@article{oai:minpaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00004274,
 author = {C. , Сасаки and Sasaki, Shiro and 佐々木, 史郎},
 issue = {２},
 journal = {国立民族学博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology},
 month = {Dec},
 note = {The purpose of this paper is to examine two concepts, which were
put forward by M. G. Levin and N. N. Cheboksarov in 1950s, in the case
of the peoples of the Lower Amur and Sakhalin. One is the concept of
"
economic-cultural types" and the other is that of "historicalethnographic
regions". These concepts were born in Soviet ethnology in
the studies of economic and cultural diversity among the peoples of the
same level of socio-economic development.
Definition of the concepts by Levin and Cheboksarov is as
follows: the economic-cultural type is to be understood as historically
formed complexes characteristic of a given economy and culture, typical
for the peoples living under certain natural geographic conditions, at
a certain level of socio-economic development; the historicalethnographic
regions are the territories where a definite cultural entity
was formed as a result of continued relations among the people inhabiting
them, of their influences on one another, and of a similarity in
their historical destiny [LEVIN 1972: 3, 5].
Levin and Cheboksarov grouped the peoples of northern Siberia into
five by the concept of economic-cultural types: 1. hunter-fishermen
in taiga (Siberian forest), 2. sea mammal hunters in the arctic shore and
Bering sea, 3. fishermen on large rivers, 4. hunter-reindeer-breeders in
taiga, and 5. reindeer nomads in tundra. According to them, an examination
of the major economic-cultural types of northern Siberia and
the [Soviet] far East reveals that: 1) the same economic-cultural type may
develop among different peoples, in different, even remote, regions but
only under conditions of the same level of development of productive
forces and of a similar geographic environment; 2) different types in a
particular territory have definite historical continuity [succession]—
under certain historical conditions one type develops into
another, for instance some hunter-fishermen of the forest zone changed
their economic-cultual type to "hunter-reindeer-breeders" by introducing
renideer-breeding; 3) the cultural traits characteristic of each type form
in the first place through the orientation of the economy to certain
geographic conditions [LEVIN 1972: 5].
They also grouped the same peoples by the concept of historicalethnographic
regions: 1. Yamaro-Taimyr region, 2. Western Siberian
region, 3. Sayan-Altayan region, 4. Eastern Siberian region, 5. Kamchatka-
Chukchi region, 6. Amur-Sakhalin region.
Although these two concepts make it possible to classify the peoples
of Siberia and the Soviet Far East by cultural similarity and diversity,
one can find some defects which must be corrected by examination of
concrete cases.
For instance, as it stands, the concept of the economic-cultural types
cannot explain the case of the peoples of Lower Amur and Sakhalin who
have complex economic systems. Such a defect was caused by the fact
that Levin and Cheboksarov did not systematically examine the productive
activities of the peoples of Siberia and the Soviet Far East.
They mentioned only five activities: fishing, forest hunting, sea mammal
hunting, forest rendeer breeding, and tundra rendeer breeding; but it
is obvious that there are four other activities, i. e. tundra reindeer hunting,
nomadism in steppe and forest-steppe zone, cultivating with
domesticated animals, and plant collecting. Each activity has not only
economic meaning but has its own cultural phenomena and activities.
In this paper I have made a typology of these productive activities and
their respective cultures and called it "fundamental types of productive
activity and culture". There are nine types in Siberia and the Soviet Far
East, because each of the above mentioned activities has its own cultural
set and can be considered a distinct type.
Economic systems of the peoples of Siberia and the Soviet Far East
consist of combinations of these nine types, which are determined by
ecological and cultural conditions. The economic -cultural type, which
clearly show the relation between the economic system and culture, can
be defined as a combination of some of the fundamental types of productive
activity and culture.
From such a point of view, the "economic-cultural types" of the
peoples of Lower Amur and Sakhalin can be grouped as follows: a) combination
of fishing, forest hunting, cultivationg with domesticated
animals, and plant collecting (Nanais of Amur, Sungari and Ussuri); b)
combination of fishing, forest hunting, sea mammal hunting, and plant
collecting (Ul'chi, Nivkhi, Orochi, Ainu, and Negidals), c) combination
of fishing, forest hunting, sea mammal hunting, forest rendeer breeding,
and plant collecting (Uilta and Evenki), d) forest hunting, fishing, plant
colledting (Udehes, a part of Nanais and Negidals, and Uilta and Evenki
without rendeer).
An examination of these corrected "economic-cultural types"
reveals that: 1) each type is fundamentally determined by the ecological
system of the region; 2) it is often determined also by cultural and
historical conditions, e. g., cultural interactions, development of productive
force and technology, etc.; 3) the same economic-cultural type rarely
appears in regions geographically distant from each other (in contrast to
"fundamental types of the productive activity and culture" which are
common to regions distant from each other); 4) it is possible for a region
to change or step up from one type to another. Such a case is typically
caused by the adoption of new productive activities or the technological
development of present activities.
In the case of the peoples of Lower Amur and Sakhalin some
cultural elements concerning their productive activities or economic
systems, e. g. foods, fishing and hunting tools, utensils, and so on, are
common to this area. This is because the people has formed a trade area
since the 17th century in this region and they trade or exchange their products
to provide each other with indespensable things of their daily life.
Such a fact could be one of the factors which made this area one of the
historical-ethnographic regions.
As to the concept of the historical-ethnographic regions, there is a
criticism that each region has been identified by the author's impression
[大林 1990a: 51]. In fact, Levin and Cheboksarov did not show any
theoretical basis to distinguish the above mentioned six regions of the
Siberian peoples. They proposed this concept in order to classify the
people by the cultural elements and historical factors which are common
among the people of the region but which have nothing to do with
ecological and economic systems. However, Levin and Cheboksarov did
not indicate such elements and factors in their works at all.
In the case of the peoples of Lower Amur and Sakhalin it is true that
there are many cultural elements and characteristics which are common
and unique to this region, and that therefore this area can be treated as a
genuine historical-ethnographic region. However these elements and
characteristics must be concretely shown.
Cluster analysis is an effective way of classifying the cultures of the
Siberian peoples, because it can quantitatively show the similarity and
diversity of cultures. Such analysis reveals distributions of the same or
similar elements and one can clearly find the border of the region.
Though it is difficult to show all the common elements and their distributions
in this brief paper, we can guess that there are three types of common
elements in Lower Amur and Sakhalin; 1) elements of fundamental
cultural stratum, 2) common elements of various ethnic origins (e. g.
Tungus, Nivkhi, or Ainu origin), and 3) elements of Chinese, Manchu,
Korean, or Japanese origin.
It is also necessary to review the political and economic history of
the given areas. The border of the historical-ethnographic region is
often decided by political borders or economic areas.
In the case of Lower Amur and Sakhalin, the rule of the Qing dynasty
(17th century—middle of 19th century) was decisive in creating a typical
historical-ethnographic region. The Nerchinsk treaty (1689) obstructed
the invasion of the Russians to this region, and the dynasty prohibited
the immigration of other peoples of the empire to northeastern Manchuria
in order to monopolize the fur trade in this area. It was only a
few administrators and merchants who could visit there and have contact
and trade with the people of this region.
Such a policy encouraged the trade activity of the people of Lower
Amur and Sakhalin to fourish. They traded not only with each other
but also with the Chinese, Manchu, and Japanese traders at the entrances
of this region. The native traders exchanged ,products of each
area and provided the people with various things from China, Manchuria,
and Japan. Their activity mixed many different cultures, and
distributed them all over the region. It is inevitable that the political
border coincided with that of the historical-ethnographic region in the
case of Lower Amur and Sskhalin.
In conclusion, we point out as follows: 1) by adopting the concept
of fundamental types of productive activity and culture, it becomes possible
to make a typology of economic systems and cultures of the peoples
with complex economic systems, and it becomes easier to examine the
ecological and historical factors which determined the characteristics of
each type; 2) the historical and ethnic background of the historicalethnographic
region can be clearly shown in the case of Lower Amur and
Sakhalin. Cluster analysis and reexamination of regional history help us
to identify an area which has common history and cultural elements, not
influenced by ecological factors.},
 pages = {261--309},
 title = {アムール川下流域とサハリンにおける文化類型と文化領域 : レーヴィン，チェボクサロフの「経済・文化類型」と「歴史・民族誌的領域」の再検討},
 volume = {16},
 year = {1991},
 yomi = {ササキ, シロウ}
}