Ethnohistory and <i>etnicheskaia istoriia</i>: outer similarities and inner differences

Abstract

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.