The article is devoted to the craniological characteristics of the ancient population of the Armenian Highlands. Intra-group comparison revealed significant morphological heterogeneity of the Beniamin series. An intergroup analysis revealed that the Caucasian group shows similarities with the Scythians of Moldova, the steppes of the Black Sea region and Ukraine, the Sarmatians of the Volga-Ural region, and the Saks of Central Asia. The results indicate active migration processes in the Caucasus in the ancient era, which is reflected in the diversity of the anthropological appearance of the population.

Keywords: Armenian Highlands, Benjamin, Eurasia, the epoch of Antiquity.

Introduction

The ethnic composition of the population of Armenia (and the Caucasus as a whole) has been of interest not only to anthropologists, but also to archaeologists for many years. In the XX century, excavations of historically valuable monuments were carried out, the study of which played an important role in the study of the ethnogenesis of the peoples of the Caucasus and the Ancient East. The economic, cultural and political relations between neighboring states and the local ethnic environment have a long and complex history, and without taking them into account, it is impossible to correctly understand the overall historical development of this region.

The ancient period of the history of the Armenian people spans ten centuries (VI century BC - III century AD). The state of Urartu, which was formed on the territory of the Armenian Highlands at the beginning of the VI century BC, fell. By this time, the Armenian state had emerged. However, it was soon forced to recognize the supreme authority of the kings of the mighty Media. In 553 BC, the Median king Astyages was rebelled by his general Cyrus, the leader of the emerging Persian people, and in 550 BC, Media was subordinated to Persia. It seemed that Armenia was freed from foreign rule, especially since the Armenian king Tigran Yervanduni assisted Cyrus in his struggle to save Astyages. But, having strengthened his state, Cyrus also subjugated Armenia. Taking advantage of the struggle for the Persian throne of Gautata and Darius I, a number of countries, including Armenia, revolted. However, the Armenian struggle for independence was not crowned with success. After the suppression of the revolt by Darius I, Armenia, divided into two satrapies, remained under the rule of the Achaemenids until the collapse of their great power in 331 BC.

Cimmerians and Scythians in Transcaucasia

The Cimmerians were one of the nomadic (or semi-nomadic) tribes of the Northern Black Sea region, most likely related to the Iranian and possibly Thracian ones, which in the eighth century BC penetrated the Armenian Highlands and Asia Minor. A tempting object for nomad raids, of course, were

page 138
areas of ancient civilizations, from which various cultural inventions have long reached the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region. The Cimmerian army was a serious threat to the ancient Eastern slave states. By completely plundering the occupied territory, it terrified the inhabitants of neighboring countries. The long-term success of a small group of nomads can only be explained by assuming that they were joined by some semi-nomadic pastoral tribes that had previously lived in Transcaucasia and Asia Minor on the periphery of large states. After the Cimmerians, another nomadic Iranian - speaking tribe or group of tribes, the Scythians, invaded Transcaucasia. Initially, this name belonged to a tribe that lived east of the lower Volga, and then penetrated to its western bank and the North Caucasus. From here, the Scythians rushed to the territory of Azerbaijan through the Derbent Pass. Here they settled and made trips to various parts of the Armenian Highlands and Near East. The role of the Scythian invasion in the history of both Transcaucasia (and Near East Asia) and Eastern Europe was significant. It led to the establishment of close ties between the Black Sea region and the Ancient East. It is quite possible that in Transcaucasia there was a merger of the local population, who spoke Caucasian languages, with the newcomers-Scythians, and elements of the local culture were intertwined with Scythian ones (Piotrovsky, 1959). The Scythian invasion, shaking the forces of the old powers of the East, contributed to their destruction, which, in turn, prepared the ground for the creation of new ones-Persian and Median.

Material and methods

The ancient burial ground is located in the Akhuryanovsky district near the village of Veniamin. One of the excavations, laid on the top of the central hill, revealed the walls of a large building, presumably a palace. Judging by the location of the palace and religious complex with outbuildings below (under the hill), this is the mansion of the ruler of Shirak, and the settlement was the administrative center of the region (Ter-Martirosov, 1993). At the end of the second century BC, the palace was destroyed as a result of a military invasion of nomads [Ter-Martirosov, 1999, p. 38] and this territory became part of the necropolis.

In the course of excavations in 1989-1997 (archeologists: F. I. Ter-Martirosov, A. A. Khachatryan, L. G. Yeganyan), 218 burials were uncovered, of which two cenotaphs, three completely and four partially destroyed, two burials are paired, the rest are single. The main type of burial in Benjamin is boxes made of stone slabs. There are also pitcher, ground and pit burials. There are especially many pitcher cases with children and young people buried (pogr. 138, 182, 183, etc.). Most of the dead were laid with their heads facing north-east, in an elongated position (both on their backs, and on their right or left sides), but other burial methods are also observed (Yeganyan, 2010). In paired burials, the dead were laid in a crouched position facing each other (pogr. 195, 207). Analysis of the burial inventory indicates that the burial ground consists mainly of ordinary burials. Most of them are non-antique, although sometimes there are copper beads, earrings, needles, processed stones, and bone musical instruments [Ibid.].

As a result of excavations at the Beniamin burial ground, a collection of 95 adult (65 female, 30 male) and 48 children's skulls was obtained. 30 (4 adults and 26 children) had artificial deformities of their skulls, and 6 had teeth (Khudaverdyan, 2011b). Osteological materials from the Beniamin burial ground also show various pathological changes [Khudaverdyan, 2010, 2011a]. The present work is devoted to the study of skulls from this burial ground and their comparison with synchronous and earlier ones from the Caucasus, Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

86 craniological series were selected for comparative analysis (Table 1). 17 of them were from the Caucasus (N 1-17), 19 - from Central Asia (N 18 - 34, 37, 38), 32 - from the Volga-Ural region (N 35, 36, 39-50, 52 - 65, 83 - 86), 3 - from the Don region (N 51, 66, 80), 10 - from Ukraine and the Dnieper region (N 67, 68, 72 - 79), 2 - from the Baltic States (N 81, 82), 3-from Moldova (N 69-71). The skulls were studied in full (three diameters of the cranium, width of the forehead, width and height of the face, nose and orbit, nasomalar and zygomaxillary angles, simotic index and angle of protrusion of the nose). Craniological data were subjected to canonical analysis. The groups were compared in pairs using the generalized Mahalanobis distance adjusted for abundance (Rightmire, 1969). Statistical programs of V. E. Deryabin ("Kanoklass") and A. G. Kozintsev and B. A. Kozintsev were used.

Results and discussion

Skulls from the Beniamin burial ground (without deformed ones) have large longitudinal, medium transverse and high-altitude diameters, a dolichocranial brain box with a moderately developed frontal relief. The face is medium-wide and medium-high, with an average horizontal profile. The orbits are medium-high, the width is small for men, and medium for women. All the main parameters of the lower jaw and the angle of the branch are characterized by average values in both the male and female samples (Table 2).

page 139
Table 1. Craniological series used for intergroup analysis

N n/a

Series

Era

A source

1

2

3

4

1

Veniamin

II-III centuries AD

[Khudaverdyan, 1996, 2000]

2

Benjamin I

II-III centuries AD

The same thing

3

Benjamin II

II-III centuries AD

"

4

Shirakawan

II-III centuries AD

[Palikyan, 1990]

5

Karchakhpyur

II century BC-I century AD

The same thing

6

Garni

I-II centuries AD

[Alekseev, 1974]

7

Samtavro I

II-III centuries AD

[Abdushelishvili, 1978a]

8

Samtavro II

II-III centuries AD

[Abdushelishvili, 1978b]

9

Zhinvali

II-III centuries AD

[Abdushelishvili, 1978a, b]

10

Homereti

II-III centuries AD

The same thing

11

Abelia

II-III centuries AD

"

12

Mingechaur

II-VI centuries AD

[Kasimova, 1960]

13

Mingechaur buried in a crouched position

II-VI centuries AD

The same thing

14

Mingechaur, log burials

II-VI centuries AD

"

15

Mingechaur, elongated bones

I century AD

"

16

Mingechaur, pitcher burials

I century AD

"

17

North Caucasus, total series

I century AD

[Alekseev, 1974]

18

Tumek-Kichijik

V century BC-IV century AD

[Ginzburg, Trofimova, 1972]

19

Chirik-Rabatskaya

IV century BC-II century AD

The same thing

20

Asar Tomb

IV century BC-II century AD

"

21

Tagisken

IV century BC-II century AD

"

22

Uydarak

I-III centuries AD

"

23

Gur-Miron

II century BC-I century AD

"

24

Isfar district

I-III centuries AD

"

25

Aruk-Tau

I century AD

"

26

Meshreti-Ottoman

II-III centuries AD

"

27

Tarymskaya Street

II-III centuries AD

"

28

Kancha-Kala

I century AD

"

29

Tuz-Gyr

I century AD

"

30

West Turkmenistan, total series

I century AD

"

31

Kazybaba

IV-V centuries AD

[Bagdasarova, 2000]

32

Sakar-Chaga I, collective multi-act burial sites

III-V centuries AD

[Yablonsky, 2000]

33

West Kazakhstan, total series

IV-VI centuries AD

[Ginzburg, Trofimova, 1972]

34

West Kazakhstan, total series

I-IV centuries AD

The same thing

35

Lower Volga region, total series

III-IV centuries AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

36

Old Kiosks

I-II centuries AD

[Akimova, 1968]

37

Kara-Both

I-II centuries AD

[Ginzburg, Firstein, 1958]

38

Kalmykova

I-II centuries AD

The same thing

39

Berezhnovka II

I-II centuries AD

[Firstein, 1970]

40

Kalinovka

I-II centuries AD

[Ginzburg, 1959]

41

Bykovo

I-II centuries AD

[Glazkova, Chtetsov, 1960]

42

Upper Balykley

I-II centuries AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

page 140
End of Table 1

1

2

3

4

43

Verkhnepogromnoye

I-II centuries AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

44

Kilyakova

I-II centuries AD

The same thing

45

Bow Curve

I-II centuries AD

"

46

Oxbow

I-II centuries AD

"

47

Batayevka (mound 1)

I-II centuries AD

[Debets, 1936]

48

Stepnoy IV (mound 1)

I-II centuries AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

49

Pervomaisky

I-II centuries AD

The same thing

50

Ternovsky

I-II centuries AD

"

51

Manych-Sal

I-II centuries AD

[Batieva, 1992]

52

Berezhkovka I

I - first half of the second century AD

[Firstein, 1970]

53

Berezhkovka II

I - first half of the second century AD

The same thing

54

Politotdelskoe

I - first half of the second century AD

[Glazkova, Chtetsov, 1960]

55

Bykovo

I - first half of the second century AD

The same thing

56

Kalinovka-1

I - first half of the second century AD

[Ginzburg, 1959]

57

Kalinovka-2

I - first half of the second century AD

The same thing

58

Kuzin

I - first half of the second century AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

59

Oxbow

I - first half of the second century AD

The same thing

60

Bow Curve

I - first half of the second century AD

"

61

Volgo-Chograi

I - first half of the second century AD

"

62

Evdyk

I - first half of the second century AD

"

63

Pervomaisky

I - first half of the second century AD

"

64

Zhutovo

I - first half of the second century AD

"

65

Ternovsky

I - first half of the second century AD

"

66

Manych-Sal

I - first half of the second century AD

[Batieva, 1992]

67

Dnepropetrovsk, total series

I - first half of the second century AD

[Konduktorova, 1956]

68

Zaporozhye, total series

I - first half of the second century AD

The same thing

69

Budesti

IV-III centuries BC

[Velikanova, 1975]

70

Malaesti

IV-III centuries BC

The same thing

71

Nikolaevka

I century AD

"

72

Steppes of the Black Sea region, total series

I century AD

[Konduktorova, 1972]

73

Sredny Dnipro, total series

I century AD

The same thing

74

Naples

I century AD

"

75

Zolotaya Balka

I century AD

"

76

Ukraine, total series

I century AD

"

77

Nikolaevka-Kazatskoe

I century AD

[Konduktorova, 1979]

78
Population of the European Bosporus
III century BC-IV century AD
[Gerasimova, Rud,
and Yablonsky, 1987]

79

Population of the Asian Bosporus

III century BC-IV century AD

The same thing

80

Tanais

VI-V centuries BC

"

81

Aukstayty

II-IV centuries AD

[Denisova, 1975]

82

Flutes

II-IV centuries AD

The same thing

83

Bogodushansky District

I-II centuries AD

[Balabanova, 2000]

84

Red October

I-II centuries AD

The same thing

85

Verkhne Pogromnoye

I-II centuries AD

"

86

Krepinski

I - first half of the second century AD

"

page 141
Table 2. Average sizes and indexes of skulls from the Beniamin burial ground

page 142
End of Table 2

A significant part of the empirical coefficients of sexual dimorphism of the main sizes and indicators fit within the standard limits. Therefore, male and female skulls do not differ in general morphology. When comparing empirical square deviations with standard ones (according to 86 signs and indicators), increased variability was noted in 31 cases in the male sample, and in 34 cases in the female sample. In male skulls, the greatest range of variability is found in the longitudinal and high-altitude diameters, angles of horizontal profiling of the face and protrusions of the nasal bones, simotic height, as well as those indices in which these linear parameters appear. The reliability of the above discrepancies was estimated from the F-distribution tables (Lakin, 1980), where confirmation was found for most of the features. An identical pattern is observed in the female sample [Khudaverdyan, 2000, Table 7].

Data from the Beniamin series show significant variations in dacrial and simotic dimensions, angles of horizontal and vertical profiling, and protrusion of the nasal bones. It is necessary to note a certain "weakening" of the signs of Europeoid appearance: a more moderate profiling of the upper facial region; on several skulls, a decrease in the angle of protrusion of the nasal bones. In this connection, the results of comparing the empirical square deviations with the standard ones of the most chronologically and geographically close series of skulls from the Samtavro and Mingechaur burial grounds are very interesting.

page 143
The variability of the latter has a different character. Only in terms of simotic height, the variations in all three series were similar [Ibid., Tables 8, 9].

The heterogeneity of the Beniamin group is also indicated by the results of the analysis of the correlation coefficients of features. In the male sample, a high and significant coefficient (0.921) was obtained for the simotic height and longitudinal diameter. Significant positive correlations were also found for palate length (0.784), simotic width (0.642), simotic index (0.795), dacrial width (0.631), and palate width (0.625). The zygomaxillary angle correlates with the height diameter (0.843), the width of the occiput (0.749), the full (0.875) and upper (0.711) face heights, and the nasomalar angle (0.684). In the female sample, a high and significant coefficient (0.667) was obtained for the nasomalar angle and height diameter. A positive correlation is observed in the upper width of the face with height diameters (0.762 and 0.734), length of the base of the face (0.575), nasomalar angle (0.646). The correlation coefficients of the zygomaxillary angle with the nose width (0.585) and the orbital height (0.578) significantly deviate from those in homogeneous groups (Efimova, 1991). There is a definite correlation between the protrusion of the nasal bones and some features of the facial skeleton. Thus, a larger protrusion of the nose is associated with a greater height of the face and width of the cheekbones and smaller values of the zygomaxillary and nasomalar angles. In the female sample, the degree of vertical facial profiling is inversely related to the transverse diameter of the skull (-0.259), nasomalar and zygomaxillary angles (-0.259 and -0.269), and weakly directly related to the width of the face (0.046). Based on this, it can be assumed that mesognathity is characteristic of skulls with a weakly profiled face in the horizontal plane, while skulls with the opposite set of features tend to be orthognathous.

A detailed analysis of the intra-group structure was carried out by the principal component method (Table 3). Two morphological types were identified. The first one is dolichocranial, low-headed, medium-broad-faced, with some weakening of horizontal profiling (Veniamin I). The second one is also dolichocrane, the ratio of the height diameter to the other two

Table 3. Average size of skulls of groups I and II from the Beniamin burial ground

page 144
does not exceed the average size; the face is medium-wide and medium-high, strongly profiled in the horizontal plane (Benjamin II). Female skulls from Veniamin are similar to male skulls in terms of a set of characteristics and variability parameters. When comparing empirical square deviations with standard ones (for 21 attributes), increased variability was observed in the first group in eight cases for men, in nine cases for women, and in nine and eight cases for the second group, respectively [Khudaverdyan, 2000, Table 18]. The applied analysis of the characteristics by which the selected morphovariants are differentiated justifies itself and allows us to consider the conclusion about the heterogeneity of the population that left the Beniamin burial ground as a natural one.

The canonical analysis included 81 series of male skulls from the territory of Eurasia. For their differentiation in the first vector (KB I), the transverse diameter of the cranium and the width of the orbit are most significant, in the second (KB II) - the height of the orbit and the simotic index, in the third (KB III) - the height of the nose, face and skull, as well as the angle of protrusion of the nasal bones (Table 4).

Given the nature of the relationship of features in KB I (reflects 31.8% of variability), it can be argued that high values of coordinates correspond to groups with large values of the width of the skull and orbit. Samples from the Aral Sea region (Uidarak, Asar tomb, Tagisken) and the Volga-Ural region (Evdyk (I - first half of the second century AD), Verkhnepogromnoye, Starye Kiishki (early Sarmatians)) have the highest values. In the field of negative values, series from Transcaucasia (Zhinvali, Shirakavan, Karchakhpyur), Central Asia (Kancha-Kala), and the Middle Dnieper (Scythians in total) are concentrated.

In KB II (reflects 13.4 % of the variability), there is a high correlation of the simotic index (negative) with the orbital height (positive). The maximum coordinate values are found in Central Asia (Kancha-Kala, Tagisken, Meshreti-Takhta), the Armenian Highlands (Veniamin I), and the Volga-Ural region (Batayevka (mound 1), Bykovo). In the field of negative values, series from the Baltic States (Aukshtaity, Zhemeyty), the Volga-Ural region (Stepnoy IV (mound 1), Kilyakova, Ternovsky, Krivaya Luka, Staritsa), Turkmenistan (Tumek-Kichijik), and Georgia (Zhinvali, Abelia) are localized.

In KB III (reflects 10.3% of variability), there is a high correlation between the height of the nose and skull (positive) with the angle of protrusion of the nasal bones and the height of the face (negative). The maximum coordinate values are typical for representatives of Central Asia (Kancha-Kala), Azerbaijan (Mingechaur, log burials), the Volga-Ural region (Evdyk), and Moldova (Malaesti).

Then the groups were compared in pairs using the generalized Mahalanobis distance.-

See Table 4. Elements of the first three canonical vectors

Note. Statistically significant results are highlighted.

page 145
1). Groups from the Armenian Highlands (Veniamin, Veniamin II) were found to be in the same cluster as the Scythians of the Zolotaya Balka, Naples, the Lower Dnieper region (Nikolaevka-Kazatskoye), the steppes of the Black Sea region, and the Sarmatians of the Ferghana Valley (Isfara region), and the Manych-Salsky interfluve (I-II c. AD), the Volga-Ural region (Kuzin). Cluster analysis revealed the similarity of the Transcaucasian groups (Shirakavan, Karchakhpyur, Samtavro I) with the Scythians of the Middle Dnieper and Moldova (Nikolaevka). Earlier, we noted the proximity of the craniological series from Nikolaevka to the second group from Veniamin (Khudaverdyan, 2000). A sample from Samtavro II reveals parallels with representatives of the Baltic States (Auksteites). A separate cluster includes series from Transcaucasia (Homereti, Mingechaur, with the exception of those buried in a crouched position) and Moldova (Budesti, Malaesti).

The closest relations of the group from Gomereti (Georgia) with Sarmatians from the Volga-Ural region (Ternovsky (0.022), Volgo-Chograi (-0.277), Pervomaisky (0.468)) and Scythians of the Black Sea steppes (-0.033) were revealed. This group is also taxonomically close to the population of the Baltic States (Zhemeyty - 0.444), Moldova (Budesti - 0.650), the European Bosporus (0.971), and Western Kazakhstan (Sauromats - 0.981). One sample from Mingechaur (log burials) shows parallels with the series from Moldova (Budesti - 0.331), the other (elongated bones) - with the second group from Veniamin (0.852), and those buried in a crouched position were in the same cluster with Sarmatians from the Volga-Ural region (Pervomaisky, Upper Balyklei, Ternovsky), They are also close to the early Sarmatians buried in the burial grounds of Batayevka (mound 1 - 0,746) and Berezhnovka II (-0,818).

The female KB I series (reflecting 35.7% of intergroup variability) is distinguished by the shape of the skull (see Table 4). The positive values were Saka and Sarmatian groups from Central Asia, Sauromatian from Western Kazakhstan, Sarmatian from the Volga-Ural region and Ukraine; the negative values were samples from Transcaucasia, the Lower Don, from Ukraine, Moldova and the Baltic States. The maximum positive coordinate values are found in the series from Central Asia (Aruk-Tau) and the Volga-Ural region (Starye Kiishki, Berezhnovka II, Pervomaisky, Bogodushansky Erik), and negative values are found in Georgia (Samtavro I, Abelia).

KB II (reflects 11.8 % of the total variability) has the highest correlation of the orbit width (negative) with the height and width of the face (positive). Sarmatians from the Volga-Ural region (Politotdelskoye), Dnepropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, the second group from Veniamin are characterized by the maximum positive coordinate values, while those buried in the Samtavro II burial ground in Georgia and Saks from the Volga - Ural region (Krepinsky) are characterized by negative coordinates.

In KB III (reflects more than 9 % of the variability), there is a very high correlation of the angle of protrusion of the nasal bones (negative) with the simotic index (positive). The Sarmatian samples from the Volga-Ural region (Krasny Oktyabr, Verkhne Pogromnoye) have the maximum positive coordinate values, the Sarmatian samples from the territory of Georgia (Abelia) are negative, and the early Sarmatian samples from the Volga - Ural region (Kalmykova, Bykovo, Krivaya Luka) and Sauromatian samples from the Aral Sea region (Kazybaba) are minimal, respectively.

The results of cluster analysis of female series based on the Mahalanobis distance matrix are shown in Figure 2. Characteristics of female samples

Figure 1. Dendrogram of clustering of 81 male craniological series (based on the sum of 14 features).

Serial numbers in accordance with Table 1.

page 146

2. Dendrogram of clustering of 62 female craniological series (by the sum of 14 features).

Serial numbers in accordance with Table 1.

from Transcaucasia (Veniamin, Veniamin II, Mingechaur (II-VI centuries AD and elongated bones)) They are located compactly around a single morphological complex, which suggests that these groups are dominated by the same anthropological type. Taxonomically similar to them are the series from Moldova (Nikolaevka) and the Volga-Ural region (Staritsa, early Sarmatians). The Scythians of the Black Sea steppes are most similar to the Beniamin group (0.470), and those buried in the Sakar - Chaga I (-0.001) and Gur-Miron (0.113) burials in Central Asia are most similar to the Mingechaur group (elongated bones). These data are consistent with the findings of archaeologists (Ter-Martirosov, 1999).

Craniological materials of the European Bosporus show a general similarity with the Garnian series. Groups from Moldova (Malaesti), from the Middle Dnieper (Scythians) and the Samtavro I series from Georgia were included in the same subcluster. The craniological materials of the Budesti and Tanais burial grounds are similar to them. The parallels of the Beniamin first group with the Aukstein series are revealed. Another line of comparison reveals analogies between the craniological materials of Samtavro II, Mingechaur (pitcher burials) and Abelia. As you can see, men and women generally have the same connections.

We did not set out to give a complete picture of the relationship between different ethnic groups, which is certainly important, but only studied some migration flows in the Caucasus. Scythians, Sarmatians, and Cimmerians often made military raids in the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia. Information about episodic infiltrations of this kind is contained in the ancient (Strabo. XI, V, 8) and ancient Armenian sources (Khorenatsi, 1893) covering the historical events of the period under consideration. During the movement of nomadic tribes, they interacted with local groups. Statistical analysis reveals different directions of anthropological connections. According to the morphological features of the skulls, the ancient population of the Armenian Highlands is similar to the Scythians of Moldova, the steppes of the Black Sea region and Ukraine, the Sarmatians of the Volga-Ural region and the Saks of Central Asia. Interpretation of dendrograms cannot claim to be an exhaustive reconstruction of the extremely complex system of genetic connections of this population. The craniological materials of the ancient period from the territory of Transcaucasia show modifications of the dolichocrane type with a medium-wide, sharply profiled face and a strongly protruding nose. Female skulls (in particular, from the Beniamin burial ground) tend to have a more moderate protrusion of the nasal bones with some weakening of the horizontal profiling. Probably, it was the norm for Transcaucasian men to marry women from other tribes, or the newcomers entered into marital relations with local residents. This situation led to an ethnic and anthropological one.

page 147
diversity of the population. We see that the study of anthropological material is important for solving many specific historical issues, in particular, the ethnic history of the Caucasus.

List of literature

Abdushelishvili M. G. Anthropology of the Caucasus population in the Early Antique and Hellenistic period. Tbilisi: Metsniereba Publ., 1978a, 111 p. (in Russian).

Abdushelishvili M. G. Anthropology of the Caucasian population in the Late Antique period. - Tbilisi: Metsniereba, 1978b. - 309 p. (in Russian).

Akimova M. S. Anthropology of the ancient population of the Urals. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1968, 119 p. (in Russian)

Alekseev V. P. Proiskhozhdenie narodov Kavkaza [The origin of the peoples of the Caucasus], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1974, 317 p.

Bagdasarova N. A. Sauromaty yugo-zapadnogo Priaral'ya po materialam mogilnika Kazybaba [Sauromats of the South-Western Aral Sea region based on the materials of the Kazybab burial ground]. Etnicheskaya antropologiya Srednoi Azii, Moscow: Stary Sad, 2000, Issue 2: Anthropologicheskie i etnograficheskie informatsii o naselenii Srednoi Azii, pp. 78-112.

Balabanova M. A. Anthropology of the ancient population of the Southern Urals and Lower Volga region: Early Iron Age, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2000, 133 p.

Batieva E. F. Skulls from mounds between the Manych and Sala rivers (Sarmatian time) / / Ilyukov L. S., Vlaskin M. V. Sarmatians between the Manych and Sala rivers. Rostov-on-Don: Rostov State University Publ., 1992, pp. 262-271.

Velikanova M. S. Paleoanthropology of the Prut-Dniester interfluve, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1975, 283 p.

Gerasimova M. M., Rud ' N. N., Yablonsky L. T. Anthropology of the ancient and medieval population of Eastern Europe. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1987, 253 p.

Ginzburg V. V. Etnicheskie svyazi drevnogo naseleniya Volgogradskogo Zavolzhya [Ethnic relations of the ancient population of the Volgograd Zavolzhye].

Ginzburg V. V., Trofimova T. A. Paleoanthropology of Central Asia, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1972, 372 p.

Ginzburg, V. V. and Firshtein, B. V., Materials on the anthropology of the ancient population of Western Kazakhstan, Sb. MAE, 1958, vol. 18, pp. 390-427.

Glazkova N. M., Chtetsov V. P. Paleoanthropological materials of the Lower Volga detachment of the Stalingrad expedition / / MIA. - 1960. - N 78. - pp. 285-292.

Debets G. F. Materials on paleoanthropology of the USSR: the Lower Volga region. Zhurnal, 1936, No. 1, pp. 65-81.

Anthropology of the ancient Balts. Riga: Zinatne Publ., 1975, 403 p.

Yeganyan L. G. Archaeological and historical-ethnographic studies of Chirac. Yerevan: Gyumri Publ., 2010, 210 p. (in Russian) (in Russian).

Efimova S. G. Paleoanthropology of the Volga region and the Urals. Moscow: Moscow State University Press, 1991, 95 p. (in Russian)

Kasimova R. M. Anthropological study of skulls from Mingechaur. Baku: Academy of Sciences of the AzSSR, 1960, 133 p.

Skul'pa iz vovnigskikh pozdneneoliticheskikh mogilnikov [Skulls from the Vovnig Late Neolithic burial grounds]. Kratkieye soobshcheniya Inti-ta arkheologii AN USSSR, 1956, issue 6, pp. 68-71.

Konduktorova T. S. Antropologiya drevnego naseleniya Ukrainy (I thous. b.c. - sredina I thous. a. d.) [Anthropology of the ancient population of Ukraine (I thous. b.c.-mid I thous. a. d.)]. state University, 1972, 155 p. (in Russian)

Konduktorova T. S. Physical type of people of the Lower Dnieper region at the turn of our era (based on the materials of the Nikolaevka-Kazatskoe burial ground). - Moscow: Nauka, 1979. - 127 p.

Lakin G. F. Biometriya [Biometrics], Moscow: Higher School of Economics, 1980, 293 p.

Palikyan, A. K., New paleoanthropological materials from the territory of Armenia,Biol. Armenia. -1990. - N 4 (43). - P. 296-300.

Piotrovsky B. B. The Kingdom of Van (Urartu). - M.: East. lit., 1959. - 284 p.

F. Ter-Martirosov. Monuments of classical antiquity in Armenia / / Vestn. Yerevan. un-ta. Societies. sciences. -1993. - N2. - p. 59-65.

Ter-Martirosov F. Shirak in the era of classical antiquity / / Shirak Center for Armenian Studies. 1999, Issue 9, pp. 32-46.

Firshtein B. V. Sarmatians of the Lower Volga region in anthropological coverage // Toth T. A., Firshtein B. V. Antropologicheskie dannye k voprosu o velikom perezhenii narodov: Avary i sarmatiy [Anthropological data on the Great migration of peoples: Avars and Sarmatians].

Khorenatsi M. Istoriya Armenii: Novyi perevod I. O. Emin (s primchaniyami i prikladeniyami) [History of Armenia: A new translation by I. O. Emin (with appendices and appendices)].], 1893. - 323 p.

Khudaverdyan A. Yu. Paleoanthropology of the Beniamin burial ground of the epoch of antiquity. "Biol. zhurnal. Armenia". - Yerevan, 1996. - 22 p. - Dept. in ArmNIINTI 15.04.96, N68 Ar 96.

Khudaverdyan A. Y. Population of the Armenian Highlands in the ancient era (according to the anthropological data of the Beniamin burial ground). Yerevan: Tigran Mets Publ., 2000, 140 p.

Yablonsky L. T. Kraniologicheskie materialy iz sklepov Prisarykamyshskogo mogilnika Sakar-Chaga I (V-III vv. B.C.) [Craniological materials from the crypts of the Prisarykamysh burial ground Sakar-Chaga I (V-III vv. B.C.)]. Antropologicheskie i etnograficheskie informatsii o naselenii Srednoi Azii [Anthropological and ethnographic data on the population of Central Asia], Moscow: Stary Sad, 2000, pp. 47-77.

Khudaverdyan A. Pattern of disease in three 1st century ВС - 3rd century AD burials from Beniamin, Vardbakh and the Black Fortress I, Shiraksky plateau (Armenia) // J. of Paleopathology (Italy). - 2010. - Vol. 22. - P. 15 - 41.

Khudaverdyan A.Y. Unusual occipital condyles and cranio vertebral anomalies of the skulls burials Late Antiquity period (1st century ВС - 3rd century AD) from Armenia // Europ. J. ofAnatomy (Spanish). - 2011a. - N 15 (3). - P. 162 - 175.

Khudaverdyan A. Artificial modification of skulls and teeth from ancient burials in Armenia // Anthropos (Switzerland). -2011b. - Vol. 106, N2. - P. 602 - 609.

Rightmire G.P. On the computation of Mahalanobis' generalized distance (D2) // Am. J. of Phys. Anthropol. - 1969. -Vol. 30, N1. - P. 157 - 160.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 06.12.11. The final version was published on 03.04.12.

page 148

© elibrary.fr

Permanent link to this publication:

https://elibrary.fr/m/articles/view/ARMENIA-IN-THE-ANTHROPOHISTORICAL-SPACE-OF-EURASIA-IN-THE-ERA-OF-ANTIQUITY