UDC 903 ' 1

The Pakhomovo culture, which is widespread within the forest-steppe Tobol-Irtysh region, is part of the array of cultures of the Andronoid community that developed on the northern edge of the Andronovo world as a result of the interaction of local and alien Andronovo populations. In the west, its territory was bounded by the area of the Cherkaskul complexes, in the south - by the early Alekseyevo-Sargarinsky ones, in the east - by the Horde-type monuments and the Novochekinsky variant of the Suzgun culture. Cultural originality is conveyed by specific features in the ornamentation of dishes, original types of things, features of funeral rituals and settlement arrangements. The economy is being reconstructed as a multi-branch economy that combines elements of an appropriating and producing economy. There is reason to believe that the carriers of the Pakhom culture, along with others, were the guides of productive forms of economy to the taiga world; it was with them that lexical borrowings from the Indo-European dictionary appeared here. The time of the culture's existence, taking into account the nature of its main connections (the Cherkaskulian and early phase of the Alekseyevo-Sargara cultures), is determined within the framework of the XIV-XIII centuries BC.

Key words: Bronze Age, Western Siberia, Pakhomovo culture, Andronoid community.

Introduction

The Pakhomovo archaeological culture was identified in the late 1980s on the basis of materials obtained by expeditions of the Ural University (Yekaterinburg) during excavations of Late Bronze Age settlements and burial grounds in the Tobolsk-Irtysh interfluve (Korochkova, 1987; Korochkova, Stefanov, Stefanova, 1991; Evdokimov, Korochkova, 1991). The isolation of these materials in the Tobol-Ishim-Irtysh antiquities array was quite predictable. By that time, the Cherkaskul culture in the forest-steppe Trans-Urals, the Elovskaya culture in the forest-steppe Ob region, and the Suzgun culture in the southern taiga Tobol-Irtysh region had already been identified, which researchers combined within the framework of the Andronoid community. Monuments of the andronoid appearance in the Middle Ishim and Irtysh regions (the settlements of Pakhomovskaya Pier I, Inberen IV, Abatsky and Likhachevsky burial grounds) were discovered somewhat later, and at first, due to their small number and pronounced Andronovo color, they were perceived as Andronovo complexes of a late stage of development (Geningidr., 1970; Koryakova and Stefanov, 1981).

The situation changed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when the newly discovered archaeological centers of Omsk and Tyumen joined the work along with the Ural State University. In the forest-steppe Tobolsk-Irtysh region, large-scale research was conducted, which significantly changed the state of the source base and, accordingly,the idea of the nature and dynamics of cultural genesis in the Late Bronze Age. In the Zavodoukovsky and Uporovsky districts of Yekaterinburg, archaeologists investigated the multi-layered settlements of Novo-Shadrino VII, Uk III and VI, stratified materials of which provided the basis for identifying an intermediate layer between the complexes of the Andronovo community and the Barkhat complexes of the Mezhovo-Irma horizon. The synchronicity of the Andronoid and Cherkaskul artefacts found in the same archaeological context was reliably recorded in a number of settlements. The peculiarity of the andronoid ceramic materials of Pritobolsk against the background of the long-known and, in general, easily recognizable Cherkaskul and Suzgun

The work was carried out within the framework of the project RGNF 06 - 01 - 00037a "The Bronze Age of the Urals and Western Siberia: continuity, innovations, interactions".

Fig. 1. Location of monuments of the Pakhomovskaya (1 - 29) and Suzgun (30 - 32) cultures.

1-Mysovsky sites; 2 - sites on Lake Andreevsky; 3 - Borki; 4 - Cheryomukhovy Bush; 5 - Ginger; 6 - Uk III; 7 - Uk VI; 8 - Botniki; 9-Olkhovka; 10-Shchetkovo; 11-Novo-Shadrino VII; 12-Pakhomovskaya Pier I; 13-Klepikovo; 14 - Likhachevsky burial ground; 15 - Abatsky; 16-Ir II; 17, 18-Ust-Logatka; 19-Krutinka II; 20-Ust-Kiterma IV; 21-Ust-Kiterma V; 22-Kalugino; 23-Prorva; 24-Novochekino III; 25 - Alekseyevka XXI; 26-Yurts; 27-Batakovo XXI; 28-Inberen IV; 29-Chernoozerye II; 30-Peipsi Mountain; 31-Suzgun II; 32-Potchevash.

a - settlement; b - burial ground.

