Table Of ContentCopyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
ANTHROPOLOGICAL ESSAY ON THE BRONZE AGE MIGRATIONS IN
CENTRAL ASIA (THE CASE OF GONUR DEPE, TURKMENISTAN)
Nadezhda A. DUBOVA
Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
The migration of separate (both small and big) linguistics constructions is also constantly discussed
populations on considerable distances is one of the basic (Lamberg-Karlovsky 2002 and its discussion). The
factors defining ethno-cultural processes of the territory hypothesis of the original localization of Aryans in the
of Central and Middle Asia during many historical Eastern European steppes is dominant. The carriers of
periods. Migrations played a special role during Neolithic these languages are associated with different cultures.
and Bronze Age. During these periods active movement The point of view of Indo-Iranian profile of Srubno-
of people took place along vast regions, as from the Near Andronovo tribes is most accepted (Abaev 1965;
East to the ranges of Pamir and Himalaya. The Grantovskij 1970; Smirnov and Kuz’mina 1977;
movements of the artifacts are deeply impressed in Kuz’mina 1994; 2008). The Alakul’ culture of the
archaeological material, giving us information of the Transural populations was formed in close relations with
more important classes of that epoch and characterizing Srubno-Andronovo culture of Eastern Europe. Carriers of
also the spiritual culture. The analysis of the structure of the last one moved ahead to the south, as confirmed by
the language allows us to track the origin centre of the many experts of Arians migration to India.
ancient languages and the movements from their original
areas. But in most cases there is a question before doing Another point of view is supported by a smaller number
any research: whether artifacts, ancient ideologies and of considerable scientists, as Vjač V. Ivanov and T.V.
languages are understandable simply analyzing a trade Gamkrelidze. The researchers assume that Indo-European
exchange or a dialogue. Anthropology is often nearly the mother language dialects, together with their carriers,
only science that can answer this question since it, unlike have extended across Eurasia from the sphere of ancient
archaeology and linguistics, is able to confirm in the Near Eastern cultures, most likely from an area of
present time physical migrations of cultures and northern Mesopotamia, adjacent to Eastern Anatolia -
languages. “Occurrence of a new anthropological historical Armenia (the south-eastern part of the territory
complex … by all means speaks about an impurity of the of modern Turkey) and north-eastern Syria (Gamkrelidze
new population since this complex extends at and Ivanov 1984; 1995). In their opinion the Indo-
resettlement of people or as a result of marriage contacts. Iranians, who separated from Indo-European tribes,
Enormous value of an anthropological material consists settled in the northern part of Iran, whence then they
in it as thin indicator of migrations, especially during migrated toward India, northern Mesopotamia and steppe
ancient epoch that it is impossible to find out by means of zone1. The main witness of the Aryan migration, as
given other sciences” (Alekseev 1989: 152). confirmed by all researchers, is the presence of chariot
and domesticated horse.
Paying special attention to the results obtained by
different sciences as archaeology, linguistics, history, In 1950 South-Turkmenistan Archaeological Complex
anthropology, the academician V.P. Alekseev Expedition (JuTAKE) started their works in the Karakum
demonstrated that anthropology can obtain important data desert. Vadim Masson was the chief of the expedition and
throughout the entire human history, in contrast, for Victor Sarianidi was his permanent colleague and later
example, to archaeology, most productively during pre- the chief of the Margiana archaeological expedition.
literate epochs, or general history, more valuable in More than 200 settlements (Sarianidi 1990) and Margush
modern time (Alekseev 1989). For this reason only a region were found (Sarianidi 2001; 2005; 2008a; Gubaev
multi-disciplinary approach to the analysis of the history et al. 1998). The largest and richest site of Margush
of any ancient period, taking into account the results of region, Gonur Depe (translated from the Turkmen
different disciplines including anthropology, is most language, “grey hill”), was found by Prof. V. Sarianidi in
productive. 1972 in the sands of the Karakum desert, 85 km north
from the city of Bayram-ali. Two years later he began
Numerous researchers are excited by the problem of the excavating the site, continuing up to the present time
origin of Indo-Europeans. The problems of Indo-Iranian (Sarianidi 1990; 1998; 2001; 2002a; 2002b; 2005; 2007;
origin and the localization of the provenance area of 2008a; 2008b).
Aryans are very close to the first one. The bibliography
on these subjects is huge (Safronov 1989; Kuz’mina
Gonur Depe was defined to be the main settlement of
1994; 2008; Parpola 1994; Grigor’ev 1999; 2002). The
Margush on the basis of architecture and craft activities.
archaeological and anthropological data, except
linguistics, are involved on this topic. The possibility of 1 For further confirmation of this concept, taking into account the last
their employment for ethno-genetic and history- two decades, see Ivanov 2004.
193
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
MAURIZIO TOSI E L’ARCHEOLOGIA COME MODO DI VIVERE
A considerable number of radiocarbon dates (Sarianidi culture material was found near Gonur South (Themenos)
1990; 1994; Hiebert 1993; 1994; Jungner 2004; Zajzeva and it is also dated to the second half of the 2nd
et al. 2008) suggests that the site was settled from 2300 to millennium BC (Hiebert and Moore 2004). All other
1600 BC. Stratigrafic investigations and radiocarbon pottery (some thousand units), discovered in Gonur
dates highlight a uniform cultural horizon of three tombs (until now about 4000 of them are described) and
periods: first period - from the foundation of the complex belonging to all three above mentioned cultural horizons,
(2300-2250 BC) to the heavy fire which destroyed the is wheel-made of a very high quality. Most of them have
entire central part of the Kremlin (1800-1700 BC); the thin walls and is made of white clay; manufacture
second period continued approximately 200 years after testifies the belonging to technologically advanced
the heavy fire; during the third period (about 1600 BC) farmers. Only it is necessary to say that the ceramic
Gonur lost the capital position and the settlement was complex of Gonur has not studied so far. Short
characterized by a layer of abandonment after the publications available (Udeumuradov 1993; 2002;
movement of the Murghab River to the west. Kozhin 2010) cannot complete the study of this rich
collection.
Archaeological materials of Gonur Depe testify that the
site is typical of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Some experts think that BMAC is a local independent
Complex (BMAC) - a Bronze Age cultural horizon archaeological culture, generated by the integration of
characterizing a vast territory to the south-west of Asia, various traditions of earlier cultures living in the
localized by V.I. Sarianidi (1990: 74-89), and nowadays surrounding regions: Namazga, Indus Valley/Baluchistan,
recognized by the majority of experts. A number of Elam and steppe regions of Eurasia (Hiebert 1994). An
researchers use Oxus Civilization to define this cultural interesting specific variant of such point of view is M.
complex (Ligabue and Salvatori 1989; Francfort 1984; Tosi and S. Salvatori's position (Salvatori and Tosi 1997).
2004). The researchers believe that the similarity among the
characteristics of the area from Kara Kum to Arab deserts
BMAC origin is considered differently. According to V.I. cannot be explained only by trade. They consider that in
Sarianidi Gonur, as well as other settlements of the the second half of the 3rd millennium BC in the Middle
ancient Murghab alluvial fan, was founded by people East, from the Indus Valley (Harappan) to Egypt, a 'great
moving from the far west, because of high demographic transformation' of the main Aeneolithic centres to the
density and the so-called ‘xerothermic crisis’. In the end cities took place. In the areas, most favorable for
of 3rd millennium BC, the Murghab alluvial fan was economic and environmental indicators, industrial,
occupied by numerous tribes coming from the regions religious and administrative activities developed. In other
outside of Mesopotamia, after an integration with Late words, similar processes took place in a huge territory,
Neolithic local population living along the foothills of but the people living there were connected by a common
Kopet Dagh mountains probably from 7th-6th millennium ideology that led to the political structure and religious
BC. The culture of these populations is named BMAC, beliefs (Salvatori and Tosi 1997: 122-123).
characterizing the major part of the sites in Turkmenistan
from Ashgabat to Serakhs (Ašhabad settlement, Anau, Due to the presence in Margiana in the middle of the 2nd
Namazga Depe, Ulug Depe at Dušak, Altyn Depe, etc.) millennium BC of different steppe sites, other researchers
and witnessing the large scale movement of the tribes. believe that BMAC came from interactions between
indigenous peoples from Southern Turkmenistan and the
Studies of the new material coming from Gonur nomads from Eurasian steppes (Kuz’mina 1994; Cattani
(especially results of 2004-2006 excavations) brought 2004; Hiebert and Moore 2004). Another point of view
new data about the integration of local South explains the origin of BMAC culture as a result of
Turkmenistan cultural traditions with populations of intensive commercial relations between the populations
Egypt, Western Mediterranean, Elam and Western Iran of Near East and Central Asia (Francfort 1989: 413-421).
on the one hand and, on the other hand, with Indus A special attention addresses on tin trade and exchange
Civilization regions and Baluchistan (Sarianidi 1998; (Lyonnet 2005).
2001; 2002a; 2002b; 2004; 2005; 2008a; 2008b).
According to V.I. Sarianidi, remarkable similarities In conclusion, the main questions which we can try to
cannot be explained only by commercial relations among answer on the basis of physical anthropology, are as
these regions. He believes that real migration was one of follows:
the most important factors for the formation of the
Are the inhabitants of Gonur Depe (the well studied
BMAC culture profile, in Gonur in particular.
capital site of Margush region) natives of Southern
Turkmenistan or are exclusively immigrants?
In early Gonur horizons there are not absolutely traces of
steppe cultures. All nomadic sites of Margiana are dated
If they are immigrants, from which territory or
approximately from the middle - second half of the 2nd
territories did they come?
millennium BC. In the uppermost layers of Gonur (along
the east side of the palace-temple complex), five Are the inhabitants of Gonur Depe foreign population
fragments of black hand-made pottery were found, two of or have they integrated native population of the
them with incised decoration typical of steppe southern areas of Turkmenistan - foothills of Kopet
ornamentation. A small settlement with Andronovo Dagh?
194
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
N.A. DUBOVA: ANTHROPOLOGICAL ESSAY ON THE BRONZE AGE MIGRATIONS IN CENTRAL ASIA…
Anthropological sciences may encounter objective huge spaces - processes that were much more
difficulties, trying to answer these questions. First of all, complicated. But also known circumstances lead to the
the fact that the Middle East is the cradle of the vast situation: differently for historical periods, more close to
majority of modern populations is perfectly confirmed our time, from Upper Palaeolithic is more difficult to
scientifically. The genes or expressiveness of their track the presence of newcomers from the West on the
morphological combinations (craniological and basis of the change of anthropological characteristics of
odontological in particular), characteristics that are the population.
peculiar (e.g. Neolithic populations of Mesopotamia), can
be highlighted in various areas, thanks to the transfer The situation in Gonur is extremely interesting. As well-
through the generations. known, Neolithic population of Kopet Dagh floodplain is
related to the Neolithic population of Near East, studied
As a concrete example, we can talk about the by anthropologists and archaeologists. Archaeological
combination of well-known words 'Mediterranean' or investigations show that Gonur was founded in the end of
'Eastern Mediterranean' anthropological type. Generally it 3rd millennium BC, i.e. ‘only’ two-three thousand years
is mentioned that some anthropological features usually after Neolithic period, and in a territory which was not
joined in the populations characterized by rather various earlier occupied. Thanks to the excavations of Gonur
combinations of traits (Сappieri 1961; 1965; Ginzburg necropolis (2853 funeral structures), where burials are
and Trofimova 1972: 51-56, tab. 6; Hodžajov 1981; contemporary with the palace-temple complex, we were
Jablonskij 2000). But these differences can be explained able to study the first inhabitants of the town (Babakov et
quite possible: the same gene pool is shown differently in al. 2001). The burials were made also on the ruins of
every concrete situation. During long time in many cases Gonur during the last settlement period. In Spring 2009
they remain dolikhocephalia (rather long and narrow almost 1300 tombs were excavated (235 of them on the
cranium); leptoprosopia and leptorhinnia (frequently territory of the palace) (see preliminary publications
mezorhinnia - rather high and narrow face and nose); Dubova and Rykušina 2004; 2005; 2007). It allowed us to
rather large and round orbits; high nasal bridge and a analyze the change of anthropological characteristics of
good (frequently very strong!) acting nose; very high the inhabitants of Gonur during the whole time of its
chin, which usually is higher than the height of the lower existence, i.e. along 700-800 years. The most important
jaw body, that usually reinforces the visual impression of thing is that we can compare the anthropological
sharpness of the horizontal profile of the face. characteristics of Neolithic population of Southern
Turkmenistan with new inhabitants of ancient Murghab
Considering the entire complex of historical data, alluvial fan.
apparently it is possible to speak of many waves of
immigrants (natives of Mesopotamia area, Asia Minor, According to the author of the excavations of the site, V.I.
Eastern Mediterranean in the broadest sense of the word Sarianidi, based on the results of archaeological analysis,
or from the so-called ‘half moon of fertility’ area). These the inhabitants of Gonur, as mentioned before, are
movements went toward scarcely occupied and less immigrants from Western Anatolia. The ancient town was
favorable territories, in terms of nature and climate. After characterized in the past by wide cultural and trading
a certain amount of time every successive wave amassed contacts, including with Indus Civilization. Returning to
on the previous one. From a genetic point of view, the gene-anthropological terminology, it is necessary to
probably we should observe how different parts of a basic say that, if V.I. Sarianidi is right, Gonur’s material can
gene pool (certainly developing over the time) break allow us to compare Neolithic descendants of Near East
away from it, moving into the space and interacting with ancestors, but they were developing during two or three
the parts which leaved it earlier, already modified by thousand years isolated from their parent population.
environmental and survival conditions. We must not
forget that newcomers arrived in territory where If the point of view about local independence of BMAC
indigenous groups already adapted to new conditions of is valid, we should see similarities among the populations
life. Thanks to various genetic processes, they already got of previous epochs of Southern Turkmenistan (foothills
the special traits which their far ancestors, who probably of Kopet Dagh). In this case if differences between Gonur
thousand years ago arrived from the West, did not have. and Southern Turkmenistan populations will be found
out, they should keep within a variation of Neolithic
It is important to notice that when groups leave the anthropological type.
ancestor population during different periods of time,
joining a new generality, the gene pool of the last one is At least, in the case that the steppe cattle-breeders had a
expressed in rather archaic kind. Direct analogies are part in the formation of the population of Gonur Depe, we
hardly possible to highlight here, but we can observe should find out this anthropological component as a part
them, for example, in the fauna. It is well-known that a of the population studied2. Considering the mass of
mixture of different races of dogs, horses or birds, anthropological material available from Gonur and also
different in size, color, proportions etc., will remind very the absence of successive layers of occupation, in view of
close to the wild one, which has ‘neutral’ properties.
2 For northern areas of Central Asia, see Ginzburg and Trofimova 1972:
98; Jablonskij 1996: 58 - for southern areas of Central Asia, see
Certainly the scheme shown above is rather uncertain and
Kijatkina 1987: 51-52; Gromov 1995: 156-159; Hodžajov 2004: 96,
very rough, as the issue of the formation of populations in 101; Jablonskij 2004: 284.
195
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
MAURIZIO TOSI E L’ARCHEOLOGIA COME MODO DI VIVERE
the complete determination of the life in this former oasis Trofimova and V.V. Gizburg consider that Tazabagjab
in the middle of the 2nd millennium BC, it is possible to population from Kokča 3 is a result of the integration
consider this situation unique in many aspects. between Srubnaja and Andronovo tribes, with a small
participation of the people coming from southern regions
The basic conclusion of the researchers, who were (Ginzburg and Trofimova 1972: 54-55).
engaged in the study of Central Asian palaeo-
anthropology, is that the Middle and Late Bronze Age B. Hemphill published the comparison of craniometrical
agricultural tribes of the described region were part, from variation (14 sizes) of Northern Bactria with that of
an anthropological point of view, of the thick South Southern Uzbekistan and Indus Valley (Hemphill 1998).
Europoid layer. Average height or high face, with very In total he analyzed 544 skulls coming from 12 Bronze
strong horizontal profile with strongly acting big nose Age sites. Unfortunately in his publication there are no
were the main distinctive features of their appearance. It references to the first researchers and authors of the basic
is possible to assume that the colour of hairs and eyes of Bronze Age series of Uzbekistan - T.K. Hodžajov and
this population most likely had dark shades. K.K. Halilov (Hodžajov 1977; Hodžajov and Halilov
Geographically this anthropological type has spread 1978a; 1978b; 1984). The comparison of cranio-series,
throughout the territory of Southwest Asia, using various statistical methods (D2 of Mahalanobis,
chronologically 'dating back' to ancient forms (probably two types of cluster-analysis, multidimensional scale and
of Mesolithic), extended in several areas. In some burials analysis of main components), have not confirmed the
(early layers of Iranian Sialk, Turkmen Kara Depe, Hemphill’s hypothesis of ‘late colonization’ and the so-
Geoksyur, Altyn Depe, Uzbek Sapallitepa, Tadžik called ‘threefold’ model. Sometimes the hypothesis of an
Tigrovaja Bal’ka and Makoni-Mor, Zaman-Baba and early influence might be true. At the same time he does
Pakistan Timargarha) hypermorphic skulls with not take into account a possible influence of interregional
extremely high faces were found. Tatyana P. Kiyatkina contacts and possible gene flow: from Western China
considers that mature construction of them does not (until 2000 BC) to the Zerafšan Valley (after 2000 BC)
change the general configuration of the skulls. High face which could have, according to the author, a dominant
feature dates back to Mesolith, or even to Upper role in the formation of BMAC civilization in the oasis of
Palaeolith (Kijatkina 1987: 51). In spite of the diffusion Northern Bactria.
of territorial distinctions related to the height of the faces
(lower - in the groups from Southern Tajikistan; higher - Considering all the materials available so far from the
in Sapallitepa and in Southern Turkmenistan), the southern parts of Central Asia, we can assume that
researcher does not see any participation in the formation Gonur's skulls do not differ greatly from synchronous
of anthropological 'steppe' Proto-europoid type (Kijatkina farmers. Several specialists provided anthropological data
1987: 52). during archaeological excavations at Gonur: the Italian
researchers from the Department of Anthropology of the
A. Gromov arrived to opposite conclusions. He studied Special Division of the National Museum of Prehistoric
skulls from Parhaj 2 and the valley of Sumbar (south- Ethnography “L. Pigorini” (Rome, Italy), A. Sperduti, L.
western Turkmenistan), not only on the basis of Bondioli and R. Macchiarelli (np), practically did not
craniological classical point of view, but also for discrete study craniometric traits and mentioned in their
variable features. He also compared the Bronze Age publications measurements only of a limited number of
series of Eurasian steppe, by using one of the most traits. The basic craniological material from Gonur
popular statistical methods of canonical analysis necropolis has been collected between 1998 and 2001 by
variation. He asserts that Sumbar cranio-series are the famous Turkmen scholar of the Institute of History of
characterized by indicators representatives of Bronze Age Academy of Sciences of Turkmenistan (Aşgabat), O.
steppe, together with the series from Tigrovaja Bal’ka Babakov. He defined sex and age of the buried bodies
and Early Tul’har (Gromov 1995: 157). and published the first data of some individual skulls
(Babakov 2002; 2004). Since Spring 2002 until now, the
Studying Timargharha, W. Bernhardt marked a Author of this article participated in the expedition as
considerable individual variability of anthropological anthropologist.
traits of this site. Among others, he indicated the presence
of Veddoid features on two female, one male and The data obtained at Gonur Depe show near-normal rate
probably on one baby skulls. These remains are sex with very insignificant number of men exceeded
characterized by general frail structure, direct forehead, women (1.06), noted by G.V. Rykušina (Babakov et al.
poorly expressed relief in the upper eyebrow area and 2001; Dubova and Rykušina 2004; 2007). The excess of
strongly pronounced alveolar prognathism. W. Bernhard number of men over women in the entire group is rather
(1967: 374) considers possible a certain similarity of insignificant, but quite reliable. As it does not correspond
these rests with a skull bearing equatorial features from to the normal biological sex ratio (1:1), it is possible to
Kokča 3 (region of the Aral Sea), described by T.E. assume that the first settlers of Gonur were immigrants.
Trofimova (1961). It is important to say that the most For this reason we have significant excess number of men
attested expert of anthropology of the Mediterranean over women. As the site of Gonur is characterized by
area, M. Cappieri, also includes the skull from Kokča 3 as three periods of agricultural life, the sex ratio was leveled
Eastern Mediterranean type (Cappieri 1965). However in due course and became almost equal. It is possible to
Russian researchers do not agree with him. T.A. assume also that part of women (about 36%) could be
196
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
N.A. DUBOVA: ANTHROPOLOGICAL ESSAY ON THE BRONZE AGE MIGRATIONS IN CENTRAL ASIA…
either included in population from the outside regions or aspects with an extensive immigration and connected
a group, coming from new territory, superseded part of with several previous groups, not in contact with each
local men and included local women. Three stages of life other. On the other hand, the ecological factor was very
have been identified on the basis of funeral ceremony and important yet (Alekseeva 1977: 16-18; 1998: 45-51). It is
gifts. Therefore, if the second assumption is true, the clear that craniological series of Gonur, which can testify
people who founded Gonur Depe probably came not only as the population moved from one of the earliest centres
in one but in several waves. of brachicephalization (near-eastern one) and about the
presence in the population of metisation process of
Preliminary analysis of the general parameters of the various groups, previously live away from each other.
skull, developed by A.P. Pestrjakov (Babakov et al.
2001), shows that length, width, and height of skulls from New evidence of the use of artificial deformation of the
Gonur necropolis are typical of the synchronous Bronze skull from the population of Margiana are not less
Age population of Middle East, from Mesopotamia to important. Most likely, handkerchiefs (or special hats
north-west India. Towards the Great Eurasian steppe in popular among modern Turkmens) dressed on infant's
the north the impurity of Tropoids decreases, and the head, causing the flatness of the bregma and occipital
most remote cranio-series (Okunevo, Karasuk, Plitoščniki mound, were an item of baby care (Dubova 2004a;
of Transbajkalia) are probably completely absent. This 2004b; 2006a).
conclusion is based on the variability of the
craniometrical and angular features of the skeleton skull This custom, judging by the available bibliographical
and face. Gonur series shows a variation from the data (Hodžajov 1966; 2000; Tur 1998), appeared in the
smallest to the greatest sizes of many dimensions. That steppe areas of Eurasia not earlier than the middle of the
data allow us to speak about its heterogeneity. The 1st millennium BC, whereas at Gonur it appeared already
presence of more archaic and more progressive forms in in the 2nd millennium BC. It is possible therefore to speak
the anthropological type of Gonur population is attested, about its distribution to the steppe from Southern
as well as the existence of Veddoid component. Margiana. Certainly, a parallel event of this tradition in
various territories is still not excluded. Anyway we can
Odontological traits show that Gonur series differs for conclude that these data do not confirm the presence of
numerous signs from ancient and modern Europoid series steppe migrants in the southern areas of Central Asia in
by interpolation of a complex of signs of the western the middle of the 2nd millennium BC.
odontological trunk. This series shows also features of
the eastern one. I will not dwell here on anthropomorphic plastic from
Gonur, because the attention has been paid to it earlier
It is also possible to speak about the reference of Gonur (Dubova 2006a; 2006b). I noticed that the images of
people to the group of not differentiated odontological facial features from Gonur are predominantly of
types and about their mixed character (between western Sumerian style, although there are some pictures of
and eastern odontological trunks). In both cases the Eastern Mediterranean type. The same anthropological
population buried in Gonur necropolis occupies marginal plastic reconstruction process was performed by several
position, finding out on the level of eastern odontological authors, with the application of a method used by M.M.
traits a complex similarity to the majority of ancient Gerassimov. It is significant that there is no reconstructed
Europoid series, and on the expressiveness of the western figure which could be connected with Palaeoeuropoid
complex - approaches with the modern population of population.
southern and south-eastern Asia (Oraon, Munda and
Viets). Last circumstance allows us to connect certain The results of a comparison of Gonur cranial series with
specificity of Gonur population with contacts to Aeneolith-Late Bronze Age 60 cranial series of
representatives of this region, and also to include it in the agricultural and cattle breeding population of different
ancient anthropological substratum, which was not areas of Central Asia and surrounding regions by Factor
enough widespread in the territory from Southwest Asia Analysis (cranial length, breadth, height; minimal frontal
to northern India. and bizigomatic diameters, upper facial height, nose
height and width, orbital height and width (mf) ) show
The material collected in the past years suggested the that the first three factors describe almost 65% of
following conclusions. For the first time on the territory intergroup variability (more in detail see: Dubova 2008;
of Central Asia it was revealed that the Bronze Age Avanesova et al. 2010) (Fig. 1).
population of Margiana, being dolycocephalous as a
whole (the male CI is 71.0 and female one 71.6), was The first factor (36.7 of variability) differentiates each
subjected to brachicephalization process: among group for the height of the upper part of the face, orbit
representatives of both sexes there are brachicephals and nose. The second factor (14,6%) - only for the cranial
(they are 5 or 2,1%). It is important to note that such sites length and the minimal frontal diameter. It is necessary to
as Tepe Sialk and Tepe Hissar in Iran are those of the underline that such situation is original enough. Usually
first centers of brachicephalization process. As V.V. the variability of cranial length (as general parameter,
Bunak, A. Valois, I. Schwidetzki and M. Cappieri which is correlated with the general growth of an
demonstrated (Bunak 1927; Vallois 1939; Schwidetzki organism in a longitudinal direction) brings the essential
1950; Cappieri 1961), this process is interfaced in many contribution to the first factor, i.e. the factor defining the
197
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
MAURIZIO TOSSI E L’ARCHEOLLOGIA COME MODDO DI VIVERE
Fig. 1. Poosition of 60 coompared seriees of 11 cranioological traitss in the space F1 and F3
((Factor Analyysis, Principall Components)).
1.Gonur neccropolis; 2. Gonnur tombs; 3. DDžarkutan; 4. Saazagan, Zarafšaan; 5. Učtut Zaarafšan; 6. Daštti-Kazi, Zarafšaan: 7. Zaman-
Baba, Zarafšaan; 8. Dalverdžžin; 9. Early Tuul’har; 10. Tigroovaja bal’ka I ((Vakš); 11. Tigrrovaja bal’ka III (Jakka Pista);; 12. Tigrovaja
bal’ka III (Oyykul’); 13. Makkoni Mor; 14. KKokča III; 15. TTumek-Kičidžik; 16.Altyn Depee; 17. Buston VVI; 18. Sapally ttepa; 19. Kara
Depe; 20. PParhai 2; 21. Suumbar; 22. Tahirbay III; 23. GGeoksjur; 24. Boolšie Balhany; 225.Mohenjo-DDaro; 26. Harapppa R 37; 27.
Harappa H; 228.Harappa Arrea G 289; 29. Shahr-i Sokhtaa; 30. Tepe Hisssar II; 31. Tepe Hissar III; 32. Timargarha; 333.Butkara II;
34.Tepe Džeemšidi; 35. Hasanlu 5000; 36. Hasanlu V-IV; 37.Gumugou;38.Huoshaogoou, Yumen, Gannsu; 39. Shangssujia, Datong,
Qinghai, Kayyne Culture; 40.. Shangsujia, DDatong, Qinghaii, Han Dynasty;; 43. Habarno’’e, Andronovo, KKazakhstan; 444.Tasty-Butak,
Kazakhsttan; 45. Maturee Srubnaja, Vollgo-Ural; 46. Affanas’evo, Mouuntain Altay; 477.Afanas’evo, MMinusinsk; 48. Okunevo;
49.Karasuuk; 50. Andronoovo, Mountain AAltay; 51. Andrronovo (Fedoroovo), Minusinskk; 52. Andronovvo (Fedorovo), KKazakhstan
in sum; 553.Andronovo ((Alakul’), West Kazakhstan; 544.Andronovo ((AAlakul’), Kazakkhstan; 55. Sarggat culture, Easst Siberia;
56. ČČogray, Kalmykiija; 57. Ju. Jurggeni, Kalmykijaa; 58. Bolšekaraagansky, 25; 599.Pazyryk cultuure; 60. Krivoe ozero.
greatest variiability sharee among otheer parameterss. In Turkkmenistan - negative. Foresst and forest-ssteppe groupss
compared grroups the greaatest variabiliity is observeed by (Okuunevo, Sargaat, Karasuk bburial groundds) and alsoo
several highh-rise traits. IIt is interestiing that the third seriees from the terrritory of Chinna have a sepparate positionn
factor definees 13,3% of vaariability, inclluding the greeatest in thhe graph. Ann exception iis representedd by a buriall
loadings on all breadth siizes (cranial bbreadth, minimmum grouund of Gumuggou of Xingjiaan, which on tthe sum of thee
frontal and bizigomatic diameters andd orbit widthh). It traits is located near the Zerrafšan series from Dashti--
means that growth-processses in comparred groups (booth in Kazyy. On the conntrary, a smalll series fromm Tasty-Butakk
longitudinal and cross-seection directioons) bring allmost (Kazzakhstan) hass “come off a great bulkk” of steppee
identical conntribution to intergroup vvariability. Crranial “cloud”, the origiinality of whiich was highllighted by thee
height (ba-brr), which constitutes the mmost importantt part researcher (Ginzbburg 1962).
of the fourrth factor allong with thhe width off the
pear-shaped opening, deescribes 10,55% of interggroup The main components differrentiate all thhe comparedd
variation. seriees by height of face, nosee and orbits, and also byy
crannial, facial andd orbit breadtths. Independdent value hass
The involvedd series are aaccurately enoough differenttiated crannial length. Stiill in the earlyy seventies, VV.V. Ginzburgg
in the territoories. All Kazzakhstan, Souuth Siberia, AAltay, and T.A. Trofimmova (1972: 997-98, fig. 15) concludedd
and also Uraal-Volga regioon groups havve positive values abouut the presencce of two largge areas of ddistribution off
of F3, and allmost all popuulations of Iraan, Pakistan, IIndus anthhropological ttypes in Centtral Asia andd Kazakhstann
Valley, soutthern areas oof Uzbekistann, Tajikistan and (the East Mediiterranean annd Protoeuroopoid types),,
198
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
N.A. DUBOVA: ANTHROPOLOGICAL ESSAY ON THE BRONZE AGE MIGRATIONS IN CENTRAL ASIA…
approved by many researchers, on the basis of the same It is impossible to analyze here details of features of
indicators. The original position (not just Palaeoeuropoid cranial morphology of different groups living in the
variants) of some skulls, as written by T.P. Kijatkina southern and northern steppe areas of Central Asia during
(1987: 52), is also highlighted by our analysis. Bronze Age. But it is necessary to underline that some
similarities of the late Gonur inhabitants with cattle-
We can speak about new results of accumulation of large breeders can be not only a result of penetration of steppe
craniological data from the territory of southern areas of groups in southern agricultural areas. If we agree with the
Central Asia, representing agricultural and cattle breeding point of view that an initial impulse of migration
population. The groups, in which both types of house- (including migration of Indoarians) was both in eastern
hold are combined (Kokča III, Buston VI, Karaelemata- and northern Transcaucasian directions3 from an original
Saj and Patma Saj, Džarkutan), obviously find their territory, the epicenter of which is presumably located in
place on the graph (Fig. 1) between ‘typical’ farmers modern Syria, the participation of identical
(Hasanlu, Gonur, Mohendjo Daro, Pakistan Timargarha anthropological components in the formation process of
and Butkara) and series from Kazakhstan, Southern South Turkmen and steppe tribes is not less probable.4
Siberia and Volga-Ural region. At the same time, Gonur Thereupon I should mention the presence of
skulls from later tombs, as well as from later layers anthropological components, similar to Mediterranean
of Tepe Hissar in Iran, have great values for what ones, among Srubnaja (and even earlier) groups of Volga
concerns the third main component (great breadth size). region (Trofimova 1961; Ševčenko 1974; Hohlov 1998)
They preserve face and head height at the same level, and Southern Ural (Jusupov 1989), and especially among
as in the earlier periods. It can be connected, first of all, Alakul population (Ginzburg 1962; Alekseev 1967).
with the process of general brachi-cephalization which These facts testify a movement from the south to the
has begun at the same time. It is possible also to speak steppe areas (probably much more earlier than in Bronze
about the influence of gradual penetration of steppe Age time), then from steppes to southern direction.
groups to the south and, most likely, the increasing of
originally casual and then more and more frequent So the new data obtained allow us to affirm that the flo-
marriage contacts of them with farmers. The more urishing of Gonur population originates from unconditio-
suitable term for this integration process could be nal migration towards the alluvial fan of the Murghab
‘gradual infiltration’. river. Unlike the First Bronze Age craniological data
from Gonur series show the considerable polymorphism
It is important to highlight not in particular the arriving to of the population. Except the most widespread East
the south of ‘pure’ Protoeuropoids (massive population Mediterranean anthropological component, among the
having rather lower, wide, almost flatted horizontal face population of Kopet Dagh foothills and in Gonur series
plane, but with high bridge nose and rather narrow and Southwestern Asian and Veddoid elements are present. It
wide rectangular orbits), but groups in which is evident is the ‘certificate’ of mutual migrations between Near
the integration with Mediterranean anthropological East and East Mediterranean on the one hand and among
component. This situation, of course, leads to strengthen Hindustan and also Pakistan and Afghanistan on another.
Mediterranean features (present in both groups) in the
new mixed population. Besides it is necessary to underline that different
anthropological complexes can speak about archaism of
Archaeological materials by N. Avanesova from Buston the anthropological type of newcomers in ancient
VI show rather considerable Andronovo component. The Murghab. The most probable motherland of a
anthropological type of Buston shows, not only in men considerable part of migrants (or only of the
but also in women, decreased facial height and more Southwestern Asian component) is Syria-Anatolia region,
often the square shape of the orbits. From the results of the area of distribution of Sumer culture. It is possible to
our analyses the Mediterranean components (high, say about the presence of the anthropological component,
narrow and sharp profile in the horizontal plane face with which has in its structure the Palaeoeuropoid admixture,
a high, narrow well acting nose and high round orbits) are in the population of the southern areas of Turkmenistan
expressed more strongly, however, that the Protoeuropoid not earlier than the middle of the 2nd millennium BC.
ones.
For what concerns the anthropological component which References Cited
can be connected with cattle breeders living around
Gonur Depe (i.e., in the southern areas of Turkmenistan), ABAEV, V.I. 1965. Skifo-evropejskie izoglossy. Мoskva.
we can say that it is possible to date back not earlier than
ALEKSEEV, V.P. 1967. “Antropologija andronovskoj
the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. We need to notice
kul’tury”, Sovetskaja arheologija, 1: 22-26.
that the closest groups, by anthropological characteristics,
to the people buried in the late Gonur tombs are from ALEKSEEV, V.P. 1989. Istoričeskaja antropologija I
etnogenez. Мoskva.
Harappa R37, Iranian Hasanlu, Pakistan Timargarha and
Turkmen Kара Depe. The groups living during Bronze
3 Probably also in western direction if we will take in consideration the
Age in Eurasian steppes differ from them not less than on
excavation in Egyptian Avaris (Bietak 1996).
1,5 of standard deviation, and their basic ‘cloud’ more
4 For linguistic data, see Gamkrelidže and Ivanov 1984; Ivanov 2004;
than on 2 sigma. for archaeological data, see Sarianidi 1990; 1998; 2001; 2002a.
199
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
MAURIZIO TOSI E L’ARCHEOLOGIA COME MODO DI VIVERE
ALEKSEEVA, T.I. 1977. Geografičeskaja sreda i biologija DUBOVA, N.A. 2008. “Antropologija Gonur Depe: tak
cheloveka. Moskva. est’ li stepnoj antropologičeskij component u
zemledel’cev II tys. Do n.e. Južnogo
ALEKSEEVA, T.I. 1998. Adaptacija čeloveka v različnyh
Turkmenistana?”, in A.A. Tiškin (ed.) Drevnie i
ekologičeskih nishah zemli. (Biologičeskie aspekty).
srednevekov’e kočevniki Central’noj Azii. Vserossij-
Мoskva.
skaja naučnaja konferencija, Barnaul: 201-205.
AVANESOVA N.A., DUBOVA N.A. and V.V. KUFTERIN
2010. “Skeletal remains from Buston VI - a Sapalli DUBOVA, N.A. and G.V. RYKUŠINA 2004. “Necropolis
and Area 5 of Gonur-depe: some anthropological
culture cemetery in Uzbekistan”, Archaeology,
data”, in M.F. Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and N.A.
Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, 41(1): 118-
Dubova (eds.) Near the sources of civilization,
137.
Мoscow: 317-336.
BABAKOV, O. 2002. “The settlement of Gonur-Depe in
the light of Anthropological findings”, in G. Rossi DUBOVA, N.A. and G.V. RYKUŠINA 2005.
“Paleodemografiya nekrologiya Gonura”, in Ju.K.
Osmida (ed.) Margiana. Gonur-Depe Necropolis. 10
Čistov (ed.) VI Kongress etnografov i antropologov
years of excavations by Ligabue study and research
Rossii, 28 junja - 2 julija, Sankt-Peterburg: 71.
Centre, Venice: 145-163.
BABAKOV, O. 2004. “Gonur-Depe population in the DUBOVA, N.A. and G.V. RYKUŠINA 2007.
“Paleodemografiya Gonur-depe”, in T.I. Alekseeva
Bronze Age (in the light of anthropological data)”, in
(ed.) Čelovek v kul’turnoj i prirodnoj srede. Trudy
M.F. Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and N.A. Dubova (eds.)
Tret’ih Antropologičeskih čtenij k 75-letiju so dnja
Near the Sources of Civilization, Мoscow: 337-348.
roždenija akademija V.P. Alekseeva, Мoskva: 309-
BABAKOV, O., RYKUŠINA, G.V., DUBOVA, N.A., VASILEV, 319.
S.V., PESTRJAKOV, A.P. and Т.K. HODŽAJOV 2001.
“Human skeletal remains of the necropolis of Gonur- FRANCFORT, H.-P. 1984. “The Early periods of
Shortughai (Harappan) and the Western Bactrian
Depe”, in V. Sarianidi 2001. Necropolis of Gonur and
culture of Dashly”, in B. Allchin (ed.) South Asian
Iranian paganism, Мoscow: 219-240.
Archaeology 1981. Proceedings of the Sixth
BERNHARD, W. 1967. “Human skeletal remains from the International Conference of the Association of the
cemetery of Timargarha”, Ancient Pakistan. Bulletin
South Asian Archaeologists in Western Europe. Held
of the Department of Archaeology, University of
in Cambridge University 5-10 July 1981, Cambridge:
Peshawar, 3: 291-407.
170-175.
BIETAK, M.A. 1996. The capital of the Hyksos. Recent FRANCFORT, H.-P. 1989. “Fouilles de Shortughaï.
excavations at Tell el‘Daba’a. London.
Recherches sur l’Asie centrale protohistorique”, in
BUNAK, V.V 1927. “Crania armenica. Issledovanie po Mémoires de la Mission archéologique française en
antropologii Perednej Azii”, in Trudy naučno- Asie Centrale, vols. I-II. Paris.
issledovatel’skogo institute antropologii Moskovskogo
FRANCFORT, H.-P. 2004. “Animals in reality, art and
gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. M.V. Lomonosova,
myths in the Oxus Civilization (BMAC): bison, deer”
vol. II, Мoskva.
in M.F. Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and N.A. Dubova
CAPPIERI, M. 1961. “Die asiatische Proto-Mediterranen”, (eds.) Near the sources of civilization, Мoscow: 182-
Ethnographisch-Archaeologische Zeitschrift, 2: 95-11. 192.
CAPPIERI, M. 1965. “I protomediterranei dell’Asia GAMKRELIDŽE, T.V. and V.V. IVANOV 1984.
Centrale russa”, Rivista di Antropologia, LII. Indoevropejskij yazyk i indoevropejcy, vols. 1-2.
Tbilisi.
CATTANI, M. 2004. “Margiana at the end of Bronze Age
and beginning of Iron Age”, in M.F. Kosarev, P.M. GAMKRELIDŽE, T.V. and V.V. IVANOV 1995. Indo-
Kozhin and N.A. Dubova (eds.) Near the sources of European and Indo-Europeans. Berlin-New York.
civilization, Мoscow: 303-315.
GINZBURG, V.V. 1962. “K antropologii naselenija
DUBOVA, N.A. 2004a. “Eščё raz o tysjačeletnej davnosti Ferganskoj doliny v epohu bronzy”, in Materialy i
dolihocefalii Turkmen”, Miras, 4: 78-85. issledovanija po arheologii, 118, Moskva: 201-218.
DUBOVA, N.A. 2004b. “Obyčaj kol’zevoj deformacii GINZBURG, V.V. and T.A. TROFIMOVA. 1972.
golovy novye dannye o ego bytovanii v južnyh Paleoantropologija Srednej Azii. Moskva.
rajonah Srednej azii v epohu bronzy”, in Integracija
GRANTOVSKIJ, E.A. 1970. Rannjaja istorija iranskih
arheologičeskih i etnografičeskih issledovanij.
plemen Perednej Azii. Moskva.
Almaty, 23-24 sentjabrja 2004 g., Almaty: 295-297.
GRIGOR’EV, S.A. 1999. Drevnie indoevropejcy. Opyt
DUBOVA, N.A. 2006a. “Iskusstvennaja deformacija istoričeskoj rekonstrukcii. Čeljabin’sk.
golovy u zemledel’cev epohi bronzy”, in M.B.
Mednikova (ed.) OPUS: meždisciplinarn’e GRIGOREV, S.A. 2002. Ancient Indo-Europeans.
Eurasian ancient history, vol. 1. Čeljabin’sk.
issledovanija v arheologii, vol. 5, Мoskva: 22-36.
DUBOVA, N.A. 2006b. “Qui vivait a Gonur Depe?”, GROMOV, A.V. 1995. “Naselenija jugo-zapadnogo
Dossier de l'archeologie et sciences des origines, 317: Turkmenistana v epohu pozdnej bronzy”,
40-45. Antropologija segodnja, 1: 151-160.
200
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
N.A. DUBOVA: ANTHROPOLOGICAL ESSAY ON THE BRONZE AGE MIGRATIONS IN CENTRAL ASIA…
GUBAEV, A., KOSHELENKO, G. and M. TOSI (eds,) 1998. HODŽAJOV, T.K. and H.H. HALILOV 1978a. “Novye
The Archaeological Map of the Murghab Delta. materialy k paleoantropologii drevnej Baktrii”,
Preliminary Reports 1990-95. Reports and Memoirs. Sovetskaja etnografija, 5: 130-133.
Series Minor, III. IsIAO. Roma.
HODŽAJOV, T.K. and Kh.Kh. HALILOV 1978b. “Čerepa
HEMPHILL, B.E. 1998. “Biological affinities and epohi bronzy iz mogil’nikov Džarkutan i Bustan
adaptation of Bronze Age Bactrians: III. An initial (raskopki 1975 g.)”, Istorija material’noj kul’tury
craniometrical assessment”, American Journal of Uzbekistana, 14: 43-50.
Physical Anthropology, 106: 329-248. HODŽAJOV, T.K. and H.H. HALILOV 1984. Naselenie
HIEBERT, F.T. 1993. “Chronology of Margiana and verkhov’ev Amudar’i po verhov’ev Amudar’i po
Radiocarbon Dates”, IASCCA Information Bulletin, dannym paleoantropologii. Taškent.
19: 136-148. HOHLOV, A.A. 1998. Paleoantropologija pogranic’ja
HIEBERT, F.T. 1994. Origins of the Bronze Age oasis lesostepi i stepi Volgo-Ural’ja v epohi neolita-bronzy.
civilization in Central Asia. Cambridge. Avtoreferta kandidatskoj dissertacii. Мoskva.
HIEBERT, F.T. and K.M. MOORE 2004. “A small steppe KIJATKINA, T.P. 1987. Paleoantropologija zapadnyh
rajonov Srednej Azii. Dušanbe.
site near Gonur”, in M.F. Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and
N.A. Dubova (eds.) Near the sources of civilization, KOŽIN, P.M. 2010. “Novyj etap pervobytnoj i
Мoscow: 294-302. ranneistoričeskoj arheologii Srednej Azii”, in P.M.
Kožin, M.F. Kosarev and N.A. Dubova (eds.) Na puti
IVANOV, V.V. 2004. “Dvadzat’ let spustja. O dovodah v
otkrytija zivilizacii. Sbornik statej k 80-letiju V.I.
pol’zu rasselenija nositelej indoevropejskikh
Sarianidi. Trudy Margianskoj arheologičeskoj
dialektov iz drevnego Bližnego Vostoka” in M.F.
ekspedicii, vol., 3. Sankt-Petersburg: 135-143.
Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and N.A. Dubova (eds.) U
istokov civilizacii, Мoskva: 41-69. KUZ’MINA, E.E. 1994. Otkuda prišli indoarii?. Мoskva.
JABLONSKIJ, L.T. 1996. Saki Južnogo Priaral’ja. KUZ’MINA, E.E. 2008. Arii: put’ na jug. Мoskva.
Мoskva. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY, C.C. 2002. “Anthropology and
JABLONSKIJ, L.T. 2000. “Eščё raz k voprosu o language. The Bronze Age Indo-Iranians”, Current
proishoždenii rasy sredneaziatkogomeždurec’ja 8b Anthropology, 43(1): 63-88.
svete novyh paleoantropologičeskih materialov iz LIGABUE, D. and S. SALVATORI 1989. Bactria: an ancient
Priaral’ja)”, in N.A. Dubova and G.V. Rykušina (eds.) oasis civilization from the sands of Afghanistan.
Antropologičeskie i etnografičeskie svedenija o Venice.
naselenii Srednej Azii, Мoskva: 5-21.
LYONNET, B. 2005. “Another possible interpretation of
JABLONSKIJ, L.T. 2004. “Čerep čeloveka ih Kangurttuta”, the Bactro-Margiana culture (BMAC) of Central
in N.M. Vinogradova (ed.) Jugo-Zapadnyj Tadžikistan Asia: the tin trade”, in C. Jarrige and V. Lefevre (eds.)
v epohu pozdnej bronzy, Мoskva: 275-285. South Asian Archaeology 2001. Proceedings of the
sixteenth international conference of the Association
JUNGNER, H. 2004. “A collaboration for developing
of South Asian Archaeologists, held in Collège
archeological research in Turkmenistan”, in M.F.
de France, Paris, 2-6 July 2001., vol. I, Paris: 191-
Kosarev, P.M. Kozhin and N.A. Dubova (eds.) Near
200.
the sources of civilization, Мoscow: 290-293.
PARPOLA, A. 1994. Deciphering the Indus script.
JUSUPOV, R.M. 1989. Kraniologija baškir. Leningrad.
Cambridge.
HODŽAJOV, T.K. 1966. “O prednamerennoj deformacii
SAFRONOV, V.A. 1989. Indoevropejskie prarodiny.
golovy u narodov Srednej Azii v drevnosti”, in
Gorkii.
Vestnik Karakal’pakskogo filiala AN UzSSR, 4,
Nukus: 56-60. SALVATORI, S. and M. TOSI 1997. “Some reflection on
Shahdad and its place in the Bronze Age Middle
HODŽAJOV, T.K. 1977. Antropologičeskij sostav
Asia”, in A. Hakemi (ed.) Shahdad. Archaeological
naselenija epohi bronzy Sapallitepa. Taškent.
excavations of a Bronze age center in Iran, Rome:
HODŽAJOV, T.K. 1981. Paleoantropologija Srednej Azii i 121-132.
etnogenetičeskie problem. Avtoreferat doktorskoj
SARIANIDI, V.I. 1990. Drevnosti strany Marguš. Ašhabad.
dissertacii. Moskva.
SARIANIDI, V.I. 1994. “Margiana i drevnij Vostok”, in
HODŽAJOV, T.K. 2000. “Obyčaj iskusstevennoj Bjulleten’ MAIKZA 19, Мoskva: 6-32.
deformacii golovy v Srednej Azii”, in N.A. Dubova
and G. Rykushina (eds) Antropologičeskie i SARIANIDI, V. 1998. Margiana and protozoroastrizm.
Athens.
etnografičeskie svedenija o naselenii Srednej Azii,
vol. 2, Moskva: 22-45. SARIANIDI, V.I. 2001. A necropolis of Gonur and Iranian
paganism. Мoscow.
HODŽAJOV, T.K. 2004. “Novye antropologičeskie
materialy neolita, eneoilita i epohi bronzy so SARIANIDI, V.I. 2002a. Margush: ancient Oriental
Srednego i Verhnego Zarafšana”, Vestnik antropologii, kingdom in the ancient delta of Murghab river.
11: 87-101. Ashgabat.
201
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
MAURIZIO TOSI E L’ARCHEOLOGIA COME MODO DI VIVERE
SARIANIDI, V.I. 2002b. “Drevnevostočnoe carstvo Marguš SPERDUTI, A., BONDIOLI, L. and R. MACCHIARELLI
v Turkmenistane”, in M.A. Davlet (ed.) Mirovozrenie (unpublished) Paleobiology of the Third Millenium
drevnego naselenija Evrazii, Мoskva: 257-318. BC graveyard of Gonur Tepe (Turkmenistan).
Preliminary report 1995. Rome.
SARIANIDI, V.I. 2004. “Strana Marguš otkryvaet svoj
tajny”, in M.F. Kosarev, P.M. Kožin and N.A. Dubova TROFIMOVA, T.A. 1961. “Čerep iz mogil’nika
(eds) U istokov zivilizacii, Мoskva: 229-253. tazabag’jabskoj kul’tury Kokča 3”, in Materialy
horezmskoj ekspedicii, 5, Мoskva: 97-146.
SARIANIDI, V.I. 2005. Gonur Depe: a city of kings and
gods. Ashgabat. TUR, S.S. 1998. “K voprosu o proishoždenii i funkzijah
obyčaja kol’zevoj deformacii golovy”, in Arheologija,
SARIANIDI, V. 2007. Gonur necropolis. Athens.
antropologija i etnografija Sibiri, Barnaul: 25-29.
SARIANIDI, V.I. 2008a. Margush. Secret and truth of the
great culture. Ashgabat. UDEUMURADOV, B.N. 1993. Altyn-Depe i Margiana:
svyazi, hronologija, proishoždenie. Аšhabad.
SARIANIDI, V.I. 2008b. Zoroastrianism: a new
motherland for and old religion. Thessaloniki. UDEUMURADOW, B.N. 2002. “Ceramic Material from
Gonur-depe Necropolis”, in G. Rossi Osmida (ed.)
SCHWIDETZKI, I. 1950. Turaniden Studien. Akademie der Margiana. Gonur-Depe Necropolis. 10 years of
Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Abh. der
excavations by Ligabue study and research Centre,
Matematisch - Naturwissenschaftlische Klasse, 9.
Venice: 132-143.
Weisbaden.
VALLOIS, H. 1939. “Les ossements humans de Sialk”, in
ŠEVČENKO, A.V. 1974. “Novye materialy po R. Ghirshman (ed.) Fouilles de Sialk pres de Kashan,
paleoantropologii Povolž’ja (epoha bronzy)”, in
2, Paris: 5-127.
Problemy etničeskoj antropologii i morfologii
čeloveka, Leningrad: 123-135. ZAJZEVA, G.I, DUBOVA, N.A., SEMENCOV, A.A., REJMAR,
P., MELLORY, DZ. and H. YUNGNER 2008. “Radio-
SMIRNOV, K.F. and E.E. KUZMINA 1977. Proishoždenie uglerodnaja hronologija pamjatnika Gonur Depe”, in
indoirancev v svete novejših arheologičeskih otkrytij.
V. Sarianidi (еd.) Transactions of Margiana
Moskva.
archaeological expedition, 2, Мoskva: 166-179.
202
