{"title":"带麋鹿头的棒子:仪式中的象征","authors":"E. Kashina, A. Zhulnikov","doi":"10.3176/ARCH.2011.1.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Rods with sculptural elk/reindeer heads and their analogues in rock art are important elements for reconstructing the North Eurasian prehistoric inhabitants' social structure and mythology in the period from the Mesolithic to Early Metal Age. The extremely long period of their existence - from the VII millennium to the second half of the II millennium cal BC for rods and from the VI millennium to the III millennium cal BC for rock art images - and the huge territory of their spread (northern Europe and beyond the Urals) obviously provide some evidence of the common world outlook of many archaeological cultures in the Eurasian forest zone (Stolyar 1983; Studzitskaya 1997). Both categories were studied earlier, but require a more careful examination. Carved items are markedly different in shape and size, and this is why a more detailed morphological analysis should be carried out. Also all fragmented items, not mentioned in the earlier studies should be examined. The morphology and finding context having been studied, some conclusions can be made about the functional and symbolic role of these rods. As for the rock art images, the most informative are those scenes with the rods, where they are used in certain actions. Their multiple symbolic meaning is confirmed by rod images with not only elk heads but also those of reindeer. Such scenes should be carefully examined in order to reveal the functions of the carved rods, which existed in reality. Carved rods with elk/reindeer heads Most items are made of antler, though some are of elk bone. Most rods from the Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (the Barents seashore) and the one from the Mayak II site are made of reindeer antler and portray reindeers (Gurina 1997; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Several wooden and stone items with elk heads are known, but they are not rods. Stone elk heads (4 items) have holes for putting them on rods and their only spread in south Finland and Karelia seems to be a local tradition (Nordman 1937, 40 ff.; Studzitskaya 1966, 30; Carpelan 1977; Huure 2003, 241) (Fig. 1). Three of them are made in a very stylized manner and only one item has highly detailed features of an elk. Judging by the hole-making technology, they are dated back to the Late Mesolithic or Neolithic. All of them are stray finds and will not be discussed here. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Carved items have the angle between the head and the rod from 90 to 120 (rarely to 150) degrees. All items are made extremely carefully--all of them are burnished and polished. Their lengths range from 10 to 47 cm. A total of 48 pieces can be divided into two groups according to their size (Fig. 1). Group I--small rods: from 10 to 25.3 cm--consists of 12 pieces from Mayak II, Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (7 pieces), Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground on Onega Lake, Zvejnieki burial ground, Sventoji IV, Modlona (Gurina 1953; 1956; 1997; Oshibkina 1978; Zagorskis 1987; Rimantiene 1996; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Group II--big rods: from 40 to 49 cm - includes 16 pieces from the Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (2 pieces), Riigikula III, Villa (Fig. 2: 1-2), the Malmuta river estuary, Sventoji III (2 pieces), Kretuonas I, Sakhtysh I, Zamostye II, Chornaya Gora, the Tok river burial, Shigir peat bog (2 pieces), Kalmatskiy Brod, Annin Ostrov (Eding 1940; Gurina 1956; Tsvetkova 1969; Loze 1970; Bogdanov 1992; Oshibkina et al. 1992; Rimantiene 2005; Lozovskij 2009). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The minimum and maximum lengths of the items were measured using unbroken rods, but there were also numerous fragments. All the fragments were compared with the whole rods, and their lengths were estimated approximately. According to these lengths, they are included in group II--big rods. The piece from the Volodary site could not be thus classified, because it had no handle, with a deep hole located at the bottom of the elk head probably for fastening it to a handle (Tsvetkova 1973) (Fig. …","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"RODS WITH ELK HEADS: SYMBOL IN RITUAL CONTEXT\",\"authors\":\"E. Kashina, A. Zhulnikov\",\"doi\":\"10.3176/ARCH.2011.1.02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction Rods with sculptural elk/reindeer heads and their analogues in rock art are important elements for reconstructing the North Eurasian prehistoric inhabitants' social structure and mythology in the period from the Mesolithic to Early Metal Age. The extremely long period of their existence - from the VII millennium to the second half of the II millennium cal BC for rods and from the VI millennium to the III millennium cal BC for rock art images - and the huge territory of their spread (northern Europe and beyond the Urals) obviously provide some evidence of the common world outlook of many archaeological cultures in the Eurasian forest zone (Stolyar 1983; Studzitskaya 1997). Both categories were studied earlier, but require a more careful examination. Carved items are markedly different in shape and size, and this is why a more detailed morphological analysis should be carried out. Also all fragmented items, not mentioned in the earlier studies should be examined. The morphology and finding context having been studied, some conclusions can be made about the functional and symbolic role of these rods. As for the rock art images, the most informative are those scenes with the rods, where they are used in certain actions. Their multiple symbolic meaning is confirmed by rod images with not only elk heads but also those of reindeer. Such scenes should be carefully examined in order to reveal the functions of the carved rods, which existed in reality. Carved rods with elk/reindeer heads Most items are made of antler, though some are of elk bone. Most rods from the Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (the Barents seashore) and the one from the Mayak II site are made of reindeer antler and portray reindeers (Gurina 1997; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Several wooden and stone items with elk heads are known, but they are not rods. Stone elk heads (4 items) have holes for putting them on rods and their only spread in south Finland and Karelia seems to be a local tradition (Nordman 1937, 40 ff.; Studzitskaya 1966, 30; Carpelan 1977; Huure 2003, 241) (Fig. 1). Three of them are made in a very stylized manner and only one item has highly detailed features of an elk. Judging by the hole-making technology, they are dated back to the Late Mesolithic or Neolithic. All of them are stray finds and will not be discussed here. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Carved items have the angle between the head and the rod from 90 to 120 (rarely to 150) degrees. All items are made extremely carefully--all of them are burnished and polished. Their lengths range from 10 to 47 cm. A total of 48 pieces can be divided into two groups according to their size (Fig. 1). Group I--small rods: from 10 to 25.3 cm--consists of 12 pieces from Mayak II, Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (7 pieces), Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground on Onega Lake, Zvejnieki burial ground, Sventoji IV, Modlona (Gurina 1953; 1956; 1997; Oshibkina 1978; Zagorskis 1987; Rimantiene 1996; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Group II--big rods: from 40 to 49 cm - includes 16 pieces from the Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (2 pieces), Riigikula III, Villa (Fig. 2: 1-2), the Malmuta river estuary, Sventoji III (2 pieces), Kretuonas I, Sakhtysh I, Zamostye II, Chornaya Gora, the Tok river burial, Shigir peat bog (2 pieces), Kalmatskiy Brod, Annin Ostrov (Eding 1940; Gurina 1956; Tsvetkova 1969; Loze 1970; Bogdanov 1992; Oshibkina et al. 1992; Rimantiene 2005; Lozovskij 2009). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The minimum and maximum lengths of the items were measured using unbroken rods, but there were also numerous fragments. All the fragments were compared with the whole rods, and their lengths were estimated approximately. According to these lengths, they are included in group II--big rods. The piece from the Volodary site could not be thus classified, because it had no handle, with a deep hole located at the bottom of the elk head probably for fastening it to a handle (Tsvetkova 1973) (Fig. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2011.1.02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3176/ARCH.2011.1.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
摘要
带有麋鹿/驯鹿头像的木棒及其岩石艺术中的类似物是重建欧亚北部史前居民中石器时代至早期金属时代社会结构和神话的重要元素。它们存在的极其漫长的时期——从公元前七千年到公元前二千年的下半叶,从公元前六千年到公元前三千年的岩石艺术图像——以及它们传播的巨大领土(北欧和乌拉尔以外)显然为欧亚森林地区许多考古文化的共同世界观提供了一些证据(斯托亚尔1983;Studzitskaya 1997)。这两种分类早前都研究过,但需要更仔细的检查。雕刻的物品在形状和大小上明显不同,这就是为什么应该进行更详细的形态学分析。此外,所有在早期研究中未提及的碎片项目都应进行检查。通过对这些杆状体的形态和发现背景的研究,可以对这些杆状体的功能和象征作用作出一些结论。至于岩石艺术图像,最有信息的是那些有杆的场景,在那里它们被用于某些动作。它们的多重象征意义不仅由麋鹿头,而且还有驯鹿头的杆状图像证实。为了揭示现实中存在的雕刻棒的功能,应该仔细检查这样的场景。大多数物品是用鹿角制成的,尽管有些是用麋鹿骨制成的。来自Oleniy Ostrov墓地(巴伦支海岸)和Mayak II遗址的大多数杆都是用驯鹿角制成的,并描绘了驯鹿(Gurina 1997;Murashkin & Shumkin 2008)。已知有几件带有麋鹿头的木制和石制物品,但它们不是杆。石制麋鹿头(4件)有孔,可以把它们放在杆子上,它们在芬兰南部和卡累利阿的唯一传播似乎是当地的传统(Nordman 1937, 40 ff);Studzitskaya 1966,30;Carpelan 1977;Huure 2003, 241)(图1)。其中三个是用非常程式化的方式制作的,只有一个项目具有麋鹿的非常详细的特征。从造洞技术来看,它们可以追溯到中石器时代晚期或新石器时代。所有这些都是偶然发现的,不在这里讨论。[图1省略]雕刻物品的头部和杆之间的角度从90到120度(很少到150度)。所有的东西都做得非常仔细——所有的东西都经过打磨和抛光。它们的长度从10厘米到47厘米不等。总共48件,根据其大小可分为两组(图1)。第一组-小棒:从10到25.3厘米-由12件组成,分别来自Mayak II, Oleniy Ostrov墓地(7件),Onega湖上的south Oleniy Ostrov墓地,Zvejnieki墓地,Sventoji IV, Modlona (Gurina 1953;1956;1997;Oshibkina 1978;Zagorskis 1987;Rimantiene 1996;Murashkin & Shumkin 2008)。第二组-大杆:从40到49厘米-包括16件来自南奥列尼奥斯特罗夫墓地(2件),Riigikula III, Villa(图2:1-2),Malmuta河河口,Sventoji III(2件),Kretuonas I, Sakhtysh I, Zamostye II, Chornaya Gora,托克河墓地,Shigir泥炭沼泽(2件),Kalmatskiy Brod, Annin Ostrov(1940年);Gurina 1956;Tsvetkova 1969;Loze 1970;Bogdanov 1992;Oshibkina et al. 1992;Rimantiene 2005;Lozovskij 2009)。[图2略]物品的最小和最大长度是用未折断的杆测量的,但也有许多碎片。所有的碎片都与整个杆进行了比较,并估计了它们的长度。根据这些长度,它们被归为第二组——大杆。Volodary遗址的碎片不能被归类,因为它没有把手,在麋鹿头的底部有一个深洞,可能是为了把它固定在把手上(Tsvetkova 1973)(图. ...)
Introduction Rods with sculptural elk/reindeer heads and their analogues in rock art are important elements for reconstructing the North Eurasian prehistoric inhabitants' social structure and mythology in the period from the Mesolithic to Early Metal Age. The extremely long period of their existence - from the VII millennium to the second half of the II millennium cal BC for rods and from the VI millennium to the III millennium cal BC for rock art images - and the huge territory of their spread (northern Europe and beyond the Urals) obviously provide some evidence of the common world outlook of many archaeological cultures in the Eurasian forest zone (Stolyar 1983; Studzitskaya 1997). Both categories were studied earlier, but require a more careful examination. Carved items are markedly different in shape and size, and this is why a more detailed morphological analysis should be carried out. Also all fragmented items, not mentioned in the earlier studies should be examined. The morphology and finding context having been studied, some conclusions can be made about the functional and symbolic role of these rods. As for the rock art images, the most informative are those scenes with the rods, where they are used in certain actions. Their multiple symbolic meaning is confirmed by rod images with not only elk heads but also those of reindeer. Such scenes should be carefully examined in order to reveal the functions of the carved rods, which existed in reality. Carved rods with elk/reindeer heads Most items are made of antler, though some are of elk bone. Most rods from the Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (the Barents seashore) and the one from the Mayak II site are made of reindeer antler and portray reindeers (Gurina 1997; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Several wooden and stone items with elk heads are known, but they are not rods. Stone elk heads (4 items) have holes for putting them on rods and their only spread in south Finland and Karelia seems to be a local tradition (Nordman 1937, 40 ff.; Studzitskaya 1966, 30; Carpelan 1977; Huure 2003, 241) (Fig. 1). Three of them are made in a very stylized manner and only one item has highly detailed features of an elk. Judging by the hole-making technology, they are dated back to the Late Mesolithic or Neolithic. All of them are stray finds and will not be discussed here. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] Carved items have the angle between the head and the rod from 90 to 120 (rarely to 150) degrees. All items are made extremely carefully--all of them are burnished and polished. Their lengths range from 10 to 47 cm. A total of 48 pieces can be divided into two groups according to their size (Fig. 1). Group I--small rods: from 10 to 25.3 cm--consists of 12 pieces from Mayak II, Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (7 pieces), Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground on Onega Lake, Zvejnieki burial ground, Sventoji IV, Modlona (Gurina 1953; 1956; 1997; Oshibkina 1978; Zagorskis 1987; Rimantiene 1996; Murashkin & Shumkin 2008). Group II--big rods: from 40 to 49 cm - includes 16 pieces from the Southern Oleniy Ostrov burial ground (2 pieces), Riigikula III, Villa (Fig. 2: 1-2), the Malmuta river estuary, Sventoji III (2 pieces), Kretuonas I, Sakhtysh I, Zamostye II, Chornaya Gora, the Tok river burial, Shigir peat bog (2 pieces), Kalmatskiy Brod, Annin Ostrov (Eding 1940; Gurina 1956; Tsvetkova 1969; Loze 1970; Bogdanov 1992; Oshibkina et al. 1992; Rimantiene 2005; Lozovskij 2009). [FIGURE 2 OMITTED] The minimum and maximum lengths of the items were measured using unbroken rods, but there were also numerous fragments. All the fragments were compared with the whole rods, and their lengths were estimated approximately. According to these lengths, they are included in group II--big rods. The piece from the Volodary site could not be thus classified, because it had no handle, with a deep hole located at the bottom of the elk head probably for fastening it to a handle (Tsvetkova 1973) (Fig. …