- Email: [email protected]
Boats in the rock art of Kanozero and Northern Europe
ARCHAEOLOGY, ETHNOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY OF EURASIA Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81 E-mail: [email protected]
76
THE METAL AGES AND MEDIEVAL PERIOD
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dvortsovaya Nab. 18, St. Petersburg, 191186, Russia E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]
BOATS IN THE ROCK ART OF KANOZERO AND NORTHERN EUROPE A comparative analysis of boats depicted in the rock art of Lake Kanozero and Northern Europe suggests that they refer to the same type, which was common in northern cultures and was characterized by a protruding straight keel, an oblique sternpost, and a stem post decorated with an elk head. The design apparently consisted of a broad keel plank to which the sides, bow, and stern were attached. In boats represented at Kanozero, this plank protrudes forward, beyond the nose, and backward, beyond the stern. Keywords: Petroglyphs, Kanozero, boats, Northern Europe
Introduction Rock art images at Alta Fjord in Norway and those at Lake Kanozero on the Kola Peninsula in Russia appear to be among the outstanding discoveries that have been recently made in Northern Europe (Fig. 1, 2). The ¿rst petroglyphs were recorded at Alta in 1973. In 1985, the Alta rock art site, comprising more than 3000 ¿gures, was placed on the UNESCO list of World Heritage Sites (Helskog, 1988). By 2008, 6000 rock art images were recorded at more than 100 localities (Tansem, Johansen, 2008). The ¿rst petroglyphs at Kanozero were discovered in 1997 (Shumkin, 2000, 2001; Likhachev, 2007). By 2009, 1140 ¿gures subdividable into 18 groups had been found there (Kolpakov, Murashkin, Shumkin, 2008). Boats represent one of the most popular motifs in the rock art of Kanozero; they form 16 % of all ¿gures. The same situation is typical of rock art in Fennoscandia both for the “northern” Neolithic and Chalcolithic assemblages and for the “southern” complexes attributable to the Bronze and Early Iron Ages. Boats seem to demonstrate many similar elements among the rock art images throughout Fennoscandia. Thus, they are signi¿cant for
identi¿cation of cultural relations, typological dating, relative chronology within petroglyphic assemblages, and cultural and historical interpretations of rock art in Northern Europe. Clearly, it would not make sense
Fig. 1. Map showing the location of Kanozero on the Kola Peninsula.
Copyright © 2012, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved doi:10.1016/j.aeae.2012.05.009
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
77
for the present authors to pass over the images of boats in their studies of the Kanozero petroglyphs. Boats in petroglyphs of Kanozero At Kanozero, 182 boats have been recorded (Fig. 3–7). All of them are shown in profile. The depictions are scooped out (the entire surface inside the contour is pecked). This technique is typical of all the Kanozero petroglyphs. No features that can be interpreted as masts, sails, oars or paddles are observed. It is also impossible to determine whether the drawings represent the whole body of the boat or just its part above the water.
1
Fig. 2. Kamenny Island where two thirds of the Kanozero petroglyphs are concentrated.
2 4
3
5
6 7 8 9 10
0
1m
11
Fig. 3. Kanozero petroglyphs: grouped representations of boats. 1 – Gorely-3; 2 – Elovy-1; 3 – Elovy-2; 4 – Elovy-3; 5 – Elovy-6; 6 – Kamenny-1; 7 – Kamenny-3; 8 – Kamenny-4; 9 – Kamenny-5; 10 – Kamenny-7; 11 – Odinokaya rock.
78
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
1m
0
Fig. 4. The most impressive representations of boats.
b
ɚ
Fig. 5. Boats with three (a) and two (b) boatmen.
Fig. 6. Hunting a bear from a boat.
Fig. 7. Two boats “going upstream.”
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
Design features of boats. The design features of boats in Kanozero petroglyphs boil down to the following: (1) a hull shape in pro¿le; (2) a keel protruding forward and backward; (3) a high stem decorated with an animal head; (4) sternpost placed either horizontally backwards or obliquely upwards to the stern (Kolpakov, 2007). Boats are usually subrectangular in shape with the exception of four crescent-shaped forms. In some cases, the hull is slightly curved outwards. In cases when the gunwale and keel are nonparallel, the bow is always wider than the stern. Only six rectangular boats have a keel that is not protruding forward. However, this might be a result of recent damage to the petroglyphs. A keel protruding backwards from the stern is observed on 65 rectangular boats and is absent on 53 ones. All other images demonstrate either an indistinct or damaged stern. Stems decorated with an animal head are recorded on all boats that preserved a fore body, with the exception of one rectangular and two crescent-shaped forms. All the identi¿able stems are decorated with an elk head stressed by a characteristic chin tuft (21 images) and sometimes by a typical hump-shaped muzzle. Antlers are not represented, but one or both ears are generally depicted realistically. There is only one case where the ears are disproportionately long and are curved back, but they do not look like antlers. Stems vary in length. The shortest stems are depicted as animal heads almost without a neck located right on the bow of the vessel. The longest stems are nearly as long as the hull. Sternposts are not visible only on 14 rectangular boats out of 144 identi¿able. They are rendered as thin rods or protrusions placed horizontally or obliquely (sometimes almost vertically) to the sterns. On some boats, the ends of such rods are turned down and have a short spur directed downwards. Archetype. It can be concluded that it was important for the petroglyphs’ creators to show the elk-shaped stem, the sternpost, and the keel protruding forward. This inference is supported by the most sophisticated and the largest images of boats in this assemblage (Fig. 4). Most of them have an elongated “elk” stem; distinct frontal protrusion of the keel; the keel protruding in the back or a rectangular lower part of the stern; and a sternpost often bearing a spur directed downwards. Deviations from this “canon” are few and insigni¿cant, since they are generally associated with minor (poorly discernable) elements or crudely made images. Reconstruction. Based on the analysis of the images, it can be concluded that only one constructional type of vessels is represented in the Kanozero petroglyphs (with the exception of four crescent-shaped ¿gures). This is a construction with a broad keel plank to which boards, bow, and stern are attached. This plank protrudes forward, beyond the bow, and backward, beyond the
stern, and thus forms the silhouette corresponding to the Kanozero boats. Such boats are known from various parts of the world. Boats of Kanozero and Northern Europe The Kanozero boats to a greater or lesser degree resemble representations of vessels known from some Northern European sites. The White Sea images (551 boats) (Ravdonikas, 1938; Savvateyev, 1970; Zhulnikov, 2006b) bear the closest similarity to the Kanozero ¿gures. They are characterized by a subrectangular hull fashioned by continuous pecking, a stem shaped as an elk (or deer?) head, a keel protruding forward, and oblique sternpost often with the end turned down. Thus it appears to be relevant to apply the chronological estimations of 4–3 ka BC suggested by A.M. Zhulnikov for the White Sea petroglyphs to the Kanozero images that have not been dated yet (Zhulnikov, 2006a). However, a difference is observed in depicting boatmen. The White Sea petroglyphs are characterized by rowers with paddles shown in full-length in pro¿le. No images of this type are recorded at Kanozero. At best, boatmen are shown “sitting” with the upper part of the body visible. The only boatman standing full-length is depicted full face. Certainly, boats with people rendered as rods display the highest similarity among the Kanozero and White Sea petroglyphs. The Onega petroglyphs (62 boats) (Ravdonikas, 1936; Zhulnikov, 2006b) demonstrate similarity to the Kanozero rock art images only in general features. There is a boat rendered in the silhouette style that resembles the Kanozero and White Sea images (Zhulnikov, 2006b: 106). However, most boats are depicted in a single-line manner. However, as with the Kanozero boats, the Onega vessels display similar attributes such as an elk-shaped stem, protruding keel, and a sternpost turned backward. The Onega boats seem to bear the closest similarity to the images recorded in rock art galleries in Finland. At Nämforsen, from among 366 boat representations, only ¿ve images are made in silhouette (Hallström, 1960: pl. XVI, XVII, XXVI); several boats are rendered in the single-line manner, while the majority of boats are outlined in contour. Boats fashioned in the silhouette and contour styles are characterized by a keel of the same length as the boat. Stems are rendered rather schematically and just hint at the zoomorphic head. However, some single-line boats have an elk-shaped stem, a protruding keel, and the sternpost turned to the back. These boats bear the highest similarity to the Onega petroglyphs. The boats depicted at Alta are rather diverse (Helskog, 1988). There are several boats shown in contour with a short elk-shaped stem and a keel protruding forward and backward. Some boats rendered in the single-line
79
80
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
technique also have an elk-shaped stem and a keel protruding forward and backward. Several boats fashioned in silhouette demonstrate an almost vertical elk-like stem; no distinct keel is shown. Boats with a sternpost turned to the back are also encountered. Slettnes petroglyphs in Norway (Hesjedal et al., 1996) and Norrfors petroglyphs in Sweden (Forsberg, 2000) can also be mentioned here, though they add nothing to the point of the discussion, since the former are close to the Alta petroglyphs, while the latter resemble the ones at Nämforsen. Rock art galleries in Finland (Lahelma, 2008) contain single-line representations of boats (68) that usually have an elk-shaped stem, though no keel protruding forward and backward is shown. It seems to be interesting to compare boats of Northern Europe with vessels recorded at the other end of the world – on the Chukchi Peninsula. There they are represented by petroglyphs on the Pegtymel River (Dikov, 1971; Devlet, Devlet, 2005) and by engravings on the recently discovered walrus tusk (Poslaniye…, 2009). Obviously, the depicted vessels represent kayaks and umiaks, i.e. boats constructed from skins stretched over some frame. Umiaks are generally depicted in silhouette without detailed representation of the frame. On the kayaks, the hull is normally rendered as a single line or a line split at one end. These features of the Pegtymel boats add to the long-term discussion on the presence of frame boats in the rock art of Northern Europe. The issue is whether the outlined boats with vertical lines inside the
hull represent frame boats or not. The Pegtymel images have demonstrated that the inner structure of the boat is not necessarily shown in depictions of frame boats. This list nearly exhausts the boat representations relatively similar to those of Kanozero. Beyond these remain petroglyphs of what could be termed Southern Scandinavia, associated with sites suggestive of a hunting economy and with those indicative of a producing economy. The former represent outlined boats without a keel and with a schematically rendered stem and sternpost. The latter are boats characterized by double stem and double stern, which are well-known from Bronze Age rock art sites of Southern Sweden. The presence of stem and stern points to a speci¿c type of vessel such as that found at Hjortspring, Denmark. Interpretation
Similarities in depiction of boats in Northern Europe might be interpreted in several ways. The simplest explanation is that the people who made the petroglyphs were related. However there are signi¿cant differences observed between boats recorded at various sites. Taking into consideration differences and similarities between boats as well as between all other categories of images, it seems reasonable to conjecture that the images similar to the Kanozero boats depict a real constructive type of vessels that was popular among the bearers of northern cultures. In petroglyphs, such boats are characterized by a protruding straight keel, oblique sternpost, and an elk-shaped stem. These attributes are encountered at a number of quite different representations of the boats. Is it possible to correlate rock art representations of boats with archaeological finds? About a dozen complete boats and their fragments attributable to the Mesolithic and the Early Iron Age are currently known in Northern Europe. Some of them undoubtedly represent dugouts. A wooden elk head with a groove and a hole at the base that might decorate a stem (Westerdahl, 2006: 168) appears to be the most relevant for the present discussion. It was discovered in Northern Finland (Lehtojärvi, Rovaniemi) and its age was estimated as 5700 years BC. H o w e v e r, t h e s p a t i a l l y c l o s e s t archaeological materials come from recent excavations at the well-known burial ground on Bolshoy Oleniy (Great Reindeer) Island in Kola Bay, Barents Sea. The site is radiocarbon dated to the midFig. 8. Burial 19 on Bolshoy Oleniy Island in Kola Bay, Barents Sea. Kerezh 2nd millennium BC (Shumkin, Kolpakov, boat-sledges in the process of clearing.
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
Murashkin, 2006). As our excavations have shown, most of the deceased were buried in special boat-like sledges (kerezh), which seem to have been intentionally manufactured for that purpose (Fig. 8). These boatsledges were made of joined planks and then coated with tar. The way planks were joined remains unclear. These ¿ndings evidence that by the mid-2nd millennium BC, the population of the Kola Peninsula had mastered the technologies required for making hulls of boats by ¿xing wooden planks. Thus, the scarce archaeological data does not contradict the suggested reconstruction of types of boats depicted in Kanozero petroglyphs and at some other rock art sites. These are boats based on a broad keel plank to which the boards, bow, and stern were attached; this plank protrudes forward, beyond the bow, and backward, beyond the stern. A similar construction of boats among various cultures of Northern Europe can be explained in various ways such as single origin, intertribal contacts, similar economy, etc. The solution, of course, lies beyond the scope of rock art studies.
