peter shulga
Petr Shulga – Candidate of Historical Sciences, SB RAS Institute of Archeology and Ethnography Senior Researcher (Paleometal Department). Born on the 28 of August,1955 in Russia (Siberia, Kemerovo Region). In 1976-1980 worked as a radio meteorologist in the Altai Mountains (Republic of Altai, Russia) at the Bertek and Ulandryk remote weather stations on the Kazakhstan, China and Mongolia border. In 1985 graduated from the Altai State University.In the 1980-90s carried out exploration and excavation of ancient pastoralist settlements in the Altai Mountains. In the 1991–2009 conducted excavations and cartography of funerary monuments of the 3rd mil. BC. e. – Ist mil. А.В. in the Altai mountains and foothills. For about 20 years he has been involved in horse equipping and Scythian times arming as well as in chronology and cultural contacts in the eastern part of the Scythian world.Since 2009 the focus has been on the Xinjiang and North China Scythoid cultures archeology on which two monographs were published: 1. P. Shulga. Xinjiang in the VIII – III centuries. BC. (Funerary complexes. Chronology and periodization): monograph. - Barnaul: Publishing house of Altai State Technical University, 2010. – 238 p. 2) Shulga P.I. “Yuhuangmiao - burial ground of VII-VI centuries. BC e. in North China. " Monograph Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the SB RAS Institute of Archeology and Ethnography, 2015. – 304 p.), And two more are in the process of being printed. He is the author of more than 200 research works, including 12 monographs on the Scythian time in Sayano-Altai and China nomads cultures.
less
InterestsView All (36)
Uploads
books
под руководством П.И. Шульги в 1991–2002 гг. в долине р. Сентелек на территории Чарышского р-на Алтайского края (Россия). В книгу также включены материалы могильников Машенка-1 и Щучий Лог-1, расположенных по р. Чарыш. Большинство исследованных захоронений относится к эпохе бронзы и скифскому
времени. Среди них особое место занимает погребально-поминальный комплекс у «царского» кургана 1
пазырыкской культуры – первый памятник такого рода на Алтае, исследованный одним раскопом.
Монография предназначена для археологов и специалистов, занимающихся вопросами истории восточной части скифского мира.
Th e proposed monograph provides materials from the Sentelek archaeological expedition led by P.I. Shulga
in 1991–2002 in the Sentelek River Valley in the Charyshsky District of the Altai Territory (Russia). Th e monograph
also includes materials from burial grounds Mashenka-1 and Shchuchiy Log-1 located along the Charysh River. Most
of studied burials date back to the Bronze Age and the Scythian times. Among them, a special place is occupied by
the funeral and memorial complex at “tsarist” mound 1 of the Pazyryk culture, which is the fi rst monument of this
kind in Altai investigated in one excavation.
Southern Siberian and Kazakhstan cultures at an early stage, which suggests a much wider distribution of such transitional sites.
The monograph is intended for archaeologists and scientists engaged in studying the history of the Eastern Scythian world as well as the features of transition from the late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age.
Battle wounds of the early nomads in the Volga-Ural zone
Warrior’s image in the Saka art of Kazakhstan
War on the pectoral from Tolstaya Mohila
Foreign commanders in the Bosporan Kingdom
Ad gloriam German Parzinger
Конь и всадник на востоке скифского мира
Боевой травматизм ранних кочевников Волго-Уралья
Образ воина в сакском искусстве Казахстана
Война на пекторали из Толстой Могилы
Иностранные командиры в Боспорском царстве
Ad gloriam Германа Парцингера
In the monograph the largest necropolis in the Altai region by the number of examined burial grounds, Scythian-like necropolis of VII-VI cent. BC. Gilyovo-10 (Group №5) materials are published. The necropolis became widely known due to the relatively well-preserved riding horses harness and military belts with leather base and bronze details detection, which allowed tracing their structure reliably.
Of particular interest is the funeral rites variety, indicating the cohabitation of diverse population groups, which came from the Kazakh steppes in the second half of VII century BC. Some graves orientation and horses location features are similar to the later formed Pazyryk culture of the second half of VI-III cent. BC., that can be explained by their genetic relation.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts dealing with the Scythian- Siberian world eastern part history problems and riding horse and warrior outfit as well.
and periodization» for the first time in the Russian-speaking scientific literature a large-size
block of materials from more than 30 sepulchres of the VIII–III centuries BC in Xinjiang in expanded
form is published, sepulchral rite, chronology and periodization questions are considered. The basic
attention is paid to the most well investigated sepulchres of Chawuhugou, Yanghai and Jiaohe Goubei
with the representative material comparable to sepulchral complexes from Sayan-Altai.
The territory of Xinjiang (East Turkestan) directly borders on Kazakhstan, Altai Republic, Mongolia
and through Gansu corridor on Northern China, that is why it has been drawing the attention
of Russian and foreign researchers for a long time. One considers Xinjiang as a source of large migrations,
other – as a place of mixture of various cultures of the West, the North and the East. During the
large-scale archaeological researches which begun in the 80-ies of the last century the considerable
material was obtained, but excavations were basically spent in foothills of Tien Shan, while Dzungaria,
located to the north, still remains a white spot. Nevertheless, it is already possible to make some significant
conclusions relying on this material, particularly to reconsider or add some occurring propositions
in Chinese and Russian archaeological literature.
Recent years many researchers in Xinjiang suggest to count the beginning of the Early Iron Age
not from the VI century BC (as they supposed it before), but from the XIII–XII centuries BC. The
present position is substantially based on radiocarbon dates from the sepulchre of Yanbulake (till 1200
BC), and also Chawuhugou (to the X and even the XIII centuries BC). Indeed, iron tools were found
in these sepulchres, but, under the available data, in Chawuhugou they come from burials of the VI–V
centuries BC and only one iron knife was found in Chawuhugou-4 in a tomb of the VII century BC.
In the published materials of «bronze epoch» of Yanbulake sepulchre there are products authentically
dated by analogies from Sayan-Altai and Xinjiang of the VII–VI and the V–IV centuries BC. Iron
subjects obviously come from latter tombs and are unreasonably included in early group of burials.
Practically all the earliest sepulchral complexes from the investigated sepulchres (Chawuhugou,
Habuqihan, Baileqier, Qunbake, Kezier, Yanghai, etc.) do not exceed the limits of the VIII–VII centuries
BC. The reason for improper making the specified monuments 200–500 years older is orientation
of the Chinese researchers to radiocarbon dates, lack of development of implements’ chronology and
the extremely weak knowledge of archeology of Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan. It is significant that in
generalizing works on Jiaohe Goubei (Городище Цзяохэ, 1998), Chawuhugou (Чауху, 1999) and on
the Early Iron Age in Xinjiang (Хань Цзянье, 2007) burial places are dated only on С14, on features of
sepulchral rite and on ceramics. Thus accepted in China historical periodization is traditionally used;
according to this periodization materials of the Early Iron Age are divided into the periods of Chunqiu
(770–476 BC), Zhanguo (475–221 BC) and Han (the II century BC – the II century AD). In search of
analogies to implements researchers also address to materials from Northern China.
Such approach is ineffective so long as complexes of the VIII–III centuries BC in Xinjiang gravitate
to Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan. Strange as it may seem at the first sight, but no representative
sepulchral complex of the VIII–V centuries BC similar to those known in Northern China and Gansu
was revealed there so far. Considering the large quantity of monuments investigated on Tien Shan,
it is possible to ascertain that there were no considerable migrations from the east to Tien Shan. Peculiar
sepulchral rite and ceramics unequivocally specify the existence in the most well investigated
areas of cities Hami, Turfan and Hejing of archaeological cultures generated in the VIII century BC
and existing without fundamental changes approximately to the middle of the V century BC. Most
brightly and convincingly this unusual to steppe zone stability is traced on sepulchres of cultures of
Chawuhu (Chawuhugou-1, 2, 4, 5, Habuqihan, etc.) and Subeixi (Yanghai-1, 2, 3). Some continuity
is traced in the V–III centuries BC too, but it would be premature to speak about their existence up
to the turn of the eras as it is believed in Xinjiang. The reason for cultures’ stability is the absence of
considerable population migrations on the territory and stability of generated economic types. Presumably,
by the VII century BC in foothills of Tien Shan culturally close groups of population start
124 Шульга П.И. Синьцзян в VIII–III вв. до н.э. Погребальные комплексы. Хронология и периодизация
to divide into «tillers» and «nomads». Approximately in the middle of the VI century BC the settled
population of Xinjiang endures the obvious crisis synchronizing with the occurred at that time sharp
change of cultures of steppe zone from Black Sea Coast to Tuva. So, on the thoroughly investigated
sepulchre of Chawuhugou-4 it has been built only five tumuli out of 248 sepultures after the middle
of the VI century BC. The similar situation is fixed on sepulchres of Chawuhugou-1 and Habuqihan,
each of them numbering nearly 700 burial places of the VIII–V centuries BC. In the middle of the VI
century BC Chawuhu culture population was sharply reduced, huge sepultures have almost stopped
being completed, and to the end of the V century BC the culture ceases to exist. Let us emphasize
that changes of forms and types of armament subjects, decorations, harness and waist accessories occurred
in Chawuhu in the same chronological sequence as in Sayan-Altai. Among the monuments of
the V–III centuries BC the particular interest represents the sepulchre of Jiaohe Goubei located nearby
to Turfan. It has been dated by Chinese researchers within the limits of Han epoch (the II century
BC – the II century AD), but material from the main sepultures turned out to be earlier – the of V–III
centuries BC (Кубарев, Шульга, 2007, с. 24; Шульга, Варёнов, 2008). The additional analysis of sepulchral
rite and implements allowed singling out from the lump the tombs of Han epoch, in one of
which (М01mj) the wu-zhu coin was found. These burial places are really dated not earlier than the
second half of the II century BC and are synchronized with burials on the western sepulture near the
Jiaohe settlement. Tombs of Hun time in Jiaohe continue to keep latitudinal orientation, but they had
another structure, while the deceased were buried with a head to the western sector whereas in tombs
of Scythian time they were buried with heads to the east-north-east. Significant results were received
by the analysis of the Scythian time sepulchral rite. As to the structure, tombs in М16, М01 Jiaohe
Goubei tumuli are similar to burials in linings from Yanghai-2, 3, but they have features connected
with additional burying of horses and camels. There are four preliminary sorted out variants of such
sepultures. Two of them actually are versions of Pazyryk sepulchral rite that presupposed burying a
person with a horse on a step directed to the eastern sector. Tackles of many horses in Jiaohe included
corneous harness sets similar to those found in Altai, but special features of the sepulchral rite, the ceramics
and implements leave no doubts in the local character of the considered monument. It appears
that in Jiaohe Goubei burials of group of population are discovered, which was a part of a community
of tribes, occupying Dzungaria, East Kazakhstan, Mountain Altai and partially southwest part of
Mongolia in the V–III centuries BC. Evidence to that fact is a typically Pazyryk under the description
sepulture in a tumulus of the 22-nd sepulchre of Ke’ermuqi located in foothills of Altai in the north
of Dzungaria. It is necessary to add that in Alagou (М30) besides the known silver pendant harness
plates with images of predators, there were four cover plates on saddle pommels. All these details
were behind the northern wall of a blockhouse. This feature of the rite also has proximate analogies in
Pazyryk culture. However, it was already written about cultural affinity and ethnic uniformity of the
population of northwest Xinjiang and Pazyryk people of Mountain Altai at the initial stage of acquaintance to materials from East Turkestan (Полосьмак, 1998, с. 341–342).
6th – 3d centuries B.C.) found in the Republic of Altai, Altai foothills and the Upper Ob Area (the Altai
Territory and a part of the Novosibirsk Region, Russia). It deals with the issues of the burial sites’ cultural
belonging, their relative chronology, as well as the influence of other cultures from the eastern part of
the Scythian world, including Chinese territory.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of the Scythian-
Siberian world.
in China. It covers in great detail the materials published in Beijing in 2007 and 2010 describing a unique burial
site Yuhuangmiao with 400 excavated graves that yielded a great number of finds of the 7th – 6th centuries B.C.,
comparable in quantity and quality to the archaeological collections of entire regions. Relative chronology of the
graves, nomadic and Chinese objects found in the Yuhuangmiao cemetery reveal for the first time its evolution also
helps significantly in addressing the most important task of synchronizing the nomadic cultures in Eastern Eurasia
and the cultures of ancient China.
The work addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of the Scythian-Siberian world.
Mountain Altai, most of them belonging to the world-famous Pazyryk culture (the 6th-3d centuries
B.C.) studied traditionally according to burial monuments data. Settlements data provide
an opportunity to consider scarcely studied questions of nomads' economic and settlement
activity in Altai as well as to correct and add information to the understanding of ethnic
and cultural situation in the Mountain Altai in the Scythian time. A lot of unpublished settlement
materials from the Eneolithic Period (the Afanasevo culture) to the Middle Ages have
been introduced into scientific use. In the light of comprehensive studying of the burial and
settlement sites a view on the Pazyryk culture as a whole has been attempted.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of
the Scythian-Siberian world.
Summary
The book “Herders of Mountain Altai in Scythian Time (settlement materials)” deals with the
Early Iron Age settlements (the 8th-2nd centuries B.C.) in the Mountain Altai, most of them belonging
to the world-famous Pazyryk culture (the 6th-3d centuries B.C.) studied traditionally according
to burial monuments data. Settlements data provide an opportunity to consider scarcely studied
questions of nomads' economic and settlement activity in Altai as well as to correct and add information
to the understanding of ethnic and cultural situation in the Mountain Altai in the Scythian
time. A lot of unpublished settlement materials from the Eneolithic Period (the Afanasevo culture)
to the Middle Ages have been introduced into scientific use. In the light of comprehensive studying
of the burial and settlement sites a view on the Pazyryk culture as a whole has been attempted.
Chapter 1. Settlements' topography and characteristics. Homes
One of the major objectives of studying herders settlements in the Eurasian steppe belt is to develop
methods of their search. In many areas including Tuva, Mongolia, Minusinsk Basin, Kazakhstan,
Xinjiang and North China nomadic settlement are not known, or their belonging to the cultures
of nomads is questionable. On the ground of the analysis of climatic conditions and herders lifestyle
in the Altai Mountains in the 18th-20th centuries, the author has assumed that the system of their migrations
and the location of the main settlements – zimniks (winter locations) – have been the same
for the past five thousand years. Field studies conducted by the author fully confirmed the assumption:
most of the 92 settlements found were located not on the banks of water bodies (as in the
plains) but in winter pastures at mountain slopes, rocks outcomes and in the narrows, where herders
could protect their cattle and homes from wind and enemies in case of danger. For these reasons,
the settlements are usually multi-layered (the Eneolithic, Early Iron Age and Middle Ages). Modern
shepherds' zimniks are often found in these same places (Shulga, 1990a). Such method can be applied
in similar landscapes of Tuva, Mongolia, Minusinsk Basin, Kazakhstan, Xinjiang and North
China, which was proved by finding herders settlements in Tuva, near the burial mounds Arzhan-1
and Arzhan-2 (Shulga, 2011; Zhogova, 2014). Judging by the small area of the found settlements,
winter locations included from one to three homes of related families both in ancient times and in
the 18th-20th centuries. The number of homes in the zimniks was finally determined by the area and
the quality of available pastures necessary to maintain the herd in winter food shortage. The homes
were arranged in zimniks in a row, similar to the burial mounds location (Fig. 3, 4).
Chapter 2. Natural environment, climate and physical-geographical zoning of the Altai
Mountains
According to the available data, it is certain to conclude that, despite certain fluctuations, climatic
conditions in the 1st millennium B.C. in the territory of the Altai Mountains were approximately
the same as at present. In the Altai Mountains since antiquity there have been two climatic
zones – unsuitable for livestock unpopulated humid foothills and steppe cattle breeding area (Fig.
1a), in the latter's winter pastures near the settlements there is a vast majority of known Afanasevan
burials (Eneolithic), Pazyryk and Turkic burial mounds.
Summary 135
Chapter 3. Economy of the Mountain Altai population in ancient times
Ancient and modern herders practiced vertical migrations. In the summer the cattle grazed on
alpine meadows situated 10-30 km away from winter locations, and in the winter they went down to
the valley winter pastures with little snow and grass available to livestock. In the Early Iron Age the
same livestock as in the 18th-19th centuries was bred in the Altai Mountains: horses, sheep, goats
and cows. Yaks and camels were less used. The composition of the herd was also similar to the one
of the 19th century. (See Table. 1-5). In the areas with little snow there was a high proportion of
sheep, goats and cows who can not get grass under the snow. In the areas with relatively deep snow
horses dominated, as well as goats and sheep. Hunting for roedeer and fur animals was important.
In the Central Altai and in the Lower Katun River population also practiced agriculture.
Chapter 4. Settlement materials of the Early Iron Age in the Altai Mountains
Most findings in the settlements are ceramics and bones of wild animals. The tools were usually
made of bone and stone. Weapons and metal objects are found rarely (Fig. 106-111). It was proved
that in everyday life (in the settlements) residents of the Altai Mountains in the early Iron Age did
not use jars and jugs found in the graves (Fig. 102 – 1–15) but used cups, pots and bowls (Fig. 104).
Ornamentation on the vessels was almost the same both in the Early Scythian (the 8th–7th centuries
B.C.) and in the Middle Scythian time (the 5th-3d centuries B.C.) (Fig. 104). It means that in spite
of rapid change of cultures (Biykenskaya to Pazyryk) in the 6Th century B.C., the population was
mainly unchanged.
Chapter 5. Ethnocultural situation according to the settlement and burial sites data. Dating
of the Early Iron Age settlements.
According to the burial sites in the Altai Mountains, the Biykenskaya culture of the Early
Scythian time (the 8th-7th centuries B.C.) and the Pazyryk culture of the Middle Scythian time (the
5th-3d centuries B.C.) are distinguished. Funeral rites, weapons, horse and rider equipment are fundamentally
different in those cultures. The Biykenskaya culture people were buried at the soil surface
in stone boxes, in a crouched position with the head to the northwest (Fig. 5. – 1, 6. – 1, 7. – 1)
and the Pazyryks – in wooden log constructions set in deep pits, in a sleeping position with the head
to the east. Therefore, many researchers considered them as separate peoples; however, the uniformity
of the settlement pottery shows that in the 8th-3d centuries B.C. the population of the Altai
Mountains remained the same but changed its cultural identity.
Judging by the number of settlements with the Early Iron Age ceramics (133 settlements), it
was the epoch of the maximum inhabiting of the Mountain Altai, when previously unoccupied areas
became populated. The number of settlements in the Eneolithic (about 50 settlements with ceramics
of Afanasevan type) and in the Middle Ages (46 villages and settlements) was approximately the
same. Almost all of them contain the Early Iron Age pottery. It means that in the Scythian time all
the pastures that attracted herders both at earlier and later times were used. Moreover, in half a century
of the Pazyryk culture expansion (about 325–275 B.C.) the Mountain Altai herders went for
some time far beyond the Central Altai to the northwestern lowlands, the Chuya River steppe, the
Ukok, as well as the surrounding areas of East Kazakhstan, Xinjiang and Mongolia.
могильников скифского времени, оставленных многочисленными скотоводческими племенами
в VII—III вв. до н. э. Особый интерес представляет пограничная с Казахстаном территория Верхнего
Алея, являвшаяся своеобразным коридором для двигавшихся на север кочевников и вместе с тем
контактной зоной между культурами гор, лесостепи и степи. Поразительное смешение особенностей
различных культур здесь наблюдается уже в раннескифское время. В V—III вв. до н. э. в юго-западных
предгорьях Алтая также фиксируются разнообразные черты погребального обряда культур
Южного Приуралья и Казахстана, саргатской, каменской, быстрянской, пазырыкской и кулажур-
гинской, но относящихся к ним «чистых» памятников пока не найдено. При этом на многих могильниках
заметны и общие черты, в таком сочетании не встречающиеся в соседних культурах. Очевидно,
это результат процесса смешения обрядности и унификации инвентаря на почве мирных
контактов проживавших рядом разнокультурных групп населения.
Изучение подобных контактных зон имеет большое значение для понимания механизма формирования
и взаимодействия древних культур, но до недавнего времени скифское время на Верхнем
Алее и прилегающей территории было представлено лишь отдельными захоронениями. Исследование
могильника Локоть-4а позволило восстановить один из образов неясной мозаичной картины,
связать его через другие фрагменты и образы с каменской культурой Верхней Оби, пазырыкской
культурой Горного Алтая и Восточного Казахстана, а также с расположенным в тысяче километров
к югу, замечательным памятником сакской культуры - курганом Иссык. В небольших по размерам
курганах Локтя-4а были найдены соотносимые ранее только с элитными погребениями остатки
украшенных золотой фольгой костюмов «золотых людей» и головных уборов, орнаментированных
бусами подошв обуви, уникальные серьги с золотой зернью, «индийское» зеркало-погремушка
и многое другое. Не менее важными представляются такие особенности погребального обряда,
как наличие упорядоченной планировки могил и стандартизация их размеров.
Несмотря на специфичность погребальной обрядности и инвентаря, материалы могильника
Локоть-4а указывают не на механическое смешение различных культурных традиций, а на существование
в V-III вв. до н. э. на юге Алтая и, по-видимому, в соседнем Казахстане групп населения,
близких по происхождению пазырыкцам и каменцам, являвшихся передаточным звеном между
ними и саками.
За рамками исследования остался вопрос о системе хозяйствования населения юго-западных
предгорий и о предполагаемом существовании у каменцев «системы «кормления» - эксплуатации
и управления подчиненными территориями» (Матвеева Н.П., 1998, с. 362). В нашем случае «подчиненная
территория» - это лесостепной и степной Алтай (каменская культура), а «эксплуататоры» -
сакская знать с юга. Признать реальность существования системы «кормления» не представляется
возможным. Принятие «системы» требует кардинального пересмотра сложившихся представлений
о кочевом мире восточной части Евразийского пояса степей и его отношениях с оседлыми племенами
Юга и Севера; о системе перекочевок в степных и лесостепных ландшафтах; о значении
летников и зимников, в частности, при выборе мест захоронений и т.п. Основной недостаток данной
концепции в некритическом восприятии выводов А.Д. Таирова о невозможности зимовки «копытных
зверей» (в том числе лошади и овцы без заготовки для них кормов) в урало-казахстанских
степях и полупустынях» (Таиров А.Д., 1993, с. 9), а следовательно, вытекающей отсюда необходимости
скотоводческих коллективов, основу хозяйства которых составляло разведение лошадей,
овец и коров без заготовки кормов, иметь зимники в Приаралье, по Сырдарье и т.д. Формальный
подход к имеющимся критериям определения «невыпасного дня» и количества невыпасных дней,
а также прямой перенос данных XVIII-XIX вв. на хозяйственную жизнь в I тыс. до н.э., привел
авторов к отрицанию существования у скотоводов-полукочевников вышеуказанного типа хозяйствования
не только в урало-казахстанских степях, но и на Саяно-Алтае. Между тем фиксируемое
нами достаточно стабильное существование многочисленных скотоводческих культур VII—III вв. до
н. э. однозначно указывает на их способность столетиями преодолевать трудности, связанные с
зимним выпасом скота без заготовки кормов на зиму. Материалы каменской и пазырыкской культур,
а также могильника Локоть-4а демонстрируют многочисленные связи с южными территориями
как в материальной, так и в духовной жизни. Однако у нас нет никаких оснований предполагать
наличие системы эксплуатации местного населения со стороны саков и тем более допускать их
ежегодные перекочевки на Алтай. Население Горного Алтая уже с эпохи энеолита перешло к скотоводству
с круглогодичным выпасом скота без заготовки кормов (Шульга, 1998а). Данный тип
хозяйства сохраняется здесь до настоящего времени. В степной части равнинного Алтая переход
к кочеванию произошел позже. Однако уже в раннескифское время эта форма хозяйства становится
доминирующей и сохраняется до XVIII в. Перекочевки древних скотоводов Горного Алтая
между летними и зимними пастбищами обычно не превышали несколько десятков километров. На
равнинных участках они ограничивались ареалом распространения памятников той или иной культуры
с использованием для летников буферных зон типа пояса увлажненных предгорий, притаежных
участков и лесостепи (Шульга, 1994; и др.).
Рогозиха-1, исследованного в 1985 г. на левобережье Оби в Алтайском крае.
Раскопки многочисленных курганов VIII—III вв. до н.э. в Южной Сибири позволили на высоком
уровне решать вопросы хронологии и этнокультурной истории восточной части скифо-
сибирского мира, показали ее самобытность и значимость для скифской культуры в целом. Крупным
достижением сибирской археологии можно считать работу по синхронизации богатейших комплексов
Тувы (Аржан, Аржан-2 и др.) и Горного Алтая (Пазырык) с памятниками юга Восточной
Европы (Грязнов, 3980; 1983; и др.), вычленение «культурно-хронологических пластов» (Марсадолов,
2004). До этого западные и восточные культуры, как правило, рассматривались изолировано
друг от друга, тогда как этот подход в перспективе дает возможность соотнести с «общескифской
» хронологией и историей материалы конкретных этнокультурных образований скифоидного
облика в зоне степи и лесостепи Евразии. В раинескифское время переброшенный с востока на
запад мост имеет очень мало надежных опор на промежуточных территориях. Для последующего
времени (середина VI - первая половина V в. до н.э.) в Нижнем Поволжье и Южном Урале уже
выявляется значительная группа памятников, синхронных алтайским и тувинским. Однако до
недавнего времени на разделявшем Горный Алтай и Южный Урал отрезке в 1500 км не имелось
достаточно представительных памятников этого времени. Соответственно, большое значение приобретают
памятники каменской культуры Верхнего Приобья. Они являются промежуточным звеном
между культурами указанных восточных и западных территорий.
Уже на первом этапе подготовки монографии было установлено, что ранняя (северная) группа
курганов относится не к IV—III вв. до н. э., а примерно к концу VI-V вв. до н.э. (Уманский, Шульга,
1999, с. 60). В ходе последующего всестороннего анализа материалов Рогозихи-1, рассматриваемых
на фоне сбруйных комплексов Южной Сибири, Казахстана и Южного Урала VI-V вв. до н.э.,
с учетом сопутствующего инвентаря, особенностей звериного стиля и погребального обряда,
авторы пришли к выводу, что курганы северной группы сооружались во второй половине VI -
первой половине V в. до н.э. С опорой на рогозихинский коплекс в каменской культуре были
выделены захоронения раннего этапа, что позволило синхронизировать эту группу с раннепазы-
рыкскими и «савроматскими» (раннепрохоровскими), а также наметить основные особенности
формирования каменской культуры, происходившего путем постепенной трансформации погребальной
обрядности раннескифского времени.
В монографии впервые подробно описаны, проанализированы и датированы ранее почти не
известные на этой территории сбруйные наборы верховой лошади, существенно отличающиеся
от пазырыкских и имеющие свою линию развития.
Важные выводы были получены по казалось бы немногочисленным образцам звериного стиля,
также имеющего свои, отличные от пазырыкских, корни и формировавшегося на стыке пазырыкской,
сакской и южноуральской традиций. Вполне вероятно, территория каменской культуры была
одним из центров формирования еще не изученного, существовавшего в середине VI-IV вв. до
н.э. особого локального варианта скифо-сибирского звериного стиля.
Новую страницу в истории изучения связей с сакским миром и более южными территориями
открывают изготавливавшиеся, по-видимому, в Индии или Бактрии «восточные» зеркала, в том
числе самое яркое из них зеркало-гюгремушка с изображением религиозно-мифологической сцены.
Неожиданно интересные параллели с Бактрией, Передней Азией VI-V вв. до н.э. и раннескиф82
Заключение
скими памятниками кавказского региона находят оригинальные модели роговых ножен. Их исследование
позволило несколько продвинуться в понимании процесса сложения ножен ирано-алтайского
типа Горного Алтая, а также по-новому взглянуть на семантику и иконографию классических
образов свернувшегося или S-видного кошачьего хищника и терзаемого копытного.
Значимые наблюдения были сделаны на массовом материале из Рогозихи-1 по планировке могил
под курганными насыпями, их размерам и парным могилам, имеющим значение как для каменской,
так и для других культур скифского времени с многомогильными курганами.
Публикация материалов могильника Рогозиха-1 существенно дополняет имеющуюся источни-
ковую базу, позволяет по-иному взглянуть на происходившие здесь в VT-IV вв. до н.э. этнокультурные
процессы, и выводит каменскую культуру Верхнего Приобья на сопоставимый уровень
с культурами Саяно-Алтая, Южного Урала и сакского мира.
This book’s special feature is large number (18) of the published burial grounds stretching
along the Ursul, the Katun and the Chuya from Tuekta up to the border with Mongolia (fig. 1). As a
result one can see panorama of the basic territory where the Pasyryk culture was distributed. Among
55 barrows presented in the book (38 of them are published for the first time) there are no burial
places of permafrost type like Pasyryk, Bashadar, Tuekta and Ukok. However, as for the number and
importance of weaponry and horse equipment which simultaneously entered the scientific use this
research is one of the most informative. The materials are considered on the general background of
the Pasyryk culture. The special attention is given to chronology and period placement of the Pasyryk
culture monuments.
Chapter 1. Cultural Identity, Dating and Period Placement
The Pasyryk Culture. General characteristic. Defining cultural identity of the published
funeral complexes on the rivers Chuya and the Ursul, the authors proceed from the thesis of existence
of united Pasyryk archeological culture on the territory of the Mountain Altai and adjoining part
of East Kazakhstan, the culture that occupied convenient for half-nomadic cattle breeding steppe
territory of the Mountain Altai (in borders of the Altai Republic) and the Eastern Kazakhstan up to
the Tarbagataiskii Ridge and the Irtysh.
Among barrows of the Pasyryk culture there are two basic types of burials: authentically
Pasyryk (in wooden frame, frequently with a horse) and Karakobinskii (in a stone box, without horse
burial). It is believed that behind those types there were various ethnic groups of population that
lived alternately and quite peacefully coexisted on all the territory of the Mountain Altai. All of them
buried the dead with the head to the East, and placed the same stock into the burial. In most of the
published kurgans of the Chuya and the Ursul the burial places are accomplished according to the
“certificate” of the rights of kinship group (including conditional relatives) for the territory.
Chapter 6. Equipment of the Saddle Horse in the Pasyryk Culture
Harness of the Early Scythian time (VHth century B.C.). Due to remarkable safety of organic
remnants in permafrost Pasyryk kurgans, and to the finds of rich bronze harness sets with the oxidized
belts in the North-West Altai, equipment o f the saddle horse o f the Vllth-IIId centuries B.C. in Altai
is represented incomparably better than in other regions ofEurasia and is considered referential for
this territory.
It is stated that the main principles of harness arrangement from Ural to China in the Vlth-IIId
centuries B.C. were established in the Early Scythian time (Vllth century B.C.). Belt basis of Early
Scythian harness corresponded to the one found in permafrost kurgans of the Pasyryk culture
(fig. 77-80). The bridle consisted of 1) two crownpiece belts that began in the top apertures of cheek
pieces and were connected by vorvorka (fastener) or a knot at the left on the back of the horse’s neck
(fig. 7 9 .- 1 , 2, 4); 2) two throat lashes (long right and short left) connected by a special fastener
at the left (fig. 7 9 .-1 , 4); 3) noseband, the ends of which were inserted into the bottom apertures
f cheek pieces (fig. 79. - 4). The bits were attached to three-hole cheek pieces or were put on a special
extension (fig. 79). The belt of rein was fastened to the rings of the bit on the right, and chumbur (long
rein) was fastened on the left. There was no browband (fig. 79). Saddle belts included a chest-piece
with two withers belts, and also two belly-bands - wide top and narrow bottom (fig. 79. - 3a; 78).
According to the data there were saddles consisting of two pillows and under-tail belts. Belts were
connected by vorvorkas and fasteners and were decorated with a plenty of ringlets (fig. 79). On the
belly belts there were three details: on the left - a belly-band buckle (with the peg downwards) on the
wide top belt; a block on the narrow bottom belt (fig. 78. - 1); on the right these belts were connected
by a large metal plate - a fastener (fig. 79.2, 3a). The saddle accessories, except for flat ringlets of
under-tail belts was not found. Horses were saddled from the left.
In the kurgans of the Chuya and the Ursul the details of horse equipment were found in 18 of 57
burial places. Seven of them belong to Early Pasyryk stage, the rest - to the Late Pasyryk stage.
Equipment of the saddle horse of the Pre-bashadarskii period of the Early Pasyryk stage
(middle of the Vlth - middle of the Vth centuries B.C.). In the horse equipment of the Vlth century
B.C. from the Southern Ural and up to China the features of the Early Scythian harnesses continue to
be kept, and rather standard set of details (fig. 80) is formed. The bridle of the Pre-bashadarskii period
was equipped with bronze and horn details: two cheek pieces inserted in the bits (fig. 80. - 1,21,25);
four dividers of the crossing belts (fig. 80. - 7, 8; 23); two dividers (fig. 80. - 4, 22); semicircular,
oval (rarely circular) ringlets (fig. 80. - 9, 24, 24); chumbur (long rein) blocks (fig. 80. - 2). Nose
pendants and fasteners of throat latch are seldom found in Altai. Forehead metal plates are absent.
Only a modified belly-band buckle and a block have remained from the saddle accessories of the
Early Scythian time (fig. 80. - 10, 18, 19), but there are saddles with horn metal plates and overlays
similar to the found in the later barrows of Ala-Gail-3, Borotal-1 and Chendek-6a (fig. 30; 39; 81).
Equipment of the saddle horse of the Bashadarskii period (about second half of the Vth
century B.C.). About the middle of the Vth century B.C. the kept Early Scythian tradition in harness
accessories (fig. 80) disappears completely. The belt basis of the ceremonial funeral Pasyryk harness
starts to be closed completely by various nonfunctional wooden plates, slats and other products
(fig. 78. - 3), but in daily life an ordinary shepherd, hunter and even a noble soldier (fig. 78. - 1)
used a simple harness as in the Early Scythian time, which is shown by all known images of the
Scythian time (also fig. 72. - 7; 78. - 2).
The harness of the Bashadarskii period is presented in the five published kurgans of the Chuya
and the Ursul: Ala-Gail-3,11 (fig. 27; 30); Borotal-1, k. 7, 82, 99,100 (fig. 34; 36; 39; 40). Almost all
of them are accompanied by the dated stock. Doubtless «gem» of the published collection is the horn
sets from Ala-Gail-3 (k. 11) and Borotal-1 (k. 99).
The harness of the Late Pasyryk stage (IVth - Illd centuries B.C.). The horse equipment of this
stage is wonderfully presented in the kurgans of Pasyryk, Ukok, the Upper Chuya and Berel, it is truly
considered the standard for reconstruction of the harness of the Scythian time for the territories of Eurasia
(fig. 77; 78. - 3,4), but almost all ornaments were made for burial. Only belt basis and iron bits are genuine
(fig. 75. - 11-18). Even horn belly-band buckles and blocks are seldom found in the burials (fig. 76. - 11).
The exception is rare hom sets used in real life (fig. 81), and also kurgan 3 of Balyk-Sooka-1 where besides
plenty of gold foil, remnants of unique nagrivnik (mane case) with images of cocks and of cheprak (horsecloth
under the saddle) decorated with horse brasses were found (fig. 4-10).
Equip ment of the sad dle horse in the VIIIth–IIId cen tu ries B. C. New data on the sad dle
horse equip ment in the VIIIth-IIId cen tu ries B. C. have been gained re cently in Altai (Kubarev,
Shulga, 2007). As a re sult, in Altai, for the first time in the East ern Si be ria there ap peared an op -
por tu nity to com pare the Early Scythian and Pasyryk har nesses and re trace evo lu tion of sad -
dle horse equip ment from the VIIIth to the IIId cen tu ries B. C. The Early Scythian har ness from
foot hills of the North-West ern Altai as well as the Pasyryk one can be con sid ered stan dard for
in ter pret ing nu mer ous har ness sets be yond Altai. Those find ings al low to de fine func tions of
nearly all known frag ments and un der stand pe cu liar i ties of the evo lu tion of sad dle horse equip -
ment in Altai and ad ja cent ter ri to ries in the VIIth–VIth cen tu ries B. C., in par tic u lar in the Cen -
tral Asia and in Tuva. All over those ter ri to ries there ex isted com mon prin ci ples in ar rang ing
and dec o rat ing sad dle horse har ness, which in cluded a bri dle and a sad dle with ad join ing belts.
The most stan dard bri dle is the one with four al lo ca tors (usu ally small ones) placed at the
cross ing of a crownpiece belt, a noseband and a throatlash, a pen dant of the noseband, a clasp
of the throat lash, and a vorvorka (a fas ten ing) for fix ing crownpiece belts on the back of
horse’s head (Fig. 7–10; 15; 20; 27; 34–36; 43. — 5–8; 66 and oth ers). Browbands, plaques and
pen dants were not found.
The find ings from Gilyovo-10 al low to sup pose that sad dles ap peared al ready in the Early
Scythian pe riod. Ap par ently, such sad dles were spread among no mads in the VIIth cen tury B.C.
in the East ern Eur asia, in clud ing Kazakhstan and Tuva, where har ness equip ment was anal o -
gous to the one found in Altai. Sad dle equip ment wasn’t found in
Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan yet but there are rea sons to sup pose ap pear ing in Altai
arched horn pom mels (Fig. 63. — 1–4) and ring lets for fix ing un der-tail belts (Fig. 63. – 5-10).
Sad dle belts con sisted of a chest-piece with two with ers belts and two belly-bands (Fig. 8; 11;
20; 34; 36. – 1). The chest-piece in all known find ings was fas tened to the up per belly-belt and,
as a rule, con sisted only of one belt (Fig. 20; 66. — 1). A chest-piece con sist ing of two par al lel
belts with cor re spond ing set of al lo ca tors, fas ten ers, and ring lets was found only in Gilyovo-10
(Fig. 8; 11; 66. — 2). Full set of bronze de tails of stan dard sin gle-belt chest-piece in cluded two al -
lo ca tors, a left-side fas tener, a cen tral pen dant and ring lets (Fig. 16. — 1, 2; 36. — 1; and oth ers).
They are larger than those of the bri dle as they were used with thicker belts. Wither belts must
have been sim ply tied to gether. On the belly belts there were three de tails: on the left — a
belly-band buckle (with the pin down wards) on the wide up per belt; a block on the nar row
lower belt (Fig. 20; 74); on the right those belts were con nected by a large plaque-fas tener (Fig.
11. — 1a; 62. — 29–43). There have been found no sad dle equip ment ex cept for flat ring lets of
un der-tail belts (Fig. 63. — 5–10). As in the Pasyryk pe riod the Early Scythian sad dle was
equipped with two belly-bands – a wide up per one and a nar row lower one (Fig. 64. – 2,3; 20).
The buckle was fixed with a nar row belt or was fas tened pin down to the broad up per belly belt
(Fig. 20; 72. — 7, 7b, 9), a block with out pin was fixed dif fer ently at the end of nar row bot tom
belt (Fig. 20; 28. — 1; 72. — 7, 7a, 8). When tight en ing the girth, the nar row belt on the left end of
the up per belly belt (next to the buckle) went through a large ap er ture of the block fas tened at
the end of bot tom belly belt; the nar row belt was fas tened with the pin of the buckle (Fig. 20;
70. — 4) the same way as in the Pasyryk harness (Fig. 70. — 3, 5, 6).
Horses were sad dled from the left, so on the left there is a vorvorka (fas ten ing) of the
crownpiece belts, buck les of the throatlash and the chest-piece, as well as the belly-band
buckle and the block (Fig. 20; 34). On the same side there must have been a chumbur (long
rein) (Fig. 20). A whip was also placed on the left from the sad dle. Ac cord ing to the ma te ri als of
Gilyovo-10 multipart chest belts could have had ad di tional buck les on the left (Fig. 11; 12; 16).
In the foot hills of Altai all har ness de tails were made of bronze. Shin ing bronze of al lo ca -
tors, clasps, belly-band plaques (up to 7-8 cm in di am e ter), pen dants, cheek pieces, nu mer ous
ring lets (up to 128 in Mashenka-1) and other el e ments made har ness an ex pen sive and pres ti -
gious horse man’s at trib ute. Horn (bone) ac ces so ries were al most never used in Early Scythian
Summary 135
sad dle horse har ness. In the moun tains horn was used to make cheek pieces (Fig. 53. — 3, 5–7,
10–19) and bone ring lets of the men tioned type (Fig. 65. — 8, 9). Other parts (al lo ca tors, clasps
and oth ers) were made of horn more rarely, and, as a rule at the fi nal stage (Fig. 37. — 6, 7;
40. — 8, 9; 42. — 20–25; 44. — 2, 4–7; 47. — 10, 11).
Equip ment of the draught horse in the VIIIth - IIId cen tu ries B.C. In Early Scythian buri als
no char i ots have been found. A team of four draught horses was found in Pasyryk-5 (around
the turn of the IV–IIId cen tu ries B.C.) where a char iot sur vived (Fig. 68. – 3; Rudenko, 1953, pp.
60, 214, 232–235, 374; Rudenko, 1960, pp. 232–236). Re cently four horses have been found in
Altai in elite Early Scythian kur gan (Fig. 1; 38). In both cases no sad dles were found but there
were fas ten ers. Most horses from Arzhan-1,2, with out sad dles, with fas ten ings and pom mels
must have been draught ones.
Draught four-horse teams have been also found in Kazakhstan. For ex am ple, there are de -
tails of four bri dles and pom mel of a cart in the “hoard” from Bizhe (Fig. 68. – 4; Akishev, 1978,
pp. 57–58). Draught horse team was found also in Tasmola-5, where along with two pom mels
two mas sive tri ple-al lo ca tors (di vid ers for three di ver gent belts) and three bells have been
found (Fig. 68. — 6; See Kadyrbaev, 1966, fig. 15–19). The tri ple-al lo ca tors from Tasmola-5 could
be vari a tions of well-known in the North ern Cau ca sus cyl in der tri ple-al lo ca tors with three
holes in har ness sets of the VIIIth–VIIth cen tu ries B. C. In the men tioned teams vorvorkas and
bells are of ten found (See Petrenko, 2006, p. 69; Erlikh, 1994). Tri ple-al lo ca tors, anal o gous to
those from Tasmola-5, have been found in har ness sets in Kyryk-Oba-2 in the sur round ings of
the South ern Urals (Fig. 68. — 6; Gutsalov, 2007, fig. 13. — I–IV) and in Yukhuanmyao near
Beijing (Fig. 77. — III, 3.4) dated within the VIth cen tury B. C. Thus, tri ple-al lo ca tors of that kind
are not ac ci den tal but widely spread (from the Urals to Ordos) in an cient har ness de tails re pro -
duced for a pe riod of about 100–150 years. On the whole, in Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan the
fol low ing at trib utes of draught har nesses: 1) no sad dle belts in ac ces so ries sets; 2) bri dles are
ar ranged sim i larly in a num ber of cases; 3) fas ten ings (nar rowed in the mid dle and three-trove
ones) and ad di tional vorvorkas; 4) dif fer ent “pom mels”, bells and tri ple-al lo ca tors.
Каменская культура представляла собой одно из самых мощных в Южной Сибири
этнокультурных образований VI–III вв. до н. э., занимавшего территорию протяжён-
ностью около 500 км от Иртыша на юге до места нахождения г. Новосибирска на севе-
ре (рис. 1), и являлась важным передаточным звеном между культурами Саяно-Алтая,
Казахстана, Южного Урала и подтаёжной зоны. К настоящему времени в Барнаульском
и Новосибирском Приобье исследовано около 1500 подкурганных захоронений камен-
ской культуры. Наибольшее количество захоронений вскрыто на правобережье р. Обь
у с. Быстровка Искитимского района Новосибирской области (около 500, см. Троицкая,
Бородовский, 1994; Бородовский, Слюсаренко и др., 2002) и у с. Новотроицкое Таль-
менского района Алтайского края (около 310, см. Могильников, 1997; Уманский, 1997).
Крупные могильники (до 115 погребений в Камне-2) раскапывались на левобережье
Оби (см. сводку: Могильников, 1997, с. 15) и в верховьях Алея – левого притока Оби.
Захоронения каменской культуры рассматривались в двух обобщающих исследовани-
ях (Троицкая, Бородовский, 1994; Могильников, 1997), однако публикация полных ма-
териалов исследованных могильников началась сравнительно недавно (Шульга, 2003а;
Уманский, Шамшин, Шульга, 2005). Всё это не позволяет дать объективную характери-
стику каменской культуры, уточнить её границы, понять особенности формирования.
