CC BY
81
Section 3. History and archaeology
https://doi.org/10.29013/ESR-20-5.6-9-12
Abdukayumov Asror Rayimovich, PhD, Termez state university Termez city, Uzbekistan E-mail: abdukayumov1980@yandex.ru
EARLY SETTLEMENTS OF CENTRAL ASIA AS A FACTOR OF FORMATION OF FIRST SOCIETIES (ON EXAMPLE OF THE SETTLEMENT OF SARAZM)
Abstract. The issue explores the interpretation of the formation of the first societies in Central Asia. The role of the settlement of Sarazm in the development of social relations and social structures in the region is studied. On the methodological aspect, the method of generalizing analysis of archaeological, etymological and source studies is chosen. The application of this method made it possible for the first time to determine and clarify the transitional stages from primitive to urban culture and civilization in human history.
Keywords: Sarazm, Avesta, village, settlement, sociality, kind, neighboring community, tribe, society, structure.
Introduction. The Eneolithic period in archeology is assimilated as an era by the invention of man of the first ore from copper metals. Therefore, researchers of different spheres of historical science consider the Eneolithic period a rapid development after the "Neolithic revolution" of production farms: agriculture, handicraft and cattle breeding, as well as the emergence of trade in the form of trade between different communities, tribes and nationalities. The study of Eneolithic settlements in Central Asia began at the beginning of the 20th century by the archaeologist R. Pumpelli [1] and has been systematically continued to this day. Archaeological excavations in Central Asia gives researchers the opportunity to compile a geographical map of the monuments for the periods of the Eneolithic and Bronze [2; 129]. This article does not provide for exploring the ar-
chaeological study of the Eneolithic and Bronze
Ages. I wanted to carefully analyze the social development in these ancient settlements on the basis of a scientific synthesis of studies of archeology, etymology and source study.
Sarazm is an ancient settlement located 15 km west of the current city of Panjakent (Tadjikstan). In the monument, the life of settled communities existed for one and a half millennia, with the greatest flowering during the periods of the Late Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age. According to researchers, the settlement arose as a result of migration processes, the general appearance of architecture, material culture, economy, cults indicate its southern origin (Southern Tukmenistan), associated with the zone of settled agricultural crops that formed during the Neolithic period. The basis of the economy of the in-
habitants of Sarazm was agriculture and cattle breeding, and various specialized industries, primarily metallurgy, were of no small importance. The main metallurgy deposits of Yori, Kanchoch and Dzhilau were 40-50 km east of the settlement. In such an abundance of deposits, from the end of the fourth millennium BC the settlement became one of the largest centers of ancient metallurgy in Central Asia. Jewelry findings, like gold and silver beads, as well as waste from jewelry production-lapis lazuli, turquoise and other minerals show a high development in jewelry art. And the findings of bracelets adorned with obviously imported sea shells and vessels of northern Iranian origin proves that Sarazm was an amazing center for crossing a wide variety of ties and trade contacts [3]. Thus, the favorable natural and environmental conditions of the settlement of Sarazm allowed its inhabited communities to develop about 100 hectares of land.
Topics. The most pressing problem of historical sciences today is to study the development of social relations of communities, the emergence of estates living in settlements such as Sarazm at the time of the formation of cities and early civilizations. One of the reasons for the complication of the social organization of settled farmers and cattle breeders is the possibility ofliving in one place, in one settlement, a significant number of people. According to studies, we know that during the Neolithic period, the average population of the villages amounted to 100-300 people [4, 153], from 50-70 to 150-300 inhabitants lived in small villages of the Jeytun culture, and even 600-800 in large villages [5, 142]. It is likely that population growth due to land tightness led to resettlement, traced, in particular, in two directions: to the north, to the Zeravshan valley, and to the south, to Seistan. Another reason for the complexity of the structure of society is the need for exchange between neighboring and remote villages. Environmental conditions that largely determine the characteristics of the economy, even in small areas were not completely identical, which led to some specialization of
economic activity. Thus, farmers and cattle breeders of the Eneolithic were interested not only in land favorable for agriculture, but also in areas promising in relation to the possibilities of extraction, processing, and exchange of minerals.
