The article considers the problem of dating and duration of the transition period from the Early Iron Age to the Late Iron Age on the basis of materials from the KozlovMys-2 burial ground in the Podtaezhny Pritobolye and monuments of the final stage of the Sargat culture. Based on a set of dates, a short - term chronology of transitional monuments of the forest-steppe and sub-taiga Trans-Urals is proposed-within the first half of the IV century AD.

Keywords: Early Iron Age, early Middle Ages, Sargat, Kashin, Karym, Bakal cultures, chronology.

Introduction

The period indicated in the title in the archaeological record of the region under consideration is one of the least studied, especially against the background of fairly well-studied cultures of the Early Iron Age. We are faced with a whole set of problems of the Great Migration era that are waiting to be resolved. For example, when did the Early Iron Age cultures change to medieval ones? We are talking mainly about the disappearance of the Sargat culture, which occupied the entire forest-steppe, sub-taiga and partially steppe Tobol-Irtysh region for almost a millennium. Its upper limit was established as the III-IV centuries. not a very large set of facts: dating data from the burial grounds of Kalachevka [Mogilnikov, 1972, p. 68], Abatsky-3, and Sidorovka [Mogilnikov, 1992, p.297; Matveeva, 1994, p. 100; Matyushchenko and Tataurova, 1997, p. 82]. Radiocarbon dates were obtained for wood from the Tyutrinsky and Savinovsky burial grounds of the final stage in the interval of the N-W centuries. [Matveeva, 1993, p. 156, Table 52]. The joint occurrence of carved Sargat and Kashin ceramics and Yarsala and Tuman ceramics, ornamented with figured and combed stamps, at the Ipkul settlement allowed us to date it to the III-V centuries. [Koryakova, Morozov, Sukhanova, 1988, p. 126]. L. I. Pogodin determined the upper date of Sargat burials of the III-IV centuries by the main types of weapons [1991, p. 24].

A. A. Kovrigin, disputing my dating of the Abatsky-3 burial ground as the latest monument of the Sargat culture, II-IV centuries, insists on narrowing the scope to the N-W centuries [2007, p. 198], relying on the dates of weapons and military equipment, but does not agree with the date of the burial site of the Sargat culture. it takes into account the rather late range of existence of a number of beads, for example, cross-striped arrow-shaped ones of the first half of the IV century. [Alekseeva, 1978, Tables 27-72, p. 43], and, as is known, any closed complex is dated according to the latest things. The idea of ending the existence of the Sargat culture in the second or third century AD, as I think, arose under the influence of the opinion of S. G. Botalov and S. Yu. Gutsalov about the placement of the Hunnic Horde in the Southern Urals, on the Asian-European border, already in the P-W centuries. and its active participation in political events.-

* This work was supported by the RGNF, project N12 - 01 - 00329.

Ciscaucasia and the Caspian region in the third century. However, the mentioned authors consider the Hunnic cultural genesis as a long one that took place over two centuries, from the second half of the second century to the second half of the fourth century, after which the nomads left the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes (Botalov and Gutsalov, 2000, pp. 25-26). Their position does not require a revision of the dating of the Sargat culture, even if the thesis about the migration of a significant part of its carriers to the west along with the Huns is accepted.

V. A. Zakh suggests moving the boundary under discussion to the first century AD [2009, p. 76], based on new radiocarbon dates in the range I-VT centuries obtained by S. G. Botalov and co-authors for the Large Bakal settlement*. This ancient settlement was almost destroyed, and insignificant materials of recent excavations on the floor area behind the external moat do not reflect all the strata of the already disappeared monument (Botalov et al., 2008). In addition, the date taken into account is ¹⁴ From a random piece of coal from the Lastochkino Gnezdo-1 settlement and represented by V. A. Zakhu noted its synchronicity with Bakal ceramics. It is precisely accidental, since the remains of medieval towers and fortifications claimed by the author are not found in the published drawings [Zach, 2009, p. 75; Fig. 2, 3]**. The actual time range of this ancient settlement remains within the boundaries of III-IV bb. (according to two dates: SOAN-4259 - 1 730 ± 65 BP; calibrated-240-400 AD; SOAN-4301 - 1 785 ± ± 40 bp; calibrated-130-330 AD)***. The monument has such a thin layer, moreover, with finds from different eras right under the turf, that it is not considered basic. However, there is a very solid series of several dozen radiocarbon dates for the final Sargat culture in the Kolovsky and Rafailovsky hillforts, and it indicates the cessation of the existence of these centers in the IV century [Matveeva et al., 2005, p. 58, 91; Matveeva, Berlina, and Rafikova, 2008, p. 152-153]. And it is important that there are no medieval materials on the latter.

The question of the duration of the transition period from the Early Iron Age to the Late Iron Age is also not clear. Until recently, almost all researchers accepted the IV-V centuries as such an interval. V. A. Mogilnikov most clearly formulated the situation of this chronological segment, who wrote that the forest-steppe fell into desolation, and then taiga tribes related by origin to the Kulais, as well as groups of carriers of the Lower Ob culture, advanced there, which is precisely demonstrated by the materials of the Ipkul XV settlement and the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground [1992, p. 311]. According to L. N. Koryakova, V. M. Morozov, and T. A. Sukhanova, the Sargat population of the forest-steppe migrated to the west already in the first centuries AD, and in the sub-taiga zone they preserved their traditions longer [1988, p. 127].

Until recently, for the transition period from the Early Iron Age to the Middle Ages, only data were available in the literature on four burials of the Kozlovsky burial ground (Kozlov Mys-2)* (Chernetsov, 1957) and the settlement of Ipkul XV [Koryakova, Morozov, and Sukhanova, 1988]. New materials from the ancient settlements of Kolovsky (Matveeva, Berlina, Rafikova, 2008), Ust-Utyak (Kaidalov, Sechko, Kolmogorov, 2010), Ust-Tersyuk (Rafikova, Matveeva, Berlina, 2008) suggest that the beginning of the Middle Ages was associated with the formation of the Bakal culture, thus returning to the original dating of its discoverer (Salnikov, 1956]. All layers of these monuments contain several types of finds (Bakalsky, Kushnarenkovsky, Karymsky, Yudinsky), reflecting the transition to a mobile life with repeated visits to the same favorable places, but do not give a clear stratigraphy of medieval deposits. Therefore, the main information about the epoch of interest to us should be sought in necropolises with satisfactory preservation of skeletons and artifacts, such as Ust-Tara-7 [Skandakov and Danchenko, 1999], Ustyug-1 [Matveeva, 2009], however, the total number of burials studied in them does not exceed 30 yet.

The Kozlovsky burial ground, widely known in the scientific archaeological literature on Western Siberia and recognized as one of the most important objects for studying the culturogeny of the Ural peoples, continues to be a reference monument for studying this era. His materials have long been discussed in discussions about the turn of the archaeological ages and the formation of medieval cultures (see, for example, [Mogilnikov, 1987, p. 165, 167]). In the burial ground today there are 63 burials of the time of interest to us.

Discussion of materials

The Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground was discovered by V. N. Chernetsov in 1952 on the southern shore of Lake Andreyevsky, which, together with other flowing lakes, is connected to the lake itself.-

* The mentioned date cannot be considered correct, since the monument contains various cultural materials, including those from the Early Iron Age. The authors publish Gorokhov, Sargat, and Kashinsky vessels, but for some reason they refer to the Middle Ages (Botalov et al., 2008, fig. 4, 2; 6, 8; 8, 15; 10, 16].

** It is difficult to recognize a 0.2 m deep groove as a moat, and a rolled strip as the remains of log cabins [Zakh, 2009, p. 75].

*** OxCal calibration on May 10.

* The double name was introduced by V. P. Chernetsov: published as Kozlovsky, and registered with the monument protection authorities as Kozlov Mys-2.

1. Location of the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground.

1). It consisted of a zone of ground burials in the most elevated part of Kozlov Cape, jutting into the water mirror in the direction of Bolshoy Andreevsky Island, and 15 mounds with a diameter of 4-5 m and a height of 30-40 cm along its gentle western part. There were also numerous small hills that were considered natural. V. N. Chernetsov investigated 11 mounds with a "well", the central part of the cape-with a continuous excavation [1952,1955, 1956], and several burials were discovered on the cape arrow during the study of the Neolithic site of Kozlov Mys-1. In 1960, to clarify the area of the burial ground, a trench was laid on the eastern side (Zotova, 1960). The researchers immediately determined that the mounds and ground graves are simultaneous, and that no burial breaks the others, so they gave a continuous numbering to all 62 objects they excavated.

However, the materials of the monument were not published, as it seems to me, because of their unexplained diversity of cultures. It should be borne in mind that V. N. Chernetsov and V. I. Moshinskaya were pioneers in the study of taiga antiquities in Western Siberia, and forest-steppe cultures were still unexplored at that time, in particular, the Sargat, Bakal, and Kashinsky complexes represented in the necropolis were not even identified at that time. Since the monument is extremely destroyed and its territory is already partially built up, I conducted emergency excavations (Fig. 2)*.

The graves of Kozlov Cape-2 are divided into strictly oriented along the C-S line and located at an angle of 45° to it; and by the presence of dishes of a certain type, it is possible to distinguish the Late Sargat, Late Kash, Bakal, Karym, Kushnarenkov and mixed groups (Fig. 3). Early Medieval burials are located in latitudinal rows, oriented meridionally, sometimes in the Middle Ages. with slight deviations to the northwest or northeast. The deceased were buried in an elongated position on their backs with their arms along the torso, their heads facing north; the depth and shape of the grave pits are similar everywhere (Fig. However, in some graves (∼16 units), no skeletal remains or items were preserved. But their location in the same rows with the ones described above, with the same interval, similar dimensions and orientation allow us to assume that these burials belong to the same necropolis.

All the buried people had a small pot at their head. In places of lifetime wear, there were bronze belt buckles with a movable tongue, belt tips, beads, bracelets, grivnas, tweezers. In several cases, fur was found stuck to bronze objects, which indicates the custom of burying in winter clothes or performing the rite in winter. Weapons and cult items are rare. Interestingly, most of the decorations come from childhood and adolescent burials, where they apparently played the role of amulets and were placed separately, wrapped in cloth. White pebbles placed at the headboard, and sometimes at the feet, had some symbolic meaning.

Some of the vessels were located not in the graves, but near them. In some cases, horse teeth were found at the level of the buried soil, lying in anatomical order-from collapsed heads placed on or near the floor. Accumulations of leg bones of small cattle, horse hooves are noted. The filling of almost all the holes contained broken dishes, which probably were traces of the trizna at the grave. In addition to vessels, bones of a large ungulate animal, arctic fox, were found in the headboard.

In some graves, cremation of some organic remains was recorded, but not human ones, since skeletal bones were also present there. Its traces were observed in the form of a thick layer of greasy coal (up to 40 cm thick) or as a ground puncture in one of the corners of the pit (Fig. 4, 3, b). The vessels in these graves were of the Karym type, but one Kushnarenkov type was also found (see Figs. 3, 10). There were three cases when the fire was filled with coals. As a variation of the rite (3 units), coal and ash spots were near the headboard, but to the side (see Figs. 4, 7). In two graves, such bonfires are recorded at the foot of the ancient horizon.

It is interesting that burials with Bakal and Karym vessels are equally located on the necropolis area, and do not form groups. Burials with Kushnarenkov ceramics are concentrated in the middle of the cape, but they are located in rows among the Bakal graves.

* The work was carried out with the financial support of the Russian State Scientific Foundation (project No. 08-01-18196e "Organization of an expedition to complete the excavation of the Kozlovsky burial ground-a monument of the Great Migration of Peoples in the forest Trans-Urals") and the Committee for the Protection and Use of Objects of Historical and Cultural Heritage of the Tyumen Region Administration. I would like to thank the employees of IPOS SB RAS for their cooperation.

2. Plan of excavations on Kozlov Cape of Lake Andreevsky, a-mound; b - excavated mound; c-excavation; d-excavation (?); e-excavation in 2007; d-monument; g-excavation in 2008; w - pit of the Ural Archaeological expedition; i-destruction; k - artificial embankment; l - transformer substation; m - children's railway; h - railway platform; o-excavation in 2009; p-excavation in 2010; r - depth mark; c - height mark; t-forest road.

Fig. 3. Ceramics.

A-Bakalskaya; B - "kushnarenkovskaya"; C-Karymskaya; D-Sargat-Kashinskaya; E-mixed.

1-border 1; 2-border 32; 3, 32-border 12a; 4-border 14; 5-border 31; b-border 67; 7-border 63; 8-border 40; 9 - border 41; 10 - border 47; 11-border 81; 72 - border 9; 13 - border 48;

14-border crossing 19; 15-border 11; 16-border 33; 17-border 42; 18-border 23; 19-border 54; 20-border. 13 - 3; 21, 22, 24, 30-border 36; 23, 26-border 16; 25, 34 - border 34; 27-border 20;

28-border 26; 29-border 44; 31-border 5; 33-border 21; 35-border 53; 36-border 27.

4. Plans and sections of graves with different types of pots. 1 -border 51; 2-border 50; 3-border 23; 4-border 66; 5-border 63; 6-border 29; 7-border 47; 8-border 53; 9-border 70.

The closest to Kozlovsky is the Ustyug-1 necropolis on Tobol, which also combines underground and underground burials that form common rows (Matveeva, 2009). Only partial analogies are found in a number of burial grounds in the Urals, for example, Brodovsky, where there are traces of bonfires, horse skulls, and broken ceramics on sites bounded by ditches near graves (Goddina R. D., 1986). Ipkulsky (Chikunova, 2011) and Birsky (Mazhitov, 1968) burial grounds are similar in inventory to Kozlovsky.

Vessels from graves are formed and decorated in a completely different manner: pots with a carved pattern, decoration of notches, prints of combed and framed stamps, pits, "pearls", lattices, painted jugs and bowls with dense linear compositions of grooves and impressions of figured stamps. They can be attributed to the Karym, Bakal and Kushnarenkov pottery traditions.

The Bakal group is represented by 47 vessels. Of these, 40 bomb-shaped poorly profiled pots, one relatively high-mountain pot, one small pitcher, and five closed bowls. All are made of baked dough with chamotte. The diameter of the mouth varies from 4 to 15 cm, the predominant 9-11 cm. Pots are clearly utensils for drinking for individual use. Of these, 11 vessels are without ornaments, the rest are poorly decorated with a number of pits, notches along the corolla or inclined impressions of a short and small combed stamp, a single lattice, seed-shaped and triangular punctures. In addition to horizontal lines, there are zigzag, "wave", and "hanging" triangles on the shoulders and torso (see Fig. 3, A). Closed bowls bear traces of technical innovation -they have collars that were not previously seen on local dishes. The size of the bowls is small, the diameter of the mouth is from 8 to 15 cm; they were probably intended for one serving of food.

Karym ceramics (23 copies) are so named rather conventionally, since in the complex, along with closed bowls, there are pots that are characteristic of the interior.

for the forest-steppe. The defining feature is a dense elegant decor made from the impressions of a comb stamp, as well as a rhombic one in three versions: with four or nine indentations, a cross inside the rhombus (see Fig. 3, C). The diameter of the mouth of bowls is much larger than that of pots (12-17 and 5-12 cm, respectively). In the collection there is one jug (from page 34) with a swollen body and a narrow, low throat, decorated with prints of a comb on the neck and a rhombic four-membered stamp on the shoulders.

The group of other ceramics includes vessels that find direct analogies in other cultures. Two pots from page 16 can be considered Late Sargatic: one shows a bunch of leaves fanned out in slices (see Figs. 3, 23), the other has a carelessly shaped drain. Two vessels from page 36 are definitely Kashin in shape and ornamentation. They have a sharply curved straight neck, a slightly swollen torso, and a pattern of impressions of a large comb stamp in the form of "columns", "trees", and a "walking comb" (see Figs. 3, 21, 22). However, the medieval age of these ceramics is indicated by the presence of a number of pits at the transition from the neck to the shoulders, which is completely unusual for the decoration of vessels of the early Iron Age, and the presence of Bakal ware in the complex. A pot from border 44 with sparse impressions of a large comb and an unfinished composition of "hanging" triangles applied with a rather large rhombic nine-tooth stamp can be called Bakal-Karymsky (see Figs. 3, 29). In the decoration of vessels from borders 72 and 85, there are Oronturian ("fringe", collar, stamp" caterpillars") features (Mogilnikov, 1987, Table LXXXVI, 2) and Yudinsky (several horizontal lines on the neck) features, however, the rim is roughly incised, which is typical for Kashinsky or Bakal ceramics.

Three pots and two jugs have Kushnarenkov features: a carefully smoothed surface, a collar on a crown, a decor of vertical lines applied with a thin metal ornament on a clearly marked neck (see Fig. 3, B) or hangers. A peculiar feature can be called the deflection of the bottom along its center on vessels from pogr. 9 and 81 (see figs. 3, 11, 12). The most similar to Kushnarenkovskie high-proud jug from page 47, on which the above-described pattern is divided by horizontal lines and a double zigzag (see Figs. 3, 10). Another jug, from page 63 (see Figures 3, 7), combines a belt of triangles made with a thin metal comb on the body with larger, but also vertically applied prints of another comb stamp on the crown, which is more typical of the Bakala ornamental tradition. Vessels from the Pereyiminsky burial ground have more reason to be called Kushnarenkovskiye than those described, since they are high-necked pitchers (Chernetsov, 1957, Table XIV), as well as polished shards made of finely ground red clay dough from the settlement layers of Kolovsky, Ust-Tersyuksky and other ancient settlements. Kozlov's specimens are rather imitations of some Central Asian ware, perhaps copper or silver, made by coinage.

Arrowheads are iron, petiolate, three - bladed, with a rhombic feather and blades cut off at an obtuse angle, the refractive line of which is located in the middle of the feather (Fig. 5, 1). Such arrowheads were common in the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Eurasia in the I-IV centuries. [Zasetskaya, 1983, p. 77].

Daggers - iron, double-edged, with a ring-shaped pommel (Fig. 5, 10), one (from pogr. 56) it was bronze. More typical of the Early Iron Age.

Bronze scabbard plates: 1) a small rectangular one, decorated with large carnations with caps along the blade line in the middle (Fig. 5,5), finds analogies in the materials of the Tarasovsky burial ground [Goldina R. D., 2003, Table. 49, 15; 277, 8]; 2) a large rectangular-rhombic one, with a triangular end, was attached to the wooden frame with carnations 5, b). An object of similar proportions and design was found in the Krasnoyarsk burial ground in the Kama region (Kazantseva, 1988, Fig. 2, 54).

The bits were iron, double - jointed, double-ringed, and ring-shaped (Figs. 5, 8, 9). They were distributed in a wide chronological range.

Knives - iron, petiolate, with a straight or humped back, differ in small size (Fig. 5, 25-27). Both varieties were widespread in the Early Iron Age and the Middle Ages.

Tweezers - bronze with expanding tweezers (Fig. 5, 28). Similar objects were found in the Sarapul burial ground of the IV-V centuries [Armatynskaya, 1986, fig. 6, 6], Brody [Goldina R. D., 1986, p. 67], on the Verkhneutchansk settlement of the VI-IX centuries. [Goldina R. D., 2004, Fig. 134, 9], they are also very characteristic of the Alanian and Central Asian monuments.

Buckles are divided into seven types; all but one (type 7) are bronze.

1. Small round-framed and oval-framed shield-less buckles with a movable tongue. Variants are based on the detailed shapes proposed by A. K. Ambrose [1971]: 1a) with a ring thickened in front and a tongue without deflection (Figs. 5, 13). V. Yu. Malashev writes that such thick straight lines

* N. A. Mazhitov's oral report on a metal vessel with a "Kushnarenkov" pattern that he saw in the collections of the National Museum of Kazakhstan.

5. Household items and weapons. 1, 2-border crossing 5; 3-border 34; 4-border 22; 5, 27-border 11; 6, 14 - border 21; 7-border 48; 8, 9-border 41; 10-border 53; 77 - border 27; 12, 17- border area 29; 13-border 67; 15 - border 47; 16-border 22; 18 - border 7; 79, 20, 25 - border 2; 21 - border 12a; 22, 24-border 70; 23 -border 31; 26-border 16; 28-border 66; 29-border 51.

the reeds begin to occur in the fourth century [2000, p. 209]; 1b) with a thick proboscis tongue, stepwise cut off from behind, and a sharply thickened anterior part of the ring (Figs. 5, 12, 23), date back to the fourth century (Ambrose, 1971, p. 102). According to V. Yu. Malashev, they were used in the early Middle Ages. in the second and third thirds of this century [2000, p. 209]; their analogs were found in Hun monuments [Zasetskaya, 1994, p. 93, fig. 19b, 36], Late Sarmatian burials, burial complexes of the Jety-asar culture, for example, in border 76-2 and 314 of the Kosasar-2 burial ground [Levina, 1996 123, 75, 19]; 1b) with a less thickened ring in front and a far-protruding proboscis tongue, thin at the attachment point (Fig. 5, 19, 20, 29), They were developed in V. B. [Ambrose, 1971, p. 103].

2. Trapezoidal shield-less buckle with a fixed protruding peg (Fig. 5, 15). Similar items are typical of the end of the Early Iron Age, they are in the collection of the Tarasovsky burial ground [Goldina R. D., 2003, tab. 366, 1; 711, 17].

3. Round-framed and oval-framed buckles with segmented round flap and movable tongue (Fig. 5, 16, 21). They may date from the end of the third to the first third of the fourth century. [Voronin and Malashev, 2006, p. 56]. Similar buckles were found in the Varna necropolis (Semenov, 1980, Table X, 1)and early monuments of the Jety-Assar culture, for example, in border 66 of the Kosasar-2 burial ground (Levina, 1996, Fig.

4. An oval-framed buckle with a tongue and a movable joint with a rectangular elongated shield narrowed in the middle (Figs. 5, 7). Analogs are known in the materials of border 92 of the Tarasovsky burial ground I-IVbb. [Goldina R. D., 2003, Tables 32, 7], Mazuninsky and Nevolinsky monuments. V. Yu. Malashev considers Mazuninsky buckles to be specific and dates them not earlier than the 5th century [2000, p.205].

5. Round-edged buckles with a rectangular flap and a protruding tongue (Fig. 5, 17, 18). The closest ones were found in the Irtysh region in the Ust-Tara-7 burial ground [Skandakov and Danchenko, 1999, Fig. 14, 2], and in the Aral Sea region, for example, in burials 27, 57, and 70 of the Tompakasar burial ground [Levina, 1996, Fig. 124, 3, 5, 6]. Focusing on the remark A. K. Ambrose, that the buckles of the V century. rings in front are not very sharply thickened, proboscis tongues protrude far forward, this type can be attributed to this time. A similar elongated shield has a buckle from the Priuralsky

The Birsk burial ground of the IV-VII centuries, where specimens with rectangular shields are dated to the VI century [Ambrose. 1980, fig. 7, 13]. Interestingly, they correlate with vessels with Kushnarenkovskaya ornamentation.

6. A round-framed buckle with a trapezoid flap and a proboscis-like tongue protruding beyond the frame (Figs. 5, 22). Similar items are known from the materials of the "Golden Cemetery" in the Kuban region (Gushchina and Zasetskaya, 1994, Tables 22, 212), Mazuninsky and Azelinsky antiquities, which, according to V. Yu.Malashev, should be attributed to the end of the IV - beginning of the V century (2000, p. 204).

7. An iron shield-less egg-shaped buckle with a movable tongue (Fig. 5, 14). Similar ones were found in the Varna necropolis [Semenov, 1980, Table XI, 29, 30], border 165 of the Kosasar-2 burial ground (Levina, 1996, Fig. 121, 19). Since the back of the frame is straightened, and the tongue is short and straight, it is likely that this specimen should be attributed to the end of the III or beginning of the IV century. [Malashev, 2000, p. 209].

Belt tips are bronze double strips fixed on the outside and inside of the belt with carnations (Figs. 5, 2, 3). They are characteristic of burial grounds in the Kama Region and are known in the Aral Sea region (Goldina R. D., 2003, Tables 666, 1, 3; Levina, 1996, figs. 129, 48).

There are two types of hryvnia: 6, 11, 14, 23) or with a lock in the form of a hook (16); 2) rolled up from bronze foil (hollow). Both variants of the first type find analogies in the materials of Nevolinsky and Mazuninsky burial grounds, for example, Tarasovsky [Goldina R. D., 2003, tab. 67, 4 - 12; 78, 1, 6]. The second type of hryvnia has flattened ends with holes for connecting with a string (Fig. 6, 1), a similar one was found in Varninsky the burial ground [Semenov, 1980, Table IV, 5].

Earrings - bronze, wire, in the form of a question mark, eight-shaped (Fig. 6, 8, 9). This is a widespread type of jewelry.

The ring is closed, with a rhombic shield (Fig. 6, 10). Analogs are found in the Dzhetyasar antiquities [Levina, 1996, Fig. 142, 4, 12].

There are two types of bracelets: 1) round-wire; 2) composite of twisted wire and beads. The first one is represented by two varieties: 1a) unclosed-

Fig. 6. Decorations.

1 2,11, 13, 16 - 19 - border 12a; 3-5, 10, 21-border 11; 6-border 20; 8-border 31; 9 -border 16; 7, 12, 15-border 36; 14- border 13-3; 20-border 39; 22-border 70; 23 - border 54.

Fig. 7. Beads. 1-depasportized (possibly from border 9.44 and 56.57); 2 - border 10; 3, 4-border 16; 5-border 20; 6-border 52; 7-border 47; 8-border 70; 9-border 21; 10 - border 12a; 11-border 45.

two bracelets, one of which is wrapped in spiral wire, and the other has pointed ends (Fig. 6, 2, 20); 1b) with the ends going behind each other (Fig. 6, b, 13). Such jewelry is widely known in the Kama region. The composite bracelet consists of a thin flat rectangular bronze wire spirally twisted in cross-section, on which 15 purple glass 14-sided flattened beads were strung (Fig. 6, 15).

There are also two types of bronze plaques: 1) rectangular, with holes in the center and corners for sewing, with a punch pattern (Fig. 6, 7); 2) cast, round, with a loop on the back (Fig. 6, 12). Similar "buttons" decorated the belts of the waist set and bridles are well known from the materials of the Kama burial grounds, for example, Tarasovsky [Goldina R. D., 2003, Tables 508, 2].

Hollow pendants are mainly represented by stylized figures of a standing bear. One of them has a relief cast cord pattern (Figs. 6, 5), analogs are known in the Urals and Western Siberia at the turn of the Early Iron Age and the Middle Ages, for example, in the Abatsky-3 and Krasnoyarsk burial grounds (Matveeva, 1994; Kazantseva, 1988, Fig. 3, 35). The other figures are smooth (Figs. 6, 16-19), similar to those found in the collections of the Memorial, Varninsky, and Tarasovsky burial grounds, but unlike them, the Kozlovsky ones have prominent ears. 6, 21) are widely known in the Kama antiquities [Mazhitov, 1977, p. 16; Goldina R. D., 2003, Tables 688, 5].

Push through-bronze cylindrical tubes with rollers at the ends (Fig. 6, 3, 4). This is a widespread type of jewelry in the Finno-Ugric environment, for example, similar ornaments were found in the Varninsky (Semenov, 1980, Table VII, 48) and Tarasovsky burial grounds.

The beads are more reminiscent of Early Iron Age sets than medieval ones, where the beads tend to be larger and more diverse. Stone, metal, and glass beads stand out, as well as beads. Carnelian bead - bipyramidal, 12-sided (Fig. 7, 6), double-sided drilling. In the Aral Sea region, there are similar proportions [Levina, 1996, Fig. 6, 2], and E. V. Goldina identified a smaller one in type XIA7 [2002]. Crystal transparent prismatic hexahedral permeation (Fig. 7, 1) finds analogies in the North Caucasus (Deopik, 1963, Fig. 5, 33). Bronze beads - short-cylindrical and barrel-shaped, transversely compressed, large, similar to Tarasov's in the Urals [Goldina R. D., 2003, Tables 296, 17]. The vast majority of glass beads in the collection are described in Table 1.

V. N. Chernetsov believed that the time of operation of the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground "hardly goes beyond the IV century", and according to ceramics, it should be attributed to the Karym stage of the Lower Ob culture within the IV-V bb. When compared with the burial complexes of the Western Urals, he saw the greatest similarity with the Khara ones and considered the communities that left them related (Chernetsov, 1956, p. 9). To clarify the dating of burials, inventory data are summarized in Table 2.

Table 1.

Classification and chronology of glass beads from the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground

* D - diameter, H-height.

Table 2.

Chronology of objects from the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground

Note. For a description of the item type, see the text, and for the type of beads , see Table 1.

Conclusions

Thus, even now, on a much wider range of sources, there is every reason to accept the dating of V. N. Chernetsov and assign Kozlov Mys-2 to the IV-beginning of the V century AD. However, I do not agree with him in the cultural interpretation of the burial ground. The burial mound rite, the horse cult, pot-shaped and pitcher-shaped forms, and the ornament of more than half of the ceramics collection suggest that the monument reflects the formation of the Bakal culture in the forest-steppe. It was formed on the basis of the Sargat and Kashin substrate elements and the Karym superstrate. I believe that the change of archaeological cultures of the Early Iron Age to medieval ones in the northern part of the forest-steppe and the subtaiga zone took place at the beginning of the IV century.

Most types of inventory of the Kozlov Mys-2 burial ground find analogies in the Urals and correlate with the Nevolinsky, Mazuninsky and Polomsky complexes. The presence of burial mounds and ground burials separated by a space of 15-17 m, it seems to me, indicates that the monument consists of multicultural burials of one multiethnic (?) community, in which the tradition of burying newcomers in ground graves was replaced by the burial rite in mounds, which was previously practiced by the autochthonous population.

Materials from the burial site, dating from the fourth to the beginning of the fifth century, contain obvious components of Early Iron Age cultures along with medieval ones. This allows us, in my opinion, to talk about a brief transition period, probably within the first half of the fourth century.

List of literature

Abramova M. P. Podkumsky mogilnik [Podkum burial ground], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1987, 182 p.

Alekseeva E. M. Antique beads of the Northern Black Sea region. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1978, Part 2, 120 p.

Ambrose A. K. Problemy rannesrednevekovoy khronologii Vostochnoi Evropy [Problems of Early Medieval Chronology of Eastern Europe].

Ambrose A. K. Birsky mogilnik i problemy khronologii Priural'ya v IV-VII vv. [Birsky burial ground and problems of chronology of the Urals in the IV - VII centuries].

Armatynskaya O. V. Ust ' -Sarapulskiy mogilnik [Ust-Sarapul burial ground]. Ustinov: Udmurt State University, 1986, pp. 26-46.

Botalov S. G., Gutsalov S. Yu. Hunno-Sarmatians of the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes. Chelyabinsk: Rifey Publ., 2000, 267 p. (in Russian)

Botalov S. G., Tideman E. V., Lukinykh A. A., Vokhmentsev M. P. Novye materialy issledovaniy Bolshogo Bakalskogo gorodishche [New materials for research of the Great Bakal Settlement]. - Chelyabinsk; Shadrinsk: Institute of History and Archeology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2008. - p. 6-40.

Voronin K. V., Malashev V. Yu. Funeral monuments of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age of the plain zone of the Republic of Ingushetia, Moscow: IA RAS, 2006, 152 p.

Sotsial'no-istoricheskie i metodologicheskie problemy drevnoi istorii Prikamya [Socio-historical and methodological problems of the ancient history of the Kama region]. - Izhevsk: Publishing house "Udmurt University", 2002. - p. 82-103.

Goldina E. V. Beads of burial grounds of the Nevolinsky culture (late IV-IX centuries). Izhevsk: Udmurt State University, 2010, 264 p.

Goldina R. D. Issledovaniya kurgannoy chasti Brodovskogo mogilnika [Studies of the kurgan part of the Brodovian burial ground]. - Ustinov: Udm. State University, 1986, pp. 47-98.

Goldina R. D. Tarasovsky burial ground of the I-V centuries on the Middle Kama River. - Izhevsk: Udmurt State University, 2003. - Vol. 1. - 318 p.; Vol. 2. - 724 p.

Goldina R. D. Ancient and medieval history of the Udmurt people. - Izhevsk: Publishing house "Udmurt University", 2004. - 422 p.

Goldina R. D., Koroleva O. P. Beads of medieval burial grounds of the Upper Kama region // Ethnic processes in the Urals and Siberia in the primitive era. Izhevsk: Udmurt State University, 1983, pp. 40-71.

Gushchina I. I., Zasetskaya I. P. "Golden Cemetery" of the Roman era in the Kuban region. St. Petersburg: Farn Publ., 1994, 172 p.

Deopik V. D. Klassifikatsiya i khronologiya alanskikh oboruzheniy VI-IX vv. [Classification and chronology of Alan ornaments of the VI-IX centuries]. - M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963. - P. 122-147. - (MIA; N114).

Zasetskaya I. P. Klassifikatsiya nakonechnikov strel hunnskoy epokhi [Classification of arrow tips of the Hunnic era]. - Saratov: Publishing House Saratov, un-ta, 1983. - p. 70-84.

Zasetskaya I. P. Culture of nomads of the Southern Russian steppes in the Hunnic era. Saint Petersburg: Ellipse LTD., 1994, 224 p. (in Russian)

Zakh V. A. Gorodishche Lastochkino Gnezdo-1 v Nizhni Priishimye [The Lastochkino Gnezdo-1 ancient settlement in the Lower Ishim region]. Vesti, arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii [News, Archeology, Anthropology and Ethnography], IPOS SB RAS, 2009, No. 11, pp. 67-80.

Zotova S. V. Report on the work of the Andreevsky detachment of the West Siberian expedition in 1960 / / Archive of IA RAS. R-2145. 12 l.

Novye arkheologicheskie pamyatniki Kamsko-Vyatskogo mezhdurechya [New archaeological sites of the Kama-Vyatka interfluve]. - Izhevsk: Udm. State University, 1988, pp. 44-65.

Kandalov A. N., Sechko E. A., Kolmogorov N. A. Medieval complex of the Ust-Utyak-1 settlement: interpretation and chronology // Vestn. Archeology, Anthropology and Ethnography / IPOS SB RAS, 2010, No. 13, pp. 75-78.

Kovrigin A. A. K datirovke Abatskogo-3 mogilnika [On the dating of the Abatsky-3 burial ground]. archeol. the second one. Surgut; Yekaterinburg: Magellan Publ., 2007, pp. 194-198.

Koryakova L. N., Morozov V. M., Sukhanova T. Yu. Settlement Ipkul-XV-monument of the transition period from the early Iron Age to the Middle Ages in the Lower part of the Volga region / / Material culture of the ancient population of the Urals and Western Siberia. - Sverdlovsk: Ural. State University, 1988, pp. 117-128.

Levina L. M. Etnokul'turnaya istoriya Vostochnogo Priaral'ya [Ethnocultural history of the Eastern Aral Sea region].

Mazhitov N. A. Bakhmutinskaya kul'tura [Bakhmutinskaya culture], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1968, 162 p.

Mazhitov N. A. Yuzhny Ural v VII-XIV vv. - Moscow: Nauka, 1977. -240 p.

Malashev V. Y. Periodization of belt sets of the late Sarmatian period // Sarmatians and their neighbors on the Don. Rostov n / A: Rostov State University, 2000, pp. 194-217.

Matveeva N. P. Sargat culture in the Middle Tobol. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1993, 175 p. (in Russian)

Matveeva N. I. Early Iron Age of the Ishim region. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1994, 152 p. (in Russian)

Matveeva N. P. Multicultural environment of the forest-steppe Trans-Urals in the middle of the first millennium AD and the formation of early Medieval communities. Kazan: Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan, 2009, pp. 150-152.

Matveeva N. P., Berlina S. V., Rafikova T. N. Kolovskoe gorodishche: Archeologo-paleoecological research. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2008, 228 p. (Antiquities of the Ingal Valley; issue 2).

Matveeva N. P., Larina N. S., Berlina S. V., Chikunova I. Yu. Comprehensive study of the living conditions of the ancient population of Western Siberia. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2005, 229 p.

Matyushchenko V. I., Tataurova L. V. Sidorovka burial ground in the Omsk Irtysh region. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1997, 198 p. (in Russian)

Mogilnikov V. A. K voprosu o sargatskoy kul'tury [To the question of Sargat culture]. Problemy arkheologii i drevnoi istorii ugrov [Problems of Archeology and ancient History of the Ugrians], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1972, pp. 66-86.

Mogilnikov V. A. Ugrs and Samodiytsy of the Urals and Western Siberia / / Finno-Ugrs and Balts, Moscow: Nauka, 1987, pp. 163-235.

Mogilnikov V. A. Lesostep ' Zaural'ya i Zapadnoy Sibiri [Forest-steppe of the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia]. Stepnaya polosa Asiaticheskoi chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmaticheskoy vremya [Steppe strip of the Asian part of the USSR in the Scythian-Sarmatian time], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1992, pp. 274-311.

Pogodin L. I. Problemy khronologii sargatskikh pamyatnikov v svyazi s osobennosti organizatsii voennogo dela (po materialam Priirtyshya) [Problems of chronology of Sargat monuments in connection with the peculiarities of the organization of military affairs (based on the materials of the Irtysh region)]. Omsk: Omsk State University, 1991, pp. 20-24.

Rafikova T. N., Matveeva N. P., Berlina S. V. Ceramic complexes of the Iron Age of the Ust-Tersyuk settlement //AV ORIGINE: Problems of the genesis of Siberian cultures. Tyumen: TriT Publ., 2008, issue 2, pp. 85-113.

Salnikov K. V. Isetsky ancient settlements / / SA. -1956. - N25-p. 189-214.

Semenov V. A. Varninsky burial ground / / Novy pamyatnik polomskoy kul'tury. Izhevsk: Research Institute of History, Language and Literature of the UdmSSR, 1980, pp. 5-106.

Skandakov I. E., Danchenko E. M. Ust-Tapa-VII kurgan burial ground in the southern taiga Irtysh region. Omsk: Omsk State Pedagogical University. un-t, 1999. - p. 160-186. - (Continuity; issue 3).

Chernetsov V. N. Report on the work of the West Siberian Expedition in 1952 //Archive of IA RAS. R-891. 45 l.

Chernetsov V. N. Report on the work of the West Siberian expedition of the IA of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1955 //Archive of IA RAS. R-1. N1211. 9 l.

Chernetsov V. N. Otchet o raboty Zapadno-Sibirskoy expeditsii IA AN SSSR v 1956 godu [Report on the work of the West Siberian Expedition of the IA of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1956].

Chernetsov, V. N., Lower Ob region in the first millennium of Our Era, MIA. -1957. - N58. - pp. 136-245.

Chikunova N. Y. Ipkulsky burial ground as a source for studying the ethno-cultural situation in the early Middle Ages in the Pritobol region // Tr. III Vseros. archeol. the congress. Veliky Novgorod, Staraya Russa Publ., 2011, vol. 2, pp. 112-113.

The article was submitted to the editorial Board on 06.10.11, in the final version-on 14.05.12.

Permanent link to this publication: