Siberian Ethnography: Historical Sketch and Evaluation

Siberian Ethnography: Historical Sketch and EvaluationAuthor(s): Demitri B. ShimkinSource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 27, No. 1 (1990), pp. 36-51Published by: University of Wisconsin PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40316195 .

Accessed: 18/06/2014 18:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArcticAnthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.230 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:04:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uwisc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40316195?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


SIBERIAN ETHNOGRAPHY: HISTORICAL SKETCH AND EVALUATION

DEMITRI B. SHIMKIN

Abstract. Since the late sixteenth century an important body of materials has been developed on Siberian ethnography. It has been the product of administrators, academicians, exiles, and social scientists. It has been unified by a common tradition of prolonged fieldwork with good knowledge of the native language. It has dealt, in particular, with current materials on social composition, subsistence, economic behavior, and survival problems. Religion and folklore have often been covered. With a few late exceptions, this literature has been pragmatic rather than broadly theoretical. It comprises at least a dozen studies of "world level" quality and is generally an important component of world ethnographic knowledge.

INTRODUCTION

Since the late sixteenth century a substantial literature, both archival and published, has developed on the native peoples and rural Russians of Siberia. Although these materials were generated by service people, clerks, administrators, exiles, and social scientists working at various times and in different contexts, they constitute one body of information in many important respects. They are primarily current reports of the social composition, subsistence, economic behavior, and survival problems of particular societies. They give much attention to religion, especially shamanism, and to folklore. Almost nothing is communicated on individual variability. Finally, these reports have been the products, almost always, of prolonged fieldwork with good knowledge of the native language or languages. In the later literature, much use is made of earlier sources, as far back as the Cossack reports of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. And, while the earlier studies are pragmatic, albeit often directed toward governmental goals, work of the Soviet period has embraced more theoretical issues, particularly evolutionism of Morgan-Engels orientation, and has been prone to polemical judgments, especially ones hostile to shamanism.

Since Pypin!s important review and analysis (Pypin 1892), there has been no systematic history of Siberian ethnography, which now includes over 1000 published

investigations alone. This essay provides a sketch which identifies some major periods of Siberian ethnographic research and briefly discusses the finest studies - contributions, in my opinion, of "world class" significance. It seeks, in essence, to be a guide to the field.

This essay does not consider systematically the contributions of foreign field studies (and, to a lesser degree, secondary compila- tions) to Siberian ethnography. These have been fundamental for the Uralic peoples, Karjalainen (1921, 1922, 1927) being representative of the extensive work of Finnish and Hungarian scholars. In recent years, such studies as those of Balzer (1980), Humphrey (1983), and Bond (1984, 1985) have discussed dimensions of acculturation and cultural persistence unclarified in the Soviet literature.

HISTORICAL SKETCH

EARLY ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND SUMMARIES

The conquest, administration, and efficient exploitation of Siberia required systematic intelligence from each expedition, which was recorded by its clerks and maintained in key archives. In preparation for new advances, information on geography, valuable resources, ethnic units, leadership, and tensions was gathered from sources such as Eskimo prisoners of the Chukchi. The initial reports

Demitri B. Shimkin, Department of Anthropology , University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801

ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 36-51, 1990



Shimkin: Siberian Ethnography 37

or skazki compiled by explorers and conquerors often constituted concise ethnographies. Atlasovfs report on Anadyr, Kamchatka, and the Kuriles was of remarkable scope and quality (Alfkor and Drezen 1935:25- 33).

As Russian rule consolidated, records became increasingly varied. Alfkor and Grekov (1936) have compiled seventeenth century documents on Yakutia dealing with native complaints against unruly natives and against Russians, censuses of Cossacks and their bond slaves of varied ethnicity at Anadyr, an ukaz prohibiting slash-and-burn agriculture in sable-trapping areas, petitions for the return of slaves and other runaways, etc. Special reports on fisheries, fowl, walrus tusks, gems, and other topics were also produced (Skalon 1951).

Beginning in the eighteenth century, these primary data were assembled and analyzed for wider scientific purposes. In this, the extensive work of Gerard-Friedrich Miller [Müller] at Yakutsk was critical not only for his noted history of Siberia but also because it provided background data for others, e.g. Krasheninnikov . These records, although far from fully exploited to this day, provided the sources for later, fundamental studies. S. A. Tokarev's (1945) incisive study of Yakut social structure and law in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries rests upon records of Yakut litigation collected by early administrators. B. O. Dolgikh's (1960) comprehensive history and analysis of ethnic groupings, their sociopolitical structure, and their demography in the seventeenth century, one of the fundamental works in Siberian ethnography, is also based on these early sources.

Later administrative reports were compiled into statistical and ethnographic surveys of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. These surveys have a wealth of data not otherwise available. The materials on acculturation are particularly noteworthy. The flavor of these interesting works can be gained by brief extracts from two, the 1809 statistical survey of Siberia ( Minister stvo vnutrennykh del 1810), and a similar survey by Gagemeister (1854). According to the 1809 study (Ministerstvo vnutrennykh del 1810):

Agriculture is totally unknown to the Yakut Their iron work is skillful , especially on the Vilyuy.... Poor Yakut living near peasants have their tributes paid for them and are supplied by the peasants for whom they work in return (p. 138).

Many Yakut are Christians. But these are the poor. The rich object because of

the prohibition of polygamy for Christians, eating beef, butter and milk during fast periods, and the total prohibition of horse flesh... (p. 140).

[Among the Tungus] ... their favorite drink is a brandy prepared from soured [reindeer] milk, which they distill from their cast iron kettles with the aid of wooden pipes set in a wooden cover smeared with manure. In summer, when they have enough milk, they are drunk every day. Both men and women are so addicted to tobacco, they almost cannot live without it (p. 168).

The Chukchi go over to America to trade when Bering Strait is frozen (p. 187).

The Gagemeister study includes valuable data on Yakutsk in the mid-nineteenth century (Gagemeister 1854:192-193):

The city dwellers engage in trade with the natives, and in fishing. They generally live without poverty. More Yakuts than Russians engage in handi- crafts. For bartering Russian manu- factures, grain, tobacco and iron wares against furs, they travel to different parts of Yakutsk Oblast, more in summer, however, than in winter. In the native Yakuts, the Russians meet strong com- petitors for the local trade, who yield little to them in intelligence, cleverness and industry. They [the Yakuts] lack trade connections with Irkutsk, whence come most Russian wares.

The Yakut fair lasts from the first of July to the first of August.... Prices on all goods except livestock products are extraordinarily high.

In this connection, Yakut industrial innovations should be noted:

The Yakut women, in addition to their clothing, sew artfully patterned carpets out of multicolored cowskins, and weave netting, mats or bedding out of long grass not only for themselves but also for sale. Fish nets are woven from horsehair (Gagemeister 1854:493).

These early records and official summaries show that, prior to the great changes of the nineteenth century, information on native life was widespread among administrators. It constituted daily rather than exotic knowledge, thus providing a basis for realistic interrelationships, notwithstanding poverty and exploitation.



38 Arctic Anthropology 27:1

THE WORK OF THE IMPERIAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

From its founding early in the eighteenth century and up to the Russian Revolution, the Imperial Academy of Sciences contributed importantly to the study of Siberian ethnography. But the role of the Academy changed appreciably over two centuries. In the eighteenth century, very large, long term, multidisciplinary expeditions, often in association with the Admiralty, were most important. Then up to 1845, individual work, most notably the researches of Middendorf and Castren, was characteristic. From 1845 to 1894, the Academyfs field studies were in close association with the Imperial Russian Geographical Society. Although this work often reflected military concerns (e.g. in the Amur) it was conducted and published more freely than in the previous century. Finally, after 1894, the development of the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography under Academician V. V. Radlov provided a new mechanism of national and international communication, cooperation, and training for Siberian ethnography (Pypin 1892; Shimkin 1975; Shternberg et al. 1907).

While there had been vague plans earlier, serious study of Siberian ethnography by the Academy began in 1719, when the German physician Daniil Messerschmidt was invited to conduct investigations in Western Siberia. Over a period of eight years, Messerschmidt, aided in part by the Swedish prisoner of war, Philip J. Stralenberg, gathered basic data on the Siberian Tatars, Voguls, Tungus (Evenki), and other ethnic groups. This included information on ethnic territories, lifeways, mores and customs, religion, subsistence activities, housing, tools, clothing, art, and other subjects. Messerschmidt's extensive data have remained unpublished to this day but they have been extensively used by scholars at the Academy, for whom they provided a basic research model (Novlyanskaya 1970).

The development of great national expeditions was one aspect of Russia1 s rise as a world power in this period. The first and greatest was the Siberian-Pacific (Sibirsko- Tikhookeanskaya) Expedition, sometimes termed the Second Kamchatka Expedition. This project, directed by the Admiralty in St. Petersburg and long led in the field by Captain Vitus Bering, lasted nearly 20 years (1724-1743) and involved nearly 10,000 partici- pants, including construction and transportation workers. It created a usable horse track, including needed postal stations, from Irkutsk to the coastal settlement of Okhotsk. There, the expedition built shipyards for building vessels for North Pacific exploration, including Kamchatka, the Aleutians, and the Kuriles. Extensive land explorations also took place.

Astronomical observations, charts and maps, studies of natural history and resources, and ethnography were objectives (Yefimov 1964:x).

Within this context, the study of Kamchatka was a basic assignment for the Academy of Sciences. This took place in two phases. Beginning in 1733, the historian G. F. Miller, the naturalist Johann G. Gmelin and several students, including S. P. Krasheninnikov , conducted preliminary archival and field research in Yakutia and elsewhere in Central Siberia. Krasheninnikov was sent to Kamchatka in 1737, where he worked until 1741. His efforts were guided by extensive orders from Miller and Gmelin, including many perhaps superfluous opera- tional details. Krasheninnikov himself exer- cised considerable authority in the field, for example ordering a Koryak chief to be brought to him in order to record a needed vocabulary (Berg Grigorfyev, and Stepanov 1949:564).

Krasheninnikov^ Opisaniye zemli Kamchatki (A Description of Kamchatka Land) was completed for publication on the eve of his death in 1755 (Berg et al. 1949; Crownheart- Vaughan 1972). In its thorough treatments of ethnic groups, and their settlement and subsistence patterns, and in its technical apparatus (description of localities, maps and diagrams, animal and plant identifications, native vocabularies and statistics) , the work was far ahead of its time. Also extraordinary and truly courageous were the discussions of Russian impacts upon the native population. The treatments of social structure and religion were somewhat pedestrian.

Georg W. Stellerà (1774) treatise on Kamchatka was heavily indebted to Krasheninnikov, but he made independent observations on health, sexual practices, aspects of religion and mythology, political control, and the settlement of disputes. Thus both authors must be read for an optimal grasp of Kamchatkan ethnography in the mid-eighteenth century.

In 1768, Catherine II launched another large expedition, under the young German naturalist, Peter Simon Pallas. It was to cover both European Russia and Siberia. Research topics included natural history, tribal organization, lifeways, subsistence patterns, and archaeology. Fieldwork continued to 1774, Pallas1 personal travels ex- tending as far as Dauria in the Transbaykal. The most important products of this research were Pallas» natural historical studies and his extensive travel diary. His student, V. I. Zuyev, also made pioneering studies of Ostyak (Khanty) and Samoyedic ethnography. Zuyev, only 18 when he did independent fieldwork in 1771, provided data subsequently written up by Pallas. Zuyev!s materials,



Shimkin: Siberian Ethnography «o

later reconstituted by G. D. Verbov and N. N. Stepanov (Zuyev 1947), give a basic account of Ostyak and Western Samoyedic cultures, including good observations on clan sanctuaries, shamanism, clan exogamy, and Russian exploitative practices. Zuyev, al- ready an Academician, died at 40. He might well have become a second Krasheninnikov .

The ambitious attempt of Pallas1 colleague, J. G. Georgi, to compile a comprehensive ethnography of the Russian Empire must, unfortunately, be regarded as a confused failure, a work filled with errors (Pypin 1892:255-260).

In 1785, Catherine II initiated a Northeastern Secret Geographical and Astronomical Expedition, again under the Admiralty and the Academy of Sciences, and with both scientific and political goals. It was led by Captain Joseph Billings, an Englishman in Russian service who had sailed with James Cook. The expedition lasted eight years (Pierce 1989 :v; Pypin 1892:262). It provided much useful information on the North Pacific, including Chukotka, but no major work on Siberian ethnography.

In 1840, Academician K. E. Ber [Baer] proposed to Alexander von Middendorf, a young professor of zoology at Kiev Univer- sity, field studies on the limits and conditions of organic life in the far north. The study later selected the Taymyr Peninsula, the northernmost part of Asia, as its objective. In 1843 and 1844, Middendorf explored the Taymyr and northern Yakutia, and then undertook a comparative survey of the lower Amur, then still under Chinese suzerainty (Pypin 1892:288-298).

Middendorf, working essentially alone, gathered an enormous body of data on meteor- ology, magnetism, geology, botany, zoology, and the Yakut language, in addition to his ethnological observations. A number of scientists at the Academy wrote up much of the technical material, producing a four- volume report in German in 1848-1875. A two-volume version in Russian was published in 1860-1869.

Middendorf1 s ethnographic contributions, primarily on the Samoyed, Tungus (Evenki), and Yakut (Middendorf 1878) were aided by an interpreter. Informally written, they remain unique in the Siberian literature for their empathy with native views, their inti- macy, and their lively descriptions of interactions. He describes elements of daily life among the Tavgi Samoyed (Nganasan) as follows:

Small children lie bare before the fire on little skins; Sphaghum moss absorbs filth. Sacks of burbot [fish] hang ready to pack children in them during migrations. The somewhat older children wear

short pants, embroidered with rings around the groin. On their necks are various iron decorations and glass beads. Nonetheless, they meet natural needs in the tent, before all eyes. Somewhat older boys fight among themselves in friendly fashion, swinging their arms at each other, up and down. They also fist fight, seeking to hit each other in the face.

The strong love for children is expressed in both sexes by kissing; even fathers rock children not uncommonly. The elder sent me children asking for bread. Kissing evidently also pertains to higher civil etiquette. Every member of the camp, when entering the tent would approach the elder and kiss him on both cheeks (Middendorf 1878:668).

In 1845-1849, the Imperial Academy of Sciences supported the far-flung fieldwork of the linguist, the greatest of his time, Matias A. Castren (1813-1852). Castren had been doing basic research on Finnish mythology and Finno- ugrian linguistics since 1838. He now was invited by the Academy to do systematic studies of Samoyedic languages. Castren, despite poor health, remained in the field almost continually until his death. He not only accomplished his task, including the all-but-unknown Altay Samoyedic languages, but also did basic studies on Turkic, Mongolian, and Kettic ("Yenisey Ostyak"). He analyzed his data, formulating a grand concept of an overarching Ural-Altaic stock, now seen as a contact phenomenon of Altaic and Uralic. Castren undertook no ethnographic monographs but his field observations and, particularly, his vocabularies are still of ethnographic significance .

Castréis monumental work was written up posthumously with meticulous care by Acade- mician Anton Schiefner. It appeared in 12 volumes in 1853-1858 (Pypin 1892:287-345).

From the 1830s, Russian anticipations of advances into Central and Inner Asia prompted extensive work, initially through the recruitment of natives,1 in the study of Turkic

xThe first Buryat scholar, Dorzhi Banzarov (1822-1855), was recruited for schooling in KazanT in 1835. He entered Kazan' University in 1842, completing his Kandidat dissertation in 1846. This work on "The Black Faith or Shaman- ism among the Mongols" (Banzarov 1955:48-100) was based on extensive use of Mongol writings and constituted the first scientific study of shamanism. Quickly published, "The Black Faith" brought Banzarov acclaim from Russian orientalists. He also made important linguistic contributions. Nevertheless, Banzarov, as a Cossack, was required to return to Siberia. He continued researches under great difficulties, and died at age 33.




and Mongolian languages and cultures. Thus, Castren' s pioneering researches contributed to a major effort, a key figure in which was the young Turkologist V. V. Radlov.

Radlov's early work was on the language and oral literature of the Altay Turks, including the Teleut, Shori, Koybal, and others. He also contributed to Kirgiz ethnography and to Central Asiatic geographical studies. An interesting publication was that of a Russian grammar for the Tatars of Eastern Russia, the first known undertaking in applied linguistics. In 1884 came his notable Aus Siberien (Out of Siberia) , which comprised a geographical review, ethnographic sketches of Altay Turkic communities , important folkloristic materials, a discussion of shamanism, notes on Siberian antiquities, and a discussion of Russian- Chinese frontier problems.

Beginning in 1886, Radlov contributed fundamentally to comparative Turkic, including Hunnic (the Codex Comanicus). He pioneered the decipherment of Old Turkic inscriptions, including the royal epigraphs of the Orkhon valley in Mongolia.

A new phase of Radlov's work began in 1894 with his appointment as Director of the Academy's moribund Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Shternberg et al. 1907). Although the Museum had important physical anthropological, archaeological and ethnographic collections, including some from the time of Peter I, these were scattered in several places, and often lacked even rudi- mentary labels. There was no library, and curatorial funds were negligible. The Museum failed to meet its task of "Providing ...a picture of the gradual development of the human race and the varied cultural positions of different tribes" (Shternberg et al. 1907:36). The coverage of the Russian Empire, except for the Amur, was particularly bad. Academician Radlov attacked these problems vigorously and persistently. His solicitations of materials from official and private sources, including the Crown, were highly successful. Opening the Museum to domestic and foreign visitors, including specialists from Germany, Hungary, Great Britain, and the United States, communicated internationally the unique importance of many of the Museum's collections. It also initiated dialogues widening scientific perspectives and facilitating active international cooperation, notably in the Jesup North Pacific Expedition (1897-1902). The Ministry of Finance finally provided funding for curatorial and, increasingly, scientific activities. In all, by the end of the century, the Museum was well established.

In the final years of his directorship, Radlov used the Museum as a vehicle for communication, staff recruitment, scientific

research, and publication. It developed as an important nucleus for the later expansion of anthropological studies, including Siberian ethnography, in the Soviet period. Among the reports published by the Museum, E. K. Pekarskiy's and V. P. Tsvetkov's (1913) incisive analysis of economics and social structure among the Tungus (Evenki) of the Okhotsk coast deserves particular mention.

EXPLORATIONS AND STUDIES UNDER THE IMPERIAL RUSSIAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY

In the mid-nineteenth century, a new thrust of systematic geographical exploration, natural historical survey, and economic, demographic, and ethnographic research came from the formation in St. Petersburg of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society. This body, chartered by Nicholas I in 1845, funded from the Imperial Treasury, and formally led by a Grand Duke, Nicholas1 second son, was paradoxically open to re- formist thought and to numerous joint efforts with private institutions and donors. The Geographical Society aroused much interest among the capital's elite. Between 1845 and 1856, 513 men - bureaucrats, literateurs, and scholars - became full members. They wrested control from the old German and Baltic leadership to pursue field and library programs building basic knowledge on Russia, including its new acquisitions in Asia and Inner Asia. In these tasks they received much support from the Imperial General Staff (Lincoln 1982:91-101).

From its founding up to the Russian Revolution, the Geographical Society was the nation's most active agent for field research. As Pypin (1892:293-294) notes:

. . . the Geographical Society took an active part in almost all undertakings directed toward the study of Siberia and Central Asia: it was itself their initiator, or joined in expeditions conceived by other jurisdictions and offices. In this way, the publications of the Geographical Society, in its journals or in separately issued 'Travels,1 'Expeditionary Memoirs', etc., became the basic source of geographic and natural-historical data on Siberia.

Topics of particular interest to the Geo- graphical Society and to the Imperial General Staff were detailed topographic and statistical studies. In particular, one of the Society's leaders, P. P. Semenov, directed the "Geo- graphical Statistical Dictionary of the Russian Empire," published in five volumes, 1864- 1885. The Society collaborated in other statistical studies, such as Gagemeister's, mentioned earlier.




In 1869, the Geographical Society established a branch in Irkutsk and, in 1879, another for Western Siberia, in Omsk. These steps, and the active participation of local workers, including some educated natives, in research and publication, greatly widened the educational and political impacts of the Society. Buryats such as M. N. Khangalov (1958) were particularly active. Yakut, Altay Turks, Tatars, and other Turkic ethnicities were also represented (Pypin 1892:400).

The Imperial Russian Geographical Society supported multipurpose expeditions in remote areas. From the standpoint of Siberian ethnography, the most productive was Richard MaakTs to northern Yakutia in 1855- 1856. Publication of this work was long delayed, the ethnographic volume coming out posthumously in 1887 (Maak 1887).

Maak's work is truly a classic which gathers and integrates into an analytic whole demographic data (including age compositions, birth and death numbers, and migration estimates), current sociopolitical organization, detailed studies of housing, and of diet. In regard to diet, it discusses famine foods among the poor. All this culminates in estimates of food supply, including the effects of exports to southern Yakutia. The next section deals with public health, the high prevalences of gastrointestinal infections, trachoma, and leprosy being noted. Family life and the indifferent care of children are briefly sketched. Land use, economic strati- fication and the imports of the Lena gold rush are final subjects. This is a compact yet comprehensive treatise. It is well written with very cogent observations. For example, Maak states (1887:38):

...Formerly, the naslegs [territorial units] were administered by clan chieftains titled "princes" (knyazi) in patents given by the Crown. According to the new regulations for natives, the administrators of naslegs have been renamed elders (starshiny). This change is disliked by the latter, who by established custom, still call themselves !princes,f and who prize highly the ceremonial dagger (kortik) given by the Crown to their ancestors, which they exhibit on every convenient occasion .

In 1854-1856, Academician Leopold von Schrenk [Shrenk] conducted fundamental natural historical investigations on the lower Amur. Volume II of the Russian edition (Shrenk 1899) was devoted to its native peoples: Gilyak, Oroki, Ol'cha, and others. This study is noteworthy for its comparative presentation of material culture and subsistence patterns.

THE ROLE OF POLITICAL EXILES

From early in the eighteenth century, well educated, humane political exiles were a part of Siberian society.2 After 1825, exiled Decembrists pictured their world, particularly Yakutia, in graphic terms which appeared in fragments in literary journals. But it was not until 1888 that the young philanthropist Innokenty M. Sibiryakov conceived of forming and funding investigations of current cultures and conditions in northeastern Siberia. Critical questions were whether the native populations were growing or declining, and what the effects of gold mining (the source of Sibiryakov1 s wealth) were upon the welfare of the people. Sibiryakov proceeded with remarkable vision and courage. He wished his fieldworkers to be accepted in their areas, to know the native language, and to be capable of first-class work - qualities found only among the political exiles sentenced to remote areas without rights of return or travel (Maynov 1929).

Sibiryakov encountered both ardent opposition and high-level support from the Imperial Russian Geographic Society and the Academy of Sciences. With great persistence he was able to get the project approved, albeit under strict police surveillance and with the inclusion of administrators and clergy in the work group. At the same time, the project director, Dmitriy A. Klementz was able to add to the group several educated Yakuts who could improve communications with the peoples studied. Finally, in January 1894, the team met in Yakutsk to begin its bold efforts on tiny resources. Eight exiles participated: Eduard K. Pekarskiy, Nikolay A. Vitashevskiy , Vsevolod M. Ionov, Lev G. LeventaT , Sergey V. Yastremskiy, Vladimir I. Iokhel'son [Waldemar Jochelson] , Vladimir G. Bogoraz, and Ivan I. Maynov.

The meeting was productive. Sibiryakov provided, in addition to expeditionary resources, funds for the publication of Pekarskiy *s monumental analytical dictionary of the Yakut language. Proper transcriptions for this did not exist but were devised by Academician Otto Betling [Bühtlingk]. An appropriate press was then set up in Yakutsk. Publication of Pekarskiy fs great work started in 1899 but was not completed until 1930. 3

2In 1711, up to 800 Swedish officer prisoners captured primarily at Poltava were sent to Siberia, where they remained to 1722. These prisoners were extensively used in administration and research (Andreyev 1960 11:32-44).

3The first Bulletin of the Slovar' yakutskogo yazyka (Dictionary of the [cont.]




Between 1894 and its end in 1896, the expedition's work proceeded furiously. By 1897, V. A. Obruchev, the noted geologist, was able to organize the reports of the expedition into a proposed thirteen volume study. This included: (1) demography (I. I. Maynov), (2) physical anthropology (N. L. Gekker, I. I. Maynov, and F. Ya. Kon), (3) Yakut language and folklore (Pekarskiy, Yastremskiy, Ionov), (4) religious beliefs (Ionov), (5) material culture, household and family life of the Yakut (V. Ye. Gorinovich and others), (6) Yakut economic system (LeventaT), (7) Yakut legal system (Vitashevskiy) , (8) the economic positions of the Olekminsk and Kirensk Yakut, and the influence upon them of gold mining, (9) the Yukagir (Iokhel'son), (10) Yakut of the Kolyma and Zhigansk areas (IokheFson) , (11) the Chukchi (Bogoraz), (12) the Russian population on the Kolyma (Bogoraz), (13) notes on the Lamut (Eveny) and Chuvan (Bogoraz).

Publishing this extraordinary collection would have cost almost twice as much as the expedition itself. Unfortunately, Sibiryakov sickened and later died, and no other ade- quate donor could be identified. Some of the work came out separately, notably Iokhel'son's [Jochelson's] and BogorazTs, which was published in English as part of the results of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Other sections, such as the basic study on Yakut customary law, awaited the Soviet period (Pavlinov, Vitashevskiy, and Levental1 1927). Parts remain unpublished. Nevertheless, the results of this work, highly esteemed by Russiafs ablest scientists, were far reaching. They established new standards of ethnographic research in a dynamic context which

Yakut Language) came out in Yakutsk in 1899. It combined, with Pekarskiy's own work, data from other exiles and educated Yakuts, notably M. N. Androsova-Ionova, who participated in this task. But it became evident that local resources were lacking for a complete publication. The Imperial Russian Geographical Society then requested the Imperial Academy of Sciences to assume responsibility, which it agreed to do. For this purpose, Pekarskiy was permitted to move in 1905 to St. Petersburg to work with Academician Radlov, who in turn involved Russia's leading Turkologists and Mongolists in producing an extraordinary comparative dictionary. Its first five Bulletins came out under the imprimateur of the Academy before the Russian Revolution. Publication resumed in the 1920s, but now under the auspices of the Yakut A.S.S.R. It was finished in 1930. In 1958-1959, this very rare series was reissued in a three-volume text of 3858 columns (Pekarskiy 1958-1959 I:i-vi).

closely related pure and applied science. And, although the Revolution and Civil War later had destructive effects, they represented the first participation of native in- tellectuals in fundamental research and problem solving for their own people.

There were other important exiles. One was V. L. Seroshevskiy who, between 1880 and 1892, was exiled in central Yakutia and wrote a fundamental geographic and ethnographic monograph on the Yakut (Seroshevskiy 1896). This was very rich in observed detail, responsive to informants, sympathetic to Yakut clan-level society, but somewhat superficial in the complexities of Yakut religion.

The other great exile was Lev Ya. Shternberg, born in 1861, arrested in 1886, and exiled on Sakhalin, 1889-1897. During his exile, Shternberg, despite severe restric- tions, studied the social structure, religion, and customary law of the Gilyak, in addition to their language and folklore. He also did basic work on the social structure of Tungusic peoples, particularly the Ol'cha. A follower of Lewis H. Morgan, Shternberg undertook the first scientific studies of Gilyak and Tungusic kinship, discovering peculiari- ties of marriage, sexual access, and avoidance now known to be characteristic of unilineal societies with obligatory interclan circulation of women. He received early notice from Friedrich Engels for his discovery of "group marriage" among the Gilyak.

After exile, Lev Shternberg was be- friended by Academician Radlov and was able to earn the academic degree then necessary for a Jew to live beyond the Pale (a legally defined part of western Russia). From 1904 to 1914 he was at the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, giving occasional lectures which provided the basis for his later instruction. In 1918 he became, at Leningrad State University, the first Professor and Dean of Ethnography in the Soviet Union. Between 1918 and 1927 he taught most of the first generation of professionally trained Soviet ethnographers .

Lev Shternberg was a pioneer of great analytical capability who long suffered from overdependence upon Morgan and a lack of familiarity with researches in North American Indian kinship systems which would have placed his findings in a stronger setting. He also overemphasized the "primitive" nature of Gilyak society, despite its sophisticated interactions with other peoples. He, of course, had no knowledge of the long history and sophistication of Amur cultures disclosed by recent archaeological and historical research (Okladnikov 1981). With these reservations and admitting the presence of considerable obscurities, of ambiguities between what he inferred and what he




observed, in his writings (Shternberg 1933a, 1933b) Shternberg must be recognized as one of the giants of Siberian ethnography.1*

THE SOVIET PERIOD TO THE 1960s

As the Soviet State consolidated its authority in Siberia in the early 1920s, ethnographic specialists proposed plans for the self-government and cultural development of the small minorities. Some of these plans were rejected as naive and anti-Soviet, notably Bogoraz's suggestion for establishing reservations for sole native use (Sergeyev 1955:215-216). In 1924-1925, the Communist Party took firm control over the problem of northern minorities, on grounds of the "enormous economic and political importance of the northern frontiers . . . the catastrophic posi- tion of the tribes , ... the isolation of the aboriginal masses from Soviet construction . . . and the need to create legal, administrative and economic protection of their interests" (Sergeyev 1955:215-216). A Committee of the North was formed directly under the All- Union Central Committee of the Party. It was staffed by the greatest experts on the north: V. G. Bogoraz-Tan, S. A. Buturlin, B. M. Zhitkov, S. V. Kertselli, P. Ye. Ostrovskikh, and L. Ya. Shternberg (Sergeyev 1955:224).

In less than a decade of existence, the Committee accomplished much fundamental work. In 1926-1928, it helped develop the first comprehensive censuses of the North and the lower Amur. These were important for national land and water use and also served to define wealth levels for "dekulakization" (i.e., elimination of wealthier natives) (Sergeyev 1955:13-205). Education was fostered both by native recruitment for training in Leningrad and by extensive efforts to develop technical resources for literacy in northern languages (Al'kor and Davydov 1932). Young ethnographers en- gaged in long-term schoolteaching. As by- products, they later produced extremely fine studies, e.g., Kreynovich (1929, 1934), Verbov (1939), Chernetsov (1939), Prokofyev (1952). Finally, some important studies of appalling health conditions, which were needed for ameliorative interventions, were undertaken (Shreyber 1931).

During these same years, a number of Russian refugees published significant ethnographic works in China. The most

'The Gilyak (Nivkh) scholar Ch. M. Taksami (1967:202-228) has reexamined Shternbergfs findings. "Group marriage" was limited by prohibitions upon sexual relations with younger brothers' wives, and permitted only within one generation. In practice, this relation was exercized primarily via the sororate .

important was S. M. Shirokogoroff, a great specialist on Tunguso-Manchuric peoples. He was the author of a penetrating, historically sophisticated monograph on Tungus (Evenki) shamanism and a valuable comparative study of Tungus-Manchu kinship organization (Shirokogoroff 1935, 1929).

Between 1934 and 1957, large parts of Siberia were governed by the NKVD (People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs). This agency was the driving force in Soviet efforts to prepare for, conduct, and recover from World War II through the intense development of mining, metallurgy, transportation, and supporting activities from the Urals to the Pacific. Originally based on free labor, these efforts became primarily dependent upon prisoners from great domestic purges and prisoners of war. The efforts of the NKVD were greatly complicated after 1937 by the growth of Far Eastern garrisons and the evacuation to Central Asia of local Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese in response to the growing Japanese threat. Transportation overloaded by military demands could bring only meager supplies to mines in northeastern Siberia,* including the key Kolyma gold fields (Shimkin and Shimkin 1975). The results were often tragic.

During this period, policies toward native peoples changed sharply. Rather than foster- ing welfare and social development, emphasis was placed upon collective farms and allied organizations that could provide a maximum product to the State of furs, fish, meat, hides, and transport services. This change initiated bitter resistance, attributed by Soviet authorities to the machinations of shamans and kulaks. The resistance was crushed and native leadership was replaced by Russian managers; in general, native workers performed traditional tasks, i.e., hunting, herding, fishing, and common labor (Sergeyev 1955:352-363). Native cultures were denigrated as archaicisms to be replaced by common Soviet institutions. For example, dictionaries omitted "...terms relating to religious concepts, archaic forms of marriage, and the so-called hunters' language..." (Sergeyev 1955:501). New terminology, often simply Russian, was introduced to identify new institutions, technology, etc. (Sergeyev 1955:501). Local migrations and interethnic marriages were promoted to accelerate deculturation .

World War II added to these stresses. "The northern regions felt particularly keenly the breakdown of economic links caused by the War - the curtailment of consignments of food , fuel , and building materials .... The roles of local industry and agriculture became particularly important, for they had not only to supply the northern regions with energy, manufactured goods and food, but also to




fulfill orders for the front..." (Savoskul 1978:135). The largest single effort, which embraced the entire area from Bering Straits to Krasnoyarsk, was Soviet participation in the Alaska-Siberian Air Ferry Route, through which 12,000 planes were dispatched to the German front (Shimkin and Shimkin 1975).

It is unclear what role Soviet ethnographers played in these activities. Sergeyev, the major reporter, asserts that his data from the 1930s to 1950 came, not from personal observations, but from "Central Siberian and Far Eastern newspapers, journals and almanacs . . . the most valuable being those from National Okrugs and Regions" (Sergeyev 1955:8).

Notwithstanding these obscurities, Soviet scholarly work on Siberian ethnography reached a climax in the 1950s. Most important was a monumental treatise organized and edited by M. A. Levin and L. P. Potapov of the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences (Levin and Potapov 1956). This, for the first time, brought together the vast earlier literature with current research on Siberian archaeology, rural Russian cultures, and the cultures of native peoples. The various sections of this giant work are of good to excellent quality, the bland treatment of collectivization excepted. (A good transla- tion has been made by Scripta Technica 1964.) Supplementing this work was an excellent historico-ethnological atlas, also edited by Levin and Potapov (1961).

Another remarkable study was B. O. Dolgikh!s (1960) thorough investigation of Siberian sociopolitical organization and demography in the seventeenth century, a research based upon meticulous analysis of administrative reports. Most interesting was his assessment of the varied levels of sociopolitical integration achieved. The Yakut were on the verge of state formation. Unified tribes led by hereditary leaders, often an established aristocracy, characterized Western Siberian Finno-Ugrians, Samoyeds and Tatars, the Transbaykal Tungus (Evenki) and the coast Lamut (Eveny). Among the once numerous Yukagiric peoples of the northern taiga and tundra, the easternmost groups adjoining the Chukchi (Chuvan, Khodin, Omok) had tribal- level political organization (Dolgikh 1960:10-11).

Dolgikh inspired much excellent ethno- historical research. Publications by Vdovin (1948), Antropova (1957) and Gurvich (1982) are particularly noteworthy. The last is an updating and continuation of Dolgikh1 s basic work.

Much other useful work was published during this period. Ivanov (1954) undertook an exhaustive survey of Siberian representative art. Unfortunately, this study was based almost totally on museum materials so

that important technical and subjective dimensions remained uncovered. In field ethnography, the outstanding work appears to have been Popov!s (1948) on the subsistence patterns and material culture of the Nganasani (Tavgi Samoyed), who in the 1930s were still hunters of wild reindeer. A posthumous volume (Popov 1984) adds extensive data on social structure and religion.

SIBERIAN CULTURES TODAY: A FRAGMENTARY PICTURE5

Since the 1950s, the Siberian economy and population have changed profoundly. The painfully hard explorations and developmental efforts of earlier years have produced major results, especially in mining. Northwestern Siberia has become one of the world1 s largest oil and gas producers. In Central Siberia, the complex of mines centered on Norilsk, the largest Arctic city in Asia, produces perhaps two-thirds of Soviet nickel, as well as platinum and other valuable metals. In central Yakutia, diamonds, iron, and coal are among the expanding industries of the north (Armstrong, Rogers, and Rowley 1978:21-70).

Underlying this economic expansion has been a rapid but unstable growth of population, almost all urban and migratory from European Russia. Despite high wages and improved amenities, population turnover throughout Siberia has been high. Acute labor shortages have even led to the recruitment of Vietnamese in Kuznetsk basin mining and industry. The current decline of the Siberian rural economy and population have intensified the problem of maintaining a large urban population at reasonable standards of living (Rostankowski 1983). In Kemerovo Oblast in 1984, I noted good supplies of bread and dairy products, fair supplies of poor meat, and extreme shortages of vegetables and fruit, particularly in late winter and early spring.

The effects of these changes upon native peoples, who are now minorities throughout Siberia, are unclear from the meager literature. The best studies, Leontyev (1973, 1977) on Chukotka and Gurvich (1977) on the northern reindeer breeding Yakut, show very different patterns. In Chukotka, between

5A more extended discussion of current problems and research in Siberian social structures, religions, and public health is in the forthcoming paper by D. B. Shimkin: Siberian Ethnography: A Current Assessment (Comptes rendus, Centre df études sur l'u.r.s.s., l'europe oriental et le domain ture, Ecole des hautes études en sciences sociales, Paris).




1959 and 1970 alone, the number of immigrants rose from 35,000 to 88,000, with the native numbers rising only from 12,000 to 13,000. Less than 10% of the native population became urban; however, even in 22 rural places, Russians predominated in five and were the second largest group in six more. Social stresses are indicated by the facts that 21% of the native families were female-headed, 11% being those of unmarried mothers. Fertility was low, with an average of only 1.9 children per family, a condition deeply dis- tressing to older Chukchi.

In northern Yakutia, little Russian in- migration took place; skilled administrators, educators, and technicians came largely from educated southern Yakut. Accordingly, economic development appears to have been relatively unstressful. Hunting, fishing, and herding technologies modernized; rising labor productivity permitted labor diversions to hamlet construction and services. Closer relations with the south, radio, and widespread literacy brought wider cultural sharing, specifically of southern variants of Yakut epics. Gurvich (1977) is less explicit about other areas of continuity and change. He notes that shamanistic seances ceased in these areas in 1934-1936, that most of his data on shamanism came from interviewing older informants, and that he himself witnessed only certain family and hunting rituals (Gurvich 1977:191). In the 1940s, he notes hunting rituals associated with killing reindeer and moose were still being observed strictly (Gurvich 1977:201).

Widespread disagreement is evident in assessments as to the general preservation of Siberian cultures. Vdovin (1980:16) states: "... Not very much traditional culture has remained in daily life. The past is preserved to an appreciable extent only in the memories of the older generation, in part in material culture and in survivals of former spiritual culture." Yet Gurvich and Dolgikh (1970: 418-427) bring out the degree to which clan identity, including exogamy and allied practices, have remained alive among many Siberian peoples, especially Uralic and Amur groups. In this connection, it should be noted that in 1976 Balzer (1980) observed great vitality in traditional burial practices and religious beliefs among Khante.

Other dimensions of contemporary Siberian ethnography have been reported only by foreign investigators. Humphrey^ (1983) excellent study of a Buryat collective farm, and Bondfs (1984, 1985) notes on living conditions and life in NoriPsk are significant.

In all, it is not surprising that Vdovin (1980) in an overall review of needed cultural research on present day problems, expressed dissatisfaction. Expanded work is needed. In particular:

The cadres of specialists on the ethnography of Siberian and Northern peoples are being filled with a notable lag behind contemporary scientific needs. We have a few individual persons or no specialists [at all] trained for research on the history and ethnography of a series of peoples of Samoyedic, Ugrian, Tungus and Paleoasiatic groups, as well as south Siberian Turks (Vdovin 1980:28).

A TENTATIVE SYNTHESIS

The reports and studies accumulated over more than 300 years in Siberian ethnography can, despite their heterogeneity, be regarded as a single corpus of primary data with much continuing relevance over time and space. This state is somewhat like that for Spanish America, where materials of the sixteenth century not infrequently illuminate living cultures and societies. It is radically different from the virtually chaotic assembly of ethnographic data on Anglo- America.

The reasons for such continuing utility are several. First, Siberia, like Mexico and Peru, was conquered over a short period of time, so that acculturation processes took place synchronously rather than being spread over centuries, as in Anglo- America. Second, in both Siberia and Spanish America, policies toward the native population were directed toward rational economic exploitation. While there were serious abuses in both areas, wild excesses, such as the deliberate murders of California Indians in the 1870s, did not take place. Third, in Siberia, particularly, the native cultures, those of the Beringian area somewhat excepted, shared many features, such as complex foraging, patrilineal clans, and relatively strong leadership by war chiefs and shamans. Russian administrative strategies adapted early to these conditions. Moreover, except in south- western Siberia, governmental concern with fur tributes long blocked private settlement and land alienation. There were no Siberian encomiendas. Fourth, up to most recent times, native peoples remained largely in their traditional areas, pursuing traditional econo- mies, and maintaining their languages and social patterns.

Most important, while smallpox, measles, and other epidemics were episodic, as was starvation, and while some small groups such as the Ket and the Yukagir diminished tragically through losses and absorption, the demographic catastrophies now evident in New World history, in which population losses of 50-90% repeatedly took place, were absent in Siberia. Finally, there was great continuity in administrative practices up to recent years. In consequence, while periods of




substantial disruption, as in 1933-1937, took place, there has clearly been much mutual accommodation between rulers and ruled. The official repression of shamanism since the eighteenth century is a case in point. In many areas, shamanism, like the covert practices of my Old Believer ancestors, un- questionably continues to be a part of native covert culture.

In sum, the study of Siberian ethnography offers important possibilities for both humanistic appreciation and the scientific analysis of one of the world's important bodies of anthropological data.

Acknowledgements. This paper is a by- product of research and teaching over a considerable period (Shimkin 1939, 1954, 1963, 1967, 1975, 1985; Shimkin and Shimkin 1975). It has also benefited from dialogues with Soviet anthropologists, particularly Eduard Markarian, Julian Bromley, and Anatoly Martynov. Teaching and research as a Fulbright Senior Fellow and Professor of Archaeology at Kemerovo State University, February-June 1984, were invaluable both in approaching substantive matter and in under- standing current developments in Marxism.

APPENDIX: SOME "WORLD CLASS" MONOGRAPHS

To this day, ethnography remains not a unified science but an assembly of regional traditions often of a highly distinctive nature. Only to a limited extent can contributions which transcend local constraints be recognizable as valid parts of a world legacy. One was Bogoraz1 (1904) monumental study of the Chukchi which was assessed most respect- fully by Franz Boas, Robert Lowie, and other American anthropologists.

It is my belief that this and a number of other works on Siberian ethnography are worthy candidates for such recognition. I shall cite these chronologically.

S. P. Krasheninnikov: Opisaniye zemli Kamchatki (A Description of Kamchatka Land), 1755. Elsewhere (Shimkin 1975) I have evaluated this work in detail. It remains a basic source for human ecology and for the study of cultural destruction. The fourth Russian edition (Berg, Grigor'yev and Stepanov 1949) is the great scholarly one, with major additions of background materials as well as an exact text. The best transla- tion is by Crownheart-Vaughan (1972).

Richard Maak: Vilyuyskiy okrug yakutskoy oblasti ch. Ill (Vilyuy District of Yakut Province, Pt. Ill), 1887. Like Krasheninnikov, but with a far closer per- spective of the people, Maak pictures an economically marginal society undergoing major change.

V. L. Seroshevskiy : Yakuty. Opyt etnograficheskogo issledoveniya (The Yakut. An Experiment in Ethnographic Research) , 1896. This systematic geography and ethnography of Central Yakutia remains a core element of the extensive Yakutian literature. Conceptually, it resembles classical American ethnographies of the early twentieth century. This is perhaps the most distinguished contri- bution of the many Polish exiles in Siberia (Pypin 1892:312-319).

V. G. Bogoraz: The Chukchee, 1904. The fruit of a decadefs fieldwork, enriched by collaboration with Franz Boas and other leading anthropologists, Bogoraz1 studies of the ethnography, language, and folklore primarily of the Reindeer Chukchi remain unparalleled contributions. At the same time, later investigations have added new questions. It is now clear that the Chukchi, although an acephalous society without formal, permanent leadership, were long effective in trade and organized war (Antropova 1957; Vdovin 1948). Boat crews, men's houses and war parties were foci of power among the Maritime Chukchi. A reinforcing mechanism was wife exchange by men, which established a series of special kin relationships. Pro- foundly similar institutions and behavioral systems were later discovered among the Bering Sea Eskimos (Lantis 1947; Burch 1975).

E. K. Pekarskiy and V. P. Tsvetkov: Ocherki byta priayanskikh tungusov (Economic Sketches of the Ayan Tungus [Evenki]), 1913. An exemplary quantitative study of the effects, 1880-1903, of tea haul- ing on the economy of a coastal Tungus group. Subsistence sealing and fishing persisted but hunting declined. Despite economic differentiations, mutual help within clans remained strong, with continued food- sharing obligations.

Andrey A. Popov: Nganasany: Material' naya kuVtura (The Nganasan: Material Culture) , 1948. Nganasany: SotsiaVnoye ustroysto i Verovaniya (The Nganasan: Social Structure and Beliefs) , 1984. Popov (1902-1960), a native Yakut, conducted profound ethnological researches on the Taymyr Peninsula in 1930-1931 and 1936-1938. His work is distinguished by full, meticulous observation and close rapport with the peoples (Dolgan and Nganasany) among whom he lived and travelled. His contributions to material culture, customary law, shamanism, and particularly Nganasan world view are fundamental. His 1948 volume is adequately translated into English (Ristinen 1966). The 1984 posthumous publication is severely truncated.

S. M. Shirokogoroff: Psychomental Complex of the Tungus, 1935. The most thorough and best study of the cognitive




world of a Siberian people. Its discussions of shamanistic belief and ritual are exemplary. Also noteworthy is the attention paid to external influences and syncretism, both ancient and later.

M. G. Levin and L. P. Potapov: Narody Sibiri (The Peoples of Siberia) , 1956, translated by Scripta Technica, Inc. (1966); M. G. Levin and L. P. Potapov: Istoriko- etnograficheskiy atlas Sibiri (Historico- Ethnographic Atlas of Siberia), 1961; and B. O. Dolgikh: Rodovoy i plemennoy sostav narodov Sibiri v XVII veke (The Clan and Tribal Composition of the Peoples of Siberia in the 17th Century), 1960. These great syn- theses have been discussed above. They are indispensable to the study of Siberian ethnography.

I. S. Gurvich: Kul'tura severnykh Yakutov- olenovodov (Culture of Northern Yakut Reindeer Breeders) , 1977. Although this is a historical study formally centered on the traditional culture, much of its content appears to be currently applicable. The work rests upon profound knowledge, including extraordinary studies of life and acculturation in multiethnic reindeer collectives (Gurvich 1953, 1954). Carefully written and avoiding controversy, it is yet clearly sympathetic to its subjects.

Caroline Humphrey: Karl Marx Collective, 1983. This unique volume, based on fieldwork in 1967 and 1975, plus very extensive literary research, places a Buryat collective farm in the context both of Soviet socio- economic policy and the specific constraints of Buryat culture and demography. At the local level, it deals in detail with politics, ritual, marriage and reciprocity, and religion (shamanism and lamaism). Dr. Humphreyfs observations on contemporary Buryat shamanism are penetrating:

Shamanism, on the one hand, is fluid, undogmatic, secret and transient. Its practitioners need have little personal authority, since it is as vehicles for the spirits and ancestors that they have power. To take part in shamanistic rituals does not require a personal commitment of belief, as we see from the fact that Russian TOrthodoxf believers consult shamans. . . .

But it is perhaps most important that shamanistic thought provides- perhaps even consists - of an explanation of suffer- ing. ... All that in Soviet ideology should never happen, all that is explained away as a !mistaket or a Shortcoming1 or a 'deviation' is in Buryat shamanism only what is to be expected by the living- that is by the sons and daughters of the ancestors who have suffered... (Humphrey 1983:416-417).

REFERENCES

Alfkor Ya. P. and I. D. Davydov (eds.) 1932 Materialy I Vserossiyskoy kon-

ferentsiyi po razvitiyu yazykov i pisfmennosti narodov Severa (Materials on the First All-Russian Conference on the Development of Language and Literacy for Peoples of the North). Uchpedgiz, Moskva.

Al'kor, Ya. P. and A. K. Drezen (eds.) 1935 Kolonial'naya politika Tzarizma na

Kamchatke i Chukotke v XVIII v Sbornik arkhivnykh materialov (Tsarist Colonial Policy in 18th Century Kamchatka and Chukotka: A Collection of Archival Materials). Instituí narodov severa, Leningrad. Trudy po istoriyi t. III.

Alfkor, Ya. P. and B. D. Grekov (eds.) 1936 KoloniaPnaya politika Moskovskogo

gosudarstva v Yakutiyi v XVII v. Sbornik dokumentov (The Colonial Policy of the Muscovy State in 17th Century Yakutia. A Collection of Documents). Instituí narodov severa, Leningrad. Trudy istoriko- arkheograficheskogo insíiíuía AN SSSR i.xiv.

Andreyev, A. N. 1960 Ocherki po isiochnikovedeniyi Sibiri

(Skeiches of Research on [Hisiorical] Sources on Siberia). I: XVII vek (Seveníeeníh Ceníury) ; II: XVIII vek (pervaya polovina) (Firsi Half of Eighíeeníh Ceníury). AN SSSR, Moskva.

Ant ropo va, V. V. 1957 Voprosy voyennoy organizatsiyi i

voyennogo déla u narodov kraynnego severo-vostoka Sibiri (The Problems of Military Organiza- tion and Military Culture among the Peoples of Extreme Northeastern Siberia). Trudy instituía etnografiyi XXXV: 99-245. AN SSSR, Moskva.

Armstrong, T., G. Rogers, and G. Rowley (eds.)

1978 The Circumpolar North. Methuen, London .

Balzer, Marjory M. 1980 The Route to Eternity: Cultural

Persistence and Change in Siberian Khanty Burial Ritual. Arctic Anthropology 17(l):77-89.




B an z ar o v , Dor s hi 1955 Sobraniye sochineniy (A Collection

of Essays). AN SSSR, Moskva.

Berg, L. S., A. A. Grigorfyev, and N. N. Stepanov (eds.)

1949 S. P. Krasheninnikov : Opisaniye zemli Kamchatki (S. P. Krashenin- nikov: A Description of Kamchatka Land) . Izd . Glavsevmorputi , Moskva.

Bogoraz, Waldemar [Vladimir] 1904 The Chukchee. Memoirs of the

American Museum of Natural History Vol. XI.

Bond, Andrew R. 1984 Urban Planning and Design in the

Soviet Far North: The Norilsk Experience. Soviet Geography 25:145-165.

1985 Northern Settlement Family Style. Labor Planning and Population Policy in Noril'sk. Soviet Geography 26:26-47.

Burch, Ernest S., Jr. 1975 Eskimo Kinsmen. Changing Family

Relationships in Northwest Alaska. Monographs of the American Ethno- logical Society 59. West Publishing Co., St. Paul.

Cher net sov, V. N. 1939 FratriaPnoye ustroystvo obsko-

ugorskogo obshchestva (The Phratry Organization of Ob-Ugrian Society). Sovetskaya etnografiya. Sbornik statey 11:20-42.

Crownheart-Vaughan, E. A. P. (Trans.) 1972 Stepan P. Krashenninikov : Explora-

tions of Kamchatka. Oregon Histori- cal Society, Portland.

Dolgikh, B. O. 1960 Rodovoy i plemennoy sostav narodov

Sibiri v XVII veke (The Clan and Tribal Composition of the Peoples of Siberia in the 17th Century) . Trudy instituta etnografiyi XL. AN SSSR, Moskva.

Gagemeister, Yu. A. (Chair, Siberian Committee)

1854 Statisticheskoye obozreniye Sibiri, Ch. II (Statistical Survey of Siberia, Pt. II). Tipografiya II otdeleniyi Imperatorskogo Velichestva Kantselariy, St. Peterburg.

Gurvich, I. S. 1953 Ethnographic expedition to the

basin of the Indigirka River. A preliminary report (in Russian). Kratkiye soobshcheniyi Instituta etnografiyi. AN SSSR XIX: 28-42.

1954 Byt i kul'tura olenovodcheskikh kolkhozov Nizhnekolymskogo rayona (The Life ways and Culture of the Reindeer Breeding Collective Farms of Kolyma Region). In: Doklady na Pyatoy i Shestoy Nauchnykh Sessiyakh Istoriyi i Filologiyi. (Yakutskiy Filial AN SSSR), edited by Z. K. Gogolev, pp. 62-79. Yakutskoye Knizhnoye izdatel'stvo, Yakutsk.

1977 Kurtura severnykh Yakutov-olenovodov (The Culture of Northern Yakut Reindeer Breeders). Nauka, Moskva.

Gurvich, I. S. (ed.) 1982 Etnicheskaya istoriya narodov

Severa (The Ethnic History of the Peoples of the North). Nauka, Moskva .

Gurvich, I. S. and B. O. Dolgikh 1970 Obshchestvennyy stroy u narodov

Severnoy Sibiri (Social Structure of the Peoples of Northern Siberia). Nauka, Moskva.

Humphrey , Caroline 1983 Karl Marx Collective: Economy,

Society and Religion in a Siberian [Buryat] Collective Farm. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge .

Ivanov, S. V. 1954 Materialy po izobraziternomu

iskusstvu narodov Sibiri XIX-nachala XX v. (Materials on the Representative Art of Siberian Peoples in the 19th and Early 20th Centuries). Trudy instituta etnografiyi t. XIII. AN SSSR, Moskva.

Karjalainen, K. F. 1921, 1922, 1972 Die Religion der

Jugra-vOlker (The Religion of the Ugrian Peoples). Folklore Fellows Communications Nos. 41, 44, 63.

Khangalov, Matvey N. 1958 Sobraniye sochineniy (A Collection

of Essays). t.I Ulan Ude: Buryatskoye knizhnoye izdatel'stvo.




Kreynovich, Ye. A. 1929 Ocherk kosmogonicheskikh

predstavleniy gilyak o. Sakhalina (A Sketch of the Cosmogonie Concepts of the Sakhalin Island Gilyak [Nivkh]). Etnografiya No. 1:78-102.

1934 Morskoy promysel gilyakov derevni KulT (Sea-Mammal Hunting among the Gilyak of Kulf Village). Sovetskaya etnografiya 1934 No. 5: 78-96.

Lantis , Margaret 1947 Alaskan-Eskimo Ceremonialism.

University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Leontyev, V. V. 1973 Khozyaystvo i kuPtura narodov

Chukotki, 1958-1970gg. (Economy and Culture of the Peoples of Chukotka, 1958-1970.) Izd. Nauka SO. , Novosibirsk.

1977 The Indigenous Peoples of Chukchi National Okrug: Population and Settlement. Polar Geography 1:9-22.

Levin, M. A. and L. P. Potapov (eds.) 1956 Narody Sibiri. (The Peoples of

Siberia). AN SSSR, Moskva.

1961 Istoriko-etnograficheskiy atlas Sibiri (Historico-Ethnographic Atlas of Siberia). AN SSSR, Moskva.

Lincoln, W. Bruce 1982 In the Vanguard of Reform.

Russia's Enlightened Bureaucrats 1825-1861. Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalb.

Maak, R. 1887 Vilyuyskiy okrug yakutskoy oblasti,

C. Ill (Vilyuy District of Yakut Province Pt. III). Tipografiya A. Transhellya, St. Peterburg.

Maynov, I. I. 1929 Predisloviye (Introduction). In:

Materials on the Customary Law and Social Lifeways of the Yakut, edited by D. M. Pavlinov, N. A. Vitashevskiy and L. G. Levental1, pp. 1-49.

Middendorf, A. 1878 Korennyye zhiteli Sibiri (Aboriginal

Inhabitants of Siberia). Ch. II, Otd. VI of Puteshestviye na Sever i Vostok Sibiri. Izd. Imp. Akademiyi Nauk, St. Peterburg.

Ministerstvo vnutrennykh del 1810 Statisticheskoye obozreniye Sibiri

(Statistical Survey of Siberia). Schnorr, St. Peterburg.

Novlyanskaya, M. G. 1970 Daniil Gotlib Messerschmidt i yego

rabota po issledovaniyi Sibiri (Daniil Gotlib Messerschmidt and His Work in the Study of Siberia). Nauka LO, Leningrad.

Okladnikov, Alexei 1981 Ancient Art of the Amur Region.

Rock Drawings, Sculpture, Pottery. Aurora Art Publishers, Leningrad.

Pavlinov, D. M., N. A. Vitashevskiy and L. G. Levental1

1929 Materialy po obychnomu pravu i po obshchestvennomu bytu Yakutov (Materials on the Customary Law and Social Lifeways of the Yakut). Trudy Komissiyi po izucheniyu Yakutskoy ASSR t.IV. Iz. Akademiyi nauk SSSR, Leningrad.

Pekarskiy, E. K. 1958- Slovar1 yakutskogo yazyka 1959 (Dictionary of the Yakut Language)

3 vols. Yakut skiy filial Akademiyi nauk SSSR, Yakutsk.

Pekarskiy, E. K. and V. P. Tsvetkov 1913 Ocherki byta priayanskikh tungusov

(Economic Sketches of the Ay an Tungus [Evenki]). Sbornik Muzeya antropologiyi i etnografiyi 2:1-128.

Pierce, Richard A. (ed.) 1980 Siberia and Northwestern America

1788-1792. The Journal of Carl Heinrich Merck, Naturalist with the Russian Scientific Expedition led by Captain Joseph Billings and Gavril Sarychev. Translated by Fritz Jaensch. The Limestone Press, Kingston.

Popov , A . A . 1948 Nganasany. Material'naya kulTtura

(The Nganasan [Tavgi Samoyed]. Material Culture). AN SSSR, Moskva.

1984 Nganasany. SotsiaTnoye ustroystvo i verovaniya (The Nganasan [Tavgi Samoyed]. Social Structure and Beliefs). AN SSSR, Leningrad.

Prokofyev, Ye. D. 1952 K. voprosu sotsial'noy organizatiyi

sel'kupov (On the Question of SePkup Social Organization). Trudy instituía etnografiyi XVIII: 88-107.




Pypin, A. N. 1892 Istoriya Russkoy etnografiy. t. IV

Belorussiya i. Sibir (History of Russian Ethnography. Belorussia and Siberia). M. M. Stasyulevich , St. Peterburg.

Radloff, Wilhelm [Vasiliy V. Radlov] 1884 Aus Sibirien. Lose Blatter aus dem

Tagebuche eines reisenden Linguisten. 13. I. II. (Out of Siberia. Loose Leaves Out of the Diary of a Travelling Linguist). 2 vols. Weigel, Leipzig.

Ristinen, Elaine K. (Trans.) 1966 A. A. Popov: The Nganasan. The

Material Culture of the Tavgi Samoyeds. Uralic and Altaic Series vol. 56. Indiana university, Bloomington.

Rostankowski, Peter 1983 The Decline of Agriculture and the

Rise of Extractive Industry in the Soviet North. Polar Geography and Geology 7:89-98.

Savoskul, S. S. 1978 Social and Cultural Dynamics of the

Peoples of the Soviet North. Polar Record 19:129-152.

Schiefner, Anton (ed.) 1853- Nordische Reisen und Forschungen 1858 von Dr. M. Alexander Castren, B.

1-12 (Northern Journeys and Researches by Dr. M. Alexander Castren. 12 vols.). Buchdruckerei der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, St. Peterburg.

Scripta Technica, Inc. (Trans.) 1964 Maksim G. Levin and L. P.

Potapov: The Peoples of Siberia. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Semenov, P. P. 1864- Geograficheskiy-statisticheskiy 1885 slovar1 Rossiyskoy imperiyi

( Geographical- Statistical Dictionary of the Russian Empire) t. 1-5 (5 vols.). St. Peterburg.

Sergeyev, M. A. 1955 Nekapitalisticheskiy putT razvitiya

malykh narodov Severa (The Non- Capitalist Developmental Path of the Small Northern Peoples). Trudy instituía etnografiyi t. XXVII. AN SSSR, Moskva.

Seroshevskiy , V. L. 1896 Yakuty. Opyt etnograficheskago

issledovaniya (The Yakut. An Experiment in Ethnographic Research). Udelov, St. Peterburg . Izd . Imperator skago Russkago geografiche skago obshchestva.

Shimkin, Demitri B. 1939 A Sketch of the Ket or Yenisei:

"Ostyak." Ethnos 4:147-176.

1954 Consulting Editor, Russian and Siberian Ethnology: The New Century Cyclopedia of Names, 3 vols., edited by C. L. Barnhart. Applet on- Century, New York.

1963 Current Characteristics and Problems of the Soviet Rural Population. In: Soviet Agricultural and Peasant Affairs, edited by R. D. Laird, pp. 79-127. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence .

1967 Pre-Islamic Central Asia. Canadian Slavic Studies 1:618-639.

1975 S. P. Krashenninikovfs Opisanie zemli Kamchatki (Description of Kamchatka Land). An Eighteenth-Century Scientific Masterpiece . Canadian- American Slavic Studies IX: 374-380.

1985 (Review). Caroline Humphrey. Karl Marx Collective: Economy, Society and Religion in a Siberian [Buryat] Collective Farm. Lab our I he Travail. Journal of Canadian Labour Studies 16:349-351.

Shimkin, Demitri B. and Edith M. Shimkin 1975 Population Dynamics in Northeastern

Siberia 1650/1700 to 1970. The Musk-Ox 16:7-23.

Shirokogoroff, S. M. 1929 The Social Organization of the

Northern Tungus. Commercial Press, Shanghai.

1935 Psychomental Complex of the Tungus. Kegan Paul, London.

Shrenk , L . 1899 Ob inorodtsakh Amurskago kraya

(On the Aborigines of Amur Territory). Izd. imperatorskoy Akademiy nauk, St. Peterburg.




Shreyber, S. Ye. 1931 Mediko-sanitarnoye obsledovaniye

naseleniya vilyuyskogo i olek- minskogo okrugov (Medico- Sanitary Investigations of the Population of Vilyuy and Olekminsk Okrugs). Materialy po izucheniyu Yakutskoy ASSR vyp. 9. Izd. AN SSSR, Leningrad.

Shternberg, Lev Ya. 1933a Semfya i rod u narodov severo-

vostochnoy Aziyi (Family and Clan Among the Peoples of Northeastern Asia). Izd. Institute narodov severa Tsik SSSR, Leningrad.

1933b Gilyaki, Orochi, Goldi, Negidal'tsy, Ayny: statyi i materialy (Essays and Materials on the Gilyak, Orochi, Goldi, Negidar, and Ainu). Pod redaktsiyi i predisi. Ya. AlTkor. DaPgiz, Khabarovsk.

Shternberg, L. Ya. , S. F. OPdenburg, B. F. Adler, Ye. L. Petri, Yu. V. Lugoviy, and Ye. M. Romanova

1907 Muzey Antropologiyi i Etnografiyi za 12 letiye upravleniye V. V. Radlova (The Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography in the 12 years of V. V. Radlov's Direction). Ko dnyu semidesyatiletiya Vasiliya Vasilevicha Radlova, pp. 27-106. Tip. Imperatorskoy Akademiyi nauk, St. Peterburg.

Skalon, V. N. (ed.) 1951 Russkiye zemleprokhodtsy-

issledovateli Sibiri XVII veka (The Russian Explorers - Scientific Inves- tigators of Siberia in the Seven- teenth Century). Izd. Moskovskogo obshchestva ispytateley prirody, Moskva.

Steller, Georg W. 1774 Beschreibung von dem Lande

Kamschatka dessen Einwohnern, deren Sitten, Nahman, Lebensart, und verschiedenen Gewohnheiten (Description in Kamchatka Land of the Inhabitants and Their Mores, Names, Lifeways, and Various Customs). J. B. Scherer, Frankfurt .

Taksami, Chuner M. 1967 Nivkhi: sovremennoye

khozyaystvo, kul'tura i byt (Nivkhi [Gilyaks]: Contemporary Economy, Culture, and Lifeways.) Nauka LO, Leningrad.

Tokarev, Sergey A. 1945 Obshchestvennyy stroy Yakutov

XVII-XVIII vv. (Social Structure of the Yakut in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries). Yakutskoye Knizhnoye izdatel!stvo, Yakutsk.

Vdovin, I. S. 1948 Iz istoriyi obshchestvennogo stroya

Chukchey (From the History of Chukchi Social Structure). Sovetskaya etnografiya 1948, No. 3:56-70.

1980 AktuaPnyye problemy etnografiyi aborigennogo naseleniya Sibiri i Severa (Current Problems of the Ethnography of the Aboriginal Population of Siberia and the North).

Verbov, G. D. 1939 Perezhitki rodovogo stroya u

Nentsov (Survivals of Clan Organization Among the Nenets) Sovetskaya etnografiya. Sbornik statey 11:43-66.

Yefimov, A. V. (ed.) 1964 Atlas geografiche skikh otkrytiyi v

Sibiri i v Severo- Zapadnoy Ameriki XVII-XVIII vv. (Atlas of Geographical Discoveries in Siberia and Northwest America in the 17th and 18th Centuries). Nauka, Moskva.

Zuyev, V. F. 1947 Materialy po etnografiyi Sibiri XVIII

veka, 1771-1772 (Materials on the Ethnography of Siberia in the 18th Century, 1771-1772). Prepared by G. D. Verbov and N. N. Stepanov. Trudy instituía etnografiyi. t. V. Izd. AN SSSR, Moskva.

