Максим Жих - Ранние славяне

85. Хелимский, Е.А.Изучение ранних славяно-венгерских языковых отношений (Материалы и интерпретация. Вопрос о этноязыковых контактах венгров с восточными славянами) / Е.А. Хелимский // Славяноведение и балканистика в странах зарубежной Европы и США. – М.: Наука, 1989. – С. 184-198.

86. Шаскольский, И.П.Известия Бертинских анналов в свете данных современной науки / И.П. Шаскольский // Летописи и хроники. 1980. – М.: Наука, 1981. – С. 43-54.

87. Яжджевский, К.О значении возделывания ржи в культурах раннего железного века в бассейнах Одры и Вислы / К. Яжджевский // Древности славян и Руси. – М.: Наука, 1988. – С. 98-99.

III . Авторефераты диссертаций:

1. Бейлис, В.М.Сочинения ал-Масуди, как исторический источник по истории Восточной Европы Х в.: Автореф. дисс. … канд. ист. наук: 07.00.03 / В.М. Бейлис. – М., 1963. – 25 с.

2. Галкина, Е.С.Русский каганат и Салтово-маяцкая археологическая культура: Автореф. дисс. канд. … ист. наук: 07.00.02 / Е.С. Галкина. – М., 2001. – 16 с.

3. Щеглова, О.А.Проблемы формирования славянской культуры VIII-X вв. в Среднем Поднепровье (памятники конца VII – первой половины VIII вв.): Автореф. дис. … канд. ист. наук: 07.00.06 / О.А. Щеглова. – Л., 1987. – 15 с.

IV . Литература на иностранных языках:

1. Березовец, Д.Т.Про iм’я носиiв салтивьскоi культури / Д.Т. Березовец // Археологiя. – Т. XXIV. – Киïв, 1970. – С. 59-74.

2. Козак, Д.Н.Венеди / Д.Н. Козак. – Киïв: Ин-т археологии НАНУ, 2008. – 470 с.

3. Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum // М. J. de Goeje. Lugduni Batavorum. – Leiden: Brill, 1885. V.

4. Munkácsi, B.A magyar-sláv etnikai erintkezës kezdetei / В. Munkácsi // Ethnographia. – T. 8. – Budapest, 1897. – P. 1-30.

5. Napolskih , V.V. Die Vorslaven im unteren Kamagebiet in der Mitte des I. Jahrtausend unserer Zeitrechnung: Permisches Sprachmaterial / V.V. Napolskih // Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen. Bd. 18/19. – Hamburg, 1996. – P. 97-106.

6. Validi Togan , A.Z.lbn Fadlan's Reisehericht / A.Z. Validi Togan. – Leipzig, 1939. – 336 p.

СПИСОК СОКРАЩЕНИЙ

АН СССР– Академия наук СССР

КНЦ УрО РАН -Коми научный центр Уральского отделения Российской Академии наук. Сыктывкар

МарНИИ– Марийский Научно-исследовательский институт языка, литературы, истории и экономики. Йошкар–Ола.

МГУ– Московский государственный университет им. М.В. Ломоносова

НАНУ– Национальная Академия наук Украины

РАН– Российская Академия наук

СамГУ– Самарский государственный университет

Соцэкгиз –Издательство социально-экономической литературы. Москва

СПбГУ– Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет

ХГАК– Харьковская государственная Академия культуры. Харьков

SUMMARY

Until recently the beginning of mass settling by the Slavs in the Middle Volga region was considered to belong only to the middle of the 16th century – to the time following the conquest of the Kazan Khanate by Ivan the Terrible and its inclusion in structure of the Russian state. The information accumulated by the science up to this time allows the shifting of the approximate date of the beginning of Slavic colonization of the region approximately one thousand years earlier.

In the 19th century, during the introduction of the Arabic-Persian medieval sources about the Eastern Europe into the scientific circulation, the scientists have noticed, that the forementioned sources localize a certain as-sakaliba – in this way the eastern authors named the Slavs – in the Middle Volga region. However scientists didn’t know how to explain this fact, as in the medieval Ruthenian annals or in any other sources there were not any reminiscences of any Slavic “tribe” residing in the Middle Volga region. The opinions were divided accordingly. A. Garkavi considered it quite possible to tell about the considerable Slavic population, residing in the Middle Volga region in the 1st millenium AD that joined structure of the population of the Volga Bulgaria and was assimilated gradually by Turkic people. Contrary to it А. Z.V. Togan has assumed that the term as-sakaliba could be used by the Arabic authors to name not only Slavs, but also other East Europe people. But in the limited circle of the eastern information this question was hardly probable to find the final decision.

In the late 20th century the Imenkovo archaeological culture existing in the Middle Volga region in 4th-7th centuries has been discovered and there begun discussions about its ethnic definition which could also be hardly resolved on the basis of only the archaeological material.

Accordingly, there was a possibility to make a comparison between the written sources about the Slavs living in the Middle Volga region in the 1st millenium AD and archaeological materials of Imenkovo archaeological culture. The following comparison was accomplished by S. Klyashtorny for the first time and then it has been continued by other researchers (V. Sedov, E. Galkina etc.). The written and archaeological materials perfectly confirm and supplement each other, testifying to residing of a considerable Slavic population in the Middle Volga region before the Volga Bulgarian period. Afterwards the linguists allied in questioning the research and also started to reveal presumable borrowings of Imenkovo culture in languages of the people of the Volga-Kama region.

In our work we have undertaken an attempt of thorough consideration of all Arabic information narrating (precisely or approximately) about as-sakaliba in the Middle Volga region which has shown that they can be connected quite soundly with representatives of Imenkovo archaeological culture that serves as powerful argument in favor of a position of those archeologists which consider the representatives of this culture (all of them or their part) to be the Slavs.