a historically emerged type of stable social grouping of people, represented by racial, linguistic or national identity. The term is imprecise, as a distinction is sometimes made between cultural and political ethnicity. Moreover, racial attributes are not always the defining characteristics of ethnic groups.
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
ETHNOS
a localized large community of people, consolidated as a form of their active adaptation to the regional conditions of the natural environment through a developed unique way of activity - culture. In the existing discussion on the problem of ethnicity, one of the points of view, presented in concentrated form in the works of Yu. V. Bromley, defines ethnicity as a phenomenon by its nature, that is, by genesis and essence, social. Its sociality is determined by the fact that it is a product of the objective process of division of labor, the formation and development of economic and political social structures. The content of the concept of E. is formed by a set of features in their integrativeness. These include: the presence of a certain group of people who have a common territory of residence and activity; the presence of a stable self-name, an ethnonym that is transformed in the languages of other peoples; self-awareness through the antithesis “we - they”, including historical memory, knowledge about the emergence and historical stages of the life of one’s ethnic group, national feelings and interests; general culture including language, religion, etc.
This principle of determining E. by listing its various characteristics is methodologically not entirely justified, since it allows one to exclude some characteristics and introduce others. And if any of the signs of E., and in some cases several of them, are absent, which in reality occurs often, it is impossible to consider a given society as an ethnic community. This approach does not present the functional purpose of ethnic determinants; for example, the need for a common territory is emphasized, but it is unclear how the territory “forms” ethnicity. Finally, the question here is not about the very essence of ethnicity, but only about individual aspects of the existence of real ethnic communities. Therefore, there is a need to search for a single ultimate basis for the existence of E., which determines the representation of humanity through a set of ethnic groups that are not similar to one another. This approach to the problem of the nature and essence of energy is presented, in particular, in the concept of L. N. Gumilyov. He views ecology as the result of a creative process of intensive development by a community of people of a unique natural landscape, or more precisely, a zone of their optimal combination. In the process of developing the landscape, the community forms a new unique “stereotype of behavior.” This concept, including a special way of activity and relationship to the world, characterizes E. as a bearer of a certain cultural type, if we understand culture as a specific “technology of activity.” This approach assumes the idea of the constancy of ethnic differences, due to the constancy of the natural conditions of different regions; the idea of a discrepancy between the ethnic and social “rhythms” of human history (E. are considered not as a form of socio-economic processes, but as independent phenomena, the functioning and interaction of which largely determine the course of history). Gradual death through simplification of the internal structure is the fate of all E. To maintain its viability, an ethnic community creates social, political structures, institutions, but ethnogenesis is of a deep nature, and processes, for example, ethnic aging, do not depend on the nature of the social system, political system, etc. d.
The idea of searching for an objective basis for the phenomenon of ecology in the interaction of man and nature has a long historical and philosophical tradition. The question of the nature of E. was considered within the framework of the so-called. "geographical determinism". Such a phenomenon as the “spirit of the people” (Montesquieu), the “temperament of races” (L. Woltman), the “national idea” (E. Renan), which determines the entire economic, political, social life of the people, depends on climatic, landscape and other natural conditions. Thus, L. Woltman considers two types of factors as determining the form and method of government: first, natural conditions and the type of economy; secondly, the psychological characteristics of peoples. I. G. Herder, also analyzing the features of the political life of peoples, comes to the conclusion about the influence of natural conditions and ethnic dynamics on the features of statehood. Sociology of the 19th century. represented, in particular, by F. G. Giddings, already makes such phenomena as social structure and methods of organizing the social life of peoples dependent on the conditions of the natural environment. Thus, common to representatives of this trend in social science is the idea that social structures correspond to the natural “sacred law of development” (L. Woltman) of individual peoples, and it is this correspondence that should be the highest criterion for the activities of management structures. Later, this idea was developed by a variety of trends in historical, sociological, and social-philosophical science, from Russian Slavophilism, the philosophy of N. Ya. Danilevsky, N. A. Berdyaev to modern foreign historiography, in particular, the works of F. Braudel. Here we can point to the works of sociologists of the 19th century: K. Ritter, G. T. Boklya, F. Ratzel, N. Kareev, L. I. Mechnikov and others.
If, according to its objective grounds, ecology is considered a natural phenomenon, or more precisely, a “territorial” one, then according to the methods of self-organization, it is a sociocultural phenomenon. Indeed, connecting the solution to the question of the representation of the human race through a set of ethnic groups with the representation of the earth's surface through a system of territorial landscape zones, one cannot help but raise the following question: what is the criterion for the sustainability of each individual E., given that territorial integrity for many peoples Is it lost over time or does E. end up distributed within several landscape zones? What acts as an intra-ethnic system-forming factor that “protects” E. from the penetration of “alien” elements into the system? There are also a number of research approaches here. Some authors consider ethnic endogamy and heredity as such a criterion and factor. However, we must take into account that the processes of reproduction of the gene pool are influenced by historical and cultural traditions, conquests, habits, and the standard of living of the people. Heredity is embodied, in particular, in the characteristics of the anthropological type. But it is known that anthropological typology does not have an absolute coincidence with the ethnic structure of society. Other authors see ethnic constants in the self-awareness of the people. The origins of this approach lie in the social sciences of the Enlightenment. But ethnic self-awareness also acts as a reflection of the joint activities of a given human collective; the specificity and uniqueness of the worldview of a particular people is determined by the specifics of its activities in developing the environment. The same activity is carried out differently by different peoples; each people perceives the same aspects of reality in its own way. Culture as a “set of methods of human activity”, “technology of activity” and the specific historical and social experience accumulated on its basis, enshrined in traditions, in ethnic memory, is an extra-biological stable mechanism constituting a unique integrity, autonomy and relative stability of E. He exists as a community of people with common economic and cultural characteristics and, at the same time, a common historical destiny; the concept of economics defines precisely the measure of the relationship between a single economic and cultural type and a common historical destiny.
E. is a dynamic system undergoing a continuous internal transformation process, however, having some stability in its variability. Culture is a factor and criterion of ethnic stability, a system of intra-ethnic constants. Of course, there is internal variability in culture itself: it changes from era to era, from one social group within E. to another. But as long as it retains its qualitative originality, Egypt exists as an autonomous whole, even if it loses a single territory, language, unity of the anthropological type, etc. National culture, primarily through traditions: moral, religious, etc., has a decisive influence and on the effect of the actual biological factors of self-reproduction of E., such as ethnic endogamy, which is a way of preserving the national gene pool. The qualitative uniqueness of culture constitutes those most stable patterns of activity that develop during the formation of the ethnic system and are determined by the specifics of the “ethnic homeland” and which E. “takes with him”, “traveling in space and time.” They constitute a “code” of intra-ethnic information, forming for E. his special attitude to the world, organically linking his previous and subsequent states in time.
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
Ethnos? The answer to this question is not always the same. The word "ethnos" itself is of Greek origin, but it has nothing in common with today's meaning. People is exactly how it is translated, and in Greece there were several concepts of this word. Namely, the word “ethnicity” was derogatory in nature - “herd”, “swarm”, “flock” and in most cases was applied to animals.
What is ethnicity today? Ethnicity is a group of people that was formed historically and was united by common cultural and linguistic characteristics. In Russian, the concept of “ethnos” is close in meaning to the concepts of “people” or “tribe”. And to make it more clear, both of these concepts should be characterized.
A people is a specific group of people that is distinguished by common characteristics. This includes territory, language, religion, culture, historical past. One of the main signs is, but this is not the only condition. There are quite a lot of peoples who speak the same language. For example, Austrians, Germans and some Swiss use German. Or the Irish, Scots and Welsh, who, one might say, have completely switched to English, but at the same time do not consider themselves English. This means that in this case the word “people” can be replaced by the term “ethnic group”.
A tribe is also a group of people, but one that feels related to each other. A tribe may not have one compact territory of residence, and its claims to any territory may not be recognized by other groups. By one definition, a tribe has common characteristics that are clearly distinct: origin, language, traditions, religion. Another definition states that it is enough to have faith in a common bond, and you are already considered one tribe. The latter definition is more suitable for political unions.
But let's return to the main question - “what is ethnicity”. It began its formation 100 thousand years ago, and before that there were such concepts as family, then clan, and the clan completed everything. Mainstream scholars interpret differently. Some name only language and culture, others add a general location, and still others add a general psychological essence.
Each ethnic group has its own behavioral stereotype and, of course, a unique structure. Internal ethnicity is a specific norm of relations between the individual and the collective and between the individuals themselves. This norm is tacitly accepted in all areas of everyday life and is perceived as the only way to live together. And for members of a given ethnic group, this form is not a burden, since they are accustomed to it. And vice versa, when a representative of one ethnic group comes into contact with the norms of behavior of another, he may become confused and greatly surprised by the eccentricities of an unfamiliar people.
Since ancient times, our country has combined various ethnic groups. Some ethnic groups of Russia were part of it from the very beginning, while others joined gradually, at different stages of history. But they all have equal rights and responsibilities to the state and are part of the people of Russia. They have a common education system, common legal and legal norms and, of course, a common Russian language.
All Russians are obliged to know the diversity of the ethnic group of their country and get acquainted with the culture of each of them. Have at least a basic understanding of what an ethnic group is. Without this, harmonious existence within a single state is impossible. Unfortunately, over the past 100 years, 9 nationalities have disappeared as an ethnic group and another 7 are on the verge of extinction. For example, the Evenks (aboriginals of the Amur region) have a stable tendency to disappear. There are already about 1,300 of them left. As you can see, the numbers speak for themselves, and the process of disappearance of the ethnic group continues irreversibly.
A little
about nations, ethnic groups and scientific approaches.
About some concepts.
Ethnology from the Greek words - ethnos - people and logos - word, judgment - the science of the peoples of the world (ethnic groups, more precisely,
Its dissemination is due to the famous French physicist and thinker M. Ampere, who determined the place of ethnology in the system of the humanities along with history, archeology and other disciplines. At the same time, ethnology included, according to
Ampere's thoughts, as a subdiscipline of physical anthropology (the science of the physical properties of individual ethnic
groups: hair and eye color, structure of the skull and skeleton, blood, etc.). In the 19th century in Western European countries
ethnological research developed successfully. Along with the term “ethnology”, another name for this science has become widespread - ethnography.
– from the Greek words – ethnos – people and grapho – I write, i.e. description of peoples, their history and cultural characteristics. However, in
second half of the 19th century the prevailing point of view was that ethnography was viewed as
predominantly a descriptive science based on field materials, and ethnology as a theoretical discipline,
based on ethnographic data. Finally, the French ethnologist K. Lévi-Strauss believed that ethnography, ethnology and anthropology - three successive stages in the development of human science: ethnography represents the descriptive stage of the study of ethnic groups, field
research and classification; ethnology – synthesis of this knowledge and its systematization; anthropology seeks to study
man in all his manifestations. As a result, at different times and in different countries, preference was given to any of these terms, depending on
developed tradition. Thus, in France the term “ethnology” (l’ethnologie) still prevails, in England along with it
The concept of “social anthropology” (ethnology, social anthropology) is widely used; in the USA the designation
This science is “cultural anthropology”. In the Russian tradition
the terms “ethnology” and “ethnography” were initially considered synonymous. However, since the late 1920s. in the USSR ethnology, along with sociology, began to be considered
"bourgeois" science. Therefore, in the Soviet era, the term “ethnology” was almost completely replaced by the term “ethnography”. In recent years, however,
the prevailing tendency is to call this science, following Western and American models, ethnology or sociocultural
anthropology.
What is an ethnos, or ethnic group (more precisely, an ethnic community or ethnic
group)? This understanding varies greatly in different disciplines - ethnology,
psychology, sociology and representatives of different scientific schools and directions. Here
briefly about some of them.
Thus, many Russian ethnologists continue to consider ethnicity as a real
existing concept - a social group that emerged during the historical
development of society (V. Pimenov). According to Yu. Bromley, ethnicity is historically
a stable population of people that has developed in a certain territory and has
common relatively stable features of language, culture and psyche, and
also by awareness of one’s unity (self-awareness), fixed in self-name.
The main thing here is self-awareness and a common self-name. L. Gumilev understands ethnicity
primarily as a natural phenomenon; this is one or another group of people (dynamic
system), opposing itself to other similar groups (we are not
we), having its own special internal
structure and a given stereotype of behavior. Such an ethnic stereotype, according to
Gumilyov, is not inherited, but is acquired by the child in the process
cultural socialization and is quite strong and unchanged throughout
human life. S. Arutyunov and N. Cheboksarov considered ethnicity as spatially
limited clusters of specific cultural information, and interethnic
contacts – as an exchange of such information. There is also a point of view according to
which ethnicity is, like race, an initially, eternally existing community
people, and belonging to it determines their behavior and national character.
According to the extreme point of view, belonging to an ethnic group is determined by birth -
at present, practically no one shares it among serious scientists.
In foreign anthropology, there has recently been a widespread belief that ethnos
(or rather an ethnic group, since foreign anthropologists avoid using
the word "ethnicity") is an artificial construct that arose as a result of purposeful
efforts of politicians and intellectuals. However, most researchers agree that ethnos (ethnic group)
represents one of the most stable groups, or communities, of Lyuli.
This is an intergenerational community, stable over time, with a stable composition, with
In this case, each person has a stable ethnic status, it is impossible to “exclude” him
from the ethnic group.
In general, it should be noted that the theory of ethnos is the favorite brainchild of domestic
scientists; in the West, problems of ethnicity are discussed in a completely different way.
Western scientists have priority in developing the theory of the nation.
Back in 1877, E. Renan gave a statist definition of the concept of “nation”: a nation unites
all residents of a given state, regardless of their race or ethnicity. Religious
accessories, etc. Since the 19th century.
Two models of the nation took shape: French and German. French model following
Renan, corresponds to the understanding of the nation as a civil community
(state) based on political choice and civic kinship.
The reaction to this French model was the model of the German romantics, appealing
to the “voice of blood”, according to her, a nation is an organic community connected
general culture. Currently, they talk about “Western” and “Eastern” models of society,
or about the civil (territorial) and ethnic (genetic) models of the nation, Quite a lot
scientists believe that the idea of a nation is often used for political purposes - by the ruling
or those wishing to gain power by groupings. What
concerns ethnic groups, or ethnic groups (ethnic groups), then in foreign, and in recent times
years and in domestic science it is customary to distinguish three main approaches to this
range of problems – primordialist, constructivist and instrumentalist
(or situationist).
A few words about each of them:
One of the “pioneers” in the study of ethnicity, whose research had a huge impact on social science,
there was a Norwegian scientist F. Barth, who argued that ethnicity is one of the forms
social organization, culture (ethnic – socially organized
variety of culture). He also introduced the important concept of “ethnic border” - el
that critical feature of an ethnic group beyond which attribution to it ends
members of this group itself, as well as assignment to it by members of other groups.
In the 1960s, like other theories of ethnicity, the theory of primordialism (from the English primordial - original) was put forward.
The direction itself arose much earlier, it goes back to the already mentioned
ideas of the German romantics, his followers considered ethnos to be the original and
an unchanging unification of people according to the principle of “blood”, i.e. possessing unchanging
signs. This approach was developed not only in German, but also in Russian
ethnology. But more on that later. In the 1960s. did not become widespread in the West
biological-racial, but a “cultural” form of primordialism. Yes, one of her
founders, K. Geertz argued that ethnic self-awareness (identity) refers
to “primordial” feelings and that these primordial feelings largely determine
people's behavior. These feelings, however, wrote K. Geertz, are not innate,
but arise in people as part of the socialization process and subsequently exist
as fundamental, sometimes – as unchangeable and determining people’s behavior –
members of the same ethnic group. The theory of primordialism has repeatedly been subject to serious criticism, especially
from supporters of F. Barth. So D. Baker noted that feelings are changeable and
situationally determined and cannot generate the same behavior.
As a reaction to primordialism, ethnicity began to be understood as an element of ideology (attributing oneself to
this group or attributing someone to it by members of other groups). Ethnicity and ethnic groups became
also be considered in the context of the struggle for resources, power and privileges. .
Before characterizing other approaches to ethnicity (ethnic groups), it would be appropriate to recall the definition
given to an ethnic group by the German sociologist M. Weber. According to him, this
a group of people whose members have a subjective belief in a common
descent due to similarity in physical appearance or customs, or both
another together, or because of common memory. What is emphasized here is
BELIEF in common origin. And in our time, many anthropologists believe that the main thing
the IDEA of community can be a differentiating feature for an ethnic group
origin and/or history.
In general, in the West, in contrast to primordialism and under the influence of Barth’s ideas, they received the greatest
dissemination of the constructivist approach to ethnicity. His supporters believed
ethnicity is a construct created by individuals or elites (powerful, intellectual,
cultural) with certain goals (struggle for power, resources, etc.). Many
also especially emphasize the role of ideology (primarily nationalisms) in the construction
ethnic communities. Followers of constructivism include English
scientist B. Anderson (his book bears the “talking” and expressive title “Imaginary
community" - fragments of it were posted on this site), E. Gellner (about him too
discussed on this site) and many others whose works are considered classics.
At the same time, some scientists are not satisfied with the extremes of both approaches. There are attempts to “reconcile” them:
attempts to present ethnic groups as “symbolic” communities based on
sets of symbols - again, belief in a common origin, a common past, a common
fate, etc. Many anthropologists especially emphasize that ethnic groups arose
relatively recently: they are not immemorial and unchangeable, but change under
the impact of specific situations, circumstances - economic, political and
etc.
In domestic science, the theory of ethnos has become especially popular, and, initially
in its extreme primordialist (biological) interpretation. It was developed by S.M. Shirokogorov, who
considered an ethnos as a biosocial organism, highlighting its main
characteristics of origin, as well as language, customs, way of life and tradition
[Shirokogorov, 1923. P. 13]. In many ways, his follower was L.N. Gumilev,
partly continuing this tradition, he considered ethnicity as a biological system,
especially highlighting passionarity as the highest stage of its development [Gumilyov, 1993]. About
Quite a lot has been written about this approach, but now few serious researchers
completely shares the views of L.N. Gumilyov, which can be considered an extreme expression
primordialist approach. This theory has its roots in the views of German
romantics on a nation or ethnic group from the position of “common blood and soil”, i.e.
some kind of consanguineous group. Hence L.N.’s intolerance. Gumilyov to
mixed marriages, the descendants of which he considered “chimerical formations”,
connecting the incompatible.
P.I. Kushner believed that ethnic groups differ from each other in a number of specific characteristics,
among which the scientist especially highlighted language, material culture (food, housing,
clothes, etc.), as well as ethnic identity [Kushner, 1951, pp. 8-9].
The studies of S.A. stand apart from the range of domestic studies. Arutyunov and N.N.
Cheboksarova. According to them, “...ethnic groups are spatially limited
“clumps” of specific cultural information, and interethnic contacts are an exchange
such information”, and information connections were considered as the basis for the existence
ethnicity [Arutyunov, Cheboksarov, 1972. P.23-26]. In a later work by S.A. Arutyunova
an entire chapter devoted to this problem bears a telling title: “Network
communications as the basis of ethnic existence" [Arutyunov, 2000]. Introduction to
ethnic groups as specific “clumps” of cultural information and
internal information communications is very close to the modern understanding of any
systems as a kind of information field, or information structure. IN
further S.A. Arutyunov directly writes about this [Arutyunov, 2000. P. 31, 33].
A characteristic feature of the theory of ethnos is that its followers consider
ethnic groups as a universal category, i.e. people, according to it, belonged to
to some ethnic group/ethnic group, much less often to several ethnic groups. Supporters
this theory believed that ethnic groups were formed in one or another historical
period and transformed in accordance with changes in society. Influence of Marxist
theory was also expressed in attempts to correlate the development of ethnic groups with the five-member division
development of humanity - the conclusion that each socio-economic formation
corresponds to its type of ethnic group (tribe, slave-holding nation, capitalist
nationality, capitalist nation, socialist nation).
Subsequently, the theory of ethnos was developed by many Soviet researchers, including
features of Yu.V. Bromley, which
believed that ethnicity is “...a historically established
in a certain area
a stable collection of people who have relatively stable common
peculiarities of language, culture and psyche, as well as the consciousness of its unity and
differences from other similar formations (self-awareness), fixed in
self-designation" [Bromley, 1983. pp. 57-58]. Here we see the impact of ideas
primordialism - S. Shprokogorov, and M. Weber.
The theory of Yu.V. Bromley, like his supporters, was rightly criticized back in the Soviet period.
So, M.V. Kryukov has repeatedly and, in my opinion, quite rightly noted
the artificiality of this entire system of nationalities and nations [Kryukov, 1986. P.58-69].
EAT. Kolpakov, for example, points out that under Bromley’s definition of ethnos
many groups are suitable, not only ethnic ones [Kolpakov, 1995. P. 15].
Since the mid-1990s,
views close to constructivist. According to them, ethnic groups are not real
existing communities, but constructs created by the political elite or
scientists for practical purposes (for more details see: [Tishkov, 1989. P. 84; Tishkov,
2003. P. 114; Cheshko, 1994. P. 37]). So, according to V.A. Tishkova (one of the works
which bears the expressive title “Requiem for an Ethnicity”), Soviet scientists themselves
created a myth about the unconditionally objective reality of ethnic communities, as
certain archetypes [Tishkov, 1989. P.5], but the researcher himself considers ethnic groups artificial
constructions that exist only in the heads of ethnographers [Tishkov, 1992], or
the result of elite efforts to construct ethnicity [Tishkov, 2003. P.
118]. V.A. Tishkov defines an ethnic group as a group of people whose members have
common name and elements of culture, a myth (version) about a common origin and
common historical memory, associate themselves with a special territory and have a sense of
solidarity [Tishkov, 2003. P.60]. Again - the influence of the ideas of Max Weber expressed
almost a century ago...
Not all researchers share this point of view, which was formed not without the influence of ideas
M. Weber, for example, S.A. Arutyunov, who has repeatedly criticized it [Arutyunov,
1995. P.7]. Some researchers working in line with Soviet theory
ethnic group, consider ethnic groups to be an objective reality that exists independently of our
consciousness.
I would like to note that, despite the sharp criticism addressed to supporters of the theory of ethnos,
the views of constructivist researchers are not so radically different from
first glances. In the definitions of ethnic groups or ethnic groups given
listed by the scientists, we see a lot in common, although the attitude towards the defined
objects diverge. Moreover, wittingly or unwittingly, many researchers
repeat the definition of an ethnic group given by M. Weber. I'll repeat it again
times: an ethnic group is a group of people whose members have subjective
belief in a common origin due to similar physical appearance or customs,
or both together, or due to shared memory. Thus, the main provisions
M. Weber had a noticeable impact on various approaches to the study of ethnicity.
Moreover, his definition of an ethnic group was sometimes used almost verbatim
supporters of different paradigms.
The concept of “ethnicity” includes a historically established stable group of people who have a certain number of common subjective or objective characteristics. Ethnographic scientists include these characteristics as origin, language, cultural and economic characteristics, mentality and self-awareness, phenotypic and genotypic data, as well as the territory of long-term residence.
The word "ethnicity" has Greek roots and is literally translated as “people”. The word “nationality” can be considered a synonym for this definition in Russian. The term “ethnos” was introduced into scientific terminology in 1923 by the Russian scientist S.M. Shirokogorov. He gave the first definition of this word.
How does the formation of an ethnic group occur?
The ancient Greeks adopted the word “ethnos” designate other peoples who were not Greeks. For a long time, the word “people” was used in the Russian language as an analogue. Definition of S.M. Shirokogorova made it possible to emphasize the commonality of culture, relationships, traditions, way of life and language.
Modern science allows us to interpret this concept from 2 points of view:
The origin and formation of any ethnic group implies great length of time. Most often, such formation occurs around a certain language or religious beliefs. Based on this, we often pronounce such phrases as “Christian culture”, “Islamic world”, “Romance group of languages”.
The main conditions for the emergence of an ethnic group are the presence common territory and language. These same factors subsequently become supporting factors and the main distinguishing features of a particular ethnic group.
Additional factors influencing the formation of an ethnic group include:
- General religious beliefs.
- Intimacy from a racial perspective.
- The presence of transitional interracial groups (mestizo).
Factors that unite an ethnic group include:
- Specific features of material and spiritual culture.
- Community of life.
- Group psychological characteristics.
- General awareness of oneself and the idea of a common origin.
- The presence of an ethnonym - a self-name.
Ethnicity is essentially a complex dynamic system that is constantly undergoing processes of transformation and at the same time maintains its stability.
The culture of each ethnic group maintains a certain constancy and at the same time changes over time from one era to another. Features of national culture and self-knowledge, religious and spiritual-moral values leave an imprint on the nature of the biological self-reproduction of an ethnic group.
Features of the existence of ethnic groups and their patterns
The historically formed ethnos acts as an integral social organism and has the following ethnic relations:
- Self-reproduction occurs through repeated homogeneous marriages and the transmission from generation to generation of traditions, identity, cultural values, language and religious characteristics.
- In the course of their existence, all ethnic groups undergo a number of processes within themselves - assimilation, consolidation, etc.
- In order to strengthen their existence, most ethnic groups strive to create their own state, which allows them to regulate relations both within themselves and with other groups of peoples.
The laws of peoples can be considered behavioral models of relationships, which are typical for individual representatives. This also includes behavioral models that characterize individual social groups emerging within a nation.
Ethnicity can simultaneously be considered as a natural-territorial and sociocultural phenomenon. Some researchers propose to consider the hereditary factor and endogamy as a kind of connecting link that supports the existence of a particular ethnic group. However, it cannot be denied that the quality of a nation’s gene pool is significantly influenced by conquests, living standards, and historical and cultural traditions.
The hereditary factor is tracked primarily in anthropometric and phenotypic data. However, anthropometric indicators do not always completely coincide with ethnicity. According to another group of researchers, the constancy of an ethnic group is due to national identity. However, such self-awareness can simultaneously act as an indicator of collective activity.
The unique self-awareness and perception of the world of a particular ethnic group may directly depend on its activities in developing the environment. The same type of activity can be perceived and evaluated differently in the minds of different ethnic groups.
The most stable mechanism that allows preserving the uniqueness, integrity and stability of an ethnic group is its culture and common historical destiny.
Ethnicity and its types
Traditionally, ethnicity is considered primarily as a generic concept. Based on this idea, it is customary to distinguish three types of ethnic groups:
- Clan-tribe (species characteristic of primitive society).
- Nationality (a characteristic type in the slave and feudal centuries).
- Capitalist society is characterized by the concept of nation.
There are basic factors that unite representatives of one people:
Clans and tribes historically were the very first types of ethnic groups. Their existence lasted several tens of thousands of years. As the way of life and the structure of mankind developed and became more complex, the concept of nationality appeared. Their appearance is associated with the formation of tribal unions in the common territory of residence.
Factors in the development of nations
Today in the world there are several thousand ethnic groups. They all differ in level of development, mentality, numbers, culture and language. There may be significant differences based on race and physical appearance.
For example, the number of ethnic groups such as Chinese, Russians, and Brazilians exceeds 100 million people. Along with such gigantic peoples, there are varieties in the world whose number does not always reach ten people. The level of development of different groups can also vary from the most highly developed to those living according to primitive communal principles. For every nation it is inherent own language However, there are also ethnic groups that simultaneously use several languages.
In the process of interethnic interactions, processes of assimilation and consolidation are launched, as a result of which a new ethnic group can gradually form. The socialization of an ethnic group occurs through the development of such social institutions as family, religion, school, etc.
The unfavorable factors for the development of a nation include the following:
- High mortality rate among the population, especially in childhood.
- High prevalence of respiratory infections.
- Alcohol and drug addiction.
- Destruction of the family institution - a high number of single-parent families, divorces, abortions, and parental abandonment of children.
- Low quality of life.
- High unemployment rate.
- High crime rate.
- Social passivity of the population.
Classification and examples of ethnicity
Classification is carried out according to a variety of parameters, the simplest of which is number. This indicator not only characterizes the state of the ethnic group at the current moment, but also reflects the nature of its historical development. Usually, formation of large and small ethnic groups proceeds along completely different paths. The level and nature of interethnic interactions depends on the size of a particular ethnic group.
Examples of the largest ethnic groups include the following (according to data from 1993):
The total number of these peoples is 40% of the total population of the globe. There is also a group of ethnic groups with a population of 1 to 5 million people. They make up about 8% of the total population.
Most small ethnic groups may number several hundred people. As an example, we can cite the Yukaghir, an ethnic group living in Yakutia, and the Izhorians, a Finnish ethnic group inhabiting territories in the Leningrad region.
Another classification criterion is population dynamics in ethnic groups. Minimal population growth is observed in Western European ethnic groups. The maximum growth is observed in the countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
ETHNOS, -a, m. (2nd half of the 20th century). Historically established stable social community of people; tribe, people, nation. The state of the German ethnic group in Russia. This is typical for any ethnic group..
Greek ethnos - people, tribe.
L.M. Bash, A.V. Bobrova, G.L. Vyacheslova, R.S. Kimyagarova, E.M. Sendrowitz. Modern dictionary of foreign words. Interpretation, word usage, word formation, etymology. M., 2001, p. 922.
Classification of ethnic groups
CLASSIFICATION OF ETHNOSIS - the distribution of ethnic groups of the world into semantic groups depending on certain characteristics and parameters of this type of community of people. There are several classifications and groups, but the most common of them are the areal and ethnolinguistic classifications. In the areal classification, peoples are grouped into large regions, called historical-ethnographic or traditional-cultural regions, within which, in the process of long-term historical development, a certain cultural community has developed. This commonality can be traced primarily in various elements of material culture, as well as in individual phenomena of spiritual culture. The areal classification can be considered as a kind of historical and ethnographic zoning...
Ethnicity
ETHNICITY is a widely used category in science that denotes the existence of culturally distinctive (ethnic) groups and identities. In domestic social science, the term “ethnos” is more widely used in all cases when we are talking about ethnic communities (peoples) of various historical and evolutionary types (tribe, nationality, nation). The concept of ethnicity presupposes the existence of homogeneous, functional and static characteristics that distinguish a given group from others that have different parameters of the same characteristics.
Ethnicity (Lopukhov, 2013)
ETHNOS is a historically emerged, localized, stable, large group of people, united by a common landscape, territory, language, economic structure, culture, social system, mentality, i.e. an ethnic group combines both biological and social properties, this phenomenon and natural, anthropological and sociocultural. Only tribes, nationalities and nations are classified as ethnic groups. They were preceded by another genetic chain: family, clan, clan.
Ethnos (DES, 1985)
ETHNOS (from the Greek ethnos - society, group, tribe, people), a historically established stable community of people - tribe, nationality, nation. The main conditions for the emergence of an ethnos are the common territory and language, which usually then act as signs of the ethnos; Ethnic groups are often formed from multilingual groups (for example, many nations of America). In the course of the development of economic relations, under the influence of the characteristics of the natural environment, contacts with other peoples, etc.
Ethnic group (NiRM, 2000)
ETHNIC GROUP, the most common designation in science for an ethnic community (people, ), which is understood as a group of people who have a common ethnic identity, share a common name and elements of culture and are in fundamental ties with other communities, including state ones. The historical conditions for the emergence of an ethnic group (ethnogenesis) are considered to be the presence of a common territory, economy and language.
Ethnos (Kuznetsov, 2007)
ETHNOSIS, ethnic community - a set of people who have a common culture, speak, as a rule, the same language and are aware of both their commonality and their difference from members of other similar human groups. The ethnomes are Russians, French, Czechs, Serbs, Scots, Walloons, etc. An ethnos may consist of: a) an ethnic core - the main part of the ethnos living compactly in a certain territory; b) ethnic periphery - compact groups of representatives of a given ethnic group, one way or another separated from its main part, and, finally, c) ethnic diasporas - individual members of an ethnic group, scattered across territories occupied by other ethnic communities. A number of ethnic groups are divided into