The article presents the results of dating the buildings of the monument of the era of Russian colonization of Siberia - Staroturukhansk settlement. A brief history of Staroturukhansk is presented. A comparative analysis of archaeological and dendrochronological sources allowed us to identify six construction tiers on the site of the ancient settlement, dating from the middle of the XVII to the middle of the XVIII century.

Key words: archeology, dendrochronology, dating, Staroturukhansk ancient settlement, New Mangazeya.

Introduction

In recent years, against the background of increasing general interest in the problems of the North and the Arctic territories of Russia, the topic of Russian development of the northern regions of Siberia has attracted more and more attention. However, this region remains poorly studied even against the background of neighboring countries-Western Siberia and Yakutia. In the vast territory of northern Siberia, stationary archaeological studies were conducted only at 12 sites related to the period of Russian development of the Siberian land (XVI-XVIII centuries). At present, the Staroturukhansk settlement is the only monument of the Russian development of the Lower Yenisei explored by excavations.

The city of Turukhansk-Novaya Mangazeya began with the Turukhansk Yasach winter shelter on the Turukhan River, 4.5 km from its confluence with the Yenisei channel Bolshoy Shar (Fig. 1). There are several versions about the foundation of the winter shelter. Thus, G. F. Miller writes that the time of construction of this settlement correlates with the collection of the first yasak in 1607 from the Tungus living in the Lower Tunguska by the Berezovsky Cossack Mikhail Kashmylov [2000, pp. 29-30], who probably laid the Turukhansk winter quarters. According to B. O. Dol-

1. Fig. Location of Staroturukhansk ancient settlement and Mangazeya.

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project N 12 - 06 - 33040), RGNF (project N 12 - 34 - 01024) and a Grant from the President of the Russian Federation (N MK-1675.2011.6).

Based on the data of Yasach books, it appeared as early as 1604 [1960, p.122].

With the gradual decline of Mangazeya, the Turukhansk winter shelter increasingly assumed its functions and was increasingly referred to in documents as the New Mangazeya (or simply Mangazeya). Service personnel from all the winter quarters of Yasach and industrial people returning from sable hunting met here, and a continuous fair was held here every summer [Miller, 2000, p. 99]. In 1670, the voivodeship administration was transferred to the Turukhansk winter quarters from Mangazeya, and on July 12, 1672, Voivode Danila Naumov laid a new city on the site of the winter quarters.

From the second half of the 17th century until 1822, Turukhansk was the center of the vast Turukhansk Region, specializing in furs and fishing. In 1708, by decree of Peter I, Novaya Mangazeya became a city of the Siberian province, in 1780 it was renamed Turukhansk, which in 1782 had the status of a county town of the Tomsk region. With the foundation of the Yenisei Province and the gradual shift of economic life to the south, Turukhansk began to decline, its population and trade volumes steadily decreased. In 1822, Turukhansk lost its status as a district city and became a minor city of the Yenisei Province [Alexandrov, 1964, p. 32]. In 1909. all its administrative bodies were transferred to the village of Monastyrskoye, located at the mouth of the Nizhnyaya Tunguska River. In 1920, this village received the status of a city and was renamed Turukhansk. In turn, the former Novaya Mangazeya became the village of Staro-Turukhansk (later a village) [Turukhansk..., 2004, p. 55]. Today it is the oldest settlement on the territory of the Krasnoyarsk Territory.

Materials and methods

The first archaeological survey, during which the cultural layer was identified and the name of the monument "Staroturukhansk settlement" was given, was carried out in 1970 by V. F. Starkov as part of the Mangazey expedition of the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute. An eye-measuring plan was drawn up, lifting material of the XVII-XIX centuries was collected, and the layer was cleaned in 12 modern pit cellars (Starkov, 1970).

Systematic archaeological research in Staroturukhansk began in 2007 by an expedition of the Research and Production Association "Northern Archeology-1" under the leadership of G. P. Vizgalov. A full instrumental survey of the monument and the surrounding area was carried out, and the boundaries of the cultural layer distribution were determined by a series of reconnaissance pits. The established dimensions of the ancient settlement are approx. 970 * 280 m, the thickness of the cultural layer is up to 2 m or more. Comparison of the preserved schematic plan of the city of the XVIII century and the current topographical situation made it possible to determine the site of the hillfort's ascent - the most convenient gentle ascent, which is still the entrance to the central part of the village. In this place, free from modern development, in the western part of vzvoz, in the central part of Posad, a dig site with an area of 99 ^m2 was laid out. The thickness of the cultural layer in it was 2.3 m from the modern day surface. Excavations in 2008-2011 examined the remains of nine buildings (Vizgalov and Rudkovskaya, 2011a, b).

In the eastern and central part of the excavation, continuous development was recorded in the period from the middle of the XVII to the middle of the XVIII century. At least six construction tiers of this period have been identified. All buildings bear traces of fires. The burnt-out house in Turukhansk was taken apart to the salary crown or several lower ones. Dismantled logs were often used for a second time, during subsequent construction, and the remaining crowns in the ground served as the foundation for a new structure. The general orientation of the buildings along the line of west-north-west-east-south-east was preserved and corresponded to the edge of the terrace.

Since the Priarctic archaeological sites are located in the permafrost zone, their lower layers, dating back to the XVII-XVIII centuries, are frozen all year round, which determines the unique preservation of the remains of material culture, including wooden structures. In this regard, it becomes possible to perform a comprehensive archaeological study using the methods of natural sciences, including dendrochronology.

In the course of stationary work in 2008-2011, a dendrochronological collection of samples in the form of cores, cross cuts and wedge-shaped cuts was selected in the excavation of the Staroturukhansk settlement, a total of 96 copies. (Table 1). Samples were taken from nine sites, and as a result, seven buildings were dated (1a, 2, 3, 5, 7 - 9), estate fence and pavement.

Measurements of the width of annual rings were made according to the standard method on the semi-automatic LINTAB installation (with an accuracy of 0.01 mm). The measured series are dated using a combination of graphical cross-dating [Douglass, 1919] and cross-correlation analysis (in the package of specialized programs for dendrochronological studies-DPL [Holmes, 1984] and "TSAP V3.5" [Rinn, 1996]). As a result, two tree-ring chronologies (DCS) "Staroturukhansk" were constructed - according to Siberian cedar (Pinus sibirica Du Tour) and Siberian larch (Larix sibirica Ledeb). To date the collected dendroarchaeological material, the following model was used: Schweingruber DKH "Mangazeya" on cedar

Table 1. Characteristics of dendrochronological material from buildings in the central part of the Old Turukhansk settlement settlement (excavation 1, 2008-2011)

Continuation of Table 1

Continuation of Table 1

End of Table 1

Notes: r is the interseries correlation coefficient, and a is the standard deviation; listv. - siberian larch, ras. - a vessel. - diffuse vascular wood.

Figure 2. Cross-dating of the generalized standardized chronology "Staroturukhansk" for archaeological wood (a) with DKH "Mangazeya" (b). Both for Siberian cedar.

Siberian, covering the period from 1246 to 1969 [Schweingruber]. The correlation coefficients for the total interval of 1451-1698 between the Mangazeya farm and two Staroturukhansk farms (for cedar and larch) were 0.58 and 0.66, respectively. The use of this chronology made it possible to verify the previously obtained results [Myglan, Zharnikov, and Vizgalov, 2011] and provided reliable dating of individual increment series for archaeological wood at the same time. 2, Table 1). The histometric analysis of the samples showed that harvesting of trees for construction took place mainly in the autumn-winter period, since the annual rings were fully formed (Myglan, Zharnikov, and Vizgalov, 2011).

Results and discussion

In the course of the study, 85 of the 96 samples were dated. Failures to date some of the samples are related to the presence of the latter

anomalies in growth (heeled wood)," complacency " * of growth, insufficient length of individual series, the presence of scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L) samples in the sample, for which there are no DCS necessary for dating. Xylotomic analysis showed that the studied material is distributed among tree species as follows: 68 copies. - siberian pine, 23 - larch, 3 copies. - scots pine. The forest-forming species in the study area are Siberian pine (cedar) and larch. They were mainly used as building materials. Scots pine grows to the south, i.e. this wood was brought and used for the second time.

For the convenience of describing the results obtained, the material was divided according to the location of the construction tiers in the excavation.

The lower (first) building tier is represented by building 9. It is residential, three-part (izba-seni-izba). The western crate has been completely excavated, measuring 360*370 cm along the inner contour of the walls. The log house was preserved to the height of two crowns, the diameter of the logs is 21-27 cm, the crate was cut down in the region with a release. The hut was insulated with rubble: a log was preserved from the southern one, and a board from the western one. The floor was located at the level of the third crown. It left two transverse lags. The size of the entrance hall on the inner walls is 370*322 cm. Three transverse logs and one board have been preserved from the floor. The latter has dimensions 364*40*4 see It is of secondary use, with numerous holes in which there are fragments of nagels. The western and eastern walls of the hall are the walls of residential cages. The southern wall was made in a floodplain system. Two pillars (24 and 29 cm in diameter), with vertical grooves for fixing cross boards, have been preserved from it. A large number of objects were found in the entrance hall: a lining made of shoes, fragments of fabric and clothing, wooden and birch bark items, a cluster of sinkers-kiba-owls, floats, a clay bird-whistle, etc. The second hut (eastern crate) is residential or economic. The excavation recorded its western corner. Only the salary crown has been preserved. Not a single find was found in the log house within the excavation.

14 samples were taken from building 9 (Table 1). Elements of the western stand, with the exception of one southern crown, are dated to 1649. There are no crustal rings, so we can conclude that this crate was built no earlier than 1649. Judging by the results of dating samples from the hall (logs and pillars), the presence of a crustal layer in two of them (s11_02 and s11_45), the vestibule was built no earlier than 1653. Three samples were taken from the logs of the eastern stand, which indicate one year of material harvesting - 1650. The presence of a podkorovy ring at two of them (s11_37 and s11_50) allows to speak about construction of this cage not earlier than 1650.

It is most likely that initially the western box was built, then a year later - the eastern one, and three years later the huts were united by the vestibule into one three-private structure. Building 9 was destroyed in a fire. The thickness and localization of the layer of burnt wood chips indicates that the source of fire was located in the western part of the western stand.

The second construction tier began to form from the time of construction of Building 8. It was placed on the site of the eastern cage of the burnt-out building 9, the salary crown of which was used as a foundation, the fire was covered with loam. Building 8 log cabin was probably a residential building. During the excavation, its western corner was examined, four lower logs of the western wall and three logs of the southern wall (25 - 33 cm in diameter) were cleared. The log of the salary crown of the western wall has a diameter of 38 cm, not sanded (s11_18), laid clearly on top of the western salary log of building 9 (s11_37). At first, in the courtyard of the estate, sealed pillars from the vestibule of the burned-out building remained standing. Apparently, this place turned out to be behind the back wall of the house, it was not built up and the pillars did not interfere with its owners, as a result of which a layer of manure, wood chips and vegetation cover appeared here, the remains of which are recorded in the excavation in the form of a layer of buried turf with humusized loam under it.

From building 8, 10 samples were taken, covering the crowns from the first to the fourth (Table 1). Of these, five from the outer log house indicate one year of material preparation - 1667, and two-for 1666 and 1677. Samples from the inner log house (s11_21 and s11_23) date back to 1677, a burnt support under the roof of the building is located in the the western wall of the building - 1650. The last lining log was most likely used for a second time and probably taken from the burnt-out building 9 (which is confirmed by the correspondence of dates). Taking into account the preservation of the substructure rings in samples s11_29 and s11_23, it can be argued that the outer log house was built no earlier than 1667, and the inner one was built ten years later-no earlier than 1677. The presence of a log in the fourth crown of the outer log house, the sample of which (stl0_d13) dates back to 1677, indicates the fact of perestroika.

Thus, we have the following sequence of construction: building 9, after standing for a total of no more than 18 years, burned down, and in its place no earlier than 1667, building 8 was built. In 1677, for some reason (probably after another fire), reconstruction was required, during which an internal log house was erected- the basement of the house, the outer walls were dismantled to three lower crowns, and the upper ones were replaced with new ones. This is the assumption-

* The term introduced by S. G. Shiyatov characterizes samples with wide rings and weak partial growth variability (Shiyatov et al., 2000).

This is confirmed by stratigraphic observations: the internal log house is located at a depth of -190... -208 cm (relative to the conditional zero of the monument), which is 40-45 cm higher than the external one (-230... -253 cm relative to the conditional zero of the monument). The internal log house is placed on a clay filling, on top of which a thin layer of brown wood chips is fixed, which was formed during the activity of the residents of the house before the construction of the log house-basement.

To the north-east of the house, a pavement was found. It is a boardwalk laid on top of transverse logs. Planks and logs eventually "sank" in the mud, so new tiers were laid on top. Two samples were taken from the pavement for dendrochronological analysis. They date from 1665 and 1668. (tab. 1), which corresponds to the time of construction of the building 8. Therefore, the flooring for the passage along the house was most likely laid immediately during construction (this constant and time-tested method of fighting dirt is still used today).

The third building stage is distinguished by the correlation of stratigraphic and planigraphic observations. During the operation of building 8, its owners, apparently due to their growing economic well-being, decided to enclose the yard and equip it with outbuildings: two buildings were built on an empty area to the west of the house. Let's look at the objects in chronological order of their construction.

The estate fence is a log wall in the floodplain system to the north-east of building 8, installed close to the pavement. Five samples were taken from the structure, of which four are dated: three-1676, one-1655 (Table 1). It can be assumed that after the construction of the house, the courtyard was not fenced for the first nine years. The fence was built in 1676. The earliest date of the lowest log of the eastern part of the fence (sample s11_40) is due to the secondary use of building material.

Building 7 is represented by a square log house measuring 284 * 296 cm along the inner contour of the walls, preserved to the height of two crowns. Inside there are nine pillars with a diameter of 11.0 to 18.5 cm: four in the corners, one in the center of three walls, two in the middle of the building. Perhaps these numerous pillars were piles for floor logs. The logs and floor themselves were located higher and were not preserved in the excavation. Inside the building, at the level of the salary crown, the lower floor is fixed, laid directly on the ground. It is made up of individual boards of different sizes, cooper's rivets and bottoms, fragments of skis, etc. Based on the composition of numerous finds, it can be assumed that the building was used as a residential or storage shed.

22 samples were taken from building 7, 19 of them were dated (Table 1). Analysis of the dates showed the following: two salary crowns date back to 1650, which indicates their repeated use, the rest - in the interval from 1674 to 1676. Judging by the samples with a preserved crustal layer (indicating the year of cutting), timber for the construction was harvested for three years (from 1674 to 1676). Thus, building 7 was built no earlier than 1676. Consequently, the courtyard of the house remained undeveloped for nine years. Building 7 was built at the same time as the fence. The date of their construction is close to the time of the reconstruction of the manor house-1677.

Additional information about building 7 is provided by dendrochronological dating of the pillars. The results of the analysis of eight samples (the ninth pillar is a sawn log of building 9, dated 1653) showed: five are dated 1687, the rest-1673, 1684 and 1686. Based on the presence of a crustal ring in the samples, we can say that the wood was harvested from 1686 to 1687. Probably, after standing for 11 years, the building underwent repair: not earlier than 1687, the floor was replaced with piles. New eight pillars were installed, and the ninth, the oldest (a tight log from building 9), deeply dug in, apparently, did not begin to pull out and left in place.

Building 3 is represented by a salary crown, a log of the second crown of the eastern wall and a date located along this wall at a distance of 5 cm from it. The length of the eastern wall from the inside is 360 cm, the length of the southern and northern walls cannot be calculated, because the latter goes into the excavation wall, and the log of the southern one is cut off. By analogy with all the other buildings of the Staroturukhansk settlement studied, it can be assumed that building 3 was also close to a square in plan. As a log of the second crown of the eastern wall, a kokora is used, protruding beyond the log house by 73 cm and located with a bend up. Judging by the fragments of nagels preserved in it, it was originally a ship's part-a beam (a cross beam under the deck decking). Internal filling with thick layers of manure with wood chips indicates the use of the structure as a flock (premises for livestock).

11 samples were taken from Building 3, of which seven are dated (Table 1).The dates are grouped between 1669 and 1674, some of the peripheral rings of the samples are missing (as can be clearly seen from the comparison of samples taken from one structural element). It can be concluded that building 3 was built not earlier than 1674. However, according to the lower level of fixation (-183 cm), it is located above building 7 (-200... -210 cm) and the base of the fence (-211 cm), therefore, it was put later than them.

Based on the thickness of the accumulated cultural layer relative to building 7 and the fence (17-28 cm), building 3 is correctly dated to the 80s of the XVII century.

The fourth building tier is characterized by the following picture: the residential hut and flock (buildings 8 and 3) continue to stand, building 7 burns down and building 2 is erected in its place. It is square in plan, 360*360 cm along the inner contour of the walls. From the log house, three logs of the salary crown and two logs-supports for the southern wall have been preserved. The diameter of logs is from 23 to 30 cm. The salary crown rests on the remains of building 7 protruding from the ground - log cabins and pillars. The composition of numerous finds gives grounds to interpret building 2 as residential. A porch-locker is attached to its western wall, four horizontal logs with a length of 207 to 246 cm, a diameter of 15-20 cm and a transverse step board with a size of 107*30 cm, a thickness of 6.5 cm remain from it. The relative position of the structures-on the same level, with an emphasis on each other-allows us to talk about the existence of a period of simultaneous existence of buildings 2, 3 and the porch.

14 samples were taken from Building 2 for dendrochronological analysis, of which one is undated (Table 1). Of the six elements of the log house, three are dated to 1700, two to 1698 and 1680. (probably just missing some of the peripheral rings). In the case of logs-liners, the samples of which (st10_d03 and st10_d04) have earlier dates, the option of wood reuse should be assumed. The preserved crustal rings date back to 1700, which is probably the time of construction of this structure.

Separately, it is worth considering the data of dendrochronological dating of the details of the porch-locker. Analysis of four samples showed that the dates fit into the interval 1654-1657. Given the absence of anchor rings in the samples, we can talk about the construction of the porch no earlier than 1657. However, the presence of non-functional grooves in the logs for this design-bowls indicates the secondary use of wood, i.e. 1657 is the time of harvesting wood for the log house, which later served as a source of material for the porch. In our case, the time of construction of the porch-locker will be the date of construction of building 2-not earlier than 1700.

Building 2, just like the previous one, burned down. After the fire, the log house was dismantled to the salary crown, the fire was covered with a thick layer of clay for new construction (building 1a).

The fifth building tier is represented by building 1a, which is shifted to the north relative to the previous one, but is oriented in the same way. It is two-part, with an entrance hall attached to the main room on the north side. The hut has an internal blockage, which is a structure of two log cabins inserted one into the other. They are almost square in plan, external 340*350 cm (along the inner contour of the walls), internal 232*244 cm. The space between them is 21-50 cm. During the operation of building 1a, it was not filled in, probably in order to keep the basement dry. The internal log house has a floor covering at the level of the top of the salary crown and served, apparently, as a basement-a cold warehouse under the floor of a residential building for storing food. The vestibule was built using the raft technique: rectangular grooves were cut in the long outlets of the salary crowns of the western and eastern walls of the hut for fixing vertical posts, which, in turn, were attached to the spikes of horizontal logs of the walls of the vestibule.

Table 2. Operating time of the construction tiers of the Staroturukhansk settlement

15 samples were taken from the construction of la, of which 13 (without repeating elements of 10) are dated (Table 1). Given that the crustal layer is not preserved on any sample, and the main part of the dates falls on the period from 1695 to 1709, we can say that the construction of this structure was not earlier than 1709. This date logically fits into the scheme of changing buildings. The presence of samples d21 and s11_49 indicates wood reuse.

Thus, 1709 is the extreme date for buildings 2 (together with the porch) and 3. Accordingly, building 2 stood for about nine years.

The sixth building tier is characterized by the change of building 8 to building 5. The upper remaining crowns of the external log house of building 8 were used as the foundation for a new house. Building 5 log cabin, made of logs with a diameter of 28 cm. Three samples are dated (Table 1). Their crustal rings occurred in 1718. Therefore, building 5 was built no earlier than 1718. This date can be considered the end date for building 8, which was a solid residential building that stood for about 51 years (1667-1718) and survived several fires. Such a long "life" is quite consistent with the capacity of the cultural layer accumulated around the building 8-50-60 cm.