References Devlet E.G., Devlet M.A. 2005 Mify v kamne: Mir naskalnogo iskusstva Rossii. Moscow: Aleteya. Dikov N.N. 1971 Naskalnye zagadki drevnei Chukotki: Petroglify Pegtymelya. Moscow: Nauka. Forsberg L. 2000 The social context of the rock art in Middle Scandinavia during the Neolithic. In Myanndash – Rock art in the Ancient Arctic. Rovaniemi: Arctic Centre Foundation, pp. 58–87. Hallström G. 1960 Monumental Art of Northern Sweden from the Stone Age. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. Helskog K. 1988 Helleristningene i Alta. Alta: Alta Museum. Hesjedal A., Damm C., Olsen B., Storli I. 1996 Arkeologi på Slettnes. Tromsø museums skrifter, No. 26. Kolpakov E.M. 2007 Petroglify Kanozera: Tipologicheskiy analiz (po sostoyaniyu na 2005 god.). In Kolsky sbornik: (K 60-letiyu V.Y. Shumkina). St. Petersburg: Eleksis Print, pp. 155–183. Kolpakov E.M., Murashkin A.I., Shumkin V.Y. 2008 The rock carvings of Kanozero. Fennoscandia Archaeologica, vol. 25: 86–96.
Lahelma A. 2008 A Touch of Red: Archaeological and Ethnographic Approaches to Interpreting Finnish Rock Paintings. Helsinki: Finnish Antiquarian Society. (Iskos; No. 15). Likhachev V.A. 2007 Petroglify ozera Kanozero: Istoriya otkrytiya. In Kolsky sbornik: (K 60-letiyu V.Y Shumkina). St. Petersburg: Eleksis Print, pp. 146–154. Poslanie drevnikh kitoboeyv. 2009 Nasledie narodov Rossiiskoi Federatsii, No. 1: 5–7. Ravdonikas V.I. 1936 Naskalnye izobrazheniya Onezhskogo ozera. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd. AN SSSR. Ravdonikas V.I. 1938 Naskalnye izobrazheniya Belogo morya. Moscow, Leningard: Izd. AN SSSR. Savvateyev Y.A. 1970 Zalavruga. Pt. 1: Petroglify. Leningrad: Nauka. Shumkin V.Y. 2000 The rock art, labyrinths, seids and beliefs of Eastern Lapland’s ancient population. In Myanndash – Rock art in the Ancient Arctic. Rovaniemi: Arctic Centre Foundation, pp. 202–241. Shumkin V.Y. 2001 Naskalnye izobrazheniya reki Umby: Novyi unikalnyi kompleks Severnoi Evropy. In Arkheologiya v puti ili put arkheologa: (K 80-letiyu A.D. Stolyara), pt. 2. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg. ¿losof. obschestvo, pp. 88–107. Shumkin V.Y., Kolpakov E.M., Murashkin A.I. 2006 Nekotorye itogi novykh raskopok mogilnika na Bolshom Olenem ostrove Barentseva moray. Zapiski IIMK RAN, No. 1: 42–52. Tansem K., Johansen H. 2008 The world heritage rock art in Alta. Adoranten: 65–84. Westerdahl Ch. 2006 Cosmology and magic at the shore. In Pervobytnaya i srednevekovaya istoriya i kultura Evropeiskogo Severa: problemy izucheniya i nauchnoi rekonstruktsii. Solovki: SOLTI, pp. 162–184. Zhulnikov A.M. 2006a K voprosu o datirovke Belomorskikh petroglifov. In Pervobytnaya i srednevekovaya istoriya i kultura Evropeiskogo Severa: problemy izucheniya i nauchnoi rekonstruktsii. Solovki: SOLTI, pp. 238–247. Zhulnikov A.M. 2006b Petroglify Karelii: Obraz mira i miry obrazov. Petrozavodsk: Skandinaviya.
Received May 31, 2010.
81
76
THE METAL AGES AND MEDIEVAL PERIOD
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dvortsovaya Nab. 18, St. Petersburg, 191186, Russia E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]
BOATS IN THE ROCK ART OF KANOZERO AND NORTHERN EUROPE A comparative analysis of boats depicted in the rock art of Lake Kanozero and Northern Europe suggests that they refer to the same type, which was common in northern cultures and was characterized by a protruding straight keel, an oblique sternpost, and a stem post decorated with an elk head. The design apparently consisted of a broad keel plank to which the sides, bow, and stern were attached. In boats represented at Kanozero, this plank protrudes forward, beyond the nose, and backward, beyond the stern. Keywords: Petroglyphs, Kanozero, boats, Northern Europe
Introduction Rock art images at Alta Fjord in Norway and those at Lake Kanozero on the Kola Peninsula in Russia appear to be among the outstanding discoveries that have been recently made in Northern Europe (Fig. 1, 2). The ¿rst petroglyphs were recorded at Alta in 1973. In 1985, the Alta rock art site, comprising more than 3000 ¿gures, was placed on the UNESCO list of World Heritage Sites (Helskog, 1988). By 2008, 6000 rock art images were recorded at more than 100 localities (Tansem, Johansen, 2008). The ¿rst petroglyphs at Kanozero were discovered in 1997 (Shumkin, 2000, 2001; Likhachev, 2007). By 2009, 1140 ¿gures subdividable into 18 groups had been found there (Kolpakov, Murashkin, Shumkin, 2008). Boats represent one of the most popular motifs in the rock art of Kanozero; they form 16 % of all ¿gures. The same situation is typical of rock art in Fennoscandia both for the “northern” Neolithic and Chalcolithic assemblages and for the “southern” complexes attributable to the Bronze and Early Iron Ages. Boats seem to demonstrate many similar elements among the rock art images throughout Fennoscandia. Thus, they are signi¿cant for
identi¿cation of cultural relations, typological dating, relative chronology within petroglyphic assemblages, and cultural and historical interpretations of rock art in Northern Europe. Clearly, it would not make sense
Fig. 1. Map showing the location of Kanozero on the Kola Peninsula.
Copyright © 2012, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved doi:10.1016/j.aeae.2012.05.009
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
77
for the present authors to pass over the images of boats in their studies of the Kanozero petroglyphs. Boats in petroglyphs of Kanozero At Kanozero, 182 boats have been recorded (Fig. 3–7). All of them are shown in profile. The depictions are scooped out (the entire surface inside the contour is pecked). This technique is typical of all the Kanozero petroglyphs. No features that can be interpreted as masts, sails, oars or paddles are observed. It is also impossible to determine whether the drawings represent the whole body of the boat or just its part above the water.
1
Fig. 2. Kamenny Island where two thirds of the Kanozero petroglyphs are concentrated.
2 4
3
5
6 7 8 9 10
0
1m
11
Fig. 3. Kanozero petroglyphs: grouped representations of boats. 1 – Gorely-3; 2 – Elovy-1; 3 – Elovy-2; 4 – Elovy-3; 5 – Elovy-6; 6 – Kamenny-1; 7 – Kamenny-3; 8 – Kamenny-4; 9 – Kamenny-5; 10 – Kamenny-7; 11 – Odinokaya rock.
78
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
1m
0
Fig. 4. The most impressive representations of boats.
b
ɚ
Fig. 5. Boats with three (a) and two (b) boatmen.
Fig. 6. Hunting a bear from a boat.
Fig. 7. Two boats “going upstream.”
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
Design features of boats. The design features of boats in Kanozero petroglyphs boil down to the following: (1) a hull shape in pro¿le; (2) a keel protruding forward and backward; (3) a high stem decorated with an animal head; (4) sternpost placed either horizontally backwards or obliquely upwards to the stern (Kolpakov, 2007). Boats are usually subrectangular in shape with the exception of four crescent-shaped forms. In some cases, the hull is slightly curved outwards. In cases when the gunwale and keel are nonparallel, the bow is always wider than the stern. Only six rectangular boats have a keel that is not protruding forward. However, this might be a result of recent damage to the petroglyphs. A keel protruding backwards from the stern is observed on 65 rectangular boats and is absent on 53 ones. All other images demonstrate either an indistinct or damaged stern. Stems decorated with an animal head are recorded on all boats that preserved a fore body, with the exception of one rectangular and two crescent-shaped forms. All the identi¿able stems are decorated with an elk head stressed by a characteristic chin tuft (21 images) and sometimes by a typical hump-shaped muzzle. Antlers are not represented, but one or both ears are generally depicted realistically. There is only one case where the ears are disproportionately long and are curved back, but they do not look like antlers. Stems vary in length. The shortest stems are depicted as animal heads almost without a neck located right on the bow of the vessel. The longest stems are nearly as long as the hull. Sternposts are not visible only on 14 rectangular boats out of 144 identi¿able. They are rendered as thin rods or protrusions placed horizontally or obliquely (sometimes almost vertically) to the sterns. On some boats, the ends of such rods are turned down and have a short spur directed downwards. Archetype. It can be concluded that it was important for the petroglyphs’ creators to show the elk-shaped stem, the sternpost, and the keel protruding forward. This inference is supported by the most sophisticated and the largest images of boats in this assemblage (Fig. 4). Most of them have an elongated “elk” stem; distinct frontal protrusion of the keel; the keel protruding in the back or a rectangular lower part of the stern; and a sternpost often bearing a spur directed downwards. Deviations from this “canon” are few and insigni¿cant, since they are generally associated with minor (poorly discernable) elements or crudely made images. Reconstruction. Based on the analysis of the images, it can be concluded that only one constructional type of vessels is represented in the Kanozero petroglyphs (with the exception of four crescent-shaped ¿gures). This is a construction with a broad keel plank to which boards, bow, and stern are attached. This plank protrudes forward, beyond the bow, and backward, beyond the
stern, and thus forms the silhouette corresponding to the Kanozero boats. Such boats are known from various parts of the world. Boats of Kanozero and Northern Europe The Kanozero boats to a greater or lesser degree resemble representations of vessels known from some Northern European sites. The White Sea images (551 boats) (Ravdonikas, 1938; Savvateyev, 1970; Zhulnikov, 2006b) bear the closest similarity to the Kanozero ¿gures. They are characterized by a subrectangular hull fashioned by continuous pecking, a stem shaped as an elk (or deer?) head, a keel protruding forward, and oblique sternpost often with the end turned down. Thus it appears to be relevant to apply the chronological estimations of 4–3 ka BC suggested by A.M. Zhulnikov for the White Sea petroglyphs to the Kanozero images that have not been dated yet (Zhulnikov, 2006a). However, a difference is observed in depicting boatmen. The White Sea petroglyphs are characterized by rowers with paddles shown in full-length in pro¿le. No images of this type are recorded at Kanozero. At best, boatmen are shown “sitting” with the upper part of the body visible. The only boatman standing full-length is depicted full face. Certainly, boats with people rendered as rods display the highest similarity among the Kanozero and White Sea petroglyphs. The Onega petroglyphs (62 boats) (Ravdonikas, 1936; Zhulnikov, 2006b) demonstrate similarity to the Kanozero rock art images only in general features. There is a boat rendered in the silhouette style that resembles the Kanozero and White Sea images (Zhulnikov, 2006b: 106). However, most boats are depicted in a single-line manner. However, as with the Kanozero boats, the Onega vessels display similar attributes such as an elk-shaped stem, protruding keel, and a sternpost turned backward. The Onega boats seem to bear the closest similarity to the images recorded in rock art galleries in Finland. At Nämforsen, from among 366 boat representations, only ¿ve images are made in silhouette (Hallström, 1960: pl. XVI, XVII, XXVI); several boats are rendered in the single-line manner, while the majority of boats are outlined in contour. Boats fashioned in the silhouette and contour styles are characterized by a keel of the same length as the boat. Stems are rendered rather schematically and just hint at the zoomorphic head. However, some single-line boats have an elk-shaped stem, a protruding keel, and the sternpost turned to the back. These boats bear the highest similarity to the Onega petroglyphs. The boats depicted at Alta are rather diverse (Helskog, 1988). There are several boats shown in contour with a short elk-shaped stem and a keel protruding forward and backward. Some boats rendered in the single-line
79
80
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
technique also have an elk-shaped stem and a keel protruding forward and backward. Several boats fashioned in silhouette demonstrate an almost vertical elk-like stem; no distinct keel is shown. Boats with a sternpost turned to the back are also encountered. Slettnes petroglyphs in Norway (Hesjedal et al., 1996) and Norrfors petroglyphs in Sweden (Forsberg, 2000) can also be mentioned here, though they add nothing to the point of the discussion, since the former are close to the Alta petroglyphs, while the latter resemble the ones at Nämforsen. Rock art galleries in Finland (Lahelma, 2008) contain single-line representations of boats (68) that usually have an elk-shaped stem, though no keel protruding forward and backward is shown. It seems to be interesting to compare boats of Northern Europe with vessels recorded at the other end of the world – on the Chukchi Peninsula. There they are represented by petroglyphs on the Pegtymel River (Dikov, 1971; Devlet, Devlet, 2005) and by engravings on the recently discovered walrus tusk (Poslaniye…, 2009). Obviously, the depicted vessels represent kayaks and umiaks, i.e. boats constructed from skins stretched over some frame. Umiaks are generally depicted in silhouette without detailed representation of the frame. On the kayaks, the hull is normally rendered as a single line or a line split at one end. These features of the Pegtymel boats add to the long-term discussion on the presence of frame boats in the rock art of Northern Europe. The issue is whether the outlined boats with vertical lines inside the
hull represent frame boats or not. The Pegtymel images have demonstrated that the inner structure of the boat is not necessarily shown in depictions of frame boats. This list nearly exhausts the boat representations relatively similar to those of Kanozero. Beyond these remain petroglyphs of what could be termed Southern Scandinavia, associated with sites suggestive of a hunting economy and with those indicative of a producing economy. The former represent outlined boats without a keel and with a schematically rendered stem and sternpost. The latter are boats characterized by double stem and double stern, which are well-known from Bronze Age rock art sites of Southern Sweden. The presence of stem and stern points to a speci¿c type of vessel such as that found at Hjortspring, Denmark. Interpretation
Similarities in depiction of boats in Northern Europe might be interpreted in several ways. The simplest explanation is that the people who made the petroglyphs were related. However there are signi¿cant differences observed between boats recorded at various sites. Taking into consideration differences and similarities between boats as well as between all other categories of images, it seems reasonable to conjecture that the images similar to the Kanozero boats depict a real constructive type of vessels that was popular among the bearers of northern cultures. In petroglyphs, such boats are characterized by a protruding straight keel, oblique sternpost, and an elk-shaped stem. These attributes are encountered at a number of quite different representations of the boats. Is it possible to correlate rock art representations of boats with archaeological finds? About a dozen complete boats and their fragments attributable to the Mesolithic and the Early Iron Age are currently known in Northern Europe. Some of them undoubtedly represent dugouts. A wooden elk head with a groove and a hole at the base that might decorate a stem (Westerdahl, 2006: 168) appears to be the most relevant for the present discussion. It was discovered in Northern Finland (Lehtojärvi, Rovaniemi) and its age was estimated as 5700 years BC. H o w e v e r, t h e s p a t i a l l y c l o s e s t archaeological materials come from recent excavations at the well-known burial ground on Bolshoy Oleniy (Great Reindeer) Island in Kola Bay, Barents Sea. The site is radiocarbon dated to the midFig. 8. Burial 19 on Bolshoy Oleniy Island in Kola Bay, Barents Sea. Kerezh 2nd millennium BC (Shumkin, Kolpakov, boat-sledges in the process of clearing.
E.M. Kolpakov and V.Y. Shumkin / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/1 (2012) 76–81
Murashkin, 2006). As our excavations have shown, most of the deceased were buried in special boat-like sledges (kerezh), which seem to have been intentionally manufactured for that purpose (Fig. 8). These boatsledges were made of joined planks and then coated with tar. The way planks were joined remains unclear. These ¿ndings evidence that by the mid-2nd millennium BC, the population of the Kola Peninsula had mastered the technologies required for making hulls of boats by ¿xing wooden planks. Thus, the scarce archaeological data does not contradict the suggested reconstruction of types of boats depicted in Kanozero petroglyphs and at some other rock art sites. These are boats based on a broad keel plank to which the boards, bow, and stern were attached; this plank protrudes forward, beyond the bow, and backward, beyond the stern. A similar construction of boats among various cultures of Northern Europe can be explained in various ways such as single origin, intertribal contacts, similar economy, etc. The solution, of course, lies beyond the scope of rock art studies.
References Devlet E.G., Devlet M.A. 2005 Mify v kamne: Mir naskalnogo iskusstva Rossii. Moscow: Aleteya. Dikov N.N. 1971 Naskalnye zagadki drevnei Chukotki: Petroglify Pegtymelya. Moscow: Nauka. Forsberg L. 2000 The social context of the rock art in Middle Scandinavia during the Neolithic. In Myanndash – Rock art in the Ancient Arctic. Rovaniemi: Arctic Centre Foundation, pp. 58–87. Hallström G. 1960 Monumental Art of Northern Sweden from the Stone Age. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. Helskog K. 1988 Helleristningene i Alta. Alta: Alta Museum. Hesjedal A., Damm C., Olsen B., Storli I. 1996 Arkeologi på Slettnes. Tromsø museums skrifter, No. 26. Kolpakov E.M. 2007 Petroglify Kanozera: Tipologicheskiy analiz (po sostoyaniyu na 2005 god.). In Kolsky sbornik: (K 60-letiyu V.Y. Shumkina). St. Petersburg: Eleksis Print, pp. 155–183. Kolpakov E.M., Murashkin A.I., Shumkin V.Y. 2008 The rock carvings of Kanozero. Fennoscandia Archaeologica, vol. 25: 86–96.
Lahelma A. 2008 A Touch of Red: Archaeological and Ethnographic Approaches to Interpreting Finnish Rock Paintings. Helsinki: Finnish Antiquarian Society. (Iskos; No. 15). Likhachev V.A. 2007 Petroglify ozera Kanozero: Istoriya otkrytiya. In Kolsky sbornik: (K 60-letiyu V.Y Shumkina). St. Petersburg: Eleksis Print, pp. 146–154. Poslanie drevnikh kitoboeyv. 2009 Nasledie narodov Rossiiskoi Federatsii, No. 1: 5–7. Ravdonikas V.I. 1936 Naskalnye izobrazheniya Onezhskogo ozera. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd. AN SSSR. Ravdonikas V.I. 1938 Naskalnye izobrazheniya Belogo morya. Moscow, Leningard: Izd. AN SSSR. Savvateyev Y.A. 1970 Zalavruga. Pt. 1: Petroglify. Leningrad: Nauka. Shumkin V.Y. 2000 The rock art, labyrinths, seids and beliefs of Eastern Lapland’s ancient population. In Myanndash – Rock art in the Ancient Arctic. Rovaniemi: Arctic Centre Foundation, pp. 202–241. Shumkin V.Y. 2001 Naskalnye izobrazheniya reki Umby: Novyi unikalnyi kompleks Severnoi Evropy. In Arkheologiya v puti ili put arkheologa: (K 80-letiyu A.D. Stolyara), pt. 2. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg. ¿losof. obschestvo, pp. 88–107. Shumkin V.Y., Kolpakov E.M., Murashkin A.I. 2006 Nekotorye itogi novykh raskopok mogilnika na Bolshom Olenem ostrove Barentseva moray. Zapiski IIMK RAN, No. 1: 42–52. Tansem K., Johansen H. 2008 The world heritage rock art in Alta. Adoranten: 65–84. Westerdahl Ch. 2006 Cosmology and magic at the shore. In Pervobytnaya i srednevekovaya istoriya i kultura Evropeiskogo Severa: problemy izucheniya i nauchnoi rekonstruktsii. Solovki: SOLTI, pp. 162–184. Zhulnikov A.M. 2006a K voprosu o datirovke Belomorskikh petroglifov. In Pervobytnaya i srednevekovaya istoriya i kultura Evropeiskogo Severa: problemy izucheniya i nauchnoi rekonstruktsii. Solovki: SOLTI, pp. 238–247. Zhulnikov A.M. 2006b Petroglify Karelii: Obraz mira i miry obrazov. Petrozavodsk: Skandinaviya.
Received May 31, 2010.
81