scholarly journals History of Research of the Krasnoyarsk Forest-Steppe Burial Mounds

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-72
Author(s):  
Vinogradov D. ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-95
Author(s):  
А. V. Petrauskas ◽  
D. V. Bibikov ◽  
V. H. Ivakin ◽  
S. V. Pavlenko

In the summer of 2015, Zhytomyr expedition conducted archaeological research at the burial mounds at the tract of Long Niva near the village Tepenitsa Olevsky district of Zhytomyr region. As a result, the burial with a stone construction under the embankment was explored and studied. The stone cover was discovered right after the turf layer and completely covered the embankment as if it was an armor. The construction consisted of granite fragments and pieces of quartzite and sandstone. At the bottom of the embankment were stone boulders of large size that became smaller at the top of burial. At the level of the mainland around the embankment placed small ditch that had a form of two arcuate sections. Remains of a skeleton or gravel pit in the burial mound was not discovered (cenotaph). Two large fragments of the potter’s pot was found on the sand pit in the central part of the embankment at the level of the ancient horizon. The practical absence of inventory does not allow date the archaeological complex clearly. A fragment of the pot can be attributed to two chronological periods: the end of IX — the first half of the X century or the second half of the XIII — XIV centuries. The stone constructions in the burial mounds are not inherent for Old Russian time in Ukraine. Stone fixt only in slightly more than 1 % of all investigated burial mounds. The discovery of such rare complex forced the authors refer to the history of research of this type of monuments on the territory of Ukraine. In the Middle Dnieper area, burial mounds with stone structures are located in two regions: on the territory of Zhytomyr Polissya (Ubort river basin, Slovechansko-Ovruch ridge) and in Porossya. The burial groups in Zhytomyr region were explored by the excavations of Ya. V. Yarotsky (1902), O. A. Fotinsky (1904), M. B. Shchukin (1976), B. A. Zvizdetsky (1988, 1996—1999), the exploration of V. O. Misiats (1961, 1978), A. P. Tomashevsky and S. V. Pavlenko (1996, 2006, 2013). There are 18 gravediggers with stone burial mounds on this territory currently. 42 burial mounds were excavated (more than 300 known). At the 29 burial complexes were fixed stones fragments. These sights don’t occupy a separate compact area and located next to burial mounds consisting exclusively of mounds with simple earthen embankments. Only at the 7 necropolises majority burial mounds contains stones. On other monuments such burial mounds was few. Different methods of using stones have been recorded in investigated burial mounds. Often different variants of stone designs are fixed in one monument. Different kinds of stone were used for constructions: sandstone, granite, quartzite. In burial mounds with stone structures under the embankment are fixed various types of burial ceremony (cremation on the site, cremation on the side, inhumation on the horizon, inhumation in undermount pits, cenotaph). The ritual is accompanied by typical Slavic equipment. The earliest complexes are dated by the X century, the most recent are the second half of the XIII century. Stone barrows Porossya are known since the middle of the nineteenth century (about 500 individual complexes was fixet). They were discovered by V. B. Antonovych (70s of XIX century), T. M. Movchanivsky (1928), V. Ye. Kozlovskaya (30s of the XX century), R. S. Orlov and P. M. Pokas (1986, 1988). 9 burial mounds with stone constructs under the embankment are known on the territory of Porossya. 78 monuments have been investigated at 5 a monuments, 37 of them — with stone crepes (the structure was mostly fixed in the of circle form of boulders, which engird the embankment). The burial ceremony and accompanying equipment are typical for Slavic monuments. There are two main hypotheses about the origin of this type of monuments. According to the first, the stone structures in the mounds are a purely practical tradition of local people, which arose in the territories characterized by significant presence of the stone (O. A. Fotinsky, V. B. Antonovych, A. V. Petrauskas). According to the second hypotheses, use of a stone is a tradition of the Slavic alien population. Ya. V. Yarotsky considered that this is a memorial of the Dregovichi burial mounds of Zhytomyr Polissya, Western Balts (Yotvingians) — I. P. Rusanova, B. A. Zvizdetsky, A. P. Tomashevsky, mixed Baltic-Dregoviches population — V. V. Sedov and A. P. Motsia. The tradition of using stones in the burial mounds of Porosyya was explained by the borrowing of the elements of the burial ceremony of the nomads S. V. Shamray, I. P. Rusanovа and O. P. Motsia. Influenced by the coming population from the western and northern territories of Old Rus — L. I. Ivanchenko. Some researchers have ruled out both hypotheses.


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-65
Author(s):  
I. V. Sаpоzhnykov ◽  
Yi. V. Boltryk

The article is devoted to the kurgans which are located on the 45 km long cape, formed by the valleys of the Yagorlyk and Sukhyi Yagorlyk rivers, which merge at the left bank of the Dniester. These burial mounds were mentioned and even painted by J. A. Münz (1781), and then described and put on cards by A. K. Meyer and F. P. de Volan (1791). Topographers and archaeologists have noted up to 120 mounds reaching a height of 8—9 m in this local region. Most of them are stretched along the top of the watershed, some groups stand with two parallel lines, a number of chains of kurgans are oriented across the watershed. In general, they mark the site of the ancient trade route, along which it was possible to travel from the Dniester to the north to the forest-steppe; to the east to the Dnipro region and to the south-east to the Danube delta and the Black Sea.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 365-382
Author(s):  
Axel G. Posluschny ◽  
Ruth Beusing

AbstractThe Early ‘Celtic’ hillfort of the Glauberg in Central Germany, some 40 km northeast of Frankfurt, is renowned for its richly furnished burials and particularly for a wholly preserved sandstone statue of an Early Iron Age chief, warrior or hero with a peculiar headgear – one of the earliest life-size figural representations north of the Alps. Despite a long history of research, the basis for the apparent prosperity of the place (i.e., of the people buried here) is still debated, as is the meaning of the settlement site as part of its surrounding landscape. The phenomenon known as ‘princely sites’ is paralleled in the area north and west of the Alps, though each site has a unique set of characteristics. This paper focusses on investigations and new excavations that put the Glauberg with its settlement, burial and ceremonial features into a wider landscape context, including remote sensing approaches (geophysics and LiDAR) as well as viewshed analyses which define the surrounding area based on the Glauberg itself and other burial mounds on the mountains in its vicinity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 105-116
Author(s):  
S. S. Frankov ◽  

Introduction. Most of the Dniester basin is located within Ukraine, but the study of flora and fauna of its individual territories is insufficient, particularly, in terms of ornitho­logy of the forest-steppe zone. Materials and discussions. Active study of the bird population of the region was started by Polish researchers in the first half of the 18th century. A significant contri­bution to the study of ornithocomplexes of the then Podolsk province was made by K. F. Kessler, who published a three-volume work on birds of the Kyiv educational district, which also included the above region. Noteworthy are the works by E. Eichwald, G. Belke, V. Taczanowski and A. Brauner. A detailed summary of the history of the fauna of Podillya and its current state, at the beginning of the 20th century, including birds, was prepared by V. P. Khranevych. Data on the then state of the avifauna of the Kherson province, which included part of this region, is provided in the works by I. K. Pachoskii. There are almost no publications on the bird population of the region in the period from the 1930s to the present. At present, the avifauna of the Ukrainian part of the Dniester forest-steppe zone has not been studied fully enough. Available publications and monographs concern either individual species and groups of birds, or the entire territory of Vinnytsia or Odessa regions. Among them are the publications by O. A. Matviichuk and the monograph “Cadastre of terrestrial tetrapods of Vinnytsia region”. However, most of these works relate to the Southern Bug basin. The avifauna of the Dniester basin is presented rather fragmentarily. The monograph by H. I Denysyk “Zoocenoses of anthropogenic landscapes of Podillya” deserves special attention. However, it concerns anthropogenic landscapes of the Podolsk region as a whole, and does not fully cover the features of the spatial distribution of fauna, including birds, in the Dniester basin within the forest-steppe zone of Ukraine. Conclusions. The analysis of the available literature has shown that, despite a nearly 300-year history of research, this region is currently one of the least surveyed in terms of bird population. The history of the study of birds in the above area can be divided into four periods of research with different intensity and nature of publications. Taking into account the data of the analysis, it can be stated that the available data are extremely poor to form an idea of the dynamics and current state of the avifauna of this region. Therefore, it is obvious that there is an urgent need for targeted comprehensive research that will address most of the above issues.


1983 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 545-546
Author(s):  
Rae Silver

2017 ◽  
Vol 186 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-112
Author(s):  
Lukáš Laibl ◽  
Oldřich Fatka

This contribution briefly summarizes the history of research, modes of preservation and stratigraphic distribution of 51 trilobite and five agnostid taxa from the Barrandian area, for which the early developmental stages have been described.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren Rhodes

Time is a fundamental dimension of human perception, cognition and action, as the perception and cognition of temporal information is essential for everyday activities and survival. Innumerable studies have investigated the perception of time over the last 100 years, but the neural and computational bases for the processing of time remains unknown. First, we present a brief history of research and the methods used in time perception and then discuss the psychophysical approach to time, extant models of time perception, and advancing inconsistencies between each account that this review aims to bridge the gap between. Recent work has advocated a Bayesian approach to time perception. This framework has been applied to both duration and perceived timing, where prior expectations about when a stimulus might occur in the future (prior distribution) are combined with current sensory evidence (likelihood function) in order to generate the perception of temporal properties (posterior distribution). In general, these models predict that the brain uses temporal expectations to bias perception in a way that stimuli are ‘regularized’ i.e. stimuli look more like what has been seen before. Evidence for this framework has been found using human psychophysical testing (experimental methods to quantify behaviour in the perceptual system). Finally, an outlook for how these models can advance future research in temporal perception is discussed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 27-79
Author(s):  
Marc Brose

“Perfective and Imperfective Participle”: This article deals with the basic semantic opposition of the two types of Egyptian participles, jri̯ and jrr. After an extended overview of the history of research presenting the classical approaches of K. Sethe and A. H. Gardiner, who both used established terms of models of tense and aspect, and also the advanced approaches of W. Schenkel, J. P. Allen, K. Jansen-Winkeln and E. Oreál, who introduced new concepts and terminolgy and so tried to overcome the classical approaches, it is nevertheless shown that the classification of the opposition as “perfective–imperfective”, with modernized definitions in contrast to Gardiner’s, suffices to explain the entire functional range of the two types and that the advanced approaches are not necessary.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document