The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Teoretiko-metodologichesky bases of research activity of M.B. Shatilov



literatura

1. S.E. Rybakov. To a question of the concept "ethnic group": philosophical and anthropological aspect//Ethnographic review. 1998. No. 6.
2. V.A. Tishkov. Social anthropology: profession and calling. Interview with professor Valery Tishkov//Magazine of sociology and social anthropology. 2001. No. 4.
3. M.N. Rosenko. The nations in modern society: teoretiko-methodological analysis//http://nationalism.org/library/science/nationalism/ gs^epko/gs^epko^a-1999.I1t.
4. A.G. Zdravomyslov, A.A. Tsutsiyev. Ethnicity in the former Soviet Union: rivalry of theoretical paradigms//http://www.unci. ru/vestnikiv/vest04.html.
5. V.A. Tishkov. Requiem for ethnic group: Researches on welfare anthropology. M, 2003.
6. S.V. Lurye. Nationalism, ethnicity, culture. Categories of science and historical practice//Social sciences and present. 1999. No. 4.
7. S.E. Rybakov. Fate of the theory of ethnic group. Yu.V. Bromley's memories//Ethnographic review. 2001. No. 1.
8. B.V. Sapunov. The geographical environment - the most important factor of formation of national community//Ethnic group. Landscape. Culture. SPb., 1999.
9. V.V. Karlov. An ethnonational reflection and a subject of ethnology (to a problem of consciousness of science)//the Ethnographic review. 2000. No. 4.
10. N.V. Isakova. Culture and the person in ethnic space. Novosibirsk, 2001.
11. B.E. Winer. Ethnicity: in search of a study paradigm//the Ethnographic review. 1998. No. 4.
12. Discussions. Discussion of the report of V.A. Tishkov "About ethnicity phenomenon"//the Ethnographic review. 1998. No. 1.
13. S.E. Rybakov. About methodology of a research of ethnic phenomena//the Ethnographic review. 2000. No. 5.
14. I.Yu. Zarinov. Time to look for common language. (Problem of integration of ethnic theories and concepts)//Ethnographic review. 2000. No. 2.
15. M.M.K falcons of the theory of Post-Soviet ethnicity//http://www.soc.pu.ru:8101/publications/jssa/1999/3/9sokol.html, etc.
16. I.Yu. Zarinov. Society - ethnic group - ethnicity - the nation - nationalism//the Ethnographic review. 2002. No. 1.
17. I.Yu. Zarinov. Research of phenomena of "ethnic group" and "ethnicity": some results and reasons//Academician Yu.V. Bromlya and domestic ethnology. 1960-1990. M, 2003.
18. B.H. Bgazhnokov. Bases of humanistic ethnology//Ethnographic review. 2000. No. 6.
19. V.Yu. Hotinets. Ethnic consciousness. SPb. 2000.
20. V.A. Tishkov. "The fire promoted it much to ornament" (The Russian ethnology: status of discipline and condition of the theory)//http://www. ethnonet.ru/lib/0503-01.html.

A.G. Tuchkov

TEORETIKO-METODOLOGIChESKIE of the BASIS of RESEARCH ACTIVITY of M.B. of ShATILOVA1

Tomsk state

The name of the Tomsk ethnographer Mikhail Bonifatye-vich Shatilov is well known among domestic and foreign ugroved. Now there is a number of the works characterizing M.B. Shatilov as the scientist, the organizer scientific local history and publishing. Its role in development of a number of problems of domestic ethnography is highly appreciated (see: [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7]). However, despite interest so fixed recently in his personality and results of his scientific creativity, there are no researches,

pedagogical university

the theoretical representations of the ethnographer, methodology of his research directed to identification. This work, thus, is the first appeal to the teoretiko-methodological views of M.B. Shatilov which formed the basis of his scientific activity.

Preceding the main contents of article, it should be noted that M.B. Shatilov was not professional ethnographer. He graduated in 1909 from law department, and later two courses of historical and philological faculty of the Tomsk university. Aude -

1 Research is executed with financial support of RGNF within the RGNF research project "Indigenous ethnic groups of the North of the earth Tomsk: fate of traditions and language", No. of 05-01-64102a/T.

nako in student's years he was interested in questions of ethnography of indigenous people of Siberia. Its collecting folklore material among the Russian starozhilchesky population of the Tomsk region in 1910 became the first manifestation of this interest. The final turn towards ethnography happened in 1920 when M.B. Shatilov addressed studying radical ethnic groups of Siberia, first of all, of Khanty and Selkups. From now on it is possible to speak about M.B. Shatilov as the ethnographer whose works did not lose the scientific value yet already.

To reveal M.B. Shatilov's ideas and to systematize them not easy. They are presented in a number of its works in the form of the separate remarks, statements and conclusions formulated by the scientist in connection with consideration of the concrete ethnographic facts or social phenomena. Substantially M.B. Shatilov's ideas are reflected in his book "Vakhov-sky ostyak. Ethnographic essays" (1931). Therefore the appeal to this work as to the main source in which teoretiko-methodological views of the ethnographer are focused will be justified. Article framework, unfortunately, limits a possibility of detailed illumination of views of M.B. Shatilov therefore only some aspects of his scientific outlook will undergo the analysis.

Scientific creativity of M.B. Shatilov was developed by

in 1920, during free domination in the Russian ethnographic science of pluralism of the ideas, theories and concepts. New theoretical currents, such as, for example, ideas of cultural and historical school F. Boasa, the ideas of anthropogeography, the Marxism, new methods of a research, only began to be approved in ethnography. However the evolutionism approved in the Russian ethnography in 1870 remained the prevailing scientific direction of that time. The fundamental principles of the evolyutsionistsky direction in ethnography were aspiration to objective knowledge of reality, idea of regularity of development and progress (see: [8, page 357-358; 9, page 102]). In the scientific and world outlook relation evolutionism, being an integral part of positivism, organically entered the orientation dominating in the 19th century and kept at the beginning of the 20th century a paradigm of history which main lines were scientific character, a peculiar cult of a historic fact, belief in the natural nature of historical development and progress of human society, belief in the social importance of history [10, page 9-13].

On the theoretical positions M.B. Shatilov is close to evolutionism. Works of the western ethnologists had noticeable impact on his views,

widely known and in Russia: E. Taylor, G. Spencer, J. Mac-Lennana, J. Lebbok and also work of the Russian ethnographers evolutionists D.N. Anuchin, L.Ya. Shternberg, N.N. Haruzin. It should be noted at the same time especially: in the research practice M.B. Shatilov addressed G. Spencer, J. Lebbok, J. Mac-Lennana's works, referred to their views, in particular - to a problem of origin of an exogamy at the "primitive" people [11, page 81] that obviously speaks about acquaintance of the ethnographer to their works. However direct appeal to works E. And references to it M.B. Shatilov has no Taylor though his supply of material and conclusions are in many respects close to positions of the English scientist. Practically all work, especially that its part where it is about outlook and beliefs of vakhovsky Khanty, is imbued with E. Taylor's ideas.

Other proof of commitment of M.B. Shatilov to the ideas of evolutionism is terminological vocabulary in its works. Characterizing various parties of activity of Khanty of the Vakh River, the researcher often used such concepts as: "uncivilized people", "primitive people", "primitive people", "primitive person", "savage", "primitive imagination"; at the same time the lack of any sense of superiority of the ethnographer over the studied people is noticeable. Besides, in the research M.B. Shatilov never used the terms "ethnic group" and "culture", using the concept "nationality".

The main idea on which M.B. Shatilov's views are constructed is based on idea of continuous forward development of the cultural phenomena from primitive forms to more perfect and difficult. He saw confirmation of this idea both in material, and in spiritual culture of the Khanty ethnos. Most brightly this approach was shown in treatment by M.B. Shatilov of the phenomena of material culture of vakhovsky Khanty and, first of all, in the description of the types of dwellings occurring at them. Unlike the western ethnologists evolutionists whose attention was mainly paid to social and spiritual components of culture M.B. Shatilov was close to positions of the Russian ethnographic school where as the object of study first of all elements of material culture acted.

On belief of the ethnographer, various on type and a structure of the dwelling of vakhovsky Khanty are a graphic evidence of process of evolution in a domostroitelstvo, uniform for most of the people of Siberia. It recognized that situation that from the presented culture phenomena simpler has to precede more difficult. "From a primitive tent through cone-shaped

and from a dugout or a cave through a winter earth yurta we observe further a yurta, - M.B. Shatilov wrote, - the whole gradation of gradual development of the dwelling in vakhovsky ostyak in modern to us forms inclusive to simplified like the Russian log hut" [11, page 47].

For M.B. Shatilov there was no doubt in a possibility of development of some types of the dwelling in others. Examples of the direction of this development were obvious. Comparing various types of dwellings of vakhovsky Khanty, he built the continuous and progressively developing evolutionary row: 1) summer dwellings: tent ^ cone-shaped yurta ^ square birch bark yurta; 2) winter dwellings: a dugout (cave) ^ a winter earth yurta ^ a semi-earth winter yurta ^ a square timbered yurta ^ the simplified Russian log hut. "Along with it, - the researcher emphasized, - we observe gradual development of both separate parts of a yurta, and auxiliary, office constructions and constructions about a yurta. Separate parts of a yurta and its accessory... develop gradually with dwelling type" [11, page 47]. All types of the dwelling of vakhovsky Khanty, thus, are the evidence of effect of the law of forward development of the cultural phenomena for M.B. Shatilov.

M.B. Shatilov believed that not only natural factors, but in not smaller degree and economic way of the population have impact on any given type of the dwelling. With its change also the dwelling type changes. Following logic of reasonings of the ethnographer, it is possible to draw a conclusion that the researcher considered types of dwellings of Khanty as the proof of transition of ancestors of Khanty from a nomadic way of life which was inherent in hunters, to settled, caused by occupation fishery. Presence at Khanty of the Vakh River of portable and stationary housing buildings testifies about them mixed - hunting-ry-bolovcheskom type of economy [11, page 47].

From a position of evolutionism and the animistic theory of E. Taylor M.B. Shatilov considered also outlook, religious beliefs and ceremonies of vakhovsky ostyak. To their analysis the ethnographer approached as a complex of ancient, archaic mythological ideas, the general not only for all ostyak, but also for all people of Siberia. These representations were based, the researcher, on the general mythological system of the "primitive" people considered. The analysis of, at first sight, separate religious representations of vakhovsky Khanty, in the absence of examples of consecutive development of these representations, allowed it to reveal, nevertheless, a number of the main positions making the system of their beliefs.

M.B. Shatilov carried a cult of the Supreme deity of Khanty of Torum, a bear cult to this system,

cult of spirits-lungov, honoring of the dead, honoring of sacred places. A basis of these ancient representations was the belief of vakhovsky Khanty in existence of soul. Being guided by the animistic theory according to which the initial "minimum of religion" (according to E. Taylor) consisted of belief of the person in spiritual beings, the researcher probably also believed that roots of these representations are in first-hand experience of observations of the person over by itself and, first of all, over the dreams [11, page 117]. M.B. Shatilov considered (here he close approached positions E. Taylora) that from the simplest ideas of soul inherent in all "primitive" people, more difficult ideas of spirits of the nature, animals, an afterlife, of the Supreme deities developed. Various cults at vakhovsky Khanty also are connected with ideas of soul eventually.

In this regard attention the analysis M.B. Shatilov deserves existing problems at vakhovsky Khanty of a cult of the dead and a cult of ancestors. The researcher considered this problem within the animistic theory. He noted fundamental difference between two of these cults. A cult of the dead, the ethnographer believed, is the general phenomenon and is honored irrespective of whether soul of the dead enters a circle of relatives or a circle of family or not. A cult of ancestors, he considered, on the contrary, provides honoring only of the died relatives, first of all men and therefore it is limited to a framework of one family or a sort [11, page 120].

In terms of evolutionism, the image of the ancestor develops from the idea of soul of the dead, replacing mythological images of totemic animals. Thus the ethnographer brought a cult of ancestors out of the general ideas of soul as considered that in the center of worship there is an image of spirit - the patron of family. And though the ethnographer saw the remained remnant of once pronounced patrimonial cult in a stump of ancestors of vakhovsky Khanty, it went further founders of evolutionism in the solution of this question and brought closer it to modern understanding. This cult, M.B. Shatilov believed, resulted from decomposition of a patrimonial society organization when the value acquired honoring of relatives within family, a so-called family and patrimonial cult of ancestors [11, page 120]. M.B. Shatilov managed to record the evidence of existing of a cult of ancestors at vakhovsky Khanty in the form of special honors: bringing of the victim is dying heads of the family and commission of the victim by the senior in family. This fact deserves special attention as it contradicts the opinion on absence which settled in domestic ethnography at the people of Siberia of this cult. By assessment

S.A. Tokareva, the cults which remained at most of the people of Siberia as which objects various patrimonial and family spirits patrons act are not connected with ideas of the died ancestors in any way. Weak lines of this cult are found only at the Buryat, Evenks and Nenets; as for Khanty, at them as S.A. Tokarev notes, the family and patrimonial cult which is also not connected with a cult of ancestors in any way is developed [12, page 251, 259].

Estimating other difficult phenomenon in the culture of vakhovsky Khanty as a bear cult, M.B. Shatilov inclined to a thought that in his origin a special role was played by emotions, first of all, emotions of fear. "The phenomenon it can be explained to those, - the ethnographer wrote, - that in many places the bear was one of the most dangerous animals and, therefore, already per se excited to himself feeling of superstitious fear" [11, page 110]. This position is close to the point of view of the Austrian ethnographer evolutionist Yu. Lipper-ta according to which in the course of origin of religious beliefs of the "primitive" people of emotion of fear played the leading role (tsit. on: [13, page 47]).

And in a bear holiday M.B. Shatilov saw early totemistichesky views of ostyak in the fact of worship of a bear. The phenomenon - a totemizm - the researcher characterized as an important and necessary condition for existence of ethnic group which community is supported by belief in a family relation between physical relatives, on the one hand, and an animal - with another. The idea of relationship of ethnic group with any given animal, in this case with a bear, makes, M.B. Shatilov, a totemizm basis considered. "At domination of a totemizm, - he wrote, - each patrimonial, breeding group conducts the origin from some animal and considers itself with it in relationship, renders it worship, and then at some cultural development the national consciousness creates the myths which are a little softening former, narrating or about temporary transformation of their ancestor into animal, or just about the name of the ancestor a name of any given animal in connection with any circumstance" [11, page 81]. As such mythological images of the totemic ancestors turned subsequently into images of people - ancestors of the people, M.B. Shatilov considered epic athletes of vakhovsky Khanty Sayali (Gogol) and Kul-Kosyak (chebak) [11, page 81]. The researcher carried this phenomenon, as well as a question of existing of a cult of ancestors, to existence in the past at Khanty of the Vakh River of the patrimonial device. The same evidence of existence in the past of the patrimonial device and domination of a totemizm among vakhovs-ky Khanty were, according to the researcher, traces of an exogamy and honoring of spirits of the nature [11, page 82, 101-108].

From the general theoretical views of M.B. Shatilov the scientific methods applied by him are inseparable.

The complex of the informative procedures applied by M.B. Shatilov in scientific practice is a set of general scientific and special methods of a historical and ethnographic research. The general scientific methods characterizing process of knowledge which objective basis are the all-methodological principles include: a method of visual observation, a comparative-historical method within which reception of typological comparison, the historiographic analysis of sources is used. Treat the special methods applied only within separate sciences: method of a field ethnographic research, poll method, mapping, method of "remnants", method of the statistical analysis, photofixing, collecting ethnographic objects. On some of them it is necessary to stop especially.

For all the time of the scientific activity the ethnographer adhered to the traditional direction in the Russian ethnography - studying separate ethnic groups by method of a field ethnographic research, giving the chance to the ethnographer to come into direct contacts with the studied population, to fix "live" actual material, to accumulate the impressions and knowledge forming the basis of scientific generalizations. This method allowed M.B. Shatilov, one of the few, in considerable volume to study material and spiritual culture of vakhovsky Khanty, to systematize various aspects of life of this local group, to describe conditions of its functioning. Also productively the method of a field research was applied by the ethnographer earlier, in a research of culture of narymsky Selkups and the Russian starozhilchesky population of the Tomsk province in 1920

The method of visual observation belongs to the system of a field ethnographic research, despite its general scientific character. In observation the active nature of scientific knowledge is implemented. It allows to study purposefully research objects, separate objects and the phenomena of culture, thoroughly fixing their outer sides. It is a method of empirical knowledge which result is the description - display by means of language of initial data on the studied object. Thanks to this method M.B. Shatilov managed to describe outer side of activity of vakhovsky Khanty, their economic and household way. Its detailed descriptions of sacred places of vakhovsky Khanty made on the basis of personal observation are especially valuable [11, page 102-109].

A comparative-historical method which cornerstone the research of the phenomena of culture is, on -

pravlenny on identification and comparison of separate cultural elements, the general for various areas of material and spiritual culture, allowed M.B. Shatilov to analyze in more detail the questions connected, for example, with conditions of the conclusion of marriages among vakhovsky Khanty with carrying out a bear holiday. So, providing comparative descriptions of a bear holiday at various groups of Khanty and Mansi, supplementing them with examples from ritual practice of other people of Siberia, the ethnographer pointed to wide circulation and antiquity of existing of this holiday, revealed the general for all Siberian people including Khanty, the attitude towards a bear as to the idolized being [11, page 112-115].

In close connection with a comparative-historical method there is a reception of typological comparison entered into ethnography still by E. Taylor. This reception based on comparison repeating in time and in space of the cultural phenomena having the similar general reasons in the basis allowed M.B. Shatilov to model the phenomena of traditional culture, tying them to certain stages of historical development of society. The analysis the ethnographer of a question of application by vakhovs-ky Khanty of a cervine skin in a marriage ritual in this regard is characteristic. Having reviewed standard examples from marriage practice of various people, M.B. Shatilov came to a conclusion that the ceremony of use of a cervine skin is a peculiar symbol of a unification of spouses, equal to a betrothal ceremony. Its typological comparisons of remnants of a totemizm and traces of a cult of a bear at the people of Siberia are in this regard also indicative [11, page 81, 95, 110].

In a research of culture of vakhovsky Khanty M.B. Shatilov used the reception connected with the concept "remnants" (method of "remnants", or the theory of "remnants"), proved by E. Taylor who saw "stability of culture" in remnants [14, page 66]. The Tomsk ethnographer saw certificates of ancient "primitive" history of the people which owing to conservatism inherent in it were transferred by it to other stage of the development in remnants. It carried to them as the general for all primitive people (remains of totemichesky views, traces of an exogamy, a cult of ancestors, a bear cult), and the phenomena inherent only in vakhovsky Khanty - storage of a beak of the gagara as birds which played an important role in formation of the earth, dissecting by a stone of bones of animals and eating of crude marrow, production of dyes from improvised plant materials [11, page 52, 55, 62, 82, 109]. However unlike E. Taylor who saw in remnants only the remains which remained in the people ancient more difficult yavle-

niya, M.B. Shatilov assigned to remnants the special part giving stability to culture and cementing ethnic group.

M.B. Shatilov closely coordinated a problem of interethnic loans to a problem of "remnants". The researcher paid attention to a number of elements, uncharacteristic for the culture of the Khanty, promoting, in his opinion, progress of society. It fixed loans in dwelling types, in clothes, in food of vakhovsky Khanty. At the same time many elements of culture observed by the researcher despite availability of their substitutes which arrived from other cultural environment continued to function in ordinary and religious practice of the people that was, according to the ethnographer, the evidence of manifestation of a peculiar conservatism of society.

Noting communication of remnants and loans, M.B. Shatilov came to a complex problem of a ratio of tradition and an innovation and their role in cultural development of ethnic group. It showed that in society those elements of culture which directly answer collective living conditions, centuries the stability of culture approved and being reliable guarantors have a tendency to preservation and functioning. Only what is ineffective in comparison with again acquired objects, labor-consuming in production and production is subject to replacement. From here disappearance of skills of production of fabrics, observed M.B. Shatilov almost universal among vakhovsky Khanty, from a nettle, potter's ware, replacement of onions and arrows with guns, on the one hand, on the other hand - maintaining technology of tailoring, tools for production having treated kindly (boats-dolblenok), production of dyes from bark of a larch or a bird cherry, tradition of preparation of fish, etc. [11, page 52, 58, 68]. However this problem remained the undeveloped ethnographer; The set of the interconnected elements integrating traditional society thanks to which it kept the originality and resilience was only succeeded to record M.B. Shatilova.

As an example of the historiographic and source study analysis of the ethnographer serves his approach to a solution of the problem of geographical localization and ethnolanguage identification of Yugra - the legendary territory of accommodation of ostyak. He believed that near Yugra, the Yugra earth should be considered the territory of lower reaches of Ob and its inflows. Leaning on a number of annalistic sources and various opinions of the predecessors, the researcher came to a conclusion that "under Yugra has to understand some third people, besides Samoyeds and Voguls... Same people, since ancient times living. along with vogu-

Lamy and Samoyeds, ostyak which, obviously, and were called are... Yugra" [11, page 16]. Except ostyak (Khanty), he did not see any other people under the term Yugra. Near annalistic Yugra the ethnographer also saw in the ethnolanguage relation ostyak. Though this problem remains debatable so far (see: [15, page 133-144; 16, page 343-351; 17, page 48], M.B. Shatilov rather close approached her understanding.

M.B. Shatilov's approach to historical sources Attracts attention. Speaking about the historical past of vakhovsky Khanty, the researcher noted that this problem can be successfully solved only in total these sources, various on character: historical acts, legends and "local" archive materials. This point of view was successfully realized by M.B. Shatilov on pages of his research. Leaning on documentary historical evidences, various on character: from statistical data and materials of Academy of Sciences to annalistic data, it managed to create a small historical essay of vakhovsky region and the territories of accommodation of ostyak, neighboring to it. However for an illustration of the historical past of vakhovsky Khanty the ethnographer was forced as it is visible on his research, to address oral historical legends of vakhovsky ostyak. In his opinion, in historical legends the data relating to historical reality and containing objective information about the past of vakhovsky Khanty are concluded. The appeal to this sort of sources was probably in the unique way at that time, in the absence of authentic data (M.B. Shatilov constantly speaks about "poverty of historical data"), studying the matter. Despite so considerable support on the folklore data exceeding reserves of objectivity of this sort of sources, nevertheless, M.B. Shatilov's conclusions concerning the history of settling by vakhovsky Khanty of the Vakh River were the most reasonable for that time.

Speaking about the general teoretiko-methodological views of the ethnographer, it is necessary to tell that M.B. Shatilova traditional society was inherent to consider, its culture in terms of continuous historical process, the sequence of social development. The characteristic of his views is the statement of indissoluble link of times, belief in the natural and progressive nature of development of traditional society. In its work "Vakhovsky ostyak. Ethnographic essays" the idea of progress of culture is visible.

The researcher developed the concept of study not only the general phenomena of culture universal for all cultures on is defined -

ache stages of their historical development (ethnographic materials on vakhovsky Khanty gave enough grounds for theoretical generalizations), and much more it was occupied by studying the specific features of culture defining its originality. M.B. Shatilov was convinced that traditional culture is result of both its independent development, and historical interaction and loan. On development of society, its economic and household way, outlook, the ethnographer considered, two major factors influence: geographical habitat of ethnic group and next societies. Like other evolutionists M.B. Shatilov considered development of human culture as a factor of action of the nature (the point of view inherent, however, in both a romanticism historiography, and positivistic philosophy of history). The geographical habitat defines, according to him, necessary conditions of activity of ethnic group, the direction of its development, specific features of its culture. Contacts with neighbors bring to society a necessary set of the cultural loans allowing to progress on M.B. Shatilov's belief, society, keeping at the same time the sequence of the development. M.B. Shatilov sought to show cultural unity of vakhovsky Khanty, emphasizing at the same time unique extent of adaptation of ethnic group to the environment of dwelling.

Proving the idea of progress of development of ethnic culture of Khanty of the Vakh River, M.B. Shatilov, however, faced manifestations in their ethnic environment of the facts of cultural stagnation which were not coordinated with its ideas of gradual, evolutionary development of society in any way. He explained these facts with isolation of this ethnic group from external cultural influences. At the same time M.B. Shatilov was not inclined to consider the phenomena of stagnation of culture as an example it degradation (the idea inherent in many evolutionists). However, leaning probably on E. Taylor's views, it assumed that in the history of culture (ethnic group) it is possible to find also the facts of regress. So, considering a question of Shamanism of vakhovsky Khanty, M.B. Shatilov considered that this phenomenon exists in their culture in very simplified form that speaks about loss by vakhovets of a number of features inherent in Shamanism, the general for all Siberian people [11, page 124].

Thus, the concept of classical evolutionism is presented in M.B. Shatilov's work with essential amendments. It is formulated by the author of "Vakhovsky ostyak" not so strictly and rectilinearly, as at his predecessors. For M.B. Shatilov it was important to show the cultural identity of vakhovsky Khanty distinguishing them despite a number of similar elements, from others ethno -

owls of a taiga zone of Siberia to emphasize uniqueness and identity of their culture. At the same time, revealing characteristics of culture of ethnic group, M.B. Shatilov spoke about its concrete historical variability.

In "Vakhovsky ostyaka" the striking example of communication of story with ethnography is presented. M.B. Shatilov considered both of these sciences as means of reconstruction of history of development of ethnic group. Attraction to research tasks of anthropological data (the tradition put still by D.N. Anuchin), geographical data, the statistical materials collected by the ethnographer during the expedition, data received by poll method, in particular oral information from E.S. Prasin on a bear holiday at vakhovsky Khanty [11, page 111], a method of the mapping which allowed to systematize the ethnographic facts and to mark out on the general background of the ethnographic phenomena those features of culture (practice of burial of children without any ceremonies, a ceremony of the ritual use of the kindled bear fat and

other) which were inherent, according to the researcher, only in vakhovsky Khanty [11, page 114], promoted comprehensive coverage and deeper penetration of the ethnographer into history and the culture of traditional society.

In conclusion it should be noted that since the middle of 1920 the ethnography becomes demanded by government institutions as means by means of which tried to resolve political and social issues. The research of Khanty of the Vakh River thus, except the scientific purposes, was subordinated to socio-political tasks and had strategic character. Therefore assessment by M.B. Shatilov of a number of the parties of economic and cultural life of vakhovsky Khanty comprises traces of realities of 1920, features of ideology of that time. On extensive historical and ethnographic material of local group of Khanty the ethnographer sought to show not only a historical picture of the life of people and its cultural originality, but also to plan ways of its development in the future, already in the conditions of formation of new economy and ideology.

Literature

1. Chests - the people from water meadows: An ethnographic collection of vakhovsky Khanty in the Tomsk regional museum of local lore / N.A. Tuchkova, A.G. Tuchkov. Tomsk, 2003.
2. Lukina N.V. Shatilov as ethnographer//Works of the Tomsk state joint historical and architectural museum. Tomsk, 1994. T. 7.
3. Hanevich V.A. Mikhail Bonifatyevich Shatilov (materials to the biography)//Works of the Tomsk regional museum of local lore. Tomsk, 2004. T. 13.
4. A.G. Tuchkov. Materials on stories of an ethnographic expedition of M.B. Shatilov on the Vakh River (1926)//In the same place.
5. Kulemzin V.M. Mikhail Bonifatyevich Shatilov and sibirevedeniye//In the same place.
6. O.A. Osipova. Value of works of M.B. Shatilov for linguistics//In the same place.
7. Kryukov V.M. Oblastnik Mikhail Bonifatyevich Shatilov//In the same place.
8. Tokarev S.A. History of the Russian ethnography. M, 1966.
9. T.D. nightingale "fundamental change" in domestic ethnography (a discussion about a subject of ethnological science: the end of 1920 - the beginning of 1930)//the Ethnographic review. 2001. No. 3.
10. Mogilnitsky B.G. Istoriya of a historical thought of the 20th century. Crisis of historicism. Tomsk, 2001. Issue I.
11. Shatilov M.B. Vakhovskiye ostyaka. Ethnographic essays. Works of the Tomsk regional museum. Tomsk, 1931. T. IV.
12. Tokarev S.A. Early forms of religion. M, 1990.
13. Tokarev S.A. History of foreign ethnography. M, 1978.
14. E. Taylor. Primitive culture. M, 1991.
15. A.V. Golovnev Yugra and Samoyad//Siberia in a panorama the millennia (Materials of the international symposium). Novosibirsk, 1998. T.
2.
16. V.V. Napolsky. About origin of the name Yugra//In the same place.
17. E.A. Kurlayev. Annalistic Yugra is the drevnepermsky people?//Ob Ugra. Materials II of the Siberian symposium "Cultural heritage of the people of Western Siberia" (on December 12-16, 1999, Tobolsk). Tobolsk; Omsk, 1999.
Bruce Gibson
Other scientific works: