69-82 p.

Download the article

doi.org: https://doi.org/10.22378/he.2026-11-1.69-82
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/QYMVBM

Abstract. Thie article examines the influence of L.M. Drobizheva’s legacy on the modern discussions about the essence of ethnicity. The complex nature of this phenomenon, its variability and dynamic nature, as well as its inherent connection to social context determine the epistemological difficulties of conceptualizing ethnicity. On the one hand, the most authoritative, classical rationality adheres to substantial optics. On the other hand, interdisciplinary practices that claim to transcend disciplinary boundaries are becoming increasingly relevant. This gives rise to serious problems in the consideration of objects of complex synthetic nature, in the particularities of procedural processes, which entail the temptation of reductionism. The disciplinary landscape of ethnosociology is outlined as a space of competition between proponents and opponents of the “anthropological turn.” While the former aim to reduce ethnicity to identity, the latter seek foundations that synthesize the most effective scientific approaches for studying ethnic phenomena. The significance of L.M. Drobizheva’s ideas and the contributions of her mentors and followers to the search for such foundations have been revealed. In collaboration with Yuri Arutyunyan, she proposed a multi-paradigmatic methodology for the systemic study of ethnicity, which integrates structural and phenomenological perspectives. This methodology formed the basis for studying the ethnosocial situation in post-Soviet Russia. Leokadia M. Drobizheva’s commitment to classical scientific rationality in substantiating the complementarity of ethnic and civic identities is emphasized. The study of the social interior in the context of which ethnicity is reproduced remains an urgent task that cannot be solved without an analysis of the objective, network and institutional factors of its reproduction. Developing the ideas of the Novosibirsk academic ethnosociological school on ethnosocial processes as a subject of ethnosociology, we propose to consider ethnosocial dynamics in the unity of two foundations of social structuring: first, as a form of cultural distinction based on the network self-organization of society and secondly, as a status position included in the space of social stratification. From this perspective, ethnicity appears to be the result of social forces that influence human activity and behavior through the choices they make.

Keywords: ethnosociology; ethnic diversity; ethnicity; L.M. Drobizheva; “anthropological turn”; epistemology of socio-humanistic studies

For citation: Erokhina E.A. (2026). Leokadia Mikhailovna Drobizheva’s legacy in the context of the discussion about the nature of ethnicity. Istoricheskaya etnologiya [Historical Ethnology]. Vol. 11. No. 1: 69–82. https://doi.org/10.22378/he.2026-11-1.69-82 (In Russ.)

REFERENCES

Alymov S.S., Perepelkin L.S. et all. (2022) Post-mortem ethnos: reflections and comments. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review]. No. 6: 102–131. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869541522060070 (In Russ.)
Arutunyan Yu.V., Drobizheva L.M., Susokolov A. A. (1998) Ethnosociology: a textbook for universities. Moscow: Aspekt Press Publ. (In Russ.)
Barth F. (2006) Introduction. In: Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: Social Organization of Culture Difference. Moscow: Novoye Izdatel’stvo Publ.: 9–48. (In Russ.)
Bromley Yu.V. (1981) Modern Problems of Ethnography (essays on theory and history). Moscow: Nauka Publ. (In Russ.)
Bourdieu P. (1994) Things say. Moscow: SocioLogos Publ. (In Russ.)
Drobizheva L.M. (2006) Methodological problems of ethnosocial research. Sotsiologicheskiy zhurnal [Sociological Journal]. No. 3/4: 90-101. (In Russ.)
Drobizheva L.M. (2013). “Science is life and calling”. Sotsiologicheskiy zhurnal [Sociological Journal]. No. 1: 135–143. (In Russ.)
Drobizheva L.M. (2005) Ethnosociology today. Problems of methodology of interdisciplinary research. In: Interdisciplinary Research in the Context of Socio-Cultural Anthropology. Moscow: Nauka Publ.: 14–25. (In Russ.)
Fais-Leutskaya O.D. (2021) Yu. V. Bromley: a new word in science heard in Europe. Vestnik antropologii [Bulletin of Anthropology]. No. 1 (53): 24–32. https://doi.org/10.33876/2311-0546/2021-53-1/24-32 (In Russ.)
Golovnev A.V. (2016) Ethnocultural potential and polyethnicity (Russian perspective). Vestnik Tomskogo gosuniversiteta. Istoriya [Bulletin of Tomsk State University. History]. No. 4 (42): 61–67. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988613/42/11. (In Russ.)
Ilyin V.I. (2000) Social Inequality. Moscow: Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sсiences Publ. (In Russ.)
Karlov V.V. (2021) Yu.V. Bromley and the “Bromley period” of Russian ethnology. Vestnik antropologii [Bulletin of Anthropology]. No. 1(53): 9–23. https://doi.org/10.33876/2311-0546/2021-53-1/9-23. (In Russ.)
Kryukov M.V. (2023) How beautiful, how fresh the roses were then… Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review]. No. 5: 63–95. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869541523050056. (In Russ.)
Nizamova L.R. (2009) Complex concept of modern ethnicity: limits and possibilities of theoretical synthesis. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology]. Vol. 12. No. 1: 141–159. (In Russ.)
Popkov Yu.V. (2024) Anthropological revolution and challenges for ethnosociology (an invitation to discussion). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 9: 43–55. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0132162524090047. (In Russ.)
Popkov Yu.V., Tugashev E.A. (2009) The subject of ethnosociology: an experience of conceptualization. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 3: 93–101. (In Russ.)
Semenov Yu. I. (2006) There is hardly any point in rushing with a funeral prayer for an ethnic group (On the main ideas of the book by V.A. Tishkov “Requiem for an Ethnos. Studies in Socio-Cultural Anthropology”. Moscow, 2004). Filosofiya i obshchestvo [Philosophy and Society]. Issue 2 (43): 94–106. (In Russ.)
Sokolovskiy S.V. (1993) Ethnographic research: ideal and reality. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review]. No. 2: 3–13. (In Russ.)
Tishkov V.A. (2003) Requiem for an Ethnos: Studies in Socio-Cultural Anthropology. Moscow: Nauka Publ. (In Russ.)
Verkhovtsev D.V. (2022) Post-mortem ethnos: Soviet theories of ethnos in contemporary Russian language discourse. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review]. No. 6: 79–101. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869541522060069 (In Russ.)
 

About the author: Elena A. Erokhina, Doctor Sc. (Philosophy), Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Humanities, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management (56 Lomonosov St., Novosibirsk 630099, Russian Federation); https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1513-4557; e-mail: leroh@mail.ru

Received 01.10.2025 Revised 17.11.2025   Accepted for publication 01.12.2025

Published Online 02.03.2026