The article considers the image of a" hoofed predator " depicted on a bone spoon from the Sara burial ground in the Eastern Orenburg region. It combines the features of a herbivore and a predatory animal - a snarling mouth with large fangs and legs ending in hooves. Two hard-to-prove versions are discussed: this is either a fantastic polymorphic creature, or a real animal-musk deer. Reliable analogs among the images of the animal style of the Scythian era are absent in both the first and second cases. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that the image of the" hoofed predator " has an eastern (Altai, Tuva) origin.

Keywords: early nomads, Scythian epoch, bone spoons, animal style, syncretic images, Southern Urals, Eastern Siberia.

Introduction

In 1889, P. S. Nazarov, a member of the Anthropological Department of the Imperial Society of Lovers of Natural Science, Anthropology and Ethnography, excavated several mounds in the Orsk district of the Orenburg Province [1890], including one in the Bish-Uba tract (Bish-Oba), which contained remarkable materials from the early nomad era [Kharuzin, 1890]. Among the finds was a spoon carved from a horn with images of two animals, one of which combines the features of a carnivore and a herbivore. In 2012, O. F. Bytkovsky established that the Bish-Oba of P. S. Nazarov is the well-known Sara* burial ground, which was also studied in 1928 by D. I. Zakharov [Zakharov, 1929; Smirnov, 1964, Fig. 35, A, B] and in 1993 by V. N. Vasiliev and V. K. Fedorov [1994]. Bish-Oba-the traditional Turkic name for mound groups that have large mounds in their composition, means "Five hills". Under this name in various variants - Bish-Oba, Bish-Uba, Bis-Oba, Besoba - burial grounds of early nomads in Bashkiria, Orenburg region, Kazakhstan are known. In the future, we will call our monument Sarah.

The spoon, which the article is devoted to, was found in the female burial of mound 1. Around the skull there were gold plaques, glass beads and "Egyptian paste". To his left was a mirror, on which stood a small vessel. There were also three shells with paints (black, blue and red), two oval stones, a bone plate and two blue glass beads. The rest of the equipment was located to the right of the buried woman: two gold earrings, a stone touchstone, a bone head of an animal, a spoon made of horn, a large clay pot, another shell with red paint, and the bone remains of a horse (spine, ribs, and hind leg bones).

This work was supported by the RGNF (project N 13 - 01 - 00148.).

* We thank O. F. Bytkovsky for kindly submitting the manuscript of an unpublished article " On the geographical localization of the mound in the Bish-Oba tract (according to historiographical research)".

page 55
According to the traditional chronology dating back to B. N. Grakov and K. F. Smirnov, the burial dates back to the end of the VI-V century BC.

Description of the bone spoon

This is the very first spoon from the early Nomadic antiquities of the Southern Urals, which became known to scientists. Despite the fact that 125 years have passed since its discovery and more than 200 spoons have been found since then, the specimen from Sarah remains the only one of its kind. It is carved from elk horn, well polished, the finish is very thorough. The length is 12.2 cm, the handle is 4.5 cm, the scoop is 7.7 cm, and its width is 6.0 cm. Such proportions - a short handle and a large ladle-are not typical for early nomadic spoons. Their handle is always much longer than the ladle, which is usually small. Only one spoon in terms of proportions, size and thoroughness of dressing is comparable to ours - from Lipovka (mound 10, border). 2) [Smirnov and Popov, 1972, Fig. 5, K]. But it has no images, and Sarinskaya's composition can be attributed to the best examples of the animal style of the early nomads of the Southern Urals.

On a spoon from Sarah, a technique is applied that is not fixed on other similar products. The head of the animal on the handle is made in the technique of flat relief, and the body is carved on the back of the scoop, taking up all the space. This is the only case when the bucket contains an image. The shape of another animal is carved inside the body contour. This complex composition required careful preliminary preparation from the master. At first, the drawing was applied with thin drawn lines, some fragments of it were preserved on the inner side of the hind legs of both animals depicted. Then, rather deep furrows were cut along these lines (Fig. 1)*.

Compositions with the participation of several characters in the decoration of spoons are relatively rare, in addition to the copy from Sarah, we know six (Fig. 2, 1-6). Two come from the territory of Scythia. A spoon from a mound near the village of Daryevka shows a hoofed animal standing on the back of a recumbent predator [Bobrinsky, 1894, Fig. 12], and a specimen from mound 5 (1911) of the Elizavetovsky burial ground at the mouth of the Don - a complex composition including the heads of eagles, elk (?) and the figure of a recumbent predator [Miller, 1914, fig. 19]. On the lower Volga, in mound 15 of the Nikolskoye burial ground, a spoon with the image of the heads of a ram and a wolf was found (Zasetskaya, 1979, Fig. 10, 2). Three specimens come from the Southern Urals. On the broad flat handle of a spoon made of Syntas (mound 1, border 3), a predator with a snarling mouth, a flying eagle, and a saiga head are carved (Kadyrbaev and Kurmankulov, 1976, Fig. 12, 1). The image of one figure inside the contour of another is found in a specimen from the Zhalgyz-Oba monument: within the body boundaries The saiga antelope has a large eagle's head, which occupies all the free space, and a predator standing below it (Korolkova, 2006, Tables 46, 3). The composition with the figure of a saiga antelope and the head of an eagle is found on a spoon from Tanabergen II (mound 4) [Gutsalov, 2004, Figs. 5, 22]. We have suggested that these South Ural items represent variations of the same plot, the characters of which are a wolf, a saiga antelope, and an eagle (Fedorov, 2007). The spoon from Sarah has no analogies in localization and mixed media of images, as well as in the plot and characters.

The first animal depicted on the spoon (the"external" figure) is a bear, and there is usually no doubt about its definition [Smirnov, 1964, p. 227-228; Korolkova, 2006, p. 69]. The manner of execution of the head can be called ka-

Fig. 1. Spoon from mound 1 of the Sara burial ground, a-photo by Ya. V. Rafikova; b-drawing by I. V. Rukavishnikova.

* Drawings and photographs of the spoon were repeatedly published (Kharuzin, 1890, Fig. 8; Rostovtsev, 1918, Table VII, 1; Smirnov and Petrenko, 1963, Table 22, 4; Smirnov, 1964, Fig.

page 56

2. Spoons with zoomorphic images.

1-Elizavetovsky (Miller, 1914, Fig. 19); 2-Darevka (Bobrinsky, 1894, Fig. 12); 3-Nikolskoye (Zasetskaya, 1979, Fig. 10, 2); 4-Syntas (Korolkova, 2006, Table 46, 1); 5 - Zhalgyz-Both [Ibid., Tables 46, 3]; 6-Tanabergen [Gutsalov, 2004, Fig. 5, 22]; 7-Luka Curve [Korolkova, 2006, Tables 20, 19].

Ionic for the art of early nomads, not only in the Southern Urals, but also in other regions [Korolkova, 2006, Table 40], in particular in the Altai Mountains [Bogdanov, 2006, Tables XXV, XXVI]. The parabolic mouth is shown with a roller, inside the teeth are cut out-two canines, and behind them two premolars at the top and bottom. Also, the rollers make sub-triangular contours of the eye and ear, inside which there is a bulge and a recess, respectively. This manner of performing the mouth, eye, and ear is a kind of" standard " in the art of early nomads (Smirnov, 1964, p.227). The torso image can also be considered" standard". Few reliable images of bears in the Southern Urals are clearly focused on a certain "canon", which includes a shortened body, thick powerful paws, huge claws and a prominent rounded heel (Pyatimary I, mound 4, border 3 [Ibid., Fig. 79, 6], Filippovka I, mound 1 [The Golden Deer..., 2000, cat. 23, fig. 63]).

The second animal depicted on the spoon (the"inner" figure; Fig. 3, a) is not defined with such unambiguity as the first. V. I. Sizov, who was the first to study the spoon, noted only "the method of depicting one animal in another" [Kharuzin, 1890, p. 302]. In 1918 M. I. Rostovtsev gave a very inaccurate description: "On the outside of the spoon is engraved a rough image of a crouched predator with clawed, characteristically stylized paws and large ears" [1918, p.26-27]. This is not entirely true: the clawed feet on the ladle belong to the "outer" figure of the animal, and the large ears belong to the "inner" one. In 1928, B. N. Grakov mentioned "a spoon with the image of a bear and a curled animal", without specifying which one [1999, p. 25]. Later, a researcher will describe it as "ungulate, but with the teeth of a predator" (Trakov, 1947, p. 115). K. F. Smirnov writes in "Sauromatiki": "The bear's figure is engraved with a half-bent figure of a feline predator, also with a snarling muzzle, a protruding big ear, and, it seems, hooves instead of clawed paws" (1964, p. 228). In a 1976 article. he placed the" inner "figure of an animal in the section" Coiled-up predators " (Smirnov, 1976, p. 76, Figs. 1, 3). In the monograph by E. F. Korolkova included this image in the table "Images of creatures that do not find direct analogies; in some cases, it is difficult to determine their species due to the combination of signs of different animals" [2006, Tables 43, 4], while the text says only that the bear figure "has an additional zoomorphic image within the main contour (as if inside it)" [Ibid., p. 70].

The "inner" figure in the cited literature is interpreted as a syncretic image of a "predatory herbivore" or "hoofed predator", but if the choice is made in favor of a real animal, then rather a predatory one (because of the expressive mouth with large fangs). The most adequate is the opinion of E. F. Korolkova - this is really "a creature that does not find direct analogies". There are only two possible solutions: either a fantastic polymorphic animal is depicted, or a real one. Iconographic analysis, even if it was carried out by the above-mentioned researchers, remained outside the scope of their works. We'll spend it here.

page 57

3. Image of a "hoofed predator" on a spoon scoop (a) and its details: head (b), front leg (c), hind leg and tail (d). Photo by Y. V. Rafikova.

The" inner "figure of the animal really seems to be trying to collapse into a complete ring, and only the contours of the "outer" one prevent this. One detail significantly distinguishes the pose of the beast on a spoon from the classic images of coiled predators. The front paw of the latter is always stretched forward, in our case it is drawn far back and tucked up to the belly. Inside the outline of the bear's very thick front paw, it was quite possible to fit both the head and the front leg of the "inner" figure.

The head line (Fig. 3, b) is closed - this technique is found in images of both carnivores and herbivores. The mouth is wide open, with two disproportionately large canines (one in the upper jaw, the second in the lower), behind which the premolar or perhaps tongue is shown as a bump. We note the absence of a roller, but in general the mouth is shown in accordance with the canon. The eye is quite large, almond-shaped, such as is found in both carnivores and herbivores. The ear is very large, almost reaching the size of the head, which is typical only for images of deer and antelopes. Its outline-leaf-shaped, with a wide middle part-is typical for herbivores. Images of carnivores have sub-triangular ears, with the widest point at the base. The neck in our drawing is relatively long, with a pronounced "hump" at the point of transition to the body, which is also more typical for images of herbivores. The back of the body is noticeably more massive than the front, the leg is more powerful and thicker.

Both legs end in long hooves of a peculiar shape, with a curved sharp tip and a rounded "heel" highlighted (Fig. 3, c, d). Four such hooves are found in a ram engraved on a mirror from Novy Kumak, the proportions of its body and the presence of a "hump" at the junction of the neck into the trunk are very similar to our figure [Smirnov, 1976, fig. 5, 23]. Among the bone products, we will point out a plate made of elk horn with images of two bears and a hoofed animal, one of whose hooves is of the same type, from border 3 of mound 4 of the Pyatimary I burial ground [Smirnov, 1964,

page 58

4. Mirror from the Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I burial ground (Grach, 1980, fig. 113, 2).

figure 33]. Sharp curved hooves with rounded "heels" are depicted in all deer and antelopes on the gold plates of vessels from Filippovka (The Golden Deer..., 2000). A hoof of similar shape is also reproduced on a spoon from the Curve of Luka XVII (mound 15, border 2, backbone 1) in the Lower Volga region (Korolkova, 2006, Tables 20, 19) (see Figs.

The tail is quite long, slightly curved, with a rounded tip, it does not look like the small tails of ungulates and more like the tails of predators. The tail has a detail that we have not seen anywhere else - on the inside, at the place of its attachment to the body, an oblong "island"is carefully depicted. The main contour of the tail is shown by deeply cut furrows, the "island" is separated by a less deep one (see Fig. 3, d).

Iconographic analysis shows that it is really difficult to determine which animal is depicted inside the bear figure due to the combination of features inherent in different animals. However, consider both possibilities (fantastic creature or real animal) it seems useful to us.

Image Interpretation

Version 1-syncretic image. The characteristic features of the predator and herbivore combined in one creature are found in the art of early nomads mainly in the images of"horned predators". They combine clawed feet and a head with a snarling mouth with the horns of a deer or a goat (ram) [Perevodchikova, 1994, p. 53-54; Cheremisin, 2008, p.59-64]. However, we did not find any images of an animal connecting the head with a snarling mouth and legs with hooves in one creature, at least not as a systemic phenomenon. In addition to Sarinsky, we met only one other person. Therefore, we will consider it especially carefully.

On the surface of the mirror from mound 2 of the Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I burial ground in Tuva, "the image of an animal with the body of a dog and the legs of a horse (legs bent), tormenting the head of a mountain ram, is applied with the finest carving" (Grach, 1980, p. 79, Fig. 113, 2) (Fig. 4). This image has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. Among the engraved mirrors from Central and Central Asia, V. D. Kubarev mentions (with reference to the drawing in A. D. Grach's monograph) a mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I (Kubarev, 1991, p. 102). In addition to individual animal figures, he also mentions " plot compositions, where iconographic schemes in a visible and concise form reflect various fragments from cosmogonic myths. Only carnivorous animals and herbivores participate in them, " including a fantastic predator and a goat's head. "Decoding the ideological and semantic content of scenes is a topic of special research" [Ibid., p. 103]. Such a study - the theses of A. S. Surazakov "Cosmogony in the ornamentation of mirrors of the Scythian time" - appeared already in 1992. According to the author, the mirrors "show a dual opposition of the solar-front and reverse, i.e. "night", sides of the object. On the last page... in some cases, scenes of" swallowing " are depicted, symbolizing the sunset - "this scene was transmitted in the form of tormenting a hoofed animal by predators or swallowing the head of a herbivore by a mythical creature" (Surazakov, 1992, p.52).

T. N. Troitskaya also mentions "the figure of a predator with horse hooves gnawing on the head of a ram" among the scenes of torment on products from mounds of the early Iron Age of Tuva [1997, p. 37]. D. G. Savinov also mentions among the" first-class works of the Scythian-Siberian animal style " of the Saglynsk culture the image of "a predator with horse legs tormenting the argali's head. Combining the features of various animals to convey the fantastic essence of mythological characters is one of the most striking features of Pazyryk art, which also spread to the territory of Tuva " [2002, p. 126-127]. V. D. Kubarev suggested that such scenes capture "the brightest, culminating moment and recognizable fragment of the Eurasian myth "about the space chase" - an eclipse or departure beyond the horizon of the heavenly bodies, which was represented as the absorption of a bright celestial being by a predatory beast " [2002, p. 73-74].

In the typology of attack/torment scenes proposed by Yu. B. Polidovich, the composition on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I is assigned to type II "Scene of a predator tormenting the head of a hoofed animal":-

page 59
Such images originate mainly from the eastern regions (Altai, Tuva, Minusinsk Region, Central Asia) and date back to the V-IV century BC. The scene of tormenting in this case is interpreted rather conditionally: the predator does not express any action, its head is tilted down or set straight, and the head of an ungulate (mountain sheep or fallow deer) is located under/in front of its muzzle" [2006, p. 357, fig. 7, 2].

Another interpretation of the plot on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I belongs to E. S. Bogdanov. In his interpretation, "we are dealing with the image of a dog undergoing a 'zoomorphic transformation'. When it eats a herbivore, it turns into one (or becomes a syncretic creature)... we see a visual embodiment of the idea of the cycle and cyclicity of processes in nature "[Bogdanov, 2006, p. 86]. The idea of the appearance of syncretic creatures as a result of "a new birth, the condition of which is the death of ungulates in the mouth of predators" and their connection in a "fantastic relationship" was elaborated in detail by D. V. Cheremisin [2008, pp. 59-64]. He mainly considered images of "horned predators", but as one of the first examples of an iconographic "solution" of this mythologeme, he gave an image on a mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I*, where "a predator tormenting a ram's head has acquired the features of a herbivore" [Ibid., p. 60].

As you can see, researchers were attracted primarily by the plot and the place that the image of the "hoofed predator" occupies in it. Iconographic analysis of images on mirrors in the cited articles, except for the work of Yu. B. Polidovich, is absent. We'll try to do it here. So, on the mirror there are two interconnected images - the argali head and the figure of a" hoofed predator"," nuzzling " at the base of this head separated from the body, that is, exactly in the place where there is direct access to the flesh. We can say that the predator is tormenting, or "gnawing", the head of the herbivore. This compositional scheme is well known in the art of animal style. "In a bundle" these images are quite common (of course, if you do not take into account the extraordinary "hoofiness" of the predator). However, taken separately, they show such strong differences that their consideration leads us to an unexpected conclusion, and the syncretism of the predator figure plays almost no role here.

The image of the argali head belongs to one of the iconographic types typical of Central Asia: with the ear, eye and mouth located approximately on the same line (the eye is sometimes located slightly higher). The ear and eye are "surrounded" by a ringed ribbed horn, with its end extending beyond the upper part of the muzzle. Similar images made of wood, horn, and metal are known [Rudenko, 1953, Tables XXXIV-XXXVI; 1960, Tables XXIX-XXXI; Grach, 1980, p. 113, Fig. 40; Kubarev, 1991, fig. 29, Tables XXVI, 35; XLVII, 8; L, 7; Polos'mak, 1994, Fig. 105; The Golden Deer..., 2000, cat. 174, 203; Semenov, 2003, Tables 11, 39; Bogdanov, 2006, Tables XXIV, 4; LXXIV, 6 Korol'kova, 2006, Tables 11, 11; Bazarbaeva, 2008, Figures 1, 2-4]. The drawing of argali head on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I is executed with a confident hand, skillfully and in full accordance with the canon.

A different impression is made by the figure of the "hoofed predator". The outline of the body with the head raised and the muzzle pointing forward is typical for images of a lying, crouching animal. The legs (equine) are shown bent. In scenes of tormenting the head of a herbivore, the predator is most often depicted calmly standing on straight legs with its head lowered and its muzzle pointing downwards [Cheremisin, 2008, Table XXVI], while lying or crouching on the ground is very rare, and usually these are full-figure images on objects whose size and shape limit the ability to show animals standing [The Golden Deer..., 2000, cat. 24-26; Polos'mak, 1994, fig. 21].

The mouth is wide open, the teeth are shown in the simplest and most primitive way-an oblique grid (XXX). They are crossed by the line of the original upper contour of the mouth. Usually, the teeth of predators were depicted with special care and anatomically correct: incisors (rarely), followed by canines (usually), then two or four or more premolars and molars. Sometimes the language is also shown. If the teeth were transmitted conditionally, these are non-overlapping, more or less identical triangular teeth from above and below, or (extremely rarely) a simple zigzag (ALL), and the image of an oblique lattice is unknown.

The ear is rounded, located within the body and gives the impression of drooping, which is probably why some researchers call the beast a dog. Usually, predators were depicted as sub-triangular with a pointed tip, protruding ears that protrude beyond the contours of the body, only tigers had rounded ears that are almost completely within the body, but they also have a small sharp tip sticking up. Images of drooping ears in carnivores are unknown.

The stripes on the neck probably indicate a tiger. There are only four of them, they are C-shaped, not very carefully applied - the first and last upper tips protrude beyond the body. Most images of the tiger have a very sophisticated banding pattern, although there are also more complex ones.-

* In the text - Dujerlig-Khovuzu, in the caption to the illustration-Mazhalyk-Khovuzu.

page 60
some variants, including those with C-shaped stripes, but made more carefully [Bogdanov, 2006, Tables XXV, 2; XXVIII, 1].

The front leg with the hoof is disproportionately large, bent, the place of its attachment to the body is depicted clumsily and anatomically incorrectly. The back part of the shape is made with several strokes (four are visible in the drawing, although one line would be enough). The hip is transmitted anatomically correctly, below the leg is barely outlined. The tail is hooked and thrown over the back, which is relatively rare in images of predators. In scenes of tormenting, it is usually shown pointing downwards (Cheremisin, 2008, Table XXVI), and thrown over the back is more typical for figures of predators with the head turned back (Polidovich, 2002, p. 201, Fig.6).

The iconography and technique of depicting the argali head and the "hoofed predator" show such a big difference that it is possible to assume that they were executed by different masters. The person who carved the argali head had a confident " set " hand and was well acquainted with the pictorial canons. "Master 2", who portrayed the "hoofed predator", was distinguished by weak skills of an artist and carver, and was poorly oriented in the canons. His drawing turned out to be clumsy, "uncanonical" and incomplete (the images of the hind leg and tail are not completed). The drawn lines are intermittent, during operation the tool constantly stopped, and at the point of its separation from the surface, the "master 2"almost always could not continue the line it started. He had no idea how to draw teeth and ears in accordance with the canon, and correctly showing the articulation of the front leg with the trunk was an impossible task for him. On the free field of the mirror surface, random strokes are visible, giving the impression of a "pen test". Opposite the knee of the front leg, there appears to be a test image of the eye. Maybe it's a drawing by a student who doesn't have a steady hand and isn't experienced in drawing animals. How confidently and perfectly accurately "master 1" performed the argali head, just as helplessly "master 2" depicted the "hoofed predator".

It can be assumed that when performing the composition on the mirror, the masters had some kind of sample in front of their eyes. A very similar image can be seen on the sarcophagus from Bashadar. Argali heads on it are exactly the same type as on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I. The tigers also buried their noses in the argali heads without biting them. The outline of the animal's body on the mirror and especially the outline of the head (and in the original version - with a heavy massive upper part) are very similar to the figures of Bashadar tigers. Maybe we are dealing with the result of a "drawing lesson". It should be noted that along with masterfully executed images on oriental mirrors, there are often quite inept ones that barely exceed the level of doodles (Cheremisin, 2008, Table XXXV). They should be interpreted with caution.

The uniqueness and iconographic features of the image on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I make us treat it as an isolated and accidental one. Therefore, it is not necessary to assume that the early nomads had a stable image of the "hoofed predator", similar to the images of the "vulture-ram", "horned predator" or "hoofed griffin". In this case, we are again faced with the problem of who is depicted inside the figure of a bear on a spoon from Sarah. If this is not a fantastic "hoofed predator" or "predatory ungulate", i.e. not a syncretic image at all, it remains to assume that some real animal is captured.

Version 2 - a real animal. Once again, let's list his signs. It is a hornless ungulate with a heavy back and a lighter front, a very thin body, a small tail, rather large eyes, ears of considerable size and large canines. It is shown, probably, in a jump, throwing back the front leg and lowering the head low.

Here is a description of an animal that is very similar to the one depicted on the spoon: "Musk deer in appearance is very different from other deer and from all other ungulates. The overall warehouse is light and elegant. The hind legs are very long and strongly muscled, while the forelegs are relatively thin and weak; the thorax is small. Thanks to this, the back of the body looks much larger, wider and more massive than the front, and the back is strongly curved and the animal is much higher in the sacrum than in the shoulders. With a small head, relatively thin, not long, rather low-set neck, the musk deer looks as if "hunched" or bent " [Mammals..., 1961, pp. 83-84]. In its general appearance, the animal depicted on the spoon-elegant, with a powerful hind leg and a thin front, "hunched" - is very similar to musk deer (Fig. 5). This similarity is even more evident in the image of the animal's head. Musk deer "have a relatively small, elongated head with rather large eyes. The ears are long and wide with a more or less round top, very mobile. Large, slightly saber-shaped, thin and very sharp canines protrude straight down from the males ' mouths. Their ends in old males fall significantly below the chin" [Ibid., p. 84]. Here are all the signs of the animal depicted on the spoon - a large eye, a long and wide ear, large curved fangs. True, very large canines are shown in both the upper and lower jaws, and in the real musk deer, the lower ones do not differ in size from the incisors [Ibid., p. 85].

page 61

5. Siberian musk deer (Moschus sibiricus Pallas), adult male (Flerov, 1952, fig.
The musk deer's mode of movement is specific: "Even at slow gaits... it moves with rather large, exceptionally light, soft springy jumps, lowering its head, which further emphasizes its originality" [Ibid., p. 84]. The spoon shows the animal in motion, in the characteristic manner of "jumping" running musk deer with its head down. The front leg thrown far back may convey the remarkable feature of the animal when running fast, touching the ground with its front legs behind the hind ones, so that in the footprints left, the prints of the front legs "lag" behind the hind ones, like in a hare [Ibid., p. 97]. Long hooves with thin pointed tips are characteristic of musk deer (Fleurov, 1952, p. 25).

The musk deer's tail is "very small and does not protrude from its fur" [Mammals..., 1961, p. 84]. This does not quite match the image on the spoon - a small tail is shown "protruding from the fur". But other details are anatomically correct: adult males have a naked tail with a rounded tip, and most importantly, on its inner surface "there are glands that secrete secretions with a sharp 'goat' smell " (Zhizn zhivotnykh, 1971, p. 451). Presumably, these glands are shown in the figure as a separate "island" on the tail, which can strongly indicate musk deer.

If we accept this assumption, the question inevitably arises: how could an image of musk deer, endemic to East Asia, appear on an object from the everyday life of the early nomads of the Southern Urals? "It can be said that musk deer inhabit the entire eastern half of this continent, with the exception of the desert areas. In the west, it is distributed as far as the Altai, occupying the entire mountain system " [Flerov, 1952, p. 40]. Musk deer lived on this territory for the entire Quaternary epoch, without going beyond its limits [Vereshchagin and Baryshnikov, 1985, p. 9, Table 1]. Here we can only speculate. The musk deer's fame extends far beyond its range thanks to the musk jet-musk, which is the secret of a special gland located between the navel and the male's genitals. The very scientific name of musk deer Moschus moschiferus means "musk", "musky animal". "In the past, musk of musk deer was used in European and Eastern medicine and for this purpose was exported from Siberia for a long time" [Mammals..., 1961, p.97]. It can be assumed that in the era of early nomads, his fame reached the Southern Urals. This does not explain, of course, how the naturalistic image of musk deer was made here, which the inhabitants of the region could hardly see alive.

Spoons with images of animals are a specific object of material culture of the nomads of the Southern Urals. There are only a few of them found to the west of the Urals, and none at all to the east. Undoubtedly, the Sara spoon is also made in the Southern Urals. This is also indicated by the image of a bear in the local manner. The version that it could have been made somewhere in the east and brought from there to the Southern Urals should be rejected. Most likely, the image of the musk deer could not have been copied from some other animal-style object that came to the region from more eastern territories. We did not find such a sample among the huge number of animal images found in the Altai, Tuva, Xinjiang, and Ordos. Archaeologically, musk deer is widely represented in the burials of nomads of Central Asia. Many amulets made from its fangs were found in Tuva (Poltoratskaya, 1966, fig. 6, 16; 7, 16; 8, 11; Grach, 1980, p. 111, 114, 117, 118, 130, rice. 38, 13 - 24; 60, 2; 61, 2; 112, 2; Semenov, 2003, pp. 12, 28-29, 42, tab.. 9, 1 - 5; 56, 24 - 28; 58, 18, 19; 62, 3 - 8; 68, 14, 15], They are found in the Altai [Zavitukhina, 1966, p. 63, Fig. 3, 6; Semenov, 1999, p. 166], we do not have reliable data for other regions. These items are often found together with the same amulets made of boar's tusks, bear's teeth, and maral's teeth. There are images of all these animals in the art of nomads of Central Asia, but musk deer are not.

At the moment, the situation with the resolution of the question of how the image of musk deer on a spoon from Sarah could have appeared is almost a dead end. We have to limit ourselves to stating that the animal depicted inside the figure of a bear, from real animals, looks only like musk deer, and accept this version only as a hypothesis.

Let's ask ourselves two other questions: why is musk deer depicted on the spoon and inside the bear figure? There are two main versions about the purpose of bone spoons of early nomads:

page 62
a female household item intended for rubbing cosmetic dyes, or a ritual attribute - a tool for sacrifice. If we assume that the spoon from Sarah is somehow connected with the kabarog stream, it can act in both roles. Musk can be both a cosmetic (perfume) product and a sacrificial substance. In ancient times, it was primarily a medicine, which is confirmed by Herodotus, who wrote about the use of it (though not wild boar, but beaver) by budins for medicinal purposes (IV, 109). It seems that it is in this area that you can find the connection between musk deer and bear.

It should be noted that the straightforward interpretation of the meaning of the image as the swallowing of musk deer by a bear is unconvincing. Musk deer are shown alive and in motion. In addition, in nature, the bear is not its natural enemy [Mammals..., 1961, p. 96]. In mythology, we do not know any plots whose heroes would be a bear and a musk deer. The connection of these animals is found in traditional medicine. In the Tibetan canon of medical science "Zhud-shi" among medicines, musk and bear bile are repeatedly mentioned, often in a mixture. Maybe the spoon was used to mix the ingredients of the medicine and give it to the patient. The meaning of the image in this case is as follows: the medicinal mixture is symbolically shown in the form of animals, whose substances are contained in the medicine. All this, of course, is nothing more than speculation.

Discussion of the results. We must admit that we cannot completely reject or confirm any of the versions. In both cases, we encounter unique situations. Either the image of a fantastic animal is presented - a "hoofed predator", which has no reliable analogues, or a real animal is captured, judging by a number of signs, a musk deer, which has no other animal-style images.

The situation is quite paradoxical. The carver of the Sarin spoon, unlike the "master 2", who executed the animal figure on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I, did not make any mistakes and cut out exactly what he wanted. There are traces of his original drawing, from which he practically did not deviate. The only question is what the carver wanted to portray. The version about musk deer is to some extent supported by the" external " figure of a bear, executed in such a way that it is easy to identify the real animal. If the carver had the same approach to the "inner" image, it is most likely a musk deer*. In favor of the fact that the image is a herbivore, and not a predatory animal, is indicated by the absence of the option "predator + predator" in the compositions on the spoons, only "herbivore + predator" (Daryevka, Nikolskoye), "herbivore + predator + eagle" (Elizavetovsky, Syntas, Zhalgyz-Both), "herbivore + eagle" are known."(Tanabergen). It can be assumed that the spoon from Sarah captures the plot of a zoomorphic transformation as a result of the attack of a predatory animal on a herbivore. According to D. V. Cheremisin, the predator-torturer in this case acquires the features of the prey it devours (see above). On the spoon, we see the opposite picture-the victim swallowed by a predatory animal turns into a predator itself. This mythologeme requires some other semantic justification. We don't have it at the moment.

Conclusion

After the analysis, we can not choose any of the considered options. Nevertheless, we note that in both cases there is a connection with the territories that are eastern relative to the Southern Urals. Even if the image on the mirror from Mazhalyk-Khovuzu I is considered unreliable, the overwhelming majority of syncretic images of animals that combine the characteristics of predators and herbivores are presented in the animal style of Central Asia. These are "horned tigers" and" horned leopards", which are numerous, for example, in Pazyryk art [Bogdanov, 2006, Tables LXX, 2, 4; LXXXIII, 1; CIV, ZA; SHKHP, 7; Cheremisin, 2008, Tables XXXVI]. In the West, such images are rare: in the animal style of steppe Scythia, A. R. Kantorovich noted only one " ro-

6. Gold earrings from mound 1 of the Sara burial ground. Photo by Y. V. Rafikova.

* We have previously suggested this assumption, but without any detailed arguments [Fedorov, 2003].

page 63
a gated lion "and one" olenelva " (a lion with deer horns) [2002, Table 1]. In the Southern Urals, they do not exist at all.

Some connection of the early nomads of the Southern Urals with Central Asia, apparently, existed. In the materials from Sarah, in addition to the spoon examined, there are other finds that definitely indicate such a connection. Two gold earrings with biconic decorative elements soldered to the rings found in the same mound (Fig. 6) are undoubtedly derivatives of gold earrings with conical caps, which are common mainly in Tuva and Altai (Semenov, 1999; Devlet, 2004; Cugunov, Parzinger, Nagler, 2010, taf. 12, 2, 5; 57, 5; 58; 191, 1, 2; 93, 2]. Similar finds to the west of these regions are explained by Yu. F. Kiryushin and A. A. Tishkin by moving the bearers of this tradition from the eastern regions to the west (Kiryushin and Tishkin, 1997, p. 90), including to the Southern Urals. From somewhere in the east, the image of a "hoofed predator" or musk deer could also have been brought here. However, the topic of Eastern influences in the culture of the early nomads of the Southern Urals is formally beyond the scope of this article.

List of literature

Bazarbaeva G. A. K izucheniyu zoomorfnogo koda drevnykh kochevnikov Kazakhskogo Altay [To the study of the zoomorphic code of ancient nomads of the Kazakh Altai]. Astana: Publishing House of the PCC Group of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 2008, pp. 121-133.

Bobrinsky A. A. Barrows and random archaeological finds near the town of Smely. - St. Petersburg: [Type of M. M. Stasulevich], 1894. - Vol. 2. - 234 p., 30 l. ill., 2 l. maps.

Bogdanov E. S. The image of a predator in the plastic art of nomadic peoples of Central Asia: Scythian-Siberian artistic tradition. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2006, 240 p. (in Russian)

Vasiliev V. N., Fedorov V. K. Excavations of burial mounds near the village. Sara / / AO of 1993, Moscow: NA RAS, 1994, pp. 125-127.

Vereshchagin, N. K. and Baryshnikov, G. F., Extinction of mammals in the Quaternary period of Northern Eurasia, in Mammals of Northern Eurasia in the Quaternary Period, ZIN AN SSSR, Moscow, 1985, pp. 3 - 38. (Proc. ZIN AN SSSR; vol. 131).

Grakov B. N. (Survivals of the Sarmatian matriarchy) / / VDI. - 1947. - N 3. - pp. 100-121.

Grakov B. N. Pamyatniki scifskoy kul'tury mezhdu Volgoy i Uralskimi gorami [Monuments of Scythian culture between the Volga and Ural mountains]: 100 years of B. N. Grakov: Archival materials, publications, articles. Moscow: IARAN Publ., 1999, pp. 7-33.

Grach A.D. Ancient nomads in the center of Asia, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1980, 256 p.
Longline burials of the Southern Urals / / Ufa. archeol. Vestn. - 2004. - Issue 5. - pp. 135-152.

Devlet M. A. Ob izobrazheniyakh sereg na olennykh kamniakh i real'nom prototipe iz raskopok v Todzhe [On the images of earrings on olenny stones and a real prototype from excavations in Toja]. Pamyatniki arkheologii i drevnego iskusstva Evrazii [Monuments of Archeology and Ancient Art of Eurasia], Moscow: IA RAS, 2004, pp. 22-50.

Zhizn zhivotnykh [Life of animals], Moscow: Prosveshchenie Publ., 1971, vol. 6: Mammalian animals or animals, 628 p.

Zavitukhina M. P. Kurgany u selo Bystryanskogo v Altaiskom kray: Po raskopkam S. M. Sergeeva v 1930 g. [Mounds near the village of Bystryansky in the Altai Territory: On the excavations of S. M. Sergeev in 1930].

Zasetskaya I. P. Sauromatian and Sarmatian burials of the Nikolsky burial ground in the Lower Volga region // Tr. Gos. The Hermitage Museum. 1979, Issue XX, pp. 87-113.

Zakharov D. I. Brief report on the survey of mounds near the village of Sary (Petropavlovsk) 2/1929. N 166 Archiv IIMK RAS. f.2/1929. N 166 (in Russian).

Kadyrbaev M. K., Kurmankulov Zh. K. Burials of Sauromatian warriors on the left bank of the Ilek River / / Past of Kazakhstan according to archaeological sources. Alma-Ata: NaukaKazSSR Publ., 1976, pp. 137-156.

Kantorovich, A. R., Classification and typology of elements of "zoomorphic transformations" in the animal style of steppe Scythia, Strukturno-semioticheskie issledovaniya v arkheologii. - Donetsk: Don. nat. un-t, 2002, vol. 1, pp. 77-130.

Kiryushin Yu. F., Tishkin A. A. Scythian epoch of the Altai Mountains. Barnaul: Alt. State University, 1997. Part I: Culture of the population in the Early Scythian period. - 232 p.

Korolkova E. F. Animal Style of Eurasia: The Art of the Lower Volga and Southern Urals Tribes in the Scythian Era (VII-IV centuries BC): Problems of Style and ethno-cultural belonging. - St. Petersburg: Petersburg. Vostokovedenie Publ., 2006, 272 p. (in Russian)

Kubarev V. D. Kurgany Yustyda [Mounds of Yustyda]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1991, 192 p. (in Russian)

Arkheologiya, etnografiya i antropologiya Evrazii [Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia]. - 2002. - N 3. - p. 63-77.

Miller, A. A., Excavations near the village of Elisavetovskaya in 1911, Izv. Imp. arkheol. commissions. - 1914. - Issue 56. - pp. 220-247.

Mammals of the Soviet Union, Moscow: Higher School of Economics, 1961, vol. I: Artiodactyls and Ungulates / Edited by V. G. Heptner and N. P. Naumov. - 776 p.

Nazarov N. S. Zametka o kurganakh Orskogo uyezda Oren'burgskoy gubernii [A note on the mounds of the Orsk uyezd of the Orenburg province]. Izv. Imp.ob ob lyubiteley estestvoznaniya, antropologii i etnografii. - 1890. - Vol. LXVIII: Tr. Antropol. ed. - Vol. XII, issue 2. - pp. 88-91.

Perevodchikova E. V. Yazyk zverinykh obraz: Ocherki iskusstva evraziyskikh steppei scifskoy epokhi [The Language of Animal Images: Essays on the Art of the Eurasian Steppes of the Scythian Era]. Russian Academy of Sciences, 1994. -208 p.

Polidovich Yu. B. Prirodnoe i mifologicheskoe v skifskikh izobrazheniyakh: Na primere pozitsii khvosta predatory'nikov [Natural and mythological in Scythian images: On the example of predator Tail positions]. - Donetsk: Don. nat. un-t, 2002, vol. 1, pp. 189-206.

Polidovich Yu. B. Predator and its prey: Expression of the cycle of life and death by means of the Scythian zoomorphic code / / Structural and semiotic studies in Archeology. - Donetsk: Don. nat. un-t Publ., 2006, vol. 3, pp. 355-398.

Polos'mak N. V."Vultures guarding gold": Ak-ala-Khin mounds. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1994, 124 p. (in Russian)

page 64
Poltoratskaya V. N. Pamyatniki epokhi rannykh kochevnikov v Tuve: Po raskopkam S. A. Teploukhova [Monuments of the Early Nomad Era in Tuva: Based on the excavations of S. A. Teploukhov].

Rostovtsev M. I. Kurgan finds of the Orenburg region of the early and late Hellenistic epochs. - Pg: [The Ninth State type], 1918. - 106 s, VII table.

Rudenko S. I. Kul'tura naseleniya Gornogo Altay v skifskoe vremya [Culture of the population of Gorny Altai in Scythian times].

Rudenko S. I. Kul'tura naseleniya Tsentralnogo Altay v skifskoe vremeni [Culture of the population of the Central Altai in the Scythian period].

Savinov D. G. Early nomads of the upper Yenisei: Archaeological cultures and cultural genesis. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, 2002. - 204 p.

Semenov V. A. Synchronizatsiya i khronologiya pamyatnikov aldy-belskogo tipa v Tuve [Synchronization and chronology of monuments of the Aldy-Belsky type in Tuva]. Barnaul: Alt State University, 1999, pp. 164-169.

Semenov V. A. Suglug-Khem and Khayyrakan-burial grounds of the Scythian period in the Central Tuva basin. - St. Petersburg: Petersburg. Vostokovedenie Publ., 2003, 240 p. (in Russian)

Smirnov K. F. Sauromati: Early History and Culture of the Sarmatians, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1964, 380 p.

Smirnov K. F. Sauromatian-Sarmatian animal style / / Scythian-Siberian animal style in the art of the peoples of Eurasia, Moscow: Nauka, 1976, pp. 74-89.

Smirnov K. F., Petrenko V. G. Sauromats of the Volga region and the Southern Urals. - Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963. - 40 p., 30 tables. - (SAP, vol. D1-9).

Smirnov K. F., Popov S. A. Sauromato-Sarmatian mounds near the village of Lipovka in the Orenburg region / / Monuments of the Southern Urals and Western Siberia of the Sarmatian time, Moscow: Nauka, 1972, pp. 3-26.

Surazakov A. S. Kosmogoniya v ornamentatsii zerkal skifskogo vremeni [Cosmogony in the ornamentation of mirrors of the Scythian time]. Problemy izucheniya istorii i kul'tury Altay i sopredel'nykh territorii: mat-ly konf., posv. 40 - letiyu GANIIIYAL. - Gorno-Altaisk, 1992. - p. 49-53.

Troitskaya T. N. Scenes of torment in Scythian-Siberian and Hunno-Sarmatian art / / Vesti, arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii-1997. - N 1. - pp. 35-38.

Fedorov V. K. On the question of the bear cult among early nomads of the southern Urals //International (XVI Ural) Archaeological Meeting: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference October 6-10, 2003-Perm, 2003. - pp. 222-223.

Fedorov, V. K., Plot content of images on Early Nomadic spoons, Mat-ly Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. "Kadyrbayev Readings-2007" May 16-18, 2007. - Aktobe, 2007. - P. 128-132.

Flerov K. K. Musk deer and deer. - Moscow; L.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1952. - 256 p. - (Fauna of the USSR: Mammals; vol. I, issue 2).

Kharuzin A. N. Kurgan excavated by P. S. Nazarov in the Orsk uyezd of the Orenburg province / / Izv. Imp. ob ob lyubiteley estestvoznaniya, antropologii i etnografii. - 1890. - Vol. LXVIII: Tr. Antropol. otd. - Vol. XII, issue 8. - pp. 298-302.

Cheremisin D. V. Iskusstvo zverinogo stilya v pogrebal'nykh kompleksakh ryadovogo naseleniya pazyrykskoy kul'tury: Semantika zverinykh obraz v kontekste pogrebalnogo obryada [The Art of animal style in the funeral complexes of the ordinary population of the Pazyryk culture: Semantics of animal images in the context of the funeral rite]. Novosibirsk, IAET SB RAS Publ., 2008, 136 p. (in Russian)

Cugunov K.V., Parainger H., Nagler A. Der Skythenzeitliche Filrstenkurgan Arzan 2 in Tuva. - Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 2010. - 330 S., 153 Taf.

The Golden Deer of Eurasia: Scythian and Sarmatian Treasures from the Russian Steppes. - N. Y: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000. - 304 p.

The article was submitted to the editorial Board on 26.07.13, in the final version-on 16.12.13.

page 65

Permanent link to this publication: