UDC 903

A. P. Derevyanko ¹, D. Olsen ², D. Tseveendorzh ³, S. A. Gladyshev ¹, T. I. Nokhrina ¹, A.V. Tabarev ¹

¹ Institute of Archeology and Ethnography SB RAS

17 Akademika Lavrentieva Ave., Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia

E-mail:gladyshev@archaeology.nsc.ru

² University of Arizona Department of Anthropology

Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona

Emil W. Haury Anthropology Building

1009, East South Campus Drive

Tucson, Arizona, 85721 - 0030, U.S.A.

E-mail: jwo@arizona.edu

³ Institute of Archaeology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences

Institute of Archaeology, Mongolian Academy of Sciences

Zhukoviyn Gudamzh, 77, Ulaanbaatar, 51, Mongolia

E-mail: dtseveen@yahoo.com

The article continues a series of publications devoted to the materials of the Chihen-Agui grotto, one of the few stratified archaeological sites in Mongolia. Previous studies have provided evidence for the interpretation of Chihen Grotto as a seasonal hunter settlement of the Early Holocene epoch. In this publication, the complex of archaeological finds is considered from the perspective of a multifunctional approach. Numerous beads made from ostrich eggshells in the pre-entrance part of the grotto, the remains of a pillar in the center of the cavity, the bases of insert tools near the hearths, the preparation of biface and a fragment of a pendant made from exotic raw materials for these places are characterized as products associated with non-utilitarian technologies. Based on this, it is assumed that the context of the archaeological site in Chiheng Grotto is more complex than previously thought. This is indicated by a number of items whose presence in the" residential "complex cannot be explained solely by "everyday" tasks. The intensification of the exploitation of natural resources and adaptation to landscape conditions were also accompanied by corresponding processes in the spiritual sphere-the ritualization of specific relief elements. According to the authors of the article, the ritual episode in the Chihen grotto may be connected with this cultural background.

Introduction

Most of the Stone Age monuments on the territory of Mongolia do not have a buried cultural layer; archaeological material lies on the surface. In this regard, the study of a few stratified complexes, which include the multi-layered archaeological site in the Chiheng - Agui grotto (in the first publication-Chiheng-Huwer), is of particular importance [Derevyanko et al., 1989] (Fig. 1). In the course of work in 1996 - 1998, 2000, the grotto was almost completely excavated [Archaeological research..., 1998, 2000]. The archaeological material belongs to two cultural horizons: the upper one - the Russian Academy of Sciences-

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Scientific Research, projects N 06-01-00522a " Salmon fishing in Archaic and traditional cultures of the Pacific basin "and N 07 - 01 - 00417a"Genesis and periodization of stratified Upper Paleolithic complexes of Northern Mongolia and Transbaikalia".

Fig. 1. Location of Chiheng Grotto.

non-Holocene and lower-Pleistocene periods. The upper two lithological layers (2, 2a) contain Holocene remains, while the lower one (3, 3a) contains Late Pleistocene remains. A microplate complex of the Holocene stage is recorded on the entire excavated area (57 ^m2), while the Pleistocene stage is preserved on an area of approximately 13 ^m2. A description and interpretation of the archaeological material and stratigraphic sections of the grotto, as well as a list of dates, were published in a number of works (Derevianko et al., 2001; Gladyshev and Nokhrina, 2003; Orlova, Kuzmin, and Lbova, 2005; Gladyshev, Nokhrina, and Tabarev, 2007; Derevianko et al., 2003). In them, the Chihen grotto is reasonably interpreted as a seasonal settlement of hunters. We do not dispute this conclusion, but suggest looking at the whole complex of archaeological finds in a slightly different way, from the standpoint of a multifunctional approach.

Each type of activity is associated with a special way of organizing the living space. Separation of activity types, as well as spaces, is not always possible, since "each of the activities contains the principles of other activities subordinate to it, and each of the spaces is to a certain extent not alien to spaces of a different kind..." [Florensky, 2000, p.112]. Based on this, it can be assumed that the context of the archaeological site in Chiheng Grotto is more complex than imagined. A number of objects were found, the presence of which in the" residential "complex cannot be attributed to the solution of exclusively "everyday" tasks (Fig. 2).

Most recent publications devoted to the archaeology of Paleolithic - Neolithic cave complexes in North and Central Asia provide detailed descriptions of the stratigraphy of sediments, the chronology of layers, and paleofauna; detailed morphotypological and technological descriptions of the tool kit, products, and waste products of stone splitting are provided. Based on the results and a comprehensive analysis of these factors,

Fig. 2. Plan of the Chiheng Grotto with the most notable features

objects. 1-bone tool; 2-pendant decoration; 3 - bone insert dagger; 4-jade object; 5-hearth N 44; 6-hearth N 40; 7-fragment of a wooden pillar lined with stones; 8-bone tool; 9-puncture; 10-hearth N 4; 11 - place of accumulation of beads.

These data assess the functional purpose of the grotto as a monument of long-or short-term exploitation of a seasonal or commercial parking lot, workshop, etc. Artifacts of "non-utilitarian" purpose, with rare exceptions [Derevyanko and Rybin, 2003; Zenin and Kandyba, 2006; Markin, 2000], are recorded, described, and included in the category of jewelry or religious objects, but they are not analyzed as attributes of ceremonies or rituals. In this publication, we propose an additional approach to the interpretation of the Holocene complex of finds.

Hypothesis of the "settlement episode" in the Chiheng Grotto

The assumption of using the cavity as a hunting ground has been repeatedly stated in various publications (Gladyshev and Nokhrina, 2003; Derevianko et al., 2003). In brief, we will once again give the arguments underlying it.

1. The inhabitants of the grotto did not experience difficulties with obtaining lithoresources. They knew perfectly well the deposits and places where stone raw materials came out. A variety of flints and quartzites were widely used for the manufacture of tools, less often quartic and unsilicified sandstone, and very rarely jade (Kulik, Nokhrina, and Milyutin, 2005). Near the grotto, flint and quartzite are absent, therefore, this raw material was brought. Representatives of the early Holocene were well aware of the raw material potential of their area. For example, the nearest jade outcrops are located about 90 km from the grotto, on the north-eastern slope of the Shineginst mountain range.

2. The main occupation of the inhabitants of the Chihen grotto was most likely hunting. Hunters lay in wait for the animals at the watering hole, near the spring. Not far from the cave (350 m) there is a gorge with vertical walls, along which the animals moved, probably to this key. The gorge with a length of more than 100 m is an ideal place for hunting both herd animals (dzeren, saiga, horse, camel) and solitary animals (see Figure 1). In the Holocene layers of the grotto, mostly small fragments of ungulate bones were found. There are few definable bones. The following animal species were identified: tolai hare (Lepus capensis), Alpine pika (Ochotona cf. Alpind), marmot (Marmota sp.), ground squirrel (Spermophilus sp.), jerboa (Dipodidae indet.), kulan (Equus hemionus), dzeren (Procapra gutturosa), Siberian goat (Capra sibirica sibirica). Some of the bones were burned [Baryshnikov, 1998, p. 309, Table 1].

3. The grotto is comfortable to live in. It is dry, well-lit by the sun. From the pre-entry platform, you can view the surrounding area for a long distance. There is a spring nearby. The climatic conditions of that time did not differ much from the present ones; in the early Holocene, the climate was slightly wetter and warmer, which is confirmed by the analysis of humic acids isolated from the sediments of the grotto (Derevyanko, Dergacheva et al., 2006; Derevyanko, Fedeneva et al., 2006). In the vicinity of the grotto, dry and desolate steppes and deserts stretched for many hundreds of kilometers. Among the plant communities dominated by desert species-ephedra, haze, wormwood and a small amount of mixed grasses. In general, the bioclimatic situation during the precipitation formation period of the Chiheng Grotto site was more favorable than at present.

4. Two areas lined with a layer of dry grass were found in the cavity near the walls (Gladyshev and Nokhrina, 2003). They are located symmetrically relative to each other, and there is a passage between them. At the left wall, a plot of approx. 3 m and wide

approx. 2 m. At the right wall there are two sections of grass flooring measuring approximately 1.5 x 1.5 m. Between these sections there is a hearth and a fire pit. The hearth is rectangular in shape, measuring 30 x 30 cm, and is surrounded by vertically standing limestone tiles around the perimeter. Filling the hearth is made up of layers of coal and calcined earth. An accumulation of flakes, small flakes, and microplate fragments is noted in the upper carbonaceous layer. The fire pit is oval in shape, measuring 25 x 15 cm. It was located almost at the very wall of the grotto. Approximately 1 m from the grass decks, almost in the middle of the cavity, along the drip line, a large fire pit with a length of 100 cm and a width of 80 cm with a powerful filling is fixed. Based on this, it can be concluded that the grotto was used as a living space by a group of hunters during seasonal fishing. However, there are several arguments against this conclusion. The area of the grotto is small, and the height is insignificant. You can only stand at full height under the drip line. Already a meter from the entrance, you need to bend down, and where the grass decks are located, you can only sit or lie down. Without rejecting the whole concept of the" settlement " function of the grotto, we propose the following, refined variation of it.

Chiheng Grotto was a seasonal hunting camp, but its cavity was not used for housing. Bonfires warmed people and lit up the place of work, and food was prepared on them. They were sitting on grass mats. At the drip line and in the right half of the grotto, the ancient inhabitants processed stone, updated hunting equipment, and made new tools to replace those that had fallen into disrepair or lost tools. All this is evidenced by the analysis of the quantitative distribution of finds across the excavation squares: artifacts are concentrated on a site limited to square meters. C, D, D along lines 4-7. On a plot located in sq. m. C, D, and E along line 7, two clusters of stone artefacts were found (Milyutin and Nokhrina, 2005). The first cluster includes 23 chips of light gray translucent chalcedony. They are obtained from a single small nodule or nucleus; eight chips are collected in one block. The second cluster has 102 cleavages. They are from a single prismatic nucleus (dark green opaque flint); six chips are also collected in one block. In addition, preforms with prepared impact pads and nuclei for producing microplates were found at the same site (Fig. 3, 29-33), made of small (80 x 60 x 50 mm) flattened chalcedony nodules. On the pre-emergence site, mainly near the rock wall, a few accumulations of flakes from the same rock are recorded. Comparing the obtained data, we can assume that the most active stone splitting activity-preparation of small chalcedony nodules for splitting and removal of microplates from the nuclei-took place at the entrance and under the cave roof around a large fire pit. This is evidenced by the localization of chips removed from a single nucleus, as well as the presence in almost every cluster of all categories of technical chips. The typological composition of tools from Holocene deposits of the grotto is as follows, pcs.:

As you can see, the leading tools are inserts and retouched plates. All other types, such as broken points (Figs. 3, 7.14 ), incisors (figs. 3, 16, 17), arrowheads (figs. 3, 9-13), plates with recesses, scrapers (figs. 3, 25-27), punctures, and geometric microliths (figs. .3, 1-4), occupy a subordinate position. This is quite natural, since the newly made and repaired tools of hunting and processing its products from the grotto were taken away and used

3. Stone products from the Chiheng grotto. 1 - 4-trapezoids; 5, 6, 8-tools of geometric shape; 7, 14-points; 9-13-arrowheads; 15-original product; 16, 17-incisors; 18-20-plates with retouched transverse edges; 21-medial fragment of the plate; 22-24 - plates with elements of retouching on the side edges; 25-27-scrapers; 28-plate without traces of retouching; 29-33-nuclei.

directly at the mining site. There was no point in carrying the carcasses up the steep slope to the grotto. In addition to stone products, three bone tools, a wooden object and jewelry - beads made from ostrich eggshells, and a pendant made of serpentine-antigorite-were found in the Holocene deposits of the grotto.

Hypothesis of the "ritual episode" in the Chiheng Grotto

Consider the finds that do not quite fit into the functional model of the grotto as a seasonal hunting camp. In the lining of the hearth, located about 2.5 m from the entrance and almost in the middle

4. Bone (1, 3, 4) and stone (2, 5) items from the Chiheng grotto.

1-a piercing; 2 - a fragment of a pendant; 3 - the base of an insert dagger; 4-a bone tool; 5-an object made of jade.

4, 5). Recall that the nearest source of jade is located approximately 90 km from the grotto, therefore, it was deliberately picked up and placed in the lining of the hearth. In the depth of the grotto, on the last line of the excavation, a pendant made of serpentine-antigorite with inclusions of magnetite was found (Fig. 4, 2). The mineral belongs to the subclass of layered silicates. The item is broken. Its curved preserved part is rectangular in shape, measuring 60.2 x 17.3 x 7.3 mm. The surface is sanded and polished. The longitudinal and transverse edges of the product are smoothed. Near the preserved end there is a through hole drilled on both sides. On the one hand, the outer diameter of the hole is 5.5 mm, the inner diameter is 2.6 mm; on the other hand, it is 7.1 and 3.1 mm, respectively. Apparently, during drilling, the serpentine stratification occurred and drilling was continued on the other side. Inside the hole, there are remnants of a pink substance (possibly ash mixed with calculus).

Approximately 2 m from the entrance to the grotto, almost at the wall, in a small hole, a cluster of fragments of eggshells presumably from an ostrich was found.

A cluster of beads, probably made from ostrich eggshells, is found on the pre-passage site. The bulk of the beads (15 pcs.) is concentrated in the area bounded by sq. A-1, B-2 and C-1 (see Figs. 2, 11). There are two types of beads - round and polygonal. For round objects, the outer diameter ranges from 4 to 4.8 mm, and the inner diameter is approx. 2 mm. Polygonal items are somewhat large in size. Their outer diameter is from 5.2 to 5.6 mm, and their inner diameter is about 1.8 mm. Individual beads (one or two at a time) were also found in other squares of the excavation, but no clusters were found.

At the left wall of the grotto, almost 2 m from the drip line, next to the grass flooring, the rest of a post was marked, vertically dug into the ground and reinforced at the base with stones (see Fig. 2, 7). The diameter of the post at the base is 18 cm.

The remains of 44 ancient bonfires were found in the cultural layers. Bonfires are usually oval in shape, only some incorrectly-quadrangular. Most often, these are ash spots with carbon edging, occasionally with puncture residues. The main part of the bonfires was located in the pre-exit zone near the drip line. There are few hearths inside the grotto. The first hearth measures 30 x 30 cm and is a complex structure. It is rectangular in shape, surrounded by vertically standing limestone tiles around the perimeter. The filling of the hearth consists of layers of coal and calcined earth. In the upper carbonaceous layer, an accumulation of flakes, small flakes and fragments of microplates was recorded. In the lining of this hearth there was a product made of jade, next to it was the bone base of a single-phase insert dagger (see Figs. 4, 3). The nozzle and proximal end are flat. The depth of the groove is not the same along the entire length: 1.2 mm at the end, 3.3 mm in the middle and 1.3 mm at the nozzle. The second hearth (bonfire) measuring 25 x 15 cm oval in plan was located almost at the very wall of the grotto. Next to it was found a wooden single-phase tip, vertically stuck in the ground. Product length 13.8 cm, diameter 1.8 cm. The groove is cut almost along the entire length of the tool, not traced only at the petiole. The base-petiole of the product is rounded (planed).

Analysis of the stone inventory of the Chiheng grotto allows us to interpret the monument within the framework of the traditional hunting and fishing version. However, some artefacts from the Early Holocene deposits in the cave demonstrate the non-utilitarian nature of the use. Therefore, we propose as a working hypothesis a ritual episode in the Chihen grotto. It was first briefly discussed at an archaeological conference in Irkutsk in 2007 [Gladyshev,

Nokhrina and Tabarev, 2007]. The framework of the hypothesis consists of the following semantic chain: the social structure of society at the turn of the Paleolithic-Neolithic-prestige and prestigious technologies-ritual as a form of prestige realization - small caves as a ritual space.

The modern archaeological literature describes many interesting models of the structure of societies whose economy was based on appropriating economy (hunting-gathering-fishing). One of these models suggests the division of societies into egalitarian and transegalitarian [Owens. Hayden, 1997]. Egalitarian societies have access to rather scarce natural resources, have virtually no capacity to accumulate food, and have difficulties with fluctuations in biomass. In such collectives, the mechanism of equal distribution operates; their life strategy is subordinated to the tasks of survival. Trans-egalitarian societies exploit highly productive niches; they have a wide range of natural resources, the ability to combine various forms of appropriating farming and create food reserves to mitigate the difficulties caused by inter-seasonal cycles; and they develop specialized fisheries. In transegalitarian societies, the mechanism of social competition is activated, and the desire to acquire and maintain priority positions of individuals, groups, clans, lineage, etc. is actively manifested. This aspiration is realized in the control of fishing grounds; in the development of a variety of prestigious technologies; trade and exchange procedures; burial with accompanying equipment; the creation of economically profitable family and marriage alliances; the organization of holidays and ceremonies, a system of debt obligations, secret societies and closed rituals. Thus, prestigious technologies serve a ritual that becomes a form of achieving and maintaining a special social status.

The list of traces of prestigious technologies in archaeological contexts is quite extensive; experts name up to 25-30 such signs (Beaune de, 1995; Clark, 1986; Costin, 1991; Hayden, 1998; Hayden and Adams, 2004). For the Stone Age, first of all, tools and blanks that have unusual dimensions or are made from unusual raw materials are distinguished. This list should also include a variety of jewelry, items made from rare raw materials, special containers (made of wood, stone, wicker, etc.), burials of the dead or sacrificed with accompanying inventory in the form of products made of non-traditional materials, etc. A very significant feature is the unusual position of artifacts.

According to numerous ethnographic descriptions, the entrance to and exit from the cave as a sacred space (rite of passage) is accompanied by a symbolic payment (Van Gennep, 2002). In our case, these may be eggshell beads, the accumulation of which can be traced at the entrance to the grotto (see Figure 2). As an analysis of archaeological materials from other regions of Mongolia and Transbaikalia shows, the production of beads and other jewelry could have developed as early as the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic (see, for example, [Lbova Volkov, 2007; Tashak, 2002]). The shell probably also served as a small vessel (a container containing the remains of grain), which was fixed at the base of a stone-reinforced pillar inside the cave. This pillar (its analogues in the form of a World Tree, mountain, magic staff, stelae, etc.) could play the role of a macrorhital complex-axis mundi.

Two foci were traced in the layer (N 40, 44), next to which the bases of insert tools were found. The product was placed in an upright position next to hearth No. 44. This combination can be interpreted as a micro-ritual complex with a vertical symbol. Analogs in the form of six-sided stone pillars, polished stone rods-sekibo or bifacial products are noted on the monuments of the final Paleolithic-Neolithic in the Middle Amur (Barkasnaya Sopka-3), in Primorye (Ustinovka-4, Suvorovo-4, Bogopol-4) and Japan (Iwato, Masugata, etc.) [Krupyanko, Tabarev, 2001, 2005; Tabarev, 2006]. In hearth No. 40, an object made of an unusual raw material for this area, jade, was found among the paving stones( see Figures 4, 5). A person had to reach the nearest exits for at least three or four days. The product was deliberately placed in the hearth space. No less remarkable is another find found near the far wall of the grotto - a fragment of an elegant pendant made of" exotic " raw materials - serpentine-antigorite with small inclusions of magnetite (see Figs. 4, 2).

As mentioned above, researchers of cave monuments rarely reach the level of their functional interpretation within the entire complex when describing and analyzing non-utilitarian products and, as a rule, are limited only to raw materials and technological characteristics. Obviously, this can be explained by the influence of outdated stereotypes. According to one of them, evidence of the cave's use as a ritual object can only be vivid examples of rock art or mobile art, remains of religious buildings or altars, hoards of products, traces of paleoastronomical observations, as well as burials with rich accompanying equipment. However, it is quite obvious that all of the above reflects

only a small part of the ceremonies, or rather, only rites with rich decorations. Rituals, in which content and procedure were much more important than paraphernalia, left no trace.

The second stereotype is related to the idea that only large cave cavities with several halls, entrances or galleries could be used for worship, while small grottoes and canopies were used mainly as places for living or recreation during the fishing season. But the facts show that both small grottoes and rock canopies have always been an attractive element of the landscape for humans, an object of sacralization. The choice of the cavity was based on a variety of bases. For example, the cave was the only natural object of its kind in a large area, was located in close proximity to fishing sites (hunting, fishing, collecting wild plants), had external specific features (hidden entrance, unusual arch configuration and color), etc. not only functional, but also ritual use of the grotto or canopy - the presence of traces of the presence of representatives of previous cultures in the cave. We are talking about stone tools, nuclei, fragments of ceramic vessels, etc. For the new inhabitants, such finds were of particular importance. clearly attributed magical properties and magical power. For example, the Uchiol Indians of Mexico believed that the fragments of ancient stone arrowheads that they periodically came across during agricultural work had healing powers. Tradition required such finds to be handed over to a local medicine man (shaman), who hid them in sacred caves or caves where they came into contact with patron spirits and ancestral spirits. Along with ancient items, painted vessels, small ornaments, and pieces of colorful cloth were also placed in caves (Weigand, 1970, p.366-367). The mountain Maya people of northwestern Guatemala collect arrowheads, obsidian plates, polyhedral nuclei, and pre-Columbian pottery fragments in the jungle, and then place them on altars next to Christian saints as objects of worship. Local healers widely use antiques for medicinal purposes [Brown, 2000, p. 326-328]. Thompson Indians (Plateau territory) highly value stone arrowheads and knives, converted from ancient artifacts. In their opinion, the ancient objects were made by their totemic ancestor Raven; they are particularly effective and have magical power [Lowrey, 1999, p. 56].

Partial disturbance of Holocene sediments and their compaction make it impossible to establish an exact connection between individual finds. Nevertheless, we believe that the above-mentioned artifacts from the Chiheng grotto (beads in the pre-entrance part of the grotto, the remains of a pillar in the center of the cavity, the foundations of insert tools at the hearths, the preparation of biface and a fragment of a pendant made from rare raw materials for this area) fit into the range of products associated with prestigious technologies, and we believe that The grotto was a ritual episode (s).

What was the content and purpose of the rituals performed in the Chiheng Grotto? Do these findings allow us to make any assumptions?

A number of interesting hypotheses have recently been proposed by experts studying caves in Western Europe and Africa [Beaune de, 1995; Clottes, 1992, 1996; Hayden, 2003; Lewis-Williams, 1994; etc.]. The space of caves, according to some researchers, did not allow a group of more than 20 people to participate in the ritual - 25 people. [Beaune de, 1995, p. 238]; the number of secret societies and groups described by ethnographers among many peoples was approximately the same [Owens and Hayden, 1997, p. 153-155]. Almost all the cave sites under study show traces of the presence of children or adolescents (burials, drawings, footprints, palm prints, etc.), which suggests participation in rituals of this age group (Clottes, 1992, p. 59). Such rituals include rites dedicated to birth, various stages of growing up, entering puberty, initiations, training shamans, first participation in hunting, etc. Among the attributes of this circle of ritual practices can be attributed and finds in the Chihen grotto.

Conclusion

A representative series of radiocarbon dates covering a long period of approximately 6 thousand years has been obtained from coal samples from the ancient bonfires of the grotto (see table). However, the degree of reliability of dates varies. The first one (5630 ± 250 bp (SOAN-3732)) has a low degree of reliability and, according to the Candidate of Biological Sciences, is not very reliable. geol.- L. A. Orlova's Ph. D. should be discarded or accepted as indicative. The second date (6870 ± 105 BP (GX-23893)) was obtained from filling taken from a rodent burrow. Naturally, it records the life time of a rodent, not a human. Most of the dates fall in the interval from 7850 ± 110 to 11545 ± 75 BP. We assume that the complex we are considering belongs to this particular time period, most likely to its final stage.

Comparing materials of Holocene deposits of the Chihen grotto with simultaneous sopre complexes-

Radiocarbon dates for Chiheng Grotto

It should be noted that, according to the published materials, neither in Mongolia in the Shabarak culture [Berkey and Nelson, 1926; Gabori, 1962; Mania, 1963; Kozlowski, 1968; Fairservice (jr), 1993], nor in China in the microlytic industries [Jia Lanpo and Huang Weiwen, 1985; Gai Pei, 1985; Kwangchih Chang, 1986] products of geometric shapes have not yet been found. Among the Mesolithic artefacts, such items are found in Western India, which is remote from Mongolia (Shchetenko, 1979; Sali, 1990, p. 231, fig. 37). Note that segments predominate among geometrically shaped microlithic tools from the western part of India, and trapezoids are extremely rare (Sali, 1990, p. 235). In the area northwest of Chiheng Grotto, geometric tools are becoming a characteristic element of Mesolithic technocomplexes.

The closest analogs of stone tools from Holocene layers in the Chiheng Grotto are found in collections from the northern part of Inner Mongolia (China), which were studied by the American-Chinese expedition in the late 1980s and early 1990s (Bettinger et al., 1990; Bettinger, Madsen, and Elston, 1994; Madsen et al., 1996; Elston et al., 1997]. According to this expedition, the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic in this area took place against the background of positive changes in climate and fauna, which, in turn, led to a change in hunting strategies and improved hunting equipment based on the widespread use of microplate technology. In the spiritual sphere, the ritualization of specific relief elements has become a reflection of the intensive exploitation of natural resources and adaptation to natural conditions. In our opinion, the ritual episode in the Chihen Grotto may be connected with this cultural background.

Acknowledgements

The authors express their deep and sincere gratitude to Professor Brian Hayden (Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada) for his advice and assistance in the selection of literature on the topic of the article, as well as to artist Yulia Tabareva (IAET SB RAS, Novosibirsk) for preparing the illustrations.

List of literature

Archaeological research of the Russian-Mongolian-American expedition to Mongolia in 1996 /

A. P. Derevyanko, D. Olsen, D. Tseveendorzh, V. T. Petrin, A. N. Zenin, A. I. Krivoshapkin, S. V. Nikolaev, V. P. Mylnikov, R. U. Reeves, B. Gunchinsuren, Ya.Tserendagva. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1998, 343 p.

Derevyanko A. P., Olsen D., Tseveendorzh D., Petrin V. T., Gladyshev S. A., Zenin A. N., Mylnikov V. P., Krivoshapkin A. I., Reeves R. U., Brantingham P. D., Gunchinsuren B., Tserendagwa Ya. Archaeological research of the Russian-Mongolian-American expedition in Mongolia in 1997 - 1998. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2000, 383 p.

Derevyanko A. P., Olsen D., Tseveendorzh D., Petrin V. T., Zenin A. N., Krivoshapkin A. I., Nikolaev S. V., Mylnikov V. P. Arkheologicheskie issledovaniya Rossiiskoi-Mongol'sko-Amerikanskoi expeditsii v Mongolii v 1996 godu [Archaeological research of the Russian-Mongolian-American Expedition to Mongolia in 1996]. Reeves, B. Gunchinsuren, and J. Tserendagwa. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1998, pp. 309-310.

Van Gennep A. Rites of passage. Systematic study of rituals, Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2002, 198 p.

Gladyshev S. A., Nokhrina T. I. Settlement complex of the Holocene time in the Chihen cave (Mongolia) / / Problems of archeology and paleoecology of Northern, Eastern and Central Asia: Mat-ly of the international conference "From century to century", dedicated. 95th anniversary of the birth of Academician A. P. Okladnikov and 50th anniversary of the Far Eastern Federal University. Expeditions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk: IAET SB RAS Publ., 2003, pp. 105-108.

Gladyshev S. A., Nokhrina T. N., Tabarev A.V. Interpretation of the archaeological complex of the Chihen grotto // Northern Eurasia in anthropogeny: man, paleotechnologies, geoecology, ethnology and anthropology. Irkutsk: Ottisk Publ., 2007, vol. 1, pp. 162-168.

Derevyanko, A. P., Gladyshev, S. A., Olsen, D., Petrin, V. T., and Tserendagwa, Ya., Characteristics of the stone industry of the Chihen Cave (Gobi Altai), in Archeology, Ethnography, and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2001. - N 1. - p. 25-39.

Derevyanko, A. P., Dergacheva, M. I., Fedeneva, I. N., and Nokhrina, T. I., Ecology of ancient man and paleopedogenesis in the Late Pleistocene on the territory of the Gobi Altai (based on studies of deposits of the Chihen monument), Sovremennye problemy arkheologii Rossii. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 114-116.

Derevyanko, A. P., Dorzh, D., Larichev, V. E., and Petrin, V. T., Archaeological research in Mongolia in 1988, Izv. Sibirskogo otdeliya AN SSSR. Ser. istorii, filologii i filosofii. - 1989. - Issue 2. - p. 26-34.

Derevyanko, A. P. and Rybin, E. P., The oldest manifestation of the symbolic activity of the Paleolithic man in the Altai Mountains, in Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2003. - N 3. - p. 27-50.

Derevyanko, A. P., Fedeneva, I. N., Dergacheva, M. I., and Nokhrina, T. I., Natural and climatic conditions of the Gobi Altai in the Late Pleistocene-Holocene (based on the research materials of the Chihen monument), in Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii: Mat-ly Godovoi sessii Instituta arkheologii i etnografii SB RAS 2006. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 12, part I, pp. 109-111.

Zenin A. N., Kandyba A.V. Arkheologicheskie issledovaniya v peshere Strashnaya v 2006 g. [Archaeological research in the Strashnaya Cave in 2006] / / Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii: Mat-ly Godovoi sessii Instituta arkheologii i etnografii SB RAS 2006-Novosibirsk: Izd. IAET SB RAS, 2006. - pp. 141-145.

Krupyanko A. A., Tabarev A.V. Archaeological complexes of the Stone Age in Eastern Primorye. Novosibirsk: Sib. university. Publishing House, 2001, 104 p.

Krupyanko A. A., Tabarev A.V. Ritual complexes with bifaces and hexagons in the final Paleolithic of Primorye / / Art and Ritual of the Glacial Epoch. Lugansk: PE "Vega" Publ., 2005, pp. 91-99.

Kulik, N. A., Nokhrina, T. I., and Milyutin, K. I., Petrography of Paleolithic and Mesolithic artefacts in the Eastern part of the Gobi Altai (based on the materials of the Suuzh and Chihen monuments), in Paleolithic Cultures of Transbaikalia and Mongolia (new monuments, methods, hypotheses). Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2005, pp. 97-103.

Lbova L. V., Volkov P. V. Tekhnologii izgotovleniya ob " ektov izobrazhitel'noi deyatel'nosti v kompleksakh nachalnoy pory verkhnogo paleolita v Zabaikalie [Technologies for manufacturing objects of visual activity in complexes of the initial period of the Upper Paleolithic in Transbaikalia]. Barnaul: Azbuka Publ., 2007, pp. 40-43 (SAIPI Proc., issue 3).

Markin S. V. Neolithic burial of the North-Western Altai / / Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2000. - N 2. - p. 53-64.

Milyutin K. I., Nokhrina T. I. Izuchenie planigrafii kul'turnykh ostavkov verkhnego kul'turnogo gorizonta caves Chihen (Mongolia) [Study of planigraphy of cultural remnants of the upper cultural horizon of the Chihen Cave (Mongolia)]: Mat-ly Region. Scientific and practical conference-Barnaul: Alt. State University Publ., 2005. 14. - p. 139-142.

Orlova L. A., Kuzmin Ya. V., Lbova L. V. Radiocarbon dates of Paleolithic and mesolithic monuments of Transbaikalia and Mongolia / / Paleolithic cultures of Transbaikalia and Mongolia (new monuments, methods, hypotheses). Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2005, pp. 88-92.

Tashak V. I. Processing of ostrich egg shells in the Upper Paleolithic of Transbaikalia // Istoriya i kul'tura vostoka Azii: Mat-ly Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. - Novosibirsk: Izd. IAET SB RAS, 2002. - Vol. 2. - pp. 159-164.

Florensky P. A. Articles and studies on the history and philosophy of art and archeology. Hegumen Andronik (A. S. Trubachev); edited by Hegumen Andronik (A. S. Trubachev). - Moscow: Mysl, 2000. - 446 p.- (Philos. legacy).

Shchetenko, A. Ya., Primeval Hindustan, Nauka Publ., 1979, 275 p. (in Russian)

Beaune S.A. de. Pes homes au temps de Pascaux. - P.: Hachette, 1995. - 316 p.

Berkey Ch. P., Nelson N.C. Geology and Prehistoric Archaeology of the Gobi Desert // American Museum Novitates. - 1926. - N222. - P. 1 - 16.

Bettinger R.L., Elston R.G., Madsen D.B., Li Zhuangwei, You Yuzhu. Transitional Paleolithic - Neolithic Settlement and Subsistence in Alashan Peague, Western Inner Mongolia, People's Republic of China // Current Research in the Pleistocene. - 1990. - Vol. 7. - P. 1 - 3.

Bettinger R.L., Madsen D.B., Elston R.G. Prehistoric Settlement Categories and Settlement Systems in the Alashan Desert of Inner Mongolia, PRC // J. of Anthropological Archaeology. - 1994. -Vol. 13. -P. 74 - 101.

Brown L.A. From Discard to Divination: Demarcating the Sacred Through the Collection and Curation of Discarded Objects // Latin American Antiquity. - 2000. - Vol. 11, N 4. - P. 319 - 333.

Clark G. Symbols of Excellence. Precious Materials as Expressions of Status. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. - 138 p.

Clottes J. L'Archeologie des grottes ornees // La Recherche. -1992. - Vol. 23. - P. 52 - 61.

Clottes J. Thematic Changes in Upper Paleolithic Art // Antiquity. - 1996. - Vol. 70. - P. 276 - 288.

Costin C.L. Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production // J. of Archaeological Method and Theory. - 1991. - Vol. 3, N 1. - P. 1 - 56.

Derevianko A.P., Gladyshev S.A., Nohrina T.I., Olsen J.W. The Mongolian Early Holocene: Excavations at Chikhen Agui Rockshelter in Gobi Altai // The Review of Archaeology. Special Issue. - 2003. - Vol. 24, N 2. - P. 50 - 56.

Elston R.G., Xu Gheng, Madsen D.B., Zhong Kan, Bettinger R.L., Li Jingzen, Brantingham P.J., Wang Huiming, Yu Jun. New Dates for the North China Neolithic // Antiquity. - 1997. - Vol. 71. - P. 985 - 993.

Fairservis W.A. (jr). Archaeologiy of the Southern Gobi of Mongolia. - Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 1993. - 253 p.

Gabori M. Beitrage zur Typologie und Verbreitung der Shabarakh-Kultur // Acta Archaeologica. Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. - 1962. - T. 14 (3/4). - P. 159 - 174.

Gai Pei. Mcrolithic Industries in China // Paleoanthropology and Palaeolithic Archaeology in the People's Republic of China / eds. Wu Rukang, J.W. Olsen. - Orlando; San Diego; N.Y.: Academic Press, 1985. -P. 225 - 241.

Hayden B. Practical and Prestige Technologies: The Evolution of Material Systems // J. of Archaeological Method and Theory. - 1998. -Vol. 5, N 1. - P. 1 - 55.

Hayden B. Shamans, Sorcerers, and Saints. - Wash., D.C.: Smithsonian Books, 2003. - 528 p.

Hayden B., Adams R. Ritual Structures in Transegalitarian Communities // Complex Hunter-Gatherers: Evolution and Organization of Prehistoric Communities on the Plateau of Northwestern North America. - Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2004. - P. 84 - 102.

Jia Lanpo, Huang Weiwen. The Late palaeolithic of China // Paleoanthropology and Palaeolithic Archaeology in the People's Republic of China / eds. Wu Rukang, J.W. Olsen. - Orlando; San Diego; N.Y.: Academic Press, 1985. - P. 211 - 223.

Kozlowski J.K. Research on the Stone Age in South Mongolia in 1968 // Archaeologia Polona. - 1968. - [Т.] 13, vol. 1/2. - P. 231 - 261.

Kwang-chih Chang. The Archaeology of Ancient China. -New Haven; L.: Yale University Press, 1986. - 450 S.

Lewis-Williams J.D. Rock Art and Ritual: South Africa and Beyond // Complutum. - 1994. - N 5. - P. 277 - 289.

Lowrey N.S. An Ethnoarchaeological Inquiry into the Functional Relationship between Projectile Point and Armor Technologies of the Northwest Coast // North American Archaeologist. - 1999. - Vol. 20. - P. 47 - 73.

Madsen D.B., Elston R.G., Bettinger R.L., Xu Gheng, Zhong Kan. Settlement Patterns Reflected in Assemblages from the Pleistocene/Holocene Transition of North Central China // J. of Archaeological Science. - 1996. -Vol. 23. -P. 217 - 231.

Mania D. Archaologidsche Studien in der zentralen Mongolei // Arbeiten aus dem Institut fur vor- und fruhgeschichte der Martin-Luther-Universitat Halle-Wittenberg. - 1963. - H. 13. - (Sonderdrucke aus der Wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift der Martin-Luther-Universitat Halle-Wittenberg. - Heft 11). - S. 847 - 888.

Owens D., Hayden B. Prehistoric Rites of Passage: A Comparative Study of Transegalitarian Hunter-Gatherers // Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. - 1997. - Vol. 16. -P. 121 - 161.

Sali S.A. Stone Age India. - Aurangabad: Shankar Publishers, 1990. - 288 p.

Tabarev A.V. People of Salmon: Technology, Art and Ritual of the Stone Age Cultures, Russia Far East // Archaeological Education of the Japanese Fundamental Culture in East Asia. 21 COE Program Archaeology Series. - 2006. - Vol. 7. - P. 111 - 124.

Weigand P. C. Huichol Ceremonial Reuse of Fluted Point // American Antiquity. - 1970. - Vol. 35, N 3. - P. 365 - 367.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 08.10.07.

Permanent link to this publication: