No. 3 (30) (2023), Eurasian Heritage
No. 3 (30) (2023)

Artistic forms of the Siberian Ice Age as a way of self-identification of man and society: objects of personal ornamentation

Eurasian Heritage
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46748/ARTEURAS.2023.03.002
Published 2023-09-30
Lyudmila V. Lbova
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation; Regional Department of the Urals, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Academy of Arts in Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4103-7785
eLibrary ID
lbova-lv@yandex.ru
Выпуск № 3 (30) 2023 журнала "Искусство Евразии"
HTML (Russian)
PDF (Russian)
JATS XML (Russian)
HTML (Russian)
PDF (Russian)
JATS XML (Russian)

Keywords

Archaeology, primitive art, mobile objects, Stone Age, self-identification of man and society, Siberia

Categories

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Lbova, L.V. (2023) ‘Artistic forms of the Siberian Ice Age as a way of self-identification of man and society: objects of personal ornamentation’, The Art of Eurasia, (3), pp. 22–33. doi:10.46748/ARTEURAS.2023.03.002.
ABNT ACM ACS APA Chicago Harvard IEEE MLA Turabian Vancouver Eurasia Art

Download Citation

Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX

Индексация статей

Белый списокScience IndexDimensionsDOAJOpenAlexScilitКиберЛенинкаEBSCOCrossrefDataCiteInternet Archive ScholarGoogle Scholar
Open Access
Антиплагиат

* Not an advertisement

Abstract

Research of the oldest forms of Prehistory portable art of the Ice Age in Siberia allows to distinguish three groups of objects: personal jewellery, objects of prestigious character (objects of exchange including), collection of volumetric sculpture (anthropomorphic and zoomorphic images). Hypotheses that were previously proposed by researchers about the aesthetic, household, magic-ritual, etc. functions of the Prehistory portable art (artifacts with signs of artistic creativity) continue to develop on the basis of new instrumental and cognitive capabilities. The paper proposes a hypothesis of understanding personal objects (personal ornamentation, or “decoration”) as a way of self-identification or self-description of a person and a community. The research is based on the results of technical-morphological, typological, microscopic analysis of objects, and subsequent cross-cultural analogies. Multidisciplinary studies of the mobile plastics of Prehistory art from the archaeological and ethnographic museum collections of Siberia and the Far East present the possibility of reconstructing such forms of creativity as evidence of self-identification (gender, social, ethno-cultural).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46748/ARTEURAS.2023.03.002

Acknowledgments

The research was supported by the grant of the Russian Science Foundation No. 23-28-00140 “Man in the archaic art of Northern Eurasia: a paradigm shift” https://rscf.ru/project/23-28-00140/

References

  1. D'Errico, F. and Vanhaeren, M. (2007) ‘Evolution or Revolution? New evidence for the origin of symbolic behaviour in and out of Africa’, in Mellars, P., Boyle, K., Bar-Yosef, O. and Stringer Chris, C. (eds.) Rethinking the human revolution: new behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans. Cambridge: McDonald Institute Monographs, pp. 275–286.
  2. White, R. (2007) ‘Systems of personal ornamentation in the Early Upper Palaeolithic: methodological challenge and new observations’, in Mellars, P., Boyle, K., Bar-Yosef, O. and Stringer Chris, C. (eds.) Rethinking the human revolution: new behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans. Cambridge: McDonald Institute Monographs, pp. 287–302.
  3. Barton, C.M., Clark, G.A. and Cohen, A.E. (1994) ‘Art as information explaining Upper Paleolithic art in Western Europe’, World Archaeology, 26(2), pp. 185–207.
  4. Lbova, L. (2020) ‘Personal ornaments as markers of social behavior, technological development and cultural phenomena in the Siberian early upper Paleolithic’, Quaternary International, 573, pp. 4–13. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2020.05.035.
  5. Rybin, E.P. (2014) ‘Tools, beads, and migrations, specific cultural traits in the Initial Upper Palaeolithic of southern Siberia and Central Asia’, Quaternary International, 347, pp. 39–52. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2014.04.031.
  6. Vanhaeren, M. (2014) ‘The beauty of beads: from prehistory to present day. Art as behavior (an ethnological approach to visual and verbal art, music and architecture)’, Hanse Studies, 10, pp. 273–290.
  7. Álvarez Fernández, E. and Jöris, O. (2007) ‘Personal ornaments in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of Western Eurasia: an evaluation of the record’, Eurasian Prehistory, 5(2), pp. 31–44.
  8. Hodder, I. (1991) The meaning of the things: material culture and symbolic expression. London: Harper Collins.
  9. Lbova, L.V. and Volkov, P.V. (2021) The oldest art of Siberia (technologies, forms, symbols). Saint Petersburg: Politekh-press. doi: 10.18720/SPBPU/2/i21-214. (In Russ.)
  10. Shunkov, M.V. (ed.) (2022) History of Siberia. Vol. 1: Stone and Bronze Age. Novosibirsk: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography SB RAS. (In Russ.)
  11. Lbova, L.V. and Volkov, P.V. (2022) ‘Innovations of the Asian Upper Paleolithic: an artifact with geometric ornamental decoration (Siberia, Russia)’, in Ovidiu, C. and Niţu, E.-C. (eds.) A life dedicated to the Paleolithic studies in honorem Marin Cârciumaru. Târgovişte: Cetatea de scaun, pp. 139–152.
  12. Kogay, S.A. and Rogovskoy, E.O. (2013) ‘Ornamented Items of the Mamony II Paleolithic Site (Irkutsk)’, Izvestiya Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Irkutsk State University. Geoarchaeology, Ethnology, and Anthropology Serie, (1), pp. 62–70. (In Russ.)
  13. Larichev, V.E. (1986) The Wheel of Time: The Sun, Moon, and Ancient Humans. Novosibirsk: Nauka. (In Russ.)
  14. Larichev, V.E., Lipnina, E.A., Medvedev, G.I. and Kogay, S.A. (2009) ‘Angara Paleolithic: The beginnings of arts and scientific conceptualization of early Homo Sapiens in the East Siberia’, High-school scientific archaeology and ethnology of the Northern Asia. Irkutsk scientific school in 1918–1937. Irkutsk: Amtera, pp. 249–264. (In Russ.)
  15. Lbova, L.V., Kulik, N.A., Volkov, P.V., Barkov, A.V., Vanharen, M., Marchenko, D.V. and Kovalev, V.S. (2018) ‘Technology of working with “exotic” mineral resources in the upper palaeolithic of South Siberia (based on the materials of Malaya Syia)’, Stratum plus, (1), pp. 199–214. (In Russ.)
  16. Cârciumaru, M., Nitu, E.-C., Goutas, N. (2016) ‘The engraved stone pendant from Poiana Ciresului-Piatra Neamt, Romania. New contributions to the understanding of symbolic behavior in Gravettian’, Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, 44(4), pp. 35–45. doi:10.17746/1563-0110.2016.44.4.035-045.
  17. Pitulko, V.V., Pavlova, E.Y. and Nikolsky, P.A. (2015) ‘Mammoth ivory technologies in the Upper Palaeolithic: a case study based on the materials from Yana RHS, Northern Yana-Indighirka lowland, Arctic Siberia’, World Archaeology, (47), pp. 333–389. doi:10.1080/00438243.2015.1030508.
  18. Derevianko, A.P. (2009) The Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition and formation of Homo sapiens sapiens in Eastern, Central and Northern Asia. Novosibirsk: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography SB RAS. (In Russ.)
  19. Derevianko, A.P. and Rybin, E.P. (2003) ‘The earliest representations of symbolic behaviour by paleolithic humans in the Altai Mountains’, Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia, (3), pp. 27–50. (In Russ.)
  20. Lbova, L.V. and Vanhaeren, M. (2011) ‘Systems of personal ornamentation in the context of variability of cultures of the Early Upper Paleolithic of Eurasia’, Archeology of Southern Siberia, vol. 25. Kemerovo: KGPU – IAET, pp. 36–40. (In Russ.)
  21. Gerasimov, M.M. (1958) ‘The Paleolithic site Malta: excavations of 1956–1957’, Sovetskaya etnografiya = Soviet Ethnography, (3), pp. 28–52. (In Russ.)
  22. Bogoraz, V.G. (1991) The material culture of the Chukchi. Moscow: Glavnaya redaktsiya vostochnoy literatury. (In Russ.)
  23. Abramova, Z.A. (1962) Paleolithic art in the territory of the USSR. Moscow – Leningrad: Academy of Sciences of the USSR. (In Russ.)
  24. Beregovaya, N.A. (1984) Paleolithic localities in the USSR (1958–1970). Leningrad: Nauka. (In Russ.)
  25. Drozdov, N.I. and Artemyev, E.V. (2007) ‘The Paleolithic site of Afontova Gora: Recent findings and new issues’, Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia, (1), pp. 39–45. (In Russ.)
  26. Gening, V.F. and Petrin, V.T. (1985) The Late Paleolithic Epoch in the South of Western Siberia. Novosibirsk: Nauka. (In Russ.)
  27. Vishnyatsky, L.B. (2005) ‘Information explosion and visual activity’, Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia, (1), pp. 51–54. (In Russ.)
  28. Mellars, P. (2005) ‘The impossible coincidence a single — species model for the origins on modern human behavior in Europe’, Evolutionary Antropology, (14), pp. 12–27.
  29. Vanhaeren, M. (2005) ‘The evolutionary significance of bead making and use’, in D'Errico, F. and Backwell, L. (eds.) From tools to symbols. Johannesburg: Wits University Press, pp. 525–535.

Most read articles by the same author(s)