For citation: From the Editors, in Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. 2018. № 2. Pp. 115-116.
|Title of the article||From the Editors|
|In the section||Disputatio / Discussion|
|Type of article||RAR||Index UDK||Index BBK|
|Abstract||Texts and things have always been “the historian’s territory”. They are the sources from where the scholars have drawn their material.In the 21st century, history has extended the range of sources, drawing upon interdisciplinary research and entering the spheres of medicine, biology, psychology, ecology, and etc. Advance in genetics has enabled us to put the question: If it is possible to establish relationship between people with a maximum precision, can the same be done for ethnic groups?
The studies of ethnogenesis have long been based on written records, artefacts found by archaeologists and the data of anthropology, craniology, etc. Obviously, narratives are dependent on the discourses of the time, and the research of archaeologists and anthropologists is fragmentary, since a comprehensive investigation of a territory is impossible for objective reasons. This means that ethnogenetic concepts are based on opinions and fragmentary examples, which has led to the crisis of primordialism in recent decades and the advance of historical constructivism. Defining the nation, or any ethno-cultural community, asan “imaginary community” is at least strongly based on cultural images. Other approaches require finding in the past the ethnicity traces undistorted by discursive practices.
One possible approach has been suggested by scholars studying haplogroups of population that has long been living on a certain territory. Their stable values can be determined and then related to certain ethnic communities. This opens a wide field for discussion: What does the likeness of haplogroups mean? What is the connection between biological features and ethnicity? How can they be used in the study of ethnogenesis, migrations, and interactionsbetween people in historical retrospective? These issues cannot be discussed among “historians only” or “geneticists only”. Results that can influence the existing ethnogenetic concepts can be obtained only in the interdisciplinary field with the elaboration of a uniform conventional language.Today the necessity of such interdisciplinary dialogue is evident. We are looking forward to further discussion of the problem and welcome publications concerning new, modern approaches to the studies of the identity of the nations of Central and Eastern Europe. Their authors suggest hypotheses that may seem controversial and ambiguous - but it is in the dialogue of scientists that we approach the understanding of the past.
|Full text version of the article.||Article language||Russian; English|