образом, налицо постепенная смена традиций – регресс производства пластинчатых заготовок на фоне становления и развития технологий производства рубящих-бифасов.

Для функционального анализа было отобраны образцы разных типов орудий со вторичной обработкой и пластин без ретуши из каждого слоя. Всего было изучено 390 предметов: 100 орудий из нижнего слоя, 140 орудий из слоя ВМ и 150 из слоя ВВК. Следы износа были интерпретированы для 77% изделий (табл.1). Наиболее стабильную связь с функциональным использованием показали простые скребки и часть комбинированных, а также достаточно аморфная группа скребел, однако, во всех слоях ими обрабатывали как мягкие (шкуры), так и твердые материалы. Изделия с приостренным выступом, оформленным противолежащей ретушью, несмотря на различия в пропорциях и размерах, преимущественно использовались для сверления-развертывания дерева-кости-рога. Многие типологические проколки на отщепах или пластинах служили сверлами или резцами по твердым материалам. Косые острия на пластинах (ВВК) служили ножами для шкур. Другие типы орудий не показали предпочтительной функции, их выбор для той или иной работы, вероятно, был случаен. Так, пластины использовались для широкого спектра работ: ими обрабатывали мягкие (скребки, ножи) и твердые (скребки, струги, ножи, резцы, сверла) материалы; одни являлись элементами составных лезвий или были закреплены в рукоятках, у других, напротив, использовались естественные углы (сломов), в том числе для скобления шкур. В то же время некоторые комбинированные орудия и, особенно, “тип Замостье” можно считать орудиями полифункционального назначения – в работе (скобление, прокалывание, резание шкур, скобление, резцовое резание, сверление твердых материалов) использовались все рабочие элементы, но всего лишь два орудия имели две функции. Таким образом, трудно говорить о ясной функциональной специализации типов орудий во всех трех индустриях. Более того, большое количество многолезвийных орудий, возможно, и явилось результатом традиции случайного (ситуационного) использования.

На основании полученных данных достаточно полно можно реконструировать следующие виды хозяйственной деятельности, обеспечиваемые кремневыми ретушированными орудиями: обработку шкур и изготовление костяных (или роговых) и деревянных изделий. Никаких свидетельств обработки травы или злаковых нет. Мясные ножи достаточно редки даже среди пластин. Инструменты для разделки туш или чистки рыбы либо не представлены в выборке, либо их функции выполнялись орудиями из кости или рога. В обработке шкур наиболее полно представлена функция скобления (рис. 1), ножи для резания малочисленны, большая часть проколок относится к слою ВВК. Следует добавить, что для выделки шкур широко использовались и костяные орудия (в частности, многочисленные проколки). Обработка дерева занимала важное место в хозяйственной жизни обитателей поселений. Не случайно появление шлифованных тесел, специализированных орудий для тесания и строгания, уже в мезолите, также как и явная направленность технологии расщепления на производство топоров-рубящих. Кремневые орудия на сколах выполняли также операции скобления и сверления (рис. 3). Пилки по дереву единичны, как нет и следов пиления на деревянных предметах. По материалам стоянки известно, что обработка дерева осуществлялась не только каменными, но и костяными (роговыми) орудиями. Речь может идти, в частности, о роговых шлифованных топорах (теслах) или о скошенных орудиях из трубчатых костей лося с узким поперечным лезвием, сходным с лезвием резца (орудия 45°). Следы износа на этих лезвиях позволяют отнести их к орудиям для резцового скобления или строгания (иногда сверления) мягкого дерева или коры (Лозовская 1997). Судя по многочисленным и разнообразным орудиям и предметам искусства, найденным на стоянке, обработка кости и рога в конце мезолита – начале неолита достигла совершенства. Все операции производились каменными орудиями. Наиболее хорошо представлен инструментарий для скобления, сверления (рис. 3) и резцового резания кости-рога. Резцовая функция, включающая операции изготовления надрезов (фрагментация), выскабливания пазов и гравирования (орнаментация), осуществлялась различными типами орудий без резцового скола (рис. 2).

Итак, нам удалось выявить некоторые тенденции общего порядка, касающиеся изменения роли каменного инвентаря в хозяйственной жизни древних обитателей стоянки. Очевидно, что орудия из кремня не могли больше обеспечивать все повседневные потребности людей; их роль уменьшается в пользу орудий из кости-рога. Остается только два вида деятельности, где преимущество кремня было неоспоримым, – обработка дерева и, в особенности, обработка кости (рога). Обработка твердых материалов требовала более или менее прочных лезвий, необходимость в пластинчатых заготовках с прямыми и острыми лезвиями уменьшается, традиции их изготовления слабеют. На фоне развития и совершенствования производства топоров и тесел. Орудия для работы изготавливаются из различных отщепов с помощью крутой ретуши, формирующей выемки, заостренные жальца и скребковые лезвия. Функциональное использование носило в ряде случаев случайный характер. Таким образом, ввиду отсутствия типологической четкости и функциональной специализации типов при очень низком проценте орудий с двумя функциями следует предположить, что формы орудий, с которыми мы имеем дело, формировались непосредственно в процессе их использования и подправок (переоформления и т.д.). В начале неолита с появлением новых технологических традиций (струйчатая ретушь и тонкие бифасы) ситуация немного меняется.

O. M. Lozovskaya and V. M. Lozovskiy. The Typology and Functions of Stone Tools from the Site of Zamostye-2 (Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic of the Russian Plain)

The site of Zamostye-2 (the Sergiev-Posad District of the Moscow Oblast) became widely known due to its rich assemblage of bone, horn and wooden objects from settlements of hunters and fishers of the late Mesolithic and early and middle Neolithic periods. Its unique stratigraphic conditions enable us to trace the changes which occurred over several millennia in the economy and tool set of the ancient inhabitants of the zone between the Volga and Oka.

In this article, the focus of studies, for the first time, is concentrated on the flint and stone tools from the abovementioned site, which are considered in a complex way in terms of their types, technology and functions. On the basis of a comparison of the evidence, an attempt is undertaken to recognise the laws of the formation of these types and identify the economic role of flint industries during the transition from the Mesolithic to Neolithic periods in the forest zone of the Russian Plain.

Considered in these studies were the materials from the three main layers – the lower (LM) and upper (UM) late Mesolithic ones and the early Neolithic layer of the Upper Volga Culture (UVC) from excavations of 1989–1991 (Expedition of the Institute of Archaeology AS USSR headed by V. M. Lozovskiy; now these materials are preserved in the Sergiev-Posad Historical and Art Museum-Preserve). The flint collections are quite numerous: in the lower layer over 2 thousand artefacts have been found, in the upper Mesolithic – over 7 thousand, and over 3.5 thousand objects were in the layer of the Upper Volga Culture (UVC).

Types. All of the three stone and flint assemblages showed an undoubted typological resemblance that is an indication of the continuance of the cultural traditions during the transition from the Mesolithic to Neolithic. Among the most characteristic common features, one must mention a strong predominance of flakes over blades, the latter often having an irregular shape and cut and including a large number of massive ribbed examples with remains of crust. The pressure-flaked microblades are rare. Hence, the tools on flakes and spalls are 3–5 times more numerous than those on blades. Scrapers of various types are the most numerous in this assemblage of tools, while burins are completely absent. We observe a sharp augmentation of the number of combinated tools as a result of making different typological elements on a single blank – abrupt retouch resembling end-scrapers edges, short acute projections, flat depressions, angle microscrapers, and undulated and indented blades, the tool of the “Zamostye type” being the most characteristic example. The points-borers show an extreme diversity resulted both of the choice of non-typical blanks and of a wide spectre of the positions of the points (on the angles of breaks, on distal ends and on side edges with the tips formed by means of recesses in the latter case). Drills and tools with acute projections, formed by alternate retouch, also stand out. The rest of the tools are typologically inexpressive. In the Neolithic layer, a new type of retouch appears – semi-parallel flat retouch (on points and retouched scrapers), as well as a small group of burins and a new type of tools – oblique points on blades. In all of the layers, one can note the presence of polished adzes and numerous bifaces or their blanks, as well as the complete absence of geometric microliths.

Technological analysis, conducted by E.Yu. Girya (Гиря, Лозовский, Лозовская 1997), revealed the existence of two major technologies of cleaving: a technological chain of manufacture of bifaces and polished chopping adzes that included by-production of blades. Therefore, the amount of “genuine blades” is the minority in all of the three industries, while the lateral ones and spalls from pre-cores, as well as production of pressure-flaked microblades-inserts are prevailing. In the Neolithic period a new technology appears – manufacture of thin bifaces. Thus a gradual change of traditions is evident here – a regress in production of bladed blanks with simultaneous formation and development of technologies of the production of chopping tools and bifaces.

For the functional analysis, samples of re-worked tools of various types and blades without retouch were selected from each layer. A total of 390 objects were studied: 100 tools from the lower layer, 140 from UM layer, and 150 from the UVC layer. Wear traces have been interpreted for 77% of the artefacts studied (fig. 1). The most stable relation to the function was identified for simple scrapers and for some of the combinated ones, as well as for a certain amorphous group of scrapers; however, in all of the layers those tools were used for working both soft materials (skins) and hard ones. The tools with acute projections formed by alternate retouch, notwithstanding their variance in proportions and size, were used mainly for drilling and unwrapping of wood/bone/horn. Many of the technological punches on flakes and blades served as drills or burins for hard materials. Oblique points on blades (UVC) were used as knives for skins. The other types of tools did not show any preference of function – probably their choice for one work or other was accidental. Thus blades were used for a wide range of works: for working soft (scrapers and knives) and hard (scrapers, planing tools, knives, burins, drills) materials; some of them were elements of combined blades or were fixed in hafts, while on the others, on the contrary, their natural angles (breaks) were used inter alia for scraping skins. At the same time, some of the combinated tools, especially those of the “Zamostye type” may be considered as tools of a polyfunctional purpose – all their working elements were employed (scraping, puncturing, and cutting skins; scraping, cutting and drilling hard materials), but only two of such tools had two functions each. Therefore it is difficult to talk about any clear functional specialisation of tool types in each of the three industries. Moreover, the large amount of multi-blade tools probably resulted precisely of the tradition of their accidental (situational) application.

The evidence obtained enables us to reconstruct with a fair completeness the following types of economic activities provided with flint retouched tools: working of skins and manufacture of bone (or horn) and wooden articles. There is no evidence of working grass and cereals. Meat knives are fairly rare even among blades. Tools for butchering or scaling fish either are not represented in our sample or tools made from bone or horn were employed for this purpose. In the processing of skins the most completely represented was the function of scraping (fig. 1); cutting knives are rather not numerous and most of the borers come from the UVC layer. It should be added that bone tools (including numerous borers) also were widely used for processing skins. Working of wood took an important place in the economic life of the inhabitants of the settlements under onsideration. The appearance of polished adzes or specialised tools for hewing and planing as early as already in Metholithic period is not accidental, nor is the evident orientation of the cleaving technology to manufacture of axes and chopping tools. Flint tools on spalls also were used for scraping and drilling (fig. 3). Saws for wood are rare and traces of sawing are absent on wooden artefacts. On the basis of materials from the site it is known that wood was worked not only with stone tools but also with bone (horn) ones. The latter possibly included polished horn axes (adzes) or oblique tools made of tubular bones of elk with a narrow transversal blade similar to that of a burin (tools 45°). Traces of wear on these tools suggest their belonging to implements for cutting, scraping or planing (sometimes drilling) soft wood or bark (Лозовская 1997). Judging by numerous and diverse tools and art objects found at the site, in the late Mesolithic and early Neolithic, processing of bone and horn achieved its perfection. All of such operations were fulfilled with stone tools. The most completely presented are tools for scraping, drilling (fig. 3) and cutting bone and horn. The cutting function, that comprised operations of making incisions (fragmentation), scraping mortises and engraving (ornamentation), was carried out with various types of tools without burin blows (fig. 2).

Thus we were able to identify some general tendencies concerning the change of the role of stone inventory in the economic life of the ancient inhabitants of the site. It is clear that flint tools could not provide for everyday needs of people anymore; the role of such tools was decreasing in favour of tools made of bone and horn. Only two branches of activities remained where the advantages of flint were incontestable – working of wood and, especially, processing of bone (horn). Working of hard materials demanded more or less strong blades, while the need for blade blanks with straight and sharp edges was lessening and traditions of their manufacture were weakening against the background of the development and perfection of the manufacture of axes and adzes. Working tools are manufactured from various flakes by means of abrupt retouch used for formation of recesses, narrow tips and scraping blades. In a number of cases, the function of a tool had an accidental character. Hence, in view of the absence of typological clearness and functional specialisation of the types and a very low percentage of bi-functional tools, one has to suppose that the shapes of the tools with which we are dealing were formed directly in the process of their employment and touching (reforming etc.). In the beginning of the Neolithic period the situation slightly changed with the appearance of new technological traditions (parallel flat retouch and thin bifaces).

И. Клементе Конте (Испания), Е. Ю. Гиря. Анализ орудий из ребер лося со стоянки Замостье 2 (7 слой, раскопки 1996-97 гг.)

Ignacio Clemente Conte, E. Yu. Giria. L'analyse des outils des cotes d'elan de Zamostje 2 (la septieme couche, la fouilles 1996-1997 annees)

Dans ce compte-rendu nous présentons les résultats obtenus à partir de l’analyse fonctionnelle ou tracéologique, appliquée à une série d’outils en côte d’élan du niveau mésolithique (7400-7300 B.P.) de Zamostje 2. Jusqu’alors, on les considérait comme des couteaux pour écailler les poissons. Cette attribution se faisait par analogies ethnographiques avec les peuples de Sibérie, et parce qu’ils ont été récupérés dans un contexte archéologique où les restes en relation avec la pęche et avec la consommation de poisson sont évidents (nasses de pкche en bois, hameçons, harpons, restes d’écailles et de vertèbres de poisson, etc.). Notre objectif était donc de confirmer ou d’infirmer cette hypothèse de départ à partir de la mise en application d’une méthode analytique scientifique, telle que l’analyse des traces d’utilisation. D’une part, afin de pouvoir réaliser l’analyse tracéologique, nous avons utilisé une importante collection expérimentale du Laboratoire de Tracéologie de l’Institut d’Histoire de la Culture Matérielle (Académie des Sciences de Russie а Saint-Pétersbourg), réalisée sous la direction de G. F. Korobkova. Nous avons donc eu а notre disposition outils expérimentaux en os en relation avec le travail sur diverses matières telles que: la peau (aiguilles, poinçons, grattoirs, racloirs/polissoirs), le bois (herminettes, burins, ciseaux à bois), les plantes non ligneuses (faucilles), la céramique (racloirs et outils pour la décoration) et le bois d’animaux (perforateurs/poiçons). En ce qui nous concerne, nous avons complété la collection expérimentale en réalisant une série d’expériences, avec des outils en côte de bśuf, utilisés pour écailler, vider et couper le poisson. Dans ce travail nous décrivons les traces d’utilisation observées dans les outils expérimentaux ainsi que les traces observées dans les outils archéologiques. A partir des analyses du matériel archéologique nous avons mis en évidence, par les caractéristiques des traces d’utilisation ainsi que par la morphologie de ces outils, que nous nous trouvons face а deux types d’outils différents, par leur forme et par les activités productives spécifiques dans lesquelles ils ont été utilisés. Nous aurions, d’une part, une série de côtes (fracturées au niveau de l’épiphyse et dans la partie distale), dont l’un des bords fût aiguisé moyennant raclage а l’aide d’un outil lithique, et présentant des traces d’utilisation d’écaillage de poisson dans le troisième quart de la longueur de l’outil et spécialement dans la partie intérieure ou concave de la côte qui serait donc celle qui devait ętre en contact avec le matériel travaillé. Le total des outils, de ce niveau archéologique étudié, qui pourraient ętre associés а cette activité s’élève au nombre de 15. Et d’autre part, 49 fragments de côtes qui présentent des traces d’utilisation de contact avec de la peau (et/ou d’autres matières tendres d’origine animale).

А. Ю. Тарасов. Центр изготовления каменных макроорудий энеолитического времени на территории Карелии

New materials from a number of stone macrotool production sites, located in the lower part of the Shuja river on the west coast of lake Onega have made it possible to evaluate the basic traits of the Eneolithic (Halcolithic) slate industry on the territory of Russian Karelia. This industry, which employed the production of large woodworking implements (macroforms) with a trapezoid-like form in cross section, is characterized by: 1) using raw material of high quality (hard and homogenous); 2) division between macrotool production and consumption sites; 3) employing an efficient technology. It consists of 4 knapping stages and implies serial knapping at the latest stages, as well as utilizing soft percussors like an antler billet and punch, and also a very qualitative final abrasive working; 4) probable specialization of certain members of the collective in producing large woodworking implements (macrotools).

These new materials have allowed to return to the question of exchange of implements produced in this local place over a wide territory.

Боряна И. Матева (Болгария). Раскопки поселения среднего энеолита в северо-восточной Болгарии (предварительные результаты)

В статье рассматриваются результаты раскопок поселения Чакмака, находящегося в Северо-восточной Болгарии близ г. Исперих. На основании многочисленных находок кремневых изделий и заготовок для изготовления орудий, а также выходов мелового кремня, располагающихся неподалеку, Чакмака интерпретируется как поселение-мастерская эпохи среднего энеолита. Это первое и пока единственное поселение в Северо-восточной Болгарии, специализировавшееся на производстве кремневых орудий труда. Раскопки одного из жилищ поселения позволили охарактеризовать приемы и материалы, применявшиеся в процессе строительства. Обнаруженный при раскопках керамический комплекс подразделяется на три группы: столовую, кухонную и посуду для хранения зерна. По типологическим характеристикам и орнаментации керамика относится к IV фазе Б культуры Поляница, т.е. к концу среднего энеолита. Четвертая фаза культуры Поляница синхронна культуре Боян в Румынии и Марица IV во Фракийской долине.

B. I. Mateva. Excavation of a Middle Eneolithic Settlement in North-Eastern Bulgaria (preliminary results)

This article deals with results of excavation at the site of Chakmaka situated near the town of Isperikh in North-Eastern Bulgaria. On the basis of numerous finds of flint objects and blanks for making tools, as well as outcrops of chalk-flint located not far away, Chakmaka is interpreted as a settlement-workshop of the Middle Eneolithic epoch. This is the first and as yet the single settlement in North-Eastern Bulgaria which is specialized in manufacture of flint tools. Excavation of one of the dwellings at the site enabled to characterize the techniques and materials used during its construction. The ceramic assemblage found during the excavations is divided into three groups: tableware, kitchenware and vessels for storing grain. According to its typological features and decoration, this pottery belongs to the 4^th phase B of the Polyanitsa culture, i.e. it is dated to the end of the Middle Eneolithic period. The fourth phase of the Polyanitsa culture is synchronous to the Boian culture in Romania and that of Marica IV in the Thracian Valley.

М. Холл, С. С. Миняев. Рентгеновский флуоресцентный анализ керамики сюнну

While there have been art historical studies on the trade and exchange of goods between the Han Empire and Xiong-nu confederacy, a study of the movement of more mundane goods within the Xiong-nu confederacy has yet to be addressed. The purpose of this study is to provide a starting point to remedy this situation. The minor and trace element chemistry of pottery from the sites of Derstui, Dureny, Justyd, and Tzaram was determined using energy dispersive x-ray fluorescence (EDXRF). Model-based clustering using the classification maximum-likelihood approach was used to find clusters in the principal component (PC) scores. After removing the outliers, classification maximum-likelihood cluster analysis indicates that there are two spherical clusters of equal volume in the chemical data. One cluster consists primarily of sherds from the site of Justyd in the Altai; the other group consists of sherds mainly of sites in the Trans-Baikal. These two clusters are interpreted as reflecting regional clay deposits. On the basis of the distribution patterns of the chemical clusters, only a limited amount of pottery movement occurred during the Xiong-nu period.

Ю. А. Заднепровский (†). Могильник Уч-ат в Южной Киргизии

Статья Ю. А. Заднепровского была написана в 1980–1981 гг. Воспроизводимый текст статьи имел небольшие утраты, которые были восстановлены по отчетам Ю. А. Заднепровского за 1972–1975 гг. хранящимся в ИИМК РАН, а также по разным записям подготовительного характера из домашнего архива Ю. А. Заднепровского. Последние были предоставлены вдовой Ю. А. Заднепровского, Т. Н. Заднепровской, оказывавшей постоянную помощь в восстановлении и подготовке статьи к печати.

К сожалению, неизвестно местонахождение монет, бронзовых и железных изделий, а также некоторых сосудов из могильника. Таблицы металлических изделий взяты из архива. В таблице 3 “Керамика” воспроизводятся только те сосуды, которые хранятся в фондах ИИМК РАН. Монеты из могильника определялись М. В. Воробьевым, И. Г. Добровольским, О. И. Смирновой.

Текст статьи остался в основном без изменений, в авторском варианте. Современное состояние исследования этого весьма интересного могильника отражено в публикуемой ниже заметке А. И. Торгоева.

Ju.A.Zadneprovsky. A cemetry of Uch-at in Southern Kirghizia

The article of Ju.A.Zadneprovsky has been written to 1980-1981. The text of the article had small losses which have been restored under Ju.A.Zadneprovsky's reports for 1972-1975 stored in the Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and also on different records of draft character from Ju.A.Zadneprovsky's personal archive. The last have been given by widow Ju.A.Zadneprovsky, T.N.Zadneprovsky, helped in restoration and preparation the article for printing.

Unfortunately, some coins, bronze and iron products, and also some vessels from a cemetry are lost. Tables of metal finds are taken from archive. In table 3 "Ceramics" only those vessels which are stored in IIMK funds are reproduced. Coins were defined by M.V.Vorobevym, I. G.Dobrovolsky, O.I.Smirnova.

Article text remained basically without changes, in an author's variant. The current state of research of this rather interesting cemetry is reflected in a note of A.I.Torgoev published below.

А. И. Торгоев. К интерпретации могильника Уч-ат

Могильник Уч-ат раскопан Ю. А. Заднепровским в 1972–1974 гг. Этот могильник находился в предгорьях Ферганской долины, около с. Иски-Наукат, в 40 км юго-западнее Оша. В могильнике исследовано 33 кургана, некоторые были раскопаны повторно. Все исследованные в Уч-ате погребальные сооружения являлись катакомбами. Катакомбы имеют короткий дромос и небольшую камеру – катакомбу. Выделяются два типа могил, которые различаются ориентировкой.

В могильнике получен разнообразный набор вещей. Керамика из могильника полностью лепная, ведущими формами которой являются небольшие кувшины, иногда имеющие оттянутый слив. Найдены также фестончатые кружки. Прототипы керамики из Уч-ата находятся в керамике Согда VII–VIII вв., аналогии ей широко представлены в керамике Семиречья VIII–X вв.

Украшения представлены перстнями, кольцами, подвесками в виде петушков, серьгами, пластинчатыми браслетами, височными кольцами и многочисленными бусами. Найдены замечательные серебряные серьги, конструкция которых близка серьгам салтовского типа.

Очень интересной является находка лировидной подвески от пояса и поясных наконечников. Представленные в могильнике поясные украшения аналогичны поясным украшениям центральноазиатских кочевников IX–X вв. В погребениях могильника также обнаружены различные монеты: бухархудатские подражания абассидским драхмам, саманидские фельсы Ахмада ибн Асада 861–862 гг., китайская монета “Кайюань Тунбао”.

Благодаря проведенному сравнительному изучению материалов этого могильника выяснилось, что в могильнике Уч-ат было захоронено коренное полукочевое население Ферганы, на культуре которого отразились процессы культурной интеграции. С одной стороны интеграционный процесс шел со стороны Согда, он выразился в керамике, с другой стороны в материалах могильника ярко отразилось влияние тюркоязычных кочевников Центральной Азии (Central Asia). Этот могильник является наиболее поздним катакомбным памятником в Средней Азии (Middle Аsia), а для саманидского времени он остается единственным в Мавверанахре могильником с не мусульманским погребальным обрядом.

Находки саманидских фельсов ограничивают нижнюю дату могильника временем не раньше середины IX в. Сопоставление вещей из комплексов могильника Уч-Ат показывает, что могильник должен датироваться в пределах второй половины IX – X в., хотя не исключено, что верхняя дата могильника может быть отодвинута и до XI в.

A. I. Torgoev. To the Interpretation of the Cemetery of Uch-at

The cemetery of Uch-at was excavated by Yu. A. Zadneprovskiy in 1972–1974. This cemetery is located in the foothills of the Ferghana Valley near v. Iski-Naukat, 40 km south-west from Osh. Excavated at the cemetery were 33 kurgans – some for the second time. All of the funerary structures excavated at Uch-at were catacombs. The graves had a short dromos and a small chamber-catacomb. Two types of the graves differing in their orientation were distinguished.

A fairly varied set of objects was obtained during the excavations. The pottery was exclusively handmade, the predominating forms being small jugs, sometimes with an outstretched spout. A number of festooned mugs also have been encountered. Prototypes of the pottery from Uch-at are found among that from Sogd of the 7^th–8^th centuries; its parallels are widely represented in the pottery from Semirechye of the 8^th–10^th centuries.

The adornments include rings, finger rings, pendants in form of cockerels, earrings, lamellate bracelets, temple-rings and numerous beads. The earrings comprised remarkable silver ones close in their design to earrings of the Saltov type.

Of great interest is the find of a belt lyre-shaped pendant and belt tips. The belt adornments found at this cemetery are analogous to belt adornments of Central-Asia nomads of the 9^th–10^th centuries. The graves contained also various coins: Bukharkhudat imitations of ´Abbasid drachms, Samanian felses of Ahmad ibn Asad of 861–862, and a Chinese coin “Kaiyuan Tongbao”.

A comparative study of these finds showed that buried at the cemetery were the indigenous semi-nomad inhabitants of Ferghana whose culture reflected certain processes of cultural integration. On the one hand, the integration process was directed from Sogd and it expressed itself in the pottery, on the other hand, the materials from the cemetery distinctly reflected the influence of Turkic-speaking nomads of the Central Asia. The cemetery under discussion is the latest catacomb site in Middle Asia, and as far as the Samanid period is concerned it is the single cemetery in Mavrannakhar with a non-Moslem funerary rite.

Finds of Samanid felses have limited the lower date of the cemetery by the period not earlier than the middle of the 9^th century. A comparison of finds from funerary complexes of Uch-at showed that this cemetery must be dated within the second half of the 9^th and the 10^th century, though one may not rule out the possibility of shifting the upper date to the 11^th century.

Л. Б. Кирчо, Г. М. Ковнурко (†). Престижные культовые предметы и украшения Алтын-депе из древнейших искусственных минералов (по данным рентгенометрического анализа)

Авторы продолжают изучение минерального состава предметов, происходящих из раскопок Алтын-депе – одного из крупнейших и наиболее изученных поселений эпохи энеолита – бронзы Средней Азии (Кирчо, Ковнурко 1999: 76–85). Объектом исследования явились 11 предметов из беловато-серого каменного материала (рис. 1, табл. 1) – печати, статуэтка, бусы и бляшка. Рентгенометрический анализ проведен В. Б. Трофимовым (кафедра кристаллографии геологического факультета Санкт-Петербургского Государственного университета) на приборе ДРОН-2,0.

На основе рентгеновских данных выделяются по химико-минеральному составу две группы образцов (табл. 2). В одной группе (7 образцов) преобладают кварц и кристобалит, т. е. в основе химического состава находится двуокись кремния. Четыре образца другой группы сложены силикатами магния – тальком и энстатитом. В одном из образцов этой группы присутствует клиноэнстатит и форстерит.

Аналитические данные свидетельствуют о том, что минеральные агрегаты не являются природными образованиями, а появились при высокотемпературном обжиге.

1. Соотношение между минеральными фазами непостоянно при одинаковом (близком) химическом составе двух типов образцов. Это непостоянство можно объяснить различиями в температуре и длительности обжига. В природе условия кристаллизации расплава ограничены, высокие содержания кристобалита в кислых горных породах, а энстатита в ультраосновных не характерны.

2. Изделия, сложенные смесью талька и энстатита, имеют белый цвет, в то время как горные породы подобного химического состава характеризуются зеленовато-черной или черной окраской.

3. Все обнаруженные при рентгеновском исследовании минералы являются хрупкими и обладают высокой твердостью. Высверливание отверстий относительно большой длины при малом диаметре (0,1–02 см) представляет значительные технические трудности.

Таким образом, исходным материалом для изготовления предметов явились мягкие горные породы, легко поддающиеся механической обработке – резьбе, сверлению. Примерами пород кремнистого состава могут быть такие осадочные образования как опока, трепел, диатомит. К горным породам магнезиального состава относятся тальковый сланец и другие талькосодержащие породы. В результате обжига происходила перекристаллизация минералов, фазовые переходы.

Технология обжига представляется достаточно сложной. Такие магнезиальные пироксены как энстатит, кристаллизуются при температурах, превышающих 1200°С, а температура фазового перехода кварца в кристобалит – выше 1400°С (при нормальном атмосферном давлении). Весьма важными являются скорость нагревания и охлаждения материала, длительность обжига. Эти условия нужно было подобрать так, чтобы предупредить растрескивание или оплавление вещества. Для отработки такой сложной технологии обжига, по-видимому, требовалось весьма длительное время.

Изученные предметы входили в инвентарь погребений или найдены в культурном слое эпохи ранней и средней бронзы (период среднего Намазга IV – начало позднего этапа Намазга V) и датируются второй половиной – концом III тыс. до н. э.

Соотношение химико-минерального состава и типологической характеристики исследованных образцов показывает, что из пород кремнистого состава (первая минералогическая группа) изготовлены преимущественно предметы, характерные для культурного комплекса Южного Туркменистана эпохи ранней и средней бронзы, причем антропоморфная статуэтка и крестовидная печать несомненно имеют местное происхождение, а плоские прямоугольные пронизки с зубчатым краем и округлые бусы широко представлены в инвентаре погребений Алтын-депе (погр. 41, 131–168, 195, 198, 258, 403–409, 413, 419–422, 424–429, 590–597, 634–638, 813). За пределами Южного Туркменистана пронизки с зубчатыми краями найдены в Иране в погребении времени Гиссар IIIB–C на Тепе-Гиссар (Sсhmidt 1937: 231, tabl. LXIX, H 2856) и в погребениях 224, 340, 351 и 362 могильника А в Шахдаде (Hakemi 1997: 393, No. 2767: 517, No. 4097; 528, No. 4194–4199; 539, No. 4284), также датируемых второй половиной III тыс. до н. э. К концу III – началу II тыс. до н. э. относятся находки округлых бус в могильнике Северного Гонур-депе 1 в древней Маргиане (Salvatori 1995: 10, fig. 20, G. 432, 9–11), причем автор раскопок определяет материал таких бус как фаянс. Интересно, что уже Э. Шмидт указывал, что пронизка с зубчатыми краями и бусина с тремя каналами и с зубчатым оформлением краев изготовлены из фритта (frit), выделяя тем самым эти бусы по материалу (Schmidt 1937: 231).

Во вторую минералогическую группу (породы магнезиального состава) вошли две цилиндрические пронизки, округлая плоская подвосьмиугольная бусина и квадратная печать со знаками. Цилиндрические пронизки не имеют точной культурно-хронологической атрибуции, округлая подвосьмиугольная бусина – единственная на Алтын-депе, однако здесь представлены близкие по форме округлые бусы из сердолика. Белые каменные плоские округлые бусы найдены в погр. 221, 340, 351, 362 (Hakemi 1997: 390, No. 21714; 517, No. 4097; 528, No. 4194–4195; 539, No.4284) могильника А в Шахдаде, то есть в инвентаре тех же захоронений, что и плоские прямоугольные пронизки с зубчатыми краями. Наконец, квадратная печать со знаками уже в момент находки была однозначно определена как печать протоиндийского типа (Массон 1977: 147; 1981: 115), являющаяся прямым импортом на Алтын-депе из района цивилизации Хараппа. Наши исследования, показавшие что печать была изготовлена из стеатита и затем обожжена, дополнительно подтверждают эту культурную атрибуцию.

В древней Индии технология изготовления предметов из мягкого талька (стеатита) с последующим обжигом известна, начиная с неолита (Vidale 1990) и, видимо, именно отсюда распространилась на территорию Ирана и Средней Азии. Однако использование в качестве сырья мягких осадочных пород (опока, трепел, диатомит) с последующим высокотемпературным обжигом и получением кварц-кристобалита в материалах Алтын-депе зафиксировано впервые. Показательно, что предметы из обожженных стеатита и кремнеземов входили в состав одних и тех же комплексов, а инвентарь коллективного захоронения (погр. 634–638) среднего этапа периода ранней бронзы — наиболее раннее проявление такой технологии.

L. B. Kircho, G. M. Kovnurko. Ceremonial and ritual objects and adornments from ancient artificial minerals from Altyn-Depe (data obtained by means of roentgenometric analysis)

We continue here our investigations of the mineral composition of objects obtained from excavations at Altyn-Depe – one of the largest and most studied settlements of the Aeneolithic epoch and Bronze Age in Central Asia (Кирчо, Ковнурко 1999: 76–85). Examined were 11 artefacts made from whitish-grey stone-like material (fig. 1, table 1): seals, a figurine, beads, and a plate. The roentgenometric analysis was carried out by V. B. Trofimov (Chair of Crystallography of the Geological Faculty, Saint-Petersburg State University) using the DRON-2,0 apparatus.

Two groups of samples were segregated on the basis of their chemico-mineral composition as shown by X-ray analysis (table. 2). In one of the groups (7 samples), predominant are quartz and cristobalite, i.e. their chemical composition is based on silicon dioxide. Four samples of the other group are composed of silicates of magnesium — talc and enstatite. One of the samples from this second group contains clinoenstatite and forsterite.

The analytical data suggest that these mineral constituents were not formed naturally but appeared during high-temperature firing.

1. The ratio of the mineral phases is not constant while the chemical compositions of the two types of samples are identical (or close). Such inconstancy may be explained by variances in the temperature and duration of firing. In nature, the conditions of crystallisation of a melt are limited, therefore high contents of cristobalite in acid rocks and those of enstatite in the ultra-basic ones are uncommon.

2. The artefacts composed of mixtures of talc and enstatite are white, while greenish-black or black tints are peculiar to natural rocks of similar chemical composition.

3. All of the minerals identified by X-ray analysis are brittle and very hard. Drilling any relatively long holes with a small diameter (0.1–0.2 cm) in them is technically fairly difficult.

Thus the original materials for making our objects were soft rocks that yield easily to mechanical processing — carving and drilling. Examples of siliceous rocks are inter alia such sedimentary forms as gaize, bergmeal and diatomite. Rocks of magnesian composition include talc schist and other talc-containing rocks. Firing of the raw materials resulted in re-crystallisation and phase transitions in the constituent minerals.

The technology of firing seems to have been fairly complicated. Such magnesian pyroxenes as enstatite crystallise at temperatures exceeding 1200°C, and the temperature of the phase transition of quartz to cristobalite is over 1400°C (under the normal atmospheric pressure). Of great importance are the rates of heating and cooling of the material and the duration of firing. These conditions must be selected so as to prevent cracking and vitrification of the substance. The development of such a complicated technology of firing took, as it seems, a very long time.

The objects mentioned made part of the grave goods or were found in the cultural layer of the early and middle Bronze Age (middle Namazga IV and the beginning of the later stage of Namazga V) and are dated to the second half or the end of the 3^rd mil. B.C.

The correlation of the chemical-mineral compositions and typological characteristics of the samples studied shows that from the rocks of siliceous composition (the first mineralogical group) mostly objects peculiar to the cultural complex of southern Turkmenistan of the early and middle Bronze Age were made. Furthermore, the anthropomorphic statuette and cruciform seal undoubtedly are of the local origin, and the flat rectangular spacer-beads with dentated edges and rounded beads are widely represented among the funerary inventory at Altyn-Depe (graves 41, 131–168, 195, 198, 258, 403–409, 413, 419–422, 424–429, 590–597, 634–638, 813). Outside southern Turkmenistan, spacer-beads with dentated edges were found in Iran in a burial dated to the Hissar IIIB–C period at Tepe-Hissar (Sсhmidt 1937: 231, tabl. LXIX, H 2856) and in graves 224, 340, 351 and 362 at cemetery A in Shahdad (Hakemi 1997: 393, No. 2767: 517, No. 4097; 528, No. 4194–4199; 539, No. 4284). The latter graves also are dated to the second half of the 3^rd mil. B.C. In ancient Margiana, at the cemetery of the Northern Gonur-Depe 1, one found rounded beads dated to the end of the 3^rd and beginning of the 2^nd mil. B.C. (Salvatori 1995: 10, fig. 20, G. 432, 9–11). The author of the latter excavations identified the material of those beads as faience. It is interesting that already E. Sсhmidt pointed out that the spacer-bead with dentated edges and the bead with three channels and dentated edges were made from frit, thus distinguishing them by their material (Schmidt 1937: 231).

The second mineralogical group (rocks of magnesian composition) includes two cylindrical spacer-beads, a rounded flattened nearly eight-angled bead and a square seal with signs. The cylindrical spacer-beads have no precise cultural and chronological attribution. The rounded nearly eight-angled bead is the single example at Altyn-Depe, however, several rounded cornelian beads, close to this one in their shape, are represented here. White flat rounded beads were found in graves 221, 340, 351, 362 (Hakemi 1997: 390, No. 21714; 517, No. 4097; 528, No. 4194–4195; 539, No. 4284) at cemetery A in Shahdad – i.e. among goods from the same burials as were the flat rectangular spacer-beads with dentated edges. Finally, the square seal with signs, already at the moment of its find was identified with confidence as a seal of the proto-Indic type (Массон 1977: 147; 1981: 115), directly imported to Altyn-Depe from the region of the Harappan civilisation. Our investigations, which showed that the seal had been made from steatite and then fired, confirmed additionally this cultural attribution.

In ancient India, the technology of making objects from soft talc (or steatite) with subsequent firing is known as early as the Neolithic period (Vidale 1990) and, as it seems, it is from there that it spread throughout Iran and Central Asia. However, in materials from Altyn-Depe the use of soft sedimentary rocks (gaize, bergmeal and diatomite) as raw materials with subsequent high-temperature firing in order to obtain quartz-cristobalite has been recorded for the first time. It is indicative that articles from fired steatite and silica constituted one and the same set of complexes, the earliest manifestation of such technology being the inventory from the collective burials (graves 634–638) of the middle stage of the early Bronze Age.

К. Х. Кушнарева, М. Б. Рысин. Новые данные к хронологии памятников эпохи средней бронзы Южного Кавказа

Широко известную Триалетскую культуру авторы рассматривают как второй (после бедено-алазанского) этап динамично развивающейся курганной культуры Кавказа, возникшей после распада куро-аракской общности (середина III тыс. до н.э.) и просуществовавшей примерно до начала II тыс. до н.э. Триалетская культура отражала период ее наивысшего расцвета. Несмотря на 60-летнюю историю исследования триалетской культуры, в результате чего открыты многие десятки памятников и созданы реконструкции разносторонней жизни общества, оставившего эти памятники, в деле изучения этой культуры и сегодня остаются определенные лакуны. На восполнение одной из таких лакун – обоснование хронологической позиции памятников “цветущей поры” среднебронзовой культуры на базе новых и новейших материалов – и направлена настоящая статья.

Для решения обозначенной проблемы мы в первую очередь опирались на продукцию металлургии, прогресс которой в большой степени определял социально-экономические успехи любого общества. Среди металлургической продукции особенно чувствительно к переменам в обществе было оружие. Именно поэтому мы обратились к данному виду источников. Ввиду ограниченных рамок статьи мы отобрали три ведущих вида вооружения (топор, копье, меч). Сравнительно-типологический анализ этих изделий позволил сделать следующие выводы.

1. По уточненным датировкам ведущих видов оружия, опирающихся на четко датированные изделия из стран Переднего Востока, время сооружения курганов “цветущей поры” или триалетско-кироваканского этапа должно быть перенесено с середины II тыс. до н.э. (точка зрения Б. А. Куфтина и др.) в конец III – начало II тыс. до н.э.

2. Те же данные не дают оснований период создания рассматриваемых курганов растягивать на всю первую половину II тыс. до н.э. (точка зрения Э. М. Гогадзе и др.).

3. Результаты анализа показывают, что период “цветущей поры”, начавшийся в конце III тыс. до н.э., просуществовал несколько столетий и завершился не позднее XVIII в. до н.э. Известно, что в последующие века, вплоть до XVI – XV вв. до н.э., на юге региона бытовала кармирбердская культура.

4. Предпринятое удревнение памятников “цветущей поры” позволило переосмыслить направление импульсов, стимулировавших формирование основных видов кавказских металлоизделий. Стало очевидным, что первые импульсы посылались на Кавказ не из эгейского мира, как это предполагалось ранее, а из стран Переднего Востока; в этом процессе большую роль играли передневосточные центры, вовлеченные в международную ассирийскую торговую сеть. Оттуда же направлялись аналогичные импульсы в страны эгейского мира. И лишь впоследствии начали налаживаться связи Кавказа с Эгеидой.

5. Более дробная датировка отдельных погребальных комплексов может быть обоснована лишь после подобного анализа всех видов оружия, а также других металлических изделий, в частности, изделий из драгоценных металлов. Пока можно лишь предположить, что в кругу рассмотренных комплексов “цветущей поры” Карашамбский курган по времени несколько опережает остальные, ибо в его составе оказался якоревидный топор, известный еще по погребениям первого, бедено-алазанского, этапа; в других поздних погребениях подобные топоры не обнаружены. Представляется также, что Кированский курган, в составе инвентаря которого находилась секира, тяготеющая по своей форме к боевым топорам позднего бронзового века, был несколько моложе остальных рассмотренных выше курганов.

Сделанные краткие выводы указывают на необходимость дальнейшей разработки проблемы периодизации и хронологии памятников среднебронзового века Кавказа.

K. Kh. Kushnareva, M. B. Rysin. New Data for the Chronology of the Middle Bronze Age Sites in Southern Caucasus

The authors of this article consider the widely known Trialeti Culture as the second stage (after the Beden-Alazan one) of the dynamically developing kurgan culture of Caucasus that appeared after the disintegration of the Kura-Aras community (middle of the 3^rd mil. B.C.) and lasted into about the beginning of the 2^nd mil. B.C. The Trialeti reflected the peak of that kurgan culture. Notwithstanding the 60 years of studies of the Trialeti Culture that have resulted in the discovery of many tens of sites and reconstruction of various aspects of the life of the society which left those sites, certain lacunas in our knowledge about this culture still remain. Here, an attempt is made to fill on the basis of some new and the newest evidences one of such lacunas and establish the chronological position of sites of the “blooming period” of the middle Bronze Age culture.

In order to solve the problem stated above we considered first and foremost products of metallurgy, the progress of which determined to a considerable degree the social and economic successes of any society. Of the metalwork, the most sensitive to changes in society were weapons. For this reason we turned our attention to that kind of evidence. In view of the limited volume of this paper we selected for consideration only the three leading kinds of weapons (battle-axe, spear and sword). Comparison of the types of these objects allowed us to propose the following conclusions.

1. According to precise dating of the leading kinds of weapons based on reliably dated objects from the Near East, the period of the construction of kurgans of the “blooming period”, or Trialeti-Kirovokan stage, must be shifted from the middle of the 2^nd mil. B.C. (as proposed by B. A. Kuftin et al.) to the end of the 3^rd or beginning of the 2^nd mil. B.C.

2. The same evidence gives no grounds to stretch the period of the creation of the kurgans under consideration throughout the entire first half of the 2^nd mil. B.C. (as viewed by E. M. Gogadze et al.).

3. Our analysis showed that the “blooming period” dating from the late 3^rd mil. B.C. continued several centuries and ended not later than the 18^th century B.C. It is known that later, until the 16^th–5^th centuries B.C., the Karmirberd Culture was spread in the south of this region.

4. The attempted chronological shift of sites of the “blooming period” to earlier dates allowed us to reconsider the direction of the impulses which stimulated the formation of the main types of Caucasian metal objects. It became clear that the first impulses were directed to Caucasus not from the Aegean World as supposed before but rather from lands of the Near East; a considerable role in this process was played by those Near Eastern centres that were involved in the international Assyrian trade network. Therefrom, similar impulses were directed to lands of the Aegean World. Only later, establishing connections between Caucasus and Aegeis began.

5. More detailed dating of particular burial complexes may be grounded only after a similar analysis of all kinds of weapons, as well as other metal objects, including articles made from silver and gold. Meanwhile, one may only suppose that the Karashamb kurgan is somewhat earlier than the other burial complexes of the “blooming period”, since it contained an anchor-shaped battle-axe known still from burials of the first (Beden-Alazan) stage; in the later burials no such battle-axes have been found. It also seems that the Kirovakan kurgan, which contained a pole-axe resembling in its shape the battle-axes of the late Bronze Age, was slightly younger than the other kurgans considered.

The brief conclusions presented above suggest the necessity of further studies of the problem of periodization and chronology of Caucasian sites of the middle Bronze Age.

В. А. Папанова. Расписная ойнохоя местного производства из некрополя Ольвии

В статье рассматривается вопрос о времени производства в Ольвии расписной керамики. Производство местной, расписной керамики датируется довольно широко – второй половиной IV – серединой II вв. до н.э. Это связано с тем, что большая часть исследованных сосудов была найдена не в закрытых комплексах. На сегодняшний день не разработаны хронологические рамки производства для каждой из групп ольвийских расписных сосудов. Поэтому особый интерес представляет находка расписной красноглиняной ойнохои местного изготовления в комплексе тризны на участке семейных захоронений ольвийского некрополя (рис. 1). Ойнохоя была оставлена на месте совершения тризны вместе с чернолаковым киликом типа болсала 430 г. до н.э., чернолаковым канфаром третьей четверти IV в. до н.э. и сетчатым лекифом второй половины IV в. до н.э. (рис. 2). Данный комплекс позволяет отнести производство ойнохои к третьей четверти IV в. до н.э.

Интерес представляет и необычное сооружение на месте тризны – некое подобие входа в лабиринт. Лабиринт у древних греков символизировал путь в обитель мертвых, переход между мирами живых и мертвых, являясь магической защитой мира живых. Сосуды, лежавшие вверх дном, также символизировали переход умершего в загробный мир.

Расписные сосуды местного производства, возможно, специально изготовлялись для поминально-погребального обряда, имевшего у ольвиополитов сложную символику.

V. A. Papanova. A Painted Oinochoe of Local Manufacture from the Necropolis of Olbia

In this paper the problem of the period of manufacture of painted pottery in Olbia is considered. The production of local painted pottery is dated now to a fairly wide period – from the second half of the 4^th century to the middle of the 2^nd century B.C. Such wide evaluation is due to the fact that most of the vessels investigated were not found in closed complexes. At present, the chronological frames of the manufacture of each group of Olbian painted vessels still are not developed. Of a special interest therefore is the find of a painted red-ware oinochoe of local production in the funeral feast complex from the area of family burials on the Olbian necropolis (fig. 1). This oinochoe was left at the place of the funeral feast along with a black-glazed kylix of the bolsal type of the 430 B.C., a black-glazed kantharos of the third quarter of the 4^th century B.C. and a lekythos with grid decoration of the second half of the 4^th century B.C. (fig. 2). This complex allows us to date the manufacture of the oinochoe to the third quarter of the 4^th century B.C.

Also of interest is an unusual structure found on the place of the funeral feast – some likeness of the entrance into a labyrinth. For ancient Greeks labyrinth symbolised the way to the abode of the dead – a passage between the worlds of the living and dead – being a magic protection of the world of the living. The vessels lying bottoms up also symbolised the transition of the deceased into the other world.

Possibly, painted vessels of the local production were specially manufactured for funeral rites which implied a complicated symbolism for Olbiapolitians.

Р. В. Стоянов. Еще раз об ориентировке и положении костяков в некрополе Херсонеса Таврического V-I вв. до н. э.

Вопросы интерпретации ориентировки и положения костяков в некрополе Херсонеса классического и эллинистического периодов являются во многом спорными до настоящего времени. Целью данной работы является анализ положения и ориентировки погребений V–I в. до н. э. на всех известных в настоящее время участках некрополя. В исследовании использовались только данные о погребениях описание ориентировки и положения костяков в которых не вызывает сомнений или может быть реконструировано по чертежам отчётов.

Для большинства погребений херсонесского некрополя на протяжении классического и эллинистического периодов преобладающей является ориентировка восточного румба. Характерной чертой классического некрополя является абсолютное преобладание восточного направления с отклонениями к северу и югу (81% от общего количества погребений). Причём количество погребений ориентированных на северо-восток в два раза меньше погребений ориентированных на юго-восток и в четыре раза меньше погребений в которых костяк лежал головой на восток (см. Таблицу I). В эллинистический период происходят изменения в количественном соотношении ориентировки погребений (см. Таблицу II). Прежде всего, резко возрастает количество погребений с меридиональной ориентацией. Могилы, расположенные по линии север-юг составляют 56% от общего числа погребений в отличие от 14% в классический период.

Несмотря на наличие представительного числа погребений со скорченными костяками преобладающим положением покойника в некрополе Херсонеса является вытянутое. Большинство скорчеников в некрополе V–IV в. до н. э. (23 из 29 известных) были погребены на северном участке. Погребальный инвентарь, ориентировка погребённого и стратиграфия могил, в которых были отмечены скорченные захоронения, не дают никаких сведений об этнической интерпретации погребённых. То, что костяки в скорченном положении были встречены на одних участках рядом с погребёнными в вытянутом положении, свидетельствует о том, что первые являлись жителями города. Отличительной чертой погребений северного участка являлась бедность погребального инвентаря. Хотя этот признак является характерным для всего городского некрополя классической эпохи, нельзя исключать, что в данном случае он мог свидетельствовать и о низком благосостоянии или социальном статусе его обладателей. Необходимо всё же отметить, что имеющийся материал не позволяет сделать однозначный вывод по поводу социального положения скорчеников. Можно лишь утверждать, что они являлись жителями города и наиболее вероятно принадлежали к наименее зажиточной части его населения. В отношении этнической интерпретации погребённых в скорченной позе эллинистического времени вопрос может быть разрешён ровно также, как и в отношении погребений классического периода – данных для того чтобы отнести их к варварскому или греческому населению города в настоящее время нет.

R. V. Stoyanov. Once More about the Orientation and Position of Skeletons at the Necropolis of the Tauric Chersonesos of the 5^th–1^st Centuries B.C.

Up to the present the problems of interpretation of the orientation and position of skeletons found at the necropolis of Chersonesos of the Classic and Hellenistic periods are disputable in many aspects. The object of this article is to analyse the position and orientation of burials of the 5^th–1^st centuries B.C. in all areas of the necropolis now known. In this study, only those burials have been considered for which the orientation and position of skeletons is reliably described or may be reconstructed from drawings in the scientific reports.

Throughout the Classic and Hellenistic periods, in most of the burials at the Chersonesean necropolis predominant is the orientation of the eastern bearing. A characteristic feature of the Classic necropolis is the absolute prevalence of the eastern orientation with some deviations to the south or north (81% from the total number of burials). Furthermore, the number of the burials oriented north-eastward is two times lesser than that of the burials oriented to south-east and four times lesser than the quantity of the burials in which skeletons were lying head to east (cf. Table I). In the Hellenistic period, changes in the quantitative relation of the orientations of graves (cf. Table II) take place. First and foremost, increased is the number of burials with meridional orientation. The graves directed along the north–south line amount to 56% of the total number of burials unlike the 14% during the Classic period.

Notwithstanding a significant number of burials with flexed skeletons, the predominant position of the deceased at the necropolis of Chersonesos is the extended one. The majority of the flexed at the necropolis of the 5^th–4^th century B.C. (23 of the 29 known) were buried in the northern area. The grave goods, orientation of the buried and stratigraphy of the graves, in which flexed skeletons were found, give no information to help the ethnic interpretation of the dead. The fact that the crouched skeletons were encountered in the same areas as the extended ones suggests that the former were inhabitants of the city. Peculiar to burials in the northern area was the poverty of their grave inventory. Although such a feature is characteristic of the entire city’s necropolis of the Classical period, one may not rule out that in the northern area it possibly indicates to a low prosperity or social status of the buried. The evidence available, however, does not allow us to make any certain conclusions as to the social position of the flexed. We may assert only that they were inhabitants of the city and most probably belonged to the least well-to-do part of its population. As for the ethnic interpretation of the buried in flexed position of the Hellenistic period, the problem remains at the same stage as for those of the Classic period, i.e. there are thus far no evidences for attributing them either to the Barbarian or Greek population of the city.

Х. Г. Ахунбабаев. К проблеме северных границ греко-бактрийского царства

Одной из проблем истории Греко-Бактрийского царства является проблема его северных границ. Преобладает мнение, что, как и при Александре Македонском, в период господства Селевкидов и греко-бактрийцев Согд входил в состав этих государственных образований. Существует и иная точка зрения. Одним из факторов проливающих свет на данную проблему является, по мнению автора статьи, наличие остатков линии оборонительных стен, известных среди местного населения под названием Кампыр-дувал и маркирующих реальные границы Греко-Бактрийского царства в Согде. Опираясь на исследования Кампыр-дувала, проводившихся начиная с конца прошлого столетия можно утверждать о взаимосвязанности сохранившихся участков этой стены, протянувшейся по территории трех древних исторических областей (Западного, Центрального Согда и Уструшаны) и составлявшей в древности единую оборонительную систему (рис. 1). Археологических раскопок непосредственно связанных с Кампыр-дувалом практически не проводилось, если не считать нескольких разрезов Х. Мухамедова и небольших по объему разведочных работ О.В. Обельченко, которые позволили ему дать приблизительную дату времени возведения стены – первые века до нашей эры. В вопросах датировки возведения Кампыр-дувала большое значение имеют материалы по исторической топографии городов и крепостей античного периода, полученные за последние годы на территории Бухарской и Самаркандской областей. Материалы из Бухарской области, кроме того, дают представление и о динамике развития древних укреплений, в средневековое время превратившихся в кольцо стен вокруг оазиса.

Анализируя данные письменных источников, результаты археологических исследований, автор склонен утверждать, что остатки древней оборонительной стены являются зримой чертой, обозначившей северные границы Греко-Бактрийского царства. Возведена она была, видимо, вскоре после отложения Греко-Бактрии от Селевкидов и могла расцениваться, кроме всего прочего, как политический акт засвидетельствовавший образование нового государства, унаследовавшего все завоевания Александра Македонского в Средней Азии.

В 208–206 гг. до н.э., когда селевкидский царь Антиох III осаждал греко-бактрийского царя в его столице, стена уже существовала. Известные слова Евтидема (в передаче Полибия) адресованные к Антиоху: "...положение обоих становится небезопасным. На границе стоят огромные полчища номадов, угрожающие нам обоим; если только варвары перейдут границу, то страна наверняка будет ими завоевана" [Polyb. XI. 34] – неоспоримое свидетельство наличия линии оборонительных укреплений вдоль северных пределов Греко-Бактрии. Сообщение это не имело смысла, если бы речь шла о границе проходившей по реке Окс (Амударья). Вряд ли здесь речь могла идти и о воображаемой пограничной черте на карте царства.

H. G. Akhunbabaev. On the Problem of the Northern Boundaries of the Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom

One of the problems of history of the Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom is that of its northern boundaries. Prevailing is the point of view, that Sogdia made part of those state formations both during the time of Alexander of Macedon and during the period of the rule of Seleucids and Graeco-Bactrians. However, there is also a differing point of view. In the opinion of the author of this paper, among the facts that may throw light on this problem, one should consider remains of a line of defensive walls known by the local inhabitants under the name of Kampyr-Duval. These line possibly is marking the actual borders of the Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom in Sogdia. On the basis of the investigations of Kampyr-Duval conducted since the end of the last century we may assert that the preserved remains of this wall which ranged through the territories of three historical areas (Western and Central Sogdia and Ustrushana) are related to each other and formed in antiquity a single defensive system (Fig. 1). Practically no archaeological excavations, directly connected with Kampyr-Duval, have been carried out, not counting a few sections excavated by H. Mukhamedov and small-scale exploratory works of O. V. Obel’chenko which enabled him to date approximately construction of the wall to the first centuries B.C. Of great importance for dating the construction of Kampyr-Duval are the evidences of historical topography of towns and fortresses of Classic period obtained recently from the Bukhara and Samarkand provinces. The materials from Bukhara Province, in addition, give us an idea about the dynamics of the development of the ancient fortifications which in the Medieval period were transformed into a ring of walls encircling the oasis.

Considering the information from written documents and results of archaeological investigations, the author of this article supposed that the remains of the ancient defensive wall are the visible line that designates the northern boundaries of the Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom. That wall was built probably shortly after the secession of Graeco-Bactria from Seleucids and, along with all its other purposes, it possibly was considered as a political act testifying the formation of a new state which inherited all the conquests of Alexander in Central Asia.

The wall was already existing in 208–206 B.C. when the Seleucid king Antiochus III was besieging the Graeco-Bactrian king in the latter’s capital. The well-known words of Euthydemus (quoted by Polybius) addressed to Antiochus: “…the position of both is growing rather dangerous. On the border, enormous hordes of nomads are staying and threatening both of us; if only the Barbarians pass the border, the country undoubtedly will be conquered by them” [Polyb. XI. 34] – are an indisputable evidence on the existence of a line of fortifications ranged along the northern limits of Graeco-Bactria. This message would have been senseless if it involved the border which ran by the Oxus River (Amu Darya). Neither it is probable that some imaginary boundary line on the Kingdom’s map was here implied.

Н. В. Семенов. Происхождение иконографии и символика некоторых коптских стел

Среди коптских надгробных стел можно выделить огромный по количеству памятников пласт – это стелы с архитектурными мотивами, к ним относятся и большинство стел из Эрмитажного собрания. Две из них отличаются своеобразным композиционным построением и упрощенной схематичной проработкой рельефа. Оба памятника были привезены В. Г. Боком из Египта в 1898 году (рис. 1: 1, 2). Общим композиционным принципом в них является изображение в центре колонны-алтаря, фланкированного анхами. Анализ рельефов и их сопоставление с другими памятниками восточнохристианского искусства, а также изображениями древнеегипетскими и эллинистическими позволяют говорить о трех традициях, иудео-христианской, эллинистической и древнеегипетской, которые могли оказать влияние на композицию стел и их символический смысл. А. Бадави рассматривает архитектурные мотивы на стелах как символическое изображение храма. Данный аспект интерпретации А. Бадави требует особых дополнений. На сирийском кубке (рис. 1: 10) есть изображение храма, которое М. С. Росс сопоставляет с коптскими рельефами с архитектурным мотивом (рис. 1: 5). Эти стелы сопоставимы с изображениями на ампулах Монца (рис. 1: 9), которые представляют киворий Церкви Воскресения в Иерусалиме. В своем исследовании Б. Кюнель доказала на основе раннесредневековых изображений храма, что именно они легли в основу христианского образа Небесного Иерусалима как символа Рая. Уходя корнями в иудаизм эта иконография нашла отражение и в росписях большого здания некрополя Эль-Багават в Египте. Среди прочих рисунков здесь имеются три аналогичных изображения зданий. Рядом с одним надпись по-гречески “Иерусалим”. Иконография стел с архитектурными мотивами восходит к погребениям восточно-эллинистического типа, где такие изображения представляют собой символические врата в потусторонний мир. Кроме того, колонна-алтарь на стелах восходит к эллинистическим изображениям жертвенников и напоминает их по форме. Подтверждением подобного значения могут служить также несколько коптских памятников, например, навершие из ГМИИ им. А.С. Пушкина (рис. 1: 12), где птицы пьют из чаши, стоящей на алтаре. Можно провести ряд аналогий не только с памятниками христианского искусства соседних областей средиземноморья, но также и с искусством фараоновского Египта. В статье М. Хаммада упоминаются некоторые древнеегипетские изображения, где одна центральная колонна или столб является характерной чертой. Тип некоторых египетских построек М. Хаммад выводит из египетских иероглифов. Один из них Sah – иероглиф, напоминающий по форме и обозначающий шатер с центральной колонной. Круглый шатер со священным столбом известен также по коптским росписям. К “Вратам” потустороннего мира имеет отношение египетский “ джед” – столб Осириса, он помещался в виде амулета на шею мумии и, как гласит назначенная для амулета формула: “чтобы он входил через двери преисподней, как имеющий силу, и никто не мог ему препятствовать, никто, никто не мог спрашивать”. В связи с изображением на наших стелах уместно вспомнить некоторые древнеегипетские композиции (рис. 1: 11), в центре которых расположен “джед” – столб вечности, над ним – солнечный диск, по обеим сторонам знака – крылатые богини Исида и Нефтида, обращенные лицом к символу Осириса. Если рассматривать схему этой композиции, то обнаружится сходство с исследуемыми стелами.

На стелах есть еще одна интересная деталь – это крест или хризма с расположенными между перекладинами круглыми пластинами с буквами альфа и омега. Знак этот представляет четыре сезона года, то есть время, которое имеет свое начало и конец в Иисусе Христе. В завершение можно сказать несколько слов о происхождении такого рода стел. Большое число их происходит из Луксора, некоторые из Эрмента, то есть памятники являются узколокализованными и выполнены примерно в одно время – VI–VII века. Вероятно, что они могут относятся к одной мастерской.

Изображения на стелах представляют единый синтез различных символов, призванных охранять души умерших и помочь им достичь “Небесного Царства”. Можно говорить о преемственности иконографии коптов у более древних культур, но их осмысление осуществляется в христианском духе.

N. V. Semenov. The Origin of the Iconography of Some Coptic Stelae and their Symbolism

Among Coptic tomb stelae, one may single out a group of monuments enormous in their quantity which involves stelae with architectural motives. Most of the Coptic stelae from the Hermitage collection belong to this group. Two of them stand out in their distinctive compositional structure and a simplified schematic treatment of the relief. Both of the monuments were brought by V. G. Bock from Egypt in 1898 (Fig. 1: 1, 2). Their common compositional principle is representation of a column-altar in the centre flanked with ankhs. Analysis of the reliefs and their comparison with other objects of the East-Christian art as well as ancient Egyptian and Hellenistic representations enables us to distinguish three traditions – Judaic/Christian, Hellenistic and ancient Egyptian – which probably have influenced the composition of the stelae and their symbolic meaning. A. Badawy considers the architectural motifs on the stelae as a symbolic representation of temple. Such an aspect of Badawy’s interpretation requires a special commentary. On a Syrian goblet (fig. 1: 10) there is a depiction of a temple, which M. S. Ross compared with the Coptic reliefs with architectural motif (fig. 1: 5). These stelae may be compared with representations on ampoules of the Holly land (fig. 1: 9), which represent the ciborium of the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem. In her research B. Kühnel proved on the basis of early Medieval representations of temple that the Christian image of the Heavenly Jerusalem as symbol of Paradise was based on these representations. Rooted in Judaism, this iconography found its reflection also in paintings of the large building on the necropolis of El-Bagaouat in Egypt. There, along with other drawings, there are three similar representations of buildings. Near one of the drawings there is a Greek inscription meaning “Jerusalem”. The iconography of stelae with architectural motifs leads to burials of the East-Hellenistic type where such depictions represent symbolic gates to the other world. Furthermore, the column-altar has the genetic tie with Hellenistic representations of altars and resembles them in its shape. Such a meaning is probably confirmed also by several Coptic objects, e.g. the crook-top from A. S. Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts (fig. 1: 12) with depiction of birds drinking from a bowl set on an altar. A number of parallels may be drawn not only with objects of Christian art from the neighbouring Mediterranean regions, but also with the arts of Pharaohs’ Egypt. In M. Hammad’s paper certain ancient Egyptian representations are mentioned the peculiarity of which is a central column or pillar. M. Hammad deduced the types of some Egyptian edifices from Egyptian hieroglyphs. One of the latter is Sah – a hieroglyph resembling and meaning a tabernacle with a central pillar. A round tabernacle with a sacred pillar is known also from Coptic paintings. Related with the “Gates” of the Other World is the Egyptian “djed” – the pillar of Osiris. It was put like an amulet on the neck of a mummy, and, as the formula designated for the amulet says: “in order that he would enter the door of the nether world like one who has power, and nobody would be able to hinder him, and nobody, nobody would dare ask”. In connection with depictions on our stelae it is appropriate to remember some ancient Egyptian compositions (fig. 1: 11) with “djed” in the centre – the pillar of eternity, the solar disc above it, and winged goddesses Isis and Nephthys on both sides with their faces turned to the symbol of Osiris. Consideration of the scheme of this composition reveals the resemblance with the stelae described.

Our stelae bear one other interesting detail – a cross between the crossbeams of which there are round plates with letters alpha and omega. This sign designates the four seasons, i.e. the time that takes its beginning and end in Jesus Christ. In conclusion, some words may be told about the origin of the stelae of that kind. A great number of them come from Luxor, some are from Hermonthis, i.e. these objects are narrowly localised and manufactured approximately in the same period – the 6^th–7^th centuries. It is possible, that they come from a single workshop.

The representations on the stelae are synthesised of different symbols intended to guard the souls of deceased and help them to reach the “Kingdom of Heaven”. The iconography of Copts suggests its continuity from earlier cultures, however their conceptualisation was realised in the Christian spirit.

Т. С. Нунан (†), Р. К. Ковалев. Большой клад дирхемов ранней эпохи викингов, найденный в 2000 г. в г. Козельске, Калужской обл.

Th. S. Noonan, R. K. Kovalev. A Large Early Viking-age Dirham Hoard found in 2000 in the city of Kozel’sk in Kaluga oblast’

Those interested in the history of European Russia during the early Viking age, i.e., the period from ca. 750 to the 830s, are confronted with the complete absence of contemporary written sources. Consequently, they must rely almost entirely on the material evidence and especially that which derives from archaeology and numismatics. As concerns numismatics, the hoards of Islamic silver coins or dirhams constitutes our most important source of information. These hoards enable us to determine when Rus’ trade with the Near East began (Noonan 1980: 401-469; 1984: 151-282), what routes were used by merchants traveling through European Russia from the Baltic to Baghdad, which peoples were involved in this commerce, and to what extent, and how the relative volume of this trade changed over time (Noonan 1992: 237-259; 1994: 215-236). In addition, these hoards suggest an historical context for the archaeological date. They help to explain, for example, why Vikings first came to European Russia (Noonan 1986: 321-348), and why the Rus’ established bases along the Volkhov at Staraia Ladoga and Sarskoe gorodishche along the upper Volga. Furthermore, these hoards demonstrate very clearly that the trade of the early Viking age was in the hands of Rus’ merchants from the Volkhov region who utilized the Oka basin to reach the Don-Northern Donets basin and Khazaria, which acted as chief intermediary in Rus’ commerce with the Islamic world at this time. Our understanding of the early Viking age in European Russia is thus very dependent on the numismatic evidence.

Given the great importance of the early Viking-age dirham hoards, it in not surprising that each new hoard from this period constitutes a significant addition to our knowledge. And, the larger the hoard, the great its significance. Since each hoard represents a more or less random sample of the dirhams circulating in European Russia, the larger a hoard is, the more it provides a complete and trustworthy random sample of the dirhams in circulation. Most dirham hoards deposited in European Russia between ca. 800 and ca. 835 were rather modest in size, e.g., 18 of 32 hoards from this period contained less than 100 dirhams and 9 were composed of less than 50 coins (see Table 1).

Several larger hoards, such as those from Kniashchino, Minsk province, and especially Orsha, have not been fully preserved and/or have questionable backgrounds. Other large hoards of this period have not yet been published although they were discovered sometime ago, e.g., Nizhnie Novoselki, Kremlevskoe, Elmed, and Kasakiaki. Finally, only a few dirhams have been identified from several hoards whose contents have been in large part dispersed, e.g., Borki and Antoninenberg. We are thus left with only four large hoards whose contents have been published in some detail, e.g., Nizhniaia Syrovatka, Ugidichi, Iarylovichi, and Uglich. And, two of these hoards contain less than 150 coins while a third had less than 300 dirhams. To date, the only truly large hoard to be published was deposited in Uglich and dates to 832/33, i.e., the end of the early Viking age in Eastern Europe. Consequently, the discovery of a new dirham hoard containing almost 1000 coins and predating the Uglich by 17 years constitutes a most important addition to our evidence for the early Viking age.

In the summer of 2000, a very large early Viking-age coin hoard was found in Kaluga region in the area of the town of Kozel’sk on the Zhizdra river (Fig. 1). The hoard was apparently unearthed in an early medieval settlement at a depth of 0.5 m to 0.6 m from the surface in the ground. It is believed that the hoard was originally buried in a wooden box which subsequently perished without any trace. The box was evidently fastened with a bronze lock from which the body and part of the iron mechanism have been preserved. The coins were apparently wrapped in a decomposed cloth from which a few fragments, trimmed or embroidered, with small yellow glass beads, remained. The whole coins were found in three small stacks with the coin fragments placed around them. In addition to the coins, the hoard consisted of a piece of a silver rod (ingot?), square in cross-section, with a length of ca. 1 cm, and a small fragment of a spiral silver bracelet, round in cross-section, having a length of ca. 2 cm.

The hoard contained 937 Sasanian drachms and Islamic dirhams. The earliest coin was a Sasanian drachms struck between 459 and 484 while the most recent dirham dated to 815/16 although there were two dirhams that were struck between 815/16 and 833/34. Consequently, the hoard was presumably deposited sometime shortly after 815/16.

The Kozel’sk hoard contains all the distinctive dynastic characteristics of early Viking-age dirham hoards from European Russia (Table 1). Its single-largest component, ‘Abbāsid dirhams, constituted 66% of the hoard. The remaining coins were of “secondary” dynasties dating to the pre-‘Abbāsid era, e.g., Sasanian, Pre-Reform Umayyad, Umayyad, while others were contemporaneous with the ‘Abbāsids, e.g., ‘Abbāsid Governors, Idrīsids, Aghlabids, and Spanish Umayyads. Overall, the Kozel’sk hoard contains more categories of coins from more dynasties than any other known early Viking-age dirham hoard in European Russia.

Table 2 shows the chronological composition of our dirham hoards from European Russia. Since so many hoards have been dispersed or not published, our data derives from only 17 hoards. ‘Abbāsid dirhams constituted the largest dynastic component in the hoards from European Russia, the chronological composition of these hoards reflects, to a great extent, ‘Abbāsid mint production. And, as Th. S. Noonan had demonstrated, ‘Abbāsid mint production between ca. 750 and ca. 850 was highly erratic (Noonan 1998: 113-175). The chronological composition of the early Viking-age dirham hoards from European Russia was thus determined, to a considerable degree, by the output of ‘Abbāsid mints.

The dominant chronological composition was unquestionably that from the 770s-780s. It was the largest component in 15 of the 17 hoards. As for the other two hoards, it was the second largest component in the Iarylovichi hoard (34% vs. 35% for the 790s), while the small 819/20 Novotroitskoe hoard may not provide reliable data. While the dirhams from the 770s-780s were predominant, their percentages steadily declined. In our two earlier hoards, they constituted over 60%. In the hoards deposited between 805/06 and 816/17, they fluctuated between 59% and 40%. By 820/21, they dropped to 34-35% while in our last three hoards, they only accounted for 20-29% of all dirhams. But, this pattern is precisely what one would expect; as time went on, there were fewer and fewer “old” dirhams from the 770s-780s in circulation in the Near East and available for export to Eastern Europe. Strangely, the pattern of fewer dirhams from a given period as time went on does not apply to the other chronological components. On average, there were more pre-750 coins in hoards deposited after 812 than before. In fact, such coins composed around 20% of the large Kozel’sk, Iarylovich, and Uglich hoards. The largest percentages from the 750s-760s are found in hoards deposited after 822. Large percentages of dirhams from the 790s could be found in the large Iarylovich and Elmed hoards from 820/21. With the exception of the 770s-780s, while older coins were constantly being exported to Eastern Europe where they were buried, many older coins remained in circulation in both the Near East and Eastern Europe. Finally, the drop in ‘Abbāsid mint production starting ca. 810 meant that there were relatively few new dirhams in the hoards deposited after that date.

The Kozel’sk hoard contains far more datable dirhams (687) than any other dirham hoard of the period in northern Europe. Ramsowo in Poland with 328 dirhams is the second largest while Iarylovichi with 284 dirhams in the third. In addition to providing our largest random sample, Kozel’sk was deposited near the middle of our era and thus enables us to look both backwards and forwards with some confidence. What then does the Kozel’sk hoard tell us about the chronological composition of the early Viking-age hoards from Eastern Europe? First of all, it confirms many of the conclusions from small hoards. Dirhams from the 770s-780s were the dominant chronological component although their relative numbers continued to decline. Large numbers of coins struck before 750s remained in circulation. There were relatively few new dirhams struck after ca. 800 (10%). At the same time, the Kozel’sk hoard contains a relatively small number of dirhams from the 750s-760s (3%) and 790s (17%). It is also interesting to compare the 815/16 Kozel’sk hoard with the much smaller, and as yet unpublished, 816/17 hoard from Tula oblast’. These two hoards, so different in size, have almost identical percentages for the pre-750s, 750s-760s, and 770s-780s components. They differ a little for the 790s and 800s but if we combine these two decades, then the totals are almost the same, 26% vs. 28%. In sum, Kozel’sk validates most of our conclusions and replicates the data in a much smaller hoard of the same time.

Second, because it has so many datable ‘Abbāsid dirhams (388), the Kozel’sk hoard allows us to measure early ‘Abbāsid mint production with some degree of confidence. This data is displayed in Graph 1. Here, we see that mint output remained at relatively low levels until ca. 775 when it grew rapidly but erratically until reaching a peak in 780/81. It continued at a relatively high level, but still with extreme fluctuations, until ca. 792/93, when it slowly but steadily declined. ‘Abbāsid mint output, as reflected in the Kozel’sk hoard, helps to explain a great deal about the chronological composition of early Viking-age hoards from Eastern Europe.

Turning to the regional composition of our hoards, it is not surprising that Iraq and northern Iran, with their big ‘Abbāsid mints of Baghdad (Madīnat al-Salām) and al-Muhammadīyyah/al-Rayy are two of the three principle regions represented in the early Viking-age hoards. Each of these two regions is present in 17 of the 18 hoards in our database (see Table 3). However, the key regional characteristic of our early Viking-age hoards is the predominant position of North African dirhams. These coins form the largest regional component in 11 of the 18 hoards for which we have data. The dominance of North African dirhams is even more pronounced if we limit ourselves to the period before 830s; in 11 of 15 hoards, North African dirhams form the largest component and, if we exclude the Kniashchino hoard with its problematic history as well as the mini-hoards from Sarskoe gorodishche and Novotroitskoe, then the figures are 11 of 12 hoards. In other words, Viking-age dirham hoards of the period up to ca. 825 from Eastern Europe are distinguished by the dominance of North African dirhams along with substantial components from Iraq and northern Iran. A small percentage of coins, normally 10% or less in each case, from up to 8 other regions, was also present in these hoards. It should also be noted here that dirhams from Transoxiana are found in 9 of the 11 hoards deposited between 812/13 and 835.

The regional composition of the Kozel’sk hoard, as one would expect, is fairly typical of its time and place. North African dirhams constitute just under half of the hoard while the coins of Iraq and northern Iran each form 1/5 or more of the hoard, i.e., these three regions account for 90% of all the coins in the hoard. A small percentage of coins came from 7 of the other 8 regions. Using the tpq of Kozel’sk as our benchmark, ca. 815/16 can be considered the time when North African dirhams still constituted around half the coins in a typical hoard, when Iraqi and northern Iranian dirhams account for another 2/5 of the coins, and the remaining 10% came from 8 other regions. The large Uglich hoard of 832/33 illustrates the changes which were to take place in the next 15 years or so. North African dirhams now represented ca. 10% of the coins while 3/5 came from Iraq and northern Iran. Over 30% of the coins now originated from the other 8 regions. As noted above, these changes apparently took place after ca. 820/21. Kozel’sk thus strengthens the conclusions drawn from other contemporaneous hoards about the regional composition of early Viking-age dirham hoards from Eastern Europe.

The dirham hoards from Eastern Europe provide the most abundant and reliable data about the great trade of the Rus’ with the Islamic world during the Viking Age. In particular, the Kozel’sk and other contemporaneous hoards furnish the best evidence about the origins and development of this commerce in the first third of the IX century. Table 4 lists the hoards from Eastern Europe between ca. 800 and ca. 835 and indicates how many coins were originally in each hoard. The find spots of these hoards are displayed graphically on Map 1. In some cases, the figure for the total number of coins is an estimate or guess. The beginnings of the Rus’ trade with the Near East is often dated to the late VIII century based on the 786/87 hoard from Staraia Ladoga. However, as Table 4 suggests, the Ladoga hoard can be considered atypical. Not only was it composed entirely of ‘Abbāsid dirhams which makes it unique for this period, but it was the only hoard deposited in Eastern Europe during the second half of the VIII в. It can thus be considered an aberration.

The real early Viking-age Rus’ trade with the Near East began ca. 800 and continued on a regular basis for the next 35 years. During this period, a minimum of 32 hoards were buried containing around 6866 coins. And these are minimum figures. Various dirhams which had been imported into Eastern Europe before 835 were only buried after 835. Furthermore, the discovery of at least four new early Viking-age hoards during the past few years strongly suggests that more hoards, both large and small, remain to be unearthed from this period. In any event, it was only starting with ca. 800 that a sufficient number of dirhams were annually imported into Eastern Europe for at least one hoard to be deposited each year on average (fig. 2).

In addition, many of the early hoards were small in size, normally less than 100 coins. Eighteen of the 32 hoards were under 100 coins. And of the 11 hoards deposited before 812, only 2 contained over 100 coins. In other words, it took a decade or more to develop the initial infrastructure of the Rus’ trade with the Near East. It requited time to establish bases along the Volkhov-upper Volga-Oka rivers, bases which were necessary to service this trade. By the 810s, these commercial-craft bases were already taking shape. During the decade of the 810s, for example, 8 hoards with 100 dirhams or more were deposited in Eastern Europe. The growing volume of dirhams in circulation indicates that more coins were constantly being imported into Eastern Europe, i.e., the volume of trade was growing. During the 820s and early 830s, the pattern of growing trade continues. Five hoards, each with over 100 dirhams were deposited at this time. The largest of these hoards was deposited in Uglich ca. 832/33 and contained over 1100 coins. While many small hoards of less than 100 dirhams continued to be deposited during the 810s to early 830s, the most important historical development was the appearance of many large hoards (see Graph 2). Demand for silver dirhams was clearly growing in Eastern Europe and Muslim merchants from the Near East tried to meet this demand through the export of large quantities of dirhams to the north. Thus, by ca. 830, we can talk about a network of craft-commercial bases, utilized by the Rus’ and connecting the lower Volkhov river with the Don-Donets basins, i.e., the Baltic with Khazaria.

While find spots of hoards are not necessarily a reliable indicator of trade routes, large concentrations of find-spots from well defined periods do tend to point to routes used by merchants. Here, the earliest 34 hoards from Eastern Europe tend to point to 4 major regions: 1) Volkhov basin; 2) the upper Dnepr basin; 3) the upper Volga via the Oka system; and, 4) the lower Don-Donets basins. The only find-spots which appear to clearly challenge this North-West and South-East pattern of routes are Zavalishino, Elmed, and Viatka.

Е. М. Пашкин, В. О. Подборская. Исследование нижних частей несохранившейся угловой башни XVI в. Кирилло-Белозерского монастыря

E. M. Pashkin, V. O. Podborskaya. Investigation of the Lower Structures of a Non-Preserved 16^th Century Corner Tower of the Kirillo-Belozerskiy Monastery

In order to diagnose the causes of the largest structural deformation in the stack of bricks of the defensive wall of the Novy Gorod (The New Town) in the Kirillo-Belozerskiy Monastery, investigations of the structure of foundations and properties of soils at the base of the wall in that area were conducted. These investigations resulted in an interesting discovery. During excavation of an exploratory trench, remains of a destroyed structure (part of a brick wall and its base laid of boulders) which belonged to a non-preserved corner tower of the Ivanovskiy Monastery of the 16^th century, were found. This article presents a detailed description of the excavated fragments of the tower and their relation as strengthening elements to the now existing structures.

The morphology of the crack in the wall of the Novy Gorod may serve as a distinctive indicator of the development of deformations in the places where the now existing structures of architectural sites include some fragments of non-preserved structures of historical interest. The results of the mentioned investigations showed the same technology of building foundations from large boulders with preliminary compression of the soils under the bases by means of short piles.

А. В. Курбатов. «Меры сапожные» и проблематика ремесленного ученичества

В статье дан анализ археологических находок так называемых шаблонов для раскроя кожаных деталей, выделенных при раскопках в Новгороде, Пскове и Москве. Обращается внимание на несоответствие единичных находок "шаблонов" с массовым характером производства кожаных изделий, большой площадью исследования многих средневековых русских городов, а также открытием в них многих кожевенных мастерских. Учитывая особенности самих шаблонов (материал, форма, следы крепления), малочисленность их находок в городах, а также анализируя письменные упоминания "мер сапожных" автор приходит к выводу, что они, скорее всего, служили своего рода "учебно-практическими пособиями" для учеников и подмастерьев, помогающими запоминать форму и пропорции ракраиваемых кожаных деталей.

В коллекции кожи из раскопок Тверского кремля выделена группа не менее 94 предметов, происходящих из комплексов мастерских кожевенно-обувной специализации, которые можно рассматривать нак "ученические тетради".

Рассмотрение археологических находок, исторических упоминаний и историографической традиции, связанных с вопросом о характере ремесленного ученичества в русском средневековом обществе приводят автора к выводу о преобладании до XVI–XVII вв. наследственных семейных традиций передачи производственного опыта и мастерства от отца к сыну. Широкое распространение традиции обучения ремеслу людей со стороны, видимо, происходило не ранее этого времени. Такое предположение объясняет достаточно позднее появление многочисленных письменных документов, регулирующих отношения мастера и ученика.

A. V. Kurbatov. The “Shoemaking Measures” and Problems of the Handicraft Apprenticeship

This article presents an analysis of the so-called “templates” for cutting leather parts. Such templates were found during excavations in Novgorod, Pskov and Moscow. Attention is attracted to the fact that the single finds of the “templates” do not correspond to the mass character of the manufacture of leather articles, the large areas excavated in medieval Russian towns, and numerous leather-dressing workshops discovered in the latter. Taking into account peculiarities of the templates themselves (their material, shape and traces of fastening), the small number of their finds in towns, as well as on the basis of an analysis of records of “shoemaking measures”, the author concluded that these objects probably served as a sort of “teaching and practising aids” for apprentices and journeymen, which helped them to remember the shape and proportions of the leather parts to be cut.

In the collection of leather from excavations of the Tver Kremlin, a group of at least 94 objects which may be regarded as “pupils’ copy-books” from complexes of workshops specialised in leather-dressing and shoemaking has been segregated.

Consideration of archaeological finds, historical records and the historiographic tradition, related to the problem of the nature of apprenticeship in the medieval Russian society, lead the author to the conclusion that before the 16^th and 17^th centuries predominating were the family traditions of transferring the handicraft experience (from father to son). The wide propagation of the tradition of teaching persons from aside, it seems, occurred not earlier than that period. This supposition may explain the rather late appearance of numerous documents which regulated relations between master and apprentice.

АКТУАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ АРХЕОЛОГИИ

А. К. Филиппов. Роль орудий труда и символических средств в деятельности человека нижнего палеолита

Основываясь на данных палеоантропологии, Человек с самого начала истории, скорее всего, представлял собой единый вид, тогда как Homo sapiens erectus (?), Homo sapiens neanderthalensis и Homo sapiens sapiens являлись подвидами. Происхождение человека (сознания) – не следствие трудовой деятельности, а результат развертывания предопределенных генетических потенций, проявившихся в способности удерживать в поле внимания, образных представлениях и в памяти некоторую совокупность связанных между собою предметов и объектов. Это произошло благодаря информационному космо-планетарному ритмическому влиянию. Вольно или невольно, в условиях активизации внимания и памяти так называемые естественные посредники – необработанные, случайные камни, палки, кости животных в руках наших прапредков превращались в орудия труда, приобретая к тому же символическую функцию. Это был конец короткого периода антропогенеза, то есть чисто биологического становления человека.

Данный процесс мог проявиться везде, где был подходящий биологический материал. Ни адаптация, ни естественный отбор в происхождении человека не представляли главных механизмов эволюции. С появлением Homo erectus’а и внутри его деятельности возникает первая искусственно созданная орудийно-производственная система с подразделениями “ядра” и “скола”, с целеосознанным расщеплением камня с угла, образованного двумя плоскостями, с добыванием совершенно бесполезного качества остроты, имея в виду непосредственные биологические потребности. К подразделению “ядра” чаще относятся довольно тяжелые и массивные изделия. Это чопперы, некоторые нуклеусы, отбойники, чоппинги-проторубила. Подразделение “скола”, как правило, включает более мелкие изделия со случайной формой кромки и острия. Вообще говоря, подразделения “ядро” и “скол” где-то на границе между собой перекрывают друг друга. С помощью этой производственной системы, как показывают эксперименты, потенциально может быть изготовлено любое изделие из более мягких, чем камень, материалов. Система возникла в олдувае и раннем ашеле.

Чоппер и отщеп, являясь важнейшими звеньями производственно-орудийной системы, одновременно оказались орудиями непроизвольного анализа и синтеза. Более того, следует обратить внимание на то, что в олдувае и раннем ашеле чопперы, чоппинги и проторубила, довольно часто, обрабатываются только с одного края, особенно галечные орудия. Такая локализация обработки совершенно определенно говорит о существовавшем изначально интуитивном представлении вещи. Названные изделия становятся более или менее постоянными, а типологическое разнообразие их косвенно указывает на то, что Homo erectus не просто различал их, но и как-то называл. Система “ядро-скол”, целостные формы орудий с противопоставлением искусственной рабочей и естественной рукояточной частей, как бы продолжая момент естественно возникшей символизации, свидетельствовали о чисто человеческих языковых значениях вещей и ситуаций. На этом основании можно предположить существование долговременной памяти об относительно отдаленных целях. При изготовлении, к примеру, простой деревянной рогатины осуществлялись поиск материала и изготовление рубящих и строгающе-скоблящих каменных орудий. Конечной же целью являлась коллективная охота.

Таким образом, уже на самом раннем этапе развития человек интеллектуально не был близок обезьяноподобным существам. Орудия символизировали целостную технологию и образ жизни, являясь одним из важнейших аккумуляторов знаний, опыта, навыков, передающихся от поколения к поколению. Орудие, таким образом, было обращено не только в сторону природных объектов или непосредственно к руке человека, но и – к мышлению, языку, комплексам представлений, в том числе представлений, не имеющих прямой биологической пользы. И, тем не менее, в течение 1.5 млн. лет в круговороте простого воспроизводства не было движения времени и особенных изменений в каменной технике, вплоть до середины ашеля (0.3–0.25 млн. лет), являющегося временем окончательного исчезновения подвида Homo erectus.

Примерно с середины ашеля возникают индустрии, содержащие, с одной стороны, целостные орудия труда, представленные значительно большим разнообразием, с другой – орудия, приобретшие специально изготовленные рукояточные и обушковые части, а также выпрямленные лезвия и острия рабочих элементов. Происходит геометризация некоторых форм, не находящая практического обоснования. Мы усматриваем в этом высшее, бескорыстное производство целостности вещей, содержащей в себе напоминание о мастерстве и свободном владении материалом, а также видим в этом отражение эстетического отношения человека к своим изделиям. Это может быть связано с повышением статуса умелых мастеров.

Начиная с этого времени, наблюдается использование различного рода условных знаков (Пешь-дель-Азе), возможно, изображений (грот Дель Альто), а также – медвежьих черепов. Некоторые условные знаки изготовлены не только с практическими целями, символизируя некую реальность, но и с соблюдением особой формы. Подчеркнутая организованность формы знаков со стороны ритма, симметрии, обработки поверхности выступает также в качестве эмоциальной оценки общественного веса означаемого. Мустьерские подвески, наверное, существовали в виде ожерелья: у них одинаковые отверстия (примерно 2 мм), и они обнаружены в серии, например в Ля Кина. В свою очередь, наличие ожерелья предполагает визуальное членение тела человека по вертикали и композиционное выделение части, связанной, по всей вероятности, с содержательно-смысловой ролью самого ожерелья. В этом мы видим проявление внимания к самому человеку, который становится непосредственным объектом символизации.

Хорошо известны мустьерские погребения с признаками исполнения некоего ритуала. В 1921 г. на стоянке Ля Ферраси было обнаружено захоронение трехлетнего ребенка, череп которого, без нижней челюсти, находился в стороне от скелета. Погребение было перекрыто известняковой плитой с маленькими ямками. В 1939 г. в гроте Гаттари обнаружили череп среди окаймлявших его по кругу камней. Отверстие в основании черепа было преднамеренно расширено. Одной из самых интересных находок в Шанидаре (Ирак) является захоронение мужчины (50000 лет тому назад), тело которого было помещено на ложе из цветов, устроенном в могиле. Восемь видов цветов были собраны, по-видимому, специально - между концом мая и началом июля. Были определены эфедра, тысячелистник и другие растения, большинство из которых употребляется ныне в медицинских целях. В некоторых мустьерских погребениях наблюдается ритуал окрашивания дна могилы и самого покойника красной охрой.

Ограниченность интеллекта человека указанного времени относительна. Искусственный мир вещей в некоторой степени мог представляться уже самодействующим, в виде аниматической реальности. В конце мустье можно предполагать существование у человека неких догадок – образных “представлений порождения”: вещь порождает вещь. Думается, человек не считал вещи живыми, и он вообще не понимал “живого”, качественно отличного от неорганических предметов. Может быть, это произошло значительно раньше. Общие признаки “представлений порождения” связаны с мыслительными комплексами, которые у нас совсем иные и которые в наших понятиях трудно определимы. Не исключено, что эта смутная идея “порождения” была первым подобием общего представления, в котором возникла неясно осознаваемая бинарная оппозиция активно действующего и рождающего; отсюда качество мужского и женского впоследствии легко переносится на предметный мир. Может быть “представление порождения”, если оно действительно существовало в это время, и было протоформой первого мифа.

На первый взгляд при переходе к верхнему палеолиту не происходит никаких изменений : в мустье мы встречаемся с долговременными жилищами, и никого уже, кроме определенных скептиков, не удивляют ни мустьерская технология обработки каменных предметов, достигающая на некоторых стоянках филигранного совершенства, ни вымостки, ни окраска слоя охрой, ни погребения. В верхнем палеолите все это возрастает вроде бы только количественно. Эта точка зрения, отражающая бурное накопление неординарных фактов в олдувае, ашеле и мустье, рождена в археологии. У нее много сторонников, но она, как нам кажется, не отражает истины в целом. Впрочем, нетрудно заметить в переходе к верхнему палеолиту качественные изменения и, прежде всего, мощное проявление в твердом материале наглядной условно-абстрактной и условно-фигуративной деятельности. Изобразительная деятельность, в том числе и искусство, связывается и с жилищами, и с орудиями труда, и с человеком, и с так называемыми святилищами, но одним из важнейших условий развития фигуративной символики явился переход к полнокровному описательному языку и развитой мифологии.

Palaeoanthropological evidences suggest that, from the very beginning of his history, man was most probably a single species, while Homo sapiens erectus (?), Homo sapiens neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens were subspecies. The origin of man (conscience) was not the consequence of labour activities, but resulted from the development of predetermined genetic potencies which expressed themselves in the ability to fix a certain aggregate of inter-connected objects in one’s attention, figurative ideas and memory. This occurred owing to a cosmic and planetary rhythmic informational influence. Voluntarily or not, under the conditions of activation of the attention and memory, the so-called natural mediators — accidentally found unworked stones, sticks, and animal bones — in the hands of our pre-ancestors were transformed into tools and in addition acquired a symbolic function. That was the end of the short period of anthropogenesis, i.e. of the merely biological formation of man.

That process could appear everywhere where there was an appropriate biological material. Neither adaptation nor the natural selection were the major mechanisms of evolution in the origin of man. With the appearance of Homo erectus and inside his activities, the first artificial tool-manufacturing system arises. This system included the subdivision into “core” and “flake” and purposeful knapping of stone from the angle formed by two planes to attain the quality of sharpness that is quite useless in terms of mere biological necessities. To the subdivision of “core” mostly fairly heavy and massive objects belonged: choppers, some of the nuclei, hammerstones, choppings/proto-adzes. The subdivision of “flakes” comprised, as a rule, smaller artefacts with accidental shape of their edges and points. Generally speaking, the subdivisions of “core” and “flake” were overlapping somewhere at their boundary. As experiments showed, by means of the above-mentioned manufacturing system in principle any artefact could be manufactured from materials softer than stone. This system arose in Olduvai and early Acheulian.

Chopper and flake, being the major links of the system “manufacture–tools”, in addition proved to be tools of involuntary analysis and synthesis. Moreover, it should be noted that in the Olduvai and early Acheul, choppers, choppings and proto-adzes (especially, worked pebbles) are worked fairly often only on one side. Such a localisation of processing indicates quite clearly the existence of an originally intuitive notion of the object. The above-mentioned artefacts became more or less continual and their typological diversity indicates indirectly that Homo erectus not only distinguished between them, but also had for them some appellations. The system “core”-“flake” and integral forms of tools with contraposition of the artificial working parts and natural haft ones, as if continuing the momentum of the naturally arisen symbolisation, indicates the inherently human linguistic meanings of objects and situations. On the basis of this fact, one may suppose that there existed long-lasting memory able of retaining fairly distant goals. For making e.g. a simple wooden forked spear, one had to search for appropriate material and to manufacture chopping, scraping and planing tools, while the final goal was the collective hunting.

Hence, already at the earliest stage of his development, man was not intellectually close to apelike creatures. Tools symbolised an integrated technology and a certain mode of life, being among the most important accumulators of knowledge, experience, and skills inherited from generation to generation. The tool was thus directed not only towards natural objects or human hand, but also toward thought, language and complexes of ideas including notions devoid of the direct biological utility. Nevertheless, throughout 1.5 million years until the middle Acheulian (0.3–0.25 million years) when the subspecies of Homo erectus finally disappeared, there had been no motion of time nor essential changes in the stone technique which would have disturbed the constant flow of simple reproduction.

About the middle of the Acheulian period, industries appear that comprise, on the one hand, integral tools of significantly greater diversity, and on the other hand, the tools with intentionally made haft and butt parts, as well as straightened blades and points of the working elements. Some forms acquire geometrisation which is not based on any practical needs. We consider it as a supreme disinterested production of an integrity of objects with the quality of reminding of skill and free hold over the material, and in addition, we regard it as a reflection of the esthetical attitude of man toward his products. This fact possibly was connected with the rise of the status of skilful masters.

From that time on, one observes the use of various conventional signs (Peche-del-Aze), bear skulls, and perhaps representations (grotto Del Alto). Some of the conventional signs were made not merely with practical goals as symbols of certain reality, but observed a special form. The stressed organisation of the form of signs in terms of the rhythm, symmetry and finish of the surface appears also as emotional evaluation of the social weight of the symbolised object. Mousterian pendants were used, probably, as necklaces: they have identical holes (about 2 mm) and are found in series, as e.g. in La Quina. The use of necklaces, in its turn, suggests certain visual vertical articulation of human body and compositional segregation of the part which was probably linked with the substantial and semantic role of the necklace itself. We regard this fact as concentration of attention on the human being proper, who becomes the direct object of symbolisation.

Well known are Mousterian burials with signs of performing some ritual. In 1921, at the site of La Ferrasie, one found the burial of a three-year-old child whose skull, without the lower jaw, was lying aside of the skeleton. The burial was covered with a limestone slab dotted with small pits. In 1939, in the grotto Gattari, a skull bordered around with a circle of stones was found. The hole in the base of the skull was intentionally widened. One of the most interesting finds at Shanidar (Iraq) is a burial of a male (50000 b.p.) whose body was placed on a bed of flowers made inside the grave. Eight species of flowers were evidently gathered specially between the end of May and beginning of July. Identified are ephedra, milfoil and other plants, most of which even now are used with medical purposes. In some Mousterian burials the ritual of dying the deceased and the bottom of the grave with red ochre is observed.

The limited nature of the human intellect at the period mentioned is rather relative. The artificial world of objects may have been regarded already as, to some degree, self-acting in form of animatic reality. In the end of the Mousterian, man possibly had some guesses — figurative “concepts of engendering”: an object gives birth to another object. We suppose that rather man did not regard things as alive, and that he did not understand the “living” at all as something differing qualitatively from inorganic objects. Perhaps, this took place considerably earlier (?). The general features of the “concepts of engendering” are linked with complexes of thought which are quite different by us and which in our notions are difficult to define. It is possible that this vague idea of “engendering” was the first likeness of the general concept in which an unclearly realised binary opposition of the active and giving birth appeared; hence the quality of the male and female is easily transferred later onto the material world. Possibly, it was the “concept of engendering” if it really existed at the time, that actually was the proto-form of the first myth.

On the face of it, no changes occurred during the transition to the upper Palaeolithic period: in the Mousterian period, we encounter long-lasting dwellings, and already nobody, except for certain sceptics, is surprised by the Mousterian technology of working stone objects, which at some sites reached a filigree perfection, nor by pavements and dying of layers with ochre, nor by burials. In the upper Palaeolithic all this seems to have been increased just in quantity. Such a point of view, which reflects the dramatic increase of non-ordinary facts in Olduvai, Acheulian and Mousterian periods, arose in archaeology. This view has many supporters, but it seems to us, it does not reflect the truth in general. It is not difficult though to notice certain qualitative changes during the transition to the upper Palaeolithic: first of all, a powerful manifestation of visual conditional-abstract and conditional-figurative activities in hard materials. The figurative activities, including arts, are being connected with dwellings, tools, man and the so-called sanctuaries, but one of the most important conditions of the development of figurative symbolism was the transition to a full-fledged descriptive language and developed mythology.

Н. Ф. Лисицын (†). Финальная пора позднего палеолита на юге Средней Сибири

N. F. Lisitsyn. The final stage of the Upper Paleolithic in the South o f Middle Siberia

The chronological frames of the Late Sartan glaciation and the early Holocene 15,5–9,5 kyr BP, define the final stage of the Upper Paleolithic in the south of Middle Siberia. The most well known are the assemblages attributed to Afontovo and Kokorevo cultures which differed in knapping techniques. The first was based on flake blanks and the second one – on blades.

The earliest site of Kokorevo culture is supposed to be Novoselovo 11. According to the stratigraphy observations the age of the finds is the interstadial 16,5–15,5 kyr BP. Also attributed to early Kokorevo culture is the lower cultural layer of Kokorevo 4b site dated by C14. The noontide of Kokorevo culture falling on Nyapan stadial 15–13 kyr BP comprises sites in the Minusinsk valley: Novoselovo 6, 7, 12, 13 (1), Kokorevo 1(2–3), Listvenka 1 (5–13). Dated by the end of this stadial or by the very beginning of the next Kokorevo interstadial are sites Pervomayskoye 1, Krutogorskoye, Podgornovkaya and Ayoshka 3.

The genesis of Afontovo culture is still under discussion. Attempts of dating this culture by the age earlier than 20 kyr BP contradict the data based on the chronology of the South Siberian Paleolithic. Results of the new investigations on the eponymous site Afontova Gora 2 revealed 8 cultural layers three of which were not excavated in the 1920–1930th. Six upper cultural layers were deposited in the stratum of light grayish silt dated within 13–14 kyr BP.

The most complicated material culture development is marked by a number of sites in the south of Eastern Sayan mountains. In the cultural layers 1–4 of Listvenka 1 site the only late Afontovo cultural complex with dates 12,2–10,3 kyr BP was traced. These were underlain by Kokorevo culture layer. On the multilayer site Birusa the Afontovo knapping tradition was revealed in all cultural horizons as late as the Neolithic. The inventory of Beriozovyi Ruchei 1 site in the Nazarov valley has no analogies in the materials of either Kokorevo or Afontovo cultures though the upper layer is characterized by flake knapping and the lower one – by chiefly blade manufacturing.

In the Chulym-Yenisei watershed Afontovo culture arose some later than Kokorevo culture. The earliest is the site Kurtak 3 and the materials of the Kokorevo 4a lower cultural layers. The age of the finds according to the radiocarbon chronology is not earlier than 14,5 kyr BP. In the Batenevski Ridge area Afontovo culture appeared circa the same age or later and existed until the very end of the Pleistocene (Tashtyk 1,2, Bolshaya Irdzha, Lepeshkino, 1, Bateni).

Exclusively late sites of Afontovo culture dated by the age 12–11 kyr BP have been found in the Abakan-Yenisei watershed. The problem of Afontovo culture population coexistence with the bearers of the local Ulugbil-type assemblages characterized by combination of large and macro tools while lacking micro inventory is still unclear. Blade knapping is traced in asynchronous assemblages Ulugbil, Kongurae, Khyzyl-Khaya, Khyrkhazy, flake knapping – in Sosnovoye Ozero, Utukh-Khaya-Kiste.

In the West Sayan mountains the dominance of flake knapping has existed since the earliest stages up to the Neolithic. The sources of the local Afontovo culture formation are thought to derive from the Ui 2 site materials. An extraordinary phenomenon in this region seems to be the Golubaya 1 site industry based on regular blade knapping dating back to the 13 kyr BP.

Thus, during the latest phase of the Upper Paleolithic in the South of Middle Siberia various stone knapping styles were in progress both within blades-based and flakes-based cultural streamlines. According to the contemporary data flake knapping superseded blade knapping and became predominant in the first half of the Holocene turning into the Epi-Paleolithic stone knapping tradition.

Г. Бозински. Средний палеолит: 250 000 лет нашей истории

Gerhard Bosinski. The Middle Palaeolithic 250,000 years of our history

The Middle Palaeolithic is defined by the calculated production of flakes using the Levallois technique and dates to the period between MIS 8 and MIS 3, some 300000 to 40000 years ago. At this time the entire Old World was populated, with the exception of the far North and the highest mountainous regions; environmental conditions were correspondingly very diversified. People were big game hunters; their most important weapons were wooden lances and spears, some of them tipped with a stone point. Exploiting the topographic situation formed an important element of hunting strategy.

Examples of hunting are described for straight-tusked elephant and mammoth, rhinoceros, bison and aurochs, red deer and reindeer, horse, wild ass, and ibex. Beyond this there are also indications for skilful hunting of birds and fishing. By contrast, evidence for the collection of birds' eggs, fruit and nuts is rare and known above all from interglacial sites.

Only few specimens of open-air dwellings are known. The existence of several find concentrations at the same locality suggest repeated visits by the same human group. Caves and rock shelters were also used repeatedly and the material from successive occupations can be distinguished only with difficulty at such sites.

On our present knowledge it appears that the small groups of humans stayed at each site only briefly; sites inhabited by a larger group over a long period of time are unknown.

Upon leaving a site stone tools were taken along and subsequently resharpened or discarded at the new site. Knowledge of the sources of the raw materials of the artefacts shows that groups occupied a territory more than 100 km in diameter.

Those raw materials that occur locally at the site are often mainly represented by flakes and cores, showing that those tools which were manufactured here were subsequently removed on departure from the site.

The small and mobile groups had an established social structure which gave protection to injured and disabled members. Burials show that even badly disabled individuals could survive for a long time.

Middle Palaeolithic stone working required good quality raw materials. Knapping workshops at outcrops of suitable rocks (obsidian, flint, quartzite) are a characteristic feature of the period. The classic Levallois technique of stone working in which a core served to produce a single preformed flake is found only at such sites with unlimited raw material.

Simple forms of tools such as denticulated and notched pieces were used for various activities. By contrast, trace wear analysis suggests that more carefully retouched tool types had only a single function.

The functional categories of knife, point or scraper were resolved in different ways. The basis of these different tool forms are, chronologically, the handed down traditions and, spatially, the communication between groups. During the Late Middle Palaeolithic of the last glaciation there developed in this way different typological traditions such as the MtA and the Keilmessergruppen, which can often themselves be subdivided into further groups.

Beside the artefacts of conchoidally fracturing fine-grained siliceous rocks there occur chopping tools and other forms of implement for coarser work.

Trace wear analysis of the stone tools often shows their use in woodworking; preserved is only the yew wood lance from Lehringen. Some stone tools were set in wooden handles, held in place by a resinous mass. At Kцnigsaue this substance could be identified as birch pitch obtained by dry distillation at temperatures below 350°.

Carefully worked bone points have been identified on several occasions. At Salzgitter-Lebenstedt are also found pointed mammoth ribs and fibulae, the material of which had been especially selected. The common working of bone and antler at this northern European site during a cold phase might be due to the absence of wood.

Red (iron oxide) and black (manganese) colourants, from which powdered pigments were obtained by scraping, are known from many sites. Furthermore, fossils (Dentalium, Cardium, Terebrates, shark teeth) or their impressions (Pecten, brachiopods, sea urchins) were also collected, although drilled pendants are very rare.

The graves known so far date to the Late Middle Palaeolithic and are found in caves. Women, men and children were buried in the same way and sometimes with grave goods. Of particular importance is the antler of a fallow deer with attached skull fragment found in the child's grave at Qafzeh, which finds parallels in depictions known from Upper Palaeolithic art, in Mesolithic burials and in Siberian shamanisn. In the Kebara cave and at Regourdou the skulls had been removed from the grave while the lower jaw remained in place. The careful removal of the skull from a grave dug many years before shows that the position of the grave must have still been kept visible at the surface and equally demonstrates that the living still had a relationship with the dead. This might also help to explain the presence of human skulls at sites such as Biache, Fontйchevade and Wannen.

At some sites (Krapina, Ehringsdorf, Hortus) are found large numbers of bones of men, women and children whose explanation (cannibalism, burial rite) is still unclear and disputed.

Ю. Е. Березкин. О путях заселения Нового Света: некоторые результаты сравнительного изучения американских и сибирских мифологий

Yuri E. Berezkin. Peopling of the New World: Some Results of Comparative Study of American and Siberian Mythologies

I am grateful to prof. Lloyd Andersen for important corrections
of English text. All the shortcomings are mine, however.

Our prime aim in this paper is to explain some important patterns in the areal distribution of sets of motifs selected from traditional mythological texts. We are concerned with distributions over very wide geographic areas. We claim that these patterns contain evidence on the distant past, and can be correlated with information provided by archaeology. We offer particular hypotheses concerning plausible causes of some of these patterns, but are ready to accept any hypotheses other than ours which would provide cogent explanations. The immediate topic of this research is the migrations of peoples within and to the New World.

Traditional narratives contain ready–made elements which we call motifs. This study is possible thanks to the fact that these elements are reproduced when people retell their texts. Motifs preserve their form during very long periods of time, while the mythological texts which are composed of them change their meanings more rapidly.

The database consists of more than 25,000 abstracts of texts (on disc), mostly American and Siberian. There remain no significant gaps in the database, but more and more publications do become available with time. With a such a volume of information already accumulated, additional data do not change major conclusions. But some new, previously unrecognized, minor patterns are revealed.

Archaeological Background, Comparative Linguistics, Population Genetics, and Physical Anthropology. Correlations with archaeological complexes will be shortly discussed after we have presented the cultural and geographic distributions of mythological motifs. Figure 1 shows for reference some principal archaeological distributions. Radiocarbon dates are “before present” and are not calibrated.

Linguistic reconstructions deeper than 8–600 b.p. are not reliable enough to secure consensus among major specialists. Population genetics has its own difficulties. Correlation of the discovered genetic patterns with the data of archaeology is uncertain. Expensive genetic analyses of DNA are still not numerous and detailed enough for such a complex and detailed situation as the New World. Analyses of teeth and of crania yield mixed results, and different scholars come to conclusions which cannot be easily integrated.

Folklore Motifs as Reproducing Cultural Elements. Mythological motifs are capable of replication. Being integrated into tales retold by people, motifs “reproduce themselves” in Dawkins' (1976: 203–215; 1996) sense. Definition of folklore motifs as replicators raises the same problem that emerges if we try to discover units of replication in archaeology (Lyman & O'Brien 1998: 619): how simple and indivisible should such units (in our case, motifs) be? For American anthropologists of the early 20th century, the motif was a “ready made unit which [the narrator] can insert in his composition when appropriate” (Wissler 1929: 252). Even a complex plot or a set of images could be considered as a “motif” if such a unit is copied and repeated from text to text. S. Thompson defined the motif as “the smallest element in a tale having a power to persist in tradition” (cited in Dundes 1962: 97). This restriction (“the smallest”) was necessary to make of the motifs the appropriate units for the formalized description of texts. For our purposes, the description is not correct and the restriction is unnecessary. The preference for more or for less simple motifs as the units of the research depends on the scale of the research itself. The longer the chain of episodes encompassed by the same motif, the more significant it will be for reconstruction of historical links, but the narrower will be the localization of these links in space and time. With only one text in hand, we are unable to select any motif in our sense. The greater and more diverse the collection of texts, the greater the number of motifs which can be selected. The list of motifs is open and subject to change as long as new texts attract the attention of the researcher.

For simple motifs, it is not easy to determine whether similar ones have emerged independently of each other. It is impossible to observe the birth of a new motif, and any claim about typological vs. genetic reasons for the existence of identical motifs in different traditions would be speculative. We should study not the origins of individual motifs but the degree of similarity/dissimilarity between entire traditions. If mythology A contains 20% of its motifs in common with mythology B and only 2% in common with C, a hypothesis that A is closer to B than to C is at least based on facts subject to verification. If the parallels discovered in myths correlate with external factors social, economic, or environmental), then typological explanations should be considered. If there are no such correlations, then a common origin of A and B or diffusion and borrowing seem plausible. Differences between areal mythological complexes become visible thanks to comparison of statistical measures which signal a mutual correlation between some motifs and its lack between others. Motifs with areas of distribution which are the largest but sharply bounded influence the picture more than others. Here the statistical patterns discovered are illustrated with maps of the areal distribution of several characteristic motifs.

A hundred years ago F. Boas demonstrated that tales are relatively ephemeral and composed of elements which are subject to easy dissemination and are not culturally specific. The origins of particular patterns in their areal distribution and of particular sequences in which these elements are combined into tales are not known to us. When motifs show any correlation with territorial distribution of other cultural traits at all, it is more with big culture areas than with language families (Boas 1891: 20; 1896: 9; 1916: 878; 1928: 149–150; 1940: 290–294, 312–315, 331–343, 437–490). Being eager to attain a reasonable degree of certainty about non–multiple origin of every motif under his study, Boas rejected as doubtful any cases when a distribution of motifs was not continuous (Boas 1940: 461). This restriction does not seem sufficient to his purpose. After all, even in case of continuous distribution the possibility of multiple origin is not excluded completely. Complete certainty is not attainable in this way.

Boas's restriction is also not necessary. Boas first used (1895) and then rejected statistics as an appropriate instrument to analyse mythology (1940: 309). Certainly his application of statistical methods to mythology of the restricted area of the Northwest Coast was not very successful. The reason is obvious. Cultures in contact constantly exchange their elements and the resulting pattern of distribution is chance and chaotic. Statistics is more useful when we compare mythologies of distant areas whose inhabitants have been isolated from each other for a long period of time.

On the other hand, there are examples where the patterning of mythological complexes clearly reflect recent migrations which are independently known on linguistic or other grounds. Northeastern Asia offers some clear examples. For the North American trickster tales, parallels in Eurasia are found in Western Siberia and across Chukotka – Kamchatka, but are not found in Eastern Siberia, which was recently occupied by Tungus and Turkish–speaking Yakut who arrived from the south. To take history backwards, we must mentally undo that migration.

Many of the motifs that we have examined seem to be neutral with respect to any forms of economic activity, social organization or environment. Therefore it is not likely that they emerged recently as a result of such factors. Others may very well be favored by environment, warm or cold, wet or dry, and we attempt to discover any such correlations for what they are worth.

Technical Details. The following procedure is used to create and modify the database. The abstract of each text is copied into the Analytical Catalogue as many times as necessary, once for each motif which the text contains. The table of occurrences is constructed with rows for motifs and columns for areas. 1025 motifs have been selected so far and their distribution is examined across 169 areas. In the table, “1” stands for the presence of the particular motif and “0” for its absence.

Some motifs are elementary and the same as in Thompson's (1955–1958) catalogue (e.g. sun is a woman, thunderbird). Many others correspond to Thompson's (2000) tale–types. There is, however, a difference. Thompson's Tale types do not have fixed structure the same for all relevant texts. Some texts cited by Thompson in connection with certain tales have very few traits in common with the paradigm example text. To exclude arbitrariness and be sure that we are always dealing with one and the same set of elementary motifs, the content of every text should correspond precisely to the accepted definition of the given motif.

Areas selected for the analysis, as well as the territorial and linguistic groups included in each area, are enumerated in Appendix.

The Principal–Components Analysis is computed using A. Yastrebov's program. It reveals major patterns in the distribution of motifs across areas. Separate patterns correspond to each of the principal components (PC). The program assesses pairwise the degree of similarity or dissimilarity between sets of motifs recorded in each area and assigns a value for the contribution of each motif to the overall pattern.

The first PC corresponds to the strongest pattern, the following ones to successively less important patterns. The greater the number of elements (motifs, in our case), the more axes (PC) will be meaningful and the smaller the percent of information (general dispersion) which is accounted for by each PC. The combination of all principal components which have been analysed here together account for slightly more than one fifth of the total information. The remainder corresponds to distributions of motifs on a local and subregional level. The closer two such assigned values stand to each other, one value for each mythological complex, the greater number of motifs the two mythological complexes have in common. Every PC axis is independent from others and has two extremes which correspond to the most different complexes of motifs.

Areal Distribution of Motifs: First Principal Component. The major distinction represented in the first PC is the difference between North American mythologies on the one side, and Central and South American mythologies on the other. The first group is assigned the highest negative values, the second, the highest positive values (it would make no difference if “+” and “–” were interchanged). These two complexes are provisionally named North American (fig. 6) and Amazonian (fig. 7). The mathematical difference between the assigned values does not correlate with the geographical distance between the respective areas. The greatest number of North American motifs to the South of Rio Grande are contained in the mythologies of the South Cone, i.e. the Fuegian, Patagonian and Araucanian, some South Brazilian and Chacoan. Geographically, they are the ones farthest from North America. Some of the motifs characteristic of these two geographic extremes are very specific and their independent emergence in different hemispheres is not plausible. The motif Time periods discussed is representative (fig. 16). Animals come together to decide how many units of time it should be in a certain period of time (year, winter, night, menstrual cycle, etc.). Toes, nails, feathers, hairs, or colored stripes are counted to establish the number of units. Siberian parallel is in Altai folklore, where units of time are not equated, however, with parts of the body. In most of American tales animals discuss the duration of winter or night. Though the interest to the theme of darkness/light, cold/warmth alternation can be ecologically motivated, the particular way of its treatment is unique for the New World which makes North American – Patagonian parallels meaningful.

Among other predominantly North American (or Siberian –North American) motifs not known or rare in Eastern South America are Blood paints the sky (fig. 19), Earth–diver (fig. 17), Obstacle flight (fig. 18), Bungling host (fig. 20), Cosmic hunt (fig. 21), Rolling stone (fig. 26), Swan lake (fig. 34). Siberia has much in common with North America and shares with it such specific motifs as Leg as a bridge (fig. 22) and Water–carrier in the Moon (fig. 23).

The typical North American trickster is absent in mythologies of Mesoamerica and most of South America but is characteristic of the southern Central Andes, Patagonia and especially of Chaco. Parallels in Eurasia are found in Western Siberia and across Chukotka – Kamchatka but not in Eastern Siberia which was recently occupied by Tungus and Turkish–speaking Yakut who arrived from the south.

Some North American episodes where trickster participates are known in Amazonia and Guiana. However, they are connected there with typologically different personages and often treated as a heroic or tragic tale, not in a burlesque manner. The trickster is often associated with a particular animal species. The Chacoan, Central Andian and Patagonian trickster is predominantly Fox, i.e. associated with a species which is most similar to North American Coyote (coyotes do not live in South America). In North America, the area of Coyote as mythological trickster is the western United States, especially southern California, the Great Basin and the Southwest. We can consider whether Fox/Coyote as a trickster was brought to southern South America from western North America by the same people who produced fish–tailed fluted projectile points. At least the areal correlation of both features suggests such a hypothesis.

The Amazonian set of motifs is most developed in Llanos, Northwest Amazonia and some parts of Guiana. On the other side of the Pacific, such motifs are widespread in Australia and especially in Melanesia (fig. 4). Known since the late 19th century, parallels which involve mythology and ritual include a set of ideas about the human body and relations between men and women (Gregor & Tuzin 2001). In particular, 1) masks, bull–roarers and flutes used in male rituals are considered to be incarnations of spirits dangerous for women; 2) sacred objects are said to be obtained from under the water or from ashes of a killed demon; 3) stories about Amazons, matriarchy, separation and enmity of the sexes are typical; 4) in myths male and female genitals act as separate creatures or are endowed with supernatural properties.

Parallels between the two regions include also motifs such as Change of skin as condition of immortality (fig. 22), Spots on the Moon as a trace of a wound, stroke, or paint, i.e. not figurative (fig. 23), Rainbow serpent (fig. 24), Arrow ladder (fig. 26), fruits falling into the water during the flood (fig. 31), etc.

In the Far East, as we move from the Chukchi Peninsula to Kamchatka and further to Japan, the percent of motifs shared with the North American pole decreases and the percent shared with the Amazonian pole increases. As part of this pattern, the mythologies of 1) Chukchi 2) Koryak, 3) Kamchadal, 4) Ainu, 5) Japanese and Ryukyuan form a gradient (fig. 4). We reach an opposite pole in New Guinea.

As we move from Southwestern Alaska to Greenland through a sequence of Eskimo mythological clusters, the relative weight of the North American component decreases significantly. For Eastern Inuit mythologies the proportions of these two components are balanced as in Patagonian mythology. Chips turn to fish (fig. 29) serves as an example of a motif common to Eskimo and Amazonia.

The shift in the Eskimo patterns away from the North American pole is remarkable in comparison not only with the rich mythologies of Ojibwa and Cree but also with the less well known Naskapi–Montagnais, Chipewyan and even Beaver, on which there are relatively poor collections of tales. The mythologies of Alaska Eskimos contain more North American motifs than the Inuit of Greenland, probably because they have been subject to longer and more intensive interaction with Indian mythologies.

Third Principal Components. The second PC selects areal clusters which have greater or smaller number of the analysed motifs, and it does not directly concerns us now. The third PC represents a contrast between mythologies of the Northwest Coast and Alaska and mythologies of most of inner North America. The first set of motifs is named Alaskan (fig. 8), the second, Midwestern fig. 9). The region of southern NW Coast, Plateau and California is intermediate between these two extremes. The patterns of areal distribution of motifs reflected in the third PC probably result from several separate migration episodes. On the NW Coast, the last and the most securely reconstructed one was the spread of the microblade–microcore industry related to the Denali. This archaeological tradition may be linked to the appearance of Na–Dene languages (Athabascan–Eyak and Tlingit). Whether Haida is genetically related to that family or whether similarities result from long contact and borrowing, Tlingit and Haida mythologies occupy one extreme position on the third PC, while the American Southwest represents the other extreme position.

Just as the traces of the Early Holocene microblade industry are no longer visible south of Vancouver, the set of motifs typical for Tlingit and Haida is less evident among the Wakashan (Nootka, Kwakiut, Heiltsuk), still less among the Coastal Salishan groups and only weakly perceptible in Sahaptin on the southern Plateau. Some non–adaptive ethnographic traits (types of baskets and fishing hooks) distinguish Tlingit and Haida from the more southern people of the NW Coast. Archaeological sites with preserved organics prove the long–term stability of these traits (Croes 1997). For the NW Coast, information from archaeology, ethnography, comparative mythology, linguistics and population genetics correlate in an almost ideal way. This makes the “Na–Dene migration episode” one of the most reliable reconstructions for the peopling of the New World.

One pole of the third PC represents motifs common to northwestern North America and eastern South America. Though this tendency is not strong, it is supported by the spread of some motifs unique for these regions, such as Bait and hook (fig. 25) or Ducks and canoes (fig. 34). Other examples are Arrow ladder (fig. 26) and some variants of the cluster of motifs named The bird nester (fig. 27). While these two areas are strongly water–based economies, and the first two motifs might therefore have arisen independently, such an explanation would be more difficult for the last two. If these parallels reflect a common origin in earlier cultures, it is impossible to explain Alaskan parallels in eastern South America by the spread of the microblade industry. Nor is there any other attractive hypothesis.

The Midwestern set of motifs is best represented in the American Southwest, in central areas of North America, with some reflections also in Mesoamerica. In South America it can be traced down along the Andes. Typical motifs include Rabbit in the Moon, Colored worlds (fig. 28), and Horned serpent (fig. 29). It is plausible that the initial spread of the Midwestern complex was connected with movements of people via Central Alaska and Canada, perhaps down the foothills of the mountain ridges. Later contacts between the US Southwest, Mesoamerica and the Central Andes might also have played a role.

Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Principal Components. Taking into consideration only American data (without Eurasia), the fourth PC represents a contrast between Pacific–Rim and Eastern sets of motifs (figs. 10–11). The first unites mythologies of the NW Coast (Coastal Salish at the extreme) and Mesoamerica. In South America, this complex can be traced down to Northwest Amazonia (Columbia and Ecuador) and Central Peru. Several motifs which treat themes of the election of a person capable to become the Sun and of the first sunrise followed by the death or metamorphosis of the primeval ancestors are the most important (fig. 30). The Eastern complex is best represented by the Northern Plains and the Great Lakes areas. In South America it finds parallels in Central and Eastern Brazil, Sharp leg (fig. 30) being the typical motif. Was the Pacific Rim set of motifs brought by populations moving along the Pacific (Salish – Mesoamerica – the Andes), while Eastern set was brought across the Mackenzie corridor? Displaced from Nuclear America by later migrants, the Eastern set could survive in more far away areas of Brazil and Guiana.

Incorporating Eurasian data into the system, we get similar though not identical sets of motifs revealed by the fifth PC (figs. 12–13). Here again the mythologies of western and eastern parts of North America are the most different. The mythologies of Sahaptin and other groups of certain or possible Penutian linguistic affiliation as well as the mythologies of Inner Salish, of Numic people of the Great Basin and of Southwestern Indians are grouped as a Plateau set of motifs. Both Inner Salish and Numic spread across their present areas relatively late (Kelly 1997; Pokotylo & Mitchell 1998: 83–85; Wright 1978). It is possible that before that most of the inner areas had been occupied by Penutians and that this family is specifically connected with a Plateau mythological complex. The time of the split of proto–Penutian is impossible to assess because there is no agreement even about the composition of this family. California Penutians migrated into this area from Nevada in three separate waves from about 4500 b.p. (Campbell 1997: 130; De Lancey & Golla 1997; Fagan 1995: 243–246; Lathrap & Troike 1988: 97–100). Accordingly, the original split between different more northern Penutian groups dates probably to the earlier time. If we seek a possible correlation with archaeological data, we can note that the Plateau motifs occupy territory where Windust and Lind Coulee stone points were widespread in the Early Holocene.

The core area of the Canadian mythological complex coincides with the territories occupied by the Algonkians, but this correlation is hardly significant. Though speakers of the western Algonkian languages entered the Plains from the east and northeast (Goddard 2001: 77–78), the original homeland of this family could be far to the west because Yurok and Wiyot, two languages distantly related to proto–Algonkian, are localized in northern California; around 1000 b.p. they were present somewhere in the Columbia basin (Cambell 1997: 153–154). The split of proto–Algonkian is relatively recent, about 4000 b.p.

The same motifs which define the North American mythological complex are also most significant for the Plateau and Canadian complexes, i.e. the latter are just local variants of the former. Destiny of people discussed and Bear and deer can be considered as typical particularly for the Plateau complex (fig. 31) and Babies escape and return (fig. 33), Snake threatens nestlings (fig. 19), Mosquito and Thunder (fig. 35), for the Canadian complex. For the Plateau complex, significant parallels are found in Chaco in South America as well as along the northern and eastern margins of Eurasia. Detailed and specific analogs for the Canadian set of motifs are present in Turkic and Mongolian folklore. Most such ranscontinental parallels have never been studied. They deserve special attention and are here only mentioned.

A set of Central and Eastern Asian parallels exist for the fourth PC in Mesoamerica (fig. 14). Some of them are so specific that possibility of late post–Columbian borrowing should be considered.

The sixth PC opposes Eurasia to America, but with the qualification that the Paleoasiatic mythologies (Chukchi and Kamchatkan) are clustered together with the New World (fig. 15). This means that the core of the Siberian complex has been formed recently and the motifs typical of it did not extensively influence the Northeastern corner of Asia. The Siberian complex thus does not include the Paleoasiatic cultures of the most eastern edges of Russia. Siberian mythologies share many motifs with South Asia and the Middle East(Кызласов 2001; Toporov 1989). The existence of North American parallels for some Siberian motifs allows us to date them to an early epoch, though not as early as the very first penetrations into the New World. These motifs are not recorded in South America, nor are they recorded in California or New England. Escape from the Polyphemo's cave, Snake threatens nestlings and, for the North Siberian region, Monster under the ice (fig. 32) are in this series.

Conclusions. If the earliest migration was along the South Alaskan coast, it might have consisted of separate episodes with groups of different linguistic affiliation engaged. Wakashan, Chimakum and Salishan people may be the linguistic descendants of the early migrants. The data of the third and the fourth PC on the Northwest Coast mythologies reveal here two centers of concentration of motifs (fig. 36). One is connected with the Tlingit and the Haida and probably with the movement of the microblades–microcores tradition. Another is connected with Salishan languages and possibly with the earlier leaf–shaped biface tradition. Wakashan mythology is intermediate between these two, and the Chimakum occupy areas too small to be considered separately.

Motifs shared between Salish and Mesoamerican sets may be a trace of further migration along the Pacific Belt. Different groups of these early migrants reached South America, some moving along the Andes (the Western set of motifs, fourth PC), others across the Lowlands in the eastern parts of the continent (the Amazonian complex of the first PC and the Alaskan complex of the third PC). At the time of the Pleistocene/Holocene transition, the precipitation in the Neotropics was much reduced in comparison with later epochs (Muslin, Burns 2000; Mayle a.o. 2000: 2294). Accordingly, open grasslands would have occupied territories later covered with rain forest, and the conditions for rapid spread of hunter–gatherers were favorable. It is still difficult to interpret the concentration of Amazonian motifs in the northwestern part of the South American Lowlands. The earliest known sites here are attributed to a somewhat later time than in other areas of South America (9400–9000 b.p.; Gnecco, Mora 1997), but these data are surely not final.

In Alaska and the Northwest Coast, those motifs which have South American parallels might be the earliest. The “Raven cycle”, probably connected with the creators of the microcores–microblades industry, spread somewhat later. At Charly Lake site in British Columbia two burials of ravens were found (Driver 1999). One of the them dates to the time of microblades industry (9500 b.p.), while another is of somewhat earlier age (10,290±100 b.p.). A special attitude to biological species shown in rituals does not mean that the same species was necessarily a protagonist in narratives, but it is still an argument in favor of such an assumption.

All conclusions drawn in this paper concerning the peopling of South America by early migrants who moved along the Alaskan coast are based on the results of the data on distribution of mythological motifs. They are not supported by archaeological evidence, and considering the enormous gaps in data for several crucial areas, such evidence is not expected to appear soon. In any case, the movement of people across Central Alaska and the Rocky Mountains piedmont was probably the principal one and it brought to America most of the “North American” motifs. There is a good correlation between their predominant areal distribution in South America and the spread across South Cone of the fish–tail, Clovis–derived projectile points.

The precise set of motifs brought to New World by the Clovis people is difficult to select because once established, contacts across Beringia and then across the Bering Strait probably never ceased. Two types of distributional patterns with all possible intermediate variants in between can be distinguished within the North American complex. Some motifs are absent in the Northeast Asia or are known exclusively in the New World where they are recorded not only in North America but also in South America. The South American areas include Chaco and Patagonia (Light and darkness discussed, The rolling stone, Son revenges on his father's death, Blood paints the sky, Fox/Coyote as trickster), but sometimes also Brazil (Star–spouse; Mortal people are like stone that sinks, not like a stick that floats; Girls come to marry the chief but get to the imposter). Other North American motifs – of almost certainly later origin – demonstrate extensive Siberian parallels but are either completely unknown in South America (The leg–bridge, Person with water pails in the moon), or are recorded there rarely and mostly in areas not far from the Isthmus of Panama (Earth–diver, Swan lake, False parent, Eye–juggler).

The Altai or Mongolian mythological parallels for areas to the east of the Rockies allow us to suggest that the Dyuktai industry (i.e. the probable source of the Denali tradition) was not the only tradition whose movement to the New World had begun in inner Eurasia. Could Nenana have had similar origins?

If we select those areas for which the statistical program assigns the highest absolute values on the analysed principal components, it appears that most such areas are in North America and only one is in South America (fig. 36). All sets of motifs selected by the third, fourth, and fifth PC are local manifestations of the principal North American complex. The opposition between North American and Amazonian complexes is the basic one.

Appendix. Correlations with Archaeological Cultures. There are two principal Paleolithic cultural traditions in central Alaska (West 1996) (Fig.1). (All references for this section are in an appendix. Radiocarbon dates are “before present” and are not calibrated.)

The Denali tradition is dated to about 10,500 – 9,500 b.p. It looks like an Eastern Beringian extension of the Siberian Dyuktai tradition. Microcores and microblades (fig.2.1, 2) are typical. In the early Holocene, around 8500–8000 b.p. this tradition replaces the leaf–shaped bifaces of the southern Alaskan coast (see below) but does not penetrate to the south beyond Vancouver.

The Nenana tradition sites are usually older than the Denali, about 11,700 – 10,500 b.p. Drop–shaped Chindadn points are typical (fig. 2.3, 4). No microblades are found.

The Clovis tradition is dated to 11,200 – 10,900 b.p. It is the earliest generally accepted (Beck, Jones 1997: 187–188; Meltzer 1995: 24) archaeological culture of North America to the south of the ice sheet. Bifacially flaked, elongated stone points with characteristic fluting at the base are typical (fig. 2.6). Real fluting is unknown in the Old World, so all other types of fluted points in the Americas may ultimately be derived from Clovis. There is no fluting in Nenana but it is similar to Clovis in other ways, so it is plausible that Clovis originated from Nenana. Clovis ancestors may have entered the inner areas of North America along the Mackenzie corridor between Cordilleran and Laurentine ice sheets.

People may also have entered the New World along the South Alaskan Coast (Ames, Maschner 1999: 63–64; Fedje, Christensen 1999). The first known sites in southern Alaska and western British Columbia are dated to about 10,000–9000 b.p. Leaf–shaped bifaces (fig. 2.9) and cobble tools are typical for the earliest complexes. In the southern area of the Northwest Coast this tradition survives up to 5000 b.p. About 8500–8000 b.p. the microcore–microblade tradition derived from Denali replaces the leaf–shaped bifaces but does not penetrate to the south beyond Vancouver (Ackerman 1996; Carlson 1998; Davis 1996; Moss 1998).

Across the Plateau and Great Basin regions, Windust (fig. 2.10), Lind Coulee (fig. 2.11), and other stemmed points appear in the Early Holocene and possibly in the Final Pleistocene (Ames & Maschner 1999: 82; Beck, Jones 1997: 199–202; Carlson 1998: 30–31; Fagan 1995: 239–240).

In South America the earliest stone industries are dated to about 11,000±500 b.p. The dates for most Brazilian sites are not reliable enough to ensure precise synchronization with North American data. The materials from many parts of South America are very diverse and cannot be reduced to one or two ancestral complexes (Borrero & McEwan 1997; Correal 1981: 42; Correal, Hammen 1977: 32; Flegenheimer 1987; Fogaça 1995; Hurt 1977; Kipnis 1998; Ortiz–Troncoso 1981: 191; Rodríguez 1992; Roosevelt a.o. 1996; Sales Barbosa 1992; Sandweiss a.o. 1989; 1998; 1999; Schmitz 1987: 57–71). However, it has been suggested that the fish–tail and usually fluted Fell points (fig. 2.5, 12–15), which are widespread across the South Cone (Pampa, Patagonia, Tierra del Fuego, Southwestern Brazil), are almost definitely connected to Clovis (Morrow & Morrow 1999). The dates for their first appearance concentrate between 11,000 and 10,000 b.p. A few sites with similar points are also found in the northern areas of the Pacific Belt from Southern Mexico to the Darien area of Colombia. They are even more rare in Ecuador and Peru and are absent in Eastern South America.

In Highland, Caribean and Pacific Columbia, northern Venezuela, Guiana and northern Amazonia, there are found big (up to 20 cm long) rather crudely chipped points with a short stem (Ardila Calderón, Politis 1989, lam.2; Evans, Meggers 1960: 21, pl.8; López Castaño 1989, lam. 5; Olsen Bruhns a.o. 1976; Reichel–Dolmatoff 1986, figs. 3–10; Roosevelt 1996: 383, endnote 27; Rouse, Cruxent 1963: 29). They are nowhere discovered in a reliable stratigraphic context. Some of these points are fluted (fig. 2.17) and probably somehow related to Clovis. Being quite different from the Fell type, they are probably connected with some other movement of people.

No cultural materials in America can be securely dated to a time earlier than 12,000–12,500 b.p. The hypothesis that people entered the New World several millennia before Clovis is certainly a possible one. All available facts in support of it are, however, under doubt in one or another way and cannot yet provide a basis for further hypotheses.

В. А. Кисель. Заметки о специфике рукопашного боя у сарматов

В 1900 г. в Южном Зауралье близ дер. Сапогово был найден клад из 20 бронзовых фигурок людей (рис.1). Большинство из них представляли воинов, вооруженных длинными кавалерийскими мечами, короткими мечами или кинжалами и луками.

Фигурки были отлиты в двустворчатых глиняных формах в вертикальном положении. Лицевая форма являлась воспроизводящей, оборотная же сыграла роль крышки. В качестве модели использовались плоские шаблоны, вырезанные из дерева. Литейная поверхность изделий не обрабатывалась, литники не удалялись (Зуев 1993: 97).

Согласно заключению археолога С.А. Яценко, автор Сапоговского клада не принадлежал к миру кочевников, так как древнекочевническому искусству не были свойственны изображения людей. По-видимому, мастер происходил из местного населения предтаежной зоны Южного Урала (Яценко 1999: 284).

Датировать клад можно опираясь на типологию представленного вооружения. По внешнему виду мечей и кинжалов, снабженных серповидными навершиями и прямыми перекрестиями, очевидно, что образцом послужило оружие развитой раннесарматской (прохоровской) культуры. Правда, среди сарматологов до сих пор не сложилось общего мнения относительно времени бытования подобных мечей. Их датируют с конца IV – до I в. до н.э. (Смирнов 1961: 27, 31; Смирнов 1984: 56; Смирнов 1989: 172; Мошкова 1963: 34; Шилов 1975: 116; Скрипкин 1990: 118–119, 138; Марченко 1996: 52–54; Зуев 19981: 149; Зуев 19982: 17–19; Зуев 2000: 96–98; Абрамова 1999: 100, 103, 106; Клепиков 2000: 118). Видимо, Сапоговский клад следует отнести к III – I вв. до н.э. (скорее всего, ко II в. до н.э.)

Среди фигурок наибольший интерес вызывают три изображения воинов, вооруженных парными короткими мечами или кинжалами, привязанными к бедрам. Как считает В.Ю. Зуев, два из них олицетворяют басилевсов, а одно – верховного жреца, то есть представителей элиты сарматского общества (Зуев 1993: 99, 101). Появление на этих фигурках дублирующего предмета вооружения вряд ли стоит объяснять художественно-мифологической гиперболой, даже несмотря на несомненно культовый характер всего комплекса. Если бы мастер желал преувеличить военную мощь мифических персонажей, он бы акцентировал внимание зрителей на самом оружии, изобразив мечи не спрятанными в ножнах, а показав их обнаженными в поднятых руках бойцов. Конечно, можно предположить, что показаны основной и запасной клинки, но и это маловероятно, так как их обычно располагали рядом, чтобы после утраты первого меча незамедлительно выхватить той же рукой второй. Размещение же оружия на разных бедрах, как изображено на фигурках, давало возможность мгновенно обнажить оба клинка.

По всей видимости, автор Сапоговского клада, не отступил от реальности и запечатлел воинов, владевших приемами боя двумя мечами одновременно, то есть практиковавших парное фехтование.

Косвенным доказательством присутствия у сарматов таких бойцов служат находки в курганных могильниках Бишунгарово и Старые Киишки на Южном Урале, а также Верхне-Погромном в Поволжье, где у погребенных находилось по два коротких меча (правда, как правило, в комплекте с длинным мечом) (Хазанов 1971: 9; Пшеничнюк 1983: 32, 108).

Сама техника применения одноименного клинкового оружия предполагает довольно высокий уровень рукопашного боя (Асмолов 1993: 174; Иитиро Масатоши 1993: 60, 90; Гвоздев 1997: 79). Однако сарматские воины вряд ли достигли высокого уровня фехтования, так как кочевники обычно мало уделяли внимания пешей рукопашной схватке. И хотя она выступала неотъемлемой фазой сражений номадов, до высот боевого искусства никогда не поднялась и чаще всего напоминала обычную резню (Горелик 1993: 21). Несмотря на это, появление в кочевнической среде парного фехтования оказалось абсолютно новым словом в военном деле номадов.

Представляется маловероятным самостоятельное изобретение кочевниками способа одновременного ведения боя одинаковым клинковым оружием. Он мог возникнуть только на основе длительной и высокоразвитой традиции пешего рукопашного единоборства, в месте, где существовали условия для обучения и планомерного совершенствования боевых навыков, то есть в оседлом земледельческом мире, на территории древнейших государств.

Чтобы предположительно очертить регион, откуда произошло заимствование, следует провести краткий обзор имеющихся сведений о парном фехтовании.

В XIV в. до н.э. были созданы, вероятно, древнейшие изображения бойцов с двумя одинаковыми орудиями в обеих руках – это египетские рисунки, запечатлевшие схватку единоборцев, вооруженных дубинками или деревянными мечами (Горелик 1993: табл. XXXII: 70; Панченко 19971: 10–11; История боевых искусств…1 1997: 46, рис. 5; Мишенев 1999: 14–15) (рис. 2). Хотя данные сцены нельзя отнести к моментам боя, скорее, они воспроизводили празднично-ритуальное действо. Другим памятником, также датирующимся II тыс. до н.э., является петроглиф окуневской культуры из Хакасии. На обломке плиты фронтально изображено антропоморфное существо, держащее в обеих руках по предмету, отдаленно напоминающему копье (Мачинский 1997: рис. 1) (рис. 3). Близким подобием окуневскому персонажу служит изображение на бронзовом клевце IV – III вв. до н.э. из пров. Сычуань в Китае (Итс 1976: рис. 9, 10) (рис. 4).

Следующая выявленная параллель относится к VII в. н.э. – это фигура человека в рогатом головном уборе с двумя копьями в руках на бронзовой матрице из Торслунда в Швеции (Славяне… 1986: илл. 4) (рис. 7). Завершает изобразительный ряд железное изделие из Обь-Енисейского междуречья конца XIX – начала XX в. (Иванов 1970: рис. 177; Плотников 1987: рис. 2: 5) (рис. 5).

Все перечисленные аналогии без сомнения не могут служить отражением реальных батальных сцен, так как у представленных на них антропоморфных героев в руках показаны парные большие копья, одновременное применение которых практически невозможно.

Широкое распространение сложившегося образа и связанных с ним мифологических представлений демонстрирует этнография. Так, при камлании эвенкийскому шаману помогали в борьбе с духом болезни два символических копья, выструганные из дерева (Анисимов 1958: 206, 211), ханты и манси поклонялись паре железных копий и нередко обрамляли фигуру антропоморфного божественного покровителя семью парами больших стрел (Бахрушин 1955: 104; Зенько 1997: 29), а в мифологии удэгейцев, двумя копьями вооружались некоторые агрессивные духи (Иванов 1954: рис. 203) (рис. 6).

Пожалуй, впервые боевое парное фехтование изображено в батальной сцене на китайском бронзовом сосуде “ху” V – IV вв. до н.э., из пров. Сычуань (So 1980: Pl. 91, Fig. 107; Горелик 1993: табл. XIII: 4). Воин на сосуде показан с двумя одинаковыми мечами или кинжалами в руках (рис. 8).

В 264 г. до н.э. в Риме началась эпоха гладиаторских боев, которая продлилась до 404 г. н.э. Для увеличения зрелищности поединков в гладиаторских школах создавались новые виды оружия, изобретались эффектные технические приемы, активно использовались экзотические способы варварского рукопашного боя. Среди различных категорий гладиаторов привлекает внимание группа бойцов димахеров, сражавшихся двумя короткими мечами или кинжалами (Панченко 1997: 75; История боевых искусств… 1997: 108; Мишенев 1999: 75, 84). Появление этой группы вполне могло быть самостоятельным изобретением гладиаторских школ, хотя нельзя совсем отвергать вероятность культурного импульса из сарматской среды.

Приблизительно в одно время с Сапоговским кладом, или несколько позже, в Приобье были изготовлены две пластины из кости и рога (Мошинская 1953: 99–100, табл. XV: 1; Троицкая 1979: 27, табл. XXIX: 1) (рис. 9 аб). На них нанесены личина и часть торса, помещенные между двумя мечами. Мечи по типу близки сарматским.

В качестве продолжения и развития традиции выступают многочисленные изображения мифологических героев с парными саблями в руках, процарапанные на иранских, византийских и хазарских серебряных блюдах, найденных в Приуралье (Спицын 1906: рис. 4, 5, 7, 9, 14, 15; Даркевич 1976: табл. 54: 5; Лещенко 1976: рис. 19аб, 20а, 21аб, 22а, 26–28; Гемуев…1989: рис. на с. 86, 92, 96, 97; Сокровища…1996: кат. № 27) (рис. 10 абвг). Большинство изображений датируется IX–X вв. н.э. (Лещенко 1976: 180). Должно быть, в одном ряду с ними надо рассматривать фигуру на бляшке из Ишимбаевского могильника на Южном Урале (Плотников 1987: рис. 2: 4; Соловьев 1987: 119) и рисунок на костюме удэгейского шамана (Иванов 1954: рис. 195, 196) (рис. 11).

Обычно сюжет картин на блюдах связывается с угорскими ритуальными плясками с оружием, возглавлявшихся жрецом, который держал две сабли. Эти “танцы” были описаны путешественниками и этнографами в XIX – первой половине XX в. (Чернецов 1947: 177–178; Чернецов 1957: 189-190; Лещенко 1976: 184; Косарев 1984: 151–152; Плотников 1987: 126-128; Соловьев 1987: 117–119; Гемуев…1989: 93). Однако пляски не имели ничего общего с военной пантомимой, а следовательно, и с реалиями настоящего боя. По-видимому, не сарматы позаимствовали технику владения двумя мечами у таежных племен Урала, а скорее сами послужили образцом для подражания. Использование парного клинкового оружия в среде аборигенных народов Сибири так и осталось лишь в культовой практике, возможно, наложившись на более древнюю (с парными копьями), и не нашло места в военных столкновениях.

В Европе парное фехтование, как отчетливо выраженное явление, не прослеживается. Безусловно, эпизодически могли встречаться отдельные случаи применения двух одинаковых клинков, но они остались на стадии эксперимента: римские гладиаторы, английские дуэлянты XVI в. (фон Винклер 1992: 159; Асмолов 1993: 204; Мишенев 1999: 13), донские казаки (Медведев 1993: 71; Грунтовский 1993: 117), осетинские воины (Беджизати 1987: 22).

В Средней и Передней Азии также не выявляется широкого владения парным оружием.

Только Юго-Восточная Азия демонстрирует устойчивую традицию использования парных предметов в бою. Согласно китайским письменным источникам, уже в III–IV вв. н.э., вполне сложились тренировочные комплексы, позволявшие воину обучиться владению парными короткими копьями и мечами (Маслов 1995: 93–94, 123). К этому моменту такой способ ведения боя должен был пройти долгий путь развития и зарекомендовать себя как безусловно действенный. Постепенно со сложением различных стилей боевого искусства сформировалась традиция использовать в парном варианте практически все короткое оружие, то есть не превышающее 150 см (Ян Юэминь 1992: 47; Ян Юэминь 1993: 41–42; Асмолов 1993: 180; Панченко 19971: 376). В качестве парного оружия выступали не только мечи, кинжалы, ножи, копья, но и молоты, чеканы, клевцы, топоры, шестоперы, стилеты, а также простые палки, цепы, костыли, серпы, крюки, грабли, хлысты… (Асмолов 1993: 27–30, 66–70, 85–86, 97–101, 119, 139–146, 149–153, 173–177, 180–181, 184–186; Маслов 1995: 118; Панченко 19971: 293–294, 376, 380).

Стоит отметить, что, если владение парными палками и их производными (костыли, дубинки…) фиксируется почти по всему азиатскому Юго-Востоку, то использование всего богатейшего арсенала парного оружия наблюдается лишь в Китае. В других смежных регионах умение управляться с двумя одинаковыми предметами вооружения или вообще осталось на ступени ритуально-праздничных представлений, или, оказавшись невостребованным, перешло в танцевальные номера (Глухарева 1982: 187, 198, илл. 187, 200; Асмолов 1993: 175; Маслов 1995: 429–430).

По-видимому, из Китая распространялись приемы своеобразного ведения рукопашного боя в сопредельные страны. Оттуда-то могли их перенять и сарматские воины. Этому способствовала и сложившаяся в то время политическая ситуация. В III в. до н.э. в Китае возникли все условия для всемерного развития военного искусства. Последняя четверть века ознаменовалась окончанием эпохи войн и вооруженных конфликтов, завершением периода Чжаньго (“сражающихся царств”), когда все внимание китайского общества было занято войной. В Китае возникла новая социальная группа – полупрофессиональные воины, которые, помимо участия в боевых действиях, занимались регулярными тренировками и совершенствованием своих воинских качеств (Васильев 1998: 235–236).

В середине I тыс. до н.э., согласно археологическим данным, произошло внедрение значительной группы кочевников в район верховьев р. Янцзы (Деопик 1979: 63–67). А вплоть до II в. до н.э. области современной провинции Ганьсу занимал племенной союз юечжей (Крюков… 1983: 56–57, 113; Восточный Туркестан…1998: 236, 239; Кляшторный, Савинов 199: 172). Юечжи же, согласно мнению ряда археологов, оказали влияние на окончательное формирование сарматской культуры (Скрипкин 1990: 199–202; Таиров 2000: 23–24).

Таким образом, вполне вероятно, что именно юечжи сыграли роль передаточного звена, которое донесло до южноуральских кочевников приемы одновременного владения двумя мечами. Восприняв нововведение, сарматы практиковали его в узком элитарном кругу. Однако новый способ рукопашного боя оказался слишком необычным и не привился на кочевнической почве, а вскоре и вовсе был забыт.

V. A. Kisel’. Notes on Peculiarities of Close Fight of Sarmatians

In 1900, a hoard of 20 bronze human figurines (fig. 1) was found near the village of Sapogovo in the southern Trans-Ural region. Most of the figurines represented warriors armed with long cavalrymen’s swords, short swords or daggers and bows.

The figurines were cast in bivalve clay moulds in vertical position. The facial mould was the shape-forming, the back one served as the lid. As models, flat templates cut of wood were used. The cast surface of the objects was not finished and pin-gates were not removed (Зуев 1993: 97).

According to the conclusion of archaeologist S. A. Yatsenko, the manufacturer of the objects from the Sapogovo hoard did not belong to the world of nomads, because representations of humans were not peculiar to the ancient nomadic art. Probably, the master was by birth from the local populations of that zone of the southern Urals that is bordering with taiga (Яценко 1999: 284).

This hoard may be dated on the basis of the types of the represented weapons. The swords and daggers are provided with crescens-shaped tops and straight crossguards. Such appearance suggests that weapons of the developed early Sarmatian (Prokhorovo) culture had served as their pattern, although among Sarmatologists no common opinion on the period of the existence of similar swords still has formed. They are dated to the period from the late 4^th to the 1^st century B.C. (Смирнов 1961: 27, 31; Смирнов 1984: 56; Смирнов 1989: 172; Мошкова 1963: 34; Шилов 1975: 116; Скрипкин 1990: 118–119, 138; Марченко 1996: 52–54; Зуев 19981: 149; Зуев 19982: 17–19; Зуев 2000: 96–98; Абрамова 1999: 100, 103, 106; Клепиков 2000: 118). It seems that the Sapogovo hoard must be dated to the 3^rd–1^st centuries B.C. (most probably the 2^nd century B.C.).

Of the greatest interest among these figurines are three representations of warriors armed with pairs of short swords or daggers tied on the hips. In the opinion of V. Yu. Zuev, two of them represent basileis, and one is the supreme priest, i.e. they are representatives of the elite of the Sarmatian society (Зуев 1993: 99, 101). It is unlikely that the appearance of a duplicate units of armament on these figurines may be explained by some artistic and mythological hyperbole, notwithstanding the undoubtedly ritual character of the entire complex. If the master wished to exaggerate the war power of the mythical characters, he would have accentuated the attention of onlookers at the weapons proper, depicting the swords unsheathed in the hands of the warriors rather than hidden in sheaths. One may suppose, of course, that here the main and the spare blades are shown, but this is also unlikely, because such swords were usually put near each other in order that after the loss of the first weapon the second one could be snatched out promptly by the same hand. The arrangement of the weapons at different hips, as it is shown on these figurines, gave possibility to unsheathe momentarily both of the blades.

It seems that the author of the Sapogovo hoard did not deviate from the reality and rendered warriors who possessed the technique of wielding two swords simultaneously i.e. practiced two-handed swordsmanship. That such fighters existed at Sarmatians is indirectly evidenced by finds from the barrows of Bishungarovo and Starye Kiishki in the southern Urals and that of Verkhne-Pogromnoe in the Volga region where the buried had each two short swords (though mostly accompanied with a long one) (Хазанов 1971: 9; Пшеничнюк 1983: 32, 108).

The technique of wielding the blade weapons under discussion suggests itself a fairly high level of close fight (Асмолов 1993: 174; Иитиро Масатоши 1993: 60, 90; Гвоздев 1997: 79). However, it is doubtful that Sarmatian warriors ever achieved a high level of swordsmanship since nomads usually paid little attention to unmounted close fight. Although the latter was an essential phase of the nomads’ combats, it never had reached the heights of swordsmanship and mostly resembled just common butchery (Горелик 1993: 21). Nevertheless, the appearance of two-handed swordsmanship was an absolutely new word in the military science of nomads.

It seems unlikely that nomads independently invented two-handed fighting with two identical blade weapons. Such a technique may have arisen only on the basis of a long and high-developed tradition of unmounted hand-to-hand single-combat in those places where conditions for training and systematic refining of war skills existed, i.e. in the settled agriculturists’ world — on the territory of the earliest states.

In order to outline tentatively the region from which the two-handed swordsmanship was borrowed, the available information about such traditions should be briefly reviewed.

In the 14^th century B.C., probably the earliest depictions of fighters with identical weapons in both hands were created – Egyptian drawings with representations of single-fighters armed with clubs or wooden swords (Горелик 1993: табл. XXXII: 70; Панченко 19971: 10–11; История боевых искусств…1 1997: 46, рис. 5; Мишенев 1999: 14–15) (fig. 2). These scenes cannot be attributed to real battle instants though, rather they reproduced a festive-ritual performance. Another source, that also is dated to the 2^nd mil. B.C., is a petroglyph of the Okunevo culture from Khakassia. It is a fragment of a flagstone with a frontal representation of an anthropomorphic creature holding in each hand an object which remotely resembles a spear (Мачинский 1997: рис. 1) (fig. 2). A close parallel to the Okunevo personage is a representation on a bronze battle axe with narrow edge of the 4^th–3^rd century B.C. from Sichuan Province in China (Итс 1976: рис. 9, 10).

The next known parallel is dated to the 7^th century A.D. It is a human figure in a horned headdress with two spears in the hands on a bronze die from Thorslund in Sweden (Славяне… 1986: ill. 4) (fig. 7). The figurative series described is completed by an iron object of the end of the 19^th or beginning of the 20^th century from the region between the rivers Ob and Yenisei (Иванов 1970: рис. 177; Плотников 1987: рис. 2: 5) (fig. 5).

Without doubt, none of the parallels enumerated may be considered as reflection of a real battle scene because the anthropomorphic heroes shown on them are holding paired long spears which are practically impossible to use simultaneously.

The wide spread of the image formed and mythological ideas linked with it are demonstrated by ethnography. Thus during shaman rituals, the Evenk shaman in his struggle with the spirit of disease was helped by two symbolic spears planed from wood (Анисимов 1958: 206, 211); Khanty and Mansi worshipped a pair of iron spears and fairly often framed the figure of the anthropomorphic divine protector with seven couples of large arrows (Бахрушин 1955: 104; Зенько 1997: 29); in the mythology of Udeges, some aggressive spirits were armed with a couple of spears (Иванов 1954: fig. 203) (fig. 6).

Perhaps for the first time, two-handed combat is represented in the battle scene on a Chinese bronze vessel “hu” of the 5^th or 4^th century B.C. from Sichuan Province (So 1980: Pl. 91, Fig. 107; Горелик 1993: pl. XIII: 4). The warrior on that vessel is shown with two identical swords or daggers in his hands (fig. 8).

In 264 B.C., in Rome an epoch of gladiator fights began which continued until 404 B.C. For increase of the staginess of the contests, new kinds of weapons were designed in gladiators’ schools, spectacular technical movements invented and exotic techniques of Barbarian close fight were actively used. Of note among various categories of gladiators is the group of fighters dimachaeri who carried a short sword or a dagger in each hand (Панченко 1997: 75; История боевых искусств… 1 1997: 108; Мишенев 1999: 75, 84). The appearance of that group undoubtedly may have been an independent invention of schools of gladiators, although one may not rule out the probability of a cultural impulse from the Sarmatian medium.

Approximately at the same period as the Sapogovo hoard or slightly later, in the Ob region two plates were manufactured from bone and horn (Мошинская 1953: 99–100, pl. XV: 1; Троицкая 1979: 27, pl. XXIX: 1) (fig. 9 аб). On these plates a face and part of the torso put between two swords are drawn. The swords are close to the Sarmatian ones in their type.

As the continuation and development of the tradition appear the numerous representations of mythological heroes carrying paired swords in each hand scratched on Iranian, Byzantine and Khazarian silver dishes. Such representations were found in regions close to the Urals (Спицын 1906: fig. 4, 5, 7, 9, 14, 15; Даркевич 1976: pl. 54: 5; Лещенко 1976: fig. 19аб, 20а, 21аб, 22а, 26-28; Гемуев…1989: fig. on p. 86, 92, 96, 97; Сокровища…1996: Catalogue no. 27) (fig. 10 абвг). Most of them are dated to the 9^th and 10^th centuries A.D. (Лещенко 1976: 180). It seems that in the same rank with them, the figure on a platelet from the Ishimbaevskiy Cemetery in the southern Urals (Плотников 1987: fig. 2: 4; Соловьев 1987: 119) and a drawing on the costume of a Udege shaman (Иванов 1954: рис. 195, 196) (fig. 11) should be considered.

The subject of the depictions on dishes usually is considered as connected with Ugrian ritual dances with weapons under the leadership of a priest carrying two sabres. Such “dances” were described by travellers and ethnographers in the 19^th and the first half of the 20^th centuries (Чернецов 1947: 177–178; Чернецов 1957: 189–190; Лещенко 1976: 184; Косарев 1984: 151–152; Плотников 1987: 126–128; Соловьев 1987: 117–119; Гемуев…1989: 93). However, those dances had nothing in common with war pantomime and therefore with the features of a real combat. Evidently, it were not Sarmatians who borrowed the technique of swordsmanship with two swords from taiga tribes of Urals, but rather Sarmatians themselves had become examples for imitation. The use of paired blade weapons among the aboriginal peoples of Siberia remained just only a ritual practice, possibly having overlapped some earlier one (with paired spears), and has not found its place in war conflicts.

In Europe, two-handed swordsmanship has not been observed as any clearly expressed phenomenon. Undoubtedly, single sporadic cases of using two identical blades were encountered, but those have ended at the stage of experiments: Roman gladiators, English duellists of the 16^th century (фон Винклер 1992: 159; Асмолов 1993: 204; Мишенев 1999: 13), Don Cossacks (Медведев 1993: 71; Грунтовский 1993: 117), and Ossetian warriors (Беджизати 1987: 22).

From central and western Asia no extensive use of paired weapons is reported.

Only south-eastern Asia demonstrates a stable tradition of using paired weapons in combat. According to Chinese written sources, training complexes which enabled a warrior to learn wielding paired short spears and swords had completely formed as early as the 3^rd and 4^th centuries A.D. (Маслов 1995: 93–94, 123). By that time such a technique of in-fighting must have undergone a long development and manifested itself efficient. Along with the formation of different styles of combat arts, a tradition gradually formed of using practically any short weapons (i.e. those that did not exceed 150 cm) in two-handed variant (Ян Юэминь 1992: 47; Ян Юэминь 1993: 41–42; Асмолов 1993: 180; Панченко 19971: 376). Not only swords, daggers, knives and spears appeared as duplicate arms, but also hammers, battle axes (pointed – chekans, and those with narrow edge and hammer-like head – klevetses), axes, six-ribbed maces, stilettos, as well as simple canes, flails, crutches, sickles, hooks, rakes, whips, etc. (Асмолов 1993: 27–30, 66–70, 85–86, 97–101, 119, 139–146, 149–153, 173–177, 180–181, 184–186; Маслов 1995: 118; Панченко 19971: 293–294, 376, 380).

It is notable, that while fencing with paired canes and their derivatives (crutches, clubs, etc.) is reported from throughout almost entire Asiatic South-East, the use of the complete richness of the arsenal of paired arms is observed only in China. In the regions adjoining it, the skill of coping with two identical units of armament, having proved unclaimed, either remained at the stage of ritual and festival shows or turned into dance performances.

Probably, the methods of peculiar close fight were spreading from China into the contiguous countries. It is from the latter, that Sarmatians may have borrowed these techniques. Propitious to this was the political situation established in that period. In the 3^rd century B.C., all possible conditions for extensive development of military arts arose in China. The last quarter of that century was marked by the end of the epoch of wars and military conflicts – the conclusion of the Zhanguo (“Warring States”) period during which the entire attention of the Chinese society was concentrated on war. In China, a new social group arose – half-professional soldiers who were occupied with regular training and refining their military qualities along with participating in war operations (Васильев 1998: 235–236)

According to archaeological evidence, in the middle of the 1^st mil. B.C., intrusion of a considerable group of nomads into the region of the upper Yangtze River took place (Деопик 1979: 63–67). Until the 2^nd century B.C. the regions of what is now Kansu Province were occupied by the tribal union of Yüeh-chih (Крюков… 1983: 56–57, 113; Восточный Туркестан…1998: 236, 239; Кляшторный, Савинов 199: 172). But Yüeh-chih, according to the opinion of a number of archaeologists, influenced the final formation of the Sarmatian culture (Скрипкин 1990: 199–202; Таиров 2000: 23–24).

Thus it is quite possible that it were Yüeh-chih who played the role of intermedium that brought the methods of two-handed swordsmanship to the South-Ural nomads. Having accepted that innovation, Sarmatians practised it in a narrow circle of their elite. The new method of close fight, however, proved to be too unusual to establish itself in the nomadic milieu and a little later it was altogether forgotten.

С. В. Харитонов. О средневековом письменном памятнике «Записка готского топарха» в связи с результатами археологических исследований Эски-Кермена и его округи

S. V. Kharitonov. Medieval Document “Report of the Gothic Toparch” and Results of Archaeological Investigations of Eski-Kermen and its Surroundings

“Report of the Gothic Toparch” is an enigmatic medieval document discovered in the beginning of the 19^th century by French byzantinist Ch. B. Hase in a collection of manuscripts composed in Greek. That collection included epistles of St. Basil, Phalaris, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. In 1819, Ch. B. Hase published in Paris the “Report”, provided with a Latin translation, as part of commentaries to the “History” of Leo Diacon. Hase believed that the birth-place of the “Report” was the Tauric Chersonesos and that the events described in this document were connected with the Crimean campaign of Russian prince Vladimir I in 988.

In Russia, the text of the “Report”, published by Ch. B. Hase, was studied by N. Lambin and A. A. Kunik in the second half of the 19^th century. These researchers came to the conclusion that the text originated not from Chersonesos but from the district of Gothia which lay to the east from the Tauric Chersonesos. On the basis of historical documents, A. A. Kunik dated the “Report” to the middle of the 10^th century. In the opinion of some historians and philologists, the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” is the document that may throw light on those events in the Crimea which had been preceding directly the raid of Russian prince Svyatoslav I against Khazars in 965 (Куник 1874; Вестберг 1909; 1910; Кулаковский 1914; Vasiliev 1936).

In the 19^th century, the fate of the collection with the text of the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” turned out to be dramatic. That collection probably had been brought to Paris from Italy shortly before 1815. In Paris, it was kept in the Royal library. However, nobody saw the collection after Ch. B. Hase and its traces are lost. It is believed to have been returned to Italy after 1814 or 1815 and kept in one of Italian book depositories (Куник 1874; Васильевский 1909; Vasiliev 1936; Левченко 1956).

Before the second half of the 20^th century, the leading byzantinists, who studied the text of the “Report of the Gothic Toparch”, did not doubt its authenticity. In the early 1970-s, American byzantinist I. Ševčenko supposed that the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” was a falsification written by Ch. B. Hase.

The facts presented in this article enable us to return to the traditional views on the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” as an authentic document.

The “Report of the Gothic Toparch” is written in Greek in form of travel notes. Its author calls himself the ruler of Klimata – a district which probably was situated not far from the Tauric Chersonesos. In 1929, N. I. Repnikov identified the town described in the “Report” in the district called “Klimata” with the Crimean “cave-city” Eski-Kermen.

Eski-Kermen is situated in the south-western part of the Mountainous Crimea, 20 km south-west from Bakhchisaray, on the flat summit of an isolated mountain ranged from north to south and surrounded by abrupt precipices. The approximate area of the city is 81,600 sq. m. Owing to archaeological investigations carried out in Eski-Kermen in 1928-1937 and 1978-1982 one may suppose that Eski-Kermen as a populated city existed since the 6^th to the end of the 13^th century.

N. I. Repnikov supposed in addition that the remains of fortifications of Kyz-Kule, close to Mt. Eski-Kermen, north-west of its northern part, are situated on the place of the “small fortress”, about construction of which the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” narrates.

In this article, topographical peculiarities of Mt. Eski-Kermen and its surroundings are described. These peculiarities along with archaeological data and the general geographical information derived from the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” may be considered as reliable bases of Repnikov’s hypothesis which connects the “Report of the Gothic Toparch” with the Crimean “cave-city” Eski-Kermen.