News of Science Association of students and graduate students of historical department of the Perm State Pedagogical University, 1 (3)

) 2007. P. 91-97

Shmuratko D.V., PGPU (Perm) Supervisor: Professor, Dr A.M. Bellavin Archaeology and social reconstruction: the boundaries of knowledge Social differentiation is an inherent part of any society. With the development of society its social structure is complicated too. The basis of social division may be a variety of reasons: age, gender, belonging to a particular occupation, ethnic origin, the level of wealth, and others. The conclusion is there are no monolithic societies. The research of social groups, their composition, nature, allows understand the nature of this society and its historical destiny in a better way. Debate about the possibility of studying the social structure of ancient societies by their burial site is not subsiding in modern archeology. The most pressing issues in this debate are: 1. Does the funeral ceremony represent the social status of deceased? 2. If it so, how can we extract social information from the burial site? Does the funeral ceremony represent the social status of deceased? There are three answers of this question: - Does not represent in any way; -----------------------------------91--------------------------------------- Represent, but not completely; - Represent with certainty. The first categorical judgment heard at the different levels conferences, but on the backroom conversations that opinion has not spread. There was no evidence of any printed work, which this point of view would be a detailed justification or clearly expressed at least. The second of the proposed judgment has already very reasoned printed confirmation in the papers by B.C. Olkhovskiy and I.L. Kyzlasov. B.C. Olkhovskiy, responding to a question, first of all, differentiates the notion of "funeral ceremony", "burial" and "funerary site". The funeral ceremony, the researcher notes, cannot represented in its result - the burial in full, and all the more so in the funeral site (i.e., burial, which had reached an archaeologist), so the researching sites is not equivalent to the researching of funeral ceremony (Olkhovskiy, 1995, p. 88). Thus, Olkhovskiy impugns the possibility of researching the funerary ceremony (which is a sum of actions) by those reified residues, which are recorded archaeologist as funerary site. Next Olkhovskiy notices that, at least from the Neolithic period, existed and operated in varying degrees several social structures: - Sex and age; - Family and marriage;

- Differentiating rank; - Differentiating the estate; - Professional differentiating; - Religious and confessional; - Mythological (Olkhovskiy, 1995, p.89). The funeral ritual (religious-mythological system) realy contains "sotsioinformativnye elements", but not as real but as the mythological world (Olkhovskiy, 1995, p.92). That is, funerary site, which archaeologist works directly, can serve only as a source of learning just a surreal, mythical social structure and in no way reflect the historical realities of the society. Olkhovskiy concludes, "sociological information is information of the second level for the most, it enters into the content elements of the funeral sites so rarely" (Olkhovskiy, 1995, p.93). Olkhovskiy's approach is too cautious; the researcher focuses on the pitfalls which any archaeologist deciding -----------------------------------92--------------------------------------to study the social structure of ancient societies will inevitably break. Of course, caution, and the more way science-based, is always welcome, but if we accept as axiomatic position that the funerary site does not contain social information, we simply voluntarily deprive ourselves of valuable source, but it would be recklessly at least. Besides, no one cultural phenomenon does not occur in a vacuum. A.F. Losev, in his essay "The Dialectics of Myth" notes "you have to be short-sighted in the last degree in science or just blind to not to see that myth (for the mythical consciousness, of course) is the highest in its concreteness, greatly intense and intensive reality. It is not fiction, but - the brightest and most authentic reality. It is - absolutely necessary category of thought and life, far from any contingency and arbitrariness" (Losev, 1990). Thus, studying the myth, we willingly or not willingly exploring the reality, but specially coded. I.L. Kyzlasov partly also doubts in possibility of real social reconstruction based on funerary sites. Although, unlike Olkhovskoye, he does not preclude this possibility. Kyzlasov warns, saying that the funeral ceremony (very conservative system) lags from reality. That is, studying the funerary sites (the remains of the burial rite, have come down to us), we are dealing with not a reflection of the social structure, which was common in the community at the time of burial, but with a more ancient, though belonging to the studied community (Kyzlasov, 1995, p. 101 ). The third point of view on this issue is declared to E.P. Bunyatyan and S.V. Ivanova. E.P. Bunyatyan, on the one hand, agrees with the fact that the phenomenon of the past life is recorded by archaeologists in a highly truncated form, besides it refracted through the ideological and religious beliefs in funeral rite. This fact, however, Bunyatyan continues, does not mean that the archaeological source does not contain information about the social aspects of the life of ancient societies. The task of the archaeologist is recognizing it in the material remains (Bunyatyan, 1985, p.72).

S.V. Ivanova also clearly says "the fact that the funeral ceremony is the epitome not only utilitarian, ideological, but also the social representations of ancient people, supported by most modern researchers of this problem" (Ivanova, 2002, p.48). Thus, the question about representing social information into the funeral sites we will be considered resolved positively. -----------------------------------93--------------------------------------In what a way is possible to extract social information from the burial sites? S.S. Tikhonov said about next research algorithm of study social structure of ancient societies on the materials 'ordinary' burials: 1. an analysis of burial rites and to identify groups of graves with common characteristics is done. The analysis is performed separately for men and women. 2. After that interpretation of the identified groups as socially equal and possibly related marriage and family relations is done (Tikhonov, 2002). Tikhonov's algorithm seems too simple at first sight, but there are disputes here too. What should pay attention at first to the analysis of burial: inventory, burial orientation to the cardinal, size? Firmly established at the moment in archeological science is the theory of estimation of labor costs in the analysis of social structures. For the first time it was expressed in the Russian science by V.M. Masson (Masson, 1976). The theory was developed by A.O. Dobrolyubskiy who analyzing the structure of a funeral ceremony identified the required labor costs, which associated exclusively with the utilitarian function, and additional labor costs. More the second, compared with the first, is embedded in the burial, than the higher the social status of the deceased in the relative number of considering burials. Dobrolyubsky believes that the greatest attention should be paid to structural complexities of burials (ledges, recess, additional cameras, etc.). In the analysis of the social status of the deceased Dobrolyubsky does not consider burial equipment, including its in criteria for material well-being, rather than social position. Also burial's modification particular (the position of the body in the grave, orientation, etc.) is excluded, it, according to Dobrolyubskiy indicates the ethnicity deceased (Dobrolyubsky, 1986). Scheme proposed by Dobrolyubskiy seems too simplistic and unambiguous, besides poorly reasoned. It use in the version proposed by Dobrolyubskiy is nearly impossible for a lot of Kama's sites. The reason is that there are no "structural complexities" in Kama burials. In addition, there are serious difficulties to share concepts required and additional labor costs. Where is the border, in the front of which utilitarian costs are finished and additional costs are begun? More suitable in this case is the logic of abovementioned E.P. Bunyatyan, who also follows the theory of estimation of labor costs, but it see not only the criterion of the design complexities of burial, but also in the inventory as a materialized labor. Bunyatyan notes -----------------------------------94---------------------------------------

that in the earliest stages of human development the social benefits were base of wealth inequality (Bunyatyan, 1985, p.73). In addition into the strictly stratified societies members of certain classes have external features (signs, symbols difference) in the decoration, clothing, etc. (Bunyatyan, 1985, p.74). Classification of methods for extracting social information. Thus, working with funerary sites, archaeologist actually works with a symbolic text, which must be correctly decipher and understand. There are many ways to extracting social information from burial sites. We can call intuitivelogical and formal methods. Intuitive-logical methods reduced to a simple classification of burials for various reasons. This scheme is followed by P.P. Azbelev, who remodeling social structure of Kyrgyz medieval society (Azbelev, 1992), V.V. Tsimidanov, who working with materials of Srubnaya culture (Tsimidanov, 2004). Top experts on Lomatovo and Mazuno archaeological cultures R.D. Goldina (Goldina, 1985) and T.I. Ostanina (Ostanina, 1997), although use methods of descriptive statistics and formulas calculate the number of staff in their reconstruction still does not go beyond the intuitive and logical approach. This group also includes methods "assessment of labor costs" in the version proposed by the A.O. Dobrolyubskiy. The second group of methods is based on statistical analysis of tools, and, therefore, appeals to the law of large numbers, reciprocal takeover of the accidents and identifying patterns. Formal methods remove and reduce the subjectivism which unavoidable presence in intuitively logical constructions. Working with the mathematical model, researchers build their conclusions not only internal sense what truth is around here, but on the specific objective results. Formalized methods include the newt way: 1. Method, which consists in identifying the "average" characteristics of burials and its comparison with actual burials, with fixed deviation of the actual burials from the "average", on these results conclusions about the social status of the buried are made. Adherents of this technique are S.V. Ivanova, a researcher who engaged in the reconstruction of the social structure of the Yamnaya culture north-western Black Sea region (Ivanova, 2001), and R.A. Litvinenko, who studies the social structure of the Srubnaya culture Donetsk steppe (Litvinenko, 1994), N.P. Matveeva, who considering the social division of the ancient population of the forest-steppe Ob river (Matveeva, 1999); -----------------------------------95--------------------------------------2. method based on the detection of the complexes associated features, groups of objects between which mathematical statistics indicate an association (contingency or correlation). Method actively used by E.P. Bunyatyan to study the social structure of the Scythian society (Bunyatyan, 1985); 3. Hierarchical cluster analysis (method of multivariate classification). As an example, was used by group of authors to study the sites of the north-western Caucasus Sarmatian time (Berlizov, Vinidiktov et al, 2003). Author considers that

cluster analysis should be basis of the algorithm for the study of ancient social structures too (Shmuratko, 2006). At the first, because of its mobility, at the moment there are a lot of software (other than SPSS we can call such programs as, Statistica, SYSTST, JMP Statistical Discovery, etc.) which allows carry out this type of analysis quickly and efficiently, eliminating and adding the necessary signs. The secondly, cluster analysis demonstrates using dendrograms entire internal structure of links between signs. The third, methods give a wide field for interpretation. The fourth, using of different metrics of clustering and comparing the results we increases the accuracy of clustering. It is just some advantages of the cluster analysis. Thus, the author is convinced that the funerary sites represent social information but in a coded form. Extracting this information is possible practically and theoretically, by using an appropriate algorithm research based on the use of the apparatus of mathematical statistics. References 1. Azbelev P.P. Experience the archaeological reconstruction of the social structure of the population of the Kyrgyz Khanate (VII-X century). / / Problems of historical interpretation of archaeological and ethnographic sources of Western Siberia. - Tomsk, 1990, p. 74-76. 2. Berlizov N.E., Vinidiktov A.P. Piyankov A., Zelenskiy Y. Statistical analysis of the funerary sites of the North-West Caucasus Sarmatian time - the Middle Ages. Part I. Sites Sarmatian time. - Krasnodar, 2003. 3. Bunyatyan E.P Methods of social reconstruction in archeology (based on Scythian burial 4th-3th centuries BC). - Kiev, 1985. 4. Goldina R.D. Lomovatovskaya culture in the Upper Kama region. Irkutsk, 1985. 5. Dobrolyubsky S.A. On the principles of social reconstruction according to the funeral ceremony / / Theory and methods of archaeological research. - Kiev, 1982, p. 154-168. -----------------------------------96--------------------------------------6. Ivanova S.V. The social structure of the population of Yamnaya culture of the North-Western Black Sea Region. - Odessa: Druk. - 2001.244 p. 7. Ivanova S.V. The funeral rites: discursive ideological aspect / / Structuralsemantic research in archeology. T. 1. - Donetsk, 2002, p. 45-51. 8. Kyzlasov I.L. The funeral rites and the level of development of the society / / Russian Archaeology, 1995, 2, p. 99-103. 9. Litvinenko R.A. On social partitioning burials Srubnaya culture Donetsk steppe / / Problems of Scythian and Sarmatian archeology of the Northern Black Sea: Proceedings of the International Conference. - Zaporozhye, 1994, p. 108-110. 10. Losev A.F. The dialectics of myth. - Moscow: The Truth. 1990. 11. Masson V.M. Economy and social structure of ancient societies. - L., 1976.

12. Matveeva N.P. Social development of the ancient inhabitants of the forest-steppe Ob river / / Results of the study of the Scythian period of Altai and adjacent territories. - Barnaul, 1999, p.118-122. 13.Olhovsky B.C. The funeral rites and sociological reconstruction / / Russian Archaeology, 1995, 2, p. 85-98. 14. Ostanina T.I. The population of the Middle Kama in 3th-5th centuries AD. - Izhevsk, 1997. 15.Tihonov S.S. Basic research methods of the social structure of ancient societies / / Historical origins, the experience of interaction and tolerance of peoples Urals. - Izhevsk, 2002, p.254-259. 16.Tsimidanov V.V. The social structure of Yamnaya's society. - Donetsk, 2004. 17.Shmuratko D.V. Agafonovsky I burial: social reconstruction or what dose statistics say / / Museum and Heritage Komi-Perm Perm region in space. Kudymkar, 2006, p. 145-151. -----------------------------------97---------------------------------------