The Distaff and the phallic cult

“On the border of the Velsky and Totemsky districts, near the upper reaches of the Vaga River, in the parish of the Kochevarsky volost, there is a legend that every year a deer ran out of the forest on this holiday; the people, accepting the deer as a gift from God, slaughtered it and, tearing it apart, prepared dinner for themselves. This went on [...] for several years, but when the appearance of the deer stopped, the villagers began to cook dinner instead of the deer, killing a bull for this purpose».

According to another legend, on a festive day two deer ran to the chapel, one of which was sacrificed, and the other was set free. Similar legends are recorded in many in the Vologda, Novgorod, Arkhangelsk and Olonets provinces. Be that as it may, they were all associated with the pagan rite of sacrifice, the original object of which was a deer.

In heraldry, the deer symbolizes the Sun, creation, fire, renewal and is often associated with the Tree of Life. In Russian folklore, the deer also serves as a poetic symbol of the sun: “From distant winter countries, the sun directed its return run in the form of a golden-horned deer, bringing light to the world.” In Russian folk tales, deer usually have silver hooves and golden horns.

V. N. Demin explains the origin of the word "deer" (in Old Russian - "deer") from the word "spruce". In this interpretation, the deer appears to us as an animal living among the fir trees. The researcher claims that the same lexical nest includes the word "elin", which in the Old Russian language meant "hellin". It remains only to remember the name of the first Delphic priest - Olen - and seriously think about the origin of the ancient Greek people.

It just so happened that for a century and a half (interest in Russian folk art first manifested itself in the middle of the 19th century), researchers were mainly engaged in the classification of wooden hand spinning wheels, their distribution areas and, at best, in the analysis of their stylistic features, practically not paying attention to this attention to chronological issues and not even trying, at least in general terms, to restore their "pedigree". Figuratively speaking, scientists painstakingly worked on the fruits, completely ignoring the tree and its roots.

V. S. Voronov, quite rightly noted: “The Vologda type of Russian wooden hand spinning wheel should be considered the oldest in time of occurrence, far beyond the limits of chronological digital data represented by spinning wheels.” Indeed, the form of the Vologda root spinning wheels, cut from a whole piece of wood, in its antiquity far exceeds all other types of Russian spinning wheels. It is curious that in Novgorod, from where, according to most art historians, "culture" came to the north, archaeologists did not find a single root-type spinning wheel!

In the lower part of the blade of the Vologda spinning wheels, there is usually a schematic representation of the earth in the form of crossed squares, rhombuses and triangles, above it is a solar sign or a symbol of "white light" (the Universe) with rays turned inward. Earrings on the lower part of the blade depicted the rising and setting sun, respectively, and the “towns” crowning the blade depicted its daytime path.

All other types of spinning wheels - collapsible (from 2-3 parts), painted, with chiseled and slotted legs, decorated with through, contour, embossed and bracketed carvings, of course, are of later origin and are much inferior to the Vologda-type spinning wheels in terms of the degree of archaism.

The art critic O. V. Kruglova suggests that the most ancient type of northern spinning wheels are related to the Gryazovets, Buisk and Yaroslavl terem spinning wheels: It is this simplest, stable and most natural form of the root and the broad, at first, probably little processed massive board from the tree trunk, which extends from it, which was the initial one for root spinning wheels of the Vologda type, which is widely known to us.

In no way trying to offend Olga Vladimirovna, I argue that in this case what is desired is simply passed off as real. To be convinced of this, it is enough to put the Yaroslavl tower, Bui, Gryazovets and Vologda spinning wheels next to it: the greatest archaism of the latter will not cause doubts even for a person who has never studied Russian folk art. The primitive form of the Vologda spinning wheel, reminiscent of a “simple working shovel”, its stern and rough appearance, its bulkiness and heaviness speak so eloquently of its ancient origin that it seems to me to compare with it the artsy, light, fragile and elegant spinning wheel of the Yaroslavl, Kostroma and Gryazovets types simply frivolous: the difference in "age" between them is at least 1.5 thousand years!

It is noteworthy that archaeologists discovered the oldest root spinning wheel in Russia in the Vologda region on the Modlon River connecting Lake Vozhe and Veshozero, in a peat layer of the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC, along with cultivated flax seeds. The argument of O. V. Kruglova regarding the “wide board” is broken at one glance at the Modlon spinning wheel, as well as at the ancient (albeit later in comparison with it) root spinning wheels of the Ryazan region: there is no “wide board” in these spinning wheels at all .

The desire of O. V. Kruglova to proclaim the Yaroslavl teremkovsky and related Buisk and Gryazovets spinning wheels as the oldest spinning wheels, in my opinion, is quite understandable: Olga Vladimirovna herself comes from the village of Novoselovo, Prechistensky district, and Yaroslavl region - an area where Yaroslavl teremkov spinning wheels were widely used. Your own shirt, of course, is closer to the body.

Of all the types of spinning wheels that existed on the territory of the Vologda province, the most ancient, without a doubt, are the "Vologda", that is, those that were common in the Nyuksensky, Velikoustyugsky, Tarnogsky, Nikolsky and Verkhovazhsky districts. This is followed by spinning wheels that existed in the Totemsky, Sokolsky and Mezhdurechensky regions: I call them “totemsky”. By their "age" they are much older than the Gryazovets, although they are inferior to the Vologda ones. This is supported by their shortened square blade, slotted gratings, figured completion of side sections, etc.

Gryazovets spinning wheels are clearly inferior to both Vologda and Totem ones in terms of antiquity. They are more slender, light and graceful, decorated with small through carvings, often covered with paintings, have a fanciful shape of a leg, as well as a small comb “cut off” from above and oval tapering downwards. Fragments of the decor of the Gryazovets spinning wheels also testify to their late origin: here we find architectural slotted “pillars”, stylized images of a samovar, a double-headed eagle, etc. There is nothing like this among the Vologda and Totemsky spinning wheels.

References to the “evolution of type” and the later origin of certain patterns are also, in general, untenable: in Russian folk art there have never been sharp leaps and “stylistic revolutions”, the form and decor of rural household items seemed to mature, crystallize over many centuries. V. S. Voronov expressed this idea very succinctly and figuratively: “The development of peasant collective art cannot be likened to a fast-flying horse of stormy and unrestrained individual creativity. This is the movement of a slow raft on a wide river; as if motionless and dead, this dormant raft on the water, but this is not true: it moves and overcomes thousands of miles of space.

The most ancient painting not only of the north, but of the whole of Russia, without any doubt, should be considered the Mezen: in its magical "running" ornament lies the secret of millennia. Researchers compared the Mezen painting with northern embroidery (Rabotnova, Vishnevskaya, Kozhevnikova), with geometric woodcarving (Vasilenko), the Azelin culture of 3-5 centuries (Arbat), with the petroglyphs of Zaonezhie (Zhegalova, Vasilenko) and even with cave paintings in France and northern Spain (Kruglova).

Severodvinsk painting was born much later. Some researchers look for its roots in northern icons, some start an old song about the “Novgorod” or “Moscow” influence, but not one of the venerable scientists has yet taken the trouble to directly compare the motifs of the Severodvinsk painting with the artistic traditions of the Old Believers, although the connection between them is undeniable and requires the most in-depth study.

Having scrupulously studied the smallest details of the Boretskaya, Puchuzhskaya and Nizhnetoemskaya paintings, the researchers ignored the semicircular arch traditional for the decoration of these spinning wheels, which was most often placed in the center of the blade, in the so-called “middle stave”. Of course, the motif of the arch could not be just random and clearly carried a certain semantic load.

Which one? In heraldry, the arch symbolizes the firmament, transformation, heroic victory. The image of the arch on the Boretsky, Puchuzhsky and Toyemsky spinning wheels exactly repeats the shape of the famous Vshizh bronze arches of the 12th century, which symbolized the universe and was placed on the church altar. And although the path of the sun across the sky on vshchizh arches was depicted in specific symbols (birds, circles, lizards, etc.), and in spinning arches only with the help of thick lines, their identity is still obvious.

Serious attempts to decipher the symbolism of the northern spinning wheels have so far been made only by B. A. Rybakov, V. M. Vasilenko and G. L. Malitsky. The rest of the researchers preferred to study folk art "in the context", using exclusively sterile laboratory methods and trying to look into the folk soul with a scalpel. Examining pieces of living flesh under a microscope and trying to reconstruct from them the image of a bird soaring in the sky is an absolutely fruitless task. It is not surprising that such methods never justified themselves and brought science more harm than good.

Some scientists even denied the originality of the North Russian folk art, diligently trying to find its "roots" in the cultures of other peoples or in the traditions of other regions. Of course, there were always analogues, and our unfortunate scientists immediately declared themselves to be the discoverers of new “influences”, completely not thinking about the fact that all Indo-European peoples once had one common culture and, as they became isolated, they broke away further and further from ancient roots, preserving in their ancestral memory the remnants of the former common Indo-European beliefs and ideas

The most ancient knowledge was consolidated in the word, ritual and symbol, the meaning of which was forgotten over time and with each generation became more and more mysterious and mysterious. The archaic patterns on North Russian spinning wheels are undoubtedly filled with the most invaluable information, which we will be able to decipher only if we manage to get closer to the ancient cosmological thinking.

Along with the spinning wheel, almost every peasant hut had a seamstress, the purpose of which is eloquently indicated by its very name: a female seamstress sat on the bottom and pinned the fabric to a low patterned column, which allowed her to conveniently stretch the cloth while sewing. It is noteworthy that in the only serious scientific work on the subjects of rural life - "Economy and Life of Russian Peasants" - not a single word is said about seamstresses. It is not mentioned in the recently published illustrated encyclopedia "Russian hut". Until now, none of the Russian museums has taken the trouble to prepare a separate exposition "Russian seamstresses". Moreover, in the entire history of Russian science, not a single article has been published devoted to this truly unique subject of peasant life.

By its design, the North Russian sewing machine resembles a small spinning wheel and differs from it only in the riser, which often has the shape of a swan's neck, a carved turret in several tiers, a milestone, horse heads and even a phallus. In my collection, there are more than 450 seamstresses who lived within the Vologda province. Some of them resemble real sculptural works. I am convinced that in terms of the degree of elegance of forms and subtlety of decoration, they fully deserve to become the subject of the most serious and comprehensive study.

Arkhangelsk region. 1948

Афанасьев А. Н. Поэтическое воззрение славян на природу. Т. 1. М. 1995.

Афанасьева З. «Сию прялку работал...». Красный Север. Вологда. 1980. 23 января.

Бакушинский А. Роспись по дереву, бересте и папье-маше. М. 1953.

Бернштам Т. А. Прялка в символическом контексте культуры. Из культурного наследия народов Восточной Европы. М. 1992.

Бобринский А. А. Народные русские деревянные изделия. Вып. I-XII. М. 1910-1914.

Богуславская И. Я. Русское народное искусство. Л. 1968.

Брюсов А. Я. Очерки по истории племен Европейской части СССР в неолитическую эпоху. М. 1952.

Брюсов А. Я. Сетчатая керамика. СА. XIV. 1950.

Василенко В. М. Народное искусство. М. 1974.

Воронов В. С. О крестьянском искусстве. М. 1972.

Глебова А. Едет князь за княгиней. Русский Север. Вологда. 1992. 18 января.

Даркевич В. П. Символы небесных светил в орнаменте Древней Руси. СА. 1960. № 4.

Денисова И. Сия прялица изрядна. Сельское хозяйство Нечерноземья. 1986. № 6.

Дилакторский П. А. Святочные шалости в Пельшемской волости Кадниковского уезда. ЭО. 1898 № 4

Ефименко П. С. Материалы по этнографии русского населения Архангельской губернии. Ч. 2. М. 1878.

Жарникова С. В. Фаллическая символика севернорусской прялки как реликт протославянско-индоиранскои близости. Историческая динамика расовой и этнической дифференциации населения Азии. М. 1987.

Жегалова С. К. Художественные прялки. Сокровища русского народного искусства: резьба и роспись по дереву. М. 1967.

Жегалова С. К. Северодвинская роспись по дереву. Русское художественное дерево. М. 1983.

Жегалова С. К. Экспедиция Государственного Исторического музея на Северную Двину. Советская этнография. 1960. № 4.

Жегалова С. К. Русская народная живопись. М. 1975.

3абылин М. Русский народ, его обычаи, предания, суеверия и поэзия. М. 1880.

Иванова Ю. Б. Секреты старой прялки. Важская область. Шенкурск. 1972.

Крестьянское искусство СССР. Искусство севера. Т. 1. Л. 1928.

Круглова О. В. Границы распространения прялок Русского Севера и Поволжья. Сообщения ГРМ. В. XI. М. 1976.

Круглова О. В. Грязовецкие прялки. Декоративное искусство СССР. 1971. № 5.

Круглова О. В. Жанровые росписи Русского Севера. Сообщения Загорского ГИХМЗ. Вып. 3. Загорск. 1960.

Круглова О. В. Русская народная резьба и роспись по дереву. М. 1974.

Круглова О. В. Северодвинские находки. Декоративное искусство СССР. 1960. № 3.

Круглова О. В. Северодвинские росписи. Русское народное искусство Севера. Л. 1968. Круглова О. В. Границы распространения прялок Русского Севера и Поволжья. Сообщения ГРМ, Вып. XI. М. 1976.

Крутова О. Северные прялки. Красный Север. Вологда. 1969. 25 декабря.