CC BY
17Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
UDC 94 https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73/50
THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT STAGES OF THE TASHKENT OASIS
©Ibragimov R., National Archaeological Center of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan, [email protected]
ЭТАПЫ ИСТОРИЧЕСКОГО РАЗВИТИЯ ТАШКЕНТСКОГО ОАЗИСА
©Ибрагимов Р. З., Национальный центр археологии Академии наук Узбекистана, г. Ташкент, Узбекистан, [email protected]
Abstract. The article is devoted to the development of ancient cultural processes of the Tashkent oasis on the basis of data collected as a result of archaeological research of monuments. The scientific views of researchers on the history of the oasis are critically examined and enriched with new scientific ideas and conclusions based on their comparative analysis.
Аннотация. Статья посвящена развитию древних культурных процессов Ташкентского оазиса на основе данных, собранных в результате археологических исследований памятников. Критически рассмотрены научные взгляды исследователей на историю оазиса и обогащены новыми научными идеями и выводами, основанными на их сравнительном анализе.
Keywords: Tashkent oasis, Paleolithic, Bronze Age, Early Iron Age, Antiquity, Burgulik culture, Melon culture, settlements, tombs, Qang state, Yuni property.
Ключевые слова: Ташкентский оазис, палеолит, бронзовый век, ранний железный век, античность, бургуликская культура, дынная культура, поселения, гробницы, государство Кан, Юниское владение.
Introduction
The Tashkent oasis, one of the most important historical and cultural regions of Central Asia, is located in the north-eastern part of the region, on the right bank of the middle reaches of the Syrdarya River and consists of the Chirchik and Ahangaron micro districts. The Tashkent oasis is bordered on the northeast, east and northwest by the Qurama, Chatkal, Piskom, Ugom and Qorjantov mountains, which are part of the Western Tianshan mountain system, on the southeast by the Bekabad plains, on the west by the Keles steppe and on the south by the Syrdarya. Most of the Tashkent oasis consists of the foothills (Chirchik-Ahangaron) sloping towards the Syrdarya.
Favorable natural and geographical conditions of the Tashkent oasis have long created opportunities for human habitation. The region has been developed by primitive people since the early Paleolithic period. Here the monuments of the Paleolithic period are located mainly in
Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
the mountainous and foothill areas of the oasis, partly in the plains. In the mountains and foothills, the monuments are considered to be cultural stratified places where primitive people lived permanently. Obirahmat [1] Human bones found in the Kolbulak area [2] indicate that the oasis played an important role in the anthropogenesis process.
Materials and methods
It is known that during the Mesolithic period, the earth was cleared of ice and significant changes took place in the social life of mankind. During this period, a specialized form of subsistence farming developed in the hot southern regions of the world, leading to the formation of the first production economy (agriculture and animal husbandry). In the Tashkent oasis, there are very few monuments of this period. The bones of cattle, sheep and goats, along with stone tools, were found in the area of Koshilish, Bozsuv I, studied by O. I. Islamov. Paleozoologist R. K. Kambariddinov believed that several bones of young cattle found in the area belonged to a domesticated animal [2].
But the fact that a process that has not been observed anywhere in the world since the early Mesolithic period took place in the Culture of the Accession is a matter far from scientific truth. There are few monuments of the Neolithic period, which do not reveal the features of the oasis of this period. A general conclusion can be drawn about the existence of a group of primitive people who lived on hunting in the Mesolithic-Neolithic period in the Tashkent oasis.
The Bronze Age In the southern regions of Eurasia, profound socio-economic and cultural changes took place. The first urban centers developed in the Middle East, the Middle East, and Asia Minor, and continued with the emergence of regional kingdoms. These processes also took place in the southern lands of Central Asia. The first urban centers were developed in place of such settlements as Oltintepa, Gonurtepa, Jarquton. In the northern part of Eurasia, a productive economy was formed during this period and the culture of cattle-breeding developed.
In the second millennium BC, the northern steppes of Central Asia were inhabited by tribes belonging to the Andronovo culture, which practiced nomadic pastoralism. They lived on a livestock farm. He raised mainly sheep, goats, cattle and yearlings. Lalmi farming was a subsidiary form of farming. In agriculture, barley, wheat, millet and other cereals are grown.
It is known that in the III-II millennium BC, the end of the Atlantic climate, the drying up of the weather in Eurasia, led to the migration of peoples belonging to the Andronovo culture to the south. Their migration intensified in the middle of the second millennium BC and spread to the southern lands of Central Asia in the last quarter of the millennium.
Late Bronze Age sites in the Tashkent oasis (Serkali and Quyun), burial structures (Nikiforov lands, graves 1-5 in the Charvak Reservoir, graves in the villages of Iskandar and Ertosh), random finds (Chimbaylik Treasure, Tashkent Canal Finds and Tuyabogis material objects, the find of the village of Ertosh).
Their description is described in the scientific works of A. I. Terenozhkin, G. V. Oboldueva, M. E. Voronets, S. Rakhimov, H. Duke, F. A. Maksudov and S. R. Ilyasova [3, 4]. The exact period of these monuments has not been determined. Generalizing them, E. E. Kuzmina divided them into the last stage of Srub culture and Fedorov stages of Andronovo culture [5]. According to archaeologist A. Z. Beisenov, there are no monuments of Andronovo culture in Kazakhstan after the 15th century BC. The arrival of the last wave of Andronov culture in the Tashkent oasis dates back to this period.
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
H. Duke believes that the Burgulik culture was the result of the settlement of peoples belonging to the Andronov culture [4]. The French expert J. Benduza-Sarmiento et al. compared the basement houses in the lands of the Tuyaboguz reservoir with the houses of the Late Bronze Age in the lower reaches of the Amudarya and believes that the Burgulik culture was formed under the influence of the Tozabogyob culture [6].
In general, the influence of the Andronovo culture prevailed in the formation of the Burgulik culture. If the lower date of the Burgulik culture is dated to the XIII century BC by S. R. Baratov, it would be correct to date the monuments of the Tashkent Bronze Age to the first half of the second and third quarters of the II millennium BC [7].
In general, the Bronze Age tombs found in the Tashkent oasis are located mainly in mountainous and foothill or hilly areas, which are suitable for animal husbandry. The peoples of the Late Bronze Age Tozabogyob culture of the Andronov culture in the lands of the Southern Akchadarya valley of the Amudarya also initially dominated the form of animal husbandry [6].
The tombs of the Late Bronze Age cattle-breeding tribes of the Zarafshan oasis [8], Kofirnahr and Vakhsh [9] oases are also located in the foothills near the reservoir, which is mainly suitable for grazing livestock.
The history of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of the Tashkent oasis is reflected in the Burgulik culture. Villages consisting of basement dwellings belonging to this culture are mainly scattered near river basins and in mountain and foothill areas. Finds of Burgulik culture were first identified by A. I. Terenozhkin in 1940 during the construction of the Tashkent Canal in the Burguliksay area and included in archaeology as a separate Burgulik culture [3]
Monuments of burglary culture were studied in the 70s of the XX century by Yu. F. Buryakov [9], G. Dadabaev, H. Duke [4] and partly in the XXI century by S. Ilyasova, F. Maksudov. At present, more than a dozen places in the Tashkent oasis have been identified in the Burgulik culture. Yu. F. Buryakov divided this culture into two stages (Burgulik I IX-VII BC, Burgulik II VI-IV centuries BC) [9]. S. R. Baratov dated its first stage to the XIII-IX centuries BC [7].
It was established that the economy of the Burgu culture consisted of agriculture, animal husbandry and handicrafts. Based on his observations in the Tuyaboguz reservoir, Yu. F. Buryakov believes that the Burguls were engaged in irrigated agriculture [9]. According to him, the crop was irrigated by a ditch leading from Ahangaran.
However, during this period it was not possible to build canals on the lands of the Tuyaboguz reservoir, which is a proluvial area.
People living in the Tuyaboguz area were engaged in liman-style (lalmi) farming, which was based on irrigating the fields at the foot of the rivers with rainwater. It is known from the experience of the Neolithic period that the productivity of dry farming was very low and could not adequately meet the food needs of the population [3].
In contrast, there are many animal bones in Burgulik, among which specimens belonging to cattle predominate over the bones of other species. In this case, the Burgulik culture was dominated by livestock, and they raised more cattle. Agriculture was a subsidiary farm.
Another aspect of Burgundy culture is the question of its second stage. M. I. Filanovich believes that the basement houses studied by G. Dadabaev below the Shoshtepa settlement are antiquated to the first stage of culture (Burgulik I), and in the VII century BC the population moved here to the south, to Ustrushna [10]. In the last century, the researcher studied graves that touched the cattle tribes located above the basement houses. According to him, the rest of the population was
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
mixed with nomadic herdsmen from the Eurasian steppes in the VI century BC. It was these herdsmen who owned the tombs in Shoshtepa.
It should be noted that H. Duke built a trench 20-25 m wide, 2.0-2.5 m deep and 40-42x24^12 cm on three sides of the settlement on the left bank of the Ahangaron River (Location 1) [4]. noted a 2-meter-thick defensive wall made of dimensional raw brick. It is dated to the IX-VIII centuries BC and is described as an emerging city [11].
During this period, in the southern agricultural centers of Central Asia (Bactria, Sogd, Margiyana) there was a complex of the first phase of the spring. They are considered to be on a par with the first stage of Burgulik culture and have close similarities in material culture and economy. In the next stage, i. e. in the VIII-VII centuries BC, the irrigation system was improved in the southern regions, the ancient cities were replaced by agricultural villages, and in the third stage, the cities were further developed. The same rate of development has been maintained at both stages of the Burgundy culture.
The unchanging continuity of economic and material culture for ten centuries has not been observed in any part of Central Asia. In general, the lands of the middle reaches of the Syrdarya have been occupied by nomadic pastoral tribes since the second quarter of the first millennium BC. Samples of their material culture have been identified in the 1st burial mound of the Jomantoba cemetery of the VII-VI centuries BC, located in the Chordara area. The materials found in the Burchmullo tomb in the Tashkent oasis date back to the 5th-3rd centuries BC. These monuments serve to confirm the closeness of the opinion expressed by M. I. Filanovich [10].
Accordingly, based on the materials of the few archaeological monuments identified in the middle reaches of the Syrdarya and comparisons with other lands of Central Asia, it would be scientifically expedient to consider the second-Burgulik II stage (VII/VII-IV centuries BC) as a separate cultural complex.
Information about the ancient cattle-breeding Sak tribes is preserved in the rock inscriptions of Herodotus (VI century BC), Hellanica (V century), Darius I and Behustun. These written sources include "Sogdian Transi Saks", "Yaksart Orti Saks", "Xaoma Preparatory Saks", "Tigrahauda Saks". Some of them lived beyond the Syrdarya, especially in the Tashkent oasis. Based on these data and the tombs of Jomantoba 1 and Birchmulla mentioned above, it would be a scientifically correct conclusion to accept the second stage of the Burgulik culture as an archaeological complex belonging to the Saks.
From the last quarter of the 4th millennium BC, the influence of Sogdian culture began behind the Syrdarya. In the lower layer of the ancient city near the city of Shymkent in southern Kazakhstan, pottery was found, similar to the pottery of Sogdia of the V-IV centuries BC [4].
Naturally, they belonged to the people who retreated behind the Syrdarya when Alexander the Great's armies marched on Sogdia in 329 BC. Ancient written sources state that the Seleucid general Demodam crossed the Yaksart (Syrdarya) and built a fortress (city) to resist the nomadic Scythians (sak). The first Shahristan (Shahristan I) defensive wall of Qanqa settlement, located 70 km south of Tashkent in the territory of Akkurgan district, was built in the form of a square (39x39x10-12, 40x40x10-12 cm) from raw brick in Hellenic architecture. considers the role of [9]. Thus, the first city in the Tashkent oasis was formed in the IV/III centuries BC. This city was Antioch behind Yaksart. The next stage of cultural development in the Tashkent oasis is associated with the formation of the Melon culture. According to L. M. Levina, some rivers of the Syrdarya became dehydrated in the III-II centuries BC. As a result, the Babishmulla and Chirikrabad cultures here were in crisis [12].
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
A group of people living in this area migrated to Parthia (Dakhlar) in the middle of the 3rd century BC and founded the Arshakian dynasty. Another group settled in the Tashkent oasis and created the Melon culture. The monuments of the material culture of the Melon I, in particular, the buckle depicting the lying position of the camel, the pottery is similar to the samples of the material culture of the Eastern Aral Sea region and the Prokhorov culture of the Sarmatians (IV/III-II centuries BC) [11].
The development of urban planning, irrigated agriculture and metallurgy is a characteristic feature of the melon culture. Shoshtepa residential complex is very close to the architecture of the Eastern Aral Sea and Khorezm. A written source from the Han period of China (3rd centuries BC) lists the Qang state, which included five small estates (Suse, Fumu, Yuni, Gi, Yuegyan). Its capital was the city of Bityan, located on the lands of Loyueni. Researchers place the property of Yuni or Loyue in the Tashkent oasis. One of the important issues is to study the relationship between the Qang state and the Melon culture. Based on data from Chinese sources, the formation of the Qang state dates back to mil. av. Marking with the II century has become a tradition. K. Sh. Shoniyozov, on the other hand, ruled over the Qang state. av. It is believed to have originated in the middle of the century as a result of the struggle of the local nomadic population against the Seleucid dynasty in the early 3rd century [13].
B. A. Litvinsky considers the Melon Complex I to be the first stage of the Qang state and the last Sak state [14]. The Qang state appeared before the 2nd century BC, during the formation of the Melon culture, and their date is not later than the 3rd century BC. In the first stage of the melon culture, the power of the Qang state increased and the urban culture further developed. The capital of the country, Bityan (Qanqa), will expand and become a major trade and production center. During this period, its area expanded to 150 hectares and was surrounded by a new defensive wall. New urban centers are emerging in the oasis. Ancient cities such as Shokhrukhiya, Oktepa 2 (Southern Kazakhstan), located along the Kovunchitepa, Shoshtepa, Zangoritepa, Akkurgan and Syrdarya rivers, will appear. According to Yu. F. Buryakov, Shahrukhiya was replaced by a city in the 1st century [9].
The history of the ancient city has a square shape (sides 600*600 m.), and in the Syrdarya flood its main part, in particular, the arch, was completely destroyed. According to researchers, the defensive wall of Oktepa 2 was built in the first century AD.
In ancient times, the growth of the power of the Qang state played an important role in the socio-economic and cultural development of the Tashkent oasis, especially in the development of urbanization. During the development of the Qang state, there were more than a dozen cities in the Tashkent oasis. According to Yu. F. Buryakov's archaeological research, there are more than 100 archaeological sites of antiquity in the oasis, 13 of which are ancient cities [9]. The monuments of the first stage of the ancient period of the oasis were mainly collected in the southern lands of the oasis, and in the next stage expanded to the north.
The development of trade and economic relations on the Great Silk Road also plays an important role in the development of the Tashkent oasis. A branch of the trade route from China through the Fergana Valley to the Syrdarya, passing through the territory of the Tashkent oasis, passed through the settlement near Shahrukh on the Yaksart (Syrdarya), and passed through Sogd to Bactria and Margiyana. Another branch went east along the river to the Aral Sea (Yantsai state) and Khorezm. Craftsmanship and trade are highly developed in the cities along the trade route.
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
One of the largest city centers of the Tashkent oasis, Kanka, has a trade and production center of more than ten hectares. Metal reserves mined from Karamazor Mountain have played an important role in the industrial development of the country's cities. The Tashkent oasis was later recorded in Chinese Beishi as Chjeshi (Chjesi), Shi. The term Shi means stone in Chinese.
Yu. F. Buryakov believes that it was used for the turquoise stone, which is a symbol of victory. Archaeological evidence has shown that turquoise was mined from deposits such as Feruzakon and Aktashkon in the Qurama Mountains [15].
The history of the last ancient period of the Tashkent oasis is mentioned in the written monuments of the Sassanid king Shopur I in the Zoroastrian tomb. It first mentions the name Chach or Chachistan. Some researchers believe that the term Chach is the oldest of the Saxon period, with its territorial boundary extending to the Aral Sea.
Conclusion
In general, the climate and rich nature of the Tashkent oasis have created favorable conditions for human habitation since ancient times. The favorable natural conditions of the oasis have led to the long-term preservation of the ancient economic traditions of the population. During the Bronze Age, when the first urban culture was formed in the southern regions of Central Asia, nomadic tribes engaged in animal husbandry in the Tashkent oasis. Cities appeared much later in the country. Cities came into being under the direct cultural influence of neighboring areas (Qanqa, Qovunchitepa, Shoshtepa, etc.). The underground ore deposits of the Chatkal-Qurama Mountains played an important role in the social-economic and cultural development of the country in ancient times. The fact that the international trade route passes through the oasis is also an important factor in economic and cultural development.
References:
1. Glants, M., Viola, B., & Chikisheva, T. A. (2004). Novye ostanki gominidov iz grota Obi-Rakhmat. Grot Obi-Rakhmat. Novosibirsk, 77-99. (in Russian).
2. Islamov, U. I. (1970). Mezoliticheskaya stoyanka Kushilish pod Tashkentom. Obshchestvennye nauki Uzbekistana, (7), 54-57. (in Russian).
3. Terenozhkin, A. I. (1950). Sogd i Chach. In Kratkie soobshcheniya instituta istorii material'noi kul'tury, 33, 152-169. (in Russian).
4. Duke, Kh. (1982). Tuyabuguzskie poselenie burgulyukskoi kul'tury. Tashkent. 77-73.
5. Kuzmina, E. E. (2008). Arii - put' na yug. St. Petersburg. (in Russian).
6. Bendezu-Sarmiento, J., & Lhuillier, J. (2009). Between Nomadic and Sedentary Cultures: study the Ancient Iron Age cultures of in Chach. Is it possible to speak about an influence of Khorezm? In Toshkent sha^rining 2200-iillik yubileiiga basishlangan kha^aro anzhuman materiallari, Tashkent.
7. Baratov, S. R. (2008). Burgulik madaniyati. Toshkent vox,asi arkheologiyasi. Tashkent.
8. Bobomulloev, B. S. (2020). Petroglify Soi Sabag v verkhov'e Zeravshana. Uchenye zapiski muzeya-zapovednika «TomskayaPisanitsa», (12), 22-34. (in Russian).
Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 7. №12. 2021
https://www.bulletennauki.com https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
9. Buryakov, Yu. F. (1983). Genezis i etapy razvitiya gorodskoi kul'tury Tashkentskogo oazisa (v drevnosti i srednevekov'e). 2. Illyustratsii.
10. Filanovich, M. I. (2010). Drevnyaya i srednevekovaya istoriya Tashkenta v arkheologicheskikh istochnikakh. Tashkent, 84-92. (in Russian).
11. Masson, V. M. (1971). Poselenie Dzheitun. Leningrad. (in Russian).
12. Levina, L. M. (1996). Etnokul'turnaya istoriya Vostochnogo Priaral'ya. I tysyachiletie do n.e. I tysyachiletie n.e. Moscow. (in Russian).
13. Shoniezov, K. Sh. (2001). Yzbek khal^ining shakllanish zharaeni. Tashkent.
14. Litvinskii, B. A. (1968). Kangyuisko-sarmatskii farn. Dushanbe. (in Russian).
15. Buryakov, Yu. F., Bogomolov, G. I., & Fonarev, S. A. (1990). Drevnii i srednevekovyi gorod Vostochnogo Maverannakhra. Tashkent. (in Russian).
Список литературы:
1. Гланц М., Виола Б., Чикишева Т. А. Новые останки гоминидов из грота Оби-Рахмат // Грот Оби-Рахмат. Новосибирск: Изд-во ИАЭТ СО РАН. 2004. С. 77-99.
2. Исламов У И. Мезолитическая стоянка Кушилиш под Ташкентом // Общественные науки Узбекистана. 1970. №7. С. 54-57.
3. Тереножкин А. И. Согд и Чач // Краткие сообщения института истории материальной культуры. 1950. Т. 33. С. 152-169.
4. Дуке Х. Туябугузские поселения бургулюкской культуры. Ташкент. 1982. С. 57-73.
5. Кузьмина Е. Е. Арии - путь на юг. СПб.: Летний сад, 2008. 557 с.
6. Bendezu-Sarmiento J., Lhuillier J. Between Nomadic and Sedentary Cultures: study the Ancient Iron Age cultures of in Chach. Is it possible to speak about an influence of Khorezm? Тошкент шахрининг 2200-йиллик юбилейига багишланган халкаро анжуман материаллари. Ташкент, 2009.
7. Баратов С. Р. Бургулик маданияти. Тошкент вохаси археологияси. Ташкент, 2008.
8. Бобомуллоев Б. С. Петроглифы Сой Сабаг в верховье Зеравшана // Ученые записки музея-заповедника «Томская Писаница». 2020. №12. С. 22-34.
9. Буряков Ю. Ф. Генезис и этапы развития городской культуры Ташкентского оазиса (в древности и средневековье). Т. 2. Иллюстрации. 1983.
10. Филанович М. И. Древняя и средневековая история Ташкента в археологических источниках. Ташкент, 2010. С. 84-92.
11. Массон В. М. Поселение Джейтун. Л.: Наука. 1971.
12. Левина Л. М. Этнокультурная история Восточного Приаралья. I тысячелетие до н. э. I тысячелетие н. э. М.: Восточная литература. 1996.
13. Шониезов К. Ш. Узбек халкининг шаклланиш жараени. Ташкент, 2001.
14. Литвинский Б. А. Кангюйско-сарматский фарн. Душанбе. 1968. С. 27.
15. Буряков Ю. Ф., Богомолов Г. И., Фонарев С. А. Древний и средневековый город Восточного Мавераннахра. Ташкент: Фан, 1990. 128 с.
Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice https://www.bulletennauki.com Т. 7. №12. 2021 https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73
Работа поступила в редакцию 15.11.2021 г. Принята к публикации 17.11.2021 г.
Ссылка для цитирования:
Ibragimov R. The Historical Development Stages of the Tashkent Oasis // Бюллетень науки и практики. 2021. Т. 7. №12. С. 401-408. https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73/50
Cite as (APA):
Ibragimov, R. (2021). The Historical Development Stages of the Tashkent Oasis. Bulletin of Science and Practice, 7(12), 401-408. https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/73/50
