UDC 903.08

Amur State University of Humanities and Education 17 Kirova str., building 2, Komsomolsk-on-Amur, 681000, Russia

E-mail: inga-ph@mail.ru

The article is devoted to the problem of Neolithic ornamental traditions of the Lower Amur. Based on the structural and functional analysis of ceramic decoration as a "cultural language" in the ornamentation of Malyshevskaya, Kondonskaya and Voznesenovskaya cultures, similar features are identified and their correlation is determined. Malyshevskaya and Voznesenovskaya ornamentation is characterized by the predominance of impressions of a combed stamp and a toothed wheel, coloring of various parts of vessels, decoration of the corollas of vessels with straight and wavy rollers, the presence of meander, spiral, larvae motifs, and concentric construction of compositions. The Malyshevsky and Condon decor is dominated by the impressions of a comb stamp, there is a motif of a grid-plait of the "Amur plait" type. Condon and Voznesenovsky ornaments are brought together by the use of impressions of a combed stamp, the presence of a "flute" motif. Apparently, the Malyshevsky and Voznesenovsky complexes can be considered as components of one ornamental tradition, and the Kondonsky - another. The presence of ornamental invariant motifs associated with water in the decoration of ceramics of all three Lower Amur cultures indicates a common paradigm of their development and suggests that their carriers had a horizontal "river" model of the world.

Introduction

Lower Amur region - the territory of the Amur River valley from the lower reaches of the Amur River. Ussuri to Ustya-is one of the cultural areas of the Far East, which are rich in materials of pottery production of the Neolithic era. The study of the Lower Amur Neolithic sites is generally connected with the activities of the Far Eastern Archaeological Expedition led by A. P. Okladnikov. Thanks to the work of A. P. Okladnikov, A. P. Derevyanko, V. E. Medvedev, A. K. Konopatsky and other researchers, a large source base was formed, including a variety of material. Based on it, five Neolithic cultures were identified in the archeology of the Lower Amur: Osipovskaya, Mariinskaya, Malyshevskaya, Kondonskaya and Voznesenovskaya. Stratigraphic and radiocarbon dating data allowed us to correlate the Osipovskaya culture (XIV-X thousand years BC) with the initial one, the Mariinskaya culture (VIII-VII-VI thousand years BC) with the early one, the Malyshevskaya culture (VI - V-mid - III thousand years BC) with the early middle one, and the Kondon culture (VI-mid-III thousand years BC) - with the early (?) Middle, Voznesenovskaya (mid-III-last quarter of II thousand years BC) - with the late Neolithic (Medvedev, 2005b, 2006).

Monuments of Malyshevskaya (Malyshevo, Gasya, Voznesenskoe, settlement on Suchu Island, etc.), Kondonskaya (Kondon-Pochta) and Voznesenovskaya (Voznesenskoe, Kondon-Pochta, settlement on Suchu Island, etc.) cultures are characterized by representative collections of ceramics with rich and diverse decor. Ceramics from the monuments of the Osipovskaya (Gasya, Khummi, etc.) and Mariinsky (a settlement on Suchu Island) cultures are not numerous, so it is difficult to get an exhaustive idea of the ornament. The purpose of this article is to use the results of structural and functional analysis to identify similarities and differences in the decor of the building.

page 88
ceramics of the Malyshev, Kondon and Voznesenov cultures, as well as to determine the ratio of these ornamental complexes.

Historiography of ornaments of the Lower Amur Neolithic period

The ornamental traditions of the Lower Amur Neolithic cultures have not been studied in detail, although the problem seems relevant, since the Lower Amur is a zone of active cultural genesis [Medvedev, 2006, p.288] and the results of comparing the ornamental complexes identified here can answer the question of whether there is a continuity between the cultures of the region and neighboring territories.

In the works of A. P. Okladnikov, A. P. Derevyanko, V. E. Medvedev, A. K. Konopatsky and other researchers, quite a lot of attention is paid to the decor on ceramics. According to A. P. Okladnikov, in the art of the Lower Amur Neolithic, "first of all, ornamentation differs from the rest of the Siberian one" [2003, p. 67], i.e. the ornament is the main cultural defining sign. In the stadium characterization of the Malyshev, Kondon, and Voznesenov cultures, A. P. Derevyanko relies on morphological and decorative features of vessels (Derevyanko, 1972, pp. 45-47). The criteria for distinguishing the early, developed ("stage of classical cultures") and late stages in the periodization of the Lower Amur Neolithic, proposed by A. K. Konopatsky, are typological features of ornaments on ceramics (Konopatsky and Mylnikova, 1994). A general description of the ornamentation of all the selected Neolithic cultures based on comparative typological and formal typological analysis is presented in the works of V. E. Medvedev [2000; 2001; 2005a,b; 2006]. Natural-scientific methods of studying the technology of manufacturing and ornamentation of vessels were tested by L. N. Mylnikova when analyzing the ceramics of the Condon-Poshta settlement [1999]. A comprehensive method was used to study entire archaeological complexes (Shevkomud, 2004). The study of ornaments on Lower Amur Neolithic ceramics is characterized by a variety of methodological approaches, attempts to find the most adequate methodological techniques and methods of study.

Methodology and methods of research of ornamental traditions of the Lower Amur Neolithic period

In understanding tradition, we adhere to the point of view of E. S. Markaryan: "cultural tradition is a group experience expressed in socially organized stereotypes, which is accumulated and reproduced in various human collectives through spatio-temporal transmission" [1981, p. 80]. In addition to the actual "human language", the so-called cultural languages can also act as means of recording, storing, transforming and transmitting life experience. The language of culture is a set of cultural objects that has an internal structure (a set of stable relations that are invariant under any transformation), explicit (formalized) or implicit rules for education, understanding and use of its elements, and serves for the implementation of communicative and translational processes (production of cultural texts) [Kulturologiya..., 1998, p.215]. Each cultural language corresponds, as a rule, to its own area of reality or human activity, represented in certain senses, as well as the sign system itself - the expressive means of the language.

In our opinion, the role of one of these "cultural languages" in an archaic society is played by an ornament-a pattern built on a regular rhythmic alternation and organized arrangement of abstract-geometric or pictorial elements. The ornament is an object of special study by archaeologists, ethnographers, art historians, cultural scientists, semiotics, etc. Among the main areas of research are art criticism (Yu. Ya. Gerchuk 1998], L. M. Butkevich [2005]), often involving the methods of exact sciences, comparative history (St. Ivanov [1963]), semantic (V. V. Evsyukov [1988]), information and semiotic (V. B. Kovalevskaya [1970]), formalized (V. F. Gening [1992]) approaches. This indicates the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon under study.

In the ornament on ceramics, both its technical and decorative components are equally important. Of great importance is the method of interaction with the surface of the vessel - the technique of applying decor. There are two types of ornaments: relief (deepened, convex) and planar (Glushkov, 1996, 63). The decorative qualities of an ornament largely depend on the formal features of its structural units - the spatial structure (simple and complex), the shape (closed and open), the nature of the outlines (rectilinear and curved).

The technical characteristics of a technical and decorative element as a minimal unit of the ornament structure are determined by the method of its creation. In the most general form, a model formed by a single movement of an ornamental with a closed shape, which is initially set, can be considered as a norm (type)

page 89
by the tool itself. Other models can be defined as deviations from the norm (variants).

The repetition of elements, which results in an ornamental row, gives motifs that are simple in structure, shape and character of outlines. These are straight lines (horizontal, vertical, inclined) and curved lines (arcs, angles). The use of various construction principles (repetition, alternation) not only of elements, but also of ornamental rows leads to the formation of complex motifs, such as zigzag, meander, spiral, grid, etc.

In composition, the means of expressing formal features are primarily meter, rhythm, symmetry, and tectonics. Based on metric and rhythmic repetitions, symmetry or asymmetry in space, (1) unlimited closed (border), (2) unlimited open (grid), (3) limited closed (rosette) ornaments are organized. However, when describing compositions on clay vessels, it is necessary to take into account the zones of placement of the ornament; for all its self-sufficiency as a system, the decor cannot be considered separately from the product. Thus, the structure of the ornament includes three components: the background (the outer surface of the vessel), the motif (the simplest unit of plot development) and the dividing line, which marks the location of the motif and background, as well as various motifs.

Like any system of signs organized according to certain rules, the ornament captures, encodes, stores and transmits information, i.e. it acts as a specific text. This is its main function - semantic. The perception of an ornament as a text allows us to draw certain parallels between it and the written text in the usual sense. Since the space on which the printed text is located performs its semiotic functions, it can be assumed that the background also has a certain meaning. In this case, the motive should be considered as the actual text, and the dividing line should be considered as an indent in the printed text before the beginning of a new paragraph: it separates various elements of the message from each other, indicates their relative isolation and connection.

When identifying and formulating the semantic content of the components of an ornament, we take into account: first, the significance of the positions of the components within the compositional whole; secondly, that we are looking at copy signs, which, due to the technique of their reproduction (primitivism, schematism), reveal signs of index signs, and in some cases, perhaps, are transformed into indexes; third, components capture important actual realities of the surrounding world; fourth, the semantics of such signs can be described mainly through abstract categories; fifth, not every single element of the ornament is semantic. We propose a model that includes a description of the following items:: 1) the name of the motif; 2) the variety (indicated if any, each described separately); 3) what it is formed by; 4) the number of repetitions; 5) the location (corolla, body, bottom); 6) orientation (vertical, horizontal, indefinite); 7) whether it performs independently or with other motifs; 8) contactor motifs; 9) distanter motifs; 10) orientation of contactors and distanters in space; 11) presence of a fixed position; 12) invariants (border, grid, rosette); 13) background function. This model allows us, in our opinion, to compile a set of basic semantic characteristics of the ornamental complex of ceramics of a particular culture.

Results of structural analysis of ornamental ceramic complexes

Structural analysis revealed similarities and differences in the ornamental complexes of the Malyshevskaya, Kondonskaya, and Voznesenovskaya Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur. Thus, relief as the principle (terminology according to I. G. Glushkov) of decorating the surface of vessels is the leading one for the Malyshev and Voznesenovskaya cultures and the only one for the Kondonskaya cultures. In all three ornamental complexes, it is represented by negative (dominant) and positive images.

Negative relief in all three cultures was created in various ways-by stamping, impaling, cutting, "walking", rolling, dragging, stretching, and drawing. Stamping was most often used by native speakers of the Malyshev and Condon cultures. Voznesenovtsy resorted, as a rule, to rolling and dragging, less often-to stamping. For all three ornamental complexes, a combination of two or three or more decorating methods is usually used. Negative relief was applied to all the main areas of decoration placement. Positive relief in the ceramics of all three cultures was obtained by sticking and pinching. In the Malyshevsky and Voznesenovsky ornamental complexes, it is characteristic primarily for the design of corollas. Representatives of the Condon culture decorated vessels with positive relief, as a rule, of a certain type. Flat decor is presented in the materials of the Malyshev and Voznesenovskaya cultures. There is no such thing in the Condon culture.

In general, the use of relief ornaments as the leading principle of decoration, as well as

page 90
the dominance of its negative variety can be considered as a stadial feature of the ornamental tradition of the Lower Amur Neolithic. The presence of painted ceramics in the Malyshevsky and Voznesenovsky ornamental complexes and the absence of such ceramics in the Kondonsky complex are probably cultural signs.

The principles of decorating the surface of vessels are directly related to technical and decorative elements as the primary unit of the ornament structure. The groups of elements identified by our formal characteristics - simple/complex, rectilinear/curved-are characteristic of the ornament of all three cultures (Fig. 1). In the ornament of the Malyshevskaya, Kondonskaya and Voznesenovskaya cultures, lines and grooves are classified as simple rectilinear elements of the negative relief, and straight rollers of the positive relief. Their share in different ornamental complexes varies. Simple curvilinear elements of the negative relief of Malyshev ceramics - impressions arc-shaped and angular; Condon and Voznesenovskaya-arc-shaped. In the ornamentation of all three cultures, complex rectilinear elements include impressions of a comb stamp, as well as square and rectangular impressions. The Malyshev and Condon ornaments also have triangular and diamond - shaped impressions, while the Malyshev and Voznesenovsky designs also have shaped impressions. Among other elements in the Malyshev and Voznesenovsky ornaments, the leading impressions are rectangular and shaped, obtained by rolling a gear wheel. Complex curved elements in all three ornamental complexes are represented by round and oval impressions, as well as wavy rollers.

Thus, all ornamental complexes are characterized by the use of simple and complex elements, rectilinear and curved shapes, which can be considered as a stadium feature. In our opinion, the predominance of comb stamp impressions in Malyshevskaya and Kondonskaya ceramics, and in Malyshevskaya and Voznesenovskaya also square, rectangular and figured impressions obtained by rolling a gear wheel, is a cultural and stadium sign. The nature of the "comb" impressions in the Malyshev, Kondon, and Voznesenov ceramics, as well as traces of the use of gear-rolling and staining techniques in the Malyshev and Voznesenov ornamental complexes, should be evaluated as cultural features.

The next structural unit is ornamental motifs. We subdivided them into "geometric" (Fig. 2) and "non - geometric" (Fig. 3). The former are found in all three ornamental complexes, the latter-only in Malyshevsky and Voznesenovsky. Geometric motifs are divided into simple/ complex, open/closed, straight and curved. In the ornament of all cultures, a straight line is assigned to the group of simple open rectilinear motifs. Simple open curved motifs - a curved line (arc, angle) - are found on Malyshevskaya, Voznesenovskaya and are absent in Condon ceramics. The motifs are complex open rectilinear in Malyshevskaya and Voznesenovskaya ke-

Fig. 1. Technical and decorative elements in the ornament of Lower Amur Neolithic cultures. 1, 4, 11, 18-Voznesenskoe; 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 15, 19, 22, 23 - Condon-Mail; 7, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21 - Suchu Island settlement (14-according to [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1995a, p. 28, Fig. 10, 5]); 9-Golyi Mys-5 (according to [Shevkomud, 2004, p. 40, Table 28, 5]); 10 - Gasia (according to: [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1993, p. 84, fig. 57,2]); 13-Malyshevo-2. Ornamentation zones: 1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 17, 20, 23 - neck; 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 14 - 16, 18, 19, 22 - body; 13, 21-corolla.

page 91

Figure 2. "Geometric" ornamental motifs

Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur. 1, 4, 12-Voznesenskoe; 2, 5, 8, 13, 16, 18 - Condon-Mail; 3, 6, 9, 10, 14, 77- settlement on Suchu Island; 7, 15-Gasya (7-according to: [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1993, 50, 3]; 15-by: [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1993, p. 82, Fig. 55, 2]); 11-Kolchem-3 (according to: [Shevkomud, 2004, p. 73, Table 55, 2]). Ornamentation zones: 1, 2, 4 - 9, 11, 13 - 18 - body; 3-corolla; 10, 12-neck.

ramike is represented by a zigzag, meander, and grid; in the Condon culture, it is represented by a zigzag and grid. The motifs are complex open curved in Malyshev's ornamentation - a wavy line, spiral, volute, in Kondonskaya-a wavy line, in Voznesenovskaya - a wavy line, spiral. Complex closed rectilinear motifs in Malyshev ceramics - triangle, rectangle, rhombus, in Voznesenovskaya - triangle, rectangle, in Kondonskaya-are not highlighted. Complex closed curved motifs in Malyshev and Voznesenovsky ceramics are represented by a circle and an ellipse. In general, the ornamental complexes of all three cultures are characterized by motifs of complex structure, rectilinear and curved forms. "Non-geometric" images, so-called masks, are recorded in Malyshevskaya (Figs. 3, 1, 3) and Voznesenovskaya (Figs. 3, 2, 4) ceramics. In the Malyshev ornament, they are mostly pronounced stylized in nature. Voznesenovskaya culture presents both relatively realistic and stylized forms. We can speak about the qualitative diversity of motifs in the ornaments of all three cultures, and Voznesenovskaya ceramics are largely characterized by imagery and plot content.

The next structural level of the ornament is composition (Fig. 4). For Malyshevsky and Condon decor, the main means of expressing formal features in the composition are meter and rhythm. For Voznesenovo ceramics, metric and rhythmic orders are typical only for simple and complex rectilinear motifs. In our opinion, these are cultural features. The structure of the Malyshevsky and Voznesenovsky ornaments is usually concentric (Fig. 4, 1, 3, 4, 6); samples with a radially concentric structure (Figs. 4, 7, 9) are isolated. In the Condon ornament, the structure is concentric (Fig. 4, 2, 5) and radially concentric (Fig. 4, 8). The types of spatial composition in the ornament of all three cultures are border, grid, rosette in various combinations. Morphological characteristics of vessels in the construction of ornamental compositions are not decisive.

3. "Non-geometric" ornamental motifs ("guises") of the Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur.

1, 3-Suchu Island settlement (7-according to [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1997, p. 54, Fig. 1, 3]; 3 - according to [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1995b, p. 226, 7]); 2 - Condon Post Office; 4-Voznesenskoe (according to: [Medvedev, 2005a, p. 47, fig. 8, 7]).

page 92

4. Variants of construction of concentric (1-6) and radial - concentric (7-9) compositions in the ornament of Lower Amur Neolithic cultures.

1, 9-Voznesenskoe; 2, 5, 8-Condon Post Office; 3, 4, 6 - settlement on Suchu Island; 7-Gasya (according to [Derevyanko and Medvedev, 1994, p. 40, Fig. 14, 4]).

Results of functional (semantic) analysis of ornamental ceramic complexes

Semantic characteristics of ornamental complexes of all three Lower Amur cultures, compiled according to the proposed model, include descriptions of such components as the background, motif, and dividing line.

The two main types of background identified by us (empty (non-filled with elements) surface; painted and / or filled with various impressions surface) are inherent in all three cultures. However, Condon ceramics with a painted surface are not available. The main semantic values of the background are the surrounding world, the space of existence, and the background of being. They correspond to such basic elements of the universe as water, earth, air, and fire. The surface of the vessels filled with impressions of a comb stamp may have symbolized rain or the wind-rippled surface of a river or lake, and the smooth unpainted surface-a calm water surface. Images of the earth-soil, forest-could be transmitted by straight horizontal lines or grooves drawn on the surface of the vessel, impressions of a combed stamp. Images of air were associated, perhaps, with a smooth, unpainted surface of vessels, not filled with elements. Ideas about fire, the flame of a bonfire could be expressed by the red-painted surface of Malyshev and Voznesenov ceramics covered with a horizontal and / or vertical zigzag-in the ornament of the Condon and Voznesenov cultures. Perhaps the concepts of "water", "earth", "air", "fire" were embodied in the images of animals.

Invariants of the dividing line for all three cultures are straight and wavy horizontal lines. For the ornament of ceramics of the Malyshev culture, straight horizontal lines made up of impressions of various shapes and/or a straight roller are more characteristic. In the ornamental complex of the Condon culture, the leading variant of the dividing line is the impression of a combed stamp, less often oval or rectangular impressions on the upper plane of the corolla. Dividing lines in the Voznesenovo culture ornament are straight horizontal lines made up of grooves, round impressions, rollers, and wavy lines made up of rollers. The semantic expression of the dividing line depends on the place it occupies in the ornamental composition. When placed in the upper part, it is similar to the title or splash screen in the text, in the middle part - the indent in the text before the beginning of a new paragraph, in the lower part - the end of the text.

Ornamental motif is the main semantic component of the semantic structure of an ornament. Fik-

page 93
invariant motifs for all three cultures are analyzed: a straight horizontal line, a zigzag (horizontal and vertical), and a grid. A straight horizontal line from the impressions of a comb stamp, ordered in accordance with the meter and rhythm in the Malyshev and Condon ornaments, loses its metricity in Voznesenovsky, thus knocking down the rhythm, but, nevertheless, it is read quite clearly. This motif can be interpreted (similar to the corresponding background of the vessels) as an expression of the element of water - earth (the Amur River, its tributaries) or sky (rain).

Zigzag (vertical and horizontal) is formed mainly by impressions of a comb stamp, in addition, in the Malyshev ornament - impressions of a figured stamp in the form of an angle, in Voznesenovsky-impressions of a gear wheel, grooves. The motif can be traced on the shoulders and torso, less often on the neck. Oriented vertically or horizontally. The vertical zigzag appears independently or in interaction with the horizontal contactor zigzag, interspersed with it. In combination with the spiral and meander decor, it serves as a backdrop. The location invariant is a solid line or segment. As a component of the semantic structure of the ornament, the zigzag is connected with the sphere of the upper, upper world. Thus, a vertical zigzag can be associated with lightning, a "fiery serpent", a dragon - a creature of the air, fire and water elements, and a horizontal one-with the top of hills.

Grid-inclined or straight jointed intersecting lines - in Malyshevskaya ceramics is formed by impressions of a comb stamp, angular impressions, in Kondonskaya-by impressions of a figured stamp, rollers, in Voznesenovskaya-by impressions of a comb stamp, grooves. The motif can be traced on the outer rim of the corolla (in the Malyshev ornament), the shoulders and the body of vessels (in the Condon and Voznesenovsky decor). It is oriented horizontally. Performs independently or in contact. In the Voznesenovsky ornament, the background is a vertical zigzag. The layout invariant is a grid. Semantics of the motif (based on formal features) - fishing net.

In general, the presence of invariants associated with the water element indicates a general paradigm of development of Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur, which are directly connected in their cultural and economic activities with the largest waterway in the region. One way or another, the river as a component of the structure of the universe had to find its semantic expression in the ornament.

So, the occurrence of motifs in compositions creates a textual level of semantic analysis in the aggregate. The dominant horizontal arrangement of ornamental motifs-invariants associated with the water element, suggests that the carriers of the Lower Amur Neolithic cultures probably had a horizontal "river" model of the world. In addition, the semantics of pottery and ornaments on it were connected, in our opinion, with the general idea of life and well-being. The vessel was the embodiment of the idea of a receptacle that should always be filled, whether it is real or symbolic, as a guarantee of a safe existence of a person.

Conclusion

In the ornamental complexes of the Malyshevskaya, Kondonskaya, and Voznesenovskaya Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur, a number of similar cultural features are distinguished at different levels of the decorative structure. In the ornament of Malyshev and Voznesenovsky ceramics, these include: at the element level - the predominance of impressions of a comb stamp, rectangular and shaped impressions made with a toothed wheel, red painting of various parts of vessels, the design of the corollas of vessels with straight (in particular, in the form of a cornice on the inner rim) and wavy rollers; at the motif level-the presence of complex rectilinear and curvilinear open geometric motifs (meander and spiral), "non-geometric" motifs (masks); at the composition level - concentric construction. In general, similar cultural features are recorded at all levels of the ornamental structure, which, in our opinion, allows us to assume the possibility of direct (acculturation) or indirect (diffusion) contacts at different stages of the formation of ornamental complexes.

In the decor of Malyshev and Condon ceramics, the similarity at the element level is manifested in the predominance of the impressions of the comb stamp in the presence of arc-shaped and diamond-shaped impressions; at the motif level - in the presence of a complex rectilinear open motif (a grid-braid of the "Amur braid"type). No similar cultural features were recorded at the composition level. The proximity of cultural features in Malyshev and Condon ceramics at the lower and middle levels of the decorative structure allows us to speak about possible direct (acculturation) or indirect (diffusion) contacts only at the early stages of the formation of ornamental complexes.

Ornamental complexes of Condon and Voznesenovo ceramics are related at the element level by the predominant use of impressions of a combed stamp; at the motif level, by the presence of "flutes". There are no analogies at the compositional level. The similarity of cultural features of the Condon and Voznesenovo ceramics at the lower and middle levels of the decor structure may indicate the presence of a direct correlation between the two types of ceramics.-

page 94
In the late (Condonian) and early or middle (Voznesenovian) stages of development of ornamental complexes, there are no direct (acculturation) or mediated (diffusion) contacts.

In general, structural and functional analysis of the decoration of the Lower Amur Neolithic cultures showed a significant similarity of ornaments on Malyshevskaya and Voznesenovskaya ceramics. Apparently, they can be considered as components of a single ornamental tradition, formed on the basis of acculturation and, to some extent, diffusion. The ornament of the Condon culture probably developed within the framework of a different tradition, although it experienced an occasional external influence (direct or indirect) on the part of native speakers of both Malyshev and Voznesenov cultures.

Acknowledgements

The author is sincerely grateful to all participants of field and desk work, thanks to whose work the archaeological community has had the opportunity to get acquainted with numerous new ceramic collections, as well as to Dr. V. E. Medvedev for valuable recommendations during the research and to reviewers for their positive criticism and comments.

List of literature

Butkevich L. M. Ornament as an art , Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ., 2005, 245 p.

Gening V. F. Drevnaya keramika: Metody i programmy issledovaniya v arkheologii [Ancient ceramics: Methods and research programs in archeology]. - Kiev: Nauk. dumka Publ., 1992, 185 p. (in Russian)

Gerchuk Y. Y. What is an ornament? Structure and meaning of the ornamental image, Moscow: Galart, 1998, 356 p.

Glushkov I. G. Keramika kak arkheologicheskiy istochnik [Ceramics as an archaeological source]. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1996, 328 p. (in Russian)

Derevyanko A. P. Istoriografiya kamennogo veka Priamurya [Historiography of the Stone Age of the Amur Region]. Novosibirsk: IIFF SB OF the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1972, part 1, pp. 38-66.

Derevyanko A. P., Medvedev V. E. Studies of the Gasya settlement (preliminary results, 1980). Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1993. 109 p.

Derevyanko A. P., Medvedev V. E. Studies of the Gasya settlement (preliminary results, 1986-1987). Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1994. 95 p.

Derevyanko A. P., Medvedev V. E. Studies of the Gasya settlement (preliminary results, 1989-1990). Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1995a. 64 p.

Derevyanko A. P., Medvedev V. E. The sanctuary of idolaters on Suchu Island - a new type of monuments in the Far East / / Review of the results of field and laboratory research of archaeologists, ethnographers and anthropologists of Siberia and the Far East in 1993. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 1995b., pp. 225-227.

Derevyanko A. P., Medvedev V. E. On the results of excavations on the island. Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii [Problems of Archeology, Ethnography, and Anthropology of Siberia and adjacent Territories]. Institute of Archeology and Ethnography, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 40th Anniversary of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and 30th anniversary of the Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, December 1997.

Evsyukov V. V. Mythology of the Chinese Neolithic based on the materials of paintings on ceramics of the Yangshao culture. Novosibirsk: IIFF SB RAS, 1988, 127 p. (in Russian)

Ivanov S. V. Ornament of the peoples of Siberia as a historical source (based on the materials of the XIX-early XX centuries). Narody Severa i Dalnego Vostoka [Peoples of the North and the Far East], Moscow: AN SSSR Publ., 1963, 500 p. ser.; vol. 81).

Kovalevskaya V. B. To the study of ornaments of typesetting belts of the VI-IX centuries. Statistiko-kombinatornye metody v arkheologii [Statistical and combinatorial methods in archeology], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1970, pp. 144-165.

Konopatskiy A. K., Mylnikova L. N. Osnovnye problemy izucheniya neolita nizhni Amura [The main problems of studying the Neolithic of the Lower Amur].

Cultural studies. XX vek: Entsiklopediya [XX century: Encyclopedia]. Saint Petersburg: University Press. kniga, 1998. - Vol. 2-447 p.

Markaryan E. S. Uzlovye problemy teorii kul'turnoi traditsii [Nodal problems of the theory of cultural tradition]. SE. - 1981. - N 2. - pp. 78-96.

Medvedev V. E. Novye zazyety v iskusstvo nizhneamurskogo neolita i svyazannye s nimi predstavleniya drevnykh [New stories in the Art of the Lower Amur Neolithic and related representations of the ancient]. -2000. - N3. - p. 56-59.

Medvedev V. E. K probleme istokov nekotorykh sculpturnykh i naskalnykh obraz v primevitnom iskusstve yuga Dalnego Vostoka i nakhodki otnoshchie k osipovskoy kul'tury na Amure [On the problem of the origins of some sculptural and rock images in the primitive art of the South of the Far East and finds related to the Osipov Culture on the Amur River]. - 2001. - N 4. - p. 77-94.

Medvedev V. E. Neolithic cult centers in the Amur Valley / / Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2005a. - N 5. - p. 40-69.

Medvedev V. E. Neolithic cultures of the Lower Amur region / / Russian Far East in antiquity and the Middle Ages: Discoveries, problems, and hypotheses. Vladivostok: Dalnauka Publ., 2005, pp. 234-267.

Medvedev V. E. O kul'turogenez v epokhu neolita v Nizhni Priamurye [On cultural genesis in the Neolithic era in the Lower Amur region]. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 288-291.

Mylnikova L. N. Pottery of Neolithic tribes of the Lower Amur (based on the materials of the settlement of Condon-Pochta). Novosibirsk, IAET SB RAS Publ., 1999, 159 p. (in Russian)

Okladnikov A. P. Neolith of Siberia and the Far East / / Okladnikov A. P. Archeology of Northern, Central and Eastern Asia. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2003, pp. 54-85.

Late Neolithic of the Lower Amur. Vladivostok: Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004, 156 p.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 14.03.07.

page 95

Permanent link to this publication: