Ceramic Complex of the Neolithic Camp Ekidin 24
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2019-21-1-37-43
Abstract
The camp Ekidin 24 is located in the southern part of the Turgai Depression (Northern Kazakhstan, Kostanay region). The monument was explored by the Turgai archeological expedition in the 1989 field season. The present research featured the ceramic complex of camp Ekidin 24. The research objective was to study technological aspects in the manufacture of ceramic vessels of the Ekidin potters. An important aspect of the work is the generalization of all currently known camp data. The ceramic collection of the Ekidin 24 camp consists of 48 fragments, including 6 fragments of the upper parts of vessels with a grooved neck, one fragment of a vessel bottom, and 38 fragments of vessel walls. All fragments of ceramics from the Ekidin 24 camp were subjected to a technical and technological analysis. The study employed petrographic analysis and binocular microscopy. The initial raw material of the Ekidin potters was iron clay (iron hydroxides, such as hematite and magnetite), or hydromica. A formula of molding mass was revealed: clay + organic (wool) + chamotte. The Ekidin 24 camp is the reference monument of the Mahanjar culture of the Turgai Depression. The age of Mahanjar finds is determined primarily on the analogies with early Neolithic monuments of the Central Asian interfluves as late 7,000 – 5,000 B.C. The obtained radiocarbon dates indicate 6,000 B.C. Mahanjar-like Ceramics are still represented by single fragments outside the Turgai Depression and, as a rule, are not recognized by researchers as Mahanjar. We can confidently say that the Mahanjar culture is not an isolated phenomenon, and the identification of new Mahanjar sites in different regions of the steppe and forest-steppe Eurasia is only a matter of time.
About the Author
I. V. ShevninaRussian Federation
47, Baitursynov St., Kostanay, Republic of Kazakhstan, 110000
References
1. Shevnina I. V. Technical and Technological Analysis of Ceramics from the Neolithic Site Ekidin 24. Margulan Readings-2009: Proc. Intern. Sci. Conf. Petropavlovsk: SKGU im. M. Kozybaeva, 2009, 1: 95–99. (In Russ.)
2. Logvin V. N. The Stone Age of Kazakhstan’s Pritobolye (mesolithic-eneolithic). Alma-Ata: KGPU, 1991, 63. (In Russ.)
3. Logvin A. V. The site of the Mahanjar culture Ekidin 24 of the Turgai Depression. Izvestiia Natsional'noi akademii nauk respubliki Kazakhstan. Seriia obshchestvennykh i gumanitarnykh nauk, 2002, (1): 15–23. (In Russ.)
4. Gaiduchenko L. L. The evolution of the vital activity of the Trans-Ural steppe population in the Neolithic-Bronze. Gaiduchenko L. L., Kalieva S. S., Logvin V. N., Logvin A. V. Ecology of Ancient and Traditional Societies: Proc. Conf. Tiumen: IPOS SO RAN, 2007, iss. 3: 88–91. (In Russ.)
5. Glushkov I. G. Ceramics as an archaeological source. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo In-ta arkheologii i etnografii SO RAN, 1996, 328. (In Russ.)
6. Shevnina I. V. Studying the hair and animal fur as part of the ancient ceramics of the Neolithic tribes of the Turgai Depression. Ancient Pottery: Results and Prospects of Study. Moscow: IA RAN, 2010, 66–71. (In Russ.)
7. Shevnina I. V. Experiments with the addition of wool to molding materials in the context of the study of the Neolithic Torgay ceramics. Modern approaches to the study of ancient ceramics in archeology: Intern. symposium, October 29–31,
8. Moscow: IA RAN, 2015, 155–163. (In Russ.)
9. Bobrinskii A. A. Pottery of Eastern Europe. Moscow: Nauka, 1978, 272. (In Russ.)
10. Bobrinskii A. A. The method of studying of ceramics burning. First Kuban archaeological conference: Proc. Conf., March 5–7, 1989. Krasnodar, 1989, 20–23. (In Russ.)
11. Myl'nikova L., Chemiakina M. Ceramics of the Late Irmen culture (based on the materials from the Om 1 settlement complex in Central Baraba). Ukrainskii keramologіchnii zhurnal, 2003 (1): 79–90. (In Russ.)
12. Liokumovich L. M. Bricks burning in a reducing environment. Improving the quality of clay building bricks. Moscow: Nauka, 1962, 40. (In Russ.)
13. Myl'nikova L. N. Drying and roasting of the Neolithic ceramics of the Condon settlement (Lower Amur). Material culture and problems of archaeological reconstruction. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo In-ta arkheologii i etnografii SO RAN, 1991, 93–103. (In Russ.)
14. Mosin V. S. Chronology of the Neolithic Zauralye: New Dates, Old Problems. Archaeological Heritage of the Urals: from the first discoveries to fundamental scientific knowledge (XX Ural Archaeological Conference): Proc. All-Russian Sci. Conf. from Intern. Participation, October 25–29, 2016. Izhevsk, 2016, 78–79. (In Russ.)
15. Zaibert V. F. Atbasar culture. Ekaterinburg: UrO RAN, 1992, 221. (In Russ.)
16. Kovaleva V. T., Zyrianova S. Iu. Neolithic cultures of the Middle Trans-Urals: genesis, correlation, interaction. Problems of studying the Neolithic of Western Siberia. Tiumen: IPOS SO RAN, 2001, 46–56. (In Russ.)
17. Iudin A. I. Neolithic. Archeology of the Lower Volga region. Vol. 1: Stone Age, ed. Skripkin A. S. Volgograd: Volgogradskoe nauchnoe izdatel'stvo, 2006, 331–407. (In Russ.)
18. Vokhmentsev M. P. Monuments of the Neolithic, Eneolithic, and Early Bronze in the forest-steppe Tobol. Chelyabinsk: Rifei, 2016, 137. (In Russ.)
19. Zakh V. A., Yen'shin D. N. To issue of neolithisation in the forest-steppe of Western Siberia. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2015, (2-6): 34–43. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Shevnina I.V. Ceramic Complex of the Neolithic Camp Ekidin 24. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2019;21(1):37-43. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2019-21-1-37-43