Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 46 (1) 2018   DOI: 10.17746/1563-0110.2018.46.1.076-085

Annotation:  Personal Ornament Production Technology in the Early Holocene Complexes of Western Central Asia: Ins Hadjoh-2: A Middle Paleolithic Workshop-Camp in Northwestern Caucasus The Late Chalcolithic Ceramics of the Volga Forest-Steppe On the Origin of Natural Bitumen at Yasnoye-8 (Sakhalin Island) Inskoy Dol: A New Early Bronze Age Site in Western Altai Decorated Birch-Bark Artifacts from the Ust-Polui Sanctuary (100 BC to 100 AD) An Old Turkic Statue from Borili, Ulytau Hills, Central Kazakhstan: Issues in Interpretation On Ancient Agriculture in Arid Regions of Central Asia: The Case of the Uvs Nuur Basin Geophysical Studies at the Kushmanskoye (Uchkakar) Fortifi ed Settlement, Kama Basin Pit-Grave (Yamnaya) and Pit-Grave-Maikop Burials at Levoyegorlyksky-3, Stavropol A Periodization of the Timber-Grave Culture in the Western Orenburg Region: Archaeological and Natur The Russian Pioneers’ Winter Camp on Karachinsky Island, the Lower Tobol River, Western Siberia An Experimental Assessment of the Cause of Mummification in the Joseon Period Burials, Republic of K Celestial Bodies on the Ob Ugrian Ritual Artifacts (Based on Archaeological and Ethnographic Sources Craniotomy as a Prehistoric Medical Practice: A Case of Antemortem Cranial Trepanation in Southern Secular and Age-Related Dynamics of Biological Characteristics in the Rural Population of Mongolia:   

Geophysical Studies
at the Kushmanskoye (Uchkakar) Fortified Settlement,
Kama Basin

I.V. Zhurbin¹ and M.G. Ivanova²

¹Physical-Technical Institute, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kirova 132, Izhevsk, 426000, Russia

²Udmurt Institute of History, Language and Literature, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Lomonosova 4, Izhevsk, 426004, Russia

This article presents the results of interdisciplinary research at the Kushma nskoye (Uchkakar) fortified settlement, dating to the 9th–13th centuries. Using geophysical methods, such as resistivity and magnetometry surveys, groundpenetrating radar, and electrical resistivity tomography, we were able to assess the total area of the site (over 26,000 sq. m), outline its boundaries, evaluate its structure, and reconstruct the layout of all three lines of defensive constructions. Various types of feature were identified: dwellings, utility structures, a group of household- and production-related pits, and the inner fortification line. Excavations, carried out at all parts of the site but covering less than 1 % of its area, supported our preliminary conclusions based on geophysical data. The earliest fortification line, unidentifiable by visual inspection, separates the inner and the middle parts of the site. The prospection survey has revealed the housing plan of the middle and outer parts of the settlement, and the deep features outside the fortified area. The thickness of the cultural layer and its preservation were assessed throughout the site. For the first time at the site associated with the Cheptsa culture, the habitation horizon was revealed outside the fortified area.

Keywords: Kama basin, Uchkakar, fortified settlement, magnetometry survey, resistivity survey, electrical resistivity tomography, ground-penetrating radar