History of Tuva in the Middle Ages

It is translated by google from Russian Language

LR Kyzlasov
History of Tuva in the Middle Ages.


The history of the Turkic state formations - khanates existed in VI-VIII centuries on the territory of Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Central Asia and parts of South Siberia - is represented in the global historical literature a lot of work. They cover many private and common problems associated with the study of historical data, language, epigraphy, culture, archeology and anthropology of the ancient Turks.

In general historical works devoted to South Siberia, Tuva and Kazakhstan, investigators often pose the entire political history of the Turkic khanates, not focusing its attention on the historical processes that occur among the tribes of this area. Such an approach is incorrect. This chapter is devoted to the study of the history of a particular tribe of Tuva in the VI-VIII centuries, represents only part of the population of the former East Turkic khanates. 

Archaeological Site of VI-VIII centuries. - 18

Funeral constructions. - 18

Burials with the horse. - 18

Burial without a horse. - 22

Funeral constructions. - 23

Grave mounds. - 23

Ancient memorial fence. - 23

Funeral constructions nobility. - 33

Monuments of art and literature. - 35

Ancient stone statues. - 35

Written Monuments and petroglyphs. - 43

Economy, trade and everyday life. - 44

Cattle breeding, farming, hunting and fishing. - 44

Mining and crafts. - 46

Exchange and trade. - 48

Life and beliefs. - 48

Turk Empire and the population of Tuva. - 50

The population of Tuva in the VI-VIII centuries. - 50

The social system. - 52

Turkish Balbal - Tuva

The Tuvans or Tuvinians are a Turkish ethnic group living in southern Siberia.

Siberia Turks give also the geographical name to Siberia, Sibir/Sabir Turks/Siberia (land of Sibir).

Scythian-Turks leaders statue in Tuva (link)

Tuvaian are Turkish Tribe.

TURKISH HISTORY

Scythian Period Deer Stone and Bronze Plaque

fig 1-2-3

Bronze plaque with zoomorphic images. After: Treasures 1998, p. 68, Fig.62). 

Figs. 2 & 3, details of upper and lower parts of bronze plaque in Fig. 1

Geyik Taşlarındaki Bazı Resimlerin Yorumlanması Üzerine

Sergei S. Miniaev

Geyik taşları, Tunç Çağı ve İskit dönemlerine ait Avrasya bozkırlarındaki anıtlar arasında belirli bir türdür. Bunlar, bazen antropomorfik, ancak çoğunlukla zoomorfik tasvirlere sahip, farklı boyutlarda taş stellerdir. Bunlar arasında, uzun, dallı boynuzlu, dörtnala koşan geyiklerin stilize figürleri baskındır. Bu tür anıtlar, tarihlerini ve bulundukları toprakların kapsamını belirleyen birçok bilim insanı tarafından sıklıkla incelenmişlerdir (Volkov 1981; Chlenova 1984; Khudiakov 1987; Savinov 1994; Varenov 1998). Tüm uzmanlar, geyik taşlarını savaşçıların sembolik temsilleri, üzerlerindeki tasvirleri ise savaşçıların kıyafetlerindeki dövmeler veya deri aplikeler olarak yorumlamışlardır. Hem müze koleksiyonlarından hem de son yıllardaki kazılardan elde edilen bir dizi bronz objenin analizi, bu tür tasvirlerin yorumlanması için başka bir seçenek daha önermektedir.

Öncelikle özel bir koleksiyondan alınmış bir bronz plakaya bakalım (Resim 1). Bu plakanın keşfedilme koşulları bilinmemektedir, ancak tasvirlerin tarzı onu İskit-Sibirya kültürleriyle ilişkilendirmektedir. Şekli yaklaşık olarak yamuk şeklindedir, 31,5 x 8,5 cm boyutlarındadır ve yaklaşık 0,5 cm kalınlığındadır; alt kenarı yuvarlak, üst ve daha geniş kenarı ise kabaca üçgen şeklindedir.

Plakanın ön yüzünde birkaç süsleme bölgesi bulunur: bunlardan üçü geometrik kompozisyonlara, ikisi ise zoomorfik konulara sahiptir. Geometrik kompozisyonlar, üç sırası plakanın ortasında, bir sırası alt ve üst kenarlarda olmak üzere volütlerden oluşur. Plakanın üst kısmındaki zoomorfik nesne, iki geyik ve iki öküz figürü içerir; bu çiftler, simetrik olarak yan yana (sırt sırta) dizilmiştir (Şekil 2). Plakanın alt kısmında (Şekil 3) iki sıra halinde (ancak neredeyse tam simetri içinde) yırtıcı hayvan sahneleri yer alır: her sırada bir kedi yırtıcı hayvan bulunur ve bunun altında bir toynaklı hayvanın (at veya kulan) başı tasvir edilmiştir. Kedinin arkasında bir sıra halinde uzun gagalı üç yırtıcı hayvan bulunur. Plakanın uzun kenarları boyunca ve alt kenarı boyunca, birbirinden yaklaşık eşit uzaklıkta, her biri 3-4 cm çapında 37 delik bulunur.

Bu deliklerin varlığı, katalog açıklamasının yazarlarını, plakanın deriye tutturulmuş bir at koşum takımı süsü (muhtemelen bir alınlık) olduğuna karar vermeye yöneltmiştir (Treasures 1998, s. 68). Ancak, bu amaç bu kadar çok delik gerektirmezdi. Dolayısıyla, söz konusu plaka için farklı bir işlev önermek mümkündür. Savunma amaçlı bir silahın parçası olabilir ve ayrı bir kol plakası olarak hizmet etmiş veya (deri kayışlar veya kirişler yardımıyla) benzer bir veya daha fazla plakayla birleştirilerek koruyucu bir giysi oluşturmuş olabilir. Söz konusu plakadaki geyik ve diğer hayvan tasvirlerinin, geyik taşlarındaki tasvirlerle benzerliği oldukça açıktır (Şekil 4). Dolayısıyla, bu taş savaşçı heykellerine oyulmuş tasvirlerin, yalnızca kıyafetlerdeki dövmeleri veya deri aplikeleri değil, aynı zamanda bronz zırhlardaki zoomorfik kompozisyonları da taklit ettiği öne sürülebilir.

İskit döneminde Avrasya bozkırlarındaki halkların bu tür bronz zırhları kullandığı iyi bilinmektedir. Arkeolojik anıtlarda, bu zırhların parçaları esas olarak üretim ve kullanım gelenekleri Tunç Çağı'na kadar uzanan bronz miğferlerle temsil edilmektedir (Komissarov 1987; Varenov 1989). Bozkır kuşağının doğu kesiminde uzun süre İskit dönemine ait bu tür miğferler yalnızca tesadüfi buluntularla biliniyordu ve yağmalanmış mezarlarda tek tek buluntular da mevcuttu (Erdenebaatar ve Khudiakov 2000; Khudiakov ve Erdene-Ochir 2010; Varenov 1994; bozkır kuşağının doğu bölgesindeki buluntular için bkz. Kang 2009). Son yıllarda Çin'in kuzeydoğusunda yapılan kazılar, yalnızca silah koleksiyonunu doldurmakla kalmamış, aynı zamanda ilk kez yerinde zırh parçalarının buluntularını da kaydetmiştir.

Özellikle, 1985 yılında İç Moğolistan, Ningcheng İlçesi'ndeki Xiaoheishigou bölgesinde kazılan 2 numaralı mezarda (85 NDKhA I M2) durum böyledir (Resim 5). Bir önceki yüzyılın sonlarında yapılan kazılarda, kültürel katmanlara ve konut yapılarına oyulmuş birkaç düzine mezar bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, çeşitli tahrip edilmiş mezarlardan kaynaklandığı anlaşılan temsili bir bronz eser koleksiyonu da oluşturulmuştur. Çalışmanın yapıldığı yıla denk gelen bu koleksiyonlara (belirli bir mezarın mezar envanterini oluşturmayan) geçici olarak "mezar 8501", "mezar 9601" vb. isimler verilmiştir (Xiaoheishigou 2009).

Toplam altı bronz miğfer, beşi kompleksin dışında, biri ise 85 NDXA I M2 numaralı mezarda olmak üzere alanda bulunmuştur. Bu gömü, dikey duvarları olan sığ bir çukurda ahşap bir tabuttaydı. Erkek bedeni sağ tarafına yatırılmış, başı güneydoğuya dönük ve uzuvları uzatılmış halde yatıyordu; ancak ayak kemikleri eksikti. Ölen kişinin başında, tepesinde dikdörtgen bir halka bulunan bronz bir miğfer vardı. Envanterde bronz silahlar (mızraklar [Şekil 6.1,2], hançerler [6: 9–12, 14–16], sivrilen bıçaklı ve trapez dipli bir hançer baltası [6:3], dip kısmında topuz bulunan dikdörtgen şekilli yuvalı bir balta [6:7] ve iki bıçaklı ok uçları [6:17–23]), bıçaklar, bızlar, küçük bir içi boş balta [6:13], bronz halkalar [6:24, 27, 28], beş boncuk sırası gibi oluşturulmuş kemer süsleri [6:26, 29] ve iki çift hayvan başından şekillendirilmiş kare bir plaka [6:25] vardı.

Ölen kişinin başının üzerinde, üzerinde bir açıklık (muhtemelen küçük bir balta) [6:8] ve hayvan boynuzundan yapılmış bir çivi [6:5] bulunan kama biçimli bir taş obje vardı. Özellikle, ölen kişinin ön kolunun yakınında bulunan iki bronz levha ilgi çekiciydi [Res. 5, okla gösterilmiştir; 6:4,6; 7:1,2]. Boyutları yaklaşık olarak aynı olmasına rağmen, kazı raporunda (mezarın ölçüleri de dahil olmak üzere) bunların belirlenmesi kesin değildir: Mezar çiziminde (Xiaoheishigou 2009, Res. 237) ölçek, uzunluklarının yaklaşık 45 cm olduğunu gösterirken, envanteri tasvir eden resimde ölçek, levhaların yaklaşık 11 cm uzunluğunda olduğunu göstermektedir (Aynı eser, Res. 238).

Buluntuların açıklamasında, bir levhanın uzunluğu 22,1 cm, diğerinin ise 11,4 cm olarak belirlenmiştir (Aynı eser, s. 298). Açıklamada verilen mezarın boyutlarına (285 x 100 cm) bakılarak, diyagramdaki ölçek düzeltilmeli (1 m'den 0,5 m'ye) ve böylece plakaların muhtemel uzunluğu 22 cm olmalıdır. Plakalardan biri, uzun kenarları yuvarlatılmış düzensiz bir yamuk şeklindedir; diğerinin alt kısmı dikdörtgen şeklindedir ve üst kısmı yamuk şeklinde daralmaktadır. Plakaların kesiti üçgendir; arka yüzünde üst kısımda iki, alt kısımda ise bir halka bulunmaktadır.

Kazı raporunun yazarları, söz konusu nesneleri at alınlıkları olarak tanımlamaktadır; bu pek de haklı görünmemektedir: 85 NDXA I M2 mezar envanterinde at koşum takımı parçalarıyla ilişkilendirilebilecek hiçbir nesne bulunmamaktadır (diğer mezarlarda ise bu tür nesneler bulunmuştur). Plakaların ön kollar yakınındaki yerindeki konumu ve bunları sabitlemek için kullanılan halkalar göz önüne alındığında, bu plakaların kol plakası olarak kullanılmış olabileceği ve miğferle birlikte kullanıcıyı keskin silah darbelerinden korumak için kullanılmış olabileceği öne sürülebilir.

Şekli ve işlevi bakımından benzer olanlar, tesadüfi buluntular arasında yer alan ve alandan bilinen plakalardır (geçici numaraları "M8501" ve "M9601" olan eser koleksiyonu) (Şekil 7:3,4). Bunlardan birinin uzunluğu 24 cm, diğerinin uzunluğu ise 20 cm'dir. Plakaların üst kısmı, üst kenarı yuvarlatılmış bir yamuk (No. M8501) şeklindedir; alt kısmı ise içbükey, uzun kenarlı düzensiz bir yamuk şeklinde daralmaktadır. Plakaların ön yüzünde, üst kısmın ortasında iki çıkıntı bulunur; M8501 plakasının altında ayrıca küçük bir eşkenar dörtgen biçimli çıkıntı bulunmaktadır (muhtemelen, bu detaylar bir araya getirildiğinde bir maskeyi temsil etmektedir). Her iki plakanın arka yüzündeki kısa kenarlardan tutturma amaçlı küçük halkalar çıkmaktadır.

Açıkça 85 NDXA I M2 mezarı ve Xiaoheishigou sahasındaki diğer mezarların çoğu, İskit dünyasının Uzak Doğu uzantısının bir parçasıdır (Miniaev 1991). Bunu, hem İskit dönemine ait mezarlarda bulunan hem de geyik taşlarında tasvir edilen birçok nesnenin (hançerler, hançer başlı baltalar, baltalar, dizgin kılavuzları) bulunduğu mezar envanteri ve birçok eserdeki tasvirlerin "İskit-Sibirya" tarzında olması kanıtlamaktadır (Şekil 8).

Bu mezarların, bu alanın ait olduğu Yukarı Xiajiadan kültürüyle bağlantısı hâlâ tartışmalıdır. Tıpkı bu kültürün özelliklerini tanımlayan Xiajiadian'da olduğu gibi, Xiaoheishigou alanının katmanı ve onunla bağlantılı, envanteri olmayan yuvarlak çukurlardaki mezarlar, genellikle taş sandukalarda, daha az sıklıkla ahşap tabutlarda veya taş sandukaların içine yerleştirilmiş tabutlarda, envanteri olan İskit görünümündeki mezarlarla kesişmiştir. Dolayısıyla, "Yukarı Xiajiadian kültürü" olgusunun, terminolojik ve kronolojik karışıklığı önlemek için daha ayrıntılı bir analize ihtiyaç duyduğu açıktır (Miniaev 1985, s. 78; 1991, s. 173).

Aksine, gerçek "Üst Xiajiadian kültürü"nün (hem yerleşim yerleri hem de envanteri olmayan çukurlardaki gömüler), İskit envanterli sandık veya ahşap tabutlara gömülme kültürüyle bağlantısı olmayan ayrı bir kültürü temsil etmesi muhtemeldir. Üst Xiajiadian'ın günümüzde kabul gören kronolojisi - MÖ 1000-600 (Regional 2003), burada tartışılan gömülerin stratigrafisi ve Xiaoheishigou'daki "yerleştirilmiş" gömülerden elde edilen buluntuların çoğunun İç Asya'daki İskit kültürleriyle olan benzerlikleri göz önüne alındığında, bu tür gömülerin olası tarihi İlkbahar ve Sonbahar döneminin ikinci yarısı ile Savaşan Devletler döneminin başlangıcı, yaklaşık MÖ 7.-5. yüzyıllardır.

***

On the Interpretation of Certain Images on Deer Stones

Sergei S. Miniaev

Deer stones are one specific type among the monuments of the Eurasian steppes from the Bronze Age and Scythian periods. They are stone steles of varying dimensions, sometimes with anthropomorphic but primarily with zoomorphic representations, among which dominate stylized figures of of galloping deer with long branching horns. Such monuments have frequently been the subject of study by many scholars, who have established their date and the range of territory over which they are found (Volkov 1981; Chlenova 1984; Khudiakov 1987; Savinov 1994; Varenov 1998). All the specialists have interpreted deer stones as symbolic representations of warriors and the depictions on them as tattoos or leather appliqués on warriors’ clothing. Analysis of a number of bronze objects both from museum collections and from excavations of recent years suggests yet another variant for the interpretation of such representations.

Let us look first of all at a bronze plaque from a private collection (Fig. 1). The circumstances of the discovery of this plaque are unknown, but the style of the depictions connect it with Scytho-Siberian cultures. Its shape is approximately trapezoidal, it measures 31.5 x 8.5 cm, and is about 0.5 cm thick; its lower edge is rounded, while the upper and wider edge has roughly a triangular shape. 

On the face side of the plaque are several ornamental zones: three of them have geometric compositions and two zoomorphic subjects. The geometric compositions consist of volutes, three rows of which are in the center of the plaque and one row each on the lower and upper edges. The zoomorphic subject in the upper part of the plaque contains two figures of deer and two figures of oxen, these pairs symmetrically arranged in addorsed (back-to-back) poses (Fig. 2). On the lower part of the plaque (Fig. 3) in two rows (but practically in direct symmetry) are scenes of predation: in each row is a feline predator, under which is depicted the head of an ungulate (a horse or kulan). Behind the feline in a row stand three raptors with long beaks. Along the long edges of the plaque and along the lower border, approximately equidistant from each other, are 37 holes, each with a diameter of 3–4 cm. 

The presence of these holes led the authors of the catalog description to decide that the plaque was decoration for horse harness (probably they had in mind a browband) attached to leather (Treasures 1998, p. 68). However, that purpose would not have required such a large number of holes. So it is possible to propose a different function for the given plaque. It could be part of defensive armament and have served either as separate arm plates or (with the help of leather straps or sinews) have been combined with an analogous plaque or plaques to form a protective suit. The similarity of the depictions of the deer and other animals on the given plaque with those on the deer stones is quite obvious (Fig. 4). Therefore, one can propose that the depictions, carved on these stone statues of warriors, imitate not only tatooing or leather appliqués on clothes but as well zoomorphic compositions on bronze armor.

The use of such bronze armor by the peoples of the Eurasian steppes in Scythian times is well established. In archaeological monuments its parts are represented principally by bronze helmets whose traditions of manufacture and use date from the Bronze Age (Komissarov 1987; Varenov 1989). For a long time such helmets of the Scythian period in the eastern part of the steppe belt were known only from chance finds, and in individual instances were found in plundered graves (Erdenebaatar and Khudiakov 2000; Khudiakov and Erdene-Ochir 2010; Varenov 1994; for a collection of finds in the eastern region of the steppe belt see Kang 2009). Excavations of recent years in northeastern China not only have filled out the collection of armaments but for the first time possibly have recorded finds of armor parts in situ.

fig 4: The Ivolga deer stone. After: Okladnikov 1954.

Fig. 5. Plan and section of grave 85 NDXA I M2 at Xiaoheishigou. After: Xiaoheishigou 2009, Fig. 237

In particular, this is the case in grave No. 2 excavated in 1985 (85 NDKhA I M2) at the site of Xiaoheishigou in Ningcheng County, Inner Mongolia (Fig. 5). At the end of the previous century excavations of the site found several dozen burials, which had been cut into the cultural layers and domestic structures. Moreover, a representative collection of bronze artefacts was made, ones originating it seems in various destroyed burials. Corresponding to the year in which the work was carried out, these collections (which did not constitute the burial inventory of a specific tomb) were given the provisional names “grave 8501,” “grave 9601” etc. (Xiaoheishigou 2009).

In toto six bronze helmets were found at the site, five of them outside the complex and one in grave no. 85 NDXA I M2. That burial was in a wooden coffin in a shallow pit with vertical walls. The male body lay on its right side, head to the southeast with extended limbs, but the foot bones were missing. On the head of the deceased was a bronze helmet with a rectangular loop at the top. The inventory included bronze weapons (spears [Fig. 6.1,2], daggers [6: 9–12, 14–16], a dagger axe with tapering blade and trapezoidal butt [6:3], a socketed axe of rectangular shape with a knob on the butt [6:7], and two-bladed arrowheads [6:17–23]), knives, awls, a small hollow axe [6:13], bronze grommets [6:24, 27, 28], belt decorations formed like a row of five beads [6:26, 29], and a square plaque shaped from two pairs of animal heads [6:25].

Fig 6:Inventory of grave 85 NDXA I M2 at Xiaoheishigou. After: Xiaoheishigou 2009, Fig. 238.

Above the head of the deceased was a wedge-shaped stone object with an opening (possibly a small axe) [6:8] and a spike made from animal horn [6:5]. Of particular interest were two bronze plaques found in the vicinity of the forearm of the deceased [Figs. 5, indicated by arrow; 6:4,6; 7:1,2]. They have approximately the same size, whose determination (as also that of the measurements of the grave) in the excavation report is imprecise: on the drawing of the burial (Xiaoheishigou 2009, Fig. 237) the scale suggests that their length is about 45 cm, whereas in the figure depicting the inventory, the scale suggests the plaques have a length of about 11 cm (Ibid., Fig. 238).

The description of the finds assigns one plaque a length of 22.1 cm, the other 11.4 cm (Ibid., p. 298). Judging from the size of the grave given in the description (285 x 100 cm) the scale on the diagram should be corrected (from 1 m to 0.5 m) and thus the probable length of the plaques is 22 cm. One of the plaques has the shape of an irregular trapezoid with rounded long edges; the lower part of the other is in the shape of a rectangle with the upper part narrowing in the shape of a trapezoid. The cross-section of the plaques is triangular; on the reverse side are two loops in the upper part and one in the lower.

The authors of the excavation report describe the given objects as horse browbands, which hardly seems justified: in the inventory of burial 85 NDXA I M2 are no objects which can be connected with pieces of horse harness (whereas in other burials such are found). Taking into account the position of the plaques in situ in the vicinity of the forearms and the loops for securing them, one can suggest that such plaques could have been used as arm plates and, along with the helmet, served to defend the wearer from blows of sharp weapons.

Similar in shape and possibly analogous in function are the plaques known from the site that were among the chance finds (the collection of artefacts with the provisional numbers “M8501” and “M9601”) (Fig. 7:3,4). The length of one of them is 24 cm, the other 20 cm. The upper part of the plaques has the shape of a trapezoid, No. M8501 with rounded upper edge; the lower part narrows in the shape of an irregular trapezoid with concave longer sides. On the face side of the plaques in the center of the upper part are two projections; under them on plaque M8501 is also a small rhomboid-shaped projection (possibly, taken together these details represent a mask). Small loops for fastening project from the short sides on the reverse of both plaques.

Fig. 7. 1, 2. 

Bronze plaques from grave 85 NDXA I M2 (depicted also in Fig. 6: 4, 6). 3. Bronze plaque from “grave M8501.” 4. Bronze plaque from “grave M9601”. 

After: Xiaoheishigou 2009, Figs. 238; 330:2,10.

Clearly grave 85 NDXA I M2 and the majority of the other burials at the Xiaoheishigou site are part of the Far Eastern extension of the Scythian world (Miniaev 1991). Attesting to this is the inventory of the graves, where there are many objects both found in burials of the Scythian period and depicted on deer stones (daggers, dagger-headed axes, axes, rein guides), and the depictions on a number of the artefacts are in the “Scytho-Siberian” style (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8. Bronze objects collected at Xiaoheishigou from “grave M8061” and “grave M8501” respectively. After: Xiaoheishigou 2009.

The connection of these burials with the Upper Xiajiadan culture (to which this site is attributed) as yet remains controversial. Just as at Xiajiadian, which has defined the features of this culture, the stratum of the Xiaoheishigou site and the burials in round pits connected with it that have no inventory were cut through by burials with inventory of Scythian appearance, often in stone cists, less commonly in wooden coffins or coffins placed inside a stone cist. Thus it is clear that the phenomenon of the “culture the Upper Xiajiadian” is in need of more detailed analysis in order to avoid terminological and chronological confusion (Miniaev 1985, p. 78; 1991, p. 173). 

Rather it is probable that the real “culture of the Upper Xiajiadian” (both settlements and burials in pits without inventory) represents a separate culture which is not connected with the culture of burials in cists or wooden coffins with Scythian inventory. Taking into account the currently accepted chronology of the Upper Xiajiadian — 1000–600 BCE (Regional 2003), the stratigraphy of the burials discussed here, and analogies of the majority of finds from the “inserted” burials at Xiaoheishigou to Scythian cultures of Inner Asia, the probable date of such burials is the second half of the Spring and Autumn period to beginning of the Warring States period, approximately the 7th–5th centuries BCE.


Sergei Miniaev -pdf
The Silk Road Vol 11 - 2013
is a senior scholar at the Institute of the History of Material Culture in the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg. He is one of the leading specialists on the archaeology of the Xiongnu, having directed major excavations in Transbaikalia.

Note: This article previously appeared in Russian as “K interpretatsii nekotorykh izobrazhenii na olennykh kamniakh,” in: Kul’tury stepnoi Evrazii i ikh vzaimodeistvie s drevnimi tsivilizatsiiami: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii, posviashchennoi 110-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia vydaiushchegosia rossiiskogo arkheologa Mikhaila Petrovicha Griaznova, Kn. 1 (SPb.: IIMK RAN; Periferiia, 2012), pp. 262–67.

Pazyryk - Sarcophage

Pazyryk Tattoo

and

more photos

Example Pazyryk burial - burial mound excavated 

Turkish woman Ak-Alakha (Siberian Ice Maiden). 

1990 to 1995 Southern Altai detachment of the North-Asian complex expedition of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted research on a high plateau Ukok, located in the border zone with China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan. During excavations in one of the mounds burial Ak-Alakha was found unique burial Turkish woman.... As in other Pazyryk graves in the northern part of the burial pit at the bottom it was laid six horses killed by a blow combat coinage in the parietal part of the skull. They lay in two tiers in a narrow (about 65 cm) space between the wall and the wall of the pit log. Preserved wool, braided tails, wooden jewelry harness, parts of saddles and felt cover.... Open to Ukok burial belongs to the free and noble Turkish woman. Pazyryk mounds almost never single, and ancestral burial grounds make up, but the mound, which was buried a young woman stood alone. Only much later, not earlier than VII century BC. e., near the Turkish soldier was buried. Even if we assume that the woman was the head of the family, her mound was to be the beginning or the center of the family chain. It can be assumed that a single burial of a young woman Pazyryk indicates celibacy peculiar shaman and other holders of secret knowledge. Celibacy emphasizes their independence and exclusivity.

On the left shoulder shows a fantastic animal in the animal style: a deer with the beak of a griffin, deer and ibex horns. Horn are decorated with stylized heads of griffins; a similar tip is placed on the back of the animal, which is shown with "Twisted" body. Later in the same pose depicted a sheep with his head thrown back; at his feet - serried jaws of a spotted leopard with a long curly tail. Under the leopard is a fantastic beast, the image of the head of which has not been preserved; his claws, a long striped tail tiger trunk lying deer and grow back from the head of a griffin. On his wrist is clearly visible deer head with large branched antlers. Almost all of these are real and fantastic animals are already known from the drawings on the body of a man from the Second Pazyryk mound. According to the authoritative opinion of Lotman, in the unwritten culture, "focused not on the multiplication of the number of texts, and on repeated their reproduction, the role of written characters perform mnemonic", which include samples and Pazyryk tattoos. With recurring images of real and fantastic animals the human body applied a kind of "text", a sacred record important information.

Tattoos in archaic and traditional societies involved, usually women. In addition, since ancient times traced another trend - tattooed women themselves often become.

The lives of many archaic societies tattoo occupied a significant place and was quite common, most often associated with the rite of initiation (and boys and girls). But note that the seven mummies found in the rich "frozen" graves, the tattoo was present at only two - a man and a woman. So, not all noble Pazyryk were indelible pictures on the body. But quite unexpectedly, the tattoo was found on the VI Molodin Ukok on ordinary warrior mummies Pazyryks. It was a picture of a fantastic animal figures - deer with gryphon's beak, as if thrown over the right shoulder to the chest and back.

That could mean tattooed Pazyryk society? Probably the same as in all traditional or ancient cultures. First of all, it could indicate the place occupied in society a specific person. These indelible marks can be distinguished warriors, priests, tribal chiefs, heads of other categories of the population. The point is in the "text": the kinds of real and imaginary animals, their number, the location of the drawings on the body. Tattooed woman's hand with Ukoka - a sign of her social status, but, unfortunately, does not answer the question of which one. According to archaeological materials difficult to identify the burial of the clergy, the priests. There is some evidence to suggest that the young woman buried tribesmen with such a pronounced respect, different kind of a special gift. This is not necessarily to be considered its shaman or priestess. In the ritual practice of the Sayano-Altai is known, for example, at least 30 names of various specialists - holders of secret knowledge that have always existed along with the shaman as his necessary background. The young woman could be a healer, storyteller, fortune teller. But it is unlikely we will ever know about it ...

Altai.go

google translate from Russian language / link

SCYTHiAN  - Altai.go

Scythian/Saka/Massagetae/Parthian are the ancestors of today Turks, all over the World

Turks on Stones - Turkish inscriptions

Okunev Culture - Turkish Culture

first half of 2nd millennium BC

in the National museum of Republic of Khakassia (HAKASYA)

and Minusinsky Regional History Museum

Materials on the ethnography. Volume IV, Vol. 2. L .: 1929.Sredi these numerous ancient monuments attract attention standing alone in the desert, or the components of the sculptures of the burial structure, known in the literature as "stone idols". This name is initially applied to the female statue in southern Russia, and then transferred to the Siberian monuments, although the latter, in most cases, have nothing to do with the figure of a woman. Especially strange to hear that typical Kirghiz steppes figure of a man with a mustache, armed with a sword, called "stone Baba." Turkish tribes Minusinskogo edge more individualized, these statues, calling them puss-Tash, Kizhi-tas, karadush-tas, kurtuyak-tas, etc., Which translated into Russian means: the girl-rock male rock hero-stone old-stone, etc. Among these monuments meets the figure of a man upright, but more often the image of only one person. Paul most statues are not defined, only in a few cases, you can more or less safe to say - a woman or a man shows the monument. Based on the above considerations, we call these monuments are not "broads", and stone statues...

All visiting Minusinsk edge researchers considered Askyzsky area "classic location of the stone idols", but now those would have to be considered in the neighborhood Ulus Charkovo p. Uibat, where there are 15 sculptures. Next, according to the riches Askyzo Esinsky area (11 sculptures). It is followed by a neighborhood street. Tazmina (9 Math.), River Tasheba (7 Math.), Ust-Birya (6 Math.), The top of p. Bigi (5 Math.), P. Black Yus (4 Math.), The estuary. Tubes (4 Math.), The neighborhood with. Senyavin (4 Math.), And finally, about 20 sculptures scattered in different places..... (ALL THESE NAMES ARE iN TURKiSH, samples - ASKYZ=AS KIZ (AS GiRL - AS TURKS) ; ULUS (NATiON) ; UST-BiRYA (UPPER BiRYA) note:SB)...

The exceptional wealth of the Minusinsk edge remnants of a bronze culture eclipsed him all the rest, and some researchers have attributed to Siberia all the monuments of antiquity prehistoric Bronze Age. Also, stone sculptures mechanically treated them to the same time 1.  In general, on-time construction of stone sculptures there is a wide variety of opinions. It should, however, be noted that we are considering the type of statues in the literature, usually, does not stand out from the crowd of so-called "stone idols" and the name "Yenisei stone idols" are understood all types of statues found there. From a number of different studies on the subject (of dating) it should be noted only two of the most well-founded, it works DA Clemenza and NM Yadrintseva.

Clements 2  notes in constant contact with the graves of statues of late types that, in his opinion, "shows conclusively that" their value as gravestone monuments, and leads the testimony of Chinese chroniclers of the custom of the people Tukyu (VI cent. BC) put the image of the deceased on the grave stones and a number on the number of enemies killed. This practice, according to Clemenza could be borrowed from the older people and thus dates back to the VI. BC and earlier.

Yadrintsev 3  also considering stone images gravestone monuments, he notes that the Chinese chronicles detailing the practices of Khakassia, there is no indication about the custom to put stone women, hence they "belonged to the people preceded Khakassia, or who lived in the neighborhood with them." The appearance of stone sculptures Yadrintsev dates back to BC, the most recent of which, in his opinion, along with the Orkhon inscriptions.

If all of these views for most of the "stone idols" of Mongolia, Turkestan, Kirghiz, and the southern Russian steppes partially correct, then, with respect to the just considered type Minusinsk statues, no one of them can not agree, because nowhere in the Chinese annals there is no direct indications of the existence of stone statues and sculptures connection with the ancient Turkish inscriptions inscribed on them, and burials, on which they stand, raises some doubts. That's why in this essay will be appropriate to reconsider the history of stone sculptures Minusinskogo type and, as far as possible, to determine their place in the culture of the Minusinsk region.

Neither the style nor the machinery manufacturing statues do not give any indication of the time of their construction. The only way to determine their place in the chronology of the region - is the study of relationships with other monuments of ancient cultures namely, with burials in which they stand, and being found on them ancient Turkish inscriptions.

Sculptures of ancient inscriptions are rare. We only know three of these sculptures. One of them (Fig. 39) from the lake. Achikkul (!?) We know only schematic drawings Miller 1. Whether the inscription read this stone and what it means - we could not figure out. Unknown, too, and the fate of the monument. The other two sculptures (Fig. 28 and 36) stored in the Minusinsk Museum and inspected by us, at one time were studied Radlov and the text of their inscriptions translated into German 2.  Both of these sculptures were first Uybatskoy in the wilderness, far from the street . Charkovo. Unfortunately, their relationship to the numerous tombstones of the area is now known as, take them to the IP Minusinsk Kuznetsov did not disclose any information about its original position and does not have the exact location.

A relatively small inscription on the sculpture are 36 dedicated to the "gallant father Alto." "I have raised this monument tarkhan people Ah" - writes the author of the inscription. "Because of his merits, he went out of the midst of his people (as ambassador) to the Kara-Khan."

Extensive inscription sculptures 28 places much erased; Although some lines of its half-lost, the general meaning of the inscription is clear. It describes the events in the life of the hero-Kapga Teng-Erdem and repeated usual for Yenisei tombstones formula: 'I parted "so-what" I could not stay "with so and so In this inscription mentions the name of the Turkish khan Tacham (Kudulu Khan) 3.  Within the meaning of the inscription Radloff concludes that the inscription is dedicated athlete, proved once Tachamu military aid, and that subsequently Tacham, standing Turkish Khan built this monument to him. If this assumption is correct, the notice shall be attributed to the end of the VII century., When after 683, the dominion of the Turkish khan was broken Kudulu Khan (Tachamom).

It would seem that the question of temporary structures considered Uybatskih sculptures, and, consequently, all the like, is allowed. They should refer to the time around VII century. AD and are tombstones. However, certain facts lead to refrain from such a definition.

All known Minusinsk steppes of ancient Turkish inscriptions are in content gravestone. Only two inscriptions made on the rocks (one on the White Yuce and the other near the Sulekova street.), Are perhaps an exception in this regard. The inscriptions were made, for the most part, standing on the rocks in the desert, and only in three cases they are applied on the rocks. Unfortunately, most of the stones with inscriptions taken away from their original location, and now it is not known on what they were graves. This information is only available for 4 inscriptions. One of them was on the river. Tasheba, on the mound, Heikel'em excavated in 1889, 1.  The inscription is made on one of the stones, standing at the base of the mound. Among these stones was a statue (Fig. 31). This mound, judging by the objects found in it, should be attributed to the time close to the era of the ancient Turkish alphabet on the Yenisei. Another inscription is carved in stone, situated on the west side of a large mound near the village. Tes on the river. Touba. This mound was excavated in 1889 Aspelin'om 2.  Judging by the nature of the funeral facilities and found it subjects the mound should refer to the end of the set SA Teploukhov, Minusinsk Kurgan culture, ie, to the first centuries of our era (Talgren dates this mound III-IV centuries AD.).

Finally, two inscriptions were at the bottom of embankment mounds excavated AV Adrianov 3  at p. Uibat. One inscription mound number 1 in the group Uzun Oba, and the other - the mound number 1 group Kara Kurgen. Both of these must also be barrow Minusinsk attributed to the end of the Kurgan culture, only a few early Tesinskogo mound. Thus, VII century gravestone inscriptions found on tombs of different epochs. In Kara-Kurgene on the grave of the first centuries AD, we find later inscription: "balbal (ie monument) Kashuk'a." A similar inscription read on a rock on the coast Tuba: "My country Edil balbal" (ie monument). All this goes to show that the inscriptions were made on the first available stone or rock with a smooth surface and that they are not tombstones in the literal sense of the word, as put to the tomb of the hero, after whom they were written. No wonder that, when Finding a convenient place for an inscription, the choice can sometimes fall to the ancient statue, which the plane always smooth hewn. Thus, the sculptures have nothing to make them inscriptions. This is confirmed and some other facts.

Careful consideration Uybatskih sculptures with Turkish inscriptions (Fig. 28 and 36) suggests the following circumstances. At that time, as the contours of the face with all its attributes to make an accurate, deep vyshlifovannoy line inscriptions in quite casually and superficially some cutting instrument. Moreover, in those places where the inscription and image overlap each other, it is clear that the drawing was preceded by an inscription, as the letter caused a slight touch, are on the surface of the grooves (lines), forming a figure sculptures. In addition, the location of the inscriptions can not be reconciled with the figure sculptures. Some lines it covers a wavy line extending upward from the forehead and on one stone inscription comes even on the face. All of this points to the fact that the inscription and the picture are not simultaneous, and, of course, the inscription later.

Stones, standing in the Minusinsk steppes for centuries, are exposed to a variety of destructive actions. In this respect, a role played by grazing cattle in the desert, which has a habit of rubbing against the rocks. Animals, took a fancy yourself a few stones, rubbing against them, and as a result of this centuries-old work of all the irregularities of the stone at a height of 80-130 cm. From the ground smoothed out, and its surface is smooth buffed. Such actions apparently undergone a statue 36. It is interesting to note that while the surface of the stone faces above strongly flattened, and drawing a wavy line in some places completely erased, letter writing, deposited thin strokes, in the same place prered distinguishable 1. This can be explained only by the fact that the statue, stood a fairly large amount of time in the wilderness, had influenced the rubbing of his animals flatten considerably, and only if it was on the inscription.

Thus, consideration of the Yenisei inscriptions again convinces us that they have nothing to do with the statues do not have, therefore, can not date them, and that the statues of ancient inscriptions made on them.

Most of the sculptures located on the mounds and tombs. Involuntarily a question - whether they are connected with any known types of burials and can not be there, so what that dated to a certain cultural era? It turns out that not all types of tombstones found sculptures. There are a number of burials in which they have never met, and, conversely, some types of burial structures are often accompanied them.

For a more clear understanding types of mounds and tombs, on which there are sculptures, it is appropriate to quote here gravestones characteristic structures of different cultural epochs, worked out during many years of research SA Teploukhov. They adopted the scheme of evolution of funeral rites of ancient cultures Minusinskogo edge makes it possible to sort out the numerous forms of gravestone constructions almost entirely covers the Minusinsk steppes.

Burials Chalcolithic (afanasevo culture) and early Bronze Age cultures (Andronovo and Karasuk) under this scheme - flat or barely rising above the surrounding land in bulk. These standing stones have no burial. Also sculptures of stone are never found. These burials, we will not dwell. Burial Phase I Minusinskaya Kurgan culture, flat or with a small mound, surrounded by a wall of quadrangular dug into the ground and barely rising above the surface of the plate. In the corners of the fence are stone slabs, focused on narrow edges of NO and SW, and wide on SO or NW with some deviations in either direction.

Burials of stage II Minusinskaya Kurgan culture are arranged in the same way as the previous, only slightly larger in size, and in addition to the angular stones are still on one plate to the north-western and south-eastern sides of the fence and one or two on opposite sides. In addition, sometimes there are 2 or 3 boards to the north-eastern side of the fence ("lighthouse").

Burials III and IV stage Minusinsk culture on the device are similar to prediduschemu, but much larger in magnitude. In addition to the angular stones on the north-western and south-eastern sides of the fence is two or more boards and the appropriate number of plates on opposite sides. Also part of the "beacons" Burials Tashtyk culture (first century BC) have the form of pits, near which is sometimes a number of standing stones (from 5 to 40 stones).

For the time from V to X centuries. BC characterized by the burial mound with a stone. Newer ones are decorated at the base of chetyrёugolniku standing stones. In more recent graves, or they are not available or there is only one standing somewhere at the base of the mound, the stone. Burials of the late iron age cultures flat, without standing stones. They are stone sculptures have never met.

Stone statues did not occur at the earliest burials of the Bronze culture (Andronovo and Karasuk). SA Teploukhov told us that about art. Shira has a stone statue, like number 48 and standing at the grave of Phase I Minusinskaya Kurgan culture. 22 sculptures are also on the burial of Phase I of the Kurgan culture (?). Sculptures of 7, 17, 18, 20, 46, 47, 48 are on the graves of stage II (some of them maybe on the graves of Phase I) Minusinsk Kurgan culture. Statues 13, 25 and 30 are at the mounds III or stage IV of the same culture. Further, sculptures 4 and 11 - in facilities Tashtyk culture. Finally, the comparatively large number, namely 18 statues 1,  on the graves of the Stone graves (Fig. 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 19, 29, 41, 42, 45).
So, starting with stage I Minusinskaya Kurgan culture, sculptures found in all types of gravestone constructions having in its structure standing stones and capture, so a huge amount of time, not less than one and a half thousand years, and a number of cultural epochs. It is as if, contrary to the above assumption that the sculptures belong to the same cultural epoch limited, comparatively short period of time. Yet, it would be strange to assume that the so-very stylish Minusinsk sculptures in all its manifold forms could live for a number of cultural epochs. If you look at the accompanying table, there is a new bewilderment. Why the same form, sometimes completely identical, there are the graves of different ages 2,  and, conversely, for the burial of the same era are various sculptures? 1  What is the explanation? Let's try to consider carefully the conditions for finding statues in burial facilities.

Gravestone construction Minusinsk steppes extremely characteristic of the correctness of their buildings. Along the walls of a rectangular fence in an orderly arranged facing the plate. Often they are matched in size and shape and strictly oriented relative to the cardinal points, thereby forming a symmetric shape. If we sometimes observe some irregularities in the number of plates, their size or shape, it mostly be attributed to the ravages of time. If a stone statue standing on the grave, was a monument to the man buried here, it would seem, he had to take a certain position in the construction of burial structure. The observations show the opposite. Sculptures never takes a special, central place, and is always one of ordinary plates. Often it is as a corner stone (Math. 7, 15, 16,17, 20, 30, 45 and 48), in other cases, it replaces the stones, standing along the fence (Math. 8, 9, 10, 18, 25, 46 and 47), or one of the plates standing in front of the mound (the lighthouse, number 13). At that time, all the plates gravestones facilities strictly oriented with respect to the cardinal points, sculptures, for that matter, are as horrible 2.  Most of them are facing the person to NO or vice versa, to SW. This is in connection with the general orientation of the entire burial structure, where all the plates facing narrow faces on NO and SW. Finally, it is especially interested in those cases when standing at the grave of the statue is in the inverted position. Minusinsk region known 4 sculptures set upside down - namely, 2, 13, 30 (or in the text of Fig. 8) and 51.

Such indiscriminate and random position on the sculptures gravestones says, as if a careless handling of the people, put them on their grave. Neglect in the construction of the tombs to the images carved on the plate, can be explained only by the fact that for people to put them on the grave, they did not constitute the object of worship, and there were only stones left in the steppes of the former inhabitants of the region, and served as a simple material for the construction of the fence grave. It seems that, both now and in the past, the population is widely used by the ancient monument to the material of the device of their graves 1 and for different economic needs.

Confirmation of this assumption may serve as a slab with carved human figures on it, standing on the mound about Tazmina district. Such human figures are common on tombstones, but especially the described plate is that all these figures are depicted upside down, with all of them located in the lower part of the plate so that some of them proved to be buried in the ground. In this situation the stone, they could not be carved on it. Undoubtedly, this slab was once at a position opposite to the present, and if it were made on the images.

If we accept the idea that the production of statues does not belong to the nations, to put them on the grave as the boards of the fence, that these monuments are alien to them, we come to the conclusion that the sculptures of ancient of all the graves in which they are located, that is ancient Minusinskaya Kurgan culture. Considering Minusinskuyu top Kurgan culture department and the beginning of the Bronze Age culture of iron, we thus define the statues as monuments of the Bronze Age Minusinsk region.

This is confirmed by an interesting discovery in the village. Znamenka. In 1904, AV Adrianov 1 learned of the accidental excavations of ancient tombs in the estate of a farmer. The tomb was a tomb built of slabs. It was found about 70 bronze beads, a bronze knife and clay pot 2.  plate, served tire coffin proved fragment statues Minusinskogo conventional type (Fig. 21) 3. 

The history of this plate is of great interest. Undoubtedly, when she stood in the steppe, and for some time exposed to the corrosive effects of the atmosphere and, perhaps, humans. Over time, the origin and destination it has managed to blot out the memory of the people inhabiting the edge. The monument is not revered. On it for fun, or for other reasons, cut out different shapes (pictures of animals, carriages, etc.), And finally, he was already in the broken form serves as a prime material for the construction of the grave. Sure, it's a statue there long, perhaps for several centuries before the construction of tombs excavated in Znamenka. That is why the dating of this tomb is of great importance for the history Minusinsk sculptures.
Found in the tomb of copper beads and a knife point to its affiliation to the Bronze Age. Unfortunately, without knowing the types of objects, it is not possible to date the tomb more precisely. One can only assume that it is, in all likelihood, by the time until the first stage of the Minusinsk Kurgan culture.

The nature of the burial structure also does not give a precise indication of the time of construction of the grave as the coffin of stone slabs found, since Andronov Culture. Yet, it should be noted that in the graves Andronov and karasuk culture plates are always subtle. Massive slabs appear only on the first phase of the Minusinsk Kurgan culture. So burial Znamenka covered the massive stove - statue, should be attributed to the time until the first stage of the Minusinsk Kurgan culture. From the third stage of the Kurgan culture, the main tomb mound always a log house. Only in the side of the children's graves are sometimes found with walls lined with stone slabs 4. 

Thus, the burial of Znamenskoye likely refers to the first or second stage of Minusinsk Kurgan culture. Consequently, the statue should be attributed to the time that preceded the era.
You can, therefore, assume that during the construction of the Kurgan culture sculptures preceded or coincided with the 1st stage of the Kurgan culture, less likely. The probability of all statues be attributed Karasuk culture. (By SA Teploukhova - while close to 1000 BC). By the time more ancient sculptures can not be classified as manufacturing them requires a massive metal tools, what could hardly be in the initial stages of the Bronze Age.

Minusinsk region in large numbers found chisel tools. Some of them have a very narrow but massive blade 1.  Over the massiveness and the frequent failure of these tools suggest that they were used to work on the stone, maybe for otёsyvaniya and engraving plates. Drill with a concave blade 2  could be used to align the semicircular grooves, forming a pattern on the sculptures. Unfortunately, the time of existence of bronze bits can not yet be accurately determined. We can only point out that one such bit concave blade was found in the Saratov province. in the famous Pine-Mazinskom clade 3,  which time corresponds to approximately Karasuk culture in the Minusinsk region.

By studying the characteristics of style statues, we could not find exact analogies among other monuments of antiquity, nor in Minusinsk territory or outside it 4. 

Apparently, a material property, require special processing techniques, led to the emergence of a new, distinctive interpretation of the forms did not occur, for example, among the many metal products.

Also, the plot sculptures (human face with symbolic signs) does not appear among the other monuments of antiquity.

It may be noted only schematic representations of human faces on one of the inscriptions Minusinskogo edge (its exact location is unknown) is quite similar to the face image on the sculptures (see Fig. 9 in the text). Dash across the face, bracketed on this feature and vertical lines on the forehead - these characteristics, there is no doubt that the uniformity of these images with images on statues. The fact that the image of the face on pisanitsa made different technique (knockout sharp instrument), than a statue, and that they are located among the other figures related to the relatively late time, suggests a different meaning of these images, and perhaps another time their faces. It would not be strange if it turns out that images of faces on pisanitsa made much later sculptures are the product of some idle shepherd carving on a rock along with other figures and images of faces, imitating thus the forms of what he saw in the desert on the sculptures. Another analogy we do not find. This is probably explained by the special purpose of the statues. Monumental memorials, canonical image and, of course, symbolic signs (a circle with corners, a trait through the nose and many others) - all this speaks of its religious significance. Settled opinion considers their tombstones can be true of so-called "stone the women" Kyrgyz and Mongolian steppes, Minusinsk the statues of the type described, refer to the tombstones there is no reason, as we have already seen that in any one instance can not establish a direct link sculptures with some burial. 

Furthermore, they are sometimes quite independently, away from any graves (e.g., sculptures Fig. 3, 14, 24, 32, 35 and 38). Most likely they were the image of the deity. In this case, it becomes clear image of the head and ram occurring on some sculptures. In the life of the peoples of the Bronze Age ram he played probably the biggest role, as in the tombs of this period are always sheep bones. The existence of the ancient inhabitants of the edge of the cult of the ram indicate also finds of stone statues depicting the whole shape of the animal. However, without a good reproduction of similar figures (Fig. 56, 57), we do not dare to claim that they belong to the same epoch of the Middle Bronze Age, like those statues, which are still riveted our attention. Figure 59 is made with pieces of red sandstone sheep stored in Barnaul Museum. Unfortunately, no information about its origin in the Museum was not. The material of the monument, which is characteristic for the Minusinsk region, suggests that the sculpture comes from the same place. Perhaps this is one of those sheep, which says Radloff, an excerpt from the diary Messerschmidt and Miller (see. Explanations to the table).

In the literature, there are indications that, in addition to sheep, in the Minusinsk steppes are images of bulls, bears, lions and leopards 1. [36] Probably because they are now a few have survived, as the authors point out that some of the monuments, being taken away from the field They died or were lost, we were also in their frequent trips to the edge only managed to see the horse's head, probably representing a fragment of a large statue. Not a single picture with statues of animals, other than the head of a predator stored in Krasnoyarsk (Fig. 58 or in the text of Fig. 10), and the already mentioned sculptures of sheep, we failed to do 2.

Types sculptures typical of the region. 
The above does not exhaust all the material wealth Minusinsk steppe stone sculptures. There are several, but the nature of them is quite different. First of all, you need to specify a statue, known for drawing in 1739 surveyor Ivan Shishkov (Fig. 64). It was located on the Black Yuce against the mouth of the river. Sarala and the local population was called Hosen Hys -zayats-girl that probably spelled wrong, since this figure is not in any way resembles a hare. Another name Kazan Kizhi tas (or tash), much more accurately. His translation of "Stone man with a pot" has, it seems, gave Popov.

Unfortunately, this interesting monument was killed and died for a long time, since no questioning the local population did not give indications of his whereabouts. I had only heard vague memories that the head was broken off and taken away by someone, and then disappeared and the rest. Statue of a man holding a crook in his right hand a vessel resembling the silver vessels found in the Minusinsk region 1,  and the left hand holds the scimitar or sword. On the belt, decorated with cross bars, suspended three objects of unknown purpose, apparently, handbags. The image of the earth some strange waves, resembling an old splint image sabers, as if coming out of the plane of the stone, everything indicates a small experience of the author in the drawing, and he himself recognized in the report Tatischev "Although railway discharge the same patterns will not be very serviceable, I humbly beg you not angry, because in the art of painting do not have. " Because of this it is impossible to draw any conclusions about the art sculptures. Yet it is clear common type.

These sculptures are widely distributed within the Kirghiz steppes, Altai and Turkestan. Typical representatives thereof are sculptures depicted in Fig. 65 and 66. Monument 65 in technique is one of the best things of this kind. All the details clearly, accurately and very well rounded sculpted low relief, but the right hand still retains the character of flatness. Of course, on any face of portrait of this type, however. Typical posture and details are canon image of a man (probably Turkish) tribe.

In addition to Fig. Shishkov has yet to specify Radlov of other similar statue is located on the river. Tuim (Minusinsk region). This statue was taken to Krasnoyarsk and head on the road broke off. Where is it now - is unknown.

Individuality finds statues of its kind in the province Minusinskom 2  and their abundance in the western provinces say that Minusinsky edge was only the periphery of the spread of this type.

Sinyavinskaya statue (fig. 60 or in the text of Fig. 11), is also of a circular sculpture is a different iconographic character. The sword is missing, and the vessel is in both hands, folded on his chest.

This is the Tes-Erbinsky "hero-stone", but the execution of its much more primitive (Fig. 61). It is a flat plate, hewn in the form of a human figure, one side of which are carved the ancient Turkish writings, on the other - light relief (judging by the picture, the resulted from Radloff) male face with a mustache and hands holding the vessel.

If both is given in the sculptures of the same species are known in large numbers in the Tannu-Tuva Republic (Uriangkhai) (Fig. 62 and 63), Mongolia, the Kyrgyz steppes, su, and Altai Krai Minusinsk then they are the only ones. Salbyksky "Grandfather Rock" (Fig. 70) has the form of a long rectangular in cross-section bar, at the top end of which is depicted person. The eyes, eyebrows, and the bar over them made incised line. Cheeks - in the form of circles, the nose and the vessel was placed directly under him, slightly embossed.

This image has no analogues in Minusinsk territory, but are found in other places, for example. Altai.

Figure 73 without the person outlines depicting only the eyes, nose in a loop and a small mouth is also known in the Altai. A similar but even more primitive image, lacking even the mouth available in Mongolia.

Figures 71 and 72, we will not stop, because the first could not see, and it some particularly difficult to install on a photo, make an unconditional refrain from assigning it to a group of typical Minusinsk; The second chip is not giving anything definite. But especially attracted attention last two monuments (Fig. 67 and 68), which gives figures Spassky. Statues depict a man and a woman. Once they were in the desert, near the Askyza, but then were transported to the village, and what their fate is currently unknown. They certainly belong to the group of those statues, which depicts a human figure with folded "up" legs and hands holding the vessel. This type is very small in number, but widely distributed. Such sites are known in the Altai, in the Seven Rivers and Tannu Tuva Republic, (Fig. 69). The latter is particularly interesting drawings of vessels, representing the so-called "Scythian cauldrons," or copy them clay vessels. Such vessels found, for example, in the Aspelin Tesinskom mound date back no later than III-IV centuries. BC 1.  This suggests that the statues of the type described are approximately to the same time.

The bulk of the Minusinsk sculptures is a distinct group of monuments which do not occur outside the region. Ancient Turkish gravestone inscriptions makes first got into rock steppes, no relation to the statues do not have and can not date them. On the mounds of different eras late bronze and iron sculptures fall crops just as a material. They are these ancient mounds. Time structures sculptures refers most likely to the Middle Bronze Age, ie Karasuk to culture (for Teploukhova about 1000 BC).

Encountered in the Minusinsk steppes full human figure sculptures - "stone woman" - not typical for the region, they are inherent in other areas. For example, a male figure with a vessel in his right hand and a sword in the left wide-spread in the Altai, in Turkestan and the Kirghiz steppes, in the Minusinsk region represented by a single statue. Sculptures from the receptacle in both hands, characteristic of other areas, namely Tannu Tuva Republic and Mongolia adjacent part of the Altai and Kirghiz steppes. About the different types of the Mongolian, Turkestan and South Siberian sculptures, we hope to talk too much.

In our work we often use the advice and instructions of SA Teploukhova and SE Malova, for which he gives them our sincere gratitude.

Leningrad, 1926
M. Gryaznov, E. Schneider.
google translate from russia

References. 
1. (Adrianov, A.B.). Preliminary data on collecting inscriptions in Minusinsk territory in the summer of 1904, seconded by the Committee A. Adrianov. Math. Russian. Com. for the study. Avg. and East. Asia in 1904
2. Adrian A. Journey to the Altai and Sayan, committed in 1881 Zap.R.G.O. by common geography, ie. X, 1888.
3. Aspelin, S.R. Antiquités du nord Finnoougrien. Helsingfors, 1877-1884.
4. Bayer, Th.S. Vertus inscriptio Prussica Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae. Tomus II. Petropoli, 1729. (Used by Radloff - 35).
5. Bogolyubskii, IS The study of antiquities of Minusinsk District, Yenisei Province. 1881 I. V.S.O.R.G.O. XIII, № 3, 1882.
6. Chantre, E.Recherches anthropologiques dans le Caucase. Paris - Lion, 1885.
7. Geykel, GK From the Finnish archaeological literature. Math. Archaeological. Com. Vol. 38, 1911.
8. Falk, I.P. Beiträge zur topographischen Kenntniss der Russ Reichs. Petersb. 1785.
9. Gmelin, I.G. Reise durch Sibirien. Göttingen, 1752. (Used by Radloff - 35).
10. H (eikel), A. Déchiffrement des inscriptions de l'Orkhon et de l'Enissei. Finskt Museum, I, 1. 1894.
11. Heikel, A.O. Die Grabunterscuhungen und Funde bei Tascheba. Journal de la Société Finl. d'Archéol. XXVI, 1912.
12. Inscriptions de l'Enissei recueillies et publiées par la Société Finlandaise d'Archéologie. Helsingfors, 1889.
13. Gastrén, M.A. Reisenberichte und Briefe. St.-Petersb. 1856.
14. Klaproth, M.I. Mémoires, relatifs à l'Asie, contennants des recherches historiques, géographiques et philologiques sur les Peuples de l'Orient. Paris, 1826.
15. Klaproth, M.I. Sur quelques antiquités trouvées en Sibérie. Journal Asiatique. Paris, 1823, T. II. (Used by Popov - 28).
16. Clements, D. Minusinskogo Antiquities Museum. Monuments of metal ages. Tomsk, 1886.
17. Clements. Materials collected by DA Clemenza during excursions into the upper Abakan in 1883 and 1884. Zap.Z.S.O.R.G.O. XI, 1890.
18. (lements), D. Minusinskaya Switzerland and the gods of the desert (From the diary of a traveler). "Eastern Outlook." 1884. №№ 5, 7, 9 and 12.
19. campfire. Essays life Minusinsk Tatars. Trudy IV Arch. Congress in Kazan in 1877, vol. I, 1884.
20. He. List of stone statues, located in the Minusinsk District Yenisei Province. Zap.S.O.R.G.O. VII, 1864. See. Bulletin and geography. On the Island, ch. X, 1854.
21. Kuznetsov, Ince. Ancient graves Minusinsk District. Tomsk, 1889.
22. (Martianov, MN). Sculptures and paintings of animals in the Minusinsk region. (From a letter of Martyanova. Izv.V.S.O.R.G.O. XII, № 4-5, 1885.
23. Pallas, P.S. Reise durch verschiedene Provinzen des Russischen Reichs. St.-Petersb. 1776 (see. Also Voyages du professeur Pallas dans plusieurs provinces de l'Emp. De Russie et dans l'Asie septentr.).
24. Pallas, PS Journey in various provinces of the Russian state, h. III, I. half of St. Petersburg, 1788.
25. Pestov. Notes on the Yenisei province. Moscow, 1833.
26. Piskarev, AI About the location of the stone sculptures in Russia. Zap. SPB Archaeological. On the Islands. III. 1851.
27. Popov. NI General view of the petroglyphs Minusinsk region. Izv.S.O.R.G.O. VI, VII and 1875, 1876.
28. He. About stone broads in Minusinsk territory. Izv.S.O.R.G.O., II, № 4, 1871.
(91/92)
29. He. About inscriptions Minusinsk region. Izv.S.O.R.G.O. III, 1872.
30. He. About Runes Minusinsk region. Izv.S.O.R.G.O. V, 1874.
31. He. Tatishchev and his time. (Used by Popov - 28).
32. Radloff, W. Aus Sibirien. II Band. Leipzig, 1893.
33. He. Die alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei. Petersb. 1894-95.
34. Radlov V. Siberian antiquity (from the travel notes). Zap. Russian. Arch. On the Islands. VII, 1895. (Excerpt from «Aus Sibirien»).
35. He. Siberian antiquity. "Archaeological Materials. Russia », № 3, 1888; Number 5, number 15 in 1891 and 1894.
36. He. Proceedings of the Orkhon expedition. Atlas Antiques Mongolia. SPB. 1892-1899.
37. Ritter, K. Geography Asia. SPB. 1879.
38. Savenkov, IT On the ancient monuments of the fine arts on the Yenisei. Proceedings of the XIV Archaeological. Congress in Chernigov. Moscow, 1910.
39. Skorogovorov. Description of the Yenisei province. Zap.S.O.R.G.O. Vol. 8. II (mixture). Irkutsk, 1865.
40. Spassky, Gr. About Attractions Siberian antiquities and monuments of the similarity of some of them to the Great. Zap.R.G.O. XII, 1857.
41. He. About Siberian ancient mounds. "Sons of the Fatherland", 1817, № 39. See. Also "Siberian Herald" in 1818, h. 41.
42. Spitcin A. Archaeological album. Zap. Dep. Russian. and glory. Archaeological. Russian. Archaeological. The Society XI, 1915.
43. Stepanov, Yenisei Province, hours. I, St. Petersburg. 1835.
44. Stralenberg, F.I. Das Nord- und Östliche Theil von Europa und Asia. Stockholm, 1730. (Used by Radloff number 35).
45. Tallgren, A.M. Collections Tovostine des antiquités préhistoriques de Minoussinsk conservées chez le Dr. Karl Hedman à Vasa. Helsingfors, 1917.
46. ​​He. Minoussinskin arohaudat. Finskt Muséum XXII, 1915.
47. Teploukhov, SA Paleoetnologicheskie studies in Minusinsk territory. Collection "Ethnographic Expedition 1924-25." Leningrad, 1926 Ed. Russian Museum.
48. Uvarov, AS Details stone broads. Archaeological Works of I. Congress in Moscow in 1869 Moscow, 1871.
49. Eichwald, EI About Chud mines. Proceedings of the Eastern. Dep. Imp. Archaeological. On the Islands. III, 1856.
50. Yadrintsev, N. ancient monuments and inscriptions in Siberia. "Analects", published. edited "Orient. Review "1885.

link for the photos

MP Gryaznov / Minusinsk stone images

MP Gryaznov, ER Schneider - Ancient statues Minusinsk steppes.

Hakasya - Taştaki Türkler

Göbeklitepe ve Hakasya