Experience of Studying Vessel Forms of the Nikolayevskiy Burial Ground of the Bronze Age Using the ‘Envelope’ and Geometric Morphometry Methods
https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2021-20-7-21-36
- Р Р‡.МессенРТвЂВВВВВВВВжер
- РћРТвЂВВВВВВВВнокласснРСвЂВВВВВВВВРєРСвЂВВВВВВВВ
- LiveJournal
- Telegram
- ВКонтакте
- РЎРєРѕРїРСвЂВВВВВВВВровать ссылку
Full Text:
Abstract
The article considers the possibilities of the ‘envelope’ and geometric morphometry methods exemplified by the analysis of 47 whole forms of vessels from the Nikolayevskiy burial ground of Srubnaya culture from Bashkir Fore-Urals.
Purpose. The purpose of this work is to reveal the morphological characteristics of the ceramic complex of the necropolis with the isolation of the reference forms of vessels using the ‘envelope’ method and methods of geometric morphometry. Consideration of their possibilities will allow for the further construction of a general typology of the vessels of Srubnaya culture of the Urals. The authors are convinced that only the publication of the results of the study of the morphology of the vessels of individual complexes, processed according to a unified technique, will make it possible to proceed with the study of ceramics of the Late Bronze Age cultures of the entire Southern Urals. The use of the ‘envelope’ method proposed by Clive Orton made it possible to highlight the leading forms of the considered collection. The obtained classification scheme includes six groups of pot-shaped vessels and four groups of jar-shaped vessels.
Results. The results of the principal component analysis allow for the conclusion that the majority of the sample vessels are similar to each other in general proportions. A small group of vessels of Srubnaya culture low in heigh and a number of vessels with a foreign cultural component, in particular those with features characteristic of Alakul culture, stand out from the rest. There is no clear connection between the distribution of pottery groups among burials and mounds. Only two points stand out. The finds of vessels of the first group of pots prevail in the embankment of mound 1, while pots of the second group appear only in burials of mounds 3 and 5. In mound 3, the finds of these vessels are concentrated in the burials of the northwestern sector, which probably reflects a certain stage in the functioning of the burial ground.
Conclusion. The studied variations of pot forms in the analyzed collection, the presence of vessels with the so-called early-Srubnaya signs, and their mutual occurrence with the vessels of the Srubno-Alakul appearance, reflect the processes of the influence of the Alakul pottery stereotypes on the dominant Srubnaya component of the Urals.
Article info:
Date submitted: 09.12.2021
Published: 09.12.2021
All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
About the Authors
I. I. BakhshievRussian Federation
Ilshat I. Bakhshiev, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Head of the Department of Archaeological Heritage of South Ural
Ufa
E. V. Bersenev
Russian Federation
Egor V. Bersenev, Postgraduate Student
Ufa
References
1. Gromov A. V., Kazarnitskiy A. A. Primenenie metodov geometricheskoi morfometrii pri izuchenii form keramicheskoi posudy [Application of methods of geometric morphometry for investigation of shapes of ceramic ware]. In: Trudy IV (XX) Vserossiyskogo arkheologicheskogo s’ezda v Kazani [Transactions of IV (KhKh) All-Russian archaeological congress in Kazan]. Kazan, Otechestvo Publ., 2014, vol. 4, p. 143-145. (in Russ.)
2. Ismagil R., Morozov Iu. A., Chaplygin M. S. Nikolaevskie kurgany (“Elena”) na reke Sterlya v Bashkortostane [Nikolaev mounds (“Elena”) on the Sterlya river in Bashkortostan]. Ufa, DizanPoligrafServis Publ., 2009, 240 p. (in Russ.)
3. Kholoshin P. R. Sovremennye podkhody k izucheniyu form glinianykh sosudov v zapadnoevropeiskoi i amerikanskoi arkheologii [Recent Approaches to the study of clay vessel shapes in the West European and American archaeology]. In: Formy glinyanykh sosudov kak ob’ekt izucheniya. Istoriko-kul’turnyi podkhod [Shapes of Clay Vessels As a Subject of Study. Historical-and-Cultural Approach]. Moscow, IA RAS Publ., 2018, p. 228-246. (in Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25681/IARAS.2018.978-5-94375-254-4.228-246
4. Lycett S. J. Quantifying Transitions: Morphometric Approaches to Palaeolithic Variability and Technological Change. Sourcebook of Palaeolithic Transitions: Methods, Theories, and Interpretations (Edited by Marta Camps & Parth R. Chauhan). New York, Springer, 2009, p. 79-92.
5. Lycett S. J., Chauhan P. R. Analytical Approaches to Palaeolithic Technologies: An Introduction. In. New Perspectives on Old Stones: Analytical Approaches to Palaeolithic Technologies. Eds. Stephen J. Lycett & Parth R. Chauhan. New York, Springer Publ., 2010, p. 1-22.
6. Martínez-Carrillo A. L., Lucena M. J., Fuertes J. M., Ruiz A. Morphometric Analysis Applied to the Archaeological Pottery of the Valley of Guadalquivir. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, 2010, p. 307-323.
7. Molodin V. I., Mylnikova L. N., Selin D. V. Sosudy vostochnogo varianta pakhomovskoi kul’tury pamyatnika Staryi Sad: morfologicheskii analiz [The Vessels of Pakhomovo Culture at Old Garden Site, Eastern Variant: Morphological Analysis]. In: Problemy arkheologii etnografii antropologii Sibiri i sopredel’nykh territorii [The Problems of Archaeology, Ethnography, Anthropology of Siberia and Cross-Border Regions]. Novosibirsk, IAE SB RAS Publ., 2014, iss. 20, p. 227-230. (in Russ.)
8. Mylnikova L. N. Izuchenie form drevnikh keramicheskikh sosudov Teoreticheskii i prakticheskii aspekty [Studying the forms of ancient ware: theoretical and practical aspects]. Arkheologiya etnografiya i antropologiya Evrazii [Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia], 2014, no. 58 (2), p. 31-43. (in Russ.)
9. Mylnikova L. N., Borzykh K. A. Morphological Analysis of Vessels from the Early Iron Age Burial Ground Bystrovka-1 (Novosibirsk Region). Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology, 2019, vol. 18, no. 3: Archaeology and Ethnography, p. 100-120. (in Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2019-18-3-100-120
10. Okumura M., Araujo A. G. M. Archaeology, biology, and borrowing: A critical examination of Geometric Morphometrics in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2019, vol. 101, p. 149-158.
11. Orton C., Tyers P., Vince A. Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge, Cambridge Uni. Press, 1993, 280 p.
12. Orton C. The ‘Envelope’: un nouvel outil pour l’étude morphologique des céramiques. In: La Ceramique (Ve-XIXe s.), Fabrication, Commercialisation, Utilisation. Caen: Société d’archéologie médiévale, 1987, p. 33-41.
13. Pavlinov I. Ya., Mikeshina N. G. Printsipy i metody geometricheskoi morfometrii [Principles and methods of geometric morphometrics]. Zhurnal obshchei biologii [Biology Bulletin Reviews], 2002, iss. 63, no. 6, p. 473-493. (in Russ.)
14. Selden R., Perttula T., O’Brien M. Advances in Documentation, Digital Curation, Virtual Exhibition, and a Test of 3D Geometric Morphometrics: A Case Study of the Vanderpool Vessels from the Ancestral Caddo Territory. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 2014, no. 2 (2), p. 64-79.
15. Sukhanov E. V. Amfory kak istochnik dlya izucheniya torgovykh kontaktov naseleniya caltovomayatskoi kul’tury Srenego i Nizhnego Dona [Amphorae as a source for studying trade contacts of the Saltovo-Mayak culture of the Middle and Lower Don]. Cand. Hist. Sci. Diss. Moscow, 2018, vol. 1, 96 p. (in Russ.)
16. Sukhanov E. V. Formy prichernomorskikh amfor VIII-X vv. [Shapes of “pontic” amphorae of the 8th - 10th centuries AD]. Rossiiskaya arkheologiya [Russian archaeology], 2017, no. 3, p. 89- 104. (in Russ.)
17. Sukhanov E. V., Volkova E. V. Tri primera ispolzovaniya geometricheskoi morfometrii dlya izucheniya form glinyanykh sosudov k voprosu o vozmozhnostyakh metoda [Three examples of geometric morphometry employment for earthenware vessel shapes study (on the opportunities and limitations of method)]. In: Formy glinianykh sosudov kak ob’ekt izucheniya. Istorikokul’turnyi podkhod [Shapes of Clay Vessels As a Subject of Study. Historical-and-Cultural Approach]. Moscow, IA RAS Publ., 2018, p. 214-227. (in Russ.)
18. Tarasova A. A. Geometricheskaya morfometriya kak metod sravnitel’nogo kolichestvennogo analiza formy arkheologicheskikh ob’ektov [Geometric morphometry as a method of comparative quantitative analysis of the form of archaeological objects]. In: Novye materialy i metody arkheologicheskogo issledovaniya [New materials and methods of archaeological research]. Proceedings of III International conference of young scientists. Moscow, IA RAN Publ., 2015, p. 196-198. (in Russ.)
19. Vasilev A. G., Vasileva I. A., Shkurikhin A. O. Geometricheskaya morfometriya ot teorii k praktike [Geometric morphometrics: from theory to practice]. Moscow, KMK Scientific Press, 2018, 471 p. (in Russ.)
20. Volkova E. V., Sukhanov E. V. Vozmozhnosti i predely primeneniya metoda geometricheskoi morfometrii dlya analiza form glinyanykh sosudov [Possibilities and limitations in applying the geometric morphometrics method for analysis of the clay pot share]. Kratkie soobshcheniia Instituta arkheologii [Brief communications of the Institute of archaeology], 2017, vol. 248, p. 249-261. (in Russ.)
21. Wilczek J., Monna F., Barral P., Burlet L., Chateau C., Navarro N. Morphometrics of Second Iron Age ceramics - strengths, weaknesses, and comparison with traditional typology. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2014, vol. 50, p. 39-50.
Review
For citations:
Bakhshiev I.I., Bersenev E.V. Experience of Studying Vessel Forms of the Nikolayevskiy Burial Ground of the Bronze Age Using the ‘Envelope’ and Geometric Morphometry Methods. Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology. 2021;20(7):21-36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2021-20-7-21-36