Ugric peoples in the Cis-Ural region: continued

The article is a response to the criticism of the concept of Ugric presence in the Kama and the Urals region in the early Middle Ages, which was advanced at the XIX Urals archaeological congress in Syktyvkar in 2013. The severest criticisms were aimed by R.D. Goldina and V.V. Napolskikh at the findings of the underlying archaeological statistical analysis conducted by the author of this article. Some comments turned out to be correct. Having considered these critical remarks, in this article, the author presents the results of a new statistical analysis of the funerary rite of archaeological cultures in the Kama region and the Ural region in the second half of I millennium AD, and their synchronous cultures from the forest zone of the Trans-Ural region and Western Siberia and the ancient burial grounds of the Hungarians (the Arpad period) on the Danube. He sets out the principles of selection of the input materials and methods of their statistical analysis. The conducted studies allow a conclusion: Lomovatovo, Nevolino, Polom culture in the Kama region, Kushnarenkovo and Kara-Yakupovo cultures in the forest-steppe zone of the Cis-Ural region, forest culture from the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia, in fact, represent one ethnocultural area (ECA) and are typologically associated with the archaeological culture of the ancient Hungarians. In conclusion, the author proposes to abandon, for a while, further attempts to combine data of archaeology and historical linguistics in ethnic reconstructions and explain the phenomenon of high typological similarity of the above cultures using modern methods of analysis of archaeological material, or prove absence of such phenomenon