Author: Andr

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                      ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Alona Karmaza¹
Morphology of Early Hominid Hand in Context of Tool making
¹ Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-162-171
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-162-171

ABSTRACT

This article will focus on morphology of hand early hominids. We already have not many hands fossils, but this evidences can help us to interpret early hominid`s potential of tools making. We will talk about Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus sediba, Paranthropus robustus and Homo habilis.

Early hominid research in Africa began in earnest in the second part of the 20th century, decades after the discovery of the Taung Child by Raymond Dart in 1924. After Dart’s momentous discovery finally gained widespread acceptance, scientists at last came to understand that human ancestry began in Africa rather than the Far East as was previously believed. Unfortunately there are very few carpal bones dating to this formative period of paleoanthropological research. Real interest in the development and implications of hominid hand morphology emerged only after the discovery of stone stools at Lomekwi 3 by Sonia Harmand in the 2010s. The discovery of 3 million year old tools fundamentally altered our understanding of the timeline of human cultural evolution. In addition to raising a number of pressing questions about the origins and definition of the genus Homo, Lomekwi 3 also radically reworked our understanding of the kinds of hand morphologies required for the production of stone tools. This brings us to the central question of this paper, namely, «which morphological features in early hominid hands are potentially indicative of tool making?».

When we are talking about Lomekwi its very important to understand that the stone tools found at the site have not yet been associated with any paleoanthropological remains. Nonetheless, the 3.3 million year old date of the Lomekwi tools calls into question whether or not tool making can be said to be a trait unique to the genus Homo. We will see that by interpreting the carpal bones of the various early hominids present 3.3. million years ago we are forced not only to abandon outmoded assumptions about uniquely Homo traits, but to also reconsider the cognitive and mechanical capabilities of previously underestimated early hominid groups. Our goal is to determine which groups of early hominids may have been capable of producing the Oldowan and Lomekwi toolkits on the basis of functional morphology alone.

Because we don’t find hominid remains holding tools, we need to make educated guesses about who made them. We can look at hand morphology, and its development, to attribute early tools to the particular hominids who may have made them.

Key words: archaeology, paleoanthropology, evolution, Australopithecus, Paranthropus, Early hominids.

Language: English

PDF

Cite as:

Karmaza, A.О. 2023. Morphology of early hominid hand in context of tool making. VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

Alba, D.M., Moyà-Solà, S., Köhler, M. 2003. Morphological affinities of the Australopithecus Afarensis hand on the basis of manual proportions and relative thumb length. J . Hum. Evol., 225 - 254. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2484(02)00207-5.

Alemseged, Z. et al. 2006. Supplementary Information for ‘A juvenile early hominin skeleton from Dikika, Ethiopia. Nature, Volume 51, Issue 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature05047.

Berger, L.R. et al. 2010. Australopithecus Sediba: A New Species of Homo-Like Australopith from South Africa. Science, Vol 328, Issue 5975, 195-204. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1184944.

Clarke, R.J. 1999. Discovery of complete arm and hand of the 3.3 million-year-old Australopithecus skeleton from Sterkfontein, S. Afr. J. Sci., 477-480.

Harmand, S., Lewis, J., Feibel, C. et al. 2015. 3.3-million-year-old stone tools from Lomekwi 3, West Turkana, Kenya. Nature, 521, 310–315. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14464.

Kibii, J.M., Clarke, R.J., Tocheri, M.W. 2011. A hominin scaphoid from Sterkfontein, Member 4: Morphological description and first comparative phenetic 3D analyses. Journal of Human Evolution, 61(4), 510–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.06.001.

Kivell T.L., Kibii J.M., Churchill, S.E., Schmid, P., Berger, L.R. 2011. Australopithecus Sediba hand demonstrates mosaic evolution of locomotor and manipulative abilities, Science, Vol. 333, Issue 6048, 1411-1417. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1202625.

Marzke, M.W., Shackley, M.S. 1986. Hominid hand use in the pliocene and pleistocene: Evidence from experimental archaeology and comparative morphology, J. Hum. Evol.

Napier, J. 1962. Fossil hand bones from Olduvai Gorge, Nature, 196, 409-411. https://doi.org/10.1038/196409a0

Pickering, R. et al. 2011. Australopithecus Sediba at 1.977 Ma and implications for the origins of the genus Homo, Science, Vol. 333, Issue 6048, 1421-1423. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1203697.

Ricklan, D.E. 1987. Functional anatomy of the hand of Australopithecus Africanus, J. Hum. Evol., Vol. 16, Issues 7–8, 643-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2484(87)90018-2.

Susman, R.L., Creel, N. 1979. Functional and morphological affinities of the subadult hand (O.H. 7) from Olduvai Gorge, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., Vol. 51, Issue 3, 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330510303.

Trinkaus, E., Long, J.C. 1990. Species attribution of the Swartkrans member 1 first metacarpals: SK 84 and SKX 5020, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 607-629

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                     ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Kyrylo Tretiak¹
Stylistic and Aesthetic Transformation of the Historical Buildings of Kyiv Caused by the Destruction during the Second World War
¹Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5732-4466

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-140-160
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-140-160

ABSTRACT

The article is about the transformation into historical buildings in Kyiv caused by destruction during the WWII. The author analyses the losses of ruined architectural buildings and objects in 1941-1943, the damages to preserved buildings which have been reconstructed after the war. The architecture of pre-war buildings of Khreshchatyk, Prorizna, Luteranska, Instytutska and other central streets are compared in the article to the post-war architecture of the same streets. The style, the layouts of the streets, the architectural details, the quality of materials and constructions of separate objects are analyzed as well.

The destruction of Kyiv during the World War II with the subsequent reconstruction of the city brought significant changes both in the appearance of entire streets and districts and in the architecture of specific objects of the historical buildings of the central part of the city. The streets that suffered from great destruction were significantly re-planned with a change in the architectural concept. Homestead development according to individual projects was replaced by the complex ensemble development in a single stylistic key. Architectural pathos of post-war buildings as well as entire ensembles have low quality of construction materials and works, which led to the gradual destruction. Regardless of the cultural and historical value of such ensembles as the post-war buildings of Khreschatyk, one can state a certain stylistic monotony, which is significantly inferior to the pre-war architectural diversity of Kyiv.

Most of damaged Kyiv buildings were renovated with loss of architectural and decorative details. Other buildings were reconstructed. Such reconstructions mostly caused the loss of important architectural accents as towers, bay windows, gables and attics. Only a small number of houses were renovated without loss of decoration. Even fewer buildings were restored with reconstruction that improved their architectural expressiveness.

The Second World War caused catastrophic consequences for Kyiv: tens of thousands of Kyivans died or lost their relatives, hundreds of thousands were left homeless, hundreds of buildings and structures were destroyed. But this is not the end of the tragedy of the war for Kyiv. As a result of the destruction of the city, a large-scale reconstruction of its central part was carried out. The complex building in the spirit of a single ensemble, the architecture of which bore clear features of the ideological propaganda of the communist regime was created. We can state the partial loss of architectural authenticity and aesthetics of the city historical buildings. Neither the economic, nor the political, nor the legal systems of the communist regime were able to create higher quality and highly artistic buildings in the conditions of total totalitarianism. In the absence of private ownership of real estate, all buildings of post-war Kyiv were repaired and reconstructed without taking into account their values and aesthetics. As a result, a significant proportion of the rebuilt objects lost a significant part of their decor and were distorted during the construction works.

Key words: WWII, Kyiv, architecture, rebuilding, destruction, reconstruction, transformation, aesthetic.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:

Tretiak, K.O. 2023. Stylistychno-estetychna transformatsiia istorychnoi zabudovy Kyieva vnaslidok ruinuvan pid chas Druhoi svitovoi viiny (Stylistic and aesthetic transformation of the historical buildings of Kyiv caused by the destruction during the Second World War). VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

Damilovskyi, M. 1936. Arhitektura i budivelni materialy/ Socialistychnyi Kyiv, 1936, №6

Giliarov, S. 1936. Arhitektura Kyyeva peredvoyennoyi doby/ Socialistychnyi Kyiv, 1936, №4

Yerofalov-Pilipchak, B. 2010. Arhitektura sovetskogo Kiyeva. Kyiv.

Matushevych, A. 1950. Khreshchatyk. Kyiv.

Kondel-Perminova, N. 2021. Khreshchatyk – komunikator mizh chasamy. Kyiv.

Severov, M. 1952. Problema prostorovoyi kompozytsiyi Khreshchatyka/ Visnyk Akademiyi arhitektury URSR, 1952, №1

Tsentralnyi Derzhavnyi Arhiv-Muzey Literatury i Mystectva Ukrayiny. F. 11, Op. 1, Spr. 356, Ark. 2.

Tsentralnyi Derzhavnyi Arhiv-Muzey Literatury i Mystectva Ukrayiny. F. 11, Op. 1, Spr. 360, Ark. 7-9.

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                     ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Oleksandra Ivanova¹
Balkan and Ukrainian Experience of Cultural Heritage Protection and Preservation during Military Operations
¹ Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7848-3419

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-110-121
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-110-121

ABSTRACT

This essay is devoted to comparing the experiences of countries that have experienced wars on their territories and whose cultural heritage has undergone large-scale destruction. We tried to analyze what steps have been taken for conservation, protection and restoration of heritage in the Balkans and how we can use this experience in Ukraine.

Since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the impact on the archaeological heritage of Ukraine has been devastating countless precious objects and sites have been damaged or destroyed and museums looted.

This is one of the innumerable aspects of the Russian war, which has direct consequences for the heritage of all mankind, and such consequences have already occurred in the world in the past. During the conflict in the Balkans, during the war in Afghanistan, during the war in Iraq and in Syria.

The task of this work is to take a look on the international legislation of cultural heritage protection, to draw attention to the experience of the Balkan countries in the protection and monitoring of cultural heritage during military operations, compare the foreign experience with the Ukrainian one, understand which methods we can use, and which, on the contrary, are different.

Key words: Balkans, Ukraine, cultural heritage, protection of monuments, war.

Language: English

PDF

Cite as:

Ivanova, O.A. 2023. Balkan and Ukrainian experience of protection and preservation cultural heritage during military operations. VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

International Donors Conference for the Protection and Preservation of Cultural Heritage in Kosovo. Сonsolidated summary. Paris, 2005.

Jan Hladík. The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the notion of military necessity.1999. International Review of the Red Cross, No. 835.

Herscher, A., Riedlmayer, A. (2000), “Monument and Crime: The Destruction of Historic Architecture in Kosovo”, Grey Room 1.

Helen Walasek, “Bosnia and the Destruction of Cultural Heritage”, 2018.

Legnér, M. (2018) “Post-confict reconstruction and the heritage process” Journal of Architectural Conservation 24:2, 78–90.

MCIP “1,373 objects of cultural infrastructure have already been damaged because of russian aggression in Ukraine”, 04.04.2023, accessed April 10th, 2023: https://www.mkip.gov.ua/news/8917.html.

“Monitoring of archaeological sites during the war” Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, accessed December 20th, 2022 https://iananu.org.ua/novini/ekspeditsiji/1219-monitoring-arkheologichnikh-ob-ek-tiv-pid-chas-vijni.

Рrotection and Preservation of Cultural Heritage in Kosovo. Consolidated Summary. — http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139567eb.pdf8.

Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Resource https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_001-99#Text.

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Telizhenko, S.A., Ivakin, V.H. 2023. Archaeological Monitoring in War-Torn Ukraine, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2023.2209835.

Poshkodzhennya kurhannoho mohylʹnyka Boldyni Hory v Chernihovi vnaslidok viyny / Tsentr paleolitychnykh doslidzhenʹ im. Khv. Vovka. Rezhym dostupu: http://vovkcenter.org.ua/uk/2022/12/30/%d0%b1%d0%be%d0%b-b%d0%b4%d0%b8%d0%bd%d1%96-%d0%b3%d0%be%d1%80%d0%b8.

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Kornienko, M.V., Ivakin, V.H. (eds.). 2022. Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OF UKRAINE’ (November 23, 2022, Kyiv, Ukraine: Abstracts. Kyiv: Center for conservation of archaeological objects. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.742447 . [In Ukrainian].

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                      ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Oleksandr Naumenko¹, Tetiana Radiievska²
Return from nothingness: the curious history of the collection of stone artefacts of the Iskorost site from the excavations of V. Khvoika
¹, ² the National Museum of the History of Ukraine
¹ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3931-603X
²ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8490-7950

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-122-139
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-122-139

ABSTRACT

In the modern realities of the aggressive war started by the russian federation against Ukraine, the problem of preserving museum collections is more relevant than ever. Our essay highlights the history of the collection of stone artefacts from the Iskorost site, which was discovered by V. Khvoika more than 110 years ago and which managed to “survive” a number of extreme events, retaining its scientific and exhibition potential.

The Iskorost site (now Korosten, Zhytomyr Oblast) was discovered in 1911 during V. Khvoika’s research of the mounds near the city of Ovruch and in the Iskorost village. V. Khvoika recorded traces of three hearths surrounded by flint artefacts on the site. He selected approximately 500 stone objects and distributed them between the Imperial russian Archaeological Society (today, these artefacts in the amount of 253 items are stored in the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of the russian Academy of Sciences) and the Kyiv Art, Industry and Science Museum (now the National Museum of the History of Ukraine). The total number of artefacts in the Ukrainian part of the collection is 265: 246 come from the excavations of V. Khvoika in 1911, the other 19 possibly from the reconnaissance works of I. Levytskyi, F. Kozubovskyi, and K. Korshak in 1920–1940s.

Until 1936, the materials left in Ukraine were stored in the Archaeological Museum of the All-Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, where they were transported from the All-Ukrainian Historical Museum (the name of the Kyiv Art, Industry and Science Museums since 1924). Then this collection became part of the Central Historical Museum. At that time, K. Korshak and T. Teslia worked with this (Ukrainian) part of the collection. 79 artefacts from Iskorost were presented in a new exposition of the “Pre-class Society” department of the Central History Museum (1938–1941).During World War II, the Iskorost collection was moved from the Kyiv-Caves (“Kyiv-Pechersk”) Lavra (where the Central Historical Museum was located) to the building of the former Lenin Museum (now the Kyiv City Teacher’s House). The archaeological collection became the basis for creating an exposition of the Museum of Prehistory and Protohistory. In the autumn of 1943, the materials from the Iskorost were taken to Kraków, and from there were transported to Höchstädt. In 1947, the cultural values moved from Höchstädt to Munich were delivered to the Soviet occupation zone of Berlin and from there to Kyiv. At the beginning of 1948, the experts of the special commission began to inspect collections returned from Germany. This process spanned decades. Because of the difficulties during the identification of museum objects, artefacts of the Iskorost were attributed to collective collections: 29 items to “a3 Volyn”, the majority to “a252 Zhytomyr Polissia”. For some time, it was believed that the only finds from the excavation of V. Khvoika at the site, which have “survived” to this day, are contained in the collection of “a3 Volyn”. Another part of the artefacts from the Iskorost site was identified during the last inventory of the collections.

Key words: Iskorost, Ukrainian Polissia, Vikentii Khvoika, museum collection, history of research..

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:

Naumenko, O.O., Radievska, T.M. 2023. Povernutysia z nebuttia: zahadkova istoriia kolektsii kamianykh artefaktiv stoianky Iskorost iz rozkopok V. Khvoiky (Return from nothingness: the curious history of the collection of stone artefacts of the Iskorost site from the excavations of V. Khvoika). VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

• r.a. Rukopisnyi katalog Arkheologicheskogo otdela Kievskogo gorodskogo muzeia drevnostei i iskusstv. Naukovyi arkhiv NMIU, t. І, kn. II, № 15767–16001.
• r.b. Rukopisnyi katalog Arkheologicheskogo otdela Kievskogo gorodskogo muzeia drevnostei i iskusstv. Naukovyi arkhiv NMIU, t. ІІ, kn. IV, № 21.901–21911.

Belenko, M. M., Radiievska, T. M. 2010. Paleolitychni doslidzhennia V. V. Khvoiky. V: Kovtaniuk, N. H. (hol. red.). Vikentii V’iacheslavovych Khvoika ta yoho vnesok u doslidzhennia davnoi istorii Ukrainy. Tematychnyi zbirnyk naukovykh prats (do 160-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia). Kyiv: Taki spravy, s. 30–43.

Boriskovskii, P. 1953. Paleolit Ukrainy. Materialy i issledovaniia po arkheologii SSSR, 40, s. 1–463.

Boryskovskyi, P. 1947. Ohliad istorii vyvchennia paleolitu Ukrainy. Arkheolohiia, I, s. 85–100.

V spravi arkheolohichnykh doslidiv Korostenskoho horodyshcha. 1930. Naukovyi arkhiv IA NANU, f. 59, op. 1, spr. 360, ark. 53.

Vishnevskii, B. N. 1924. Doistoricheskii chelovek v Rossii (kamennyi vek). V: Osborn, G. F. Chelovek drevnego kamennogo veka. Sreda, zhizn, iskusstvo. Leningrad: «Put k znaniiu», s. 439–506.

Danylevych, V. 1925. Arkheolohichna mynuvshyna Kyivshchyny. Kyiv, 154 s.

Efimenko, P. P. 1938. Pervobytnoe obshchestvo. Ocherki po istorii paleoliticheskogo vremeni. 2-e izd., dop. i pererab. Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoe sotsialno-ekonomicheskoe izdatelstvo, 636 s.

Zapysky, rizne lystuvannia, etnohrafichni vidomosti. (b. r.). Naukovyi arkhiv IA NANU, f. 10, spr. 18/4, ark. 5.

Zaiava Trokhyma Tesli z prokhanniam dozvolyty oznaiomytysia z materialamy Kyrylivskoi paleolitychnoi statsii ta materialamy z statsii v s. Iskorosti. 1932. Naukovyi arkhiv IA NANU, f. 59, spr. 480, ark. 53.

Kovtaniuk, N., Shovkoplias, H. 1999. Skarbnytsia istorychnoi pam’iati Ukrainy Kyivska starovyna, 4, s. 63–80.

Kozlovska, V. 1936. Kratkie svedeniia ob osnovnykh kompleksakh eksponatov byvshego Arkheologicheskogo muzeia VUAN, kabineta antropologii VUAN, voshedshikh odnovremenno s dokumentami v sostav Tsentralnogo istoricheskogo muzeia k 1936 godu. Naukovyi arkhiv NMIU, f. R–1260, op.1-d, od. zb. 28-a, s. 1–53.

Kolesnikova, V. A. 2008. Do istorii doslidzhen kurhaniv u Korosteni ta Ovruchi v 1911 rotsi. V: Motsia, O. P. (hol. red.). Starodavnii Iskorosten i slovianski hrady. Zbirka naukovykh prats. Korosten, s. 166–168.

Korshak, K. 1930a. Paleolitychna statsiia v m. Iskorosti. V: Kozlovska, V. (red.). Khronika arkheolohii ta mystetstv. Chastyna 2. Kyiv: Misklit, s. 7–21.

Korshak, K. 1930b. Paleolitychna statsiia v mistechku Iskorosti. Naukovyi arkhiv IA NANU, f. 13, spr. 1.

Levytskyi, I. 1950. Pro vik stoianky vidkrytoi V. Khvoikoiu v Iskorosti. Arkheolohiia, IV, s. 156–162.

Naumenko, O. O., Radiievska, T. M. 2022. The Iskorost Site and its Place in the Stone Age of Ukraine: Historiographical, Typological and Technological Aspects. Arheologia, 3, p. 88–112. https://doi.org/10.15407/arheologia2022.03.088 (in Ukrainian).

Otkrytyi list na 1911 god. 1911. Naukovyi arkhiv IA NANU, f. 2, op. 3, № 660.

Otroshchenko, V., Korpusova, V. 2003. Fylfot in sign systems of Copper-Bronze period in Ukraine. Magisterium. Archaeological studies, 11, p. 13–18 (in Ukrainian).

Otchet Imperatorskoi Arkheologicheskoi Komissii za 1911 god. 1914. Petrograd: Tipografiia Glavnogo Upravleniia Udelov, 123 s.

Radiievska, T. M., Zavalna, O. M., Sorokina, S. A. 2016. Mandry arkheolohichnykh kolektsii Natsionalnoho muzeiu istorii Ukrainy v 1930-ti roky. Pratsi tsentru pam’iatkoznavstva, 29, s.183–200.

Radiievska, T. M., Sebta, T. M., Sorokina, S. A. 2018a. Dokumenty svidchat: vyvezennia na zakhid zbirok Kraiovoho muzeiu do- i rannoi istorii v Kyievi u 1943–1945 rr. Ukrainskyi arkheohrafichnyi shchorichnyk, 21/22 (24/25), s. 799–860.

Radiievska, T. M., Sebta, T. M., Sorokina, S. A. 2018b. Z istorii zibran Natsionalnoho muzeiu istorii Ukrainy: peremishchennia na zakhid ta restytutsiia zbirok 1943–1948 rr. Naukovyi visnyk NMIU, 3, s. 15–52.

Raport Komisii po pryiomtsi Arkheolohichnoho Muzeiu Instytuta Istorii Materialnoi kultury pry Akademii nauk USR. 1936. Naukovyi arkhiv NMIU, f. 1260, op. 1-d, od. zb. 17-B.

Savchuk, M. I., Sorokina, S. A., Radiievska, T. M., Zavalna, O. M. 2020. Fondova robota Derzhavnoho istorychnoho muzeiu v m. Kyievi (1943–1950). Naukovyi visnyk NMIU, 6, s. 249–277.

Sorokina, S. A., Kostiuk, I. O. 2010. Posudyny zi svastykamy zrubnoi kultury u kolektsii NMIU. V: 20 rokiv nezalezhnosti Ukrainy. Tematychnyi zbirnyk naukovykh prats. Kyiv: Taki spravy, s. 81–87.

Sorokina, S., Radiievska, T., Zavalna, O. 2016. Ekspozytsiia viddilu Doklasovoho suspilstva Tsentralnoho istorychnoho muzeiu im. T. H. Shevchenka v Kyievi (1938–1941 rr.). V: Zaremba, O. O. (vidp. red.). «Arkheolohiia & Fortyfikatsiia Ukrainy». Zbirnyk materialiv VI Mizhnarodnoi naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii. Kam’ianets-Podilskyi: PP Buinytskyi O. A., s. 320–329.

Sorokina, S. A., Radiievska, T. M., Zavalna, O. M. 2017. Ekspozytsiia Kraiovoho muzeiu do- i rannoi istorii u Kyievi (1942–1943). Materialy i doslidzhennia z arkheolohii Prykarpattia i Volyni, 17, s. 347–365.

Spitsyn, A. A. 1915. Russkii paleolit. Zapiski Otdeleniia russkoi i slavianskoi arkheologii Imperatorskogo russkogo arkheologicheskogo obshchestva, IX, s.133–172.

Fettikh, N. 2004. Kyivskyi shchodennyk (3. XII. 1941–19. I. 1942). Kyiv, 168 s.

Khvoika, V. V. 2008. Drevnie obitateli Srednego Pridneprovia i ikh kultura v doistoricheskie vremena (s kommentariiami i illiustratsiiami). Kiev, 160 s.

Khlopachev, G. A. 2016. Muzei antropologii i etnografii — krupneishii sobiratel drevnostei kamennogo veka: istoriia i osobennosti formirovaniia kollektsionnogo fonda. V: Khlopachev, G. A. (otv. red). Verkhnii paleolit: obrazy, simvoly, znaki. Sankt-Peterburg: Ekstraprint, s. 12–45.

Cherniakov, I. T. 2006. Vikentii Khvoika (1850–1914). Kyiv: Arkhetyp, 199 s.

Yanenko, A. 2017. Arkheolohichnyi muzei Vseukrainskoi akademii nauk: doslidzhennia i materialy. Kyiv: NKPIKZ, 288 s.

Field, H., Prostov, E. 1936. Recent archaeological investigations in the Soviet Union. American Anthropologist, 38 (2), p. 260–290. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1936.38.2.02a00090.

Golomshtok, E. A. 1938. The Old Stone Age in European Russia. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, XXIX (II), p. 197–468.

Hančar, F. 1940. Zum Problem der Venusstatuetten im eurasiatischen Jungpaläolithikum. Praehistorische Zeitschrift, 30–31 (1–2), p. 85–156. https://doi.org/10.1515/prhz.1940.30-31.1-2.85.

Radiievska, T. M., Naumenko, O. O. 2021. Materiály z vykopávek Čeňka Chvojky ve sbírkách Národního muzea historie Ukrajiny. In: Hlaváček, P. (ed.). Archeologové Čeněk Chvojka a Ivan Borkovský: česko-ukrajinský příběh.

Skutil, J. 1928. Ossarynce und Iskorost, zwei paläolithische Stationen in Osteuropa (Ukraine). Eiszeit und Urgeschichte, T. 5, s. 46–48.

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                     ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Liliya Kazantseva², Nataliya Pysarevska², Liubov Samoilenko³
University museums and the war in Ukraine
², ³Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
² National Technical University of Ukraine Ihor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-72-92
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-72-92

ABSTRACT

The article is devoted to a preliminary analysis of the activities of university museums in wartime conditions. Since the beginning of the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine in 2014, the system of higher education has undergone significant destruction. In the occupied territories of Luhansk, Donetsk regions and Crimea, the occupation authorities liquidated Ukrainian universities. Our state suffered not only great material losses, but also irreparable losses of a significant part of the cultural heritage accumulated and preserved by university museums.

Despite the unfortunate experience of 2014, university museums were not prepared for a full-scale military invasion. No state body takes care of and purposefully does not provide funds for the maintenance and protection of such museums and their collections. Preservation of national heritage in university museums takes on a spontaneous nature and depends only on the conscious position of the university rector. In a situation of martial law, university museums and their collections in many cases were far from the first in line for attention and evacuation. Often, there was simply not enough time, people and logistical capabilities for this. In fact, all the responsibility for their preservation was voluntarily assumed by the museum workers themselves on the ground.

The lack of a full-fledged legal status, which ensures standards of protection and financing, was also shown. University museums are often not registered and are not accounted for in any way. Today it is not even possible to count how many and which profiles of museums there are in higher school of Ukraine, how they work, what, how and how much they store.

Using the example of the museums of two leading universities in Kyiv, the authors share their own experience of working in wartime conditions and present conclusions regarding the organization of university museology.

Key words: armed aggression of the Russian Federation, education, museum, university.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:

Kazantseva, L.V., Pysarevska, N.V., Samoilenko, L.G. 2023. Universytetski muzei I viina v Ukraiini (University Museums and the War in Ukraine). VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

Kazanceva L.V. (upor.). 2012. Universytets"ki muzeyi: yevropejs"kyj dosvid ta ukrayins"ka praktyka. Zb. pr. Mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. Konf. (6-7 zhovt. 2011 r., m. Kyyiv). Nizhyn: Vyd-vo NDU imeni Mykoly Hoholya, (In Ukrainian).

Osvita v umovah voennogo stanu. 2022. Informaciyno-analitychnyy zbirnyk.  [online]. Rezhym dostupu: https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna%20serednya/serpneva-konferencia/2022/Mizhn.serpn.ped.nauk-prakt.konferentsiya/Inform-analityc.zbirn-Osvita.Ukrayiny.v.umovakh.voyennoho.stanu.22.08.2022.pdf , 343 c. (In Ukrainian).

Samoilenko, L. 2016. Osvita v muzei ta muzeina osvita v istorii Kyivskoho universytetu. Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka, 4 (131), s. 53-61. [online]. Rezhym dostupu: http://www.library.univ.kiev.ua/ukr/host/10.23.10.100/db/ftp/visnyk/istoriya_131_2016.pdf#page=53 . (In Ukrainian).

Samoilenko L.G. 2006. Muzeyi Kyyivskoho nacionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka: istoriya, dosvid roboty, perspektyvy rozvytku Visnyk Odeskoho istoryko-krayeznavchoho muzeyu. – Lypen" 2006. – Odesa: Astroprynt, pp. 61-66. [online]. Rezhym dostupu: http://www.history.odessa.ua/publication3/stat11.htm  (In Ukrainian).

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                     ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Serhii Telizhenko¹
The War in Ukraine: new challenges for archaeology
¹Insitute of Archaeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
¹ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1677-4900

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-24-35
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-24-35

ABSTRACT

As a result of the Russian aggression, which began in 2014, hundreds, if not thousands, of cultural heritage sites were destroyed or damaged to one degree or another. Against this background, the objects of archaeological heritage, which include settlements, hillforts, barrows, burial mounds (kurgans), etc., stand out. Work on collecting information on damaged archaeological sites began back in 2014. In 2016, after a monitoring mission to study the state of archaeological heritage in the war zone within the territory of Luhansk region, information began to be collected somewhat more actively. Starting from February 2022, when even more Ukrainian territory was subjected to military action, even more archaeological heritage sites were damaged or completely destroyed. Identification and analysis of cases related to the destructive impact of the war on the archaeological heritage is the main task for the near future. Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop methodological recommendations. The publication proposes the allocation of three conditional groups of locations of archaeological heritage objects:

group A - objects in the zone of cessation of hostilities or in the zone of active hostilities in the unoccupied territory (controlled by Ukraine);

group B - objects in the zone close to the front line, military operations were not carried out, but archaeological objects were damaged by the military (territory controlled by Ukraine);

Group C - objects in the zone where hostilities are no longer taking place, or in the zone of active military operations in the occupied territory.

Given the existing information, a preliminary typology of the nature of damage to archaeological heritage objects was developed, which includes 6 items:

• Mounds with partially destroyed embankments as a result of shelling (presence of ruptures from explosions);
• Mounds damaged as a result of the arrangement of protective structures/support and observation point or firing points with the help of machinery or hand tools;
• Settlements, hillforts, and ground necropolis, on the day surface of which there are ruptures from explosions (the integrity of the object is damaged);
• Settlements, hillforts, and ground necropolis that were damaged or destroyed as a result of the construction of protective structures;
• Mined areas;
• Areas with objects of archaeological heritage allocated for large-scale construction of military infrastructure (Crimean Peninsula). The construction of civil infrastructure in the occupied territories is a topic for a separate study.

In all cases, the degree of damage is indicated separately. The possibility of supplementing or correcting the data is not excluded, since the research process is at the stage of development. It also offers 4 ways of obtaining information about the facts of the destruction of archaeological heritage sites, including private messages, monitoring of social networks and specialized forums, visual monitoring, and research of satellite images.

Language:

Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:

Telizhenko, S. 2023. Viina v Ukraini: novi vyklyky dlia arkheolohii (The War in Ukraine: new challenges for archaeology). VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

Bida, O.A., Blaha, A.B., Koval, D.O., Martynenko, O.A., Statkevych, M.H. 2016. Zi shchytom chy na shchyti? Zakhyst kulturnykh tsinnostei v umovakh zbroinoho konfliktu na skhodi Ukrainy. [With a Shield or on a Shield? Protection of Cultural Values in the Conditions of Armed Conflict in the East of Ukraine]. Ukrainska Helsinska spilka z prav liudyny [Ukrainian Helsinki Union for Human Rights]. Kyiv: KYT. 72 s., https://helsinki.org.ua/publications/zi-schytom-chy-na-schyti-zahyst-kulturnyh-tsinnostej-v-umovah-zbrojnoho-konfliktu-na-chodi-ukrajiny/.

Druha richnytsia heroichnoi oborony Dovzhanskoho. [The second anniversary of Dovzhanskyi’s heroic defense]. State Border Service of Ukraine, Accessed August 30, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4du0ed4HI0o.

Okupanty hrabuiut muzei ta pryvatni kolektsii v Khersonskii oblasti, vkradene vyvoziat v okupovanyi Krym https://gur.gov.ua/content/okupanty-hrabuiut-muzei-ta-pryvatni-kolektsii-v-khersonskii-oblasti-vkradene-vyvoziat-v-okupovanyi-krym.html

Telizhenko, S.A. 2020. Arkheolohichni Pam’iatky i Viina [Archaeological Sites and the War]. Kyiv: Spilka arkheolohiv Ukrainy [Union of Archaeologists of Ukraine], (in Ukrainian), https://www.academia.edu/77162779/.

Telizhenko, S.A., Hardy, S. 2019. Video Report Arkheolohiia na Okupovanykh Terytoriiakh ta u Zonakh Zbroinykh Konfliktiv [Archeology in Occupied Territories and Zones of Armed Conflicts], http://www.vgosau.kiev.ua/novyny/arkheolohichna-spadshyna-na-okupovanykh-terytotiyakh/990-telizhenko-khardi.

Telizhenko, S. 2016. Monitoring Archaeological Sites & Monuments in a War Zone. http://rmchapple.blogspot.com/2016/07/monitoring-archaeological-sites.html

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Telizhenko, S.A., Ivakin, V.H. 2023. Archaeological Monitoring in War-Torn Ukraine, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2023.2209835.

Telizhenko, S. 2016. Monitoring Archaeological Sites & Monuments in a War Zone. http://rmchapple.blogspot.com/2016/07/monitoring-archaeological-sites.html.

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                     ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological Research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Alla Bujskikh¹, Vsevolod Ivakin², Pavlo Shydlovskyi³, Ivan Zotsenko⁴
Archaeological Sites During the War: field experience and legal aspect (on the example of the Archaeological Monitoring Expedition works in Kyiv and Kyiv region in 2022)
¹, ², ⁴ Insitute of Archaeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
³Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7233-1288
²ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0074-1963
³ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-812X
⁴ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8517-7101

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-36-59
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-36-59

ABSTRACT

The issue of recording the damage caused to cultural heritage as a result of unprovoked aggression of the Russian Federation is extremely relevant. The process of monitoring the destruction of objects takes place both at the state level and thanks to the activities of civil initiatives. However, at the present stage, the analysis of losses focuses mainly on objects of architecture, monumental art and religious buildings. On the other hand, recording the destruction of archaeological sites, due to certain features, faces significant difficulties. This situation is related to the unrevealed state of the archaeological objects themselves, the detection of which is possible due to significant landscape transformations. Among the main factors that make it difficult to record the loss of archaeological heritage, the following should be mentioned: problems related to the accounting of archeology objects, issues of limited remote and direct access to sites in the de-occupied and front-line territories, immediate risks to life and health when conducting field research.

In order to solve problems in the field of documenting damage to the archaeological heritage, representatives of a number of domestic scientific, educational and museum institutions created an interdisciplinary Archaeological Landscapes Monitoring Group, whose task is to record losses at archaeological sites. Currently, the work of the group is carried out in the territories of Kyiv and Chernihiv regions within the framework of the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) project 'Ukrainian Archaeological Heritage, threatened by war: saving and protection'. One of the conclusions obtained during the work of the Group was the understanding of the need for direct field studies of destroyed areas of landscapes, given the limited use of remote methods of studying and the need for production site-protection documentation, which provides for the cultural and chronological attribution of objects.

The article provides a brief summary of the Group's work in Kyiv region and analyzes the compliance of monitoring activities with international standards. One of the conclusions of the proposed study is the statement about the need for a long-term state program for compiling the archaeological cadastre of Ukraine. The crisis in the archaeological heritage accounting system and the existing need to record losses in the field of archaeology during the war allows to restart the system of sites registering at a modern level and with the use of international experience.

Key words: cultural heritage, archaeological monitoring, recording of damages, war, archaeological landscape, accounting of sites.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:

Bujskikh, A.V., Ivakin, V.H., Shydlovskyi, P.S., Zotsenko, I.V. 2023. Pamiatky arkheolohii pid chas viiny: polovyi dosvid ta yurydychnyi aspekt (na prykladi robit MAE u m. Kyievi ta Kyivskii oblasti u 2022 r.) [Archaeological Sites During the War: field experience and legal aspect (on the example of the Archaeological Monitoring Expedition works in Kyiv and Kyiv region in 2022)]. VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

References:

Amburher, N.P., Bilanovska, T.D. 1956. Piznotrypilske poselennia bilia s. Bortnychi. Arkheolohichni pamiatky URSR, T. 6, Kyiv.

Buiskykh, A., Zotsenko, I., Shydlovskyi, P. 2022. Poperedni rezultaty monitorynhu arkheolohichnykh pam’iatok u Kyievi ta Kyivskii oblasti. In: Shydlovskyi, P., Kornienko, M., Ivakin, V. (eds.). Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Heritage of Ukraine’ (23 November 2022): Abstracts. Kyiv: KZ ‘Center for Conservation of Archaeological Objects’, 12. [In Ukrainian].

Buijskykh, A., Ivakin, V. 2022. Spilnyi ukraino-nimetskyi proiekt “Ukrainian Archaeological Heritage, threatened by War: saving and protection”. In: Shydlovskyi, P., Kornienko, M., Ivakin, V. (eds.). Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Heritage of Ukraine’ (23 November 2022): Abstracts. Kyiv: KZ ‘Center for Conservation of Archaeological Objects’, 15. [In Ukrainian].

Ivakin, V.H., Baranov, V.I., Zotsenko, I.V., Hnera, V.A. 2018. Zvit pro arkheolohichni naukovo-riativni doslidzhennia Arkhitekturno-arkheolohichnoi ekspedytsii IA NAN Ukrainy na terytorii Natsionalnoho zapovidnyka "Sofiia Kyivska" za adresoiu vul. Volodymyrska, 24 u ta vul. Oleny Telihy, 12 Shevchenkivskomu raioni m. Kyieva u 2017–2018 rr. Scientific Archive of Institute of Archaeology of the NAS of Ukraine, F. 64. [In Ukrainian].

Koziuba, V.K. 2014. Rozvidky na terytorii Kyieva. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia v Ukraini, 2014, s. 72-74. [in Ukrainian].

Korshak, K.Z. 1930. Pratsi seminaru pry Arkheolohichnomu viddili Vseukrainskoho Istorychnoho muzeiu im. Shevchenka u Kyievi. Khronika arkheolohii ta mystetstva, 1930, Ch. 1, s. 57-66. [in Ukrainian].

Kudrytskyi, A.V. (ed.). 1981. Kyiv. Entsyklopedychnyi dovidnyk, Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

Kudrytskyi, A.V. (ed.). 1995. Vulytsi Kyieva. Dovidnyk, Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].

Kuchera, M.P. 1987. Zmievy valy Srednego Podneprovya. Kyiv. [in Russian].

Telizhenko Serhij. (2020). Arkheolohichni pam'iatky i vijna. Kyiv: Union of Archaeologists of Ukraine, https://www.academia.edu/77162779. [in Ukrainian].

Shydlovskyi, P., Ivakin, V., Ivanova, O. (2022). Peredumovy stvorennia ta vektory diialnosti mizhhaluzevoi Hrupy monitorynhu arkheolohichnykh landshaftiv. In: Shydlovskyi, P., Kornienko, M., Ivakin, V. (eds.). Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Heritage of Ukraine’ (23 November 2022): Abstracts. Kyiv: KZ ‘Center for Conservation of Archaeological Objects’, 10. [in Ukrainian].

Shydlovskyi, P., Kornienko, M., Ivakin, V. (eds.). (2022). Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Heritage of Ukraine’ (23 November 2022): Abstracts. Kyiv: KZ ‘Center for Conservation of Archaeological Objects’. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7424472. [in Ukrainian].

Hardy, S.A. 2022. Looting of Antiquities from Ukraine by soldiers, collaborators and ordinary criminals, trafficking to and through russia and dealing and collecting in Western Europe, since 2014. In: Shydlovskyi, P., Kornienko, M., Ivakin, V. (eds.). Scientific and Practical Seminar ‘Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Heritage of Ukraine’ (23 November 2022): Abstracts. Kyiv: KZ ‘Center for Conservation of Archaeological Objects’, 15.

Ivakin, V., Shydlovskyi, P. (2022). Ukrainian archaeological heritage under threat of Russian aggression: problems and prospects. In: The Protection of Heritage in Time of Conflict. RESQUE Annual General Meeting Conference (17 September 2022), 12-15. https://rescue-archaeology.org.uk/2022/08/rescue-agm-2022/.

Shydlovskyi, P., Telizhenko, S. Ivakin, V. (2022). Archaeological Heritage as a Target during War. The European Archaeologist, Issue 74 – Autumn 2022, European Association of Archaeologists, 36-43. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7492858.

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Telizhenko, S.A., Ivakin, V.H. 2023. Archaeological Monitoring in War-Torn Ukraine, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2023.2209835.

VITA ANTIQUA                                                                                      ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological research
VITA ANTIQUA 14, 2023, CULTURE HERITAGE AND THE WAR : CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Oleksandra Ivanova¹, Pavlo Shydlovskyi²
Protect the past - to save the future (Instead of a Foreword)

¹,² Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7848-3419
²ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-812X

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2023-14-10-22
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-10-22

ABSTRACT

Ukrainian society is going through one of the most difficult moments of its historical development - the brutal and unprovoked aggression of the Russian Federation on our peaceful towns and villages, which for our people has become a struggle for real freedom and independence. Wars all over the world always have the similar consequences, and the Russian-Ukrainian war is no exception: they lead to terrible casualties among the civilian population, mass displacement, violations of human rights and neglect of international humanitarian law. One of the manifestations of such violations is the destruction of cultural heritage; it becomes one of the most vulnerable segments of social life during war.

In the conditions of the threat of losing part of the cultural heritage, the meaning of this heritage is being rethought in society and an understanding of the importance of preserving and studying objects of historical, anthropological, ethnographic, and archaeological value is being formed. The future vectors of social consciousness will definitely be related to the development of critical thinking, awareness and control over things and events happening around. Cultural heritage and diversity will become one of the focuses of attention of the society of the new Ukraine. The struggle of Ukrainians for independence is also a struggle for humanistic values, among which respect for the cultural and natural heritage of mankind is of particular importance.

Language:

Ukrainian / English

PDF

Cite as:

Ivanova, O., Shydlovskyi, P. 2023. Protect the past - to save the future (Instead of a Foreword). VITA ANTIQUA, 14. Culture Heritage and the War : challenges and solutions.

VITA ANTIQUA,                                                                        ISSN 2522-9419 (Online), 2519-4542 (Print)
Center for Paleoethnological research

VITA ANTIQUA 13, 2021. Dwellings of Prehistoric Europe: social adaptations in variable environments.
List of scientific works of Mykhailo I. Gladkikh

Compiler Marharyta Chymyrys
Taras Shevchenko National University
ORCID: 0000-0002-4177-5246

DOI:10.37098/VA-2021-13-23-30
https://www.doi.org/10.37098/VA-2021-13-23-30

Language: Ukranian

List of scientific works

Cite as:

Chymyrys, M. 2021. List of scientific works of Mykhailo I. Gladkikh. VITA ANTIUA, 13. Dwellings of Prehistoric Europe: social adaptations in variable environments, pp. 9-22.