Far Eastern State University

Sukhanova str., 8, Vladivostok, 690950, Russia

E-mail: batar@museum.dvgu.ru

popov@museum.dvgu.ru

Research conducted in recent years by archaeologists of Primorsky Krai has brought to light a number of problems in the study of the Rudninsk archaeological culture of the Middle Neolithic (7.5-6.0 thousand years AGO). The most actively discussed among them is the problem of cultural typology. Based on the study of the materials of the Sergeyevka-1 monument, the authors developed an internal periodization of the Rudninsk culture and identified two stages: the early Rudninsk (7.5 - 7.0 thousand years ago) and the late Sergeyevsky (7-6 thousand years ago). The names of the stages correspond to the names of reference monuments, from which reference collections of archaeological equipment are compiled: Rudnaya Pristan in Eastern Primorye and Sergeyevka-1 in Western Primorye. The differences between the stages were clearly manifested in ceramics, to a lesser extent - in stone tools and practically did not affect the design of dwellings.

Introduction

Until recently, ideas about the earliest Neolithic period in Primorye (the Rudninsk archaeological culture) were based mainly on materials from two sites studied in the 1950s and 1980s: the settlement of Rudnaya Pristan (Tetyukhe) and the cave site of Chertovy Vorota. In recent years, new archaeological sites containing the Rudninsky or chronologically and typologically similar inventory have been investigated, and collections of previously studied monuments have been analyzed and published. The active introduction of new sources into scientific circulation has actualized a number of problems in the study of Rudninsk culture. The most debatable and actively discussed problem among them is the problem of cultural typology, which implies the grouping of archaeological material according to the trehrang scheme "province-culture-variant" [Klein, 1991, p.193].

For the first time D. A. Saphirov addressed the problem of heterogeneity of the inventory of monuments of Rudninsk culture. In his opinion, "the formation of the Rudninsk culture took place within the Khankai basin": its monuments discovered here, according to archaeological material, differ significantly from the same objects in Eastern Primorye. From the point of view of D. A. Saphirov, these monuments represent a special Khankai Neolithic culture, with the further development and spread of which "the appearance of Rudninsky complexes in the III millennium BC is connected" on the eastern coast of Primorsky Krai (1985, p. 70). A little later, this idea was supported by V. A. Lyn'sha. In 1988, on the Prikhankai plain (Western Primorye), he discovered a new Neolithic monument Sergeyevka-1. Based on the exploration materials, V. A. Lyn'sha identified the object as a single-layer one and referred it to the " Prikhankaiskaya

This work was supported by the Russian State Science Foundation grants No. 06-01-00543a and 07-01-00496a.

page 2

Fig. 1. Map of distribution of monuments of Rudninsk culture. Monuments with ceramics: 1-rudninsky type; 2 - Sergeyevsky type; 3-Rudninsky and Sergeyevsky types. 1-Chertovy Vorota; 2-Rudnaya Pristan; 3-Ustinovka-8; 4-Sheklyaevo-7, Novotroitskoe-2; 5-LPZ-3-6; 6-Blue Guy-4; 7-Chernihiv-1; 8-Luzanova Sopka-2, - 5; 9-Sirotinka; 10-Petrovichi; 11-Sergeyevka-1; 12-Dvoryanka-1; 13-Osinovka; 14-Boysman-2; 15-Sinkailu.

a group of Early Neolithic monuments". V. A. Lyn'sha proposed the definition of "Sergeyevsky type" for the ceramics of these monuments [1989, p. 43]. Recently, N. A. Klyuev, based on the results of studies of a series of monuments with ceramics of the Sergeyevsky type in the Central (Sheklyayevo-7, LPZ-3 - 6, Novotroitskoe-2) and Western (Dvoryanka-1) Primorye, proposed to distinguish the Sheklyayevskaya culture, or Sheklyayevskaya cultural group, which basically duplicates the Khankai Neolithic culture [Klyuev et al., 2005; Klyuev and Garkovik, 2006; Klyuev and Pantyukhina, 2006].

In 2001 - 2004, joint expeditions of the Museum of Archeology and Ethnography of the Far Eastern State University and the Far Eastern Laboratory of Archeology and Paleoecology of the Institute of Ecology and Ecology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted a search and stationary study of Neolithic monuments on the Prikhankai Plain (Western Primorye). As a result, three monuments were excavated - Luzanova Sopka-2, Luzanova Sopka-5 and Sergeevka-1. When studying these objects, homogeneous inventory collections were obtained, which made it possible not only to characterize the Rudninsk complexes of the Prikhankai plain, but also to conduct a comparative analysis of materials from cultural monuments from different regions of Primorye (Batarshev, 2005). The results of studies of the Luzanova Sopka-2 and - 5 monuments are presented in a number of works [Batarshev, Moreva, Popov, 2003; Popov et al., 2003; Popov, Batarshev, 2007]; this article focuses on the characterization and interpretation of materials obtained in 2004 during the study of the multilayer monument Sergeevka-1 [Popov et al., 2004].

Archaeological materials

Monument Sergeyevka-1 is located 3 km north-west of the village. Sergeyevka in the Border region of Primorsky Krai, on the surface of a bluff that is cape-shaped in the direction of the Nesterovka riverbed (Fig. 1). The excavation with a total area of 245 m2 covered almost the entire territory of localization of culture-containing deposits.

Structure of culture-containing deposits. Stratigraphic sections of the monument reflect a rather complex process of formation of lithological divisions of eluvial-deluvial genesis and the cultural and chronological complexes contained in them (Popov et al., 2004). The most significant stratigraphic section is along the line 8-8 (view from the east) (Fig. 2). It presents: 1) turf (5-13 cm); 2) sub-turf dark brown humus sandy loam (5-21 cm); 3) yellow-brown dense sandy loam with inclusions of sandy loam between pickets D-P (7-65 cm); 4) dark brown humus sandy loam with an admixture of sandy loam between pickets B'- W (24 - 65 cm); 5) yellow-red-brown dense gravelly sandy loam with inclusions of gravel between pickets G-A and L-P (12-32 cm); 6) black-brown gravelly sandy loam with inclusions of gravel between pickets-

page 3

2. Stratigraphic section. Sergeyevka-1. 1-turf; 2-bright yellow dredge; 3-dark brown humusized sandy loam; 4-buried turf; 5-roots; 6-yellow-brown dense sandy loam; 7-yellow-red-brown dense gravelly sandy loam; 8-red-brown light loam; 9-dark brown humus sandy loam; 10 - reddish-brown sandy loam; 11-light brown aggregate of burrows and root passages; 12-dark brown aggregate of burrows and root passages; 13-stones; 14-black-brown gravelly sandy loam; 15-rock; 16-loose semi-decomposed plinth; 17-dense dress code.

mi EG-M (10-26 cm). The layer is saturated with organogenic particles of humus and carbonaceous-soot matter;

7) reddish-brown sandy loam with a low content of wood between the pickets G-EG (4-18 cm);

8) red-brown light loam with an admixture of gravel between the O-P pickets (up to 14 cm); 9) mainland-loose semi-decomposed plinth, rock and dense gravel.

Stratigraphic study, as well as analysis of the planigraphy of the distribution of artifacts, allow us to reconstruct the sequence of cultural and chronological complexes. On the grivka of the northern tip of the monument, a few Late Paleolithic artefacts made in plate and microplate techniques were found in the sub-bottom dark brown humus sandy loam, yellow-brown dense sandy loam, and red-brown light loam. The occurrence of these finds in layers containing Neolithic and Paleometallic material indicates their redeposited character.

The main cultural and chronological complex of the monument belongs to the Middle Neolithic and is represented by artifacts of the Rudninsk culture. These materials are found in the thickness of a layer of yellow-red-brown gravelly sandy loam, the roof of red-brown light loam and in the filling of the dwelling.

The pit of the dwelling, fixed on the daytime surface of the excavation site in the form of a vast rounded depression, occupies the main part of the monument's territory. The ancient inhabitants of the settlement chose loose deposits up to the rock base or the products of its weathering during the construction of the pit of the dwelling. As a result of human activity, a layer of black-brown gravelly sandy loam was formed on the floor of the dwelling. In its formation, a certain role was played by abundant carbonaceous-soot inclusions from the burnt roof of the dwelling.

After the dwelling stopped functioning, a layer of yellow-red-brown gravelly sandy loam slid down into the formed depression, covering the northern part of the layer of black-brown gravelly sandy loam. In the remaining part of the depression, with the active participation of planar washout, strata of dark brown humus-rich and yellow-brown dense sandy loam were formed, which were successively settled by people of three epochs - the Late Neolithic, Bronze, and Early Iron. Active anthropogenic disturbances, the appearance of rootstocks and numerous animal burrows caused the redeposition of Late Neolithic and Paleometallic materials. In addition, there was compression of the bottom layers of dark brown humus and yellow-brown dense sandy loam with a roof of black-brown gravelly sandy loam. As a result, the upper part of the Rudninsk dwelling was completely destroyed and included in the overlying layers, and the Rudninsk material was mixed with later artifacts. However, it should be noted that late disturbances did not affect the main strata of black-brown gravelly sandy loam and red-brown light loam, which ensured good preservation of the early Neolithic complex on the floor of the dwelling and beyond in the northern part of the monument.

Residential complex. The pit of the dwelling has irregular, close to square outlines, gentle shoulders with external and internal contours. According to the internal contour, the area of the dwelling is approx. 68 m2, according to the external contour-approx. 144 m2. In the northern and western parts of the pit of the dwelling there are two side niches. Of particular interest is the western niche with a length of 4 m and a width of 2.5 - 3.0 m. 54.5% of ceramic fragments and 46.0% of stone products from the total amount of ceramics and stone tools found on the floor of the dwelling are concentrated in it or near it. This site was probably a specialized household utility area.

page 4
the zone. On the north-eastern part of the shoulder of the dwelling, an artificial plume of stones is marked, which, most likely, is part of the structure of the dwelling. In the center of the dwelling is a hearth made of stones. Along the inner contour of the dwelling pit, 71 pits were traced (including five pits with a stone wall); some of them could have been pillars, others-the remains of burrows and root passages (Figs. 3, 4).

