Fieldwork related to the mapping of archaeological sites in the valley of the Dzhazator River (the southern part of Gorny Altai) allowed us to determine the principles of spatial organization of various types of objects dating back to the Eneolithic-ethnographic time. The connection between monuments and petroglyphs of the Bronze Age, located mainly in the northern zone of the so-called lower valley, is traced. In the Early Iron Age and in the ancient Turkic era, funerary and memorial structures were created on the entire expanse of coastal terraces. The analysis showed that archaeological and petroglyphic monuments of late times are significantly less numerous at the southern end of the valley than at the northern end. In the central part of the valley, various traces of ancient inhabitants are recorded on both banks of the river.

Keywords: landscape archeology( landscape archeology), mapping, South-Eastern Altai, spatial organization of archaeological sites.

Introduction

Gorny Altai is well known to archaeologists all over the world. Due to the special natural conditions in the ancient permafrost, the Scythian burial sites of Pazyryk, Tuekta, and Bashadar (Rudenko, 1953, 1960) and undisturbed burials on the Ukok Plateau (Polosmak, 1994; Polosmak and Molodin, 2000; Molodin et al., 2004) are perfectly preserved here. They can probably be considered the best-preserved archaeological sites on the planet. Despite the threat of extinction of many sites due to global warming, uncontrolled tourism, unauthorized land use, and planned economic activities [Bourgeois, De Wulf, Ebel et al., 2007; Plets et al., 2011; Plets, Verhoeven, Cheremisin et al., 2012; Plets, Gheyle, Verhoeven et al., 2012], this region does not lose its importance as a rich source of materials for archaeological research.

page 106
Thousands of monuments from different periods - from the late Neolithic (late IV-III millennia BC) to the ethnographic time (starting from 1500 AD) [Parzinger, 2006] - are scattered across the valleys of the Altai Mountains. As a rule, these are burials and / or ritual monuments. Very few settlements are known, since the Altai was inhabited mainly by nomadic peoples. Settlements of the Pazyryk culture, as well as earlier and later cultures, were located on the slopes of hills in close proximity to winter pastures [Kubarev V. D., Shulga, 2007, p. 156]. It should be noted that small settlements are rarely found during field research, which is explained by the peculiarities of nomadic culture. The valleys of the Jazator, as well as other rivers of the Altai, are rich in rock outcrops, on the surface of which petroglyphs were created in different historical epochs.

A lot of research is devoted to the archaeological sites and rock art of Altai. In some publications, different types of monuments are considered in connection with dating, cultural or historical interpretation. Attempts to identify and study the principles of spatial patterns of placement of funerary, memorial, and petroglyphic monuments were made in the course of archaeological work, for example, in the valleys of Sebystei and Kalanegir, as well as in the territory of the Mongolian Altai [Bourgeois, Van Meenen, Van Hoof et al., 1999; Bourgeois, Mikkelsen, Van Hoof et al., 1999; Jacobson-Tepfer, Meacham, 2010; Jacobson-Tepfer, 2009]. But such tasks, which include continuous mapping of archaeological sites, as a rule, were not set until recently. An exception for the Russian Altai is the creation of an archaeological map of the Ukok plateau (Molodin et al., 2004).

In this article, petroglyphs are considered only from the point of view of their chronological attribution, without a general interpretation of the monument or determining its functional significance. The main topic of the article is the spatial relationship between rock art monuments and funerary and memorial archaeological sites. Petroglyphs and archaeological sites are part of the same cultural landscape, which has been noted by many experts (see, for example, [Bradley, 2000; Nash and Chippindale, 2002]). It is this cultural landscape that is of interest to us. The study of archaeological sites (ritual and funerary) in combination with petroglyphs as objects of the cultural landscape can help to re-imagine how ancient people organized their surrounding space for economic and ritual purposes.

The monuments left by ancient populations in the Jazator Valley are excellent objects for research from the standpoint of this approach. The valley was thoroughly surveyed in 2005 by scientists from the Universities of Ghent and Gorno-Altaisk [Bourgeois, De Wulf Goossens et al., 2007; Gheyle 2009].Petroglyphs were studied earlier by one of the authors of the article - D. V. Cheremisin [1995a, b; 1998; Cheremisin, 1996; 1998a, b].

Landscape characteristics of the Jazator Valley

The Jazator River stretches for more than 70 km from east to west through the valleys of the South-Eastern Altai, from the high plateau around the lake. Zerlikur-Nur to Jazator village (also known as Belyashi village on maps; Fig. 1), near which it merges with the Ak-Ala River-

1. Rock art monuments in the Jazator Valley in the southern part of Gorny Altai. 1-Uzungur-1; 2-Uzungur-2; 3-Rybinsk-2; 4-Rybinsk-1; 5-Kukkaragai-1; 6-Kukkaragai-2.

page 107
ha; their confluence forms the Argut River. The river catchment area includes a large area of the Yuzhno-Chuisky ridge. The Jazator River crosses spaces with different landscapes. Its valley can be divided into three parts. In the first part - from the source of the Jazator to its confluence with the Tara River (height 2 300 - 2 050 m above sea level) -it is wide, almost U-shaped. In the second (middle) part, the valley abounds in wide open steppe terraces (heights of 2 950 - 1 950 m), which taper in the third (lower) part at the confluence of the Jazator with the Ak-Alakha.

In the highest part of the valley on the left bank, oriented to the north, pine forests grow. The terraces of the right bank, facing south, are covered with low steppe grass, and the slopes are covered with forests. At a height of approx. 2,050 m the valley widens noticeably. The width of the terraces on both banks is measured in hundreds of meters; the borders between terraces up to 10 m high are steep. The terraces have steppe vegetation. In the lower part of the river, both the slopes and most of the valley floor are covered with forest. On the right bank of the river, between the slopes and rock outcrops, there are numerous smaller terraces. Only low steppe grasses grow on these flat plots of land. It is here that archaeological sites are mainly concentrated.

Today, large areas in the lower and middle parts of the valley are used as pasture for livestock in summer, and in winter people leave them and move to the Ukok Plateau or other high-altitude areas.

History of the archaeological study of the valley

The Jazator Valley is interesting from several points of view. First, fieldwork was carried out in neighboring areas of Southeastern Altai: in 1996 - 1997 in the Sebystey and Kalanegir tracts, and in 2003 - 2004 in some valleys of the Chui Steppe, for example, Elangash, Irbistu, and Yustyd (Bourgeois, De Wulf, Goossens et al., 2007). In addition, in 1991-1996, employees of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences mapped all open sites on the Ukok plateau (Molodin et al., 2004). Therefore, information about archaeological sites in this area can be used for comparative analysis. Secondly, the Jazator Valley is known for a variety of archaeological sites.

Several expeditions worked in the valley. A purposeful study of petroglyphs was carried out in the late 1990s: several large rock art monuments were recorded (Cheremisin, 1998; Cheremisin, 1998a, b). July and August 2005 A large expedition funded by UNESCO (Flemish / UNESCO Fund-in-Trast), which mainly studied funerary and memorial structures, also described several rock art monuments. In July 2011, a small team from the University of Ghent made a four-day trip to the Jazator Valley to learn about the impact of deforestation on the archaeological heritage and to test the budget method of 3D documentation of monuments [Plets et al., 2012].

An archaeological survey in 2005 included a survey of the terraces and upper slopes of the valley. During the survey, the participants of the expedition lined up in a chain of 5-8 people, separated by a distance of 30 - 50 m. Such an organization allowed for a high degree of detection of objects on the surface (only a few and very small structures could be missed). Topographic mapping was performed using GPS navigation. A detailed description of the locations of archaeological sites with finds for which there are preliminary dates is based on morphological analysis, data from published sources, as well as on comparison with other monuments in this region, published in a number of works [Goossens et al., 2006; Bourgeois, De Wulf, Ebel et al., 2007].

The entire Jazator Valley was surveyed at altitudes of 2 300 - 1 600 The total area of the territory covered by the search operations was 284 km2. Archaeological sites have been discovered on numerous terraces on both banks of the river. In the lower part of the valley, studies were conducted only on the right bank. The forested approaches to the confluence of the Jazator and Ak-Alakha rivers, as well as the Ar-Guta valley, were not surveyed during the 2005 expedition, although the expedition members knew that there are archaeological sites and rock art sites near the village and along the Argut River, in particular, the large petroglyphic monument Juramal (Cheremisin, 2000). The territory of the Jazator Valley adjacent to the village of the same name was excluded from the survey area for both practical (limited access to the border control zone) and scientific reasons. The fact is that due to the proximity to the village of Jazator and the active economic activity of a person, it is impossible to form a complete picture of the distribution of archaeological sites. It is likely that some of the archaeological sites in the area were damaged or even destroyed. Archaeological sites in the valley

During field research, 2,060 individual structures were found and documented,

page 108
related to 225 locations. No settlements were found. All monuments are objects of a ceremonial or funerary nature.

Eneolithic and Bronze Age (end of IV-II millennium BC). The oldest visually identifiable monuments of the Jazator Valley can be dated to the Eneolithic and / or Bronze Age (Fig. Belonging of monuments to these periods is controversial. On the Ukok Plateau, only 3 out of 405 monuments were supposedly attributed to the Eneolithic Afanasiev culture and 3 more monuments to the Bronze Age. The authors of the publication in the descriptions do not indicate differences between the monuments of these periods, so we will consider them as belonging to the same time. Half of the monuments are isolated mounds. One burial ground has two undisputed burial mounds, two more-four and six mounds each. These few mounds with a diameter of 8-14 m are characterized by circular fences made of blocks of sedimentary rock. During excavations in one mound, ceramics were found that can be attributed to the Afanasyev culture (Molodin et al., 2004, 135-136, fig. 219).

2. Density of different types of archaeological sites of different epochs and petroglyphs (indicated in yellow) in the Jazator Valley: a-Eneolithic-Bronze Age; b-Early Iron Age (Scythian culture); c - Ancient Turkic era; d-paleoethnographic period.

page 109
Most of the monuments of this period are concentrated in the lower part of the Jazator Valley, at altitudes of 1 735 - 1 625 m over sd. m. In this area there are nine monuments with one or two round low mounds with an average diameter of 6.2 m, with fences (Figure 3). We did not conduct excavations, but taking into account the description of the Eneolithic and Bronze Age monuments on the Ukok plateau, we can assume that these objects belong to the end of the IV-II millennium BC.

Some stone stelae, or vertically placed stones, are quite large. They are built mainly in the middle of a small square fence. The stelae are not very large, but they are much larger than similar objects of the Early Iron Age (Scythian time) or the Turkic Era (except, of course, Turkic statues). They cannot be clearly associated with Iron Age burial mounds or ancient Turkic memorial complexes represented in the valley. It is assumed that large stelae belong to the Bronze Age [Kuba-rev V. D., 2009; Jacobson-Tepfer, 2009, p. 28-29]. Four monuments with stelae of this type in the Jaza Tora Valley are dated to the Bronze Age.

Early Iron Age - the era of early nomads (800-200 AD). There are descriptions of several hundred monuments of this period. All of them belong to burial complexes and form a series of mounds located in a straight line with a diameter of 5-16 m and a height of 0.10 - 0.30 m. The north - south orientation of the rows of two to five mounds, the presence of a central pit in each mound, and some of the stones (balbals) vertically installed on the eastern side, as well as stone circles or platforms on the western side, confirm the attribution of these objects as monuments of early nomadic, or so-called Scythian, cultures (figure 4).

Funerary monuments are found throughout the Jazator Valley. They are located on terraces and mostly on the right bank of the river. However, in the central part of the valley at an altitude of approx. 2 thousand rubles. m above sea level. where the valley widens and the terraces become more spacious, and the river crossing does not cause any problems.-

a research project. 3. A mound with a rampart, presumably dating from the Eneolian - early Bronze Age.

4. The burial complex of the Early Iron Age (Scythian) is represented by a chain of mounds oriented along the north-south line.

page 110
in case of difficulties, there are also such monuments on the left bank (see Fig. 2, b).

Hunno-Sarmatian period (200 BC-400 AD). Traces of Late Iron Age cultures are much harder to find than those of the previous Period. It would not be superfluous to compare the Jaza Tora Valley with the Ukok Plateau, where only a few monuments of the Hunno-Sarmatian era are recorded. Ukok monuments are characterized by small oval mounds of relatively shallow river pebbles, but without stone circles at the base. The well-known Akkol-1 monument is a burial ground with 42 small oval mounds (Molodin et al., 2004, pp. 153-155, figs. 244-246); other complexes, possibly also Hunno-Sarmatian, consist of a small number of mounds.

In the low-mountain Altai valleys, for example, in the middle reaches of the Katun River, excavations in the 1990s revealed several relatively large Hunno-Sarmatian monuments. During Bike's research, it was found that due to the small size and low height, not all burial mounds can be seen on the modern surface [Kubarev V. D., Kireev, Cheremisin, 1990; Kubarev V. D., 2007]. This explains why only a few small oval mounds are known in the Jazator Valley (dimensions from 2.0 * 5.0 to 2.0 * 3.7 m and height 0.10 m), composed of small river pebbles of sedimentary rocks. These monuments can be considered as funerary structures of the Hunno-Sarmatian period, significantly different from the Pazyryk mounds.

Ancient Turkic era (400-900 AD). Monuments of the ancient Turkic period are easily identified: they are square and rectangular fences of various types with an average size of 3.9 m on the north-south axis and 3.6 m on the west - east axis (see Fig. 2, b; 5), usually accompanied by vertically placed ones on the eastern side stones, and some-anthropomorphic sculptures. In the Ayuta tract, an image of a human face is stamped on one of the balbals (Cheremisin, 1995a). At one of the fences on a 200-meter-long plot, 90 vertically installed stones were recorded. Sometimes there are individual fences, often they are adjacent to each other. Monuments of the Ayutinsky type are represented by two characteristic fences, delineated by a rectangular moat and rampart (Kubarev G. V., 2005) (Fig. 6). Fences are considered to be memorial monuments.

Mounds or burial grounds of the ancient Turkic period have not been found in the Jazator Valley, but, as noted in the study of V. D. Kubarev, they may be part of the burial structures of the Early Iron Age and located near the chain of mounds of the Scythian era. However, it is difficult to find such objects without conducting excavations. Like the monuments of the Early Iron Age, ancient Turkic fences are located throughout the valley, although in the high-altitude part of it they are somewhat smaller (see Fig. 2, c). The preliminary assignment of a few monuments in the high-altitude part of the valley to the ancient Turkic period remains a controversial issue.

5. Three Turkic fences with anthropomorphic sculptures installed on the eastern side.

page 111

6. A typical Ayutin monument with two Turkic fences and an anthropomorphic statue.

7. Burial of the ethnographic period with the remains of wooden structures and small stone mounds.

Paleoethnographic period (after 1500 AD).

Monuments from the Mongol period (900-1500 AD) in the Jazator Valley are unknown, possibly due to the lack of clear typological characteristics, but at least eight funerary monuments can be attributed to ethnographic time. Such burial complexes are burial grounds consisting of 3-23 stone or earthen mounds, under which there are wooden structures (Fig. 7).

In the Jazator Valley, burial complexes of ethnographic time are located only at altitudes below 2 thousand meters above sea level, mainly on the right bank. Only one monument was found on the large central terrace of the left bank. At altitudes of 2.0 - 1.5 thousand meters above sea level, such objects are quite common, the distance between them is 2-7 km (see Fig. 2, d).

Petroglyphic monuments

Six petroglyphic monuments have been discovered in the Jazator Valley, forming two groups that are approximately 15 km apart. The first group consists of Uzungur-1 and -2, the second - Rybinskoe-1, -2 and Kukkaragai-1, -2. Materials of the Uzungur-1 and -2 monuments are partially published (Cheremisin, 1995a; 1998).

All listed monuments are located on the right bank of the river, where there are many rock outcrops with polished planes. The vertical and, more rarely, horizontal planes of these rocks, composed mainly of shales and, in rare cases, metamorphic rocks, are covered with a dark patina and are suitable for creating petroglyphs. In this paper, we do not deal with the detailed topographical characteristics of petroglyphic monuments, stylistic analysis or interpretation of images, but we consider it important to provide some considerations regarding the dates of monuments and their location in the valley.

Uzungur-1 (49°40 ' 802 "N; 87°33' 049 " E) is the largest rock art monument in the Jazator Valley, located on a flat rocky surface facing the river, about 1.2 km upstream from the confluence of the Uzungur Stream. The plane is oriented to the south (Figure 8).

We registered 84 images: 83 zoomorphic and 1 anthropomorphic. Some drawings are fragmentary. On the plane there are images of horses, bulls, deer, mountain goats and animals of indeterminate appearance (Figure 9). The anthropomorphic figure in the "pose of worship" is a schematic ithyphallic image. It is not clear if it is part of any composition? Ver-

page 112
The tical line touching the outline of the bull's back may represent a spear; this interpretation suggests that we are looking at a scene of hunting a wild bull. All the drawings of this group, except for the image of a mountain goat engraved on top of the figures of other animals, are similar in style and technique.

The complex is characterized by petroglyphs made in the picket technique, in a single style. Animals such as bulls, horses, and deer (marals), regardless of their species, are shown with their heads and necks silhouetted and with parallel lines inside the body outline (Cheremisin, 1998a).

Uzungur-2 (49°40'403"N; 87°34'252" E) - engravings on the surface of a large boulder on a narrow terrace. The monument is located approximately 1,650 m upstream from Uzungur-1.

A large boulder. 3,0 * 2,5 * 2,0 m is covered with a dark brown, sometimes reddish-brown patina (Fig. 10). Approximately 45 images were detected. According to the style and composition of the plots, they are the same as on Uzungur-1: mainly bulls and deer are represented, possibly an elk, a mountain goat and an anthropomorphic character. A bear (Ursus Arctos L.) is shown, an image that is rare for the Altai petroglyphic bestiary (Cheremisin, 1996; Cheremisin, 2000). Five images of the bear were recorded. One of the scenes of the animals ' confrontation probably conveys the attack of a bear on a bull (Figure 11). There are about ten images of deer, males and females.

Four other monuments are located about 15 km upstream from Uzungur; they are concentrated in an area of approx. 2.5 km between the confluence of the Tangyt and Kukkaragai streams.

A cluster of petroglyphs Rybinskoe-1 was recorded in the area called Rybinskoe (coordinates 49°38 '379" N; 87°46 ' 318 " E). Six small rocks were found on the rock descending to the terrace boundary.-

8. Fig. General view of the Uzungur-1 monument. The engravings are located on the left side of the rock outcrop.

9. Images of a bull and an indeterminate animal of the Bronze Age on the Uzungur-1 monument.

Figure 10. 3D model of a boulder on the Uzungur-2 monument created using overlapping photos and the Agisoft software package

page 113

11. Two figures of bears, one of which attacks a bull (right), on the Uzungur-2 monument. Printmaking (Cheremisin, 2000).

groups of petroglyphs located on both horizontal and vertical planes (Fig. 12). The images are mostly fragmentary and partially covered with lichens. There are many traces of embossing and engraving, mostly illegible, but at least 20 images can be identified. According to the subjects of the images, this monument is close to Uzungur-1 and -2: bulls, mountain goats and a female deer are depicted. The most notable drawing is an engraved image of a deer, made in the style of deer stones, which can be dated to the initial stage of the Early Iron Age (Figure 13).

Many images of Rybinsky-2, located 750 m downstream from Rybinsky-1 (49°38 '387" N; 87°45 ' 699 " E), are covered with lichens, which makes interpretation difficult. Seven different planes were found, showing at least 36 animals: mountain goats, female deer, and possibly bulls. On plane 1, there is an interesting image of an animal with two horizontal and two vertical horns, and the vertical horns end in two disks. We dated it to the Bronze Age.

The Kukkaragai-1 monument is located at a bend in the river at the narrowest point of the terrace (49°38 '243" N; 87°47 ' 357 " E), where several stone tongues with strongly patinated rock planes descend to the river. Two small groups of petroglyphs were found on the horizontal and vertical planes facing south (Fig.

12. General view of the location of the petroglyphs Rybinskoe-1.

13. Image of a male deer with well - developed antlers from the Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age at the Rybinskoe-1 monument.

page 114

14. General view of the location of the Kukkaragai-1 petroglyphs.

Plane 1 is located to the south of the road, and plane 2 is located to the north. A total of seven images were detected. On plane 1 there are two images of a deer with horns, the style is the same as on the Uzungur-1 monument. Obviously, these two figures are engraved by the same hand. The horizontal plane shows a bull with its head turned to the left. There are several figures stamped on plane 2. Among them, images of mountain goats and dogs are identified; several figures are very illegible. The rock surface is damaged; two images are badly damaged.

Petroglyphs of the Kukkargai-2 locality (49°38 '248" N; 87°47 ' 574 " E) are located on the surface of a boulder that separated from the main rock mass in ancient times. The engraved plane is strictly vertical, facing the river. On the part of the plane that is not covered with lichens, you can see the contours of four images-a horse, a female deer, a mountain goat, and an indeterminate animal (the drawing is fragmentary and incomplete).

Stylistic and chronological analysis of petroglyphs. Petroglyphs of the Jazator Valley are stylistically uniform, with the exception of drawings on the site of Kukkaragai-2. Typical images of bulls, horses, deer and other animals, made by stamping in a silhouette manner with a detailed study of the head and neck. Rows of vertical lines are usually shown inside the torso. Rock carvings in the Jazator Valley are similar in style to petroglyphs of other Altaic monuments, such as the Kucherla-1 grotto (Molodin, 1996; Molodin and Efremova, 2010), Kalbak-Tash (Kubarev and Jacobson-Terfer, 1996), as well as images on the Ukok Plateau (Molodin et al., 2004) and in the valley Kalanegir (Bourgeois, Mikkelsen, Van Hoof et al., 1999; Bourgeois, Van Meenen, Van Hoof, 1999).

There are parallels with petroglyphs of Shalabolino and Oglakhty monuments in the middle reaches of the Yenisei (Minusinsk basin) [Cheremisin, 1998; Pyatkin and Martynov, 1985; Sher, 1994] and in Mongolia [Jacobson-Terfer, Kubarev, Tseveendorj, 2001]. According to V. D. Kubarev, who analyzed the images on the Aral-Tolgoi monument in Mongolia, petroglyphs in a similar style could belong to the Neolithic and early Bronze Age [2007]. V. I. Molodin dates stylistically identical images of deer in the Kucherla-1 grotto to the Afanasiev period - late Neolithic or Early Bronze Age [Molodin and Efremova, 2010].

The image of a male deer with well-developed antlers at the Rybinskoe-1 site can be attributed to the deer stone culture and is dated to the Late Bronze Age-the Early Iron Age. The figures of the four animals represented in Kukaragai-2, in our opinion, may belong to the Early Iron Age.

Discussion

It is obvious that in ancient times the valley of Jazator was inhabited by people: there are funerary, memorial monuments, as well as rock art monuments dating from the end of the IV-III millennium BC to the present. No pa detected-

page 115
mints of the late Middle Ages. The oldest rock carvings in the Jazator Valley can be confidently attributed to the Late Eneolithic and Bronze Age. Some of the images date from the Late Bronze or Early Iron Age. Petroglyphs of later periods are absent here.

Monuments built on the terraces of the river differ by chronological affiliation. Given their number, the area was most densely populated in the Early Iron Age and Early Middle Ages. The Hunno-Sarmatian period is poorly represented, although it is possible that the monuments of this time do not have pronounced features and are difficult to detect during search operations. Comparing our results with the topography of the Ukok plateau antiquities (Molodin et al., 2004), we found the following pattern: the Early Iron Age and the Turkic period are reflected in rich material, while other periods are either not represented at all, or their traces are few.

The geography of monuments from different eras does not coincide. Monuments of the Eneolithic and Bronze Ages may be concentrated in the lower part of the valley - this is where synchronous rock art monuments are located. Obviously, petroglyphs are also part of the cultural landscape: they are recorded only in those areas where there are summer pastures and funerary monuments. This article is not intended to initiate a discussion about the role of petroglyphs as territorial markers, ritual sites, road markings, etc. (Bradley, 2000; Sognnes, 1994; Nash and Chippindale, 2002). In it, we can only point out that the rock art monuments are located in the areas where people lived and died; they are clearly visible to anyone walking along the terraces.

Many archaeological sites can be dated to the Early Iron Age, but they do not coincide quantitatively with the rock art sites that are synchronous with them. Only very few images of the Bronze and Early Iron Ages are recorded in Rybinsk-1, -2, Kukkaragai-1 in the middle part of the valley. Probably, the correlation of archaeological sites with Eneolithic and Bronze Age rock art monuments for the later periods cannot be established. Scythian funerary monuments are scattered throughout the valley, so there is no doubt that the Scythian population occupied the entire territory and even developed pastures located in areas above 2 thousand meters above sea level: such objects are found quite regularly throughout the valley, every 1-2 km.

In the Turkic period, the valley was probably also quite densely populated, although to a lesser extent than in the early Iron Age. Turkic monuments are almost completely absent on the terraces in the upper reaches of the Jazator. However, the concentration of memorial monuments and statues in the central part of the valley indicates intensive development of the valley space.

There are fewer monuments of the paleoethnographic period than those of the previous period, and they are located in the lower and middle parts of the valley.

Almost all archaeological and petroglyphic monuments are located on the right bank of the Jazator. This can be explained by the fact that the right bank and its terraces, although small, are convenient for the construction of funerary structures. There are no such terraces on the left bank. The difference between the banks of the river is clearly visible today: the left bank is characterized by taiga vegetation, while the right bank is characterized by steppe vegetation. A detailed palynological study of the territories of the surrounding areas (the Kurai Steppe and the Tarkhaty Valley) showed that the climate changed during the Holocene (Schlutz and Lehmkuhl, 2007): during the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, it was warm and humid, in the Early Iron Age - quite cold, in the Hunno-Sarmatian period - wet and cold, in the ancient Turkic era - warm. The climatic conditions on the southern and northern slopes were significantly different. However, relatively minor changes in the early Holocene epoch did not significantly affect the formation of zonal vegetation.

Thus, we can assume that the landscape of the valley basically did not change. The right bank with its meadows and steppes was convenient for economic activity, primarily cattle breeding. Next to the living inhabitants of the valley, the dead found their place. The left bank, which is more wooded, was a hunting ground in the taiga and may have been perceived as the territory of spirits. Obviously, the right bank of the river was better lit than the left.

In the central part of the valley there is a plot where large terraces are located on both sides of the river. Even today, the shallow river can be crossed by horse in this place. Here are concentrated monuments of the period of nomadic cultures, mainly ancient Turkic. The creators of memorial structures used the advantages of extensive river terraces. It was in this place that we discovered the most impressive Turkic memorial monuments - Ayutin-type fences; these are double fences outlined by a rampart and a moat, near which two large Turkic statues are installed. Two such monuments have been recorded in the Ayuta area. Next to one fence in this area, there is a row of 90 vertically placed balbal stones, directed to the east. All these monuments can be dedicated to representatives of the Turkic nobility.

page 116

15. Structure of the Jazator Valley. 1-steppe; 2-taiga.

The ancient inhabitants of the valley built memorial structures, probably in places where there were conditions for this. We believe that the opportunity to cross the river was an important factor in choosing a place to create a memorial structure. As we mentioned, the section in the central part of the valley is the only place where you can cross the Jazator: here the road that goes from the Chui steppe through the Elangasha Valley crosses the river and then stretches further south to the Ukok plateau, which today, as in the Early Iron Age, is used by the local population in winter for grazing of livestock.

Thus, the choice of location for memorial structures and rock carvings was not accidental; it was determined by landscape characteristics - the presence of terraces, places where you can cross the river, features of vegetation and wildlife, as well as land use opportunities (Figure 15).

A special note concerns petroglyphs: if Uzungur-2 can refer to the Eneolithic Afanasiev culture or the early Bronze Age, then petroglyphs are evidence of the appearance of the first carriers of the metal culture in the taiga region of the Altai Mountains. The image of a bear in rock art, which is not so typical of the Altai, probably reflects the contacts of the creators of petroglyphs with Neolithic hunters of the taiga, for whom this image was quite natural.

Conclusion

As a result of continuous mapping of archaeological sites in one of the Gorny Altai valleys, we have recorded all funerary and/or cult structures from the Eneolithic/early Bronze Age to the ethnographic present, as well as all rock art sites discovered during exploration. Based on the obtained data, we tried to trace the relationship between the spatial parameters of cultural objects and the geographical features of the area. This method allows a deeper study of the internal structure of the archaeological landscape and reconstruct the principles of use of the surrounding natural and cultural space by the ancient population of the Jazator Valley.

It is important to note that although the information for analysis was obtained as a result of a very thorough archaeological study, one cannot be absolutely sure that it takes into account absolutely all existing monuments. However, we are confident that we have collected enough information to allow us to analyze the overall archaeological situation. The same can be said about the study of rock art monuments, which were actively studied by D. V. Cheremisin, as well as discovered during joint expeditions of the universities of Ghent and Gorno-Altaisk. In connection with the question of the chronological connection of archaeological sites, it should be noted that these conclusions are based on typological characteristics and the results of comparison with the published materials of numerous excavations conducted by Russian archaeologists. Finally, the date of rock art monuments is based on their stylistic features.

Our research has shown the need for a comprehensive approach to the study of archaeological sites and rock art monuments by analyzing the archaeological landscape in order to reconstruct the use of environmental features by the ancient population of a particular locus. The diachronic approach allows us to comprehensively consider the development of the landscape by representatives of different epochs. This approach may be of particular interest in mountainous areas where the terrain and historical landscape have changed dramatically.

Gratitude

We would like to express our deep gratitude to the Scientific Foundation of Flanders (FWO) for its sponsorship of this project, as well as for providing a doctoral grant-

page 117
ta in 2011 Additional funds were received from the Agency for Innovation in Science and Technology (IWT) (2010-2013), as well as the UNESCO Flemish Office (2005-2006). The archaeological study of Altai was carried out in cooperation with Prof. Rudy Goossens and Prof. Alan de Wulf (Faculty of Geography, University of Ghent). We are also grateful to our volunteer assistants who participated in the fieldwork - Quentin Bourgeois, Kaat De Lange, Thijs De Bus, Thijs De Schacht, Stephanie Lowte, Elisa Luneaua and Matthijs Vanommeslaeche. We are grateful to Gorno-Altaisk State University for its long-term cooperation. When transporting the equipment, we used the support of Brussels Airlines.

The materials of D. V. Cheremisin's research included in this article were funded by the Russian State Scientific Foundation, project No. 13-21-08002m.

List of literature

Kubarev V. D. Aral-Tolgoi: a new monument of rock art in Mongolia / / Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2007. - N 1. - p. 111-126.

Kubarev V. D. Monuments of Karakol culture of Altai. Novosibirsk, IAET SB RAS Publ., 2009, 264 p. (in Russian)

Kubarev V. D., Kireev S. M., Cheremisin D. V. Kurgany urochishcha Bike [Mounds of the Bike tract]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1990, pp. 43-94.

Kubarev V. D., Shulga P. I. Pazyryk culture (Chui and Ursula mounds). Barnaul: Alt State University Publ., 2007, 282 p. (in Russian)

Kubarev G. V. Culture of ancient Turks of the Altai (materials funerary monuments). Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2005. - 397 p.

Molodin V. I. Naskalnye izobrazheniyaa fanasyevskaya kul'tury (k postanovke problemy) [Rock images of the Fanasyevskaya culture (to the problem statement)]. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 1996, pp. 178-181.

Molodin V. I., Efremova N. S. Kuylyu Grotto-a cult complex on the Kucherle River (Gorny Altai). Novosibirsk, IAET SB RAS Publ., 2010, 264 p. (in Russian)

Molodin V. I., Polosmak I. V., Novikov A.V., Bogdanov E. S., Slyusarenko I. Yu., Cheremisin D. V. Archaeological sites of the Ukok plateau (Gorny Altai). Novosibirsk: IAET SB RAS, 2004, 256 p. (Materials on the Archeology of Siberia; issue 3).

Burial complexes with permafrost in the Altai Mountains: strategy and prospects: proceedings of the International Conference March 28-31, 2006, Gorno-Altaisk, Altai Republic. - Gorno-Altaisk, 2007. - 336 p.

Polos'mak P. V., Molodin V. I. Pamyatniki pazyrykskoy kul'tury na ploskogorye Ukok [Monuments of the Pazyryk culture on the Ukok plateau]. - 2000. - N 4. - p. 66-87.

Pyatkin B. A. Martynov A. I. Shalabolinsky petroglyphs. Krasnoyarsk: Publishing House of the Krasnoyarsk State University, 1985. -188 p.

Redenko S. I. Kul'tura naseleniya Gornogo Altay v skifskoe vremya [Culture of the population of the Altai Mountains in the Scythian period].

Redenko S. P. Kul'tura naseleniya Tsentralnogo Altay v skifskoe vremeni [Culture of the population of the Central Altai in the Scythian period].

Cheremisin D. V. Issledovanie arkheologicheskikh pamyatnikov v bassein rek Argut i Jazator [Research of archaeological sites in the Argut and Jazator river basins]. Obozrenie rezul'tatov polevykh i laboratornykh issledovaniy arkheologov, etnografov i antropologov Sibiri i Dalnego Vostoka v 1993 [Review of the results of field and laboratory studies of archaeologists, ethnographers and anthropologists of Siberia and the Far East in 1993].

Cheremisin D. V. Rock images of Juramala (Gorny Altai) / / Ancient Art of Asia. Petroglyphs. Kemerovo: Kem. gosudarstvenny Univ. Publ., 1995b, pp. 75-81.

Cheremisin D. V. Petroglyphs of Uzungur (preliminary message) / / Review of the results of field and laboratory research of archaeologists, ethnographers and anthropologists of Siberia and the Far East in 1994-1996 - Novosibirsk: Publishing House of the Institute of Electrotechnical Engineering of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1998, pp. 52-56.

Cheremisin D. V. Image of bears in Uzungur petroglyphs // Bear in ancient and modern cultures of Siberia. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2000, pp. 19-22.

Bourgeois I., Mikkelsen J.H., Van Hoof L., Van Huele W., Bourgeois J., Langohr R., Cammaert L., Decleir H. An Archaeological Survey of the Kalanegir Valley (Kosh-Agash Region, Altai Republic): Petroglyphs and Scytho-Siberian Kurgans in a Permafrost Area. A Multidisciplinary Approach // From Scythia to Siberia. - 1999. - T. 6, N 1/2. -P. 77 - 101.

Bourgeois I., Van Meenen D., Van Hoof L., Cheremisin D.V. Decouverte des petroglyphes dans les vallees de Sebistei et de Kalanegir (Gorno-Altai) // INORA. - 1999. -N 22. - P. 6 - 13.

Bourgeois, J., De Wulf A., Ebel A.V., Gheyle W., Goos-sens R., Van Hoof L. Mapping and Surveying the Archaeological Monuments of the Altai Mountains (Altai Republic) / eds. J.T. Clark, E.M. Hagemeister // Digital Discovery. Exploring New Frontiers in Human Heritage. CAA 2006 Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. Proceedings of the 34th Conference, Fargo, United States, April 2006. - Budapest, 2007. - P. 67 - 79.

Bourgeois J., De Wulf A., Goossens R., Gheyle W. Saving the Frozen Scythian Tombs of the Altai Mountains (Central Asia) // World Archaeology. - 2007. - N 39. - P. 458 - 474.

Bradley R. An Archaeology of Natural Places. - Г.: Routledge, 2000. -177 p.

Cheremisin D.V. Fes representations rupestres de l'Altai du Sud // Dossiers d'Archeologie. - 1996. - N 212. - P. 66 - 73.

Cheremisin D.V. Rock Art Sites in Uzoungour (Gornyi Altay) // International Newsletter On Rock Art. - 1998a. -N 20. - P. 5 - 11.

Cheremisin D.V. Rock art traditions in the Southern Altai. The Djuramal Petroglyphs, River Argut Basin // International Newsletter on Rock Art. - 1998b. - Vol. 21. - P. 23 - 27.

Gheyle W. Highlands and Steppes. An Analysis of the Changing Archaeological Fandscape of the Altay Mountains from the Eneolithic to the Ethnographic Period. - Gent: Ghent University, 2009. - 380 p.

Goossens R., De Wulf A., Bourgeois J., Gheyle W., Willems T. Satellite Imagery and Archaeology, the Example of CORONA in the Altai Mountains // J. of Archaeol. Science. - 2006. - N 33. - P. 745 - 755.

Jacobson-Tepfer E. Archaeology and the Fandscape in Mongolia's High Altai: Inventory and Documentation // Current Archaeological Research in Mongolia: Papers from the

page 118
First International Conference on "Archaeological Research in Mongolia" Held in Ulaanbaatar, August 19th-23rd, 2007 / eds. J. Bemman, H. Parzinger, E. Pohl, D. Tseveendorj. - Bonn, 2009. - P. 135 - 148.

Jacobson-Tepfer E., Kubarev V.D., Tseveendorj D. Mongolie du Nord-Ouest: Tsagaan Salaa/Baga Oigor. Repertoire des petroglyphes d'Asie Centrale. - P.: De Boccard, 2001. -481,256 р.

Jacobson-Tepfer E., Meacham J. Archaeology and Landscape in the Mongolian Altai: An Atlas. - Redlands, California: ESRI Press, 2010. - 209 p.

Kubarev V.D., Jacobson-Tepfer E. Siberie du Sud 3: Kalbak-Tash I (Republique de l'Altai). Repertoire des petro-glyphes d'Asie centrale. - P.: De Boccard, 1996. - XXIII, 45 p.

Nash G., Chippindale Chr. European Landscapes of RockArt. - L.: Routledge, 2002. - XVI, 218 p.

Parzinger H. Die Fruhen Volker Eurasiens vom Neolithikum bis zum Mittelalter. - Munchen: Verlag C.H. Beck, 2006. - 1045 p.

Plets G., Gheyle W., Plets R., Dvornikov E.P., Bourgeois J. A Line through the Sacred Lands of the Altai Mountains: Perspectives on the Altai Pipeline Project // Mountain Research and Development. - 2011. - T. 31, N 4. -P. 372 - 379.

Plets G, Gheyle W., Verhoeven G., Reu J., de, Bourgeois J., Verhegge J., Stichelbaut B. Three-Dimensional Recording of the Archaeological Remains in the Altai Mountains // Antiquity. - 2012. - T. 86, N 333. - P. 884 - 897.

Plets G., Verhoeven G., Cheremisin D.V., Plets R., Bourgeois J., Stichelbaut В., Gheyle W., Reu J., de. The Deteriorating Preservation of the Altai Rock Art: Assessing Three-Dimensional Image-Based Modelling in Rock Art Research and Management // Rock Art Research. - 2012. -T. 29, N 2. - P. 139 - 156.

Polosmak N.V. The Ak-Alakha 'Frozen Grave' Barrow // Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia. - 1994. - T. 1, N 3. - P. 346 - 354.

Rudenko S.I. Frozen Tombs of Siberia. The Pazyryk Burials of Iron-Age Horsemen. - L.: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, 1970. - 340 p.

Schlгtz F., Lehmkuhl F. Climatic Change in the Russian Altai, Southern Siberia, Based on Palynological and Geomorphological Results, with Implications for Climatic Teleconnections and Human History Since the Middle Holo-cene // Vegetation History and Archaeobotany. - 2007. - T. 16, N 2. - P. 101 - 118.

Sher J.A. Siberie du Sud 1: Oglakhty I-III (Russie, Khakassie). - P.: De Boccard, 1994. - XXXVII, 51 p.

Sognnes K. Ritual Landscapes: Towards a Reinterpretation of Stone Age Rock Art at Trondelag, Norway // Norweg. Archaeol. Rev. - 1994. - T 27, N 1. - P. 29 - 50.

The article was submitted to the editorial Board on 08.01.14, in the final version-on 11.06.14.

page 119

Permanent link to this publication: