Ufa Archaeological Herald

This article is devoted to the study of paired and collective burials of children related to the Bronze Age in the Southern Urals (XXI-XV centuries BC). In comparison with the other times, children’s graves of this period are characterized by variability and multiplicity. Such graves could be classiied both as the burials of independent subjects, or as the examples of manipulations with a kid, thus treated as an object, processed by adults. Hence, we conclude that there was no universal attitude to children after death in the South Ural communities of the Bronze Age. Infants were treated as subjects or as objects depending on the circumstances and therefore, different types of children’s burials had different implications. A large number of kids found on the archaeological sites referred to the analyzed period could be explained by their exceptional, probably sacral, role for the collective.

the Bronze Age, Southern Urals, children’s burials, an object, a subject

• Berseneva N.A. «Semeinye» (?) pogrebeniya sintashtinskoi kul’tury (epokha bronzy Yuzhnogo Urala) ["Family" (?) burials of the Sintashta Culture (the Bronze Age period in the Southern Urals)] // Kazakhskoye khanstvo v potoke istorii: Sb. nauchnich statei, posvyashennyi 550-letiyu obrazovaniya Kazakhskogo khanstva / Gl. red. B.A. Bajtanaev. Almaty, 2015. S. 335-331.
• Berseneva N.A., Kupriyanova E.V. Detskie pogrebeniya petrovskoi kul’tury Yuzhnogo Zauraliya [Children’s burials of the Petrovka Culture in the Southern TransUrals] // Etnicheskie vzaimodeistviya na Yuzhnom Urale. Chelyabinsk, 2015, S. 59-61.
• Crawford S. Companions, Co-incidences or Chattels? Children in the Early Anglo-Saxon Multiple Burial Ritual. Children, Childhood and Society. BAR International Series 1696. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2007. S. 83-92.
• Diaz-Andreu M., Lucy S., Babic S., Edwards D. The Achaeology of Identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion. London and New York: Routledge, 2005. 171 s.
• Epimakhov A. V. Rannie kompleksnye obshestva severa Zentralnoi Evrasii (po materialam mogil’nika Kamennyi Ambar-5) [Early complex societies of the Northern part of Central Eurasia (a study based on the materials from a burial ground Kamenny Ambar-5)]. Chelyabinsk: Chelyabinskii Dom Pechati, 2005. 192 s.
• Garwood P. Vital Resources, Ideal Images and Virtual Lives: Children in Early Bronze Age Funerary Ritual. Children, Childhood and Society. BAR International Series 1696. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2007. S. 63-82.
• Gowland R., Thompson T. Human Identity and Identiication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. 225 p.
• Kupriyanova E.V. Pogrebal’nye praktiki epokhi Bronzy Yuzhnogo Zaural’ya: Mogilnik Stepnoye-1 [Burial rites of the Southern TransUral societies during the Bronze Age period: based on Stepnoye-1 burial ground]. Chelyabinsk: Enziklopediya, 2016. 119 s.
• Kupriyanova E.V., Zdanovich D.G. Drevnosti Lesostepnogo Zaural’ya: Mogil’nik Stepnoye VII [Antiquities of forest-steppe TransUrals: Stepnoye VII burial ground]. Chelyabinsk: Enziklopediya, 2015. 196 s.
• Logvin A.V., Shevnina I.V. Ob odnom sintashtinskom pogrebal’nom komplexe mogil’nika Bestamak [On the Sintashta burial complex located at the Bestamak burial ground] // Arheologiya Kazahstana v ehpohu nezavisimosti: itogi, perspektivy. Mat. mezhdunar. konf. 12-15 dekabrya 2011. g. Almaty: Institut arheologii im. A.H. Margulana, 2013. S. 349-359.
• Petrov F.N., Kupriyanova E.V. Poseleniya epokhi bronzy v Arkaimskoi doline: po resul’tatam pazvedochnykh issledovanii 1997-2015 gg. [The Bronze Age settlements of Arkaim valley: a report based on the results of archaeological surveys in 1997-2015]. M.: Moskowskii oblastnoi obshestvennyi fond "Nasledie", 2016. 148 s.
• Raikova Ya.V. Srubno-Alakul’skii kurgan Selivanovskogo II mogil’nika iz Yuzhnogo Zaural’ya i problema parnykh zakhoronenii epokhi bronzy [A mound of the Srubno-Alakul’ culture located on the territory of Selivanovsky II burial groundSouthern TransUrals): on the problem of the Bronze Age paired burials] // Rossiiskaya arkheologiya. 2008. № 4. S. 72-83.
• Sofaer J.R. The Body as Material Culture. A Theoretical Osteoarchaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 188 p.
• Ucko P.J. Ethnography and the archaeological interpretation of funerary remains. World Archaeology. 1969. Vol. 1. S. 262-290.
• Vinogradov N.B. Novye materialy dlya rekonstruktsii oblika odezhdy alakul’skikh zhenshin (po resul’tatam izycheniya mogil’nika Kulevchi VI) [New materials applied for the clothes reconstruction of the Alakul’ women (based on the study of Kulevchi VI cemetery)] // Problemy istorii, ilologii, kul’tury. Vyp. VI. M. – Magnitogorsk, 1998. S. 186-202.
• Vinogradov N.B., Berseneva N.A. Intramural Burials of Children at Bronze Age sites in the Southern Urals (early 2nd millennium BC) // Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia. 41/3. 2013. S. 59-67.
• Zdanovich D.G. Arkaim: nekropol’ (po materialam kurgana 25 Bol’shekaraganskogo mogil’nika) [Arkaim: necropolis (based on the materials of mound 25 located on the territory of Bol’shekaragansky burial ground)]. Kn. 1. Chelyabinsk: Uzhno-Ural’skoe kn. Izd-vo, 2002. 216 s.