A ritual complex. Ri unique for the Neolithic of Primorye was studied in the immediate vicinity of the hearth-

Fig. 3. Home plan. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

1-stones; 2-boundary of a rock outcrop; 3-pit; 4-pit with a stone buttress; 5-ceramic fragments; 6 - polished arrowhead; 7-fragment of a polished arrowhead; 8-slate tile; 9-abrasive; 10-animal's jaw; 11-retouched flake; 72-biface; 13-scraper; 14 - chopping tool; 15-fragment of a chopping tool; 16-fragment of a retouched tool; 17-piercing; 18-drill; 19-preparation of a stone tool; 20-fragment of a polished knife; 21-fragment of a retouched arrowhead; 22-bead.

page 5

Fig. 4. The pit of the dwelling. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

5. A pillar pit with a stone buttress and a ceramic figurine made from it. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

1-ceramic figurine; 2-zabutovka stones; 3-loose filling of the pit.

tualny complex [Popov and Batarshev, 2006]. It consists of a post pit with a stone buttress (pit No. 4). in the upper part of which was an anthropomorphic clay figurine. The figurine depicts a kneeling woman (?) with schematically rendered abdomen and female genitalia (height 4.9 cm, maximum width 3.6 cm, maximum thickness 2.7 cm). The head is missing; it may have been deliberately broken off or not shaped at all. Given that the figurine was located between the stones of the buttress of one of the central support pillars, which apparently had a special significance for the construction of the roof, this complex can be considered as a reflection of the ritual of the construction sacrifice (Fig. 5).

Stone tools. The characteristics of the stone inventory of the Rudninsky complex were compiled on the basis of a collection of products made from a layer of black-brown gravelly sandy loam (Dorofeeva and Batarshev, 2006). The collection is small (113 items, including industrial waste); it lacks the primary splitting complex and has a small proportion of retouched tools (11.2%). The products illustrate the flake technique for obtaining blanks, the final product of which was flakes and lamellar flakes. Secondary processing was performed using bifacial, unifacial, and edge retouching techniques. Morphologically expressed tools include: a diamond-shaped biface in plan and lenticular in cross-section (Fig. 6, 3), an end-type scraper with a high semicircular blade (Fig. 6, 1), a piercing-screwdriver on a tetrahedral elongated billet (Fig. 6, 2), a fragment of an arrowhead with a recess in the base, designed with edge double-sided retouching (figs. 6, 4).

Information on the complex of polished products is more diverse. The raw materials for their manufacture were metamorphosed shales of various colors, varying degrees of shale and hardness. The most widespread group of tools processed by grinding are arrowheads - 52 copies (33 fragments, 14 whole and five unfinished items). They are quite close, meet certain standards and are probably made according to certain "templates". A narrow "template" is represented by willow - shaped tips with a length of about 3.5 cm, a width of 1.0 - 1.1 cm, a thickness of 1.5 - 2.0 mm, with a rhombic point in cross-section and a lenticular body in cross-section (four whole, eight fragmented and three unfinished products; Figs. 6, 6). A wide "template" is represented by laurel-leaf tips. the forms are approx. long. 4 cm, 1.2 - 1.3 cm wide, 2-3 mm thick, with a rhombic point in cross-section and a lenticular or hexagonal body in cross-section (10 whole, 19 fragmented and two unfinished tools; Fig. 6, 7).

Most arrowheads have a straight tip (16 copies; Fig. 6, 6, 8), but there are tools with a convex (2 copies), slightly concave (3 copies; Fig.-

page 6

Fig. 6. Stone tools. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

bent (3 copies) base. Two guns reflect an attempt to form stingrays (Figs. 6, 9).

The next group of polished tools is adze-shaped tools of small size (5 copies). Products of elongated triangular shape with a slightly convex working blade, processed by double-sided grinding. The tools are flat in cross-section, 1.5 - 2.0 mm thick; only one specimen is oval in cross-section, 6 mm thick (Figs.

In addition, the collection from the floor of the dwelling contains fragments of large polished tools (two fragments of two-edged knives (Figs. 6, 5), a fragment of a chopping tool attachment), two polished beads (spherical and cylindrical) and three small abrasives.

Ceramics. The ceramic collection belonging to the Rudninsky complex of the monument includes 795 ornamented fragments of ceramics of about 300 vessels. Archaeologically, there are no intact vessels in the ceramic collection; six containers were restored by 1/2 or 1/3.

Raw material. According to the petrographic analysis (definitions of cand. geol. B. L. Zalishchaka, Far Eastern Geological Institute, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences), ceramic dish dough is prepared according to three recipes. The most common molding composition is "clay+sand+gravel". As a mineral thinning agent, weathering products were apparently used, from which the hills of the left bank of the Nesterovka River are composed. The loose rock added to the clay was previously crushed, but not sieved, as evidenced by a significant variation in the size indicators of the otoshchitel grains. Less common recipes are "clay+sand" and "clay+sand+chamotte". As a chamotte, judging by the small size and roundness of the grains, unburned, sun-dried clay was used.

Forming. Dishes were made by a ring-shaped tourniquet taping. The junctions of the harnesses when disintegrating are straight or with a slight bevel. Seams of structural elements on the surface of vessels are not fixed. The bottom was made of a thin clay cake, in the end of which the lower torso harness was attached. The connection of the bottom to the body from the outside is smooth, without a ledge or rim, at an angle of about 100°. Inside, the junction of the trunk and bottom was not additionally strengthened. The corollas of the vessels were formed by simple modeling of the upper torso bundle (flattening, thickening, bending).

Surface treatment. The walls and bottom of the vessels were carefully smoothed. On the inner surface of some samples there are traces of processing with a smooth tool (possibly with pebbles) - parallel, horizontally oriented tracks up to 0.6 cm wide. At the final stage of surface treatment, the walls and bottom of the vessels were covered with a layer of liquid finely dispersed clay from the outer, less often from the outer and inner sides.

Firing. Ceramics in the fracture are mostly brown, light brown, and reddish-orange in color, solid or with a gradual transition of tones. The color of the fracture and the surface of the shard, as a rule, coincide or slightly differ. Some shards with light-colored surfaces show a dark streak in the fracture. Judging by the color scheme of the potsherds, the ceramics were fired in both oxidizing and reducing media at a temperature of 600-700 °C.

Morphological characteristics. All dishes are flat-bottomed, simple open shape. The largest diameter corresponds to the center or lower third of the vessel. The corollas of the vessels are straight in profile, slightly or strongly bent outwards. The shape of the rim of the corolla is different: pointed symmetrical, pointed asymmetrical (the edge is beveled outwards or inwards), flat and rounded. In some vessels, especially those with corollas with an outwardly or inwardly sloping edge, the outer edge of the rim is thickened.

The main differentiating feature of the shape of dishes is the neck. By the presence or absence of a neck, as well as by the degree of its profiling, containers without a neck, with an intended neck and a selected neck are distinguished. In vessels with a marked neck, the border between its base and the trunk is clearly traced. Vessels with the intended neck

page 7
they have a slight narrowing between the body and the mouth and an undefined border at the base of the neck. The contour of the necks of all vessels is smooth, gradually expanding from its base to the mouth.

Ornamentation. Ceramic ornaments belong to the negative (99.8%) and positive (0.2%) relief classes. The dominant method of applying decor is stamping (98.9%); secondary methods are drawing (0.6%), indentation (0.4%) and nailing (0.2%). The main types of ornaments are formed by impressions of a comb (40.4%), a V-shaped stamp with different angles of conjugation of the sides of a straight or curved contour ("birds"; 22.6%), oval-rounded (17.3%), rhombic (8.2%), in the form of a bracket (5.4%) and triangular (3.4%).

The ornament was applied along the edge of the corolla and in the estuarine part of the body. As a rule, only the walls were decorated (67.7%), less often-the edges of the corolla and the walls (29.5%), in some cases - only the edges of the corolla (2.8%). The ornament on the edges of the vessels consisted of oval-rounded impressions grouped in a horizontal line. The corolla was ornamented most often along the outer edge of the edge, less often along the edge; on one sample - along the outer and inner edges of the edge. Decor in the mouth part of the vessel was applied under the outer edge of the rim of the corolla or just below. The width of the ornamental field on the vessel walls is 2 - 10 cm.

The walls of the vessels were decorated with ornaments consisting of simple and complex motifs. The group of simple motifs (79.4%) includes horizontal (54.7%), vertical (16.7%), inclined (6.7%) and zigzag (1.4%) rows/lines, which were made using ornaments of ten types: rhombic, oval-rounded, combed, rectangular and rope, in the form of a bracket, "birds", nail impression, spatula, adhesive roller. Complex motifs included a grid (20.6%), which consisted of five types of ornaments: rhombic, triangular, combed, in the form of a bracket and drawn lines. Stamp impressions were arranged in a checkerboard pattern or close to it ("Amur pletenka").

An ornament in the form of a solid strip with parallel edges encircled the vessel. By the number of types and motifs, simple and complex compositions are distinguished.

Simple compositions (35.8%) are formed on the basis of one type and one motif:

1st option - a grid of impressions of combed, rhombic and triangular stamps, brackets ("Amur plait") or drawn lines. It includes two to five vertical impressions.

Option 2-vertical rows of impressions of brackets and nails. There are three or seven prints in a row. On one vessel - a vertical zigzag marked with a comb stamp.

Option 3-horizontal rows / lines of triangular, oval-rounded impressions, impressions of horizontal and inclined combs, ropes, and receding spatulas. Vertically includes one (for vessels decorated only along the edge of the corolla) - seven rows/lines or more.

Complex compositions (64.2%) are characterized by the use of several types of ornaments (usually two), one or two motifs:

1st option - the basis of the composition is a horizontal strip of closely placed impressions of horizontal, vertical or inclined comb stamps. The strip includes from one (for vertical and inclined combs) to six (for horizontal combs) rows. In some cases, the comb rows are grouped into zigzag shapes. At the top and bottom, and rarely only at the top, the band of the comb stamp is contoured with one or two horizontal rows of "bird" impressions or vertical rows of the same "birds", sometimes brackets and a rectangular stamp (Fig. 7, 1-6).

Option 2 - a horizontal strip of three or seven lines of closely spaced impressions of a horizontal comb, divided in the central part by one or two horizontal rows of impressions of "birds" or vertical rows of two or three impressions of the same stamp.

In the described versions of compositions, attention is focused on a strip of impressions of a comb stamp; "birds" act as secondary details that border or dissect the main belt of the decor.

Option 3-an ornamental composition is constructed by alternating two or three stripes from horizontal rows of impressions of a comb stamp and "birds". The composition begins with a band of "birds" grouped in one or two horizontal rows or in vertical rows of two or three impressions. Then there is a strip of one to five rows of impressions of a horizontal, vertical or inclined comb. Below - again rows of "birds", behind them - rows of impressions of a comb stamp. On some vessels, the ornamental field ends with another band of "birds" (Figs. 7, 7-10). A characteristic feature of the composition is alternating bands of prints of different types of comb stamp (horizontal, vertical and inclined) (Fig. 7, 10).

In this version of the composition, the impressions of "birds" and combs, as a rule, are equal in importance. In some cases, the comb stamp comes to the fore.

Option 4 - the main part of the composition is a strip of "Amur braid", made with impressions of rhombic and triangular stamps. Above and below, in rare cases only from above, the "amur" strip-

page 8

Fig. 7. Ceramics. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

Figure 8. Ceramics. Monument Sergeyevka-1.

skoi pletenki "is contoured with one row of impressions of an inclined comb, in some cases-a horizontal comb and "birds". A special feature of this version of the composition is the impressions of a comb stamp with two or three teeth (Figs. 7, 11; 8). In this version of the composition, the band of the "Amur braid" dominates, the impressions of the comb stamp only border the main part of the decor.

In addition to dishes, a ceramic ring with a cone-shaped profile and three through holes in the base was found on the monument. [Popov and Batarshev, 2006].

In general, the ceramics of the lower Neolithic horizon of the monument are characterized by standard features that allow us to consider the analyzed material as single-cultural and chronologically discrete. There is a variety of methods of applying decor and types of ornaments within the same principles of compositional structure. Some differences were revealed in the composition of the formulation of the molding mass of ceramics. At the same time, the difference in the technical and technological production cycle, morphology and ornamentation of vessels made of dough with different mineral thickeners was not recorded, which indicates the use of different types of molding masses within the same tradition of pottery production.

Cultural and chronological interpretation of the Neolithic complex

Field and field studies of the Sergeyevka-1 monument resulted in the identification of a homogeneous complex of the Rudninsk culture. The cultural and chronological interpretation of the Neolithic complex of the object is based on a comparative description of the technical, technological and morphological characteristics of ceramics of all currently known monuments of the Rudninsk culture.

The ceramics of most monuments related to the Rudninsk culture are united by stable features in the technique and technology of production (methods of designing the body, modeling the filling and corollas, processing the walls, and the temperature regime of firing). Some differences were only in the preparation of clay dough. On the monuments of Central, Western and Southern Primorye, ceramics prepared according to the recipes "clay+sand", "clay+sand+dredge" and "clay+sand+chamotte" are common, while on the monuments of Eastern Primorye - only "clay+sand" and "clay+sand+dredge". Thus, objects located on or near the Prikhankai plain demonstrate a strong tradition of thinning clay dough with chamotte, which could be used as either sun-dried clay or crushed potsherd.

A different situation is observed when comparing the morphology and ornamentation of blood vessels. According to the combination of morphological and ornamental features in Rudninsk ceramics, two complexes are distinguished:

The first complex. The vessels are flat-bottomed, simple saddle-shaped. The maximum expansion of the vessel corresponds to the edge of the mouth or estuarine part. Corollas are straight, sometimes slightly concave inwards or bent outwards. Vein edges-

page 9
the cheeks are flat and rounded, often with L - and T-shaped thickening. The ornament was applied in two zones - along the edge of the corolla and in the estuarine part of the body, between which, as a rule, a narrow unornamented strip was left. The main types of decoration are impressions of rhombic, triangular and oval-rounded stamps, the edge decoration was most often rope prints. Among the motifs of the ornament, the "Amur plait" dominates. The composition consisted of a narrow border encircling the vessel with parallel edges, which was sometimes interrupted vertically by an unornamented section, an insert of another ornament, or a drawn line. There are vessels decorated with triangular figures (chevrons) made up of stamp impressions. A characteristic feature of the complex is the drawn lines delineating the lower edge of the ornamental strip.

The second complex. Flat-bottomed dishes, according to the degree of profiling, vessels without a neck, with an intended neck and a dedicated neck are distinguished. The maximum diameter of the body of the container corresponds to the center or lower third of the vessel. The corollas are straight or bent outwards, the edges of the corollas are pointed symmetrical, pointed asymmetrical (the edge is beveled outwards or inwards), flat and rounded. The ornament was applied in a solid strip with parallel lower and upper edges in the mouth part of the vessel. The decor consists of combinations of impressions of a rhombic and triangular stamp ("Amur plait"), horizontal stripes of "birds", brackets, impressions of a comb, rectangles, prints of a rope and a receding spatula. A typical method of constructing a decor is to make an ornamental border from the bottom and top with impressions of a comb, rope or horizontal rows of"birds". The outer edge of the rim of the corolla could be decorated with oval-rounded impressions. Within the framework of the complex, an ornament consisting of straight or wavy rivet rollers and pinches is distinguished.

The first complex of ceramics in its "pure" form is presented at Luzanova Sopka-2 [Popov and Batarshev, 2007; Popov et al., 2003] and in nine out of ten excavated dwellings of Rudnaya Pristya (Dyakov, 1992), the second complex - in Boysman-2 [Moreva, Popov, Batarshev, 2002], Dvoryanka-1 [Klyuev and Garkovik, 2006; Klyuev et al., 2005], LPZ-3-6 [Klyuev and Pantyukhina, 2006], Luzanova Sopka-5 [Batarshev, Moreva, Popov, 2003], Novotroitsk-2 [Anuchinsky district..., 2006], housing No. 9 (complex No. 24) of Rudnaya Pristan [Dyakov, 1992], Sergeyevka-1, Sinyom Gai-4 [Moreva, Popov, and Batarshev, 2002], Ustinovka-8 [Report..., 2005], Chertovy Vorota [Neolithic of the South..., 1991], and Sheklyaev-7 [Kononenko, Yanshina, and Klyuev, 2003] (Fig. 9). On three monuments with a destroyed cultural layer (Petrovichi, Sirotinka, and Chernihiv-1) presents ceramics from both complexes (Moreva, Popov, and Batarshev, 2002). The localization of Rudninsk ceramics in Osinovka is noteworthy: in the south-western part of the settlement (excavations by A. P. Okladnikov) - ceramics of the first and second complexes (Batarshev, Moreva, Popov, 2003), in the north-eastern part (excavations of the Russian-Japanese expedition in 2003) - only the first [Report..., 2004]. Thus, we can consider

9. Ceramics of the Rudninsky (A) and Sergeevsky (B) types.

page 10

10. Morphology of Rudninsky (A) and Sergeevsky (B) types of vessels.

not only the typological, but also the spatial discreteness of two ceramic complexes within the Rudninsk archaeological culture (even within the same archaeological site - Rudnaya Pristan, Osinovka) is quite justified (see Fig. 1).

Ceramics of the first complex were first found at the Rudnaya Pristan monument in Eastern Primorye, so it is quite logical to designate this ceramic as Rudninskaya (Rudninsky type), meaning ceramics not of the entire culture, but only a certain part of it. Ceramics of the second complex in recent publications appear as Khankai, Prikhankai, Sergeyevskaya or Petrovichi-Sirotinskaya. In this paper, following V. A. Lynsha (1989), it is proposed to call similar ceramics based on the Sergeyevka-1 monument Sergeyevskaya (Sergeyevsky type) (see Figs.

The chronological positions of the Rudninsk and Sergeyevskaya ceramics are determined by a series of radiocarbon dates (see the table). According to them, Rudninsk ceramics fit within the limits of 7.5 - 7.0 thousand years ago, Sergeevskaya-7-6 thousand years ago. Of course, without further replenishment of the list of radiocarbon dates, the proposed chronological definitions should be considered preliminary, but now we can say that Rudninsk ceramics are older than Sergeevskaya. This assumption is not contradicted by the fact that Sergeyevskaya ceramics are younger in appearance than Rudninskaya ceramics: vessels are more diverse in shape, types, and compositional structure of ornaments, with taped ornaments (see Figs. 9, 10).

The stone inventory complexes corresponding to the Rudninsk and Sergeyevskaya ceramics do not show any clear technological differences. Monuments with Sergeyevskaya ceramics are characterized by a variety of polished products (axes, adzes, knives, arrowheads, jewelry), and the use of grinding in the manufacture of small tools is noted. On monuments with Rudninsk ceramics, grinding was used only in the manufacture of a relatively narrow category of chopping tools (axes, adzes), the main part of the products was processed using bifacial techniques-

Radiocarbon dates of the Rudninsk culture

Type of ceramic

Monument

Date, l. n.

Index

Material

Literature

Rudninsky District

Ore Pier

7 390 ±100

GIN-5984

Charcoal

Dyakov, 1992, p. 119

7 550 ± 60

GIN-5631

Too

7 690 ± 80

GIN-5983

"

Luzanova Sopka-2

7 320 ± 40

IAAA-32076

Food deposits on ceramics

Popov, Batarshev, 2007, p. 107

Sergeyevsky

The Devil's Gate

5 890 ± 45

LE-4181

Animal bone

Radiocarbon chronology..., 1998, p. 15

6 380 ± 70

MSU-504

Charcoal

6 575 ± 45

SOAN-1083

Too

6 710 ±105

LE-4182

"

6 825 ± 45

SOAN-1212

"

7 010 ±95

TERRA-Ь011300а36

Human bone

Kuzmin, Richards, Yoneda, 2002, p. 56

7 110 ± 95

TERRA-Ь011300а37

Too

Sergeyevka-1

6 700 ± 80

AA-60608

Food deposits on ceramics

Popov, Batarshev, 2007, p. 109

Ustinovka-8

6 770 ± 50

TKa-13433

Also (dates for one vessel)

Archaeological..., 2006, p. 176

6 830 ± 50

TKa-13432

6 890 ± 50

TKa-13430

7 020 ± 90

TKa-13431

page 11
background and edge retouching. Some items that are characteristic of monuments with Rudninsk ceramics (for example, the so-called Rudninsk-type scrapers) cease to play a leading role or disappear altogether in the inventory complexes of monuments with Sergeyevsky-type ceramics. These features are most likely due to chronological reasons and reflect the change of priorities in the use of different stone processing techniques.

The information about long-term residential structures accompanying both ceramic complexes is very interesting. Excavated (in whole or in part) 15 dwellings: Rudnaya Pristan - ten, Dvoryanka-1, Novotroitskoe-2, Sergeyevka-1, Chertovy Vorota and Sheklyaevo-7-one each. They are characterized by pits of square (sub-square) or rectangular shape. By area, there are three groups of dwellings - up to 10, 20 - 35 and 70 - 140 m2. A hearth is located in the center of the dwellings or close to them. Hearth designs are diverse - hearths without a special hearth space, in earthen depressions, a wooden box with sand added, on a clay platform and in a pit with a stone lining. The bottom of the pits is usually flat without special filling or coating. Some dwellings (Rudnaya Pristan, Sergeyevka-1) are characterized by stepped exits (niches) adjacent to the walls, and stone platforms (masonry / plumes)that form the pit around the perimeter or the space around it. The pillar structure of the roof was reinforced in pits located around the perimeter and in the center of the pit; among them, pits with a stone zabutovka were noted. Thus, the structures of dwellings containing ceramics from the Rudninsky and Sergeyevsky complexes are similar, and the similarity is evident even in such specific details of the pit design as side exits (niches) and stone platforms/plumes.

Discussion of the results

The information accumulated so far allows us to conclude that there are two ceramic complexes within the Rudninsk culture - Rudninsky and Sergeyevsky (see Figures 9, 10). Their chronological sequence and similarity in features, reflecting primarily the technical and technological cycle of production, techniques and principles of ornamentation of vessels, allow us to interpret the complexes as cultural and chronological types corresponding to two stages (chronological variants according to L. S. Klein [1991, p. 392-393]) of the Rudninsk culture (Batarshev, 2005). The differences between the Rudninsk (7.5 - 7.0 thousand years ago) and Sergeyevsky (7 - 6 thousand years ago) stages clearly manifested themselves in ceramics, as the most dynamic archaeological structure, to a lesser extent-in stone tools and practically did not affect the design of dwellings. In our opinion, there is no reason to separate the Sergeyevsky stage into a separate culture, as suggested by D. A. Saphirov, V. A. Lyn'sha, and N. A. Klyuev.

The area of monuments of the Rudninsky and Sergeyevsky stages includes Western, Central, and Eastern Primorye (see Figure 1). In Southern Primorye, material from the Rudninsky culture (Sergeyevsky-type ceramics) has so far been found only on Boysman-2. In addition, judging by the publications, monuments with ceramics of the Sergeyevsky type are represented in North-Eastern China: Wanglihotong [Alkin, 1992], Daobeishan [Wu Weike, Liu Huanxin, Chang Zhiqiang, 1987], Dongning City Monument [Alkin, 1992], Xinkailu [Yang Hu, Tan Yingjie, 1979]. Rudninsky monuments, apparently, are widely distributed in North-Eastern China, so special attention should be paid to the fact that the carriers of the Rudninsky culture use chamotte for thinning ceramic dough. Fireclay ceramics are found on Rudninsky monuments in Central, Western, and Southern Primorye, but are absent from similar sites in Eastern Primorye. According to S. V. Alkin, the Sergeyevskaya ceramics represented in Chinese monuments are made of clay with an admixture of sand or crushed rock [1992]. Thus, the tradition of replacing ceramics with chamotte is geographically connected with the Prikhankai area of the Rudninsk culture, and here it can be traced at both its stages. The reasons for this are not yet fully understood; it is possible that the Rudninsk culture was influenced by other cultures within the Prikhankai plain and that technological innovations were formed under these conditions.

Conclusion

Based on the research results of the Sergeyevka-1 monument, an internal periodization of the Rudninsk culture has been developed. Two stages are distinguished: the early Rudninsk (7.5 - 7.0 thousand years ago) and the late Sergeyevsky (7 - 6 thousand years ago). The names of the stages correspond to the names of reference monuments, from which reference collections of archaeological equipment are compiled: Rudnaya Pristan in Eastern Primorye and Sergeevka-1 in Western Primorye. The differences between the stages were most pronounced in the corresponding ceramic complexes. The ceramic complex of the Rudninsk stage is characterized by simple-shaped dishes with a non-profiled body and neck and a monotonous decor. Ceramics of the Sergeyevsky stage are distinguished by a more developed morphostructure and a variety of application techniques

page 12
decorative elements, types and compositions of ornaments. According to technical and technological characteristics, the ceramics of both complexes are identical, which confirms their belonging to the same archaeological culture.

The proposed concept, of course, does not claim to be complete and needs additional argumentation, which can be obtained in the course of further research of both known and new monuments. The most important task remains to create a comprehensive and detailed description of the stone industry of the Rudninsk culture, which is much less studied than ceramic production.

List of literature

Alkin S. V." Kondonskaya "kul'turnaya obshchnost': novye materialy i perspektivy issledovaniya ["Condon" cultural community: new materials and research prospects]: Tez. dokl. Region. Scientific conference-Ussuriysk, 1992. - pp. 150-153.

Anuchinsky district of Primorsky Krai in antiquity and the Middle Ages: Textbook. Vladivostok: IIAE FEB RAS Publ., 2006, 120 p. (in Russian)

Batarshev S. V. Rudninskaya arkheologicheskaya kul'tura v Primorye: Khronologicheskie variatsii i mezhkul'turnye svyazi [Rudninsk archaeological culture in Primorye: Chronological variants and Intercultural relations]. dis. ... candidate of Historical Sciences. Vladivostok, 2005, 24 p. (in Russian)

Batarshev S. V., Moreva O. L., Popov A. N. Keramicheskiy kompleks poseleniya Osinovka i problema rannego neolita Prikhankayskoy nizmennosti [Ceramic complex of Osinovka settlement and the problem of the Early Neolithic of the Prikhankai Lowland]. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2003, pp. 66-72.

Dorofeeva N. A., Batarshev S. V. Stone inventory of the lower Neolithic layer of the Sergeyevka-1 monument (Primorye). Khabarovsk: Khabarov, kraevoi kraeved, muzei, 2006, part 1, pp. 54-60.

Dyakov V. I. Multilayered settlement Rudnaya Pristan and periodization of Neolithic cultures of Primorye. Vladivostok: Dalnauka Publ., 1992, 140 p. (in Russian)

Klein L. S. Archaeological Typology , Leningrad: LF TSENDISI, Leningr. branch of the Center for Scientific Research. - technical activities, research and social studies. Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1991, 448 p.

Klyuev N. A., Garkovik A.V. K voprosu o kul'turnoi otnoshenii neoliticheskogo kompleksa pamyatnika Dvoryanka-1 v Primorye [On the question of cultural belonging of the Neolithic complex of the Dvoryanka-1 monument in Primorye].

Klyuev N. A., Garkovik A.V., Sleptsov I. Yu., Gladchenkov A. P. The Epoch of stone and paleometal in Western Primorye: discoveries and finds of 2004 // Northern Pacifica - cultural adaptations at the end of the Pleistocene and Holocene. - Magadan: Publishing House North. mezhdunar. univ., 2005, pp. 81-83.

Klyuev N. A., Pantyukhina I. E. Novye pamyatniki rannego neolita Primorye (stoyanka LZP-3 - 6) [New monuments of the Early Neolithic of Primorye (parking lot LZP-3-6)]. Khabarovsk: Khabar, Regional ethnographer, Museum, 2006, part 1, pp. 84-87.

Kononenko N. A., Yanshina O. V., Klyuev N. A. The settlement of Sheklyaevo-7-a new Neolithic monument in Primorye / / Russia and the Asia-Pacific Region, 2003, No. 4, pp. 5-15.

Lyn'sha, V. A., Sergeevka-1-a new Neolithic site in the south of Primorye, Problemy kraevedeniya: Tez. dokl. konf. - Ussuriysk, 1989, pp. 41-43.

Moreva O. L., Popov A. N., Batarshev S. V. Vzaimovliyanie ranneneoliticheskikh kul'tury Primorskogo kraya (po keramicheskim materialam) [Mutual influence of Early Neolithic cultures of Primorsky Krai (based on ceramic materials)]. Blagoveshchensk: Amur State University Press, 2002, issue 4, pp. 31-19.

Neolithic of the South of the Far East: An ancient settlement in the Chertovy Vorota Cave, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1991, 224 p.

Popov A. N., Batarshev S. V. Ritualnyj kompleks pamjenta Sergeevka-1 (rudninskaya kul'tura) [Ritual complex of the monument Sergeyevka-1 (Rudninskaya kul'tura)]. - Khabarovsk: Khabar. regional historian. museum, 2006, part 1, pp. 95-98.

Popov A. N., Batarshev S. V. Materialy rudninskoy kul'tury na pamyatnik Luzanova Sopka-2 v Zapadnom Primorye [Materials of the Rudninsk culture on the Luzanova Sopka-2 monument in Western Primorye]. Irkutsk: Ottisk Publ., 2007, vol. 2, pp. 101-111.

Popov A. N., Batarshev S. V., Krutykh E. B., Malkov S. S. Pamyatnik Sergeevka-1 v Yugo-Zapadnom Primorye: stratigrafiya i obshchaya kharakteristika kul'turno-khronologicheskikh kompleksov [Monument of Sergeyevka-1 in the South-Western Primorye: stratigraphy and general characteristics of Cultural and chronological complexes]. Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii: Mat-ly Godovoi sessii IAET SB RAS, 2004, Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2004, vol. 10, part 1, pp. 161-167.

Popov A. N., Moreva O. L., Krutykh E. B., Batarshev S. V. Novye issledovaniya na pamyatnik Luzanova Sopka-2 v Yugo-Zapadnom Primorye v 2003 godu [New research on the monument Luzanova Sopka-2 in the South-West Primorye in 2003]. Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii: Mat-ly Godovoy sessii IAET SB RAS, 2003-Novosibirsk: Izd.- vo IAET SB RAS, 2003. - Vol. 9, part 1. - pp. 208-213.

Radiocarbon chronology of ancient Stone Age cultures in Northeast Asia. - Vladivostok: Pacific. Institute of Geography, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1998, 127 p.

Saphirov D. A. The problem of Rudninsk culture of Primorye //Arsenyev readings: Tez. dokl. Region. conf. - Ussuriysk, 1985. - P. 68-70.

Wu Weike, Liu Huanxin, Chang Zhiqiang. Neolithic complex of Daobeishan, Jixi, Beifang wenwu, 1987, No. 3, pp. 2-5 (in Chinese).

Yang Hu, Tan Yingjie. Xinkailu Monument in Mishan County//Caogu xuebao. - 1979. - N4. - p. 491-518 (English).

Archaeological Elucidation of the Japanese Fundamental Culture in East Asia. - Tokyo: Kokugakuin University, 2006. - 212 p.

Kuzmin Y.V., Richards M.P., Yoneda M. Palaeodietary Patterning and Radiocarbon Dating of Neolithic Populations in the Primorye Province, Russian Far East // Ancient Biomolecules. - 2002. - Vol. 4 (2). - P. 53 - 58.

Report on the Archaeological Research in Russian Primorye // Comparative Study on the Neolithic Culture between EastAsiaand Japan. - 2004. - Vol. 1. - P. 15 - 114.

Report on the Archaeological Research in Russian Primorye II - Ustinovka 8 Site // Comparative Study on the Neolithic Culture between East Asia and Japan. - Tokyo: Kokugakuin University, 2005. - Vol. 2. - P. 11 - 181.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 10.12.07.

page 13

Permanent link to this publication: