Issues of Researching the Modern-Time Sites of the Tom River Basin
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2020-22-1-107-114
Abstract
The present research deals with methodical and methodological issues of the study of post-Medieval archaeological sites. The paper focuses on the features of related field and research lab work. The author believes that archeology plays an accessory role in Modern-Time studies, which was a period of radical changes in the demographic and a political situation of Siberia. These conditions triggered the development of new socio-territorial groups, which became involved in the globalization process. Therefore, regional historical problems can be resolved only taking into account a broad historical background. The postMedieval archeology can significantly expand the range of sources for historians and ethnographers. However, the approach requires interdisciplinary interaction. Post-Medieval archeology can be successful only if it solves the tasks formulated by historians. The author proposes a comprehensive program for the accumulation and analysis of archaeological materials. The paper features the case of Modern-Time sites of the Tom River basin, namely the transformation of cultural complexes of the indigenous inhabitants of the Tom River basin in the XVII–XVIII centuries. This process was affected by various groups of Russian settlers and some Sayan-Altai ethnic groups. Therefore, the area of interest of archeology of the Modern Time is wider than "the Russian archeology" that developed in the recent years. As a result, post-Medieval archeology programs require a new methodical and methodological apparatus for scientific research and personnel training.
About the Author
Yu. V. Shirin
Tomsk State University;
Kemerovo State University (Novokuznetsk branch)
Russian Federation
Tomsk
Novokuznetsk
Russian Federation
Tomsk
Novokuznetsk
References
1. Sadovoi A. N. Territorial community of Mountain Altai and Shoria (late XIX – early XX centuries). Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat, 1992, 198. (In Russ.)
2. Kimeeva T. I. The culture of the peoples of the Tom River area as a result of ethnic interaction (late XIX – early XX centuries). Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat, 2007, 295. (In Russ.)
3. Kimeev V. M., Kopytov A. I. Mountain Shoria: history and modernity. Historical and ethnographic essays. Kemerovo: Primula, 2018, 600. (In Russ.)
4. Vizgalov G. P., Parkhimovich S. G. Mangazeya: a polar city estate. Nefteyugansk-Ekaterinburg: Izdatelskaia gruppa Karavan, 2017, 360. (In Russ.)
5. Shirin Yu. V. Archaeological study of Kuznetsk. Kuznetsk antiquity. Novokuznetsk: 400 years in the history of Russia. Tomsk-Novokuznetsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 2018, 27–78. (In Russ.)
6. Pervukhina A. A. Perfumery, pharmacy, personal cleanliness: reconstruction possibilities based on the materials of archaeological investigation of Kurgan occupational layer of the 18–19th centuries. Archeology of the Middle Tobol Area and adjacent territories: Proc. Interregional Round Table, Kurgan, December 8, 2016. Kurgan, 2016, 109–119. (In Russ.)
7. Ianchenko E. S. Porcelain and faience artifacts from the Kurgan occupational layer through the example of the excavation on the territory of manor-houses at the corner of Sovetskaya and Pichugina streets. Archeology of the Middle Tobol Area and adjacent territories: Proc. Interregional Round Table, Kurgan, December 8, 2016. Kurgan, 2016, 119–123. (In Russ.)
8. Samigulov G. Kh., Vasina J. V., Nikitin A. U., Mishin S. A. Archaeological research in the territory of the Pokrovsky estate in Chelyabinsk. Archeology of the Middle Tobol Area and adjacent territories: Proc. Interregional Round Table, Kurgan, December 8, 2016. Kurgan, 2016, 125–133. (In Russ.)
9. Practices of archaeological stratigraphy, ed. Harris E. C. Academic Press, 2014, 296.
10. Koval V. Yu. The primary statistical fixation of the mass ceramic material on the Middle Ages sites (X–XVII centuries) and the early Iron Age in the forest zone of Eastern Europe. Archeology of Moscow Region: Proc. Sci. Seminar, Moscow, February 10–20, 2013. Moscow, 2014, 489–571. (In Russ.)
11. Shirin Yu. V., Yakovlev Ya. A. "In general, it’s not a matter of geese, but everything is not amiss!" Difficulty in defining of postmedieval archaeological sites' items. Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug in the mirror of the past. Tomsk-Hanty-Mansijsk, TSU, 2019, iss. 17, 255–305. (In Russ.)
12. Samigulov G. Kh. The issue of cast cross-pendants of the late XVII – mid XIX century revisited: the case Old Believer crosspendants. Russian culture in archaeological research: Proc. III All-Russian Sci. Conf., Omsk, November 24–25, 2008. Omsk, 2008, 202–221. (In Russ.)
13. The Age of transition: the archaeology of English culture 1400–1600, eds. Gaimster D. R., Stamper P. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1997, 266.
14. Malykh S. V. The complex of objects of the 1850's from excavations on Sadovnicheskaya street in Moscow. Archeology of a Russian city. Materials of the scientific and practical seminar 2017. Moscow: SAB, 2018, vol. II, 252–287. (In Russ.)
15. Culture of Russians in archaeological researches, ed. Tataurova L. V. Omsk: Izdatelskii dom "Nauka", 2017, 580. (In Russ.)
16. Faces of first Irkutsk inhabitants, ed. Molodin V. I. Irkutsk: Amtera, 2011, 84. (In Russ.)
17. Shirin Yu. V. The funeral rite of the Christian cemeteries of Pritomye XVII–XVIII centuries. Russian culture in archaeological research: interdisciplinary methods and technologies: Sci. Conf., Omsk-Tara, November 21–24, 2011. Omsk, 2011, 416–422. (In Russ.)
18. Zagvazdin E. P. The first research of the 17–18th century Orthodox cemetery in Abalak Monastery (2007 archaeological excavation materials). Archeology of the Middle Tobol Area and adjacent territories: Proc. Interregional Round Table, Kurgan, December 8, 2016. Kurgan, 2016, 94–101. (In Russ.)
19. Simonov D. A., Shirin Yu. V. Investigation of the possible burial places of Pyotr of Tomsk in the Monashki tract. Archaeological discoveries. 2015, ed. Lopatin N. V. Moscow: Institute arkheologii RAN, 2017, 440. (In Russ.)
20. Kimeev V. M. The Russian colonization as the basis of the Shor ethnos. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2014, (3-3): 67–78. (In Russ.)
21. Zinyakov N. M. Blacksmithing specific nature in Kuznetsk Ostrog and the surrounding villages in the XVII–XVIII c. (on the basis of metallographic studies). Culture of Russians in archaeological researches, eds. Tataurova L. V., Borzunov V. A. OmskTyumen-Ekaterinburg: Magellan, 2014, vol. I, 82–93. (In Russ.)
22. Shirin Yu. V. The kuznetsk tatars' bloomery complexes from site Sharton 1. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Istoriya, 2019, (62): 192–201. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/19988613/62/22
23. Martyushov R. A., Shirin Yu. V. Difficulties interpreting of written and archaeological sources of information of ferrous metallurgy of the Kuznetsk tatars. Bylye Gody, 2018, 49(3): 915–930. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.13187/bg.2018.3.915
24. Skriabina L. A. The Russians of the Tom River basin. Ethical and ethnographic essays (XVII – early XX centuries). Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat, 1997, 130. (In Russ.)
25. Chigrik G. M. On the dialectal and national composition of the inhabitants of Kuznetsk in the XVII century. Russian dialects in Siberia, ed. Palagina V. V. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, 1971, 89–95. (In Russ.)
26. Panov V. I. The history of the settlement of the Kuznetsk district (XVII – early XX centuries): regional and ethnic composition of the migrants. Kuznetsk antiquity. Novokuznetsk: Kuznetskaia krepost, 1998, iss. 3, 36–53. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Shirin Yu.V. Issues of Researching the Modern-Time Sites of the Tom River Basin. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2020;22(1):107-114. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2020-22-1-107-114
Views:
562
Email this article 