Our Ref. GB/AA/1654_Add. Info Charenton-le-Pont, 6 October 2020
H. E. Mr Alexander Kouznetsov Permanent Delegation of the Russian Federation to UNESCO 8, rue de Prony 75017 Paris
World Heritage List 2021 Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea (Russian Federation)
Dear Ambassador,
ICOMOS is currently assessing the nomination of “Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea” as a World Heritage site and an ICOMOS evaluation mission shall visit the property, if current sanitary conditions allow it, to consider matters related to protection, management and conservation, as well as issues related to integrity and authenticity.
In order to help with our overall evaluation process, we would be grateful to receive further information to augment what has already been submitted in the nomination dossier.
Therefore, we would be pleased if the State Party could consider the following points and kindly provide additional information:
Description of the nominated property ICOMOS notes that, in the history and development section of the nomination dossier, mention is made of how sites were documented and researched but there is no information on the history of the petroglyphs themselves. Brief information is included in the management plan (p. 23 and 25), however, a detailed history depicting how the cultural groups settled, evolved and migrated, including a description of the context in which the petroglyphs were created as at the current state of research, would be beneficial to the understanding of the nominated property.
It would be important to provide a history of the development including settlements and migrations of the Neolithic cultures at the Lake Onega and the White Sea as well as in the wider region (evolution, settlement, trade routes and communication, migration, believes and traditions etc. of the Pit-Comb Ware & Rhomb-Pit Ware cultures for example). It would also be appreciated if the relation existing between the Neolithic cultural groups and the peoples of Finno-Ugric origin (described as their descendants on page 63 of the nomination dossier) could be further explained.
Further information would also be welcome regarding the physical immovable remains retrieved from the archaeological campaigns in various sites of the Lake Onega and the White Sea, which testify to the rituals, spiritual beliefs and oral traditions held.
ICOMOS 11 rue du Séminaire de Conflans - 94220 Charenton-le-Pont - France Tel. + 33 (0) 1 41 94 17 59 - [email protected] - www.icomos.org
Boundaries of the nominated property and buffer zones ICOMOS notes that the management plan of the nominated property mentions that 49 archaeological ‘monuments’ are located in the immediate vicinity of the rock carvings of the Lake Onega as well as the 42 camp sites associated with the petroglyphs of the White Sea. It would be useful for ICOMOS to understand whether these additional sites are located within the buffer zones of the nominated components, and if not, what are their protective designations.
Regarding the delineation of the buffer zone of component 1 of the Lake Onega, ICOMOS notes that there is an overlap of the delineation of the nominated component part in the sea with the one of the buffer zone. ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could explain how an additional layer of protection could be considered, taking into account this configuration. It would also be useful if the State Party could clarify whether a buffer zone delineation in the sea beyond the proposed nominated area was considered.
ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could clarify the rationale followed for the delineation of the buffer zones, in relation to existing protective designations.
Integrity ICOMOS notes that the component parts selected by the State Party contain archaeological settlements, but that other archaeological elements, such as burial grounds, have not be included into the component parts of the series. ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could further explain the reasons why the other archaeological elements have not been included in the nominated areas.
Comparative analysis ICOMOS notes that, in the comparative analysis section, detailed comparisons are undertaken with rock art sites of the Tentative List of Russian Federation, and with rock art sites inscribed on the World Heritage List located in the same geo-cultural region, in Northern Fennoscandia. ICOMOS notes that the polar petroglyphs of the Lake Kanozero on the Umba River are considered as being potentially added in the future to the nominated property as an extension. ICOMOS understands that this site benefitted from recent research and conservation works. Could the State Party provide further information on the current state of research of this site and how it compares with the nominated property?
In addition, in relation to the selection of the component parts of the series, could the State Party provide further information as regards the rationale that has been followed for the selection of the components? In particular, ICOMOS would be interested in understanding whether they can be said to reflect different facets of the same culture, and how they complement or reinforce each other.
Conservation In 2016, the State Committee of the Republic of Karelia for the protection of cultural heritage objects was established. ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could provide information on the role it plays within the management of the property, and especially its prerogatives as regards the conservation of the nominated series.
ICOMOS would also be interested to understand how the institutions of State Committee, State public institution and the Belomorsk Municipal Museum operate and collaborate for the purpose of conservation of the nominated property.
On page 95 of the management plan, mention is made that “for the time being, the condition of the monuments is not regularly monitored; there is no system governing monitoring activities or appointed responsible persons; the existing number of available officers is insufficient to perform full monitoring.” It would be highly appreciated if the State Party could indicate if the preparation of a conservation plan is being considered. Has a short, medium and long-term conservation programme been set up beside the project of “a regular comprehensive preventive maintenance system”?
As far as scientific research is concerned, is there a research plan providing a policy, framework, guidelines and an action plan for future research at the nominated property?
Protection Could the State Party provide a detailed map, in English, of existing protection designations in relation to the boundaries of the nominated property and of the buffer zones? It would be useful if this map could include existing natural reserve(s) and other protected areas.
Could the State Party clarify whether all the places and sites identified within the nominated property and buffer zones are also included on the National Heritage Register or equivalent protection when mention is made of federal listing?
The nomination dossier indicates that there is a project to list the petroglyphs of the Lake Onega of the White Sea as cultural heritage site of federal significance (“considered for protection under the State Code of Especially Valuable Properties of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation”). Could the State Party indicate the implications of their current status and what benefits would the petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea gain with this listing? What is the timetable in place to complete this designation?
Management As the nominated property is presented as a series, management for individual component parts is necessary, but also an overall management system for the series as a whole. Therefore, ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could provide information as to whether an overall coordination management body has been established.
ICOMOS understands that there will be a Coordination Council comprising a number of private and public stakeholders meeting at least once every 6 months. However, further information would be appreciated so as to understand how the various public bodies involved in the management of the nominated property (Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Karelia, the Institute of Language, Literature and History of the Karelian Research Centre, the Forest Institute of the Karelian Centre, the State of information centre, le Belomorsky and the Pudozhsky Municipal districts) will interact with the Coordination Council and the Reserve Museum.
It would be much appreciated if the State party could specify who will be directly responsible for the conservation, protection and management of the nominated property and provide further details on this matter.
With regards to the management plan, could the State Party provide additional information on the implementation time scale concerning the formal approval and implementation of the management plan?
Tourism and development projects ICOMOS would welcome further information on the type of foreseen industrial and tourism development projects – in particular their location in respect to the nominated property - as well as on any consequence over the existing road network and the traffic in the vicinity or within the nominated property.
Could the State Party indicate what is the status of the tourism development plan announced in the Management Plan?
ICOMOS appreciates that the timeframe for providing this additional information is short. Brief responses are required at this stage, and can be discussed further with the State Party if needed during the ICOMOS World Heritage Panel process.
We look forward to your responses to these points, which will be of great help in our evaluation process.
We would be grateful if you could provide ICOMOS and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre with the above information by Monday 16 November 2020 at the latest.
Please note that the State Party shall submit two copies of the additional information to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre so that it can be formally registered as part of the Nomination Dossier.
We thank you in advance for your kind cooperation.
Yours faithfully,
Gwenaëlle Bourdin Director ICOMOS World Heritage Evaluation Unit
Copy to Department of the Republic of Karelia for the protection of cultural heritage UNESCO World Heritage Centre Description of the nominated object section “History and development” The European North was covered with the huge glacier for a long time, and humans appeared here since its disappearance about 12000 years ago. When disappearing the glacier left vast wetlands, hundreds of lakes and rivers and formed certain picturesque landscapes. When the massive layer of land ice had melted and released the Baltic crystalline shield from the enormous ice pressure it started slowly raise. Climate and vegetation gradually changed and soil cover started to form, different forest and marine flora and fauna began to spread. Environment suitable for humans started to evolve about 11000 years ago, but still cold climate heavy watering and dearth of food resources constrained reclaiming of this territory. Modern scientific data evidence that humans reclaimed the south and central Karelia about 10000 years ago, in the Late Mesolithic age. Pioneers arrived here from earlier reclaimed territories located to the south and southeast and from the upper Volga-Oka basin. Polished rock surface convenient for making carvings were still under the water level by this time. In the Early Neolithic, appr.7000 years ago it became warmer and water level lowered. This time is called the Atlantic optimum of Holocene. It was particularly warm and dry 6400-6700 years ago. The average temperature at that time exceeded the modern for almost 3°, thermophilous forests (oaks, beeches, elms, hazels) spread up to the latitude of Kem’ town. This favorable natural circumstance lasted several hundreds of years. During that Neolithic period, among local population there appeared the unique petroglyphic tradition on ice-dressed rocks - slanting granite slopes polished by glacier and progressed for several hundreds of years on the shores of the lake Onego and river Vyg.
Cultural and natural context of the Lake Onega petroglyphs Nearby the rock carvings of the Lake Onega there over 40 archeological sites: seasonal (temporary) or round-year, places with finds, Medieval settlements and one burial ground were revealed. These materials cover nearly 10000 years and refer to the number of the most studied in the North-West Russia. They significantly enhance our overview about ancient periods of history of Karelia and adjacent regions so far they reflect archaeological time from Mesolithic till Middle-age period. Numerous paleo-osteological materials from cultural layers of the sites give principally new vision of fauna in ancientry. Geologo-geomorphological and palynological studies were conducted in the monuments’ area and they allowed to imagine the state of natural environment within periods of their existence. The Late Mesolithic is the earliest period on the territory of Karelia, which lasted from the beginning of the 8th to the end of the 6th millennium BC. It is defined by the characteristics of stone tools and their technique. The first settlers were attracted by the rich and vast hunting and fishing places, convenient natural routes - numerous lakes, rivers and lake-river systems. Initially, the Mesolithic population adapted and spread widely in the southern regions of Karelia; they advanced to northern Karelia (White Sea region) somewhat later. The pioneers did not find the flint they were used to for the production of tools, and they began to use local raw materials: quartz, slate, quartzite, etc. The flint tools found in the cultural layers of Mesolithic and later sites testify to the links of the Karelian population with the territories located to the south and east, where the deposits of this mineral are located. Due to the rather harsh natural and climatic conditions, the most common type of Mesolithic sites are permanent (round year) settlements with semi-earthen dwellings and summer seasonal camps. Excavations carried out near all Onega groups of petroglyphs. Obviously, that ancient settlements’ proximity to rock carvings sites is not an eve dance of their direct relation. For its revealing researchers carried out thorough comprehensive study of all archaeological and paleo-
1 geographical data, and as a result the age of petroglyphs was corrected and defined peculiarities of natural and cultural environment wherein they were created. Within the buffer zone, 9 sites of the Late Mesolithic Age (8500-7700 years ago) were found in surroundings of the Lake Onega petroglyphs. Their topography reflects one of the transgression phase of the lake. 10 interesting household constructions of the Mesolithic Age were excavated on the capes Besov Nos and Kladovets Nos. In pit-house shelters were cleaned fireplaces collected numerous stone tools, remains of calcinated bones of fish and animals. High occurrence of fish bones tells about occupation of local inhabitants. Objects of art include a fragment of a thin polished bone plate with a hole (pendant), ornamented with zigzag cut lines and an unusual anthropomorphic bone figurine depicting a man with a large, long face and protruding cheekbones from the settlement of Besov Nos VI. The appearance of the ancient population of Karelia has been reconstructed by anthropologists based on materials of buried grounds of Mesolithic and Neolithic Time in the European North of Russia. One of them, the most famous and biggest located in the northern part of the lake Onega, on the Island of Yuzhny Oleniy at the distance of 40 km from petroglyphs. It existed about 8000 years ago. Judging by opinion of certain researchers the island served as a necropolis for the whole population lived on the shores and islands of the lake Onega. Owing to lime soils human skeletons and tens of crafts made of bone and horns like human and animal figures preserved here. Upon definition of anthropologists typical representatives of northern Europeoids were buried in that buried ground. The main defining feature of the Neolithic Time in the forest zone is the appearance of ceramics, which becomes the main criterion for identifying archaeological cultures. Neolithic sites with Pit-Comb ceramics of different phases of its development (from the earliest round-pit to pit-comb and final late rhomb-comb ceramics) – the most noticeable and remarkable layer of ancientry studied near the Lake Onega petroglyphs. The improvement of natural conditions in the Neolithic and the displacement of natural zones to the north contributed to the widespread distribution of Neolithic cultures. Holders of this culture occupied vast forest spaces from the south of Kola Peninsula to the northern Ukraine and from Finland to Ural mountings this area correlates with the territory where later on resided Finno-Ugric tribes. In the middle of the XX century, correlation of ranges allowed certain archaeologists to develop a hypothesis that Finno- Ugric ethnic group was formed on the culture of Pit-Comb ceramics. Though this hypothesis was not proved with scientific convincing facts. Round-year sites of Neolithic Age (13) existed for several hundreds of years at the distance of 1-6 km from the Lake Onega shore, up-stream of the rivers Vodla and Chernaya. Neolithic artifacts like Pit-Comb and Rhomb-Comb ceramics and accompanying tools were found on tips of all capes with rock carvings, on sandy shores between capes, under dunes, on islands near petroglyphs. They were revealed in 27 points that refer to seasonal man sites. It is reputed that these points with finds relate to creators of rock carvings. Not only their topography, but peculiarities of cultural bedding and inimitable set of tools prove it. Culture of early stage Pit-Comb ceramics is tied to insufficiently researched studied burial ground on the cape Kladovets Nos. 11 ovate-oblong form bone chambers aligned over the line 3-B were excavated in that area. Backbones in bone chambers placed in sandy soils do not save, but in one grave there was found phalangeal bone saved owing to thermal treatment. Study of ancient pollen collected in the cultural layer of the burial ground performed steep domination of elder in that area that prefers to grow in cemeteries. When digging graves there were revealed separate details of the obsequies: small funeral fires near ochre lenses, small pits in the bottom of the grave with tools (slate axe, flint-stone
2 arrowhead, pieces of a vessel decorated with pit-comb ornament). One of the funeral fire places was age-dated with calibration (Cal.BC) as 4730±200 years ago. Late artifacts of Eneolithic Age (within the buffer zone of the Onega Petroglyphs component) are performed nominally and that evidences noticeable decline of human population compared to previous ages. The reasons lay in the environmental degradation: upon archaeological and paleo-geographical data there was fixed massive (up to 3-3,5m) Early Subboreal transgression about 5000 years ago. The climate gradually turned to be more wet and cold, thermophilous forests departed to the south. Rocks with carvings sank under water for several hundreds of years. Thus the almost one thousand year petroglyphic tradition was lost. Minor Bronze, Early Iron and Early Medieval Time materials also point out traces of short visits of hunting/fishing groups of inhabitants to the shore. Similar seasonal hunting and fishing character had small ancient settlements in XVI-XVIII centuries abandoned by inhabitants from surrounded villages. There is no doubt that Neolithic monuments located on capes and islands close to Onega rock carvings directly related to them. Along with petroglyphs, the burial ground on the cape Kladovets Nos was also important part of sacred-ritual environment.
Natural and Cultural context of the White Sea petroglyphs By now, there has been collected sufficiently complete information about climate and vegetation change dynamics, fluctuations in the White Sea level, migration of its coastal line during Holocene. These processes ran more or less simultaneously in the territory of the North- west Russia, and relatively they have had similar character in the petroglyphs areas of the lake Onega and the White Aea. In 1960-70’s there carried out geologic-geomorphological and paleo- geographical studies at the river Vyg delta and they let reveal transgression-regression stages in the White sea development and tie certain groups of archaeological monuments to correspondent cost levels. Study of ancient natural environment within the considered area was continued by archaeologists and geologists in 2007. During the Atlantic climate optimum (6400-6700 years ago) middle and mixed with the southern taiga spread in the South-west coastal territory of the White Sea and wetlands widely progressed there. Noticeable decline of natural and climate conditions coincided with the beginning of Subboreal (4800-4900 years ago), broadleaf species and relative species of grasses and shrubs began to disappear. This phase accompanied with global cooling during 300 – 400 years. The boundary Atlanticum – Subboreal was marked with contrast change in natural complexes, that was big scale milestone, a certain boundary that caused changes in many life sides of the White Sea lowland humans – creators and followers of the rock art. By now, there has been revealed and in a certain scale studied more than 80 Early Neolithic – Late Middle age archaeological monuments on the shores and islands and often on rapids of the river Vyg delta. Among them, 36 monuments located near the petroglyphs are included in the buffer zone. These are round-year sites, seasonal sites and one burial ground refered to the Eneolithic Age. Monuments of the previous age (Mesolithic age) have not been revealed, probably due to absence of convenient terraces of correspondent height. Ancient living constructions have not been revealed near White Sea petroglyphs, there have been located seasonal sites with mixed inventory of different ages. Well performed complexes of middle and late Neolithic stages and Early Neolithic complexes. Big collections of middle Neolithic age Pit-Comb ceramics have been collected. Fragments of Middle Neolithic vessels have been found in the drained bed of the river Vyg in the silt layer below the rock with petroglyphs Besovy Sledki. Even more numerous finds of ceramics with Rhomb-Comb and Round-Pit ornament collected when excavating sites close to petroglyphs and in a distance of 100 – 500 m around, prove the Late Neolithic Age. Quartz hummer-stones with
3 chipped working edge that fit well in hands, have been found in ыщьу sites nearby petroglyph groups Besovy Sledki and Zalavruga. Modern experiments showed that exactly they had been used for carving images on polished rock surfaces of Karelia. Compared to eastern shore of the lake Onegа, the river Vyg Eneolithic sites with porous and asbestos ceramics are numerous. Their appearance refers to Subboreal (post-petroglyphic) age that has been proved with paleo-geographical and archaeological observations and also data as per C-14. Zalavruga I site has been studied best of all, there have been excavated more than 4000 sq.m. of the area. Cultural layers of this monument almost completely overlapped rock art areas of Novaya Zalavruga, so the man site functioned after petroglyphic tradition had disappeared. One of the most interesting monument is the man site Zalavruga II, that lies 70-100 m. to the north from utmost southern groups of Novaya Zalavruga petroglyphs. When carrying diggings, except early neolithic settlement complexes, there was also studied a grave with red ochre synchronic to them, wherein presumably were remains of three humans. Backbones did not save but there were cleaned three ovate-oblong ochre spots laid in shallow pits under the boat shaped pile of boulders. Funeral tools including elongate flint-stone arrowheads of an exquisite workmanship and numerous quantity of buttons and pendants (68 pieces) made of Baltic amber were found in graves. The closest analogues to this buried ground are located in the southern shore of the Lake Onega, in the Eneolithic buried ground of Tudozero (Vologda region, RF). Like in the area of the lake Onega petroglyphs, in Bronze, Early Iron and Middle ages, the human population of the river Vyg delta was rather small. Studied little settlements with scanty goods reflect traces of short stays of hunters and fishermen on the shores and islands. Creators of Karelian petroglyphs are representatives of Neolithic culture of Pit-Comb ceramics, they were skilled hunters, fishermen, foragers. They made dugout and frame boats, skis, houses with pole construction. They sculpted ceramic vessels, decorated them with round and then rhomboid pits and prints of different comb and other stamps, produced tools of supplied flintstone and local stones like slate, quartz, and other minerals. Humans were able to make ornaments and cult accessories of stone, bones or horns. Inhabitants of the eastern shore of the lake Onega and south-western White Sea learned to carve images on granite rocks. Best rock art panels of the lake Onega and the White Sea demonstrate perfect artful proficiency of quartz tools applied on a hard rock like granite. There is no any precise scientific data proving that the authors of rock galleries and their contemporaries were ancestries of modern Finno-Ugric ethnos, so far they are divided by the huge time interval of more than 6000 years. For the same reason, there are no any evidences of rituals, religions and oral traditions referring to monuments of the rock art. There exist only local legends written by first petroglyph researchers about the giant anthropomorphic figure of the “Onega Devil” known since the middle of XIX century.
Integrity Studied archaeological materials about settlements near petroglyphs on the eastern shore of the lake Onega and the river Vyg reveal exclusive interest for description of many sides of life of population for long period and finally reflect the most ancient stages of the history not only for this local area but for the whole territory of the North-West Russia. However, the main components of the nomination dossier are the groups of rock carvings. Other archaeological artifacts perform important cultural context of petroglyphs, show cohesiveness of the nominated object allowing understanding the lifestyle of humans, peculiarities of their material culture for many thousands of years. All archaeological monuments located nearby or at a distance of 1-5 km from the rock art area (points with finds, seasonal sites, long-term settlements with houses,
4 buried ground Kladovets and a burial site of Zalavruga II) are in the buffer zone of the nominated object “Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea”.
Comparative analysis The rock art of Kanozero has its own peculiarities of location, differs from the petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea both in the technique and long time of creation (over three millennia), and also in a number of motives and plots that are not represented in Karelia. The petroglyphs of Kanozero have a much greater similarity in a number of indicators with the North Scandinavian monuments, first of all with the UNESCO site “Petroglyphs of the Alta” (Norway). At the same time, one cannot deny the possible connections and contacts at a certain stage (in the Neolithic Time) between the creators of the petroglyphs on the Umba River and in the lower reaches of the Vyg River, however, this aspect is currently not studied. Petroglyphs of Kanozero were discovered quite recently, at the end of the 20th century. In recent years, field documentation of the images of Kanozero has been carried out in order to draw up registration documents, but the natural and cultural contexts of this object have not yet been sufficiently studied. There is also no detailed information about the degree of conservation of the rock art sites, no monitoring was carried out that would make it possible to find out the nature and dynamics of natural processes affecting its preservation. These works require a long time and a serious approach. Only after completing all the necessary research in this direction, the rock carvings of Kanozero can claim the status of a UNESCO site and supplement the serial nomination "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea".
Boundaries of the nominated site and buffer zones. Protective designations of archaeological sites All objects of the archaeological heritage of the Onega and Belomorsk petroglyphs, both included in the buffer zones of the components of the object "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea", and those remaining outside their boundaries due to relative remoteness, according to Russian legislation, are included in the protected zones. In addition, according to Federal Law No.73-FZ "On Objects of the Cultural Heritage of the Russian Federation" within the boundaries of the territory of archaeological sites, any activity, except scientific study and conservation work, is prohibited. Moreover, all objects of the archaeological heritage included in the buffer zones of component 1 "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega" and component 2 "Petroglyphs of the White Sea" are located on the lands of the forest fund, water protection zones, protective forests, green zones, for which, in accordance with the Water and The Forest Codes set strict restrictions on the use of natural resources and economic activities, therefore they are additionally protected. The territory of component 1 "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega" recently is fully included in the boundaries of a specially protected natural area - the natural reserve "Muromsky" with stricter regimes for the use of forest lands. Вuffer zones of component 1 "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega" When establishing the boundary of component 1 of the nominated object passing through the territory of the water body - Lake Onega, despite the scale of the water body and considerable distances from the nearest coastline projections to the locations of the island subcomponents, an additional protective distance was provided from the boundaries of the territories of the subcomponents to the water boundary of the component territory 1. In addition, along the water border of component 1, restrictions have been established dictated by environmental and water legislation, reinforced by more stringent regimes of the «Muromsky nature reserve», which restrict the use of natural resources and prohibit any economic activity associated with the acquisition of water plots for the construction of capital and non-capital structures (floating platforms, berthing facilities), mining, etc.
5
The difference between "existing protective designations (protection zones)" from the planned buffer zones of components The boundaries of the protection zones within the historical and cultural monuments in the area of the Onega and White Sea petroglyphs were developed and approved in the 1990s. The projected buffer zones of component 1 "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega" and component 2 "Petroglyphs of the White Sea" were determined on the basis of recent both archaeological and multidisciplinary environmental research, which take into account the requirements of modern Russian and International legislation in relation to the protection of cultural and natural heritage objects.
Preservation. Management. The Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage Sites of the Republic of Karelia is a governmental body authorized in the field of conservation, use, promotion and state protection of all heritage objects located on the territory of the Republic of Karelia. The Department monitors the implementation of the established restrictions in the protection zones of cultural heritage sites as well as other restrictions in accordance with the legislation regarding cultural heritage sites. The Department, together with the specialists of the Scientific and Expert Council on Historical and Cultural Heritage, evaluates design materials for all the works to be carried out on monuments’ preservation as well as proposals for the implementation of projects and programmes with the purpose of integration of heritage sites in social-cultural activities. On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Karelia, the Department acts as the authority responsible for coordinating the promotion of the Property "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea" to be inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage List. This work is carried out in accordance with the plan of actions (i.e. "road map") agreed in 2016 by the Government of the Republic of Karelia and the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation. The staff list of the Department has been extended by new employees responsible for the coordinating the activities of all the parties interested in managing the nominated Property (See p.215, v.2). Within the activities regarding the development of the nomination dossier, the Department, together with the Municipal Budget Institution "Belomorsk Regional Museum of Local Lore "Belomorsk Petroglyphs" and the Environmental Recreational Institution of the Republic of Karelia “Directorate of Specially Protected Natural Areas of Regional Significance of the Republic of Karelia”, interacts with the authorities of the Federal, regional and municipal levels as well as with the right holders and owners of the objects, local community, economic entities located on the territory of the cultural heritage sites and the scientific and expert community. From 2016 to 2019, the following activities were carried out at the request of the Department and the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation at the expense of the budgetary funds: - detailed monitoring of petroglyphs groups (subcomponents) and an assessment of their state, safety and integrity; - development of the recommendations on regimes of the territory use provisions of cultural heritage sites (petroglyphs) and topographic and geodetic determination of the boundaries of the Onega and White Sea petroglyphs. The approved boundaries and protective regimes of the territory use provisions of groups of petroglyphs (subcomponents) have been put on the State cadastral registration; - development of the inventory documents for the groups of petroglyphs identified in recent years in accordance with the Russian legislation; receipt of the expert opinion on the value of the identified groups of petroglyphs. As the result, the identified groups of petroglyphs have
6 received the status of objects of Federal significance and have been included in the Unified State Register of Monuments of Russia; - the preliminary research work in order to develop a management concept for the Property “Petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea” within the elaboration of the application for the WHS Tentative List and a nomination dossier; - the calculation of the anthropogenic loads and justification of the buffer zones of the nominated components on the basis of a landscape-visual analysis of the territory and the current urban development, land use, existing protection regimes; - organisation of a Scientific and Methodological seminar and a Scientific and Research conference in the Republic of Karelia in 2017 and 2018 in order to discuss the developed materials for the nomination dossier of Lake Onega and the White Sea petroglyphs and to get recommendations from Russian and international experts, archaeologists and leading experts on Rock Art. The programmes of the seminar and the conference included visits to the nominated sites; - working out of architectural concepts for the development of the territory of the archaeological complexes "Petroglyphs of the White Sea" and "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega" in 2019. The concepts were developed by the professional architects taking into account the impact of work on cultural and natural complexes in accordance with the UNESCO recommendations. The concepts were reviewed by the expert community at the meetings of the Government of the Republic of Karelia. As a result of all the abovementioned joint activities of the Republic of Karelia and the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the Property "Petroglyphs of Lake Onega and the White Sea" was included in the World Heritage Tentative List in September, 2018. A set of nomination dossier was adopted in the ICOMOS centre (Paris) in January, 2020. Since January 2020, the Government of the Republic of Karelia has done the following work in the field of integrated development of the territories of Onega Lake and the White Sea petroglyphs and creating the set of measures for the protection and management of the petroglyphs’ territories as well as the developing an effective management system for the nominated Site. 1. Management of the territory of the complex “Petroglyphs of Lake Onega” as well as improvement of the nearby territory with further possibility of its use for recreational purposes, taking into account the allowable anthropogenic load on historical, cultural and natural complexes, are entrusted to the Environmental Recreational Institution of the Republic of Karelia “Directorate of Specially Protected Natural Areas of Regional Significance of the Republic of Karelia”. For this purpose, amendments to the Regulations on the nature reserve were made and its borders were expanded by including territories with the location of groups of petroglyphs near the Shala settlement (Cape Kochkovnavolok, Cape Chernyi) and on the islands of Bolshoy Golets and Mikhailovets. A new structural unit to be constantly presented on the territory of the nature reserve with approved funding for its material and technical equipment was created within the Institution. Funds for the creation of a network of cordons and improvement of the territory were also allocated. 2. The Government of the Republic of Karelia and the executive and municipal authorities, together with interested parties, have developed a plan of actions (i.e. "road map") for the improvement of the nearby territories adjacent to the projected buffer zones of the Onega and White Sea petroglyphs. The plan of actions is based on the developed architectural concepts for the improvement of the complexes of the Onega and White Sea petroglyphs. The first stage of the activities consists of the development of the archaeological complex "The White Sea Petroglyphs", included in the federal programme "Individual program of socio-
7 economic development of the Republic of Karelia". The above activities were supported by the budgetary funds in the amount of 606 million RUB for the implementation for the period from 2021 to 2024. The list of activities carried out on the territory of the Onega petroglyphs and the financial sources of the measures above are being currently under the final stage of development. In order to form an effective management structure for the nominated Property and development of the territory for the short-, mid- and long-term perspective, the Head of the Republic of Karelia made a decision to create a budget museum of the Republican level “The petroglyphs of Karelia” (working codes: “The pages of a stone book”, “The historical- archaeological natural museum of the petroglyphs of Karelia"). Nowadays, the concept of the museum’s creation has been developed, the preparation of a feasibility study of the project and registration of constituent documents is being under completion. The abovementioned activities form the first stage of the measures of the centralized management of the territories of the Onega (“Directorate of Specially Protected Natural Areas of Regional Significance of the Republic of Karelia”) and the White Sea (Municipal museum) petroglyphs. At the second stage (mid-term perspective), it is provided to create a unified structure of a museum of regional subordination “The petroglyphs of Karelia”, including a central subdivision in Petrozavodsk, the Belomorsk branch of the Museum, converted from the municipal museum "The White Sea petroglyphs", and the Onega branch of the museum, created on the basis of a permanent staff structure "Directorate of Specially Protected Natural Territories of Regional Significance of the Republic of Karelia” on the territory of the natural reserve "Muromsky". Up to date, all issues related to the preservation of a potential World Heritage Site (WHS) are being considered within the framework of the Scientific Expert Council on the Historical and Cultural Heritage of Karelia. A Coordination Council for the management of the WHS representing all the interested parties in preservation, use and development of the Property (i.e. State authorities, local governments and public organizations, prominent representatives of science, culture and local community) is planned to be created by the Museum “The petroglyphs of Karelia”. The similar Coordination Council of the Kizhi Museum has been in effect since 2014 by the WHS “Kizhi Pogost”. At the third stage (long-term perspective) it is provided to increase the status, powers and capabilities of the Museum through the transition from the regional to the Federal level, i.e. the creation of the state museum-reserve (similar to the Kizhi Museum), and the expansion of the Museum's security, exhibition, excursion, research, educational and other functions.
8
List of the archaeological sites within the buffer zone of the component 2 “The White Sea Petroglyphs” № site 1 Besovy Sledki I 2 Besovy Sledki II 3 Besovy Sledki IIIa 4 Place with finds in the Vyg River bed 5 Sanctuary 6 Vygostrov III 7 Vygostrov IV 8 Vygostrov V 9 Vygostrov VI 10 Vygostrov VII 11 Erpin Pudas I 12 Erpin Pudas II 13 Erpin Pudas III 14 Erpin Pudas IV 15 Zalavruga I 16 Zalavruga II 17 Zalavruga III 18 Zalavruga IV 19 Zalavruga V 20 Zalavruga VI 21 Zalavruga VII 22 Zalavruga VIII 23 Zalavruga IX 24 Zalavruga X 25 Zalavruga XI 26 Zalavruga XII 27 Zalavruga XIII 28 Zalavruga XIV 29 Zalavruga XV 30 Zalavruga XVI 31 Bol’shoy Malinin Island 32 Zolotets XXIII 33 Zolotets XXIX 34 Gorely Most III 35 Gorely Most IV 36 Gorely Most V
List of the archaeological sites within the buffer zone of the component 1 “Petroglyphs of Lake Onega”
№ site 1 Ust-Vodla I 2 Ust-Vodla II 3 Ust-Vodla III 4 Ust-Vodla IV 5 Peri Nos I 6 Moduzh I 7 Besov Nos V 8 Besov Nos IV 9 Besov Nos VI 10 Besov Nos I 11 Besov Nos XI 12 Besov Nos VII 13 Besov Nos IIIa 14 Besov Nos VIII 15 Burial ground Kladovets 16 Kladovets I 17 Kladovets Ia 18 Kladovets Ib 19 Kladovets II 20 Kladovets IIа 21 Kladovets III 22 Kladovets IV 23 Kladovets V 24 Kladovets Va 25 Kladovets VI 26 Kladovets VII 27 Kladovets VIII 28 Kladovets IX 29 Chjornaja Rechka V 30 Chjornaja Rechka VII 31 Chjornaja Rechka VIII 32 Chjornaja Rechka XV 33 Chjornaja Rechka I 34 Kala-ruchey I 35 Chjornaja Rechka III 36 Chjornaja Rechka II 37 Chjornaja Rechka IIa 38 Chjornaja Rechka IV 39 Chjornaja Rechka VI 40 Chjornaja Rechka XII 41 Chjornaja Rechka XIIa 42 Chjornaja Rechka XIII 43 Gazhy Nos I 44 Site on the Bol’shoy Gury 45 Site on the Bol’shoy Gury 46 Chjornaja Rechka XVI 47 Chjornaja Rechka XVII 48 Chjornaja Rechka XI 50 Chjornaja Rechka X 51 Chjornaja Rechka IX
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...... 3 1. SCOPE OF THE SERIAL NOMINATED PROPERTY ...... 5 1.1. SCOPE OF THE SERIAL NOMINATED PROPERTY. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE COMPONENTS OF THE LAKE ONEGA AND THE WHITE SEA (IN THE LOWER REACHES OF THE VYG RIVER) ...... 6 1.2. RESEARCH AND THE RESULTS OF THE ROCK ART STUDIES IN KARELIA . 11 1.3. THE CHRONOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PETROGLYPHIC TRADITION OF KARELIA IN TIME AND SPACE ...... 27 1.4. DETAILED ILLUSTRATIONS ...... 29 2. DOCUMENTATION ...... 30 2.1. PETROGLYPHS OF KARELIA DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ...... 30 2.2. REQUESTED PUBLICATIONS ...... 31 3. LEGAL PROTECTION ...... 43 3.1. CURRENT LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE COMPONENT PARTS ...... 43 3.2. STATE CODE OF ESPECIALLY VALUABLE PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL HERITAGE OF THE PEOPLES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ...... 48 3.3. LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE BUFFER ZONE ...... 48 4. MANAGEMENT ...... 52 5. DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ...... 57 CONCLUSION ...... 59 ANNEXES ...... 61 INTRODUCTION
The nomination dossier of the Petroglyphs identified areas where it considers that of the Lake Onega and the White Sea was further information is needed. The relevant submitted by the Russian Federation to the request of ICOMOS was submitted to the World Heritage Center in 2019. The State Party on December 17, 2020 nomination is currently undergoing a (Ref.GB/AA.1654/IR). technical evaluation by the International Council on Monuments and Monuments The additional information to support the (ICOMOS). Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea World Heritage nomination was On October 6, 2020, ICOMOS requested prepared in accordance with the latest additional information on the nomination, ICOMOS request by the order of the including description of the nominated Ministry of Culture of the Russian property, boundaries, integrity, Federation and prepared by the Russian comparative analysis, conservation, Research Institute of Cultural and Natural protection, management, tourism and Heritage named after D. S. Likhachev and management projects. The Russian the Administration for the Protection of Federation provided this information on 16 Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Karelia, November 2020. as well as several relevant stakeholders contributed to the preparation of the The ICOMOS technical evaluation mission document. to the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea nominated property was The information and illustrations held from October 17 to 20, 2020 and was presented in section 1 is prepared by Dr. conducted by Dr. Geoffroy Heimich Lobanova N.V., Candidate of Historical (France). Sciences, a senior researcher of the Department of Archaeology of the At the end of November 2020, the ICOMOS Institute of Language, literature and World Heritage Panel evaluated the History Karelian Scientific Research Center cultural and mixed properties nominated of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The for inscription on the World Heritage List in information presented is based on the field 2021, including the Petroglyphs of the Lake work carried by Dr. Lobanova in 1997-2020 Onega and the White Sea property. The on the eastern shore of the Lake Onega previously provided additional and in the lower reaches of the river Vyg information, together with the results of (including monitoring, search and the mission and desk review reports were documentation of petroglyphs as well as examined by the members of the Panel. excavation of archaeological sites located in their vicinity). On November 25, 2020, the delegation of the Russian Federation participated with The additional information is grouped in the representatives of the ICOMOS Panel. accordance with the request of ICOMOS As a result of the meeting, the Panel into five points, including (1) Scope of the
3 serial nominated property, (2) Documentation, (3) Legal protection, (4) Management, (5) Development pressures and is presented below.
4 1. SCOPE OF THE SERIAL NOMINATED PROPERTY
Additional Information Requested:
The serial nominated property consists of two groups of rock art sites, 22 in the Lake Onega area and 11 in the White Sea area. Both the Nomination Dossier and the Management Plan present the two areas independently and link them together indicating that the petroglyphs of Lake Onega were first created before the emergence of the carving traditions at the White Sea. As this is one nomination, the component parts should complement each other to demonstrate the proposed Outstanding Universal Value of the property. Therefore, ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could provide a clearer understanding of this relationship.
The ICOMOS Panel understands from the nomination Dossier and the Management Plan that important scientific research has been undertaken on the two components. ICOMOS would be pleased to receive a synthesis of the research undertaken to date and its conclusions, especially in the links and interrelations of the petroglyphs at Lake Onega with those at the White Sea. Based on the current state of research, what are the elements that connect the two components together to form a coherent ensemble?
It would be much appreciated if the State Party could provide detailed illustrations of the engraved scenes and motifs of the petroglyphs including photographs, drawings or other visual support, to demonstrate how the petroglyphs of Lake Onega are interlinked with those of the White Sea. Furthermore, it would be useful to develop detailed descriptions on order to provide further evidence of the petroglyphs’ outstanding significant while also establishing their chronological setting.
The ICOMOS Panel acknowledges that these petroglyph sites appear to be link with some 500 archaeological sites – some located in the buffer zone – that require further contextualization. Could the State Party elaborate further on what are the relation between these different types of archaeological remains?
More details would also be helpful in order to gain a greater understanding of the relationships between the petroglyphs and the Neolithic communities who created then and how these cultural groups settled, evolved and migrated. More specifically ICOMOS would be pleased to better understand the cultural context of the petroglyphs and particularly how the rock art sites are connected with the Neolithic culture that created them?
ICOMOS notes that sites within the components selected by the State Party contain some archaeological settlements, but other archaeological elements, such as burial grounds, have not been included into the component parts of the series. Given their potential importance for the integrity of the property ICOMOS would be pleased if the State Party could further explain and illustrate the rationale whereby some archaeological elements
5 have been included in the nominated areas, some in the buffer zones and others outside the buffer zones?
1.1. SCOPE OF THE SERIAL NOMINATED PROPERTY. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE COMPONENTS OF THE LAKE ONEGA AND THE WHITE SEA (IN THE LOWER REACHES OF THE VYG RIVER)
In accordance with modern scientific data sandstone, lydite) for manufacturing tools. accumulated by archaeologists, geologists At the same time, they continued to and palaeogeographers over the past 50 maintain their close ties with the related years, it has been established that the population of the Upper Volga and the creators and contemporaries of Karelian Eastern Onega as these regions were rock art sites were the carriers of the providing flint raw materials, which were Neolithic Comb Ceramics culture at all not available in Karelia. At the early stage stages of its development, generally dated of the development of the Pit-Comb to the 5-4 millennia BC. At the present Ceramic culture, the population had quite a stage of research, there is no doubt that mobile lifestyle that conditioned contacts this archaeological culture is directly and mix with the descendants of the related to the appearance and aboriginal population that lived in Karelia development of Karelian rock art. since the Mesolithic. In this context, any stationary semi-earth dwellings of this The developed hydrological network on period are unknown: they appeared later in the territory of Karelia contributed to the the middle stage of the development of active expansion and settlement of the the Pit-Comb Ceramic culture. Apparently, population with comb Pit-Comb Ceramics they built small ground structures of chum from the south and south-east (from the type, however, the archaeologists have Upper Volga or and modern Vologda not been able to identify traces of them Oblast, Russia) to the north up to the coast yet. of the White Sea. The local climate, which was significantly warmer than current as According to modern scientific data, at well as the abundance of forest and least 450 Neolithic archaeological sites aquatic fauna created the most optimal have been identified on the territory of living conditions for humans. Human Karelia, the main area of which is societies adapted well to these natural associated with the basin of the Lake features, fully mastered the local raw Onega and the south-western White Sea. resources (shale slate, quartz, quartzite,
6
Stone tools of the Pit-Comb Ceramic Culture
The representatives of the Neolithic Pit- territory from which the representatives of Comb Ceramics culture of Karelia were this culture came to Karelia, the rock skilled hunters, fishermen, and gatherers. carvings are unknown. They made dugout and frame boats, skis, and pillar-shaped dwellings. Their ceramic vessels were molded, decorated with round, later rhombic pits and have the impressions of various combed or other stamps. Their tools were made from imported flint, local stone raw materials, including slate, quartz and other rocks minerals.
The population was able to make jewelry and religious items from clay, stone, bone or animal horns. The population of the Pit- Comb Ceramic Culture, which lived on the territory of the eastern coast of the Lake Onega and the south-western White Sea region, were the bearers of the tradition of carving images on smooth granite rocks. It is necessary to highlight that nowhere else Artefacts from burnt clay. The eastern shore of the within the boundaries of the vast area, to Lake Onega, Chjornaja Rechka III archaeological site which this culture was spread and in the
7
The Lake Onega, the ceramic finds of figurines with the holes for kernels, Chjornaja Rechka III archaeological site
The quartz tools, which were used to carve the The White Sea, Old Zalavruga: the depiction of the petroglyphs found on the river Vyg near the rock with ritual item in the form of waterfowl the Besovy Sledki rock art site
Perhaps, the Prehistoric artists had a The territory of the Lake Onega special status in their societies, as they petroglyphs component and its buffer sought to ensure the well-being of their zone has 45 archaeological sites, including societies with the petroglyphs. Apparently, settlements, seasonal sites and a burial not every member of these societies had ground (dated to 4730±200 BC (Cal. BC). an ability to do carvings on rocks as well as The 32 of them contain Neolithic Pit-Comb developed creative thinking, which is Ceramics of the early, middle and final noticeable on rare figures with ‘ragged stages of the development of this culture outlines’ and rough picketing. At the same (the final stage is featured by the time, many rock carvings of the White Sea application of rhombic pits instead of and the Lake Onega show the virtuoso round pits on the ceramic vessels) and possession of quartz tools on such a quite accompanying stone and other tools. hard rock as granite.
8
The Lake Onega: The ware of the Pit-Comb Ceramics of the early stage (reconstruction) from the Chjornaja Rechka I archaeological site artefacts found and studied near the Lake They, without any exaggeration, are the Onega petroglyphs. most noticeable and striking layer of
The Lake Onega: the fragments of the ceramics found 30 meters above the central group of Besov Nos rock art site (Besov Nos I archaeological site). 1-4, 7-8, 18-19, 21 – early stage, 6-17 middle stage, 5,9,20 – final stage.
The fragment of the Pit-Comb ceramics with ornithomorphic motif (the image of a swan with long neck, made with holes and comb stamping)
9 Such types of vessels are found near petroglyphs component and its buffer almost all groups of petroglyphs of this zone has 36 archaeological sites, including component. settlements and places of seasonal stops with 17 Neolithic sites with Pit-Comb As regards the White Sea petroglyphs, the Ceramics of the middle and final stages, Early Pit-Comb Ceramics, typical for south- which have the closest analogies with the eastern Karelia and the territory of the vessels of the eastern coast of the Lake Lake Onega petroglyphs, is completely Onega. Currently, there is no Neolithic absent. However, the Pit-Comb Ceramics burial grounds found in the White Sea of the middle and final stages are well- region. represented. The territory of the White Sea
The White Sea: the fragments of the Pit-Comb ceramics of middle stage discovered on the river Vyg, under the Besovy Sledki rock art site, 100 meters from petroglyphs and Zolotec I
Therefore, the population with Pit-Comb the population to new environmental Ware at the middle stage of its conditions. Archaeological finds (ceramics, development was gradually moving to the stone tools) as well as the rock carvings north on water-portage paths, populating themselves (with the same style, carving south-western White Sea and the lower techniques, common motifs and plots, reaches of the river Vyg, where the including mythological ones), clearly show tradition of rock art was clearly developing: that the connections and direct contacts of it was enriched with new bright themes the new settlers of the White Sea with the related to sea hunting, whales and seals, territory of the Lake Onega were not which is associated with the adaptation of interrupted.
10 periods near the rock art sites in the delta of the Vyg River and on the eastern coast of the Lake Onega. The considerable part of these sites (Neolithic with Pit-Comb and Rhomb-Pit Ceramics) are directly related to the creators and admirers of rock art in Karelia. Together with the petroglyphs, these complexes form unique places of interest that have an undeniable Outstanding Universal Value.
The White Sea: the reconstruction of the ware of the Pit-Comb ceramics of middle stage discovered on the river Vyg, under the Besovy Sledki rock art site
Moreover, they continued, apparently, unevenly and with varying degrees of intensity. In conclusion, it is necessary to stress that the petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea are, undoubtedly, links of one successive chain of creative practice of the Lake Onega and the White Sea populations, who were the representatives of the same archaeological culture that created a single integral ensemble of Neolithic rock art.
The cultural context of the petroglyphs strongly suggests that the tradition of rock The White Sea: the fragments of Pit-Comb and art was created and continued to develop Rhomb-Pit Ceramics (final stage of the development among the population of the Pit-Comb of the culture) from the archaeological sites near the Ware Culture at different stages of its Petroglyphs of Zalavruga (I and III), Shoyruksha. development. There are large complex well-studied complexes constituted by over 100 archaeological sites of different
1.2. RESEARCH AND THE RESULTS OF THE ROCK ART STUDIES IN KARELIA
The materials obtained during field the experience of international and documentation are the main source for Russian colleagues has been widely further scientific interpretation and applied. This allowed to significantly comparative analysis of Karelian expand the range of sources, clarify or petroglyphs. Over the past 15 years, the completely change the previous ideas methods of their search and about the evolution and the content of the documentation have been improved, and rock art sites, and provide an opportunity
11 for a deeper and more complete were made on mycalent paper in the understanding of the most relevant period 2006-2015. For the last 5 years, relief scientific findings and ways to solve the copies are made on black rice paper, which issues of conservation and interpretation. clearly shows the relief of the image and the surrounding rock space. Today, this is Since 2006, the method of black the most accurate and extremely complex polyethylene film, described in detail in the and time-consuming way to document the publications of N. V. Lobanova, has been petroglyphs. The documentation is used for the search and preliminary supplemented by other methods, primarily identification of petroglyphs. In order to photo-documentation and detailed accurately reproduce the images, copies description.
Relief copies on black rice paper: the Lake Onega, Relief copies on black rice paper: the White Sea, Kochkovnavolok peninsula Besovy Sledki and Old Zalavruga
12 The Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the performed in these places. On the Lake White Sea have both differences and Onega, the mythological background of similarities. The differences occur due to the images is more clearly expressed. Both many reasons, including the peculiarities of the topography and the themes of the the natural environment (which to some petroglyphs captures better the idea of the extent influenced the choice of themes vertical division of the world. In this and the way of their presentation), context, the images of waterfowl are of economy and lifestyle, the consciousness particular importance: their role only and preferences of Prehistoric artists, and, increased and reached its peak at the final apparently, the nature of the rites stage of the development of the rock art.
The Lake Onega: the evolution of the ornithomorphic motifs
Moreover, an important role was also scenes. It seems that the Prehistoric artists played by solar and lunar symbols, as well at the White Sea aimed for a truthful and as motifs of people and animals. specific reflection of various aspects of the life of the population. The strongest The White Sea petroglyphs more brightly impetus to the development of rock art capture so-called domestic origin, was given here by the sea hunting of including the connection with the belugas. It required a good knowledge of economy and labor practice, the desire to the characteristics of the behavior of this reproduce some real (or fictional) events in animal, a clear organization of work, the form of the brightest narrative hunting serious training, skills and experience. On
13 the other hand, sea hunting, associated the first small cluster of them on the with great emotional and mental stress mainland was discovered. and the experiences of its participants, left strong impressions in the memory for a In the White Sea, the figures are carved long time. The sea hunting allowed to entirely, over the entire area of the identify particularly brave and skilled, silhouette, whereas on the Lake Onega, strong and hardy outstanding hunters, only the outline of the image is often who contributed to the heroization of this carved, and occasionally, a part of the work. Therefore, the numerous images of figure is contoured, and the other is boats, skis, ski poles, bows and arrows, silhouetted. The carving, especially spears and harpoons, traces of people and throughout the silhouette, creates a animals are the most striking features and polychromic effect due to the contrast of advantages of the White Sea rock art sites, the natural rock surface (red or gray) and which are almost unknown on other similar the whitish silhouette. sites in Fennoscandia and Eurasia. The similarity between the Lake Onega and The similarity of the two component parts the White Sea petroglyphs is also observed of the Lake Onega and the White Sea in size: from tiny, a few centimeters long, petroglyphs is manifested by many ways, to ‘giant’ petroglyphs from 2.5 to 4.1 including (1) carving technique (chainage a meters. However, there are only a few such depth of 1-3 mm); (2) the shape of figures, the sizes from 15 to 50 centimeters petroglyphs in the localization on the prevail in both components. The manner of ground in separate groups; (3) the images is generally naturalistic, with some tradition of the placement of the carvings schematization and conventionality in the near the water edge on flat, almost transfer of images, which is especially horizontal surfaces of the rocky outcrops; characteristic to the Lake Onega rock art (4) the similarity of motifs and sites. Some images are endowed with compositions of the petroglyphs. supernatural features and details, and there are also unique mysterious It is necessary to mention that the both characters that cannot be deciphered. component parts have single images. The Lake Onega petroglyphs are found on There are striking examples of the amazing capes and coastal islands. As regards the similarity of motifs and compositions, White Sea, in the Vyg River delta, until which is the evidence of contacts and recently, all groups of images were connections (possibly through marriage) concentrated on islands. However, in 2019, of the population of both territories.
14 Evidences of similarity between 2 nominated component – Onega Lake and the White Sea Rock Art The White Sea Identified motifs The Lake Onega component component 1. Boats (with crew or empty) 65 (5%) 692 (20%) 2. Animal and human tracks 8 (0,7%) 690 (20%) 3. Tools for hunting, equipment 4 (0,3%) 576 (17%) 4. Anthropomorphs 92 (8%) 334 (10%) 5. Forest animals 133 (11%) 290 (8%) 6. Sea animals 5 (0,4%) 232 (7%) 7. Ornitomorphs 528 (43%) 140 (4%) 8. Sea stars – 10 (0,3) 9. ”Baskets” 3 (0,2%) 6 (0,2%) 10. ”Neckleges” 1 (0,08%) 1(0,03) 11. Trees 2 (0,16%) 3 (0,09) 12. Signs, symbols 208 (17%) 3 (0,09) 13. Snakes 4 (0,3%) 2 (0,06) 14. Fish 3 (0,2) 1(0,03) 15. Poorly preserved vague images 16 (14%) 457 (13 %) Total 1225 3436
In a few cases, there is even an impression (beluga and seals) and forest animals of the work of one artist carving the (moose and bears). The similarity can be petroglyphs at both territories. This traced in many anthropomorphic figures, includes scenes of defloration, the theme including dualistic content, where human of the continuation of the human race, and animal features are combined in one figures of skiers, swans with ears, close image. compositions of hunting sea animals
15 The similar motifs of animals in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Peri Nos III Cape: realistic image of moose Zalavruga (group XV): realistic image of moose
Peri Nos III Cape: realistic image of a little moose Erpin Pudas III: a moose with two heads
Besov Nos: image of beavers Besovy Sledki (southern and northern groups): image of beavers
Kareckij Nos Cape: image of foxes Besovy Sledki (northern group): image of foxes
16
The images of snakes from top to bottom: 1-2 the White Sea, Zalavruga; 3-4 the Lake Onega, Kochkovnavolok peninsula
The similar motifs of hunting in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega, Besov Nos, Peri Nos III: scenes of hunting on bear and moose
The White Sea, Zalavruga (groups IV, XXI): the scenes of hunting on bear and moose
17 The similar motifs of birds in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Dualistic images of swans with moose heads
Cape Peri Nos II and III Besovy Sledki (northern and southern groups)
Ornitomorphs with two heads
Cape Besov Nos (central group) Besovy Sledki (northern group)
Waterfowl nests
Moduj island Besovy Sledki (northern group)
18 The similar motifs of swans in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Swan nest
Bolshoi Golets Island
Cape Peri Nos III Besovy Sledki (northern group) Swan
Cape Peri Nos IIV Erpin Pudas III
The similar motifs of trees in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Besov Nos Cape (central group) Zalavruga (groups IV, XXII)
19 The similar motifs of anthropomorphic figures in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Malyj Gurij Island and Cape Karetski Nos Zalavruga (Group II)
Besov Nos Cape (central group) Zalavruga (Group VI)
Korjushkin Island Old Zalavruga
Korjushkin Island Old Zalavruga
20
Cape Peri Nos III and Besov Nos (central group) Besovy Sledki and Zalavruga (Group XIV)
Cape Peri Nos III Besovy Sledki (northern group)
Besov Nos (central group) Zalavruga (group XV)
21 Cape Peri Nos III Old Zalavruga
Cape Karetski Nos Nameless island III and Erpin Pudas III
The similar motifs of ritual items in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Neckless
Peri Nos VI Zalavruga (group XXIII)
Ritual moose head wands: 1-3 the Lake Onega (Peri Nos III), 4-5 the White Sea (Old Zalavruga)
22
The Ritual moose head wand found on the Lake Onega, South Olenij island, a Mesolithic burial ground (6-7 thousands BC)
In the White Sea rock art tradition, the 4 figures of floating swans with the typical features of the Lake Onega borrowings are Lake Onega appearance, which more numerous and distinct. In this regard, topographically and by the surface nature the new group of petroglyphs discovered of the embossing, of course, should be in the White Sea region on the mainland attributed to the initial stage of the White near the former Shoiruksha threshold close Sea petroglyphic tradition. to Besovy Sledki is a striking case. There are
Swan flock images in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The White Sea: Zolotec II group (discovered in 2018), the drawing and the photo of the swans of the Lake Onega type
23
The Lake Onega: the petroglyphs on the mouth of the Vodla river
In the group of petroglyphs of Erpin Pudas boats with swan heads on the stem. Such IV, discovered in 2008, there is an similar plots are absent in other petroglyph interesting series of the Lake Onega linear sites of the White Sea.
The similar motifs of boats in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea
The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Cape Karetski Nos and Peri Nos III Erpin Pudas IV
Kochkovnavolok peninsula (top and bottom), Cape Besovy Sledki (northern group) Karetski Nos (center)
24
Bol’shoj Gurij Island Nameless Island I
The Solar signs, popular on the Lake Onega, are represented only in Old Zalavruga in the White Sea. At the same, time both the Lake Onega and the White Sea components have the Images of trees, which is an extremely rare motif for rock art (2 and 3 images, respectively).
The similar motifs of solar signs in the rock art of the Lake Onega and the White Sea The Lake Onega component The White Sea component
Cape Peri Nos VI Old Zalavruga
On the Lake Onega, the influence of the of hunting to beluga whales (which habitat White Sea rock art is clearly visible on Cape is not in fresh water as in the Lake Onega), Besov Nos. It has, in addition to four scenes an image of a bear and two of its tracks.
The Lake Onega: Korjushkin Island, Cape Besov Nos: the images of bear and its The White Sea: Zalavruga traces (group XXV): the image of bear and its traces
25
The Lake Onega: Besov Nos: maritime hunting on The White Sea, 1-2 Zalavruga (groups XVIII, II), 3- beluga (2 scenes) Besovy Sledki (northern group): maritime hunting on beluga
The borrowings from the White Sea traditions in the Lake Onega Petroglyphs
Carvings resembling baskets
The White Sea: Zalavruga (group XII); the mythological scene of crime and The White Sea: Nameless island I punishment. The theft of a mysterious ‘basket’. Three men are following the robber
The Lake Onega, Bol’shoj Gurij Island: basket images, borrowings from the White Sea traditions
The small group of petroglyphs (13) stands the mouth of the Chernaya River. Its out on the tiny island of Korjushkin near striking feature is the White Sea style of all
26 carved figures, including a skier, an highlighted facial features. Moreover, the anthropomorph, shown in profile in a images of birds, bears, and bear tracks typical for the Vyg River pose and with have the same stylistic character.
The Lake Onega, Korjushkin Island. The composition of The Lake Onega, Korjushkin Island. An image of a the White Sea type on the rocks of the Lake Onega: person of the White Sea type on the rocks of the Lake the only one (for the whole component) image of Onega skier, 2 bears, its traces and 3 swans
1.3. THE CHRONOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PETROGLYPHIC TRADITION OF KARELIA IN TIME AND SPACE
It is scientifically proven that the waterways, the famous White Sea - Baltic petroglyphic tradition of Karelia originates Canal was laid at the beginning of the 20th on the flat, far-reaching rocks of the century. eastern shore of the Lake Onega. A few hundred years later, it apparently The rock art of Karelia appeared about 7-6. appeared 300 km to the north, in the 5 thousand years ago on the Lake Onega south-western White Sea region. Despite and several centuries later on the shores of the fact that the Lake Onega and the White the White Sea during the warmest period Sea petroglyphs are separated from each of the Atlantic time. The total time of its other by a considerable distance, it was not existence is less than one millennium difficult to pass it in Prehistoric times. within the early, developed and late phases Widely used in the Neolithic, such means of of the Neolithic era on the Lake Onega and transportation as skis, sleds, and boats in the developed and late stages in the allowed more and more movement, and as White Sea region. This fact sharply a consequence new territory were distinguishes them from similar large rock developed. From the Lake Onega to the art sites of Northern Europe (Alta, coast of the White Sea, there was a Nemforsen, Kanozero, and others), developed hydrological network, along created over many millennia and belonging which the local population moved along to different eras. The petroglyphs ceased rivers and lakes, sometimes dragging. On to be carved more than 5,5 thousand years the basis of one of these Prehistoric ago due to a cold snap, a significant rise in the water level and flooding of all rock art
27 sites. After a few hundred years, when the noticeable, small-sized rock carvings level of reservoirs decreased to the (waterfowl, boats, signs of the simplest previous levels, the creation and forms). They are clumsily carved, with veneration of petroglyphs was unlikely to rough and very weak relief, some of the resume due to the fact that the new figures are incomplete. population was already incomprehensible and alien to the rock art culture. Then, the territory with petroglyphs had greatly expanded, the islands were In the last decade, new scientific data have developed by the population and as a been obtained, based on the technical and consequence, the center of the sanctuary typological analysis of the carvings, which moved to the capes of Besov Nos and Peri allow us to outline the sequence of the Nos. At the middle stage, the technique of appearance of rock images as well as to carving was improved, and the number of trace their evolution. The combination of motifs grew, the size of the carvings field observations, archaeological and increased, however, the image of a swan paleogeographic data allows to assume and other waterfowl remained as the that the carvings located low above the leading theme throughout the tradition. At edge of water are among the most ancient the same time, the abstract signs, both on the Lake Onega and on the Vyg anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figures River (the White Sea). In the Lake Onega became also popular. At the later stage component, about 10 years ago, a group of (the Kochkovnavolok Peninsula), the petroglyphs was discovered at the mouth petroglyphs become larger in size (from 1 of the Chernaya River, which reflects the to 4 meters long), the number of motifs initial stage of the petroglyphic tradition in and plots had sharply reduced (about 80% Karelia. Here, on a low coastal section of of them are associated with the rock, there is a group of barely ornithomorphic images of swans).
The White Sea, Zalavruga (group IV): the fragment of the composition of hunting on moose in winter using ski with the depiction of tiny details and the high level of artistic work and realism
28 In the White Sea, the very first petroglyphs anywhere else. They are characterized by a appear on Nameless Islands, on the large detailed narrative, positive expressiveness island of Erpin Pudas and Besovy Sledki. and an abundance of small realistic details Most often, these are single images of (hunting equipment, traces of people, simple outlines (boats without passengers, animals, skis and ski poles). deer, belugas, linear boats that resemble the Lake Onega images, and, as it was Therefore, the Petroglyphs of Karelia discovered recently, the swans with long reflect the origin and development of a necks), which are many on the capes and unique tradition of rock carvings that islands in the Lake Onega rock art sites. originated in the culture of the Neolithic population, a tradition that generally The peak and the end of rock art tradition developed from simple in outline and small are reflected in Zalavruga, in the largest in size figures to larger and more complex, group of petroglyphs in the European part from figures of a mythological nature on of Russia. The main themes of Zalavruga the Lake Onega to realistic multi-figure are associated with hunting. This kind of hunting scenes of narrative content on the large and expressive scenes are not found Zalavruga on the White Sea.
1.4. DETAILED ILLUSTRATIONS
Photo credits: I.Yu. Georgievskiy, D.A. Bakalin
Copy rights: Administration for Cultural Heritage Protection of the Republic of Karelia
Link to download: https://yadi.sk/d/eWjIab4t6pE5AA
29 2. DOCUMENTATION
Additional Information Requested:
The ICOMOS Panel notes that there is mention in the nomination dossier of a Database management system ‘Petroglyphs of Karelia’, which is presented as one of the key outcomes of recent research work.
ICOMOS would be pleased to receive details of this documentation process and information regarding the overall recording system, including where the documents are held and what they cover in terms of information regarding descriptions and illustrations of the rock art panels and their state of conservation. To assists in assessing the integrity of the rock art sites it would be helpful if further details if this system could be provided with a sample entry for a site in each component.
It would also be helpful to have a copy of the recent monograph published in 2015, by N.V. Lobanova “Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega”, which we note has an English summary and the “Rock carvings of Lake Onega, I (1998) and II (2019)” by V. Poikalainen and E. Erits. If possible, it would also be helpful to have a copy of the edited volume ‘Rock Art of the White Sea” (2018).
2.1. PETROGLYPHS OF KARELIA DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
There are two database management The second, Petroglyphs of Karelia, was systems related to the archaeological sites created in 2000-2002 by the State Center in the Republic of Karelia: for State Protection of Cultural Heritage Properties State Budgetary Institution of The first, Archaeological Sites of Karelia, the Republic of Karelia. The project was was created in 2000-2003 by the Karelian funded by Riksanitkvaren (Norway). The Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of database contains 200 entries on Sciences and funded by the Russian petroglyphs sites of the Republic of National Science Foundation/North (2001- Karelia. Each entry contains topographic 2003) and partly under the programme of plans, photographs, graphite copies as well the Fundamental Research of the as detailed description of site, including Presidium of the Russian Academy of size, orientation, height above water, Sciences (2003-2005). This database depth of carving, degree of lichen fouling, contained 2500 entries of archaeological state of conservation, possible sites of Mesolithic, Neolithic, Eneolithic, interpretations of individual figures or Bronze, Iron Ages, Middle Ages and compositions. Modern periods located in the Republic of Karelia. The database became a basis for Currently, both database management the publication of the Archaeological Sites systems due to the outdated software are of Karelia Catalogue in 2007. requiring considerable re-development to
30 ensure further accessibility. In this context, The available information of the it is necessary to highlight that the Petroglyphs of Karelia database inscription of the Petroglyphs of the Lake management system in provided in Onega and the White Sea property to the Annex 1. World Heritage List would assist in attraction of required funds and efforts to this process.
2.2. REQUESTED PUBLICATIONS
Lobanova N.V. (2014) Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega. Petrozavodsk-Moscow: Dmitry Pozharsky University
harbors one of the largest in Northern Europe and world known congestions of ancient rock art sites. Such objects have always been under the scrutiny of scientists and the public. It is no wonder, given that rock art reflects the spiritual environment and world views of ancient people and, presumably, represents a form of communication. Petroglyphs of Lake Onega are unusual and mysterious, thematically diverse, well preserved, and set in exceptionally expressive natural surroundings. Quite a number of prehistoric sites, medieval settlements, a Neolithic burial ground have been discovered and examined nearby. These include sites synchronous to the petroglyphs.
Onega rock carvings were discovered more than 160 years ago, but the first profound Link: https://yadi.sk/i/drsNJX1zItdITg publication (catalogue of the sites known at the time) appeared as late as in the 1930s Language: Russian (Ravdonikas, 1936). The information there Summary: The monograph Petroglyphs of is now out-of-date, incomplete, and Lake Onega is an output of years of intense requires correction and thorough revision activities of integrated archaeological based on modern knowledge. In the 1970s, expeditions to the eastern shore of Lake Yu. Savvateev resumed studies of Lake Onega headed by N. Lobanova. The area Onega petroglyphs. They yielded good
31 results, but the materials never entered group. For the first time efforts were taken scientific discourse. A minor part of the to determine the exact original locations of Onega petroglyph cluster (Vodla River petroglyphs on the rock fragments taken mouth) was published in the English from Cape Peri Nos III away to museums in language by amateurs from Estonia in the Petrozavodsk and St. Petersburg. late 1990s. Since 1997, the author of the monograph has been searching for and All in all, over 1200petroglyphs recording rock art in Karelia. Lots of new concentrated in 24 sites on the eastern data have appeared, which have notably shore and nearby islands have been broadened our ideas about the plots, described. Introduction and Chapter 1 styles, evolution, and age of the rock provide a general description of the state- carvings, and characteristics of the of-the-art and the documentation material culture of the people who had techniques, the history of field research created them. A digital database and an and some conceptual aspects of the ideas information retrieval system have been of the most prominent researchers of developed and are used in the preparation Onega petroglyphs. The second chapter of monographs on the subject. deals with issues related to the modern and old-time natural environment in the The monograph summarizes all materials area of the rock art galleries. The bulk of ever gathered on Lake Onega petroglyphs the volume is the first very detailed (year 2013 inclusive). The author’s principal catalogue of petroglyphs generated aim has been to introduce them into following a common layout, as well as scientific circulation, making this classification and analysis of their plots information available to a wide range of (Chapters 3 & 4). The analysis is built on specialists and laymen. Petroglyphs are a wide comparative material the author is kind of a historical source very difficult to personally familiar with. N. Lobanova has interpret. Not only does their study involve taken part in many international excursions specialized techniques and research and trips for documentation of rock art in procedures different from those applied to the Kola Peninsula, Finland, Sweden and regular archaeological objects, but it also Norway. It is also worth mentioning the requires assiduous and time-consuming author’s substantial contribution to the field work. development of the chronology and periodization of Lake Onega petroglyphs The monograph’s main task is through thorough analysis of data from comprehensive publication of Lake Onega archaeology, geology, palynology and petroglyphs and the related natural and palaeogeography. cultural context. The author has introduced some 500 new petroglyphs into Most topical problems in the study, scientific discourse, updated the contours conservation and management of Lake of many images discovered previously and Onega petroglyphs are considered in the published in the 1930– 1990s, and Conclusion. attempted to detect the order in which figures appeared within one cluster or The book is supplied with excellent illustrations totaling over two hundred.
32 They include maps and detailed Lake Onega petroglyphs, which involved arrangement layouts of rock art groups, extensive source study, has been images based on carbon copies — the accomplished. Dozens of new images have most objective way to document such been detected; earlier data about the sites, as well as photo material. Especially archaeological sites have been impressive are panoramic photographs of considerably updated. All this turns this some groups of petroglyphs taken by the book into the most comprehensive and well-known photo artists from Karelia I. profound description of Onega Georgievskiy. petroglyphs as of now.
Thus, rather labor-intensive work for documentation and analysis of all known
Poikalainen V., Erits.E. (1998) Rock Carvings of Lake Onega. The Vodla Region. Tartu: Estonian Society of Prehistoric Art
Summary: The study of Lake Onega rock art has quite a long history, from the initial description of the first findings one and a half centuries ago. During this time the number of known carvings, sites and the territory concerned has constantly expanded, and the initial views of them being ‘petty petroglyphs on the periphery of Northern Europe’ have gradually changed to the conviction that they represent a valuable part of hunters rock art in the Northern Hemisphere and the World. Along with this rise in status, the need for an integral publication, which could serve as scientific source material for the studies of prehistory, religion, art history, etc. has also become apparent. But the meaning of rock art is much more than merely scientific. It should also be considered to be a contemporary artistic, political and economic resource, the Link: https://yadi.sk/i/UKiSZsdlwqG6Kg exploitation of which will be possible after Language: English adequate information becomes available.
33 The present work attempts to address graphic information of different these demands. It consists of a survey of hierarchical levels, from general map to the Neolithic rock art at Lake Onega and a separate carvings, united with a grid catalogue of the petroglyphs of the Vodla network penetrating all these layers. region. This is the less known and Besides graphic representation, the northernmost part of the entire rock art carvings are also characterized territory, including the Kochkovnavolok parametrically and described verbally. The peninsula and the Bolshoi Golets Island of verbal description of the biomorphs is the Shalskiye Ostrova Archipelago. The based on the international terminology structure of the catalogue us based on used in human and veterinary anatomy.
Poikalainen V., Erits.E. (2019) Rock Carvings of Lake Onega. The Besov Nos Region. Karetski and Peri Localities. Tartu: Estonian Society of Prehistoric Art
world. The study of these has quite a long history, in which the Estonian Society of Prehistoric Art has a certain role. The most considerable achievements of the Society have been the discovery of new sites of Cape Swan and formerly unknown carvings throughout the whole territory, documentation of all sites (from 1982 to 1996), and publication of a catalogue of the petroglyphs of the Vodla region (1998). This northernmost part of the entire rock- art territory includes the Kochkovnavolok Peninsula and Bolshoi Golets Island of the Shalskiye Ostrova archipelago.
The structure of the catalogue is based on graphic information of different hierarchical levels, from a general map to sperate carvings, united with a grid network penetrating all these layers. Link: https://yadi.sk/i/Du5IDmbU3-TXOw Besides graphic representation, the carvings are also characterized Language: English parametrically and described verbally. The Summary: Rock carvings of Lake Onega verbal description of the biomorphs is represent a valuable part of hunters’ rock based on the international terminology use art in the Northern Hemisphere and the d in human and veterinary anatomy. This
34 kind of complex approach has been highly valuable monograph dealing with the evaluated by rock art researchers. It has archaeological sites of the rock art territory been expected that the material on the (2015). sites of the Besov Nos region will also be published according to the same structure Despite the new publication, the need for to satisfy the constant need of an integral publishing the material collected by the publication, which could serve as source Estonian Society of Prehistoric Art is material for the studies of prehistory, actuate still. Through the main religion, art history, and a mean for documentation on separate carvings, planning management, propagation, groups and sites was compiled from 1993 protection, etc. activities. to 1996, the gathered data, drawings, photos and parametric information of Unfortunately, the planned publishing of earlier (especially from 1986-1992) and the material of the sites at Lake Onega was later (especially from 1998 to 2012) delayed for 20 years for several reasons. expeditions are valuable as well. Its Meanwhile, many archaeological diversity in graphic representation of excavations were carried out and new maps, plans, carving groups and separate findings of rock art were made throughout carvings with parametric and verbal the territory especially by Karelian descriptions will complement the pool of archaeologists. Aleksandr Zhulnikov (2010) existing knowledge internationally. The and his team have revealed separate current volume attempts to address these unattached rock slabs with carvings at Peri demands considering the sites of Cape 6. Nadezhda Lobanova has found new Karetski and Cape Peri localities. It also carving groups on Mikhailovets Island and includes references to the material at Cape Korjushkin, and many formerly published by Lobanova, Zhulnikov and unknown carvings especially at Karetski other researchers which was not covered site. Her most important achievement is by our documentation. The other localities the publication of a monograph about Lake of the Besov Nos region (Besov Nos, Onega carvings In Russian (2015). At the Kladovec, Gazhij and Gurij) will be the same time, she is the co-author of another topics of the next volume.
As the edited volume of the Rock Art of the Link: https://yadi.sk/d/UcMIa-CtR2_rPw White Sea has not been published yet, the State Party, on the approval of the author Please note that additional illustrations for of the monograph, N.V. Lobanova, is the Lake Onega component part is submitting the documentation, including available via link: photographs and graphic images of the https://yadi.sk/d/mFv0n54j9RV5Ag petroglyphs related to this serial nomination.
35
36 Lobanova N.V., Filatova V. F. (2014) Archaeological sites in the area of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega. Moscow: Dmitry Pozharsky University
and dwelling structures from different eras, peculiar stone structures were found in several sites. Analysis of paleo- osteological material yielded new, pivotal information about Mesolithic and Neolithic fauna. Geological-geomorphological and palynological surveys have been carried out in the sites and around them, permitting complex relations between humans and environment at different stages of the Holocene to be recorded more or less comprehensively.
The paper is based on unpublished archaeological collections gathered during field studies of the 1960s-1990s and early 21st century. Analysis and systematization of the archaeological data, their
involvement in scientific discourse add Link: https://yadi.sk/i/xosf95k3Vi5d0g greatly to our knowledge of ancient stages of Karelian history, and in some aspects Language: Russian provide a possibility for referencing certain chronological cultural layers to the Summary: The monograph by N. Lobanova petroglyphs. The monuments stand out for and V. Filatova Archaeological Sites in the a complex pattern of occurrence of Onega Petroglyphs Area provides a cultural remains. They are predominantly descriptive and analytical review of multilayered, i.e. contain a mixture of archaeological materials on two local materials from different times and groups of monuments on the eastern different cultures in unstratified or little shore of Lake Onega (in total 43), situated stratified layers. This phenomenon is in immediate vicinity of rock carvings. One obviously due to repeated settlement in a of the groups is located in the Vodla River fairly limited number of topographically mouth, on Kochkovnavolok peninsula, the convenient sites coupled with several other one – 12 km further south, in an area disturbances by periodic lake level from Cape Karetckij Nos to Gazhij Nos and fluctuations. Mixing of the materials made Gurij Islands. Archaeological materials their cultural and chronological from these monuments reflect different interpretation, especially statistical eras – from the Mesolithic to Late Middle treatment, difficult. Therefore, we based Ages. Among them, remains of household their classification on technical typology
37 and morphological traits. Detailed analysis fisheries in littoral areas and near mouths of the artefacts in comparison with well of rivers and streams. stratified and reliably dated “pure” complexes from monuments situated on Mesolithic settlements in the area date other shores of Lake Onega has permitted back to different time periods, as indicated provisional identification of ceramic and not only by their spatial settings, but also stone tool complexes, types and shapes of by the tools found. They belonged to dwellings characteristic of specific cultural different stages of the Onega culture, units. The initially colonized sites, which previously distinguished within the Onega eventually pre- determined the spatial Lake catchment, representing its local scope of the settlements, were outlined. group (sixth out of fourteen or fifteen), and functioned from the third quarter of It turned out the group of sites in question the 7th to the end of the 6th millennium BP comprises all known for Karelia strata of (according to uncalibrated radiocarbon antiquities and cultural types from the dates). Mesolithic to Middle Ages. Cultural types or cultures followed each other in The studied group of Mesolithic sites did chronological order, perhaps with minor not contain Onega culture’s most ancient gaps in some eras. It was found also that complexes of the second quarter of the 7th settlement intensity differed among time millennium BP (like Suna XII, XIII, periods, as evidenced by the number and Sheltozero XV, etc.). It also lacks materials characteristics of the investigated sites. from the final stage of the first quarter of This is an important fact, given the vicinity the 5th millennium BP, although some of rock carvings, which apparently had a short-term visits (the population has special mission in the life of the primitive already become seasonally nomadic), e.g. society. to Besov Nos VI site, might have taken place. Mesolithic sites are the most representative ones as regards the Note also that the Mesolithic complexes duration of their use and the number of show no similarity to monuments from artefacts. This group comprises 10 fairly nearby areas situated outside the Onega large settlements with abundant and culture. Apparently, early elements of the diverse remains of the material culture, culture had already transformed under including dwellings of two types, most new conditions by the time the most probably used for a long time around the ancient ones of the latter (Kladovec Va year. They prove that the people led a and, perhaps, Chjornaja Rechka VIII) sedentary life, which is possible when the appeared. Neither do we see any signs of natural environment is favorable, with synchronism of the Mesolithic monuments diverse bioresources available in vast and the rock carvings. It suffices to surrounding and unsettled spaces. The mention paleogeographic data, which main livelihood was hunting forest animals, prove that the rocks now bearing first of all moose. Another presumed large- petroglyphs used to be submerged at the scale activity was seasonal or year-round time.
38 Early Neolithic complexes, traditionally fragments) at nearly every group of related to the Sperrings ceramics, are also petroglyphs – unlike other ceramic present in this group of monuments. They materials. The sites however were all are distinguished quite reliably by stone temporary settlements. Large long-term industry traces and are of a distinctly settlements were situated at a sedentary nature. Monuments of this time “respectful” distance from sacred sites. period (in contrast to Mesolithic and later This is true both for the early and the late ones) have been found only on Cape phases of the culture. Materials from Kladovec Nos, Kochkovnavolok Peninsula Middle (advanced) Neolithic are much and Bolshoi Gurij Island; some material was fewer, and no permanent settlements are collected from the Chjornaja River mouth to be found in the Cape Besov Nos area. and Cape Peri Nos. The largest long-lived The reason was most probably a rise of the (although perhaps seasonally used) water level at that time. Further north settlements were situated in Kladovec Ia, however, 11-20 km away, in the Vodla River II, VI and IX sites, the second one possibly mouth and downstream reaches, they are containing a ground-based structure (a quite well represented. In this case, one dwelling?). Much scantier are complexes in can assume that the centre of the rock Kladovec IV and VII. Dating of the sanctuary was moved there monuments is problematic, but they (Kochkovnavolok Peninsula), to an area definitely do not belong to the early with rocks good for engraving. During the Sperrings culture, and can be preliminarily following, regression phase in Lake Onega dated to mid- to late 5th millennium BP. In evolution, people continued carving a way, the lack of traces of interactions petroglyphs in the former southern flanks between the stone industries of the Early of the sanctuary (near Besov Nos). Early Neolithic and Late Mesolithic complexes Subboreal transgression in the beginning testifies to a chronological gap between of the 3rd millennium BP terminated the them. One should note, on the other hand, tradition of rock carving. No data has been that no final Mesolithic materials that could found indicating it could recover later on, fill in the gap have been found on the during the Late Eneolithic. Thus, the overall eastern shore of Lake Onega. Hence, other timeframe of the Onega petroglyphs use is explanations cannot be excluded either, limited to the Neolithic (late 5th – early 3rd e.g. that Early Neolithic ceramics appeared millennium BP) and it is most likely that the there later than in other parts of the Lake carvings were created and venerated by Onega area. In addition to typical Sperrings people of the pit-comb ceramics culture. ware, two sites (Kladovec II & VI) yielded Continuity traits inherited from earlier sherds of hybrid vessels having no pottery found in Late Neolithic ware point analogues in other areas. Borrowed to a single uninterrupted course of elements and motifs from pit-comb ware development of the culture. have been detected in their ornaments. The pit-comb ceramics culture is the leader Later antiquities of the period from the on the eastern shore in terms of the Eneolithic to Late Middle Ages are not so number of monuments. It was found in graphically re- presented on the eastern different amounts (from one to tens of shore as earlier ones. The materials are few
39 altogether, and only singular specimens hunters and fishermen. Small settlements have been found for the Iron Age (Late left by people from the surrounding Kargopol ceramics). Presumably, they villages in the 16th-18th centuries represent seasonal fishing camps. Only performed the same seasonal activity three sites of the textile culture in Vodla function. and Chjornaja river mouths are more stable, with quite expressive complexes of Let us emphasize in conclusion that in spite ceramics and stone tools. Very scant Early of their varied quantitative and qualitative Medieval materials, chiefly comprising characteristics, Mesolithic – Medieval fragments of roughly molded 10th-11th archaeological sites in the area of Onega century pottery, were discovered in Stone petroglyphs are exceptionally important – Bronze Age sites by Cape Besov Nos and for understanding the livelihoods and life in the Vodla River mouth. They also witness styles of their inhabitants over nearly eight short-term visits to the lake by groups of thousand years.
Lobanova N.V. (2019) On the Chronology of Rock Art in Karelia (Russia). Fennoscandia archaeologica 36. P. 168-179
Summary: The rock art sites of Karelia are among of the most valuable clusters of north European prehistoric petroglyphs, comprising of thousands of images that reflect in a specific form the spiritual life and lifestyle of Neolithic people. For 170 years, they have been of major interest for researchers. Recently, petroglyphs on the shores of Lake Onega and the White Sea coast (in the lower reaches of the Vyg River) have been the object of thorough field surveys by an international team. In the course of this work, the methods for their discovery and documentation were improved, the body of sources was expanded annually, and data on the natural and cultural context at the time of creation of rock art were updated. These new Link: https://yadi.sk/i/zSa-QUL4SfalZQ materials broadened the data pool and enabled a deeper and more Language: English comprehensive understanding of related key issues. New groups of carvings were
40 discovered, including previously unknown of the monuments and recent dating of all motifs and probably the earliest rock art Stone–Iron Age cultural forms of Karelia, cluster on the eastern shore of Lake Onega the author substantiates a chronological (at Cape Korjushkin Nos). Some signs of framework of the Karelian rock art. The mutual influence and possible direct main stages of its development are contacts between the authors of Onega described in detail. This topic has been and White Sea rock carvings were discussed to some extent by the author in revealed. The aim of this paper is to clarify previous Russian publications, and the the ages of Lake Onega and White Sea current article summarizes all data on the petroglyphs in the Republic of Karelia, dating of Karelian petroglyphs, which may north-west Russia. Based on a detailed be useful for a wider circle of researchers analysis of the natural and cultural settings who do not read Russian.
Lobanova N.V. (2014) Experiences Documenting Petroglyphs at Lake Onega, Russia, 1998- 2012, in Open-Air Rock-Art Conservation and Management: state pf the art and future perspectives, eds. T. Darvill and A.P. Batarda Fernandes). New York: Routledge. PP.98-111
Link: https://yadi.sk/i/dXeRVxrwR4YFkA
Language: English
Summary: The thorough and comprehensive study of the rock-art heritage in Karelia is a priority task. By combining various methods and techniques (survey and recording using back plastic shelters, normal paper and mycalent paper copies, and composite photographs), it is possible to identify more reliably the sites, panels, and motifs that comprise the rock-art resource and at the same time facilitate further interpretative work. Well-documented field-data are also instrumental in developing effective and sustainable measures for conserving, monitoring, and presenting the petroglyphs.
41 (2019) Petroglyphs of Karelia. Moscow: Severniy Palomnik
more than 6 thousand years ago on Lake Onega shores and in the south-western White Sea are is reflected in special petroglyph images.
The authors of this popular science edition introduce all the main petroglyph groups of Karelia and their natural environment to readers. The book provides the information about the rock carvings features, description of individual images and scenes, it also contains the data about Link: https://yadi.sk/i/QLQYjpBne4gGgg the way of life and activities of Karelia Stone Book creators and contemporaries. Language: Russian and English The book contains a great number of Summary: The petroglyphs of Karelia have illustrations: maps and layouts of the been in the focus of attention both if monuments locations, panoramic scientists and general public since mid 19th photographs taken on land and from the century. Petroglyphs or stone carvings are air, mosaic photographs of the rock panels remarkable monuments of the creative and images, graphic drawings. activity of the ancient people of the North, vivid and unique phenomenon standing out at the background of the rock art of Eurasia. The world of Neolithic man living
Additional Link to all Publications https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1W described above: CpXUmHIZXg8Ff57a7jCTq16DO4n0k8Z?us p=sharing
42 3. LEGAL PROTECTION
Additional Information Requested:
ICOMOS notes that currently, 19 out of 25 parts of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega component have a designation of cultural heritage site of federal importance, whereas 7 of them have a status of identified cultural heritage sites.
The Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea are currently being considered for the protection under the State Code of Especially Valuable Properties of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation that would offer the optimal level of protection at national level and secure funding. What is the timeframe for the establishment of this legal protection? Do the boundaries of the components have legal status?
It Is understood that there are various levels of protection for the buffer zone since this concept is not reflected in the national legislation. As regards the delimitation of the buffer zones and their legal status, could the State Party confirm how archaeological sites in the buffer zone are protected. How does protection within the buffer zone assist in supporting the proposed Outstanding Universal Value of the property?
3.1. CURRENT LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE COMPONENT PARTS
In accordance with the Federal Law of date of their discovery and therefore, they 25.06.2002 No. 73-FZ on Objects of Cultural receive immediate state protection. Heritage (Historical and Cultural Monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Stage 2. The identified cultural heritage Federation, rock art sites are attributed to sites are included in the List of Identified archaeological sites, which legal protection Cultural Heritage by the decision of the and national designation are established regional body for cultural heritage within the following timeframe: protection within 3 days from the date of receipt of information about the Stage 1. After the discovery of an discovered archaeological site. archaeological site, archaeologists (with excavation permit) inform regional body Stage 3. The regional body for cultural for cultural heritage protection of cultural heritage protection also issues heritage within 10 days in written form with notifications on the identified cultural the description of the site, its and heritage site to relevant regional and local geographical coordinates of the authorities, land owners and (or) the user characteristic points of these boundaries. of the land within 30 days from the date of It is necessary to highlight that the receipt of information about the archaeological sites are considered as discovered archaeological site. The identified cultural heritage sites from the notifications specify the name and location
43 of the identified cultural heritage site as cultural heritage site of federal well as the information about prescribed significance. land-use regime aimed to ensure the protection and conservation of the Stage 6. The Ministry of Culture of the archaeological site. Russian Federation within 30 days from the date of receipt of the application issues a Stage 4. After the inclusion of the decision to include the identified cultural identified cultural heritage site to the List, heritage site in the State Register as a the regional body for cultural heritage cultural heritage site of federal protection orders a state historical and significance. cultural expertise, which is held within 1-3 months. The results of the state historical Stage 7. The Ministry of Culture of the and cultural expertise contain information Russian Federation notifies relevant on the archaeological site, including its regional and local authorities, land owners value and boundaries. and (or) the user of the land within 3 days from the date of the designation of the Stage 5. After receiving the results of the archaeological site as the cultural heritage state historical and cultural expertise on site of federal significance. the archaeological site, the regional body for cultural heritage protection submits in The overview of the process of designation 30 days an application to the Ministry of of archaeological sites as cultural heritage Culture of the Russian Federation for the sites of federal significance within the designation of an identified cultural context of national designation is given heritage site to the State Register as a below:
44
45 It is necessary to highlight that boundaries of all component parts of the archaeological sites with the status of Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the identified cultural heritage sites are state White Sea property have legal status. protected in the same level as the archaeological sites, which underwent the At the time of the submission of the designation process and received the nomination dossier of the Petroglyphs of status of cultural heritage sites of federal Lake Onega and the White Sea property, its significance. The boundaries of both types 21 component parts had the designation of of archaeological sites are delimitated and cultural heritage site of federal legally protected. Therefore, the significance:
Nо. Name of the component part # in state register
Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega Component 1.5 Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos VII 101440131810006 1.8 Petroglyph on the cape Besov Nos 101741291350006 1.9 Petroglyphs of the cape Gazhij Nos 101741293360006 1.10 Petroglyphs of the cape Kareckij Nos 101741293520006 1.11 Petroglyphs of the cape Kladovec 101741293550006 1.12 Petroglyphs of the cape Korjushkin Nos 101741291320006 1.13 Petroglyphs on the peninsula Kochkovnavolok 101640558300006 (group А) Petroglyphs on the peninsula Kochkovnavolok 101740842580006 (group B) Petroglyphs on the peninsula Kochkovnavolok 101740842570006 (group C) 1.14 Petroglyphs on the peninsula Kochkovnavolok 101640558390006 (group D) 1.15 Petroglyph on Mihajlovec island 101741291330006 1.16 Petroglyph on the cape Chjornyj 101741309700006 1.17 Petroglyphs of Moduzh island 101440132130006 1.18 Petroglyphs on Bol'shoj Golec island 101741293240026 1.19 Petroglyphs on Bol'shoj Gurij island I 101741293240036, Petroglyphs on Bol'shoj Gurij island II 101741293540006 1.20 Petroglyphs on Malyj Gurij island 101741293240036 1.21 Petroglyphs in the mounth of the river Vodly 101741293240016 1.22 Petroglyphs in the mounth of the river Chjornaja 101540275700006 Petroglyphs of the White Sea Component 2.1 Petroglyphs Zalavruga 10741293490006 2.2 Petroglyphs Besovy Sledki 101741293480006
46 2.3 Petroglyphs Erpin Pudas I 101741293500006 2.5 Petroglyphs Erpin Pudas III 101740825940006 2.7 Petroglyphs on the no-name islands I 101741293510006
The following 6 component parts of the cultural heritage sites as federal White Sea component were designated as significance in 2020:
Nо. Name of the component part Designation document
Petroglyphs of the White Sea Component 2.4 Petroglyphs Erpin Pudas II Decree of the Ministry of Culture No.627 of 10.06.2020 2.6 Petroglyphs Erpin Pudas IV Decree of the Ministry of Culture No.626 of 10.06.2020 2.8 Petroglyphs on the no-name islands II Decree of the Ministry of Culture No.625 of 10.06.2020 2.9 Petroglyphs on the no-name islands III Decree of the Ministry of Culture No.628 of 10.06.2020 2.10 Petroglyphs on the island Bol'shoj Decree of the Ministry of Culture Malinin No.624 of 10.06.2020 2.11 Group of petroglyphs Zolotec I Decree of the Ministry of Culture No.635 of 10.06.2020
The 6 component parts of the Lake Onega were submitted by the Administration for component are currently in the process of the Protection of Cultural Heritage of the designation as cultural heritage sites of Republic of Karelia to the Ministry of federal significance in 2020. As of Culture of the Russian Federation. The 25.01.2021, the application for their designation process is to be completed by designation as cultural heritage sites of the end of February. However, this process federal significance along with the results may be prolonged due to the restrictions of state historical and cultural expertise set due to the COVID-19 situation.
No. Name of the component part Current status Comments
Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega Component 1.1 Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos I The designation These component 1.2 Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos documents for parts also a part of the II cultural heritage site Rock Art Sites of the 3- Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos of federal 2 millennia BC cultural III significance heritage site of federal
47 1.3 Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos submitted to the significance IV Ministry of Culture of (designated under the 1.4 Petroglyphs of the cape Peri Nos the Russian Decree of the Council VI Federation on of Ministers of the 25.01.2021 RSFSR No 1327 of 30.08.1960 1.6 Petroglyphs of the cape Besov These component Nos (northern group) parts also a part of the 1.7 Petroglyphs of the cape Besov Petroglyphs of the Nos (central group) cape Besov Nos cultural heritage site of federal significance (designated under the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the Karel ASSR No.199 of 21.04.1971
3.2. STATE CODE OF ESPECIALLY VALUABLE PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL HERITAGE OF THE PEOPLES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
The decision to include cultural heritage inscribed to the World Heritage List, are sites to the State Code of Especially automatically included to the State Code. Valuable Properties of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation can The inclusion of the component parts of be taken by the Government of the Russian the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the Federation regarding properties, which White Sea property is scheduled after its already have the designation of cultural above-mentioned 6 component parts will heritage sites of federal significance. At the receive the status of cultural heritage sites same time, cultural heritage sites on the of federal significance. territory of the Russian Federation
3.3. LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE BUFFER ZONE
The delimitation of the buffer zones were the consideration of landscape and visual conducted based on the results of the analysis and functional zones complex research project on the correction commissioned by the Administration for of the justification of the boundaries of the the Protection of Cultural Heritage of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the Republic of Karelia in 2019. White Sea cultural heritage property as serial property and its buffer zones with
48 Due to the significant distance between 4. Ust-Vodla III two components of the property (300 km), 5. Ust-Vodla IV it was decided to divide buffer zone of the 6. Ust-Vodla V property into two parts: 7. Cape Cherny site 8. Kareckij Nos site • Buffer Zone of the Lake Onega 9. Peri Nos I site Component 10.Moduj I 11. Besov Nos I site The buffer zone of the Lake Onega 12. Besov Nos IIIa component was established based on the 13. Besov Nos V Decree of the Head of the Government of 14. Besov Nos VI the Republic of Karelia No 518-r of 15. Besov Nos VIa 5.09.1996 on Temporary Protection Zones 16. Besov Nos VII of the Petroglyphs of Onega and 17. Besov Nos VIII settlement Archaeological Sites within these Zones in 18. Besov Nos IX settlement Pudozhsky District. The decree provides: 19. Besov Nos X settlement a) protection zones for the cultural layers 20. Kladovec I of archaeological sites (settlements, 21. Kladovec Ia seasonal sites, burial grounds, medieval 22. Kladovec Ib settlements) 23. Kladovec II 24. Kladovec IIa b) protection zones for the Petroglyphs of 25. Kladovec III the Lake Onega located on the capes and 26. Kladovec IV islands 27. Kladovec V 28. Kladovec Va c) landscape protection zones in the area 29. Kladovec VI of the Petroglyphs of Lake Onega 30. Kladovec VII d) archaeological observation areas 31. Kladovec VIII 32. Kladovec IX The territory of the buffer zone of the 33.Kladovec burial site Petroglyphs of Lake Onega component 34. Chernaya Rechka VII site includes the following archaeological sites 35. Chernaya Rechka VIII site (from north to south) with a total of 39: 36. Chernaya Rechka XV site 37. Gazhij Nos 1. Lebediniy Nos site 38. Bol'shoj Gurij island 2. Ust - Vodla I 39. Malyj Gurij island 3. Ust - Vodla II
49 • Buffer Zone of the White Sea and Cultural Purpose. The decree ensures Component sufficient level of protection for cultural heritage sites, both already identified and The buffer zone of the White Sea potential, including petroglyphs, component was established based on the prehistoric sites and surrounding natural Decree of the Government of the Republic landscape. of Karelia No 221 of 9.04.1998 on the Recognition of Lands on the Territory of The territory of the buffer zone of the the Archaeological Complex of the Petroglyphs of White Sea component Petroglyphs of the White Sea in includes the following archaeological sites Belomorsky District as Lands of Historical (from north to south) with a total of 27:
1. Zalavruga I 15. Zalavruga XV 2. Zalavruga II 16. Zalavruga XVI 3. Zalavruga III 17. Bol'shoj Malinin I 4. Zalavruga IV 18. No-name islands I 5. Zalavruga V 19. Besovy Sledki I 6. Zalavruga VI 20. Besovy Sledki II 7. Zalavruga VII 21. Besovy Sledki III 8. Zalavruga VIII 22. Vygostrov V 9. Zalavruga IX 23. Vygostrov VI 10. Zalavruga X 24. Erpin Pudas I 11. Zalavruga XI 25. Erpin Pudas II 12. Zalavruga XII 26. Erpin Pudas III 13. Zalavruga XIII 27. Erpin Pudas IV 14. Zalavruga XIV
The buffer zone was established to ensure mechanisms, namely protection zones, the protection of the nominated property; lands of historical and cultural purpose and to ensure the protection of the protected natural areas, which currently archaeological sites (identified and constitutes the multiple protection layers potential), supporting the potential OUV of of the buffer zone of the nominated the nominated property, as well as to property. ensure the protection of the surrounding natural landscape. • Protection Zones
Due to the absence of the concept of The Decrees of the Head of the buffer zone in the Russian heritage Government of the Republic of Karelia legislation, the legal protection within the No.518-r of 05.09.1996 and No.163-R of territory of the buffer zone is implemented 25.03.1998 approved the protection zones basing on existing national legal of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and
50 the Petroglyphs of the White Sea, sustainable tourism and to create the respectively. conditions for active recreation. The same legal act approved the regulations on the • Lands of Historical and Cultural reserve and established the regime for the Purpose protection of its territory. In 2019, the necessary amendments were introduced The lands, within the boundaries of which to the regulations of the reserves to the archaeological sites and the rock art expand the boundaries of its protected sites are located, are designated as the territories to include all previously lands of historical and cultural purpose undercovered territories and wider setting (Article 99 of the Land Code of the Russian of the following parts of the Lake Onega Federation). The land-use regime on these component: 1.13. Petroglyphs on the lands are governed by the Federal Law No. peninsula Kochkovnavolok (group А), 73-FZ, the Land Code of the Russian Petroglyphs on the peninsula Federation and the Federal Law No. 122-FZ Kochkovnavolok (group B), Petroglyphs on on State Registration of Rights to the peninsula Kochkovnavolok (group C); Immovable Property. 1.14. Petroglyphs on the peninsula • Protected Natural Areas (*relevant Kochkovnavolok (group D); 1.15. for the Lake Onega Component and its Petroglyph on Mihajlovec island; 1.16. buffer zone) Petroglyph on the cape Chjornyj; 1.18. Petroglyphs on Bol'shoj Golec island. The Lake Onega component and its buffer zone are located within the boundaries of To harmonize the several protection layers the Muromsky Landscape Reserve of of the buffer zone of the nominated Regional Significance Protected Natural property, it was decided to establish two Area. The state landscape reserve was remarkable places of federal significance established in the Pudozhsky district of cultural heritage sites, which boundaries Karelia in accordance with the resolution of are coinciding with the buffer zone of the the Council of Ministers of the Karelian Lake Onega component and the White Sea ASSR No. 390 of 13.11.1986 as the reserve of component. By January 2021, the necessary the local significance. By the Decree of the research and project works for the Government of the Republic of Karelia No. establishment of both remarkable places 304-p of 28.12.2009, it was transformed were accomplished by the Administration into the state complex landscape reserve for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of of regional significance to preserve the the Republic of Karelia. The designation typical and unique natural complexes and process for both remarkable places are to sites as well as cultural heritage sites be completed in 2021. However, it is (including archaeological sites and rock art necessary to highlight that the timeframe sites) of the South-Eastern part of the for the designation may change due to the Republic of Karelia; to maintain the restrictions related with COVID-19 ecological balance and the development of situation.
51 4. MANAGEMENT
Additional Information Requested:
ICOMOS understands that there is currently no centralized management system in place for the serial nominated property. It appears that the management structure for the nominated property will be housed in the Karelian Petroglyph Museum to be located on the western side of Lake Onega at Petrozavodsk and that the management of the two components will be coordinated through a coordinating council. It would be helpful to clarify how this council will work and effectively coordinate the range of agencies involved in the management of the nominated property. Could the State Party please elaborate on how the overarching management of the two components will operate? What is the timeframe for its establishment? Furthermore, it would be helpful to know what are the processes in place for the conservation of the petroglyphs at the two components? How will the conservation of the petroglyphs be assessed and monitored on an ongoing basis?
Currently, the Petroglyphs of the White Sea Petroglyphs on the peninsula component part is managed by the White Kochkovnavolok (group C); 1.14. Sea Petroglyphs White Sea District Local Petroglyphs on the peninsula Lore Museum Municipal Budgetary Kochkovnavolok (group D); 1.15. Institution. The museum has 7 employees Petroglyph on Mihajlovec island; 1.16. and 4 inspectors. Petroglyph on the cape Chjornyj; 1.18. Petroglyphs on Bol'shoj Golec island. In The Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega 2020, the separate department with 3 component part due to its location within employees was established within the the Muromsky Natural Reserve is managed institution to ensure the permanent by the Direction of Protected Natural present of the staff in Muromsky Natural Territories of Regional Significance of the Reserve. Republic of Karelia Budgetary Nature Protection Recreational Institution. In At the present stage, the Administration 2019, for the purposes of protection and for Cultural Heritage Protection of the management of the Lake Onega Republic of Karelia, as an authority component, the necessary amendments to authorized in the field of conservation, use, the Bylaws of the natural reserve were promotion and state protection of cultural introduced, the boundaries of the natural heritage sites located on the territory of reserve were enlarged to include the the Republic of Karelia, ensures the previously undercovered territories and coordination and interaction between two wider setting of the following parts: 1.13. managing institutions, (1) White Sea Petroglyphs on the peninsula Petroglyphs White Sea District Local Lore Kochkovnavolok (group А), Petroglyphs on Museum Municipal Budgetary Institution the peninsula Kochkovnavolok (group B), and (2) the Direction of Protected Natural
52 Territories of Regional Significance of the promotion of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Republic of Karelia Budgetary Nature Onega and the White Sea property to the Protection Recreational Institution, as well UNESCO World Heritage List in accordance as with federal, regional and municipal with the Program of Joint Actions (the authorities and other stakeholders, Road Map approved by the Government of including communities, economic entities, the Republic of Karelia and the Ministry of scientific and expert community. On behalf Culture of the Russian Federation in 2016. of the Government of the Republic of Karelia, the administration is also the The current management system of the authority responsible for coordinating the nominated property is presented below:
To establish more effective management developed. In 2011, it is planned to conduct system of the nominated property, by the feasibility studies and prepare constituent Decision of the Head of the Republic of documents of the Petroglyphs of Karelia Karelia (under the Protocol of 27.01.2020). Museum. As regards further steps of the it was decided to establish the Petroglyphs improvement of the management system, of Karelia Museum of regional level. In it is necessary to highlight the following: 2020, a draft concept of the museum was
53 # Period Aims
Stage 1 Short-Term • To achieve centralized management of the Perspective component parts: the Lake Onega (Direction of Protected Natural Territories) and the White Sea (Local Lore Museum)
• To achieve unified planning of research, state of conservation monitoring activities
• To achieve unified cooperation with the local communities
• To achieve unified tourism management
• To achieve unified promotion and interpretation strategy
• To create necessary infrastructure for the Petroglyphs of Karelia Museum with its head department located in Petrozavodsk
Stage 2 Mid-Term • To establish a unified structure of the Petroglyphs of Perspective Karelia Museum, including its head department located in Petrozavodsk and two regional departments, including on the White See (transformed from the White Sea Petroglyphs White Sea District Local Lore Museum Municipal Budgetary Institution) and the Lake Onega (transformed from the separate department in Muromsky Reserve of the Direction of Protected Natural Territories of Regional Significance of the Republic of Karelia Budgetary Nature Protection Recreational Institution) with introduction of more staff members. This strategy would ensure the enhancement of the partnership and effective use of the potential of the two current institutions involved in the management system with the gradual improvement of their budgetary funding and capacity-building.
54 The planned mid-term management system of the nominated property is presented below:
As regards the Coordination Council within Although the Coordination Council is not the management system of the nominated present at the current stage of the property, its establishment is planned development of the management system under the Petroglyphs of Karelia Museum. of the nominated property, all issues The Republic of Karelia have a successful related to the conservation and research as experience of creating a similar steering well as promotion to the UNESCO World body for the Kizhi Pogost World heritage Heritage List, including various project site in 2014, which includes all involved proposals, are considered on the stakeholders, including state authorities, mandatory basis by: local government, public organizations, scientific and expert community, the local (1) Council for the Preservation of community and operates under the Kizhi Historical and Cultural Heritage in the Pogost Museum-Reserve. The similar Republic of Karelia under the Head of the model would be used regarding the Republic of Karelia (Decree of the Head of nominated property. the Republic of Karelia No. 4 of 28.01.2019).
55 Council for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage in the Republic of Karelia under the Head of the Republic of Karelia
Parfenchikov A. O. – Head of the Republic of Karelia, Chairman of the Council
Alipova Yu. B. – Head of the Administration for Cultural Heritage Protection of the Republic of Karelia, Secretary of the Council Members: Vakhrameeva T. I. – Director of LAD closed joint-stock company Itzykson E. E. – Chief architect of the Karelproekt Institute Kopnin V. G. – Chief architect of LAD closed joint-stock company Kutkov N. P. – local historian, journalist, writer Lobanova N. V. – Senior Researcher of the Karelian Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences Lyubimtsev A. Yu – Head of the service of the Kizhi State Historical, Architectural and Ethnographic Museum-Reserve Orfinsky V. P. – Director of the Research Institute of Historical and Theoretical Problems of Folk Architecture of Petrozavodsk State University Semyonova I. G. – General Director of the Semyonova Architectural and Restoration Center Skopin V. A. – Director of the Zaonezhye Architectural and Restoration Center Taev E. G. – Architect Shakhnovich M. M. – Chief Researcher of the National Museum of the Republic of Karelia
(2) Scientific and Expert Council for the The professional supervision and Historical and Cultural Heritage of the assessment of the conservation and Republic of Karelia under the promotion of the nominated property on Administration for the Protection of national and international level is mainly Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Karelia ensured by the organization of (Order of the Department No. 64 of international scientific seminars (in 2017 3.05.2018) and 2018) devoted to the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea.
56 5. DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES
Additional Information Requested:
In the Management Plan, there are some concerning trends, notable the focus on increasing visitor numbers as part of the overall tourism strategy of the Republic of Karelia and the provision of interpretation, visitor and related facilities as part of that process. It should also be noted that the main indicator of community engagement in the Management Plan appeared to be the involvement of tourist business. Major initiatives, such as the museum at Besovy Sledki have commenced without being linked to a Visitor Strategy for the nominated property.
While it is encouraging to hear if the interest of local businesses in setting up tourist activities, ICOMOS is concerned about the potential impact that increasing number of visitors and provision of facilities and services could have on the integrity and authenticity of the nominated property. The state of conservation of the property might change profoundly in the light of new tourism development projects. Apart from the Tourism Study for the whole of the Republic of Karelia, is there a detailed Visitor Strategy for the proposed property with the purpose of sustaining its proposed Outstanding Universal Value? If so, could this document be provided?
Has the potential impact of the projects at the two components that have been initiated or are being planned been measured by way of heritage impact assessments?
As part of the preparation of the • Development of the recommendations nomination, the Karelian Scientific Center on the land-use regimes for the of the Russian Academy of Sciences territories of cultural heritage sites Federal State Budgetary Institution of (petroglyphs); topographic and Science in 2017-2018 conducted the study geodetic determination of the on the complex assessment of natural boundaries of the Lake Onega and the complexes and determination of the White Sea component parts. The permissible anthropogenic load (carrying approved boundaries and land-use capacity) on the areas with petroglyphs regimes had undergone cadastral and the surrounding landscape on the registration. coasts of the Lake Onega and the White Sea (see Annex 2). • Complex landscape and visual analysis of the territory of the nominated From 2016 to 2019 the following property and its buffer zone within the assessments and studies regarding the context of current urban development nominated property were conducted by situation and land-use regimes to the Ministry Culture of the Russian calculate anthropogenic loads Federation: (carrying capacity) and to justify the
57 buffer zones of the nominated development of the territories adjacent to component parts. the buffer zones of the White Sea component part for 2020-2024 were As regards potential developments, the approved by the Decree of the architectural concepts for the Government of the Russian Federation No. development projects of the two 973-r of 10.04.2020. It is necessary to component parts with the consideration of highlight that the measures are focused on the anthropogenic loads determined by the establishment of the necessary previous studies as well as impact infrastructural facilities (including a visitor assessment on cultural and natural center, parking and others) in accordance attributes of the nominated property. with the determined carrying capacities of These concepts were considered by the the component parts outside of the buffer expert community and the Government of zones of the component parts in order to the Republic of Karelia. avoid potential negative impact on the attributes of the potential OUV of the Based on the developed architectural nominated property as well as on its concepts, the Government of the Republic natural environment. of Karelia, executive and municipal authorities in cooperation with the It is planned to complete a study on the stakeholders, have developed Action Plans network of tourism routes for the (Road Maps) on the development of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the territories adjacent to the buffer zones of White Sea by the end of 2021. The study the nominated property. aims to ensure the sustainable development of tourism for the nominated As the first stage of the implementation of property. the action plans, the measures for the
58 CONCLUSION
The Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the The uniqueness and distinctiveness of the White Sea nominated serial property Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the reflects the origin and development of a White Sea property is proven by the unique tradition of rock carvings that numerous research projects, which results originated in the culture of the Neolithic were carefully documented and presented population. in the Petroglyphs of Karelia Database Management System as well as in The cultural context of the petroglyphs numerous publications provided in this strongly suggests that the tradition of rock document by the State Party to support art was created and continued to develop the nomination dossier. among the population of the Comb Ceramic Culture at different stages of its The State Party continuously working on development. There are large complex the improvement of the legal protection of well-studied complexes constituted by the nominated serial property and its over 100 archaeological sites of different buffer zone. The significant efforts were periods near the rock art sites in the delta taken from the date of the submission of of the Vyg River and on the eastern coast the dossier to improve the legal protection of the Lake Onega. The considerable part of the component parts. In this context, of these sites (Neolithic with pit-comb and the State Party confirms its intention to rhomb-pit ceramics) are directly related to continue the highest designation the creators and admirers of rock art in protection for the component parts and Karelia. Together with the petroglyphs, the inclusion of the nominated property to these complexes form unique places of the State Code of Especially Valuable interest that have an undeniable Properties of Cultural Heritage of the Outstanding Universal Value. Peoples of the Russian Federation, which is currently hindered by the COVID-19 It is scientifically proven that the situation. petroglyphic tradition of Karelia originates on the flat, far-reaching rocks of the As regards the buffer zones, their eastern shore of the Lake Onega. A few delimitation was based on the results of hundred years later, it apparently appeared the complex research project on the 300 km to the north, in the south-western correction of the justification of the White Sea region. boundaries of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the White Sea cultural heritage This unique petroglyphic tradition property as serial property and its buffer generally developed from simple in outline zones with the consideration of landscape and small in size figures to larger and more and visual analysis and functional zones. complex, from figures of a mythological The buffer zone includes numerous nature on the Lake Onega to realistic multi- archaeological sites located in vicinity to figure hunting scenes of narrative content component part and supporting the on the White Sea. potential Outstanding Universal Value of
59 the property, providing important cultural stakeholders and communities interested context on the Prehistoric bearers of this in protection, conservation, sustainable unique rock carving tradition. development and promotion of the Petroglyphs of the Lake Onega and the The State Party also focuses on the White Sea. improvement of the management system of the nominated serial property, which is The development of tourism for the currently based on the White Sea nominated serial property is strictly based Petroglyphs White Sea District Local Lore on the carrying capacities of both Museum and the Direction of Protected component parts identified basing on Natural Territories of Regional Significance complex research, involving geographical, of the Republic of Karelia coordinated by landscape and visual analysis as well as the Administration for Cultural Heritage assessment of cultural and natural heritage Protection of the Republic of Karelia. In in accordance with the Russian legislation. 2020, the process of the unification of the The development projects proposed are management system was launched by the implemented basing on the principles and Head of the Petroglyphs of Karelia to methods of sustainable development with achieve in long-term perspective the the involvement of the stakeholders and establishment of the unified management communities and careful impact analysis structure of the nominated serial property on the potential Outstanding Universal (the Petroglyphs of Karelia Museum), Value of the nominated property. which will be guided by the Coordinating Council, encompassing all relevant
60 ANNEXES
Annex 1. Petroglyphs of Karelia Annex 2. Report of the scientific Database Management System research work on the complex characteristics and evaluation of the natural complexes, definition of permissible anthropogenic load on the Link: https://yadi.sk/i/tVsgrJcK13k--A petroglyph sites and their surrounding Language: Russian landscape on the Lake Onega and the White Sea The document represents the description of the operation of the Petroglyphs of Karelia Database Management System. It Link: https://yadi.sk/i/3Sy8s3GIqYdFCg shows the key characteristics of each entries of the rock art sites, which was Language: Russian collected to the database. The document presents the results of the scientific research work on the definition of the maximum carrying capacity of the components of the nominated serial property and its buffer zones. The work was based on a complex analysis, which includes geographical, landscape, visual analysis as well as cultural and natural heritage assessments.
61