17. Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere, Gumilev

Part Eight, 3rd section, XXXIII. Fracture Phase

PASSIONARIC FRACTURE

We have already seen by the example of Byzantium that the surplus of passionarity of ethnic system is not always useful for it, but the disappearance of passionarity is even more pernicious. In the 7th century, it turned out that the attempt to restore the Roman Empire failed. Justinian overestimated the strength of his people and underestimated the strength of the eastern enemy. It is difficult to blame him for the latter: he thought that the only serious rival of Byzantium was Persia. And that state had been weakened by the reforms of the Vizier Mazdak (488-629) and the liquidation of their consequences, as well as by the rebellion of Bahram Chubin (590-591), which killed the best part of the regular army. However, the war of 604-628 was won by Byzantium with extreme effort and thanks to the help of the Turkites, who relied on Khazaria.

Both Byzantium and Iran were exhausted in this war, so the performance of a new ethnos, the Arab-Muslims, formed from the relict tribes of the Arabian Peninsula, was tragic for both Persians and Greeks-(Byzantium).

Iraq was conquered in its entirety and robbed clean. Byzantium lost Syria, Egypt, Carthage, and lowland Cilicia, and it was not until 718 that the Arabs were defeated at the walls of Constantinople, after which the war in Asia Minor turned into a series of plundering raids and counter-raids.

On the Balkan Peninsula Byzantium also suffered losses. In 679 the Bulgarians, who had fled from the Khazars, crossed the Danube and occupied the country between the Danube and the Balkans. The Eastern Roman Empire had become a Greek kingdom, which did not care about the feral Western Europe, which had turned from a center of world power into the object of predatory raids by Arabs from the south, Avars from the east and Scandinavian Vikings from the north. Without passion it was very difficult to repel all these enemies.

But the Byzantine powers were so great that after losing those lands, whose population wanted to be put off, the Constantinople government subdued the Slavic tribes in the Balkan Peninsula (689) and repulsed the Arabs from the walls of the capital in 718. The ethnocultural differences, weakly perceptible at a low level of passionarity, became more acute in the eighth century, when the Byzantine ethnos entered a violent phase of breakdown, manifested in the iconoclasm of the emperors of the Isaurian dynasty.

This time was, perhaps, more unnatural than the preceding acmatic phase, when the increased passionarity of the whole region broke the golden hoop of the empire's borders and threw Syria, Egypt, Africa and Armenia into the hands of the Umayyad caliphs, and Italy into the heel of the Lombard kings. The division then arose naturally: the Arians, the Monophysites,

Nestorians claimed, "We are not as ignorant as you, for we understand the Scriptures better." The Chalcedonites responded in the same way, after which ethnic divergence ensued, with ethno-psychological motives of confessional declarations. However, having quarreled, it was possible to disperse, which was the natural way out, while under iconoclasm everything was unnatural and therefore creepy.

Indeed, the Orthodox tsar, the conqueror of the impious Muslims and pagan Bulgarians, suddenly forbids religious art under the pretext of the need to separate speculative philosophy and the emotional element of art, and yet, using his official position, wants to teach monks, specialists in their business; and who supports him? - Soldiers and noble lackeys of both secular and clerical rank. Not heresy, but disgusting.

We deliberately leave aside the historical analysis of iconoclasm in the political, economic and ideological aspects. Much has been written about them, but what is important for an ethnologist has been omitted. The most profound thoughts of emperors and patriarchs cannot explain why the Isaurian soldier cut down the image of the Virgin with his sword, and the Greek women, risking their lives, beat that soldier with stones and sticks. And yet both were illiterate, they were ignorant of theology and politics, and did not think at such a time of such complex subjects.

There is a simple and correct explanation for the nature of the events of this era: iconoclasm is a Minor Asian phenomenon, iconoclasm is a Hellenic phenomenon. For the Asiatic, icons were the decoration of the temple, where the spirit was to be exalted to the throne of Truth as an abstraction with no visible image. For the Greeks, icons were a window into another being; they depicted a countenance, not a countenance or even a face; therefore, spiritual perfection was associated with aesthetic perception, through which the truth was revealed.

The level of passional tension in Byzantium in the eighth century declined to the phase of breakdown. As a consequence, even the unprincipled disagreements caused bloodshed which was not good for the cause. Italy fell away from Byzantium, where in 751 the Lombards took Ravenna, and in 756 a secular state of the popes was formed. And Emperor Constantine Copronymus, instead of bringing order to the fallen-away region, massacred defenseless lovers of the fine arts at home.

The Seventh Council of Nicaea in 787 brought temporary pacification, but during the period of turmoil the Bulgarians managed to gain a foothold on the Danube. Only in Asia were undoubted successes achieved, and that because in the Caliphate, which united the Arab-Muslim super-ethnos, things were even worse. The Caliphate under the Abbasid dynasty was falling apart, and, as in Byzantium, the decisive principle was ethnicity, clothed in confessional forms. In its decay, the Caliphate was ahead of Byzantium, which in the subsequent, inertial phase of ethnogenesis managed to grow stronger, politically and economically, thanks to which it survived the Caliphate. Now let us conclude.

During the periods of the first two phases of ethnogenesis, the ethnic system overcomes extraneous influences, the growing passionate tension makes it resistant. But even in these initial phases, there are always numerically more harmonious people individually and with instincts that are balanced. These are serious people. When sub-passionarians start to run amok in their midst, they start a labyrinthine hunt (where they destroy people), organize the exile of unfit people to colonies, etc. In this way they preserve the ethnic stereotype of behavior and tradition, the basis of the signal heredity of people.

It is more complicated with passionarians: they are needed and can defend themselves. Therefore they are given the right to kill each other, which they widely use. But the very presence of passionaries in the system makes it malleable and capable of resisting external influences, because the passionaries know how to find a way out of the most difficult situations. And when between these types of members of the ethnos, a certain optimal ratio is established - the system is almost invincible. But as soon as this ratio is broken during the change of phases, the system becomes susceptible to blows from the outside. Then the ethnos can easily die from displacement.

Such a displacement proved tragic for the Arab super-ethnos, because the areas included in the Caliphate, which received a charge of passionarity from the Arab conquerors, began to fall away from Baghdad. Sometimes uprisings were suppressed with great expenditure of military force, such as the defeat of Mukanna in Central Asia in 762, but more often they were successful. In 789 Morocco was laid aside, in 820. - Khorasan, and Seistan in 867. Two years later a ghastly revolt of the Zinj slaves, led by an Arab, broke out. In 872 Iain Tulup declared himself independent ruler of Egypt, and in 877 the Carmates of Bahrain went on the offensive and in 903-909 the - Fatimids in Tunisia. Passionate tension broke the shackles of any political system and in half a century transformed a benign law-abiding state with a thriving economy and growing culture into a kaleidoscope of struggling ethnicities or consortia seeking to form themselves into ethnicities.

Blood flowed so profusely that the Arabs lost hegemony in their own country. In Africa, the Berbers and Tuaregs seized the initiative; in Iran, the Deilemites, a mountain tribe that until then had stayed out of politics; in Central Asia, the Tajiks, after a long struggle, yielded to the Turks and Turkmens. The enormous forces of the Muslim super-ethnos were extinguished within their own system. The process of ethnogenesis, initiated by Arabs, destroyed the ethnos that gave birth to it, but left intact a unique culture and the tradition connected with it, into which neighboring ethnoses were drawn for a long time.

This process took place somewhat differently in the Romano-Germanic world. There it was less intense, which benefited Europeans, although the features of the acmatic phase in Western Europe were very clearly expressed.

SUCCESSION OF FLOURISHES

Looking at the subsequent history of the Western European or Romano-Germanic super-ethnos, it is easy to see that different ethnoses alternately lead and give way to one another. This leadership is expressed in different ways, but if we see it as a function of the passionary tension of the ethnic groups that make up the super-ethnos, the diversity of forms ceases to confuse the researcher.

The first place after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire was taken by the Germans. Their kings Heinrich Ptitzeloff and Otgon the Great stopped the Hungarian raids, thus ensuring the economic growth of Germany on both sides of the Rhine. The borders of their domain were the Elbe and Rhone, and in Italy they inherited the iron crown of the Lombards. Otgon II tried to wrest southern Italy from the Byzantines, but unsuccessfully, and then the French Normans took over the initiative. But they too fell victim to the Germans in 1194.

Three dynasties changed in Germany during this time: the Saxon, Franconian and Swabian (Hohenstaufen) dynasties, and in the 13th century the Germans began to lose their positions. The French took the Languedoc and part of Lorraine from the German empire, and the Italians managed to get rid of the "beastly race" (Germans) altogether. Politically, the war between emperors and popes, socially, the struggle between feudal lords and cities, historically and culturally, the rivalry between jurists and prelates, and ethnically, the loss of the leading German tribe, the Swabians, of their stock of passionarity and the consequent loss of the margins.

In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries Italians were the leading ethnos of Catholic Europe.  Profiting from the Crusades, robbery of Byzantium, trade with the East, and usury, they simultaneously supplied all the kings of Europe with lawyers, diplomats, theologians, poets, artists, builders, and sailors.

Dante wrote: "Be proud, Florence, of your share of majesty, you beat the earth and the sea with your wing, and your very Hell is filled with glory..." With the Florentines successfully competed no less dexterous and unscrupulous Venetians, corrupt Romans, cunning Bolognese, hypocritical Sienese, thuggish Calabrians, but the right to first place on the road to Hell, according to the same Dante, belonged to the Genoese, who broke through for the sake of their trade affairs not only in the Golden Horde, but even into Russia; though here they failed.

During the heyday of the urban republics of Italy, the other countries of Europe were going through hard times.

England and France were at each other's throats, with the English supported by the Gascons and the French by the Scots. The war lasted more than a hundred years, bound the two countries together and left them utterly exhausted. And even after the English left "Belle France" (with the exception of Calais), they transferred the edge of their irrepressible passions to each other and began the War of the Scarlet and White Rose. These feudal lords were so accustomed to war and so incapable of doing anything else that "Old England" knew no rest.

And then the hitherto small countries rose up: the Czech Hussites and the Swiss Highlanders poured blood into Germany, Austria, and Burgundy. In short, almost all the forces of Western Europe were locked in on themselves and were mutually destructive. Passionary fracture made the "Christian world" powerless, which was very beneficial to the strengthening of Turkey and Russia, i.e. the countries which began their ascent in the XIV century, therefore, compared with Western Europe – they were young.

A similar change of passionary blossoms is traced in the eastern half of the European super-ethnos, where the Slavs were in contact with the Germans. In the 14th century, the Czech Hussites carried out the first stage of the Reformation, which bleached both Bohemia and the neighboring regions of Germany. In the 16th century Poland came out on top, absorbed Lithuania and became a pillar of the Counter-Reformation. This was its undoing, for it deprived it of the opportunity to establish contact with the Orthodox.

In the middle of the XVII century the Ukrainian Cossacks inflicted a few crushing defeats on the Polish troops, then the Swedes marched through Poland and robbed it clean, and, finally, the Turks conquered Podolia. The heroic victory in 1688 saved Austria, but finally wore out Poland, whose decline in the XVIII century is well known.

Sweden was the most successful in the XVII century, but this sparsely populated country has spilled its passionates with Gustav Adolf in Germany, with Charles X in Poland, with Charles XII - in Russia, and did not compensate for the damage in population growth. There were enough children born, but not as many as there were in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

It should be noted that there was no economic or cultural decline in the Scandinavian and Slavic countries, nor in the western duchies of Germany, Austria, and Holland. In the 18th century almost all European countries, having overcome the passionary "overheating" of the acmatic phase, developed their economy, built beautiful cities, traded with the whole world, making huge profits, and patronized writers, artists and scientists, i.e. people gifted but not excessively passionary. This was the so-called Age of Enlightenment. The optimal level of passionary tension in Europe was achieved by the fact that "excessive" passionarians went to the colonies and rampaged there, without mentioning Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant and Goethe.

And yet, there was one country in eighteenth-century Europe where the passionary tensions were growing. Doesn't this contradict the concept outlined above? Let's look into it.

Germany suffered more than any other country from the horrors of the Reformation, the Counter-Reformation and the Thirty Years' War. This is understandable: the passionate tension there began to subside already in the XIII century, which was mentioned above, and if so, then this rich and civilized country became a victim of ethnic groups with a high level of passionarity. Croats, Spaniards, Walloons, Danes, Swedes and the French passed through Germany, while Germans, both Lutherans and Catholics, either endured the outrages of the Landsknecht (mercenary gangs), or joined their gangs themselves. Faith did not play a role here; they went to the colonels who paid better.

Since the Catholics were defeated at White Mountain in 1618, the Protestants from Bohemia had to emigrate; many of them found refuge in the neighboring Margraviate of Brandenburg. French Huguenots as well as Polish "Arians" willingly resettled there as well. Berlin became a haven for persecuted ideological Protestants who brought their passion with them.

The Brandenburg Brand was founded on the land of the Slavic Lutic tribe, and its population in the 18th century was mixed - Slavic-Germanic. The importation of passionarity entailed a fusion of these ethnicities, similar to what happened in England in the eleventh and thirteenth centuries.  Thus, Brandenburg, which became the Brandenburgian-Prussian state, was one phase behind Western Germany and Austria in terms of ethnogenesis: when everyone else was "enlightened," the Prussians still wanted to fight. That is why they won the War of the Austrian Succession. The Seven Years' War, the war with Napoleon I and finally with Napoleon III, after which Prussia became the leader of a unified Germany, excluding Austria and Luxemburg.

The end of the fifteenth century saw the unification of Castile with Aragon, the Spanish conquest of Granada, and the discovery of America (1492) and the discovery India (1498). The forces of Spanish and Portuguese passionaries found use, and the passionate tension in the Iberian Peninsula decreased to an optimum. This gave great advantages to the Habsburgs, who inherited the Spanish crown. Throughout the sixteenth century the Spanish infantry went from victory to victory, Spanish gold solved the complexities of diplomacy, and the Spanish navy dominated the seas. The glitter of the victory over the Turks at Lepanto (1571) lessened the bitterness of losing the war, especially as it was Venice that paid for the defeat.

But the collapse of the Invincible Spanish Armada (1585) and the fall of Holland (1581) showed that Spain's strength was declining rather than growing. In the seventeenth century, Spain suffered defeat after defeat. It did not have enough men to replenish its army and navy, nor for the needs of industry, nor to defend its American possessions against English and French corsairs. And it was not that Spain was depopulating, but simply that Spaniards were fighting less well and working less.

In 1648, at the Peace of Westphalia, the Spaniards accepted the loss of their hegemony in Europe to France and, on the seas, to Holland. But the domination of the Dutch was short-lived, as England came forward. And then began her new, the Hundred Years' War with France, which ended with the battle (1815) at Waterloo, after which the palm of primacy in Western Europe went to England.

All ethnic groups known to science have passed through this phase of ethnic development, with the exception of those who died in the previous phases. In Europe, this phase coincided with the Reformation, the great discoveries, the Renaissance and the Counter-Reformation. In Rome it was the time of the conquests of Marius, Sulla Pompey, and Caesar, as well as the civil wars. In Byzantium, a similarly creative and difficult period was the victories of the Isaurian dynasty and iconoclasm. In the Arab Caliphate, this age proved fateful: the Caliphate collapsed, Spain and Maghrib seceded, Maverannahr (Central Asia) and Khorasan; pseudo-Muslims appeared: the Karmats, Sufis, and secondary Shiites, the Buids; Egypt fell away; around Baghdad the Negroes-Zinjis, the whiney Turks, and the desperate Deilemites fought for real power. The Arabs were left with only the cultural sphere, but they succeeded handsomely in it.

AND IN CHINA...

In ancient China, this is the era of the seven "Warring States. The analogy of the bellicose and Moorish-soaked Spain was the Qin Kingdom, which included the warlike Di tribes living in the lowlands of the Shaanxi and the jungles of Sichuan, and subjected them to the brutal discipline of the Legism doctrine, the equivalent of the Jesuit order. France was matched by the rich, cultured and cheerful country of Chu, covered from the north by the blue Yangtze River and from the south by the impenetrable jungle. Chu was Qin's most dangerous rival, contrasting the rigid soldier system with the allure of luxury, art, and freedom. The heart of China, the territory of the former kingdom of Jin, heir to the Zhou Empire, broke up into three small kingdoms: Han, Wei and Zhao; they corresponded to the territory of Germany, also fragmented and also heir to the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation. The eastern kingdom of Qi, located in Shandong, could easily be compared with England, and the Yan kingdom, abandoned in Liaodong, with Sweden or Denmark.

The situations in this arrangement were similar: Spain, leading the Counter-Reformation, wanted to subjugate all of Europe, but, fortunately for itself, did not succeed. Qin, with its doctrine of Legism, conquered all of China in the 3rd century BC... to its own misfortune.

Well, let's imagine for a moment that the same conquest - of Europe - would have succeeded to Philip II. What would have happened? An Inquisition all over Europe; Spanish garrisons in Paris, Geneva, London, Stockholm, Venice, for which all the young men of Spain would not have been enough. Huge expenditures on the army and police, for it was still necessary to keep the front against Turkey; and that meant debilitating taxes, causing general popular hatred. And at the first opportunity - a general uprising of the peoples, who would not spare the conquerors. Spain escaped this fate, but this is what happened to the kingdom of Qin in 207 B.C. Qin never rose again, and the bleeding China was easy to unite to the first able pretender. It was the peasant Liu Bang, who gave the empire, built on the ruins, the name Han. In similar situations there may be different results. 

The Medieval China, which emerged on the ruins of the ancient kingdom of Qin, like the "Christian world" of Western Europe emerged on the ruins of Ancient Rome, formed as an ethnic entity in the 6th century. [34] and reached a similar phase in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It suffered a different fate: the brilliant culture of the Song era under a repulsive administration and a demoralized government fell prey to foreigners: the Tangugs, the Jurchens and the Mongols. In contrast to the Arab caliphate and the Arabic-speaking Muslim ethnos, China was resurrected under the Ming dynasty, but this is a different phase of ethnogenesis.

As can be seen from these examples, and all the others do not contradict them, it is difficult to consider the phase of fracture as a "blossom. In all known cases, the meaning of the phenomenon is to squander the wealth and glory accumulated by the ancestors. Yet in all textbooks, in all survey works, in all multi-volume "histories" of art or literature, and in all historical novels, descendants praise this very phase, knowing full well that Savonarola was rampant next to Leonardo da Vinci and that Benvenuto Cellini himself shot the traitor and vandalist, the connetable of Bourbon, with a gun.

Obviously, the impressions of such a wide range of deeds, from exploits to crimes, have a powerful effect on the researcher or novelist, and it is characteristic of every person to remember the light bands of the spectrum and to forget the dark spots. That's why they call these eerie eras "the heyday."

VICTIMS OF THE HEYDAY

By the beginning of the XVI and in the XVII centuries, the percentage of passionaries in Europe had decreased, and the percentage of sub-passionaries had increased due to the extermination of the conservative part of the harmonic population, the most industrious and law-abiding ones. The system of super-ethnos lost its stability, because individual passionarians could easily recruit roving soldiers from among the sub-passionarians. This they did, then as preachers: Luther, Calvin, Savonarola, John of Leiden; then as condottieri: Moritz of Saxony, Mansfeld, Wallenstein; then as kings who violated the laws of the kingdom - Henry VIII Tudor. Whereas earlier such attempts had met with immediate resistance from other passionaries, when there were fewer of them, each had a larger arena, and hence an opportunity to gain inertia.

Hence the clashes of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation took on a great scale and cost even more victims. The unified system splintered, and people began to look for friends to keep from falling into the clutches of their enemies. And since it made no sense to ask for help from the rulers, the principle of complimentarity came into force: they looked for sincere friends and paid them in sincerity, for this was the surest insurance.

And how could these unhappy people not seek association for self-defense when the Duke of Guise burned the barn where the Huguenots sang psalms, Jeanne of Navarre had Catholics who went to mass thrown into an underground prison, and the English King Henry VIII ordered a Catholic to be hanged on a gallows for honoring the pope and a Calvinist for denying the sanctity of mass! Cynical rulers were scarier than non-believers, for they had at their service executioners and informers without faith, honor or conscience (sub-passionarians).

But the rulers, too, could not do without sincerely faithful servants. So, they had to join one of two unifying ideologies:

Protestantism or Reformed Catholicism, for only a memory remained of traditional Catholicism. Thus the Catholic League and the Protestant Union were created. The Thirty Years' War cost Germany three-quarters of its population. Other countries suffered less, but also a lot. But, alas, in this phase of ethnogenesis, not only ideological or political opponents of secular and spiritual rulers perished.

During the Renaissance, manslaughter was a daily occupation for the inhabitants of Western Europe, and it was on a massive scale. The object of persecution here was not so much thinkers, poets, philosophers, although they had their share of burnings - Miguel Cervet in Geneva and Giordano Bruno in Rome - as simple, harmless people with imagination. They were declared sorcerers and witches and mercilessly burned in Spain, and in New England. This suggests that the cause  of the executions lay not in the dogmas of faith, but in the behavioral shift caused by a decrease in the level of passional tension of the super-ethnic system. As soon as the phase transition was accomplished, the execution of witches began to seem an anachronism to the average citizen. And so everywhere wherever ethnos passed this phase change.

The philistine's accusatory pathos is usually fruitless, because it runs into an orderly judicial procedure, in which a critical attitude to denunciations is obligatory. But the inquisitors J. Sprenger and G. Institoris were themselves, judging by their actions, they were philistines with extraordinary powers. They were well aware that accusing a noble person of witchcraft was fraught with trouble for themselves. So they seized, tortured and burned defenseless women who had been denounced by their neighbors.  It was a kind of genocide: honest people who hated snitching and talented people who aroused envy died, while morally impure dullards multiplied, giving birth to the generation of European philistine characteristic of the 19th century.

THE SPLIT OF THE ETHNIC FIELD

At the end of the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) came weariness. It did not, however, entail unification. For a century and a half Protestants and Catholics alike had developed different stereotypes of behavior, which could only be reconciled on the basis of tolerance. The latter was proclaimed as a principle, but was pursued very inconsistently. It was not until the eighteenth century that the old scores were forgotten, and Europe regained its integrity, which was called not "Christian" but the "Civilized World." But even this balance was achieved at the cost of reducing the passionariness of the super-ethnos, which was relatively painless for Europe itself: passionarians and sub-pasionarians (first of all vagrant soldiers) were fused into the overseas colonies.

Three Catholic and two Protestant countries were active in colonial policy: Spain, Portugal and France, England and Holland. For the sake of clarity, let us agree on terms. If the peasants come from the country who want to do it with their own hands, here is what is remarkable; already in the VIII-IX centuries the doctrine of witchcraft and spoilage among the Germans was considered superstition[35]. Therefore, in the laws of the Lombard kings of the accusation of a woman that she flew on a broom, was seen as a slander, for which the denunciator was punished by putting him in prison[36]. Under Charlemagne such a denunciation was even punishable by death[37]. In the IX century at the Council of Anquira the coven was declared a denunciator's illusion,[38] though some bishops - Isidore of Seville, Raban Moor, Guincmar of Reims - accepted the doctrine of lamia[39].

This humane legislation was not inherited from civilized Rome, which was approaching a phase of obscuration. There sorcerers were either exiled or executed[40]. No, it was the common sense of passionate lizards building a life for their descendants. It would have been absurd if they had not made sure that their grandchildren would not become victims of conspiracy and arbitrariness.

But why did persecution of sorcerers arise in imperial Rome? In republican, semi-wild Rome there was no interest in witchcraft, but when a wave of luxurious civilization came from the conquered East, with it came a hatred of the intellect. The Jewish teachers of the first century prescribed the extermination of sorcerers (Talmud),[41] and in the middle of the second century Apuleius popularized the psychosis of fear of Thessalian sorceresses. And the persecution of fortune-tellers unfolded by the end of the second century at the same time as the persecution of Christians.

In Rome, this era coincided with the inertial phase of ethnogenesis on the eve of the transition to obscuration. Europe was ahead of Rome. Trials against witches began in the fifteenth century,[42] and no one accused the unhappy women of heresy and fighting against the church. They were burned because they were different.

So, in the "dark years" Middle Ages the defenseless creative people, the dreamers and naturalists could live peacefully; in times of war they suffered, of course, but so did their fellow citizens. But here came the age of humanism, the age of religious and philosophical quests, the age of great discoveries... And what? There came the 16th century; the High Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Second Inquisition, which fought not the Cathars - the enemies of the Church - but the defenseless dreamers and experts in traditional medicine. Here Catholics and Protestants acted as a united front. Oddly enough, the most burnings in an equal period of time were not at work in the new land they had seized, that was colonization. If soldiers, officials, and merchants are going there, seeking revenues from a subjugated country, it is colonization.

What is worse for the local population is another question. This is where the consequences of the split of the single field of the European super-ethnos, which manifested themselves in the religious war between Protestants and Catholics, came into play. During the colonization of America it was noticed that the Spaniards and the French had relatively easy contacts with the Indian tribes, though not with all of them, whereas the Anglo-Saxons were unable to establish relations, except purely diplomatic (for example, with the Iroquois in the 17th century), and organized scalp hunts, giving a bounty for killed Indians. Let us try to offer a theoretical solution.

The Spanish, the French and the English are the ethnic groups that constitute to this day the super-ethnic Romano-Germanic unity. But within this integrity they are quite dissimilar to each other in their ethno-psychological dominants.

Colonization of America coincided with the Reformation, i.e. a complete restructuring of the behavioral structure in the phase of super-ethnos fracture. The structure was simplified, and the released energy rushed beyond the Western European geobiocenosis, within which individual cultural variants became isolated from each other.  Not only Protestants, but also Catholics after the Council of Trent became unlike their ancestors, because Savonarola, Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini, Ignatius Loyola did no less for ethnocultural deformation than Martin Luther or Jean Calvin. So, the isolation of nations is a natural product of ethnogenesis, but the divergence of behavioral stereotypes is an inevitable consequence of it. These divergences determined the different attitudes of the European colonists toward the Indians.

The Spaniards saw the Kasik tribes as local nobles and gave them the title "don" when they were baptized. As a consequence, in Mexico and Peru a large portion of the Indians were assimilated. The French in Canada became fascinated with the Indian way of life and in the nineteenth century became a semblance of an Indian tribe. During the Louis Rillet Rebellion, the Métis and Indians acted in concert. The Anglo-Saxons drove the Indians into reservations, except for those who agreed to the American way of life.

The differences noted can be explained by the concept of the ethnic field we suggested earlier (pp. 355-356). If every super-ethnos is a field with its own frequency of oscillations, then the fields of super-ethnoses in this respect are in a different degree of closeness, So, it can be assumed that in the rhythms of the fields of "Catholic" ethnoses there were "consonances" with Indian ones, while those who chose Protestantism in Europe did not have them. But in the 16th century, almost all nations of Europe were divided into Catholics and Protestants, and everyone chose the stereotype which suited him.

Let's check. The Velikorussians mingled with the Tatars and Buryats, who largely embraced the Russian culture, easily dissolved among the Yakuts, but the Ugric peoples kept their identity, despite the long, close and friendly relations with the Slavs. But the Russians did not get along with the Indians in Alaska and California and could not gain a foothold there, despite the support of the Aleuts and Eskimos. And it is no accident that during the Thirty Years' War, Russia supported the Protestant Union against the Catholic League, employed Protestant Germans and traded with Holland. And yet Catholicism is dogmatically and ritually much closer to Orthodoxy than Lutheranism. Obviously, the ethnic factor prevailed over the ideological here as well.

The Protestants who came to South Africa - the Dutch, French Huguenots and Germans - formed an ethnic group called the Boers. They were most intolerant of the natives. Slavery in the Transvaal was not abolished until 1901, and the French in Haiti taught the Negro slaves the French language and the Catholic religion. The latter was interpreted in its own way by the Negro curées. In 1792, when the English fleet blockaded revolutionary France, the Negroes revolted against the French planters, reasoning: "God came to the whites and the whites killed God. Let us avenge God by killing the whites. And they killed all the French who were on the island.

And yet it is not alienation, but a form of ideological contact on a super-ethnic level. Today, the Haitian Negroes have restored to themselves the Dahomey cult of Vodou, the veneration of the snake, but only Catholics, including Europeans, are allowed to attend the mysteries.

From the observations described, we can conclude that the Reformation was not so much a revolt of ideas as a phase of nadolon, i.e., in-between the acmatic and inertial phases.

FRACTURE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE

It follows from all the above that the phases of ethnogenesis differ only in the degree of diversity, determined by the level of passionary tension. Subpassionaries, characteristic of homeostasis, are always there, but when passionaries appear in several generations they lose their exclusive importance in the established system; they are simply not noticed. During the rise, the role of harmonious people, faithfully carrying out their duties, grows. And they don't disappear in the acmatic phase, when the most passionate individuals die one after another during the passionary "overheating”.

In the phase of overheating the importance of subpassionarians grows, forming a cadre of performers during the civil war. Then, in the inertial phase, the importance of harmonious individuals increases again, but it sharply decreases in the phase of obscuration, when along with quiet sub-passionarians, inherited by the ethnos from its substrates, there are violent vagrant soldiers - the product of the departure of the inertial phase. They deftly deal with the harmonious individuals and simplify the system to the point of losing their resistance. Then they themselves perish, and following the collapse of the ethnos, its unique culture is forgotten and homeostasis sets in. This ethno-social pattern can also be traced in the ethno-geographical material. The characteristics of all phases coincide.

Ethnos, at its emergence, "adjusts" the host landscape to its needs and simultaneously applies itself to the conditions of the landscape; in short, the principle of feedback works here, in which nature suffers minimally. In the acmatic phase, when the ethnic system swells with energy, there comes a time of conquest and migration, the former limited by the resistance of neighbors and the latter also limited by natural conditions. 

Nature suffers in two ways. At home, passionarians are bored by digging in the ground. They prefer more difficult but more exciting ways of living and thriving. The pressure of civilization on nature diminishes, and since negative population growth is often associated with these tumultuous periods, the economy also falls into decline, with the consequence that natural landscapes: forests, steppes and swamps, as well as wild animal populations, are restored. But the countries conquered by the passionaries suffer greatly. The victims of conquests, as a rule, become those ethnic groups in which the level of passionary tension is low, which prevents them from organizing an effective defense. Therefore, they themselves and the wealth of their countries, including works of nature, fall prey to the victors.

Suffice it to recall the Spanish "gold fleets" carrying gold from Mexico and Peru, or the silver mines in Potosí, Bolivia, which became the grave of countless Indians. And the Portuguese plantations in Brazil can only be compared to the Dutch colonies in Java, the other Sunda Islands. Thousands of Malay and African slaves perished in order to turn the luxurious groves in the hills of Portugal and the meadows of the Netherlands into the estates of negociants and nobles, who for the sake of brilliance were not afraid of risk and spared neither others nor themselves. Fur companies in Canada have almost completely exterminated beavers, which today are saved only in nature reserves, and in East Africa elephant hunters exterminated whole herds in order to lose the money earned for their tusks on the London Stock Exchange. It was the same in ancient times. The rhinoceros was exterminated in China, the land deposits of jade were robbed in Khotan. But enough examples; let's look at the matter from the other side.

Whatever ferocity the passionate conquerors showed, they spoiled nature in a limited way. They took what lay on the surface, what was to be fought for, but did not have to work for. Therefore, after their victorious campaigns they left restorable biocenoses and badly damaged, but not destroyed, tribes of Indians, blacks, Polynesians and Papuans. And in doing so, the invaders risked their lives on a minute-by-minute basis.

So, in the course of the kraitons the level of passionarity of ethnic populations was largely artificially reduced, and it never occurred to anyone that these measures reduce the power of the state and the degree of resistance of the ethnic group.

We have already seen that in some cases this has had disastrous consequences, but the Romano-Germanic integrity of Western Europe has been lucky. Western Europe is a peninsula of the Eurasian continent. The sea protected it on three sides. The only danger was in the southeast, where the Turks, having broken the Byzantine Empire, launched a major offensive in the 16th-17th centuries. Hungary fell. Italy and Germany were next in line. And then the heroic Poland, the most backward [43] of the Western European countries, and therefore preserved a relatively large dose of passionarity, sacrificed itself. Jan Sobieski's hussars saved Vienna in 1683. By shedding their blood for Germany, Poles prepared the division of their homeland. When the German fracture ended and the inertial phase with national consolidation set in, Europe became invulnerable and aggressive again, but very little like itself in the preceding period. From "chivalrous" it turned into "mercantile", and this is worth mentioning. For now, let us return to the concept of Jaspers, or rather, to the views of Western European philosophers of history. All of them, starting with Augustine, saw in history a direction, purpose and meaning. All the Eastern thinkers saw in history the rise and decay, in other words, they saw processes as an end in themselves, and the meaning they believed in personal perfection, where history is only the background.

The difference, obviously, is not accidental. In our opinion, it is that the Westerners were talking about the progress of human creations, i.e. technosphere, which also includes philosophy as a product of human activity, while the Eastern sages talked about the living nature, humans being its part and machinery being its background. Let's translate this into scientific language: in the West, they studied socio-cultural history and in the East they studied ethnic history, often just genealogy. And we cannot say that one is more important than the other. Both are necessary. It is only bad when the methodology of sociology is applied to the study of natural phenomena. It is good that it is not the other way around.

This would be the end of the argument with Jaspers and other teleological systems of religion and progress. Two leading factors are involved in ethnic processes: the loss of inertia of the initial impetus, aging, and the violent impact of neighboring ethnicities or other forces of nature [44], displacement. The latter always deforms the ethnogenesis programmed by nature itself, but only at moments of phase transitions can disastrous displacement occur.

NOTES

[34] Gumilev L.N. 1) Three Kingdoms in China / / Reports of VGO. Vyp. 5. Л., 1967. С. 107-127; 2) Hunnish in China. С. 235.

[35] See: Lozinsky S.G. The Fatal Book of the Middle Ages//Monk J. Sprengeri G. Institoris. Hammer of witches /Translated from Latin N. Tsvetkov. M., 1932. p. 8-9.

[36] The edict of Rotar of 643 banned belief in strigs or lamias (vampires) and inadmissible "murders of women accused of witchcraft by madmen" (Ibid.).

[37] The first Saxon capitularium of 787 (Ibid.).

[38] Orlov M. A. History of man's relations with the devil. SPb., 1904. С. 183184. - This book represents a quite serious study of the medieval folklore, contrary to the title fashionable for the time of publication.

[39] Lozinsky S.G. The fatal book of Middle Ages. С. 10.

[40] Orlov M.A. op. cit. p. 132. 135.

[41] Ibid. С. 134.

[42] Ibid. С. 183.

[43] Since all ethnoses are subject to the entropic process of dissipation of energy - passionarity, the word "backwardness" means that the ethnos is still rich enough in this energy, just as a hot object has not yet had time to cool down.

[44] By the forces of nature here we mean grandiose changes in the landscape. For example, a transgression of the sea, a volcanic eruption on an island, a century-long drought, an epidemic caused by a newborn or introduced virus, etc.

.