Lev Gumilev

Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the Earth

Dedicated to my wife Natalia Viktorovna

Introduction

What will we talk about and why is it important?

In which the need for ethnology is substantiated and the author’s view of ethnogenesis is presented, without the argumentation to which the rest of the treatise is devoted, where the author will lead the reader through a labyrinth of contradictions

Fear of disappointment

When a reader of our time buys and opens a new book on history or ethnography, he is not sure that he will read it even to the middle. He may find the book boring, pointless, or simply not to his taste. But it’s still good for the reader: he just lost two or three rubles, but what about the author? Collections of information. Formulation of the problem. Decades of searching for a solution. Years at a desk. Explanations with reviewers. Fight with the editor. And suddenly everything is in vain - the book is uninteresting! It lies in libraries... and no one takes it. This means that life was in vain.

This is so scary that all measures must be taken to avoid such a result. But which ones? During his studies at the university and in graduate school, the future author is often instilled with the idea that his task is to write out as many quotations from sources as possible, put them in some order and draw a conclusion: in ancient times there were slave owners and slaves. The slave owners were bad, but they had a good time; the slaves were good, but they felt bad. But life for the peasants was worse.

All this, of course, is correct, but the problem is that no one wants to read about it, not even the author himself. Firstly, because this is already known, and secondly, because it does not explain, for example, why some armies won victories while others suffered defeats, and why some countries grew stronger while others weakened. And, finally, why powerful ethnic groups arose and where did they disappear, although there was certainly no complete extinction of their members.

All of the questions listed are entirely related to our chosen topic - the sudden strengthening of one or another people and its subsequent disappearance. A striking example of this is the Mongols of the 12th–17th centuries, but other peoples also obeyed the same pattern. The late academician B. Ya. Vladimirtsov clearly formulated the problem: “I want to understand how and why all this happened?” But he did not give an answer, like other researchers. But we return to this plot again and again, firmly believing that the reader will not close the book on the second page.

It is absolutely clear that in order to solve the problem we must first examine the research methodology itself. Otherwise, this task would have been solved long ago, because the number of facts is so numerous that it is not a question of replenishing them, but of selecting those that are relevant to the case. Even contemporary chroniclers were drowning in a sea of ​​information, which did not bring them any closer to understanding the problem. Over the past centuries, archaeologists have obtained a lot of information, chronicles have been collected, published and accompanied by commentaries, and orientalists have further increased the stock of knowledge by codifying various sources: Chinese, Persian, Latin, Greek, Armenian and Arabic. The amount of information grew, but did not transform into a new quality. It still remained unclear how a small tribe sometimes became the hegemon of half the world, then increased in number, and then disappeared.

The author of this book raised the question of the degree of our knowledge, or rather, ignorance of the subject to which the study is devoted. What at first glance is simple and easy, when trying to master the plots that interest the reader, turns into a mystery. Therefore, it is necessary to write a detailed book. Unfortunately, we cannot immediately offer precise definitions (which, generally speaking, greatly facilitate the research), but at least we have the opportunity to make primary generalizations. Even if they do not exhaust the full complexity of the problem, they will, to a first approximation, allow us to obtain results that are quite suitable for interpreting ethnic history, which has yet to be written. Well, if there is a fastidious reviewer who demands a clear definition of the concept of “ethnos” at the beginning of the book, then we can say this: ethnos is a phenomenon of the biosphere, or a systemic integrity of a discrete type, working on the geobiochemical energy of living matter, in accordance with the principle of the second law of thermodynamics , which is confirmed by the diachronic sequence of historical events. If this is enough for understanding, then you don’t need to read the book further.

Ethnic groups as a form of existence of the species homo sapiens

For more than a hundred years, discussions have been going on: is the biological species Homo sapiens changing or have social patterns completely replaced the mechanism of action of species-forming factors? Common to man and all other living beings is the need to exchange matter and energy with the environment, but he differs from them in that almost all the means of existence necessary for him are forced to obtain through labor, interacting with nature not only as a biological, but primarily as a social being. . Conditions and means, productive forces and the corresponding relations of production are constantly developing. The patterns of this development are studied by Marxist political economy and sociology.

However, the social laws of human development do not “cancel” the action of biological laws, in particular mutations, and it is necessary to study them in order to avoid theoretical one-sidedness and practical harm that we inflict on ourselves by ignoring or consciously denying our subordination not only to social, but also to more general patterns of development.

Methodologically, such research can begin on the basis of a deliberate abstraction from specific methods of production. Such an abstraction seems justified, in particular, because the nature of ethnogenesis differs significantly from the rhythms of development of the social history of mankind. With this method of consideration, we hope, the contours of the mechanism of interaction between humanity and nature will become clearer.

No matter how developed technology is, people get everything they need to maintain life from nature. This means that they enter the trophic chain as the upper, final link in the biocenosis of the region they inhabit. And if so, then they are elements of structural-systemic integrity, including, along with people, domesticates (domestic animals and cultivated plants), landscapes, both transformed by man and virgin, mineral resources, relationships with neighbors - or friendly , or hostile, one or another dynamics of social development, as well as one or another combination of languages ​​(from one to several) and elements of material and spiritual culture. This dynamic system can be called ethnocenosis. It arises and disintegrates in historical time, leaving behind monuments of human activity, devoid of self-development and capable only of destruction, and ethnic relics that have reached the phase of homeostasis. But each process of ethnogenesis leaves indelible traces on the body of the earth’s surface, thanks to which it is possible to establish the general nature of the patterns of ethnic history. And now, when saving nature from destructive

Gumilyov Lev - Ethnogenesis and the Earth's biosphere - read book online for free

Annotation

The famous treatise “Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth” is the fundamental work of the outstanding Russian historian, geographer and philosopher Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov, dedicated to the problem of the emergence and relationships of ethnic groups on Earth. Exploring the dynamics of the movement of peoples, in search of their historical identity, coming into conflict with the environment, Gumilyov collected and processed a huge amount of scientific and cultural data. In this unique book, translated into many languages, which the author considered his main work, the main provisions of the theory of ethnogenesis and the doctrine of passionarity developed by L.N. Gumilev are formulated and developed in detail.

Lev Gumilev
Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the Earth

Dedicated to my wife Natalia Viktorovna

Introduction
What will we talk about and why is it important?

In which the need for ethnology is substantiated and the author’s view of ethnogenesis is presented, without the argumentation to which the rest of the treatise is devoted, where the author will lead the reader through a labyrinth of contradictions

Fear of disappointment

When a reader of our time buys and opens a new book on history or ethnography, he is not sure that he will read it even to the middle. He may find the book boring, pointless, or simply not to his taste. But it’s still good for the reader: he just lost two or three rubles, but what about the author? Collections of information. Formulation of the problem. Decades of searching for a solution. Years at a desk. Explanations with reviewers. Fight with the editor. And suddenly everything is in vain - the book is uninteresting! It lies in libraries... and no one takes it. This means that life was in vain.

This is so scary that all measures must be taken to avoid such a result. But which ones? During his studies at the university and in graduate school, the future author is often instilled with the idea that his task is to write out as many quotations from sources as possible, put them in some order and draw a conclusion: in ancient times there were slave owners and slaves. The slave owners were bad, but they had a good time; the slaves were good, but they felt bad. But life for the peasants was worse.

All this, of course, is correct, but the problem is that no one wants to read about it, not even the author himself. Firstly, because this is already known, and secondly, because it does not explain, for example, why some armies won victories while others suffered defeats, and why some countries grew stronger while others weakened. And, finally, why powerful ethnic groups arose and where did they disappear, although there was certainly no complete extinction of their members.

All of the questions listed are entirely related to our chosen topic - the sudden strengthening of one or another people and its subsequent disappearance. A striking example of this is the Mongols of the 12th–17th centuries, but other peoples also obeyed the same pattern. The late academician B. Ya. Vladimirtsov clearly formulated the problem: “I want to understand how and why all this happened?” But he did not give an answer, like other researchers. But we return to this plot again and again, firmly believing that the reader will not close the book on the second page.

I picked up this book twice, but only read it on the third try in 3(!) months. Lev Nikolaevich playfully sprinkles with special terms, names of ethnic groups and examples from the history of mankind in the intervals from the 10th century. BC until the 19th century AD To somehow perceive all this requires serious effort. Lev Nikolaevich, not without humor, at the very beginning of the book addresses the reader:
"Well, if there is a fastidious reviewer who demands a clear definition of the concept of “ethnos” at the beginning of the book, then we can say this: ethnos is a phenomenon of the biosphere, or a systemic integrity of a discrete type, working on the geobiochemical energy of living matter, in accordance with the principle of the second the beginning of thermodynamics, which is confirmed by the diachronic sequence of historical events. If this is enough for understanding, then you don’t need to read the book further."
All claims to this work are very accurately described in the article " Bitter thoughts of a “fastidious reviewer” about the teachings of L.N. Gumilyov"

Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev(1912-1992) - Russian scientist, historian-ethnologist (Doctor of Historical and Geographical Sciences), poet, translator from Farsi. Founder of the passionary theory of ethnogenesis.

Born in Tsarskoye Selo on October 1, 1912. Son of poets Nikolai Gumilyov and Anna Akhmatova. In 1930 he tried to enter Leningrad University, but was not allowed to take the exams as “the son of an enemy of the people.” Participated in several geological expeditions to the Sayans and Pamirs.In 1934, he still managed to enter the university’s eastern department, but a year later he was arrested for “failure to report” - and was released from prison only after A. A. Akhmatova’s repeated appeals to various authorities.Gumilev was reinstated at the university in 1937, and a year later he was arrested again, given five years in a maximum security colony and sent to build the White Sea-Baltic Canal, from where he was soon transferred to the Norilsk Gulag.

In 1943, after his term expired, Gumilyov tried to go to the front, but only joined the army in 1944 and ended up in a penal battalion, which included taking Berlin. In 1946, he defended his diploma and entered graduate school, and in 1948 he was again arrested for “subversive activities” and sentenced to ten years in prison; in 1956, the case was closed “due to lack of evidence”; Gumilyov returned to Leningrad and a few years later defended his doctoral dissertation, published in 1967 under the title “Ancient Turks.”From 1956 until his retirement (1986), he lectured at the university's geography department.In 1974 he defended his second doctoral dissertation (“Ethnogenesis and the Earth’s biosphere”).

Official Soviet science rejected Gumilyov's ideas and banned his books from publication. Recognition came only with “perestroika,” the fruits of which Gumilev no longer saw.

He died in 1992 and was buried in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

Annotation:

The famous treatise “Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth” is the fundamental work of the outstanding Russian historian, geographer and philosopher Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov, dedicated to the problem of the emergence and relationships of ethnic groups on Earth. Exploring the dynamics of the movement of peoples, in search of their historical identity, coming into conflict with the environment, Gumilyov collected and processed a huge amount of scientific and cultural data. In this unique book, translated into many languages, which the author considered his main work, the main provisions of the theory of ethnogenesis and the doctrine of passionarity developed by L.N. Gumilev are formulated and developed in detail.

“However, with all the achievements of the 20th century, each of us carries within us nature, which constitutes the content of life, both individual and species. And none of the people, other things being equal, will refuse to breathe and eat, to avoid death and protect their offspring. Man remained within the species, within the biosphere - one of the shells of planet Earth. Man combines his inherent laws of life with specific phenomena of technology and culture, which, while enriching him, did not deprive him of his involvement in the elements that gave birth to him."

"Unlike most mammals, Homo sapiens can be called neither a herd nor an individual animal. A person exists in a collective, which, depending on the point of view, is considered either as a society or as an ethnic group. Or rather, each person is at the same time a member of society, and a representative of a nationality, but both of these concepts are incommensurable and lie in different planes, such as length and weight, or the degree of heating and electric charge."

“But at the same time, man differs from other animals in that he makes tools, creating a qualitatively different layer - the technosphere. Manufactured products from both inert and living matter (tools, works of art, domestic animals, cultivated plants) fall out of the cycle conversion of the biocenosis. They can only either be preserved, or, if not conserved, destroyed. In the latter case, they return to the bosom of nature. A sword thrown into a field, rusted, turns into iron oxide. A destroyed castle becomes a mound. A feral dog becomes a wild animal, a dingo, and the horse is a mustang. This is the death of things (the technosphere) and the recapture by nature of the material stolen from it. The history of ancient civilizations shows that although nature suffers damage from technology, it ultimately takes its toll, of course, with the exception of those objects that are transformed so much so that they became irreversible, such as flint tools from the Paleolithic period, polished slabs at Baalbek, concrete platforms and plastic products. These are corpses, even mummies, which the biosphere is unable to return to its bosom, but the processes of inert matter - chemical and thermal - can return them to their original state in the event that a cosmic catastrophe befalls our planet. Until then, they will be called monuments of civilization, because our technology will one day become a monument."

“Let us imagine that a Russian, a German, a Tatar and a Georgian enter a tram, all belonging to the Caucasian race, dressed identically, having lunch in the dining room and with the same newspaper under their arms. It is obvious to everyone that they are not identical, even beyond minus individual characteristics. “So what? - one of my opponents once objected to me. - If an acute national incident does not occur on this tram, all four will calmly move on, setting an example of people who have become separated from their ethnic groups.

No, in our opinion, any change in the situation will cause different reactions in these people, even if they act together. Let's say a young man appears on the tram and begins to behave inappropriately towards a lady. How will our characters act? The Georgian will most likely grab the offender by the chest and try to throw him off the tram. The German will frown in disgust and start calling the police. The Russian will say a few sacramental words, and the Tatar will prefer to avoid participating in the conflict. A change in the situation, which also requires a change in behavior, makes the difference in behavioral stereotypes among representatives of different ethnic groups especially noticeable."

"But if this is so, then nature and culture are being destroyed by free communication and free love!The conclusion is unexpected and frightening, but this is a paraphrase of Newton’s second law: what is gained in social freedom is lost in contact with nature, more precisely, with the geographical environment and one’s own physiology, for nature is also inside our bodies."

"WITH The power of an ethnic stereotype of behavior is enormous because members of the ethnic group perceive it as the only worthy one, and all others perceive it as “savagery.”"

" The answer is simple: racial differences are not decisive, and in general, as a rule, of great importance, and ethnic differences lie in the sphere of behavior. The behavioral pattern of Christian communities was strictly regulated. The neophyte was obliged to comply with it or leave the community. Consequently, already in the second generation, on the basis of Christian consortia, a subethnic group was forged, heterozygous, but monolithic, whereas in a pagan, or rather irreligious, empire, the psychological remelting of subjects was not carried out. Members of different ethnic groups coexisted within a single society, which collapsed under its own weight, for even Roman law was powerless before the laws of nature."

" And if so, then the emergence of a new ethnic group is the creation of a new stereotype of behavior, different from the previous one."

" However, in any case, migrants are looking for conditions similar to those to which they are accustomed in their homeland. The British willingly moved to countries with a temperate climate, especially to the steppes of North America, South Africa and Australia, where they could raise sheep. Tropical regions did not attract them; there they acted primarily as colonial officials and merchants, i.e. people who live not at the expense of nature, but at the expense of the local population. This is also migration, but of a completely different nature. The Spaniards colonized areas with a dry and hot climate, leaving tropical forests unattended. They took root well on the Mexican plateaus, where they broke the power of the Aztecs, but the Mayans in Yucatan survived in the tropical jungle, defending their independence in the “race war” against the Mexican government. Yakuts of the 11th century. penetrated into the Lena River valley and bred horses there, imitating the former life on the shores of Lake Baikal, but they did not encroach on the watershed taiga massifs, leaving them to the Evenks. Russian explorers in the 17th century. passed through all of Siberia, but inhabited only the forest-steppe edge of the taiga and river banks, i.e. landscapes similar to those where their ancestors formed into an ethnic group. Likewise, the expanses of the former “Wild Field” in the 18th-19th centuries. Ukrainians mastered it. Even in our time, Tibetans who left their homeland preferred Norway to flourishing Bengal; they founded a colony in Oslo."

" And a beginning has already been made for this: in the problem of the relationship between man as a bearer of civilization and the natural environment, the concept of “ethnicity” was introduced as a stable group of individuals, opposing itself to all other similar groups, having an internal structure, unique in each case, and a dynamic stereotype of behavior. It is through ethnic groups that humanity is connected with the natural environment, since the ethnic group itself is a natural phenomenon."

" Let's think, do people need an eternity of vegetation, “without deity, without inspiration, without tears, without life, without love”?Isn't the best thing about people the ability to be creative? But it entails an irreparable expenditure of vital energy of the human body."

" Firstly, the monotony of a dull existence reduces people’s vitality so much that a tendency to drugs and sexual perversion arises in order to fill the resulting spiritual emptiness."

" For those who die, be it a microbe or a baobab, a person or an embryo, time disappears, but all the organisms of the biosphere are connected with each other. And the departure of one is a loss for many, because this is a victory for the eternal enemy of life - Chronos. To come to terms with loss means to give up positions, and Memory stands up against Death - a barrier to the entropy of no longer being, but consciousness. It is memory that divides time into past, present and future, of which only the past is real.

In fact, the present is only a moment that instantly becomes the past. There is no future, because actions that determine certain consequences have not been committed, and it is unknown whether they will be committed. The future can only be calculated statistically, with tolerances that deprive it of practical value. But the past exists; and everything that exists is the past, since any accomplishment immediately becomes the past. That is why the science of history studies the only reality that exists outside of us and besides us".

" Passionarity can manifest itself in a variety of character traits, with equal ease giving rise to exploits and crimes, creation, good and evil, but leaving no room for inaction and calm indifference."

" Passion has an important property: it is contagious. This means that harmonious people (and, to an even greater extent, impulsive people), finding themselves in close proximity to passionaries, begin to behave as if they were passionate."

" No matter how great the role of passionaries in ethnogenesis is, their number in the ethnos is always negligible. After all, passionaries in the full sense of the word we call people in whom this impulse is stronger than the instinct of self-preservation, both individual and species. In the vast majority of normal individuals, both of these impulses are balanced, which creates a harmonious personality, intellectually complete, efficient, accommodating, but not overactive. Moreover, the uncontrollable combustion of another person, unthinkable without the passionate sacrifice of oneself, is alien and antipathetic to such people. To this it must be added that in developing ethnic groups, most individuals have the same weak passionarity as in relict ethnic groups. The only difference is that in dynamic ethnic groups there are passionaries who invest their excess energy in the development of their system.

However, it should be noted that the intensity of development does not always benefit the ethnic group. “Overheating” is possible when passionarity gets out of the control of rational expediency and turns from a creative force into a destructive one. Then harmonious individuals turn out to be the saviors of their ethnic groups, but also to a certain limit."

" The average person, as a rule, lacks imagination.He cannot and does not want to imagine that there are people who are not like him, driven by other ideals and not striving for goals other than money. The concept of immediate benefit has never been precisely formulated, because then its absurdity would have become obvious, but as a matter of course it appears in reasoning on any occasion and even in scientific constructions, which is why it requires attention."

" The percentage of harmonious and subpassionate people is growing, reducing, or even nullifying, the efforts of creative and patriotic people, who are beginning to be called “fanatics.” It is the lack of internal support for “their own” that determines the death of ethnic groups from their few but passionate opponents. “Fear the indifferent,” said a 20th century writer before his death."

"Symbols: 1 - ordinary people, 2 - vagabond soldiers; 3 - criminals; 4 - ambitious; 5 - business people; 6 - adventurers; 7 - learned people; 8 - creative people; 9 - prophets; 10 - non-covetous people; 11 - contemplatives: 12 - tempters."

"All people have a strange attraction to truth (the desire to form an adequate idea about a subject), beauty (what is liked without prejudice) and justice (compliance with morals and ethics). This attraction varies greatly in the strength of the impulse and is always limited by the constantly operating “reasonable egoism,” but in a number of cases it turns out to be more powerful and leads the individual to death no less steadily than passionarity. It is, as it were, an analogue of passionarity in the sphere of consciousness and, therefore, has the same sign. Let's call it “attractiveness” (from Latin attractio, ionis, f. -attraction).

The nature of attraction is unclear, as is the nature of consciousness, but its correspondence with instinctive impulses of self-preservation and passionarity is the same as the relationship between the engine (oar or motor) and the rudder in a boat. Equally correlated with them is “reasonable egoism” - the antipode of attractiveness."

""TWILIGHT" OF ETHNOSIS

A distinctive feature of “civilization” is the reduction of the active element and the complete contentment of the emotionally passive and hardworking population. However, we cannot omit the third option - the presence of people who are both uncreative and unhardworking, emotionally and mentally disabled, but who have increased demands on life. In heroic periods of growth and self-expression, these individuals have little chance of survival. They are bad soldiers, no workers, and the path of crime in strict times quickly led to the scaffold. But in the soft times of civilization, with general material abundance, everyone has an extra piece of bread and a woman. “Life-lovers” (may the author be forgiven for the neologism) begin to multiply without restrictions and, since they are individuals of a new type, create their own imperative: “Be like us,” i.e. do not strive for anything that you cannot eat or drink. Any growth becomes an odious phenomenon, hard work is ridiculed, intellectual joys cause rage. In art there is a decline in style, in science original works are being replaced by compilations, in public life corruption is being legitimized, in the army soldiers keep officers and generals in submission, threatening them with mutinies. Everything is corrupt, no one can be trusted, no one can be relied upon, and in order to rule, the ruler must use the tactics of a robber chieftain: suspect, track down and kill his comrades.

In fact, even to preserve a family and raise children, completely different qualities are needed than those that were so carefully cultivated; otherwise, children will deal with their parents as soon as it is convenient for them. So, after the triumph of obscuration, its carriers disappear like smoke, and what remains are the descendants of the original carriers of the static state who survived all the troubles, who in the ruins again begin to teach their children to live quietly, avoiding conflicts with neighbors and with each other. Anatomically and physiologically, they are full-fledged people who have adapted to the landscape, but they have so little passionary tension that the process of development of ethnic groups does not take place. Even when a passionate individual is accidentally born among them, it seeks employment not in its homeland, but among its neighbors (for example, Albanians made a career either in Venice or Constantinople). Here two possibilities arise: either the survivors eke out a miserable existence as a relict ethnos, or they fall into the crucible of melting and, under some favorable conditions, a new ethnos is smelted from several fragments, only vaguely remembering its origin, because for it the date of its rebirth is much more important . And again the process goes through the same stages, unless it is accidentally interrupted by outside influences.

There are fewer clear examples to illustrate the obscuration phase than for other stages. The peoples of Europe, both Western and Eastern, are not so old as to fall into a state of insanity. Therefore we must turn to antiquity for examples."

"We are not alone in the world! The nearby Cosmos takes part in protecting nature, and our job is not to spoil it. She is not only our home, she is us ourselves.

For the sake of this thesis, a treatise was written, which is now completed. I dedicate it to the great cause of protecting the natural environment from anti-systems."

L. N. Gumilyov

Ethnogenesis and biosphere of the Earth

Dedicated to my wife Natalia Viktorovna

The gift of words, unknown to the mind, was promised to me by nature. He is mine. Everything obeys my command; land and waters,

AND light air and fire In my one word is hidden, But the word rushes about like a horse,

Like a horse along the seashore, When he galloped madly, dragging the remains of Hippolytus,

AND remembering the monster's grin,

AND the shine of scales is like the shine of jade, This menacing face torments him,

AND neighing noise is like a howl,

And I’m dragging along like Hippolytus, With a bloody head

AND I see - the mystery of existence is deadly for the earthly brow,

AND the word rushes along her,

Like a horse along the seashore.

Introduction. WHAT WILL WE SPEAK ABOUT AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT Fear of disappointment. Ethnicities as a form of existence of the species Hosho sapiens. Subject of study. An excursion into philosophy. Humanity as a species Homo sapiens. Definitions of the concept "ethnicity"

Part one. ABOUT THE VISIBLE AND THE INVISIBLE I. On the usefulness of ethnography

The dissimilarity of ethnic groups. The terminology used is confusing. Generalizations and scrupulos. Framework. A historian without geography encounters a “stumbling block”

II. Nature and history

A combination of natural history and history of formations and ethnic groups. Can historical sources be trusted? Can monuments be trusted? There is no sign to determine ethnicity. Ethnicity is not society. Language. Ideology and culture. Descent from one ancestor. Ethnicity as an illusion.

III. Is there an ethnicity?

Between West and East. A country and people without a name. "Ethnos" - an essay by S. M. Shirokogorova. "States" and "Processes"

Part two. PROPERTIES OF ETHNOSIS IV. Ethnicity and ethnonym

Names are deceiving. Examples of camouflage. The powerlessness of philology and history

V. Mosaicism as properties of an ethnic group

It is possible to do without the clan system How the clan system is replaced Formation of subethnic groups Options for ethnic contacts The role of exogamy Experience of interpretation

VI. Ethnic stereotype of behavior

Dissimilarity as a principle Variability of behavioral stereotypes Ethnicity and four senses of time

VII. Ethnicity as a system

"System" in the popular explanation. "System" in hagiology. Levels and types of ethnic systems

VIII. Subethnic groups

The structure of the ethnic group. Self-regulation of ethnicity. Consortia and convictions IX. Superethnic groups

The reality of the superethnos is the “Franks”. The birth of a superethnos - Byzantium. The breakdown of superethiaos - Arabs of the 7th - 10th centuries.

X. Algorithm of ethnogenesis

Ethnic relics. Statics and dynamics. Incorporation. The difference between balance and development. Ethnogenesis and natural selection. Altruism, or more precisely, anti-egoism. Extermination of relict ethnic groups XI. Ethnic contacts

Hierarchy of ethnic taxonomy. Contacts at different levels. Correlation of ethnic values ​​of different orders. Contact between the "five tribes" and the inhabitants of the "Middle Plain". Contacts between barbarians and Romans. Ethnic groups always arise from contacts. "Factor X".

Part three. ETHNOSIS IN HISTORY XII. Thoughts on World History

Two aspects of World History. Why do I disagree with A. Toynbee. Why do I disagree with N.I. Conrad. About Hellenism. About Byzantium. About China

XIII. Thoughts on ethnic history

The principle of uncertainty in ethnology. Two reference systems. History of culture and ethnogenesis. Urania and Clio

Part four. ETHNOS IN GEOGRAPHY XIV. Inverted problem

Ethnicity is a natural phenomenon. Man in a biocenosis. The geographical environment does not affect the change of formations. Man's war with nature. Society, polity and ethnicity. Peoples have a homeland! Location development XV. The role of landscape combination

Monotony and heterogeneity of landscapes. On the shores of seas and the edges of glaciers. The influence of the nature of the landscape on ethnogenesis XVI. Formation of anthropogenic landscapes

Development of society and change of landscape. Indians, peoples of Siberia and their landscapes. Ancient civilizations of the "fertile crescent". In Ancient China. Emergence and decline.

Periodization by phases XVII. Explosions of ethnogenesis

The explosion of ethnogenesis in the 1st century. AD Huns in the 3rd - 5th centuries. AD Explosion of ethnogenesis in the 6th century. AD The explosion of ethnogenesis in the 11th century. AD

Part five. NATURE IS WITHIN US XVIII. Ethnicity and population

Ethnicity is not a population. Monomorphism Background and factor X. Complementarity. Biological lines of research XIX. Phylogeny or ontogeny?

Progress and human evolution. Regional mutations. Conversions of biocenosis and succession. Anthroposuccession

XX. When immortality is worse than death

Phylogeny is transformed into ethnogenesis. Evolution and ethnogenesis. Creativity or life? Thoughts of S.I. Korzhinsky. Excess and inertia in ethnogenesis

XXI. Sum of contradictions

No answer found yet. Ethnogenesis and energy. Discreteness of ethnic history. Where is the "X factor"? Clio vs Saturn

Part six. PASSIONARITY IN ETHNOGENESIS XXII. Ethnogenic trait, or ¬factor X-

Here it is, the “X factor”! F. Engels on the role of human passions XXIII. Images of passionaries

Napoleon. Alexander the Great. Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Jan Hus, Joan of Arc and Archpriest Avvakum. Accumulation or waste? XXIV. Passionary tension

Biochemical aspect of passionarity. Multi-vector ethnic system in the scheme. Passionary induction. Ways to lose passionarity

XXV. Subpassionaries

Individuals are harmonious. "Vagabonds", "vagrant soldiers" and "degenerates". Gradations of passionarity Hannibal and Carthage XXVI. Decay of passionarity

Flash and ash. Passionarity is weak, but effective. Bastards. What cements ethnic groups?

Part seven. BRIDGE BETWEEN SCIENCES XXVII. Field in the system

Ethnogenesis. Ethnic field. Rhythms of ethnic fields. Ethnic field and ethnogenesis. The nature of superethios. Chimeras XXVIII. The nature of passionarity

The doctrine of V.I. Vernadsky about the biosphere. Mutations are passionary impulses. "Joints" of landscapes. Thoughts on the noosphere XXIX. Passionarity and the sphere of consciousness

Reference system. Pulse discharge ratios. Let's apply the concept to ethnogenesis The place of passionarity in historical synthesis Generalization The curve of ethnogenesis History and ethnology

Part eight. AGES OF ETHNICITY

XXX. Method of scientific search Time and history. From historical geography to ethnic geography

psychology. Contrary to that. Ups and downs. Principle of reference XXXI. Phases of passionary rise and overheating

The birth of an ethnos. Rising passionarity. Second Rome or Anti-Rome? Decay and rebirth. Passionary "overheating". Poetry of concepts

XXXII. Offsets

And there is a pattern here. Passionary impoverishment.

Reciprocity. Anomaly. The detriment of youth. Youth restored XXXIII. Breakdown phase

Passionate breakdown. A series of blossoms. And in China. Victims of heyday. Split of the ethnic field. The breakdown and its meaning XXXIV. Inertia phase

"Golden Autumn" of civilization. From the “Christian” world to the “Civilized” world. Civilization and nature. Who destroyed Babylon? What is "cultural decline?"

XXXV. Obscuration phase

"Twilight" of the ethnic group. From heyday to decline. Bloody darkness. Substitution. And it’s like that everywhere

XXXVI. After the end

Memorial phase. Going to nowhere

Part nine. ETHNOGENESIS AND CULTURE XXXVII. Negative meanings in ethnogenesis

Crystallized passionarity. Subsequence. No! "Abyss" (vacuum). Acts and phenomena. In the "freedom strip". Insights of V. I. Vernadsky

XXXVIII. Bipolarity of the ethnosphere

Lies as a principle. Third parameter. A destructive phantom. Ancient dualism. Concordat with Satan. Way out of hopelessness

Afterword Explanatory dictionary of terms

Introduction

WHAT WILL WE BE SPEAKING ABOUT AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT IN WHICH THE NECESSITY OF ETHNOLOGY AND

FEAR OF DISAPPOINTMENT

When a reader of our time buys and opens a new book on history or ethnography, he is not sure that he will read it even to the middle. He may find the book boring, pointless, or simply not to his taste. But it’s still good for the reader: he just lost two or three rubles, but what about the author? Collections of information. Formulation of the problem. Decades of searching for a solution. Years at a desk. Explanations with reviewers. Fight with the editor. And suddenly everything is in vain - the book is uninteresting! It lies in libraries... and no one takes it. This means that life was in vain.

This is so scary that all measures must be taken to avoid such a result. But which ones? During his studies at the university and in graduate school, the future author is often instilled with the idea that his task is to write out as many quotations from sources as possible, put them in some order and draw a conclusion: in ancient times there were slave owners and slaves. The slave owners were bad, but they had a good time; the slaves were good, but they felt bad. But life for the peasants was worse.

All this, of course, is correct, but the problem is that no one wants to read about it, not even the author himself. Firstly, because this is already known, and secondly, because it does not explain, for example, why some armies won victories while others suffered defeats, and why some countries grew stronger while others weakened. And, finally, why powerful ethnic groups arose and where did they disappear, although there was certainly no complete extinction of their members.

All of the questions listed are entirely related to our chosen topic - the sudden strengthening of one or another people and its subsequent disappearance. A striking example of this is the Mongols of the 12th-17th centuries, but other peoples also obeyed the same pattern. The late academician B. Ya. Vladimirtsov clearly formulated the problem: “I want to understand how and why all this happened?”, but he did not give an answer, like other researchers. But we return to this plot again and again, firmly believing that the reader will not close the book on the second page.

It is absolutely clear that in order to solve the problem we must first examine the research methodology itself. Otherwise, this task would have been solved long ago, because the number of facts is so numerous that it is not a question of replenishing them, but of selecting those that are relevant to the case. Even contemporary chroniclers were drowning in a sea of ​​information, which did not bring them any closer to understanding the problem. Over the past centuries, archaeologists have obtained a lot of information, chronicles have been collected, published and accompanied by commentaries, and orientalists have further increased the stock of knowledge by codifying various sources: Chinese, Persian, Latin, Greek, Armenian and Arabic.

The amount of information grew, but did not transform into a new quality. It still remained unclear how a small tribe sometimes became the hegemon of half the world, then increased in number, and then disappeared.

The author of this book raised the question of the degree of our knowledge, or rather, ignorance of the subject to which the study is devoted. What at first glance is simple and easy, when trying to master the plots that interest the reader, turns into a mystery. Therefore, it is necessary to write a detailed book.

Unfortunately, we cannot immediately offer precise definitions (which, generally speaking, greatly facilitate the research), but at least we have the opportunity to make primary generalizations. Even if they do not exhaust the full complexity of the problem, they will, to a first approximation, allow us to obtain results that are quite suitable for interpreting ethnic history, which has yet to be written. Well, if there is a fastidious reviewer who demands a clear definition of the concept of “ethnos” at the beginning of the book, then we can say this: ethnos is a phenomenon of the biosphere, or a systemic integrity of a discrete type, working on the geobiochemical energy of living matter, in accordance with the principle of the second law of thermodynamics , which is confirmed by the diachronic sequence of historical events. If this

ETHNOUS AS A FORM OF EXISTENCE OF THE SPECIES HOMO SAPIENS

For more than a hundred years, discussions have been going on: is the biological species Homo sapiens changing or have social patterns completely replaced the mechanism of action of species-forming factors? Common to man and all other living beings is the need to exchange matter and energy with the environment, but he differs from them in that almost all the means of existence necessary for him are forced to obtain through labor, interacting with nature not only as a biological, but primarily as a social being. . Conditions and means, productive forces and the corresponding relations of production are constantly developing. The patterns of this development are studied by Marxist political economy and sociology.

However, the social laws of human development do not “cancel” the action of biological laws, in particular mutations, and it is necessary to study them in order to avoid theoretical one-sidedness and practical harm that we inflict on ourselves by ignoring or consciously denying our subordination not only to social, but also to more general patterns of development.

Methodologically, such research can begin on the basis of a deliberate abstraction from specific methods of production. Such an abstraction seems justified, in particular, because the nature of ethnogenesis differs significantly from the rhythms of development of the social history of mankind. With this method of consideration, we hope, the contours of the mechanism of interaction between humanity and nature will become clearer.

No matter how developed technology is, people get everything they need to maintain life from nature. This means that they enter the trophic chain as the upper, final link in the biocenosis of the region they inhabit. And if so, then they are elements of structural-systemic integrity, including, along with people, domesticates (domestic animals and cultivated plants), landscapes, both transformed by humans and virgin ones, mineral wealth, relationships with neighbors or friendly , or hostile, one or another dynamics of social development, as well as one or another combination of languages ​​(from one to several) and elements of material and spiritual culture. This dynamic system can be called ethnocenosis. It arises and disintegrates in historical time, leaving behind monuments of human activity, devoid of self-development and capable only of destruction, and ethnic relics that have reached the phase of homeostasis. But each process of ethnogenesis leaves indelible traces on the body of the earth’s surface, thanks to which it is possible to establish the general nature of the patterns of ethnic history. And now, when saving nature from destructive anthropogenic influences has become the main problem of science, it is necessary to understand which aspects of human activity were destructive for the landscapes that accommodate ethnic groups. After all, the destruction of nature with disastrous consequences for people is not only a problem of our time, and it is not always associated with the development of culture, as well as with population growth.

Raising the question of the interaction of two forms of natural development, it is necessary

agree on the aspect. We can talk about either the development of the biosphere in connection with human activity, or the development of humanity in connection with the formation of the natural environment: the biosphere and bone matter that makes up the other shells of the Earth: the lithosphere and the troposphere. The interaction of humanity with nature is constant, but extremely variable both in space and time. However, behind the apparent diversity lies a single principle,

characteristic of all observed phenomena. So let’s pose the question this way!

The nature of the Earth is very diverse; humanity, unlike other species of mammals, is also diverse, because humans do not have a natural habitat, but are distributed, starting from the Upper Paleolithic, throughout the entire landmass of the planet. The adaptive abilities of humans are an order of magnitude greater than those of other animals. This means that in different geographical regions and in different eras, people and natural complexes (landscapes and geobiocenoses) interact in different ways. In itself, this conclusion is unpromising, since a kaleidoscope cannot be researched, but let’s try to introduce classification into the problem... and everything will be different. There is a constant correlation between the laws of nature and the social form of the movement of matter. But what is its mechanism and where is the point of contact between nature and society? And this point exists, otherwise the question of protecting nature from humans would not arise.

S. V. Kalesnik proposed dividing geography into: 1) economic, which studies the creations of people, and 2) physical, which studies the natural shells of the Earth, including the biosphere. A very reasonable division. Nature creates what we cannot create: mountains and rivers, forests and steppes, new species of animals and plants. And people build houses, construct cars, sculpt statues and write treatises. Nature cannot do this.

Is there a fundamental difference between the creations of nature and man? Yes! The elements of nature transform into each other... “This stone once roared, this ivy soared in the clouds.” Nature lives forever, swelling with the energy it receives from the Sun and stars of our Galaxy and radio decay in

the depths of our planet. The biosphere of planet Earth overcomes global entropy through the biogenic migration of atoms tending to expand. Conversely, objects created by man can either be preserved or destroyed. Pyramids stand for a long time, the Eiffel Tower will not stand for that long. But neither one nor the other is eternal. This is the fundamental difference between the biosphere and the technosphere, no matter how grandiose the latter may acquire.

SUBJECT OF STUDY

A review of the current state of the science of ethnicity should plunge the reader into bewilderment. All authors writing on this topic, including ethnographers, essentially replace genuine ethnological characteristics with professional, class, etc., which, in fact, is equivalent to the denial of ethnos as a reality. The existence of an ethnos is only indicated by the fact that it is directly felt by people as a phenomenon (phenomenon), but this is not proof. The poet said: “Both day and night the sun walks before us, but stubborn Galileo is right.” And indeed, the ethnologist has some reasons for pessimism, which seem insurmountable at first glance.

Ethnology is a nascent science. The need for it arose only in the second half of the 20th century, when it became clear that the simple accumulation of ethnographic collections and observations threatens that science, which does not pose problems, will turn into meaningless collecting. And so, before our eyes, social science and ethnology emerged - two disciplines interested in one, at first glance, subject - humanity, but in completely different aspects. And this is natural. Each person is simultaneously a member of society and a member of an ethnic group, and this is far from the same thing. Equally, ethnology as a science requires definition. Let's just say for now that ethnology is the science of the impulses of behavior of ethnic groups, similar to ethology, the science of

animal behavior. Impulses can be conscious and emotional, dictated by the personal will of the individual, tradition, the forced influence of the team, the influence of the external situation, the geographical environment, and even spontaneous development, the progressive course of history. In order to understand such a complex issue, an appropriate methodology is needed. The methodology can be either the traditional method of the humanities or the natural sciences. Which one should be chosen to successfully overcome the difficulties that arise for a scientist who has taken on a completely new field of science?

First of all, let us clarify the concept of “humanities”. In the Middle Ages in the Christian world, the only absolutely authoritative source of scientific information were two books: the Bible and the works of Aristotle. Science came down to commenting on quotes, which had to be given accurately, because illiterate heresiarchs often invented supposedly quoted sayings of the prophets, Christ and Aristotle. From here arose a system of references to the text that has survived to this day. This stage of science was called scholasticism, and by the 15th century. it no longer satisfied scientists. Then the range of sources was expanded - the works of other ancient authors were involved, whose texts needed to be verified. This is how the humanitarian (i.e. human, not divine) science arose - philology, which differs from scholasticism in its critical approach to texts. But the source was still the same - someone else's words. After the Renaissance, major naturalists opposed

humanitarian methods of obtaining information natural science based on observation of nature and experiment. The formulation of the question has changed: instead of “what did the ancient authors say?” tried to find out “what really is?”

As we see, it is not the subject of study that has changed, but the approach and, accordingly, the methodology.

The new technique gained acceptance slowly and unevenly. Back in 1633, Galileo had to renounce that the Earth revolves around the Sun, and his opponents appealed to the fact that there was no such information in the literature known to them. In the 18th century Lavoisier, at a meeting of the French Academy of Sciences, declared the message about the fall of a meteorite “unscientific”: “Stones cannot fall from the sky, because there are no stones in the sky!” Geography only in the 19th century. got rid of legends about Amazons, hairy people, giant octopuses sinking ships, and other fiction that readers at the philistine level took literally. The hardest thing was for historians, who could neither set up an experiment nor repeat an observation. But here the monistic approach came to the rescue, which allowed for criticism of the source, both comparative and internal. Through much painstaking research, codes of indisputable facts have been compiled with

chronological references, and some of the dubious information was rejected. This enormous wealth of knowledge can be useful only when it is applied to a specific object, be it social communities - classes, or political entities - states, or ethnic groups that we

interested. In the latter case, the facts of history turn into an “information archive” and serve the purposes of ethnology along with other information:

geographical, biological, biophysical and biochemical, which, in the presence of creative synthesis, makes it possible to interpret ethnology as a natural science, built on a sufficient number of reliable observations recorded during the accumulation of primary material.

And now let’s return to the cardinal thesis: can we consider that ethnography, both descriptive and theoretical, has left the field of view of geography and belongs entirely to the sphere of historical sciences? No and no again. This position, in our opinion, is groundless and destructive. It leads science to impoverishment, i.e. simplification by reducing the erudition of the researcher. It’s easier for him, of course, but his work loses its promise and ceases to be of interest to the reader. I am afraid that persistent disagreement with the thesis posed here will lead to a compromise not only of the historical methodology, which is not used for what it was developed for, but also of the science itself - ethnography. For for her there is only one path of development -

transformation into ethnology, where, along with the collection and description of material, there is an interpretation of it from the angle dictated by the formulation of the problem.

EXCURSION INTO PHILOSOPHY

This should be extremely brief. Since we proceed from the fact that an ethnos in its formation is a natural phenomenon, then the basis for its study can only be the philosophy of natural science, i.e. dialectical materialism. Historical materialism aims to reveal the laws of social development, i.e. refers, in the words of K. Marx, to the history of people, and not to the history of nature located in the bodies of people. And although both of these “stories” are closely intertwined and interconnected, scientific analysis requires clarification of the point of view, i.e. aspect. The historical material we use is our information archive, nothing more. For the purposes of analysis, this is necessary and sufficient. On this occasion, K. Marx expressed himself clearly: “Itself

history is a real part of the history of nature, the formation of nature by man. Subsequently, natural science will include the science of man to the same extent that the science of man will include natural science: it will be one science." Now we stand on the threshold of the creation of such a science.

When we talk about synthesis, the approach to the problem will change accordingly. But, as we know, analysis precedes synthesis, and there is no need to get ahead of ourselves. Let us only say that even then the foundations of scientific materialist natural science will remain unshakable. Having agreed on the meaning of the terms and the nature of the methodology, let us move on to the formulation of the problem.

HUMANITY AS A SPECIES OF HOMO SAPIENS

It is customary to say: “Man and Earth” or “Man and Nature,” although even in high school they explain that this is elementary, primitive anthropocentrism,

inherited from the Middle Ages. Yes, of course, man created technology, which neither the dinosaur of the Mesozoic era nor the Machairodus of the Cenozoic era created. However, with all the achievements of the 20th century. Each of us carries within us nature, which constitutes the content of life, both individual and species. And none of the people, other things being equal, will refuse to breathe and eat, avoid death and protect their offspring. Man remained within the species, within the biosphere - one of the shells of planet Earth. Man combines his inherent laws of life with specific phenomena of technology and culture, which, while enriching him, do not deprive him of his involvement in the elements that gave birth to him.

Humanity as a biological form is a single species with a huge number of variations, which spread in the post-glacial era across the entire surface of the globe. The density of distribution of the species varies, but with the exception of polar ice, the entire Earth is human habitation. And one should not think that somewhere there are “virgin” lands where no human has set foot. Today's deserts and wilds are filled with traces of Paleolithic sites; Amazon forests grow on redeposited soils, once destroyed by the agriculture of ancient inhabitants: even on the cliffs of the Andes and Himalayas traces of structures incomprehensible to us have been found. In other words, during the period of its existence, the species Homo sapiens repeatedly and constantly modified its distribution on the surface of the Earth. He, like any other species, sought to develop the largest possible space with the greatest possible population density. However, something interfered with him and limited his capabilities. What?

Unlike most mammals. Homo sapiens can be called neither a herd nor an individual animal. A person exists in a collective, which, depending on the angle of view, is considered either as a society or as an ethnic group.

More precisely, each person is both a member of society and a representative of a nationality, but both of these concepts are incommensurable and lie on different planes, such as length and weight, or the degree of heating and electric charge.

The social development of mankind has been well studied, and its laws are formulated by historical materialism. The spontaneous development of social forms through socio-economic formations is inherent only to man, found in a collective, and is in no way connected with his biological structure.

This question is so clear that there is no point in dwelling on it. But the question of nationalities, which we will call ethnic groups to avoid terminological confusion, is full of absurdities and extremely confusing. One thing is certain - there is not a single person on Earth outside the ethnic group. Each person when asked: “Who are you?” - will answer: “Russian”, “French”, “Persian”, “Masai”, etc., without thinking for a minute. Consequently, ethnicity in consciousness is a universal phenomenon. But that is not all.

DEFINITIONS OF THE CONCEPT "ETHNOS"

What meaning or, most importantly, what meaning does each person listed put into his answer? What he calls his people, nation, tribe and how he sees his difference from his neighbors - this is the still unresolved problem of ethnic diagnosis. At the everyday level it does not exist,