Theoretical review. It should be noted that the interpretation of archaeological cultures and finds, according to the scientific refinement of the transitional stage of humanity from primitive to the emergence of cities and civilizations, has always depended and continues to depend on theories developed by ethnographers, ethnologists and sociologists [2, 193]. The current degree of development of historical thinking, in our opinion, on the basis of even a brief analysis of studies of source studies and etymology gives us some answers in this direction. Thanks to research in the field of source studies, we find such evidence that society was formed in a slow and long-term process of merging several and different tribal communities, primarily in places where the climatic conditions enabled the communities to switch to settled life. We find such facts in the Avesta, which was considered the holy book of the religion of Zoroastrianism, distributed in agricultural and settled cattle-breeding communities of Central Asia and Eastern Iran in the first half of the 1st millennium BC. Here we did not want to analyze in detail the history of the study of the Avesta, we only pay attention to the terms that were used in the most ancient parts of this book as a designation of the main social structures, which were organizations that formed the society itself in the territories of modern Central Asia.
The lowest structure of society in the Avesta is the term "nmana" ("dmana"), which means "house" as the family's dwelling, as well as its household (Yasna, XXXI-16.18; Yasht, V-38.62.63; X-28.30; XVII-6.8). At the head of the family house is the householder - "nmano (dmano) paty", literally the head, the owner of the house. In turn, related family homes form a kind under the term "vis". The same term also refers to the ancestral village in the Avesta. The "vis" becomes a patriarchal kind, the totality of
"nman (dman)", united by descent from a common ancestor and called by the name or nickname of this ancestor. According to the Zoroastrian tradition, at least 15 families should be part of the kind [2, 220]. In the oldest parts of the Avesta, the kind is the main unit and carrier of the most important political, social and legal institutions. Pastures, fields, and the simplest irrigation facilities were the property of the "vis". At the head of the kind is "vispati" - master, master of the kind, usually the oldest of the kind. Since "vis" is not only a kind, but also a kind village, the "vispati" in the Avesta also acts as the head of the kind village. In the Ghats, according to researchers of the emerged part of the Avesta during the period of the prophet's activity, there is evidence that the kind village's were part of the territorial communal associations called "vrzana", which denoted the villages of the neighboring community [6, 185]. "Vrzana" in the Ghats stands in line with the terms "hvaytu" -family, relatives, and "aramyan" - a union of fellow tribesmen, possibly also a cult union [7]. In addition to "vis" and "vrzana", the term "gava" is mentioned in the Avesta - a village, a rural district, denoting a settlement of farmers and settled cattle breeders. There is also such a structure as "gava-shayana" or "gava-shiti" - in translation it means living in a village - the names used in the tenth Yashta to characterize the central belt of the earth, opposing the northern steppes inhabited by nomads [8]. Perhaps here we are talking about the first settlements with fortifications. The term "gava" appears in the same text, in combination with the Avestan geographical name Sogd: "gava Suguda" - Sogdian settlement. It should be noted that in our opinion it is here that the first signs of society appear, or we can get the primary evidence and facts about the formation of society itself [9, 28].
The development of new lands and pastures, the creation of irrigation facilities, and the complicated practice of water distribution to a large extent contributed to strengthening the importance of the neighboring community, and led to an ever greater
decomposition of the principles of the clan structure. The settlements of farmers and settled cattle breeders gradually turn out to be more based on economic ties than on purely tribal ones. Special designations also appear for the rural district-territory belonging to the neighboring community and encompassing several different tribal villages along with their pastures and fields. In the Ghats, the term "shoytra" is used, which denotes a rural district, tribal area, tribe [Yasna, XXXI-16; XXXII-10], and at the same time in Wis-pered, cultivated land, counties, land unit to which water, land and plants belong [Wispered, XVI-3]. The full next stage can be called a tribe, which is already mentioned in the Little Avesta under the term "zantu" quite rarely. This is consistent with the real situation of the tribe in the Avestan society. Unlike houses and a kind, the tribe enters the settlement of farmers and settled cattle breeders as a formal community, the degree of kinship is important inside the "vis" and "vrzan", only the fact of kinship is taken into account in the tribe. A larger unit than a tribe or region occupied by several tribes in the Ghats is defined by the term "dahu" [Yasht, XV-31]. In the Avesta, "dahu" is primarily a territorial, geographical concept, often indicating a significant ethnic community, but it is not yet a clear administrative unit within the existing state.
Thus, the early settlements, which formed from various tribal community-villages, in the process of slow merging in the development of a productive economy formed in society. In other, no hints of the presence of cities, urban life, which are considered the main criteria of civilization, are not emphasized in the Avesta. There are no special terms for the citadel. Analyzing the above terms in the Avesta, which denoted mainly the social structures of Central Asia and East Iran in the last quarter of the second and first half of the 1st millennium BC, it can be firmly established that in fact we should consider the word and concept of society as the primary element and category of civilization. And we can assume that the first societies are this voluntary community of peo-
ple, various tribal communities and tribes having a single territory, or rather real pastures and fields for the development of a productive economy, a common religion, language and culture [9, 30-31].
Result and Discussion. The analysis allows us to draw the following conclusions:
1. The study of the early settlements of Central Asia on the example of the Sarazm monument has an important scientific priority in the study of the transitional stage of human history from primitive to civilization.
2. Historiography on the study of the settlement of Sarazm shows that the early settlements were formed on the basis of a long process of merging various primitive communities, more precisely kind's. In this process, producing farms, mainly agriculture and a settled lifestyle, have become decisive factors.
3. And of course, the sociality of mankind made it possible to strengthen the relationship between different communities. It was manifesting their social
qualities that primitive communities at the time of civilization began to form and develop new social relations. In our opinion, such a long process went through a paradigm in a sedentary way with the life of primitive communities: a) small patriarchal family villages; b) tribal community-village; c) territorial neighboring community-rural district; d) the first societies - settlements.
3. The early settlements of Central Asia, and the planet Earth as a whole, is the primary point in the formation of urban culture, various spheres of production economy and service, political genesis, religion, science and art. From this point of view, it can be established that the early settlements are actually the first societies in the history of mankind. And also, the first societies are the paramount sign of civilizations.
4. Further research on the historiography ofvari-ous disciplines of historical science will provide new opportunities to clarify the stages of formation of ancient civilizations.
References:
1. Pumpelli R. Explorations in Turkestan. Expedition of 1904.- Prehistoric Civilization of Anau.-Vol. 1-2.- Washington, 1908.
2. Istoria of the Tajik people. The oldest and most ancient history.- T. 1. Ed. L. A. Litvinsky and V. A. Rano-va.- Dushanbe-Tehran, 1998.- 745 p.
3. Besenval R., Isakov A. Sarazm et les debuts du peuplement agricole dans la region de Samarkand. Arts Asiatiques.- Paris.- T. 44; Lyonnet B. Sarazm (Tadjikistan) ceramiques.- Paris, 1996.
4. Hole F. A. Investigating the origins of the Mesopotamian Civilizations // Sciense.- Vol.- No. 37. 1966.153 p.
5. Masson V. M. Jaytun Settlement // MIA.- No. 180. 1970.
6. Dyakonov I. M. The history of Midia from ancient times to the end of the 4th century BC - ML., 1956.-P. 180-189.
7. Benveniste E. Les classes sociales dans la tradition avestique // JA.- T.221.- No. 1.- P. 117-134.
8. Gershevich I. The Avestan Hymn to Mithra.- Cambridge, 1959.- P. 87-187.
9. Abdukayumov A.R. Towards a new approach to periodization of the prehistory. doi.org/10.29013/ EJHSS-20-1-24-32
