New Neolithic Site of Priozernaya in the Lower Volga Region

IF 0.1 Q3 HISTORY
Tatiana Grechkina, Alexandr Vybornov
{"title":"New Neolithic Site of Priozernaya in the Lower Volga Region","authors":"Tatiana Grechkina, Alexandr Vybornov","doi":"10.15688/jvolsu4.2023.4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The Lower Volga region attracts the attention of specialists because the ancient cultures of this region had a great influence on neighboring regions. This also applies to the Neolithic era, when the inhabitants of this territory had the oldest ceramic production and cattle breeding. A number of questions remain open, as new sources are required. One of them is the site of Priozernaya in the southern part of the Lower Volga region. Methods and materials. Planographic and stratigraphic methods are used to identify the nature of the monument. According to the results of the technical and technological analysis, the ceramics are made of silt. The results of the typological method reveal flat-bottomed vessels ornamented with receding incisions in a geometric style. Stone tools are represented by scrapers, spikes, and knives. Spears and spearheads are made of bones. According to the results of archeozoological analysis, tur, kulan, saiga, tarpan, etc. are represented. According to the results of radiocarbon analysis, dates are obtained. It is 6700–6600 years BP for animal bones and ceramics. Results. The results of the spatial analysis reveal the presence of remnants of dwelling structures. The manufacturing technology and typology of ceramics and stone tools allow us to attribute the monument to the Tentexor type of the late stage of the Neolithic of the Northern Caspian. The results of the faunal analysis confirm the presence of only wild animal species. The hypothesis about the appearance of a producing economy in this region at the late stage of the Neolithic has not been confirmed. Only the dog belongs to the domesticated animals. According to the results of radiocarbon analysis, the site functioned in the second quarter of the 6th millennium BC. The monument is a short-lived hunting camp. The pattern application techniques and the nature of ornamental compositions allow us to detect similarities with the ceramics of the Caspian culture. This suggests assuming the participation of the local Neolithic population in the genesis of the bearers of the Eneolithic tradition. Authors contribution. T.Yu. Grechkina wrote sections about planographic and stratigraphic methods. A.A. Vybornov described ceramic and stone tools. The results are written together.","PeriodicalId":42917,"journal":{"name":"Volgogradskii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet-Vestnik-Seriya 4-Istoriya Regionovedenie Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya","volume":"140 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volgogradskii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet-Vestnik-Seriya 4-Istoriya Regionovedenie Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2023.4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. The Lower Volga region attracts the attention of specialists because the ancient cultures of this region had a great influence on neighboring regions. This also applies to the Neolithic era, when the inhabitants of this territory had the oldest ceramic production and cattle breeding. A number of questions remain open, as new sources are required. One of them is the site of Priozernaya in the southern part of the Lower Volga region. Methods and materials. Planographic and stratigraphic methods are used to identify the nature of the monument. According to the results of the technical and technological analysis, the ceramics are made of silt. The results of the typological method reveal flat-bottomed vessels ornamented with receding incisions in a geometric style. Stone tools are represented by scrapers, spikes, and knives. Spears and spearheads are made of bones. According to the results of archeozoological analysis, tur, kulan, saiga, tarpan, etc. are represented. According to the results of radiocarbon analysis, dates are obtained. It is 6700–6600 years BP for animal bones and ceramics. Results. The results of the spatial analysis reveal the presence of remnants of dwelling structures. The manufacturing technology and typology of ceramics and stone tools allow us to attribute the monument to the Tentexor type of the late stage of the Neolithic of the Northern Caspian. The results of the faunal analysis confirm the presence of only wild animal species. The hypothesis about the appearance of a producing economy in this region at the late stage of the Neolithic has not been confirmed. Only the dog belongs to the domesticated animals. According to the results of radiocarbon analysis, the site functioned in the second quarter of the 6th millennium BC. The monument is a short-lived hunting camp. The pattern application techniques and the nature of ornamental compositions allow us to detect similarities with the ceramics of the Caspian culture. This suggests assuming the participation of the local Neolithic population in the genesis of the bearers of the Eneolithic tradition. Authors contribution. T.Yu. Grechkina wrote sections about planographic and stratigraphic methods. A.A. Vybornov described ceramic and stone tools. The results are written together.
伏尔加河下游地区Priozernaya新石器时代遗址
介绍。伏尔加河下游地区吸引了专家们的注意,因为该地区的古代文化对邻近地区有很大的影响。这也适用于新石器时代,当时该地区的居民拥有最古老的陶瓷生产和养牛。由于需要新的资料来源,许多问题仍未解决。其中之一是位于伏尔加河下游地区南部的Priozernaya遗址。方法和材料。平地学和地层学的方法被用来确定纪念碑的性质。根据工艺分析结果,陶瓷是由淤泥制成的。类型学方法的结果显示,平底容器装饰着几何风格的后退切口。石制工具以刮刀、尖刺和刀为代表。矛和矛头都是用骨头做的。根据考古分析结果,有图尔、库兰、赛加、塔潘等。根据放射性碳分析的结果,得到了日期。距今6700-6600年的动物骨骼和陶瓷。结果。空间分析的结果揭示了居住结构遗迹的存在。陶瓷和石器的制造技术和类型学使我们能够将这座纪念碑归因于北里海新石器时代晚期的Tentexor类型。区系分析的结果证实只有野生动物种类存在。关于该地区在新石器时代晚期出现生产经济的假设尚未得到证实。只有狗属于家养动物。根据放射性碳分析的结果,该遗址在公元前六千年的第二个季度中运行。这个纪念碑是一个短暂的狩猎营地。图案应用技术和装饰成分的性质使我们能够发现与里海文化陶瓷的相似之处。这表明假设当地的新石器时代人口参与了新石器时代传统的承载者的起源。作者的贡献。T.Yu。Grechkina写了关于平面和地层学方法的章节。维博尔诺夫描述了陶瓷和石器工具。结果写在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信