Статтю присвячено історії вивчення неолітичної стоянки Бондариха ІІ на Сіверському Дінці.
Автори публікації заново переглянули матеріали
стоянки, порівняли отримані статистичні дані
зі статистикою Д. Я. Телегіна, який досліджував
пам’ятку на початку 1950-х рр. Робиться висновок
про гомогенність матеріалів стоянки та їх належність до розвинутого етапу донецької культури,
тобто — до першої половини VI тис. до н. е.
The Neolithic site Bondarikha ІІ was explored
70 years ago by D. Ya. Telegin. The materials of the
site were not processed utilizing modern methods. The
authors of the paper re-examined and analyzed the
site’s materials using current methodologies.
The Bondarikha II site is set along a natural
boundary on what is now the south-eastern outskirts
of the modern city of Izium, Kharkiv region. The location
of the site is a section of an over-flooded terrace
that stretches along the left bank of the River
Siversky Donets, and a section of an older river bed
named the Willow Pit. In the north, sections of the
terrace were crossed by an unnamed stream, and its
southern boundary defined by floodplains. The lowlands
nearest the terrace are primarily comprised of
wetlands.
It is quite clear that the Willow Pit was once an active
river and seasonally may have transformed into
a lake during times of flooding. The site is located
general site position is typical for the Neolithic sites of
Donetsk Culture, with the vast majority of which are
located on terraces above the floodplain lakes of Siversky
Donets, with the habitational remains occupying
the highest areas of terraces, or the periphery / edges
of such terraces.
The interpretation of Bondarikha material culture
was quite simple. The presence of pencil-like blade
cores, oblique truncated points of the Abuzova Balka
and Donetsk types, a series of blades displaying abrupt
retouch on edges, along with bilateral burins, scrapers
on flakes, and ovate axes are attestation that the
assemblage and complex are connected with the advanced
stages of Donetsk Culture.
The estimation of the site’s age is possible only by the
principles of relative chronology. The Mariupolian origin
of the trapeze projectiles allows us to establish the
earliest age range of the complex within the beginning
of the VI millennium BC. However, the utilization of
trapeze projectiles with flat dorsal retouch that spread
in the basin of Siversky Donets in the third quarter of
VI millennium BC is not present. Accordingly, we can
safely place the age of the site within the first half of
VI millennium BC.
