
Ilia Palaguta
Ilia Palaguta
CURRENT POSITION:
Institution: Saint-Petersburg Stieglitz State Academy of Art and Design, Art History Department
Professional position: Professor, Head of Art History department
Address: 191028, Solyanoj pereulok 13, Saint Petersburg, RF
EDUCATION:
University education: Moscow State University, Historical department, 1988–1993
Additional: Management in educational sector, 2018; Art Theory and Art History, 2019
ACADEMIC DEGREES:
— Doctor Habilitat (Doctor of Historical Sciences), 2012
Doctorate: Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (the Kunstkamera) RAS, Saint-Petersburg.
Specialty: Ethnography, Ethnology, Anthropology
— PhD: Institute of History of Material Culture RAS, Saint-Petersburg. Specialty: Archaeology
ACADEMIC TITLE:
Associate Professor of Art History, 2009
FIELDS OF RESEARCH, SCIENTIFIC INTERESTS:
— Art History
— Archaeology
— Cultural and Social Anthropology
TEACHING AND FACULTY EXPERIENCE
Since 2007/08 — present time
— Saint-Petersburg Stieglitz State Academy of Art and Design, Art History Department, professor
2003–2016
— Saint-Petersburg University of Humanities and Social Sciences
Lecture courses (SPbUHSS, SPbSSAAD)
— Prehistoric and Traditional Art
— The Basics of Archaeology
— Western European Art of the Middle Ages
— Art History (basic course) etc.
Guest and Public Lectures
2015, 2017 — Universität Regensburg
2024 — Yunnan Arts University
Grants, Scholarships, and Awards:
2016 — Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Polska, SONATA BIS 5, UMO-2015/18/E/HS3/00754 «Mikroregion Skarpy Dobużańskiej jako część fizjograficznego i biokulturowego pogranicza między strefą bałtycką i pontyjską (od VI do II tysiąclecia przed Chrystusem» (as consultant);
2011–2013 — Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) 11-06-00441, “Dynamics of Centralization – Decentralization of the Traditional Sociopolitical Systems of the Old and New World (A Study of Archaeological, Historical, and Ethnographic Data)”
2020 — RFBR 19-112-50079, "Studies on Ornament: main directions and perspectives"
Supervisors: Kozhin P.M.
CURRENT POSITION:
Institution: Saint-Petersburg Stieglitz State Academy of Art and Design, Art History Department
Professional position: Professor, Head of Art History department
Address: 191028, Solyanoj pereulok 13, Saint Petersburg, RF
EDUCATION:
University education: Moscow State University, Historical department, 1988–1993
Additional: Management in educational sector, 2018; Art Theory and Art History, 2019
ACADEMIC DEGREES:
— Doctor Habilitat (Doctor of Historical Sciences), 2012
Doctorate: Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (the Kunstkamera) RAS, Saint-Petersburg.
Specialty: Ethnography, Ethnology, Anthropology
— PhD: Institute of History of Material Culture RAS, Saint-Petersburg. Specialty: Archaeology
ACADEMIC TITLE:
Associate Professor of Art History, 2009
FIELDS OF RESEARCH, SCIENTIFIC INTERESTS:
— Art History
— Archaeology
— Cultural and Social Anthropology
TEACHING AND FACULTY EXPERIENCE
Since 2007/08 — present time
— Saint-Petersburg Stieglitz State Academy of Art and Design, Art History Department, professor
2003–2016
— Saint-Petersburg University of Humanities and Social Sciences
Lecture courses (SPbUHSS, SPbSSAAD)
— Prehistoric and Traditional Art
— The Basics of Archaeology
— Western European Art of the Middle Ages
— Art History (basic course) etc.
Guest and Public Lectures
2015, 2017 — Universität Regensburg
2024 — Yunnan Arts University
Grants, Scholarships, and Awards:
2016 — Narodowe Centrum Nauki, Polska, SONATA BIS 5, UMO-2015/18/E/HS3/00754 «Mikroregion Skarpy Dobużańskiej jako część fizjograficznego i biokulturowego pogranicza między strefą bałtycką i pontyjską (od VI do II tysiąclecia przed Chrystusem» (as consultant);
2011–2013 — Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) 11-06-00441, “Dynamics of Centralization – Decentralization of the Traditional Sociopolitical Systems of the Old and New World (A Study of Archaeological, Historical, and Ethnographic Data)”
2020 — RFBR 19-112-50079, "Studies on Ornament: main directions and perspectives"
Supervisors: Kozhin P.M.
less
Related Authors
Vanya Stavreva
Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski"
Ivan Vajsov
National Institute of Archaeology and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
Maria GUROVA
National Institute of Archaeology and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
Валери Григоров
National Institute of Archaeology and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
Ivan Suvandzhiev
University of Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
Kamen Boyadziev
National Institute of Archaeology and Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
Dona Stoyanova
Bulgarian National Academy of Arts
InterestsView All (121)
Uploads
Books by Ilia Palaguta
Книга посвящена ярким и самобытным культурам древнейших земледельцев, населявших территорию Европы в VII–III тыс. до н.э. Их носители были не только творцами «аграрной революции», но и создателями памятников первой архитектуры — жилищ, оборонительных и культовых сооружений, многочисленных произведений мелкой антропоморфной и зооморфной пластики, первых образцов ювелирных изделий из металлов, ярких образцов орнаментального искусства. В основу работы легло исследование особенностей памятников искусства и архитектуры раннеземледельческой эпохи, принципов и закономерностей сложения художественных форм, рассмотрение их как продукта реальной жизни древних обществ. Книга предназначена для широкого круга читателей, студентов вузов и специалистов в области истории, культурологии, искусствоведения, этнологии и археологии
В книге представлены основные разновидности памятников искусства европейских раннеземледельческих культур, а также варианты их интерпретации. Издание снабжено богатым иллюстративным материалом, хронологическими таблицами и картами.
Предназначено для широкого круга читателей, рекомендуется в качестве учебного пособия для студентов искусствоведческих специальностей вузов
Book chapters by Ilia Palaguta
Abstract: The article analyzes the principal approaches to the studies of the terracotta figurines from the Balkan-Carpathian cultures of the Neolithic and the Copper Age (VII-III millennia BC): anthropomorphic and zoomorphic statuettes and various miniatures representing houses, furnishings, utensils, weapons and tools. As previously suggested by R. Lesure (2011), these approaches can be defined as universalism and contextualism. The first proposes the interpretation of the figurines within the framework of the external anthropological concepts and religious studies, the other one is based on the empirical studies and the analysis of the specific archeological and cultural contexts. While the first one seems beneath serious criticism, the second one implies that research algorithms and strategies should be established, based on the analysis of the material at various levels: its location in the cultural layer of the site, the place of the phenomenon within the context of the paleo-demographic and paleo-social reconstructions, the framework of workable analogies. The feasibility of such reconstructions is informed by the definition of culture as a form of the humans’ adaptation to the natural and social environment, and of art as a media technology that perpetuates the existence of the community
Thus, the question of synchronization of the Cucuteni А–В — Tripolye BI–BII period with the cultures mentioned above still remains open. Along with the necessity to search for new evidence allowing us a to establish substantial synchronization between these cultures, the irregular development of local groups of artefacts within the area of Tripolye and specifics of the contacts at the boundaries between different cultures should also be taken into account
From this perspective, the most informative are ‘closed’ assemblages, which represents by sets of figurines. In the article two of such sets analyzed, that were found in the settlements of the early period of Cucuteni-Tripolye culture: Poduri and Isaia in Romania. Both sets were found in vessels, and included 21 seated statuettes, differing in size, shape and decorations, and 13 miniature chairs. The analysis of the statuettes iconography shows that the kits includes 6 male and 7 female figurines, seated on 13 chairs, and 8 figures without chairs (female and of uncertain sex). They designated one group of personages that organized on the hierarchical principle, similar to the hierarchy of social groups. Such sets were used in other settlements of this period. Such figurine sets were regularly reproduced during about 400 years when bearers of Tripolye-Cucuteni tradition settled on a large area to the east of the Carpathians.
In conditions of differentiation of groups and development of new territories, figurines sets might represent the group of ancestors, common to the whole population. Functions of the sets can be defined in the field of ancestor worship and their application in the initiations and/or in mantic practices is also possible. Discontinuation of such sets associated with changes in ideology on the next stage of culture development.
The cult of ancestors and ancestor’s images in various forms are represented in the world anthropology and they are important part of spiritual culture of traditional societies. An analysis of antique, particularly Roman material gives close structural analogies to the European statuettes of the Neolithic Age. In extant texts is mentioned the whole group of gods associated with house and family: Genii Familiae, Lares Familiares et Compitales, Penates. As suppose the number of researchers, cults of such gods date back to honor of family or community ancestors. The iconography’s research of “household” gods shows tie between Lares and house. Figurines and images of Lares are usual placed on “Lararium” (hovel, often framed by a portico) a kind of house model. Some features of Lares and Penates cult and it’s iconography give base to draw a parallel between Lares and Penates and certain groups of the early-agriculturalist statuettes, which can be interpreted as character’s images connected with ancestor’s cult — either a direct ancestors or general mythology ancestors of ethnic group.
Papers by Ilia Palaguta
ORNAMENTED PHALANX BONES OF ANIMALS AT SETTLEMENTS OF THE BOTAI CULTURE: ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT, DECORATION SPECIFICS AND INTERPRETATION
Finds of ornamented phalanx bones of horses and other ungulates are typical for the Eneolithic cultures of Eurasian steppes. The collection of ornamented fetlock bones, mainly of horses (less commonly, of kulan and saiga) from the Botai culture settlements of Botai and Krasny Yar I (North Kazakhstan Oblast, Kazakhstan) includes 78 items. It is the largest series of ornamented phalanges known in the materials of Eurasian antiquities. The assumption that they represent a distinctive type of anthropomorphic figurines, has been repeatedly expressed earlier. The Botai settlement is unique in terms of the abundance of osteological material: 99% belonging to horses. The life of the “Botai people” was closely connected with horse population of the forest-steppe region. The phalanx bone of a hoofed animal, stable in vertical position, resembles by its shape an anthropomorphic figurine. A phalanx was processed before applying decoration. Planographic analysis of the finds indicates their ubiquitous presence in the living space of the Botai settlement. Perhaps, they played the role of idols-charms that protected the living space, and/or in some ways represented the relationship between a man and a horse.
EARLY TRYPILLYA SETTLEMENT BERNOVO-LUKA:
SOME REMARKS TO THE GRADUATE WORK OF H.K. KACHALOVA
Her scientific research N.K. Kachalova began by studying materials from the early Trypillya settlement Bernovo-Luka, which became the subject of her graduate work in 1955. Currently, the collection collected during the excavation of this site is stored in the State Hermitage. The article presents individual observations on the ceramic assemblage and anthropomorphic figurines. These are studies of carbon deposit on ceramics, which make it possible to determine the function of vessels; analysis of a set of symmetries presented in ornaments (significant differences from later periods were revealed); reconstruction of a number of ceramic forms; attribution of imported pottery from the Gumelniţa culture. The anthropomorphic statuettes from Bernovo-Luka most likely differ in function, but some of them could be part of sets of female and male figurines, which may have depicted a group of real or mythical ancestors.
Keywords: Early Trypillya, ceramic assemblage, anthropomorphic figurines
Исследования культуры Кукутень-Трипольe в последние десятилетия приобрели более многоплановый характер, когда для изучения феномена этой культуры стало возможным задействовать потенциал целого ряда европейских археологических школ. Отдельные аспекты развития этой культуры остаются дискуссионными. Автор представляет к обсуждению ряд вопросов, касающихся дальнейшей разработки ее периодизации, анализа керамических комплексов, интерпретации памятников изобразительного искусства и социальных реконструкций
ORNAMENT IN DECORATIVE AND APPLIED ARTS AND ARCHITECTURE: IN SEARCH OF THEORETICAL GUIDELINES
In ornament studies, there is a need to “dot the i’s and cross the t’s”: to clarify the terminology utilised, to identify the main directions of ornament research more clearly, and to base research on the real capabilities of the material rather than on imaginary premises. The widely used terms ornament and decor are not interchangeable, the essential characteristic of ornament is its rhythmic organisation. The original forms of ornamental motifs can be various: either geometric, mostly derived from the “technical ornament”, or figurative. At the same time, even interpretation of similar motifs can vary and be based on free associations. Thus, assumptions about the deep antiquity of ornamental forms and their meanings have no solid grounds. Ornament has nothing to do with writing and text. While the study of the semantics of ornament is significantly limited by the specifics of its artistic form, the studies of symmetry provide grounds for identifying the connection between it and social changes (Washburn 2018). The connection between decor and social changes is also obvious, and there also are certain prospects for its identification
27 декабря 2022 года в Выборгском государственном объединенном музее-заповеднике состоялось открытие очередной выставки из серии «Чудо Рождества», представляющей 87 работ художников из Санкт-Петербургской государственной художественно-промышленной академии
имени А.Л. Штиглица
Книга посвящена ярким и самобытным культурам древнейших земледельцев, населявших территорию Европы в VII–III тыс. до н.э. Их носители были не только творцами «аграрной революции», но и создателями памятников первой архитектуры — жилищ, оборонительных и культовых сооружений, многочисленных произведений мелкой антропоморфной и зооморфной пластики, первых образцов ювелирных изделий из металлов, ярких образцов орнаментального искусства. В основу работы легло исследование особенностей памятников искусства и архитектуры раннеземледельческой эпохи, принципов и закономерностей сложения художественных форм, рассмотрение их как продукта реальной жизни древних обществ. Книга предназначена для широкого круга читателей, студентов вузов и специалистов в области истории, культурологии, искусствоведения, этнологии и археологии
В книге представлены основные разновидности памятников искусства европейских раннеземледельческих культур, а также варианты их интерпретации. Издание снабжено богатым иллюстративным материалом, хронологическими таблицами и картами.
Предназначено для широкого круга читателей, рекомендуется в качестве учебного пособия для студентов искусствоведческих специальностей вузов
Abstract: The article analyzes the principal approaches to the studies of the terracotta figurines from the Balkan-Carpathian cultures of the Neolithic and the Copper Age (VII-III millennia BC): anthropomorphic and zoomorphic statuettes and various miniatures representing houses, furnishings, utensils, weapons and tools. As previously suggested by R. Lesure (2011), these approaches can be defined as universalism and contextualism. The first proposes the interpretation of the figurines within the framework of the external anthropological concepts and religious studies, the other one is based on the empirical studies and the analysis of the specific archeological and cultural contexts. While the first one seems beneath serious criticism, the second one implies that research algorithms and strategies should be established, based on the analysis of the material at various levels: its location in the cultural layer of the site, the place of the phenomenon within the context of the paleo-demographic and paleo-social reconstructions, the framework of workable analogies. The feasibility of such reconstructions is informed by the definition of culture as a form of the humans’ adaptation to the natural and social environment, and of art as a media technology that perpetuates the existence of the community
Thus, the question of synchronization of the Cucuteni А–В — Tripolye BI–BII period with the cultures mentioned above still remains open. Along with the necessity to search for new evidence allowing us a to establish substantial synchronization between these cultures, the irregular development of local groups of artefacts within the area of Tripolye and specifics of the contacts at the boundaries between different cultures should also be taken into account
From this perspective, the most informative are ‘closed’ assemblages, which represents by sets of figurines. In the article two of such sets analyzed, that were found in the settlements of the early period of Cucuteni-Tripolye culture: Poduri and Isaia in Romania. Both sets were found in vessels, and included 21 seated statuettes, differing in size, shape and decorations, and 13 miniature chairs. The analysis of the statuettes iconography shows that the kits includes 6 male and 7 female figurines, seated on 13 chairs, and 8 figures without chairs (female and of uncertain sex). They designated one group of personages that organized on the hierarchical principle, similar to the hierarchy of social groups. Such sets were used in other settlements of this period. Such figurine sets were regularly reproduced during about 400 years when bearers of Tripolye-Cucuteni tradition settled on a large area to the east of the Carpathians.
In conditions of differentiation of groups and development of new territories, figurines sets might represent the group of ancestors, common to the whole population. Functions of the sets can be defined in the field of ancestor worship and their application in the initiations and/or in mantic practices is also possible. Discontinuation of such sets associated with changes in ideology on the next stage of culture development.
The cult of ancestors and ancestor’s images in various forms are represented in the world anthropology and they are important part of spiritual culture of traditional societies. An analysis of antique, particularly Roman material gives close structural analogies to the European statuettes of the Neolithic Age. In extant texts is mentioned the whole group of gods associated with house and family: Genii Familiae, Lares Familiares et Compitales, Penates. As suppose the number of researchers, cults of such gods date back to honor of family or community ancestors. The iconography’s research of “household” gods shows tie between Lares and house. Figurines and images of Lares are usual placed on “Lararium” (hovel, often framed by a portico) a kind of house model. Some features of Lares and Penates cult and it’s iconography give base to draw a parallel between Lares and Penates and certain groups of the early-agriculturalist statuettes, which can be interpreted as character’s images connected with ancestor’s cult — either a direct ancestors or general mythology ancestors of ethnic group.
ORNAMENTED PHALANX BONES OF ANIMALS AT SETTLEMENTS OF THE BOTAI CULTURE: ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT, DECORATION SPECIFICS AND INTERPRETATION
Finds of ornamented phalanx bones of horses and other ungulates are typical for the Eneolithic cultures of Eurasian steppes. The collection of ornamented fetlock bones, mainly of horses (less commonly, of kulan and saiga) from the Botai culture settlements of Botai and Krasny Yar I (North Kazakhstan Oblast, Kazakhstan) includes 78 items. It is the largest series of ornamented phalanges known in the materials of Eurasian antiquities. The assumption that they represent a distinctive type of anthropomorphic figurines, has been repeatedly expressed earlier. The Botai settlement is unique in terms of the abundance of osteological material: 99% belonging to horses. The life of the “Botai people” was closely connected with horse population of the forest-steppe region. The phalanx bone of a hoofed animal, stable in vertical position, resembles by its shape an anthropomorphic figurine. A phalanx was processed before applying decoration. Planographic analysis of the finds indicates their ubiquitous presence in the living space of the Botai settlement. Perhaps, they played the role of idols-charms that protected the living space, and/or in some ways represented the relationship between a man and a horse.
EARLY TRYPILLYA SETTLEMENT BERNOVO-LUKA:
SOME REMARKS TO THE GRADUATE WORK OF H.K. KACHALOVA
Her scientific research N.K. Kachalova began by studying materials from the early Trypillya settlement Bernovo-Luka, which became the subject of her graduate work in 1955. Currently, the collection collected during the excavation of this site is stored in the State Hermitage. The article presents individual observations on the ceramic assemblage and anthropomorphic figurines. These are studies of carbon deposit on ceramics, which make it possible to determine the function of vessels; analysis of a set of symmetries presented in ornaments (significant differences from later periods were revealed); reconstruction of a number of ceramic forms; attribution of imported pottery from the Gumelniţa culture. The anthropomorphic statuettes from Bernovo-Luka most likely differ in function, but some of them could be part of sets of female and male figurines, which may have depicted a group of real or mythical ancestors.
Keywords: Early Trypillya, ceramic assemblage, anthropomorphic figurines
Исследования культуры Кукутень-Трипольe в последние десятилетия приобрели более многоплановый характер, когда для изучения феномена этой культуры стало возможным задействовать потенциал целого ряда европейских археологических школ. Отдельные аспекты развития этой культуры остаются дискуссионными. Автор представляет к обсуждению ряд вопросов, касающихся дальнейшей разработки ее периодизации, анализа керамических комплексов, интерпретации памятников изобразительного искусства и социальных реконструкций
ORNAMENT IN DECORATIVE AND APPLIED ARTS AND ARCHITECTURE: IN SEARCH OF THEORETICAL GUIDELINES
In ornament studies, there is a need to “dot the i’s and cross the t’s”: to clarify the terminology utilised, to identify the main directions of ornament research more clearly, and to base research on the real capabilities of the material rather than on imaginary premises. The widely used terms ornament and decor are not interchangeable, the essential characteristic of ornament is its rhythmic organisation. The original forms of ornamental motifs can be various: either geometric, mostly derived from the “technical ornament”, or figurative. At the same time, even interpretation of similar motifs can vary and be based on free associations. Thus, assumptions about the deep antiquity of ornamental forms and their meanings have no solid grounds. Ornament has nothing to do with writing and text. While the study of the semantics of ornament is significantly limited by the specifics of its artistic form, the studies of symmetry provide grounds for identifying the connection between it and social changes (Washburn 2018). The connection between decor and social changes is also obvious, and there also are certain prospects for its identification
27 декабря 2022 года в Выборгском государственном объединенном музее-заповеднике состоялось открытие очередной выставки из серии «Чудо Рождества», представляющей 87 работ художников из Санкт-Петербургской государственной художественно-промышленной академии
имени А.Л. Штиглица
The problem of the development of abstract forms in art and their coexistence with naturalistic forms is one of the key ones in Art History. In Prehistoric art, as in the art of other eras, these forms often coexist even within the same cultural space. Their occurrence is due to a number of factors, the disclosure of which allows us to reconstruct the characteristics of a particular culture more correctly. An important role among these factors is played by social factors that form the need of society for naturalistic forms of art. If in the visual arts shaping develops from giving the object a similarity, then this principle does not work in the ornament. Ornament is a separate art form, where rhythm, meter and symmetry play the main role. In addition, here abstract forms are often due to “technical ornamentation”.
в середине февраля
In addition to such an applied study of pottery, there is a need for a more detailed study of archaeological and functional assemblages as an independent phenomenon closely related to other technologies and to the changes in the economic and household sphere. The set of vessel shapes of the Tripolye-Cucuteni culture is diverse, including up to 8-12 varieties. It was formed already at an earliest stage in the development of the culture (Tripolye A-Precucuteni), and retained its main features during the subsequent development of the culture (Tripolye BI, BII, CI – Cucuteni A, A-B, B periods). But a number of forms and categories of pottery have undergone significant changes. The ratio of certain vessel’s forms largely depends on the “use-life” of certain types of vessels and the characteristics of the formation of the cultural layer in a particular settlement
The range of scientific interests of Pavel Kozhin (1934–2016) was quite wide. His books, articles, notes related both to various areas of history, culture, religion of China, where he was recognized as one of the best specialists in Russia, but also to archeology and ethnography, covering the problems of studying ancient ceramics and other industries, ornament, reconstruction of the processes of ethnogenesis and cultural genesis etc. The essay also considers important remarks of P.M. Kozhin regarding the development of art, as well as a number of his views on the global problems of mankind.
Annotation. This paper is a review of the most recent investigations of the giant-settlements of the Tripolye culture which was developing in the south of East Europe in the 5 th-4 th millennium BC. Results of magnetometric surveys and their interpretations are considered, as well as the hypothetic reconstructions of the sequence of formation of these sites. Critical analysis was conducted on the proposed concepts, including the hypothesis about the giant-settlements as 'places of pilgrimage'; particular characteristic features of the art of this period of Tripolye are presented.
Keywords: ornament, theory of ornament, history of ornament, definition of ornament, ornament in archeology, ornament in ethnography, symmetry in ornament.
In the study of ornaments, an important role is played not only by the set of decorative elements and motifs used, but also by the ways of their organization in the space of the ornamental feld that were made according to certain rules. This is the use of certain types of symmetry or ornament’s construction by desymmetrization, as well as the hierarchy of dominates and additional elements, a certain sequence of their application. The ways of ornaments’ constructing are considered on the examples of Tripolye–Cucuteni pottery. This archaeological culture was developed on the territory of modern Romania, Moldova and Ukraine during the Copper age period (ca 5000–3000 BC) by analyzing the sequence of fulfillment of painted polychrome decoration on vessels found in Zhura settlement of the Dniester region, it was demonstrated that similar ornamental patterns could be applied in various ways. by analyzing the sequence of fulfillment of painted polychrome decoration on vessels found in Zhura settlement of the Dniester region, it was demonstrated that similar ornamental patterns could be applied in various ways. The presence of vessels with ornaments made in different traditions can be interpreted both in terms of the chronological differences between the dwelling assemblages, of by their making by various craftsmen. During comparing with the ethnographic analogies, the question was raised about the ancient craftsmen’s motivation for choosing certain motifs and elements in the process of making ornaments, as well as about the stability of their meaning
The evolution of Cucuteni-Trypillia ornaments was unfolding in the context of a system that combines a set of vessel shapes (the shape determines the geometry of the ornamental field), a set of ornamental motifs and principles of composition, which, in turn, are related with the technology and technique of ornamentation. The use of one or another ornament directly depends on the shape of the vessel. A detailed study of the decoration reveals the sequence and method of applying colorful layers, individual ornamental motifs, and sometimes — to highlight the marking elements of a complex ornamental scheme. The example of Cucuteni-Trypillia shows that changes in the system of forms and ornaments occur in a complex manner: the evolution of forms directly affects the ornament and vice versa. The principles of its application mark local variations, and the predominance of basic symmetries mark global shifts in the evolution of culture
These specific forms became widespread at the beginning of the middle stage of cultural development Cucuteni A – Trypillya BI and disappeared with the end of Cucuteni B – Trypillya CI period when significant changes in various fields of culture occurred (Palaguta 2007).
The shapes of these items vary. “Monocles” are either cylindrical or consist of two cones; they may have a holes, handles, or knobs. Their existence is mainly limited to the Cucuteni A – Trypillya BI period. For “binoculars,” both the shape of the tubes and the shape and number of jumpers vary too. It is possible that these categories of items represent two different evolutionary lines.
Analysis of the archaeological context does not make it possible to unambiguously interpret and determine the functions of these items. They were usually found within residential buildings; special sanctuaries cannot be marked based on their findings. This is another argument in favor of the fact that the Cucuteni-Trypillya society was built on the basis of horizontal social connections.
There are several versions regarding the functions of these items. Interpreting them as drums (Kovács, Gridan 2015; similar to ceramic drums of the Late Neolithic Walternienburg-Bernburger culture in Germany or modern darbuka-type goblet drums) is only suitable for “monocles”. The upper jumper of the “binoculars” does not make it possible to stretch the membrane over the bells.
As stands/altars, “monocles” can be interpreted based on multiple analogies from Ancient Near East, Mediterranean, Central Asia, and even China. “Binocular” items don’t find analogues in other cultures; most likely, they were used for cult purposes.
Palaguta I.V. The first wagon depiction or a landscape image? On the interpretation of the drawing on the vessel from Bronočice
The image on a vessel of funnelbeaker culture from Bronočice (Poland) is considered to be the oldest image of wheeled transport, created several centuries earlier than the pictograms of carts of late Uruk. A detailed examination of the iconography makes it possible to cast doubt on such an interpretation: it is rather a conditional “landscape” rather than an image of wagons.
Ceramics in ethnocultural reconstructions: illusions of similarities and differences concerned with the principles of production
In comparative analysis of ceramics, it is important to consider the whole set of properties of the pottery, and not just one of its characteristics. The use of a single attribute can lead to ephemeral reconstructions and synchronizations. Te present report is dealing with examples of constructing of such schemes relative to the Eneolithic and bronze age. a study of ceramics “as products of particular pottery-makers who produced pottery according to a single or differing techniques” (Кожин 1989) provides its consideration within a functional and production complex reflected in archaeological assemblages as a system of interrelated stages of the technological process: preparation of raw materials, molding and forming techniques, methods and style of ornamentation, the character of the environment and fring temperature, and preparation for usage. Tis fact in no way negates an examination of the arrays of ceramic material at the level of their individual attributes or technological stages in cases of strong fragmentation of the materials or when studying pottery within a homogeneous cultural area.
On the problem of the methodology of researching works of Prehistoric art
The dominant form of fine arts in the Eurasian early agricultural cultures was “mobile” small sculptures: anthropomorphic and zoomorphic fgurines, and different kinds of models. Teir studies may be defned as universalist and contextualist approaches (Lesure 2011). Such approaches can be traced as well in the studies of Russian and Eastern European scholars. In addition, since the late 1960s, an integrated approach emerged, being reflected both in archaeological and oriental studies.
Problems in the interpretation of fgurines can be overcome within the framework of this approach that is based on a thorough study of the archaeological context, iconographic analysis; reconstructions of the social context, and a consideration of objects of art as means of social communication. Te use of comparative analysis is also quite productive one, but under the condition of a comparison not only of the fnds themselves, but of their contexts.
Prehistoric and Traditional Art:
on the borders of Art History, Archaeology and Ethnology
Traditionally the Art of Prehistoric and traditional societies is considered on the periphery of the subject field of Art studies. Despite the fact that its shapes significantly influenced to the development of XXth century Western art, many it’s aspects remain unresolved, and in it’s interpretations sometimes stereotypes prevailed that are based on simplistic interpretations of the anthropological theories, including that were been obsolete long ago.
The terms “primitive” or “prehistoric” art themselves while been applied to the art-objects that were created within the frameworks of societies, which have not reached the level of stable state institutions (in contemporary cultural anthropology, its are determined as “early complex societies”), are not look quite successful. Many of the evaluation criteria and the terms used in this field of studies require revision.
The main problem in the study of these art-objects is associated with limited information (with complete or partial absence of criteria and ratings, and performers’ comments), and sources of information need to do its further critical analysis. The solution of this problem requires using of the basis and researching instruments of related disciplines: archeology and ethnology (cultural anthropology). It need also to be taken in account the factors of “invention of traditions”, which has had a significant impact on the interpretation of images and decoration motives, that formed during the formation of ethnography and entrenched in the historiography.
On the other hand, Art History methods are possible to be effective for such studies, in particular, the approach based on a combination of formal, iconographic and iconological analysis. Their application allows to go beyond the set of stereotypes existing among the archeologists and ethnologists.
In the studies on the art of archaic societies should define a particular problem of developing approaches to the study of ornament, because of applied and decorative nature of a significant part of art-objects. The rhythmic foundation of the structure, symmetric construction of composition and motifs of ornament, allow to allocate it in a special art form (nearly not to images, but to music), which is based on the principles of artificial, geometric organization of space. Semantic field of ornament is primarily formed on the principle of free associations.
A complete review of the rich material presented by creativity of artists beginning from the Paleolithic era up to the modern traditional societies, can significantly extend the boundaries of both Art Studies and the concept of “Art” itself.
Palaguta I. (Saint-Petersburg)
LBK pottery: it’s technology and ornamentation
LBK-culture, which linked with the spread of the productive economy in Temperate deciduous forest zone of Western, Central and Eastern Europe, is a key-point for understanding of cultural genesis processes that passed during the Neolithic and Copper Age periods on this extensive territory. Instead of large-scale field investigations the studies on LBK pottery technology are still limited by few regional issues. Materials from Western part of the areal were studied in details only (Gomart, 2014).
LBK pottery shapes itself that comes both from the Eastern (Floreşti, Niezwiska) and Western pars of it’s wide areal demonstrate the same using on “paddle-and-anvil” technique as a main manufacturing operation. Such technique implies in simplest case making crude thick-walled cup-shaped preform. Walls might be built by belt-strips. But large and complex-shaped forms can be constructed from separate parts. Similar observations are obtained for pottery from the Western part of LBK area (Gomart, 2011).
Paddle-and-anvil technique is used for making of both ornamented pottery (so called ‘table-ware’) and ‘kitchen-ware’ with a rough surface that is mostly unornamented (fig. 1). Using of paddle-and-anvil technique requires the use of finely divided impurities that are not damaged and break the wall of the vessel: sand (crushed powdered gruss; chamotte) or organics (chaff or, perhaps, dried manure) (Кожин, 1964; Rye, 1981). The differences between admixtures obviously have regional character and associated with the quality and composition of various clays, and with the methods of clay mass preparing.
The peculiarity of the set of pottery shapes and using of paddle-and-anvil technique as the main method of forming operation, which generate the round-bottom tradition of pottery-making, gives possibilities to separate LBK zone from the general areal of Middle and Late Neolithic cultures of the Balkan-Carpathians region.
In particular, LBK’s role in the genesis of Precucuteni-Tripolye A ceramics assemblage (Marinescu-Bȋlcu, 1971 etc.) can be excluded. There a completely different system of techniques were used that presupposed forming of vessels by flat bottom scheme with followed scraping. Such forming technique allows to use of large fractions of chamotte as an admixture. Paddle-and-anvil technique was not used during Early Tripolye period as during later ones (Palaguta, 2007).
Observations on the LBK ornamentation technique allow to suppose that it was initially associated with processing of solid materials. It might be wood (or wood-burl) or, perhaps, gourd (Childe, 1958: 108; but this assumption need to be proved because the widespread use of bottle-gourd in Europe can be observed only from the Roman period). For example, in Floreşti lines of pottery decoration are mostly cut with the sharp instrument on clay that is in near ‘leather-hard’ condition (in 1,5–2 mm depth), ‘dots’ were made after lines (fig. 1/1–4). Vessel’s polishing was made after ornamenting (there are some cases in Floreşti assemblage, when the ornamental lines were erased during the polishing process; fig. 1/2–3).
The construction of ornamental compositions on early LBK pottery was produced in a ‘free manner’ and did not correlate with the tectonics of pottery shapes. Ornamental zones’ formation took place during the stage of ‘note’ pottery. This fact also point to the influences of non-ceramic artifacts. As an example here could be applications or braiding by bark strips or straws over gum coating. It is often when ornaments of such ‘coating’ are not the same as incise decoration that made directly on pot surface. Multiple examples of such vessels were found in LBK wells, where organic materials preserved in layers of groundwater (Elburg, 2013; it can not be excluded that additional coating and it’s ornamentation was linked exactly with such well-discovered pottery and might be the traces of some ‘water-cults’). Anyway, here we faced with the development of ‘technical’ decoration (see: Bremer, 1925; Кожин, 2014; Палагута, 2009). All indicated features displays that the traditions of LBK ornamentation didn’t linked with steady pottery production, but with a set of household utensils made from non-ceramic, organic materials.
The question on the origins of LBK pottery tradition is still opened. Nowadays it is popular the concept that LBK culture assemblage appeared in a Pannonian plain, North to Balaton lake, where new forms of adaptation to the environment was formed among local ‘Mesolithic’ forager’s communities under the influence of Starčevo-Körös-Criş culture (Банффи, 2014). It is not possible now to say with confidence about the continuity or connections between Starčevo-Körös and early LBK pottery traditions at least because there was not made any detailed study on this pottery (unfortunately, data on the composition of the ceramic mass (Kreiter, Pető, Pánczél, 2013) is clearly insufficient in this case). Typical longhouses already presents in earliest pre-LBK sites, but pottery looks like Starčevo one (Bánffy, Oross, 2010). Peculiar LBK pottery tradition was formed later, and it is possible to claim that it is a special phenomenon in European Neolithic.
Тезисы докладов Международной научно-практической конференции 22–25 мая 2018 года, Санкт-Петербург. Науч. ред. Т.В. Горбунова, И.В. Палагута, Е.Г. Старкова, С.Е. Сухарев. Санкт-Петербург: СПГХПА им. А.Л. Штиглица, 2018. 144 с.
В сборнике представлены тезисы докладов Международной научно-практической конференции «От ремесла к искусству. Керамика: технология, декор, стиль», посвященной проблемам взаимодействия науки и практики, применения результатов научных исследований керамики, проведенных в рамках широкого спектра гуманитарных и естественных наук, в практической деятельности художников в области декоративно-прикладного искусства
Until recently archaeological objects dated to the Roman period were represented on the territory of the present Leningrad oblast by accidental finds and a small number of graves associated with the culture of Estonian Stone Burial Grounds.
The discovery of two hoards with Roman coins and some other objects near the village of Koporie gives new information about the history of the region during the I–II centuries AD. The hoards include 30 and 12 brass coins, sestertius and dupondius (worn and corroded), and one silver denarius (found on the place of hoard 2). All the definable coins are dated to the times of Titus (79–81 AD) Lucius Verus (161–169 AD), and therefore the hoards could have been deposited ca. 160–170 and 140–150 AD, respectively.
It is shown by the chemical analysis, the admixture of zinc in brass corresponds to Fleming’s diagram (1975) and agrees with
the proposed dates. The same brass alloy was used both for the fibula of Almgren’s type 55 and the conical edged neck-ring dated to 70–160 AD. The similarity of coin alloys with those of other articles allows to suppose that the former were used as raw material for the latter. The Koporie hoards can be indicative
of the fact that this region was a part of the eastern area of the Estonian Stone Burial Grounds culture. One more possibility is
that it belonged to the area of the related and synchronous archaeological culture of Izhorian Stone Burial Grounds.
Press, 2021. 370 p.). Prehistoric Archaeology. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 2021 (2), 124–131. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31600/2658-3925-2021-2-124-131
В исследовании орнаментов ключевым вопросом является разработка вопросов терминологии. В частности, вопроса определения орнамента, где орнамент бы рассматривался не как декоративное дополнение к предмету, а как самостоятельный вид искусства (Рогинский 1981). Это подчеркивает и этимология термина «орнамент» (Summers 2003).
В отечественной историографии теоретические основы исследования орнамента были разработаны П.М. Кожиным (1934–2016). В работе, посвященной орнаменту керамики китайского неолита, им были обозначены основные направления его изучения: формальное; технологическое; этноисторическое; семантическое; искусствоведческое (Кожин 1981).
В формообразовании орнаментов керамики важную роль играют «технический орнамент» (Кожин 2014; Палагута 2010); разметка (Кожин 1995); принципы симметрии (Shepard 1948); обратимость (Чернецов 1948).
В орнаменте ритм и гармония композиции доминирует над смысловой (изобразительной) составляющей. Геометрия элементов и мотивов часто является исходной для последующих их интерпретаций по принципу свободных ассоциаций (Палагута 2011).
Наблюдения над закономерностями и принципами построения орнаментов керамики различных древних и традиционных культур имеют важное значение не только в теоретических исследованиях, но и в художественной практике при создании новых произведений декоративно-прикладного искусства.
Практический и теоретический аспекты орнамента тесно взаимосвязаны. В дефиниции орнамента и связанной с ним терминологии с XIX в. произошли существенные изменения. Определение орнамента через его декоративную функцию не отражает его сущностных характеристик — ритма, метра и симметрии. Орнамент можно рассматривать как способ визуализации ритма, а своеобразие выразительных средств позволяет выделить его в особый вид искусства.
Современные направления в исследовании орнамента сложились в различных областях искусствознания, культурной антропологии и археологии. Помимо формального направления, основанного на систематизации орнаментов (по форме элементов и мотивов, а также по принципам организации композиции), важную роль играют подходы к орнаменту как к основе этнокультурных и исторических реконструкций. Целый спектр мнений представлен в исследованиях по семантике орнамента. Расхожее мнение о том, что орнамент является набором знаков и символов, на основе которого часто реконструируются мифологические представления, требует критического рассмотрения с точки зрения приемлемости используемых методов и доказательной базы имеющихся реконструкций. Между тем орнамент играет важную роль в процессе межкультурной и внутрикультурной коммуникации на уровне сигнала и индекса, представляя собой особый вид «искусства-ритма».
Междисциплинарный подход существенно расширяет представления о возможностях изучения орнаментов, создает базу для дальнейших исследований, из которых перспективными являются сквозной и кросс-культурный анализ орнамента как элемента коммуникативной системы, основанные на поиске связей между развитием орнаментальных традиций и стилей и развитием других областей человеческой культуры.