UDC 902.652

S. V. Pankova ¹, S. S. Vasiliev ², V. A. Dergachev ², G. I. Zaitseva ³

¹ State Hermitage Museum: 34 Dvortsovaya Emb., Saint Petersburg, 191965, Russia

E-mail: oaves@hermitage.ru

² Ioffe Institute of Physics and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences 26 Politechnicheskaya St., Saint Petersburg, 194021, Russia

E-mail: sergey.vasiliev@mail.ioffe.ru

v.dergachev@mail.ioffe.ru

³ Institute of the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences 18 Dvortsovaya Emb., Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russia

E-mail: ganna@mail.wplus.net

The article is devoted to the dating of log cabins from mogs. 4 Oglakhtinsky burial ground (Khakassia), belonging to the extreme stage of the Tashtyk culture. The complex is characterized by good preservation of products made from organic materials, but its dating, as well as the age of most Tashtyk ground burial grounds, is debatable. For dating by the "wiggle matching" method, samples were taken from two log cabins. For each of them, two probable radiocarbon dates were obtained - early and late, which is due to the peculiarity of the calibration curve for the II-IV centuries, which does not allow us to date unambiguously. The averaged dates of both samples are represented by the intervals 260 - 296 and 372 - 402 AD. In order to determine one more reliable interval, the obtained radiocarbon dates were analyzed using mathematical statistics, according to which the late date of the log house construction - 387 AD ± 15 years (2 σ) - is much more likely.

Key words: Tashtyk culture, Oglakhta burial ground, radiocarbon dating, "wiggle matching".

Introduction

Oglakhtinsky burial ground is located in Khakassia, on the left bank of the Yenisei River, inside the Oglakhty mountain group, about 50 km north of Abakan. The monument belongs to the early stage of the Tashtyk culture, the so-called stage of ground graves. To date, more than 300 burials of this type have been excavated, but none of them is comparable to the Oglakhta burials in terms of preservation of materials. The dry ground and hermetic insulation of the burial chambers created conditions for preserving items made of fur and fabrics, wood and birch bark, as well as the bodies of the buried. Items of clothing and utensils represent a vibrant paleoethnographic culture, which is extremely rare in archaeological sites.

The Oglakhtinsky burial ground was accidentally discovered in 1902, and in 1903 A.V. Adrianov examined 17 graves on two of its sites. On one of them, three burials were distinguished by surprisingly good preservation [Adrianov, 1903, p. 4]. Excavations at the monument resumed in the late 1960s: in 1969-1973, one burial was excavated by E. B. Vadetskaya and seven others were excavated.

The study was supported by INTAS (project N). 03 - 51 - 4445) and the program of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Adaptation of peoples and cultures to changes in the natural environment, social and technological transformations".

1. Oglakhtinsky burial ground. Photo by M. P. Gryaznov in 1969 (from the archive of E. B. Vadetskaya).

2. Fur hat from grave 4 of the Oglakhta burial ground. State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.

3. Children's fur coat from grave 4 of the Oglakhta burial ground. State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.

L. R. Kyzlasov*. According to E. B. Vadetskaya, the burial ground includes more than 200 Tashtyk burials and, possibly, commemorations [Vadetskaya, 1999, p. 230], i.e. it has been studied only in a small part. Recently, a nature reserve was established in the Oglakhta Mountains, and currently it is extremely difficult to conduct excavations here (Figure 1).

One of the complexes studied by L. R. Kyzlasov - mog. 4-contained an intact burial of excellent preservation**. A log house was placed in the pit, hermetically sealed on all sides with sheets of birch bark. In a log cabin measuring 2.5*1.5 m there were mummies of a man and a woman. The faces of the buried were covered with plaster masks with paintings. Clothing was preserved - fur hats, jackets and trousers, a fragment of a skirt, mittens (?) and shoes (Fig. 2, 3). The man's body was tattooed (Fig. 4). In addition to mummies, the log house contained so - called funeral dolls-leather likenesses of human bodies with burnt bones sewn inside. Wooden blocks and leather pillows were placed under the heads of mummies and dolls. In the burial there were wooden and clay dishes, a spear with arrows and a model of a bow, a miniature bridle and other items. The Mog4 complex, including the log house, was transferred to the State Hermitage Museum. L. R. Kyzlasov planned to publish it

* According to the general numbering given by L. R. Kyzlasov for various archaeological complexes in the Oglakhta Mountains, the Tashtyk burial ground is designated under the number VI [1970, p. 197]. There is another, more fractional numbering of the monument: E. B. Vadetskaya, following A.V. Adrianov, identifies two burial grounds on opposite sides of the log-Oglakhty I and II; in addition to them, she separates the third Tashtyk cemetery below, on the dunes [Report..., 1906, p. 16-17; Vadetskaya, 1999, p. 230]. The plan of the burial ground has not been published. The authors of the article adhere to the traditional name of the monument-Oglakhtinsky burial ground.

** Mogg. 4 is located on the Oglakhty I site according to the A.V. Adrianov / E. B. Vadetskaya planigraphy variant (Vadetskaya, 1999, p. 232).

4. Tattoo on the shoulders and chest of a man (infrared survey) Oglakhtinsky burial ground, mog. 4.

completely upon completion of the restoration of things and dolls. To date, there are a series of preliminary publications, exhibition catalogues with photographs of individual objects, and several small special articles [Kyzlasov, 1969; 1970; 1971; Kyzlassow, 1971; Kovalenko, 1972; Nikitina and Baranova, 1973; Frozen, 1978; Siberia..., 2001; Kyzlasov and Pankova, 2004; Pankova, 2005].

In 2005, in agreement with the author of the excavation, radiocarbon dating of log logs from Mog4 was started using the "wiggle matching"method. In the spring of 2007, the first results of these studies were published (Zaitseva et al., 2007). This report presents the final materials of the study.

Oglakhty burial ground and issues of chronology of Tashtyk ground burials

The author of the first excavations in Oglakhty, A.V. Adrianov, was in no hurry to make a conclusion about the time of construction of the investigated graves. A report prepared by him for the Imperial Archaeological Commission states that "the time of an open culture representing perfect news cannot yet be determined" [Report..., 1906, p.129]. The next publications devoted to the Oglakhta burial ground appeared in the 1930s, after the discovery of the famous tombs of Noin-Uly, dating back to the first century BC - the first century AD, and the Altai mounds of Katandinsky and Shibe, attributed to the last centuries BC. A number of items from Oglakhta burials (false braids, silk polychrome fabrics, some types of wooden utensils) were similar to Noin-Ula, and the custom of trepanation of skulls, practiced in Oglakhta, was recorded in the Altai. These facts allowed G. P. Sosnovsky to assign the Oglakhta burial ground to the same epoch as the mentioned monuments [1939, pp. 38-39]. This was the basis for dating the Oglakhta complexes to the time around the turn of the eons.

Other ground graves, structurally and according to the burial rite similar to Oglakhta, were ordinary archaeological objects with a minimum of preserved objects, and many of them were looted. S. A. Teploukhov, in his periodization of monuments of the Minusinsk region, placed tashtyk burials between the mounds of the last stage of the Minusinsk kurgan (Tatar) culture and graves with bust masks (crypts). He dated the burials known by that time to the first and second centuries AD, based on the political events of the beginning of the new era in Central Asia, linking them with a sharp change in the funeral rite on the Yenisei (Teploukhov, 1929, pp. 50-51). Subsequently, a similar "historical" version of the dating was put forward by A. N. Bernshtam, who suggested that the Oglakhta burial ground "is a monument to the penetration of the Xianbians to the north in the second century AD" [1951, p. 47]. G. P. Sosnovsky, in dating ground graves, relied on glass beads similar in appearance to early Sarmatian ones, and attributed these monuments by the first century BC - the 1st century AD [1933, pp. 38-39]*.

These dating variants have existed in parallel for a long time. This was due to the fact that items from most of the Tashtyk burials are not indicative in terms of dating. Metal objects were rarely placed in graves, and objects made of bone and ceramics are featureless. Judging by the Oglakhta burials, the Tashtyk graves contained mainly items of clothing and utensils made of fur, leather and wood. Imported glass beads were found in a number of complexes, but the methods of determining their date by chemical composition were not yet known.

Analogs given for a number of Oglakhta products by G. P. Sosnovsky and S. V. Kiselev, when-

* M. P. Gryaznov, who later united all the ground burial grounds in the early Batenev stage of the Tashtyk culture, was close to the first Teplokhov variant (I-II centuries) [1971, pp. 96-99]. The second variant (I century BC - I century AD) was followed by L. R. Kyzlasov. A. M. Talyren attributed to this period all the few Tashtyk monuments known at that time (Tallgren, 1937, p. 88). S. V. Kiselyov's opinion stands apart, according to which ground graves and crypts are simultaneous within the first century BC - IV century AD, but Oglakhta burials tend to reach the turn of the eons [1949, pp. 220-224, 260-261].

The arrangements of burials were measured in time, but in fact it was not the objects themselves that were compared, but rather the categories of things (silk, wooden vessels, scythes) that were raised to the rank of dating due to their unique preservation. Meanwhile, the braids and wooden vessels themselves are not dating, and it was impossible to determine the age of silk without special research that was not carried out at that time.

L. R. Kyzlasov, when considering the date of ground burial sites, noted a number of individual objects that have analogies in the Sarmatian, Tess and Hunnic complexes. As a result, the Tashtyk graves and several "early" crypts were attributed to the first century BC - the first century AD (Kyzlasov, 1960, pp. 108-116). Many of the analogs given by L. R. Kyzlasov do not have narrow dates. For example, scabbards with protrusions, similar to the Oglakhta wooden models, existed not only in the first century BC - I century AD, but also up to the V-VI centuries [Ambrose, 1986, pp. 30-31]. However, critical analysis of analogs is not part of the task of our message. In addition, none of these "dating" objects were found in Oglakhtinsky pogr. 4.

Dating of the graves studied in the Oglakhta Mountains in the 60s-70s of the XX century was not specifically studied by anyone*. Most of the materials were not published (as they are now), and page 4, known from preliminary publications, did not seem to contain any dating items. Shortly after the excavation, L. R. Kyzlasov took the complex of graves. 4 to the first century BC [1971, p. 174], and in one of the last works - to the turn of the eras [Kyzlasov and Pankova, 2004].

The dating of the Tashtyk crypts also indirectly influenced the idea of the age of ground graves. Following M. P. Gryaznov, most of the crypts were attributed to the second, Tepsei stage of the Tashtyk culture, dated approximately to the III-V centuries (Gryaznov, 1971, p. 99). Accordingly, the time of the existence of ground graves fit into a small interval at the turn of the eras-at the beginning of a new era, between the end of the Tesinsky stage and the beginning of the period of Tashtyk crypts.

The works of E. I. Lubo-Lesnichenko and E. B. Vadetskaya became a new stage in the study of the chronology of ground burial grounds, and in particular Oglakhtinsky. The key to dating the Oglakhta burials were silk fabrics found here. In 1973, experts on ancient textiles K. Riboux and E. I. Lubo-Lesnichenko determined that polychrome fabrics from Oglakhtov differ from Noin-ula, with which they were usually compared. At the same time, some of the Oglakhta fabrics, including those from mog. 4, are similar to silks from Loulan, a large shopping center in the lake district. Lobnor in East Turkestan**. The similarity is manifested in the identity of technical data, the coincidence of details of the ornament and the form of writing hieroglyphs. Lobnorsk fabrics were found in the LC cemetery, and were probably made in the workshops of Shu (prov. Sichuan). The burials of Loulan in the 20s of the XX century were dated by A. Stein to the I century BC-II century AD [Riboux and Lubo-Lesnichenko, 1973, pp. 273-274, 278]. This date was also crucial for Oglakhta silk, confirming the existing view on the age of Tashtyk graves.

However, in 1994 E. I. Lubo-Lesnichenko gave a different date for the Lobnorsk finds, based on little-known publications of Chinese researchers in Russia. On the one hand, "the dating of finds from this region is complicated by the fact that most of them come from burials of the LC cemetery and graves N 34 and 36, which are mass secondary burials" (Lubo-Lesnichenko, 1994, p. 65). On the other hand, studies of specialists in the history of East Turkestan showed that he could. 34 refers to the time not earlier than the end of the second century AD, and some other burials-already to the period of Six dynasties. And most importantly, in numerous texts found on the ancient settlement LC, dates from 252 to 330 were presented [Ibid.]. Based on these data, it was concluded that "most of the finds from the Lobnor area, including those in the LC cemetery, date from the third to the beginning of the fourth century" [Ibid., p. 71]. Accordingly, fabrics from the Oglakhta burial ground, similar to the Loulan ones, should also be attributed to the same time [Ibid., p. 194].

The given date was contrary to all existing ideas, and it was almost impossible to verify it. In addition, shortly before the report of E. I. Lubo-Lesnichenko, a book by E. B. Vadetskaya was published, which confirmed the accepted dating of burial grounds from the first century BC to the 1st century AD (1986, pp. 144-146). Neither the author of the excavations in Oglakhty, nor other researchers reacted to the message of E. I. Lubo-Lesnichenko, so that the information that is fundamental for dating the Oglakhty complexes remained unnoticed.

In 1999, E. B. Vadetskaya published the results of her new research, also related to ZNA-

* A 185-year-long "floating" arboretum was constructed based on samples from the logs of the Mog4 log house (Kolchin and Bitvinskas, 1972, p. 85).

** The Loulan analogues of Oglakhta silk were first mentioned by S. V. Kiselev [1949, p. 224].

*** It was based on the "old" date of silk fabrics, the first data on the chemical composition of glass beads, and several radiocarbon dates. According to E. B. Vadetskaya, the manuscript has been waiting for publication for more than 10 years. By the time the book went out of print, the author already had doubts about the correctness of this dating.

a positive rejuvenation of Tashtyk monuments. On the one hand, the new date of the Tashtyk crypts - V-VII centuries, which has long been assumed by some researchers [Ambrose, 1971, p.120; Vadetskaya, 1986, p. 145; Azbelev, 1992, p. 52] was justified. On the other hand, a detailed study of the structures of graves and burial rites led E. B. Vadetskaya to conclude that "the planned narrow chronological framework of the functioning of burial grounds contradicts their diversity and the evolution of funeral rituals, which could not have changed in such a short time" [1999, p. 65]. The presence of graves of different types in large burial grounds, in particular on different slopes in Oglakhty, suggested that they were chronologically heterogeneous. According to the number of people buried, the predominance of the rite of corpse laying or corpse immolation, the presence of mummification and secondary burials, the types of graves that make up three conditional chronological groups and reflect the change in funeral traditions were identified. Two extreme and most distinct groups were clearly distinguished, while the middle group, which included most of the burials in Oglakhty, including grave 4, was intermediate [Ibid., pp. 66-67].

The selection of three groups should be checked by analyzing the material found. However, it was extremely difficult to establish their chronology with the help of things. Therefore, based on the similarity of the graves of one of the groups with the later small crypts, it was determined as late, and the other two - as middle and early. The only material that gave any hope of getting absolute dates was glass beads and beads. According to E. B. Vadetskaya, they are found only in the early group burial grounds (there are few of them in the middle group, and none at all in the late group). [Ibid., p. 67]*. Chemical analysis of the beads conducted by V. G. Galibin showed that most of them date back to the beginning of the new era, and some of them, according to the manufacturing technology, date back no earlier than the second century AD (see: [Ibid., pp. 68-69]). In addition to analyzing glass, E. B. Vadetskaya used radiocarbon dating of wood from burial chambers. The dates for several intact complexes did not contradict the proposed periodization: I century - for the early group, IV century - for the late group [Ibid., p. 67].

As a result, based on data on grave typology, beads, silk fabrics, and radiocarbon dating, E. B. Vadetskaya proposed an interval of I-IV centuries A.D. for Tashtyk ground burial grounds. Oglakhtinskaya grave 4 is assigned to the middle chronological group by its type, and for silk imports-to the period not earlier than the second half of the III-first quarter of the IV B. This dating system, like the previous ones, has its own weaknesses, which E. B. Vadetskaya herself admits. Periodization needs to be confirmed by absolute dates. The beads do not provide information about the age of late Tashtyk graves, and single random radiocarbon determinations are not absolute indicators. The dating of Oglakhta graves from silk imports is convincing, but the date of Turkestan silk originals is very difficult to verify. Thus, the "new" age of ground graves proposed in the 1990s is not sufficiently justified. As before, the dating of Tashtyk burials, including Oglakhta burials, requires confirmation by some other materials. In such a situation, it was desirable to conduct an independent study using some new "key". The use of materials from the Oglakhta border 4, which already has a late date for silk imports, should be particularly revealing.

Nature of samples and their analysis

The excellent preservation of the log house from Oglakhtinskaya mog. 4 gave a rare opportunity to study its logs using the "wiggle matching" method, highlighting the totality of tree rings for dating. In the archeology of Southern Siberia, this method was used to determine the age of monuments of the pre-Scythian and Scythian times, in which there were log cabins of good preservation. The success, difficulties and subtleties in its application are described in the joint work of archaeologists and representatives of natural sciences (Evraziya..., 2005). The Oglakhty burial ground is the first monument of another era, the materials of which were subjected to such research. Previously, wood and coal from Tashtyk ground graves were already provided for performing radiocarbon analyses, but the results often looked unreliable due to insufficient initial data [Zaitseva et al., 2007, pp. 302 - 303].

The "wiggle matching" method provides more accurate results when determining calendar age. The conditions for its use are good preservation of the tree sample and the presence of a significant number of annual rings in it. The sample is divided into blocks of ten annual rings, and a radiocarbon date is obtained for each block. Their sequence is a "floating" dendroscale. The obtained series of radiocarbon determinations is compared with the closest section of the calibration curve in configuration, which shows the chronological interval for the sample under study [Evraziya..., 2005, p.71]. The date of the outer rings of logs determines the possible lower time frame-

* There were no beads in Oglakhta grave 4.

5. Log house from grave 4 of the Oglakhtinsky burial ground in the State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg. Photos from the 1970s

the construction site of the burial chamber, since it indicates the time when the tree was cut down.

Most of the logs from mog. 4 meet these conditions. In the 1970s and 1980s, the log house was on display at the Hermitage in the Hall of Tashtyk Culture (Fig. 5). It is now dismantled. The log house was built of two or three crowns connected in a paw, and had a ceiling of nine transversely laid logs marked with counting notches. Log cabin dimensions 2,3*1,55*0,85 Moscow, Russia. Its detailed description was repeatedly given by L. R. Kyzlasov (see, for example, [Kyzlasov and Pankova, 2004, p. 61]). It is important that the log house was tightly wrapped in layers of birch bark during the burial, and the compressed backfill above the floor was not disturbed, so the samples are relatively "clean" for radiocarbon analysis*.

The wood was analyzed in the Department of Scientific and Technical Expertise of the Hermitage cand. Biol. nauk M. N. Kolosova**. The samples were identified microscopically based on their anatomical structure. Twelve logs are larch (Larix sp.), seven are pine (Pinus sylvestris). The lower logs of the end walls of the log house and five logs of the ceiling (having two, three, five, six and seven notches) turned out to be pine.

In 2005, two cuts were taken from the log house mog. 4: a sample of larch from the upper log of the end wall and a sample of pine from the log of the floor, which has seven notches. The choice of logs was determined both by their safety and the ability to assemble a log house without compromising its appearance when the exhibition was resumed. In the cosmic ray laboratory of the Ioffe Institute of Physics and Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (PTI), the samples were divided into blocks, and in the radiocarbon laboratory of the Institute of the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IIMC), radiocarbon dates were obtained for them (liquid scintillation technology). At the University of Helsinki, the isotopic fractionation of ^13C/^12C, which occurs during biochemical reactions during tree growth, was measured for these dates (mass spectrometric method). Employees of the Institute of Physics and Technology calibrated the obtained values using mathematical statistics methods, taking into account the correction for laboratory fractionation of ¹⁴ C/¹² C (occurs during chemical treatment of wood). In the spring of 2007, dating data for the larch sample were published, according to which the date of cutting down the tree for the construction of the grave was in the range 267 - 289 AD [Zaitseva et al., 2007, p. 306].

At the end of 2007, the FTI staff calculated the calendar age from the pine sample by matching the calibration curve. It should be noted that they did not limit themselves to providing data on pine, but made a number of adjustments to the measurements on larch, in particular, they emphasized the impossibility of giving an unambiguous date for harvesting log cabins due to the peculiarities of the calibration curve for the II-IV centuries. The results of previous calculations for larch were also ambiguous, but the authors of the publication gave the most likely conclusions, for which the estimate of the correction for laboratory fractionation is minimal [Ibid., Fig. 2]. With the advent of pine data, it became clear that the second date should not be discarded, because without additional analysis, you can not give preference to only one of them.

Calibration of radiocarbon measurement results

Two data sets were considered: for pine and larch. In contrast to larch (Zaitseva et al., 2007, Figure 2), the radiocarbon age values obtained for pine significantly fluctuate (Figure 6). To eliminate the fluctuation, they were averaged in pairs (Table 1). For the sake of uniformity, the same was done for larch data (Table 2).

* It was noted that for the construction of the log house, mostly dead-hardy trees were taken, judging by the movements of bark beetles (Marsadolov, 1988, p. 73). However, in the logs selected for analysis, such moves were practically absent. In addition, they are not absolute evidence of the death of the tree, so it is difficult to judge whether dead or live trees were cut down for logging.

** The authors are deeply grateful to M. I. Kolosova.

6. Calibration of radiocarbon measurement data (Oglakhty, Le7326-42, Sosna).

The middle line is a smoothed calibration curve drawn within the error corridor. A solid vertical line indicates the position of the most likely date value, while dashed lines indicate the left and right borders of the 95% confidence interval. The panel also shows the value of the correction for laboratory fractionation of ¹⁴ S/¹² S (Δy), determined by the maximum likelihood method [Evraziya..., 2005].

Table 1. Measured radiocarbon age of pine samples adjusted for natural fractionation ¹⁴ S/¹² S

Notes.

1. The weighted average value of x for a series of and measurements is determined as follows: where the weighting coefficients w _i are expressed in terms of the measurement errors σ _i: 

2. Variance of the mean (squared error of the mean) or 

3. The radiocarbon age correction δt was calculated as follows: Δt = 16.066 (25 ⁺ δ13 S).

4. A_cor = A₀ + Δt.

Table 2. Measured radiocarbon age of larch samples adjusted for natural fractionation of ¹⁴ S/¹² S*

* See note. go to Table 1.

7. Comparison of radiocarbon measurement data (Oglakhty, Le7343-61, larch) and the calibration curve, a - early date; b-late date. For explanations, see Figure 6.

The calibration curve for the II-IV centuries does not allow for unambiguous dating of samples due to the cyclical nature of climatic processes: two identical sections of the curve fall on this time interval, reflecting the similarity of climatic fluctuations of these centuries. The obtained radiocarbon dates can be equally correlated with each of them. It follows that an unambiguous determination of the calibrated time for the sample is not possible in this case*. Therefore, for larch as well,

* The problem of ambiguity in date selection occurs quite often (see, for example, [Evraziya..., 2005, p. 81]). For unambiguous calibration, it is necessary that there is no systematic error in radiocarbon age when performing measurements. This is possible with the use of masses-

8. Comparison of radiocarbon measurement data (Oglakhty, Le7326-42, Sosna) and the calibration curve, a - early date; b-late date. For explanations, see Figure 6.

Table 3. Calibration results

Notes. Two standard deviations (2σ) are indicated for the error. P is the probability of a random match between radiocarbon data and the calibration dependence. If P < 0.95, the data can be considered consistent with the calibration curve.

Two calibrated dates were obtained for each pine tree: early and late (Figs. 7, 8). They determine the possible time intervals for harvesting logs for the log house. The dates for the two samples, both for the early and late interval, do not differ significantly (the difference is significantly less than the statistical error), which makes it possible to average these values (Table 3).

So, we have obtained two possible time intervals for harvesting logs for a log house: 260-296 and 372 - 402 AD (95 %). For an objective choice of one of them, it is advisable to additionally perform mass spectrometric measurement of samples.

Discussion of radiocarbon measurement results

To select one of the two intervals, you can analyze the combined data for pine and larch. To do this, it is convenient to switch from statistics

which is a_Ai and the calibration function , to the variance S², which serves as a measure of the spread of the measured values of radiocarbon age relative to the calibration dependence. S² and χ ² are related by a simple relation 

where n is the number of sample dimensions. Using the values of χ ² (see Figs. 7, 8), it is easy to calculate the variance for both samples for both the early and the

the spectrometric method and the method using proportional gas meters. The IIMC radiocarbon laboratory uses a liquid scintillation technique involving chemical treatment of wood samples. It is difficult to rule out a systematic error here.

Table 4. Radiocarbon age variance relative to the calibration function

See Table 5. Radiocarbon age of pine and larch samples

4). For the next step, it is significant that due to the small number of layers measured (n), the values of for larch and pine are statistically identical at the 95% confidence level (Pollard, 1982). Therefore, for one of the time intervals, two dimensions (for pine and larch) can be considered together. The total variance is denoted by (Table 4).

As a result of calibration, it was found that the radiocarbon measurement data are in good agreement with the calibration curve in two time intervals separated by about 100 years, and in the later one it is noticeably better (values of χ ² are less). It is logical to assume that it is true (the values are less than).

Consider the value - the value for the early interval, and - for the late one. Statistics F has a Fischer distribution F_{n-1, n-1} [Afifi and Eisen, 1982], where n is the total number of layers (dimensions) in two samples. The larger the value of F, the less likely it is that its difference from unity is due to fluctuations in measurement errors. Large values of F fall into the so-called critical region of the Fisher distribution. There are 5%, 1%, etc.critical areas. The value expressed as a percentage indicates the probability of the statistical nature of the difference between the value of F and unity. Let's make estimates. Using the data in Table 4, we find: F = 4.0. Analysis of the Fischer distribution table [Ibid., 1982] allows us to conclude that this value falls into the 1% critical region of the Fischer distribution F_{14, 14}. Therefore, the variance for the early time interval is significantly determined not by statistical errors, but by variations of a different nature. These variations are due to the selection of an inappropriate site for comparing radiocarbon data with the calibration curve.

So, at a confidence level of 99 %, the early interval for the monument date of 278 AD ± 18 years should be excluded. The true age is late-387 AD ± 15 years. The choice made makes it possible to determine the value of corrections for laboratory fractionation of ¹⁴ S/¹² S (Δy, see Figs. 7, b; 8, b) and based on the data in Tables 1, 2 (A _{) to obtain the final results:} A ₌ A _{± Δ} Y (Table 5).

Conclusions

Radiocarbon dating of the log house from Oglakhtinskaya mog. 4 by the method of "wiggle matching" showed that its construction can relate to the period 260-296 or 372-402 AD. Subsequent statistical analysis allowed us to conclude that the probability of a late interval is much higher. For the final selection of one of the dates, it is desirable to perform additional measurements of the same samples using the mass spectrometric method.

The results obtained confirm the dating of the mog. 4 complex by the time not earlier than the end of the III-IV centuries, based on the date of silk imports, and the conclusion of E. B. Vadetskaya on the functioning of Tashtyk ground burial grounds up to this time. At the same time, it is necessary to continue archaeological research to verify and clarify the date of the Oglakhta burial, obtained using radiocarbon chronology methods.

List of literature

Adrianov A.V. Oglakhtinsky burial ground. - Tomsk, 1903.- (XXIX Illustrated appendix. to gaz. Sibirskaya Zhizn, No. 249 of November 16.)

Azbelev P. P. Tipogenesis of characteristic Tashtyk buckles / / Problems of archeology, history, local history and ethnography of the Yenisei region. Krasnoyarsk: Krasnoyarsk State University, 1992, vol. 2, pp. 48-52.

Ambrose A. K. Problems of Early Medieval chronology of Eastern Europe. Part II / / SA. - 1971. - N 3. - pp. 106-134.

Ambrose A. K. Daggers of the fifth century with two protrusions on the scabbard / / SA. - 1986-N 3. - pp. 28-35.

Afifi A., Eisen S. Statistical analysis: A Computer-based approach, Moscow: Mir Publ., 1982, 488 p.

Bernshtam A. N. Ocherk istorii hunnov [An Essay on the history of the Huns], Leningrad: Leningr State University Publ., 1951, 256 p.

Vadetskaya E. B. Archaeological sites in the steppes of the Middle Yenisei. - L.: Science, 1986. - 178 p.

Vadetskaya E. B. Tashtykskaya epokha v drevnoi istorii Sibiri [The Tashtyk Epoch in the Ancient History of Siberia]. - St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe vostokovedenie, 1999. -440 p. (Archeologica Petrovitana; N 7).

Gryaznov M. P. Miniatures of the Tashtyk culture: (From the works of the 1968 Krasnoyarsk expedition) / / ASGE. - L., 1971. - Issue. 13. - p. 94-106.

Alekseev A. Yu., Bokovenko N. A., Vasiliev S. S., Dergachev V. A., Zaitseva G. I., Kovalyukh N. N., Cook G., Van der Plicht I., Possnert G., Sementsov A. A., Scott E. M., Chugunov K. V. Evraziya v skifskuyu epokhu: Radiocarbon and Archaeological Chronology. St. Petersburg: Teza Publ., 2005, 290 p. (in Russian)

Zaitseva G. I., Sementsov A. A., Lebedeva L. M., Pankova S. V., Vasiliev S. S., Dergachev V. A., Junger H., Sonninen E. Novye dannye o khronologii pamyatnika Oglakhty-6 [New data on the chronology of the Oglakhty-6 monument]. Radioklerod v arkheologicheskikh i paleoekologicheskikh issledovaniyakh: mat-ly konf., posv. 50th anniversary of the Radiocarbon Laboratory of the Institute of Chemical Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, April 9-12, 2007, St. Petersburg: Teza Publ., 2007, pp. 300-307.

Kiselev S. V. Drevnyaya istoriya Yuzhnoi Sibiri [Ancient History of Southern Siberia], Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1949, 364 p. (MIA; issue 9).

Kovalenko T. Restoratsiya gipsovykh pogrebal'nykh masok [Restoration of gypsum funeral masks]. SGE, L., 1972, issue 35, pp. 77-79.

Kolchin B. A., Bitvinskas T. T. Sovremennye problemy dendrochronologii [Modern problems of dendrochronology]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1972, pp. 80-92.

Kizlasov L. R. Tashtykskaya epokha v istorii Khakassko-Minusinskaya kotloviny [The Tashtyk Epoch in the history of the Khakass-Minusinsk basin]. - 198 p.

Who lived in Khakassia two thousand years ago? // Science and Life. - 1969. - N 12. - p. 93-96.

Kyzlasov L. R. Excavations in Oglakh-Tah / / AO of 1969. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1970, pp. 197-199.

Kyzlasov L. R. Khakasskaya arkheologicheskaya expeditsiya 1969 goda [The Khakass archaeological Expedition of 1969]. The hack. NIIYALI Ser. historical. Abakan, 1971, Issue 16, No. 3, pp. 173-176.

Kyzlasov L. R., Pankova S. V. Tatooka drevnoi mumii iz Khakasii (rubezh nashi eri) [Tattoo of an ancient mummy from Khakassia (the turn of our Era)]. SGE. - SPb., 2004, issue 62, pp. 61-67.

Lubo-Lesnichenko E. I. China on the Silk Road: Silk and External relations of ancient and Early Medieval China. - M.: East. lit., 1994. - 326 p.

Marsadolov, L. S., Dendrochronology of large mounds in the Sayano-Altai region of the first millennium BC, ASGE, L., 1988, issue 29, pp. 65-81.

Nikitina K., Baranova T. Opyt restoratsii sukhoi arkheologicheskogo meha [Experience of restoration of dry archaeological fur]. SGE. - L., 1973, issue 37, pp. 78-79.

Report of the Imperial Archaeological Commission for 1903-St. Petersburg: [Tip. ch. management of appanages], 1906. - 245 p.

Pankova S. V. Composite skirt from the Oglakhty burial ground in Southern Siberia / / VI Congress of Ethnographers and Anthropologists of Russia. St. Petersburg, June 28-July 2, 2005: tez. dokl. - SPb., 2005. - P. 159-160.

J. Pollard Handbook of Computational methods of Statistics, Moscow: Finance and Statistics, 1982, 344 p.

Riboux K., Lubo-Lesnichenko E. I. Oglakhty i Loulan': (Dva gruppa drevnykh khudozhestvennykh tkaniy) [Oglakhty and Loulan: (Two groups of ancient artistic fabrics)]. 1973, Issue 15, pp. 272-281.

Sosnovsky G. N. O nakhodkakh Oglakhtinskogo mogilnika [About the finds of the Oglakhtinsky burial ground]. - 1933. - N 7/8. - p. 34-41.

Teploukhov S. A. Opyt klassifikatsii drevnikh metallicheskikh kul'tury Minusskogo kraya (v kratkom posazhenii) [Experience of classification of ancient metal cultures of the Minusinsk region (in a brief presentation)].

Frozen Tombs: The Culture and Art of the Ancient Tribes of Siberia. - L.: British Museum Publications Ltd, 1978. - 102 p.

Kyzlassow L. Das Grabmal am Jenissei // Ideen des exakten Wissen: Wissenschaft und Technik in der Sowjetunion. - Stuttgart, 1971. -N 8. - S. 517 - 522.

Siberia: Gli uomini dei fiumi ghiacciati. - Mlano: Electa, 2001. - 209 p.

Tallgren A.M. The South Siberian cemetery of Oglakty from the Han period // Eurasia Septentrionalis Antiqua. -Helsinki, 1937. - N 11. - P. 69 - 90.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 28.03.08.

Permanent link to this publication: