The problems of cultural genesis in the Southern Urals in the Early Middle Ages in the works of N. A. Mazhitov in the second half of the 1950s - mid-1960s.

Akhatov Al'bert Tagirovich PhD in History Scientific Associate, R. G. Kuzeev Institute for Ethnological Studies of the Ufa Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences 450077, Russia, respublika Bashkortostan, g. Ufa, ul. K. Marksa, 6 bertik@mail.ru Other publications by this author

On August 20, 2023, the famous Soviet and Russian scientist Niyaz Abdulkhakovich Mazhitov, one of the founders of archaeological science in the Republic of Bashkortostan, whose name is associated with the beginning of the formation and development of a special field – archaeology of the Middle Ages of the Southern Urals, would have turned 90 years old.

The study of the life and detail of scientists includes not only a description of their biographies, but also implies, first of all, the study of scientific heritage – the researcher's personal contribution to the development of certain research problems (including through the formation of a source base), the creation and development of individual areas, scientific schools, etc.

To date, many aspects of N. A. Mazhitov's life and work have been highlighted during numerous conferences ^{[10, 5, etc.]}. Some researchers have studied his contribution to the development of the problems of ethnocultural development of the Southern Urals in the era of antiquity and the Middle Ages, ethnogenesis and ethnopolitical history of the Bashkir people, etc. ^{[4, 1, etc.]}. At the same time, the contribution of Niyaz Abdulkhakovich Mazhitov in the field of research on the problems of cultural development (cultural genesis) in the Southern Urals in the Middle Ages, the beginning of the archaeological study of which is associated with his name, seems insufficiently studied.

N. A. Mazhitov is known to the scientific community not only as the discoverer and researcher of many monuments in the Republic of Bashkortostan, but also as a scientist who fruitfully combined theoretical developments and materials from various archaeological, ethnographic, historical, philological and other sciences. This allowed him to develop his own scientific concept of the ethnic history of the Southern Urals in the Early Middle Ages already at the early stages of his scientific activity – by the turn of 1950-1960.

The purpose of this work is to analyze the main works of N. A. Mazhitov published in the mid–1950s - mid–1960s and to consider the cultural aspects of his research on the ethnic history of the Southern Urals in the Early Middle Ages.

This period occupies a special place in the research activities of Niyaz Abdulkhakovich, who studied at that time mainly the monuments of the Bakhmutin, as well as the Pianobor and Turbasli cultures. During this period, N. A. Mazhitov was becoming a scientist; at the same time, he outlined the main directions and problems of his future scientific activity.

Having got a job in 1956 at the Institute of the History of Language and Literature of the BSF of the USSR Academy of Sciences (currently IIAL UFIC RAS), he was engaged in archaeological research within the framework of the research topic "Ancient History of Bashkiria" (subsection "Nizhne-Belskoye settlement"), declared for 1957-1960 and extended as "Ancient History of Bashkiria. The Age of Bronze and Early Iron" (subsection "The population of the northern regions of Bashkiria in the I millennium AD") until 1965. Since 1965, further research activities of N. A. Mazhitov were closely connected with the execution of the following research topic of the archeology and Ethnography sector of the IIAL "Archaeological map of the Southern Urals", planned for 1965-1970 by the head which Niyaz Abdulkhakovich himself became in 1965. The result of his research was the preparation and defense of the PhD thesis "Bakhmutin culture" in 1963 at the Institute of Archaeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences: (The population of Northern Bashkiria in the middle of the first millennium AD)" ^{[1, pp. 18-19]}.

It is worth noting that the stage under consideration falls at a time when in archaeology (after the criticism of the teachings of academician N.Ya. Marr by I. Stalin in 1950) "a "non-theoretical" period was established, stretching for two decades" ^{[3, p. 18]}. Archaeologists of Bashkortostan practically did not write special methodological works, which, of course, does not mean that they did not think about the theoretical component of their scientific activities, but tried to identify it in their publications. So, already in the first half of 1950, the future colleague of Niyaz Abdulkhakovich, Yusupov Harun Valeevich, for the first time in the history of archaeology of the Southern Urals and the Urals, raised the question of the presence of the Ugric component in the ethnic map of the region in the I millennium BC and outlined the ways and mechanism of its penetration into the region ^{[4, p. 61]}.

As already noted, throughout almost the entire designated period, N. A. Mazhitov conducted archaeological research on the monuments of mainly Bakhmutin culture: Yumakaevskoye, Afanasyevsky, Kansiyarskoye, Ardashevskoye, Tazlarovskoye settlements, Tugubaevskoye, Novokarskoye settlements (1957), Birsky burial ground (1958-1960, 1962), etc. At the same time, he examined the Chiatava (1957) and Kamyshly-Tamak (1961) burial grounds of the Pianobor culture, and also excavated the Novoturbasli mounds (1958-1959), according to the results of which he distinguished them into a special Turbasli culture.

The results of the first years of research were published by N. A. Mazhitov in the form of articles in the Bashkir archaeological collection ("Chiatava burial ground", "Kurgan burial ground in the village of Novo-Turbalsy", "Settlements of the Bakhmutin culture"), in which he concluded that the northwestern regions of Bashkiria in the I millennium BC were They are inhabited by tribes of the Pianobor culture, closely related in their development to the preceding tribes of the Ananyin culture. The close connection of the Bakhmutin culture with the local cultural communities of the previous era, revealed by him, allowed N. A. Mazhitov to join A.P. Smirnov's conclusion about the autochthonous nature of its origin. As for the materials of the Novo-Turbasli burial ground, he attributed it to the number of typical monuments of the Alan tribes, noting their proximity to the monuments of the Alan tribes of the Volga region and the North Caucasus ^{[2, pp. 113, 142, 151]}.

Later, he developed his preliminary conclusions and outlined his concept of the ethnic history of the Southern Urals in the 1st millennium AD in a number of articles and in his PhD thesis, on the basis of which the monograph "Bakhmutin culture" was published in 1968.

According to N. A. Mazhitov, in the middle and in the second half of the I millennium AD, the territory of Bashkiria was a mixed ethnocultural population. However, two arrays of monuments stood out here. The northern part of Bashkiria, the Middle Kama and the southern regions of the Perm region were occupied by settlements and burial grounds of the Bakhmutin culture (Ugric-Magyar tribes), which was genetically closely related to the culture of local tribes of the Pianobor epoch. The second large group that determined the composition of the ethnic map of Bashkiria in the specified period of time were the bearers of the Turbasli culture, who appeared during the invasion of the Huns at the turn of the IV–V centuries. in the middle course of the Belaya River. According to N. A. Mazhitov, Turkic elements prevailed in the language and culture of this alien population.

The Kushnarenkovsky burial ground, known at that time, the materials of which V. F. Gening attributed to a separate Kushnarenkovsky culture and the monuments allocated by K. V. Salnikov to a special Romanov culture, according to Niyaz Abdulkhakovich showed more similarities with the Turbasli ones than testified to their difference.

The last centuries of the existence of the Bakhmutin and Turbaslin cultures fell at the time of the appearance of the first written sources, one part of which connected the population of Bashkiria at the end of the I millennium AD with the Turkic-speaking Bashkirs, and the other with the ancient Hungarian tribes. Niyaz Abdulkhakovich believed that the Bakhmutin culture was close to the culture of the Danube Hungarians from the archaeological cultures of the end of the I millennium AD. He saw the early Bashkirs in the Turbasli tribes, which made up the possibly far-advanced northern group of Bashkir tribes, while their main part in the middle and end of the first millennium roamed the South Ural steppes ^{[7, 9]}. Identified and investigated in 1963-1966 . The Mrasimov, Staro-Khalilov, Ishimbaev mounds and settlements near the Yangan-Tau sanatorium dated by him at that time in the VIII–X centuries. in a preliminary report, N. A. Mazhitov also referred to the monuments of ancient Bashkirs ^[8].

The concept of the ethnic history of the Southern Urals designated by N. A. Mazhitov in the 1st millennium AD was described in its expanded form in his monograph "Bakhmutin culture", written on the basis of a PhD thesis ^[6].

It is worth noting that in his works N. A. Mazhitov did not write about cultural genesis as such; the term itself was introduced into Russian–language literature later - in 1973 by archaeologist A.P. Okladnikov ^{[3, p. 15]}. Nevertheless, his research on the ethnic history of the Southern Urals in the 1st millennium AD was largely based on ideas of a historical and cultural nature.

According to Niyaz Abdulkhakovich, the study of the patterns of ethnogenetic processes occurring on the territory of Bashkiria in the first millennium was possible only when analyzing the history of all ethnic groups. Each of them was marked by independent complexes of monuments united in an archaeological culture, which "usually means not only commonality in basic and characteristic features of material culture (tools, jewelry, household items, worship, etc.) and burial rite, but also kinship in origin, lifestyle" ^{[7, p. 102]}.

The archaeological material helped not only to identify the features of one or another ethnocultural group, but also served as a certain indicator of significant events taking place. Thus, finds from settlements and burial grounds, giving an idea of the main aspects of the material and spiritual culture of the Bakhmutins, allowed N. A. Mazhitov to identify two main stages in their development: early (II-III–IV centuries) and late (V–VII centuries). Such periodization, in his opinion, to a certain extent reflected the nature of the development of the entire Western Urals in the middle of the I millennium AD ^{[6, pp. 3, 7-8]}.

According to Niyaz Abdulkhakovchia, the early Bakhmutin culture was genetically related to the culture of local tribes of the Pianobor epoch, which is confirmed by many features of the funeral rite. This is also evidenced by some of the women's jewelry, waist belts, ceramics, etc., which were the result of the evolutionary development of the Pianoborsk forms ^{[7, pp. 102-103]}.

At the same time, Niyaz Abdulkhakovich continued, the Bakhmutin tribes, compared with the Pyanobor tribes, have made a big leap in economic terms. Metallurgy received strong development, the productivity of agriculture and cattle breeding increased, intertribal exchange developed, the disintegration of tribal relations began and the separation of family groups on this basis. The unification of local tribes, previously economically poorly connected tribes, now took place at a higher stage of development and is accompanied by the development of a single form of culture. All these changes could not but affect the material culture and rituals ^{[6, p. 64]}.

As for the late Bakhmutinsky stage, the boundary of which was the era of the Great Migration of Peoples, it was associated with the appearance in the Southern Urals of monuments such as the Novo-Turbaslinsky mounds, which were left by the newcomers nomads. Under the influence of intercultural interaction, there is a change in the funeral rite (pits are deepening, lining, ritual burial of horses, etc.) and funeral equipment (amber and underglaze glass beads, V-shaped buckles, etc. appear, and then widely distributed). At the same time, there remain features connecting them with the culture of the early Bakhmutin tribes – orientation and the position of the bones, temporal pendants of the Bakhmutin type, etc. ^{[7, p. 108]}.

The long stay of the Turbasli and Bakhmutin tribes on the same territory contributed to their close rapprochement, erasing sharp differences in culture. The cultural proximity in the V–VII centuries is evidenced by ceramics, the spread of necklaces with approximately the same composition of beads, similar breast jewelry, belt sets, etc. in burial grounds. But the process of ethnocultural mixing of nomads with the indigenous population by the VII century. It's not over yet. Their culture is still distinctive and retains many ethnographic features in ceramics, jewelry, perhaps in the economy and language ^{[6, pp. 48, 72-73]}.

A characteristic feature of N. A. Mazhitov's research activity was the widespread use of data from related humanities disciplines. Thus, pointing to the ethno-cultural continuity between the Turbaslins and Bashkirs, he noted the similarity in their ornamentation: S-prominent, rhombic, square, heart-shaped three-lobed, etc. belt overlays for the former and folk embroidery patterns for the latter; Kushnarenkov type ceramics ornament and similar patterns on the lids of Bashkir wooden dishes, leather shield, etc. Similar parallels were drawn with the materials of the Staro-Khalilov burial ground, where overlays in the form of a vortex rosette were revealed spirals, hearts, etc., analogues of which are also widely present in the ornamental art of Bashkirs ^{[8, pp. 150, 156]}.

Thus, Niyaz Abdulkhakovich, considering the ethnic history of the Bashkiria population in the early Middle Ages, largely relied on the ethnocultural processes taking place in the region, primarily related to the change in spiritual and material culture, which was reflected in the archaeological material. Based on the works of N. A. Mazhitov, the main factors that influenced their transformation are the following: migration (the appearance of the Turbaslins), socio-economic (changes in the social and economic life of the early Bakhmutins compared with the Drunkards), intercultural interaction (convergence of the culture of the Turbaslins and Bakhmutin tribes), traditions and innovations (a combination of continuity of elements funeral rites of the early and late Bakhmutins, with obvious innovations in the latter) ^{[6, pp. 28, 29, 64, 72]}.

It is noteworthy that N. A. Mazhitov's thought about the close relationship between ethnocultural and ethnogenetic processes was close to the idea expressed later (in the 1970s) by the famous scientist A.P. Okladnikov, who made a significant contribution to the formulation of theoretical problems of cultural genesis, that the very formulation of the problem of ethnogenesis is impossible in isolation from the study of cultural genesis processes. Moreover, according to the latter, cultural genesis and ethnogenesis are two sides of a single historical process, which reflect the dialectic of the actual development of history ^{[3, p. 18]}.

A.V. Bondarev, who analyzed the research on the problems of cultural genesis, concluded that "of all the numerous strategies for studying cultural processes, two closely related search lines seem to be the most promising." In the first case, it is the study of cultural genesis as "the process of cultural creation (N.Ya. Marr, I.I. Meshchaninov), self-renewal and self-generation of culture (A.L. Flier)". In the second case, "cultural genesis appears as the process of the emergence and development of culture of specific units of the historical process (A.P. Okladnikov, V.M. Massa, L.N. Gumilev)". In the latter case, we are talking about "the study of specific historical units of cultural genesis" on the basis of which it is possible to "approach the construction of a certain model of this process" ^{[3, p. 21]}. It seems that in this context, N. A. Mazhitov's ideas and thoughts were in many ways close to the second direction.

Thus, the analysis of N. A. Mazhitov's works of the second half of the 1950s - the first half of the 1960s devoted to the study of the ethnic history of the Bashkiria population in the Early Middle Ages testifies. Despite the so-called "non-theoretical" period established in archaeology during the studied period of time and the absence of methodological works on cultural genesis in general, N. A. Mazhitov's publications showed a historical and cultural approach both in studying the development of individual archaeological cultures of the Southern Urals in the I millennium AD, and in studying ethnogenetic processes occurring in the region in general.

Considering the issues of the emergence and development of individual archaeological cultures in the Southern Urals, their interaction and historical fate, Niyaz Abdulkhakovich became one of the first scientists in the region to study the ethnogenesis of Bashkirs in the context of interdisciplinary research using mainly archaeological materials and involving ethnographic and written sources.