Issue 2 (75)

CAVE — SANCTUARY — MYTH: INTERPRETATION CRITERIA FOR THE UPPER PALEOLITHIC DECORATED CAVES IN THE URALS
Year 2022 Number 2(75)
Pages 128-138 Type scientific article
UDC 903.27(470.5) BBK 63.442.12(235.55)
Authors Shirokov Vladimir N.
Shirokova Natalia A.
Topic ARCHAEOLOGICAL MOSAIC
Summary Caves with the Upper Paleolithic wall paintings are known in the Southern Urals — Kapova (Shulgan-Tash) and Ignatievskaya (Yamazy-Tash). They represent the largest karst cavities in their areas with lots of figurative and non-figurative motifs. In many respects, the Urals’ decorated caves are similar to those in Western Europe: in terms of the structural organization of space, pictorial assemblages and their context. The Western European caves are often referred to as “deep sanctuaries”. Within the framework of this article, the authors address to the works of foreign experts, who have been developing this subject for more than a dozen years, in order to identify the criteria for such an interpretation. Due to the kinship of the Ice Age cave art from the Atlantic to the Urals, the interpretations of Western European art are also applicable to the Ural cave sites. Archaeological, phenomenological and mythological criteria stand out as the most important ones. Archaeological criteria were formulated by C. Renfrew: focusing attention; the border zone between this and other worlds; the presence of a deity; participation and offering. Phenomenological criteria are relied on a person’s sensory experience which is based on the main sense organs — sight, hearing, smell, touch. It is they which provide the caves with indicators of hierophony, constructing, according to M. Eliade, a collective sacred space. Of all the characteristics of myth in relation to the Paleolithic art, M. Groenen considers the presence of composite anthropomorphic creatures, composite animals and surreal, fantastic animals. Comparing unreal and hybrid creatures from the regions of Franco-Cantabria and the Urals shows their close similarity. Together with the considered archaeological criteria and criteria of the sensory experience of an ancient man in relation to the underground cavity, we can assert that the Ural decorated caves of the Upper Paleolithic are sanctuaries of the Ice Age, preserving fragments of the mythology of that distant time.
Keywords Southern Urals, Upper Paleolithic, cave art, sanctuary, myth
References

Airvaux J. L’art prehistorique du Poitou-Charentes. Sculptures et gravures des temps glaciaires. Paris: La Maison des Roches, 2001. (in French).

Barriere C. L’art parietal des grottes des Combarelles. Paléo, hors-série, 1997, no. 1. (in French).

Breuil A. H. Quatre cents siecles d’art parietal. Les cavernes ornees de l’age du Renne. Montignac: Centre d’Études et de Documentation Préhistoriques, 1952. (in French).

Chauvet J-M., Brunet-Dechamps E., Hillar C. La grotte Chauvet à Vallon-Pont-d’Arc. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, 1995. (in French).

Diez M. G., Rodriguez R. G. El Castillo. Las cuevas con arte paleolitico en Cantabria. Cantabria: Edita Cantabria, 2010, pp. 179–190. (in Spanish).

Dmitrieva T. N. [Cave as integrity (to the problem of interpretation of the Paleolithic cave painting)]. Peshchernyy paleolit Urala: materialy mezhdunarod. konf. [Cave Paleolithic of the Urals: materials of the international conf.]. Ufa: “Gilem” Publ., 1997, pp. 53–56. (in Russ.).

Eliade M. Mify, snovideniya, misterii [Myths, Dreams and Mysteries]. Moscow: “Refl Buk”, “Vakler” Publ., 1996. (in Russ.).

Filippov A. K. Khaos i garmoniya v paleolite [Chaos and harmony in the Paleolithic art]. Saint Petersburg: Sokhraneniye prirody i kul’turnogo naslediya Publ., 2004. (in Russ.).

Filippov A. K. Proiskhozhdeniye izobrazitel’nogo isvkusstva. Arkheologicheskiye izyskaniya [The origin of the graphic art. Archaeological research]. Saint Petersburg: “Academ Print” Publ., 1997, iss. 51. (in Russ.).

Gaussen J. La grotte ornee du Gabillou (pres Mussidan, Dordogne). Bordeaux: Dellmas, 1964. (in French).

Gonzalez R. Notas para un analisis y definition del concepto de sanctuario paleolitico. II Congreso Mundial Vasco. Congreso de Antropología. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Servicio Central de Publicaciones del Gobierno Vasco, 1988, vol. III, pp. 17–26. (in Spanish).

Groenen M. Ombre et lumitere dans l’art des grottes. Bruxelles: Centre de Recherches et d’Etudes Technologiques des Arts Plastiques, 1997. (in French).

Groenen M. Thèmes iconographiques et mythes dans l’art du Paléolithique supérieur. Art du Paléo-lithique et du Mésolithique — Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Art. Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, University of Liège, Belgium, 2–8 September 2001. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2004, pp. 31–39. (British Archaeological Reports, no. 1311). (in French).

Kosintsev P. A., Bachura O. P. Late Pleistocene and Holocene mammal fauna of the Southern Urals. Quaternary International, 2013, vol. 284, pp. 161–170. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2012.06.022 (in English).

Leroi-Gourhan A. Prehistoire de l’art occidental. Paris: Éditions Mazenod, 1965. (in French).

Leroi-Gourhan A. Répartition et groupement des nnimaux dans l’art pariétal paléolithique. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique de France, 1958, vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 515–528. (in French).

Lorblanchet M. La grotte ornée de Pergouset (Saint-Géry, Lot), un sanctuaire secret paleólithique. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, 2001. (in French).

Renfrew C. The archaeology of cult: The Sanctuary at Phylakopi. London: Thames and Hudson (distributor), 1985. (in English).

Renfrew C., Bahn P. Archaeology, theories, methods and practice. London: Thames and Hudson, 1991. (in English).

Reznikov E. D. [The sound size of the Shulgan-Tash (Kapova) cave in connection with Paleolithic painting]. Kul’turnoye naslediye Yuzhnogo Urala kak innovatsionnyy resurs: Materialy Vseross. nauch.-praktich. konf. “Prirodnoye i kul’turnoye naslediye Yuzhnogo Urala kak innovatsionnyy resurs” [Cultural heritage of the Southern Urals as an innovative resource: Proceedings of the All-Russian sci. and pract. conf. “Natural and cultural heritage of the Southern Urals as an innovative resource”]. Ufa: IIYaL UNTs RAN Publ., 2010, pp. 84–94. (in Russ.).

Sauvet G., Tosello G. Le mythe paléolithique de la caverne. Le propre de l’homme, Psychanalyse et préhistoire. Lausanne: Delachaux et Niestlé, coll. Champs psychanalytiques, 1998, ch. 3, pp. 55–90. (in French).

Scelinskij V. E., Širokov V. N. Hohlenmalerei in Ural. Kapova und Jgnatievka. Die altsteinzeitlichen Bilderholen im Sudlichen Ural. Deutchland, Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1999. (in German).

Shirokov V. N. [Cave Paleolithic art of the Urals and Franco-Cantabria: an experience of comparison]. Ot Baltiki do Urala: izyskaniya po arkheologii kamennogo veka [From the Baltic to the Urals: research on the archaeology of the Stone Age]. Syktyvkar: IYALI Komi NTs UrO RAN Publ., 2014, pp. 69–88. (in Russ.).

Shirokov V. N. [Paleolithic underground “art galleries” of the Urals and Western Europe]. Vestnik Ural’skogo otdeleniya RAN [Bulletin of the Ural Branch of the RAS], 2014, no. 1 (47), pp. 165–179. (in Russ.).

Shirokov V. N. Some comparisons of the Paleolithic cave art between the Urals and Western Europe. Forgotten times and spaces: New perspectives in paleoanthropological, paleoetnological and archaeological studies. Brno: Masaryk University Press, 2015, pp. 347–360. (in English).

Shirokov V. N., Petrin V. T. Iskusstvo lednikovogo veka. Ignatiyevskaya i Serpiyevskaya 2 peshchery na Yuzhnom Urale [Art of the Ice Age. Ignatievskaya and Serpievskaya 2 caves in the Southern Urals]. Ekaterinburg: ID “Azhur” Publ., 2013. (in Russ.).

Vouvet J., Brunet J., Vidal P., Marsal J. Lascaux en Perigord Nour. Environnement, art parieteal et conservation. Perigueux: Pierre Fanlac, 1982. (in French).

Zhitenev V. S. Kapova peshchera — paleoliticheskoye podzemnoye svyatilishche [Kapova Cave — a Paleolithic underground sanctuary]. Moscow: “Indrik” Publ., 2018. (Proceedings of the Faculty of History of Moscow State University, iss. 127, series II: Historical Research, 73). (in Russ.).

 
Download in PDF