On the sixth building tier, traces of reconstruction of building 1a can be traced. From it were left the logs of the salary crown of the outer log house and two crowns of the inner one. All the space inside the outer log house, along with the inner one, is covered with yellow sand. On the remaining external crowns, a new structure was erected-building 1. It was not possible to take any samples from it due to the poor condition of the wood, which was located above the permafrost boundary. No later buildings have been preserved in the excavation. The upper layers were redeposited, and logs from later dismantled structures were found lying separately in them.

Conclusion

The location of the Staroturukhansk settlement in the permafrost zone caused the unique preservation of buildings in the excavation, which in most cases made it possible to determine the time of their construction and the formation of building tiers in the central part of the posad with an accuracy of up to a year. As a result of the study, six construction tiers were identified in excavation 1 (Table 2). The first (lower) one corresponds to the period of operation of the building 9 - 1649 - 1667 the second is associated with the first stage of construction 8 and the lower pavement floors - 1667-1677; the third dates back to the time of the existence of buildings 3, 7 and the fence of the estate - 1676-1700 years. The fourth refers to the period of operation of the building 2 - 1700 - 1709 the fifth (building 1a) and sixth (buildings 1 and 5) tiers, according to dendrochronology data, have only the initial date-1709 and 1718, respectively.

List of literature

Aleksandrov V. A. Russkoe naselenie Sibiri XVII-nachala XVIII v. (Eniseyskiy krai) [The Russian population of Siberia in the 17th-early 18th centuries (Yenisei Region)].

Vizgalov G. P., Rudkovskaya M. A. Postroeniya na territorii posada Staroturukhanskogo gorodishche (Novaya Mangazeya) [Buildings on the territory of the Old Turukhansk settlement settlement (Novaya Mangazeya)]. archeol. the congress. - SPb.; M.; Veliky Novgorod: IIMK RAS, 2011a. - T. P.-pp. 226-227.

Vizgalov G. P., Rudkovskaya M. A. Pervye rezul'taty arkheologicheskikh raskopok Staroturukhanskogo gorodishche (Novaya Mangazei) [The first results of archaeological excavations of the Staroturukhansk settlement (Novaya Mangazei)]: Interdisciplinary methods and technologies. Omsk: Om. fil. IAET SB RAS, 2011b., pp. 180-188.

Dolgikh, B. O., Generic and tribal composition of the peoples of Siberia in the XVII century, Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1960, 622 p. (TIEI; vol. 55).

Miller F. G. Istoriya Sibiri [History of Siberia], Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2000, Vol. 2, 796 p.

Myglan, V. S., Zharnikov, Z. Yu., and Vizgalov, G. P., Dendrochronological dating of structures from archaeological excavations of the Staro-Turukhansk Settlement (Novaya Mangazei), Zhurnal Sibirskogo federalnogo universiteta, Ser.: Gumanitarnye nauki. - 2011. - N 4. - pp. 952-963.

Starkov V. F. Report on the work of the Mangazey expedition of the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute in 1970. N 4402.

Turukhansk-northern fiefdom of the Russian state: a book-album dedicated to the history and prospects of Turukhansk and Turukhansky district. Krasnoyarsk: Kn. izd-vo, 2004, 208 p. (in Russian)

Shiyatov S. G., Vaganov E. A., Kirdyanov A.V., Kruglov V. B., Mazepa V. S., Naurzbaev M. M., Khantemirov R. M. Methods of dendrochronology. Krasnoyarsk: Publishing House of the Krasnoyarsk State University, 2000. - 80 s.

Douglass A.E. Climatic cycles and tree-growth: A study of the annual rings of trees in relation to climate and solar activity. -Washington: Carnegie Inst, 1919. -Vol. 1. - 127 p.

Holms R.L. Dendrochronological Program Library / Laboratory of Tree-ring Research. - Tucson: The University of Arizona, 1984. - 51 p.

Rinn F. TSAP V3.5. Computer program for tree-ring analysis and presentation. - Heidelberg: Frank Rinn Distribution, 1996. - 269 p.

Schweingruber F. Mangazeja (historisch), Siberian larch; Mangazeja (hist. + rez.), black spuce // International Tree Ring Data Bank (ITRDB). - URL: http://wwwl.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/ data/paleo/treering/chronologies/asia.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 03.06.13, in the final version-on 17.06.13.

Permanent link to this publication: