Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:21:01.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Russians into Iakuts? “Going Native” and Problems of Russian National Identity in the Siberian North, 1870s-1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Willard Sunderland
Willard Sunderland*
Affiliation:
Department of History, University of Cincinnati
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As far as the Russian state and most educated Russians were concerned, assimilation in the eastern borderlands of the Russian empire in the late imperial period was supposed to be a one-way street. “Backward” eastern peoples were generally supposed to become more like Russians, while Russians, for their part, were expected to change others while themselves maintaining their language, customs, religion, and overall Russianness. In reality, of course, things were rarely so straightforward. In the mixed settlement worlds of the borderlands, both Russians and non-Russians influenced one another in multiple ways, and Russian influences were not always strongest. In fact, in certain cases, contrary to official and elite expectations, it was not so much the Russians who “Russianized” the “natives” as the “natives” who “nativized” the Russians. By the late imperial period, “nativized” Russians of one kind or another could be found throughout the imperial east. In the northern Caucasus, for example, whole Russian villages looked and lived like gortsy; in the Volga-Ural region, other Russian peasants performed “pagan” sacrifices like Voguls and Maris; on the Kazakh steppe, still others had converted to Islam; and on just about every frontier one came across supposedly “Russian” cossacks who lived according to native ways and preferred to speak native languages.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 55 , Issue 4 , Winter 1996 , pp. 806 - 825
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Research for this article was supported by grants from the International Research and Exchanges Board and the Social Science Research Council. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Fifth International Congress for Central and East European Studies held in Warsaw in August 1995. My thanks to Indiana University's Research and University Graduate School and to its Russian and East European Institute for providing the travel funds that allowed me to attend the conference. I would also like to thank Ben Eklof, David Ransel, David Spaeder, Elizabeth Lehfeldt, Thomas Cragin, and the two anonymous reviewers for Slavic Review for their helpful suggestions.

1. For references to Russians “gone native” in the empire's various borderlands, see Semilutskii, A, “Selo Pokoinoe, Stavropol'skoi gubernii, Novogrigor'evskogo uezda,” Sbornik materialov dlia opisaniia mestnostei i piemen Kavkaza 23, no. 2 (1897): 316 Google Scholar; E. K., Pekarskii, “O religioznom sostoianii inorodtsev Permskoi i Orenburgskoi eparkhii,” Elnograficheskoe obozrenie 20, no. 3 (1908): 94 Google Scholar; Zemlianitskii, F, “Neskol'ko slov o vliianii cheremisskogo obshchestva na zhivushchikh v nem russkikh krest'ian v religioznom otnoshenii,” Izvesliia po Kazanskoi eparkhii, 1874, pp. 204–6Google Scholar; Sokolov, F, “Poseshchenie sviashchennikom russkikh poselentsev v kirgizskikh aulakh Nikolaevskogo uezda, Turgaiskoi oblasti,” Orenburgskie eparkhial'nye vedomosti, 1892, no. 21: 550 Google Scholar; S. G., Rybakov, “Otchet chlena-sotrudnika S. Rybakova o poezdke k kirgizam letom 1896 po porucheniiu Imperatorskogo geograficheskogo obshchestva; chast’ 1-aia: Obshchie nabliudeniia nad sovremennym bytom kirgiz,” Zhivaia starina 7, no. 2 (1897): 208 Google Scholar; and Kaufman, A. A., Pereselentsy-arendatory Turgaiskoi oblasti (St. Petersburg, 1897), 108–12Google Scholar. On cossack communities taking on “native” ways, see K. D., Loginovskii, “O byte kazakov Vostochnogo Zabaikal'ia,” Zhivaia starina 12, no. 2 (1902): 182 Google Scholar; Potanin, G. N., “Sibirskie kazaki,” Zhivopisnaia rossiia (St. Petersburg and Moscow, 1894) 11: 111–12Google Scholar; Thomas M., Barrett, “Lines of Uncertainty: The Frontiers of the North Caucasus,” Slavic Review 54, no. 3 (Fall 1995): 593–95Google Scholar; and Catherine B., Clay, “Ethnography and Mission: Imperial Russia and Muslim Turkic Peoples on the Caspian Frontier in the 1850s,” Turkish Studies Association Bulletin 18, no. 2 (1994): 36 Google Scholar.

2. For general remarks on Siberian nativization, see Armstrong, Terence E., Russian Settlement in the North (New York, 1965), 96–97Google Scholar; Gurvich, I. S., Etnicheskaia istoriia severo-vostoka Sibiri (Moscow, 1966), 196–210Google Scholar; Russkie starozhily Sibiri (Moscow, 1973), 121–57; Safronov, F. G., Russkie na severo-vostoke Azii v xvii-seredine xix v. (Moscow, 1978), 215, 219, 245Google Scholar; James, Forsyth, A History of the Peoples of Siberia: Russia's North Asian Colony, 1581–1990 (New York, 1992) 155, 198–99Google Scholar; and Stephan, John J., Tlie Russian Far East: A History (Stanford, 1994), 25 Google Scholar. For references to nativization from a culturalist perspective, see Yuri Slezkine's fascinating study of Siberia's circumpolar peoples, Arctic Mirrors: Russia and the Small Peoples of the North (Ithaca, 1994), 97–98, 119.

3. For a few major works that explore the problems of cultural representation, see Said, Edward W., Orientalism (New York, 1978)Google Scholar; James, Clifford, The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth-Century Ethnography, Literature, and Art (Cambridge, Mass., 1988)Google Scholar; Stephen, Greenblatt, Marvelous Possessions: The Wonder of the New World (Chicago, 1991)Google Scholar; and David, Richards, Masks of Difference: Cultural Representations in Literature, Anthropology, and Art (New York, 1994).Google Scholar

4. This summary is based on Yuri, Slezkine, “Naturalists versus Nations: Eighteenth-Century Russian Scholars Confront Ethnic Diversity,” Representations, 1994, no. 47: 170–95Google Scholar. On the wider European sources for Russian “ethnographic” thinking during this period, see Henri, Baudet, Paradise on Earth: Some Thoughts on European Images of Non-European Man, trans. Wentholt, Elizabeth (New Haven, 1965), 23–53Google Scholar; Duchet, Michèle, Anthropologie et histoire au Siècle des lumières: Buffon, Voltaire, Rousseau, Helvétius, Diderot (Paris, 1971) 229–473Google Scholar; and Marshall, P.J. and Williams, Glyndwr, The Great Map of Mankind: Perceptions of New Worlds in the Age of Enlightenment (London, 1982).Google Scholar

5. Yuri, Slezkine, “Savage Christians or Unorthodox Russians? The Missionary Dilemma in Siberia,” in Diment, Galya and Slezkine, Yuri, eds., Between Heaven and Hell: The Myth of Siberia in Russian Culture (New York, 1993), 18.Google Scholar

6. For discussions of assimilation, merging, Russification, and Russian nationalism in the first half of the 1800s, see Seymour, Becker, “Contributions to a Nationalist Ideology: Histories of Russia in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century,” Russian History/Histoire russe 13, no. 4 (1986): 348–51Google Scholar; Andreas, Kappeler, Russland als Vielvölherreich: Entstehung, Geschichte, Zerfall (Munich, 1992), 198–200, 204–7Google Scholar; and Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors, 81–82.

7. For a few references suggesting the inevitability of eastern peoples turning (to one degree or another) into Russians, see Plemiannikov, V, “Nravy i obychai Buzulutskikh poselian,” Moskovskii telegraf 35, no. 17 (1830): 35 Google Scholar; Skal'kovskii, A., “O Nogaiskikh tatarakh, zhivushchikh v Tavricheskoi gubernii,” Zhurnal ministerslva narodnogo prosveshcheniia, 1843, pt. 40: 188–89Google Scholar; Nicholas, Turgenev, La Russie et les russes (Paris, 1847), 2: 105–6Google Scholar; Vladimir, Islavin, Samoedy v domashnem i obshchestvennom bytu (St. Petersburg, 1847), 140–41.Google Scholar

8. S. V. Lur'e, “Rossiiskaia imperiia kak etnokul'turnyi fenomen,” Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost', 1994, no. 1: 58.

9. For Russian assumptions about how European colonists were expected to influence their Russian neighbors, see Roger, Bartlett, Human Capital: The Settlement of Foreigners in Russia, 1762–1804 (Cambridge, Eng., 1979), 214–Google Scholar; Ingeborg, Fleischhauer, Die Deutschen im Zarenreich: Zwei Jahrhunderte deutsch-russische Kulturgemeinschaft (Stuttgart, 1986) 123–33Google Scholar. On Russia's mission civilisatrice among the eastern inorodtsy, see Kappeler, Russland als Vielvölkerreich.

10. N. I., Nadezhdin, “Ob etnograficheskom izuchenii narodnosti russkoi (chast’ 1),” Etnograficheskoe obozrenie, 1994, no. 1: 116 Google Scholar. Nadezhdin's article was originally published in Zapiski russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva, 1847, vol. 2: 61–11’ .

11. On the Russian construction of otherness in different parts of the empire in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, see Kappeler, Russlandals Vielvölkerreich, 141 (the connotations of the term inorodets); Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors, 58–60, 73–80; Susan, Layton, “Eros and Empire in Russian Literature about Georgia,” Slavic Review 51, no. 2 (1992): 212 Google Scholar; and Katya Hokanson, “Literary Imperialism, Narodnost', and Pushkin's Invention of the Caucasus,” Russian Review 53, no. 3 (1994): 348–49.

12. Baron August Haxthausen, Freiherr von, The Russian Empire, Its People, Institutions, and Resources (London, 1856), 2: 4.Google Scholar

13. For the history of Russian colonization in the north, see Armstrong, Russian Settlement in the North, 46–57; Aleksandrov, V. A., Russkoe naselenie Sibiri xvii-nachala xviii v. (Eniseiskii krai) (Moscow, 1964), 59–77Google Scholar; Istoriia Sibiri, vol. 2, Sibir’ v sostave feodal'noi Rossii (Leningrad, 1968), 25–60, 181–98, 357–64; Russkie starozhily Sibiri, 13, 16, 18–19, 26–27, 33, 43–45; Minenko, N. A., “Gorodovye kazaki Obskogo severa v xviii v.,” in Russkoe naselenie Pomor'ia i Sibiri (period feodalizma) (Moscow, 1973), 336–49Google Scholar; Lantzeff, George V. and Pierce, Richard A., Eastward to Empire: Exploration and Conquest on the Russian Open Frontier, to 1750 (Montreal, 1973), 94–140, 183–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pavlov, P. N., Promyslovaia kolonizatsiia Sibiri v xvii v. (uchebnoe posobie) (Krasnoiarsk, 1974), 79–105Google Scholar; Istoriia krest'ianstva Sibiri, vol. 2, Krest'ianstvo Sibiri v epokhufeodalizma (Novosibirsk, 1982), 36–45, 157–77; Safronov, F. G., “Rasprostranenie zemledeliia na severo-vostoke Sibiri v xvii-nachale xx v.,” in Istoricheskie sviazi narodov Iakutii s russkim narodom (Iakutsk, 1987), 28–40Google Scholar; Collins, David N., “Subjugation and Settlement in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Siberia,” in Wood, Alan, ed., The History of Siberia: From Russian Conquest to Revolution (New York, 1991), 37–56.Google Scholar

14. For general descriptions of these groups, see Gurvich, Etnicheskaia istoriia severovosloka Sibiri, 9–212; Forsyth, History of the Peoples of Siberia, 10–21, 48–57, 69–75; and Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors, 1–7.

15. The archbishop of Tobol'sk (1643), quoted in Butsinskii, P. N., Zaselenie Sibiri i byt ee pervykh nasel'nikov (Khar'kov, 1889), 334 Google Scholar. On intermarriage in the seventeenth century, see Collins, “Subjugation and Settlement in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth- Century Siberia,” 43; Forsyth, History of the Peoples of Siberia, 67–68; Slezkine, Arctic Mirrors, 43–44.

16. Krasheninnikov, S. P., The History of Kamtschatka, and the Kurilski Islands, with the Countries Adjacent (Chicago, 1962), 267 Google Scholar; Zuev, V. F., Materialy po etnografii Sibiri xviii veka (1771–1772) (Moscow, 1947), 70 Google Scholar; Pallas, Peter Simon, Voyages de M. P. S. Pallas en dijferentes provinces de I'empire de Russie, et dans I'Asie septentrionale (Paris, 1793), 4: 392 Google Scholar; John Ledyard's Journey through Russia and Siberia 1787–1788: The Journal and Selected Letters (Madison, 1966), 174.

17. Gmelin, Johann Georg, Reise durch Sibirien von demjahr 1733 bis 1743 (Göttingen, 1752), 2: 370.Google Scholar

18. Castren, M. Alexander, Reiseerinnerungen aus den Jahren 1838–1844 (Leipzig, 1969), 280 Google Scholar; Ferdinand, Wrangel, Narrative of an Expedition to the Polar Sea in the Years 1820, 1821, 1822, and 1823 (Fairfield, Wash., 1981), 193 Google Scholar; Khudiakov, I. A., Kratkoe opisanie Verkhoianskogo okruga (Leningrad, 1969), 98 Google Scholar; Adolph, Erman, Travels in Siberia, including Excursions Northwards, down the Obi to the Polar Circle, and Southwards, to the Chinese Frontier (London, 1848), 2: 356 Google Scholar; Middendorff, A. T. von, Reise in den äussersten Norden und Osten Sibiriens (St. Petersburg, 1875), vol. 4, pt. 2, p. 1546 Google Scholar; Goncharov, I. A., Fregat “Pallada” (Leningrad, 1986), 513 Google Scholar. For more references to lakut linguistic and cultural influence on the Russians of Iakutsk and Iakutsk oblast’ see Uklonskii, A, “Kratkie medikotopograficheskie i chast'iu statisticheskie zamechaniia o viliuiskom okruge iakutskoi oblasti,” Zhurnal minislerslva vnulrennykh del, 1841, pt. 39: 88 Google Scholar; Makarii, , “Zametki o Iakutske i iakutakh,” Vestnik imperatorskogo russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva, 1852, pt. 4: 89 Google Scholar; and Ditmar, Karl von, “Reisen und Aufenthalt in Kamtschatka in den Jahren 1851–1855,” in Beiträge zur Kenntniss des russischen Reiches und der angrenzenden Länder Asiens, 3d ser., 7 (1890): 33.Google Scholar

19. G., Hartwig, The Polar World: A Popular Description of Man and Nature in the Arctic and Antarctic Regions of the Globe (New York, 1869), 228 Google Scholar; Gerhard, Maydell, “Reisen und Forschungen im Jakutskischen Gebiet Ostsibiriens in denjahren 1861–1871,” Beiträge zur Kenntniss des russischen Reiches und der angrenzenden Länder Asiens, 4th ser., 1 (1893): 542–43Google Scholar; Middendorff, Reise, 1546.

20. S. Shvetsov, “Ocherk Surgutskogo kraia,” Zapiski imperatorskogo russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva: Zapadnosibirskii otdel, 1888, no. 10: 71.

21. Andrievich, V. K., Sibir’ v xix stoletii (St. Petersburg, 1889), vol. 6, pt. 2, p. 349.Google Scholar

22. V., Zenzinov, Russkaia kul'tura na dalekoi okraine (Petrograd, 1915), 51–52Google Scholar. For an allusion to how strange it seemed that Iakuts were influencing Russians, also see his Road to Oblivion (New York, 1931), 48.

23. Élisée Reclus, Nouvelle géographie universelle: La terre et les homines, vol. 6, L'Asie russe (Paris, n.d.), 774.

24. Zenzinov, Russkaia kul'tura na dalekoi okraine, 51; V. Bartenev, “O russkom iazyke v Obdorskom krae,” Zhivaia starina 4, no. 1 (1894): 126.

25. P. Golovachev, “Vzaimnoe vliianie russkogo i inorodcheskogo naseleniia v Sibiri,” Zemlevedenie 10, no. 2/3 (1902): 67.

26. On the importance of language to nineteenth-century nationalisms, see E.J. Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality (New York, 1990), 51, 59–62.

27. E. P., Popov, “Nekotorye dannye po izucheniiu byta russkikh na Kolyme,” Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 19, no. 1/2 (1907): 160 Google Scholar; Vasil'ev, V., “Ugasshaia russkaia kul'tura na dal'nem severe,” Sibirskie voprosy 4, no. 1 (1908): 34 Google Scholar; Veniukov, M. I., Rossiia i vostok: Sobranie geograficheskikh i politicheskikh statei (St. Petersburg, 1877), 77.Google Scholar

28. Leskov, N, “O vliianii korel'skogo iazyka na russkii v predelakh Olonetskoi gubernii,” Zhivaia starina 2, no. 4 (1892): 97.Google Scholar

29. Pypin, A, “Russkaia narodnost’ v Sibiri,” Vestnik evropy, 1892, no. 1: 300 Google Scholar; Tret'iakov, P. I., Turukhanskii krai, egopriroda i zhiteli (St. Petersburg, 1871), 154 Google Scholar; Golovachev, “Vzaimnoe vliianie russkogo i inorodcheskogo naseleniia v Sibiri,” 65.

30. P., Golovachev, Sibir': Priroda, liudi, zhizn’ (Moscow, 1902), 145 Google Scholar; Riabkov, P, “Poliarnye strany Sibiri: Zametki i nabliudeniia v Kolymskom okruge,” Sibirskii sbornik, 1887, p. 16.Google Scholar

31. Riabkov, “Poliarnye strany Sibiri,” 16.

32. Anuchin, D, “Rasy,” Entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ (St. Petersburg, 1899), 26: 356–60.Google Scholar

33. Russian social thinkers (especially radicals) in the late imperial period tended to reject the idea of race as a permanently binding category just as they shied away from social Darwinian views of a “struggle for existence” between more advanced and less advanced racial groups. See Alexander, Vucinich, Darwin in Russian Thought (Berkeley, 1989), 384 Google Scholar; Graham, Loren R., Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: A Short History (New York, 1993), 60–64.Google Scholar

34. Eli, Weinerman, “Racism, Racial Prejudice, and Jews in Late Imperial Russia,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 17, no. 3 (1994): 448.Google Scholar

35. Take, for example, the views of the well-known explorer and statesman M. I. Veniukov who encouraged the practice of miscegenation in Central Asia as a means of increasing the “Russian element.” Racial mixing in Turkestan, Veniukov argued, neither violated “canonic laws [n]or common sense” since it would gradually lead to the formation of a “superior race [poroda] of people, such as those we see on the banks of the Terek where Russian cossacks have intermarried for ages with the daughters of Caucasian mountaineers.” M. I. Veniukov, “Postupatel'noe dvizhenie Rossii v Srednei Azii,” Sbornik gosudarstvennykh znanii 3 (1877): 64, 61. For more on Veniukov's views, see Milan Hauner, “Russia's Geopolitical and Ideological Dilemma in Central Asia,” in Canfield, R. L., ed., TurcoPersia in Historical Perspective (New York, 1991), 204–5.Google ScholarPubMed

36. For western views on race, miscegenation, and racial degeneration in the nineteenth century, see Nancy, Stepan, “Biological Degeneration: Races and Proper Places,” in Chamberlin, J. Edward and Gilman, Sander L., eds., Degeneration: The Dark Side of Progress (New York, 1985), 97–120Google Scholar; Stocking, George W. Jr., Victorian Anthropology (New York, 1987), 46–109Google Scholar; Tzvetan, Todorov, On Human Diversity: Nationalism, Racism, and Exoticism in French Thought (Cambridge, Mass., 1993), 90–Google Scholar; and Young, Robert J. C., Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture, and Race (London, 1995)Google Scholar.

37. See, for example, Tal'ko-Gryntsevich, Iu., K antropologii velikorossov: Semeiskie (staroobriadlsy) zabaikal'skie (Tomsk, 1898)Google Scholar; Zeland, N, “Antropologiia zapadno-sibirskogo krest'ianina,” Russkii antropologicheskii zhurnal, 1900, no. 3: 75–82Google Scholar; I. I., Pantiukhov, Anlropologicheskie nabliudeniia na Kavkaze (1893)Google Scholar; D. N., Anuchin, “O geograficheskom rasprostranenii rosta muzhskogo naseleniia Rossii (po dannym o vseobshchei voinskoi povinnosti za 1874–1883 g.),” Zapiski imperatorskogo russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva po otdeleniiu statistiki 7, no. 1 (1889): 1–184.Google Scholar

38. V. Vorob'ev, “Velikorussy (ocherk fizicheskogo tipa),” Russkii antropologicheskii zhurnal, 1900, no. 1: 66.

39. D. N. Anuchin, “Beglyi vzgliad na proshloe antropologii i na ee zadachi v Rossii,” Russkii antropologicheskii zhurnal, 1900, no. 1: 41.

40. V. F. Troshchanskii, “Iakuty v ikh domashnei obstanovke (etnograficheskii ocherk),” Zhivaia starina 17, no. 4 (1908): 445. For a nonderogatory description of the Iakuts’ physical traits, see Gekker, N. L., K kharakteristike fizicheskogo tipa iakutov (antropologicheskii ocherk) (Irkutsk, 1896), 89–90.Google Scholar

41. Tret'iakov, Turukhanskii krai, 171. In the west, attention to the skull, head, and prominent apelike jawbones of primitive or “degenerate” races was also common during this period, see Stepan, “Biological Degeneration,” 97–98.

42. See, for example, N., Rubakin, Razskazy o zapadnoi Sibiri Hi o guberniiakh Tobol'skoi i Tomskoi i kak tarn zhivut liudi, 4th ed. (Moscow, 1915), 61–62Google Scholar; Shternberg, L. Ia., Giliaki, Orochi, Gol'dy, Negidal'tsy, Ainy (Khabarovsk, 1933) 24 Google Scholar; Seroshevskii, V. L., Iakuty: Opyt etnograficheshogo izsledovaniia (St. Petersburg, 1896), 1: 241–42Google Scholar (on the Iukagir and Tungus); Waldemar, Bogoras, The Chukchee (New York, 1904–1909; reprint, 1975), 33.Google Scholar

43. Riabkov, “Poliarnye strany Sibiri,” 9.

44. Shvetsov, “Ocherk Surgutskogo kraia,” 6.

45. I. I., Mainov, “Pomes’ russkikh s iakutami,” Russkii antropologicheskii zhurnal, 1900, no. 4: 42, 57Google Scholar. See also his “Russkie krest'iane i osedlye inorodtsy Iakutskoi oblasti,” Zapiski imperatorskogo russkogo geografecheskogo obshchestva: Otdelenie statistiki 12 (1912).

46. A. P. Shchapov, “Istoriko-geograficheskie i etnologicheskie zametki o Sibirskom naselenii,” in his Sobranie sochinenii: Dopol'nitel'nyi torn k izdaniiu 1905–1908 gg. (Irkutsk, 1937, ) 100–104.

47. Riabkov, “Poliarnye strany Sibiri,” 12–13.

48. S., Patkanov, O priroste inorodeheskogo naseleniia Sibiri: Statisticheskie materialy dlia osveshcheniia voprosa o vymiranii pervobytnykh piemen (St. Petersburg, 1911) 179.Google Scholar

49. ladrintsev, N. M., Sibir'kak koloniia (St. Petersburg, 1882), 28–32.Google Scholar

50. Ibid, 28.

51. ladrintsev, N. M., Sibirskie inorodtsy: Ikh byt i sowemennoe polozhenie (St. Petersburg, 1891), 182, 184. 52Google Scholar. Shchapov, “Istoriko-geograficheskie i etnologicheskie zametki o Sibirskom naselenii,” 123–24.

53. Shvetsov, “Ocherk Surgutskogo kraia,” 71.

54. Golovachev, Sibir', 146.

55. Tret'iakov, Turukhanskii krai, 154.

56. Bogoras, , The Chukchee, 721; N ,” “Pokhodskaia viska,” Sibirskii sbornik 12, no. 1/2 (1897): 17.Google Scholar

57. V. G. Bogoraz, “Russkie na reke Kolyme,” Zhizn’ 6 (1899): 121; Riabkov, “Poliarnye strany Sibiri,” 36. M. A. Czaplicka also noted this phenomenon but doubted that it could truly affect Russians of European origin, see her Aboriginal Siberia: A Study in Social Anthropology (London, 1914), 324.

58. Bogoraz, “Russkie na reke Kolyme,” 106. This phenomenon was recorded in other parts of Siberia as well, see Iadrintsev, Sibirskie inorodtsy, 180–81.

59. Viktor, Bartenev, Na krainem severo-zapade Sibiri: Ocherki obdorskogo kraia (St. Petersburg, 1896), 19.Google Scholar

60. Golovachev, Sibir', 146; Zenzinov, Road to Oblivion, 167; Aziatskaia Rossiia, vol. 1, Liudi i poriadki za Uralom (St. Petersburg, 1914), 185; Bogoraz, “Russkie na reke Kolyme,” 122; V. V. Kiriakov, Ocherki po istorii pereselencheskogo dvizheniia v Sibir1 v sviazi s utoriei zaseleniia Sibiri (Moscow, 1902), 81. One ethnographer disputed reports of Russian shamanic practices in northern Enisei province, see I. A., Chekaninskii, “Sledy shamanskogo kul'ta v russko-tungusskikh poseleniiakh po reke Chune v Eniseiskoi gubernii,” Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 26, no. 3/4 (1914): 61–80.Google Scholar

61. Pypin, “Russkaia narodnost’ v Sibiri,” 294–95.

62. Vasil'ev, “Ugasshaia russkaia kul'tura na dal'nem severe,” 30–31.

63. Iadrintsev, Sibir’ kak koloniia, 10.

64. Iadrintsev, Sibirskie inorodtsy, 167–68.

65. Mainov, “Pomes’ russkikh s iakutami,” 38.

66. Iokhelson, V, “Zametki o naselenii iakutskoi oblasti v istoriko-etnograficheskom otnoshenii,” Zhivaia starina 5, no. 2 (1895): 130 Google Scholar. This attention to the dangers of colonization was very much in the air in Russia in the late imperial period when massive Russian settlement was taking place in the empire's eastern borderlands. For references to the problems Russian colonists faced, including disease, drought, floods, alien environments, homesickness, a lack of churches (a prominent concern in Siberia), “native” encirclement, and the cultural inadequacies of the settlers themselves, see I. I., Pantiukhov, “Vliianie malarii na kolonizatsiiu Kavkaza,” Kavkazskii kalendar’ na 1899 g. (Tiflis, 1898), 55 Google Scholar; Murov, G. T., Liudi i nravy Dal'nego Vostoka: Ot Vladivostoka do Khabarovska (putevoi dnevnik) (Tomsk, 1901), 149, 158Google Scholar; Kolonizatsiia Sibiri v sviazi s obshchim pereselencheskim voprosom (St. Petersburg, 1900), 366; Kulomzin, A. N., Vsepoddanneishii otchet po poezdke v Sibir’ dlia oznakomleniia s polozheniem pereselencheskogo dela (St. Petersburg, 1896), 1: 125 Google Scholar; V., Dashkevich, Pereselenie v Sibir1 (St. Petersburg, 1912), 74–75Google Scholar; Liprandi, A. P., Kavkaz i Rossiia (Khar'kov, 1911), 253 Google Scholar; and Kaufman, A. A., Pereselenie i kolonizatsiia (St. Petersburg, 1905), 345.Google Scholar

67. M. S., Vrutsevich, “Obitateli, kul'tura i zhizn’ v Iakutskoi oblasti,” Zapiski imperatorskogo russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva po otdeleniiu etnografii 17, no. 2 (1891): 27–28.Google Scholar

68. Waldemar Jochelson, Peoples of Asiatic Russia (n.p., 1928), 134.

69. Pypin, A. N., Istoriia russkoi etnografii, vol. 4, Belorussy i Sibir (St. Petersburg, 1892), 432.Google Scholar

70. N. Kharuzin, “K voprosu ob assimiliatsionnoi sposobnosti russkogo naroda,” Etnograficheskoe obozrenie, 1894, no. 4: 64–70.

71. Ibid., 76–77.

72. Ibid., 77–78.

73. For a few examples of this view, see Butsinskii, Zaselenie Sibiri i byt ee pervykh nasel'nikov, 334–35; S. Kravchinskii (Stepniak), The Russian Peasantry (New York, 1888), 85; Razumov, N. I., Zabaikal'e: Svod materialov vysochaishe uchrezhdennoi kommissii dlia izsledovaniia mestnogo zemlevladeniia i zemlepoVzovaniia, pod predsedateVstvom stats-sekretaria Kulomzina (St. Petersburg, 1899), 42.Google Scholar

74. Miropiev, M. A., 0 polozhenii russkikh inorodtsev (St. Petersburg, 1901), 289, 291.Google Scholar

75. Iokhelson, “Zametki o naselenii Iakutskoi oblasti v istoriko-etnograficheskom otnoshenii,” 128; Pypin, “Russkaia narodnost’ v Sibiri,” 302. On the purported weakness of national feeling among Russians in comparison with other “cultured” peoples, see Miropiev, O polozhenii russkikh inorodtsev, 288–89.

76. Iadrintsev, Sibir’ kak koloniia, 162; Shvetsov, “Ocherk Surgutskogo kraia,” 87; Kolonizatsiia Sibiri v sviazi s obshchim pereselencheskim voprosom (St. Petersburg, 1900), 372; Miropiev, O polozhenii russkikh inorodtsev, 297.

77. I. N., Smirnov, “Obrusenie inorodtsev i zadachi obrusitel'noi politiki,” Istoricheskii vestnik 47 (1892): 762–63.Google Scholar

78. Zygmunt, Bauman, “Modernity and Ambivalence,” Theory, Culture, and Society 7 (1990): 158 Google Scholar. Bauman's discussion of assimilation is pursued further in his monograph Modernity and Ambivalence (Ithaca, 1991).