This was a significant argument in favor of identifying a new archaeological culture of the Andronoid community - Pakhomovskaya (Korochkova, 1987; Korochkova, Stefanov, and Stefanova, 1991). The settlement of Pakhomovskaya Pier I was excavated in the 1960s on the Ishim River (Evdokimov and Korochkova, 1991) (Fig. 1). Its median position on the map of the Tobolsk-Irtysh interfluve, the characteristic appearance of ceramics, and its single-layer structure fully corresponded to the status of a reference monument.

General characteristics of the culture

Ceramics. It defines the specifics of the archaeological complexes of the Pakhomov culture and is represented by rather large collections of settlement and small series of funerary dishes. For the most part, these are flat-bottomed vessels of a pot or pot-jar shape with a low neck, smoothly turning into a slightly swollen body. In settlement sets, there are vertically elongated specimens with a small bottom and a wide mouth, but there are few of them; single round-bottomed and narrow-necked containers (Figs. 2, 8, 37), vessels with pallets (Figs. 3, 34). As a rule, the ornament covers only the upper third of the vessels and is located along the main tiers (neck, transition zone from neck to body, shoulders), sometimes the bottom part is decorated. Pottery from the burials is covered entirely with ornaments (see Fig. 2, 33, 34; 3, 34, 36 - 39) and it gives the impression of being more elegant; Andronovo elements are noticeably accentuated on it - ribbon zigzags, meanders, triangles. The division into " elegant "(decorated with complex geometric patterns) and" non-charged " (covered with a simple monotonous ornament), which is so characteristic of Andronovo dishes of the previous time [Stefanov, Korochkova, 2000, p. 56], remains in Pakhom complexes, but the ratio of these groups changes somewhat: vessels whose decor is dominated by geometric elements Andronovsky style, it becomes as if more. The basis of a monotonous ornament is formed by borders made of multi-slope prints of a smooth, less often combed stamp, horizontal Christmas tree (see Fig. 2). Sometimes such borders are separated by rows of small round pits or depressions. The peculiarity of Pakhomovsky ceramics is given by patterns based on an oblique grid of ribbon meander-shaped and geometric shapes (triangles of different configurations, rhombuses), which bring it closer to Fedorovskaya. Triangles are usually framed by a "fringe" (see Fig. 3, 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 14, 34) - a detail that in Fedorovsky decor is evidence of the late origin of the product, and in Pakhomovsky becomes typical. These ceramic complexes are also brought together by a similar technique of fluting the transition zone from the neck to the body (see Figures 2, 1, 14). The difference lies in the fact that on Pakhomov dishes, narrow and wide grooves are often "filled" with frequent straight or inclined prints of a combed or smooth stamp (see Fig. 3, 1 - 4, 13, 14, 17, 28). Note this element

2. Ceramics from the monuments of the Pakhomovo culture.

Pakhomovskaya: 1-4, 9, 15-Inberen IV; 5 - 8, 10 - 12, 13, 16, 18 - 26, 32, 37 - Pakhomovskaya Pier I; 14, 17, 27-29-Novo-Shadryne " VII; 33, 34-Chernoozerye I; inokulturnaya: 30, 31, 35, 36-Cherkaskulskaya, Novo-Shadrino VII; 38, 39-alekseevsko-Sargarinskaya, Ir II.

3. Pakhomovskaya ceramics.

1-9, 11-Inberen IV; 10, 19, 26 - 32, 35 - Novo-Shadrino VII; 12, 15, 22, 23-Ir II; 13, 14, 16 - 18, 20, 21, 24, 25 - Pakhomovskaya Pier I; 33, 34, 36 37-Chernoozerye II; 38-40-Likhachevsky burial ground.

as one of the indicators of Pakhomovsky ornaments. Often, molded rollers are formed in wide grooves (see Fig. 2, 17, 25, 27). In some cases, the transition zone from the neck to the trunk is formed in the form of an unornamented strip (see Fig. 2, 28, 29, 33; 3, 29), This is found in principle in the Alakul decorative scheme, but is especially characteristic of the so-called mixed Alakul-Fedorov complexes. Specific elements are the "grid" (see Fig. 2, 4, 9, 20, 22, 28, 29), stamp angle depressions (see fig. 3, 13, 17, 35), diagonal "ladders" made in the form of ribbon segments (see figs. 3, 7, 37) or indentation belts (see fig. 2, 5, 16, 19, 25). The special color of Pakhomov ceramics is given by small round pits; they emphasize the contours of the meander and the lower line of the neck (see Fig. 2, 19, 24, 28; 3, 19, 21, 30, 31), they are made up of dividing belts of monotonous Christmas tree ornaments. The borders of "brackets" are infrequent, but extremely expressive and indicative (see Fig. 2, 16; 3, 19). Curly "brackets" and pits are much more characteristic of the Suzgun complexes (Moshinskaya, 1957, pp. 120-125; Lesnoe Tobolo-Irtysh..., 1995, Table III); they are noticeably smaller on the Pakhomov ware, but they indicate the participation of the taiga component in the composition of this culture.

A duffel set. It mainly includes products made of bone and clay; there are very few stone artifacts. Among the bone objects are arrowheads with and without stalks, punctures, awls, spatulas, end inserts for bows (fig. 4, 1 - 4, 15 - 20, 27).

4. Inventory of the Pakhomovo culture.

1, 2, 13, 17 - 19, 23, 33 - Pakhomovskaya Pier I; 3 - 5, 15, 16, 20, 22, 25 - 32, 34 - Novo-Shadrino VII; 6-8, 11, 12-Ir II; 9, 14, 24-Inbereni IV; 10, 21-Chernoozerye II.

1 - 5, 15 - 20, 22, 27- bone; 6-14, 21-bronze; 23-26, 28-34-clay.

A lot of clay sinkers, typical of the Andronovo period, are oval or round - flattened with one or two intersecting grooves (Fig. 4, 25, 26, 30). Biconical sinkers with a hole in the center are a purely Pakhomov attribute (Fig. 4, 28). Among the clay objects, we note balls with a diameter of 4-5 cm (Figs. 4, 31, 32), which are found in the layers of the Novo-Shadrino VII settlement of approx. 20. A characteristic find is massive clay disks- "tortillas". There are few items that indicate bronze foundry production: fragments of slagged ceramics and crucibles, bronze awls, convex-concave plaques with a pin, a plaque with a loop and a mold for casting openwork jewelry, vtubchatye two-bladed arrowheads (Fig. 4, 6 - 14, 21, 24, 29).

Dwellings. Their remains were excavated at the settlements of Novo-Shadrino VII and Uk III in the Pritobolye region, Pakhomovskaya Pier I in the Ishim region, Inberen IV, and Alekseevka XXI in the Irtysh region. We do not have information about the number of buildings on the territory of one village, because there are no fully investigated settlements. The number of depressions recorded on the surface is also not very significant, since their indisputable Pakhomovian affiliation has not been established and, in addition, some structures in the relief are not traced. There are also reasons to assume the presence of abandoned buildings on the territory of settlements, as evidenced by powerful ash pits in their pits. Judging by the planography of the depressions and the objects discovered in the excavations, the dwellings were located quite close to each other, at a distance of 6 - 10 m. The buildings had square or rectangular pits with an area of 80-100 ^m2, deepened into the mainland soil by 0.2 - 0.6 m. On Pakhomovskaya Pier I, two of the three excavated dwellings had short corridor - like exits facing the river, and one was long with a rather spacious vestibule 3x3 m. Inside there were from 2 to 6-11 foci. Judging by the large number of holes from the pillars, the buildings had a frame-pillar structure. Household structures (pits, wells) residents preferred to take out of the residential facilities.

Ashtrays. They are a remarkable feature of the settlements of the Pakhom culture. On Pakhomovskaya Pier I, these are small piles of ash that have been preserved near the hearth in dwelling 3. In the settlement of Novo-Shadrino VII, ash pits looked like powerful platforms with an area of up to 30 ^m2, 0.2 - 0.6 m thick, filled in one case in the pit of an abandoned dwelling, in the other-on the ancient surface in a depression between two buildings. The ash layer contained a large number of animal bones, ceramics, clay and bone products, and lumps of baked clay. Scattered skeletal remains of 14 people were found in an ash pit between two dwellings. Parts of the skeletons of children, adult men and women rested on a layer of light gray ash and were covered with a thick layer of white ash. Human remains were found in dwelling 1 of Pakhomovskaya Pier I: fragments of one skull lay at the bottom of pit 1 near the northwestern wall of the pit, and another skull and bones were found near the southern wall. Burials of people found in the settlements of Ust-Kiterma IV, Alekseevka XXI [Polevodov and Trufanov, 1997; Tataurova, Polevodov and Trufanov, 1997]. All these cases are unique and require individual analysis. However, their obvious repeatability, despite the variety of archaeological contexts, makes it necessary to consider burials in settlements as one of the characteristic manifestations of the Pakhom culture.

Funeral rites. In addition to the "settlement" burials mentioned above, it is also reflected in the few and mostly destroyed burials discovered during the excavations of the Early Iron Age mounds of Nechunaevsky (one burial). on Tobol, Likhachevsky (two graves) on Ishim and the only proper Pakhomovsky burial ground Chernoozerye II on the Irtysh (four burials and two grave pits). Burial chambers were located either in rather deep pits (0.5-0.7 m in the mainland), sometimes with shoulders (Gening Stefanov, 1991, Fig. 1), or in shallow depressions in the dark-colored soil horizon. It is difficult to say anything specific about the nature of the tombstone structures, but they were definitely not large mounds. The remaining burials known in the forest - steppe zone-in the settlements of Alekseyevka XXI, Ust-Kiterma IV, Ust - Kiterma V and Batakovo XXI burial grounds-are attributed as Suzgun burials (Polevodov, 2003, p. 9). Looking ahead a little, we note that in this case it does not play a big role, since the undoubtedly related and closely related Pakhom and Suzgun cultures demonstrate a close system of funerary rites. A special feature of these burial complexes is the secondary nature of burials. At the settlement of Ust-Kiterma IV, a single burial of a child (in a crouched position on its side with slightly bent legs) and a collective burial of at least 10 people were found. Their remains are represented by incomplete skeletons: the upper part of the postcranial skeleton is cremated almost completely, the lower part-to a lesser extent. The skeletons lay in two rows, skulls facing north and northwest. Remains of at least 37 people were found in mound 2 of the Ust-Kiterma V burial ground. Partially cremated or burned skeletons, represented mainly by fragments of the skull and limb bones, were located in two compact groups. When burying pyt's bones-

The skulls are oriented to the north-east. According to the secondary rite, a burial was performed in the burial mound of the Batakovo XXI burial ground [Pogodin, Polevodov, Pleshkov, 1997] in the Irtysh region: the skull and limb bones were buried in a chamber at the level of the ancient surface.

Unfortunately, information about well-known burial complexes in the literature is extremely sparse, and there is not enough information for possible reconstructions. However, we can hardly be mistaken if we assume that the funerary practice of the population of the Andronoid community of the Tobol-Irtysh forest-steppe provided for a variety of complex ceremonies of the pre-funeral, funeral and post-funeral cycles. One of its striking features was the existing custom of exposing (excarnation) and subsequent secondary partial burials in special crypts or individual graves. Human remains found in settlements can be considered as evidence of atypical treatment of the dead and as options for temporary or permanent burials. The practice of secondary burials in the forest-steppe zone of Western Siberia has deep roots. On the burial ground of the Ust-Tartass culture So-pka-2/3, For such burials account for 84.2 % [Molodin, 2001, p. 108]. Secondary burials were recorded in the Seimin-Turbinsky necropolises: Rostovka (Matyushchenko and Sinitsyna, 1988, p. 64-65), So - pka-2 (Molodin, 1985, p. 65). 80-81], Staroaleika-2, Tsygankova Sopka-2 [Kiryushin, 1987], Teleutsky Vzvoz [Kiryushin, Grushin, Tishkin, 2003, pp. 69-72].

We especially note the minimalism of the burial equipment. In the Ust-kiterminsky crypt with 37 buried people, there were only two pots. Of the four burials of Chernoozerye II, only one contained three vessels, while the others contained one each. Bronze plaques were found in two Chernoozersk graves.

Given the powerful Andronovo component in the Pakhom culture, it would be logical to expect its manifestation in ritual practice. But of all the recorded features, perhaps only the crouched position on its side causes Andronovsky associations. However, such burials are also secondary burials. Apparently, local traditions of funerary practice became a priority for the bearers of the Pakhom culture. In this sense, the Pakhom culture differs significantly from the neighboring Cherkaskul culture, which almost completely inherits the Feodor funerary rites.

Economy. It is reconstructed as a multisectoral one that combines elements of an appropriating and producing economy (Kosarev, 1984, p. 115). Judging by the osteological remains and numerous tools of hunting and fishing in the settlement of Novo-Shadrino VII, a significant place in the economy was given to hunting and fishing. The proportion of wild animal bones was 22.6 % of the total number of bone remains. Elk (44.5 %), roe deer (29.3 %), and wild boar (18.4%) predominated among hunting trophies. They also hunted foxes, bears, hares, wolverines, beavers, and birds. The herd of domestic animals was dominated by horses (42.7 %) and cattle (36.8%); compared to the Andronovo period, the share of small cattle significantly decreased (20.5%). The increase in the role of the horse is a consequence of the adaptation of local cattle breeding to the climate of the subtaiga zone and reflects the general trend of this time. Small cattle lose their economic advantage in these landscape and climatic conditions. Unfortunately, we have very few osteological definitions for other monuments of the Pakhomovo culture, but we assume that the composition of the herd of domestic animals could vary. Similarly, the ratio of hunting and cattle breeding in the economy of the population of different regions could be different. This is evidenced by the data of the settlement of Pakhomovskaya Pier I [Smirnov, 1975, pp. 37-38], in the materials of which the bones of wild animals are absent. Examples of the increased role of hunting and fishing in the economy of native Pakhomov culture are quite consistent with the supposed participation of the taiga component in the development of this culture.

Territory, genesis, connections, and time of culture. The main Pakhomov monuments are located within the northern forest-steppe of the Tobol-Irtysh region (see Figure 1). In the west, the area of culture distribution was most likely limited to the area of Cherkaskulsky kopmleks, in the south - early Alekseevsko-Sargarinsky. It is difficult to say how far it extended to the east. We assume that beyond the Irtysh River, the andronoid formations close to the Pakhomov formation, which probably include the Horde-type monuments (Matveev, 1993, p.90-101) and the Novochekinsky variant of the Suzgun culture (Molodin, 1985, p. 143-155), developed other cultural configurations. Understanding the specifics of this region largely depends on the current assessment of the Elovskaya culture. We tend to consider it among forest-steppe formations, rather than taiga ones. After the publication of materials from the Old Garden (Molodin and Neskorov, 1992), the pre-Irmen complexes of the Yelovsky II burial ground (Matyushchenko, 2004), and the identification of Horde-type monuments in the forest-steppe Ob region (Matveev, 1993, p. 4). 93-112] and the Korchazhkin culture in the Altai Ob region (Kiryushin, 1986) give the impression of a longer eastern plume of forest-steppe andronoid cultures. Despite the similarity of the mechanisms of addition, they were their own version.-

Andronovo line of development, which largely depended on the nature of the aboriginal culture, regional features of the "Andronovo colonization", and the composition of migration groups of Andronovo residents.

Strange as it may seem, the question of the northern neighbors of the Pakhom culture carriers seems rather complicated. Following M. F. Kosarev [1981, p. 84-86] and many other colleagues, we assume that we are talking about some kind of community of cultures with comb-pit ceramics, but what kind of culture has not yet been established. We can't even imagine how densely populated the territory of the southern taiga Tobolsk-Irtysh region was at the beginning of the Bronze Age. The current schemes of cultural and chronological periodization of the Bronze Age in the taiga zone of Western Siberia do not provide a satisfactory answer to this question (Koksharov, 2006). At the late stage of the Pakhom culture, its northern neighbor was the Suzgun culture, which was essentially a subsidiary.

The formula for adding up the cultures of the Andronoid community, at first glance, seems simple and obvious: This is the result of the interaction of local and alien Andronovo cultures [Kosarev, 1981, p. 111-111]. However, it should be noted that on the eve of the main cultural background in the forest-steppe region reflected syncretic, already andronoid formations, so to speak, of the first order (Gening and Stefanov, 1993, p.85). Thus, it should be a question of further transformation of the Andronoid culture under the influence of a certain influence of taiga population groups.

By the middle of the second millennium BC, Andronovo settlers had firmly mastered the forest-steppe lands occupied at the beginning of the Bronze Age by the carriers of the Tashkovo culture in Pritobolye and Krotovskaya on the Irtysh*. Acculturation took place quite intensively, as evidenced by the monuments of the Chernoozersk-Tomsk variant, which reflect the processes of interaction between the Krotovo and Andronovo cultures [Kosarev, 1981, p. 129; Gening and Stefanov, 1991]. There is reason to believe that not all groups of the local population were ready for close integration. According to the researchers, due to the "Andronovo colonization" they were pushed to the east [Kovaleva, 1988, p. 45] or to the north [Kosarev and Galkin, 1993, p. 54-55] carriers of the Tashkovo culture.M. F. Kosarev in this regard drew attention to the lack of examples of a combination of the knuckle - retreating technique and elements of Andronovo geometrism [2004, p. 131]. Apparently, the most receptive to new trends in Pritobolye were the bearers of the comb-pit ceramic tradition, whose heritage in the ceramics of the Pakhomovo culture is clearly felt. The Andronovo line of development during this period was probably provided with the advantages of a new life support system based on local cattle breeding. The extensive nature of the economy aimed at developing new pastures and territories largely determined the orientation of the creolized "andronoid" population of the forest-steppe zone to the north. The lands lying to the south, by that time were occupied by descendants of carriers of the Alakul and Fedorovskaya cultures. Apparently, it was contacts with the inhabitants of the southern taiga zone that were one of the factors of further cultural transformations and the formation of the Pakhom culture. The participation of taiga cultures in its composition is evidenced by the characteristic "forest" borrowings in ornamentation, a noticeable tilt of the economy to the appropriating branches of the economy, and anthropological data (Zubova, 2007).

Foreign cultural manifestations in Pakhomovsky materials are presented differently in different districts. In Pritobolye, the ceramic collection from the settlement of Novo-Shadrino VII contains vessels of the Cherkaskul culture (see Fig. 2, 30, 31, 35, 36). Typical Circassian elements are found on ceramics from the Ishim and Irtysh settlements (see Figures 3, 6, 15). Evidence of contacts with southern neighbors in the form of finds of the Alekseevsko-Sargara culture is recorded in the materials of the settlement of Ir II on Ishim [Kosinskaya, 1984] and Zhar-Agach on the Irtysh (Gening and Stefanov, 1993). There are many more examples of the presence of Pakhomov ceramics in the layers of the Alekseyevo-Sargara monuments. One gets the impression that pre-taiga collectives were the more proactive side in the interaction of carriers of these cultures [Lesnoe Tobolo-Irtyshye..., 1995, p. 119]. Relations with the northern neighbors, apparently, were of a systemic nature, due to the further development of the northern territories and their inclusion in the zone of producing farms. Archaeological evidence of this process is the phenomenon of the Suzgun culture.

The question of the correlation between the Pakhomov and Suzgun complexes is perhaps the most controversial and discussed. The problem is formulated simply: are they different cultures or stages of the same one? The legitimacy of its formulation is evidenced by the difficulty in dissecting the Suzgun and Pakhom complexes. This problem is especially relevant for the forest-steppe Irtysh region. The situation here was characterized by more dynamic processes, proximity to other centers of cultural genesis (Irmenskaya, Alekseevsko-Sargarinskaya cultures, with cross ceramics).

* We find it difficult to assess the situation on Ishim; we assume that this time is characterized here, in addition to the well-known Odinovo-Krokhalevsky complexes, also Loginovo and Krotovo antiquities.

So, cultures or milestones? If we proceed from the chronostratigraphy of the region, then, most likely, we should talk about cultures, since the main cycles of formation and development of these formations did not coincide. The Pakhomovo culture is a consequence of the gradual and gradual development of forest - steppe areas by groups of the Andronovo population; the Suzgunskaya culture is the result of the translation of the achievements of the Andronovo life support system to the north by native speakers of the Pakhomovo culture [Ibid., pp. 115-116].

By the time the Suzgun culture was finally formed in the southern taiga in the forest-steppe, where the initial "andronoid impulse" came from, the situation had already changed dramatically. Here, due to the intensive processes of the final phase of development of the Eurasian Metallurgical Province, due to its proximity to the more dynamic steppe region, there was a break in the ties of the previous time. The defining cultural interactions that were previously realized along the north-south line were established within landscape-cultural zones (forest, forest-steppe, steppe); the period of stabilization was replaced by a period of differentiation and fragmentation. While consolidation processes took place in the southern taiga Tobol-Irtysh region-the main area of distribution of the Suzgun culture-in the forest - steppe region, a single andronoid massif broke up into local formations confined to the basins of the main rivers. In the Pritobol region, this period is characterized by settlements of the Barkhatov culture; in the Ishim region, monuments of the Chupino and Kuchum type represent the result of interaction and close integration of related cultures - Suzgun, Barkhatov, Krasnoozerskaya; in the Irtysh region, Irmensk and Irmensk-Suzgun complexes. The chronology of the Suzgun culture is determined by contacts with native speakers of Irma, Barkhat, cross ceramics, and Gamayun-Itkul cultures.

Conclusion

Thus, the Pakhomovo culture, widespread within the forest-steppe Tobol-Irtysh region, was formed as a result of the development of this territory by groups of the Andronovo population. It belongs to the Andronoid community of the stable phase of the Late Bronze Age. Waves of "Andronovo colonization" in the forest-steppe region passed through densely populated areas and involved a wide variety of cultures in their orbit. But the superstrategic "Andronov impulse" in some sense leveled the cultural environment, brought it to a common denominator, and perhaps a common language. Hence the impression of the general Andronovo background of the Bronze Age in Western Siberia, which was generally provided by the andronoid cultures. There is reason to believe that the bearers of the Pakhom culture were also the guides of productive forms of economy to the taiga world; it was with them that lexical borrowings from the Indo-European dictionary appeared here. Without radiocarbon dating data, we will use the established fact of Pakhomovo-Sargara contacts, which correspond to the early phase of the development of a common culture with roller ceramics, and venture to assume that the Pakhomovo culture existed in the XIV-XIII centuries. Epimakhov, Hanks, and Renfrew, 2005, p. 100; Chernykh, 2007, Figs. 5, 10].

List of literature

Gening, V. F., Gusentsova, T. M., Kondratiev, O. M., Stefanov, V. I., and Trofimenko, V. S., Periodization of Neolithic and Bronze Age settlements in the Middle Irtysh region, Problemy khronologii i kul'turnoi otnoshchnosti arkheologicheskikh pamyatnikov Zapadnoy Sibiri. Tomsk: Publishing House of the Tomsk State University, 1970, pp. 12-51.

Gening V. F., Stefanov V. I. Tombstones of the andronoid cultural community of the Ishim forest-steppe / / Ancient burials of the Ob-Irtysh region. Omsk: Omsk State University, 1991, pp. 52-60.

Gening V. F., Stefanov V. I. Settlements of Chernoozerye I, Bolshoy Log and some problems of the Bronze Age of the forest-steppe Irtysh region / / Monuments of ancient culture of the Urals and Western Siberia. Yekaterinburg: Nauka Publ., 1993, pp. 67-111.

Evdokimov V. V., Korochkova O. N. Poselenie Pakhomovskaya Pristan I [Settlement of Pakhomovskaya Pier I]. Istochniki etnokul'turnoy istorii Zapadnoy Sibiri [Sources of ethnocultural history of Western Siberia]. Tyumen: Tyumen State University, 1991, pp. 50-63.

Epimakhov A.V., Hanks B., Renfrew K. Radiocarbon chronology of monuments of the Bronze Age of the Trans-Urals / / RA. - 2005. - N 4. - pp. 92-102.

Zubova A.V. Odontological characteristics of the population of Western Siberia in the advanced and late Bronze Age // Northern archaeology in anthropogeny: man, paleotechnologies, geoecology, ethnology and anthropology. Irkutsk: Ottisk Publ., 2007, vol. 1, pp. 254-263.

Kiryushin Yu. F. Lesostepnoy Altay v epokhu pozdnoi bronzy i rannezheleznom veke [Forest-steppe Altai in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age]. Barnaul: Alt. State University Publ., 1986, pp. 75-79.

Kiryushin Yu. F. Novye mogilniki ranney bronzy na verkhnyaya Ob ' [New burial grounds of the Early Bronze Age on the Upper Ob River]. Barnaul: Alt. State University Publ., 1987, pp. 100-125.

Kiryushin Yu. F., Grushin S. P., Tishkin A. A. Funeral rite of the population of the Early Bronze Age of the Upper Ob region (based on the materials of the Teleutsky Vzvoz ground burial ground). - Barnaul: Alt Publishing House. state University, 2003, 333 p. (in Russian)

Kovalev V. T. Taskovska culture of the early bronze age the Lower Tobol region // Material culture of the ancient population of the Urals and Western Siberia. Sverdlovsk: Ural State University, 1988, pp. 29-47.

Koksharov S. F. The North of Western Siberia in the era of early metal //Archaeological heritage of Ugra. Yekaterinburg; Khanty-Mansiysk: Charoid Publ., 2006, pp. 41-67.

Korochkova O. N. Predtaezhnoe i yuzhnotaezhnoe Tobolo-Irtysh'e v epokhu pozdnoi bronzy: Avtoref. dis. ... kand. ist. nauk [Pre - taiga and South Taiga Tobolsk - Irtysh region in the Late Bronze Age].

Korochkova O. N., Stefanov V. I., Stefanova N. K. Bronze Age cultures of the pre-taiga Tobol-Irtysh region // Questions of archeology of the Urals. Yekaterinburg, 1991, issue 20, pp. 70-92.

Koryakova L. N., Stefanov V. I. Inberen IV ancient settlement on the Irtysh River / / SA. - 1981. - N2. - pp. 178-196.

Kosarev M. F. Bronzovyi vek Zapadnoy Sibiri [The Bronze Age of Western Siberia]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1981, 287 p.

Kosarev M. F. Zapadnaya Sibir ' v drevnosti [Western Siberia in ancient Times], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1984, 245 p.

Kosarev M. F. Migratsiya kak modeli istoricheskogo protsessa po sibirskim arkheologo-etnograficheskim materialam [Migration as a model of the historical process based on Siberian archaeological and ethnographic materials]. Pamyatniki arkheologii i drevnogo iskusstva Evrazii [Monuments of Archeology and Ancient Art of Eurasia], Moscow: Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004, pp. 123-136.

Kosarev M. F., Galkin V. T. The settlement of Yurgarkul III in the Lower Part of the Volga Basin / / KSIA. - 1993. - Issue 209. - pp. 50-58.

Kosinskaya L. L. Settlement of Ir II // Ancient settlements of the Urals and Western Siberia. Sverdlovsk: Ural State University, 1984, pp. 45-55.

T. M. Potemkina, O. N. Korochkova, and V. I. Stefanov, "Forest Tobolsk-Irtysh Region at the End of the Bronze Age (based on materials from Peipsi Mountain)," in Russian. Moscow: PAIMS Publ., 1995, 205 p. (in Russian)

Matveev A.V. Irmen culture in the forest-steppe Ob region. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State University Publ., 1993, 182 p. (in Russian)

Matyushchenko V. I. Elovsky archaeological complex. Omsk: Publishing House of the Omsk State University, 2004. 2: Elovsky II burial ground. Pre-Irman complexes. - 68 p.

Matyushchenko V. I., Sinitsyna G. V. Burial ground near the village of Rostovka near Omsk. - Tomsk: Publishing House of the Tomsk State University, 1988. - 136 p.

Molodin V. I. Baraba in the Bronze Age. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1985, 200 p. (in Russian)

Molodin V. I. Monument Sopka-2 on the Omi River. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2001, vol. 1, 128 p.

Molodin V. I., Neskorov A.V. O svyazyakh naseleniya zapadno-sibirskoy lesostepi i Kazakhstaniya v epokhu pozdnoi bronzy [On the relations between the population of the West Siberian forest-steppe and Kazakhstan in the Late Bronze Age]. 1990: (Materials of the conference), Moscow, 1992, Part 1, pp. 93-97.

Moshinskaya V. I. Suzgun II-monument of the Bronze Age of the forest belt of Western Siberia / / MIA. - 1957. - N58. - pp. 114-135.

Pogodin L. L., Polevodov A.V., Pleshkov E. A. Kurgany mogilnik Batakovo XXI - novy pogrebal'nyj pamyatnik suzgunskoy kul'tury [The burial mound of Batakovo XXI-a new burial monument of the Suzgun culture]. Chetverty istoricheskie chteniya pamyati M. P. Gryaznov: Mat-ly nauch. konf. - Omsk: Om State University, 1997, pp. 121-126.

Polevodov A.V. Suzgunskaya kul'tura v lesostepi Zapadnoy Sibiri: Avtoref. dis. ... kand. ist. nauk [Suzgun culture in the forest - steppe of Western Siberia: Abstract of the dissertation of the Candidate of Historical Sciences], Moscow, 2003, 22 p.

Polevodov A.V., Trufanov A. Ya. O pogrebal'nom obryade suzgunskoy kul'tury [On the funeral rite of the Suzgun culture]. Obed. Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy, 1997, pp. 19-23.

Smirnov N. G. Landscape interpretation of new data on the fauna of the Andronovo monuments of the Trans-Urals // Questions of archeology of the Urals. - Sverdlovsk, 1975. - Vol. 13. - p. 32-41.

Stefanov V. I., Korochkova O. N. Andronovo antiquities of the Tyumen region. Yekaterinburg: Polygraphist Publ., 2000, 108 p. (in Russian)

Tataurova L. V., Polevodov A.V., Trufanov A. Ya. Alekseevka XXI-monument of the Late Bronze Age of the pre-taiga Irtysh region //Archaeological microdistricts of Western Siberia. Omsk: Omsk State University, 1997, pp. 162-191.

Chernykh E. N. Kargaly, Moscow: Yazyki slavyan (Languages of the Slavs). kul'tury, 2007. - Vol. 5: Kargaly: phenomenon and paradoxes of development; Kargaly in the system of metallurgical provinces; Hidden (sacred) life of archaic miners and metallurgists. -200 s.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 29.01.08.

Permanent link to this publication: