APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF MIGRATION PROCESSES IN ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE 20TH — EARLY 21TH CENTURY
Abstract
The paper examines the dynamics of the migration explanatory model development from the emergence of migration to the present day. The authors do not seek to resolve all issues related to migrationism. The purpose of the paper is to characterize the attitude of researchers to migration processes and, in particular, migrations, to demonstrate the approaches, types and possible consequences of them that exist today. The paper presents the main ideas that influenced the study of migration processes, addresses the problems of terminology and possible solutions. It demonstrates the evolution of understanding migration as a phenomenon. Thus, for foreign archaeology, the following periods can be distinguished. The first, 1900s‑1950s — the emergence of migrationism theory and the rise of its popularity. The second, 1960s‑1990s, a gradual rejection of migrationism. The third, 1990s and to the present day, a return to migration, due to the increased evidence base. For domestic archaeology, two periods are distinguished. The first, 1940s — first half of the 1960s — inclusion in the discussion of migration. The second, second half of the 1960s and up to the present day — the emergence of developments within the framework of an integrated approach and a smooth transition to an interdisciplinary approach. The substantive part of all the listed periods is tied to existing and emerging trends in archaeology, be it evolutionism or postprocessualism. The later inclusion and smoothness of the successive stages in domestic science is apparently associated with both the ideological component of the works of the 20th century and the desire to resolve emerging problems exclusively on archaeological material. For the unification of research, it is proposed to use the developments of K. Gymbl and M.F. Kosarev in the classification of migrations, and the division proposed by L. S. Klein in the typology. The main consequences of migrations are given (movement of complexes of cultural features, change in anthropological and genetic composition). The article summarizes the current state of the migration explanatory model, which is capable of confidently stating the migration processes that have taken place. The increased level of evidence is associated not only with the accumulation of archaeological material, but also with established approaches that combine various disciplines, allowing one to look at the complexes being studied from different angles.
Downloads
References
Alekseyev V. P. Historical Anthropology and Ethnogenesis. Moscow: Nauka, 1989. 448 p. (In Russ.)
Artamonov M. I. Questions of the History of the Scythians in Soviet Science Herald of Ancient History. 1947;3:68–82. (In Russ.)
Bromley Yu. V. Ethnos and Ethnography. Moscow: Nauka, 1973. 284 p. (In Russ.)
Bryusov A.Ya., ZiminaM. P. Stone Drilled Battle Axes on the Territory of the European Part of the USSR. Moscow: Nauka, 1966. 98 p. (Collection of Archaeological Sources. Archaeology of the USSR. Iss. B4–4). (In Russ.)
Gening V. F. Ethnic Process in Primitive Times. Sverdlovsk: Izd-vo Sverldovskogo un-ta, 1970. Pp. 103–105. (In Russ.)
Durakov I.A. Bronze Casting Production of the Population of the Ob-Irtysh Forest-Steppe in the Bronze Age — the Transitional Time from the Bronze to Iron: abstract dis. … doctor of Historical Sciences. Novosibirsk, 2024. 32 p. (In Russ.)
Ivanov V. A. Dynamics of Migrations in the Ural-Volga Region in the Middle Ages and Their Results. Ufimskij arheologicheskij vestnik = Ufa Archaeological Bulletin. 2022;22(2): 299–309. (In Russ.)
Kleyn L. S. Archaeological Signs of Migrations. In: IX International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnographic Sciences (Chicago). Reports of the Soviet Delegation. Moscow: Nauka, 1973. 14 p. (In Russ.)
Kleyn L. S. Migration: Archaeological Signs. Stratum plus. 1999;1:52–71. (In Russ.)
Korochkova O. N. Interaction of Cultures in the Bronze Age in the Middle Urals and Subtaiga Tobol-Irtysh Region: Factors, Mechanisms, Dynamics: abstract dis. … doctor of Historical Sciences. Moscow, 2011. 38 p. (In Russ.)
Koryakova L. N., Molodin V. I. Cultural Variability: an Old Problem in a New Time. In: III Northern Archaeological Congress. Khanty-Mansiysk; Yekaterinburg: ID “IzdatNaukaServis”, 2010. Pp. 110–141. (In Russ.)
Kosarev M. F. Ancient History of Western Siberia: Man and the Natural Environment. Moscow: Nauka, 1991. 301 p. (In Russ.)
Matveyeva N. P., D’yoni G., ZelenkovA. S. Problems of Studying the Origin of the Magyars (based on Ural-Siberian materials of the early Middle Ages). Rossijskaya arheologiya = Russian archeology. 2021;2:147–166. (In Russ.)
Matveyeva N. P., ZelenkovA. S., Tret’yakov Ye.A.The Role of Migrations in the Cultural Genesis of the Medieval Population of the Forest-Steppe and Subtaiga Zone of Western Siberia. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Istoriya = Bulletin of Perm University. History. 2024;1(64):39–58. (In Russ.)
Matyushin G. N. Archaeological Dictionary. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1996. 304 p. (In Russ.)
Merpert N. Ya. Migrations in the Neolithic and Eneolithic Eras. Sovetskaya arheologiya = Soviet Archaeology. 1978;3:9–29. (In Russ.)
Mogil’nikov V.A. Some Features of the Genesis of the Forest-Steppe Cultures of Western Siberia in the Early Iron Age. In: Questions of Ural Archaeology. Iss. 15. Sverdlovsk: Ural’skij gosudarstvennyj universitet, 1981. 156 p. (In Russ.)
Molodin V.I. Migrations and Their Manifestations in the Bronze Age in the South of the Central Part of the West Siberian Plain. Main Models. In: Mobility and Migration: Concepts, Methods, Results. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo In-ta arheologii i etnografii SO RAN, 2019. Pp. 27–35. (In Russ.)
Myl’nikova L. N. Ceramics as an Indicator of Migration Processes. In: Mobility and Migration: Concepts, Methods, Results. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo In-ta arheologii i etnografii SO RAN, 2019. Pp. 128–140. (In Russ.)
SalnikovK. V.Andronovo Settlements of the Trans-Urals. Sovetskaya arheologiya = Soviet Archaeology. 1954;19:213–252. (In Russ.)
Titov B. C. On the Study of Migrations of the Bronze Age. In: Archaeology of the Old and New Worlds. Moscow: Nauka, 1982. Рр. 89–146. (In Russ.)
Tikhomirov K.N. Migration Processes in the Territory of Western Siberia (Bronze Age – Middle Ages): abstract of the dissertation … Cand. Hist. Sciences. Barnaul, 2002. 21 p. (In Russ.)
Tishkin A.A. Features of the Study of Migrations in Archaeology. In: From the Bronze Age to the Digital Age: The Phenomenon of Migration in Time. Barnaul: Izd-vo Alt. un-ta, 2018. Pp. 296–207. (In Russ.)
FormozovA.A.Can Stone Age Tools Serve as an Ethnic Indicator? Sovetskaya arheologiya = Soviet Archaeology. 1957;27:66–74. (In Russ.)
Foss M.E. The Earliest History of the North of the European Part of the USSR. Moscow: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1952. 280 p. (Materials and Research on the Archaeology of the USSR. No. 29) (In Russ.)
Adams W. Y., Van Gerven D., Levy R. S.The Retreat from Migrationism. Annual Review of Anthropology. 1978;7:483–532.
Clark G. Migration as an Explanatory Concept in Paleolithic Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. 1994;1(4):305–343.
Clarke D. L.Analytical Archaeology. London: Methuen, 1968. 704 p.
Cook R. M.Archaeological Argument: Some Principle. Antiquity. 1960; XXXIV:81–84. CookeC.K. Evidence of Human Migration from the Rock art of Southern Rhodesia. Africa. 1965;35(3):263–285.
Dehn W. Einige Uberlegungen zum Charakter keltischer Wanderungen. In: IX Congres International des sciences prehistoriques et protohistoriques. Paris: Société d’anthropologie de Paris, 1979. Pp. 15–20. (In Germ.)
Dommelen P.Colonialism and Migration in the Ancient Mediterranean. Annual Review of Anthropology. 2012;41:393–409.
Eggers H. J. Einführung in die Vorgeschichte. München: R. Piper u. Co., 1959. 318 p.
Gamble C. People on the Move: Interpretations of Regional Variation. In: Cultural Transformations and Interactions in Eastern Europe. Avebury: Ashgate Publ, 1993. Pp. 37–55.
Hachmann R. Die Goten und Skandinavien. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1970. 579 p.
Härke H.Archaeologists and Migrations (A Problem of Attitude?). Current Anthropology. 1998;39(1):19–45.
Jackson J.W. Shells as Evidence of the Migrations of Early Culture. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1917. 258 p.
Kehoe A. B. Ceramic Affiliation in the Northwestern Plains. American Antiquity. 1959;25(2):237–246.
KnappA. B. Migration Myths and the End of the Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. 93 p.
Kossinna G. Die verzierten Eisenlanzenspitzen als Kennzeichen der Ostgermanen. Zeitschrift fur Ethnologie. 1905; XXXVII:596–599. (In Germ.)
Kristiansen K. Prehistoric Migrations — the Case of the Single Grave and Corded Ware Cultures. Journal of Danish Archaeology. 1991;8:211–225.
Mellaart J.The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ages in the Near East and Anatolia. Beirut: Khayats, 1966. 212 p.
Neustupny E. Mobilität der Äneolithischen Populationen. Slovenska archeologia. 1981; XXIX(1):111–119. (In Germ.)
Neustupny E. Prehistoric Migrations by Infiltration. Archeologické Rozhledy. 1982;34:278–293.
Palmer L. R. Mycenaeans and Minoans. London: Faber and Faber, 1961. 396 p.
Renfrew C., Boyle K. Archaeogenetics: DNA and the Population Prehistory of Europe. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 2000. 310 p.
Rouse I. B. Migrations in Prehistory. Inferring Population Movement from Cultural Remains. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986. 197 p.
Wheeler M.Archaeology and the Transmission of Ideas. Antiquity. 1952; XXVI:180–192.
Wilfred J. J., Smith G. E. The Migrations of Early Culture. Manchester: Manchester university press, 1929. 164 p.
Willey G. A Pattern of Diffusion — Acculturation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology. 1953; IX:369–384.
Zapatero R. G. Modelos teóricos de invasiones migraciones en arqueología prehistórica. Tutormació Arqueologica. 1983;419:147–157.
Zvelebil M. The Social Contexts of the Agricultural Transition in Europe. In: Archaeogenetics: DNA and the Population Prehistory of Europe. Cambridge: McDonald Institute, 2000. Pp. 57–80.
Copyright (c) 2025 Л.Н. Мыльникова, И.Н. Латышев
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Theory and Practice of Archaeological Research is a golden publisher, as we allow self-archiving, but most importantly we are fully transparent about your rights.
Authors may present and discuss their findings ahead of publication: at biological or scientific conferences, on preprint servers, in public databases, and in blogs, wikis, tweets, and other informal communication channels.
Theory and Practice of Archaeological Research allows authors to deposit manuscripts (currently under review or those for intended submission to ABS) in non-commercial, pre-print servers such as ArXiv.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
2.jpg)
