Scientific life. Congresses, conferences, and symposia

The study of the military affairs of the peoples of Eurasia in antiquity and the Middle Ages is one of the promising areas of modern archaeological science in Russia, the CIS countries and European countries. Over the past decades, weapons studies have been conducted in many scientific centers of these countries, scientific conferences on this issue have been organized, and scientific works on the history of wars, weapons, and the art of war have been published. The exchange of information contributes to the intensification and development of scientific research in the field of military history.

One of the thematic forums devoted to the problems of studying weapons, horse harness and costumes of nomadic peoples of the Eurasian steppes in ancient times and the Middle Ages was the All - Russian scientific conference "Equipment of nomads of Eurasia", held on September 21-25, 2005 in Barnaul by Altai State University. It was attended by archaeologists, experts in the history of weapons and heraldry from scientific institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, universities and museums in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Barnaul, Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk, Novokuznetsk, Gorno-Altaisk, Kemerovo, Shchuchinsk. Among them were researchers from the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Altaistics, teachers and employees of the Altai, Barnaul Pedagogical, Gorno-Altai, Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk Pedagogical, Krasnoyarsk Universities, the State Historical Museum, the State Hermitage Museum, the Kuznetsk Fortress Museum, the University of Defense of Kazakhstan, as well as foreign guests.

The conference was held in the framework of a plenary session and three thematic sections. The work of the plenary session "Theoretical foundations of the study of equipment of nomads of Eurasia" was opened by the chairman of the organizing committee A . A. Tishkin (Barnaul), who addressed the participants with a welcoming speech, announced the conference program. Then the vice-rector of the Altai State University addressed the audience . Nevinsky (Barnaul), who spoke about the main directions of the university's scientific activities. Yu. S. Khudyakov (Novosibirsk) emphasized the importance of thematic scientific conferences devoted to the analysis of current problems of military affairs, military and horse equipment, nomad costumes for the exchange of the latest scientific information and the development of weapons research in Russia and the Siberian region. A. P. Umansky (Barnaul) introduced the participants to a new book published in collaboration with P. I. Shulga and A. B. Shamshin and dedicated to the study of archaeological sites of the Scythian period in the Altai Territory.

The report "Nomad equipment as an ethno-cultural and chronological indicator in studying the history of Altai" was presented by a . A. Tishkin, BB . Gorbunov et al . G. Gorbunova (all-Barnaul). They touched upon some issues of the history of weapons, horse equipment and costumes of ancient and medieval nomads of Altai and presented their understanding of the methods of formal and typological analysis of artifacts. V. V. Gorbunov also noted the peculiarities of descriptive, graphic and natural reconstruction of weapons, stressed the importance of using different types of sources.

The problems of reconstruction of the armament complex of the nomads of Central Asia in the late Middle Ages were covered by Yu . S. Khudyakov, J. A. Bobrov (both from Novosibirsk) in the report "Experience of reconstruction of nomad armaments in Central Asia during the Late Middle Ages". The experience of researchers who reconstructed the armor of the Ministry of Education and Science was analyzed-

page 160

The article also demonstrates the possibilities of recreating the armor of Dzungarian and Tibetan warriors based on scientific developments and the study of well-preserved museum exhibits.

T. G. Gorbunova in her report "Typological method in archeology and its significance in the study of nomad equipment" considered this method as a way to study the evolution of artifacts, including those related to military and horse equipment in time and space.

Eight reports were presented at the section "Armament and Military affairs of the Eurasian Nomads: Analysis, interpretation and reconstruction".

P. K. Dashkovsky (Barnaul) in his report "Weapons in the funeral rite of the Pazyryk culture of Altai" gave statistical data on the finds of weapons and their votive models in the graves of different sex and age groups of ancient nomads of the Scythian time. Some debatable problems in the study of the military affairs of the Kamensk culture of Altai were considered by G. A. Kolesnikov . E. Ivanov (Barnaul). He expressed doubt that the population of the Kulai culture, which lived in the taiga zone of Western Siberia, could be superior in military terms to the steppe nomads of the Kamenskaya culture. L. A. Bobrov (Novosibirsk) made a report on the development of heavy-armed cavalry in Central Asia and Southern Siberia in the late Middle Ages and modern times. Yu's report . S. Khudyakova and Yu Su-Hua (Novosibirsk) "The role of Xianbi in the development of the armament complex of the nomads of Central Asia" was devoted to the analysis of changes in the military affairs of the nomadic world during the period of political and military domination of the Xianbi power. A comparative study of the weapons and equipment complexes of the Huns, Xianbians and other nomadic ethnic groups showed that the Xianbins were superior to their historical opponents in close combat and defense. In the speech of P . In Mandryk (Krasnoyarsk), finds of weapons and military equipment from early medieval cremation burials excavated in the taiga zone of Central Siberia were introduced into scientific circulation.

V. V. Gorbunov in his report "Spears of warriors of the Srostkin culture" summarized all the known finds of shaft piercing weapons from the forest-steppe and steppe regions of Altai. N. A. Kuznetsov (Novokuznetsk) spoke about the finds of quivers in medieval cremation burials in the Kuznetsk Basin. The speaker suggests that the forms of these quivers are similar to the cases for carrying arrows from the monuments of the Xiongnu period in East Turkestan. A. V. Varenoe (Novosibirsk) in his report "A set of weapons from the M164 horse burial at the Xiaotun burial ground in Anyang and the problem of horse riding in Shan China" reviewed the results of excavations and interpretation of one of the burial sites of the Shang-Yin era, which Chinese scientists consider to be the burial of a horseman. The speaker gave a number of arguments in favor of considering this complex as the burial of a charioteer, and therefore, there is no data on the appearance of horse riding in the Shan period. During the discussion, a representative of the Heraldic Service and the University of Defense of Kazakhstan, G. A. Abramovich, made a speech . V. Plotnikov, who spoke about plans for cooperation with Russian scientists in the study of military affairs of nomadic peoples of Eurasia.

Eight reports were presented at the section "Equipment of riding horses: chronological and ethno-cultural attribution of archaeological materials".

D. V. Papin (Barnaul) analyzed the findings of horse equipment items on the monuments of the final bronze age and the transition period from the Eneolithic to the Early Iron Age of the steppe and forest-steppe Altai. He gave information about the finds of psalms in the monuments of the plain Altai. In the report of K. V. Chugunov (St. Petersburg) considered the findings of bits and psalms from the monuments of the Aldybel culture of the Early Scythian period in Tuva and expressed his views on the evolution of the bridle among nomads of the entire steppe belt of Eurasia. Report E . V. Perevodchikova (Moscow) "Items of horse equipment from Scythian royal mounds of the IV century BC, as a chronological indicator" contained data on breast hanging ornaments of horse harness from monuments of the highest nobility of Scythian culture in Eastern Europe . G. Gorbunova proposed several options for the reconstruction of the horse's bridle based on excavations of the graves of the Bulankobin culture at the Yaloman II monument in Gorny Altai.

S. A. Komisarov (Novosibirsk) in his report "On the origin of stirrups" analyzed new information about the finds of paired stirrups and one-sided footrests in the archaeological sites of China. He supported the opinion of the Chinese scholar Wang Theing about the independent

page 161

the origin of stirrups and running boards. In the report T . G. Gorbunova "Ornaments of khitan horse equipment and their analogues in the monuments of Southern and Western Siberia" analyzed harness accessories with rich plant, zoomorphic canonical ornamentation. Noting the similarity in ornamentation, she stressed that she does not consider such objects in Siberia to be Khitan. In the joint report T . G. Gorbunova, A. A. Tishkin and St. Khavrina (Barnaul) on the basis of spectral analysis, the features of the technology of manufacturing horse equipment items from non-ferrous metals are considered. In speech A . M. Ilyushina and M. G. Suleimenov (both Kemerovo) presented the results of studying horse equipment from excavations of medieval monuments in the Kuznetsk Basin.

At the section "Costume complex (clothing) of nomads of Eurasia as an ethnic and social indicator", six reports were read.

A. L . Kungurov (Barnaul) spoke about the study of finds of wooden scabbards from the monuments of the Old Alei culture of the Early Iron Age. In the joint report "Belt buckles-clasps of the Scythian period in the Altai" A. P. Umansky and PI . Shulga (both from Barnaul) noted that their findings of buckles are typical of the Scythian-era complexes in steppe Altai and Tuva, but are not typical of the Pazyryk culture of Gorny Altai. P. I. Shulga touched upon the finds of whips in the monuments of Altai. Performance With . S. Matrenina (Barnaul) was devoted to the analysis of costume, and in particular jewelry, for the reconstruction of the social structure of nomads of the Xiongno-Xianbian period in the Altai Mountains. In his opinion, monuments of the Kok-Pash type should be attributed to the Bulankobin culture. This assumption needs justification. A. A. Tishkin presented a reconstruction of women's headwear and outerwear based on finds from the Yaloman II burial ground in Gorny Altai. Topic of the CA presentation . Pilipenko (Novosibirsk) - "On the issue of the distribution of women's headdresses of the Mongolian period". He analyzed the findings of birch bark conical pommels related to the headdresses known in the sources under the name "bocca".

Speakers ' presentations at all sections aroused great interest and discussion on the main problems of reconstruction of weapons, harness and costumes of nomads.

The conference demonstrated the importance of holding such scientific forums for exchanging information, familiarizing scientists with the results and methods of the latest research on the history and culture of nomadic peoples of Asia. The organizers of the conference gave its participants the opportunity to take an excursion to the Altai Mountains and see some archaeological sites.

Another scientific forum devoted to the history of weapons, military equipment and military affairs in general of the ancient and medieval peoples of the Eurasian continent, held in recent years, was the X International Conference on the history of weapons "Invaders and their weapons in antiquity and the Middle Ages". It was organized and held in Lodz by the local branch of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences on November 3 - 5, 2005. The conference was attended by scientists, military historians, archaeologists and weapons experts from Bulgaria, Germany, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and France.

The conference was opened by PAN E. Mike, Director of the Lodz Branch of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnology, who addressed the participants with a welcoming speech.

At the first meeting, presentations were made on the study of military affairs in classical antiquity.

N.'s report Secunda (Poland) was devoted to the analysis of the prevailing ideas about defensive weapons and, in particular, about the shields of Greek soldiers. The speaker presented a diverse and very informative iconographic material on the problem raised. Various images of the Hellenistic period, bas-reliefs and statuettes, coins and seals very realistically show warriors with oval-shaped shields, with an external vertical bar, edging and an umbon in the center. The author of the report considers such shields to be "Galatian". They were used by horsemen riding on horses covered with chepraki. In some drawings, they are shown barefoot, but with spurs tied to the ankle. The report showed a reconstruction of the appearance of a mounted warrior in a long cloak with a hood and an oval shield.

In the report in . A. Goroncharovsky (Russia) analyzed the finds of Roman offensive weapons in the monuments of ancient times in the Northern Black Sea region and considered the issues of their use by the soldiers of the Bosporan Kingdom. As the author of the report noted, since

page 162

during the reign of King Mithridates VI Eupator, the army of the Pontic Kingdom had defectors from the Roman army, and military units - spira-were created on the model of the Roman ones. At the same time, finds of Roman offensive weapons in Bosporan cities are very rare. One of these finds was discovered in 2002 On the square of the town of Gorgippia on the Taman Peninsula, an iron sword with brackets and rings from the scabbard was found. Similar paired rings attached to the scabbard on both sides are characteristic of Roman gladiuses. Another Roman sword was found in the Gorgippia necropolis. Such swords were depicted by Roman soldiers in relief in Palmyra. The speaker showed images of Roman soldiers in frescoes, where they are shown with standards and two spears. He noted that the army of the Bosporan Kingdom had a Thracian spira, organized according to the Roman model. These materials testify to the influence of Roman military affairs on the Greek population of the Northern Black Sea region.

The reports heard at subsequent sessions contained information on the history of military affairs of various medieval peoples of Europe and Asia.

P.'s speech Skupniewicz (Poland) was devoted to the analysis of Sasanian plate armor. The author of the report drew on well-known images of lamellar military carapaces and horse protective blankets on bas-reliefs of the Sasanian kings Ardashir and Shapur, Parthian graffiti from the Dura-Evrops monument, images of scenes of royal hunting on toreutics objects. According to the speaker, these personal metal protective equipment is quite comparable to the cuirasses of Polish soldiers of the XVII century.

Topic of the report A. K. Nefedkina (Russia) - armament of the Goths of the III-VI centuries AD. He made an attempt to reconstruct the Goth armament complex based on information from written sources. Originally, the Gothic weapons complex included spears, swords, and shields. Gothic shields were rounded or oval in shape. In the materials of the Chernyakhovskaya and Velbar cultures, according to the speaker, rectangular shields with an umbon in the center and protrusions on the sides should be considered protective weapons. In the reconstruction used in the report by D. Warry, the shields are shown rounded and trapezoidal. The Gothic warriors used German Spangenhelm helmets for protection, as well as chain mail, scaly and plate armor, just like the Romans. The speaker considered the image of a warrior on a dish from Isola Rizza, which is interpreted as a drawing of a Goth, a Lombard, or a Byzantine. According to the decree of the Visigoth king Er-viga, the Gothic warriors had two types of armor: lorica and tsaba. The speaker offered his understanding of this information. In general, the complex of protective weapons of the Gothic warrior, according to A. K. Nefedkin, included a helmet, chain mail or shell and a shield.

Report In . Iotova (Bulgaria) provided a detailed comparative analysis of the weapons of the tribes that lived on the Lower Danube in the VII-XII centuries AD.The author of the report noted that different ethnic groups took part in the military operations of that era, which had unique weapons and military traditions. Soldiers from among the Turkic, Slavic and other peoples served in the troops of different sides. The early Bulgarians, or Proto-Bulgars, a Turkic-speaking nomadic people, fought and made campaigns together with the subject Slavic tribes against the Byzantine Empire during the acquisition of Thrace. However, at the same time, the troops of the Bulgarian Khan Omur-tag also made campaigns against the rebellious Slavic tribes. Representatives of various nations, including Greeks, Armenians, and even a Christian Arab specialist in the use of siege engines, served in the Proto-Bulgarian troops. The Bulgarian Khan Krum made a joint campaign with the Avars against the Byzantine emperor Nikephoros Phokas. The main allies of the Bulgarians during this period were the Pechenegs. Together with the Pechenegs, the Bulgarians made campaigns against the Magyars. During the campaigns of Prince Svyatoslav against Byzantium, the Pechenegs, Magyars and Bulgarians were with him, although he later died as a result of the Pechenegs ' attack. Later, the allies of the Bulgarians were the Guzes and Polovtsians. All these contacts contributed to the mutual influence of the nomads and the Bulgarian population in the military field. At the same time, a part of the Magyars, the Vardariots, who converted to Christianity, were hired soldiers in the Byzantine army. In the design of weapons and horse equipment found on the Lower Danube, there is a certain ethno-cultural specificity. According to the speaker, Proto-Bulgarian stirrups had a peculiar, lobed footrest. Lanceolate arrowheads were typical for the X-XI centuries. Byzantine swords, Scandinavian swords and scabbard points, brushes and maces were found in Bulgaria. This weapon was characteristic of the Varangians, soldiers of the Varangian squad of the Kievan Prince Svyatoslav. The Pechenegs were characterized by bone arrows. The speaker believes that iron stirrups with ce-

page 163

the ribbed coinage and spurs reflect the "Kyrgyz influence" on the equestrian equipment of Bulgarian riders. This report aroused many questions and great interest among the audience.

In the report of Yu . S. Khudyakova and L. Bobrova (both from Russia) presented methods for the subject reconstruction of armaments of medieval nomads of Central Asia. Based on the reconstruction of weapons complexes, it is possible to compare the level of military development of different nomadic ethnic groups, highlight their ethno-cultural features and evaluate the military art of nomads. Graphic reconstructions do not always correspond exactly to real prototypes. Based on the same finds of objects, different, sometimes clearly erroneous options for the reconstruction of armor are proposed. As an example of such an untenable reconstruction, we can cite a variant of the reconstructed ancient Turkic helmet and carapace, based on an incorrect interpretation of the findings of carapace plates from the excavations of the Balyk-Sok monument in Gorny Altai. The authors of the report developed the basics of methods for reconstructing weapons and armor of medieval nomads of the Central Asian region. To understand the basic principles of creating the design of armor, well-preserved carapaces and helmets of Mongolian and Tibetan warriors stored in Russian museums were accurately reproduced. This helped to understand their design features and find out their functional properties. On the basis of this armor, the carapaces and helmets of the Xianbian, ancient Turkic, and Jurchen warriors were reconstructed, and their wearing and use in combat and field conditions were tested. The report was accompanied by a presentation of reconstructions of the weapons complex of medieval nomadic warriors. It aroused interest and many questions from the audience. Speakers emphasized the importance of subject reconstructions for weapons studies.

In report A. Different variants of graphic reconstruction of the military vestments of nomadic warriors of the VII-XIII centuries were proposed in Vashkova (Bulgaria). The speaker is a professional artist who is interested in the military history of the nomadic peoples of Eurasia. In his speech, he rightly noted that such reconstructions should be based on materials from iconographic and archaeological sources, and called for the cooperation of archaeologists, military historians and artists. His drawings are based on the use of medieval images of soldiers and published finds of weapons. However, in the report itself, the sources were not analyzed, and it is rather difficult to judge the reliability of the reconstruction of the Proto-Bolgar, Magyar, Pecheneg and Cuman weapons complexes from the drawings themselves.

In the report, p . Kotovich and A. Michalak (both in Poland) presented data on the finds of petiole axes, cleavers, and birdsharks from the advanced Middle Ages in Poland, Ukraine, and Bulgaria. The findings of such an axe in Karakorum in Mongolia and in Transbaikalia, according to the authors, indicate that they were introduced to Eastern and Central Europe by the Tatar-Mongols.

During the discussion of this report, the authors ' attention was drawn to the proliferation of such weapons among the Jurchens and Tungus.

V. Svetoslavski (Poland) in the report " Confrontation of two worlds. Armament of Western European and Mongolian warriors in the first half of the XIII century. " conducted a comparative analysis of the weapons of Europeans and Mongols. He compared the possibilities of using Western European swords with a straight, double-edged blade and nomadic weakly bent sabers. According to his observations, spears with lenticular cross-section, elongated - rhombic feather became widespread among Europeans, and tetrahedral peaks with a hook were common among the Mongols. Such spears were characteristic of the Jurchen. Europeans, according to the speaker, were characterized by tetrahedral petiolate arrowheads of bows and spiked vtubchatye crossbow tips, and for the nomads of the Mongols-reflex bows, flat and three-bladed petiolate arrows. A comparison of different types of armor, chain mail, helmets, and shields among Europeans and Mongols is also made. The speaker noted that the Mongols used bracers that the Europeans did not have. The report touched upon the use of ballistae and combat gases by the Mongols, reconstructed the equipment of horses and horse armor. Such a comparative analysis is of undoubted interest for the history of military affairs of European and Asian peoples. The report was illustrated with graphic reconstructions of warriors. It caused a lively discussion among the conference participants.

In report A. Zemann (France) considered the weapons of the "barbarians" according to medieval iconography. The object of the analysis is images of Norman and Saxon warriors on the famous Bayou carpet, which shows the Battle of Hastings. Author of the report-

page 164

I noticed that the Saxon and Norman warriors had different types of weapons: battle axes, spears, armor, and shields. Another medieval European miniature presented in the report depicted the scene of Genghis Khan's death during the siege of the capital of the Tangut state. According to the creator of the miniature, the Mongol Khan died from being mortally wounded by an arrow fired from the city by one of its defenders. Genghis Khan is depicted on horseback, with a scimitar on his belt. Next to it are Mongolian horsemen in turbans with spears in their hands. Other medieval European miniatures discussed in this report also show Mongols wearing turbans and carrying scimitars. Judging by these drawings, the creators of miniatures did not see the Mongols, but represented them as typical "eastern" warriors, more like Arabs or Turks.

In the speech in . Medieval crossbows of various designs, v-shaped tips of crossbows of different types and methods of their manufacture were analyzed in Serdeau (France). The historian mapped the finds of various types of crossbow tips found on the territory of Europe, and noted the peculiarities of their distribution in France. She is the author of a detailed monograph on crossbows, called "the devil's weapon", which was demonstrated to the conference participants.

Report from . Ekdala (Germany), dedicated to the "victory machines" used by soldiers of the Baltic Crusaders, presented an analysis of crossbows, catapults and ballistas. The author analyzed a crossbow with a characteristic loop and horns curved in the direction of shooting. The stone-throwing machines used by the Crusaders were also reconstructed. Catapults and ballistae made of wooden beams have different designs. Especially impressive is the large catapult, about 10 m high, with a high frame and two wheels. The use of such weapons contributed to the military success of the Crusaders in the Baltic States.

In the report to . The military strategy of the Crusaders in the Baltic States is considered. The author touched upon the issues of Christianization of the local population and the role of military equipment in military operations.

In the message D . Rakevicius (Lithuania) spoke about the design of the crossbow of the XIV-XV centuries., preserved in Vilnius Castle. Its trigger mechanism is a gear wheel with a handle, which served to tighten the bowstring. The speaker touched upon the design of Livonian crossbows and the typology of iron-tipped bolts used to shoot crossbows. G. Rakevicius reminded the conference participants that Vilnius University, which has a three-hundred-year history, awarded an honorary doctorate diploma to one of the conference participants - Professor Sven Ekdal from Berlin. All present congratulated S. Ekdal on this honorary award.

In the report in . The role of weapons mentioned in the Polish and Czech chronicles of Gallus Anonymous and Kosmas was evaluated . These sources mention different types of weapons and equipment, and describe the appearance of warriors. The description of swords, battle axes, bows and arrows, carapaces and helmets is given. The author of the report compared the description of the swords of Siegfried and Roland in the medieval epic.

Report of M . Voloshina (Poland) was devoted to the analysis of the Tatar campaigns to Europe in the XIII century.according to the data of archeology and history. The author noted the finds of weapons and equipment on the territory of Poland, which he attributed to the Tatars. Among them are the middle lining of bows with a circular pattern, flat asymmetrically rhombic arrowheads, the pommel of whips in the form of a bird's head, horn parts of horse harness, petiolate axes and axes with ornaments.

L. Marek (Poland) spoke about the weapons of the Flemish infantry, called "gedendag" - "good day". This weapon had a piercing or cutting tip and a shaft. Such weapons are depicted in miniatures and bas-reliefs. It resembles the palm trees used by the Tungus and Mongols.

T.'s speech Grabarczyk (Poland) is devoted to the study of weapon inventories in the register of the garrison service of the Polish fortress of Vardiowa in 1493. Based on this data, he tried to divide the warriors into four categories. However, the registry data is incomplete. For example, it mentions 18 helmets, 8 shoulder pads and carapaces, and only three knee pads. It is quite obvious that these data are not complete and it is impossible to distinguish different categories of soldiers from them. The report raised many questions and comments.

page 165

Report from . Botalova (Russia) It was devoted to the characteristics of the Hunnic weapons complex of the II-VI centuries AD. According to the author, the Hunnic culture developed in Ordos in the Bronze Age on the basis of different ethnic components: Iranians-Juns and Di, as well as Mongoloids. In the future, it spread throughout the steppe of Eurasia. According to his version, long swords were borrowed by the Huns from the Chinese. As the Huns advanced westward, there was a gradual increase in the thickness and width, as well as the massiveness of the blade of these swords. Such a reconstruction has raised a number of questions and objections, since no swords have yet been found in Hun monuments in Central Asia, and Western Hun complexes differ significantly from those of the Huns.

The reports presented at the conference contained important information on the history of weapons of the ancient and medieval peoples of Eurasia. The organizers plan to publish the conference materials.

The conference was accompanied by a rich cultural program. Participants had the opportunity to take a tour of the museums of a number of cities, to see the historical estates and castles of famous Polish aristocratic families in the cities of Uniew, Turek and Konin. These monuments of defense architecture of the XV-XVII centuries were partially rebuilt in the following centuries. The most interesting exposition is contained in the Konin City Museum, in a castle with a high fortress wall, towers and casemates. The exhibition features weapons of the Galynstadt period, early and developed Middle Ages. Among the exhibits there are reconstructions of helmets and carapaces of Polish soldiers of the XVII century.

In conclusion, I would like to note the hospitality, warmth and cordiality of our Polish colleagues, the organizers of the conference, who made considerable efforts to ensure that this scientific forum was held at the highest level.

The tenth conference on the history of weapons of the peoples of Eurasia became a significant event in scientific life. It demonstrated new scientific methods and research results of weapons experts, the interest of the scientific community in deepening scientific contacts and information exchange.

Permanent link to this publication: