Institute of History and Ethnology named after Sh. Sh. Ualikhanov

In the history of the humanitarian science of Kazakhstan, a special, original place belongs to ethnography. A science without which it is impossible to carry out serious general historical research, develop fundamental laws of historical, social nature, concerning the genesis of culture and ethnicity, their past, present, and to a certain extent, future. It should be immediately stipulated that the development of domestic ethnological and ethnographic science over the past decades is primarily associated with the formation and fruitful activity of its academic division. Namely, the Department of Ethnography/ Ethnology of the Ch.Ch. Valikhanov Institute of Economics, which produced a large group of professional ethnographers of our country, including more than 50 candidates and doctors of science. At the same time, the important scientific-theoretical and scientific-organizational significance of this small structure – in which a whole galaxy of major pioneering researchers worked and whose achievements were in demand by representatives of many related scientific disciplines – of course, was not adequate to the formal status of the department supervising ethnographic work in the republic.

If we turn to the history of science, it should be noted right away that the organizational design and development of academic ethnography in Kazakhstan in the second half of the 1940s-50s was quite natural. The formation of an independent department of ethnography during the organization of the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography after the war was dictated not only by the state policy in the field of science, but also by a significant reserve, scientific traditions in the study of the culture and life of the Kazakhs and other peoples of Kazakhstan. Behind the small department, which initially numbered 4 research associates headed by the original orientalist Nigmet Sabitov, stood the mighty figures of predecessors: A.I. Levshin, Ch.Ch. Valikhanov, G.N. Potanin, J. Castagne, A. Divaev and others.

Ethnographers were initially given important tasks of studying the traditional culture of the Kazakhs, other ethnic groups of the republic, changes that took place in culture and everyday life during that period – primarily on the basis of field research. A serious problem was the training of personnel. Therefore, close scientific ties were soon established with Moscow and Leningrad scientists, both in the matter of joint field research and in terms of training young specialists. In the early 1950s, under their supervision, the first professional ethnographers in Kazakhstan defended their candidate dissertations: I.V. Zakharova, G.N. Valikhanov, V.V. Vostrov, R.D. Khodzhaeva.

Undoubtedly, the post-war years were very complex and difficult for the development of science. It is enough to note that until 1955, our ethnographers’ expeditions were carried out on passing vehicles. Nevertheless, a lot had already been done – expeditions were carried out almost every year, the materials of which formed the basis of dissertations, a number of important publications, as well as future monographs. Work on the planned topic “Culture and Life of the Kazakh Kolkhoz Aul” was completed. But, apparently, the most important thing was that during this period the organizational formation of the ethnography department took place, which was already able to solve serious scientific problems and train personnel. Special merit in this belongs to the first head of the sector N. Sabitov, as well as I.V. Zakharova.

It was during this period that a group of young, energetic, talented researchers came to Kazakh ethnography – Khalel Argynbayev, Yedige Masanov, Marat Mukanov, Orazak Ismagulov. They were in demand, since the ethnography of Kazakhstan, especially the Kazakh people, remained unexplored in scientific terms and represented a huge field of activity. Each of them chose his own area of research, or even several areas, and successfully developed them later. Here is how veteran of Kazakh ethnography I.V. Zakharova writes about this time in one of her articles: “A serious turn in the ethnography of Kazakhstan begins during the years of the so-called “thaw”, in the mid-1950s. Specifically, this is connected with the new task set by the USSR Academy of Sciences – the preparation of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas of Central Asia and Kazakhstan”, for which all work on the Kazakhs was assigned to the ethnography department of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR.

 From this time on, the opportunity for a freer choice of topics appeared; ethnographers moved on to an in-depth collection of materials and their objective interpretation…”.

This was a romantic stage of Kazakh field ethnography, when primary importance was given to expeditionary work in various regions of the huge republic. Based on these studies, the first serious publications of young ethnographers of Kazakhstan appeared. The publication of these materials and studies was then given serious importance. A telling example: out of the first six volumes of the Proceedings of the IHAE, two volumes were proportionally devoted to ethnography – the 3rd and 6th.

Expeditionary research was systematically and intensively carried out by a small team of ethnographers until the early 1980s, a huge unique field material was collected on various sections of the traditional everyday culture of the Kazakhs and other peoples of the republic. Along with this, solid archival and bibliographic research was conducted. All this was expressed in dissertation research, monographs, which received high marks in the Soviet ethnographic science: “Culture and life of the Kazakh collective farm village”, “Kazakh national clothing of the 19th – early 20th centuries”, “Essays on the history of the ethnographic study of the Kazakh people in the USSR”, “Tribal composition and settlement of the Kazakhs (late 19th – early 20th centuries)”, “Population of Kazakhstan from the Bronze Age to the present day”, “Economy of the Kazakhs”, “Kazakh folk applied art”, etc. It should be noted that a number of later publications, which have absolutely not lost their scientific significance, are also based on the research of those years – “Kazakh national housing”, “Kazakh shezhiresi hakynda”.

Undoubtedly, during this period, Kazakh ethnography was on the rise, had serious scientific achievements – especially in the mainstream of the implementation of the program for the regional “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”. After the publication of “The Economy of the Kazakhs” in 1980, according to Moscow scientists, Kazakh ethnographers were far ahead of their colleagues from other union republics, including Russia. Indeed, each of the listed books was a generalizing, often fundamental study, in many ways an example of scientific analysis. Behind each of them stood a lot of work, difficult expedition routes, specific personalities of the authors, their fates. All this can be seen in the essay on the history of the ethnology department published below from the time of its formation and, in fact, until the mid-1990s.

* * *

When the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography (IHAE) was organized within the system of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR in 1945, the very name of the newly formed scientific institution defined one of its main tasks – the study of the life and culture of the Kazakhs and other peoples of the republic, which constituted one of the main tasks of ethnographic science at that time.

Unfortunately, no archival documents (orders) have been found that indicate the date of the formation of the divisions within the walls of the Institute, but there are indirect documents regarding this issue. According to the Five-Year Plan of the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies of the Kazakh SSR Academy of Sciences for 1946-1950, the ethnography sector included: a) the department of folk customs, b) the department of domestic life, c) the department of spiritual culture. The head of the sector during the organizational period was candidate of philological sciences, orientalist Nigmet Sabitov.

It would seem that such an impressive division of the sector into three departments should also presuppose the presence of numerous employees. In fact, this was not the case. In 1946, the ethnography sector staff included four research associates: N. Sabitov, Sh.

In this regard, I would like to note: whatever the branch of science, it is subject, first of all, to internal laws developed during the period of its inception, initial formation. Such laws were inherent in the period under consideration and Soviet ethnography, which had already established itself as an independent science, the closest relative of history, but having its own tasks and objects of research, its own methodology and methodology, its fundamental theoretical basis. At that time, there were no ethnography specialists in Kazakhstan, and even the head of the sector was a philologist.

However, this in no way diminishes the role of N. Sabitov, his role in the development of ethnographic science in the republic, the training of ethnographers. In his explanatory note to the “Five-Year Plan (1946-1950)” he wrote that “the ethnography of Kazakhstan has been studied extremely poorly” and the main task in the 4th Five-Year Plan is “development of personnel”. The lack of a methodology for scientific ethnographic knowledge, the small number of personnel who did not have special training – all this was the reason that a small team had to start from scratch. And the first steps in their scientific work were in the right direction – in organizing expeditions to study the culture and life of the Kazakhs in the thick of the people.

In accordance with the decision of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR, an ethnographic expedition, or rather a detachment of two people, M. Uralov and D. Rakhmetov, was sent to the East Kazakhstan region in 1946. According to N. Sabitov, “the work of this expedition, being only the beginning of the ethnographic study of Kazakhstan, had a reconnaissance nature.” The expedition participants were given the following tasks: to study traditional forms of farming, primarily cattle breeding and its reflection in material culture; to collect material on the tribal composition and kinship system of the Kazakhs, their pre-Islamic beliefs, ornamentation, etc. M. Uralov and D. Rakhmetov worked in the Zaisan, Tarbagatai and Aksu regions of East Kazakhstan and, judging by the report, collected interesting ethnographic material. Unfortunately, the results of the expedition have not been published, and the archives (recordings of conversations, photos, drawings) have not been preserved. However, given that this was the first ethnographic expedition of the newly organized Institute and as a token of gratitude to its participants, I would like to at least briefly present some information on the traditional culture of the Kazakhs, preserved in the report of the ethnography sector for 1946.

The expedition participants recorded some types of Kazakh clothing that have now completely disappeared. These include the winter felt coat of shepherds – kebenek (in the document: “kegenek”), felt boots in rawhide galoshes – shaqai (shahai).

Of interest are the materials on the tribal composition of the Kazakhs, cattle breeding and agriculture, housing, etc.

An important stage in the formation and development of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan was the holding of an extended meeting of the ethnography sector, which was attended by scientists from the Institute, the director of the Central State Museum of Kazakhstan A. Zhirenchin, and an employee of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences M.G. Levin. The meeting was chaired by the director of the Institute, academician of the Kazakh SSR Academy of Sciences S.V. Yushkov. In particular, he noted: “Regarding ethnography, it should be noted that the ethnography department is as small and sparsely populated as the history department is. The scope and work plan of our [ethnography] sector should be linked to the Institute of Ethnography [of the USSR Academy of Sciences].” M.G. Levin mainly covered issues of anthropology, but also touched on ethnography itself, calling for the establishment of contacts between Moscow and Kazakhstani scientists. S.V. Yushkov also called for the training of anthropologists.

The significance of this meeting is that it led to a more systematic development of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan at the initial stage, and facilitated the establishment of contacts between Kazakh researchers and Moscow and Leningrad scientists, the results of which were quickly felt.

On August 5, 1947, prominent Moscow and Leningrad scientists arrived in Almaty to participate in the Complex Anthropological and Ethnographic Expedition of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of the Kazakh SSR. The anthropologist and ethnographer N.N. Cheboksarov was approved as the head of the expedition. The expedition was divided into two subdivisions: anthropology, which included N.N. Cheboksarov, V.V. Ginzburg, A.V. Ginzburg, I.A. Minsky, K.D. Kaupush, and ethnography, which included A.N. Nurkanov (deputy chief expeditions), G.G. Stratanovich   (Leningrad),    E.I.Makhova   (Moscow), N.V. Shlygina (Moscow), N.G. Borozna (Moscow), M.N. Kabirov, D.R. Rakhmetov, F.A. Aronov, I.V. Zakharova (Almaty).

The main group of anthropologists and ethnographers worked in the Chilik and Kegen districts of the Almaty region, M. Kabirov and I.V. Zakharova collected ethnographic material in the Panfilov district of the Taldykorgan region, and a group led by G.G. Stratanovich surveyed the Dungans of the village of Zhalpaktobe in the Zhambyl region. The Muscovite ethnographers studied mainly material culture, while the Kazakhs studied social and family life, clan relations, and folklore.

The results of the expedition were good. In addition to notes, drawings, and photographs, decorative and applied art items (tekemet, syrmak kebezhe, etc.) were purchased from the population in the survey areas. Apparently, this collection went to Moscow or Leningrad, most likely to the latter city, where the State Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR was located, adding to the interesting collection of products by Kazakh craftsmen.

The composition of the ethnography sector changed. Judging by the composition of the participants of the Complex Expedition and the minutes of the meeting of January 20, 1948, the ethnography sector included: N. Sabitov (head of the sector) and junior research assistants F. Aronov and D. Rakhmetov. M. Uralov is not there – apparently, he quit. Thus, there was no quantitative growth in the department. The participants of the first ethnographic expeditions were mainly scientists from outside.

Unfortunately, the materials of this Complex Anthropological-Ethnographic Expedition were not published, like those publications that were carried out by similar expeditions in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. But its effectiveness and the richness of the collected ethnographic material can be judged at least by the fact that expedition participant I.V. Zakharova collected extensive material on the economy and material culture of the Kazakhs, which formed part of the future dissertation of the researcher, which was subsequently published (in an abridged version). It should be said that Zakharova’s research was devoted to both the pre-revolutionary period and, primarily, the present day, which corresponded to the subject matter of the ethnography sector.

The year 1949 can be considered a certain milestone in the development of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan. That year, field research was conducted in the collective farms of the Chui (Shu) district of the Zhambyl region, and the leadership of the expedition was entrusted to the senior research fellow of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences O.A. Korbe. It is also noteworthy that in addition to the previous employees of the sector – D. Rakhmetov and F. Aronov – the postgraduate student G. Valikhanov and the artist M. Shatalov took part in the expedition, which indicates not only an increase in the number of expedition participants, but also the growth of its scientific potential. The expedition worked from August 25 to October 15 and collected a wealth of material on the material and spiritual culture of the Kazakhs. 265 photographs, 38 sketches of various objects (dwellings, settlements, schools, etc.), examples of decorative and applied art (felt products, embroidery, etc.), etc. were taken.

The publication by O.A. Korbe and E.I. Makhova in the Moscow edition, based on the results of the survey of 1947 and 1949, should be considered a positive development. This article gives an idea of the crafts that exist in the Chui Valley, the products, and their ornamentation. The significance of the publication was also that the public of the country once again began to receive information on the culture and life, ethnography of the Kazakhs, which had been interrupted back in the late 1930s.

In 1950, V.V. Vostrov and R.D. Khodzhaeva were accepted to the postgraduate program at the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies. The Institute’s management made the right decision to send their postgraduate students to the Leningrad branch of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which was one of the world centers of ethnology. Leningrad, like no other city in the Soviet Union, had an ethnographic scientific base. In addition to the specialized institute, there was the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences, a successor to the traditions of Petrovskaya Kunstkameras, the State Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR and other scientific, cultural and educational institutions. It is in such conditions that ethnographic personnel should be formed. The postgraduate students were supervised by the prominent Soviet ethnographer, Doctor of Historical Sciences L.P. Potapov.

In the early 1950s, under the supervision of Doctor of Historical Sciences T.A. Zhdanko, I.V. Zakharova, a postgraduate student at the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, defended her dissertation. In 1947, she took part in the Complex Anthropological-Ethnographic Expedition of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR and the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR. G.N. Valikhanov’s postgraduate studies at the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR were also nearing completion. In general, the training of scientific personnel was moving in the right direction.

In May 1950, a plan for scientific research work in the ethnography sector for 1951-1955 was developed, and the main problem for the five-year period, as before, was the study of the topic “Culture and life of the Kazakh collective farm village”. If the areas of the survey were subject to adjustment (expanded), then the main thematic direction of the research was preserved.

In 1950, a small in volume but significant in content book by N. Sabitov, “Mektebs and Madrassas of the Kazakhs,” was published. In his research, the author revealed the system of public education in Kazakhstan before 1917, pointed out the economic base that formed education and presented those social strata of the population from which the teaching staff and the contingent of students were formed, and in general illuminated the significance of traditional and “new-method” mektebs and madrassas in the life of the Kazakhs.

In 1951, there were also personnel changes. In connection with the appointment of N. Sabitov as deputy director of the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies for scientific affairs, he was relieved of his post of head of the ethnography sector and Kh. G. Aidarova was appointed to this position by order of the Institute No. 2 of January 5, 1951. However, in October of the same year (order No. 130 of October 1, 1951), N. Sabitov returned to his previous position, and Kh. G. Aidarova was appointed head of the department of the history of Kazakhstan in the 19th century.

In 1951-53, the ethnographic expedition worked in the Zhambyl region, continuing to collect materials on the main problem of the ethnography sector. Thus, in 1951, a field team consisting of I.V. Zakharova (head of the expedition), F. Aronov, postgraduate student R.D. Khodjaeva and artist Musaev conducted research in the Zhambyl region. In 1952, an expedition led by N. Sabitov (members of the expedition I.V. Zakharova, artist N. Tretyakov) examined the Merkensky region of the region.

In 1953, V.V. Vostrov and G.N. Valikhanov successfully defended their dissertations, and R.D. Khodzhaeva prepared her dissertation for defense. That same year, the sector was transformed into the Department of Ethnography, which brought together real ethnographers, candidates of science: I. Zakharova, G. Valikhanov, and R. Khodzhaeva, who was “ready to defend.” V. Vostrov worked in the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, but he, too, would soon return to his native land.

The accumulated ethnographic material enabled the head of the department, N. Sabitov, to publish in print, which described the problems being developed by Kazakh ethnographers and summarized the results of the research being conducted. In 1952, he published an article entitled “Work on the Study of the Culture and Life of a Kazakh Kolkhoz Aul,” and in 1953, in the journal “Soviet Ethnography” (No. 3), “Ethnographic Expedition to the Merkensky District of the Dzhambyl Region.”

In 1953, the department’s expedition collected ethnographic material in the Yenbekshikazakh district of the Almaty region. The head of the expedition, N. Sabitov, stayed on the expedition for 15 days, but, having fallen seriously ill, he returned to Almaty. The leadership of the expedition, and a little later the performance of the duties of the head of the department, was taken over by I. V. Zakharova, due to Sabitov’s serious illness.

 In the same year, the department staff wrote the first versions of the chapters “Material Culture”, “Spiritual Culture”, and parts of the chapters “Economy” on the topic under development.

 “Housing”, the basis of which was field materials from ethnographic expeditions of recent years. In 1954, Kh. Argynbaev was accepted to graduate school, and I. V. Zakharova was appointed as his supervisor.

In 1955, the ethnography department began working on a new topic: “Development of folk housing and changes in the way of life of Kazakh collective farmers” (performers: I.V. Zakharova, V.V. Vostrov). The researchers set themselves the task of tracing the history of the formation of sedentary housing among the Kazakhs, the process of its improvement and development. The work turned out to be labor-intensive and complex. And although the topic was completed by the deadline (1960), the process of preparation for publication, taking into account the comments of opponents, stretched out for many years (it was necessary to complete other regular topics) and the book was published only in 1989, when V.V. Vostrov was no longer alive, and I.V. Zakharova had long been living in Omsk. However, despite this, the book has not lost its important scientific significance. Its value lies not only in showing the genesis and development of the settled dwellings of the Kazakhs (including in connection with the history of the portable dwelling – the yurt), but also in compiling typological maps according to various characteristics: wall material, types of roofs, types of estates, etc.

During this period, the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR began compiling the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas of the Peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan” and, as a coordinating center, attracted the relevant Institutes of the Union Republics to this work. This topic determined the research paths of Kazakhstani ethnographers for many years. According to the program, the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas” was to clearly, with the help of maps and tables, present the ethnic history, life and culture of each people of the region; the text of each section was to fully show the ethnic culture of a separate people, and the drawings (in addition to maps and tables) were to visually present traditional crafts and trades, clothing, housing, utensils, etc.

In the same year of 1955, an expedition was organized to survey the Ayaguz and Shubartau districts of the Semipalatinsk region, and the Karkaralinsk and Shet districts of the Karaganda region. The expedition was led by V.V. Vostrov, and included graduate student H. Argynbaev, as well as researchers from outside: L.A. Demazi – from the Central State Museum of Kazakhstan and E. Mikulskaya – art historian.

In addition to the topic of the history of housing, the expedition members collected materials on all the main sections of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”: clothing, food, means of transportation, family settlement, etc. Some conclusions are interesting – for example, that the original sedentary dwelling in the surveyed areas of Kazakhstan was not a dugout (semi-dugout) as in other regions of Kazakhstan, but an above-ground structure called a shoshala or toshala.

It should also be said about this expedition that it was the first to use motor transport (until now, expeditions were carried out on passing cars). This, of course, was in many ways convenient both in terms of household arrangements and in terms of more productive use of time.

A significant event in the life of the Institute was the publication of works on various branches of history. In 1956, the 3rd volume of the Works of the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR was published, entirely devoted to ethnography and consisting of large articles of a reporting and research nature. Publications by V.V. Vostrov and I.V. Zakharova examine the traditional culture of the Kazakhs in the past and at the present stage, namely: the history of the region under study, economy, life, material culture. The articles by these authors are interesting not only in terms of presenting the ethnography of the local population, but also for a comparative analysis of the traditional culture of various parts of Kazakhstan – the western, where Vostrov conducted research, and the southeastern, where Zakharova worked. This analysis confirms the existence of a single ethnic culture of the Kazakhs and at the same time reveals certain features in the life of the local population. For example, unlike many regions of Kazakhstan, the Bukeev Kazakhs switched to using stationary dwellings quite early. As the author writes: “While in the Inner Horde, winter houses appeared in the 30-40s of the 19th century; even in the 70s, the Trans-Ural Kazakhs continued to live in yurts all year round.”

R.D.Khojaeva’s publication was devoted to the ethnography of the Uyghur people and mainly examines the position of women in society and everyday life. This was, one can consider, the first scientific work on the ethnography of the Uyghurs, where the position of women in the past and present is compared.

N. Sabitov’s article in this collection is a posthumous publication of a part of a multifaceted study conceived by the author. Since the foundation of the ethnography sector, N. Sabitov has focused on studying the spiritual culture of the Kazakhs. Following the expeditions, he published articles on various issues of ethnographic research in Kazakhstan in the post-war years. But of all that was conceived in this direction, N. Sabitov managed to prepare only one article on the social and family life of the Kazakhs.

In connection with the early publications of Kazakh ethnographers, I would like to dwell on one question: do the publications of the Soviet period have scientific value or should they be discarded as a product of the “totalitarian regime”. And here, of course, the correct answer is: the works of ethnographers do not lose their significance.

Ethnographers who lived and are living in different times are undoubtedly “products” of their era and their research bears the imprint of some ideological husk, but nothing more. The main content of their works – ethnic history, material and spiritual culture, etc. – does not lose its relevance and educational value to this day. This position is fully true for the research of Kazakh ethnographers of the post-war period, in which, through the inevitable ideological overlay, a powerful field of original historical, cultural, ethnographic information is revealed.

In 1956, E.A. Masanov was accepted to the ethnography department and M.S. Mukanov was appointed junior researcher. It is worth dwelling in more detail on the personality of Yedige Aidarbekovich Masanov, who died tragically during the expedition of 1965. He was a major, versatile ethnographer-researcher, possessing extraordinary talent, diligence and erudition – it is enough to recall his remarkable articles on various types of Kazakh crafts, and, of course, “Essay on the History of Ethnographic Study of the Kazakh People” – a book that is known to all Kazakh ethnographers and historians. He was the son of a responsible employee of the Soviet apparatus, innocently arrested in 1937 and shot in the dungeons of the GULAG, a participant in the Great Patriotic War. After the war, E. Masanov graduated from Moscow State University and worked as a teacher. In

1956-1958 he completed postgraduate studies at the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences under the supervision of T.A. Zhdanko, a prominent ethnographer, “godmother” of many Central Asian and Kazakhstani ethnographers.

During his short life, he published 40 scientific works. His merits in studying the crafts and trades of the Kazakhs are especially great – the topic on which the scientist wrote a candidate’s dissertation, defended in Moscow, and, unfortunately, still unpublished. E.A. Masanov was the first in many ways – for example, he discovered a lifetime publication about Shokan Valikhanov with his portrait in a French edition. He carried out a great deal of work on studying the history of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan, having published many articles. The scientist prepared a manuscript for a book on this topic, which in the future was to form the basis of his doctoral dissertation. But the monograph was published after the author’s death and has lived its own life for many years as an exceptionally valuable, generalizing study.

In 1956, the largest (of all previous) ethnographic expedition to the Kustanai and Aktobe regions was organized. Almost all the scientific staff of the department took part in it. The expedition was led by the head of the department I.V. Zakharova and V.V. Vostrov. Members of the expedition: G.N. Valikhanov, M.S. Mukanov, postgraduate student E.A. Masanov, L.A. Demazi (from the museum), artist N. Tretyakov, photographer R. Mirshanov.

 It can be said that by 1956 the department had developed the main methodology for collecting ethnographic material, which undoubtedly contributed to the purposeful work on a wide scope of field surveys. Each member of the expedition was assigned a topic, which he then led for many years: “Clothing and jewelry” (I.V. Zakharova, later joined by R.D. Khodzhaeva), “People’s housing” (V.V. Vostrov, I.V. Zakharova), “Tribal composition of the Kazakhs” (V.V. Vostrov, M.S. Mukanov), “Folk crafts and trades” (E.A. Masanov, M.S. Mukanov). All of the above problems were sections of the extensive program “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas of the Peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan”, developed by the Institute of Economics of the USSR Academy of Sciences together with the academies of all the union republics.

In 1956, postgraduate student H. Argynbaev continued collecting materials for his dissertation in the Semipalatinsk and East Kazakhstan regions. The topic of the dissertation concerned the historical and cultural ties between the Russian and Kazakh peoples in the mid-19th – early 20th centuries, using East Kazakhstan as an example. The material he collected allowed the postgraduate student to begin writing his dissertation the following year.

In 1957, a group was organized at the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies to study the legacy of Ch.Ch.Valikhanov, headed by Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR A.Kh.Margulan (elected academician in 1958). The group of Chokan scholars was assigned to the ethnography department, and in 1958 A.Kh.Margulan was elected head of the ethnography department, and I.V.Zakharova remained in the department as a senior research fellow, continuing to be an authority for her ethnographer colleagues, thanks to her erudition and extensive experience in expeditionary research.

The group of Chokanologists included various specialists: ethnographer G.N.Valikhanov, geographer, specialist in Arabic script D.Kh.Karmysheva, historians L.M.Auezova, M.S.Tursunova. At different times, other scientists of the Institute were also involved in collecting the manuscript heritage of Ch.Valikhanov. For ten years, this group researched, prepared for publication extensive materials, which under its supervision were published in the form of an academic 5-volume Collected Works of a scientist of encyclopedic scale, which was Chokan Chingisovich Valikhanov.

In 1956, O. Ismagulov was accepted to the department, subsequently moving on to graduate school and specializing in anthropology. He soon defended his candidate’s dissertation, in 1984 – his doctoral dissertation, and in 1989 separated from the ethnography department, organizing an independent anthropological laboratory. At present, the group of anthropologists is again listed within the above-mentioned department, which is officially called the “department of ethnology and anthropology.”

As already noted, the research of the late 1950s was focused on the key issues of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas” and the expedition of 1957-1959 collected ethnographic material on its various sections. According to the 1959 report, the department was working on two transitional topics: “Map of the tribal settlement of the Kazakhs in the late 19th – early 20th centuries” (performers: V.V. Vostrov, M.S. Mukanov) and “Folk clothing of the Kazakhs” (performers: I.V. Zakharova, R.D. Khodzhaeva). M. Mukanov identified and copied materials from the Central State Archives of the USSR and maps from the Saltykov-Shchedrin Public Library (Leningrad) on the tribal composition and settlement of the Kazakhs. Extensive material on folk clothing was also found in the Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR, which allowed the authors to begin writing a monograph.

In 1959, the 6th volume of the Proceedings of the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies, devoted to ethnography, was published. It was also mainly based on the analysis of ethnographic material from expeditionary research. Summing up the results of the ethnographic expeditions, I.V. Zakharova noted the purposefulness of the search – namely: collecting materials for the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”. A wealth of material on agriculture was obtained – in particular, detailed descriptions and drawings of water-lifting structures (atpa, shyєyr) were made, which are given in the author’s article. The material on housing is extensive. Describing the structure of the yurt, Zakharova noted the unique shanyraks of Northern Kazakhstan: the presence of twelve arched planks fastening the rim of the shanyrak – six in each plane. The expedition participants also drew attention to the peculiarities in other areas of material culture: in the design of stationary dwellings, in headdresses, jewelry, etc.

The article by H. Argynbaev is an abridged version of the dissertation that he successfully defended the following year, 1960, in Moscow. It shows the history of the settlement of Eastern Kazakhstan by Russians, the ethnic composition of the population according to the 1926 census, and progressive changes in the economy and everyday life of the Kazakhs in the second half of the 19th – early 20th centuries. These undoubtedly include the development of productive haymaking (using a scythe), stationary housing construction in winter quarters (kystau), the appearance of wheeled plows (saban), improvement of means of transportation, etc. The researcher writes that already “in the middle of the 19th century, the construction of log houses was quite intensive.” Even three-chamber log houses and villages with street planning appeared, etc. In general, the significance of the large article by H. Argynbaev, as well as the dissertation, lies both in showing the causes and consequences of the innovations that occurred in Kazakh society after the historical and cultural “turning point” of the 1830-50s (namely, in connection with the beginning of the transition to a semi-nomadic, semi-sedentary way of life), and in the multifaceted analysis of the traditional economy and material culture of the Kazakhs in the pre-revolutionary period.

The articles by ethnographers E.A.Masanov, V.V.Vostrov, M.S. Mukanov, and art historian N.A.Orazbaeva are also based on expedition materials and are devoted to the trades and crafts of the Kazakhs. In addition, E.Masanov devoted another article to the history of the ethnographic study of the Kazakhs before 1845, and the historian G.I.Semenyuk to slavery in Kazakhstan.

In 1960, the department again returned to the study of the modern life of Kazakh collective farmers, but, unlike previous years, a stationary study was organized, i.e. the selected objects (villages) were studied over several years and the annual stay in them was no less than 60 days, in total. After pilot trips, two collective farms were selected: the XXII Congress of the CPSU and Zhetysu in the Taldykorgan district of the Almaty region. During 1961-64, the study of these objects was to be completed by the publication of a monograph covering all aspects of industrial and everyday culture. Of course, the choice of the objects to be studied was aimed at showing the life and culture of the village in the best light. For this purpose, successful farms were selected: the kolkhoz im. The 22nd Congress of the CPSU was led by twice Hero of Socialist Labor Nurmold Aldabergenov, and Zhetysu was led by Hero of Socialist Labor Abdykadyr Dairov.

Along with the stationary survey of collective farms, the staff of the ethnography department continued to collect ethnographic material in the sections of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”. In the early 1960s, the following expeditions were conducted: Kyzylorda, West Kazakhstan – 1960, Central Kazakhstan – 1961, “Kosh-Agach” (Kosagash, Gorno-Altai Autonomous Okrug), Emba – 1962, Torgai – 1963.

In 1964, the monograph by I.V. Zakharova and R.D. Khodjaeva “Kazakh National Clothing. XIX – early XX century” was published, which is the result of many years of work on one of the sections of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”. Ethnic and age characteristics; clothing complexes; old, no longer in use, disappeared, and traditionally in use clothing; cut and material from which it is sewn; age purpose of headwear; classification and typology of clothing and much more – this is the content of this general study. Undoubtedly, this was a serious success for the authors and our ethnographic science as a whole.

In 1964, the department’s staff participated in the VII International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnographic Sciences in Moscow. Ethnographers from Kazakhstan actively worked in sections and symposiums, and A.Kh. Margulan and E.A. Masanov presented reports.

 In the same year, in connection with the move to Omsk, I.V. Zakharova, who had done much for the development of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan, left the Institute. But Kazakh ethnographers maintained creative ties with her for a long time, as evidenced by her participation in subsequent planned topics in the ethnography departments. And after many years, being already at a respectable age, Irina Vitalievna still pays attention to Kazakhstani issues.

That same year, the department was replenished with new employees: D.Kh.Karmysheva, who had completed her work in the Chokan studies group, was hired as a junior research assistant, and H.A.Kauanova, who had completed her postgraduate studies in Moscow, was hired as a senior laboratory assistant. She would soon defend her dissertation and work on the problem of the everyday life and culture of workers at industrial enterprises.

In 1965-1966, the staff of the ethnography department worked mainly on sections of the planned topic on the culture and life of a modern Kazakh collective farm village and completed them by the autumn of 1966. The manuscript was discussed at meetings of the boards of the surveyed collective farms and received approval. It was presented to the Academic Council of the Institute, which recommended it for publication. The book was published in 1967 and examines many aspects of life on the surveyed collective farms: farming, material culture, family and family life, and village culture. Such a broad scientific ethnographic publication, giving an idea of the modern Kazakh village, was produced for the first time.

In 1966, two topics were approved for the ethnography department: “The history of the development of the Kazakh family” (performers: H. Argynbaev, R. D. Khodjaeva, D. H. Karmysheva) and “Modern technical progress and changes in the material culture of the Kazakh people” (performers: V. V. Vostrov, M. S. Mukanov, H. A. Kauanova). The name of the latter topic turned out to be rather unsuccessful and in 1967 it was given a new name “Changes in the material culture of the Kazakh people at the present stage”.

To carry out these tasks, which were to be completed by 1968-69, expeditions were organized to the Tselinograd, South Kazakhstan, and Semipalatinsk regions.

In 1968, the Nauka publishing house published a monograph by V.V. Vostrov and M.S. Mukanov, “The Tribal Composition and Settlement of the Kazakhs (late 19th – early 20th centuries)”, in 20 pp. (256 p.). This book examines the history of the Kazakh zhuzes, tribes and clans, their settlement during the specified period, which was influenced by various factors: inter-clan struggle, the establishment of military settlements, and the resettlement of peasants. The book was prepared as a section of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas”. Therefore, it provides detailed maps of the settlement of clans, which can be used to clearly imagine the ethnic situation at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries.

The book was met with interest by the public and with some caution by the party and state apparatus. At first, small-caliber comments were sent from above: “Why do the authors quote M. Tynyshpaev?”, “Why are detailed generic schemes cited?”, etc., etc. But more serious accusations were looming, and they were only waiting for the moment that came after the December events of 1986, during the reign of G.V. Kolbin. In connection with the appearance of the notorious label of “Kazakh nationalism”, “approved” in Moscow, a number of Kazakh philosophers came to life, accusing the book of inciting nationalist passions and suggesting not to deal with such topics at all, that is, to throw out a huge historical layer from the history of the Kazakhs, depriving the people of their own history.

As we know, these idle anti-scientific approaches to assessing the work of professional ethnographers in the 1990s absolutely did not stand the test of time, when the need for scientific research into the collective folk history of the Kazakhs (the problem of “shezhire”, etc.) became completely obvious, and, naturally, such research no longer needed “permission”. But during the perestroika period, the monograph on the tribal history of the Kazakhs ended up in special library storages (effectively banned) and was almost inaccessible to readers for a significant time, which, on the contrary, created a stir around this publication, which became even more popular and in demand.

 Returning again to the period of the late 1960s, we note that at that time an interesting book by H.A. Argynbaev “Kazakhstani folklore ethnographic essay” was published. During the same period, he completed work on the topic of “Family and marriage among the Kazakhs”, and V.V. Vostrov and H.A. Kauanova – on the topic of “Material culture of the Kazakh people at the present stage”, which were subsequently published in the form of monographs.

In 1970, the ethnography department began developing a new problem, “Types of Kazakh Economy and the History of Its Development.” It was divided into two sections: “Agriculture” – performers: V.V. Vostrov, I.V. Zakharova (Omsk), M.S. Mukanov, K.A. Birzhanov (graduate student who studied in Moscow), D.Kh. Karmysheva; “Animal Husbandry” – H.A. Argynbayev, R.D. Khodjaeva, H.A. Kauanova. To collect materials on this topic, two expeditions were organized: to the North Kazakhstan and Kyzylorda regions.

In 1972, the book by V. Vostrov and H. Kauanova “Material Culture of the Kazakh People at the Current Stage” was published, where, along with the rural population, the life and culture of workers at industrial enterprises were presented for the first time.

The following year, a monograph by H. Argynbaev on the family and marriage of the Kazakhs was published, which was the result of many years of expeditionary research and archival and bibliographical research. In his research, the ethnographer examines family forms, paternal law and the right of inheritance, the upbringing of children, issues of exogamy during marriage, matchmaking, the size of the kalym and much more. Much attention in the book is paid to customs and rituals, which play a special role in family relations. All of them are scientifically comprehended by the author and presented with interest, which is captivating when reading. The monograph formed the basis of a doctoral dissertation, which H. Argynbaev successfully defended in 1976.

In 1974, a book by M.S. Mukanov, dedicated to the ethnic history of the Kazakhs of the Middle Zhuz, was published. It was the first to present various materials from the archives of Leningrad, Moscow and Almaty, covering the system of settlement of Kazakh clans in Saryarka, their migration routes, the number of clan communities in the districts, etc. The monograph presented the main issues of the author’s candidate’s dissertation, defended in 1972.

As is known, for quite a long time, starting in 1957, the Department of Ethnology was headed by A.Kh. Margulan. He was a versatile scientist and belonged to “that galaxy of scientists who had the difficult but happy lot of being pioneers in science and through whose efforts the culture of the Kazakh people became the property of all mankind.”

Having become the head of the department, he nevertheless paid great attention to the preparation and publication of the five-volume Collected Works of Ch.Ch.Valikhanov and his main passion – archeology, especially since he was preparing a monograph on the Begazy-Dandybaev culture he had discovered. In addition, the scientist did not abandon active work on publishing a wide variety of materials (literary criticism, popular science, etc.), publishing – in addition to articles concerning Chokan Valikhanov – a large number of publications on Abai, the epic, the antiquities of Kazakhstan and much more. Such intense work required a lot of effort, and time dictated its own … In 1976, Academician A.Kh. Margulan left the head of the department, handing it over to the new Doctor of Sciences Kh.A. Argynbaev. The Department of Ethnography worked under the supervision of this prominent scientist until 1989.

In 1977, H.A.Kauanova and K.A.Birzhanov worked on the topic “Culture and Life of Miners and Metallurgists of Central Kazakhstan,” which was to be completed in 1979. The second topic of the department was “Material Culture of the Kazakhs” (performers: H.A.Argynbaev, M.S.Mukanov), which was completed in 1980.

After the Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU “On Folk Art Crafts” of December 17, 1974, which concerned both scientists and researchers, it was necessary to respond to the party’s directive with action, as was the practice of those years. The material accumulated in the ethnography department made it possible to begin writing monographs on folk crafts and decorative and applied art from the standpoint of historical and ethnographic analysis, showing the origins of crafts, trades, ornaments, and, tracing various stages of cultural and historical development (genesis) of these phenomena, to connect them with the folk art of modern craftsmen and craftswomen.

In 1979, M.S. Mukanov’s book “Kazakh Home Artistic Crafts” was published, based on field materials from expeditions over many years. In it, the author examines the origins of folk crafts and ornaments. All cycles of felt production are widely represented, weaving, mat weaving and embroidery are considered, and illustrations are provided. Many years of ethnographic trips allowed the author to identify regions of production of mosaic felt carpets, lint-free and lint-woven carpets, embroidery, to substantiate the reasons for their formation and characteristic features.

Following this, in 1981, M.S. Mukanov’s second book was published, also devoted to the problems of folk crafts and trades – “Kazakh Yurt”, which illuminates the “genealogy” (history) of the yurt, its place in the life of nomads. The manufacturing technology and interior decoration of this universal mobile dwelling are widely presented – the result of the author’s searches in the museums of Almaty and Leningrad.

A very informative book by H. Argynbaev on a relevant topic was prepared and published in the Kazakh language. Unlike previous editions – which mainly examined folk crafts from the field of women’s labor – this work covered the skills of Kazakh artisans. The book is also based on the author’s field research; along with this, materials from museum collections are used. The author, in fact, for the first time ethnographically professionally covered the art of old Kazakh masters, paying special attention to the production technology. Thus, the art of wood craftsmen who specialized in the manufacture of yurt parts, saddles (ershi), furniture and dishes is considered in detail. The skills of traditional specialists in silver (zerger) and bone are also widely represented. Original are the essays on leather production and, in particular, on stone-cutting art, with original field illustrative materials.

As we see, the above-mentioned books – combining the qualities of a scientific monograph and a richly illustrated publication – were a worthy response of Kazakh ethnographers to the dictates of the time. They still remain relevant and widely in demand.

In the mid-1970s, the Department of Ethnography was replenished with fresh forces: in 1975, a graduate of KazSU A.T. Toleubaev was accepted to the Institute of Historical and Ethnographic Studies, and then to graduate school and assigned to the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In 1979, he defended his candidate’s dissertation on pre-Islamic beliefs in Moscow and returned to the institute. However, he soon transferred back to the university (now the al-Farabi Kazakh National University), where he prepared a doctoral dissertation and defended it at the Academic Council of our institute in 1993.

In 1976, N.E. Masanov was accepted to the ethnography department, and immediately joined the department’s work on implementing planned topics. Soon he also defended his candidate’s dissertation, but on historical issues (the tax policy of tsarism in Kazakhstan). Subsequently, the researcher was more purposefully engaged in developing historical and ethnographic problems.

As noted above, in 1970 the department began working on the topic of “Types of Kazakh Economy and the History of Its Development”. The topic was completed in 1973 and was accepted by the Academic Council of the Institute as completed. At the same time, the Academic Council decided to prepare, taking into account the comments, a manuscript for publication. Academic ethnographers were busy with this in the late 1970s. At the same time, such a multifaceted topic required the involvement of specialists in various fields, scientists from outside. Archaeologists K. M. Baipakov, M. K. Kadyrbayev, ethnographers I. V. Zakharova (Omsk), V. P. Kurylev (Leningrad) were invited. Deputy Director of the Institute G. F. Dakhshleiger took part in the preparation of the publication. The main backbone of the author’s team was the ethnographers of the department: Kh.A. Argynbaev, V.V. Vostrov, R.D. Khodzhaeva, M.S. Mukanov, Kh.A. Kauanova, K.A. Birzhanov, D.Kh. Karmysheva, N.E. Masanov.

 In 1980, this collective work of the ethnography department staff with a more precise title, “The Kazakh Economy at the Turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries. Materials for a Historical and Ethnographic Atlas,” was published and became a milestone in the history of Russian ethnology. The book covers many issues in the history of animal husbandry (cattle breeding) and agriculture in Kazakhstan, provides an ethnographic description of these forms of farming, and the beliefs and rituals associated with them. Most of the sections are written at a high scientific level (for example, the remarkable historical and archaeological essay on cattle breeding by M.K. Kadyrbaev and many others). The indisputable advantage of the book is that it comes with a set of 8 maps illustrating the types of cattle breeding, the location of seasonal pastures, migration routes, the distribution of crops, agricultural tools, etc. Moscow cartographers with experience in similar work were invited for this purpose; The maps were printed by the Map Enterprise of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Kazakh SSR.

Thus, in line with the program of the “Historical and Ethnographic Atlas of the Peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan”, the ethnography department of the IIAE prepared and published books of considerable volume and content. According to the conclusion of Moscow scientists, Kazakh ethnographers were far ahead of their colleagues from other union republics, including Russia.

During this period, ethnographers of Kazakhstan quite reasonably conceived the idea of creating a general historical and ethnographic work “Kazakhs”, which would cover the ethnogenesis and ethnic history, economy, material and spiritual culture of the people. By 1980, the scientific base was prepared: monographs and articles on the above-mentioned problems were published, records, illustrations, photographs were accumulated in the archive of the department, giving an idea of the culture of the Kazakhs, archival materials and literary publications were collected. Therefore, for 1980-84, the topic “Kazakhs. Historical and ethnographic research” was assigned to the ethnography department.

The writing of the sections was completed just before the beginning of Gorbachev’s perestroika. The spirit of “perestroika”, or rather the fear of not fitting into its framework, also seized the leadership of the IAHE. Instead of thoroughly discussing the manuscript of “Kazakhs” within the walls of the Institute, it was (to be on the safe side) sent to Moscow for review. The manuscript lay at the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences for two years and returned with a detailed review, which indicated the comments, after which it could be recommended for publication. But the manuscript did not pass through the Academic Council of the Institute in Almaty: almost all the fire of criticism was directed at the section “Ethnogenesis” (performed by N. Masanov). The discussion resulted in a “deaf debate”: opponents do not hear the author’s arguments and vice versa. Unfortunately, personal relationships were mixed in with this. In general, the manuscript did not pass. And only almost 10 years later, the management gave the green light to the publication of “Kazakhs”. The motivation of the Director of the Institute, Academician M.K. Kozybaev, was quite positive: “Let N. Masanov’s opinion on the issue of ethnogenesis be expressed. There is nothing to be afraid of.”

But the manuscript of “Kazakhs”, already ready for submission to the publishing house, was again subjected to forced discussion and doubts. And a dilemma arose: either to defend the full volume of the manuscript, again postponing its publication for years, or to seek a compromise, to give in on something. The authors’ collective went for the second – they removed the section on the ethnogenesis of the Kazakhs from the manuscript; a number of other sections of the book were significantly shortened. In this “truncated” form, this work was published in 1995, nevertheless representing an important result of many years of work by the team of the academic department of ethnography. The book remains the only generalizing work on the ethnography of the Kazakhs and is in considerable demand.

At the same time, it should be noted that the issue of publishing a full-fledged fundamental, in its own way, presentation work on the historical ethnography of the Kazakhs remains largely open. Moreover, the problem has not lost its scientific relevance in connection with the latest ethnological and ethnographic research, carried out over the past 10-15 years by a group of researchers of the middle and young generation. But it should be emphasized once again that the publication of the collective work “Kazakhs” was a serious result, a milestone in the development of domestic ethnography in the post-war period, which in historiographical terms could most accurately be designated as the “Kazakh ethnographic school of the second half of the twentieth century.” A scientific school that was formed in the bosom of domestic fundamental science, on the basis of a small but significant division – the academic department of ethnography.

In the 1980s, the issue of personnel became acute due to the fact that qualified specialists left the ethnography department: R.D. Khodjaeva, a top specialist in clothing, food and utensils of the Kazakhs, moved to the Institute of Uyghur Studies; in 1981, A.T. Toleubayev left for the university; in 1986, N.E. Masanov took the position of scientific secretary of the Department of Social Sciences. By the time he left the ethnography department, N. Masanov had already published interesting articles on the traditional economy of the Kazakhs, ethnodemography, ethnic history, nomadism, etc. The publication of his book, Problems of the Socio-Economic History of Kazakhstan at the Turn of the 18th – 19th Centuries (Almaty: Nauka, 1984), aroused great interest; the material in the book is largely linked to the ethnography of the Kazakhs, especially with the traditional population system and economy. In 1992, the researcher successfully defended his doctoral dissertation in Moscow, which was later used as the basis for a general monograph (“The Nomadic Civilization of the Kazakhs: Fundamentals of the Life Activity of a Nomadic Society.” Almaty-Moscow, 1995).

It should be noted that in the 1980s, there was a noticeable replenishment of ethnology with new young employees. Not having sufficient capacity to send postgraduate students to the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences, where qualified ethnographers of a wide profile were trained, the Institute’s management, on the recommendation of the head of the department, H. Argynbaev, began to enroll specialists of various profiles in the department: historians (A. Kalyshev, E. Orazbekov, A. Toktabaev), art historian (Sh. Tokhtabaeva), paleoethnographer (S. Ajigalieva), specialists in the history of the working class (K. Sakenova) and historiography (N. Alimbaev). But only two of them completed an internship in Moscow – E. Orazbek and A. Kalyshev, and the first of them – also postgraduate study, and only A. Kalyshev defended his candidate’s dissertation on a completely new topic in the ethnography department – ethnosociology. Sh. Tokhtabaeva and S. Azhigaliev defended their candidate dissertations in Leningrad, respectively, in 1984 and 1989. Sh. Tokhtabaeva’s interests mainly concerned jewelry, the art of Kazakh zergers (which was the basis of her candidate dissertation), but also national clothing and food. In addition, she was entrusted with the work of organizing a museum of ethnography at our Institute, although this important idea could not be realized. S. Azhigaliev’s main attention was focused on the memorial and religious architecture of Western Kazakhstan, where he carried out a number of expeditions. The results of field research and their analysis are contained in his book, published in the spring of 1994, although it was written almost 10 years earlier. In 1984-1986, the ethnography department was developing the topic “Modern rural family”. Four objects were selected for the study: in the Almaty region –   A. Nusupbekov collective farm in Kegen district and Chilik winery; in Taldykorgan region – Kuibyshev collective farm and “Enbekshi” in Kirov district. Annual expeditions were organized to these settlements (1984-86) with a fairly long stay of a large field group in them for up to 15-20 days per season. The expedition participants had to study the rural family in the light of a new methodology – socio-ethnic. The social study of families consisted of questioning married couples, families by national (interethnic) characteristics, by the time of family creation, its composition, living conditions (home, its furnishings, etc.), earnings, cultural needs, etc. Such questioning was conducted, statistical calculations and generalizations were made, many chapters of the monograph “Modern Rural Family of the Peoples of Kazakhstan” were written. But, at the same time, most of its sections contained an apology of the disappearing Soviet way of life. There were also costs of a scientific and methodological nature: the research was mainly carried out in the spirit of the then fashionable, dominant in Soviet ethnography ethnosociological trend, which obscured the valuable research in traditional ethnography – an equally important basis for deep ethnosociological generalizations. Thus, the monograph lost its notorious “relevance”, immediately became morally outdated in many respects and was not published. But it cannot be said that the work was done in vain: many very significant parts of the research were later published by some authors.

In 1988, at the Specialized Academic Council of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences, M.S. Mukanov defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic of “Women’s Artistic Crafts of the Kazakhs”, where traditional home industries (felt making, weaving, braiding, embroidery), their origins, technical and technological information about each of them, ornament, etc. were examined in historical and ethnographic terms. The dissertation was the result of many years of research and was based on field research and the study of literary sources on the topic.

In 1989, due to the age limit, Professor H. Argynbaev left the department and in his place was elected candidate of historical sciences H. A. Kauanova, who mainly dealt with modern ethnographic and sociological issues: the life of the working class, the rural family.

In 1990, the All-Union Scientific Session on the results of field ethnographic and anthropological research in 1988-1989 was held in Almaty, which was a major event in the scientific life of the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of those years. At the same time, it was an important event for the ethnographers of the republic, to a certain extent recognition of their merits in the development of problems of historical ethnography of the Kazakhs, ethnosociology, anthropology and other scientific areas. Such forums, which were held once every two years in various cities – major scientific centers of the Soviet Union, usually gathered the cream of ethnographic science. And the conference in Almaty was no exception. Numerous sections worked on ethnogenesis, ethnic processes, material and spiritual culture, etc. There were even such sections, the holding of which was unthinkable several years ago – for example, the section “Ethnic conflicts and operational ethnology”. Abstracts of the reports were published in 3 parts. Many Kazakhstani scientists – employees of the ethnography department, researchers from universities, etc. – presented reports. The exchange of ideas and discussions in the sections were useful and interesting.

Having successfully completed the session, the ethnographers of the department began to develop the topic adopted at the beginning of the year: “The Culture of Traditional Life Support of the Kazakh Ethnic Group”. Its implementers were H. Argynbayev, S. Adzhigaliev, Sh. Tokhtabayeva, E. Orazbekov, A. Toktabayev, and N. Shakhanova (Leningrad). As is known, by that time ethnologists from a number of countries had approached the study of the culture of an ethnic group in accordance with the general theory of problems developed by L. Bertalanffy. The essence of this concept is that every phenomenon is connected with others and a comprehensive study is necessary for a complete understanding of it. However, this does not at all contradict the principle of scientific abstraction – the study of some component part of a system. In accordance with this theory, the topic of traditional subsistence of the Kazakhs was designated as a complex research problem, including the study of the settlement system, housing, clothing, food and folk knowledge. The work was completed on time and subsequently published as a collective monograph by three authors. In February 1993, after the retirement of H.A. Kauanova, Doctor of Historical Sciences M.S. Mukanov was appointed acting head of the department, and in May of the same year he was elected to this position by the Academic Council of the Institute. The name of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology also changed: after the separation of archaeologists and the formation of an independent Institute of Archaeology, the head institute began to be called the Institute of History and Ethnology named after Ch.Ch. Valikhanov; accordingly, the name of the department also changed – “the department of ethnology”.

 In 1994-96 the ethnology department worked on the topic: “Folk Art (Epos, Folklore, Ornament) – as a Historical and Ethnographic Source” (performers: H. Argynbaev, M. S. Mukanov, Sh. Tokhtabaeva, S. Ajigaliev, N. Alimbay, A. Toktabaev, E. Orazbekov, K. Ergazieva). The choice of topic was not accidental, since before that ethnographers had paid primary attention to the study of the economy and material culture. Spiritual culture, with rare exceptions, was still given little attention. Therefore, the department staff decided to turn to the study of Kazakh folk art, which could provide a lot of interesting and important data, ethnological and ethnographic information: on mythology, folk history, culture and everyday life, spiritual life. A number of non-monographic works were published on the topic; but it should be noted that the problem of studying the spiritual life of the Kazakhs remains relevant to this day.

In the following three years, the staff of the ethnology department (whose staff had noticeably thinned out by this time) were engaged in developing the problems of Kazakh genealogical history – shezhire, including in connection with the issues of ethnogenesis.

The research was mainly based on the materials collected in previous years. At the same time, a more in-depth study of the shezhire phenomenon showed that genealogical history is only a part of the entire collective folk history of the Kazakhs, which should include many types of verbal and non-verbal sources that came “from the thick” of the people. Among them are such specific, but important, as memorial Arabic-script epigraphy on numerous gravestones, etc.

One of the general results of the development of the very complex topic of “shezhire” by Kazakhstani ethnographers, as already indicated, was the publication of a collective monograph by three authors: Kh.A. Argynbayev, M.S. Mukanov and V.V. Vostrov. It was posthumous, since in 1998, unexpectedly, one after the other, professors Kh. Argynbayev and M. Mukanov died – some of the last representatives of the national ethnographic school of the post-war period. Undoubtedly, the death of major research scientists, still full of creative ideas, was a serious loss both for the ethnology department (which for a number of years had been experiencing very serious personnel difficulties) and for the ethnographic science of Kazakhstan as a whole.

Thus, in the 1990s, a large and important stage in the development of ethnological and ethnographic science in Kazakhstan was completed, which was associated, first of all, with the history of the Department of Ethnography/Ethnology of the Ch. Ch. Valikhanov Institute of Ethnography. For many years, a large team of original researchers worked in this structure, creating fundamental works on historical ethnography and other scientific areas. One of the results of the activities of this team of scientists was the publication in 1995 of a generalizing monograph “Kazakhs”, which, despite its truncated version, is an important milestone in the development of domestic ethnography in the post-war period. This period in historiographical terms could most accurately be designated as the “Kazakh ethnographic school of the second half of the twentieth century.” Somewhere around this time, the first stage in the development of ethnology in Kazakhstan, already as a sovereign state, begins, and which is associated with the activation of the activities of the middle and young generation of researchers, with new difficulties, problems and achievements. A significant event, a milestone in this regard should be considered the Frontal Ethnocultural Survey of all 14 regions of the republic in 1998, which was carried out under the leadership of the academic department of ethnology. After this, there is a noticeable revival in the field ethnographic (expeditionary) work, in the field of developing new topics, defending dissertations, etc. But the current state of ethnology in Kazakhstan is very complex and contradictory – this is the subject of a separate article.

* * *

In concluding the first essay on the history of ethnographic science in Kazakhstan, which is intended for the jubilee collection for the 60th anniversary of the Institute of Ethnography of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan, we have the opportunity to only briefly highlight the state of affairs in our ethnology over the past 10-15 years.

 The ethnological and ethnographic science of this period is characterized by the same development features as the fundamental science of the post-Soviet period as a whole: a serious crisis and the beginning of a revival in recent years. It should be said that by the beginning of the 1990s, domestic ethnographic science had achieved solid achievements in the field of field research, archival and bibliographic research, and the publication of monographs. General works prepared by ethnographers were highly valued in Soviet ethnographic science, as evidenced by the above material. At the same time, during the Soviet period, there were also pronounced omissions in the development of the ethnography of Kazakhstan: due attention was not paid to theoretical problems of Kazakh ethnography (ethnology), paleoethnographic (ethnoarchaeological), cultural and genetic research, the study of some branches of the traditional economy, spiritual culture, ideology, and folk art.

But in general, the successes and achievements of the “ethnographic school” of the Soviet period clearly outweighed the shortcomings and omissions. It is quite natural that during the 90s, important generalizing works prepared in the past were published by inertia. This is, first of all, the collective study “Kazakhs”, published in 1995, but, unfortunately, in an abridged version. In 2000, another collective monograph, prepared in previous years, about the Kazakh shezhire “Kazakh shezhiresi hakynda” was published. These and a number of other studies seem to summarize the development of domestic ethnographic science in the post-war period – mainly in terms of the historical ethnography of the Kazakhs. But, at the same time, it should be noted that there is still no full-fledged, generalizing, unabridged work on the historical ethnography of the Kazakhs, which would be fully adequate to the previously conducted long-term and recent field research and the extraordinary abundance of materials.

In general, in the 90s of the twentieth century, a serious crisis was observed in the ethnography of Kazakhstan, which was “renamed” into ethnology, which was manifested in many ways: structural and organizational (primarily), scientific and publishing, in the field of field research (lack of expeditions). This, one might say, total crisis coincided with the period of generational change, when the middle generation of ethnologists came to the fore. Nevertheless, at this time a number of works were published, characterized by new approaches to understanding the traditional culture of the Kazakhs, the expansion of ethnological topics: “Relics of pre-Islamic beliefs in the family rituals of the Kazakhs” by A. Toleubaev, “Genesis of traditional burial and cult architecture of Western Kazakhstan” by S. Azhigali, “Nomadic civilization of the Kazakhs” by N. Masanov, “Representations, cults, rituals among the Kazakhs. (In the context of everyday Islam in Southern Kazakhstan (in the late 19th – 20th centuries)” by R. Mustafina, “Traditional culture of life support of the Kazakhs” by N. Alimbay, M. Mukanov, H. Argynbaev and some others.

It should be noted that all these works were prepared and published on the basis of field research conducted during the Soviet and perestroika periods – the latest field materials were virtually absent. And only in 1998 was a way out of the crisis in the field ethnography sphere outlined, when the Frontal Ethnocultural Survey of the Republic was conducted. Under the leadership of the academic department of ethnology, expeditions were carried out to all 14 regions of Kazakhstan. Based on these studies and a summary of materials from previous years, a solid collective work “Customs and Rituals of the Kazakhs in the Past and Present” was published – a phenomenon that is in its own way a milestone in the latest ethnological historiography.

If we talk about actual field ethnographic research, its revival has only occurred in recent years. Since 2001, ethnologists have once again begun to conduct complex expeditions, namely to Western Kazakhstan and Mongolia. Of particular note are the field research of the Mongolian Complex Ethnographic and Ethnoarchaeological Expedition of the Ch. Ch. Valikhanov Institute of History and Ethnology in terms of a comprehensive study of the history, culture, and everyday life of the Kazakhs of Mongolia, the current state of the diaspora, as well as the monuments of nomads. A very serious basis has been laid for the creation of general works on the historical ethnography of the Kazakhs, ethnosociology, and monument studies.

In recent years, a special scientific direction has been developed within the bosom of Kazakhstan ethnology – ethnoarchaeology, which in its objectives is closely linked with the former paleoethnography. Ethnologists have made a serious contribution to the development of this important scientific direction in our country, and were the initiators of the XII International Scientific Seminar “Integration of Archaeological and Ethnographic Research”, which was held in September 2004 at the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Thus, the signs of the revival of complex ethnological and ethnographic research in the field of academic science are obvious. At the same time, serious unresolved problems remain. Currently, more than 50 highly qualified specialists (doctors and candidates of science) work in the field of ethnological science in Kazakhstan, there are many “related” specialists: cultural scientists, folklorists, art historians, etc. These are serious forces that require their consolidation in the form of an Association of specialists. In addition, the need to create a large Scientific Center for Ethnological and Ethnographic Research in Kazakhstan has long been overdue.

The serious and important scientific potential in the field of national ethnology is evidenced by the historiography of recent years. This includes the aforementioned “Customs and Rituals of the Kazakhs…”, a solid collection of articles “History and Culture of the Aral-Caspian Region” (from the “Heritage of Turan” series), the collective monograph “Altai Kazakhs” (authors O.I. Ismagulov, K. Sikhymbaeva, A.O. Ismagulova), the generalizing works of S.E. Azhigali “Architecture of Nomads”, Sh.Zh. Tokhtabaeva “Silver Path of Kazakh Masters”, the monograph of R.A. Beknazarov “Kazakhstan of the Kazakh Empire”. Quite recently, with the participation of Kazakh ethnologists, a solid book-album “Kazakh Yurt” (Atyrau-London, 2005) was published, which received very high public praise. All this instills hope for future development in the field of domestic ethnology.

————————————

1. Захарова И.В. Этнографическая работа в Казахстане в 1920-1950-х годах // Этническая история тюркских народов Сибири и сопредельных территорий: Сб.научных тр. Омск, 1998, с. 17.

2. В основе данного очерка лежит текст, подготовленный покойным профессором М.С.Мукановым в 1994 г., дополненный, отчасти переработанный соавтором.

3. Центральный архив Национальной академии наук Республики Казахстан. Ф.11.Оп.1. Л.1. (в дальнейшем: ЦА НАН РК).

4. Там же. Д.5. Л.3,5.

5. Там же. Д.1. Л.28.

6. Там же. Д.5. Л.41.

7. Там же. Д.5. Л.26.

8. Там же. Д.5. Л.1.; Д.6. Л.3.

9. Там же. Д.10. Л.3.

10. Там же. Д.15. Л.3

11. Там же. Д.10. Лл. 3-10.

12. Там же. Д.15. Л.1.

13. Там же. Д.25. Лл. 1-4.

14. Географические названия в статье даны, преимущественно, в современном написании.

15. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.21. Л.7.

16. Захарова И.В. Материальная культура казахов-колхозников Юго-Восточного Казахстана (По материалам Алма-Атинской и Джамбулской областей) // Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии АН КазССР (далее: Тр. ИИАЭ). Алма-Ата, 1956. Т.3. С.105-189.

17. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.56. Лл.1-5.

18. Корбе О.А., Махова Е.И. Декоративное искусство колхозниц Казахстана // Краткие сообщения Института этнографии АН СССР. М., 1950. Вып.11.

19. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.72. Л.42.

20. Там же. Д. 72. Л.42; Д.77.Л.1 об., 66 об.-67.

21. Вестник АН КазССР.1952.№ 3.

22. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.104. Л.53.

23. Востров В.В., Захарова И.В. Казахское народное жилище. Алма-Ата, 1989.

24. Там же. С.48, 52, 56 и др.

25. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.134. Л.1-2.

26. Там же.

27. Востров В.В. Казахи Джаныбекского района Западно-Казахстанской области (Историко-этнографический очерк) // Тр. ИИАЭ. Алма-Ата, 1956. Т.3; Захарова И.В. Материальная культура казахов-колхозников Юго-Восточного Казахстана (По материалам Алматинской и Джамбулской областей) // Там же.

28. Востров В.В. Казахи Джаныбекского района…С.27.

29. Ходжаева Р.Д. Общественное положение и семейный быт уйгурской женщины Казахстана // Тр. ИИАЭ. Алма-Ата, 1956. Т.3.

30. Сабитов Н. Общественная жизнь и семейный быт казахов-колхозников (По материалам Алма-Атинской и Джамбулской областей) // Там же.

31. О Н.Сабитове подр. см. статью С.Ажигали в данном сборнике, а так же: Его же. Памяти востоковеда Нигмета Сабитова (1895 – 1955 гг.) // Вестник МН – АН РК. 1996. №3; Шыєыстанушы, єылым-библиограф Н.Сјбитов (1895 – 1955). Библиографиялыќ кґрсеткіш / Ќўраст. М. Бегманова. Алматы: Орталыќ єылыми кітапхана, 2000 и др.

32. Масанов Э.А. Домашние промыслы и ремесла казахского народа во второй половине XIX – начале XX в. : Историко-этнографический очерк по материалам северных областей Казахстана: Автореф. дисс .канд. ист. наук. М., 1960. См.также: Масанов Э.А. Из истории ремесла казахов (Вторая половина XIX – начало XX в.) // Советская этнография. 1958. № 5; Его же. Казахское войлочное производство во второй половине XIX и начале XX в. // Тр. ИИАЭ. Алма-Ата, 1959. Т.6. и др.

33. Масанов Э.А. Некоторые новые материалы о Ч.Ч.Валиханове // Изв. АН КазССР. Сер.обществ.наук. 1964. Вып.1.

34. Масанов Э.А. Очерк истории этнографического изучения казахского народа в СССР. Алма-Ата, 1966.

35. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.134. Л.30.

36. Об истории антропологической науки в Казахстане см. статью О. Исмагулова в данном издании.

37. Захарова И.В. Об итогах этнографических экспедиций 1955 и 1956 годов // Тр.ИИАЭ. Алма-Ата, 1959. Т.6.

38. Там же. С.4, рис.1,2.

39. Там же. С.6, рис.5.

40. Аргынбаев Х. Историко-культурные связи русского и казахского народов и их влияние на материальную культуру казахов в середине XIX и начале XX веков. (По материалам Восточного Казахстана) // Тр.ИИАЭ. Алма-Ата, 1959. Т.6. С.19-90.

41. См.статьи в «Трудах ИИАЭ» (1959, Т.6): Муканов М.С. Ковровое производство и его орнаментика; Его же. Резьба по кости у казахов; Масанов Э.А. Казахское войлочное производство во второй половине XIX и начале ХХ веков; Востров В.В. Некоторые изделия казахских мастеров-зергеров; Оразбаева Н.А. Искусство резьбы по кости у казахов; Масанов Э.А. Об этнографическом изучении Казахстана в России до 1845 г.; Семенюк Г.И. Рабство в Казахстане в XV – XIX веках.

42. Архив отдела этнологии Института истории и этнологии НАН (МОН) РК.

43. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.201. Л.6-10; Д.212 .Л.10; Д.268. Л.3; Д.307. Л.1-4.

44. Там же. Д.358. Л.3-4. См. также: Маргулан А.Х. Казахская юрта и ее убранство. М.,1964,[VII МКАЭН]; Масанов Э.А. Из истории этнографического изучения казахского народа в России (XV-XVII вв.). М.,1964.[VII МКАЭН].

45. См., напр.: Захарова И.В. Этнографическая работа в Казахстане в 1920 – 1950-х годах // Этническая история тюркских народов Сибири и сопредельных территорий: Сб.научных тр. Омск, 1998.

46. Культура и быт казахского колхозного аула. Алма-Ата, 1967. 304 с. с илл.

47. ЦА НАН РК. Ф.11.Оп.1. Д.449. Л.1-3.

48. Там же. Д.469. Л.1.

49. Там же. Д.449. Л.3; Д.468. Л.4.

50. Арєынбаев Х. Ќазаќты» мал шаруашылыєы жайында этнографиялыќ очерк. Алматы, 1969.

51. Арєынбаев Х. Ќазаќ халќындаєы семья мен неке (тарихи-этнографиялыќ шолу). Алматы, 1973.

52. Муканов М.С. Этнический состав и расселение казахов Среднего жуза. Алма-Ата, 1974.

53. Муканов М.С. Труды Чокана Валиханова в исследованиях А.Х. Маргулана // Чокан Валиханов и современность. Алма-Ата, 1983. С.208.

54. Маргулан А.Х. О характере и исторической обусловленности казахского эпоса // Известия Казахского филиала АН СССР. Сер. ист. Алматы, 1946. № 2. С.75-81; Его же. Ўлытау тґ»ірегіндегі тас мїсіндер // Ежелгі мјдениет кујлары. Алматы, 1966. С. 8-52; Его же. Остатки оседлых поселений в Центральном Казахстане // Археологическтие памятники Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1978. с.3-37; Его же. Ежелгі жыр, а»ыздар. Алматы, 1985. 368 б.; Казахское народное прикладное искусство. В 3-х томах. Алматы: Ґнер, 1986-1994 и др.

55. О Х.А.Аргынбаеве и его роли в развитии этнографической науки в Казахстане подр. см.: Аджигалиев С. Этнограф Халел Аргынбаев // Наука Казахстана. 1994. № 23; См. также статью о нём в данном сборнике.

56. Об идеологической работе КПСС. Сборник документов. М., 1977. С. 577.

57. Арєынбаев Х. Ќазаќ халќыны» ќолґнері. Алматы, 1987.

58. Прим. М.С.Муканова: «И здесь как специалист могу сказать, что я не согласен с некоторыми положениями Н.Э.Масанова, но это не значит, что автор должен уступать в том, что считает принципами (основой, первоначалом) своего исследования. Единообразие мнений – это деградация мнений, вернее отсутствие их, перерождение в кому-то нужную идеологическую направленность».

59. Казахи. Историко-этнографическое исследование. Алматы, 1995. 352 с. с илл. (22,3 п.л.).

60. Типология скотоводческого хозяйства кочевников Евразии // Взаимодействие кочевых культур и древних цивилизаций. Алма-Ата, 1989; К этнической истории уаков // Проблемы изучения и охраны памятников Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1980; Этногенез казахов: проблема исторической преемственности // Проблемы этногенеза и этнической истории народов Средней Азии и Казахстана. М., 1968; Социальная огранизация кочевого общества казахов // Вестник АН КазССР. 1984. №4. и др.

61. Казахские ювелирные украшения / Сост. Ш.Тохтабаева. Алма-Ата, 1985; Тохтабаева Ш. Казахское ювелирное искусство казахов Западного Казахстана // Советская этнография. 1978. №4; Её же. Семантика казахских женских украшений // Советская этнография. 1992. №1.

62. Аджигалиев С. Генезис традиционной погребально-культовой архитектуры Западного Казахстана (на основе исследования малых форм). Алматы, 1994.

63. См. напр.: Ажигали С.Е. Религиозность и обрядность сельчан Казахстана в ближайшей ретроспективе: Жетысу, середина 80-х // Обычаи и обряды казахов в прошлом и настоящем. Сб. статей. Алматы, 2001. С. 35 – 96 с илл.; Калышев А.Б. Этнокультурные аспекты семейно бытовой жизни сельского населениясемиречья // в кн. «Современные этнокультурные процессы в Семиречье». Алматы, 1996. С. 3-26; Он же Состав семей и структура внутрисемейных отношений современного сельского населения Семиречья // Вестник КазГУ. Сер. историческая. 1996. Вып. 3. С. 144-155; Он же Родильная и детская обрядность у казахов Семиречья // Вестник Академии Гуманитарных наук РК. 1998. №1. С. 75-79.

64. Всесоюзная научная сессия по итогам полевых этнографических и антропологических исследование 1988 – 1989 гг. Тезисы докладов. В 3-х ч. Алма-Ата, 1990.

65. По данным архива отдела этнологии ИИЭ МОН РК

66. Алимбай Н., Муканов М., Аргынбаев Х. Традиционная культура жизнеобеспечения казахов. Очерки теории и истории. Алматы: Єылым, 1998. 234с. Необходимо отметить, что, почему-то, не все готовые разработки участников данной плановой темы были включены в книгу. В частности, большая статья (глава) по системе традиционного поселения казахов одного из авторов данного очерка, которая позднее была опубликована в одном из сборников в России: Ажигали С.Е. Традиционная система скотоводческого поселения казахов (в историческом развитии) // Этнографо-археологические комплексы: проблемы культуры и социума. Новосибирск, 2002. Т.5. С. 143-190.

67. Ќазаќ шежіресі хаќында. Алматы, 1999.