Kirjoittaja Kristiina » 02 Elo 2025 12:37
@ Kinaporin kalifi
Sain tuosta Samus-Kizhirovo -aiheisesta artikkelista aikaiseksi alla olevan Google-käännöksen:
Monuments with metal and casting molds of the Samus-Kizhirovo type
As in the 1989 book, the reference to bronzes and casting molds of this type is due to the fact that the problem of the relationship between metalworking of the Samus-Kizhirovo type and Seima-Turbino continues to be relevant in the Ural-West Siberian archaeology of the Late Bronze Age. Moreover, over these years, fundamentally new materials have appeared that shed light on the formation of Samus-Kizhirovo metalworking, the range of cultures and communities associated with it, and the dynamics of its development. Unlike the summary of Seima-Turbino bronzes, in this section I did not aim to take into account all the known finds of the Samus-Kizhirovo type. For me, it was important to present the most important materials in terms of quality.
The sanctuary or votive hoard Vis 2 (Komi Republic, Knyazhpogosky district, village of Sindor). During excavations by V. S. Zelensky in 1997 and V. N. Karmanov in 1999, the only complex of materials with tools of the Samus-Kizhir type (6 specimens) was discovered in Eastern Europe (bone remains of the buried were not found). Among them are a celt of the K-40 type, but with "false" eyes; a dagger of the KZh-8 type; a knife of the NK-8 type; a narrow lanceolate knife with a rib on the blade and a sharpened handle; a knife-scraper of the NK-24 type; an awl or rod (Fig. 3, 1–6).
Cult monument (sanctuary) Shaitanskoye Ozero II (Kirovgrad district, Sverdlovsk region). From the excavations of Yu. B. Serikov in 2006–2007, O. N. Korochkova and V. I. Stefanov in 2008–2010, 188 bronze objects were recovered. Most of the materials, with the exception of the excavations of 2009–2010, have been published ( Serikov, 2006. Fig. 1, 1 ; Serikov et al., 2008; 2009; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010). The metal of the monument (Fig. color. VIII) is morphologically divided into three groups. The Seima-Turbino group includes double-edged lamellar knives (classes NK-2 and NK-4, less often NK-6) ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 3–8, 5; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3B, 1, 3 ), knife-scrapers (NK-24) and other combined tools made on the basis of or from fragments of lamellar knives ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 12, 6, 46, 47, 49; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 15, 3B, 10 ), two miniature earless celts (K-14) ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 7, 8 ; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 11). The Samus-Kizhirovskaya group includes a series of celts with one or two "false" ears (categories K-46 and K-48) (Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 7, 1–7, 11, 12, 8, 9; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 18), a dagger with a ring pommel, a plate blade and a flat handle decorated on both sides with hatched rhombuses and triangles (Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 20, 10, 1). The Eurasian group is characterized by double-edged daggers with cast-on handles (KZh-8) ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 16, 17, 21, 10, 2, 11), models of slotted handles ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 1, 2), knives with a crossguard and interception (NK-14 and NK-16) ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 4, 9, 10, 13–15; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 12, 17), forged chisels and adzes ( Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 6, 51; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 16 ), a spearhead (KD-36), their fragments and model ( Serikov et al. , 2009. Fig. 6, 37–39 ; Korochkova, Stefanov , 2010. Fig. 3A, 2 ), plate and rod bracelets and rings, etc. ( Serikov et al. , 2009. Fig. 6, Fig. 3. Celts of the Seima-Turbino (2, 3) and Samusko-Kizhirovsky (1) types 1 – Sulem; 2 – Kanonerka; 3 – Nikolaevka (bronze) 42–45, 52–54, 64 ), well known primarily in the steppe and forest-steppe cultures – Sintashta, Petrovka, Alakul, etc.). A number of items, both unique (sleeve-shaped chisels) (Serikov et al., 2009. Fig. 7, 9, 10; Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. Fig. 3A, 1), and the bulk of forging and casting waste, are not associated with any particular morphological group of metal. The general syncretic nature of the complex of bronze and copper items of the site, which has a Seima-Turbino basis, is a reflection of the initial phase of the development of metalworking of the Samus-Kizhir type, which after some time will spread to a number of cultures of the taiga and forest-steppe zones of Western and Eastern Siberia. One of its distinctive features will be precisely the "false" ears of celts and spearheads (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Pp. 147, 157). The Shaitanskoye Ozero II monument itself is associated with the cult practice of the Koptyakov culture population (Korochkova, Stefanov, 2010. P. 129).
The Palatki 1 (Iset 1) settlement near Yekaterinburg; a fragment of a talc mold matrix for casting a dagger of the KZh-8 category (Viktorova, 2001. Fig. 5, Earlier, a dagger of the same type and a fragment of a celt with a "carpet" ornament of the K-50 category were found here ( Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Fig. 65, 6, 79, 7; Viktorova, 2001. Fig. 5, 3, 7 ). These finds are most likely associated with the Koptyakov-Cherkaskul cultural complex of the site.
SAO (northern shore of Lake Andreyevskoye near Tyumen), a complex of finds associated with a sanctuary or votive treasure; among them is a false-ear celt of the K-50 category (information from V. I. Stefanov and O. N. Korochkova). Tartas-1 burial ground (Vengerovsky district of Novosibirsk region, Barabinsk forest-steppe). From the Late Krotovo culture site 323 comes a fragment of a clay mold matrix for casting a celt of the K-44 category (conditionally) ( Molodin, Mylnikova et al., 2009. pp. 338, 339. Fig. 1, 3 ).
Tanai 5 settlement (Toguchinsky district, Novosibirsk region); a matrix of a stone mold for casting a celt of the K-50 category ( Bobrov, 2000. Fig. 2) (Fig. 1, 2 ); associated with the Samus culture ceramic complex.
Umna-6 settlement (Kolyvansky district, Novosibirsk region); two clay mold matrices for casting a celt-shovel ( Borodovsky, 2002. Fig. 1, 1–3 ). There are no metal examples of Umna-6 type tools with a strongly protruding socket. The valves were clearly "buried" on the periphery of the monument, and covered from above by a cluster of Krokhalev type ceramics ( Borodovsky , 2002. pp. 163, 165).
A burial ground or grave near Novosibirsk; a celt of the K-52 category ( Soloviev, Chibiryak , 2001. Figs. 1–5) was discovered on the city beach. The authors of the publication suggest that it got here together with sand taken for the improvement of the beach in the coastal zone of the Ob River upstream or downstream from the city ( Soloviev, Chibiryak , 2001. p. 454). Fragments of a wooden insert from a composite handle are well preserved in the socket of the tool ( Soloviev, Chibiryak , 2001. Figs. 6–9). This detail allowed us to correlate the find with the destroyed burial (Soloviev, Chibiryak, 2001. P. 454). Indeed, almost all the preserved wooden handle parts of the Bronze and Early Iron Age Celts in Northern Eurasia come from burial sites – from the Seimin-Turbino to the Ananyino, Akozin-Melar and Kulai. A. I. Soloviev and V. E. Chibiryak (2001. P. 456, 457) associate this tool with the late stage of the Samus culture.
Ozernoye burial ground (Ongudaysky district of the Altai Republic); A burial of the Karakol culture was uncovered in a stone box during excavation work ( Molodin, 2006. pp. 273–282) with a vessel, a bronze plate, and a stone matrix for casting a celt-shovel ( Kubarev, 1988. Fig. 65, 2 ; Grushin et al., 2009. Fig. 2, 1 ). The upper part of the valve is lost, as a result of which the type of tool cannot be reconstructed. The ratio of the sizes of the sleeve and the blade is not typical for Seima-Turbino samples. Shkolny settlement (Prokopyevsk district of the Kemerovo region, at the headwaters of the Karagayla River). From the excavations of M. G. Elkin come three matrices of sandstone casting molds for casting KD-48 spearheads (Bobrov, 2005. Fig. 2, 1, 3, 4) and one clay one for casting an anthropomorphic figure (Bobrov, 2005. Fig. 2, 2). Their connection with the ceramic complex of the Samus culture is noted (Bobrov, 2005. Pp. 54, 57).
The settlement of Kuznetsk 1/2 (Novokuznetsk, Kemerovo Region), the monument is located in the immediate vicinity of the historical center of Kuznetsk - Kuznetsk Fortress (near the Transfiguration Cathedral). In the layer of the settlement with pseudo-textile ceramics of the Krokhalev culture, fragments of clay casting molds were found: 1) part of a matrix for casting a celt of the K-38 or K-40 category ( Shirin , 2008. Fig. 6, 1 ); 2) the upper part of the core for molding a ribbed bushing of spearheads of the KD-48 category ( Shirin , 2008. Fig. 6, 2 ). The best example of a matrix with a negative of a spearhead with a similar bushing is known from the settlement of Samus 4 ( Chernykh, Kuzminykh , 1989. Fig. 82, 1 ).
Settlement Dolgaya 1 (Yashkinsky district of the Kemerovo region, at the mouth of the Dolgaya River). During the excavations of 2010, a fragment of a clay casting mold for casting a celt-scapula was found in a layer with Krokhalevskaya culture ceramics (information from A. G. Marochkin and I. V. Kovtun). The reconstructed tool is morphologically similar to those that were cast in matrices from the Umna-6 settlement.
Burial ground on Mount Tatarka (Sharypovsky district of Krasnoyarsk Krai). In 1998–2000, A. S. Vdovin’s excavations examined a late Bronze Age monument whose burial rite and material culture are characterized by features of the cultures of neighboring regions. In metal (single-edged and, less frequently, double-edged knives, "horned" bracelets, rings covered with gold foil, various plate ornaments, etc.) there are clear manifestations of the forest-steppe "andronoid" cultures of Western Siberia (such as Elovka 2, Sopka-2, Chernoozerye 1). Stone burial structures and jade rings indicate connections with the cultures of the Baikal region. The Minusinsk line of connections, despite the geographical proximity of the basin, is reflected in the monument to the least extent. For the first time, two false-ear celts of the K-54 13 category were reliably discovered in the burial grounds (p. 14 and 15). Earlier finds of tools of this type also come from the Yenisei (2 specimens) and Vasyugan (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. P. 154).
The Bronze site near the village of Tunka (Republic of Buryatia, Tunkinskaya Basin, middle reaches of the Irkut River, in the gap between the Black and White Mountains). Together with the Glazkovo culture ceramics, a talc mold for casting a celt comes from the collections (Ugolkov, Ugolkova, 2001. Tables 51–53). Its ornamental composition corresponds to the tools of the K-52 category, but the celt reconstructed from the matrix is noticeably larger than the known samples (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Fig. 79, 8, 80, 1, 2, 4); it also differs in noticeable ears-protrusions, similar to the tool from the settlement of Goremyk on Baikal (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Fig. 80, 8).
The Shenna settlement (near the city of Xining, Qinghai Province in northwest China). In one of the storage pits, attributed to the late Shenna period (Molodin, Komissarov, 2001. p. 377), a spearhead was discovered (Molodin, Komissarov, 2001. Fig. on p. 375; Chernykh, 2009. Fig. 14.3, 3), which, judging by the morphological features, is an imitation of the known Seima-Turbino spears with a KD-10 rank hook (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Figs. 29, 30; Molodin, Neskorov, 2010. Figs. 1, 2, 3, 2). Based on these features, I assume that it belongs to the number of post-Seimin (but not Samus-Kizhirovo) weapon samples. Its overall length is striking – 61.5 cm. The Qinghai tip has a “fork” (or, in fact, an imitation of it) formed not at the base of the feather, but at the top of the sleeve; the rounded (not rhombic!) in cross-section feather shaft “enters” the sleeve; the hook is located on the opposite side from the side eye; it is distinguished from the spears from Rostovka and from near Omsk by its rounded tip, possibly indicating the cutting function of the weapon in combat readiness.
Random finds of Samus-Kizhirovsky type items
Sulem village (near Pervouralsk, Sverdlovsk region, Chusovaya river); celt – variant of the K-48 category (with a “blind” eye and a ladder-shaped belt) ( Serikov , 2006. Fig. 1, 9 ) (Fig. 2, 1 ).
The village of Souzga (Maiminsky District of the Altai Republic); the spearhead is a variant of the KD-48 category (without an eye) (Kocheyev, 1997. Fig. 1, 1).
Overview of the Samus-Kizhir bronze database
Thus, in addition to the 1989 summary, 24 metal finds 14 and 13 casting molds were taken into account, of which 6 items were in the European zone (and these are the first finds of the Samus-Kizhir type west of the Urals - the sanctuary or votive hoard Vis 2), and 18 items and all casting molds were in the Asian zone. The materials of the Asian zone are distributed as follows: random finds - 2 tools, sanctuaries or votive hoards - 12, settlements - 11 casting molds 15, burial grounds - 4 metal items and 2 casting molds.
Distribution by classes: tools and weapons - 23 items and 12 casting molds, cult items (anthropomorphic figure) - casting mold and undefined - plate from the Ozernoye burial ground. Distribution by categories of tools and weapons: celts - 16 + 7 face plates, knives - 3, daggers - 2 + 1 face plate, spearheads - 1 + 4 face plates, awls - 1 item. In the Samus-Kizhirovskaya series of tools and weapons, the most noticeable increase compared to the early sample (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. p. 146) is associated with celts: the number of metal samples has almost doubled - and still due to tools of the so-called Kizhirov type 16 (with "false" ears and rich geometric decor); the number of casting molds increased by a quarter. The remaining categories are quite small in both the early and current samples, so their correct comparison is impossible.
It is noteworthy that the most significant increase in Samus-Kizhir bronzes in recent decades was given by sanctuaries or other cult sites - primarily Vis 2 and Shaitanskoye Ozero II. In the 1989 sample, E. N. Chernykh and I associated the bulk of the materials with settlements, although in light of recent research, it is necessary to adjust previous ideas, especially with respect to the Samus 4 and Saygatino VI (Ostyatsky Zhivets VI) sites. Thus, it is assumed that the first of them "was not a settlement or production center, but primarily a sacred center, visited at a certain time of the year and associated with events and rituals of obtaining and distributing metal and making (more symbolic than real) bronze tools. Within the framework of this hypothesis, the current problem of the relationship between the various complexes of Samus IV can be interpreted not through the model of a multi-layered settlement, but through the participation in the rituals of bearers of various cultural traditions" (Vasiliev, 2001. P. 26). At present, V. I. Stefanov and O. N. Korochkova - in light of the studies of Shaitanskoye Ozero II - are inclined to consider Saygatino VI as a cult monument.
Touching upon the morphological characteristics of the new tools and weapons of the Samus-Kizhirovsky type, I will note that, using the example of the Vis 2 Celts, another previously unknown line of transformation of the Seima-Turbino morphological stereotypes has emerged. It is associated with the belt celts of the K-6 category, the main mass of which comes from the Turbinsky 1 burial ground (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Pp. 39, 46). However, the false-ear celts of the variant known in Vis 2 did not receive further distribution in Northern Eurasia. This line of development turned out to be a dead end. At the same time, using the example of the Samus belt tools of the K-40 category (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Pp. 148, 152) we see the main line of transformation of the belt tools of Turbino 17.
On the basis of the Seima-Turbino tools of the K-4 category (the so-called undecorated), discovered mainly in Eastern and Northern Europe (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Pp. 39), a type of tool with a wide collar along the mouth of the socket and lacking massive “stiffening ribs” bordering the chamfer was formed in Fennoscandia (Meinander, 1954. Taf. 10, e, f) 18. The chronological position of these celts has not yet been determined, so their relationship with the Seima-Turbino tools, as well as with the series Eurasian celts of the Late Bronze Age, the socket of which is reinforced with a massive roller-rim (Loboykovki, Derbedenevskie, etc.). Apparently, we are dealing with a narrow local group of tools that morphologically continue the Seima-Turbino line of development.
A series of false-eared celts discovered at the Shaitanskoye Ozero II sanctuary (Fig. color. VIII, 5, 7, 8) confirmed the guess about the original models of the Kizhirov celts with "false" ears and the so-called "carpet" pattern (Chernykh, Kuzminykh, 1989. Pp. 152, 154). A number of random finds from the Trans-Urals and the matrix from Saigatino VI (classes K-46 and K-48) were classified by E. N. Chernykh and I at the time as transitional types from the Seima-Turbino tools to the Kizhirov ones. In light of the Shaitanozero finds, it became clear that the formation and establishment of the Samus-Kizhirovsky type metalworking took place in the mountain-forest and forest regions of the Middle Trans-Urals on the basis of the Seima-Turbino and Sintashta-Petrovsky traditions. Somewhat later, with the formation of the suite of the so-called "Andronoid" cultures, the Samus-Kizhirovsky type metalworking took root in most of the taiga and forest-steppe cultures of Western Siberia; its extreme limit in the east was the Tunkinskaya Basin in the Baikal region. West of the Urals, apart from isolated tools from the Vis 2 sanctuary, there are no clear traces of metalworking of this circle. In most of the forest and forest-steppe belt of Eastern Europe, celts began to be made, the relationship of which with the Seima-Turbino ones is only sometimes detected in the decor (belts-"ladders", geometric figures), but morphologically the series of eared and earless celts of the end of the Bronze Age (Chernykh, 1976. Table I) are very far from the Seima-Turbino and Samus-Kizhirovo ones. This line of development "emerges" here only in the Early Iron Age - the hexagonal series of celts of the Ananyino world and the Itkul culture (Kuzminykh, 1983. Tables XIII-XXII).
It is important to note that the Kizhirov tools of the K-52 and K-54 classes, which belong to the latest types of celts of the Seima-Turbino line of development (Gryaznov, 1941. pp. 237-271), were first discovered in burial sites of the Ob-Yenisei interfluve (the burial ground on Mount Tatarka and the burial near Novosibirsk), and in the first of them, manifestations of the West Siberian "andronoid" cultures are distinct. In concluding the review of the Samus-Kizhir bronzes, it is necessary to pay attention to the dominance of new finds in the Middle Trans-Urals in the area of the Koptyakov and Cherkaskul "andronoid" cultures, along the ribbon pine forests of the Ob Right Bank and in the Ob-Yenisei interfluve (the Samus, Krokhalev and "andronoid" type of culture). In the east, the area of the characteristic ("carpet") Kizhirov Celts reached the Baikal region (Tunkinskaya Basin); their connection here with one of the stages of the Glazkov culture cannot be ruled out.
Acknowledgments. The discussion of the Seima-Turbino and Samus-Kizhirov problems in the last two decades was carried out in close communication with E. N. Chernykh, V. I. Molodin, V. V. Bobrov, Yu. F. Kiryushin, V. I. Stefanov, O. N. Korochkova and I. V. Kovtun, and it was very valuable and useful for me and, I hope, for my colleagues. My sincere gratitude to S. V. Studzitskaya, V. V. Sidorov (Moscow), B. S. Solovyov (Yoshkar-Ola), V. S. Zelensky and V. N. Karmanov (Syktyvkar), M. V. Ivanishcheva (Vologda), A. F. Melnichuk (Perm), Yu. B. Serikov (Nizhny Tagil), E. M. Bes-prozvanny (Ekaterinburg), A.V. Polevodov (Omsk), V.K. Mertz (Pavlodar), S.P. Grushin (Barnaul), A.G. Marochkin (Kemerovo) and Yu.V. Shirin (Novokuznetsk), who assisted in collecting materials.