Существенным препятствием на пути верного понимания места каменской культуры
являлись завышенные даты имеющихся материалов, относимых в прежние годы, как
правило, к V–III, IV–II вв. до н. э. Вследствие этого, выявляемые этнокультурные про-
цессы в каменской культуре, во-первых, как бы отставали от соседних территорий, а
во-вторых, были оторваны от предшествующих раннескифских комплексов на несколь-
ко столетий. Каменская культура оказалась в определённом вакууме, в подвешенном
состоянии, оторванная от корней и синхронно существовавших (но казавшихся боле
ранними) достаточно хорошо исследованных этнокультурных образований Алтая, Ка-
захстана и Южного Урала.
Предлагаемая работа по Новотроицкому некрополю является третьей книгой в заду-
манном цикле публикаций материалов могильников каменской культуры. В первой моно-
графии рассматривался расположенный в южной части ареала могильник Локоть-4а, в по-
гребальном обряде и инвентаре которого наиболее ярко прослеживаются связи с саками
Казахстана и пазырыкской культурой Горного Алтая (Шульга, 2003а). Во второй моно-
графии опубликованы материалы могильника Рогозиха-1, где в частности, были обнару-
жены сбруйные наборы, позволяющие синхронизировать Рогозиху-1 с Филипповским
могильником на Южном Урале. В последующих работах планируется издать материалы
могильника Камень-2 (115 погребений), а также Михайловский-6, Гоньба-2, Кучук-1 и
Нижний Кучук-1.
horse or separate bridle sets together with human body but, paradoxically,
it is the Minusinsk Basin (Minusinskaya Kotlovina) where the
richest in the Southern Siberia collection of bronze cheek-pieces (around
60 items) and mouth-pieces (around 220 items) of the 9th-4th centuries
B.C. originates from. Besides there were found about 50 mysterious
barbed objects (Fig. 39, 40) which might be classified as severe bits and
also other details of harness equipment (Fig. 40). All of them are incidental
findings; nevertheless, they illustrate the harness equipment evolution
of the period.
In the 9th – 13th centuries B.C. cheek-pieces of specific forms were
spread, including those with tubular holes and large hemispherical caps
(Fig. 38. – 6–13). Both archaic mouth-pieces with triangular endings
(Fig. 29. – 1–3) and mouth-pieces with additional holes in the endings
(Fig. 42) were likely to be used at that time.
Late 7th – early 6th centuries B.C. witness important changes when
there appear cheek-pieces with two holes (Fig. 30–33) with eastern
mouth-pieces (Fig. 15, 16), similar to the ones from Transbaikalia and
Northern China but formed on the local basis. Soon, within the first half
– middle of the 6th century B.C. the eastern mouth-pieces started to be
replaced by the mouth-pieces with rings of middle diameter (Fig. 13, 14).
In the 6th century B.C. the harness in the Minusinsk Basin appears to
have corresponded mostly to the harness used in the eastern community
(eastern mouth-pieces, mouth-pieces with holes, absence of girth buckles,
presence of bronze rings). Simultaneously, numerous things were borrowed
from the Sakai world, Altai and Tuva, which is indicated by transitional
mouth-pieces of “Kazakhstan” variant (Fig. 15. – 6; 50), cheekpieces
ornamentation, cylinder and cross-like distributors, details for dividing
belts, bind reins block, nose pendant, side clasps, and bronze imitations
of boar fangs (Fig. 50). Almost all of the above characterizes the
Summary
80
harness of the 6th-5th centuries B.C. in Altai and Tuva. Mysterious
“skrebnitsas” (barbed objects) decorated with images of heads of longbilled
and eared eagles in “Altai” style are likely to have appeared in the
Minusinsk Basin already in the 6th century B.C. (Fig. 39; 40). According
to those findings the horse equipment of the 5th-4th centuries B.C. in the
Minusinsk Basin corresponded essentially to the Altai equipment
(Fig. 53, 54).
Analysis of the materials and new data on Scythian-like cultures of
the Northern China has led to overviewing some of commonly held positions.
Traditionally the horse equipment of the Minusinsk Basin was viewed
as a part of Kazakhstan, Altai, the Upper Ob and Tuva equipment, however
an eastern component demonstrating stable links with the cultures
of Mongolia and Northern China has been distinguished now. The Asian
part of the Eurasian Steppe Belt can be divided into two vast areas where
the horse equipment differed substantially. The western area (community)
included Caucasian cultures of Kazakhstan, Xinjiang, Altai, Tuva, as
well as the Minusinsk Basin and Western Mongolia. The eastern area
(community) included Mongoloid cultures of the Northern China, Central
and Eastern Mongolia and Transbaikalia. In the course of historical
development up to the 8th – 7th centuries B.C. in each of the areas there
was formed a particular complex of weapons, horse equipment, decorations,
work tools and zoomorphic ornament style. Located in the north
and relatively isolated, the Minusinsk Basin was originally connected for
geographical reasons with the western cultures (Afanasevo, Andronovo)
but since the Late Bronze the contacts with the eastern community were
strengthened, which was demonstrated most vividly in the horse equipment
of the 6th century B.C.
Papers
The Scythian-like cultures formation and transformation process in North China is as follows. The "Xiajiadian upper layer" culture is the earliest. There, in sites like Nanshangen (IX-VIII centuries BC) already established animal style images were recorded for the first time. On this basis, by the middle of the VII century BC with the participation of nomadic Mongoloid tribes the Yuhuangmiao culture is taking shape on the Yan Chinese kingdom northern border (fig. 1). This culture population was gradually "Chineseizing", but in the second half of the VI century BC part of it, which retained ties with the "northern nomads" migrated 250-300 km west to Ordos in the Lake Daihai area. It is possible that the Daihai lake inhabited by Yuhuangmiao culture representatives from the VII century BC. On this basis, in the VI-V centuries BC the Maoqinggou culture, which partially adopted the aliens from the Yanglangg and Shajing cultures formed there.
AS A PART OF THE SCYTHIAN WORLD*
Based on archaeological and written sources, the authors characterizes the two ethno cultural regions of the 9th — 3rd centuries BCE that developed in the east of the Scythian world — in Xinjiang and North China. In the 9th — 8th centuries BCE there, in local cultures of transitional appearance, burial complexes with “Scythian triad” individual elements in the Animal style in a horse bridle are recorded. It is obvious that both of these areas were the early Scythian cultures formation centers like the center in Tyva. At the same time, according to all sources, the Animal style was brought to the China territory from Mongolia. Due to natural factors, in these areas up to the 2nd century BCE Scythian cultures developed almost in isolation from each
other in contact with the adjacent Kazakhstan, Southern Siberia and Mongolia regions. In the second half of the 4th century BCE the northern part of Xinjiang (including the Tien Shan) get closed culturally with
Pazyryk culture of Altai, and then to the Sakas and Wusuns of Kazakhstan. At this time the North China cultures were in close contact with South Siberia population. At the same time, some Scythian-like features were preserved in them until 3rd — 2nd centuries BCE, even after the Han and Xiongnu empires formation at the end of the 3rd century BCE
под руководством П.И. Шульги в 1991–2002 гг. в долине р. Сентелек на территории Чарышского р-на Алтайского края (Россия). В книгу также включены материалы могильников Машенка-1 и Щучий Лог-1, расположенных по р. Чарыш. Большинство исследованных захоронений относится к эпохе бронзы и скифскому
времени. Среди них особое место занимает погребально-поминальный комплекс у «царского» кургана 1
пазырыкской культуры – первый памятник такого рода на Алтае, исследованный одним раскопом.
Монография предназначена для археологов и специалистов, занимающихся вопросами истории восточной части скифского мира.
Th e proposed monograph provides materials from the Sentelek archaeological expedition led by P.I. Shulga
in 1991–2002 in the Sentelek River Valley in the Charyshsky District of the Altai Territory (Russia). Th e monograph
also includes materials from burial grounds Mashenka-1 and Shchuchiy Log-1 located along the Charysh River. Most
of studied burials date back to the Bronze Age and the Scythian times. Among them, a special place is occupied by
the funeral and memorial complex at “tsarist” mound 1 of the Pazyryk culture, which is the fi rst monument of this
kind in Altai investigated in one excavation.
Southern Siberian and Kazakhstan cultures at an early stage, which suggests a much wider distribution of such transitional sites.
The monograph is intended for archaeologists and scientists engaged in studying the history of the Eastern Scythian world as well as the features of transition from the late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age.
Battle wounds of the early nomads in the Volga-Ural zone
Warrior’s image in the Saka art of Kazakhstan
War on the pectoral from Tolstaya Mohila
Foreign commanders in the Bosporan Kingdom
Ad gloriam German Parzinger
Конь и всадник на востоке скифского мира
Боевой травматизм ранних кочевников Волго-Уралья
Образ воина в сакском искусстве Казахстана
Война на пекторали из Толстой Могилы
Иностранные командиры в Боспорском царстве
Ad gloriam Германа Парцингера
In the monograph the largest necropolis in the Altai region by the number of examined burial grounds, Scythian-like necropolis of VII-VI cent. BC. Gilyovo-10 (Group №5) materials are published. The necropolis became widely known due to the relatively well-preserved riding horses harness and military belts with leather base and bronze details detection, which allowed tracing their structure reliably.
Of particular interest is the funeral rites variety, indicating the cohabitation of diverse population groups, which came from the Kazakh steppes in the second half of VII century BC. Some graves orientation and horses location features are similar to the later formed Pazyryk culture of the second half of VI-III cent. BC., that can be explained by their genetic relation.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts dealing with the Scythian- Siberian world eastern part history problems and riding horse and warrior outfit as well.
and periodization» for the first time in the Russian-speaking scientific literature a large-size
block of materials from more than 30 sepulchres of the VIII–III centuries BC in Xinjiang in expanded
form is published, sepulchral rite, chronology and periodization questions are considered. The basic
attention is paid to the most well investigated sepulchres of Chawuhugou, Yanghai and Jiaohe Goubei
with the representative material comparable to sepulchral complexes from Sayan-Altai.
The territory of Xinjiang (East Turkestan) directly borders on Kazakhstan, Altai Republic, Mongolia
and through Gansu corridor on Northern China, that is why it has been drawing the attention
of Russian and foreign researchers for a long time. One considers Xinjiang as a source of large migrations,
other – as a place of mixture of various cultures of the West, the North and the East. During the
large-scale archaeological researches which begun in the 80-ies of the last century the considerable
material was obtained, but excavations were basically spent in foothills of Tien Shan, while Dzungaria,
located to the north, still remains a white spot. Nevertheless, it is already possible to make some significant
conclusions relying on this material, particularly to reconsider or add some occurring propositions
in Chinese and Russian archaeological literature.
Recent years many researchers in Xinjiang suggest to count the beginning of the Early Iron Age
not from the VI century BC (as they supposed it before), but from the XIII–XII centuries BC. The
present position is substantially based on radiocarbon dates from the sepulchre of Yanbulake (till 1200
BC), and also Chawuhugou (to the X and even the XIII centuries BC). Indeed, iron tools were found
in these sepulchres, but, under the available data, in Chawuhugou they come from burials of the VI–V
centuries BC and only one iron knife was found in Chawuhugou-4 in a tomb of the VII century BC.
In the published materials of «bronze epoch» of Yanbulake sepulchre there are products authentically
dated by analogies from Sayan-Altai and Xinjiang of the VII–VI and the V–IV centuries BC. Iron
subjects obviously come from latter tombs and are unreasonably included in early group of burials.
Practically all the earliest sepulchral complexes from the investigated sepulchres (Chawuhugou,
Habuqihan, Baileqier, Qunbake, Kezier, Yanghai, etc.) do not exceed the limits of the VIII–VII centuries
BC. The reason for improper making the specified monuments 200–500 years older is orientation
of the Chinese researchers to radiocarbon dates, lack of development of implements’ chronology and
the extremely weak knowledge of archeology of Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan. It is significant that in
generalizing works on Jiaohe Goubei (Городище Цзяохэ, 1998), Chawuhugou (Чауху, 1999) and on
the Early Iron Age in Xinjiang (Хань Цзянье, 2007) burial places are dated only on С14, on features of
sepulchral rite and on ceramics. Thus accepted in China historical periodization is traditionally used;
according to this periodization materials of the Early Iron Age are divided into the periods of Chunqiu
(770–476 BC), Zhanguo (475–221 BC) and Han (the II century BC – the II century AD). In search of
analogies to implements researchers also address to materials from Northern China.
Such approach is ineffective so long as complexes of the VIII–III centuries BC in Xinjiang gravitate
to Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan. Strange as it may seem at the first sight, but no representative
sepulchral complex of the VIII–V centuries BC similar to those known in Northern China and Gansu
was revealed there so far. Considering the large quantity of monuments investigated on Tien Shan,
it is possible to ascertain that there were no considerable migrations from the east to Tien Shan. Peculiar
sepulchral rite and ceramics unequivocally specify the existence in the most well investigated
areas of cities Hami, Turfan and Hejing of archaeological cultures generated in the VIII century BC
and existing without fundamental changes approximately to the middle of the V century BC. Most
brightly and convincingly this unusual to steppe zone stability is traced on sepulchres of cultures of
Chawuhu (Chawuhugou-1, 2, 4, 5, Habuqihan, etc.) and Subeixi (Yanghai-1, 2, 3). Some continuity
is traced in the V–III centuries BC too, but it would be premature to speak about their existence up
to the turn of the eras as it is believed in Xinjiang. The reason for cultures’ stability is the absence of
considerable population migrations on the territory and stability of generated economic types. Presumably,
by the VII century BC in foothills of Tien Shan culturally close groups of population start
124 Шульга П.И. Синьцзян в VIII–III вв. до н.э. Погребальные комплексы. Хронология и периодизация
to divide into «tillers» and «nomads». Approximately in the middle of the VI century BC the settled
population of Xinjiang endures the obvious crisis synchronizing with the occurred at that time sharp
change of cultures of steppe zone from Black Sea Coast to Tuva. So, on the thoroughly investigated
sepulchre of Chawuhugou-4 it has been built only five tumuli out of 248 sepultures after the middle
of the VI century BC. The similar situation is fixed on sepulchres of Chawuhugou-1 and Habuqihan,
each of them numbering nearly 700 burial places of the VIII–V centuries BC. In the middle of the VI
century BC Chawuhu culture population was sharply reduced, huge sepultures have almost stopped
being completed, and to the end of the V century BC the culture ceases to exist. Let us emphasize
that changes of forms and types of armament subjects, decorations, harness and waist accessories occurred
in Chawuhu in the same chronological sequence as in Sayan-Altai. Among the monuments of
the V–III centuries BC the particular interest represents the sepulchre of Jiaohe Goubei located nearby
to Turfan. It has been dated by Chinese researchers within the limits of Han epoch (the II century
BC – the II century AD), but material from the main sepultures turned out to be earlier – the of V–III
centuries BC (Кубарев, Шульга, 2007, с. 24; Шульга, Варёнов, 2008). The additional analysis of sepulchral
rite and implements allowed singling out from the lump the tombs of Han epoch, in one of
which (М01mj) the wu-zhu coin was found. These burial places are really dated not earlier than the
second half of the II century BC and are synchronized with burials on the western sepulture near the
Jiaohe settlement. Tombs of Hun time in Jiaohe continue to keep latitudinal orientation, but they had
another structure, while the deceased were buried with a head to the western sector whereas in tombs
of Scythian time they were buried with heads to the east-north-east. Significant results were received
by the analysis of the Scythian time sepulchral rite. As to the structure, tombs in М16, М01 Jiaohe
Goubei tumuli are similar to burials in linings from Yanghai-2, 3, but they have features connected
with additional burying of horses and camels. There are four preliminary sorted out variants of such
sepultures. Two of them actually are versions of Pazyryk sepulchral rite that presupposed burying a
person with a horse on a step directed to the eastern sector. Tackles of many horses in Jiaohe included
corneous harness sets similar to those found in Altai, but special features of the sepulchral rite, the ceramics
and implements leave no doubts in the local character of the considered monument. It appears
that in Jiaohe Goubei burials of group of population are discovered, which was a part of a community
of tribes, occupying Dzungaria, East Kazakhstan, Mountain Altai and partially southwest part of
Mongolia in the V–III centuries BC. Evidence to that fact is a typically Pazyryk under the description
sepulture in a tumulus of the 22-nd sepulchre of Ke’ermuqi located in foothills of Altai in the north
of Dzungaria. It is necessary to add that in Alagou (М30) besides the known silver pendant harness
plates with images of predators, there were four cover plates on saddle pommels. All these details
were behind the northern wall of a blockhouse. This feature of the rite also has proximate analogies in
Pazyryk culture. However, it was already written about cultural affinity and ethnic uniformity of the
population of northwest Xinjiang and Pazyryk people of Mountain Altai at the initial stage of acquaintance to materials from East Turkestan (Полосьмак, 1998, с. 341–342).
