Settlement of peoples on Earth - a journey, migration or a way home? It's just a migration or a new Great Migration.

The resettlement of man on the planet is one of the most exciting detective stories in history. Deciphering migrations is one of the keys to understanding historical processes. By the way, you can see the main routes on this interactive map. Recently, many discoveries have been madeScientists have learned how to read genetic mutations; in linguistics, methods have been found in accordance with which it is possible to restore proto-languages ​​and the relationships between them. There are new ways of dating archaeological finds. The history of climate change explains many routes - a man went on a great journey around the Earth in search of a better life, and this process continues to this day.

The ability to move was determined by the level of the seas and the melting of glaciers, which closed or opened up opportunities for further advancement. Sometimes people have had to adapt to climate change, and sometimes it seems to have worked out well. In a word, here I reinvented the wheel a little and sketched out a brief summary of the settlement of the earth, although I am most interested in Eurasia, in general.

This is what the first migrants looked like

The fact that Homo sapiens came out of Africa is now recognized by most scientists. This event happened plus or minus 70 thousand years ago, according to the latest data, it is from 62 to 130 thousand years ago. The figures more or less coincide with the determination of the age of skeletons in Israeli caves at 100,000 years. That is, this event still took place over a decent period of time, but let's not pay attention to the little things.

So, a man came out of southern Africa, settled on the continent, crossed into the narrow part of the Red Sea to the Arabian Peninsula - the modern width of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait is 20 km, and in the Ice Age the sea level was much lower - perhaps it could have been crossed almost ford. The level of the world's oceans rose as the glaciers melted.

From there, part of the people went to the Persian Gulf and into the territory of approximately Mesopotamia,part further to Europe,part along the coast to India and further - to Indonesia and Australia. Another part - approximately in the direction of China, settled Siberia, partly also moved to Europe, another part - through the Bering Strait to America. So Homo sapiens basically settled around the world, and in Eurasia there were several large and very ancient centers of human settlements.Africa, where it all began, is by far the least studied, it is assumed that archaeological sites can be well preserved in the sand, so interesting discoveries are also possible there.

The origin of Homo sapiens from Africa is also confirmed by the data of geneticists, who discovered that all people on earth have the same first gene (marker) (African). Even earlier, there were migrations of homoerectus from the same Africa (2 million years ago), which reached China, Eurasia and other parts of the planet, but then died out. Neanderthals most likely got into Eurasia by approximately the same routes as homo sapiens, 200 thousand years ago, they died out relatively recently, about 20 thousand years ago. Apparently, the territory approximately in the region of Mesopotamia is generally a passage yard for all migrants.

In Europe the age of the oldest Homo sapiens skull is determined at 40 thousand years (found in a Romanian cave). Apparently, people climbed here for animals, moving along the Dnieper. Approximately the same age as the Cro-Magnon man from the French caves, who is considered in all respects the same person as we are, only he did not have a washing machine.

The lion man is the oldest figurine in the world, 40 thousand years old. Restored from micro parts over 70 years, finally restored in 2012, kept in the British Museum. Found in an ancient settlement in southern Germany, where the first flute of the same age was found. True, the figurine does not fit into my understanding of the processes. In theory, it should be at least female.

Kostenki, a large archaeological site 400 km south of Moscow in the Voronezh region, whose age was previously determined at 35,000 years, also belongs to the same time period. However, there are reasons to make the time of the appearance of man in these places ancient. For example, archaeologists have found layers of ash there -trail of volcanic eruptions in Italy 40 thousand years ago. Numerous traces of human activity were found under this layer, so the man in Kostenki is more than 40 thousand years old, at least.

Kostenki were very densely populated, the remains of more than 60 ancient settlements were preserved there, and people lived here for a long time, not leaving it even during the Ice Age, for tens of thousands of years. In Kostenki, they find tools made of stone, which could be taken no closer than 150 km, and shells for beads had to be brought from the sea coasts. This is at least 500 km. There are figurines made of mammoth tusk.

Diadem with mammoth tusk ornament. Kostenki-1, 22-23 thousand years old, size 20x3.7 cm

Most likely, the process of resettlement to one degree or another continued constantly. For example, one of the monuments of this period - Dolni Vestonica (South Moravia, Mikulov, the nearest large city - Brno), the age of the settlement is 25 and a half thousand years.

Vestonica Venus (Paleolithic Venus), found in Moravia in 1925, 25 thousand years old, but some scientists consider it older. Height 111 cm, kept in the Moravian Museum in Brno (Czech Republic).

Most of the Neolithic monuments of Europe are sometimes combined with the term "Old Europe". These include Trypillya, Vinca, Lendel, the culture of funnel-shaped goblets. Minoans, Sikans, Iberians, Basques, Lelegs, Pelasgians are considered pre-Indo-European European peoples. Unlike the Indo-Europeans who came later, who settled in fortified cities on the hills, the old Europeans lived on the plains in small settlements and did not have defensive fortifications. They did not know the potter's wheel and wheel. On the Balkan Peninsula there were settlements of up to 3-4 thousand inhabitants. The Basque Country is considered to be a relic old European region.

In the Neolithic, which begins about 10 thousand years ago, migrations begin to take place more actively. The development of transport played an important role. The migrations of peoples take place both by sea and with the help of a new revolutionary vehicle - a horse and cart. The largest migrations of the Indo-Europeans belong to the Neolithic. Regarding the Indo-European ancestral home, almost unanimously they name the same area in the territory around the Persian Gulf, Asia Minor (Turkey), etc. Actually, it has always been known that the next resettlement of people occurs from the territory near Mount Ararat after a catastrophic flood. Now this theory is increasingly being confirmed by science. The version needs proof, therefore, the study of the Black Sea is of particular importance now - it is known that it was a small freshwater lake, and as a result of an ancient catastrophe, water from the Mediterranean Sea flooded nearby areas, possibly actively inhabited by Proto-Indo-Europeans. People from the flooded area rushed in different directions - theoretically, this could serve as an impetus for a new wave of migrations.

Linguists confirm that a single linguistic Proto-Indo-European ancestor came from the same place where migrations to the territory of Europe and in earlier times take place - approximately from the north of Mesopotamia, that is, roughly speaking, all from the same area near Ararat. A large migration wave went from about the 6th millennium almost in all directions, moving in the directions of India, China and Europe. In earlier times, migrations also took place from the same places, in any case, it is logical, as in more ancient times, the penetration of people into Europe along the rivers approximately from the territory of the modern Black Sea region. Also, people actively populate Europe from the Mediterranean, including by sea.

During the Neolithic, several types of archaeological cultures developed. Among them are a large number of megalithic monuments.(megaliths are large stones). In Europe, they are distributed mostly in coastal areas and belong to the Eneolithic and Bronze Age - 3 - 2 thousand BC. To an earlier period, the Neolithic - in the British Isles, in Portugal and France. They are found in Brittany, the Mediterranean coast of Spain, Portugal, France, as well as in the west of England, in Ireland, Denmark, Sweden. The most common are dolmens - in Wales they are called cromlech, in Portugal anta, in Sardinia stazzone, in the Caucasus ispun. Another common type of them is corridor tombs (Ireland, Wales, Brittany, etc.). Another type is galleries. Menhirs (separate large stones), groups of menhirs and stone circles, which include Stonehenge, are also common. It is assumed that the latter were astronomical devices and are not as ancient as megalithic burials, such monuments are associated with migrations by sea. The complex and intricate relationships between settled and nomadic peoples are a separate story; by the year zero, a quite definite picture of the world is taking shape.

Quite a lot is known about the great migration of peoples in the 1st millennium AD thanks to literary sources - these processes were complex and diverse. Finally, over the course of the second millennium, a modern map of the world is gradually taking shape. However, the history of migrations does not end there, and today it takes on no less global scale than in antiquity. By the way, there is an interesting BBC series "The Great Settlement of Nations".

In general, the conclusion and the bottom line is this - the resettlement of people is a living and natural process that has never stopped. Migrations occur for certain and understandable reasons - it's good where we are not. Most often, a person is forced to move on by worsening climatic conditions, hunger, in a word, the desire to survive.

Passionarity - a term introduced by N. Gumilyov, means the ability of peoples to move and characterize their "age". A high level of passionarity is a property of young nations. Passionarity, in general, was good for the peoples, although this path has never been easy. It seems to me that it would be better for a single person to be smarter and not sit still :))) Willingness to travel is one of two things: either complete hopelessness and compulsion, or youth of the soul .... Do you agree with me?

Our civilization knows many facts of the great migration of peoples. The first millennium was the time of the great migration of the peoples of Europe and Asia. Subsequently, it will be called the "Great Migration of Nations" or "ethnic revolution." As a result of large-scale movements of people, the boundaries of settlements changed, entire states disappeared, ethnic components mixed up, new nationalities were formed. Historians believe that this migration of people became the basis of the ethno-political situation of the modern world.

Researchers are sure that the reason for the majority of mass movements of people is leaving impoverished and unfavorable regions in order to find lands that are attractive for living. One of the main reasons for the mass exodus of people from inhabited territories in 535-536 was the climatic cooling. In this regard, the population from cold regions rushed to areas with a warmer and milder climate.

Subsequently, numerous migrations of peoples were associated with the Arab conquests, expeditions of the Normans, Mongol campaigns and the creation of the Ottoman Empire. Among the large-scale migrations, one can rightfully include the mass emigration of the population from the European continent to the USA, Australia and Canada in the 19th and 20th centuries. As well as the resettlement of Jews in Palestine in the 20th century. In the modern world, migration flows go from poor or war-torn countries to rich ones with comfortable living conditions.

Man, as a rational being, has achieved power on Earth, but it is not unlimited. Society cannot control floods, tsunamis, earthquakes, unable to prevent drought, volcanic eruptions ... The result of these natural disasters: death of people, destruction of housing, water sources, rendering fertile land unusable. The consequence of these disasters is the migration of people from the affected areas. But, since the indigenous population of the regions where the flow of refugees is sent is not always happy to accept them, it is possible that uninvited migrants will come not with a request for help, but with. Mankind is too wasteful and thoughtlessly spends natural resources. It is quite likely that a fierce struggle for the mastery of territories rich in natural resources may begin. And these are not only natural resources, oil and gas - a war can start due to a lack of drinking water or food for the attackers.

If we analyze the conflicts taking place in the world, we can conclude that in the future the world will face a fierce struggle for the possession of hydrocarbon raw materials with the use of armed violence. Research by British petroleum says that there are enough proven sources of oil to supply the planet, but the demand for them in the last five years has significantly exceeded the level of the 90s. Humanity currently consumes about 85 million barrels of oil daily. IEA experts believe that by 2030 oil consumption per day will be 113 million barrels. The total oil reserves are estimated at 15 trillion. barrels. The acuteness of the oil problem is created by the fact that the sources of production have an uneven geographical distribution.

No less tense situation was created in the natural gas market. For the European Union and developing China, uninterrupted supplies of blue fuel are vital. The people of these countries demand that their leaders take steps to ensure the guaranteed supply of this natural fuel in the required volumes and at a favorable price for citizens and corporations.

But the most acute problem facing mankind in the future will be the lack of drinking water - in 2030, half of the world's population will lack it.

The bioresources of the Earth are depleted: soil, forests, water. They do not have time to reproduce naturally. Disagreements in the field of ecology can lead to violent actions of some subjects against others in order to reduce the risks of man-made disasters.

From the above, it is clear that military conflicts and mass migration of the population are possible in the future due to changes in climatic conditions in certain regions of the planet.

Let's remember the earthquake in Haiti in 2010: more than 200 thousand people died, 3 million people lost their homes. Currently, the number of migrants from the territory of Haiti is annually 6% of the total population of the country.

By order of the Pentagon, futurologists have prepared a report on possible conflicts in the future due to natural disasters.

Here is some data from this report:

2015 will bring Europe clashes over food, energy and drinking water. Only Russian help can save the Europeans from energy shortages.

In 2018, perhaps, China will undertake a military operation against Kazakhstan in order to take control of the oil and gas pipelines passing through the territory of this Central Asian country.

The year 2020 will bring another problem to Europe - an increase in the flow of migrants, in connection with which the already existing shortage of drinking water will be exceeded. Note that back in 2006, the World Water Council noted that 41 million Europeans lack water for drinking, and 80 million Europeans have neither sewerage nor drainage systems.

2022 - A conflict between France and Germany is likely over the Rhine River. The Rhine is not only the largest river in Europe, but also a natural border between Liechtenstein and Switzerland, Germany and France, Austria and Switzerland. These countries are now faced with the difficult task of keeping the Rhine waters from pollution, since this river is their main source of drinking water. The fate of millions of Europeans depends on whether the parties reach an agreement.

In 2025-2030, the collapse of the European Union is possible, which will lead to the migration of Europeans to the southern Mediterranean. The resettlement rate could reach 10% of the European population. The large-scale transition of the peoples of Northern Europe to the south will be facilitated by climate change - it will become much more severe. Migrants from Turkey, Tunisia and Libya will also rush to the south of Europe. It is difficult now to imagine how the situation in the European south will develop in this case.

By 2030, relations between Japan and China may worsen due to raw material sources.

As for the United States, this country is threatened by the flow of migrants from the Caribbean islands, and starting from 2015, Europeans will immigrate en masse to America.

It is assumed that in connection with a significant increase in oil prices by 2020, a number of serious conflicts will arise between the leading world powers. And sooner or later, it is in the Persian Gulf that a conflict will occur between the United States and China in the struggle for oil sources.

The governments of China, Pakistan and India will do their best to hold on to power. And to do this, they can plunge their peoples into a large-scale military conflict. Crowds of hungry people will seek refuge in other countries of the world.

It is believed that the grain-producing regions of the world will be able to maintain a stable position in the event of a global climate catastrophe - these are Argentina, Russia and the United States.

Some countries will unite in front of the possibility of an external threat: Mexico, Canada and the United States will create a single state. The main task of which will be the fight against uncontrolled migration from Europe and Asia.

The unification of Korea will benefit both states: the entire Korean population will have access to the latest technologies that Seoul previously possessed. A unified Korea will become a nuclear power.

In Africa, in the future, constant military conflicts are possible, so the resettlement of Europeans or Asians there is unlikely to happen.

The report of American scientists states that Russia, having become part of a united Europe by 2030, will become a supplier of energy resources, food and fresh water for Europeans.

UN specialists also prepared a report on possible migration processes and regional conflicts in the future.

According to their forecasts, Africa will face the spread of AIDS, a water crisis and an avalanche-like migration of the population to Europe. By 2025, there will be an armed conflict between the states located on the banks of the Nile.

The mass migration of the peoples of many countries to the south of Europe can provoke a revolt against black foreigners. The Europeans will be forced not only to finance the famine-stricken countries, but also to create camps for refugees.

The current increase in droughts in Latin America will lead, in the future, to an agricultural crisis. For example, last year in Brazil, a drought that swept its northeastern regions caused a difficult food situation in more than 1,000 cities in the country. Fights over water have become more frequent in rural areas. The water crisis has led to the bankruptcy of many farms. More than half of the livestock has been lost. There has already been a reduction in the harvest of legumes, soybeans and grains. UN experts believe that in the future the ecological balance of the Amazon may be completely upset and Latin America will face an increase in the struggle for the possession of fertile lands.

The Asian region will not have problems with drinking water, but this part of the planet is threatened, in the future, by powerful cyclones and rising water levels.

Pakistan's rivers may dry up. This will lead to tension throughout the region. And, it is possible that a war will begin between India and Pakistan. The fact that the opponents of this confrontation have nuclear weapons will further aggravate the situation around the world.

China will face the most difficult situation: the south of the country will suffer from heavy rainfall, and the northern regions will turn into a desert due to severe drought. The Chinese coast will be devastated by typhoons. Thousands of refugees will be sent to the south of the country, fleeing the climate catastrophe. The government of the Celestial Empire will try to deal with the chaos with the help of the army, perhaps using weapons.

The United States will try to block the flow of migrants from its southern border into its territory. In the border towns, due to the crowding of people, the crime rate will increase. Thus, according to the information available today, the majority of illegal migrants ended up in the United States by crossing the border with Mexico: 90% of them are of Mexican origin.

According to a forecast report by UN experts, American cities can be destroyed by the strongest hurricanes. If the American oil-producing infrastructure is destroyed, the US will be forced to use its strategic reserve, which will significantly weaken the country.

We must pay tribute to the leadership of the United States: they took the information about possible climate catastrophes in the world very seriously. The Pentagon has already developed a military training program to help the affected regions. New “desert” food rations have been introduced for the soldiers, the necessary uniforms have been prepared and new types of weapons have been created.

Russia has also changed its priorities in terms of types of weapons, significantly reducing the purchase of traditional weapons, began to build frigates and landing ships. Consequently, the Russian military plans in the future to switch to a “gunboat policy” towards a potential adversary. The reduction of the country's population and the decline in the power of the armed forces do not add optimism to the understanding of the future of the Russian state. The optimal strategy for Russia is to strengthen the state's armed forces while simultaneously solving the demographic problem of increasing the country's indigenous population.

Materials used:
http://x-files.org.ua/articles.php?article_id=2901
http://forum.artofwar.net.ru/viewtopic.php?t=110
http://janaberestova.narod.ru/wel.html
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C2%E5%EB%E8%EA%EE%E5_%EF%E5%F0%E5%F1%E5%EB%E5%ED%E8%E5_%ED %E0%F0%EE%E4%EE%E2

Having outlined the general scheme of the movement of the Indo-European peoples in Eastern Europe at the turn of the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC. (see section ), let's try to recreate the picture of the migration processes of the peoples living here in more detail. While the development of animal husbandry, the increase in the number of livestock among the Turkic settlers in the interfluve of the Dnieper and Don necessitated the development of new pastures (see section), one of the reasons for the movement of the Indo-Europeans was the relative overpopulation of the territory they occupied between the Vistula and the upper reaches of the Oka. Fishing as the basis of management provided a stable and reliable source of food for the local population and its numbers gradually increased, leading to a certain demographic tension. The natural conditions of Europe also contributed to the beginning of migration:

Although at that time the vast expanses that today have been turned into cultural countries and are densely populated were covered with primary forests and impenetrable swamps, this circumstance was not a significant obstacle. An extensive system of rivers, along which it was possible to move at any time of the year on canoes and rafts, everywhere provided the opportunity to develop new space. Water was available everywhere and there were no waterless lands or deserts anywhere. There was no summer in Europe with deadly heat, and even winters here were not so severe as to be an obstacle to living ( Kramer Walter. 1971, 22).

It should be emphasized that during the migrations of ancient peoples, not all of the population left their habitable places. For the Indo-Europeans, for the reason indicated above, there was no great need for this, Porzig also believed, but for other reasons ( Portig W. 1964, 97-98). Usually, a surplus of the population departed in search of new places for settlement, and a fairly large part of it, especially in isolated places, remained. When this territory was settled by new people, the remnants of the former inhabitants were assimilated by them, but to a certain extent they influenced the language and culture of the newcomers, i.e. the principle of superposition came into play. on the example of several languages ​​are considered separately. On the other hand, on the way of resettlement, for various reasons, in convenient places from time to time, some part of the migrants remained for permanent residence, while the majority moved on.

Thus, the movement of the peoples of those times was not a resettlement in the full sense of the word. It would be more correct to call it settlement. Obviously, this could not do without military conflicts, but cultural contacts between the newcomers and the autochthonous population were inevitable. In particular, a close cultural exchange took place during the settlement of the Turks in the Trypillia culture, when they began to move to the right bank of the Dnieper in search of free land. The movement of the Turkic tribes in the western direction is considered in more detail in the section.

Natural conditions not only contributed to the migration of the population, but also determined their direction. It is clear that forest spaces still made it difficult for people to resettle and the most convenient way was river systems ( Golubovsky P. 1884, 13). Swimming along the rivers was mostly carried out on one-trees, which were hollowed out from tree trunks (see photo of a Slavic one-tree on the left). In the steppe zone, where rivers flow more in the meridian direction, the need for resettlement pushed people to look for other means of transportation. So the Turks inhabiting the steppe came to the invention of the wheel.

Turkic languages ​​have a common word for sled cana. The Turks were the first to domesticate the horse and used it as a draft force for transporting things on a sleigh. Since sledges are inefficient in summer, the Turks probably made their migrations in winter, until they invented the wheel. The discovery of rotational movement (skating rinks, slopes, etc.) and its use for transportation occurred among different peoples at different times ( Zworykin A.A. and others. 1962, 55). The idea of ​​using the wheel also arose among the bearers of the Yamnaya culture, regardless of external cultural influences ( Novozhenov V.A.. 2012. 123). This is evidenced by carts with disk-shaped wheels found in burials.

Pit period wooden carts.
1. - Art. Novotitarovskaya (Dinsky district of the Krasnodar Territory). 2. - The rest burial mound. 3. - Chernishevsky burial mound (Steppe Zakubanye).
(Kulbaka V., Kachur V. 2000, 54)

On right: Map of finds of wooden carts in the burials of the Yamnaya period(32-30 centuries BC) Southern Ukraine and adjacent territories ( there, 58)

Apparently the wheel and wagon were a further development of the skating rink. In this regard, the first carts were too clumsy, because in them the wheels rotated at the same speed, being rigidly planted on an axle that rotated with the wheels. Such primitive wagons could only move along a straight road for short distances. However, over time, the axle and wheels were separated. The wheels were planted on a fixed axle, which gave them the ability to rotate independently of each other at different speeds.

Left: Reconstruction of the wagon of Novotitarovskaya culture.
The reconstruction is based on materials from burials 150 and 160 I of the Ostanniy burial ground ( Gay A.N. 1991, 64).

As can be seen in the figure on the left, wagons of this type were already distinguished by a complex design with standard part sizes.

Three-part wheels 7 cm thick and about 70 cm in diameter had hubs protruding from both sides. Axes of a quadrangular section were built into the frame, and the wheels at the rounded ends were fixed on them with a pin and rotated freely. The method of attaching the axles excludes the presence of a turning device, that is, the wagon could not provide a sharp turn. Draft animals (bulls or oxen) were harnessed on both sides of a drawbar with a forked end, which was attached to the frame ( there, 64-65). This design already allowed to move over long distances. During this movement in different directions, on the basis of the Yamnaya culture and under the influence of local characteristics, various variants of the Corded Ware culture began to develop in Europe, and in Asia, cultures of a different type. The difference in crop types can also be explained by the time difference in the start of migrations.

The settlement of the Turks in Eastern Europe took place in several streams, bypassing the settlements of the Indo-Europeans and the Finno-Ugric peoples (see the map on the left).

Only a part of those Turks who inhabited its left bank could cross to the right bank of the Dnieper, that is, the linguistic ancestors of the Bulgars, modern Turkmens, Turks, Gagauzes, whose areas were determined.

From the steppes, the Turks moved further along the left bank of the Dniester and the northern spurs of the Carpathians, leaving their settlements in Right-Bank Ukraine and Eastern Poland. Their languages ​​for a long time retained the archaic features of the Proto-Turkic language, because they lost ties with the rest of the Turkic languages, which continued to develop in close contact with each other in the old places of settlements. Most of the migrants to Central Europe and the Baltic States eventually assimilated among the Indo-Europeans and pre-Indo-European natives, however, due to historical circumstances, one of the descendants of the Bulgars, namely the Chuvash, retained their ethnic identity and, along with it, the archaic of the Proto-Turkic language. Thanks to this, the material of the Chuvash language helps us track the paths of the wanderings of the Turks over a very wide area.

A small part of the Turks, moving along the banks of the Desna, reached the interfluve of the Volga and Oka and populated this territory, partially evicting, and partially assimilating the local population. Here they created the Fatyanovo culture as one of the variants of the Corded Ware culture. Another version of this culture, the so-called Balanovskaya, was created by that part of the Turks, who, having crossed the Don, moved along the right bank of the Volga to the mouth of the Oka. The migration of the Turks towards the Upper Volga set in motion a significant part of the local Finno-Ugric population (for this, see the section "")

At the same time, some groups of Turks also moved towards the Balkans along the banks of the lower Danube. As Kuzmina points out, in the III millennium BC. there is a gradual penetration of the pit tribes from the steppe zone into the area of ​​ancient agricultural cultures - in Moldova, Romania, Hungary ( Kuzmina E.E., 1986, 186 1989, 23). Moving up along the left bank of the Danube, the Turks reached the mouth of the Tisza and then turned north. They gradually populated the left-bank part of the Tisza basin up to the Carpathians, i.e. the territory of the Cukuteni culture. The swampy interfluve between the Danube and the Tisza remained uninhabited. Small groups of Turks settled on the right bank of the Danube.

Left: The accumulation of burial mounds of the Yamnaya culture in the Carpathian region and in the Danube basin.. The map was compiled based on the data of Piotr Wlodarchak ( Wodarczak Piotr. 2010. Fig. one)

European scientists, recognizing the great role of the ancient pit cultural and historical region in the further history of Europe, unequivocally connect the population of this region with the Indo-Europeans. In particular, the following considerations are characteristic of the settlement of pits in the Danube basin:

The Western Black Sea region was the territory through which, starting from the Eneolithic, mobile groups of Indo-European pastoralists moved south and west. Basically, these routes passed along the Danube valley (to the west) and the western coast of the Black Sea (to the Balkans). In geographical (landscape) terms, these territories were a continuation of the Azov-Black Sea steppes, which stretched along the Danube region south of the Carpathians to the lowlands of Central Europe (modern Hungary, Northern Yugoslavia, western Romania and the southern part of Slovakia). That is, the territories that were previously occupied by the agricultural tribes of the Balkan Peninsula and Central Europe. The penetration into these regions of the steppe pastoralists of the Northern Black Sea region - Adazov region to a large extent determined the specifics of the formation and further development of agricultural and pastoral tribes, which is reflected in the term "Indo-Europeanization" ( Kulbaka V., Kachur V. 2000, 27

Taking into account the Turkic ethnicity of the bearers of the Yamnaya cultures, the meaning of the above quotation is rightly attributed specifically to the Turks. In addition, it contains a significant error. The settlement of the Indo-Europeans in Europe is associated with the spread of Corded Ware cultures (CWC), which developed on the basis of the Yamnaya kiltur. But the KSHK monuments in the Balkans have not been recorded.

According to many researchers, the genetic roots of the Cukuteni-Trypillia culture are hidden in the cultures of the Balkans, the lower Danube and the Carpathian basin, and not in the Bug-Dniester Neolithic; their ethnicity is considered unknown ( Zbenovich V.G., 1989, 172; Archeology of the Ukrainian SSR, 1985, 202-203). We suggested that the Trypillians could be Semites, which is quite possible if their ancestors came to the Balkans from Asia Minor. There are some unclear connections between the Balkan cultures and those of Asia Minor.

If the Trypillians were Semites, then traces of the influence of their language on the Turkic ones should remain, since they were neighbors of the Turks. The Dnieper could not be an insurmountable barrier, especially in winter, so primitive trade and cultural exchange between the Turks and Trypillians must have taken place. The search for traces of Trypillian influences in the sphere of trade, i.e. among the words meaning "goods", "payment", gave certain results. A similar word is present in the Chuvash language kěměl and has the meaning "silver", and in other Turkic languages, in full accordance with the phonology of these languages, it corresponds to the word kumus"also". Of course, silver in those ancient times could perform the function of money, and the change in the meaning of the word is connected with the fact that the trading parties did without a translator and therefore could attach different meanings to the same object. What for some was just a payment, for others it took a specific meaning of silver. Further searches brought rich material, which gives grounds to consider the Semitic origin of Trypillia seriously. This issue is discussed in detail in the "" section.

Apparently, the Trypillians did not have tribal leaders, however, the norms of life had to be established by someone, but by whom, it remains unclear. Initially, they also did not have a priestly class, and the appearance of priests and priestesses in Late Trypillia is explained by the influence of the ancestor cult borrowed from the tribes of the Yamnaya culture ( Alekseeva, I.L. 1991, 21). Nevertheless, there must have been some spiritual authorities in Trypillia society during the general practice of the cult of fertility, which was reflected in the image of a woman-mother, as evidenced by the finds of statuettes with emphasized female forms. Previously, even the point of view about the matriarchal organization of Trypillian society dominated, but such a view contradicts the fact that "the cult of the female ancestor is almost nowhere recorded" ( there,eighteen). It can be thought that the sacred attitude towards women in society came into conflict with the role that a man played in the economy due to physical superiority. Probably, this internal crisis of Trypillian society predetermined its decline and made it easier for warlike nomads from the east to occupy a dominant position in these lands without much effort. However, the Trypillia cultural heritage left traces on the later cultures of this region, so it can be assumed that most of the population remained in their places. And this is quite likely, because the invaders could not recklessly destroy civilians. Obviously they were limited to robbery and destruction of settlements ( Bryusov A.Ya., 1952).

Along with the cult of the woman-mother, the Trypillians also had the cult of the bull as a masculine principle, and these two cults were somehow intertwined ( Zbenovich V.G., 1989, 165). There is an opinion that the image of a bull and the phallic cult as symbols of male power were brought with them by the pitmen, as well as the patriarchal-tribal system, the cult of ancestors and the funeral rite ( Alekseeva, I.L. 1991, 20-21).

It is possible that in the field of Trypillia culture, with the beginning of its late stage of development With(3000 - 2400 BC), Indo-European tribes also began to gradually settle, having already adopted the Trypillia culture, which in the middle period AT(3600 - 3000 BC) spread to the upper reaches of the Southern Bug, Ros and the middle Dnieper ( Archeology of the Ukrainian SSR, 1985, 211). Thus, the spread of culture went in the direction from the southwest to the northeast, but archaeologists do not note the invasion of the agricultural population from the Trypillia culture ( Kuzmina E. E., 1986, 186).

Ancient Greek toponymy on the territory of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, most of the Greeks continued to sail to the mouth of the Dnieper. Having gained experience in the construction of watercraft and navigation, they continued their movement along the shores of the Black Sea. In Greek, the sea is called the word ποντοσ, akin to the Slavic path. Sailing skills further contributed to the settlement of the islands of the Aegean by the Greeks. Having reached the arm of the Danube, the Greeks ascended upstream to the Iron Gates, which made further navigation impossible, so they further moved to the Peloponnese by land, previously inhabited by tribes, obviously related to Asia Minor. In any case, the ancient toponyms of Greece reveal features that are not characteristic of the Indo-European languages.

The Greeks populated the Aegean and Peloponnese in several waves. The first wave, which consisted of the later Achaeans, Ionians and Aeolians, swept in from the Balkans and reached the Aegean Islands around 1900. AD The conquerors reduced to ruins the settlements of the previous settlers, whom they called Pelasgians, Carians or Lelegs. Dark memories of the mysterious tribe of the Pelasgians survived among the Greeks until classical times ( Hoffmann O., Scherer A., 1969, 19). With this Greek invasion, the Middle Helladic era began, which is characterized by the fusion of local cultural traditions with new Indo-European elements. This era lasted more than three centuries, and at the end of the cultural synthesis came the Mycenaean period (1600 - 1050 BC). In the XIV-XIII centuries. BC. Achaeans began their expansion into Asia Minor, Egypt, Sicily and the south of the Apennine Peninsula. This expansion is associated with reports from Egyptian sources about the invasion of "sea peoples". The attack of the Greeks on Troy dates back to this time. Shortly after the end of the Trojan War, around 1200 B.C. According to archaeological data, some destructive phenomena took place in continental Greece, which are associated with a new invasion of Greek tribes - Dorians, more primitive relatives of the Achaeans, who also came from the north.

The second stream of Indo-European expansion passed overland to the southwest to the shores of the Adriatic. It included Italians and Illyrians. At the turn of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age, great changes take place in the composition of the population of the Transdanubia and Alfeld ( Shusharin V.P., 1971, 15). There are reasons to link these changes with the coming of the Italics and Illyrians. The latter, in their movement to the Balkans, stopped in Saxony, Moravia, Bohemia, where their traces can be found in toponymy ( Pokorny J., 1936, 193), then settled in the northwest of the Balkan Peninsula, and later occupied Epirus and, possibly, the wider territories of Greece ( Hoffmann O., Scherer A.1969., 10). But the Italic tribes (Sabines, Oscas, Umbers, Latins) were the first to move, since in their wanderings they moved a little further, to the Apennine Peninsula. The settlement of the peninsula took place in several waves, obviously the Latins and Falisci lingered in Pannonia for a long time

On right: The peoples of Italy at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC

The numbers on the map indicate:

1. - Veneti.

2. - Ligures.

3. - Etruscans.

4. - Sabines (picenes).

5. - Umbra.

6. - Latins.

7. - Messaps (yapigi).

8. - Oski.

9. - Sikans.

10. - Sardis.

11. - Corso.

All this movement of the Indo-European tribes to the south could continue for several centuries, because the Phrygians and Armenians later joined the general process of resettlement. The fact of the penetration of the Phrygians into Asia Minor through the Balkans is confirmed in Greek legends. The Phrygians and the mysterious "flies" came to the shores of the Sea of ​​Marmara at about the same time as the Dorians ( Bartonek Antonyn, 1976, 60-65). These "flies" could be a tribe related to the Phrygians, or one of their tribes, it could also be another name for the Phrygians, but the fact that the "flies" later advanced to the headwaters of the Tigris and settled there suggests that they were the ancestors of modern Armenians. True, Tumanyan, referring to data from Hittite and Assyro-Babylonian sources, claims that the ancestors of the Armenians, together with the "sea peoples", appeared in the valley of the Chalis River in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC, ( Tumanyan E.G., 1971). The question of the special closeness of the Armenian and Phrygian languages ​​is considered in the section "". Since the Phrygians and Proto-Armenians appeared in Asia Minor in the middle (or at the end) of the 2nd millennium BC, until that time (not counting the time of resettlement) they had to populate the Right Bank of the Dnieper, since they remained in the Indo-European language space for some time , south of the Thracians.

The Tocharians, on the other hand, should have remained in their ancestral home for some time, as evidenced by some linguistic data, in particular, the lexical correspondences of the Tocharian and Ossetian languages. IN AND. Abaev gives the following examples in his works:

tox. Witsako"root" - Osset. widag"also",

tox. porat"axe" - Osset. farat- "too",

tox. eksinek"dove" - ​​Osset. axinag"also",

tox. aca-karm"boa constrictor" - Osset. Kalm"snake",

tox. kats"belly" - Osset. qasta"also",

tox. kwas"village" - Osset. qwa"also",

tox. menki"smaller" - Osset. mingi"small, little."

The Indo-Aryans moved towards Central Asia, crossing the Volga and the Urals. However, some part of them remained in Eastern Europe forever, and clear traces of their language have been preserved in some Finno-Ugric languages ​​for millennia. Examples of Indo-Finno-Ugric lexical convergences are given by T.T. Kambolov:

hung. tehen"cow" - other-Ind. dhenu"cow",

Mansi Sis"child" - OE Ind. Sisu-"child".

muzzle Saras"kura" - OE Ind. Saras"motley" ( Kambolov T.T.. 2006, 32).

To these couples, one can add a lonely one among the Finno-Ugric moks. vrgaz almost completely phonetically identical to OE Ind. vrgas"wolf" (in the Erzya language vergiz). Referring to E.A. Grantovsky, Kambolov also speaks of reverse Finno-Ugric borrowings in Indian, separate from Iranian ones ( there)

In addition, there is reason to believe that the languages ​​of the Sindo-Meotian tribes that inhabited the Taman Peninsula and adjacent territories are genetically related to Indian ones:

Thanks to the works of O.N. Trubachev, hundreds of ancient language forms have been etymologized, and three vast areas of Indo-Aryan language relics have been identified in the Northern Black Sea region: Sindo-Meotian (Azov region), Taurus-Scythian (Great Scythia) and Siginno-Getian (Little Scythia). The overwhelming majority of Meotian language relics are comparable with the language materials of the Indo-Dardo-Kafir group of the Indo-European family. The linguistic material already described and studied before is sufficient to conclude that the Sindo-Meotian and Indian languages ​​are genetically related. ( Shaposhnikov A.K. 2005, 32).

According to Zograf, the division of the Indo-Aryan languages ​​into two branches occurred already outside of Europe, although, obviously, outside of India ( Zograf G. A., 1982, 112). Such a division could have occurred somewhere during the first long stop of the Indo-Aryans, possibly in Central Asia. Linguistic analysis shows that the creation of the Rigveda took place no later than the 2nd millennium BC, therefore, the movement of the Indo-Aryans from Central Asia or Northern Iran occurred earlier than this time ( Lal B.B., 1978, 47). On the other hand, the presence of the Indo-Aryans in Iran may also be evidenced by the fact that a special “Western Indo-Iranian language” appeared not far from it, represented by a relatively small number of names of people and gods:

The area of ​​such names coincides with the area of ​​distribution of the Hurrian language (from the foothills of Iran to Palestine) ( Dyakonov I.M. 1968, 29).

From Dyakonov’s reasoning about the use of the art of mass use of war chariots by the speakers of this language, it follows that they came from the regions “north of the Caucasus” ( Dyakonov I.M.. 1968, 30). Here it must be said that the problem of the migration of the ancient Indo-Aryans is confused by the generally accepted idea of ​​the existence of a special Indo-Iranian (Aryan) linguistic community. According to Harmatta, the advance of the "Indo-Iranian" peoples from the steppes of Eastern Europe to Asia up to Hindustan and China took place in two waves. The first wave took place with the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC, and the second - with the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. ( Harmatta J., 1981, 75). According to our idea, only the Iranian tribes should be considered with the second wave, and the first should have followed that part of the Turks that moved to Central Asia (see below for more on this).

On right: Migration of Iranian tribes

The deserted areas of settlements of the Indo-Aryans, Thracians (proto-Albanians), Phrygians and Armenians are settled by Iranians (see the map on the right). After the departure of the Tocharians, their range was settled by the Balts. Following the Phrygians, the Thracians crossed the Dnieper and settled for a long time on the Right Bank, and from there, in pre-Scythian times, advanced to the Balkans. The Celts, perhaps under the pressure of the Germans, began to move west, where in Central Europe they became the creators of the cultures of the fields of burial urns (1300-750 BC), the northeastern border of which, it seems, passed along the Neman, beyond which there were already lands Slavs. The Germans spread into the area of ​​the Celts, and also occupied the area of ​​the Greeks and the southern areas of the Italics and Illyrians. In the process of these migrations, the Slavs also expanded their territory to the Baltic Sea, moving on the right bank of the Neman and thus establishing direct linguistic contact with the Celts.

A.A. Shakhmatov, who placed the ancestral home of the Slavs in the Baltic states somewhere not far from the Celts. Some linguists, among whom were such authorities as M. Vasmer and K. Buga, were very critical of his statements about the special proximity of the Celts and Slavs, ( Martynov V.V.., 1983), but later his opinion was listened to more carefully:

A.A. Shakhmatov provides a significant list of alleged lexical borrowings in the Slavic language from Celtic, in which a prominent place belongs to social, military and economic terms. The researcher also assumed that part of the Germanisms penetrated into the Slavic language through the Celts. Close Celtic-Slavic relations contributed to the spread of the ethnonym "Venedi" to the Slavs. ( Sedov V.V., 1983, 98).

Examples of Celtic borrowings in Slavic are given by Gamkrelidze and Ivanov: * sluga, *braga, *ljutü, *gunja, *dǫgъ, *testo(Gamkrelidze T.V., Ivanov V.V., 1984). In phonetics, the result of Celtic-Slavic contacts was the nasalization of vowels in the Slavic languages, which developed in line with the general Slavic process of monophthongization of diphthongs * en , *em , *on , *om etc. with a tendency to increase sonority in the structure of the syllable, which led to the dominance of the law of the open syllable ( Vinogradov V. A., 1982, 303,Khaburgaev G. A., 1986, 94). Since nasals already existed in Celtic, under its influence, monophthongization in this case went in the direction of nasalization of the indicated diphthongs in closed syllables. This phonetic influence can be explained by the fact that the Celts and Slavs lived in the same phonetic area. According to Bernstein, Ler-Splavinsky tried to explain the emergence of the Masurian dialect by Celtic influence. Bernstein himself also believed that "the ancient Celtic influences on the Proto-Slavic language were deeper than it seemed so far" ( Bernstein S. B., 1961, 95).

V.V. Sedov believed that intense Slavic-Celtic interaction took place during the reverse migration of the Celts from west to east, which began around 400 BC. Being the creators of the La Tene culture, they made a great contribution to European culture, in particular, to the development of metallurgy and metalworking ( Sedov V.V. 2003, 4-5). Traces of this influence are noticeable in the Przeworsk culture, the creators of which Sedov considered the Slavs, but in fact they were the Germans, and the Celtic influence on the culture and especially on the metallurgy of the Slavs is not visible at all. This is understandable - at that time there could be no Slavic-Celtic contacts, they took place at a much earlier time, even before the arrival of the Goths in the Vistula basin, which forever separated the Slavs from the Celts. The ancestral home of the Goths was located in the area between the upper reaches of the Pripyat and the Neman from Yaselda to Sluch, where they stayed until the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. After that, they began to move in a westerly direction to the lands of the Slavs, stretching to the Vistula. And only a few centuries later, a new wave of Slavic settlers forced the Goths to leave these lands and move along the right bank of the Vistula to Volyn and further to the Black Sea steppes (see the map below).

Wielbar culture in late Roman times (Birbrauer F. 1995, 37. Fig. 6, after: Kokowski. Problematyka kultury wielbarskiej w młodszym okresie rzymskim).
On the original map, the ancestral home of the Goths (number I) and the ancestral home of the Slavs (number II) are additionally indicated.

Since the time of Pliny the Elder (23? AD - 79 AD), ancient scholars (Tacitus, Ptolemy) have placed the Wends on the right bank of the Vistula. Usually Slavs are understood by this name:

... starting from the birthplace of the Vistula River, a populous tribe of Veneti settled down in the boundless spaces. Although their names now change according to different genera and localities, they are still predominantly called Sclavens and Antes ( Jordan III. 35).

Whether the Venedi and Veneti were one people, or whether it was a consonant name for different or related tribes, has not yet been established. In this regard, the history of the migrations of the Slavs in prehistoric times remains vague. It can be assumed that the Slavs were not completely assimilated by the Goths and part of them were forced out to the left bank of the Vistula, after which they continued their migration together with the Celts and reached the area where Venice is now located.

Compared with the migrations of the Indo-Europeans, the Turkic expansion over a wide area of ​​Eurasia lasted much longer and captured the Yamnaya and Catacomb periods. On the territory of Ukraine and the North Caucasus, in the burials of the Pit and Catacomb period, the remains of wooden carts and clay models of wheels, carts and tent-carts were found in about 250 burials ( Kulbaka V., Kachur V. 2000, 27). At the same time, studies show that during the Catacomb period, the number of finds of carts and their models in Right-Bank Ukraine and the Kuban significantly decreased, but increased in the area of ​​the Kuma-Manych depression, which may indicate a cessation of migration to Central Europe and an increase in the outflow of population in an easterly direction ( see map below and compare with map 32-30 above).

On right: Map of Finds of Wooden Carts, Wheels and Their Clay Models from the Catacomb Period(29-22 Art. BC) Southern Ukraine and adjacent territories ( Kulbaka V., Kochur V. 2000, 60)

Burials with characteristic chariot paraphernalia in the Don-Volga forest-steppe testify that the second wave of Turks followed the same path that the Fatyanovo and Balanovites had previously traveled. On the territory of the Upper and Middle Volga region from the upper Oka to the Urals in the second millennium BC. they became the creators of a new culture, which was called Abashevskaya. Archaeological finds, in particular ceramics of the non-Abashev type in the cultural complexes of that time, are evidence that only military detachments moved through this territory from the south and took place " not the mutual assimilation of full-fledged cultures, but rather the replenishment of the deficit of their own "unicultural" women at the expense of local" (Matveev Yu.P. 2005, 11).

The bulk of the Turks, in search of new pastures, moved beyond the Volga to the steppes of Kazakhstan, and another part of them settled in Ciscaucasia, displacing the population of the Maikop culture from there, which should also move to the left bank of the Volga and move further east.

On right: Settlement of the ancient Turks in Ciscaucasia.

In the present, the population of the North Caucasus is multinational, but among it are the Turkic peoples of the Kumyks, Balkars, Karachays and Nogais.

At the same time, only the Nogais have pronounced Mongoloid features, while other Caucasian Turks, just like the Turks, Azerbaijanis, Turkmens, Gagauz, belong to the Caucasoid type. Mongoloid signs clearly make themselves felt at the slightest miscegenation, so there is great doubt that the ancestors of these peoples were once located in the territory where the main population belonged to the Mongoloid race. According to the location of the areas of formation of the Turkic languages, the ancestors of the Caucasoid Turks had an ancestral home between the Seversky Donets and the Dnieper. And the linguistic ancestors of the Yakuts, Kirghiz, Kazakhs, Khakasses, Tuvans lived at the same time between the Seversky Donets and the Don. That's it, they were supposed to move through the Volga to the east.

In principle, the Chuvash and Kazan Tatars were also not supposed to have Mongoloid features, but they appeared as a result of miscegenation with the Finno-Ugric peoples, who have laponoid features, or after the arrival of the Tatar-Mongols in Eastern Europe. The mixing of the Chuvash and Tatars with the Mongols could not occur on a large scale, however, Mongoloid signs in some of the Chuvash and Tatars are quite noticeable. This once again shows how difficult it is to get rid of them. If ever the ancestors of modern Turks lived in Altai, then their appearance clearly testifies to this. Thus, we can confidently say that not only the Chuvashs and Tatars, but also the Turkmens, Kipchaks (ancestors of modern Crimean Tatars, Balkars, Karachevs, Kumyks), Oguzes (ancestors of the Gagauz), the ancestors of modern Turks and Azerbaijanis either always remained in Eastern Europe, or did not go far from the Caspian Sea.

There are facts that indicate that the Kipchaks inhabited Ciscaucasia from prehistoric times. First of all, this is evidenced by Turkic toponymy (Terek, Beshtau, Ersakon, Kyzyl-Togay, Uchkeken, for example). Only in the territory of North Ossetia "there are more than one hundred and fifty geographical names explained from the Turkic and Mongolian languages" ( Tsagaeva A.Dz. 2010, 97). And Tsagaeva assumes that these toponyms were left by the Hunnic and Tatar-Mongolian tribes, but this statement can only be partially true. The conquerors usually do not change the names of settlements. When the Ossetians came from the Don basin to the Caucasus, displacing or assimilating the local Turks, they also either did not change the Turkic names, or transferred them to Ossetian, as shown, for example, by the name of the Ursdon River, which is a tracing paper of the Turkic Aksu "White Water" ( there, eighteen). According to Abaev's calculations, the number of common words in the Ossetian and Karachay-Balkar languages ​​reaches two hundred. At the same time, their possible structuring is logical:

There are three main categories of lexical similarities: elements borrowed from Ossetian into Balkar-Karachaev, elements learned from Balkar-Karachaev into Ossetian, and elements perceived by both of them from a common local Japhetic substrate ( Kambolov T.T. 2006, 277).

Kambolov points out that morphological, etymological, phonetic and other criteria can be used in determining the direction of borrowing, but he does not offer a criterion for the stratigraphy of similarities. He does this by sharply arguing with V.I. Abaev, M. Dzhurtubaev. He analyzes a huge amount of data on mutual linguistic borrowings of the North Caucasian peoples and, in particular, on borrowings in the Ossetian language from Turkic and other languages. On the basis of figures and facts, he proves that the Karachais and Balkars lived in the Caucasus long before the arrival of the Ossetians ( Dzhurtubaev M. 2010, 265-413). There is no way to elaborate on his arguments here, this is a separate big topic, but it should be pointed out that Dzhurtubaev was mistaken in believing that the Ossetians came to the Caucasus not from the Great Steppe, but from Transcaucasia. Just like the Turks, they came from the steppes, but one and a half thousand years later.

Already in historical times, the Balkars and Karachays were pushed back by the Kabardians and Circassians to the mountainous regions, but the Kumyks continue to live on the plain, although at some time they advanced into the valleys of Dagestan, as evidenced by the names of the rivers Sulak and others with a Turkic component Koysu. Having settled in close proximity to peoples of various origins, the Turks not only adopted the customs and way of life of the local population, but also enriched the general cultural fund of the peoples of the Caucasus. For example, from them came the broad custom of "dairy brotherhood", based on the temporary transfer of a newborn child to another family. This custom is called emjack, emcheg, but these same words can mean "milk brother", "pupil". That the custom is of Turkic origin is proved by its name, which is based on a word that in the Turkic languages ​​means "mother's breast" (kum. amcak, karach., balk emcek).

The fact that the Kipchaks, or Cumans, have never been in Central Asia is confirmed by the study of the genetic structure of the population of the Western Caucasus:

As for the East Eurasian component, it was represented in the studied populations to approximately the same extent according to both mtDNA and Y-chromosome data. At the same time, Turkic-speaking Karachays do not demonstrate a significant proportion of this component, which is especially true for mtDNA. Moreover, some populations of the Abkhaz-Adygs contain it to a greater extent. Data on the Y-chromosome, in general, confirm these data ... ( Litvinov Sergey Sergeevich, 2010, 20).

Balkars (Karachays?). Photo from the website "Forgotten Stories."

The photo on the left clearly shows that the Balkars and Karachais do not have signs of the Mongoloid race. It is believed that the Polovtsy came from beyond the Volga to the Black Sea steppes at the beginning of the 11th century, displacing the Pechenegs from there.

However, there is absolutely no historical evidence to support such an assumption, although in ancient Russian and Byzantine sources the invasion of a large people into a neighboring country could not be ignored.

In the Tale of Bygone Years, the first mention of the Polovtsy is under the year 1055 and it is very casual: "In the same year, Bolush came with the Polovtsy, and Vsevolod made peace with them, and the Polovtsians returned back from where they came." For the chronicler, there is nothing new in the presence of the Polovtsy in the immediate neighborhood.

Before the arrival of the Turks in Ciscaucasia, there lived the bearers of the Maikop culture of unknown ethnicity, which there is no reason to identify with any modern Caucasian peoples. Therefore, the assumptions may be different and one of them may be that the Maikopians were forced out by a separate branch of the Turks beyond the Volga and then migrated somewhat south of the bulk of the Turks in the direction of Altai. Many scholars associate the arrival of migrants from Eastern Europe with the emergence of the Afanasiev culture in Asia, which could not develop on local soil:

In the archeology of South Siberia and Central Asia, the Afanasiev culture has long and rightfully occupied a special place for a number of reasons. The most significant of them are the fundamental cultural transformations that take place for the first time at this time in the designated territory. The key components of the “Afanasiev phenomenon” were formulated by M.P. Gryaznov... This is a transition to a productive cattle-breeding type of economy, the beginning of copper metallurgy, a number of indirect data indicating the process of the emergence of a complex system of social relations, suggesting the emergence of social stratification, special ideological ideas and other innovations, pointing to a completely new, but, nevertheless, recognizable matrix, which will finally take shape in the steppe world a little later ( Freebus. A.V, 2012, 199).

Monuments of the Afanasiev culture are recorded in a wide area - in the Upper and Middle Yenisei, in the Altai Mountains and Mongolia. Their study was carried out by various groups of researchers independently of each other without generalizing conclusions ( Stepanova N.F., Polyakov A.V. 2010, 4). However, anthropological studies show that the craniological types of the Afanasievites do not differ from the skulls of the Sredne Stogians and Pitmens of the Zaporozhye region or Kalmykia, which are either descendants of the Sredne Stogians or a mestizo group with a mixture of the same components as in the population of the Sredny Stog culture ( Solodovnikov K.N. 2003). This conclusion is also confirmed by archaeological data:

A number of features that can be considered as ethno-cultural point to the regions where the proto-Afanasievo complex could have been formed - these are the territories of the Lower Dnieper and the steppe Crimea to the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov and Ciscaucasia. Only here are analogies to the Afanasiev funeral rite, in particular, to specific burial structures. As for the other elements of burial practice, it would be more accurate to compare the entire set of features in the most general form with the early common pit standard, which was an integrating element at an early stage in the formation of the ancient pit cultural and historical area ( Fribus A.V. 2012, 200).

Thus, there is evidence that suggests that the creators of the Afanasiev culture were the tribes of the Turks, who came from the steppes of the Northern Black Sea and Azov regions. The chronological framework of the migration of the Turks to the Altai is difficult to establish. The similarity between the sites of the Afanasyevo and Yamnaya cultures allows us to consider them synchronous, but there is a distance of several thousand kilometers between them, so a chronological shift is inevitable. On the other hand, the determination of the age of the Yamnaya cultural-historical community was calculated using the radiocarbon method, so there is no other way than to use the same method when determining the age of the Afanasiev culture. According to calculations, the upper limit of the range of radiocarbon dates of burial sites in the Middle Yenisei and Altai coincides with an accuracy of one year (2289 and 2290 BC). At the same time, Altai dates are distributed relatively evenly over 1500 years, which clearly contradicts the number of monuments left , and in the Middle Altai - on a chronological interval of 700 years (3200-2500 BC). The question is why the Afanasiev sites could appear in Altai earlier than it is proposed to consider them open in the Middle Yenisei ( Polyakov A.V.. 2010. 161).

However, while agreeing that the creators of the Afanasiev culture came from the west, as evidenced, among other things, by the spread of wheeled transport (see the map below), one must agree that the Afanasiev monuments on the Middle Yenisei could not have appeared earlier than on Altai.

Distribution of chariot transport in the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes.
Based on materials (I.V. Chechushkov, A.V. Epimakhov, p. 207)

In their movement to the east, the Turkic tribes followed the order determined by the location of the places of settlements in the ancestral home. The Yakuts, who occupied the extreme eastern area, were the first to move north of Balkhash in the direction of Lake Baikal. Subsequently, they climbed up the Lena to their current habitats. They were followed by the ancestors of the Tuvans, whom we conventionally call tuba. They reached the upper reaches of the Yenisei and now live there. The ancestors of their modern neighbors in the Altai Mountains were the same neighbors in their ancestral home. To the north of both, Khakasses, Kamasinians, Shors, and Chulym Tatars now live. All of them speak close languages, descending from one language, which we conditionally call Khakass, whose area occupied the northernmost part of the Turkic territory in the ancestral home. Obviously, they were moving in a more northerly stream, and their southern neighbors, the Kirghiz, were moving behind them. For a certain time they were supposed to occupy neighboring territories in Siberia, but later the Kirghiz moved to Central Asia, where they live now. In order of priority, the common ancestors of modern Kazakhs and Nogais moved behind the Kirghiz. The Kazakhs gradually settled a large area from the Lower Volga to the Altai, and the Nogais have recently returned to Europe. The last of those Turks who crossed the Volga were the ancestors of the Uzbeks and modern Uighurs, whom we call collectively the Karluks (see the map below).

The Karluks along the right bank of the Syr Darya reached the lower reaches of the Zeravshan, where Uzbeks still live there and in the nearest territories. The Uyghurs, on the other hand, inhabit the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China in close proximity to the Uzbeks. They should not be confused with the Uyghur Sars, who speak a language close to Khakass. They live in the Gansu province in northern China, east of Xinjiang. It is hard to say how they got there, but the path of the Karluks can be restored from archaeological finds:

The advancement of the steppe tribes to the borders of Central Asia is evidenced by the Zamanbaba burial ground discovered in the lower reaches of the Zeravshan and other monuments, now united in the Zamanbaba culture ( Masson V.M., Merpert N.Ya., 1982, 329).

Monuments of the Zamanbaba culture, discovered at present in the region of Khorezm, Tashkent, Samarkand, and Bukhara, are close to the Andronovo culture in a number of ways. At the same time, her funeral rite bears the features of the cultures of the Catacomb period. All this gives grounds to believe that the steppe tribes of the pit type took part in its formation ( Masson V.M. 1989, 64).

Presumably, the advance of the Turks to the south towards Afghanistan was stopped by the numerous local population. Fortified settlements in Margiana with traces of fires and ceramics of the steppe appearance found in them can confirm this assumption. Obviously, after the first meetings with warlike nomads, local farmers began to build fortifications to protect their settlements and temples. The first appearance of regular fortresses in the south of Central Asia dates back to the turn of the 3rd - 2nd millennium BC ( Shchetenko A.Ya. 2005, 124-131). This time just corresponds to the ongoing migration of the Turks in the steppes of Kazakhstan and Central Asia.

The Turkic expansion to the east continued for several centuries, and with the beginning of the Bronze Age, a new wave of Turks advanced to the Altai, becoming the creators of the Andronovo culture, and their Caucasoid morphological features can confirm the data of anthropological studies:

Caucasoid in its morphological characteristics, the population made up the vast majority of the Altai-Sayan highlands in the Eneolithic and Bronze Ages, and partly in the Early Iron Age. The Mongoloid admixture is fixed at this time only in isolated cases, but it is constantly increasing, starting from the Early Iron Age, and reaches its full advantage in the modern era ( Alekseev V.P., 1989, 417).

The morphological similarity of part of the Caucasoid skulls of the Andronovo series of the Preobrazhenka-3 burial ground with the series of steppe cultures of the Bronze Age indicates the possibility of migration of the population from the western regions of the distribution of the Andronovo culture, in the physical appearance of which the Mediterranean racial type is manifested ( Molodin V.I., Chikisheva T.A., 1988, 204).

On right: Bronze Age Man. Kazakhstan and South Siberia. Andronovo culture.

Reconstruction by M.M. Gerasimov.
(World History. 1955. Volume 1, p. 457).

At the same time, attention is also drawn to the fact that “during the Andronov period, the population of the Baraba forest-steppe was exceptionally mixed” ( Molodin V.I., Chikisheva T.A., 1988, 204), but people of Caucasoid appearance are definitely associated by specialists with the migration of Indo-Europeans to Siberia and Central Asia:

The origin of the Andronovo community is one of the central problems in the history of the Indo-European peoples. The Indo-Iranian or Iranian affiliation of this community can be considered proven ( Kozintsev A.G., 2009, 126).

How true and on what basis this bold statement can be concluded from the following fact:

In 1960, the archaeologist S.S. Chernikov published in Moscow an interesting book “Eastern Kazakhstan in the Bronze Age”, in which, based on the archaeological material he had obtained, he expressed “seditious” thoughts: the bearers of the Andronovo culture, who were considered to be Iranian-speaking, he rightly called the ancestors of the Turkic peoples. S. S. Chernikov was immediately attacked with harsh criticism by some archaeologists, captivated by the idea that the Andronovites were Iranian-speaking. ( Laipanov K.T., Miziev I.M., 2010, 6).

A question arises for the convinced supporters of the Iranian-speaking Andronovites: How could it happen that a fairly large mass of Indo-Europeans completely disappeared from the face of the earth, without even leaving noticeable traces in the languages ​​of the local population? Even if they gradually dissolved in it, then, as the experience of Tokhar shows, it should have taken hundreds of years. During this time, migrants from Europe had to assimilate at least part of the local population and impose their own language on it, since they were carriers of a higher culture than the inhabitants of Siberia. This is exactly what we see if we recognize Turks in migrants. In the process of coexistence and regular miscegenation of the Turks with the local population, over time, a homogeneous anthropological type took shape with obvious Mongoloid features of many ethnic groups that retained either their Turkic (Yakuts, Tuvans, Khakass, Kirghiz, Kazakhs, etc.) or Mongolian language.

It is difficult to say anything definite about the migrations of the ancestors of the Bashkirs, because the Mongoloid element is quite pronounced among them, and in language they are close to the Tatars. It is also difficult to speak with certainty about the time when the Oguzes, Seljuks and Turkmens appeared in the Trans-Caspian steppes.

THE GREAT MIGRATION OF PEOPLES, the designation of mass migrations in Europe at the end of the 4th-7th centuries, which was one of the main reasons for the fall of the Western Roman Empire (see Ancient Rome) and the basis for the formation of a modern ethno-cultural map of Europe, is accepted in historical science. The term "Great Migration of Nations" (French les Grandes invasions, German Völkerwanderung) entered scientific circulation in the 1st half of the 19th century, primarily thanks to French and German researchers who were searching for the historical roots of their nations. Since then, various scientific schools of historians, archaeologists, linguists, ethnologists and scientists of other specialties have been studying the Great Migration of Nations. But many problems associated with the study of the phenomenon of the Great Migration of Nations remain debatable.

Among the reasons for the Great Migration of Peoples are usually attributed socio-economic and socio-psychological changes in the Eurasian barbarian world, which was no longer able to meet the needs of a growing population and a distinguished elite, affected by the influence of civilization and striving for rapid enrichment due to robbery. Also important are the processes that took place within the Roman Empire and made it more and more vulnerable to the barbarians. Specific explanations for the causes of the Great Migration of Nations are also offered, such as the impact on the socio-ethnic sphere of climate change, cycles of solar activity or outbursts of passionarity.

One of the most controversial is the problem of the space-time continuum of the Great Migration of Nations. The main tradition was laid down in the works of Western European historians of the 19th century, who studied the circumstances of the collapse of Rome, the origins of modern European peoples and states. Many of them considered the year 375 to be the starting point of the Great Migration; Around this time, the Huns defeated the Ostrogoths (Ostrogoths), causing the migration of the Visigoths (Visigoths) and other barbarians who flooded the provinces of the Roman Empire. They attributed the completion of the Great Migration of Nations to the middle of the 6th century, when the formation of the Frankish state was completed. Later, some historians began to include the migration of Slavs and Turks in the Great Migration of Peoples, which ended by the end of the 7th century with the formation of the Khazar Khaganate and the First Bulgarian Kingdom. In modern historiography, there is a tendency to expand chronological boundaries both in the depths of centuries and in later times. Some researchers attribute the beginning of the Great Migration to the 2nd half of the 2nd century (see Marcomannic wars, Velbar culture, Alemanni, Goths). Some historiographic schools consider the end of the Great Migration of Nations to be the resettlement of the Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin at the end of the 10th century and the last period of the Viking era. Attempts have also been made to consider the Great Migration of Peoples in a global context, including, in addition to Europe, Central Asia, the Asia-Pacific region, North Africa and the Middle East and covering a huge time period from the 3rd millennium BC to the 1st millennium AD .

According to the composition of the most important participants and the nature of their actions, the direction of migrations (see maps) and their results in the Great Migration of Peoples, several periods can be distinguished: “prologue” (2nd half of the 2nd - middle of the 3rd century), “Hunno-East Germanic” (late 4th - the middle of the 5th century), "Ostgothic-West Germanic" (2nd half of the 5th - 1st third of the 6th century) and "Slavic Turkic" (6th-7th centuries). In turn, within these periods, there are stages associated with key events in European history of the 1st millennium AD.

The "prologue" of the Great Migration of Peoples, which is not included by all historians in the Great Migration itself, was the Marcomannic wars, when the Germans (Marcomanni, Quadi, Lombards, etc.), representatives of the Sarmatian and other tribes invaded the territory of Pannonia, Rezia, Noric and other Roman provinces. The barbarians were rebuffed, but they received the right to settle on the land of the Roman Empire along its borders. These wars provoked migratory waves of tribal unions of the Alemanni and Franks, who lived between the Rhine and the Elbe. In the middle of the 3rd century, tribal unions of Borans, Costoboks, Goths, Gepids allied with them and other tribes moved to the Balkan and Asia Minor provinces. Rome had to cede to the barbarians a small part of its lands (Dacia and some others), but on the whole it managed to stop the threat with the help of military force and skillful diplomacy.

The existing system of the Roman Empire - the barbarian world - for decades was in a situation of mobile balance, from which it was brought out by a powerful external factor. Around 375, the Huns appeared in the Northern Black Sea region from the east. They defeated the Goths led by Ermanaric, which prompted some other Gothic and related groups to move to the territory of the Roman Empire, which granted the newcomers the rights of federates (see also Untersiebenbrunn). Soon a conflict broke out between the Romans and the Visigoths, which ended with the defeat of the army of Rome and the death of Emperor Valens in the battle of Adrianople on 9.8.378.

At the end of the 4th - beginning of the 5th century, the tribes of Sarmatians, Saxons, Burgundians, Vandals, Sueves, Gepids, etc. came into motion. In 404-406, their hordes, led by Radagaisus, invaded Italy, but were defeated by Stilicho. In 406, the Vandals, Alans and Suebi, breaking the resistance of the Frankish federates, broke into Gaul, but by 409 they were driven out to Spain, where they captured most of the country. A huge moral shock for the ancient world was the capture (24.8.410) and sack of Rome by the Visigoths of Alaric I. After a series of agreements and clashes in 416, the Visigoths again became federates and received the southwestern part of modern France for settlement.

In the 420-450s, the barbarians of Eastern and Central Europe consolidated under the rule of the Huns. The formation of their power from the Volga to the Danube was completed under Bled and Attila. However, the onslaught of the Huns and their allies to the west was stopped by Aetius in the "battle of the peoples" on the Catalaunian fields in 451. After the campaign in Italy (452) and the death of Attila (453), the Huns and their allies were defeated by the tribal groups that rebelled against them in the “battle of the tribes” on the Nedao River; their empire collapsed. After the battle on the Nedao River and a number of other clashes, the Gepids, who led the uprising against the Huns, founded a kingdom in Potissia (see Apahida), the Ostrogoths began to control Pannonia, the Rugs - Coastal Noric, the Heruli - lands in modern South Moravia and Western Slovakia. Groups with a significant East Germanic component in the 2nd half of the 5th century are known in the Eastern Carpathian region, Upper Potissia, Central Poland, and the lower reaches of the Vistula (vidivaria).

During the 1st half of the 5th century, new migration waves reached the Atlantic. In Britain abandoned by the Roman troops (end of the 4th - beginning of the 5th century), which was attacked by the Picts and Scots, around the 420s Saxons appeared (see Anglo-Saxons). From the middle of the 5th century, new waves of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians began to arrive here. Seeking salvation from this invasion, part of the Britons moved to Brittany (in 441 and others).

In 422, having defeated the Romans, the Vandals and Alans captured the coastal cities and fleet in Spain, which allowed them in 429 under the leadership of Gaiseric (428-477) to cross to North-West Africa. Under the treaty of 442, the kingdom of the Vandals and Alans becomes the first legally recognized independent state on the territory of the Roman Empire.

In the 2nd half of the 5th century, the weakening of Rome and the expansion of the Germanic tribes reach their climax. In 455, the Vandals terminated the treaty with the Western Roman Empire and sacked Rome again. The Western Roman Empire (actually Italy), relying on squads of barbarians, was actually ruled in 456-472 by Ricimer (half Sev and Visigoth), from 474 by Orestes (former secretary of Attila), from 476 by skir Odoacer, who deposed the last Western Roman emperor Romulus Augustulus.

In 489, the Ostrogoths and other factions, led by Theodoric the Great, invaded Italy and by 493 captured it. Founded by Theodoric the Great, the Ostrogothic kingdom for several decades turned into the most powerful force in Western and Central Europe. Thus, at the end of the 5th - the middle of the 6th century, the transition from the stage of resettlement of the Germanic tribes to the stage of their establishment in new lands and the formation of "barbarian kingdoms" was completed. As a result, on the territory of the former Western Roman Empire, the state of the Burgundians in South-East Gaul (see Burgundy, Arelat), the Toledo kingdom of the Visigoths - in Spain (see the Visigothic kingdom), the Ostrogoths, and then the Lombards - in Italy (see the Lombard kingdom), the Franks in Gaul. "Barbarian kingdoms" also formed in Britain after its conquest in the middle of the 5th century by the Anglo-Saxons (see Anglo-Saxon conquest). A new ethnopolitical map of Western Europe is taking shape.

However, the idea of ​​restoring the Roman Empire was also preserved, which the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire Justinian I tried to implement. Having conquered the state of the Vandals in Africa by 534, the Byzantine troops began a war with the Ostrogoths, who were broken in 552. By 555, Constantinople had achieved complete control of Italy and Dalmatia. The year before, the Byzantines had landed in Spain, beginning the capture of its southeastern part, where they held out until 626.

In the 6th century, a new wave of migration of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe gained momentum. By the end of the 5th century, the Lombards mastered the upper reaches of the Elbe, in 526/527 they occupied the lands from Vienna to Aquinas, from 546 - the territory of modern southwestern Hungary. In 558, the Avars appeared in the steppes of South-Eastern Europe. In 568, having defeated the Gepids in alliance with the Lombards and after the latter left for Italy (a new kingdom of the Lombards with a center in Pavia formed in its northern and central parts), they became masters of the entire Middle Danube region, establishing the Avar Khaganate here. In the steppes of Eastern Europe, after the Avars, the Turks appear, who until 630 included the lands east of the Don in the Turkic Khaganate.

The process of the Great Migration of Peoples was completed by the migration of Slavic and Turkic tribes, including to part of the territory of the Eastern Roman Empire. Already in the 5th century, the Slavs proper (Slavs according to Latin and Greek sources) mastered the territory from the Dnieper to the Oder and from Polissya to the Eastern Carpathian region (see Prague culture). Groups close to them (see Zaozerye) from the Upper Dnieper region settled to the territory of modern southeastern Estonia, the Pskov region and the Upper Volga (long mounds of culture). Other groups of Slavs occupied the basin of the Desna and the Seim (Kolochinskaya culture), and also spread through the Ukrainian forest-steppe to modern central Moldavia (Antes). Until the middle of the 6th century, the Slavs advanced beyond the Oder (then gradually mastering the lands to the Elbe) and in Pomerania (see Sukov - Dziedzitsy), to the northeast of the Carpathian basin (probably by agreement with the Lombards), the Lower Danube (see Ipotesti - Kyndeshti - Churel ). Since the 520s, raids of the Sklavians and Antes on the Balkans have been known. Especially massive were the campaigns of the Sklavinian groups in 540-542, 548-551, in the late 570s - 580s. Together with them or separately, raids on the Balkans were also carried out by Eastern European nomads, among whom Western Turkic groups dominated from the 5th century (see Proto-Bulgarians). Not later than the 580s, groups of Slavs already lived in Thessaly, by the 1st third of the 7th century - in the Western Balkans, in the Southern and Eastern Alps (see Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, etc.). The counter-offensive of the Byzantines against the Slavs and Avars, which began after the conclusion of peace with the Persians (591), ended with the uprising of Phocas (602) and the fall of the border of the Eastern Roman Empire on the Danube.

In the 7th century, the Slavs settled throughout the Balkan Peninsula up to the Peloponnese, forming tribal principalities - "Sclavinia", some groups moved to Asia Minor, raided as far as Crete and Southern Italy. Although the huge forces of Byzantium were taken away by the opposition to the Arab conquests, already from the 2nd half of the 7th century, the restoration of the power of Constantinople in the south of the Balkans began.

From the middle of the 7th century, new early political formations appeared in the steppes of Eastern Europe (see Great Bulgaria, Pereshchepinsky treasure, Voznesenka). The result of the expansion of the Khazars in the 660-680s was the departure of part of the Bulgars to the Balkans, where the First Bulgarian Kingdom was formed and the Khazar Khaganate was formed in the south of Eastern Europe.

With the completion of the Great Migration of Peoples, migration processes in Europe, Asia, North Africa, the Near and Middle East did not stop, but their role in world history was already different.

The Great Migration of Nations had enormous historical consequences. The civilization associated with the Roman Empire experienced tremendous upheaval and destruction. From now on, the main carrier of ancient traditions was the Eastern Roman Empire, in which they underwent a profound transformation (see Byzantium). In place of the Western Roman Empire, absorbing elements of its culture, new political formations arose - "barbarian kingdoms", which were destined to become the prototype of the European states of the Middle Ages and Modern times. The ethnolinguistic map of Europe began to be largely determined by the Germanic and Slavic peoples. The habitats and the ratio of the Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Iranian, Celtic and other peoples of Eurasia have changed significantly. European civilization parted with the era of antiquity in order to enter the era of the Middle Ages.

Lit.: Diesner H. J. Die Völkerwanderung. Lpz., 1976; Die Germanen. V., 1976. Bd 2; Goffart W. Barbarians and Romans. Princeton, 1980; Korsunsky A.R., Günther R. The decline and death of the Western Roman Empire and the emergence of the German kingdoms (until the middle of the 6th century). M., 1984; Wolfram H. Das Reich und die Germanen: zwischen Antike und Mittelalter. V., 1990; Bona I. Das Hunnenreich. bdpst; Stuttg., 1991; Collection of the oldest written news about the Slavs. M., 1991-1995. T. 1-2; Zasetskaya I.P. The culture of the nomads of the southern Russian steppes in the Hun era (the end of the 4th-5th centuries). SPb., 1994; Machatschke R. Volkerwanderung. Von der Antike zum Mittelalter. Die Wandlung des Römischen Reichs und das Werden Europas. W., 1994; Martin J. Spätantike und Völkerwanderung. Munich, 1995; Maczyriska M. Wçdrôwki ludow. Warsz.; Krakow, 1996; Shuvalov P. V. The penetration of the Slavs into the Balkans // Fundamentals of Balkan linguistics, languages ​​of the Balkan region. SPb., 1998. Part 2; Budanova V.P., Gorsky A.A., Ermolova I.E. The Great Migration of Peoples. Ethnopolitical and social aspects. M., 1999; L'occident romain et l'Europe centrale au début de l'époque des Grandes Migrations. Brno, 1999; Budanova V.P. The barbarian world of the era of the Great Migration of Peoples. M., 2000; Gavritukhin I. O. The beginning of the great Slavic settlement to the south and west // Apxeological studies. Kiev; Chernivtsi, 2000.T. one; Tyszkiewicz L. A. Hunowie w Europie. Wroclaw, 2004; Sedov V.V. Slavs. Ancient Russian people. M., 2005; Shchukin M. B. The Gothic Way. SPb., 2005.

More and more migrants and refugees from Africa, Asia and the Middle East continue to arrive in Europe. This flow will go down in history as the most massive migration of people in the era of globalization.

As one person remarked:History doesn't repeat itself, it rhymes". The current migration process is unique in its own way, but at the same time it has features that were inherent in the large-scale migrations of the past.

The flight from poverty and wars in the hope of a better life brings alien peoples to indigenous peoples, and in this clash, as always, many things are born: the shock of the invasion, the joy of finding a new home, relief after a long journey, a hidden hatred for foreigners and their customs, intensification of conflicts and a whole gamut of other human emotions, as well as long-term political and socio-economic consequences and changes.

Great Migration

"I would rather say that these are bipedal animals, not people, or stone pillars, roughly hewn in the form of a person, which are displayed on bridges. This disgusting appearance corresponds to their habits, characteristic of cattle: they eat food unboiled and unseasoned; instead of ordinary food supplies, they are content with wild roots and the meat of the first animal they come across, which they put under their seat on a horse and so soften.

They live roaming among the forests and mountains, hardened from cold and hunger. They wear clothes like a tunic of linen or fur, and once they put their head through it, they do not let it off their shoulders until it falls off in tatters. They cover their heads with fur-lined hats and wrap their hairy legs in goatskin.

All of them, without a roof, without a fatherland, without any habit of a settled way of life, wander in space, as if everyone is running further, carrying their carts behind them, where their wives work clothes for them, give birth and raise their children ... "

Attila and his hordes invade Italy. Eugene Delacroix

This is how the ancient Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus (who, by the way, was a Syrian Greek by origin) described the Huns in his work "Acts" (Res Gestae, also known as "History" or "Roman History"), commenting on the invasion of barbarian tribes into Europe in the middle of IV century AD e.

Experts are still arguing about the reasons for the mass migration of nomads. Some talk about "global climate change": severe droughts have led to the depletion of lands controlled by nomadic tribes. Population growth also played a role. As a result, the barbarians began to increasingly visit the inhabitants of the European part of the Roman Empire.

The expansion of the living space of the Huns, Goths, Vandals and other tribes and their penetration deep into Europe stretched for several centuries. The aggravation of cultural, linguistic and religious conflicts between the Germanic tribes and the settled population ultimately led to the collapse of Rome and the destruction of the empire.

Newcomers arriving in Europe today do not wear goatskins or fur tunics. In many ways, however, their invasion of modern Europe looks as overwhelming as the barbarian invasion looked to the citizens of the Roman Empire 15 centuries ago.

What drives people from different parts of Africa and Eurasia today? In this crisis, it is quite difficult to distinguish between refugees and migrants. Many have indeed lost everything they had in the bloody chaos of the wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya and other conflicts. Others flocked to the countries of the Old World in search of new opportunities, fleeing poverty in their native lands.

Intercontinental migrations

In search of new opportunities, many migrants of the past made even longer journeys than those who flee today to Europe. The European and African ancestors of today's Americans, Canadians, and residents of South America followed the discoverers of new continents, from the Old World to the New.

At the same time, according to many estimates, the number of imported slaves from Africa until the beginning of the XIX century. outnumbered free people. A number of historians note that in the period 1492-1776. of the 6.5 million immigrants who crossed the Atlantic and settled in the Western Hemisphere, only 1 million were Europeans. The remaining 5.5 million were slaves brought by force from Africa.

During the nineteenth century the scale of intercontinental migration is on the rise, due to relative overpopulation in some countries and labor shortages in others. In addition to the main migration destinations - the United States, Canada, as well as a number of countries in South America - following the exiled prisoners, in search of a better life, people went to Australia and New Zealand.

At the same time, as during the Great Migration of Peoples in the IV-VII centuries. in Europe, conquistadors and adventurers of all stripes and the waves of migrants that followed them crushed the old order of life in those parts of the world where they came to plunder and equip their new world.

A new beginning and expansion of living space for Old World colonists and their slaves was an apocalypse for the indigenous peoples of the Americas. Many tribes and peoples were completely exterminated, their cultures and value systems were wiped off the face of the Earth.

The genocide of the natives of Australia and Tasmania by the British colonists also went down in history and was described by a number of contemporaries, in particular Charles Darwin, as well as military historian and correspondent Alan Moorhead.

Intercontinental migration to the countries of North and South America reached its maximum at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1900–1914 about 20 million people left Europe, about 3/5 of this number settled in the United States. The subsequent world wars had a serious impact on the fate and lives of many people and migration flows.

Immediately after the First World War, the intensity of intercontinental migration dropped sharply. A number of countries, in particular the United States and Australia, introduced restrictive measures for migrants at the legislative level, and after a surge in the early 1920s. in the future, the number of overseas migrants again began to decline.

First and Second World Wars

The First World War led to mass movements of the peoples of Europe. People were forced to flee from the war zones both to other regions of their countries and to neutral countries. However, a much more serious factor was the conclusion of peace treaties and the establishment of new state borders following the war. National minority groups were forced to leave their former places of residence, often there were also forced deportations. In particular, over 500 thousand Germans were resettled from the territory that had ceded from Germany to Poland, more than 200 thousand Hungarians were forced to leave the territory of Czechoslovakia. Groups of the German-Austrian population moved to Austria from areas that used to belong to Austria-Hungary.

The Second World War further accelerated the movement of population groups of one nationality from one country to another. Before the start of the war, more than 12 million Germans lived in the countries of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, on the territory of Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.

Those who did not return to Germany along with the retreating German troops were resettled in Germany in the years after World War II by the decisions of the Potsdam Conference in 1945. Many countries of Eastern Europe also exchanged national minorities - again due to changes in the borders of states following the war.

At the same time, the Second World War led to a new intensification of intercontinental migrations. In particular, during the repatriation of the Japanese from the regions of China, Korea, and other regions of Asia, about 6.3 million people were resettled in Japan.

Great Depression in the USA

An example of a large-scale flight from poverty was migration within the United States during the Great Depression and a series of dust storms in the 1930s.

By some estimates, more than 1 million Americans impoverished by the economic and environmental crises have traveled across the continent in search of work.

The confrontation with the reality of poverty and hopelessness, as well as the contempt with which the desperate migrants in the western states were met, was described by John Steinbeck in The Grapes of Wrath:

"And in the eyes of people, a feeling of powerlessness and despair, in the eyes of the hungry, anger is ripening. In the souls of people, clusters of anger are pouring and ripening - heavy clusters, and now they do not ripen for long.".

Some rural counties in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas have shrunk by more than 25%. At the same time, in a number of districts of the western states (California, Nevada), the population has almost doubled. The population of Los Angeles County grew by over 500,000, the largest increase of any county in any US state between 1930 and 1940.

From all over the world to Israel

The very emergence of Israel as a separate state after a large amount of time since quite ancient times, the resettlement of Jews around the world and the persecution they have undergone in various countries - this issue is likely to be the subject of all sorts of disputes and conspiracy theories for a very long time.

One way or another, the migration of Jews in the course of a series of so-called "aliyahs" to the territory of the future state of Israel and their repatriation after the official creation of the country in 1948 became the acquisition of a home (perhaps the most long-awaited in history) for some and a disaster for others. According to a number of estimates, after the partition of Palestine in 1947, more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were forced to flee the territories occupied by Israel.

Since the founding of the state, Israel, surrounded by Arab countries, has been fighting for existence and capturing more and more new territories. The ongoing demolition of Palestinian settlements in territories seized after the Six-Day War in 1967 is just one example of what one ethnic group has found a home for others.

Resettlement 2.0: reshaping Europe

What conclusions can be drawn from these and many other similar migration processes?

First, migrants flee to Europe not only from the countries of the Middle East or specifically from Syria, as a number of politicians are trying to present.

Migrants from African countries, as well as Central Asia (in particular, Afghanistan) also represent a fairly significant proportion of those eager to get into the EU.

Data: EU External Border Security Agency, graphics: BBC

Secondly, the migration crisis did not begin this year at all. The flow of migrants, which was measured in tens of thousands in 2012, has grown many times in a few years. The belated reaction of the authorities indicates their low ability to analyze further migration trends.

Thirdly, the statements of the Prime Ministers of Britain and France David Cameron and Manuel Valls about the need to "remove Assad by military force" - in 2015, after since 2011 the authorities of these countries have actually done nothing to destroy the Islamists tearing apart Syria and Iraq speak of their inability to understand the cause-and-effect relationships in the current crisis.

After the "humanitarian" bombing of Libya during NATO's "Operation Unified Protector" and the ensuing virtual political and economic collapse of Libya, the flow of migrants to Europe only intensified. Will it become smaller after the complete destruction of the remnants of statehood in Syria?..

In addition, the statements of the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, that another 160 thousand migrants planned for resettlement in the EU countries represent "only 0.11% of the European population" also call into question the ability of the EU authorities to deal with the current crisis.

Data: United Nations Refugee Agency, graphics: BBC

If Brussels could predict the social stability of society by calculating the growing share of migrants in Europe, then, quite possibly, the European commissioners could notice a certain connection between the ethnic riots that occurred in Sweden in 2014 and the increase in incoming migrants.

Europe is on the verge of a new round of exacerbation of social tension. At the same time, most likely, the growth of nationalist sentiment is inevitable, which will strengthen the positions of parties that openly criticize the continuation of European integration and the loss of national sovereignty and control of individual countries over their borders.

Questions are already open about what will become of the Schengen agreements on free movement within the EU. But what will happen to the very future image of Europe? Will the future face of the average European become a little more Syrian-Iraqi? Or will the Mali-Somali traits stand out more strongly? ..

There is a certain non-zero and growing risk that while interest rates are being calculated in Brussels and quotas for resettling migrants are being distributed, not everyone will want to wear masks of tolerance.

Individual law-abiding citizens of Europe may decide in the future to cease being such and, without waiting for the moment when Messrs. Cameron, Waltz, Juncker and others deign to "find a solution", they themselves will begin to "solve problems" - and by exactly the same methods that the European authorities offer for Syria and other countries.