The article discusses the use of ethnographic data in archaeological research. Based on the works of Russian ethnographers, we can distinguish a number of features of traditional art of the peoples of the North and Siberia. Based on these features, approaches to its study that can be applied in the analysis of Upper Paleolithic fine plastics are outlined.

Keywords: Upper Paleolithic, small form art, small plastic, ornament, traditional art.

Introduction

Until the late 50s and early 60s of the XX century, there was a generally accepted tendency to interpret Paleolithic antiquities with references to ethnographic data. Then there was a call to completely abandon ethnographic comparativism and look for explanations of the studied archaeological materials in themselves (see, for example, Laming-Emperaire, 1962; Leroi-Gourhan, 1965, 1995). Currently, there is a departure from both extremes, and the search for optimal ways of interaction between archeology and ethnography continues (see, for example, [Integration of archaeological and Ethnographic research, 2001, 2008; Tomilov, 1999; Sher, 2006, pp. 19-21]).

Studies of cave art actively develop the idea of the connection of ancient images with shamanism, an altered state of consciousness (with the use of neuropsychological and ethnographic data) [Clottes and Lewis-Williams, 2001; Lewis-Williams, 2003; Clottes, 2011, p. 68-142], and study the acoustic properties of caves and their connection with possible phenomena. rites of hunting magic [Reznikoff, 1987, 2010]. It is suggested that primitive art is inherently close to folklore and, by analogy with it, contains mytho-epical formulas that are a vivid sign of culture and move along with its carriers in space and time [Sher, 2000, pp. 81 - 82].

In the process of studying the art of small forms, it is difficult to restore its archaeological context, since a significant part of the samples known to us were found before the end of the 60s of the XX century. and archaeological reports of that time do not always contain the necessary information. In this regard, the researcher is forced to draw information exclusively from the available object, which leads to a thorough description of the finds [Abramova, 1962, 2005, 2010], the creation of typologies of certain categories of images according to metric parameters [Gvozdover, 1985], attempts to decipher iconic records on the surface of the sculpture [Frolov, 1981, pp. 71-109; Larichev, 2003, 2008], search for analogies in the materials of sites in Western and Eastern Europe, Central Russia, and Siberia [Abramova, 1960, pp. 22-23; McDermott, 1996; Primeval Art, 1998, p. 80; Demeshchenko, 1999, pp. 104, 108; Mussi, 2000, p. 371-374 Dupuy, 2007, p. 279; Volkova, 2011, p. 41-42; et al.]. Even at the level of describing small plastics, terms borrowed from ethnography are used and obviously used in the art of painting.

page 31
bearing a certain semantic load: "amulet", "chief's rod", "magic ratchet","spear thrower", etc. (see, for example: [Russo, 2003, p. 12, 52, 61]). Perhaps this suggests that the language of a researcher of primitive art is at the stage of transition from scientific jargonism to the primary formalization of vocabulary [Sher, 1978, p. 44].

In the study of small-form art, the main directions based on ethnographic evidence at the present stage are ethnoarchaeology, experimental archaeology and complex research. The goal of ethnoarchaeology in Western science has been defined as the reconstruction of socio-cultural phenomena. Its main task was to study the laws and mechanisms of transformation of ethnographic culture into archaeological one. Knowledge of these laws and mechanisms dramatically increases the possibility of reconstructing the socio-cultural appearance of the ancient population based on archaeological materials. Experimental archaeology involves reconstructing the past of people in the course of an experiment that recreates a particular situation, with the participation of researchers.

As a source for reconstructing the features of primitive thinking, the ethnographic works of the first complex expeditions seem to be more reliable, since the level of integration of modern and traditional societies is getting higher every year, and the evidence of authentic material and spiritual culture of the aborigines is becoming more difficult to distinguish. The results of early studies prove the connection of sculpture with folklore and the worldview of ancient people (see, for example, [Sternberg, 1936]). The example given by D. A. Sergeev is convincing: sculptural images made of walrus tusk found in the Ekvensky burial ground created in the first centuries of our era are closely related to the traditional ideas of the modern Eskimo population about the world around them. One find is an amulet, on which, among other animals, the head of a killer whale is depicted on one side, and directly opposite - the head of a land predator, a wolf. This paired image is not random. And in our time, whalers consider killer whales as their patrons: whales, pursued by these predators, often throw themselves ashore and become easy prey for hunters. Local residents could not understand where the killer whales disappear in winter, when the sea is covered with ice. The desire to explain their disappearance has led to ideas about the transformation of the killer whale into a wolf for the winter period. Therefore, the wolf became sacred and inviolable, it was not revenged for killing deer: "In winter, killer whales take deer from people, and in summer they give them to whales" (Sergeev, 1970).

The sculpture, which resembles the Upper Paleolithic, is found among the aborigines of Siberia. In this regard, it is advisable to refer to the works of Russian ethnographers devoted to its detailed analysis (for example: [Ivanov, 1970]), which will allow us to borrow the experience of specialists in the field of traditional art and determine some approaches to the study of Upper Paleolithic visual activity, without referring to direct analogies.

Upper Paleolithic fine plastic art and traditional art

Form variability. The Upper Paleolithic sculpture represents two main images - animal and human. Among the peoples of Siberia, we find similar anthropomorphic and zoomorphic images. It is very difficult and not entirely correct to draw semantic parallels in this case. Based on ethnographic data, it is impossible to draw conclusions about what exactly, for example, this or that Upper Paleolithic figure of a woman meant. In the works devoted to the culture and everyday life of the peoples of Siberia, it is noted: the sculpture depicted spirits, ancestral souls, creatures that were seen as the source of illness, etc.; it was divided into everyday (dolls) and religious (Ivanov, 1949, p. 9, 163-164; 1979, p. 150-155). 1950, pp. 30, 32]. Thus, the role of these images was diverse and differentiated. Presumably, this can be explained by the presence in the materials of one Upper Paleolithic monument of various kinds of figurines of women, such as at the sites of Malta (near Irkutsk), Gagarino (in the upper reaches of the Don), etc. [Gerasimov, 1958, pp. 30-50; Abramova, 1962, pp. 28-29, 44-51]. Tarasov, 1972, p. 200; Lipnina et al., 1997].

Transformation of the meaning and features of using the material. In the opinion of St. According to Ivanov, the meaning of each image may have changed over time and depending on the circumstances and context of use, and the functions performed by similar images, but made of different materials, may have differed. It is interesting to note the case of transformation of a non-utilitarian object from Malta -a rod made from a mammoth tusk and "ornamented" with transverse cut lines (Fig. 1). At one end of it, the top layer was removed in order to drill a hole. Apparently, the surface of the rod was also originally "ornamented" here, since small depressions from the previously existing transverse lines remained at the edges. Perhaps this indicates the use of this object first as a statuette, and then "turning" it into a pendant, which is likely,

page 32

Fig. 1. "Ornamented" rod from the Malta parking lot.

2. Experimentally made from chalk figure of a Kostenkov type woman (author Yu. S. Volkova).

indicates that the semantic and functional category of the image changes over time.

The physical properties of the material and the special ideas associated with it played an important role in the life of the aborigines of Siberia (Smolyak, 1976, p. 138). Among the Upper Paleolithic objects, there are repeatedly found products made of mammoth tusk, the shape and surface of which are imitated for a different natural material, a specific texture (shells, teeth, fish scales, the inner part of a mammoth tusk, etc.) [Bibikova, 1965; Taborin, 1990, p. 31, fig. 2; Chollet, Airvaux, 1990, p. 82, fig. 7; White, 1997, p. 96, 109; Volkova, 2010]. It can be assumed that the imitated materials were of particular value to the people of that era due to their rarity, special physical and tactile properties, or other reasons unknown to us.

Images from the Kostenka I parking lot made of mammoth tusk and soft stone are indicative. According to some authors, the results of studying fragments of stone female figurines indicate that these figurines, unlike those made from mammoth tusk, were deliberately broken [Abramova, 1966, p. 90; Dupuy, 1999, p. 152-154; Dupuy and Praslov, 1999, p.29]. Perhaps these differences are precisely due to the purpose, ritual function of objects used for more or less long-term purposes. According to J. R. R. Tolkien: Hana, it took more than 40 hours to make a replica of the horse figurine from Vogerhold, which is quite a long time for hunter-gatherers. It can be assumed that there is a direct relationship between the time required to create a statuette and the duration of its use [Halm, 1990, p. 173-183]. According to our experiments, making a Kostenkov type figurine out of chalk with a flint plate takes no more than five hours on average (Figure 2). Therefore, it takes 8 times longer to create a sculpture out of a tusk, which may actually affect its value in the eyes of the creators. Deliberate destruction of terracotta figurines is also noted at Gravvetta sites in Moravia, which researchers associate with the rites of hunting magic (Svoboda, 1999, p. 262-263).