6th – 3d centuries B.C.) found in the Republic of Altai, Altai foothills and the Upper Ob Area (the Altai
Territory and a part of the Novosibirsk Region, Russia). It deals with the issues of the burial sites’ cultural
belonging, their relative chronology, as well as the influence of other cultures from the eastern part of
the Scythian world, including Chinese territory.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of the Scythian-
Siberian world.
in China. It covers in great detail the materials published in Beijing in 2007 and 2010 describing a unique burial
site Yuhuangmiao with 400 excavated graves that yielded a great number of finds of the 7th – 6th centuries B.C.,
comparable in quantity and quality to the archaeological collections of entire regions. Relative chronology of the
graves, nomadic and Chinese objects found in the Yuhuangmiao cemetery reveal for the first time its evolution also
helps significantly in addressing the most important task of synchronizing the nomadic cultures in Eastern Eurasia
and the cultures of ancient China.
The work addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of the Scythian-Siberian world.
Mountain Altai, most of them belonging to the world-famous Pazyryk culture (the 6th-3d centuries
B.C.) studied traditionally according to burial monuments data. Settlements data provide
an opportunity to consider scarcely studied questions of nomads' economic and settlement
activity in Altai as well as to correct and add information to the understanding of ethnic
and cultural situation in the Mountain Altai in the Scythian time. A lot of unpublished settlement
materials from the Eneolithic Period (the Afanasevo culture) to the Middle Ages have
been introduced into scientific use. In the light of comprehensive studying of the burial and
settlement sites a view on the Pazyryk culture as a whole has been attempted.
The work is addressed to archaeologists and experts in the history of the eastern part of
the Scythian-Siberian world.
Summary
The book “Herders of Mountain Altai in Scythian Time (settlement materials)” deals with the
Early Iron Age settlements (the 8th-2nd centuries B.C.) in the Mountain Altai, most of them belonging
to the world-famous Pazyryk culture (the 6th-3d centuries B.C.) studied traditionally according
to burial monuments data. Settlements data provide an opportunity to consider scarcely studied
questions of nomads' economic and settlement activity in Altai as well as to correct and add information
to the understanding of ethnic and cultural situation in the Mountain Altai in the Scythian
time. A lot of unpublished settlement materials from the Eneolithic Period (the Afanasevo culture)
to the Middle Ages have been introduced into scientific use. In the light of comprehensive studying
of the burial and settlement sites a view on the Pazyryk culture as a whole has been attempted.
Chapter 1. Settlements' topography and characteristics. Homes
One of the major objectives of studying herders settlements in the Eurasian steppe belt is to develop
methods of their search. In many areas including Tuva, Mongolia, Minusinsk Basin, Kazakhstan,
Xinjiang and North China nomadic settlement are not known, or their belonging to the cultures
of nomads is questionable. On the ground of the analysis of climatic conditions and herders lifestyle
in the Altai Mountains in the 18th-20th centuries, the author has assumed that the system of their migrations
and the location of the main settlements – zimniks (winter locations) – have been the same
for the past five thousand years. Field studies conducted by the author fully confirmed the assumption:
most of the 92 settlements found were located not on the banks of water bodies (as in the
plains) but in winter pastures at mountain slopes, rocks outcomes and in the narrows, where herders
could protect their cattle and homes from wind and enemies in case of danger. For these reasons,
the settlements are usually multi-layered (the Eneolithic, Early Iron Age and Middle Ages). Modern
shepherds' zimniks are often found in these same places (Shulga, 1990a). Such method can be applied
in similar landscapes of Tuva, Mongolia, Minusinsk Basin, Kazakhstan, Xinjiang and North
China, which was proved by finding herders settlements in Tuva, near the burial mounds Arzhan-1
and Arzhan-2 (Shulga, 2011; Zhogova, 2014). Judging by the small area of the found settlements,
winter locations included from one to three homes of related families both in ancient times and in
the 18th-20th centuries. The number of homes in the zimniks was finally determined by the area and
the quality of available pastures necessary to maintain the herd in winter food shortage. The homes
were arranged in zimniks in a row, similar to the burial mounds location (Fig. 3, 4).
Chapter 2. Natural environment, climate and physical-geographical zoning of the Altai
Mountains
According to the available data, it is certain to conclude that, despite certain fluctuations, climatic
conditions in the 1st millennium B.C. in the territory of the Altai Mountains were approximately
the same as at present. In the Altai Mountains since antiquity there have been two climatic
zones – unsuitable for livestock unpopulated humid foothills and steppe cattle breeding area (Fig.
1a), in the latter's winter pastures near the settlements there is a vast majority of known Afanasevan
burials (Eneolithic), Pazyryk and Turkic burial mounds.
Summary 135
Chapter 3. Economy of the Mountain Altai population in ancient times
Ancient and modern herders practiced vertical migrations. In the summer the cattle grazed on
alpine meadows situated 10-30 km away from winter locations, and in the winter they went down to
the valley winter pastures with little snow and grass available to livestock. In the Early Iron Age the
same livestock as in the 18th-19th centuries was bred in the Altai Mountains: horses, sheep, goats
and cows. Yaks and camels were less used. The composition of the herd was also similar to the one
of the 19th century. (See Table. 1-5). In the areas with little snow there was a high proportion of
sheep, goats and cows who can not get grass under the snow. In the areas with relatively deep snow
horses dominated, as well as goats and sheep. Hunting for roedeer and fur animals was important.
In the Central Altai and in the Lower Katun River population also practiced agriculture.
Chapter 4. Settlement materials of the Early Iron Age in the Altai Mountains
Most findings in the settlements are ceramics and bones of wild animals. The tools were usually
made of bone and stone. Weapons and metal objects are found rarely (Fig. 106-111). It was proved
that in everyday life (in the settlements) residents of the Altai Mountains in the early Iron Age did
not use jars and jugs found in the graves (Fig. 102 – 1–15) but used cups, pots and bowls (Fig. 104).
Ornamentation on the vessels was almost the same both in the Early Scythian (the 8th–7th centuries
B.C.) and in the Middle Scythian time (the 5th-3d centuries B.C.) (Fig. 104). It means that in spite
of rapid change of cultures (Biykenskaya to Pazyryk) in the 6Th century B.C., the population was
mainly unchanged.
Chapter 5. Ethnocultural situation according to the settlement and burial sites data. Dating
of the Early Iron Age settlements.
According to the burial sites in the Altai Mountains, the Biykenskaya culture of the Early
Scythian time (the 8th-7th centuries B.C.) and the Pazyryk culture of the Middle Scythian time (the
5th-3d centuries B.C.) are distinguished. Funeral rites, weapons, horse and rider equipment are fundamentally
different in those cultures. The Biykenskaya culture people were buried at the soil surface
in stone boxes, in a crouched position with the head to the northwest (Fig. 5. – 1, 6. – 1, 7. – 1)
and the Pazyryks – in wooden log constructions set in deep pits, in a sleeping position with the head
to the east. Therefore, many researchers considered them as separate peoples; however, the uniformity
of the settlement pottery shows that in the 8th-3d centuries B.C. the population of the Altai
Mountains remained the same but changed its cultural identity.
Judging by the number of settlements with the Early Iron Age ceramics (133 settlements), it
was the epoch of the maximum inhabiting of the Mountain Altai, when previously unoccupied areas
became populated. The number of settlements in the Eneolithic (about 50 settlements with ceramics
of Afanasevan type) and in the Middle Ages (46 villages and settlements) was approximately the
same. Almost all of them contain the Early Iron Age pottery. It means that in the Scythian time all
the pastures that attracted herders both at earlier and later times were used. Moreover, in half a century
of the Pazyryk culture expansion (about 325–275 B.C.) the Mountain Altai herders went for
some time far beyond the Central Altai to the northwestern lowlands, the Chuya River steppe, the
Ukok, as well as the surrounding areas of East Kazakhstan, Xinjiang and Mongolia.
могильников скифского времени, оставленных многочисленными скотоводческими племенами
в VII—III вв. до н. э. Особый интерес представляет пограничная с Казахстаном территория Верхнего
Алея, являвшаяся своеобразным коридором для двигавшихся на север кочевников и вместе с тем
контактной зоной между культурами гор, лесостепи и степи. Поразительное смешение особенностей
различных культур здесь наблюдается уже в раннескифское время. В V—III вв. до н. э. в юго-западных
предгорьях Алтая также фиксируются разнообразные черты погребального обряда культур
Южного Приуралья и Казахстана, саргатской, каменской, быстрянской, пазырыкской и кулажур-
гинской, но относящихся к ним «чистых» памятников пока не найдено. При этом на многих могильниках
заметны и общие черты, в таком сочетании не встречающиеся в соседних культурах. Очевидно,
это результат процесса смешения обрядности и унификации инвентаря на почве мирных
контактов проживавших рядом разнокультурных групп населения.
Изучение подобных контактных зон имеет большое значение для понимания механизма формирования
и взаимодействия древних культур, но до недавнего времени скифское время на Верхнем
Алее и прилегающей территории было представлено лишь отдельными захоронениями. Исследование
могильника Локоть-4а позволило восстановить один из образов неясной мозаичной картины,
связать его через другие фрагменты и образы с каменской культурой Верхней Оби, пазырыкской
культурой Горного Алтая и Восточного Казахстана, а также с расположенным в тысяче километров
к югу, замечательным памятником сакской культуры - курганом Иссык. В небольших по размерам
курганах Локтя-4а были найдены соотносимые ранее только с элитными погребениями остатки
украшенных золотой фольгой костюмов «золотых людей» и головных уборов, орнаментированных
бусами подошв обуви, уникальные серьги с золотой зернью, «индийское» зеркало-погремушка
и многое другое. Не менее важными представляются такие особенности погребального обряда,
как наличие упорядоченной планировки могил и стандартизация их размеров.
Несмотря на специфичность погребальной обрядности и инвентаря, материалы могильника
Локоть-4а указывают не на механическое смешение различных культурных традиций, а на существование
в V-III вв. до н. э. на юге Алтая и, по-видимому, в соседнем Казахстане групп населения,
близких по происхождению пазырыкцам и каменцам, являвшихся передаточным звеном между
ними и саками.
За рамками исследования остался вопрос о системе хозяйствования населения юго-западных
предгорий и о предполагаемом существовании у каменцев «системы «кормления» - эксплуатации
и управления подчиненными территориями» (Матвеева Н.П., 1998, с. 362). В нашем случае «подчиненная
территория» - это лесостепной и степной Алтай (каменская культура), а «эксплуататоры» -
сакская знать с юга. Признать реальность существования системы «кормления» не представляется
возможным. Принятие «системы» требует кардинального пересмотра сложившихся представлений
о кочевом мире восточной части Евразийского пояса степей и его отношениях с оседлыми племенами
Юга и Севера; о системе перекочевок в степных и лесостепных ландшафтах; о значении
летников и зимников, в частности, при выборе мест захоронений и т.п. Основной недостаток данной
концепции в некритическом восприятии выводов А.Д. Таирова о невозможности зимовки «копытных
зверей» (в том числе лошади и овцы без заготовки для них кормов) в урало-казахстанских
степях и полупустынях» (Таиров А.Д., 1993, с. 9), а следовательно, вытекающей отсюда необходимости
скотоводческих коллективов, основу хозяйства которых составляло разведение лошадей,
овец и коров без заготовки кормов, иметь зимники в Приаралье, по Сырдарье и т.д. Формальный
подход к имеющимся критериям определения «невыпасного дня» и количества невыпасных дней,
а также прямой перенос данных XVIII-XIX вв. на хозяйственную жизнь в I тыс. до н.э., привел
авторов к отрицанию существования у скотоводов-полукочевников вышеуказанного типа хозяйствования
не только в урало-казахстанских степях, но и на Саяно-Алтае. Между тем фиксируемое
нами достаточно стабильное существование многочисленных скотоводческих культур VII—III вв. до
н. э. однозначно указывает на их способность столетиями преодолевать трудности, связанные с
зимним выпасом скота без заготовки кормов на зиму. Материалы каменской и пазырыкской культур,
а также могильника Локоть-4а демонстрируют многочисленные связи с южными территориями
как в материальной, так и в духовной жизни. Однако у нас нет никаких оснований предполагать
наличие системы эксплуатации местного населения со стороны саков и тем более допускать их
ежегодные перекочевки на Алтай. Население Горного Алтая уже с эпохи энеолита перешло к скотоводству
с круглогодичным выпасом скота без заготовки кормов (Шульга, 1998а). Данный тип
хозяйства сохраняется здесь до настоящего времени. В степной части равнинного Алтая переход
к кочеванию произошел позже. Однако уже в раннескифское время эта форма хозяйства становится
доминирующей и сохраняется до XVIII в. Перекочевки древних скотоводов Горного Алтая
между летними и зимними пастбищами обычно не превышали несколько десятков километров. На
равнинных участках они ограничивались ареалом распространения памятников той или иной культуры
с использованием для летников буферных зон типа пояса увлажненных предгорий, притаежных
участков и лесостепи (Шульга, 1994; и др.).
Рогозиха-1, исследованного в 1985 г. на левобережье Оби в Алтайском крае.
Раскопки многочисленных курганов VIII—III вв. до н.э. в Южной Сибири позволили на высоком
уровне решать вопросы хронологии и этнокультурной истории восточной части скифо-
сибирского мира, показали ее самобытность и значимость для скифской культуры в целом. Крупным
достижением сибирской археологии можно считать работу по синхронизации богатейших комплексов
Тувы (Аржан, Аржан-2 и др.) и Горного Алтая (Пазырык) с памятниками юга Восточной
Европы (Грязнов, 3980; 1983; и др.), вычленение «культурно-хронологических пластов» (Марсадолов,
2004). До этого западные и восточные культуры, как правило, рассматривались изолировано
друг от друга, тогда как этот подход в перспективе дает возможность соотнести с «общескифской
» хронологией и историей материалы конкретных этнокультурных образований скифоидного
облика в зоне степи и лесостепи Евразии. В раинескифское время переброшенный с востока на
запад мост имеет очень мало надежных опор на промежуточных территориях. Для последующего
времени (середина VI - первая половина V в. до н.э.) в Нижнем Поволжье и Южном Урале уже
выявляется значительная группа памятников, синхронных алтайским и тувинским. Однако до
недавнего времени на разделявшем Горный Алтай и Южный Урал отрезке в 1500 км не имелось
достаточно представительных памятников этого времени. Соответственно, большое значение приобретают
памятники каменской культуры Верхнего Приобья. Они являются промежуточным звеном
между культурами указанных восточных и западных территорий.
Уже на первом этапе подготовки монографии было установлено, что ранняя (северная) группа
курганов относится не к IV—III вв. до н. э., а примерно к концу VI-V вв. до н.э. (Уманский, Шульга,
1999, с. 60). В ходе последующего всестороннего анализа материалов Рогозихи-1, рассматриваемых
на фоне сбруйных комплексов Южной Сибири, Казахстана и Южного Урала VI-V вв. до н.э.,
с учетом сопутствующего инвентаря, особенностей звериного стиля и погребального обряда,
авторы пришли к выводу, что курганы северной группы сооружались во второй половине VI -
первой половине V в. до н.э. С опорой на рогозихинский коплекс в каменской культуре были
выделены захоронения раннего этапа, что позволило синхронизировать эту группу с раннепазы-
рыкскими и «савроматскими» (раннепрохоровскими), а также наметить основные особенности
формирования каменской культуры, происходившего путем постепенной трансформации погребальной
обрядности раннескифского времени.
В монографии впервые подробно описаны, проанализированы и датированы ранее почти не
известные на этой территории сбруйные наборы верховой лошади, существенно отличающиеся
от пазырыкских и имеющие свою линию развития.
Важные выводы были получены по казалось бы немногочисленным образцам звериного стиля,
также имеющего свои, отличные от пазырыкских, корни и формировавшегося на стыке пазырыкской,
сакской и южноуральской традиций. Вполне вероятно, территория каменской культуры была
одним из центров формирования еще не изученного, существовавшего в середине VI-IV вв. до
н.э. особого локального варианта скифо-сибирского звериного стиля.
Новую страницу в истории изучения связей с сакским миром и более южными территориями
открывают изготавливавшиеся, по-видимому, в Индии или Бактрии «восточные» зеркала, в том
числе самое яркое из них зеркало-гюгремушка с изображением религиозно-мифологической сцены.
Неожиданно интересные параллели с Бактрией, Передней Азией VI-V вв. до н.э. и раннескиф82
Заключение
скими памятниками кавказского региона находят оригинальные модели роговых ножен. Их исследование
позволило несколько продвинуться в понимании процесса сложения ножен ирано-алтайского
типа Горного Алтая, а также по-новому взглянуть на семантику и иконографию классических
образов свернувшегося или S-видного кошачьего хищника и терзаемого копытного.
Значимые наблюдения были сделаны на массовом материале из Рогозихи-1 по планировке могил
под курганными насыпями, их размерам и парным могилам, имеющим значение как для каменской,
так и для других культур скифского времени с многомогильными курганами.
Публикация материалов могильника Рогозиха-1 существенно дополняет имеющуюся источни-
ковую базу, позволяет по-иному взглянуть на происходившие здесь в VT-IV вв. до н.э. этнокультурные
процессы, и выводит каменскую культуру Верхнего Приобья на сопоставимый уровень
с культурами Саяно-Алтая, Южного Урала и сакского мира.
This book’s special feature is large number (18) of the published burial grounds stretching
along the Ursul, the Katun and the Chuya from Tuekta up to the border with Mongolia (fig. 1). As a
result one can see panorama of the basic territory where the Pasyryk culture was distributed. Among
55 barrows presented in the book (38 of them are published for the first time) there are no burial
places of permafrost type like Pasyryk, Bashadar, Tuekta and Ukok. However, as for the number and
importance of weaponry and horse equipment which simultaneously entered the scientific use this
research is one of the most informative. The materials are considered on the general background of
the Pasyryk culture. The special attention is given to chronology and period placement of the Pasyryk
culture monuments.
Chapter 1. Cultural Identity, Dating and Period Placement
The Pasyryk Culture. General characteristic. Defining cultural identity of the published
funeral complexes on the rivers Chuya and the Ursul, the authors proceed from the thesis of existence
of united Pasyryk archeological culture on the territory of the Mountain Altai and adjoining part
of East Kazakhstan, the culture that occupied convenient for half-nomadic cattle breeding steppe
territory of the Mountain Altai (in borders of the Altai Republic) and the Eastern Kazakhstan up to
the Tarbagataiskii Ridge and the Irtysh.
Among barrows of the Pasyryk culture there are two basic types of burials: authentically
Pasyryk (in wooden frame, frequently with a horse) and Karakobinskii (in a stone box, without horse
burial). It is believed that behind those types there were various ethnic groups of population that
lived alternately and quite peacefully coexisted on all the territory of the Mountain Altai. All of them
buried the dead with the head to the East, and placed the same stock into the burial. In most of the
published kurgans of the Chuya and the Ursul the burial places are accomplished according to the
“certificate” of the rights of kinship group (including conditional relatives) for the territory.
Chapter 6. Equipment of the Saddle Horse in the Pasyryk Culture
Harness of the Early Scythian time (VHth century B.C.). Due to remarkable safety of organic
remnants in permafrost Pasyryk kurgans, and to the finds of rich bronze harness sets with the oxidized
belts in the North-West Altai, equipment o f the saddle horse o f the Vllth-IIId centuries B.C. in Altai
is represented incomparably better than in other regions ofEurasia and is considered referential for
this territory.
It is stated that the main principles of harness arrangement from Ural to China in the Vlth-IIId
centuries B.C. were established in the Early Scythian time (Vllth century B.C.). Belt basis of Early
Scythian harness corresponded to the one found in permafrost kurgans of the Pasyryk culture
(fig. 77-80). The bridle consisted of 1) two crownpiece belts that began in the top apertures of cheek
pieces and were connected by vorvorka (fastener) or a knot at the left on the back of the horse’s neck
(fig. 7 9 .- 1 , 2, 4); 2) two throat lashes (long right and short left) connected by a special fastener
at the left (fig. 7 9 .-1 , 4); 3) noseband, the ends of which were inserted into the bottom apertures
f cheek pieces (fig. 79. - 4). The bits were attached to three-hole cheek pieces or were put on a special
extension (fig. 79). The belt of rein was fastened to the rings of the bit on the right, and chumbur (long
rein) was fastened on the left. There was no browband (fig. 79). Saddle belts included a chest-piece
with two withers belts, and also two belly-bands - wide top and narrow bottom (fig. 79. - 3a; 78).
According to the data there were saddles consisting of two pillows and under-tail belts. Belts were
connected by vorvorkas and fasteners and were decorated with a plenty of ringlets (fig. 79). On the
belly belts there were three details: on the left - a belly-band buckle (with the peg downwards) on the
wide top belt; a block on the narrow bottom belt (fig. 78. - 1); on the right these belts were connected
by a large metal plate - a fastener (fig. 79.2, 3a). The saddle accessories, except for flat ringlets of
under-tail belts was not found. Horses were saddled from the left.
In the kurgans of the Chuya and the Ursul the details of horse equipment were found in 18 of 57
burial places. Seven of them belong to Early Pasyryk stage, the rest - to the Late Pasyryk stage.
Equipment of the saddle horse of the Pre-bashadarskii period of the Early Pasyryk stage
(middle of the Vlth - middle of the Vth centuries B.C.). In the horse equipment of the Vlth century
B.C. from the Southern Ural and up to China the features of the Early Scythian harnesses continue to
be kept, and rather standard set of details (fig. 80) is formed. The bridle of the Pre-bashadarskii period
was equipped with bronze and horn details: two cheek pieces inserted in the bits (fig. 80. - 1,21,25);
four dividers of the crossing belts (fig. 80. - 7, 8; 23); two dividers (fig. 80. - 4, 22); semicircular,
oval (rarely circular) ringlets (fig. 80. - 9, 24, 24); chumbur (long rein) blocks (fig. 80. - 2). Nose
pendants and fasteners of throat latch are seldom found in Altai. Forehead metal plates are absent.
Only a modified belly-band buckle and a block have remained from the saddle accessories of the
Early Scythian time (fig. 80. - 10, 18, 19), but there are saddles with horn metal plates and overlays
similar to the found in the later barrows of Ala-Gail-3, Borotal-1 and Chendek-6a (fig. 30; 39; 81).
Equipment of the saddle horse of the Bashadarskii period (about second half of the Vth
century B.C.). About the middle of the Vth century B.C. the kept Early Scythian tradition in harness
accessories (fig. 80) disappears completely. The belt basis of the ceremonial funeral Pasyryk harness
starts to be closed completely by various nonfunctional wooden plates, slats and other products
(fig. 78. - 3), but in daily life an ordinary shepherd, hunter and even a noble soldier (fig. 78. - 1)
used a simple harness as in the Early Scythian time, which is shown by all known images of the
Scythian time (also fig. 72. - 7; 78. - 2).
The harness of the Bashadarskii period is presented in the five published kurgans of the Chuya
and the Ursul: Ala-Gail-3,11 (fig. 27; 30); Borotal-1, k. 7, 82, 99,100 (fig. 34; 36; 39; 40). Almost all
of them are accompanied by the dated stock. Doubtless «gem» of the published collection is the horn
sets from Ala-Gail-3 (k. 11) and Borotal-1 (k. 99).
The harness of the Late Pasyryk stage (IVth - Illd centuries B.C.). The horse equipment of this
stage is wonderfully presented in the kurgans of Pasyryk, Ukok, the Upper Chuya and Berel, it is truly
considered the standard for reconstruction of the harness of the Scythian time for the territories of Eurasia
(fig. 77; 78. - 3,4), but almost all ornaments were made for burial. Only belt basis and iron bits are genuine
(fig. 75. - 11-18). Even horn belly-band buckles and blocks are seldom found in the burials (fig. 76. - 11).
The exception is rare hom sets used in real life (fig. 81), and also kurgan 3 of Balyk-Sooka-1 where besides
plenty of gold foil, remnants of unique nagrivnik (mane case) with images of cocks and of cheprak (horsecloth
under the saddle) decorated with horse brasses were found (fig. 4-10).
Equip ment of the sad dle horse in the VIIIth–IIId cen tu ries B. C. New data on the sad dle
horse equip ment in the VIIIth-IIId cen tu ries B. C. have been gained re cently in Altai (Kubarev,
Shulga, 2007). As a re sult, in Altai, for the first time in the East ern Si be ria there ap peared an op -
por tu nity to com pare the Early Scythian and Pasyryk har nesses and re trace evo lu tion of sad -
dle horse equip ment from the VIIIth to the IIId cen tu ries B. C. The Early Scythian har ness from
foot hills of the North-West ern Altai as well as the Pasyryk one can be con sid ered stan dard for
in ter pret ing nu mer ous har ness sets be yond Altai. Those find ings al low to de fine func tions of
nearly all known frag ments and un der stand pe cu liar i ties of the evo lu tion of sad dle horse equip -
ment in Altai and ad ja cent ter ri to ries in the VIIth–VIth cen tu ries B. C., in par tic u lar in the Cen -
tral Asia and in Tuva. All over those ter ri to ries there ex isted com mon prin ci ples in ar rang ing
and dec o rat ing sad dle horse har ness, which in cluded a bri dle and a sad dle with ad join ing belts.
The most stan dard bri dle is the one with four al lo ca tors (usu ally small ones) placed at the
cross ing of a crownpiece belt, a noseband and a throatlash, a pen dant of the noseband, a clasp
of the throat lash, and a vorvorka (a fas ten ing) for fix ing crownpiece belts on the back of
horse’s head (Fig. 7–10; 15; 20; 27; 34–36; 43. — 5–8; 66 and oth ers). Browbands, plaques and
pen dants were not found.
The find ings from Gilyovo-10 al low to sup pose that sad dles ap peared al ready in the Early
Scythian pe riod. Ap par ently, such sad dles were spread among no mads in the VIIth cen tury B.C.
in the East ern Eur asia, in clud ing Kazakhstan and Tuva, where har ness equip ment was anal o -
gous to the one found in Altai. Sad dle equip ment wasn’t found in
Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan yet but there are rea sons to sup pose ap pear ing in Altai
arched horn pom mels (Fig. 63. — 1–4) and ring lets for fix ing un der-tail belts (Fig. 63. – 5-10).
Sad dle belts con sisted of a chest-piece with two with ers belts and two belly-bands (Fig. 8; 11;
20; 34; 36. – 1). The chest-piece in all known find ings was fas tened to the up per belly-belt and,
as a rule, con sisted only of one belt (Fig. 20; 66. — 1). A chest-piece con sist ing of two par al lel
belts with cor re spond ing set of al lo ca tors, fas ten ers, and ring lets was found only in Gilyovo-10
(Fig. 8; 11; 66. — 2). Full set of bronze de tails of stan dard sin gle-belt chest-piece in cluded two al -
lo ca tors, a left-side fas tener, a cen tral pen dant and ring lets (Fig. 16. — 1, 2; 36. — 1; and oth ers).
They are larger than those of the bri dle as they were used with thicker belts. Wither belts must
have been sim ply tied to gether. On the belly belts there were three de tails: on the left — a
belly-band buckle (with the pin down wards) on the wide up per belt; a block on the nar row
lower belt (Fig. 20; 74); on the right those belts were con nected by a large plaque-fas tener (Fig.
11. — 1a; 62. — 29–43). There have been found no sad dle equip ment ex cept for flat ring lets of
un der-tail belts (Fig. 63. — 5–10). As in the Pasyryk pe riod the Early Scythian sad dle was
equipped with two belly-bands – a wide up per one and a nar row lower one (Fig. 64. – 2,3; 20).
The buckle was fixed with a nar row belt or was fas tened pin down to the broad up per belly belt
(Fig. 20; 72. — 7, 7b, 9), a block with out pin was fixed dif fer ently at the end of nar row bot tom
belt (Fig. 20; 28. — 1; 72. — 7, 7a, 8). When tight en ing the girth, the nar row belt on the left end of
the up per belly belt (next to the buckle) went through a large ap er ture of the block fas tened at
the end of bot tom belly belt; the nar row belt was fas tened with the pin of the buckle (Fig. 20;
70. — 4) the same way as in the Pasyryk harness (Fig. 70. — 3, 5, 6).
Horses were sad dled from the left, so on the left there is a vorvorka (fas ten ing) of the
crownpiece belts, buck les of the throatlash and the chest-piece, as well as the belly-band
buckle and the block (Fig. 20; 34). On the same side there must have been a chumbur (long
rein) (Fig. 20). A whip was also placed on the left from the sad dle. Ac cord ing to the ma te ri als of
Gilyovo-10 multipart chest belts could have had ad di tional buck les on the left (Fig. 11; 12; 16).
In the foot hills of Altai all har ness de tails were made of bronze. Shin ing bronze of al lo ca -
tors, clasps, belly-band plaques (up to 7-8 cm in di am e ter), pen dants, cheek pieces, nu mer ous
ring lets (up to 128 in Mashenka-1) and other el e ments made har ness an ex pen sive and pres ti -
gious horse man’s at trib ute. Horn (bone) ac ces so ries were al most never used in Early Scythian
Summary 135
sad dle horse har ness. In the moun tains horn was used to make cheek pieces (Fig. 53. — 3, 5–7,
10–19) and bone ring lets of the men tioned type (Fig. 65. — 8, 9). Other parts (al lo ca tors, clasps
and oth ers) were made of horn more rarely, and, as a rule at the fi nal stage (Fig. 37. — 6, 7;
40. — 8, 9; 42. — 20–25; 44. — 2, 4–7; 47. — 10, 11).
Equip ment of the draught horse in the VIIIth - IIId cen tu ries B.C. In Early Scythian buri als
no char i ots have been found. A team of four draught horses was found in Pasyryk-5 (around
the turn of the IV–IIId cen tu ries B.C.) where a char iot sur vived (Fig. 68. – 3; Rudenko, 1953, pp.
60, 214, 232–235, 374; Rudenko, 1960, pp. 232–236). Re cently four horses have been found in
Altai in elite Early Scythian kur gan (Fig. 1; 38). In both cases no sad dles were found but there
were fas ten ers. Most horses from Arzhan-1,2, with out sad dles, with fas ten ings and pom mels
must have been draught ones.
Draught four-horse teams have been also found in Kazakhstan. For ex am ple, there are de -
tails of four bri dles and pom mel of a cart in the “hoard” from Bizhe (Fig. 68. – 4; Akishev, 1978,
pp. 57–58). Draught horse team was found also in Tasmola-5, where along with two pom mels
two mas sive tri ple-al lo ca tors (di vid ers for three di ver gent belts) and three bells have been
found (Fig. 68. — 6; See Kadyrbaev, 1966, fig. 15–19). The tri ple-al lo ca tors from Tasmola-5 could
be vari a tions of well-known in the North ern Cau ca sus cyl in der tri ple-al lo ca tors with three
holes in har ness sets of the VIIIth–VIIth cen tu ries B. C. In the men tioned teams vorvorkas and
bells are of ten found (See Petrenko, 2006, p. 69; Erlikh, 1994). Tri ple-al lo ca tors, anal o gous to
those from Tasmola-5, have been found in har ness sets in Kyryk-Oba-2 in the sur round ings of
the South ern Urals (Fig. 68. — 6; Gutsalov, 2007, fig. 13. — I–IV) and in Yukhuanmyao near
Beijing (Fig. 77. — III, 3.4) dated within the VIth cen tury B. C. Thus, tri ple-al lo ca tors of that kind
are not ac ci den tal but widely spread (from the Urals to Ordos) in an cient har ness de tails re pro -
duced for a pe riod of about 100–150 years. On the whole, in Sayan-Altai and Kazakhstan the
fol low ing at trib utes of draught har nesses: 1) no sad dle belts in ac ces so ries sets; 2) bri dles are
ar ranged sim i larly in a num ber of cases; 3) fas ten ings (nar rowed in the mid dle and three-trove
ones) and ad di tional vorvorkas; 4) dif fer ent “pom mels”, bells and tri ple-al lo ca tors.
Каменская культура представляла собой одно из самых мощных в Южной Сибири
этнокультурных образований VI–III вв. до н. э., занимавшего территорию протяжён-
ностью около 500 км от Иртыша на юге до места нахождения г. Новосибирска на севе-
ре (рис. 1), и являлась важным передаточным звеном между культурами Саяно-Алтая,
Казахстана, Южного Урала и подтаёжной зоны. К настоящему времени в Барнаульском
и Новосибирском Приобье исследовано около 1500 подкурганных захоронений камен-
ской культуры. Наибольшее количество захоронений вскрыто на правобережье р. Обь
у с. Быстровка Искитимского района Новосибирской области (около 500, см. Троицкая,
Бородовский, 1994; Бородовский, Слюсаренко и др., 2002) и у с. Новотроицкое Таль-
менского района Алтайского края (около 310, см. Могильников, 1997; Уманский, 1997).
Крупные могильники (до 115 погребений в Камне-2) раскапывались на левобережье
Оби (см. сводку: Могильников, 1997, с. 15) и в верховьях Алея – левого притока Оби.
Захоронения каменской культуры рассматривались в двух обобщающих исследовани-
ях (Троицкая, Бородовский, 1994; Могильников, 1997), однако публикация полных ма-
териалов исследованных могильников началась сравнительно недавно (Шульга, 2003а;
Уманский, Шамшин, Шульга, 2005). Всё это не позволяет дать объективную характери-
стику каменской культуры, уточнить её границы, понять особенности формирования.
Существенным препятствием на пути верного понимания места каменской культуры
являлись завышенные даты имеющихся материалов, относимых в прежние годы, как
правило, к V–III, IV–II вв. до н. э. Вследствие этого, выявляемые этнокультурные про-
цессы в каменской культуре, во-первых, как бы отставали от соседних территорий, а
во-вторых, были оторваны от предшествующих раннескифских комплексов на несколь-
ко столетий. Каменская культура оказалась в определённом вакууме, в подвешенном
состоянии, оторванная от корней и синхронно существовавших (но казавшихся боле
ранними) достаточно хорошо исследованных этнокультурных образований Алтая, Ка-
захстана и Южного Урала.
Предлагаемая работа по Новотроицкому некрополю является третьей книгой в заду-
манном цикле публикаций материалов могильников каменской культуры. В первой моно-
графии рассматривался расположенный в южной части ареала могильник Локоть-4а, в по-
гребальном обряде и инвентаре которого наиболее ярко прослеживаются связи с саками
Казахстана и пазырыкской культурой Горного Алтая (Шульга, 2003а). Во второй моно-
графии опубликованы материалы могильника Рогозиха-1, где в частности, были обнару-
жены сбруйные наборы, позволяющие синхронизировать Рогозиху-1 с Филипповским
могильником на Южном Урале. В последующих работах планируется издать материалы
могильника Камень-2 (115 погребений), а также Михайловский-6, Гоньба-2, Кучук-1 и
Нижний Кучук-1.
horse or separate bridle sets together with human body but, paradoxically,
it is the Minusinsk Basin (Minusinskaya Kotlovina) where the
richest in the Southern Siberia collection of bronze cheek-pieces (around
60 items) and mouth-pieces (around 220 items) of the 9th-4th centuries
B.C. originates from. Besides there were found about 50 mysterious
barbed objects (Fig. 39, 40) which might be classified as severe bits and
also other details of harness equipment (Fig. 40). All of them are incidental
findings; nevertheless, they illustrate the harness equipment evolution
of the period.
In the 9th – 13th centuries B.C. cheek-pieces of specific forms were
spread, including those with tubular holes and large hemispherical caps
(Fig. 38. – 6–13). Both archaic mouth-pieces with triangular endings
(Fig. 29. – 1–3) and mouth-pieces with additional holes in the endings
(Fig. 42) were likely to be used at that time.
Late 7th – early 6th centuries B.C. witness important changes when
there appear cheek-pieces with two holes (Fig. 30–33) with eastern
mouth-pieces (Fig. 15, 16), similar to the ones from Transbaikalia and
Northern China but formed on the local basis. Soon, within the first half
– middle of the 6th century B.C. the eastern mouth-pieces started to be
replaced by the mouth-pieces with rings of middle diameter (Fig. 13, 14).
In the 6th century B.C. the harness in the Minusinsk Basin appears to
have corresponded mostly to the harness used in the eastern community
(eastern mouth-pieces, mouth-pieces with holes, absence of girth buckles,
presence of bronze rings). Simultaneously, numerous things were borrowed
from the Sakai world, Altai and Tuva, which is indicated by transitional
mouth-pieces of “Kazakhstan” variant (Fig. 15. – 6; 50), cheekpieces
ornamentation, cylinder and cross-like distributors, details for dividing
belts, bind reins block, nose pendant, side clasps, and bronze imitations
of boar fangs (Fig. 50). Almost all of the above characterizes the
Summary
80
harness of the 6th-5th centuries B.C. in Altai and Tuva. Mysterious
“skrebnitsas” (barbed objects) decorated with images of heads of longbilled
and eared eagles in “Altai” style are likely to have appeared in the
Minusinsk Basin already in the 6th century B.C. (Fig. 39; 40). According
to those findings the horse equipment of the 5th-4th centuries B.C. in the
Minusinsk Basin corresponded essentially to the Altai equipment
(Fig. 53, 54).
Analysis of the materials and new data on Scythian-like cultures of
the Northern China has led to overviewing some of commonly held positions.
Traditionally the horse equipment of the Minusinsk Basin was viewed
as a part of Kazakhstan, Altai, the Upper Ob and Tuva equipment, however
an eastern component demonstrating stable links with the cultures
of Mongolia and Northern China has been distinguished now. The Asian
part of the Eurasian Steppe Belt can be divided into two vast areas where
the horse equipment differed substantially. The western area (community)
included Caucasian cultures of Kazakhstan, Xinjiang, Altai, Tuva, as
well as the Minusinsk Basin and Western Mongolia. The eastern area
(community) included Mongoloid cultures of the Northern China, Central
and Eastern Mongolia and Transbaikalia. In the course of historical
development up to the 8th – 7th centuries B.C. in each of the areas there
was formed a particular complex of weapons, horse equipment, decorations,
work tools and zoomorphic ornament style. Located in the north
and relatively isolated, the Minusinsk Basin was originally connected for
geographical reasons with the western cultures (Afanasevo, Andronovo)
but since the Late Bronze the contacts with the eastern community were
strengthened, which was demonstrated most vividly in the horse equipment
of the 6th century B.C.
The Scythian-like cultures formation and transformation process in North China is as follows. The "Xiajiadian upper layer" culture is the earliest. There, in sites like Nanshangen (IX-VIII centuries BC) already established animal style images were recorded for the first time. On this basis, by the middle of the VII century BC with the participation of nomadic Mongoloid tribes the Yuhuangmiao culture is taking shape on the Yan Chinese kingdom northern border (fig. 1). This culture population was gradually "Chineseizing", but in the second half of the VI century BC part of it, which retained ties with the "northern nomads" migrated 250-300 km west to Ordos in the Lake Daihai area. It is possible that the Daihai lake inhabited by Yuhuangmiao culture representatives from the VII century BC. On this basis, in the VI-V centuries BC the Maoqinggou culture, which partially adopted the aliens from the Yanglangg and Shajing cultures formed there.
AS A PART OF THE SCYTHIAN WORLD*
Based on archaeological and written sources, the authors characterizes the two ethno cultural regions of the 9th — 3rd centuries BCE that developed in the east of the Scythian world — in Xinjiang and North China. In the 9th — 8th centuries BCE there, in local cultures of transitional appearance, burial complexes with “Scythian triad” individual elements in the Animal style in a horse bridle are recorded. It is obvious that both of these areas were the early Scythian cultures formation centers like the center in Tyva. At the same time, according to all sources, the Animal style was brought to the China territory from Mongolia. Due to natural factors, in these areas up to the 2nd century BCE Scythian cultures developed almost in isolation from each
other in contact with the adjacent Kazakhstan, Southern Siberia and Mongolia regions. In the second half of the 4th century BCE the northern part of Xinjiang (including the Tien Shan) get closed culturally with
Pazyryk culture of Altai, and then to the Sakas and Wusuns of Kazakhstan. At this time the North China cultures were in close contact with South Siberia population. At the same time, some Scythian-like features were preserved in them until 3rd — 2nd centuries BCE, even after the Han and Xiongnu empires formation at the end of the 3rd century BCE
Composite bronze rattle-mirrors are the most exotic and difficult to manufacture mirrors of the Scythian time. It is believed that they were produced in the V–IV centuries BC e. on the North-West India and Bactria territory which, in particular, is indicated by the «maidens’
in Indian dancers costume, the elephant, peacocks, antelopes and lotuses. Until recently, only five rattle-mirrors were known in the nomads graves of the 5th-4th centuries BC e. in the Altai and the Southern Urals. Each mirror discovery is a significant event since it brings some new
answers about their purpose and place of production. In this regard, the rattle-mirror from the Middle Urals occupies a special place since it has many specific features, it`s found in the taiga zone and also has an unusual graffiti, which also indicates the similarity of the rattlemirrors functions and cult bronze disks from the Kazym treasure.
Analyzing the rattle-mirrors features and copying them cult discs the authors suggest that the rattle-mirrors received by nomads in the South Urals in the 5th-4th centuries BC e. could be made in Iran. After Persia fall and cultural environment changes instead of mirrors in the III–II centuries BC e. they began to produce similar disks of religious use, apparently, supplied to the Southern Urals nomads and than to northern taiga hunters in exchange for furs.
Based on archaeological and written sources, the authors characterizes the two ethno cultural regions of
the 9th — 3rd centuries BCE that developed in the east of the Scythian world — in Xinjiang and North China.
In the 9th — 8th centuries BCE there, in local cultures of transitional appearance, burial complexes with
“Scythian triad” individual elements in the Animal style in a horse bridle are recorded. It is obvious that both
of these areas were the early Scythian cultures formation centers like the center in Tyva. At the same time,
according to all sources, the Animal style was brought to the China territory from Mongolia. Due to natural
factors, in these areas up to the 2nd century BCE Scythian cultures developed almost in isolation from each
other in contact with the adjacent Kazakhstan, Southern Siberia and Mongolia regions. In the second half of
the 4th century BCE the northern part of Xinjiang (including the Tien Shan) get closed culturally with
Pazyryk culture of Altai, and then to the Sakas and Wusuns of Kazakhstan. At this time the North China
cultures were in close contact with South Siberia population. At the same time, some Scythian-like features
were preserved in them until 3rd — 2nd centuries BCE, even after the Han and Xiongnu empires formation at
the end of the 3rd century BCE.
Based on archaeological and written sources, the author characterizes the two ethno cultural regions of the IX–III centuries BC that developed in the east of the Scythian world – in Xinjiang and North China. In the IX–VIII centuries BC there, in local cultures of transitional appearance, burial complexes with "Scythian triad" individual elements in the Animal style in a horse bridle are recorded. It is obvious that both of these areas were the early Scythian cultures formation centers like the center in Tyva. At the same time, according to all sources, the Animal style was brought to the China territory from Mongolia. Due to natural factors, in these areas up to the II century BC Scythian cultures developed almost in isolation from each other in contact with the adjacent Kazakhstan, Southern Siberia and Mongolia regions. In the second half of the IV century BC the northern part of Xinjiang (including the Tien Shan) get closed culturally with Pazyryk culture of Altai, and then to the Sakas and Wusuns of Kazakhstan. At this time the North China cultures were in close contact with South Siberia population. At the same time, some Scythian-like features were preserved in them until III–II centuries BC, even after the Han and Xiongnu empires formation at the end of the III century BC. Perhaps in Xinjiang and North China, as well as in Tuva (Arzhan-1) in the IX-VIII cent. BC arose some centers with some elements of early Scythian culture. Perhaps this was due to the influence of Mongolia, around which they were located. The above-mentioned cultures on the territory of China were an integral part of the Scythian world.
Горный Алтай (Республика Алтай и Восточный Казахстан) и его западные предгорья являются единственным регионом в Евразии, где подхоронения лошадей со сбруей совершались почти без перерывов с VIII в. до н. э. до XIX в. н. э. Благодаря обилию бронзовой сбруйной фурнитуры в предгорных погребениях майэмирской культуры (VII — начало VI в.
до н. э.) и мерзлоте в курганах пазырыкской культуры (вторая половина VI — начало III в. до н. э.), к настоящему времени удалось максимально полно изучить снаряжение верховой лошади VII—III вв. до н. э., а также проследить эволюцию ременной основы и деталей, что позволяет считать верховую сбрую с Алтая эталонной для скифского мира.
Вместе с тем, на его восточной окраине в рамках «восточной» историко-культурной общности (ВИКО), снаряжение
верховой лошади и его эволюция имели существенные отличия. Отчасти это связано с сохранением традиции использования колесниц на протяжении всего I тыс. до н. э. Маркером наличия колесниц на востоке являются находимые
в погребениях детали упряжной сбруи и колесниц,
в уезде Хэцзин (Южное Притяньшанье). В 2011–2012 гг. на могильнике исследовано 236 погребений культуры Чауху, в том числе самые ранние из известных в этой культуре, датируемых китайскими и российскими
исследователями в рамках X–VIII вв. до н. э. В настоящее время ранняя группа захоронений в Мохучахань является единственным представительным комплексом IX в до н. э. в восточной части скифского мира, существенно дополняющим материалы Аржана-1. В ходе сравнительного анализа отмечено сходство погребального
обряда ранних погребений в Мохучахань с захоронениями в кольцах из могильника Курту-2. Можно полагать,
что схема погребального обряда бийкенской культуры могла сформироваться в Притяньшанье. Особое значение имеет и обнаружение в Курту-2 и в Мохучахань псалиев аржанского типа. Это хронологический маркер
и показатель вовлеченности Притяньшанья в культурную общность преимущественно европеоидного населения Казахстана и Южной Сибири, существовавшую не только в VIII–VII вв. до н. э., но и в IX в. до н. э. –
во время становления скифской культуры.
Ethno-Cultural Situation in the East of the Scythian World in the 3rd Century BC
The article briefly analyses the ethno-cultural situation in the east of the Scythian world in the 3rd century
BC. The investigation is focused on the Scythian-like cultures of the 6th—3rd centuries BC inhabiting the territories from
the Upper Ob region and Kazakhstan to Transbaikal and Manchuria, including the cultures of Northern Xinjiang (China) and
Northern China itself that are barely known in Russia. We considered the problem of propriety of dating some relatively late
Scythian-like burials of Tuva and Mongolia in the 2nd—1st centuries BC. It is concluded that these burials should be dated by
the period no later than the 3rd century BC. Many artifacts described as the “chronological indicators of Xiongnu” cannot be
regarded as dating materials because they had been common for eastern historical and cultural community of the territories
from Northern China to Transbaikal before the Xiongnu culture existence. Paleoclimatic and archaeological materials and
written sources describe the 3rd century BC as a period of crisis of Scythian-like nomadic cultures and a time of flourishing
for the cultures that involved in complex economy of forest steppe. The reasons for the decline of nomads cultures differ.
In Northern China the decline of nomads and Scythian-like culture was directly related to the expansion of the agricultural
kingdoms of China that ended with their consolidation in the year 221 BC and the displacement of nomads to the northern
semi-deserts, where in the 2nd century BC the archaeological culture of Xiongnu appeared.
на могильнике Юйхуанмяо под г. Пекином. Среди предметов вооружения и воинского снаряжения выделяются
чуждые культурам Северного Китая, но имеющие явные аналогии в памятниках VII–VI вв. до н. э. на территории
Монголии, Тувы и Забайкалья. «Северные» наконечники стрел, кинжалы с разнонаправленными головками хищных птиц на перекрестиях, специфические ножи, а также поясные обоймы и пряжки-застёжки, имеющие аналогии
в Туве и Забайкалье, встречались в Юйхуанмяо только на первых трёх этапах функционирования могильника.
Преимущественно они находились в захоронениях высшей знати (М18, М250) и в воинских погребениях высокого ранга. Представители воинской элиты всё это время (вторая половина VII – первая треть VI в. до н. э.) продолжали поддерживать связи с северными племенами и традиционно использовали «северные» наконечники стрел
и другие изделия. В результате на могильнике Юйхуанмяо аккумулировался комплекс датированного оружия и деталей воинского снаряжения, в течение 50–70 лет привносимого кочевниками с территории Монголии,
а возможно, и более удалённых районов.
The article deals with bronze weapons of nomads (presumably from Mongolia) that were found
at the Yuhuangmiao burial ground near Beijing. In the 1980–1990s, 400 tombs were excavated
there, containing 18 thousand bronze objects including 86 daggers, 137 knives, 305 bronze and 481
bone arrowheads, 4 dagger-axes (ge), 38 celts and 31 "chisels". The Yuhuangmiao culture was
formed with the participation of the “Xiajiadian upper layer” neighboring culture, as well as tribes
from Mongolia and Transbaikalia. There was also a constant influence by the Yan state population.
Among the weapons and military equipment there are some items alien to northern Chinese
cultures which have obvious analogies at the VII–VI centuries BC sites in Mongolia, Tuva and
Transbaikalia. The "northern" arrowheads, daggers with opposite facing bird heads on pommels
and guards, specific knives, as well as belt clips and buckles-clasps that have analogies in Tuva and
Transbaikalia were encountered in Yuhuangmiao only in the first three stages of the burial ground,
mostly in the graves of the highest nobility (M18, M250) and in high rank military burials. During
all this time (from the second part of VII to the first third of the VI century BC) representatives of
the military elite maintained ties with northern tribes and traditionally used "northern" arrowheads
and other items. As a result, a complex of dated weapons and military equipment brought by nomads
from the territory of Mongolia and even more remote areas was accumulated at
Yuihuangmiao burial ground over the span of 50–70 years. The mountain-steppe and steppe territory
of Mongolia favorable for cattle breeding is rich in Bronze Age and Early Iron Age burial
grounds and sacrificial sites. In the second half of the II millennium BC it was one of the nomadic
culture centers with hereksurs, stag stones (deer stones) and slab-grave burials, that had acquired a
Scythian-style appearance by the IX–VIII centuries BC. Undoubtedly, local tribes that were the link
between the cattle-breeding cultures of North China and the Minusinsk Basin possessed a variety of
weapons and ornaments. However, due to the funeral rite peculiarities in Mongolia of the XII–VI
centuries BC there are almost no burials with rich inventory. Hence, archaeologists are forced to
reconstruct Mongolian Late Bronze Age weaponry with the help of stag stones images, stray finds
and materials from neighboring territories. The question of weapons of Mongolian nomads of the
VII–VI centuries BC has not even been raised, since it was mainly represented by a few bronze arrowheads
found in slab-grave burials with uncertain dating.
The territory of Xinjiang directly borders on Kazakhstan, Altai Republic, Mongolia and through
the Gansu corridor on Northern China, which is why it has been drawing the attention of Russian
and foreign researchers for a long time. Some consider Xinjiang as a source of large migrations,
while others – as a place of mixture of various cultures of the West, the North and the East. During
large-scale archaeological research studies which begun in the 1980’s considerable material was
obtained, but excavations were basically spent in foothills of Tian Shan, while Dzungaria located to
the north, still remains a white spot. Chinese archaeologists conducting extensive work within the
Altai county in the last decade discovered a new Pazyryk culture center (IV–III centuries BC.). Forty Pazyryk mounds have been investigated on 12 burial grounds. In 20 of them, the accompanying
burials of 1–2 horses were found. In 12 cases the graves with horses, just like in the Altai Mountains, had a wooden log-type construction inside the grave pit, in which 1-4 people were buried with
their heads directed to the eastern sector. The inventory consists of iron horse bits and knives, as
well as golden foil and ceramic jugs typical for Pazyryk culture.
The active peopling by Pazyryk tribes of the southern foothills of Altai mountains in Xinjiang
was simultaneous with their penetration in the foothills surrounding Central Altai in Eastern Kazakhstan and Western Mongolia in the second half of the IV century BC. Almost all of these burial
grounds at the Pazyryk culture periphery belong to its late stage (IV–III centuries BC) by inventory.
The way to China was the most difficult, as it crossed the available passes on the ridge, separating
Southern Altai from Xinjiang, including the Kanas pass at Ukok. In the course of settlement in Xinjiang the alien population mixed with local, and as a consequence caused specific variations in funeral rites. It is likely that at this time, a large number of Pazyryk-type sites appeared in Dzungaria
between Altai and Tian Shan, and a special harness type and animal style, well represented in the
Pazyryk-3, 4, were formed here. Burial grounds close to Pazyryk rites discovered in the far south at
Jiaohe Goubei allows for the suggested existence of several related cultures, closely connected with
Altai Mountains, throughout all of this territory in IV – beginning of III century BC.
New Information оn the Chronology and Relations of Chawuhu Culture (Xinjiang, China) The article describes the materials of the fully excavated Mohuchahan burial ground of 9th-8th (7th) cc. BC located to the southwest from Urumqi in Hejing County in the South Tien Shan region. The features of the burial rite noted at the burial ground typical for the Chawuhu culture. Based on the available radiocarbon dates and the Arzhan-type cheek-pieces, the group of early Mohuchahan burials can be preliminary attributed to the 9th century BC. Accordingly, this is the fi rst early representative complex of the 9th century BC in Xinjiang substantially supplementing the materials of Arzhan-1. The links between the Chawuhu culture and the Sayan-Altai dating to the 7th-6th centuries BC were well traced in the Chawuhugou burial grounds. However, the Mohuchahan materials demonstrate their existence as early as in the 9th century BC. The parallels are noticeable in horse gear and in burial rites. The Arzhan-type cheek-pieces from Mohuchahan have been found only in Tuva (Arzhan-1), in the Gorny Altai (Kurtu-2, Ak-Alakh-2) and in the Upper Ob region. In Gorny Altai (Kurtu-2) there is also a similarity in the burial rite.
AND ADJACENT REGIONS OF CHINA IN VII-VI CENTURIES BC
The article deals with bronze weapons of nomads (presumably from Mongolia) that were found at the Yuhuangmiao burial ground near Beijing. In the 1980–1990s, 400 tombs were excavated there, containing 18 thousand bronze objects including 86 daggers, 137 knives, 305 bronze and 481 bone arrowheads, 4 dagger-axes (ge), 38 celts and 31 "chisels". The Yuhuangmiao culture was formed with the participation of the “Xiajiadian upper layer” neighboring culture, as well as tribes
from Mongolia and Transbaikalia. There was also a constant influence by the Yan state population.
Among the weapons and military equipment there are some items alien to northern Chinese cultures which have obvious analogies at the VII–VI centuries BC sites in Mongolia, Tuva and Transbaikalia. The "northern" arrowheads, daggers with opposite facing bird heads on pommels
and guards, specific knives, as well as belt clips and buckles-clasps that have analogies in Tuva and Transbaikalia were encountered in Yuhuangmiao only in the first three stages of the burial ground,
mostly in the graves of the highest nobility (M18, M250) and in high rank military burials. During all this time (from the second part of VII to the first third of the VI century BC) representatives of the military elite maintained ties with northern tribes and traditionally used "northern" arrowheads and other items. As a result, a complex of dated weapons and military equipment brought by nomads from the territory of Mongolia and even more remote areas was accumulated at
Yuihuangmiao burial ground over the span of 50–70 years. The mountain-steppe and steppe territory of Mongolia favorable for cattle breeding is rich in Bronze Age and Early Iron Age burial grounds and sacrificial sites. In the second half of the II millennium BC it was one of the nomadic culture centers with hereksurs, stag stones (deer stones) and slab-grave burials, that had acquired a Scythian-style appearance by the IX–VIII centuries BC. Undoubtedly, local tribes that were the link
between the cattle-breeding cultures of North China and the Minusinsk Basin possessed a variety of weapons and ornaments. However, due to the funeral rite peculiarities in Mongolia of the XII–VI centuries BC there are almost no burials with rich inventory. Hence, archaeologists are forced to reconstruct Mongolian Late Bronze Age weaponry with the help of stag stones images, stray finds and materials from neighboring territories. The question of weapons of Mongolian nomads of the
VII–VI centuries BC has not even been raised, since it was mainly represented by a few bronze arrowheads found in slab-grave burials with uncertain dating.
Keywords: Northern China, Yuhuangmiao cemetery, Mongolia, weapons of nomads.
Полная публикация семи дисков из Казымского клада. В 2014 г. в низовьях Оби у Полярного круга был обнаружен богатый клад, в состав которого входило нескольких крупных бронзовых дисков, очень похожих на рельефные оборотные диски зеркал-погремушек, до этого встречавшихся только в женских погребениях V-III вв. до н. э. на Алтае, Верхнем Приобье и Южном Урале в пазырыкской, каменской и прохоровской культурах. В ходе изучения указанных бронзовых дисков установлено, что это не часть составных зеркал-погремушек, а впервые зафиксированная особая категория культовых изделий. На трёх экземплярах сохранились не встречавшиеся в скифо-сибирском искусстве гравированные изображения мифических коней. Предположительно, эти диски могли производиться в III в. до н. э. в каких-то переднеазиатских ремесленных центрах, копировавших «индийские» зеркала-погремушки, но в соответствии со своей производственной и художественной традицией. Вероятно, уже во II-I вв. до н. э. своеобразный рельеф дисков с конусами и валиками был воспринят культурой населения Нижней Оби и ещё несколько столетий воспроизводился на различных бляхах и пряжках.
Сборник научных трудов подготовлен НИЦ ИКТН ГАГУ в рамках научно-исследовательских проектов РГНФ – Минобрнауки Республики Алтай «Культурно-исторические процессы на Алтае в конце I тыс. до н.э. – середине I тыс. н.э.», № 14-11-04002а(р); «Алтайский традиционный костюм в исторической ретроспективе», № 14-11-04003а(р) и госзадания Минобрнауки Российской Федерации «Системы природопользования и производственные технологии древних и традиционных обществ Горного Алтая» (код проекта 536).