Великий Шовковий шлях, якого не було

• Veröffentlicht in: Археологія і давня історія України
• Datum: 2022
• 1. Verfasser: Хазанов, А.М.
• Format: Artikel
• Sprache: Ukrainisch
• Veröffentlicht: Інститут археології НАН України 2022
• Schlagworte: Дискусії
• Online Zugang: https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/187585
• Назва журналу: Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
• Zitieren: Великий Шовковий шлях, якого не було / А.М. Хазанов // Археологія і давня історія України: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: ІА НАН України, 2022. — Вип. 1 (42). — С. 163-192. — Бібліогр.: 194 назв. — укр.

У статті йдеться про формування, зміст та
 розуміння поняття «Великий Шовковий шлях». Автор доводить, що трансконтинентальної торгівлі
 шовком між Китаєм та країнами Близького Сходу
 і Європи в сучасному економічному розумінні у давнину не існувало. Торговельні зв’язки на так званій
 «трасі Великого Шовкового шляху» були спорадичними, нерегулярними та залежали від багатьох
 зовнішних чинників. Більш-менш стабільні торговельні операції між Китаєм та Заходом сформувалися лише у пізньому середньовіччі. Interregional long-distance trade in silk certainly existed
 in ancient and medieval times, but the transcontinental
 and regular «Great Silk Road», whether overland
 or even maritime, is a myth, a phantom. Its existence is
 not confirmed either by written sources or by archaeological
 data. A concept of the Silk Road implies at least knowledge
 of macro-routes and their final destination, as well
 as transcontinental connectivity. The latter, if it existed in
 antiquity and medieval times at all, was much more occasional
 than regular and intentional. As a rule, such trade
 involved many middlemen. The «Silk Road» and the trade
 in silk, even a trans-regional one, are quite different notions.
 The transcontinental overland trade existed in but
 a few short-lived historical periods; it was neither confined
 to silk nor was it even a road. The «silk roads» were only
 one of many long-distance continental and transcontinental
 trading itineraries that existed in the Old World in
 premodern times. It is also important to remember that
 transcontinental trade was limited only to high-value,
 low-volume goods. The exotic appeal of long-distance trade
 in luxuries combined with a striving for political correctness
 often results in distorted and exaggerated opinions
 on premodern commerce in general. Not only silk and
 other luxury and prestige goods, but also people, religions,
 languages, scientific knowledge, inventions, innovations,
 new technologies, know-how, chemicals, minerals, metals,
 plants, medicine, cultural transmissions and artistic styles
 and fashions, cuisine, and musical instruments moved
 along its numerous itineraries, but on the negative side,
 epidemic diseases and epizootics were also disseminated
 across Eurasia along with them. Finally, it is worth stressing
 again that the long-distance Eurasian trade not only
 directly or indirectly stimulated movements of people and
 created ethnic diasporas. Frequently it was just members
 of these diasporas who brought new knowledge and technological
 knowhow and contributed to their practical applications
 in the new milieus. That was the main achievement
 of Eurasian trade, with no continuity between the
 trade in silk in the ancient and medieval times.