Category: Без рубрики

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Anastasiia Husak ¹
“Traditional” archaeological drawing : a future vestige or a necessity
¹ National University of "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy"
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7995-4813

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-93-101
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-93-101

ABSTRACT

This article explores the role of archaeological drawing (especially its traditional form) in the development of archaeological knowledge, while also illustrating the generalized process behind the cognitive and mental models of archaeological thought. Archaeological drawing, being subjective in its interpretative nature, serves as an important method of critical observation and analysis of archaeological objects and artifacts.

The main discussion focuses on the necessity of preserving the «traditional» type of drawing in modern archaeology amid rapid digitalization. A comparison of how digital and traditional drawing are perceived allows for an understanding of the cognitive level of two seemingly similar, but in fact, different methods of archaeological recording.

Digital drawing, despite its many advantages, such as speed of execution and the ability to easily process images, is not always able to provide as deep an interaction with archaeological artifacts. When using digital drawing, researchers often focus on the technical aspects of the work, which can distract them from critical analysis of the artifacts themselves.

The nature of traditional archaeological drawing makes it an indispensable tool in research, as it fosters a high-quality interaction with artifacts. Visualizing findings through such drawing is a process that combines cognitive and sensory aspects of perception, leading to a deeper understanding of the object. In addition, traditional drawing remains a reliable pedagogical tool; helping new generations of archaeologists not only master technical skills but also develop critical thinking abilities.

Overall, the decline in the use of the «traditional drawing» method, although not yet observed in Ukrainian archaeology, could eventually alter the perception of archaeological finds. The spread of digital recording methods creates a risk that archaeologists may lose important aspects of research that are tied to deep interaction with artifacts. However, digital technologies continue to integrate into modern science, promoting a faster pace of work and access to research results. Combining traditional and digital approaches allows, ensuring both speed and depth of analysis for more comprehensive results.

In conclusion, while modern technologies continue to influence all aspects of science, including archaeology, traditional archaeological drawing remains an important tool. Its preservation and integration with new methods can contribute to the development of archaeological science, maintaining a balance between speed and accuracy, between the demands of modern science and the deep knowledge provided by the traditional approach.

Key words: archaeological drawing, mental models, traditional drawing, digitalization, cognitive archaeology, archaeological knowledge.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Husak, A.M. 2024. “Tradytsiinyi” arkheolohichnyi maliunok: maibutnii perezhytok chy neobkhidnist [“Traditional” archaeological drawing: a future vestige or a necessity]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 93-101.

References:

Asare, S., Walden, P., Aniagyei, E.D., Emmanuel, M.K. 2023. A Comparative Study of Traditional Art Techniques versus Digital Art Techniques in the Context of College Visual Art Education. American Journal of Arts, Social and Humanity Studies, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 21-34. https://doi.org/10.47672/ajashs.1556 .

Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. North-Holland: In: Advances in psychology. Vol. 52, pp. 139-183.

Johnson-Laird, P.N. 1983. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Harvard University Press, No. 6. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=FS3zSKAfLGMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR6&ots=win8Q-hKKj&sig=-Qc9aKsnRjQ3mENVh1rLaimQtTQ

Jones, N.A., Ross, H., Lynam, T., Perez, P., Leitch, A. 2011. Mental Models: An Interdisciplinary Synthesis of Theory and Methods. Ecology and Society. Vol. 16, No. 1. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268859 .

Kennedy, H., McKenzie, H. 2024. Art & Archaeology: Employing Drawing as an Observational Technique. Pathways, No. 4, pp. 27-44.

Morgan, C., Petrie, H., Wright, H., Taylor, J.S. 2021. Drawing and Knowledge Construction in Archaeology: The Aide Mémoire Project. Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 46, No. 8, pp. 614-628. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2021.1985304 .

Sapirstein, P. 2020. Hand Drawing Versus Computer Vision in Archaeological Recording. Studies in Digital Heritage, Vol. 4, pp. 134-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.14434/sdh.v4i2.31520 .

Stengers, I., Muecke, S. 2018. Another Science is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science. John Wiley & Sons, 220 p.

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Serhii Ryzhov ¹, Victoriia Tysliuk ²
Cognitive possibilities of studying pigments on stone artefacts
^1,2 Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3229-1020
² ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3533-9927

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-79-91
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-79-91

ABSTRACT

Palaeolithic stone artifacts reflect traces of human activity and spatio-temporal natural modifications. The study of stone artifacts and the development of modern technologies serve as an impetus for the development of new methods of reconstruction of the prehistoric past. Findings of the remains of natural dyes have always attracted the special attention of researchers, because it is traditionally believed that such finds rather reflect symbolic and social behaviour, interpreted according to numerous ethnographic and archaeological sources.

Numerous finds of the use of ochre pigments as various dyes and unmodified nodules, which in most cases are interpreted by researchers as a display of symbolic behaviour, are recorded at Palaeolithic sites on the territory of Ukraine. Recent microscopic studies of the ochre pigments and use-wear analysis on the stone artifacts from the Late Acheulean site of Zaskelna IX (Crimea) allowed researchers to hypothesize the use of ochre as one from the components of the adhesive mixture for clamping the artifacts in the handle, which was composed of hides and plants. Taking into account the personal experience of studying ochre pigments on stone artifacts, the authors highlight the main stages and research methods that can be used to reproduce the hominins behavioural activities in prehistory.

In the process of researching the ochre pigments on the stone artifacts originating from the cultural layer, there is a need to distinguish successive stages to study the surface: archeomineralogical, technological and residue analysis, use-wear analysis, and conducting an experiment. Non-destructive methods of studying the surface of a stone artifact are of great importance on the study of the composition of organic and inorganic compounds by modern methods of spectrometry.

Key words: ochre pigments, residue analysis, stone artifacts, Palaeolithic, territory of Ukraine.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Ryzhov, S.M., Tysliuk, V.V. 2024. Kohnityvni mozhlyvosti doslidzhennia pihmentiv na kamianykh artefaktakh [Cognitive possibilities of studying pigments on stone artefacts]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 79-91.

References:

Ambrose, S.H. 2001. Paleolithic technology and human evolution. Science, 291, 1748–1753.

Ambrose, S.H. 2010. Coevolution of composite-tool technology, constructive memory, and language: Implications for the evolution of modern human behavior. Current Anthropology, 51. https://doi.org/10.1086/650296 .

Anderson-Gerfaud, P.C. 1986. A few comments concerning residue analysis of stone plant-processing tools. Early Man News, 9/10/11, 69–85.

Andrefsky, W. 2005. Lithics. Macroscopic approaches to analysis. Cambridge: University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810244 .

Barham, L. 2013. From Hand to Handle: The First Industrial Revolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Biletskyi, V.S., Suiarko, V.H., Ishchenko, L.V. 2018. Mineraloho-petrohrafichnyi slovnyk. Knyha persha. Kharkiv: NTU «KhPI», Kyiv: FOP Khalikov R.Kh.

Cnuts, D., Rots, V. 2018. Extracting residues from stone tools for optical analysis: towards an experiment-based protocol. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 10 (7), 1717–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-017-0484-7 .

Culey, J., Hodgskiss, T., Wurz, S., de la Peña, P., Val, A. 2023. Ochre use at Olieboomspoort, South Africa: insights into specular hematite use and collection during the Middle Stone Age. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 15, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-023-01871-9 .

Dinnis, R., Pawlik, A., Gaillard, C. 2009. Bladelet cores as weapon tips? Hafting residue identification and micro-wear analysis of three carinated burins from the late Aurignacian of Les Vachons, France. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 1922–1934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2009.04.020 .

Eren, M.I., Lycett, .J., Patten, R.J., Buchanan, B., Pargeter, J., O’Brien, M.J. 2016. Test, Model, and Method Validation: The Role of Experimental Stone Artifact Replication in Hypothesis-driven Archaeology. Ethnoarchaeology, 8, 103–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/19442890.2016.1213972 .

Gutiérrez Sáez, C., Lerma, I., Marreiros, J.J., Mazzucco, N., Gibaja, J.F., Bicho, N.N., Gibaja Bao, J., Bicho, N.N. 2015. Use-Wear and Residue Analysis in Archaeology. Keys to the Identification of Prehension and Hafting Traces. Springer 231. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8 .

Hardy, B.L., Kay, M., Marks, A.E., Monigal, K. 2001. Stone tool function at the Paleolithic sites of Starosele and Buran Kaya III, Crimea: Behavioral implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98 (19), 10972–10977. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.191384498 .

Hardy, B.L. 2004. Neanderthal behaviour and stone tool function at the Middle Palaeolithic site of La Quina, France. Antiquity, 78, 547–565. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00113213 .

Hardy, K. 2018. Plant use in the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic: Food, medicine, and raw materials. Quat. Sci. Rev., 191, 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2018.04.028 .

Heyes, P.J., Anastasakis, K., De Jong, W., Van Hoesel, A., Roebroeks, W., Soressi, M. 2016. Selection and use of manganese dioxide by neanderthals. Sci. Rep. 6, 22159. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep22159 .

Hodgskiss, T. 2012. An Investigation into the Properties of the Ochre from Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal, Southern African Humanities, vol. 24, pp. 99-120 https://www.sahumanities.org/index.php/sah/article/view/21 .

Hodgskiss, T., Wadley, L. 2017. How people used ochre at rose cottage cave, South Africa: Sixty thousand years of evidence from the middle stone age. PLoS One 12, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176317 .

Hodgson, D. 2012. Hominin Tool Production, Neural Integration and the Social Brain. Human Origins 1, 41–64.

Keeley, L.H. 1980. Experimental determination of stone tool uses. Prehistoric archeology and ecology series. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Keeley, L.H. 1982. Hafting and Retooling: Effects on the Archaeological Record. American Antiquity 47, 798–809. https://doi.org/10.2307/280285 .

Krotova, O.O. 2013. Piznopaleolitychni myslyvtsi azovo-chornomorskykh stepiv. Kyiv: Vydavets Oleh Filiuk.

Kuhn, S.L. 2014. Signaling Theory and Technologies of Communication in the Paleolithic. Biol. Theory 9, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0156-5 .

Lemorini, C., Cesaro, N.S. (eds.). 2014. An Integration of the Use-Wear and Residue Analysis for the Identification of the Function of Archaeological Stone Tools. BAR International Series, 2649. Oxford: Information Press.

Lombard, M. 2005. Evidence of hunting and hafting during the Middle Stone Age at Sibidu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: A multianalytical approach. Journal of Human Evolution 48, 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.11.006 .

Lombard, M., Wadley, L. 2007. The morphological identification of micro-residues on stone tools using light microscopy: progress and difficulties based on blind tests. J. Archaeol. Sci. 34, 155-165.

Marreiros, J., Gibaja Bao, J., Ferreira Bicho, N. (eds). Use-Wear and Residue Analysis in Archaeology. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8 .

Moncel, M.H., Chiotti, L., Gaillard, C., Onoratini, G., Pleurdeau, D. 2012. Non-utilitarian lithic objects from the European Paleolithic. Archaeol. Ethnol. Anthropol. Eurasia 40, 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeae.2012.05.004 .

Moyo, S., Mphuthi, D., Cukrowska, E., Henshilwood, C.S., van Niekerk, K., Chimuka, L. (2016). Blombos Cave: Middle Stone Age ochre differentiation through FTIR, ICP OES, ED XRF and XRD. Quaternary International, 404, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2015.09.041 .

Odell, G.H. 2003. Lithic Analysis. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9009-9 .

Pedergnana, A., Asryan, L., Fernández-Marchena, J.L., Ollé, A. 2016. Modern contaminants affecting microscopic residue analysis on stone tools: A word of caution. Micron, 86, p. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micron.2016.04.003 .

Piasetskyi, V.K. 2009. Paleolit Volynskoi vysochyny ta Maloho Polissia. Rivne.

Pіdoplіchko, І.G. 1976. Mezhirichskie zhilishcha iz kostei mamonta. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.

Ramos, P.M., Ruisánchez, I., Andrikopoulos, K.S. 2008. Micro-Raman and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy data fusion for the classification of ochre pigments. Talanta 75, 926–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2007.12.030 .

Rifkin, R.F., 2011. Assessing the efficacy of red ochre as a prehistoric hide tanning ingredient. J. African Archaeol. 9, 131–158. https://doi.org/10.3213/2191-5784-10199 .

Rots, V. 2008. Hafting Traces on Flint Tools. in: Longo, L., Della Riva, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Congress «Prehistoric Technology: 40 years later. Functional Studies and the Russian Legacy», Verona, Italy, 20-23 April 2005, 75-84.

Rots, V. 2014. What method to study hafting? The potential of use-wearand residue analysis confronted. BAR International Series 2649. Proc. Int., 27–42.

Rots, V. 2014b. Stone tool hafting in the Middle Palaeolithic as viewed through the microscope. In: International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis: Use-Wear 2012, edited by N.B. João Marreiros, and J.G. Bao, 466–478. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Ryzhov, S.M., Stepanchuk, V.M., Matviishyna, Zh.M., Karmazynenko, S.P., 2011. Plesna – nova verkhnopaleolitychna pamiatka na Volyno-podilskii vysochyni. Kamiana doba Ukrainy, 14, s. 88–100.

Ryzhov, S.M., Stepanchuk, V.M., Nezdolii, O.I., Vietrov D.O. 2021. Mikrozalyshky pihmentiv na poverkhni kamianykh artefaktiv z ashelskoho sharu Zaskelnoi IX. Kamiana doba Ukrainy, 4, s. 1–22.

Ryzhov, S.M., Stepanchuk, V.M., Nezdolii, O.I., Vietrov, D.O. 2022. Analysis of micro-residues on stone tools from Zaskelna IX, Crimea: first results. Археологія, 1, 5–25. https://doi.org/10.15407/arheologia2022.01.005 .

Sahle, Y. 2019. Ethnoarchaeology of compound adhesive production and scraper hafting: Implications from Hadiya (Ethiopia). J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 53, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.11.001 .

Schwertmann, U., Cornell, R.M. 2000. Iron Oxides in the Laboratory Preparation and Characterization. Second, Completely Revised and Extended Edition. WILEY-VCH.

Semenov, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric Technology. An Experimental Study of the Oldest Tools and Artefacts from Traces of Manufacture and Wear. Adams & Dart, Bath.

Shipton, C. 2019. Three Stages in the Evolution of Human Cognition. Handbook of Cognitive Archaeology, 153–173. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429488818-9 .

Shovkoplias, I.H. 1965. Mezinskaia stoianka. K istorii Srednedneprovskoho basseina v pozdnepaleoliticheskuiu epokhu. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, s. 113-115.

Soriano, S., Villa, P., Wadley, L. 2009. Ochre for the toolmaker: Shaping the still bay points at Sibudu (Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa). J. African Archaeol. 7, 41–54. https://doi.org/10.3213/1612-1651-10121 .

Stanko, V.M. 1999. Anetovka 2 - pozdnepaleoliticheskoe poselenie i svyatilishche okhotnikov na bizonov v Severnom Prichernomore. Stratum plus, 1, Vremya sobirat kamni, s. 322-324.

Stanko, V.M., Grigoreva, G.V., Shvaiko, T. 1989. Pozdnepaleolitecheskoe poselenie Anetovka II. Voprosi kulturno-istoricheskoi periodizatsii pozdnego paleolita Severnogo Prichernomorya. K.: Naukova dumka.

Stemp, W.J., Watson, A.S., Evans, A.A. 2016. Surface analysis of stone and bone tools. Surface Topography: Metrology and Properties 4, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1088/2051-672x/4/1/013001 .

Stepanchuk, V.M., 2013. Mira: stoyanka rannego verkhnego paleolita na Dnepre. Stratum Plus, 1, c 3-94.

Stepanchuk, V.M. 2022. Pebbles with ochre residues from Neanderthal sites of Eastern Crimea. A life dedicated to the Paleolithic : studies in honorem Marin Cârciumaru. Târgovişte: Cetatea de scaun, 53–69.

Stepanchuk, V.M., Nezdolii, O.I., Vietrov, D.O. 2018. Pryrodni barvnyky v materialakh bahatosharovoi mustierskoi stoianky Prolom II. Arkheolohiia i davnia istoriia Ukrainy, 3 (28), s. 7–21.

Stepanchuk, V.M., Vasilev, S.V., (eds.). 2018. Pozdnie neandertaltsi Krima. Zaskalnaya VI (Kolosovskaya). Sloi III i IIIa. Kyiv: Slovo.

Stordeur, D. 1987. Manches et emmanchements préhistoriques: quelques propositions préliminaires. Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient, 11–34.

Susman, R.L. 1998. Hand function and tool behavior in early hominids. Journal of Human Evolution 35, 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.1998.0220 .

Velliky, E.C., Barbieri, A., Porr, M., Conard, N.J., MacDonald, B.L. 2019. A preliminary study on ochre sources in South-western Germany and its potential for ochre provenance during the Upper Paleolithic. J. Archaeol. Sci. Reports 27, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.101977 .

Velliky, E.C., Porr, M., Conard, N.J. 2018. Ochre and pigment use at Hohle Fels cave: Results of the first systematic review of ochre and ochre-related artefacts from the Upper Palaeolithic in Germany, PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209874 .

Wadley, L. 2005. Putting ochre to the test: Replication studies of adhesives that may have been used for hafting tools in the Middle Stone Age. Journal of Human Evolution, 49 (5), p. 587–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2005.06.007 .

Wadley, L. 2013. Recognizing complex cognition through innovative technology in stone age and palaeolithic sites. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23, 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774313000309 .

Wadley, L., Hodgskiss, T., Grant, M. 2009. Implications for complex cognition from the hafting of tools with compound adhesives in the Middle Stone Age, South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106 (24), 9590–9594. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900957106 .

Wadley, L., Williamson, B., Lombard, M. 2004. Ochre in hafting in Middle Stone Age southern Africa: A practical role. Antiquity, 78 (301), 661–675. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00113298 .

Wojcieszak, M., Wadley, L. 2018. Raman spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy confirm ochre residues on 71 000-year-old bifacial tools from Sibudu, South Africa. Archaeometry 60, 1062–1076. https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12369 .

Wolf, S., Dapschauskas, R., Velliky, E., Floss, H., Kandel, A.W., Conard, N.J. 2018. The Use of Ochre and Painting During the Upper Paleolithic of the Swabian Jura in the Context of the Development of Ochre Use in Africa and Europe. Open Archaeol. 4, 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2018-0012 .

Wreschner, E.E., Bolton, R., Butzer, K.W., Delporte, H., Häusler, A., Heinrich, A., Jacobson-Widding, A., Malinowski, T., Masset, C., Miller, S.F., Ronen, A., Solecki, R., Stephenson, P.H., Thomas, L.L., Zollinger, H. 1980. Red Ochre and Human Evolution: A Case for Discussion [and Comments and Reply]. Curr. Anthropol. 21, 631–644.

Wynn, T.G., Coolidge, F.L. 2016. Cognitive Models in Palaeolithic Archaeology. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190204112.001.0001 .

Yakovlieva, L.A. 2013. Naidavnishe mystetstvo Ukrainy. Kyiv: Starodavnii Svit.

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Sofiia Rudenko ¹
Settlements and hillforts of the Zarubinets culture of the Cherkasy region
¹ Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6389-3514

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-67-76
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-67-76

ABSTRACT

Sites of the Zarubinets culture of the Cherkasy region constitute the southern part of the Middle Dnieper local version of this culture. In the article, a brief historiographical review of the vestiges is carried out: their topography, chronology, classification and state of study are considered.

The article presents a concise catalogue of Zarubynets settlements and hillforts located in Cherkasy region. Among them are 13 settlements and 10 hillforts.

The general chronological boundaries of the culture constitute in III/II cent. B.C. – I cent. A.D. The sites considered in the work represent all stages of cultural development: early – 3^rd – 1^st cent. B.C., middle – 1^st cent. B.C. – the end of the 1^st cent. A.D., late – middle of the 1^st cent. B.C. – the end of the 2^nd cent. A.D. Since the last period (the second half of the 1^st – the 2^nd cent. AD) is currently considered by most researchers to be the time of the existence of late Zarubinets vestiges, we can consider the late stage of the «classical» Zarubinets culture precisely from the middle/end of the 1^st cent. B. C. – the end of the 1^st cent. A.D. E.V. Maksimov identified two types of settlements of the Middle Dnieper variant of the Zarubinets culture based on topography: sites located on capes, and located in floodplains, supraflood terraces or slopes.

The article considers the settlement near the villages Moshny, Mezhyrich, Zalevky, Zhabotyn, Orlovets, the Cherkasy city of the Cherkasy district; hillforts near the village Buchak, Subotiv, Sakhnivka, Trakhtemiriv, the cities of Kaniv, Cherkasy of the Cherkasy district. In contrast to the burial grounds of the Zarubinets culture, the study of settlements began exclusively in the period after the end of the Second World War. Most of the settlements and hillforts are known only from reconnaissance materials. Systematic excavations by E.V. Maksimov investigated only three hillforts: Pylypenkova Hill, Babyna Hill, and Monastyrok. During the last decades, stationary excavations of settlements were not carried out. Obviously, the mentioned sites existed throughout the entire chronological period of the development of the Zarubinets culture, i.e., during the III/II centuries B.C. – I century A.D.

In order to obtain new information about the settlement sites of the Zarubinets culture, it is necessary to conduct a new stage of research using new methods and technologies.

Key words: Zarubinets culture, Middle Dnieper variant, settlement, hillfort, chronology.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Rudenko, S.V. 2024. Poselennia ta horodyshcha zarubynetskoi kultury Cherkaskoi oblasti [Settlements and hillforts of the Zarubinets culture of the Cherkasy region]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 67-76.

References:

Abashyna, N.S., Kozak, D.N., Synytsia, Ye.V., Terpylovskyi, R.V. 2012. Davni sloviany. Istoriia ta arkheolohiia. Kyiv: Inst. of Archaeology of the NAS of Ukraine; Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. https://irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/ulib/item/ukr0000012538 .

Bogusevich, V.A., Linka, N.V. 1959. Zarubinetskoe poselenie na Pilipenkovoi gore bliz g. Kaneva. Materiali i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR, 70, s. 114–119.

Dovzhenok, V.I., Linka, N.V. 1959. Raskopki ranneslavyanskikh poselenii v nizhnem techenii r. Ros. Materiali i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR, 70, s. 102–114.

Kushtan, D.P., Lastovskyi, V.V. 2016. Arkheolohiia ta rannia istoriia Cherkas. Kyiv–Cherkasy: Inst. of Archaeology of the NAS of Ukraine.

Maksimov, Ye.V. 1972. Srednee Podneprove na rubezhe nashei eri. K.: Naukova dumka.

Maksimov, Ye.V. 1982. Zarubinetskaya kultura na territorii USSR. K.: Naukova dumka.

Maksimov, Ye.V., Petrashenko, V.A. 1988. Slavyanskie pamyatniki u s. Monastirek na Srednem Dnepre. K.: Naukova dumka.

Petrashenko, V.A. 1982. Otchyot o razvedochnikh rabotakh v gorode Cherkassi i yego okrestnostyakh v 1982 g. Scientific archive of the ІA NAS of Ukraine. 1982/36.

Ponomarenko, M.F. 1981. Ekspedytsiia “Cherkasy-1981”. Zvit. Scientific archive of the ІA NAS of Ukraine. 1981/151.

Rets, S.K. 1997. Zvit pro arkheolohichni rozvidky v Cherkasakh 1997 r. Scientific archive of the ІA NAS of Ukraine. 1997/116.

Rets, S.K. 1996. Zvit pro arkheolohichni rozvidky i sposterezhennia v raioni m. Cherkasy 1996 r. Scientific archive of the ІA NAS of Ukraine. 1996/71.

Terenozhkin, A.I. 1954. Arkheologicheskie issledovaniya bliz Smeli v 1952 g. Kratkie soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii, 3, s. 71–76.

Zelenetskaya, I.B., Maksimov, Ye.V. 1984. Otchet o rabote Kanevskoi ekspeditsii v 1984 g. (poselenie Orlovets). Scientific archive of the ІA NAS of Ukraine. 1984 / 27.

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Pavlo Shydlovskyi ¹, Mykhailo Gladkikh ¹
Peculiarities of spatial behaviour among bearers of the Mezhyrichian Upper Palaeolithic tradition
¹ Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-812X

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-55-66
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-55-66

ABSTRACT

Sites of Mezhyrichian tradition of the Middle Dnieper Epigravettian provide critical insights into the seasonal mobility and functional use of space by prehistoric communities. The study of the Dwelling 4 at the Mezhyrich settlement has unveiled distinct patterns in the organization of living space, particularly concerning the placement of functionally diverse objects within and around mammoth bone dwellings.

An analysis of the interior of the fourth dwelling reveals a clear differentiation of economic activities across different sections of the space. This functional variation within the dwelling suggests diverse aspects of social life, potentially including gender roles and economic specialization. The spatial arrangement of household assemblages demonstrates a pronounced symmetry, with objects systematically arranged around a central hearth and oriented according to the cardinal points. This centralized spatial organization is evident not only at the individual settlement level but also across the broader micro-region, reflected in the relationship between major settlements with monumental architecture and temporary summer camps.

The analysis of site layouts, along with the spatial and topographical positioning of Middle Dnieper settlements, provides compelling evidence of the regularity and symmetry in the behaviour of Epigravettian society. Seasonal mobility played a crucial role in shaping worldviews, which were expressed through the spatial arrangement of objects and the creation of «landscape ornament» by these prehistoric inhabitants. Ornamentation in art, architecture, and the placement of anthropogenic objects signifies the process of humanization, the domestication of space, and the symbolic mastery of the landscape. These phenomena were vital tools for the psychological adaptation of groups to the conditions of the late Würm Glacial, ensuring resilience in a changing environment.

Key words: hunter-gatherers, Upper Palaeolithic, Eastern Epigravettian, Mezhyrich culture, archaeological site, spatial analysis.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Shydlovskyi, P.S., Gladkikh, M.I. 2024. Osoblyvosti prostorovoi povedinky nosiiv mezhyritskoi verkhnopaleolitychnoi tradytsii [Peculiarities of spatial behaviour among bearers of the Mezhyrichian Upper Palaeolithic tradition]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 55-66.

References:

Chymyrys, M., Shydlovskyi, P., & Tsvirkun, O. 2023. The structure of dwellings from the Upper Palaeolithic settlements (Mezhyrich, Dobranichivka, Hintsi). In: 29th EAA Annual Meeting (Belfast, Northern Ireland 2023) ‘Weaving Narratives’ - Abstract Book: 1015, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8369825 .

Gladkikh, M.I. 1971. Krem’ianyi inventar piznopaleolitychnoho poselennia Mezhyrich. Arkheolohiia, 3: 58-63. (in Ukrainian).

Gladkikh, M.I. 1977. Nekotoryie kriterii opredeleniia kulturnoi prinadlezhnosti pozdnepaleoliticheskih pamaiatnikov. In: Praslov, N.D. (Ed.), Problemi paleolita Vostochnoi і Tsentralnoi Yevropy (Issues of Palaeolithic of Eastern and Central Europe), Leningrad: Nauka: 137-143. (in Russian).

Gladkikh, M.I. 1999. Drevneyshaya arkhitektura po arkheologicheskim istochnikam epokhi paleolita. VITA ANTIQUA, 1: 29-33. (in Russian), https://vitaantiqua.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/004VA01-gladkikh.pdf .

Gladkikh, M.I., Kornietz, N.L. 1979. Otchet o raskopkakh Mezhirichskogo pozdnepaleoticheskogo poseleniya v 1978 godu. Kyiv: Scientific Archive of the Institute of Archaeology of the NAS of Ukraine, FE #1978/106, 44 p. (in Russisan).

Gladkih, M.I., Kornietz, N.L., Soffer, O. 1984. Mammoth-Bone Dwellings on the Russian Plain. Scientific American, November, 251 (5): 164-175, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1184-164 .

Gladkikh, M., Shydlovskyi, P. 2021. Studying the Fourth Dwelling of Mezhyrich Settlement: problems and perspectives. Naukovi Studii, Vol. 11: 3–27. (in Ukrainian), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8329420

Haesaerts, P., Péan, S., Valladas, H., Damblon, F., Nuzhnyi, D. 2015. Contribution à la stratigraphie du site paléolithique de Mezhyrich (Ukraine), L’Anthropologie, 119 (4). Hommes et environnements au Paléolithique supérior en Ukraine: Mezhyrich: 364-393, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anthro.2015.07.002 .

Kornietz, N.L., Suntsov, Yu.V., Soffer O. 1996. Otchet o raskopkakh pozdnepaleoliticheskoy stoyanki Mezhirich v 1995 g. Kyiv: Scientific Archive of the Institute of Archaeology of the NAS of Ukraine, FE #1995/96. (in Russian).

Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1993. Gesture and speech (Cambridge, London).

Lévi-Strauss, C. 1963. Structural Anthropology (New York).

Nuzhnyi, D.Yu. 2008. The Epigravettian variability of the Middle Dnieper river basin. In: Koulakovska, L.V. (Ed.), Doslidzhennia pervisnoii arkheolohii v Ukraiini. Proceedings of the international conference, Kyiv: Korvin-Pres.: 96-134.

Nuzhnyi, D.Yu., Shydlovskyi, P.S. 2015. Variabilité de l’industrie lithique entre les structures de l’habitation no 1 de Mezhyrich, site du Paléolithique supérieur d’Ukraine, L’Anthropologie, 119 (4), p. 394-416, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anthro.2015.07.003 .

Nuzhnyi, D.Yu., Shydlovskyi, P.S. and Lyzun, O.M. 2017. Upper Palaeolithic sites of Semenivka in the context of Epigravettian of the Middle Dnieper area. Kamiana Doba Ukrainy, 17-18: 16–47 (in Ukrainian). http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1268743 .

Pidoplichko, I.G. 1969. Pozdnepaleolithicheskie zhilischa iz kostej mamonta. Kyiv: Naukova dumka (in Russian).

Pidoplichko, I.G. 1976. Mezhyrichskiie zhylishcha iz kostei mamonta (Mezhyrich Mammoth Bone Dwelling Constructions). Kyiv: Naukova dumka (in Russian).

Shovkoplias, I.H. 1971. Hospodarsko-pobutovi kompleksy piznoho paleolitu. Arkheolohiia, 3: 13-21.

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Mamchur, B.V., Chymyrys, M.V., Péan, S. 2020. Osteological materials from the household Pit 6 at the Mezhyrich settlement : interpretation of the finds. Archaeology and Early History of Ukraine, 37(4), p. 299-309. https://doi.org/10.37445/adiu.2020.04.25 .

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Péan, S., Tsvirkun, O.I., Chymyrys, M.V., & Dudnyk, D.V. 2022. Internal and External Structures of the Upper Palaeolithic Dwelling No.4 from Mezhyrich Settlement (Ukraine). (Re)integration. 28th EAA Annual Meeting (Budapest, Hungary, 2022) – Abstract Book: 779–781. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8311434 .

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Tsvirkun, O.I., Péan, S., Chymyrys, M.V. 2022. Spatial Distribution of Mezhyrichian Objects (Eastern Epigravettian): A Model of Seasonal Mobility. In: Sobkowiak-Tabaka, I., Diachenko, A., Wiśniewski, A. (eds.) Quantifying Stone Age Mobility. Quantitative Archaeology and Archaeological Modelling. Springer, Cham: 212-217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94368-4_8 .

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Tsvirkun, O.I., Péan, S., Chymyrys, M.V., Mamchur, B.V. 2019. New Study of Fourth Dwelling from Mezhyrich Upper Palaeolithic Campsite: the results of International Summer School activity. VITA ANTIQUA, 11. Archaeology, Museum & Monument Studies: educational and research aspects: 92-115. https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2019-11-92-115 .

Soffer, O.A. 1985. The Upper Paleolithic of Central Russian Plain. San Diego, Academic Press Inc.

Soffer, O.A. 1993. Ekonomika verhneho paleolita: prodolzhytelnost zaseleniia stoianok na Russkoi ravnine. Rossiiskaia arheolohiia, 3: 5-17 (in Russian).

Tsvirkun, O., Shydlovskyi, P., Dudnyk, D., Chymyrys, M. 2021. Lithic processing complex of the fourth dwelling of the Mezhyrich Upper Palaeolithic settlement. VITA ANTIUA, 13. Dwellings of Prehistoric Europe: social adaptations in variable environments, 55-86. (in Ukrainian), https://www.doi.org/10.37098/VA-2021-13-55-86 .

Yakovleva, L. 2013. Naidavnishe mystetstvo Ukrainy. Kyiv: Starodavii Svit. (in Ukrainian).

Yakovleva, L. 2015. The architecture of mammoth bone circular dwellings of the Upper Palaeolithic settlements in Central and Eastern Europe and their socio-symbolic meanings. Quaternary International, 359-360: 324 – 334, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.08.050 .

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Ihor Pistruil ¹, Mykhailo Syzov ²
Archaeological research and the problem of protection of archaeological objects (on the example of Stone Age sites of Odesa region)
¹ Odesa Archeological Museum of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
² Department of Housing and Communal Services, Improvement and Land Relations, Znamianska Rural Territorial Community
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6193-1963

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-45-54
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-45-54

ABSTRACT

The paper investigates different aspects of the problem of localization of Stone Age sites in the vicinity of Chervonoznamenka village (Ivanovka district of Odessa region). The sites were discovered in 1960-s by V.I. Kraskovskyi. In total, V.I. Kraskovskyi opened six sites in this region (Katarzhyno, Tsybulivka, Tsybulivka І-ІV). According to V.I Kraskovskyi, the sites are located on small promontories of the right bank of the Malyi Kuialnyk River, about 2 km from the village Znamyanka. In this place, the river is blocked by a dam, as a result of which a rather large reservoir was formed.

In 2007-2010, the author conducted research in this region. However, it turned out to be quite difficult to localize the locations of the sites discovered by V.I. Kraskovskyi.

The problem was that in the 50 years since V.I. Kraskovskyi’s research, the area had become overgrown with trees and bushes. In addition, a railroad was laid here in the 60s. As a result, considerable excavation work was carried out. Thus, all the Stone Age sites that were discovered as a result of the 2007-2010 surveys were given new names (Katarzhyno 1-5). During these years, the author conducted excavations in a small area at the Katarzhyno 1 and Katarzhyno 2 sites. As a result of the research, flint products and fragments of pottery were found at the sites. This made it possible to date the sites to the Neolithic era. An additional survey of the region was conducted in 2020. At that time, it was found that trees and shrubs had grown even more. In this regard, it was not possible to establish GPS coordinates of the sites. Therefore, the locations of the campsites were recorded on Google maps.

However, a mistake was made when registering these sites in the databases. And now, in all documents it is stated that these sites are located on the cape, which is formed as a result of the confluence of the Malyi and Serednii Kuialnyk rivers. And no one will correct documentation with errors that have been approved by many authorities. This leads to the loss of various, including unique, archaeological complexes for science and society.

Key words: North-Western Black Sea region, Stone Age, settlement/site, protection of cultural heritage.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Pistruil, I.V., Syzov, M.H. 2024. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia ta problema okhorony pamiatok arkheolohii (na prykladi stoianok kamianoho viku Odeskoi oblasti) [Archaeological research and the problem of protection of archaeological objects (on the example of Stone Age sites of Odesa region)]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 45-54.

References:

Gudkova, A.V., Okhotnikov, S.B., Subbotin, L.V., Cherniakov, I.T. 1991. Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Odesskoi oblasti (spravochnik). Odessa: Reniiskaia tipografiia. (in Russian).

Kraskovskii, V.I. 1962. Epipaleoliticheskoe mestonakhozhdenie Skosarevka. Materialy po arkheologii Severnogo Prichernomoria, 4, s. 133-135. (in Russian).

Kraskovskii, V.I. 1972. Pamiatniki mezoliticheskogo vremeni v doline reki Malyi Kuialnik. Materialy po arkheologii Severnogo Prichernomoria, 4, s. 172-179. (in Russian).

Kraskovskii, V.I. 1978. Pamiatniki paleolita i mezolita severo-zapadnogo Prichernomoria (arkheologicheskaia karta). K.: Naukova dumka. (in Russian).

Masiuta, D., Pistruil, I. 2021. Deiaki dopovnennia do arkheolohichnoi karty m. Odesa. In: Hanchev, A.Y., Koch, S.V., Stoianova, H.N. (ed.). Mnohaia polia: transdystsyplynarnye еtiudy. Odessa: Symеks-Prynt, s. 266-279. (in Ukrainian).

Pistruil, I.V. 2009. Pamiatniki kamennogo veka srednego techeniia r. Malyi Kuialnik. Lukomor’ia: arkheologіia, etnologіia, іstorіia pіvnіchno-zakhіdnogo Prichornomor’ia, 3, s. 65-71. (in Russian).

Pistruil, I.V. 2011-a. Stoianka Katarzhino 1 i problema identifikatsii pamiatnikov neolita v stepiakh severo-zapadnogo Prichernomoria. Stratum plus, 2, s. 209-219. (in Russian).

Pistruil, I.V. 2011-b. Doslidzhennia stoianok kam’ianoho viku Katarzhyno 1 ta Katarzhyno 2 bilia s. Chervonoznam’ianka (Ivanivskyi raion Odeskoi obl.). Kam’iana doba Ukrainy, 14, s. 172-181. (in Ukrainian).

Pistruil, I.V. 2011-v. K probleme lokalizatsii pamiatnikov kamennogo veka u s. Chervonoznamenka (Ivanovskii raion Odesskoi oblasti). Materialy po arkheologii Severnogo Prichernomoria, 12, s. 246-251. (in Russian).

Pistruil, I.V. 2012. Stoianka kamennogo veka Katarzhino 2 u s. Chervonoznamenka (Ivanovskii r-n Odesskoi oblasti). Stratum plus, 2, s. 205-210. (in Russian).

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Katerina Halushko¹, Mariia Lobanova ²
Special status of cultural heritage objects during armed conflicts: a comparative analysis of Dubrovnik and Odesa experience
¹ the National Center «Junior Academy of Sciences of Ukraine»
² Odesa Archaeological Museum of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine; Odesa I.I. Mechnikov National University
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2653-5551
² ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8497-8206

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-33-43
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-33-43

ABSTRACT

This article provides an analysis of the activities of international and state organizations during armed conflicts and post-war reconstruction, and explores the impact of UNESCO World Heritage status on these activities. The main focus is on two historic cities – Dubrovnik in Croatia and Odesa in Ukraine – which are representative examples for considering the effects of armed conflicts on cultural heritage.

Dubrovnik, inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1979, has become a symbol of resilience and rebirth after Croatia’s War of Independence. The city suffered significant damage during the shelling, but the international community, together with the Croatian authorities, joined the restoration of historical monuments. UNESCO drew attention to the need to preserve cultural heritage, which helped mobilize resources and international assistance. The restoration work demonstrated the importance of international cooperation in preserving cultural heritage during conflicts.

A similar situation is now unfolding in Odesa, which also has the status of a UNESCO World Heritage Site, although it was added to the list only in 2023, after the start of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Odesa, like Dubrovnik, found itself at the centre of an armed conflict that threatened cultural heritage. The war has posed serious challenges to the protection of the city’s architectural and historical values, including risks to museums, libraries, churches, and other cultural sites.

The article pays special attention to the challenges faced by cultural heritage in times of war. For example, in addition to physical destruction, important issues include the protection and preservation of museum collections and archives, which can be subject to looting or destruction. In the case of Odesa, civil society also plays an important role in protecting cultural heritage. Numerous initiatives are emerging to preserve architectural monuments and cultural sites. An important element is the involvement of local residents in heritage preservation processes, which helps to raise awareness and responsibility for the cultural heritage of their city.

Finally, the article emphasizes the importance of the UNESCO World Heritage status as a tool for protecting cultural heritage during armed conflicts and post-war reconstruction. The experiences of Dubrovnik and Odesa demonstrate that international recognition and support can be key factors in the preservation and restoration of cultural sites that are an important part of national and world heritage.

Key words: Museum collections, cultural heritage, damaged monuments, Russo-Ukrainian war, Croatian War of Independence, Dubrovnik, Odesa.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Halushko, K.K., Lobanova, M.A. 2024. Spetsialnyi status obiektiv kulturnoi spadshchyny pid chas zbroinykh konfliktiv: porivnialnyi analiz dosvidu Dubrovnyka ta Odesy [Special status of cultural heritage objects during armed conflicts: a comparative analysis of Dubrovnik and Odesa experience]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 33-43.

References:

Damaged cultural sites in Ukraine verified by UNESCO. 2024. UNESCO: Building Peace through Education, Science and Culture, communication and information. URL: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/damaged-cultural-sites-ukraine-verified-unesco [date of access: 30.04.2024].

Dawson, M. 2023. War and the Historic Environment. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 14:2, 129-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2023.2211378 .

Emergency assistance to cultural institutions in Odesa, 2024. Phase 1. Museum for Change. https://www.mfcua.org/en/projects/emergency-assistance-to-cultural-institutions-in-odesa [date of access: 30.04.2024].

Ertan, T., Eğercioğlu, Y. 2016. The Impact of UNESCO World Heritage List on Historic Urban City Centers and its Place in Urban Regeneration: The Case of Melaka, Malaysia and Tire, Turkey. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 216, p. 591-602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.12.031 .

Fact-Finding Mission to Dubrovnik and Ston. UNESCO World Heritage Centre – Document – Technical Report, 12-15 November 1996.

Gaze, H. 2014. Reconstructing Dubrovnik. https://www.presidentsmedals.com/Entry-14260 .

Ivanova, O.A. 2023. Balkan and Ukrainian experience of protection and preservation of cultural heritage during military operations. VITA ANTIQUA 14, Culture Heritage and the War: challenges and solutions, p. 110-121. https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-110-121 .

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

Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage cultural and natural properties, 1992.

Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage cultural and natural properties, 1994.

Monitoring of the state of conservation of World Heritage cultural properties and related technical problems, 1992.

Report of the World Heritage Committee, 1991.

Shydlovskyi, P., Kuijt, I., Skorokhod, V., Zotsenko, I., Ivakin, V., Donaruma, W., Field, S. 2023. The tools of war: conflict and the destruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage. Antiquity, 97(396), e36. doi: https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2023.159 .

State of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List, 1995.

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Alina Moroko ^{1, 2}
Legal and Regulatory Aspects of Archaeological Heritage Protection in Contemporary Ukraine: General Overview and Opportunities for Improvement
¹ The Museum of the History of the City of Kyiv; Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6779-624X

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-21-32
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-21-32

ABSTRACT

Since 2014, a portion of our country’s territory has been under occupation by Russian forces, leading to the declaration of martial law in Ukraine in 2022. This stems from the Russian Federation’s “liberation operation” purportedly aimed at unifying our nations, promoting the notion of fraternal ties. Moreover, the occupiers persistently inflict irreparable damage upon Ukraine’s cultural heritage, seeking to obliterate evidence contradicting their narrative and ultimately erasing our national identity. Hence, safeguarding our historical legacy, particularly archaeological sites – among the most vulnerable heritage assets — is paramount and demands immediate solutions. Numerous legal frameworks govern the protection of cultural heritage, bolstered by Ukraine’s membership in the UN, affording access to international standards and best practices in shaping legal and administrative frameworks for safeguarding archaeological heritage.

This publication delves into the primary normative legal instruments governing archaeological heritage protection within Ukraine’s legislation. Specifically, it explores the regulatory framework established by the Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Archaeological Heritage” and the Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Cultural Heritage.” Additionally, it acknowledges the relevance of ancillary legislation such as the Laws of Ukraine “On Regulation of Town Planning Activities”, “On Architectural Activities”, “On Culture”, and “On the State Land Cadastre”. Furthermore, the article discusses ratified international treaties, whose implementation facilitates collaboration with other nations in the realm of cultural heritage preservation. It scrutinizes the principal shortcomings of the aforementioned laws, illustrating the legislative framework’s deficiencies through a case study focusing on archaeological sites in the Kyiv region. Through these examples, the article highlights areas for potential enhancement within the legislative framework.

Preserving our history stands as a paramount task demanding urgent attention. One proposed solution involves engaging international governmental and non-governmental organizations to establish dedicated authorities tasked with safeguarding archaeological heritage. These bodies would oversee the maintenance of a unified electronic registry of archaeological sites within each region. Such a system would facilitate the systematic organization of data, encompassing both registered sites and archaeological objects requiring protection.

Key words: law, archaeological object, archaeological site, cultural heritage, legislative act.

Language: Ukrainian

PDF

Cite as:
Moroko, А.О. 2024. Normatyvno-pravovyi aspekt okhorony arkheolohichnoi spadshchyny v suchasnii Ukraini: zahalnyi ohliad ta mozhlyvosti dlia pokrashchennia [Legal and Regulatory Aspects of Archaeological Heritage Protection in Contemporary Ukraine: General Overview and Opportunities for Improvement]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 21-32.

References:

Bilash, K. 2022. Pidryv Kakhovskoi HES postavyv pid zahrozu sotni arkheolohichnykh pamiatok. LB.UA, 6 June 2023. URL: https://lb.ua/culture/2023/06/06/559133_pidriv_kahovskoi_ges_postaviv_pid.html .

Buiskykh, A.V., Ivakin, V.H., Shydlovskyi, P.S., Zotsenko, I.V. 2023. 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, p. 36-59 (in Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2023-14-36-59 .

Buiskykh, A.V., Shydlovskyi, P.S., Ivakin, V.H. 2023. Monitoring of the Ukrainian archaeological heritage objects during the russia’s military aggression. Kyivski Zbirnyky Istorii, Arkheolohii, Mystetstva ta Pobutu, IV, p. 3-15 (in Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.55389/2786-5797.2023.01.01 .

Criminal Code of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine No. 2341-III of 04/05/2001: as of 01/01/2024. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14#n1870 .

Decision № 117436629, 21.02.2024, Commercial Court of Kyiv, https://youcontrol.com.ua/catalog/court-document/117436629/ .

Derzhavnyi Reiestr Nerukhomykh Pamiatok Ukrainy. MKIP Ukrainy. URL: https://mcip.gov.ua/kulturna-spadshchyna/derzhavnyy-reiestr-nerukhomykh-pam-iatok-ukrainy/ .

European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised) dated January 16, 1992, URL: https://rm.coe.int/168007bd25 .

International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964), II nd International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments, Venice, June 1964. URL: https://www.icomos.org/images/DOCUMENTS/Charters/venice_e.pdf .

Ivakin, V., Buiskykh, A., Zotsenko, I., Skorokhod, V., Zhyhola, V., Hotun, I., Hnera, V., Borysov, A., Shydlovskyi, P., Sushko, A. 2023. Monitorynh na Kyivshchyni ta Chernihivshchyni arkheolohichnykh obiektiv, yaki postrazhdaly vid viiskovoi ahresii rosii. Archaeological Researches in Ukraine 2022, p. 124-128 (in Ukrainian). URL: http://www.vgosau.kiev.ua/AP-ADU/ADU_2022.pdf .

On architectural activity: Law of Ukraine No. 687-XIV dated 05/20/1999: as of 03/31/2023. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/687-14#Text .

On culture: Law of Ukraine No. 2778-VI dated 14.12.2010: as of 21.09.2023. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2778-17#Text .

On export, import and return of cultural values: Law of Ukraine No. 1068-XIV dated 09/21/1999: as of 12/31/2023. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1068-14#Text .

On protection of Archaeological Heritage: Law of Ukraine No. 1626-IV dated 18.03.2004 as of 12.12.2012. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1626-15#n9 .

On protection of Cultural Heritage: Law of Ukraine No. 1805-III dated 08.06.2000: as of 02.10.2023. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1805-14#Text .

Second Protocol to the Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 1954 dated March 26, 1999. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_001-99#Text .

On the regulation of urban planning activities: № 3038-VI dated 02.17.2011 as of 01.04.2024. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3038-17#Text

On the State Land Cadastre: Law of Ukraine No. 3613-VI of 07.07.2011: as of 12.31.2023. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3613-17#Text .

Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or Private Works. The General Conference of the UNESCO, Paris, November 19, 1968. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_723#Text .

Recommendation concerning the Protection, at National Level, of the Cultural and Natural Heritage. The General Conference of the UNESCO, 17th session, Paris, November 16, 1972. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_724#Text .

Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding of the Beauty and Character of Landscapes and Sites, adopted by the General Conference of the UNESCO at its 12th Session, Paris, 11 December 1962, https://www.icomos.org/public/publications/93towns7a.pdf .

Shydlovskyi, P., Telizhenko, S., Ivakin, V. 2023. ArchaeologicalMonitoring in War-Torn Ukraine. The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 14:2, p. 154-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/17567505.2023.2209835 .

Zotsenko, I., Kornienko, M., Shydlovskyi, P. 2022. Kyiv archaeological heritage objects accounting : problems and prospectives. Kyivski Zbirnyky Istorii, Arkheolohii, Mystetstva ta Pobutu, III, p. 37-45 (in Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.55389/2786-5797.2022.01.04 .

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

VITA ANTIQUA 15, 2024, METHODS FOR MONITORING AND RESEARCH OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE OBJECTS

Pavlo Shydlovskyi¹, Anastasiia Diachenko²
To Know is to Preserve (Instead of Foreword)
¹ Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
² National Museum of the History of Ukraine
¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-812X
² ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2449-0286

DOI: 10.37098/VA-2024-15-9-19
https://doi.org/10.37098/VA-2024-15-9-19

ABSTRACT

For the archaeological, museological, and preservationist community, this period has been one of immense challenges. The individual scientific interests of researchers have been overshadowed by a collective concern for the state of cultural heritage and the urgent need to protect sites during a full-scale war. Public and scholarly initiatives aimed at preserving monuments and monitoring the impact of war on cultural values have grown into a wide array of projects and organizations capable of mobilizing significant resources to document crimes against cultural and natural heritage. After the initial shock of witnessing the scale of looting and destruction of cultural objects, the current situation demands a rational and proactive approach to heritage preservation. The preservation of historical and cultural heritage has been officially recognized as a priority in thematic areas and scientific and technical developments.

In response, significant attention has recently been devoted to advancing methodologies in the field of archaeological recording—from the use of space technologies to traditional methods of documenting archaeological information and culturally attributing materials. Ukrainian archaeology and museology have rapidly embraced modern global trends and technologies for preserving and processing culturally and scientifically significant data. Modern digital technologies, particularly in the realm of remote analysis of objects and artifacts, have been actively integrated into archaeological and museum subdisciplines. This approach goes beyond a simple pursuit of easy solutions or striking visualizations. In situations where collections or entire archaeological sites face the imminent risk of loss, the ability to digitally record relevant information has become a powerful tool for preserving cultural heritage and disseminating this knowledge to the world.

In response to the challenges facing our community during these difficult times, the Scientific School «Objects of Cultural Heritage: detection, research, preservation» was established at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv in October 2023. The School was initiated by a team of specialists, bringing together experts from the Department of Archaeology and Museum Studies of the Faculty of History, Archaeology Museum of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, the Interdepartmental Laboratory of Archaeology and Ethnography, and the Center for Paleoethnological Research. These specialists have long been engaged in research focused on the discovery, study, and preservation of Ukraine’s cultural heritage. Considering activities of the Scientific School for 2024-2029, this collection of articles focuses on methods for recording and monitoring archaeological objects.

Language:
Ukrainian / English

PDF

Cite as:
Shydlovskyi, P.S., Diachenko, А.V. 2024. To Know is to Preserve (Instead of Foreword). VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 9-19.

References:

Diachenko, A.V. 2024. Keramika z poselennia Andriivka : suchasnyi pidkhid do zberezhennia arkheolohichnoho materialu [Ceramics from the Andriivka settlement : new approaches to the preservation of archaeological material]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 93-101.

Diachenko, А.V., Tyshechko, T.L. 2024. Vidtvorennia slovianskoho pobutu shliakhom naturnoho modeliuvannia [Reconstruction of Slavic lifestyle through full-scale modeling]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 137-154.

Halushko, K.K., Lobanova, M.A. 2024. Spetsialnyi status obiektiv kulturnoi spadshchyny pid chas zbroinykh konfliktiv : porivnialnyi analiz dosvidu Dubrovnyka ta Odesy [Special status of cultural heritage objects during armed conflicts : a comparative analysis of Dubrovnik and Odesa experience]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 21-32.

Husak, A.M. 2024. “Tradytsiinyi” arkheolohichnyi maliunok: maibutnii perezhytok chy neobkhidnist [“Traditional” archaeological drawing: a future vestige or a necessity]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 93-101.

Moroko, А.О. 2024. Normatyvno-pravovyi aspekt okhorony arkheolohichnoi spadshchyny v suchasnii Ukraini: zahalnyi ohliad ta mozhlyvosti dlia pokrashchennia [Legal and Regulatory Aspects of Archaeological Heritage Protection in Contemporary Ukraine: General Overview and Opportunities for Improvement]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 21-32.

Pistruil, I.V., Syzov, M.H. 2024. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia ta problema okhorony pamiatok arkheolohii (na prykladi stoianok kamianoho viku Odeskoi oblasti) [Archaeological research and the problem of protection of archaeological objects (on the example of Stone Age sites of Odesa region)]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 45-54.

Rudenko, S.V. 2024. Poselennia ta horodyshcha zarubynetskoi kultury Cherkaskoi oblasti [Settlements and hillforts of the Zarubinets culture of the Cherkasy region]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 45-54.

Ryzhov, S.M., Tysliuk, V.V. 2024. Kohnityvni mozhlyvosti doslidzhennia pihmentiv na kamianykh artefaktakh [Cognitive possibilities of studying pigments on stone artefacts]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 79-91.

Shydlovskyi, P.S., Gladkikh, M.I. 2024. Osoblyvosti prostorovoi povedinky nosiiv mezhyritskoi verkhnopaleolitychnoi tradytsii [Peculiarities of spatial behaviour among bearers of the Mezhyrichian Upper Palaeolithic tradition]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 45-54.

Sokolovska, A.A. 2024. Shtuchnyi Intelekt ta perspektyvy yoho vykorystannia dlia doslidzhennia naskelnoho zhyvopysu doby verkhnoho paleolitu [Artificial Intelligence and Prospects for its Use in the Study of Upper Palaeolithic Rock Art]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 127-135.

Yeredenko, L.I. 2024. Fotohrammetriia. Praktychne zastosuvannia v arkheolohii : naukovi ta hromadski perspektyvy [Photogrammetry. Practical application in Archaeology : Scientific and Public Perspectives]. VITA ANTIQUA, 15. Methods for Monitoring and Research of Archaeological Heritage Objects, 115-125.

VITA ANTIQUA Library                                                                               ISBN 966-95597-3-1

Sea Trade in North Black Sea Region. The collection of scientific articles. Kyiv, 2001
Chios amphorae and trade relations between Olbia and Chios, 6-17

Leypunskaya N.A.

Abstract:
The process of trade relations between Olbia and Chios is examined in this article. The base of this research is the analysis of the Chian amphorae importation to the Lower Bug Region from the fourth quarter of the 7^th to the 4^th - the beginning of the 3^th century B.C. The typology of all basic types of Chian amphorae was traced. Some significant complexes from Olbia - cromlechs, pits, burial places - with different types of Chian amphorae were described. The conclusions about the existence of the connection between the changes of some amphorae types and the political and social events on Chios, the continuity and great capacity of the trade relations between Olbia during the all mentioned period were on the chronological observations.

Language: Russian

Download PDF

Cite as:
Leypunskaya, N.A. 2001. Chios amphorae and trade relations between Olbia and Chios. In: Parshina, E.A. (ed.). Sea Trade in North Black Sea Region. The collection of scientific articles (Morska torhivlia v Pivnichnomu Prychornomor’i. Zbirka naukovykh statei). Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Society of Archaeology and Anthropology, 6-17. VITA ANTIQUA Library (in Russian).

VITA ANTIQUA Library                                                                               ISBN 966-95597-3-1

Sea Trade in North Black Sea Region. The collection of scientific articles. Kyiv, 2001
Amphorae of hillforts of Lower Dniper in the IV сentury B.C., 18-25

Karyaka O.V.

Abstract:
This article is devoted to the analysis of main categories of ancient pottery amphorae, discovered at excavations of hillforts of Low Dniper. As a result, the author proves that the main part o f these materials was transported to mentioned region from productive centers of Thasos, Menda and Peparetos. Exception to this were materials of Lisaya Gora hillfort, which evidence of more close trade relations with centers of South Black Sea region.

Language: Ukrainian

Download PDF

Cite as:
Karyaka, O.V. 2001. Amphorae of hillforts of Lower Dniper in the IV сentury B.C. In: Parshina, E.A. (ed.). Sea Trade in North Black Sea Region. The collection of scientific articles (Morska torhivlia v Pivnichnomu Prychornomor’i. Zbirka naukovykh statei). Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Society of Archaeology and Anthropology, 18-25. VITA ANTIQUA Library (in Ukrainian).