An ethnos is a group of people united by common features: objective or subjective. Various directions in ethnology (ethnography) include origin, language, culture, territory of residence, self-consciousness, etc. in these signs. In Soviet and Russian ethnography, it is considered the main type of ethnic community.

In Russian, the synonym for the term Ethnos for a long time was the concept of "people". The concept of "ethnos" was introduced into scientific circulation in 1923 by the Russian emigre scientist S. M. Shirokogorov.

ethnicity

Ethnicity can be thought of as a form social organization cultural differences, consisting of those characteristics that the members of the ethnic community themselves consider significant for themselves, and which underlie their self-awareness. These characteristics also include the possession of one or more common names, common elements culture, the idea of ​​a common origin and, as a result, the presence of a common historical memory. At the same time, there is an association of oneself with a special geographical territory and a sense of group solidarity.

The definition of ethnicity is also built on the basis of the cultural self-identification of an ethnic community in relation to other communities (ethnic, social, political) with which it has fundamental ties. As a rule, there is a significant difference between the intra-group and external idea of ​​ethnicity: both objective and subjective criteria are present to determine the ethnic community. Differences in anthropological type, geographical origin, economic specialization, religion, language, and even features of material culture (food, clothing, etc.) are used as such criteria.

Concepts and theories of ethnos

Among ethnologists there is no unity in the approach to the definition of ethnos and ethnicity. In this regard, several of the most popular theories and concepts stand out. So, the Soviet ethnographic school worked in line with primordialism, but today the highest administrative post in the official ethnology of Russia is occupied by a supporter of constructivism V. A. Tishkov.

Primordialism

This approach assumes that a person's ethnicity is an objective reality that has its basis in nature or in society. Therefore, ethnicity cannot be artificially created or imposed. Ethnos is a community with real-life, registered features. You can point to the signs by which an individual belongs to a given ethnic group, and by which one ethnic group differs from another.

"Evolutionary-historical direction". Supporters of this direction consider ethnic groups as social communities that have arisen as a result of a historical process.

Dualistic theory of ethnos

This concept was developed by employees of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences (now the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences), headed by Yu. V. Bromley. This concept assumes the existence of ethnic groups in 2 senses:

In a narrow sense, the ethnos was called "ethnikos" and was understood as "a stable intergenerational set of people that has historically developed on the territory, possessing not only common features, but also relatively stable features of culture (including language) and the psyche, as well as the consciousness of their unity and difference from all other similar formations (self-consciousness), fixed in the self-name (ethnonym).

In a broad sense, it was called an “ethno-social organism (ESO)” and was understood as an ethnos that exists within the state: “ESO is that part of the corresponding ethnicity that is located on a compact territory within one political (potestary) entity and thus represents a socially defined -economic integrity.

Sociobiological direction

This direction assumes the existence of ethnicity due to the biological essence of man. Ethnicity is primordial, that is, originally characteristic of people.

Theory of Pierre van den Berghe

Pierre L. van den Berghe transferred certain provisions of ethology and zoopsychology to human behavior, that is, he assumed that many phenomena public life determined by the biological side of human nature.

Ethnos, according to P. van den Berghe, is an "extended family group."

Van den Berghe explains the existence of ethnic communities by the genetic predisposition of a person to kin selection (nepotism). Its essence lies in the fact that altruistic behavior (the ability to sacrifice oneself) reduces the chances of a given individual to pass on his genes to the next generation, but at the same time increases the possibility of his genes being passed on by blood relatives (indirect gene transfer). Helping relatives to survive and pass on their genes to the next generation, the individual thereby contributes to the reproduction of his own gene pool. Since this type of behavior makes the group evolutionarily more stable than similar other groups in which altruistic behavior is absent, the "altruistic genes" are supported by natural selection.

Passionary theory of ethnos (Gumilyov's theory)

The original passionary theory of ethnogenesis was created by Lev Gumilyov.

In it, an ethnos is a group of people naturally formed on the basis of an original stereotype of behavior, existing as a systemic integrity (structure), opposing itself to all other groups, based on a sense of complementarity and forming an ethnic tradition common to all its representatives.

An ethnos is one of the types of ethnic systems, it is always a part of superethnoi, and consists of subethnoi, convixions and consortia.

The unique combination of landscapes in which an ethnos was formed is called its place of development.

Constructivism

According to the theory of constructivism, ethnos is an artificial formation, the result of the purposeful activity of the people themselves. That is, it is assumed that ethnicity and ethnos are not a given, but the result of creation. Those signs that distinguish representatives of one ethnic group from another are called ethnic markers and are formed on a different basis, depending on how to most effectively separate this ethnic group from another. Ethnic markers can be: physical appearance, religion, language, etc.

So, V. A. Tishkov gives the following definition: " People" in the sense of an ethnic community - a group of people whose members have one or more common names and common elements of culture, have a myth (version) about a common origin and thus have, as it were, a common historical memory, can associate themselves with a special geographical territory, and also demonstrate a sense of group solidarity.

Instrumentalism

This concept considers ethnicity as a tool by which people achieve certain goals, and, unlike primordialism and constructivism, it is not focused on finding a definition of ethnicity and ethnicity. Thus, any activity and activity of ethnic groups is considered as a purposeful activity of ethnic elites in the struggle for power and privileges. In everyday life, ethnicity remains in a latent state, but, if necessary, is mobilized.

In line with instrumentalism, 2 directions are distinguished: elitist instrumentalism and economic instrumentalism.

Elite instrumentalism

This direction focuses on the role of elites in the mobilization of ethnic feelings.

Economic instrumentalism

This direction explains interethnic tensions and conflicts in terms of economic inequality among members of different ethnic groups.

Ethnogenesis

The main conditions for the emergence of an ethnos - a common territory and language - subsequently act as its main features. At the same time, an ethnos can also be formed from multilingual elements, take shape and be fixed on different territories in the process of migration (gypsies, etc.). Under the conditions of early long-distance migrations of "homo sapiens" from Africa and modern globalization ethnic groups are becoming increasingly important as cultural and linguistic communities, freely moving throughout the planet.

Additional conditions for the formation of an ethnic community can be the commonality of religion, the proximity of the components of an ethnic group in racial terms, or the presence of significant mestizo (transitional) groups.

In the course of ethnogenesis, under the influence of the characteristics of economic activity in certain natural conditions and other reasons, features of material and spiritual culture, life, group culture, specific for a given ethnic group, are formed. psychological characteristics. The members of an ethnos develop a common self-awareness, a prominent place in which is occupied by the idea of ​​a common origin. The external manifestation of this self-consciousness is the presence of a common self-name - an ethnonym.

The formed ethnic community acts as a social organism, self-reproducing through predominantly ethnically homogeneous marriages and transferring language, culture, traditions, ethnic orientation, etc. to the new generation.

V. Shnirelman emphasizes that the passionary theory of ethnogenesis does not take into account that ethnic identity (ethnicity) can be floating, situational, symbolic. It doesn't necessarily have to do with language. Sometimes it is based on religion (Kryashens, or baptized Tatars), economic system (reindeer Koryaks-Chavchuvens and settled Koryaks-Nymyllans), race (African Americans), historical tradition (Scots). People can change their ethnicity, as happened in the 19th century in the Balkans, where, moving from rural life to trade, a person turned from a Bulgarian into a Greek, and the language factor did not serve as an obstacle to this, because people were fluent in both languages.

Anthropological classification. Ethnos and race

Anthropological classification is based on the principle of dividing ethnic groups into races. This classification reflects the biological, genetic and, ultimately, historical relationship between ethnic groups.

Science recognizes the discrepancy between the racial and ethnic division of mankind: members of one ethnic group can belong both to the same and to different races (racial types) and, conversely, representatives of the same race (racial type) can belong to different ethnic groups, etc.

A fairly common misconception is expressed in the confusion of the concepts of "ethnos" and "race", and as a result, erroneous concepts are used, for example, such as "Russian race".

Ethnos and culture

Culture - to give a universal, comprehensive definition for this concept is difficult and perhaps even impossible. The same can be said about "ethnic culture", insofar as it is manifested and implemented different ways and manner, so it can be understood and interpreted in different ways.

As you know, culture in general has many definitions. Some experts number up to several hundred. But all these definitions "fit", in fact, into several basic meanings (aspects), due to which they become more or less visible.

There are several approaches to studying culture:

  • value (axiological - the connection of universal values);
  • symbolic (culture - a system of symbols);
  • organizational
  • activity approach.

The selected aspects of culture - axiological, symbolic, organizational, activity - are closely interconnected, and seem to be the most relevant. So, for example: the basic ideas about the world and the beliefs of an ethnic group (symbolic aspect) are realized and reflected in the way of life (organizational aspect). And in the end, they are formed into a certain value-normative system - with their own priorities and peculiar connections between individual value orientations (axiological aspect), and the lifestyle and value system, in turn, determine the forms of behavior and methods of activity of members of the ethnic group (activity aspect).

Finally, typical forms of behavior and modes of activity serve to reinforce and support the ideas and beliefs that prevail in an ethnic group (just as, for example, systematic prayer maintains faith in a person, does not allow it to weaken and fade away). It is known that the so-called ethnicity is, first of all, and mainly the culture of an ethnos, it is it that determines the "boundaries" of an ethnos, the differences of each of them from others.

Numerous historical research ethnologists from different countries convince us that throughout human history (from the primitive state to the present day) people have had and still have a need for knowledge not only about their lives, traditions and customs, but also about the culture of the surrounding peoples. The presence of such knowledge now makes it easier to navigate in the world around us, to feel safer and more confident in it. For several millennia, the accumulation of information and data of various kinds about many peoples of the world has been going on, while already in antiquity attempts were made not to limit this knowledge only to a simple presentation or description. So, even in ancient times, some authors attempted to bring numerous empirical materials into a system, to classify various peoples on the basis of their economic and cultural characteristics. However, these attempts were mostly speculative and therefore did not achieve their goals.

Ethnic and interethnic communities

ethnic communities

In Soviet ethnography, the idea of ​​a hierarchy of ethnic communities was put forward, connected with the fact that one person can belong (identify himself) simultaneously to several ethnic communities, one of which completely includes the other. For example, a Russian may consider himself a Don Cossack and a Slav at the same time. This hierarchy is:

  • elementary ethnic units (micro-ethnic units). This level mainly includes the family - an elementary social unit, which plays a significant role in the reproduction of the ethnos. It is also possible to classify a person (ethnophore) as a direct carrier of ethnic properties to this level.
  • sub-ethnic divisions and ethnographic groups. Sub-ethnoi occupy an intermediate position between consortia and convixions, on the one hand, and ethnic groups, on the other.
  • main ethnic division. This is actually "ethnos".
  • macro-ethnic communities or meta-ethnic communities - formations covering several ethnic groups, but having ethnic properties of less intensity than the ethnic groups included in it. The following macro-ethnic communities are distinguished: meta-ethno-political, meta-ethno-linguistic, meta-ethno-confessional, meta-ethno-economic, etc.

Ethnographic communities

Unlike ethnic communities, belonging to an ethnographic community is not recognized by people and, therefore, such communities do not have self-names, but are distinguished as a result of scientific research.

  • ethnographic group
  • historical and ethnographic area

Hierarchical classification of ethnic groups

In the Soviet school of ethnography, in line with the dualistic concept of ethnos, the following gradation of ethnoi in the broad sense (ESO) was adopted, later this gradation was transferred to the ethnos in general:

  • A clan is a group of people based on blood ties.
  • A tribe is an ethnos of the era of the primitive communal system or the period of its decomposition.
  • Nationality is a community of people that has not yet been fully formed, united by a common space, culture, language, etc., in which there are still significant internal differences.
  • Nation is currently the most commonly used concept in ethnographic literature. Corresponds to a developed industrial and post-industrial society with a strong self-identification. At the same time, in Soviet ethnography, the division into socialist and capitalist nations was accepted, which, as a result of the collapse of the socialist system, lost its meaning.

Ethnos and nation

Between the concepts of "ethnos" and "nation" is often put an equal sign. In the domestic literature devoted to this issue, it was usually specified that the nation is not just an ethnos, but its highest form, which replaced the nationality.

Nevertheless, some researchers clearly articulate the differences between a nation and an ethnos, pointing to different nature the origin of the concepts of "ethnos" and "nation". So, for an ethnos, in their opinion, is characterized by supra-individuality and stability, the repetition of cultural patterns. In contrast, for a nation, the process of self-awareness based on the synthesis of traditional and new elements becomes decisive, and the actual ethnic identification criteria (language, way of life, etc.) of belonging fade into the background. The nation comes to the fore those aspects that provide supra-ethnicity, the synthesis of ethnic, interethnic and other ethnic components (political, religious, etc.).

Ethnos and statehood

Ethnic groups are subject to changes in the course of ethnic processes - consolidation, assimilation, etc. For a more stable existence, an ethnos strives to create its own socio-territorial organization (state). Modern history knows many examples of how various ethnic groups, despite their large numbers, have not been able to solve the problem of socio-territorial organization. These include ethnic groups of Jews, Palestinian Arabs, Kurds, divided between Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Other examples of successful or unsuccessful ethnic expansion - expansion Russian Empire, Arab conquests in North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula, Tatar-Mongol invasion, Spanish colonization of South and Central America.

ethnic identity

Ethnic identity is an integral part of the social identity of the individual, the awareness of one's belonging to a certain ethnic community. In its structure, two main components are usually distinguished - cognitive (knowledge, ideas about the characteristics of one's own group and awareness of oneself as its member based on certain characteristics) and affective (assessment of the qualities of one's own group, attitude towards membership in it, the significance of this membership).

One of the first to develop a child's awareness of belonging to a national group was studied by the Swiss scientist J. Piaget. In a 1951 study, he identified three stages in the development of ethnic characteristics:

  • at 6-7 years old, the child acquires the first fragmentary knowledge about his ethnicity;
  • at 8-9 years old, the child already clearly identifies himself with his ethnic group, based on the nationality of the parents, place of residence, native language;
  • in early adolescence (10-11 years old), ethnic identity is formed in full, as features of different peoples, the child notes the uniqueness of history, the specifics of traditional everyday culture.

External circumstances can force a person of any age to rethink their ethnic identity, as happened with a resident of Minsk, a Catholic born in the Brest region bordering Poland. He “listed as a Pole and considered himself a Pole. At the age of 35 he went to Poland. There he became convinced that his religion unites the Poles, but otherwise he is Belarusian. Since that time, he has become aware of himself as a Belarusian” (Klimchuk, 1990, p. 95).

The formation of ethnic identity is often a rather painful process. So, for example, a boy whose parents moved to Moscow from Uzbekistan even before his birth speaks Russian at home and at school; however, at school, due to his Asian name and swarthy skin color, he receives an offensive nickname. Later, having comprehended this situation, to the question “What is your nationality?” he may answer "Uzbek", or maybe not. The son of an American and a Japanese woman may turn out to be an outcast in Japan, where he will be teased as a “long-nosed” and “oil-eater”, and in the USA. At the same time, a child who grew up in Moscow, whose parents identify themselves as Belarusians, most likely will not have such problems at all.

There are the following dimensions of ethnic identity:

  • mono-ethnic identity with one's ethnic group, when a person has a positive image of his ethnic group with a positive attitude towards other ethnic groups;
  • the changed ethnic identity of a person living in a multi-ethnic environment, when a foreign ethnic group is regarded as having a higher status (economic, social, etc.) than its own. This is typical for many representatives of national minorities, for immigrants in the second generation (see also the article assimilation (sociology));
  • bi-ethnic identity, when a person living in a multi-ethnic environment owns both cultures and recognizes them as equally positive;
  • marginal ethnic identity, when a person living in a multi-ethnic environment does not sufficiently own any of the cultures, which leads to intrapersonal conflicts (feeling of failure, senselessness of existence, aggressiveness, etc.);
  • weak (or even zero) ethnic identity, when a person does not identify himself with any ethnic group, but declares a cosmopolitan (I am an Asian, I am a European, I am a citizen of the world) or civil (I am a democrat, I am a communist) identity.

(Visited 55 times, 1 visits today)

A little
about nations, ethnic groups and scientific approaches.

About some concepts.
Ethnology from the Greek words - ethnos - people and logos - word, judgment - the science of the peoples of the world (ethnoses, more precisely,

ethnic communities) their origin (etognenese), history ( ethnic history), their culture. The term ethnology
distribution is due to the famous French physicist and thinker M. Ampère, who determined the place of ethnology in the system humanities along with history, archeology and other disciplines. At the same time, ethnology included, according to
Ampere's thoughts, as a subdiscipline of physical anthropology (the science of physical properties separate ethnic
groups: hair and eye color, skull and skeleton structure, blood, etc.). In the 19th century in Western European countries
ethnological studies were successfully developed. Along with the term "ethnology", another name for this science has become widespread - ethnography.
- from the Greek words - ethnos - people and grapho - I write, i.e. description of peoples, their history and cultural characteristics. However, during
second half of the 19th century the point of view prevailed, according to which ethnography was considered as
predominantly a descriptive science based on field materials, and ethnology as a theoretical discipline,
based on ethnographic data. Finally, the French ethnologist C. Levi-Strauss believed that ethnography, ethnology and anthropology are three successive stages in the development of the science of man: ethnography is a descriptive stage in the study of ethnic groups, field
research and classification; ethnology - the synthesis of this knowledge and their systematization; anthropology seeks to study
man in all his manifestations. As a result, in different times and in different countries preferred one of these terms, depending on
developed tradition. So, in France the term "ethnology" (l'ethnologie) still prevails, in England, along with it
the concept of "social anthropology" (ethnology, social anthropology) is widely used, in the USA the designation
of this science is “cultural anthropology” (cultural anthropology). In the Russian tradition
the terms "ethnology" and "ethnography" were originally treated as synonyms. However, since the late 1920s in the USSR, ethnology, along with sociology, began to be considered
"bourgeois" science. Therefore, in the Soviet era, the term "ethnology" was almost completely replaced by the term "ethnography". AT last years, However,
the trend has prevailed to call this science, following Western and American models - ethnology or sociocultural
anthropology.

What is an ethnos, or an ethnic group (more precisely, an ethnic community or an ethnic
Group)? This understanding varies greatly in different disciplines - ethnology,
psychology, sociology and representatives of different scientific schools and directions. Here
briefly about some of them.
Thus, many Russian ethnologists continue to consider ethnicity as a real
existing concept - a social group that has developed in the course of historical
development of society (V. Pimenov). According to J. Bromley, ethnos is historically
a stable group of people that has developed in a certain territory, possessing
common relatively stable features of the language, culture and psyche, and
also awareness of its unity (self-consciousness), fixed in self-name.
The main thing here is self-awareness and a common self-name. L. Gumilyov understands ethnicity
first of all how a natural phenomenon; this or that group of people (dynamic
system) that opposes itself to other similar collectives (we do not
we), having its own special internal
structure and predetermined stereotype of behavior. Such an ethnic stereotype, according to
Gumilyov, is not inherited, but is acquired by the child in the process
cultural socialization and is quite strong and unchanged during
human life. S. Arutyunov and N. Cheboksarov considered ethnicity as a spatial
limited clusters of specific cultural information, and interethnic
contacts - as an exchange of such information. There is also a point of view
which an ethnos is, like a race, originally, an eternally existing community
people, and belonging to it determines their behavior and national character.
According to the extreme point of view, belonging to an ethnic group is determined by birth -
at present, among serious scientists, almost no one shares it.

In foreign anthropology in recent times there is a widespread belief that ethnicity
(or rather, an ethnic group, since foreign anthropologists avoid using
the word "ethnos") is an artificial construct that arose as a result of purposeful
the efforts of politicians and intellectuals. However, most researchers agree that ethnos (ethnic group)
represents one of the most stable groups, or communities of people.
This is an intergenerational community, stable over time, with a stable composition, with
In this case, each person has a stable ethnic status, it is impossible to “exclude” him
from an ethnic group.

In general, one should pay attention to the fact that the theory of ethnos is a favorite brainchild of domestic
scientists; in the West, the problems of ethnicity are discussed in a completely different way.
Western scientists have priority in developing the theory of the nation.

Back in 1877, E. Renan gave an etatist definition of the concept of “nation”: a nation unites
all residents of this state, regardless of their race, ethnicity. Religious
accessories, etc. Since the 19th century.
Two models of the nation took shape: French and German. French model, following
Renan, corresponds to the understanding of the nation as a civil society
(state) based on political choice and civil kinship.
The reaction to this french model was the model of the German Romantics, appealing
to the “voice of blood”, according to her, the nation is an organic community, connected
common culture. Nowadays people talk about "Western" and "Eastern" models of society,
or about the civil (territorial) and ethnic (genetic) models of the nation.
scientists believe that the idea of ​​a nation is often used for political purposes - by the ruling
or wishing to gain power groupings. What
concerns ethnic groups, or ethnic groups (ethnic groups), then in foreign, and in recent
years and in domestic science it is customary to distinguish three main approaches to this
range of problems - primordialist, constructivist and instrumentalist
(or situationist).

A few words about each of them:

One of the "pioneers" in the study of ethnicity, whose research had a huge impact on social science,
was a Norwegian scientist F. Barth, who argued that ethnicity is one of the forms
social organization, culture (ethnic - socially organized
kind of culture). He also introduced the important concept of "ethnic boundary" - el
that critical feature of an ethnic group beyond which the attribution to it ends
members of this group itself, as well as the assignment to it by members of other groups.

In the 1960s, like other theories of ethnicity, the theory of primordialism (from the English primordial - original) was put forward.
The direction itself arose much earlier, it goes back to the already mentioned
ideas of the German romantics, his followers considered ethnos to be the original and
unchanging association of people on the principle of "blood", i.e. with permanent
signs. This approach has been developed not only in German, but also in Russian
ethnology. But more on that later. In the 1960s. spread in the West
biological-racial, and "cultural" form of primordialism. Yes, one of her
founders, K. Girtz argued that ethnic self-consciousness (identity) refers
to "primordial" feelings and that these primordial feelings largely determine
people's behavior. These feelings, however, wrote K. Girtz, are not innate,
but arise in people as part of the process of socialization and in the future there are
as fundamental, sometimes - as immutable and determining the behavior of people -
members of the same ethnic group. The theory of primordialism has repeatedly been subjected to serious criticism, in particular
from the supporters of F. Barth. So D. Baker noted that feelings are changeable and
are situationally determined and cannot generate the same behavior.

As a reaction to primordialism, ethnicity began to be understood as an element of ideology (attributing oneself to
this group or attributing someone to it by members of other groups). Ethnicity and ethnic groups have become
considered also in the context of the struggle for resources, power and privileges. .

Before characterizing other approaches to ethnicity (ethnic groups), it would be appropriate to recall the definition,
given to an ethnic group by the German sociologist M. Weber. According to him, this
a group of people whose members have a subjective belief in a common
descent by reason of similarity in physical appearance or customs, or both
the other together, or because of shared memory. Here it is emphasized
FAITH in a common origin. And in our time, many anthropologists believe that the main
a differentiating feature for an ethnic group can be an IDEA of community
origin and/or history.

In general, in the West, in contrast to primordialism and under the influence of Barth's ideas, they received the greatest
dissemination of the constructivist approach to ethnicity. His supporters considered
ethnos is a construct created by individuals or elites (powerful, intellectual,
cultural) with specific goals (struggle for power, resources, etc.). Many
also emphasize the role of ideology (above all, nationalisms) in the construction of
ethnic communities. The followers of constructivism include English
scientist B. Anderson (his book bears a “speaking” and expressive title “Imaginary
community" - its fragments were posted on this site), E. Gellner (about him, too
was discussed on this site) and many others whose works are considered classics.

At the same time, some scientists are not satisfied with the extremes of both approaches. There are attempts to "reconcile" them:
attempts to present ethnic groups as "symbolic" communities based on
sets of symbols - again, belief in a common origin, in a common past, a common
fate, etc. Many anthropologists emphasize that ethnic groups arose
relatively recent: they are not eternal and immutable, but change under
the impact of specific situations, circumstances - economic, political and
etc.

In domestic science, the theory of ethnos has become especially popular, moreover, initially
in its extreme primordialist (biological) interpretation. It was developed by S.M. Shirokogorov, who
considered the ethnos as a biosocial organism, singling out its main
characteristics of origin, as well as language, customs, way of life and tradition
[Shirokogorov, 1923. P. 13]. In many ways, his follower was L.N. Gumilyov,
partly continuing this tradition, he considered the ethnos as a biological system,
emphasizing passionarity as highest stage its development [Gumilyov, 1993]. About
Quite a lot has been written about this approach, but now there are few serious researchers
fully shares the views of L.N. Gumilyov, which can be considered an extreme expression
primordial approach. This theory has its roots in the views of the German
romantics to a nation, or an ethnic group from the position of "common blood and soil", i.e.
some kindred group. Hence the intolerance of L.N. Gumilev to
mixed marriages, whose descendants he considered "chimerical formations",
connecting the unconnected.

P.I. Kushner believed that ethnic groups differ from each other in a number of specific features,
among which the scientist especially singled out language, material culture (food, housing,
clothes, etc.), as well as ethnic identity [Kushner, 1951. P.8-9].

The studies of S.A. Arutyunova and N.N.
Cheboksarova. According to them, “... ethnic groups are spatially limited
"clumps" of specific cultural information, and interethnic contacts - the exchange
such information”, and information links were considered as the basis for the existence
ethnos [Arutyunov, Cheboksarov, 1972. P. 23-26]. In a later work, S.A. Arutyunova
an entire chapter devoted to this problem bears a "talking" title: "The Network
communications as the basis of ethnic existence” [Arutyunov, 2000]. The idea of
ethnic groups as specific "clumps" of cultural information and
internal information relations is very close to the modern understanding of any
systems as a kind of information field, or information structure. AT
further S.A. Arutyunov directly writes about this [Arutyunov, 2000. pp. 31, 33].

A characteristic feature of the theory of ethnos is that its followers consider
ethnic groups as a universal category, i.e. people, according to it, belonged to
to some ethnic group / ethnic group, much less often - to several ethnic groups. Supporters
This theory believed that ethnic groups were formed in one or another historical
period and transformed in accordance with changes in society. Marxist influence
theory was also expressed in attempts to correlate the development of ethnic groups with a five-member division
development of mankind - the conclusion that each socio-economic formation
corresponds to its own type of ethnos (tribe, slave-owning people, capitalist
nationality, capitalist nation, socialist nation).

In the future, the theory of ethnos was developed by many Soviet researchers, in
features Yu.V. Bromley, who
believed that ethnos is “... a historically established
in a certain area
a stable group of people who share relatively stable
features of the language, culture and psyche, as well as the consciousness of their unity and
differences from other similar formations (self-awareness), fixed in
self-name" [Bromley, 1983. S. 57-58]. Here we see the impact of ideas
primordialism - S. Shprokogorov, and M. Weber.

The theory of Yu.V. Bromley, like his supporters, was rightly criticized back in the Soviet period.
So, M.V. Kryukov repeatedly and, in my opinion, quite rightly noted
the far-fetchedness of this entire system of nationalities and nations [Kryukov, 1986, p.58-69].
EAT. Kolpakov, for example, points out that under the Bromley definition of ethnos
many groups are suitable, not only ethnic ones [Kolpakov, 1995. p. 15].

Since the mid-1990s, Russian literature has begun to spread
views close to constructivist. According to them, ethnic groups are not real
existing communities, and the constructs created by the political elite or
scientists for practical purposes (for details, see: [Tishkov, 1989. P. 84; Tishkov,
2003, p. 114; Cheshko, 1994, p. 37]). So, according to V.A. Tishkov (one of the works
which bears the expressive name "Requiem for an Ethnos"), Soviet scientists themselves
created a myth about the unconditionally objective reality of ethnic communities, as
certain archetypes [Tishkov, 1989. p.5], the researcher himself considers ethnic groups to be artificial
constructions that exist only in the minds of ethnographers [Tishkov, 1992], or
the result of elite efforts to construct ethnicity [Tishkov, 2003. p.
118]. V.A. Tishkov defines an ethnic group as a group of people whose members have
a common name and elements of culture, a myth (version) about a common origin and
common historical memory, associate themselves with a special territory and have a sense of
solidarity [Tishkov, 2003. p.60]. Again - the impact of the ideas of Max Weber, expressed
nearly a century ago...

Not all researchers share this point of view, which has developed not without the influence of ideas
M. Weber, for example, S.A. Arutyunov, who repeatedly criticized it [Arutyunov,
1995. P.7]. Some researchers working in line with the Soviet theory
ethnos, consider ethnoi to be an objective reality that exists independently of our
consciousness.

I would like to note that, despite the sharp criticism of the supporters of the theory of ethnos,
the views of constructivist researchers are not so radically different from
first glances. In the definitions of ethnic groups or ethnic groups given
listed scientists, we see a lot in common, although the attitude to the identified
objects diverge. Moreover, wittingly or unwittingly, many researchers
repeat the definition of an ethnic group given by M. Weber. I will repeat it again
times: an ethnic group is a group of people whose members have a subjective
belief in a common origin due to the similarity of physical appearance or customs,
or both together, or because of shared memory. So the basics
M. Weber had a significant impact on various approaches to the study of ethnicity.
Moreover, his definition of an ethnic group was sometimes used almost verbatim
supporters of different paradigms.

All the inhabitants of our big planet are very different: for example, the highlanders are not at all like the islanders. Even within the same nation or country, there may be separate ethnic groups that differ in their cultural characteristics and traditions. In fact, an ethnic group is a part of an ethnic group, a certain community that has historically formed in a certain territory. Let's consider this question in more detail.

History and origin of the term

Today, an ethnic group is an important object of study for such sciences as history, population geography, and cultural studies. Social psychologists study this issue with the aim of preventing and resolving various ethnic conflicts. What is the origin this term?

The etymology of the word "ethnos" is very interesting. It can be translated as "non-Greek". That is, in fact, "ethnos" is a stranger, a foreigner. The ancient Greeks used the term to refer to various tribes of non-Greek origin. But they called themselves another, no less famous word - "demos", which means "people" in translation. Later, the term also migrated to the Latin language, in which the adjective "ethnic" also appeared. In the Middle Ages, it was also actively used in a religious sense, being a synonym for the words "non-Christian", "pagan".

Today, "ethnos" has become a purely scientific term for all kinds of ethnic groups. The science that studies them is called ethnography.

An ethnic group is...

What is the meaning of this term? And what are its features and distinctive features?

An ethnic group is a stable community of people that has formed in a certain territory and has its own distinctive characteristics. The features of such a group will be discussed a little later.

In science, this term is very often identified with such concepts as "ethnicity", "ethnic identity", "nation". But in the legal sphere, it is completely absent - there it is often replaced by the terms "people" and the lack of clear definitions of all these concepts is a serious scientific problem. Many scientists believe that each of them hides its own specific phenomenon, so they cannot be identified. In the "ethnic group" Soviet researchers often abused the categories of sociology, and Western - psychology.

Western scholars identify two very important features of ethnic groups:

  • firstly, they do not have their own statehood;
  • secondly, having their own history, ethnic groups are not active and important historical subjects.

Ethnic group structure

All existing ethnic groups have approximately the same structure, which consists of three main parts:

  1. The core of an ethnic group, which is characterized by compactness of residence in a particular territory.
  2. The periphery is the part of the group that is territorially isolated from the core.
  3. Diaspora is that part of the population that is territorially dispersed, including, it can occupy the territories of other ethnic communities.

The main features of ethnic communities

There are several signs by which a particular person can be attributed to a particular ethnic group. It is noteworthy that the members of the community consider these characteristics to be significant for themselves, they underlie their self-awareness.

Here are the main signs of an ethnic group:

  • kinship by blood and marriage (this sign is already considered somewhat obsolete);
  • general history of origin and development;
  • territorial sign, that is, binding to a specific locality, territory;
  • their cultural characteristics and traditions.

Main types of ethnic groups

To date, there are several classifications of ethnic groups and ethnic communities: geographical, linguistic, anthropological and cultural and economic.

Ethnic groups include the following types (levels):

  • Genus is nothing more than a close community of blood relatives.
  • A tribe is several clans that are linked by common traditions, religion, cult, or a common dialect.
  • Nationality is a special ethnic group that has been formed historically and is united by one language, culture, faith and common territory.
  • The nation is highest form development of an ethnic community, which is characterized by a common territory, language, culture and developed economic ties.

ethnic identity

An important indicator of the level of formation of a social ethnic group, in particular a nation, is ethnic self-awareness. This term is one of the main ones in the psychology of the groups we are considering.

Ethnic self-consciousness is a feeling of belonging of a particular individual to a particular ethnic group, ethnic group, nation. At the same time, a person must be aware of his unity with this community and understand the qualitative differences from other ethnic groups and groups.

For the formation of ethnic identity, it is very important to study the history of one's people, as well as cultural characteristics, folklore and traditions that are passed down from generation to generation, a thorough knowledge of one's language and literature.

Finally...

Thus, ethnic is a rather interesting phenomenon and a separate object of research. By studying individual communities, we not only learn about their cultural or historical features but we also cultivate tolerance, tolerance and respect for other ethnic groups and cultures. Ultimately, understanding and respect for the characteristics of other ethnic groups leads to a significant reduction in ethnic disputes, conflicts and wars.

Ethnos, people, nation, nationality. The difference between concepts, the danger of their confusion. The people as the basis of Eurasian integration

Huge variety ethnic composition population makes our country unique. Representatives of more than 180 ethnic groups live in Russia, according to Rosstat. As a rule, each group has its own language, preserves certain traditions, carries its own mythology, world outlook, system of values... This diversity, of course, is the wealth of Russia. Every language, every myth, every tradition makes our common Russian culture wider and more multifaceted.

At the same time, it is obvious that polyethnicity, in the implementation of a careless policy, can become an Achilles' heel. Russian state. Such geopoliticians who enjoy influence in the United States, such as G. Kissinger and Z. Brzezinski, repeatedly voiced in their works the idea of ​​dividing the "Heartland" (first the USSR, and then Russia) into several controlled nation states. Our geopolitical opponents could realize this scenario by inciting inter-ethnic conflicts in Russia, introducing controlled people into the Russian domestic political field, using the latest social technologies, mass media. Therefore, in the field of regulation of Russian interethnic relations, a balanced, carefully thought-out approach and a well-developed strategy are needed. The task of such a strategy is to make our society stable, to exclude the possibility of its split due to interethnic strife.

It is impossible to discuss various options for a national policy strategy and offer something new without having decided on the basic ethno-sociological concepts. Experts in the field of sociology, including A.G. Dugin, note that there is some confusion in the understanding of ethno-sociological terms even in the scientific community. The purpose of this report is to try to clearly distinguish between such fundamental concepts for sociology as ethnos, people, nation and nationality, and then briefly voice the course in the regulation of interethnic relations, which is proposed by representatives of the conservative Eurasian movement.

The first important concept that I would like to consider in the framework of the report is the concept of ethnicity. Sergei Shirokogorov and Max Weber defined an ethnos as a group of people who speak the same language, have a common origin and traditions.

Language is an extremely important factor in the life of an ethnic group. As the German philosopher Martin Heidegger said, language is the house of being. It is the language that unites the area where the ethnic group lives. For example, all those who think and speak Russian can be considered Russian, no matter what state they live in.

In most cases, the origin of the ethnic group is the belief in a common ancestor. Since the existence of a common ancestor is very difficult to prove or, conversely, to disprove, historically any person who believed in the myth of his common origin with members of the ethnos could join the ethnos.

Also, it can be noted that the ethnos is an indivisible, basic sociological unit. Any attempt to invade the culture of an ethnos, dismember it, disrupt the natural course of its existence, destroys the ethnos. There is no strict stratification in the ethnic group, it is characterized by relationships similar to family ones, that is, as a rule, senior members of the community enjoy authority. An ethnos is a static, conservative unit capable of existing for a long time practically in an unchanged state, preserving its language and culture.

People is also a basic ethno-sociological concept. In the course of the historical process, ethnic groups interact with each other, lose their static state, and gradually form peoples together. Another option is also possible, when an already formed active people absorbs, including by military means, the ethnic groups living nearby.

A people can be defined as an association of ethnic groups that enters history, becomes a player in the political arena. Moreover, society acquires a high degree differentiation. Having formed a single people, ethnic groups can create a state, religion and civilization.

A clear example of the emergence of a people from an ethnos on the way to a nation can be considered the Jewish people: “The Jews existed as an ethnos, entered history in a state of dispersion that lasted more than two thousand years, and at the same time they survived, becoming a people, and then created their own nation-state Israel". Also, the concept of people is inherent in Russians, which have developed from many ethnic groups.

The people are unique and deep Russian concept, which has no analogues in other languages. In English, "people" can be translated as "people", in Spanish - as "el pueblo" i.e. people, in German "people" - "das Volk", in pronunciation, close to the Russian word "regiment". One way or another, in no other language is there such a capacious concept as the Russian “people”, which could designate a huge mass of ethnically diverse population, united by common goals, a common history.

Nation- a social unit that expresses the political unity of precisely individuals living in one state. The Latin word "natio" means a mass of people having a common territorial origin. When a nation is formed, cultural differences between ethnic groups and peoples that formed the state are erased. A nation is nothing but a "melting pot" that destroys traditional forms of identity (ethnic, cultural, even religious) and creates an artificial entity within the state. When a nation is created, as a rule, the linguistic difference between ethnic groups is completely eliminated, and the language of one of the most numerous ethnic groups is imposed in the state as the only one possible for use.

In the Nation-State, in French "Etat-Nation", by definition there can be only one nation. A nation is defined primarily on a formal basis - citizenship. Nationality and citizenship are identical, synonymous concepts. Nations can be considered, for example, the population of France and the United States. In these states, a policy of erasing ethnic differences has been purposefully pursued for centuries. Only the identity of a citizen as an individual is strictly protected, other forms of identity are sacrificed political interests ruling circles.

Nationality- a term introduced by the Austrian Marxist O. Bauer, who understood this word as a people passing into the state of a nation. In our country, nationality in the Soviet era meant ethnicity, which does not correspond to the definition of this term accepted in the world scientific community. Calling an ethnic group that is part of the state a nationality is the same as calling for separatism. According to the constitution, we are the multinational people of Russia. If a people is multinational, it means doomed to disintegration into several nation-states, at the same time, if multi-ethnic, it means united within the state, but consisting of groups of the population that are different in origin and culture.

Future of Russia: united people or nation? Why is the nation, from the point of view of representatives of the Eurasian movement, not the best option for Russia? As already mentioned, the formation of a nation is nothing but the depersonalization of the people, the elimination of all forms of identity, except for the individual. When the cultural code of an ethnic group is destroyed, the system of meanings and values ​​that helped the members of the community to exist and “fight for a place under the Sun” disappears. If ethnic differences between the citizens of the state are removed and a common liberal “surrogate of culture” is imposed on everyone, then the historically established traditional meanings will disappear. A people forcibly turned into a nation may lose incentives to develop and defend its territory. The result may be the complete extinction of such a nation and the disappearance from the historical arena.

Another development option Russian society may be the gradual formation of a single, but multi-ethnic people. Which could, with its diversity, unite on the basis of a common historical path, common values ​​and a common folk idea. Many sociologists understand by "empire" a combination of strategic unity with polyethnicity. Perhaps the most optimal or even the only possible option for the existence of Russian society is just an empire. Russia has historical experience in building ethnically diverse empires. Moreover, this experience can be considered successful despite all the military, economic and cultural achievements of the united Russian people, from the multi-ethnic Russian kingdom to the communist empire of the USSR.

a historically emerged type of stable social grouping of people, represented by racial, linguistic or national identity. The term is imprecise, as a distinction is sometimes made between cultural and political ethnicity. Also, racial attributes are not always the defining feature of ethnic groups.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

ETHNOS

a localized large community of people, consolidated as a form of their active adaptation to the regional conditions of the natural environment through a developed unique mode of activity - culture. In the existing discussion on the problem of ethnos, one of the points of view, presented in a concentrated form in the works of Yu. V. Bromley, defines ethnicity as a phenomenon by its nature, that is, by its genesis and essence, social. Its sociality is determined by the fact that it is a product of the objective process of the division of labor, the formation and development of economic and political social structures. The content of the concept of E. is formed by a combination of features in their integrativity. These include: the presence of a certain group of people who have a common area of ​​​​residence and activity; the presence of a stable self-name, an ethnonym that is transformed in the languages ​​of other peoples; self-awareness through the antithesis "we - they", including historical memory, knowledge about the origin and historical stages of the life of their ethnic group, national feelings and interests; shared culture, including language, religion, etc.

This principle of defining E. through the enumeration of its various characteristics is methodologically not entirely justified, since it allows excluding some features and introducing others. And if any of the signs of E., and in some cases - several of them - is absent, which is often found in reality, it is impossible to consider this society as an ethnic community. This approach does not present the functional purpose of ethnic determinants, for example, it emphasizes the need for a common territory, but it is not clear how the territory “forms” E. Finally, the question here is not about the very essence of E., but only about certain aspects of the existence of real ethnic communities. Therefore, there is a need to search for a single ultimate basis for the existence of E., which determines the representation of mankind through a set of ethnic groups that are not similar to one another. Such an approach to the problem of the nature and essence of E. is presented, in particular, in the concept of L. N. Gumilyov. E. is considered by him as a result creative process intensive development by a community of people of a unique natural landscape, more precisely, the zone of their optimal combination. In the process of developing the landscape, the community forms a new unique "behavior stereotype". This concept, including a special way of activity, attitudes towards the world, characterizes E. as a carrier of a certain cultural type, if we understand culture as a specific "technology of activity." This approach assumes the idea of ​​the constancy of ethnic differences, due to the constancy natural conditions different regions; the idea of ​​non-coincidence of ethnic and social "rhythms" of human history (E. are considered not as a form of socio-economic processes, but as independent phenomena, the functioning and interaction of which largely determine the course of history). Gradual death through simplification internal structure- the fate of all E. To maintain its viability, an ethnic community creates social, political structures, institutions, however, ethnogenesis is of a deep nature, and processes, for example, ethnic aging, do not depend on the nature of the social system, political system etc.

The idea of ​​searching for an objective basis for the phenomenon of E. in the interaction of man and nature has a long historical and philosophical tradition. The question of the nature of E. was considered within the framework of the so-called. "geographical determinism". Such a phenomenon as the "spirit of the people" (Montesquieu), "the temperament of the races" (L. Voltman), the "national idea" (E. Renan), which determines the entire economic, political, social life people, depends on climatic, landscape and other natural conditions. So, L. Voltman considers two kinds of factors as determining the form and method of state government: firstly, natural conditions and type of economy; Secondly - psychological features peoples. I. G. Herder, also analyzing the features political life peoples, comes to the conclusion about the influence of natural conditions and ethnic dynamics on the features of statehood. Sociology of the 19th century in the person of, in particular, F. G. Giddings, it already makes such phenomena as the social structure, ways of organizing the social life of peoples, dependent on the conditions of the natural environment. Thus, the idea that social structures correspond to the natural "sacred law of development" (L. Voltman) of individual peoples is common to representatives of this trend in social science, and it is this correspondence that should be the highest criterion for the activities of management structures. Later, this idea was developed by a variety of currents in historical, sociological, socio-philosophical science, from Russian Slavophilism, the philosophy of N. Ya. Danilevsky, N. A. Berdyaev to modern foreign historiography, in particular, the works of F. Braudel. Here one can point to the works of sociologists of the 19th century: K. Ritter, G. T. Bokl, F. Ratzel, N. Kareev, L. I. Mechnikov, and others.

If, for its objective reasons, E. is regarded as a natural phenomenon, more precisely, "territorial", then in terms of the methods of self-organization, it is a sociocultural phenomenon. Indeed, linking the solution of the question of the representation of the human race through the totality of ethnic groups with the representation earth's surface through the system of territorial-landscape zones, it is impossible not to raise the following question: what is the criterion for the stability of each individual ecosystem, provided that territorial integrity For many peoples, is it lost over time, or does E. become settled within several landscape zones? What acts as an intra-ethnic system-forming factor that “protects” E. from the penetration of elements “alien” to it into the system? Here, too, there are a number of research approaches. Some authors consider ethnic endogamy and heredity as such a criterion and factor. However, it must be taken into account that the processes of reproduction of the gene pool are influenced by historical and cultural traditions, and conquests, and habits, and the standard of living of the people. Heredity is embodied, in particular, in the features of the anthropological type. But it is known that anthropological typology does not have an absolute coincidence with the ethnic structure of society. Other authors see ethnic constants in the self-consciousness of the people. The origins of this approach - even in the social science of the Enlightenment. But ethnic self-consciousness also acts as a reflection of the joint activity of a given human collective; the specificity, uniqueness of the worldview of a particular people is determined by the specifics of its activity in the development of the environment. The same activity is carried out in different ways by different nations, each nation perceives the same aspects of reality in its own way. Culture as "a set of ways human activity"," technology of activity "and the specific historical and social experience accumulated on its basis, enshrined in traditions, in ethnic memory - is a non-biological stable mechanism that constitutes the unique integrity, autonomy and relative stability of E. It exists as a community of people that has common economic and cultural features and, at the same time, a common historical destiny; the concept of E. determines precisely the measure of the relationship between a single economic and cultural type and a common historical destiny.

E. is a dynamic system undergoing a continuous internal transformation process, however, having some stability in its variability. Culture is a factor and criterion of ethnic stability, a system of intra-ethnic constants. Of course, there is internal variability in culture itself: it changes from epoch to epoch, from one social group as part of E. to another. But as long as it retains its qualitative originality, E. exists as an autonomous whole, even if it loses a single territory, language, unity of the anthropological type, etc. National culture, primarily through traditions: moral, religious, etc., has a decisive influence and on the action of the biological factors of self-reproduction of E., such as ethnic endogamy, which acts as a way to preserve the national gene pool. The qualitative originality of culture constitutes those most stable patterns of activity that take shape during the formation of the ethnic system and are determined by the specifics of the "ethnic homeland" and which E. "takes with him", "traveling in space and time." They make up the "code" of intra-ethnic information, forming for E. his special attitude to the world, organically linking his previous and subsequent states in time.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