Ceramics of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh Culture, Early Bronze Age, Yakutia

ARCHAEOLOGY, ETHNOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY OF EURASIA Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115 E-mail: [email protected]

106

THE METAL AGES AND MEDIEVAL PERIOD

V.M. Dyakonov Institute of the Humanities and Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petrovskogo 1, Yakutsk, 677027, Russia E-mail: [email protected]

CERAMICS OF THE ULAKHAN-SEGELENNYAKH CULTURE, EARLY BRONZE AGE, YAKUTIA

The principal diagnostic feature of the Bronze Age (2nd millennium BC) Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture of southern, southwestern, and western Yakutia, which was ¿rst described by the present author, is pottery decorated with punched nodes in combination with dentate impressions and stamp imprints. This type of pottery differs from Ust-Mil pottery and resembles both ancestral Ymyiakhtakh ceramics and ceramics made by immigrants. The Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture did not spread across all Yakutia, but occupied vast taiga regions in the basins of the Aldan, Olekma, Vilyui, and Middle Lena. Most immigrants were descendants of the Glazkovo people, and entered Yakutia along the upper reaches of these rivers. Keywords: Yakutia, Bronze Age, Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture, ceramics, decorations.

Introduction Although entire chapters of summarizing monographs address the cultures of the Bronze Age, very little detailed knowledge is available on Yakutia during this period, unlike the Neolithic (Okladnikov, 1949, 1955; Fedoseyeva, 1968; Arkhipov, 1989; Alekseyev, Gogoleva, Zykov, 1991; Alekseyev, 1996). Since the 1960s, only one culture belonging to this huge territory has been attributed exclusively to the Bronze Age, the Ust-Mil culture identi¿ed by S.A. Fedoseyeva and Yu.A. Mochanov. The Ust-Mil culture was ¿rst identi¿ed on the Aldan River and then in other regions of Yakutia (Fedoseyeva, 1970a, b, 1974; Mochanov, Fedoseyeva, 1976: 524). This culture is described in a monograph by V.I. Ertyukov (1990), who synthesized all Bronze Age materials collected in Yakutia up to and during the 1980s. Until recently it was believed that the Ymyiakhtakh culture was universally replaced by the Ust-Mil culture, although the date of the latter is still open to debate. The

Ymyiakhtakh culture originated during the ¿nal Neolithic, while at the late stage of development, bearers of this culture borrowed bronze artifacts from their neighbors (Fedoseyeva, 1980: 215; Mochanov et al., 1983: 18). Later, descendants of the Ymyiakhtakh people mastered bronze technology (Khlobystin, 1998: 175; Everstov, 1999a: 53; Kiriyak, 2005: 11). Researchers have attributed the Ymyiakhtakh culture both to the Late Neolithic (Fedoseyeva, 1980: 215; Alekseyev, 1996: 55) and to the Bronze Age (Khlobystin, 1987). At different times, scholars have made attempts to divide the Yakutia Bronze Age into early and late stages (Okladnikov, 1955: Ertyukov, 1990), and to single out a speci¿c Chalcolithic period (Zykov, 1978: 37–38). S.A. Fedoseyeva, the principal investigator of Ymyiakhtakh, has recently attributed this culture to the Neolithic/Bronze Age transition (Fedoseyeva, 1999: 58– 59; Mochanov, Fedoseyeva, 2001: 32; 2002: 28). It is the author’s opinion that at the outset, the Ymyiakhtakh culture was intrinsically Late Neolithic, and then, due

© 2013, 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.2013.04.011

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

to migration processes, began transforming into several Bronze Age cultures (Dyakonov, 2007, 2008, 2009; Alekseyev, Dyakonov, 2009). S.I. Everestov’s works on the lower Indigirka and the radiocarbon dates of his ¿nds convincingly demonstrate that descendants of the Ymyiakhtakh people coexisted with those associated with Bronze and Iron Age cultures north of the Arctic Circle. Having adopted full-scale bronze metallurgy, they nonetheless retained their traditional culture, material and spiritual alike (1998, 1999a, b, 2006). At the same time, Ust-Mil sites are few in the North. Presumably, the Bronze Age Sugunnakh culture, derivative of Ymyiakhtakh, existed through the 1st millennium BC – 1st millennium AD north of the Arctic Circle and in contiguous regions of Yakutia (Alekseyev, Dyakonov, 2009; Dyakonov, 2009). Pottery represented primarily by plain vessels with appliquéd rolls constitutes the main diagnostic element of the Bronze Age Ust-Mil culture (Ertyukov, 1990: 85, 111). This pottery differs markedly from ceramics of preceding and succeeding cultures. Stone and bone artifacts in Ust-Mil assemblages are few and characterless (Alekseyev, 1996: 70). The attribution of Yakutian petroglyphs to speci¿c Bronze Age cultures remains as contentious as the attribution of single bronze artifacts to the same period. Single burials, which some researchers attribute to the Bronze Age Ust-Mil culture are poorly documented and their attribution is still problematic (Ibid.: 72; Dyakonov, 2010). Beside diagnostic rolled ceramics, researchers attribute vessels decorated with punched nodes, dentate impressions, and stamp imprints (type XIV, according to V.I. Ertyukov) to the Ust-Mil pottery, though they differ sharply from typical UstMil ceramics (Ertyukov, 1980, 1990, 1992; Akekseyev, 1996). At the same time, V.I. Ertyukov notes that ceramics decorated with punched nodes have not yet been found in distinct Bronze Age horizons, so its attribution to the Ust-Mil culture is provisional (1980: 94). According to S.A. Fedoseyeva, ceramics decorated with nodes could have spread among the Ymyiakhtakh people together with Seima-Turbino bronze ware (1980: 205). Fedoseyeva points to the possibility that in some areas west of the Lena, the Ymyiakhtakh culture was succeeded not by the Ust-Mil culture but by another culture marked by pottery decorated in the comb design, or that the latter two cultures coexisted (Ibid.: 211). In V.I. Ertyukov’s opinion, the traditions of decorating pottery with comb impressions and nodes penetrated Yakutia from the Cis-Baikal region, most probably, via the upper reaches of the Lena and Vilyui in the middle and end of the 2nd millennium BC (1990: 112). Ertyukov also suggests that migrations of the bearers of these traditions were few and their inÀuence on the formation of the UstMil culture was indiscernible. At the same time, Etyukov associates the appearance of some bronze artifacts (such as Muriya celts, Khatyngnakh and Syuldyukar knives)

with the bearers of precisely these ceramic traditions (Ibid.), without, however, considering the possibility that these artifacts may represent a separate culture or subculture. Thus, until recently it was believed that the Bronze Age in Yakutia was represented by the Ust-Mil culture solely and that this culture was distributed all over Yakutia and even spread to contiguous regions (Ibid.: 111). As we now believe, during the Bronze Age, at least three cultures existed in the region: Ulakhan-Segelennyakh, Ust-Mil, and Sugunnakh (Alekseyev, Dyakonov, 2009; Dyakonov, 2009: 19). The principal diagnostic feature of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture is ceramics decorated with punched nodes, dentate impressions, and stamp imprints. Pottery of this type has been described in our paper presented at the Second International Conference “Ancient Cultures of Mongolia and Baikal Siberia” held in Irkutsk on 3–7 May, 2011 (Dyakonov, 2011). The article continues studies in the same area. The present author attributes archaeological sites and complexes containing such ceramics to the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture. Other components of this culture (lithic and bone artifacts, economic and ritual activities of the culture’s bearers, etc.) and their speci¿cs require further examination and therefore will not be discussed in this article. Here we touch brieÀy upon the chronology and distribution area of the culture – the territory, throughout which ceramics of this kind were discovered. Description of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh ceramics In Yakutia, ceramics decorated with punched nodes, dentate impressions, and stamp imprints have been found on the Middle Lena, Olekma, and Vilyui (Fig. 1). As mentioned above, pottery of this type was attributed to the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture named after the multilayered site Ulakhan-Segelennyakh (Tokko River in the Olekma basin)*. At this site, the culture under *The etymology of these toponyms is worth noting. Ulakhan-Segelennyakh is the left tributary of the Tokko River. According to the Yakutian ethnographer and historian Gavriil Ksenofontov, the word ‘sögölöön’ refers to larch branches from which mattresses were made; the “blankets” were also woven from such twigs (Ksenofontov, 1992: 233). ‘Nöökh’ is the possessive af¿x (Leontyev, Novikova, 1989: 46; Bagdaryyn Syulbeh, 2004: 8). The adjective ‘ulakhan’ means ‘large’, ‘main’, etc. If so, Ulakhan Sögölöönökh (pronounced “UlakhanSegelennyakh” by Russian speakers) would mean ‘large stream where larch twigs are available’. However, E.K. Pekarsky’s Yakutian Dictionary provides an alternative translation: ‘sögölöön’ can also mean ‘luck in hunting’ (1959, col. 2299). In this case Ulakhan Sögölöönökh would mean a place well suited for hunting and trapping.

107

108

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

reconstructed*. All the reconstructed vessels are round-based, open, and have a distinct neck (Fig. 2, 14, 18, 22, 23). No traces of ring-building or coiling are visible on fractures of the potsherds. The pottery appears to be handmade using pressing and subsequent percussion method with an anvil (a smooth stone) applied to the inside. According to S.A. Vorobiyev who conducted experiments on shaping ceramic vessels (some made in the ¿eld at Ulakhan-Segelennyakh), this pottery making technique could have been used in Yakutia from the Early Neolithic until the Middle Ages (1999: 69–71). Generally, in his view (Ibid.: 71), the entire technique consisted in modeling the vessel by hand from a lump of clay and paddling it against an anvil, placing a ring woven from willow twigs on the future mouth, tamping the walls, truncating the upper part of the ring, smoothing the surface, and applying a design. Apparently, paddling rather than modeling on a template was ɚ b used in this case since the latter method leaves little room for subsequently modifying of shape Fig. 1. Map showing location of sites belonging to the Ulakhan(Zhushchikhovskaya, Pankratova, 2000: 131), Segelennyakh culture (a) and those presumed to be associated whereas the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh vessels have with it (b). 1 – Ust-Chirkuo I; 2 – Ulakhan-Ediek I and II; 3 – Syangda; 4 – Khotu-Tuulaakh; rather complex pro¿les. 5 – Ust-Chuga II; 6 – Sumnaghin II; 7 – Ughino I; 8 – Tangha I; 9 – UlakhanThe vessels were manufactured with the help Segelennyakh; 10 – Khongsuor; 11 – Nemyugyuntsy; 12 – Aldakai I; 13 – Ustof a wafÀed paddle. Five vessels bear imprints Chikaltui-1; 14 – Ust-Minya-1; 15 – Ust-Karenga-12, -14, and -16. Arrows show of rhombic cells; one vessel bears imprints of presumed migration routes of tribes ancestral to Ulakhan-Segelennyakh. square cells. Cell sizes vary from 0.5 × 0.5 cm to 1.0 × 1.0 cm. All ceramics are double-layered, possibly due to layer-by-layer building: additional pieces consideration was ¿rst recorded in distinct stratigraphic of paste were stuck to the almost finished vessel and position within cultural horizon VII dated to the Bronze then thoroughly beaten with the paddle. The vessels are Age (Kirillin, 1996; Alekseyev, 1996). In addition to approximately 20–30 cm high. Their walls are 0.2–0.8 cm the ceramics, lithics, bone artifacts as well as bones of (mean 0.3–0.5 cm) thick. Body sherds are thinner than rim animals and ¿sh, the site yielded 20 fragments of a ladle and base fragments. Ceramic paste is comprised of sand, possibly suggesting that bronze casting was practiced at grass, and wool. It should be noted that the admixture of the site (Alekseyev, 1996: 71). The following radiocarbon dates were generated on organic remains from horizon wool and plant components is more typical of Ymyiakhtakh VII: 3570 ± 140 BP (IM-1011) and 3120 ± 120 BP pottery, though it is sometimes encountered in Ust-Mil pottery due to the impact on it of the Ymyiakhtakh ceramic (IM-1009) (Ibid.: 69). In an earlier study (Alekseyev, tradition (Dyakonov, 2001; Dyakonov, Ertyukov, 2001). Dyakonov, 2009: 31, 35, 38) addressing the absolute Four vessels show traces of ancient repair. Remains chronology of the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of of a black substance, most likely birch bark pitch, is Yakutia, the calibrated (±2 ı) interval of the former date preserved on their walls. The layer contains potsherds was erroneously estimated at 2600–1750 BC. As a result, stuck together with pitch. Thus, the ancient technique of the lower date of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture was ceramic vessel repair has been reconstructed as follows: set too early, and the chronological range of the culture a crack was ¿rst mended with hot pitch; then pieces of was extended to 830 years (2175 ± 425… 1350 ± 350 pitch 1.5 cm wide were placed on the interior and exterior BC), which now appears highly unlikely. The correct surfaces; ¿nally holes were drilled on either side of the calibration interval for the date IM-1011 (±2 ı) is 2300– crack and laced with cordage. 1500 BP; accordingly, the hypothesized period of the Decorations on the vessels are impressively intricate culture’s existence is 1900 ± 400… 1350 ± 350 BP, i.e. (Alekseyev, 1996: 69–70, 72, 77, 79, 139–140, pl. 40–42). no less than 550 years. Cultural horizon VII of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh (Fig. 1, 9) comprised fragments of six ceramic vessels *A.S. Kirillin restored the vessels and described their including ¿ve specimens whose shape was completely morphological features.

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

1

6

3

2

5 8

9

7

4

10

109

12

11

13 15 17 14 5 cm

0

16 18

20

19

21

22

23

Fig. 2. Ceramics of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture. 1 – Nemyugyuntsy; 2–4, 13 – Ust-Chuga II; 5 – Ulakhan-Ediek II; 6 – Tangha I; 7 – Ughino I; 8, 11, 16, 19–21 – UstChirkuo I; 9 – Khotu-Tuulaakh; 10 – Syangda; 12 – Ulakhan-Ediek I; 14, 18, 22, 23 – Ulakhan-Segelennyakh; 15 – Khongsuor; 17 – Sumnaghin II. 1 – N.P. Prokopiyev’s unpublished materials; 2–4, 13 – (Vorobiyev, 2007: pl. 28, 7, 10, 11; 29, 1); 5, 12 – (Antipina, 1980: pl. I, 15, 20); 6 – (Kozlov, 1980: pl. II, 16]; 7, 17 – (Ertyukov, 1980: pl. II, 28, 29); 8–11, 16, 20, 21 – (Mochanov et al., 1991: pl. 1, 9; 7, 5; 25, 3, 12, 15; 84, 2; 92, 6); 14, 18, 22, 23 – (Alekseyev, 1996: pl. 40–42); 15 – (Ertyukov, 1990: pl. 14, 3); 19 – (Fedoseyeva, 1968: ¿g. 14, 6).

The lips are decorated with plain dentate impressions inclined to the right and with imprints of a two prong semicircular stamp. Rims are ornamented with interiorpunched nodes arranged in continuous horizontal bands. Rows of round dentate impressions and imprints of a

pronged (two prong or ¿gurate) stamp are located below. Some decorative compositions are comprised of several elements. The ¿rst – a band of nodes – is present in all compositions. The second element consists of one or two rows of round dentate impressions. On one vessel these

110

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

impressions are paired. The third element is composed of two parallel horizontal bands of comb imprints, either continuous or discontinuous. The fourth element is represented by stylized phallic ¿gures made by a ¿gurate pronged stamp (Fig. 3). As mentioned previously, in Yakutia, anthropomorphic ¿gures on pottery appeared in the 2nd millennium BC (Dyakonov, 2002) with the arrival of groups, who mastered the technology of copper and bronze. The tradition of rendering symbolic anthropomorphic images was typical of the Bronze Age of the Cis-Baikal region. This, apparently, was one of the sources of migration which contributed to the origins of the Bronze Age culture in Yakutia. In terms of technique, style, and manner of rendition (e.g., arms shown as two horizontal lines, horned heads, imitation of a round dance), anthropomorphic ¿gures from horizon VII of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh bear some similarity to images present on certain Bronze Age vessels in the Cis-Baikal region (Alekseyev, 1996: 72–73; Goriunova, Novikov, 2009). In the Aldan valley, vessels decorated with nodes were found at Ust-Chuga II, Sumnaghin II, Ughino I, and Tangha I (Amga River). At Ust-Chuga II, pottery of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh type was discovered in distinct stratigraphic context within cultural horizon II (Vorobiyev, 2007) (Fig. 1, 5). Fragments of at least seven vessels were found. Three are ornamented with interior-punched nodes. The ¿rst vessel is represented by eight fragments of the rim and adjoining area (Fig. 2,

Fig. 3. Vessel decorated with stylized anthropomorphic ¿gures from cultural horizon VII of UlakhanSegelennyakh.

3, 4). This thin-walled vessel is decorated with at least three horizontal bands of vertical imprints of a six prong comb, two lines impressed above the ¿rst band which may represent traces of technical winding, and another band of nodes below it. Vertical imprints of the same stamp are visible on the interior of the rim (Ibid.: 23– 24, 107, 109, pl. 28, 7, 10; 30, 2, 4). The second vessel was identi¿ed by a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 2). The sherd is ornamented by at least two bands of vertical imprints of a seven prong stamp connected by a “bridge” of six rectangular impressions of a comb stamp (three arranged broadwise, and two – lengthwise), and a row of nodes in the zone of the upper band (Ibid.: 24–25, 107, 109, pl.. 28, 11; 30, 3). The third vessel is represented by 35 fragments of waffled ceramics (Fig. 2, 13). The fragments are decorated with three bands of vertical imprints of a seven prong stamp, a line roughly impressed above the upper band, and a row of nodes in the zone of this band (Ibid.: 26, 108–109, pl. 29, 1; 30, 6). The paste of the vessels contains sand and quartz grains (Ibid.: 24, 27, 29). Discussing the cultural af¿nities of pottery from UstChuga II horizon II, S.A. Vorobiyev wrote that the totality of criteria (thin walls, horizontal belts of decoration, punched nodes, comb design, and wafÀe imprints) links this pottery not with the pure Ust-Mil culture, but with its southwestern variant. In this regard, Vorobiyev considered ceramics from Aldakai I on the Amedichi River (the left tributary of the upper Aldan) and Ulakhan-Segelennyakh on the Tokko River (the left tributary of the Chara) to be the closest parallels. The distribution range of ceramics displaying these peculiarities of shape and decoration extends further west, into the upper Vitim basin and areas around Lake Baikal (Ibid.: 30–31). Hence it follows that Vorobiyev spoke of an unspecified local variety of the Bronze Age culture, being unable to identify it with Ust-Mil. A date of 3145 ± 75 BP (SOAN-6687) with the calibrated (±2 ı) interval of 1610–1210 BC was generated on charcoal from Ust-Chuga II layer II (Alekseyev, Dyakonov, 2009: 36). This date concurs with radiocarbon dates obtained for cultural horizon VII of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh. At Sumnaghin II on the Aldan River (Fig. 1, 6), a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 17) with a single row of nodes (Ertyukov, 1980: 92, pl. II, 28; 1990: 39, 130; pl. 17, 1) was found. At the multilayered site of Ughino I (Fig. 1, 7), cultural layer I attributable to the Early Iron Age (Mochanov et al., 1983: 38) contained a rim sherd of a plain vessel (Fig. 2, 7). The fragment is decorated with a row of nodes; at least one band of slanting imprints of a three prong comb grouped in ¿ves is located below it. The impressions of a plain paddle slanting to the left decorate the lip (Ertyukov, 1980: 92, pl II, 29; 1990: 40, 127, pl. 14, 2; Mochanov et al., 1983: 205, pl. 103, 8). According to researchers, cultural layers I (Early Iron

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

Age) and II (Bronze Age Ust-Mil culture) were disturbed by tillage and modern building works (Mochanov et al., 1983: 38; Ertyukov, 1990: 40), so archaeological remains could be mixed at the site. Site Tangha I on the Amga River (Fig. 1, 8) yielded a rim fragment of a wafÀed vessel (Fig. 2, 6) ornamented by a row of nodes (Kozlov, 1980: 57, pl. II, 16; Mochanov et al., 1983: 367, pl. 262, 20). Judging by the illustrations, the lip was decorated with semioval impressions resembling a horizontally elongated oval with a truncated left part. Notably, at this site, lips decorated in a similar way were recorded on typical Ymyiakhtakh wafÀed vessels (Kozlov, 1980: 57, pl. II, 10, 25, 31; Mochanov et al., 1983: 367, pl. 262, 25, 30, 31). It is the author’s opinion that this fact points to the early origins of the UlakhanSegelennyakh complex and suggests that it was formed on the Ymyiakhtakh base. In the Middle Lena basin, ceramics decorated with punched nodes have been recorded at the sites of Khongsuor and Nemyugyuntsy (Fig. 1, 10, 11). At Khongsuor (on the Buotoma River, the right tributary of the Lena), a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 15) with two rows of closely set nodes was found. The lip is decorated with dentate impressions slanting to the right (Ertyukov, 1990: 70, 127, pl. 14, 3). N.P. Prokopiyev’s unpublished materials from Nemyugyuntsy, a site discovered in the Erkeeni valley (approximately 50 km south of Yakutsk), in a ploughed ¿eld near the village hospital, contain a small fragment of a rim (Fig. 2, 1) demonstrating at least one row of nodes and indistinct comb imprints located below it. Pottery decorated with punched nodes has also been encountered at several sites in the Vilyui River basin: Ulakhan-Ediek I and II, Ust-Chirkuo I, Syaangda (Tyung), and Khotu-Tuulaakh. A rim sherd with a thickened and outward slanting lip decorated with impressions of a two prong stamp (judging by the illustrations, the impressions are oval in the middle part of the lip and punctuated near the inner edge) was found at Ulakhan-Ediek I (Fig. 1, 2). A row of nodes is located right below the lip (Antipina, 1980: 41–42, pl. I, 15; Ertyukov, 1990: 57, 127, pl. 14, 8; Mochanov et al., 1991: 104, pl. 29, 1). Ulakhan Ediek II (Fig. 1, 2) contained a rim fragment (Fig. 2, 5) decorated with two horizontal rows of nodes; the lip shows straight and parallel impressions of a three prong stamp (Antipina, 1980: 42, pl. I, 20; Ertyukov, 1990: 57, 127, pl. 14, 6; Mochanov et al., 1991: 104, pl. 29, 3). An assemblage of pottery with nodes consisting of six vessels was found at Ust-Chirkuo I (Fig. 1, 1). Surface ¿nds from the site area on the beach at Vilyui include fragments of presumably three vessels decorated by a ribbed paddle. The ¿rst vessel is represented by a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 11) with an everted lip bearing two horizontal rows of nodes (Mochanov et al., 1991: 100,

pl. 25, 3). The second vessel was identi¿ed by a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 20). Paired incisions slanting to the left dissect what appears to be an appliquéd roll decorating the lip. A horizontal row of nodes is located below it (Ibid.: 100, pl. 25, 12). The third vessel is represented by a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 16) ornamented with a similar appliquéd roll stretching from the lip down towards the body, and with two horizontal rows of nodes (Ibid.: pl. 25, 15). S.A. Fedoseyeva excavated Ust-Chirkuo I in 1962–1963 and found a rim sherd (Fig. 2, 19 which, judging by the drawing, was ornamented with three rows of closely set nodes and straight impressions of a paddle running along the outer edge of the lip (Fedoseyeva, 1968: 54, 110, ¿g. 14, 6). Initially, Fedoseyeva attributed the lower layer that contained the sherd to the Middle Neolithic (Ibid.: 137). Later, the site’s stratigraphy was re¿ned. A small rim fragment (Fig. 2, 8) with a straight lip and a node was found in the ¿rst cultural layer dated to the Early Bronze Age (Mochanov et al., 1991: 76, pl. 1, 9). The second cultural layer (Late Neolithic Ymyiakhtakh culture) contained a rim sherd of what appears to have been a plain vessel (Fig. 2, 21) with a round lip and a horizontal row of nodes just below (Ibid.: 82, pl. 7, 5). In the test pit at Syangda (on the Tyung River, the left tributary of the Vilyui), nine fragments of plain ceramics were found. One fragment represents a small rim sherd (Fig. 2, 10) decorated with at least tow horizontal rows of nodes. The lip bears left slanting imprints of a three prong almond-shaped stamp (Ibid.: 49, 158, pl. 84, 2). Syangda is the northernmost site in Yakutia (Fig. 1, 3), where pottery of this sort has been recorded. A small fragment of a rim (Fig. 2, 9) was found at the lake site of Khotu-Tuulakh (Fig. 1, 4). This sherd is decorated with at least two horizontal rows of nodes. The lip demonstrates dentate impressions slanting to the left (Ibid.: 166, pl.. 92, 6). The finds described above represent all known finds of pottery with punched nodes (the list may be incomplete). Closest parallels Ceramics decorated with punched nodes were widespread during the ¿nal Neolithic and Bronze Age in the TransBaikal, Cis-Baikal, and Angara regions as well as in Western Siberia. The closest analogues to UlakhanSegelennyakh pottery have been recorded in the CisBaikal area. Thus L.P. Khlobystin (1987: 332) mentions that rows of nodes and lines made with a dragged and periodically pressed stick are the most typical decoration elements occurring on Glazkovo vessels. According to V.V. Krasnoschekov and A.V. Tetenkin, ribbed and plain ceramics decorated with nodes have been found at Ust-Chikaltui-1 (cultural layer I) in the Upper Lena,

111

112

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

south of Zhigalovo village, and at Ust-Minya-1 (cultural layer I) in the Kirenga River basin (right tributary of the Lena) in the northern part of the Irkutsk Province (Fig. 1, 13, 14). The sites Ust-Karenga-12, -14, and -16 (cultural layer I in all cases) on the Vitim River (Fig. 1, 15) are spatially close and, presumably, attributable to the area of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture. Ceramic assemblages from these sites contain waffled vessels with an evereted rim decorated with pits, nodes, and stamp imprints (A.V. Tetenkin and V.M. Vetrov, personal communication). Radiocarbon dates obtained for these sites – 250 ± 40 BP (LE-2649) and 3670 ± 40 BP (LE2650) (Vetrov, Samuilova, 1990: 123) – generally coincide with dates generated for the south Yakutian sites of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture. A.N. Alekseyev noted the similarity between vessels from the Olekma and Vitim. According to Alekseyev, the Vitim River being the area where the Amur basin, Trans-Baikal region, and Yakutia join, was evidently one point through which the tradition of decorating vessels with nodes penetrated Yakutia (Alekseyev, 1996: 77). The settlement of Aldakai I (Fig. 1, 12) on the Amedichi River in the upper Aldan River basin, contained ceramics combining elements of Ymyiakhtakh pottery (round-based vessels, wafÀed décor) and those typical of synchronous cultures in the Trans-Baikal and Cis-Baikal regions (appliquéd rolls dissected by a multipronged stamp, impressed Àutes, etc.) (Vorobiyev, 2003: 62–63). This may not be a typical Ulakhan-Segelennyakh assemblage because punched nodes are absent. One fragment of a mouth, however, reveals an applied boss, which might imitate a node (Ibid.: 58, 62, ¿g. 9, 13). In addition, the Aldakai assemblage comprises vessels ornamented with rolls – elements not typical of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh pottery. Based on the radiocarbon date obtained for the Àoor of a dwelling – 3185 ± 65 BP (SOAN-4730), V.S. Vorobiyev (Ibid.: 46, 62) attributed Aldakai I to the Bronze Age. Vorobiyev refrains from attributing it to Ust-Mil, while acknowledging autochthonous features (Ibid.). In addition to local traits and marked inÀuence of the Baikal Late Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures, the Aldakai I assemblage demonstrates af¿nity with the Late Neolithic Voznesenovskoye culture of the Amur region. Arrow heads with a tetrahedral point shaped by a speci¿ c technique imitating burin blow is worth mentioning in this regard (Ibid.: 48–50). A similar technique of arrow head shaping was recorded among finds from Late Neolithic settlements on the Lower Amur: Kabachi, Kolchem-3, Malaya Gavan, and Goncharka (Shevkomud, 2004: 54, 85–86, 113, pl. 36, 7; 64–I, 6, 7). At the same time, archaeological materials of the Voznesenovskoye culture differ signi¿cantly from Aldakai ¿nds. Assemblages with pottery decorated with nodes attributable to the Bolshaya Bukhta culture have been

found at certain sites in the northeastern part of the Amur basin and on Sakhalin Island; isolated ¿nds of this kind have been recorded on the continental coast of the Tatar Strait (Deryugin, Losan, 2009: 52, 66, pl. 10). Radiocarbon dates, primarily generated on charred remains of food on vessels from the settlements of Golyi Mys-1 and Bolshaya Bukhta-1, indicate that the Bolshaya Bukhta culture existed within the range of the middle – ¿rst half of the 1st millennium BC (Shevkomud, 2008: 168), most probably in the 7th–4th centuries BC (Deryugin, Losan, 2009: 52). Bolshaya Bukhta pottery is represented by round-based and thin-walled vessels decorated with rows of nodes and compositions made using a retreating paddle technique. Pottery is accompanied by stone tools which have a Neolithic appearance (Shevkomud, 2008: 164, 168, pl. 5, 3, 4). Specialists mention the eastern Siberian af¿nities of Bolshaya Bukhta, speci¿cally its ties with the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of Yakutia (Ibid.: 169; Deryugin, Losan, 2009: 52). Conclusions The diagnostic features of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh ceramics include the following: 1. The vessels are handmade using the pressure technique. Subsequently the paddle-and-anvil technique was used (sometimes thin layers of clay were added). Both single- and double-layered ceramics were encountered. A similar technology can be traced in Yakutian archaeological collections from the Early Neolithic to the Middle Ages. 2. Most vessels have curved pro¿les, with a neck, distinct lip, and round base. Vessels of this shape are only occasionally encountered in the Late Neolithic assemblages of Yakutia (Fedoseyeva, 1980: pl. 2; Vorobiyev, 1999: 75, ¿g. 2) and at the sites of the UstMil culture not prevailing there (Ertyukov, 1990: pl. 24; 1992: ¿g. 2). 3. Data concerning the paste of the UlakhanSegelenniakh pottery are available from few sites only, and no petrographic analysis has yet been carried out, so our conclusions are tentative. Sand, grit (quartz grains), wool, and plant remains are visually detectable in some potsherds. Such a composition is most typical of Ymyiakhtakh ceramics, therefore, the presence of organic admixtures in the paste suggests genetic links between the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh and Ymyiakhtakh cultures. This is also true for other Bronze Age cultures of Yakutia (UstMil and Sugunnakh). 4. Both vessels with technical décor (wafÀed and to a lesser degree, ribbed) and plain vessels were found. The presence of wafÀed, ribbed, and plain vessels is typical of Ymyiakhtakh sites (Fedoseyeva, 1980) and for the Early Iron assemblages of Yakutia (Konstantinov, 1978). Such vessels are also characteristic of the Glazkovo

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

culture (Khlobystin, 1987: 331). Typical Ust-Mil pottery is plain. 5. Apart from simple decorations, intricate patterns are present on Ulakhan-Segelennyakh vessels: horizontal rows of round dentate impressions, ornamental bands made by pronged and ¿gured stamps, including anthropomorphic images imitating a round dance. From one to three horizontal rows of interior-punched nodes are necessarily present in the rim zone. Lips are normally decorated with dentate impressions and stamp imprints. Importantly, neither applied decoration, typical of Ust-Mil, nor incised patterns are present (the latter are very typical of Ymyiakhtakh). In sum, in the 2nd millennium BC, the UlakhanSegelennyakh culture spread throughout southern, southwestern, and western Yakutia, extending to its central regions. Its principal diagnostic feature is pottery decorated with punched nodes combined with dentate impressions and stamp imprints. These features link Ulakhan-Segelennyakh with both the autochthonous Ymyiakhtakh and intrusive cultures (Dyakonov, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011; Alekseyev, Dyakonov, 2009). The Ulakhan-Segelennyakh vessels were made using a paddling technique; they are round-based and have a curved pro¿le; the walls are of medium thickness. WafÀed pottery is most typical, although ribbed and plan ceramics are also encountered. Ulakhan-Segelennyakh pottery differs drastically from Ust-Mil and Ymyiakhtakh in a number of ways. Ulakhan-Segelennyakh mostly derived from Glazkovo, the elements of which were introduced via the headstreams of the Lena, Vilyui, Olekma, and Aldan. Based on calibrated radiocarbon dates, the chronological range of Ulakhan-Segelennyakh should be estimated at 1900 ± 400… 1350 ± 350 BC, or 550 years at least. The distribution range appears to have been patchy and included vast taiga areas of southern, southwestern, and western Yakutia.

References Alekseyev A.N. 1996 Drevnyaya Yakutiya: Neolit i epokha bronzy. Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN. Alekseyev A.N., Dyakonov V.M. 2009 Radiocarbon chronology of Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures in Yakutia. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, No. 3: 26–40. Alekseyev A.N., Gogolev A.I., Zykov I.E. 1991 Arkheologiya Yakutii (epokha paleometallov i srednevekovya): Ucheb. posobiye. Yakutsk: Izd. Yakut. Gos. Univ. Antipina N.V. 1980 Novye arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Verkhnego Vilyuya. In Novoye v arkheologii Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Yakutsk: YF SO AN SSSR, pp. 41–45.

Arkhipov N.D. 1989 Drevniye kultury Yakutii. Yakutsk: Knizh. izd.. Bagdaryyn Syulbeh. 2004 Toponimika Yakutii: Nauch.-popul. ocherk. Yakutsk: Bichik. Deryugin V.A., Losan E.M. 2009 Problemy klassifikatsii, periodizatsii keramiki epokhi paleometalla Severo-Vostochnogo Priamurya. In Kulturnaya khronologiya i drugiye problemy v issledovaniyakh drevnostei vostoka Azii, I.Ya. Shevkomud (ed.). Khabarovsk: Khabarovsk. kraevoi muzei im. N.I. Grodekova, pp. 47–73. Dyakonov V.M. 2001 K voprosu o sostave keramiki ust-milskoi kultury Yakutii. In Prostranstvo kultury v arkheologo-etnograficheskom izmerenii: Zapadnaya Sibir i sopredelnye territorii: Materialy XII Zap.-Sib. arkheol.-etnograf. konferenstii. Tomsk: Izd. Tomsk. Gos. Univ., pp. 33–35. Dyakonov V.M. 2002 Antropomorfnye izobrazheniya na keramike bronzovogo veka Yakutii. In Severnaya Evraziya v epokhu bronzy: Prostranstvo, vremya, kultura, Yu.F. Kiryushin, A.A. Tishkin (eds.). Barnaul: Izd. Altai. Gos. Univ., pp. 36–39. Dyakonov V.M. 2007 Mnogolineinost razvitiya kultur bronzovogo veka Yakutii. In Etnoistoriya i arkheologiya Severnoi Evrazii: Teoriya, metodologiya i praktika issledovaniya. Irkutsk, Edmonton: Izd. Irkutsk. Gos. Tekhn. Univ., pp. 62–67. Dyakonov V.M. 2008 K probleme perekhoda ot pozdnego neolita k bronzovomu veku v arkheologii Yakutii. Izvestiya Ros. gos. ped. univ. im. A.I. Gertsena: Aspirantskiye tetradi, No. 37 (80): 104–108. Dyakonov V.M. 2009 Pozdnii neolit Tsentralnoi Yakutii (po materialam pamyatnikov doliny Tuimaada). Cand. Sc. (History) Dissertation. Yakutsk. Dyakonov V.M. 2010 Pogrebeniye Neleger – pamyatnik ust-milskoi kultury i voprosy khronologii pogrebalnykh kompleksov bronzovogo veka Yakutii. In VI Dikovskie chteniya: Materialy nauch.-prakt. konferentsii, posvyaschennoi 85-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya N.N. Dikova i 50-letiyu obrazovaniya SVKNII DVO RAN. Magadan: SVKNII DVO RAN, pp. 110–113. Dyakonov V.M. 2011 Keramika ulakhan-segelennyakhskogo tipa v bronzovom veke Yakutii. In Drevnie kultury Mongolii i Baikalskoi Sibiri: Materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konferentsii. (Irkutsk, 3–7 maya 2011 g.), iss. 2, A.V. Kharinsky (ed.). Irkutsk: Izd. Irkutsk. Gos. Tekhn. Univ., pp. 163–170. Dyakonov V.M., Ertyukov I.V. 2001 Analiz ornamenta i sostava keramiki bronzovogo veka Yakutii. In Istoriko-kulturnoye naslediye Severnoi Azii: Itogi i perspektivy izucheniya na rubezhe tysyacheletii: Materialy XLI RAESK. (Barnaul, 25–30 marta 2001 g.), A.A. Tishkin (ed.). Barnaul: Izd. Altai. Gos. Univ., pp. 210–212. Ertyukov V.I. 1980 Osnovnye tipy keramiki bronzovogo veka Aldana. In Novoye v arkheologii Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Yakutsk: YF SO AN SSSR, pp. 88–94. Ertyukov V.I. 1990 Ust-milskaya kultura epokhi bronzy Yakutii. Moscow: Nauka.

113

114

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

Ertyukov V.I. 1992 Ust-milskaya kultura bronzovogo veka i ee rol v drevnei istorii Yakutii. In Arkheologicheskiye issledovaniya v Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 144–160. Everstov S.I. 1998 Etnicheskaya identi¿katsiya ymyiakhtakhskikh pamyatnikov Nizhnei Indigirki. In Istoriko-kulturnye svyazi mezhdu korennym naseleniyem Tikhookeanskogo poberezhya Severo-Zapadnoi Ameriki i Severo-Vostochnoi Azii: K 100-letiyu Dzhezupovskoi Severo-Tikhookeanskoi ekspeditsii: Materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konferentsii. Vladivostok: DVO RAN, pp. 206–210. Everstov S.I. 1999a Sugunnakh – novaya stoyanka ymyyakhtakhskoi kultury na Indigirke. In Arkheologiya Severo-Vostochnoi Azii: Astroarkheologiya. Paleometrologiya. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 40–54. Everstov S.I. 1999b Izobrazheniya na bereste i etnicheskaya identifikatsiya ymyyakhtakhskikh pamyatnikov Indigirki (v svete novykh arkheologicheskikh otkrytii). In Arkheologiya Severo-Vostochnoi Azii: Astroarkheologiya. Paleometrologiya. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 54–64. Everstov S.I. 2006 Pionery bronzoliteinogo proizvodstva Yakutii (v svete novykh arkheologicheskikh otkrytii). In IV Dikovskiye chteniya: Materialy nauch.-prakt. konferentsii, posvyasch. 250-letiyu so dnya vykhoda v svet rossiiskoi nauchnoi akademicheskoi monogra¿i S.P. Krasheninnikova “Opisanie zemli Kamchatki.” Magadan: SVKNII DVO RAN, pp. 83–87. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1968 Drevniye kultury Verkhnego Vilyuya. Moscow: Nauka. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1970a Novye dannye o bronzovom veke Yakutii. In Po sledam drevnikh kultur Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Yakutsk: Knizh. izd., pp. 128–142. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1970b Epokha bronzy na Aldane (po materialam mnogosloinoi stoyanki Belkachi I). In Sibir i ee sosedi v drevnosti, iss. 3. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 303–313. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1974 Ust-milskaya kultura epokhi bronzy Yakutii. In Drevnyaya istoriya Yugo-Vostochnoi Sibiri, iss. 2. IIrkutsk: Izd. Irkutusk. Gos. Univ., pp. 146–158. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1980 Ymyiakhtakhskaya kultura Severo-Vostochnoi Azii. Novosibirsk: Nauka. Fedoseyeva S.A. 1999 Arkheologiya Yakutii i ee mesto v mirovoi nauke o proiskhozhdenii i evolyutsii chelovechestva. Ocherki po dopismennoi istorii Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Yakutsk: Litograf. Goriunova O.I., Novikov A.G. 2009 Anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, and solar symbolisms on Bronze Age ceramics from the Western Baikal region. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, No. 4: 76–82. Khlobystin L.P. 1987 Bronzovyi vek Vostochnoi Sibiri. In Epokha bronzy lesnoi polosy SSSR. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 327–350.

Khlobystin L.P. 1998 Drevnyaya istoriya Taimyrskogo Zapolyarya i voprosy formirovaniya kultur Severa Evrazii, V.V. Pitulko, V.Ya. Shumkin (eds.). St. Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin. Kirillin A.S. 1996 Mnogosloinaya stoyanka Ulakhan Segelennyah na reke Tokko. In Arkheologiya Severnoi Pasifiki. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, pp. 246–251. Kiriyak (Dikova) M.A. 2005 Kamennyi vek Chukotki (novye materialy). Magadan: Kordis. Konstantinov I.V. 1978 Rannii zheleznyi vek Yakutii. Novosibirsk: Nauka. Kozlov V.I. 1980 Novye arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Amgi. In Novoye v arkheologii Yakutii: Trudy Prilenskoi arkheolog. ekspeditsii. Yakutsk: YF SO AN SSSR, pp. 55–61. Ksenofontov G.V. 1992 Uraanghai-sahalar: Ocherki po drevnei istorii yakutov, vol. 1, bk. 2. Yakutsk: Nats. knizh. izd. Resp. Sakha (Yakutiya). Leontyev V.V., Novikova K.A. 1989 Toponimicheskii slovar Severo-Vostoka SSSR, G.A. Menovschikov (ed.). Magadan: Knizh. izd. Medvedev V.E. 2005 Neoliticheskiye kultury Nizhnego Priamurya. In Rossiiskii Dalnii Vostok v drevnosti i srednevekovye: Otkrytiya, problemy, gipotezy. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, pp. 234–267. Mochanov Yu.A., Fedoseyeva S.A. 1976 Osnovnye etapy drevnei istorii Severo-Vostochnoi Azii. In Beringiya v kainozoe. Vladivostok: DVNC AN SSSR, pp. 515–539. Mochanov Yu.A., Fedoseyeva S.A. 2001 Noosfera i arkheologiya. Nauka i tekhnika v Yakutii, No. 1: 28–33. Mochanov Yu.A., Fedoseyeva S.A. 2002 Arkheologiya, paleolit Severo-Vostochnoi Azii, vnetropicheskaya prarodina chelovechestva i drevneishie etapy zaseleniya chelovekom Ameriki: Doklad dlya Mezhdunar. Severnogo arkheolog. kongressa (g. Khanty-Mansiysk, 9– 14 sentyabrya 2002 g.). Yakutsk: Polyarnyi krug. Mochanov Yu.A., Fedoseyeva S.A., Alekseyev A.N, Kozlov V.I., Kochmar N.N., Scherbakova N.M. 1983 Arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Yakutii: Basseiny Aldana i Olekmy. Novosibirsk: Nauka. Mochanov Yu.A., Fedoseyeva S.A., Konstantinov I.V., Antipina N.V., Argunov V.G. 1991 Arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki Yakutii: Basseiny Vilyuya, Anabara i Olenioka. Moscow: Nauka. Okladnikov A.P. 1949 Istoriya Yakutii, vol. 1. Yakutsk: [Yakut. gos. tip.]. Okladnikov A.P. 1955 Istoriya Yakutskoi ASSR, vol. 1. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd. AN SSSR. Pekarsky E.K. 1959 Slovar yakutskogo yazyka, vol. 2, iss. 5–9. Moscow: Izd. AN SSSR, col. 1280–2508. Shevkomud I.Ya. 2004 Pozdnii neolit Nizhnego Amura. Vladivostok: DVO RAN.

V.M. Dyakonov / Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 40/4 (2012) 106–115

Shevkomud I.Ya. 2008 Bolshebukhtinskaya kultura v Nizhnem Priamurye. In Traditsionnaya kultura vostoka Azii, iss. 5. Blagoveschensk: Izd. Amur. Gos. Univ., pp. 158–170. Vetrov V.M., Samuilova O.V. 1990 Novoe napravleniye v arkheologii Verkhnego Vitima (epokha paleometalla). In Paleoetnologiya Sibiri: Tezisy dokladov k XXX region. arkheol. stud. konferenstii, 29– 31 marta 1990 g., G.I. Medvedev, N.A. Savelev (eds.). Irkutsk: Izd. Irkutsk. Gos. Univ., pp. 122–124. Vorobiyev S.A. 1999 Opyt eksperimentalnogo modelirovaniya neoliticheskoi keramiki Yakutii i nekotorye problemy ee tekhnologii. In Arkheologiya Severo-Vostochnoi Azii: Astroarkheologija. Paleometrologiya. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 64–86. Vorobiyev S.A. 2003 Aldakai I – poseleniye epokhi bronzy v Yuzhnoi Yakutii. In Drevniye kultury Severo-Vostochnoi Azii: Astroarkheologiya. Paleoinformatika. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 44–65.

Vorobiyev S.A. 2007 Otchet ob arkheologicheskikh raskopkakh mnogosloinoi stoyanki Ust-Chuga II v polevoi sezon 2006 goda. Neryungri. (Archives of the Institute of Archaeology). Zhushcikhovskaya I.S., Ponkratova I.Yu. 2000 Syrievaya baza, klimat i traditsii drevnego goncharstva (po materialam kultur Vostochnoi i Severo-Vostochnoi Azii). In Vpered... v proshloe: K 70-letiyu Zh.V. Andreyevoi. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, pp. 103–149. Zykov I.E. 1978 Novye dannye o vremeni perekhoda ot neolita k bronzovomu veku v Yakutii. In Ideino-politicheskoye vospitanie molodezhi v svete reshenii XXV siezda KPSS. Yakutsk: n.p., pp. 36–38.

Received December 21, 2011.

115