Issue 1 (70)
| THE PERM CIS-URALS IN 5th–7th CENTURIES: RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM USING GIS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 2021 | Number | 1(70) |
| Pages | 160-169 | Type | scientific article |
| UDC | 902(470.53)“639” | BBK | 63.4(235.55) |
| Authors | Vostroknutov Artyom V. Shmuratko Dmitry V. |
Topic | ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONSTRUCTION |
| Summary | The article on the base of GIS-technologies reconstructs the tribal settlement system of the “Harin time” (5th–7th centuries) in the Perm Cis-Ural region. The basis for reconstruction is materials of 45 sites, forming five territorial groups. Each of these groups can be interpreted as a community (tribe) settlement area with internal economic unity. The comparative analysis of topographical peculiarities of the sites location, specifics of space organization, population dynamics, probable population size, communication links of groups made it possible to distinguish two types of adaptive strategies of human interaction with the environment. The first type has a producing economy (cattle-breeding) as its basis. This type was situated within the Tuisko-Poludenskaya and Sylvenskaya groups. The location of the settlements on the terraces above the floodplain in groups of two or three villages at some distance (about 3 km) from the necropolis is typical for this type. There are two or three groups of settlements within one territory, the distance between groups is about 6 km. The boundaries of the territory can be marked by hillforts, making up a single defensive / signal line. The second type is oriented to the appropriating economy — hunting and gathering — and was typical for the northern territories of the region (the Lologskaya, Gainskaya and Velvinskaya groups). The location of cemeteries near settlements (no more than 1 km) is typical for these territories. In this case, one cemetery often adjoins one village. There are from one to three or more such groups within the territory. The distance between them is 3–4 km. As a rule, there is one single hillfort in the territorial groups. In the first type, we can see the prevalence of local “Glyadenovo” traditions, and in the second — of foreign “Kharino” ones. | ||
| Keywords | Great migration, Kharino type sites, Glyadenovo archaeological culture, settlement system, GIS | ||
| References |
Afanasyev G. E. [Archaeological exploration in new buildings and spatial analysis]. Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta arkheologii [Brief Communications of the Institute of Archaeology], 1989, iss. 196, pp. 3–12. (in Russ.). Askeev I. V., Askeev O. V., Galimova D. N. [Natural environment and man in the Volga-Kama region and the Cis-Urals (Late Paleolithic — Middle Ages)]. Sredneye Povolzh’ye i Yuzhnyy Ural: chelovek i priroda v drevnosti [The middle Volga region and South Urals: man and nature in antiquity]. Kazan: “Fan” AN RT Publ., 2009, pp. 32–112. (in Russ.). Chernykh E. M. Zhilishcha Prikam’ya (epokha zheleza) [Dwellings of the Kama Region (Iron Age)]. Izhevsk: UdmGU Publ., 2008. (in Russ.). Gening V. F. [Oputyatskoe settlement — metallurgical center of the Kharin period in the Kama region (second half of the 5th — first half of the 6th centuries AD)]. Pamyatniki epokhi srednevekov’ya v Verkhnem Prikam’ye [Monuments of the Middle Ages in the Upper Kama region]. Izhevsk: B. i., 1980, pp. 92–135. (in Russ.). Gening V. F., Goldina R. D. [The Kharino burial mounds in the Upper Kama region]. Voprosy arkheologii Urala [Questions of Archaeology of the Urals]. Sverdlovsk: UrGU Publ., 1973, iss. 12, pp. 58–121. (in Russ.). Goldina R. D. Lomovatovskaya kul’tura v Verkhnem Prikam’ye [The Lomovatovskaya culture in the Upper Kama region]. Irkutsk: Irkutskiy Universitet Publ., 1985. (in Russ.). Ivanov V. A. [Early Iron Age and medieval sites in the Southern Ural region: context of sources (forest and forest-steppe)]. Povolzhskaya arkheologiya [The Volga River Region Archaeology], 2017, no. 1 (19), pp. 130–144. DOI: 10.24852/pa2017.1.19.130.144 (in Russ.). Kulyabina N. V. Burkovskiy kurgannyy mogil’nik — etalonnyy pamyatnik epokhi velikogo pereseleniya narodov [The Burkovsky burial mound — a standard site of the era of the Great Migration]. Available at: museum.perm.ru/img/file_old.php?id_file=224 (accessed: 09.12.2017). (in Russ.). Kulyabina N. V. Permskoye Prikam’ye v nachale epokhi Velikogo pereseleniya narodov [The Perm Kama region at the beginning of the era of the Great Migration]. Available at: museum.perm.ru/img/file_old.php?id_file=443 (accessed: 13.10.2017). (in Russ.). Machinsky D. A., Kuleshov V. S. [Northern peoples of the middle 4th — first half of the 6th century in Jordanes’ “Getica”]. Ladoga i Gleb Lebedev. Vos’myye chteniya pamyati Anny Machinskoy [Ladoga and Gleb Lebedev. Eighth readings in memory of Anna Machinskaya]. Saint Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskiy institut istorii RAN; “Nestor-Istoriya” Publ., 2004, pp. 26–72. (in Russ.) Mityukov N. M., Korobeynikov A. V. Ballistika strel po dannym arkheologii: vvedeniye v problemnuyu oblast’ [Ballistics of arrows according to archaeology: an introduction to the problem area]. Izhevsk: NOU KIT Publ., 2007. (in Russ.). Pereskokov M. L. [The territory and local variants of the late stage of the Glyadenovskaya culture in Perm Kama Region]. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Istoriya [Perm University Herald. History], 2013, no. 1 (21), pp. 58–66. (in Russ.). Polyakov Yu. A. [Konovalyatskoe settlement]. Uchenyye zapiski Permskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Scientific notes of the Perm State University]. Perm: PGU Publ., 1960, vol. 12, iss. 1, pp. 207–218. (in Russ.). Polyakov Yu. A. Glyadenovskaya kul’tura v Srednem i Verkhnem Prikam’ye (III v. do n. e. — seredina VI v. n. e.): avtoref. kand. diss. [Glyadenovskaya culture in the Middle and Upper Kama region (3rd century BC — mid-6th century AD): Abst. diss. kand.]. Perm, 1980. (in Russ.). Ramazanov S. P., Nikolaev N. Yu., Yurchenko S. A. [River landscape and monument topography in archeological cultures of the Volga and South Ural regions in the Late Eneolithic period and the Bronze Age]. Istoricheskiye, filosofskiye, politicheskiye i yuridicheskiye nauki, kul’turologiya i iskusstvovedeniye. Voprosy teorii i praktiki [Historical, Philosophical, Political and Law sciences, Culturology and Study of Art. Issues of theory and practice], 2017, no. 2 (76), pp. 166–170. (in Russ.). Sorokin S. S. [On chronological formulas and the meaning of the term “burial ground”]. Uspekhi sredneaziatskoy arkheologii [Successes of Central Asian archaeology]. Leningrad: AN SSSR Publ., 1975, iss. 3, pp. 17–22. (in Russ.). Vostroknutov A. V., Shmuratko D. V. [Tuysko-Poldnevskaya territorial group of archaeological sites 5th–7th centuries AD in Perm Cis-Urals: the experience of study with use of GIS-technologies]. Trudy Kamskoy arkheologo-etnograficheskoy ekspeditsii [Proceedings of the Kama archaeological and ethnographic expedition], 2017, iss. 13, pp. 101–109. (in Russ.). Zhelezchikov B. F. [Probable number of Sauromato-Sarmatians in the Southern Cis-Urals and Trans-Volga regions in the 6th century BC — 1st century AD on demographic and ecological data]. Drevnosti Evrazii v skifosarmatskoye vremya [Antiquities of Eurasia in the Scythian-Sarmatian time]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1984, pp. 65–68. (in Russ.). Zhurbin I. V., Ivanova M. G., Zubareva O. T. [The simulation model of formation and development of archaeological culture]. Istoricheskaya informatika. Informatsionnyye tekhnologii i matematicheskiye metody v istoricheskikh issledovaniyakh i obrazovanii [Historical Information Science. Information Technology and Quantitative Methods in Historical Research and Education], 2012, no. 2, pp. 64–76. (in Russ.). |
||
| Download in PDF | |||