It is interesting to trace different contexts and ways of using the same material-terracotta. In the French Pyrenees, various technologies were used for making art objects from clay-modeling, sculpture, engraving. In Moravia, mostly recorded sculpture, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic, made according to a certain canon, and fingerprints on the material indicate that these products were made by women and children. Consequently, we can note the variability in the use of clay: an individual approach to creating art objects in the French Pyrenees and more standardized actions with this material in Moravia (Boureaux, 2004; Bougard, 2010).

The context of finds. In the Grimaldi grotto, clusters of female figurines were found in hiding places. R. White suggested that they were hidden for future use by pregnant women during childbirth, which did not happen so often in small hunting groups [White, 1997, p.116-117]. Russian researchers have also written about the finding of Upper Paleolithic sculptural images in ancient hiding places, "storage pits" (Zamyatnin, 1935, p. 36, 63; Efimenko, 1958, p. 346-350; Amirkhanov and Lev, 2003, p. 24-26; 2007; etc.). In ethnographic works, we find a lot of different types of sculptures. certificates of special places intended for storing sculptural images.

page 33

3. Fragment of a sculptural piece made from a mammoth tusk from the Malta site.

Fig. 4. Fragments of sculptural crafts made from mammoth tusk from the Malta site.

Thus, we can assume the existence of a "life" of sculptural images within the collective of their creators, changing and supplementing their semantic meaning.

Appearance. In ethnographic works, one can find attempts to link the functional purpose of the sculpture with its appearance. For example, in some cases, the appearance of simplified" rod-shaped "images of a person is explained by the fact that these figures were put on "clothes", so there was no need to finish them [Ivanov, 1979, p. 158]. According to S. A. Demeshchenko, the holes in the lower part of the figures of birds and women from the Malta parking lot may have been made for ease of perception: if the pendant was worn around the neck or belt, then taking it in hand, a person found himself "face to face" with this image [2008].

It is known that in traditional cultures, nuances in the transmission of a particular image play a decisive role. According to S. V. Ivanov, the Amur peoples used to make a bear figurine with a small bloat in the abdominal part for abdominal pain. When the golds were generally unwell, they made an image of a sitting bear with its body covered with shavings out of wood [Ivanov, 1937, p.12]. Images of different types conveyed different diseases, for example, extremely thin figures - consumption, swollen ones - dropsy [Zelenin, 1936, p. 262]. In the case of heart or other internal diseases, a hunchbacked human figure was made, and in the case of indigestion, a human figure with no legs was made, its arms were made only up to the elbow, and a through hole was drilled inside from the neck to the lower abdomen. The image of a person with "trailed" arms and legs was made in the case of rheumatic pain [Larkin, 1964, p. 94-95].

General classifications of female figurines are based on body features (see, for example: [Abramova, 1966, p. 13-15; Yelinek, 1982, p. 372-373]), local types are distinguished based on the shape of the blanks [Khlopachev, 1998; 2006, p.120-132]. We can outline a different approach, paying attention to various nuances of performance that not only indicate the individualization of the female image [Anikovich, 2000; Demeshchenko, 2000], but also allow combining images into groups.

Ornament-decor. A separate direction in the study of Upper Paleolithic art is the analysis of" ornament " on objects of utilitarian and non-utilitarian purposes. In this regard, the experience of ethnographic research will be useful. For example, S. V. Ivanov considered it most correct to analyze not individual elements of the ornament, but their combinations, since individual elements, as a rule, are universal in nature and are found in different artistic traditions [Ivanov, 1952, p. 86; 1963, p.5 - 43; 1964, p. 145]. The researcher's conclusions are supported by data obtained from the study of human neuropsychology. Thus, D. Lewis-Williams and T. Dawson distinguish six types of simplest signs that are universal in nature and are associated with entoptic vision: lattices, parallel lines, spots/dots, zigzags, wavy lines, and meanders [Lewis-Williams and Dowson, 1988, p. 203]. In the opinion of St. Ivanova, it is the combination of technical techniques for making ornaments that is one of the most important signs of kinship and cultural relations between peoples, a sign that characterizes culture [1958, p.19-23].

Turning to the works devoted to the study of "ornament" on Upper Paleolithic objects, among its simplest elements we find "lines" and "dots" (see, for example: [Taborin, 1990, p. 21]). If several types are distinguished among the former, the latter remain simply "dots " or" pits " (Sauvet, 1990, p. 87). Taking into account the remarks of SV. Ivanova, we can challenge this one-sided approach. Thus, the analysis of" ornamented " objects from Malta makes it possible to distinguish at least two different types of objects.

page 34
there are two types of drawing points: with drawn lines and paired ones.

The" ornament " in the form of dots with lines is found on the central pendant made of a composite necklace [Abramova, 1962, Table LVI, 5], a plate with a hole in the center [Ibid., Table LI, 2], and on a fragment of an indeterminate object made of a mammoth tusk (Fig. 3). A distinctive feature of this combination is that it can be seen in the form of a single point. A. K. Filippov suggested that the lines were scraped with the tip from the drilled hole [2004, p. 115]. Such a technology of applying "ornament" is not found on any monument. Thus, it can become a fairly reliable characteristic of the visual tradition of Malta.

The" ornament " in the form of paired dots is present on two female figurines [Abramova, 1962, Table XLVI, 8; XLVII, 9], a small pendant made from a composite necklace [Ibid., Table LVI, 2] , and on fragments of undefined objects made from a mammoth tusk (Fig. 4). In the description of the costume Evenkovs wore a special headdress with a hole in the back, through which the scythe was released (Vasilevich, 1969, p. 134). Among the peoples of the North and Siberia, the patterns on the head of female figurines convey the features of a hairstyle or headdress [Slobodin, 2002, pp. 145-149]. It can be assumed that the statuettes from Malta also have braids with the help of an" ornament", and one of them has a braid falling over her chest. However, this assumption does not seem entirely correct, since completely different objects are also "ornamented" with paired dots: a pendant and fragments of mammoth tusk products.

In general, the principle of identifying stable combinations of ornamental elements and the technology of their application can be applied when comparing art objects from various monuments of the Upper Paleolithic era to determine the features of local visual traditions and identify their kinship and possible cultural interaction [Fedorova, 1995, p. 15; Amirkhanov and Lev, 2004, p. 318].

Conclusions

Thus, it is possible to outline several features of traditional art that may be useful in the study of Upper Paleolithic fine plastic art:

1) the meaning of the same sculptural image may have changed over time, as well as depending on the context and material from which it is made;

2) the appearance of an ancient sculpture is directly related to its functional purpose;

3) nuances in transmitting the same image can affect its meaning;

4) combinations of individual ornamental elements and their technical execution are a characteristic feature of the local pictorial tradition.

Given these features, it is not necessary to refer to direct ethnographic analogies. It can be assumed that the basic principles of creating and applying sculptural images are universal and can be used in the interpretation of Upper Paleolithic fine plastics.

List of literature

Abramova Z. A. Paleolithic art of Siberia. - Cheremkhovo: Cheremkhovsky rabochy, 1960. -40 p.

Abramova Z. A. Paleolithic art on the territory of the USSR. - Moscow; L.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1962. - 85 p.- (Archeology of the USSR. Set of archaeological sources).

Abramova Z. A. Izobrazheniya cheloveka v paleoliticheskom iskusstve Evrazii [Human images in the Paleolithic art of Eurasia].

Abramova Z. A. Animal and human in the Paleolithic art of Europe. St. Petersburg: European House Publ., 2005, 352 p.

Abramova Z. A. The oldest image of Man: a catalog based on the materials of Paleolithic art in Europe. - St. Petersburg: Petersburg. vostokovedenie Publ., 2010, 303 p. (in Russian)

Amirkhanov Kh. A., Lev S. Yu. Statuette of a bison from the Zaraisk parking lot: archaeological and symbolic aspects of studying / / RA. - 2003. - N 4. - pp. 14-28.

Amirkhanov Kh. A., Lev S. Yu. Statuette of a bison from the Zaraisk parking lot / / Problems of the Stone Age of the Russian Plain. mir Publ., 2004, pp. 299-321.

Amirkhanov, Kh. A. and Lev, S. Yu., New works of Paleolithic art from the Zaraisk site, RA. - 2007. - N1. - pp. 22-35.

Anikovich M. V. [Society and personality in the Paleolithic : what archaeological data can say about it]. Kul'tura: society and the individual. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2000, pp. 103-112.

Anisimov A. F. Semeynye okhraniteli u evenkov [Family guards among Evenks]. SE. - 1950. - N3. - pp. 28-43.

Bibikova, V. I., On the origin of the Mezinsky Paleolithic ornament, SA. - 1965. - N 1. - pp. 3-8.

Vasilevich G. M. Evenki: Istoriko-etnograficheskie ocherki [Evenki: Historical and ethnographic Essays]. XX century). - L.: Nauka, 1969. - 304 p.

Volkova Yu. S. On the "natural" source of the appearance of the ornament // Materials of reports of the V (L) Russian (with international participation) Archaeological and Ethnographic Conference of students and young scientists, Irkutsk, April 4-9, 2010-Irkutsk, 2010. - pp. 397-398.

Volkova Yu. S. On the problem of the existence of a "proto-language" on the territory of Eurasia in the Upper Paleolithic era (contours of the hypothesis). Kemerovo: Kem. state University, 2011, issue 25, pp. 41-45.

Gvozdover, M. D., Typology of female figurines of the Kostenkov Paleolithic Culture,Vopr. - 1985. - N75. - p. 27-66.

Gerasimov M. M. Paleolithic site Malta // SE. - 1958. - N3. - pp. 28-52.

page 35
Demeshchenko S. A. Relativnaya khronologiya paleoliticheskogo iskusstva malykh form i khudozhestvenno-stilisticheskie traditsii [Relative chronology of Paleolithic art of small forms and artistic and stylistic traditions]. Kemerovo: Nikals Publ., 1999, pp. 96-109.

Demeshchenko S. A. Iskusstvo paleolita (k voprosu ob individualizatsii) [Paleolithic Art (on the issue of individualization)]: society and the individual. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, 2000, pp. 163-164.

Demeshchenko S. A. Semanticheskaya interpretatsiya arkheologicheskikh artefaktov [Semantic interpretation of archaeological artifacts]: In the depths and spaces of history. St. Petersburg: Asterion Publ., 2008, pp. 191-201.

Dupuy D. Novy podkhod k izucheniyu zhenshchikh statuetok iz Kostenok I I Avdeevo [A new approach to the study of female figurines from Kostenok I and Avdeevo]. dokl. on Mezhdunar. konf., prov. 100th anniversary of the birth of S. N. Zamyatin. - SPb., 1999. - p. 15-154.

Dupuy D., Praslov N. D. Fragmentation of female stone figurines in Kostenki I // Osobennosti razvitiya verkhni paleolita Vostochnoi Evropy: tez. dokl. na Mezhdunar. konf., posv. 120th anniversary of the discovery of the Paleolithic in Kostenki. St. Petersburg, 1999, pp. 29-30.

Yelinek Ya. Big illustrated atlas of the primitive man. Prague: Artia Publ., 1982, 560 p.

Efimenko P. P. Kostenki I.-M.; L.: Nauka, 1958. -452 p.

Zamyatnin S. N. Excavations near the village of Gagarin (upper reaches of the Don, TCHO). Izv. GAIMK. - 1935. Issue 118, pp. 26-77.

Zelenin D. K. Kult ongonov v Sibiri [The cult of Ongons in Siberia], Moscow, Leningrad: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1936, 436 p.

Ivanov S. V. Medved v religionnom i dekorativnom iskusstve narodnostey Amura [The Bear in the religious and decorative art of the Amur peoples]. Pamyati V. G. Bogoraza (1865-1936): sb.st. - M.; L.: Izd - vo AN SSSR, 1937.-pp. 24-44.

Ivanov, S. V., On the significance of two unique female statuettes of American Eskimos, Sb. MAE, 1949, vol. 11, pp. 162-170.

Ivanov S. V. Materialy ornamenta k probleme kul'turno-istoricheskikh svyazi khanty i mansi [Materials of the ornament on the problem of cultural and historical relations between the Khanty and Mansi]. SE. - 1952. - N3. - pp. 85-99.

Ivanov S. V. Narodnyi ornament kak istoricheskii istochnik [Folk ornament as a historical source].

Ivanov S. V. Ornament of the peoples of Siberia as a historical source. - Moscow; L: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963. - 500 p.

Ivanov S. V. On the issue of methods of collecting and studying works of folk art // SE. - 1964. - N4. - pp. 136-146.

Ivanov S. V. Sculptura narodov severa Sibiri XIX-pervoi poloviny XX v. Sculpture of the peoples of the North of Siberia of the XIX-first half of the XX century.

Ivanov S. V. Sculpture of Altaians, Khakass and Siberian Tatars of the XVIII-first quarter of the XX century. - Moscow: Nauka, 1979. - 194 p.

Integratsiya arkheologicheskikh i etnograficheskikh issledovaniy: sb. nauch. trudov [Integration of archaeological and ethnographic research]. univ., 2001, 254 p. (in Russian)

Integratsiya arkheologicheskikh i etnograficheskikh issledovaniy [Integration of archaeological and ethnographic research]. univ., 2008, 342 p. (in Russian)

Larichev V. E. Devouring time (sculptural image of the planetary deity of Maltese culture) / / Ancient Cultures of North-East Asia: Astroarchaeology. Paleoinformatics. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2003, pp. 187-200.

Larichev V. E. Pervoobrazy luny (deciphering iconic records on sculptures of Malta and semantics of images embodied in them) / / Antropogen: Paleoanthropologiya, geoarcheologiya, etnologiya Azii. Irkutsk: Ottisk Publ., 2008, pp. 90-101.

Larkin V. G. Orochi: (historical and ethnographic essay from the middle of the XIX century to our days). - Moscow: Nauka, 1964. - 174 p.

Lipnina E. A., Medvedev G. I., Novoseltseva V. N., Kov N., Kun D., Sitlivy V., Shmygun P. E. New anthropomorphic sculptural image from the Maltese Paleolithic locality // Problems of archeology, ethnography, and anthropology of Siberia and adjacent territories. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 1997, vol. 3, pp. 24-25.

Primitive art. Kemerovo: Kem. State Institute of Arts and Culture Publ., 1998, 210 p. (in Russian)

Russo A. Glossary of Paleolithic Art. Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat Publ., 2003, 80 p.

Sergeev D. A. Motivy eskimosskogo fol'klora v drevneberingomorskoj skulpturu (pervye veka nashe eri) [Motifs of Eskimo folklore in ancient Bering Sea sculpture (the first centuries of our era)].

Slobodin S. B. A unique find of the Koryak statuette from the northern coast of the Sea of Okhotsk / / Istoriya i kul'tura Vostoka Azii: (mat-ly Mezhdunar. nauch. konfer. k 70-letiyu V. E. Laricheva). Novosibirsk: IAET SB RAS, 2002, vol. 2, pp. 145-149.

Priroda i chelovek v religioznykh predstavleniyakh narodov Sibiri i Severa [Nature and man in religious representations of the peoples of Siberia and the North].

Tarasov, L. M., Sculpture of the Gagarin Paleolithic Site, MIA, 1972, No. 185: Paleolithic and Neolithic of the USSR, vol. 7, pp. 193-201.

Tomilov N. A. Ethnoarchaeology: new directions of Russian science // Vestn. Omsk State University. - 1999. - Issue 2. - p. 5-9.

Fedorova E. G. Ornamentum kak pokazak "svoi" i "chuzhoi" cheshi [Ornament as a sign of " own " and "alien" things]. Chuzhaya cheshi v kul'tury: mat-ly nauch. konf. - SPb.: Izd-vo SPb. gosudarstvennogo unita, 1995, pp. 14-16.

Filippov A. K. Chaos and Harmony in Paleolithic art. - St. Petersburg: Leningr. region. societies. organization "Preservation of natural and cultural heritage", 2004. - 224 p.

Frolov B. A. About what the Siberian Madonna told. - Moscow: Znanie, 1981. - 112 p.

Khlopachev S. A. Dva podkhody k postroeniyu figy zhenshchikh statuetok na vostochno-gravvetiskikh stoyankakh Russkoi ravniny [Two approaches to constructing the figure of female figurines on the East Gravvetisk sites of the Russian Plain].

Khlopachev G. A. Tusk industries of the Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Europe. - SPb.: Science. - 2006. - 259 p.

Sher Ya. A. O razvitii yazyka arkheologii [On the development of the language of archeology] / / Problemy arkheologii II: sb. st. v pamyat prof.

Sher Ya. A. Primeval art: facts, hypotheses, methods and theory //Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2000. - N 2. - p. 77-87.

Sher Ya. A. Primeval art: textbook. stipend. Kemerovo: Kuzbassvuzizdat Publ., 2006, 350 p.

Primeval religion in the light of ethnography: research, articles, lectures. - L.: Publishing House of the Institute of Peoples of the North of the CEC of the USSR, 1936. - 568 p.

page 36
Bougard E. The use of clay in the Upper Palaeolithic of Europe. Symbolic applications of a material. - Oxford: BAR, 2010. - P. 36 - 48. - (BAR Intern. Ser., N 2069).

Boureaux C. -J. L'Homme et l'argile au Paleolithique superieur dans l'espace Francocantabrique. Prehistoire, Art et Societes // Bull. de la Societe Prehistorique Ariege-Pyrenees. -2004. - N59. - P. 93 - 108.

Chollet A., Airvaux J. Bases objectives de la chronologie de 'art mobilier Paleolithique en Poitou // L'art des objets au Paleolithique: Colloque international Foix - Le Mas-d'Azil, 16 - 21 novembre 1987. - P.: Direction du Patrimoine, 1990. -T. 1: L'art mobilier et son contexte. - P. 77 - 82.

Clottes J. Pourquoi Part prehistorique? - P.: Gallimard, 2011. - 330 p.

Clottes J., Lewis-Williams D. Les chamanes de la prehistoire. - P.: La maison des roches, 2001. - 237 p.

Dupuy D. La statuaire gravettienne, du geste au symbole: These de doctorat Nouveau Regime. - Marseille: Universite de Provence, 2007. - Vol. 1. - 320 p.

Hahn J. Modelage et peinture dans 'art mobilier // L'art des objets au Paleolithique: Colloque international Foix - Le Mas-d'Azil, 16 - 21 novembre 1987. - P.: Direction du Patrimoine, 1990. - T. 2: Les voies de la recherche. - P. 173 - 185.

Laming-Emperaire A. La Signification de l'art rupestre paleolithique. - P.: Picard, 1962. - 424 p.

Leroi-Gourhan A. Prehistoire de l'Art occindental. - P.: Mazenod, 1965. - 400 p.

Leroi-Gourhan A. Brigitte et Gilles Delluc Prehistoire de l'art occidental. - P.: Citadelles & Mazenod, 1995. - 624 p.

Lewis-Williams D. The Mind in the cave. - L.: Thames & Hudson, 2003. - 320 p.

Lewis-Williams, J.D., Dowson T. The signs of all times: entoptic phenomena in Upper Palaeolithic art // Current Anthropology. - 1988. - Vol. 29. - P. 201 - 245.

McDermott Le R. Self-Representation in Upper Paleolithic Female Figurines // Current Anthropology. - 1996. - Vol. 37, N2. - P. 227 - 275.

Mussi M. Echoes from the mammoth steppe: the case of the Balzi Rossi // Hunters of the Golden age. - Leiden: University of Leiden, 2000. - P. 355 - 374.

Reznikoff I. Sur la dimension sonore des grottes a peinture du Paleolithique // Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences. Ser. II/3. - 1987. -Vol. 304. -P. 153 - 156.

Reznikoff I. La dimension sonore des grottes paleolithiques et rochers a peintures Pre actes du congres, IFRAO Ariege. -Pleistocene art of Europe. - Tarascon-sur-Ariege: Lacombe, 2010. (DVD).

Sauvet G. Les signes dans l'art mobiier // L'art des objets au Paleolithique: Colloque international Foix - Le Mas-d'Azil, 16 - 21 novembre 1987. - P.: Direction du Patrimoine, 1990. -T. 2: Les voies de la recherche. - P. 83 - 99.

Svoboda J. L'art Gravettien en Moravie: context, dares et styles // L'anthropologic. - 1999. - T. 99, N 2/3. - P. 258 - 272.

Taborin Y. Le decor des odjets de parure // L'art des objets au Paleolithique: Colloque international Foix - Le Mas-d'Azil, 16 - 21 novembre 1987. - P.: Direction du Patrimoine, 1990. -T. 2: Les voies de la recherche. - P. 19 - 39.

White R. Substantial Acts: From Materials to Meaning in Upper Paleolithic Representation // Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol. - San Francisco: California Academy of sciences, 1997. - P. 93 - 120.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 11.04.11, in the final version-on 27.03.12.

page 37

Permanent link to this publication: