Other People's Anthropologies

Ethnographic Practice on the Margins

Aleksandar Bošković, Aleksandar Bošković

• Editorial: Berghahn Books
• Año: 2008
• ISBN:
  9780857450203
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Social Sciences
• Categoría: Anthropology

Anthropological practice has been dominated by the so-called "great" traditions (Anglo-American, French, and German). However, processes of decolonization, along with critical interrogation of these dominant narratives, have led to greater visibility of what used to be seen as peripheral scholarship. With contributions from leading anthropologists and social scientists from different countries and anthropological traditions, this volume gives voice to scholars outside these "great" traditions. It shows the immense variety of methodologies, training, and approaches that scholars from these regions bring to anthropology and the social sciences in general, thus enriching the disciplines in important ways at an age marked by multiculturalism, globalization, and transnationalism.

Chapter 1

Russian Anthropology:
Old Traditions and New Tendencies

Anatoly M. Kuznetsov

INTRODUCTION

The interest in Russian (Soviet) ethnography and its affiliated disciplines was present in the West for a number of decades. There were publications in the US, the UK, and other countries (Gellner 1980; Clay 1995; Eidlitz 1985; Rethmann 1999; Skalník 1988). The articles by Russian authors in English began to appear more frequently. All of this gives one a possibility of understanding current conditions of ethnology and anthropology in Russia (Elfimov 1997; Slezkine 1991, 1996; Tishkov 1992). However, due to its lengthy development, the territorial extent, and the sheer quantity of scholars involved, Russian ethnology (or Soviet ethnography) is still an enormous topic to be covered by a single author. The situation was additionally complicated and the understanding impeded by the language barrier on both sides. In this essay, I address the questions not substantially covered by my predecessors.

One of the peculiarities of social anthropology in Russia is that it was publicly acknowledged quite late, despite the long history of its development. Nowadays, when Russian specialists are free to take part in international conferences and discuss anthropological issues with their foreign colleagues, we can see the different approaches in examining these issues. On the one hand, a particular position of Russian (Soviet) ethnologists (or ethnographers) could be simply traced to the dictate of the communist ideology twenty years ago. After the period of “Khruschev's thaw” in 1956, Soviet scientists had the opportunity to access foreign literature. Visits of foreign colleagues to the USSR also became a practice. However, the acquaintance with the conditions and the problems of the West—European and American socio-cultural anthropology—was only possible in the USSR through criticism from Marxist positions (Averkieva 1979; Bromley 1979; GriguLévich 1976; Puti Razvitiya Zarubezhnoj Ethnologii 1983). Such a simplified explanation is no longer effective. Many Russian scientists continued to keep the ideas of Soviet ethnography and ethnos conception even after perestroika, the period when ethnography relieved of its ideological dictate (Akademik U.V. Bromlej i Otechestvennaya Etnographiya 1960–1990s, 2003). In this case, we should look at other reasons that contribute to the tendency of the great majority of Russian specialists of accepting certain ideas, while refuting others. The first step in explaining this is understanding it—meaning both the knowledge of modern conditions and the history of the discipline.

FORMATION AND INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF RUSSIAN ANTHROPOLOGY

The start of materials collection in Russia dates back to the period of Peter the Great's reorganization in the eighteenth century. In 1714, the first museum, Kunstkamera, was established in St. Petersburg. The different collections, including the ethnographic ones, were concentrated there. The decisive event was the establishment of the Academy of Sciences in 1725. This event initiated complex studies of Povolzhe, Siberia, the North of the Far East of Russia, and then of Middle Asia within the bounds of geographic (Oriental) expeditions. During these expeditions, different ethnographic materials were collected and described by V.N. Tatischev (1744), S.P. Krasheninnikov (1756), G. Georgy (1776–1780), and others. Extensive ethnographic collections were presented by the participants of the great Far Eastern expeditions and around the world seaside expeditions, undertaken between 1725 and 1849 (V. Bering, U.V. Lisianski, I.F. Krusenshtern, V.M. Golovin, and others).

The Oriental scholarly tradition was established on the basis of the research in early nineteenth century Russia. In accordance with this tradition, the primary task of the Oriental studies was “to study the culture in the broadest sense of the word.” These studies resulted in the opening of a special Asian Museum in St. Petersburg. Also, as the new data was collected, the conditions were ripe for the emergence of anthropology.

The Ethnographic Museum separated from the Kunstkamera in 1836 and became one of the first ethnographic institutions in Russia. The next stage of the development of Russian ethnography was the establishment of the Russian Geographic Society in 1845. The Ethnographic Bureau of this Society implemented its research programs and published the Ethnographic collections of articles (1853–1864). With the ongoing investigations of Central and Eastern Asia, the famous expedition of Nikolai Mikluho-Maklai to New Guinea was organized by the Geographic Society during the 1870s. The Geographic Society departments in different parts of the country, including Siberia (East Siberian in Irkutsk and Troitsko-Savskoe in Kiyahta), and the Far East (CisAmurian in Khabarovsk, South Ussurian in Nikolsk-Ussuriiski) thus made many contributions to the development of ethnography, archeology and physical anthropology. It was not accidental that future Russian ethnology (anthropology) studies proved to be influenced by geography and Oriental studies.

The appearance of the separate sub-disciplines traditionally included in anthropology was not simultaneous. At first in the 1840s, physical anthropology as a separate discipline emerged at the Russian Academy of Science. The biologist Karl Ber, who came to Russia from Königsberg (Prussia) in 1834, played an important role in its formation. He was also instrumental in the formation of the anthropological cabinet in 1842 in St. Petersburg.

Archeology was established in the 1840s. Its beginning was based on the amateur digs of classical ancient relics in the South of the country (the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth century). The Society for History and Archeology was founded in Odessa in 1839. One of the first centers for systematic research was the Archeological Numismatic Society, based in 1846 in St. Petersburg. A young aristocrat, Count Alexi Uvarov, became the Head of this Society. He played a great but contradictory role in the history of Russian archeology. The Imperial Archeological Commission, established in 1859, was another institution devoted to archeological research. In 1864, the Moscow Archeological Society emerged through Uvarov's initiative. In 1866, the Archeological Numismatic Society was reorganized and became the Russian Archeological Society. Count Uvarov was also the initiator of the establishment of the Moscow Museum of History in 1883.

Ethnographic societies established in the 1840s also influenced Russian science. In 1864, the Moscow Society of Amateurs of Natural Science, Anthropology and Ethnography was established by Moscow University. They began to publish the Society's News and then the Works of this department. The All Russia Ethnographic Exhibition in 1867 was the one of the first prominent activities of the Society. After this exhibition, its collections were moved to the Moscow Public Museum and set the basis for the Dashkovski Museum. In 1879, this Society organized an Anthropological exhibition with ethnographic and archeological displays. The Society of Archeology, History and Ethnography was established at the Kasanski University in 1878. In the spirit of that period, the Ethnographic Museum in Petersburg was reorganized in 1879 into the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography. The Russian Museum that included the Department of Ethnography was established in 1897 in Petersburg. Its task was to study the ethnography of the Russian population.

As the new science of ethnography was being formalized, the question of specialized ethnographic training arose. Vsevolod Miller, Nicolai and Vera Harusina in 1885 received the permission of the Ministry of National Education to give lectures on ethnography in Russian Universities. This discipline was also included in the program of anthropology, initated by Dmitri Anuchin at the Faculty of Geography of Moscow University in 1884. Edward Petry did the same at Petersburg University. The problem of the lack of textbooks was taken up by N.N. Haruzin, who prepared the first publications of them early in the twentieth century. A review of the foreign and Russian ethnography position of this period was written, and the problems of ethnography were examined, in this textbook. N.N. Kharuzin directed his attention to the evolutionary theory of Tylor and considered discovering the law of human development to be the main task of ethnography. The first part of this textbook dealt with problems of general and material culture, the second with family and marriage, the third with property and primitive society, and the fourth with old beliefs. The next important event was the foundation of the first specialized journal, Etnografi

eskoe obozrenie, The Ethnographic Review, in 1889 (Kerimova 2003).

There was no state support for ethnographic research at this stage, and so it also developed through private initiative. An example of this is the work of the Ethnographic Bureau in Petersburg, established by the Prince V. N. Tenishev in 1897. This great landowner and businessman wanted to write a major work about Russian social life, because of the broad revolutionary movement that had developed throughout the country. For this purpose, he organized intensive research of Russian peasants. At first, he wanted to act via the Society of Amateurs of the Moscow University, but then he decided to work for himself. The results of the research about peasants living in the central part of Russia (published in Smolensk in 1897) contained the following sections: physical and natural features of the peasants, local conditions of peasants’ living, holidays, community ownership, and specific features of the peasants from different regions—the principles of functionalism (Nachinin 1955).

The political exiles of the nineteenth century also played a great role in the formation of Russian ethnography, as well as in archeology. They collected complete and sometimes unique information about the aboriginal populations of Siberia and the Far East. Some of the former exiles— including Vladimir Bogoraz, Vladimir Iohilson, Bronislav Pilsudski, and Lev Shternberg—became famous Russian ethnographers.

Gradually, the practical needs of the state, caused by the multiethnic character of the country, forced the government to extend the quantity of the institutes connected with ethnographic research. In the case of history, archeology, linguistics, and ethnography, the prominent role was played by the Russian Committee for Studying Central and Eastern Asia, established at the Academy of Science in 1903. The Commission for Aboriginal Population Structure of Russia and Neighboring Countries, led by Sergey Oldenburg, the academician and secretary of the Academy of Sciences, was founded only in 1917. In the beginning of the twentieth century, Russian ethnography (as well as physical anthropology and archeology) passed through the formative period and became well institutionalized in the scientific and academic associations. It also acquired a certain influence within society. In 1913, Vladimir Arseniev, the famous writer and researcher of the Far East of Russia, established the Ethnography Amateur Study group in Khabarovsk. Only a year later, based on this study group, the Department of Archeology, History, and Ethnography was formed at the Priamurski Section of the Russian Geographic Society.

The problems of ethnography and related sciences initiated a discussion in 1916. The obvious tendency to join ethnography to other scientific disciplines—like geography, archeology, and physical anthropology—and to form a new and more general discipline, was established during this discussion. The question was raised as to what name this new synthetic discipline should have. Finally, the debate ended with the idea of creating the new complex science, ethnology. Russian ethnology was formed with the input of natural sciences (geography, biology) and was based on the evolutionary theory.

THE OCTOBER REVOLUTION AND THE EMERGENCE OF SOVIET ETHNOLOGY

By the October Revolution of 1917, ethnology had been developing on the basis of an earlier tradition. A remarkable feature of formerly Russian and Soviet ethnology was the direction of this science toward complex studies of local varieties of cultures. The methods of ethnological research were applied to the past, so paleoethnology also developed. The transformation of science from ethnography to ethnology was strengthened with the reorganization of the existing and newly emerging scientific centers. At the same time, the total reorganization of the Universities and search for the new institutional and substantial (revolutionary) forms of teaching and scientific work led to the instability of many of the chairs, faculties, and institutes which appeared at that time. Another attempt to determine ethnography as a part of anthropology dated from the period of the Civil War. The famous Russian scientist Dmitri Anuchin, who studied at Sorbonne, developed a concept of anthropology as a unity of ethnography, archeology, and physical anthropology. He managed to establish the Chair of Anthropology within the Natural Studies Department of the Moscow State University in 1919. In 1922, this chair was reorganized into the Institute of Anthropology, named in honor of Anuchin after his death in 1923. However, other Russian specialists did not provide support for the idea of general anthropology and took the concept of ethnology as the universal science. It is significant to notice that there were no principal differences of views on origin, objects, and problems of this science between the anthropologists and the ethnologists.

The leading role in the formation and development of ethnology as well as Russian science in general at this stage belonged to specialists in Petersburg (and Leningrad thereafter). The ethnographic department was formed at the newly established Institute of Geography within Petrograd University in 1918. In the mid-1920s, the Institute of Ethnology was established in Leningrad, with Lev Shternberg as the head. In 1928, the Ethnographic Scientific Research Institute was formed on the basis of the Department of Ethnology at the State Leningrad University. As a result of the progressive policy toward the developing of the northern areas of the country during the 1930s, the Institute for Northern People's Studies was also established. In 1924, the Board of Languages and Northern Caucasus Ethnic Cultures Studies was established within the Academy of Sciences, along with the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, and the Commission for Inadigenous Structure Studies. The journal of the professional association, Ethnography, began to be published in 1926 in Leningrad.

Moscow was another important center. A very significant factor for that period was that besides the Anuchin Institute of Anthropology, the Ethno-Linguistic Department at the Faculty of Social Science Studies was established in 1922 on the basis of the former Faculty of History and Philology. The Chair of Ethnology was established at this facility in 1923. Then followed the new reorganization, causing the formation of the Faculty of Ethnology within the Social Sciences Faculty. The departments of history and material culture, ethnography, literature, and fine arts were included. The dean and the famous ethnologist, P.Ph. Preobrazhenski said, the primary purposes for this faculty were: “to form professional ethnographers and ethnologists, researchers of the USSR people culture; to form scientists-theorists combining particular specialty with broad humanitarian minds; to prepare practical cultural and political instructors for national minorities.” The changes applied to the museums as well. In 1923, the Central Museum for People Studies (based on the Rumiyantsev Museum) was established in Moscow. It was one of the most important ethnological institutions (Markov, Pimenov, Solovey 1999; Solovey 2001).

The Civil War led to the opening of new universities in Irkutsk (1918) and in Vladivostok (1920). The main role in organizing these universities belonged to the ethnographers from Petersburg who were in Siberia and the Far East because of the war. Sergey Shirokogoroff, who led the second expedition to Manchuria and the Far East, played an active role in Vladivostok. Alexandr and Ludmila Mervart were also in Vladivostok in 1918. They took an active part in creating the private Faculty of History and Philology in 1918 and opening of the State Far Eastern University. The Chair of Ethnography and Geography of the Far East and the Chair of Peoples’ Studies were formed at Vladivostok University.

By the late 1920s, Russian ethnology resembled Western European and American socio-cultural anthropology. It was based on the idea of combining ethnography, archeology, and physical anthropology, and these disciplines set the necessary terms for ethnologists to know ethnic languages. The long expeditions were considered to be the main method of collecting the information. However, by the end of 1920s, the situation in the country and the science had ch...