Introduction

The pages of the journal "Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia" regularly become a venue for fruitful discussions on the most important practical and theoretical problems of archaeological science - the origin and migration of modern humans and their ancestors, the forms and content of the transition from the Middle to the late Paleolithic period, approaches to the interpretation of primitive art, etc. It seems that the problem of reconstruction of life support systems and mechanisms of adaptation of ancient societies to various natural landscapes and economic systems will fit into the circle of such discussions.

As a first step, we propose to consider one of the interesting models of farming formulated by the creative tandem of an archaeologist (D. L. Brodyansky) and a hydrobiologist (V. A. Rakov) based on the materials of ancient cultures of Primorye and adjacent territories, where the so-called shell heaps containing a significant number of oyster leaves (Crassostrea gigas) were recorded. The authors called it "aquaculture" and for more than 20 years they have continued to actively increase the argument for their hypothesis in a series of works published in Russia, as well as in the USA, Japan, Korea and China. It was presented in the most concentrated form in a report at the All-Russian Archaeological Congress (Novosibirsk, 2006) [Brodyansky, 2006] and in an article in this journal [Rakov, Brodyansky, 2007]. The term "aquaculture" is used in a number of popular scientific works and textbooks published for students (for example: [Brodyansky, 19956; Brodyansky and Rakov, 1986]).

Several circumstances prompted me to enter into a discussion with the authors of the "aquaculture" model. First, I have been working on similar issues for a long time - I am working on a project dedicated to salmon fishing in the archaic and traditional cultures of Pacifica, which is also a special form of exploitation of water resources. Secondly, the scientific nature and viability of any hypothesis is confirmed in the process of polemics between its authors and their opponents. Paradoxically, despite the ambiguous attitude of Far Eastern archaeologists to the model of "aquaculture", so far there has not been a single detailed discussion work on this issue. It is quite possible to understand authors who resent short passages in publications or oral presentations at conferences, as well as anonymous reviews of their articles, and do not consider them as scientific criticism (for example: [Brodyansky, 2003, p. 101; 2004, p.93; 2006, p. 241]). At the same time, there is a very obvious field for criticism of the "aquaculture" hypothesis. This concerns first of all the main theoretical conclusion of the authors - about the productive nature of the farm, called "aquaculture". Third, the moment has come when, together with the criticism of certain propositions of this hypothesis, it is possible to change the position of the author.-

* This work was supported by the Russian Scientific Foundation, project No. 06-01-00522a "Salmon fishing in archaic and traditional cultures of the Pacific basin".

page 52

It is necessary to identify ways of its further development in relation to the subject of maritime archaeology and Northern Pacifica in general. Without claiming to be an exhaustive analysis of all publications on this topic, I will try to trace the dynamics and terminological component of the hypothesis, as well as identify the most controversial, in my opinion, conclusions of the authors.

Evolution of the "aquaculture"hypothesis

The interest of specialists in shell heaps on the coast of the Sea of Japan dates back to M. I. Yankovsky [1881], after whom the archaeological culture is named. On the pages of one of the first issues of "Pacific Archeology"*, the following is said about the Yankovites ' farm:: "The Yankovites who lived on the coast and islands were closely connected with the sea... Marine adaptation * * is also emphasized by the diversity of marine products in the diet (more than 60 established species of fish and shellfish, crabs, seals)..."[Dikov, Brodyansky, Dyakov, 1983, p. 107]. There is no mention of aquaculture yet. They are also absent in the article on the aquatic fauna of the Sea of Japan in the primitive economy, published in 1985 (Brodyansky, 1985).

According to D. L. Brodyansky himself, the birth of the hypothesis dates back to 1984-1985: "At the initiative of V. A. Rakov, he and the author since 1985 have carried out calculations on several shell heaps of the Yankovo culture... The age structure of the extracted oysters testified to artificial selection and sorting... These observations served as the basis for reporting the discovery of primitive aquaculture... " [2003, p. 100]. To be fair, the authors of the 1985 publication use the term "mariculture" along with the term "aquaculture" - "a system of conducting an organized economy for the collection and cultivation of marine organisms", emphasizing its difference from "primitive gathering of marine products" (Rakov and Brodyansky, 1985, p.158). It also points out the link between aquaculture and the producing economy: "... the producing economy is stable... The stable coastal population is also rapidly developing aquaculture skills... As the most preliminary remarks, we can mention the age of aquaculture, which is as ancient as that of agriculture, and the relationship of these industries in coastal areas..."[Ibid., pp. 158-159]. Practically word for word, these conclusions about the nature of the Yankov oyster fishery are repeated in the monograph of D. L. Brodyansky, published in 1987, when describing the "economy of the ancients in the Ussuri region" [p. 212-213]. In the same year, 1987, an extremely important discovery for the entire Far Eastern archeology took place: a monument called Boysman-2 was discovered in Boysman Bay (Peter the Great Bay) [Brodyansky, Krupyanko, Rakov, 1995]. Stationary excavations here began in 1991, and the materials obtained played a crucial role in the further development of the "aquaculture" hypothesis. This happened a little later, and in the theses of the report at the International Conference on Stratigraphy and Correlation of Quaternary Deposits of Asia and the Pacific region, held in Nakhodka in October 1988, D. L. Brodyansky and V. A. Rakov continued the characterization of faunal complexes in the shell heaps of the Yankovo culture: "Being the remains of economic activity: fishing, gathering and primitive aquaculture, they (shell heaps. - A. T.) are the result of their mixing... < ... > Method of production-regular extraction from cultivated oysters... <...> The method of population analysis applied to shell heaps and oystercatchers of Peter the Great Bay revealed the ancient selection of oysters by age and seeding of juveniles" [1988, pp. 112-113].

By the mid-1990s, excavations at the Boysman-2 monument yielded unique archaeological and faunal material : the lower layer of cultural deposits made it possible to identify a new Neolithic culture - the Boysman culture. On the monument, it was represented by the remains of a housing structure, shell heaps, and a burial complex (Popov, Chikisheva, and Shpakova, 1997).

New motives in the interpretation of shell heaps and the content of aquaculture were voiced in the text of the joint report of D. L. Brodyansky and V. A. Rakov at the International Symposium "Archeology of the Northern Pacific" (Vladivostok, 1993). The title contains the phrase "on the problem of aquaculture", which is quite correct for the preliminary report [Brodyansky and Rakov, 1996b, p. 271]. Analyzing the distribution of mollusks in the shell heaps of the Boysman-2 monument, the authors conclude that there is a fact of "control of the main object of extraction, a kind of concern for preserving the food resource for subsequent years, that is, evidence of the appearance of a primitive form of aquaculture in the early Neolithic" [Ibid., pp. 276-277]. Further, they write about the systematic exploitation of oystercatchers: "The level of this exploitation, based on population analysis, we define as aquaculture. Its presence in the economy makes it reasonable to search for traces of other species

* Under this title, since 1980, the Far Eastern University Press has published a series of thematic collections on various problems of Pacific archeology.

** Here and further in the quotes, emphasis added by me.

page 53

producing economy in this layer (breeding for dog meat, domestication of pigs)... "[Ibid., p. 278]. It is not yet clear from the text whether aquaculture itself is defined as a productive type of farm.

D. L. Brodyansky made it absolutely clear about the content of ancient aquaculture in 1995 in the course of lectures " Man. Culture. Society " (for schoolchildren, students, cadets, for anyone who wants to get humanitarian knowledge): "The oldest Neolithic shell pile in Primorye was discovered by the author in Boisman Bay. Here, on the shore of a warm lagoon teeming with fish, people settled 7-5 thousand years ago. And the oysters were selected only for adults-almost without mistakes. It is impossible to do this underwater, even in scuba gear: the return of children to the water-sowing - was carried out deliberately. Observations in Primorye give rise to a hypothesis: along with two branches of the productive economy, agriculture and cattle breeding, a third one, aquaculture, was born in the Neolithic. Three industries that still feed people... " [1995b, pp. 81-84]. Thus, aquaculture fundamentally changes its status in the model - from fishing it becomes a branch of the producing economy. In the text of the scientific report on which D. L. Brodyansky defended his doctoral dissertation in the same year, he expressed himself more restrained terminologically, but no less optimistic in essence: "Together with the hydrobiologist V. A. Rakov, the author, using the population method, established the fact that oysters were grown by Yankov and Boysmanians, and the juveniles obtained - 60% of the population-were returned in the water for rearing, the existence of a previously unknown branch of agriculture in primitive society - aquaculture-is obvious. 1 ha of oyster farm in the area of Shelekh m. could produce up to 25 tons of meat per year. This idea is also making its way and gaining new arguments and supporters... " [1995a, p. 27]. In 1996, an article by D. L. Brodyansky and V. A. Rakov was published, in which the phrase "producing economy in the Neolithic of Primorye" was first included in the title [1996a].

V. A. Rakov in the article "Oysters of Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg) from shell heaps of Southern Sakhalin: introduction, acclimatization, aquaculture", published in the collection "Pacific Archeology", gives the results of observations of oysters in the area of Lake Baikal. And concludes that they could not have got there naturally due to the temperature conditions: "Therefore, we came to the only possible and seemingly improbable conclusion - Lake Nevsky in Russia. Terpenia was artificially populated with oysters by ancient people, who maintained their existence for a long time using primitive methods of aquaculture. Such artificial migration of aquatic organisms is called introduction, which is always the first stage of the acclimatization process, which is closely related to aquaculture..." [2001, p.27]. This conclusion is extremely interesting and important, but even more important is the question posed by the author of the article: "...was there a deliberate or accidental introduction of oysters? Accidental introduction is possible in the case when young oysters were transported attached by larvae to the bottoms of boats... " [Ibid., p. 32]. However, if such an alternative exists for a hydrobiologist, then for his colleague an archaeologist, apparently, it does not - in the preface to the above-mentioned collection, D. L. Brodyansky writes only about intentional introduction: "At the intersection of hydrobiology, hydrology and archeology, the high level of ancient aquaculture is convincingly argued. People of the Neolithic and subsequent cultures advanced this branch of the economy far north, to the Sea of Okhotsk. By God, I feel sorry for the skeptics!.." [2001, p. 3].

In the next issue of "Pacific Archeology" V. A. Rakov considered the problem of aquaculture in detail. In his opinion, the term "gathering" used in archaeology does not fully reflect the specifics and complexity of the extraction of marine products. Among the features of aquaculture, he refers to a wide range of cultivated aquatic organisms and animals, technologies that include measures related to reproduction, as well as prohibitions (taboos) aimed at protecting and reproducing aquatic biological resources. Aquaculture, therefore, arises and develops "with the aim of obtaining products that are useful for humans without compromising the natural resources of cultivated objects, with rational use of environmental conditions. In this way, aquaculture is fundamentally different from mining, fishing or fishing... "[Rakov, 2003, pp. 58-59]. Omitting the various statistics on the size of seafood production, and oysters in particular, which are plentiful in the article, I will note very important observations about the morphology of cultivated biological resources: "There are usually few morphological features that distinguish cultivated objects from uncultivated ones, and they are not clear enough... Unlike cultivated land animals and plants, cultivated water bodies practically do not have clear morphological features that make it possible to distinguish them... In fact, "wild" forms of aquatic organisms are cultivated... Externally, the shells of cultivated oysters practically do not differ from those grown in nature. Only in the presence of comparative material can some differences be noted... " [Ibid., pp. 63, 80]. Draws

page 54

It is noteworthy that the hydrobiologist never refers to aquaculture as a productive farm and refers to it as "rational use of natural resources", but uses the term "oyster farming"in relation to oyster cultivation. In the same collection there are also D. L. Brodyansky's comments to the article by V. A. Rakov. He notes the importance of the discovery of aquaculture for Far Eastern archaeology and refers to the positive and skeptical reviews of colleagues. As for the term itself, the author confines himself to its narrow understanding - introduction, conservation of juveniles, seeding and rearing, i.e. cultivation, and does not mention the productive nature of aquaculture [Brodyansky, 2003, p.103]. There is no mention of this in the theses of D. L. Brodyansky's report at the International Scientific Conference dedicated to the 80th anniversary of N. N. Dikov in Magadan in 2005. The title and the text itself refer to marine adaptation [2005, p. 134].

Finally, two publications followed, in which the recognition of aquaculture as a producing economy (on a par with agriculture and cattle breeding) is very clearly formulated. In the abstract of his report to the All-Russian Archaeological Congress in October 2006, D. L. Brodyansky notes that " another productive branch of the Neolithic economy - oyster farming, aquaculture, was discovered during the study of Boisman II by V. A. Rakov and the author... V. A. Rakov showed that the introduction and acclimatization of Pacific oysters in the Neolithic of the Far East is not a hypothesis, but rather a a thoroughly reasoned discovery... " [2006, p. 240].

As a final touch to the chronology of the development of the term "aquaculture", I will quote a phrase from the text dedicated to D. L. Brodyansky on the website of the Far Eastern State University: "... in 1985.... they were the first in world archaeology to show that aquaculture-one of the three branches of food production-originated, like agriculture, in the Stone Age... " [To the 70th anniversary...].

Discussion

I will make a reservation right away that neither the term "aquaculture" itself, nor the originality of the idea do not raise any doubts in my mind. The term was not coined by the authors of the hypothesis; it was introduced into the literature much earlier and is quite applicable to archeology, since it reflects the most diverse forms of interaction between humans and water resources (see, for example, a detailed review of the problem: [Erlandson, 2001]). D. L. Brodyansky and V. A. Rakov really made an interesting and important discovery - They demonstrated the complex cycle of oyster exploitation within several archaeological cultures in Primorye and adjacent territories. They convincingly proved that aquaculture has been highly technologically advanced and productive since the Neolithic period.

So, what is the argument about? About the content of the term and giving aquaculture the status of a producing farm, which, in my opinion, is illegal. If the authors put aquaculture on a par with agriculture and cattle breeding, then there must be clear general parameters for this. Moreover, chronologically, the development of the "aquaculture" hypothesis coincides or follows a number of classical works on the theory of the transition from appropriating to producing farms published by Russian researchers [Masson, 1970, 1976, 1989; Berezkin, 1969, 1980, 1989; Bashilov, 1984, 1985, 1999; Shnirelman, 1986, 1989; Istoriya..., 1988; et al.]. Despite the tribute to the Marxist tradition, these works are distinguished by a high level of analysis, logic of theoretical constructions and many bold hypotheses, which were put forward almost simultaneously with similar developments of European and North American colleagues. An unfortunate pause in theoretical research has occurred since the mid-1990s and has put the current generation of Russian archaeologists in the position of second-year students who have to catch up. At the same time, the English-language literature consistently continues to publish works devoted to various aspects of the ratio of appropriating and producing farms (for example: Hayden, 1990; Histories..., 2006; Price and Gebauer, 1995; Richardson, 1992; Winterhalder and Goland, 1997; etc.), and addressing them This would remove the contradiction that exists in the "aquaculture" hypothesis.

Thus, at the current level of research, the process of transition to a productive economy is considered to be rather long (non-revolutionary), with stages of gradual adaptation of a person to new types of resources and methods of their exploitation. In the case of agriculture, this process has three mandatory components, which are commonly referred to as" domestication"," cultivation "and"agriculture". Domestication is understood as a biological process that causes genetic changes and leads to the emergence of new species of plants and animals, the existence and reproduction of which becomes possible only with constant human care and is impossible without it. New species have the qualities that are only indicated in the wild, but isolated by humans and repeatedly strengthened in the course of breeding. Cultivation is a technological process that includes all types of human activities for sowing, caring, collecting, sorting, processing and storing crops.-

page 55

It is accompanied by the invention of new tools and devices that are designed to fundamentally improve the efficiency of the economy. Agriculture is the social result of a new form of human - nature dialogue, the emergence of new forms of social organization that are fundamentally different from the structure of hunter-gatherer and fishing communities, and a new cycle of life based on full or partial settlement.

So what do the arguments of the authors of the "aquaculture" hypothesis say against this background? In my opinion, it is exclusively about cultivation, i.e. about effective technologies and methods of exploitation of an important food source-oysters Crassostrea gigas. There is not a single evidence of domestication - evidence that there is a special type of mollusk in the biological classification, bred by humans and existing exclusively due to humans. According to V. A. Rakov (hydrobiologist), there are no clear morphological criteria for separating cultivated and wild oysters. The hypothesis also does not contain any social reconstructions that indicate drastic changes in the economy and life of the bearers of the Boisman culture in comparison with their predecessors. This block, with rare exceptions (Moreva and Popov, 2003), has so far been poorly developed based on Boisman materials.

Oyster meat certainly played an important role in the diet of the coastal inhabitants of Southern Primorye. However, it is doubtful that it could (by analogy with the products of agriculture, cattle breeding, and even fishing) form its basis. Most likely, we are talking about an additional product that smoothed out the so-called periods of food risk between seasons and (which is even more preferable) it served as a delicacy.

Compared to oyster farming, salmon fishing, which existed in the archaic and traditional cultures of Northern Pacifica, seems to be a larger phenomenon. Its origins go back to the final Paleolithic (17-16 thousand years AGO); technological support is represented by a wide range of tools, fishing structures, fishing techniques, processing and storage; salmon meat was one of the basic food sources and formed the basis of seasonal stocks for humans and dogs*. It was salmon fishing that served as the economic base, thanks to which cultures with a high level of social organization, developed crafts and a specific ritual and mythological complex were formed on the Pacific coasts [Vasilevsky, 1994; Gavrilova and Tabarev, 2004, 2006; Tabarev, 2000; Shnirelman, 1993; Kew, 1976; Tabarev, 2006]. Despite the impressive annual catch volumes, there is every reason to believe that native fisheries, thanks to their knowledge of the laws of homing (returning salmon to spawn in their native waters), not only did not harm the Pacific salmon population, but supported it. Nevertheless, the exploitation of the spawning phenomenon is an example of highly efficient nature management, but not a productive economy.

If we follow the logic of the authors of the "aquaculture" hypothesis, then after oyster farming, we should add the cultivation of bears by Far Eastern peoples for a special holiday, larval plantations arranged by the inhabitants of a number of South Pacific islands under the bark of fallen trees, etc. Everywhere we will find an increase in the" volume " of the product, and special technologies, and devices (tools), and methods of introduction and cultivation.

It is possible that it is the results (really impressive!) selection, productivity and efficiency of oyster farming confused the authors of the hypothesis. The framework of "gathering" and "fishing" seemed to them unworthy for such a developed industry.

At the same time, it is quite obvious that the old paradigm, which places appropriating and producing farms in a hierarchical sequence, has not worked for a long time. The transition to a productive economy is not a "main direction of history", but one of the choices, an alternative way of human adaptation on Earth in relation to the appropriating economy. The differences between them are not recorded by the level of productivity and technological efficiency. An appropriating farm has many forms**,

* The minimum level of daily ration is determined for the climatic conditions of the region at 2000 calories. If even half of this diet was red fish (about 200 calories per 100 g of product), then it turns out that a person ate about 130 - 140 kg of salmon per year. Of course, in different territories, depending on other components of the diet (other types of fish, meat of marine animals, birds, shellfish, land game, etc.), this indicator will be different. So, for example, for the Aleuts, according to estimates at the end of the XVIII century, it was only 130 kg per year, for the Tlingit -225, for the Haida - 180, for the Indian tribes of the delta and lower reaches of the Fraser River - from 270 to 450 (!), for the inhabitants of its middle course (Thompson, Lillooet) - from 270 to 400 kg, for the Indians of the coastal regions of the states of Oregon and California (Shinuk, Yurok, Karok) - from 165 to 180 kg (calculated according to: [Hewes, 1973]).

** For example, Kamchatka Itelmen, Southwestern Alaska Eskimos, and Tlingits practiced seasonal salmon fishing, but the organization, efficiency, and productivity of salmon fishing vary significantly. Accordingly, the social characteristics of these cultures are different.

page 56

a significant part of which clearly exceeds the efficiency of the early forms of productive economy and is not inferior even to the developed ones. By the way, the" ceiling " of the efficiency of the appropriating economy is a separate research problem and is not categorically defined in any of the serious modern works.

Conclusions and prospects

1.The hypothesis of "aquaculture" in the Neolithic period of Primorye and adjacent areas of the southern Far East, which is based mainly on specialized oyster farming, is an important discovery and contribution to the archaeology of the region. Analysis of its dynamics shows that it is based on a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach, rich empirical material, is an effective research tool and a promising model for development.

2. The only drawback of the hypothesis, in my opinion, is the recognition of aquaculture as a producing economy (along with agriculture and cattle breeding). There is no evidence of full-fledged domestication (the appearance of new species with previously nonexistent properties) and socialization (cardinal changes in the way of life and the structure of society under the influence of a new type of economy). Aquaculture is a vivid example of highly efficient nature management, an element of coastal adaptation, specialized fishing, strategy, etc. (variants of the designation of this phenomenon in the publications of the authors themselves). Any of these terms is quite suitable, and then everything will fall into place-both high productivity and technological efficiency, and significance for ancient cultures in general. The model of "aquaculture", as its authors rightly point out, has many supporters among domestic and foreign specialists, but in their publications, colleagues still refrain from treating it as a producing farm.

3. It seems that the persistent defense of the status of a producing farm is not in the interests of further development of the "aquaculture" model. Its perspective lies in the detailed development of issues related to the diverse role of water resources both in specific archaeological cultures and across the entire Pacific region.

4. In my opinion, the following are promising: (a) The study of the relationship between aquaculture and productive forms of farming; they are not limited only to "partner" and complementary ones, as evidenced by the archaeological materials of the north-west coast of North America and the Pacific Ocean (Tabarev, 2006; Moseley, 1975, 1992; Sandweiss, 1996). et al.]; b) consideration of shell heaps not only as traces of fishing and consumption, but also as remnants of ritual structures. Evidence for this is found in different areas of the Pacific and Atlantic, for example, on the coast of Florida (Russo and Heide, 2002).

5. In relation to the Boisman Neolithic culture, I propose a preliminary version of the interpretation of the shell heap within the framework of the "aquaculture" model. Judging by the spread of Boisman motifs in ceramics, the carriers of the culture successfully adapted to various natural landscapes, and not only to coastal ones. The arrival of Boysmans on the coast is one of the components of a complex seasonal cycle. The materials of burials at the Boysman-2 monument (rich burial equipment, objects made of exotic materials (obsidian), micro-ritual complexes, polyeiconic sculpture and plastic, elegant vessel decoration, skull deformity, etc.) indicate the developed "prestigious technologies" used in funeral rites (Tabarev, 2002a, 2002b; Hayden, 1998).. There is reason to believe that the burial ground was the burial place of the tribal elite, and the shell heaps are evidence of funerary and memorial ceremonies, accompanied by plentiful "feasts" with the use of a large number of" delicacies " (including not only oysters, but also, for example, dogs). Similar rituals are widespread in cultures throughout the Pacific Rim.

List of literature

Bashilov V. A. Nekotorye obshchie aspekty "neoliticheskoi revolyutsii" [Some general aspects of the "Neolithic Revolution"].

Bashilov, V. A., the Pace of the historical process in the most important centers of the "Neolithic revolution" // Historical fate of the American Indians: the problem of indianstyle. - M.: Nauka, 1985. - P. 42 - 51.

Bashilov V. A. "Neolithic revolution" in the Central Andes: Two models of the paleoeconomical process. - Moscow: TOO "Old Garden", 1999. - 206 p.

Berezkin Yu. E. The beginning of agriculture on the Peruvian coast / / SA. - 1969. - N 1. - pp. 3-12.

Berezkin Yu. E. Early farmers of the coast of Peru / / Early farmers, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1980, pp. 86-109.

Berezkin Yu. E. Formation of agriculture: an Americanist's view // Vesti, ancient history. - 1989. - N 1. - p. 114-117.

Brodyanskii D. L. Vodnaya fauna basseina Yaponskogo morya v primevitnoi ekonomiki [Water fauna of the Sea of Japan basin in the primitive economy]. - P. 57-60.

Brodyansky D. L. Introduction to Far Eastern archeology. - Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 1987. - 276 p.

page 57

Brodyansky D. L. Neolithic and paleometal of Southern Primorye: Dis. ... Doctor of Historical Sciences in the form of scientific reports-Novosibirsk, 1995a. - 49 p.

Brodyansky D. L. The Man. Culture. Society. Vladivostok: Far Eastern State University Press, 19956, 192 p. (in Russian)

Works of art and other antiquities from the monuments of the Pacific region-from China to Honduras. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 2001, pp. 3-4.

Brodyanskii D. L. Rakovinnye kuchi i akvakultura (komentari k statei V. A. Rakov) [Shell piles and aquaculture (commentary to the article by V. A. Rakov)]. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 2003, pp. 98-105 (Pacific Archeology, issue 13).

Brodyansky D. L. People and problems of Far Eastern Archeology: (Essays, essays, articles, reports). Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2004, 192 p. (in Russian)

Brodyanskii D. L. Morskaya adaptatsiya v drevnem Primorye [Marine adaptation in ancient Primorye]. Severnaya Pacifika - kul'turnye adaptatsii v kontse pleistocene i holocene: Mat-ly Mezhdunar. konf. "In the footsteps of ancient bonfires". - Magadan, 2005. - p. 134.

Brodyansky D. L. Two economic strategies in the Neolithic of the Far East // Sovremennye problemy arkheologii Rossii: Mat-ly Vseros [Modern Problems of Russian Archeology]. archeol. Congress (October 23-28, 2006, Novosibirsk). Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 240-242.

Brodyansky D. L., Krupyanko A. A., Rakov V. A. The shell heap in Boisman Bay is an early Neolithic monument//Lead. Far East. Department of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1995, No. 4, pp. 128-132.

Brodyanskii D. L., Rakov V. A. Pamyatniki pervobytnoy akvakul'tury [Monuments of primitive aquaculture]. - 1986. - N 5. - p. 43-45.

Brodyansky D. L., Rakov V. A. Marine faunal complexes in shell heaps of Southern Primorye // Stratigraphy and correlation of Quaternary sediments of Asia and the Pacific region. Mezhdunar. simp. (October 9-16, 1988, Nakhodka). - Vladivostok: Far East. Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1988, vol. 1, pp. 112-113.

Brodyansky D. L., Rakov V. A. Marine adaptation of the population and the producing economy in the Neolithic of Primorye // Vestn. Far East. Department of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996a. - N 1. - p. 124-130.

Brodyansky D. L., Rakov V. A. Preliminary results of studying the malacofauna of the lower layer of Boisman II: (on the problem of aquaculture) / / Archeology of the Northern Pacific. Vladivostok: Dalnauka Publ., 19966, pp. 271-279.

Vasilevsky R. S. Khozyaistvennaya specializatsiya i osedlost ' v postpleistocene - Holocene na coast Severo-Vostochnoy Azii [Economic specialization and settlement in the Post-Pleistocene-Holocene on the coast of Northeast Asia]. - 1994. - N 3. - p. 9-13.

Gavrilova E. A., Tabarev A.V. Losos v promyslyakh, mifakh i ritualakh drevnykh i traditsionnykh kul'tury pacific Severa [Salmon in the fisheries, myths and rituals of ancient and traditional cultures of the Pacific North]. Novosibirsk: Izd-vo IAET SB RAS, 2004, vol. 10, part 1, pp. 57-60.

Gavrilova E. A., Tabarev A.V. Lightnings floating behind each other: (Pacific salmon in the fisheries and rituals of the Indians of the North-West coast of America): Textbook. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University. univ., 2006, 126 p. (in Russian)

Dikov N. N., Brodyansky D. L., Dyakov V. I. Ancient cultures of the Pacific coast of the USSR: Textbook. - Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 1983. - 116 p.

Istoriya pervobytnogo obshchestva [History of primitive Society], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1988, vol.3: Epokha klassoobrazovaniya. - 568 p.

To the 70th anniversary of the scientist: David Lazarevich Brodyansky [Electronic resource] / / Far Eastern State University. Zonal scientific library. - Access mode: http://lib.dvgu.ru/index.php?fold=menu/3/3/brodianskiy (20.02.2007).

Masson V. M. The problem of the Neolithic revolution in the light of new archaeological data // Questions of history. 1970, No. 6, pp. 73-89.

Masson V. M. Ekonomika i sotsial'nyi stroi drevnykh obshchestv (v svete dannykh arkheologii) [Economics and social structure of ancient societies (in the light of archaeological data)].

Masson V. M. Pervye tsivilizatsii [The First Civilizations], Nauka Publ., 1989, 275 p.

Moreva O. L., Popov A. N. Keramika kak obryadovy atribut boysmanskoy kul'tury [Ceramics as a ritual attribute of the Boysman culture]. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 2003, pp. 33-56 (Pacific Archeology, issue 13).

Popov A. P., Chikisheva T. A., Shpakova E. G. Boisman Archaeological Culture of Southern Primorye (based on the materials of the Boisman-2 multi-layer monument). Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 1997, 96 p. (in Russian)

Rakov V. A. Oysters Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg) from shell heaps of Southern Sakhalin: introduction, acclimatization, and aquaculture / / Works of Art and other antiquities from monuments of the Pacific region-from China to Honduras. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 2001, pp. 25-36 (Pacific Archeology, issue 12).

Rakov V. A. Akvakultura Vostochnoi Azii v drevni vremeni (problemy proiskhozhdeniya i razvitiya) [Aquaculture of East Asia in ancient times (problems of origin and development)]. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 2003, pp. 56-98 (Pacific Archeology, issue 13).

Rakov V. A., Brodyansky D. L. Primeval aquaculture / / Problems of Pacific Archeology. Vladivostok: Publishing House of the Far Eastern State University, 1985, pp. 145-162.

Rakov V. A., Brodyansky D. L. Ancient aquaculture (oyster cultivation in the Boisman Neolithic culture) // Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2007. - N3 (31). - p. 39-43.

Tabarev A.V. On the origin of the oldest commercial cults of Northern Pacifica // Integration of archaeological and ethnographic research. - Vladivostok; Omsk: Publishing House of Omsk State University. ped. Univ., 2000, pp. 201-202.

Tabarev A.V. Drevneyshie pamyatniki pacificheskogo korega Yuzhnoi Ameriki: istoki primorskoi adaptatsii [Ancient monuments of the Pacific coast of South America: the origins of Coastal adaptation]. Problemy arkheologii, etnografii, antropologii Sibiri i sopredel'nykh territorii: Mat-ly totogovoi godovoi sessii v IAET SB RAS: Novosibirsk: Izd. IAET SB RAS, 2002a, pp. 203-206.

Tabarev A.V. Dances with bifaces (obsidian in ritual and ritual practice of North American Indians) / / Istoriya i kul'tura Vostoka Azii: Mat-ly Mezhdunar. konf. k 70-letiyu V. E. Laricheva. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2002, pp. 154-158.

page 58

Tabarev A.V. Introduction to the archeology of South America: Andes and Pacific coast: Textbook. Novosibirsk: Sib. nauch. kniga Publ., 2006, 244 p. (in Russian)

Shnirelman V. A. "Neolithic revolution" and uneven historical development // Problems of the transition period and transitional social relations: (Problems of uneven social development). Moscow: Publishing House of the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1986, pp. 119-134.

Shnirelman V. A. the Main centers of ancient productive economy in the light of modern science // Vestn. ancient history. - 1989. - N 1. - p. 99-110.

Shnirelman V. A. Rybolovyj Kamchatki: ekonomicheskij potentsial i osobennosti sotsial'nykh otnoshenij [Fishermen of Kamchatka: economic potential and features of social relations].

Yankovsky, M. I., Kitchen remains and stone tools found on the shore of the Amur Bay, Izv. East. - Siberian Branch of the Russian Geographical Region. - 1881. - Vol. 12, issue 2/3. - pp. 92-93.

Erlandson J. M. The Archaeology of Aquatic Adaptations: Paradigms for a New Millennium // Journal of Archaeological Research. - 2001. - Vol. 9, N 4. - P. 287 - 350.

Hayden B. Nimrods, Piscators, Pluckers, and Planters: The Emergence of Food Production // Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. - 1990. - Vol. 9. - P. 31 - 69.

Hayden B. Practical and Prestige Technologies: The Evolution of Material Systems // Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. - 1998. - Vol. 5, N 1. - P. 1 - 55.

Hewes G. W. Indian Fisheries Productivity in Pre-Contact Times in the Pacific Salmon Area // Northwest Anthropological Research Notes. - 1973. - Vol. 7, N 2. - P. 133 - 155.

Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Prehistory, Biogeography, Domestication, and Evolution of Maize. - San Diego: Academic Press, 2006. - 678 p.

Kew M. Salmon Abundance, Technology and Human Populations on the Fraser River Watershed / Ms. on the file with Anthropology Department. - Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 1976. - 242 p.

Moseley M. E. The Maritime Foundations of Andean Civilization. - Menlo Park: Cummings Publishing Company, 1975. - 131 p.

Moseley M. E. Maritime Foundations and Multilinear Evolution: Retrospect and Prospect // Andean Past. - 1992. - Vol. 3. - P. 43 - 54.

Price T. D., Gebauer A. B. New Perspectives on the Transition to Agriculture // Last Hunters, First Farmers: New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture. - Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 1995. - P. 3 - 19.

Richardson J. B. III. Early Hunters, Fishers, Farmers and Herders: Diverse Economic Adaptations in Peru to 4500 B. P. // Revista de Arqueologia Americana. - 1992. - N 6. - P. 71 - 90.

Russo M., Heide G. The Joseph Reed Shell Ring // The Florida Anthropologist. - 2002. - Vol. 55, N 2. - P. 67 - 87.

Sandweiss D. H. The Development of Fishing Specialization on the Central Andean Coast // Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Fishing Strategies. - Boise: Boise State University, 1996. - P. 41 - 63.

Tabarev A. V. People of Salmon: Technology, Art and Ritual of the Stone Age Cultures, Russia Far East // Archaeological Education of the Japanese Fundamental Culture in East Asia. 21 COE Program Archaeology Series. - 2006. - Vol. 7. - P. 111 - 124.

Winterhalder B., Goland C. An Evolutionary Ecology Perspective on Diet Choice, Risk, and Plant Domestication // People, Plants, and Landscapes: Studies in Paleoethnobotany. - Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1997. - P. 123 - 160.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 27.02.07.

page 59

Permanent link to this publication: