The second half of the XX - beginning of the XXI century is a time of great archaeological discoveries. At the same time, researchers in many countries are paying more and more attention to the study of ancient and medieval settlements. An important role in research is played by taking into account all existing monuments and their detailed description, which allows us to obtain material for solving such key issues as material culture and socio-economic structure. This is especially true in relation to the Central Asian societies of the ancient and Medieval eras, whose internal structure and dynamics of development are practically poorly covered by any other types of sources, which explains the attention paid to the study of settlement typology and the consideration of settlement groups and historical and cultural oases as hierarchical microsystems.

However, in order to get a complete picture of the historical development of Central Asia in different periods, much work remains to be done on a detailed study of individual historical and cultural areas of the region under consideration, including areas that are poorly studied in archaeological terms. These include the problem of historical and cultural study of the Lebap region-the coast of the middle course of the Amu Darya and the oases adjacent to it.

Lebap was located at the junction of well-developed and well-researched historical and cultural areas: Bactria-Tokharistan, Sogd, Khorezm and Margiana. Despite the fact that the archaeological work carried out in the region under consideration was episodic and mainly reconnaissance in nature, research in the late 70s-early 90s of the XX century (V. N. Pilipko, G. G. Gutlyev, A. A. Burkhanov) led to a significant accumulation of material on its history and culture. They made it possible to identify the Lebap region as a contact zone [Baktria-Tokharistan..., 1983, p. 19-21; Burkhanov, 2002 (2), p. 75-80; Burkhanov, 2005 (2), p. 15-18; Pilipko 1978, p.80-97; Pilipko 1985].

Contact zones are zones of special activity in the process of cultural genesis, associated with general historical progress and the strengthening of all types of communication links-from the development of epoch-making standards to the development of trade activities [Eastern Europe..., 1999, p. 3 - 8, 19, 39, 101; Dergachev, 1989, pp. 26-28]. The nature of such zones may have been different and its origins go back to physical and geographical zoning, which influenced various types of adaptation, which led to the establishment of forms of life and behavior. The boundaries of contact zones are usually stable and broken only with cultural progress associated with the development of transport links and urbanization.

page 5

Lebap-Middle Amu Darya, or Amul region , is the main part of the modern Lebap velayat (formerly Chardzhou region) Regions of the middle Amu Darya River valley with adjacent lands and the historical center in Amul-Charju [Burkhanov, 2001, pp. 75-78; Burkhanov, 2005 (1)].

The main vital artery of the Lebap region-Oks-Jeyhun-Amu Darya was the main trade and transport highway of the entire Central Asia. In its middle course, there were four main and most important ferries, of which the most important, strategically advantageous and convenient on the route of the Great Silk Road was located in the Amul-Chardzhuy area [Burkhanov, 2001, p. 75; Drevny Amul..., 1993, p. 7-14].

Archaeological data allow us to distinguish three large historical and cultural oases in the Middle Amudarya region: Chardzhui (northern), Karabekaul (central), and Kerki (southern), separated by desert zones (Burkhanov, 2005 (1), pp. 6-10; Pilipko, 1985, p.102). In the writings of authors of the IX-X centuries [Materials..., 1939, p. 146, 150], the coast of the middle course of the Amu Darya was divided into two historical and cultural areas: Zemm, corresponding to the area of the southern, Kerkin group of monuments, and Amul, whose territory included the Chardzhou and Karabekaul oases. The works of V. N. Pilipko gave a general idea of the nature and main features of the culture of the Zemma region in ancient times, which is archaeologically included in the north-western part of Bactria [Baktria-Tokharistan..., 1983, p. 63; Pilipko, 1985]. However, due to the lack of extensive excavations, many aspects of the culture of the population of the Lebap region and its individual parts in ancient and medieval times remain completely unknown. This is especially true in relation to the northern and central parts of Lebap - the Amul region and the southern part of Khorezm adjacent to the region.

In physical and geographical terms, the section of the Amu Darya under consideration is a single whole. Within this zone, the river has no tributaries and is in fact the main and only source for irrigation. Its width here is 15-20 km. A strip of cultivated land from ancient times to the present day is actively used for agriculture and stretches along the floodplain of the river, sometimes interrupted, and in some places forming small oases. On both sides, this strip is bounded by deserts. The area adjacent to the valley with loosely anchored sands is used by local residents as pasture. As a result of agricultural work carried out since ancient times, the soil in the irrigated zone has become a powerful cultural and irrigation layer. In addition, the Amu Darya water contains a large amount of silt, which during active floods and irrigation settles in the cultural zone, which increases the fertility of fields. The climatic conditions and water regime of the Amu Darya are favorable for irrigation farming and growing heat-loving plants.

Amu Darya water is characterized by the presence of a significant amount of mechanical impurities that give it a dirty coffee color. Impurities are deposited at the bottom of the river and on the banks, forming shoals and islands. From year to year, the configuration of the banks and bottom, consisting of loose soil, changes. The river flows at high speed, eroding the banks, mainly on the right.

The remains of ancient settlements, especially those located in close proximity to the river, are being destroyed due to natural factors. This is due to the high level of ground water, strong soil salinity, active vegetation coverage of the surface of monuments, frequent floods, riverbed wandering and erosion of the indigenous banks. To date, a number of archaeological sites have disappeared forever in the waters of the Amu Darya, remaining virtually unknown to science (the fortress in Narazym, Ak-kala in Garabekvulsky, the ancient settlement of Old Farab). Today there is a process of destruction on the right bank of a large settlement

page 6

Navidah (keshk Zuhra-Tahir) and Nargiz-kala settlements, which are already half washed away (Burkhanov, 1994, pp. 58-62; Burkhanov, 2005 (1) p. 8 - 9,43 - 44].

Another reason for the destruction of monuments is active human activity. In the irrigated zone, where the proportion of land suitable for agriculture is insignificant, the land is used too intensively, which affects the preservation of archaeological sites. Some monuments are buried under agricultural irrigation drifts, while others are plowed open. Fertilizer-rich crop layers are often exported to the fields to increase fertility. Some archaeological sites were located in the area of construction of industrial and residential facilities, roads, etc.Small monuments (Araphana, Zargar-depe, Shor-depe, Tokhar-kala, Gosha-kala, Kyzyl-kala and several sites near Amul-Chardzhuy) suffered primarily. Major monuments of the region were also destroyed, especially in suburban areas of cities and large settlements (Amul-Chardzhuy, Bityk-kala, Usty-kala, Ling-Ling-depe). With the beginning of construction of water management facilities and the development of new land in the Lebap velayat, especially in the 70s-90s of the XX century, the above-mentioned destructive factors became even stronger.

The process of destruction of archaeological sites was also facilitated by the fact that the territory of the Lebap velayat, for various reasons, remained aloof from large-scale archaeological work carried out in the last decades of the XX century in Central Asia by scientists from the scientific centers of Ashgabat, Tashkent, Moscow and St. Petersburg. An exception in this respect can be the reconnaissance works of V. N. Pilipko, partial excavations of G. Gutlyev and A. A. Burkhanov, conducted as part of the compilation of an archaeological map and a set of monuments of Turkmenistan, as well as contractual works of the 70s-90s of the XX century.

The Amu Darya Valley developed intensively in different historical epochs [Burkhanov, 2002 (1): 35-41; Burkhanov, 2002 (2): 75-81; Gulyamov, 1957; Tolstov, 1948]. Archaeological materials allow us to speak about a fairly dense development of the territory under consideration already in the 1st millennium BC. e. It is reliably known that the left-bank part of the Amu Darya within the Amul region was inhabited by farmers, at least in the middle of the 1st millennium BC. e. This is evidenced by the monuments of the Achaemenid time in both Chardzhou and Karabekaul an oasis [Pilipko, 1972, p. 83; Pilipko, 1979]. Earlier materials, in particular those related to the 9th century BC, were studied only on one site - the Odey-depe ancient settlement, which is considered the oldest agricultural settlement in the Chardzhou oasis and the entire Amul region, and the extreme northern point of distribution of complexes of the Yaz-I and Yaz-II periods (Pilipko, 1979, p. 83).

The entire appearance of the Odey-depe material culture, primarily the ceramic complex, has the closest analogies with the Margiana culture of the Yaz-I-III period (Masson V. M., 1959). It can be assumed that this culture was widely spread throughout the entire territory of the Lebap region. New excavations revealed materials of the Yaz-I-III type in the Kerka oasis of the Middle Amu Darya (Pilipko, 1985, p. 101).

In the Early Iron Age, the cultural affinity of all the major Central Asian regions, without exception, was preserved within the framework of a cultural community of the Yaz-III type, which is usually identified with speakers of ancient Eastern Iranian languages. Studies suggest that cultural affinity was also based on broad exchange relations between Central Asian regions, including between the inhabitants of the Murghab Valley and the Amu Darya coast. M. E. Masson, in particular, points to the finds of beads from mollusk shells originating from the Amu Darya Delta and the Aral Sea [Masson M. E., 1966]. Based on the materials of the study of monuments, it is possible to trace the existence of several trade routes in the Early Iron Age, in particular Yaz-depe-Odey-depe-Khorezm-the lower reaches of the Amu Darya and the lower reaches of Balkhab-Odey-depe-Ho-

page 7

resm. At the same time, the second route passed along the left bank of the Amu Darya, i.e. partially through the territory of the Amul River, which coincides with later trade routes [Sagdullaev, 1990, pp. 8-9].

Despite the proximity of the historical and cultural development of all the main regions of Central Asia, the process of identifying local variants was actively underway. In particular, we can speak with confidence about the formation and development of Bactrian, Khorezm, Margian and Parthian cultural and ethnic communities [Urban Environment..., 1986, p.79]. Similar processes may have occurred in ancient Lebap.

The entry of most of Central Asia into the Achaemenid state somewhat slowed down the formation of local historical, cultural and ethnic communities. As is known, Khorezm, Sughd, Bactria, Parthia, and the lands inhabited by Saka nomads were part of the Achaemenid empire during its greatest heyday [Gafurov, 1972, p.73; Tolstov, 1948]. In this regard, we can assume the entry of the Middle Amu Darya into this state, because the region was located between the above-mentioned territories. Bactria and Margiana, under the direct cultural influence of which in ancient times most of the middle reaches of the Amu Darya were located, were part of the Achaemenid empire until the end of its existence. The presence of Achaemenid layers is clearly indicated by archaeological materials (cylindrical-conical vessels) found in the Odey-depe pit. Ceramic ware of this type is a characteristic feature of the complexes of the V-IV centuries BC of most settlements in the Central Asian region (Masson V. M., 1959; Sarianidi, 1972).

Written sources attesting to the campaigns of Alexander the Great describe the crossing of the Amu Darya River by his troops in the spring of 329 BC (Gafurov, 1972, pp. 93-94; Gafurov and Tsibukidis, 1980, pp. 246-247; Pyankov, 1997, pp. 42, 48). The location of the crossing has not yet been determined. Recently, researchers have suggested that this crossing was located between Termez and Bosaga in northwestern Bactria (Pilipko, 1985, p. 101).

In this regard, we will focus on one hypothesis that can clarify some aspects of the history of the Amul region. V. V. Grigoriev expressed the opinion that Alexander crossed the river in the place where the city of Navidah was located, mentioned by the medieval author Maxidi [Grigoriev, 1881, p. 411; Khlopin, 1983, p. 151]. Let's turn to Arrian, who wrote: "Bess, when he was informed that Alexander was near, crossed the river Oke; the ships on which they crossed, burned and went to the Sogdian land, to Navtaka "[cit. by: Gafurov, 1972, p. 93]. I. N. Khlopin tried to adopt V. V. Grigoriev's hypothesis by combining two consonant toponyms - Navtaki and Navidakh, points located on the right bank of the Oks (on the Sughd coast), where there were crossings on the way to Samarkand (Khlopin, 1983, pp. 149-152). Despite its attractiveness, this opinion remains only a hypothesis until archaeological materials confirming the existence of life in the Hellenistic era are identified on the Navidakh settlement, located in the right-bank part of the Karabekaul oasis of the Lebap region within the Amul region (Burkhanov, 2005 (1), pp. 43-44, figs. 33-35).

The Greek-Macedonian conquest of Central Asia, and then the colonization of its main areas, contributed to the penetration of Hellenistic culture into the local environment. The strongest centers of Greek influence emerged in Bactria, Sogd, and Margiana, where Hellenic settlers actively influenced Central Asian culture. Bactria, Sughd and Margiana developed along the same historical and cultural path in the Early Antique period. This unity was expressed, judging by archaeological materials, in the widespread use of ceramics of the Aykhanum type; in a number of elements, even direct Greek influence was found (architecture, coroplastics, coinage). [Urban environment..., 1986, p. 79]. It is possible to think that life in the oases of Amul did not stop even in the post-Achaemenid period, but there are no Hellenistic monuments-

page 8

No evidence has yet been found of the Greek and Greco-Bactrian period (III-I centuries BC). Although archaeological studies have not given a positive answer to the question of the habitation of Odey-depe in the first centuries AD, however, one cannot completely deny the possibility of finding evidence of this period in the monuments of the Amul region. In particular, they can be discovered in unexplored monuments of the region and unexplored citadels of Odey-depe and Amul. Evidence can be found in the late layers of the Odey-depe settlement: a huma corolla with a profile typical of the Early Anguy period, as well as a fragment of a black-angobed vessel imitating Greek black-and-white ware (Pilipko, 1979, p.31).

According to experts, during the formation of independent states in Central Asia, the border between Greco-Bactria and Parthia initially passed within the Geriruda-Tejena basin. Margiana was added to the Arshakid state already under Mithridates I [Masson M. E., 1970, pp. 12-22]. Prior to this, Margiana, along with the coast of the Amu Darya, was probably under the political influence of the Greco-Bactrian rulers, although there is no concrete evidence of this yet [Masson M. E., 1966, p.16].

After the fall of Greco-Bactria, in the late II - early I century BC, Parthia withstood the onslaught of nomadic tribes (Saks and Yuezhi). It is difficult to say anything definite about the fate of the Amul region in this period. We can only assume that the region was under the influence of the Yuezhi (Tocharian) tribes [Masson M. E., 1963, p. 21]. It is known that by the time of the arrival of the Yuezhi, there were centuries-old cultural traditions here, which was reflected in the development of urban (Odey-depe) and rural settlements of the local agricultural population. Indirect evidence for the presence of the Yuezhi and other nomadic tribes can be found in materials from the Babashov burial ground (I century BC), located in the north-eastern part of Bactria - the Kerkin oasis of the Lebap region (Mandelstam, 1963, pp. 88-93).

The first century BC was the time of the Parthian advance to the East, which led to the formation of political associations dependent on them on the eastern and south-eastern borders of the Arsacid state (Gafurov, 1972). The Parthian power by this time controlled huge sections of the trade highways of the Middle East and Central Asia, which allowed the Parthians to become active intermediaries in trade operations between East and West in the Great Silk Road system in ancient times. According to Chinese sources, Parthian merchants traded with neighboring countries both by land and by water, and were owners of sea and river vessels. In particular, it is known that they "swam on the Guishui River (Amu Darya)" [Masson M. E., 1951, pp. 146-149]. This is confirmed by archaeological materials, in particular, the finds of Parthian coins of Sinantruk and Phraates III in Mirzabek-kala and in the Kerkov area (Pilipko, 1976, p. 24-25). Researchers admit the possibility of a short-term entry of the Amu Darya territories into the sphere of economic expansion of Parthia and the active participation of Parthian merchants in caravan and trade operations, the presence of Parthian coins in the monetary economy of northwestern Bactria, which closely adjoined the southern part of the Amul region. Isidore Haraksky (I c. AD) reports that one of the main lines of the Great Silk Road passed relatively close to these places, along which the flow of goods between China and Rome went (Pilipko, 1976, p.25). It should be noted that, probably, at this time, merchants used the Amulevskaya ferry and trade routes along the left bank of the Amu Darya River within the Amulya region [Gafurov, 1972; Masson M. E., 1963, p. 35].

Gradually, Parthian influence in the East weakened due to the emergence and flourishing of the Kushan state. Thus, in the first and second centuries AD, the rulers of Merv, who were only nominally dependent on the Arsacids, became stronger. Numerous archaeological materials confirm that the most intensive habitation was considered in the past.-

page 9

the name of the region falls at the time of its entry into the powerful Kushan Empire. At this time, historical and cultural contacts with neighboring territories, primarily with Bactria, the core of the Kushan state, are increasing. Numerous finds of copper and bronze coins of Vasudeva, Kanishka and their successors are convincing evidence of the entry of the main part of the Middle Amu Darya into the Kushan state and confirmation of the high level of its monetary economy in the III-IV centuries AD. At present, coins of these rulers are found practically throughout the entire territory of the region, starting from the settlement of Shikh-Bilalovliya in the north and ending with the settlement of Khoja-Gunduz-kala in the south of the Amul region (Burkhanov, 1990, pp. 89-90; Burkhanov, 1993, pp. 138-145, Fig. 35; Pilipko, 1978, pp. 89-97].

The Kushan period is the period of the construction of powerful fortresses and the emergence of rural settlements, the active development of new areas suitable for agriculture and the construction of irrigation systems, population growth, trade and culture development. The Amu Darya valley is being developed by the agricultural population. However, this does not exclude the possibility of settling the nearby fertile pastures and nomadic pastoralists. But there is no archaeological confirmation of this yet. The Lebap region is characterized by an oasis character of settlement. Numerous fortress towns and rural settlements of medium and small size are formed around certain urban settlements - the centers of oases.

The center of the region and Chardzhou oasis is the ancient settlement of Amul (9 ha), located on an important stratigraphic site - the central route of the Great Silk Road. In the Kushan and Kushan-Sasanian times, a network of 24 urban and rural settlements was formed around it, among them the largest are the settlements of Odey - depe, Khoja-Yaryk-depe and Bityk-kala. Most of the settlements are located on the left bank, where trade and caravan routes passed. The Khoja-Idat-kala settlement (6 ha) becomes the center of the Karabekaul oasis. A group of 15 urban and rural localities is formed around it. The largest of them are Khoja-Gunduz-Kala, Kutnam-kala, Chishlen-kala and Navidah. The architectural and planning structure of most urban settlements of the Amul region under consideration is similar to the monuments of Kushan Bactria [Ancient States..., 1985, tab. 114, 4, 5, 7, 11; Masson V. M., 1976, pp. 3-17, fig. 6; Pugachenkova, 1976, p. 92, fig. 6].

The development of many fortress cities in the region is associated with a favorable geographical location - at the ferry crossings. Kushan settlements on both banks of the Amu Darya make it possible to identify the crossing points of Kerkin (Kerki-Kerkichi), Karabekaul (Khoja-Idat-Kala-Navidakh), Amul (Amul-Bityk) and Deynau (Ust-Kala). At the same time, there is reason to assume that large settlements were usually located on the left bank, and only small outposts or settlements were located on the right bank.

The basis of the economy of the Amul region was irrigation agriculture. Canals were built to irrigate the fields from the main source - the Amu Darya. Archaeological materials also confirm the high development of crafts, especially pottery production, metalworking and jewelry making [Baktriya-Tokharistan..., 1983, p. 19-21; Burkhanov, 1991, p. 35-43; Burkhanov, 1993, p.110-145; Ancient States..., 1985, p. 243-249].

The material culture of the Lebap region of the Kushan period is characterized by the influence of Bactria. In particular, rural settlements with citadels are widespread, especially in the Karabekaul oasis, and ancient settlements have a rectangular planning structure; small-format raw bricks with a sign are used in construction. Pyramidal and pear-shaped loom weights, stone spinning wheels, bone decorative hairpins, and Buddhist terracotta figurines were found in a number of monuments. The ceramics of the Kushan period have a lot in common with the neighboring territories: red-fleshed and red-angobed vessels, humas with

page 10

manchetovidny and several horizontal rollers [Burkhanov, 1993, p. 69-145; Burkhanov, 2004; Drevneyshie gosudarstva..., 1985]. However, there are also differences. For example, there are no decorative finishes and zoomorphic moldings typical of Bactrian ceramics.

During the Kushan period, local cults that were influenced by Buddhism were widely developed in the Amul region. The spread of Buddhism among the local population is primarily due to the political dominance of the Kushan rulers, their patronage of Buddhism and the use of the Amu Darya as the most important route of international trade. Traces of the spread of Buddhism are confirmed by the discovery of a Bodhisattva figure and Vedic figures (Ak-kala and Khoja-Idat-kala). The discovery of a bodhisattva image in a small rural settlement of Ak-kale indicates the local manufacture of figurines of this type and the widespread spread of the Buddhist religion among the indigenous population (Burkhanov, 1994; Pilipko and Masimov, 1969, pp. 250-251). Buddhist characters were depicted on Kushan coins, which are often found in the Amul region [Burkhanov, 1990, p. 89-90; Burkhanov, 1993, p. 138-145; Pilipko, 1978, p.89-97]. The development of local cults and religious beliefs of the region's population is evidenced by the widespread production of figures depicting erect goddesses by local coroplast craftsmen. The image of the female deity is primarily associated with the influence of Hellenic, Iranian and local fertility cults. Figurines of this type convey the iconographic type known already in the first century BC in Central Asian coroplasty: a goddess dressed in dense clothes of first Hellenized, and then local cut. The newly found terracotas suggest that a number of coroplastics of the region show similarities with the figures of not only Bactria, but also Sogd, Khorezm and Merv. The identity of the local school of coroplasty is traced, which expresses the peculiarities of the local culture of the Amul region [Burkhanov, 1991; Burkhanov, 2005 (1), pp. 26-47, 115-151; Pilipko, 1977, pp. 201-202]. The mass and local nature of the production of ceramic products, including terracotta, is indicated, in particular, by the discovery of matrices for their production. There may have been several terracotta manufacturing centers in the Amul area (Khoja-Idat-kala, Amul).

During the Kushan period, the region was relatively safe. To the west was the hard-to-reach desert that separated it from Margiana. The northern territories were controlled by the Kushans, and the north-eastern lands were subject to them [Masson V. M., 1981, pp. 35-36]. In the first third of the third century AD, the Sasanians defeated the Parthian Arsacids, then seized the lands of their former allies, the rulers of Merv and Sakastan, and made direct contact with the Kushans. In the second half of the fourth century, the Sassanids began active efforts to conquer the Kushan possessions directly: in a short time, they captured the entire Bactria, the Amu Darya coast, and part of the Bukhara oasis (Gafurov, 1972, pp. 195-196; Zeymal, 1978). All this has led to changes, in particular, the temporary cessation of the existence of some settlements [Gafurov, 1972, p. 195-196; Sedov, 1987, p. 109].

In the Kushan-Sasanian period, the area of irrigated land is increasing, new fortresses and settlements are being built. Thus, a significant number of fortresses of the Karabekaul oasis appear (Chishlen-kala, Kekreli-depe, Ak-depe, the citadel of Sultan-niyazbiy-kala and others). According to archaeological data, they belong to the Kushan-Sasanian period. At this time, the region of Amul is included in the sphere of circulation of Kushan-Sasanian and Sasanido-Kushan coins. 25 coins of this type have been found in the entire territory of the middle Amu Darya River (Burkhanov, 1990, p. 89-90; Pilipko, 1978, p. 89-90). The publication of coins from the Pelvert hoard found on the border between the Amulya region and the Kerka oasis (northwestern Bactria) confirms their distribution along the entire Amu Darya River (Gutlyev and Nikitin, 1987, pp. 259-269). In pe-

page 11

During the Sassanid period, coins of this series were widely distributed throughout Bactria and in the surrounding areas (Zeimal, 1978; Zeimal, 1983). Along the Amu Darya, during the first centuries AD, Kushan and Sasanido-Kushan coins were widely distributed even in the northern regions-up to Khorezm (Burkhanov, 2005 (2), pp. 56-60; Vainberg, 1977; Pilipko, 1979).

The materials of excavations in the Amul area show that in the IV-V centuries, the region experienced a further rise in the economy, in the words of V. M. Masson, "late Renaissance" [Masson V. M., 1976, p. 6]. The same phenomena are also characteristic of Bactria-Tokharistan and Sogd [Gafurov, 1972, pp. 231-246, 252-261; Masson V. M., 1976; Pilipko, 1985, pp. 107-108; Sedov, 1987, pp. 114-115]. Some settlements fell into decline, but this is most likely due to the political events of the second half of the IV century and after, when, especially in the V-VII centuries, the Amul region became the scene of the struggle of Sasanian Iran with nomads: the Chionites, the Hephthalites, and then the Turks. In particular, sources - Arab authors Tabari and Dinaveri-describe in detail the battles between Varakhan V Bahram Gur (420 - 437) and the Turkic khagan in the area of Merv and Amul.

If in the previous period, during the Kushan era, the Lebap region was firmly part of a powerful empire and closely adjoined its core - Bactria, then after the Sasanian conquest it becomes the periphery of a huge state. But the "provincial factor" did not seem to have a very strong impact on the life of small and medium-sized settlements typical of the region. In the Kushan-Sasanian period, a certain influence and cultural influence of Sasanian Iran is felt, but it did not occur directly, but through Margiana , one of the significant provinces and cultural centers of a powerful state. This is evident in the ceramic carvings, characters of terracotta figurines (warriors with swords), coins of the Sasanian coinage, and subjects of coin issues of local rulers (the altar of fire in Arapkhan and Odey-depa) [Burkhanov, 2000, p. 17; Burkhanov, 2005 (2), p. 35-36; Ancient States..., 1985]. However, due to the short period of Sasanian occupation, Iran's influence was limited. During the Sassanid period, local traditions developed. This is due to the fact that for several centuries before the Sassanids, the Amul region was part of a stable state entity, which was the Kushan Empire. This factor naturally contributed to the consolidation (in historical and cultural terms) of regional centers and the formation of a unique image of local material culture.

With the entry of the Chionites and Hephthalites into the political arena, the situation in the region is changing again. At the end of the IV-V centuries. The Sassanids lost their Amu Darya and Bactrian possessions, and the territory of Southern Turkmenistan became the scene of military operations (Gafurov, 1972; Urban Environment..., 1986). The confrontation between Sasanian Iran and its opponents gradually led to constant changes in borders and active contacts in various areas. The region of Amul, like Bactria-Tokharistan, alternately came under the rule of one or another political association and served as a kind of relay of cultural achievements.

At the end of the V-VI century. A new period begins in the history of Lebap, due to the weakening of the Sassanids and the inclusion of the region into the state of the Hephthalites, and later the formation of small independent possessions on this territory (Stavisky and Vainberg, 1972). Perhaps they were formed on the basis of well-established historical and cultural oases of the region. This is the period of the final formation of feudal relations, a significant rise in economic and cultural life. A new image of material culture is being formed, which is largely different from the previous one, but is genetically related to it.

In the IV-VII centuries, the Amul region as a whole felt the cultural influence of Sogd and the nomadic world, especially this is clearly expressed in the materials of the Chardzhou oasis

page 12

[Burkhanov, 2005 (2), pp. 36-37]. The identification of Early Medieval monuments is very difficult due to the poorly studied complexes of the region. The main search feature for the specified period is a large raw brick of rectangular format. It is generally accepted that the change of square bricks to rectangular ones in Bactria and Sogd occurred in the fifth century (Nielsen, 1966, p. 212). According to the latest archaeological data, this conclusion can also be extended to the Lebap monuments (Araphana, Odey depe, Chishlen kala, Khoja Idat kala, Khazarek depe).

This is a time of feudal and interethnic conflicts. The defensive functions of fortresses are strengthened, temples and citadels of small settlements are strengthened, turning into powerful castles that can withstand sieges and enemy attacks (Khazarek-depe, Ak-kala). Due to the decline of large urban settlements, the castle is becoming a characteristic phenomenon for the settlements of Sogda and Bactria [Urban environment..., 1986, p. 9-11; Semenov, 1990, pp. 58-61]. The ceramic complex of the time under consideration, in particular for the Amul region, is characterized by the appearance of large containers with a grooved, L - and T-shaped corolla, with a rough porous and poorly burned potsherd, with streaks on the outer surface. It is known that vessels decorated with streaks are typical of the monuments of the Middle and Lower Syr Darya of the late Antiquity and early Middle Ages (Levina, 1971). Similar vessels were widely distributed on the territory of Sogd in the IV-V centuries, especially in Bukhara Sogd (Mukhamedzhanov et al., 1983). Archaeological studies have shown that the appearance of these ceramics in the Amul region should be attributed to the second half of the IV century. Circles with a spherical body and a loop-shaped handle are widely used, especially close analogies to which are found, in particular, in ceramics of the late VII-early VIII centuries in Penjikent and Ferghana [Abdulgazieva, 1990, p. 34; Bentovich, 1964, pp. 265-298]. Sometimes there is a pin (button) on the top of the handle of these vessels. There is also a commonality with Sogd in the elements of tableware decoration - a wavy ornament drawn with a combed object on the shoulder of pots, and large containers - angob strips. The connection of the Amul region with Southern Sughd and Tokharistan can be traced quite clearly on the example of samples of stucco ceramics decorated with toothed-comb ornaments, characteristic of the Kashkadarya regions (Albaum, 1960; Kabanov, 1981, p. 32, Fig. 19; Nezdik, 1959, p. 152]. The ceramic complex of the Amul region is also characterized by the presence of tableware, where vessels and their plums are depicted as animals (turtle, bull, and wild boar) (Burkhanov, 1991; Burkhanov, 1993). Similar vessels with plums in the shape of an animal's head are widely found in Sogd tableware, in particular in Samarkand, Penjikent, and Talu-Barzu (Bentovich, 1964; Pugachenkova and Rempel, 1965, fig.

Hearth stands (Odey-depe, Araphana), also known from excavations of Sogd monuments, are widely distributed in the Amul region (Kabanov, 1981). The Sogdian influence on the culture of the Amul region can also be seen in the example of the depicted terracotta figurines with vessels and an investment ring (Amul, Navidah), as well as in the style of images and clothing of female figurines (Meshkeris, 1989, 70, p.324).

Thus, the Lebap region was intensively inhabited in antiquity and the early Middle Ages, but the full development of the territory is primarily associated with the Kushan and Kushan-Sasanian periods. As for the historical and cultural affiliation of the region's monuments and the direction of cultural and economic ties, all of them are included in the circle of the Kushan and later Kushan-Sasanian historical and cultural community at the beginning of the 1st millennium AD.

The Amul region, and above all the Chardzhou oasis, is characterized by the presence of a significant layer of the IV-V century complex, which is genetically related to the culture of the Bukhara oasis, and its appearance on the Amu Darya coast should probably be associated with the well-known expansion of the Eftalites to the southern territories. Downstream of the Amu Darya River, i.e. by

page 13

On the territory of the Amul region (Chardzhou and Karabekaul oases), the Kushan-Sasanian period is characterized by the presence, as already noted, of coarse stucco ceramics with chamotte, humas with corollas decorated with dents, braziers, hearth stands. V. N. Pilipko is inclined to see this as an influence of Khorezm (Pilipko, 1979). However, without completely denying the influence of Khorezm, it should be noted that the appearance of this complex should be explained rather by the influence of the Bukhara oasis, the southwestern periphery of which can also be considered the Chardzhou oasis. The Bukhara oasis of the IV-V centuries is characterized by the addition of a ceramic complex with a strong influence of ceramics of the middle course of the Syr Darya, and this complex is characteristic of the Sogda of the Khionite-Eftalite time (Mukhamedzhanov et al., 1983).

The active influence of the nomadic (Turkic) world in the early Middle Ages is also clearly seen in the materials of coroplasty. For example, in Bityk-kale and Beshir-kale there are terracotta figurines-busts of a Turkic warrior [Burkhanov, 2000, p. 20; Burkhanov, 2005 (2), p. 36, fig.63,2,80]. The warrior from Bityk-kala is wearing a scaly protective robe. The terracotta figures of the so-called idolchikov horsemen (freak riders) are typical: a figure of a horseman mounted on a skate, made in a rough form by hand, in a generalized manner, with schematically depicted hands. His posture is clearly sedentary: his head is usually tilted back in a pointed nomad cap, the features of a broad face with a pointed nose and chin are clearly outlined, and his eyes are highlighted with round paste cakes. The image of the ugly horseman was widespread in the art of early medieval Central Asia. The question of the significance of this type in coroplasty remains unresolved. Perhaps the figures were children's toys, and also had a cult significance. G. A. Pugachenkova connects the image of the character of the rider and horse with the influence of nomadic traditions on the local agricultural environment. She emphasizes their special, magical character and believes that " at its core, it is obviously a generalized image of the patron god of horsemen, representatives of the steppe environment "[Pugachenkova, 1966, pp. 231-232]. Among the finds from the settlements of the Middle Amu Darya, there are many terracotas depicting figures of horses. The widespread use of horse figurines with or without a rider is due to the fact that in the Central Asian region with its diverse sedentary and nomadic population, the horse is a particularly revered animal. Since ancient times, horse breeding has been an important part of economic life, in particular, special work was carried out to select special breeds of horses that are actively used in military operations.

Spearheads and three-bladed arrows are noted among the weapons in the Amul area. Experts associate the appearance of such arrows in Sughd with the invasion of the Turks and Arabs, but there is evidence of local Central Asian development of this form. [Belenitsky et al., 1973, pp. 71-78] So, in particular, iron three-bladed arrowheads found in Arapkhan, based on the accompanying material (coins and ceramics), are dated to the V-VII centuries.B. A. Litvinsky, who examined arrowheads of the VI-VIII centuries, noted a wide variety of their shapes and sizes. It is generally assumed that the spread of new forms of arrowheads in the early Middle Ages, primarily the enlargement of their size, is associated with the appearance of the Turks and nomads [Belenitsky et al., 1973, pp. 76-78, fig. 44-46; Litvinsky, 1965; Pugachenkova, 1989, pp. 143-145, Fig.66]. The increase in the size of arrowheads is associated with the strengthening of protective weapons - armor (plate armor, chain shirt, helmet with a chain shirt that protected the face). Obviously, the small arrows that were widely used in ancient times could no longer penetrate the armor of the new model.

The main directions of historical and cultural development of contacts and relations of the Middle Amu Darya can be traced in general and in the Middle Ages. Contacts of the Central Amudarya region with other regions of Central Asia, in particular with Merv and Sughd, are being strengthened due to the Arab conquest and entry into the unified historical and Cultural Center of Uzbekistan.-

page 14

The cultural region is Khorasan. It is known that the Arabs, after mastering Merv, did not immediately manage to subdue Amul. In particular, after the Arab governor of Khorasan ar-Rabi died in 672, a new one named Abdallah bin Khujra had to fight the inhabitants of the city on the Amu Darya. When Amul and the surrounding lands became part of the Caliphate is unknown. But in the eighth century and later, Amul became one of the administrative districts where the Arab Amil ruled [Burkhanov, 2001, p. 77; Masson M. E., 1966].

In the IX century. Merv, the Amul region and Khorezm are part of the Tahirid dynasty. Frequent finds of Samanid coins in the settlements of the Middle Amu Darya (Navidakh, Gebekly, Ling-Ling-depe, Kekrel-depe, Shamba-Bazar) confirm the region's entry into the powerful state of the Samanids and the strengthening of contacts with Bukhara (Burkhanov, 2002 (2), pp. 38-39; Burkhanov, 2005 (2), p. 61-71; Pilipko, 1980, pp. 70-97]. In the 9th-10th centuries, trade routes from Khorezm to Transoxiana and Tokharistan intersected in the Middle Amu Darya. Further development of the caravan trade contributes to the prosperity of Amul. Maqdisi calls Amul " populous, rich in life's goods, and well-supplied with water." The data of written sources are confirmed by historical, topographical and archaeological materials and indicate a high culture of the settlements of the region [Burkhanov and Bektasov, 1994; Drevny Amul..., 1993, pp. 12-13, 20-30; Masson M. E., 1966; Pilipko, 1980].

The favorable location of the Amul often becomes his trouble. At the beginning of the XI century, the last Samanids - Muntasir and the Turks-were fighting for influence in the region. In 1035, when the Seljuks moved from Khorezm to Khorasan, they plundered Amul and other settlements of the Middle Amu Darya on their way. In the state of the "Great Seljuks", the city becomes an important and strong fortification.

In the 12th and early 13th centuries, the region of Amul continued to gravitate ethno-culturally towards the Bukhara oasis, but politically it was part of Khorezm. This is confirmed by archaeological data, in particular, finds of Khwarezmian ceramics (humas with a "stick-shaped corolla") and coins of Muhammad Alad-din (1190-1220), the last khwarezmshah before the Mongol invasion. The materials of our excavations, in particular, the findings of iron asymmetric rhombic tips of petiole type with the greatest expansion in the upper part (Kyz-kala) and terracotta figures (Amul, Khalachzhi-kala), allow us to assume that the Khwarezmian garrisons in the Middle Amu Darya could serve as Kipchak soldiers from the Aral Sea region, who played a significant role in the strengthening of the city. defense capabilities and power of this state [Buniyatov, 1986, p. 41; Burkhanov, 1998, p. 185].They could also participate in campaigns to Transoxiana as part of the army of Khwarezmshah Muhammad.

Among the finds from the Middle Amudarya settlements of the XI-early XIII centuries, we note ceramic and stone dishes, terracotta figurines of horses, toys-whistles in the form of vessels and horses, glass products, slingshot balls, coins.

On the eve of the Mongol invasion, in 1220, remnants of a Turkmen detachment appear near Amul. This detachment fought on the side of the Mongols and participated in the capture of Jend and Yangikent. During the campaign to Khorezm under the command of Tainal Noyon, the Turkmens rebelled and killed one of the leaders of the detachment. As a punishment, the rebels were killed, only some of them escaped. The Mongols themselves, as reported by the head of Amul Ikhtiyar-addin, who fled to Merv, stormed the city in 1221. Amul became a springboard from which the Mongol troops led by Tuli moved to conquer Khorasan (Burkhanov and Bektasov, 1994; Masson M. E., 1966).

After the invasion of the Mongols, life in the oases of the Middle Amu Darya, especially in the southern ones, freezes, which is associated with the destruction or abandonment of irrigation systems and the flight of the population. Excavations have shown that, in particular, in the Karabekaul oasis, out of 31 known archaeological sites, Ling-Ling depe is the only one where materials from the 13th-14th centuries have been identified [Burkhanov, 1994, pp. 70-71; Burkhanov, 2002 (1),

page 15

pp. 39-40]. However, life is rapidly recovering in most of the Sredneamudarya settlements, especially in the northern oases of Lebap adjacent to the Golden Horde Khorezm, many of which were taken by the Mongols without a fight and remained undisturbed.

Representatives of the Chagataid dynasty, who ruled a large part of Central Asia, appreciated the strategic importance of the crossing city and restored it in the second half of the 13th century. Ak-bek was appointed commandant, but he later joined the Hulaguids. Under them, Amul was ranked among the cities of Merv. In the 14th century, according to archaeological data, in the restored Amul, life continued in Ishkhristan and the outer city, and construction in Rabad was revived [Burkhanov, 2001; Burkhanov, 2002 (1), p. 39; Masson M. E., 1966; Pilipko, 1980]. Finds related to the 13th-14th centuries, primarily ceramics from the northern and central regions, are typically Khorezmian.

In the 15th century, Amul, like many settlements in the Amudarya region, was part of the powerful Timurid state and played an important military and strategic role. Our excavations at the ancient settlement of Amul-Chardzhuy testify to the high material culture of the city. Ceramic dishes with a luxurious blue-blue glaze, remains of glazed tiles of the same color, traces of buildings made of brick, stone and limestone, as well as metal, glass, stone and coins were found. Under the Timurids, the commandant of the city was Hussein-Emir Yar Ali Kundalan [Burkhanov and Bektasov, 1994; Masson M. E., 1966]. However, in general, at this time in Southern Khorezm and the northern regions of the Middle Amu Darya, many settlements ceased to exist due to Timur's campaigns against the Golden Horde Khorezm in the 80s of the XIV century.

In the late 15th and early 16th centuries, Amul was known as Charjuy. Under the former name, the city last appears in the description of Timur's military campaigns, where the Amul crossing is mentioned. In "Baburname", the new name of the city is first mentioned in the events of 1498, when it refers to "charju guzari" (Charju ferry).

For a long time, Amul-Chardzhuy has retained the importance of the most important crossing over the Amu Darya on the Merv-Bukhara highway. Crossings were also active near Kerks and Navidakh (Keshk Zuhra-Tahir near Burdalyk). Trade caravans, travelers, and invading troops passed through the Amul Crossing.

In 1504, during the campaign against Khorezm, Sheibani Khan captured the city, and Chardzhui became part of the Uzbek state, and later - in the possession of the Bukhara emirs. Located at the crossroads of roads, Charjuy becomes one of the centers of the slave trade developed in Bukhara.

Beginning in the 1840s, the region's population was drawn into a long war against the ruler of Iran, Nadir Shah, who decided to conquer Bukhara and Khiva. His troops crossed from Chardzhuy to the right bank of the Amu Darya and in the summer of 1740 entered Bukhara, which was conquered without a fight [Amantyev, 1995, pp. 217-229; Drevny Amul..., 1993; Masson M. E., 1966]. Nadir Shah's campaign greatly disturbed the local Turkmens. They knew his strength, for two years earlier they had attacked Nadir Shah's garrison in Merv several times and had been severely punished. At the approach of the Iranian army, many Turkmen tribes left their places and went down the river to the Khanate of Khiva, where they joined the militia of Ilbars Khan.

Having accumulated forces, Ilbars Khan sends a 30-thousandth detachment to Charjuy to fight the enemy outside his domain. Having learned about this, Nadir Shah hurries to Charjuy and, not far from the city, joins the Merv detachment of Mukha-medriz Khan to his army and moves along the bank down the Amu Darya. The opponents clash in the town of Cheges (north of Chardzhuy). The Khiva Turkmen-Uzbek detachment was led by Muhammad-aly-beg from the Yomud family Ushak and Artyk-inak from the Uzbek tribe Mangyt (Amantyev, 1995; Drevny Amul..., 1993). In the battle, superiority was shown.-

page 16

Despite their bravery and boldness, the Khiva detachment retreated due to the presence of Nadir Shah's more prepared army.

During the battles, Turkmen tribes strengthen their fortresses, especially to the south of Chardju, in the Karabekaul oasis. Ersari Turkmens, who arrived from Mangyshlak, began to settle in the region already in the XVI century, they are characterized by dispersed settlement and the construction of large fortresses. For the construction of the latter, as a rule, the remains of ancient (Kushan) and medieval settlements were used (Burkhanov, 1994; Pilipko, 1982, pp. 72-85). Ersara fortresses were built on the site of the ancient settlements of Chishlen-kala, Kutnam-kala, Khoja-Idat-kala, Sultan-niyaz-biy-kalasi, Khala-zhi-kala (near Halach), etc. Sultan-niyaz-biy-kalasi, which played the role of the Ersara capital, located in the northern part of the Karabekaul oasis, was built on a natural hill (with the exception of a small part built on the remains of the former citadel of a small Kushan settlement). The oldest fortress in Ersara is Kutnam-kala. Written sources that report on the Amu Darya campaign of Nadir Shah mention the "town of Kotnam", where the Turkmens-ersari were concentrated [Materials..., 1939].

Ersarin fortresses were built on the basis of Kushan settlements, repeating the configuration of defensive structures of that time, new walls were built from earthen clods and mud bricks. The walls reached a height of 6-8 m, the thickness of the walls at the base reached 3 m. At a height of 4 - 5 m on the inner side there were positions for shooters. Loopholes were located in the upper part of the wall 2 - 3 m apart. In some places, the walls are marked with loop-shaped and undulating projections.

The arrival of Turkmen tribes on the Amu Darya dates back to the XVI-early XVII centuries and is associated with the turn of this river and the devastation of territories on Mangyshlak and on the banks of the Uzboy. Their migration continued until the 19th century [Amantyev, 1995; Istoriya..., 1957; Metgeldiyev, 1980, pp. 28-29]. The exodus of Turkmen tribes from Mangyshlak and Sarikamysh was significantly influenced by the raids of the Nogais in the 16th century, the Kalmyks in the 17th century, and the Kazakhs in the 18th and 19th centuries, as well as by the political events of the 16th century-the formation of the states of Khiva and Bukhara in Central Asia.

list of literature

Abdulgazieva B. O. O kul'turnykh svyazyakh Fergany s Sogd v epokhu rannego srednevekovya [On cultural relations between Ferghana and Sogd in the Early Middle Ages]. Tashkent, 1990.

Albaum L. I. Balalyk-tepe. To the history of material culture and art of Tokharistan. Tashkent, 1960., Amantyev O. History of Turkmenistan of the XVIII century. Ashgabat, 1995.

Bactria-Tokharistan in the ancient and medieval East, Moscow, 1983.
Belenitsky A.M., Bentovich I. B., Bolshakov O. G. Srednevekovy gorod Srednoi Azii [Medieval City of Central Asia]. Moscow, 1973.

Bentovich I. B. Keramika verkhnego sloya Penjikenta (VII-VIII vv.) [Ceramics of the upper layer of Panjikent (VII-VIII vv.)]. N 124. Moscow-L., 1964.

Buniyatov Z. M. The State of the Khorezmshahs-Anutenids (1097-1231). Moscow, 1986.

Burkhanov A. A. Terracotas of the Middle Amu Darya// Abstracts of the Second All-Union Symposium on the Problems of Hellenistic Culture in the East. Yerevan, 1984.

Burkhanov, A. A., New finds of Kushan and Sasanido-Kushan coins from the Middle Amu Darya (based on the materials of the Karabekaul oasis), Molodezh i nauchno-tekhnicheskiy progress. Materials of the Republican Conference of Young scientists. Ashgabat, 1990.

Burkhanov A. A. Izobrazhenie zhivotnykh v koroplastike i na keramicheskoi potoshke Srednoi Amudarya [Image of animals in coroplastics and on ceramic dishes of the Middle Amu Darya]. Humanities. 5. Ashgabat, 1991.

Burkhanov A. A. Antiquities of Amul. Ashgabat, 1993.

Burkhanov A. A. Drevny Lebap [Ancient Lebap]. Part 1. Monuments of the Garabekevul oasis. Chardzhev, 1994.

Burkhanov, A. A., Arrowheads from the fortress of Kyz-kala (Middle Amu Darya), Kul'turnye tsennosti 1996, St. Petersburg, 1998.
Burkhanov A. A. K izucheniyu kostyuma naseleniya Srednoi Amudarii epochi rannego srednevekovye [To the study of the costume of the population of the Middle Amu Darya in the Early Middle Ages]. Samara, 2000.

page 17

Burkhanov A. A. Amul-Chardzhuy-capital center of the Sredneamudarya region // Integration of archaeological and ethnographic research. Nalchik-Omsk, 2001.

Burkhanov A. A. Ethno-cultural situation in the Sredneamudarya region in the Middle Ages (on the problem of studying ethno-cultural processes in the contact zones of Central Eurasia) // Integration of archaeological and ethnographic research. Omsk-Khanty-Mansiysk, 2002 (1).

Burkhanov A. A. Srednyaya Amudarya mezhdu Iranom i Turanom (k probleme kontaktnykh zonov v drevnosti i srednevedovye) [Middle Amu Darya between Iran and Turan (on the problem of contact zones in ancient and Medieval times)]. Dialogu tsivilizatsiy: istoricheskiy opyt i perspektivy XXI veka, Moscow, 2002 (2).

Burkhanov A. A. Khazarek-depe: round temple on the Middle Amu Darya. Kazan, 2004.

Burkhanov A. A. Drevny Lebap [Ancient Lebap]. Archaeological sites of the Amulya region. Kazan. 2005 (1).

Burkhanov A. A. Drevny Lebap [Ancient Lebap]. Culture of settlements in the Amul region. Kazan, 2005 (2).

Burkhanov A. A., Bektasov M. J. Amul-Chardzhuy: 2000 years of history. Chardzhev, 1994.

Vainberg B. I. Coins of ancient Khorezm, Moscow, 1977.
Eastern Europe in antiquity and the Middle Ages. Contacts, contact zones and Contact zones, Moscow, 1999.
Gafurov B. G. Tajiks. Ancient and Medieval History, Moscow, 1972.
Gafurov B. G., Tsibukidis D. I. Alexander the Great and the East. Moscow, 1980.

Urban environment and culture of Bactria-Tokharistan and Sogd. IV century B.C.-VIII century A.D. Tashkent, 1986.

Grigoriev V. V. Pokhod Aleksandra Velikogo v Zapadnom Turkestan [The campaign of Alexander the Great in Western Turkestan]. Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosveshcheniya, ch. 217., Otd. 2.SPb, 1881.

Gulyamov Ya. G. History of irrigation in Khorezm from ancient times to our time. Tashkent, 1957.

Gutlyev G., Nikitin A. B. Treasure of Sasanido-Kushan coins and imitations of Vasudeva's coinage from Turkmenistan // Soviet Archeology, 1987.

Dalverzin. Kushan city in the south of Uzbekistan. Tashkent, 1978.

Dergachev V. A. Moldavia and neighboring territories in the Eneolithic - Bronze Age II Abstract. Doct. dis. L., 1989.

Ancient Amul: Problems of history and culture of the Middle Amu Darya. Chardzhev, 1993.

Drevneyshie gosudarstva Kavkaza i Srednoi Azii [The oldest states of the Caucasus and Central Asia].
Zeimal ' E. V. Politicheskaya istoriya drevnoi Transoxiana po numizmaticheskim dannym [Political history of ancient Transoxiana based on numismatic data]. Drevnost ' i rannee srednevekovie [Ancient and Early Middle Ages], Leningrad, 1978.
Zeymal E. V. Ancient coins of Tajikistan. Dushanbe, 1983.

Istoriya Turkmenskoi SSR [History of the Turkmen SSR]. Vol. 1. Kn. 2. Ashkhabad, 1957.

Kabanov S. K. Kul'tura sel'skikh poseleniy Yuzhnogo Sogda III-VI vvakh [Culture of rural settlements in Southern Sogd, 3rd-6th centuries].

Levina L. M. Keramika Nizhni i Srednoi Syrdarii [Ceramics of the Lower and Middle Syrdarya]. Trudy Khorezmskoy arkheologo-etnograficheskoi expeditsii [Proceedings of the Khorezm Archaeological and Ethnographic Expedition], vol. 7, Moscow, 1971.

Litvinsky B. A. Sredneaziatskie zheleznye nakonechniki strel [Central Asian Iron arrow tips]. N 2, 1965.

Mandelshtam A.M. Poslekushanskiye pogrebeniya v Severnoi Baktrii [Post-Kush burials in Northern Bactria]. Kratkieye soobshchie o dokladakh i fieldovykh issledovaniyakh Instituta Arkheologii AN SSSR, issue 94, Moscow - L., 1963.

Masson V. M. Drevnezemledelcheskaya kul'tura Margiany [Ancient agricultural culture of Margiana]. N 73. Moscow-L., 1959.

Masson V. M. Kushanskiye poseleniya i kushanskaya arkheologiya [Kushan settlements and Kushan archeology].
Masson V. M. Kushanskaya epokha v drevnoi istorii Uzbekistanii [The Kushan Epoch in the ancient history of Uzbekistan]. N1. Tashkent, 1981.

Masson M. E. On the north-eastern limits of the Parthian State // Brief reports on reports and field studies of the Institute of the History of Material Culture of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Issue XXXVIII, Moscow, 1951.
Masson M. E. Peoples and regions of the southern part of Turkmenistan as part of the Parthian state // Proceedings of the South Turkmenistan Complex Archaeological Expedition, vol. 5. Ashgabat, 1963.

Masson M. E. Srednevekovye torgovye puti iz Merv v Khorezm i Maverannakhr (v predelakh Turkmenskoi SSR) [Medieval trade routes from Merv to Khorezm and Transoxiana (within the Turkmen SSR)]. Vol. 13. Ashkhabad, 1966.

Masson M. E. On the question of Margiana as part of the Greco-Bactrian state // Izvestia of the Academy of Sciences of the Turkmen SSR. Series of Social Sciences, No. 5. Ashgabat, 1970.

Materials on the history of Turkmens and Turkmenistan, Moscow-L., 1939

Metgeldiev S. Socio-economic structure of the Middle Amu Darya Turkmens in the 19th century. Ashkhabad, 1980.

Meshkeris V. A. Sogdian terracotta. Dushanbe, 1989.

Mukhamedzhanov A. R., Suleymanov R. Kh., Urakov B. Kul'tura drevnebukharskogo oazisa III-VI vv. AD [Culture of the Ancient Bukhara oasis of the 3rd-6th centuries AD].

Nezazik E. E. Keramika Khorezma afrigidskogo perioda [Ceramics of Khorezm of the Afrigid period]. Proceedings of the Khorezm Archaeological and Ethnographic Expedition, vol. 4, Moscow, 1959.

Nielsen V. A. Stanovlenie feudal'noi arkhitektury Srednoi Azii [Formation of feudal architecture of Central Asia].

Pilipko V. N. Nekotorye arkheologicheskie pamyatniki pravoberezhya Srednoi Amudarya [Some archaeological sites of the right bank of the Middle Amu Darya]. Social Sciences Series, N5. Ashgabat, 1972.

page 18

Pilipko V. N. Nakhodki parfyanskikh monetov na Amudarya ' [Finds of Parthian coins in the Amu Darya].

Pilipko V. N. Female cult figurines from the banks of the Middle Amu Darya // Sovetskaya arkheologiya [Soviet Archeology], No. 1, 1977.
Pilipko V. N. Topography of finds of Kushan coins on the coast of the Middle Amu Darya / / History and Archeology of Central Asia. Ashgabat, 1978.

Pilipko V. N. Drevneye gorodishche Odey-depe na srednego poteshke Amudarya [The ancient settlement of Odey-depe on the middle course of the Amu Darya]. Issue 8. Ashgabat, 1979.

Pilipko V. N. Srednevekovye pamyatniki Severnoi chasti Chardzhouskoy oblasti [Medieval monuments of the Northern part of the Chardzhou region]. Ashgabat. 1980.

Pilipko V. N. Arkheologicheskaya razvedka v Karabekaul'skom oazis [Archaeological exploration in the Karabekaul oasis]. Ashgabat, 1982.

Pilipko V. N. Settlements of North-Western Bactria. Ashgabat, 1985.

Pilipko V. N., Masimov I. Buddhist statuette from Ak-kala (Middle Amu Darya) / / Soviet Archeology, No. 1, 1969.
Pugachenkova G. A. Khalchayan. Tashkent, 1966.

Pugachenkova, G. A., Excavations of the Uzbek art history expedition on ancient monuments in 1973, Baktriiskie drevnosti, L., 1976.

Pugachenkova G. A. Drevnosti Miankala [Antiquities of Miankal]. Tashkent, 1989.

Pugachenkova G. A., Rempel, L. I. the History of art of Uzbekistan from the earliest times to the middle of the XIX V. M., 1965.

Pyankov I. V. Srednaya Aziya v antichnoi geograficheskoi traditsii [Central Asia in the Ancient Geographical tradition]. Moscow, 1997.

Sagdullaev T. K. On the evolution of the oldest trade routes in the south of Central Asia / / On the Central Asian routes of the Great Silk Road. Tashkent, 1990.

Sarianidi V. I. Tillya-tepe in Northern Afghanistan. Materials for the archaeological map of Northern Afghanistan, Moscow, 1972.
Sedov V. A. Kobadian on the threshold of the Early Middle Ages. Moscow, 1987.

Semenov, G. L. castle and the City in early medieval Sogdian // Cultural relations of the peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus. M., 1990.

Stavisky, B. Ya. and Vainberg, B. I., Sasanids in right-bank Bactria (Tokharistan) in the IV-V centuries, Vestnik drevnoi istorii, No. 3, 1972.
Tolstoy SP. Ancient Khorezm, Moscow, 1948.
Khlopin I. N. Historical geography of the southern regions of Central Asia (Antiquity and Early Middle Ages). Ashgabat, 1983.

Permanent link to this publication: