Unfortified Settlements of the Cheptsa Culture (9th–13th Centuries): Ambiguity of Interpretation and Delimitation of Boundaries

I. Zhurbin
{"title":"Unfortified Settlements of the Cheptsa Culture (9th–13th Centuries): Ambiguity of Interpretation and Delimitation of Boundaries","authors":"I. Zhurbin","doi":"10.17746/1563-0110.2021.49.1.085-093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unfortified rural settlements have traditionally been detected by the presence of surface finds in tilled soil or of a cultural layer in test pits, by the conformity of the area to known landscape features, and by the absence of salient signs of defensive structures. The totality of these parameters is not always an unambiguous indicator of an unfortified settlement. Owing to intense tillage in the late 20th century, affecting many sites in Central Russia and the western Urals, their outward features have been obliterated, and erosion has resulted in a gradual displacement of habitation deposits from watersheds and slopes to negative landforms. Given these destructions and the resulting unreliability of traditional archaeological criteria, the most efficient way of revealing unfortified settlements, delineating their boundaries, and tentatively reconstructing their layouts, is to use multidisciplinary approach. This study focuses on medieval unfortified settlements in northern Udmurtia—Nizhnebogatyrskoye I, and Kushmanskoye II and III. Their outward features are virtually identical. They were explored using geophysical prospection, soil drilling, and archaeological excavations. On the basis of the results, types of settlement were reliably determined and boundaries of cultural layer were delimited. In all cases, preliminary interpretations were rejected. Kushmanskoye III is shown to be a fortified settlement, and Kushmanskoye II is likely to have been a medieval economic development zone without any structures. In the case of Nizhnebogatyrskoye I, its previously determined boundaries, deduced from the distribution area of finds and landscape features, were substantially corrected.","PeriodicalId":45750,"journal":{"name":"Archaeology Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeology Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2021.49.1.085-093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Unfortified rural settlements have traditionally been detected by the presence of surface finds in tilled soil or of a cultural layer in test pits, by the conformity of the area to known landscape features, and by the absence of salient signs of defensive structures. The totality of these parameters is not always an unambiguous indicator of an unfortified settlement. Owing to intense tillage in the late 20th century, affecting many sites in Central Russia and the western Urals, their outward features have been obliterated, and erosion has resulted in a gradual displacement of habitation deposits from watersheds and slopes to negative landforms. Given these destructions and the resulting unreliability of traditional archaeological criteria, the most efficient way of revealing unfortified settlements, delineating their boundaries, and tentatively reconstructing their layouts, is to use multidisciplinary approach. This study focuses on medieval unfortified settlements in northern Udmurtia—Nizhnebogatyrskoye I, and Kushmanskoye II and III. Their outward features are virtually identical. They were explored using geophysical prospection, soil drilling, and archaeological excavations. On the basis of the results, types of settlement were reliably determined and boundaries of cultural layer were delimited. In all cases, preliminary interpretations were rejected. Kushmanskoye III is shown to be a fortified settlement, and Kushmanskoye II is likely to have been a medieval economic development zone without any structures. In the case of Nizhnebogatyrskoye I, its previously determined boundaries, deduced from the distribution area of finds and landscape features, were substantially corrected.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
切普察文化的未设防定居点(9 - 13世纪):解释的模糊性和边界的划定
传统上,未设防的农村居民点是通过在耕作土壤中发现的表面发现或在试验坑中发现的文化层,通过该地区与已知景观特征的一致性,以及通过缺乏防御结构的明显迹象来检测的。这些参数的总和并不总是没有设防的定居点的明确指标。由于20世纪后期的密集耕作,影响了俄罗斯中部和乌拉尔西部的许多遗址,它们的外部特征已经被抹去,侵蚀导致居住沉积物从流域和斜坡逐渐转移到负面地貌。考虑到这些破坏以及由此导致的传统考古标准的不可靠性,揭示未设防定居点、划定其边界并初步重建其布局的最有效方法是使用多学科方法。本研究的重点是在乌德穆尔蒂亚北部的中世纪无防御工事的定居点- nizhnebogatyrskoye I,和库什曼斯科耶II和III。他们的外貌几乎一模一样。他们利用地球物理勘探、土壤钻探和考古发掘进行了勘探。在此基础上,可靠地确定了聚落类型,划定了文化层边界。在所有情况下,初步解释都被拒绝。库什曼斯科耶三世被证明是一个设防的定居点,库什曼斯科耶二世很可能是一个中世纪的经济开发区,没有任何结构。就Nizhnebogatyrskoye I而言,其先前根据发现物的分布区域和景观特征推断出的边界得到了实质性的修正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: This international journal analyzes and presents research relating to the archaeology, ethnology and anthropology of Eurasia and contiguous regions including the Pacific Rim and the Americas. The journal publishes papers and develops discussions on a wide range of research topics including: Quaternary geology; pleistocene and Holocene paleoecology ; methodology of archaeological, anthropological and ethnographical research, including field and laboratory study techniques; early human migrations; physical anthropology; paleopopulation genetics; prehistoric art; indigenous cultures and ethnocultural processes.
期刊最新文献
Variability in the Sibiryachikha Assemblages of the Altai Mountains (Based on Materials from Okladnikov Cave Layer 2) Nikolaevo-Otradnoye II—A New Early and Middle Paleolithic Site in the Northeastern Azov Region A New Type of IUP Settlement in the Selenga River Basin, Northern Mongolia: The Kharganyn Gol-13 Short-Term Occupation Site Spatial Structures of the Initial/Early Upper Paleolithic at Tolbor-21, Northern Mongolia Gazma Cave—A Final Middle Paleolithic Site in Azerbaijan: Paleogeography, Chronology, Archaeology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1