Russian scientists Anthropologists: Russians are not Slavs. Scientists - anthropologists presented a new missing link "Princess" from Kizilsky

For the first time in history, Russian scientists conducted an unprecedented study of the Russian gene pool - and were shocked by its results. In particular, this study fully confirmed the idea expressed in our articles “Country of Moksel” (No. 14) and “Non-Russian Russian Language” (No. 12) that Russian Russians are not Slavs, but only Russian-speaking Finns...

“Russian scientists have completed and are preparing for publication the first large-scale study of the gene pool of the Russian people. The publication of the results could have unpredictable consequences for Russia and the world order,” this is how the publication on this topic in the Russian publication Vlast sensationally begins. And the sensation really turned out to be incredible - many myths about Russian nationality turned out to be false. Among other things, it turned out that genetically Russians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Finns...

The Russians turned out to be Finns

Over several decades of intense research, anthropologists have been able to identify the appearance of a typical Russian person. They are of average build and average height, light brown-haired men with light eyes - gray or blue. By the way, during the research a verbal portrait of a typical Ukrainian was also obtained. The standard Ukrainian differs from the Russian in the color of his skin, hair and eyes - he is a dark brunette with regular facial features and brown eyes. However, anthropological measurements of the proportions of the human body are not even the last, but the century before last, of science, which has long ago received at its disposal the most accurate methods of molecular biology, which make it possible to read all human genes. And the most advanced methods of DNA analysis today are considered to be sequencing (reading the genetic code) of mitochondrial DNA and DNA of the human Y chromosome. Mitochondrial DNA has been passed down through the female line from generation to generation, virtually unchanged since the time when the ancestor of mankind, Eve, climbed down from a tree in East Africa. And the Y chromosome is present only in men and therefore is also passed on to male offspring almost unchanged, while all other chromosomes, when transmitted from father and mother to their children, are shuffled by nature, like a deck of cards before being dealt. Thus, in contrast to indirect signs (appearance, body proportions), sequencing of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome DNA indisputably and directly indicate the degree of relationship between people, writes the magazine “Power”.

In the West, human population geneticists have been successfully using these methods for two decades. In Russia they were used only once, in the mid-1990s, when identifying royal remains. The turning point in the situation with the use of the most modern methods to study the titular nation of Russia occurred only in 2000. The Russian Foundation for Basic Research has awarded a grant to scientists from the Laboratory of Human Population Genetics of the Medical Genetics Center of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. For the first time in Russian history, scientists were able to fully concentrate on studying the gene pool of the Russian people for several years. They supplemented their molecular genetic research with an analysis of the frequency distribution of Russian surnames in the country. This method was very cheap, but its information content exceeded all expectations: a comparison of the geography of surnames with the geography of genetic DNA markers showed their almost complete coincidence.

The molecular genetic results of Russia’s first study of the gene pool of the titular nationality are now being prepared for publication in the form of a monograph “Russian Gene Pool”, which will be published at the end of the year by the Luch publishing house. The magazine “Vlast” provides some research data. So, it turned out that the Russians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Finns. By the way, these studies completely destroyed the notorious myth about the “Eastern Slavs” - that supposedly Belarusians, Ukrainians and Russians “make up a group of Eastern Slavs.” The only Slavs of these three peoples turned out to be only Belarusians, but it turned out that Belarusians are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but Western ones - because they are genetically practically no different from the Poles. So the myth about the “kinship blood of Belarusians and Russians” was completely destroyed: Belarusians turned out to be virtually identical to the Poles, Belarusians are genetically very far from Russians, but very close to Czechs and Slovaks. But the Finns of Finland turned out to be much closer genetically to the Russians than the Belarusians. Thus, according to the Y chromosome, the genetic distance between Russians and Finns in Finland is only 30 conventional units (close relationship). And the genetic distance between a Russian person and the so-called Finno-Ugric peoples (Mari, Vepsians, Mordovians, etc.) living on the territory of the Russian Federation is 2-3 units. Simply put, genetically they are IDENTICAL. In this regard, the magazine “Vlast” notes: “And the harsh statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Estonia on September 1 at the Council of the EU in Brussels (after the denunciation by the Russian side of the treaty on the state border with Estonia) about discrimination against the Finno-Ugric peoples allegedly related to the Finns in the Russian Federation loses its substantive meaning . But due to the moratorium of Western scientists, the Russian Foreign Ministry was unable to reasonably accuse Estonia of interfering in our internal, one might even say closely related, affairs.” This philippic is only one facet of the mass of contradictions that have arisen. Since the closest relatives for Russians are Finno-Ugrians and Estonians (in fact, these are the same people, since a difference of 2-3 units is inherent in only one people), then Russian jokes about “inhibited Estonians” are strange, when Russians themselves are these Estonians. A huge problem arises for Russia in self-identification as supposedly “Slavs,” because genetically the Russian people have nothing to do with the Slavs. In the myth about the “Slavic roots of the Russians,” Russian scientists have put an end to it: there is nothing of the Slavs in the Russians. There is only the near-Slavic Russian language, but it also contains 60-70% of non-Slavic vocabulary, so a Russian person is not able to understand the languages ​​of the Slavs, although a real Slav understands any Slavic languages ​​(except Russian) due to the similarity. The results of mitochondrial DNA analysis showed that another closest relative of Russians, besides the Finns of Finland, are the Tatars: Russians from the Tatars are at the same genetic distance of 30 conventional units that separates them from the Finns. The data for Ukraine turned out to be no less sensational. It turned out that genetically the population of Eastern Ukraine is Finno-Ugrians: Eastern Ukrainians are practically no different from Russians, Komi, Mordvins, and Mari. This is one Finnish people, who once had their own common Finnish language. But with the Ukrainians of Western Ukraine, everything turned out to be even more unexpected. These are not Slavs at all, just as they are not the “Russo-Finns” of Russia and Eastern Ukraine, but a completely different ethnic group: between the Ukrainians from Lvov and the Tatars the genetic distance is only 10 units.

This close relationship between Western Ukrainians and Tatars may be explained by the Sarmatian roots of the ancient inhabitants of Kievan Rus. Of course, there is a certain Slavic component in the blood of Western Ukrainians (they are more genetically close to the Slavs than the Russians), but these are still not Slavs, but Sarmatians. Anthropologically, they are characterized by wide cheekbones, dark hair and brown eyes, dark (and not pink, like Caucasians) nipples. The magazine writes: “You can react as you like to these strictly scientific facts that show the natural essence of the standard electorates of Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych. But it will not be possible to accuse Russian scientists of falsifying these data: then the accusation will automatically extend to their Western colleagues, who have been delaying the publication of these results for more than a year, each time extending the moratorium period.” The magazine is right: these data clearly explain the deep and permanent split in Ukrainian society, where two completely different ethnic groups actually live under the name “Ukrainians.” Moreover, Russian imperialism will take this scientific data into its arsenal - as another (already weighty and scientific) argument to “increase” the territory of Russia with Eastern Ukraine. But what about the myth about the “Slavic-Russians”?

Recognizing these data and trying to use them, Russian strategists are faced with what is popularly called a “double-edged sword”: in this case, they will have to reconsider the entire national self-identification of the Russian people as “Slavic” and abandon the concept of “kinship” with Belarusians and the entire Slavic World - no longer at the level of scientific research, but at the political level. The magazine also publishes a map indicating the area where “truly Russian genes” (that is, Finnish) are still preserved. Geographically, this territory “coincides with Russia during the time of Ivan the Terrible” and “clearly shows the conventionality of some state borders,” the magazine writes. Namely: the population of Bryansk, Kursk and Smolensk is not a Russian population at all (that is, Finnish), but a Belarusian-Polish one - identical to the genes of Belarusians and Poles. An interesting fact is that in the Middle Ages the border between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Muscovy was precisely the ethnic border between the Slavs and Finns (by the way, the eastern border of Europe then passed along it). The further imperialism of Muscovy-Russia, which annexed neighboring territories, went beyond the boundaries of ethnic Muscovites and captured foreign ethnic groups.

What is Rus'?

These new discoveries by Russian scientists allow us to take a fresh look at the entire politics of medieval Muscovy, including its concept of “Rus”. It turns out that Moscow’s “pulling of the Russian blanket over itself” is explained purely ethnically and genetically. The so-called “Holy Rus'” in the concept of the Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow and Russian historians was formed due to the rise of Moscow in the Horde, and, as Lev Gumilyov wrote, for example, in the book “From Rus' to Russia”, due to this same fact, Ukrainians and Belarusians ceased to be Rusyns, ceased to be Russia. It is clear that there were two completely different Russias. One, the Western one, lived its own life as a Slav and united into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia. Another Rus' - Eastern Rus' (more precisely Muscovy - because it was not considered Russia at that time) - entered the ethnically close Horde for 300 years, in which it then seized power and made it “Russia” even before the conquest of Novgorod and Pskov into the Horde-Russia. It is this second Rus' – the Rus' of the Finnish ethnic group – that the Russian Orthodox Church of Moscow and Russian historians call “Holy Russia”, while depriving Western Rus' of the right to something “Russian” (forcing even the entire people of Kievan Rus to call themselves not Rusyns, but “outskirts” ). The meaning is clear: this Finnish Russian had little in common with the original Slavic Russian.

The very centuries-old confrontation between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Muscovy (who seemed to have something in common in the Rus of the Rurikovichs and in the Kievan faith, and the princes of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Vitovt-Yurii and Jagiello-Yakov were Orthodox from birth, were Rurikovichs and Grand Dukes of Russia, did not speak any other language except Russian knew) - this is a confrontation between countries of different ethnic groups: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania gathered the Slavs, and Muscovy gathered the Finns. As a result, for many centuries two Russias opposed each other - the Slavic Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Finnish Muscovy. This also explains the glaring fact that Muscovy NEVER during its stay in the Horde expressed a desire to return to Rus', gain freedom from the Tatars, and become part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. And its capture of Novgorod was caused precisely by the negotiations of Novgorod on joining the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This Russophobia of Moscow and its “masochism” (“the Horde yoke is better than the Grand Duchy of Lithuania”) can only be explained by ethnic differences with primordial Russia and ethnic closeness to the peoples of the Horde. It is this genetic difference with the Slavs that explains Muscovy’s rejection of the European way of life, hatred of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Poles (that is, the Slavs in general), and a great love for the East and Asian traditions. These studies of Russian scientists must necessarily be reflected in the revision of their concepts by historians. In particular, it has long been necessary to introduce into historical science the fact that there was not one Rus', but two completely different ones: Slavic Rus' and Finnish Rus'. This clarification makes it possible to understand and explain many processes in our medieval history, which in the current interpretation still seem devoid of any meaning.

Russian surnames

Attempts by Russian scientists to study the statistics of Russian surnames initially encountered a lot of difficulties. The Central Election Commission and local election commissions flatly refused to cooperate with scientists, citing the fact that only if voter lists are kept secret can they guarantee the objectivity and integrity of elections to federal and local authorities. The criterion for including a surname in the list was very lenient: it was included if at least five bearers of this surname lived in the region for three generations. First, lists were compiled for five conditional regions - Northern, Central, Central-Western, Central-Eastern and Southern. In total, across all regions of Russia there were about 15 thousand Russian surnames, most of which were found only in one of the regions and were absent in others.

When superimposing regional lists on top of each other, scientists identified a total of 257 so-called “all-Russian surnames.” The magazine writes: “It is interesting that at the final stage of the study they decided to add surnames of residents of the Krasnodar Territory to the list of the Southern region, expecting that the predominance of Ukrainian surnames of the descendants of the Zaporozhye Cossacks evicted here by Catherine II would significantly reduce the all-Russian list. But this additional restriction reduced the list of all-Russian surnames by only 7 units - to 250. Which led to the obvious and not for everyone pleasant conclusion that Kuban is populated mainly by Russian people. Where did the Ukrainians go and were they even here at all is a big question.” And further: “The analysis of Russian surnames generally gives food for thought. Even the simplest action - searching for the names of all the country's leaders - gave an unexpected result. Only one of them was included in the list of bearers of the top 250 all-Russian surnames - Mikhail Gorbachev (158th place). The surname Brezhnev occupies 3767th place in the general list (found only in the Belgorod region of the Southern region). The surname Khrushchev is in 4248th place (found only in the Northern region, Arkhangelsk region). Chernenko took 4749th place (Southern region only). Andropov has 8939th place (Southern region only). Putin took 14,250th place (Southern region only). And Yeltsin was not included in the general list at all. Stalin's last name, Dzhugashvili, was not considered for obvious reasons. But the pseudonym Lenin was included in the regional lists at number 1421, second only to the first president of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev.” The magazine writes that the result amazed even the scientists themselves, who believed that the main difference between the bearers of southern Russian surnames was not the ability to lead a huge power, but the increased sensitivity of the skin of their fingers and palms. A scientific analysis of dermatoglyphics (papillary patterns on the skin of the palms and fingers) of Russian people showed that the complexity of the pattern (from simple arches to loops) and the accompanying sensitivity of the skin increases from north to south. “A person with simple patterns on the skin of his hands can hold a glass of hot tea in his hands without pain,” Dr. Balanovskaya clearly explained the essence of the differences. “And if there are a lot of loops, then such people make unsurpassed pickpockets.” Scientists publish a list of the 250 most common Russian surnames. What was unexpected was the fact that the most common Russian surname is not Ivanov, but Smirnov. This whole list is incorrect, it’s not worth giving, here are just the 20 most common Russian surnames: 1. Smirnov; 2. Ivanov; 3. Kuznetsov; 4. Popov; 5. Sokolov; 6. Lebedev; 7. Kozlov; 8. Novikov; 9. Morozov; 10. Petrov; 11. Volkov; 12. Soloviev; 13. Vasiliev; 14. Zaitsev; 15. Pavlov; 16. Semenov; 17. Golubev; 18. Vinogradov; 19. Bogdanov; 20. Vorobyov. All top all-Russian surnames have Bulgarian endings with -ov (-ev), plus several surnames with –in (Ilyin, Kuzmin, etc.). And among the top 250 there is not a single surname of “Eastern Slavs” (Belarusians and Ukrainians) starting with -iy, -ich, -ko. Although in Belarus the most common surnames are -iy and -ich, and in Ukraine - -ko. This also shows deep differences between the “Eastern Slavs”, for Belarusian surnames with –i and –ich are equally the most common in Poland – and not at all in Russia. The Bulgarian endings of the 250 most common Russian surnames indicate that the surnames were given by the priests of Kievan Rus, who spread Orthodoxy among its Finns in Muscovy, therefore these surnames are Bulgarian, from holy books, and not from the living Slavic language, which the Finns of Muscovy do not have was. Otherwise, it is impossible to understand why Russians do not have surnames of Belarusians living nearby (in -iy and -ich), but Bulgarian surnames - although the Bulgarians are not at all bordering Moscow, but live thousands of kilometers away from it. The widespread use of surnames with animal names is explained by Lev Uspensky in his book “Riddles of Toponymy” (Moscow, 1973) by the fact that in the Middle Ages people had two names - from their parents and from baptism, and “from their parents” it was then “fashionable” to give names animals. As he writes, then in the family the children had the names Hare, Wolf, Bear, etc. This pagan tradition was embodied in the widespread use of “animal” surnames.

About Belarusians

A special topic in this study is the genetic identity of Belarusians and Poles. This did not become the subject of attention of Russian scientists, because it is outside Russia. But it is very interesting for us. The very fact of genetic identity of Poles and Belarusians is not unexpected. The very history of our countries is confirmation of this - the main part of the ethnic group of Belarusians and Poles is not the Slavs, but the Slavicized Western Balts, but their genetic “passport” is so close to the Slavic that it would be practically difficult to find differences in genes between the Slavs and the Prussians, Masurians, Dainova , Yatvingians, etc. This is what unites the Poles and Belarusians, the descendants of the Slavicized Western Balts. This ethnic community also explains the creation of the Union State of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The famous Belarusian historian V.U. Lastovsky in “A Brief History of Belarus” (Vilno, 1910) writes that negotiations began ten times on the creation of the Union State of Belarusians and Poles: in 1401, 1413, 1438, 1451, 1499, 1501, 1563, 1564, 1566, 1567. - and ended for the eleventh time with the creation of the Union in 1569. Where does such persistence come from? Obviously, only out of awareness of ethnic community, for the ethnic group of Poles and Belarusians was created by dissolving the Western Balts into themselves. But the Czechs and Slovaks, who were also part of the first in the history of the Slavic Union of Peoples of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, no longer felt this degree of closeness, because they did not have a “Baltic component” in themselves. And there was even greater alienation among the Ukrainians, who saw little ethnic kinship in this and over time entered into complete confrontation with the Poles. The research of Russian geneticists allows us to take a completely different look at our entire history, since many political events and political preferences of the peoples of Europe are largely explained precisely by the genetics of their ethnic group - which until now has remained hidden from historians. It was genetics and the genetic kinship of ethnic groups that were the most important forces in the political processes of medieval Europe. The genetic map of peoples created by Russian scientists allows us to look at the wars and alliances of the Middle Ages from a completely different angle.

The results of research by Russian scientists about the gene pool of the Russian people will be absorbed in society for a long time, because they completely refute all our existing ideas, reducing them to the level of unscientific myths. This new knowledge must not only be understood, but rather one must get used to it. Now the concept of “Eastern Slavs” has become absolutely unscientific, the congresses of the Slavs in Minsk are unscientific, where it is not Slavs from Russia who gather, but Russian-speaking Finns from Russia, who are not genetically Slavs and have nothing to do with the Slavs. The very status of these “congresses of the Slavs” is completely discredited by Russian scientists. Based on the results of these studies, Russian scientists called the Russian people not Slavs, but Finns. The population of Eastern Ukraine is also called Finns, and the population of Western Ukraine is genetically Sarmatian. That is, the Ukrainian people are not Slavs either. The only Slavs from the “Eastern Slavs” are the Belarusians, but they are genetically identical to the Poles - which means they are not “Eastern Slavs” at all, but genetically Western Slavs. In fact, this means the geopolitical collapse of the Slavic Triangle of the “Eastern Slavs,” because the Belarusians turned out to be genetically Poles, the Russians were Finns, and the Ukrainians were Finns and Sarmatians. Of course, propaganda will continue to try to hide this fact from the population, but you can’t hide an sew in a bag. Just as you can’t shut the mouth of scientists, you can’t hide their latest genetic research. Scientific progress cannot be stopped. Therefore, the discoveries of Russian scientists are not just a scientific sensation, but a BOMB capable of undermining all currently existing foundations in the ideas of peoples. That is why the Russian magazine “Vlast” gave this fact an extremely concerned assessment: “Russian scientists have completed and are preparing for publication the first large-scale study of the gene pool of the Russian people. The publication of the results could have unpredictable consequences for Russia and the world order.” The magazine did not exaggerate.

Vadim Rostov, “Analytical newspaper “Secret Research”

Interesting article?

At London's Natural History Museum, UK, copies of the remains of the australopithecus Australopithecus sediba are exhibited. Museum visitors had the opportunity to see with their own eyes what paleoanthropologists have been heatedly arguing about since 2010.

In 2010, 2 years later, Lee Berger and his colleagues discovered the well-preserved remains of a new species of australopithecus - Australopithecus sediba, which is an intermediate link from australopithecines to humans themselves. It is likely that the australopithecines, whose skeletons were found by scientists, fell into a large pit and therefore remained virtually untouched. A total of 2 skeletons were found - a young female aged approximately 30 years, and a young individual aged 10–13 years.

Australopithecines have characteristics characteristic of both humans and chimpanzees. What makes them similar to humans are their short fingers, a similar structure to our skull, and legs adapted for walking. However, these primates had long arms, their wrists were adapted for climbing trees, and their brains were relatively small compared to the first “direct” ancestor of humans, Homo habilis.

A group of scientists led by Christian Carlson from the University of Witwatersrand (South Africa) studied the structure of the skull of a teenage Australopithecus who died at the age of 12-13 years. A scanner image of the inside of the skull showed that the brain of Australopithecus sediba was more similar to that of modern humans than to that of its closest relative, Australopithecus africanus.

Anthropologists believe that their find is much closer to the genus Homo than to australopithecines, and should supplant Homo habilis as the first representative of the genus Homo. However, not scientists agree with this.

TEST
Famous anthropologists

Executor:
Lyutoeva Marina Evgenievna
Faculty of Information Technology and Technology Group 127

Syktyvkar 2009

INTRODUCTION
Every person, as soon as he began to realize himself as an individual, was visited by the question “where did we come from?” Despite the fact that the question sounds absolutely banal, there is no single answer to it. Nevertheless, this problem - the problem of the emergence and development of man - is dealt with by the science of anthropology, which is studied by scientific anthropologists.
The main purpose of this test is to find out what the science of anthropology studies and what scientists are working on this issue.
In this work, based on our goal, we want to pay special attention to the great achievements and discoveries of famous anthropologists of the world.

SUBJECT ANTHROPOLOGY
The term “Anthropology” is of Greek origin and literally means “the science of man” (anthropos - man; logos - science). The first use of the term dates back to antiquity. Aristotle (384-322 BC) was the first to use it to designate a field of knowledge that studies primarily the spiritual side of human nature (currently psychology deals with this). With this meaning the term existed for over a millennium. It has been preserved to this day, for example, in religious knowledge (theology), in philosophy, in many humanities (for example, in art history), and partly in psychology itself. Thus, Anthropology is a field of scientific knowledge within which the fundamental problems of human existence in the natural and artificial environment are studied.
In modern science there are various options for systematizing anthropological disciplines. Anthropology includes: archaeology, ethnography, ethnology, folklore, linguistics, physical and social Anthropology. This set of anthropological disciplines is gradually expanding. It includes medical Anthropology (human psychology, human genetics), human ecology, etc. In the literature, there is an opinion that Anthropology as a field of scientific research unites Anthropology itself, or the natural history of man (including embryology, biology, anatomy, human psychophysiology); paleoethnology, or prehistory; ethnology - the science of the distribution of man on earth, his behavior and customs; sociology, which examines the relationships between people; linguistics; mythology; social geography, devoted to the impact of climate and natural landscapes on humans; demography, which presents statistics about the composition and distribution of the human population.

SYSTEMATIZATION OF ANTHROPOLOGY
Based on the delimitation of research fields, we can give the following systematization of Anthropology.
Philosophical anthropology focuses its attention on the study of the problems of human existence in the world as a whole, and seeks an answer to the question of the essence of man. It arose as a natural continuation of the search for a solution to the human problem in Western philosophy, as one of the options for its solution. “What is a person?” - the problem posed by Kant was later picked up by Scheler, who believed that in a certain sense all the central problems of philosophy can be reduced to the question: what is a person and what is his metaphysical place in the general integrity of being, the world and God. The problems of philosophical anthropology were developed by Gehlen, E. Rothacker, M. Landman, Plesner and others.
Theological anthropology examines human interaction with the world of the superreal, the divine; For this direction it is important to define a person through the prism of a religious idea. Theological anthropology is one of the areas of modern religious modernism, within the framework of which religious thinkers raise questions about the essence of man as a dual being by nature, consider the problems of human existence in the modern world, the tragic processes of the growth of lack of spirituality, based on the fundamental principles of Christian doctrine..
Cultural anthropology is a special field of scientific research that focuses on the process of relationship between man and culture. This area of ​​knowledge developed in European culture in the 19th century. and finally took shape in the last quarter of the 19th century. In foreign literature, there are different approaches to identifying the subject field of this science. The concept of cultural anthropology is used to denote a relatively narrow field concerned with the study of human customs, i.e. comparative studies of cultures and communities, the science of humanity that strives for generalizations about human behavior and the fullest possible understanding of human diversity. Cultural anthropology focuses on the problems of the genesis of man as a creator and the creation of culture in phylogenetic and ontogenetic terms. It developed in the research of Fr. Fraser, J. McLennan, J. Lebbock, Y. Lippert and domestic scientists K.D. Kavelina, M.M. Kovalevsky, M.I. Kulishera, N.N. Miklouho-Maclay, D.N. Anuchina, V.G. Bogoraza (Tan) and others.
In 20-30 years. Psychological anthropology arose in the USA, which was initially called the “culture-and-personality” direction. She became widely known thanks to the books of M. Mchd, Benedict, I. Hallowell, J. Dollard, J. Whiting, I. Child, J. Honigman, E. Hughes. The main subject was the study of how an individual acts, knows and feels in different cultural environments.
Biological (or natural science) anthropology focuses on the biology of humans as a species. To date, anthropology is understood not only as the science of the most ancient forms of man and his evolution (i.e., anthropogenesis and paleoanthropology), but most often as human anatomy, physiology, and morphology (the study of patterns of growth and variations common to all humanity). body structure).
After World War II, researchers turned to the methodology of structural-functional analysis, which led to the emergence of social anthropology (Malinowski, Radcliffe-Brown, etc.). It explores the formation of man as a social being, as well as the basic structures and institutions that contribute to the process of human socialization, and a number of other issues. The ideas of social anthropology were developed by Malinovsky, Radcliffe-Brown,
One of the leading structuralist trends in A. is cognitive A. (Goodenough, F. Lounsbury, H. Conchlin, S. Bruner, etc.), which deals with the identification and comparison of “cognitive categories” in different cultures. This direction arose in the mid-50s. in the USA as part of the development of methods of formal semantic analysis. It finally took shape in the mid-60s. Cognitive psychology is based on the idea of ​​culture as a system of symbols, as a specifically human way of cognition, organization, and mental structuring of the surrounding reality.

FAMOUS ANTHROPOLOGISTS
Mikhail Mikhailovich Gerasimov (1907 - 1970) - anthropologist, archaeologist and sculptor, Doctor of Historical Sciences. Author of a method for restoring a person’s external appearance based on skeletal remains - the so-called “Gerasimov method”.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Gerasimov was born on September 15, 1907 in St. Petersburg, in the family of a zemstvo doctor. My father was an educated man and an excellent doctor, my maternal grandfather was an artist.
He spent his childhood and youth in Irkutsk. The boy's interests were formed early, which was facilitated by his father's rich library. From a young age, he dreamed of recreating the appearance of ancient people. From the age of 13, Gerasimov studied at the anatomical museum at the Irkutsk Medical Institute, and also worked at the Museum of Local Lore. These classes laid the foundation for Gerasimov's future work in the field of facial reconstruction based on its bone base. His first experiments in the field of plastic reconstruction date back to 1927, when he made sculptures of Pithecanthropus and Neanderthal for the museum. Before the war, Gerasimov created at least 17 reconstructions of the faces of fossil people and two reconstructions of the appearance of Russian princes - Yaroslav the Wise and Andrei Bogolyubsky.
In Leningrad, the scientist worked at the Institute of the History of Material Culture and headed the restoration workshops of the Hermitage.
In Samarkand, he participated in the opening of the tomb of Timur and the Timurids in the Gur-Emir mausoleum.
In 1938, the remains of a Neanderthal boy who died at the age of 9-10 were discovered in the Teshik-Tash grotto, located in the spurs of the Gissar ridge south of Samarkand (Uzbekistan), at an altitude of about 1500 m above sea level.
Skull of a child from the Teshik-Tash grotto (Middle Paleolithic, Uzbekistan). M.M. Gerasimov completely reconstructed the appearance of the child from Teshik-Tash. The skull, he said, “is much larger and more powerful than the modern skull of a child of the same age. The size of the eyebrow exceeds the degree of its development in a modern adult. The forehead is sloping. The head is large, heavy, especially in the front part, the height is small, the torso is long. He is only 9-10 years old, but he looks older than his age. This disproportion in the size of the head and figure is combined with very strong shoulders and a peculiar stoop of the entire upper torso. Hands are very strong. The legs are short and muscular. This entire complex of features is typical of Neanderthal forms.”
Since 1944, Gerasimov lived in Moscow, worked at the Institute of the History of Material Culture, and at the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences.
Over the years of painstaking work M.M. Gerasimov studied in detail the anatomical relationship between the structure of the facial skeleton and soft tissues of the face. He developed a detailed scale of soft tissue thickness at different levels of the head and face. Gender and age differences in the distribution of these indicators were studied. The asymmetry of the soft tissues was studied, which is closely related to the asymmetry of the facial skeleton and largely determines the unique individuality of the human face. He discovered a number of patterns in the variability of the thickness of soft tissues depending on the degree of development of the skull relief. MM. Gerasimov was the first to prove that by recreating a person’s appearance from the skull, it is possible to achieve a close portrait resemblance if one is guided by a whole complex of individual morphological features of the facial skeleton.
Gerasimov is known for his works: “Basics of facial reconstruction from the skull” (1949), “Face reconstruction from the skull” (1955) and “People of the Stone Age” (1964). Based on the method he developed, he created reconstructions of many representatives of the most ancient (Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus) and ancient people (over 200 in total). Gerasimov’s works give an idea of ​​the appearance of people who lived in different territories (from France to China) in different eras.
In 1950, the Laboratory of Plastic Reconstruction was created at the Institute of Ethnography. Her work M.M. Gerasimov led for twenty years, until his death. Mikhail Mikhailovich Gerasimov died at the age of 62 in 1970.

Eric R. Wolf is an Austrian-born American anthropologist and Marxist historian. Eric Wulff was born in Vienna to a Jewish family, Arthur Georg and Maria Ossinovskaya. In 1933-1938 he lived in the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia. The dismemberment of Czechoslovakia by the Munich Treaty forced Wulff's family to flee the country to avoid anti-Semitic persecution. She first went to Great Britain (in 1938) and then to the United States of America, settling in New York.

Eric Wolf participated in World War II: he joined the 10th Mountain Division of the US Army, formed in July 1943, and fought with it on the Italian front from 1943-1945, where his interest in studying other cultures began. After the end of the war and the demobilization of a significant part of the American army, the government provided demobilized soldiers with preferences in obtaining higher education. Like many of his comrades, Wolfe took advantage of the GI Bill of Rights and enrolled at Columbia University to study anthropology.

Home to the anthropological school of Franz Boas, Columbia University was for many years the foremost center for the study of anthropology in North America. By the time Wolfe arrived at the university, Boas had already died, and his colleagues abandoned the methods he had used, which involved abandoning generalizations and creating a comprehensive picture in favor of detailed study of individual issues. The new head of the anthropology department was Julian Steward, a student of Robert Loewy and Alfred Kroeber, interested in creating a full-fledged scientific anthropology that could explain the process of development of human societies and their adaptation to environmental conditions.

Woolf was among the students whose scientific views were formed under the influence of Steward. Most of Steward's students, like Woolf, were left-wing in their political beliefs and proceeded from a materialistic view of history, which did not prevent them from fruitfully collaborating with their less politicized mentor. These included many prominent anthropologists of the second half of the 20th century, including Marvin Harris, Sidney Mintz, Morton Fried, Stanley Diamond, and Robert F. Murphy.

Wolfe's dissertation was written as part of Steward's project to study the population of Puerto Rico. Subsequently, Latin American themes played one of the most important roles in Wolfe’s work. After graduation, Wolf accepted a teaching position at the University of Michigan in Ann Anbor. Since 1971, he has worked at Lehman College and the CUNY Graduate Center. In addition to his work in Latin America, he was also active in field research in Europe.

The importance of Wolfe's work for modern anthropology is enhanced by the fact that he focused on issues of power, politics, and colonialism, while most of his colleagues moved away from these issues in the 1970s and 1980s. Wolf's most famous book - written in line with the world-system analysis of Immanuel Wallerstein and Andre Gunder Frank, “Europe and the People Without History” - from a Marxist position explains the processes due to which Western Europe overtook Western Europe during the Great Geographical Discoveries. in the economic development of other regions of the world and subordinated them to its influence. Particular attention is paid to how non-Europeans were oppressed by Western capitalism through global processes such as the slave trade or the fur trade. Debunking Eurocentrism in general and myths about the “backwardness” of non-European cultures, Woolf explains that they were not “isolated” or “frozen in time,” but were always involved in the world historical process.

At the end of his life, Wolf warned about the danger of “intellectual impoverishment” of anthropology, which abandoned field research and the connection of science with ongoing realities and problems, dealing exclusively with abstract issues of “high matters.” Eric Wolf died of cancer in 1999.

BOAS Franz (1858-1942
etc.................

Bolshekaragan people are Arkaim people.

Thanks to archaeologists, we learned a lot about the inhabitants of Arkaim and the Land of Cities. But last year, anthropological scientists gave us a real sensation. They restored the appearance of specific people buried here four thousand years ago. Until now, we could only guess what the Arkaim people looked like. Famous anthropologists Alexey Nechvaloda from Ufa and Alexander Khokhlov from Samara made a scientific reconstruction of four of our ancient fellow countrymen using the methods of the famous scientist M.M. Gerasimova.

"Princess" from Kizilsky

The first female portrait was made on the basis of the remains found in the territory of the present Kizilsky district. Chelyabinsk archaeologists have been excavating here since 2008. In time, the Kizilsky burial ground precedes Arkaim. But it is unique in that it is one of the earliest burial mounds in the Urals.

The group of archaeologists was led here by Associate Professor of the Department of Archeology of ChelSU, Candidate of Historical Sciences Tatyana Malyutina. She says:

Before this, mounds were not built over the graves. The movement of the Yamnaya tribes is considered the most ancient migration of Indo-Europeans on the territory of the European steppes up to the Altai and Yenisei. Now a mound was being built for the burial of one person...

The skeleton of a woman was discovered in one of the local mounds. Scholars debate her social status, but privately call her "princess."

Princess.

Princess's grave

The fact is that the mound is large - 22 meters in diameter. Around it there is a deep ditch three to four meters wide. In essence, it is a small fortress. Making such a structure was not an easy task. Archaeologists did not find any “equipment” in the grave of the “princess”. However, at that time the tradition of laying objects with the deceased had not yet developed. The body was only sprinkled with ocher; apparently, there was some kind of ritual associated with resurrection - ocher symbolized blood, and therefore life.

The “Princess” was about 25 years old at the time of her death. It’s hard to say what she died from. Tatyana Malyutina says that at that time a person could die even from a cold. Therefore, they lived little - few lived to be 32 years old.

With a fang on his chest

Alexandrovsky man

But on the chest of the second man, whose appearance was restored by scientists, a bear fang was discovered. A. Nechvaloda depicted it as an amulet around the neck, but this is the scientist’s assumption, not a fact. The fang could have already been placed in the grave. The man is also no more than 25 years old. His remains were found by a group of archaeologists under the leadership of Dmitry Zdanovich, candidate of historical sciences, already near Arkaim, in the Aleksandrovsky-4 burial ground. Here, under the already blurred mounds at great depths, burials with perfectly preserved skeletons were found.

Here we also find ocher. In the light of new excavations, it was presented that the burials were also left by the Yamnaya tribes, says Tatyana Malyutina. - I conventionally call all the burials near Arkaim the burials of the patriarchs of Arkaim. When they were buried, Arkaim itself did not yet exist. People had just mastered this territory, understood its meaning and planned to build a fortress.

Young "citizens"

The last two reconstructions are actually Arkaim residents. These people are younger than the first two by about 200-300 years. But the man's age is supposedly 23 years old.

The woman is a little older. She is tall - about 180 centimeters, despite the fact that the average height of the residents of Arkaim was about 170 centimeters. Their remains were found in the Bolshekaragansky burial ground, one of the most striking mounds. There are many items here: arrowheads, an adze axe, a mace, a hook. It happened that sacrificial animals were placed in the graves along with the deceased person, in some cases up to 20 carcasses, which indicates a certain prosperity. But Doctor of Historical Sciences Gennady Zdanovich is sure that there was no strict stratification of property in Arkaim. Social differentiation depended on authority, talent, gender and age. Whether such a “classless” society was the result of a rational social organization or whether it needs to be explained by more mundane reasons is difficult to say. But Professor Zdanovich always insists: Arkaim is capable of teaching us important lessons.

Same as us

However, much has already been said and written about all this. But the restored appearance of the inhabitants of the Land of Cities gives us other important information. As we see, the Arkaimites, if they were in our time now, would easily disappear into the crowd. They really are very similar to us.

Alexey Nechvaloda and Alexander Khokhlov classify the Arkaim population as the oldest Caucasoids, specifying that two Caucasoid branches are mixed here - Central European and Mediterranean. Uraloid signs are also present.

This confirms the previously known opinion of scientists that the most ancient population in the Urals was of Finno-Ugric origin (Uraloids). It existed and developed here in the singular until the Eneolithic (the era of transition from the Stone Age to the Bronze Age) and the Bronze Age. Only in the Bronze Age did the Caucasian population appear here - the “Yamniki”. They begin to mix with the Uraloid population. Moreover, women have a greater degree of Uraloidity (anthropologists say that this is even noticeable in reconstructions), while men are more Caucasian.

Anthropologists say that with the current capabilities of science (and with sufficient funds, of course), it would be easy to obtain even the genome of the inhabitants of Arkaim.

Gerasimov School of Reconstruction

In Russia, for 60 years now, there has been a whole scientific school of anthropological reconstruction of a person’s appearance based on his skull. Its founder is the outstanding scientist Mikhail Gerasimov. His technique is recognized throughout the world and is considered unique to this day, and the reconstruction is very accurate. Mikhail Mikhailovich recreated portraits of nameless ancient people, as well as famous historical characters. Among them were Yaroslav the Wise and Ivan the Terrible, and most of all the scientist himself was proud of the fact that he had recreated the appearance of Tamerlane.

The results of the work of M.M. Gerasimov's works are kept in many museums around the world, including the famous Museum of Man in Paris.

Gerasimov’s method is also used by modern criminologists in their work, which is well known to detective fans. The work begins with an analysis of the skull. Then comes the turn of graphic reconstruction of the face. The next stage is a sculptural reproduction of the head diagram. On a genuine skull, the main muscles are restored using plasticine or wax, and thick ridges are applied. Gerasimov developed a table of soft tissue thickness.

The most difficult thing is to restore the eyes, nose, mouth and especially the ears. But there is a special technique here too. For example, the cartilaginous part of the nose can be reconstructed based on the shape of the edges of the nasal opening of the skull. The height of the wings of the nose is determined by the height of the so-called conchal ridge, located at the very edge of the nasal opening. Even to restore the shape of the ears and their protrusion, there are methods.

The work ends with the creation of a sculptural bust, taking into account historical data (if any) - clothing, hairstyle, jewelry. It should be noted that a specialist involved in reconstruction must not only know the intricacies of anatomy, but also be to a large extent an artist.

Alexey Nechvaloda:

A person's skull is as individual as his face. It is the uniqueness of the skull that provides a portrait reproduction of a person’s external appearance. Each new reconstruction, whether you are working on restoring the image of a nameless person of the Bronze Age, Iron Age, or on restoring the appearance of a famous historical figure, is another opportunity to learn to “read” the skull as deeply as possible, that is, to study it enough to “remove” it as much as possible. » from it all the information about the individual characteristics of the person.

Reference:

Alexey Ivanovich NECHVALODA - anthropologist, specialist in paleoanthropology and facial reconstruction from the skull, artist, head of the anthropology department of the Ufa Museum of Natural History. Author of many printed works and a series of graphic and sculptural reconstructions of the ancient population of the Urals, Kazakhstan, Central Asia, Egypt and other regions.

Alexander Alexandrovich KHOKHLOV- Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Paleoanthropological Laboratory of the Faculty of Natural Geography of the Volga Region State Social and Humanitarian Academy.

Where do we come from? Humanity has been asking itself this question throughout the history of its existence. Probably from the time when man first developed the rudiments of reason and self-awareness. Many philosophers and great minds have tried to answer it.

Many ideas and concepts were proposed. People argued with each other, defending their point of view, finding and bringing forward new evidence and refutations. But for thousands of years they have not been able to get to the truth. Another question that followed from the previous one and went along with it was how does a person develop in a social environment? How do society and culture influence its formation and existence? By what laws does a person live and is able to live in this world?

All the questions raised above concern a person and in order to answer them, it is necessary to study oneself - a person. People have studied themselves throughout the history of their existence, but the science of man (anthropology) appeared much later in the 18th and mainly 19th centuries. Philosophers of the classical and non-classical schools (I. Kant, L. Faierbach), as well as representatives of French philosophical thought, made a great contribution to the formation of this scientific discipline. Anthropology itself in our time is divided into several directions. Since the development of this science was initially carried out by philosophers, the first direction is philosophical anthropology. This school of thought primarily dealt with the question “What is man?” " She was not interested in questions about human origins.

Their main goal was to understand the diversity of human existence. Another direction in anthropology, oddly enough, relates to the sphere of religion. Religious anthropology tries to understand the essence of man in the context of religious teaching. Another major field in anthropology is cultural anthropology. Scientists in this direction study and compare human societies, cultures, peoples, races, etc. Any culture leaves behind traces - material products, which serve as the object of study.

The study of cultures is carried out not only in a horizontal direction (by comparing existing ones), but also in a vertical direction (by studying culture at all stages of the development of history). Finally, another major area is physical anthropology. An important issue in this direction is the origin and evolution of man. When the word “anthropologist” is uttered, one first of all imagines a scientist who deals specifically with the issue of human origins.

It can be noted that anthropology is at the intersection of various fields of knowledge: from the humanities to the natural sciences. Therefore, at present, anthropology considers man as a biological being, changing over time, and at the same time, the manifestations of his biological nature are mediated by the social environment. Therefore, when conducting their research, anthropologists always take into account the influence of the environment on the formation of certain biological characteristics.

So what is an anthropologist and how do you become an anthropologist? Anthropologists often arrive at excavations. To understand how a person has changed over time, it is necessary to obtain material for analysis. Anthropologists study the external similarities and differences of populations, nationalities, and races. Anthropologists also pay attention to the constitutional characteristics of a person, the influence of the environment and genes on the formation of the constitution. It is important to note here another area of ​​activity of the anthropologist.

We also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the professions of agronomist, linguist and ecologist.

Everyone knows that using the found remains and skulls, scientists carry out reconstructions - they recreate the possible lifetime appearances of the found creatures. A huge contribution to the development of the reconstruction method was made by the Soviet scientist M. Gerasimov, whose techniques and methods are still used all over the world. This method has become popular not only among anthropologists, but also among criminologists.

Using this method, it was possible to solve a huge number of crimes and identify many found bodies and skeletons.

Pros of being an anthropologist:

The first is constant trips to excavation sites. The anthropologist does not have to sit still. It is necessary to constantly look for new finds, the search for which can be carried out in various lost corners of the world, where no human has ever set foot.

The second is the endless variety of human faces. Having direct dealings with people, an anthropologist constantly has to meet, observe and study representatives of different ethnic groups and peoples. The diversity that he encounters in his work amazes the imagination, making us think about how different we are all and at the same time how we are all the same.

Third, it's a friendly team. The famous anthropologist S. Drobyshevsky, talking about why he chose this profession, said that the anthropology department interested him because of the very friendly staff. After all, as he says, it is impossible to study a person and at the same time not love him.

Fourth, like any scientific activity in this area, there is a chance to go down in the history of science by making an incredible discovery.

Disadvantages of being an anthropologist:

The first is the low salary of anthropologists. Like any scientific activity, the work of an anthropologist is poorly paid. We have to constantly conduct active scientific, teaching and educational activities. Writing scientific articles and monographs results in a salary increase. Writing non-fiction books can also generate income. You can receive a separate fee for assisting criminologists by analyzing bone remains from a crime scene.

Secondly, there is high competition. As in any other scientific field, competition here manifests itself in the desire to make a discovery. You also have to be under a barrage of criticism when putting forward your own ideas or hypotheses.

Third, the difficulties of combining academic and family spheres. Of course, in the work of an anthropologist, combining family and work is much easier, however, constant trips to excavation sites can harm family relationships. We should also not forget that in science they remember the name of the one who first made the discovery.

The video will help you learn more about the profession: