Ancient and new buildings in historic sections of cities
As shown in the previous Chapter, many groups over the centuries, changing, replenishing with new facilities and acquired new aesthetic qualities. In addition, each era was created in the historical…

Continue reading →

The ancient art
The term "Romanesque" . emerged in the XIX century Applied to ancient Western European art XIX-the X-XII centuries (in some countries – XIII century) Architecture. Architecture is the leading art…

Continue reading →


In the past two years by an expedition of the Chelyabinsk scientific center, there were works on the study of megalithic structures found near lake Turgoyak, North of Miass, Chelyabinsk region. In 2003, the island was visited by the expedition of S. A. Grigorieva, N. M. Menshenina and M. S. Arkanov, which made the conclusion about the antiquity of this monument and made his initial description and documentation [1]. In the summer and autumn of 2004 on the island worked expedition of the Chelyabinsk scientific center of UB RAS under the guidance of the authors of this article. In this paper we will not dwell on the description of detected objects given in the above


The field season of 2004 was made on the largest megalithic structure No. 1. This work made significant changes in our ideas about this monument, formed on the basis of the previous studies. So it was assumed that recorded in the southern part of the deepening and associated Windows have been made by believers in the reuse of the monument [1]. However, the discovery of the wall in one of the indentations suggested that indentations are the result of the collapse of the floors, and there are cameras that collapsed in antiquity. Accordingly, it is possible that recorded in the southern part of the mound the Windows also belong to the original design.

On the basis of geological analysis of rocky outcrops and spheroidal separateness granodiorites, carried out by V. Y. Nikolsky, was concluded that the creation of the pit of the megalith builders had used the natural tectonic crack in the rock on the mainland.

In 2004 work was conducted the Northwest chamber on the mound and megalith.

The description of the excavation

In the North – Western chamber was made of a sample of the cultural layer with a capacity of from 0.2 to 0.4 m. the cultural layer disturbed here later priispolzovanii, and at the bottom of the recorded material later time, including a coin of 1978. Along with them, in the mixed layer were found plates, flakes, large knife-like plate, a fragment gumauskas ceramics and stone arachnic. At the bottom, in the Northern part of the chamber, was cleared excavated in bedrock pit, which had dimensions of 0.6×0.9 m and depth of 0.2 m (Fig. 1). Apparently, the pit was covered with large stove, which was moved, and the mixed layer in the pit. Here was found a small fragment of the dead-burned bones, but his condition does not allow to determine whether it belonged to man or animal.

Fig. 1. The recess on the floor of the North–Western camera

Fig. 1. The recess on the floor of the North–Western camera

An interesting feature was identified in the West end wall, where the slabs were removed. However, here above the wall on loose lay four oblong layer of stones, which probably were originally set tilted, closing the hole between the wall and the ceiling. It was securely locked (works on the monument continued until the end of October) that at the spring and autumn equinox the setting sun penetrates into this hole, passing through the megalith and reaching the Eastern end wall of the great hall.

It is not excluded, of course, that it is a coincidence, because, in General, the construction of a megalith is tied to tectonic fractures. However, the direction of cracks is somewhat different from the centerline of the structure.

Fig. 2. Excavations of the mound of megalith

Fig. 2. Excavations of the mound of megalith

In addition to the excavations in megalith studies have been performed of its mounds in the southern part (Fig. 2). Masonry walls partly outside of the pit. The South wall is fixed the stone mounds built without clearly defined walls. Slab and wall were covered with a layer of sandy loam of brown color. The power of the mound above the slab is 0.2 m. the surface of this sandy loam over plates lipchinskii found a fragment of pottery of the Eneolithic period. Another fragment was found at the base of this layer under the embankment. In the layer of sandy loam is also found flint arrow. Among the stones of the masonry are often found flint plates and small flakes. In another part of the mound is detected in the nucleus. However, under the embankment gumauskas found a fragment of pottery of the early iron age. Two other similar fragment was found at the bottom layer of the mound. One of these fragments belongs to the same vessel as the Northern fragment of the camera.

In the study of the mound were cleared of large oblong stones, which are probably part of some fallen stelae surrounding the design. Found three such stones along the embankment. Another is recorded to the East under the ground surface.

Fig. 3. The layering of the layers in the corridor in the North – Western camera

Fig. 3. The layering of the layers in the corridor in the North–Western camera

Despite repeated reuse of the monument and the dislocation layers in all cells, were able to identify the layers that preserved stratigraphic sequence. Such, in particular, found in the corridor leading to the North–West chamber (Fig. 3). With little power remains in this place (up to 15 cm), were recorded four successive thin layer quasireverse fixing the frames of the visit and use of the monument (including the upper layer, caused by modern tourists), separated by three layers of granodiorite crumbs accumulated as a result of shedding from the ceiling and walls in the periods when the monument was not visited. In an early layer detected a fragment of pottery and two flint plates, in the upper — wrought nail, Dating back to probably the nineteenth century.

Thus, at the base of the cultural layers of Eneolithic is material, notwithstanding the disturbance of layers at most sites. All this points to the construction of structures in the bronze age with its subsequent reuse in mamayskoe time in the XIX century.

We also tested a hypothesis on the possibility of building constructions in the early iron age or at a later time, with the introduction of sandy loam for filling of the embankment from the Parking lot, which caused the presence of early material on the monument. However, geological surveys conducted on the island showed that identical sandy loam has about the megalith, while near the sites, located below, near the shore, it is characterized by its granulometric characteristics. In the area of the megalith our research of the cultural layer is not yet revealed, although we do not exclude that there may be isolated finds, left by the builders.

Description of inventory

Just was excavated 33 of the plate 26 of flakes of Jasper and flint, 1 nucleus and 1 flint arrowhead (Fig. 4). However, it should be noted that we are dealing still with a pronounced lamellar technique of splitting stone, as the flakes are usually very small sizes and were formed probably in the manufacture and handling of cores. The width of the plates ranges from 5 to 10 (rarely 12) mm. The average width is 7 mm. As for gumauskas culture more characteristic tools made of flakes with use retouch bilateral or larger plate, flint and Jasper tools belong to the Neolithic time. With gumauskas culture comparable only part of the ceramics (Fig. 4, 1, 2). Thus we can date the complex to the early Chalcolithic, as in the late Chalcolithic transition to the production of tools on flakes [2, p. 13]. This date is confirmed by the presence on the monument lipchinskii ceramics (Fig. 4, 3) belonging to the first phase of the Eneolithic of the Ural.

Fig. 4. Finds from the megalithic 1

Fig. 4. Finds from the megalithic 1

Thus, the initial archaeological investigations of the megalithic constructions of the Vera island confirmed the assumption of their early date. In conclusion, I would like to touch on possible reasons for the emergence of this phenomenon in the southern Urals, the closest analog of which are megalithic structures, especially the gallery and chamber tombs in Western Europe. Reasoning facilities, in particular the construction of a false arch, which led to the change in the direction of stress and the achievement of dynamic equilibrium of the entire facility, no doubt indicate the presence of a long tradition of construction of such objects. Therefore, we do not exclude the possibility of bringing this tradition to the West in the large-scale processes of restructuring of the cultural system in Europe in the last third of IV Millennium BC, However, if we turn to the analogues meter line of megaliths in Western Europe, the most acceptable date 2700-2500 BCE Thus, the final issue date is still there, although the latter date seems the most reasonable, because it explains the presence of Neolithic ceramics in the lower layer of the monument.