Abstract
In the article new directions in the methodology of studying of the burial monuments of the Asian Bosporus are under consideration, allowing to give more objective interpretation of the burial rites. Long study of the funeral monuments of the Asian Bosporus led to the accumulation of a large amount of information that needs to be systematized, which led to the need for improved methods for processing archaeological material. Funeral traditions are very diffi cult to adequately interpret only with reliance on archaeological artifacts without involving other sources (written, epigraphic, monuments of fi ne art, etc.). However, traditionally in archaeological works only certain aspects of the funeral rite are considered and narrowly focused approaches. Currently, more and more researchers consider the most promising integrated approach with the mandatory correct implementation of ethnographic analogies and anthropology methods, which is very productive for resolving controversial issues in this area. It helps to take into account various factors infl uencing the formation of ritual traditions: chronological, social, religious, ethnic, etc.
No less difficult is the processing and systematization of a suffi ciently voluminous archaeological material accumulated over the years of excavation. The percentage ratio method traditionally used in many archaeological works is not always effective due to the impossibility of applying it to small samples and subjectivity in the selection of features when interpreting archaeological material. The development of technology contributed to the introduction of multivariate analysis methods, including cluster and factor analysis, into archaeological science in the early 1970s. The interpretation of the results of a multivariate analysis of burial monuments was signifi cantly facilitated by an innovative technique based on the use of interpreter signs in the source matrices. It is offered to use the complex approach, including alongside with the traditional archaeological methods the methods of the multivariate mathematical analysis.
Keywords
Asian Bosporus, archaeological excavations, burial rite, factor-analysis, clusteranalysis.
Abramova, A.N., Berlizov, A.N. 2019: Antropologo-tafologicheskaya kharakteristika muzhskikh pogrebeniy nekropolya Volna 1. [Anthropological-taphological characteristic of the male burials of the necropolis Volna 1] Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii [Brief Communications of the Institute of Archaeology] 257, 339–355.
Alexandridou, A. 2016 Funerary Variability in late eighth-century Attica (Late Geometric II). In: J.B. Carter, C.L. Johnston, B. Simpson (eds.), American Journal of Archaeology 120.3. Boston, 333–360.
Berlizov, A.N., Kashayev, S.V., Mimokhod, R.A. 2019: Evolyutsiya pogrebalnykh traditsiy v nekropolyakh Volna 1 i Artyushchenko 2 v VI–IV vekakh do novoy ery. [Evolution of funerary traditions in the necropolises of Volna 1 and Artyushchenko 2 in the 6th – 4th centuries BC]. Problemy Istorii Filologii, Kul’tury [Journal of Historical, Philological and Cultural Studies] 3, 222–245.
Berlizov, N.E., Venediktov, A.P. Pyankov, A.V. 2003: Statisticheskiy analiz pogrebalnykh pamyatnikov severo-zapadnogo Kavkaza sarmatskogo vremeni – epokhi srednevekovya. [Statistical analysis of the funerary monuments of the Northwestern Caucasus during the Sarmatian period and the Middle Ages]. Krasnodar.
Gulyaev, V.I. 2010: Izucheniye pogrebal’nogo obryada v zarubezhnoy arkheologii. [The study of the funeral rite in foreign archaeology]. Kratkiye soobshcheniya Instituta Arkheologii [Brief Communications of the Institute of Archaeology] 224, 5–19.
Zhdanovsky, A.M. 1985: Istoriya plemen Srednego Prikubanya vo II v. do n.er. – III v. n. e. [The history of the tribes of the Middle Kuban in the 2nd century BC – 3rd century AD]. Moscow.
Zhdanovsky, A.M., Limberis, N.Yu., Marchenko, I.I. 1985: Pogrebalnyy obryad sarmatov Zakubanya (po raskopkam 1984 goda i dorevolyutsionnym materialam) [Buriral rite of the Sarmatians of Zakubanye (according to excavations of 1984 and pre-revolutionary materials)]. Pogrebalnyy obryad drevnego i srednevekovogo naseleniya Severnogo Kavkaza [Burial rite of the ancient and medieval population of the North Caucasus]. Ordzhonikidze, 103–126.
Kamenetskiy, I.S. 1983: Kod dlya opisaniya pogrebal’nogo obryada. [A code to describe the burial rite.] The Antiquities of the Don. In: U.A. Krasnov (ed.), Drevnosti Dona. Materialy rabot Donskoy ekspeditsii [Materials of the works of the Don Mission]. Moscow, 221–250.
Kamenetskiy, I.S. 1986: Kod dlya opisaniya pogrebal’nogo obryada (chast vtoraya) [A code to describe the burial rite (part two)]. Arkheologicheskiye otkrytiya na novostroykakh [Archaeological discoveries on new buildings]. Moscow, 136–194.
Klein, L.S.1999: Glubina arkheologicheskogo fakta i problema rekonversii [Depth of archaeological fact and the problem of reconversion]. Stratum plus 6, 337–361.
Marchenko, I.I. 1996: Siraki Kubani (Po materialam kurgannykh pogrebeniy Nizhney Kubani) [Shiraki of the Kuban (Based on materials from the burial mounds of the Lower Kuban)]. Krasnodar.
Moshkova, M.G. 1963: Pamyatniki prokhorovskoy kultury [Monuments of Prokhorov culture]. (Svod Arkheologicheskikh Istochnikov [Corpus of Archaeological Sources] D 1–10). Moscow.
Sudarev, N.I. 2005: Gruntovyye nekropoli bosporskikh gorodov VI–II vv. do novoi eri kak istoricheskiy istochnik [Ground necropolises of the Bosporan cities of the 6th – 2nd centuries BC as a historical source]. Moscow.
Fedorov-Davydov, G.A. 1987: Statistical methods in archaeology. Moscow.