The travelling of the historians in a maze of transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages has been going on already more than a thousand and a half years. From that point of a maze, in which we now have appeared, the special perspective of vision of this period has even the symbolical title - THE GREAT MIGRATION OF PEOPLES.

The phenomenon of the Great Migration always attracted attention of a broad circle of the researchers. Its also impossible to overestimate the scientific interest to this phenomenon in the end of XX c. The Change of pharadygms - in such a way it would be possible to describe a process in a modem science concerning the Great Migration of the peoples, as well as the concepts barbarians, the barbarian world, ethnic space, ethnonym. If to judge on world historiography it becomes evident, that in the present moment in the researches, devoted to the migration, there are more problems, than answers. But the first approach to it already reveals unproductiveness of the traditional vision and first of all in the sphere of interpretation of a given phenomenon. On the one hand, as the historical theme and the part of historiography The Great Migration of the peoples has come into a research context mainly of late-Roman, partly of early-Byzantine works, and also into investigations of medievalists. Such severance and traditional location of this theme for a long time have displaced it on the margins of historical researches. It expressed in stagnation and unilateral explanation of the processes of the Migration, in a contraction of its chronological frames, in the creation of the simplified model of this phenomenon. On the other hand, the basis of the Great Migration reveals itself in the interaction of the barbarian world and civilization. However, an extreme complexity and internal inconsistency of this process becomes more and more obvious.

Nowadays Roman civilization and barbarian world are considered to be closely connected with each other as links of the common world system, with peoples being at different levels of historical development. The interaction of the barbarian world and civilization includes military, political, diplomatic, trade, religious and other contacts and influences reflecting complicated, casual, spontaneous, and as a rule, indirect character of the actual relations, which generated these contacts and influences. Features of interaction are determined also by ethnic specificity of the barbarian world.

The system study of the Great Migration of the peoples allows, in my opinion, to define it as a special period of historical development, when on considerable historical space (any more Antiquity, but not yet Middle Ages), limited by concrete chronological frames (H-VΠ cc.) and a certain territory (Europe, Asia, Africa), the interaction of barbarity and civilization has achieved the most intensive phase. The result of this interaction was evident in the appearance of a new (medieval) civilization.

As a chronological clip between Antiquity and the Middle Ages, the Great Migration of the peoples is divided into three stages. The first one - German (-IV cc.), embraces period from Marcomann wars up to the Adrianopol battle. At this stage of the Migration the processes of ethnic consolidation and differentiations were liven up in the world of barbarian tribes. Majority of the tribes have them almost simultaneously: but in some cases ethnic sep

aration and isolation dominated, in others - the decisive force was expressed in integration According to the specificity of the period tribes frequently were gathered in a union in a violent way. Some of them consolidated in a new, large tribes: the Alamanns to the south from Main, the Francs on Lower Rhine, the Saxi on Lower Elba, the Vandales in Pannonia, the Goths to the north from a mouth of Danube. These large tribes covered and inspected huge territories, waged among themselves the wars for a conquest of a better lands.

Destinies of a large tribes have developed differently and it is extremely evident as far as an example of the Germans is concerned. Alongside with this phenomenon, on extensive spaces of Barbaricum there were transitional, contact zones, where the merging or active interaction of the tribes took place. 1n this period in their overwhelming majority tribes constantly or periodically interact with each other, move on a new territories, occasionally expanding the area of dwelling, and sometimes being displaced by more forcible competitors. Quite often mighty and prospering tribes disintegrate and practically vanish, and a small unknown group becomes the center of unification of several tribes.

The second stage of the Great Migration of the peoples - Hunnic (1V-V cc.), covers period between the Adrianopol battle (378) and the battle on Katalaun fields (451). At this stage of the Migration the European Barbaricum has joined numerous nomadic tribes of the steps near the Volga and the Caspian sea. The hunnic presence in the European Barbaricum livened up the whole space of migration, stimulating mobility of the Germans both in the beginning of a mass resettlements in the Empire in 376, and as well shortly before of fallings without roar of the Western Roman Empire in 476. The Hunnic emerging on the Danube has finally destroyed a system of the buffer barbarian states on the Rhine and the Danube borders, promoting to the ethnopolitical consolidation of German tribes and to a rather fast appearance of barbarian kingdoms within the limits of the Roman Empire. The resettlement and moving of the Germans on the Roman territory was being under a fixed control of the Empire. Between the Adrianopol battle and falling of the Western Roman empire the main mass of the German tribes has gone through the brightest and dramatic pages of their history. On Hunnic stage of the Migration, when the main mass of migrants has passed from migrations to settlements and the Roman provinces appeared to be occupied by the tribes, which were far from each other by origin, the moving was accompanied by intensive ethnic processes.

The interaction of the tribes, which were not connected by relationship, probably, had a complicated character. 1t is possible to trace only eventual results of the processes, which have been going on not the only century. The East-German tribes after removing on the territory of the Empire were dispersed in the Roman social environment. They did not manage to consolidate ethnically, for their integration developed on polyethnic basis. The Roman social environment has swallowed also large West-German tribes, in spite of the fact that the level of their consolidation was higher. The part of German tribes, not yielding the temptation of the migrations, has remained on their traditional lands and was able even mixing up and being integrated, to finish the process of formation of nationality.

The third stage of the Great Migration of the peoples - Slavic (VI-VΠ cc.), is connected with the movement of Slavic tribes across the Eastern, South-Eastern and Central Europe. The main streams of Slavic migrations were not pointed to the West. Having entered on a path of an opposition to Byzantium and having concentrated on themselves it's attention, Slavic tribes indirectly promoted to evolutional transformation of western areas of Barbaricum. Behind a back of the Slavic movements, between the Rhein and the Oder, the German tribal world was stabilizing, the Francs created their barbarian kingdom. 1n Slavic presence on the Balkans and in the Central Europe stuck new migrations from the East of Turkic and Finnish-Ugorian origin - proto-Bulgarians and the Avares. The stages of the Migration differ from each other by a character of ethnic composition of the participants of the Migration, position of migrating tribes, main accents of an opposition and interaction, direction of migrations and their results.

1n a system of concepts connected to characteristic of a phenomenon of the Great Migration of the peoples a term barbarians became one of the main. Long since the epoch of the Migration tanta scriptorum turba searched for the answer to a trivial problem, what was

hidden under this capacious concept. The associative image of a barbarian had been formed long before the beginning of the Migration. Semantics of a term was understood within the framework of an antithesis the Hellenes - barbarians, the Romans - barbarians. Three circles of associations made perception of this image automatic. The first was the ethnic. Barbarian is a foreigner, person living outside of the boundaries of the given state. The second one was ethical. It was concluded in the formula: the barbarian is not the Roman, that was considered to be the barbarian, who had no paideia, Greek education. And, at last, the third circle was philological. An ignorance in Greek and Iatin languages was valid indication of barbarity.

The contemporaries of the Migrations named as barbarians a conglomerate of tribes, located both to neighbour, and as well to distant rim of the antique world. The image of the barbarian during the Great Migration of the peoples traditionally followed opposition the barbarians are not the Romans. The opposition of the Barbaricum and the Antique world at that time has achieved the extreme sharpness and strength, and the inclusive characteristic of the concrete barbarians was as a whole based on the balance of hostility and interest. This tendency was reflected as well in the lexicon of the compositions of both Latin and Greek authors, though the logic of the description of the intrusions of the barbarians occasionally required obligatory, trite phrases. The notion barbarians was attached to a military context and, as a rule, was accompanied by the words have destroyed, "have besieged, have devastated, have made an attack. During the moving of tribes in the Empire the frequency of the address of the contemporaries to a word "barbarians was noticeably reduced. But it doesnt mean, that the barrier of a mutual estrangement of the Romans and the barbarians disappeared. The barbarians were still perceived as a field of a special danger, but already inside the Empire, though epicenter of barbarity (Barbaricum solum, BαpβαpικoO χωρou), according to the opinion of the contemporaries, was not in the Empire itself, but the other side of its limits. Barbaricum solum is at most degree a space of movements of the barbarians, and being continuous movements (μ∈ταvαστdσeις). The contemporaries of the Great Migration considered as the barbarians not everyone, who differed from the inhabitants of the Empire, but only the inhabitants of the remote countries, savages. The barbarian as such was characterized first of all by a place of inhabitance - Barbaricum. A typical surrounding of the barbarian was a heart of the forest with its rich vegetation, inaccessible, dark, so concealing danger. As a Barbaricum, the place of inhabitance of the barbarians, appeared large untitled spaces or remote areas located close to the limits of the world. As the barbarians had been fitting themselves into the Roman territory', the use instead of the notion barbarians of another terms - equivalents became quite singificant: for example, common words such as manus, globus, gens, populus, exercitus or concrete ethnonums, sometimes in a combination - populus Alamanorum, gens Francorum has become exponential. By the end of the second stage of the Migration the notion barbarians is come across not so frequently, but it becomes more rigid. Barbarian is not simply ignorant foreigner, but first of all extremely aggressive and unpredictable foreigner, holder of destructive force. In this common everyday meaning the notion barbarians was finally formed just in the epoch of the Migration, has gone through it and, having survived through the Middle Ages and a Modem Period, has lived up to now. The plurality of the barbarians, their large number in the eyes of the contemporaries of the Migration associated with crowd, and even more often - with army. The crowd, unorganized mass of the barbarians is characterized as hashed (permixta, mixta, immixta), restless (tumaltisa), unefficient (imbellis). For the people of that time the barbarian was a negative another thing. In the thick of a model of the barbarians behaviour was an aggression as the most peculiar feature. Simultaneously, against a background of a negative stereotype of a barbarian the new nuances of its image have appeared. Beginning with the IV c. he is not only the enemy (eχθpoς), hostile (πoλ⅛^ μoc), but an ally - friend (φlλoc), συμμαχlς, feι-,σπoυδ∂c, federalist. In the period between Adrianopol and the Katalauns the strategy of hostility of the barbarians was drawed up op a more neutral image of another, and not simply on the image of an enemy. For example, in everyday practice of Greek intellectual elite the concepts dλλ∂τpLoς and dλλ6φυλoς were

usual, and the concepts βαpβαpoc and ξevoc were always are exactly and thoroughly separated from each other.

The Great Migration of the peoples, as the system process of interaction of the Barbaricum and Antique civilization, has formed a unique ethnic space. Ethnic space is meant as a whole totality of tribes and peoples connected to the concrete historical phenomenon and its ethnic image in history. The ethnic space created by the Great Migration, had a great number of various strata. Its ethnic structure consisted of more than 20 ethnic groups (German, Thracian, Italian and other tribes). Among them it is possible to select the natives and alien tribes, inert and dynamical; tribes and peoples, located on the territory of the Roman Empire and located in the provinces, and tribes of Barbaricum itself. In the circle of inert participants, which have withstood a number of waves of the Great Migration, its possible to include Italian, Iberian, Celtic, Thracian, Illirian, Greek tribes and the tribes of Asia Minor. The leader of the Barbaricum, active and dynamical participant of interaction with Roman and Early-Byzantine civilizations, was the world of German, Tiurk, Slavic, Alan-Sarmatian tribes.

The German ethnic space of this time was one of the most singificant. Long since the beginning of the Great migrations the Germans were spread on extensive territories, with great part of it being marked by extreme geographical and climatic conditions: huge woods, abundance of the rivers, lakes, unfitness of many territories for agriculture and cattle-breeding. They constantly tested on themselves military and civilizing rush of the Roman world, expecially strong on the joint of milleniums. In the result, the rather a high level of mobility of German tribes became evident. It reflected first of all adaptive possibilities and properties of the German ethnic space. Besides, the mobility of the Germans symbolized their special social adaptation. Not only the vital needs stimulated the movement of tribes. Plunders, conquest of the neighbours, robbery in the close Roman provinces, seizure of cities, fall of the emperors and outstanding Roman military leaders were the acts of self-assertion, demonstrating the power of the tribes, their belonging to a traditionally marked winners and leaders of Barbaricum. Exposition of a history of the German ethnic space is rather representative. It is evident in the abundance of titles of the tribes, various forms of manifestation of their activity, significant geographical range of movements, pulsing character of moving, multivariance of the contractual relations with Rome and Byzantium. During rather a short historical period, migration of the Germans enveloped the main regions of Europe, Asia, Northern Africa. They promoted to the appearance of the main lines of breaks, zones of conflicts in the European model of the Migration. The migratory experience of the Germans is various. It is represented by various types of migrations: the resettlement of tribes, movements of separate units, professional migration (bodyguards of imperial courts), business migration (German handicraftsmen and merchants). The German ethnic space during many centuries of resettlement created peculiar migratory standard, which was used also by other tribes. It. for example, included a script of a behavior of the barbarians in stereotyped situations (campaigns, intrusions, negotiations) and standard gang of their claims to Empire. The various degree of dependence from the Roman world as well generated in the German ethnic space various impulses of consolidation. The highest manifestation of the impulses became so-called large tribes. During the Migration changed not only horizontal dynamics of the barbarian world (that is to say its picture, expressing in involving and resettlement of a number of a new tribes). The essential changes took place inside the Migration itself. Ethnosocial vertical, internal evolution of the tribes in movement, their potestarian development impetuously changed. Very often the resettlement was begun by definite people and was finished by quite another one. Many German tribes had to pay high price for cognition of the Roman world, accepting them.

Speaking about the ethnic space of the Great Migration of the peoples it is important to emphasize, that the vital activity of any tribe as an ethnic community is expressed in selfpreservation and in self-development. On the turning-point stages and in particular during the epoch of violent resettlements with their collisions and contacts of tribes the ethnic component can go through a period of closeness. Oversensitiveness of ethnic feeling acquires the

form of specific integrative quality, which it is possible to define as corporativeness. It exists as internal and external. External corporativeness separates one tribe from an other, that is, it reveals itself as a factor of ethnic differentiation. Internal corporativeness integrated a tribe, ensured it as a unity and gave it a normal vital activity. Both internal and external corporativeness of the tribes during the epoch of the Migration revealed themselves in two ways. First of all, in similar understanding of the past, present and future of the tribe or the union of tribes. Secondly in a likeness of attributes (clothes, ornaments, hairdresses etc.) and in a special "models" of actions (rites, traditions, stereotypes of a behavior, mode of life).

In the course of the Migration were exhibited both ethnic CoiporativenessJoining ethπo- homogeneous tribes, and ethno-orientated corporativeness as well, which promoted to unification of ethnically heterogeneous tribes around the main one. It expressed the main idea, being a nucleus of tradition of a unification. Such tribe acted as a collective leader, and dependent tribes accepted not only its ethnic name, but also some stereotypes of a behavior, traditions and customs of the leader. So, for example, the Goths, the Vandales, the Burgundes, the Francs, the Langobardes have rallied under their banners a great number of tribes and peoples, which were not always of the same origin with them, say, the Alans, the Sarmats1 but which have accepted a mode of life and a system of values of the Germans. Certainly, one ought to exaggerate a degree of internal solidarity and closeness of such tribal associations. They had a different degree of consolidation. It is also impossible not to pay attention to such psychological factor, as feeling of a membership to this or that large tribe. In epoch of migrations this feeling created a certain comfort, for it both supported, and inspired, rescued and protected. However, difficult it is to reconstruct the processes of ethnogenesis of Barbaricum tribes, nevertheless the problem is not settled. The ethnic space of the Great Migration of the peoples consists of two interconnected components.

The first component is represented by an actual tribes and peoples, the participants of a historical events of the epoch of the Migration. The second one is a system of notions about these tribes and peoples, ethnic image of the Migration created by the contemporaries of the events, and by national historiographies of modem and contemporary period as well. On the boundary of Antiquity and the Middle Ages not only tribes and peoples came in movement. Images of these tribes and peoples also came to life. The basis of the images usually was ethnonym.

The ethnonyms of the epoch of the Great Migration of the peoples are represented by the titles of families, tribes, groups and unions of tribes. Ethnonym of die Great Migration resembles a phantom, which walked together with moving tribes and peoples. It frequently abandoned the host chose another one. The dialectics of life in the course of migrations changed also the holder of ethnonym itself. Dynamics of the contents of many ethnonyms took place. The majority of them existed all the way along the Great Migration of the peoples, but at the end of the Migration they could designate not exactly the same tribes as in the beginning. During mass settling of barbarian tribes on the territory of Empire some ethnonyms became collective. The unifying and disjoining processes resulted in a modification of social organization of numerous tribes, saving old ethnonyms, but with new meaning. The ethnonym became an escaping image of the tribe. The ethnonym of the conquers was frequently transferred on the conquered and vice versa. However it is known, that ethnonym is an archetype of unique stability. As the names, the ethnonyms were notable for conservatism and great viability. They were piously kept by the members of this or that ethnic community and were passed on from one generation to another. In case of a military defeat of a tribe, ist fragments, scattered on long distances, went on to keep their ethnonyms. Being included in the structure of a new tribal unions, a tribe could take a new name, but moreover it also used an old one. At the end of the Great Migration of the peoples the ethnonyms of some tribes became an estimational terms. They represented themselves as definitions to personal names. Personal merit or personal fault were fixed through ethnonyms. It is possible to observe the ethnopholity of both archaic and actual ethnonymy. The ethnonym of the epoch of the Great Migration of the peoples turns itself into title, acquiring new terminological function. The conditions for a transition of an ethnic term into social have been already formed. They were

incorporated in the very status of the barbarians - migrants, which had been grinding dur⅛E the centuries. But the society was not ready yet finally to part with ethnic nominations, which to the end of the Migration became to acquire less importance, never being lost. It is possible to mark, as a whole, that in the epoch of the Migration the ethnonym carried the function of peculiar universal language of intercourse between the barbarian world and the Roman civilization. It was also used as a peculiar password, governor of interethnic connections. Furthermore the ethnonym reflected also a comparative nature of ethnos. In written tradition ethnic characteristics of differentness, the differentiation of Barbaricum and its representatives mainly was expressed by means of ethnoπymy.

Violent history of the barbarian world of Π-VΠ cc., on the first sight being so rich with the omens of a great future, still gives rise to perplexity of researches as unexpected and even disappointing. The state system of the majority of barbarian kingdoms and has never been formed in a proper way. First kingdom of Vesegoths, having achieved its zenith, could not overcome a major historical boundary separating barbarity from CiviIlization. From all barbarian kingdoms, reaching the start" in V c., the Francs alone came closely to a threshold of medieval civilization. In a course of the Great Migration they did not seem to be a tribal unity, giving great expectations and in many respects were inferior to such tribes as Goths, Langobardes, Burgundes, Vandales. Many participants of this peculiar maraρhon, as, for example, Heruli1 or Gepidaes1 left a distance already at the first stage of the Migration, and never achieving that great aims, to which, according to modem scientific conceptions, the barbarians, moving in the Empire, had to direct themselves. During the Migration the majority of German tribes has lost almost all their achievements, gradually losing individual image of the inhabitants of Barbaricum, and not overcoming a barrier separating barbarity from civilization. Kingdom, and than the Empire of Francs was a common child of Barbaricum1 represented by a German tribal community. The exhibited viability of this kingdom is a peculiar result of a historical path, which was passed through the West- German tribal world during hundreds of years of the Migration. After the migrations of II-VΠ cc. the two-polar system in Europe was formed. By the Early Middle Ages one pole revealed itself as Postbarbaricum with a center of consolidation in the Kingdom of the Francs, while another was a Second Rome, that is to say - Byzantian civilization. Their interaction in many respects will determine a further history of medieval Europe.

Thus, search of the new approaches to a problem of the Great Migration of the peoples assumes a new understanding of it as an integrative, independent, continuous, system process of interaction between Barbaricum and Antique civilization. Offered paradymg of the Migration gives additional possibilities of a research and allows to define more exactly the main tendencies and directions of the migrations, structure of tribal associations, positions of leading tribes, character and forms of Barbaricunfs contacts with the Empire. Already the first approach to the history of the barbarian world shows, that not only this world itself influenced a course of the Migration, but the Migration also changed this world, including those who went on remaining in the Barbaricum when their neighbours and tribesmen set themselves in the Empire.

<< | >>
: ... . - .: ,2000. - 544 ., .. 2000


  2. 9. XVIII : . II.
  3. 1. (-, Iiaon-.)
  4. . . .
  5. 3.
  6. (8) I. I, .
  7. 1 ( )
  8. I . .. - II . ..
  9. 27.
  10. 1. , ,
- - - - - - -
- - - -