According to the results of geological researches lowlands after withdrawing the great Tetis sea was called Central Asian historic and geographic lituratures [1]. During the fourth period of Earth Geology, happened tectonic movements caused to be motley of lowland,its features have come till now. Naturally, in fourth period from black sand of Uzungi till the broad area in Aral Sea, as a result of sinking silts in water of Amudarya formed lowland in the term “ Khvarizam” Avesto [2]. It is known that from the results of archaeological researches carried out in the basins of Low Amudarya and Sariqamish under the leader of Tolstov, they achieved to take materials meant social and economical attitudes happened during the late Stone Age and Eneolit(new Stone Age) periods [3]. At that time with the reason of rising the Amudarya water level, appeared water basins mountain-mass with landscapes. This process is watched on borders of Uzboy, Sariqamishbuyi and Low Amudarya. In this way temporary cultural-economy areas formed on borders of Southern Uzungi Qoraqum, from north-west till the south of Aral Sea. It is a pity, in families which built huts in water basins, were main economy hunting and lived in termachilik (an activity which people pich up everything). They did not know clay architecture and irrigational farming. That’s the reason is natural climate and geographical environment.
The social- economy and cultural development of late Stone Age and Eneolit(new Stone Age) periods originated from geographical environment in South Turkmenistan. It can be watched that tribes brought clay architecture knowledge to house-building put step to irrigational farming. These conclusions can be connected archaeological materials which found in areas of people of Jaytun, Chaqmoqlitepa(hill with spark) and Geoksyur [4]. It can be concluded from archaeological researches that Geoksyur carried out irrigational farming culture by doing with small width, short and shallow irrigational water-works structures while Jaytuns carried out agriculture based on natural water. This created field system of farming and improved in the next processes.
In social- economy and ethnocultural development of the Bronze Age happened radical changes. Labour tools made from brass by tribes were the base for changes happened in societies. The giving-up a part of people’s accommodation to others raised the demand for food products and it gave chance to come into existence and develop new branches of agriculture. Peoples group mixed some specifications among population. The increase of the number of population requires to master new areas and this created to form new and new farming areas. The change of quality of the Bronze Age is watched in South Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and north-west Tadzhikistan. Early irrigational farming centers formed in the basin of the Tadzhan river in South Turkmenistan.
Archaeological researches that carried out on a large scale in Altintepa (goldenhill) in South Turkmenistan by archaeologist Masson proved that farming oasises under the control of city mayor that have a large extension [5]. But Askarov learned historical roots of consequtive progressed irrigational farming and townbuilding in Sopollitepa and watched its progressing process in Jarkuton [6]. Yu.A.Zadneprovskiy achieved to take materials that elucidated irrigational farming culture of settled population situated in basins and rivers like Koradarya (blackriver), Kosonsoy, Govasoy, Oq bura in Fergana valley [7].
Process that differ completely from irrigational farming areas formed in South Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Fergana valley was existed in Khorezm oasis. In early stages of the Bronze Age the activity of cultural-economy tracts with antropogen landscapes abolished on borders of Sarikamish, Uzboy and central, north of Akschadarya. According to the conclusions of researchers ancestors who lived on borders of Sarikamishbuyi, Uzboy moved to the basin of south Akschadarya [8]. In the last Bronze Age period it can be seen that cultural and sociol-economical depelopment of Khorezm region and it shows that the beginning of new period of ethnic interactions. Basis modifications in the development of social life are clearly visible in the places of Yonboshqa’la -7 and Yakkaparson-2. M. A. Itina carried out archeological investigations in the place of Yakkaparson-2 where is near Yakkaparson, the keepsake of early middle ages. In its cultural sphere she found out the remnant of agricultural equipment which was used for grain thresher and hammer. Investigator concluded that the place belonged to IX- VIII ages before Christ [9].
While investigating Yonbosh-7, where is situated in southern Okchadaryo, Y.G’.G’ulomov worked on the remnant of parallel walls in the direction of west to east which is situated with each other 20 m width and its height 77 m. S. P. Tolstov pointed out that the place belonged to VIII-VII ages (B.C) [10]. The culture of tribes that differ from the activity of heads of households that built second habitation of Yonbosh-7, Yakkaparsan-2 and Kuyisoy abode was learned by B. I. Vaynberg in south-west of Sarikamishbuyi. In investigations of explorers, Kuyisoy people did not have clay architecture and cattle-breeding was leader [11]. In our opinion, Yakkaparsons that have a huge number of cattle moved to the basin of Sarikamishbuyi Kuyisoy was rich in lakes and they were wealthy with food for cattle. In our mind, materials taken from cultural layers of Yonbosh-7, Yakkaparsan-2 confirm that the arrival of urbanization process which encompassed Middle Asia to the basin of South Akchadarya. It is a pity, the effect of this process did not take the tribes habited in Low Amudarya to clay architecture and farming culture level of Baktria and Margiyonas’. Undoubtedly, the quick change of Amudarya also did not give an opportunity for this historic progress.
Khorezm people made magistral canals of Amudarya and its streams and began to reclamation of unsued lands in the end of the second half of VI age (B.C.). And framing places came into existence. A.Asqarov explained that process depended on the immigration of Khorezm people in Khilmend valley to Amudarya [12].
So, with the help of historical information which is given above, we can come conclude that the development of neolit, eneolit social life of Khorezm region depended on geographical condition and the dynamic of Amudarya. As a result of raising water level in Amudarya brought into appearing very many water basins, after decreasing water level the function of appeared water basins ended up.
With the changing of flowing water in Amudarya new water basins appeared and this made hunts and the people who pick up things live on walk a lot. As a result villagers near Amudarya carried out irrigating farming with the help of irrigation equipments. It is a pity, to carry out investigations are required to prove the scientification of explorer’s conclusion. The lifehood who created Amirobod culture carried out farming on very damp lands which appeared as a result of the flooding of Amudarya. So the method of “ qayr” in farming developed. It is a pity this type of primitive farming continued till the end of the second half of the VI B. C. Our ancestors carried out household trends,tolerating fastidiousness of Amudarya during thousands years, dealing with geographical features. With household trends carried out by Khorezm people contributed heavily to the development of ancient world society of Central Asia.
It should be noted particularly that the location of the centres of farming of ancient East and the centre of nomads world in north, to introduce the knowledge on clay architecture and town-building of cultivator population to stock clans performed that the duty of ethnic centre in developing of cultural-economical communications.Though the valley situated inconvenient geographical condition, it is considered one of the hearth ancient civilization in developing of Central Asia’s ancient world.
Литература:
1. Герасимов И. И. К.Н.Марков Четвертичная геология М, 1939, с. 270–330.
2. Вайнберг Б. И. Экология Приаралья в древности и средневековье. //Этнографическое обозрение. М.”Наука”, 1997, № 1, с. 24, рис. 1.
3. Толстов С. П. Древний Хорезм. М. 1948, с. 59–65. ОН. же. По следам древнехорезмийской цивилизации. М-Л, 1948. с.50–54. ОН же. По древним дельтам Окса и Яксарта. М. «Наука», 1962. с. 27–39.
4. Масон В. М. Поселение ДЖейтун. М».Наука».1971. Хлопин И. В. Геоксюрская группа поселений М-Л «Наука», 1964; с. 9. рис-1.
5. Масон В. М. Новая цивилизация древневосточного типа на юге Средней Азии // Памятники культуры, новая открытия. М».Наука», 1976. Он.же. Протогородская цивилизация юга Средней Азии /СА, № 3, 1967 с.170–171. Он. же. Фортификация Средней Азии в бронзовом веке /Этнография и археология Средней Азии / М».Наука», 1979. с.28–33.
6. Асқаров А. Сапаллитепа. Т.”Фан”, 1973. Он же. Древнеземледельческая культура эпохи бронза юга Узбекистана. Т».Фан», 1977.
7. Заднепровский Ю. А. Древнеземледельческая культура Ферганы. МИА, № 118, М «Наука», 1962.
8. Собиров Қ, Атамуратова Д. Марказий Осиё қадимги дунёси минтақавий ривожланишида Хоразм воҳасининг тутган ўрни.//ЎЗМУ, № 3, 2011, с.213.
9. Итина М. А. Поселение Яккапарсон -2 (раскопки 1956–1959 гг) МХЭ, вып-6, 1963, с.107–129.
10. Толстов С. П. Древний Хорезм. М».Наука», 1948, с.70, рис.7.
11. Вайнберг Б. И. Памятники Куюсайской культуры //Кочевники на границах Хорезма. М».Наука», 1979. Изучение памятники Присарыкамышской дельты Амударьи в 70–80-х годах //Скотоводы и земледельцы Левобережного Хорезма. Вып.Л, М.”Наука», 1991.
12. Асқаров А. Ўзбек халқининг этногенези ва этник тарихи. Тошкент “Университет”, 2007, Б.117.
