Paragraphs 4 analyze results achieved by contemporary Russian scholars in studying of Ermanaric’s kingdom. At the turn of XX—XXI^st centuries there appeared new approaches to historical estimation of anciejit societies, including Chernyakhov, which had been previously considered as late primitive one. At this time fundamental monographic studies concerning the history of Goths and Chernyakhov culture were created by M.B. Shchukin, A.M. Oblomski, M.M. Kazanski. They testify that priority in studying of Ermanaric’s kingdom and its culture has transferred to archaeologists. Meanwhile, all the enormous corpus of archaeological sources is still far from being completely used for studying of the phenomenon of our interest.

Chapter IV “Goths and Chernyakhov culture” is dedicated to studying of historical, geographical, socio-economical and cultural aspects of the problem in the light of comparative analysis of data from narrative, linguistic and archaeological sources. Paragraph 1 considers stages of the Ostrogothic history in context of Chernyakhov culture evolution. Special attention is paid to the ‘age of Ermanaric’ (333—375 AD), which was marked with a heyday of classic Chernyakhov culture in Phase C3. Paragraph 2 defines the territory of Ermanaric’s kingdom. In IV^th century AD the enormous area occupied by Chernyakhov culture was a scene of complex processes marked by spreading of uniform items, homebuilding traditions, funeral rituals, and also information, experience and innovations. The Ostrogothic society of IV^th century AD was characterized by the quick synthesis of achievements of late ancient civilization and local barbarian culture.

Paragraph 3 throws light on a contemporary approach to the problem of Goths in the south of Eastern Europe. Today no one of the scholars is doubtful that linguistically Goths belong to East German group (vocabulary of Ulfila’s Bible, runic inscriptions, etc.). But all that complex conglomerate united under the reign of Gothic kings was perceived by Greeks and Romans as ‘Scythians called Goths’ (Dexipp., Chron., 16). It is not impossible that such a definition masks a wish of Greek and Roman authors to emphasize some special, non-Germanic features of Goths, which had to emerge in the process of‘finding of native land’ in Black-Sea Scythia.

Paragraph 4 deals with a question about the area of Oium and a pre-Gothic substrate in connection with the problem of Spali. Paragraph 5 analyzes the basic ethnic components of Chernyakhov culture to the east from the Dniester. Now we reveal more and more distinctive archaeological ethnic indicators of the presence of Eastern Germans in the south of Eastern Europe in III—IV^th centuries AD: long houses, inhumations with northern orientation and cremations in urns, hand-made ceramics of Wielbartype, arms, many details of clothing, first of all fibulae, decorations, as well as horn combs. Certainly, one of the most definitive Germanic elements was represented by the runic script. Anthropological research testifies that Chernyakhov population also included ethnic groups close to the population of Northern and Central Europe of the Roman age. A late Scythian tradition in Chernyakhov culture shows itself in stone homebuilding in the Black sea region, some pottery shapes, partly — in anthropology; Sarmatian elements are perceptible in the spread of circular yurt-shaped dwellings, in some types of burial structures (pits with fillets, cuttings, catacombs), as well as in a custom of artificial deformation of skulls. ‘Sarmatian’ features serve not as a heritage of the pre-Gothic substrate, but as an evidence of the presence of scattered groups of Sarmatians and Alans among the population of already formed Chernyakhov culture.