Ètnografičeskoe obozrenie

The article touches on the problem of self-perception of domestic scholars in a long on-going dialogue with American anthropology. The focus is on the figure of the latter’s founding father, who, as is known, maintained intensive contacts with many prominent Russian scholars (L. Shternberg, W. Bogoras, J. Averkieva, etc.). Thanks to him, they received their positions and degrees, weight in the scientific world. But there is much that is paradoxical in the Boasian influence on Russian anthropology. Bogoras, who was most strongly associated with him personally and adopted Boas’s fieldworks methods, nevertheless made little reference to him in his works. On the other hand, Averkieva, who quoted “Papa Franz” many times, practically remained unaffected by his intellectual influence. In the modern Russian history of anthropology, there is a growing desire to participate in the “sharing” of Boas’s legacy, together with their recognized American colleagues (G. Stocking, R. Darnell, etc.). However, the genealogy of professional connections between Russian and American anthropologists is not easy to construct. Mutual relationship sometimes appears in the most unexpected points (anthropological linguistics, physical anthropology), while parallels are often explained by “similar ways of thinking”.

Soviet ethnic history (etnicheskaia istoriia) and North American ethnohistory share not only similar names but also similar methods, such as the collection of interdisciplinary sources and the synthesis of collected information by ethnographers/anthropologists. However, on the inside, differences substantially exceed similarities. Thus, the foundation of the Soviet research genre is a primordial understanding of ethnicity where the focus is the past of either indigenous groups or industrialized peoples, whereas the North American genre is principally concerned with the continuity of group identities. In these genres, disciplinary development crises were also handled differently: ethnohistorians, while occupying a rather marginal position within anthropology, nevertheless quite radically expanded the geographical and subject areas of their research, whereas in the works of ethnohistorians, on the contrary, the discussion of theoretical issues nearly ceased. This situation is due to the different modes of functioning of science and research scholarship in the respective societies, as well as different degrees of involvement in interactions with various levels of the governmental structure.

The article analyzes theoretical and methodological discussions in Russian ethnography and historiography of the 1960s. The focus is on the fate of the historian L.V. Danilova and the collection, edited by her, “Problems of the History of Pre-Capitalist Societies” (1968), one of the brightest achievements of the non-dogmatic Marxism of the thaw era. On the basis of new archival materials, it reconstructs the project of the multi-volume publication “Laws of History and Specific Forms of the World Historical Process”, traces the roots of the “new direction” in ethnography, and offers a new reading of the activity of the history methodology sector of the Institute of History. International team of the would-be authors of this project could have made it a notable phenomenon in world Marxist thought. The author concludes that this did not happen because of the opposition of the conservative academic establishment.

The article examines rock paintings in a cave in Cerro Aci, a sacred place of indigenous peoples living in the Cananari river basin, a left tributary of the Apaporis (Colombia, Vaupes department). Residents of the nearby multi-ethnic community, where taiwano, cabiyari and tatuyo live together but taiwano predominate, consider the cave in Cerro Aci to be the first maloka – a communal dwelling, the home of the Master of animals, one of the key characters in the traditional religion of the autochthonous population of the Vaupes region. Research interest in this object of ancient rock art is due to the lack of scientific information about it. I record the location of rock paintings in the interior of the sacred cave, describe them, analyze the interpretation of the symbolism of rock paintings proposed by taiwano informants, and evaluate the possibility of determining the ethnic identification of this object. I further compare the pictorial motifs of the sacred cave in Cerro Aci and another nearby rock art monument, Cerro Morocco. Special attention is paid to changes in the attitude of indigenous peoples of the region toward giving the strangers access to sacred places, such as the dwelling of the Master of animals in Cerro Aci.

Taking the cases of Australian aboriginal people and Siberian Evenkis, the article discusses the issue of interaction of dissimilar cultures – on the one hand, autochthonous, traditional, having no developed literacy systems, and functioning without state structures or colonizing cultures; on the other, literate, technologically oriented, and developing in the context of statehood. The two people under consideration differ as much as state politics and policies that were applied to them. What they have in common, however, are negative factors such as the increase in mortality rates due to deaths of people under 40, self-destructive behavior (alcoholism, accidents, fights, or involuntary manslaughter), and suicides that are especially prominent among the youth. The article examines the use of population models to consider the possible causes of the depressive behavior against the backdrop of a relatively decent level of social stability, and explores the ways in which traditional culture, its transformations, religious bans, and everyday norms may influence the suicide rates.

The article presents a Russian researcher’s view of German ethnographers as “Others” and their perception of fieldwork as the main practice and method of the discipline, as reflected in their informal communication. In attempting to compare this with the Russian material, I found that it was impossible to apply the same optics to the analysis of the professional cultures of Russian and German ethnographers, yet similar narratives about fieldwork emerged as the result. The reason for these similarities lies in the communicative nature of ethnologists’ work and the universal traits of the psychology of people who produce ethnological knowledge. Reflecting on my experience of collecting this field material in Berlin, I look at myself as an observer of “Others” and argue that subjective experiences and boundaries influenced the way the research was conducted and the character of interpretations that the material received. I further comment on the unfavorable role asymmetry between the researcher and the researched, that made the coproduction of knowledge problematic.

The article examines the problems of the relationship between rural local communities and local landscape shrines. Drawing on fieldwork data, archival materials, local periodicals, and writings of Siberian Old Believers, I attempt to reconstruct the historical past of the Holy Spring, one of the most revered places in the Altai region, which bears the characteristics of both the cult and memorial place. I inquire into the conditions leading to transformations in the historical memory that is embodied in revered places and expound the methodology for studying such loci as functional zones of cultural landscapes, locations of memory, and objects of cultural heritage. I further specifically address the interesting case of overlapping vernacular practices of venerating holy places and collective memory of local events during the Civil War. Finally, I examine the most significant stages in the history of the revered place, as well as the reasons for its “reinvention” at the present time.