A small tour along the Black Sea coast of the North Caucasus, one of the goals of which was: to study a group of dolmens. It was planned in advance and some of the tools were, as they say, grabbed on the fly. It's simple - from the town of Tuapse by bus to the city of Gelendzhik and then get to the river. Janet (Zhenet) was not a difficult business (fortunately, the place is nearby - 17 km along the highway by the same vehicle). Having made a pretty decent ascent up the tourist trail passing near the Janet River, you begin to notice the peculiarities of the local climate (high humidity in extreme heat creates the effect of a tightly closed greenhouse) - the slightest breeze, as they say, is welcomed with a bang. Suddenly a serious rain came, but along with it the suffocation of the greenhouse effect only "got stronger" - and this is instead of the expected freshness! Atmosphere,around the mountainous terrain, the area around the Janet River is very specific. So much for the Caucasus with all the quirks of the local climate …
Dolmens. When you first look at these strange structures, which is called "point-blank", the question immediately arises, firstly, why? Second: who is the author? And with a more detailed examination of the structural features of the elements of structures, the third question arises: what did you do?
On the first question, an assumption creeps in about the importance of location in front of an open space (preferably on a hill, mountain, plateau, etc.), at least the dolmens that we managed to see along the Janet River met exactly these requirements. There are many versions, according to one of them, there is an assumption about some acoustic installations operating in resonance with an object located at a certain distance in front of the open portal of the dolmen (a round hole in front).
However, this version has many weak points, and others do not give an answer to this question.
Promotional video:
On the second question, in general, you can fantasize as long as you like, but even applying a cursory analysis of all known ethnic groups who have lived here since time immemorial, one can question the involvement of the local population in these mysterious structures. Even if the aborigines had something to do with the construction of dolmens, they hardly had any idea about their functional purpose. Perhaps one of the select few (if, of course, it was, to whom and from whom to elect) and was dedicated, then there were most likely a small group of priests. And who is the engineer ??
I would like to dwell on the third question in more detail: what did they do (what did they do)? What were dolmens built from? Strictly speaking, regarding the third question, this event was started. Only direct, even visual inspection, can give a definite answer to it. Let me remind you that according to one of the theories, dolmens were built from the so-called sandy-clay cementing mass. “While investigating where sandstone was supposed to be mined, we found outcrops of non-layered sandstone. The bizarre shapes of sandy boulders with traces of plastic deformations characteristic of igneous rocks, in contrast to sedimentary ones with clearly distinguishable stratification, gave us the idea thatthat it is possible that once this sandstone was squeezed out onto the surface in a liquid or plastic form, by analogy with the mud volcanoes of the Taman Peninsula. And there is every reason for such an assumption.
While studying the technology of dolmen construction, the location of the dolmen groups and the peculiarities of sandstone outcrops, we have formed a different theory of dolmen construction, which is different from the generally accepted theory. The proposed theory gives quite logical answers to all the contradictions of the quarry point of view. Dolmens (individual structural elements) were cast or molded from a sandy-argillaceous cementing mass (PGCM), which was squeezed out of the bowels to the surface directly at the sites of geological ruptures (thrust faults)."
Site: Ancient technologies of the Caucasus Dolmens. So, checking this statement on the spot (the Janet River), very interesting details came to light:
Firstly, all large dolmen slabs really have characteristic features inherent in the rock, which for a certain time ago was possibly in a plastic (liquid) phase.
“On the inner surfaces of the chamber and outside the portal, in some dolmens, traces of stone processing in the form of overhangs are clearly visible, made with a tool with a blade width of 3-4 cm. Just like those described above by V. I. Markovin. The length of the paddle is from 4 to 10 cm. These are not stone chips, such as occur from stone processing by the method of chipping with a scalpel. It looks more like traces of a spatula on an incompletely frozen solution. And the bronze tools described by V. I. Markovin, which “… resemble the knives of our planers,” also look more like spatulas than chisels.
It is impossible to chop a stone with such thin bronze tools”. And upon a superficial examination, a preliminary conclusion about a single casting method for building dolmens was already formed, but … oh, this little particle "but" … It turns out that "secondly", and even "third" …
Secondly, at the diverged joints of the dolmen, characteristic cuts and grooves are observed, clearly left by some kind of tool, even if we assume that they were cut off from not quite solidified rock with a copper scraper - this may explain the relatively easy way of processing the rock, however, here the question arises about the ultra-precise adjustment of the plates to each other, into recesses and grooves, by the creators of the Bronze Age with the technology of the “squinted eye”. Suppose that the jelly-like slabs were layered to each other (or poured one on top of the other), then in the corners along the edges, logically, the squeezed out solution should have remained. But there are no traces of it !!! As well as there are no traces from the tool that cleaned the influx (I will note that such formations were not observed on all other dolmens on the Zhan River).
Top photos: external and internal corners, general view of the dolmen in the photo below.
Meanwhile, the statement about assembling from not completely solidified slabs that were once a plastic mass seems very plausible. However, a caveat: the arguments "about the exact joining of blocks" using primitive methods of the Bronze Age with a spreading mass, in the opinion of the author of this article, are not entirely convincing. Third, there is a block (composite, dry) type of dolmen masonry. In this case, a single technique is not only the laying method with an exact fit into the joint without mortar, but also an absolutely unique technical detail - the so-called "nipples" or "pimples". General view of the central dolmen (the Janet river, 3 dolmens in the clearing behind the apiary) on the right, a “nipple” is marked on the block.
Slightly to the right of the first, the arrow shows the second - similar.
Attention is drawn to the even step, possibly from an uneven cut of the surface on the same block.
More similar dolmen blocks near the village of Dzhugba.
The so-called "nipples" are en masse on many blocks of ancient buildings not only in the American continent and Egypt, but also in other regions of the planet! Megalithic structures of South America.
Egypt.
India.
What is called - no comment … So why are the mentioned elements (nipples) present in the masonry on different continents? In principle, an explanation is given for the unusual technology of separating blocks of various shapes from the rock, the traces of which go back to ancient times. Its essence is in cutting the entire workpiece out of the rock, leaving only small retaining bridges between the detached block and the parent rock. For example, quarries in Egypt, see photo below.
After that, the jumpers were cut off (of course, the block was already fixed with some kind of grip that protects it from falling) and then modified to fit. I will only note that not having a sufficiently strong cutting tool is an incredibly time-consuming process. For example, in order to separate such a block from pink parfum using this technology, at least diamond cutting is required. However, the structure of the dolmens' rock is sandstone of a non-layered structure, and it is much easier to process. Of course, there are quarries with characteristic “pimples”, for example, in South America.
… it means that there must be somewhere in the Caucasus, albeit very small in scale - all the more time … everything is simply overgrown (after all, the climate there is very humid). In addition, the conjugation of blocks with each other in dolmens (where necessary) have a sufficiently smooth and even surface.
However, this surface is somewhat reminiscent of bush hammering.
Most likely, the dolmen builders were well versed in the intricacies of megalithic construction, but for some reason had a limited resource in the tool. For example, using an uncomplicated technology, for simple work, the labor force of the aborigines was used - blanks were poured, according to the proposed scheme (see figure).
And the rest of the assembly and fitting was done by someone who was well versed in engineering construction and had a set of necessary precision tools. Let me remind you that the same method was most likely used during the construction of Baalbek, the famous unfinished 1000 ton trilithon has signs of manual processing with a simple hammer tool, and already stacked in a joint, in fact, the same giant trilithons, have a gap between them that is barely visible to the eye!
Conclusion to all of the above There is an opinion about the combination of methods for constructing dolmens. Where it was rational to use the plasticity of the breed and did it. If for some reason such material was not suitable, for example, another type of sandstone was required (with soot, due to the conditions of the piezoelectric effect), they used the technology (now inapplicable) of cutting out the required blanks from the rock and processing them on site. Let me remind you that some of the constituent blocks of dolmens have characteristic traces, the so-called "pimples" or "nipples", for example, a complex of three dolmens on the river. Janet. The same technological traces are seen on all ancient structures, from polygonal masonry technology in South America, then in Egypt (the pyramid complex on the Giza plateau, for example) and ending, say, the Yonshan stone wall in China.
And what to do with specific joints? Where they parted, the recesses for a tight fit of the slabs are very clearly visible (dolmens near the Janet River, for example, clearly demonstrate this), the impression is that the slabs were cut down with some kind of tool and then, then tightly fitted into the joint. PS One more "trifle" draws your attention, all the inner surfaces of the dolmen slabs have a rough or rough surface, at first I considered this an imprint of the soil on which the solution was poured. Maybe so, but then how to explain that a rough (matte) mark could remain on the cut or embossed pattern ?? see the photo below.
Logically, the surface texture inside the pattern should be smooth or different from that on the plate. It seems that the matte layer, for a specific purpose, was applied to the inner walls of the dolmens later. After the pattern has been applied! But how can you give such an unusual relief? In principle, if you come up with a machine with a fast-rotating round brush or roller dipped in the same solution, you can achieve such a matte texture by even spraying. But only where to get such a machine in the Bronze Age, and this is, excuse me, technologies of a higher level of development of society. And also, exclusively visually, the texture of the inner surface of the dolmen slab resembles … quartz crystals grown at the factory.
… And yet there is something in this ancient artist, where it is necessary, the beauty and accuracy of the drawings immediately appear.
And a few more photos, just like that, for the collection.
Sincere gratitude to the local population, as well as the number of those tourists who helped with the filming. Special thanks to I. Golts, in consultation on the places of stops and accommodation in private hotels. The shooting was carried out with a non-professional camera KENOX S760. During the examination of the monuments, nothing was sawed off or broken off.