Folia archeologica 27.
István Fodor: Az uráli és finnugor őshaza kérdése (Régészeti áttekintés)
164 I. FODOR The Kama valley was peopled by the Finno-Ugrians in all probability during the centuries about 3000 B. C., assimilating verly likely the sparse population of this area. 9 2 In this connection Chernetsov called the attention to a very peculiar climatic phenomenon, which gives, presumedly, the only possible explanation for the fact, why the greatest part of the Kama valley in the fourth millennium B. C. was almost quite uninhabitated. He explains this with the unequal distribution of precipitation on both sides of the mountain. While namely in the region west of the Ural there is a precipitation of about 100-140 mm between November and March, east of the mountain ridge it is not more than 70 to 90 mm. Clouds, brought by western winds, carrying rainfalls deliver their load mainly on the western side of the mountain. In winter this region was, consequently, covered by a thick snow layer, while east of the mountain the snow layer had been very thin, there could have been even patches sporadically not covered by snow. Every autumn, before snowdrifts could block up the passages, ungulates, as reindeer, elk and deer, crossed the mountain from west to east, where they could scratch off their food from below the rather thin snow layer also in winter. On the eastern side of the Ural the stock of game was in winter consequently copious, producing for Neolithic hunters considerably more favourable living conditions. 9 3 In the third millennium B. C., according to Chernetsov, the first great disintegration of Finno-Ugrians was completed. At this time in the Kama valley the Finno-Permian branch was living, in the zone between Ural and Irtis the Ugrians. Among these ethnic parts there had been at this time still very strong bonds, maintaining the cultural unity of Finno-Ugrian peoples more or less till the times about 2000 B.C. 9 4 Near to the above notion of Chernetsov is the theory of O. N. Bader. As for the migration of Proto-Samoyeds and Proto-Lapps there are no essential differences between their points of view. Bader puts, though, the period of the Uralian unity to the Mesolithic Age; 9 3 according to him the Finno-Ugrian unity disintegrated as early as the middle of the Neolithic, 9 6 and not at its end (about 2000 В. С.), as thought by the majority of linguists. 9 7 In this question he follows the notion of A. P. Okladnikov , previously traited, according to whom we have to regard the Neolithic culture of the eastern Ural not as the heritage of a common Finno-Ugrian population, but as that of the ancestors of Ugrians and Samoyeds. 9 8 (The scene of the Uralian co-existence is put by Okladnikov to the forest, resp. wooded grassland - steppe zone of both sides of the Ural. 9 9) According to A. Kb. Kbalikov in the third millennium B. C. the Volga-Kama Region and both sides of the Ural belonged to the dwellings of the Finno-Ugrians. Previously, in the fourth millennium B. C., we can observe an even larger 9 2 Cernecov, V. N., К voprosu о meste . . . 409. 9 3 Id., Naskal'nye izobrazenija Urala. II. 110.; Id., Opyt vydelenija . . . 115 116. 9 4 See notes 85 and 92. 9 5 Bader, O. N., О drevnejsih finno-ugrah ... 21. 9 0 Ibid. 14., Id., MIA 166. 169.; Id., MIA 172. 106. 9 7 Cf. Hajdú, P., Bevezetés az uráli nyelvtudományba. (Bp. 1966) 14. 9 8 Okladnikov, А. Р., К izuceniju neolita Vostocnogo Priural'ja i Zapadnoj Sibiri. In: Pervoe ural'skoe arheologieeskoe sovescanie. (Molotov 1948) 20.; Id., Iz istorii etniceskih i kul'turnyh svjazej neoliticeskih plemjon Srednego Jeniseja. (K voprosu о proishozdenii samodijskih plemjon.) SA 1957: 1. 54. 9 9 Id., Iz istorii ... 55.
