“History is a treasury of our deeds, a witness to the past, an example and lesson for the present, a warning for the future. “- said the great Spanish writer and humanist of the Renaissance, Miguel de Cervantes. And this statement fully reflects the creative heritage of the Soviet and Russian scientist Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev (1912-1992), whose 100th anniversary we celebrated on October 1, 2012.

Gumilyov's works on the history of Ancient Rus', the Khazar Kaganate, relations between the Russian state and Byzantium, the Polovtsian steppe and many others are included today in the golden fund of world scientific thought. In this article I will dwell on only one problem that the scientist raised - namely, the relationship between Rus' and the steppe nomadic peoples.

Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev. Rus' and the Great Steppe

In touch with the theoretical heritage of L.N. Gumilyov, one cannot help but feel that the history we are taught today is far from the truth. This is especially evident when studying the emergence and formation of ancient Russian civilization. Events described in “The Tale of Bygone Years”, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, “Zadonshchina”, “History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin, research by S.M. Solovyova, N.I. Kostomarova, V.O. Klyuchevsky, many Soviet historians appear in a completely different light when reading the works of L.N. Gumilyov. The same can be said about historians’ assessment of ancient Russian princes.

As for the relations of the Old Russian state with its neighbors, and above all, with the Khazar Khaganate and nomadic tribes, here too Gumilyov, with his characteristic scientific insight, criticizes the interpretations of events that have been established since the time of The Tale of Bygone Years. The same applies to the story of the Golden Horde yoke. Regarding the relationship of the Russian state with the Mongol-Tatars, researcher V. Demin in his book “Lev Gumilyov”, with reference to the works of the scientist himself, in particular, writes the following: “ As a result Tatar-Mongol invasion and the so-called 300-year “yoke” that followed, in fact, marked the beginning of the formation of a symbiosis of two peoples - Tatar and Russian, which ultimately led to the formation of the Russian superethnos ". Thus, L.N. From this point of view, Gumilev is already an innovator, and his ideas provide not only food for thought, but are also the most important impetus for a true understanding of the significance of the Golden Horde yoke in the history of our country.

In his works, Gumilyov sought to show the complexity of the relationships between nomadic and sedentary peoples inhabiting Eurasia, the mutual influence of their cultures and traditions. And he completely succeeded, although for a long time official science did not recognize the obvious advantages of Gumilyov’s theory. And only with the beginning of the democratization process, Gumilyov’s works began to be published. And today we have the opportunity to get acquainted with the theoretical heritage of a scientist whose works occupy a worthy place in modern science.

Already in his first, essentially scientific work, Gumilev began to refute the established canons in relation to the history of the Turkic and other peoples of Eurasia. In his mind, a completely different story emerged, especially about the relationships between steppe, nomadic and sedentary peoples.

The problem raised by Gumilev in his Ph.D. thesis was continued by him in subsequent works, about which we knew nothing for a long time. And only recently, thanks to the democratization of our society, have we been able to come into contact with theories and concepts that were banned. One of them is the concept of Eurasianism, the ideas of which are reflected in Gumilyov’s numerous works. It should be noted that Gumilyov not only reflected the ideas of Eurasianism, but also largely contributed to the enrichment of its conceptual content. And here, first of all, we need to introduce such works of the scientist as “Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe”, “From Rus' to Russia. Essays on ethnic history”, “Khazaria and the Caspian Sea”, as well as works devoted to the history of the Turkic Kaganate and the Golden Horde.

In all these works, Gumilev defended the idea that the history of the ancient peoples of the steppe has not been fully studied, and in the available sources, their historical path is reflected in a distorted form. Therefore, he said, it is necessary to study history not only from a socio-economic and political position, but, above all, from the point of view of ethnogenesis. What did Gumilyov understand by this term? The scientist himself answered this question in his fundamental work “Ethnogenesis and the Earth’s Biosphere.” In his opinion, " Ethnogenesis is a natural process, therefore, independent of the situation, formed as a result of the formation of culture. It can start at any moment; and if there is an existing barrier in his way - cultural integrity, he will break it or be broken against it. If it begins when “the land lies fallow,” the emerging ethnos creates its own culture as a way of its existence and development. In both cases, the impulse is a blind force of natural energy, not controlled by anyone’s consciousness.”. In his subsequent works, Gumilev preached the concept according to which the historical process is determined by the natural course of development of the peoples inhabiting our planet. And here Gumilyov comes to the fore time , space , ethnos , and most importantly - passionarity .

Speaking about space, Gumilev wrote: “ space is the first parameter that characterizes historical events ” . As for time, Gumilev believed that time is the second parameter in which the formation, development and decline of ethnic groups occurs. And why these processes occur, Gumilyov explained as follows: “ ...we can also hypothetically associate the beginning of ethnogenesis with the mechanism of mutation, as a result of which an ethnic “push” occurs, which then leads to the formation of new ethnic groups. The process of ethnogenesis is associated with a very specific genetic trait. Here we introduce a new parameter of ethnic history - passionarity" So we come to the main component principle of the historical process according to Gumilyov’s theory - passionarity.All of Gumilyov’s scientific activities were connected precisely with this concept. Through the prism of passionarity, he examined not only the history of ethnic groups, but also states.

“Passionarity is a trait that arises as a result of mutation (passionary impulse) and forms within a population a certain number of people who have an increased desire for action. We will call such people passionaries”– this is what Gumilyov himself wrote, explaining the term he himself invented, which he himself introduced into scientific circulation, and which today has become one of the fundamental ones in solving the problems of ethnogenesis.

But not only the problems of ethnogenesis and Eurasianism interested Gumilyov. In his scientific activity Gumilyov did everything possible to get rid of the preconceived misconception about nomadic peoples and their connections with Russia. Gumilev made a great contribution to rethinking the role and place of the Golden Horde in the history of medieval Eurasia. The idea, rooted in historiography, that the Golden Horde yoke threw Rus' back many centuries, according to Gumilyov, does not correspond to the truth. “ The alliance with the Tatars, Gumilyov wrote, turned out to be a blessing for Rus', from the point of view of establishing order within the country.”. Moreover, Gumilyov believed that only thanks to the Tatar army was Rus' able to maintain its independence and the opportunity to develop further without falling under the yoke of the Western crusaders. In support of this opinion, we give another quote from the same work of the scientist: “TWhere the Tatar troops entered into action,” said Gumilyov, “the crusader onslaught quickly stopped. Thus, for the tax that Alexander Nevsky undertook to pay to Sarai, the capital of the new state on the Volga, Rus' received a reliable and strong army that defended not only Novgorod and Pskov. After all, in the same way, thanks to the Tatars in the 70s of the 13th century. Smolensk, which was under threat of capture by the Lithuanians, retained its independence... ”.

Gumilyov also did not trivially assess the relationship between Rus' and the Golden Horde. Here's what they wrote about this relationship: “ Moreover, the Russian principalities that accepted the alliance with the Horde completely retained their ideological independence and political independence. For example, after the victory in the Horde of the Muslim party represented by Berke, no one demanded that the Russians convert to Islam. This alone shows that Rus' was not a province of the Mongol ulus, but a country allied with the Great Khan, which paid some tax for the maintenance of the army, which it itself needed ”.

Summing up the results of the study of Gumilyov’s scientific activity, I would like to say the following: Lev Nikolaevich was and remains an outstanding theorist, whose views, hypotheses and concepts played and continue to play a key role in the study of the history of the Great Steppe, the Turkic Khaganate, Volga Bulgaria, the Golden Horde and the Russian state.

Today it is no longer possible to imagine history without Gumilev’s works; they have long been included in the golden fund of scientific thought not only in Russia, but throughout the whole world. Gumilyov's works are now published in many languages ​​of the world and are included in the collections of leading libraries and collections. At the same time, there are quite a few controversial points in the presentation of the scientist’s history, and discussions around the theory of passionarity are still ongoing today. This is another confirmation that Gumilyov’s ideas are in demand by historical science.

Another important direction foreign policy The Kyiv princes had a “steppe policy” - protecting the borders of Rus' from nomads. The Pechenegs became a serious enemy. The first mention of them in the chronicles dates back to the years of Igor’s reign.

In 969, the Pechenegs besieged Kyiv. Svyatoslav, who fought in the Balkans, made a rapid transition and defeated them. In the 90s of the 10th century. there is a new onslaught of the Pechenegs. It is known that to fight them, Vladimir I (980_1015) went to Veliky Novgorod for troops. It was then that the prince erected fortifications in the south of the country, along the Desna, Ostr, Trubezh, Sula, and Stugna rivers. The German missionary Brun, who visited the Pechenegs in 1007, recalled that Vladimir accompanied him to the very borders Kievan Rus, “which he protected from the Pechenegs with the largest palisade over a very large area.” Under 1036, the chronicles place the last message about the Pechenegs’ raid on Kyiv. Yaroslav (who was in Novgorod) came with a strong army, there was an “evil slaughter.” According to legend, St. Sophia Cathedral was built on the spot where Yaroslav defeated the Pechenegs.

After the battle, Pecheneg attacks on Rus' ceased. The remnants of the Pechenegs migrated to the southwest. Turkic nomads (Torks, Berendeys, Pechenegs) began to settle south of Kyiv, recognizing themselves as subjects Prince of Kyiv. “Black hoods” (as they were called in Rus') became a kind of “watchmen” in the south.

But since 1037, Rus' has been threatened by new Turkic nomadic tribal associations - the Polovtsians. In the fight against the Polovtsians, Kyiv no longer played a leading role. It goes to the prince of Pereyaslavl South - Vladimir Monomakh. From 1061 to 1210, Rus' suffered 46 large raids by the Polovtsians. 34 times the Polovtsians took part in the internecine wars of the Russian princes. Every year 1/15 of Russian lands were ruined. The most successful campaigns against the Polovtsians were those in which the united squads of Russian princes participated (1109-1110 - “Don Campaign” - Prince Svyatopolk, Vladimir Monomakh, Davyd - “the Polovtsians were defeated in the depths of their steppes”). At the beginning of the 13th century. The Polovtsy's strength was exhausted. But new enemies will approach the borders of Rus'.

Rus' and Europe

During the time of Kievan Rus, trade, cultural, and diplomatic ties were established with European countries - Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, England, etc. Marriages were also concluded between representatives of the Kievan princely house and European dynasties, which reflected the growth of the political power and international authority of Rus'. Thus, the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise Anna was married to French king Henry I, Elizabeth - for the Norwegian king Harald, Anastasia - for the Hungarian king Andrew.

Sons lived at the court of Yaroslav the Wise English king Edmund. Yaroslav's grandson, Vladimir Monomakh, was married to the daughter of the last Anglo-Saxon king Harald - Gita.

One of the significant factors historical development South Russian principalities of the 11th - early 13th centuries. was their border position. To the south and southeast of them lies the Polovtsian steppe. For almost two centuries, nomadic Turkic-speaking tribes of the Polovtsians lived here, entering into various relations with Russia. Sometimes they were peaceful, accompanied by marriages and military alliances, but more often, as discussed above, they were hostile. It is no coincidence that Russia was so acutely faced with the task of strengthening its southern and southeastern borders. The famous call of the author of “The Lay of Igor’s Campaign” - “Block the gates of the field”, addressed to the Russian princes in 1185, was topical throughout the entire history of Russian-Polovtsian relations. So that the reader can more clearly imagine what kind of enemy she stood “face to face” with. Southern Rus' in the 11th - early 13th centuries, it is advisable to give at least short essay history of the Polovtsians. The Russians first encountered the Cumans in 1055, when the horde of Khan Balush approached the southern borders of Rus'. By this time, the Polovtsians occupied the entire space of the steppes, displacing the Pechenegs, Torks, and Berendeys from there. The Polovtsian land did not have stable borders. The nomadic way of life forced the Polovtsians to occupy all lands convenient for nomads, invade the borders of neighboring states and seize (even temporarily) their outlying territories. To a greater extent, the southern Russian border suffered from the Polovtsians, but their predatory campaigns also reached the northern borders of the Byzantine Empire. Like their predecessors, the Cumans were divided into separate khanates or associations, each of which occupied “its own” territory. The northern border of the “Polovtsian Field” ran on the Left Bank - in the interfluve of Vorskla and Orel, on the Right Bank - in the interfluve of Rosi and Tyasmin, the western - but by the Ingulets line. In the south it included the North Caucasus, Azov and Crimean steppes. Ethnically, this huge country was not only Polovtsian. Other peoples lived here: Alans, Yasses, Khazars, Guzes, Kosogi. They were probably the main population of the cities of Sharukan, Sugrov, Balina on the Donets, Saksin on the Volga, Korsun and Surozh in the Crimea, and Tmutarakan on Taman. In various written sources, these centers are called Polovtsian, or Kipchak, but this is not because they were inhabited by the Polovtsians, but because they were located within the Polovtsian land or were in tributary dependence on the Polovtsians. Some of the previously existing cities (for example, Belaya Vezha) were destroyed and turned into Polovtsian winter camps. The history of the Polovtsians after they settled the Eastern European steppes is divided by researchers into four periods. The first - the middle of the 11th - the beginning of the 12th century, the second - the 20-60s of the 12th century, the third - the second half of the 12th century, the fourth - the end of the 12th - the first decades of the 13th century. Each of these periods has its own characteristics, both in the area internal development Polovtsians, and in the area of ​​their relationships with Russians and other neighbors. In general, the first period is characterized by the extraordinary aggressiveness of the Polovtsians. They rushed to the borders of rich agricultural countries, invaded their borders, and robbed the local population. The passion for profit pushed individual representatives of the Polovtsian elite to participate in the wars of the Russian princes with each other or with their western neighbors. For this help they received a double price: rich gifts from the allies and indemnities from the vanquished. During this period of their history, the Polovtsians were at the initial, camp stage of nomadism, characterized by constant movement their hordes across the steppe. This circumstance made it difficult to organize serious military expeditions of Russian military squads against them. Beginning XII V. was marked by significant changes in the life of the Polovtsians. By this time, the entire steppe space was divided between separate hordes, and each of them roamed within a very specific territory. Now the Polovtsians, who turned out to be immediate neighbors of Rus', could not invade its borders with impunity. They were expecting retaliatory strikes. During the first two decades, the combined forces of the southern Russian principalities inflicted several serious defeats on the Cumans. In 1103 they were defeated in the area of ​​the river. Molochnaya, flowing into the Sea of ​​Azov, in 1109, 1111 and 1116. the same fate befell the Donetsk Polovtsians. During these campaigns, Russian squads captured the cities of Sharukan, Sugrov and Balin. The chronicle reports that the Polovtsians, as a result of Russian military campaigns in the Steppe, were driven “beyond the Don, beyond the Volga, beyond the Yaik.” It was then, as researchers believe, that Khan Otrok left with his horde from the Seversky Donets region “to Obezy” - to the Caucasus. The second period of Polovtsian history coincided in time with the initial stage of feudal fragmentation in Rus', marked by the aggravation of inter-princely relations, frequent internecine wars , the rivalry of contenders for the grand ducal table. Under these conditions, the fight against the Polovtsians faded into the background. Individual campaigns of a few Russian squads in the steppe could not achieve tangible victories. The princes, especially representatives of the Chernigov Olgovichi, thought more about how to use the Polovtsians in the fight for Kyiv than about border security. The establishment of allied relations with the Cumans (wild) and their involvement in solving the internal affairs of Rus' contributed to the relatively rapid revival of the power of the nomads. At this time they are experiencing the highest stage of their development. The transition to the second method of nomadism was completed, characterized by the appearance of stable boundaries of each horde and the presence of permanent winter quarters. Instead of large but unstable associations, small hordes appeared, consisting of both consanguineous and non-consanguineous families and clans. In Polovtsian society, military-democratic relations were replaced by early feudal ones. The third period of Polovtsian history is marked, on the one hand, by the increased pressure of nomads on the southern Russian borderland, and on the other, by the consolidation of Russian forces for retaliatory anti-Polovtsian campaigns. Most often, Russian squads were sent to the Dnieper region, where the Dnieper and Lukomor Polovtsian hordes ruled, threatening the security of the Dnieper (Greek) trade route, especially its southern section. Of course, this path was not, as is sometimes claimed, in the hands of the Dnieper Polovtsians, but in order for it to fulfill its purpose, it required constant guarding, sending Russian troops to the most dangerous areas (Kanev, the region of the rapids). The chronicle speaks of such campaigns in 1167, 1168, 1169 and other years. Russian princes also went to the deep regions of the Polovtsian nomads. In 1184, the regiments of princes Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich and Rurik Rostislavich defeated the Polovtsians at the mouth of the Orel. Almost the entire Polovtsian elite was captured: Kobyak Karenevich with his sons, Izay Bilyukovich, Tovly, Osoluk and others. Russian regiments carried out a similar campaign in 1187, as a result of which the Polovtsian winter camps on the river were destroyed. Samara. Unlike the Dnieper Polovtsians, who did not represent in the second half of the 12th century. any significant threat to Rus', the Don, led by the energetic Khan Konchak, constantly invaded Russian lands and robbed the population. Russian chroniclers speak of Konchak, the son of Khan Otrok and the Georgian princess Gurandukht, either as a mighty hero “who brought down the Court,” or as a cursed and godless destroyer of Rus'. The defeat of the Russian regiments of Igor Svyatoslavich in 1185 showed that the forces of one principality were not enough to successfully fight the “Don Union” of Konchak. The defeat at Kayal “opened” the southeastern border of Rus' with the Steppe. The Don Polovtsy got the opportunity not only to plunder the border areas of the Novgorod-Seversky and Pereyaslavl principalities with impunity, but also to invade the borders Kyiv land. The fourth period of Polovtsian history is characterized by some improvement in Russian-Polovtsian relations. Chronicles note for this time mainly the participation of the Polovtsians in princely civil strife, the main theater of which was the Galician and Volyn principalities. Of course, this does not mean that the Cumans completely abandoned their traditional policy of robbery. Even after their defeat in two battles with the Mongol-Tatars (in 1222 and 1223), the Polovtsians carried out attacks on Russian lands. In 1234 they ravaged Porosye and the outskirts of Kyiv. This was their last action. The power of the Polovtsians in the southern Russian steppes came to an end. Sources indicate that in the 30s and early 40s, the Polovtsians waged a stubborn struggle against the Mongol-Tatars, but were conquered by them and became part of the Golden Horde. Thus, the Polovtsians, who occupied vast areas of the southern Russian steppes, over the 200 years of their history went from camp nomads to the creation of a nomadic state association in the socio-economic field and from military democracy to feudalism in the field of social relations. A huge role in this belongs to the Old Russian state, which was at an immeasurably higher (compared to the Polovtsians) stage of its historical development.

Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

106. Friends and enemies of the great steppe

The super-ethnic group, conventionally called “Hunnic” by us, included not only the Huns, Syanbis, Tabgachs, Turkuts and Uyghurs, but also many neighboring ethnic groups of other origins and diverse cultures. The mosaic nature of the ethnic composition did not at all prevent the existence of integrity, which contrasted itself with other super-ethnic groups: ancient China (9th century BC - 5th century AD) and early medieval China - the Tang Empire (618–907), Iran with Turan (250 BC - 651 AD), the caliphate, that is, the Arab-Persian superethnos, Byzantium (Greek-Armenian-Slavic integrity) and Romano-Germanic Western Europe; Tibet stood apart, which, in combination with Tangut and Nepal, should also be considered as an independent super-ethnic group, and not the periphery of China or India. All these super-ethnic entities interacted with the Great Steppe, but in different ways, which greatly influenced the nature of the culture and variations in the ethnogenesis of both the steppe and surrounding super-ethnic groups. What was the difference between these contacts? Solving the problem using traditional methods is simple, but useless. You can list all the wars and peace treaties, as well as tribal feuds, which, by the way, has already been done, but this will be a description of ripples on the surface of the ocean. After all, states, i.e., social entities, are at war, and not ethnic groups, entities of natural origin, as a result of which they are more conservative. Wars often take place within the ethnic system, and a “bad peace” is maintained with outsiders, which is not always better than a “good quarrel.” Therefore, it is advisable to choose a different path. Complementarity is the mechanism on the basis of which the destinies of interacting ethnic systems, and sometimes even individuals, not only pass, but are realized. Let's clarify this concept.

Positive complementarity is unconscious sympathy, without attempts to rebuild the partner’s structure; it is accepting him as he is. In this variant, symbioses and incorporations are possible. Negative is an unconscious antipathy, with attempts to rebuild the structure of the object or destroy it; this is intolerance. With this option, chimeras are possible, and in extreme collisions - genocide. Neutral is tolerance caused by indifference: well, let it be, there would only be benefit or at least no harm. This means a consumer attitude towards a neighbor or ignoring him. This option is typical for low levels of passionary tension. Complementarity is a natural phenomenon that does not arise by order of a khan or sultan and not for the sake of merchant profit. Both can, of course, correct the behavior of contacting persons guided by considerations of profit, but cannot change sincere feelings, which, although at the personal level can be as diverse as individual tastes, at the population level acquires a strictly defined meaning, because frequent deviations from norms are mutually compensated. Therefore, the establishment of mutual likes and dislikes between superethnic groups is legitimate. The easiest way is to get confused in the little things and lose Ariadne's thread - the only thing that can lead you out of the labyrinth of contradictory information, variations and random coincidences. This thread is the selection of political collisions and zigzags of worldviews at the personal level, because the sources were the authors, i.e. people, and super-ethnic groups were systems three orders of magnitude higher.

The ancient Chinese treated the Huns with undisguised hostility. This was especially clearly manifested in the 4th century, when the Huns, pressed by drought, settled in Ordos and Shanxi, on parched fields abandoned by farmers. The Chinese abused the steppe people so much that they led them to revolt. The Chinese treated the Tibetans and Xianbeans in the same way; They did not spare the mestizos either, but since there were many of them, they survived near the ruins of the Great Wall, on the border of the steppe and Chinese superethnic groups.

Passionary impulse of the 6th century. exacerbated this hostility, turning it into enmity. The renewed Chinese of the Bei-Qi and Sui dynasties exterminated the last descendants of the steppe people, and they raised the Tang dynasty on their shield and retained the old tribal name - Tabgachi, although they began to speak Chinese.

The Tang Empire is similar to the kingdom of Alexander the Great, but not in the phase of ethnogenesis, but in idea. Just as Alexander wanted to unite the Hellenic and Persian cultures and create a single ethnic group from them, so Taizong Li Shimin tried to combine the “Celestial Empire”, i.e. China, the Great Steppe and Sogdiana, relying on the charm of humane power and enlightened Buddhism. It would seem that this grand experiment should have been a success, since the Uyghurs, Turks and Sogdians, who were being pushed aside by the Arabs, were ready to sincerely support the empire. But Chinese loyalty was hypocritical, as a result of which the Tang dynasty fell in 907, and the Tabgach ethnic group was exterminated in less than one century (10th century).

But traditions outlived people. The baton of the “third force,” equally alien to both China and the Steppe, was picked up in the east by the Khitans, and in the west, more precisely, in Ordos, by the Tanguts. Both of them repeatedly destroyed China and fought fiercely in the north: the Khitans - with the Tzubu (Tatars), the Tanguts - with the Uighurs, “so that the blood flowed like a gurgling stream.”

However, when the passionary impulse of the 12th century. lifted the Mongols over Asia, the conquered Tanguts, Khitans and Jurchens survived and became subjects of the Mongol khans, and the Uighurs and Tibetans received privileges and became rich. When the Chinese of the Ming dynasty won, the Tanguts disappeared, and the Western Mongols - the Oirats - barely fought back in the 15th–16th centuries.

But the Chinese cannot be considered villains! They considered their historical mission to be civilizing, accepting into their superethnos those who agreed to turn into Chinese. But in case of stubborn resistance, complementarity became negative. The Turks and Mongols had to choose between the loss of life and the loss of soul.

The Iranian group of ethnic groups - Persians, Parthians, Chionites, Alans, Hephthalites - constantly fought with the Huns and Turkuts, which, of course, did not favor them with each other. The exception was the enemies of the Sarmatians - the Scythians, from whom, as the discoveries of P.K. Kozlov and S.I. Rudenko showed, the Huns borrowed the famous animal style - the image of predatory animals hunting for herbivores. But, alas, the details of the history of such an ancient period are unknown.

In the VI century. The Khazars became allies and true friends of the Turkuts, but the fall of the Western Turkut Khaganate and the coup in Khazaria did not allow the Khazars to realize the favorable opportunity and develop the victory over the Persians and Chionites, thanks to which both of them managed to recover.

Nevertheless, the influence of Persian culture on the Great Steppe took place. Zoroastrianism is not a proselytizing religion, it is only for the noble Persians and Parthians. But Manichaeism, persecuted in Iran, Roman and Chinese empires and in early Christian communities, found shelter among the nomadic Uighurs and left traces in Altai and Transbaikalia. The highest deity retained her name - Khormusta (by no means Agura Mazda), which, in combination with other details, indicates the congeniality of the ancient Iranians and the ancient Turks. The victory of the Muslim Arabs changed the color of the times, but until the 11th century. Iranian ethnic groups - Daylemites, Sakas and Sogdians - defended their culture and traditions in the fight against the Turks. They died heroically, without tarnishing their ancient glory in any way: the Arabs and Turks retained deep respect for the Persians, therefore there is neither reason nor reason to consider Turkic-Persian complementarity negative.

Relations between the Turks and Arabs in the Middle East developed somewhat differently. Muslims demanded a change of faith: in those days this meant that Kok-Tengri ( Blue sky) should have been called Allah (the Only One). The Turks willingly accepted such a replacement, after which they occupied important positions if they were ghulam slaves, or received pastures for sheep if they remained free herders. In the latter case, a symbiosis arose, with mutual tolerance and even respect, although the cultured Persians found the Turks “rude.”

Acute collisions arose only in extreme cases, for example, when suppressing the uprisings of the Zinj or Qarmatians, during wars with the Daylemites and during palace coups. But even here, many Arabs and even Persians preferred the Turks to sectarians and robbers. And when the Seljuk Turkmens drove the Greeks beyond the Bosporus, and the Mamluk Cumans threw the crusaders into the Mediterranean Sea, mutual understanding was restored, and the renewed super-ethnic group found the strength to assert itself.

Byzantium interacted with nomads in two ways: in their homeland, the Greeks used the help of the Turkuts in the 7th century, the Pechenegs - in the 10th century, the Polovtsians - in the 11th-13th centuries, in a foreign land, where the Nestorians who emigrated from Byzantium converted many Mongol and Turkic tribes to Christianity , part of the settled Uighurs and part of the Khorezmians, and Orthodox missionaries baptized Bulgaria, Serbia and Rus', no longer a restrained symbiosis arose, but incorporation: the baptized Turks were accepted as their own. The last Cumans, betrayed by the Hungarians, found refuge from the Mongols in the Nicene Empire.

Apparently, a similar positive complementarity should have taken place in Ancient Rus'. And so it was, as we will soon see.

Unlike Eastern Christians, Western Christians - Catholics - treated the Eurasian steppe inhabitants completely differently. In this they resemble the Chinese rather than the Persians, Greeks and Slavs. It is important that political conflicts between both super-ethnic groups were episodic and much less significant than the wars between the Guelphs and the Ghibellines. There was simply a belief that the Huns and Mongols were dirty savages, and if the Greeks were friends with them, then the Eastern Christians were “such heretics that they make God himself sick.” But with the Spanish Arabs and Berbers in Sicily European knights fought constantly, but were treated with full respect, although the Africans deserved it no more than the Asians. It turns out that the heart is stronger than the mind.

And finally Tibet. In this mountainous country there were two worldviews: the ancient Aryan cult of Mithra - Bon - and different forms of Buddhism - Kashmiri (Tantrism), Chinese (Chan-Buddhism of contemplation) and Indian: Hinayana and Mahayana. All religions were proselytizing and spread in the oases of the Tarim basin and in Transbaikalia. In Yarkand and Khotan, Mahayana, quickly supplanted by Islam, established itself, in Kucha, Karashar and Turfan - Hinayana, which coexisted peacefully with Nestorianism, and in Transbaikalia, Bon, the religion of the ancestors and descendants of Genghis, gained sympathy. Bon got along with Christianity, but the Mongols and Tibetans did not accept Chinese teachings, not even Chan Buddhism. This cannot be accidental, so the complementarity between the steppe people and Tibet was positive.

As we see, the manifestation of complementarity does not depend on state expediency, economic conditions or the nature of the ideological system, because complex dogma is inaccessible to the understanding of most neophytes. And yet the phenomenon of complementarity exists and plays, if not a decisive, then a very significant role in ethnic history. How can we explain it? The hypothesis of biofields with different rhythms, i.e., oscillation frequencies, naturally suggests itself. Some coincide and create a symphony, others - a cacophony: this is clearly a natural phenomenon, and not the work of human hands.

Of course, you can ignore ethnic sympathies or antipathies, but is this advisable? After all, here lies the key to the theory of ethnic contacts and conflicts, and not only of the 3rd–12th centuries.

The Turko-Mongols were friends with the Orthodox world: Byzantium and its companions - the Slavs. They quarreled with the Chinese nationalists and, to the best of their ability, helped the Tang Empire, or, what is the same, the Tabgach ethnic group, with the exception of those cases when Chinese literati gained the upper hand at the imperial court in Chang'an.

The Turks got along with the Muslims, although this led to the formation of chimeric sultanates, more among the Iranians than among the Arabs. But the Turks stopped the aggression of Catholic Romano-Germanic Europe, for which they still suffer criticism.

The international situation around the shores of the Caspian Sea was built on these invisible threads before the Mongol advance. But even after the Mongol campaigns, the constellation changed only in details, which are by no means fundamental, which can be verified by any reader familiar with elementary general history.

This text is an introductory fragment. From the book Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe author Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

106. Friends and enemies of the great steppe The super-ethnic group, conventionally called “Hunnic” by us, included not only the Huns, Syanbis, Tabgachs, Turkuts and Uyghurs, but also many neighboring ethnic groups of other origins and diverse cultures. The mosaic nature of the ethnic composition is by no means

From the book Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe author Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

129. Friends and Foes When Toghrul, khan of the Keraits, learned that the Mongols had chosen Temujin, the son of his Anda and in this sense his nephew, as khan, he showed complete pleasure. To the ambassadors who notified him of the election of Temujin, he said: “It’s fair that they put him in the khanate

From the book Aryan Rus' [The Heritage of Ancestors. Forgotten gods of the Slavs] author Belov Alexander Ivanovich

The Polovtsy are the new masters of the great steppe. A few words must be said about the Polovtsy themselves. Until the 19th century, historians believed that the name “Polovtsy” comes from the Russian word for “field.” The habitat of the Polovtsians was called the Polovtsian land. However, the historian late XIX century A. Kunik believed

From the book In Search of an Imaginary Kingdom [L/F] author Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

Map 1. Tribes of the Great Steppe from the 8th to the 10th centuries. General comment. In the 8th century dominance over the Great Steppe passed from the Turks to the Uyghurs (747) and then to the Kyrgyz (847), but the borders of the Khaganates are omitted on the map (see L.N. Gumilev, Ancient Turks. M., 1967). Attention paid to location

From the book Millennium around the Caspian Sea [L/F] author Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

84. Friends and enemies of the great steppe The super-ethnic group, conventionally called “Hunnic” by us, included not only the Huns, Syanbis, Tabgachs, Turkuts and Uyghurs, but also many neighboring ethnic groups of other origins and diverse cultures. The mosaic nature of the ethnic composition is by no means

From the book Wormwood of the Polovtsian Field by Aji Murad

WORLD OF THE GREAT STEPPE

From the book World History: in 6 volumes. Volume 2: Medieval civilizations of the West and East author Team of authors

NOMADS OF THE GREAT STEPPE AND THE GREAT MIGRATION OF PEOPLES The so-called era of the Great Migration of Peoples became the conventional border between Antiquity and the Middle Ages. In relation to Europe, it is customary to talk about it in connection with the invasions of the Roman Empire by barbarian tribes

From the book Secrets of Great Scythia. Notes of a Historical Pathfinder author Kolomiytsev Igor Pavlovich

Mirages of the Great Steppe For now, we will mentally move from the west of the Great Steppe to its center. More precisely - to the Urals. It was here, on the eastern slopes of these mountains in 1985, that an archaeological expedition led by Chelyabinsk historian Gennady Zdanovich discovered

From the book World History: in 6 volumes. Volume 3: The World in Early Modern Times author Team of authors

CHINESE GREATNESS, ITS CRITICISM AND THE FATE OF THE GREAT STEPPE Under Emperor Kangxi, whose length of reign can be compared with his elder contemporary Louis XIV, China began to recover from the horrors civil war and the Manchu conquest.

From the book In Search of a Fictional Kingdom [Yofification] author Gumilev Lev Nikolaevich

Map 1. Tribes of the Great Steppe from the 8th to the 10th centuries. General comment. In the 8th century dominance over the Great Steppe passed from the Turks to the Uyghurs (747) and then to the Kyrgyz (847), but the borders of the Khaganates are omitted on the map (see L.N. Gumilyov, Ancient Turks. M., 1967). Attention paid to location

From the book Turkic Empire. Great civilization author Rakhmanaliev Rustan

Religions of the Great Steppe Let us trace the process of penetration of religions into the Great Steppe in the time period from the 3rd century. and, looking ahead, to the 11th century. At all times, every individual, being alone, felt defenseless. Family affiliation or

author

Chapter I Early nomads of the Great Steppe Ancient history The Great Steppe is, first of all, the history of horse breeding tribes that mastered the steppes in the 3rd–2nd millennium BC. e. Ethnic composition population of the steppes has changed over the course of thousands of years of history, and below we will trace the dynamics

From the book States and Peoples of the Eurasian Steppes: from Antiquity to Modern Times author Klyashtorny Sergey Grigorievich

Ethnolinguistic situation in the Great Steppe at the beginning of the 1st millennium AD. e. During the 1st millennium BC. e. - first half of the 1st millennium AD e. The settled population and nomadic tribes in the strip of steppes and mountains between the Lower Volga region and Altai were predominantly speakers of Indo-European languages.

From the book Research and Articles author Nikitin Andrey Leonidovich

“Swans” of the Great Steppe All textbooks of Russian history mention the Polovtsians as something self-evident and well-known. They can be found on the pages of historical novels and on the stage of opera houses. And it always turns out that the Polovtsians are the fiends of hell, their worst enemies

From the book History of the Turks by Aji Murad

Kipchaks. Ancient History of the Turkic People and the Great SteppeThe Steppe is our Homelandand the Altai is our cradleIntroductionMany people, in fact billions of them around the Earth, speak Turkic languages ​​today, and have done so since the beginnings of history, from snow-swept Yakutia in Northeast Asia to temperate Central Europe, from chilly Siberia to torrid India, and even in a

From the book Wormwood My Way [collection] by Aji Murad

World of the Great Steppe The earliest runic inscriptions found in Europe and attributed to Gothic: a spearhead from Ovel (Volyn, 4th century) and a gold ring from Pietroassa, dating back to 375. An attempt to read them in ancient Turkic shows a very specific: “Win,

Even in the first year of the history department, the author came up with the idea of ​​filling the gap in World history, writing the history of the peoples who lived between cultural regions: Western Europe, Levant (Middle East) and China ( Far East). The task turned out to be extremely difficult; it could not be solved without the help of geography, because the borders of regions moved repeatedly over the historical period, the ethnic content of the Great Steppe and the countries adjacent to it often changed both as a result of the processes of ethnogenesis, and because of the constant migrations of ethnic groups and the displacement of some worldviews by others. The physical and geographical situation did not remain stable. In place of forests, steppes and deserts arose both due to climatic fluctuations and due to the predatory impact of humans on the natural environment. As a result, people had to change systems of economic activity, which, in turn, influenced the nature of social relationships and cultures. And cultural ties brought diversity to the worldview of the population of the Eurasian continent, something specific in each era.

All these components of the historical process are so closely interconnected that it is impossible to omit any of them, but if we add to them chronological, genealogical, sociological, etc. clarifications, it turns out that the book will turn out to be a collection of various information and, informing the reader “what and who?” will not contain an answer to the questions: “how?”, “why?” and “what’s what?”, for the sake of which its outline was undertaken. Obviously, to solve the problem it is necessary to apply suitable research techniques.

To describe the events taking place in Eastern Eurasia, a three-level presentation technique was used. The smallest details necessary to clarify the course of events were described in the article using traditional methods of historical research. More than a hundred of these articles - historical, geographical and archaeological - had to be written.

The second level - generalization - gave birth to special monographs (Hunnu. M., 1960; Huns in China. M., 1974; Ancient Turks. M., 1967; Searches for a fictional kingdom. M., 1970; Discovery of Khazaria. M., 1966 ). All of them were also performed using traditional techniques, with one exception - they were written not in academic language, but in a “funny Russian style,” which increased the digestibility of the text and expanded the circle of readers.

However, the main goal was not achieved, because the question was left unanswered: where are the “beginnings and ends,” that is, the boundaries, of historical and geographical phenomena? Therefore, it was necessary to specifically analyze the theory of the origin and disappearance of ethnic groups against the backdrop of a changing natural environment. Only after this did it become possible to move from describing history to understanding it as a series of regular processes in the biosphere and sociosphere. But since the biosphere, like the entire surface of the Earth, is mosaic, collisions of ethnogenesis with each other are inevitable. Then the need arose for another book, namely this very one, now offered to the reader. But is the problem worth the amount of work required to solve it? It's worth it, and here's why.

In the history of mankind, not all eras are covered equally. Where the processes of sociogenesis, ethnogenesis and noogenesis (cultural development) proceeded without disruption from hostile neighbors, it was easy for historians. When ethnic groups or states clashed, the tragic consequences were simply recorded and one of the parties was declared guilty of the disasters of the other. But where the entire outline of history took place in the zone of antagonistic contact, it is very difficult to grasp the pattern; therefore, these sections of history remained either unwritten or written extremely cursorily and superficially. It’s a pity, because these particular eras were important not only for their participants, but also for world history.

These include the period of the 9th–12th centuries. in South Eastern Europe. Contacts between the Slavs and the Rus, the nomads and the sedentary, the Christians and the pagans, and the Khazars with the Jews took place here. Everything was mixed up and confused until Vladimir Monomakh brought clarity with an armed hand, after which it finally became clear where ours were and where the foes were.

And here the philistine question constantly arises: why study processes that we cannot control? Is there any practical sense in this that justifies the labor costs and material losses? Let's answer with examples! People do not know how to control earthquakes or the paths of cyclones, but seismography and meteorology help to escape from natural disasters and, conversely, to use favorable conditions with the greatest effect. After all, in the event of a tsunami, which we cannot prevent, it makes no difference whether we go to a nearby mountain or let the ocean wave wash us to the bottom. For the sake of one’s own salvation, it is necessary to study volcanic activity, which is as spontaneous as ethnogenesis.

Formulation of the problem

The principle of ethnogenesis is the extinction of impulse due to entropy, or, what is the same, the loss of passionarity of the system due to resistance environment, ethnic and natural, does not exhaust the variety of historical and geographical collisions. Of course, if ethnic groups, and even more so their complicated structures - super-ethnic groups, live in their ecological niches - enclosing landscapes, then the ethnogenesis curve reflects their development quite fully. But if large migrations occur, associated with social, economic, political and ideological phenomena, and even with different passionary tensions of the ethnic groups participating in the events, then special problem– a break or displacement of the direct (orthogenic) directions of ethnogenesis, which is always fraught with surprises, usually unpleasant and sometimes tragic.

If during such collisions the ethnic group does not disappear, then the process is restored, but the exogenous impact always leaves scars on the body of the ethnic group and the memory of losses, often irreparable. Superethnic contacts generate violations of the pattern. They should always be taken into account as zigzags, the very presence of which is a necessary component of ethnogenesis, because no one lives alone, and relationships between neighbors can be varied.

When two systems interact, the problem is easily solved by contrasting “we are our enemies,” but with three or more systems it is difficult to obtain a solution. Namely, three ethnocultural traditions collided in Eastern Europe in the 9th–11th centuries, and only in the 12th century. The zigzag of history was overcome, after which cultural flourishing began with a passionary decline, i.e., the inertial phase of ethnogenesis. This is a unique version of ethnic history, and that is why it is of interest in a number of aspects, which will be discussed below.

The evolutionary theory of Darwin and Lamarck was proposed to explain speciation, and ethnogenesis is an intraspecific and specific process. For this reason alone, the application of the principles of evolution to ethnic phenomena is unlawful.

Ethnic processes are discrete (intermittent), and exceptions to this rule - persistent (solid, stable) - do not prolong their life, but stop it, as Faust stopped the moment; but it was then that Mephistopheles grabbed him! This means that for a dynamic ethnic group such a solution to the problem of immortality is contraindicated.

For a relict persistent ethnic group, in addition to complete isolation, three options are possible: 1) wait until the neighbors are exterminated (elimination); 2) join the living superethnos during the change of phases and strengthen in it (incorporation); 3) scatter differently (dispersion). All three options can be traced back to just one century - the XII. This century is like an intermission between the breakdown of the world of Islam, the resuscitation of Byzantium and the childish riot of “Christian” Europe, pompously called “crusades.” Here it is easy to trace variations in the relationship between Rus' and the Steppe. The most remarkable historians of the 18th–19th centuries were engaged in this, as a result of which one should become familiar with their ideas, but, of course, from the point of view of ethnology, for this new science has already shown what it is capable of. And the main thesis of ethnology is dialectical: a new ethnic group, young and creative, arises suddenly, breaking the dilapidated culture and the soulless, i.e., having lost the ability to create, life of the old ethnic groups, be they relics or simply obscurantists; in a thunderstorm and storm he asserts his right to a place in the sun, in blood and torment he finds his ideal of beauty and wisdom, and then, as he grows old, he collects the remains of antiquities that he once destroyed. This is called rebirth, although it would be more correct to say “degeneration.” And if a new push does not shake up the decrepit ethnic groups, then they are in danger of becoming relics. But the shocks are repeated, albeit randomly, and humanity exists in its diversity. This is what our conversation with the reader will be about.