Первые цивилизации

In the early farmers epoch Iran is represented with a number of brilliant complexes not yielding those in Mesopotamia (fig. 31, 32). Then one can observe the uneven rate of growth. In southern-west regions the protoelam civilization is formed. There equally with the initial local stratum Mesopotamian cultural standards were of important enough. Creation of the protourban of the early-urban culture in the rest of the territory takes place in the III mil. В. С (fig. 34). Desintegration of those ancient civilized centres is over in the middle of the II mil. В. С, where class relations and state system were of less significance, being precipitated in the west through the military and political interaction with the states in the West Asia.

Materials of the meridional Middle Asia indicate of the spontaneous transformation according to the Sumerian standards but a little slacker for the limited natural resources (fig. 36). At times one can state the stimulated impact of the Iranian and Mesopotamian cultural standards. Discovered regional Altyn-depe civilization (fig. 38) may characterise the early- urban organism being developed in a natural way on the basis of communitive structions. Both collapsing and desintegration of the centre of impulsive development simultaneous with the same process in Iran made it trasferred to the east in Margiana and in Bactria. Irregular cultural development is also typical for Hindustan. Culture of the archaic farmers (fig. 46) close to the Middleasian Jeitun evolves rather rapidly in the high developed system, that bears the strongly pronounced features of cultural peculiarity. To all appearances the spontaneous transformation type prevails here. Harappian civilization belonged to the ancient eastern regional type has rather distinctive traits in sphere of urban amenities and in that of military function that was poorly developed. Broad stable lies both in culture and in trade with Mesopotamia as well as with far northern centres including the Altyn-Depe civilization are typical for it.

As origines of ancient Chinese agriculturists stay unclear general cultural aspect of that period keeps much originality (fig. 54). Spontaneous type of transformation prevails here. Adopted metallurgy could be there only as the technological import less influenced the local cultural aspect. One should state the In dynasty standards impacked greatly the centres beyond the nuclear zone of the civilization.

With the chronological gap available between the first civilizations of the Old World and the ancient culture of Peru and that of Mesoamerica the latters are obviously appropriated to the same epochal type. Their creation and progress confirm significance of the first civilizations period as the diachronous phenomenon with the definite stages of the mankind history. The initial stratum of the early agricultural epoch is accurately revealed in the New World. Complex economy which combined agriculture and marine resources (fig. 59) indicates of the considerable cultural achievements in the littoral regions of Peru. Mochika (fig. 64) and Olmek (fig. 65) civilizations though being retarded in the formative stage created initial cultural standards and patterns for their regions. Socio-cultural system of the Post- Olmek Mesoamerica with the common features, determined according with the epochal and regional cultural type, had much peculiarities in each civilization. Study of ancient cultures in dialectic unity of general and separate traits is the most perspective way in analysis of the historical past.

Литература

Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Соч. 2-е изд. Т. 21.

Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Соч. 2-е изд. Т. 49.

Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Соч. 2-е изд. Т. 46, ч. I.

Ленин В. И. Полн. собр. соч. Т. 30.

Ленин В. И. Полн. собр. соч. Т. 24.

Абрамян Э. Г. Инновация и стереотипизация в процессах развития этнической культуры // Методологические проблемы исследования этнических культур: Матер/ симпозиума. Ереван, 1978.

Аверкиева Ю. П. Индейцы Северной Америки. М., 1974.

Алёкшин В. А. Социальная структура и погребальный обряд древнеземледельческих обществ. Л., 1986.

Алёкшин В. А., Буряков Ю. Ф. Хроника // ДЦВ. Самарканд, 1986.

Артановский С. Н. Критика буржуазных теорий культуры и проблемы идеологической борьбы. Л., 1981.

Арутюнов С. А. Механизмы усвоения нововведений в этнической культуре // Методологические проблемы исследования этнических культур: Матер. симпозиума. Ереван, 1978.

Арутюнов С. А. Этнографическая наука и изучение культурной динамики // Исследования по общей этнографии. М., 1979.

Арутюнов С. А, Инновации в культуре этноса и их социально-экономическая обусловленность // Этнографические исследования развития культуры. М., 1985.

Археология Зарубежной Азии. М., 1986.

Археология СССР: Энеолит СССР. М., 1982.

Аскаров А. А. Саппалитепа. Ташкент, 1973.

Аскаров А. А, Древнеземледельческая культура эпохи бронзы юга Узбекистана. Ташкент, 1977.