En
Register Log in
  1. Main
  2. Journal "Ethnic culture"
  3. No 4 (5)
  4. The Sacred Landscape of the Northern Selcups: The...

The Sacred Landscape of the Northern Selcups: The Losyl-Lakka Sanctuary on Lozyl-to Lake

Research Article
EDN: JRGCJY DOI: 10.31483/r-96616
Open Access
International academic journal «Ethnic Culture»
Creative commons logo
Published in:
International academic journal «Ethnic Culture»
Author:
Olga B. Stepanova 1
Work direction:
Ethnic and Ethno-Cultural Processes in Modern Society
Pages:
23-27
Received: 24 October 2020

Rating:
Article accesses:
3933
Published in:
doaj РИНЦ
1 Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera) of Russian Academy of Sciences
For citation:
Stepanova O. B. (2020). The Sacred Landscape of the Northern Selcups: The Losyl-Lakka Sanctuary on Lozyl-to Lake. Ethnic Culture, 23-27. EDN: JRGCJY. https://doi.org/10.31483/r-96616
UDC 39

Abstract

The article is devoted to the most famous ancient sanctuary of the northern Selkups – Shaman Mountain Lozyl-lakka on Lozyl-to Lake. The purpose of the study is to combine the information available about it in the scientific literature and in the author's field archive and to find out what this object of the sacred landscape is. The research methods were description, semantic analysis and fieldwork. The result of the study was the conclusion that Lozyl-lakka is a family sanctuary, where sacrifices were made to the spirits-masters of the ancestral fishing grounds, on which the success of members of the clan in the trade "depended". The memory of the sanctuary has survived to this day due to its location in a remarkable natural place. It was also found that the sacred mountain serves as an indicator of the state of the modern ethnic identity of the Selkups. It is characterized by the preservation of faith in spirits and strict adherence to a number of traditions that this belief dictates, therefore, the process of transformation of traditional culture into new modern forms among the Selkups, which is ongoing among the northern peoples today, is hampered by the vitality of some elements of this very traditional culture. A separate comprehensive study of the Lozyl-Lakka sanctuary, including the standpoint of the attitude of modern Selkups, constitutes the scientific novelty of the study. The publication of summary data on the sanctuary preserves it as part of the cultural heritage for future generations of Selkups and replenishes the data bank of ethnographic science.

References

  1. 1. Adaev, V. N. (2014). Varianty zakhoronenii i tipy namogil'nykh konstruktsii u verkhetazovskikh sel'kupov (po materialam etnograficheskikh issledovanii 2013 g.). Ab origine, 104-122. Tiumen': Izdatel'stvo TiumGU.
  2. 2. Adaev, V. N. (2017). O roli traditsionnogo mirovozzreniia narodov Severa v kachestve reguliatora rezhima prirodopol'zovaniia. Etnos i sreda obitaniia: sbornik statei po etnicheskoi ekologii. Vyp. 5: Issledovaniia sistem zhizneobespecheniia, 137-148. M.: Staryi sad.
  3. 3. Adaev, V. N. (2014). Sel'kupy Verkhnego Taza. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii, 1, 124-132.
  4. 4. Adaev, V. N., & Poshekhonova, O. E. (2016). Pogrebal'naia i pominal'naia pishcha v severosel'kupskom zakhoronenii XIX v.: opyt etnoarkheologicheskogo analiza. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii, 3, 127-136.
  5. 5. Adaev, V. N., & Slepchenko, S. M. (2017). K voprosu ob arkheologicheskoi rekonstruktsii pishchevykh traditsii korennykh narodov Sibiri: arkheoparazitologicheskii analiz materialov XVII. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 23: Antropologiia, 1, 103-114.
  6. 6. Belich, Ig. V., & Belich, Ir. V. (1997). K voprosu o kul'tovykh mestakh tazovskikh sel'kupov. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii, Vyp. 1, 99-112.
  7. 7. Golovnev, A. V. (1995). Govoriashchie kul'tury. Traditsii samodiitsev i ugrov., 605. Ekaterinburg: UrO RAN.
  8. 8. Prokof'eva, E. D. (1977). Nekotorye religioznye kul'ty tazovskikh sel'kupov. Pamiatniki kul'tury narodov Sibiri i Severa (vtoraia polovina XIX, nachalo KhKh v.): sb. MAE. T. 33, 66-79. L.: Nauka.
  9. 9. Rakhimov, R. Kh. (2016). Sovremennyi pogrebal'nyi obriad verkhnetazovskikh sel'kupov (po polevym nabliudeniiam 2013 g.). Ab origine, 105-114. Tiumen': Izdatel'stvo TiumGU.
  10. 10. Stepanova, O. B. (2005). Materialy po pogrebal'nomu obriadu tazovskikh sel'kupov. Radlovskie chteniia (2005), 165-169. SPb.: MAE RAN.
  11. 11. Stepanova, O. B. (2007). Medved' kak obraz materi-predka i dushi cheloveka v traditsionnom mirovozzrenii sel'kupov. Radlovskii sbornik. Nauchnye issledovaniia i muzeinye proekty MAE RAN v 2006 godu, 206-215. SPb.: MAE RAN.
  12. 12. Stepanova, O. B. (2007). Mir mertvykh i pogrebal'nyi obriad sel'kupov. Mifologiia smerti. Struktura, funktsiia i semantika pogrebal'nogo obriada narodov Sibiri, 182-198. SPb.: MAE RAN.
  13. 13. Stepanova, O. B. (2008). Ob odnoi iz kategorii obrazov dushi u sel'kupov. Radlovskii sbornik. Nauchnye issledovaniia i muzeinye proekty MAE RAN v 2007 godu, 291-301. SPb.: MAE RAN.
  14. 14. Stepanova, O. B. (2014). Sakral'noe znanie sel'kupov: pochemu molchat informanty. Sibirskii sbornik, tungusoveda Nadezhdy Vsevolodovny Ermolovoi), 340-350. SPb.: MAE RAN.
  15. 15. Stepanova, O. B. (2014). Severnye sel'kupy: sistema traditsionnykh vzgliadov v zerkale odnogo interv'iu. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii, 2, 124-131.
  16. 16. Stepanova, O. B. (2016). Selo Tol'ka i ne tol'ko. Materialy polevykh issledovanii MAE RAN. Vyp. 16, 46-66. SPb.
  17. 17. Stepanova, O. B. (2015). Sel'kupy sela Sovrechka. Vestnik arkheologii, antropologii i etnografii, 3 (30), 126-134.
  18. 18. Stepanova, O. B. (2017). Fol'klor severnykh sel'kupov (polevye sbory 2004, 2005, 2008 gg.). Chast' II. Materialy polevykh issledovanii MAE RAN. Vyp. 17, 37-67. SPb.
  19. 19. Stepanova, O. B. (2012). Fol'klor severnykh sel'kupov. Materialy polevykh issledovanii MAE RAN. Vyp. 12, 5-31. SPb.: MAE RAN.

Comments(0)

When adding a comment stipulate:
  • the relevance of the published material;
  • general estimation (originality and relevance of the topic, completeness, depth, comprehensiveness of topic disclosure, consistency, coherence, evidence, structural ordering, nature and the accuracy of the examples, illustrative material, the credibility of the conclusions;
  • disadvantages, shortcomings;
  • questions and wishes to author.